Advanced Search

My WE experience

Recent Forums Main Forum My WE experience

Viewing 8 posts - 16 through 23 (of 23 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #54421
    keith
    Participant
    • Topics: 9
    • Replies: 13

    ME:     When I wrapped them in tape, they grew 0.05″ in diameter.

    TOM:  One quibble….the tape thickness probably is .005″ and not 50 thou.

    Thanks, Tom. You are correct. I missed a decimal point.

     

    #54422
    tcmeyer
    Participant
    • Topics: 37
    • Replies: 1928

    It’s an interesting point to note, that with each increase in grit, the distance between the rod center and the face of the stone is slightly reduced.  At least after being fully broken in.  With each step, the average diameter of the diamond particles is smaller, hence the distance is less.  The result is that the angle is reduced accordingly, assuming that you don’t change the micro-adjust settings.  The total change is quite small, but it means that with each progression step, the stone will tend to cut closer to the apex.  Clay called it a “happy accident,” and it really does work to our advantage.

    Check your stones with a micrometer or a good digital caliper and you’ll see the differences.  If memory serves me, (as I age, it’s less reliable) each 0.010″ works out to be about 0.1 degrees over the 6″ from the knife edge to the ball joint.  While you’re at it, check the difference from one end of the stone to the other.  Occasionally, we see cases where a stone is not fully seated into its pocket.  This causes angle variation on the side with the mal-positioned stone.

    The platen thickness and tape thickness are pretty fixed, so the differences in the face-to-face dimensions would be attributed to the height of the diamond substrates.

    3 users thanked author for this post.
    #54426
    000Robert
    Participant
    • Topics: 2
    • Replies: 41

    It’s an interesting point to note, that with each increase in grit, the distance between the rod center and the face of the stone is slightly reduced. At least after being fully broken in. With each step, the average diameter of the diamond particles is smaller, hence the distance is less. The result is that the angle is reduced accordingly, assuming that you don’t change the micro-adjust settings. The total change is quite small, but it means that with each progression step, the stone will tend to cut closer to the apex. Clay called it a “happy accident,” and it really does work to our advantage. Check your stones with a micrometer or a good digital caliper and you’ll see the differences. If memory serves me, (as I age, it’s less reliable) each 0.010″ works out to be about 0.1 degrees over the 6″ from the knife edge to the ball joint. While you’re at it, check the difference from one end of the stone to the other. Occasionally, we see cases where a stone is not fully seated into its pocket. This causes angle variation on the side with the mal-positioned stone. The platen thickness and tape thickness are pretty fixed, so the differences in the face-to-face dimensions would be attributed to the height of the diamond substrates.

    I noticed that as well but didn’t think much of it since I check and adjust the angle everytime I change stones. I also like my Klein Tools 935DAG angle finder better than the one WE sent with my PPIII. I will just set the angle of the first stones that I start with on the next knife that I sharpen and not change the settings through the rest of the stones, and see how it turns out.

    • This reply was modified 1 week, 4 days ago by 000Robert.
    #54429
    tcmeyer
    Participant
    • Topics: 37
    • Replies: 1928

    I choose to check between grits with my USB microscope.  If there’s an angle difference, I’ll see it in the scratch pattern.

    At one point, I realized that one of my 1000-grit stones was consistently about 0.016 degrees different from the others, so when I’d get to that stone, I could check with the angle cube, or even just make the appropriate adjustments accordingly (almost exactly one-half turn on the micro-adjust screw).

    1 user thanked author for this post.
    #54430
    000Robert
    Participant
    • Topics: 2
    • Replies: 41

    I need to get a USB microscope. My big AmScope is on my electronics bench and I don’t like to put my WE on it. My HH microscope doesn’t work well with checking edges. The blade edges keep sticking into the plastic lens spacer/protector. I usually just use my lighted magnivisor while the blade is clamped.

    #54431
    keith
    Participant
    • Topics: 9
    • Replies: 13

    It’s an interesting point to note, that with each increase in grit, the distance between the rod center and the face of the stone is slightly reduced. At least after being fully broken in. With each step, the average diameter of the diamond particles is smaller, hence the distance is less. The result is that the angle is reduced accordingly, assuming that you don’t change the micro-adjust settings. The total change is quite small, but it means that with each progression step, the stone will tend to cut closer to the apex. Clay called it a “happy accident,” and it really does work to our advantage. Check your stones with a micrometer or a good digital caliper and you’ll see the differences. If memory serves me, (as I age, it’s less reliable) each 0.010″ works out to be about 0.1 degrees over the 6″ from the knife edge to the ball joint. While you’re at it, check the difference from one end of the stone to the other. Occasionally, we see cases where a stone is not fully seated into its pocket. This causes angle variation on the side with the mal-positioned stone. The platen thickness and tape thickness are pretty fixed, so the differences in the face-to-face dimensions would be attributed to the height of the diamond substrates.

    I checked all  my stones for parallel, which was very good. However, there is variability in the  distance from stone face to stone face among the stones. So, when I switch grits, I must check/reset the angle before cutting.  This factors out the gradual o.10 degree angle change provided by grit progression.  I could adjust my reset angle that 0.10 degree so I can enjoy that happy accident, assuming my angle finder is accurate enough.  I didn’t realize that natural angle change  happened. That’s really cool. Thanks for that tip.

    #54434
    tcmeyer
    Participant
    • Topics: 37
    • Replies: 1928

    I checked all my stones for parallel, which was very good. However, there is variability in the distance from stone face to stone face among the stones. So, when I switch grits, I must check/reset the angle before cutting. This factors out the gradual o.10 degree angle change provided by grit progression. I could adjust my reset angle that 0.10 degree so I can enjoy that happy accident, assuming my angle finder is accurate enough. I didn’t realize that natural angle change happened. That’s really cool. Thanks for that tip.

    To be clear, there is no 0.1 degree that necessarily happens in the progression.  I simply use it as an example of how much an error in thickness can affect the angle.  The differences between stones are quite small, but they can accumulate.  A series of tests I ran some years ago showed that a change of 0.15 degrees could be seen in the scratch patterns – especially at the higher grits.  An increase in angle would show up as scratches that wouldn’t quite reach down to the shoulder, while a decrease would result in scratches that wouldn’t quite reach up to the apex.  If you had a 1000-grit stone that was mounted on thinner-than-normal tape (like mine), it could cause the apex to be lowered to the extent that subsequent stones wouldn’t reach the apex at all.

     

    #54435
    airscapes
    Participant
    • Topics: 13
    • Replies: 265

    Also it is a good idea to look at the specs of your measuring cube..   For instance the popular WR300 Type 2 had the following specs

    You will notice repeatability is +-.1 so you can expect to have a difference of .1 to either side of your first measurement when you set the angle even with the same stone.   That said, the play between rod and stone, thickness of the adhesive tape they use to hold the stone plate to  the handle, the thickness variance  from handle to handle, the thickness variance between stone plate to stone plate, if the stone is held by a stop so it is centered on the bevel with every measurement (Contact point at top of stone will exaggerate the play between rod and handle) as well as rock and roll of table surface can all change the angle between stones.  The last one just screws up your measurement.. 🙂

    So check each change until you know your stones.. you will notice every time you check a certain stone or set that changes need to happen and other they do not..

    specs
    
    
    Attachments:
Viewing 8 posts - 16 through 23 (of 23 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.