Thread: oil on Jnat

Originally Posted by ovidiucotiga

4)



Diamonds are stones formed under tremendous pressure...

This is why I use a lot of pressure when I hone on a second rate stone.

Originally Posted by ovidiucotiga

Duuude...that's all you got out of this? ...seriously
Yes they used to use laquer on the sides and botton of the stones to protect them from cracks...some mines like Aiwatanyy even used a paint resembling the colour of the stone to seal the sides...both to protect the stone and hide various imperfections.

Serious has not always been one of my virtues. I will work on it

“ https://sites.google.com/site/japane...ural-whetstone

If you scroll down to the bottom of the page you will find a table with the mineral contents of various analised JNATS.

The table is quoted from a scientific article by Dr.of science mr. ShimaMakoto.

Lets take a few of these elements for example and do some 8th grade anorganic chemistry.

Ca(OH)2 + Fe = Ca + Fe(OH)2 “

What this good man is talking about is removing the rust from the blade with sharpening using these stones and nothing more. As for the composition of the stones, when you see a list of oxides, it doesn’t mean they are free in there. It means they are part of the composition, minerals there. You won’t find Ca2O and K2O, you’ll find their salt with SiO2 in various compositions with the rest of the elements there.
“8th grade chemistry says “Ca(OH)2 + Fe = Ca + Fe(OH)2” ? Really? Free metal Calcium from Calcium hydroxide AND iron? The calcium replaces the less electronegative elements “where it suit it”, you can’t do the above. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronegativity
So, this reaction would go Ca(OH)2 + Fe + xH2O = Ca(OH)2 + Fe(OH)2/Fe(OH)3 +H2 (“1 ½” hydrogens (you go X2) if Fe gets the +3 oxidation state). You also see bubbles of hydrogen. If only getting metallic Calcium was that easy and simple, people would be having it for some aeons around. Instead it was first isolated in 1808. THAT is 8th grade chemistry.
On Chemistry 101 on the other hand, you learn that in the above reaction, aside from oxides, you get a salt, (CaOH2) +2Fe = Ca2(FeO2) + H2 where the iron “performs the duties” of an acid in the salt, on that example, the salt has the +3 oxidation state. If you try it, you’ll get both that salt and the two oxides separate and in a balance.

“What is Fe(OH)2 a precursor of rust.

Taking into consideration tere is plentyfull water...the reaction continues:

4Fe(OH)2 + O2 + 2H2O → 4Fe(OH)3 “

Do you know that this “O2” comes from a strong oxidizing agent? Like hydrogen peroxide? NOT atmosphere. Nor someone blowing with a straw in the solution.
You can’t readily find the Fe(OH)2 on steel, or anywhere else other than a lab, but you can find the anhydrous form, FeO far more commonly combined with Fe2O3, to form Fe3O4/ FeO ∙ Fe2O3, what is known as magnetite. That’s the stuff you get in the process of bluing. Yes, guns and other carbon steel instruments that you can’t replace with stainless but need them rust free with less care than optimally, or even just in case. That patina you find on great great grandfather’s tools that must have been dust by now, only to form a nice patina on them that doesn’t allow rust to form? Magnetite. Not a precursor or rust. More like the opposite.

"What is Fe(OH)3 ?... its what we know as rust."

And yet again we are talking, I think, about steel and oxides, not hydroxides.
Rust consists of hydrated iron(III) oxides Fe2O3•nH2O and iron(III) oxide-hydroxide (FeO(OH), Fe(OH)3).

The stone, or any stone, is NOT chemically active; a razor’s finished edge is like 0.1μM thick. Do you think something that thin would not get readily oxidized? Try honing using a strong acid like HCl/HNO3/H2SO4 as your “lubricant” and see what you get for an edge. Or a base, like concentrated ammonia. The first that get attacked by chemicals is the thin layer on the surface or loose thin particles. Our edge is that thin layer, the thinnest in fact that longs to be oxidized, that’s why we don’t leave our razors wet or in water after shaving. Sure, the slightly acidic or basic nature of a stone can have an effect on steel particles left there for too long, but we try not to do that’ not only on naturals, iron particles love to get oxidized, so, we take care our synthetic stones as well not to see traces of rust and a subsequent positive feedback with any new steel on them we would expect.

“@Vasilis
2) you say the ''kawa was already there''

But I ask you this...
- How did it get there in the first place.

It we were to analyse the statement of oxides depositing into cracks of the stone on the bottom of the ocean...

Where did the oxides come from if not from the stone itself?
I'm trying to imagine water loaded with mineral oxides flowing into tiny fisures in the layers on the bottom of the ocean ... where oxigen concentration is low...presure is high and in some cases temperature is high.

The oxides did not flow into the cracks...THEY WERE BORN THERE...thats why they are bonded to the stone.”

Cracks were formed naturally, and this iron in there was there before it reached the ocean, the stone wasn’t a solid sphere, cracks existed anyway. And iron found its way in there either in the earth’s crust in the process when the material was formed, or from cracks when it reached its final destination/while reaching it, with water that had high iron oxides concentration, and as it evaporated, it left them there. There was no direct exposure on the air, the stone was under, be that sea or dirt. That skin/”kawa” did not form any time soon, as in, last few thousands of years. …And there is oxygen under earth’s surface too, you don’t need contact with the atmosphere to see oxidization. Otherwise we would have many metals in elemental state, like Iron, found naturally.
…No you can’t found elemental iron somewhere naturally (meteorites aside) if you are wondering, and no need to search for sources, our ancestors have been doing that for the last 3000 years.

"Taking it out from the bottom of the ocean or from the pressure of the mineral layer will not harm it.

Only harm can be done by mecanical or chemical action.
Ie explosion mining...heavy blows...oxide expansion...expansion/contraction....

If your statement were true my friend DIAMONDS would explode!

Diamonds are stones formed under tremendous pressure...and temperature...the cristaline structure of carbon...and yet it does not explode...nore does it crack without intervention if the cristaline structure is intact.
The only logical conclusion to draw here is that the more presure/heat a mineral takes in to reach a stable state..
THE MORE ENERGY IT TAKES TO TAKE IT OUT OF THAT STABLE STATE!!!”

Yeah, no, doesn’t make sense. We are not talking about a single 3μM crystal, we are talking about a relatively unstable rock that stayed in a stable environment for millions of years, and got out by us. Sure, it won’t turn to dust tomorrow, but it’s a matter of time of when it actually does. Every stone from there has a ticking clock, and the more stable was their shape, with fewer cracks and strange lines, the more they’ll “live”. The clock IS ticking.
On the other hand, we have something like the Translucent Arkansas. That stone is in such a state, I bet in a thousand years today’s stones will still be around, if not used enough. But these are two different rock formations. One pretty much as solid as can be and pretty much impervious to the elements/environment, the other far far less so.
Diamonds… would… explode? Why?
Also, “diamonds are stones formed under pressure”; I really like that phrase. If it was that simple, today we would be wearing solid diamond bracelets (impractical, I know, things would get constantly get scratched ), not rings with traces on them.
Removing the pressure from above does not make the stone go boom, it just destabilizes the pressures that it was subjected to and was stabilized at. Other pieces of the same material failed to do so. That’s why there are so many quarries, for pretty much the same material. Anything in between failed to “get naturalized” under the Kyoto mountain. Follow the line of where the material runs beneath, and see on how many places it has been extracted. Anything in between failed to stay as a stone
Now, where did the explosions came from, that I do not know.

“6) What importance does the origin of a stone has...be it suita...uchi...koma.

We were discusing the oxidation they produce on carbon steel...the effects on the quench line ie. Hammon...and why they were specificaly used in sword polishing.

You realy think those master sword polishers used a specific progression of stones to polish the blade and bfing out the hammon that coincidently was made up of some of the most acidic stones they had?”

Again, no. I explained above, not again. Also, I followed a traditional toishi for some 6 months of 6 hours daily training more than a few years back (and ended up with a knee problem but now it's pretty much healed), I have a certificate that doesn't really worth a thing, and it would wrong for me to consider myself one after seeing his passion and knowledge. But I’ve had plenty of experience, and I continue to finish swords, Japanese too. No acidity. Particle size and hardness leave that pattern. Iron does not get oxidized or end up as a salt ON the piece of steel. Otherwise we would see rust, a tiny speckle and your whole tool needs repolishing and resharpening. Also, iron salts have interesting colors, but are certainly not "haze", more like green and red. So, sorry, no.

I can go on and on and on but that's not a chemistry lesson, and I have explained my thoughts above.

Check out Alex's blog (darn, I said it so many times, I'll ask for a stone in return, kidding of course)
thejapanblade.com Blog | Sharpening Japanese Blades with Natural Japanese Stone for Care and Maintaince

Everything below is interesting, for anyone having the time and thirst for knowledge I have, here you go.
Some history and thoughts on the mine structure of Kyoto | thejapanblade.com Blog
A little bit about color stones and stratas | thejapanblade.com Blog
How, why, who: grading awasedo in Japan | thejapanblade.com Blog
A peak into the past and the future regarding Jnats. | thejapanblade.com Blog


As I said, there are people who know that stuff better than us. Let them share their knowledge, we are here to enjoy our shave and honing experience. I will also not continue writing on this subject, enough is enough.
Peace friends!

Thank you for argumenting your ideas Vasilis. You made your point and i apreciate it, although i cant fully agree...i still have many unanswered questions.
i'll go read Alex's blog once again...perhaps one day i will find and explanation for why :

-pH paper behaves the way it does when put on a Jnat with slurry...
-why carbon steel rusts faster on jnat slurry...and
-why the polishing stones bring out the diffrence in the metals out the way they do.

I doubt i'll find the answer there but i dont want to be superficial so i'll take your advice.

There must be a scientific explanation for these phenomenons and i'll keep looking for it until i find a propper answer.
i'll try to send a few stone samples to get tested at the university lab....i have some friends there that know more then me.

You have a good head on your shoulders and i respect you for it!
Have a nice day Vasilis!

Every natural stone is different. Some are composed of minerals and such that do rust steel faster. It doesn't help that using the stone produces a slurry of micro-fine steel particles that get mixed with the stone slurry - think about it. Both of these produce a solution with two components that are at or near their absolute maximum of surface area, mixed with water. I have read of Japanese polishers using a touch of baking soda in their honing water to counter this effect. I occasionally do this myself.

Regarding the difference between hagane and jigane appearance, I'm sure there are other reasons at play also but a big one is the difference in hardness of the metals in question. The abrasives can cut much deeper scratches in softer metal than they can in harder metal. In effect this makes the stone behave like a coarser one on the softer metal. Notice there is very little difference in appearance between the two (hagane, jigane) when a synthetic hone is used. The synth hones are so much harder than the steel that they cut both metal types very easily.

Yes soft steel does get abraded faster.
It has a cristaline structure resembeling that of a rubix cube. Its less resistant to outside forces.
Hardened steel has a cristaline structure simmilar to a brick wall. So it can take more force.
Also these diffrent struccture respond diffrent to corosion.

Originally Posted by ovidiucotiga

Also these diffrent struccture respond diffrent to corosion.

This thread has completely jumped the shark.

I'll tell you what it's done, like most people who are in the scientific portion of the world they have made this thread to complicated and the rest of us who really work know it's only about putting a razor on a rock and shaving. All the analysis of the rocks won't make it shave any better. And to continue to beat a dead horse we need to move on. I couldn't care less how many letters you have behind your name, you can't hone or shave any better than myself or hundreds of others. And I'll tell you this I'll bet I know as much about rock formations than the average person, and rocks way down below where most will ever go, but I,m not going to make this forum out to be about what I know and what you don't know. The discussion was fine till it got into a pissing argument between 2 guys who I'm sure are right in their perspectives.

All things being equal I,m ok with you Ron, the only egghead I've ever liked!

Man where's Nelson? Maybe he could explain it to them. Tc

Yup. Agreed. This is not the place for it.

always fun watching battle of the minds here and there