Properties Of Wootz
 

Hi Folks,

Over the years there has been much discussion on this forum about the properties of Wootz, and recently the metallurgist Dr Larrin Thomas has posted a very informative video on this legendary steel: https://knifesteelnerds.com/2024/04/...amascus-steel/

Whilst probably not the last word on this subject, it nevertheless gives us a fairly good idea of what Wootz was like in its heyday.

Cheers
Chris

Very interesting paper but only from the metallurgical point of view as it researches the properties of modern, recently made wootz that is massively different from antique wootz.

Moreover, even modern wootz displays a very wide spectrum of properties contingent on its primary composition and heat treatment. For example, I have a wootz Cossack knife made of drill bits that has a very high hardness that I estimate to be around 60 HRC. I also have another recently made wootz hunting knife with a significantly softer blade of around 52 HRC.
Yet, both these blades are vastly superior from the mechanical point of view to my antique wootz blades.

Regarding the antique wootz, there is also quite vast bibliography starting with the works of M. Faraday, going through the research of Verhoeven & Pendray and ending with the papers of Ann Feuerbach.

As a constant, antique wootz is of considerably lower quality than modern wootz in terms of edge retention (hardness) and toughness.

I have many Persian, Indian and Ottoman wootz blades and many needed repairs and maintenance so I can approximate their mechanical properties by the way they behave when subjected to bending and polishing.

On a similar note, did wootz blades have a higher carbon content when compared to a contemporary non wootz European blade? Because I’ve seen European sabre blades be more resistant to rust then say a wootz blade from the same time period.

Hi mariusgmioc,

Good obeservations!

Well, the toughness test results of the Wootz tested by Larrin is rather poor, so I imagine that the antique variety can't be much worse.

A note here on edge retention. The slicing edge retention CATRA test conducted by Larrin does not equate with push cutting nor with edge stability. Slicing edge retention of steels is largely dependent on carbide content, and in this respect Woots does fairly well.

Push cut edge retention and edge stability depend on a combination of high yield point and impact toughness. Hardness is only an approximate indicator of these properties.

I have no first had experience with antique hardened Wootz, but after watching the video, am inclined to think that it had low toughness but decent combined edge retention, always allowing for the inevitable wide variability due to inexact manufacturing.

Cheers
Chris

Hi,

A fairly high carbon content is what made Wootz crucible steel possible, that is to say, by lowering the melting point. Upon solidification, the excess carbon formed carbides, the presence of which not only lowered tougness but also corrosion resistance.

Of course, the carbon content of contemporary European steel varied greatly due to inexact manufacturing, but on average was lower than that of Wootz.

I hasten to add that corrosion resistance is also significantly influenced by other factors such as surface smoothness, degree of cold working and impurities.

Cheers
Chris

Don't forget "Manfred Sachse, Damszener Stahl"! ;)

When did the quality of European blades surpass that of wootz? I assume it was when the Industrial Revolution started, though I know Europeans exported blades to India in large quantities due to their skill in mass production techniques, however I don’t exactly know if these blades were deemed superior in quality to wootz

Dear Chris Evans,

I have to say that https://knifesteelnerds.com/2024/04/...amascus-steel/ is the best reference material I have ever seen on the subject. Thanks for that. Peter Hudson.

For anyone interested in this topic:

Khaidakov K.S., Sukhanov D.A. (2024). H"
https://historical-weapons.com... _io_13_2024.pdf

https://elar.urfu.ru/bitstream... _03_135-140.pdf

Hi,

Thanks for the links, but I could not find the article that the first like was supposed to take me to and got an error message on the second one. What am I doing wrong?

Cheers
Chris

Yes, I have to say that what Larrin has to say on the subject is very informative. He has lots of other very good articles on cutlery steels on his website.

Cheers
Chris

Try this:
https://historical-weapons.com/wp-co...io_13_2024.pdf
https://elar.urfu.ru/bitstream/10995...03_135-140.pdf

Regards, Yuri

Brigadier General John jacob (1812-1848) of the East India Company had this to say:

Even the men’s swords were of English manufacture, with
broad curved blades in the old dragoon style—the weapon which had
achieved the British cavalry triumphs under Marlborough and Welling¬
ton—and the ‘cast’ blades were much sought after by Baluch tribesmen
who loved a good sword and recognized their superiority to the pro¬
ductions of the smithies of Shikarpur.

All that Jacob claimed for these
English sabres is borne out by another high authority in cavalry matters,
Captain Nolan. When Jacob speaks of the peace of his border being
maintained by the ‘good swords of the Scinde Horse’ the phrase may
not have been wholly figurative.

See https://archive.org/stream/JacobW/Jacob%28W%29_djvu.txt

Of course, he does not say if the said smithies of Shikarpur produced Wootz swords, but the troopers preference was clearly for English steel.

Cheers
Chris

Hi Yuri,

Many thanks for the links. Unfortunately they are in Cyrillic script, so I will have a difficult time in reading them. Do you know of an English translation?

Cheers
Chris

Hi Chris

Unfortunately, the articles are only in Russian. But if you are interested in this topic, I advise you to take up translation. A very interesting study. Google to the rescue.:)

Regards, Yuri

Hi Yuri,

Any chance of you writing a short summary of these papers? I have not had much luck with translating technical papers with Google.

Cheers
Chris

Hi Chris

Unfortunately, I can only give an abstract of the article:

Khaidakov K.S., Sukhanov D.A. (2024). Himicheskij sostav klinkov kak atribucionnyj priznak bulatnyh stalej Indo-Persidskogo regiona XVI-XIX vekov [Chemical composition of blades as an attributing feature for bulat steels of the Indo-Persian region of the 17th-19th centuries]. Istoricheskoe oruzhievedenie [Weapons History Journal], № 13, pp. 161 — 266.

Chemical composition of blades as an attributing feature for bulat steels of the Indo-Persian region of the 17th-19th centuries Kamil S. Khaidakov — private researcher in the field of oriental historical weapons (Moscow, Russia).

x-k-c@Yandex.ru

Dr. Dmitry A. Sukhanov — the Director of the ASK-MSC Company (metallurgy), (Moscow, Russia).

suhanov7@mail.ru

Abstract: The article is devoted to historical bulat blades of the Indo-Persian region. Based on a range of sources, the article reveals that comprehensive studies on historical bulat steels have been sporadic over the last hundred years due to an insufficient number of bulat samples suitable for experiments to determine patterns between steel composition, structure and properties. Attention is drawn to the fact that attribution of certain bulat blades from the collection of K.S. Khaidakov and D.A. Sukhanov raised doubts about their production time and their region of origin.

Standard typological attributive features of oriental bulat blades were combined with changes occurred in the Modern Period (the 16th – 19th centuries) with charge and fluxes of crucible process. As a result, a trend was revealed in the presence/absence of a certain number of permanent impurities in patterned steels, which are found only in the Indo-Persian region before the beginning of the 19th century.
The research result marks out that not all crucible steels which have a distinctive pattern on the blade surface can be considered as bulat by chemical composition. The article describes in detail and confirmes on specific examples the chemical sign of attribution by the quantitative content of permanent impurities.

The article presents new data concerning chemical composition of 20 collectible bulat blades of the 17th-19th centuries, including shamshirs by Asad (Asadullah) of Isfahan. It also outlines various types of patterns from the private collections of K.S. Khaidakov and D.A. Sukhanov with the indication of their corresponding chemical composition.

The authors conclude that in terms of chemical composition, macro- and microstructure, Indo-Persian bulat crucible steels form a separate group of historical blade steels, which were produced before the changes in traditional metallurgical production of the Indo-Persian region under the influence of new European technologies.

Keywords: Indo-Persian bulat steel, crucible process, chemical composition, shamshir.

Chris contact the author Khaidakov K. by email. Kamil is a well-known researcher and author of several books in the field of oriental historical weapons. Perhaps he is present on this forum.

Regards, Yuri

Based on my experience with antique wootz and European blades, I can say that the 17th century European blades coming from reputed centres like Toledo, Solingen, Milano were significantly superior to the wootz blades. But if I believe that some authors concluded that already in the 14th or 15th century some quality European blades were superior to wootz blades.

However, wootz continued to thrive due to its exoticism, reputation, and due to the inability of European smiths to reproduce it and the fascination that derived from this.

All wootz is crucible ultra high carbon steel. Ultra high carbon steel is clearly defined.

Wootz itself is not so clear. It's ultra high carbon steel, but could also be:
- modern
- traditional
- pattern X
- pattern Y
- a little vanadium
- a little manganese
- etc.

The ancient method of forging ultra high carbon steel made those blades superior to all other blades.

Hi Yuri,

Very much appreciated!

Cheers
Chris