Replies

1. 
   RalphBarker | Feb 23, 2012 01:06pm | #1

   The Grit Indoors

   Are those ANSI/CAMI (USA), FEPA (Europe), or JIS (Japan) grits?  ;-)

   Here's one chart (of many) that compares grit "standard" grit sizes to equivalents in microns:

   http://sharpeningmadeeasy.com/grits.htm

1. 
   Metod | Feb 24, 2012 07:17am | #2

   Grit

   My water stones are Japanese. I am guessing (with trepidation...) that their grit is measured in JIS. It could be that the material was imported (from China?) and then the stones were assembled in Japan. 

   I would not mind if all grits were indicated in microns - right on the stones or sandpaper. I am too old to memorize the chart <g>.

   Best wishes,

   Metod

2. 
   Isabella8688 | Mar 16, 2012 05:38am | #3

   hi all

   Metod wrote:

   I saw this clip a few days ago. Good and inexpensive help for someone who wants to learn sharpening free-hand. It works with other (then diamonds) sharpening media just fine.

   Paul Sellers - How to sharpen a handplane - YouTube

   I learned about this method a while ago (there must be an old post of mine), and adopted it.

   What surprised me on the video was his  'casual' use of a strop. I mean, 30 strokes, dubbing and such - right after about #1200 grit. 

   My practice was (I use water stones - with oil) to go from 1200 to 3000 to 8000 and then 4-6 strokes on a strop.

   Metod

   Thanks you for the post.

   __________________

   Watch 21 Jump Street Online Free

3. 
   Metod | Mar 16, 2012 08:52am | #4

   Another efficient Way

   Isabella,

   You are welcome.

   Here is another efficient and quick way:

   Plane and Chisel Sharpening - YouTube

   Some prefer concave (hollow ground) bevels, so this should even the sharpening field. Hollow ground helps to register a blade and maintain an angle - but is not used for that purpose in the video. I found that rather clever.

   Either video renders various sharpening pontifications redundant - for some, that is.

   Best wishes,

   Metod

1. 
   RalphBarker | Mar 16, 2012 12:39pm | #5

   Just guessing, but . . .

   . . . I suspect Isabella isn't a woodworker, but a "signature-spammer" promoting the link in "her" signature.

1. 
   Metod | Mar 17, 2012 08:08am | #6

   Good Point

   Ralph,

   I did not pay attention to her link (and still do not). You are probably right. Without an enticing picture to pique my curiosity...

   Of course, if she picks up free-hand sharpening from either (free) video, she is way ahead from those who 'need' to spend $$$ on DVDs, week (or longer) long workshops or be guru-ed in some other fashion. 

   Best wishes,

   Metod

4. 
   gdblake | Mar 17, 2012 09:22am | #7

   Standard practice a generation or two ago

   Metod:

   I've looked at dozens of old wooden plane irons and chisels over the years.  Most had convex bevels which indicates to me this basic approach to sharpened use to be standard.  One big advantage is that this approach doesn't require your stones to be flat.  A dished stone may even be a help.  I've wondered what technique was used for grinding since a convex bevel shows no signs of a hollow grind.

   gdblake

1. 
   swenson | Mar 17, 2012 09:33am | #8

   convex vs concave

   I'm trying to figure out how a convex bevel would work in a bevel down plane,  Wouldn't the round ride on the wood, since the angle is fixed on the plane, and the cutting edge ride above the wood?  Maybe I'm missing something.

1. 
   RalphBarker | Mar 17, 2012 12:39pm | #9

   bevels, steep and shallow

   I think it would depend on the angle of the hand-guided bevel at the cutting edge. Assuming a 45° frog and an average 30° bevel, there would be a nominal 15° difference. If the segment of the bevel near the cutting edge had a steeper angle (due to wrist movement, dished stone, etc.), however, there might be a thin line of the bevel cross-section that would be riding on top of the work piece, resulting in burnishing rather than cutting.

2. 
   Metod | Mar 18, 2012 12:08pm | #10

   Hobbyists

   gdblake,

   "since a convex bevel shows no signs of a hollow grind"

   From various pictures of old waterstones, the diameter could be 15" or more. Very little hollow in that. I am lso guessing, that the grinding was done free-hand, so any hollow could be erased in the process. Also, what you see is probably not fresh from the wheel but after some honing on flat stones.

   A generation or two ago, most woodworkers were probably well trained (apprenticed) professionals, for whom the efficiency and the quality of the workmanship/surface vas high if not the highest priority. When we hobbyists entered the fray, accumulating gizmos and navel (oops, shavings) gazing became the in-thing. There is a difference between a recreation and making stuff to bring the food on the table. One probably thinks much harder about buying a new gizmo when you foot the bill with your bread money rather than with your disposable income. 

   Best wishes,

   Metod

5. 
   lwilliams | Mar 18, 2012 07:15pm | #11

   Don't you think honing a bunch of stuff that doesn't matter is kind of silly? Then 50 strokes to dub the edge on a strop. I don't have time for that kind of nonsense. Use traditional techniques like have been used for centuries and spend your time woodworking. It used to be that almost all the sharpening information was pretty much the same. Now we have a bunch of people with no real experience promoting stuff because they're just plain smarter than generations of woodworkers? Here ya go, the instructions Stanley was puting on a block plane package as late as the 1970s:

   
6. 
   Metod | Mar 19, 2012 07:40am | #12

   If it Works

   Larry,

   "Don't you think honing a bunch of stuff that doesn't matter"

   I am not sure what did you mean by that sentence. It is a demonstration of his(Paul Seller's) technique that is the point.

   As I mentioned in my original post, I was urprised that he used so much stropping (30 strokes), dubbing being an issue. 

   Well, his blades appear to be sharp. Either he does not dub them or ...

   Before I posted, I tried (30 lashes) honing right after a #1200 water stone. Sharp - as with my 'old' sequence. Did I dub? Not a clue. It is sharp that counts. 

   Convex bevels (bezels) allow for a higher pressure on account of their geometry.

   Best wishes,

   Metod

   Edit: It looks that my second youtube reference demonstrates the instructions that you posted. I wonder it the author knew of your 'old' instructions or came b the technique on his own. 

1. 
   lwilliams | Mar 19, 2012 09:16am | #13

   Metod,

   He spends the overwhelming majority of his honing time working on steel that's not near the cutting edge and never will be. While doing this, his honing has no impact on the cutting edge. It's a huge waste of time and shows no control of the process.

   "...Convex bevels (bezels) allow for a higher pressure on account of their geometry." Higher pressure where? And when? Are you saying you have a problem with the whole edge area breaking off in use?

1. 
   Metod | Mar 21, 2012 07:31am | #14

   A bit more to it

   Larry,

   "overwhelming majority of his honing time"

   As I see it (for my own use) , Paul Sellers gets from a dull edge to a sharp one in a minute or two. So, "overwhelming majority of his honing time" is still a short time. He does not spend any time on a grinder, though. Aled Dafis, on the other hand, uses a grinder (I like how fluid he is with it) to remove the bulk of material in one large chunk. Paul does it on the sly, a bit at the time. He, thus, does not waste his strokes. 

   On a grinder, Aled is "working on steel that's not near the cutting edge " - all of his grinding time, in case that you did not notice. The difference to me is that the material removal in one case is manual and power assisted in the other. Maintaining a convex bezel makes for an efficient material removal. The area of the contact region between a convex bezel and a flat stone/plate is very small, so that a given force results in a higher pressure.

   I find both ways very effective (that's why I posted about them). Myopically speaking, convex bezels are more robust than the concave ones - but I don't think that there is a 'practical' difference at given (25* or larger) bezel angles.

   Best wishes,

   Metod

7. 
   RoninKokomo | Jun 28, 2012 03:45pm | #15

   Honing

   Hey Folks,

   Paul Sellers knows what he is doing. He has been doing ig for a long time and it works very well for him and hundreds of other folks. Now, having said that, there are at least 5 other ways to sharpen/hone that I know about. They all work. Repeat. They all work. Pick one and stick to it. You will get much better and quicker at it the more you do it.

   Ron in Kokomo

1. 
   Metod | Jun 29, 2012 07:54am | #16

   At least 5 other ways?

   Ron,

   I can only (at the moment) think of four: flat, convex, concave and waivy. I have no experience with 'waivy', but  some folks on various forums might give it a moment of a short-attention-span-glory.

   If "much better and quicker at it" were a serious goal, the forums would be much less populated.

   Best wishes,

   Metod