Jump to content

Omega 30 t2 pc - balance wheel stuck


Khan

Recommended Posts

Hi

I earlier had an issue with a bent hairspring, so I replaced the hair spring from an Omega 200-series, a cal. 268, since Bidfun says these are in the same generation. But when I install the balance, it only turn in one direction. The stone below balance, which moves by pallet fork, seems stuck on one side of the fork during placing, even if I have attempted dozens of times. The balance itself runs freely when laying upside down on the table or when installed without pallet fork. Any help appreciated.

20200810_150628.jpg

20200810_150756.jpg

20200810_150825.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect it is a mile out of beat. I sugest you remove the balance & the pallet folk & re-install the balance & check where the impulse jewel is in relation to the banking pins. It should settle in the middle when it stops oscillating. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Khan said:

 But when I install the balance, it only turn in one direction. The stone below balance, which moves by pallet fork, seems stuck on one side of the fork during placing, even if I have attempted dozens of times.

The simpler explanation is that you're installing with the impulse pin outside of the horns. Depending on the mov't you can actually see if that is the case.
When it happens like that, leave the cock screw lose, and lift the balance so slightly that it can fell within the horns. Assuming there is at least some power it will start beating right away.
Just a passing note, it is said impulse jewel that makes the pallet move, not vice-versa.

Edited by jdm
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, nickelsilver said:

The roller table looks to be out of position, the roller jewel is normally at 90 degrees to the arms. Add to that the hairspring is likely not correctly positioned I agree that you are way out of beat.

Right. But looking at the mov't picture from Ranfft's, the pallet sits inline with the cock screw and the balance. And in the OP picture the impulse jewel is inline with the same said reference points. That should make so that the jewel is in the proper position are when the balance in installed, and the watch should at least run anyway.
 

Omega_269.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, jdm said:

Right. But looking at the mov't picture from Ranfft's, the pallet sits inline with the cock screw and the balance. And in the OP picture the impulse jewel is inline with the same said reference points. That should make so that the jewel is in the proper position are when the balance in installed, and the watch should at least run anyway.
 

Omega_269.jpg

Hmm so OP probably put the new spring fairly close to where the old one was, but the roller is still out of place. When the balance is at rest, with the fork engaged with the roller, fork between the bankings, the balance arms should be perpendicular to a line drawn from escape jewel to balance jewel. They should really realign the roller, then get the hairspring oriented correctly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, jdm said:

Just a passing note, it is said impulse jewel that makes the pallet move, not vice-versa.

Not strictly correct.

It is indeed the impulse jewel that knocks the pallet out of lock, however once the escape wheel tooth is sliding down the impulse face of the pallet stone it is the pallet that is accelerating the impulse jewel. So both pallet and impulse jewel take it in turns to make each other move.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Just now, Marc said:

It is indeed the impulse jewel that knocks the pallet out of lock,

To highlight that sequence of events I wrote "makes the pallet move", meaning "initiates the movement of the pallet". Of course the pallet also transmits significant power to the impulse jewel and certain parameters can be optimized for a nicely "self starting" mov't, but all that I've omitted for the simplicity of discussion.

2 minutes ago, nickelsilver said:

. When the balance is at rest, with the fork engaged with the roller, fork between the bankings, the balance arms should be perpendicular to a line drawn from escape jewel to balance jewel. 

I  have been searching on (digital) old texts about the importance of this, but haven't found anything so far. 
Intuitively it seems to me that with a perfectly poised balance there should be no difference in performances no matter how they sit, but likely there something that escapes me?
Not to say that it would be acceptable for a factory or repairer to assemble in a inconsistent manner, and before considering that three and four spokes balances also exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



 
I  have been searching on (digital) old texts about the importance of this, but haven't found anything so far. 
Intuitively it seems to me that with a perfectly poised balance there should be no difference in performances no matter how they sit, but likely there something that escapes me?
Not to say that it would be acceptable for a factory or repairer to assemble in a inconsistent manner, and before considering that three and four spokes balances also exist.


The standard is with the roller centered with the arms, it the most aesthetically pleasing, also means the arms are not obscuring the fork when setting up the escapement, and makes visually checking the amplitude easy.

As the roller is not poised, it does have an effect on the balance poise. So balances are always poised with the roller in place. For fun, reverse the position of roller and hairspring 180 degrees on a watch with a good rate in the vertical positions. It goes way out.

On 3 arm balances it can really be anywhere. If in doubt after replacing a staff, bet on placing the roller jewel opposite where metal was removed to poise the balance.
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nickelsilver said:

The standard is with the roller centered with the arms, it the most aesthetically pleasing, also means the arms are not obscuring the fork when setting up the escapement, and makes visually checking the amplitude easy.

This is probably exactly how they are setup with these Omegas too.
I use to take a shot when working on watches and by a chance I found one when I changed the balance staff on one of these.
 

Ranchero.thumb.jpg.ab44e4f6b01d813d04055d249efeeba1.jpg

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A huge gratitude to all responses.

First of all, it's now alive! It turned out that the  furthest centre pin at the tip of the pallet fork was slightly bent, so this was replaced as well. My challenge now is that the beat is low, like 16500 bph, which makes it running slow. I hear a slight scratching noise, but dont know where it comes from. The hairspring seems flat enough and is not touching the balance wheel from side view. 

 

20200811_011941.jpg

20200811_011213.jpg

20200811_011924.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hairspring should be centered better, but that won't give you a rate like that. Are you sure the hairspring is in the regulating pins?

 

That's like 600 minutes/day slow; you can try removing a pair of timing screws (screws from opposite sides of the rim) and see what that does.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Khan said:

Yes, slow in all directions. Okay, I can try remove few screws here and there and see what happens. 

 

If you remove screws they need to be in pairs, directly opposite each other, not here and there. Otherwise you might get close to whatever bbh it should be, but will have a positional error in the hundreds of seconds.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Khan said:

Yes, slow in all directions. Okay, I can try remove few screws here and there and see what happens. 

 

Haven't yet found where that scratching noise comes from, couldn't it be whats causing all this?  

Edited by Nucejoe
any pair as long as opposite sides, enhances the rate
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect the issues here are due to mixing up parts from the 2nd series and 3rd series of balances from the 30T2 and 200-series family. 
 

1st: bimetallic cut, blue steel hairspring 

2nd: monometallic, screw rim, two arms

3rd: monometalic, smooth rim, four arms

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Khan said:

Actually, I have seen the watch run normal before dismantling. I had to replace the hairspring because it got a serious bent when turning the regulator, as it was stuck in the regulator pins.

If not broken, sorting out the old hairspring is a lot easier than trying to vibrate a new one, especially that the kink is in the terminal region of the spring. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Khan said:

Hi Rodabod 

Only hairspring is replaced. Everything else is untouched to the watch. Visually, it looks the same as the original hairspring. But I dont know if it makes any difference? 

Where did the hairspring come from? As I explained before, there are different versions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bidfun has not lied, they are in the same generation, that means CGS is the same for both, since it runs slow it will definately vibrate, though your balance complete may look like laurel hardy if you had to cut too much of that hairspring.

Dose your old HS still have a desent coil? Will you show a close up of it. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • See, what has happen is a normal consequece of the reducing the hammer size and changing it's shape by the removing metal from it. But here the hammer is adjustable and just adjustment is needed to correct, and this is what You have done. There is a rule for the adjustment and it is that the hammer must lay firmly on the seconds counter heart and there should be a litle free play in the same time of the minutes counter heart/hammer which alows counter movement of about 0.5 min on the small dial hand (+/- 0.25). Of course, there is no way to make one hammer to delay from the other, as they are one single part. What has changed too is the slope of the hammer head and thus the orientation of the heart has changed, and thus the switching finger position. This led to need of the finger position correction. The rule here is that switching of the minute counter has to start when the seconds counter hand is on '59'. Of course, the seconds hand must be positioned as so the resetting is at '0' exactly. If switching is earlier than 59, there will be no problem, but it will be wrong as reading can be not correct. If the switching starts later, the problems that You described can happen.
    • Thanks, This watch was in a box of old scrape units that a friend gave me. They used to be his late father's who was a watchmaker before the war and then continued later in life. I picked this one out as it looked like it had potential, and I liked the dial, it's been a bit of a learning curve for a beginner but I was determined to get it going. Now I'm on the final lap it feels good. I'm just wondering whether to invest in a decent set of hand placement tools or stick with the cheap Chinese red thing I have, decisions decision 😆
    • An update, for everyone who contributed advice, and for those who come after with a similar problem. Based on the answers received, I decided to work on the face of the hammer first. I used a square degussit stone to guarantee a vertical surface to work against, and ground the face back until it was square across 90% of the depth. I was conscious of the risk of removing too much material.* After I'd got the shape how I wanted it, I polished the surface with lapping film. To cut a long story short, it did the trick and the hammer hasn't slipped off the cam since. Of course, that wasn't the end of my problems. Have a look at this video and tell me what you think is wrong. https://youtu.be/sgAUMIPaw98 The first four attempts show (0 to 34 sec.) the chrono seconds hand jumping forwards, the next two attempts (35 to 47 sec.) seem "normal", then on the seventh attempt (48 to 54 sec.) the seconds hand jumps to 5 sec. and the minute counter jumps to 1. The rest of the video just shows repeats of these three variants. I solved it by rotating the minute counter finger on the chronograph (seconds) runner relative to the cam.  I'd be interested to hear your opinions on that. It seemed to be the right thing to do, but maybe I've introduced another problem I'm not aware of. * What is the correct relationship between the two hammers and cams, by the way? Should both hammers strike the cams exactly at the same time, or is it correct for the minute counter hammer to be a bit behind the seconds hammer? In this picture, I removed the adjusting screw at 1, and the hammers are contacting the cams simultaneously at 3 and 4. I had to turn the screw down tight to achieve this condition after stoning the seconds hammer and replacing the bridge.
    • It was easy enough to pop off. Once I had the cannon pinion hanging on the blades of the stump, I got my #2 tweezers on the gear attached to the staff and levered it down. That way none of the force was on the brass wheel itself.   I reinstalled it and the bridge, and it looks like a small but reasonable amount of end shake. It also spins easily with a blower. It stops quickly, but I think that's due to the large shoulder and about what I'd expect from this wheel.  
    • Oh, right. For some reason I was picturing a monocoque case in my head. Good looking watch!
×
×
  • Create New...