Theoretically, would a sword blade of lenticular shape (especially wide one, like type XIII) have more ability of repeated sharpening after heavy abuse, than a blade of diamond cross section?
If my logic is right, thin, lenticular blade can be repeatedly sharpened without much problem, while blade of diamond cross section of same width would be much thicker, and therefore, after repeated sharpening, at some point planes of blade would come down at too steep angle to form the proper edge, and you would need to make an extremely noticeable secondary bevel in order to sharpen the blade again.
I also recall reading about several antique type XIII swords that were resharpened so much during period of their use, that their profile tapers changed extremely and caused them to be misclassified as type XIIs.
Maybe swords of diamond cross-sections (like XVIIIs) never needed to be sharpened as much, because their edges are significantly more durable since they have more "meat" behind them?
I would say yes, provided you survived that many encounters to warrant that many resharpening on the first hand. :D
| Lancelot Chan wrote: |
| I would say yes, provided you survived that many encounters to warrant that many resharpening on the first hand. :D |
But it could happen with an ancestral blade passed down many generations: An originally 2 1/2" wide blade might end up 2" wide or less and with a modified edge profile: Probably more common when sword where very expensive and prized in the Dark Ages than in later Medieval periods where cheaper swords might be more expendable.
One wouldn't be constantly resharpening a blade of a sword unless it was actually dulled by some test cutting, which they may not have done too often with a valuable sword, or if the blade acquired some nicks and needed to be re-profiled.
Just speculation on my part. ;) :D
| Andrej S wrote: |
| Theoretically, would a sword blade of lenticular shape (especially wide one, like type XIII) have more ability of repeated sharpening after heavy abuse, than a blade of diamond cross section?
If my logic is right, thin, lenticular blade can be repeatedly sharpened without much problem, while blade of diamond cross section of same width would be much thicker... |
Only if you assume same width as well as same cross-sectional volume and/or same edge angle! Those are not likely to be true, and width alone doesn't really mean anything in this case.
Generally speaking, lenticular blades are cutting designs that try to minimize thickness while maintaining a certain amount of cross-sectional volume (and thus mass), while diamond blades are thrusting designs that try to maximize thickness (and thus stiffness) while keeping the cross-sectional volume down; those two hypothetical blades would actually be built for different purposes with diametrically opposite design goals in mind and used quite differently, so comparing them like this without further and much more specific context doesn't really lead to any kind of useful or meaningful analysis at all, IMO.
| Quote: |
| Maybe swords of diamond cross-sections (like XVIIIs) never needed to be sharpened as much, because their edges are significantly more durable since they have more "meat" behind them? |
You actually have that backwards, I think - assuming the same width and thickness, lenticular blades have more "meat" behind the edge due to the convex curve of the bevels, whereas diamond cross-section blades have flatter edge bevels with less volume between them. But this isn't necessarily true, either, as the surface curvature of a blade with an overall lenticular cross-section can flatten out towards the edges, and one with an overall diamond cross-section can have a more convex "appleseed" edge geometry. Neither is inherently better, of course - it's essentially a trade-off between friction and fragility.
(At least this is what "meat", or niku, means in the context of Japanese blades: the degree of convexity of the edge bevels. A blade with strongly convex bevels and thus lots of supporting material immediately behind the cutting edge has much niku, whereas one with completely flat edge bevels, like many modern katana designed for competitive cutting rather than combat, would have zero niku.)
PS. Of course, lenticular blades might well need more sharpening simply because you mostly find them on cutting swords that a) have more acute edge angles and b) make more use of edge strikes. :)
Page 1 of 1
You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
All contents © Copyright 2003-2006 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum