janekp

mam 5 ,zadna rewelacja .....

Wolalbym zebys sie interesowal Wiedniem .....

pokazuj zakup tutaj

Widzialem go na zywo tez ,fajny ,,,

Mialem z nim -PJ- kontakt od 2011 roku,byly problemy z wypalaniem na miedzi ,na stali i innych materialach ,doborem emalii ,kolorami itp,pozniej rzeczywiscie wszedl w giloszowane tarcze

Mam kilka takich zegarow,bardzo mi sie podobaja ,gratuluje nabytku.

Podepne sie pod Twoj temat i wrzuce filmiki z moimi Telavoxami,jeden zasilany trzema paluszkami drugi zasilaczem z sieci

Witam po przerwie. Troche to potrwalo ale skontaktowalem sie jednym zegarmistrzem i na podstawie opisu patentu udalo mu sie odtworzyc w miare dokladnie to co autor mial na mysli. Zeby to zrobic zostal przeciety zegarek kieszonkowy na pol i zaadoptowany do napedu tego mechanizmu. Zgodnie z opisem zespol napedowy od kieszonki wystarcza a reszte daje duzy beben ,aha i jest to bijacy roczniak. Mysle ze zasade dzialania i droge restauracji opowie sam mistrz. Niestety jest to jedyny znany na razie na swiecie werk z tym patentem i nie za bardzo wiemy czy dzialal poprawnie.

Pawel Jankowski rzeczywiscie to robil Polecam filmik

No to gratuluje szczescia i czekamy na zdjecia

A nie zauwazyl kolega ze o niektorych zegarach na nawacu sie nie pisze ,bo ja widze takie tematy tabu<To samo w Niemczech ,we Francji<bratobojcze walki o ciekawe egzemplarze ostatnio w modzie :Pobejrzalem niedawno kolekcje w Niemczech, o zadnym z zegarow tutaj nie rozmawialismy a byl roczniak ktory nie powinien istniec a jest niestety

musze Ci powiedziec ze tak wlasnie zadzialalo ostatnio intuicyjnie cos odpuscilem bo kolega jest napalony rowniez i udalo sie

Popieram

Zostawilem kieszonke u pewnego zegarmistrza ciekawe co z niej wyjdzie ,,,,,,,

Szkieletor

Dziadek w czwartek przejezdzam obok Ciebie Moge sie nim zaopiekowac

No nie jest tak zle ,trzeba sie liczyc z tym z enie kupi sie nigdy idealu,ja ostatnio nawiazalem kontakt z handlarzem i zaoferowal mi mechanizm do roczniaka,dogadalismy cene ,przy odbiorze okazalo sie ze jest mechanizm i ,wahadlo - gdzie cena samego wahadla ho ho ho .Nie narzekalemna ten zakup.

No tak roczniaki sa wymagajace,ja sie domyslalem czyj to zegar ale skoro kolega chyba cos zauwazyl to nasze rady byly jak najbardziej na miejscu.Jezeli zegar chodzil pol roku to bedzie chodzil dalej.

To chyba ktos z forum sprzedal a jak miales adres z Berlina to znam tego goscia handlujacego roczniakami w Niemczech.Jak najszybciej do kompetentnego zegarmistrza bo beda nieodwracalne szkody po krotkim czasie

David begins by stating that John Hammersley announced his invention of the tria-in-uno spring in the February 1860 edition of the HJ, with the stated objective of eliminating the problem of 'acceleration' in new chronometers, and that this has not been disputed. However the origins of the duo-in-uno spring were disputed with Hammersley by both McLennon and Walsh. Acceleration is the effect seen in chronometers with balance springs formed by hardening and tempering the helical portion and only afterwards forming the terminal curves at each end by bending. Such springs can take a long time in use to settle into a stable rate. Hammersley's invention allowed the spring to be completely formed into its final shape before hardening and tempering, without resorting to any manipulations afterwards. He includes diagrams of tria and duo from Rupert Gould's famous work on chonometers. David goes on to mention Hammersley's design for a 'double flat isometrical balance spring' which corresponds exactly with the example shown by Ethan in post #17, and which was contested by J.F. Cole who stated that he had made such springs 30 years earlier, which Hammersley had subsequently to accept. In 1894 Hammersley wrote in the HJ that he accepted that McLennon had been the first to apply a duo-in-uno spring to a watch, although he had been making the claim earlier on his own watches for some time. Hammersley did however claim that the duo-in-uno was merely a tria-in-uno with one spiral cut short. In a letter to the HJ of September 2018, David expanded on his article with an image of a US patent, (2,457,631 from Dec. 28 1948), concerning a complex demountable former for cylindrical balance springs, by W.O. Bennett Jr. for Hamilton's Model 21. He supposes that Hammersley must have used a similar former to avoid damage to the finished spring when the former was removed. He also clarified a point I had brought to his attention regarding the exact configuration of duo-in-uno springs. Na zdjeciu werk Frodshama ;temat z Nawacu https://mb.nawcc.org/threads/what-theoretical-advantage-if-any-does-a-duo-in-uno-hairspring-possess-over-a-helical-hairspring.159085/ I now have a scan of the 1862 catalogue page containing i nformation on the Charles Frodsham stand. It says of the duo-in-uno harispring (at the bottom right of the page attached): New "Duo in Uno" balance springs for perfecting the adjustments of high-class watches and chronometers in their various positions. In his watches and chronometers Hammersley used duo-in-uno springs (as shown by Graham earlier in the thread) too but never wrote about them. In fact, we do not know much about them at all. Duo-in-uno’s explanation, given by Tony Mercer in his The Frodshams, was taken almost word by word from a eulogy of A. P. Walsh given by Robert Gardner in 1893. Gardner wrote that Walsh told him that the duo-in-uno was invented by Mairet.* There is compelling evidence that this might not be true. In 1860, there was an argument between James Fergusson Cole and Hammersley about who invented the trio-in-uno (which, at the time, was called a “double flat balance spring”). Cole, claiming priority, knew Mairet well. He used Mairet’s movements in quite a few of his watches. Had Mairet invented the duo-in-uno, Cole would have known about it and, logically, he would either have mentioned the fact in his arguments or he would have not argued at all. But instead he did argue. My impression has always been that the tria-in-uno was invented first (first by Cole circa 1840 without the helical section, then by Hammersley about 1858** with the helical section) and then the duo-in-uno was a logical simplification. Had the duo-in-uno been invented before 1860, the heated argument between Cole and Hammersley would not have made sense. Someone, even Mairet, would have objected that both of them stole the idea from him. Having said that I cannot resist but mention that there are known watches from circa 1820 with duo-in-uno springs. Like John Roger Arnold No. 2175 (British Museum) or Pennington No. 130/596 (hallmarked 1810). Another advantage of the duo-in-uno and the tria-in-uno over helical is that the sagging effect is smaller. * Interestingly, in the Chronometer Makers, the same Mercer says that it was John Osborn McLennan that was “reputed to have invented the Duo-in-Uno balance spring”. This is probably due to the fact that the McLennans exhibited them in 1862 Exposition. But in June 1860 McLennon, writing on the subject of double flat springs, did not mention anything about himself as a precursor of the idea. ** In May 1860 Hammerslay claimed he introduced them "more than two years since in London". A "standard" helical hairspring has an attachment to the balance cock at the top that is roughly in the vertical line of the hairspring with a slight inner curve to the attachment point. The end that is attached to the balance typically has a single curve of one turn that goes to the collect on the balance. Almost all helical springs are made that way including the larger marine chronometers as well as pocket chronometers. The "duo in uno" hairspring changes the curve from the cylindrical spring to the balance to a flat spiral of several turns. Other variants have the flat spiral on both the top and bottom of the cylindrical portion or have the entire hairspring formed into a spherical form. A. P. Walsh had succeeded in "perfecting" the hardening and tempering of hairsprings in the 1850's and was the supplier of the springs to many of the top makers in England, so many feel that his springs and the watches made from them are superior and thus Gardner's praise of his skills.

O ile dobrze zrozumialem opis to rowniez wlos byl podwojny w jego zegarkach?No i jeszcze regulator wiszacy tegoz autora. US46652.pdf US165991.pdf US42175.pdf

Zdjecia nie sa moje ,znalazlem gdzies w necie chyba elektrodaczy jakos tak ,wpisz zelazkiewicz ,rzeczywiscie byl powiaznay z lodzka fabryka,wazne podkreslenia jest slad wywozu maszyn ze slaskich fabryk do czech ....

Pierwszy z brzegu przyklad Zegar o napedzie elektromagnetycznym balansu z wbudowanym przerywaczem. Zasilanie najprawdopodobniej 9 VDC Pozniej aparat fotograficzny wojskowy W 1936 roku Wytwórnia Zegarów WUZET Żelazkiewicz K. i Nipanicz E. w Warszawie rozpoczęła w Polsce licencyjną produkcję (montaż) aparatu SIDA. Strona 33 http://mbc.cyfrowemazowsze.pl/Content/60622/00063950%20-%20Historia%20Zak%C5%82ad%C3%B3w%20Mechaniczno-Precyzyjnych%20Mera-B%C5%82onie.pdf Fabryka Zelazkiewicza WUZET powstala w 1931 roku w Warszawie przy ul Grzybowskiej . strona 6 http://bcpw.bg.pw.edu.pl/Content/5192/09pt1939_nr11.pdf

No tak ,masz racje ,juz wiem to jest miernik bezpiecznego czasu skoku na lewo dla zonatych mezczyzn z mozliwoscia resetowania i wykonania kilku skokow w bok