Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20
Like Tree3Likes

Thread: Grit to mesh to micron conversion

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    77
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 11 Times in 9 Posts

    Default Grit to mesh to micron conversion

    I don't know if this has been posted before, or even if it's interesting. But I found a conversion chart for grits and microns (and meshes, whatever those are).

    http://www.faceters.com/askjeff/answer67.shtml

    To my understanding, hones are measured in grits, while pastes are measured in microns. This chart helped me see the connection. Maybe it will do someone else some good too.

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to HenrikWL For This Useful Post:

    niftyshaving (12-28-2009),tinkersd (09-26-2011)

  3. #2
    Forum mogwai thebigspendur's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    21,651
    Thanks
    305
    Thanked 3,244 Times in 2,420 Posts
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Mesh is usually used with diamond hones.
    Why I'm so good with a pistol I could kill a crow on the wing. Did the crow have a pistol? Was he shooting back? I will be.

  4. #3
    There is no charge for Awesomeness Jimbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Maleny, Australia
    Posts
    7,213
    Thanks
    812
    Thanked 1,341 Times in 876 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Based on that chart, and assuming the data it contained was not rounded or approximated too much (maybe a big assumption, and there's some evidence that it has been to some extent), I just quickly ran a quick analysis to get a functional form for the relationship between grit and microns.

    A graph of the raw data shows an exponential relationship (decay):

    Name:  graph1.jpg
Views: 15513
Size:  9.3 KB

    This is confirmed by the almost linear relationship when the natural logarithm of each variable is taken:

    Name:  graph2.jpg
Views: 15622
Size:  7.9 KB

    Treating the numbers in the table as data, and assuming a functional form between Microns and Grit of

    Microns = C x Grit^B

    (and including "measurement" error), the relationship between Microns and Grit is estimated to be:

    Estimated Microns = 11764.71 x Grit^(-0.93589)

    with approximate 95% Confidence intervals of (9146.074, 15133.100) for C and (-0.969, -0.903) for B.

    This estimated relationship fits the original data quite well (original data are the points, the estimated relationship is the line):

    Name:  graph3.jpg
Views: 14515
Size:  9.6 KB

    The fidelity of the estimated relationship breaks down a little for higher grits. This is most likely due to increased rounding or approximation in, and sparsity of, the original data at higher grits. Note also that this is a local approximation - this relationship may not hold at grits outside the range of those included in the table.

    So, if you had a Shapton 16k ceramic on glass and you wanted to know its grit, using the formula above you get:

    Estimated Microns = 11764.71 x 16000^(-0.93589) = 1.37

    Of course, a prediction error or confidence interval should accompany this estimate. A very approximate 95% confidence interval is (0.78, 2.41).

    A little bit of maths can convert the formula into one that predicts grit if you know the Micron rating:

    Grit = (Microns/11764.71)^-1.0685

    So, using this one, a 0.92 micron hone is predicted to have a grit of 24440.42, with an approximate 95%CI for the prediction of (13404.45, 46542.28).

    More data, accurately measured, would yield formulae with more precise (and accurate) estimates.

    James.
    <This signature intentionally left blank>

  5. #4
    Member fryguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Milton, Ontario. Canada
    Posts
    52
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Default

    What?

  6. #5
    There is no charge for Awesomeness Jimbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Maleny, Australia
    Posts
    7,213
    Thanks
    812
    Thanked 1,341 Times in 876 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    OK, OK. I actually found some data from another source that includes some Shapton derived micron measurements. I couldn't find the formula that Shapton used, but as a quick and dirty attempt to reproduce the equation I ran a similar analysis as the one above on the new data.

    The results were:

    Estimated Microns = 14755.41 x Grit^(-1.00044)

    (If anyone wants the confidence intervals so they can work out the prediction error, let me know )

    This one just looks like a simple inverse relationship, which I guess makes physical sense. Does anyone know the Micron measurement of a grit of 1? Depends on the makeup of the grit, I suppose - based on the data, it looks like 1 Grit = 14755 microns in this case. So a simpler approximate formula is

    Estimated Microns = 14755/Grit.

    Anyway, with this data the Shapton-based microns work out better (16K = 0.918 microns), but the Norton-based micron calculations are a bit screwed (8k = 1.84 microns).

    Again, if you want to predict Grit using known Micron values, you can use this one based on the simplified formula:

    Estimated Grit = 14755/Microns

    So, e.g., 0.5 micron Chromium Oxide power is predicted to be 29510 grit (approx. 30k) using this formula.

    James.
    <This signature intentionally left blank>

  7. #6
    Member AFDavis11's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Stephens City, VA
    Posts
    5,692
    Thanks
    123
    Thanked 1,431 Times in 682 Posts

    Default

    Well, atleast you didn't blow your day reading strange posts.

  8. #7
    JMS
    JMS is offline
    Usagi Yojimbo JMS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Ramona California
    Posts
    6,858
    Thanks
    700
    Thanked 787 Times in 577 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimbo View Post
    OK, OK. I actually found some data from another source that includes some Shapton derived micron measurements. I couldn't find the formula that Shapton used, but as a quick and dirty attempt to reproduce the equation I ran a similar analysis as the one above on the new data.

    The results were:

    Estimated Microns = 14755.41 x Grit^(-1.00044)

    (If anyone wants the confidence intervals so they can work out the prediction error, let me know )

    This one just looks like a simple inverse relationship, which I guess makes physical sense. Does anyone know the Micron measurement of a grit of 1? Depends on the makeup of the grit, I suppose - based on the data, it looks like 1 Grit = 14755 microns in this case. So a simpler approximate formula is

    Estimated Microns = 14755/Grit.

    Anyway, with this data the Shapton-based microns work out better (16K = 0.918 microns), but the Norton-based micron calculations are a bit screwed (8k = 1.84 microns).

    Again, if you want to predict Grit using known Micron values, you can use this one based on the simplified formula:

    Estimated Grit = 14755/Microns

    So, e.g., 0.5 micron Chromium Oxide power is predicted to be 29510 grit (approx. 30k) using this formula.

    James.
    Can we get a little street lingo for us poor uneducated bastards?

  9. #8
    There is no charge for Awesomeness Jimbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Maleny, Australia
    Posts
    7,213
    Thanks
    812
    Thanked 1,341 Times in 876 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Yeah, sorry guys.

    I thought that although a table is useful, a formula for working out grit to micron conversions (and back) might also be useful.

    To work out grit when you know microns you can use:

    Estimated Grit = 14755/Microns

    And to work out microns when you know grit you can use:

    Estimated Microns = 14755/Grit

    So, for example, say you knew your diamond paste was 0.25 microns. Using the first formula you could work out what grit that was (roughly) by plugging 0.25 into it:

    Grit = 14755/0.25 = 60K (or close enough).

    On the other hand, say you knew your Shapton Pro has a grit of 30k, but you want to know what that is in microns. You can use the second formula to work that out:

    Microns = 14755/30000 = 0.5 (or close enough).

    The formulae are not the be all and end all though, because I worked them out based on data I found using Shapton's figures, which may only hold for their hones. For example, there seems to be a general consensus that the Norton 8k is about 3 microns. But if you put 8000 into the second formula you get:

    Microns = 14755/8000 = 1.8 microns....

    James.
    leadingedge likes this.
    <This signature intentionally left blank>

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Jimbo For This Useful Post:

    joke1176 (11-21-2008),leadingedge (05-18-2012)

  11. #9
    Picky Bastd Smokintbird's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Austell, GA
    Posts
    111
    Thanks
    49
    Thanked 36 Times in 18 Posts

    Post A more complete Comparison

    I have been lurking here for a couple months now, and when I came across this thread I decided that I needed to try to contribute something to the forum.

    I am attaching a PDF of a grit comparison that I have been working on for a couple years as I happen across new information. Hopefully it is more accurate than most, since almost all figures come from the manufacturers themselves.

    I'm interested greatly if anyone catches any errors or has something else to add to the list, so please let me know.

    BTW, I'm lovin the wealth of information here, it's good to learn from skilled mentors!
    Attached Images Attached Images

  12. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Smokintbird For This Useful Post:

    JimR (05-19-2009),matt321 (05-18-2009),MuzzleVelocity (05-18-2009),niftyshaving (12-28-2009),simpleman (02-08-2011),StraightRazorDave (05-18-2009)

  13. #10
    crazycliff200843 crazycliff200843's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    texas
    Posts
    306
    Thanks
    49
    Thanked 27 Times in 25 Posts

    Default

    I'm curious as to what one grit would look like. I'm imagining a rock about the size of a baseball. I'm probably way off, though. Or does that even make sense?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •