1095 Quench

B

buckaroo

Well-Known Member
I am using canola and olive oil to quench my 1095 blades. I can do 4 to 5 blades at a time in my oven.
I heat the oil to the 125 degree range. My question is this. After the first blade the temp of the oil has risen above 125 and will continue to rise with each blade. By the time the last blade goes in the oil is really hot and I am worried I'm not getting the proper quench. How do you handle.
 
Only have about 2 gallons. I will have to get more and see how that works. Thanks

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 
Buckaroo, are you getting full hardness with your canola and olive oil with 1095? I ask because those oils are not recommended for 1095. They are a medium speed oil, more suitable to 52100 and such. 1095 requires you to get under the nose in about 1 second, and canola/mineral/olive oils don't come close to that speed.
 
Best I can do right now. Don't have the funds for the pro oils.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 
I don't think your making the nose either, with that oil combination. 1095 takes a fast oil. Parks 50 or something of similar make up.
Good luck!

Fred
 
Since a fast quench is required - what would a water quench do? OR - perhaps a brine quench? Wouldn't that get 1095 under the nose faster? I agree the Parks 50 would be best, but depending on the number of 1095 blades to be quenched over a yr's time that can be expensive.

Ken H>
 
KenH said:
Since a fast quench is required - what would a water quench do? OR - perhaps a brine quench? Wouldn't that get 1095 under the nose faster? I agree the Parks 50 would be best, but depending on the number of 1095 blades to be quenched over a yr's time that can be expensive.

Ken H>
Click to expand...

Brine would work, but that dreaded "ping" sound might be the result. Nothing ventured nothing gained.

Fred
 
I was trying to get 1095 HTed in Canola. I got full hardness - by Rockwell tester - up to 1/8" and mostly with 5/32. 3/16" or more was generally failure or unintended hamon.
 
It depends a bit on who you are getting your 1095 from. Early on I did two blades from a lot that I obtained from Admiral steel and oil would not harden it; I had to use brine. My understanding is that the 1095 from Aldo Bruno, aka the New Jersey Steel Baron, had a bit more manganese in it and will harden in something like canola oil, though I have to admit that I've never used it.

Regardless, 1095 is a shallow hardening steel and, depending on things like exact alloy and grain size, will only harden to a given thickness. Above that mark there is too much mass for the qenchant to cool before the 1095 crosses the pearlite finish line at the nose. So not being able to get the blade to harden past 3/16" thickness is what would be expected with this alloy and not a failure. Actually if I got a blade to harden at that thickness I'd start worrying about having too large a grain size.

Doug
 
To reiterate Knifemaker.ca and Doug’s excellent advice, a slightly slower oil does not necessarily mean total failure to harden, it only means your depth of hardening is limited. I have found that most oils not designed to deal with the needs of 1095 will result in the beginning of pearlite formation at around 3/16” up a wedge shaped section, like a knife bevel. Depending on your edge bevel angles this should be far enough away from the edge to insure good hardness where it really counts. The other downside is that you will be limited to hardness files for checking hardness where you can- at the edge. Any flat area approaching 3/16” that would be ideal for a Rockwell test will only read as soft, this is why I pace like a caged animal when I am asked to heat treat a thick 1095 blade.

1095 is my steel of choice when doing testing for quench effectiveness since it is one of the most demanding in quench speed of the high carbon steel s, but my test coupons are cross sectioned for hardness reading. As I mentioned, most oils begin to fall short at the 1/16” mark, while under just the right conditions, Parks #50 has hardened up to 5/16” spines. But speed is not everything, the ideal quenchant gets you maximum martensite formation with the least amount of stress in the process. In knife size cross sections there is no need for water based quenchants with modern alloys, if a knife comes out less hard than you wanted you can always re heat treat it, but if you hear that dreaded “ping” you are done. I have observed many water quenches with modern steels and almost all of the successful ones involved under-soaking to avoid that ping. It is far better to get maximum hardening from a gentler quench than to deny the martensite precious carbon in order to deal with a quenchant that is overkill.

The quickest and most economical solution to your initial question is to simply increase your oil volume to handle the heat volume. Industry does work with special cooling setups through which the oil is circulated, but if that was an option the switch from canola/olive to a dedicated quench oil wouldn’t be a problem either. With what you have, simply buy more oil, and if you want no hamons make thinner knives and soak them well.
 
Thanks for all your input on my question. I have done a lot of reading on this forum and others regarding the type of quenchants to use for 1095. There are two definite camps on this topic. One is Parks 50 or equivalent and the other is Canola or brine. The train of thought seems to be evenly split 50/50 on this subject. I have not had the opportunity to use the Parks 50 so I can not speak to that. I seem to be getting good results from the cooking oil. I am using 1/8 and 5/32 stock so I should be within the hardening zone that Kevin and Doug and Knifemaker are getting good results with.

I want to make the best possible blade I can so may use up the 1095 I have and start using 1080 or 1084.
 
buckaroo said:
Thanks for all your input on my question. I have done a lot of reading on this forum and others regarding the type of quenchants to use for 1095. There are two definite camps on this topic. One is Parks 50 or equivalent and the other is Canola or brine. The train of thought seems to be evenly split 50/50 on this subject. I have not had the opportunity to use the Parks 50 so I can not speak to that. I seem to be getting good results from the cooking oil. I am using 1/8 and 5/32 stock so I should be within the hardening zone that Kevin and Doug and Knifemaker are getting good results with.

I want to make the best possible blade I can so may use up the 1095 I have and start using 1080 or 1084.
Click to expand...

Buckaroo, I totally concur with your observation on the number of different answers you can get on the best approach to any number of facets in knifemaking. However, it is a very common error, in any number of fields or pursuits to approach it as an exercise in democracy. There are countless topics where a majority of the population will insist on the validity of something that is simply not supported by any facts whatsoever. I have encountered so many popular and strongly held beliefs in knifemaking, with no basis in fact, that I have honestly lost count. The best advice I can give to others is to ignore consensus in favor of credibility based upon accurate supporting facts, i.e. quality of information trumps quantity; even if 100% of people agree on something that is wrong, all this means is that they are 100% wrong.

That is not to say that there is always a clear cut right or wrong here, since it will all be relative to what you want to achieve. If all you want is a hard edge and may even prefer a softer spine or some “auto-hamon”:3: activity then something like Parks #50 would be counterproductive, while a vegetable oil may be just the ticket. If you desire homogenous structure and hardness throughout, the #50 would be the way to go.
 
I agree. Kevin, I have followed you and your post and have gleaned a lot of knowledge from you. I take great stock in your comments. Thank you.

I am a custom furniture maker and tend to see things through those eyes at times. There are 100 different ways to cut a joint and 1000 different opinions on what tool to use.
 
Yes, that is consistent with my observations. Although numbers from flat stock are not completely interchangeable with a wedge or tapered cross section, the amount of pearlite observed at that thickness corresponds with the observed loss of hardness in the 63-64 range, while hopefully at the thinner edge the maximum of 65+HRC is obtained.
 
buckaroo said:
I agree. Kevin, I have followed you and your post and have gleaned a lot of knowledge from you. I take great stock in your comments. Thank you.

I am a custom furniture maker and tend to see things through those eyes at times. There are 100 different ways to cut a joint and 1000 different opinions on what tool to use.
Click to expand...

That is the wonderful thing about grinding, polishing and handle work, just about everybody gets to be correct, since there is so much based on personal tastes and aesthetics, with heat treatment we have the steel to answer to, and it is even more cold and uncaring about our feelings than a woman scorned.:3:
 
This is such a perfect thread. I came here and searched for "1095 quench" and BAM! Answers! :D

I've got a few 0.093" thick paring knives in 1095 that I am about 2 days from heat treating. After reading that the olive or canola has had some success on thinner sections, I'm no longer worried about the quench.
 
It might be too simple and cheap but you can quench 1095 in water and achieve good results.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top