I recently purchased computer software from knifegrinders.com.au Knifegrinders is the business website for our member, Wootz. Initially I made the purchase to support a forum member. After using it, I would purchase it again. Wootz, whose non forum name is Vadim, has devised a different method than Dutchman uses. I believe a sophisticated Tormek sharpener should be fluent with both systems. They fill different needs.
Dutchman's tables, among other things, are the basis for the kenjig. The system measures Distance from the universal support to the grinding wheel. The technique uses a combination square or the groove of a kenjig. Measurements are fast, reliable and repeatable. The units are millimeters and degrees, quite adequate for general sharpening.
Wootz's system measures Distance from the support bar down to a horizontal on the top of the Tormek frame. This system, being computer based, should more than satisfy the requirements of even the most discerning user. In fact, it far exceeds both my Starrett metric combination square and the Anglemaster. Why would someone want such accuracy? In industry, a tool's accuracy should be beyond its general use.
Projection from where the knife jig's adjustable stop rests on the support bar to the bevel edge of the knife, is determined the same way with both systems.
Using computer generated tables suits Vadim's work philosophy. He goes beyond sharp. He strives for the sharpest, most uniform edge possible. He has several different grinding wheels available, often of slightly different diameters. This program allows him to hone in on the exact same angle with different diameters.
The program is sophisticated, but easy to use. Initially, one selects the model of Tormek being used, T4, T7, or T8. The program now remembers the choice for future use. The user imputs the grinding wheel diameter in millimeters and fractions of a millimeter. Next the angle is input in degrees and fractions of a degree. The program displays the distance between the universal support and the top of the Tormek.
For general sharpening with one wheel, I will probably use mostly Dutchman's simpler method. For more demanding work, especially involving more than one grinding wheel, it is nice to have the firepower of Vadim's more sophisticated program. I see both in use in my shop.
Vadim's program is available directly from him (knifegrinders.com.au). It works with Mac OS, Windows, and Android. (not for ios ipads yet) It costs $30US. Vadim is very conscientious about product support. I like supporting forum members. I especially like when it also supports such a useful program.
Ken
Thank you so much for your positive review, Ken.
Coming from you, it has an added value due to your legendary honesty.
We are so happy our software has met that much interest in Europe and the US, thousands of views by the website logs.
We've been using it to set grinding angle for two years now, verifying the edge angle with a CATRA laser protractor in the end of grinding for QA, and this software has never failed. The applet sets an exact grinding angle; but given the manual setup, real life accuracy is 0.1 degree.
Ken has placed this thread in the Knife Sharpening section of the forum for a reason - this applet works for Knife Jigs and the Axe Jig only.
For the Jig Distance parameter, we use this simple but nonetheless accurate jig length measuring/setting block:
(http://knifegrinders.com.au/Equipment/E_jig_setter.JPG)
Wootz,
I like your setting jig. My pencil set up works well; yours is definitely better. I have thought of building a cradle to hold the knife jig with knife attached. It would have a knife line in the same plane as the knife edge. When the knife was exactly centered, the edge would match the knife line. It looks like you may have incorporated this into your jig. Yes?
As moderator, I try to keep this forum non commercial and not promoting products which directly compete with Tormek, our hosts. That stated, I also feel an obligation to recommend products, especially by members, which benefit Tormek users. In every case, I have either purchased the product involved or, if given the product, I have made it a point to purchase other products from these members or related non members. I have never received, nor would I accept any pay for my comments.
In this case, I paid the same paypal amount any of us would. I did not consider asking for a discount.
I believe Wootz' work demonstrates my long held belief in the versatility of the Tormek. Through teachers like Steve Bottorff, Robin Bailey, and Wootz, a new Tormek owner can become proficient within a few hours of training. "Self taught" also works, although it is a less efficient way to work.
I believe some of the advanced work shown on this forum by people like Wootz, Dutchman, Jan and others, may surprise even the Tormek engineers. (I do not mean to minimize the continuing improvements by Tormek.) Even with all of this fine work, I do not believe we have reached the peak of the Tormek's potential.
Keep up the outstanding work, everyone.
Ken
Thank you for the praise, Ken.
Yes, our "jig setter" helps align the knife edge so that it is parallel with the Universal Support, which is often not the same as the blade spine.
Quote from: wootz on September 18, 2017, 10:43:34 PM
For the Jig Distance parameter, we use this simple but nonetheless accurate jig length measuring/setting block:
(http://knifegrinders.com.au/Equipment/E_jig_setter.JPG)
Wootz, thank you for posting the picture of your very practical length setting block. :)
Jan
For an easy and accurate setting of the universal support – grindstone distance I have modified the "Starrett combination square". This has been intended for Dutchman and kenjig concepts. For more info see https://forum.tormek.com/index.php?topic=2879.msg15575#msg15575
The same tool can also be used for setting the Universal Support height above the top of the Tormek housing in the frame of Wootz bevel angle setting procedure.
Jan
Ken, I would like to ask you to do some exercise with your new software.
Please calculate the Universal support height for T7 and then for T8 for the following parameters: stone diameter 250 mm, projection length 139 mm and bevel angle 15°.
I expect some small difference between those USB heights.
Jan
I had a chance to beta test wootz program... and what a simple, yet effective way to set an angle. I find it pretty cool to input a set of numbers, setting the USB almost feels like an act of faith, yet when checked with the AngleMaster... it's perfect. I'm glad he's making the leap onto the mobile platform... hopefully iOS is coming soon!
Jan, yet another excellent modification. I'm using a digital caliper (having recently discovered the "step" measurement method), but I like your setup, and may try and adopt it to the caliper.
Hopefully someday, all theses components can come together in a package made for the Tormek... so other tools don't have to be modified, etc. Wootz, program, a "Jig Distance" block of some sort, and a specific device for accurately setting the USB, would make a great combo, and help bring the Tormek into the knife sharpening mainstream.
(A bit of a sidebar, if you get wootz program and find you don't have a metric ruler handy... it's easy to find one online to print out, until you can grab one).
Wootz program, I too consider a "must have"... in the toolkit.
Quote from: Jan on September 19, 2017, 03:27:00 PM
Ken, I would like to ask you to do some exercise with your new software.
Please calculate the Universal support height for T7 and then for T8 for the following parameters: stone diameter 250 mm, projection length 139 mm and bevel angle 15°.
I expect some small difference between those USB heights.
Jan
I'm not Ken, but....
T-7 = 169.31mm
T-8 = 169.83mm
Bonus T-4 = 159.61mm (but 200mm stone) :)
Thank you cbwx for your numbers. :)
The reason for differences in USB heights are modifications of housing geometry of individual models.
Jan
For those who may want to replicate the "jig setter block", the end-board height is 8mm, which together with the ruler 1mm thick brings it just above the knife jig lower jaw, allowing to lay the blade flat on the ruler.
(http://knifegrinders.com.au/Equipment/E_jigLegth2.JPG)
Quote from: Jan on September 19, 2017, 10:39:58 AM
For an easy and accurate setting of the universal support – grindstone distance I have modified the "Starrett combination square". This has been intended for Dutchman and kenjig concepts. For more info see https://forum.tormek.com/index.php?topic=2879.msg15575#msg15575
The same tool can also be used for setting the Universal Support height above the top of the Tormek housing in the frame of Wootz bevel angle setting procedure.
Jan
Unfortunately, your advanced tool can't be used to measure distance to the housing in the newer T4 and T8, no matter how much I like it - where you can drop a perpendicular from the Universal Support with your tool sleeved on, the housing is chamfered.
A quality combination square can be used instead of the caliper depth probe - it is just matter of personal preferences.
Quote from: Jan on September 19, 2017, 03:27:00 PM
Ken, I would like to ask you to do some exercise with your new software.
Please calculate the Universal support height for T7 and then for T8 for the following parameters: stone diameter 250 mm, projection length 139 mm and bevel angle 15°.
I expect some small difference between those USB heights.
Jan
Jan,
My readings are identical with those of CB and, I trust, with your readings. That sort of accuracy would be quite a feat with the kenjig.
Now that we have the flexibility and sccuracy to reproduce so many subtle changes in angles, the trick will be in choosing which angle we wish. :)
Ken
Quote from: wootz on September 20, 2017, 01:48:44 AM
Unfortunately, your advanced tool can't be used to measure distance to the housing in the newer T4 and T8, no matter how much I like it - where you can drop a perpendicular from the Universal Support with your tool sleeved on, the housing is chamfered.
Wootz, thank you for your response. You are correct, my hands on experience is limited to the T7 model.
Jan
Wootz, what is your preferred measuring tool for your program?
Ken
Ken, you are asking a good question. The input parameters for the program (stone diameter and projection length) should be defined accurately.
Based on my calculations:
1.0 mm error in projection length estimation can change the desired bevel angle by 0.5°.
1.0 mm error in stone diameter estimation can change the bevel angle by 0.3°.
1.0 mm error in US height setup can change the bevel angle by 0.7°.
Hence be accurate, because if you are lucky, one error can compensate for the other, but if you are not lucky, the errors can sum. ;)
Jan
My estimate is in line with Jan's, and since the US height is set with 0.1mm accuracy, we know that the best achievable real life edge angle accuracy is within +/- 0.1 degree .
Of those three, for getting the utmost edge sharpness the wheel diameter and the Universal Support height are important; the jig projection is not, obviously, as long as you keep it the same through the sharpening session.
We measure wheels diameter with a 30cm caliper;
set the Universal Support height with a caliper depth probe;
and the jig projection length with the "jig setting block" described earlier.
In sharpening under 100 BESS, submicron edge apex, randomicity rules - you do exactly the same sharpening routine that gave you 40 BESS on the same steel yesterday, but get 70 today, a slightly different temper etc, all tiny inaccuracies factor in.
I have prepared a drawing showing the geometry of the unique Dutchman approach for grinding angle adjustment. Previously we have discussed here the fact, that Dutchman concept is approximate which guaranties bevel angle setting with an accuracy better than cca 1.0°. This is sufficient for majority of applications.
For those who need more accurate angle setting I have offered my Excel script which works without approximations. https://forum.tormek.com/index.php?topic=2654.msg14297#msg14297
In this thread we are discussing Wootz's Grinding Angle Setter program which calculates the USB height for the desired grinding angle. Wootz uses the approximate Dutchman concept and transforms his stone – USB distance to USB height above the top of the Tormek housing.
The accuracy of the calculated USB height is limited by the accuracy of the Dutchman concept. In the second picture you can see that an inaccuracy in the USB height estimation may be almost 0.9 mm which will cause an inaccuracy of some 0.6° in grinding angle setting.
Jan
Jan, the way you assume about my applet accuracy is like me telling you that your Excel calculator can't be correct because inspired by Dutchman.
My concept and formulas aren't Dutchman's, how may you compare them if I've never published formulas from my applet in the public domain?
The idea was inspired by Dutchman's genius, but my software is different.
You might be judging by my initial script published on this forum, but as I wrote to you the other day, that script had inaccuracies and is a forgotten history - the applet is different. I told you that because of the inaccuracies I removed the script from that old post to prevent further confusion, yet you are bringing it up here again.
OK, Wootz, it was not a difficult forensic task. :)
Because I do not have your applet I have asked forum members to provide me with USB height for T7 with stone diameter 250 mm, projection length 139 mm and bevel angle 15°. I have got the USB height 169.31mm.
This number is biased by 0.87 mm as shown in my picture_02.jpg above. Because I assume that your segment of the applet, which is simple Pythagorean triangle, works correctly, I have deduced that the inaccuracy roots in the applet segment inspired by Dutchman approach. Even numerically the bias can be derived from the original Dutchman's formula.
You can verify your bias by grinding this angle on a blade. You will see that you will not get 15° (or 30°) angle. Let us know the results. ;)
Jan
Jan, the "bias" you are talking about is the bias only to your vision of how the cosine rule should be applied to the Tormek setup. Funnily enough, when I thought over your Excel formulas over a year ago, I initially thought the same, but you aren't doing transposition right.
Wootz, it is really funny! Please, if you can, prepare some explanatory drawing.
Jan
Jan, I can only guess what your motivation was to take this discussion from our private dialogue to public, but I believe I've been patient enough not to hurt your self-esteem.
I'd suggest to return to private discussion, if you really want to know where you mistake.
When you guys get it hashed out... please share! (It'll probably make my head hurt... but still find it interesting).
Wootz, the only reason why I posted the discussion here, on the Tormek forum, was your laconic refusal to discuss the issue with me privately via email.
As you know from my email, my intention was to draw your attention to a sketch and formula publically available on your website, where I saw some problems. You refused my suggestion with the argument, that documents on your website are not instructional, just a showcase.
I agree with your suggestion to return to private discussion.
Jan
Quote from: cbwx34 on September 24, 2017, 05:15:18 PM
When you guys get it hashed out... please share! (It'll probably make my head hurt... but still find it interesting).
CB, thanks for your interest and also for to usage of the appropriate US verb's "to hash out".
Jan
As a forum member, I value the many contributions each of you has made to this forum, and hope you will continue to do so.
As forum moderator, I can foresee more unfortunate downside risk than benefit to continuing this discussion on the forum. Therefore, I ask both of you as friends and gentlemen of good character to continue this discussion privately.
Ken
OK, Ken.
Jan
Quote from: Ken S on September 18, 2017, 09:36:18 PM
The user inputs the grinding wheel diameter in millimeters and fractions of a millimeter. Next the angle is input in degrees and fractions of a degree. The program displays the distance between the universal support and the top of the Tormek.
What about the projection from where the knife jig's adjustable stop rests on the support bar to the bevel edge of the knife? It seems one would also have to input that distance?
Quote from: Herman Trivilino on October 08, 2017, 04:49:19 PM
Quote from: Ken S on September 18, 2017, 09:36:18 PM
The user inputs the grinding wheel diameter in millimeters and fractions of a millimeter. Next the angle is input in degrees and fractions of a degree. The program displays the distance between the universal support and the top of the Tormek.
What about the projection from where the knife jig's adjustable stop rests on the support bar to the bevel edge of the knife? It seems one would also have to input that distance?
Yes... that is entered also...
(https://image.ibb.co/n64zvb/Angle_Setter_Screenshot01.jpg)
Oops........I neglected to include entering the Projection (at least this time).
I think one must decide between simplicity and speed or more refined accuracy. The two are not mutually exclusive; I believe the well trained Tormek sharpener has both tools at his ready command.
I have a kenjig in my Tormek work station and Wootz' program "on speed dial" on my laptop.
Ken
Quote from: Ken S on September 18, 2017, 09:36:18 PM
The program is sophisticated, but easy to use. Initially, one selects the model of Tormek being used, T4, T7, or T8. The program now remembers the choice for future use. The user iputs the grinding wheel diameter in millimeters and fractions of a millimeter. Next the angle is input in degrees and fractions of a degree. The program displays the distance between the universal support and the top of the Tormek.
Wootz, why not output the distance between the US and the surface of the grindstone instead of the top of the Tormek? It seems this would make things easier as you wouldn't need to worry about the type of Tormek.
For the sake of better precision, Herman
Quote from: Jan on September 19, 2017, 10:39:58 AM
For an easy and accurate setting of the universal support – grindstone distance I have modified the "Starrett combination square". This has been intended for Dutchman and kenjig concepts. For more info see https://forum.tormek.com/index.php?topic=2879.msg15575#msg15575
The same tool can also be used for setting the Universal Support height above the top of the Tormek housing in the frame of Wootz bevel angle setting procedure.
Jan
I have combination squares that could be used but I wanted something that could be dedicated to the Tormek. So, taking something from my limited experience with pattern making, I bought a "wheel marking depth gauge", graduated in both inch and metric. Unfortunately, it doesn't extend far enough for some setting off the USB, so I grabbed a piece of 5/16" stainless rod from my stock rack and made a 9" shaft. The new shaft is not graduated at all, that doesn't really matter because I use my calipers to set the distance and set the making gage off of the calipers. I have a 6" Mitutoyo electronic caliper that reads out in metric also, so use that for setting the knife jib distance, but I only a 12" dial caliper for USB distances over 6" and it is only inch, so I have to do the inch/metric conversion and then set the extended shaft marking gage for the USB height settings. I've been using WOOTZ's software, which is really sweet.
Rick
P.S. I tried uploading a couple photos of these, but the system said they didn't pass security and couldn't be uploaded.
Rick,
I may have the same wheel marking gage:
http://www.leevalley.com/US/wood/page.aspx?p=59455
Is that it?
Mine is the original uncalibrated version. It's a nice tool, although today I would purchase the micro adjust version. I was setting it up this afternoon to scribe a line 2 3/8" in with plate aluminum. Getting the cutter exactly is the cut line on my Starrett rule was difficult without the microadjust. I think your calipers would set the distance more accurately than the rod calibrations.
Did you leave the rod end square or slightly rounded?
Clever idea; keep up the good work! It seems a good match for Wootz' program.
Ken
Quote from: Ken S on October 30, 2017, 07:58:12 AM
Rick,
I may have the same wheel marking gage:
http://www.leevalley.com/US/wood/page.aspx?p=59455
Is that it?
Mine is the original uncalibrated version. It's a nice tool, although today I would purchase the micro adjust version. I was setting it up this afternoon to scribe a line 2 3/8" in with plate aluminum. Getting the cutter exactly is the cut line on my Starrett rule was difficult without the microadjust. I think your calipers would set the distance more accurately than the rod calibrations.
Did you leave the rod end square or slightly rounded?
Clever idea; keep up the good work! It seems a good match for Wootz' program.
Ken
Ken,
Cool. Yes, it is the same, but different. The one I have is both inch and metric. I did not know about the micro adjust. Just ordered a metric micro adjust. Thanks for the heads up on that.
Rick
Rick,
The Lee Valley tool is really a marking gage, a very nice one! It would made a very nice depth gage for our purposes with a longer rod.
Ken.
Quote from: RickKrung on October 30, 2017, 04:57:40 AM
I have combination squares that could be used but I wanted something that could be dedicated to the Tormek. So, taking something from my limited experience with pattern making, I bought a "wheel marking depth gauge", graduated in both inch and metric. Unfortunately, it doesn't extend far enough for some setting off the USB, so I grabbed a piece of 5/16" stainless rod from my stock rack and made a 9" shaft. The new shaft is not graduated at all, that doesn't really matter because I use my calipers to set the distance and set the making gage off of the calipers. I have a 6" Mitutoyo electronic caliper that reads out in metric also, so use that for setting the knife jib distance, but I only a 12" dial caliper for USB distances over 6" and it is only inch, so I have to do the inch/metric conversion and then set the extended shaft marking gage for the USB height settings. I've been using WOOTZ's software, which is really sweet.
Rick
P.S. I tried uploading a couple photos of these, but the system said they didn't pass security and couldn't be uploaded.
Trying to upload images taken with my iPhone, downsized in email transmission and not further modified on my computer.
Rick
Glad it finally worked.
Looks like a good way of setting it.
Replacement Angle Master Storage Plate just fell off. I'm not using it much so I think I'll just leave it off and store the AM with the other jigs and such. For knives, I am primariy using Wootz's app and wheel marking gauges.
I received a Lee Valley micro-adjust metric marking gauge today. Nice unit, but I found the graduations to be about 1 mm off. When set to 139 mm, it is actually 137.8 mm measured with a Mitutoyo in/mm digital caliper. I'd have thought it would be better than that. I"ll have to remember the error when setting it or use calipers. I may just use the micro-adjust head on the 9" ungraduated rod for setting the USB height.
Rick
Rick,
In the 2nd photo which shows the Tormek, I see a metal lathe in the background. Have you tried to sharpen your lathe tools on the Tormek ? If so, any luck / thoughts / guidance you can share ?
Kind regards,
Rich
Quote from: RichColvin on November 04, 2017, 04:02:54 AM
Rick,
In the 2nd photo which shows the Tormek, I see a metal lathe in the background. Have you tried to sharpen your lathe tools on the Tormek ? If so, any luck / thoughts / guidance you can share ?
Kind regards,
Rich
Rich,
No, I have not, part because I understand I need a different stone. But, I wonder about that because my drills are all HSS and they can be sharpened on the standard stone. Another reason is that I don't use many ground HSS cutting tools, mostly insert tooling, both HSS and carbide. But... I want to learn. And third, I just haven't had much time for playing with the lathe lately, and that is in part due to me spending more of my free time fiddling with the T8. Is that circular logic, or what?
Further, I never learned how to free-hand grind HSS cutters very well, so have not attempted much. But... and there is always a "but". I make bamboo fly fishing rods. I also make and sell a tool for making the wood reel seat mounting insert for fishing rods (more precisely, I have the parts made and I assemble them into the tool [mandrel]). For turning of a recess in the wood reel seat cylinder, I had ground HSS cutters with a 3/8" radiused nose. I had 10 ground, cost me $300 and I sold 9 of them for $30 ea. Now, if I could rough them on a traditional high speed grinder and finish them on the Tormek, and still sell them for $30, I'd have look at it. Another but. There are carbide circular inserts available, so i don't think it pencils out.
For that one remaining 3/8" radius cutter, I will sharpen it with the Tormek, but I do not yet have the proper jig. But I do have the toolrest jig, which it seems could be used.
Rick
Well, you know, I have a hobby metal lathe (7" x 14", from Grizzly), and I've made a number of parts for sharpening on it. Probably something to think about ....
That lathe of yours looks like it is really solid !
Rich
Quote from: RichColvin on November 04, 2017, 05:15:27 AM
Well, you know, I have a hobby metal lathe (7" x 14", from Grizzly), and I've made a number of parts for sharpening on it. Probably something to think about ....
That lathe of yours looks like it is really solid !
Rich
Solid and precise. Monarch 10EE, but it actually swings just under 13". One of two "ultimate" lathes for a home shop machinist.
I started in 2000 with the same type of lathe, (7x10, then 7x14" Grizzly) and a Grizzly MiniMill, graduated to an Atlas 10" lathe, then South Bend 9A lathe. The big jump was to a Rivett 1020 at 1500 lb in 2007. Full restoration, 1941 vintage. Unfortunately, it got dumped on its face during moving a bit over a year ago. Surprisingly minor damage. But I opted to graduate to the Monarch, also, fully restored, 1946 version, with DRO.
Rick
Quote from: RickKrung on November 04, 2017, 02:51:19 AM
Replacement Angle Master Storage Plate just fell off. I'm not using it much so I think I'll just leave it off and store the AM with the other jigs and such. For knives, I am primariy using Wootz's app and wheel marking gauges.
I received a Lee Valley micro-adjust metric marking gauge today. Nice unit, but I found the graduations to be about 1 mm off. When set to 139 mm, it is actually 137.8 mm measured with a Mitutoyo in/mm digital caliper. I'd have thought it would be better than that. I"ll have to remember the error when setting it or use calipers. I may just use the micro-adjust head on the 9" ungraduated rod for setting the USB height.
Rick
Superglue has held for me... so far anyway, if you change your mind.
May seem like a silly question, but how do you know which measurement is accurate? (What's the saying... a man with two watches never knows the exact time). ;)
Quote from: cbwx34 on November 04, 2017, 12:40:23 PM
May seem like a silly question, but how do you know which measurement is accurate? (What's the saying... a man with two watches never knows the exact time). ;)
I'm taking your question as "tongue in cheek", but will answer it seriously (of which I assume you already know). By definition, a precision measuring device such as calipers should be more accurate than a graduated ruler. But, there are "standards" available for checking and calibrating said precision devices. Those pictured are for micrometers, but work for calipers. There are 1-2-3 blocks and I have a full set of gauge pins from 0.0610" to 0.5000" (and the digits are significant).
Said another way, not all watches are the same. ;D
Rick
Thanks. It was a bit "tongue in cheek", but at the same time, I sometimes wonder about the quality of some of the calipers I've seen.
I got a better answer than I anticipated. Good stuff.
(What's the saying... a man with two watches never knows the exact time)
Supposedly if he checks Coordinated Universal Time. ;)
Quote from: cbwx34 on November 04, 2017, 12:40:23 PM
Superglue has held for me... so far anyway, if you change your mind.
I'm trying the superglue route.
Rick
Quote from: Elden on November 05, 2017, 12:22:18 AM
(What's the saying... a man with two watches never knows the exact time)
Supposedly if he checks Coordinated Universal Time. ;)
Then the watch will be accurate, but if it's a cheap watch it will drift and no longer be accurate. It lacks precision.
On the other hand an expensive watch may not drift much at all, so it's more precise. But if it's never compared to the standard clock it may not be accurate.
Quote from: RickKrung on November 05, 2017, 10:10:47 PM
Quote from: cbwx34 on November 04, 2017, 12:40:23 PM
Superglue has held for me... so far anyway, if you change your mind.
I'm trying the superglue route.
Rick
Your picture gave me a chuckle (I often read posts under the "Recent Posts" section and it doesn't show pictures, so didn't see it until now). I just squirted some SuperGlue on the plate and stuck it to the machine. :o
(Now you know why I'm worried about drilling the holes for the USB mod)..... ;)