Messages

Ah yes!
Perhaps there is a correlation here as well. I wonder if it would be linear or not? In my mind, BESS sharpness would asymptotically approach an angle of incidence where the edge first becomes 'sharp'. Perhaps this would be 90°. I would expect this curve to follow a quadratic function, thus making it difficult to choose the best angle to sharpen at. The observation of infinitesimally small edge, though being sharp, and its lack of durability would half to play an important factor. Perhaps if there was a systematic approach to dulling a knife consistently, at a small rate; a before and after "snapshot" would be useful.

The graph of inverse durability vs angle and sharpness vs angle, when charted together, may yield a max or min that could show the best combination of the three variables.

I believe my time spent per knife sharpening has just doubled to accommodate data collection.

Well, this was a long read.

Anyways, I too use the BESS method. Though not an ISO, ASME, ASTM, etc. standard, it is a fantastic tool. I have been collecting data with it and my whetstones (having newly acquired a T-7 have not had experience enough to collect data yet for the Tormek). I am working on a graph of "BESS mass [g]" vs "sharpening medium [µm]". The BESS system is great for this because you really only need the independent variable to be standardized of sorts. Granted, the sharpening/honing grit is only as good as the operator.

In an effort to tie into the original question of "how sharp is sharp", I move to offer that the answer is relative to the task. In my perfectionist mind, nothing is sharp unless you get cut just by looking at it (see most any Japanese sharpness story). I have trouble stopping when I take on a set of knives to sharpen, I would call it a problem if I was not proud of my work. How could I not produce an edge that I am not proud of? However, this once again leaves us with the relative sharpness of an edge. To me, sharp happens when I run out of honing paste that is smaller than what I am currently using; as you can imagine, this is not practical. That is why I am so dedicated to producing this graphical representation of "sharpness vs µm".

I would love to help answer any questions with this regard. My current items to question are as follows:

What µm medium is the minimum requirement to break the BESS "sharp cutlery" requirement?

What grit is the apex most prominent?

How does this method compare across steel types?

how does this method compare across blade types/thicknesses?

Sharpness of knife upkeep (steeling vs stropping)?

As an aside, I would like to take magnified photographs of each sharpness at multiple blade points to try to qualify the "look" of a blade with sharpness. Perhaps a diagnostic visual test. Perhaps an arbitrary method, but say... 2 visible blade imperfections per inch qualifies the blade to the "not sharp" category.

I also want to test this on my personal knives with longevity and durability. There is no standard for when someone needs to resharpen their knives, just hone often enough and you are fine for 6-12 months. I don't like this. Perhaps I could have my neighbors contribute to the study and let me take BESS scale measurements and record them?

OORRRRR, I may just be taking this too seriously and sharp happens when you can cut a tomato. 

Jon 

Quotes (""):
This activates the search for only what is within the quoted phrase. You can use this in conjunction with other words as well (e.g. "leather wheel" chisel will yield different results from leather wheel chisel and "leather wheel chisel").

Well, I just tried to use your idea in a search for "kenjig" with the quotes as shown and got only one hit. That hit is the opening statement in this dialog, it is above. I know there  have been other times the term has been used. The search engine needs updating.

I believe that is because you were still on this thread while doing the search. When you use the search tool at the top of the page, it will perform the search in the actual subfolder you are in, with regard to the website map. So you can search a 5 page thread for a name to narrow your search. This is similar to doing a search on your computers C drive vs doing a search in the My Documents folder or Desktop.

For example, on the forum home page, you can perform a search and get many more results than you would by clicking on "general tormek questions" first. So if you know the topic you are looking for is in the "knife sharpening" section, you can first click on that sub folder from the forum home and then do your search.

Just as a note: When you put quotes around a single word, it produces the same search results as if you had no quotes. The quotation is best if used with more than one word.

When performing searches, there are some embedded search techniques that you can use.

Quotes (""):
This activates the search for only what is within the quoted phrase. You can use this in conjunction with other words as well (e.g. "leather wheel" chisel will yield different results from leather wheel chisel and "leather wheel chisel").

The minus operator (-):
This removes items from the search (e.g. leather wheel -(chisel) returns all results with leather, wheel, and excludes chisel)

And the final tip would be to use unique words. So, say you used the above two methods but still cannot find the post, throw in some unique words (e.g. "leather wheel" -(chisel) veritas will yield two search results [now three with this post] as opposed to several pages)

Granted, all of this is useful if you know what you are looking for specifically. Sometimes we search for such generic items that they get lost in the noise, this is the benefit of unique keywords.

As to your filing method, you can export a shortcut of the web link to a word document or an "executable" of sorts. And keep those in logically named folders. I do this for work with references for nuclear plants, however I recently have been printing as much as possible to pdf (or .prn) for easy transferal between hard drives, backups, and coworkers. This can be done at the bottom of any page in a specific thread with the print icon. With this you can print to a printer or adobe pdf. The adobe prints out a .pdf document which can then be saved however you prefer, "dutchmans table design.pdf" for example. Hyperlinks do keep with this method as well.

Novel, commence. This is great. I too second the "sharpening hobby", I have used that phrase many times. I have even referred to it as part of my "garage time with a sharpening problem".

More-so, I agree with offering evidence as opposed to proof. The amount of philosophy that this could dig into is mind boggling, even to the point of erasing most of what I was going to post. However, I also subscribe to educating the difference between theories and postulates. I don't know that I will ever formulate a theory, but I have many postulates about life.

In my mind, I am living too stagnant of a life if I am not learning something. I have started a trend at work where I pick a person on my team, and ask them to "Teach me something". Never does it have to be about work, but I won't turn that away as knowledge (Iliad Ch. X, where with two men, two may see an opportunity where one may miss). Now it is to the point where my coworkers come to me with questions and aid in tasks, thus creating a community of genuine subscription to furthering knowledge. I look forward to learning from you gentlemen in the same way. I may not have the knowledge of the Tormek system yet, but I do thermal-hydraulic mechanical engineering well enough that they pay me for it.

With regard to proofs in science, I believe that the closer we get to understanding the quantum realm, the better chance we have of achieving the first scientific proof as opposed to merely a theory. For instance, in statistical thermodynamics the use of information theory allows us to confirm our conventional equations. Yet, even then, we have much to learn.

I will "mic drop" with this:
Were numbers discovered or invented?

A sanding sponge

Roger.

Hey folks, I'm a bit new here, but have been lurking in the shadows learning.

I just unboxed my T-7 last night and took it for a test run. I have been sharpening on Norton Whetstones for a few years now and I saved up a knife set to sharpen for one of my coworkers to test out on the new machine. I'm impressed. Much longer to change angles and all, but once there, it is nice that it stays the same. The things are sharp though, granted, not quite as sharp as my 8000 grit Norton and 0.5 micron strop, but the process was mighty fast.

Anyways, for the reason of this post, I have noticed that the seam where the leather is sewn/glued together on the honing wheel has a bump to it. I can almost guarantee that it has no negative affect on my finish, but it does bother me. Has anyone come across this and/or thing of any solutions other than 'get use to it'?

Regards,

Jon