The metallurgical quality of Ersatz Bayonets

[trajan]

This is a topic I have become rather interested in over the past few years. Woods and White, and Carter, and others have projected the view that the Ersatz bayonets were of poor quality. That may well have been the case in service use from the point of view of their handles and poorly made mortise slots and loccking mechanism...but what about the blades?

Well, I was lucky enough to convince some colleagues at university and in the Ministry of Antiquities to do the XRF analysis of eight Erstaz blades and also those of two regular WW1 bayonets (a 98/05 and a 'dress' KS 98), and a couple of WW2 88/98's and an Israeli 1949, as controls. In addition to the controls, I have only just now managed to get a sight of the WW1 official specifications for the 98/05's made by Haenel.

True, XRF only gives a 'surface' reading, but it is useful for gaining a general view of the content of a metal artefact (archaeological speak for any man-made object!). And Needless to say, the results yet need processing by a bladed weapon expert (anybody out there??!!). BUT one initial observation I thought to share with you fellow bayonteers that might be of passing interest is that with one exception, the metal quality of the eight Ersatz bayonet blades seems to best match those of (surprise!) the WW2 and 1949 Israeli blades, although only one of the Ersatz contains the chrome complement in these. And another is that (again a surprise!) the blades of the two 'regular' WW1 blades do not match the official specification as defined by Haenel!

I am by no means a metallurgist, and other than knowing that the addition of chrome prevents or hinders corrosion, I know very little about bladed weapon technology (well, I do know a wee bit about Roman swords!). So, if there is anybody in GWF with an interest and the appropriate expertise in bladed weapon metallurgy I will be happy to share the analyses - and would welcome comments on how to interpret the results

Trajan

[N White]

Trajan

In addition to corrosion, chrome will also make a steel harder. In certain circumstances, it will also act as an effective carbide former.

My blacksmith friend who made my wootz wedding ring used chromium as the carbide former in the ingot melt rather than the more usual vanadium.

Not a metallurgist here either, but a relatively interested amateur. What percent carbon in the samples?

[dman]

Critical is the tempering process where the steel heated red hot then rapidly queched in either water or oil to freeze the crystal structure

Steel is then heated back up to a lower temperature (Annealing) then slowly cooled to relieve stress and prevent brittleness

Carbon content also affects the hardness of steel - most steels having a carbon content .75 to 1.00 percent

Any more and steel is too brittle, too little is soft

WWII combat knives (of which have several) were usually of 1095 steel, .9 to 1.00 percent carbon and. 5 percent manganese

[trajan]

Trajan

In addition to corrosion, chrome will also make a steel harder. In certain circumstances, it will also act as an effective carbide former. ... Not a metallurgist here either, but a relatively interested amateur. What percent carbon in the samples?

... Carbon content also affects the hardness of steel - most steels having a carbon content .75 to 1.00 percent

Any more and steel is too brittle, too little is soft ...

Thanks, both, for your comments.

The XRF analysis didn't pick up any carbon in any of the ones we looked at, but we were only looking at the surface of the blades, which might explain that. I need to talk to the XRF guy, currently on sabbatical, about that... However, Haenel's 'recipe' for their 98/05's does include a maximum of 0.7-0.9 carbon. Their 'recipe' also allows for a max. 0.03 sulphur - to allow for the use of brown coal?

I won't put up the full results here as they will be properly published elsewhere, and then they'll be put up here - but I am happy to share with those interested.

In the meantime, I am still somewhat surprised by the general similarity in the results from the Ersatz and the WW2 and Israeli blades... The WW2 ones were 1940 and 1944, and the 1949 Israeli one is one of those allegedly made in a kibbutz using railway rails...

Trajan

[MartH]

The point about all blade weapons is that the manufacturing process changes the carbon content, and other alloy contents. You are looking for a hard steel to get a good edge and softer steel for the body of the blade so it does not snap. The use of a forge and heating the blade in coal or charcoal can increase the amount of carbon on the surface. Its not a uniform alloy.

It's a very complex metallurgical mix, and unless you do the XRF analysis of the cutting edge, the middle of the blade, etc and cutting the blade in half to do an analysis in the middle of the crystalline structure I doubt if you can draw any meaningful conclusions.

[trajan]

The point about all blade weapons is that the manufacturing process changes the carbon content, and other alloy contents. ... It's a very complex metallurgical mix... I doubt if you can draw any meaningful conclusions.

Good points, and I do have one Turked Ersatz that can be sacrificed for sectioning. Maybe more XRF'ing can be done of different parts of these blades to see if there any variations from one area to another.

Of course, I happily admit that no major conclusions can be drawn from the current results, and that ideally sections are what's needed to see the actual structure. This is a problem in most attempts to assess ancient metal technology - nobody wants to have their nice sword or bayonet cross-sectioned! There again, I think it is worth noticing that, generally speaking, there is no evidence from the results we have that the quality of the mix used for making Ersatz blades was radically different from that used for regular blades.

Trajan

[MartH]

It's a while since I did my Material Science and Engineering degree, but I also have someone with a Phd In Metallurgy in the house.

I have been thinking that if you could remove the handle and do analysis of the material beneath it there, because it is used to hold and fashion the blade that it might give an representative analysis of the starting material.

[trajan]

The point about all blade weapons is that the manufacturing process changes the carbon content, and other alloy contents. You are looking for a hard steel to get a good edge and softer steel for the body of the blade so it does not snap. The use of a forge and heating the blade in coal or charcoal can increase the amount of carbon on the surface. Its not a uniform alloy.

It's a very complex metallurgical mix, and unless you do the XRF analysis of the cutting edge, the middle of the blade, etc and cutting the blade in half to do an analysis in the middle of the crystalline structure I doubt if you can draw any meaningful conclusions.

As I indicated above, post 6, I do realise that all I can succeed in doing with this approach to Ersatz bayonets is to get some rather gross rather than detailed results, and I do fully appreciate MartH's comments, that more detailed analysis including cross-sectioning is required. However, it is a standard method in archaeology and it does get good and interesting results, which is why I think it is a worth-while venture in this case, even just for gross results!

So, for those interested in the applications of XRF analysis in this way see eg: file:///C:/Users/user/Downloads/TNT_13-2.pdf, for the use of XRF in the analysis of a Crusader sword. Also: http://www.olympus-ims.com/en/applications/xrf-metals-analysis-characterization-private-bowie-knife-collection/for the analysis of some bowie knives... (Warning: parental guidance is need for the first... )

What is interesting to me in both of these (and other similar analyses I have looked at) is that unless I have missed it, none of these XRF analyses picked up any carbon content. However, the analyses did indicate how the samples correlated to carbon steels...

Trajan

[trajan]

It's a while since I did my Material Science and Engineering degree, but I also have someone with a Phd In Metallurgy in the house.

I have been thinking that if you could remove the handle and do analysis of the material beneath it there, because it is used to hold and fashion the blade that it might give an representative analysis of the starting material.

Again, thanks for making a good point on this topic. I do have one rather 'orrible Turked Ersatz (and originally a rare type at that! ) which can be sacrificed this way. I'll see what I can get done with that one.

Trajan

[MartH]

As I indicated above, post 6, I do realise that all I can succeed in doing with this approach to Ersatz bayonets is to get some rather gross rather than detailed results, and I do fully appreciate MartH's comments, that more detailed analysis including cross-sectioning is required. However, it is a standard method in archaeology and it does get good and interesting results, which is why I think it is a worth-while venture in this case, even just for gross results!

So, for those interested in the applications of XRF analysis in this way see eg: file:///C:/Users/user/Downloads/TNT_13-2.pdf, for the use of XRF in the analysis of a Crusader sword. Also: http://www.olympus-ims.com/en/applications/xrf-metals-analysis-characterization-private-bowie-knife-collection/for the analysis of some bowie knives... (Warning: parental guidance is need for the first... )

What is interesting to me in both of these (and other similar analyses I have looked at) is that unless I have missed it, none of these XRF analyses picked up any carbon content. However, the analyses did indicate how the samples correlated to carbon steels...

Trajan

I can't see the first file. I have read the second, but it does not look at the alloy contents in parts of the blade.

[trajan]

I can't see the first file. I have read the second, but it does not look at the alloy contents in parts of the blade.

Try this link - https://www.asnt.org/~/media/Files/Publications/TNT/TNT_13-2.ashx

There is more that I know of published on the analyses of Roman swords, Bronze Age daggers, etc., but not much of that is on-line. However, you might find this MA thesis an interesting read: http://etd.fcla.edu/WF/WFE0000425/Linden_Sarah_Elizabeth_201312_MA.pdf

BTW, I don't know of any work that has been done in comparing the results of different methods of non-destructive and destructive analyses on iron objects, but I am aware of one study done and published late last year on copper objects using, IIRC, about a dozen different methods, including XRF, and this concluded that the results produced by one or other method were not significantly different as far as macro-elements are concerned. That said, they were using one of those mega-XRF scanners that did whole objects, and I was limited to the use of a portable device that takes spot-readings

I should add that apart from obviously not being a materials scientist, my knowledge of XRF (and other!) analytical techniques, and validity thereof, is only what I have gained while teaching archaeology students about methods of analyses, although a colleague of mine, who does Bronze Age stuff, swears by XRF! So, I am naturally very happy to accept any advice or comments!

Trajan

[MartH]

Thanks I will study them over the weekend, and get the old Phd of Metallurgy to comment too, who will be far more knowledgeable than I. I will reiterate again that the manufacturing processes change the local alloy content and crystalline structure. I know this to be true because we have in the past had to study and explain to my two nephews why viking swords where so good and why Sheffield pen knives had the best blades.

[trajan]

Good-oh. I'll try to find the comparative study done on copper - it should be on file somewhere in the office.

Trajan

PS: So, how would you rate a Viking sword against a gladius?

[MartH]

Viking swords were very special and the really good ones used steel obtained from the east where the steel was much better. I don't know to much about gladius but would think one of the good viking swords would be far superior to it. Obviously it depends when the gladius where manufactured.

Back to bayonets, what are the physical properties of a really good bayonet?

[trajan]

Viking swords were very special and the really good ones used steel obtained from the east where the steel was much better. I don't know to much about gladius but would think one of the good viking swords would be far superior to it. Obviously it depends when the gladius where manufactured.

Back to bayonets, what are the physical properties of a really good bayonet?

Gladii were often of damascened steel, but also frequently had nice gold/silver inlays - can send you a link if you like!

Back on topic... To paraphrase (as I understand it) GB specifications - a bayonet should go through a Russian greatcoat and inflict a nasty wound! I vaguely remember being taught how to 'stab-butt-slash' in drill (with staves), but would have to check my copy of bayonet drill what the exact procedure was... Family story was my WW1 granddad saying that you left the last bullet to pulling the bayonet out if it got stuck in jerry... Of course, nobody ever said (as far as I can gather!) - "Why not shoot the bu**er instead of bayoneting him?

[CharlieBris]

It isn't possible to get a carbon reading with XRF - the atomic number of Carbon is too low. XRF works by knocking out a 1s electron from an atom in the sample by irradiating

the sample with X-rays from a Chrome or Tungsten source. The excited sample atom(s) emits an X-ray of characteristic wavelength. The emitted X-rays are reflected from an

analyzer crystal to a detector. The emitted Carbon X-ray wavelength from a sample is too long to reflect from a suitable analyser crystal - fluorine used to be the lower limit.

You really need a spark emission spectrograph to analyse Carbon in steel down to about 0.05%C.

Steels above 1% C are pretty brittle, although extremely hard - usually called "file steels"

Regards,

Charlie

[N White]

There are exceptions to steel being brittle at over 1% carbon. Going back to the middle eastern crucible steels, collectively known as wootz, carbon contents could be 1.5% or higher. The trick that makes this work is that all that extra carbon is tied up in carbide bands, so you end up with something like a bar of 1080 with extreme carbide banding all through it. The end material is stiffer than a regular steel would be, but not at all brittle. The trade off though is that wootz must be forged at a low enough temperature to prevent the carbides from dissolving and releasing the carbon back into solution. For your enjoyment, a close up picture of a wootz saber with approximately 1.5% carbon content, and vanadium as the carbide forming element.

Relating to bayonets, rather than a stiff blade with a hard sharp edge, the most important quality would be a certain springiness, as point deflection and shock absorbsion would be more concerning than sharpness. Bayonets are a dull tool, and especially in the lengths of Great War bayonets, a little bit of leverage the wrong way could be a bad thing. My ideal in my mind is something like a leaf spring from a truck with a point on it. Sharp, no, but tough.

Are you able to do hardness tests on them?

[trajan]

It isn't possible to get a carbon reading with XRF - the atomic number of Carbon is too low. ... You really need a spark emission spectrograph to analyse Carbon in steel down to about 0.05%C. ...

Thanks Charlie, that clears that one up! Don't know if I can get one access to of them things here but none of the archaeological reports I have seen on non-destructive analyses of ancient blades don't seem to be that concerned about carbon content...

... Relating to bayonets, rather than a stiff blade with a hard sharp edge, the most important quality would be a certain springiness, as point deflection and shock absorbsion would be more concerning than sharpness. Bayonets are a dull tool, and especially in the lengths of Great War bayonets, a little bit of leverage the wrong way could be a bad thing. My ideal in my mind is something like a leaf spring from a truck with a point on it. Sharp, no, but tough.

Are you able to do hardness tests on them?

Agree with the former, except possibly with the longer ones, especially the S98 and clones, which might bend a bit too much...

Might be able to do the latter - I'll have to ask around!

[JMB1943]

Trajan,

A very interesting thread & project !!

I would assume that the XRF results for any given blade are due (a) to the origin of the iron ore used & ( whatever additives (e.g. Cr) that the manufacturer used. There is a statistical technique called Principal Component Analysis (PCA) that allows the investigator to group together those sets of data (from any analytical technique) that are similar. You have a small database here, but are you able to possibly "eye-ball" the Ersatz data to differentiate between manufacturers ? Conversely, is the data sufficiently sensitive & accurate enough for a forensic investigation, i.e. identify an unknown mfr. from the data ?

I look forward to the next installment.

Regards,

JMB

[trajan]

A very interesting thread & project !! ...

Thanks for the encouraging view and comments!

My main aim was simply to test the consensus view that these 'orrible Ersatz were made to a poorer standard than the regulation bayonets, hoping to show that the iron content, etc., in their blades was at least equal to those - and in fact it is on average higher (not that means a lot by itself). I am, though, working from a very small sample - 6 or so at the moment, out of almost a million that were made, and the six I have chosen are stylistically similar so they may have been made and/or finished by the same small concern or group of concerns - Solingen used the 'putting-out' system pre-1914. I can get access to about six or so of different types and so I will see if I can get those done also.

Come to think of it, I am now wondering if I can extend the research and put it on an official basis, so allowing me to test more examples and use a variety of other tests as well - there may be a EU funding opportunity: I will have to check.

Trajan

Trajan