You are correct. If i multiply it with the sine of the shaving angle i get 0.18. Close enough.I got a gap of 0.39mm and an exposure of 0.15mm if recollection serves. Remember that the exposure is measured as a line perpendicular to the shave plane drawn from the shave plane to the apex of the blade. Gap seems like it should be straight forward but it's actually a bit confusing. I think it's a line perpendicular to the blade plane measured from the apex to the guard. The illustration is unclear, but perpendicular to the blade plane makes sense (I think).
DE razor geometry. A system for measuring aggressive razors.
- Thread starter Slock
- Start date
Good news and bad news. Good news first. The good news is that I got some good photos of the RR Lupo .72. It's an easy one to photograph, because it's not chrome (which is exasperating reflective), and the blade edge is on the same plane as the profile unlike 99.9% of razors. I put it on the backlight setup that I posted earlier in the thread. It's just a shop light under a piece of glass that serves as the photography platform, with a piece of copy paper serving as a filter.
Unfortunately, LED light's actually flicker, and if they flicker at the hz as your camera, you see flickering lines in the camera feed. That's what happened to me. They look like zebra stripes wide zebra striped shadows in the pictures. Fortunately, I do not have epilepsy, so it was just an annoyance. I took a photo of one side, then the other. This is very important to overall accuracy, because it accounts for blade skew. I think the best practice would be to do this and average the results. Fortunately, the gap and blade gap calcs were just about the same in both pics. That was either luck, or damn good machining. Here are the pics in the following order: Original Pic, Left side measurements, Right Side Measurements. I was using a Personna (Comfort Coated aka Lab Blue) that I measured at 21.94mm with my $25 calipers (probably +/- 0.05 accuracy lol).
Last edited:
They look perfect to me. Well done!
If you have a photoshop program that allows you to use filters, you might find a filter, like a graduated polarized filter, to help with reflections.
If you have a photoshop program that allows you to use filters, you might find a filter, like a graduated polarized filter, to help with reflections.
Do you have the 0.95 lupo?Good news and bad news. Good news first. The good news is that I got some good photos of the RR Lupo .72. It's an easy one to photograph, because it's not chrome (which is exasperating reflective), and the blade edge is on the same plane as the profile unlike 99.9% of razors. I put it on the backlight setup that I posted earlier in the thread. It's just a shop light under a piece of glass that serves as the photography platform, with a piece of copy paper serving as a filter.
Unfortunately, LED light's actually flicker, and if they flicker at the hz as your camera, you see flickering lines in the camera feed. That's what happened to me. They look like zebra stripes wide zebra striped shadows in the pictures. Fortunately, I do not have epilepsy, so it was just an annoyance. I took a photo of one side, then the other. This is very important to overall accuracy, because it accounts for blade skew. I think the best practice would be to do this and average the results. Fortunately, the gap and blade gap calcs were just about the same in both pics. That was either luck, or damn good machining. Here are the pics in the following order: Original Pic, Left side measurements, Right Side Measurements. I was using a Personna that I measured at 21.94mm with my $25 calipers (probably +/- 0.05 accuracy lol).
What blade are you using?
The cap muzzle area is it an area or just a distance?
- Thread starter
- #226
Here what I am thinking about the Zamak R41 (Full disclosure I do not own one). The cap bends the blade. They are using the spring tension to hold the bent blade tight against the cap. This way they don’t have to manufacture to a very tight tolerance. Unfortunately, the blade not being clamped well also creates blade chatter. They can get away with these deficiencies because it is “the aggressive razor” that everyone compares too. So when someone says wow that razor is a biter everyone shrugs it off because it is “the aggressive razor”.
I would like to see a photograph of a R89. That being a mild razor you can’t get away with a sloppy design and write it off as the attributes of an aggressive razor.
I was thinking about getting a R41 just for reference purposes now I am thinking why bother.
I would like to see a photograph of a R89. That being a mild razor you can’t get away with a sloppy design and write it off as the attributes of an aggressive razor.
I was thinking about getting a R41 just for reference purposes now I am thinking why bother.
I was supposed to get a RR Lupo .95 baseplate in the mail yesterday according to the Canada Post tracking website. It didn't show up. I checked again this morning and it shows "item delayed". I ordered it on June 1st.
I really want to get it under the microscope!
I'm labeling the blade in the diagrams under the razor name along with what my calipers measured it at (not that my calipers are certified, but it's better than nothing). I used a Personna Comfort Coat aka Lab Blue.
It's an area. There was a typo on the Cap Muzzle area. The pic said 0.050mm and I'm pretty sure it was supposed to be 0.50mm. Oops. I editied it in the pic series above.
Last edited:
Ron R
I survived a lathey foreman
Be interesting to see what it looks like with a Kai SS blade!Good news and bad news. Good news first. The good news is that I got some good photos of the RR Lupo .72. It's an easy one to photograph, because it's not chrome (which is exasperating reflective), and the blade edge is on the same plane as the profile unlike 99.9% of razors. I put it on the backlight setup that I posted earlier in the thread. It's just a shop light under a piece of glass that serves as the photography platform, with a piece of copy paper serving as a filter.
Unfortunately, LED light's actually flicker, and if they flicker at the hz as your camera, you see flickering lines in the camera feed. That's what happened to me. They look like zebra stripes wide zebra striped shadows in the pictures. Fortunately, I do not have epilepsy, so it was just an annoyance. I took a photo of one side, then the other. This is very important to overall accuracy, because it accounts for blade skew. I think the best practice would be to do this and average the results. Fortunately, the gap and blade gap calcs were just about the same in both pics. That was either luck, or damn good machining. Here are the pics in the following order: Original Pic, Left side measurements, Right Side Measurements. I was using a Personna (Comfort Coated aka Lab Blue) that I measured at 21.94mm with my $25 calipers (probably +/- 0.05 accuracy lol).
I keep mine for exactly that only, reference purposes.
Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk
Oops. I just remeasured the muzzle areas because I knew one of the labels had a decimal error and both lacked a mm^2 unit. I switched the wrong one in the series of 3 photos above, just before the 45 min edit window expired.
The Cap Muzzle Area is 0.05mm^2.
The Guard Muzzle Area is 0.085mm^2.
Here is the revised diagram.
Last edited:
It's interesting you bring that up. A Kai blade is 22.18mm according to the wiki. Conventional wisdom is that the increase in exposure is 22.18mm - 22mm = 0.2mm/2 = 0.09mm. That's not correct though. Exposure is measured as a line perpendicular to the shave plane measured from the apex of the blade to the shave plane. Therefore the shave plane angle and the blade plane angle determine how much marginal exposure there will be. The steeper the blade angle (from a very large blade bend radius for example) the less marginal exposure you will see. It'll be different for every razor.
For a quick rule of thumb, the equation would be (measured blade width - 22.00mm)/4.
In our Kai example, it would be (22.18mm - 22.00mm/4)= 0.045mm. That's won't be exactly correct, but it's in the ballpark.
I'll check and see if I still have a Kai I can stick in the Lupo .72 tonight.
Here is an illustration that might make more sense. I'm bad at explaining things:
Last edited:
I agree with you. Some razors with a noticeable gap (DE89) seem to be commonly labelel "mild", despite the gap. OTOH, my FOCS has no gap, but is still somewhere between R5 and R6 on the Rockwell S6. I think the easiest way to determine initial weights for our classifier would be a poll, then (normalize and) copy the values for each parameter. Gradient descent for linear regression can always be computed if need be.
When i compare blade rigidity of the lupo vs the karve razor (D-plate), the karve is over 4 times as rigid as the lupo.It's interesting you bring that up. A Kai blade is 22.18mm according to the wiki. Conventional wisdom is that the increase in exposure is 22.18mm - 22mm = 0.2mm/2 = 0.09mm. That's not correct though. Exposure is measured as a line perpendicular to the shave plane measured from the apex of the blade to the shave plane. Therefore the shave plane angle and the blade plane angle determine how much marginal exposure there will be. The steeper the blade angle (from a very large blade bend radius for example) the less marginal exposure you will see. It'll be different for every razor.
For a quick rule of thumb, the equation would be (measured blade width - 22.00mm)/4.
In our Kai example, it would be (22.18mm - 22.00mm/4)= 0.045mm. That's won't be exactly correct, but it's in the ballpark.
I'll check and see if I still have a Kai I can stick in the Lupo .72 tonight.
Here is an illustration that might make more sense. I'm bad at explaining things:
This is not accurate, but you get an idea. The most important difference here is that the karve razor uses the top cap to increase rigidity and to reduce blade chatter. One of the down sides is that the effective shaving angle range is reduced with the Karve. The muzzle peak to muzzle peak distance is also wider with the lupo. This distance is probably also an important parameter to take into account.
When i use the Lupo 0.95 i get more blade feel than the Karve, but not an increase in efficiency. I think that the lupo 0.72/0.95 because of the more flexible blade clamping and the more open shaving angle is a really good middle ground, and a good starting point for someone just starting out, or if you do not mind the extra blade feel.
I think that the Tatara Masamun/Nodachi razors is a combination of these two geometries with a good balance. I think that the lupo razor would have been rated much higher if the blade clamping was more rigid.
The Tatara is to me almost as efficient as the R41, but much more smooth.
Last edited:
Focus stacking requires an extremely rigid camera mount with the Plugable USB 2.0 microscope. The problem is that the manual focus is located on the camera, and it requires a bit of force to turn. This wiggles the camera a huge amount in the stock stand which uses a flexible gooseneck. The resulting picture if done badly enough will look like this:
I've exaggerated that shot quite a bit, but it makes the point. Focus stacking is not without peril. I mounted mine on an indicator stand, and used Polymorph to make a custom holder and bracket. It took about 5 minutes. This stand is 100x more rigid than the stock stand, but mine still has the tiniest wiggle when I adjust the focus from the blade to the profile of the razor. The wiggle is from the plastic bending the slightest bit, but at 50x magnification, even a fraction of a mm is noticeable. I'm going to try to stiffen mine up by laying a triangle of Polymorph over the top like an I-beam. Hopefully that stiffens it up enough to take out that tiny wiggle. If that doesn't work, I'll have to buy the machined aluminum stand on Amazon for $20.
I've exaggerated that shot quite a bit, but it makes the point. Focus stacking is not without peril. I mounted mine on an indicator stand, and used Polymorph to make a custom holder and bracket. It took about 5 minutes. This stand is 100x more rigid than the stock stand, but mine still has the tiniest wiggle when I adjust the focus from the blade to the profile of the razor. The wiggle is from the plastic bending the slightest bit, but at 50x magnification, even a fraction of a mm is noticeable. I'm going to try to stiffen mine up by laying a triangle of Polymorph over the top like an I-beam. Hopefully that stiffens it up enough to take out that tiny wiggle. If that doesn't work, I'll have to buy the machined aluminum stand on Amazon for $20.
Last edited:
Ron R
I survived a lathey foreman
Looks like you are having a little fun with your USB microscope. I can get a reasonable shot but how do you get the lines but in the picture afterwards is really the hard part for myself.Focus stacking requires an extremely rigid camera mount with the Plugable USB 2.0 microscope. The problem is that the manual focus is located on the camera, and it requires a bit of force to turn. This wiggles the camera a huge amount in the stock stand which uses a flexible gooseneck. The resulting picture if done badly enough will look like this:
I've exaggerated that shot quite a bit, but it makes the point. Focus stacking is not without peril. I mounted mine on an indicator stand, and used Polymorph to make a custom holder and bracket. It took about 5 minutes. This stand is 100x more rigid than the stock stand, but mine still has the tiniest wiggle when I adjust the focus from the blade to the profile of the razor. The wiggle is from the plastic bending the slightest bit, but at 50x magnification, even a fraction of a mm is noticeable. I'm going to try to stiffen mine up by laying a triangle of Polymorph over the top like an I-beam. Hopefully that stiffens it up enough to take out that tiny wiggle. If that doesn't work, I'll have to buy the machined aluminum stand on Amazon for $20.
What app are you fellows using for drawing straight lines and adding words?
A simple usb microscope.
The lines and labels are relatively easy. Import the photo into Google Slides, or PowerPoint, or Microsoft Paint and start drawing and labeling. Save the edited image, and post it as you ordinarily would. These days I do all of my measuring and most of my labeling in ImageJ, which was developed by the US National Institute of Health for measuring and labeling photos from microscopes in lab work. It's free, and pretty easy to use.
Ron R
I survived a lathey foreman
Thanks for the information.
