Eating Pie

[Eating Pie]

Allow me to throw in my alternative…

For those (like me) uncomfortable with drilling out your paddles, I found a far less invasive solution: aluminum shims. Basically a thin sheet of aluminum that I cut down to match the circumference of the bore hole through the paddle.

Based on my measurements, I decided on the 0.016” thickness sheets. I purchased 1100 Aluminum Shim Stock, SAE-AMS-DTL-22499/QQ-A-250/1, 0.016″ Thick, 12″ Width, 12″ Length, 0.002″ Laminate Layers on Amazon. It arrived as a multi-layered sheet, which gave me more than enough for my 20 or so paddles.

The process is pretty self evident.

Peel off a layer of aluminum.
Calculate circumference of bore hole (trial and error works!)
Cut to fit.
Mold the shim into a cylinder around one of the guide rods.
Insert into the bore hole.
Done!

When you peel the aluminum up, the sheets will curl rather than lay flat. I reverse-rolled the sheets to get them to flatten, though I had somewhat dubious results here: Wrinkles in the aluminum being the biggest problem.

You do not have to be exact in cutting fitting the shim. As long as it’s close (and smaller) than the bore hole circumference, it will work — but the closer you get to matching the bore hole circumference, the “tighter” the paddle will fit to the guide rod.

After molding the shim around the guide rod, you will probably need to mildly “crush” one end of the shim to get it to start sliding into the bore hole. Since the aluminum sheets were longer than the length of the paddle, I always had to cut the excess at one end, so if you get overzealous with the crushing, that’s the end you slice off.

Since the paddle bore holes varied in diameter, I found one or two case where I used two layers of aluminum. But in the end it made the paddle fit so tightly on the rod, I could barely slide it. So it ended up being one layer on every paddle. I also found that I did not need any adhesive. The shims want to expand, so once inserted, they stay tight. This means they can be easily removed and/or replaced. If you find you really need an adhesive, I recommend purple loctite since it can be removed — but try it without first!

-Pie

[Eating Pie]

I think the more practice you have with the system, the more natural you become with the motion of the stones and this issue becomes less noticeable. Obviously it does help to have good form, and in the end your edges are the judge.

Unfortunately, for me the opposite is true. I began reading and hearing about the importance of consistency with setting angles and holding the paddles.

I’ve changed my technique a couple of times also, so who knows?

One thing I can say is that the only way to consistently hit the bevel is to have the paddles exactly parallel to the guide rods, or as close as possible — closer, I think, than what they are by default. The problem diminishes the shorter you make each pass over the bevel.

-Pie

[Eating Pie]

I am partially confused. In your pictures it shows 7.97 degrees of play but your actual real world measurements seem to be all less than a half of a degree off. is this correct? If so then that little of play shouldn’t really mess up your bevels at all.

I definitely did cause confusion with the diagrams, and I apologize.

The diagrams are meant as a “proof of concept” rather than a real world example. The diagrams exist to illustrate that using push/pull to force the Bore Hole ends against the Guide Rods introduces more and more error as you pass upward over the bevel. The numbers are certainly exaggerated, but they leave no doubt mathematically.

I do have a caveat I italicized. I’ll go back and bold face it, and maybe reword it a bit. 🙂

I think the only way to get 100% reliability up the bevel is to have the Bore Hole fit “tightly,” causing the Paddle/Stone to run parallel to the guide rod.

It so happens that I took some angle readings just this last week to evaluate the play in a new set of stones. My method is to lay the stone against the edge with the edge touching the approximate center of the stone. With an AngleCube attached magnetically, I took readings in two conditions: pressing against the top of the stone and when pressing against the bottom of the stone. Of course, the force (I tried to approximate the typical force I use when sharpening) was applied in the cross-direction and perpendicular to the rod. The stone “rocks” about the fulcrum provided by the edge. I came up with a difference of between 0.55 and 0.6 degrees.

You explain this much better than I did! I used a little different method, but would have produced the same results. But I really like your explanation a lot better!

My real world numbers are similar to yours, a few stones going out to 0.5, but I only listed three to show a range.

Did you ever post how you added the bushings? I’ve been curious for a while.

-Pie

[Eating Pie]

It’s possible the stones are off, though I think not. However, what would I do in that case? How do I get them “unramped” or back to parallel with the platen?

First you’d need to measure the thickness at each end with a micrometer if you have one, if not then at least a very good ruler. Then you could cover the thin side with tape temporarily to protect it while you lap the thick end of the stone down to the thickness of the thin end. At that point, you’d need to lap the whole stone a little to get it flat all the way across.[/quote]

Man oh man, the genius of simplicity!

Clay, I want to take a quick second to say that your great replies, as well as your patience and politeness on these thread has always impressed me. No less so the absolute brilliance of this fix, as I thought surely this was an insurmountable problem!

Much thanks to you, a creator of something so marvelous and fun. And given the time of year, a humble thanks also to the Creator who you reflect.

-Pie

[Eating Pie]

Another way in which the Choseras could be causing the issue is if they are flat but vary in thickness from one end to the other. If one end is thicker, the two ends will be at different angles to the blade and will create a convex edge.

Good replies, all. I do the crosshatch when lapping, so I got that covered. I will rub my stones together if the session goes a little long, but always start with full lapping.

It’s possible the stones are off, though I think not. However, what would I do in that case? How do I get them “unramped” or back to parallel with the platen?

Thanks!

-Pie

[Eating Pie]

Thanks for the suggestion. They’re flat. I lap them before use so I can take advantage of the slurry.

I might start (or search for) another thread, I think my issue is how I hold the stones more than the stones themselves.

-Pie

[Eating Pie]

Would this type of “issue” also occur with softer stones like the Choseras?

I was considering another thread, but I’m seeing some convexing similar to described here. And I’m dead on at-angle all the way through the 10K, then the finest ceramics — I think they’re 1u? — after that.

-Pie

[Eating Pie]

We have several Cutcos that we use regularly, and we like them. After Cutco called and said they now do in-home sharpening, I did my research and caught the cited video then found this thread.

About the Knives.

Cutco claims to make their own steel in the USA. We have older knives that show rust, but we “store” them in the drying rack (yes, I hear the groans), so it’s not super soft stainless stainless, and surely has some carbon. Their serrated knives use a patented Double-D patterned edge, very square-ish, and aptly named. Works great IMHO, but I don’t know chef knives.

The knives use a sort of high-flat + chisel-like grind. First, both sides have the same high-flat grind. But one side has no bevel — like a chisel — while the other (what the video refers to as the Double-D side) contains the bevel and serrations. The image shows the serrated Double-D side (didn’t notice the poor choice of background until too late, sorry 🙁 ).

The serrations are all exactly the same pattern on every knife! I lined up three different models, whose bevels all matched perfectly; same as the bevel in the above photograph.. And that’s really the trick for the sharpener.

The Sharpener.

I owned a Spyderco Sharpmaker for a bit, and while Cutco’s base is custom, those ceramics look exactly the same — triangle shaped, dark for course, light for fine — but with one major exception. The ceramics have multiple grooves on one side that exactly match the shape and pattern of their Double-D serration. Since all their knife serrations match, and probably all have the same bevel angle, they simply make sure the ceramics’ grooves match the Double-D, and the ceramics slide into the base at the correct angle.

I’ve heard that Clay gets his ceramics from the same people that Spyderco uses, so it makes sense that Cutco either hit up Spyderco directly, or went to the source.

Wicked Edge

Now heres the big quesiton… Can this be done with the WE? A grooved ceramic stone matching the Double-D should be something do-able. Probably would also need the low angle adapter to hit the bevel-less “flat” side just right.

One deal-killer may be the WE’s natural angular change while progressing forward toward the point or back toward the heel. IE As you sharpen parallel to the WE mounting bracket, you fit the Double-D serrations exactly. But as you progress forward or backward, the stone angle changes, and you no longer sharpen directly in-line with the serrations.

That said, I’d sure love to be able to sharpen our Cutcos with the WE!

-Pie

Attachments:

• double-d-bevel.jpg

[Eating Pie]

What do you guys think you’d do after the Choseras are already ramped? How do you get them back to being squared (parallel) with the paddles?

I received a couple sets that measures a bit off kilter — they’re dead-on flat after a few minutes on my DMT 9u, but still ramped — and I want to fix them, but am not sure what to do. Nor am I sure what tolerance (error) to expect.

-Pie

[Eating Pie]

By “end for end”ing the stone, do you mean 180 the paddle so palm is now pressing on the side fingers held previously? Very good advice for avoiding this issue!

I lap with each use, though from the Ken’s pinned thread (or the texturing thread), I came away with the sense that rubbing stones together helps delay the need for lapping. I am also rubbing or lapping immediately prior to use so I can take advantage of the slurry.

Prevention is absolutely the best, but I have a couple of stones in need of a cure. 🙂

-Pie

[Eating Pie]

I settled on the DMT W8EFNB 8-Inch DuoSharp Bench Stone Extra-Fine / Fine No Base from Amazon for about $70.00. They also sell a 10” for about $96.00.

DMT guarantees that their DuoSharps are really flat (like 0.005 micron or something), and you get 2 grits and a silicon non-slip map. I’ve lapped my 5K/10K Choseras, and my Micro-Fine ceramics. I did one Micro-Fine entirely on the DMT, and the other I ran through the WE 100/200/400 progression first. Took longer without the progression, but that stone was really warped.

I don’t know if this constitutes “poor man’s” Atoma, but it’s over $100 savings. Your other choice is to simply use the WE stones up to the 1000 grit. I found that such a hassle I gladly shelled out the $70 for the DMT DuoSharps.

-Pie

[Eating Pie]

Why not PIE

👿

The pie I saved for tonight.

Yum! 🙂

-Pie

[Eating Pie]

Actually a great post Ken!. Thanks for taking the time to write it!
As I have mentioned many times this will take some objective (SEM) evidence to settle the questions regarding whether what we observe during stropping. Is it abrasion only? Is it actually abrasion and burnishing? What percentage of each type of polishing is in play.

BTW, glad to see you back here.

When I first looked at Clay’s images of scratches, I saw a mention of contacting Sandia Labs. I believe the post was dated about two years ago. Long enough to make me wonder “so what happened at Sandia?” 🙂 Since all this talk about the SEM remains in future tense, probably a better question is “so what happened with Sandia?”

If there is anyone in this world that comes across as calm, levelheaded and reasonable, it’s Clay. So while I can envision a “get outta here you kook!” if, say I approached them, I just can’t imagine a scenario like that involving Clay. OTOH maybe they didn’t think this was worth giving up precious time on their SEM, or they wanted some math to back it up ahead of time. ??

I’m only asking because there’s always references to a Scanning Electron Microscope in these discussions, but no mention of that actually happening any more.

And now, time for a bagel! B)

-Pie

[Eating Pie]

Has anyone tried using the marker with strops? (i.e. to see if your pressure is too hard)

When my strops were new I was afraid of getting marker on them and contamination, etc. Wondering if anyone has tried this?

Alcohol takes the sharpie right off the leather like a charm.

But I’ve done sharpie with the leather strops only. I wouldn’t try it on the balsa because it’s too porous. The color rubs off the bevel pretty slowly… unless you put alcohol on your strops, then it comes right off. 🙂 The color basically just gets lighter and lighter, rather than showing scratches. It does tell you if you’re hitting the bevel right.

I can’t comment on other contamination in the ink. I hadn’t thought of that. The other issue is that the alcohol can dry out the leather. My original strops are pretty hard now — much harder than my balsa.

-Pie

[Eating Pie]

I’m not through the thread yet, but spotted this and thought I could comment — maybe even intelligently! 😀

DMT Extra fine is rated 1200 grit.. I think the Extra Extra fine is 8000 grit
They are not cheap, but it seems that that grit level can be made in diamond plates.
No idea whether the supplier that WEPS uses can do those grits.

Thanks Geo!

That’s the kit I got too. That is an impossible step from 1000 diamond to the microfine ceramic stones.

And I agree a 1200/1600 diamond stone would be great, I like the consistency of the diamond stones. It’s easy to step up through the grits and get all the last grits scratches out. But there probably is a reason they don’t exist.

[/quote]
The DMT EEF can be had for just south of $15.00 for a 4.3 x 0.9 x 0.2 inches sample. I use “Permanent” double-sided tape, sticky enough to hold the stone tightly in place, not too sticky to keep you from getting it off. The only issue is that you have to remove the platen from the handle — just six screws. But this gives you a good chance to test without a massive investment.

http://www.amazon.com/DMT-A4EE-Diamond-Whetstone-Extra-Extra/dp/B001AU4LZO/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1369421118&sr=8-3&keywords=dmt+extra+extra+fine

I personally found it too abrasive, even though it’s rated at about 3 micron vs. the 1000 stone’s 7 micron. I’m sure it needs a break-in period, but I didn’t like it enough to keep it. More anecdotal evidence that no two microns are the same. 🙂

Update: I typed the above even before reading this post! 😀

I also thought I should share my experience with the 3M Micro Abrasive Film/Paper (aka PSA). Here’s my source for the 3M PSA paper.

http://www.toolsforworkingwood.com/store/item/ST-MAF.XX/Search/3M%20PSA/3M_Micro_Abrasive_Film__for_Scary_Sharpening_-_PSA

I like the 3M PSA because it was inexpensive and was easy to use. I had no problems taping it onto the 800 or 1K stones, as the backing is very adhesive. I have used the 5u, 1u and 0.3u Aluminum Oxide. After I gained some experience with them, I noticed a slightly hazy look to my finish, rather than a nice shiny mirror.

I changed to using just the 5u AlOx (site above sells on Silicon Carbide in 5u), and subsequently jumping to strops/pastes (same micron progression) from there. This performed better than the 5 to .3 all-PSA progression, AND better than the 5 to .25 all-strop/diamond paste progression! I had a more noticeable mirror from the 5u AlOx PSA to 3.5u-1u-.25u diamond-on-balsa.

I have not used ceramic on the WE yet, but from descriptions and experience on Lansky/Spyderco, I get the impression the 5u AlOx is acting like a ceramic. I’ve seen ceramic described as “more uniform” and “hazy” in its shine, and this is [exactly how I’d describe the 5u AlOx. I’ve also heard it said that you can get a better mirror by using ceramic prior to stropping — the uniform / hazy scratches aren’t as deep as the diamond, so the strops shine them out nicely. My experience also matches up with that.

The drawback to the paper is that it’s paper. If you have a turned edge, they may (okay, probably will) scratch up before they raise it to vertical. I’ve also scratched them up when the knife tip was turned. Need a stone for that stuff (I only have the 1K and it’s too abrasive for touch-ups like that). But given the PSA’s low cost and total ease of use, I think it’s something worth trying.

-Pie

[Author]

Posts