backlash

[3D Anvil]

...
Also, I'm coming from a Hapstone R1 fixed-angle system (also KME) where one has to account for slight variations in stone thickness.  With these fixed-angle systems, .4° in variation would be a huge problem because you would be hitting different parts of the bevel with each stone change.  For best results with these systems you really need to hold the variation to less than .1° variation.
...

I've had the same conversation in the old Knifeforums... even with those systems, to be most effective, it's better not to lock everything down so much that the system has no room to "maneuver" (for lack of a better term).  You do need to do things like compensate for stone thickness, but not tighten things so much that the stone can't "find" the bevel, and it will work better if it can.

Oh for sure, the stone has to be able to roll to stay flat on curves.

[cbwx34]

Oh for sure, the stone has to be able to roll to stay flat on curves.

I'm meaning all directions....

[3D Anvil]

Not sure I'm understanding.  The pivot can't be loose.  Some systems do have a tiny bit of play in the clamps themselves.

[Ken S]

"Re: backlash
« Reply #13 on: Yesterday at 05:33:36 pm »
I guess if the shift is consistent, and you lock the USB the same way every time, then in fact it wouldn't matter.  I'll have to check and see how consistent it is on my machine.

I agree that it is a relatively small shift that won't matter in most cases.  It just struck me as being rather large in relation to the degree of precision that I see some folks attempting to employ.  For example, Wootz's methodology calls for extremely precise adjustments down to 1/10th of a millimeter.  Obviously, that's problematic if there's 6/10ths of a millimeter of slop in the set screws."

Based on Wootz' videos, he appears to have used Tormek support bars, like the rest of us. If he could get 1/10 of a millimeter precision, we should be able to do the same. If not, I would investigate our technique.

Ken