Clayless Hamon Technique?

TK Steingass

TK Steingass

Knifemaker - Buckeye
Knifemaker / Craftsman / Service Provider
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
5,581
wheeler hamon.jpeg

Hello All:

I've been experimenting and failing to get some wild looking hamon activity without clay. I've seen some dandy ones over the years - the photo above shows one done by Nick Wheeler. As I understand it, this is achieved by finding a balance in your combination of steel choice, geometry, times, temperatures, and quenchant. Since there are SO MANY variables, I haven't been able to get anything near this. I've used 1075, 1095, and W-2. I have a forge, an electric oven, and an oxy/acetylene torch in my shop - I also have Parks 50 and brine quenchants.

I'd sure appreciate some guidance from those of you successful in no-clay hamons.

V/R,

TK
 
It’s easier the thicker the stock is. There are two main ways to do this, one is heating and watching so you can see the decalescence. Quench before the whole blade changes. The second is the interrupted quench. This is the way I do it. Here’s a couple examples: (1095 on top, Hitachi White on the bottom.)

IMG_0770 by Wjkrywko, on Flickr

IMG_1597 by Wjkrywko, on Flickr

Having an agitated quench tank helps, which I don’t have yet, and using austenitizing temps on the low end of the scale helps. Brine is best, but you know the risks.
 
I don't understand the point? I've never seen one that wouldn't have been achievable with clay. It just seems like an exercise in frustration. Which clay has enough of itself.
 
Last edited:
TK....for that type of hamon, forget the oven. The forge is a bit better.

But Karl is right on target. In my experience, salts are key to this.

It might be attainable with w2 and EXTREMELY drastic changes in geometry and taper with a forge......but salts would be way better.
 
How does that result in more than a solid temper line? Or, is the key agitating the quench like color case hardening so that cooling rate varies by location?
 
I can't answer that exactly....but I've gotten pretty similar results with both 1075 and w2 in my salts. Always lots of fine activity and never just a straight quench line.

Some one with more knowledge than me would have to exactly explain why. I think some of it has to do with the geometry and taper and also the pre-quench thermal cycles.
 
Here is one I did 2 years ago. W-2 (aldos) heat treated in a pid controlled forge with a light satanite wash. To finish ferric chloride, then pumice ,and AO powder with oil using the rough side of a piece of leather. Working on a chef knife right now I'm going to try ferric and then vinegar this time. I think there is a video of that Wheeler blade being heat treated, pretty sure that was the one that inspired me.
DWvVWWDm.jpg
v5z6fItm.jpg
 
Last edited:
I was just looking into this last week. Hes got a short video of it and there are some older threads out there. From my understanding he does get it pretty close to finish ie the swedge is ground pretty thin.
Like karl said nick uses a salt pot and he says it comes down to time and temp. But basically its you rely on the thicker cross sections to not fully transform. And its 3 sec in, 3 seconds out then back in.
Then again this is just from my understanding
 
Karl B. Andersen said:
Nick's blade shown above was probably - if I know Nick - austenized in salts almost exactly at a precise temp and time where the thinner portions had been held in austenite for only a few seconds before the thicker portions could get there.
It's a spectacular hamon.
Click to expand...

That makes sense Karl and John - a real fine grain after normalization and a short duration austenitization prior to an interrupted quench which limited grain growth. Looks like the way to go is with a salts bath if I want to achieve this result. I just priced an 18" salt bath - $1700 from Knifedogs - ouch.

Any suggestions from you folks who makes a more reasonably priced salt bath?
 
kuraki said:
I don't understand the point? I've never seen one that wouldn't have been achievable with clay. It just seems like an exercise in frustration. Which clay has enough of itself.
Click to expand...

On this I disagree. The most spectacular hamon I have seen have been clayless. Second best are the ones that do not follow the clay closely and develop natural activity.
 
J. Doyle said:
I can't answer that exactly....but I've gotten pretty similar results with both 1075 and w2 in my salts. Always lots of fine activity and never just a straight quench line.

Some one with more knowledge than me would have to exactly explain why. I think some of it has to do with the geometry and taper and also the pre-quench thermal cycles.
Click to expand...

That makes sense Karl and John - a real fine grain after normalization and a short duration austenitization prior to an interrupted quench which limited grain growth. Looks like the way to go is with a salts bath if I want to achieve this result. I just priced an 18" salt bath - $1700 from Knifedogs - ouch.

Any suggestions from you folks who makes a more reasonably priced salt bath?
 
Willie71 said:
On this I disagree. The most spectacular hamon I have seen have been clayless. Second best are the ones that do not follow the clay closely and develop natural activity.
Click to expand...

I agree - the clayless hamons really show much more activity and interest (to me at least) that the ones I've done and seen with clay except for Don Hanson's (the hamon master). :):D
 
TK Steingass said:
That makes sense Karl and John - a real fine grain after normalization and a short duration austenitization prior to an interrupted quench which limited grain growth. Looks like the way to go is with a salts bath if I want to achieve this result. I just priced an 18" salt bath - $1700 from Knifedogs - ouch.

Any suggestions from you folks who makes a more reasonably priced salt bath?
Click to expand...

You are definitely able to do a bit of tinkering to set one of these up.

http://www.hightemptools.com/salts.html

If the exchange and shipping wasn’t so cost prohibitive, I would have bought one of these a couple years ago. I’ll probably just have a local pro welder make the basic structure (don’t want to risk my own hobbyist level of shill on something this critical) and set up a pid burner.
 
TK Steingass said:
I agree - the clayless hamons really show much more activity and interest (to me at least) that the ones I've done and seen with clay except for Don Hanson's (the hamon master). :):D
Click to expand...

It seems the exaggerated forced hamon much like what Ben Seward, or Sam Lurquin do is the popular style now, but I personally like the much more organic look. Especially in hand, as getting a picture of the nuance in the activity is way beyond my skill. The two I posted pictures of are stunning, but not like the Wheeler example you posted. I’m still trying to get there. I’ve unfortunately used mostly air hardening steels this past 18 months, but have a few larger projects coming up that call for a hamon. I just don’t see how you get something like this with clay:

IMG_5926 by Wjkrywko, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Willie71 said:
On this I disagree. The most spectacular hamon I have seen have been clayless. Second best are the ones that do not follow the clay closely and develop natural activity.
Click to expand...

I guess I'd have to see one in person I know a lot can be lost in photos, as I can't tell why a random spattering of clay wouldn't do what I see in most pictures with one or two exceptions.
 
I first met Bing at a hammer-in and he demonstrated doing a clayless hamon with a 1095 blade. He used a gas forge and a bucket of hot water to quench in. It was impressive. Anyone who knew Bing well understood he could be a bit stubborn at times. I remember him saying that someone had told him it couldn’t be done, so he decided he’d take that as a challenge.

He held the blade in the forge with some tongs and had the 5 gallon bucket nearby. He said he used the water as hot as it would come out of the tap at home. When he determined the blade was at the right temp, he QUICKLY went straight to the water and agitated it-somewhat violently-in the water.

That was several years ago and I think I have some notes on it somewhere along with a pic or two during the process on an old phone (stupid photobucket...). It really did leave an amazing hamon on that blade-I got to see it later on in the finishing process. One thing Bing did say was that wasn’t the method to use for consistent success, he cracked some blades while trying to figure it out. I sure miss Bing...

I built my salt pot, TK and it was a lot less than the price tag you mentioned. I first saw one up at Ed Caffrey’s shop and modeled mine after his. He used to have (maybe still does?) a bunch of info on it on his site. I ordered I think 316L tubs and plate from onlinemetals and paid someone to Tig weld the plate to the bottom of the tube. Then I just built an upright forge and some burners, etc. The forge heats up the stainless tube, the PID and gas solenoid control the on/off of the gas once temp is reached based on the info you put into the PID. I’m fairly certain mine is all kinds of ugly compared to what many others look like, but it does work ;). One side note-I think I’d try and get the thickest tube wall I could find. I remember talking with John and his tube was a ways thicker than mine-I want to say something like 3/4”? It may take a little longer for that much metal to heat up and subsequently melt the “salts”, but it hangs onto that heat better than mine. I can tend to get some temp swings (overshooting a bit on the way up, dropping below target temp as the burners kick back on) with mine, but if I remember right, John’s has very minimal over/under temp swings.

I don’t have an oven, but would like one and have considered building one a number of times-just pretty intimidating with all the electrical stuff for me. I really like being able to use the salt pot for austenizing and the control it gives vs the gas forge. But for the clayless hamon, I can say with certainty that it can be done with a gas forge :). I look forward to seeing what you come up with, sir.

Jeremy
 
kuraki said:
I guess I'd have to see one in person I know a lot can be lost in photos, as I can't tell why a random spattering of clay wouldn't do what I see in most pictures with one or two exceptions.
Click to expand...

Clay tends to create a more defined transition. Look at the two I posted, or the Wheeler blade, and the foggy, whispy transitions are not created by the clay. They are the blending of matensite and pearlite over a wide area, more like air brushing compared to masking off a line when painting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top