My take on the LV chromium oxide compound

[Patrick Chase]

I'm splitting this off from the "Spyderco" thread as it's a tangent, but want to make a couple remarks in the wake of the recent "rediscovery" that the LV honing compound contains larger Al-Oxide particles.

As noted in the other thread, the LV honing compound is very cheap as abrasives go, at $0.07/g. That puts it at about 1/100th of the cost of quality diamond pastes, and 1/7th that of the pure Cr-Oxide paste that Stewie cited. The thing to bear in mind is that that price point doesn't really support expensive processing or process controls.

As also noted in the other thread, the real-world performance of the compound in question is MUCH better than implied by the "300- grit" specification that its ultimate manufacturer provides.

What I think is happening is that the grinding process for the Al-Oxide in that paste actually produces very small particles the vast majority (and perhaps even all) of the time. Because of the price/cost constraints they're unable to do anything fancier than sieving to grade the resulting particles, and as a result the finest grit they can specify is the size of their sieve, hence "300-". In my experience as a (former) mechanical engineer this sort of thing is very common in cost-constrained products. While you may achieve some level of quality the vast majority of the time, you can't afford the incremental cost to do what it takes to formally claim that as your specification.

What I'm driving at here is that I wouldn't read too much into that spec. As I've said many times, based on my own experience I don't think the stuff is really "0.5 um", but it definitely isn't "300 grit" either. If it's working for you then stick with it. If you haven't tried it and you're on a budget then you probably should at least give it a go, because IMO it's good enough for (most) woodworking and the value is unbeatable.

You can get finer edges with a good polishing stone or tightly-graded compound, but I'm still not convinced that matters for anything but planing competitions and bragging rights. Full disclosure: I'm obsessive enough that I use tightly graded films and pastes much of the time. I'm just trying to be realistic about what all of that buys me (mostly speed IMO).

[Patrick Chase]

First, I doubt that he was stropping with the LV compound. Most of the competition and straight-razor folks seem to go for either untreated strops or more exotic compounds like 0.025 um CBN sprays. Given Brian's known burr-detecting abilities (his apprentice recently compared him to the Princess and the Pea) I suspect that he was using an untreated strop to do final burr remover after his JNat polishers. I therefore doubt that whatever he saw has relevance to this discussion.

Second, nobody I know takes or needs to take continuous and flawless 8 micron shavings that must run the entire length of a cherry-picked piece of clear/straight-grained timber as part of their daily woodworking. For that specific use I can easily believe that stropping would be counterproductive on multiple levels, starting with the fact that you fundamentally give up some control of tip geometry when you strop with compliant media. I don't think anybody (even Brian) would generalize from "you need to do X to win planing competitions" to "you need to do X to make good furniture". That was really the point of the remark you quoted.

[Patrick Chase]

Patrick; I recently asked you, what was your logic in owning a #7, # 7 1/2, and #8 jointing planes. You answered my question by stating, "who said there was any logic applied." :D


and now we have this statement.



Since you asked, I bought the BUJointer ("7-1/2") first when I thought that BU was the way to go because it provided easier edge-angle control. Then along came the latest rediscovery of cap irons, as well as the Veritas custom planes which made angle changes easy by offering modular frogs. That's when/why I got the 7. Then I tried an 8 and decided I really liked the extra size for panel work. If I had it to do again I'd skip the 7-1/2. I think "who said there was any logic applied" conveys the amount of thrash and evolving knowledge involved much more concisely and efficiently, though.

[Stewie Simpson]

I had a look at the feasibility of using the higher cost premium diamond pastes. The research I carried out suggests that dependant on the substrate used within the strop, what can occur is that the hard diamond particles will embed themselves within the substrate to the point they make no actual contact with the cutting edge being honed. I am hopeful the particles within the pure chromium oxide will not be offer a different outcome. On the subject of the Chromium Oxide Jewellers Rouge, it should be remembered that the wax component within these products deems it better suited for high speed power stropping, where the friction heat generated will soften the wax to expose the polishing compounds within. That its being advertised for use with hand stropping I am yet to fully understand.

Stewie;

[Kees Heiden]

About the subject, I use Autosol, because the LV green compound isn't easilly avialable overhere. Autosol is also cheap, I have no idea how it is rated but it puts a nice shine on my bevels ;)

[Pat Barry]

... The research I carried out suggests that dependant on the substrate used within the strop, what can occur is that the hard diamond particles will embed themselves within the substrate to the point they make no actual contact with the cutting edge being honed. I am hopeful the particles within the pure chromium oxide will not be offer a different outcome. Stewie;
The largest particles are typically going to be odd shaped and longer than they are wide, for example. As such they are not stable standing straight up where you might think that they would be prone to putting a deep gouge into your edge. The most likely scenario is that the larger particles just lay down on the surface due to simple physics as part of the honing process . I suppose that they all must embed to a point (sic) just so that they don't slide all over. I think it highly unlikely that the large particles get driven very deeply into the strop surface however. As for not making contact, unless all the particles are exactly the same size and shape, the smalletst one will not make contact, again due to simple physics.

[Stewie Simpson]

Kees; David Weaver mentioned recently he has had success using a different stropping compound, I cant remember what that product was, Derek may recall.

Stewie;

[Stewie Simpson]

The largest particles are typically going to be odd shaped and longer than they are wide, for example. As such they are not stable standing straight up where you might think that they would be prone to putting a deep gouge into your edge. The most likely scenario is that the larger particles just lay down on the surface due to simple physics as part of the honing process . I suppose that they all must embed to a point (sic) just so that they don't slide all over. I think it highly unlikely that the large particles get driven very deeply into the strop surface however. As for not making contact, unless all the particles are exactly the same size and shape, the smalletst one will not make contact, again due to simple physics.

Hi Pat; some of the diamond pastes and honing sprays available on the market are down to 0.5, 1, and 2.5 micron in sizing. http://www.bestsharpeningstones.com/catalog/Hand-America-Diamond-Spray.htm

Stewie;

[Stewie Simpson]

Kees; you may find the following study of interest. https://scienceofsharp.wordpress.com/2015/03/31/the-pasted-strop-part-3/

Stewie;

[Derek Cohen]

Stewie, did you read the home page, where the author writes ..



There is a misconception that more expensive, higher purity abrasives with tighter size distributions are always superior.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Stewie Simpson]

As a user of natural water stones, I found the following study on Jnat slurry of great interest.

https://scienceofsharp.wordpress.com/2016/03/29/jnat-slurry-part-2/

Stewie;

[Brian Holcombe]

I haven't taken any offense to this thread, so no worries there.

WRT to the relevance of the planing competition to regular work, it's a few measures of extreme beyond what most would normally take but it helps the participants in problem solving when they return to normal work. I prepped the beam with winding sticks followed by a 3' precision straight edge and a 1 thou feeler gauge, not a lot of people had seen that sort of thing done and it was maybe an 'ah-ha' moment to witnesses who have trouble taking a full length shaving. Normally one does not need that extreme but when you see it, it helps problem solve if you are not getting full shavings (and blaming your plane).

Same can be said about the extreme degree of sharpening or sole prep or anything of that sort. It helps you determine what is actually critical in normal use and to separate what truly matters from what makes little difference and even further to what is actually causing you a disservice when you thought otherwise.

Basically if you have figure out how to take an 8 micron or thinner shaving it causes you to become very good at taking 100 micron shavings.

[Bruce Page]

Folks, I have done a lot of editing/deleting in an attempt to get this thread back on track and to remove several personal attacks.
Please stay on topic.

[Patrick Chase]

Stewie, did you read the home page, where the author writes ..

"There is a misconception that more expensive, higher purity abrasives with tighter size distributions are always superior."

Regards from Perth

Derek


Indeed, particularly when one considers cost-effectiveness.

What I think the tightly-graded abrasives do ultimately buy you is speed. I say "ultimately" because it's indirect. IMO edge quality is largely determined by the larger particles in the abrasive medium.
It doesn't matter if 95% of the edge is pristine if the other 5% has massive scratches. This means that if you have a loosely-graded abrasive you have to "de-rate" a bit more to achieve any given quality.

Conversely, speed is mostly determined by the nominal particle size. Returning to my example above, the overall speed at which metal is removed is governed more by the 95% of the edge that's getting polished.

What this means in the real world is that a tightly-graded abrasive lets you use a higher nominal size for any given target quality, and that translates to higher speed. You'll pay dearly for that speed, though, so whether it's "superior" or not depends a lot on what value you assign to your time.

[Patrick Chase]

I had a look at the feasibility of using the higher cost premium diamond pastes. The research I carried out suggests that dependant on the substrate used within the strop, what can occur is that the hard diamond particles will embed themselves within the substrate to the point they make no actual contact with the cutting edge being honed.

Very true. I've seen the same thing even with MDF, never mind leather. FWIW I use mild steel and cast iron plates, but you can't really call it "stropping" at that point. It also takes a while to get your fine-grit plates flattened to the point where they cut efficiently in succession, particularly for wider tools.


I am hopeful the particles within the pure chromium oxide will not be offer a different outcome.

Both Cr-oxide and diamond are effectively "infinitely hard and sharp" compared to leather or MDF, so I wouldn't expect a different outcome. IMO the biggest difference is that at 1/100th to 1/10th the price of good diamond compound (for LV and the pure Cr-oxide you bought, respectively) it isn't a big deal if you have to periodically refresh it.

w.r.t. the wax thing, a lot of people work in some mineral oil when they apply the compound. At that point the wax in the bar is just a convenient storage/delivery vehicle, which the user "seasons to taste".

[Patrick Chase]

Hi Pat; some of the diamond pastes and honing sprays available on the market are down to 0.5, 1, and 2.5 micron in sizing. http://www.bestsharpeningstones.com/catalog/Hand-America-Diamond-Spray.htm

Stewie;

Norton goes down to 0.25, PSI goes to 0.1, and others go even lower, particularly if you include CBN.

I have both 0.25 and 0.1, though I almost never use the latter because I've found it to be more hassle than it's worth. Probably the biggest hassle is that you'll end up polishing one or two spots on your blade unless you either use a flexible backing or your 0.1 um plate *exactly* matches the flatness profile of your next-higher plate. I mostly got it out of curiosity. For most things I stop at 0.5, and even that is probably overkill with a tightly-graded (low max grit size) paste.

[Luke Dupont]

Interesting discussion.

One thing: I notice that people are always pointing specifically to the LV compound in these discussions. Do you have any experience with other brands / find any noticeable variance?

I still am quite fond of the green compound because I feel it is one of the most cost effective, and easiest ways to get a very fine edge even if you finish on a fairly coarse stone, though. Even a 1200 grit diamond plate, or an India, when followed by a strop loaded with this compound will produce a pretty decent edge. If you use plain leather instead, you won't even be able to remove a burr often times at these grits, much less refine the edge. For this reason I used to doubt the effectiveness of bare leather, but since I've acquired some finer stones I'm beginning to be of the same impression as you.

Lately, since I have finer stones now, I've been experimenting with plain leather strops without compound, and I've been impressed with the kind of edge I'm able to produce. Ending on my Washita, I'm able to get a *much* finer edge than I would have expected just by going to plain leather. Same is true for my hard and translucent arks, though the difference (extent to which I'm able to refine the edge from its starting point) is less remarkable than it is with my Washita. My synthetics and waterstone don't seem to respond as well to an unloaded strop at the same "ballpark" grit. Mind you, the finest waterstone I have is only 2400 grit, but that should be finer than my Washita in theory. However, if I sharpen and strop on bare leather and compare the two, I'll get a significantly finer edge off of the Washita, interestingly enough. This makes me wonder if the scratch pattern left behind from the Washita responds better to an untreated strop due to... shallower valleys/scratches? Of course, I could just be judging the corresponding "grit" of my Washita incorrectly, but it already removes material faster than the 2400 grit waterstone I'm comparing it to.

As to weather stropping with compound vs stropping without improves my edge more off of say my Washita, Hard, or Translucent Ark, it's hard for me to say. I think it may improve the Washita and the Hard Ark more than plain leather, but the difference is not nearly as large as one would expect, and I think I'm able to get pretty comparable results with bare leather.

One last observation I have, though, is that I don't think people generally strop enough to get the full benefit of the green compound. Even finishing on my finer stones, I find that I need as many as 40-50 strokes to get a the full benefit of the strop, if not more, depending on how much pressure is used. And while some claim that worn-in compound works better, I find I still get better final results with fresher compound (granted, I guess it gets worn in fairly quickly with the number of strokes that I generally employ).

I'm still quite new to all of these mediums though, so this is all strictly my limited experience / early impressions.

[Jim Koepke]

One last observation I have, though, is that I don't think people generally strop enough to get the full benefit of the green compound. Even finishing on my finer stones, I find that I need as many as 40-50 strokes to get a the full benefit of the strop, if not more, depending on how much pressure is used.

One of the books in my library suggests no more than 10 strokes on either side of a blade when stropping.

Today off of my 8000 stone only 5 stokes on the strop were used on either side to get to a fine polish.

My strop is leather and is loaded with green compound from a lapidary supply store.

My experience with stropping much more than 10 strokes is the likelihood of rounding the edge.

jtk

[Pat Barry]

Stewie provided an interesting link on the stropping topic earlier. If you haven't checked it out you should. Also, I found the second page on this website very informative as well --> check it out https://scienceofsharp.wordpress.com/2016/05/29/the-pasted-strop-part-4/

[george wilson]

The likelihood of rounding the edge by stropping depends upon what the strop is made of,and your technique. I use a MDF strop which is not prone to round the edge unless the user lifts up the blade towards the end of the stroke. I don't do that,but many may. No telling what different people might do.

I wear a 1 1/2" belt custom made of hard English harness leather(The harness maker made it for me. Probably will outlast me!) I take the end out of the keeper and use its HARD suede side as a strop when sitting in the living room. It brings back my SLIGHTLY less than razor sharp ball bearing steel blade pocket knife blade,which I made, to razor keen ness. I take light strokes,and may do 100 if needed. There is no compound on the belt. Certainly gets the knife razor sharp again. I get about 8" of belt to strop on when I pull it out of the leather keeper. Only use about 3" to strop on. I CHANGE ANGLES a lot. That includes the initial stropping after honing the blade on the last stone.

I find I don't need to strop after the UF ceramic stone. It will get razor sharp just off the stone,easily shaving hairs. But,part of that is how I USE the stone. Angles,etc..

I repeat: ITS ALL ABOUT TECHNIQUE that you bring to bear on the strop. Not necessarily the strop itself,provided the strop is made of good material itself,properly compounded (for initial stropping just after stoning),etc..

[Pat Barry]

The likelihood of rounding the edge by stropping depends upon what the strop is made of,and your technique. I use a MDF strop which is not prone to round the edge unless the user lifts up the blade towards the end of the stroke. I don't do that,but many may. No telling what different people might do.

I wear a 1 1/2" belt custom made of hard English harness leather(The harness maker made it for me. Probably will outlast me!) I take the end out of the keeper and use its HARD suede side as a strop when sitting in the living room. It brings back my SLIGHTLY less than razor sharp ball bearing steel blade pocket knife blade,which I made, to razor keen ness. I take light strokes,and may do 100 if needed. There is no compound on the belt. Certainly gets the knife razor sharp again. I get about 8" of belt to strop on when I pull it out of the leather keeper. Only use about 3" to strop on. I CHANGE ANGLES a lot. That includes the initial stropping after honing the blade on the last stone.

I find I don't need to strop after the UF ceramic stone. It will get razor sharp just off the stone,easily shaving hairs. But,part of that is how I USE the stone. Angles,etc..

I repeat: ITS ALL ABOUT TECHNIQUE that you bring to bear on the strop. Not necessarily the strop itself,provided the strop is made of good material itself,properly compounded (for initial stropping just after stoning),etc..
George, thanks for the info. As a learning point for us, can you articulate how much force you use to strop on your MDF? Would you say it is high pressure or low pressure. How about when you charge the strop with fresh paste - do you use a lot of pressure then to embed the particles? How about the angle for stropping - do you try to replicate the angle used for honing on your stones or do you go to an even lower angle? Thanks

[Luke Dupont]

One of the books in my library suggests no more than 10 strokes on either side of a blade when stropping.

Today off of my 8000 stone only 5 stokes on the strop were used on either side to get to a fine polish.

My strop is leather and is loaded with green compound from a lapidary supply store.

My experience with stropping much more than 10 strokes is the likelihood of rounding the edge.

jtk

I've actually had no problem with rounding the edge, except for two exceptions that I'll mention. I use a backed leather strop, and if I test the angle that my chisel or plane iron starts cutting at, it is rarely changed much by stropping.

The two exceptions to this were:
1. When I used a very wet/loose compound that didn't stick to the strop, moved around, and therefore dubbed my edge.
2. When I was goofing around and trying to strop on my wallet, which is way too soft and has too much give. This dubbed my edge as well.

Of course, I guess there is no harm in going less - it will still help to remove the burr. But you won't get the full benefit of the strop.

Now, of course, if you are ending on a really fine stone (maybe finer than 8000), or the strop is in less than optimal shape, then there is a chance that it will degrade or just not improve your edge regardless of technique. I find this to happen if my strop is really dirty or something.

I always advocate experimenting and seeing for yourself, though! Try going significantly more, if you feel experimentive some time. Test the angle and the sharpness as you go. It's all in technique. As george says, a strop won't dub your edge, unless it's just entirely too soft or the compound isn't behaving properly.

[Patrick Chase]

One of the books in my library suggests no more than 10 strokes on either side of a blade when stropping.

I think that the overall point (that stropping too much increases likelihood of rounding) is valid, but it seems to me that the maximum number of strokes would depend on the strop in addition to the user's technique. As an example, an untreated fabric strop does next to nothing to the steel with each stroke, and so people can and do use very high stroke counts with good results. I've seen people advocate up to 100 or more strokes in that configuration.

On the other extreme a leather strop with honing compound does a fair bit to the steel with each stroke, so the limit will be correspondingly lower.

[Patrick Chase]

Interesting discussion.

One thing: I notice that people are always pointing specifically to the LV compound in these discussions. Do you have any experience with other brands / find any noticeable variance?

The LV is the only wax-based compound I've used, so I don't know how any of the similar bars on the market perform. I've seen it claimed that most of them ultimately come from the same supplier, but I haven't seen any documentation (MSDS/SDS/etc) to confirm that.

I've used the Tormek compound, which is an oil-based aluminum-oxide paste (no chromium oxide). It seem to work very well, and maybe leaves a slightly cleaner surface than the green compound. I've also used 0.5 um alumina powder on strops both with and without oil, with extremely good results.

[Sean Hughto]

Sayre: "In any dispute the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the issues at stake."

[Trevor Goodwin]

The LV is the only wax-based compound I've used, so I don't know how any of the similar bars on the market perform. I've seen it claimed that most of them ultimately come from the same supplier, but I haven't seen any documentation (MSDS/SDS/etc) to confirm that.

Patrick here's one for you: http://www.flexcut.com/pw11-flexcut-gold-polishing-compound/ Flexcut Gold. It's meant for carving tools. I think it uses a blend that is mostly titanium oxide. It works very well and has a good reputation. The Flexcut company recommend only stropping their knives and never take them to stones. I believe this is because the compound on a strop maintains the factory micro-bevel which makes the edge last a lot longer.

[Patrick Chase]

Stewie provided an interesting link on the stropping topic earlier. If you haven't checked it out you should. Also, I found the second page on this website very informative as well --> check it out https://scienceofsharp.wordpress.com/2016/05/29/the-pasted-strop-part-4/

+1 for scienceofsharp. I stumbled across that site a while back, and his SEM work is amazing.

I don't think that all of his conclusions necessarily hold for woodworking. In particular he's honing to pretty low tip angles suitable for razors, and has problems with tip "break-off" in some cases, for example here (https://scienceofsharp.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/g20_500ltr_100lin_04.jpg). My intuition is that that wouldn't be as much of a problem at common edge-tool angles, and that you might not want to sacrifice acuity at the very tip if you're starting with a more obtuse base angle.

[Stewie Simpson]

I have placed an order for a 60 inch length of 3.5mm x 76mm Cowhide Butt Leather from the U.K, to make up some new stropping paddles. The leather will be glued to the wood substrate flesh side down.

http://www.jwoodleathers.co.uk/leatherhide.html

Stewie;

[Stewie Simpson]

The Pure Chromium Oxide Paste arrived in the mail today. I completed a basis trial on the application of PCOP product compared that of the Chromium Oxide Wax Compound (COWC) to some old stock cowhide leather I had in my workshop.

The PCOP was very easy to apply. Only the smallest amount was required to cover a large area of leather. As you wipe the surface with your finger tip, you can feel the extremely fine granular polishing compound within the product. Wear rubber gloves when applying this product as it will stain your skin.

The COWC was a lot harder to apply to work an even coverage across the surface of the leather. As you wipe the surface with your finger tip, the surface feels very undulated and clumpy, with obvious signs of the fine granular polishing compound within the product.

http://i1009.photobucket.com/albums/af219/swagman001/pure%20chromium%20oxide%20paste/_DSC0202_zpsm5idgwfd.jpg (http://s1009.photobucket.com/user/swagman001/media/pure%20chromium%20oxide%20paste/_DSC0202_zpsm5idgwfd.jpg.html)

I have read of recommendations not to use any petroleum products on leather strops, as its use long term can severely damage the strengthening fibres within the leather itself, potentially resulting in rotting of the leather.

As a test only, I rubbed the surface of the COWC vigorously with a Honing Oil to see if that allow the COWC to be more evenly spread across the leather. Due to the wax component within this product it made no difference.

http://i1009.photobucket.com/albums/af219/swagman001/pure%20chromium%20oxide%20paste/_DSC0203_zpsn7cephvw.jpg (http://s1009.photobucket.com/user/swagman001/media/pure%20chromium%20oxide%20paste/_DSC0203_zpsn7cephvw.jpg.html)

I then trialled rubbing the surface of the COWC vigorously with Mineral Turpentine. Due to the wax component within this product it made little to no difference.

http://i1009.photobucket.com/albums/af219/swagman001/pure%20chromium%20oxide%20paste/_DSC0204_zpswkw4he6n.jpg (http://s1009.photobucket.com/user/swagman001/media/pure%20chromium%20oxide%20paste/_DSC0204_zpswkw4he6n.jpg.html)

Stewie;

[Stewie Simpson]

When viewing the content of the Pure Chromium Oxide Paste, be aware that is all you receive within the supplied container. On opening the product, there was a very thin layer of solidified paste on top of the liquid paste below. That skin has to be removed and discarded as its not re-usable. Its represents a loss of usable product. To prevent re-occurrence at a later stage, I am storing this product in a refrigerator between use. I will make inquiries with the supplier to obtain some further advice.

Its important to note that I payed full retail price to personally trial this Pure Chromium Oxide Paste product.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Chromium Oxide Paste 1 £15.00 £15.00
================================================== ====================
Subtotal: £15.00
Shipping (Airmail Signed): £11.00
Total (inc VAT): £26.00

Stewie;

[george wilson]

Pat: I answered your PM. But,I don't use a lot of pressure when stropping,and I change angles all the time. I neglected to say that I strop LIGHTER and lighter as I near the finished edge. Changing stropping angles is to help prevent the build up of microscopic "mountains" on the edge. Changing angles helps wear them down more evenly. And,lightening the strokes is to strop the increasingly sharp edge more delicately,to help preserve the sharpness.

[Patrick Chase]

I have read of recommendations not to use any petroleum products on leather strops, as its use long term can severely damage the strengthening fibres within the leather itself, potentially resulting in rotting of the leather.

In that case you should probably stick to wax-based compounds. The Workshop Heaven paste is mineral-oil-based IIRC (it had better be, because if it's vegetable oil it will polymerize and turn rancid on your strop in short order). The wax in the conventional bar is also petroleum-based, but it's relatively non-penetrating compared to oil.

w.r.t. application, the first few passes with a tool smooth out the wax-based compound. Diitto with working in mineral oil as a thinner - put a couple drops on it and run an edge over. I wouldn't use mineral spirits, though, as those will just absorb into the leather without doing much of anything to the paste.

I'll grant you that pastes look better "out of the box", but I don't think that has any real significance.

[Stewie Simpson]

I'll grant you that pastes look better "out of the box", but I don't think that has any real significance.

Patrick; you don't think or you don't know. It would help if you could clarify that point.

Stewie;

[Patrick Chase]

Patrick; you don't think or you don't know. It would help if you could clarify that point.

Stewie;

When I've used the paste on both leather and mdf it clumped on application, as you demonstrate. I observed that it became smoother as I used it, and I didn't see any edge degradation. So:

1. I *know* that the clumping had no significance in my specific situation.

2. I *think* that that conclusion should generalize to others.

[Stewie Simpson]

My contribution to this post has ended.

regards Stewie