http://www.onthedash.com/docs/Project99.html

So, I've read this ^^ a few times in the past and while I'm sure some of the points of facts are subject to debate, it does a really good job of chronicling the auto chrono arms race.

I've generally not been interested in auto chronos as most sophisticated collectors are because to wind and set time isn't too much of a hassle. I'm more than happy with an 1873 or 188. I prefer my chronos with no other complications.

Anyway, my question is simple and the answer I'm certain isn't: what was so technically difficult about developing the auto wind chrono? It must have been very difficult because it seems like the smartest mechanical watch engineers had a really tough go at it.

 

I don't know, but I would imagine it would have been related to the thickness of the watch and the positioning of the axle for the weight.

If you think about the thickness of something contemporary and manual - let's say an early 861 Speedmaster - and then think about how to incorporate a fully rotating oscillating weight and still maintain clearance of the chronograph parts, that alone would have presented problems with it being usable as an everyday item.

Now factor in that, ideally, you want the weight to rotate around the centre axis of the movement and all of a sudden you have the main moving parts of the chronograph in the way. You could mount the axle on top of the chronograph bridge and compromise the thickness or you could come up with a smart, micro-rotor solution. Alternatively, you could make the whole movement and chronograph layer thinner, mount a full weight on top of the chronograph bridge, make it tick at 36,000 vph and throw in a date complication for good measure whilst still maintaining a wearable watch.

 

Not ny words but from the book "chronograph wristwatches - To Stop Time by Lang/Meis".


"Of course these first chronograph movements grew
quite thick (6.5 to 7.5 mm) because of the automatic
winding, which did not allow their use in elegant flat
watches. In spite of that, the production of such thick watches was favored by the new sporty watch designs that were just becoming popular. What was decisive here was
not the new taste of the customer, but rather the rational manufacture of the case which was machined completely out of solid material, without needing later handwork.
On the other hand, there was no need to put so much emphasis on flat construction in the Breitling and Heuer models, which were intended mainly for timing sporting events and in aviation. In any case, additional turning glasses, additional indications and a certain size of the numbers to guarantee accurate reading meant that the cases had to be made bigger."

 

Then, for good measure - if you really knew what you were doing - you could throw in the month, day and phase of the moon.

 

The development of these auto chronos must have been a challenge, and one that was attractive to the watch industry, as there were 3 individual teams (Zenith, Heuer et al, and Seiko) who were engaged in trying to make it work. I agree with the above posts, the movements needed to be designed to be accurate, relatively easy to manufacture, and attractive to the public (large watch cases were all the vogue in the late '60s and '70s). One also had to think that the companies were aware are the coming quartz revolution (Seiko brought the first quartz watch to market for Xmas, 1969), and how manual wind chronos would have been viewed as old tech and surpassed by these newer pieces. Interesting that one of the most popular chronograph watches in the world remains a manual wind-the Speedmaster...

 

Thickness was also quoted as the key obstacle by Jack Heuer in his autobiography:

"At heuer we had been aware of the drop of interest in non-automatic chronographs for some time. my father, Charles heuer, had already started looking around for a solution and had examined the potential of the very first movement that came out with a microrotor, made by the buren Watch Company around 1963. however, when a chronograph mechanism was added the whole movement became impossibly thick and the project was shelved. but the moment buren unveiled its new, thinner and patented mi- crorotor movement at the basel Watch and Jewellery Fair in 1967 we joined up with Dubois-Dépraz, one of our most reliable suppliers, and studied the feasibility of using the new buren microrotor movement combined with a plate carrying the entire chronograph mechanism made by Dubois-Dépraz. As Dubois-Dépraz had already developed the plate heuer had needed to create its successful “monte Carlo” stopwatch with the 12-hour window, we were confident they could handle this new challenge.
"

 

I think it's the thickness and size. Because there're quite a few complication movements below 6mm based on off-center microrotor design contained within the overall thickness of the movement But no chrono mov'ts IIRC.

Maybe someone can revive the now obsolete spring+hammer automatic design and come up with a slim chrono movement 'small' enough to fit into a 50mm diameter case

 

With laser etchers getting cheaper, making your own watch movement (or parts for repair) are a real possibility. Has anyone here tried to do anything like that? Is there are particular reason that it would be doomed to fail? CO2 lasers would be limited to pretty thin metal stock, but yttrium lasers, though too expensive for the average hobbyist, would be well within reach for a well-equipped watchmaker, and would be capable of reproducing just about anything that could be fabricated from flat stock. Anybody?? Anybody? Bueller?

 

I have some first hand experience with lasers, specifically Nd-Yag lasers which would be used primarily for laser marking, but maybe some cutting. If you set the Q-switch to the right frequency, you could hear the sound change and they would "cut" the hardened steel slightly.

The systems I specified, purchased, and installed were up to about 90 watts, and the automated feed station, chiller, etc. made the total system price somewhere in the $250,000 area. I bought maybe 8 or 9 of these going from memory - place in Orlando so at least when it came time to run the machines off and sign the paperwork to approve them for shipment and payments, it was nice weather.

If you wanted a stand alone, hand fed station, they would still be in the $75,000 and up range depending on power, just for the laser "rail" and the basic guarding required - the Nd-Yag we used was quite dangerous because the 1064 nm wavelength can blind you as it is absorbed by the retina. Note that this does not include a CNC table, which would be needed for a cutting system like you are describing.

CO2 is used more traditionally for CNC guided cutting applications, but that is usually larger stock than what would be used for watch parts.

Note that these systems require a lot of maintenance, not to mention programming, as well the high initial price. I know prices come down over time, but I don't see these being commonly bought by "well equipped watchmakers" any time soon.

I have to say these posts from various places about methods (lasers, 3D printing, etc.) of producing your own parts - well let's just say they are very optimistic in my view. The number of parts a laser could make for a typical watch would be pretty small. You could make a few parts, and maybe some parts of parts, but almost all (even simple flat parts) would need post processing of some sort after being cut out.

The 3D printing one really gets me - here is "one" part from a common movement people will be familiar with here - a winding wheel (reversing wheel) from a Cal. 550:



As you can see it's made of several parts, which are different materials:



Even worse a balance complete, made up of the balance wheel, balance staff, roller table, impulse pin/jewel, balance spring collet, balance spring stud, and then the balance spring itself. All made from different materials with different properties. People talk like we will be printing these things at will from our desktop, which for the foreseeable future is not going to be possible.

Note that some watchmakers/jewelers have lasers, but these are laser welding machines, not cutting machines that can be programmed to produce a very specific and tightly toleranced part. Even a simple laser welding machine is a large outlay of cash, and you need work to keep it humming or it will never pay for itself. You will most often see these in use where the store also performs jewelry repairs, and that is where the bulk of the work would come from.

Cheers, Al

 

Thanks for the input.

Marginally related: Did anybody ever read the Heinlein story "Waldo and Magic" ? We really should have Waldoes by now. And if you haven't read it, you should. It's a REALLY unusual story for Heinlein, although not quite up to "The Unpleasant Profession of Jonathan Hoag". iiIii

 

We use a 'budget' computer guided 4kW CO2 laser at my work place, usually limited to cutting thin materials (<1 inch) and it's a hellishly expensive piece of equipment. Around $600,000 with enclosure. A fully automated complete system will occupy a pretty large room and cost upwards of $1M

And don't forget cutting is only one of the final steps of a long process, you'll also need state of the art 3D laser scanning to reproduce those vitage parts into CAD for fine inspection and adjustments. And necessary post processing involving other EXPENSIVE equiptments plus the not so small pile of cash for the blokes who know what they're doing.

 

I'm available for less then a small pile of cash.

But I gotta say, man, a 4kw CO2 laser is a badass piece of equipment. Anything that will cut 4" of metal is a formidable machine. But if you are making a watch movement out of 1" steel flatstock, uh, uh, ... uh dude.

I'm completely out of responses.

respect.

 

Haha i' not in the watchmaking business and, we usually make house decor and over engineered sound equipment cases for some high-end brands....

And I'm not sure our equipment can handle the tight tolerance of watch parts ..maybe only some larger bridge parts which will require further post processing...

Regards

A.