[OP]
Member
Looked through the archives and found plenty about Liogier, but nothing addressed this particular question:
Does anybody know what Liogier's "proprietary" Sapphire coating is?
The color and stated hardness of HV 2800 are both exact matches to Titanium Aluminum Nitride, which is used on some higher-end drill bits (note that that's a 15-bit set for $225. Did I mention that it's expensive?). The wording of Liogier's corrosion resistance claim is also consistent with TiAlN. Can anybody confirm?
Member
Patrick; why is there a high need for the customer to know the critical process involved. As far as I am concerned that's the intellectual property of Logier.
Stewie;
[OP]
Member
They're certainly within their rights not to disclose it. I think it's a bad decision in this instance because it doesn't afford them much real protection and may annoy knowledgeable customers, but it's their call.Originally Posted by Stewie Simpson
With that said, anybody in possession of a tool would be equally within their rights to use analytical methods (as opposed to theft of secrets) to determine what it is, and then do anything they want with the results. The analytical result would be that second individual's IP, not Liogier's. I was merely checking to see if somebody had created such analytical IP, and if so whether they were willing to share.
IP law isn't as blatantly biased in favor of the maker as you seem to believe. It is if anything biased in favor of disclosure, not secrecy. There are exceptions, such as the US DMCA's notorious prohibition on reverse-engineering cryto-based digital rights management, but AFAIK none of those apply here.
Last edited by Patrick Chase; 12-27-2016 at 10:16 PM.
Contributor
Maybe they have lost a few sales to some customers with whom they really do not want to bother.I think it's a bad decision in this instance because it doesn't afford them much real protection and may annoy knowledgeable customers, but it's their call.
From what has been posted here there seems to be a backlog of orders. Maybe if there were no one waiting for their wares they would be inclined to try and pump up demand by disclosing some secrets.
jtk
"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."
- Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
Member
Jim; I am rather disappointed to hear you openly undermine the reputation of Noel Logier's Company. As an ongoing user of Noel's merchandise, I cant fault the price and quality of service being offered. If this is the type of feedback that we can expect from the OPs opening topic of discussion, it needs to be relegated to the sinbin by the Moderators asap.
Stewie;
Last edited by Stewie Simpson; 12-27-2016 at 10:38 PM.
[OP]
Member
To be clear, I think that Liogier and LV (the two companies I singled out) both have unimpeachable reputations. I disagree with that they're doing in this instance, but that shouldn't be interpreted as an assault on their reputations. It isn't.
I also don't think that Jim impugned Liogier in any way. They're a business, and as such they engage in marketing. Jim merely pointed out some marketing tradeoffs that they may be making today or may make in the future. There's nothing derogatory about that IMO.
Last edited by Patrick Chase; 12-28-2016 at 12:04 AM.
Contributor
Patrick, it is essentially irrelevant what the physical properties actually are - that is an intellectual issue that may be of interest to some (obviously to you). Call it marketing. What is relevant is whether the claims for longevity are backed up. That is what users/purchasers are paying for. Comparative testing (using the tool and its competitors) will reveal that. A metallurgical analysis offers little real value.
Regards from Perth
Derek
[OP]
Member
In principle I agree - it wouldn't matter what the composition was if we had thorough life-testing data from somebody using the Traditional and Sapphire rasp in a manner representative of my intended usage. The problem is that we don't. I can't find such data for *any* use model, beyond Liogier's own claim of a "4X" difference in edge life. There are plenty of people like Holtey who subjectively attest to the long life of the sapphire rasps, but no objective comparisons AFAIK.
Given the known and fairly long endurance of the "Traditional" rasps it would take many years for most users to see the benefit of Sapphire, so the fact that there aren't any such data out there shouldn't be a surprise.
In the absence of life-test results the composition is a useful shortcut to make a reasonable estimate of the incremental value to me (in tool life) of the "Sapphire" treatment. I have a fair bit of experience with TiAlN tools (and TiN, and TiCN, etc) so if I know it's one of those then I can make pretty decent guesses about what it will buy me.
Engineers make such judgments all the time. What we're debating here is basically the difference between "black box" and "white box" testing. It takes a lot more effort to accurately assess something when you don't know its innards.
Last edited by Patrick Chase; 12-27-2016 at 11:09 PM.
Member
A list of online feedback on Logier Rasps. http://www.liogier-france.fr/user-testimonials?lang=en
Contributor
Stewie, I fail to see how my comments:
Maybe they have lost a few sales to some customers with whom they really do not want to bother.
From what has been posted here there seems to be a backlog of orders. Maybe if there were no one waiting for their wares they would be inclined to try and pump up demand by disclosing some secrets.
jtk
have in anyway undermined the reputation of Liogier, even down to the part of spelling the name correctly.
There rasps seem to be selling faster than they can make them. Should they forgo their principles regarding their intellectual property or proprietary processes to sell a few more tools?
In my experience the "customer" who demands to know every trade secret before making a purchase is often one who is more trouble when compared to the little business they will likely bring to your door. Often they will become dissatisfied with their purchase with little reason. Chances are they will bring more head aches than business.
Other than that, it is often easier for a company to have a standard answer anyone answering the phone can give instead of having to stop work every time someone calls demanding to know exactly how they achieve their quality.
My question is why do we need two different threads involved in discussing the coating used to create a hardness barrier on rasps?
jtk
Last edited by Jim Koepke; 12-28-2016 at 2:48 PM.
"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."
- Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
Contributor
Ok. This helps. Now I see why you're asking.
Friend of the Creek
From a marketing perspective, claims backed up by "reasons to believe" are always stronger and considerably more pursuasive than claims alone. Claims without stated, factual "reasons to believe" are simply fluff IMO. If I catch Patrick's point, a claim of 4X longer without any backup is pure smoke.
[OP]
Member
That's perhaps a bit stronger than I intended. I don't doubt that it lasts "4X longer" for some wood[s] and use pattern. Given that it's Liogier making the statement I'm willing to take that much on faith.
The thing you have to realize is that benefits like this are invariably nonuniform/nonlinear w.r.t. use/application, and that's where knowing the details becomes useful.
Member
Whatever the coating is,I sam DELIGHTED that they are making use of coatings that have been in use for MANY years in metal cutting tools.
[OP]
Member
Indeed. TiAlN coatings have been in widespread use since the late 90s or so, TiN and TiCN even longer.
IMO rasps are a perfect candidate precisely because they generally aren't resharpened (Boggs etc notwithstanding). The "one-shot" nature of a coating like TiAlN therefore isn't an issue as it would be in some other settings.
Last edited by Patrick Chase; 12-28-2016 at 12:53 PM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote