Striking mechanism fault diagnosis and rectification

[silverman166]

I have a mantle clock of unknown make, apart from the 'Made in Germany' stamped on the backplate with a logo and the letters P K.
The clock itself works fine, but the striking mechanism never has in my 20 year ownership (bought second hand, possibly 1920's or later).

I'm just starting in clocks and would like if at all possible to restore the striking mechanism to working order. I'm slowly learning how the mechanism works, but am puzzled by the positioning of the tail on the rack, in that it is not in the same plane as the snail with which I understand it is meant to come into contact. It is also of a two piece construction with a flat spring along the arm towards the pin, which I assume is meant to contact the snail cam.

Hopefully the accompanying photos will demonstrate the issue, and I would be grateful for any comments, and if the manufacturer can be identified, that would be of much interest.

Thanks.

Peter

 

[Tbucket]

I have a mantle clock of unknown make, apart from the 'Made in Germany' stamped on the backplate with a logo and the letters P K.
The clock itself works fine, but the striking mechanism never has in my 20 year ownership (bought second hand, possibly 1920's or later).

I'm just starting in clocks and would like if at all possible to restore the striking mechanism to working order. I'm slowly learning how the mechanism works, but am puzzled by the positioning of the tail on the rack, in that it is not in the same plane as the snail with which I understand it is meant to come into contact. It is also of a two piece construction with a flat spring along the arm towards the pin, which I assume is meant to contact the snail cam.

Hopefully the accompanying photos will demonstrate the issue, and I would be grateful for any comments, and if the manufacturer can be identified, that would be of much interest.

Thanks.

Peter

View attachment 734457 View attachment 734458 View attachment 734459 View attachment 734460 View attachment 734461 View attachment 734462

That trademark is for a Kienzle movement. The arm with the pin sticking out is suppose to fall down on the snail to set the drop distance for the rack. It looks like someone didn't want to hear the strike anymore. Not sure what's going on with the additional arm that is pushing/bending the pin arm away from the snail. I'm sure someone on here will know the correct setup for that this.

 

[J. A. Olson]

The sprung pin is supposed to go through the rack tail. The spring and pin pushes outward if the clock is left to run 'silent' after letting the strike train wind down, letting the pin push out and safely tracing along the snail so the clock can run without the strike functioning. It is a very common setup on German movements but some movements seem to do this more effectively than others.

You can even see the scoring on the snail where the rack's sprung tail traced along at some point.

The rack tail spring is held on with the E clip which appears to be loose in your photos.
Do notice the strike train barrel's cap is out of place and will require attention. The entire strike train spring may be gone.

 

[shutterbug]

Jason makes good observations about both problems. You'll have to disassemble the movement to secure the barrel cap, so you can deal with the rack while it's apart. You might as well do a complete repair while you're at it. You can learn how to install bushings at the same time.

 

[silverman166]

That trademark is for a Kienzle movement. The arm with the pin sticking out is suppose to fall down on the snail to set the drop distance for the rack. It looks like someone didn't want to hear the strike anymore. Not sure what's going on with the additional arm that is pushing/bending the pin arm away from the snail. I'm sure someone on here will know the correct setup for that this.

View attachment 734463

Thanks for your comments, and I'm pleased to at least know the manufacturer.
I had another look at the tail, and thinking I've not a great deal to lose, I straightened the free end of the arm, which resulted in the pin, mounted on the flat spring, being pushed through the hole in the inner arm, enabling it to contact the snail cam when called upon to do so. The arm and spring are now flat against each other. Whether that is correct or not I'm not sure, but it seems reasonable enough.

 

[shutterbug]

The barrel cap loose like that will allow the main wheel to tilt. I don't think it will run that way, and it could ruin some gear teeth.

 

[silverman166]

Thanks for your comments, J.A. Olson.
Before I saw your post I had straightened the free end of the tail as outlined in my reply to TBucket, but from what you say it seems that is incorrect.
Not having seen the strike in action, what puzzles me is what actually triggers the spring to reposition the pin in the tail arm hole, and conversely what pulls it out again? I can see no mechanism which would enable this.
I too thought that the e clip was loose, but on closer examination it is as far as it can go, as it comes up against a shoulder on the shaft.
I was aware of the strike train barrel problem, intending to fix this once I feel confident that the strike mechanism components are all in place.
I also notice that at some stage the lifting arm (?) has been fastened in the upper position with a piece of wire (now broken) through its central hole (see 3rd picture).
I presume this was to prevent striking, but looking in that area raises two other questions in my mind - a) what is the hole in the lifting arm through which the wire is placed actually for (something for another clock perhaps), or is something missing? and b) what is the function of the long pin projecting from the top of the backplate just above the lifting arm to the right of said hole? It's not a stop for the lifting arm as the rack hook stop prevents further upward movement of the lifting arm, with the arm about 1/8" below the long pin.

 

[silverman166]

The barrel cap loose like that will allow the main wheel to tilt. I don't think it will run that way, and it could ruin some gear teeth.

Thanks for all your comments - Hopefully no damage has been done by the loose barrel cap, but the striker has never been used whilst I've had the clock. That's not to say it didn't happen before, of course! I'll know once I've dismantled the clock.
I don't think I'll have equipment for re-bushing, should it be required. I'll look on the website to see what's involved

 

[new2clocks]

That trademark is for a Kienzle movement. The arm with the pin sticking out is suppose to fall down on the snail to set the drop distance for the rack. It looks like someone didn't want to hear the strike anymore. Not sure what's going on with the additional arm that is pushing/bending the pin arm away from the snail. I'm sure someone on here will know the correct setup for that this.

View attachment 734463

The trademark on the OP's clock is that of Kienzle as you have stated, but for the sake of clarity, the Kienzle trademark that you provided from mikrolisk is not the same trademark as the OP's clock.

The OP's trademark does not have the word 'Kienzle' above the 'stubby winged wheels' logo. The OP's trademark was registered in 1921, two years earlier than the trademark cited from mikrolisk.

Here is the registration of the OP's trademark:

Regards.

 

[silverman166]

Thanks, new2clocks, that's really interesting. I wonder how long they had used that logo before actually registering it, and also how long it was before stock with that logo ran out after it was superceded in 1923?

Regards.
Peter

 

[new2clocks]

Thanks, new2clocks, that's really interesting. I wonder how long they had used that logo before actually registering it, and also how long it was before stock with that logo ran out after it was superceded in 1923?

Regards.
Peter

Use of the trademark prior to registration is unknown. But your trademark is the third of the 'winged wheel' trademarks from Kienzle.

To clarify the Kienzle 'winged wheel' trademarks:

Registered in 1890:

Registered in 1910:

Registered in 1921:

Registered in 1923 (According to mikrolisk):

Trademark usage can overlap, and this has been confirmed by others who are compiling data on Kienzle movements. Your trademark was used beyond 1923, for example. What has not been discovered yet is usage by Kienzle of a trademark prior to its registration

Regards.

 

[silverman166]

Thanks for that fascinating information.
Having now looked at the history of Kienzle on this forum, it seems I can perhaps date of my clock manufacture to between 1921 and 1931 when the structure of the company changed?

 

[new2clocks]

Thanks for that fascinating information.
Having now looked at the history of Kienzle on this forum, it seems I can perhaps date of my clock manufacture to between 1921 and 1931 when the structure of the company changed?

Please provide a picture of the complete clock (case, dial, etc.) and a picture of the complete backplate.

Regards.

 

[Tbucket]

The trademark on the OP's clock is that of Kienzle as you have stated, but for the sake of clarity, the Kienzle trademark that you provided from mikrolisk is not the same trademark as the OP's clock.

The OP's trademark does not have the word 'Kienzle' above the 'stubby winged wheels' logo. The OP's trademark was registered in 1921, two years earlier than the trademark cited from mikrolisk.

Here is the registration of the OP's trademark:

View attachment 734504


Regards.

Nice Catch. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[silverman166]

Please provide a picture of the complete clock (case, dial, etc.) and a picture of the complete backplate.

Regards.

Hope these will suffice.

Regards
Peter
PS I am aware of issues with the pendulum mount etc

 

[new2clocks]

Some clarifications:

logo ran out after it was superceded in 1923?

The trademark was not superseded. You can have and use two trademarks at the same time.

One point with the 1923 trademark. I have not been able to confirm a 1923 registration of that trademark. However, the data collection on Kienzle clocks being performed by others has not yet discovered a movement with the 1923 trademark made earlier than 1923.

Hope these will suffice.

One last request. Please provide a clear picture of the gong bracket.

My apologies for not requesting this picture earlier.

Regards.

 

[J. A. Olson]

The gong pedestal can be seen in the second photo, showing an ornate pattern with a little flower on it.
Your case looks to be British made going by its construction, ornamentation, and veneer work which were not used among German factories.
British clock casemaking from the 20th century has little documentation and it may never be clarified who made the case.

Gong ornamentation varied over the years and while not always indicative of any particular production year, the same gong and movement appear in the 1926 Kienzle catalog. These were used in production for more than one year so one can argue that the clock's production span jumps anywhere between 1926 to the mid 1930's. Kienzle movements normally bore a serial number but after 1930 or thereabouts their numbering system was upended and ignored, replacing the number with a two letters 'code' like your movement exhibits, or sometimes a shorter serial out of sequence with earlier products.

 

[silverman166]

Oh wow, that info is amazing - thankyou so much for going to so much trouble, it's really appreciated.

I wonder if I could ask you to comment on the following extract from Post #7 which I made in response to your P#3, and also whether I should have left the tail arm bent as it was originally, please? I don't understand what mechanism would release the flat spring to remove the pin when the strike train has wound down, as you explained in p#3

"I also notice that at some stage the lifting arm (?) has been fastened in the upper position with a piece of wire (now broken) through its central hole (see 3rd picture).
I presume this was to prevent striking, but looking in that area raises two other questions in my mind - a) what is the hole in the lifting arm through which the wire is placed actually for (something for another clock perhaps), or is something missing? and b) what is the function of the long pin projecting from the top of the backplate just above the lifting arm to the right of said hole? It's not a stop for the lifting arm as the rack hook stop prevents further upward movement of the lifting arm, with the arm about 1/8" below the long pin."

Regards

Peter

 

[J. A. Olson]

When the strike train has wound down and the clock reaches somewhere between 12:30 to 1:00, the sprung rack tail will begin to push itself outward so it traces along the snail without stalling the time train. If the sprung tail is left bent as shown in your photos, the rack tail will not pop itself back into line once the strike train is started again.

It is not required to change anything with the rack lifting arm, however it looks like someone modified it in an attempt to silence the strike train through different means. Perhaps the sprung rack tail did not work as it should have, or there was some other reason to try a more permanent solution to stop the striking.

From the 1928 HAC catalog we see a three train movement with the rack tail popped out, tracing along the snail.
Ironically this particular movement would sometimes come with a silent lever which simply holds the rack up when silenced.

Having handled multiple clocks with sprung rack tails, it's worked without any problems.

 

[silverman166]

Many thanks for your clarification.
It looks as though I may just about be ready to have a go at disassembly!

 

[silverman166]

I'm pleased to say that I have now successfully completed a thorough overhaul of the clock, and have got the strike mechanism working, after a lot of head scratching!
The strike barrel cap being loose does not appear to have resulted in any malfunction of the works, at least so far, although three of the barrel teeth showed damage along the top land. There was no damage on the mating gear teeth, and meshing of the gear teeth in that area did not seem to have been affected, but time will tell (pardon the pun!) now it's going.

Once again, it's with heartfelt gratitude that I post this, as without the help of the people on the various forums on this site, my task would have been much more difficult.