Yes it’s one of the convex ones from jarrod.Good for you. Basil, it is a convex one?
nice chopper there btw
Excuse my impatience, but why not quickly?I am planning to slowly flatten the other side
ah good. hopefully you already have a flat ark to compare it to. I only have the convex, and am curious about what they say about convex being faster.
This convex one just feels normal to me, which means that the flat arks must be very slow honing stones.
Lol I have enough flat hones for now. Lol also I hear it will take a while to do.Excuse my impatience, but why not quickly?
If set the bevel and then progresses on flat hones there is no need to reset it when going to the convex ark. If you use the convex ark to finish but then want to go to a different flat finisher you would need to spend some time to make the bevel flat againIf bevel is already set on flat hones, is it necessary to reset bevel on convex? Or will results be similar finishing on convex?
What about taking previously finished edge, then just refinishing on convex?
I'm confused. Where does the 33' radius come from? Jarrod talks about a spherical surface equivalent to that of an imaginary 20' wide basketball (which would obviously have a 10' radius).The angle change of going to a large radius (33') convex hone from a flat hone is equivalent to lowering the spine .001".
ah good. hopefully you already have a flat ark to compare it to. I only have the convex, and am curious about what they say about convex being faster.
This convex one just feels normal to me, which means that the flat arks must be very slow honing stones.
The math shows that the bevel angle will be reduced less than .1 degrees on each side, so technically the bevel will be reset before the stone can reach the edge. Depending on the bevel reveal (the bevel width) the amount of steel that needs to be removed to 'correct' the new bevel angle could be very small and within the ability of the convex finishing stone.
The angle change of going to a large radius (33') convex hone from a flat hone is equivalent to lowering the spine .001". I worked this out a while ago but will I be rechecking my math.
OK using a 33' radius convex hone and a razor with 6/8 between the contact points the angle change on each side would be .05 degrees. Equivalent to lowering the spine .0007". Ever measure tape wear while honing?
The 33' radius was calculated from a .5mm crown over an 8" hone which is one the figures floating around.I'm confused. Where does the 33' radius come from? Jarrod talks about a spherical surface equivalent to that of an imaginary 20' wide basketball (which would obviously have a 10' radius).
Where did you get this? Every thing that I have seen has been 2 orders of magnitude smaller. I've been using .5mm over 8" for my calculations. A tile is only about 1cm thick!But my understanding is that jarrods master sagitta is 5cm on a 12 inch tile/ diameter.
Figures "floating around" ain't that helpful are they? In Jarrod's scheme of things (with the 10' radius) the crown would be ~1.7mm. Quite a difference (but still pretty tiny).The 33' radius was calculated from a .5mm crown over an 8" hone which is one the figures floating around.