Comments on: Carbon nanotechnology in an 17th century Damascus sword

By: Walter S. Andriuzzi

Walter S. Andriuzzi — Thu, 06 May 2010 11:29:19 +0000

… wow
(maybe Tolkien’s Elves and Dwarves used that trick too )

By: Begin PHASE THREE! | Not Exactly Rocket Science | Discover Magazine

Begin PHASE THREE! | Not Exactly Rocket Science | Discover Magazine — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 23:54:46 +0000

[...] Carbon nanotechnology in an 17th century Damascus sword [...]

By: Gaey Ford

Gaey Ford — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 23:14:23 +0000

Back in the early 90′s i went to several blade smithing classes at Mr. Cleston Sinyards shop in Alabama. At one of these classes Mr. Al Pendray taught a class on making wootz steel in a crucible. The process was done in a gas forge that took some time to do. i don’t remember the total time the crucible was in the forge as there were other things going on . if memory is correct i think the woots soaked in the fire all day and into the night. Mr. Pendray broke the crucible open the next day to show the lump of steel inside.He didn’t do any more to the steel at this time. He also demonstrated useing a top and bottom spring fuller die to make a ” T ” topped blade of middle eastern design. i do make pattern welded steel for my knives i sell my favorite steels are L 6 and 1084 for doing pattern welded as the different steels show up nicely after etching. Garey Ford . Moss Point Mississippi

By: Asad Shbaita

Asad Shbaita — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 15:47:31 +0000

for Damascus sowred and the reuslt been made during crusaders war in middle east , that sowreds of european were brittle while this sowred was sharp , hard and not breakable.
before 300 years a reasrech study been started in One of Uk universities to produce same sowred of damascus one, and after that with coordination with Yale university , this research study been closed after they bring same caractaristcs of damascus sowred with traditional ways of anneling , heating and cooling process.
one of my Brit emplyee from Bemingham city , that there is
story among people there talking about that Brit. took with
them experit from Syria to taought the english workers how to produce such sowred.
realy this sowred is amaizing piece of product.
tks
shbaita

By: Withheld

Withheld — Thu, 21 May 2009 18:09:00 +0000

Wow. There has been a great deal of misinformation given here, much of it from some very experienced people. I have long followed the history of pattern welding and exotic steels of antiquity. Blended steels were not uncommon. Each culture which used them (and there were at least a dozen distinct) did it for local reasons. Japanese steel (plentiful, in fact) was low in carbon, and was folded to increase carbon content (by forming carbides at the surface) and create a variety of steels from which to make different areas within a blade. Conversely, European iron was too carbon rich (compare with cast iron), and folding was required to reduce carbon content (by oxidation) and prevent brittleness and sponginess. Malaysia folded steel to mix mild steel (which was common) with meteoric steel (which was precious). Pattern welding is (broadly) this process of folding steel at the forge to change its characteristics. 12 such folds will produce about 4000 layers (enough that the metal becomes homogenous by migration and pattern is lost), and so was not as heroic as often depicted (though it requires superior skill to pattern weld at all).
Wootz has been known to be a very different animal for a long time and has been known to contain substantially more than 1% carbon since modern science. NO MODERN STEEL has been able to reproduce this high carbon content without brittleness and porosity, and this includes modern pattern welds, which combine high (approaching 1% carbon) and medium or low carbon steels. These produce (something like) the traditional appearance of some pattern welded steel, but do not possess the carbon within, or characteristics attributed to, Damascus steel. Finally, it has been known since at least 2000 that Damascus steel originated in India, and generally agreed that its ‘secret’ was lost when the natively specially alloyed ore was consumed: the Indians had little idea why their steel was special, only the technique to get the most out of their very special ore. It is called Damascus steel because it was exported to Europe through Damascus which was assumed (incorrectly) to be its source. I hope that clears up some of the dumb guy misinformation here, now to the not-so-dumb-guy misinformation.
Those who are embedded in the dogma of pre-2000 metallurgical discovery are missing the point of this article. The tools to inspect metals to the degree of detecting nanotube structure did not exist until recently, and have made metallurgy from prior times obsolete. Nanotubes have their own unique geometry and properties, but if one had to make a comparison with another material, it would be diamond, not any kind of carbon or other alloy steel. By locking up cementite (a carbon steel geometry, someone should have explained that…) in the carbon-carbon bonds of nanotubes, Indians (inadvertently) appear to have actually created the mythical blade which “cleaved man and horse together, and all armor, in twain”. It seems they created the 15 year old child’s sword dream: a steel sword with an edge of diamond, which brings me to a final point, not formerly dealt with.
High carbon steel, even cast iron, is only incrementally harder than low carbon steel. Two properties of mythical Damascus blades were their ability to self-sharpen and to cut like a saw. This myth has been approached, but not met, by modern pattern welding techniques which expose a thin layer of brittle and chipping metal at the edge. This cuts like a microscopic saw and wears more slowly than supporting softer steel. Such blades cut best by slicing rather than hacking (as Mideastern blade were said to have) and require less sharpening. Most had written more than this off to the hyperbole of myth, and set it to rest.
But… Nanotube molecular bond strength and wear resistance are far greater than those of metal carbides (which are what makes all types of steel strong). In addition, the edge exposed in such a blade must necessarily consist of nanotube ends. Imagine a blade with needle points, made of something like diamond, of molecular size, as a sword edge. Suddenly the myths concerning self-sharpening may not have been so far-fetched. Such a blade would improve itself by wear far better than it could possibly be sharpened by hand. Imagine fiberglas, but instead of plastic, the supporting structure is steel, and instead of glass fibers, the threads within are diamond and are orders of magnitude smaller and more numerous. I am very excited by this.

By: Ted

Ted — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 12:24:10 +0000

In addition,the appreciation of Japanese sword was developed from strength inspection of non-destruction.It is big defference compared to Damascus sword. And wavy pattern on sword surface is made not only by forging but also by quenching.
And also beautful wave pattern is controlled by raw material”Tamahagane”.So tamahagane is made by ancient steel making “tatara” which high-tech steel maker Hitachi Metals deal with.

By: Sandro Magi

Sandro Magi — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 05:52:12 +0000

Just came across this thread again. Great post Nagrom!
Charles wrote:
Sandro Magi: Mister Pendray is getting a close approximation… only.
A “close approximation” that is identical at a molecular level is certainly an interesting interpretation of term “approximation”! Perhaps a link or a bit more elaboration would help in explaining how exactly Pendray falls short.

By: Robert Nichols

Robert Nichols — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 21:27:00 +0000

I really am a metallurgical engineer and amature smith. Nagrom nailed it. Go learn something about the process before you post igorant theories and vain repetitions. I post regularly on the blacksmithing and bladesmithing sites. If you want to meet some bladesmiths who know their metallurgy, go to the formum at http://www.dfoggknives.com I have the highest respect for the folks who post there. It is rare that I read there the kind of drivel I read here.

By: Duke

Duke — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 22:56:39 +0000

I agree completely with NAGROM. The hype and mistique that is perpetuated about blade making is silly. I’ve known Hank Reinheart for over 35 years and I admit he was very knowledgable, but he sure wasn’t right about everything he promoted. He was in business to make money when he started Museum Replicas ( as well as making good affordable swords available to Americans), and so he showboated his information to make it seem more “authentic”. A lot of blade mekers or sellers have similar “spiels” to get you to think their stuff is best and you should only listen to them and buy their stuff.
I was just watching the Smithsonian Channel the other day and saw another “expert” proclaim the “Blood Gutter” on a bayonet sword was to “break the vacuume created when you tried to pull out the blade from a stabbed enemy”. That is a common fable associated with grooves in blades. They are simply to make the blade less heavy because the center of the blade doesn’t add very much strength to it and so can be removed without weakening it much and make it lghter in weight. A simple matter of physics, not mistical hocus pocus.
I agree that simple scientific analysis may not give all the answers in how a blade was able to perform and I am completely in favor of testing replicas to see how well they work. But just because someone proclaims they “Know” all about them due to a few testing experiments, I don’t believe they do. Historically many blades were made by many smiths out of many sources of iron ore. To say a single testing, or of a small number of blades or styles, can define a much larger body of artifacts or traditions, is rediculous. IT WILL TAKE MANY TESTS AND EXPERIMENTS TO FIND THE FULL ANSWERS. TILL THEN WE SHOULD ALL TAKE EVERY “PRONOUNCEMENT OF THE TRUTH”, WHATEVER THAT MAY BE, WITH A LARGE GRAIN OF SALT. None of it is Gospel. And I would advise those that are interested in finding the REAL truth , to keep an open mind and read and study as much as you can. Learn what it really takes to make a blade, yourself! Don’t rely on other’s fancy descriptions, since they often are motivated to make themselves look better ( see NAGROM’s comment above about demonising the enemy to make you look better) or smarter or to make their wares more desirable for you to buy, and PAY THEM for. It doesn’t take much effort or expense to produce a simple blade ( see how cheap some imported blades can be) if you know what you are doing. So why not learn and do it yourself? It’s a lot cheaper and more fun than shelling out big bucks for fancy looking blades that often aren’t any better than what you yourself could make!
Start by learning and be careful of who you listen to. If it sounds too hard to believe, it’s probably at least an exageration and posibly not true.
Good Luck!

By: Charles

Charles — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 00:38:43 +0000

allzipy: How do they know the wootz came from India, well it’s well documented, and of course there is that huge pure iron pillar thousands of years old that hasn’t deteriorated. India was a cool place for ancient tech.
Michael: Fake is such a harsh word, just misnamed. They should be sold as pattern welded. There are some experimenters that attempt to make true Damascus blades, but even these guys are only close.
Not Saying: Vikings were making Damascus swords, well in a word that’s bull. Viking swords technology was terrible, they usually bought their swords from the Franks, Viking swords had to be straightenend under foot in combat, because they would bend. Pattern welding in “not” a true Damascus technology.
Sandro Magi: Mister Pendray is getting a close approximation… only.
Sword fan: Jim doesn’t do “Damascus”, his bread and butter comes from his very good books and his pattern welding
Summary: Pattern welding = European and Japanese sword construction. Woots = no folding necessary.