a new angle setting tool

[RichColvin]

Rick,

Did you use skate-board ball bearings like these "https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002BBD6X4/ref=oh_aui_search_detailpage?ie=UTF8&psc=1 ?

Kind regards,
Rich

[RickKrung]

Rich,

I used 1/4"x5/8" stainless bearings, purchased from McMaster-Carr.  The URL only takes you to the page, not the specific item.  Here are the specs from that page:

R4   1/4"   5/8"   0.196"   440C Stainless Steel   260   75   45,000   Lubricated   -40° to 240°   ABEC-1   6138K13   7.89

I used stainless on everything, all from McM-C

Shoulder bolts:
5/8"   10-24   3/8"   3/8"   3/16"   Passivated   70,000   1/8"   ASME B18.3   90298A539   2.60   2.21

Washers:
No. 10   0.203"   0.438"   0.025"-0.040"   Not Rated   __   100   92141A011   2.33

Nyloc Nuts:
10-32   3/8"   15/64"   220°   100   91831A411   6.27

NOT cheap!  I ordered enough bearings for all four jigs, 16 total, which were the major cost ($101).  Total order was $139. 

I used stainless because of the proximity to water.  With proper care ordinary steel could be used.  Given that I was going to be using them at farmers markets and wouldn't have time for "proper care", I opted for stainless. 

Rick

[tgbto]

Hello, 

I'm in the process of trying to see if I can 3D-print these brilliant jigs, as I am no machinist, nor do I have easy access to one.

Regarding the bearings, I understand they will make the jig much more wear-resistant, but I was wondering, as I do not sharpen hundreds of knives a year : what if I 3d-printed the circular part protruding from the bottom as part of the plate ? The cost of reprinting compared to the cost of stainless bearings might make it worth a shot. Plus, I can always print the hole for the bearing axis, so I can mount some when the discs show significant wear...

Any thoughts ?

Thanks,

Nick.

[RickKrung]

Hello, 

I'm in the process of trying to see if I can 3D-print these brilliant jigs, as I am no machinist, nor do I have easy access to one.

Regarding the bearings, I understand they will make the jig much more wear-resistant, but I was wondering, as I do not sharpen hundreds of knives a year : what if I 3d-printed the circular part protruding from the bottom as part of the plate ? The cost of reprinting compared to the cost of stainless bearings might make it worth a shot. Plus, I can always print the hole for the bearing axis, so I can mount some when the discs show significant wear...

Any thoughts ?

Thanks,

Nick.

I'm sure you could do that, but I think they would wear so quickly as to become useless until you did install bearings.  The manner of detecting the angle, that I use at least, involves rotating the stones/wheels until there is enough of them rotating due to contact with the grinding surface.  I suspect you could use the jig in a manner were you "sight" this contact without rotating the grinding wheels, so as to minimize wear of the contact points. 

Stainless steel bearings don't have to be expensive.  I just bought a set of 10, for $30 off Amazon.  I am certain they are not high quality, but for the purpose of these jigs, I am sure they would work.  The URL above is for bearings with an OD of 1/2", which is smaller than my design, but I also suspect one could find similarly inexpensive bearings with an OD of 5/8".  I would make sure to get "sealed" bearings rather than "open" is the only caveat. 

You should know, however, that I do not use these jigs any longer.  They work great, but I have found that setting the sharpening angles is much faster, more consistent/accurate and easier measuring the distance from the USB bar to the surface of the grinding or honing wheels.  I don't have time right now to search for the many threads where this is discussed, but if you haven't found them by the time I can search a little, I'll post some later.  It is one of the methods included in the TormekCalc2 spreadsheet and I know some of the calculator apps will provide this distance. 

Rick

[Dutchman]

... snip
I have found that setting the sharpening angles is much faster, more consistent/accurate and easier measuring the distance from the USB bar to the surface of the grinding or honing wheels.  I don't have time right now to search for the many threads where this is discussed ...

You can find the original approach in the link in my "signature". It is, imho, still the fastest and easiest method 

[RickKrung]

... snip
I have found that setting the sharpening angles is much faster, more consistent/accurate and easier measuring the distance from the USB bar to the surface of the grinding or honing wheels.  I don't have time right now to search for the many threads where this is discussed ...

You can find the original approach in the link in my "signature". It is, imho, still the fastest and easiest method 

I love it, Dutchman.  Thanks for "rooting" us at the beginning and thank you again for your awesome work and contribution. 

Rick

[Ken S]

I was the first forum convert to Dutchman's Grinding Tables in 2013. At the time, I was sharpening chisels and plane blades. I had devised a method of standardizing set up. I saw the potential of using Dutchman's tables to standardize knife sharpening. His tables became the foundation of my kenjig.

Over the years, I have dabbled with the other programs. I have only good things to say about them; however, Dutchman's tables have remained my go to source. They give me repeatable sharpness. I have no need of interchangeable knives with matching bevels to the nth degree. I generally sharpen my knives to 15° edge bevels, and can adjust with the marker and microadjust on the rare occasions when I want something else.

Dutchman's tables have served me well.

Ken

[RichColvin]

Rick, your interest pleases me. You are almost correct in your considerations. 

I have considered 250 mm and 160 mm stones and have found shift of the tangent line 1.4 mm and 2.1 mm respectively.

For a projection length 139 mm the centres of the USB for bevel angles 10, 15 and 20⁰ lie on a circle with radius 133.54 mm.

Your drawing angles differ from my USB positions for bevel angles 10, 15 and 20⁰ by some 5.2⁰, which is an angle given by the geometry of the knife jig and the USB (atan(12 mm/ (139-6) mm) = 5.16⁰).

CB, I guess in my country they are one or two dozens of Tormekers using this setting tool. Some people printed it on a 3D printer. My is metallic. 

Jan

Jan,

Where can I get the STL file for this 3D print?

Rich

[sharpening_weasel]

This may be an exceedingly dumb question- will all these interesting new techniques work with the self centering jig?

[cbwx34]

This may be an exceedingly dumb question- will all these interesting new techniques work with the self centering jig?

Not dumb at all.  I think most will work to some extent (there's a lot in this thread), maybe with some modifications.  For example Jan's template for setting the location of the knife would have to be modified.  Some techniques rely on a specific Projection Distance, which was easier to set with the older jig, (since you could adjust the Stop Collar), so they would still work, just need to be adjusted.

So, yes, they should work, some with some modification.

[Ken S]

I agree with CB. The various setting jigs we have devised will probably require some rethinking with the new jigs. Some will become less practical as is. However, whatever setting methods we devise with the new jigs will have the notable advantage of being self centering.

As we become more familiar with the new KJ-45 jig, our present SVM jigs will increasingly become part of our box of older, no longer used gear. They have served us well, but have become obsolete. Some of us, including me, have several jigs milled to match different knife thicknesses, with in between thicknesses filled in with feeler gages. Wootz' (Vadim's) jig modifications is quite clever, but no longer necessary.

In time, I expect even the new KJ-45 jig to be replaced. Since I first purchased my T7 in 2009, almost all of the jigs have been redesigned at least once. Even the T7 was replaced with the T8. Yes, these all still work; however, Tormek is an innovative company and better keeps improving.

Ken

[tgbto]

They have served us well, but have become obsolete.

Ken, I respectfully disagree with this statement. I've recently purchased two additional older jigs from my usual supplier who was getting rid of them, for a total of <edit, just counted> 8. I have two of them mounted with a Pin pivot collar, not so much for pivoting as for being able to keep the projection distance identical when sharpening a bunch of standard knives along with a couple much longer or shorter ones.

With the thickness of knives I'm sharpening, I never run into trouble with a visually, significantly assymetrical bevel. I use the KJ for the odd very thick knife. As for convexing with the KJ, I have mounted a BGM-100 on a support for use with my tiny belt grinder, it works a charm with older jigs, and I can choose to convex just a bit or a lot with a combination of belt curvature and pressure. Convexing on the Tormek with the KJ feels very unnatural to me : I hate it when the knife seems to be willing to ride up the stone when I release the jig pressure on the USB, as well as the clack-clack involved. I even think one is better off convexing with the older jigs by gradually modifying the projection distance by rotating the jig handle.

I purchased the Tormek as a time saver for my sharpening sessions, and I think it shines when sharpening knives in bulk. I still find the KJ to be a major step backwards. I don't foresee getting rid of my SVMs.

Nick.

[Ken S]

Nick,

We are not far apart in our thinking. Like you, I have been frustrated by not having enough jig travel to keep the Projection setting the same with all of my knives. I had not thought of using a pivot collar for that. That's a clever idea. I stumbled upon the fact that the pre 2002 SVM-45 and SVM-100 jigs had longer shafts. The longer shaft allows me to use my 139 mm Projection with small knives. I prefer that to using the SVM-00. However, it seemed unfair to me to include using a long out of production jig in the kenjig technique. I have purchased two older jigs, although I realize others might not be as fortunate.

I have no plans to "get rid of my SVMs". In fact, I just had a machinist modify two of my eight following Vadim's suggestion. For my simple sharpening needs, I have not felt the need to convex edges.

I am keeping the jury out on the future of knife jigs. I do believe that eventually we will be using self centering jigs. I am not certain whether the KJ jigs will be the future or a bridge to the future. Until that time, I plan to keep both options open.

Ken

[tgbto]

Ken,

Then I no longer disagree

I think an adjustable, self centering jig would be ideal...

[Ken S]

Me,too!