Thread: An experiment in steel

Originally Posted by L R Harner

false
hammering a blade will not noticeably change anything but matter of fact will build up stress in the steel (that should be relieved in heat treat anyhow)

most steel that you get will have been forged in rolling mills down from blocks more then a foot thick (let me know what ta guy with a hammer is doing other then shaping ot his needs)
the true fixing of grain is in the heat and cycles there of (most of would not need fixing if not over heated in the forging processes )

Butch, there is a provable change in grain size from forging techniques. While there has been considerable horse exhaust spread about this process in many different directions, it does, and will refine grain. It would not have persisted as a smithing technique for several hundreds of years if it did not work. Plus work hardening was performed on how many millions of perfectly serviceable copper and bronze blades long before iron and steel came along.

Tossing out the baby with the bathwater is never a good idea. I do not argue against there being better ways to get the job done, and refine the grain over the whole blade, not just the edge, as you've alluded to with thermal cycling. Perhaps a more efficient smith will use more efficient methods, but it doesn't mean that history is worthless or should be condemned out of hand.

Mike: "packing" is probably better referred to as finish forging where you're attempting to refine the surface features of a blade while the temperature is falling through the decalescence range of temperature, where, coincidentally, grain formation is at its most active and likely to be best influenced by mechanical reduction. I've met any number of European smiths who were taught to forge everything, so as to leave any grinding or filing to a minimum. Their technique is impressive. It makes my skill with a hammer look childish to be honest.

But, when I made a blade and they did according to their methods, and I thermal cycled mine and we broke both blades, they were full of all kinds of questions. Like "Show me that again..." There is no doubt in my mind that better techniques will catch the attention of a craftsman everytime.

Where packing went off course, so to speak, is when folks started explaining it as moving atoms closer together. If that were true, then smithy's should be easier to identify from the residual radiation and cratering....

Originally Posted by Mike Blue

Butch, there is a provable change in grain size from forging techniques. While there has been considerable horse exhaust spread about this process in many different directions, it does, and will refine grain. It would not have persisted as a smithing technique for several hundreds of years if it did not work. Plus work hardening was performed on how many millions of perfectly serviceable copper and bronze blades long before iron and steel came along.


Where packing went off course, so to speak, is when folks started explaining it as moving atoms closer together. If that were true, then smithy's should be easier to identify from the residual radiation and cratering....

ok so not total but to put copper and bronze i the same kind of work hardening is a bit over the top. let me know how well cold working steel gets you to a usable hardness

but yes there has been much garbage put out about edge packing but one has to remember that steel is more like working crystals not atoms
kind of like sugar
depending on the temp you take sugar to you can make taffy or hard candy called tempering
all in all the debat will rage on and for the best of it will help get more and more out of the steel we use by making us all try different thing and testign