G'day Rasdan.
Mate, I cannot tell one thing from the other when I look at pictures. Even when we know, or strongly believe that the material is the same, its appearance can vary enormously depending on the way it has been worked, the amount of surface erosion, and the staining. Anybody who reckons he can tell much from pictures of pamor, or iron, is just kidding himself.
To really see the nature of the material you need to hold it in your hand, feel the material, and turn it this way and that in good light. Then you might --- only might --- get some sort of indication as to what you're looking at.
Why is meteoritic material often prickly to the touch?
No idea.
How do we differentiate an old iron that is folded numerous times to make a dense material and modern iron which is already dense?
It looks different.
How does it look different?
I cannot explain, but it has a different look.Yes, you can mostly see some sort of grain in it, even when it is very padat you can see grain under magnification.
How can we differentiate the lines of fibrous inclusions found naturally in wrought iron to the folding lines produced by repeated folding or mbesut process?
It looks different.
Again I cannot explain, it just looks different.
Something to bear in mind:-
prior to about 1850 steel was not mass produced, and even after mass production began, it was only common in major areas of population in industrial countries. Up until WWII wrought iron was a pretty common material. About 1950 mass production of steel became very economic and efficient with the introduction of the basic oxygen process, since that time mild steel has replaced wrought iron completely.
Thus, in a modern, current era blade we could expect to see mild steel rather than wrought iron, but in anything from pre-WWII we would be much more likely to see wrought iron. Go back into the 19th century and earlier, and we will certainly be looking at wrought iron.
Up to now this thread has been about just pamor.
Here is the original question:-
I would greatly appreciate if anyone could post images contrasting the differences between the pamors - meteorite, luwu, and modern nickel.
I posted examples of recent blades with various types of pamor. None of those blades are more than 150 years old, and most are much younger than that. In other words, this was all about as easy as it gets. But to be honest, if somebody else had put those examples up, and I had no personal knowledge of the blades, I could not have said with any certainty what it was that I was looking at.
That was my purpose in posting the examples:- to try to demonstrate how absolutely futile it is to try to learn about pamor and blade materials from pictures.
Quite simply it is totally impossible.
However, when we broaden the area under consideration a bit, and we begin to enter into aspects of blade appraisal and classification, we then need to consider the entire blade, not just the pamor. When the entire blade comes under consideration we get a lot more feedback from what we can see, and all this information cross matches to assist in the appraisal or classification.
Thus, if we are considering a blade that is obviously very old, there is no possibility that mild steel is involved, similarly, European nickel will not be present. We then need to decide if we are looking at Luwu material, or phosphoric iron, or one of the multitude of other materials that have been used as pamor, such as imported Chinese tools.
When we get involved in this sort of exercise it gets hard.
Very hard.
And far, far beyond what can be conveyed by any sort of image.
|