Jump to content

Trying to close the mainspring barrel pivot, but the hole simply will not close up


Recommended Posts

I have an old pocket watch, and the sideshake on the arbor is unacceptably large.  The amount of shake is just visible to the naked eye, so I am trying to close it up.  I am using the method prescribed by Kalle Slaap at Chronoglide Watchmaking

So I tried it, with gentle tapping at he does, and it did not make any noticeable change.  I kept having to hit harder and harder, and I'm eventually wailing on the staking punch to try to get it to do anything.  I had to hit so hard that the equipment on my table was rattling, and it was barely making a dent in the movement plate.  In the YouTube video, he closes the hole to the point where it's too small, then broaches it open.  Mine never got close to the point of being too small.

The dial plate took to the staking set better than the movement plate.  If you look in this video that I took, the sideshake on the movement plate is still large enough to be visible.  What methods do you all use to close up holes?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The larger the diameter of your punch the higher the force needed to perform noticable work.  Not knowing what the base material is it's hard to say how much force will be required to displace it.  If things on your bench are jumping up and down, your bench may not be ridgid enough for this type of work.  If your bench is solid enough nothing else should move.  Try putting the staking set directly over the bench leg (it should have better support there) and you may have better results (just don't hit it as hard as you have been until you know that you still need to).

Best of luck.

Shane

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you both for the replies. I remembered that I had one of the hole-closing attachments for my Seitz tool. So this gave me an excuse to finally restore my Seitz press.

I pressed down on the hole with the correct attachment and in a few minutes the hole was closed up a little further than needed, do I broached it open a tad and we're all set!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought the funniest joke in our business was "Never use force. Get a bigger hammer", until @nickelsilvermentioned that there are situations where a bigger hammer really is needed. I can't remember the context right now but thought it might be a good idea in this case!? Anyway, I have never closed an arbor bearing so don't take my word for it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, GregG said:

Thank you both for the replies. I remembered that I had one of the hole-closing attachments for my Seitz tool. So this gave me an excuse to finally restore my Seitz press.

I pressed down on the hole with the correct attachment and in a few minutes the hole was closed up a little further than needed, do I broached it open a tad and we're all set!

That’s great you managed to solve it!
 

Could you take a photo of the hole-closing attachment? I’m curious how a lever jeweling tool could close a hole where a staking tool didn’t.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, mikepilk said:

I hadn't realised until I just looked, my jewelling tool has hole closing bits.

I don't know whether you are supposed to just press the lever, or hammer on the top ?

20221024_134343.thumb.jpg.2c62d49a81721f7d6f9491eb7af18a40.jpg

That’s an interesting “pusher” for hole closing. Do you use a flat faced anvil at the bottom? I’m also curious if just using the lever will generate enough force to deform the brass plate, or do you use the spindle (with hole closing punch inserted) with a hammer like in a staking set.

Edited by ifibrin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, GregG said:

Mike's already beat me to it, but these are the ones I bought.

https://www.cousinsuk.com/product/seitz-jewelling-reducing-jewel-hole-tools?code=J30577

I use it with the regular jewel press, no hammer involved.  The lever will give you a huge mechanical advantage.

What did you use to support the movement from the bottom? A flat faced anvil? Or a normal anvil with hole. Do you think you could take a picture of the set of anvil and hole reducing pusher you used to successfully close the hole?

Edited by ifibrin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, ifibrin said:

What did you use to support the movement from the bottom? A flat faced anvil? Or a normal anvil with hole. Do you think you could take a picture of the set of anvil and hole reducing pusher you used to successfully close the hole?

I didn't have an anvil large enough to support the large plate, so I used the "face plate with 3 clamps" body from the Seitz catalog, page 19 (https://ihc185.infopop.cc/helphand/pdf/seitz.pdf).

I can take a picture when I'm back home later if you'd like, but there's not a whole lot to see. 😛  Just imagine the hole reducer punch with the face plate on the bottom.

Edited by GregG
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ifibrin said:

That’s an interesting “pusher” for hole closing. Do you use a flat faced anvil at the bottom? I’m also curious if just using the lever will generate enough force to deform the brass plate, or do you use the spindle (with hole closing punch inserted) with a hammer like in a staking set.

In the Seitz catalogue it shows them used with a flat anvil at the bottom, and the lever to create the force.

These are designed for slightly loose jewels, so only a very slight movement of metal is required. For an arbor slopping around in a bridge, I will still be using two round punches (top and bottom) in my staking set. And a hammer 🔨 -  it's "hammer-time" (ref Kalle Slaap)!

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/24/2022 at 5:38 PM, mikepilk said:

For an arbor slopping around in a bridge, I will still be using two round punches (top and bottom) in my staking set.

This way you will enlarge the vertical play of the arbor, too. Not something that you really want.

Disregarding that the non-butcher method is to replace the worn hole with a bushing.

Frank

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, praezis said:

This way you will enlarge the vertical play of the arbor, too. Not something that you really want.

Disregarding that the non-butcher method is to replace the worn hole with a bushing.

Frank

If you are careful I don't think this is so. If you only deform a little at the edge of the hole, the 'shoulder' on the top of the arbor is wide enough to press on the flat surface of the bridge.

I closed a hole in a barrel bridge this afternoon, and just put it under the microscope to check that the vertical play is not affected. 

And for the movement I'm working on, the bridge is far too thin to bush - at least for my tools/experience.

Edited by mikepilk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, praezis said:

This way you will enlarge the vertical play of the arbor, too. Not something that you really want.

Disregarding that the non-butcher method is to replace the worn hole with a bushing.

Frank

How would be just closing up the arbor hole from just the top face Frank leaving the underside flat so the endshake remains the same. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/24/2022 at 9:24 PM, GregG said:

I can take a picture when I'm back home later if you'd like, but there's not a whole lot to see. 😛  Just imagine the hole reducer punch with the face plate on the bottom.

Actually, I would be interested in some photos of the faceplate, especially on how to hold pieces (such as a mainplate) where it’s not entirely flat along the entire circumference. How do you keep the hole you are inserting perpendicular to the axis on a faceplate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

How would be just closing up the arbor hole from just the top face Frank leaving the underside flat so the endshake remains the same. 

That's how I did it until I saw Kalle Slaap's video. As @ifibrinpoints out, if the plate isn't flat, it can be difficult to sit it on a flat stump, and get the punch exactly centred.  I had this problem and ended up with the created chamfer not being symmetrical.

Using the two punches makes it much easier to get the plate and punches perpendicular, and the punches centred in the hole.  As @praezis points out, there is a danger of increasing vertical play, but this shouldn't usually be a problem. The pic shows one I just did, with the chamfer arrowed, being much less than the width of the arbor shoulder.

pic1.thumb.jpg.284136b628a24840ec3b9cb598c99b5d.jpg

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also a question of the dome radius. 
A high domed punch will leave a small chamfer but rather push the metal aside. A lower domed one will push the metal more down and close the hole, but produce a wider chamfer. 
A bit dangerous just with those narrow shoulders of barrel arbors, where all support is needed to avoid digging into the brass.

I admitted that I do this, too, to avoid higher cost and prolong the period until a "real" repair will be done. But this punching is just a short term, not lasting repair.

Frank

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, mikepilk said:

That's how I did it until I saw Kalle Slaap's video. As @ifibrinpoints out, if the plate isn't flat, it can be difficult to sit it on a flat stump, and get the punch exactly centred.  I had this problem and ended up with the created chamfer not being symmetrical.

Using the two punches makes it much easier to get the plate and punches perpendicular, and the punches centred in the hole.  As @praezis points out, there is a danger of increasing vertical play, but this shouldn't usually be a problem. The pic shows one I just did, with the chamfer arrowed, being much less than the width of the arbor shoulder.

pic1.thumb.jpg.284136b628a24840ec3b9cb598c99b5d.jpg

Thanks Mike. Good hear someone elses experiences and get overs .

3 hours ago, mikepilk said:

That's how I did it until I saw Kalle Slaap's video. As @ifibrinpoints out, if the plate isn't flat, it can be difficult to sit it on a flat stump, and get the punch exactly centred.  I had this problem and ended up with the created chamfer not being symmetrical.

Using the two punches makes it much easier to get the plate and punches perpendicular, and the punches centred in the hole.  As @praezis points out, there is a danger of increasing vertical play, but this shouldn't usually be a problem. The pic shows one I just did, with the chamfer arrowed, being much less than the width of the arbor shoulder.

pic1.thumb.jpg.284136b628a24840ec3b9cb598c99b5d.jpg

Choosing the right sized punch with a balance of leaving enough of the mainplate untouched but not so small that the new created arbor hole is too thin. Learning to bush a hole woukd be the next step forward. Appreciate that information Mike.

2 hours ago, praezis said:

Also a question of the dome radius. 
A high domed punch will leave a small chamfer but rather push the metal aside. A lower domed one will push the metal more down and close the hole, but produce a wider chamfer. 
A bit dangerous just with those narrow shoulders of barrel arbors, where all support is needed to avoid digging into the brass.

I admitted that I do this, too, to avoid higher cost and prolong the period until a "real" repair will be done. But this punching is just a short term, not lasting repair.

Frank

A fine balance then Frank and a temporary fix. Second stage of wear occuring much faster than the first stage. 

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.

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.



×
×
  • Create New...