SUMMARY Reach - Gives defense and offense bonus until enemy closes the distance. Hand Protection - Gives defense bonus. More forgiving parries. May limit Versatility. Point of Balance - Handiness vs. Impact of weapon. Also includes amount of weight distribution as well as location. Type of Steel - Alters the limits to sword or other weapon customization. Versatility - Makes it easier to do more stuff. Weight - Combines with Point of Balance to affect handling. May also set parameters for customization. Rigidity - Effects cutting, thrusting and absorption of energy. Swords are often rigid at different parts of the sword, such as the edge vs. the flat. Angle of Edge - Bigger angles cut less vs. smaller angles. Wider blades are one way of creating smaller angles without reducing Rigidity. Tip Acuity - Tip cutting vs. Thrusting. Better thrusting is gained by smaller angles, but loses tip cutting. Better tip cutting from bigger angles, but loses thrusting.
It's not that simple, if you are talking about a relatively intelligent pair of opponents. For example, hand protection also increases reach in a way, because it allows you to hold your sword out further from your body without fear of your hand being sniped.
David Szeto Yeah I wasn't as in the know when I wrote that shit. But in general, armor (ie. hand protection, and other things) lets people be more liberal, including with extending reach. And all tactics change when it comes to full armored opponents. Mainly, reach doesn't really matter as much anymore, unless I guess it's with anti-armor thrusting weapons such as the ahlspiess (but they require a very good thrust). There's other thrusting anti-armor weapons that are better (more wedge shaped I think), but they're shorter.
I have three more things that I think are important. 1, The moment of inertia of the sword at different rotation points (somewhat related to taper and weight). 2, The pivot points of the sword. And 3, mostly for two handed swords, the length of the grip.
+gurkfisk89 The length of the grip is ALSO very important in one-handed swords. Most modern manufactures make them too long, which makes it very hard to grip and swing them properly. Why is it so hard to get such a simple thing right? I mean, don't the manufacturers look at period swords at all... This is probably due to their experience with sabers and similar weapons which are used very differently to early medieval swords. Especially the Viking era, it's impossible to find a lower-price sword with a short enough grip.
***** Absolutely, that's why I said "mostly" for two handed swords. It is ofc still important for one handed swords but there isn't that huge difference that you can find on two handed ones. Having a viking sword with a too long grip will make the grip akward and change balance etc a bit. But it will not change the properties or use as much as the difference between, say, a 20 cm grip and a 40 cm grip.
+gurkfisk89 If you have the moment of inertia about one axis, you can calculate the moment of inertia about every parallel axis (parallel axis theorem). Plus, you can calculate the centers of oscillation ("pivot points"). Here's more on this topic: hroarr.com/concerning-the-dynamics-of-swords/
Hey, Shad. A followup would be nice. Unless there already is one and I haven't found it. Also a closer analysis of different types of cross sections would be interesting.
This is awesome, thanks Shad! Love your videos =) If I may add my two cents however, I think in reference to your Point of Balance claim (about adding mass to the hilt of an axe) that there's a lot more of a trade-off in doing something like that than just cutting power. By adding weight below the point of balance, you're making the hilt a better moment arm than it would be. As such, if you, say, cut at the opponent and miss, not only do you have to stop the acceleration of the blade, you also have to stop the acceleration of the hilt as well, making the weapon far more unwieldy. At the same time, if an opponent bats your blade aside, you have to deal with the same issue, resulting in an ultimately slower weapon that can't defend as well. I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) that this is the principle behind fencing foils. They sacrifice speed for accuracy by moving the point of balance into the hilt, but then trade mass for speed to compensate, resulting in a fast weapon with good control but that couldn't hold its own against a broomstick.
as always, informative vids like this are my favs, thanks Shad, you rule man, keep them coming :) I'd really be interested to see a vid about patterned wielding, damascus steel, and the influence of middle eastern wielding technologies to medieval europe.
As several others point out moment of inertia is also important. Center of balance is essentially only a measure of your sowrd's center of mass, wheras moment of inertia (about whatever axis of rotation) describes the sword's mass distribution effect on the ease of swinging it. Essentially moment of inertia is the resistance to rotational forces about some axis (normally your hand, elbow, shoulder or waist depending on your degree of commitment to the strike). Take your example of the handle weighted axe, for simlicity's sake we'll consider swinging it with your wrist and rotating about your hand: You'll still be moving the mass of the head and accelerating it along your swing arc, regardless of your added handle mass (which we consider to be rotated about). The handle mass does however make the axe seem nimbler due to the fact that a free body tends to pivot around its center of mass, meaning it wil exert less reactional force on your hand (due to less of a leveraging bar since the center of mass essentially being half as far from your hand compared to no added handle mass). I hope I managed to make some sense.
In regards to rigidity, I give you the Scottish basket hilt. According to several reports (I have not had the opportunity to examine antiques) the tip is almost paper thin, but delivered horrific wounds on the English during the Jacobite uprising on the 1740's. in some accounts, delivering blows that split men from the base of the neck to almost out the waist.
As for the falchion, wide tips are also about adding mass to the weak of the blade, thus making it better at chopping, without making weak thicker and worse at slicing.
Do you have any resources that can be used for designing a sword? Particularly aspects of how to find the right ratio of depth, width, and length depending on the material?
+I am Shad 1 minor niggle and 1 possible change rigidity not regidity. the other is the depth and width, consider this when you are measuring something you usually assign measures an a working situation ie assume true edge alignment. to clarify, the term for a cut is Depth of cut, that would indicate that true edge to false edge would be depth measure
The problem with point-of-balance changes, using your axe example as reference, is that increasing the overall weight of the weapon decreases its SPEED, which is a bigger impact than pure mass. Moving faster with a lighter weapon isn't wholly different from moving slower with a heavier weapon in terms of cutting power. More weight will have a heavier impact when it comes to overpowering an opponent's guard, but if we're talking about pure cutting power against flesh, the two stack up about the same. Though slower is easier to dodge, which isn't good if you're the slower one.
Shad I have a question, so if I want to make a arming/longsword (it's a weird thing) Wich material Sall y use? I mean for the blade. The name of the perfect or the better steel for it. I know that I have to use steel, but there are a lot of different kinds of steel.
Weight distribution is even more important in a sword than PoB and weight. P. Johnsson did marvellous work on this in the catalogue to the exhibition "The sword - form and thought"
I think there are two caveats worth mentioning, one with reach and one with edge angle. With reach, it might be worth it to consider where the center of percussion is so you know how far or close your sweet spot is going to be. With edge angle, it might be worth discussing the sword's bevel, whether single or secondary.
Hi Shad. The tempering is more important than the type of steel. You can make an unusable blade out of good steel by messing up the heat treatment. But you can make a usable blade out of not to crappy steel. It seems that you have a misconception about hardening. Spring steel is a kind of tool steel, often it is the same alloy, sometimes different molten but mostly only different in the heat treatment. You harden a steel and than temper it to release stress, so it is less brittle and it normally happens that it get softer at the same time. (There only a few exceptions)You can use the same Steel (with nothing than 1.5%C as alloy elements) to make a razorblade (very flexible) ore a file (very stiff) ore a knife (for a longer blade it would only serve superb in a laminated construction).
If a blade were made of magical substance comparable in durability to steel but able to cut through pretty much anything with little effort (resting on edge would have it sink into most objects), what would be the optimal style of weapon to wield it? Long sword, halberd, scythe, etc?
You linked to a video regarding a swept hilt, but what about a curved hilt? Would a curved hilt change how you would use a sword or its effectiveness as opposed to a straight hilt?
Curved hilts are usually only found on sabers and it's because they are commonly used with a pistol grip or handskake grip, rather than the traditional fist grip. It helps point control and edge alignment on those types of weapons.
I have heard, though i'm not certain that using a curved hilt, thumb ring, fingering the guard, or using a weapon two handed will help you follow through in a cut when cutting through a large or dense target.
This perfect sword may exist sooner than you think. As you point out steel in not capable of this type of structure. There is however something that is, Graphene; or a foraged kind of Graphene at least. I can be basically as small as a single atom in one layer and be layered to stop bullets, or enough to withstand normal forces. The biggest issue maybe its rigidity as a material.
Sexy im learning blacksmithing at the moment this helps lots im going to be dedicating 11 good years to mastering to basics of blacksmithing then engineering hard & soft fabrication and welding i find the idea of the sword used in the same hand as a long sword
Can you do this with armor comparing the Roman's, Greek's, Samurai's, middle ages knight's as well as some middle eastern types of armors seeing which is the best for it's weight against every type of weapon.
According to this article hroarr.com/concerning-the-sharpness-of-blades/ the edge angle does not affect the sharpness of the blade as much as other factors: "McGorry et al. [5] evaluated under field conditions the effect of the edge angles 20°, 30° and 45° on the force required for cutting meat. They deduce from their measurements that within the evaluated range of angles, the edge angle does not affect the required force significantly. This suggests that the sharpness reducing effect of larger edge angles is in practice overlaid with other effects. McCarthy et al. [3] consider the edge angle less important than other effects." Also, here's some nice reading about sword dynamics (mass moment of inertia and how it's connected to the centers of oscillation ("pivot points")): hroarr.com/concerning-the-dynamics-of-swords/
+Alex Alex Man thanks heaps for pointing out this web-page, it's amazing. Having taken a look I'm a little confused. I found the part you quoted and indeed it they seem to say that the angles doesn't have a huge effect on the force required. But then two paragraphs down they seem to be saying that the force required to make a cut with a double edged blade that has an edge angled nearly two times as large as a single edged triangular blade is twice as much: *quote Equations (6) and (7) as well as Fig. 4 show that the same ratio of blade width and thickness yields an edge angle \(\delta\) of a double-edged blade with rhombic cross-section which is 1.69 to 2 times as large as the edge angle \(\varepsilon\) of a single-edged blade with triangular cross-section. From Eq. (2) follows that the cutting force of a double-edged blade needs to be twice as large as for a single-edged blade with the same ratio of width and thickness. *quote I'm not sure if I'm reading it right.
+I am Shad Greetings, Shad! I agree with you, figure 3 shows that doubling the edge angle approximately doubles the force required for cutting. Doubling the required force may seem a lot, but doubling the edge angle is also quite a change in the blade geometry. Also, if we look at equation 1 (sometimes hroarr.com doesn't display the math properly; just download the PDF at the bottom of the article), we see that the required force is proportional to the edge radius. I looked for some data on edge thickness from the article bibliography and i found 1µm or even less for a mechanically sharpened blade, and around 10µm for a worn blade. This means that there is a factor of about 10 for the required cutting force within a usual wear/re-sharpening cycle vs. a factor of only 2 for a rather dramatic doubling of the edge angle. Maybe that's why the authors say that the edge angle isn't that significant.
I don't like the term distal taper as it's apparently used in swords. Distal means the end that's further away (I suspect it's etymologically related to distance, as its opposite, proximal, is to proximity.) Profile taper is also distal taper, by the dictionary definitions of those words. (There are of course blades whose profiles could arguably be described as tapering proximally, but I suspect that's usually described in terms of getting wider towards the tip.) So it's a very confusing term if you were familiar with distal and proximal in in their general sense before you learned about the finer points of swords. It's a descriptive term applied to only a subset of the things that could be described by that descriptor - precisely the kind of term that you, Shad, avowedly hate. But it does appear to be the accepted term, so we're probably stuck with it.
Having counter weight on your axe may weaken your power. But there are some math. Your balance point is the center mass. And energy exerted by your strike is speed of center mass x mass of center mass x distance between center mass and the pivot point. When you pull your center mass from the tip you are shortening the distance to the pivot point and also reducing speed (because then center mass is traveling slower than the tip of weapon).
arming sword with side rings and finger rings? good hand protection without defining a true edge. good weight and a good balance between cutting and thrusting. And if well made, rigid but flexible when it needs to be.
and how the handle guard and pommel are constructed. I can't understand why some sword smiths do this, but There are swords out there that don't allow you to unscrew your pommel and end thy opponent rightly. Even if that dose make the grip more secure.
Okay, it's been a year, and nobody is probably going to read this, but... could anyone be so kind to tell me what's the font used in the list? It looks just perfect for something I plan to do, and it maddens me that I cannot, for the life of me, figure it out... !
Sorry man, though I don't have time to research a heap of different fonts, two that I use that are somewhat similar to this is "OldStyle" for a slightly weathered look, and "Cardo" for a slightly more elegant look, these are both available on dafont.com - sorry in advance if this wasn't very helpful!
The same mass in the blade does not always the same cutting capacity. Any mass that is not exactly on the pivot point (and it is impossible to put a mass only on that point, because that point is never in the same place during the cut) add some inertia and momentum.
And the further the matter (mass) is from the pivot point, the more angular momentum the blade will have, if its it rotating at the same speed, even if compared to blade of similar weight, where the mass in concentrated close to the pivot point.
+Aleksi Nuutila But Im not sure how the physics works if you just add more mass to the pivotpoint of the axe, for example. Would it have better cutting capacity? After all we should take into account the force needed to accelerate the blade.
The only thing that seems difficult for me to understand is: How does someone not cut his fingers grabbing the sword from the blade to perform a crossguard or pommel strike ? EDIT: How does someone not cut his fingers grabbing the sword from the blade to perform a crossguard or pommel strike, when grabbing a double edge sword ?
Great video! An observation, about the edge angle, is that you also can make it sharper by hollow or concave grinding. Here, look at this example: www.shopwingchun.com/ewcblog/uploads/grinds1.jpg
Hey shad, have you thought about breaking videos like this into parts? Like an intro and go over a couple qualities, then part 2 with more qualities, then video three with the final info? Could maybe help you with the views and money issues youtube is causing.
Shad, have you ever actually fenced with a sword that has hand protection? I do some heavy saber and rapier. My heavy saber has a hand guard on it, but is based on sabers on which the back 1/3 of the edge would be sharp, so you can land cuts with it if you turn your hand during a cut, etc. I'm having trouble imaging how it'd be any easier to do this or any different at all if I took my knuckle bow off. The same goes for my swept hilt rapier.Yeah, it's got knuckle protection, but you can do back cuts with it to. To my mind, the limiting factor to the ease of getting back or false edge cuts with these weapons is the fact that they are single handed, not that they have hand protection. Having a single hand on it makes it a bit harder to get enough power behind a back-edge cut at times. It's much easier to do when you have two hands on a longer grip--that is, easier to generate force to get the back edge to hit hard enough. Make sense?
+Sparrowhawk Yeah, if I understand these swords well enough, the downside to having a sword with an extensive guard is that it adds a lot of weight to the weapon, which can affect the way it performs, but as for making certain techniques more difficult, I don't see how that would be an issue.
+HamsterPants522 *shrug* I guess you'll just have to take my word for it but (a) the weight isn't much and (b) it's right at the hand. You are correct, of course on a basic physical level it adds weight, but I've fenced, for example, sword and buckler as well as rapier and buckler and a single handed arming sword is around the same total weight as a 37-inch rapier. Getting back cuts with a rapier is a bit harder, but it's got more to do with the fact that the blade is longer than any additional weight from the guard.
+Sparrowhawk I'd also like to point (LOL) out that rapiers (even ones with slightly wider blades) aren't great cutters. Don't get me wrong, you could easily break open skin and make someone bleed, but it's nothing like a cut from a nice wide sharpened broadsword blade.
+Sparrowhawk The fact that the weight is at the hand will affect the balance of the sword, though, which can affect how much inertia it has when you cut with it. I'm not sure how extensive the guards are that you've been dealing with which are the same weight as arming sword guards. It'd be nice to have a visual example.
Sparrowhawk *"I'd also like to point (LOL) out that rapiers (even ones with slightly wider blades) aren't great cutters."* That goes without saying. There's no real impact to a cut with a rapier.
Your list of criteria doesn't seem to account for the curvature of a blade, which makes a difference both visually and in terms of performance. That said, I remember seeing Matt Easton talk about curved swords and how a straight sword can technically perform like a curved sword if the edge of the sword is curved towards the tip. Here's an example of what I mean: img.photobucket.com/albums/v130/GaryWGraley/5D_Mk_ii/Albion-Saint/Saint.jpg~original Even though the blade is technically straight, you can see that the edge is curved enough that this sword is clearly performing the same function as a curved sword.
+UnbeltedSundew There's also a limit to how fast you can move your hands. A maximum speed if you will. Plus you will be able to reach very similar speed in the swing with most things regardless of weight (up to a point), so when you talk about speed with swords you generally mean redirection-speed wich wouldn't affect cutting power. Therefore, more often than not, slow swords are better cutters.
IofOden The maximum speed of the hand es exactly what I meant. Imagine you are swinging a light sword, you will reach maximum speed without effort. Now if you swing a heavier one you will feel how your muscles have to work harder; you really have to push it.The harder your muscles work, the more energy is transfered into the sword.
First of all; thank you for taking the time and effort to elaborate on the subject with this long text. After having a look at your account I saw that you speak German and so do I (I'm Swiss). I had already written quite a bit and since your grasp of English seems to be very good I continued. I agree with you on every but one point, which was the same one I was initially making. It's about the energy you put in a sword. Here we go. As you said yourself, when using a more forward weighted weapon your arms seem more tired afterwards. That is because you did excert them more, which in turn means you put more energy into the weapon. This is most easily explained with inertia as you mentioned. However, it's not the distribution of mass that is important. It's the amount of mass you accelerate to a given speed, like in the formula for kinetic energy you wrote down. So a forward weighted sword means you have to accelerate more mass to a higher speed since the tip of the sword moves faster than the base (at the cross guard). And the more you have to use your muscles to accelerate the sword, the harder you push it, the more energy goes into it. That's conservation of energy at work here (Energieerhaltungsgesetz). Example: You take a very light sword, let's say a smallsword and a heavy one like a heavy longsword (it would work with any swordsof different weight). You swing the smallsword in a horizontal cut (so we can ignore potential energy) as hard/fast as you can. It won't take much strength. It will feel as if the sword almost moves on it's own; as if you made it move at the maximum speed at which you could have moved your arm without a sword. Now you swing the longsword. You will feel that it took more strength, it was more of a strain on your muscles. You will probably also feel that you could have moved your arms significantly faster without the sword. This indicates that you put more strength into the swing with the longsword and this must result in more force delivered at the recieving end. Again, conservation of energy. Ich hoffe das war verständlich. Ich glaube, dass wir eigentlich der gleichen Meinung sind, nur, dass wir auf leicht unterschiedlichem Weg darauf kommen. Ich freue mich auf eine Antwort. Und frage ruhig nach falls es dir zu blöd ist alles zu lesen, ich denke ich könnte mich auf Deutsch ein bisschen kürzer fassen.
it's all the opposite. the best cold sword-like weapon isn't cold at all. is ultra light and still cuts the best, even all the mass is in handle. has no point and still thrust the best. isn't flexible at all and still won't break.. ommm ok I stop here u recognize light saber :D missing just two feaures, it has no hand protection unless it's disney nonsense crap and there is no pommel to unscrew and toss! ye some toss the whole thing and call it back. and back to reality- great vid with super important info. I would add grip into the list- lenght, shape (some round makes it harder to keep edge alingment), material (could get slippery). then maybe construction like it should probably have full tang. but these things r less important than those on your list I guess. maybe hand protection can be bad in the way if it lessens manoeuvrability or long cross guard can hit your own arm or leg. I had pointy one turned forward like horns and stabbed my own leg with it.. xD ..imagine having cross-light-guard! ehm.. Kylo missed just little light pommel
As you acknowledged in your opening, you missed some critical elements of blade design, curvature most signally. Apart from those, you overlooked the type of edge grind--single-bevel, double-bevel, hollow, seed-shape--and virtually omitted comment, except for a brief mention of pommels, on what is on the other side of the handguard from the blade, including the significance and shape of the handguard, itself. Mass is not everything. The handguard is key to protection of the hand. The pommel affects balance, grip security, and offensive ability. The grip-type--single-hand, bastard, two-handed--affects fighting style options. The grip shape and size--profile and cross-section--is important to blade control. It should not be too thick or too thin, too flat-sided or too round. A properly-sized, oval cross-section is needed for comfort and blade indexing. And, of course, the grip covering should not just be attractive but provide grip security. You know this stuff and have talked about it elsewhere, but not here. This should have been a more inclusive, two-part video.
Depth of a sword...? Depth usually refers to concavities. Why not call it thickness? Yes, it takes longer to spell out, but that way people won't think you mean the depth of the fuller.
sooo... light, strong, able to thrust and cut, versatile and point of balance... a lightsaber. light as faq. the balance of a flashlight. cuts and pierces with low force. will not break. adjustable in length.
but at the same time you cant really parry anything with a lightsaber, if someone swings an axe at you and you parry the axes shaft, the axe head will be cut from the shaft and continue into you, possibly killing you.
hotsteamypudding or, you may think of it as a breachweapon. kinda like a greatsword. you dont parry with it as balance and weight makes it hard to manuever. a lightsaber excels in cutting and thrusting as armor and anything blocking you goes to shiet. a natural instinct when being attacked is to shield youself, if your only chance to win is to strike first, the it is a suicide strike, as there is no meaning for the lightsaber wielder to stop his blade. he will continue through the weapon into the opponents body.
Lightsabers are actually terrible examples of this! Their blades are plasma rather than light and are stated to be quite heavy. Further, the plasma moving up and then back down gives it angular momentum (like a chainsaw) which makes its use extremely complicated. Further, they usually do not have any guard (unless you're Kylo Ren) meaning that any of those dramatic blade locks in the films could be solved instantly by sliding one blade down onto the opponents hands. The big, continuous movements we see in lightsaber duels (rather than more realistic and conservative fencing-type moves) are a result of having to maintain momentum with the blade to be able to move it quickly.
im2randomghgh well, regarding the guard; it is stated in lore that lightsabers "stick" together, meaning there practically is no sliding. furthermore, if a lightsaber clashes with a non-lightsaber/non-lightsaber-resistant-material, then the lightsaber will preferably block/parry incomming attacks as close to the opponents hands as possible to kill the momentum of the now detached "meanie-piece"
No, The Light saber is not the best sword. The best sword of all fiction or nonfiction is undoubtedly the Shard Blades from Brandon Sanderson's Stormlight Archive series.
"Anything can be made as sharp as anything" In the context of steels and swords its true enough but steel is unlikely to ever be made as sharp obsidian, for example. The statement might be a tad too broad!
i think u misunderstand axes there are tools and weapons, and ey r different. weapons r not absolutely tip heavy, ey have thinner blades - u need to operate this thing after all not having too much handshock and sure noone chop trees with weapon as noone kills warriors with tool
Point of balance: The example of an axe is misleading because it is so topheavy you have to shift the point of balance quiet a lot to feel the difference. Turning the axe upside down in your hand is just the most extreme example of shifting the point of balance since the total mass of the axe hasnt changed at all. ->"the weight is still there" . Versatility: That is so wrong to say Versatility is automatically an advantage. A Gun can only shot in one way but that is much more effective in killing than a multi tool you can us in so many but much poorer ways. The Pommel- or crossguard strike is just an improvised war hammer. Weight: The important thing of weight on your weapon is, how it is related to the weight of your enemy's weapon. It's just about mass. If you block a weapon of equal mass you will need as much force as your enemy. if your sword is lighter you will need much more power to resist a blow and it will be harder to knock the enemy weapon out of its place. Rigidity:: That's much more important if you are going to Trust. There are Stabingswords that are practical rectangular metal bars with no real cutting capacity only made for stabbing through armor.
I disagree with this list of characteristics, because there are lot finer characteristics, actual mechanical/scientific notions, that allows a much better understanding of how swords work, and explain "macrocharacteristics" such as rigidity, PoB, etc... It basically comes down to only two things: - evolution of cross-section along the length of the sword - mechanical properties of the materials used For practical purposes, we can divide the sword in two subgroups: blade and hilt. Most of the studying work will be on the blade, the hilt you only need a basic approach for the type of hand protection offered, and a punctual repartition of the various masses. A wood grip will have a dampening effect on blade vibrations, but that is way too difficult to get a hold of it. Of course, the serious part is the blade. Imagine you could slice a blade in 1mm thick slices, perpendicular to the length. Each slice would have two cut faces, resulting in two cross-sections. Imagine you could modelize these cross-sections, and measure surface area and second moment of area (both in regard to the edge-to-edge axis, and to the face-to-face axis). As you now have the progression of cross-section characteristics along the length, you can deduct: - tapers in all directions - edge angle, or more precisely: edge geometry (except on katanas, it will almost never be a single straight line from the very edge to the middle ridge, fuller, etc, there will always be a steeper angle at the very edge) - mass repartition (since cross-section area is mm², if you consider it along the length (mathematically an integral), you get mm³, i.e. volume, you just need to account for density and you have the mass repartition along the length of the blade) But we need to take into account the mechanical properties of steel (technically density is a mechanical property, but it's so basic I didn't felt the need to put it there). And there is ONE graph you need to keep in mind when talking about steel: it's the stress-strain curve. The stress-strain curve basically tells you almost everything you need to know mechanically. The first thing you have to understand is the difference between elastic deformation (no permanent deformation once the load is removed, it's what makes springs springy), and plastic deformation (there is a permanent deformation that stays there after the load is removed). And then, of course, breaking. Stress-strain curves for steel always have the same general look: first a relatively steep ramp, then it transitions (either abruptly or in an arch) to a sort of plateau, and this plateau generally ends with a cross. The steep ramp is the domain of elastic deformation. The plateau is the domain of plastic deformation. The end of the curve is the breaking of the sample. Sometimes it's a bit hard to tell where the ramp ends and where the plateau begins, but that's not hugely important, what matters is that you get an idea of what load the steel can take without being permanently deformed. But in detail, we get three very important figures from this stress-strain curve: - Young's modulus: is the "angle" of the ramp, and actually describes the "springness" of the steel - elastic limit or yield strength/point: the point where the steel no longer goes back perfectly to it's original place, but keeps a permanent residual deformation (the transition between the ramp and the plateau) - ultimate strength: the point where the steel definitely breaks (the very end of the curve) Depending on the heat-treatment the steel has received, it can actually have almost no plastic deformation domain. I have to make notice that this stress-strain curve is obtained by pulling on a sample with a large press, and the length of the sample and force exerted by the press sis constantly monitored. As it's a pure pull, this test is "universal": no matter how big or small the sample is, you just have to divide the force exerted by the initial cross-section surface area of the sample and you have a N/mm², i.e. pressure (also mPa) kind of measure, that is the inherent mechanical property of the steel. But you better repeat the test with many samples, to get a meaningful average, since from one sample to another the behaviour can vary a bit. Now with the "library" of cross-section along the length (which are the geometrical characteristics of the blade), and the stress-strain curve of the steel used (which are the mechanical characteristics of the material), we can put it all together to get the mechanical properties of the blade. The stiffness/rigidity is the direct result of the encounter of the second moment of area along the length (relative to the edge-to-edge axis) and the steel Young's modulus. Of course, it's a very difficult calculation, but that's how things work, and that's how they are best modelized and described, without the extreme vagueness of everyday vernacular vocabulary. In the end, when you add up blade characteristics thus described, and account for the hilt (for mass repartition, and hand protection), you get a hold of the sword as a whole. For more details, one can look into: - cutting edges (sharpness, edge retention, etc): www.cliffstamp.com/knives/articles/index.html - beam theory: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euler%E2%80%93Bernoulli_beam_theory - second moment of area: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_moment_of_area - stress-strain curve: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stress%E2%80%93strain_curve
SGT: the general's not going to like this. General : report SGT: their baylies have baylies, their towers have towers, their tower turets have turets, their gatehouses have gatehouses and their machicolations have machicolations! honestly Sir after seeing that half the men deserted on the spot and the other half need quality time with a therapyst to get them to stop babbeling and drooling
It's funny how the things you forgot are the ones that most affect the handling of a sword, ie edge and distal taper. Since changing the taper in any way directly affects many of these points. In judging 'a good sword', I would neither count versatility, since many swords are highly specialized. otherwise the Longsword would always win out. A good sword is about handling, and handling is determined by sword geometry. So I'm sorry to say I mostly laughed and cringed at this video.
I disagree with the Pommel attack being effective, especially if not wearing gloves. If your blade is sharp, your hand is going to get slit and messed up. It will even hurt your hand by striking hard with your blade on the hand. Go out and do it at full force on a hard object. It's also a very bad idea because you are giving your opponent your sword handle. If you make a strike towards you opponent holding the blade, you have no way to secure it, while he can just grab the grip or parry it away from you. You would be all out of luck at that point. And coming from a smith a who makes swords and armor, says on how it is a terrible idea to strike your opponent with the weakest point of the blade. Meaning, you can have an easier time breaking your own sword by striking with the pommel. I think you can definitely pommel strike with the bottom while holding the grip and punching with the cross guard. It would be more practical that way. As much as I love two handed swords, it is not a practical weapon against armored opponents. An armored knight is not afraid to get in close and personal, which makes the two hand distance weapon less effective.
+Akatsukami Skallagrim is not expert is one thing. He is not holding the blade on the edge in the beginning but holding on the flat blade. My sharp swords will easily cut my hand. I don't know how his sword is. But to the point! it's quite ineffective. Do you have a sword? Go swing and hit something hard with it by holding it on the edge. Skallagrim slows down his force to reduce injury to his own hand as he strikes the tire. You are striking with the sword weak points in its structure, which means you have more chances on breaking your sword. Plus, you are ignoring the fact that you are handing your sword over to your opponent. Opponent can block, parry, and so forth that strike can be easily manipulated into the opponents advantage. You come fight me holding that grip and I'll rip that sword right out of your hand.
Sorry but you are wrong, if your sword would be feather light not only that it would lose all chopping power, chopping as opposed to slicing, but it would also be useless in a block or even in bind to an extent. Swords need mass and sword is not all about devastating attack.
he also said if it were amazingly strong. So a sword that is paper thin but strong enough to balance two pickup trucks on each end with out breaking, said sword would be able to inflict terrible carnage at incredible speed with minimal friction resistance. I think he said that this is not feasible, but if the technology were to be discovered it would cut through just about anything.
allahalla13 Unless we are talking about monomolecular wire, blade would not be able to cut through another blade. And mono-molecular wire is not a sword.
I knew someone would've already pointed that out. It was screaming at me (figuratively). On a similar vein, pOmmel and pUmmel are not the same word, but they probably share the same linguistic root.
SUMMARY
Reach - Gives defense and offense bonus until enemy closes the distance.
Hand Protection - Gives defense bonus. More forgiving parries. May limit Versatility.
Point of Balance - Handiness vs. Impact of weapon. Also includes amount of weight distribution as well as location.
Type of Steel - Alters the limits to sword or other weapon customization.
Versatility - Makes it easier to do more stuff.
Weight - Combines with Point of Balance to affect handling. May also set parameters for customization.
Rigidity - Effects cutting, thrusting and absorption of energy. Swords are often rigid at different parts of the sword, such as the edge vs. the flat.
Angle of Edge - Bigger angles cut less vs. smaller angles. Wider blades are one way of creating smaller angles without reducing Rigidity.
Tip Acuity - Tip cutting vs. Thrusting. Better thrusting is gained by smaller angles, but loses tip cutting. Better tip cutting from bigger angles, but loses thrusting.
Also tip acuity affects effective reach in cuts as a narrower blade cuts less effective near the tip.
It's not that simple, if you are talking about a relatively intelligent pair of opponents. For example, hand protection also increases reach in a way, because it allows you to hold your sword out further from your body without fear of your hand being sniped.
David Szeto
Yeah I wasn't as in the know when I wrote that shit.
But in general, armor (ie. hand protection, and other things) lets people be more liberal, including with extending reach.
And all tactics change when it comes to full armored opponents. Mainly, reach doesn't really matter as much anymore, unless I guess it's with anti-armor thrusting weapons such as the ahlspiess (but they require a very good thrust).
There's other thrusting anti-armor weapons that are better (more wedge shaped I think), but they're shorter.
I can't belive i have missed this Video for years!
It's brilliant and actually very helpful atm. Thanks @shad.
I have three more things that I think are important. 1, The moment of inertia of the sword at different rotation points (somewhat related to taper and weight). 2, The pivot points of the sword. And 3, mostly for two handed swords, the length of the grip.
+gurkfisk89 I endorse these points as well.
+gurkfisk89 The length of the grip is ALSO very important in one-handed swords. Most modern manufactures make them too long, which makes it very hard to grip and swing them properly. Why is it so hard to get such a simple thing right? I mean, don't the manufacturers look at period swords at all... This is probably due to their experience with sabers and similar weapons which are used very differently to early medieval swords. Especially the Viking era, it's impossible to find a lower-price sword with a short enough grip.
***** Absolutely, that's why I said "mostly" for two handed swords. It is ofc still important for one handed swords but there isn't that huge difference that you can find on two handed ones. Having a viking sword with a too long grip will make the grip akward and change balance etc a bit. But it will not change the properties or use as much as the difference between, say, a 20 cm grip and a 40 cm grip.
+gurkfisk89 I agree completely, just wanted to point out it matters with one-handed swords as well.
+gurkfisk89 If you have the moment of inertia about one axis, you can calculate the moment of inertia about every parallel axis (parallel axis theorem). Plus, you can calculate the centers of oscillation ("pivot points"). Here's more on this topic: hroarr.com/concerning-the-dynamics-of-swords/
(Makes skallgrim reference) "starts fangirling"
A follow-up video would be nice, yes.
I second that. I would be interested on your take on distal taper.
Hey, Shad. A followup would be nice. Unless there already is one and I haven't found it. Also a closer analysis of different types of cross sections would be interesting.
This is awesome, thanks Shad! Love your videos =)
If I may add my two cents however, I think in reference to your Point of Balance claim (about adding mass to the hilt of an axe) that there's a lot more of a trade-off in doing something like that than just cutting power. By adding weight below the point of balance, you're making the hilt a better moment arm than it would be. As such, if you, say, cut at the opponent and miss, not only do you have to stop the acceleration of the blade, you also have to stop the acceleration of the hilt as well, making the weapon far more unwieldy. At the same time, if an opponent bats your blade aside, you have to deal with the same issue, resulting in an ultimately slower weapon that can't defend as well.
I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) that this is the principle behind fencing foils. They sacrifice speed for accuracy by moving the point of balance into the hilt, but then trade mass for speed to compensate, resulting in a fast weapon with good control but that couldn't hold its own against a broomstick.
shad its RIGIDITY not REGIDITY. im sorry i had to say that
Great video! You can definitely tell a lot of thought went into it.
as always, informative vids like this are my favs, thanks Shad, you rule man, keep them coming :)
I'd really be interested to see a vid about patterned wielding, damascus steel, and the influence of middle eastern wielding technologies to medieval europe.
that skall reference... :)
Great information as always. Thank you.
As several others point out moment of inertia is also important. Center of balance is essentially only a measure of your sowrd's center of mass, wheras moment of inertia (about whatever axis of rotation) describes the sword's mass distribution effect on the ease of swinging it.
Essentially moment of inertia is the resistance to rotational forces about some axis (normally your hand, elbow, shoulder or waist depending on your degree of commitment to the strike).
Take your example of the handle weighted axe, for simlicity's sake we'll consider swinging it with your wrist and rotating about your hand:
You'll still be moving the mass of the head and accelerating it along your swing arc, regardless of your added handle mass (which we consider to be rotated about). The handle mass does however make the axe seem nimbler due to the fact that a free body tends to pivot around its center of mass, meaning it wil exert less reactional force on your hand (due to less of a leveraging bar since the center of mass essentially being half as far from your hand compared to no added handle mass).
I hope I managed to make some sense.
Those two halfswording looks intense!
There's a bold title mate! Congrats on the video.
In regards to rigidity, I give you the Scottish basket hilt. According to several reports (I have not had the opportunity to examine antiques) the tip is almost paper thin, but delivered horrific wounds on the English during the Jacobite uprising on the 1740's. in some accounts, delivering blows that split men from the base of the neck to almost out the waist.
As for the falchion, wide tips are also about adding mass to the weak of the blade, thus making it better at chopping, without making weak thicker and worse at slicing.
What video is that has the guy in the red shirt, explaining the different uses, such as murder stroke and things? I kinda want to watch it.
Do you have any resources that can be used for designing a sword? Particularly aspects of how to find the right ratio of depth, width, and length depending on the material?
+I am Shad 1 minor niggle and 1 possible change
rigidity not regidity.
the other is the depth and width, consider this
when you are measuring something you usually assign measures an a working situation ie assume true edge alignment.
to clarify, the term for a cut is Depth of cut, that would indicate that true edge to false edge would be depth measure
The problem with point-of-balance changes, using your axe example as reference, is that increasing the overall weight of the weapon decreases its SPEED, which is a bigger impact than pure mass. Moving faster with a lighter weapon isn't wholly different from moving slower with a heavier weapon in terms of cutting power. More weight will have a heavier impact when it comes to overpowering an opponent's guard, but if we're talking about pure cutting power against flesh, the two stack up about the same. Though slower is easier to dodge, which isn't good if you're the slower one.
Handle shape and material are very important as well
Shad I have a question, so if I want to make a arming/longsword (it's a weird thing) Wich material Sall y use? I mean for the blade. The name of the perfect or the better steel for it. I know that I have to use steel, but there are a lot of different kinds of steel.
You didn't mention any distal taper at all here. I'm curious if that's one of the two details you forgot to mention.
the clip you use when you're talking about pommels, where is that from?
Weight distribution is even more important in a sword than PoB and weight.
P. Johnsson did marvellous work on this in the catalogue to the exhibition "The sword - form and thought"
I think there are two caveats worth mentioning, one with reach and one with edge angle. With reach, it might be worth it to consider where the center of percussion is so you know how far or close your sweet spot is going to be. With edge angle, it might be worth discussing the sword's bevel, whether single or secondary.
what about the centers of precussion?
Handles are very important as well.
Please do the followup!
why depth and not THICKNESS?!!
Hi Shad.
The tempering is more important than the type of steel. You can make an unusable
blade out of good steel by messing up the heat treatment. But you can make a usable
blade out of not to crappy steel. It seems that you have a misconception about hardening.
Spring steel is a kind of tool steel, often it is the same alloy, sometimes different molten
but mostly only different in the heat treatment.
You harden a steel and than temper it to release stress, so it is less brittle and it normally
happens that it get softer at the same time. (There only a few exceptions)You can use the same Steel (with nothing than 1.5%C as alloy elements) to make a razorblade (very flexible) ore a file (very stiff) ore a knife (for a longer blade it would only serve superb in a laminated construction).
What would you say is a good 2 handed sword length, blade and handle, for a guy of 1,68m tall
If a blade were made of magical substance comparable in durability to steel but able to cut through pretty much anything with little effort (resting on edge would have it sink into most objects), what would be the optimal style of weapon to wield it? Long sword, halberd, scythe, etc?
You linked to a video regarding a swept hilt, but what about a curved hilt?
Would a curved hilt change how you would use a sword or its effectiveness as opposed to a straight hilt?
For reference, by curved hilt, I mean like this: casiberia.com/img/prod/sh2288.jpg
Curved hilts are usually only found on sabers and it's because they are commonly used with a pistol grip or handskake grip, rather than the traditional fist grip. It helps point control and edge alignment on those types of weapons.
I have heard, though i'm not certain that using a curved hilt, thumb ring, fingering the guard, or using a weapon two handed will help you follow through in a cut when cutting through a large or dense target.
This perfect sword may exist sooner than you think. As you point out steel in not capable of this type of structure. There is however something that is, Graphene; or a foraged kind of Graphene at least. I can be basically as small as a single atom in one layer and be layered to stop bullets, or enough to withstand normal forces. The biggest issue maybe its rigidity as a material.
This video needed to be made! Added to HEMA playlist.
Can I used your sketchup model in a project?
at 6:16, does anyone know what kind of sword I'm looking at? I can't decide if rapier or swept-hilt-something-else.
It's an early rapier, likely mid 1600s, which is why it has a slightly broader blade than later, more common rapiers.
Those were my thoughts. Something pre-transitional, but I wasn't really sure.
Sexy im learning blacksmithing at the moment this helps lots im going to be dedicating 11 good years to mastering to basics of blacksmithing then engineering hard & soft fabrication and welding i find the idea of the sword used in the same hand as a long sword
Can you do this with armor comparing the Roman's, Greek's, Samurai's, middle ages knight's as well as some middle eastern types of armors seeing which is the best for it's weight against every type of weapon.
Where did you find the image of the guy cutting all that tatami? I really want hi sword!
+Jim Giant Check Angel Sword's website.
I know the guy from Scarby in Dallas ^^
V - Pony Thanks. Crazy cutting power. Checking out theirr website now.
V - Pony No updates since 2004, do they have a new site?
+Jim Giant Etsy?
Idk
xP
does this apply to katars?
According to this article hroarr.com/concerning-the-sharpness-of-blades/ the edge angle does not affect the sharpness of the blade as much as other factors: "McGorry et al. [5] evaluated under field conditions the effect of the edge angles 20°, 30° and 45° on the force required for cutting meat. They deduce from their measurements that within the evaluated range of angles, the edge angle does not affect the required force significantly. This suggests that the sharpness reducing effect of larger edge angles is in practice overlaid with other effects. McCarthy et al. [3] consider the edge angle less important than other effects."
Also, here's some nice reading about sword dynamics (mass moment of inertia and how it's connected to the centers of oscillation ("pivot points")): hroarr.com/concerning-the-dynamics-of-swords/
+Alex Alex Man thanks heaps for pointing out this web-page, it's amazing. Having taken a look I'm a little confused. I found the part you quoted and indeed it they seem to say that the angles doesn't have a huge effect on the force required. But then two paragraphs down they seem to be saying that the force required to make a cut with a double edged blade that has an edge angled nearly two times as large as a single edged triangular blade is twice as much:
*quote
Equations (6) and (7) as well as Fig. 4 show that the same ratio of blade width and thickness yields an edge angle \(\delta\) of a double-edged blade with rhombic cross-section which is 1.69 to 2 times as large as the edge angle \(\varepsilon\) of a single-edged blade with triangular cross-section. From Eq. (2) follows that the cutting force of a double-edged blade needs to be twice as large as for a single-edged blade with the same ratio of width and thickness.
*quote
I'm not sure if I'm reading it right.
+I am Shad Greetings, Shad! I agree with you, figure 3 shows that doubling the edge angle approximately doubles the force required for cutting. Doubling the required force may seem a lot, but doubling the edge angle is also quite a change in the blade geometry. Also, if we look at equation 1 (sometimes hroarr.com doesn't display the math properly; just download the PDF at the bottom of the article), we see that the required force is proportional to the edge radius. I looked for some data on edge thickness from the article bibliography and i found 1µm or even less for a mechanically sharpened blade, and around 10µm for a worn blade. This means that there is a factor of about 10 for the required cutting force within a usual wear/re-sharpening cycle vs. a factor of only 2 for a rather dramatic doubling of the edge angle. Maybe that's why the authors say that the edge angle isn't that significant.
where do you buy swords?
I don't like the term distal taper as it's apparently used in swords. Distal means the end that's further away (I suspect it's etymologically related to distance, as its opposite, proximal, is to proximity.) Profile taper is also distal taper, by the dictionary definitions of those words. (There are of course blades whose profiles could arguably be described as tapering proximally, but I suspect that's usually described in terms of getting wider towards the tip.)
So it's a very confusing term if you were familiar with distal and proximal in in their general sense before you learned about the finer points of swords. It's a descriptive term applied to only a subset of the things that could be described by that descriptor - precisely the kind of term that you, Shad, avowedly hate. But it does appear to be the accepted term, so we're probably stuck with it.
Having counter weight on your axe may weaken your power. But there are some math. Your balance point is the center mass. And energy exerted by your strike is speed of center mass x mass of center mass x distance between center mass and the pivot point. When you pull your center mass from the tip you are shortening the distance to the pivot point and also reducing speed (because then center mass is traveling slower than the tip of weapon).
arming sword with side rings and finger rings? good hand protection without defining a true edge. good weight and a good balance between cutting and thrusting. And if well made, rigid but flexible when it needs to be.
and how the handle guard and pommel are constructed. I can't understand why some sword smiths do this, but There are swords out there that don't allow you to unscrew your pommel and end thy opponent rightly.
Even if that dose make the grip more secure.
Say you have the perfect sword like he explained could it cut through steel or armor, food for thought
Dude, do the follow up video.
Here is a comment, full watch, and like for engagement.
Okay, it's been a year, and nobody is probably going to read this, but... could anyone be so kind to tell me what's the font used in the list? It looks just perfect for something I plan to do, and it maddens me that I cannot, for the life of me, figure it out... !
Sorry man, though I don't have time to research a heap of different fonts, two that I use that are somewhat similar to this is "OldStyle" for a slightly weathered look, and "Cardo" for a slightly more elegant look, these are both available on dafont.com - sorry in advance if this wasn't very helpful!
Thanks, those are also some great fonts there!
The Iron Throne!
The same mass in the blade does not always the same cutting capacity. Any mass that is not exactly on the pivot point (and it is impossible to put a mass only on that point, because that point is never in the same place during the cut) add some inertia and momentum.
And the further the matter (mass) is from the pivot point, the more angular momentum the blade will have, if its it rotating at the same speed, even if compared to blade of similar weight, where the mass in concentrated close to the pivot point.
+Aleksi Nuutila But Im not sure how the physics works if you just add more mass to the pivotpoint of the axe, for example. Would it have better cutting capacity? After all we should take into account the force needed to accelerate the blade.
Aleksi Nuutila
The pivot point is almost always not even in the weapon boundary, unless it is a cut just from the wrist.
G'day,
Yay team.
Um, *point of Ordure...!*
"RIGIDITY"..., has no *"e"* ; one must say...
Such is Life !
;-p
Ciao !
The only thing that seems difficult for me to understand is:
How does someone not cut his fingers grabbing the sword from the blade to perform a crossguard or pommel strike ?
EDIT: How does someone not cut his fingers grabbing the sword from the blade to perform a crossguard or pommel strike, when grabbing a double edge sword ?
He wears gloves :P
End your opponent rightly with that pummel! Hahaha
When history does a boo boo :P
Great video!
An observation, about the edge angle, is that you also can make it sharper by hollow or concave grinding.
Here, look at this example:
www.shopwingchun.com/ewcblog/uploads/grinds1.jpg
A perfect sword should have some mass, to allow it to parry effectively.
Hey shad, have you thought about breaking videos like this into parts? Like an intro and go over a couple qualities, then part 2 with more qualities, then video three with the final info?
Could maybe help you with the views and money issues youtube is causing.
Shad, have you ever actually fenced with a sword that has hand protection? I do some heavy saber and rapier. My heavy saber has a hand guard on it, but is based on sabers on which the back 1/3 of the edge would be sharp, so you can land cuts with it if you turn your hand during a cut, etc. I'm having trouble imaging how it'd be any easier to do this or any different at all if I took my knuckle bow off. The same goes for my swept hilt rapier.Yeah, it's got knuckle protection, but you can do back cuts with it to. To my mind, the limiting factor to the ease of getting back or false edge cuts with these weapons is the fact that they are single handed, not that they have hand protection. Having a single hand on it makes it a bit harder to get enough power behind a back-edge cut at times. It's much easier to do when you have two hands on a longer grip--that is, easier to generate force to get the back edge to hit hard enough. Make sense?
+Sparrowhawk Yeah, if I understand these swords well enough, the downside to having a sword with an extensive guard is that it adds a lot of weight to the weapon, which can affect the way it performs, but as for making certain techniques more difficult, I don't see how that would be an issue.
+HamsterPants522 *shrug* I guess you'll just have to take my word for it but (a) the weight isn't much and (b) it's right at the hand. You are correct, of course on a basic physical level it adds weight, but I've fenced, for example, sword and buckler as well as rapier and buckler and a single handed arming sword is around the same total weight as a 37-inch rapier. Getting back cuts with a rapier is a bit harder, but it's got more to do with the fact that the blade is longer than any additional weight from the guard.
+Sparrowhawk I'd also like to point (LOL) out that rapiers (even ones with slightly wider blades) aren't great cutters. Don't get me wrong, you could easily break open skin and make someone bleed, but it's nothing like a cut from a nice wide sharpened broadsword blade.
+Sparrowhawk The fact that the weight is at the hand will affect the balance of the sword, though, which can affect how much inertia it has when you cut with it. I'm not sure how extensive the guards are that you've been dealing with which are the same weight as arming sword guards. It'd be nice to have a visual example.
Sparrowhawk *"I'd also like to point (LOL) out that rapiers (even ones with slightly wider blades) aren't great cutters."*
That goes without saying. There's no real impact to a cut with a rapier.
I like stop motion shad.
Ultimate Sword, Oh he's talking about Tinkledeath!
Regidity I believe to be a typo. Perhaps 'Rigidity' would be better.
Your list of criteria doesn't seem to account for the curvature of a blade, which makes a difference both visually and in terms of performance. That said, I remember seeing Matt Easton talk about curved swords and how a straight sword can technically perform like a curved sword if the edge of the sword is curved towards the tip.
Here's an example of what I mean:
img.photobucket.com/albums/v130/GaryWGraley/5D_Mk_ii/Albion-Saint/Saint.jpg~original
Even though the blade is technically straight, you can see that the edge is curved enough that this sword is clearly performing the same function as a curved sword.
Speed is literally exponentially more important than mass for cutting.
+UnbeltedSundew True but if a blade is too light you can't put enough energy into it to make it cut well.
David Cookson Indeed, if it's too light it likely doesn't have the requisite structure to cut well. ie it won't transfer the energy.
+UnbeltedSundew There's also a limit to how fast you can move your hands. A maximum speed if you will. Plus you will be able to reach very similar speed in the swing with most things regardless of weight (up to a point), so when you talk about speed with swords you generally mean redirection-speed wich wouldn't affect cutting power. Therefore, more often than not, slow swords are better cutters.
IofOden The maximum speed of the hand es exactly what I meant. Imagine you are swinging a light sword, you will reach maximum speed without effort. Now if you swing a heavier one you will feel how your muscles have to work harder; you really have to push it.The harder your muscles work, the more energy is transfered into the sword.
First of all; thank you for taking the time and effort to elaborate on the subject with this long text. After having a look at your account I saw that you speak German and so do I (I'm Swiss). I had already written quite a bit and since your grasp of English seems to be very good I continued.
I agree with you on every but one point, which was the same one I was initially making. It's about the energy you put in a sword. Here we go.
As you said yourself, when using a more forward weighted weapon your arms seem more tired afterwards. That is because you did excert them more, which in turn means you put more energy into the weapon. This is most easily explained with inertia as you mentioned.
However, it's not the distribution of mass that is important. It's the amount of mass you accelerate to a given speed, like in the formula for kinetic energy you wrote down. So a forward weighted sword means you have to accelerate more mass to a higher speed since the tip of the sword moves faster than the base (at the cross guard). And the more you have to use your muscles to accelerate the sword, the harder you push it, the more energy goes into it. That's conservation of energy at work here (Energieerhaltungsgesetz).
Example:
You take a very light sword, let's say a smallsword and a heavy one like a heavy longsword (it would work with any swordsof different weight). You swing the smallsword in a horizontal cut (so we can ignore potential energy) as hard/fast as you can. It won't take much strength. It will feel as if the sword almost moves on it's own; as if you made it move at the maximum speed at which you could have moved your arm without a sword.
Now you swing the longsword. You will feel that it took more strength, it was more of a strain on your muscles. You will probably also feel that you could have moved your arms significantly faster without the sword.
This indicates that you put more strength into the swing with the longsword and this must result in more force delivered at the recieving end. Again, conservation of energy.
Ich hoffe das war verständlich. Ich glaube, dass wir eigentlich der gleichen Meinung sind, nur, dass wir auf leicht unterschiedlichem Weg darauf kommen. Ich freue mich auf eine Antwort. Und frage ruhig nach falls es dir zu blöd ist alles zu lesen, ich denke ich könnte mich auf Deutsch ein bisschen kürzer fassen.
it's all the opposite. the best cold sword-like weapon isn't cold at all. is ultra light and still cuts the best, even all the mass is in handle. has no point and still thrust the best. isn't flexible at all and still won't break.. ommm ok I stop here u recognize light saber :D missing just two feaures, it has no hand protection unless it's disney nonsense crap and there is no pommel to unscrew and toss! ye some toss the whole thing and call it back. and back to reality- great vid with super important info. I would add grip into the list- lenght, shape (some round makes it harder to keep edge alingment), material (could get slippery). then maybe construction like it should probably have full tang. but these things r less important than those on your list I guess. maybe hand protection can be bad in the way if it lessens manoeuvrability or long cross guard can hit your own arm or leg. I had pointy one turned forward like horns and stabbed my own leg with it.. xD ..imagine having cross-light-guard! ehm.. Kylo missed just little light pommel
spriongsteel ahuuu!:D
You forgot about the pommel attachment. If you can unscrew and thus throw the pommel then you can end your opponent rightly
+Cherubino Vitullo 13:00 he did not
+Cherubino Vitullo I think that goes in versatility.
As you acknowledged in your opening, you missed some critical elements of blade design, curvature most signally. Apart from those, you overlooked the type of edge grind--single-bevel, double-bevel, hollow, seed-shape--and virtually omitted comment, except for a brief mention of pommels, on what is on the other side of the handguard from the blade, including the significance and shape of the handguard, itself. Mass is not everything.
The handguard is key to protection of the hand. The pommel affects balance, grip security, and offensive ability. The grip-type--single-hand, bastard, two-handed--affects fighting style options. The grip shape and size--profile and cross-section--is important to blade control. It should not be too thick or too thin, too flat-sided or too round. A properly-sized, oval cross-section is needed for comfort and blade indexing. And, of course, the grip covering should not just be attractive but provide grip security.
You know this stuff and have talked about it elsewhere, but not here. This should have been a more inclusive, two-part video.
Depth of a sword...? Depth usually refers to concavities. Why not call it thickness? Yes, it takes longer to spell out, but that way people won't think you mean the depth of the fuller.
you forgot to mention vibration notes and centers of percussion
sooo... light, strong, able to thrust and cut, versatile and point of balance... a lightsaber. light as faq. the balance of a flashlight. cuts and pierces with low force. will not break. adjustable in length.
but at the same time you cant really parry anything with a lightsaber, if someone swings an axe at you and you parry the axes shaft, the axe head will be cut from the shaft and continue into you, possibly killing you.
hotsteamypudding or, you may think of it as a breachweapon. kinda like a greatsword. you dont parry with it as balance and weight makes it hard to manuever. a lightsaber excels in cutting and thrusting as armor and anything blocking you goes to shiet. a natural instinct when being attacked is to shield youself, if your only chance to win is to strike first, the it is a suicide strike, as there is no meaning for the lightsaber wielder to stop his blade. he will continue through the weapon into the opponents body.
Lightsabers are actually terrible examples of this! Their blades are plasma rather than light and are stated to be quite heavy. Further, the plasma moving up and then back down gives it angular momentum (like a chainsaw) which makes its use extremely complicated. Further, they usually do not have any guard (unless you're Kylo Ren) meaning that any of those dramatic blade locks in the films could be solved instantly by sliding one blade down onto the opponents hands. The big, continuous movements we see in lightsaber duels (rather than more realistic and conservative fencing-type moves) are a result of having to maintain momentum with the blade to be able to move it quickly.
im2randomghgh well, regarding the guard; it is stated in lore that lightsabers "stick" together, meaning there practically is no sliding. furthermore, if a lightsaber clashes with a non-lightsaber/non-lightsaber-resistant-material, then the lightsaber will preferably block/parry incomming attacks as close to the opponents hands as possible to kill the momentum of the now detached "meanie-piece"
No, The Light saber is not the best sword. The best sword of all fiction
or nonfiction is undoubtedly the Shard Blades from Brandon Sanderson's
Stormlight Archive series.
A rune sword of course
"Anything can be made as sharp as anything" In the context of steels and swords its true enough but steel is unlikely to ever be made as sharp obsidian, for example. The statement might be a tad too broad!
You might want to run that pummeling-hypothesis to someone who is more of a...heh.....word smith. :)
i think u misunderstand axes
there are tools and weapons, and ey r different. weapons r not absolutely tip heavy, ey have thinner blades - u need to operate this thing after all not having too much handshock
and sure noone chop trees with weapon as noone kills warriors with tool
why does it seem like your videos have really low volume?
Noise reduction and no compression.
Point of balance: The example of an axe is misleading because it is so topheavy you have to shift the point of balance quiet a lot to feel the difference. Turning the axe upside down in your hand is just the most extreme example of shifting the point of balance since the total mass of the axe hasnt changed at all. ->"the weight is still there" .
Versatility: That is so wrong to say Versatility is automatically an advantage. A Gun can only shot in one way but that is much more effective in killing than a multi tool you can us in so many but much poorer ways. The Pommel- or crossguard strike is just an improvised war hammer.
Weight: The important thing of weight on your weapon is, how it is related to the weight of your enemy's weapon. It's just about mass. If you block a weapon of equal mass you will need as much force as your enemy. if your sword is lighter you will need much more power to resist a blow and it will be harder to knock the enemy weapon out of its place.
Rigidity:: That's much more important if you are going to Trust. There are Stabingswords that are practical rectangular metal bars with no real cutting capacity only made for stabbing through armor.
HARMONICS !!! BLADE HARMONICS! ! ! ! AAAA!!!!
+mikajlod25 Thank you sir. I assume you're referring to nodes v antinodes within the blade's length?
I thought it was rather important as well.
it's critical if you actually want to cut effectively and not get stuck half way through.
My thinking too, I think Skallagrim did a video on it.
I disagree with this list of characteristics, because there are lot finer characteristics, actual mechanical/scientific notions, that allows a much better understanding of how swords work, and explain "macrocharacteristics" such as rigidity, PoB, etc... It basically comes down to only two things:
- evolution of cross-section along the length of the sword
- mechanical properties of the materials used
For practical purposes, we can divide the sword in two subgroups: blade and hilt. Most of the studying work will be on the blade, the hilt you only need a basic approach for the type of hand protection offered, and a punctual repartition of the various masses. A wood grip will have a dampening effect on blade vibrations, but that is way too difficult to get a hold of it.
Of course, the serious part is the blade. Imagine you could slice a blade in 1mm thick slices, perpendicular to the length. Each slice would have two cut faces, resulting in two cross-sections. Imagine you could modelize these cross-sections, and measure surface area and second moment of area (both in regard to the edge-to-edge axis, and to the face-to-face axis). As you now have the progression of cross-section characteristics along the length, you can deduct:
- tapers in all directions
- edge angle, or more precisely: edge geometry (except on katanas, it will almost never be a single straight line from the very edge to the middle ridge, fuller, etc, there will always be a steeper angle at the very edge)
- mass repartition (since cross-section area is mm², if you consider it along the length (mathematically an integral), you get mm³, i.e. volume, you just need to account for density and you have the mass repartition along the length of the blade)
But we need to take into account the mechanical properties of steel (technically density is a mechanical property, but it's so basic I didn't felt the need to put it there). And there is ONE graph you need to keep in mind when talking about steel: it's the stress-strain curve. The stress-strain curve basically tells you almost everything you need to know mechanically. The first thing you have to understand is the difference between elastic deformation (no permanent deformation once the load is removed, it's what makes springs springy), and plastic deformation (there is a permanent deformation that stays there after the load is removed). And then, of course, breaking.
Stress-strain curves for steel always have the same general look: first a relatively steep ramp, then it transitions (either abruptly or in an arch) to a sort of plateau, and this plateau generally ends with a cross. The steep ramp is the domain of elastic deformation. The plateau is the domain of plastic deformation. The end of the curve is the breaking of the sample. Sometimes it's a bit hard to tell where the ramp ends and where the plateau begins, but that's not hugely important, what matters is that you get an idea of what load the steel can take without being permanently deformed. But in detail, we get three very important figures from this stress-strain curve:
- Young's modulus: is the "angle" of the ramp, and actually describes the "springness" of the steel
- elastic limit or yield strength/point: the point where the steel no longer goes back perfectly to it's original place, but keeps a permanent residual deformation (the transition between the ramp and the plateau)
- ultimate strength: the point where the steel definitely breaks (the very end of the curve)
Depending on the heat-treatment the steel has received, it can actually have almost no plastic deformation domain.
I have to make notice that this stress-strain curve is obtained by pulling on a sample with a large press, and the length of the sample and force exerted by the press sis constantly monitored. As it's a pure pull, this test is "universal": no matter how big or small the sample is, you just have to divide the force exerted by the initial cross-section surface area of the sample and you have a N/mm², i.e. pressure (also mPa) kind of measure, that is the inherent mechanical property of the steel. But you better repeat the test with many samples, to get a meaningful average, since from one sample to another the behaviour can vary a bit.
Now with the "library" of cross-section along the length (which are the geometrical characteristics of the blade), and the stress-strain curve of the steel used (which are the mechanical characteristics of the material), we can put it all together to get the mechanical properties of the blade. The stiffness/rigidity is the direct result of the encounter of the second moment of area along the length (relative to the edge-to-edge axis) and the steel Young's modulus. Of course, it's a very difficult calculation, but that's how things work, and that's how they are best modelized and described, without the extreme vagueness of everyday vernacular vocabulary.
In the end, when you add up blade characteristics thus described, and account for the hilt (for mass repartition, and hand protection), you get a hold of the sword as a whole.
For more details, one can look into:
- cutting edges (sharpness, edge retention, etc): www.cliffstamp.com/knives/articles/index.html
- beam theory: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euler%E2%80%93Bernoulli_beam_theory
- second moment of area: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_moment_of_area
- stress-strain curve: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stress%E2%80%93strain_curve
Modern NATO pommels come in mostly 5.56, 7.62, and 9 millimeters.
SGT: the general's not going to like this.
General : report
SGT: their baylies have baylies, their towers have towers, their tower turets have turets, their gatehouses have gatehouses and their machicolations have machicolations! honestly Sir after seeing that half the men deserted on the spot and the other half need quality time with a therapyst to get them to stop babbeling and drooling
It's funny how the things you forgot are the ones that most affect the handling of a sword, ie edge and distal taper.
Since changing the taper in any way directly affects many of these points. In judging 'a good sword', I would neither count versatility, since many swords are highly specialized. otherwise the Longsword would always win out.
A good sword is about handling, and handling is determined by sword geometry. So I'm sorry to say I mostly laughed and cringed at this video.
I disagree with the Pommel attack being effective, especially if not wearing gloves. If your blade is sharp, your hand is going to get slit and messed up. It will even hurt your hand by striking hard with your blade on the hand. Go out and do it at full force on a hard object. It's also a very bad idea because you are giving your opponent your sword handle. If you make a strike towards you opponent holding the blade, you have no way to secure it, while he can just grab the grip or parry it away from you. You would be all out of luck at that point. And coming from a smith a who makes swords and armor, says on how it is a terrible idea to strike your opponent with the weakest point of the blade. Meaning, you can have an easier time breaking your own sword by striking with the pommel.
I think you can definitely pommel strike with the bottom while holding the grip and punching with the cross guard. It would be more practical that way. As much as I love two handed swords, it is not a practical weapon against armored opponents. An armored knight is not afraid to get in close and personal, which makes the two hand distance weapon less effective.
+Akatsukami Skallagrim is not expert is one thing. He is not holding the blade on the edge in the beginning but holding on the flat blade. My sharp swords will easily cut my hand. I don't know how his sword is. But to the point! it's quite ineffective. Do you have a sword? Go swing and hit something hard with it by holding it on the edge. Skallagrim slows down his force to reduce injury to his own hand as he strikes the tire. You are striking with the sword weak points in its structure, which means you have more chances on breaking your sword. Plus, you are ignoring the fact that you are handing your sword over to your opponent. Opponent can block, parry, and so forth that strike can be easily manipulated into the opponents advantage. You come fight me holding that grip and I'll rip that sword right out of your hand.
Sorry but you are wrong, if your sword would be feather light not only that it would lose all chopping power, chopping as opposed to slicing, but it would also be useless in a block or even in bind to an extent. Swords need mass and sword is not all about devastating attack.
he also said if it were amazingly strong. So a sword that is paper thin but strong enough to balance two pickup trucks on each end with out breaking, said sword would be able to inflict terrible carnage at incredible speed with minimal friction resistance. I think he said that this is not feasible, but if the technology were to be discovered it would cut through just about anything.
allahalla13 Unless we are talking about monomolecular wire, blade would not be able to cut through another blade. And mono-molecular wire is not a sword.
You also forgot the style of sharpening, or grind, which can also effect cutting capacity. Cocave, vs chisel vs bevel vs hollow etc etc.
The spelling nazi in me feels the need to point out that it's "rigidity", not "regidity".
I knew someone would've already pointed that out. It was screaming at me (figuratively). On a similar vein, pOmmel and pUmmel are not the same word, but they probably share the same linguistic root.
"Rigidity", not "regidity". Cheers.
this video is really quiet
I can't hear a fucking word you said. Who stole my headphones!
Well... Duh...