Jump to content

Bergeon Demagnetiser Switch Replacement


JBerry

Recommended Posts

Hey folks,

I recently picked up this 2321 Bergeon Demagnetizer, the plastic ring that secures the momentary switch to the top of the wooden block had perished and snapped off, and no longer retains the button.

I'm fairly clueless when it comes to electronics. I picked up a new switch of the correct diameter, problem is I'm not sure if the switch is of the correct rating.

The switch is rated 3A 250V/AC, but I'm not sure about the amp rating of the demagnetizer. Anyone have any ideas?

dem 3.jpg

dem 2.jpg

dem 1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you have a multimeter you can find the resistance of the coil, then divide the wall voltage by that to get your amp draw.

Amps = volt/ohms

If they had listed the wattage, you could use amps= watts/volts. By the same formula if we imagine it draws 2 amps, you'd be at almost 500 watts which I'm pretty sure it doesn't use. I think you are safe with your 3 amp switch.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, AndyHull said:

The only similar demagnetiser I could find on line states it is 80 Watts. That would be approximately 1/3 A at 240V or about 700 mA at 110V. A 2A or 3A switch should be fine.

Thanks for the advice Andy. I fit the switch and it's working well!

photo_2019-03-13_01-37-22.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, nickelsilver said:

If you have a multimeter you can find the resistance of the coil, then divide the wall voltage by that to get your amp draw.

hmmm careful, multimeters measure resistance and you can't figure current knowing resistance and volts if its an AC signal with a coil .  I agree, if the power is given, then yes Ohm's law works, but we're dealing with with AC so the ohms has to be impedance not resistance....and you can't measure impedance with a multimeter (they measure resistance only, whereas impedance is resistance, inductance and capacitance, you need a fancy LCR).  

Look at it this way, if you connected a wire between the legs of AC mains, bang you blow the breaker.  But if you coil that same wire, it now has inductance.  That's why say a transformer (which is a wire connecting the mains but in a coil) doesn't blow the breaker.

I think the right answer was given on the switch so all is good, just saying with coils and AC keep in mind inductance has to part of applying ohms law to get power

 

Good job on the repair, it looks very professional

 

Edited by measuretwice
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, measuretwice said:

hmmm careful, multimeters measure resistance and you can't figure current knowing resistance and volts if its an AC signal with a coil .  I agree, if the power is given, then yes Ohm's law works, but we're dealing with with AC so the ohms has to be impedance not resistance....and you can't measure impedance with a multimeter (they measure resistance only, whereas impedance is resistance, inductance and capacitance, you need a fancy LCR).  

Look at it this way, if you connected a wire between the legs of AC mains, bang you blow the breaker.  But if you coil that same wire, it now has inductance.  That's why say a transformer (which is a wire connecting the mains but in a coil) doesn't blow the breaker.

I think the right answer was given on the switch so all is good, just saying with coils and AC keep in mind inductance has to part of applying ohms law to get power

 

Good job on the repair, it looks very professional

 

A very valid point. Also in some cases the power goes through other components before it reaches the coil. There may be some form of inrush current limiting device , an NTC or something similar,  that will also mess up your calculations if you simply try to gauge the current by measuring coil DC resistance, especially if you simply measure across the mains plug.

You can use a clamp meter to measure current, but you then need to clamp it round only one of either the live or the neutral. Simply clamping it round the whole mains cable wont give you a valid answer either.... and then we come to what do you mean by AC power, are you talking about average AC voltage or true RMS...etc...  but that is a whole different story.

In some simple cases, you can get a rough estimate by measuring the coil resistance, but it will only give you a possible ballpark figure.

In this particular case, it is probably near enough for our purposes. Anything more complicated (motors, active electronics or whatever), and you could be miles out.

Edited by AndyHull
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All correct, and I admire your knowledge, but why make the matter over complicated?

Here we have a coil without iron core and a low frequency of 50 or 60 Hz. You will find no relevant difference between AC or DC resistance...

Frank 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, praezis said:

All correct, and I admire your knowledge, but why make the matter over complicated?

Here we have a coil without iron core and a low frequency of 50 or 60 Hz. You will find no relevant difference between AC or DC resistance...

Frank 

It may seem that we are being pedantic, but it is more a case of highlighting and understanding the limitations of this technique, after all, for small values of flat, the earth is flat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, praezis said:

All correct, and I admire your knowledge, but why make the matter over complicated?

Here we have a coil without iron core and a low frequency of 50 or 60 Hz. You will find no relevant difference between AC or DC resistance...

 

good point, without the iron core they will be very close.   No interest in over complicating things, I overlooked lack of the iron core.  Point about caution on doing AC/coil/current calcs based on resistance stands as so often inductance is most of impedance

Edited by measuretwice
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Sounds great! And yes, I would use grease for the keyless as well although treating the parts with epilame would make the grease less likely to spread in the long run. Not critical but won’t hurt. My current strategy is to epilame treat all parts getting in contact with oil or grease.
    • Hello everyone, for what it's worth, here is my approach: 1. Escape wheel submerged in Epilame, then dried quickly with a hairdryer. Then the final tip of the pivots are cleaned by poking into pithwood. The logic being that the Epilame is removed at the intended contact point (to avoid any residue that may mix with the oil), but remains in the areas where oil is not supposed to spread to (further down the pivot towards the wheel). The escape wheel teeth also benefit from having Epilame to keep the 9415 in place.  2. I use a syringe to treat only the pallet stones. I suspend the pallet fork with some Rodico so that the stones hang downwards. I notably use a rather thick needle where a drop WON'T form, but rather where the Epilame liquid stays in the needle tip, which I then dip into the pallet stones. It requires some practice to get the right amount of Epilame into the needle tip, but it works for me now. This way, no drop will "jump" onto the pallet fork and potentially go all the way to the pivots.  3. I let the movement run for a few minutes without lubricating the pallet stones... to scrape off the Epilame in the intended contact "channel". Then I remove the balance again and lubricate the exit pallet stone with 3-4 successive drops. See the "channel" that forms on the pallet stone in the picture -- not so easy to see, but it's visible.       I am conflicted about the use of Epliame in balance jewel settings. My impression is that the two jewels sufficiently suspend the oil (even 9010). Apparently Rolex recommends NOT to use Epliame there (heard from a former Rolex service center watchmaker), as it could cause additional wear. Apart from that, I follow specific instructions where I can find them. E.g. the infamous Rolex reverser wheels or sometimes (parts of) the seconds wheel. Exception: I'm currently servicing an Eta 2824 and will probably ignore the service sheet that recommends treating the whole keyless works with Epilame and then using HP1300... I'll skip the Epilame and use 9504 grease.        
    • I'm going to give this a try today/tomorrow on my UTC33/Seiko 66, thanks!
    • Hello and welcome from Leeds, England. 
    • Don't forget Mark is a hard working watch maker so he is also tied up with work. I'm sure he is keeping his eye on this forum making sure it is running along nicely. 
×
×
  • Create New...