Plane (and sharpening) training?

[sploo]

The picture does not do justice to show just how shiny that surface is - the camera refuses to see that shine, it either contrasts it out, or focuses on something that reflects on it, but the clarity on the string reflected if looked at closely is a good indication, even if the shine of the reflection doesn't show up everywhere. I was a bit shocked - hair shaving wasn't strained as much as the video, either (even the video is brighter than the camera makes it look. No clue how to get a picture of that shine.

Manual focus + manual exposure settings, and a lot of care in choosing your angles and lighting, basically (but it's certainly not easy). If the reflection catches the light it'll essentially be as bright as trying to get an image of a light source and detail in the rest of the room in one exposure (i.e. way too much dynamic range for the camera to capture). If you wanted to go crazy, then set everything up fixed (i.e. camera on a tripod), bracket a set of shots, and bring into some HDR software.

 

[D_W]

I used washita, jasper

What's the "jasper" stone? Not one I've seen listed in the older sources I have.

The only Jasper I know is a highly variable, semi-precious stone, with no abrasive properties I'm aware of.

EDIT; found it (and you, I'm guessing, DaveW )

http://straightrazorplace.com/hones/111 ... -jade.html

That's some obsessive stuff, there.

BugBear

Without a diamond hone, jasper will cut softer steels and do some cutting on water hardening tool steels, but not much (which makes it a good wire edge chaser). It's about 10 bucks over here in thin slabs that are used by jewelers (someone working as a faceter turned us on to it).

If you scuff it up with a diamond hone and make a slurry of it's own particles, it's really aggressive and not as fine until it settles in again. REALLY aggressive.

Unfortunately, the one that I used for that test was a new piece with some mill marks in it, so it can go a bit finer. It's interesting to see how fine the scratches are from the japanese stone, jasper and agate. And interesting in the shave to find out what edges look like (the little bits of flotsam on the edge before stropping with the jasper are thin foil that look bad, but don't seem to affect a shade - they are orders smaller than anything that would show up on wood).

Safe to say, the only practical use of a jasper in woodworking or knife sharpening is as a burnisher, other stones are better on slurry and the jaspers are REALLY hard. Some steels are so soft (440a stainless type steels, etc in pocket knives) that they won't take a good edge on anything other than fine compounds....or the jasper. It's useful in those cases to burnish and consolidate an edge. And on wharncliffe type blades where it's easy to use, it's a nice follow on to an arkansas stone and very fast to use before bare leather.

The chinese agate stone is similar in role, a little different in feel. A waste of money for anything other than razors (and really, a waste of money when jasper can be had for a few bucks). The advent of diamond plates has made it so that you can get some stones that won't release particles to release particles and cut, and do it without contamination that would occur if you tried to use emery. It's made things like ultra hard japanese stones popular for razors whereas 100 years ago, the stones that were a touch softer were preferred.

I have a little problem with sharpening stones and sharpening materials. (I still use a washita in woodworking tools, the nutty stuff is razor related where you can get a great edge and actually keep it for months, as opposed to a few plane strokes).

(I just read one of the posts, I'll wait for the critics to point out that I used the term coplanar where I should've said planar).

 

[Jacob]

.......
Bellied blades come from hollow stones, poor technique or both.

David

Slightly convex faces come from years of normal sharpening practice and matter not at all.
Hollow stones come about from normal use and is kept to a minimum by spreading the load where possible, but doesn't really matter (within reason).
Unless generations of tool users have simply got it all wrong and only the new sharpeners have seen the light.
"Bellied" seems to be Dave's word for it - it's not widely used apropos old tools with convex faces.

 

[AndyT]

Here's something I have learnt by reading this forum for a while.

You can achieve and maintain a sharp edge on a plane iron by using a stone which has worn concave. The iron fits into the hollow and is sharpened with a camber. The back of the iron does not need to be flat - just think about a shallow gouge - it has a curved back but can still have a sharp edge. This approach naturally suits honing by hand.

An alternative approach uses a guide to hold the iron at a consistent angle to the abrasive. Because the guide stops you following a curved surface, guided sharpening works best when all the surfaces - both sides of the iron, and the abrasive - are flat.

There is room in the world for both approaches, just as there is for people who open their boiled eggs at the big end or the little end.

 

[woodbrains]

Hello,

Concluding that a close set cap iron negates the need for the blade back to be as finely finished as the bevel, is about the worst logic I've come across. It is the meeting edge of the back and the bevel that does the cutting, the level of polish that we see is only an indicator of what that is like, since we cannot see the edge. The cut can only be as good as the edge produced by the courses stone. If we finish the bevel on whatever stone we think we need, why not use the same to do the back? Surely that is a step less.

Typical woodworkers who expect to get a finish directly from the tool are woodcarvers. Can anyone name a woodcarver who stops sharpening on India stones or Washita? Hell no, hard Arkansas then chrome oxide on a strop more like! I wonder why they bother and why we should not?

Mike.

 

[D_W]

Carving tools and plane irons aren't the same thing. I know someone who works professionally who finishes carving tools with slips and no chrome-ox. Most of the carvers I've asked use a powered tool and that's it (at least they claim that).

A washita stone does very well finishing wood, as long as there's clearance. A very sharp iron is often prescribed with tiny thin shavings as a safe alternative for planes with no cap iron.

A washita stone edge does plenty well enough when there is a cap to prevent a chip from lifting. I have never had trouble shaving hair off of my arm with a washita-finished iron that was stropped on bare leather, and I haven't had trouble getting a shaving a half thousandth from one.

I don't generally use india stones only on plane irons, the washita is my preferred level of normal finish on the iron (quick, clean hair shaving without pulling, etc).

I'm a bit baffled at the assumption that the cap iron doesn't relieve some of the pressure on the edge itself doing all of the tearout resistance. Uniformity with the cap iron installed is more important (so that there aren't lines on the surface). *plus* you can continue using the cap iron until the clearance has been eliminated and the plane no longer cuts without risking any significant problems with surface finish.

I think you mean opinion rather than logic.

 

[sploo]

Continuing my education in sharpening...

From watching a few of Paul Sellers' videos on sharpening, he seems to accomplish some tasks way faster (like, an order of magnitude) than I manage with my scary sharpening system (he uses diamond stones).

Just before Xmas I picked up a couple of Trend diamond stones (CR/DWS/B6/FC) on the cheap due to a manufacturing c*ck up (I believe they're supposed to be two sided in a plastic holder, but they've been glued into the holder). With a bit of brute force and ignorance, one was popped out and reversed, so I now have a coarse (360 grit) and a fine (600 grit).

The instructions claim that what would take 5-10 minutes on an oil stone will take 20 seconds on a diamond stone.

All I can say is "wow". The cutting speed is incredible. This afternoon I reground a dodgy (concave camber!) #5 1/2 plane iron by hand in a matter of minutes - the issues with the existing bevel were such that I'd definitely have needed the grinder before. I'm still finishing on the scary sharpening sheets as 600 grit obviously isn't that fine, but if/when these ones pack up I probably will invest in a set of decent diamond plates. Consider me a converted.

 

[ED65]

From watching a few of Paul Sellers' videos on sharpening, he seems to accomplish some tasks way faster (like, an order of magnitude) than I manage with my scary sharpening system (he uses diamond stones).

Hardly surprising. Some of it is purely about technique, but obviously diamond is much harder and (initially at least, when the grains have the sharpest edges) even more abrasive than this alone would account for.

Also with diamond stones you can press down HARD, much harder than you can get away with usually when using abrasive papers although this does depend to a degree on the type of paper and how it's adhered to the solid surface (PSA's hold on the support is much better than the 'water cling effect'). And films or cloths are more robust than a typical paper. But for anyone naturally a heavy-handed sharpener diamond plates are one of the two best sharpening options, the other being ceramics. Waterstones would be at the bottom of their list.

This afternoon I reground a dodgy (concave camber!) #5 1/2 plane iron by hand in a matter of minutes

Just to check, the corners stuck out slightly further than the centre of the edge? That's very difficult to achieve, I wonder how they managed it!

but if/when these ones pack up I probably will invest in a set of decent diamond plates.

You already have a set of decent diamond plates

This is one of those fiver specials from eBay right? What I would do in your shoes is buy a handful of them and keep a stock. Then all you need to look for is an ultra-fine to round out your diamond sharpening gear, with one or more strops to complete the edge IF needed – with a lot of the planing you'll be doing the edge from even your 600 plate will be perfectly adequate to the task.

I'm sure you'll have read this elsewhere but in case you hadn't hoisted this in, diamond plates have a break-in period where initially they are both coarser and as a result faster, than their real grit rating. So expect that they'll both slow down somewhat once used for a while. After than they'll continue to work that way until they begin to wear out, which if you're lucky will be many years from now.

 

[BearTricks]

Hello,

Concluding that a close set cap iron negates the need for the blade back to be as finely finished as the bevel, is about the worst logic I've come across. It is the meeting edge of the back and the bevel that does the cutting, the level of polish that we see is only an indicator of what that is like, since we cannot see the edge. The cut can only be as good as the edge produced by the courses stone. If we finish the bevel on whatever stone we think we need, why not use the same to do the back? Surely that is a step less.

Typical woodworkers who expect to get a finish directly from the tool are woodcarvers. Can anyone name a woodcarver who stops sharpening on India stones or Washita? Hell no, hard Arkansas then chrome oxide on a strop more like! I wonder why they bother and why we should not?

Mike.

I carve and I go up to 8000 grit then finish with autosol on an old bit of leather. I find it far easier to get a sharp carving knife.

Sent from my LG-H815 using Tapatalk

 

[Jacob]

..... But for anyone naturally a heavy-handed sharpener diamond plates are one of the two best sharpening options, the other being ceramics. Waterstones would be at the bottom of their list......

You can work hard on an oil stone too. They are the cheapest option of all and last for many years.
They do need refreshing every now and then as the surface gets clogged up. I use a 3m Diapad - slightly bendy so it will follow the surface of a worn stone.

 

[sploo]

Just to check, the corners stuck out slightly further than the centre of the edge? That's very difficult to achieve, I wonder how they managed it!

The edge itself was flat, it was the bevel as viewed from the side that was concave in places. From looking at it I'd guess a relatively small grinding wheel - the middle third of the bevel was concave. Ironically the edge was actually pretty sharp. I'd usually have fought with my cheap and nasty grinder but it was so much nicer just to fix it by hand.

You already have a set of decent diamond plates

This is one of those fiver specials from eBay right? What I would do in your shoes is buy a handful of them and keep a stock. Then all you need to look for is an ultra-fine to round out your diamond sharpening gear, with one or more strops to complete the edge IF needed – with a lot of the planing you'll be doing the edge from even your 600 plate will be perfectly adequate to the task.

I'm sure you'll have read this elsewhere but in case you hadn't hoisted this in, diamond plates have a break-in period where initially they are both coarser and as a result faster, than their real grit rating. So expect that they'll both slow down somewhat once used for a while. After than they'll continue to work that way until they begin to wear out, which if you're lucky will be many years from now.

Yep - the fiver special (out of stock now). The one plate isn't particularly flat and they're (literally) only just wide enough for a 2 3/8" wide plane iron, so something bigger would be good.

 

[ED65]

You can work hard on an oil stone too.

Yes, but. I had to generalise because oilstones can vary so much. They're my primarily sharpening media, but I have gouged the synthetics once or twice when working quickly or focussing attention on a corner when working towards a camber or repairing a slight skew. This is impossible to do on a diamond plate and probably nearly impossible on a ceramic stone which is why I said they were the two best options for the heavy handed.

I haven't used many natural oilstones but most I have used are extremely tough, however, they're not as commonly bought these days.

They are the cheapest option of all

When's the last time you bought an oilstone Jacob?

They are not the cheapest of all by a long shot especially if you want to include natural stones as an option.

There are cheap oilstones but the only ones really worth having are in a different price bracket.

 

[ED65]

The edge itself was flat, it was the bevel as viewed from the side that was concave in places. From looking at it I'd guess a relatively small grinding wheel - the middle third of the bevel was concave.

In case this was it is exactly the reason I wanted to check, that's not actually a problem and you could have left it.

Some or all of the concavity from a grinding wheel can remain after honing, it doesn't seem to affect performance in any way. It is theoretically weaker, but as covered in one of the threads recently (possibly this thread, can't remember!) in practice hollow-ground bevels don't seem to fail almost ever.

The one plate isn't particularly flat

Bummer. Might be worth coming up with a jig to clamp down opposing corners (close left and far right would suit a rightie).

and they're (literally) only just wide enough for a 2 3/8" wide plane iron, so something bigger would be good.

Long tradition of this Skew the iron, or work sideways.

 

[sploo]

Some or all of the concavity from a grinding wheel can remain after honing, it doesn't seem to affect performance in any way. It is theoretically weaker, but as covered in one of the threads recently (possibly this thread, can't remember!) in practice hollow-ground bevels don't seem to fail almost ever.

It was only across the middle third of the blade, and not particularly even, so I suspect that once I'd done a few sharpenings I'd have ended up with a hollow on the front edge - hence I removed it. I tend to try to do the donkey work when I get a new plane/chisel, so life is easier from there.

Bummer. Might be worth coming up with a jig to clamp down opposing corners (close left and far right would suit a rightie).

Now that it's been popped out I think it's straightened up a bit (I suspect it wasn't glued in very flat).

Long tradition of this Skew the iron, or work sideways.

I tried sideways across the stone, but you don't get much room, and I like to move over a longer arc to camber the bevel. It works ok along the length - I just need to not be too clumsy and pay a bit of attention to what I'm doing :wink:

 

[ED65]

It was only across the middle third of the blade, and not particularly even, so I suspect that once I'd done a few sharpenings I'd have ended up with a hollow on the front edge - hence I removed it.

Unless I'm being dense your sharpening media would have bridged the hollow, so it would have taken down the high spots and left the hollow alone until you got down to that level across the bevel many sharpenings down the road.

I tried sideways across the stone, but you don't get much room, and I like to move over a longer arc to camber the bevel.

Oh sorry I was thinking of a different method entirely. It's a different story if sharpening like Paul Sellers where the whole bevel is worked every time.

 

[Jacob]

......
Some or all of the concavity from a grinding wheel can remain after honing, it doesn't seem to affect performance in any way. It is theoretically weaker, but as covered in one of the threads recently (possibly this thread, can't remember!) in practice hollow-ground bevels don't seem to fail almost ever.....

There are degrees of hollow grinding. You could grind to a very fine and very weak edge if you chose.
It isn't good with your normal Bailey thin blade either - which is rather the point of the Bailey design; thin blade making (machine) grinding unnecessary

 

[sploo]

Unless I'm being dense your sharpening media would have bridged the hollow, so it would have taken down the high spots and left the hollow alone until you got down to that level across the bevel many sharpenings down the road.

Difficult to explain without pictures (which I don't have now that I've re-ground it) but yes, you're probably right. The problem is that I get small amounts of time on an occasional basis - i.e. if I get half a day to fettle and sharpen a new (old) plane then I'll use it, as from there it might be weeks before I get time (job + family). As such, many of my jobs tend to be a "just got 5 minutes" type thing, and so if I found myself with something less than optimal (like an odd edge due to finally getting to that weird concavity) I'd be stuffed re my "5 minute" windows; until I got time to do the job properly again. Hence I tend to go at something fully when I have the time windows.

Oh sorry I was thinking of a different method entirely. It's a different story if sharpening like Paul Sellers where the whole bevel is worked every time.

Yep - Seller's style. Not saying that's optimal, but it seems to work for me (having tried using a honing guide and found it slow and frustrating - but then my guide is pretty cr*ppy).

 

[ED65]

Yep - Seller's style. Not saying that's optimal, but it seems to work for me

No need to convince me, I mostly sharpen his way.

I've only recently started experimenting with secondary bevels* on plane irons after finally hoisting in that honing angle almost doesn't matter. My goal is always to try to get back to work in 30 seconds or less and if there is a significant wear bevel on the iron a secondary bevel is one good way to do it that fast, not that working the entire convex bevel lags that much behind.

*Which I used to be firmly against on principle, before I learned that they're not an evil Spectre plot designed to produce weak edges

 

[beech1948]

You have to laugh out loud.

Here is poor old sploo trying to get some advise and what do we get. The same three or four old codgers battling it out with innuendo, rudeness, snarkiness about the same old stuff. It gets a bit boring to have to read through this "sh*t" to see the writings of others. Time for you three or four to give it a rest for a while or better yet a year or two.

I am 68.
In 1959 I went anxiously to my first secondary school.
In my first week I was introduced to the woodwork shop. Given the safety talk, shown where everything was and told we would learn to sharpen planes and chisels at the next lesson in two days.

Two days later I was shown how to sharpen by hand without the benefit of a jig by a timeserved pro who along with 12 mates came in for that day to give all the new intake some 1:1 guidance. All ( as my memory goes eschewed jigs). Rounded bevels were abundant, angles were approximate from 30 degrees down to about 23 degrees depending on the pupil. Secondary bevels were about 5 degrees more than the primary ones or maybe 7 or 8 degrees.

All blades could cut end grain well, all chisels would cut and depth into a mortice easily. I learned from my timeserved pro that when it needed an extra push it was time to sharpen again.....4 or 5 strokes on the secondary bevel, clean the swarf off and proceed because time was money.

For the next 8 years that is what I did and then I moved onto University, a BSc and eventually a Phd and to work in the fledgeling IT industry I left some 14 yrs ago.

In all of that time I have not forgotten how to sharpen freehand at speed and with a lot of acuracy. Not too shabby for 56 yrs of woodwork experience.

I now find that an injury some 18 yrs ago to my left arm has made it too weak to correctly hold and sharpen small sized chisels and narrow plane blades. I use the Veritas jig, which works wonderfully for the narrower blades and no doubt will use it more as I age further.

The only reason people today use jigs so frequently is that no one showed them a better way. Especially true of amateurs.

The arguements over jig or non-jig use are pretty stupid and back to the three or four gents mentioned above rather childlike.

Whatever works is what counts for the amateur. Often its not time critical it is afterall supposed to be a fun hobby.

BUT, why don't those who so strongly argue and theorise about sharpening simply offer a few days each year to teach a couple of rookies for free. Could be freehand; could be jig based. Think of it as passing on your knowledge just like the timeserved pros did for me in 2x2 hour lessons.

It might be better to do something and change things than to argue like kids over technique when we need practical methods to be demonstrated by one man to the next. TELL----SHOW----DO!

Anyone want to open up their workshop for a Sarurday am/pm/evening for a couple of hours by appointment.

I did my first effort 3 weeks on a visit to London at a Mens Shed in south London.

 

[beech1948]

PS,

I'm not saying that the three or four old antagonists are wrong simply that it is upto the user to choose his/her method not you.