Messages

[IT COULD BE PRINTED LIKE THIS!]

Tormek could solve the problem by including a pre measured package of oil.  Restaurants do this all the time with condiments and salad dressings. 

The problem with purchasing mineral oil at the drug store is the quantity.  I bought a pint.  It would probably serve all the new Tormek owners for a couple years.

I believe there is some latitude between too much and not enough oil.  If the factory included a pre measured package of oil for initial use, that would solve this problem.  Replacement leather wheels and the accessory shaped wheels should come with oil, also.  (Are you reading this, Tormek AB?)

Should this prove too costly, a red piece of paper with a warning, OIL THE LEATHER WHEEL BEFORE FIRST USE --ONLY-- WITH X QUANTITY OF MINERAL OIL. DO NOT OVEROIL.  should do the trick.

In fact, we could even put that warning in the sticky first message.  IT COULD BE PRINTED LIKE THIS!

KEN (sorry, I tried to get back to normal font)

I agree with Elden and Herman.  In a sense, drill bits and chisels are not all that different.  In both cases, the cutting part of the edges is the very tip.  With a chisel, most of the world uses micro bevels, the ver polished quite small flat surfaces at the tip of the bevel.  With a Tormek, we can easily polish the entire bevel.  With a drill bit, whether it is ground two of four facet, it's the tip of the primary facet or just the facet which does the cutting.  the secondary bevel (clearance) just keeps the tool out of the way of the material being cut.  Brightly polished bevels beyond the micro bevel or pristinely ground secondary facets are really for show. (beyond a certain point.  They must support the cutting edge, however, there is latitude in this)

Someone mentioned sharpening bits larger than 7/8" (22 mm, hence the name DBX-22). Using the concept of the DBS-22, and borrowing some of Ionut and Herman's knife ideas, it would be easy to make a plate for the Torlock jig which would hold the bit at the 59 degree angle.  With the Torlock set at a good angle for the "primary facet", the cutting edge could easily be ground.  Grinding the clearance could be done essentially "by hand".

The concept of four facets in a drill bit works very well when the hole is drilled with just one bit.  This is certainly convenient when needed.  With a larger twist bit, especially in metal, normally a smaller center drill is used to create a pilot hole.  When used to increase the size of a pilot hole to final diameter, the four facet grind is of no advantage.  (The cutting is being done further out from the center.)

I happen to have a DBS-22.  It does a very nice job of sharpening drill bits.  The bits cut well and look nice.  I don't believe I will ever need to sharpen a twist bit larger than 7/8".  If my lathe was larger I might. With a #1 Morse head and tail stock taper, bits only go to about half an inch.

Should I ever need to sharpen larger bits, I would make a simple platform for the Torlock or scissors jig.

I find it exciting that Tormek is expanding the scope of the machine.  I find it at least equally exciting to see that scope being even larger because of clever ideas begun and developed on the forum.  Keep up the good work!!!

Ken

Good thought about the magnifying mirror, especially for those of us whose eyes are "no longer young".

On second thought, I would be more apt to feel for a burr than look.  (another old eyes trick)

Ken

Herman, I suspect after all those years on the road for Tormek, Jeff either has quite a collection of now short mirror chisels or has given quite a few away, or both.

Jeff,out of curiosity, when you were doing shows, how long did a chisel last?

Ken

I found this very interesting.  While I like Jeff's original videos very much, this seems to have more of a relaxed flow.  (Jeff also demonstrates freehand stropping.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMCwG8xehGE

Good job, Jeff.

Ken

I thought the actor looked familiar....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TryJtirFFME

Ken

This you tube of a luthier (I believe in Swedish with English subtitles) shows the luthier sharpening a chisel with a Tormek (at about 2 min, 20 sec and toward the end).  He uses a mirror to check his progress.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TryJtirFFME

Ken

Herman, your comment about the jig wearing down reminded me of a conversation I had with David Keller, inventor and seller of the excellent Keller jigs.  David knew his jigs occasionally ended up on the wrong side of a meeting with a router bit, and suggested a liquid welding type product for field repair.  I did that and it works fine.  (Your bondo experience, I suspect, is quite similar.)

Ken 

I found this online and thought it might be of interest:


STANDARD & METRIC THREAD SIZES

STANDARD thread size refers to a thread measurement system commonly used in the United States called the 'Unified Thread Standard'. This system uses two numbers to identify thread size, for example: 1/4-20 or 2-56.

The first number references to the major diameter of the screw (major diameter is the outside diameter of the screw measuring on the outside of the threads, minor diameter is the smaller shank diameter, measuring between the threads). Larger screw sizes typically use a fraction in inches to identify major diameter, so a 1/4-20 screw has a major diameter of 1/4". Smaller screw sizes will use a 'gauge' number such as 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, etc., to identify major diameter.

The following formulas can be used to translate the gauge number into decimal inches or metric (or use cross refernece chart below).
Where 'n' equals gauge number:
n x 0.013 + 0.06 = major diameter in decimal inches
n x 0.3302 + 1.524 = major diameter in millimeters

The second number (80, 72, 64, 56, 32, 20, etc.) specifies the number of threads over a distance of 1" (25.4mm).

So using the above information, a standard thread size of 2-56 has a major diameter of:
0.086" (2 x 0.013 + 0.060)
2.184mm (2 x 0.3302 + 1.524)
with 56 threads per 1" (25.4mm).

Following is a cross reference showing: number gauge / decimal / metric:
       
0   0.060"   1.524mm
1
0.073"
1.854mm
2
0.086"
2.180mm
3
0.099"
2.515mm
4
0.112"
2.845mm
5
0.125"
3.175mm
6
0.138"
3.505mm
8
0.164"
4.166mm
METRIC thread sizes also use two numbers to identify thread size, for example: M3.5 x 0.60. The first number describes the major diameter in millimeters (to find decimal equivalent, divide millimeters by 25.4, 3.5 ÷ 25.4 = 0.137"). The second number designates the pitch of the thread, which is basically the distance from any one point on a thread to a corresponding point on the next thread. Following is a cross reference chart showing how pitch relates to threads per inch (25.4mm):
   0.30mm   84 3/4       0.60mm   42 1/4
   0.35mm   72 1/2       0.70mm   36 1/4
   0.40mm   63 1/2       0.75mm   33 3/4
   0.45mm   56 1/2       0.80mm   31 3/4
   0.50mm   50 3/4           

Mark, I had an encounter with one of those "bashing and smashing machines".  I was on a telephone repair ticket at a local factory.  The factory had previously been used to manufacture cranes.  The new tenant was a hammer shop (drop forging).  I watched with fascination as a large piece of steel about a foot square and several foot long, glowing orange hot, was being hammered......directly below our telephone cable.  Obviously the basher trumped the melted cable!

(We rerouted the cable.)

Ken

No need, Herman.  I trust the forum moderator, and I had planned to text to be from the forum (anonymous).

Ken

"I think I might know the answer.  If customers pay for this jig, they will be disappointed to see it get damaged.  And it will get damaged.  The metal is so close to the grindstone that it's inevitable that it will make contact.  Of course, the damage is inconsequential, it won't hurt the jig."

Herman, one thing I learned while experimenting with the SVD-110 is how easily the extruded aluminum can be filed with a hand file or worked with a belt grinder.  I see your point with many users, however, we need to drop the reverent attitude toward the Tormek and look at it as a very useful tool.

Ken

Mark, this you tube may interest you.  I have found better sources for Larry Williams' sharpening technique.  (I will look more when time permits.)  Larry Williams is certainly as expert as they get.  He presents a different option than is common today.

Ken

Outstanding, Herman!  Good technical video quality and informative.  Your video has all the characteristics of excellent instructional material.

Keep up the good work.

Ken

Jeff,

No further comments seem to be forthcoming.  Would this be a good time to strip away all the comments and post the last version?

Keep in mind that we can alter the text should the need arise.

Ken

ps a monor typo:  I notice in the description of the chisels, an incomplete set of parentheses, before but not after the inch sizes of the chisels.  Would you please correct that.  Thanks.