Jump to content

SparkyLB

Member
  • Content Count

    49
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About SparkyLB

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Nickelsilver, that's exactly what I did. I removed just enough material to make a hole leaving no evidence of a previously rubbed in jewel. I don't know the size of the jewel that came out, as it was shattered. I did use a seitz jeweling kit. The stump I used did produce perpendicular planes between reamer and bridge. The hole was by visual accounts, perpendicular and very clean inside. There were no impediments to the bridge sitting flat on the stump. It was a tapered reamer. The shank is a few thou larger than the business end, and the taper ends in a circular, non-cutting portion of the tool that mic's out to .229mm with the JKA tool. The jewel measured exactly .230, purchased from seitz for this project. I made the hole while waiting for the jewel to arrive. Perhaps the first mistake. If I had to guess, the original jewel was perhaps .180mm? As said above, it would have been wise in retrospect to open a bit, check, repeat. Sneak up on it as it were. It was not a 5-sided reamer, I'm not familiar with the names, but the reamer's cut-out was half the diameter of the shank and progresses to immediately below where the tool is dead on .229mm. The seitz kit I have doesn't have hole-closing reamers, but the staking set I have, includes stakes to peen/form the rivet (rounded and open, with the business end round like a doughnut) on the balance staff before flattening out the rivet with the flat open hole stake. I'll use the former to attempt to open close the hole a bit. I'll see if I can rectify it that way. It was a learning experience. This was an inexpensive orphaned movement. If I can't close the hole, I think I'll buy another jewel significantly smaller, I do have a lathe, and see if I can turn a shouldered bush and use that. I certainly appreciate all the positive feedback as usual.
  2. I recently reamed a hole in a train bridge to .229mm. I purchased a .230mm jewel and attempted to push it to depth. I find the reamed hole will let the jewel pass through without a trace of friction. It enters the top and falls from the bottom. I measured the reamer on my JKA Feintaster and found it to be .2285mm. I measured the jewel and it was right on the money. Being quite inexperienced, I'm wondering what I might have done wrong. Originally the original rubbed-in jewel was badly cracked, and despite my efforts, I could not straighten out the rubbed portion to use the same sized jewel. I reamed that hole as above. Should one ream only until the tool has done its business and then stop? I think my repeated attempts to get a nice, clean hole resulted in a nice, clean OVERSIZED hole. I didn't really have any way to measure the hole I reamed other than to measure the reamer. Did I simply go a bit too far whilst reaming?
  3. I recall losing my cat over a decade ago. My condolences to you. It was like losing a human family member. Dear old Rudy. She was 16, I adopted her from the animal shelter only 5 years before. Never thought I could become so attached to a cat. Loved her like family. Half Persian, half Himalayan. Beautiful animal. Cracked open a can of tuna and she left skid marks on the carpet running to the kitchen. Stuck her nose up to chunk light. She had albacore or nothing. My wife called her Queen Rudy. Time heals. Prayers are with you.
  4. rodabod, was this done with butane torch?
  5. Agreed, since is not as efficient holding onto heat as cast iron or copper; there's more of a gradient. This would cause brass heated from one side to always be much hotter where the flame is. I like how Roger never brings flame close to metal to be blued. Seems that Roger Smith's intention is to move the piece about such that the finished product can be as uniform as possible. He admits the improbability of bluing 3 hands identically. It's a learned skill, but what isn't? As for the bed of shavings offering inferior visibility, this seems like a large part of the equation. If you watch, the color starts on the bottom and rises quite fast to the top. If embedded in shavings, one might very easily miss this transition.
  6. FLwatchguy73, that is one incredibly beautiful dial!
  7. Thanks, vinn3. Maybe I'll look into it. For the time frame ahead, I have an ETA 6497 on the way. I'm going to make hands for it I think before anything else. That would give me a tremendous amount of confidence. Each of the 3 hands, blued with heat.
  8. Thank you, jdm! Great read. Certainly not easier. But I got into this hobby for love of "fine" work. Not saying I'll take this on, but I love the patience and craftsmanship required.
  9. Thank you for the confirmation. I've watched a few videos of jewelry applications and the enamel never seems to set flat and true, and they're using a kiln. The final product is domed, undesirable for a good-looking watch dial. Also, the absolute crisp white color seems to require enamel containing arsenic, which is not readily available. The only white I see for sale is "off white." Lastly, I have no kiln, so I don't think I'd fare better with a torch. I'll save the torch for bluing steel.
  10. Upon reading this again, it seems that the gum tragacanth is just the adhesive to capture the ceramic powder. The coarse metal mesh is what the item to be enameled rests on. I read it wrong, it seems. I'll pick up some white enamel powder and go from there.
  11. Thank you, nickelsilver. In case you're interested, it's at 50 seconds in. Don't blame me if you become attached to these 10 short videos!
  12. I'm watching the 10-part "Hand Finishing" series of videos for the 50th or so time; something of which I can't seem to get enough. Would the forum be so kind and tell me what the white honeycomb-looking mineral(?) is that he uses to protect his table from the heat of his torch? I know bricks would work fine, but I'm curious. If it's available to me, I'm going to acquire some. I'm going to give hands a try.
  13. I've taken an interest in perhaps making a dial. I would like to make a double sunk type. I am stuck on the enameling portion. I've read a brief two pages from Max Cutmore's Collecting & Repairing Watches. I am posting what I read in order that you may see where I'm coming from. This is not my text: "Coat the blank with gum tragacanth (mixed from powder to paste methylated spirits and diluted with water: 15g (1/2 oz.) gum to a liter (2 pints) water,) place it on a coarse metal mesh and sieve the white enamel powder through a 60-gauge mesh on to the face. Treat both sides to avoid edges, but the butane method burns enamel off the back. Apply the torch to the back of the dial until the enamel fuses at about 820°C (1,500°F). Repeat this process until a satisfactory white finish is obtained." I understand the "recipe," but once the paste is made, it dries to the consistency of rubber cement. Given that this must be sprinkled on the copper before firing, I'm at a loss as far as taking the cake from solid to powder. Is Mr. Cutmore suggesting to spread this paste onto a fine screen of some type and let it dry there; somehow liberate it, then sievet through the 60-gauge mesh? If so, I'd be unsure how to remove the gelatinous matter from the first screen. If not, unless I'm missing something in the text (which is not out of the realm of things,) how does one get the paste to powder form? Finally, nowhere did I find that gum tragacanth is vitreous upon firing. I'm guessing I would have to find vitreous powder on the interwebs?
  14. I checked that book out at the library a few months ago but didn't know this was in there. I'll have to check it out again. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...