the bounds of ignorance...

[Quenchcrack]

I was on one of the other forums and read the most incredible mis-representation of normalizing and annealing that I have ever read. And it was posted by well known and respected bladesmiths. It was so totally incorrect, that I did not feel posting a science-based reply would be at all helpful. It proves to me that the appeal of home-grown mythology is more powerful (or at least easier to understand) than good science. I am not a bladesmithand would never counsel anyone here on how to forge or grind a good blade. What I don't understand is why someone who has clearly not understood the most basic elements of metlallurgy would presume to counsel others with a barage of mis-information. Buy a book, educate yourselves.

[hammerdownnow]

We are always ready and willing to learn. If you don't want to name names you could give us a wrong vrs. right low down here. It would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. I don't think the guy would or should be offended if you offered your opinion. I have parroted info here that I have heard. If I say something wrong I would be grateful if someone stepped up and set me straight.

[MixonKnives]

For sure. All any of us really know is what others have told us. Wether they were correct or not, no one will ever know. I was having the same discussion with my boss the other day. We're in the paint selling buisiness and were discussing some of the more difficult process in painting. We don't paint for a living, so all we have to go off of is what the pro painters tell us. Again, wether or not they were right, we don't know. But we still have to give out that same advice to our less experianced customers. I'd hate to know someone messed up their house because I told them how to do it incorrectly. And I'd really hate to mess up one of my blades because I was doing somthing someone told me to do WRONG!!!

I think we all appricate and respect the knowlage you can offer to us all QuenchCrack.

Thanks for all the info you have given us, and a big thanx for all the info you're going to give us.
Michael

[luc]

Hey quenchcrack!
Can you suggest any good heat treating books.
Thanks.
Lucas

[Quenchcrack]

I recognize and appreciate how many people here want to learn about heat treating. This is particularly gratifying because you cannot really "SEE" the difference between a poorly heat treated blade and one properly heat treated. It is only after you have paid your money for a blade that you learn if it will perform. The fact that so many people here want to do it right is a credit to you all. I would just caution everyone to take with appropriate skepticism any advise you get from a person who does not have the credentials to warrant your trust. Any of the Master Bladesmiths should be worthy of your confidence and most of the Journeymen, too. There are a large number of forum members who are extremely capable knifemakers who can answer most questions about making a blade. But there are just danged few metallurgists who are also knifemakers and we are all glad to share the real science of heat treating our blades. Just ask.

[fitzo]

Originally Posted by Quenchcrack

I would just caution everyone to take with appropriate skepticism any advise you get from a person who does not have the credentials to warrant your trust. Any of the Master Bladesmiths should be worthy of your confidence and most of the Journeymen, too.

If we are to accept someone's "credentials", shouldn't we at least know who we're speaking to? I for one would definitely like to know who you are. Maybe some do, and I've missed something, but to me all you are is a nickname.

As for the ABS credential, it means someone can 'smith a knife and pass the tests and make some pretty pieces; it doesn't mean they know any metallurgy. Some do, some don't. Some, like Kevin C., have a lot of knowledge.

I am always anxious to extend my knowledge, so I read your posts to glean info. I must admit, though, that I really don't like disembodied nicknames. If you'd let us know, I'm sure it would be appreciated by many more than me.

Thank you for any consideration.

[AwP]

As for the ABS credential, it means someone can 'smith a knife and pass the tests and make some pretty pieces; it doesn't mean they know any metallurgy. Some do, some don't. Some, like Kevin C., have a lot of knowledge.

An ABS smith might not know the scientific words for it, but if they can pass the test then they can heat treat a blade properly and can advise on the procedure even if they don't know the names of the "ites" or what the steel is doing on a microscopic scale.

[MixonKnives]

Originally Posted by AwP

An ABS smith might not know the scientific words for it, but if they can pass the test then they can heat treat a blade properly and can advise on the procedure even if they don't know the names of the "ites" or what the steel is doing on a microscopic scale.

Agreed. If you can make a blade to pass those tests, you're doing something right,

[fitzo]

Andrew, I'm not going to argue this point much, but I will say a couple things:

I have stood next to an ABS MS at a hammer-in, listened to him counsel someone, and had many of the onlookers shaking their heads when he left, asking "How'd he get his stamp? That was just plain wrong!" True story, believe it or not.

It has been stated on a forum when this was CKD that the purpose of the ABS JS testing was to see if a 'smith can specifically heat treat a blade to perform a specific set of functions. It was also stated that the blade would not necessarily make a good knife, as it has been made to specifications not necessarily desirable in a knife. It does not in any way guarantee they have a developed knowledge of the subject. To assume otherwise is naive. There are more than one JS candidate who had to HT different blades for months to learn how to pass that test just once.

I would say that, IF the ABS is trying to give the general impression that their candidates were accomplished heat treaters, that they be required to forge, HT, and test their blade ALL IN REAL TIME, before a competent MS. They should have more than one shot to decide if the blade is acceptable to them, and the opportunity to remake/he-HT, whatever. But, when they announce it's ready, they have one shot to pass that test with that blade, or else they go home, wait a year, and try again. Want to make it real interesting, make them periodically re-test live.

I'm not at all ABS bashing, it does many fine things, but I'm also not putting them on any pedastal that is not deserved.

[AwP]

I'm sure you're right in that not all individuals really meet the expectations of the ABS and just happened to get lucky with their test. There are exceptions to every rule, but I think the test is hard enough that most people would have to be fairly competent to pass. I'm not a member, so my opinion isn't biased and I'm not offended if you disagree since it doesn't apply to me personally anyway. Just seems that a test that hard would break most mistaken HT procedures, especially when you take the test a second time for the MS test. Getting lucky once, maybe... getting lucky twice is much more unlikely. Again, it could happen, I just think that the majority of the time it wouldn't.

I don't think periodic retesting is a bad idea really, not sure if the people who would be forced to retest would agree . I also think a Rc hardness test might not be a bad idea, wouldn't prove anything by itself but combined with the rest it could show alot.

[fitzo]

Andrew,

I should add that the ABS itself says that passing the test does not indicate any certification that a member-made knife will necesarily pass those tests, just that blade they passed the test with. Nor do they certify you will get a good knife. These are made by individuals not under constant scrutiny, and quality may vary.

The truth of the matter is that the test requires a blade that is essentially hardened on so little of the edge that it wouldn't last long as a knife. Many, if not most of the physical-test knives have perhaps 1/8-3/8" of hardened steel on a rather large blade of shallow-hardening steel, and every attempt is made to keep the rest as soft as possible. I would not want a knife made to those blade specs, it wouldn't last.

Once again, don't get me wrong: the ABS is a great teaching organization, they do establish some minimum level of competency, and they have done wonders promoting the forged blade. However, the members are not required to do more than pass those tests, both performance and inspection of work. They are not brought before a panel of judges and quizzed about their knowledge. They are in no way required to be masters at heat treating, able to HT any high carbon low alloy steel to a given set of specifications on demand. An ABS MS is no slouch, that is certain, but their TOTAL knowledge level about knifemaking varies significantly. That pertains even more to the JS smiths.

These are not bad things, but I do feel I am not mis-stating things here. One has to be realistic about what the organization and it's members actually are. There has been too much mythos spring up that if someone has those stamps, it somehow guarantees a certain DEEP knowledge. That is simply not the case.

[AwP]

There has been too much mythos spring up that if someone has those stamps, it somehow guarantees a certain DEEP knowledge. That is simply not the case.

However, the members are not required to do more than pass those tests, both performance and inspection of work. They are not brought before a panel of judges and quizzed about their knowledge.

I don't disagree with this at all, that's why in my original post I mentioned something about how they might not know the names of the "ites" or what's going on at a microscopic level. While knowing that stuff can certainly help you tailor your HT since you know exactly what it's doing, you really don't need to know the details of WHY something works if you know the process and it does work.

Since there's the chopping, rope, and shaving test in addition to the breaking test, I don't think the knives made for the test would have as piddly of a hardened section as you think (though I could be wrong), it seems the blade would have to be pretty decient to do all the chopping and still retain a shaving edge. While I can guarentee not all blades were made this way, the majority of test knives I've read about were actually full hardened and the spine was drawn back, as opposed to an edge quench.

p.s. I hope you're taking this as a lively discussion as I am, and are not being offended. It can be too easy for me to offend sometimes in text since I tend to be blunt when speaking and use the tone of my voice to temper my words, which doesn't really work in text.

[fitzo]

Originally Posted by AwP

Since there's the chopping, rope, and shaving test in addition to the breaking test, I don't think the knives made for the test would have as piddly of a hardened section as you think (though I could be wrong), it seems the blade would have to be pretty decient to do all the chopping and still retain a shaving edge. While I can guarentee not all blades were made this way, the majority of test knives I've read about were actually full hardened and the spine was drawn back, as opposed to an edge quench.

p.s. I hope you're taking this as a lively discussion as I am, and are not being offended. It can be too easy for me to offend sometimes in text since I tend to be blunt when speaking and use the tone of my voice to temper my words, which doesn't really work in text.

Andrew, I have to say I completely disagree about how the majority of test blades are made. Described as you pose, there would be nothing but tempered martensite in a fully hardened and spine-drawn blade. That would not pass the bending very often. My contention is that nearly all the test blades would be a narrow section of tempered and "good edge holding" martensite at the edge with the bulk of the piece being pearlite. That does not mean that the narrow martensite band is not of exceptional quality; it would have to be to pass the testing. I am not arguing that point at all. However, I would say, then, grind off a half inch of edge, re-establish an edge, and re-test. That would provide a good answer to our question, here.

Another good test, if we are expecting an MS to be a master of steels, would be to give them, in a live test, several different quality steels with different properties, and give them two chances with each steel to get a good blade. The first try would allow them to define what type of steel thay have, and the second would allow them to produce an exceptional blade. They can re-HT the first as many times as necessary, but the second would be single attempt. Now, that would separate the masters from the journeymen, if we're really talking "masters". Honestly, I don't think that's what the ABS means with the title. There really can't be too many people like that around. (Yeah, I know, I'm a weenie!)

I would encourage you to pose this very question about the nature of the HT in test blades on Caffrey's forum and get an MS's response.

And, no, I'm not offended by anyone willing to engage in a reasonable dialogue. I am sure I am seen by many as offensive in type, and most likely verbally, even when I get the opportunity to temper my words with vocal nuance. I will also admit to not employing a lot of subtlety and being very direct, though I suppose that's obvious.

Thanks for the dialogue, I enjoy it!

BTW, I do agree totally that not having a bunch of understanding in technical language precludes a good knowledge of the actual practice of HT. I was a lab chemist for 30 years. I met all sorts of PhD's with a whole bunch of technical words that couldn't do squat at the bench; I knew many who combined both. They were a joy to know, very impressive. Kevin Cashen reminds me of that latter type.

[Terry Primos]

RE: The piddly hardened edge ...

I can answer that one for you. Yes the test blades as a general rule tend to have a very narrow section fully hardened.

However, there is a vast misunderstanding that the ABS preaches that this is the way a blade should be done. The only purpose for that part of the test is to prove that the applicant has enough understanding of and control over his/her chosen medium to create these multiple zones of hardness.

The reason I said "as a general rule" above is that some guys harden only the edge and have everything else very soft. Those types of blade will tend to bend in the shape of an "L", and will generally take a set in that shape, or only spring back a little bit.

Others (like myself) have a hard edge with nothing really dead soft except for maybe the top of the spine. Those types tend to bend more in the shape of a "C" and spring back up a pretty good ways when the pressure is released.

There are many ways to make a blade that will pass the test. I watched a guy take his test at the Moran Hammer-in in Maryland last year who had a 5160 blade that when the pressure was released, the blade went back straight. Even the seasoned Masters were gathering around him asking how he heat treated it. It was very impressive.

Anyway, the main thing to remember is that the "piddly" hardened edge is okay for the test, as are the others I mentioned. Also, remember that contrary to popular belief, the ABS does not say that all knives should be able to be bent 90 degrees.

Many smiths like myself and Kevin Cashen prefer a stiff blade that would break if you tried to bend it 90 degress (for our own personal use), but it takes a tremendous amount of force to do it.

[fitzo]

Thank you, Terry. I know it must sound like I'm ABS bashing, but I'm not. I try and say that in every post. I also know that I can't come close to saying everything that's in my head, so sometimes I might seem inaccurate. I do not intend this unfortunate consequence of forum posting.

I honestly feel, though, that there are misunderstandings that have sprung up about an ABS member's blades, and feel that the truth is less limiting than mythos. I hope folks can forgive my inadequacies in conveying my thoughts.

So, did you find out the "secret" to the 5160 blade that can be shared eith us?