U.S. patent number 3,816,920 [Application Number 05/310,931] was granted by the patent office on 1974-06-18 for novel cutting edges and processes for making them.
This patent grant is currently assigned to The Gillette Company. Invention is credited to Aiyaswami Suryanarayan Sastri.
United States Patent |
3,816,920 |
Sastri |
June 18, 1974 |
NOVEL CUTTING EDGES AND PROCESSES FOR MAKING THEM
Abstract
Novel cutting edges and especially razor blades which have
substantially better corrosion resistance, edge hardness, temper
resistance, strength and ductility than those heretofore made from
stainless steel and processes for making such cutting edges.
Generally the cutting edges are formed from alloys comprising 30 to
60 percent cobalt, 10 to 40 percent nickel, 15 to 25 percent
chromium and 5 to 12 percent molybdenum by (a) heating strips of
such alloys under conditions which will result in said strips
having a face centered cubic structure when cooled to room
temperature, (b) cold working the strips, (c) age hardening the
strips and (d) at some time during or subsequent to the
cold-working step and before or after the age hardening step
forming the cutting edge therein.
Inventors: |
Sastri; Aiyaswami Suryanarayan
(Stow, MA) |
Assignee: |
The Gillette Company (Boston,
MA)
|
Family
ID: |
23204665 |
Appl.
No.: |
05/310,931 |
Filed: |
November 30, 1972 |
Current U.S.
Class: |
30/346.54;
30/350; 148/674; 148/707 |
Current CPC
Class: |
B26B
21/54 (20130101) |
Current International
Class: |
B26B
21/54 (20060101); B26B 21/00 (20060101); B26b
021/54 () |
Field of
Search: |
;30/346.53,346.54,350
;148/11.5F,162 ;29/527.5 |
References Cited
[Referenced By]
U.S. Patent Documents
Foreign Patent Documents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
731,441 |
|
Jun 1955 |
|
GB |
|
1,103,421 |
|
Feb 1968 |
|
GB |
|
Primary Examiner: Lanhan; Charles W.
Assistant Examiner: Reiley, III; D. C.
Attorney, Agent or Firm: Anderson; William M. Bratlie;
Oistein J. Foster; Scott R.
Claims
Having described the invention what is claimed is:
1. A process for making a cutting edge, said process comprising
heat-treating a strip of an alloy consisting essentially of 30 to
60 percent cobalt, 10 to 40 percent nickel, 15 to 25 percent
chromium and 5 to 12 molybdenum under conditions such that said
strip will have a face centered cubic structure when it is cooled
to room temperature, cold working the strip to convert the face
centered cubic structure to a close packed hexagonal structure, age
hardening the strip and at some time during or subsequent to the
cold working step forming the cutting edge thereon.
2. A process as defined in claim 1 wherein said cutting edge is a
razor blade.
3. A process as defined in claim 1 wherein said strip is cold
worked so that there is a reduction in thickness of between 60 to
95 percent.
4. A process as defined in claim 1 wherein said heat treatment is
carried out at a temperature of 800.degree.C to 1,200.degree.C for
a period between 1 minute to 1 hour.
5. A process as defined in claim 1 wherein said age hardening is
carried out at a temperature of 300.degree.C to 700.degree.C for
periods of from 1 minute to 1 week.
6. A process as defined in claim 1 wherein said alloy is
heat-treated at a temperature between 800.degree.C to
1,200.degree.C for a period of 1 minute to 1 hour, cold worked
until there is a reduction in thickness of between 60 and 95
percent and age hardened at a temperature of 300.degree. to
700.degree.C for a period of 1 minute to 1 week.
7. A process as defined in claim 6 wherein said cutting edge is a
razor blade.
8. A cutting edge of an alloy consisting essentially of 30 to 60
percent cobalt, 10 to 40percent nickel, 15 to 25 percent chromium,
and 5 to 12 percent molybdenum, said alloy being in cold worked and
age hardened condition and having a close packed hexagonal
structure.
9. A cutting edge as defined in claim 8 which is a razor blade.
10. A razor blade as defined in claim 9 in which a
polytetrafluoroethylene coating is on the cutting edge.
Description
Although cutting edges such as razor blades at first glance appear
to be fairly simple instruments, they are in reality delicate and
complex. With razor blades the ultimate edge is generally in the
order of 250 angstroms thick and because of such dimensions they
are extremely sensitive to the slightest amounts of corrosion.
Further the edges are hardened to the highest extent achievable but
yet it is necessary that they retain sufficient strength and
ductility to withstand the stresses and strains such a narrow edge
is subjected to during the source of its use. Further in addition
to all this, it is necessary that they have good temper resistance
to withstand the high temperatures which they are usually subjected
to when the polytetrafluoroethylene coatings which are generally
applied to them are sintered thereon. Although stainless steels
have filled some of these requirements to a fair degree there is
substantial room for improvement.
One object of the present invention is to provide novel cutting
edges and especially razor blades which have hardnesses, stress
corrosion resistances, ductilities, strengths and temper
resistances which are substantially better than those of stainless
steel.
Another object of the present invention is to provide processes for
making such edges.
Other objects should be obvious from the following description and
claims.
In general, the aforementioned objects are achieved by: (a) heating
an alloy comprising nickel, cobalt, chromium and molybdenum in the
ranges specified below under conditions which will result in the
alloy having a well annealed single phase face centered cubic
structure when it is cooled to room temperature; (b) cold working
the single phase alloy; (c) age hardening the alloy and at some
time during or subsequent to cold working step and before or after
the age hardening step forming the cutting edge. In a preferred
mode of making cutting instruments such as razor blades, the
cutting edge is formed; e.g., by grinding subsequent to the age
hardening step.
Generally the blades of the present invention are made from alloys
which comprise by weight about 10 to 40 percent nickel, 30 to 60
percent cobalt, 15 to 25 percent chromium, 5 to 12 percent
molybdenum, and 0 to 20 percent iron. In preferred embodiments, the
alloys comprise 20 to 35 percent nickel, 20 to 45 percent cobalt,
15 to 25 percent chromium, 5 to 12 percent molybdenum and 0 to 5
percent iron. If desired, the alloys may contain other alloying
elements which enhance the properties of the alloy but do not
interfere with the processes. As examples of such other alloying
elements and their preferred ranges mention may be made of the
following:
Carbon 0 to 0.3% Manganese 0 to 5% Tungsten 0 to 3% Copper 0 to
5%
In carrying out the processes of the present invention, the alloy
is heated and held at a temperature such that the alloy will be a
fully annealed single phase material having a face centered cubic
crystal structure when it is cooled to room temperature, e.g., by
air cooling or quenching. The temperature and the period of time
the alloy has to be held at such temperature in order to provide
such a structure on cooling will vary depending upon the specific
composition of the alloy. Metallurgists are quite familiar with
this phenomena and will have little trouble ascertaining the best
time and temperature for each particular material. Generally for
most alloys within the scope of this disclosure, such a structure
may be achieved by heating the alloy to a temperature of between
800.degree.C to 1,200.degree.C and holding it there for periods
from at least 1 minute to 1 hour. It will be understood that the
longer times will be used for lower temperatures and vice versa. In
preferred embodiments, temperatures between 800.degree.C and
1,050.degree.C are employed. Particularly useful results were
obtained by heating alloys to a temperature of 1,000.degree.C for
about one half hour.
The cold working step which converts the face centered cubic
structure of the alloys to a close packed hexagonal structure and
which imparts a substantial increase in hardness to the alloy, may
be carried out by any of the well-known methods; e.g., rolling,
stamping, pressing, drawing, etc. In preferred embodiments of the
invention, the cold working is carried out by cold rolling.
Generally a reduction in thickness between about 60 to 95 percent
will provide the maximum hardening. It is to be understood that
reductions somewhat below 60 percent and about 95 percent can be
made, but the results will not be as dramatic as when the reduction
is between 60 percent and 95 percent. The preferred reduction is
between 75 to 95 percent. Preferably the cold working step is
carried out under ambient conditions. However if desired it may be
performed at temperatures below ambient temperature, e.g., down to
that of liquid nitrogen or at elevated temperatures below the
transition temperature of the alloy. Usually the transition
temperature will vary with the amount of cobalt in the alloy.
Generally with alloys comprising about 30 percent cobalt the cold
working may be carried out at temperatures up to 250.degree.C and
with alloys comprising 60 percent cobalt it may be carried out at
temperatures up to 650.degree.C.
In using the processes of the present invention for producing
cutting edges such as razor blades, the cold working may be
provided at least in part by the grinding operation normally used
in forming the cutting edge. Of course, it will be understood that
if desired, substantially all the cold working may be carried out,
for example, by cold rolling and the grinding step would contribute
little additional hardening. In such event if desired,
electro-sharpening methods may be employed in forming the cutting
edge. The cutting edge may be formed prior to the age hardening
step when the alloy is not as hard but in preferred embodiments, it
is formed subsequent to the age hardening step when the alloy is
appreciably harder. Generally, the methods which may be employed
for forming the cutting edge are well known to the art and the
specifics thereof form no part of this invention.
The age hardening step which is carried out subsequent to the cold
working step is a time-temperature dependent reaction in which a
further substantial increase in hardness is achieved. Generally the
optimum hardeness will be achieved by heating the alloy at
temperatures between about 300.degree.C and 700.degree.C for
periods, for example, of at least from about 1 minute to about 1
week. As will be appreciated, the shorter times will be more
applicable to the higher temperatures and the longer times to lower
temperatures. With the alloy containing 35 percent nickel, 35
percent cobalt, 20 percent chromium and 10 percent molybdenum,
optimum hardness was achieved by heating at 450.degree.C for 3
hours and with the alloy containing 42.5 percent cobalt, 13 nickel,
20 percent chromium, 18 percent iron, 1.6 percent manganese, 2.8
percent tungsten, and 0.2 percent carbon, optimum hardness was
achieved by heating at 450.degree.C for 10 hours.
The following non-limiting examples illustrate the processes of the
present invention as it relates to the preparation of a razor
blade.
EXAMPLE 1
A sheet of alloy containing 35 percent nickel, 35 percent cobalt,
20 percent chromium, 10 percent molybdenum (weight percentages),
and the usual trace of impurities found therein, was made to have a
face centered cubic structure by heating it at 1,000.degree.C for
one half hour and thereafter air cooling it to room temperature.
The sheet had a hardness of 200 DPHN. Part of the sheet was then
cold rolled to a thickness of 0.004 inch with a reduction of 93
percent in the thickness of the alloy. The hardness after cold
rolling was 540 DPHN. The strip was then sharpened to produce an
edge through conventional razor blade sharpening techniques.
Subsequent to sharpening, the blade was heated at 450.degree.C for
3 hours and the body hardness rose to 725 DPHN. A
polytetrafluoroethylene telomer coating was applied to the cutting
edge and it was cured thereon at 343.degree.C for 10 minutes. The
following table illustrates the temper resistance of the blade of
the present invention during the sintering step as compared with
typical carbon and stainless steel blades.
Body Body hardness Sintering hardness before Time after Blade
sintering & Temp. sintering Blades of Example 1 725 DPHN 343-10
min. 725 Carbon Steel Blades 825-880 DPHN do. 510-560 Stainless
Steel Blades (double edge type) 750 do. 580-595 Stainless Steel
Blades (ribbon type) 750 do. 520-550
EXAMPLE 2
An alloy strip containing 42.5 percent cobalt, 13 percent nickel,
20 percent chromium, 2 percent molybdenum, 1.6 percent manganese,
2.8 percent tungsten, 18 percent iron, and 0.2 percent carbon and
the usual impurities found therein was heated to 1,000.degree.C for
one half hour and thereafter cooled to room temperature to make it
a single phase material having a face centered cubic structure. The
strip with a hardness of around 220 DPHN was cold rolled until a
reduction of 84 percent in thickness had been made and the strip
had a thickness of 0.003 inch. The hardness was 521 DPHN. The strip
was sharpened to produce an edge through conventional razor blade
sharpening techniques. Subsequent to sharpening, the blade was
heated to 450.degree.C for 10 hours and the body hardness rose to
757 DPHN. A polytetrafluoroethylene coating was applied to the
cutting edge and it was cured thereon at 343.degree.C for ten
minutes. Subsequent to the cure, the blade had a body hardness of
757 DPHN which is much better than that of a typical carbon or
stainless steel blade set forth in example 1.
In addition to the hardnesses and temper resistances set forth
above, the blades of Examples 1 and 2 had strengths of
approximately 300,000 pounds per square inch and sufficient
ductility that they could be bent back on themselves (180.degree.)
without fracture. In a corrosion test at 70.degree.F in a
hydrochloric acid solution containing 10 percent sodium chloride,
open crevice samples of the alloy of Example 1 corroded at the rate
of 0.1 mil per year, whereas, 316 stainless steel corroded at the
rate of 5 mils per year. In a 10 percent ferric chloride solution
the results were even better in that the alloy of Example 1
remained intact while the 316 stainless steel corroded at the rate
of over 50 mils per year. The corrosion resistance of the alloy of
Example 2 was not as good as that of Example 1, but it was far
superior to the stainless steel.
* * * * *