Any information on the new T-8 coming out?

[Ken S]

I would not disagree with you.... just a gut feeling.

I thought about using the 3X wheels dry. However, they throw off a lot of wheel dust, so, I always use them wet. A diamond wheel would not have the wheel dust. It would need an efficient magnet to catch the metal grindings.

The future should be interesting.

Ken

[SharpenADullWitt]

I thought about trying to contact Norton (as they were the 3x wheels mentioned before), to see if there was a minimum speed the wheels should be used at (still wonder that).
On the magnet issue, the magnets are good with water, as water acts somewhat as a barrier to the magnetic field.  I wonder without that barrier, and since those diamond wheels seem to have some sort of metal base, how magnetic is the base, and spinning through the field, would it get magnetized (and then your knife try to stick to it)?
It may be nothing, but I don't know what those wheels are typically.

[Ken S]

SADW,

Please let me know what Norton says about minimum speed. I usually think of a speed constraint as maximum speed as a safety precaution against fracturing.

I don't know about the magnetic or non magnetic properties of CBN or diamond wheels. It would be an interesting topic.

Ken

[Jan]

On the magnet issue, the magnets are good with water, as water acts somewhat as a barrier to the magnetic field.  I wonder without that barrier, and since those diamond wheels seem to have some sort of metal base, how magnetic is the base, and spinning through the field, would it get magnetized (and then your knife try to stick to it)?
It may be nothing, but I don't know what those wheels are typically.

SADW, water is diamagnetic, which means it weakens the external magnetic field. But this opposition to the applied magnetic field is extremely small.  It is described by the relative magnetic permeability which is cca. 0.999 992.

Air is paramagnetic, which means it strengthens the external magnetic field. But again the strengthening of the applied field is extremely small. It is described by the relative magnetic permeability which is cca. 1.000 000 4.

So for all practical reasons we can assume that the magnetic field of a permanent magnet is the same in the water and in the air. 

Jan

[SharpenADullWitt]

Thanks Jan, so the placement of the magnet(s) and number of them, would be more of an effect.  (remembering that the tray I got with my unit, had two magnets glued on it.
I figured water current could play more an affect though.  I still have a lot to learn.

[Jan]

The magnetic field strength which attracts the steel particles is practically the same in water and in the air, but water viscosity of course exerts much larger resistance to particles movement than the air.

Jan

[jeffs55]

On the magnet issue, the magnets are good with water, as water acts somewhat as a barrier to the magnetic field.  I wonder without that barrier, and since those diamond wheels seem to have some sort of metal base, how magnetic is the base, and spinning through the field, would it get magnetized (and then your knife try to stick to it)?
It may be nothing, but I don't know what those wheels are typically.

SADW, water is diamagnetic, which means it weakens the external magnetic field. But this opposition to the applied magnetic field is extremely small.  It is described by the relative magnetic permeability which is cca. 0.999 992.


Air is paramagnetic, which means it strengthens the external magnetic field. But again the strengthening of the applied field is extremely small. It is described by the relative magnetic permeability which is cca. 1.000 000 4.

So for all practical reasons we can assume that the magnetic field of a permanent magnet is the same in the water and in the air.  :)

Jan

What we must deduce from this knowledge of the constant coupling approximation (cca) is that a magnet must be placed closer to the object to be attracted when both are submerged in water, which would be .00001 angstrom, conversely in air you could have the magnet .0001 Å further. It should be understood that this does not take into account the tilt of the earth, sunspots, pull of the moon, high or low tide, what day of the week it is, or how the stock market closed the preceding day.

[Jan]

Jeffs55, I have used the abbreviation cca. for circa = approximately and not for constant coupling approximation. 

From your list of items which were not taken into account only sunspots are relevant, the other do not influence the magnetic field of a permanent magnet. 

Jan

[jeffs55]

Jeffs55, I have used the abbreviation cca. for circa = approximately and not for constant coupling approximation. 

From your list of items which were not taken into account only sunspots are relevant, the other do not influence the magnetic field of a permanent magnet. 

Jan

No wonder I got it wrong. The abbreviation for circa in English is "c." or "ca". I told my wife minutes ago that you should be awake by now and would respond.

[Ken S]

I have a longtime fascination with machine shop measurement. When the dimentional tolerance of a particular part is determined, the tools used to check that part are of much tighter tolerances. Typically a part with a plus or minus one thousandth of an inch tolerance will be inspected with a tool calibrated in one ten thousandths on an inch. These inspection tools in turn are regularly checked in the lab by tools of even greater precision. The tools of greater precision do not go to the workers on the shop floor, but their presence is very much felt.

I feel the same way about Jan's scientific knowledge. The magnets in my water troughs catch the steel grinding. However, in the background, I am very glad we have people on the forum with a deeper understanding and who are willing to share that knowledge to benefit the rest of us.

Thanks, Jan.

Ken

[bobl]

Sounds Like GOOD advise there Ken.
Bob
At this point, I have no specific information about the T8. SADW, I remember your post about the T4. I also remember being annoyed feeling that the forum was not notified by Tormek. Apparently the marketing department did not realize that the "September" issue was on the newsstands well before September.

On behalf of the forum, I have made the request to Stig that he notify the forum at the same time the dealers are notified. That seems fair to me.

As to the original question whether to purchase a T7 or wait: Unless you have an immediate need, I would wait until we know what changes are really in the T8. At that time, you can make up your mind. You might opt for the latest features or for the reduced price of the T7.

I began using my Tormek in the age of the T7. (I bought my first T7 in 2009.) Unlike several veteran members of the forum, I have never used a Supergrind. Over the years I have not seen forum members trade their Supergrinds for the newer T7. Tormek has a commendable philosophy of making newer improvements compatable with older models.

As to the possibility of a machined cast zink top, I also have a T4 with that top. It is a major improvement over the one piece plastic frame of the T3. In addition to the improved accuracy from machining, it eliminates the overheating problem. The T4 is capable of much heavier duty than the T3.

I do not doubt that the T7 could benefit from a machined zink top. However, the T7 already has a steel top. The benefits of a zink top might not be so readily apparent to a sharpener more interested in sharpening than in theory. I do not expect the used market to be flooded with T7s whose owners are clamoring for T8s. If there was a flood of cheap T7s, I would join the other savvy members of the forum in pursuit of an additional Tormek!

When I have sharpen a tool, I use either the T7 or the T4. Since I purchased a work station, I am more likely to use the T7, only because it is already set up at a good height. I do not think about zink tops during this decision process.

I would want to base my purchase decision on full information. I hope the forum will be a timely source of this information.

Ken

[Jan]

Jeffs55, I have used the abbreviation cca. for circa = approximately and not for constant coupling approximation. 

From your list of items which were not taken into account only sunspots are relevant, the other do not influence the magnetic field of a permanent magnet. 

Jan

No wonder I got it wrong. The abbreviation for circa in English is "c." or "ca". I told my wife minutes ago that you should be awake by now and would respond.

Sorry Jeff for confusing you by using ambiguous abbreviation for circa. 

You've got me really confused also by using the "constant coupling approximation" term. May I ask how did you associate the abbreviation cca. just with "constant coupling approximation"? I think it's quite a complicated physical theory concerning ferromagnetism, so relevant to our discussion about a magnet attracting steel particles. 

Jan

[Jan]

I have a longtime fascination with machine shop measurement. When the dimentional tolerance of a particular part is determined, the tools used to check that part are of much tighter tolerances. Typically a part with a plus or minus one thousandth of an inch tolerance will be inspected with a tool calibrated in one ten thousandths on an inch. These inspection tools in turn are regularly checked in the lab by tools of even greater precision. The tools of grreater precision do not go to the workers on the shop floor, but their presence is very much felt.

I feel the same way about Jan's scientific knowledge. The magnets in my water troughs catch the steel grinding. However, in the background, I am very glad we have people on the forum with a deeper understanding and who are willing to share that knowledge to benefit the rest of us.

Thanks, Jan.

Ken

Thank you for your support, Ken, appreciated. 

An honest and spontaneous feedback is always valuable. In this case it led me to wonder if Jeff does know the "constant coupling approximation" theory about which I have heard only a little. 

Jan

[jeffs55]

Jeffs55, I have used the abbreviation cca. for circa = approximately and not for constant coupling approximation. 

From your list of items which were not taken into account only sunspots are relevant, the other do not influence the magnetic field of a permanent magnet. 

Jan

No wonder I got it wrong. The abbreviation for circa in English is "c." or "ca". I told my wife minutes ago that you should be awake by now and would respond.

I Googled "cca" and the constant coupling sounded like something a magnet would do so I just went with that. Of course you know that my entire dialog was a joke. I have no training in this field at all and was just trying to be funny.

Sorry Jeff for confusing you by using ambiguous abbreviation for circa. 

You've got me really confused also by using the "constant coupling approximation" term. May I ask how did you associate the abbreviation cca. just with "constant coupling approximation"? I think it's quite a complicated physical theory concerning ferromagnetism, so relevant to our discussion about a magnet attracting steel particles. 

Jan

[Ken S]

Jan, 

Please remember that the Romans never journeyed to our corner of the world. Therefore, Latin is not one of our native languages.

As I get older and have to fill out more medical history forms, more and more becomes "circa". I guess it really doesn't matter if I had chickenpox in 1956 or 1957.

Ken