Why does the rate start to rush when I work out?

[VWatchie]

On 9/17/2022 at 12:41 AM, JohnR725 said:

Have a pocket watch there's less body motion were a pocket watch normally would be

The more watches the better, of course!  However, if you're on a budget you could momentarily convert your wristwatch into a pocket watch while taking a brisk walk 

On 9/17/2022 at 8:56 AM, JohnR725 said:

how about if you could do an experiment?

I'll do that John and I look forward to seeing what you can get out of it! 

Edited September 18, 2022 by VWatchie

[dadistic]

16 hours ago, Gramham said:

The interesting thing I find about this thread is the expectation of isochronism from timepieces that were never designed to deliver that in such harsh conditions (I forgot to add Negative-G to High-G and Zero-G).  That's quite an amazing thing when you consider that ancient timepieces couldn't handle a 1-G shock for centuries. 
----

Two things I wanted to mention,  first Timex and my favorite escapement engineering.  If you want to consider high-G performance, think about the use of "clockwork" time fuses in artillery shells. Yes, these things ticked after they were fired from artillery, and I can't imagine much harsher G-force conditions than that.  My understanding is that the Timex V-conic escapement and the alloys used in that escapement were developed for use in artillery fuses, and afterward made very robust watch escapements

Secondly, in horology I'm used to seeing the term isochronism to refer to the rate of an oscillator being the same regardless of the amplitude of the oscillator, and does not necessarily refer to the stability of the oscillator with other varying conditions like motion.  Common understanding of a term that may have different uses in different fields helps communication, I'm sure you know that. It helps me, because it keeps me from descending into a pit of confusion that is hard to climb out of ( I spend way too much time in the Principality of Muddled Thoughts, i.e. state of confusion).

Cheers!

[Neverenoughwatches]

44 minutes ago, VWatchie said:

The more watches the better, of course!  However, if you're on a budget you could always convert your wristwatch into a pocket watch 

I'll do that John and I look forward to seeing what you can get out of it! 

Me too, and i bet it will be a lot more than anyone else can.

28 minutes ago, dadistic said:

Secondly, in horology I'm used to seeing the term isochronism to refer to the rate of an oscillator being the same regardless of the amplitude of the oscillator, and does not necessarily refer to the stability of the oscillator with other varying conditions like motion.  

I must admit i did wonder if something was amiss here in graham's explanation. It wasn't my understanding of isochronism. As far as i was aware the period between the ticks remains the same or as near as, regardless of the force applied to the balance wheel, or its amplitude .

[Gramham]

Hello @dadisticand @Neverenoughwatches,

Thanks for your thoughts.  I'm perfectly open to the idea of having used the wrong terminology to describe the phenomena of a time piece getting pushed out of its accuracy envelope by having high/zero/negative g-forces applied to it.  But - what is the correct term for that phenomena then?

As a thought experiment, let's constrain the definition of isochonism to be strictly that which is provided by Google:

Another way of stating this is:

"Isochronism is the temporal regularity of an oscillator despite any changes in amplitude"

Or, to quote @Neverenoughwatches:

"[the] period between the ticks remains the same or as near as, regardless of the force applied to the balance wheel, or its amplitude".

Here's my "hot take".  What force(s) are you talking about, exactly?  Are we focused on the same ones? 

Let's explore further.  Consider that we are presented with the following Paradox or Mystery (my absolute favorite thing in the world!):

We are given an accurate timepiece which, when left at rest with an adequately energized Power System and a properly functioning Transmission System is considered to be suitably accurate. But the timepiece becomes unsuitably accurate when it is vigorously agitated. 

To my mind, the only place where that could possibly happen is in either the Modulation or Regulation System. 

(these are, of course, my own terms and part of a longer work about horology that I am currently developing as I mature in Watchmaking, mostly as an exercise to prod me into "doing my homework" as I find some aspects of Horology far less interesting than others.)

Regardless of terminology, we need to isolate exactly where the undesired accuracy is being introduced.

Here's a peek into some of the content I am developing as my "homework" in an attempt to force myself to cover the more boring (to me) subtopics of Watchmaking.  I have devolved all timepieces into eight sympathetic systems:

1.  Enclosure
2.  Display
3.  Setting
4.  Power In
5.  Power Out
6.  Transmission
7.  Modulation
8.  Regulation

The above is hardly earth-shattering, I know - but it's really a monograph for self-consumption, not necessarily for sharing with others...but why not share?  I already find it to be a very useful tool for triage and troubleshooting because it allows me, a very newbie Watch Repairer, to eliminate huge swaths of the potential problem space by ruling out numerous "Major Systems" (to quote a brother engineer, Kalle, over at ChronoGlide):

Getting back to the example of a wristwatch that's not keeping accurate time when vigorously agitated...which of the above systems can we immediately eliminate?

1.  Enclosure
2.  Display
3.  Setting
4.  Power In
5.  Power Out
6.  Transmission

That leaves the following systems:

7.  Modulation
8.  Regulation

Considering that the purpose of the Regulation System is to adjust the Modulation System so as to bring the overall time piece into better conformity with a more authoritative time source, and that it is typically implemented as a fixed input (or invariant), the only place that variable inaccuracies in timekeeping could possibly be introduced is in the Modulation System, whose role it is to:

"govern the regularity of the release of energy through the system in a predictable, periodic way"

Hey...isn't that the definition of isochronism as given above? 

I look forward to your reaction(s).

This is a very fun discussion.  I love having my ideas challenged because that's the only way they get better.  Thanks!

g.
----

Edited September 18, 2022 by Gramham
conjugation, typos, plurality

[VWatchie]

11 hours ago, dadistic said:

in horology I'm used to seeing the term isochronism to refer to the rate of an oscillator being the same regardless of the amplitude of the oscillator, and does not necessarily refer to the stability of the oscillator with other varying conditions like motion. 

That's my experience as well.

[Gramham]

Even SEIKO is talking about this.

By the way, I'm not debating the definition of the word "isochronism".  In fact, I readily supplied three versions of it.   

What I am interested in investigating is what appears to be the weakness of that term with respect to an inherent assumption embedded within it, likely due to its era of invention and the fragility of early timepieces, that "isochronism" is itself reliant on the presence of a safe, predictable, physically stable and (very often) self-canceling environment, not one  characterized by intermittent periodic or aperiodic acceleration and/or deceleration, which was the original context (and mystery) provided.  So, YES, we all (now) agree on what "isochronism" means.  That's not my focus.

Perhaps I was mistakenly thinking about it as a process, outcome or result, as opposed to a property, a la:

"The isochronism of your timepiece seems to have been negatively affected by X"

But I could just as easily have said:

"The accuracy of your timepiece seems to have been negatively affected by X"

My question for those more experience and learned than I is this:

"What is X if it is not isochronism and/or not accuracy but rather something else?"

- We cannot say that "isochronism generates inaccuracy" because it is a pre-condition for accuracy.
- Nor can we say that "accuracy generates inaccuracy" because that is inherently self-contradictory.

So, pray tell, what is the elusive X that even SEIKO can identify, but not precisely name?

(Loving this thread!  Yes, it's getting pedantic)

Thanks!

g.
----

[VWatchie]

1 hour ago, Gramham said:

Getting back to the example of a wristwatch that's not keeping accurate time when vigorously agitated

Not sure what example you're referring to (some example in this thread, no?). As I believe John mentioned, when agitated, the deviations even out and that's why even my Vostok watches (being somewhat erratic in amplitude and rate, and being badly poised, as most Russian watches are) are surprisingly accurate (approx. +2 to +3 s/d)

The only real problem I've seen in upsetting the timekeeping is when the watch is subjected to wide continuous pendulous motions over an extended period of time.

[jdm]

13 minutes ago, Gramham said:

By the way, I'm not debating the definition of the word "isochronism". 

Historically, isochronism refers to the ability of a timepiece to keep constant time with a varying force of the power source. That is the first problem that had to be resolved powering from a mainspring was introduced.  Many watchmakers still use isochronism in this restricted sense only. Of course, the matter has been discussed here many times already in the past.

[VWatchie]

4 minutes ago, jdm said:

Of course, the matter has been discussed here many times already in the past.

Exactly what "matter"? Isochronism? Anything interesting in particular that you recall? Perhaps you could share a link in that case?

35 minutes ago, Gramham said:

What I am interested in investigating is what appears to be the weakness of that term with respect to an inherent assumption embedded within it, likely due to its era of invention and the fragility of early timepieces, that "isochronism" is itself reliant on the presence of a safe, predictable, physically stable and (very often) self-canceling environment, not one  characterized by intermittent periodic or aperiodic acceleration and/or deceleration, which was the original context (and mystery) provided.  So, YES, we all (now) agree on what "isochronism" means.  That's not my focus.

Gramham, you sound like a professor or aspiring professor in horology. I'm just a passionate enthusiast and not even an engineer, so I'm having a hard time even understanding what you write. Therefore, I find it difficult to respond and comment.

[Gramham]

1 hour ago, jdm said:

Historically, isochronism refers to the ability of a timepiece to keep constant time with a varying force of the power source. That is the first problem that had to be resolved powering from a mainspring was introduced.  Many watchmakers still use isochronism in this restricted sense only. Of course, the matter has been discussed here many times already in the past.

Hello @jdm

Your post reminded me of a really fascinating talk given by Romain Gauthier at the New York Horological Society.

Have you seen it?  It's really fascinating.

It's axiomatic precept is that the power reserve must be consistently released (Mr. Gauthier calls it "constant force"), or time accuracy of the device cannot be assured.

Here's a link.  Do have a look if you've not already.  I thought it was great.
 

I recently ca

Edited September 18, 2022 by Gramham
typo

[Neverenoughwatches]

5 hours ago, Gramham said:

Here's my "hot take".  What force(s) are you talking about, exactly?  Are we focused on the same ones? 

Eyup Graham. How you doin ?. As regards to my understanding of isochronism, I was initially suggesting the force that was intended to make the movement tick. Ie. Energy released from the mainspring that travels through the train that reaches the balance wheel. But any exterior force such as magnetism, electrical ? Or a G force can act upon the balance wheel's mass to alter its swing so changing the movement's own amplitude for which it was designed. In which case i am thinking that the isochronism that was created  for the movement is now out of the window. Which is maybe why Watchie is experiencing  non isochronism rates . 

[JohnR725]

4 hours ago, VWatchie said:

As I believe John mentioned, when agitated, the deviations even out and that's why even my Vostok watches (being somewhat erratic in amplitude and rate, and being badly poised, as most Russian watches are) are surprisingly accurate (approx. +2 to +3 s/d)

watches are interesting in that they will average out their imperfections over time. then things like poising errors they get averaged out on wristwatches because you're moving your arm around if you stayed in one position then poising errors be more of an issue.

one of the biggest influences of amplitude versus timekeeping is the regulator pins. The example picture I have shows what happens if they hairspring isn't centered versus amplitude. then I don't have an example of it but the farther the regulator pins are apart the worst timekeeping will be with amplitude. Which is why the regulator pin spacing is critical if you want to have proper timekeeping.

timing machines are also interesting in that they tend to average out instantaneous things. If you're watching the graphical display in pay attention to the amplitude oftentimes you'll see it fluctuate up and down but you may or may not see that effect on the timekeeping.

But what about if you have access to a different kind of a timing machine like it work something dreadfully expensive?

these examples were just convenient the fine I think somewhere I may have a much worse case example where things were much more dramatic but still this will make a point.

Vintage Elgin 17 size who knows when it was last serviced. Timed and six positions overall I think it looks quite good considering the age of the quality this watch. But notice as the amplitude drops even dial up and down there is a pivot issue and you can see the amplitude drops the watch slows down a little. Going into the crown positions with amplitude crashes we can very clearly see timekeeping is not happy. I suspect if I close the regulator pins a lot of this would go away.

Then on the time plot feature we can see two separate wheel issues and its effect on timekeeping.  the longer time interval is typically the center wheel pinion meshing with the mainspring barrel and the other is a faster moving  wheel pinion combination. It's a very clearly you can see power fluctuations in amplitude. You can also see timekeeping issues but realistically still really good with considering these are only looking at a plus and -15/2 for that amount of amplitude fluctuation.

What if we don't have regulator pins? Like a Rolex watch it too has a wheel issue or several issues perhaps. But notice the overall timekeeping even the effect of amplitude on timekeeping because it's scaled differently of the Elgin it is really really tight but still you see there is an effect of amplitude timekeeping issues.

Somewhere around here I know I have more files I do know I have at least one watch as much much more dramatic. But still you can see the effect of amplitude versus timekeeping with and without regulator pins.

[Neverenoughwatches]

36 minutes ago, JohnR725 said:

watches are interesting in that they will average out their imperfections over time. then things like poising errors they get averaged out on wristwatches because you're moving your arm around if you stayed in one position then poising errors be more of an issue.

one of the biggest influences of amplitude versus timekeeping is the regulator pins. The example picture I have shows what happens if they hairspring isn't centered versus amplitude. then I don't have an example of it but the farther the regulator pins are apart the worst timekeeping will be with amplitude. Which is why the regulator pin spacing is critical if you want to have proper timekeeping.

timing machines are also interesting in that they tend to average out instantaneous things. If you're watching the graphical display in pay attention to the amplitude oftentimes you'll see it fluctuate up and down but you may or may not see that effect on the timekeeping.

But what about if you have access to a different kind of a timing machine like it work something dreadfully expensive?

these examples were just convenient the fine I think somewhere I may have a much worse case example where things were much more dramatic but still this will make a point.

Vintage Elgin 17 size who knows when it was last serviced. Timed and six positions overall I think it looks quite good considering the age of the quality this watch. But notice as the amplitude drops even dial up and down there is a pivot issue and you can see the amplitude drops the watch slows down a little. Going into the crown positions with amplitude crashes we can very clearly see timekeeping is not happy. I suspect if I close the regulator pins a lot of this would go away.

Then on the time plot feature we can see two separate wheel issues and its effect on timekeeping.  the longer time interval is typically the center wheel pinion meshing with the mainspring barrel and the other is a faster moving  wheel pinion combination. It's a very clearly you can see power fluctuations in amplitude. You can also see timekeeping issues but realistically still really good with considering these are only looking at a plus and -15/2 for that amount of amplitude fluctuation.

What if we don't have regulator pins? Like a Rolex watch it too has a wheel issue or several issues perhaps. But notice the overall timekeeping even the effect of amplitude on timekeeping because it's scaled differently of the Elgin it is really really tight but still you see there is an effect of amplitude timekeeping issues.

Somewhere around here I know I have more files I do know I have at least one watch as much much more dramatic. But still you can see the effect of amplitude versus timekeeping with and without regulator pins.

Hi John. I hope you are well. I have a question, something missing regarding my knowledge on regulator pins. Everything i have read upto now states that the hairspring should fit between the regulator pins without touching, but the pins should be close, having little gap between them.  Is this always or just when the movement is at rest ? Is this statement incorrect ? If this statement is correct then why does the pin spacing matter if the hairspring should not touch the pins. When i have finished servicing a movement and it is running the hairspring beats between the pins and touches one pin then the other.

8 hours ago, Gramham said:

That's not my focus

Not meaning to sound rude, but i thought our focus was to fix watches here. This debate seems to have gone way beyond my focus, i think i will quietly and diplomatically reverse my amplitude away from the discussion . Peace out

10 hours ago, Gramham said:

Hello @dadisticand @Neverenoughwatches,

Thanks for your thoughts.  I'm perfectly open to the idea of having used the wrong terminology to describe the phenomena of a time piece getting pushed out of its accuracy envelope by having high/zero/negative g-forces applied to it.  But - what is the correct term for that phenomena then?

As a thought experiment, let's constrain the definition of isochonism to be strictly that which is provided by Google:

Another way of stating this is:

"Isochronism is the temporal regularity of an oscillator despite any changes in amplitude"

Or, to quote @Neverenoughwatches:

"[the] period between the ticks remains the same or as near as, regardless of the force applied to the balance wheel, or its amplitude".

Here's my "hot take".  What force(s) are you talking about, exactly?  Are we focused on the same ones? 

Let's explore further.  Consider that we are presented with the following Paradox or Mystery (my absolute favorite thing in the world!):

We are given an accurate timepiece which, when left at rest with an adequately energized Power System and a properly functioning Transmission System is considered to be suitably accurate. But the timepiece becomes unsuitably accurate when it is vigorously agitated. 

To my mind, the only place where that could possibly happen is in either the Modulation or Regulation System. 

(these are, of course, my own terms and part of a longer work about horology that I am currently developing as I mature in Watchmaking, mostly as an exercise to prod me into "doing my homework" as I find some aspects of Horology far less interesting than others.)

Regardless of terminology, we need to isolate exactly where the undesired accuracy is being introduced.

Here's a peek into some of the content I am developing as my "homework" in an attempt to force myself to cover the more boring (to me) subtopics of Watchmaking.  I have devolved all timepieces into eight sympathetic systems:

1.  Enclosure
2.  Display
3.  Setting
4.  Power In
5.  Power Out
6.  Transmission
7.  Modulation
8.  Regulation

The above is hardly earth-shattering, I know - but it's really a monograph for self-consumption, not necessarily for sharing with others...but why not share?  I already find it to be a very useful tool for triage and troubleshooting because it allows me, a very newbie Watch Repairer, to eliminate huge swaths of the potential problem space by ruling out numerous "Major Systems" (to quote a brother engineer, Kalle, over at ChronoGlide):

Getting back to the example of a wristwatch that's not keeping accurate time when vigorously agitated...which of the above systems can we immediately eliminate?

1.  Enclosure
2.  Display
3.  Setting
4.  Power In
5.  Power Out
6.  Transmission

That leaves the following systems:

7.  Modulation
8.  Regulation

Considering that the purpose of the Regulation System is to adjust the Modulation System so as to bring the overall time piece into better conformity with a more authoritative time source, and that it is typically implemented as a fixed input (or invariant), the only place that variable inaccuracies in timekeeping could possibly be introduced is in the Modulation System, whose role it is to:

"govern the regularity of the release of energy through the system in a predictable, periodic way"

Hey...isn't that the definition of isochronism as given above? 

I look forward to your reaction(s).

This is a very fun discussion.  I love having my ideas challenged because that's the only way they get better.  Thanks!

g.
----

I have to say Graham , which is very unlike me as I'm such a quiet and shy individual never wanting to create waves and rock boats. But I'm really confused by you. You seem to have gone from a middleman sales rep. wanting to set up beginner watch repairer's basic tool  packages to forum members to a lecturing professor. What gives ? I am rather bilwildered.  You must have many fingers in many pies and more hours in the day than anyone i know.

Edited September 18, 2022 by Neverenoughwatches

[dadistic]

9 hours ago, Gramham said:

"What is X if it is not isochronism and/or not accuracy but rather something else?"
 

I use the term stability, and again I think that it is important to be specific, and say with respect to what.

Temperature change is a great illustration of how an oscillators frequency can change with a change in operating condition.  Because metals often expand with increases in temperature, and metals may lose their springiness with increases in temperature,  the  frequency of the beat of your watch will change some amount when the temperature changes. 

Much of the horological art has been about finding materials and designs to compensate for this, and modern materials and designs are much less affected by changes in temperature. Being "adjusted to temperature" is a lot less important than it used to be, and you can see this in the removal of the adjustment features in a modern balance assembly. 

Some folks here may be able to tell that I have been diving back into Hans Jendritzki's book "Watch Adjusting"

I am trying to learn the material in that book as best I can, doesn't mean I'll be able to *apply* it, but I at least want to understand it!

Cheers!

 

[JohnR725]

15 minutes ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

Everything i have read upto now states that the hairspring should fit between the regulator pins without touching, but the pins should be close, having little gap between them.  Is this always or just when the movement is at rest ? Is this statement incorrect ? If this statement is correct then why does the pin spacing matter if the hairspring should not touch the pins. When i have finished servicing a movement and it is running the hairspring beats between the pins and touches one pin then the other.

now a minor confusion flat hairspring versus over coil? I've attached an image over coil as tight as possible but the hairspring still has to slide when you move the regulator. Flat hairspring has to have a little bit of breathing room. This is why people who aren't familiar with over coil hairsprings may not notice that the regulator pin spacing that looks fine for a flat hairspring would be unacceptable for an over coil.

Then the only way you can tell if you're centered is with no power. That will become obvious with some imagination and an example.

For the example let's imagine that we have a watch with the etachron system. I'm assuming that were all familiar with that if not I can attach an image. The reason why for my imaginary example is this would work really perfect for demonstrating the regulator pin spacing without doing any permanent damage of trying to move the regulator pins which don't normally like to be moved dramatically.

normally with this system you would with no power open the regulator pins up verify the hairspring is centered if not rotate the stud until it centered then you would close the pins but.  this is where were not going to close them and you're going to have to use your imagination of how this is all working. Plus need to look at the chart below which was up above and pretend the pins are much much farther apart because it's going to dramatically change things.

okay now with our imaginary watch with the regulator pins really far apart you barely wind the watch the balance wheel barely rotates and regulation will be at the stud in other words the watch will be really slow. Exactly what it shows on the chart below.

Now if you very very slowly wound the watch up amplitude will slowly pick up. As the balance wheels oscillating the hairspring is opening and closing at some point in time much higher amplitude what the chart shows because the pins are much farther apart in this example they hairspring will just start to touch the pins. When that happens the regulation point will move away from the stud it will start to move towards the regulator in other words the watch will start to run faster. Now as the amplitude picks up they hairspring is going to spend more time touching the regulator pins as it does that the regulation point on the hairspring will move closer and closer to the pins. At some point in time it should stabilize like the chart shows below because it's spending so much time touching the pins with very little time in between.

so this possibly confusing example shows that the regulation point with no regulator pins or pins are properly spaced apart other than over coil would be at the stud if they hairspring touches the regulator pins that more it touches them the more closely the regulation point becomes the pins themselves. This depends upon how much contact time they have greater amplitude the watch would run faster if they're far apart. If their space like the chart shows barely any spacing then like the chart shows it's much more defined.

so hopefully this weird example makes sense. As I said on a pocket watch with the over coil hairspring pins too far apart especially if the watch isn't running well then you do see some dramatic timekeeping issues. As the amplitude goes down the timekeeping slows down because you're not touching the pins enough.

 

[dadistic]

Great explanation! Really clear.

I'm going to be a bit devilish and complicate things further

The amount of time that the hairspring will spend contacting one or the other of the pins will also change with position. Just think of the way the hairspring might hang differently depending on the orientation of the balance. 

Thanks!

[Neverenoughwatches]

18 minutes ago, JohnR725 said:

now a minor confusion flat hairspring versus over coil? I've attached an image over coil as tight as possible but the hairspring still has to slide when you move the regulator. Flat hairspring has to have a little bit of breathing room. This is why people who aren't familiar with over coil hairsprings may not notice that the regulator pin spacing that looks fine for a flat hairspring would be unacceptable for an over coil.

Then the only way you can tell if you're centered is with no power. That will become obvious with some imagination and an example.

For the example let's imagine that we have a watch with the etachron system. I'm assuming that were all familiar with that if not I can attach an image. The reason why for my imaginary example is this would work really perfect for demonstrating the regulator pin spacing without doing any permanent damage of trying to move the regulator pins which don't normally like to be moved dramatically.

normally with this system you would with no power open the regulator pins up verify the hairspring is centered if not rotate the stud until it centered then you would close the pins but.  this is where were not going to close them and you're going to have to use your imagination of how this is all working. Plus need to look at the chart below which was up above and pretend the pins are much much farther apart because it's going to dramatically change things.

okay now with our imaginary watch with the regulator pins really far apart you barely wind the watch the balance wheel barely rotates and regulation will be at the stud in other words the watch will be really slow. Exactly what it shows on the chart below.

Now if you very very slowly wound the watch up amplitude will slowly pick up. As the balance wheels oscillating the hairspring is opening and closing at some point in time much higher amplitude what the chart shows because the pins are much farther apart in this example they hairspring will just start to touch the pins. When that happens the regulation point will move away from the stud it will start to move towards the regulator in other words the watch will start to run faster. Now as the amplitude picks up they hairspring is going to spend more time touching the regulator pins as it does that the regulation point on the hairspring will move closer and closer to the pins. At some point in time it should stabilize like the chart shows below because it's spending so much time touching the pins with very little time in between.

so this possibly confusing example shows that the regulation point with no regulator pins or pins are properly spaced apart other than over coil would be at the stud if they hairspring touches the regulator pins that more it touches them the more closely the regulation point becomes the pins themselves. This depends upon how much contact time they have greater amplitude the watch would run faster if they're far apart. If their space like the chart shows barely any spacing then like the chart shows it's much more defined.

so hopefully this weird example makes sense. As I said on a pocket watch with the over coil hairspring pins too far apart especially if the watch isn't running well then you do see some dramatic timekeeping issues. As the amplitude goes down the timekeeping slows down because you're not touching the pins enough.

 

Thank you John. I did need to read through your explanation twice but i understand the effects of the regulator pins now. 

33 minutes ago, dadistic said:

Great explanation! Really clear.

I'm going to be a bit devilish and complicate things further

The amount of time that the hairspring will spend contacting one or the other of the pins will also change with position. Just think of the way the hairspring might hang differently depending on the orientation of the balance. 

Thanks!

Yep dad. That all makes perfect sense thank you. John did explain that really well and your addition was a clear indication as to why the amplitude can drop dramatically in certain vertical positions depending on which way the hs hangs inbetween whatever spacing the pins have, jumping the regulation point from the pins to the stud. I cant actually believe I've overlooked this very simple detail for so long. So to make up for it, i will spend the rest of my evening developing  zero gravity inside a sealed watch case

46 minutes ago, dadistic said:

Great explanation! Really clear.

I'm going to be a bit devilish and complicate things further

The amount of time that the hairspring will spend contacting one or the other of the pins will also change with position. Just think of the way the hairspring might hang differently depending on the orientation of the balance. 

Thanks!

Thanks matey, very much appreciated  

[Neverenoughwatches]

15 hours ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

Not meaning to sound rude, but i thought our focus was to fix watches here. This debate seems to have gone way beyond my focus, i think i will quietly and diplomatically reverse my amplitude away from the discussion . Peace out

On 9/18/2022 at 8:32 AM, Gramham said:

Hi Graham.  I've decided to come back. Not unlike the Terminator. Upon reflection and some sleep i feel my quote and point making here may have been a little clouded through humor and attitude ( i do have rather more of both than the average person ). Everyone opinions ideas and thoughts are valid here, i always say this. Everyone gets something from everyone elses input. Some more than others, as we all sit in our own little niche of knowledge and intelligence. Its pretty clear that you are a very clever guy and like to delve deep into any subject you find of interest. The point I'm making I'm sure you have already worked out. A few hints here and there from a few of us will have helped you along. Your input is just as important as everyone else's so please dont take this the wrong way as it is by no means meant as any insult. I'm not the sort of person that beats about the bush, i never have been, i have absolutely no filter and say things as i see them and exactly as my brain processes them. So if you would be so kind matey can you possibly # dumb it down for some of us thickies # cheers.  No offence meant to any of us thickies lol .

[VWatchie]

@JohnR725

These numbers are from my Weishi 1900 cheap Chinese TM (X and D manually computed but double-checked, and gain setting adjusted to the best of my ability for optimal signal), and it's the watch that I've been talking about that momentarily can increase its average (extrapolated) rate to around 1400 s/d (fully wound + rotor installed) when swung in wide continuous pendulous motions over an extended period of time (+30 minutes or so), like when taking a brisk walk. Note that these rates are extrapolated, that is during the 30 minutes of walking it gains approx. 30 seconds. Once the walking is over the rate returns to the normal numbers as seen in the picture.

Note that the rate increases more when fully or near fully wound (rotor installed) and less when fully wound minus approx. 10 hours (rotor removed), approx. 500 s/d.

Hope you can make something out of it or raise some new questions!

1 hour ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

So if you would be so kind matey can you possibly # dumb it down for some of us thickies # cheers.

That goes for me too. I'm a thickie, not a pro, and not even an engineer. 55 years old (now 60) and in IT my entire adult life I had to begin by trying to figure out how screws and screwdrivers work. It's been quite a journey, to say the least. I really want to try to understand what everyone is trying to say. For example, John's sentences are sometimes a mystery to me but still immensely appreciated. I have the disadvantage of not having English as my native language, so I use Google translate more than you may think.

[Neverenoughwatches]

2 hours ago, VWatchie said:

@JohnR725

These numbers are from my Weishi 1900 cheap Chinese TM (X and D manually computed but double-checked, and gain setting adjusted to the best of my ability for optimal signal), and it's the watch that I've been talking about that momentarily can increase its average (extrapolated) rate to around 1400 s/d (fully wound + rotor installed) when swung in wide continuous pendulous motions over an extended period of time (+30 minutes or so), like when taking a brisk walk. Note that these rates are extrapolated, that is during the 30 minutes of walking it gains approx. 30 seconds. Once the walking is over the rate returns to the normal numbers as seen in the picture.

Note that the rate increases more when fully or near fully wound (rotor installed) and less when fully wound minus approx. 10 hours (rotor removed), approx. 500 s/d.

Hope you can make something out of it or raise some new questions!

That goes for me too. I'm a thickie, not a pro, and not even an engineer. 55 years old (now 60) and in IT my entire adult life I had to begin by trying to figure out how screws and screwdrivers work. It's been quite a journey, to say the least. I really want to try to understand what everyone is trying to say. For example, John's sentences are sometimes a mystery to me but still immensely appreciated. I have the disadvantage of not having English as my native language, so I use Google translate more than you may think.

Haha. No mate you are definitely not a thickie. Looking at the consistency of your timing and amplitude rates here you do amazing work on your servicing and repairing considering you come from a non tool use background.

Edited September 19, 2022 by Neverenoughwatches

[JohnR725]

10 hours ago, VWatchie said:

Weishi 1900 cheap Chinese

I find the wording interesting. Seeing as how I've done side-by-side comparison of the 1000 and the 1900 with my personal witschi watch expert two machine for the most part the Chinese machines do extremely well. So I have no problems people using these I always recommend them to everybody. So they're fine for timing. Although I really do get spoiled with the machine at work

in no particular order of intelligence it be nice to have a picture of your watch on the timing machines I would like to see the graphical display of what it looks like not the necessarily go see anything but I am curious.

you can see that there is a decrease in rates as all the amplitudes go down but not spectacular enough that you should do anything about it. I do find the amplitudes at 24 hours ago below 200 interesting. But unless we have a timing specification sheet for the watch that might be considered acceptable.

then I think you are answering one of the questions I had which is if you didn't wear the watch for 24 hours and then went for walk it doesn't seem to be gaining as much.

10 hours ago, VWatchie said:

John's sentences are sometimes a mystery to me but still immensely appreciated. I have the disadvantage of not having English as my native language, so I use Google translate more than you may think.

interesting about the Google translation.  unfortunately I'm sure that adds to the confusion as translations are not always perfect especially in technical languages. Occasionally line now scour the Internet for other watch related stuff go to foreign-language words to try to find others discussions was looking at something related to timing machines that I don't remember the language but for some reason the word blood was scattered all through my translation and I'm still not sure how that related to a timing machine. So as good as it is it does have its issues but it does allow people to do things that they wouldn't normally be able to do like read other languages.

Or people with dyslexia that can't write at least writing that you've never seen. I get set free with my dictation software but like Google translate it's not perfect. Doesn't make spelling mistakes but doesn't mean it's necessarily worded correctly and then when you add in the translation of things that aren't quite worded correctly it must be quite interesting. then yes I do go back through and try to edit things and fix the wrong words but it's time-consuming at some point time I just say the heck with it and send it.

oh then there's the other problem I don't always give the answers I like people to explore their options small ask questions. What's the fun if I just gave you the answer although I don't actually have the answer to this question we still need more information.

if you wind the watch all the way up until the mainspring should be slipping place it on the timing machine dial up or dial down that's your choice we don't need all the rest of the pendant positions are crown positions because I don't think that's a help you want to see it resting on the end of the pivots maximum amplitude wound up as tight as you can get it what is it show? Maybe even one is on the timing machine manually wind a little bit more can I go into the condition of Rebanking? Then just as a reminder for everyone else there is a video below that explains what that is.

https://youtu.be/Rcqrb3_vin8

if you're standing for the timing machine with your watch on your wrist and you vigorously walk in place and move your arm back and forth and then very quickly put it on the timing machine what he we see? It's a shame we couldn't have a time recording of the watch on your wrist as to what the balance wheels doing.

Then each day when you go for the walk does it gain the same amount of time or is different?

 

 

 

 

[VWatchie]

Thanks for your post John! I've only read part of it as I'm off to bed with a pretty high fever . Anyway, I hope I'll feel better tomorrow and post pictures of the graphical display. I have the actual pictures of the numbers I gave you in my previous post.

Edited September 19, 2022 by VWatchie

[Neverenoughwatches]

16 minutes ago, VWatchie said:

Thanks for your post John! I've only read part of it as I'm off to bed with a pretty high fever . Anyway, I hope I'll feel better tomorrow and post pictures of the graphical display. I have the actual pictures of the numbers I gave you in my previous post.

Hope you are ok Watchie. Drink plenty of water to stop you dehydrating, also electrolytes that you will lose through sweating. Sounds unpleasant and it isn't nice tasting but even if its just a tad of pink himalayan salt in your water is better than nothing. And keep nice and warm. Sweat that little bugger out. 

[VWatchie]

John, here are the graphical displays of those numbers I published yesterday:

The Weishi 1900 has two graphical display modes, A and B. For the "Fully wound minus 15 min" pictures I used mode A, and for the "Fully wound minus 24h" pictures I used mode B (longer period). Also, I haven't reduced the resolution of these pictures in case you want to get up close.

Perhaps I should mention that the power reserve for the Vostok 2415/16/31 is specified as "no less than 31 hours". Usually, I get out about 37 hours.

 

 

Edited September 20, 2022 by VWatchie

[Nucejoe]

 Good to see your fever has gone down enough to even continue with your discussion here.

  In my neck of the woods medical care is almost free, going to a doctor, just to be sure is available to all. 

Also a question,   I don't see the advantage of extrapolatiing the rushed rate to 24 hrs. though I  guess because daily rate is a bench mark.

Regds