Jump to content

Trademark help


Stuart2

Recommended Posts

Its a German Peerless  by Mathias Bauerle dating from the 1920's , what do you mean by 3x2. I have a almost identical movement that uses two springs to give a full Westminster chime  and strike on the hour it uses a differential gear similar to Gillett and Johnston patent to split the drive between chime and strike, see this earlier post:

After much reasearch I pinned the manufacturer down to Mathias Bauerle, and obtained a copy of the original patent for the two train full Westminster.

A brief history of the company can be found here, they also made mechanical adding machines sold under the Peerless brand.

https://history-computer.com/mathias-bauerle/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wls1971 said:

Its a German Peerless  by Mathias Bauerle dating from the 1920's , what do you mean by 3x2. I have a almost identical movement that uses two springs to give a full Westminster chime  and strike on the hour it uses a differential gear similar to Gillett and Johnston patent to split the drive between chime and strike, see this earlier post:

After much reasearch I pinned the manufacturer down to Mathias Bauerle, and obtained a copy of the original patent for the two train full Westminster.

A brief history of the company can be found here, they also made mechanical adding machines sold under the Peerless brand.

https://history-computer.com/mathias-bauerle/

Hi wis,

Thanks so much, i call them 3 x 2 as they do 3 functions from 2 springs. Appreciate both the links that you posted. I can't wait to get stuck in its nice to have something different to play with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

Well i finally got round to this movement and apart from that barrel everything else is fine, i am going to need to make a new barrel and cap, there were smashed teeth where someone had hit the barrel with a hammer on the barrel hook and obviously missed. And the cap was soldered because it didn't fit. 

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

    • Maybe it's just a coincidence, but note how the epilame-treated surface is illustrated in @Waggy's post. It looks like the oil is exposed to a binder (epilame!) so that it can't move sideways.
    • The epilame under the oil will also be removed  Unless the oil makes a barrier between the epilame and the escape teeth 😅 I think i need two strong coffees now 🤣
    • If we use the rub-off epilame method of pallet stones (run dry for a few minutes before applying the epilame) where will the oil go/be transported when it is pushed away from the impulse surface by the escape wheel teeth? Onto the epilame-treated sections of the pallet! Once the oil has been applied/transported to the epilame-treated sections of the pallet where will it then go? Nowhere as the oil will remain on the epilame. So, perhaps the run-dry method defeats its intended purpose leaving the pallet impulse surfaces dry!? If, on the other hand, we do not remove the epilame from the pallet stones where the escape wheel teeth come in contact with them I'd expect more oil to remain where we want it and need it. Yes, I agree, that is the question, and my gut feeling tells me that is exactly the case. Epilame was created to have an adhesive trait and the oleophobic property is just a side effect.  
    • Might that be the viscous nature of oil resisting gravity H  ,  we have been comparing water and hydrophobic surfaces which are similar in principle but water is much less viscous than oil. I guess what we trying to discover is if epilame also has an adhesive trait as well as being oleophobic. Plus the oil dropet has very little mass for gravity to work on, like watching tiny water beads that can grip onto vertical glass until they are connected together to increase their mass then run down. Gravity isn't the only factor at play when oil is placed on pallet stones. The oil receives a lot of bashing that may push it out of position ? Thinking about it if the oil stays in position for 10 minutes enough time for the escape wheel to scrape off the epilame , then  a walled in lubrication has been achieved,  the epilame is no longer beneath the oil ( possibly mixed into the oil )
    • But it also makes it seem less susceptible to gravity. If you place a droplet of oil on an epilame-treated surface the droplet of oil will still stay in place even if you then flip the surface from a horizontal to a vertical position. That is, the oil droplet remains anchored, and that's the purpose of epilame. If it was just a matter of creating an oleophobic surface we could probably use other, less expensive, methods!? I don't know @Waggy but my gut feeling tells me you're spot on (pun intended!). I believe the oleophobic property is a side effect of epilame which is designed to keep the oil anchored.
×
×
  • Create New...