Positional rate differences after poising

[Bonzer]

I have been reading an excellent blog about dynamically poising watches at this website and I noticed that it talks about the differences between DD/DU and vertical positions when material is removed or added to balance wheels to poise them. It was saying that as material is removed (which is all I can do on a balance wheel without screws), the DD/DU rate will increase and, depending on whether this position's rate was fast or slow in the first place, would cause the rates of the DD/DU and vertical positions to either align or diverge.

So what does one do to keep rates aligned on a smooth balance wheel (no screws) that can only have material removed to poise it? It would appear that there may be situations where it might be possible to poise it but you end up pushing the horizontal and vertical rates apart so there are large differences.

[praezis]

„but you endup pushing the horizontal and vertical rates apart so thereare large differences.“

No, you don‘t push them apart. You will make hor and vert rates faster equally (about).

Frank

[mikepilk]

That is a great site - where I first learned how to do dynamic poising.

But, I don't see how changing the balance weight can make horizontal and vertical rates diverge ?

Anyone?

[Neverenoughwatches]

31 minutes ago, Bonzer said:

I have been reading an excellent blog about dynamically poising watches at this website and I noticed that it talks about the differences between DD/DU and vertical positions when material is removed or added to balance wheels to poise them. It was saying that as material is removed (which is all I can do on a balance wheel without screws), the DD/DU rate will increase and, depending on whether this position's rate was fast or slow in the first place, would cause the rates of the DD/DU and vertical positions to either align or diverge.

So what does one do to keep rates aligned on a smooth balance wheel (no screws) that can only have material removed to poise it? It would appear that there may be situations where it might be possible to poise it but you end up pushing the horizontal and vertical rates apart so there are large differences.

Would the rates not change proportionally to each other to what they already were before poising ? A slightly bigger difference in rate figures, but not a proportional rate difference.

[JohnR725]

just as a reminder especially if it's a vintage static poising actually works really really well. Because sometimes with dynamic poising if you're not careful you can go in directions you don't really want to go in. Just depends on how good you are looking at all the numbers and figuring out what you are doing. so usually for vintage I find it easier to statically poise and I can still get within about 15 seconds with just that. Which is more than good enough for vintage watch of and of course when your dynamic poising the balance staff has to be absolutely perfect. Otherwise you can end up with issues from a staff that's not quite perfect and never achieved poise at all being confused about the pivots not the balance.

then if your dynamic poising it really helps to have a watch like a watch with the Etachron  system because it allows such a great range of regulation.

 so as others have stated if you remove weight from the balance wheel it runs faster. Faster in all positions everything speeds up. This is where dynamic poising is more to just make things a little more perfect as opposed to drilling a whole bunch of holes through your balance wheel and totally destroying it. I'm not sure of ever seen that by the way but you do have to be careful. Because you can end up with a situation where you cannot regulate out how fast it's going. This is where having screws are nice because once you get all that perfect it's running insanely fast to put some timing washers on. then slow thing back down again C can regulate its.

[Nucejoe]

On 8/31/2022 at 10:17 PM, mikepilk said:

But, I don't see how changing the balance weight can make horizontal and vertical rates diverge ?

I am not sure  if I am relating the right cause to the above effect.

As traveling downward any imbalance weight increases the  speed of the balance and reduces its speed when going uphill so we have a non- linear effect ( of the imbalance weight) in vertical positions, which is why we like  a read out in at least  ( four vertical positions) ,   namely CL, CR, CD & CU . But the effect of the  same imbalance on speed is constant  in horizental positions, so  only one read out  for FU & one for FD would suffice. 

We are inching towards a perfect poise when poising, hardly ever  to reach  an absolute perfection, though as you aproach a good poise  the non- linear effect diminishes. 

 So if we have correctly interpreted the initial read out and stepped  in the right direction , the two rates would change to align but diverge  if we continue  in the wrong direction.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Jon]

On 8/31/2022 at 6:26 PM, Bonzer said:

I have been reading an excellent blog about dynamically poising watches at this website and I noticed that it talks about the differences between DD/DU and vertical positions when material is removed or added to balance wheels to poise them. It was saying that as material is removed (which is all I can do on a balance wheel without screws), the DD/DU rate will increase and, depending on whether this position's rate was fast or slow in the first place, would cause the rates of the DD/DU and vertical positions to either align or diverge.

So what does one do to keep rates aligned on a smooth balance wheel (no screws) that can only have material removed to poise it? It would appear that there may be situations where it might be possible to poise it but you end up pushing the horizontal and vertical rates apart so there are large differences.

You do realise that before you even think about poising, either statically or dynamically, you need to get the end-curve of the hairspring adjusted correctly, so it always sits exactly between the regulator pins with no power on the movement. So, when the regulator index is moved from both sides of extremity the regulator pins never touch the hairspring, if the end-curve isn't sorted then the regulator pins will either push or pull the hairspring depending on the position of the regulator index. If this isn't corrected, then putting the movement in vertical positions may emulate poising problems, which it isn't.

I would be very surprised a smooth balance that has been balanced in the factory needs poising. They tend to be made of Glycudur, if it is a fairly modern movement. I've never had to poise a glycudur balance

[JohnR725]

1 hour ago, Jon said:

You do realise that before you even think about poising, either statically or dynamically,

dynamic poising yes static poising? Static poising as with the balance wheel only no hairspring which means no regulator pins

1 hour ago, Jon said:

I would be very surprised a smooth balance that has been balanced in the factory needs poising. They tend to be made of Glycudur, if it is a fairly modern movement. I've never had to poise a glycudur balance

yes why would you need to poise a factory balance wheel that's already poised? With vintage watches that have gone through lots of hands then you definitely need to check the poise to see how creative past people were but on a modern balance wheel poising? More if you just really obsessed with things. Then of course as you pointed out you do need to make sure that you're not poising to fix other problems.

[Jon]

On 9/1/2022 at 11:47 PM, JohnR725 said:

dynamic poising yes static poising? Static poising as with the balance wheel only no hairspring which means no regulator pins

yes why would you need to poise a factory balance wheel that's already poised? With vintage watches that have gone through lots of hands then you definitely need to check the poise to see how creative past people were but on a modern balance wheel poising? More if you just really obsessed with things. Then of course as you pointed out you do need to make sure that you're not poising to fix other problems.

The point I was making was not to put the cart before the horse and think that either static or dynamic poising will solve a problem when the endcurve is way out. I realise the difference between the two methods, but it's pointless statically poising before the basics are sorted out on the hairspring and regulator pins gap and how the hairspring breathes within that gap

[JohnR725]

4 hours ago, Jon said:

I realise the difference between the two methods, but it's pointless statically poising before the basics are sorted out on the hairspring and regulator pins gap and how the hairspring breathes within that gap

very good that you recognize the difference between both of them.

What were really trying to say here is it's best to figure out what's really going on before doing anything. Obsession with the hairspring like you're doing is fine but it could also be the balance staff if it's worn out has issues. I know people that work on Rolex watches they have the slightest timing difference they replace the balanced. of course were talking about a super precision watch but in this case they replaced more balance staffs for timing issues and anything else.  So you're right it's important to figure out what the problem is before jumping on other solutions.

[Neverenoughwatches]

On 9/1/2022 at 8:41 PM, Nucejoe said:

the two rates would change to align but diverge  if we continue  in the wrong direction.

 

Hi Nucejoe. Are you saying that the vertical rate will align with the horizontal rate ?

[Nucejoe]

11 minutes ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

Hi Nucejoe. Are you saying that the vertical rate will align with the horizontal rate ?

 Imbalance weight  in the wheel has exact same effect on the rate in FU & FD positions ( horizontal positions) and is constant for a given imbalancne weight, however as you add or remove weight you be looking at a new constant، such new constants may or may not converge with variations you create  in vertical positions, as you add/ remove weight .

Thats what I think johnR meams when cautions us to be carful and make sure we know what we are doing. 

Regds

Joe

 

[JohnR725]

5 minutes ago, Nucejoe said:

Thats what I think johnR meams when cautions us to be carful and make sure we know what we are doing. 

what I'm getting at is you have to be careful to understand what the problem you're trying to fix.

suppose you thought you had a poise issue or more typically replacing a balance staff. Then you would check the static poise. If it's an existing balance staff you do want to make sure the pivots are absolute perfect. imperfections on the side of the pivot which is what's touching the poising tool will cause or can cause what looks like a poising issue it's really just a pivot issue. The same as the staff has to be perfectly clean no oil on either the pivots or even the poising tool.

Dynamic poising requires everything to be perfect. you have to get the right amount of power through the gear train you can't be having power issues or un-even power issues. Balance pivots have to be perfect to jewels have to be perfect. Hairspring S3 centered it has to be in the center of the regulator pins. Regulator pin spacing has to be correct for the type of hairspring. Flat hairspring a little bit a spacing very little over a coil as tight as possible but still allow the hairspring the slide. In other words if it's not perfect whatever that imperfection is may show up as a poising problem

Inow

6 hours ago, Jon said:

The point I was making was not to put the cart before the horse and think that either static or dynamic poising will solve a problem when the endcurve is way out. I realise the difference between the two methods, but it's pointless statically poising before the basics are sorted out on the hairspring and regulator pins gap and how the hairspring breathes within that gap

I think this was the same point I was trying to make.  if you're not replacing a balance staff. Dealing with an existing watch you do want to make sure that you don't have some other problem. It's amazing the influence that they hairspring regulator pins can do to timekeeping. 

So basically like anything else in watch repair you need to understand what the problem is you're trying to fix.

 

 

[Neverenoughwatches]

1 hour ago, Nucejoe said:

 Imbalance weight  in the wheel has exact same effect on the rate in FU & FD positions ( horizontal positions) and is constant for a given imbalancne weight, however as you add or remove weight you be looking at a new constant، such new constants may or may not converge with variations you create  in vertical positions, as you add/ remove weight .

Thats what I think johnR meams when cautions us to be carful and make sure we know what we are doing. 

Regds

Joe

 

Thinking about that again Joe .I should have said vertical and horizontal rates COULD align. 

53 minutes ago, JohnR725 said:

what I'm getting at is you have to be careful to understand what the problem you're trying to fix.

suppose you thought you had a poise issue or more typically replacing a balance staff. Then you would check the static poise. If it's an existing balance staff you do want to make sure the pivots are absolute perfect. imperfections on the side of the pivot which is what's touching the poising tool will cause or can cause what looks like a poising issue it's really just a pivot issue. The same as the staff has to be perfectly clean no oil on either the pivots or even the poising tool.

Dynamic poising requires everything to be perfect. you have to get the right amount of power through the gear train you can't be having power issues or un-even power issues. Balance pivots have to be perfect to jewels have to be perfect. Hairspring S3 centered it has to be in the center of the regulator pins. Regulator pin spacing has to be correct for the type of hairspring. Flat hairspring a little bit a spacing very little over a coil as tight as possible but still allow the hairspring the slide. In other words if it's not perfect whatever that imperfection is may show up as a poising problem

Inow

I think this was the same point I was trying to make.  if you're not replacing a balance staff. Dealing with an existing watch you do want to make sure that you don't have some other problem. It's amazing the influence that they hairspring regulator pins can do to timekeeping. 

So basically like anything else in watch repair you need to understand what the problem is you're trying to fix.

 

 

So by static poising this just ensures that the balance wheel is balanced. Dynamic poising more accurately poises the balance but everthing else has to be right for that to happen. 

[Jon]

On 9/7/2022 at 9:14 PM, JohnR725 said:

 

I think this was the same point I was trying to make.  if you're not replacing a balance staff. Dealing with an existing watch you do want to make sure that you don't have some other problem. It's amazing the influence that they hairspring regulator pins can do to timekeeping. 

So basically like anything else in watch repair you need to understand what the problem is you're trying to fix.

 

 

Spot on! Understanding the problem and fixing it accordingly. I know when I started out, I would try to fix the symptom, rather than the cause and with little understanding of the theory of what I was trying to achieve.

[Neverenoughwatches]

21 minutes ago, Jon said:

Spot on! Understandin the problem and fixing it accordingly. I know when I started out, I would try to fix the symptom, rather than the cause and with little understanding of the theory of what I was trying to achieve.

Its a shame that medical practice doesn't use the same principles . # doctor i have a pain here what might it be,  hmm   take this pill it will stop you feeling that pain # .

Edited September 8, 2022 by Neverenoughwatches

[nickelsilver]

The number one thing when doing positional rating is that the watch be in perfect running condition. That means running at good amplitude vert/horizontal, escapement checks out, amplitude at 24h ok. If you have replaced a staff, whether made or bought, it's good to check on the static poising tool. If it's close, leave it. If it's way out, correct a bit. Then, you can look at dynamic poise. You can get a good watch to almost perfect posistional rate like this. A lesser watch, close. The quality of the hairspring* and general proportions play a lot here.

 

A 5x7 ligne watch will never perform like a 13"' watch. The proportions are off. A watch with the lever and escape wheel proportionally oversize to the balance will never perform well. There may be exceptions, but that's what they are, exceptions.

 

I worked on overrun vintage work for a major manufacturer of many years. The largest movements were typically 10 ligne. Smallest, down to LeCoultre 101. A weird thing with the really small stuff, and I and my colleague who is amazing at timing never figured out, is sometimes the dynamic poise theory gets reversed. We knew exactly the amplitude we had, but on something like a LeCoultre 101 or 104 (basically the same watch) you have to reverse the normal procedure. Funny thing, I had another colleague who needed a staff for a 104, I made it for him. He had like 300s vertical delta. He asked me (with Belgian beer as a motivator) to poise it. I STATICALLY poised it, and he was within 20s. A-fing OK for that watch (LeCoultre times them visually, is the minute hand where it needs to be?, haha).

 

But the above is an odd case. If I restaff, I check poise casually statically. If it's close, off we go., I correct with dynamic. You can have cases where a balance is perfectly statically poised, and then you have to remove (or add, if lucky) weight to get it right on. Or you can have a LeCoultre 104 that should be a mofo to get timed within 100s in 6 positions and a simple static poise gets it better than the average Seiko.

 

But bottom line is: before doing precision timing, the watch must be running at the utmost optimum level. Perfect escapement, perfect hairsrpring, nice recoil on the escape wheeel, etc. You might do some tweek and get a poorly running watch to give good results on the wrist (it can happen, a crap running watch that keeps good time), but that's like dialing in a sniper rifle with a bent barrel to hit a target at 100m. It will be a mile off off at distance.

 

*The quality of the hairspring is a surprisingly important thing. I read about Mercer abandoning a hairspring after weeks of timing didn't bring the desired results. A friend of mine who worked at Hamilton toward the end of WW2 told me about a prototyper who put a pin lever escapement in a Hamilton 21 marine chronometer and it rated almost the same as before, and well within the requirements for marine chronometers. Hamilton had their Hamilton Elinvar Extra hairspring material, coupled with their stainless rim Invar arm balance, and it was amazing. He proved it was so good with the pin lever escapement, but gov regs wouldn't allow simpler movements (the model 22 deck watch also performed as well, with lever escapement).

[Neverenoughwatches]

5 hours ago, nickelsilver said:

The number one thing when doing positional rating is that the watch be in perfect running condition. That means running at good amplitude vert/horizontal, escapement checks out, amplitude at 24h ok. If you have replaced a staff, whether made or bought, it's good to check on the static poising tool. If it's close, leave it. If it's way out, correct a bit. Then, you can look at dynamic poise. You can get a good watch to almost perfect posistional rate like this. A lesser watch, close. The quality of the hairspring* and general proportions play a lot here.

 

A 5x7 ligne watch will never perform like a 13"' watch. The proportions are off. A watch with the lever and escape wheel proportionally oversize to the balance will never perform well. There may be exceptions, but that's what they are, exceptions.

 

I worked on overrun vintage work for a major manufacturer of many years. The largest movements were typically 10 ligne. Smallest, down to LeCoultre 101. A weird thing with the really small stuff, and I and my colleague who is amazing at timing never figured out, is sometimes the dynamic poise theory gets reversed. We knew exactly the amplitude we had, but on something like a LeCoultre 101 or 104 (basically the same watch) you have to reverse the normal procedure. Funny thing, I had another colleague who needed a staff for a 104, I made it for him. He had like 300s vertical delta. He asked me (with Belgian beer as a motivator) to poise it. I STATICALLY poised it, and he was within 20s. A-fing OK for that watch (LeCoultre times them visually, is the minute hand where it needs to be?, haha).

 

But the above is an odd case. If I restaff, I check poise casually statically. If it's close, off we go., I correct with dynamic. You can have cases where a balance is perfectly statically poised, and then you have to remove (or add, if lucky) weight to get it right on. Or you can have a LeCoultre 104 that should be a mofo to get timed within 100s in 6 positions and a simple static poise gets it better than the average Seiko.

 

But bottom line is: before doing precision timing, the watch must be running at the utmost optimum level. Perfect escapement, perfect hairsrpring, nice recoil on the escape wheeel, etc. You might do some tweek and get a poorly running watch to give good results on the wrist (it can happen, a crap running watch that keeps good time), but that's like dialing in a sniper rifle with a bent barrel to hit a target at 100m. It will be a mile off off at distance.

 

*The quality of the hairspring is a surprisingly important thing. I read about Mercer abandoning a hairspring after weeks of timing didn't bring the desired results. A friend of mine who worked at Hamilton toward the end of WW2 told me about a prototyper who put a pin lever escapement in a Hamilton 21 marine chronometer and it rated almost the same as before, and well within the requirements for marine chronometers. Hamilton had their Hamilton Elinvar Extra hairspring material, coupled with their stainless rim Invar arm balance, and it was amazing. He proved it was so good with the pin lever escapement, but gov regs wouldn't allow simpler movements (the model 22 deck watch also performed as well, with lever escapement).

So as an enthusiast i know roughly what to expect from different positions and what i would be happy and not happy with . What might be an acceptable baseline positional difference be in an  enthusiast's world without being over critical in your opinion.   S/D and beat error. I understand that the quality of the movement is a huge factor, so something run of the mill.  Thanks