Hello everyone,
It makes several months, I am reading with very much interest, the different posts and I have learned a lot about sharpening.
This is my first post on this forum and I would like fist to thank all the contributors for sharing their knowledge.
My first Tormek was a T3, and I didn't like it because the USB support was not strong enough to keep the blade of a planer perfectly perpendicular.
Later on, I found a very cheap Tormek 4000, all in stainless steel. I try it in a dark area and I didn't realize that the stone was not a Tormek stone and that the shaft was twisted! After a while, I found someone to make me a new shaft and I bought a second hand Japanese wheel SJ250. This purchase was finely a very good one.
So now I have a SG200 wheel to sharpen knifes and I have a wider wheel to polish them (before the leather wheel).
I have tried to use the TormekCalc² to keep the same angle with the 2 stones but I realize that it was not possible. The second wheel was always grinding the edge heel instead of the edge tip.
I wanted to find the lowest possible knife angle that would polish the tip.
I have spent some time to understand all the formula of the TormekCalc² of JVH.
What is nice with the Tormek problem is that everything can be analyzed through triangle geometry. It is no more mathematic, it is only geometry, nice geometry, and I have solved my problem of polishing angle.
I share with you this spreadsheet that does the same calculation as the TormekCalc² and some more calculation; however this is done with a totally different objective. TormekCalc² is a very user friendly tool (Thank you JVH) and I don't want to compete with it. My aim is to do a very simple spreadsheet so that everyone could understand every formula and modify them as they need.
I took the liberty of using as much as possible the same letter and the same name as in TormekCalc² so that people could understand the drawing and the formula more easily.
I have also study the impact of the knife thickness and the tapered knife on the real grinding angle.
It gives me the idea to realize a Jig centering bushing before I realize that JVH has already realized it.
I have added a sheet dedicated to that.
I hope that my calculations are good. The first trial I have done was OK with a flat piece of steel of 3mm with a single bevel grinding. With the same angle as the grinding wheel, I could see the polishing of the hell and with the correction of the angle, I could see the polishing of the tip. I am happy. It works for that!
I do not have a very tapered knife so I was not able to validate my calculation for that.
Now that I understand how to use the Tormek, I need to go to practice and play with it.
Kind regards
Quote from: Gilles on May 15, 2020, 06:21:50 PM
Hello everyone,
It makes several months, I am reading with very much interest, the different posts and I have learned a lot about sharpening.
This is my first post on this forum and I would like fist to thank all the contributors for sharing their knowledge.
My first Tormek was a T3, and I didn't like it because the USB support was not strong enough to keep the blade of a planer perfectly perpendicular.
Later on, I found a very cheap Tormek 4000, all in stainless steel. I try it in a dark area and I didn't realize that the stone was not a Tormek stone and that the shaft was twisted! After a while, I found someone to make me a new shaft and I bought a second hand Japanese wheel SJ250. This purchase was finely a very good one.
So now I have a SG200 wheel to sharpen knifes and I have a wider wheel to polish them (before the leather wheel).
I have tried to use the TormekCalc² to keep the same angle with the 2 stones but I realize that it was not possible. The second wheel was always grinding the edge heel instead of the edge tip.
I wanted to find the lowest possible knife angle that would polish the tip.
I have spent some time to understand all the formula of the TormekCalc² of JVH.
What is nice with the Tormek problem is that everything can be analyzed through triangle geometry. It is no more mathematic, it is only geometry, nice geometry, and I have solved my problem of polishing angle.
I share with you this spreadsheet that does the same calculation as the TormekCalc² and some more calculation; however this is done with a totally different objective. TormekCalc² is a very user friendly tool (Thank you JVH) and I don't want to compete with it. My aim is to do a very simple spreadsheet so that everyone could understand every formula and modify them as they need.
I took the liberty of using as much as possible the same letter and the same name as in TormekCalc² so that people could understand the drawing and the formula more easily.
I have also study the impact of the knife thickness and the tapered knife on the real grinding angle.
It gives me the idea to realize a Jig centering bushing before I realize that JVH has already realized it.
I have added a sheet dedicated to that.
I hope that my calculations are good. The first trial I have done was OK with a flat piece of steel of 3mm with a single bevel grinding. With the same angle as the grinding wheel, I could see the polishing of the hell and with the correction of the angle, I could see the polishing of the tip. I am happy. It works for that!
I do not have a very tapered knife so I was not able to validate my calculation for that.
Now that I understand how to use the Tormek, I need to go to practice and play with it.
Kind regards
A very nicely laid out spreadsheet... looks good to me. Now I need help understanding how you use it? (It always takes me a while).
So, for example, I look at the "Polishing Angle" page. If I use the angle of 12° for the 200mm wheel, then look down at the 250mm wheel, I see 12.65°. So do you then take 12.65°, and put that back into the "USB Height" page (along with the wheel size difference), to obtain the answer to set the USB?
Again, nice job! Thanks.
Hi cbwx34,
you perfectly understand how to use it.
regards
Gilles, welcome to the forum!
Thanks for sharing with us your very nicely done Excel spreadsheet. It is well documented with formulas and drawings and it covers wide span of tasks related to the geometrical aspects of sharpening. I find it valuable and inspiring.
I have validated your page "USB height" and can confirm that it works accurately!
My comment to this page is, that many people use the USB top to stone distance for setting the grinding angle. It is machine independent value.
Your "Polishing angle" page, reminded me the central angle theorem which relates the grinding angle, chord angle and heel angle. Your values are in compliance with this theorem.
Jan
Hi Jan,
Thank for your comment,
You make me understand why people are using the USB top to stone distance. I will add it in a future release.
I didn't knew the existance of the cental angle theorem, I will have a look at it
Kind regards
Chord angle = ( grinding angle + heel angle ) / 2
Jan
Quote from: Jan on May 16, 2020, 11:21:27 AM
...
My comment to this page is, that many people use the USB top to stone distance for setting the grinding angle. It is machine independent value.
...
I already added it to my copy of his spreadsheet. ;)
Quote from: Gilles on May 16, 2020, 11:51:49 AM
...
I will add it in a future release.
...
I sent you a PM... if you make changes... a couple of minor things I noticed.
Gilles, in my understanding the condition for minimum grinding angle is, that the chord length is the same for both wheels. In your example the chord length is 11.4 mm. Also the angle of the chord will stay the same (15.3⁰) for both wheels.
CB, you are quick! :)
Jan
I've added this to the calculators available from the Sharpening Handbook. Here is the page link: https://www.sharpeninghandbook.info/indexCalc.html
Kind regards,
Rich
Thank you Rich. I think it is a good idea
Beautiful spreadsheet. Very nicely laid out with all the formulas, etc. Way beyond anything I could have done, even in my prime of using Excel. Just getting started looking at it and trying to understand it a bit.
I do have some questions, and perhaps a request or two.
It appears to me that the spreadsheet is sort of "hard wired" for a Supergrind 2000. On the first sheet, "USB Height". Variables "Constand HV" and "Constand VV" (for both the "Vertical Side" and "Horizontal Side") are derived from distance values in the figures, but most of the these are specific to a Supergrind 2000.
I have studied the figures and formulas enough to figure out how I could measure some of these for my T8 and input the values. You have documented most clearly. Your spreadsheet shows the computation for Constant VV (Parameter AA')(cell C16) on the Vertical Side, which is =23+12/2 (cell D16). To my spreadsheet, I have added the values for the computation of Constant HV (Parameter AB)(cell C15) to the adjacent cell (D15), which is: =119.6+12/2-63-25/2.
The one that I cannot find values for, to know how you've calculated it is the Constant VV for the Horizontal Side, cell C50 in the spreadsheet. It is the distance "BC", as shown in the figure. From the figure for the Vertical Side, the distance from the shaft center to the top of the machine would be =23+12/2 = 29, as shown in cell D16, but you do not show values for how to determined the distance from the top of the machine case to the centerline of the horizontal USB sleeve. That should be easy enough, with just a measurement from the top of the USB in the sleeve to the machine case, then subtract 12/2.
My point in torturing this is to suggest that input fields be added so that users can customize the spreadsheets for their own machines, SG, T7, T8., etc. and have those contants computed. I have not looked deeper to see if this sort of thing might apply to the other sheets in the spreadsheet. It doesn't appear so, as those other sheets look to be independent of the machine type.
Please do not take my comments as criticism. This is an amazing piece of work and I thank you for it. I mean only to suggest some things to make it even more valuable and useful to us much more casual users.
Thanks for listening,
Rick
Quote from: RickKrung on May 22, 2020, 05:00:04 PM
...
The one that I cannot find values for, to know how you've calculated it is the Constant VV for the Horizontal Side, cell C50 in the spreadsheet. It is the distance "BC", as shown in the figure. From the figure for the Vertical Side, the distance from the shaft center to the top of the machine would be =23+12/2 = 29, as shown in cell D16, but you do not show values for how to determined the distance from the top of the machine case to the centerline of the horizontal USB sleeve.
...
My GUESS.... he pulled it from the TormekCalc spreadsheet (that this is based on). 😉
High Rick
Thank you for spending some time to look a my spreadsheet.
I take all the comments as valuable remarks.
I will do a release taking into account all of them.
Concerning the formula I forgot to put in, you found the good answer.
I agree it would be nice to have a sreadsheet with the parameter of every Tormek machines.
Do you know if all those parameters have already been publish on the Tormek Forum or should I create a new subjet to ask the Tormek community to send them to me so that I could include them.
Kind regards
Quote from: Gilles on May 23, 2020, 08:17:02 PM
...snip...
Do you know if all those parameters have already been publish on the Tormek Forum or should I create a new subjet to ask the Tormek community to send them to me so that I could include them.
Kind regards
Some must know those values, they've developed apps for the machines. But I know of nowhere that info has been posted.
You can request users provide you with measurements from their machines. I have been working on some suggestions on good method of making such measurements, but I'm not ready to post it yet. I've been on "Grampa duty" since about about noon yesterday. My granddaughter stayed overnight at my place last night. We have had a lot of fun, but no time for me to work.
Rick
Quote from: Gilles on May 23, 2020, 08:17:02 PM
...
I agree it would be nice to have a sreadsheet with the parameter of every Tormek machines.
Do you know if all those parameters have already been publish on the Tormek Forum or should I create a new subjet to ask the Tormek community to send them to me so that I could include them.
Kind regards
My 2 cents (and I don't think I'm alone here)... measuring directly to the wheel is the better route. It's quick, easy, accurate, and machine independent. No matter what configuration: horizontal, vertical, FVB, etc., or even if you transition to another machine like a buffer with a honing wheel of some sort, you're good to go.
I've gone the route of "measuring to the machine"... and it just causes me unnecessary work, and I don't see any better result. Measuring to the machine is just a step added after measuring to the wheel, (with a bunch more measurements you now have to account for).
BTW, this doesn't at all "devalue" the work you've done here... it's still a good spreadsheet with some valuable info, just like the TormekCalc2 work.
p.s. I'm sure at this point you've seen it, but it's worth linking to the original work in these threads...
Simple Adjustment of the Grinding Angle by Dutchman (https://forum.tormek.com/index.php?topic=1849).
Quote from: cbwx34 on May 23, 2020, 11:45:01 PM
...snip....
My 2 cents (and I don't think I'm alone here)... measuring directly to the wheel is the better route. It's quick, easy, accurate, and machine independent. No matter what configuration: horizontal, vertical, FVB, etc., or even if you transition to another machine like a buffer with a honing wheel of some sort, you're good to go.
I've gone the route of "measuring to the machine"... and it just causes me unnecessary work, and I don't see any better result. Measuring to the machine is just a step added after measuring to the wheel, (with a bunch more measurements you now have to account for).
...snip...
CB is right about measuring directly to the wheel. It eliminates all of the unnecessary measurements and associated error, except two: 1) the one direct measurement and 2) alignment of the measurement probe with the centerline between the USB and machine shaft. A major benefit is that machine independent.
I tried it recently and was a little bit plagued with No. 2. I tried eyeing its alignment, but found I did better when I placed a straightedge (metal ruler) to indicate that "correct line". I have in mind to make an easy jig, but alas, just too much other stuff going on. I was also getting inconsistent angles. I'm sure there is something wrong with my technique, because it should be much more consistent. For the meantime, I've gone back to measuring to the top of the machine case.
Rick
Quote from: RickKrung on May 24, 2020, 05:03:08 AM
CB is right about measuring directly to the wheel. It eliminates all of the unnecessary measurements and associated error, except two: 1) the one direct measurement and 2) alignment of the measurement probe with the centerline between the USB and machine shaft. A major benefit is that machine independent.
I tried it recently and was a little bit plagued with No. 2. I tried eyeing its alignment, but found I did better when I placed a straightedge (metal ruler) to indicate that "correct line". I have in mind to make an easy jig, but alas, just too much other stuff going on. I was also getting inconsistent angles. I'm sure there is something wrong with my technique, because it should be much more consistent. For the meantime, I've gone back to measuring to the top of the machine case.
Rick
I'm sure by now you've seen the "Angle Tool" (https://www.ultimateangletool.com/listing/762938563/multi-tool-angle-measuring-gauge-jig) (but here it is for those that haven't)...
(https://forum.tormek.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4326.0;attach=4493)
https://forum.tormek.com/index.php?topic=4170.0... that makes setup pretty easy and easily repeatable. I mainly use a caliper... it's what I practiced with, and just like anything, with a bit of practice, you can get accurate consistent results. (I seem to recall you spending some time dialing in the accuracy measuring to the machine, in my mind, no different). ;)
Quote from: cbwx34 on May 24, 2020, 02:57:14 PM
Quote from: RickKrung on May 24, 2020, 05:03:08 AM
...
I have in mind to make an easy jig, but alas, just too much other stuff going on....snip...
Rick
I'm sure by now you've seen the "Angle Tool" (https://www.ultimateangletool.com/listing/762938563/multi-tool-angle-measuring-gauge-jig) (but here it is for those that haven't)...
(https://forum.tormek.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4326.0;attach=4493)
https://forum.tormek.com/index.php?topic=4170.0
... that makes setup pretty easy and easily repeatable. I mainly use a caliper it's what I practiced with, and just like anything, with a bit of practice, you can get accurate consistent results. (I seem to recall you spending some time dialing in the accuracy measuring to the machine, in my mind, no different). ;)
CB! Thanks for shaking my tree. I had of course seen postings about this tool but never paid it any attention... ... thinking "Oh, I don't need that"...
What a brilliant tool. It is extremely close to what I was imagining. I just ordered one. It will save me a lot of time and aggravation trying to reinvent this wheel.
The slot for the collar is a nice touch. I wasn't impressed with how the jaws got dragged across the stone while removing to measure the diameter. But with care, it probably can be used without wearing down those jaws too much. I'll find out.
Thanks again,
Rick
Rick,
Would something like this help find the center line? Not sure if I'm misinterpreting what you're looking for
Oops, sorry nevermind. I didn't notice CB already addressed this with a solution.
Also, while I'm here...
Gilles, thank you for sharing your work. It's a great addition and very much appreciated
Quote from: BobD on May 24, 2020, 04:10:48 PM
Rick,
Would something like this help find the center line? Not sure if I'm misinterpreting what you're looking for
Good idea! In fact, it made me think that just adding a string to the end of the caliper, could easily improve the accuracy...
(https://forum.tormek.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4326.0;attach=4499)
... or at least help during the "practice phase". :)
I also use the USB top to stone distance because is simpler and more universal approach.
Jan
I believe a generally accepted history of using trig too simply knife bevel setting on this forum began with Dutchman's booklet about grinding angles.
The next development was my kenjig. I recognized that using Dutchman's tables offered a more precise alternative to trial and error for setting up knives. Admittedly, I designed the kenjig for simpler times. At the time, knives were generally sharpened with one grinding wheel, the SG-250 (or SG-200 for the T4). Most kitchen knives were sharpened with 15° double bevels. I made provisions for wheel wear, increasing the Distance by 1 mm for every 10 mm of wheel diameter wear. I made a second kenjig for 20° double bevels, but rarely used it. Nobody was using CBN or diamond wheels at that time. I was (and still am) using Henckel kitchen knives and garden variety pocket knives. I was not thinking about sharpening exotic knives.
Dutchman used a combination square for his set up. I used a kenjig made of 12mm Baltic Birch Plywood. We both measured Distance from the top of the support bar to the arc of the grinding wheel. I use the same measurement for any Tormek model and for both vertical and horizontal positions. Later, more sophisticated programs measure from the support bar to the frame of the Tormek. Some claim this is more accurate. This may be so, although I have never understood why.
My kenjig thinking continues to evolve. For years, it has been based on 15°. Based on Wootz' ongoing research, I plan to switch to 12°. Also, I have been recently considering my fixed Projection of 139 mm. Dutchman fixed the Distance and adjusted with the Projection. Wootz' original setting block has spawned several interesting setting blocks. Diamond and CBN wheels donot change diameter, making wear correction increasingly obsolete.
o
I also realize that we have many different expectation levels in our sharpening. What it comfortable for one may not work well for another. What fit me well last year may not fit next year. As always, I believe we are best served by understanding several techniques and growing.
Ken
Ken, I think once you start sharpening your kitchen knives to 12° and honing around 13.5° you may change your mind on what is sharp enough. I too made this change on kost of my my personal knives some time ago.
Trimming a large piece of meat in preparation for the smoker or slicing vegetables is a real joy. Pay careful attention to safety best practices. Last Fall I cut a finger quite badly while trimming a large pork butt for pulled pork. I did not feel the cut but saw blood. You can also impress family and friends by s;icing tomatoes and grapes one handed. I do recommend keeping a meat cleaver or heavy kitchen knife sharpened to 20° + for times when you need to chop bone.
John,
The great photojournalist, Alfred Eisenstaedt, encouraged photographers to make a good photograph, and then make a better one. I have always felt that the present kenjig was and is a good method. However, I believe you are correct in believing that I may change my mind as to what sharp is as I explore 12° bevel and 13.5° honing. I want to be open minded for growth.
I will post when I reach significant points along the journey.
Ken
Quote from: cbwx34 on May 24, 2020, 05:26:48 PM
Quote from: BobD on May 24, 2020, 04:10:48 PM
Rick,
Would something like this help find the center line? Not sure if I'm misinterpreting what you're looking for
Good idea! In fact, it made me think that just adding a string to the end of the caliper, could easily improve the accuracy...
... or at least help during the "practice phase". :)
I found a digital caliper on sale for $9.99, so got it and glued a small strip of metal to the end...
(https://forum.tormek.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4326.0;attach=4515)
... makes for a pretty accurate setup. (Might need a better way to attach it eventually, if want it to be permanent).... ???
(and now I can use metric). ;D
Edit to add: Didn't think about it at the time, but on the leather wheel side, putting the metal strip behind the locking knob works.... just making some quick comparisons... easily less than a degree difference.
(https://forum.tormek.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4326.0;attach=4517)
(Also, I just used a couple of drops of superglue... I imagine someone here would have a better solution)? ;)
The Excel script Polishing Angle Calc is really useful tool. Recently I used the sheet Thick Tapered Knife Edge to quantify the impact of blade thickness on the bevel angles.
I assumed flat 4.5 mm (0.18") thick blade mounted in knife jig with projection distance of 139 mm and the USB set up geometrically for the grinding angle 15⁰. The script revealed that instead of the desired grinding angle 15⁰ we will get 15.5⁰ for the jig in the Up position and 14.5⁰ for the jig in the Down position. So the discrepancy between the desired grinding angle and the real grinding angle is 0.5⁰ for each side and does not depend on stone diameter or the magnitude of the grinding angle.
This has important consequences for advanced, jig guided, deburring. Assuming that the deburring wheel was geometrically set up to 16.5⁰ in reality we will hone 17⁰ for the jig in the Up position and 16⁰ for the jig in the Down position. It means that despite the fact that the bevel angles are slightly biased the deburring of each site will be done as intended. :)
Jan
Quote from: Jan on June 01, 2020, 11:49:17 AM
The Excel script Polishing Angle Calc is really useful tool. Recently I used the sheet Thick Tapered Knife Edge to quantify the impact of blade thickness on the bevel angles.
I assumed flat 4.5 mm (0.18") thick blade mounted in knife jig with projection distance of 139 mm and the USB set up geometrically for the grinding angle 15⁰. The script revealed that instead of the desired grinding angle 15⁰ we will get 15.5⁰ for the jig in the Up position and 14.5⁰ for the jig in the Down position. So the discrepancy between the desired grinding angle and the real grinding angle is 0.5⁰ for each side and does not depend on stone diameter or the magnitude of the grinding angle.
This has important consequences for advanced, jig guided, deburring. Assuming that the deburring wheel was geometrically set up to 16.5⁰ in reality we will hone 17⁰ for the jig in the Up position and 16⁰ for the jig in the Down position. It means that despite the fact that the bevel angles are slightly biased the deburring of each site will be done as intended. :)
Jan
Can you expand on this ("does not depend on stone diameter")... I thought that's why it was created... because of the difference in wheel size? ???
CB, you are talking about the sheet Polishing Angle, but I am talking about the sheet Thick Tapered Knife Edge.
In my example the honing angle is by 1.5⁰ larger than the grinding angle and for all realistic wheel diameters there is no danger that heel of the bevel could collide with the honing wheel. (I assume that the honing angle is larger than the minimum grinding angle.)
The results from the sheet Thick Tapered Knife Edge clearly show that thick blade is source of bevel angle asymmetry which does not depend on stone diameter or the magnitude of the grinding angle. The consequences are important, both, the real grinding angle and the real honing angle are biased in the same way. This allows successful deburring despite the fact that the bevel angles are biased.
Jan
Hi Jan,
This is exactly the conclusion that I have done from this study and you explain it very well: "The consequences are important, both, the real grinding angle and the real honing angle are biased in the same way. This allows successful deburring despite the fact that the bevel angles are biased. "
It is also interesting to notice the effect of thickness and the effect of tapered blade on the bevel angle asymmetry (grinding angle and bevel height).
Tapered blade angle have often more impact than the blade thickness itself. The thicker the blade is, the higher the tapered blade angle can be and the higher the asymmetry can be.
Gilles
Quote from: Jan on June 01, 2020, 09:27:15 PM
CB, you are talking about the sheet Polishing Angle, but I am talking about the sheet Thick Tapered Knife Edge.
...
Yup... wasn't paying attention. :-X
Thanks! ;)
Quote from: Gilles on June 02, 2020, 11:22:50 AM
Hi Jan,
This is exactly the conclusion that I have done from this study and you explain it very well: "The consequences are important, both, the real grinding angle and the real honing angle are biased in the same way. This allows successful deburring despite the fact that the bevel angles are biased. "
It is also interesting to notice the effect of thickness and the effect of tapered blade on the bevel angle asymmetry (grinding angle and bevel height).
Tapered blade angle have often more impact than the blade thickness itself. The thicker the blade is, the higher the tapered blade angle can be and the higher the asymmetry can be.
Gilles
Gilles, thanks for your assurance, I am glad to see that we interpret the results in the same way!
As far as I know you are the first who geometrically described the impact of blade thickness and tapper on the bevel angle asymmetry. Those are things that affect everyday life of every Tormeker.
Thanks again for sharing your valuable Excel script with us! Highly appreciated! :)
Jan
There are so many interesting things on this Forum, so many kind people. This is my small contribution. Regards
Quote from: john.jcb on May 25, 2020, 01:17:19 PM
Ken, I think once you start sharpening your kitchen knives to 12° and honing around 13.5° you may change your mind on what is sharp enough. I too made this change on kost of my my personal knives some time ago.
Trimming a large piece of meat in preparation for the smoker or slicing vegetables is a real joy. Pay careful attention to safety best practices. Last Fall I cut a finger quite badly while trimming a large pork butt for pulled pork. I did not feel the cut but saw blood. You can also impress family and friends by s;icing tomatoes and grapes one handed. I do recommend keeping a meat cleaver or heavy kitchen knife sharpened to 20° + for times when you need to chop bone.
John
do you man 12 on each side or 12 in total?
Thx
Ernst
Quote from: chiamsi on June 17, 2020, 07:52:26 PM
Quote from: john.jcb on May 25, 2020, 01:17:19 PM
Ken, I think once you start sharpening your kitchen knives to 12° and honing around 13.5° you may change your mind on what is sharp enough. I too made this change on kost of my my personal knives some time ago.
Trimming a large piece of meat in preparation for the smoker or slicing vegetables is a real joy. Pay careful attention to safety best practices. Last Fall I cut a finger quite badly while trimming a large pork butt for pulled pork. I did not feel the cut but saw blood. You can also impress family and friends by s;icing tomatoes and grapes one handed. I do recommend keeping a meat cleaver or heavy kitchen knife sharpened to 20° + for times when you need to chop bone.
John
do you man 12 on each side or 12 in total?
Thx
Ernst
Each side.