Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me
Sharpener and Accessory Maintenance

TOPIC: Chosera stone maintenance

Re: Chosera stone maintenance 1 year 3 months ago #11724

  • PhilipPasteur
  • PhilipPasteur's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Phil
  • Posts: 944
  • Thank you received: 233
  • Karma: 66
I am pretty sure that I remember that there is also a thread out there where Clay mentions... in a conversation about WEPS ceramic stones and their grit equivalents, that the Ceramic stone producers actually rate their products by surface roughness rather than grit equivalence...
No time to dig it up right now perhaps in the AM..
Phil

MAX 2001-2013
Hoping there is that bridge!
I miss you Buddy!
Last Edit: 1 year 3 months ago by PhilipPasteur.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Chosera stone maintenance 1 year 3 months ago #11726

  • KenSchwartz
  • KenSchwartz's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Expert Boarder
  • Posts: 94
  • Thank you received: 29
  • Karma: 25
So does this imply that the surface roughness remains constant and that there is no wear, or does it imply that as the surface wears the grit changes? There seems to be something missing with this picture. It seems that one of these two postulates should be true.

And just what is this transfer function or relationship between this 'engraved' scratch pattern and the fineness of the finish? Is there an upper and lower limit to how this scratch pattern can control the fineness of finish? And does this react similarly for various steels?

And could I texturize this surface with 0.1 micron diamond film and get a tenth micron honing surface from the ceramic?

So far I remain skeptical.

---
Ken
Last Edit: 1 year 3 months ago by KenSchwartz.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Chosera stone maintenance 1 year 3 months ago #11729

  • PhilipPasteur
  • PhilipPasteur's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Phil
  • Posts: 944
  • Thank you received: 233
  • Karma: 66
I had some similar thoughts when I read what both Sal and (I think) Clay said. How could the abrasive effect remain constant with wear. Is it possible to make the ceramis so that as new surfaces are exposed they maintain tha same roughness... especially when Sal mentioned using diamond abrasives for testuring what I can only believ ti the very surface of the stone.

OTH, Spyderco started out make sharpeners. They have been doing it for a very long time. It is hard to imagine that Sal is not very knowledgeable on the subject.

There must be something we haven't come to understand in this thing...

However, the original question that Mark asked was relative to him buying an Atoma plate that was finer then his 140 for texturing his 5K plus grit waterstones. From what you, Ken, and Tom have expressed texture does make a difference at the edge. Both have said that there can be a difference in finish due to stone texturing. This ties in well with what I have written and what I have observed.

I think we could say that Mark would be making a good move by getting a 400 or maybe 600 Atoma for an intermediate stage before using the stones themselves for the final texturing. It is really quite similar to sharpening, the smaller the scratches left at the previous grit, the faster one can remove them at the next level.
KenSchwartz wrote:
So does this imply that the surface roughness remains constant and that there is no wear, or does it imply that as the surface wears the grit changes? There seems to be something missing with this picture. It seems that one of these two postulates should be true.

And just what is this transfer function or relationship between this 'engraved' scratch pattern and the fineness of the finish? Is there an upper and lower limit to how this scratch pattern can control the fineness of finish? And does this react similarly for various steels?

And could I texturize this surface with 0.1 micron diamond film and get a tenth micron honing surface from the ceramic?

So far I remain skeptical.

---
Ken
Phil

MAX 2001-2013
Hoping there is that bridge!
I miss you Buddy!
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Chosera stone maintenance 1 year 3 months ago #11731

  • PhilipPasteur
  • PhilipPasteur's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Phil
  • Posts: 944
  • Thank you received: 233
  • Karma: 66
PhilipPasteur wrote:
I am pretty sure that I remember that there is also a thread out there where Clay mentions... in a conversation about WEPS ceramic stones and their grit equivalents, that the Ceramic stone producers actually rate their products by surface roughness rather than grit equivalence...
No time to dig it up right now perhaps in the AM..

Well here it is, though not exactly as I remembered it.. for whatever it brings to the party...

How the micro-fine ceramics fit into the mix is creating a lot of questions, with me as well. The stone manufacturer uses a different grit rating than what we're used to (the many we're used to) call RA, or roughness average. They sent me the specs for the grit early on as 1.4um and .6, but I have doubts that we can really rate it that fine. My new 2000x microscope came this week and my plan is to measure the scratch size that the stones leave and rate them accordingly.

wickededgeusa.com/index.php?option=com_k...rt=10&Itemid=63#3623

#3623

Though this is only talking about the Microfine Ceramics...which I believe are from Coorstec...
Same manufacturer that makes the Spyderco ceramics.

I am curious to know how the other "many that we're used to" rate their ceramic abrasives.

Clay?
Phil

MAX 2001-2013
Hoping there is that bridge!
I miss you Buddy!
Last Edit: 1 year 3 months ago by PhilipPasteur.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Chosera stone maintenance 1 year 3 months ago #11732

  • cbwx34
  • cbwx34's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Moderator
  • Posts: 1260
  • Thank you received: 413
  • Karma: 92
KenSchwartz wrote:
And could I texturize this surface with 0.1 micron diamond film and get a tenth micron honing surface from the ceramic?

So far I remain skeptical.

---
Ken

Can't imagine you letting this go untested...

... so let us know what you find out! ;)
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Chosera stone maintenance 1 year 3 months ago #11734

  • KenSchwartz
  • KenSchwartz's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Expert Boarder
  • Posts: 94
  • Thank you received: 29
  • Karma: 25
Well I don't have one of these ceramic stones to test so that's one issue. Second, I somehow doubt that I could refine the surface texture to that fine a surface so I would have to test coarser finishes. And to be perfectly candid, given well over a hundred natural stones of various types, new compound formulations, etc, to test and dealing with a bunch of backorders, I can't honestly say that testing a product I don't sell is a very high priority. If I needed that fine of a texture, I would simply use the film or CBN or Poly directly, rather than using a less hard substance.

---
Ken
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Chosera stone maintenance 1 year 3 months ago #11742

  • wickededge
  • wickededge's Avatar
  • NOW ONLINE
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 1796
  • Thank you received: 648
  • Karma: 92
PhilipPasteur wrote:

I am curious to know how the other "many that we're used to" rate their ceramic abrasives.

Clay?

The 'many that we're used to' refers to grit rating systems i.e. ANSI, FEPA, JIS etc.... RA is a method of defining abrasive texture I don't know much about. What I've read so far indicates that RA is usually the resultant roughness of a surface after a grit has been applied, as in sandblasting etc... I'll keep working with Coorstek to better understand how it relates to their stones. When I get a little more time, I can do some experimenting with surface textures and the scratch patterns they leave.
--Clay Allison
The administrator has disabled public write access.
The following user(s) said Thank You: PhilipPasteur

Re: Chosera stone maintenance 1 year 3 months ago #11744

  • PhilipPasteur
  • PhilipPasteur's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Phil
  • Posts: 944
  • Thank you received: 233
  • Karma: 66
Thanks for the reply Clay.
I read that "many we're used" to as being other ceramic producers.
Phil

MAX 2001-2013
Hoping there is that bridge!
I miss you Buddy!
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Chosera stone maintenance 1 year 3 months ago #11805

  • mark76
  • mark76's Avatar
  • NOW ONLINE
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 1253
  • Thank you received: 399
  • Karma: 87
KenSchwartz wrote:
Just speculating on his products as I have not used them, but it may be in the sintering process that he is essentially controlling the agglomeration function so that the finest particles are more friable while the coarser formulations are sintered into each other.

Thanks Ken! Also for your other contributions. This really seems the only theory I’ve read that could explain Sal’s statements, provided that you are right that texture differences (of water stones) don’t transfer to the edge (which I think is true).

I was thinking of a related theory that might explain how texture differences of ceramic stones could make a difference. I know far too little of the subject of sharpening stones, so this is a long shot, but I thought I’d post it anyway.

In a water stone, the abrasive particles are embedded in a carrier and some distance from each other. Each particle causes a scratch on the edge relative to its own size when it hits the edge. Suppose that the sintering process of ceramic stones causes some particles to “melt” together, so that they essentially become larger particles that cause larger scratches. In this way the sintering could influence the effect a ceramic stone has on the edge.

Or a slightly different theory. Suppose we can view a ceramic stone as a very dense stone, in which the abrasive particles have “molten” together. (I know that my ceramic stones are much harder than my water stones.) Now a “clean” ceramic stone of this type would hardly cause any scratches to the edge. By texturing them with a diamond plate, we’d effectively create abrasive “particles” on the top of the stone. In this way the texturing could influence the effect a ceramic stone has on the edge.

Maybe this is complete nonsense, please let me know what you think.
So does this imply that the surface roughness remains constant and that there is no wear, or does it imply that as the surface wears the grit changes?

It would have to imply that as the surface wears , the “grit” of ceramic stones changes. They should become finer. However, the ceramic stones I use are very hard and hardly wear. And there’s another factor at play: because they wear so little, steel particles get embedded in them (all of mine are quite black or at least have black spots/streaks), which should also change the effect they have on the edge.
Last Edit: 1 year 3 months ago by mark76.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Chosera stone maintenance 1 year 3 months ago #11808

  • wickededge
  • wickededge's Avatar
  • NOW ONLINE
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 1796
  • Thank you received: 648
  • Karma: 92
I think you're on the right track Mark. Have a look at the image below to see what happens to the abrasive particles during sintering:

CoorstekStone.jpg


You can see that some particles are much larger and appear to have fused together to form larger particles but are flat across the surface. I believe the reason Coorstek does not rate their stones by standard grit scales is that they don't produce the results you'd expect based on particle size alone. Instead, they measure the surface roughness in RA because they've found that the roughness is what is producing a specific scratch pattern. All of what I'm saying here is speculation at this point. If it's true, then it follows that texturizing the surface would change the scratch pattern. I will test this as soon as I can.
--Clay Allison
Last Edit: 1 year 3 months ago by wickededge.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
The following user(s) said Thank You: KenSchwartz, PhilipPasteur
Time to create page: 0.154 seconds