From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Metalworking (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Metalworking, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Metalworking on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.


This page needs to be expanded. I'm sure there's more out there on cutting in the engineering sense. For example, rubbing : tribology :: cutting : ? —Ben FrantzDale 00:43, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I'd suggest renaming this to cutting tools and put a link to the science of cutting Tribology at the top.Savonneux (talk) 05:01, 12 May 2009 (UTC)


According to the Machinery's Handbook, the very tip of a drill bit plasticly deforms the material being drilled to get it out to the fluites. That makes it sound like at least part of cutting is plastic deformation. Could one cut, say, a steel bar in two with a tool that had a lower ultimate stress but a higher yield stress than the bar? The article as is seems to say no, but I'm inclined to think yes. Suppose you have a bar to cut and a rounded linear indenter (a line as opposed to the usual point) at 90 degrees to the bar. If you indent the bar, it will only deform plastically, but along the groove you've made, the bar is thinner so you are closer to cutting it in half. At least neglecting kerf, it seems like you could extrapolate and repeat the thought experiment until the bar is cut. Thoughts? —Ben FrantzDale 16:25, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Self harm[edit]

Basically I agree with the reasoning given in the edit [1]. We already have a perfectly good article at self-harm, and this is linked to by Cutting (disambiguation), which in turn is linked to by this article. There is no point covering several different topics in one article when we have already got separate article, with an appropriate disambiguation page.

At best, perhaps we should have a disambiguation link directly to self-harm from here, as there appears to be confusion? But I see no point in having a self-harm section in this article. Mdwh 23:08, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Seconded-- the link to self-harm in the disambiguation page is completely buried. I bet there are many more people who are looking for that article instead of, say, information on cutting cards. Alternately, perhaps the disambiguation page should be reworked? Anyway, seeing that this was from half a year ago, I'm going to stick something in-- feel free to change, of course, but there should be an obvious path to the self-harm article from here. Msr657 03:14, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

cutting instrument vs. wedge[edit]

The article on "wedges" states that scissors and knives can be used as wedges but are usually cutting instruments instead. This article should help to clarify the difference. It it the direction of force used to separate an object (such as when using a drawing a knife across an object)? If so, scissors still seem to be wedge-like, even though the blades enter an object with a slight rotation. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 14:39, 7 March 2007 (UTC).


I'm not sure what people's opinions are on the photo - it seems rather off-topic to me, given that this article says nothing about stitching. Shouldn't it go in a relevant article, rather than trying to put it in every article vaguely related (cutting, nylon, Commisures, Vermillion border)...? Mdwh (talk) 22:53, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. The photo is gross, and does not match the tone or content of the article. kostmo (talk) 06:10, 10 March 2008 (UTC)


The usage of Slash (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) is under discussion, see talk:Slash (musician) -- (talk) 05:36, 5 September 2013 (UTC)