How do I start making armor?

[Friethjoph]

Here are a couple of essential items that you may not have thought of, or perhaps underrated the importance of...

--A sketch book. Get one and use it early and often. If you have an idea, sketch it out. If you think you might build something, sketch it out first.

--Hearing protection. The sorts of percussive noises an armorer generates will destroy your hearing. The high decibel drone of a grinder or saw will do it as well. The process begins immediately and deterioration is irreversible. I use ear plugs. Some prefer ear muffs. The important thing is to get something you are going to use, and use it.... every time you do something noisy. It's better to be "temporarily deaf" from earplugs while you are in the shop than to be permanently deaf when you are old and grey. Some old smiths seem to wear their deafness as a badge of honor.. it is not.

--Eye protection. I use a plastic face shield whenever I'm expecting things to hit my face... like at the grinder, or when cutting with a jigsaw. Under more usual conditions, I rely on my somewhat oversized (1980s era) glasses. This is not what I recommend, but it's better than nothing. There are lots things that can send debris into your eyes; snapping drill bits, exploding dremmel cutoff wheels, clipped off rivet ends, little snippets of sheet metal that you have removed with an aviation shear.

And while I'm on the topic of injury prevention... Learn to hammer well. If it hurts, you are doing something wrong and it will injure you sooner or later.

Mac

HIGHTLY seconded. Workshop safety first!

[Tom B.]

While you gather tools and safety gear you also can work on your book collection.

Claude Blair's European Armour 1066-1700 is still the best overall book on armour. (Note: the title is often mistyped in the listings as 1660-1700 instead of 1066-1700, the ISBN is 9780713407297)

You also can work on developing you eye by looking at extant pieces of armour.

Download Matthias Gollss PHD Thesis
Iron Documents. Interdisciplinary studies on the technology of late medieval european plate armour production between 1350 and 1500

It is invaluable due to the huge number of images it contains but beaware that there also are many fakes and reworked items included.

Here is a link to My Pinterest page with all of the images from Goll's thesis

There are numerous Discussion threads here on the AA where we reference Goll's Ref_Arm_XXXX numbers.
Here is an example where we discuss the veracity of several items.
Goll's Thesis topic #3: Controversial or Suspicious Items

Another thesis to look at is that of Nickolas Dupras:
Armourers and their workshops
The tools and techniques of late medieval armour production

Again I have pulled out the images and put them on Pinterest.

[Aaron]

Make use of your local library's interlibrary loan system!

[Konstantin the Red]

So, hence, Evan: which of the simplest projects tempts you most right now?
By our lights, not necessarily your own lights, the top simplest ones are:
1) Barrel helm/Topfhelm, 13th century. Slightly tricky to fit if you wear glasses...(?) The originals didn't consider this.
2) Pair of spaudlers, 15th century and onward. They evolved somewhat through the decades; by the 16th century a pair of spaudlers used articulation rivets forward, articulation upon a vertical leather riveted in down the centerlines, and sliding rivets, peined and washered to ride along a short slot, for max freedom from the rear to let your arms go forward with no interference, so lots of lessons and how-to in two small pieces of harness.

Either teaches pushing metal about by hammering. Your 55# anvil will suffice for rivet setting, and it's okay that it's already beat up.

[Evan M.]

So, hence, Evan: which of the simplest projects tempts you most right now?
By our lights, not necessarily your own lights, the top simplest ones are:
1) Barrel helm/Topfhelm, 13th century. Slightly tricky to fit if you wear glasses...(?) The originals didn't consider this.
2) Pair of spaudlers, 15th century and onward. They evolved somewhat through the decades; by the 16th century a pair of spaudlers used articulation rivets forward, articulation upon a vertical leather riveted in down the centerlines, and sliding rivets, peined and washered to ride along a short slot, for max freedom from the rear to let your arms go forward with no interference, so lots of lessons and how-to in two small pieces of harness.

Either teaches pushing metal about by hammering. Your 55# anvil will suffice for rivet setting, and it's okay that it's already beat up.

I think I would rather try a pair of spaudlers. I've made a couple of attempts at barrel helms when I was younger and I'd like to try something different.
Btw, is it pronounced "spauDLers" or "spauLDers"? I've heard/read both and I'm curious about which one is proper or if there's even a difference.

[Tom B.]

Btw, is it pronounced "spauDLers" or "spauLDers"? I've heard/read both and I'm curious about which one is proper or if there's even a difference.

Good catch, you have been paying attention.

This is probably the most common mistake in terminology.
Spaudlers is the correct word.

[Chris Gilman]

A lot has been posted about tools and getting to wacking metal. I'd like to bring up shape and seeing that shape.
I have seen many pieces of armour here and Facebook that have amounted to a great deal of work by the armourer, lots of details or embellishments, but it was work done on a poor form.

Silhouette.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silhouette




Can you tell which of the above is the earth?
You do not need any detail to immediately understand the difference between a globe and a box.
If you get the shape wrong, the details don't make it better.


Moving metal is important, but you need to see where you need to move it before you start. This is why Mac suggested a large sketchbook. Getting your eye accustomed to seeing the correct form or silhouette and training your hands to reproduce that shape is key to any armour ( or just about anything really) looking good the the observer. Even an untrained eye will prefer the same piece with a better form.
I had a friend who loved this one replica breastplate he saw. It had a lot of detail, but it was too long, (top to bottom) so I put it in photoshop and crushed it vertically by 30% or 40%. He immediately changed his mind when he saw it with the "Correct" proportion.
Even if you want to do fantasy armour, good form is still good form.

Which would you prefer?


or

[Halberds]

I like the bottom car.
Thank you for your contributions to the forum.
I for one, are a fan of your armouring and art works.
Hell... 10 years ago I asked you for a job.

Hal

[Konstantin the Red]

Btw, is it pronounced "spauDLers" or "spauLDers"? I've heard/read both and I'm curious about which one is proper or if there's even a difference.

Good catch, you have been paying attention.

This is probably the most common mistake in terminology.
Spaudlers is the correct word.

I'll argue with Tom, here. Both seem legit, over long centuries of usage. Spauld- exhibits more etymological comprehensiveness, so there's advantage that way. You're going to see 'em both from authorities.

We can table raising any hell about the proper pronunciation of "sallet" until another day.

Armor component words very often are derived from French words for the body parts they cover. An Englished edition of this may be seen in the Creative Anachronist habit of saying the body part for the armor-piece, if the armor is comprehensively present and not a foam kneepad -- like we used to use. There are a couple exceptions to this fashion in SCA parlance -- gauntlets stay gauntlets, if not gaunts or mitts; any all-round headpiece is genericized as helm. It's also verbed, as in the phrase "Helm Up!" for "don your lids, prepare for battle."

[Signo]

I'll add another 2 cents on Chris's post. Time "wasted" thinking, drawing ,looking, studying is hammertime better spent. So in the end it's not wasted at all. What you will learn even without an hammer in your hand is what shapes you want to achieve, and how to achieve them with less effort.
If I can: exercise your eveness, eye and learn how internal stresses shape metal in this way: cut strips of mild steel and learn to arch them evenly hammering them on the flat of the anvil with different hammers, you can bend them lenghtwise, some across the width, and both.
Check how stiffer a bent strip is compared to one bent on a horn or with whatever technique that does not pinch metal.

[coreythompsonhm]

The best tool in the tool chest is knowledge of the subject. Second to that is hammer time. Fortunately, books are available, as well as 20 years of content on this site.

[Konstantin the Red]

A question, Evan: what is the motivation for making armour? . . .

Man, that's a tough one! . . .

I guess I'll give it a try. I have been fascinated with armor, specifically European armor for as long as I can remember. {ssnip}

I would love to get involved with historical re-enactment like what Reece and Ben from Pursuing The Knightly Arts are doing. But I don't only want to use and wear armor, I really want to learn how to make it as well.

Okay, your present primary activity interest is in HEMA and the several small groups practicing it -- what we call the "rebated-steel" community. HEMA practitioners are doing good work nowadays interpreting some sword manuals that have appeared over the last decade in English translation. Before then these resources were only available to people who could read centuries-old German or Italian or French. And look at the pictures, which in none of these documentary sources are step-by-step, but more like a brochure for the fencing master and his school.

Rather different, and admittedly less historical in its development, is the rattan-players' spectrum of games -- the SCA being the player here that has the most swordplaymates for you and the widest distribution, coast to coast and well enough represented in central Ohio: this is the Kingdom of the Middle. Go to http://www.sca.org/geography/kingdom_lookup.php, and take it from there. All the SCA Kingdoms have websites with the ability to look up SCA groups nearest your home. As developed, SCA tourney combat has a couple of palpable advantages and some tactics-related disadvantages, generally adopted to make SCA's béhourd combat with rattan batons safe enough to leave only bruises at worst. Advantage: it's at full (and blurring) speed. Nearly full power too, with fullest power held in reserve until actually needed to convince some thick-hided sort he has indeed been hit hard enough. Even then, since a thick rattan stick is by any measure less lethal than a rebated steel blade, it is less battering to gear and to one's person. It may perhaps be listed in "disadvantages" that this treatment eventually wears out rattan and it mushes or breaks off -- advantage is that broken rattan is blunt and square. Nobody loses an eye in an accident. Disadvantage: no pommel tactics and no lever-locks with the length of the blade; indeed, no grappling tactics, as some non-SCA groups practice. (It is not that the SCA couldn't develop pommel strike tactics with at least certain typess/patterns/constructions of sword, at least experimentally to see if they may use these authentic mélée tactics without authentic danger as well (we had to give up the flexible flail and the quarterstaff for this reason); the certain types I refer to would be crossguard long swords, and not the metal basket hilted swords because really it's against SCA rules to hit each other with weapon-metal, and armour crashing into other armour happens only by mistake -- "Oops! Sorry, milord! Allow me to help you up." No grapple work and haft locks with polearms either, which may be inherently easier to develop, since SCA pole arms combine length (hitting power) with moderately resilient warheads. Knock a man just about down, but not breaking him.

But within these restrictions, which are distinctly tournament inspired, pour le sport, you've got tons of people to play with and a decent scattering of people making armor too, who likely will be a convenient source of tips and tricks.

Looks like here's the Dayton OH chapter: http://wingedhills.midrealm.org/

[Jasper]

How well do you dish? And have you dish? I forget the pattern name. But there a was a simple SCA basket hilt pattern which could be dished. 3 fingers the center and 2 fingers. You dished out the center. Bend about 1/2 inch of the fingers 90 degrees. Shove the rattan then the holes. grab two hose clamps and tighten down. I did part of one and just said no to doing my own armour.

[Konstantin the Red]

Jasper, was that maybe a metal edition of the sheet-HDPE baskethilt pattern nicknamed "the facehugger" for its shape in the flat? Description's somewhat mystifying, what with the 3 fingers and the 2 fingers. Sounds like a defunct brand of tequila.

It is a very great pity you didn't have a mentor that could walk your creative efforts around obstacles you encountered. A lot of this stuff is pretty simple -- once you know how to do it; it is a PITA otherwise. Gotta find a teacher. Teacher gotta be handy. It doesn't hurt if the good maker is also a good instructor -- some can do, but simply cannot tell.

I am still very oldschool about a lot of this: I believe wholeheartedly that any damn fool with at least one working hand and no history of seizures can bend up some acceptable metal. Likewise, that any and every damn fool can work satisfactorily in leather, in simple forms in plastic, and in cloth. More complex forms, bodyfitted forms, see the thread on Laminated Canvas, which builds up like papier-maché, but of strips cut or torn of stout cloth.

Prototype Plastic Basket Hilt -- pix are gone; you yourself figure in the thread a good bit. Woops, or was that Jestyr...? Anyway...

[shamelessPuck]

the 3 fingers and the 2 fingers. Sounds like a defunct brand of tequila.

This line just about killed me. There are a lot of good suggestions here, and I'll second the idea that at some point you got to just try things and see how it goes. Also, hi, I'm new here, or at least new to posting. I can introduce myself separately to avoid derailing the good ideas here.

[Aaron]

the 3 fingers and the 2 fingers. Sounds like a defunct brand of tequila.

This line just about killed me. There are a lot of good suggestions here, and I'll second the idea that at some point you got to just try things and see how it goes. Also, hi, I'm new here, or at least new to posting. I can introduce myself separately to avoid derailing the good ideas here.

Welcome to the Archive!

[Konstantin the Red]

the 3 fingers and the 2 fingers. Sounds like a defunct brand of tequila.

This line just about killed me.

Y'know, if you leave your bottle of tequila out on that apartment balcony of yours in 7-deg-F weather, that tequila probably would kill ya. Core hypothermia! Ultra brain freeze!

So avoid that, and you're about guaranteed to have a Happy New Year!

[Aaron]

Take great joy in the small bits of armour you make. I really enjoy watching a skilled armourer peen a rivet. It's amazing to watch. And, they are often amused that such a simple action can amuse me.

This summer I'll be making armour again, but only to trade on the Classified section.

[Evan M.]

How well do you dish? And have you dish?

This is my first practice run to see what I can do with my current dishing set up.
I'm not yet happy with the overall shape. I feel like it still needs to be a bit shorter and it definitely needs to be more globose (is that the right term?). This is only about an hour, maybe two into the project and I expect to spend several more on it before I have a decent shape. Any thoughts and/or advice for what I should try or change?


Here it is being worn


These are the dishing forms I made out of some old water-damaged plywood. I've already learned that the forms on the right and left are not very good shapes. The shallow one on the right needs to be completely remade and the one on the left is a bit unrealistically steep. I've mostly been using the one in the middle for the breastplate. It's holding up to the abuse well enough, but I expect I'll have to replace the top piece of plywood before long.


I also got some fancy new pieces for Christmas! er, I guess "new" isn't the right word but you know what I mean
The big anvil is 300 lbs and the little one was originally 150 but the heel was broken off a long time ago. I know that these aren't at all necessary for making armour, but I am hoping to be able to use them to forge some custom hammers, stakes and other hardy tools in the near future.



Thanks again to everyone who's replied, I'm very grateful to everyone who's taken the time to give advice and recommendations! I hope I can start giving back once I've learned more.

[Aaron]

Nice work!

[Konstantin the Red]

Yes, you'll be able to build your own hard hammers, drifting out the haft eye and everything, once you have access to a forge and can work steel hot.

Until then, VERY strongly recommend now that you have a 300# backup, that you learn 'soft hammer hard anvil' raising. It is not very noisy -- goes tak tak tak tak not BING BING BING. Even less noisy if you decouple the anvil foot from anything that can transmit sound/vibration through it into the building structure. The Garland Mfg split head rawhide face hammer does a lot to muffle the racket in itself. Insulating the anvil and the anvil stump will finish the job. I would say 1/8" balsa wood under the anvil foot plus 1/8" balsa beneath the stump or whatever you build, like a narrow, Jenga pyramid of 2x4s. The "stump's" construction can include balsa dampers anywhere in its layers if you don't want the balsa on the floor. Trim the balsa flush to the rest of it to keep the balsa from being broken.

You might like the Bowling Ball Basherizer sometime for breasts and backs when your living establishment will permit it: very smooth, effectual, large radius dishing without lumps.

You can use those anvils to effect making barrelhelms, like straight out of the Knowne Worlde Handbook, especially using the horn tip to work the riveting flange down (the other way to do it is to fab it up using welding; the 3rd way is to fit the top cap interiorly so you can have relieving cuts snipped out of the cap's circumference that are hidden away inside on assembly). I'd avoid The Fighters' Handbook unless it has been very recently revised to reflect the state of the art -- the SCA Stock Clerk does have a recent edition, so YMMV there. You'll get better knowhow on building a 5-plate helm right here. And you can find plate patterns here and elsewhere on the 'net. Imitate, insofar as you can, the Bolzano in barrel hats:

-- avoid the "Pembroke" as inauthentic, it's an SCA mongrel of a barrel helm. If the mid-13th-c. Maciejowski proto-helm interests you, the essential difference is in the shape, the curvature, of the pieces. And the great big quadcopter-drone landing pad of a top cap, too. Helm for helm, these were somewhat heavier than what came later. Not optimum for SCA play, but distinctly highly effective against the sword and axe, bcs spaced armor in those big corners. SCA barrels are better off more fitted and more with glancing surfaces designed into them, in the fashion of the later greathelms.

Most SCAdian armourers build barrel helms of the general Bolzano type about two and a half inches deeper in the bottom plates for good coverage of the neck, sheltering the throat better so other neck protection need not be obtrusive and giving good protection to the sides of the neck and the upper cervical spine. They may dip the nape plate's bottom edge somewhat to that end. But not so extensively you couldn't turn your head.

[Konstantin the Red]

A good many SCA barrel- or great-helms pattern a lot like this 5-plate one from Daleĉin, Moravia:

It sports greater density of rivets than is usual with SCA hats, but that's no bad thing if you use small rivets -- enough small rivets make a stronger rivet joint than fewer larger ones.

It's okay to be casual about the layout of breath holes; middle ages breaths leaned more to the functional than to the precise. A layout grid in Sharpie or soapstone marker is still a very good idea, for such methods were clearly used -- just recognize that such a layout grid was usually freehanded in and they satisfied themselves with "pretty straight." There was also their holemaking tech to consider. Small holes may have been made beating a spike point into the metal and filing the top of the resulting metal pimple until the hole was large enough.

You may decide to start with this section of Talbot's Fine Accessories:
http://talbotsfineaccessories.com/books/metalwork.html

[Steve S.]

Here is an article I wrote a long time ago on the subject:

https://www.arador.com/armour/how-to-make-armor/

Steve

[Konstantin the Red]

A month on, Evan, what cheer?

[wcallen]

Evan,

Back to your breastplate.

The first question anyone should ask (and you should ask) should be "So, what style of breastplate were you trying to copy?"
Without that, you don't know what you are trying to achieve, and we don't know how to comment.

For me, I find that it helps a lot of have pictures right there when I am working. And making a full sized drawing can really help a lot. It makes it a lot easier to "see" what you are trying to do before you start bashing on metal.

I expect it isn't deep enough in the bottom half, but without knowing what you are making, I can't be sure.

Wade

[Mac]

What Wade said, of course. It's important to have a particular type of armor in mind.

Now, that said; let me offer some advise on the breast you have started.





As I see it, there is a bit too much curvature across the top. That is to say, the shoulders are too close and the neck is too far out. This is a mistake that almost all modern armorers make at first, and many of us never get past it. As it stands now, the shoulder of the breast will be the place that is bearing the weight and pressure of the breast. This will limit your movement and will bruise the muscle in the area of your collar bones.


If you clamp the neck area loosely in a vise, and bend it in a bit, the shoulders will end up a bit forward. This exploits a general principle in compound curvature. If you increase the curve in one axis it will decrease the curve in the perpendicular axis.

Mac

[Indianer]

look here, there is information on the fit and rest of a breastplate:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=96588

[Evan M.]

A month on, Evan, what cheer?

I'm afraid I've somewhat neglected my breastplate lately in favor of a few other projects, but I have made some progress here and there.
I trimmed the shoulders and neck by about 3/4 of an inch and then I removed the flared piece at the bottom. I've also been dishing the belly a bit more to get a deeper shape, but it feels very thin at this point and I'm worried that it may split open if I try to push it. Which wouldn't be the end of the world since this is mostly a trial run with an old satellite dish, but I still don't want to lose all this work.

It's looking a little bit better now, but as others have mentioned it should probably still be deeper.

I've left the shoulder to shoulder measurement fairly wide since I don't know what I want to do with that part of the breastplate yet.

Evan,

Back to your breastplate.

The first question anyone should ask (and you should ask) should be "So, what style of breastplate were you trying to copy?"
Without that, you don't know what you are trying to achieve, and we don't know how to comment.

I definitely made a big mistake here, I rushed into this project with only a vague idea of what I wanted to make and I think it shows quite badly. I'm hoping to do a new breastplate before long where I'll make sure to take my time and do some proper research before jumping into it head-first with no specific references as I did here. That said, I was hoping for a mid to late 14th century breastplate that is somewhat similar to Ian LaSpina's old breastplate.



On a side note, one of those other projects that I worked on was an attempt at a Maciejowski great helm. I'm not very proud of it, the helm overall feels too big and bulky and I think I made it much taller than it should be. Still, it was a good opportunity to become acquainted with riveting.


I think that's pretty much everything I've got for now. I've mostly been working on trying to make a functional forge and taking my first steps into blacksmithing, but it will still be a while before I'm able to mess around with heating pieces of armour.
I know I've said this a few times already, but thank you guys for all the feedback, it means a lot to me!
-Evan

[Konstantin the Red]

Yes, and yes. That Maciejowski does look very tall in the top half. The type was slightly heavier helm for helm than the more tapered helms that came later in the century. Suppose that might have been because the customers groused about weight?

Something else I've long said about Maciejowskis and barrels in general is their Frankenstein-monster corners worked better against sharp weapons than SCA rattan batons -- by providing spaced armor about the cranium that a weapon had to cross before it could wound. In the SCAdian game, a telling blow to the helm is acknowledged upon feel, on impact and noise. A glancy, curvy helm can slip a lot of that, whereas a helm with corners tends more to trap the strike of a stick more fully.

Down in the bottom half, your M looks nearer the historical model's proportions -- again (and incidentally, since you are not necessarily building SCA armor) the SCA would prefer a helm that is rather longer in the lower half than the M's are depicted, to shelter the neck and cervical vertebrae -- hence helms more modeled after the Prankh and the Bolzano/Bozen helms. And so on until we get round to such as the mid-fourteenth Pembridge greats, with their very different arrangements of plates and their extensive neck coverage too.