Results Oriented - Not Equipment Nor Protocol Specific
The report shows (with the caveat below) good Cutting Edge Retention ("CER") is not equipment dependent - good CER values was achieved with three different pieces of equipment. Also, KnifeGrinder's protocols are not the only way to achieve good CER. That's why on page 25, under Conclusions, I stated, "Experiment"!
The caveat is that guided sharpening (knife clamped + guide bar) achieved much higher CER values than those that did not (sharpeners PB, WK, OA, and KH). In KGA Variation #1 (page 14), half a degree angle made a noticeable difference to CER values.
I posted somewhere else last week that I helped a commercial fisherman get his knives from around 265 BESS to around 95 BESS by deburring at .5 degree higher than the 15º angle.
Assuming a 2"/50.8mm tall knife blade (from knife edge to the spine), 15º means the spine is .518" / 13.15mm above the cutting board. 15.5º means the spine is .534" / 13.58 mm above the cutting board.
Can a human accurately and repeatedly shift from 15º to 15.5º, even with years of training one's muscle memory? I don't know. I know that I can't. After all, the difference above the cutting board is only .016" / .43mm, or 1/64".
With the fisherman's skinny Frost fillet knives (only .625" / 16mm high), I would argue the height difference between 15º and 15.5º is humanly imperceptible.
Using knife clamps and guide bars, such as on a Tormek T3, T4, T7 or T8, takes longer. But it's safer and easier to learn. Plus, better CER values means you can justify charging more. In the end, what market do you want to be? The lower-end market, or the premium sharpening (term coined by Paul at Alexandria Knife Sharpening - go check out his YouTube Channel) market?
Next Week: What is the K-Shaped Economy?
The report shows (with the caveat below) good Cutting Edge Retention ("CER") is not equipment dependent - good CER values was achieved with three different pieces of equipment. Also, KnifeGrinder's protocols are not the only way to achieve good CER. That's why on page 25, under Conclusions, I stated, "Experiment"!
The caveat is that guided sharpening (knife clamped + guide bar) achieved much higher CER values than those that did not (sharpeners PB, WK, OA, and KH). In KGA Variation #1 (page 14), half a degree angle made a noticeable difference to CER values.
I posted somewhere else last week that I helped a commercial fisherman get his knives from around 265 BESS to around 95 BESS by deburring at .5 degree higher than the 15º angle.
Assuming a 2"/50.8mm tall knife blade (from knife edge to the spine), 15º means the spine is .518" / 13.15mm above the cutting board. 15.5º means the spine is .534" / 13.58 mm above the cutting board.
Can a human accurately and repeatedly shift from 15º to 15.5º, even with years of training one's muscle memory? I don't know. I know that I can't. After all, the difference above the cutting board is only .016" / .43mm, or 1/64".
With the fisherman's skinny Frost fillet knives (only .625" / 16mm high), I would argue the height difference between 15º and 15.5º is humanly imperceptible.
Using knife clamps and guide bars, such as on a Tormek T3, T4, T7 or T8, takes longer. But it's safer and easier to learn. Plus, better CER values means you can justify charging more. In the end, what market do you want to be? The lower-end market, or the premium sharpening (term coined by Paul at Alexandria Knife Sharpening - go check out his YouTube Channel) market?
Next Week: What is the K-Shaped Economy?