Jump to content

Beat Error advise please


Recommended Posts

I’m looking for some guidance please.

I have recently adjusted my Eberhard watch which has a Valjoux 7758 calibre.

The watch was running slow at about a 90SPD. When I put it on the time grapher It was clearly showing slow and also the gap between the two beat error lines was about 6mm (on the screen) and the beat error was reading 2.4. So I decided to adjust the stud as well as the regulator. As I moved the stud the lines became closer but the beat error started to rise. I managed to get the two lines almost on top of each other but the beat error reading was showing 5.8ms. I also regulated the watch and achieved minus 1SPD. I left it at that and have worn the watch now for over two days and the accuracy is good at only losing 4 seconds in that time which I’m happy with. The question I have please, is, can anyone explain why the two lines on the time grapher would get closer but the beat error reading would increase.

Hope someone out there can advise me. I have also uploaded photo of the time grapher screen.

6E4E22A7-061F-4C44-B301-DFFFF6AE04AE.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've not seen this before but my mentor did warn me about this. When the beat error is so big until the display "rolls over" the line, it can sometimes display as a single line.

Try adjusting the stud again to get a small beat error reading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Birdie said:

I’m looking for some guidance please.

I have recently adjusted my Eberhard watch which has a Valjoux 7758 calibre.

The watch was running slow at about a 90SPD. When I put it on the time grapher It was clearly showing slow and also the gap between the two beat error lines was about 6mm (on the screen) and the beat error was reading 2.4. So I decided to adjust the stud as well as the regulator. As I moved the stud the lines became closer but the beat error started to rise. I managed to get the two lines almost on top of each other but the beat error reading was showing 5.8ms. I also regulated the watch and achieved minus 1SPD. I left it at that and have worn the watch now for over two days and the accuracy is good at only losing 4 seconds in that time which I’m happy with. The question I have please, is, can anyone explain why the two lines on the time grapher would get closer but the beat error reading would increase.

Hope someone out there can advise me. I have also uploaded photo of the time grapher screen.

6E4E22A7-061F-4C44-B301-DFFFF6AE04AE.jpeg

I have never seen that before. I would run for a while to see if it settles but I would not be surprised is the timegrapher is the fault.There is an app you can get for your smartphone “watch Tuner” and use it to cross check.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Birdie said:

I did try adjusting the stud the other way to reduce beat error but the line drifted apart and also I could not get the SPD better than about minus 10

That is because the lines are rolled over as explained before. Correct the BE by looking at the numbers, not the lines. Eventually, even with a perfectly acceptable .5ms error, lines will be very close.

Quote

I would not be surprised is the timegrapher is the fault.

Not at all. The rolling of lines has been discussed before

Quote

There is an app you can get for your smartphone “watch Tuner” and use it to cross check.

I wish it was so easy. Phone or desktop apps can't measure accurately as an instrument using a purposely made, amplified microphone.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, jdm said:

That because the lines are rolled over as explained before. Correct  BE looking at the numbers, not the lines. Eventually even with a perfectly acceptable .5ms error they will be very close.

Not at all. The rolling of lines has been discussed before

I wish it was so easy. App and desktop phone can't measure accurately as an instrument with a purposely made, amplified microphone.

Thanks all very much for your advice. I will try to get the reading as close as I can to zero and see if I can regulate to the same accuracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is the movement in the case on the timegrapher?  If so, remove it, you get a cleaner signal.

I have had this before. Remove power from the mainspring, and sight along the pallet (if possible) to see where it is sitting in relation to the impulse jewel and banking pins. With 5.7ms beat error the impulse jewel will be a long way (20-30deg?) from the centreline. Adjust it until it looks fairly central, then put it on the timegrapher  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

as mentioned above we've discussed this before. Then last time I asked the same question I'm going to ask again because it looks like I never got answer last? Would anyone with the Chinese 1900 deliberately adjust the beat error as far as you can and see at what point the graphical display is no longer indicating that. With the much larger graphical display it should be obviously a much bigger number and it may actually not roll over at all there may be enough pixels.

it's why you always have to pay attention to the graphical display has to agree with the numbers and then the watch has to agree with the timing machine. You could also let the power off and physically put the watch in beat or get it reasonably close then see what it is on the machine.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Klassiker said:

If you mean roll-over, it happens with the 1900 too.

I have been lucky then. I have owned the 1900 for approx 8 years and regulated , lots of watches, very badly worn movements that were a mile out of beat, pocket, pin lever and high end watches and never encountered the cross over. Perhaps the software was different in the original units.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, clockboy said:

Perhaps the software was different in the original units.

As John noted, it's the display that makes the difference. More pixels means more space, so lines don't roll over on the 1900 as it happens on the 1000, or not that easily at leaat. 

For a more complete comparison between models check our pinned topic:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, here are the results, and I stand corrected @clockboy, the Weishi 1900 will not roll over, or certainly not at less than the limit reading of 9.9ms. Here are some pics.

 

DSC02728.JPG.86f307a86746fd3da716288f8dff8756.JPG

 

This is the starting point, with very low BE and lines on top of one-another. (Poljot 3133 chronograph)

 

DSC02729.JPG.20ca8e6ca1a70e30fc6067164d3b704c.JPG

Stud moved clockwise. Clear separation of the traces, blue on top. The separation is around 6mm.

 

DSC02736.JPG.d63dc8b61f4b3656d0a987fd39953f45.JPG

Approaching the limit reading here, with BE=9.6ms. The separation of the traces is around 17mm.

 

DSC02737.JPG.c182fed565bb492071279087ecc12039.JPG

This is the same adjustment as in the previous picture, but the yellow trace has "rolled over", but the blue one not yet. The traces are separated by 25mm. (25+17=42, which is the vertical height of the display field).

 

DSC02738.JPG.7cbe3192c7ea5e44da3f27424f845b2e.JPG

Here I have set the beat-error way over 9.9ms (estimate >11.5ms by scaling), but the displayed value is on its upper limit, and the traces are about 21mm apart (50% of the display field). If this is your starting point, you just have to guess which way to move the stud. The balance is so far out of beat that I suspect it is intermittently rebanking.

 

I will wait for the mainspring to wind down, then try to push the stud so far over that we can see real roll-over i.e. the traces converging, although the BE is increasing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Klassiker said:

If this is your starting point, you just have to guess which way to move the stud. 

I'm pretty sure one can tell by the color of the upper line. But I never cared to take a note of which one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you everyone for your input. It is very informative. I haven’t actually tried yet to adjust the beat error closer to the zero reading because the watch is running so accurate at the moment. It has now been five days and the watch has only lost 14 seconds to date. Can I ask another question then please.

If the watch is running so accurately (in my opinion) what is the benefit in trying to get the beat error back to zero on the time grapher. Will it damage anything if left as it is?

Thanks again all for your responses

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Birdie said:

If the watch is running so accurately (in my opinion) what is the benefit in trying to get the beat error back to zero on the time grapher. Will it damage anything if left as it is?

leaving the beat error  where it is will not hurt anything, but the watch will run better  to understand the beat error adjustments I have a link to a video..

https://youtu.be/B5aRlPhF9j0

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/24/2021 at 3:40 PM, Klassiker said:

I will wait for the mainspring to wind down, then try to push the stud so far over that we can see real roll-over i.e. the traces converging, although the BE is increasing.

I tried it, but there was no way to get real roll-over, with the traces converging as the balance is pushed further and further out of beat. With separation above 50% of the display field the traces started to lose linearity, then the balance stopped swinging all together. I never got the separation anywhere near 100% of the display field. The 1900 is roll-over proof!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I think if you want to play Billy big b.ollocks then you have to have something up your sleeve, anyone that knows how to fight, plays dirty. Lets face it a lot of folk that voted for Brexit just rolled uk their sleeves to say up yours EU hoping for good changes. We have idiots for leaders and probably none of them clever enough to clean the shitty stick they were given. I didnt vote, what will be will be.
    • I voted leave too, my reasoning was the the EU is undemocratic, no elected officials. I don't regret it but I  am sad that both sides acted like petulant toddlers.  Shameful.  I'm not on other forums but if I was and left this site, would you shun me? Of course not, we aren't petulant toddlers.  
    • This is a type of tool that may be suitable to remove the bezel - though note that I'm pretty sure the watch should be face down - not face up, as in some of the photos of these tools on amazon & ebay! If you try one one of those, put the movement screws back in first to avoid accidents. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Removal-Professional-Remover-Watchmaker-Diameter/dp/B09XCH4QVN?source=ps-sl-shoppingads-lpcontext&ref_=fplfs&smid=A296NCMMFVXSDN&th=1  
    • Hi, I’m constantly asking my wife to help me with removing the stem in order to complete casing. To expand, this is not a challenge for me when the setting lever is secured by a screw (older calibers). However when the setting lever is attached to a spring loaded setting lever axel, like on more modern calibers, I simply don’t see how to apply enough pressure on the button to get the stem out short of putting the movement face down with the dial and hands attached, which I’m loath to do in order to avoid damaging the dial/hands? what technique should I be using? thanks  
    • Many thanks for your advice (being borne in mind at present) & offer Dell. When I was given the clock the plastic anchor was loose on the arbour (it had split at the 'hole') &, after repairing this, I have been trying to determine whether the spindle (pin) should be perpendicular when the pallet is sitting on a flat surface; or whether, when installed, its L-R extremes (or alternatively its tick & tock points) should lie at equal angles from the vertical when moved with spring absent. I can get the clock to run but in every such configuration the top block has to be turned anti-clockwise (from above) by quite a bit in order to be 'in beat' & it always runs fast (despite the pendulum being set to as slow as possible). This makes me wonder if there is any particular feature of/fault in a torsion spring clock which determines which turn direction (if any) is necessary to get it 'in beat'; & whether there would be a different set of settings that would get it running nearer to time at somewhere around the mid timing/inertia position which would then allow tweaking of the fast/slow setting.
×
×
  • Create New...