Waterstones revisited

[Douglas Brummett]

I have been working to swap over to oilstone and freehand sharpening in my shop. Overall I really like oilstones and sharpening with oil. However one thing continues to bother me...
http://www.sawmillcreek.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=109415&stc=1&d=1234106967
Take a look at these 2 chisels. The smaller one shows a very nice mirror polish. It was taken up to 6000g king waterstone, the polish appears almost as good off the 4000g stone though. The larger chisel was prepped using a black Arkansas stone. It has a dull appearance, but still some amount of mirror to it. The finish is less uniform.
This is a stupid thing to split hairs over, but it has bothered me. My first sharpening tools were waterstones. At this point my skill level has improved, yet I can't get my oilstones to produce a sheen like that of the waterstones.
I am starting to think it is just a result of the slurry that builds on top of the waterstone. The fine abrasive that breaks loose must be of a finer particle size and leads to a higher polished appearance than an equivalent oilstone. Does this agree with anyone else's observation? Or am I just stretching here?
The funny part is that the blade is just as sharp if not better off the oilstone. It just doesn't look as pretty. Off the 6000g king the blade still needs a stropping. I used to go straight off of an 8000g norton to work, but since I started stropping me definition of sharp has changed slightly :D
So at the end of the day the blades are sharp. I have gotten decent enough at freehand to be able to freehand on my waterstones. I found that the quality of the cutting edge is about the same despite looks of the entire bevel and back being a bit different. So I guess I just have to be content knowing that despite the lack of mirror polish on my oilstone-sharpened tools they are still very sharp. Oh, and of course I still think waterstones are a mess to work with :p

[Robert Rozaieski]

The equivalent "grit" of the black Arkansas is less than that of the 6000 grit waterstone so that is why you see a difference. I finish on a leather strop charged with green honing compound after the black Arkansas. The honing cmpd on the strop will mirror polish the steel.

[Larry Edgerton]

It is the slurry that does the work with a waterstone. That is why they sell the nagura prep stones for the finer waterstone, to work up a lather before you start. This also helps to stop the steel from being imbedded in the fine waterstone, because at that point you are wasting your energy.

I have never seen an Ark. stone that compares to water stone, and they are slower as well. The finish on the big chisel is comparable to the finish provided with a 1000 grit waterstone. Keep in mind that the quality of the steel will affect the polish as well. You can not get the same finish on a hardware chisel, or even say a marples, as you would on the cutting steel on a Japanese hand forged. If you look at the polished edge of a Japanese hand forged, you can plainly see the two different metals in the blade.

I finish up with a 8000 grit King, and I recently bought another brand and it is not as good, will be buying another King. Be careful to clean your chisel before moving from stone to stone, especially with waterstones. Grit from the last stone can contaminate the finer stone, getting embedded in the soft waterstone and scratching all of your subsequent sharpenings.

[george wilson]

I recommend the following setup. It produces a mirror finish,which is the desirable one for making the sharpest,smoothest edge. Having museum money,I was able to try everything before settling on what I now prefer: Start with a medium, or 220 grit diamond stone to get a fast edge,or eliminate little nicks,etc. quickly. Next,a black Spyderco ceramic stone. Then a white spyderco ceramic stone. They usually have a bit of fuzz on them,which must be polished off. Take the diamond stone,and rub it on the white ceramic,circular motions at the sink,with some running water. This will leave the white stone nice and smooth. Spyderco advertises an extra fine white stone,but I have found a polished off white stone just fine. The diamond stone does the grunt work of establishing the edge,making the rest quick. You're only polishing off the sandpapered surface left by the diamond's "permanent sandpaper" surface.

I use a honing fluid made like this; in a cup of water,squirt a little water soluable cutting oil,like Aquacut. You can buy a 1/2 or pint size squeeze bottle from MSC,or maybe Enco. If Enco has it,they are cheaper,though MSC owns them. Add 3 or 4 drops of dish detergent,not soap.I keep mine in a squeeze bottle. Mustard bottles are very durable, Mine is a laboratory 1/2 pint bottle with a tall,bent spout.

Use this fluid for all the stones. Do not contaminate the finer stones with grit from the coarser. Wipe the tool clean each time. After you have honed through the 3 stones,there will be a pretty well polished edge. I now use a strop. I use the hair side of the leather. The suede side is too fuzzy,and IMO rounds over the edge. Apply some Simichrome to the strop,spread it around. Don't use a lot. Strop the blade,changing angles a lot to avoid maintaining microscopic grooves on the edge.

The strop will hone finer as it turns black. Eventually,re charge it. All the stones must be wiped clean,or you will get rusty remains on them. The ceramic stones will need an occassional dressing with the diamond stone to get rid of tiny particles of steel that stick to them.

These 3 stones never will wear out of flat like other stones and have to be replaced.Those Japanese stones can be very expensive,and they wear out.

I used to hone surgical instruments for a plastic surgeon.That is a big responsibility which requires the very finest edges.

If you draw the edges across a wooden corner to remove a bur,draw only part of the edge,switch to a new spot,draw more until finished. Drawing the edge through the same spot dulls the edge. You are cutting the burr whith the edge you are trying to sharpen.

[Jim Koepke]

This is a stupid thing to split hairs over...

Not at all, if it doesn't split hairs, it isn't sharp.


I am starting to think it is just a result of the slurry that builds on top of the waterstone. The fine abrasive that breaks loose must be of a finer particle size and leads to a higher polished appearance than an equivalent oilstone. Does this agree with anyone else's observation? Or am I just stretching here?

Yes the slurry is your friend when it comes to edge and polish. When one gets to particle sizes smaller than about 10µ, there are not equivelant oilstones to my knowledge.

There was a chart posted in an earlier thread. The software will not allow the same picture to be posted in two threads.

http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?t=78741


The funny part is that the blade is just as sharp if not better off the oilstone. It just doesn't look as pretty. Off the 6000g king the blade still needs a stropping. I used to go straight off of an 8000g norton to work, but since I started stropping me definition of sharp has changed slightly :D

How are you testing the sharpness? I have a few ways, but they are not scientific. For me, a blade that barely removes hair from my arm is sharp if I am in a hurry. Really sharp means it is not felt on my arm and it leaves an area as smooth as a baby's bottom on one stroke. How it behaves in wood is also an important test of the edge.


Oh, and of course I still think waterstones are a mess to work with :p

Funny, my feeling is that oil is a bit messier than water. One thing with water is the containment. My solution was to head to Tatget and look in three different departments, kitchen, home and auto for a mat. The floor mats in the auto department were the cheapest and have turned out to be the most useful. The ribs keep the water from going everywhere. Glad they were the cheapest at the time since the others may not have had the ability to contain the lake. Many containers can be used for soaking. A water bottle with a small hole drilled in the cap works for squirtling small amounts of water on the stones.

My experience now is with a dedicated sharpening station. Water stones are my preference. If everything is packed up all the time, then oil may be quicker to the edge. Since less oil is used, it may be easier to control and clean up.

YMMV

jtk

[george wilson]

Careful,Jim,you may get someone interested in your baby's bottom smooth skin!!!

[David DeCristoforo]

As some have pointed out the "slurry" created on the surface of the waterstone does the cutting. But if you want a mirror finish, as you complete the polishing process, stop adding water so that the stone begins to dry out. As it does, it will turn black. This is from the particles of steel no longer being washed off of the stone's surface. At this point you are almost rubbing steel on steel and this will bring up the mirror finish.

[Barry Vabeach]

George, I looked and could only find Spyderco stones in 2 x 8 - do they make a bigger size, or is that the size you use?

[george wilson]

That is the size I use. Is it not large enough? Brownell's Gunsmith Supply is where I got mine. I think Woodcraft now sells them,but you might try to find them cheaper

[michael osadchuk]

I have been working to swap over to oilstone and freehand sharpening in my shop. Overall I really like oilstones and sharpening with oil. However one thing continues to bother me...
http://www.sawmillcreek.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=109415&stc=1&d=1234106967
Take a look at these 2 chisels. The smaller one shows a very nice mirror polish. It was taken up to 6000g king waterstone, the polish appears almost as good off the 4000g stone though. The larger chisel was prepped using a black Arkansas stone. It has a dull appearance, but still some amount of mirror to it. The finish is less uniform.
This is a stupid thing to split hairs over, but it has bothered me. My first sharpening tools were waterstones. At this point my skill level has improved, yet I can't get my oilstones to produce a sheen like that of the waterstones.
I am starting to think it is just a result of the slurry that builds on top of the waterstone. The fine abrasive that breaks loose must be of a finer particle size and leads to a higher polished appearance than an equivalent oilstone. Does this agree with anyone else's observation? Or am I just stretching here?
The funny part is that the blade is just as sharp if not better off the oilstone. It just doesn't look as pretty. Off the 6000g king the blade still needs a stropping. I used to go straight off of an 8000g norton to work, but since I started stropping me definition of sharp has changed slightly :D
So at the end of the day the blades are sharp. I have gotten decent enough at freehand to be able to freehand on my waterstones. I found that the quality of the cutting edge is about the same despite looks of the entire bevel and back being a bit different. So I guess I just have to be content knowing that despite the lack of mirror polish on my oilstone-sharpened tools they are still very sharp. Oh, and of course I still think waterstones are a mess to work with :p

I don't know what sheen oil stones typically are expected to leave when a blade is sharpened to the same degree of sharpness as with a man made waterstone, but I do know that "polishing" NATURAL Japanese waterstones, with grits in the 16,000 and above range, typically leave a hazy/matt finish and the cutting edges are definitely sharper at that point than they were coming off the King manmade 8000 grit stone, bling-bling shiny though King made them.

good luck

michael

[Douglas Brummett]

I don't know what sheen oil stones typically are expected to leave when a blade is sharpened to the same degree of sharpness as with a man made waterstone, but I do know that "polishing" NATURAL Japanese waterstones, with grits in the 16,000 and above range, typically leave a hazy/matt finish and the cutting edges are definitely sharper at that point than they were coming off the King manmade 8000 grit stone, bling-bling shiny though King made them.

good luck

michael

Michael, someone on woodnet also mentioned this scenario on a japanese chisel. Not that it is exclusive to them.

I was milling it over today, back on the oilstones. My current theory for why the mirror finish doesn't come up on the hard black arkansas is that the mix of silica grit sizes and the fact that they don't release easily from the stone. So you are always dragging over a mix of grits instead of a uniform grit like a man-made stone. So my black arkansas has a mix of 1-7micron silicate abrasives embeded therefore it is unlikely to evey get a polish better than say a 2000g waterstone despite being a more keen edge. I could be out in the weeds, but that is were I am currently.

I determine sharp with hair shaving, fingernail test, and end grain cutting on a soft wood. Near as I can determine coming off the black arkansas is somewhere between my 4000g and 6000g King waterstones. In any case I strop off the stones. At the end of the day the blades are sharp via both methods, the waterstones just leave a prettier polish :cool:

Mess vs. mess. You either mind oil or you don't. Even if you use water you still have to oil the blades before putting them up. I dislike the water and swarf that runs off the stones. I am also not a fan of misting the rest of my tools during the session. Initially I used way too much oil and made a mess. Now I find that I can get by with little oil, can go from stone to stone without a messy pool of contamination on the bench, and my blades are oiled and ready right off. I am also a big fan of how flat they stay even when I abuse them. They do cut slower, but for honing I don't find it a problem.

[george wilson]

I just use a little squeeze bottle with a long,bent spout. An oil can would do if it doesn't get rusty. I can put a 3/4" puddle,or string of water on a stone neatly,no trouble. I don't like getting other tools,or the bench wet,either.That is why I don't like waterstones that you have to use a lot of water on. They tend to make the tools rusty also. My mixture described above was given to me by Lynton McKenzie,a World famous engraver. We used it at the Toolmaker's Shop for decades. The water soluable cutting oil could be left out. Just add 3-4 drops of Dawn to a cup of water. The additives are to help the water float the chips off,and to help keep the stone from loading.

Be advised,once you use oil on a stone,you probably can't go back to water again. Years ago I did use lock oil.It was thin so it would run into locks. It had some solvent in it that would evaporate off later to keep the oil in the lock. I just used it because it was thin,and the museum warehouse stocked it. I tried every kind of stone there was,since the museum paid for them. What I use now seen above,is my final conclusion. You cannot sharpen D2 steel on many stones. They are too soft. You can easily grind Arkansas slip stones into special shapes on a blue zirconia belt.Not so the ceramic stones. They are too hard to cut unless you have diamond saws.

I'm not even claiming my way is best. I am very experimental,and have arrived at it.I just cannot see paying BIG bucks for these very soft stones that easily get swaybacked,and have to be wasted grinding them flat. Some like them because they don't get tiny steel chips loaded in them so easily. That's why Leonard Lee told me that he liked them. I just rub the diamond stone on the ceramics,take off probably .0001" of stone,and clear them.

[Jim Koepke]

I just cannot see paying BIG bucks for these very soft stones that easily get swaybacked,and have to be wasted grinding them flat. Some like them because they don't get tiny steel chips loaded in them so easily. That's why Leonard Lee told me that he liked them. I just rub the diamond stone on the ceramics,take off probably .0001" of stone,and clear them.

It just goes to show there are many ways to do the same thing. If you think one way is better than the other, you are probably right, at least for your own way of doing something.

jim

[Douglas Brummett]

It is the slurry that does the work with a waterstone. That is why they sell the nagura prep stones for the finer waterstone, to work up a lather before you start. This also helps to stop the steel from being imbedded in the fine waterstone, because at that point you are wasting your energy.

I have never seen an Ark. stone that compares to water stone, and they are slower as well. The finish on the big chisel is comparable to the finish provided with a 1000 grit waterstone. Keep in mind that the quality of the steel will affect the polish as well. You can not get the same finish on a hardware chisel, or even say a marples, as you would on the cutting steel on a Japanese hand forged. If you look at the polished edge of a Japanese hand forged, you can plainly see the two different metals in the blade.

I finish up with a 8000 grit King, and I recently bought another brand and it is not as good, will be buying another King. Be careful to clean your chisel before moving from stone to stone, especially with waterstones. Grit from the last stone can contaminate the finer stone, getting embedded in the soft waterstone and scratching all of your subsequent sharpenings.


The equivalent "grit" of the black Arkansas is less than that of the 6000 grit waterstone so that is why you see a difference. I finish on a leather strop charged with green honing compound after the black Arkansas. The honing cmpd on the strop will mirror polish the steel.

I think you are both getting at the same thing here. It is right to question the effective grit. That is very hard to do on a natural stone. Everything I have been able to dig up on hard/fine Novaculite puts it about equivalent to 4000g waterstone or 2000g sandpaper. The Arkansas Geological Survey reports that Novaculite is predominantly 1-5micron monocrystaline quartz. Results will vary stone to stone, but those are the guidelines I have found.

Going strictly by how keen the edge is directly off the stone my black Arkansas is finer than my 4000g king, but not as fine as my 6000g king. However looking at the polish produced during honing it looks more like that of my 1000g Norton waterstone or 1000g w/d paper. I can then get a mirror polish with leather and green rouge.

Larry, that King 8000g is suposed to be a very good stone and is rumored to actually use natural stone particles in it's composite. I have used a Norton 8000g and it did sharpen well, but I didn't like how it would clog and also drag as I honed.

[Douglas Brummett]

I'm not even claiming my way is best. I am very experimental,and have arrived at it.I just cannot see paying BIG bucks for these very soft stones that easily get swaybacked,and have to be wasted grinding them flat. Some like them because they don't get tiny steel chips loaded in them so easily. That's why Leonard Lee told me that he liked them. I just rub the diamond stone on the ceramics,take off probably .0001" of stone,and clear them.

Well, you sorta are. But that is okay by me. That is the best method that you have found. I am cool with that. I am hesitant to venture into yet another honing medium. A 220g coarse diamond plate is looming in the future, but Spyderco or Shapton media both are high priced alternatives that don't really offer much if any more bang for the buck.


I recommend the following setup. It produces a mirror finish,which is the desirable one for making the sharpest,smoothest edge. Having museum money,I was able to try everything before settling on what I now prefer: Start with a medium, or 220 grit diamond stone to get a fast edge,or eliminate little nicks,etc. quickly. Next,a black Spyderco ceramic stone. Then a white spyderco ceramic stone.

I was just looking over the Spyderco ceramic bench stones. Looks like most are 8x2 surface size. They have just come out with an 8x3 ultra-fine, but even that claims 2000g (I assume CAMI like sandpaper grit system). That is similar to the stones we are already discussing. According to a user on the spyderco forum the stones break down like this:

Spyderco benchstone grits

Med 12-14 u 800-900 grit

Fine 7-9 u 2000-3000 grit

UF 3-4 u 4000-6000 grit

So, a couple of questions for you. What evaluation methodology did you use to determine that 220g diamond->900g spyderco->3000g spyderco was the best method? How are you positioning wider blades? The stone size is a bit small for plane irons. Obviously a 2-5/8in blade is different from a 3/4in chisel. I am not picking a benchstone fight, just curious.

Okay, did a bit more reading over on the spyderco forums. Apparently all the stones use a 15-25u grit sized abrasive. The fine is the "as-fired" state and the others are just surface preparations of that according to a spyderco rep. So the previous table is just a guesstimate of effective grit sizing based off of scratch patterns.

Oh, and the more I read the more I am not liking the ceramics. Apparently the flatness spec is .02" and if you get one that isn't flat you basically could smoke a diamond stone trying to get it flat. The rep skirted the question if you could mess up the effective grit by lapping. That kind of makes me think that the answer is yes. A loose flatness spec, difficult to flatten, and potential to inadvertantly change the grit are major show stoppers for me.

[george wilson]

Douglas,a person can only offer to share the knowledge he has built up. Ceramic stones,for me,offer the most bang for the buck. Unless you break them,you are set for life,and this system offers quick,excellent results for the limited number of strokes my old joints have left.

[Douglas Brummett]

Hey George, I added some additional questions to that last entry. Would you mind taking a swing at them? Mostly ceramic stone questions. TIA :)

[David Keller NC]

"Be advised,once you use oil on a stone,you probably can't go back to water again."

This is actually possible, but if you've used a medium viscosity honing oil you're going to need to soak the stone in a mixture of solvents that will both solubilize the oil and also be of low enough viscosity to get into the pores of the stone. One of the best compromises here is laquer thinner - it's pretty effective at removing both the honing oil itself and the breakdown products. If the stone's been used with motor oil, you will probably find that you must mix the laquer thinner about half and half with odorless mineral spirits to get the oil to solubilize.

For those interested, Toshio Odate has an excellent explanation of why certain stones are not "best" for all edges and steels in "Japanese Woodworking Tools", including photomicrographs of edges.

[Douglas Brummett]

Good info David. I like the oil. I can see the advantage of using water in that you could use other water stones or ceramic stones after your fine oilstone. But at that point why even bother with oilstones?

I am following the ancestors sharpening thread as well. It is a good parallel to this. Basically most are indicating the less is more approach may be more historically correct. Woodworkers only utilizing 1 or 2 stones to handle all honing and maybe a sandstone for grinding the initial geometry.

Some good sharpening discussion going on round here :)

[David Keller NC]

Doug - Based on the very high expense of "Turkey" stones in the 18th century, the wide availability of "tripoli" or "rottenstone" (pumice or crushed limestone, respectively), I rather strongly suspect that the typical honing method was stropping.

The fact that leather is a very useful (and in the day, relatively expensive) commodity would explain the very few survivors of the period.

[Joe O'Leary]

Great thread! So, one implied question is: If there are two blades, both flat on both intersecting planes, can a matte surfaces one be sharper than a shiny one , or, given flatness, is shiny equivalent to sharp?

Joe

[george wilson]

There were probably more types of oilstones available than we know about. There were Belgian stones. Woodcraft used to sell odd shaped flattened stones. The old Dutch cabinet maker in Williamsburg only ever used one. He spit on it and began honing!

Roy Underhill visited "Whetstone Creek",or somesuch name in North Carolina,and brought back a bunch of natural whetstones to Williamsburg in the 80's. I never saw or used one. Some shops used them.

My point is,there were,and are natural deposits of suitable stones. I doubt that honing was the preferred way to fully sharpen edges. I just don't think it was practical.

Have you seen stones that were natural layers made into double sided stones. I don't mean glued together. Different sedimentary layers ground to use one layer on each side?

Shiny is sharp? Yes,I don't see how matte could be as sharp.Matte means tiny lines all over the metal= larger tiny mountains on the cutting edge.

[george wilson]

If you waste enough solvent,I guess oil might be mostly gotten out.

I wanted to mention that at a used machinery dealer's place,another guy found a whetstone 12" square!! Good find!! It was old and very dirty,but could have been an India. I have an interesting stone. It is a very fine stone,round,about 1 1/8" in the center. It tapers in convex tapers to sharp tips at each end. Never saw another like it. Have no idea where I found it,but it is old. Great for carving gouges. IIRC,it is a dark brownish/purple color. It is fine like a razor stone.

I have some NOS razor stones for razor factory use. They were made by the American Hone Co.,Moravia,Iowa. They are 5/8" thick,by about 2 1/2" wide X 8" long. I bought them new,they are still in paper. NOT FOR SALE. Dimensions from memory.

If you want some unbelivably tough ceramic stones,Gesswein sells ceramic fiber stones.They are abuout 3/32" X 3",round,and fine. They are made for ultrasonic die finisher's handpieces. I have one that does 3000 strokes PER SECOND. It is air powered.It cost $800.00 over 10 years ago. At that time,I was doing relief chiseled sculpture on 17th.C. style pistol barrels. The die finishing handpiece was only for polishing the work with tiny,fine stones.

[george wilson]

Douglas,sorry,I missed your post. I just hold a wider plane iron a bit diagonal.No,you won't smoke a diamond stone,don't worry. I have really done these processes many times. We have a 30 year old diamond stone in Williamsburg that has been used hard. It is still o.k..

Since the finer white stone was not out when I got mine,I've found mine quite good enough. It did have "FUZZ" on it from being molded when I got it. I knew that would never go away,so I ground it under water drip till the stone was flat. Fresh it up with a brief scrub when little shiny particles get stuck on it. No problem.

Can you be there to select a stone as flat as possible? I can tell you,these diamond stones can be out of flat,too. They come plastic wrapped,which is a bother. If you take them out,the grits on the stones make the rule stand off the surface. It's hard to see flatness that way. I'm talking about the solid steel plate stones.

Don't get terribly concerned about absolute surface flatness. the stone won't make a big crown in your blade at the degrees we are talking about. You may get a water stone flat,but check it after honing a blade. It won't be flat!! I like a tiny bit of convexity in my plane blades. Blends the cuts better when planing wide surfaces-the corners don't leave marks when making tissue thin shavings. Most users round up the corners to keep them from leaving tracks. I find such rounded corners too abrupt,and prefer a TINY TINY curve. Note TINY.

When edge planing,the amount of curve doesn't visually affect the joint. 3/4" wood isn't getting much curve from the blade.

I am getting tired. Hope this helps. The regular white stone leaves a polished edge that will shave hairs effortlessly when the steel is good,like an OLD KABAR knife.