Anyone who has ground and honed a chisel should get the concept.
View attachment 279062
Look at diagram (A). "Less Rubbing Here." A concave bevel allows for a much quicker and shorter amount of time on hones, even flat hones. Or perhaps, especially on flat hones. Since you are only honing the last 20% or less of the bevel, it saves time and decreases hone wear on the finishing hone.
So we ended up doing the math, and using stones with convex contours, on an arbitrary 6/8 razor the person doing the math happened to have, the bevel would be ground 3.5 microns into the bevel (on one side), and the bevel would be extended by .1mm. Both the person doing the math and I realized that due to blade flex, this could only be considered an absolute minimum bevel concavity depth and width. Bevel depth therefore is dependent on how much pressure the person doing the honing uses, and how flexible the razor is. Most straight razors tend to be fairly flexible. A Theirs-Issard razor is on the upper end of the stiffness and hardness scale.
That's using the whole range of stones. The final convex stone would be affecting .2mm of the bevel or less, and could serve as an alternate to a flat finishing hone.
And then I get on here and see that
@JPO has already posted all the math calculations, including the stuff we knew about but didn't have a formula to be able to calculate it.
In short, yes, the math holds up under scrutiny.
Click to expand...