Needs Pictures: 0
Results 31 to 45 of 149
Thread: Saw File Hardness Measurements
-
20th April 2015, 12:28 AM #31Innovations are those useful things that, by dint of chance, manage to survive the stupidity and destructive tendencies inherent in human nature.
-
20th April 2015 12:28 AM # ADSGoogle Adsense Advertisement
- Join Date
- Always
- Location
- Advertising world
- Posts
- Many
-
20th April 2015, 12:30 AM #32Innovations are those useful things that, by dint of chance, manage to survive the stupidity and destructive tendencies inherent in human nature.
-
20th April 2015, 12:32 AM #33
Yebbut you only have one of each, so nothing to compare it against.
Maybe wait until I get the nest order of Liogier files in (2 months?) and I'll get some excess to be treated - enough so that the comparison can be done 4 times over, and perhaps three people using one corner each of the same file.
-
20th April 2015, 12:35 AM #34Innovations are those useful things that, by dint of chance, manage to survive the stupidity and destructive tendencies inherent in human nature.
-
20th April 2015, 12:36 AM #35
Ok, in that case then testing a ground area (that will have the same roughness) should sort that out. It may have been just one really crap file in the batch, but that's kinda counter-intuitive. I'd back Japanese manufacturing consistency over Indian any day of the week.
-
20th April 2015, 09:25 AM #36.
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Location
- Perth
- Posts
- 27,792
Suggestions for improving readability.
List all makers in groups and then use the same colour or symbol shape for the same maker and then use different colours or symbol to identify specific files of each make
eg list all Pferd files one after the other on the list, use all squares to identify these and the use different colours to identify the specific Pferd files.
I reckon you are trying to show to much on the same graphs. e.g. I suggest not putting the Citric acid data on this graph - use a separate graph for these.
The citric acid data looks like it's highly problematic and like you say going to affect the surface. The only area of the files that should be measure is the working area and requires the removal of the teeth and this is likely to remove the effect of the citric acid - anyway you can test this ?
-
20th April 2015, 09:34 AM #37SENIOR MEMBER
- Join Date
- Dec 2005
- Location
- Sydney
- Age
- 79
- Posts
- 647
-
20th April 2015, 09:57 AM #38
Yeah I know the graphics can be improved, lot's of work though. I'm also thinking about coding the datapoints according to the buy/maybe/don't buy suggestions of the original analysis.
One of the conclusions I can draw from these data is that hardness is a necessary but not sufficient condition for user acceptance/usability. Some of the least acceptable files were also hard. Variability in hardness tends to decrease with increasing hardness. I think that the uniformity of the toothing of the files is probably the primary determinant of acceptability. Low hardness and high variability in hardness are bad signs but hardness is not a guarantee of usability.Innovations are those useful things that, by dint of chance, manage to survive the stupidity and destructive tendencies inherent in human nature.
-
20th April 2015, 09:59 AM #39
For this go round I decided to test the files as they arrived. Next step is to grind off the teeth and test again. W-1 (if that's what these files are made of) is a 'shallow hardening' tool steel but by shallow they mean about 8mm apparently thus not a problem for this work. Not much in the way of info on the alloys used for files but W-1 is mentioned.
Cheers,
RobInnovations are those useful things that, by dint of chance, manage to survive the stupidity and destructive tendencies inherent in human nature.
-
20th April 2015, 10:14 AM #40
I wouldn't spend any time at all with the Citric Acid files Rob. It was a uniform failure and so any data is irrelevant anyway (IIRC the only treated file that showed any improvement was still terrible). The only time trying to unravel a failure would be worthwhile is if it can lead to improvement but I doubt anyone in their right mind would CA treat a new file.
-
20th April 2015, 11:00 AM #41.
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Location
- Perth
- Posts
- 27,792
I agree that hardness not likely to be the only factor in file acceptance but given the current data is not from the working area of the files I don't think any conclusions relevant to working files can be drawn from this data
The amount of effort that has gone into this experiment is indeed impressive and you guys are to be congratulated for this. To reduce your workload it would have been better to just target the business area of files i.e. don't worry about tang and heel measurements. The citric acid effect on hardness is immeasurable so I would have just left this out
I dislike creating more work for you and I'm sure you also know this, but testing just one file from each brand is also fraught with problems. It's like consumer testing " one of" a product from a manufacturer, every now and then, even quality manufacturers produce a lemon or indeed several.
The first thing I would have suggested is a pilot with just say 4-5 files of just two brands as this would have uncovered most of the experimental problems etc. If the hardness variability of files from the same manufacturer turns out to be greater than the difference between the manufacturers then that changes things significantly, even to the point where it may not be worth pursuing the rest of the experiment.
A number of times I have suggested that forum members about to embark on experiments should consider posting their design before they create a lot of work for themselves. Some of us have extensive experience in experimental design and reviewing of project proposals for national and international experiments.
-
20th April 2015, 11:50 AM #42
The funny thing is Bob - I deeply suspect we have actually tested more than one file from the same manufacturer. Quite a number of the brands are made in India and by crikey they look the same. Same crappy black ink for the logo, same looking steel, same almost nil taper, same coarse grinding of the blank, same lousy performance except for one or two (musta been having a exceptional day). I know that's nowhere near conclusive, but you get my drift.
This goes for Grobet Swiss, Grobet USA, F.Dick, and Pferd although theirs may be from a different factory. Apparently Pferd used to actually own their own factory in India but it got too hard and they subbied it out.
There are quite a number of other brands in the same kettle but they weren't tested (When researching I got to the point where I could spot an Indian file a mile away and figured I had already collated enough of them.....)
Here's an example of two of the files:
Spot the odd file out.....
The top and bottom are two "different" brands. The name was not shown so as not to cause any bias to the testers (the pic was originally taken for the monster thread two years ago, which just preceded the testing of the 23 files).
-
20th April 2015, 11:56 AM #43
It was originally done to see if there is any improvement or otherwise to the file's performance - not specifically hardness but just "cutting power". There have been many claims that acid sharpening of new (and old) files improves the performance, but I think we pretty clearly mythbusted that (at least for new ones).
Maybe there was a bit of hydrogen embrittlement happening - who knows - but I do know the CA treatment is nil use and causes files to perform even more poorly (with one or two aberrations probably due to file inconsistency). Just not worth pursuing.
-
20th April 2015, 12:31 PM #44.
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Location
- Perth
- Posts
- 27,792
-
20th April 2015, 01:25 PM #45
That's the idea. The hardening effect of cryotreatment is apparently more modest in magnitude than is the improvement in scratch resistance or toughness. The older dogma was that the cryotreatment was only effective for martensitic alloys. However more recent data and opinion is that most ferrous alloys can gain some benefit either in hardness or in scratch resistance. For instance, disk brake rotors that are cryotreated apparently last about twice as long as untreated parts. Springs that are cryotreated retain their load carrying capacity longer. Why not for files? Technically they're a cutting tool but there is also a foreseeable benefit in increasing the scratch resistance of the files used in saw making. Some sources state that for some alloys cryotreatment can double the scratch resistance. Is a similar effect possible with saw files? We have the technology...
Innovations are those useful things that, by dint of chance, manage to survive the stupidity and destructive tendencies inherent in human nature.
Similar Threads
-
4140 HARDNESS
By morrisman in forum METALWORK FORUMReplies: 15Last Post: 6th March 2015, 08:01 PM -
Hardness testing of saw plates
By rob streeper in forum Saws- handmadeReplies: 2Last Post: 18th February 2014, 05:30 PM -
Fun with a hardness tester
By .RC. in forum METALWORK FORUMReplies: 5Last Post: 19th August 2012, 07:52 PM -
sheraton bed hardness
By morrisman in forum METALWORK FORUMReplies: 4Last Post: 14th November 2011, 08:04 PM -
Timber Hardness ?
By Burfodus in forum TIMBERReplies: 11Last Post: 28th July 2010, 05:15 PM