How many random layers to simulate wootz?

T

Travis Fry

Well-Known Member
So this is a bit of a "random" post. I'll likely spend some days this weekend making my first damascus billets with some folks who actually know what they're doing in that realm. I have a thing for Middle Eastern style blades and would like to make a few that are historically accurate, mostly. I say mostly because I'm not going to be buying wootz or smelting my own (I've done this with a remelting furnace, pretty fun but not what I'm currently into). I think a high layer count random billet would fit the bill and look enough like wootz to satisfy, but I'm not sure how many layers would give me the look I want. I'm not at all new to knife making, but am very new to pattern welding. Can anyone post pics of such billets to give me an idea what to shoot for? 500, 1000, 2000 layers and beyond--I'd like to see them all.
 
Last edited:
I've been asked that exact question many times over the past 20+ years.....and the real answer is......you're gona have to experiment to see. The reason I give that answer is because the layer count required has much to do with the individual's forge welding technique. Those who have good technique will require 1000+ layers to get something that looks like wootz. Poor welding technique will give the appearance of wootz with 500-700 layers. Now here's the catch.....the reason that poor welding technique will give the "wootz" look at a lower layer count, is because of carbon migration, etc., basically producing what I call "homogenized" steel.....which tends to be very inferior blade material.

Long story short, there is no set number of layers that can be stated......there are just too many other factors involved.
 
Fair enough Ed. I should have known that the answer would be "it depends." I'll be at Jim Clow's place, and we may not even get to this project. At this point it's just an idea I'm kicking around in my head for an historically accurate Persian kard or Indo-Persian khanjar. I'll make them both eventually out of something, even if this part of the idea doesn't ever pan out.

Why would homogenized steel be inferior? If I understand correctly (and I've never done this before, so I make no claim to expertise) with a lot of carbon migration OR a large number of layers one would end up with a steel in which the layers have the same carbon content, essentially the average of the component materials. Using 1084 and 15n20 which have similar carbon content anyway, would carbon (and, in this case nickel too) migration have any other significant effect than to make the transitions between the layers "muddy"?
 
The "inferior" portion comes from all the ill side effects caused by less then ideal forge welding technique. Namely too much heat (temp), over a long duration (repeated exposure to high temps over the period of time it takes to achieve a high enough layer count). Generally, when the carbon migration takes place, you also get excessive grain growth. SOME of this you can heal through thermal cycling, but there comes a point of diminishing returns (where you simply cannot get the thermal cycling to reduce the grain size enough, and you end up with a "grainy" homogenized steel.

So you're going to Jim's? Let me know when, and I might be able to make the trip up for a visit! I need an excuse to visit Jim anyway. :)
 
The plan is to be at Jim's tomorrow and Monday. I can't imagine Jim not being happy to have you, and I know for sure that I would, especially after missing you both in San Antonio and at the Alberta hammer-in. If that's too short of a planning lead time, I'd for sure be happy to come out again later! Jay Kemble will be there too.
 
Can't get there this weekend......Dana and Sandy Hackney are coming in this evening. But that's OK...I'm sure we'll get there together one of these days soon!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top