An old boatbuilder / cabinet maker in Maine taught me to use a scythe stone to put the hollow on a chisel. Took him about two minutes to go from a flat bevel(as in no hollow) to a real nice hollow.
Uh. OK. I got my definition from a dictionary (several, in fact). AFAIK, wet stones, oil stones, leather strops and wheels with honing compound, grinding wheels, sandpaper and any other sharpening media mentioned here all have particles with arbitrary orientation. Even the file, while not truly arbitrary, is not so precise that it could not be considered arbirary in use. Beyond that, your definition is merely a refinement of the dictionary definition.
Cheers, Eric.
Bad move. Dictionaries are handy for spellings and The Only Real Dictionary is useful for historical etymology, but even the Oxford falls apart when it comes to definitions of technical terms.
And Webster's isn't even a dictionary, it's a political tract for spelling reform.
Please elucidate. ARM
American spelling often varies from UK English. Many of these are traceable back to Webster compiling his dictionary and deliberately choosing what he regarded as the "simplest" spelling.
Troo enuf, but its not as bad as it kood hav bin.
ICBW but I was under the impression that much of the spelling differences
between Us English and British English occurred after the 1780s. And it was the British that changed their spelling. i.e. "color" is the origional spelling of the word
ARM
So. Those people in the UK talk funny. :)
And still, there's nothing in the extended definition that can't get back to the basic dictionary definition, of which Webster's was not among those selected. Furthermore, I believe the basic contention I replied to was that you do not grind a chisel. I would contend that using a wet stone is as much grinding as using a motor mounted "grinding" stone.
The two definitions were:
I include the not at all, because I dispute that point. I would agree with more specifically, but I certainly do not agree with not at all. Both definitions begin essentially the same. Small chips is only slightly more specific, and, by the reasonable man legal precept, be implied in the original definition. Now, I know we use the reasonable man thing here in the backwoods of the colonies. Since most American states base their law on British law, I presume that you might have some familiarity with that concept. The geometrically undefined tools is another way of saying that no specific tool is defined here for the purpose, and so says exactly NOTHING. The edges of the grinding particles having an arbitrary orientation indicates clearly that on some scale, friction will apply, since the particles will clearly not apply a refined shearing force. I'm not sure I'm making that final point as generally as I should, but I think you get the idea.
Since we are talking about woodworking tool, I would contend that the simpler definition is certainly adequate.
Cheers, Eric
"Eric Lund"
: The edges of the grinding particles having an arbitrary orientation : indicates clearly that on some scale, friction will apply, since the : particles will clearly not apply a refined shearing force.
I have an old Scientific American article saying that there are two kinds of action.
Some particles are so shaped that they act as cutting tools and form shavings (of a kind).
Others have a ploughing action.
Jeff G
-- Jeff Gorman, West Yorkshire, UK Email address is username@ISP username is amgron ISP is clara.co.uk Website
OK, the idea of a cutting action is to reduce friction to increase cutting efficiency, but I've yet to see any form of edge tool, much less an arbitrary orientation material that cuts with zero friction. There may be some super science going on with things like lasers, magnetics and possibly even superconductors, but I'm pretty sure you won't find any of those in my shop, other than the laser in my compound miter saw, and it doesn't do the cutting, just the pointing.
Cheers, Eric
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.