Why is this bushing an independent part?

[mbwatch]

Reassembling an AS 1287, which is my first real Swiss movement after several Chinese (clones & domestic originals), Russian, and Timex, I'm encountering a lot more parts. Everything seems fine with it, nothing amiss, but to satisfy curiosity can someone explain why this bushing exists as a separate part from the bridge it sits in? It is not jeweled. It just appears to be a metal bushing for the center wheel.

Is this a separate part just so that it can be replaced when worn, independently of the bridge? Would it have been better or worse for this to just have been another jewel in the bridge? (by the way, that screw is just unbelievably small, wow.)

[Shane]

I believe that I have also seen these jeweled in some movements (with similar parts).  I think I have a number of movements with and without the extra bling.  I would expect, that can be removed to allow the center wheel to be lubricated more efficiently within its own independent jewel.  If you just oil without removing that, I think most of the oil would just run down the center hole and eventually spill out on the dial while still leaving the center wheel's jewel dry.

Or I'm totally wrong.

Shane 

Edited September 10, 2022 by Shane

[JohnR725]

2 hours ago, mbwatch said:

to satisfy curiosity can someone explain why this bushing exists as a separate part from the bridge it sits in? It is not jeweled. It just appears to be a metal bushing for the center wheel.

one of the questions that comes up in watch repair is why did they design the watch this way? Usually this is in reference to the insanity of trying to repair the watch when whoever designed the watch probably hated watchmakers because of the way the watch was designed. basically we end up with a lot of questions of why did they do it this way and the tech sheets will never tell you that.

[mbwatch]

I understand now. The second wheel is beared inside the hole in the bridge directly, then the center wheel shaft passes through it but the second removable bushing is there as the upper bearing surface for the center wheel and it probably reduces the hole to match the interior size of the second wheel. So it likely couldn't be machined into the bridge. Here's the space before it is installed.

8 hours ago, JohnR725 said:

whoever designed the watch probably hated watchmakers because of the way the watch was designed.

I was thinking this is a needlessly negative take, but then I spent an hour reinstalling that piece and it's screw the size of a grain of sand, dropping it repeatedly, fishing it out of the carpet with a magnet. I even managed to shoot it across the bench from within a plastic bag I was using to contain it, and separately to sling shot it with a tiny hair of rodico.

[Gramham]

3 hours ago, mbwatch said:

I understand now. The second wheel is beared inside the hole in the bridge directly, then the center wheel shaft passes through it but the second removable bushing is there as the upper bearing surface for the center wheel and it probably reduces the hole to match the interior size of the second wheel. So it likely couldn't be machined into the bridge. Here's the space before it is installed. 

Hello @mbwatch,

What size screwdriver did you use for that "grain of sand" screw please?

g.

-----

[HectorLooi]

Most plates and bridges are made of brass and wear very easily, so sometimes a harder, more wear resistant material like steel is used for the hole. Sometimes, even the "endstone" is just a steel disk.

[Neverenoughwatches]

15 hours ago, JohnR725 said:

one of the questions that comes up in watch repair is why did they design the watch this way? Usually this is in reference to the insanity of trying to repair the watch when whoever designed the watch probably hated watchmakers because of the way the watch was designed. basically we end up with a lot of questions of why did they do it this way and the tech sheets will never tell you that.

Just as there have been cars that have been badly designed in the past. Watches have their own idiosyncratic design flaws. A design coming to its end that is running out of funds or taking too long, not reaching its deadline may have that # Lets just get it finished approach #. When i used to repair cars as a teenager i saw this all the time in the 80s and read endless magazines that told of specific design flaws of the latest models. We all know of the # dont touch that model as this goes wrong with it all the time #. Without inside manufacturers knowledge we can only guess why a movement was designed a set way, like working through a snagging list at the end, a hack to get over some other issue could create a poor design. 

7 hours ago, mbwatch said:

I understand now. The second wheel is beared inside the hole in the bridge directly, then the center wheel shaft passes through it but the second removable bushing is there as the upper bearing surface for the center wheel and it probably reduces the hole to match the interior size of the second wheel. So it likely couldn't be machined into the bridge. Here's the space before it is installed.

I was thinking this is a needlessly negative take, but then I spent an hour reinstalling that piece and it's screw the size of a grain of sand, dropping it repeatedly, fishing it out of the carpet with a magnet. I even managed to shoot it across the bench from within a plastic bag I was using to contain it, and separately to sling shot it with a tiny hair of rodico.

By the sound of it mb you could make an Olympic event out the antics you are having with that enormous screw

[Shane]

2 hours ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

Watches have their own idiosyncratic design flaws. A design coming to its end that is running out of funds or taking too long, not reaching its deadline

idiosyncratic!  Another two dollar word.

I would have to say that a watch is significantly less complicated than the average automobile.

While I agree, that the most frustrating examples released by the auto industry seem to have (on the surface) resulted from their harried production schedules and deadlines the real blame lies elsewhere.  I feel the basis of the problem exists in their own reluctance to innovate towards safer cars and in a more environmentally sound directions when they had the chance.  Since the 1970s the legal requirements to produce cleaner and safer cars (at times) has required the innovation of new technology.  It is very difficult to accurately schedule a problems solution if you don't already know the problem can even be solved.  One of the compounding factor that I think is relevant here, is that patent law and economics only allow one company to use the very best solution to any problem (there are of course exceptions).  The second factor is the variation between one customer's choice, taste and requirement to the next.  Almost, everything needed to make an accurate, reliable, aesthetically pleasing watch has already been figured out and forgotten several times over but the need to be different still exists.  If every design is (by it's very nature) different, some of them are going to make us scratch our heads and wonder.

I've typed enough on my phone and my finger is sore.

Have a great day.

Shane 

[mbwatch]

8 hours ago, Gramham said:

What size screwdriver did you use for that "grain of sand" screw please?

I used 0.6mm which is the smallest I have. I had to sharpen it very fine, and I found I could get good purchase if I actually slotted the screwdriver with a plastic baggie between.

[Neverenoughwatches]

33 minutes ago, Shane said:

would have to say that a watch is significantly less complicated than the average automobile

Eyup Shane.  It was just an example i was using to illustrate my point of view that I'm sure applies to the design of everything, from skyscrapers to zip fasteners.

40 minutes ago, Shane said:

One of the compounding factor that I think is relevant here, is that patent law and economics only allow one company to use the very best solution to any problem 

If memory serves me The Oris Watch Company was caught up in one such situation.  Which restricted them to using pin pallets for quite a long period of time. As far as i know this restriction pushed them towards innovations with pin pallet watches reaching almost if not chronometer standards at that time.

48 minutes ago, Shane said:

 

I've typed enough on my phone and my finger is sore.

Have a great day

Lol. You too matey. You go have a lay down and rest your finger you've earnt it

[Shane]

8 minutes ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

It was just an example

 I know.  It's just that I have been on the other side of this type of issues.  Saying why don't we just do it like this, it makes total sense and would also be cheaper in the long run only to be told that "we can't because, **** already has a patent on doing it that way".  It's frustrating to be forced to design something that you know could have been better.  I'm sure watches have had their share.

[mbwatch]

By the way, the next time I encounter one of these, I am NOT going to remove it and save myself the frustration. When I took this thing apart initially, I assumed at first glance it was doing something like a cap jewel and had to be lubricated from the underside. It's not at all worth the effort of battling with that eensy little screw (at least not until I develop much better tweezer & screwdriver control and get better at working through a loupe)

10 minutes ago, Shane said:

It's frustrating to be forced to design something that you know could have been better.  I'm sure watches have had their share.

I just learned about an extreme example of this recently, as explained by Stian. Oris got legally boxed into using pin pallet escapements by a 1934 law prohibiting them from adopting technology they were not already using https://youtu.be/gmMOq_CUFiM?t=266

[Neverenoughwatches]

21 minutes ago, mbwatch said:

By the way, the next time I encounter one of these, I am NOT going to remove it and save myself the frustration. When I took this thing apart initially, I assumed at first glance it was doing something like a cap jewel and had to be lubricated from the underside. It's not at all worth the effort of battling with that eensy little screw (at least not until I develop much better tweezer & screwdriver control and get better at working through a loupe)

I just learned about an extreme example of this recently, as explained by Stian. Oris got legally boxed into using pin pallet escapements by a 1934 law prohibiting them from adopting technology they were not already using https://youtu.be/gmMOq_CUFiM?t=266

Thank for the link. I knew there was something lurking in my wierd and wonderful brain about this.

[Shane]

44 minutes ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

zip fasteners

I know cars were just your example and as you say you could have used zip fasteners instead.  I would have been confused but would have tried to speak in relation to them.    I've got nothing.

[Neverenoughwatches]

2 minutes ago, Shane said:

I know cars were just your example and as you say you could have used zip fasteners instead.  I would have been confused but would have tried to speak in relation to them.    I've got nothing.

Haha. Without them everyone can see exactly what you have got.

[Shane]

28 minutes ago, mbwatch said:

It's not at all worth the effort of battling with that eensy little screw (at least not until I develop much better tweezer & screwdriver control and get better at working through a loupe)

I know what you mean.  I've said several times, pull apart cheep quartz watches.  You don't have to be careful and if you lose something you won't sweat it.  It frees you up to get comfortable.

[Neverenoughwatches]

2 minutes ago, Shane said:

I know what you mean.  I've said several times, pull apart cheep quartz watches.  You don't have to be careful and if you lose something you won't sweat it.  It frees you up to get comfortable.

That is exactly how i got my tweezer manipulation under control. I bought from ebay literally a bucket full of quartz movements and spent almost a months worth of evenings stripping them down testing them , badging and bagging them up for parts. The screws can be much smaller than mechanical.  It was the best 40 quid i have spent since i started repairing. I also learned a lot about quartz watches and now have a shed load of parts, a lot of the movements are complete and working. Amazing how well they survived as many were uncased. I still have approx 400 movements to go at when i get chance.

[mikepilk]

13 hours ago, mbwatch said:

I was thinking this is a needlessly negative take, but then I spent an hour reinstalling that piece and it's screw the size of a grain of sand, dropping it repeatedly, fishing it out of the carpet with a magnet. I even managed to shoot it across the bench from within a plastic bag I was using to contain it, and separately to sling shot it with a tiny hair of rodico.

Keep practicing. In a few years you will wonder why you had bother with small screws !

Try laying a finger across where you are trying to install the screw, then press the side of the screwdriver blade against the side of your finger. It will give you more control. 

I work under a microscope, which makes it much easier when dealing with small parts.

Edited September 11, 2022 by mikepilk

[mbwatch]

46 minutes ago, mikepilk said:

Try laying a finger across where you are trying to install the screw, then press the side of the screwdriver blade against the side of your finger. It will give you more control. 

That usually helps but in this case was what led to the rodico slingshot incident . The plate was so tiny that I couldn't keep my finger still enough on it to work the screw without shifting the plate out of place. So I stuck a dab of rodico over it then put my finger on that, and who the hell knows what then led to it stretching onto the screwdriver, grabbing the screw and flinging it off the desk.

[Neverenoughwatches]

8 minutes ago, mbwatch said:

That usually helps but in this case was what led to the rodico slingshot incident . The plate was so tiny that I couldn't keep my finger still enough on it to work the screw without shifting the plate out of place. So I stuck a dab of rodico over it then put my finger on that, and who the hell knows what then led to it stretching onto the screwdriver, grabbing the screw and flinging it off the desk.

Haha. Thats the fun part of watchrepair, you just dont know it yet. 

[JohnR725]

3 hours ago, Shane said:

Saying why don't we just do it like this, it makes total sense and would also be cheaper in the long run only to be told that "we can't because, **** already has a patent on doing it that way".  It's frustrating to be forced to design something that you know could have been better.  I'm sure watches have had their share.

let's think of this another way suppose you invented something innovative would you just give it to the world without taking out a patent on it?

It is rather nice though the patents eventually expire or we will all be screwed.

if you go the link below you can look up patents. it's more fun if you can narrow the category down the horology and just go through the patents. Watch companies are taking out so many each and every year and is watches have been around for very long time it's good that they expired because otherwise it be impossible to make a watch without stepping on somebody's past or current patent.

Oh and while you're here if you desire to have a migraine headache start reading some of the patents they're not designed for easy reading.

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/

16 hours ago, mbwatch said:

I was thinking this is a needlessly negative take, but then I spent an hour reinstalling that piece and it's screw the size of a grain of sand, dropping it repeatedly, fishing it out of the carpet with a magnet. I even managed to shoot it across the bench from within a plastic bag I was using to contain it, and separately to sling shot it with a tiny hair of rodico.

I see everyone is given the same advice practice. But what about your tweezers does that have any importance on what's going on?

I'm sure somewhere in the group we've discussed tweezers so I will not repeated here other than the say that if you have the wrong tweezers specifically how the jaws come together that would be a reason why screws like to fly away.

 

[Shane]

1 hour ago, JohnR725 said:

If you go the link below you can look up patents. it's more fun if you can narrow the category down the horology and just go through the patents. Watch companies are taking out so many each and every year and is watches have been around for very long time it's good that they expired because otherwise it be impossible to make a watch without stepping on somebody's past or current patent.

Oh and while you're here if you desire to have a migraine headache start reading some of the patents they're not designed for easy reading.

I understand and appreciate the concept of what the patent system was intended to be.  The system we now have is intentionally so vague, as you say, "not designed for easy reading", that without "flesh eating lawyers" you'll never know where your idea stands.  Even if you are on firm ground and have a totally innovative solution but just can't afford to defend your idea in patent court it dies on the vine or is stolen from you.  If you happen to work for a company with enough resources to follow through and patent your idea it is issued under the company's name not your's, making the company money and not you.  Yes, I agree the fact that most patents do eventually expire is a good thing.  Unfortunately, most patents if properly maintained, can last far longer then the industrial demand for the products they protect.  Stagnating progress, eliminating competition and unnecessarily elevating prices in their wake.

Solving and ransoming the problems of man are two different things.

1 hour ago, JohnR725 said:

suppose you invented something innovative would you just give it to the world without taking out a patent on it?

Give it to the world?  Many do open their patents.  If I had the answer to make the world a better place, I would.

Flesh eating lawyers: John Hammond.

Shane 

7 hours ago, mbwatch said:

I had to sharpen it very fine, and I found I could get good purchase if I actually slotted the screwdriver with a plastic baggie between.

Are you sharping the blade thin enough to touch the bottom of the slot?  If it is just wide enough not hit the bottom of the slot, you will have much more control as you turn.  The screw will feel like it's an extension of the driver and will not wobble out from under it like it does when the fit is to loose.  The tip will also last longer if it is as thick as possible (while still fitting).  As JohnR725 suggested tool maintenance is very important.

[jdm]

7 hours ago, mbwatch said:

I used 0.6mm which is the smallest I have. I had to sharpen it very fine, and I found I could get good purchase if I actually slotted the screwdriver with a plastic baggie between.

That means you have sharpened it too much. Once you flatten the tip a tiny bit it will not touch the bottom of the slot anymore, wedge in as intended, and grip perfectly. 

[mbwatch]

28 minutes ago, jdm said:

8 hours ago, mbwatch said:

 

That means you have sharpened it too much. Once you flatten the tip a tiny bit it will not touch the bottom of the slot anymore, wedge in as intended, and grip perfectly. 

Oh this is good advice, thanks. Because I never dealt with anything remotely this small before, I have no real instinct for how to prep the tool. But the screw's shaft is so short that even to get it stable in situ before slotting and turning was the most challenging aspect. Anything but a perfect hole in one on the slot at exactly vertical perpendicular sent it off.

[jdm]

3 minutes ago, mbwatch said:

 I have no real instinct for how to prep the tool.

Have a read below

 

3 minutes ago, mbwatch said:

 

But the screw's shaft is so short that even to get it stable in situ before slotting and turning was the most challenging aspect. 

With practice you will be able to slightly touch the screw it with the driver to set it vertical, the the driver will keep it as soon you hint it to the slow. But you need first to sit in the correct position, including forearms, work at the correct height and distance, using the correct eyepiece, and light. Normally beginner do few or none of all of that, then struggle and try to reinvent, most likely result is frustration and/or lost parts.