Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me

TOPIC: Stock stone/strop progression (Lots of Pics!!)

Re: Stock stone/strop progression 2 years 4 months ago #2187

  • wickededge
  • wickededge's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 1760
  • Thank you received: 609
  • Karma: 91
That looks perfect. Thank you for capturing and sharing it. Your edge has a nice gleam to it!
--Clay Allison
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Stock stone/strop progression 2 years 4 months ago #2222

  • KenSchwartz
  • KenSchwartz's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Expert Boarder
  • Posts: 94
  • Thank you received: 29
  • Karma: 25
Clay, the samples are on the way :)

---
Ken

wickededge wrote:
KenSchwartz wrote:
razoredgeknives wrote:
Ken,

Thank you so much for your input! I too really appreciate an owner of his business who gets involved in the furthering of his products... rock on Clay! And I also want to thank everyone else who has contributed (especially Tom)... all the info posted has been very helpful.

So Ken, where would one get this "kangaroo leather" for the WEPS paddles? And what about the nanocloth? I am very interested in looking into that... please post a website if Clay is good w/ it =) Thanks

For now, you can contact me directly - (ksskss at earthlink dot net). In time, if Clay likes it, you can get it from him directly.

---
Ken

You'd have to send me some samples :cheer:
The administrator has disabled public write access.
The following user(s) said Thank You: leomitch

Re: Stock stone/strop progression 2 years 4 months ago #2261

  • razoredgeknives
  • razoredgeknives's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 702
  • Thank you received: 302
  • Karma: 38
Got my Dino in!!! Will be posting pics soon of diff. grit strops on split grain (rough side out) cow hide leather strops...
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Stock stone/strop progression 2 years 4 months ago #2299

  • mark76
  • mark76's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 1186
  • Thank you received: 353
  • Karma: 86
razoredgeknives wrote:
Got my Dino in!!! Will be posting pics soon of diff. grit strops on split grain (rough side out) cow hide leather strops...

Please do! Really interested!
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Stock stone/strop progression 2 years 3 months ago #2387

  • mark76
  • mark76's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 1186
  • Thank you received: 353
  • Karma: 86
This threat has become the host of many topics, but I would like to return to the initial question posed by Josh and the pictures posted by Tom. Tom's pictures clearly showed that, although the WE diamond stropping pastes on leather strops did result in a very nice edge, the stropping pastes were much less abrasive than stones with diamond particles of comparable (micron) sizes; the stropping pastes produced only tiny scratches that were much smaller in size than the stones do.

I set out to see whether I could reproduce the results by Tom. I also wanted to test the hypothesis that the compounds on leather were not so abrasive because the diamond particles got hidden in the "valleys" of the leather (since leather is quite textured). To do so, I also stropped with the diamond pastes on balsa: diamond particles of 14 micron (or 3.5 micron, for that matter) cannot hide in the spaces between the filaments of the balsa.

I sharpened a knife up to 1000 grit with stones (and later 1600 grit) and then did 500 stropping strokes with 14 micron paste and 10 micron paste, both on leather and on balse. I took photographs at 50, 100, 250 and 500 stropping strokes. And I got sometimes very polished edges...



In fact, I did every experiment twice (with consistent results), since a new microscope stand came in with which I could make much better pictures when I was nearly done with the stropping.

You can find the complete story on my blog.

But for those in for quick conclusions:
  • I was able to reproduce Tom's results. The 14 micron and 10 micron diamond pastes produce scratches that are much smaller than one would expect on the basis of the grit comparison chart.
  • This is not due to the diamond particles hiding in the leather. We see exactly the same tiny scratches when using these compounds on balsa.
So the mystery remains. How come these pastes are so little abrasive compared to the equivalent stones?

I would like to throw in a second mystery. As the above picture shows, the pastes are effective. How can pastes with so little abrasive power be so effectie?
Last Edit: 2 years 3 months ago by mark76.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
The following user(s) said Thank You: razoredgeknives

Re: Stock stone/strop progression 2 years 3 months ago #2388

  • wickededge
  • wickededge's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 1760
  • Thank you received: 609
  • Karma: 91
mark76 wrote:
This threat has become the host of many topics, but I would like to return to the initial question posed by Josh and the pictures posted by Tom. Tom's pictures clearly showed that, although the WE diamond stropping pastes on leather strops did result in a very nice edge, the stropping pastes were much less abrasive than stones with diamond particles of comparable (micron) sizes; the stropping pastes produced only tiny scratches that were much smaller in size than the stones do.

I set out to see whether I could reproduce the results by Tom. I also wanted to test the hypothesis that the compounds on leather were not so abrasive because the diamond particles got hidden in the "valleys" of the leather (since leather is quite textured). To do so, I also stropped with the diamond pastes on balsa: diamond particles of 14 micron (or 3.5 micron, for that matter) cannot hide in the spaces between the filaments of the balsa.

I sharpened a knife up to 1000 grit with stones (and later 1600 grit) and then did 500 stropping strokes with 14 micron paste and 10 micron paste, both on leather and on balse. I took photographs at 50, 100, 250 and 500 stropping strokes. And I got sometimes very polished edges...



In fact, I did every experiment twice (with consistent results), since a new microscope stand came in with which I could make much better pictures when I was nearly done with the stropping.

You can find the complete story on my blog.

But for those in for quick conclusions:
  • I was able to reproduce Tom's results. The 14 micron and 10 micron diamond pastes produce scratches that are much smaller than one would expect on the basis of the grit comparison chart.
  • This is not due to the diamond particles hiding in the leather. We see exactly the same tiny scratches when using these compounds on balsa.
So the mystery remains. How come these pastes are so little abrasive compared to the equivalent stones?

I would like to throw in a second mystery. As the above picture shows, the pastes are effective. How can pastes with so little abrasive power be so effectie?

I can't see your pictures, but love the write up. A next study step would be to go from the 1000 grit to plain leather w/ no compound to examine the burnishing effect. That way you could tell how much of what you're seeing is the abrasive and how much is the substrate. My theory is that the burnishing effect of the leather is significant and is greatly improved by the added 'stiction' that the paste provides. Ideally, it would great to test an abrasive free paste on the leather. That sounds like a very fun experiment. I think the reason the diamonds are making such little scratches is two-fold - 1) The diamonds press equally into the leather as they do to the metal so you're not getting a full value scratch 2) The numbers of diamonds on the strop may be significantly less than those on the stones.
--Clay Allison
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Time to create page: 0.136 seconds