are there any decent techniques for squaring a chisel blade?

[SammyQ]

"Can't you give it a rest BB? It's boring having you trailing after me with silly comments every time I post. I don't think anybody else is particularly entertained either.
Stop being a troll!"

:shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:


Jacob? Hoisted by your own petard? What is the world coming to?

Sam

 

[Jacob]

I think you have missed the point Sam. Never mind, it doesn't matter!

 

[Reggie]

I ended up buying myself an irwin marples honing kit, it's just an eclipse honing guide, an oilstone and some honing oil, £11 all in, it was a bargain, I needed a flat rough grit stone as the stone I had been given had a little hollow on the rough side.

My reasoning for getting the honing guide is that the bevels were so shot on these chisels that it made it difficult to flatten, with a well honed bevel there's a sweet spot where you can feel that it's flat against the sharpening stone, this makes it simple to keep flat by hand, I get the feeling that I'll only have to use the honing guide once on each chisel and all subsequent sharpening of them can be done without it.

I also managed to square up the offending chisel that inspired the OP, the bevels were all over the place and the natural action of flattening it to a single bevel squared it up in the process. It did take me a while to do the first couple of chisels but I won't have to do it again so it'll be much quicker as it'll be a quick hone and done in the future.

I've just got the 1" chisel and the no.4 plane left to do.

 

[richard56]

Reggie, I have the Stanley honing guide kit. I know there is a lot if skill and science behind sharpening but I thought just get on with it. The chisel seemed to cut better so I am happy. I even sharpened my old plane iron and though I say so myself there is a definite improvement so double happy.

 

[richard56]

Have I imagined this, or did my old woodwork teacher tell me to make a figure of eight pattern on an oil stone when sharpening?

 

[Reggie]

He probably did although not with a honing guide, it's got a wheel on it to go backwards and forwards or thereabouts, the key is to make sure you cover the whole of the oilstone so you get even wear and it stays flat, so more of a W pattern than a figure of 8 would be better with a guide. As you say though, just getting on with it is the easiest way to learn.

Looking at it all a bit more there actually isn't too much science behind it, there's a lot of opinion but not much science The only reference as to why you should have a 30 degree main bevel and a 25 degree micro-bevel that I found said that it's just easier to hone the smaller face of the micro bevel, so there's no benefit to the cut in doing a micro bevel. So personally, I didn't bother with it, no point setting up the honing guide twice for each chisel for zero benefit, the time taken to just hone it as a single bevel will really be nominal. Also, the cut angle, it needs to be within a range but being exactly 30 degrees or 25 etc. isn't critical, a repeatable flat single bevel for quick honing is more important. Some of these conclusions have come through the replies in this post and my experience so far.

 

[Jacob]

...Looking at it all a bit more there actually isn't too much science behind it, there's a lot of opinion but not much science The only reference as to why you should have a 30 degree main bevel and a 25 degree micro-bevel that I found said that it's just easier to hone the smaller face of the micro bevel, so there's no benefit to the cut in doing a micro bevel. .....

Who needs science? 30º works for most things but is also very easy to eyeball if you freehand i.e. it is a 1/2 gradient, half of an equilateral triangle corner, third of a right angle.
The point of 25º is that it's a conveniently memorable angle sufficiently below 30º to allow you to grind with a coarse grit to speed up metal removal, reserving finer and slower grits for the hone of the 30º "micro" bevel. There is no other point to it and you can ignore it if you want to - a flat bevel is one way, a convex bevel is another.

 

[G S Haydon]

Good work Reggie. Looks like you have got to grips with your chisel preparation. Enjoy.

 

[bugbear]

The only reference as to why you should have a 30 degree main bevel and a 25 degree micro-bevel that I found said that it's just easier to hone the smaller face of the micro bevel, so there's no benefit to the cut in doing a micro bevel. So personally, I didn't bother with it, no point setting up the honing guide twice for each chisel for zero benefit, the time taken to just hone it as a single bevel will really be nominal.

The idea behind the traditional duo of grinding angle at 25, honing angle at 30 is that the 25 degree bevel is done quickly on a coarse stone, or even a grinder, and the 30 degree done on your finer stones.

Normal honing ONLY involves the 30 degree bevel which is (as you say) small, and quickly worked. As this process continues the small 30 degree bevel gets larger, until you once again hit the tool with the coarse grit at 25.

So the bulk of the "metal removal" is done with the fast process, and the bulk of the actual sharpening is done with the fine.

Other approaches to sharpening are available.

BugBear

 

[Phil Pascoe]

:lol: "Other approaches to sharpening are available" Nice one! Didn't you wish to attract unwanted attention? :lol:

 

[woodbrains]

Hello,

30 degree honing angles also came about through finding the best compromise between acuteness, for ease of pushing the tool through the wood, and. Edge holding ability. You can alter these angles slightly, depending on the wood to be worked, but 25 grinding and 30 honing is the universal best fit.

Regarding the figure of eight movement on the stone, for honing, has anyone even witnessed this being done, let alone done it themselves? Of the dozens of woodworkers I have seen sharpen, I don't recall anyone actually doing it. I'm sure it works if you do it, but was it just something some text books quoted as an idea to keep stone wear even, but no one (few?) actually did it that way. After all, there are an awful lot of dished stones out there! Perhaps it is the most popular thing, for all I know, I just haven't seen it.

Mike.

 

[bugbear]

Regarding the figure of eight movement on the stone, for honing, has anyone even witnessed this being done, let alone done it themselves? Of the dozens of woodworkers I have seen sharpen, I don't recall anyone actually doing it. I'm sure it works if you do it, but was it just something some text books quoted as an idea to keep stone wear even, but no one (few?) actually did it that way.

How a motion that actively avoids the "sides of the middle" of the stone is meant to render stone
wear even, I do not in any way understand.

It actively concentrates wear in the centre of the stone.

BugBear

 

[Reggie]

Hey guys, thanks for all the advice, my main concern was getting a consistent bevel, if I couldn't get one of those then there was no chance at achieving a micro bevel on top. I am now in the position where I've got sharp chisels that are easy to sharpen and will be simple enough to add the micro bevel should I feel the urge in the future, only blunt chisels and time will tell if I am bothered enough by the sharpening time taken for a single bevel to bother with a micro bevel.

With regard to figure 8 on the stone, I tried it on a cruddy chisel before these turned up and it was really a bit of a novelty more than anything, back and forth in a w or straight lines is a lot less hassle. If anything the figure 8 looked like it would still achieve a hollow, just a bigger one that covered more surface area.

 

[Jacob]

Does "figure of eight" occur in the books? I doubt it somehow. If so it's more of a notion and shouldn't be interpreted too literally. The idea is that you spread the wear over the stone as evenly as possible, which should be obvious to most people!

 

[GazPal]

Hello,

30 degree honing angles also came about through finding the best compromise between acuteness, for ease of pushing the tool through the wood, and. Edge holding ability. You can alter these angles slightly, depending on the wood to be worked, but 25 grinding and 30 honing is the universal best fit.

Regarding the figure of eight movement on the stone, for honing, has anyone even witnessed this being done, let alone done it themselves? Of the dozens of woodworkers I have seen sharpen, I don't recall anyone actually doing it. I'm sure it works if you do it, but was it just something some text books quoted as an idea to keep stone wear even, but no one (few?) actually did it that way. After all, there are an awful lot of dished stones out there! Perhaps it is the most popular thing, for all I know, I just haven't seen it.

Mike.

Yes, I've both seen it done and use the same method myself. It was a method commonly taught and used years ago in schools/colleges, workshops and on site. The fad for wide stones is a comparatively recent one, while narrower stones - 2" wide or less - tended to see more use, as wider blades are presented to the stone diagonally and not square-on. This works especially well if you wish to even out wear on whetting stones and edges, because a diagonal edge is presented, rather than square/face-on. Dished stones tend to be ones created by enthusiast who've virtually ruined good "long cared for" stones when sharpening knives, etc., using to and fro actions and attempting to grind edges using them.

Watch the various sharpening guru as they repeatedly flatten their water stones and you'll see the familiar figure-eight motion in use and how it effectively maximises the surface area covered. The same/similar movement is used when whetting edges.

The best honing angle is the one that works best for yourself on the medium being worked. It's variable.

 

[GazPal]

Regarding the figure of eight movement on the stone, for honing, has anyone even witnessed this being done, let alone done it themselves? Of the dozens of woodworkers I have seen sharpen, I don't recall anyone actually doing it. I'm sure it works if you do it, but was it just something some text books quoted as an idea to keep stone wear even, but no one (few?) actually did it that way.

How a motion that actively avoids the "sides of the middle" of the stone is meant to render stone
wear even, I do not in any way understand.

It actively concentrates wear in the centre of the stone.

BugBear

It's a perfectly random pattern that doesn't bias wear at the centre.

 

[GazPal]

Does "figure of eight" occur in the books? I doubt it somehow. If so it's more of a notion and shouldn't be interpreted too literally. The idea is that you spread the wear over the stone as evenly as possible, which should be obvious to most people!

Yes, it can be found in books. One which immediately springs to mind is "Planecraft", but I've also seen it in other older publications.

 

[bugbear]

It actively concentrates wear in the centre of the stone.

BugBear

It's a perfectly random pattern that doesn't bias wear at the centre.

Well, that's a clear disagreement.

I've attached what I think is meant by figure of eight pattern. I'm guessing that what
you have in mind differs, somewhere along the line.

Could you expand on how the randomness you're seeing comes about?

BugBear

 

[Graham Orm]

Fight! fight! fight! fight!

 

[Reggie]

Bugbear, I can explain the randomness, that comes from the person doing the sharpening and to some extent the width of the blade, they/you will never hit that perfect figure 8 pattern and the width of the blade gives far more coverage to the stone than the screwdriver you used as an example for your figure 8 implies ;-)