- Joined
- Jan 26, 2002
- Messages
- 2,737
That admittedly schematic illustration from the FAQ is one thing that confuses me...
There the fullers' width ends in the middle of the blade. So if one is counting "spines" there is the actual blade spine, and the fuller contribute n+1 ridges (so long as they are immediately adjacent) as pointed out.
Problem is the khuks that I'm aware of aren't fullered like the sketch. The actual blade spine and one ridge from a fuller are co-incident, or nearly so. That's one less ridge or "spine" than theoretical maximum.
And, whether or not the edge is "scalloped" (and whether or not a hollow grind from the grinding wheel counts, as opposed to a deeper,deliberately forged shape), it is possible for the ridge of a fuller to be co-incident with the start of the bevel. But if the bevel is well convexed, the bevel shouldn't create a ridge by itself.
But a deeply scalloped edge could be thought of as a partial fuller. The edge bevel happens to start near the middle of the fuller where the blade is thin, instead after the blade increases in thickness like a complete fuller. The profile would appear concave where the partial fuller is, but could smoothly transition to a convex profile. Like an "S" shape, not a "C" shape. To me, this is different from hollow ground. Hollow ground with a convex secondary bevel an extreme of this profile where the top and bottom of the "S" are very different in size. I'm thinking that both parts of the "S" would be about equal on a user khuk.
Counting fullers (as opposed to ridges) pretty much simplifies things.
So counting fullers seems to make more sense to me....But that can't count for much. If "chirra" does mean hollow or groove, I think I'll understand this.
There the fullers' width ends in the middle of the blade. So if one is counting "spines" there is the actual blade spine, and the fuller contribute n+1 ridges (so long as they are immediately adjacent) as pointed out.
Problem is the khuks that I'm aware of aren't fullered like the sketch. The actual blade spine and one ridge from a fuller are co-incident, or nearly so. That's one less ridge or "spine" than theoretical maximum.
And, whether or not the edge is "scalloped" (and whether or not a hollow grind from the grinding wheel counts, as opposed to a deeper,deliberately forged shape), it is possible for the ridge of a fuller to be co-incident with the start of the bevel. But if the bevel is well convexed, the bevel shouldn't create a ridge by itself.
But a deeply scalloped edge could be thought of as a partial fuller. The edge bevel happens to start near the middle of the fuller where the blade is thin, instead after the blade increases in thickness like a complete fuller. The profile would appear concave where the partial fuller is, but could smoothly transition to a convex profile. Like an "S" shape, not a "C" shape. To me, this is different from hollow ground. Hollow ground with a convex secondary bevel an extreme of this profile where the top and bottom of the "S" are very different in size. I'm thinking that both parts of the "S" would be about equal on a user khuk.
Counting fullers (as opposed to ridges) pretty much simplifies things.
So counting fullers seems to make more sense to me....But that can't count for much. If "chirra" does mean hollow or groove, I think I'll understand this.