Escapement error vs driving weight

[peterbalch]

your previous post didn't actually say what exactly you had or hadn't made . Or I missed something.

I hadn't described it just made a few allusions. I was embarrassed to write a long description. I can go into far more detail if you really, really want!

> if you want to swing the pendulum with a .. pulse. Then you can do away with the chain drive.

Well as you said before "adding electronics to this clock .. will spoil a nice wooden clock that as said your father made".

I agree. So I think I'm not allowed to alter the innards of the clock but I am allowed to add external things.

(My father got it working and made a bracket for it. He made the weight but I think everything else is original - and 170 years old. He never restored the alarm which I'm told would wake the dead; it looks intact. The gears are brass, the frame is wood - it's just a very typical black forest clock like millions of others - but I like it.)

I want anything I add to be inconspicuous so probably attached to the bracket up under the clock. I could put an electromagnet there. But it's the worst place to put an electromagnet - everyone else puts their electromagnet near the bottom of the pendulum where it has the biggest effect. Plus I want it to run for a year on AA cells.

I've been going round in circles trying to design something and I don't want to bore you with why this or that design won't work. Now I'm excited that maybe I can do it all in the autowinder.

Of course, I could just put a quartz movement in it - but then the NAWCC would put out a contract of my life.

Also placing copper plates at the end of the desired amplitude the magnet will slow down so the beat can be turned to micro seconds but your wood work would have far to greater gear mess resistance to work well . If at all .

How do you mean?

Peter

 

[R. Croswell]

I hadn't described it just made a few allusions. I was embarrassed to write a long description. I can go into far more detail if you really, really want!

> if you want to swing the pendulum with a .. pulse. Then you can do away with the chain drive.

Well as you said before "adding electronics to this clock .. will spoil a nice wooden clock that as said your father made".

I agree. So I think I'm not allowed to alter the innards of the clock but I am allowed to add external things.

(My father got it working and made a bracket for it. He made the weight but I think everything else is original - and 170 years old. He never restored the alarm which I'm told would wake the dead; it looks intact. The gears are brass, the frame is wood - it's just a very typical black forest clock like millions of others - but I like it.)

I want anything I add to be inconspicuous so probably attached to the bracket up under the clock. I could put an electromagnet there. But it's the worst place to put an electromagnet - everyone else puts their electromagnet near the bottom of the pendulum where it has the biggest effect. Plus I want it to run for a year on AA cells.

I've been going round in circles trying to design something and I don't want to bore you with why this or that design won't work. Now I'm excited that maybe I can do it all in the autowinder.

Of course, I could just put a quartz movement in it - but then the NAWCC would put out a contract of my life.



How do you mean?

Peter

I don’t believe that you even told us if this is a one-day, or an eight-day clock or how inconvenient it is for you to wind the clock. I agree, you should not bastardize the clock works by changing or eliminating basic parts. I would encourage you to do basic maintenance on this lovely old clock, regulate as close as you can over a full week, and enjoy it as it was intended to be, and otherwise leave it alone. Take the opportunity to wind it and occasionally correct the time to remember and show respect for the old gentleman who made it. Don’t try to make it do more than it was ever expected to do, or turn it into something it isn’t.

That being said, attempting to build a contraption to self wind an old clock and eliminate the inconsistencies in time keeping and individual beats sounds like an interesting challenge. I encourage you to find another clock with a pull up weight that is not so historically significant and go for it!

A couple of suggestions, if you have your self-winder pull up just a small amount of chain at frequent intervals you will nearly eliminate the effect of the chain weight. But you won’t be able to enjoy watching the weights descend throughout the day/week. If you try to regulate the pendulum rate electronically you will always have the electronics fighting the natural rate of the pendulum, not that it can’t be done. I do not believe there is much that can be done to eliminate small inconsistencies between individual beats without improving the mechanical precision of the entire going train. You will even need to counter balance the hands so their weight doesn’t “push” the clock ahead from 12 to 6, and hold ir back from 6 to 12. Enjoy the ride.

RC

 

[Raymond101]

Peter , you said what did mean when referring to my mentioned placing copper disks at the end of a swinging magnetic impulse pendulum drive.
I'm not going into full detail.
When a pendulum is pulsed from the bottom. Via magnet & coil the pendulum swing can past the desired max distance which can cause damage to the movement. So placing a small copper ring at required amplitude the magnet will stop before passing this but will never touch. It's a kind of invisible cushion with zero resistance on the pendulum..
Example.
You can play with this by simply. drop a magnet though a copper tub .

I would rather you take R Croswell advice
admire it for what it is . Nice peice of History.

 

[peterbalch]

> I don't believe that you even told us if this is a one-day, or an eight-day clock or how inconvenient it is for you to wind the clock.

I'd mentioned in somewhere in a previous post - it's a one day clock. As for winding it? I know myself well enough to know I'd remember for a week at the most. Then after another month, it would go back in its box.

> I encourage you to find another clock with a pull up weight that is not so historically significant

It's really not historically significant. 1.8 million clocks were made in 1870 in the Black Forest and 5.8 million in 1905. That's comparable with Swatch production. I could go round the dozen local antique shops and I bet I'd find another two just like it. I looked on eBay and saw five very similar ones in the first three pages; no doubt there will be another five of them next month and another five the month after.

> If you try to regulate the pendulum rate electronically you will always have the electronics fighting the natural rate of the pendulum,

I've abandoned that idea.

However, I would argue that the "natural rate of the pendulum" is regular. The escapement is interfering with the natural rate (as all escapements do). So adding electronics would restore the pendulum to its "natural rate", not fight it.

> I would encourage you to do basic maintenance

Looking at what people on this forum think of as "maintenance", my guess is that it would include replacing the bushes and cleaning the gears in a solution that would leave them looking like new.

If you worked in a museum, none of those would be acceptable. Even an antique dealer would be unhappy with "looking like new".

I see in this thread

How do you disassemble this clock for cleaning?

Hello, A co-worker's girlfriend owns this Postman's clock that she'd love to have working again. The main problem is it appears the entire case is now a parallelogram, and not the square kind, so the gear shafts are binding. I'd like to take this completely apart to inspect/replace the...

mb.nawcc.org

a member recommends screwing one of the doors to the frame to prevent sagging. And another happily talks about new bushes.

I'm not saying your approach is wrong. It's just a different philosophy. It's a clock. If it doesn't run and keep time it's no longer a clock: it's just an ornament. I agree with that. There is always a tension between "maintenance", "restoration" and "conservation". If it's historically significant then "conservation" takes priority over "maintenance".

I currently own the clock. There were a dozen owners before me and will be a dozen owners after me. My job is to pass it on as un-altered as possible.

Hanging a winder on the chain changes nothing. It can easily be reversed. It's not damaging to the clock. Surely no-one suggests that having a consistent tension on the chain is worse than a tension that varies during the day. Consistent tension may well be better for a clock. A fusee doesn't damage the rest of the movement.

I see there have been many debates here about "maintenance", "restoration" and "conservation". They seem to go round and round - which is appropriate perhaps.

Peter

 

[R. Croswell]

..........it's a one day clock. As for winding it? I know myself well enough to know I'd remember for a week at the most. Then after another month, it would go back in its box.

Someone smarter than I am once said that one does not usually forget to do the things one usually does. I have a one-day American wooden works (c. 1825) in my living room. I rely on it to tell me what time it is. I wind it every might just before turning out the lights to go to bed. I can't remember when it last stopped.

It's really not historically significant. 1.8 million clocks were made in 1870 in the Black Forest and 5.8 million in 1905...... I could go round the dozen local antique shops and I bet I'd find another two just like it.

We will just have to disagree on that. Any clock that has survived from 1870 is significant in its own right, but it doesn't have to be extremely rare to be significant. If that same clock had been owned by President Ulysses S. Grant it would be very significant. But it was owned by someone, and someone else, etc. so maybe it isn't so significant to you. Sometimes when I stand in front of my clock and wind it I wonder who before me stood there doing the same thing. Perhaps a general, perhaps a slave, perhaps someone's little kid. It was found rotting away in a wet basement and I bought it for $35. What I'm trying to say is, it isn't how many were made, but the provenance that goes with each clock that makes it significant, even if it isn't always known.

Looking at what people on this forum think of as "maintenance", my guess is that it would include replacing the bushes and cleaning the gears in a solution that would leave them looking like new. If you worked in a museum, none of those would be acceptable. Even an antique dealer would be unhappy with "looking like new"........... It's a clock. If it doesn't run and keep time it's no longer a clock: it's just an ornament. ........I see there have been many debates here about "maintenance", "restoration" and "conservation". They seem to go round and round - which is appropriate perhaps.

There is a continuum from ",maintenance" to "repair" to "restoration" to "conservation" with no finite division between each classification, and no universal agreement regarding what should be included in each. To me "maintenance" includes cleaning, lubrication, and adjustments but does not include bushings, repairs, or replacing parts. Repair, is as the name implies, fixing a broken clock that requires more than cleaning and oiling to make it go again. Restoration's goal is to return the clock as close as possible to exactly the way it was when it left the factory. That implies that any repairs be invisible or nearly so and nothing being altered, and the clock is restored to running condition whether the owner chooses to run it or not. Conservation isn't an extreme form of restoration, and indeed may be in conflict with the goals of restoration. Conservation generally requires that the clock not be run or subjected to anything that would cause it to be changed over the years (heat, moisture, UV light, wear from use etc.). Different museums have different standards. One standard is to "conserve" the artifact as it is, even if it does not run, is worn out, or missing pieces. Another standard is to replace any missing parts and paint all the replaced parts and repair work a bright color to make it clear what is or is not original. I have no opinion on this but both options are valid.

As far as cleaning gears (and other parts) in a solution that would leave them looking like new, that is not an issue. There are solutions available that contain ammonia or other ingredients that remove oxidation from brass, and there are numerous other solutions that do not have these chemicals and do not remove oxidation. Which to use is up to you, and if it is someone else's clock, the owner. It has been my experience that most people who bring me a clock to be "cleaned" expect it to be returned looking "clean". There is some concern that ammonia can promote stress crack corrosion, but regardless of how the brass is brightened, unless it is lacquered, the oxidation will return naturally in a few months/years anyway. To each his own.

RC

 

[Raymond101]

Peter . If you have a problem remembering to do things as one progress to older.
Use your smartphone calendar set a time to wind the clock that's convenient. Every day . I have a all my clocks set in my calendar. This would solve your problem.
As for maintenance etc .I have only really very basic tools for clocks. I make everything from what I have at hand. Including brass bushing.
Finished an 1850 brocot that was from fire damage. Took over 2 months straightening cleaning make new hands pins & Pendulum & case etc . Now I wind it every 8 days and the time is spot on from week to week.
It doesn't matter if it was made by a craftsman 160yrs ago it's a feeling of satisfaction and trying to think how these clock were build with also simple tools by hand .or wacked out on an assembly line .
You eather love your hobby life as is .
Or go for a $2 Chinese quartz clock that will run for a year on a battery.
It doesn't matter what material it's made of brass, wood. It's how you want it .
Your clock, your decision.
Your Rabbit Hole .

Best regards Raymond.

 

[peterbalch]

Finished an 1850 brocot that was from fire damage.

Wow. I really envy you having that project. To bring it back from the dead.

Your clock, your decision.

"Your clock". I wish. I'm just its current custodian.

"We are simply passing through history. This... This is history." (Perhaps slightly over the top but true nonetheless.)

All the best, Peter

 

[Raymond101]

Peter. My personal satisfaction is doing something as in repairing a broken clock without buying parts .
Now working on an old 120 yrs old French carriage clock it was totally drenched in wd40. The mainspring barrel had 4 teeth stripped off .this i'v been working on for over 4 months. My method are not copied. I was always taught nothing is impossible.
The point is satisfaction to fix solve and reliving the clocks previous owns & makers. Yes I could have just replaced with new. Zero learning. Doing it without power tools or modern equipment.
Sorry this is sort of off subject. But this whole post as been more about something that your trying to solve with yourself rather than the issue with the clock at hand .
Peter I believe you need to just sit down have a nice coffee and the decide what you really want.
Ps some photos would be good as well .
We haven't yet to see Your clock.

 

[peterbalch]

Ps some photos would be good as well .

I've "attached" some reference pictures I took back in 2010 when I started the autowinder project. (It's been a long project!) I've included a picture of the alarm and even of the dreaded autowinder. (I don't understand attaching vs embedding images on this forum - I hope they come through OK.)

The bracket and weight are 1950s, one of the doors is 1990s, the rest is original.

I'm confused about the alarm. It's fairly similar to other postman's clocks of the time. I don't know what the proper names are for the parts but ...

There is a striker escapement wheel with a pulley on the back. The pulley takes a string, not a chain. The striker shaft is waggled by the escapement wheel turning. The striker shaft is prevented from waggling by a detent arm.

That all works.

There's a spring which is probably meant to push the detent arm away from the escapement wheel. If so, it's currently on the wrong side of the detent arm.

On the back of the hour hand is a wooden drum with a notch in it. The detent arm has a cam follower (I think). The spring probably pushes the cam follower onto the cam (but at the moment it doesn't).

When the alarm time is reached the cam follower falls into the notch on the drum (??). The detent arm is released and releases the escapement wheel. The bell rings.

That's all supposition.

If what I just said is true then the cam follower is in the wrong place. I think it should be _under_ the hour hand drum but at the moment it's vertical. It looks to me like the wire it's made from has been bent to stop the
cam follower interfering with the drum.

What do you think?

I don't particularly want to get it working - I don't need or want an alarm. And I'd be scared to try twisting the wire of the cam follower - it may be very brittle after all these years. I'm just interested and puzzled.

Peter

 

[Raymond101]

Peter nice looking clock .
I have never had the pleasure of working on one of those clocks .
I think you will have to ask our friend Mr .Croswell who probably knows more than I.
That cats whisker spring looks correct to me and is adjusted by rotating the eye at the bottom. As for that sticker arm at the front it look like the end has been snapped off . And missing something.
..
It's funny those old rods some how reminded me of the old coat hangers . We use to use for axels as kids .
.
Ps sorry but I thought the auto winder picture look out of place . As in ugly.

Raymond.

 

[R. Croswell]

Peter nice looking clock .
I have never had the pleasure of working on one of those clocks .
I think you will have to ask our friend Mr .Croswell who probably knows more than I.
That cats whisker spring looks correct to me and is adjusted by rotating the eye at the bottom. As for that sticker arm at the front it look like the end has been snapped off . And missing something.
..
It's funny those old rods some how reminded me of the old coat hangers . We use to use for axels as kids .
.
Ps sorry but I thought the auto winder picture look out of place . As in ugly.

Raymond.

Sorry, I've never had one of these in for repair but with it in hand he should be able to figure out the problem.
The auto winder does look a bit out of place but beauty is in the eye of the beholder. It is otherwise a very nice looking clock.

RC

 

[peterbalch]

As for that sticker arm at the front it look like the end has been snapped off . And missing something.

I thought so at first but I looked at the other wire rods and they all look "broken". Maybe the maker used worn shears to cut it. I've searched the web and there are lots of photos of postman's clocks but none show the details I need.

The test would be to dis-assemble the clock, swing the arm round and see if it fits. Dis-assembly is easy - one pin - but the beam holding the striker detente stays glued in place along with the rest of the alarm - only the going-train comes out. They must have assembled it before gluing it.

Rotating it in Photoshop makes it look like it's intact as a cam-follower.

The numbers on the brass indicator disc would be in about the right place. The top surface of the cam-follower is polished as though it was touching the barrel.

If only real-life was as easy as Photoshop!

> sorry but I thought the auto winder picture look out of place .

If I "distressed" the wood to make it look older, would that help? What if the steel disk was brass?

Fortunately, when I hang it on the wall, the winder will behind a chest of drawers. So visitors won't be overcome at the sight of it.

Peter

 

[Raymond101]

Peter . Looking at that last photo. I think now seeing the missing peice. . Push the striker arm carefully down and let the cats whisker spring flip to the back of the bar . That rod should from what I can see from photos should run along the outer edge of the wheel and drop into the slot .
Which should activate the mouse trap latch . I don't know the correct names of these odd shapes leavers.
But I will say be care full of the spring it's probably blued steel and shouldn't be bent the bottom has an eccentric fixing to rotate it for the correct push. The rod if it's hasn't been bent is probably almost at balance.
This is a very simple mechanism and I'm sure if you play with it and just watch how everything interacts .don't look for complicated the simple solution is always correct.
As for the auto winder put a nice peice of teak Vania on the pulley .
Ps if you can build that auto winder.
The alarm should be a walk in the park.
That bell on the top WOW. May sound like a fire alarm. Rather you than me @ 3am in the morning .
Happy tinkering.
It's beautiful clock .

Raymond.