EOU, I appreciate the exchange of posts concerning the results of the section two of your experiment. I think everyone has their own piece of truth. 
When the weight of 150 gf was sufficient to roll the edges of all four samples (HRC 50, 54, 58 and 62), we have to use smaller weight to find the difference between various HRC numbers.
I expect that using this smaller SET weight we will see substantial drop of sharpness for samples with smaller HRC numbers and significantly smaller drop of sharpness for high HRC numbers.
EOU, would it be digestible for you to imagine that the sharpness drop of a rolled edge is caused by the fact that the applied force has to be resolved in two perpendicular forces, where the vertical force, which actually cuts, is always smaller than the applied force?
Jan
When the weight of 150 gf was sufficient to roll the edges of all four samples (HRC 50, 54, 58 and 62), we have to use smaller weight to find the difference between various HRC numbers.
I expect that using this smaller SET weight we will see substantial drop of sharpness for samples with smaller HRC numbers and significantly smaller drop of sharpness for high HRC numbers.
EOU, would it be digestible for you to imagine that the sharpness drop of a rolled edge is caused by the fact that the applied force has to be resolved in two perpendicular forces, where the vertical force, which actually cuts, is always smaller than the applied force?
Jan