Advanced Search

2200/3000 Diamond stones

Recent Forums Main Forum Techniques and Sharpening Strategies Abrasives 2200/3000 Diamond stones

Viewing 10 posts - 31 through 40 (of 40 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #53266
    Richard
    Participant
    • Topics: 13
    • Replies: 175

    So I’m looking at going with some finer grit stones and begin on providing a more polished result to those who want that.  I currently have the 800/1000 diamond and the 1200/1600 ceramic.  It seems that the next set of stones would be the 2200/3000 diamond but the vibe I’m getting from this thread is that it’s a no-no to do a diamond/ceramic/diamond progression.  Why is that?

    #53268
    MarcH
    Moderator
    • Topics: 64
    • Replies: 2469

    Each sharpening medium, whether using diamond stones, ceramic stones, lapping films or whetstones imparts a different character scratch pattern but which is consistent within the grit progressions in those individual mediums.  In the situation you’re discussing, that is wanting to sharpen to a finer, more refined grit level.  I suggest you stick with the finer grits available in the diamond stone progression.  The 1500, 2200 then 3000 grit diamonds stones will allow you to take advantage of the refined and consistent scratch patterns they create, that you’re seeking.

    You will not find the refined results you seek switching back and forth between different abrasive sharpening mediums. The scratch patterns differ that much.

    Beside the observed scratch pattern differences seen from one sharpening medium to another, the grit numbers used to describe the particle size for the abrasives in these different sharpening mediums are not necessarily consistent, from medium to medium.  So even though they appear to be described as equal or close in the finer grit progression you seek, the grit number diamond sharpening stones and ceramic stones, (or for any other mediums), may still differ markedly and visually in the scratch patterns they produce.

    When you have the opportunity to continue with the same sharpening medium down the grit progression, finer and finer, you’ll see better sharpening efficiency with more consistent results then if you mix sharpening mediums.

    You can certainly try following the fine grit diamond progression, 1500, 2200, then 3000 grit, with the 1200/1600 grit ceramic stones, because the scratch patterns are that different.  You will probably see a more polished effect resulting from using the ceramics following the fine grit diamond stones.

    Marc
    (MarcH's Rack-Its)

    2 users thanked author for this post.
    #53382
    +ULFBERHT+
    Participant
    • Topics: 0
    • Replies: 2

    I have a set of the 2200/3000 diamond stones. I have used them for months and they are still not broken in and leave a more scratched surface than my 1500.  There are rogue diamonds that just won’t go away. With so many people in this thread that have them, is there something different I should be doing for a successful break in?

    #53385
    MarcH
    Moderator
    • Topics: 64
    • Replies: 2469

    Depending on when you purchased the 1500 diamond stones they may appear very different in the scratch patterns from the newer 1500/2200/3000 grit diamond stones.

    Here’s what I wrote on 11/05/2019 in Post #52574 in the previous page of this same thread:

    I don’t know, for sure, that this is the case, but I’m guessing it is the case.  My very first 1500 grit diamond stone pair from 2016 were exactly like the second 1500 grit stone pair I bought some time later, as that first ston pair showed signs of wear.  The 2019 1500 grit stones released, were somewhat different from the earlier sold 1500 grit diamond stones.  Though equally effective, there were still bid visual differences in the scratch patterns seen in the two era 1500 grit diamond stones.

    The new 1500 grit, 2200 grit and the 3000 grit diamond stones all fit together nicely and produce similar progressively finer, shallower and closer together appearing scratch patterns.  As would be expected.  Whereas, by my personal experiences and observations the earlier version 1500 grit diamond  continues to produce finer and more polished appearing bevels then even my well broken in newer 3000 grit diamond stones.  I am aware of this situation I have with my 1500 grit sharpening stones.  So I simply use the stones accordingly for the sharpening effect and results I’m looking for.

    If you experience stray looking scratches from an odd placed too large diamond, by running your sharpening stone across the edge of a piece of plate glass or even a piece of plate steel, often will knock off those odd larger diamonds or knock it/them down so they are even with the rest of the grit pattern.  When you’re dealing with very fine diamond grits it doesn’t take much of a difference in the abrasive particle’s size for it’s larger, deeper scratch to clearly stand out.

     

    Marc
    (MarcH's Rack-Its)

    1 user thanked author for this post.
    #53533
    MarcH
    Moderator
    • Topics: 64
    • Replies: 2469

    I sharpened a knife today at 15dps bevel angle using an all diamond stone progression: 400, 600, 800, 1000, then new version 1500, 2200, 3000, (released in Summer 2019), and last I used the 3 year old version 1500 grit diamond stone.

    I saw no discernible difference between the scratch patterns imparted with the recently released 3000 grit diamond stone and the  original version 1500 grit diamond stone that was first released in 2016 or 2017.

    This is consistent with Mr. Wizards measured observation shared with the forum in post 53416:

    I used these new optical image values in revision 9 of my grit chart. The original 1500 was apparently at least as fine as the 3000 stone, which agrees with the 5 micron value I had for it before. See the thread Organic linked above.

     

    Marc
    (MarcH's Rack-Its)

    2 users thanked author for this post.
    #53534
    Mr.Wizard
    Participant
    • Topics: 5
    • Replies: 186

    To avoid a possible misunderstanding I did not perform any testing or measurement myself.  I am merely using the values that Clay provided.  The old/original 1500 was previously listed as 5µ in the Wicked Edge grit table.  Thank you for your testing however!

    2 users thanked author for this post.
    #54278
    David Larr
    Participant
    • Topics: 0
    • Replies: 6

    Excited to see the new ratings for the stones. Further down the rabbit hole we go

     

    1 user thanked author for this post.
    #54300
    Readheads
    Participant
    • Topics: 28
    • Replies: 304

    I have the same problem and have posted a few times recently about it. It is especially prevalent if you are introducing new 2200/3000 into a 3 year old set. I did a scope pic analysis on another recent thread and am currently working on how much I need to scrub the new 2200/3000 on some TBD material (glass, granite, etc) in order to use them. Have you made any progress ?

    #56344
    Mr.Wizard
    Participant
    • Topics: 5
    • Replies: 186

    If you are moving towards a new system, what is it and why move away from an industry standard, and will all your diamond stones be rated on the new system so we can compare in an apples to apples manner? Thank You

    Yes, our plan is to include all the abrasives we off in the new system.  …

    Our new system attempts to solve these issues and provide our customers with information that clearly relates one abrasive to the next in an “apples to apples manner”. Here is the approach we’ve taken:

    1. Polish to all samples to 0.1 microns
      1. Electro-polish the samples
      2. Continue polishing with 3M diamond lapping films
        1. Alternate with each grit and image at each stage to ensure all previous scratches are removed
    2. Apply the grit to be studied to the polished surface
    3. Send the samples to LANL to be analysed
      1. LANL will report on:
        1. # of scratches per distance (density)
        2. Scratch profile
          1. Avg width of scratches
          2. Height of ridges
          3. Depth of valleys
        3. RA (roughness average of the surface)
        4. Cross-section profile image of the sample showing scratch width, depth and height

    Our thought process is that what matters at the end of the day is what each abrasive does to the knife. Once that is quantified, we should be able to state something like the following: Abrasive X has n effect on the metal. With each grit having a quantified effect, it should be easy to see where each fits within a progression.

     

    Any news on this front?

    #57089
    Mr.Wizard
    Participant
    • Topics: 5
    • Replies: 186

    Biannual check: any updates yet?

Viewing 10 posts - 31 through 40 (of 40 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.