Timegrapher diagnosis for the amateur…

[M'Bob]

I don’t know if it’s completely analogous, but in medicine, when a patient has a particular set of symptoms, there are usually a list of diagnoses that can be generated from most likely, to least common.

As a hobbyist using a timegrapher, I have a general sense when looking at rate, amplitude, and beat error, in terms of what’s in the range of acceptable, and what’s not.

What I don’t have a grasp on, is for every one of these parameters, when each is either out of range high, or out of range low, what it tends to indicate could be the cause of the problem in the watch. Can any of our esteemed watchmakers or tinkerers fill in the blanks? To keep things simple, we can limit to dial up, or maybe dial up, crown down and crown left, at full wind. And whatever else I forget or didn’t know, that figures into the equation. I realize I am probably distilling out a complex set of variables into something simple, but nonetheless:

Rate:
1) high:
2) low:

Amplitude:
1) high:
2) low:

Beat Error:
1) high:
2) low:

 

[Canuck]

See my reply to your PM to me, to try to explain my read on vague questions such as you are asking. Generally, a human with a health problem can perhaps be treated successfully with medication, but sometimes surgical intervention is required. You can’t treat a malady in a watch with medication! Surgery is generally required! But sometimes, condition of the patient (watch) is such that predicting the results of the surgery cannot always yield the desired result! At least, that’s how I see it.

 

[M'Bob]

Regarding the above, interventions to remediate problems have not been mentioned; the analogy was about diagnosis.

 

[Canuck]

M'Bob

Regarding the above, interventions to remediate problems have not been mentioned; the analogy was about diagnosis.

Well then! As a novice, you perhaps don’t realize the diagnosis of problems is done to remediate problems. The nature of watches is such that, on occasion, your diagnosis of the problem was wrong, thereby, your attempt to remediate the problem tells you that you haven’t fixed it! If you sense a problem, are satisfied that you have diagnosed a problem and have no intention of fixing the problem, then don’t bother doing the diagnosis, is my view! I don’t know how to answer the question you asked!

If you intend to pre-diagnose problems with a watch that needs work before you take the watch to the watchmaker, tell him of your diagnosis an how you wish him to proceed, you likely will be shown the exit door!

 

[Joe_A]

Reminds of a conversation I had with a Chief Engineer at a company I once did business with years ago.

The company had come out with a new product and it was buggy. We did a lot of testing at the company's request and we were ready furnish information about the behavior of the product as was expected of us, but we certainly could not tell the engineer how to adjust his code.

Anyway . . .

I knew the guy pretty well and as I finished describing the problem I had the naivete - or Chutzpah, if you prefer - temerity is also a good word to use as well . . .

Well anyway, I suggested to Carl where he should look in the code for a solution to the problem.

Without a moment's hesitation he said to me: "Well, Joe, it sounds like you have it sorted out pretty well," and he immediately terminated the call before I could say a word.

Taught me a lesson. I called him right back as he expected me to . . . and I humbly asked what the next steps should be.

 

[Joe_A]

Back on topic . . .

The handful of watches I have put on the timegrapher all behave as I have come to expect.

For example, the amplitude with the dial up is nearly the same as with the dial down. The amplitude is always lower in any other position. This makes sense. With the watch heads up or heads down the force of gravity is on the "lower" bearing surfaces but there should be hardly any friction on the "upper" bearing surfaces. With the watch in any other position there is force or friction on all bearing surfaces.

But suppose the watch runs properly with the dial up but the amplitude is way down with the dial down. This may tell you that you have a bad jewel or other friction causing issue on the opposite bearing surface, compared to when the watch is flipped the other way around, but so what?

The watch is going to have to be disassembled and given a full service in any case . . . as the parts that may be needed will generally be inexpensive, but the labor will be very significant and it would probably take longer to find the one defective bearing surface then to disassemble and service the entire watch.

I'd avoid telling a watchmaker what needs to be done, but I wouldn't hesitate to ask questions making it clear to the watchmaker that I'm a curious fellow who just wants to learn.

Edited: Dec 22, 2023

 

[M'Bob]

Canuck

Well then! As a novice, you perhaps don’t realize the diagnosis of problems is done to remediate problems. The nature of watches is such that, on occasion, your diagnosis of the problem was wrong, thereby, your attempt to remediate the problem tells you that you haven’t fixed it! If you sense a problem, are satisfied that you have diagnosed a problem and have no intention of fixing the problem, then don’t bother doing the diagnosis, is my view! I don’t know how to answer the question you asked!

If you intend to pre-diagnose problems with a watch that needs work before you take the watch to the watchmaker, tell him of your diagnosis an how you wish him to proceed, you likely will be shown the exit door!

Apologies, my analogy wasn’t clear.

I was simply trying to learn more about what the different timegrapher parameters could mean when they’re higher or lower than normal, in terms of how those numbers relate to the likely problem the watch could be having. There was no intention on my part to instruct or undermine any watchmaker who would be working on any of my pieces.

 

[Archer]

M'Bob

I don’t know if it’s completely analogous, but in medicine, when a patient has a particular set of symptoms, there are usually a list of diagnoses that can be generated from most likely, to least common.

As a hobbyist using a timegrapher, I have a general sense when looking at rate, amplitude, and beat error, in terms of what’s in the range of acceptable, and what’s not.

What I don’t have a grasp on, is for every one of these parameters, when each is either out of range high, or out of range low, what it tends to indicate could be the cause of the problem in the watch. Can any of our esteemed watchmakers or tinkerers fill in the blanks? To keep things simple, we can limit to dial up, or maybe dial up, crown down and crown left, at full wind. And whatever else I forget or didn’t know, that figures into the equation. I realize I am probably distilling out a complex set of variables into something simple, but nonetheless:

Rate:
1) high:
2) low:

Amplitude:
1) high:
2) low:

Beat Error:
1) high:
2) low:

It's tough to give a good concise answer to any of this. Some my immediate thoughts were to ask more questions, because they are very vague and the question really has several layers to it. At the same time some of these could have many different causes.

So for example the rates - high or low rates could just be a matter of regulation, which is simple to resolve. But no watchmaker I know would regulate based on rate alone, without ensuring that the watch is performing well in other ways, such as the balance amplitudes. If the rates are fast and the remainder is good, then it's likely just a regulation issue. If the balance amplitudes are all low, then rates are not the problem - the watch needs servicing or repair.

Another example is balance amplitudes. Too high is typically a barrel issue, so too much braking grease, or an incorrect mainspring. However in some instances it may be related to the adjustment of the pallet fork jewels, or even wear on the escape wheel.

For low amplitude, it could be so many things that it would be difficult to list them all. It could be something as simple as a screw being installed in the wrong location causing drag on the barrel (I've actually seen that one personally, so it's not something I'm making up), or it could be dried oils, debris in the movement, too weak of a mainspring, etc.

Low amplitude may be low in all positions, or low in just one position. What I've described just previous is for low amplitude in all positions. But if there's say good amplitude dial down, but much lower dial up (common) I'll be looking for wear on the balance staff and the cap jewel when I take the watch apart. So certain details may lead you to look more closely at a specific area, but the diagnosis would only be confirmed when you find the physical thing that you are looking for - if that makes sense.

Here's a link I was able to find to the Witschi training course - it's a pdf that explains some basics of how these machines work, and gives some troubleshooting for basic things...

Witschi+Training+Course.pdf (squarespace.com)

Note that the remedies offered don't give you a lot of detail sometimes, like when they say "overhaul" the watch.

From a very practical stance for a watchmaker, when I get a watch in I perform some pre-service testing, to see what the timing is like, if there are any functional issues with winding, setting, when the date changes, how well the chronograph works, etc.. But in the end I know I'm taking it apart anyway, so really the detailed diagnosis comes when the watch is coming apart, or after it's apart, cleaned, and I can inspect all the parts.

If I have done my job properly when doing the actual work, then there won't be any diagnosis when the movement has been serviced and is running, because I'll have resolved all those issues in the watch already.

Hope this helps.

Cheers, Al

 

[ghce]

"Black box analysis" via a timegrapher tells you only one thing ( well 2 really) 1: that it needs a service 2: that it doesn't need a service right now.

Its nice to speculate what a potential issue is but in reality a service is your first port of call every thing else may as well be crystal ball gazing, well that's my take from having literally hundreds of watches serviced ( not by me) and listening to the detailed explanations of my watchmaker.

 

[M'Bob]

ghce

"Black box analysis" via a timegrapher tells you only one thing ( well 2 really) 1: that it needs a service 2: that it doesn't need a service right now.

Its nice to speculate what a potential issue is but in reality a service is your first port of call every thing else may as well be crystal ball gazing, well that's my take from having literally hundreds of watches serviced ( not by me) and listening to the detailed explanations of my watchmaker.

RE: number 2, my understanding is that a watch can have all parameters within spec and still be in need of a service, no?

 

[ghce]

M'Bob

RE: number 2, my understanding is that a watch can have all parameters within spec and still be in need of a service, no?

I am sure thats entirely true.
Perfect example is a Waltham 1883 PW that I recently got, checked out 100% within 2 secs a day, great amplitude etc but I am quite certain hadn't been serviced in decades.

 

[Canuck]

As I indicated earlier, a timing machine takes a two minute snapshot of the performance at that moment, and that can lead to the thought that the watch will perform like the timing machine is telling you, for 24 hours. Two minutes on the machine can tell you one story, while 24-hours on the wrist tells a different story on occasion. Timing machines are not the total answer!

 

[Joe_A]

Canuck

As I indicated earlier, a timing machine takes a two minute snapshot of the performance at that moment, and that can lead to the thought that the watch will perform like the timing machine is telling you, for 24 hours. Two minutes on the machine can tell you one story, while 24-hours on the wrist tells a different story on occasion. Timing machines are not the total answer!

For consideration . . .

Absent the use of a timegrapher, a watch may seem to be in good shape from an owner or wearer's perspective when the watch keeps good time; winds and sets without being very stiff and when the complication(s) function as expected and yet, the timegrapher may reveal that the watch is in poor condition and in need of service.

I've sent my vintage watches out to three watchmakers since beginning to collect within the past five years or so . . .

Before and after performance evaluation on the timegrapher has assured me that two out of three watchmakers have done careful and professional work where the third appears/appeared to be a faker or charlatan of the highest degree.

I hesitate to condemn the one "watchmaker" publicly because I only sent one watch to them three times before sending it out to a professional; paying twice . . . and then finally getting excellent service from RGM in Mt. Joy, Pa.

I've recently put one of my Sherpa Graph watches in the hands of Ashton Tracy of Precision Horology and he has also done superb work on the watch . . . and I am pleased with the result and will work with him in future.

RGM does good work, but one must expect the watch to be on a working vacation for about a year once it has left home.

Cheers,

Joe

 

[Canuck]

Joe_A

For consideration . . .

Absent the use of a timegrapher, a watch may seem to be in good shape from an owner or wearer's perspective when the watch keeps good time; winds and sets without being very stiff and when the complication(s) function as expected and yet, the timegrapher may reveal that the watch is in poor condition and in need of service.

I've sent my vintage watches out to three watchmakers since beginning to collect within the past five years or so . . .

Before and after performance evaluation on the timegrapher has assured me that two out of three watchmakers have done careful and professional work where the third appears/appeared to be a faker or charlatan of the highest degree.

I hesitate to condemn the one "watchmaker" publicly because I only sent one watch to them three times before sending it out to a professional; paying twice . . . and then finally getting excellent service from RGM in Mt. Joy, Pa.

I've recently put one of my Sherpa Graph watches in the hands of Ashton Tracy of Precision Horology and he has also done superb work on the watch . . . and I am pleased with the result and will work with him in future.

RGM does good work, but one must expect the watch to be on a working vacation for about a year once it has left home.

Cheers,

Joe

As I said in my post,”timing machines are not the total answer”.

 

[M'Bob]

This whole issue puts the watch collector in an interesting position: if a seller claims a watch has been recently serviced, and posts shots of the watch on the timegrapher in different positions showing decent results, the only real way to confirm that would be to have a watchmaker do a visual inspection. The logistics of that would not lend itself to the consummation of a typical watch deal.

 

[Archer]

M'Bob

This whole issue puts the watch collector in an interesting position: if a seller claims a watch has been recently serviced, and posts shots of the watch on the timegrapher in different positions showing decent results, the only real way to confirm that would be to have a watchmaker do a visual inspection. The logistics of that would not lend itself to the consummation of a typical watch deal.

I think that's why having evidence - in the form of an invoice from a known to be good watchmaker - is helpful. If a seller is just going to tell me it was serviced and show me some photos of a timing machine, I'm not personally going to put a lot of faith or value on that.

 

[Joe_A]

Canuck

As I said in my post,”timing machines are not the total answer”.

Are we in a state of disagreement?

I don't think so.

Timing machines certainly don't tell us everything, but used correctly, even with minimal experience, they will tell us whether a watch is in poor condition and in need of service even when the watch appears to run well, say over any 24-hour period.

Also, before service and after service performance on the timegrapher will help confirm that a good job was done.

The above along with visual inspection is helpful.

That was a point I wished to make.

Cheers,

~ Joe

 

[Canuck]

Joe_A

Are we in a state of disagreement?

I don't think so.

Timing machines certainly don't tell us everything, but used correctly, even with minimal experience, they will tell us whether a watch is in poor condition and in need of service even when the watch appears to run well, say over any 24-hour period.

Also, before service and after service performance on the timegrapher will help confirm that a good job was done.

The above along with visual inspection is helpful.

That was a point I wished to make.

Cheers,

~ Joe

I was responding to your first paragraph, stating that a watch that is performing up to the owner’s expectations, may appear unhealthy on a timing machine. I stated that timing machines are not the total answer. Did it seem that I was countering you?

 

[Joe_A]

I still don't know for sure, but that's OK. Let the words speak for themselves.

Cheers,

~ Joe

Edit: Let's try this . . .

Many of us spend a lot of money on watches and their accoutrements. For less than 150 USD and an hour or two watching Youtube videos, one can have a useful tool that will:

Tell you a lot about the health of your watch.
Confirm when the watch has come back from service that a good service was performed.

Plus . . .

If you are a tinkerer like I am, you can adjust your watch so that it runs the way you want it to run.

 

[Archer]

Joe_A

Timing machines certainly don't tell us everything, but used correctly, even with minimal experience, they will tell us whether a watch is in poor condition and in need of service even when the watch appears to run well, say over any 24-hour period.

I think a timing machine can tell you when the watch is definitely in need of servicing or repair.

What it can't always tell you is when that it doesn't need servicing or repair.