It is also my understanding that the carbon inclusions is what changed the piece of iron smelted from ore into steel.SolidState wrote:I'd like to add that in Japanese swords, the folding process involved aided in dispersing defects more evenly through the steel, making a more reliable piece of steel with less significant void spaces. It also generally breaks up carbides and carbon inclusions.
Now, with modern methods it is purely cosmetic.
Sal, Another perhaps more practical and economical reason was that steel compared to iron was much more valuable to the smith. The first laminates were strips along the edges of an iron bar, extending the useful hardenable steel further than laminating it through out the blade. A hardenable edge and a softer tougher spine made good sense. But even those blades would break. Not being ones to waste materials these would get mixed into the next bar of steel and patterns would begin to develop. Human beings are keen observers and experimenters and variations probably followed rapidly along with the development of the aesthetic of the material.sal wrote:...When the Vikings made damascus back in the day (800 AD), they were swords/weapons and their lives depended on the performance of their swords. Combining two different steels offered a much tougher blade that resisted breaking better than single steels. The worst thing that can happen to you in a blade fight to the death is that your sword breaks. When sharpening the edge, the softer material gave way to the harder material creating a serrated edge. The serrated edge cut more aggressively and stayed sharper longer.
zenith,Zenith wrote:To my knowledge Spyderco has never used Damasteel. Damasteel contains RWL-34 and powdered version of 12C27, that is pretty modern manufacturing and steels.
Forged damascus and pattern welding is a different story and there are some articles on that as well done by more experienced people.
The mystery of Damascus Blades by J.D Verhoeven.
IMPACT STRENGTH AND FAILURE ANALYSIS OF WELDED DAMASCUS STEEL
Here is a small paper.
This was my understanding- ancient metallurgy didn't have a way to infuse carbon throughout the iron, they could only get it to penetrate a tiny bit into the surface. But if you fold and weld, fold and weld, fold and weld, ... then you have layers of carbon throughout the iron bar which makes it more like steel.O,just,O wrote:It is also my understanding that the carbon inclusions is what changed the piece of iron smelted from ore into steel.
This was the old way of making steel which is just iron with added carbon so that it will harden. Higher percentages of carbon will give a greater degree of hardness.
If you like "plastic" scales CF costs quite a bit more than G-10 and, on a full tang fixed blade or a folder with dual liners, provides no real benefit. Yet some folks still prefer it. If you look at natural materials, wood scales can range from a few dollars a pair to over fifty, or you can choose between a $4 pair in plain white bone or spend nearly $100 for pre-ban ivory. Some folks are willing to pay for things that add nothing in terms of function, others are not.Officer Gigglez wrote:The only reason I was curious is because I like to make knives, and I get my stuff from Jantz supply. They have numerous Damascus blades, but they want 100 bucks give or take, just for the blade. So I came here to be enlightened.
Yeah. I know people are interested in Damascus, that's why I wanted to know if it would be worth it for me buy up some blades. It seems like they'd sell well. Maybe I'll drop the greenbacks and see what happens. I have only used wood, as all my stuff is handmade. I don't have precision tools. I have power tools, but none are actual machines. I have yet do anything with G10, though I am looking to get some for a Tacticool knife project I am going to start on soon.The Deacon wrote:If you like "plastic" scales CF costs quite a bit more than G-10 and, on a full tang fixed blade or a folder with dual liners, provides no real benefit. Yet some folks still prefer it. If you look at natural materials, wood scales can range from a few dollars a pair to over fifty, or you can choose between a $4 pair in plain white bone or spend nearly $100 for pre-ban ivory. Some folks are willing to pay for things that add nothing in terms of function, others are not.
Yes, but...bdblue wrote:This was my understanding- ancient metallurgy didn't have a way to infuse carbon throughout the iron, they could only get it to penetrate a tiny bit into the surface. But if you fold and weld, fold and weld, fold and weld, ... then you have layers of carbon throughout the iron bar which makes it more like steel.
I don't think so. Human beings are pretty creative once they realize that something cool has occurred. Probably like the invention of gunpowder...."BOOM.sal wrote:Hi Mike,
That's another good theory. Maybe I give humans too much credit for planned, rather than chance develoment?
That was my immediate impression when I got my Stretch Damascus with Nishijin scales.. WAY TOO busy. Typical great Spyderco fit and finish, but the flashy Nishijin scales and gray water pattern Damascus were just too much for me. It's on it's way back, and I'll be getting a Spydie Southard in return. All my knife money will still go to Spyderco but I'll be staying away from the Nishijin and Damascus. Different strokes.jabba359 wrote:Personally, I like a well-made Damascus pattern. Damascus is also available in stainless steels, so rust isn't necessarily an intrinsic trait. I think that when used properly, it can enhance the aesthetics of a knife. On the flip side, Damascus can also make a knife look too busy and even cheap. So far I haven't been too impressed with the Damascus patterns offered by Spyderco, as I'm not a huge fan of the "water" pattern they've been using. I almost bought the Damascus Caly3, but just couldn't justify spending the money on a Damascus pattern that, at best, I felt lukewarm about.
So yes, I like Damascus (in general). But I can understand those who don't. They probably feel the same way about Damascus as I do about the cars that people put all the extra chrome window trim, chrome gas cap, chrome side mirrors, and chrome etc. on. They probably think all those extra chrome tidbits makes their car look cool. I think it makes it look like junk.
Daryl Meier did weld up some laminates with industrial diamonds. The results were interesting but impractical. At some point the metallurgical engineers will develop a blade material very much like you describe. What is more interesting is that the carbon nanotubes exist in a material where the smith likely had little or no knowledge of what was happening inside the steel as it was being heated or forged, certainly no intention of creating carbon nanotubes. All that knowledge is recent history compared to the ancient character and manufacture of the wootz materials sampled.SpyderEdgeForever wrote:... It turns out that some of the Damascus Steel swords and knives had carbon nanotubes permeating the structure. The buckytubes (Named after Buckminster Fuller, the Buckminster Fullerene Molecule, Fuller being the geodesic dome man) are formed in the heating and forging process, and so give it extreme levels of strength and hardness while remaining relatively lightweight. Fullerene and Diamond are related but have different structures; these blades were almost diamond like steel. There is speculation that some of the ancient Japanese forge-laminated blades also produced the fullerene structure in them. If you could take diamond and fullerene or graphene and make a nano-laminated blade, it would probably have incredible cutting and durability powers.