Sharp tools with matte finishes

[Wilbur Pan]

The issue of whether shiny equals sharp has come up in this forum before. Although oftentimes the advice is given is to use whatever sharpening method you use to achieve a mirror finish, there are two problems with this piece of advice.

First, a sharp edge is achieved by the intersection of two flat surfaces, and flat is not necessarily the same as a mirror finish. If you don't believe this, look at any funhouse mirror, or the parabolic reflector in a flashlight. Those are certainly reflective surfaces that are not flat at all. A mirror finish is a characteristic of how even/repetitive the surface pattern is. You can certainly achieve a flat surface that is reflective, and you can use the reflection to see how flat your surface is by seeing if there is visible distortion in the reflected image in your tool. But the fact is that the flat and mirror finish are not equivalent.

Second, from an observational standpoint, tools sharpened with manmade Japanese waterstones will take on a very reflective surface, but those same tools sharpened with natural Japanese waterstones often can have a hazy or matte surface, even though either method can result in an extremely sharp edge. Here's an example of some chisels sharpened with natural Japanese waterstones, where you can see the matte finish that is left by the waterstone:

http://www.japan-tool.com/toishi/tennen/Nakayama_Asagi1/Nakayama_Asagi1_4.jpg

http://www.japan-tool.com/toishi/tennen/Nakayama_Asagi2/Nakayama_Asagi2_4.jpg

I've always felt that one explanation for this phenomenon is that the grit sizes in natural Japanese waterstones had more variation than what is seen in manmade waterstones. This leads to a more random scratch pattern in tools sharpened with natural Japanese waterstones, which diffuses light, which leads to the hazy surface. Manmade waterstones, on the other hand, will leave a more regular scratch pattern, which leads to an increased reflectivity and that mirror finish.

Recently, Ron Hock has posted some electron micrographs (http://hocktools.wordpress.com/2010/02/15/matte-surface-mystery-part-2/) of tools sharpened with natural and manmade waterstones that support this theory. The tools sharpened with natural Japanese waterstones have a more random scratch pattern compared to the manmade waterstones. This may not be entirely due to grit size variation. It could also be that the natural Japanese waterstone develops more of a slurry, and that the sharpening particles are moving in a more random manner than the manmade waterstone, where it could be that the majority of sharpening particles are still embedded in the matrix. The shape of the abrasive particles also probably plays a role.

Again, this is not to say that you should aim for either a matte or mirror finish when sharpening. The point is that how reflective the tool surface is not necessarily the same as a flat surface, and flatness is really the goal when sharpening a tool.

[Robert Rozaieski]

I think there's a lot of merit to this explanation Wilbur. I find that with my natural Arkansas stones, the finish is kind of hazy as well, but the tools are plenty sharp. When I used Norton (man made) water stones, I got a mirror polish. Now that I use the natural oil stones, the polish is not a mirror but the edge is just as sharp as when I used the Nortons. The irregular crystalline structure of the natural stones makes sense to cause such an irregular scratch pattern, resulting in the hazy finish.

[Richard Dooling]

Finally an explanation that makes sense. Thanks very much for this post Wilbur.

.

[george wilson]

I don't se what FLAT has to do with MIRROR. A mirror can be in any curvature,but it has nothing to do with flatness. There is flawed logic in this part of your posting. Yes,we want flat surfaces coming together,but they can be flat and polished if we hone them accurately. If I want a
little crown in a smooth plane iron,I can hone that in too,still keeping it polished.

I'll stick with making 2 polished edges come together. A polished edge consists of a more finely divided surface than a matte finish does. Flat,or slightly curved,the edge is sharper.

This looks like the beginning of another long,pointless thread about sharpening. The work I posted here was all done with polished edges. This is something that professional woodworkers would laugh about. I have been a paid,professional woodworker for 48 years,and worked wood for 8 years before getting paid to do it. That makes 56 years. Just get some work done.

Your larger chisel looks like the edge has indentations,and a broken off corner. If I wanted to post an edge I made,I wouldn't post a flawed one.

[David Gendron]

Sorry George, but I think you should read the post again. You would see that what Wilbur is saying is actualy that a mirror/polished surface doesn't meen it is flat!! And also, all respect to your great woodworking skills, Japanese have been using edge tools for quite a wile and done prety amazing stuff with them, with out a polished or mirror finishe on the face of there tools. Just thinking of those shaving contest!!
Wilbur, this is of great help, I also think that you don't need mirror to achive great Sharpness!

[harry strasil]

I remember my father telling me about my Grandfather delegating my dad during his apprenticeship to forge the sockets of chisels that were worn down to nubs like the ones shown into tangs and rounding the cutting edges so the sawmill loggers could finish using them as Barking Spuds.

[george wilson]

Of course mirrors are not necessarily flat!!!!! So what does that prove? Stropping will make edges more rounded. Just don't strop TOO much. Look at any razor blade including new ones. They are stropped. A mirror edge is smoother than a matte edge.Two mirrors coming together will be sharpest. Of course,it is possible to DUB OVER an over stropped edge. That's why I don't use powered strops. It takes SKILL to make the sharpest edge.

A basic problem with this subject is that everyone has their own idea what a truly sharp edge is.

David,I want you to take a straight razor and sharpen it with a matte finish,and try shaving your face with it. No stropping(like has been done FOREVER by barbers). Maybe that will convince you which edge is sharpest.

How many of you have shaved with a straight razor? I have. And,I certainly put a stropped mirror edge on it. Whiskers are thick and tough. You might get by shaving arm hair with a matte finish,but you won't like the way a razor less than dead sharp pulls out your whiskers instead of smoothly shaving them.

It's just common sense.

[Ben Rivenbark]

I shave with a straight razor every time I shave. Have done so for years. I hone my own razors, and have people who regularly call me and ask me to hone their razors for them.

Normally, I strop before every shave. It keeps the edge going longer, and *does* make the edge smoother - typically. But, if you've ever used a good quality Nakayama finishing stone from Japan, you'll find that you don't need to strop your razor right after it comes off the stone, provided you have honed it well enough. Japanese naturals do make for a very smooth finish. A straight razor with a matte finish can be a killer shaver.

Please get a high power microscope and hone two straight razors properly; one with a high quality japanese natural and the other with whatever method you prefer. When comparing stone to stone under the scope, the japanese natural will provide a much finer scratch pattern than most any other stone available.

Stropping with Chromium Oxide or similar will give a fantastic scratch pattern as well, but the shave is merely equal, not necessarily better.

You can get a mirrored edge with lots of stones, and 99% of them will be lousy compared to the finish shown on the chisel above.

I actually have a video of myself shaving with an old hickory paring knife that I honed to 6000 grit, with no stropping, and it shaved fantastically. It's on youtube under the channel Ben325e, if you like.

I will concur that non-power stropping is one of the easiest and fastest ways to get a fantastic edge on most anything. Chromium oxide on newspaper taped to a granite reference plate is REALLY tough to beat. An excellent quality Japanese natural finisher will cost hundreds of dollars; a lifetime supply of chromium oxide will cost about fifteen bucks.

[Tim Put]

A mirror edge is smoother than a matte edge.
...
It's just common sense.

In this case, as in many others, common sense is wrong. Shining like a mirror only shows that a significant proportion of the surface is very smooth, not that all of it is. There can be completely invisible, very large (relatively speaking), very significant defects on a mirrored surface that will be the dominant effects on sharpness. As can be seen in the SEM images posted by Hock, and linked to by Wilbur, the scale of the surface features causing matte or shiny appearance is much smaller than the scale of the edge defects limiting sharpness.

Summarized, it may be possible for a perfect shiny edge to be sharper than a matte edge, but a matte edge can be as sharp as you or anyone else has ever made. Matte-ness is not a limiting factor.

Further, a matte surface may in fact be smoother than a mirrored surface for reasons having to do with what causes a surface to act mirror-like in the first place; but the point above is sufficient.

[george wilson]

A lot of sharpening is skill. You should strop in different directions to keep smooth mountains from building up. Technique MUST be considered,not just what you use to get a tool sharp. It also depends upon what wood you are working. Aren't Japanese tools designed primarily for soft wood use? I never liked Japanese type tools,so never use them.

[Wilbur Pan]

I don't se what FLAT has to do with MIRROR.

What you are describing as "polished" I am describing as the "mirror finish". And if you had read the first sentence of the second paragraph in my post, you would see that we are in agreement on this point.

Again, if you read my original post, I am not saying that a chisel with a polished bevel cannot be sharp.


Of course mirrors are not necessarily flat!!!!! So what does that prove?

David,I want you to take a straight razor and sharpen it with a matte finish,and try shaving your face with it. No stropping(like has been done FOREVER by barbers). Maybe that will convince you which edge is sharpest.

How many of you have shaved with a straight razor? I have. And,I certainly put a stropped mirror edge on it. Whiskers are thick and tough. You might get by shaving arm hair with a matte finish,but you won't like the way a razor less than dead sharp pulls out your whiskers instead of smoothly shaving them.

It's just common sense.

It may be common sense, but there's nothing like experience to see whether an assertion holds up. Here's an end grain shaving I made in pine with a Japanese chisel with a matte finish left by sharpening it on a natural Japanese waterstone, along with a plane shaving I made with a Japanese plane, also with a matte finish from a natural Japanese waterstone.

http://lh6.ggpht.com/_a3R4RhWn1Is/SZDyLCmduQI/AAAAAAAAAZc/7Lct0OT13m8/s800/IMG_7984.JPG

I'd say that's pretty good evidence of tools with a matte finish and how sharp they can be.

By the way, I can put a polished surface on this chisel and plane blade with a manmade waterstone, and get a similar shaving. That should show that the polished vs. matte finish really doesn't come into play in determining how sharp a tool edge is.

What does matter in sharpness is how deep the scratch patterns are when you're done with the sharpening method of your choice. If you have scratches that are, say, 1 micron deep when you're done, and those scratches are arranged in a very regular fashion, you'll have a sharp tool with a polished finish. If your sharpening method leaves you with scratches that range from 0.5 to 1 micron deep that are more random in arrangement, that will leave you with an equally sharp edge that has a matte finish.

As far as straight razors go, if you look at the straight razor forums, you'll find people who use a strop to sharpen. You'll also find people who use Japanese waterstones. The people who sharpen their straight razors with Japanese waterstones report that they get a matte finish on their razors, and they are perfectly sharp.

One last thought about "common sense". There's a great quote that's often attributed to the famous philosopher Yogi Berra, but probably belongs to Jan L. A. van de Snepscheut instead. It goes, "In theory there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is." ;)

[Wilbur Pan]

Aren't Japanese tools designed primarily for soft wood use? I never liked Japanese type tools,so never use them.

That is not correct, either. I use Japanese chisels, planes, and saws in a variety of North American hardwoods. For an example of how a Japanese chisel can hold up against cocobolo and white oak, see here (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?t=83526).

[Eric Hartunian]

That is not correct, either. I use Japanese chisels, planes, and saws in a variety of North American hardwoods. For an example of how a Japanese chisel can hold up against cocobolo and white oak, see here (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?t=83526).

Wilbur, I remember this post and the consternation it caused!
I think we are all in violent agreement on this issue, just stating it differently.
I use both J tools and western, and I fully agree that shiny isn't necessarily sharp, and matte finished isn't necessarily dull.
George brings up an excellent point, however. No matter how fine your natural waterstone is, or how fine the rouge on your favorite strop is, poor technique will never deliver a sharp edge. When I started using mostly hand tools, I had some very shiny edges that would not pare end grain or anything else, but boy, were they shiny!
I like to sharpen. It is part of the craft and I enjoy it, so these discussions are interesting to me. However, I recognize that the point is rather academic. George's polished edge is sharp; Wilbur's matte edge is sharp; they both will do the job.
If this discussion pops up on the JT forum, I would be interested in what those comments will be.

Eric

[george wilson]

I really don't care how you want to sharpen your tools. I know what works for me. This discussion has been made before,so we just disagree.

[Wilbur Pan]

Just to be clear, I don't think there is anything to disagree about. I agree with you that a polished tool can be quite sharp. I've done that with my tools as well.

Where we seem to diverge in outlook is that you seem not to believe that a tool with a matte finish can also be quite sharp, regardless of evidence to the contrary.

This isn't a matter of disagreeing about an opinion, however. Many people have very sharp tools and razors that have a matte finish. This is a demonstrable fact.

I'm not asking you to change your methods of work. What I'm asking you to do is realize that oftentimes there are multiple means to the same end.

[Jon Toebbe]

I think we are all in violent agreement on this issue, just stating it differently.
Very well put! Ron Hock's blog post that was referred at the start of this thread was an interesting read. For what it's worth, I strop with chromium oxide and get nice, shiny bevels. I've been well pleased with the results when steel meets wood. Less so when steel meets embedded nail... but that's a different thread entirely! :p

[David Weaver]

I don't post here often, and couldn't remember if I was banned.

but if one wants to wonder about the real size of the scratches left by stones w.r.t. the observable service (shiny or not), there is no need to look past the work alex gilmore has done.

http://www.thejapanblade.com/test521.htm

I'll guarantee if you look at a shapton 30K edge reflecting light, you'll squint.

I'll also guarantee that if you look at the edge left by one of these suita stones, you won't squint.

I don't fully understand the difference (why one shines and why one doesn't, why natural stones cut hard steel fast but leave no nasty grooves in the backing iron but synthetics do cut both fast), and i don't care. I also won't say that it's necessary for anyone to buy natural stones. But they (the good ones) do feel nicer than artificial stones for freehand sharpening, they smell nice and they do a good job - as good as synthetics at least. What's wrong with enjoying yourself when you're involved in a hobby?

One would have to count strokes taken from an edge before it stops cutting to find out what is really better. Any volunteers? The number of strokes to do the comparison could be several hundred to a thousand strokes per sharpening, and you'd have to do that multiple times to get remotely credible data.

Not liking a certain type of tools and not having used them is no reason to assault someone who does and try to decide what curiosity they can satisfy based on what professionals "laugh at".

[Mark Roderick]

"If your sharpening method leaves you with scratches that range from 0.5 to 1 micron deep that are more random in arrangement, that will leave you with an equally sharp edge that has a matte finish."

I don't think the "random arrangement" concept is correct. I can sharpen a tool using any motion, from circular to back and forth to sideways to all of the above, and the sharpened edge always ends up shiny.

Same thing with rubbing out a finish. You use the rougher pad to take the finish to a matt, then the finer pad to bring it to a higher gloss. It doesn't matter in what direction you rub the fine pad - it still comes out to a gloss. In fact, you can use a random-orbit machine to rub out the finish!

But there must be something to the point about the depth of the grooves. You're saying that what distinguishes a shine from a matt is that the grooves on the shiny surface are all the same size? Maybe that's true. If it is true then it's the answer to this age-old debate.

[Wilbur Pan]

But there must be something to the point about the depth of the grooves. You're saying that what distinguishes a shine from a matte is that the grooves on the shiny surface are all the same size? Maybe that's true. If it is true then it's the answer to this age-old debate.
That actually is true. If you have a distribution of different sized grooves, that will diffuse light more than a collection of same sized grooves, which will be more reflective.

As far as the random orientation of the grooves goes, all I can say is that (1) a random orientation of grooves will diffuse light more than grooves in a repetitive pattern, and (b) look at Ron Hock's electron micrographs. There clearly is a more random orientation in the scratches left by the natural Japanese waterstone.

I think what is happening is that both the wider distribution of groove sizes and the random orientation are contributing to the matte appearance. It's not an either/or thing.

[Christian Castillo]

Wilbur has brought up a great point. I have used tools sharpened by both synthetic and natural stones, both get wickedly sharp, "shinyness" isnt the sole requirement for sharp. In fact, the sharpest blade I've ever had the pleasure of using was of matte finish and came off a suita stone. As for a previous comment regarding japanese tools and softwoods, I recall that Derek Cohen, member on this board and various others, uses japanese blue steel chisels and he primarily works australian timbers. That should say something regarding the ability of the chisels to hold up in hard wood.

[Jim Koepke]

While contemplating the posts in this thread I happened to glance over to my note board. I noticed one of the notes there held up by a push pin. Admittedly the push pin does have a large head, but there were no less than 27 angles dancing gleefully upon it.

I do not wish to imply that this is the maximum that can fit upon the head of this pin, nor do I wish to further such an argument.

I choose not to split hairs over methods of achieving sharpness. I choose to seek methods of achieving sharpness that will split hairs.

I think it is time to head out to the shop.

jim

[george wilson]

You wax philosophical,Jim,while I get too grumpy!! It depends upon how much pain I am in,and what I'm taking for it.

I need to not get so grumpy. Whatever works for a person is o.k..

[David Keller NC]

Wilbur - One thing to remember in this discussion is that while a steel surface with a scratch pattern can have a matte (or more matte, as the case may be) appearance than a steel surface with fewer or less deep scratches on it, it's not correct to think that a scratch pattern is the only reason for a matte appearance.

In fact, there are two different processes at work - one is the surface imperfection pattern, which will scatter light and result in a less-shiny surface. However, one can also have a utterly smooth, nearly perfect steel surface that would otherwise be a mirror that still looks matte. This effect has to do with chemical changes on the steel surface, not scratch patterns. And the use of various combinations of differently-alloyed steels and different composition waterstones can cause such a chemical change.

In other words, degree of reflectivity doesn't equal topology of surface.

[Wilbur Pan]

Can you elaborate more on the chemical changes? I am having a hard time picturing what could happen with a natural Japanese waterstone, steel/iron, and water that would result in a chemical change.

The two things that I can imagine would be some sort of oxidation or a very mild acid etching. But if either one of these was happening, there should be visible signs of that in the electron micrographs that Ron Hock posted.

[David Keller NC]

What's specifically happening is sensitively dependent on the exact metallurgy of the steel and the exact composition of the binders in stone. Many of these binders in both natural and man-made stones are alkaline in nature and can promote the hydrolysis of the iron surface to ferric hydroxide. If the binders are acidic, then it's possible to remove sufficient iron from the surface to leave behind mostly carbon and (depending on the alloy) chromium.

It takes very little of this surface change to make large changes in the reflectivity of a steel surface. While we don't typically work with stainless steels, an example of this sort of action that makes no measurable change in the bulk alloy composition but makes huge changes in reflectivity is passivation. In this process, either a mineral acid or citric acid and oxygen from the air removes the top few iron atoms from the steel surface and leaves behind primarily carbon and chromium. The surface has a "pickled" appearance, and is a matte silver-gray color where the original surface was a bright mirror remianing from electropolishing.

[Wilbur Pan]

Hi David,

I can see how those chemical reactions might be possible, but from a practical standpoint, does that really happen in the course of sharpening? As far as ferric hydroxide goes, the usual reactions to generate it that I have been able to find either involve a fairly alkaline environment, boiling temperatures, or an electrochemical reaction in a salt solution. I also am not sure that an appropriately acidic environment necessary to cause etching would exist during sharpening. Furthermore, If these types of reactions were occurring, there should be some evidence of it in the electron micrographs that Ron Hock has provided.

[Pam Niedermayer]

The temperature requirement would be satisfied by friction. Add to that a little vacuum of stiction by flat stones, maybe would add to retention of heat. Don't know about the alkaline content, but my guess is that, IRC from geology class 45 years ago, that stone is basic, or a lot of stones are.

Pam

[Brian Ashton]

By the way, I can put a polished surface on this chisel and plane blade with a manmade waterstone, and get a similar shaving. That should show that the polished vs. matte finish really doesn't come into play in determining how sharp a tool edge is.

I have shown people that you can get a usably sharp edge straight from the grinder if you're careful enough and have a set up like I do - very slow speed and fine grit, turners do it every day... Usuably is the key word as there are as many ideas about how sharp a tool is as there are stars in the sky. Basically if the tool cuts to your satisfaction and leaves the desired result it's sharp enough. Have a look at what the Egyptians 2500 years ago were making with tools most of us wouldn't even have in our little hobby shops sometime if you don't believe me. You can bet they weren't too concerned with grades of mirror finish on their tools.

But what you should really be talking about with respect to how "shiny" or "reflective" an edge should be is the relative time it will stay sharp. What you may not have noticed in those micro graphs is the more irregular edge produced on the "less shiny" edge. Those irregularities will break off much quicker and leave you with a tool that no longer has a usably sharp edge. The more irregular the quicker the edge will erode. The same principle applies to using a steel in the kitchen. It literally rips the steel of your knife and leaves it with a very ragged edge, relatively speaking. But it's an edge that will cut through most things in the kitchen extremely well. Because nothing, except bones, are all that hard in the kitchen the edge produced is quite adequate, or as I like to say usably sharp. And will stay that way for an acceptably long enough time. Long enough that there is no reason to go to such lengths as we do to obtain a mirror finish on the edge. In fact that micro serrated edge is a benefit in the kitchen.

Now I have to get back to learning regression analysis...

[Christian Castillo]

Hmmm this article states the opposite of what you are saying Brian and that an edge created by a natural sharpening stone in fact stays sharper longer. It also talks about the matte finish left by japanese natural stones as opposed to the shiny finish left by man made synthetic stones. It is written by Alex Gilmore, who is an extremely knowledgeable vendor and user of japanese natural stones. He analyzes the edges produced using natural and man made sharpening mediums. If you browse through the site, you can find pictures of scratch patterns created by natural stones estimated at 40000+ grit and compares that to a shapton 30000 grit stone. It's an interesting read, anyone care to comment?

http://thejapanblade.com/sharpvsshiny.htm

[David Keller NC]

Hi David,

I can see how those chemical reactions might be possible, but from a practical standpoint, does that really happen in the course of sharpening? As far as ferric hydroxide goes, the usual reactions to generate it that I have been able to find either involve a fairly alkaline environment, boiling temperatures, or an electrochemical reaction in a salt solution. I also am not sure that an appropriately acidic environment necessary to cause etching would exist during sharpening. Furthermore, If these types of reactions were occurring, there should be some evidence of it in the electron micrographs that Ron Hock has provided.

As Pam noted, a lot of the water stone binders are alkaline in nature, but it's hard to be specific with this - there's a lot of variation in the alloy elements in different steels, and variation in the chemical composition of abrasive stones. And the chemical reactions can be very complex.

But I do have personal experience with this in relation to the nodular iron material that L-N makes their planes out of. I flattened the sole of a 60-1/2 block plane on both a coarse diamond plate and 800 grit silicon oxide wet-dry paper. The surface left after the diamond plate is silver colored and shiny, though scratches were visible to the naked eye. After the SiC paper, the surface was rendered very, very smooth (no visible scratches), but an overall matte gray color. I've reproduced this effect on older chisels and plane blades (generally "cast steel") - some of them come off of the Norton and King 8000 grit waterstones a dull matte gray color, though you can still see yourself in the reflection. However, these same tools produced a shiny-bright surface from a Shapton fine grit stone (I think it was a 6000 grit, but not positive).

[george wilson]

Pam,I wondered when you would join in. It was you,I think,who stated that the Japanese tools were designed primarily for soft woods. Since I don't use them,I bow to your knowledge of them. Any comment?

[Sam Takeuchi]

As far as Japanese tools go, I think saying they are mainly for softwood is a wrong assumption. Maybe what's available outside of Japan tend to be softwood oriented types, but within Japan, plane blades and chisels are offered in far more variety of steels for all type of wood material than elsewhere. You can find anything from high carbon blade and all the way up to powdered steel, HSS and other exotic steel that we don't hear much about.

Foreign tools never made it much into Japan's woodworking industry, those who use non-Japanese tools are few and far in between. Historically speaking, Japan has used a lot of hardwood to make various things without foreign tools, one of the most notable piece of 'furniture' is butsudan, a family shrine in homes, normally made from ebony or other dark yet beautiful wood and quite big piece at that. Many of them do have quite intricate carving and design. I'm sure nowadays that's done by machine, but before the age of machines, they were done with tools that probably weren't much, if any, different from other Japanese tools.

Even in north America and Europe, a lot of things are made with pine, but to say their tools are designed for softwood is misguided at best. The thing about Japanese tools is that the blacksmith who made those blades weren't too far from the buyers (craftsman and carpenters). If buyers needed a blade of certain characteristics, blacksmith were able to make them.

[Wilbur Pan]

But what you should really be talking about with respect to how "shiny" or "reflective" an edge should be is the relative time it will stay sharp. What you may not have noticed in those micro graphs is the more irregular edge produced on the "less shiny" edge. Those irregularities will break off much quicker and leave you with a tool that no longer has a usably sharp edge.

As far as how durable the edges are in use, my experience is that if I finish sharpening with a natural Japanese waterstone, the edge seems to last a little while longer, although the difference isn't huge. In any case, edge durability certainly isn't an advantage for a shiny edge -- at best it's a draw.

In this picture from Ron Hock's blog post, the photo on the left is a tool sharpened with a natural waterstone. It certainly seems more regular than the one on the right, which was sharpened with a man made waterstone.

http://hocktools.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/500x2-up.jpg

[Wilbur Pan]

As far as Japanese tools go, I think saying they are mainly for softwood is a wrong assumption....

Historically speaking, Japan has used a lot of hardwood to make various things without foreign tools, one of the most notable piece of 'furniture' is butsudan, a family shrine in homes, normally made from ebony or other dark yet beautiful wood and quite big piece at that. Many of them do have quite intricate carving and design.

To expand on this, there are many hardwood species that turn up in Japanese furniture. You can see a discussion of this here (http://giantcypress.tumblr.com/post/450086989/on-that-japanese-woodworking-is-done-with-softwoods). I've successfully used Japanese tools in many domestic hardwoods, including cherry, maple, oak, and walnut.

Japanese toolmakers and woodworkers would often alter the tool to optimize its performance for the wood species they were using. For chisels and plane blades, it was a simple matter of altering the bevel angle of the tool, if needed. Saw teeth were often reshaped to suit the wood that was being sawed.

[george wilson]

I just wanted to see what Pam had to say about it. the tall,stalky teeth normally seen on Japanese saws seem delicate and easy to break off. I'm glad to hear that they were reshaped for sawing different woods. That seems like a cumbersome process,though. I'll stick with our Western style teeth.

[Wilbur Pan]

For those who knew how to do it, it's not a real cumbersome task. The issue of the crosscut teeth being too tall on a Japanese saw really has more to do with the types of Japanese saws that are imported for sale in the U.S. To say that Japanese saws are not suitable for sawing hardwoods based on that experience would be like saying that English mortising chisels were unsuitable for making mortises in hardwoods if the only mortising chisels that were imported from England had a 15º bevel, when you could get English mortising chisels with a 25º bevel and a 30º microbevel only if you travelled to England.

In Japan, you can get saws with teeth more suitable for harder woods. In my case, when I ordered the ryoba that I use all the time, I just asked the saw maker to make me a ryoba that was suitable for joinery cuts in 4/4 stock in North American hardwoods. So that's what he sent me. Here's my saw doing a crosscut in white oak:

http://lh5.ggpht.com/_a3R4RhWn1Is/S0FlU0Kc4YI/AAAAAAAAA3Y/6uwlXwmtyNY/s800/IMG_3394.JPG

Reshaping saw teeth for the species of wood that was being worked on was historically done for western saws as well. Although the saw tooth shape is somewhat different, the principles are the same.

[george wilson]

I said It SEEMS.Apparently you agree since you got a saw with different teeth.:)

[David Gendron]

I think the same thing is done with our western tools, different bevel angle for different wood, different ppi for different task on diferent wood, what aboput the different slope, fleam and rake on saws!?! Don't try to chop white oak or sugar maple or even yellow birch with a 25* bevel on your chisel, it wont last long! The same same chisel will do in white pine no problem! I have some Stanley 720 chisel that I change the bevel to 25* for paring, and threy break down realy fast in every wood harder than pine, does that meen they were not made for hard wood?

[george wilson]

I am talking about saws,David. Anyone knows to regrind chisels. Those long,skinny saw teeth look very fragile. Pan apparently agrees. I don't want to have to buy duplicate saws to do hardwood. Too little space left already from being an old tool pig!!

[Wilbur Pan]

These are the teeth of a Japanese saw that I was able to cut a piece of ipe with.

http://lh3.ggpht.com/_a3R4RhWn1Is/SZOhyZBO_VI/AAAAAAAAAaU/oHOIXyWm_Wo/s400/IMG_8028.JPG

And here are the teeth of the ryoba that I previously showed cutting the white oak board.

http://lh5.ggpht.com/_a3R4RhWn1Is/S6A_VX3X4yI/AAAAAAAABAQ/6Nqk9pumFdI/s400/Heiji%20crosscut%20teeth%20closeup.jpg

They are still taller and skinnier than what is seen in western saws.

Wilson, you did not specify chisels or saws in your original statement about Japanese tools. And David did mention saws in his post.

[Rob Fisher]

These are the teeth of a Japanese saw that I was able to cut a piece of ipe with.

http://lh3.ggpht.com/_a3R4RhWn1Is/SZOhyZBO_VI/AAAAAAAAAaU/oHOIXyWm_Wo/s400/IMG_8028.JPG



Wilbur that is and interesting tooth pattern with the varying gullet depths. Any insight on why?

Rob

[Steve knight]

comparing a shaving razor to a really sharp woodworking tool under a microscope will show you that razor is dull as hell. just like a kitchen knife to cut meat you don't want it too sharp or it takes more effort to cut.
my japanese tools will shave hair like no tomorrow. but they will also take off a layer of skin and cause irritation. a kitchen knife sharpened to say 1000 grit will cut meat with less effort then one sharpened to 8000 grit.

[David Gendron]

George, you should read slower or read all the post! I talked about saws also!!

[David Gendron]

Now we are talking Steve!!

[Pam Niedermayer]

Pam,I wondered when you would join in. It was you,I think,who stated that the Japanese tools were designed primarily for soft woods. Since I don't use them,I bow to your knowledge of them. Any comment?

You'll have to find me the quote where I said Japanese tools were designed for soft woods, because right now I can't imagine having said that. It's not what I think, generally.

As to my coming into the conversation, this isn't the first time I've had it; and the only reason I pitched in was because I thought Wilbur's conditions for a chemical reaction would perhaps be met. Probably not, but I gave it my best. :)

As to sharpening, I much prefer the edges I get with natural stones (even though I don't have much of a budget for them), and I prefer the natural stones sharpening process itself. Why? Because the process feels right and the resulting edges feel right. One of these days perhaps I'll be able to qualify that statement, but not today.

Pam

[george wilson]

Pretty sure it was you,Pam,but not important to try to search for it.

[Tim Put]

But I do have personal experience with this in relation to the nodular iron material that L-N makes their planes out of. I flattened the sole of a 60-1/2 block plane on both a coarse diamond plate and 800 grit silicon oxide wet-dry paper. The surface left after the diamond plate is silver colored and shiny, though scratches were visible to the naked eye. After the SiC paper, the surface was rendered very, very smooth (no visible scratches), but an overall matte gray color. I've reproduced this effect on older chisels and plane blades (generally "cast steel") - some of them come off of the Norton and King 8000 grit waterstones a dull matte gray color, though you can still see yourself in the reflection. However, these same tools produced a shiny-bright surface from a Shapton fine grit stone (I think it was a 6000 grit, but not positive).

I lap on a Kanaban (very coarse lapping gets the surface plate and sandpaper). When lapping with diamond paste or with SiC and water I get a shiny surface, when lapping with SiC and oil I get a matte grey finish.

[Wilbur Pan]

Wilbur that is and interesting tooth pattern with the varying gullet depths. Any insight on why?

Rob

I'm not sure why this saw has this particular pattern. I've never seen this pattern in any other saw, Japanese or otherwise. It's called the Multi Window saw (that's a really wacky name), and is available at www.japanesetools.com (http://www.japanesetools.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=59_66&zenid=3d9ee329cbf2bebcca357fd028500652). I have the 270mm version, and it comes in a 240mm size as well. It is a kick ass general purpose saw. I've done everything with this saw from crosscutting 4x4's, making rip cuts in 8/4 material, and it cuts well in 4x4 material and plywood as well.

The only thing that I can think of as far as the tooth pattern goes is that it's designed to handle a wide variety of materials. It could be that the short teeth allows this saw to cut in harder woods, and the large gullets gives the sawdust a place to go if you are cutting softer woods, which tend to generate more and larger sawdust particles.

[Wilbur Pan]

Pretty sure it was you,Pam,but not important to try to search for it.

Nonetheless, the thought that you are recalling about whether Japanese tools were "designed" for softwoods is still incorrect.

[george wilson]

Why don't you stop this endless arguing? Somehow I have gotten through life,done the work I have done,and managed to do it for a living. Can you do the work I can? It took very sharp tools to do it. I don't care about your endless discussions which amount to how many angels can dance on a pin head.

Sorry if I sound arrogant. It isn't bragging if you can do it. With what I have accomplished,it is silly to keep up these endless discussions with an amateur. If your tools are sharp enough to make you happy,use them.



I get my Western tools sharp enough to do my work. There are many ways to sharpen a chisel. So what? Skill is the main component in any case,not some magical,highly overpriced stone.

[Pam Niedermayer]

Pretty sure it was you,Pam,but not important to try to search for it.

I think you'd better try and find it, it's important to me that you're still insisting that it was I; whereas I've just said I'd never say such a thing because I've never thought it. Are we running against each other for political office or something?

Pam

[george wilson]

Pam,I like you,and I regret mentioning what I THINK you said. You have done 500 posts,and the search function only gives the first several words,not the whole post,unless I'm doing it wrong. I'm new to computers.

I did not insist it was you. I just said I was pretty sure. however,I am pushing 70,and certainly can be wrong on memory. Sorry for causing you this concern. If you say you didn't say it,that should be enough.

EDIT: O.K.,Pam.I think I found what I was referring to. Wilbur pan on 1/24/07,post # 10 said to the effect that most of the work done through the ages in Japan was done in softwoods. This is not a direct quote,but close. The post is right UNDER a post by you. since I am inclined to remember you,and not Wilbur Pan,who is always in some argument about nothing,that is what I think I remembered,but wrongly associated with you. It was,after all,3 years ago. can I come out of the corner now?

Wilbur,This IS NOT an invitation for you to start another argument.

[David Gendron]

I didn't see any argument started by Wilbur in this thread, rather I saw some information past a long to other creekers!!!

[Wilbur Pan]

Why don't you stop this endless arguing? Somehow I have gotten through life,done the work I have done,and managed to do it for a living. Can you do the work I can?

No, I can't. I have no problems admitting this.

This does not change the fact that Japanese tools can, were, and are used successfully in hardwoods.

By the way, I have never called into question your abilities as a woodworker. What I am trying to do is understand and explain how Japanese tools work, and more globally, how woodworking was done in Asia. As someone who used to work at a place where studying history was important, I would hope that you can appreciate this. This is not an issue of value judgement, or whether one method is better than another. I don't understand why you keep trying to make it so. Both western and Japanese woodworking techniques are effective, and excellent results can be gotten either way.


Pam,I like you,and I regret mentioning what I THINK you said. You have done 500 posts,and the search function only gives the first several words,not the whole post,unless I'm doing it wrong. I'm new to computers.

I did not insist it was you. I just said I was pretty sure. however,I am pushing 70,and certainly can be wrong on memory. Sorry for causing you this concern. If you say you didn't say it,that should be enough.

EDIT: O.K.,Pam.I think I found what I was referring to. Wilbur pan on 1/24/07,post # 10 said to the effect that most of the work done through the ages in Japan was done in softwoods. This is not a direct quote,but close. The post is right UNDER a post by you. since I am inclined to remember you,and not Wilbur Pan,who is always in some argument about nothing,that is what I think I remembered,but wrongly associated with you. It was,after all,3 years ago. can I come out of the corner now?

Wilbur,This IS NOT an invitation for you to start another argument.

I don't know what you expect me to do if you are going to bring up my name, or something that I had posted in the past, or make personal comments like "Wilbur Pan,who is always in some argument about nothing".

If anyone is interested in the post that was quoted, it's located here (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?p=511774&), so it can be read in context. At the time I was thinking more in terms of buildings, and again that does not change the fact that Japanese tools can, were, and are used successfully in hardwoods.

[David Gendron]

George, every body here told you that you are/were a great woodworker with outstanding tallents. But please be respectful of other people knowledge and way of doing things! Some might say of my self that I'm crazy, or it shouldn't be done that way of doing every thing with out power tools, but it is my choice and I assume it! I think here, Wilbur is kind anought to pass his knowledge on japanese tools and techniques to others, that we don't need anybody to tell him it's not the way it should be! And I would love to know how many time have you work with japanese tools?
I'm here to learn stuff, and like any thing else, you take what you like and live the rest! you don't have to post comment on a thread if you don't like or if you are not interested in the subject!

[Richard Jones]

.......just like a kitchen knife to cut meat you don't want it too sharp or it takes more effort to cut......... a kitchen knife sharpened to say 1000 grit will cut meat with less effort then one sharpened to 8000 grit.

I will respectfully disagree with this. Any of my kitchen knives, all Japanese (OK, OK, there are some Forschners hidden about, maybe 1 Henckels, but they rarely see the light of day and are reserved for chopping frozen stuff and when the relatives come over and want to cut something), some stainless, some carbon, will cut meat (and anything else, for that matter) with less effort with a more refined edge. That edge is normally finished with either a 10K Naniwa or Chosera and/or a Cr02/diamond strop. IMO there's really no use in taking a Forschner to 10k. If you want to say some steels seem to cut better with some tooth, I would agree with that to a point. I'm not a chef, but I talk with a lot of them, and all advocate more than 1K to finish an edge, at least the serious ones that use J-knives. If I handed you two identical knives, one finished to 1K and the other to 8K, I guarantee you the 8K would out cut the 1K. Could I ask how you arrived at this statement?

I can't speak to the razor analogy, I shave with a Mühle R89 and Iridiums.....:cool:

To keep on thread, I cannot duplicate a smooth matte finish with anything I own nor would I want to. It goes against all that I believe to make up a great edge and for me, just defies physics.

Rich

[Pam Niedermayer]

Pam,I like you,and I regret mentioning what I THINK you said. You have done 500 posts,and the search function only gives the first several words,not the whole post,unless I'm doing it wrong. I'm new to computers.

I did not insist it was you. I just said I was pretty sure. however,I am pushing 70,and certainly can be wrong on memory. Sorry for causing you this concern. If you say you didn't say it,that should be enough.

EDIT: O.K.,Pam.I think I found what I was referring to. Wilbur pan on 1/24/07,post # 10 said to the effect that most of the work done through the ages in Japan was done in softwoods. This is not a direct quote,but close. The post is right UNDER a post by you. since I am inclined to remember you,and not Wilbur Pan,who is always in some argument about nothing,that is what I think I remembered,but wrongly associated with you. It was,after all,3 years ago. can I come out of the corner now?

Wilbur,This IS NOT an invitation for you to start another argument.

OK, George, I like you and have a lot of respect for your skills and results; so here's an exact copy of my post:

Pam Niedermayer

Quote:
Originally Posted by harry strasil
...
The Japanese Wood Workers have very elaborate Joints which are extremely strong but they get overly complicated just for the sake of the Visual Beauty of the joint and to show off their Skill at Woodworking.
...
Nice joint, Harry, but I have to disagree about Japanese woodworkers. The ones I know are incredibly modest and never show joinery if they can avoid it. They do their best to hide it. For example, you never see them expose dovetails, they're all hidden.

Clearly I was saying nothing, absolutely nothing, about soft/hard woods. So let's lay this to rest. In the following post Wilbur did say most Japanese woodworking through history was done with softwoods, and I'd expect him to know that; but I don't. And I use Japanese tools with soft and hard woods with no ill effect. I did have broken tooth problems with the very first two Japanese saws I used, but that was due to bad technique as I was learning, and in fact one of those problems occurred while sawing pine.

I don't find Wilbur argumentative over small issues. Granted, we technical types (Wilbur's a doctor, I was a software developer in a previous life) are often accused of being argumentative, but I see this trait as simply wanting to discuss issues in depth with precision. I do enjoy the mental gyrations of a good argument, but this is difficult to carry off in an online forum; so I've been beaten down into submission. In short, you won't see my best work online in woodworking groups. :)

Pam

[george wilson]

David,I am just tired out with Wilbur keeping on forever and ever abut something that is of little importance. Shiny edge vs. matte edge. GET SOME WORK DONE. He did not need to again bring up the same issue about softwoods. I have already said that I THOUGHT she said it. It's been 3 years,after all,and my old head can't keep every little shred of every posting in it. Can yours?

No,he's just GOT to keep on attacking. Frankly,I don't think he's been too polite.

I didn't join this forum to debate endlessly about how to sharpen a chisel. I know how to sharpen mine. What works for you guys is fine. Bury it,O.K.?

When I was a dirt poor kid,I had a fifty cent chisel.The kind stamped out of flat steel,bolster and all. I had an old,gray hardware store stone. I sharpened the chisel on that stone,and spent a LONG time stropping it on a piece of plain paper. I got it sharp enough to shave by sheer tenacity. That worked for me at that time.

I'm not going to keep this argument up. It isn't even an argument. I just don't care how he sharpens his tools.

I do encourage him to learn how to make a proper chisel rack,though. That method of laying his chisels horizontally between 2 short dowels is an accident waiting to happen to one of his fine matte edges.

[Mark Bergman]

George -

Perhaps since you "didn't join this forum to debate endlessly about how to sharpen a chisel", it might be useful for us all for you to explain why you did join this forum, as well as provide a list of topics that you deem worthy of discussion so that we won't be wasting our time, and more importantly, your time, in the future.

[dan sherman]

David,I am just tired out with Wilbur keeping on forever and ever abut something that is of little importance. Shiny edge vs. matte edge. GET SOME WORK DONE.
In your opinion it's of little importance, maybe jut maybe other people see it differently.



I didn't join this forum to debate endlessly about how to sharpen a chisel. I know how to sharpen mine. What works for you guys is fine. Bury it,O.K.?

Who are you to decide what should or should not be discussed?




I do encourage him to learn how to make a proper chisel rack,though. That method of laying his chisels horizontally between 2 short dowels is an accident waiting to happen to one of his fine matte edges.
Again this is your opinion.

[Steve Dallas]

Why don't you stop this endless arguing? Somehow I have gotten through life,done the work I have done,and managed to do it for a living. Can you do the work I can? It took very sharp tools to do it. I don't care about your endless discussions which amount to how many angels can dance on a pin head.

Sorry if I sound arrogant. It isn't bragging if you can do it. With what I have accomplished,it is silly to keep up these endless discussions with an amateur. If your tools are sharp enough to make you happy,use them.



I get my Western tools sharp enough to do my work. There are many ways to sharpen a chisel. So what? Skill is the main component in any case,not some magical,highly overpriced stone.

Amen to that. I wish all it took was a sharp edge to do fine work. Unfortunately, talent, skill, perseverance and just plain wanting to do woodworking, not perpetually setting up shop, must take over.

[george wilson]

No,laying a chisel among others between 2 short pegs is very apt to cause the chisel to fall when it is reached for without due care. That isn't wise. Not just my opinion.

It is my opinion that I don't care for Japanese tools. Nor do I care to eat rice and raw fish,or to sit on the floor,holding the work between my toes. I certainly cannot even think about pulling a plane with the back trouble I have. If you prefer to do these things it's your prerogative.

[jerry nazard]

David,I am just tired out with Wilbur keeping on forever and ever abut something that is of little importance. Shiny edge vs. matte edge. GET SOME WORK DONE. He did not need to again bring up the same issue about softwoods. I have already said that I THOUGHT she said it. It's been 3 years,after all,and my old head can't keep every little shred of every posting in it. Can yours?

No,he's just GOT to keep on attacking. Frankly,I don't think he's been too polite.

I didn't join this forum to debate endlessly about how to sharpen a chisel. I know how to sharpen mine. What works for you guys is fine. Bury it,O.K.?

When I was a dirt poor kid,I had a fifty cent chisel.The kind stamped out of flat steel,bolster and all. I had an old,gray hardware store stone. I sharpened the chisel on that stone,and spent a LONG time stropping it on a piece of plain paper. I got it sharp enough to shave by sheer tenacity. That worked for me at that time.

I'm not going to keep this argument up. It isn't even an argument. I just don't care how he sharpens his tools.

I do encourage him to learn how to make a proper chisel rack,though. That method of laying his chisels horizontally between 2 short dowels is an accident waiting to happen to one of his fine matte edges.

George,

Take a deep breath and just relax. We are not here to argue: if you want that, there is a forum out there where people are knotty and not nice. :rolleyes: Let's just take a break and go sharpen our chisels.

Best to you!

-Jerry

[Steve Dallas]

No,laying a chisel among others between 2 short pegs is very apt to cause the chisel to fall when it is reached for without due care. That isn't wise. Not just my opinion.

It is my opinion that I don't care for Japanese tools. Nor do I care to eat rice and raw fish,or to sit on the floor,holding the work between my toes. I certainly cannot even think about pulling a plane with the back trouble I have. If you prefer to do these things it's your prerogative.

Agree again. If I had to work on my knees, sitting on my patookas, or practically doubled over holding work on low benches with my feet or knees in order to pull saws or planes my woodworking 'career,' as it were, would already be over. I'm six feet five inches tall. I couldn't use Japanese tools, in the manner they are designed and meant to be used, if my life depended on it.

[george wilson]

I WAS 6' 5",but now I'm 6' 3" from deterioration.

Maybe If we did it from an early age! I never could sit on the floor in the"lotus" position!!

Steve,you hit upon something very true: perpetually setting up shop. Wanting to work,but playing at it forever. Being obsessed with the romance of working. It's a real condition and in full bloom.

[Steve Dallas]

I WAS 6' 5",but now I'm 6' 3" from deterioration.

Maybe If we did it from an early age! I never could sit on the floor in the"lotus" position!!

Steve,you hit upon something very true: perpetually setting up shop. Wanting to work,but playing at it forever. Being obsessed with the romance of working. It's a real condition and in full bloom.

I'm proud of our Western woodworking tradition and thrilled beyond description that it requires precious little bending and stooping while doing the actual work.

Here's a sampling of items from the English tradition: http://www.sothebys.com/app/live/dept/DepartmentGlobal.jsp?dept_id=8

Watch the Tom Devinish video.

Otherwise, I think people want to co-opt the Asian mystique and reverence for tools but they are leaving out a key ingredient and notion - Japanese temple carpenters and bench woodworkers can walk the walk too. Their tolerance is probably even lower for poseurs and dilly-dallyers than that exhibited by accomplished Western woodworkers who have more of a live and let live approach to things. Talking and droning on about tools without being able to actually do much of anything with them is a blasphemous sacrilege to skilled Asian artisans.

[Wilbur Pan]

David,I am just tired out with Wilbur keeping on forever and ever abut something that is of little importance. Shiny edge vs. matte edge. GET SOME WORK DONE. He did not need to again bring up the same issue about softwoods.

I do encourage him to learn how to make a proper chisel rack,though. That method of laying his chisels horizontally between 2 short dowels is an accident waiting to happen to one of his fine matte edges.

Thanks for the concern. Those dowels are actually angled up about 5 degrees, so they make a nice crook for the chisel to rest in, and is more secure than it may seem at first glance. I made this rack since it seemed to be the historically accurate thing to do, based on a picture that I had seen in Toshio Odate's book on Japanese tools, and has been working well so far.


Steve,you hit upon something very true: perpetually setting up shop. Wanting to work,but playing at it forever. Being obsessed with the romance of working. It's a real condition and in full bloom.

Again, I don't know why you keep up with the personal comments.

By the way, it was you who brought up the issue with softwoods in this thread, which is why I addressed it:


A lot of sharpening is skill. You should strop in different directions to keep smooth mountains from building up. Technique MUST be considered,not just what you use to get a tool sharp. It also depends upon what wood you are working. Aren't Japanese tools designed primarily for soft wood use? I never liked Japanese type tools,so never use them.

[Matt Benton]

George,

Bragging and arrogance are just that, regardless of talent or ability. It's all about attitude...

I'm sure you'd easily be voted most talented participant here (you'd definitely have my vote). Can't that be enough?

[Steve Dallas]

George,

Bragging and arrogance are just that, regardless of talent or ability. It's all about attitude...

I'm sure you'd easily be voted most talented participant here (you'd definitely have my vote). Can't that be enough?

You should consider reading an old article by Toshio Odate in Fine Woodworking (black and white era) in which he recounts having a tool he'd bought confiscated by his "master" and never returned because he was not skilled enough to own such a fine tool. Arrogant? Nope. The master was keeping the apprentice from totally embarrassing himself - from committing a cultural faux pas at the least. Odate acknowledges in the article that the master had done the right thing. George, by saying in effect, 'hush already, you guys couldn't chisel your way out of a wet paper bag' is trying to do the same thing. People discussing the absolute minutest of minutiae who most likely are unable to wield the instrument being discussed with enough skill to make their opinion even matter in the real world of actual, as opposed to virtual, woodworking.

George's comments are not haughty in the least and since this thread is more than tangentially about Asian tools and methods of work the Toshio Odate story is applicable and instructive.

People invoke the Japanese craft tradition apparently when it suits them. Well, there's a pecking order in that tradition. As well there should be.

Listen to George.

[Matt Benton]

I don't live in Japan, and am neither a master or apprentice. I'm just another guy giving and receiving (mostly the latter) information on a web forum.

My comment had more to do with a personal pet peeve and less about the topic at hand, and for that I apologize...

fyi, I hold George's opinions in the highest regard.

[dan sherman]

How is it, this thread got contorted into a discussion on east vs. west?

I think the original post was pretty clear, let me paraphrase:
A mirror polish does not necessarily indicate a flat/sharp edge.

[Steve Dallas]

"It's not bragging if you can back it up."

---Dizzy Dean

George can back it up.

[Steve Dallas]

How is it, this thread got contorted into a discussion on east vs. west?

I think the original post was pretty clear, let me paraphrase:
A mirror polish does not necessarily indicate a flat/sharp edge.

Nope, it sure doesn't. Sandpaper dubs edges but produces the most spectacular of mirrored bevels and backs.

[Matt Benton]

So arrogance can only exist in the absence of talent? I call that lying...


I don't have anything as esteemed as Dizzy Dean, but I'll give it a shot...


"The sufficiency of my merit is to know that my merit is not sufficient."
— St. Augustine


"Humility is the solid foundation of all the virtues."
— Confucious

[george wilson]

Look,I know I am coming off badly. I just got enough of the niggling from Pan. Any of you ever get that way? If you never did,good for you.

Steve,I appreciate your support.

Jerry,your advice is good.

Matt,thank you for your kind comment.

I am sure that somehow Wilbur will chime in again to somehow still try to assert his point. I'd like to drop it.

[Steve Dallas]

So arrogance can only exist in the absence of talent? I call that lying...


I don't have anything as esteemed as Dizzy Dean, but I'll give it a shot...


"The sufficiency of my merit is to know that my merit is not sufficient."
— St. Augustine


"Humility is the solid foundation of all the virtues."
— Confucious


St. Augustine was discussing eternal salvation and not trying to teach a craft to unruly, unappreciative, and worst of all unknowledgeable, apprentices.

[george wilson]

I was fortunate to study 3 years with William Reimann,one of the very best sculptors in the World. He is now retired head of the Art Dept. at Harvard.

I was no slouch at the time,in my sophomore year at Old Dominion when I met him. He treated me like I was an idiot! It was hard to take at first. I can tell you,he was very stern with me,and properly kicked my rear when I did something he didn't think was good. He was arrogant as anyone I ever met. I knew he was a genious,though. I decided he warranted his behavior. He could draw like DaVinci. He taught me how to deal with surfaces,and how to design.

I buckled down and took his criticism and leadership. I soaked up as much as I could. I'm sure that most guys would have walked away from him,but I knew I had a very unique opportunity handed to me by accident,and I spent every extra bit of time I could with him.It was worse than boot camp,but I loved every minute I was with him. It really got me on the right path for the remainder of my life.

Only when teaching at Penland Craft School for 2 Summers was I able to get a few apprentices for myself who valued what I had to teach in the way I valued my master. I must have trained about 25 people during my time in Williamsburg. VERY few were as good apprentices as those I had at Penland.

One of my greatest wishes now that I'm retired,is to get a good,young apprentice. Such an apprentice really helps keep you young and raring to go. My wife has several young people working for her in our jewelry business. They give her a great boost in energy and help keep her enthusiasm going.

[Dave Anderson NH]

As you might have noticed, this thread is currently locked. I haven't had the time to keep up with it in the last day or so and as such didn't lock it myself. I do concur with the other moderator who locked it.

The thread was getting off topic and people are starting to get less polite and less tolerant of each others viewpoints.

I am going to try an experiment here. This thread will remain locked for 2 days for people to cool off. At that point I would hope that things have calmed down and we can get back to a normal, polite, and reasonable discourse. If that doesn't work, the thread will get locked permanently and severe editing will be done.

There is a lot of good information here and I don't want to have it lost so let's try to keep our egos in check.

[Dave Anderson NH]

I have unlocked this thread. Please show consideration of otherpeople's viewpoints and maintain a polite discourse without personal attacks.

Thank you.

Dave

[Eric Hartunian]

Dave, Thanks for unlocking the thread.
I'd like to make a comment here. This is a forum about hand tools and hand tool techniques. We are all here, I presume, to learn from each other. It isn't just about getting work done. Most of us are hobby-types, and do this for fun, so the nuances of shinny vs matte or whatever seemingly academic topic are important as they teach us a greater understanding of the tools we use.
We won't learn anything if we don't question and try new things.

[Wilbur Pan]

I have unlocked this thread. Please show consideration of otherpeople's viewpoints and maintain a polite discourse without personal attacks.

Thank you.

Dave

Hi Dave,

Thanks for putting this thread back in play.

[Brian Ashton]

comparing a shaving razor to a really sharp woodworking tool under a microscope will show you that razor is dull as hell. just like a kitchen knife to cut meat you don't want it too sharp or it takes more effort to cut.
my japanese tools will shave hair like no tomorrow. but they will also take off a layer of skin and cause irritation. a kitchen knife sharpened to say 1000 grit will cut meat with less effort then one sharpened to 8000 grit.

That has more to do with the microscopic serrations on the edge of the blade. Those "teeth" are very sharp and cut tissue extremely well; but they don't last long when hitting something hard, like bone

[Brian Ashton]

Hmmm this article states the opposite of what you are saying Brian and that an edge created by a natural sharpening stone in fact stays sharper longer. It also talks about the matte finish left by japanese natural stones as opposed to the shiny finish left by man made synthetic stones. It is written by Alex Gilmore, who is an extremely knowledgeable vendor and user of japanese natural stones. He analyzes the edges produced using natural and man made sharpening mediums. If you browse through the site, you can find pictures of scratch patterns created by natural stones estimated at 40000+ grit and compares that to a shapton 30000 grit stone. It's an interesting read, anyone care to comment?

http://thejapanblade.com/sharpvsshiny.htm

Kinda jumping back into this a bit late but... When you get to those sorts of levels of grit sizes, 30000 and 40000, the line gets quite blurred. But if you pull back a bit to the sorts of grit sizes used by 99% of the woodworkers i.e. 6000 and a few at 8000 it does make a noticeable difference - at least it does to me... When I sharpen a carving chisel to what I think is a sharp edge it almost feels like it pulls itself through the wood it's so sharp. But when I only go to 6000 it feels dull and the edge just doesn't last as long.

An extreme example is wood turning. I used to do production hand turning. The sorts of time frames I was dealing with were turning a post cap in less than 4 minutes from the time it was put on the lathe till I put it in the box finished. If I took a tool straight from a regular grinder to the work I could expect to get maybe 7 or 8 post caps out of it before I had to resharpen - that's if the wood was knot free... If I took the same tool and buffed it to a nice sharp edge I could get over 10 post caps out of it and a few small knots before I rebuffed the edge. And the work was far less effortless as a result.

[Brian Ashton]

As far as how durable the edges are in use, my experience is that if I finish sharpening with a natural Japanese waterstone, the edge seems to last a little while longer, although the difference isn't huge. In any case, edge durability certainly isn't an advantage for a shiny edge -- at best it's a draw.

In this picture from Ron Hock's blog post, the photo on the left is a tool sharpened with a natural waterstone. It certainly seems more regular than the one on the right, which was sharpened with a man made waterstone.

http://hocktools.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/500x2-up.jpg

I guess I see the opposite. Lots of little teeth just waiting to break off...

[Brian Ashton]

There's another way you can tell if the blade is sharp or not. How long you bleed for. The cleaner the cut the longer you'll bleed. Try it sometime! on the neighbors brat of a kid...

[Pam Niedermayer]

... If I took the same tool and buffed it to a nice sharp edge I could get over 10 post caps out of it and a few small knots before I rebuffed the edge. And the work was far less effortless as a result.

You do know that "far less effortless" translates as "more effortfull?" :)

Pam

[Leigh Betsch]

You do know that "far less effortless" translates as "more effortfull?" :)

Pam

Finally something more senseablefull!;)

[Richard Jones]

This is really confusing. Someone sez: Synthetic stones make mirror finish. Natural stones make matte finish. Then, Lee Valley sez:



Natural Japanese Water Stone
........Natural finishing water stones have a unique softness to the abrasive action that is not easily replicated in man-made stones. Composed mostly of quartz and sericite, the particles are held within a soft bond that resembles a flaky pastry when viewed under an electron microscope...... the structure of the natural water stone permits worn particles to release in use, ensuring a consistently abrasive surface. Even though it cuts quite quickly, it produces a mirror finish because of particle fineness. (emphasis mine) end quote. I deleted some pics and text, but not the intent or relevancy of the report.

A recent review on another forum of a Woodcraft natural stone (claimed 12K) indicates a mirror polish: "....the edges are probably equal to those I get from my strop." Japanese knives that I've seen sharpened with natural stones (perhaps up to 15K) produce a mirror finish. You can see why this is a consternativious subject.............. :D

Rich

[Wilbur Pan]

There is variation among natural Japanese waterstones. Some will leave a mirror finish. Others will leave a matte finish. There's a seller of natural Japanese waterstones on eBay who has his own rating system that descibes which end of the spectrum that particular stone will fall on, and there are some other dealers of natural Japanese waterstones who can tell you the same thing directly.

The natural Japanese waterstones that I have do cover this range. There seems to be a slight correlation between how hard the stone is and which finish the stone leaves. The harder stones seem to leave a more mirror finish, and the softer stones seem to leave a more matte finish, but this is a weak correlation at best.

Whichever waterstone I use, the sharpness of the tool does not really seem to be affected by the final appearance. In Japan, the ones that leave a matte finish seem to be more in demand, but at the end of the day I think that is more an aesthetic issue than an issue of one waterstone leaving a sharper edge than another.

[Steve Dallas]

There is variation among natural Japanese waterstones. Some will leave a mirror finish. Others will leave a matte finish. There's a seller of natural Japanese waterstones on eBay who has his own rating system that descibes which end of the spectrum that particular stone will fall on, and there are some other dealers of natural Japanese waterstones who can tell you the same thing directly.

The natural Japanese waterstones that I have do cover this range. There seems to be a slight correlation between how hard the stone is and which finish the stone leaves. The harder stones seem to leave a more mirror finish, and the softer stones seem to leave a more matte finish, but this is a weak correlation at best.

Whichever waterstone I use, the sharpness of the tool does not really seem to be affected by the final appearance. In Japan, the ones that leave a matte finish seem to be more in demand, but at the end of the day I think that is more an aesthetic issue than an issue of one waterstone leaving a sharper edge than another.

Your original post said sharpness was not affected by polish/no polish. Your latest post reiterates that point.

You know what? I believe you.

This is not meant to cause an argument as much as it is to end one. "I believe you" is a powerful statement. And I do. I think you're smart enough to know and you are well equipped enough and skilled enough to draw a conclusion that others can rely upon.

If I personally ever run into this 'issue' (really a non-issue thanks to the information and observations you've provided) I'll simply proceed with honing and enjoy the rest of my woodworking day. This seems to be the most logical course of action to take. I'm trusting your judgment that there is no need for me to be concerned about a matte finish left by an otherwise high grit waterstone.

Cheers.

[Bob Strawn]

It is easily possible that the misty appearance is caused by chemistry, but my own suspicion would be that the chemistry that causes the mist is the lack of chemistry. Diamond grits always seem to make a haze for me. Fixed, in water or in oil. Diamond apart from its pizeo effects, I would expect to be as chemically neutral as you are likely to get.

My suspicion is that grits that wear down to flat scraping surfaces, rather than remaining pointy will make for a more reflective surface. Steel can be pushed around quite a bit on the micro scale, and the flat surfaces on grit, may be pushing/scraping and filling in scratches.

I have noticed that when using a hazy polish burrs are much easier to clean up. Burr removal is the last and most likely opportunity for a good edge to be ruined.

While I do not consider my mirror edges duller than my misty edges, I consider the process of getting a misty surface, more consistently makes a perfect edge. I probably have to tweak a 2.5" mirror edge a few extra times to get it consistently sharp along the entire edge as compared to a misty edge.

Bob

[Jon van der Linden]

Japanese blades, especially swords, are made up of steels of varying hardness. In a sword there is a wavy line along the length of the blade that is very important to the aesthetics of the blade. A true mirror polish would hide this. Similar variation can be seen in chisels and plane blades. This is why the softer matrices of the natural stones are more desirable.

There are stones with high grit numbers that won't give a mirror polish, but grit being equal, the mirror polish is a flatter. There were some mentions in this thread referring to Ron Hock's blog and the final result there was "The Shapton’s grit grains are better anchored in the stone surface which allows them to shear a straight groove in the steel, carbides and all, thus creating the flatter surface." The full blog post is here:

http://hocktools.wordpress.com/2010/02/15/matte-surface-mystery-part-2/

[David Keller NC]

There are stones with high grit numbers that won't give a mirror polish, but grit being equal, the mirror polish is a flatter.

Jon - This point was addressed a while back. Mirror polish doesn't equal flat topology, on either the micro or macro scale. While it's true that a relatively scratch-free surface (or a uniform layer of very small scratches) is a necessary pre-condition for a mirror polish, that doesn't mean that a hazy, silvery-gray or matte surface is rougher than a mirrored surface. There is simply too much variation in the chemistry of steel alloys and stone binders/grits.

The only thing one might be able to infer is the obvious - that taking the same tool from one stone to a finer stone in a series of identical stone chemistries will produce a more uniform micro topography to the surface.

[Jon van der Linden]

Jon - This point was addressed a while back. Mirror polish doesn't equal flat topology, on either the micro or macro scale. While it's true that a relatively scratch-free surface (or a uniform layer of very small scratches) is a necessary pre-condition for a mirror polish, that doesn't mean that a hazy, silvery-gray or matte surface is rougher than a mirrored surface. There is simply too much variation in the chemistry of steel alloys and stone binders/grits.

The only thing one might be able to infer is the obvious - that taking the same tool from one stone to a finer stone in a series of identical stone chemistries will produce a more uniform micro topography to the surface.


While there may be chemical action, I suspect that it's primarily mechanical. Try laying the blade down on the stone, come back in an hour and see how far that goes towards changing the finish.

Unless I missed something, the metallurgist Ron Hock consulted explained the matte finish entirely by mechanical action.

I don't understand why you disagree with the results I quoted or why you think that my statement regarding equal grits is false. Perhaps you can explain it in a way I can understand.

[John Kali]

I'm no expert at sharpening tools, but the picture on the right was magnified 495x, the one on the left is magnified a bit less at 467x. I think this could play tricks on the mind, because had they magnified the picture on the left at 495x it may very well have looked exactly the same as the one on the right.

[Christian Castillo]

One can always look to the industry that has had access to both high quality natural and synthetic stones for the longest time and see what they use. I am talking about the Japanese carpentry and woodworking trades and from what I've read, they only use synthetic stones up to around 2000 grit. From there on, they use natural stones. Now this could be due to some type of tradition or reverence for the past, but time is money and these people are professionals, so I assume they are going for a sharper blade,a longer lasting edge, or what just plain gives the best result. Having dug around the net, here is a quote from So Yamashita (www.japan-tool.com (http://www.japan-tool.com)),


"Using natural stones will enable you to plane thinner (more sheen on the surface of the wood) and at the same time it will make the edge last longer. This has a good reason. The sharpening particles of the synthetic stones are even in their sizes, whereas the natural one's are not. Therefore blade sharpened by synthetic stone will have even height of serrated teeth, so once those teeth gets dull it stops cutting altogether, but... when the height is different... I think you see my point. It's like the shark's teeth. They don't break all at once.


Also, the natural stone sharpening has a hardening effect on the tip of the blade. This has been proven scientifically by the HRC testing machine, experiment done by renowned plane blacksmith Usui Kengo. The hardness was actually harder after being polished by a fine Nakayama stone. So you see, it's not just about the sharpness you are getting from natural stones. Once you use natural stones, it will be unthinkable not to finish with them."

This observation has also been observed by Alex Gilmore (www.thejapanblade.com (http://www.thejapanblade.com)) and explained in his article, "Sharp vs Shiny":

http://www.thejapanblade.com/sharpvsshiny.htm

I must say that this is a very interesting subject, and I believe that either medium will give the user an edge sharp enough that the quality of his work will be dependent entirely on his/her skill. Natural or synthetic, when you are literally splitting hairs... anything after that is just splitting hairs.

[dan sherman]

I don't understand why you disagree with the results I quoted or why you think that my statement regarding equal grits is false. Perhaps you can explain it in a way I can understand.

I think what David disagrees with, and I do as well, is this statement.


but grit being equal, the mirror polish is a flatter

A high polish does not mean the surface is flat.

[Jon van der Linden]

)


"Using natural stones will enable you to plane thinner (more sheen on the surface of the wood) and at the same time it will make the edge last longer. This has a good reason. The sharpening particles of the synthetic stones are even in their sizes, whereas the natural one's are not. Therefore blade sharpened by synthetic stone will have even height of serrated teeth, so once those teeth gets dull it stops cutting altogether, but... when the height is different... I think you see my point. It's like the shark's teeth. They don't break all at once.


Also, the natural stone sharpening has a hardening effect on the tip of the blade. This has been proven scientifically by the HRC testing machine, experiment done by renowned plane blacksmith Usui Kengo. The hardness was actually harder after being polished by a fine Nakayama stone. So you see, it's not just about the sharpness you are getting from natural stones. Once you use natural stones, it will be unthinkable not to finish with them."



In Japan most blades use at least 2 or 3 types of steel. Showing the blacksmith's art can only be done with a matte finish, a true polish will hide these different steels and make them look uniform. With a Japanese sword there are even different degrees of polish for different parts.

As for the often cited HRC test, polishing steel (as in any sharpening process) will harden it. I've never seen the actual test report, but if there's no comparison to a range of stones, then it's already suspect. It's also extremely difficult to accurately test the edge of a blade, these machines are designed for testing flat surfaces. Hardness is also something that can be built into the blade to start with.

When it's said that natural stones leave a longer lasting edge, I'd be very curious to test that with Western blades, O1, A2, S53... I suspect that if you want long lasting edges there are many other solutions than a $1500-$2000 finishing stone + a small armada of others to get there....

[Christian Castillo]

I too would like to see testing done on western steels. Off topic, one can find natural stones priced reasonably compared to synthetic solutions. They just wont be as aesthetically pleasing, of equivalent size as a pricier stone or mined from a renowned location.

[Christian Castillo]

I can't help but feel that this thread is shifting towards a discussion on the optimum sharpening solution. This thread is about the effectiveness of a matte finished edge so I will just leave it at that. I do, however, feel that a discussion on natural vs synthetic stones would be worthy of it's own thread and highly interesting. Various steels could be tested and sharpened on synthetic and natural stones and then used in a hand plane. Wear could then be observed after so many passes. This would be a great experiment. Hopefully Brent Beach is reading this.

[David Gendron]

I think we have people that are just not in favor of japanese tools and techniques and they try to make there points.... and people that try to show other tools and techniques, than the western(British/American) one we all know and are used to, and it seem to offend some of the non Japanese tool users! I think here the only thing that the OP was doing, is sharing some valuable informations on other tools/techniques/results of a different culture!
In my case, when a thread dosn't interest me, I don't chime in! When it does, I do and I try to do it in respect of the OP and others who have posted!

[Christian Castillo]

One cannot even say that this is about japanese tools and techniques as sharpening mediums most likely exist all over the world that can create matte finishes ( Arkansas Stones, Belgian Coticules, silicon carbide on lapping plates). However, what you have described David has happened. Had the OP began this conversation with a hazy finish created by a European natural sharpening stone, would this have happened? I view the information presented here as universal. This is about steel and sharpening, and thus is valuable to all woodworkers.

[David Keller NC]

I think what David disagrees with, and I do as well, is this statement.


A high polish does not mean the surface is flat.

Indeed, though I'd put a subtler nuance on it. The reflectivity of a surface is influenced by a great deal more than topology - so much so that no valid conclusions can be drawn about the surface roughness, even among similar, but slightly different, materials - such as different alloy steels, and even the same alloy but from different batches.

There are, however, several measures of surface roughness that are routinely measured with relatively simple equipment that would make an interesting study, though this equipment is probably beyond the typical woodworker's (and mine's!) budget.

Regarding the differences between natural japanese waterstones and synthetic stones and their effect on different steels, Toshio Odate has a fair number of electron micrographs of these combinations, and a good discussion/interpretation of the results in his book "Japanese Woodworking Tools".

[Dave Anderson NH]

As a point of reference and related to Dave Keller's remark. Industrially, surface finishes are measured in micro inches. A scale exists and sample kits are available with samples from 256 down to 2 micro inches. The low numbers are the finer ones. Without a kit available now I'm going to give the example of the Marples Blue Chip chisels. The surface finish from the factory is about halfways between 16 and 32 microinches. Normally the incoming inspection department at a company will do a visual inspection of incoming machined parts using the sample kit and accept or reject on that basis. For critical applications, the sample of the part and the reference sample will be placed side by side on a binocular microscope. The symbol used on mechanical drawings is the finish number placed beneath a square root symbol.

[Mark Roderick]

After all this, now I feel bad that the edges on my planes and chisels are always shiny after sharpening!

[george wilson]

I can't see why guys keep saying that mirror finishes aren't flat. Of course they aren't necessarily flat. The question is : IS the mirror edge SMOOTHER and therefore sharper?

[dan sherman]

I can't see why guys keep saying that mirror finishes aren't flat. Of course they aren't necessarily flat. The question is : IS the mirror edge SMOOTHER and therefore sharper?

I think the disconnect lies with the fact, that far to many resources imply that a mirror polish means flat and sharp.

take these pages for example.
http://www.traditionalwoodworker.com/product_info.php/cPath/34_501/products_id/3526

This King Brand Deluxe "S-2" Polishing Stone will quickly produce a mirror polish and a razor sharp edge. The last stone to use for most sharpening jobs. Comes mounted on a plastic base. Use with water to prevent filings from clogging up the stone. Made in Japan. http://www.cornerhardware.com/how_to_articles/how_to_sharpen_chisels_and_plane/05

A combination stone coarse grit on one side, fine grit on the other will give you a decent edge. But for the very best edge, you'll also want to buy a "hard Arkansas" finishing stone. This very fine, hard stone gives a mirror polish and produces a sharper, longer-lasting edge. A newbies reads stuff like this, and wrongly assumes that a mirror polish means the edge is sharp (I know I did). Please remember, most of us are self taught, we don't have the luxury of a mentor to slap us along side the head every time we make a stupid assumption.

[george wilson]

It ,the mirror,has served me well. As has been said,technique has something to do with any success. Especially sharpening.

The very first thing I did with new apprentices was to teach them how to sharpen. Next,how to adjust their wooden planes. This alone put them miles ahead of what they could have done without this knowledge.

I was very well known for sharpening,and was asked to teach some other shops sharpening skills.

[Steven Hart]

argumentum ad verecundiam

[dan sherman]

argumentum ad verecundiam

Now Now, play nice.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

[Steve Dallas]

argumentum ad verecundiam

"Arguments from authority are an important part of informal logic. Since we cannot have expert knowledge of many subjects, we often rely on the judgments of those who do. There is no fallacy involved in simply arguing that the assertion made by an authority is true. The fallacy only arises when it is claimed or implied that the authority is infallible in principle and can hence be exempted from criticism."

Internet woodworking chat forums have made it possible for dilettantes to argue with obviously skilled participants like George. They tend to rarely argue actual woodworking technique because they have no significant body of work with which to prove their bona fides or overall skill. Hence, these participants gravitate to subjects like honing and tool steels - subject for which "knowledge" can be gained and exhibited mostly by reading and regurgitating, with some lost weekends spent honing thrown in for good measure. At some point if you talk piano enough, people will ask you to sit down and play something, right? Oops. Houston, we have a problem. A 300 lb. middle age guy may dearly love and support the ballet but it is unlikely he fancies himself a dancer.

As a result of all of this, it seems every woodworking forum on the 'net has a deep, rich repository of spirited threads having to do with honing going far beyond the information needed to learn a relatively simple gateway skill that one acquires and then moves on. Esoterica pushed to the limit.

Assuming that an edge hasn't otherwise been dubbed, polish always good, never bad. It may be considered bad form to obscure the laminations in Japanese edged implements by imparting a high degree of sheen. This seems to be more a cultural artifact than anything having to do with the Price of Tea in China, if you'll pardon the pun.

[Bob Easton]

So what? ...

Another request for decorum.

[Steve Dallas]

So what? Most people here are hobbyists, and there's nothing offensive about these sorts of discussion. None of us here are indentured to the joiners' guild, and none of us should be afraid to participate in a discussion for fear of offending Master George.

I don't think anybody is under the illusion that these sorts of exchanges of information (obfuscation?) won't continue.

Supply creates its own demand sometimes.

[David Gendron]

You guys, just give up. If you are not interested in this thread other than puting it down, you should just stay away from it. All the arguments that are not related to this thread are just not helping!

[Tim Put]

The question is : IS the mirror edge SMOOTHER and therefore sharper?

That is the main question and according to the ASM standards manuals (among other sources); a mirror finish is not necessarily smoother than a matte finish. No one has claimed that you cannot sharpen your tools, you clearly can; only that a mirror finish is neither sufficient nor necessary for sharpness.

[Jon van der Linden]

That is the main question and according to the ASM standards manuals (among other sources); a mirror finish is not necessarily smoother than a matte finish. No one has claimed that you cannot sharpen your tools, you clearly can; only that a mirror finish is neither sufficient nor necessary for sharpness.

You're trying to reinvent the wheel. Japanese have been producing sharp finishes that aren't a mirror polish for at least a thousand years. There's nothing new here and nobody contests that fact.

Maybe George and I should be phrasing this in a more basic way. Because you all seem to be saying that it's "possible" that a mirror surface isn't flatter or sharper or whatever. Let's face it, we're not talking about a mirror "finish" or chemical polishing, or any number or other "possible" things. We're talking about sharpening and only that.

We're definitely not talking about things in the 8000 grit range, but the final phases of a good sharpening process in the 15000+ grit range. That's all we're talking about. That is the original topic here as far as I can tell. If you can show that a polished edge at that level is less flat, smooth, or whatever you choose to call it than the hazy surface produced by natural Japanese waterstones I'm sure that there are a lot of Japanese smiths that will be really surprised. They happen to claim that the less flat surface left by the natural stone is an advantage.

What would be interesting is to see if there is any merit to the claims made for that type of surface and if they hold true for different types of blades (i.e. O1, A2, S53, etc.).

For most of you this is a purely academic argument, it will never matter if there is a difference nor will it affect the results of your work in any way whatsoever. There is a phrase that I picked up from Karl Holtey that can be applied to George in this context... "I think I know what I'm doing."

[george wilson]

Jon,even if someone were to make tests in several modern steels,others would spend 200 posts arguing about it. I have made tools that used 1095,01,A2,06,L6,S7,HSS,and D2.,hardening and tempering all but the HSS. All of them have been formulated to present different advantages in different applications.


Different sharpenings work the same way.

[Leigh Betsch]

I find it interesting that there are different methods that produce results (matt or shinny) but I don't see much practical knowledge about which surface actually cuts and maintains the cut quality longer or results in a better surface on the wood. I would guess (and it is only a guess) that once a blade is sharpened to a fine, fine edge that as soon as it is put to use it rapidly would be worn to a point that renders all the extra sharpening work and cost senseless after a few stokes in contact with wood. It would be interesting to polish a blade to a mirror finish take a few planing strokes on wood then take a few SEM photos and then repeat but this time polishing to a matt finish. And also record the cut quality and strokes before it needs to be resharpened. Then you could repeat with various types of steel, and various types of wood, toss in some plane chatter, and maybe cross grain and figured wood, ..... Then I would know if any of this actually means anything to a woodworker or if it is just academic any how. I guess if I was making and selling plane irons I would want to know what sharpening method produced the best and sharpest edge but I would also what to know if it really mattered to the woodworker. Does anyone know if a study has been done to understand edge retention based on sharpening method?
Short of knowing better I think I'll just use the diamond, ceramic, strop method of sharpening.

[Caspar Hauser]

Well, seeing as we've got the electron microscopes out...

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124820013

'Scientists in California have done something astounding. They've shown that physical laws thought only to rule in the mysterious realm of atoms and electrons can also apply to stuff you can actually see.
Isaac Newton was pretty much right on in describing the physical laws of how objects in our world behave. But those laws break down when you get to the world of single atoms. So modern physicists came up with a new set of laws, called quantum mechanics, that does explain how things like atoms behave.
Andrew Cleland of the University of California-Santa Barbara says some of the laws are ... well, the word "weird" comes to mind.

"One of the most striking is quantum mechanics says that an object can be in two places at the same time. Or two configurations at the same time," he says.

Cleland says at first, scientists thought the laws of quantum mechanics applied to objects on the atomic scale. Cleland says it's true — physicists have observed quantum effects in structures as large as 60 atoms. That's large for the atomic world, but totally invisible in our world.
Cleland wanted to see if he could find the size where the laws of quantum broke down and everyday laws take over.
A Structure Extremely Large For The Atomic World

Technically speaking, Cleland and his colleagues used a "microwave-frequency mechanical oscillator coupled to a quantum bit." While true, that's not very informative for most of us. Let's just say that they took something very small.

"The diameter of the structure is about that of a human hair, maybe smaller," he says. But that's extremely large for the atomic world.
They cooled their structure to nearly absolute zero, and to their surprise and delight, the structure they created still behaved in a quantum way — a structure you can see with the naked eye.

So now the question is, how far can you go before the laws of quantum mechanics give way to the more familiar rules of our macroscopic world?

Physicist Markus Aspelmeyer of the University of Vienna says physicists are divided on the question of whether or not there's an upper limit.

"I don't think there will be an upper limit. I think there's something very deep and fundamental about the quantum physical laws," he says.'


It could be postulated that Matte and sharp, shiny and sharp, the edges are thinner than a human hair, sharpness is therefore a quantum event, the edge is both sharp and not sharp until you put it to wood. :)

Now, I'm going to work, where I sharpen freehand in a figure of eight (because my Dad 50+ years on the tools taught me that way, and it works) on diamond stones (because they fit in my tool box and aren't fussy) where I'm glad of a sharp edge no matter its reflectivity, where, with the exception of the very final touches a read through shaving is me wasting time and someone else's money. While I'm there I shall, in the midst of trying to earn a living, be pondering the ineffable this, the esoteric that and of course Mr Schrodinger's cat.

CH

[Steve Dallas]

Well, seeing as we've got the electron microscopes out...

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124820013

'Scientists in California have done something astounding. They've shown that physical laws thought only to rule in the mysterious realm of atoms and electrons can also apply to stuff you can actually see.
Isaac Newton was pretty much right on in describing the physical laws of how objects in our world behave. But those laws break down when you get to the world of single atoms. So modern physicists came up with a new set of laws, called quantum mechanics, that does explain how things like atoms behave.
Andrew Cleland of the University of California-Santa Barbara says some of the laws are ... well, the word "weird" comes to mind.

"One of the most striking is quantum mechanics says that an object can be in two places at the same time. Or two configurations at the same time," he says.

Cleland says at first, scientists thought the laws of quantum mechanics applied to objects on the atomic scale. Cleland says it's true — physicists have observed quantum effects in structures as large as 60 atoms. That's large for the atomic world, but totally invisible in our world.
Cleland wanted to see if he could find the size where the laws of quantum broke down and everyday laws take over.
A Structure Extremely Large For The Atomic World

Technically speaking, Cleland and his colleagues used a "microwave-frequency mechanical oscillator coupled to a quantum bit." While true, that's not very informative for most of us. Let's just say that they took something very small.

"The diameter of the structure is about that of a human hair, maybe smaller," he says. But that's extremely large for the atomic world.
They cooled their structure to nearly absolute zero, and to their surprise and delight, the structure they created still behaved in a quantum way — a structure you can see with the naked eye.

So now the question is, how far can you go before the laws of quantum mechanics give way to the more familiar rules of our macroscopic world?

Physicist Markus Aspelmeyer of the University of Vienna says physicists are divided on the question of whether or not there's an upper limit.

"I don't think there will be an upper limit. I think there's something very deep and fundamental about the quantum physical laws," he says.'


It could be postulated that Matte and sharp, shiny and sharp, the edges are thinner than a human hair, sharpness is therefore a quantum event, the edge is both sharp and not sharp until you put it to wood. :)

Now, I'm going to work, where I sharpen freehand in a figure of eight (because my Dad 50+ years on the tools taught me that way, and it works) on diamond stones (because they fit in my tool box and aren't fussy) where I'm glad of a sharp edge no matter its reflectivity, where, with the exception of the very final touches a read through shaving is me wasting time and someone else's money. While I'm there I shall, in the midst of trying to earn a living, be pondering the ineffable this, the esoteric that and of course Mr Schrodinger's cat.

CH

Best post in the entire thread. Thanks for the chuckle! Last paragraph's a killer.

[Metod Alif]

What happens to either edge after, say, one foot long pass, five passes, ten passes? Any available pictures could reveal if there is 'tangible' difference between natural and artificial stones. A single picture shows basically only the appearance but not the durability of the edge or the quality of the planed surface.
Best wishes,
Metod

[dan sherman]

While I'm there I shall, in the midst of trying to earn a living, be pondering the ineffable this, the esoteric that and of course Mr Schrodinger's cat.

You did it now, PETA is going to be all over you. :D

[Steve Dallas]

I find it interesting that there are different methods that produce results (matt or shinny) but I don't see much practical knowledge about which surface actually cuts and maintains the cut quality longer or results in a better surface on the wood. I would guess (and it is only a guess) that once a blade is sharpened to a fine, fine edge that as soon as it is put to use it rapidly would be worn to a point that renders all the extra sharpening work and cost senseless after a few stokes in contact with wood. It would be interesting to polish a blade to a mirror finish take a few planing strokes on wood then take a few SEM photos and then repeat but this time polishing to a matt finish. And also record the cut quality and strokes before it needs to be resharpened. Then you could repeat with various types of steel, and various types of wood, toss in some plane chatter, and maybe cross grain and figured wood, ..... Then I would know if any of this actually means anything to a woodworker or if it is just academic any how. I guess if I was making and selling plane irons I would want to know what sharpening method produced the best and sharpest edge but I would also what to know if it really mattered to the woodworker. Does anyone know if a study has been done to understand edge retention based on sharpening method?
Short of knowing better I think I'll just use the diamond, ceramic, strop method of sharpening.

Here is one inexorable truth: Skilled Japanese woodworkers meticulously prepare their tools and then they build stuff with them. And that makes them a helluva lot like skilled Western woodworkers.

There seems to be a notion afoot, generally, that Japanese woodworkers create time during the workday for navel gazing or that Asian woodworking is somehow a more contemplative affair than Western woodworking. It is not. They don't sit around burning incense and drinking tea all day long. They get more done during the day than just honing and penning the occasional haiku.

Sharpening is no less a gateway skill there than it is anywhere. They learn it and move on. All over the world, men pee standing up. Woodworkers everywhere manage to come up with edges that will get the work done.

[Bob Strawn]

Well, seeing as we've got the electron microscopes out...
CH

I cannot find it, but at one time there was an article about the sound of a workshop being recorded on the surface of wood by the oscillation recorded by a plane shaving wood. When they played back the sound image recorded in the wood, it produced a sound much like the sound a plane made.

This would lead one to expect that a quiet room would produce more level planed surfaces.

Since the light dispersion pattern of a matte finish bevel or plane back is less uniform, it would make sense that the oscillation induced by reflection of light would be less in a plane with a matte finish. So a mirror finish is much more likely to produce micro chatter. This could be reduced quite a bit by either using DC light sources or natural light to eliminate the 120 HZ chatter typical to North American woodworking.;)

Eliminating electricity from the shop would be the only way however to prevent inductive resonance. That and building a Faraday Cage around your workbench.

The effect of observation on an object goes into play most often when testing a cheap chisel with pine end grain. If you test, then you can say with reasonable certainty that it was sharp, if it was sharp, but after testing it is no longer sharp. So with a cheap chisel you can know if it was sharp or if it might be sharp, but you can never know if it is sharp.

Since a lot of us are using final grits that are well below a micron in diameter, the quantum qualities are fairly easy to observe. These sizes are smaller than one-tenth wavelength limitation predicted by the Rayleigh theory. So unless you are using a Rife microscope (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/one-tenth%20wavelength%20limitation%20according%20to%2 0Rayleigh%20theory) or it's modern equivalent, visible light will not let you see what is going on because of quantum effects. If you are using a Rife microscope, it is likely that you will observe phenomenon even stranger than quantum. (http://www.cheniere.org/techpapers/rifemicroscope.htm):D

Bob

[Pam Niedermayer]

Has the "been two places at once" assertion been proven for anything but photons?

Pam

[David Keller NC]

I cannot find it, but at one time there was an article about the sound of a workshop being recorded on the surface of wood by the oscillation recorded by a plane shaving wood. When they played back the sound image recorded in the wood, it produced a sound much like the sound a plane made.

This would lead one to expect that a quiet room would produce more level planed surfaces.

Since the light dispersion pattern of a matte finish bevel or plane back is less uniform, it would make sense that the oscillation induced by reflection of light would be less in a plane with a matte finish. So a mirror finish is much more likely to produce micro chatter. This could be reduced quite a bit by either using DC light sources or natural light to eliminate the 120 HZ chatter typical to North American woodworking.;)

Eliminating electricity from the shop would be the only way however to prevent inductive resonance. That and building a Faraday Cage around your workbench.

The effect of observation on an object goes into play most often when testing a cheap chisel with pine end grain. If you test, then you can say with reasonable certainty that it was sharp, if it was sharp, but after testing it is no longer sharp. So with a cheap chisel you can know if it was sharp or if it might be sharp, but you can never know if it is sharp.

Since a lot of us are using final grits that are well below a micron in diameter, the quantum qualities are fairly easy to observe. These sizes are smaller than one-tenth wavelength limitation predicted by the Rayleigh theory. So unless you are using a Rife microscope (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/one-tenth%20wavelength%20limitation%20according%20to%2 0Rayleigh%20theory) or it's modern equivalent, visible light will not let you see what is going on because of quantum effects. If you are using a Rife microscope, it is likely that you will observe phenomenon even stranger than quantum. (http://www.cheniere.org/techpapers/rifemicroscope.htm):D

Bob

You know, you've given one of the best analogies to the ridiculousness of the hobby known as "audiophile" that I've every read. Thanks for that - I was searching for a decent one to hit a friend of mine over the head with. He actually bought one of the "Bedini Clarifiers" (http://www.bedini.com/).

It never really occurred to me that there's a corollary to this with all of the sharpening jigs, stones, and other doo-dads on the market.

[Steve Dallas]

Has the "been two places at once" assertion been proven for anything but photons?

Pam

Scientists have now discovered that light can bend matter. That'll send the honing wonks into paroxysms

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36021551/ns/technology_and_science-science/

[Pam Niedermayer]

Scientists have now discovered that light can bend matter. That'll send the honing wonks into paroxysms

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36021551/ns/technology_and_science-science/

OK, but that says nothing about being in two places at once.

Pam

[Leigh Betsch]

OK, but that says nothing about being in two places at once.

Pam
I'm quite sure my wife can be in two places at once. When ever I'm looking at the classifieds I can't see her but I can feel her breathing over my shoulder, must be that 9 dimension string theory thing. And you physicists are weirding me out!

[Leigh Betsch]

OK, but that says nothing about being in two places at once.

Pam

If an object can be in two places at the same time, then there must be times when a thing can be both true and false at the same time. So the way I see it Wilbur and George are both right, and I agree.

Sheesh that ain't so hard. A couple more threads like this and I'll beable to figure out if the best bench top is maple or beech!

[dan sherman]

Sheesh that ain't so hard. A couple more threads like this and I'll beable to figure out if the best bench top is maple or beech!

blasphemy, everyone knows Gaboon Ebony is the best and only wood that should be used to make benches. :D:D

[David Gendron]

I think that it is actualy thrue LIGNUM VITAE that should be use for a good bench top...

[Tim Put]

OK, but that says nothing about being in two places at once.

Pam

If you're on a computer right now, the proof is staring you in the face.
Not only has superposition been repeatedly observed, but electronics (and the microscope images that started this thread) depend on quantum tunneling, an effect of superposition that allows subatomic particles to pass through impenetrable barriers by being already on the other side too.

This is of course all somewhat simplified, but rest assured: if you accept as true that which agrees with observation, making valid predictions, nothing you have ever heard of is truer than quantum physics.

[Tim Put]

Scientists have now discovered that light can bend matter. That'll send the honing wonks into paroxysms

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36021551/ns/technology_and_science-science/

I know it was tongue-in-cheek, but that headline has absolutely nothing to do with the researchers actual findings. Journalists have a tendency to try to sensationalize science, and since they don't understand it, miss out on the actually amazing parts of it.

[Pam Niedermayer]

If you're on a computer right now, the proof is staring you in the face.
Not only has superposition been repeatedly observed, but electronics (and the microscope images that started this thread) depend on quantum tunneling, an effect of superposition that allows subatomic particles to pass through impenetrable barriers by being already on the other side too.

This is of course all somewhat simplified, but rest assured: if you accept as true that which agrees with observation, making valid predictions, nothing you have ever heard of is truer than quantum physics.

I'm no physicist (physics and chemistry were my worst subjects), but I find quantum physics describes things quite nicely and logically.

Pam

PS I don't find it odd that focused photons distort matter, having played with lenses in the sun very often

[Mark Roderick]

Call me Einstein or whatever, but I'm not convinced. I'm surely no physicist (though I do have a pretty strong background in match) but I've read a bunch, including one of Heisenberg's books. I always have the sense that QM folks are trying to convince themselves of phenomenon they don't really believe. Yes, I know that the predictions of QM are borne out experimentally and have led to a lot of the technology we use today. At the same time, I don't think you actually BELIEVE that the photon goes through two holes simultaneously, or that the proton is on both sides of the barrier at once. There's something else going on that will actually make sense to human beings if we can only discover what that thing is.

[Caspar Hauser]

There's something else going on that will actually make sense to human beings if we can only discover what that thing is.

Ah, to quote Slartibartfarst in response to a very similar speculation "that's just perfectly normal paranoia" but then again where would be the Quark, the Strangeness and the Charm, or mayhap the Quirk, Arris and Sharp.
:)

CH

[Wes Grass]

An article I read many years ago about sharpening knives showed they were never truly sharp until they were 'steeled'. And it was obvious why in the SEM photo's they had. Granted, they weren't honing to the level of grit that's being discussed here. But that's possibly irrelevant, as, IIRC, the edges they were generating were significantly smoother than any I've seen posted here. But it's been a long time ...

I find it interesting that I've never seen anyone burnishing the edge of chisels and plane blades on a hardened steel plate or rod, other than on scrub planes and turning tools where it's all but impossible to finely hone a highly curved edge after grinding.

[Bob Strawn]

An article I read many years ago about sharpening knives showed they were never truly sharp until they were 'steeled'. And it was obvious why in the SEM photo's they had. Granted, they weren't honing to the level of grit that's being discussed here. But that's possibly irrelevant, as, IIRC, the edges they were generating were significantly smoother than any I've seen posted here. But it's been a long time ...

I find it interesting that I've never seen anyone burnishing the edge of chisels and plane blades on a hardened steel plate or rod, other than on scrub planes and turning tools where it's all but impossible to finely hone a highly curved edge after grinding.

When using a thick steel plate with loose grit to work on blades, I will often steel a blade as the last step.

http://toolmakingart.com/images/Kanaban/Kanaban%20flattening%20back.JPG

In the picture I am using 80 grit to flatten, but later in the process i will use .05 micron linde-b as the final grit. Then after cleaning the plate, I will strop on it. My feeling is that the edge lasts much longer by doing so, but I have not done any comparisons to prove it. Stropping on steel, does however put a mirror finish on what was misty before.

Regular burnishing would produce a wire edge however, so I don't think it would be such a good idea however. I think the steel plate, no matter how well I clean it, still has some bedded grit in it, so the burnishing is combined with polishing, and the wire edge can be easily managed.

http://toolmakingart.com/images/Blade%20Making/Blade%20Working%20Area.JPG

Bob

[David Gendron]

Bob, does the steel plate wares hollow? does a granit plate do the same? would it ware hollow?
Thank you!

[Bob Strawn]

Oddly enough the plate seems to remain fairly flat. I would not use my granite plate for loose grit, my granite plate is a reference tool. I have ground a bevel on the corners and edges of the plate, and when I grind, I will run half of the edge when I work, to spread the wear all over the steel plate. You would think that I would grind as much off the plate as I do the tools, but oddly enough, the softer plate seems to wear very little in the process.

Bob

[Wes Grass]

Classic lapping operation. The grit embeds in the softer piece and cuts the harder, hence the plate doesn't wear as much as you'd think it should.

And absolutely you still have grit on the plate no matter how well you clean it, so your final polishing is in fact still a lapping or honing process just like using a stone. If you needed it clean you'd have to surface grind it.

By 'burnishing', I mean physically pushing the metal around kind of like burring a scraper. But not to the extent a wire edge is formed. Just enough to smooth out the 'teeth' on the honed edge of the tool. This was also covered in the sharpening article I mentioned, with photo's and comments a wire edge will break away and dull the knife quickly. And no doubt faster in wood than meat.

What I'm thinking is, after the honing of a micro bevel on whatever xx grit finish stone you prefer, the blade is raised a tick more and run across a flat ground hardened plate to knock down the 'rough' edge left from honing. Should be gentle enough to avoid turning a burr by doing the entire edge at once, rather than running a rod across it.

And it will have to be done on the back face as well to smooth out whatever roughness remains from lapping. Like the scale trick I've seen posted.

BTW, this is how the final polish is put on pivot shafts in watches and clocks, the burnisher being basically a file with no teeth. The pressure generated at the high spots (surface roughness) on the shaft is high enough to literally iron them down to the level of the rest of the surface. And there's no doubt in my mind this can be done on A-2 or other hardened steels used in blades. I've pushed enough of it around with a hammer and punch to know it's still fairly malleable at 60C ;-)

[David Gendron]

Wes, It make a lot of sense in theory. I have to try that... What would you use for burnin?

[Bob Strawn]

Wes, It make a lot of sense in theory. I have to try that... What would you use for burnin?

When using a steel on a knife, the motion is mostly along the knife edge with a slight forward movement. The forward movement will tend to prevent the formation of a wire edge.

The ideal burnisher is polished, rounded, hard and has a small diameter.

I like to use Enco's (http://www.use-enco.com/CGI/INPDFF?PMPAGE=166&PARTPG=INLMK32) 317-5387 7/64 X 2 1/2 C/GRD CARBIDE ROUNDS $3.50 (http://www.use-enco.com/CGI/INSRIT?PMAKA=317-5387&PMPXNO=19498787&PARTPG=INLMK32) to make burnishers for scrapers. But if you were going to use them to harden the backside of a plane blade you might want a longer one. Their cheapest 4" (http://www.use-enco.com/CGI/INLMKD?SIITEM001=325-2394&SIQTY001=1&SICOUNT=1) one might do, you could even try just laying it on a plate and rolling the steel you want to compress over it with the rod pressed between the plate and the steel being hardened.

Compressing steel can do amazing things. I peen my scythe for just that reason.

Bob

[Wes Grass]

I was thinking of a piece about the size of one of my stones, so I can just click the honing gauge up another notch and make a pass or two. Which I can easily make, or possibly scrounge from a pile of old die parts. But that's not something readily available to most woodworkers.

On further thought, a granite surface plate might be worth a try. But might be more abrasive than desired. If there's any 'color' left from the blade it's cutting and not burnishing. I'll see if I can try that this weekend.

[george wilson]

I have made some carving gouges with compressed steel. However,it was done by continuing to hammer the steel below red hot while forging. This is an old process. Maybe Junior has heard about it.

It is then hardened and tempered normally. If you wanted to remove the molecular condition of the compressed steel,you heat it up above red hot,and strike the tool a sharp blow which loosens the molecules.

[Don C Peterson]

Compressed steel is interesting. I ride bicycles and many of the high end components are cold forged because it's supposed to add quite a bit of strength. Of course most bicycle components aren't made of steel, but the threads on the spokes are rolled, not cut for the same reason.

Whether it actually helps in edge retention is another matter entirely though.

[Wes Grass]

"hammer the steel below red hot while forging ... then hardened and tempered normally"

That might do something. Beryllium copper that's 1/4 or 1/2 hard will be harder than annealed stock after heat treat.

"strike the tool a sharp blow which loosens the molecules"

Have to ask my Physicist friends about that one. Might give them a good chuckle. ;-)

[george wilson]

With all due respect,Wes,best to not poke fun at something just because you haven't hear of it. Your physicist friends had better be mettalurgists if you expect their opinions to be valid.

I wish I could remember where I learned about this process,but it has been many years. I think I gave the book away to a young blacksmithing enthusiast.

This process was used in the old days to make tool steels tougher.

Why does it seem funny to you about striking the red hot metal to reset the molecules? Magnetism is removed by a sudden blow,isn't it? This re arranges the molecules,too,in carbon steel magnets.

I once had a physicist who had never made a violin,tell me that he could make a better violin than I could. His progress consisted of a few unfinished tops and backs,very crudely carved out. My violins were all sold to professional musicians. The Concert Master of the Baltimore Symphony,violinists in the New York Symphony,and people of that caliber. They were the result of nearly 50 years of building. Violin making using a natural material (wood) cannot be reduced to some equations because of variations in the materials. The physicist did not seem to grasp that,though. Had he been right in his huge assumptions,we'd all be making Stradivarius quality violins. Rather,fine violins are made on the judgements of the builder,to extract the optimum tonality of each piece of spruce and maple. This means altering the arches and the thicknesses of the woods each time to get the most desirable tone. That can only be done by having a talent in the first place for this work,and doing it many,many times to educate one's self about how to manipulate the woods.

I mention this story to illustrate that just because a person is a physicist,it does not mean that he has the answers to the arcane knowledge that centuries of practicing craftsmen,working empirically, have developed.

After all,how many centuries did it take scientists to re create the true Wootz steel,developed many centuries ago by practicing blacksmiths, used in Arabian swords,then lost. The closest we got for hundreds of years was "Damascus steel", a misnomer,which had nothing to do with the true Wootz steel. This was a patterned metal that ended up being used on gun barrels in the 19.th.C.,a European attempt to reproduce Wootz. Wootz is not patterned like that. Its pattern is very faint,and totally different.

What it consisted of was taking a high carbon steel hockey puck shaped piece of crucible steel ( the "puck" was steel that melted in the bottom of the crucible),and hammering it out into a sword. The lost part was that it was hammered at a low red heat. Not the much higher heat Europeans forged at because the metal was much softer. The carbides in the steel were not yet liquified at this lower heat. Thus,the carbides were broken into very small pieces,left in a matrix of softer steel. At high European heats,the carbides melted,and reformed in much larger structures. The steel was brittle when hardened,and had to be tempered to lower hardness to keep it from breaking. The Wootz steel could be left with the hard carbides mixed in the softer iron matrix.

That was only re-discovered in the 70's IIRC,when scientists rolled some high carbon steel bars through powerful rollers at low red heat. The resulting steel showed the characteristic "Mohammed's ladder" of the Wootz steel. This ladder consisted of tiny,shiny pieces made of carbides,usually in a repeating pattern caused by the forging techniques of the smith.

It was necessary to reduce the thickness of the steel bars by 8 times to sufficiently break the carbides up.

P.S. I will mention that this very early crucible steel was produced many centuries before Benjamin Huntsman re-discovered it in the 18th.C.

[Jim Koepke]

I mention this story to illustrate that just because a person is a physicist,it does not mean that he has the answers to the arcane knowledge that centuries of practicing craftsmen,working empirically, have developed.

One of the aircraft manufactures used to have a big sign on one of their buildings that their engineers would see everyday.

"According to the laws of physics, a bumble bee can not fly. Fortunately, no one has figured out how to tell the bee."

jim

[David Keller NC]

The mistake that most scientists make is that the observation as well as the explanation of the craftsman is wrong. The mistake that the craftsman usually makes is that the explanation as well as the observation must be right. Far more often, the observation is absolutely dead-on, while the craftsman's explanation violates a fundamental principle known to be correct.

In the case of the bumblebee, it isn't true that it shouldn't be able to fly based on theoretical physics. The difficulty has to do with modeling the aerodynamics with what's called the parametric method. That is, with fundamental symbols that can be written interms of differential equations. The equations applied to the flight characteristics of insects like the bumblebee were (and are) correct, but they are not analytically solvable - that is, one cannot reduce them to usable results with algebraic methods.

The advent of high speed computers fixed this problem - one can solve any differential equation, whether analytically reduceable or not, by means of a technique called finite element analysis. This is sometimes called non-parametric analysis. So long as a sufficient number of iterations are performed, and the finite elements are small enough, this type of modeling is airtight.

This method, btw, has been successful at a complete analytical description of the flight characteristics of bumblebees, butterflys, and many other insects in the last 10-20 years. One output of this success has been the creation of artificial flying insects that the military and others are very interested in.

[george wilson]

I knew that in the fairly recent past,the flight of the bumble bee was solved. So,are you familiar with the compressing,otherwise called "packing",(not to be confused with pack hardening,done by carburizing) of carbon steel ?

Before the re-discovery of Wootz steel,I made some engraving chisels by hammering at a low red heat,some annealed HSS. I just cannot recall my reasoning at that time,as it as in the early 70's. It worked just fine. In the Gunsmith's Shop,I was showing them an engraving chisel. One of them started cutting a groove up the tang of a Nicholson file. When he reached the annealed area's end,I told him to go ahead. The chisel tip broke off after he had gone about 3/16" into the hardened area of the file! The chisels were not only hard,they were MUCH tougher than HSS is when "properly" hardened. We also made some HSS boring bars for the lathe the same way. They cut just fine,and were of the style that was used at a much earlier time,made in the tool shop of early factories. I do not know how the toolmaker hardened those type boring bars.

I hired a blacksmith to hammer out a bunch more chisels(more properly die sinker's chisels). I have an old shoulder injury,and hammering that metal at red heat was like hammering mild steel while cold. He hammered them out,but sure complained about how hard they were to hammer!!

This was completely the wrong way to harden HSS,and no further hardening was done. They were just allowed to cool down. I still use them today.

I didn't want the other components in the HSS,just the carbon content.

[David Keller NC]

Yeah, I've some exposure to the technique. I'm not a metalurgist, but I regard the explanation as "work hardening". I think the molecular explanation has to do with shearing the crystal boundaries in a piece of alloy (in this case, carbon and iron). It also works in pure copper, as well as various alloys of brass and bronze. Of course, I'm usually trying to prevent work hardening in a piece of copper.:)

[george wilson]

The Japanese never learned to make a steel spring until later European influence. They made a spring by hammering brass down. This is why,long after they were obsolete, in the 19t.C.,they kept using matchlocks. The weak brass spring only served to hold the smoldering match up out of the pan. I am pretty sure this is why they started making laminated swords. The brittle steel was supported so as to not break. Happily,they worked out!

When I was a kid I had a Swedish knife that had a hard center lamination between soft outer layers. I curved and bent that 4" blade at a 90 degree angle once by accident. The hard steel center never cracked!!

[David Keller NC]

I suspect the japanese craftsmen that made samurai swords were very familiar with the brittle/strong equation in steel. The europeans simply made swords that were either very sharp and very fragile (not good on a battlefield!), or were very strong but wouldn't hold a really keen edge. That doesn't matter much, though, for how they used them - they were stabbing weapons and not meant for a slashing cut, so a suitably strong shaft with a reasonably sharp point would do your opponent in in a short hurry if you could find a chink in their armour.

The japanese were quite clever - they demanded an incredibly sharp edge that would stand up to the force of a slashing cut (much better to deal with iron small-plate armour and thick leather armor), and the composite samurai sword was the result. There was a PBS NOVA show that detailed the making of one of these by a modern-day master craftsman, and both the process and the final result was fascinating. The process by which these swords were rated when first made in feudal Japan was pretty brutal - a five body blade was the most prized, and was verified by making it all the way through the torsos of five condemed prisoners in one stroke.

Now that makes our standards of sharpness on diamond/ceramic/waterstone honed plane blades look pretty weak, indeed!

[george wilson]

David,the West have had both stabbing weapons and slashing weapons for centuries. You know about sabers and cutlasses,and battle axes.

[jerry nazard]

The process by which these swords were rated when first made in feudal Japan was pretty brutal - a five body blade was the most prized, and was verified by making it all the way through the torsos of five condemed prisoners in one stroke.

Now that makes our standards of sharpness on diamond/ceramic/waterstone honed plane blades look pretty weak, indeed!

David,

You may have started something here. From henceforth, I shall refer to my ultra-sharp blades as "five-body".

-Jerry

[David Keller NC]

David,the West have had both stabbing weapons and slashing weapons for centuries. You know about sabers and cutlasses,and battle axes.

Sure, but it turns out (and I didn't know this until watching way, way too much History channel a couple of years back) that the saber and cutlass are relatively recent forms, at least for europeans. The arabic and persian countries traditional forms are almost all slashing weapons - perhaps because plate armor isn't practical in a hot climate.

The battle axe is far older, but these turn out to not be slashing weapons, either - they were primarily intended for smashing through armor with tremendous force. Perhaps that's why the only 2 that I've ever had in my hands from the middle ages were exceptionally heavy - I'd guess more than 20 lbs.

[David Keller NC]

David,

You may have started something here. From henceforth, I shall refer to my ultra-sharp blades as "five-body".

-Jerry

That's definitely not the most brutal "test" procedure I've ever heard of. This one I can't confirm, but if it's true, all I have to say is that it makes a fission weapon seem positively civilized. Apparently, the romans had a habit of heat-treating a particularly fine blade by heating to glowing red temperature, and quenching it by shoving it up to the hilt into the anus of a condemned slave. I guess it shouldn't surprise me that the culture that popularized crucifixion as a spectator sport would come up with something like that.

[jerry nazard]

David,

Maybe I'll just forget about the "five-body" stuff. Sharp is good! :D

[george wilson]

I've heard of the Arabs quenching swords in a body. But,also air cooling them in a tall slit made by setting up 2 tall stones so that air was funneled between the stones at higher velocity.

The body scenario seems less than a certain way of quenching a sword,since the body would not have the same consistency all the way through.

In very ancient times,bronze made a poor sword,and the spear was the basic battlefield weapon.

Since the Arabs had Wootz steel,they could make a superior edged weapon from it. Cutting swords go way back,though. When iron became available,the possibility of making a decent edged weapon was born. The Philistines were the best iron workers in Biblical times. They were actually,contrary to popular representation,a pretty sophisticated group at the time. When Agamemnon wiped them out,those who were left were adaptable to melding into other races. Vikings had double edged swords made of pattern welded steels,not too different from the "Damascus" steels developed much later. Thrusting weapons usually had no edges that were useful,relying upon the point. They were often triangular in cross section,or had blunt edges.

[dan sherman]

The Japanese never learned to make a steel spring until later European influence. They made a spring by hammering brass down. This is why,long after they were obsolete, in the 19t.C.,they kept using matchlocks. The weak brass spring only served to hold the smoldering match up out of the pan. I am pretty sure this is why they started making laminated swords. The brittle steel was supported so as to not break. Happily,they worked out!


They made laminated swords, because they wanted the hard steel for it's edge holding ability, and soft steel for it's flexibility. If the entire sword had been made from the hard steel it would have shattered the first time it was hit by another sword.

[george wilson]

That is very obvious,dan.

[dan sherman]

If you want some real info on the sword subject, check out this special by NOVA.

http://video.pbs.org/video/1150578495/

[jerry nazard]

If you want some real info on the sword subject, check out this special by NOVA.

http://video.pbs.org/video/1150578495/

Dan,

Thanks for the link - that was well worth watching.

-Jerry

[Wes Grass]

Hey George,

Not making fun of the process, just a quaint way of describing what's happening. I think most of the people I know who actually understand this stuff would probably think about it a minute and say that's about as good a way of describing it as any.

I've personally seen a bar magnetized by aligning it north-south and whacking it with a hammer. Sets the spin of the electrons parallel, or something like that. And I suspect that's what's happening when a twist drill gets magnetized when it chatters while drilling a hole in a piece of steel.

So doing it hot should have some effect. If I had to guess, I'd say it's probably accelerating the process of rearranging the grain structure that would normally require a long soak to accomplish. But it could be something entirely different. There's that body centered, and face centered cubic thing that I can never remember.

Always amazes me how people figured out how to do things throughout history, with absolutely no idea of what's actually taking place. In the case of metallurgy, they just learned from experience that if you beat on something long enough you might make something useful out of it. Seems to apply to parenting as well.

[george wilson]

I wonder if anyone REALLY knows what is happening at the atomic level even now. They keep discovering more and more sub atomic particles. they keep building bigger accelerators to discover more about what is really going on.