Hi Ann,
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ann Feuerbach
FYI, Personally, I have not come across any blades with Martensite.
|
Neither was I aware that they existed until that earlier post by GT Obach and also this paper by Verhoeven and Pendray, available here:
http://met.iisc.ernet.in/~rangu/text.pdf
Quote:
would be interested in any metallurgical studies of antique blades that do have Martensite, so references please. 
|
So would I, but apart from the above, unfortunately I cannot help. I hasten to reiterate that as far as Wootz is concerned, I am a beginner on a steep learning curve.
I imagine that there must have been attempts to quench harden, as opposed to work harden, Wootz blades because of the superior hardness/strength attainable, but we do know the problems associated with quenching hypereutectoid steels. Perhaps quenching from the lowest possible temperature, established empirically would have minimized the problems to an acceptable level. Maybe, by sheer chance every now and then they managed to turn out a martensitic blade that wasn't badly flawed and performed superbly; I just cannot see the ancients regularly turning out superb Martensitic Wootz blades - Just my thoughts as an informed layman on the subject.
If I may impose on you a little: What is the highest measured hardness of a historical blade that you are aware of? And how was it tested (Brinell, Rockwell, Vickers)?.
I suspect that herein resides the original question of this thread. If Wootz swords were not quench hardened, merely work hardened, then I very much doubt that they could have ever been able to cut through armour, never mind wrought iron chains. And as such, whilst serviceable, their legendary reputations must have been based on gross exaggerations.
Cheers
Chris