How do you sharpen your edges?

[Brian Holcombe]

Warren is definetly sharpening faster than myself but I sharpened try plane and smoother 3-4 times each yesterday and can't recall it having taken much of my time.
Working white oak for drawers and so I like to keep the planes very sharp.

[Brian Holcombe]

You should try diamond lapping films or pastes.

The problem with the plates is that they have a single layer of abrasives, and the points of those diamond particles do wear down with use, particularly on steel.

You can get about 10 similarly-sized pieces of 3M diamond lapping film or ~12 g of high quality diamond lapping compound for the cost of a single diamond plate. Like you I prioritize speed, and the films/compounds enable you to always work with a relatively fresh surface. The plate is initially competitive, but there's no comparison by the time you've subjected it to the same amount of use that it takes to wear out a couple sheets of lapping film.

Stones are cheaper than either, of course. Films are basically "scary sharp on steroids" (faster and longer-lasting than sandpaper, but also more expensive). Pastes are significantly cheaper than films in my experience, but still pricier than stones in the long run.

I only use plates for stone-flattening at this point.

Same for myself for the past few years, only stone flattening. Thanks for the recommendation, I've used the paste but not the films. I prefer stones for everyday work, but I may use the films for Kez prep next year.

[Todd Stock]

Warren:

I laughed when you came back with your post - was a witty response to my accountancy-inspired note (BTW - NOT an accountant). Please consider my response as mining the same vein of genteel humor.

Today is a day off from the instrument grind - I get to be a 'hobbyist' and fit the door, plane and fit the shelves, and spec my vintage glass order for a Harvey Ellis piece going in the office. I think I shall take my time sharpening, and perhaps pull out the oil stones...no other stone feels as silky as a translucent hard black arkansas.

Todd

[Patrick Chase]

I spent the day today thinking about how nice if I could save $3450 a year by buying a $1000 grinder. I have used a grinder a few times on chisels, but not since 1980. As a consequence it now takes me 70 seconds to sharpen a chisel. If I could get that down to 10 seconds I could save a minute on each one. I think one of the problems is that I would not want a grinder near my bench, so a lot of that 10 seconds would be taken up walking to and from the grinder.

It takes me about 40 seconds to sharpen a carving gouge, working on three stones and a strop. I am having trouble thinking how I might save a minute on each one. Maybe I can just sharpen twice as often and save 30 seconds each time. Or maybe Patrick can help me with the concept of negative time. Come to think of it, I remember a guy making sash telling me he could set up a machine "in no time at all".

Nope, for the steels you use and your skill level I wouldn't presume to help you with anything at all. I've already said that more exotic methods only make sense for extensive work or exotic steels. What you describe above doesn't involve either.

I recently acquired a Stanley #55 and fettled all 52 irons, which included flattening the backs of all of them (though only as far back as necessary to get to a clean edge) and regrinding a couple that were chipped. There was also one (fortunately straight-edged) iron that had been ground "upside-down" at the factory, such that the notch was on the wrong side and the back->top side bevels went the wrong way (top wider than back) [*]. That one required significant regrinding to reverse the bevel and relocate the edge to the other face. Two of the irons that required regrinding were hollows, so I ended up re-dressing a spare wheel to a fairly tight-radius 90 deg point so that I could work the concave edges/bevels of those irons. IMO powered grinders (for regrinding), diamond pastes (for a variety of tasks), etc are huge time savers for that sort of work, but that doesn't contradict anything you've said because we're talking about very different sharpening tasks.

Like you I use stones for routine touch-up, either water or oil depending on the steel and edge geometry (I favor oilstone slips).


[*] Amusingly, some former owner in the century since the tool was made had actually tried to hone that particular iron. Clueless woodworkers aren't a new thing. In general the irons that had been previously "fettled" required more remediation than the ones that were in factory-ground state. Lots of dubbing, corner-chipping, etc.

[Patrick Chase]

Same for myself for the past few years, only stone flattening. Thanks for the recommendation, I've used the paste but not the films. I prefer stones for everyday work, but I may use the films for Kez prep next year.

That should make for an interesting experiment. Films (both diamond and AlOx) go down to 0.25 um (50000#) or below, so in theory they should be competitive with your JNat. For the metals you use and your application I think there's some likelihood that the JNat will come out on top anyway because of the "gentler action" of SiO2 abrasive. Your best bet may be to work down to ~0.5 um on the films/paste and then finish on the JNat polisher, similar to what you did this year.

Out of curiosity do people at Kez mess with really exotic stuff like 0.025 um CBN or diamond sprays? It seems like that should be gross overkill, but some of the straight razor crowd have been known to go there. I would expect the Kez crowd to me more tradition-oriented on the whole.

I find Kez interesting in part because to paraphrase Dr McCoy "it's woodworking, Jim, but not as we know it". The wood is different than most of us will ever encounter, the objectives/metrics are specified in terms of shaving rather than surface properties, etc.

[Brian Holcombe]

It's certainly a bizarre but highly entertaining form of woodworking. Interesting enough the surface finish is typically incredible. This is the surface finish on my test beam, during competition the beam reflected similarly. I recall having commented to some of the spectators to have a look at the reflection in the beam to provide some relevance to a real life purpose for this sort of competition. You're in northern california so actually getting wood like this is pretty easy to purchase, from what i've heard, with respect to your area. Either this or port orford cedar.



I appreciate the suggestion, I think I will give that a try in next years practice sessions and see if it is an improvement over the 12k stone in flatness, along with what we were talking about with the dai. I ran out of steam this year for making changes to the newly cut dai but had also been contemplating putting a mouth insert as well as insert at the front of the block to create end grain wear strips which would hold a flat profile better than the side grain.

[Patrick Chase]

I appreciate the suggestion, I think I will give that a try in next years practice sessions and see if it is an improvement over the 12k stone in flatness, along with what we were talking about with the dai.

If flatness is your objective then paste on a dead flat cast iron lap is the ticket. My 1, 0.5 and 0.25 um laps are the 5x3 in ones here. I further lapped them with 320# SiC powder and mineral spirits (mineral oil is too thick) on a granite surface plate, with a thin laminating sheet on the plate as a sacrificial surface. I lapped both to get the iron plates dead flat and to even out the as-ground surface profile. I can't detect any deviation from flat with my best straightedge, which is itself spec'ed flat to within 0.0002" per foot.

The fact that I can move from 1 um to .25 um and not see any uneven polishing at 0.25 um suggests that the laps are flat (or at least coplanar) to within less than a micron over the 2" width of a typical plane iron.

You'll probably want to practice a bit first though. Scratch/contamination control can take a bit of work to perfect. The fact that you're finishing on the Jnat means you don't have to be absolutely perfect coming off the diamond, but even so a chunk of loose carbide or coarser diamond can ruin your whole session. It's helpful to have a bag of Texwipes (I mostly use TX604 and TX609) on hand.

[lowell holmes]

Lowell,

You wrote: The granite slab with wet sand paper on it will make edges insanely sharp. Yes, indeed. My "sharpening station" for many years has been PSA backed sandpaper on a Corian cutoff. It stores very easily and is always ready to go without fuss or mess (well, a few drops of water) But I would like to know more about your diamond hones. What sizes and what grits?

I avoid participating in sharpening threads but I just had to chime in. IMHO sandpaper sharpening is clearly the least expensive and most effective method. I have fantasized about a Tormek but I don't think I would get sharper edges in return for the expense and space requirement. But I am curious about how diamond hones fit into your system.

Doug

The diamond hones are not used when major sharpening takes place. I will grind an edge if necessary, sharpen with sandpaper, and hone the edge.
While working on a project, I keep the diamond hones out to touch up an edge.

[Patrick Chase]

The diamond hones are not used when major sharpening takes place. I will grind an edge if necessary, sharpen with sandpaper, and hone the edge.
While working on a project, I keep the diamond hones out to touch up an edge.

Speaking of diamond hones, I've taken a liking to the DMT cones and wave plates. They're fast (at least at first), they're convenient and can be used dry, and they don't lose their shape with use (which is a problem with India and particularly waterstone slips). Diamond paste on a wooden form is more cost effective IMO, but sometimes you just don't want the hassle.

[Jim Koepke]

There was also one (fortunately straight-edged) iron that had been ground "upside-down" at the factory, such that the notch was on the wrong side and the back->top side bevels went the wrong way (top wider than back)[*]. That one required significant regrinding to reverse the bevel and relocate the edge to the other face. Two of the irons that required regrinding were hollows, so I ended up re-dressing a spare wheel to a fairly tight-radius 90 deg point so that I could work the concave edges/bevels of those irons. IMO powered grinders (for regrinding), diamond pastes (for a variety of tasks), etc are huge time savers for that sort of work, but that doesn't contradict anything you've said because we're talking about very different sharpening tasks.
[edit][*] Amusingly, some former owner in the century since the tool was made had actually tried to hone that particular iron.

I would have done less work than you by just grinding a new cutout with a dremel wheel. Either that or sell it as a rare prototype for a left hand combination plane on ebay.

Another method to use blades not correct for Stanley #45 & #55s is to retract the adjuster all the way and then push the top of the blade with the driving pin. A new blade has a bit of a deeper cut, but after a few sharpening sessions it will be more controllable.

jtk

[steven c newman]

Careful....Sargent 1080 irons were notched differently than Stanley ones ( Patent problems?) Soooo, you may having been using the WRONG irons. Sargents will not work in a Stanley 45 or 55.

[Patrick Chase]

I would have done less work than you by just grinding a new cutout with a dremel wheel. Either that or sell it as a rare prototype for a left hand combination plane on ebay.

Another method to use blades not correct for Stanley #45 & #55s is to retract the adjuster all the way and then push the top of the blade with the driving pin. A new blade has a bit of a deeper cut, but after a few sharpening sessions it will be more controllable.

Irons for the #45 and #55 are tapered from back to top. The sides are at less than 90 deg to the back, such that the top is narrower than the back (go check yours if you don't believe me - it's easy to spot once you've discovered it for the first time). This particular iron was misground such that the taper was going the wrong way. Grinding a second notch wasn't an option, because it would simply wedge in the cut. The taper meant that the only viable option was to reverse the bevel.

Careful....Sargent 1080 irons were notched differently than Stanley ones ( Patent problems?) Soooo, you may having been using the WRONG irons. Sargents will not work in a Stanley 45 or 55.

Nope, see above. The reversed side bevel is a dead giveaway that it was a manufacturing defect. Both that and the fact that Stanley's combo plane irons are tapered as I described above were subsequently confirmed by the "bloody and gory" dealer who sold it to me BTW. He was very professional to work with about the issue, as you would expect.

[Jim Koepke]

This particular iron was misground such that the taper was going the wrong way. Grinding a second notch wasn't an option

My misunderstanding, I thought the side bevels also had to be reground.

jtk

[Brian Holcombe]

If flatness is your objective then paste on a dead flat cast iron lap is the ticket. My 1, 0.5 and 0.25 um laps are the 5x3 in ones here. I further lapped them with 320# SiC powder and mineral spirits (mineral oil is too thick) on a granite surface plate, with a thin laminating sheet on the plate as a sacrificial surface. I lapped both to get the iron plates dead flat and to even out the as-ground surface profile. I can't detect any deviation from flat with my best straightedge, which is itself spec'ed flat to within 0.0002" per foot.

The fact that I can move from 1 um to .25 um and not see any uneven polishing at 0.25 um suggests that the laps are flat (or at least coplanar) to within less than a micron over the 2" width of a typical plane iron.

You'll probably want to practice a bit first though. Scratch/contamination control can take a bit of work to perfect. The fact that you're finishing on the Jnat means you don't have to be absolutely perfect coming off the diamond, but even so a chunk of loose carbide or coarser diamond can ruin your whole session. It's helpful to have a bag of Texwipes (I mostly use TX604 and TX609) on hand.

Thanks for the suggestions! One of the competitors from this year's competition went back to practice at his home and just posted a 2 micron shaving! Not sure if he is interested to share (I will certainly ask lol) but if I manage something close to that I will likely make a blog post about it.

[Patrick Chase]

Thanks for the suggestions! One of the competitors from this year's competition went back to practice at his home and just posted a 2 micron shaving! Not sure if he is interested to share (I will certainly ask lol) but if I manage something close to that I will likely make a blog post about it.

Do you know how he achieved it, or is that a "trade secret"?

It seems reasonable that a combination of Dai modifications to improve stability/flatness and honing the iron on very flat media could get you there, but am wondering if there are other factors that come into play as well.