Advanced Search

Question: Default setup to achieve matching guide rod angles

Recent Forums Main Forum Techniques and Sharpening Strategies Question: Default setup to achieve matching guide rod angles

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #56745
    KMe
    Participant
    • Topics: 1
    • Replies: 2

    Sorry for the jumbled post.  Hopefully this fixes.

    Just got the WE130 and have been learning the system.  If each guide rod is positioned at the same degree marking (locked into the same indent) then each guide rod should be at the same angle / matching angle.

     

    To have that default alignment / corresponding angles of each guide rod, is it correct to screw the ball joint back until it is flush against the L Bracket (while the L Bracket is positioned in equivalent / matching indents on both sides)?  Sort of self calibrating?

     

    Should that essentially calibrate the angles without micro-adjustment needed?

     

    I know I’ll need to micro-adjust to precisely match an existing bevel.

     

    Thanks in advance and sorry if I’ve butchered any terminology.  I’ve had a little variation which is probably user created and just wanted to validate my default ball joint position.

    • This topic was modified 4 months, 1 week ago by KMe.
    • This topic was modified 4 months, 1 week ago by KMe.
    1 user thanked author for this post.
    #56749
    MarcH
    Moderator
    • Topics: 64
    • Replies: 2469

    Welcome to the W.E. forum, KMe.

    To calibrate the guide rod angles is to position them so their positions correlate with the readings of an certified instrument or (laboratory or scientific)  standard.  In our case we use an instrument, a properly zeroed-out digital angle cube.  Then the guide rods are calibrated relative” to this instrument, that is relative to this angle cube, for that position.

    What you’re describing is simply positioning the guide rods similarly, although very closely, from side to side yet they still are really arbitrary.   The angles may be close to the inscribed angles on the square bar correlating to that indent position you’re locked into.  Without using a coorelating instrument it’s not actually calibrated.

    Marc
    (MarcH's Rack-Its)

    1 user thanked author for this post.
    #56750
    MarcH
    Moderator
    • Topics: 64
    • Replies: 2469

    KMe,  if you are simply trying to determine how close to equal the guide angles are from side to side.  That is to determine if your WE130 is square and uniform from one side to the other.  You can position the guide rods how you described in your original post using the same indent hole positions with the micro-adjuster screws backed-in all the way on both sides.

    Then with something like a thin straight/flat steel ruler clamped in the vise jaws.  Measuring the guide rod angles on both sides, left and right, with an angle cube will indicate how close to equal the angles are for one side’s position compared to the same position setting for the other side.  I believe your looking to determine the precision of your WE130 overall, and from side to side.  That is as an indication of the quality of the manufacturing and the machining process.   Just to eliminate any doubts and give you confidence in it.  If the angles measured are very close on each side this would indicates to you that the vise is “calibrated” because the readings are essentially equal for your “default ball joint positions”, (your words).

    I’m guesing your goal is to determine if errors you encounter are due to the W.E. sharpener or due to you the sharpener’s user.  Then you’ll be confident and satisfied that the W.E. can produce the quality results you expect it can when used properly.

    Marc
    (MarcH's Rack-Its)

    #56751
    KMe
    Participant
    • Topics: 1
    • Replies: 2

    Marc,

     

    Thanks for the replies.  You are spot on with what I was trying to determine.  I was using a steel rule in place of the knife and an angle gage; there was a difference between the angles (left side vs right side).  In all my research I never saw anyone mention the need to adjust / correcct for that kind of variation.  Calibrated was a bad choice of word, I expected that there would be a default setup/ starting point that would present essentially matching angles (the precision and repeatability of the WE 130).

     

    Ultimately I took the unit apart and thoroughly cleaned the threads (again) on the ball joint screw, jam nut and L-Bracket.  This seems to have fixed the issue; the only thing I can think of was that something was keeping the right ball joint from seating fully against the L-Bracket or it is an ID10T error.

     

    Again, thanks for your replies.  As I researched the WE your many posts and those of the other forum members were great education.

     

    Cheers.

     

     

     

     

    #56752
    MarcH
    Moderator
    • Topics: 64
    • Replies: 2469

    KMe,  every part of the WE130 can possibly contribute to these slight differences you’re seeing.  The tolerance of the screw holes used to mount the square bar and the screws that position and secure the vise, relative to the square bar may each impart a little variance to these observed differences you saw.  Slight differences in micro-adjuster screws and/or the mini “L” bracket’s positions may contribute, also.

    To tell you the truth all of these things don’t matter.  Any inconsistencies you may have observed, as you previously shared is over come and corrected for when micro-angle adjustments are made using the angle cube.  What matters is how you position your guide rod ball ends to set your angles relative to the knife edges for each knife you clamp to sharpen while using a properly zeroed-out digital angle cube.  By-the-way, the angle cube is zeroed out only once at the beginning of a sharpening session and used with that same zeroed setting the entire time.

    In one method the bevel angle settings can be of your choice and is used to determining how you set the guide rod ball end screws.  When done correctly the bevel is profiled to your chosen angles set relative to this zeroed-out angle cube.  Those set angles, left and right side determine the bevel angles you profile your knife edges to while sharpening.  This first method does not consider the original bevel applied to the knife edge.  Only what’s necessary in the sharpening process to profile the knife edge to this angle of your choosing.

    Another method is to use the zeroed angle cube to determine and match a knife’s existing bevel angles that are already applied to the knife you have clamped in the vise.  This is done by individually adjusting each ball end screw angles incrementally till you have determined the matching bevel angle setting.  This is usually determined when you bevel angle settings completely remove sharpie ink that has been applied to the bevels.  This second method is intended to sharpen the knife without making changes or re-profiling the existing bevel angles.

    To do both of these methods requires micro-angle adjustments done to each side’s ball end micro-adjuster screws, individually, based on the angle cube readings.   The precision you’re seeking to determine in the original post is completely ignored during normal sharpening practices because we’re setting the guide rod angles relative to the angle cube readings.  It doesn’t matter where your ball end screws start at the onset of sharpening, only where the ball ends are after you set your matching guide rod angles, individually.  The results of your efforts are determined more by the consistency of your individual angle adjustments,  your sharpening efforts and your attention to detail throughout the entire sharpening process.

    The W.E. with those slight differences you sought to discover, as you described in your original post are really of no practical consequence in the sharpening processes.  The way we use our angle cubes to set the guide rod angles relative to the cube’s readings during knife sharpening, and the ability to repeat these knife clamping settings and positions again and again consistently,  in the future, is all that really matters.

    Marc
    (MarcH's Rack-Its)

    2 users thanked author for this post.
    #56758
    KMe
    Participant
    • Topics: 1
    • Replies: 2

    Marc,

    Thanks very much for the feedback and information!

    K

    1 user thanked author for this post.
Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.