Hello Everyone, new to the board

pbinns · 29th December 2006, 03:26 PM

Thanks for that research Geoff, much appreciated, it reveals a lot to me .

...... so metallurgical technospeak aside.. that tells me that the core of this weapon was quite pure low carb iron and that the PW contrast was due to phosphourous containing iron welded (piled) with a purer iron without any phosphorous inclusions in it.

so far so good... I wonder what would happen if you bent said blade over your knee ? So much pure iron in it would surely dictate a set (ie remained bent) blade after say 5 inches out of true over the 30 inches of the blades length ??. Being hammered so thin at the tip for a good cut would mean a susceptability to incur this type of deformation in use. Easiest way to stop this is to make a thicker non flexable blade ?? any comments ?

Jeff Pringle · 2nd January 2007, 04:55 AM

Quote:

...... so metallurgical technospeak aside.. that tells me that the core of this weapon was quite pure low carb iron and that the PW contrast was due to phosphourous containing iron welded (piled) with a purer iron without any phosphorous inclusions in it.

Yes, but I wonder if they missed a higher-carbon edge material, there's another 6th C. Merovingian blade in the first chapter of "A History of Metallography" by Smith that has phosphoric iron in the patterned area, but martensitic steel at the edge.

Quote:

I wonder what would happen if you bent said blade over your knee ? So much pure iron in it would surely dictate a set (ie remained bent) blade after say 5 inches out of true over the 30 inches of the blades length ??. Being hammered so thin at the tip for a good cut would mean a susceptability to incur this type of deformation in use. Easiest way to stop this is to make a thicker non flexable blade ?? any comments ?

They seemed to like thin, flexible blades - and probably both knew how to cut with them to avoid unnecessary bending, and didn't mind a little bending - compared to breaking, at least. I'm pretty sure there was a wide variety of metal content, too - have you seen this article?

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/jom...eich-0508.html

It says, about some Merovingian swords:
"...The four other swords sampled were of Iron Age date and revealed similar heterogeneity and complexity (1922.07.0026, 1924.02.0309, 0310, and 0311). The one sword with a low carbon content (i.e., 0.2%) was ferrite with varying amounts of pearlite (1922.07.0026). Two of the three swords (1924.02.0310 and 0311) with higher carbon contents (i.e., 0.5%) displayed a banded, ferrite/pearlite structure indicative of piling and air cooling after having been raised to temperatures in excess of 900ºC. These two artifacts had an average hardness of 257.8 Hv. One of these swords also possessed a high phosphorus content (1924.02.0311). The remaining high-carbon sword (1924.02.0309) was a clearly superior weapon, with a martensitic grain structure indicative of quenching and a hardness of 711 Hv (Figure 5). It showed no evidence of piling."

So maybe things were similar today and 1500 years ago, lotsa crap and a few really nice blades mixed in. I haven't gone back-checking to see if there is a time factor in the above analysis, 'iron age' can be a pretty big spread, so if the lower carbon stuff was earlier than the higher carbon we could surmise some technological advance.

pbinns · 2nd January 2007, 11:15 AM

Thanks Jeff, that article was very informative. the phosphoric iron was good enough for low quality axes knives etc but was selected out (or included in when banded and piled with good iron for PW cores) for the higher quality stuff that was heat treated. It points to the diversity of smiths skills and the economic considerations both when in use and when depositing grave goods as possibilities for these various quality differences.

My appreciations for sharing this research with me, although England is full of museums (some would say it IS one big museum ... and will shortly being appointing a Head Curator rather than a prime minister) information like this needs to be sought out carefully from the ivory towers of academia. A bloke smelling of quenching oil and with burn holes in his shirt is not guaranteed an audience in the British Museum!!!.Besides, Im lazy when needing to look things up.

I agree totally with your comments re flexability of blades. Before chrome vanadium heterogenous blast furnace space age steel people did not expect a blade to be bent like a car ariel. If the sword is used edge on and not slapped flat on the sword should not be subject to too much bend stress.

Like you say the only failure that really matters is a sword snapping, which these should not do. Besides in this period a lot of the real fighting was done with spears, swords would come out when the sheild wall broke and the pursuit began, I would think.

Thankyou once again for your assistance matey.. if you are ever in England you must visit. please keep in touch regards paul

29th December 2006, 03:26 PM	#1
pbinns Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 10	Thanks for that research Geoff, much appreciated, it reveals a lot to me . ...... so metallurgical technospeak aside.. that tells me that the core of this weapon was quite pure low carb iron and that the PW contrast was due to phosphourous containing iron welded (piled) with a purer iron without any phosphorous inclusions in it. so far so good... I wonder what would happen if you bent said blade over your knee ? So much pure iron in it would surely dictate a set (ie remained bent) blade after say 5 inches out of true over the 30 inches of the blades length ??. Being hammered so thin at the tip for a good cut would mean a susceptability to incur this type of deformation in use. Easiest way to stop this is to make a thicker non flexable blade ?? any comments ?

2nd January 2007, 11:15 AM	#3
pbinns Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 10	Thanks Jeff, that article was very informative. the phosphoric iron was good enough for low quality axes knives etc but was selected out (or included in when banded and piled with good iron for PW cores) for the higher quality stuff that was heat treated. It points to the diversity of smiths skills and the economic considerations both when in use and when depositing grave goods as possibilities for these various quality differences. My appreciations for sharing this research with me, although England is full of museums (some would say it IS one big museum ... and will shortly being appointing a Head Curator rather than a prime minister) information like this needs to be sought out carefully from the ivory towers of academia. A bloke smelling of quenching oil and with burn holes in his shirt is not guaranteed an audience in the British Museum!!!.Besides, Im lazy when needing to look things up. I agree totally with your comments re flexability of blades. Before chrome vanadium heterogenous blast furnace space age steel people did not expect a blade to be bent like a car ariel. If the sword is used edge on and not slapped flat on the sword should not be subject to too much bend stress. Like you say the only failure that really matters is a sword snapping, which these should not do. Besides in this period a lot of the real fighting was done with spears, swords would come out when the sheild wall broke and the pursuit began, I would think. Thankyou once again for your assistance matey.. if you are ever in England you must visit. please keep in touch regards paul