[Matt Bower]

I sent off another batch of junkyard steel to my buddy with access to the spectrometer, and earlier today he sent me the results of his analyses. (I've done this once before; can't recall whether I posted the results here.) Some of y'all might find these interesting. Be aware that his machine isn't set up to read tungsten, so there could be W in any of these and we wouldn't know it.
_____________________________

• Torsion bar (make unknown)

C:0.60 | Mn:0.85 | P:0.030 | S:0.025 | Si:0.28 | Cu:0.01 | Cr:0.80 | Mo:0.02 | Ni:0.01 | Sn:0.01 | V:0.008 | Nb: -
Looks like 5160.
_____________________________

• Cheapo, made-in-India, Harbor Freight bastard file:

C:1.3 | Mn: 0.34 | P:0.015 | S:0.009 | Si:0.24 | Cu:0.01 | Cr:0.62 | Mo:0.005 | Ni:0.02 | Sn: 0.003 | V: - | Nb:0.010
_____________________________

• Huge old Nicholson mill bastard file:

C:1.28 | Mn:0.34 | P: 0.016 | S:0.015 | Si:0.15 | Cu: 0.02 | Cr:0.14 | Mo:0.005 | Ni: 0.02 | Sn: 0.002 | V: - | Nb: -
_____________________________

• Huge old Heller mill bastard file:

C:1.20 | Mn:0.25 | P:0.010 | S:0.020 | Si:0.12 | Cu:0.04 | Cr:0.03 | Mo: 0.004 | Ni:0.03 | Sn:0.018 | V: 0.005 | Nb: -

Did you notice that the steel in the cheapo HF file is extremely comparable to the old American files? Steel snobs, take note: just 'cuz it's cheap and made in less developed countries doesn't necessarily mean it's crap.
_____________________________

• Railroad tie plate (surprise here for me; I was figuring on something like 1050):

C:0.19 | Mn:0.42 | P:0.005 | S:0.030 | Si::0.04 | Cu:0.24 | Cr:0.05 | Mo:0.009 | Ni:0.07 | Sn:0.011 | V: - | Nb: -
_____________________________

• Used leaf spring of somewhat indeterminate provenance, from the dumpster behind my local truck spring shop (taken with the manager's permission!):

C:0.57 | Mn:0.74 | P:0.010 | S:0.015 | Si:0.23 | Cu:0.25 | Cr:0.70 | Mo:0.02 | Ni:0.09 | Sn:0.008 | V:0.004 | Nb:0.070

In other words, it's 5160. I was actually hoping for something else, just to help reinforce the point not to take the junkyard steel charts too seriously. But in this case the charts were right.
_____________________________

• Big ol' truck coil spring taken from the same dumpster as the leaf spring, above:

C:0.58 | Mn:0.82 | P:0.018 | S:0.016 | Si:0.90 | Cu:0.01 | Cr:0.46 | Mo:0.01 | Ni:0.005 | Sn:0.002 | V:0.094 | Nb:0.007

I'm not sure what that alloy is; it may be proprietary. It's not quite 5160 (too little chromium), it's not quite 6150 (too much carbon and not enough silicon), it's not quite 9260 (too much chromium, not enough silicon) -- and it has almost 0.10% vanadium, which is enough to make me think it might not be an accident. Should be pretty tough stuff.

I have three other samples I can post later, when I find out what they came from. (A friend sent them to me for analysis; I don't know anything about them at the moment, except their chemistry.)

This post has been edited by Matt Bower: 25 September 2009 - 11:10 AM

[Jan Ysselstein]

[quote name='Matt Bower' date='24 September 2009 - 03:20 PM' timestamp='1253823640' post='138387']
I sent off another batch of junkyard steel to my buddy with access to the mass spectrometer, and earlier today he sent me the results of his analyses. (I've done this once before; can't recall whether I posted the results here.) Some of y'all might find these interesting. Be aware that his machine isn't set up to read tungsten, so there could be W in any of these and we wouldn't know it.

Matt,

Thank you for sharing these results with us, very valuable.

Jan

[Matt Bower]

You're welcome, Jan. I'm certainly not in the same league as most here when it comes to actually making blades, so it's nice to be able to contribute something useful.

[Kenon Rain]

you wouldn't happen to know what older tire irons are would you? they harden nice, and don't really take much of a hamon, so I wouldn't be surpised if it was 5160..

[Matt Bower]

One of the reasons I do this is to try to dispel the idea that you can generalize about junkyard steels. I'm sure "older tire irons" were made out of dozens of alloys. Having said that, the first time I did this I sent my buddy a piece of tire iron. The sample was a little small, so he wasn't super-confident in the results, but here's what he found:

C: 0.70 | Mn: 0.75 | P:0.01 | S: 0.01 | Si: 0.23 | Cu: 0.01 | Cr: 0.01 | Mo: 0.002 | Ni: 0.0 | Sn: 0.0 | V: 0.001 | Cb/Nb: 0.0

Looks like 1070 with some silicon. That doesn't mean that yours couldn't be 5160. Might be. Or not.

[JM Wands]

Fun stuff,,,
thanks Matt,,



jm

[Kenon Rain]

yeah, I wouldn't be suprised if it was 1070 though, it acts very much like it, and actually did take make a hamon after further testing.

very informative, thanks

[DFogg]

Great information, thanks.

[Matt Bower]

You're very welcome, Don. Thanks for providing us with this forum!

I can't remember whether or not I ever posted the results of my first go-round, so here they are just in case. Even if I did post them before, at least now it'll all be in one place.
_____________________
Rail anchor ("clip"):

C: 0.51 | Mn: 0.80 | P: 0.01 | S: 0.03 | Si: 0.18 | Cu: 0.24 | Cr: 0.07 | Mo: 0.02 | Ni: 0.07 | Sn: 0.010 | V: 0.002 | Cb/Nb: 0.015
_____________________
Bed frame angle iron*

C: 0.53 | Mn: 0.83 | P: 0.02 | S: 0.02 | Si: 0.19 | Cu: 0.01 | Cr: 0.02 | Mo: 0.005 | Ni: 0.01 | Sn: 0.006 | V: 0.002 | Cb/NB: 0.002
_____________________
Demolition hammer bit **

C: 0.42 | Mn: 0.70 | P: 0.005 | S: 0.02 | Si: 0.2 | Cu: 0.02 | Cr: 0.02 | Mo: 0.005 | Ni: 0.02 | Sn: 0.004 | V: 0.0 | Cb/NB: 0.002
_____________________
Tire iron

C: 0.70 | Mn: 0.75 | P:0.01 | S: 0.01 | Si: 0.23 | Cu: 0.01 | Cr: 0.01 | Mo: 0.002 | Ni: 0.0 | Sn: 0.0 | V: 0.001 | Cb/Nb: 0.0

*After annealing overnight in a charcoal fire, so it's possible there was a little decarb.
**I got these (free) from a guy who sells and repairs demolition hammers (among other things). He claimed that the manfacturer's rep for the bits told him they were S5. And that corresponds perfectly with the info you'll see on some of the scrap steel charts that float around. But in truth this particular bit is nowhere close to S5! It's plain old 1040/45! Again: don't put too much stock in those charts, or even in word of mouth from people who seem like they might know.

This post has been edited by Matt Bower: 25 September 2009 - 11:07 AM

[EdgarFigaro]

Interesting stuff. Thanks for the info =]

[Sam Salvati]

Matt, cool stuff thanks!

This post has been edited by Sam Salvati: 27 September 2009 - 07:08 AM

[Matt Bray]

Any idea if an old set of hedge clippers would make a good knife blade? Thanks.

Matt

[hardingknives]

would it be possible to test somthing for me? possible some free steel in it for ya

[Matt Bower]

Matt Bray, on 03 April 2010 - 04:43 PM, said:

Any idea if an old set of hedge clippers would make a good knife blade? Thanks.

Matt

Matt, I'm sorry I didn't see this sooner. I wouldn't beging to speculate what kind of steel it might be. The whole point of testing is that I don't like to speculate! But if the steel held a reasonable edge as a hedge clipper, it'll probably hold a reasonable edge as a knife.

[Sakura]

Hey guys!

This might be a bit off-topic so sorry beforehand. I took a bunch of GEM laboratory razor blades with me from work. I have at least two kilo's . We discard them after only a few cuts so scattered around the lab there are many bins with "dull" blades we throw away, they are actually still sharp as *insert very hot place*. I asked my chief if I could take them home and I could since we considder them garbage after first use. They have a piece of metal folded around one of the sharp sides so they won't cut your fingers. I think about welding them and folding so that the carbon content of the low carbon dull side evens out the high carbon blade.

Anyway, does anybody know what the approximate carbon content of these type of razor blades is?

If anyone is interested, we throw away at least a kilo of these blades and scalpels every week.