18th Century Body Armor

Body armor was conspiciously absent in 18th century Europe due to the gunpowder revolution. I always felt it was a shame armor did not continue to evolve, so I looked up ways to keep armor in the race against anti-armor weapons. There are not many effective yet practical alternatives, but I believe there is one strong contender, Hadfield steel.

This steel alloy is also known as mangalloy, it's what was used in the British Brodie helmet of the two world wars. Invented in the 19th century, mangalloy contains over 10% manganese, which greatly increase resistance to penetration. Brodie helmets are proof against shrapnel, which would make the material also effective against lead musket balls.

To make mangalloy in the 18th century two technical challenges must be overcome. The first is the use of the Bessemer process to economically melt steel. This was not available in Europe until the 19th century, but the Chinese were using it since the time of Christ. The second requirement is knowlege of manganese. Fortunately manganese was widely used by European glass makers to control color. The material is also abundant. If they knew to mix maganese into molten glass, surely experimenting with using it in molten steel is not an implausible leap. If these two processes were combined it would mark a significant leap forward in metallurgy.

Steel with low manganese content are stronger than plain steel. This would be useful in making swords and gun barrels. Higher concentrations make steel more brittle, but go over 10% and that's when it becomes super tough. The drawback is it's difficult to forge, so the simplist application would be armor plate. You're not going to be making intricately shaped armor due to the forging problem, but something like Brigandine armor would be easy to do.

I welcome any metallurgical experts to correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this is a very doable technological what if for this time period.

I'm not a metallurgical expert, but this sounds like something that would take major changes to happen.

For instance, the leap between "using this stuff to control color in glass" to "using this stuff to make better steel" is a pretty big leap - those uses could hardly be further apart.

What natural process (as distinct from an angel coming down to pass on the idea) would inspire someone to think something good for one would be useful for the other?

One of my good friends makes armour and he was involved in a programme regarding gun proof armour. His standard breastplate withstood rounds from a 1911 Browning however a Brown Bess punched a hole right through it. The end result was that even though black powder weapons have a far lower velocity the mass of the ball adds too much kinetic energy for the armour to cope with.

tallwingedgoat said:

You're not going to be making intricately shaped armor due to the forging problem, but something like Brigandine armor would be easy to do.

Click to expand...

My understanding is that Brigandine armor is weaker than Plate Armor, so even if a Superior Metal is used, I think the strength is Questionable.

While Manganese Does make the armor Harder, I do also have to question why someone is going to experiment with it.
Glass is one thing, Steel is another, You're not exactly putting lives at risk during a war with faulty glass.

also, the Experiments done in 1816 didn't result always in good Quality mixes.
so the Ability to make Reliable mixes is what is needed.
time is needed, but at the same time, if it can't keep up with firearm advancements, it's probably going to be discarded.

also, Weight is something to consider.

Elfwine said:

I'm not a metallurgical expert, but this sounds like something that would take major changes to happen.

For instance, the leap between "using this stuff to control color in glass" to "using this stuff to make better steel" is a pretty big leap - those uses could hardly be further apart.

What natural process (as distinct from an angel coming down to pass on the idea) would inspire someone to think something good for one would be useful for the other?

Click to expand...

People have been experimenting with adding things into molten steel for a long time, including things like blood, leaves, glass. For centuries alchemists have been trying to replicate wootz steel by experimenting with various alloying effects, that effort was actually a driving factor behind metallurgical science. The same thing was happening with glass which has it's own history of experimentation. Only with glass the effect is observable. Both would use some of the same skills and knowlege and it's not implausible some polymath would have an interest with the two materials.

Perhaps the addition of high manganese glass to molten iron would result in unexpected toughness leading to experimentation with larger doses of manganese. Or perhaps manganese is tried simply because it's well known as an element that makes substantial changes to glass. IOTL it was used at first to purify steel, almost as soon as the Bessemer process was invented. Most likely the main obstacle for steel makers to experiment was simply the unavailability of the Bessemer process in Europe. While in China where the process was available, it was glass making that was undeveloped.

Fenrir_Angerboda said:

My understanding is that Brigandine armor is weaker than Plate Armor, so even if a Superior Metal is used, I think the strength is Questionable.

Click to expand...

Brigandine is as good as the quality and thickness of the steel used. It's main weakness vs plate is that it has gaps which must be overlapped. Some brigandine armor actually use large plates and is essentially a variation of plate.

also, the Experiments done in 1816 didn't result always in good Quality mixes.
so the Ability to make Reliable mixes is what is needed.
time is needed, but at the same time, if it can't keep up with firearm advancements, it's probably going to be discarded.

also, Weight is something to consider.

Click to expand...

Early experiments with maganese steel failed because they didn't have the Bessemer process. Also, the key to good mixes is agitation technique, something optical glass makers specialized in since that's how they get the micro bubbles out of glass.

As for weight, that was always a factor with any armor. Still is today.

tallwingedgoat said:

People have been experimenting with adding things into molten steel for a long time, including things like blood, leaves, glass. For centuries alchemists have been trying to replicate wootz steel by experimenting with various alloying effects, that effort was actually a driving factor behind metallurgical science. The same thing was happening with glass which has it's own history of experimentation. Only with glass the effect is observable. Both would use some of the same skills and knowlege and it's not implausible some polymath would have an interest with the two materials.

Click to expand...

An interest in the two materials? Possible. Leaping from "this controls color" to 'this would make stronger steel"? That would take quite a creative leap. Not necessarily ASB - but not a perfectly ordinary assumption, either.

Perhaps the addition of high manganese glass to molten iron would result in unexpected toughness leading to experimentation with larger doses of manganese. Or perhaps manganese is used simply because it's well known as an element that makes substantial changes to glass. IOTL it was used at first to purify steel, almost as soon as the Bessemer process was invented. Most likely the main obstacle for steel makers to experiment was simply the unavailability of the Bessemer process in Europe. While in China where the process was available, it was glass making that was undeveloped.

Click to expand...

The question then comes up on how such a process would be developed ahead of schedule.

Elfwine said:

An interest in the two materials? Possible. Leaping from "this controls color" to 'this would make stronger steel"? That would take quite a creative leap. Not necessarily ASB - but not a perfectly ordinary assumption, either.

Click to expand...

Not really, the two industries were remarkably similar in many ways. It's just that they were not located on the same continent.

tallwingedgoat said:

Not really, the two industries were remarkably similar in many ways. It's just that they were not located on the same continent.

Click to expand...

Experimenting with this stuff to see what it does? I can believe that. This? Is the production of a fairly active imagination.

That doesn't mean someone doing it is ASB, but its not as easy a connection as you think it is.

Just because the production of glass involves similar methods to the production of steel doesn't mean that people will think something desirable for one quality in one material will be useful in producing an entirely different quality in a different material.

What lead to the idea of it being used to purify steel OTL?

Elfwine said:

Experimenting with this stuff to see what it does? I can believe that. This? Is the production of a fairly active imagination.

That doesn't mean someone doing it is ASB, but its not as easy a connection as you think it is.

Just because the production of glass involves similar methods to the production of steel doesn't mean that people will think something desirable for one quality will be useful in producing an entirely different quality in an entirely different material.

Click to expand...

Well we differ on how creative we think people are. History is full of more amazing experiments than this. Inventors will try anything within their means. I don't think the lack of imagination is the limiting factor, rather it's giving Europe the Bessmer process or China advanced glassmaking. Once that happens, mangalloy steel is a matter of time.

tallwingedgoat said:

Well we differ on how creative we think people are. History is full of more amazing experiments than this. Inventors will try anything within their means. I don't think the lack of imagination is the limiting factor, rather it's giving Europe the Bessmer process or China advanced glassmaking. Once that happens, mangalloy steel is a matter of time.

Click to expand...

Again: Someone experimenting to see what this does? That's one thing. Someone saying that because this stuff works to produce one property in glass that it would produce better steel? That is what I am doubtful on.

That is like having someone experiment with the dye that was used to make Tyrian purple as a way to make gold from lead kind of creative and imaginative.

Not to mention the other issues other people have raised, which are likely to mean that people are going to, if it is developed, wonder if it was worth the trouble.

Bessmer process + glassmaking =/= mangalloy steel armor.

Elfwine said:

That is like having someone experiment with the dye that was used to make Tyrian purple as a way to make gold from lead kind of creative and imaginative.

Click to expand...

The comparison is invalid. You can't make gold from lead, but manganese steel is proven armor material and can theoritically be made with technology from that era. Your objections are noted but they are not of a technical nature.

The entire history of technology is based on experiments and inventors using the fruits of other inventors in new applications.

tallwingedgoat said:

The comparison is not valid. You can't make gold from lead, but manganese steel is proven armor material and can theoritically be made with technology from that era. Your objections are noted but they are not of a technical nature.

The entire history of technology is based on experiments and inventors using the fruits of other inventors in new applications.

Click to expand...

The point of the comparison is taking something useful in one field, for one purpose, and trying to use it in another field entirely for another purpose entirely.

Taking it literally is just a sign you are missing the difficulties in the way of technological developments of the sort you're proposing.

I'm not saying its impossible for someone to develop this, but there are difficulties in the way, and the first one is someone coming up with the idea.

What would inspire someone to think a material that leads to fixing color would have any relationship with a desired property in steel? Someone who has the time, money, and so on to work on this until they produce something useful, since putting too much or too little in won't do much good.

And if it comes off as either about the same as normal steel or more brittle through early failed experiments, it being picked up again probably won't lead to 18th century armor.

Wiki says that for the guy who actually added the Manganese, Robert Mushet, someone actually brought him a piece of Bessemer steel and said "This is poor quality, can you make it better?" Bessemer himself had never found out the answer after spending tons of money and time trying it.

ED: Mushet already knew it made steel stronger.

I think what would further the discussion is to understand how the effect of manganese on steel was discovered.

MNP said:

Wiki says that for the guy who actually added the Manganese, Robert Mushet, someone actually brought him a piece of Bessemer steel and said "This is poor quality, can you make it better?"

Bessemer himself had never found out the answer after spending tons of money and time trying it.

Click to expand...

Interesting. Why do we never hear of Mushet?

Elfwine said:

Interesting. Why do we never hear of Mushet?

Click to expand...

After Mushet's 16 year old daughter confronted Bessemer in his office about how he was wealthy thanks to her father and her father was destitute, Bessemer paid Mushet $41,000 (in 2010 USD) a year for 20 years to shut him up.

MNP said:

After Mushet's 16 year old daughter confronted Bessemer in his office about how he was wealthy thanks to her father and her father was destitute, Bessemer paid Mushet $41,000 (in 2010 USD) a year for 20 years to shut him up.

Click to expand...

Amazing how often this sort of thing happens - genius invents something, businessman gets rich off inventor, inventor is forgotten.

In fairness, at least Bessemer seems to have something to justify his fame besides borrowing/stealing Mushet's idea.

Still...

Anyway, interesting stuff here. Sounds like Mushet's discovery, while possible earlier - is not particularly probable ("sooner or latter" does not mean "likely at any point").

Which brings up the real problem. Assuming this stuff exists, you need it to exist in a time in which people are still serious about body armor as a normal part of a soldier's equipment, not after its been (mostly) abandoned already.

MNP said:

After Mushet's 16 year old daughter confronted Bessemer in his office about how he was wealthy thanks to her father and her father was destitute, Bessemer paid Mushet $41,000 (in 2010 USD) a year for 20 years to shut him up.

Click to expand...

It does not sound an immense amount of money, too, to buy such a silence. I think it is in the order of a yearly average income of a working-class European family. Of course, 41,000 USD of the time would be entirely another thing.

Elfwine said:

Anyway, interesting stuff here. Sounds like Mushet's discovery, while possible earlier - is not particularly probable ("sooner or latter" does not mean "likely at any point").

Which brings up the real problem. Assuming this stuff exists, you need it to exist in a time in which people are still serious about body armor as a normal part of a soldier's equipment, not after its been (mostly) abandoned already.

Click to expand...

I really don't understand what your objection is here. People do crazy experiments and make leaps of logic all the time, and particularly in this kind of field. You have no technical objection, you're just being "Ohhhhh I don't think people are that clever."

Besides, even if it wasn't a plausible outcome, if it was technically possible than surely we can discuss it here, in an alternate history forum. There's being a devil's advocate, and there's nay-saying. The difference lies in whether you're constructively adding to the discussion.

MNP said:

I think what would further the discussion is to understand how the effect of manganese on steel was discovered.

Click to expand...

Wiki has an article on it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadfield_steel

Manganese steel was first discovered by a German prior to the Bessemer process in 1816 and while he noted it for toughness it was not developed further. Then Bessemer himself used manganese to purify steel without understanding its effect on toughness. His method of using manganese to remove sulfur though remains in use today, and almost all steel contains some manganese because of this.

Then Robert Hadfield started experimenting with steel alloys (he also invented silicon steel, another tough steel), trying to develop a tough cast steel. Manganese was one of the many elements he experimented with and the results far exceeded his expectations for which Hadfield was made baronet.

There are many elements that will alloy with steel with useful properties. However manganese is unique in that it has very noticible effect on increasing hardenability in heat treatment in only small quantities, while also being cheap and abundant. When you consider it was already in use for steel purification, it's effect on heat treatment of the product will eventually be noticed. It's not an accident that mangalloy was the first steel alloy to be invented.

Wouldn't this change a lot more than just armor? Better steel by the 18th C. means that you might get quicker industrialization, better engines, etc.