Jump to content

Jerrod Miller

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Jerrod Miller

  1. I didn't look at the other thread, so apologies if I put a similar answer that doesn't help clarify things. Warping comes from uneven stresses. The blade can be warp free, but still under stress, and in fact these stresses can be what is holding it straight. When you thermal cycle, you remove these stresses, and possibly add new ones. It is quite common to get warps from the first thermal cycle for these reasons. If you get some after the first ccle, I would think that you are likely introducing new stresses upon cooling from the previous cycle. This can be from putting the blade down on the anvil to cool (NOT recommended!), or even from a breeze that cools one side faster than the other. How are you cooling your blades during these cycles?
  2. I absolutely love seeing posts like this (whether it be for tongs, blades, or anything else). With that attitude success is just a matter of time, and likely quicker than not.
  3. We were just talking about this in the office. We have a couple orders (let's just say a few dozen anvils) to make now. Not bad for just his first article review and pre-orders.
  4. Unfortunately I am not familiar with a condition C1 or CI, though CI is short for cast iron in my world. I know a few miscellaneous places to look, and couldn't find it there either. So my best guess is that is is specific to whoever painted it on there. Heavy section 4340 is hard to heat treat. Definitely best with oil. I've seen 100-110 F water used, too, but that leads to chances of cracking. Might have better luck just doing the face (the face isn't a heavy section). When I was working on making my anvil I trialed 4340, but didn't like how the face marred with errant hammer blows. I was fortunate enough to be able to be picky. If I didn't have the resources that I have, I would certainly be happy to stumble upon a big chunk of 4340.
  5. I'd try it without the nut/washer flange piece, then try adjusting how far the MIG tip sits into the flare, from deep down in to out of the flare. Also try various pressures and flow rates throughout.
  6. Alan has the book. Now that you have an anvil, beware: They can become an addiction. Just ask @Jeremy Blohm.
  7. I'm guessing you aren't getting any bites on this for 3 reasons. 1) Cru Forge V just isn't very popular (in general and with with smiths on this forum). Not that people hate it, they just prefer other alloys. 2) Given that nobody likes it that much, you aren't offering a blazing deal. The rough math says your listed price is less than 10% off of the price from Alpha Knife Supply. 3) With those two things considered, most people here aren't looking to buy 65 pounds of steel at a time. Sure, some people are, but a majority here are not. Just tossing this out as a maybe. Who knows, someone may point out that I'm wrong or that there is another reason. But you certainly don't have to keep posting to bump it up. It has been on the front page of the "Tools, Supplies and Materials" sub-forum since you initially posted it.
  8. 5160 is too deep hardening for a clay induced hamon. You can differentially harden by edge quenching though. You need a steel that is much more shallow hardening. Something with low Mn and Cr. Also, 5160 should only be quenched in oil.
  9. In addition to Charles' link: Everything burns with a different color. So there are a wide array of colors of flames that you may see coming off, depending on what contaminant is oxidizing (burning). It is even possible that you can see a crazy looking flame that isn't all that hot.
  10. Daniel and Alan nailed it pretty well. The only other thing I will add is that, if you wanted to hardening it, you can temper it in complete darkness to the point it is just starting to show signs of glowing. That will be about 900 F. Do not let it slow cool from this temperature. You want to heat and cool through the blue brittle range as quickly as possible when you have martensite to temper.
  11. Alan covered it nicely. I'll just add this: Given enough energy (thermal and mechanical while forge welding) you would start getting things to be quite homogeneous. Given enough time at the right temperature (cycling may be necessary), you could certainly undo all the good in any CPM alloy.
  12. The wife and I honeymooned there 3 years ago. It was great. Everyone should try to go and see it.
  13. In addition, I would think you would get a lot of welding flaws/inclusions. Ni works well in a forge weld, not sure how well many other things would work.
  14. Since this thread has already been brought back from the dead, I feel safe adding this link to Alec Steele's new anvil. Starting at about 10:34 in, he gets rather abusive to it. Not all anvils are built the same though.
  15. No, by all means, give it a shot! Seriously, it should perform extremely well. It is also one of those alloys that was developed in a time of need, and new alloys have been developed to replace it. I wouldn't go out of my way to play with it, but if you have access to a bunch it could be fun (I mean that).
  16. I should have clarified. A standard normalization isn't really a good option for D2, especially if it is very thin, as that is indeed a hardening process. You'll want to heat it to about 1000 C, then only let it cool (in still air) to about 300 C (not below 250 though, as this will start to harden things). What you are going for here is austenitizing then some stresses from the thermal expansion to get some refinement. Really though, letting it get hard is also a great way for grain refinement. If you aren't worried about cracking, I would say do that. And if you are wanting to make it soft enough to shape prior to hardening then the key will be to do a sub-critical anneal. If I were to be working D2 my process would be to do the carbide distribution cycle noted in my previous post. Then let it harden fairly thick (see Alan's warning about going through abrasives), but the key would be to let it cool in a state that is not going to encourage cracking. Then do a sub-critical anneal or two (or three). Do all my grinding and sanding. Harden, probably with plates depending on geometry. Temper. Then finish sanding. But I never plan on using D2 because that sounds like a lot of work to me. If you haven't seen the TTT for D2, you have plenty of time for hardening. You have nearly 5 minutes to get it below 700 C, and from there almost an hour until you start to form bainite. The slower you cool, the less likely you are to develop warps. So you can let it air cool over the fire a bit to be very slow for a while, then plate quench it or still air quench it from only like 400 C. Keep in mind that plate quenching from hotter will help correct some warps, while going slow the whole time will help keep them from forming due to the cooling in the first place. Warps can develop during, heating too.
  17. You're not trying to anneal your hammer head in a bucket of vermiculite, are you? Don't do that. Just normalize, like you would a blade.
  18. We have a very advanced unit that works on a similar principle at work. Metallurgically, I hate these things with a fiery passion. The definition of hardness, as far as material science (including metallurgy) goes, is "the resistance to localized plastic deformation" (Wikipedia gets it right). A rebound does not test this, and they never have and never will. Rebound tests can be useful and can definitely tell you some useful information. If you have an appropriate sample of metal (this is not very common) then you can indeed correlate the rebound to a hardness. The problem lies in different materials having different rebound rates for similar hardnesses. There is also problems with harder materials being accurate. We make steels and high chrome white iron (HCWI) that are often above 65 HRC. We need to use a different calibration for steel vs. HCWI. I've also had big problems with oil quenched and tempered 8630 reading higher than as quenched 8630 can get (a later Brinell test confirmed that the rebound tests from our vendor and our in-house test were very wrong). Sorry. These things are a bit of a trigger for me. They are a qualitative tool, not quantitative. If they were just labeled as "% rebound" rather than as a hardness I would be happy with them rather than irate.
  19. Only part of the soak time is for thickness purposes. The old (and still often used) industrial parameter is to hold for 1 hour per inch of thickness, with a 1 hour minimum. Modern testing has shown that much less is needed, and 1 hour for the first inch with 30 minutes for every inch thereafter is plenty safe. Things get weird when doing thinner things, because you have to worry much more about grain size (and therefore growth) and the whole parts comes up to temp very fast, but it still takes time to dissolve carbides and let the components diffuse properly. One solution to the dilemma is to get it quite a bit hotter for a shorter period of time to dissolve the carbides and allow for diffusion. Then still air cool. This will leave you with larger grains, but good carbide distribution otherwise. Now you can do rather short soaks (like a minute) at just above austenization temp for a few normalization cycles to refine the grains without messing with the carbides. If you don't get too hot or soak too long, then your carbides won't dissolve and you won't have to worry about them. You do need to soak for a little bit, both on the normalization steps and the hardening, because you do want to dissolve some of the carbides so that you have some carbon in solution. And next time use a more solid-fuel friendly alloy.
  20. Either. Sadly, this is one of those things where the name became standardized without a standard spelling. You'll find it both ways all over the place.
  21. Sorry. I saw this one when I didn't have time to respond, thought to myself: "Eh, I've seen others (including Alan) cover this already. It will be fine; I don't need to come back". I've never looked at alloy banding in this situation very much myself. It seems to happen with 1095, and not much else. Not sure why. I don't much care for 1095, so haven't looked at anything about it overly much. I have looked at alloy segregation in castings A LOT. In heavy section castings it can become quite a problem. The foundry I currently work at makes a few things we need to normalize before we do anything else to them (aside from getting the sand off) because the feeder contacts can have too great of a segregation issue. In these materials we generally normalize once, then process, then austenitize, quench, and temper. Unless the first temper cycle leaves the part too hard, that is the only temper it gets. These are low alloy, such as 8630. Anyway, back to the alloy banding here. I am aware of a couple theories as to why this happens, but nothing concrete; so I'd rather not get into too much of the how it came to be. What it is and the consequences of it and such Alan pretty much covered. Just an addition of the fact that carbides are the reason for soaks at temperature. The more difficult the carbide is to dissolve, the hotter and longer the soak. VC is a royal pain, FeC is super easy. MnC is much like FeC. So once you get it hot enough, a very short soak (seconds) dissolves the carbides. Hold a bit longer and you allow diffusion to occur, thus spreading the Mn out a bit more evenly. But with grain growth occurring, too.
  22. I had to read the Wikipedia page to know what was there so I could properly answer for you. The hamon is the visual representation of the blending of hardened steel and unhardened. More specifically it is where martensite (generally tempered martensite) and pearlite meet. In this zone you are going to have a mixture of the two phases, and probably a bit of bainite as well. These phases all etch differently, so the appearance of the hamon is just the mixture of different phases that had a different reaction to the etching. The etch given is usually very mild, as the difference between these phases of a given alloy are pretty minimal. The hamon can often be seen without etching, just polishing, because the abrasives, and even just the ambient atmosphere can cause enough of a difference in the reaction of these different phases to be noticeable.
  23. It will help to learn the terminology in general. Smelting is turning ore into metal via a refining operation. You are just melting cans (with a little refining, but the key is that you aren't starting with ore). Generally speaking, this forum doesn't have too much to do with melting aluminum. But what may help you out is looking into the furnaces built in the Bloomers and Buttons sub-forum. You don't want a smelting stack, but anything people are using for crucible steel may be of help.
  • Create New...