Thread: A Sharpening simplicity breakthrough?? Comments from the wise heads please

Originally Posted by IanW

So go at it, but don't get so involved in sharpening you forget to make things...

Cheers,

Ian

Now that is such a good point .

Brett

That was truly an epic and very well put together. I think the experts all seem to agree that whatever works for you is pretty much the best method. When sharpening seems to be taking over from production, you have probably taken the science too far .

I have some diamond plates. They include a couple of littlies similar to a nail file and I use those for my router cutters. I have a large plate (200 x 100) which I bought for the horrendous price of $120 about 15 years ago. I bought it specifically to sharpen the 150mm planer blades in my ancient Ryobi. The guy who sold it to me said I would never wear it out. He was wrong.

They sharpen well initially and the larger plates are very flat, but they wear very quickly, as Derek Cohen said, and their performance drops right away. This is particularly disappointing considering their price and to my mind can only be recommended for sharpening tungsten carbide cutters where there is not much alternative.

I have in the past used wet and dry glued to plate glass. It works well enough, but has two problems. It is not durable (easily tears) and, because it is attached with spray glue, that in itself can create bumps particularly on the finer grits (I used to go up to 2000 in about 8 grades).

However, and this is why I have mentioned a system that is generally regarded poorly by my peers, I have found it to be the best method for flattening the backs of blades. I have not used it for the soles of planes although I did specifically source a piece of 10mm glass from our friendly glass merchant for just this purpose. I will have to let you know another day if it works for the larger surface.

I have some sheets of 3M microfinishing film that I have had for well over a year and still have not had time to trial.

I am most interested by the paste and I can see that placing it on a suitable and flat surface can be an issue. There are cast iron lapping plates (Carbatec sell one) but these are probably better for flattening backs than sharpening bevels.

How about using your granite blocks? To remove the high gloss surface use some fine (2000/2500) wet and dry. Use it wet and very lightly to remove the glazed surface or at least reduce it to a satin finish. I realise that there is a danger of destroying the flatness, but I think if you go slowly and carefully it should be ok.

Even try one of the Jost abrasives and your ROS, again very lightly on a gentle cycle (sounds like the weekly wash with the woolens and frilly little things that... ..ooops another story). Your idea of using frosted glass could be another way. You would have to source some in heavy plate whereas you already have those magnificent granite blocks.

At the moment I use waterstones (300, 1200, 4500, 6000, 8000 & 10000), but not all of them all the time. It's a bit like marking the olympics. Knock off top and bottom and average the rest. I keep them in a plastic container immersed in water so they are not time consuming to use.

I also use a veritas sharpening guide, which I find excellent despite the stupitidy of making some parts from mild steel so the wretched thing rusts.

Food for thought. A good, well-researched, practical thread. And of course bound to provoke.

Regards
Paul

Thanks for that Paul. I do have another sheet or two or three under the house, so maybe I might experiment with that idea. Actually, theres a nice piece of white marble there - it's much finer grained than the others. I may even try the 600 diamond plate to get a satin finish - that may give an indication of any flatness problems in the marble as well.

Brett

you asked me to comment and I apologise I didn't get to this thread earlier.

I don't want to add much to what's already been said, but I will make some observations.

When a plane blade is tensioned on the frog there will be some small distortion of the plane's sole. (for some planes, this distortion can be used to very finely adjust the amount of blade projection) For this reason, I'd advise flattening the sole with the frog firmly in place.

When to stop? 200G or so should be enough -- the plane sole needs to be smooth, not mirror like, and some hollows (provided they're not in critical locations like around the mouth) are OK. Afterall it's the blade that does the work, the plane body is just the blade carrier. Going beyond "flat enough" is time that could have been spend making something.
Defining "flat enough"? Please don't ask me tonight!


The blade? well there's
very sharp
sharp,
sharp enough
just sharp enough (which often translates to I should sharpen it but I'll push on a little longer)
needs sharpening, but not right now
blunt

My experience is that these definitions jump around depending on the wood you're working and what you're trying to do AND the mass of the blade carrier.
"Just sharp enough" when cutting end grain becomes sharp or even very sharp when working long grain. (this is based on using a #5 or #9 to shoot an edge just after using the same plane to trim a rail to precise length)
The effect is particularly noticable with shoulder planes -- as teh palne gets lighter, proportionally more time must be spent preparing the blade
The risk is that you obsess about getting mirror flat when, for the wood you're working, you don't need it.


the sharpening kit.
My hand is up -- I have too many stones
I've generally settled on Pro Shapons (I have a lot of A2 blades) -- but I have too many git combinations (you don't need all of 320, 1000, 1500, 2000, 5000, 8000) backed up with a ultra fine ceramic stone for on the job honing.
I do most of my sharpening at the kitchen sink and find the Shapons offer the best combination of speed, minimal mess and rapid cleanup time when I've finished.


Lastly
for me, sharpening was a learning process that took around 6 yaers before I settled on what combination of stones, guides and techniques worked best for me

Don't be surprised if you revist your choices in two or 3 years time

Originally Posted by ian

.....there's
very sharp
sharp,
sharp enough
just sharp enough (which often translates to I should sharpen it but I'll push on a little longer)
needs sharpening, but not right now
blunt

My experience is that these definitions jump around depending on the wood you're working and what you're trying to do AND the mass of the blade carrier.
"Just sharp enough" when cutting end grain becomes sharp or even very sharp when working long grain. (this is based on using a #5 or #9 to shoot an edge just after using the same plane to trim a rail to precise length)
The effect is particularly noticable with shoulder planes -- as teh palne gets lighter, proportionally more time must be spent preparing the blade
The risk is that you obsess about getting mirror flat when, for the wood you're working, you don't need it.

Ian - I think this should be printed out & stuck on every shed wall.....

And you reminded me that I forgot to mention that I thought polishing of the plane though very pretty, is completely over the top, and a waste of time. The soles of planes suffer from all sorts of things we don't see in & on the wood they travel over - particularly if you use them on our highly siliceous hardwoods. I'm sure I'm in the top 10% of carefulness with my tools, but all my plane soles have myriads of fine scratches on their soles, acquired over years of use. My Clifton smoother has a particularly nasty gouge along 3/4 of the sole cause by the buried leg of a *#*ng staple (in a brand-new door.. ).

But the soles remain sufficently flat unto the purpose, & the 'satin' finish takes the paraffin that I use to lubricate them better.

Originally Posted by ian

Don't be surprised if you revist your choices in two or 3 years time

More or less as I ended my comments.....

Cheers,

Hi Ian, thanks for that.

Originally Posted by ian

When a plane blade is tensioned on the frog there will be some small distortion of the plane's sole. ...I'd advise flattening the sole with the frog firmly in place.

Yes, I had thought of that (broadly) and did in fact have the frog in place - the pic was a jimmy up later on. I also considered that given the way a plane is held during use, I should probably hold it by handle and knob during flattening, which is what I did (rather than using more pressure in the middle at the top of the cheeks which may give a false reading underneath).

Originally Posted by ian

The risk is that you obsess about getting mirror flat when, for the wood you're working, you don't need it.

Know what you mean (but surely one has to have at least one or two obssessions on the go at any one time - a bit like Hardly Normal interest free deals). It was more an exercise to see what happened, and I must say that the time spent from 180g up to 2500 wouldn't have been more than 10 minutes (in full knowledge that it wasn't necessary)

Originally Posted by ian

but I have too many git combinations

So does the Forum....

Originally Posted by ian

Don't be surprised if you revist your choices in two or 3 years time

I doubt it will take that long.

Rather than handing your plane over to Jim, why not attend TTTG's plane tuning workshop that Jim is leading? It's on the 23rd of September at Strathfield Mens Shed.
That way you get the experience rather than handing it over?

Have no comment on your other info other than there will be a rather large sale on in Katoomba on day!

That's a very good idea Paul, I might just do that.

FF, reading the sole flattening saga I'm glad I moved to woodies: two or three swipes on 120 and then move on. I don't think I can add anything to what wiser heads said about sharpening kit either but for the lo fi take on it, I only use two water stones 1200 and 5000 (at least I think it's 5000) the wood stays cut and i don't seam to struggle with tear out...

Have fun

A fascinating journey and well documented, Brett.

Thank you for sharing.

In relation to Derek's comments on the substrate to use I have often wondered what to do with diamond paste. aFTER ALL WHAT IS HARDER THAN DIAMOND?

I have some beautiful high quality polished porcelain tiles here that I intend to use for sharpening plates. I will let you know what happens.

Originally Posted by artme

A fascinating journey and well documented, Brett.

Thank you for sharing.

In relation to Derek's comments on the substrate to use I have often wondered what to do with diamond paste. aFTER ALL WHAT IS HARDER THAN DIAMOND?

I have some beautiful high quality polished porcelain tiles here that I intend to use for sharpening plates. I will let you know what happens.

Cheers Artme. Last night I dug out a sheet of marble (from my stash of rock sheets). One side had been polished, but the back had not. I used a DMT 220 (well worn) to flatten some areas for use with the Veritas Honing Guide, and Diamond paste. Checked for flatness of the marble with a straightedge and 1 thou feeler gauge. The substrate did work (i.e. it held the paste, to the point of some stiction), but I didn't think the polish was as good as I got from MDF (which is what LV recommends, both verbally and pictorially). Also (and it doesn't really matter much) the cloudy contamination effect from going from water (from the Tormek and the DMT plate) to the oil in the paste, was more pronounced. Today I went back to the MDF, and verified that I wasn't dreaming: the polish was far superior.

The marble was an experiment, to approximate what I might get from another hard, non-porous surface such as the honing plates from LV (which I presume are mild steel: described as "Low Carbon", or indeed the etched glass that I dreamt up the other day.

Just on that note, I read that glass is around 700 Vickers, and mild steel is less than 200 (can that be right??). The point being that if that's the case, glass would surely wear better than mild steel, and the paste retention qualities would probably be identical (pending perhaps some special grooves in the LV plates - I've not seen one in captivity).

Anyway, I think I'll settle on MDF on top of the marble (for flatness) for the moment. It needs recharging slightly more often than the marble (as you'd prolly expect), but you can add a drop of Camellia Oil if it dries out too much (the MDF will absorb the original oil in the paste of course). I'd say that you'd use max 15% more paste than with a non-porous surface. After all, it's only the small part of a hollow ground bevel (flattening is done once more or less). Plus the fact that these 5g syringes from Gemcuts are 40% of the price from LV (forget about freight - they weigh 5 grams!).

Your tiles might be an excellent choice for the PSA backed diamond sheets.

Cheers
Brett

Hi Brett

Marble is out. Glass in out.

They are too hard. As a result, the diamond grits simply rolls around on top. This has consequences - you will wear away the substrate as you wear away the steel. It will also not wear the steel evenly as the grit is not held captive.

MDF is better than marble you conclude - but that is like saying my head hurts less when I stop butting the wall. MDF is not suitable for diamond as the grits is swallowed up.

There is a good reason why cast iron and mild steel are the recommended mediums for diamond paste - they actually capture the grits, which means a longer lasting honing medium.

Why not try one out?

Tiles for the diamond mesh? That may be an excellent choice. Just check first that they are flat.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Hi Matt, yeah I'm really trying to keep it simple as it can be - I know that might sound crazy looking at the shopping list, but how else do you find out (first hand)?? Where I could I selected things that would or may have other uses, if they came second place for this sharpening task.

On a quick other note, pkjames got me a Woodriver BU block plane direct from China. There are some Chinese characteristics about it (the cap lever feels like chromed plastic), and the knobs are a little nasty, but after hollow grinding and then going through the MDF/paste routine I was shocked at the finish it left on Douglas Fir. Better than anything I've described below, and then the same on Spotty. Quite stunning really, and all of $43 worth of plane.

Originally Posted by derekcohen

Hi Brett

Marble is out. Glass in out.

They are too hard. As a result, the diamond grits simply rolls around on top. This has consequences - you will wear away the substrate as you wear away the steel. It will also not wear the steel evenly as the grit is not held captive.

MDF is better than marble you conclude - but that is like saying my head hurts less when I stop butting the wall. MDF is not suitable for diamond as the grits is swallowed up.

There is a good reason why cast iron and mild steel are the recommended mediums for diamond paste - they actually capture the grits, which means a longer lasting honing medium.

Why not try one out?

Tiles for the diamond mesh? That may be an excellent choice. Just check first that they are flat.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Hi Derek, fair enough. That was funny though, except my head hurts again Doctor!

Well yeah, as you say, trying out is to find out for one's self. I'm just fresh out of Waldorfs steel plates atm. AND they cost almost as much again with freight. Are they a smooth surface or are there some delibarately left grinding marks to hold a little paste? (you can see that I'm sold on diamond paste - those Lobsters might end up in Hot Water yet).

Another thing, what would you roughly estimate the running cost of paste v mesh? Would you say that the paste was a bit cheaper. Again, if that's the case, then with Gemcuts pastes that skews it even more in the paste direction.

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

Hi Derek, fair enough. That was funny though, except my head hurts again Doctor!

Well yeah, as you say, trying out is to find out for one's self. I'm just fresh out of Waldorfs steel plates atm. AND they cost almost as much again with freight. Are they a smooth surface or are there some delibarately left grinding marks to hold a little paste? (you can see that I'm sold on diamond paste - those Lobsters might end up in Hot Water yet).

Another thing, what would you roughly estimate the running cost of paste v mesh? Would you say that the paste was a bit cheaper. Again, if that's the case, then with Gemcuts pastes that skews it even more in the paste direction.

Brett
I haven't looked with magnification, but what everyone describes with using diamonds corresponds with the diamonds embedding in the substrate -- one point down to keep them in place, one point up to do the work
if the substrate is too soft the diamonds will dissapear from site, if too hard the diamonds will roll around and wear both surfaces down