Hand Tools

Re: Photos for bill..
Response To:
(Message Deleted by Poster) ()

Bill Tindall, E.Tn.
Globally my question is whether what your are calling carbide particles are indeed carbide particles. The first answer to that question, is the size consistent with what is known about the carbide size in these steels? I would think there is literature on the powder steel, but I don't know it. Then, can you resolve a particle of this size? It is my understanding that the powder for powder metallurgy is made at less than 100 micron. With carbide fraction of only a few percent it is not possible to have a very big carbide particle in the iron matrix. How big? I don't know.

Lets be more accurate. "Fuzzy ball" were the words that were used to describe a 2 micron image on a high quality scope. A picture of a calibration array was provided and at ten micron the edges of the 10 micron squares are well defined. Next issue is what measurement resulted in the diamond powder labeled 2.5 micron? Was the material actually imaged, measured and a result derived by some mathematical means, or is the measurement an indirect one derived by a sedimentation rate or whatever. We can't be sure this diamond is an accurate size standard, but it is probably close.

Is there image processing involved in producing the image stored, edges sharpened or whatever?

So lets assume the diamond particles are about 2 micron. Is the size of the carbide particles known to be in the PM steel consistent with your images?

© 1998 - 2017 by Ellis Walentine. All rights reserved.
No parts of this web site may be reproduced in any form or by
any means without the written permission of the publisher.