rockstar.esq

Alexander Weygers book on blacksmithing mentioned that heavier hammers upset stock deeper into the material than a lighter hammer. I suspect he's touching on a point that hasn't come up which is that the hammers mass relative to the mass of the stock has a great deal to do with the energy transfer. I've certainly found that high velocity blows from a lighter hammer tend to excel at tasks like riveting because the force seems to penetrate the stock less. The framing hammer analogy presented earlier didn't mention the mass of the work being done. The nail is small and offers little resistance to driving. Overcoming the static friction of the started nail allows the hammer to drive the remainder of the nail with less force. Therefore velocity is a big asset as it allows a lighter hammer. Aside from punching or chiseling, the blacksmith's hammer isn't encountering a similar load. Charles Stevens made a solid point about how moving a wall with a sledge isn't too tough and it doesn't damage the material. The sledge's mass is closer to the mass of the wall than the framing hammer. Thus it overcomes the static friction more readily allowing the wall to slide further. Consider the power hammer versus the bodyshop planishing air hammer. It makes sense to me that if you're working material with low mass (sheet stock) the planishing air hammer is a perfect approach. If you're working bigger mass - the larger mass of the power hammer is the way to go.

Forgemaster - I'd love to know what TAFE stands for. Union Electrical apprenticeship programs in the states are similar in terms of rigor, class time, testing, and duration. I think they were a good example of motivated instruction geared towards practical results and strong return on the memberships investment. I suspect if many modern certifications were based on those ideals - the certifications would carry more weight.

Tran, I've never found rubbing alcohol to be particularly cooling on an open wound. I could maybe see where it's useful to clean stuff out but it sure stings for a bit. I like to point out to onlookers that even black metal skips that whole smoldering thing and goes right for setting things on fire. It's subtle like a bullhorn at a chess match.

Doc (and others). Sorry I was away for so long. I've seen several box joint hinged compass/ dividers at antique stores. One half the set has a slot through which the other half passes. Once assembled, the pivot pin has four shear planes instead of two which presumably makes them last longer. The tools I've seen with a box joint are typically very precise with no wobble in the rotation to speak of. I see this type of joint used on surgical and navigation equipment Francis, that's exactly the type of joint I was referring to! I'd still like to understand what Peter Ross was talking about regarding upsetting.

There's usually a correlation between certification and demand. That is, if companies are seeking qualified help of a particular type, they'll generally incite local certification in one form or another. Lots of community colleges tailor coursework to local industrial concerns. I haven't seen a "now hiring blacksmith" advertisement in my life - I sincerely doubt certification would change that. However I've read of some recent cases where employers are testing applicants versus using certification as an indicator of quality workers. Evidently the programs were a mis-match to the skillsets the employers were looking for despite all indications to the contrary. Personally I'd love to see the decline of the Human Resources resume screener who spends mere seconds scanning the life's work of an individual looking for easily digestible acronyms to indicate worthiness. Recently I read an article about what constitutes a "good hire" at the interview level. Across the board, related experience was the single greatest predictor of success - the rest was basically random chance. I suspect that most people find that their credentials count for the first job. The second job is usually based on how you did at the first one. It seems the further you get down the line, the less anybody cares where you went to school (or if you went at all). The notion that certification drives earnings is dependent on those giving the jobs being willing to pay more. It's been my experience that such situations have been on the decline for the last ten years or so here in the U.S.

I've watched several of the Peter Ross Woodwrights Shop episodes. He is consistently clear and articulate about what he's doing. I entirely agree with the comment about good filming. As I thought about this ,there was an episode where Peter was talking about upsetting for 90 degree corners. As my foggy memory recalls, he said that he disagreed with the consensus view that stock was being driven into the corner. I know I've seen it a few times and it's never been particularly clear. It seems like he said something to the effect that if he makes a punch mark to define the corner when the stock is straight - that mark doesn't change position as he does the upsetting and turns the corner. His mark was on one of the flat sides of the corner as opposed to the apex of the bend. I also wanted to ask if his video covers making dividers with box joints?

SJS - that was a very thoughtful post. I particularly appreciate that you noted that the light and fast versus heavy and slow debate doesn't happen in a vacuum. Thick stock versus thin stock will play a greater role than a kinetic energy equation. I'm reminded of similar debates in ballistics that often ignore the intended target. It's really tempting to assume that there's got to be a single best choice. Often it's about responding to the challenge presented with the most reasonable tool at hand.

I wonder if that included training? Lots of folks today spend a lot on college before they can start at the bottom somewhere. The other day I read an article about how getting the wrong degree from the right university is actually a net loss in lifetime earnings over a person going through life with a GED. They had a list of a hundred or so of the worst offenders. The cutoff to make the list was a $30,000 or greater lifetime earning advantage for the GED graduate.

Tumbler abrasive?

Joel, I think is see what you're getting at. The start of the twist at each end is more acute than the center of the bar. It occurs to me that structural steel is performance based rather than chemically defined. It's possible that some of the bars you're using have a slightly different makeup causing them to react differently to the heat. I wonder if a longer soak at temperature would solve the problem. You could quench the ends at different distances to center till you found the right answer. It may be unlikely but I know that I've made this mistake before. Did you count the same number of rotations? I've been a quarter rotation off before and had similar results. Those last few degrees tend to twist the center more because the ends have cooled.

I was at a flea market a few weeks ago and saw some things that are worth passing on to you. Lots of people abuse hammers. I found lots of hammers with chipped heads or spalling faces where they'd been used as struck tools. Hitting hardened hammers against one another is how this happens. Hitting hardened tooling will do the same thing. Chipped faces are a warning sign that you'll need to address before the hammer can be safely used. Other than that, whatever get's you started is fair game.

Doc, You're right and I could have expressed that better. The company I used as an example was likely bidding with no or very little profit to start with. Viewed as an individual start-up, this office burned through a serious capital investment by delaying incoming profits. Viewed as a 1/6th or 16% of a firm that's otherwise profitable - the payback delay on that investment is strategic. They an extreme example because they started chasing the highest echelon market in the metro area without any local history. They're going after work that's consistently high profit - during a recession so it's a pretty dramatic example. I can see why it's in-congruent to use them as an example then I stated that huge capital isn't the deciding factor. There's a small company I work with that wins roughly three times more often than their competitors. The two principals of that firm used to work for a contractor that is a perfect example of the parasitic method. Both guy's made names for themselves with the clients and subcontractors as being sharp, honest, and efficient with their time. Before long, the clients were asking them to break off on their own. When they started their firm - they had a client roster, and an experienced team of subcontractors eager to work with them. It's not easy working for someone who's wrong - headed but these guy's are proof that perseverance and staying true to your course is a worthy investment. They launched during a recession and have slowly grown. They know their target market, and they built their operation to optimize those opportunities. They pass on jobs that are too big, or too small and they don't bid if they sense anything's amiss with the client. They're equally selective about subcontractors - they stay updated on cost data and they monitor performance strictly. Just like the earlier example - they get better subcontractor pricing because they are less risk to work with than their competitors. That pricing advantage allows them to maintain a reasonable profit margin while still being lower cost than their competitors. A critical point here is that the apex bidders see the necessity of investing in their reputation to gain market share. The small firm was built on the investment the two principals made in their reputations over many years. The bigger firm invested capital to build a local reputation in a shorter period of time. Corporate buyouts/takeovers are another way towards that end. The philosophical difference that sets apex people apart is that they're very selective and strategic about how they apply themselves. That's true regardless of their capital position. I hope that makes more sense.

SJS - well said.

Finer than jewelry!

Chris john, really beautiful work. Your reply to LastRonin was very funny. It reminded me of something Reagan said during his debate with Kennedy I want you to know that also I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent's youth and inexperience. ~ Ronald Reagan

I'll pile onto what Macbruce said - the grubby junk is "patina" to a collector and they value it more than the wood and steel. Antiques roadshow frequently has folks on who converted something priceless to worthless by simply cleaning the object. Even if it's not covered in gunk, it's possible to change material aspects of the piece that validate it's age. Stuff like roll marks, engraving, and inlay take a very practiced hand to clean without messing anything up. Entire scholarly works have been published on the font size, depth of embossing, and bluing techniques of famous arms makers. Change any of that and the experts will notice. Some antique arms were bone case hardened which gives them a unique mottled appearance. It's hard to fake a color case hardening so polishing it off removes the strongest evidence that it's a legit antique.

I've seen some Japanese cutlery where they have a chisel grind for exactly the same reason you mentioned. The two big differences being that they don't have a bevel on one face, and they have a flat grind on the other. Boning knives are sometimes ground the same way. I've never seen a knife that had a bevel grind on one side and a convex grind on the other. For that matter, I don't think I've ever seen a knife with a convex grind on one side and a flat face on the other either. It's an interesting proposition - I'd love to try side by side comparisons to see how they'd work.

Is the bias grind to emulate a chisel edge? Beautiful work.

One thing nobody's mentioned yet is that channel locking pliers are good at applying rotational force radial to a long axis. If you try to hold a long object at one end with the grips in line - you'll see that there's very little purchase to keep the work from pivoting left and right to the jaw's axis. Holding said piece of stock radially can put your off hand in an awkward position when you're trying to do something at the opposite end of the stock. So the channel lock would potentially excel at applying a twisting force to a bar but it'd would be lackluster at most everything else. Another thing not mentioned yet is that ill fitting tongs make forging stressful. As a beginner it's hard enough to learn to control everything - having a ripping hot piece of stock wobbling around makes it difficult to focus on the task at hand. Clamping harder with your tong hand reduces your fine motor control.

I posted a while back about what it's like bidding work and I was honestly taken aback at how well I was received. I'm hoping that I can share a bit more that may prove useful to folks in business or who are working for a business and wondering why things end up the way they do. Recently a colleague contacted me to tell me he'd started at a new job for an out of state company. He wanted help bidding local projects with an eye towards opening a satellite office for his firm. More on that in a moment. As a subcontractor I have a list of General Contractors that I bid to ranging from quite small to outright huge. Among them are some firms that are bidding much more often than average. I call such firms "bid mills" because it's endless grinding out bids without any concern for winning or losing. Recently I politely asked one such firm to take us off their invite list. I received an immediate reply asking me why I wanted to be removed. It's not easy to politely say "Your firm isn't going to win the unprofitable job you're chasing because your plan is to chase everything hoping whatever you win will be enough". Thinking all of this over it occurred to me that there are some prevalent philosophical differences that really get to the heart of how bidding relates to their business. I've found that there are some that work, and others that don't. The two examples above are what I'd call the Parasite. The parasite does one thing - it clamps on to the adjacent host and tries to suck it dry. One host is as good as another. Parasites aren't sophisticated - they do the same thing over and over again because survival is their only goal. This mindset carries beyond just mindlessly chasing whatever is in front of them. It's notable that the bid mill contractor's reply demanded an explanation from me. It never dawns on these folks to reply with "you may want to reconsider - we've won X amount of work last quarter and we're gearing up for the summer rush". They bid for survival so they view every invite as a lifeline - they have nothing to offer beyond shared survival. My colleague thinks that it's a simple matter to just "win whatever" then build it profitably with folks he hires once he's got work for them. The "plan" relies entirely on luck and growth to return a profit. He will likely discover that he needs to include more overhead to deliver quality work AFTER he wins a job. Then he'll want to add more overhead to the next bid - so he'll lose. He won't be winning enough work so he'll want to bid more jobs and so the parasitic philosophy is born. These folks live in a state of constant disappointment going from week to week or job to job hoping for a big break. It's depressing to think how long some companies have been doing this. There's another group I'd call Farmers. These folks have a very short client list - sometimes only one or two. They tailor their operation to please their client(s) and they rely upon the work they're given for their entire survival. Farmers are as good as their client. In most cases Farmers with good clients are relying on relationships built over long periods of time. Establishing those relationships is incredibly difficult. In most of the cases I've seen, it's some combination of being in the right place at the right time. It's pretty easy to know when you've found a farmer with a good client because they don't try particularly hard to announce their existence. They get famous for doing whatever they're good at and subcontractors flock to them. Farmers like this are generally very risk averse so they're not as focused on low bid as they are on perfect performance. They're also some of the happiest people you'll meet - it's a good life if you can get it. Farmers with bad clients are as pitiful and dangerous as an abused dog. They flinch every time their client rattles the chain, and they pass every abuse down the line. There's a national grocery chain that used to conduct "reverse auction" that's a prime example of this. A reverse auction has all the bidding contractors submit their bid to a website by a deadline. A moment after the deadline, the website posts the current low bid amount along with a countdown timer for the amount of time you have to revise your number. It depends on the conditions set by the client but I've encountered such bids where you must cut a minimum percentage of the low number in order to revise your bid amount. Some display all the bidders - some just show the low number. If they only share the low number - you don't necessarily know that you'll stay the low bidder. Even worse - some of these systems keep updating the timer to prolong the bid for as long as people are cutting their bids (hurting themselves). Some go for hours. It should go without saying that the countdowns don't allow sufficient time to contact subcontractors to ask for better pricing, or to consult with anyone. GC's have certainly cut beyond the lowest number they could achieve on bid day - where's that money going to come from? As a sub, I can tell you it'll come out of your pocket one way or the other because the farmer with a bad client can't/won't just get work elsewhere. The last group I'd identify are Apex predators. These companies are very selective about what they will target because they know that bidding less means winning more. They don't chase low profit work, bad clients, or pick fights with farmers. One such firm opened an office in the local Metro area. They have five metropolitan offices in as many states. This firm started out by aggressively targeting high end clients that have select bid lists. They took high end client jobs at a loss for over a year in order to build a local resume. It's incredibly important to point out that they paid the local subcontractors promptly, and fairly. They also delivered quality. As they got onto more select bid lists, they tapered off on buying lesser work - choosing to invest in their target demographic. After two years - they're on equal footing with firms going back 50 years in the market. I would surmise that they plan on seeing a return on their investment many years down the road from now. This is an incredibly expensive undertaking but every move they made was strategic. Now this firm is doing something truly noteworthy. They are choosing two subcontractors in every trade to bid on their work. They make it clear that they're partnering with what they believe are the best firms to target the best jobs. They expect better pricing and service from their subs and they offer lower competition, higher win rates, more profitable work, and prompt payment regardless of whether the client pays. These promises hold weight because they invested in a plan that is clearly working. The better sub pricing allows them room to add profit to their bids without exceeding market value - thereby making their final situation fiscally stable and sustainable. All without bid shopping, cheating, shortchanging the client, or screwing anyone. I can tell you that there are very few Apex predators on the market. Some of them do really small work but they're always profitable. That's an important point - it's not about having huge capital behind you - it's about knowing what you're good at, scanning the field, picking a worthy target, and applying your resources to make it successful. Companies that do that, are consistently at the top of their game. Farmers are a little more common. A bad economy is especially tough on good farmers because they struggle with how to scale back their operation to compete profitably on the hard bid market. They're also relatively unknown to the hardscrabble subs who are offering market pricing. They also fall into traps with bad clients because they're entire mindset is on cherishing a single client rather than appraising them more critically. There's never an end to the parasites - they're just the lowest common denominator wherever they reside. It's really hard to tell someone at the bottom that they should be a picky bidder. These guy's all believe the "big job" is going to come along and it'll be a gold rush for them. Lots of gold panners died broke while grizzly's got fat swatting salmon out of the same water. Know what your good at and go where it pays.

Some folks make it on brute strength, some make it on intellect, others on charm. I've found that people are rarely aware of how close they come to serious career-ending injury. I've found that the less I rely on blind luck to protect me from injury - the less often I come up hurt. Hard work is a virtue- but it's wasteful to limit your potential taking risks. Lots of go-hard journeymen die within 6 months of retirement. I doubt any of their families were happy with that outcome.

I don't know if I'm able to articulate this very well but I'll give it a try. Watching Brian's tong making videos makes the entire process seem very smooth, fast, and graceful. I'm consistently impressed by how much work gets done every heat. Similarly it's incredible to see how quickly a piece of stock is drawn out on a Uri Hofi demonstration for example. It's clear to me that skill and practice make a huge difference in what's "quicker" to a given smith. It certainly seems like some smiths would have the reigns drawn out on a set of tongs before a welder could get the leads unrolled. I would love to be capable of such a feat. I figure you've got to pick your starting point - some folks aren't going to be happy unless they smelt their own iron - others view blacksmithing as an adjunct to fabrication. For the record, I can see the instructional value of making tongs both ways. Drawing out stock efficiently is something I'm certainly striving for.

John - that is very sound advice.

Common sense is like deodorant. The people who need it most, never use it. - anonymous "Any community that gets its laughs by pretending to be idiots will eventually be flooded by actual idiots who mistakenly believe that they're in good company." - Rene Descartes "Critics are men who watch a battle from a high place then come down and shoot the survivors" - Ernest Hemingway "The problem isn't that there are too many fools in the world... it's that lightning isn't distributed right" - Mark Twain.

PCornett - I've found that getting out and asking folks for stuff will cause them to think of you when something finally does come along. The longer you're at it, the better your odds. Being broke for a long time I had no choice but to watch from the sidelines on a lot of deals. Folks will remember your knowledge and a positive attitude when they're feeling charitable. We all start somewhere. I didn't have the funds to expand a collection by paying the going rate but my persistent searching led to a half dozen acquisitions at half market value.