Work Sharp 3000/diamond discs/establishing chisel surfaces...

[ian maybury]

Part update, and part invitation for comment. Been working my fingers to the bone (almost literally :) )setting up a bunch of Japanese Matsumura white steel bench chisels. Dead pleased (but not experienced with waterstones) with the modified Veritas Mk 2 guide (previous post) and Shapton 1,000, 2,000, 5,000 and 12,000 combo. The 2,000 is probably not strictly necessary, but i'm using it since I have it and it lightens the load for the 5000 which doesn't seem to cut all that aggressively.

Getting the surfaces established has proven to be the toughest part of the job - all of the chisels so far have been high on the back a little behind the edge. I did a couple using a 120 Shapton which was slow, the surfaces rough (needing a lot of work on the 1000 to get rid of the scratches), and it didn't give the same feedback as the other stones. Switching to the WorkSharp 3000 (working from the top with the Mk2 honing guide and the accessory platform - the latter levelled accurately to the disc surface so that the bevel angle won't change upon moving to the waterstones) for backs and bevels has worked well. (but a wrong touch when doing the backs could do a lot of harm)

120 and 400grit discs deliver a nice surface that the waterstones can bring up to a polish with two passes a la Charlesworth on each. It's been important to form an accurate/dead flat bevel, as even tiny irregularities take a lot of cutting out on the waterstones. The cylindrical roller on the Mk 2 makes achieving this easy.

Care is needed on the Worksharp - even at its low speed it'd be easy to very quickly overheat the extremity of the edge. I guess the real deal would be a water cooled WorkSharp - but even cutting in bursts of only a couple of seconds and cooling in between it's quite fast. I was surprised to find it was doing the backs flat enough to finish them on the waterstones.

A longer lasting disc would be nice. Has anybody got more experience with diamond lapidary discs since the posts a couple of years ago? Thinking of the cheap Chinese ones on E Bay - do they work well, and is the grading and quality consistent?

ian

[David Barnett]

A longer lasting disc would be nice. Has anybody got more experience with diamond lapidary discs since the posts a couple of years ago? Thinking of the cheap Chinese ones on E Bay - do they work well, and is the grading and quality consistent?

They do indeed work well and are amazingly inexpensive. I buy the PSA 'toppers' and mount them onto master laps. Although I buy and use mine for gem faceting, when I first get the coarser discs I often break them in on tools before they settle in a bit and are acceptable for faceting where I need them to cut more evenly with fewer deep scratches from outlier crystals. Overall, they're as consistent and long-lasting as the domestically-made more expensive steel mounted lapping discs and for the price simply can't be beat.

[Prashun Patel]

There are a couple threads on this topic.

I use those discs on my Worksharp for the same thing you do. They work wonderfully.

I have a 120, 220, and 500 from two different manufacturers and they are fine.

I even have a '3000' grit polishing disc. I don't like this one so much. It gunks up too quickly. However I do find that a very quick pass on the 3000 makes my manual stone honing go extremely quickly.

[David Weaver]

Use care on those japanese chisels if you're going to power-do the back of the chisels. At the cost of matsumuras (which are fairly inexpensive for japanese chisels), I guess it's not a big deal, but you don't want to blow through too much of the ura on the back - it's just bad form and you can make some ugly looking chisel backs that way. I'd do them by hand with a diamond hone and with care - and most importantly don't let half of the chisel hang off of a stone and half on - it's either only the very tip on the stone or all of it, or the edge of any stone or worksharp, etc, will blow right through the lands in the middle of the chisel and make a VERY ugly step.

[ian maybury]

Thanks guys. I'll order a few discs Prashun and see how i get on - they were so cheap that it made me nervous. Think it was your write up on their use I saw a couple of years ago. (?)

The backs seem to be doing OK David, or at least so far as i can tell - but see the sample not very clear photos taken just now below. The backs are uniformly finished over their full length even though the pic due to shadow doesn't show it. The bevels (while they likewise don't look it here - they do in normal light) are finished on the 12,000 grit stone and polished the same as the backs. The backs were done (after first making sure there was enough clearance for the shank) by dropping the entire back face of the chisel flat on the WS's disc, with the rear down a shade to protect against accidentally putting on a back bevel. Also with the cutting edge pointing downstream re. rotation. Then lifting off again after a couple of seconds to avoid heating.

All of the backs have been slightly but to my mind unexpectedly bulged so far - with the (low) peak 15 - 20mm back from the edge. No twisting, and nothing that wasn't removed in a few minutes on the WS 3000 or the 120 stone though. There's some variability in the width of the flat land between the edge and the nose of the hollow as they come. (ura?) It sounds from reading that tapping out might have saved some material, but it sounds like it may be a bit risky on especially smaller chisels.

The flattened area creeps slowly forward to the cutting edge cut by cut on the WS's disc - so it's very controllable. A slip could do harm very quickly though. It's also generating a very flat and uniformly ground surface that pretty much immediately cuts all over on the 1000 waterstone - the possbility that it might not was a concern before trying it. The narrow chisels need extra care, in that it all happens faster.

Persisting with the 1000 grit until both faces definitely extend right to the edge is absolutely key - it'd be very easy to leave a bit of a chamfer or bevel intact on the edge. Having first finished the back the chisels were then loaded into the honing guide and the bevel formed on the WS. (2 sec bursts again, cooled in between in water) The chisel bevel (without removing it from the honing guide) was then finished to 12,000 on the waterstones in the same sequence as the back.

So far it's about putting a functional working edge on, but i guess there's a whole other body of technique to be researched and experimented with beyond this point.

I should say that while I've not been posting that I've been reading the posts here and doing some ad hoc sharpening over the past couple of years - so my thanks to everybody. It's so much easier with guidance...

ian

293628 293629

[David Weaver]

Looks good, coplanar is fine. I've had a couple of the matsumura branded chisels and they are accurately ground - flat like that. Some blacksmiths make their chisels bellied such that you need to flatten only the first part of the edge (like a half inch). Since those are flat, doing the whole back is a good method.

Either way is fine as a way of making the chisels, bellied or flat, though you don't want to attempt to flatten the whole back of a bellied chisel.

If they chip at all, increase their angle a little. If you get to the point that you're getting them to fail by what looks like wear, then they will last next to forever. If the angle is too acute and they chip substantially, then you'll find they aren't very convenient to keep in shape.

[ian maybury]

Thanks David, that's reassuring. Have to say that while the chisels are still to be really tested that I love the feel of the steel - it's tough yet cuts so cleanly on a stone, and has none of the tendency to develop a hairy great wire edge that you get with mainstream cheap chisels. It sounds from previous posts that the WS 3000 leather honing and felt buffing wheels work very well, so that's next on the list....

Some info for broader consumption on sourcing WS 3000 consumables.

Prashun and others have already mentioned that 150mm diamond coated lapidary discs work well for chisel bevel forming and (careful) back flattening, and come very cheaply off EBay - I've just ordered some in 150 and 500 grits to try from a supplier in Hong Kong.

Branded WS accessories are horribly expensive here and in the UK as a result of heavy marking up of what I suppose is a speciality product, but it turns out that the 150mm x 13mm thick x 12mm bore felt buffing/polishing wheels are also a widely available commodity accessory used elsewhere. They likewise are available on EBay for a small fraction of the OEM cost - and while not yet received or tested look to be identical. (1/5 of the cost of the branded item in my case)

I have the WS leather stropping disc, but it probably wouldn't be too hard to DIY or maybe improve one if needed by adding the appropriate piece of leather to one of the WS glass discs. Wonder how some bonded on MDF or similar might do for this use?

ian

[David Weaver]

You may like the MDF itself as a substrate. Especially once its had a chance to load a little.

[ian maybury]

Ta David, you're up early...

This is just an idle floating of the topic, but it turns out there's a sceptics view on the usefulness of stropping too. See this page by Brent Beach: http://www3.telus.net/BrentBeach/Sharpen/Stropping.html He argues the science says that most compounds contain much coarser abrasive particles than the finest stones/papers, and that by scratching surfaces they do more harm than good. Also that properly graded e.g. 0.5 micron compounds have such minimal cutting ability that they can only be effective on very narrow micro bevels. That the commonly reported benefit of honing is mostly the result of shortcomings in the honing process.

I have to say that some of the very heavy duty (leaning on the blade) stropping techniques demonstrated in one or two videos make me nervous - it's hard not to suspect that it may do a number on a finely honed edge. They may on the other hand shift enough metal to be effective in improving a not so finely honed example. Or perhaps in the case of the good compounds the grits break down so that the finish is much finer than the grit grading might suggest? Might it also be the case that a honing guide doesn't necessarily deliver absolute precision, and that we perhaps form a tiny micro bevel as a result of the roller lifting up on sharpening debris, and our applying pressure right out at the tip of the tool?

Guess what i'm getting at is that if the science says one thing, and genuine observations another that some means has to be found to square the circle if we're to understand what's really going on.

ian

[David Weaver]

Frankly, brent beach doesn't know enough about stropping to really know what he's talking about - the first clue is that he associates stropping only with using compounds, and doesn't describe why people would strop to begin with (I'd imagine he's unfamiliar with natural stones). He also seems to be unaware that there are powders and compounds widely available down to .05 micron (that's not a misprint). I have no idea what beach would do if he were faced with an incannel gouge, or any gouge for that matter. he might find strops very useful if that were the case.

At any rate, i don't generally use those compounds because they're not necessary, and also for the reason you mention - I'd rather do the heavy work with a stone and preserve geometry and control it so that the next wire edge is raised easily when I sharpen again. When I strop, it is with clean bare leather.

Stropping itself is another thing that you will get a good grasp of only with experience, to improve an edge with it, and to figure out the things it works with well. It is my opinion that it offers little on the very hardest of steels, but on vintage steels, it provides quite a gain. The same is true with razors. The super ultra hard razors do respond a little bit to a strop, but not so well as one that is medium hard.

All of that said, what brent doesn't give much of a nod toward is how sharpening actually fits in a work flow, with various shapes of tools and in the context of actually doing work and letting results dictate technique. I can't imagine having to stop and use his process in the middle of a session preparing a large rough panel. His pointers are useful to show that some of the popular compounds do have large particles in them, but the suggestion that graded chrome ox is too slow is only worthwhile if you're actually trying to use it to cut steel at a significant rate - which isn't its use, either. (it's a lovely thing for razors, if the razor is brought to it sharp already).

At any rate, my suggestion would always be to look at what the folks doing what you're doing ...do. If you're preparing boards from rough, find out what joiners and cabinetmakers do/did to sharpen. If you're carving, find out what carvers do. If you're sharpening and stropping a razor, find old barbering texts. The answers will often be different when in the context of the work than they are outside of it by someone trying to parameterize everything.

Anyway, the reason you might like MDF on the WS is that it's a bit harder than leather, but as it loads it becomes slick and it doesn't threaten geometry. I've got a 6" leather wheel attached to the disc on one of those junky combination belt/disc sanders, and while it works, it's no quicker for me than stones and because of the power aspect, it has an appetite for disregarding the geometry you've carefully set up on an edge. Once geometry is right, you only hone out wear, except in extreme cases where you want something like an ultra thin low-angle paring chisel or something. Parsimony in wear and in removal of steel, and preservation of geometry, while doing great amounts of work becomes infinitely more satisfying than mass removal methods.

[ian maybury]

I'll give the MDF a run David - and try some hard leather as well. What you say about taking care to preserve geometry is where my gut tends to lead me too. Plus it's got to be a lot about removing even a miniature wire edge. The prospect of having a convenient means of freshening up and edge to hand without having to go back to a multi step honing process every time is very attractive...

[Cody Kemble]

The glass disks are around 3/8" thick. Has anyone found a decent souce of 3/8" MDF in smaller quantities? I built my own platform to sharpen with my Mk2 on a WS3000 and didn't make it adjustable.

[David Weaver]

You can hand plane MDF if it comes to that. Just plan to do a lot of sharpening and take thick shavings, and then sand it as you get close to finish thickness, leaving the factory side that's left face up.

[ian maybury]

A quick look after posting this morning threw up this untried EBay UK source of low cost 3mm (1/8in) MDF discs for about $4.50 for 3 no. Cody: http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=261256760493&ssPageName=ADME:L:OC:GB:3160 Seemed easier than setting up a circle cutter. Not sure what the material will be like, but it seemed worth a try. I've also got some double sided adhesive film to stick them down to a WS glass disc.

There doesn't seem to be a similar option coming up on EBay.com, but the cost of local shipping for my order was very moderate so maybe it'd be worth ordering from the US. Failing that maybe there's somebody about with a CNC laser set up that would run some for you?

I've seen mention before of treating MDF with Danish oil before using it as a lap David - it may be one way of toughening up the surface a bit. Not sure how it might behave? Most when lapping in effect introduce a small angle. Wonder if it makes sense to do so, or to lap flat?

[ian maybury]

Hi guys. Just to table a point/thinking out loud. It seems pretty clear that there's a considerable overlap between stropping and honing.

Waterstones for example go to 12,000 grit (1 micron) or finer, and this is finer than the coarser particles in many of the stropping compounds in common use. Even the highly regarded Veritas green of nominally 0.5 micron seemingly contains particles multiples coarser than 1 micron.

The result delivered then seems to be significantly complicated by the fact that abrasive particles may or may not break down, and may cut more or less deeply for a given size depending on the material and nature of the matrix they are embedded in or spread over - meaning that apparently coarser/finer material may not behave that way. There probably isn't much option but to experiment or at least be led by personal or second hand experience.

What does seem pretty clear is that guy like Paul Sellers that suggests a heavy duty version of stropping (leaning heavily on the tool) after a 1000grit abrasive is relying on it to remove a fair amount of metal. This isn't necessarily what's needed with an edge that's been carefully worked down to 12,000 grit or so on waterstones. In this latter case it's probably more about removing micro defects from am already established edge, and as David has suggested using a hardish strop that's less likely to round over (dub?) an edge and much less pressure.

Looking a videos by the razor guys there seems to be scope for an alternative approach to finishing off an edge by honing on the finer grits of waterstone - by for example reducing to very low pressure at the end, and for only a very few strokes.

One major attraction of stropping seems to be it's convenience as a quickie 'go to' means of regular refreshing an edge - not so easy on a waterstone if using a honing guide, and if the bevel is also to be touched up… (it requires in the case of a single bevel getting back to exactly the same angle)

ian

[Warren Mickley]

I have to agree with David that a feel for stropping can come only after a good deal of experience. I don't think you can get a feel for it by reading blogs. Honing on water stones, honing on Arkansas stones, stropping with compound, stropping clean, etc. These are not equivalent operations.

[ian maybury]

That's for sure Warren. What I was suggesting (because others may be my situation) was that as a person who having got to the point of having a waterstone set up that is working well on carbon steel, and has just been steered towards a possible next step (stropping on MDF - thanks David) the penny has dropped to the effect that stropping is more than just some sort of one size fits all standardised next step beyond honing. That care is needed to fit any 'next' step method with the earlier ones, because it's not necessarily going to an improvement.

It's from a distance easy to see it a bit that way, especially if like me you've been hand sharpening tools for yonks using oilstones and/or relatively coarse diamond plates (locally common box store stuff) for use in less demanding construction type situations - and not until fairly recently come to appreciate the very high levels of sharpness obtainable from carefully working a good blade down to the finest of grits on e.g. waterstones.

It looks instead as you say that there's multiple varieties of both honing and stropping, and many paths to sharpness. The issue for somebody relatively new to the territory is that it's not practically possible to test all the options - yet it looks as though not all honing techniques are suited to all stropping options.

I guess in absence of having a teacher to hand reading blogs and forums sure beats being left entirely in the dark...

[Derek Cohen]

Frankly, brent beach doesn't know enough about stropping to really know what he's talking about - the first clue is that he associates stropping only with using compounds, and doesn't describe why people would strop to begin with (I'd imagine he's unfamiliar with natural stones). He also seems to be unaware that there are powders and compounds widely available down to .05 micron (that's not a misprint). I have no idea what beach would do if he were faced with an incannel gouge, or any gouge for that matter. he might find strops very useful if that were the case.

At any rate, i don't generally use those compounds because they're not necessary, and also for the reason you mention - I'd rather do the heavy work with a stone and preserve geometry and control it so that the next wire edge is raised easily when I sharpen again. When I strop, it is with clean bare leather.

Stropping itself is another thing that you will get a good grasp of only with experience, to improve an edge with it, and to figure out the things it works with well. It is my opinion that it offers little on the very hardest of steels, but on vintage steels, it provides quite a gain. The same is true with razors. The super ultra hard razors do respond a little bit to a strop, but not so well as one that is medium hard.

All of that said, what brent doesn't give much of a nod toward is how sharpening actually fits in a work flow, with various shapes of tools and in the context of actually doing work and letting results dictate technique. I can't imagine having to stop and use his process in the middle of a session preparing a large rough panel. His pointers are useful to show that some of the popular compounds do have large particles in them, but the suggestion that graded chrome ox is too slow is only worthwhile if you're actually trying to use it to cut steel at a significant rate - which isn't its use, either. (it's a lovely thing for razors, if the razor is brought to it sharp already).

At any rate, my suggestion would always be to look at what the folks doing what you're doing ...do. If you're preparing boards from rough, find out what joiners and cabinetmakers do/did to sharpen. If you're carving, find out what carvers do. If you're sharpening and stropping a razor, find old barbering texts. The answers will often be different when in the context of the work than they are outside of it by someone trying to parameterize everything.

Anyway, the reason you might like MDF on the WS is that it's a bit harder than leather, but as it loads it becomes slick and it doesn't threaten geometry. I've got a 6" leather wheel attached to the disc on one of those junky combination belt/disc sanders, and while it works, it's no quicker for me than stones and because of the power aspect, it has an appetite for disregarding the geometry you've carefully set up on an edge. Once geometry is right, you only hone out wear, except in extreme cases where you want something like an ultra thin low-angle paring chisel or something. Parsimony in wear and in removal of steel, and preservation of geometry, while doing great amounts of work becomes infinitely more satisfying than mass removal methods.

Ian, I have linked to David's post as I think it is so excellent. I support everything he has said.

I want to point out that you have done a fine job, but I would never power the backs of my Japanese chisels (by back I refer to the hollowed side). Why? Simply because it is not necessary, and potentially damaging - for example, You have already removed more of the ura than I do, and here I am referring to the lesser removal! There is no harm done at this point, but go very carefully on the one with the wide flattenned area in front of the ura. In my own case, I rarely have more than 1/8" showing.

Hand flattening is about control. It is far too easy to go too far with something like a Worksharp. Use it on bevels by all means, but not the back. In any event, the design of the Japanese chisel makes flattening so easy by hand - but you sometimes need to start below 1000 grit. I use 1000/6000/13000 grit, and then a swipe on a bare leather strop to ensure the wire is gone. I only ever use the 13000 on the backs , and a few swipes are enough to keep the ura at bay.

The point that must be emphasised is that sharpening is a personal matter - eventually one must do what is comfortable and fits in with the why one works. This means that there is no right or wrong method. What happens is that we improve efficiency over time. There is nothing wrong with Paul's rounded bevel or Warren's flat bevel. They all work efficiently for them. But they may not work efficiently for someone else. I hollow grind my blades - Japanese included!! That is blasphemy for some, but I don't care. With the Tormek's large wheel I am not affecting the strength of the edge, and I can freehand my blades more easily on the full hollow. It works for me. It is efficient for me. You will find what is efficient for you.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[ian maybury]

Thanks Derek. That seems to reinforce what David said on careful stropping and sets up some directions to try. i.e. that a finely honed edge needs care and light handling. For sure it's a journey of discovery.

For sure also a slip on the WorkSharp could result in serious damage - all it takes is a moment of inattention leading to popping a chisel down nose first. Or getting impatient, leaving the chisel on for too long and allowing too much heat to build up. The abrasive discs lose their cut pretty quickly too. Extra care IS needed on very narrow chisels. Against that the 120 grit Shapton used to flatten the back of the wider of the two chisels in the photo was quite a bit slower - and it feels a little odd in use when loose grits build up on the surface.

So far those are just the options I happened to have to hand for back flattening. It's very possible that there's a better one - maybe a coarse diamond plate (which might need some finer intermediate steps to remove scratches?), or the more traditional steel plate with a grit that gets progressively finer with use to deliver a fine finish.

The WorkSharp is not aggressive compared to e.g. a dry grinder - it runs about 600rpm and on 120grit it's still quite slow. I found I was able to establish a flat from the rear, and then over multiple very brief cuts with pressure a bit more towards the middle/front (not so much as to let it rock forward) have the ground area ease forward until it just reached the edge. The surface produced is nice and flat. Another advantage is that it's possible in a moment to switch to a finer grit to slow it down some more, or as a second step (400 grit in my case) to refine the surface and reduce the work subsequently required to get the 1000 waterstone cutting over the entire area. (so far the surface has always been flat enough that it's only a matter of removing the texture left by the 400 disc on WorkSharp)

Re. the photos and the flat between the edge and the hollow. There's been no more material removed than was necessary to flatten the backs. What did cause some bother and cost some metal (not sure if it's normal with Japanese chisels - suspect not ?) is that as previously mentioned all of the backs done so far (8) were to various degrees humped - with the high area roughly 15 - 30mm behind the cutting edge. Some quite markedly - tipped back so that the rearwards half of the back was flat on a surface table the cutting edge was lifted typically by 0.004 to 0.009in. (measured by feeler gauge)

As I figured it there was a choice - either settle for flattening the back for only the first 30mm or so (and remove minimal material), or remove a bit more and obtain a flat surface over the entire back. Having never seen anything but the latter done in pics and sharpening write ups about Japanese (not necessarily it seems on Western) chisels (and feeling that a longer flat improves stability when cutting) I chose to flatten the entire back….

ian

[ian maybury]

Just a word of caution re the above for anybody setting up high quality Western chisels - or for that matter Japanese chisels with flatter backs. Bear in mind also that it doesn't apply in the case of plane blades.

It's reporting experience in working up a set of Japanese white steel chisels with not very flat backs. The likelihood is that if you are starting with either of the above that it's not going to be a big deal to flatten the backs using waterstones (as in the Lie Nielsen chisel sharpening video) - and by doing so to avoid the risk the guys mentioned of a slip of the hand causing damage - or of overheating if impatience sets in and it's not lifted off quickly enough.

The other side of the coin might arise if trying to flatten badly out of flat Western chisels. If it turns out that there's a significant amount of material to be removed over quite a large area, or if it's a particularly tough (alloy) steel then 120 grit on the WorkSharp (while probably as fast as most dry options that don't risk overheating) could prove quite slow. Probably not if it's only required to flatten a small area behind the edge though.

I guess in the end all of these methods have their limits, and as such are more or less suited to particular situations and/or working styles. Which brings us back to the guys comments about the key role played by experience.

:) The ideal for flattening backs and putting on bevels has got to be some mythical zero wear water cooled and speed controlled device of some sort - one that permits grinding away without fear of overheating, while adjusting the rate of metal removal to suit the situation. Water cooled and horizontally mounted diamond disc anybody - with a work platform and optional fixture mounting tool bar?

[ian maybury]

Just to communicate a snippet of info on choice of sandpaper for use on the Worksharp discs. The diamond lapidary discs (see above) are still on the way from Hong Kong - but in the meantime my stock of OEM WorkSharp discs is used up and something was neeeded to get by with in the interval.

The OEM discs are very expensive from the UK, and the situation is worsened by the fact that Worksharp don't seem to offer then in single grades so it requires buying the coarse selection pack with only a few of the required grit in it - and lots that are of no use in my regime. (a well established marketing ploy - buying selections of any sort of consumable rarely works out as the uncommon sizes are typically left unused)

I bought self adhesive silicon carbide discs (the commonly available black wet and dry paper type), and ran some tonight. They get the job done, and cut very similarly to the OEM Norton discs (white 120, red 400) while fresh - but unfortunately lose their cut very quickly and last probably only about 1/5 as long. A right PIA to remove from the glass too.

So for anybody buying open market alternative discs - it seems there's something a little special about the OEM Norton discs - presumably the type of grit, and also the use of a low tack contact adhesive…...


Bear in mind that all of this is for bevel grinding and back flattening of Japanese chisels as above - using 120 and 400 grit to form the surfaces before switching to waterstones. Using the top mounted wide blade platform accurately levelled to the cutting surface of the disc means that Japanese style single bevel sharpening is very easy. There's no need to change the honing guide setting before switching to the waterstones - they end up cutting the bevel in exactly the same plane as did the WorkSharp.

[David Weaver]

You're getting typical experience with silicon carbide vs aluminum oxide. SC is very friable, and the grit breaks down quickly, but stays sharp as it breaks. Quality aluminum oxide is a bit softer but much tougher (there's a million different aluminas for different applications, but all that I've used are pretty tough compared to silicon carbide.)

Its a shame that the work sharp model is similar to the consumer printer model (expensive consumables), and vat plus import can only make it worse.

[ian maybury]

I wasn't sure what the WS/Norton abrasive disc was David, but that sounds very much like what was going on. It's white, so maybe it has a non clog additive/coating or something.

Some digging a few months ago seemed to suggest that zirconia was a good choice for sharpening. The trouble is that over here in what's a very small market many of these items are not available unless you order a full pack - which means that you need to know what you are looking for. First step is to try the diamond discs when they arrive.....

[David Weaver]

I think for sharpening on a moving wheel, the aluminum oxide will get you the most per unit of currency spent (though maybe from an alternate source than the super marked up and then imported and taxed worksharp branded stuff - maybe cut your own out of PSA aluminum oxide that's available).

The fact that silicon carbide breaks off and stays sharp is great, unless it's breaking into little sharp pieces a tenth of the size you actually want. Aluminum oxide is probably the best inexpensive abrasive for sharpening tool steel, thus its use in waterstones and india oilstones and on sandpaper.

I've used the blue zirconia and I think in a grinding situation like someone grinding a knife where there's no hard backer, you might get your money's worth but I'd be willing to bet that sharpening a chisel against a hard platen, you won't. I bought belts of it to lap planes a long time ago, and I don't think it lasts any longer than good quality aluminum oxide for that, but it's significantly more expensive.

I think you'll be fine with diamond and aluminum oxide, especially now that diamond is cheap. As long as you keep the grinding temperature down with the diamonds, and the pressure light.

[ian maybury]

Thanks David, good to get the feedback… Will hold fire on the zirconia.

[David Weaver]

Thanks David, good to get the feedback… Will hold fire on the zirconia.

I could be wrong since it involves power. My experience was with hand lapping, and i know with light pressure and no backer, the zirconia does last quite a bit longer - it's specifically made for that. I just don't know what level of pressure between its designed application and hand lapping that a big difference occurs. You'd have to tally what you're doing vs. aluminum oxide to really get a quantified idea of the additional durability to see if it's near zero or of it's a lot.

No clue what the blue zircon material would cost there in something you could affix to a disc, but one nice thing about al-ox of good quality (like the gold stuff or norton 3x) is that it's almost always on sale somewhere. I can get belt grinder belts in al-ox here for less than a dollar if I keep my eyes open (1x42) and they are easy enough to change that even in that specific case, the al-ox is cheaper than any blue zircon I can order.

Safe to say, though, the silicon carbide is to be saved for something where the actual hardness of the silicon carbide is needed, and with woodworking tools, that's a bit uncommon. Maybe some turning tools that are really really highly alloyed, but those folks have moved on to cubic boron nitride to cut some of the super hard carbides in their tools.

[Andrew Pitonyak]

for backs and bevels has worked well. (but a wrong touch when doing the backs could do a lot of harm)

Just to be clear, are you saying that you are able to flatten the backs with no problems.... but that you need to be very careful?

I had horrid luck flatten the backs on the worksharp. It just occurred to me that it might have worked if I had started by laying my blade flat onto the worksharp before turning it on that might have helped since my problem was lowering the back onto the already spinning disk.

Before I gave my worksharp to a friend, I was purchasing very course disks from a local store and cutting a center hole in them. It might have been around 60 grit. This very quickly established a bevel with minimal heat generation.

[Andrew Pitonyak]

I have the WS leather stropping disc, but it probably wouldn't be too hard to DIY or maybe improve one if needed by adding the appropriate piece of leather to one of the WS glass discs. Wonder how some bonded on MDF or similar might do for this use?

Not sure what I was thinking, but I purchased a bunch of leather from a local store.... I glued them to some hard maple that I had in my scrap bin.

[ian maybury]

No prob on the zircona David - it can be the reserve. The WS runs pretty slowly, and I've been using light pressure. (580 rpm)

Hi Andrew. Yes, I've been finding it does a very nice job of flattening the backs and setting the bevel angles on Japanese white steel chisels using the 120 grit WorkSharp discs, and then taking out the marks using a 400 grit disc befor finishing on the waterstones. (1000 and finer) It's producing a nice flat surface that cleans up quickly.

It's not all that fast (maybe a few times faster than the 120 grit Shapton), especially since I've been working in very short bursts of say 4 seconds at a time for fear of heating - dipping in water every time and drying with a rag before cutting again. (it keeps the main body of the chisel cold) I may have been a little lucky - in that they probably don't require an aggressive a cut compared to say an out of flat Western style chisel to get the job done - which reduces the risk of a mishap. I don't think I'd want it any faster...

The key as before is to take care when lowering the chisel on to the disc. Get it level in both directions and a hair low at the back so that the edge doesn't get dubbed, and maybe 2mm above the disc - then place it. Take care where you apply (light) pressure - too much to the front would not be a good move if you have a humped back as it could rock forward. It's inevitable that this rear touches lightly for a moment before the rest of the back, so too fast a cut/coarse a grit could cause a problem there too.

I've done 10 so far without mishap - including a couple of mortice chisels and very narrow 4mm examples. The technique has become pretty automatic. The biggest issues I've had is that the discs quickly lose their speed of cut (it's a choice of spend a fortune on discs or be patient - they do keep on cutting for a while - but here's hoping the diamond discs will arrive tomorrow), and that the chisels (Matsumura white steel) are in parts pretty approximately ground. (no idea what the norm is in this regard for Japanese chisels) Meaning that there's quite a lot of material to remove off what so far has been a 100% record of humped backs. Most have been close, but a few have been way off on bevel angle as well.

The back faces and hollows in the backs of the mortice and very narrow chisels were misaligned/quite tilted relative to the cross section of the blades too, and needed straightening - they were finished off on the 120 grit Shapton after a quick touch to get them close for fear of overdoing it.

Another manufacturing related issue has been (despite mutterings in the blurb that they are supposed to be cranked enough that the shank - the bottom surface of the round section bit between the blade and the socket - doesn't touch the work/stone) that most have needed dressing with a die grinder to create clearance. This would otherwise tip them forward to dub the edge.

None have been stropped yet (waiting for the adhesive film to arrive), so it may not work out at all - but the rationale as earlier is that using a 3mm thick MDF disc stuck to the glass disc with double sided adhesive film may help preserve the edge geometry.

[Reinis Kanders]

I use foot pedal for my worksharp when I flatten backs. Works well. It was about 30 bucks from Amazon.

[Chris Parks]

Flattening the backs on the WS for me was no issue and I read a thread here a short while ago talking about the problems some were having and wondered why. I just start it up and lay the chisel on it and get a perfect finish. I must instinctively do something that others are missing but heaven only knows what.

[Andrew Pitonyak]

Flattening the backs on the WS for me was no issue and I read a thread here a short while ago talking about the problems some were having and wondered why. I just start it up and lay the chisel on it and get a perfect finish. I must instinctively do something that others are missing but heaven only knows what.

I knew it.... it is just me :(

I told my wife one time that I thought I had no innate talent and that everything that I encountered was based entirely on tenacity and practice. I guess that after I messed up the backs of a couple of tools I did not have the gumption to continue. Would have been easier with a mentor I think. I suppose that I messed up plenty of bevels, but, unlike the back, you can't polish up the bevel once and call it good so I was forced to practice. My blades are much sharper than they used to be. And that is why I like sharpening threads; they serve sa my mentors.

Thanks for the information...

[Chris Parks]

Andrew, there are plenty of things I find difficult to do. I too look at others and there ability to just do anything they put their mind too. I have one friend who is just a natural talent and I wonder why he is not a millionaire. Hang in there and get a bit of flat steel strap and practise if it is something you really need to do.

[Prashun Patel]

Your innate talent appears to be tenacity and practice.

[ian maybury]

+1 on the persistence Andrew. Seeming talent is often just a matter of seeing what's in front of us. Of looking carefully, making the best judgement on a first method we can, and after that improving it based on our experience.

Reinis' foot pedal sounds like a smart way to reduce the risk of problems...

One key is not to let ourselves be fazed by or hung up on anything. (society spends a lot of time teaching us to defer to seeming authority…) Quite a few if they experience a problem have a default tendency to presume its them doing something wrong (when actually the advice/recommendation was a bit off/or something in the situation is different) and keep on trying the same method - so they inevitably keep on screwing up. (what bureaucracies do all the time)

Better to trust your own judgement, and try something different/adjust the method. Good judgement and thinking stuff through then does play a part, in that it reduces the number of hard lessons/fails...

The other factor is that some may have an awful lot of related hands on experience from a very young age that feeds into a given task (from stuff like modelling, DIY, time in a machine shop or whatever), even if they are not per se a hugely experienced or regarded woodworker. A more genuine beginner may just have to sweat for a while to get to the same place….

[Chris Parks]

Spot on Ian, I couldn't have said it better myself. I wish I could explain how to do it but like a lot of things it just gets done.

[Andrew Pitonyak]

I just had a meeting with a rep from the company that imports Tormek into the USA. He showed me how to flatten the back of a chisel on the Tormek. Wish I had that chat two weeks ago before I spent a bunch of time flattening the backs of six chisels on a series of stones. Took a very very long time. I even conned my 8 year old into helping me; she did a very good job on my last chisel. So, they are all very sharp at this point. I flattened the backs by hand, used a dry grinder to make things reasonable, then the Tormek to establish what I wanted, then I finished on water stones up to 16K followed by a stop (so they are very very sharp at the moment). Luckily for me, the Tormek is almost idiot proof for setting the bevel and such.

[ian maybury]

I have a Tormek Andrew, but couldn't see how to use the side to flatten a back. As in it'd be OK for a bit, but then the issue of needing to flatten and dress it comes up. Any chance of a steer?

[Andrew Pitonyak]

I have been using my Tormek for years for standard chisels and plane blades. I did learn a few things. He had a few tips with the parallel guide part (such as first place the chisel on the left side, make it mostly snug and then move it to the right and don't touch the left side again).

I had heard that before that you could use the side of the stone, but I had trouble laying it flat. When he flattened, he had the bar in front of the stone (rather than on the side) and he rested the side of the chisel on the bar as he simply brought the chisel back to the side of the stone. So, he simply used the side of the stone and he controlled the chisel by resting it on the bar. I am pretty sure that I never tried using the bar.

on a whim, I downloaded the latest copy of the manual from Tormek (it is on their web site), and they state the following:


The outside of the stone is machined flat and has a depressed centre so the grinding surface does not interfere with the washer and nut in the centre. This surface is reserved for flattening the back of plane irons, wood chisels and similar tools.

They have an illustration that shows the bar over the stone while flattening. The man I spoke with said that he has seen people do this by placing things flat against the stone before turning it on.

Seems that they have another figure showing the same procedure with the rest in front (page 122) . They have a section titled Flatten and Hone the Back of the Tools. They include a note in the section that states


Note Keep the tool absolutely flat against the grindstone. Otherwise the tip can cut into the wheel and be rounded off. Let the side of the tool rest on the Universal Support which should be placed close to the stone as shown. You do not need to smooth the tool more than 25–30 mm (1–1¼") from the edge.

They show it again on page 124.

[ian maybury]

Just an update. Some of the 100 and 500 grit diamond lapidary discs bought on E Bay for the WorkSharp 3000 ( by http://www.thk.hk ) arrived from Hong Kong and have had a test run - on the remaining few Japanese chisels, and on a bunch of old Marples and blue Irwins (same blades) i've had for years and which have been used for everything. (including opening paint tins)

Stuck them down on to the WorkSharp glass discs using double sided adhesive film. It works very nicely. Just take care to use a 1/2 in drill or something in the hole in the glass to guide the diamond disc into place as they need to be accurately centred.

The diamond works well. It cuts very aggressively when new, but pretty rapidly loses a lot of its bite - but seems to be holding very well at a level very similar to the equivalent 'run in' aluminium oxide disc from WorkSharp and to be lasting much better. Another positive is that it seems to put notably less heat into the metal than the AlOx paper. An 80 grit diamond disc would probably be better for flattening the backs of western chisels of this sort than the above - but work the backs up through successively finer discs (to at least 500) before shifting to the waterstones.

The Marples (which presumably are the usual commercial grade alloy steel) are a very different ball game to hone than the Japanese white steel chisels. It cuts well on the (Shapton professional) waterstones judging by the amounts of metal coming off, but feels different. Especially when flattening the (relatively much larger area/not hollowed) backs - a much greater tendency to suck down, and takes more time. It underlines just how smart the Japanese design is.

The alloy steel cuts differently to the white/carbon steel. It's a bit draggy, and the surface doesn't polish (maintains quite a dark tone) until the 12,000 grit right at the end - and even then it's not as bright. It's harder to remove scratches between grits too - probably just slower metal removal caused by the larger area. The widest chisel was really hard work, without a lot of pressure it was inclined to skid on the stone. It worked out fine, but the grade of steel and the area being worked can clearly make a very big difference to how/how well a given waterstone works.....

They do take an arm shaving sharp edge (in this case using a micro bevel), but it takes a bit more care. Soem complain of problems. One issue may (?) be that the alloy steel tends to form an obviously much thicker and larger wire edge on the coarser grits. It eventually hones off properly to leave an intact cutting edge, but for this to happen it's necessary to sneak gently up on it with controlled movements on successively finer grits (using a honing guide probably helps quite a bit too) - while resisting the temptation to tear/knock it off and probably take a chunk out of the edge. Quite how they will hold up in use is another matter.

Light dry stropping (?) on a buffing pad mounted on the WorkSharp (taking care to match the angles) definitely brings them up a little more.

Next up is to try the suggested honing on hard leather or on MDF discs (will try both) for re-sharpening….

[David Weaver]

There's not much 0.5 micron about the formax compound that lee valley and woodcraft sell.

I can't remember, but there's something like a particle limit of 3 or 6 microns for aluminum oxide in that stuff, and 70% of it is aluminum oxide. (that said, it still does provide a fine and sharp edge, and I'm convinced the al-ox is in it because woodworkers would be unsatisfied with how slow 0.5 micron chrome-ox actually cuts.

Graded chromium oxide pigment is available for cheap, though, in 0.3 and 0.5 microns, but they are way out there for most stuff you'll do day to day and you'll blast off that kind of edge fineness in a hurry. They are interesting for experimentation, though, and $10 worth will keep you stropping for a very very long time (and make everything you touch green).

Sharpening razors is definitely entirely different. The bevel on a razor is generally around 17 or 18 degrees and is fragile compared to a tool edge, and thus any significant pressure can cause microchipping on it. About the most you can infer from razor sharpening to apply to tools is that you can tease the wire edge off a little bit with light pressure and then strop whatever is left and get a good edge. Otherwise, you can be a little bit more heavy handed with your knives and chisels and favor time rather than fineness.

I'd imagine the danish oil is just, as you say, to harden the surface of the MDF and slick it. I haven't found it necessary, but I can't say it doesn't provide a benefit because I've not used such a thing on a regular basis.

I think I'd make my MDF lap 2" wide and no wider were I to do it these days, though - they could wear hollow in the middle and mildly belly your chisels. A narrow width will limit that.

There is truth, though, that particle size has overlap. Stuff like the gold compound is around 3 microns, IIRC, and suehiro and shapton make stones with finely graded particles all the way down to 1/2 micron. They are very expensive, though.

[David Weaver]

For no good reason, I just responded to a post from 7/26 by mistake, which is why that comment will make no sense.

[ian maybury]

No prob David, all good stuff. Stropping is the next sharpening technique for a try out here, although it may be a little while. Nice to be able to forget about Danish oil and stuff, to be able to just grab a piece of MDF. One of the more heighly bonded types like Valchromat would probably be more wear resistant.

The particle size overlap is definitely the interesting question regarding stropping vs. fine honing - given the fine finish and edge it produces. It may be as before that the dynamics of what goes on (free vs bound grits) makes a difference too.

The 12,000 Shapton seems to get stuff pretty damn sharp anyway....

[ian maybury]

To add a PS/qualifier to this thread which was about setting up some Matsumura chisels, and to float a question.

A set of Koyamaichi white steel paring chisels arrived from Japan over Christmas, I've just finished setting these up. Derek made a spot check of the two brands in use on WC a few years ago: http://tiny.cc/5mopsx - i've no comparative experience as yet.

It turns out that the Ks were quite a different deal to set up to the Matsumuras that were the subject of this thread. The Ms were my first exposure to Japanese chisels, and without exception were all humped or bowed away from the back to quite a degree - so that the if the rear/handle end of the back of the blade was rested on a flat surface that the cutting edge was raised by maybe 0.3 - 0.7mm above the surface - with the highest point typically 25 - 30mm (?) behind the cutting edge. This led into use of the WorkSharp/diamond set up described above (previously published by others) as there was more material to be removed than was to my mind realistic using waterstones.

The above while not in my view desirable (there's been discussion of the issue several times - some as a result advise only flattening for a shortish distance back from the edge, but this seems a forced compromise) seems to arise with some Japanese chisels - and not always consistently.

The Ks in contrast were in many cases flat enough to for the backs to clean up all over in a few minutes with a 1,000 grit waterstone. Some were a little less flat. For convenience I used the WorkSharp/diamond disc to flatten them. (it does a great job of producing a uniformly flat surface, especially the all important area right out through the edge and the corners, but in truth they could have been done on say a 120 grit waterstone with a bit more patience and elbow grease) The bevel angles were consistently ground at about 30 deg too - some of the Ms were quite a bit off in this regard. The other notable features were that the ura or hollows in the backs were quite a bit shallower and more precisly ground on the Ks, and were done after final heat treatment (were bright metal) - whereas the uras on the Ms were black suggesting they were heated again (maybe for tempered?) after grinding.

The two types handled very similarly on the waterstones. Both took a very good edge, with the outside possibility that the Ms were a hint harder.

The tendency to bow away from the hardened steel layer seems more or less universal in japanese chisels - it's normally evident as a hollow in the top of the chisel which is especially obvious where it meets the bevel. It seems likely that this is the result of the softer backing steel shrinking more than the (martensitic?) steel in the hardened/edge layer on quenching - the phenomenon that adds some of the curve to a samurai sword.

There's fairly clearly some difference in the manufacturing process between the above two makes of chisel. It may or may not have implications for the quality of the steel or the temper at the cutting edge, but for sure it makes a big difference to the amount of work required to set them up. Heavy humping may in more extreme cases make flattening of the entire back impractical by requiring removal of more of the hardened layer than is desirable.

Does anybody have any insight into the whys and wherefores of this difference?