rsser
30th October 2012, 09:31 PM
Some say this can't be done.
I disagree. This is my experience with a strip of glass on MDF:
1. 3 episodes with a Shapton #120 using #36 SiC grains. No problem with stone flatness and my impression was that the glass got slightly flatter. Didn't measure it with a feeler gauge, just eyeballed with a straight edge.
2. 6 faces of Sigma Power Select IIs or Sigma Power: #240, #400, #1000, using #90 SiC grains and for finer stones some of the slurry left behind from the previous. Did some skewing and some circling of the stone on the strip. Result: the #1000 is slightly higher in the centre on the long axis and the strip is dished by 1.5 thou across.
At a guess the flatness of the glass would be better with a square piece and more circular movement of the stone. Will try that next.
Someone wrote that lapping properly understood involves an abrasive medium used between a flat surface and the surface to be flattened. So the abrasive grains must move around. They do, visibly, and it works.
I disagree. This is my experience with a strip of glass on MDF:
1. 3 episodes with a Shapton #120 using #36 SiC grains. No problem with stone flatness and my impression was that the glass got slightly flatter. Didn't measure it with a feeler gauge, just eyeballed with a straight edge.
2. 6 faces of Sigma Power Select IIs or Sigma Power: #240, #400, #1000, using #90 SiC grains and for finer stones some of the slurry left behind from the previous. Did some skewing and some circling of the stone on the strip. Result: the #1000 is slightly higher in the centre on the long axis and the strip is dished by 1.5 thou across.
At a guess the flatness of the glass would be better with a square piece and more circular movement of the stone. Will try that next.
Someone wrote that lapping properly understood involves an abrasive medium used between a flat surface and the surface to be flattened. So the abrasive grains must move around. They do, visibly, and it works.