I love science! The one thing I would like to see is three tests of the chisel per sharpening. So, you sharpen the chisel. You cut through a board 1 time, measure sharpness, cut again, without sharpening, measure it, and a last time. This will tell you how durable a blade is. Right now you are testing the initial sharpness and initial edge durability. I've tests in industrial contexts that indicate that most edge initially dull quickly (3-9 strokes) but then remain at that sharpness for a very long time.
James, as a physicist, I love your scientific approach for reproducibility of your data and arrangement of your experiments, especially. One thing caught me, though. The magnet holding chisel in the vertical chopping test. The steels can differ in their magnetization and thus, to be hold by different force resulting in various friction from chisel to chisel. Therefore, the number of hits can be strongly biased. As I'm writing this I think of two ways how to solve/decrease the effect: 1) measure magnetization of each steel and take it as a coefficient or 2) lubricate the magnet surface as much as possible to reduce the friction at maximum. cheers, VK
That was something I was worried about with the magnet. Ahead of time I actually tested most of the chisels by placing them on a scale and seeing how much force it took to break the friction of the magnet and I found that every chisel was almost exactly the same to the point that it did not actually cause a significant variance.
Man wow... This deserves translation to other languages. Woodworking in youtube is full of subjective opinions. And some biased to expensive brands. This is light to many eyes. Thank you
I think this is an awesome project and appreciate that you have to draw a line somewhere, otherwise you never get things done, but I have a couple of observations. Firstly, the test. You may want to introduce some method of standardisation to the angle and force the chisel is presented to the string. A chisel that is presented at an angle or is twisted during presentation is going to have a greater cutting force than one that isn’t. Also the calibration of the tester(for example the tautness of the string) May effect results. My second point has already been mentioned, and is with regard to old/vintage tools. There is an abundance of myths about the quality of old steel. Maybe this would be a way of addressing this (or at least putting some facts out there). After all that I would just like to reiterate that I appreciate that the tests and the data you are collecting are an incredible insight and benefit to all interested parties. It is brilliant that you are attempting this.
Thanks. I actually did a few tests ahead of time to see if the speed at which I pushed into the string affected the outcome and as long as I didn't jab it really quickly every test gave the same result whether I pushed consistently over the course of 10 seconds or consistently over the course of 1 second. I think I am going to create a test rig to keep the chisel perfectly vertical when coming down into the string but we'll see how that comes out.
I have a funny feeling that there are going to be some real surprises ---- some questions and a whole lot of disagreements. Hopefully that will lead to a followup comparison in more depth.
Incredible! I've only seen a couple chisel testi videos and quickly ignored the results because they were so user biased! This will surely become the new standard for chisel test! And this quality of content is the type of content that brings on new patrons!! Money is tight right now but I will definitely be joining up soon!!
This sounds like a very well thought out project. You seem to have covered most bases. A few questions: Will you be doing the actual sharpness tests (with that string thing) in replicate? I can see potential variability in this measurement. You might also wish to calibrate the scale - not for accuracy, but for precision - do you get the same weight everytime? Just try several sizes of nuts, measuring each one about 5 times. Also, how do you control for verticality? If you are off vertical, I think you'd only measuring the vertical component of the force vector. For your chopping test, you might want to take a gander at how ASTM impact testers work. In essence, it's a calibrated hammer, much like your tube and weight. Having your chisel in the horizontal plane, and a hammer on a pivot might be more reproducible, but your method should work well. Have you considered testing variability of the less expensive chisels? I expect more variability in the cheaper products than the expensive ones, but to estabilish this by measuring multiples of all the brands will probably bankrupt you. Finally, do consider writing this up for publication in one of the many periodicals devoted to the craft. (And this would be an excellent science fair project for your daughter some time in the future.) Good luck with your project!
I will actually be changing the sanding paper in between each chisel so that I have the same amount of grit running down on it. As to stopping That is the big reason for using the sharpness tester beforehand. If there is any variance in the amount of sharpness as no human method will eliminate that. The sharpness testing will tell exactly what it is at the beginning of the test.
I did look at testing multiple chisels from a series buying them from different locations and so on as just one could skew the process one way or the other. but unfortunately in this case that might be taking the amount of work one step too far. I may be able to come back and do that in the future but we'll see.
I might write something up however that is not my forte and I am very poor at writing. Also I don't hold that much credence to most mainline publications. it's just not my thing. But who knows what the future will hold.
Terrific assessment and review. Nice work. I used the spreadsheet and added a scatter plot chart (which I'd recommend adding), with the ratings on one axis and current prices on the other. It really helped me find the best chisel for the price. Ended up going with the recommended Narex Richter chisels
Yeah. I thought about putting up a bunch of scatter tarts with comparisons of the different variables but that would be a whole lot of them going back and forth. it does make it very interesting though to see if there's any correlation between the particular values.
You've got a very well thought out plan, well done. Excited to see the results! The only variable you're not able to control is the density variances in the wood, but by selecting the right species, that can be minimized. I liked someone else's suggestion of (eventually) testing multiples of each individual make/model, to check for variations in the manufacturing process and overall product consistency. It's nice to see someone that actually understands the scientific method of testing. Subscribed!
I would like to test several from each run but that gets really expensive really fast lol I am controlling the moisture level on all three of the samples that I'm using so I'm able to keep the density well within the variability of the test.
Exactly what I was going to request, thanks @gordonmccall. I would specifically like to see how the famous 19th century Sheffield "crucible steel" chisels stand up to the LN, LV, Ashley Isles and so on.
Everybody in the whole world has ALDI chisels, except me, living 4 minutes from an ALDI in the country in which ALDI originated. I’ve never seen those chisels sold anywhere around here. Anyway, I bought a set of reasonably priced chisels from Dictum, and another, wider chisel from Pfeil, and I’m happy with all of them. If money wasn’t an object, I’d go for a full set of the prettiest ones - or rather the ones I expect to feel best in my hand when using them. I’m not suggesting that a test like this is not worth conducting, I’m just saying I expect this chisel test to be more about testing than about chisels.
That's one of the interesting things I want to find out. is there really a big difference between the steals is there a difference between the chisel types I have no idea I kind of have a feeling that there will not be as much of a difference as some people expect. I have not seen Aldi actually sell the chisels in the last year and a half. They seem to have discontinued them.
Excellent James. Such a comparison test is sorely needed. Way too much sales hype! Thank you looking forward to the results.. Loved your glue test as well. You could make a career of testing!
For a pairing test you could put the chisel in a sled with a holder to maintain the angle. Hit the chisel similarly to the chopping test (maybe with the same weight on a pivot) and see how far the sled travels. This idea just sorta came to me and there are probably details I havent though of but it may be a starting point.
The problem with pairing isn't as much the setup as the important thing is the angle of the chisel. The steel quality has very little to do with how efficient a chisel is in pairing. The angle of the bevel will determine how much force is required to pair the wood.
Waiting with great anticipation ... Need More Data! A couple of adjunct tests that may be interesting, and wake some people up ... 1. Drop test, blade down, from benchtop height onto a simulated foot - bare, in a sneaker, in a leather shoe, in a safety-toe shoe, and in a wood clog. May be less interesting numerically, but hopefully open the eyes of many who think home workshop safety is an afterthought. 2. Blade width measurement, especially blades with both US Customary and what I call the "Rest of the World" measurements. I see many where the blades are marked (for example) "1 inch / 25 mm". I know one of those numbers is not correct because one inch is defined as 25.4 mm exactly. The question is, which one is the correct one? Thank you again on behalf of all of us who want -- need -- the data, but lack the resources to gather it ourselves!
I'll have to think through a drop test that might be fun. I am taking specific measurements of every blade and yes. Few of them are what they actually say they are.
This test looks really well thought out and I'm looking forward to seeing what you find! Thanks so much for doing this sort of research and providing your results to the community! Here are a few questions or potential variables I thought about: * Will you measure the sharpness of a single chisel multiple times per step? Like measuring 3 times after sharpening... then do the chopping... then measure sharpness 3 times... then resharpen and repeat. * Do you think that the angle of the bevel in relation to the string would impact the sharpness test? That is, if you measure sharpness with the sole of the chisel perpendicular to the string, would you get a different result than if you measured with the bevel angle perpendicular to the string? * Do you have any concerns with consistency of applying minute grams of force to cut the string? In the great glue test, the crankable lift mechanism seemed quite controlled and consistent.
I tried doing multiple sharpness testings and found the number comes out so close each time that it is not worth the effort. And every test cost me around $0.50 those add up really fast. But I might find it worth it in the future I had thought about creating a jig to hold the chisel at an angle so that the bevel would come down at the same angle as the back but found that did not make a difference in how much force it took to break the string. So now I just keep it consistent by keeping the back straight up and down. I also have not noticed much of any difference between constant pressure of cutting the string as long as I don't push it too fast it works really well. And gives me a consistent cut.
"Cryogenic steel" caught my attention so I looked it up. I spent most of my adult life as a professional tuba player. In the 1980's and 90's, tuba players were experimenting with cryogenically treating brass instruments (yes tubas haha) in an effort to stabilize the brass and thereby stabilize the intonation. I never had this done but I owned an instrument that had been "frozen" as they referred to it. Most metallurgists will say that this process doesn't affect brass in any significant way. I owned several others that had never undergone this process and I couldn't tell much difference except the lacquer looked more like doughnut glaze. I'll be interested to find out if it affects steel. :)
What could also be interesting is to find out where the steel was made and forged. My suspicion is that some of these supposedly "competing" brands are from the same steel foundry and the same workshops ( or in the worst scenario, "production line" ) ? Hopefully the top few chisels are from the best steel and are completely hand-made by craft workers ? I obviously don't know what I'm talking about in that respect, but I have watched the RUclips videos of "Maximus Ironthumper" who forges hand tools on his blacksmith's forge, putting love into his products and corrctly tempering the steel as he does so - usually several times for each tool. A world of difference compared to what comes out of a mass production line ? Associated with this, perhaps some of the more "special" chisels might give up more of their secrets if they are examined by a metallurgist ? Particularly the craft worker made ones ? Fascinating !
That would be interesting to find out. Most of the nicer chisels list exactly where there still comes from but the lower half of chisels probably all come from similar places in China.
I wouldn't want to go through all that work but very interested to see how it goes and how they compare to each other. Also interested in your opinion of the sharpener once you have spent a bunch of time with it.
Hit the edges with some hardness testing files if you can get them, that will give some extra info and we can see how that corresponds to different steels, initial sharpness and durability.
I'm going to take it one step better than hardness testing files. We have a company that will be doing an actual Rockwell hardness test on all the chisels. Files will give you a nice rough approximation but the actual test will give you an exact number of each
I like it - it will be good to see the denials of the data. I wonder if one could add another cutting metric, but on a more uniformly consistent - like a trex composite board, or something. I don't think that replacing any of the real woods for a composite is a good idea, as few use their chisels on composites, but that way it would reduce the potential of having the wood cause skews in the data
I was actually thinking about doing something similar to that. The boards I chose for testing I'll have incredibly straight grain with similar rings and for each type of wood it will all come out of the same piece so it should be relatively similar but it would be kind of interesting to try it on a homogenous material
You should test the Erik Anton Berg chisels from Eskiltuna Sweden, they have the best reputation online and lots of people see them as the best chisels money can buy. A full set goes for a 700$ on ebay. I have a 3/4 I could send you for testing if you're interested and ready to cover the shipping cost
I would love to test them. Unfortunately my test rig is set up for 1/2-in size and the 3/4 wouldn't fit inside. There are a lot of other chisels I would like to add to the list.
Hi James, your testing sounds interesting and I look forward to seeing your test results. Hear a lot of opinions about chisels but little more than someones opinion which means little to me. Some get technical with or over my head talk about cryogenics and steel hardness . I want to know, which chisel holds an edge better and how hard is it to sharpen. Will be interesting to see the actual data you collect. I love my sweetheart chisels but know they are not the best. Look forward to seeing how they rate.
Hi have you considered how much material will be lost from the repeated sharpening of the chisels, this could be potentially measured by weight or length at the beginning and end of the experiment. Great idea though and I'm looking forward to seeing the results.
A remarkable work ! I have one curious question? is there any differences between the type of steel used in the chopping test in term of its ability of be magnetized ?because its may vary in the results of sharpness.
Just a spontaneous thought: One possible source of error skewing the results is the magnet, as it might affect chisels differently (magnetic properties of steels; friction).
I've thought about that especially with the blue steel where it has a hollow back. but from all the testing I've done with it it takes about the same amount of force to break the friction. So so far I have not found a big difference between the chisels on the magnets.
Knowing the variation that can occur along a piece of wood , how are you checking for difference in grain density. Are you going 3x with the same chisel before testing the next or are you going all chisels for the 1st reading, randomizing the sequence which chisel 1st, 2nd, 3rd .... is there a interaction between chisels...do you get worse readings when the previous chisel was dull? like affecting the fibres in the next cut region? Did you consider starting with a new sawcut every time ?
The particular pieces of wood I've chosen are incredibly straight grain with consistent rings running down the length of them. So the difference is intensity would be well within the testable difference. But that being said I am treating my personal Aldi chisel as the control. And I will test the wood again every couple chisels to make sure that it is still giving the same results. In the two harder woods the crushing is almost impossible to see. And there is very little surface difference between chisels. However with the Douglas fir I do clean it up on the shooting board between tests as it crushes down pretty quickly.
Has the balance been calibrated in situ? If so, moving it changes this. Are you planning to buoyancy correct the resulting readings to account for changes in air density between trials due to temperature, humidity and pressure? Just curious how one would correct for these like we must in lab settings. Even without controlling for those and varying densities within a piece of wood, on a scale of grams rather than mg or micro, they're probably largely insignificant, but still interested to know more. I look forward to seeing how the comparison turns out.
I will not be correcting for air density however there will be a consistency of moisture value in the wood across the tests and all of them are held in the same air conditioned room at the same temperature consistently.
@@WoodByWrightHowTo Cool. It'll be great to see how things compare. If that sharpness scale is linear, then the change in the single board chop test you showed alone makes a pretty good case for having more than one set of chisels, or at least half and 3/4 around for chopping. Thanks for taking the time. Hope the weather back in Illinois enjoyable for the children 👍
Send your video to university physics/engineering lecturers. One of them may want to collaborate with you - perhaps as an undergraduate experiment or, if you increase replicate numbers, send it to a journal for publication.
Excellent test method! Nicely done, James, and... WAIT... Diamond sharpening is more FUN???!!!?!!? I don't believe that I've EVER heard the words "sharpening" and "fun" in the same sentence... Are you feeling well, O wooden-shod master of all things wooden? lol.
I have a magnetic frame underneath the bench that helps balance out the moon at certain times of the month. But as to fluctuations in the gravimetric field I just have to take my best guess at that lol.
It'll be really interesting to see. There are a lot of interesting predictions some people are going to be very wrong and others are going to be very right
Talk about taking on a project...wow...yeah some testers sharpen then cut some wood and call it a test..you are going to get to the marrow of testing...only one problem...i can't wait TWO months...lol..well worth waiting for...👍
So, I only have one question - are you going to end up with a crazy amount of data?? Seriously, you have come up with probably the most unbiased test for this I've ever heard of. I had a couple questions concerning potential variables that needed to be addressed (one of which was the possibly differing magnetic strength between the steels), but you've already taken care of all that I thought of. I am EXTREMELY interested in the results of this test. Can't wait for the final numbers. You da man! As someone else mentioned, every 'test' I've ever seen on the net for this sort of thing had so many human variables in it as to be useless. As you said, this will be fun.
Thanks man. Yes I did actually test the magnet to see if there was a different amount of friction between the chisels and all of them were statistically identical. So that variable has been accounted for. Thanks for checking though.
For pairing.....you could possibly set a scale under your board then fix the chisel in a vertical sled and push down with manual force or perhaps some type of jack (acme screw or hyraulic)
You have really thought this out. When I watched you testing the sharpness I did think a jig to hold the chisel as it cut the string might make it more consistent.
I did several tests seeing difference in dropping and basically no it does not introduce any measurable variance in sharpness. On top of that that is the reason that I test the sharpness before actually doing the chopping test. This way I know the starting sharpness of every test I do. Even if I take the blade directly off of the worksharp I will get a variability of around 30 to 40 g and I get about 20 to 30 g variability off of the hands dropping. 20 to 30 grams may sound like a lot but a lot of these chisels end up well over 1,500 g pressure at the end. That's also why I do so many tests so that I can average out over everything.
So...waiting patiently... when will you post your tests!!!! I've just bought a new set so now it is just a matter of seeing how they stack up to the rest you test.
This is all good, but it is only valid if the manufacturers are consistent with the steel they use. I'm sure that some are, but I am not convinced that others don't look for good prices on steel sources that will save them some money.
The only thing I saw as a potential variable is the amount of work in the dropped weight test. Chisels have different lengths, maybe measure the distance of drop to be the same?
That's why I made the tube adjustable vertically. The tube is always set at the very top of the chisel so that the weight drops the same amount on every chisel.
James I have all ways used footprint, chisels. Looking forward to the test results. Do they lock u up in a padded room at night .Dedication to your viewers as all ways
you're nuts James. A nice nut but still nuts. Talk about reputability. Would I be interested to see the spread sheet? Of course I would. Better you than me. Reputability is in my past and I have wrist scars to prove it. Love what you do.
So sad, I thought you would be including a cast steel James Swann chisel. I have several and have found them to be head and shoulders better than any of the other dozen chisels in the drawer.
When you where doing the test on dropping the weight on the chisel did you make sure that you pulled the weight up the same height every single time ???
Yes. As I pull the string up and over the lip of the tube it stops the weight at the exact same spot every time. The weight cannot come up any higher than the lip of the tube as a string turns at that point and goes down the outside of the tube.
Looks amazing. I am sure you already thought of this but you might consider testing the A2 chisels with a 35 degree micro bevel. A common recommendation for the steel type. Thank you for your service to the woodworking community.
The only detail that gives me pause is counting how many hits to go through. What does the chisel hit after it goes through? If, for example, one chisel took exactly 3 blows to go through, and another chisel required 3.1 hits to go through, that leaves 9/10 of a blow into something that is beyond what it took to just go through the board. You would then not be measuring how much a chisel dulled by going through a board. I'm not sure what the ideal solution would be. One idea is hit each chisel 2 or 3 times (max without going through the board) and measure dullness and what % through the board it went.
I have a notch in the board below that captures the bevel without letting the tip touch anything. I thought about limiting it to a set impact amount but the veriable is harder to measure. And with doing several of each test we are getting some clear numbers.
The string that holds the weight - the part that has to be the same length every time - it will eventually stretch, so measure it occasionally? Good luck!
It doesn't matter about the length of the string the weight will always drop from the top of the tube at exactly the same point. He could do it without the string altogether and it would be exactly the same. The string just makes it easier.
Brilliant! Glad I stumbled onto your channel a week or so ago. Will be eagerly awaiting the results. I only have a cheap set at present and am planning on investing in some decent ones soon. I will wait to get an idea of the best value ones!
@@WoodByWrightHowTo yeah that's perfect. I'm fine with what I have at the moment for now anyway. I have lots of other things to get and make first before I go blowing a load of money on chisels.
I think the stropping can introduce a lot of error because it's not controlled like the worksharp is, both in grit - chromium oxide isn't uniform size or distribution in those crayons- and technique. I think you may also need to change the paper on the worksharp each time if you wanted it to be truly accurate and "clean" in results, now that I think of it. (And stropping can dub the edge due to the soft substrate rolling up and scraping past the chisel edge with the abrasive...)
I will be changing the paper in between each chisel so that they all have the same aggregate on them. As to the stropping that is the reason why I'm doing the sharpness test after the stropping before the actual test. This way I can know exactly how sharp the edge is and with horse butt there is almost no dubbing of the edge it is hard enough that it resists the steels impact. I had thought about just skipping the stropping but unfortunately that is the best way to take off the burr. And if you don't take off the burr you'll never get it quite sharp enough. That's one of the surprising things I found about with this sharpness tester. It's very interesting to see what techniques and methods actually bring things to a mathematically sharper edge.
@@WoodByWrightHowTo Ah good about the paper. You do get working chisels with stropping and you've said before that you like to do things in the most-fun ways - stropping is fun. I'm really just pointing out that it may not be extremely accurate or precise for assessing the differences in the blades. From what I've known about sharpening, taking off the burr is just a matter of working the back and front of the chisel alternately til it simply falls off. Stropping the wire edge off (with no compound - didn't exist for centuries...) breaks it, which creates micro-serrations - these are good for kitchen knives and razor blades for what they're cutting, but less useful for chopping or planing wood. Leather does have enough give in it to cause such a roll, even the horse butt, since it's at a really really small level. Using a non-standardized compound is essentially using a grit of stone or paper that's of varying particle size, possibly even larger than the finest grit gone to, and it can 'undo' some of the edge gained from previous steps. Will it give you a nice shiny bevel? Yes, because it's really for metal polishing, not sharpening. But if you wanted to sharpen with a compound you'd have to use something like an MDF wheel on a bench grinder with a highly specialized standardized-grit compound, and even then it might just be best for knives and straight razors, not woodworking tools. I wrote a bit too much, but tried to explain what I know as best I can.
When you're done, will you put out measurements for your different fixtures? This looks like an excellent excuse to buy tools for peer review purposes.
I love science! The one thing I would like to see is three tests of the chisel per sharpening. So, you sharpen the chisel. You cut through a board 1 time, measure sharpness, cut again, without sharpening, measure it, and a last time. This will tell you how durable a blade is. Right now you are testing the initial sharpness and initial edge durability. I've tests in industrial contexts that indicate that most edge initially dull quickly (3-9 strokes) but then remain at that sharpness for a very long time.
James, as a physicist, I love your scientific approach for reproducibility of your data and arrangement of your experiments, especially.
One thing caught me, though. The magnet holding chisel in the vertical chopping test. The steels can differ in their magnetization
and thus, to be hold by different force resulting in various friction from chisel to chisel. Therefore, the number of hits can be strongly biased.
As I'm writing this I think of two ways how to solve/decrease the effect:
1) measure magnetization of each steel and take it as a coefficient or
2) lubricate the magnet surface as much as possible to reduce the friction at maximum.
cheers, VK
That was something I was worried about with the magnet. Ahead of time I actually tested most of the chisels by placing them on a scale and seeing how much force it took to break the friction of the magnet and I found that every chisel was almost exactly the same to the point that it did not actually cause a significant variance.
I have to compliment how you did all you could to make this test fair in that it's as exact as possible
Wow, an ultra marathon of chisel testing. Thank you for the work and more importantly sharing it with us.
Man wow... This deserves translation to other languages. Woodworking in youtube is full of subjective opinions. And some biased to expensive brands. This is light to many eyes.
Thank you
Thanks. I will keep them coming.
This was the nerdiest project I've seen in a while. And I appreciate every aspect of it. Thanks you.
Thanks man. I am finishing up the plane iron test now!
"if it gets to zero, this chisel can basically slice light" - I about spat out my lunch HAHA!
Lol glad I could help.
Imagine an edge on a hand tool keen enough to split a photon could do some real damage to some fissionable material lol. Atomic chisels
I think this is an awesome project and appreciate that you have to draw a line somewhere, otherwise you never get things done, but I have a couple of observations. Firstly, the test. You may want to introduce some method of standardisation to the angle and force the chisel is presented to the string. A chisel that is presented at an angle or is twisted during presentation is going to have a greater cutting force than one that isn’t. Also the calibration of the tester(for example the tautness of the string) May effect results.
My second point has already been mentioned, and is with regard to old/vintage tools. There is an abundance of myths about the quality of old steel. Maybe this would be a way of addressing this (or at least putting some facts out there).
After all that I would just like to reiterate that I appreciate that the tests and the data you are collecting are an incredible insight and benefit to all interested parties.
It is brilliant that you are attempting this.
Thanks. I actually did a few tests ahead of time to see if the speed at which I pushed into the string affected the outcome and as long as I didn't jab it really quickly every test gave the same result whether I pushed consistently over the course of 10 seconds or consistently over the course of 1 second. I think I am going to create a test rig to keep the chisel perfectly vertical when coming down into the string but we'll see how that comes out.
There have been even more chisels added to the test. you can see them here: ruclips.net/video/qVb3QcIVVIo/видео.html
You're one of the most patient people I know 😂
I have a funny feeling that there are going to be some real surprises ---- some questions and a whole lot of disagreements. Hopefully that will lead to a followup comparison in more depth.
This will definitely be very interesting. I am very excited to see what comes out of it.
Incredible! I've only seen a couple chisel testi videos and quickly ignored the results because they were so user biased! This will surely become the new standard for chisel test!
And this quality of content is the type of content that brings on new patrons!!
Money is tight right now but I will definitely be joining up soon!!
This sounds like a very well thought out project. You seem to have covered most bases. A few questions:
Will you be doing the actual sharpness tests (with that string thing) in replicate? I can see potential variability in this measurement. You might also wish to calibrate the scale - not for accuracy, but for precision - do you get the same weight everytime? Just try several sizes of nuts, measuring each one about 5 times. Also, how do you control for verticality? If you are off vertical, I think you'd only measuring the vertical component of the force vector.
For your chopping test, you might want to take a gander at how ASTM impact testers work. In essence, it's a calibrated hammer, much like your tube and weight. Having your chisel in the horizontal plane, and a hammer on a pivot might be more reproducible, but your method should work well.
Have you considered testing variability of the less expensive chisels? I expect more variability in the cheaper products than the expensive ones, but to estabilish this by measuring multiples of all the brands will probably bankrupt you.
Finally, do consider writing this up for publication in one of the many periodicals devoted to the craft. (And this would be an excellent science fair project for your daughter some time in the future.)
Good luck with your project!
I will actually be changing the sanding paper in between each chisel so that I have the same amount of grit running down on it. As to stopping That is the big reason for using the sharpness tester beforehand. If there is any variance in the amount of sharpness as no human method will eliminate that. The sharpness testing will tell exactly what it is at the beginning of the test.
I did look at testing multiple chisels from a series buying them from different locations and so on as just one could skew the process one way or the other. but unfortunately in this case that might be taking the amount of work one step too far. I may be able to come back and do that in the future but we'll see.
I might write something up however that is not my forte and I am very poor at writing. Also I don't hold that much credence to most mainline publications. it's just not my thing. But who knows what the future will hold.
Terrific assessment and review. Nice work. I used the spreadsheet and added a scatter plot chart (which I'd recommend adding), with the ratings on one axis and current prices on the other. It really helped me find the best chisel for the price. Ended up going with the recommended Narex Richter chisels
Yeah. I thought about putting up a bunch of scatter tarts with comparisons of the different variables but that would be a whole lot of them going back and forth. it does make it very interesting though to see if there's any correlation between the particular values.
I'm really looking forward to seeing how the middle tier (Sweethearts, Narex, etc) compare to each other and to the highest tiers.
You and me both.
I love my Narex chisels. They aren't perfect, but neither am I.
Wow, what a great project. Thanks for taking it on.
You've got a very well thought out plan, well done. Excited to see the results! The only variable you're not able to control is the density variances in the wood, but by selecting the right species, that can be minimized. I liked someone else's suggestion of (eventually) testing multiples of each individual make/model, to check for variations in the manufacturing process and overall product consistency. It's nice to see someone that actually understands the scientific method of testing. Subscribed!
I would like to test several from each run but that gets really expensive really fast lol I am controlling the moisture level on all three of the samples that I'm using so I'm able to keep the density well within the variability of the test.
This should be interesting. I admire your dedication to testing these chisels.
You've been watching the Project Farm channel, haven't you? :) Really looking forward to the results video.
Wow! databased analysis of sharpness et all... wonderfully explained. Thank you.
This is going to be tedious, but the data is going to be awesome. Wow! Thanks!
Can’t wait to see your data. Looks like an excellent experiment set up.
So glad you are including an old Stanley Everlasting. My chisel of choice.
I'm anxious to see your results too... although I don't believe I'm quite as excited as you are. lol Cheers James!
It would be interesting to see the results of the same tests using a variety of vintage chisels made ~100 years ago.
Exactly what I was going to request, thanks @gordonmccall. I would specifically like to see how the famous 19th century Sheffield "crucible steel" chisels stand up to the LN, LV, Ashley Isles and so on.
I would love to do that. There are a lot of others that I would like to add to the test in the future.
Love it!!! What a great set of videos to need out on this rainy day here in KY
Everybody in the whole world has ALDI chisels, except me, living 4 minutes from an ALDI in the country in which ALDI originated. I’ve never seen those chisels sold anywhere around here.
Anyway, I bought a set of reasonably priced chisels from Dictum, and another, wider chisel from Pfeil, and I’m happy with all of them. If money wasn’t an object, I’d go for a full set of the prettiest ones - or rather the ones I expect to feel best in my hand when using them. I’m not suggesting that a test like this is not worth conducting, I’m just saying I expect this chisel test to be more about testing than about chisels.
That's one of the interesting things I want to find out. is there really a big difference between the steals is there a difference between the chisel types I have no idea I kind of have a feeling that there will not be as much of a difference as some people expect. I have not seen Aldi actually sell the chisels in the last year and a half. They seem to have discontinued them.
You should ask Marc Spag to borrow one of his blue spruce chisels to test along with these.
Excellent James. Such a comparison test is sorely needed. Way too much sales hype! Thank you looking forward to the results.. Loved your glue test as well. You could make a career of testing!
For a pairing test you could put the chisel in a sled with a holder to maintain the angle. Hit the chisel similarly to the chopping test (maybe with the same weight on a pivot) and see how far the sled travels. This idea just sorta came to me and there are probably details I havent though of but it may be a starting point.
The problem with pairing isn't as much the setup as the important thing is the angle of the chisel. The steel quality has very little to do with how efficient a chisel is in pairing. The angle of the bevel will determine how much force is required to pair the wood.
This is too cool. You know, the high-end tool companies ain't going to like you if they don't come out on top. Can't wait to see the results.
That is what I'm interested to see.
I could watch this kind of video all day long. I love this!!! Can’t wait to watch these videos.
Data makes my day.
Awesome. I’m a nutrition researcher and loooooved this
I'm so impressed with your project, I sent a small contribution. That's not something I've ever done before.
Thanks John. That means a lot. Really looking forward to seeing the results on this one.
Waiting with great anticipation ... Need More Data!
A couple of adjunct tests that may be interesting, and wake some people up ...
1. Drop test, blade down, from benchtop height onto a simulated foot - bare, in a sneaker, in a leather shoe, in a safety-toe shoe, and in a wood clog. May be less interesting numerically, but hopefully open the eyes of many who think home workshop safety is an afterthought.
2. Blade width measurement, especially blades with both US Customary and what I call the "Rest of the World" measurements. I see many where the blades are marked (for example) "1 inch / 25 mm". I know one of those numbers is not correct because one inch is defined as 25.4 mm exactly. The question is, which one is the correct one?
Thank you again on behalf of all of us who want -- need -- the data, but lack the resources to gather it ourselves!
I'll have to think through a drop test that might be fun. I am taking specific measurements of every blade and yes. Few of them are what they actually say they are.
Very Excited for this test!
You and me both.
This test looks really well thought out and I'm looking forward to seeing what you find! Thanks so much for doing this sort of research and providing your results to the community!
Here are a few questions or potential variables I thought about:
* Will you measure the sharpness of a single chisel multiple times per step? Like measuring 3 times after sharpening... then do the chopping... then measure sharpness 3 times... then resharpen and repeat.
* Do you think that the angle of the bevel in relation to the string would impact the sharpness test? That is, if you measure sharpness with the sole of the chisel perpendicular to the string, would you get a different result than if you measured with the bevel angle perpendicular to the string?
* Do you have any concerns with consistency of applying minute grams of force to cut the string? In the great glue test, the crankable lift mechanism seemed quite controlled and consistent.
I tried doing multiple sharpness testings and found the number comes out so close each time that it is not worth the effort. And every test cost me around $0.50 those add up really fast. But I might find it worth it in the future I had thought about creating a jig to hold the chisel at an angle so that the bevel would come down at the same angle as the back but found that did not make a difference in how much force it took to break the string. So now I just keep it consistent by keeping the back straight up and down. I also have not noticed much of any difference between constant pressure of cutting the string as long as I don't push it too fast it works really well. And gives me a consistent cut.
as a fellow data nerd, I think this is a wonderful project.(yes...I have measured shavings from my jack plane with a micrometer).
That is the best way to do it.
Thumbs up for being a man dedicated to objective science!
Thanks. My pleasure.
Love the dedication (and braveness) to build accurate data !
Dude, you are Woodini :)
Great initiative. Can't wait to see how it goes!
Finally, a test that I can trust to be accurate. Thank you for the work.
It will be fun!
"Cryogenic steel" caught my attention so I looked it up. I spent most of my adult life as a professional tuba player. In the 1980's and 90's, tuba players were experimenting with cryogenically treating brass instruments (yes tubas haha) in an effort to stabilize the brass and thereby stabilize the intonation. I never had this done but I owned an instrument that had been "frozen" as they referred to it. Most metallurgists will say that this process doesn't affect brass in any significant way. I owned several others that had never undergone this process and I couldn't tell much difference except the lacquer looked more like doughnut glaze. I'll be interested to find out if it affects steel. :)
Look up the video: "Cryogenic treatment of drill bits: tested 2X lifetime and microstructure analysis"
Well no that's interesting. Learn something new everyday. Thanks.
Wow, this is awesome! Been waiting for a modern take on chisel tests before upgrading my current mix. Thanks!
I'm hoping to have this one done in the next couple months.
What could also be interesting is to find out where the steel was made and forged. My suspicion is that some of these supposedly "competing" brands are from the same steel foundry and the same workshops ( or in the worst scenario, "production line" ) ? Hopefully the top few chisels are from the best steel and are completely hand-made by craft workers ? I obviously don't know what I'm talking about in that respect, but I have watched the RUclips videos of "Maximus Ironthumper" who forges hand tools on his blacksmith's forge, putting love into his products and corrctly tempering the steel as he does so - usually several times for each tool. A world of difference compared to what comes out of a mass production line ? Associated with this, perhaps some of the more "special" chisels might give up more of their secrets if they are examined by a metallurgist ? Particularly the craft worker made ones ? Fascinating !
That would be interesting to find out. Most of the nicer chisels list exactly where there still comes from but the lower half of chisels probably all come from similar places in China.
@@WoodByWrightHowTo Thanks for the reply - obviously a lot for us viewers to learn from your mass survey - thank you !
I wouldn't want to go through all that work but very interested to see how it goes and how they compare to each other. Also interested in your opinion of the sharpener once you have spent a bunch of time with it.
Hit the edges with some hardness testing files if you can get them, that will give some extra info and we can see how that corresponds to different steels, initial sharpness and durability.
I'm going to take it one step better than hardness testing files. We have a company that will be doing an actual Rockwell hardness test on all the chisels. Files will give you a nice rough approximation but the actual test will give you an exact number of each
I like it - it will be good to see the denials of the data.
I wonder if one could add another cutting metric, but on a more uniformly consistent - like a trex composite board, or something. I don't think that replacing any of the real woods for a composite is a good idea, as few use their chisels on composites, but that way it would reduce the potential of having the wood cause skews in the data
I was actually thinking about doing something similar to that. The boards I chose for testing I'll have incredibly straight grain with similar rings and for each type of wood it will all come out of the same piece so it should be relatively similar but it would be kind of interesting to try it on a homogenous material
Looking forward to your results. I have two sets of chisels from those you are testing. How sharp will they go - time will tell!!!
This is incredibly thorough. I tip my hat to you. Subscribed!
Wow slicing light!! This is epic!!!
You should test the Erik Anton Berg chisels from Eskiltuna Sweden, they have the best reputation online and lots of people see them as the best chisels money can buy. A full set goes for a 700$ on ebay. I have a 3/4 I could send you for testing if you're interested and ready to cover the shipping cost
I would love to test them. Unfortunately my test rig is set up for 1/2-in size and the 3/4 wouldn't fit inside. There are a lot of other chisels I would like to add to the list.
So looking forward to seeing how the Ashley Iles chisel does
As a Brit, me too, I own six of the Mk2 bench chisels - O1 Sheffield steel I believe.
Hi James, your testing sounds interesting and I look forward to seeing your test results. Hear a lot of opinions about chisels but little more than someones opinion which means little to me. Some get technical with or over my head talk about cryogenics and steel hardness . I want to know, which chisel holds an edge better and how hard is it to sharpen. Will be interesting to see the actual data you collect. I love my sweetheart chisels but know they are not the best. Look forward to seeing how they rate.
Really like the plan and want to say THANKS! for your efforts.
Thanks Richard my pleasure
Really cool! A lot of data, which is sometimes hard to analyze
My thoughts exactly. How do you properly analyze the data to conclude which chisel is "better" than another?
Hi have you considered how much material will be lost from the repeated sharpening of the chisels, this could be potentially measured by weight or length at the beginning and end of the experiment. Great idea though and I'm looking forward to seeing the results.
Going to be an interesting thing to add. I weighed them all at the beginning and we can see what the changes afterwards.
A remarkable work !
I have one curious question? is there any differences between the type of steel used in the chopping test in term of its ability of be magnetized ?because its may vary in the results of sharpness.
No. They all have just about the exact same carbon content. So they're all the same magnetism.
Yay!!! I have some chisels from Buck Brothers from HD. I am looking to upgrade to a better set. So this will help me make an educated decision.
We'll see what comes out.
Just a spontaneous thought: One possible source of error skewing the results is the magnet, as it might affect chisels differently (magnetic properties of steels; friction).
I've thought about that especially with the blue steel where it has a hollow back. but from all the testing I've done with it it takes about the same amount of force to break the friction. So so far I have not found a big difference between the chisels on the magnets.
@@WoodByWrightHowTo Excellent!
Knowing the variation that can occur along a piece of wood , how are you checking for difference in grain density. Are you going 3x with the same chisel before testing the next or are you going all chisels for the 1st reading, randomizing the sequence which chisel 1st, 2nd, 3rd .... is there a interaction between chisels...do you get worse readings when the previous chisel was dull? like affecting the fibres in the next cut region? Did you consider starting with a new sawcut every time ?
The particular pieces of wood I've chosen are incredibly straight grain with consistent rings running down the length of them. So the difference is intensity would be well within the testable difference. But that being said I am treating my personal Aldi chisel as the control. And I will test the wood again every couple chisels to make sure that it is still giving the same results. In the two harder woods the crushing is almost impossible to see. And there is very little surface difference between chisels. However with the Douglas fir I do clean it up on the shooting board between tests as it crushes down pretty quickly.
You are completely insane. I love it!
Thansk! that is about the best complement I can get.
Has the balance been calibrated in situ? If so, moving it changes this. Are you planning to buoyancy correct the resulting readings to account for changes in air density between trials due to temperature, humidity and pressure? Just curious how one would correct for these like we must in lab settings. Even without controlling for those and varying densities within a piece of wood, on a scale of grams rather than mg or micro, they're probably largely insignificant, but still interested to know more. I look forward to seeing how the comparison turns out.
I will not be correcting for air density however there will be a consistency of moisture value in the wood across the tests and all of them are held in the same air conditioned room at the same temperature consistently.
@@WoodByWrightHowTo Cool. It'll be great to see how things compare. If that sharpness scale is linear, then the change in the single board chop test you showed alone makes a pretty good case for having more than one set of chisels, or at least half and 3/4 around for chopping.
Thanks for taking the time. Hope the weather back in Illinois enjoyable for the children 👍
Send your video to university physics/engineering lecturers. One of them may want to collaborate with you - perhaps as an undergraduate experiment or, if you increase replicate numbers, send it to a journal for publication.
Excellent test method! Nicely done, James, and... WAIT... Diamond sharpening is more FUN???!!!?!!? I don't believe that I've EVER heard the words "sharpening" and "fun" in the same sentence... Are you feeling well, O wooden-shod master of all things wooden? lol.
but how did you compensate for fluctuations in the local gravitational fields and the current phase of the moon?
I have a magnetic frame underneath the bench that helps balance out the moon at certain times of the month. But as to fluctuations in the gravimetric field I just have to take my best guess at that lol.
I can predict Lie Nielsen chisels will retain sharpness better than most other ones because of its very hard A2 cryogenic steel.
It'll be really interesting to see. There are a lot of interesting predictions some people are going to be very wrong and others are going to be very right
Talk about taking on a project...wow...yeah some testers sharpen then cut some wood and call it a test..you are going to get to the marrow of testing...only one problem...i can't wait TWO months...lol..well worth waiting for...👍
Lol you can't rush good science.
So, I only have one question - are you going to end up with a crazy amount of data?? Seriously, you have come up with probably the most unbiased test for this I've ever heard of. I had a couple questions concerning potential variables that needed to be addressed (one of which was the possibly differing magnetic strength between the steels), but you've already taken care of all that I thought of. I am EXTREMELY interested in the results of this test. Can't wait for the final numbers. You da man!
As someone else mentioned, every 'test' I've ever seen on the net for this sort of thing had so many human variables in it as to be useless. As you said, this will be fun.
Thanks man. Yes I did actually test the magnet to see if there was a different amount of friction between the chisels and all of them were statistically identical. So that variable has been accounted for. Thanks for checking though.
Jeeezzz James your kids will be graduating from college by the time you finish this project. Good luck.
Lol almost.
For pairing.....you could possibly set a scale under your board then fix the chisel in a vertical sled and push down with manual force or perhaps some type of jack (acme screw or hyraulic)
You may want to check out the most recent videos. I have since this done several tests comparing over 42 different chisels now.
@@WoodByWrightHowTo just finished watching....thanks for sharing
You have really thought this out. When I watched you testing the sharpness I did think a jig to hold the chisel as it cut the string might make it more consistent.
I have thought about coming up with some sort of jig for it. We'll see what we can find.
Doesn't stropping by hand add a variable you can't control? Is there a way to strop using the worksharp?
I did several tests seeing difference in dropping and basically no it does not introduce any measurable variance in sharpness. On top of that that is the reason that I test the sharpness before actually doing the chopping test. This way I know the starting sharpness of every test I do. Even if I take the blade directly off of the worksharp I will get a variability of around 30 to 40 g and I get about 20 to 30 g variability off of the hands dropping. 20 to 30 grams may sound like a lot but a lot of these chisels end up well over 1,500 g pressure at the end. That's also why I do so many tests so that I can average out over everything.
Awesome. Data is king!
Have you considered calculating in the air speed velocity of an unladened swallow?
Now that would be a fantastic test video.
The big question is which one should I test African or European.
I have always wondered, is my veritas shoulder plane pmv-11 blade really the best or did I fall for the hype? Can't wait for the results.
I really want to know that too. I spent the extra on PMV11 for my custom plane.
Very exciting!
Lol. Brilliant! You're like a mad scientist. Respect! And thank you.
Thanks! This was a fun one for sure!
@@WoodByWrightHowTo I have a brain that works in a similar fashion. Lol
you sir are a chisel math god
Lol thanks.
So...waiting patiently... when will you post your tests!!!! I've just bought a new set so now it is just a matter of seeing how they stack up to the rest you test.
it came out last week. here is the link. ruclips.net/video/hYDLQ_gydhc/видео.html
This is all good, but it is only valid if the manufacturers are consistent with the steel they use. I'm sure that some are, but I am not convinced that others don't look for good prices on steel sources that will save them some money.
Right on.
The only thing I saw as a potential variable is the amount of work in the dropped weight test. Chisels have different lengths, maybe measure the distance of drop to be the same?
That's why I made the tube adjustable vertically. The tube is always set at the very top of the chisel so that the weight drops the same amount on every chisel.
James I have all ways used footprint, chisels. Looking forward to the test results. Do they lock u up in a padded room at night .Dedication to your viewers as all ways
Lol My bedroom does have a lot of padding on the walls for some reason
Really exited about this chisel mega-test, looking forward to it!
you're nuts James. A nice nut but still nuts. Talk about reputability. Would I be interested to see the spread sheet? Of course I would. Better you than me. Reputability is in my past and I have wrist scars to prove it. Love what you do.
Wow that is a lot of work.
My god. Thank you for doing this.
So sad, I thought you would be including a cast steel James Swann chisel. I have several and have found them to be head and shoulders better than any of the other dozen chisels in the drawer.
There are lots of other chisels I would like to test. Unfortunately I don't have money to buy them all lol
When you where doing the test on dropping the weight on the chisel did you make sure that you pulled the weight up the same height every single time ???
Yes. As I pull the string up and over the lip of the tube it stops the weight at the exact same spot every time. The weight cannot come up any higher than the lip of the tube as a string turns at that point and goes down the outside of the tube.
Let me grab my popcorn!
Looks amazing. I am sure you already thought of this but you might consider testing the A2 chisels with a 35 degree micro bevel. A common recommendation for the steel type. Thank you for your service to the woodworking community.
I might come back and test them all with the 35° as well. We'll see what the future holds.
Certainly my kind of show that mixes woodworking with spreadsheets. #FinanceRocks
I love spreadsheets.
The only detail that gives me pause is counting how many hits to go through. What does the chisel hit after it goes through? If, for example, one chisel took exactly 3 blows to go through, and another chisel required 3.1 hits to go through, that leaves 9/10 of a blow into something that is beyond what it took to just go through the board. You would then not be measuring how much a chisel dulled by going through a board.
I'm not sure what the ideal solution would be. One idea is hit each chisel 2 or 3 times (max without going through the board) and measure dullness and what % through the board it went.
I have a notch in the board below that captures the bevel without letting the tip touch anything. I thought about limiting it to a set impact amount but the veriable is harder to measure. And with doing several of each test we are getting some clear numbers.
The string that holds the weight - the part that has to be the same length every time - it will eventually stretch, so measure it occasionally? Good luck!
It doesn't matter about the length of the string the weight will always drop from the top of the tube at exactly the same point. He could do it without the string altogether and it would be exactly the same. The string just makes it easier.
Thanks for that! OK I have to admit that I wasn't entirely serious! But thank you for your observation!
Brilliant! Glad I stumbled onto your channel a week or so ago. Will be eagerly awaiting the results. I only have a cheap set at present and am planning on investing in some decent ones soon. I will wait to get an idea of the best value ones!
It will be a month or two until this is all done but I'll bring it out as soon as possible.
@@WoodByWrightHowTo yeah that's perfect. I'm fine with what I have at the moment for now anyway. I have lots of other things to get and make first before I go blowing a load of money on chisels.
I think the stropping can introduce a lot of error because it's not controlled like the worksharp is, both in grit - chromium oxide isn't uniform size or distribution in those crayons- and technique. I think you may also need to change the paper on the worksharp each time if you wanted it to be truly accurate and "clean" in results, now that I think of it.
(And stropping can dub the edge due to the soft substrate rolling up and scraping past the chisel edge with the abrasive...)
I will be changing the paper in between each chisel so that they all have the same aggregate on them. As to the stropping that is the reason why I'm doing the sharpness test after the stropping before the actual test. This way I can know exactly how sharp the edge is and with horse butt there is almost no dubbing of the edge it is hard enough that it resists the steels impact. I had thought about just skipping the stropping but unfortunately that is the best way to take off the burr. And if you don't take off the burr you'll never get it quite sharp enough. That's one of the surprising things I found about with this sharpness tester. It's very interesting to see what techniques and methods actually bring things to a mathematically sharper edge.
@@WoodByWrightHowTo
Ah good about the paper.
You do get working chisels with stropping and you've said before that you like to do things in the most-fun ways - stropping is fun. I'm really just pointing out that it may not be extremely accurate or precise for assessing the differences in the blades. From what I've known about sharpening, taking off the burr is just a matter of working the back and front of the chisel alternately til it simply falls off. Stropping the wire edge off (with no compound - didn't exist for centuries...) breaks it, which creates micro-serrations - these are good for kitchen knives and razor blades for what they're cutting, but less useful for chopping or planing wood. Leather does have enough give in it to cause such a roll, even the horse butt, since it's at a really really small level. Using a non-standardized compound is essentially using a grit of stone or paper that's of varying particle size, possibly even larger than the finest grit gone to, and it can 'undo' some of the edge gained from previous steps. Will it give you a nice shiny bevel? Yes, because it's really for metal polishing, not sharpening. But if you wanted to sharpen with a compound you'd have to use something like an MDF wheel on a bench grinder with a highly specialized standardized-grit compound, and even then it might just be best for knives and straight razors, not woodworking tools.
I wrote a bit too much, but tried to explain what I know as best I can.
Wow! That is all I can say!!! Wow!!
When you're done, will you put out measurements for your different fixtures? This looks like an excellent excuse to buy tools for peer review purposes.
Sure I can list it all out. I would love to see other results.
You are truly a crazy man. I Love It!!!
Doing it right!