New method of making

thomas hauschild · 21st January 2020, 09:51 PM

A.G.

Maybe the looking of exposed nickellayers is more a feeling or a suggestion for me than a fact. I have also used often pure nickel for damascus ( outer layers with nickel, but with a hard core as an edge ) starting with 20 layers 2 mm carbon steel and 20 ( 19 of course ) of 0,1 mm nickel the first result was allways „thick black layers and thin white layers“. After doubling to a result of 40 black + 40 white the black looks like half thickness but the whites „seems“ to have the same thickness as before or seems to have a higher presence and the hole billet becomes now more white than before. After folding to 160 and then to 320 layers the layers of the nickel becomes more and more present and looks now as they have the same thickness as the black steel. I saw some microscope pictures and yes indeed the nickel was really thin and you saw thick carbon steel layers. Visual the nickel looks more present and wider than they realy are. I made a billet with above 2000 layers and it etched with no more optical visible layers it stays against acid like a 1% Nickelsteel. Under microscope the layers and a strong border between steel and nickel was clearly visible. To that time I had a good source to make some microscope investigations but I lost this source too early ( I worked in a plant for forged shafts for electrical power plants) I wanted to take a more detailed look weather there were really movement of nickel into the steel or if the nickel layer just looking wider than they are because the black steel was washed away by the acid. After your comment and thinking about I’m now interested again and I think the washout effect was the reason for the effects that I saw and you’re right.

Thanks and best regards Thomas

A. G. Maisey · 21st January 2020, 11:43 PM

You have done a lot more playing around with this than I ever did Thomas. All I ever did was to make what I wanted, or needed, to make, and if the result was satisfactory, which it nearly always was, I let it go at that.

My comments relate to a finished blade, which of course is always etched & stained, and because a blade will always have angled faces, the nickel itself will always appear to be wider than it really is. If you just forge a flat faced billet, the nickel will look very thin.

My working method was very simple, I did not use stacks of material, usually just two pieces of +/- 1cm - 2cm thick ferric material with a paper thin piece of nickel between. Occasionally I used two or more of these already welded little billets to make a small stack, but working alone without a striker and without a power hammer, it was faster and easier to use small billets.

jagabuwana · 22nd January 2020, 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

My working method was very simple, I did not use stacks of material, usually just two pieces of +/- 1cm - 2cm thick ferric material with a paper thin piece of nickel between.

Alan, when working without a striker and without a power hammer, how many hours of work would it have taken you to get a calon from these three pieces?

A. G. Maisey · 22nd January 2020, 08:17 AM

Forget the idea of "three pieces", just focus on time to make a forging from which a keris can be carved.

The bulk of time to make a keris with a plain mlumah pamor is in the carving.

Go here:-

http://www.kerisattosanaji.com/PBXIImaisey3.html

This keris was made 100% in Australia, at Wentworthville, I used a coke forge, I worked completely alone, no striker, no power hammer.

It was carved completely with manual tools, no electric tools.

It is not a mlumah pamor, I made a mlumah pamor then turned it side on so the central portion of the blade face is adeg, so there is a bit more forge time in it than if I had left it as a wos wutah.

Total working time was 16 days, at 6 and 8 hour days, say, +/- 110 to 120 manhours.

I do not recall exactly how long the forge time took, but it was probably about 3 days, give or take a bit. It is a normal, full size keris.

For comparison, this one:-

http://www.kerisattosanaji.com/PBXIImaisey2.html

was forged in Solo, working with two strikers, it took 3 days of forge work with two strikers, so 9 mandays. It was forged on charcoal, they were not 8 hour days, more like 6 hour days, or less. It is half size keris, and it is a manipulated (twisted) pamor.

I carved it in Australia, again, only manual tools, no electric tools, total working time was +/- 40 carving days + 9 mandays forging, total 49 mandays.

Jean · 22nd January 2020, 09:09 AM

When you think that a full and good quality old kris is sold for about 100$ at some international auctions, I find that it is a shame for the makers, I admire them very much but most people cannot appreciate this exceptional work!
Regards

A. G. Maisey · 22nd January 2020, 10:33 AM

Jean, it takes less time for a current era maker to make keris than it took me.

The first real keris I made was under the supervision of Empu Suparman. That took a total of 2 days to forge using two strikers, I did not weld this keris, a local smith was engaged for the forge work, I worked as one of his strikers, so , 3 men, 2 days = 6 man days to forge, then it took me 16 days to carve.

Empu Suparman could carve a keris using only hand tools, no electric tools, in 12 to 14 days.

At the present time every single current era maker that I know, or know of, uses electric tools, with only the finishing touches done with manual tools.

True, keris makers are not richly rewarded, but compared with, let us say, a mechanical fitter or bus driver or a village pande living and working in Central Jawa, they do not fare too badly. If they become well known and their work becomes popular, they can do very, very well indeed.

22nd January 2020, 09:09 AM	#5
Jean Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,740	When you think that a full and good quality old kris is sold for about 100$ at some international auctions, I find that it is a shame for the makers, I admire them very much but most people cannot appreciate this exceptional work! Regards Last edited by Jean; 22nd January 2020 at 01:41 PM.

21st January 2020, 09:51 PM	#1
thomas hauschild Member Join Date: May 2017 Location: Germany Posts: 141	A.G. Maybe the looking of exposed nickellayers is more a feeling or a suggestion for me than a fact. I have also used often pure nickel for damascus ( outer layers with nickel, but with a hard core as an edge ) starting with 20 layers 2 mm carbon steel and 20 ( 19 of course ) of 0,1 mm nickel the first result was allways „thick black layers and thin white layers“. After doubling to a result of 40 black + 40 white the black looks like half thickness but the whites „seems“ to have the same thickness as before or seems to have a higher presence and the hole billet becomes now more white than before. After folding to 160 and then to 320 layers the layers of the nickel becomes more and more present and looks now as they have the same thickness as the black steel. I saw some microscope pictures and yes indeed the nickel was really thin and you saw thick carbon steel layers. Visual the nickel looks more present and wider than they realy are. I made a billet with above 2000 layers and it etched with no more optical visible layers it stays against acid like a 1% Nickelsteel. Under microscope the layers and a strong border between steel and nickel was clearly visible. To that time I had a good source to make some microscope investigations but I lost this source too early ( I worked in a plant for forged shafts for electrical power plants) I wanted to take a more detailed look weather there were really movement of nickel into the steel or if the nickel layer just looking wider than they are because the black steel was washed away by the acid. After your comment and thinking about I’m now interested again and I think the washout effect was the reason for the effects that I saw and you’re right. Thanks and best regards Thomas

21st January 2020, 11:43 PM	#2
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,015	You have done a lot more playing around with this than I ever did Thomas. All I ever did was to make what I wanted, or needed, to make, and if the result was satisfactory, which it nearly always was, I let it go at that. My comments relate to a finished blade, which of course is always etched & stained, and because a blade will always have angled faces, the nickel itself will always appear to be wider than it really is. If you just forge a flat faced billet, the nickel will look very thin. My working method was very simple, I did not use stacks of material, usually just two pieces of +/- 1cm - 2cm thick ferric material with a paper thin piece of nickel between. Occasionally I used two or more of these already welded little billets to make a small stack, but working alone without a striker and without a power hammer, it was faster and easier to use small billets.

22nd January 2020, 08:17 AM	#4
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,015	Forget the idea of "three pieces", just focus on time to make a forging from which a keris can be carved. The bulk of time to make a keris with a plain mlumah pamor is in the carving. Go here:- http://www.kerisattosanaji.com/PBXIImaisey3.html This keris was made 100% in Australia, at Wentworthville, I used a coke forge, I worked completely alone, no striker, no power hammer. It was carved completely with manual tools, no electric tools. It is not a mlumah pamor, I made a mlumah pamor then turned it side on so the central portion of the blade face is adeg, so there is a bit more forge time in it than if I had left it as a wos wutah. Total working time was 16 days, at 6 and 8 hour days, say, +/- 110 to 120 manhours. I do not recall exactly how long the forge time took, but it was probably about 3 days, give or take a bit. It is a normal, full size keris. For comparison, this one:- http://www.kerisattosanaji.com/PBXIImaisey2.html was forged in Solo, working with two strikers, it took 3 days of forge work with two strikers, so 9 mandays. It was forged on charcoal, they were not 8 hour days, more like 6 hour days, or less. It is half size keris, and it is a manipulated (twisted) pamor. I carved it in Australia, again, only manual tools, no electric tools, total working time was +/- 40 carving days + 9 mandays forging, total 49 mandays.

22nd January 2020, 10:33 AM	#6
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,015	Jean, it takes less time for a current era maker to make keris than it took me. The first real keris I made was under the supervision of Empu Suparman. That took a total of 2 days to forge using two strikers, I did not weld this keris, a local smith was engaged for the forge work, I worked as one of his strikers, so , 3 men, 2 days = 6 man days to forge, then it took me 16 days to carve. Empu Suparman could carve a keris using only hand tools, no electric tools, in 12 to 14 days. At the present time every single current era maker that I know, or know of, uses electric tools, with only the finishing touches done with manual tools. True, keris makers are not richly rewarded, but compared with, let us say, a mechanical fitter or bus driver or a village pande living and working in Central Jawa, they do not fare too badly. If they become well known and their work becomes popular, they can do very, very well indeed.