5 ms·

I am a long-time watch nut, and I loved this write-up - it concisely explained what makes this mechanism unique and was most educational. Fun to see a departur

by lb1lf 9y ago

I am a long-time watch nut, and I loved this write-up - it concisely explained what makes this mechanism unique and was most educational. Fun to see a departure from the norm - until this, the probably largest innovation horology over the past couple of hundred years was George Daniels' coaxial escapement (which basically eliminated friction from the equation, ensuring all transfer of energy in the escapement took place between components tangential to each other, allowing for excellent long-term precision) The plural of anecdote is not data, but my ten year old Omega with coaxial escapement (in a c.2500C) is still accurate to within a second a day without ever having been serviced. That,in my book, is remarkable. (It is due for a service soon; I do not intend to run it into the ground...)

craigsmansion 9y ago
> the probably largest innovation horology over the past couple of hundred years There was this little thing called the quartz revolution though :) Just because it turned out you can make really cheap watches with it doesn't make it less of an innovation. But limiting the field down to mechanical watches, there is also Seiko's springdrive which manages to combine the durability of mechanical watches whilst approaching the accuracy of quartz watches by using a complete new method of escapement. Co-ax movements are surely a worthy innovation, but I wouldn't want to claim it was the most significant horological innovation of the last few centuries.
- lb1lf 9y ago
  Fair point. Spring drive is a very fascinating concept and one could debate for weeks on end in the right (or, rather, wrong) circles whether it or co-ax holds the top spot. (Or whether the spring drive is even a fully mechanical movement or a hybrid!) (And I should have been more precise - I meant in mechanical horology; my apologies) Not that there's anything wrong with quartz (except its inherent inaccuracies; I say this tongue-in-cheek as my interest in all things horological extends to my having a rubidium standard in the man cave - a hand-me-down HP 5065A. Sadly, my wife does not appreciate the beautiful engineering, and suggested a Seiko wall clock would have to do for our everyday time-keeping needs...)
  - SamReidHughes 9y ago
    How can we debate whether the spring drive's fully mechanical or not? It's got a quartz oscillator and an integrated circuit.
    - craigsmansion 9y ago
      Well, for one, the escapement doesn't depend on the quartz crystal for timekeeping, but on magnetic induction. Spring drive would theoretically work without the quartz components. Seeing how they would generate an electrical current because of the principle, they build a tiny generator to drive a circuit that adjusts the escapement, but doesn't run it. Also, Spring Drive depends on a fully mechanical wheel train and barrel spring to function; it could not be made to work with a battery. So what exactly constitutes mechanical and what does quartz here? Is it the wheel train? Does electro-mechanical count as mechanical? Is the mere presence of a quartz crystal in a secondary circuit enough to call it a quartz? I found it easier to see it a as a new different system for timekeeping instead of trying to place it on an arbitrary scale between "fully mechanical" and "quartz."
      - SamReidHughes 9y ago
        > Well, for one, the escapement doesn't depend on the quartz crystal for timekeeping No, it uses the quartz crystal for timekeeping. It keeps time like any other digital watch, only it outputs that time by controlling the rotor's speed, and gets its power from the rotor. It could keep time mechanically instead and still use electronics to maintain the rotor's speed. But in fact it uses a quartz crystal.
      - twic 9y ago
        How does the spring drive actually work? What is the mechanism which keeps it moving at a consistent speed? A quick google only turned up rather vague descriptions.
        craigsmansion 9y ago
        At the heart of every mechanical watch lies a coiled spring. Within that spring energy is stored that wants to be released. This energy is released through the wheel train, which is a set of cogs with reductions (some of them attached to the hands). Left to its own device this system would just spin as quickly as possible until the spring is unwound. To prevent this, somewhere in the train there is something called a lever escapement. Simple put, this puts a stick in a cog at regular intervals to prevent it from spinning and unwinding freely. This stick is timed by a weight that spins from left to right. This stick literally is what makes watches tick, since that's where the ticking sound comes from. Spring Drive doesn't poke a stick into a wheel to prevent the system from freely unwinding. What it does do is add magnets to the wheel and stationary coils around it. The wheel can't spin freely since it has to overcome the magnetic induction as the magnets pass the coils. That's the reason SpringDrive doesn't tick and the hands glide instead of stopping and starting. If it's still unclear, try looking up escapement levers first. There should be a lot of clear animated explanations online.
sowbug 9y ago
There's one basic question I couldn't figure out from the article. Where is the spring that you wind up and that stores the "power reserve of about 60 hours"? Is it part of the silicon? Or is it external? I figured out that the three crescent-shaped parts are springy ("flex laterally to provide a restoring force as the oscillator vibrates through six degrees of amplitude"), but it doesn't look like there's anything else that could stretch/relax over 60 hours. My sense of intuition is useless, of course, at this scale and with these materials.
- SAI_Peregrinus 9y ago
  That spring will be connected to drive the escapement. The resonator is the equivalent of a pendulum, even though it contains a spring. The escapement wheel is driven by a non-constant force from the drive spring. The resonator regulates its motion to tick at a regular rate, and in so doing draws power to keep resonating. The rest of the watch is driven from the same source.
- jonsen 9y ago
  This video lecture might interest you: http://techtv.mit.edu/videos/15895-an-electrical-engineering-view-of-a-mechanical-watch http://techtv.mit.edu/videos/15895-an-electrical-engineering...
- twic 9y ago
  The energy is stored in a big spiral spring, the mainspring, as in a conventional mechanical watch. The oscillator does away with another spring, the balance spring.
- nichodges 9y ago
  This video may help, as you get to see the movement in action: https://youtu.be/xWh0p9Irznw https://youtu.be/xWh0p9Irznw It doesn’t clearly show the mainspring, however at around 10:45 you can see the small gear spinning. That is being driven by the mainspring, and if you removed the escapement it would spin super quick until the mainspring was unwound. It’s the constant rocking back and forth of the regulator that limits the speed that small gear (called the escape wheel) can rotate, therefore limiting how quickly the mainspring releases it’s energy.
icantdrive55 9y ago
I hate to be that guy, but the George Daniel's coaxial escapement was more of a marketing gimmick Omega felt they needed at the time. A lot of people in the company didn't want to use the new escapement, but they needed a new selling point. Plus--why fix something that isn't broken? Their watches seldom need to be opened for at least ten years. I have a Omega Constellation, with the standard escapement, that hasent been opened in 15 plus years, and keeps time within seconds per day. Many of the coaxial escapements had problems. It's not clear why. I believe the problems were watches produced on the first run? I have an Omega with the coaxial, and many with standard escapement. My coaxial keeps the same time as the my other Omegas. Actually, it's not as accurate. I hate to say this because it's a $3500 watch. The jury is still out on wether the coaxial escapement is any better than a standard two jewel pallet fork. The coaxial has three jewels, and a unconventional pallet fork. In fact, their are guys like myself, who actively seek out Seamasters without the coaxial escapement. My point is different, more complex isn't necessarily better. Sometimes the new design just adds more failure points to a movement. The coaxial escapement hasen't been around long enough to claim superiority. As to repairability, it's definetly more work to service. Why--Omega keeps its service manuals locked away, like all the rest of the high end watch companies. In the end, they want you to send in that watch to the factory when the time comes, and you will be charged factory prices for a wash, oil, and buffing. You will receive a fat ding on your credit card for that service. In the long run, when you can't take a watch to whomever you want for repair/parts; you really don't own said watch. You are essentially leasing the watch. Again--you buy a Omega with your hard earned money. Even if you have the skills to work on the watch, you can't call up Omega and order a spare anything. They will politely tell you to take it back to the overpriced boutique, and they will send it in, and you will pay through the nose. I'm tired now of writing. I do like George Daniels though. I wish someone would do an autobiography on the man. A couple more things about watches, and their subsequent service. Service it when it stops working, or doesn't keep the correct time. If it's in the water, you need to have it serviced at their intervals. Buy a demagnitizer. And I forgot the other thing I was going to say. Anyways, for the money, you can't go wrong with any Omega--vintage, or new. I've looked at new/old Rolexes, and Omegas under a microscope, and I can't tell a difference in quality of parts, or engineering.

by lb1lf 9y ago

craigsmansion 9y ago

> the probably largest innovation horology over the past couple of hundred years There was this little thing called the quartz revolution though :) Just because it turned out you can make really cheap watches with it doesn't make it less of an innovation. But limiting the field down to mechanical watches, there is also Seiko's springdrive which manages to combine the durability of mechanical watches whilst approaching the accuracy of quartz watches by using a complete new method of escapement. Co-ax movements are surely a worthy innovation, but I wouldn't want to claim it was the most significant horological innovation of the last few centuries.

lb1lf 9y ago
Fair point. Spring drive is a very fascinating concept and one could debate for weeks on end in the right (or, rather, wrong) circles whether it or co-ax holds the top spot. (Or whether the spring drive is even a fully mechanical movement or a hybrid!) (And I should have been more precise - I meant in mechanical horology; my apologies) Not that there's anything wrong with quartz (except its inherent inaccuracies; I say this tongue-in-cheek as my interest in all things horological extends to my having a rubidium standard in the man cave - a hand-me-down HP 5065A. Sadly, my wife does not appreciate the beautiful engineering, and suggested a Seiko wall clock would have to do for our everyday time-keeping needs...)
- SamReidHughes 9y ago
  How can we debate whether the spring drive's fully mechanical or not? It's got a quartz oscillator and an integrated circuit.
  - craigsmansion 9y ago
    Well, for one, the escapement doesn't depend on the quartz crystal for timekeeping, but on magnetic induction. Spring drive would theoretically work without the quartz components. Seeing how they would generate an electrical current because of the principle, they build a tiny generator to drive a circuit that adjusts the escapement, but doesn't run it. Also, Spring Drive depends on a fully mechanical wheel train and barrel spring to function; it could not be made to work with a battery. So what exactly constitutes mechanical and what does quartz here? Is it the wheel train? Does electro-mechanical count as mechanical? Is the mere presence of a quartz crystal in a secondary circuit enough to call it a quartz? I found it easier to see it a as a new different system for timekeeping instead of trying to place it on an arbitrary scale between "fully mechanical" and "quartz."
    - SamReidHughes 9y ago
      > Well, for one, the escapement doesn't depend on the quartz crystal for timekeeping No, it uses the quartz crystal for timekeeping. It keeps time like any other digital watch, only it outputs that time by controlling the rotor's speed, and gets its power from the rotor. It could keep time mechanically instead and still use electronics to maintain the rotor's speed. But in fact it uses a quartz crystal.
    - twic 9y ago
      How does the spring drive actually work? What is the mechanism which keeps it moving at a consistent speed? A quick google only turned up rather vague descriptions.
      - craigsmansion 9y ago
        At the heart of every mechanical watch lies a coiled spring. Within that spring energy is stored that wants to be released. This energy is released through the wheel train, which is a set of cogs with reductions (some of them attached to the hands). Left to its own device this system would just spin as quickly as possible until the spring is unwound. To prevent this, somewhere in the train there is something called a lever escapement. Simple put, this puts a stick in a cog at regular intervals to prevent it from spinning and unwinding freely. This stick is timed by a weight that spins from left to right. This stick literally is what makes watches tick, since that's where the ticking sound comes from. Spring Drive doesn't poke a stick into a wheel to prevent the system from freely unwinding. What it does do is add magnets to the wheel and stationary coils around it. The wheel can't spin freely since it has to overcome the magnetic induction as the magnets pass the coils. That's the reason SpringDrive doesn't tick and the hands glide instead of stopping and starting. If it's still unclear, try looking up escapement levers first. There should be a lot of clear animated explanations online.

sowbug 9y ago

There's one basic question I couldn't figure out from the article. Where is the spring that you wind up and that stores the "power reserve of about 60 hours"? Is it part of the silicon? Or is it external? I figured out that the three crescent-shaped parts are springy ("flex laterally to provide a restoring force as the oscillator vibrates through six degrees of amplitude"), but it doesn't look like there's anything else that could stretch/relax over 60 hours. My sense of intuition is useless, of course, at this scale and with these materials.

SAI_Peregrinus 9y ago
That spring will be connected to drive the escapement. The resonator is the equivalent of a pendulum, even though it contains a spring. The escapement wheel is driven by a non-constant force from the drive spring. The resonator regulates its motion to tick at a regular rate, and in so doing draws power to keep resonating. The rest of the watch is driven from the same source.
jonsen 9y ago
This video lecture might interest you: http://techtv.mit.edu/videos/15895-an-electrical-engineering-view-of-a-mechanical-watch http://techtv.mit.edu/videos/15895-an-electrical-engineering...
twic 9y ago
The energy is stored in a big spiral spring, the mainspring, as in a conventional mechanical watch. The oscillator does away with another spring, the balance spring.
nichodges 9y ago
This video may help, as you get to see the movement in action: https://youtu.be/xWh0p9Irznw https://youtu.be/xWh0p9Irznw It doesn’t clearly show the mainspring, however at around 10:45 you can see the small gear spinning. That is being driven by the mainspring, and if you removed the escapement it would spin super quick until the mainspring was unwound. It’s the constant rocking back and forth of the regulator that limits the speed that small gear (called the escape wheel) can rotate, therefore limiting how quickly the mainspring releases it’s energy.

icantdrive55 9y ago

I hate to be that guy, but the George Daniel's coaxial escapement was more of a marketing gimmick Omega felt they needed at the time. A lot of people in the company didn't want to use the new escapement, but they needed a new selling point. Plus--why fix something that isn't broken? Their watches seldom need to be opened for at least ten years. I have a Omega Constellation, with the standard escapement, that hasent been opened in 15 plus years, and keeps time within seconds per day. Many of the coaxial escapements had problems. It's not clear why. I believe the problems were watches produced on the first run? I have an Omega with the coaxial, and many with standard escapement. My coaxial keeps the same time as the my other Omegas. Actually, it's not as accurate. I hate to say this because it's a $3500 watch. The jury is still out on wether the coaxial escapement is any better than a standard two jewel pallet fork. The coaxial has three jewels, and a unconventional pallet fork. In fact, their are guys like myself, who actively seek out Seamasters without the coaxial escapement. My point is different, more complex isn't necessarily better. Sometimes the new design just adds more failure points to a movement. The coaxial escapement hasen't been around long enough to claim superiority. As to repairability, it's definetly more work to service. Why--Omega keeps its service manuals locked away, like all the rest of the high end watch companies. In the end, they want you to send in that watch to the factory when the time comes, and you will be charged factory prices for a wash, oil, and buffing. You will receive a fat ding on your credit card for that service. In the long run, when you can't take a watch to whomever you want for repair/parts; you really don't own said watch. You are essentially leasing the watch. Again--you buy a Omega with your hard earned money. Even if you have the skills to work on the watch, you can't call up Omega and order a spare anything. They will politely tell you to take it back to the overpriced boutique, and they will send it in, and you will pay through the nose. I'm tired now of writing. I do like George Daniels though. I wish someone would do an autobiography on the man. A couple more things about watches, and their subsequent service. Service it when it stops working, or doesn't keep the correct time. If it's in the water, you need to have it serviced at their intervals. Buy a demagnitizer. And I forgot the other thing I was going to say. Anyways, for the money, you can't go wrong with any Omega--vintage, or new. I've looked at new/old Rolexes, and Omegas under a microscope, and I can't tell a difference in quality of parts, or engineering.