Thread: Reading and believing.

G'Day Folks

I don't have access to my reference books as I write this, however, I think I can shed a little light on the use of the term "London Spring".

The ability to produce steel is quite an advanced process for any society. For steel with the necessary qualities to produce tools of consistent quality a number of factors had to line up. In the pre-industrial era there was a lot of plain luck involved. Early furnace techniques varied widely and the steels produced had distinct characters dependent upon the raw ore and coal used in production.

“Spring” steel is usually a "low alloy" medium or high carbon steel. Low alloy here means that amounts of other metallic elements aside from iron are present in amounts less than 1% the most common of these are manganese and chromium. Some spring steels have almost 2% silicon. The carbon content ranges from 0.5 to 1%.

This composition leads to a characteristic known as "yield strength", which means that the material resists deformation and returns to shape. This would be a good characteristic for a handsaw blade. I think this is where the word "Spring" comes from here.

The "London" moniker would most likely relate to the furnace that the steel was produced at. In the pre-industrial era it was common for specific implements and materials to be given the name of the town from which they originated. A blast furnace is not something that an ordinary town can easily assemble and operate successfully. It is one of the major feats of industrial engineering and chemistry. As I've stated above the products of these furnaces vary significantly depending on the raw materials used and variations in manufacture methods. Even now we know about "Sheffield Steel", "Damascus Steel" and "Toledo Steel" each of which, in the past, would have been regio-specific products with unique qualities.

An early example of this in the hand tool world is the naming of hammers after their place of manufacture. Steel with low levels of impurities with the correct qualities would be formed into specific implements such as hammers which would gain a name for themselves. Most of us will have used a "Warrington hammer" for example - which is now a name for a particular shape of hammer but originally was the name given to a hammer made in Warrington.

Hence I think the term "London Spring" is actually a contraction of "London Spring Steel".

Cheers

Horaldic

Originally Posted by Horaldic

G'Day Folks

I don't have access to my reference books as I write this, however, I think I can shed a little light on the use of the term "London Spring".

The ability to produce steel is quite an advanced process for any society. For steel with the necessary qualities to produce tools of consistent quality a number of factors had to line up. In the pre-industrial era there was a lot of plain luck involved. Early furnace techniques varied widely and the steels produced had distinct characters dependent upon the raw ore and coal used in production.

“Spring” steel is usually a "low alloy" medium or high carbon steel. Low alloy here means that amounts of other metallic elements aside from iron are present in amounts less than 1% the most common of these are manganese and chromium. Some spring steels have almost 2% silicon. The carbon content ranges from 0.5 to 1%.

This composition leads to a characteristic known as "yield strength", which means that the material resists deformation and returns to shape. This would be a good characteristic for a handsaw blade. I think this is where the word "Spring" comes from here.

The "London" moniker would most likely relate to the furnace that the steel was produced at. In the pre-industrial era it was common for specific implements and materials to be given the name of the town from which they originated. A blast furnace is not something that an ordinary town can easily assemble and operate successfully. It is one of the major feats of industrial engineering and chemistry. As I've stated above the products of these furnaces vary significantly depending on the raw materials used and variations in manufacture methods. Even now we know about "Sheffield Steel", "Damascus Steel" and "Toledo Steel" each of which, in the past, would have been regio-specific products with unique qualities.

An early example of this in the hand tool world is the naming of hammers after their place of manufacture. Steel with low levels of impurities with the correct qualities would be formed into specific implements such as hammers which would gain a name for themselves. Most of us will have used a "Warrington hammer" for example - which is now a name for a particular shape of hammer but originally was the name given to a hammer made in Warrington.

Hence I think the term "London Spring" is actually a contraction of "London Spring Steel".

Cheers

Horaldic

That makes perfect sense.

Sounds reasonable Horaldic though Stilton cheese comes to mind. It was not of course made in Stilton.
Cheers,
Jim

Originally Posted by jimbur

Sounds reasonable Horaldic though Stilton cheese comes to mind. It was not of course made in Stilton.
Cheers,
Jim

It's not much good for making saws either.

Originally Posted by ch!ppy

still waiting for my copy to arrive, somewhat overdue i think, by the time i get it it wont matter as i will have read everything about it twice already arrg!..still, that fits in with the general consensus that he didnt work as a cabbie, calling himself one is probably like the old saying, once a carpenter always a carpenter, no matter what job you may do later on

of course the seaton chest is very interesting, but i think i actually get more of a kick out of looking at the chests that have been used, the big international auction houses (not ebay) get dozens through their listings once every year or two and give a real feel for the work they have done, the tools and boxes show wear of course but that kinda tells ya something as well


cheers
chippy

Hi Chippy

I hope you are not disappointed with the book. I must admit that as much as I find the tools interesting, I much rather would have descriptions of the work day and work methods. There is very little in this regard.

What I find curious is that, for someone that was not an active cabinetmaker (although he called himself one), the chest he built is really very nice! Indeed, I would be most pleased with myself if I could do as well! That was not the chest of someone who lifted tools for the first time. The work was quite advanced.

I would love to know more about Benjamin the person. But then that's my day job speaking.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Originally Posted by Berlin

My reputation proceeds me.

(I'm house sitting, the owners needed to rest their eyes o.s.)

The odd part is they have some very nice antiques and a really cool 60's scandinavian dining suite. It points, perhaps to a variably applied matrix of need v want. The same people, may on one occasion say, 'we need a tv unit, cupboards, and a book case TODAY' and get whatever fits the bill. And then on another day say, 'we don't need this table but it is exquisite. I don't care how much it costs.'

To try and bring this back on topic then: dovetails are relevant even to buyers of orange tv cabinets some of the time.

yeah, well, it takes all tastes i guess and what appeals to some doesn't appeal to others, as a builder it keeps things interesting making different types of furniture though and many times i've had to make things to a clients specs even if i dont like it myself, i usually try and make it with some of my own influence as well, but sadly its not always possible to only make nice stuff you would use as you own, not when your doing it for a living anyway. which is a matter of design, i dont particularly like those thin dovetails either but if the design of the peice overall can carry it off then they may have a chance of looking ok, often times though the peice has poor design elements and the thin DT do nothing to enhance it...

i've made oo-dals of pine furniture too, what i call the cheap range and its true even in that type of furniture people appreciate solid wood (not veneer) and joints, housing joints where others just butt and DT etc. years ago before it was a fad (or maybe the start of it!) i made lots of baltic furniture from reclaimed floorboards etc (probably the basis of your orange furniture you dont like-, ppl emulating it perhaps) also lots from oak as well, and it fair dinkum sold like hot cakes for years, gave up after a few years as it was getting harder to get the floorboards and i eventually got tired of looking at it..have to say i occasionally dont mind that rustic furniture in the right setting..no accounting for tastes though, you would never believe it but being the entrepreneur i was i was always looking for little things to do, or ways or markets to sell to before others, so in a particular range i used to insert a penny (coin) into the piece somewhere, how hokey is that! but people loved it, go figure! it wouldn't go over so well nowadays but at the time i had people ordering from me each piece of furniture for their home so it all matched, maybe they were coin collectors hahaha

cheers
chippy

Originally Posted by derekcohen

Hi Chippy

I hope you are not disappointed with the book. I must admit that as much as I find the tools interesting, I much rather would have descriptions of the work day and work methods. There is very little in this regard.

What I find curious is that, for someone that was not an active cabinetmaker (although he called himself one), the chest he built is really very nice! Indeed, I would be most pleased with myself if I could do as well! That was not the chest of someone who lifted tools for the first time. The work was quite advanced.

I would love to know more about Benjamin the person. But then that's my day job speaking.

Regards from Perth

Derek

you know, thats the sticking point for me too! it doesnt add up!

i wanted to read the book entirely first to get a better impression but it would seem to me that there might be a couple of other workable theories to the common one put forward

Originally Posted by Woodwould

It's not much good for making saws either.

I've had some that would cut through anything.
Cheers,
Jim

Originally Posted by jimbur

I've had some that would cut through anything.
Cheers,
Jim

Cutting the cheese isn't quite the same!

Originally Posted by Woodwould

Cutting the cheese isn't quite the same!

Mustard???

Originally Posted by jimbur

Mustard???

That too!

Originally Posted by derekcohen

Ch!ppy, having actually read the book I can offer these details ...

Benjamin Seaton's father ran an established furnituremaking business. Young Ben was (it was believed) encourage to migrate to America, and the chest of tools were purchased for this purpose. He was then 21 years old.

One does wonder why he was 21 when this occurred, that is, what he did before reaching this age. He came from a fairly religious family, so possibly he was just not the sharpest knife in the drawer???

My first thought was he had just finished an apprenticeship(?). I "aint'nt a expert" so I did a quick google. (Though nominally US they were a colony of the UK and would be doing similar in that 18th century period).

So a young fella (and occassionally gal) from middleish class families would be indentured to a master typically at 14 till 21 (better off families might arrange a shorter period). The apprentice worked for the master for nix during that period, but the master had to look after the apprentice, morally, physically and intellectually and then paid out the apprentice (sometimes with a tool set!) on completion of the indenture. Also wiki indicates there was some form of compulsory apprenticeship arrangement repealed in the UK in 1814 (does this mean all workers prior to that date, other than say, labourers, needed a legal apprenticeship for whatever job they claimed to do?)

I reckon circumstantial evidence, young master Seaton got apprenticed to his dad and the 21 and go to America with this tool chest was the beginning of his journeyman period. This would explain why he could do such a decent job on his tool chest and why he claimed to be a cabinet maker throughout his life (ie he legally was, just he never did it as a trade, due to changing circumstances*)

SWK

*PS I have some sympathies here, as I also did an apprenticeship more than 30 years ago, of which I worked as a tradesman for about 9 months then moved on. I still hold all the legal requirements and am licensed still as a tradesman.

Re Seaton - there might be a close parallel to the link I posted of the 14yo chair-maker. Watching the video and reading a bit of the _blog_ <gasp> it is obvious that his father is a close and important influence.

And the end result is a fine piece of work. So if you are producing some work under the watchful gaze of professionals with a high working standard, it may make sense that you work to meet or exceed their expectations.

A similar factor may come into posting a WIP on the forum here, compared to just making something for yourself that perhaps only the family will see.

---
On the London Spring Steel topic, it definitely refers to the 'grade' of the steel. Those key words help send the sale price for Disston #12s etc professionally sharpened by a few star ebay saw-doctors into the $250-$500 range on a regular basis.

I say 'grade' as saw-blades of various types have been study metallurgically and virtually no difference found ... the 'quality factor' being put down to taper, tensioning etc.

Cheers,
Paul.


(Link to study is available, but - you know, being the internet - you just can't tell from one year to the next whether the damn things will still be there.)

Originally Posted by ch!ppy

yeah, well, it takes all tastes i guess and what appeals to some doesn't appeal to others,

'De gustibus non diputandum est' is how they put it in that other Forum.