Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
27 minutes ago, jdm said:

Maybe a PhD doesn't, but people of practical experience do. As mentioned, 50 or 60 Ohm is little for any "power application".

Nonsense. 

Posted

Is this the motor?

873304984_LR004.jpg.c59b8883dfca632876e85c1cfc56cab2.jpg

If so, it'll draw 0.5A from a max voltage of 120V.

60ohms isn't enough to alter the speed too much. 800ohm would work but a min of 240ohm would do the job... ensure that the rheostat can handle a minimum of 0.5A.

Posted
2 hours ago, Plato said:

Do you really use the internet to calculate ohm's law?

I was trying to help you verify the following: at mains voltage, 60 ohm is too little to "control"

I see now you have written that yourself, so finally, all is good.

Posted

Controlling the speed of a motor with a rheostat, is crude, but is simple and effective in this application.  The speed of the motor will be determined by at least three three things: 1) the series resistance, 2) AC mains voltage, and 3) the load on the motor (the viscosity of the fluid where the basket is spinning, and the mass of the basket).  For this application, nobody cares about the precision of the speed, but you certainly care that the speed is not too fast at the lowest setting...and you care that you can get the motor running fast enough at least by full travel of the knob (rheostat)...thus my reasoning that 60 ohms was probably too small.

Is 800 ohms too large?  A simple application of ohms law is not going to be much help for at least the reason that the load on the motor will have a significant impact on the speed.  What I have observed is this:

I get what I think is optimal motor speed (with basket immersed in the cleaning solution) when my knob is turned to about half scale.  That would give about 400 ohms in series with the motor at the speed I am comfortable with.  For this reason--my experimental results--I posit that 60 ohms is probably too small.

There is a fourth aspect that determines the speed of the motor (beyond the three listed above).  That is the motor itself!!  It appears (scanning the internet) that these cleaning machines have various motors on them.  Perhaps L&R changed the motor over the years, or some of these machines have been repaired using different motors.  The motor on my machine does not appear to be an original "stock" motor.  Thus a new variable to consider. 

Now to the schematics (where my skills where questioned).

The L&R schematic appears to properly wire the heater in series with the heater switch although the heater switch is drawn as a "push-button" style which it is not.  But I am not gonna get my panties in a wad over that because, hey, it was 1960.  The IEEE probably had not established the standard symbols for schematics by then.  The L&R schematic properly shows a SPDT switch used to control the direction of the motor. The L&R schematic is fine, but there are no values listed for components.

The hand drawn schematic is problematic.  The heater is an 84 ohm resistor in parallel with the pilot light.  The L&R schematic shows the correct way to wire the heater--the hand-drawn schematic does not.  The resistor in my machine is 236 ohms as measured.  In addition, I have a spare resistor that my Dad had purchased for future repairs.  It is labeled 220 ohms and is identical in shape, size, color to the one in my machine.  In the hand-drawn schematic, there is no switch to control the direction, and the notation indicates that the motor used comes from a "milkshake" machine.  Will the hand-drawn schematic work.  Yup...probably so.  My guess is that the "designer" took the rheostat and motor from a milkshake machine...thus the low value of resistance.  But, we cannot really know.

At the end of the day, I stick with my view that 60 ohms is too small and that, depending on the motor, a better value is closer to 800.  This is trivial to verify by @SonnyBurnettwith the expense of a few components.

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, LittleWatchShop said:

My guess is that the "designer" took the rheostat and motor from a milkshake machine...thus the low value of resistance. 

I say this because the viscosity of a milkshake is far greater than that of cleaning solution, so the motor must be more powerful.  A more powerful motor draws more current, so the "stock" rheostat in an L&R machine would have a resistance that was too high.  So, the "designer" of the hand-drawn schematic realized this and swapped the rheostat when he swapped the motors.

Posted
6 minutes ago, LittleWatchShop said:

Now to the schematics (where my skills where questioned).

Sorry, I didn't mean to offend. I felt I was being critised too, the 60ohms was measured by @SonnyBurnett and 50 ohms was on that diagram I found on the nawcc website.

I underestimated the power of the motor - I'm assuming I've found the correct one.

  • Like 1
Posted

Somebody else I think already mentioned this but what about getting rid of the resistor altogether and using some form of solid-state speed control? It doesn't even have to be that complicated I've seen people using light dimmers to control their lathe motors. The same lathe motors that look really similar to the motor on the cleaning machine.

  • Like 1
Posted
28 minutes ago, JohnR725 said:

The same lathe motors that look really similar to the motor on the cleaning machine.

Cleaning machine motor is much less powerful than lathe motor, but I agree that a PWM controller would work just fine...or perhaps even better, and there is plenty of room under the housing to install one--they are not very big.

Posted
4 minutes ago, LittleWatchShop said:

This is triac based rather than pwm, 

I was to say that, we all know that in any good Chinese product description there are two or three nice words that may relate to the item or its purpose, but do not actually describe it.

Posted (edited)
On 11/27/2021 at 2:52 PM, jdm said:

Why. That would be another case of unjustified fears of a danger that scientifically doesn't exist when exposure to the harmful substance non-existent, as when asbestos is firs and solid, and in a minuscole amount. One needs years of continuous exposition to fibers to get in danger of developing lung cancer.

Thanks for all the information I will try to answer everything.  The machine is at work and I'm off for deer season but I can run up to get it for details if needed.

jdm:  I agree I have asbestos siding on my 1922 cape cod house.  As long as it doesn't become fibrous in the air to breathe and you don't lick it, it wont hurt you.  Just have it encapsulated with a special paint and you're good to go.

Edited by SonnyBurnett
Posted (edited)
23 hours ago, HectorLooi said:

Even a PhD won't be able to tell the correct value for the rheostat with the limited information given. 

The value would depend on the internal resistance of the motor used in the machine. I'm sure the motor must have changed over the decades of production.

But 50 ohms does seem a little low.

The motor seems to be original to the machine.  It's an L&R Precision 115V at 75 cycles at 60 watts

 

13 hours ago, Plato said:

Is this the motor?

873304984_LR004.jpg.c59b8883dfca632876e85c1cfc56cab2.jpg

If so, it'll draw 0.5A from a max voltage of 120V.

60ohms isn't enough to alter the speed too much. 800ohm would work but a min of 240ohm would do the job... ensure that the rheostat can handle a minimum of 0.5A.

YES that is the EXACT motor on my machine

Edited by SonnyBurnett
Posted
13 hours ago, Plato said:

Is this the motor?

873304984_LR004.jpg.c59b8883dfca632876e85c1cfc56cab2.jpg

If so, it'll draw 0.5A from a max voltage of 120V.

60ohms isn't enough to alter the speed too much. 800ohm would work but a min of 240ohm would do the job... ensure that the rheostat can handle a minimum of 0.5A.

The one suggested to me by Dave was a , (RWA) A-29418-500 ohm, 50 watt, 0.25 amp. Type R-50. 2-1/4" diameter body, 1-3/8" behind panel depth. 1/4" diameter x 1/2" long round shaft.

As you stated the amperage of the motor is double for what this is rated for, so is there another from surplussales that I can use? 

Posted

I was just thinking about the asbestos issue... I don't think I've ever seen asbestos used in a potentiometer. Asbestos is usually used in heat insulation applications, while a high power wirewound potentiometer might get warm, it shouldn't require asbestos.

Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, SonnyBurnett said:

The one suggested to me by Dave was a , (RWA) A-29418-500 ohm, 50 watt, 0.25 amp. Type R-50. 2-1/4" diameter body, 1-3/8" behind panel depth. 1/4" diameter x 1/2" long round shaft.

As you stated the amperage of the motor is double for what this is rated for, so is there another from surplussales that I can use? 

If those dimensions fit mechanically, buy it and install it.  It will work fine.  The motor current is rated at full speed at some (unknown) load.  You will never run it full speed.  You will be fine.

At lowest setting of R=500.  IR drop at 0.5 amp is 250 volts.  Cannot happen

At middle setting of R=250.  IR drop at 0.5 amp is 125 volts.  Cannot happen

At 80% setting of R=100. IR drop at 0.5 amps is 50 volts.  That leaves 70 volts across the motor.  The motor will not be running at full power at that point.

These are overly simplified calculations, but they satisfy me that you will be fine with that rheostat.

 

edit: and Dave has been around the block a few times, so I would trust his guidance!

Edited by LittleWatchShop
Posted
2 hours ago, LittleWatchShop said:

If those dimensions fit mechanically, buy it and install it.  It will work fine.  The motor current is rated at full speed at some (unknown) load.  You will never run it full speed.  You will be fine.

At lowest setting of R=500.  IR drop at 0.5 amp is 250 volts.  Cannot happen

At middle setting of R=250.  IR drop at 0.5 amp is 125 volts.  Cannot happen

At 80% setting of R=100. IR drop at 0.5 amps is 50 volts.  That leaves 70 volts across the motor.  The motor will not be running at full power at that point.

These are overly simplified calculations, but they satisfy me that you will be fine with that rheostat.

 

edit: and Dave has been around the block a few times, so I would trust his guidance!

I've known Dave a long time.  When I first started into watches he helped me take apart and put back together my first practice pocket watch.

  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, SonnyBurnett said:

I've known Dave a long time.  When I first started into watches he helped me take apart and put back together my first practice pocket watch.

If you proceed with that rheostat, be sure to report back to the forum on your progress!!

Posted
11 hours ago, LittleWatchShop said:

If you proceed with that rheostat, be sure to report back to the forum on your progress!!

I'll get it ordered and get it in as soon as I get back to work.  I'm off for deer season this week.

  • 2 weeks later...

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

    • it would be nice to have the exact model of the watch the or a picture so we can see exactly what you're talking about. this is because the definition of Swiss watch could be a variety of things and it be helpful if we could see exactly the watch your dealing with then in professional watch repair at least some professionals they do pre-cleaned watches. In other words the hands and dial come off and the entire movement assembled goes through a cleaning machine sometimes I think a shorter bath perhaps so everything is nice and clean for disassembly makes it easier to look for problems. Then other professionals don't like pre-cleaning because it basically obliterates the scene of the crime. Especially when dealing with vintage watches where you're looking for metal filings and problems that may visually go away with cleaning. Then usually super sticky lubrication isn't really a problem for disassembly and typically shouldn't be a problem on a pallet fork bridge because there shouldn't be any lubrication on the bridge at all as you typically do not oil the pallet fork pivots.  
    • A few things you should find out before you can mske a decision of what to do. As Richard said, what is the crown and all of the crown components made of . Then also the stem .  The crown looks to have a steel washer that retains a gasket. So be careful with what chemicals you use to dissolve any stem adhesives or the use of heat. You might swell or melt the gasket unless you are prepared to change that also . The steel washer maybe reactive to alum. Something I've just used to dissolve a broken screw from a plate. First drilled out the centre of the screw with a 0.5mm carbide . Dipped only the section that held the broken screw in Rustins rust remover. This is 40 % phosphoric acid. 3 days and the screw remains were completely dissolved, no trace of steel in the brass threads. A black puddle left in the solution.
    • I suppose this will add to the confusion I have a roller jewel assortment. It lists out American pocket watches for Elgin 18 size and even 16 size it's a 50. But not all the various companies used 50-50 does seem to be common one company had a 51 and the smallest is 43. American parts are always interesting? Francis Elgin for mainsprings will tell you the thickness of the spring other companies will not even though the spring for the same number could come in a variety of thicknesses. But if we actually had the model number of your watch we would find it probably makes a reference that the roller jewel came in different dimensions. So overlook the parts book we find that? So it appears to be 18 and 16 size would be the same sort of the arson different catalog numbers and as I said we don't have your Mongol know which Log number were supposed to be using. Variety of materials garnered her sapphire single or double but zero mention about diameters. Then in a section of rollers in this case rollers with jewels we do get this down in the notes section Roller specifications but of course zero reference to the jewel size. I was really hoping the roller jewel assortment would give us sizes it doesn't really. But it does show a picture of how one particular roller jewel gauge is used  
    • Seems to still do it through my mobile data, I use an android phone almost exclusively, but I'll double check it. Thanks mark Strange, I'll try my laptop that utilities edge. I've been on site half hour since I got home, it hasn't done it yet. Thanks John
    • At work, I'm on MS Edge, not through chose, on my phone, chrome, no issues with either. 
×
×
  • Create New...