Well Pete, that makes sense. For me at least, it’s one of the few reasons that I can think of that is a good reason explaining the use of compounds. The backing material of the belt is reusable, and it’s less expensive in the long run to just resurface the belt than to purchase a new one. I also can see how it would be very handy if you forgot to reorder and you need a quick belt. Just squirt on more goo and you’re good to go! The only other advantage that I can think of is if the abrasive grit size in not available in the abrasive backing material needed for a particular application.
Like everybody else, I have used compounds and have at least some understanding of what they do. That experience led me to start this thread with the very open ended question, why use honing compound, because of the extraordinary popularity and variety of the stuff, as well as the dedication of its aficionados and the alacrity with which its benefits are proclaimed. In some threads it almost seems elevated to an almost mystical status of being some sort of secret special sauce.
Sadly, my personal experience did not ignite such excitement. To me the stuff seems to be just another, generally very fine grit polishing compound, and if anything less effective than commercially available bonded abrasives. But the popularity and veritable cornucopia of compounds gave me pause to consider it further.
Please bear with me for a couple of paragraphs because what I am trying to understand requires a bit of explanation. For this I’m only concerned with abrasive belts, sandpaper or abrasive pads and not stones or grinding wheels, etc. I’m also not addressing the durability of the abrasive, such as AO vs diamond, etc. For simplicity, let’s just consider belts.
Modern manufacturing produces high quality abrasive belts for an incredibly low cost. It’s really pretty cool when you think about it. Belts are available from really gnarly 24 grit ceramics to 3 micron, which is something like 8,000 grit, fine finishing belts.
So, what makes a good abrasive belt? Here’s my take on it:
So, how does this correlate to applying honing/abrasive compound to a leather or linen belt? In a way, this is manufacturing a homemade belt. Right? Basically, start with a backing material and apply an abrasive to it. Does that make sense? So, comparing our homemade belt to commercially manufactured belts:
Leather is soft and porous. Some of the abrasive particles will become loosely embedded in the surface of the leather, but not actually bonded to the surface. If the particles are embedded enough to sort of hold them in place, they are only partially exposed because, by definition, they are embedded. This creates an uneven surface. The rest of the particles will be “bonded” to the surface to the extent of the strength of the emulsion adhesive properties after the emulsion has dried. Is this as strong as the bonding of regular belts?
With our homemade belt, can we match the consistency of abrasive particle distribution with that of commercially manufactured belts? My very best, fairly educated without actually testing it guess is, no. Probably not even close.
Conclusions:
Pros:
Compounds may be available in particle size not available in a bonded abrasive.
Possibly less expensive in the long run.
Quick and easy to refresh a belt. Kind of like belt in a tube!
Cons:
Not as effective as a bonded abrasive.
Less evenly distributed particle distribution.
Abrasive bonding not as strong.
Probably not water, oil or solvent resistant adhesion.
Everyone starting out in sharpening runs across compounds and emulsions and it’s easy to be enticed into thinking they are in some way necessary, or may even be that special sauce needed to get that elusive perfect edge.
As far as I can tell they are just another form of abrasive and useful in some circumstances. Not some special sauce, but just another tool in the box. Nothing more, nothing less.
What do you guys think?
Like everybody else, I have used compounds and have at least some understanding of what they do. That experience led me to start this thread with the very open ended question, why use honing compound, because of the extraordinary popularity and variety of the stuff, as well as the dedication of its aficionados and the alacrity with which its benefits are proclaimed. In some threads it almost seems elevated to an almost mystical status of being some sort of secret special sauce.
Sadly, my personal experience did not ignite such excitement. To me the stuff seems to be just another, generally very fine grit polishing compound, and if anything less effective than commercially available bonded abrasives. But the popularity and veritable cornucopia of compounds gave me pause to consider it further.
Please bear with me for a couple of paragraphs because what I am trying to understand requires a bit of explanation. For this I’m only concerned with abrasive belts, sandpaper or abrasive pads and not stones or grinding wheels, etc. I’m also not addressing the durability of the abrasive, such as AO vs diamond, etc. For simplicity, let’s just consider belts.
Modern manufacturing produces high quality abrasive belts for an incredibly low cost. It’s really pretty cool when you think about it. Belts are available from really gnarly 24 grit ceramics to 3 micron, which is something like 8,000 grit, fine finishing belts.
So, what makes a good abrasive belt? Here’s my take on it:
- Strength and stability of the backing material. A belt is pretty much junk if it shreds, tears, breaks or has weak areas that makes holes in the belt, or is not strong enough to hold the bonded abrasive material.
- Consistency of the abrasive particle size. Obviously if you have a 200 grit belt, that’s about what it should be within reason.
- Well bonded abrasive particles. Nobody wants a belt that gets bald spots!
- Consistent abrasive particle distribution on the surface. It would be odd to have a belt with dense abrasives on some areas and sparse abrasives on others.
So, how does this correlate to applying honing/abrasive compound to a leather or linen belt? In a way, this is manufacturing a homemade belt. Right? Basically, start with a backing material and apply an abrasive to it. Does that make sense? So, comparing our homemade belt to commercially manufactured belts:
- Strength and stability of the backing material. Good.
- Consistency of the abrasive particle size. Good.
- Well bonded abrasive particles. ???
- Consistent abrasive particle distribution on the surface. ???
Leather is soft and porous. Some of the abrasive particles will become loosely embedded in the surface of the leather, but not actually bonded to the surface. If the particles are embedded enough to sort of hold them in place, they are only partially exposed because, by definition, they are embedded. This creates an uneven surface. The rest of the particles will be “bonded” to the surface to the extent of the strength of the emulsion adhesive properties after the emulsion has dried. Is this as strong as the bonding of regular belts?
With our homemade belt, can we match the consistency of abrasive particle distribution with that of commercially manufactured belts? My very best, fairly educated without actually testing it guess is, no. Probably not even close.
Conclusions:
Pros:
Compounds may be available in particle size not available in a bonded abrasive.
Possibly less expensive in the long run.
Quick and easy to refresh a belt. Kind of like belt in a tube!
Cons:
Not as effective as a bonded abrasive.
Less evenly distributed particle distribution.
Abrasive bonding not as strong.
Probably not water, oil or solvent resistant adhesion.
Everyone starting out in sharpening runs across compounds and emulsions and it’s easy to be enticed into thinking they are in some way necessary, or may even be that special sauce needed to get that elusive perfect edge.
As far as I can tell they are just another form of abrasive and useful in some circumstances. Not some special sauce, but just another tool in the box. Nothing more, nothing less.
What do you guys think?