The Watch Site banner
61 - 70 of 70 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
614 Posts
Try AutoCAD TrueView. It has a measurement tool which is less than intuitive. The review tools don't show up dimensioning data as you need to manually add that to the drawing and it isn't natively part of the drawing format (stupid I know).

http://www.autodesk.com/products/dwg/viewers#



Thank you Adrian! I've downloaded a free .dxf viewer (SolidWorks eDrawings), but I can't see measurements or dimensionality on the drawing, just what you see on the attached screen shot.

Is there a better program I should try to be able to see the rest of the drawing?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,201 Posts
Discussion Starter · #62 ·
Many thanks Adrian and Noah!

That sounds very interesting - any reply from Dave yet regarding the manufacturability?

On another note - the drawing above is in 2D, right?

Best
Hermann
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
614 Posts
Geday People,

I'm not here really much at all at present as most of my time is currently spent moderating another forum and work.

Just touching base with everyone and sending an update.

I tried to contact Dave last year a few times and had no luck. I'd say the time is right to have another go at that now. As a quick re-hash, Dave is a member here and works for Micrometric who are precision miniature laser cutters in the UK. He produces the Bell-matic and 6309/6139 casing springs.

Now int he long term, Dave is well past due for retirement so he may not be a long term oprion with production.

I supplied a 2D drawing to Hermann as he was going to do some legwork with getting a laser cutting quote.

I've been delaying purchase of another rapid prototyping machine using the DLP process because the Australian dollar has only been worth about the same as a bag full of used SWATCH watches, but that is starting to change now. I expect it to get to a reasonable level within a month or two and purchase of a machine is viable again. I expect I may be able to produce these parts on that machine, but they use feedstock I'm unfamiliar with, so it would be a while before I get a yay or nay on suitability for this project.

So actions for me -

1. Try and contact Dave at Micrometric again
2. Try to source another laser cutting supplier that's closer to me that can do the job
3. Keep an eye on the dollar
4. Perhaps consider a Chinese manufacturer that could stamp the part at a reasonable price?

On another note, I've rebuild some 5645 KS movements recently and they have an all-metal quick set assembly.
 

·
Special Member
Joined
·
1,834 Posts
Good to see you back Adrian. Hopefully Dave will be able to respond and assist. If not there sounds like there are a few other alternatives.

Totally understand your comments on the AUD, but it is looking slightly better recently.

I head from Hermann a few weeks ago and he also was working on some options. It is good to see some more movement on this and hope to see some more updates soon.

On a side note, how did the units from Japan I sent you work out?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,225 Posts
Test Results of Adrian's laser cut (flat) rocker gear

Hello All,
Adrian sent me three prototype laser cut gears last week to test, here are some notes I took when test fitting two:

Gear #1
-Fit as-is (no slotting) on rocker wheel post- very tight fit, need staking set to do evenly and properly. Did not lubricate.
-Tested in danger zone of date change- no slippage, to the point that the post came out of the rocker first, before anything else gave. Therefore assume no safety system if left in this manner.
-Installed tension washer below rocker wheel/gear assembly (so it was concave down, against the base of the rocker plate.

Gear #2
-Slotted with an 8/0 Ultra fine jeweler's saw blade (.16mm thick). Cut inside to out to keep inner surface free of burrs:




-Noticed gear went on to rocker wheel post much easier- could be accomplished without a staking set (though one is still needed to dismantle and re-assemble rocker assembly). No lubrication used yet.
- Installed tension washer same as above. This location of assembly does not interfere with rocker wheel teeth's engagement with setting wheel teeth.
-Rocker gear wings fully engage with date dial teeth, but only 25% to 33% engagement with intermediate day corrector wheel:

-If one puts pressure on opposite edge of interm. day corrector wheel, wings of rocker gear can slip underneath interm. day corrector wheel teeth:



-Quickset functions with watch dial up, but as soon as one turns it 90 degrees or so (i.e. 12 o'clock up)and beyond (towards dial down), intermediate day corrector wheel can come out of engagement with rocker gear wings. Result is that crown is turning but day is not correcting. Could theoretically result in some damage to edges of teeth as they slip into and out of engagement, but did not observe in testing yet.
-Danger zone safety function seems fully operational, under repeated testing both before and after date change. Due to design of plastic day finger and its wide slot on the back side, I do not believe that slippage need ever occur for day change-over period, only date.
-Added some HP1000 to post for rocker gear- slipping functionality unchanged but feel of slippage felt better. Would recommend lubricating this area going forward, heavy oil/light grease should suffice.

Thoughts: These aren't idiot-proof in their current iteration, but they are certainly better than going without, or having to hand-fabricate a replacement. While I would use them in my own watches, I don't know if they meet the bar set for retail sales, I think that is something we all need to be comfortable with before signing off on this version. That said, it is very promising, and if the price is palatable enough, people may not care about the limitations a flat gear imposes on full functionality. The majority of people quickset with the watch below their line of vision, so gravitationally the watch should be oriented such that engagement is enough to carry out day quickset. But if you find some one who likes to do it with the dial perpendicular to the ground, they will have problems with the day quickset falling out of engagement. I think this isn't a bad trade-off for maintaining a good safety slippage, but are we up for trying to get both?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
614 Posts
Thanks for spending the time to look into this.

I found similar results when using the waved washer in the stock position, but found the engagement with the day intermediate wheel was around 75% by moving the washer to the bottom the gear/rocker assembly.

Would you be able to try that and see what result you get?

My proposed change to the flat part is to make it slightly thicker and deleting the waved washer, which will achieve the same thing.

Adrian.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,225 Posts
Thanks for spending the time to look into this.

I found similar results when using the waved washer in the stock position, but found the engagement with the day intermediate wheel was around 75% by moving the washer to the bottom the gear/rocker assembly.

Would you be able to try that and see what result you get?

My proposed change to the flat part is to make it slightly thicker and deleting the waved washer, which will achieve the same thing.

Adrian.
Hi Adrian,
I think you misunderstood my notes- I did indeed install the tension washer as you suggested, at the bottom of the entire stack, between the rocker plate and the rocker wheel. As you can see in the picture below, engagement that I am seeing is not 75% of the intermediate day corrector wheel, in a static, dial up position. This engagement lessens when the watch is moved in such a way that gravity can pull the intermediate corrector wheel upwards away from the rocker gear even further:


For the reasons we discussed earlier in the project, I wouldn't suggest deleting the tension washer. Even if you make the rocker gear thicker, it will always be limited by the upper flange of the central post, which you can see is currently abutting against the top of the rocker gear in my installed example. It is not possible for it to travel any higher:


If you test your installed gears in a 12-up position and a dial-down position, do you not also get a disengagement of the day correction? Is it possible that your central post is not fully seated down into the rocker plate? That is one scenario where I could see you getting more possible engagement with the intermediate day corrector wheel than I am, but which would also be hard to replicate in successive attempts (half-way seating the post), and also is not as sturdy as a fully installed central post. I don't know that this is true in your case, just trying to figure out why we are seeing difference results.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,201 Posts
Discussion Starter · #68 ·
Hi Noah and guys,

thank you for your fantastic work and analysis!

Re (1) [wheel w/o slot]: I would assume the engagement with the IntDayWhl would be similar compared to the wheel with slot, as both are limited by the possible position on the central post?

Also: did you notice (since this is my interpretation of the use of the washer on top) any issues with the complete rocker assembly not going back into idle position after QSing or setting the time (which would indicate that the wheel is experiencing some friction especially from the top of the rocker post)?

From your analysis it seems that making the wheel thicker is probably going to cause more problems than help?

Thanks again for all the great work guys!
Best
Hermann
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,225 Posts
See responses in bold:

Hi Noah and guys,

thank you for your fantastic work and analysis!

Re (1) [wheel w/o slot]: I would assume the engagement with the IntDayWhl would be similar compared to the wheel with slot, as both are limited by the possible position on the central post?
I believe you are correct- you can't get any taller with a flat gear than what the central post's flange or head will allow

Also: did you notice (since this is my interpretation of the use of the washer on top) any issues with the complete rocker assembly not going back into idle position after QSing or setting the time (which would indicate that the wheel is experiencing some friction especially from the top of the rocker post)?
Hmm, maybe you could take another look at this, I'm not sure engagement of the corrector wheel stack is controlled by the stack itself. It seems to be controlled more by the other engaging parts with the rocker base itself. I will insert the names and photos of those parts here in the next day or two.
Edit: When the stem is in winding position (crown all the way in), the Day-date corrector wheel rocking lever #986560 controls the resting position of the rocker itself. See the surfaces here in red, which contact the rocker and prevent it from moving left or right:


When the watch is in time-setting mode (crown all the way out), the second wheel (circled in blue below) of the setting wheel lever complete #803560 is allowed to engage with the pinion of the large driving wheel #220560 (aka offset center wheel, circled in purple):


I remember you reporting this issue awhile ago with a repaired rocker, Hermann, and now that I'm looking closely at the setup, I'm not sure what was causing that for you. The setting wheel lever complete should be forced out of engagement with the gear train by its spring #812560 once the crown is pushed in from time-setting position, so that the rocker gear would not have any effect on the gear train, being thusly uncoupled. Perhaps the repaired rocker gear was actually creating binding of the wheel stack of the rocker itself, which may have been impeding the setting wheel lever complete from returning to its resting position? I guess it doesn't matter too much at this point, because I'm not seeing any issues relating to that with this flat prototype gear.

To say more about the use of the washer on top (or below as Adrian and I have them installed currently), I still believe this is a measure to create enough drag to allow the rocker to "rock" back and forth as the direction of rotation of the second setting wheel above it changes. Notice the setting wheel lever complete (shown in blue below) has two banking surfaces it encounters (shown in red) on the day-date corrector wheel rocking lever:


The green indicates the directions of movement possible of the setting wheel lever complete, and as it follows this path, the rocker base will also follow if there is enough resistance in the wheel to wheel contact between the two parts (setting wheel lever complete and day-date corrector wheel rocker). The tension washer creates this resistance. If it was deleted, there is a chance that the meshing wheels between the two parts will just spin easily together, without actually first "rocking" the rocker one way or the other. I struggle to find analogy for this beyond what I am familiar with in other calibers, particularly in the coupling/decoupling systems of hand-winding and automatic winding, where parts bearing the word "rocker" in their name are frequently used. In earlier versions where some sort of tension spring is not used, there can be issues with engagement, where the last wheel in the chain does not rock over where it needs to, but rather free-wheels in place. The Rolex 3035 is the ultimate expression of this problem to me, as lubrication basically has to fulfill this tension function.
If the rocker wheel (they call it a wig-wag pinion, as it wig-wags back and forth) is not lubricated with the right amount and right weight of grease, you can turn the crown to wind the watch, but the wig-wag pinion won't engage with the ratchet wheel. They corrected for this in the 3135 by creating a wig-wag pinion with a more defined range of motion and with an on-board tension washer, very much like the tension washer we find in the 5606 rocker assembly. By a happy coincidence of errors otherwise (such as very little to no endshake on the rocker's central post wheel stack), you may not miss the tension washer as you'd be getting the drag it usually creates from somewhere else, but I don't think it is something we should chance.


From your analysis it seems that making the wheel thicker is probably going to cause more problems than help?
That is my current opinion, based on my understanding of the rocker design. If you lengthened the central post and then increased the gear height, that would help engagement. But I think it would likely cause clearance issues elsewhere. I'm thinking there is a reason they left the central post the length that it is, and created the corrector gear with stepped teeth.

Thanks again for all the great work guys!
Best
Hermann
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
240 Posts
Hello guys,
I hope that you'll remember me - I've been quiet during a long period ...

For I've successful developed another "friction based" project I've had thought about a complete different solution for the Q/S problem.

What do you think about replacing the corrector wheel
- with a flat round rubber like a gasket, ideally D-shaped
or
- a square rubber or plastic cut part?

Unfortunately I don't have enough older Q/S rocker for more experiments.
All resting parts here by me are only a rocker plate and the setting wheel, no more a washer or a hollow post.
So I fit onto the corrector wheel a gasket with nearly same diameter as the setting wheel and replaced the post with a screw for a first quick test:


... and it is in principle working estate, all is not very good turning freely for there isn't any washer installed. The gasket slips onto the setting wheel for the inner diameter isn't correct and therefor the neccessary 'power' to move the date dial with the date jumper installed, so I've removed it for this principle test.
Have a look at a small video:

What do you think about? Can this be the base for a different and practicable starting point?
Best regards, Peter
 

Attachments

61 - 70 of 70 Posts
Top