"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...

Your 5 minutes web search has not revealed the theory
behind the gravity escapement, a form of remontoire,
a means to decouple the pendulum from the going train


One of the fundamental problems in time pieces is the decoupling of the
escapement from the oscillating element- not from the going train. The issue
is ensuring that the oscillation period is not changed by the two functions
of the escapement a) to provide the impulse b) to allow the going train to
advance at a rate controlled by the oscillator (eg the pendulum). If you
think about it, there is an analogy to Q here. In (a) I include the added
complications of ensuring an impulse largely constant despite variations in
the state of the spring (if used).

Over the years many approaches have been tried - verge, deadbeat, cylinder,
duplex, and (of course) the lever are the ones that spring to mind from my
watch repairing days. I suggest you get hold of deCarl(e)s book on the
escapement- I forget the title as it must be 25 years since I read it.

Incidently, for a 'joke' you seem to be putting in a lot of effort.

The impulse to the pendulum is dependent upon two
locally invariant properties, the acceleration due to
gravity, and the mass of the Impulse Arms
(Dennison/Grimethorpe version) and pendulum.


The pendulum is not impulsed by the (weight driven
not spring driven) Going Train.

Regardless of where the energy comes from, and this is about energy, the
fundamental issues are the same:

1. Getting energy 'into' the pendulum to maintain the oscillation.

2. Minimising the interference of the escapement on the pendulum (or other
timing element) - also an energy matter.
(This could be helped by increasing the 'swing' but that then brings into
play other errors due to pendulum length variation with temperature.)

The above is true regardless of where the energy for the impulse comes from.

"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...
2. The joke did not require any research, I have been for
some time now a clock maker and restorer.

You said it was a posting error.

Memory going?

(I notice you haven't posted it yet in alt.horology, by the way.)

3. Nuclear emissions? Remind me of that one. Did I make
a rare mistake?

Try 'Google'.

It could have been a typo I suppose- most of what you emit is unclear
(unclear emissions).

4. dB - defined as the base-10 logarithm of the ratio of
two powers. I have been consistent in my assertion of this. There
has never been any error on my part, save for when I repeated
someone else's figures without checking them.

Yes Gareth.

5. DSP - You sneered (as does a turnip-brained M3/CBer) at my
tentative proposal of "Big K", but were incapable of answering
my challenge to your sneer.

"Tentative" over some extended period- try Google again.

6. The time of owning an 830 did not coincide with the phase in
my life when I experienced a severe loss of self confidence. I explained
the typo in this respect; an intelligent person with the gentlemanly
traditions
of Ham Radio would have taken this on, but someone with the turnip-brain
of an M3/CBer would just carry on sneering regardless.

Oh, the sympathy card. We all know what a sypathetic chap you are.

7. Slope Detection - I was discussing the use of 25kHz channel-spacing,
Xtal
controlled ex-PMR gear to receive NBFM. My assertion was that the wide
bandwidth (remember the Pye hermetically sealed blue boxes?) would result
in no detectable demodulation of an on-channel NBFM signal. Did you
discuss this technically as might be expected from a _REAL_ Radio Ham,
or did you just sneer ignorantly as is to be expected from a
turnip-brained
M3/CBer?

I remember it well- in fact I retuned several of the 'blue boxes' to narrow
the bandwidth. I may still have the drilling pattern somewhere.
In those days slope detect was a common as cat muck on these very radios,
as quick temporary step to get on air before building a FM detector. So it
must have worked.

Gareth, you do get even more ratty when caught out. Why not just crawl away
and lick your wounds. Continue like this and you will end up turning to
drink.

"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...
2. The joke did not require any research, I have been for
some time now a clock maker and restorer.

You said it was a posting error.

Memory going?

(I notice you haven't posted it yet in alt.horology, by the way.)

3. Nuclear emissions? Remind me of that one. Did I make
a rare mistake?

Try 'Google'.

It could have been a typo I suppose- most of what you emit is unclear
(unclear emissions).

4. dB - defined as the base-10 logarithm of the ratio of
two powers. I have been consistent in my assertion of this. There
has never been any error on my part, save for when I repeated
someone else's figures without checking them.

Yes Gareth.

5. DSP - You sneered (as does a turnip-brained M3/CBer) at my
tentative proposal of "Big K", but were incapable of answering
my challenge to your sneer.

"Tentative" over some extended period- try Google again.

6. The time of owning an 830 did not coincide with the phase in
my life when I experienced a severe loss of self confidence. I explained
the typo in this respect; an intelligent person with the gentlemanly
traditions
of Ham Radio would have taken this on, but someone with the turnip-brain
of an M3/CBer would just carry on sneering regardless.

Oh, the sympathy card. We all know what a sypathetic chap you are.

7. Slope Detection - I was discussing the use of 25kHz channel-spacing,
Xtal
controlled ex-PMR gear to receive NBFM. My assertion was that the wide
bandwidth (remember the Pye hermetically sealed blue boxes?) would result
in no detectable demodulation of an on-channel NBFM signal. Did you
discuss this technically as might be expected from a _REAL_ Radio Ham,
or did you just sneer ignorantly as is to be expected from a
turnip-brained
M3/CBer?

I remember it well- in fact I retuned several of the 'blue boxes' to narrow
the bandwidth. I may still have the drilling pattern somewhere.
In those days slope detect was a common as cat muck on these very radios,
as quick temporary step to get on air before building a FM detector. So it
must have worked.

Gareth, you do get even more ratty when caught out. Why not just crawl away
and lick your wounds. Continue like this and you will end up turning to
drink.

"Brian Reay" wrote in message
...

One of the fundamental problems in time pieces is the decoupling of the
escapement from the oscillating element- not from the going train. The
issue
is ensuring that the oscillation period is not changed by the two
functions
of the escapement a) to provide the impulse b) to allow the going train to
advance at a rate controlled by the oscillator (eg the pendulum). If you
think about it, there is an analogy to Q here. In (a) I include the added
complications of ensuring an impulse largely constant despite variations
in
the state of the spring (if used).

Over the years many approaches have been tried - verge, deadbeat,
cylinder,
duplex, and (of course) the lever are the ones that spring to mind from my
watch repairing days. I suggest you get hold of deCarl(e)s book on the
escapement- I forget the title as it must be 25 years since I read it.

Incidently, for a 'joke' you seem to be putting in a lot of effort.

Regardless of where the energy comes from, and this is about energy, the
fundamental issues are the same:

1. Getting energy 'into' the pendulum to maintain the oscillation.

2. Minimising the interference of the escapement on the pendulum (or other
timing element) - also an energy matter.
(This could be helped by increasing the 'swing' but that then brings into
play other errors due to pendulum length variation with temperature.)

The above is true regardless of where the energy for the impulse comes
from.

Blimey, I think I'll stick to sundials, I can understand them, I suggest
Airy does the same.
--
;)
73 de Frank Turner-Smith G3VKI - mine's a pint.

"Brian Reay" wrote in message
...

One of the fundamental problems in time pieces is the decoupling of the
escapement from the oscillating element- not from the going train. The
issue
is ensuring that the oscillation period is not changed by the two
functions
of the escapement a) to provide the impulse b) to allow the going train to
advance at a rate controlled by the oscillator (eg the pendulum). If you
think about it, there is an analogy to Q here. In (a) I include the added
complications of ensuring an impulse largely constant despite variations
in
the state of the spring (if used).

Over the years many approaches have been tried - verge, deadbeat,
cylinder,
duplex, and (of course) the lever are the ones that spring to mind from my
watch repairing days. I suggest you get hold of deCarl(e)s book on the
escapement- I forget the title as it must be 25 years since I read it.

Incidently, for a 'joke' you seem to be putting in a lot of effort.

Regardless of where the energy comes from, and this is about energy, the
fundamental issues are the same:

1. Getting energy 'into' the pendulum to maintain the oscillation.

2. Minimising the interference of the escapement on the pendulum (or other
timing element) - also an energy matter.
(This could be helped by increasing the 'swing' but that then brings into
play other errors due to pendulum length variation with temperature.)

The above is true regardless of where the energy for the impulse comes
from.

Blimey, I think I'll stick to sundials, I can understand them, I suggest
Airy does the same.
--
;)
73 de Frank Turner-Smith G3VKI - mine's a pint.

"Brian Reay" wrote in message
...
"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...

Your 5 minutes web search has not revealed the theory
behind the gravity escapement, a form of remontoire,
a means to decouple the pendulum from the going train


One of the fundamental problems in time pieces is the decoupling of the
escapement from the oscillating element- not from the going train. The
issue
is ensuring that the oscillation period is not changed by the two
functions
of the escapement a) to provide the impulse b) to allow the going train to
advance at a rate controlled by the oscillator (eg the pendulum). If you
think about it, there is an analogy to Q here. In (a) I include the added
complications of ensuring an impulse largely constant despite variations
in
the state of the spring (if used).


I should have added that the later is the problem addressed by the
"remontoire" (and more crudely by a fusee). Neither address the issue of
the interference with the free oscillation of the pendulum or balance.

If your clock is weight driven, why have a "remontoire"?

"Brian Reay" wrote in message
...
"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...

Your 5 minutes web search has not revealed the theory
behind the gravity escapement, a form of remontoire,
a means to decouple the pendulum from the going train


One of the fundamental problems in time pieces is the decoupling of the
escapement from the oscillating element- not from the going train. The
issue
is ensuring that the oscillation period is not changed by the two
functions
of the escapement a) to provide the impulse b) to allow the going train to
advance at a rate controlled by the oscillator (eg the pendulum). If you
think about it, there is an analogy to Q here. In (a) I include the added
complications of ensuring an impulse largely constant despite variations
in
the state of the spring (if used).


I should have added that the later is the problem addressed by the
"remontoire" (and more crudely by a fusee). Neither address the issue of
the interference with the free oscillation of the pendulum or balance.

If your clock is weight driven, why have a "remontoire"?

"Frank Turner-Smith G3VKI" wrote in message
...

Blimey, I think I'll stick to sundials, I can understand them, I suggest
Airy does the same.

Actually, sun dials are an interesting topic in their own right. There is a
"sundial society"- not sure of the correct name but a local SK was a member
and made sundials to plans he got from them.

73

Brian

"Frank Turner-Smith G3VKI" wrote in message
...

Blimey, I think I'll stick to sundials, I can understand them, I suggest
Airy does the same.

Actually, sun dials are an interesting topic in their own right. There is a
"sundial society"- not sure of the correct name but a local SK was a member
and made sundials to plans he got from them.

73

Brian

Th escapement is part of the going train.

Brian Reay wrote in message
...
"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...
Your 5 minutes web search has not revealed the theory
behind the gravity escapement, a form of remontoire,
a means to decouple the pendulum from the going train
One of the fundamental problems in time pieces is the decoupling of the
escapement from the oscillating element- not from the going train.