[HN Gopher] Mechanical Watch ___________________________________________________________________ Mechanical Watch Author : todsacerdoti Score : 1680 points Date : 2022-05-04 15:06 UTC (7 hours ago) (HTM) web link (ciechanow.ski) (TXT) w3m dump (ciechanow.ski) | ThePhysicist wrote: | I was curious how he did those visualizations so I looked at the | source code. Turns out he codes everything _by hand_ in WebGL | [1]. Absolutely impressive stuff. Source code is non-minified so | you can have a look and understand everything as well. | | [1]: https://ciechanow.ski/js/watch.js | kragen wrote: | Why is "codes everything by hand" surprising? Is WebGL a really | shitty API or something? | donatj wrote: | > Is WebGL a really shitty API or something? | | Yes. Almost no one uses it directly. | kragen wrote: | Why not? What's wrong with it? | sha-3 wrote: | Yep, that's why the visualizations do not run on my hardened | Firefox. I disabled WebGL. | [deleted] | bananabiscuit wrote: | You should considering enabling it for this site. I don't see | what the downside here would be. | sha-3 wrote: | And it was worth it. | soheil wrote: | Can you point to what libraries he could have used that would | have made it simpler? I doubt anything like would benefit from | any type of abstraction that currently exists, unless it was a | more interactive application that would incorporate user input | etc. | JayStavis wrote: | Depending on one's skillset, you could use a dcc tool like | Blender + three.js to make _creation_ of these visuals and | interactions much simpler. Have a look at gltfjsx + react- | three-fiber [1] combination, which themselves are | abstractions over vanilla three.js. | | With that said, the raw webGL approach here is arguably more | educational, so goal achieved I think! | | [1] https://docs.pmnd.rs/react-three-fiber/getting- | started/examp... | | Edit: there's actually a 50 LOC watch example with r3f: | https://codesandbox.io/s/bouncy-watch-qyz5r | ThePhysicist wrote: | Three.js maybe, but it doesn't abstract too much away in my | opinion, it has a lot of functionality around more complex | topics (textures for example), but since he doesn't seem to | use those it's probably not worth the hassle. | abhayhegde wrote: | Apart from going to each post and manually looking at the JS | codes, is it possible to get them all in one go? | https://ciechanow.ski/js/ returns 403 error. | panzerboiler wrote: | He does it "the right way(tm)". Use the platform. Don't use any | framework or generic library. Go straight to the point and code | what you need, when you need it. Don't minify or bundle | anything, and let the people who are learning and courious a | straightforward way to connect the dots, without forcing them | into a github repository with 90% of the code unrelated to the | thing and existing just to glue 1000 pieces written by 10000 | people together. Every essay by Bartosz is so top-notch and a | such breath of fresh air! He gives me hope in humanity and I am | immensely grateful for what he does. | 10000truths wrote: | I mostly agree with you, but I don't mind minification when | appropriate, as it can serve a functional purpose with | tangible end-user-friendly benefits (less downloaded over the | network = faster response times). | | But if you want to be friendly to the tinkerers, you could | always host both the *.js and *.min.js versions, and have the | webpage just pull the latter - anyone who wants the | unminified source can remove the "min" part from the URI, | while the majority of end users will still benefit from | pulling the minified js. | throwaway2214 wrote: | minified js is not greatly smaller than gzipped js, I think | the whole minification thing is a swing and a miss and now | we have to deal with source maps and shit, and build | pipelines and etc $ ls -la -rw-r | --r-- 1 jack 197609 330905 May 4 22:56 watch.js | -rw-r--r-- 1 jack 197609 152172 May 4 22:55 watch.min.js | $ gzip watch.js $ gzip watch.min.js $ ls | -la -rw-r--r-- 1 jack 197609 43690 May 4 22:56 | watch.js.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 jack 197609 32507 May 4 | 22:55 watch.min.js.gz | kevincox wrote: | A discoverable version would be to include source maps that | link to the original as well. That way a browser console | will automatically pull up the original. | klabb3 wrote: | People measure minification in byte size (unfortunately I | guess you're charged by CDNs by that metric too?). In | reality everything text based compresses really well over | the wire. In either case, importing tons of libs left and | right is going to vastly out-size any minification, yet | most fe devs are very liberal with dependencies. | | Minification strips comments too though, which may be | undesirable in many cases. | operator-name wrote: | That's simply not a very well followed (and thus | discoverable) standard. Especially for hand crafted code, | minifying functions and variable names only obfuscates what | is written and minifying whitespace often only has minimal | benifits. | | In practice this seems to be a lost cause, and links to | alternatively hosted source code is more common. Sadly this | makes is simple to introduce subtle, harmful differences | between the source and what is hosted. | NoSorryCannot wrote: | The pattern is extremely common on CDNs that serve JS. | monocasa wrote: | It's hard to guess that extra assets exist on the server if | they aren't being pulled down by the site itself. | | Seems better just to have premassaged source available in a | repo somewhere, or called out on the page itself for a | downloaded archive. | phailhaus wrote: | The tradeoff is that there is basically nobody else that has | the expertise or time to do the same thing at a similar level | of polish. We're not going to see more Ciechanowski-level | posts unless new libraries and frameworks make it more | accessible. | javajosh wrote: | Maybe, maybe not. We should do the experiment, though. | phailhaus wrote: | What experiment do you mean? | Liron wrote: | We need a ciechanow.ski explainer for how ciechanow.sky | explainers are built | jhallenworld wrote: | Where are the comments in his code? :-) | AceJohnny2 wrote: | > _He does it "the right way(tm)". Use the platform. Don't | use any framework or generic library._ | | Hard disagree. "Use What's Right For You(tm)". | | Of course there is value in understanding the platform | beneath your framework or generic library, but that's just an | extension of "understand what you're using and why". | valtism wrote: | I strongly disagree that this is "the right way". I think | that the platform provides low level primitives that are | _designed_ to have abstractions built upon them. | | Doing it like this has the potential to be the most | performant, but it does so in the same way as writing your | programs directly in assembly is potentially performant. | | I also don't think that the source code is particularly | readable for me, and contains lots of magic numbers and very | imperative code. I would personally find it a lot more | readable if it was written in some sort of declarative way | using a library, even if I have to look at a GitHub repo | instead of view source. | WHA8m wrote: | He made this in the spirit of watch making. Super impressive | and interesting website! | mettamage wrote: | I hope Nicky Case puts this in his list of explorables :) | freeCandy wrote: | There's also a subreddit for aggregating interactive | explanations like these: https://old.reddit.com/r/explorables | mattmoose21 wrote: | Interesting to see why seiko calls their automatic line 21 | jewels. | tadzik_ wrote: | They don't call it that. "21 jewels" just describes the amount | of rubies in the watch movement. | 99_00 wrote: | How difficult is it to bootstrap the ability to manufacture | mechanical watch parts? | | It was only in 2017 that China joined the elite club of countries | capable of making ballpoint pens. Is it that hard? | | https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/01/18... | alfalfasprout wrote: | Very hard. And it comes at an outrageous price. Independent | watchmakers usually go one of four routes: | | 1) Source a movement from a big manufacturer (eg; ETA/Valjoux | or a japanese/chinese movement) and use it as is but design the | case/dial yourself 2) (1) but modify the movement adding | functionality, replacing parts, or refinishing it to your own | standard 3) Designing a custom movement around specialty | movement parts from a supplier like Jaeger LeCoultre. They make | some of the trickier parts (gears, balance springs). They can | also manufacture special parts on a swiss screw machine. 4) | Going through a bespoke movement maker like agenhor. You tell | them what you want and they have both the machinery to make | many custom parts and source the rest from elsewhere. They also | provide movement design expertise. | | Actually machining the watch parts isn't the hard part... the | tricky part comes in things like hairsprings and escapements | which are made from sometimes exotic materials like silicon. | Some tiny watch parts are made using electrical discharge | machining which costs $$$$$$$$ as well. | criddell wrote: | That depends on how many parts you want to make and to what | tolerances. | | https://www.gearpatrol.com/watches/a636135/greubel-forsey-ha... | WHA8m wrote: | Looks like a fun website to spend a hour or two. Thanks! | | Regarding tolerances, your OPs article states that they were | actually able to produce them before, but not at a satisfying | quality. I don't know what a 'good enough' quality is, | though. It's a good story nevertheless :) | michael1999 wrote: | What great work. The only thing I had to read twice was how | energy is restored to the oscillation. The text doesn't discuss | the role of the slope on the jewel fork teeth. But everything | else was so clear as to be transparent. What a loving gift. | boesboes wrote: | Wow very comprehensive & well done. | | If mechanical watches tickle your fancy, there is a ton of watch | repair video on YT. I particularly enjoy wristwatch revival | (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCD80T1s2Za4K682CQDGwEKQ). | | A warning though, if you consider to get into that hobby. I | tried, it's really hard, expensive (I spend close to EUR1k and | that is with b-quality stuff. Good stuff is 5-10x more | expensive.) and can be rather frustrating. Finding parts to buy | can be complicated depending on your locale, loosing parts is | very easy and destroying parts, even when gentle and careful is | par for the course. | | I hat to put my repair hobby on halt after running out of | practice pieces. All now have broken or missing parts. your | milage may vary ofcourse :) | gganley wrote: | Love Marshall's stuff! I also suggest their Magic: The | Gathering podcast [Limited Resources](https://lrcast.com) for | those int TCGs. | 93po wrote: | I was able to get into this with a $60 set of screwdrivers, a | $20 crappy movement from eBay, and another $20 toolkit of | random watch repair stuff that wasn't really necessary. And | maybe like $20 of lube. I would never attempt to service | something I wear/use, but for the $20 crap movement off eBay | there's no harm no foul. | glogla wrote: | My favorite video series of this sort is this guy building | Antikythera Mechanism from scratch, including making his own | era-appropriate tools. | | https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLZioPDnFPNsHnyxfygxA0... | technothrasher wrote: | > A warning though, if you consider to get into that hobby. I | tried, it's really hard, expensive | | Wrist watches are pretty hard and expensive. Pocket watches are | less so. When I was interested in getting more intimate with | watch repair, I went to eBay and bought up a whole bunch of old | pocket watch movements. I've got about 150 of them in various | condition, most of them Waltham (easy to get, inexpensive, and | I happen to have spent the first 25 years of my life spending a | lot of time in the old Waltham Watch Co factory building | because my father's company leased out space in it). | | Basic tools aren't too bad, just a nice set of tweezers, | screwdrivers, and a good magnifier is enough to do a lot of | repairs. But you can fall down the rabbit hole pretty quickly | with the desire for increased quality tools and things like a | staking set so you can replace balance wheel arbors. | | I tried to move from the pocket watches into wrist watches, and | while the technology is largely the same, the reduced size and | increased complexity made it less enjoyable for me. Instead I | ended up moving the other direction and now have a nice | collection of 18th and 19th century 30-hour and 8-day clocks | (more commonly known as "grandfather clocks"). | germinalphrase wrote: | If you wouldn't mind answering a question, how difficult is it | to swap a dial/handset/movement set into a different case? | | I saw a custom mod watch that paired the face/movement of a | Marathon navigator with an O&W diver case*. Is a combination I | find desirable (as the Marathon bezel is too chunky for my | use), but the maker won't respond to emails. | | Is it possible that the combination could be " drop in" or is | it likely to require significant modification? | | *https://westcoastime.com/m16typidivbe.html | boesboes wrote: | That really depends on the sizes, if the face and movement | are the same size I expect it should be easy enough. You will | need some tools and fine motor skill, but no where near as | much as you need when taking apart a movement. | | Looking at the two watches you mention, the navigator has a | Quartz Harley Ronda 373 movement and the diver has a ETA | 2824-2 movement. The 373 I can't find the specs for, but from | an ebay auction it seems to be a 111/2''' diameter. The | 2824-2 is the same diameter. However, all 111/2''' ronda | quartz movements I can find are 3mm thick where the 2824 is | 4.6mm. So what I'd expect is that it will fit, but you might | not be able to secure it properly. It really depends on how | the movement is held in place. Perhaps you can | fabricate/3d-print a spacer for that. | | Another consideration is the lug stem, that might not be the | right size. To long is solveable, to short means buying a | replacement. I am also not sure wether the stems can have a | different thickness, to thin and it wont be waterproof, to | thick just won't fit. | | You could probably try without destroying anything (no | guarantees ;)), you are not really touching any of the | fragile & tiny parts. But you will atleast need tool(s) to | open the cases, they might be different, and a tiny | screwdriver to release the lug. And I wouldn't count on it | remaining waterproof, not sure. | germinalphrase wrote: | Thank you for the detailed response! It's the sort of | project I find intriguing, so I'll have to do a little more | digging. May end up being beyond me though. | | Edit: I see that Marathon does make several watches with | the 2824 (which would presumably simplify the process). | coredog64 wrote: | Depends. The ETA-2824 is a fairly common movement with | inexpensive Chinese clones, so dials and hands are reasonably | cheap and common. If the target case also uses the same ETA | movement then it's simple: Unscrew the back, remove the crown | stem, drop the movement. Assembly is the reverse of removal. | | Where it gets tricky is if the target doesn't use the same | movement. In that case, I'd just buy an AliExpress watch with | the same dial size and an ETA clone movement. Otherwise you | have to ensure your target is the correct size and you'll | probably need to 3D print a movement holder. | germinalphrase wrote: | Thanks for the response! | 1970-01-01 wrote: | Interesting content, interactive, ad-free, and social-media free. | The entire site is a great example of how the old Web was better | than it is today. | archon810 wrote: | https://ciechanow.ski/archives/ - the blog archive is full of | such marvels. | rabuse wrote: | That's it, this is gonna make me pull the trigger on a | skeletonized watch. I've been wanting one for a couple years, but | never really sat down and browsed, but I appreciate the mechanics | so much more after reading this. | vngzs wrote: | It's like a clear hood on your car. On a nice enough car, it | shows the beauty of the engine. But on a cheap one ... Skeleton | watches can be uniquely telling of the price of the watch. | | Worth mentioning, most mechanical watches will have a sapphire | back, so when you take them off you can admire the movement | privately. | Andrew_nenakhov wrote: | This is breathtaking, couldn't stop reading until finished. It'll | be my go-to example of the best possible educational material. | richardlblair wrote: | Did not read, but I did play with all the slidey things. They | were fun. | tamiral wrote: | This is such an easy to follow understanding on mechanical | movements. WOW! From someone who tinkers with watches all the | time and has to explain a simple mechanism over and over I've | found my resource to send to friends now. | leeoniya wrote: | i'm continuously astounded by how accurate the Omega Aqua Terra | is. it will be within 90s over a 30 day period after 4 years of | daily use with no servicing. the fact that something mechanical | and so tiny operating at 3.5hz can do this is mind blowing to me. | | it has a cool [8800] co-axial escapement: | https://www.kapoorwatch.com/blogs/through-the-scope-the-omeg... | vmurthy wrote: | Ha! I followed a rabbit hole and found this gem : Listen to how | 3Hz sounds like. It's hypnotic https://www.omegawatches.com/en- | au/watch-omega-speedmaster-m... | | (Search for 3 Hz and click the Audio icon) | leeoniya wrote: | i put on some decent headphones to listen to this and can | tell you that at least on my 8800 movement (and the common | ETA 2824-2 in another watch i have), this clip misses some | important nuance. | | both movements have an audible "twang" of the hairspring at | each tick -- you can hear it in this video: | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNYCujza8JU. the sound is | somewhat different for each watch, since the 8800 has a Si14 | hairspring and the cheaper 2824-2 is metal. if you want | another rabbit hole: [1] | | what's interesting is that if you leave the watches on a hard | flat surface, like a table or nightstand, the entire surface | amplifies this twang, so you can hear it from several feet | away. | | [1] https://watch-insider.com/reportages/omega-defeats- | mechanica... | CydeWeys wrote: | If you want absurd accuracy in a watch powered by mechanical | energy (without just resorting to a battery-powered quartz), | look into Grand Seiko's spring drive. It's super interesting | technology, and the result is a smoothly sweeping second hand | (as in it's actually continuous, not merely a higher number of | beats per second). | leeoniya wrote: | yep, i've considered that one; insane engineering for sure. | but the watch's aesthetics don't do it for me. also, it does | feel a bit like cheating ;), if an EMP were to go off, i dont | think the Spring Drive would come out okay like a purely | mechanical watch would. | | another crazy one is Zenith's all-silicon oscillator: | | https://masterhorologer.com/2017/09/14/zenith-defy-lab- | the-w... | | https://monochrome-watches.com/zenith-defy-lab- | revolutionary... | CydeWeys wrote: | To be clear, there are literally hundreds of different | models of Grand Seiko watches that are powered by spring | drive that have been produced over the past two decades | plus, with wildly varying looks across the range. It's not | just _one_ watch I 'm talking about here. | leeoniya wrote: | i probably would not get a watch model from two decades | ago, let's limit it to maybe past 5yrs. | | most (all?) that i've seen have a power reserve gauge. if | it's a daily wearer, that needle will be pegged to max | and basically useless clutter. complications for their | own sake are not my cup of tea. | | most (all?) that have a date function have the extra-wide | single digits, which i'm not a fan of. | | (i could go on) | | i know it's not one model, but there's certainly similar | design language to them (as there should be, perhaps), | likely due to the geometry of the movement itself. i | havent seen anything wildly varying, as you say. | CydeWeys wrote: | Here's one example of one without a date or a power | reserve gauge: https://www.grand-seiko.com/us- | en/collections/sbgy007g | | If you do want a date, but it's specifically the font on | the date wheels they use that you don't like, then you're | probably SoL. | BadassFractal wrote: | Incredible work with this article. I didn't realize experiences | like that were even possible in the browser without a whole | company backing the effort. | rotten wrote: | This bumps up my desire to build my own mechanical watch using | one of the kits here: https://rotatewatches.com (something I've | had bookmarked for a while as a possible rainy day project) | ChrisMarshallNY wrote: | That's very cool. | | One of my favorite memories, as a kid, was visiting a museum in | Toronto (I think it was the Science Museum). | | Many of the exhibits had buttons that you could press, to make | them go. | | I remember a giant steam piston. That was cool. | chairmanwow1 wrote: | cached version of the page: | https://web.archive.org/web/20220504151534/https://ciechanow... | subsubzero wrote: | As someone who has been into mechanical watches since I was kid, | this article is beyond amazing and explains everything about how | a watch is powered with excellent interactive diagrams and cool | animations. The author should try to go after other areas of | mechanical movement like operation of a car or a plane. So well | done! | FR10 wrote: | As usual Bartosz with another extremely high quality post, I have | one question, in this bit: | | > However, when the driving gear can't rotate because it's | blocked by the rest of the gear train, the cannon pinion can | overpower the friction of that tight fit and rotate on its own. | This lets us set time without interfering with the gear train, | which could break the delicate parts. | | How can the cannon pinion (green) both overpower the friction to | slide freely and also be attached to the driving gear (blue) when | functioning regularly? | | Does this imply that the driving gear and cannon pinion wear each | other out every time you adjust the time? | wardedVibe wrote: | Bug report: the balance wheel animation when run on Firefox on my | android eventually becomes a forced oscillator, with the slider | running off to infinity | soheil wrote: | Crazy to see this thing with the spring is constantly rotating so | furiously all the time all so just that the second hand would | move ever so slowly once a second. | sakopov wrote: | A few months back I stumbled upon a YouTube video of a watch | maker servicing a mechanical watch. This started a mild obsession | with watch making and I've been watching these videos ever since. | For anyone interested, here's an awesome video [1] of a guy | putting together a watch and explaining how all 60 parts of a | typical mechanical watch work together (by the way the tools he | uses are as cool as the movements themselves). It's surprisingly | easy to follow for a noobie. | | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkK6e4tb5Qk | sebmellen wrote: | Just imagine the utopia that would emerge if all education were | conducted through web-essays like this. Bravo! | anuvrat1 wrote: | Words aren't enough to describe Bartosz's work, every one of them | is a masterpiece. | | Twitter: https://twitter.com/BCiechanowski Patreon: | https://www.patreon.com/ciechanowski | s3ctor8 wrote: | I didn't know I sas going to learn about watch mechanisms today, | but I couldn't stop reading! | moffkalast wrote: | It's so insane how they figured out all of this. The self | winding one way gears are even like a mechanical full bridge | rectifier. | | How was any of this even manufactured at such miniscule | scales... | _fat_santa wrote: | There's something magical about mechanical watches. Maybe it's | just knowing that you have this perpetually winding machine on | your hand (in the case of "automatic" mechanical watches). | | Also knowing that the thing will last forever, take care of it | and it will probably outlive you. Can't say that about an Apple | Watch. | | If you want a good mechanical watch that won't break the bank I | suggest picking up a Seiko SKX (though prices have been going | up), a Vostok Amphibia (might be hard with the ukraine conflict) | or a Timex Marlin. | CydeWeys wrote: | > I suggest picking up a Seiko SKX | | Sadly this advice is a little bit out of date, as the SKX has | been out of production now for a few years and the price on | uses examples has risen above what one is worth (except to | collectors). | | The newer advice is to grab a Seiko 5*. There's a million | different choices, and all the current ones come with the 4R35 | or 4R36 movement, which are better than the 7S26 which was in | the SKX divers. | | * https://www.seikowatches.com/us-en/products/5sports/lineup | jclardy wrote: | I feel the same way, I write software for a living and I'm sure | an outsider browsing through the thousands of lines of code in | my codebases everyday would be confused, but I get that same | feeling when looking at a mechanical watch. To think that | people were building the first mechanical timepieces 500 years | ago, just a hundred or so years after the printing press is | incredible to me. How did they even create parts that tiny so | accurately? | criddell wrote: | A mechanical watch needs regular service which is usually just | cleaning, lubricating, replacing seals and springs. Eventually | it will need replacement parts and that is probably the end of | life for the watch. | | There are a some brands that will service every watch they've | ever made, fabricating new parts as needed. Few of us can | afford one of those. | ajuc wrote: | My grandma has a mechanical watch she only wears on sundays - | to the church. Whenever I was visiting her she asks me to | wind it up for her before the mass. She uses this same watch | for over 30 years with minimal maintenance, and it's not an | expansive brand, just a good noname watch. | kijin wrote: | The parts last quite some time if properly maintained. If | you're worried about replacement parts availability, stick | with the most popular movements such as the ETA2824/SW200 | series or Seiko's NH35 series. | room505 wrote: | Don't forget Citizen's Miyota 9000 series! | criddell wrote: | A lot of watch fans are happy when they see a watch brand | use an in-house movement. I'm exactly the opposite for the | reason you say - the popular movements are going to be | easily and inexpensively serviced for much longer. | | That said, a lot of in-house movements are little more than | tweaks and high end finishing applied to existing commodity | movements. | kijin wrote: | Exactly. The flip side of the recent proliferation of | "barely in-house" movements is that there's actually even | less diversity of movements in the mid-range watch market | than the brands would have you believe. So in the long | term, it's going to be fairly easy to get any of them | serviced. Just replace some springs and gears with | compatible parts from a 2824/2892/7750/whatever and stick | the brand's pretty rotor back on. | _fat_santa wrote: | I'm with you on this. I see a ton of custom watches that | end up using a Seiko automatic movement or an ETA. A bit | like Lotus using Toyota Camry engines. | yobbo wrote: | For example, the size and fit of Seiko "calibers" are the | same going back further than NH35, which means far older | watches can accept NH35 as replacements. Even sub- | assemblies and parts of NH35 fit straight onto 7s26s from | the 90s. | | NH35 can be serviced, but makes more sense an assembled | replacement part. The same argument can probably made for | the entire watch. The appeal of using one watch for 30 | years is more in romantic fantasy than practicality. | JohnBooty wrote: | They last longer if you wear them, say, several times a month | - i.e. if you have a rotation with several quartz watches and | several mechanical ones. They definitely will last decades | that way. | | As others have noted, if you own a well-known brand like a | Seiko you can easily purchase an entirely new movement for | $50-$75 and this should take a watchmaker no more than one | hour of labor or you can DIY. (Many non-Seiko brands use | NH35/36 movements, which are made by Seiko) | bmj wrote: | Will Seiko provide parts for older watches? I just got | stuck with a bricked Swiss Army quartz watch because no one | can get parts for it (it's 20 years old). I'm very tempted | by some of the more affordable Seiko mechanical/automatic | models, but I'd like the watch to last at least a decade or | so. | JohnBooty wrote: | Sadly, I'm not aware of any specific "we will continue to | manufacture parts for X years" guarantees from Seiko. | | Still, though - keep in mind that entire Seiko movement | can be bought for like $50-75. And many of their most | common movements are interchangeable. For example, an | older 7S26 can be replaced with a new NH36 that sells for | about $50. | https://chronometercheck.com/seiko-7s26-movement/ | | It's not entirely unfeasible to imagine buying a spare | movement or three if you were, say, planning on doing | sort of a heirloom thing and wanted to ensure a supply of | parts N decades into the future. | gambiting wrote: | To that point - yes, but it's less expensive than many people | think. I got a vintage 1970 Omega Seamaster in very good | condition some time ago, paid less than PS1000 for it. It | kept very good time, no issues with it, but I decided that | since it turned 50 recently I'm going to treat it to a full | Omega service with an authorized workshop, paid PS495 - that | included replacement original parts from Omega, which of | course they still stock and make for this watch, because well | - it's Omega. | | I asked them how this works, and they said anything younger | than 80 years Omega just sends them parts without any issue, | anything older they have to send back to Switzerland for | service, and yes, then Omega might have to manufacture the | parts required on the spot - and yes, that then turns really | expensive. | snemvalts wrote: | A solar quartz fits this more. Those don't even require | movement or correcting as often as with mechanical watches. | Just light | kijin wrote: | The solar Casio I bought as a teenager stopped holding a | usable charge after a few winters. Maybe it was just bad | luck. I'll see if the new Citizen Eco-Drive in my | collection lives up to the 40 years claim I saw elsewhere. | :) | TMWNN wrote: | My experience with a very high-end solar Casio was akin | to yours, with the battery needing replacing after about | five years. Perhaps gambiting is correct about the common | nature of the battery, but multiple watch repair shops | (both in a department store, and the "old man in a tiny | room in an office building" type) refused to deal with | it. I always had to mail it to an authorized Casio repair | outlet. | | I do not know whether this also applies to Eco-Drive. | gambiting wrote: | Solar Casios(I own two) have a replaceable rechargable | battery, it costs very little and isn't more difficult to | replace than any other watch battery. | | It usually is this one in almost all their models: | | https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B0080GQBTU/ref=cm_sw_r_awdo_X | X5J... | onosendai wrote: | The first Eco-Drives came out in the mid 90s. If you look | around you'll find quite a few reports from people who | bought the very first ones, and which are still ticking | away virtually maintenance-free for 25+ years and | counting. My own, a dive watch with around 10 years, | which has actually been used for its stated purpose, is | also still problem-free and with zero maintenance so far. | | The only thing you need to be mindful of with Eco-Drives | is that you can't let it lose all charge. It can keep | functioning in complete darkness for around 6 months, | according to the specs, but if you do this enough times | the battery will lose the ability to hold charge and will | need to be replaced, and there are plenty of reports to | this effect. If you're not planning on wearing it, just | leave it somewhere that it can get natural light, instead | of a drawer, and you should be good. | | While mechanical watches are undoubtedly cool and | elegant, they're not perfect timekeepers, and when they | do need maintenance it's not something trivial which you | can perform yourself. For my day-to-day watch I'll take | an accurate quartz movement with virtually zero | maintenance any day. In other words an Eco-Drive, or | something similar. | donthellbanme wrote: | Parts rarely fail on watches from the 50's on, especially the | better made watches that are sealed. Even those that arn't | sealed very well, the parts seem to last. | | If a part does fail, it's usually the old blue steel | mainsprings. | | They can be replaced with modern White-Alloy springs. (That | is just a brand name.) | | Watches are my thing. I don't know why I like them so much, | but do. | | Servicing does take awhile to learn though. That whole 10,000 | hrs probally. Servicing a watch does not take that long to | learn. I'm talking about making parts with a Jeweler's lathe. | And getting to the point where you know those parts well | enough to visualize exactly what's wrong with a timepiece by | looking at it. | | If you did learn to clean/oil your mechanical watch, it's | something that will be passed down to loved ones. | | Oh yea, Service a mechanical watch when it stops keeping good | time. That is unless you take it in the water. | | I know a watchmaker who told his father he needed to Service | his gifted wristwatch. His father got it 30 years ago as a | present, and just wore it daily. The watchmaker was expecting | dried up oil, but to his astonishment, the oil was still | there. It was hermetically sealed. Oils do breakdown, but he | couldn't find any damage to parts using a 40x stereoscope. | zppln wrote: | An SKX isn't gonna outlive you and once it fails they'll just | replace the entire movement anyway. | | Mechanical watches are still indeed cool though. :) | ghostpepper wrote: | As an owner of an SKX who doesn't know much about watch | longevity, how long can I expect it to last? Are there other | automatics that will outlast a person's life? | | It still blows my mind that you can take the SKX scuba | diving, especially when you factor in the price. | | This may sound cynical but as I get older and see the world | becoming more and more digital and connected, I find myself | appreciating analog, mechanical things like watches and old | cars more and more. | yobbo wrote: | I have a 7s26A movement out of a late 90s SKX which was | unserviceable, and another 7s26C became unusable after 4-5 | months of use. | | I also have a replacement 7s26C which worked flawlessly | [-5,+5] s/d out of the box and a year so far, and another | watch with NH35 which still holds [-5,+5] s/d after seven | years of daily use. | | There are stories of SKX:s which hold good time after 20 | years. | | There are much cheaper watches than SKX (at their current | prices) that will withstand the depth, see "Beyond on the | press" pressure chamber tests, for example | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ti-GdfGbj4Y | criddell wrote: | If you are going to take your SKX diving, you probably want | to have a watchmaker pressure test it once in a while and | make repairs as needed. The seals dry out and water will | get in. | jstanley wrote: | I think maintenance requirements are overstated. I wore a | relatively cheap (~PS120) mechanical watch continuously for | about 8 years, and never had a single problem with it. I | only stopped wearing it about 2 years ago when I finally | bought a smartwatch. It still works fine, I just don't wear | it except on special occasions. | | If your watch is a sizable investment then maybe you care | about maintenance more, but otherwise I wouldn't worry that | it's going to stop working in short order. | CydeWeys wrote: | > Are there other automatics that will outlast a person's | life? | | Very unlikely. You do hear the occasional story of a | mechanical watch running fine for several decades without | requiring any servicing, but there's a lot of survivorship | bias at play there. It's extremely unlikely to go ~8 | decades without needing servicing. Keep in mind there are | lubricants at various places in the movement that are | essential to proper operation that evaporate/denature over | time. | mmcgaha wrote: | My father's Seiko from the late 70s still keeps time at | around 30 seconds per day. It has never been serviced so I | am sure it is bone dry and really should not be run. I | regularly wear a 2015 Seiko that used to be 8 seconds per | day fast but has fallen to 5 seconds per day slow so it is | probably time to service it. My two newest watches are from | 2017 and 2021 and they are consistent since break in. So | given my limited number of data points, I would say 5-7 | years between service but if you just want to wear it until | it dies, 10+ years is probably reasonable. | | On a side note, I have read about 40 year old Seikos being | worn daily without service but that sure feels outside of | the norm. | kijin wrote: | Mechanical watches can last a lifetime (or more) if | properly maintained and periodically serviced, just like | old cars. | | People all over the world pass down their Rolexes and | Omegas, still ticking, to their children and even | grandchildren. Patek Philippe is well known for their | slogan, "You never actually own a Patek Philippe. You | merely look after it for the next generation," showing | confidence in the longevity of their watches. | | Of course those are very expensive brands, but I think part | of what makes expensive watches last longer is that their | owners take good care of them. Few people bother to get | their SKX checked up on a regular schedule, on the other | hand, because they're so cheap and easily replaceable by | first-world standards. | iamben wrote: | Agree with you so much. It still feels absolutely magical | wearing one. The SKX007 was my first automatic watch and I wore | it daily for 10 years. Incredible thing. | karolist wrote: | Still love my SKX007J though I don't wear it as much once I | got in the habit of step counting, maybe I should start | wearing two watches... | _fat_santa wrote: | I actually have an SKX013 which I like wayyy more than the | 007. Basically the same watch but that 39MM size is perfect. | iamben wrote: | I wear a 39mm watch as my daily now. I agree - fantastic | size! | NoGravitas wrote: | I have an automatic mechanical watch - a Seiko 5. It loses | about 5 minutes a day. It might only need an adjustment to | calibrate it, but that would require a watchmaker. I think the | last one in town just went out of business, and even if he | hadn't, the cost of his labor would be greater than the cost of | the watch. | yobbo wrote: | > It loses about 5 minutes a day | | This suggests it's completely out of spec, and maybe beyond | saving. However, regulating functioning Seiko movements is | certainly within reach for enthusiasts using a timegrapher | device, or software with a microphone. Persistently adjusting | over a few days, it should be able to get within -10,+10 | seconds per day. | | The timegrapher will also reveal the condition of the | movement and whether further work is worthwhile. Servicing | these movements is likely more expensive than replacing them. | Ancapistani wrote: | It's not hard to make the adjustment, but you need a | timegrapher to measure the results in a reasonable time. | | I've adjusted a couple of my watches over the course of a | week or two by making small adjustments, noting the time, | wearing it for a day, and then noting how much the time had | changed versus a "known good" time. It's a pain but doable. | | There are mobile apps that use the phone's microphone to | measure the watch's "ticks" and graph them for you. They | aren't anywhere near as accurate as a "real" timegrapher but | they'll get you close enough. | | At one point I had about a dozen mechanical watches. These | days I have three, and only one that I wear almost | exclusively. It's a Maratac Mid-Pilot, which uses a Miyota | 8245 movement. I've used the "adjust and check later" method | to adjust it, and it loses about 10s per week - well within | the acceptable range. | | The other two that I've kept are a Seagull 1963, which I wear | as a "dress watch", and a Vostok Retro 1934, which I | sometimes wear when I want a change of pace. It has a white | face and I have a variety of brightly-colored straps for it. | | One day I'll step up and buy a Hamilton, but I'm still | savoring the serotonin from looking at them and anticipating | :). | CydeWeys wrote: | > but you need a timegrapher to measure the results in a | reasonable time. | | This is just an app now. All a timegrapher is is a | microphone and software, and, well, your phone has all | that. This is the app I use; I highly recommend it: https:/ | /play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.watchaccur... | bluetomcat wrote: | > Maybe it's just knowing that you have this perpetually | winding machine on your hand | | It's a mechanical device which stores energy in a spring | barrel, and consumes it through a set of gears to produce | constant velocity motion. | rkangel wrote: | I keep considering a mechanical watch, but I think I'd find the | accuracy a bit tedious - having to continually adjust it every | week so that I didn't arrive late to appointments. | | I like a watch that gets out of the way - it just works. I've | got a Citizen watch a little like this: | https://www.citizenwatch.co.uk/stiletto-ar1130-81a.html | | It's a quartz watch, powered by solar power through the face. | It has 'just worked' for as long as I've had it. From an | accuracy point of view, it loses negligible amounts over the | several month interval between me being forced to adjust it | anyway (daylight savings, international travel). | alfalfasprout wrote: | It depends on the movement in the watch. Any COSC chronometer | movement will hold +4/-6s per day which worst case is under a | minute lost per week. Typically the error is much smaller. | 93po wrote: | You can always get a spring drive from grand seiko - it's | mechanical (with an "brake" driven by an integrated circuit, | but still no battery) but basically only gets a few seconds | off per year. Lowest price point for those is like $5k | though. | rkangel wrote: | I do love Seiko watches. That's probably a little steep for | me but I'll have a look! | esaym wrote: | If this makes you think mechanical watches are cool but you don't | really want to wear one.. you can go the other direction. Ebay is | full of old mechanical driven (be it pendulum or wound springs) | wall clocks that are looking for new owners. | clord wrote: | > when we pull the crown all the way out to enter the time | setting mode, that stop lever blocks the balance wheel, which | stops the watch in an action known as hacking | | whoa, is this the origin of the word "hacking" in the "throw | something into the wheels to make it work" sense? very | interesting. | rammy1234 wrote: | I found this interesting. For more mechanical watch reference - | https://www.timezone.com/2003/10/04/mechanical-watch-faq/ | shepherdjerred wrote: | Every post from this site is gold. I've learned so much from it. | gotaquestion wrote: | There are many centuries of engineering behind this. I went to | the Museum of Horology in Austria. It has examples of the first | mechanical clocks, up to today's timepieces. It is fascinating | looking at the giant, wrought-iron town clocks that kept shitty | time and bent and rusted, and seeing different parts of the clock | evolve over the years, especially as engineering & metallurgy | improved. | | https://www.watchtime.com/featured/watch-spotting-at-the-vie... | niviksha wrote: | This blog itself is a work of art, like mechanical watches | themselves | spaetzleesser wrote: | I got this wooden clock for Christmas a while ago: | https://smile.amazon.com/ROKR-Mechanical-Building-Supplies-B... | | Definitely helped me to understand how clocks work. And it's fun | to watch it. | avestura wrote: | This man is marvelous. Even though I know how top-notch he is at | writing interactive blog posts, he surprises me with his quality | every time I open his new blog posts. Bartosz is a huge | inspiration for me. | pcurve wrote: | I don't make this comparison lightly but I'm reminded of | Leonardo DaVinci. How much talent does one need to create | something like this? It's not enough to be just 'good' at | engineering, design, watchmaking, and writing... you have to be | amazing at it ALL of it. AND have motivation to do it. | | I'm just in awe. | moffkalast wrote: | I read the GPS one a few months back, he absolutely amazingly | explained the whole thing to a depth I never would've expected. | Liron wrote: | He's elevated technical explanations to a delicious art form | leeoniya wrote: | same with https://www.youtube.com/c/3blue1brown | muh_gradle wrote: | Enjoyed this one very much. I am hoping to get a blue dial Orient | Bambino to wear for my wedding. I've always loved that watch. | I'll have to refer to this article to explain the "but why | mechanical.." question. | _asummers wrote: | I love 1940s/1950s instruction videos. Here's one from Hamilton | that shows how they work that I really like. | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rL0_vOw6eCc | jagger27 wrote: | https://web.archive.org/web/20220504151534/https://ciechanow... | beeforpork wrote: | Amazing! He's done it again, I am blown away! Thanks you very | much for this unmatched level of documentation quality! | elorant wrote: | I'd gladly pay for content like this. It's so informative. I've | watched yt channels of people who disassemble and fix automatic | watches, but never understood all the intricacies in such detail. | This is what journalism, or writing in general, should be about. | Explain things and go into details. | [deleted] | JohnBooty wrote: | The author has a Patreon, so we really can pay for his content. | =) | | https://www.patreon.com/ciechanowski/posts | smusamashah wrote: | All of articles from this blog are worth archiving and putting in | a library in this exact interactive form forever. I never | understood mechanical watches before. Now I know exactly how they | are made possible. Thanks for explaining it visually while | interaction with the visuals. | cbdumas wrote: | This page got the HN hug of death it seems. Absolutely deserves | all the traffic he is getting, Mr. Ciechanowski's blog is an | absolute gem. | naikrovek wrote: | Normally I would crap (pretty hard) on web tech, because | normally, it's only ever used to make websites harder to follow | in the name of design, or to create new ways for ads to be served | to me. | | This site, and the most recent blog entries on this site, are | excellent examples of why web technologies are not all bad. | People seeking new ways to make money make everything bad, | eventually, and thankfully there are bastions of utility without | sales still to be found, sprinkled around. | yakshaving_jgt wrote: | People trying to make money is actually what drives rather a | lot of the innovation that you enjoy every day. | | The "capitalism bad" trope is a tired one indeed. | naikrovek wrote: | nah, people trying to make enough money don't create | Facebook. people trying to have enough to live comfortably | don't create Amazon. | | monsters create those companies, and monsters grow them. | | growing larger and more profitable at any cost is called | metastasis, and that's what's happening. lives get worse for | most while the cancers grow and grow, almost unabated. | sarang23592 wrote: | What an insanely cool demo of the workings. This is so | informative. I mostly dismiss such stuff thinking I won't | understand it but this one was easy to follow even for me. Loved | it | jonsen wrote: | I was reminded of the great video lecture | | Gerald Sussman Teaches Mechanical Watch Ideas at MIT: | | https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TWQN8Yf1g70 | hexo wrote: | There are no images, like, why? :( | gjvc wrote: | This is what the web should be all about. | jIyajbe wrote: | Wow. I had no idea how intricate and CLEVER the mechanism of a | mechanical watch is. Being no engineer, I cannot imagine how | someone could think of all these clever designs. (Yes, of course | the mechanism evolved over time. Even so.) | | I have been wanting to buy an old mechanical watch. When I do, I | will never again complain about how much a watch repair shop | charges. | | Also, the explanation, presentation, and animations are top- | notch. Amazing work by the author!! | SOLAR_FIELDS wrote: | You know, I had the somewhat opposite impression reading the | article. For me, what is interesting isn't the absolute genius | of the design (which of course, it is). I find it more | interesting that the watch has had enough staying power as a | useful machine in society over hundreds of years to have gone | through thousands of design iterations to arrive at the | "genius" design. If you have enough smart engineers over | several hundred years working at a problem, such an elegant | design seems almost an inevitability to me. | | I would call it "clever" if one or two engineers created this | over perhaps a decade or so. With thousands of engineers over | several hundred years, however, it just feels like the natural | evolution of things. | | I feel that a lot of things happening in today's society will | be the "watch" in 100-200 years. A marvel of complexity at | first glance, and then an acknowledgement of how much "standing | on the shoulders of giants" contributes to things that are | enjoyed on a daily basis. | nintendo1889 wrote: | I always thought a compass that floats in water, and is also a | sundial would be neat. Not super accurate but very good for | military, offgridders and preppers, wherever there's limited | access to power. | nodesocket wrote: | What a fanatic writeup. I've been fascinated with mechanical | watches for what seems like forever. I browse YouTube at night | and see collections by Mr. Wonderful and John Mayer (mostly very | high end collector grade Rolex, Patek, AP, IWC). I actually | splurged and purchased a new Omega Seamaster Professional Diver | 300 automatic and absolutely love it. It does have a see-through | back making watching the caliber 8800 movement hypnotic. | barbazoo wrote: | I couldn't quite figure it out from the (excellent) writeup but | when you wind up the watch, you wind up the barrel AND the | balance wheel, right? | praash wrote: | The balance wheel gets a small energy push through the | escapement on each tick. The barrel's mainspring has enough | force to just kickstart a stopped balance wheel. The balance | wheel doesn't really need much "winding" - it's equivalent to | the pendulum of a grandfather clock. | | It's really fascinating seeing this mechanism alive, even in a | simple mechanical kitchen timer with plastic gears. When wound | up, the balance wheel starts to swing a little and quickly | accelerates on each tick. | vanshg wrote: | Same question. The balance wheel/hairspring has to be losing | energy overtime to friction (however miniscule). Otherwise we | have ourselves a perpetual motion machine | panki27 wrote: | This is mentioned in the article. The pallet fork gives the | balance wheel a small push after unlocking, giving it a tiny | bit of extra momentum. | alfalfasprout wrote: | To add to the other answer, that friction (and the intertia | of the balance wheel) is actually factored in when regulating | the watch. The pallet fork gives the balance wheel a nudge on | every "Tick" then the pallet fork stays stuck until the | balance wheel swings around and back and jolts it in the | other direction (the tock). Basically a little bit of energy | is released from the mainspring via the escapement to the | pallet fork to the balance wheel on each tick/tock. | aliljet wrote: | This may not be the most valuable comment, but my goodness, the | quality of this writeup and it's interactive descriptions of | complex mechanical components AND their interactions is radically | impressive. The treatment of complex topics in deeply visual and | partially interactive ways, for me at least, is a remarkably | helpful way to learn. | unfocused wrote: | Agreed! This is top quality writing AND interactive | illustrations. | [deleted] | sixothree wrote: | Does anyone know the tooling used to create these? | phailhaus wrote: | According to his Twitter, he just uses bare canvas and WebGL. | [1] What a legend. You can inspect the page and read the | source js, it is unminified. | | [1] https://twitter.com/BCiechanowski/status/1484013009219375 | 105... | amelius wrote: | Very impressive. The only thing that would make it better | is a physics engine that would allow the user to play with | gears etc. | [deleted] | tomtheelder wrote: | I almost couldn't believe the quality of this while reading it. | Not just animations, but _simulations_? That perfectly | illustrate the concept being discussed? Incredible. Not to | mention the incredibly clear and articulate prose. | soheil wrote: | To be 100% honest I found it very intimidating to even begin | reading it. It's such a time sink (no pun intended) and a huge | wall of text (with figures and interactivity nonetheless). | duderific wrote: | I usually get about half way through his posts, see how much | is left and just give up. Nonetheless I get a lot out of | them. | surement wrote: | The author calling this a "blog post" really undersold it! | causi wrote: | True multimedia is a lost art. We had it back in the 90s when | software came on discs and it was a high-density, polished | product that combined text, audio, video, and interactive | elements on the same page. The internet taking over turned | everything back into text, and then as bandwidth grew the only | thing we thought to use it on was higher and higher bitrate | video. | | When I was a kid I thought the future was going to be fully- | integrated data. Like I would be able to pause a movie and | click on anything I was seeing to get more information. Click | an actor, get his bio and interviews about the movie and | bloopers. Click a vehicle and get its model. Click a special | effect and see how it was done or an animal and learn about | that animal. Imagine watching Lord of the Rings and being able | to instantly read the original lore of any object, location, or | character just by clicking/tapping it. Hell, even the smallest | things can radically change your experience. Imagine if | Wikipedia articles had appropriate background music. I guess | there's just no market. | ezconnect wrote: | That was also my dream when I first saw the CD encyclopedia | and seeing the first demo of AR using google maps of pointing | your phone to a building and seeing information about it and | then the introduction of google glass, then it all suddenly | disappeared. | throwaway821909 wrote: | Last time I used Amazon Prime Video, around 2017, it would | show info that Amazon deemed relevant for that bit of the | show (apparently it's called X-Ray). Back then at least, it | wasn't on the same level as what you described but still | something. | | The danger was it made me want to pause all the time in case | I missed something interesting, but by putting the user in | control of what they get info on, you could avoid that. | reaperducer wrote: | _Last time I used Amazon Prime Video, around 2017, it would | show info that Amazon deemed relevant for that bit of the | show (apparently it 's called X-Ray)._ | | X-Ray still exists, but the only way I've ever seen it used | is to tell you what the background music is, and the names | of all the actors in a scene. But even then, it is often | incomplete. | reaperducer wrote: | _Like I would be able to pause a movie and click on anything | I was seeing to get more information_ | | I remember the cable companies promising this when everything | went "digital." | | I also remember when the movie studios promised us one of the | big advantages of DVDs over VHS was that we could watch the | scenes of a movie from any angle? | | Yeah, that never happened. | rapind wrote: | And the director / talent commentary tracks, which were | sometimes really great (Vanilla Sky comes to mind). I think | that was only common for a really brief period | unfortunately. To be honest I think it just failed from a | market perspective (cost vs revenue). I could be wrong and | maybe it still happens a lot? | | Suspect the angles thing was the same. Sounded cool but no | one wanted it (or to pay extra for it). | ghostbrainalpha wrote: | There is absolutely a market for your LOTR example. I think a | kickstarter made LOTR or Harry Potter Interactive | applications like you are purposing could charge $1,000 | maybe. | | And I 100% align with your 90's prediction. What we gained | going from Encarta to Wikipedia was amazing, but we shouldn't | forget that we lost some things too. | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=po3yW-wdLr0 | gman83 wrote: | Couldn't the Wikimedia Foundation raise some money to | produce these kinds of videos? I wonder why they don't. | skyfaller wrote: | I think one problem is that it's difficult to make videos | easy for anyone to edit, the way a wiki text page is. | | - The skills to edit video are more difficult to acquire, | in part because - The hardware and software requirements | can be expensive, and are not universally available - | Once you've made a video, not everyone has the bandwidth | to view it in high quality (certainly the first step to | editing it) | | Wikimedia could hire people to make videos, but they | could also hire people to write articles, and | (generally?) don't because that's not how they roll. | | A Wikipedia-like platform for video would be fascinating, | and worth pursuing, but a significant technological and | social challenge. | zozbot234 wrote: | You can already put instructional videos on Wikiversity. | | You're right that the editing workflow for raw video is a | challenge, but I expect that support for editable | animations, interactive simulation, etc. will also be | added at some point. It requires some infrastructure for | editing securely sandboxed code in-wiki, which is in the | works anyway for the upcoming project Wikifunctions. | digisign wrote: | There is a movie player that would highlight the | character/actor on screen at the moment you hit pause. There | is a link to find out more that would take you to the | appropriate web page with the info. | | I want to say it was google play, but not completely sure. | rkangel wrote: | Amazon Prime Video show you information on the actors in | the current scene. If you are (e.g.) chromecasting from a | phone you have it continually on the mobile display while | the film is on the TV. | newaccount74 wrote: | Amazon Prime Video | digisign wrote: | I've never used that, so there must be another one. | pontus wrote: | I came here to write the exact same thing. Amazing content. | stephbu wrote: | Came here to write the same - that was amazing... | justusthane wrote: | His post on how GPS works is equally excellent[1] (as are, I'm | sure, the rest of his posts). | | [1]: https://ciechanow.ski/gps/ | bambax wrote: | Came here to say the same thing. This incredibly well done, | well written, well executed, well... everything. How does one | find, not only the talent, but the patience to do such | incredible work... Mind boggling. | pcurve wrote: | This might be the single best work of art on the Web I've seen | since 1995. Nothing else even comes close. | alimov wrote: | I think that the person(s) that created the interactive visuals | would find this to be a helpful comment. Radically impressive | is a fitting description. I don't think I've ever seen and | interacted with anything like it, although I imagine people | working with CAD software get to see and mess around with this | kind of stuff pretty frequently. | fuddle wrote: | I wonder how long it took him to put together this blog post? | remarkEon wrote: | 1000%. | | Sent this to my dad, and can't wait to talk this weekend. When | I was a kid we would tinker around with watches in the basement | but, alas, I had different interests and never really got | around to truly understanding these mechanisms. I don't really | know web development beyond setting up basic pages, but how the | CAD was integrated into this is wonderful and I'd love to see | more posts going through things like human joints or ICE, or | maybe weapons ... other things where we kind of intuitively | _grasp_ how they work, but don 't know the details. This entire | blog seems to do a lot of that. So cool. | positivejam wrote: | He has one on the ICE actually, though I don't have the link | handy. | mbrubeck wrote: | https://ciechanow.ski/internal-combustion-engine/ | marcodiego wrote: | Nice! Now show us how a mechanical watch with a 3-axis tourbillon | works: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5TveIl2whXY | KaiserPro wrote: | This is a most excellent writeup. Its so very clear, | understandable, but also precise. | | A word of warning, diving into watches and clocks can be a | time/money sink. | | If you're not careful you'll end up building something like this: | https://www.secretbatcave.co.uk/projects/electromechanical-c... | eggy wrote: | I started with Greg Daniel's masterpiece: Watchmaking. | | https://www.amazon.com/Watchmaking-George-Daniels/dp/0856677... | dutchbrit wrote: | I was about to post the same book. Pretty much a must have if | you get into watchmaking. | eggy wrote: | My late Uncle Vic taught me how to repair clocks and pocket | watches when I was young. I let it go, and returned to re- | learning it with this book. I still dream of completing my | first, from scratch, pocket watch. | anfractuosity wrote: | I've heard of that book before, it sounds really interesting | too! Creating your own mechanism sounds extremely complex, is | that what you're doing? | ramtatatam wrote: | If I was born 20 years before I was born I would be able to | enroll in clock-making faculty in University of Technology I | graduated. They discontinued this faculty, and the only remaining | part was a course of precise mechanics I received.. | | This article is pure gold. It makes me thinking how much of know- | how is already lost and how much can we find in some old book | stores... I'd buy a book about clock making. | rotanibmocy2 wrote: | Amazing animations and incredibly well explained. Best ELI5 of a | mechanical watch EVER | sillysaurusx wrote: | Does anyone know how the author supports themselves? They have a | patreon, but it's not enough to make a living: | https://www.patreon.com/ciechanowski | | The hardest part for me when doing open source work full time was | giving it up and getting a day job. I was fortunate that my wife | was the breadwinner, and that I got to see what it was like to be | a stay at home husband. I've often wished to go back to it. Did | the author figure out a way, or is he wealthy? | | He could also be a Superman, being able to do this with a full | time job or contracting work. | | I spent a few days studying their blog. The work is so good that | when I retire, I'll make a conscious effort to copy their style | as closely as possible. It seems like the optimal way to transmit | knowledge. | | I wish there was an equivalent to YouTube sponsorships for blogs. | If this had a 3 minute preroll ad, they would be rolling in | money. | wlesieutre wrote: | _> I write interactive articles about physics, math, and | engineering. It 's a weekend hobby of mine, so I only end up | making a few articles per year._ | | Superman it is! | erikig wrote: | A cursory search indicates that he's a game developer in the UK | which explains the WebGL chops. | badindentation wrote: | I think that's a different guy because his twitter profile | (from the website) says he lives in California. | moritonal wrote: | They made anywhere from PS470 to (using a rough sharp-tail | model) PS1666 per article. | | Whilst I agree that the amount of time required do this doesn't | professionally cover that, it's a very nice hobby which makes | somewhat real money (very much depending on how many sharp the | tail of PS54's are) and garners some serious traffic whilst | building a very solid credability in the industry. | | Plus I signed up, so now they make PS2.50 more! | stephenanand wrote: | yumraj wrote: | This was fantastic, for the first time in my life I actually | understood what _jewel_ means and what _n_ _jewels_ refers to | when it comes to a mechanical watch. | | If Bartosz is reading this, I'm genuinely curious how much time | did it take him to create this post. It looks like an insane | amount of work with all the knowledge acquisition, write up, | animation and so on.. | natly wrote: | This guy deserves way more patreons than he has: | https://www.patreon.com/ciechanowski | JohnBooty wrote: | Well, he just got one more. What an absolute treasure. | slough228 wrote: | two more. | ycombinete wrote: | And my axe | chadash wrote: | three more :) | aenis wrote: | ...and a practical example of a race condition :-) | aenis wrote: | Three. And I am sure many more to come. Quality stuff. | [deleted] | Razengan wrote: | Is there a "gearpunk" hobbyist community anywhere? Where people | design mostly un-electrical contraptions or even mechanical | computers etc.? Would be a pretty fun and rewarding hands-on | craft. | justAlittleCom wrote: | Mechanical watch nerd here. This describe an ETA (swiss) | movement, I really prefer the Japanese movement (I know mostly | seikos). The mechanism are more simple and more robust. For | instance, on ETA the crown mechanism is really sensitive, a lot | of tiny fragile parts with a lot of tension in them, it go wrong | easily. | | Also, seeing this web page I got frustrated by the fact it | doesn't tackle what got me the hardest time: how can the crown | move the hands without any clutch mechanism (some have) ? It's a | matter of friction and torque, so it's hard to get while | reasoning on a "perfect" mechanism. | tpl wrote: | Love the diagrams. Great write up! | JohnBooty wrote: | I am absolutely astounded. This is incredible craftsmanship, on | par with mechanical watches themselves. | | This creator is absolutely among the best at his craft. I lack | the words to properly describe my admiration. | zander312 wrote: | Stunning visuals and interactivity! | herodotus wrote: | Mr Ciechanowski's articles are themselves complete works of art. | Another brilliant article and collection of interactive | animations. | | My favourite escapement is the detent escapment. I saw a cutout | model at the Imperial Science Museum in London. Even after | staring at it for ages I could not figure out how it worked! ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-05-04 23:00 UTC)