[HN Gopher] Mechanical Watch
___________________________________________________________________
Mechanical Watch
Author : todsacerdoti
Score : 3400 points
Date : 2022-05-04 15:06 UTC (1 days 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?
| donatj wrote:
| Here is "drawing a triangle"
|
| https://www.tutorialspoint.com/webgl/webgl_drawing_a_tria
| ngl...
| lostgame wrote:
| Holy living crap. I was all with it up until I saw the
| actual full HTML example. That is an incredulous amount
| of overhead for what is essentially one of the most basic
| and fundamental operations in *GL.
|
| Comparing this to Canvas is almost like comparing
| assembly to C. I'm honestly very surprised.
| kragen wrote:
| Though boilerplate is never acceptable, most of that is
| constant-factor overhead, not per-triangle overhead, and
| tutorialspoint is not a site you should trust under any
| circumstances. See my links above for better sources.
|
| If you put more vertices and indices in Step 2 you can
| draw an arbitrarily complex 3-D object with this same
| code.
|
| And there's a lot of stuff in GLSL where you can program
| directly with high-level concepts like vectors, normals,
| and partial derivatives, instead of expressing them by
| hand the way you would in C.
| woojoo666 wrote:
| Using a framework is also constant factor overhead (at
| least in LoC, which is what I assume we're talking about
| here)
| kragen wrote:
| Right, and that's what the glslCanvas project I linked
| above is, though in this case it's _negative_ overhead if
| you 're just counting the lines of code you have to
| maintain :)
| woojoo666 wrote:
| Ah gotcha. Yeah I was alluding to ThreeJS, a very
| powerful and standard framework for webgl
| kragen wrote:
| Yeah, ThreeJS is awesome! glslCanvas is just for drawing
| with shaders, not for general 3-D.
| donatj wrote:
| Yup. This is why my crappy little 3D game engine still
| uses canvas and not WebGL. I can't feel good about myself
| and deal with all that.
| kragen wrote:
| Yeah, Canvas 2D is great, though it's not any more OO
| than WebGL, and I sometimes forget to create a new path
| and wonder why it keeps getting slower and slower with
| every frame. SVG is also pretty reasonable.
| andai wrote:
| Neat, you do the math yourself and then render the
| tris/quads in canvas? I did something like that recently
| (in C/SDL, later RayLib). I found it amusing that to get
| performant 2D rendering you have to use a 3D API, so my
| "software rendered" 3D engine which just uses the gfx api
| for 2D draw calls ends up using 3D for the 2D under the
| hood...
|
| There's at least one (great) game written like that
| though, Need for Madness with a custom 3D engine and just
| using java's 2D gfx api for rendering.
| kragen wrote:
| I did this in 02007 in JS:
| http://canonical.org/~kragen/sw/torus
|
| Except that WebGL didn't exist so I just had to use the
| 2-D <canvas>. There's probably some trick for getting
| antialiased polygon edges in <canvas> to not show
| cracks...
| kragen wrote:
| That looks like a fair bit of boilerplate, and a shitty
| tutorial with comments that mostly just repeat what the
| code says, but the API doesn't look unusable.
|
| https://github.com/patriciogonzalezvivo/glslCanvas/blob/m
| ast... has most of that same boilerplate in a less
| repulsive form. https://github.com/patriciogonzalezvivo/g
| lslCanvas/blob/mast... has other bits.
| andai wrote:
| Now compare it with Flash ;)
| dncornholio wrote:
| ActionScript was fucking great. :(
| donatj wrote:
| Honestly I think your examples are both genuinely _less
| comprehendible_ to someone without a deep understanding
| of GL going in than my example.
|
| It's a very bad, non-object oriented API in an object
| oriented language. It was designed for and by people who
| know GL in other C like languages, not for people who
| know JavaScript. It is unlike any other part of the
| language.
|
| The fact that I have to write a shader myself, as a
| fricken string like I'm writing SQL over here, just to
| draw a triangle is absurd. There should at the very least
| be some sort of provided builder for simple shaders.
| kragen wrote:
| Yeah, they probably are, I didn't intend them as
| tutorials but as a better representation of the actual
| scutwork necessary to draw a triangle.
|
| Object-oriented languages are not a good way to do 3-D
| rendering. If you want to write pixel shaders in JS you
| can totally do that but you will have to run them on the
| CPU; as it happens I wrote a program last week that works
| that way: http://canonical.org/~kragen/sw/dev3/trama. If
| you want to run them on the GPU you need a language that
| exposes the GPU's capabilities.
|
| In essence your primary complaint is that the GPU
| instruction set is not object-oriented (and neither is
| your database). Well, you can design your own GPU, but
| I've got some bad news for you about Verilog, Chisel, and
| BlueSpec! And you may find out that the real problem is
| that solid-state physics isn't object-oriented, so your
| OO GPU will end up underperforming, like the Burroughs
| B5000 and the Symbolics 3600 (hopefully not as badly as
| the Intel iAPX432). You'll probably have more success
| writing an object-oriented database.
|
| However, I do agree that WebGL is a bad API, because
| boilerplate is never acceptable.
| yiyus wrote:
| > you may find out that the real problem is that solid-
| state physics isn't object-oriented
|
| I am saving this quote for future use. Thank you :)
| cycomanic wrote:
| Funny, I would argue that the rock on my table is very
| definitely an object ;)
| indigochill wrote:
| But even if we're arguing physics, that's debatable. The
| shape and toughness of the rock are actually an effect of
| forces between the atoms composing the rock, and the
| weight of the rock is actually the interaction between
| the mass of the rock and the earth. The color of the rock
| is the effect of the interaction between the molecules in
| the rock and photons (which are themselves wave-like) and
| then the interaction between that light and the cells in
| your eyes.
|
| Objects are a convenient day-to-day model in real life
| and software, but there are more "functional" models that
| comprise the object model.
| kragen wrote:
| Examine it more closely; you will find that it is a
| dynamical system composed of sextillions of parts,
| constantly entering and leaving the rock, and that the
| boundaries between the rock, the table, and the air are
| very fuzzy indeed. It isn't even encapsulated, nor are
| its interactions with its environment mediated by
| messages to which it freely chooses a response; it _is_
| its environment.
| TedDoesntTalk wrote:
| Your insight is remarkably well-written. I wish we could
| see our bodies in the same way, all of the time. The
| world might be a kinder place overall. Do you meditate?
| kragen wrote:
| Not enough to be useful. But I'm glad you enjoyed it!
| kaba0 wrote:
| I don't see how someone not understanding GL first can do
| anything useful with it. Like, what would such people
| even use it for? If they need a complete solution just
| use a plugin that displays some rotatable 3D model. But I
| really don't see the value of planning for the lowest
| common denominator in case of a highly specialized domain
| specific API.
| 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.
| notjustanymike wrote:
| Fun fact, the time and date on the model is correct as well.
| hennybobbu1994 wrote:
| grishka wrote:
| Are you sure about the _by hand_ part? There 's a lot of
| repetition, it feels like at least some of it must be
| generated.
| grishka wrote:
| I asked him. I was wrong.
|
| https://twitter.com/BCiechanowski/status/1522067904522428417
| matheusmoreira wrote:
| I wish he'd write a post about how he developed these
| visualizations. How does one even learn how to make something
| this amazing?
| indigochill wrote:
| > How does one even learn how to make something this
| amazing?
|
| I haven't done anything quite this amazing, but I have
| created other things with minimal upfront knowledge and
| "the way" is simple: just jump in and give it your best
| shot with what you already know, identify the most glaring
| deficiency in what you made, take your best shot at solving
| that, and repeat that process until you have something
| cool. You can also use this process to focus what you spend
| time studying/learning, as you backfill the information you
| were missing to figure out how to overcome whatever
| obstacles you encounter.
|
| It does take time, but you know what they say about long
| journeys and single steps. Sometimes there are no shortcuts
| and you just have to take a lot of steps.
| emmelaich wrote:
| Yeah, I'm sure a lot of it is copy/pasted or #included from
| his other work.
| ThePhysicist wrote:
| There is repetition but it doesn't look auto-generated to me.
| 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
| soheil wrote:
| Cool example, but all r3f is doing here is just providing
| the threejs camera, controls and the text with emoji, the
| watch itself is loaded as a .glb file, where I'd assume
| most people would be interested in learning about.
| JayStavis wrote:
| Yeah, I think exporting a scene from blender as glft/glb,
| and then using these tools to bring your exported 3D file
| to the web, is one of the more approachable abstractions.
|
| The reason you'd use gltfjsx (which that example doesn't)
| is to have fine grained controls for every node in the
| scene graph. In the case of the watch, this would map to
| having a component for each mesh or gear, which can be
| controlled with mechanics/physics.
| 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.
| syncsynchalt wrote:
| wget will do what you want, with the right flags. Try `wget
| -r https://ciechanow.ski/mechanical-watch/ --include-
| directories=js/`, the resulting `ciechanow.ski/js/` dir
| should have it.
|
| Adjust the flags as necessary to crawl more of the site if
| needed (omitting `--include-directories` without an `-l
| {limit}` flag will eventually crawl the whole site, please be
| kinder to their bandwidth than that).
| 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
| jseban wrote:
| > and now we have to deal with source maps and shit
|
| Yeah minification is only really for obfuscation. The
| small and unpredictable difference is absolutely not
| worth the ridiculous complex "solution" of source maps.
| Just the fact that your debugger really doesn't work
| right, is a deal breaker in and itself, not to mention
| all the time spent configuring and fighting with webpack.
|
| I don't think any form of "compilation" i.e. bundling,
| transpiling, minification etc is needed at all.
| Javascript can already dynamically load (additional) code
| files when needed, I don't understand why you need to
| bundle it in the first place.
|
| I don't buy that the http request overheads are so big
| that it motivates all this complexity, and in the average
| case a user don't use every single page of the
| application anyway, so by bundling everything you are
| always serving "too much", compared to just dynamically
| loading additional code.
| MrDOS wrote:
| Of surprise to no one, Brotli does better on both:
| $ ls -l *.js -rw-r--r-- 1 mrd staff 330904 5
| May 01:04 watch.js -rw-r--r-- 1 mrd staff
| 152172 5 May 01:10 watch.min.js $ brotli
| watch.js $ brotli watch.min.js $ ls -l
| *.br -rw-r--r-- 1 mrd staff 34461 5 May 01:04
| watch.js.br -rw-r--r-- 1 mrd staff 27122 5
| May 01:10 watch.min.js.br
|
| If I were serving this content, and if my web server and
| all of my target browsers supported Brotli, I'd be
| somewhat more content to ship an un-minified + Brotli-
| compressed file than an un-minified + gzip'd one. I'm
| sure it's some rule of thumb stuck in my head from the
| Web 2.0 era, but a JavaScript payload in excess of 40KB
| crosses some warning line in my head. (Probably 40KB /
| ~4KB/s throughput on a good dial-up connection = 10s
| transfer time, about the longest you'd want to wait for
| even a pretty spiffy page to load.)
| MrDOS wrote:
| > I'd be somewhat more content to ship an un-minified +
| Brotli-compressed file than an un-minified + gzip'd one.
|
| Whoops, typo: I meant to say that I'd be somewhat more
| content to ship an un-minified + Brotli-compressed file
| than a _minified_ + gzip 'd one. That is, I'd be more
| happy to serve the 34.4KB watch.js.br than the 32.5KB
| watch.min.js.gz.
| lifthrasiir wrote:
| Gzipped JS is generally much smaller than minified JS,
| but minified-then-gzipped JS is even more so. The
| minification (assuming gzip) doesn't make a much
| difference in this case only because the input file is
| not that large at all and compression algorithms have a
| natural bias for larger inputs. You can (rightly) claim
| it is bad to have a JS file large enough that the
| minification makes a difference after all, but you'd be
| moving a goalpost then.
| selcuka wrote:
| True, but it also removes the comments and the
| whitespace, leading to slightly better performance and
| memory usage. There are also less bytes to gzip on the
| server side.
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| Slightly, but is it enough to warrant the extra steps?
|
| I don't think the difference is significant enough in
| this case.
|
| That said, I do think there should be an alternative to
| minification+gzipping, like e.g. a compiled version of JS
| that is more optimized than a browser's own JIT compiler
| can do. Mind you, that might up being a larger package
| than the JS source code.
| kaba0 wrote:
| Webassembly is* pretty much that
|
| * hopefully will be
| 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.
| Handytinge wrote:
| We definitely won't if people are taught that frameworks
| are the only option and never allowed to just write a full
| program on their own.
| phailhaus wrote:
| Nobody stopping you from _not_ using a framework, and yet
| there is basically nobody else at Ciechanowski 's level.
| It's not going to happen, you can't expect everyone to
| become a hardcore webgl expert (have you tried?). If we
| want more cool interactive visualizations, we have to
| make it easier. Otherwise, we're stuck waiting for those
| with the time and expertise to pull it off.
| 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.
| jseban wrote:
| > has the potential to be the most performant
|
| It also has the potential to evolve in the most efficient
| way.
| the_cat_kittles wrote:
| it depends if you are doing something to get paid, or to
| last, or to be really good. only in the first case do i
| ever consider a heap of abstractions
| noitpmeder wrote:
| This is so backwards.
| the_cat_kittles wrote:
| it really depends on what your doing mate!
| kaba0 wrote:
| Abstraction is the only thing that makes any of our
| advancements possible. Not even the simplest of math
| theses could be proves without a "framework" of relevant
| lemmas, nor could you write even a single hello world
| without the layers upon layers of abstractions written
| carefully over the decades. Sure, there is also bad
| abstraction, but the problem is the bad part, not the
| concept itself.
|
| Without abstractions you wouldn't be able to read a text
| stored on a remote computer with accompanying style
| information displayed the same on both of our devices and
| with embedded 3D graphics doing the same thing on vastly
| differing devices be it a top of the line GPU or a simple
| low-end phone. Is it not abstraction?
| the_cat_kittles wrote:
| i mostly mean the _heap_ of stuff people often throw at
| problems. of course you cant do anything without
| abstractions. it helps to understand them better though.
| jseban wrote:
| Well, if the abstractions were peer reviewed and put
| through the same rigour as mathematical proofs, that's a
| whole different topic.
|
| The equivalent would be a mathematical services company,
| who created "free" abstraction packages that required you
| to rewrite all your math, away from the scientific
| community standards, to fit their abstractions, and who
| also made money on consulting and selling books. And the
| big benefit of it all, is really that they only
| abstracted away writing summaries of your papers, which
| is actually the easiest part that is quite irrelevant to
| your research.
| kaba0 wrote:
| But it is not math - we only have empirical evidence and
| not even much from that.
|
| Who is to tell whether the OSI model is ideal? It is more
| than likely not it, but we can't measure these things up
| front, there is an insane cost associated with changing
| it, etc. Yet again, what is the alternative? We can't
| manage complexity any other way, and essential complexity
| can't be reduced.
| the_only_law wrote:
| > Who is to tell whether the OSI model is ideal?
|
| The current idea of the OSI model was also retrofitted
| from what it originally was.
| ranit wrote:
| > but it does so in the same way as writing your programs
| directly in assembly
|
| > contains lots of magic numbers and very imperative code
|
| Well, we really don't know if the code was written in this
| form by hand, don't we.
|
| It could have been compiled into this, to use your words,
| "assembly with magic numbers and imperative" from much more
| elegant form. We may see this form only because this is
| what browsers understand.
|
| I am not saying it _was compiled_ , just speculating that
| seeing pure WebGL does not mean it was pure WebGL to begin
| with.
| tomc1985 wrote:
| Graphics code tends to be imperative and have lots of
| magic numbers. I suppose it's the math-intensive nature
| of it.
|
| Personally I'm not a fan of the magic numbers either but
| as I study more and more of it, it's _everywhere_
| aiisjustanif wrote:
| It was.
|
| https://twitter.com/BCiechanowski/status/1522067904522428
| 417
| swayvil wrote:
| On a scale of 1 to 10 how strongly are we talking here?
| plebianRube wrote:
| 9.5 Your PR will be held up for at least a month with the
| back and forth.
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| > Don't minify or bundle anything
|
| Yeah in this case it doesn't need to; there's no extraneous
| or unused code or documentation blocks, and gzip (and
| comparable) compression is good enough, minification doesn't
| actually reduce the downloaded code size by that much.
| WHA8m wrote:
| He made this in the spirit of watch making. Super impressive
| and interesting website!
| tomcam wrote:
| Holy shit
| rsp1984 wrote:
| I'm observing that developers these days are quite surprised to
| see anyone write code for OpenGL / WebGL directly instead of
| using some layer of abstraction on top, such as Three.js or
| Unity etc. Few seem to know that OpenGL already is an
| abstraction of the computing model underneath.
|
| A couple years ago I did some consulting for a company that
| needed a point cloud rendering engine. Luckily I had one ready
| to go. I showed them and they liked it and their young devs
| asked which library I was using. When I told them I used OpenGL
| they couldn't believe it. To them OpenGL was the "black magic
| box" and using it akin to having secret conversations with the
| GPU in some arcane cryptic language.
| bori5 wrote:
| In my waking up state I read that as "some layer of
| distraction". How fitting ;) But back to original post , yes
| his work and website is amazing.
| jachee wrote:
| When it's time to simplify and/or troubleshoot overly-
| complex things, I like to use the phrase "The abstraction
| is a distraction".
| hilbert42 wrote:
| _" Turns out he codes everything by hand in WebGL "_
|
| You really have to admire people who do stuff like that (I
| can't imagine that I would ever have the patience to do that).
|
| What I'm mildly curious about is why would anyone want to do
| it? Is there a demand for such stuff? I can understand it if
| the exercise was for training people but wouldn't most people
| who were interested in the internal workings of watches already
| be familiar with them?
|
| I'd reckon most would be like me in that they'd pulled enough
| watches apart in their younger years to already know their ins
| and outs (I've long lost track of the number watches and clocks
| I've either fixed or disassembled by the time I was a
| teenager).
| bitcurious wrote:
| > I can understand it if the exercise was for training people
| but wouldn't most people who were interested in the internal
| workings of watches already be familiar with them?
|
| Most young people don't even have access to a mechanical
| watch these days.
| syncsynchalt wrote:
| There's little benefit to writing your own asm these days[1],
| yet we need people who know asm intimately to write
| compilers.
|
| It's the same here. Without people who deeply understand a
| tool's input and output, we won't ever write a better tool.
|
| [1] don't @ me, cryptographers and kernel programmers.
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| I like that; it's a lot of work but a lot of people seem to
| prefer to have to make libraries work together than to just do
| the work, and it's timeless since it doesn't depend on any
| future frameworks; any issues that might come up in the future
| with regards to browser incompatibility can be fixed relatively
| easily.
|
| Would antifragile be an applicable word to use here?
| ojr wrote:
| I have a WebGL project thats been broken for a few years due
| to a browser deprecated api, it is not a relatively easy fix
| 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.
| joshwcomeau wrote:
| This fits into a category of thing known as "explorable
| explanations". They're an amazing form of media. This one is
| particularly brilliant!
|
| Check out this site for many others: https://explorabl.es/
| 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.
| antiframe wrote:
| I shared this blog post with him and he said "That's the
| coolest thing I've ever seen". I can't say I disagree with
| him.
| donthellbanme wrote:
| To those interested in becomming a Watchmaker I can offer this:
|
| 1. The school route is great, but after the two year program
| you still won't get a parts account from anyone. You will have
| no problem finding a job though.
|
| 2. Self-taught. It will take awhile, but it's a rewarding
| hobby/career.
|
| Every budding Watchmaker should have books. Books by DeCarle,
| Fried, and Daniels are great.
|
| There are old correspondence courses that are good to. Try to
| get Chicago School of Watch Repair, and Bulova School of Watch
| Repair. Hunt around for the best price.
|
| The quality of internet videos on the internet are spectacular.
| You are lucky to have them. When I started their was only one
| guy who taught Watch Repair.
|
| Tools:
|
| #2, #5 Dumont tweezers. (any tweezers will do, even the cheap
| ones.)
|
| Watch back removal tools. You will need various types,
| including Rolex, and universal tools.
|
| small ultrasonic bath to clean parts. A mason jar filled with
| cleaning fluid, and rinse will suffice to hobbiests though.
|
| oils. Moebius are recommended, but expensive. Personally I
| think they are overpriced.
|
| Presto #1,#2 hand removers.
|
| some Radico.
|
| A mainspring tool. These can get pricy. Look for a old set of
| Marshall mainspring removal tools.
|
| Decide if you want to work with a loupe, or a 10-40x
| stereoscope.
|
| a band remover.
|
| A staking set. (Look around. No need to spend more than $250.00
|
| A jewelers lathe, mill, etc. come way later. The biggest
| mistake newbies make is buying every tool they thing they might
| need. Then again you wealthy boys can go crazy.
|
| Too tired to go on, but I'm in the Bay Area under "I buy
| Watchmaker, jeweler, amd some Machinist's estates. I'm gearing
| up to do repairs. I hope to have a website soon. I'm thinking
| about teaching, but not sure if there's a market for it.
| 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.
| boesboes wrote:
| I probably already went overboard a bit when staring out. My
| cost where mostly in a stereo microscope and the consumables
| (mobius oils, cleaning liquids). Oh and maybe I didn't need a
| timegrapher before having a functional movement haha
|
| Also, almost everything I had to import in to the EU.
| Importing chemicals is expensive for some reason I
| discovered. UPS charged me like 3 times the usual amount.
|
| There is a lot of advice that says 'don't cheap out, just buy
| good stuff'; which is great if you are going to make this
| really your hobby for years to come. But I feel starting with
| some cheap tools on a junk movement is a fine start.
| 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...
| tgmatt wrote:
| When I saw this, the first thing I did was Ctrl + F to see if
| anyone else dropped Marshall's link. I have no desire to do it
| myself, but it's so satisfying to watch him repair them. His
| videos are great.
| dan_quixote wrote:
| His videos are a delightfully interesting AND relaxing.
| Always a joy to watch and very little patreon/shill filler.
| kQq9oHeAz6wLLS wrote:
| Huh, I recently got into it and, as is my way, I did things on
| the cheap. All told, including tools and practice movements
| (and a couple inexpensive whole watches I restored) I'm in for
| maybe $100.
|
| Here's a tip on buying watches to repair or restore - avoid the
| big brands at first. Many watches use the same or similar
| movements (ETA is a big one, but you'll find Seiko movements
| hiding in watches from the 60s and 70s, too).
|
| eBay is your friend (don't fall for too-good-to-be-true items
| from India or Pakistan)
|
| Hang out on watchrepairtalk.com and/or watchcrunch.com and ask
| lots of questions. It's a very friendly community.
| 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").
| jachee wrote:
| I was recently gifted an 1850's Waltham that a buddy
| restored. Pulling it out of my pocket is now my standard
| answer to "What's your TikTok?"
|
| This little site really helped me cement in my mind what's
| going on inside of the watch.
| 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.
| modeless wrote:
| Your definition of "old web" includes WebGL?
|
| Stuff like this is a smaller percentage of the web these days,
| but in absolute terms there's more of it than ever before and a
| lot of it is higher quality too.
| Teknoman117 wrote:
| As much as I might like features of smartwatches, my favorite
| watch is a skeleton style mechanical watch my grandparents bought
| for me a number of years ago. Watching the teeny tiny gears
| moving around is somewhat cathartic.
| 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.
| Linda703 wrote:
| 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...
| andrewgleave wrote:
| Interestingly, I met George Daniels a number of times (creator
| of the co-axial escapement). He asked me to record a video on
| my phone of a model he created to illustrate how the escapement
| works:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVhSQ_Azkr8
|
| Not the best video you'll find on it now, but he was a
| fascinating man.
| 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)
| mjard wrote:
| One of my isolation projects was to put together a watch using
| an ETA 2824-2 movement from EBay. You might want to consider
| buying the parts you want individually. Match a case to a
| movement or it's clone. Find a dial that matches the movement
| complications and the case diameter. Find hands that match the
| movement and the case diameter. Most of the work is in the
| identification of parts, putting the watch together is really
| just like slapping a small sandwich together (minus putting the
| second hand on, that... is a test of dexterity, perseverance
| and commitment, the shaft you have to set it on is ~0.25mm).
|
| Often a seller will be a small time watch maker and their
| components will all fit together, a good way to save on
| shipping.
|
| Result: it's become my favorite watch, I wear it every day.
|
| Next project was to use a bunch of cheap clone parts and a 3d
| printed dial, still working on that one :)
| exhilaration wrote:
| I'd love to see a picture of your watch!
| 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!
| modeless wrote:
| He didn't do planes yet but he did the internal combustion
| engine: https://ciechanow.ski/internal-combustion-engine/ and
| boats: https://ciechanow.ski/naval-architecture/
|
| I could post more but just go to the archives and see. Every
| single one is a treasure and there are few enough that you can
| read them all: https://ciechanow.ski/archives/
| 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?
| mayapugai wrote:
| This is a wonderful article! Thank you to the author for taking
| the time to write and animate all this.
|
| I want future generations to have access this so I have to ask -
| how can I back up this page with all of the interactive 3D
| animations still operational? Simply saving the HTML file doesn't
| seem to work.
| 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
| tempestn wrote:
| > Once the pallet fork unlocks the balance wheel, that wheel has
| to start spinning very quickly. This is why gears in the gear
| train have holes in them - it reduces their moment of inertia so
| that the barrel can accelerate them more quickly.
|
| I think that should say "unlocks the _escape_ wheel ", not the
| balance wheel.
| 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!
| tomaskafka wrote:
| I believe that for every Bartosz Ciechanowski (huge kudos and
| thanks to him!) there are 100 similarly abled people, who can't
| create essays like this, because they need to do something else
| to keep the lights on. A collective loss.
| elxr wrote:
| Sounds like something basic income could help alleviate.
| 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...
| wumms wrote:
| Bug report: on page load, the play/pause button for the stop
| lever interaction [0] shows the play icon albeit the animation is
| already playing.
|
| (The div needs the class 'playing' added, e.g.
| <div id="stop_lever_interaction" [...]> [...]
| <div class="play_pause_button playing"></div> </div>
|
| instead of <div class="play_pause_button"></div>
|
| )
|
| [0] https://ciechanow.ski/mechanical-
| watch/#stop_lever_interacti...
| mananaysiempre wrote:
| OK, if we're piling up here :)
|
| > This mechanism protects the fragile tips of the balance shaft
| from braking when the watch experiences a sudden jerk.
|
| "Breaking", presumably.
|
| More generally, am I the only one who finds that the temporal
| aliasing in the fast repetitive animations just before the
| balance is introduced looks funny to the point of being
| misleading? Might be my combination of mobile hardware, though,
| I wouldn't normally expect it to synchronize to the framerate
| to this extent, but I'm seeing that it does.
|
| (I appreciate the immense effort it would take to make this
| account for aliasing with motion blur or similar. I just went
| "huh?" when fiddling with the speed slider there, because it
| really was confusing at first.)
| _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.
| rusticpenn wrote:
| Not to defend Apple watch or other smart watches, but they have
| been my dream since my childhood watching James Bond movies. So
| I love both mechanical watches for their engineering and smart
| watches for what they bring to the table. We dont have to diss
| one to make the other feel better.
| 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
| Prcmaker wrote:
| I've been using the same mechanical watch, more or less every
| day, for a little over 12yrs now. Miyota movement, stainless
| body, Sapphire window, about $300. In years of machine shop
| work the movement survived fine, and has one scratch on window
| from some tungsten carbide.
|
| Has kept brilliant time, maybe a minute a month, and taught me
| that my watch being accurate to the second was something that,
| for me, just didn't matter. I started working around pulsed
| high voltage last year (100kV+) and now it loses a couple
| minutes a week.
| jclardy wrote:
| I've got a cheap Seiko 5, the SNK809. Bought for $50 new in
| 2013, wore it for a few years then it moved with me in
| drawers for the past 5. I pulled it out last week, wound it
| up and it works perfectly, gaining just 4 seconds a day.
| cyounkins wrote:
| > I started working around pulsed high voltage last year
| (100kV+) and now it loses a couple minutes a week.
|
| Are these two things somehow related to one another?
| Prcmaker wrote:
| Yes indeed, though not necessarily the cause in this case.
| While it could be coincidence, magnetization of components
| can result in reduced accuracy. Some companies have started
| to release watches with silicon springs, though very
| expensive.
| brchr wrote:
| Watch movements are generally sensitive to magnetic fields,
| and can become magnetized and lose accuracy. Some watch
| models explicitly advertise their level of resistance to
| magnetism, for instance the Rolex Milgauss, which is
| designed to withstand 1,000 ("mille") gauss.
| DeathArrow wrote:
| Omega has watches that are METAS certified, so they
| resist up to 15000 gauss. They use silicon balance and
| silicon escapement.
| DeathArrow wrote:
| > I started working around pulsed high voltage last year
| (100kV+) and now it loses a couple minutes a week.
|
| There are antimagnetic watches. Or you can use a cheap watch
| demagnetizer.
| Prcmaker wrote:
| A demagnetizer is on the shopping list, but at the same
| time, a quick adjustment every now and then is easy enough.
| I also love my watch, so a switch to antimagnetic isn't
| high on my priorities.
| eganist wrote:
| > one scratch on window from some tungsten carbide.
|
| Checks out. Tungsten Carbide and Corundum (sapphire watch
| crystals, the hardest watch crystal in use) have the same
| Mohs hardness of 9 and will scratch each other.
|
| And I'd guess that a $300 watch probably doesn't use Corundum
| but rather mineral glass.
| Prcmaker wrote:
| County comm mid pilot watch, it's advertised as Sapphire.
| Comparing with colleagues at the time, it was a far sight
| tougher than their watches.
| 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.
| mickael-kerjean wrote:
| Ever since I picked the hobby of fixing old mechanical
| watch, in house movement is my number 1 criteria for not
| buying because of the availability of parts.
| 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.
| kQq9oHeAz6wLLS wrote:
| Not just custom - Seiko used to (still does maybe)
| provide manufacturers with bare movements, even with the
| company name on it. That means you'll find "no name"
| watches from the 60s onward with Seiko movements. That
| makes servicing, repairing and replacing them much easier
| and cheaper. Same with ETA.
| 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.
| twobitshifter wrote:
| I have seiko automatic which kept great time when I first
| bought it, but not long after, it slipped off my wrist and
| fell on the tile floor. Since then it has been losing time
| but no so much as to be a huge problem. Would service easily
| fix this or is it just something to live with?
| elxr wrote:
| Should be a simple fix. It might just need regulation on
| the balance wheel (super quick, no need to disassemble the
| whole movement), or one of the pinions might be bent (just
| replace that wheel).
|
| Take it to a watchmaker, a fix like this would be pretty
| straightforward.
| dwringer wrote:
| It may or may not be easy to fix properly, but if it's an
| inexpensive Seiko it may not be worth doing that, just
| replacing the movement when it wears out completely.
|
| That said, simply adjusting the tick rate to regulate
| timekeeping is very easy and if you've got steady hands and
| a sharp eye then you can do it yourself with a wooden
| toothpick, assuming you've got a tool to remove the watch
| back. Any shop (offering repair facilities) could do it as
| well in a matter of minutes.
| sausagefeet wrote:
| Seiko makes a huge range of watches so: it depends. If it's
| a cheaper one, just buy a new one. If it's a mid-range one,
| you can just buy a new movement for under $100 and toss it
| in with a few tools. Lots of tutorials on YouTube.
| 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.
| [deleted]
| 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.
| approxim8ion wrote:
| They also cost a ton to service. It's nice if the
| sentiment of carrying something through the years appeals
| to you, but the thing that keeps me away from mechanical
| watches is the service costs compared to the odd battery
| replacement on a quartz.
| 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!
| domh wrote:
| I have a couple of Seiko automatic watches, but I recently
| picked up an SNK809 as a new daily driver:
| https://www.benswatchclub.com/blog/seiko-5-military-review. For
| PS120/$130, it's cheap enough to wear every day and it looks
| great. The amount of mechanical complexity and engineering that
| goes into it for that price is mind blowing.
| 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
| :).
| hoseja wrote:
| Why wouldn't they be accurate? You have a fairly precise
| 44kHz sampling rate, the only issue might be identifying
| the ticks.
| 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...
| kQq9oHeAz6wLLS wrote:
| Tickoprint is another app for android that works great
| 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.
| sparker72678 wrote:
| This rings especially true when you live and work in an
| ephemeral digital environment. I find mechanical devices of all
| kinds _grounding_. No batteries, no upgrades, no security
| vulnerabilities, no dependency hell.
| 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!
| therealplato wrote:
| you can expect a quality automatic movement (imo seiko is
| lowest end of quality) to be off on the order of single digit
| minutes per month
| 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.
| 1-6 wrote:
| Certainly a labor of love. Well done!
| tokujin wrote:
| How can I save the page with the interactive animations to my
| computer?
|
| I'm using wget --page-requisites \
| --span-hosts \ --execute robots=off \
| --adjust-extension \ --convert-links \
| https://ciechanow.ski/mechanical-watch/
|
| but I get "Loading..." messages in place of the animations when I
| open the saved html on Firefox.
| 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.
| e1ghtSpace wrote:
| Well, you can also hack away at a tree with an axe.
| 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.
| ubermonkey wrote:
| This is really, really beautiful and cool.
| bacon_waffle wrote:
| For folks who are interested in the subject matter: electronic
| tuning fork movements, like the Accutron 214, are amazingly
| elegant bits of engineering. Both the time regulation and motive
| power are provided by a tuning fork (vs the balance wheel and
| mainspring), which is kept oscillating through electromagnetism
| (vs the escapement) in one of the first consumer applications of
| the transistor. The movement was designed and started being
| manufactured in the late 1950s.
|
| Max Hetzel's patents are a good starting point -
| https://www.accutrons.com/tuning-fork-watch-patents
| _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
| smetj wrote:
| Will we still be able to find and consult this mesmerizing piece
| of documentation art in let's say .... 100 years? Pretty sure
| mechanical watches will still exist then.
| sunpazed wrote:
| What an awesome explainer! I love mechanical watches. I have a
| relatively cheap Stowa Antea which runs a simple hand-wound
| Peseux/ETA 7001. It's so thin, the entire watch is less than 7mm
| thick. All of what you see in this explainer is crammed into that
| tiny space the size of a stamp.
| jagged-chisel wrote:
| That scale can't be right. Pocket watches are bigger than a
| quarter.
| vladde wrote:
| They have other blog posts as well, all equally interesting and
| detailed.
| 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
| s1mon wrote:
| One thing that hasn't been mentioned is how the parts were
| modeled. I asked @BCiechanowski on Twitter and the response was
| "Modeled in Shapr3D [0], animated manually in JS". Another person
| asked about the gears, and he said "Gears are just generated
| programmatically, it made it very easy to tweak their shape as
| needed".
|
| Overall, a fascinating workflow.
|
| [0] https://www.shapr3d.com
| 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.
| tomaskafka wrote:
| What is wrong about trying to find ways to produce a nice stuff
| and keep being to able to pay the rent and raise kids?
|
| I run a small and nice visual weather app for Apple Watch and
| iPhone (https://weathergraph.app). Some people in reviews
| object to price, but if I wasn't able to charge a subscription
| (because weather data costs money continuously), there would be
| no app. And if I wasn't able to make (about 50 % there right
| now) a living, I would work for a corporation like I did
| before, and I wouldn't be able to dedicate enough time to make
| it great -\\_(tsu)_/-.
| 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.
| naikrovek wrote:
| I'll add that if you work at a place like this, you are
| part of the problem. your votes do not absolve you.
| 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
| krosaen wrote:
| Thanks for this!
| xcambar wrote:
| This article is everything I want the Internet to be: high
| quality contents and high interactivity so that the matter is
| more "palpable".
|
| This is peak Internet, huge congrats to the author(s).
| CryptoPunk wrote:
| I think it also points to compensation for creators, so that
| they can dedicate their time to creating their works,
| mattering. I think him being on Patreon, and knowing he can
| count on income as long as he keeps creating this kind of
| content, contributes to the quality of what is produced.
|
| I believe when someone no longer needs to concern themselves
| with financial consequences for taking time out of their day to
| create content for the public, and knows that there is
| reciprocity in the relationship between themselves and the rest
| of the world for whom they produce content, they can dedicate
| themselves more completely to their craft.
| DangitBobby wrote:
| I have favorited just a handful of things on this site. TFA and
| another one on the same blog about internal combustion engines.
| Prepare to be wowed.
|
| https://ciechanow.ski/internal-combustion-engine/
| hexo wrote:
| There are no images, like, why? :(
| hexo wrote:
| Your downvotes didn't bring images back on site.
| rocqua wrote:
| I have a mechanical watch. I wish it was quartz. I simply could
| not find any quartz watch in a style I liked. I even prefer thin
| watches.
|
| I feel like the field of actually nicely designed quartz watches
| is dead from competition with mechanical and smart watches. Where
| smart watches are just ugly, and mechanical watches look amazing
| but are more hobby or conversation pieces than actually good for
| telling time.
| amai wrote:
| In 20 years we will see similar visualizations about car engines
| which used petrol instead of electricity. We will be awed by the
| complex mechanisms, which were necessary at that time to make a
| car drive as we are awed now by the complexities of mechanical
| watches.
| zwog wrote:
| You don't have to wait 20 years, he did one last year:
| https://ciechanow.ski/internal-combustion-engine/
| adulion wrote:
| mechanical watches fascinate me, i joined /r/seikomods and
| assmbled one form parts i found of ebay.
| 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.
| jnord wrote:
| An absolutely amazing article, detailed explanation and beautiful
| graphics. Thanks so much for posting!
| 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.
| alanbernstein wrote:
| I always enjoy reading these, but this one is special for me
| because it relates to two back burner projects I'm thinking about
| recently:
|
| 1. building a custom mechanical timer, which I want for practical
| use.
|
| 2. designing a real-world alethiometer - a fictional
| watch/compass device with chaotic (magical) behavior - which runs
| entirely on clockwork. I've been wondering how to incorporate a
| source of significant entropy into a watch movement. One idea,
| for example, is something like a double pendulum, but made from
| torsion springs.
| 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.
| ManuelKiessling wrote:
| You mean like https://ciechanow.ski/gears/ ?
| [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.
| cardinalfang wrote:
| The end was the best bit. I have seen good explanations of
| the escapement and timing gears before, but not of the
| crown adjuster mechanisms.
| 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.
| mFixman wrote:
| The Kindle has a similar feature for some of its native
| book: if you long-click in the name of a character it would
| give you a short description and a timeline of where it
| appeared in prior parts of the books (with future parts
| hidden to prevent spoilers).
| 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).
| causi wrote:
| It still happens a lot but those tracks rarely make it
| onto the streaming service copy. Usually you need to buy
| the disc version.
| 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.
| mgdlbp wrote:
| There's Wikimedia Commons! It even (somewhat) addresses
| this particular issue by having a system for requesting
| specialized media-related edits--video editing, photo
| retouching, SVG editing, mapmaking, etc.
|
| For the unaware, Commons, a repository of media files, is
| but one of many Wikimedia "projects" (including
| Wikipedia). It's mostly used for images, but also hosts
| video, audio (including MIDI), 3D models (only STLs), and
| PDFs.Aside: considering what the Foundation seems to like
| doing, I'm surprised they don't do more to promote the
| "other" projects, especially to Wikipedia contributors--
| Wikipedia editors (even split by language) vastly
| outnumber those of the other projects, including Commons
| and Wikidata, which are multilingual.
|
| Commons' request system connects those who recognize
| needed edits but cannot make them with those who check
| the requests pages and _are_ able to. There 's the
| _Graphics Lab_ [0] for edits to existing uploads, and
| _File requests_ [1] for new uploads that are needed.
| Judging by the archives, they seem quite underutilized,
| though that might only be a sign of how few Commons
| contributors there are. Probably also has to do with the
| offloading of requests to local pages in many languages
| of Wikipedia.[2]
|
| [0]
| https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Graphic_Lab
|
| [1]
| https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:File_requests
|
| [2] https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5324355
|
| There's an interesting variation in the nature of
| barriers to being able to edit. Hardware and bandwidth
| cost money, but skills cost only time and software can be
| free. I'd say the Graphics Lab does decently in "teaching
| how to fish" through tutorials and lists of FOSS
| software. This contrasts with file requests, where
| there's no equivalent, because the most common reason
| that someone can't take a photo of something is that
| there physically aren't any instances of it nearby.
|
| This kind of barrier to contribution really isn't
| specific to media; analogously, not everyone has access
| to the same resources for researching edits to Wikipedia.
| Wikimedia's also trying to address that: everyone with
| >10 monthly edits in any project has free access to the
| databases participating in The Wikipedia Library.[3] Most
| are relatively specialized, however (IIRC, JSTOR is the
| most generally useful of the lot).
|
| [3] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/The_Wikipedia_Library
| 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.
| randomswede wrote:
| The Google Play video player sometimes does it (or at
| least sometimes used to).
| DeathArrow 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.
|
| This reminds me of Microsoft Encarta.
| ghaff wrote:
| Microsoft sold a bunch of titles for things like music.
| They did quite a nice job as I recall during that period
| when it was really rather wondrous you could hold all this
| information in the palm of your hand.
| causi wrote:
| Yeah, a 21st-century version of Microsoft Home would be
| incredible.
| pontus wrote:
| I came here to write the exact same thing. Amazing content.
| stephbu wrote:
| Came here to write the same - that was amazing...
| hamburglar wrote:
| And in true HN style we react to such objectively awesome
| content by having a slapfight over whether the author wrote the
| code in the "right" way.
| 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?
| qorrect wrote:
| My first thoughts were "This is what the internet was invented
| for".
|
| So impressive.
| 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/
| remarkEon wrote:
| Wonderful! Showed this to my wife who, bless her, hates
| stuff like this and she's captivated.
| 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...
| jrh206 wrote:
| This article is fantastic. Beautiful illustrations and
| comprehensive explanations.
|
| Creating something like this takes a lot of work. Consider
| supporting the creator on Patreon if you want to enable them to
| create more of these: https://www.patreon.com/ciechanowski
| eggy wrote:
| I started with Greg Daniel's masterpiece: Watchmaking.
|
| https://www.amazon.com/Watchmaking-George-Daniels/dp/0856677...
| mananaysiempre wrote:
| Linked at the very end of the long, long page (which,
| incidentally, is long).
| 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?
| wrycoder wrote:
| That is an absolutely amazing book - how to design and make the
| highest quality watches from scratch. At the time, all watch
| fabrication was by division of labor, no one made an entire
| watch from scratch.
|
| Daniels also wrote a riveting autobiography. He rose from the
| most abject poverty to world eminence, largely because of the
| British guild system.
|
| He also collected, restored, and raced old cars. He used to
| drive his Blower Bentley to his gentlemen's club (!) in
| London[0]. All this is described in his autobiography.
|
| He needed to do business in Switzerland, so he simply drove his
| restored Rolls-Royce across the Continent.
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bentley_Blower_No.1
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Daniels_(watchmaker)
| zlippslip wrote:
| My brother is a watch maker and fixer. It's an art that's
| becoming rarer and rarer with the advent of smart watches.
| Although his job is surprisingly secure because very wealthy
| people tend to pay a lot for their very fancy watches to be fixed
| or made. It's kind of sad how far we're moving from watches which
| last hundreds of years as heirlooms with minimal maintenance, to
| electronic waste generating items with components made as cheaply
| as possible and at most last several years before their
| irreplaceable battery dies and you purchase another.
|
| Watches are robust technologies that work without internet
| connectivity, are crafted/maintained by people paying attention
| to mechanical parts that are sometimes about as thin as human
| hairs. Humans have used them for hundreds of years and they are
| really freaking cool.
|
| If you think the animation is awesome(it is), consider owning the
| real thing. Not just for my brother's sake, but maybe for your
| families.
| zerop wrote:
| Since everyone is appreciating the. writeup for details,
| comprehensive and animation done by author, I was thinking if
| there is any library/platform to build such tools/animations so
| that masses of teachers, who can write good content, can write
| and animate like this. This would really make learning experience
| impressive.
| xjconlyme wrote:
| This one is insanely good.
| 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..
| overlisted wrote:
| This author author is like 3B1B but with engineering
| mc4ndr3 wrote:
| The canvases occupy so much of the screen (on small phones) that
| it is sometimes difficult to scroll the page. Otherwise, amazing
| article.
| MengerSponge wrote:
| This is lovely! While there's a lot of watch content on YouTube,
| I'm amazed that no one has called out Clickspring's skeleton
| clock build. It's _also_ a masterpiece, just in a different
| medium:
|
| Full build playlist:
| https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLZioPDnFPNsETq9h35dgQ...
|
| Direct link to the first episode:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8Y146v8HxE&list=PLZioPDnFPN...
| zerop wrote:
| Who had invented mechanical watches?
| matheusmoreira wrote:
| The GPS post blew me away but this one about watch movements is
| just so incredible.
| natly wrote:
| This guy deserves way more patreons than he has:
| https://www.patreon.com/ciechanowski
| shruggedatlas wrote:
| Signed up to HN just to say that I signed up to Patreon to
| support him. Thanks for sharing.
| 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 :-)
| bush-bby wrote:
| Hahaha.
| aenis wrote:
| Three. And I am sure many more to come. Quality stuff.
| [deleted]
| andoli wrote:
| brilliant work in every aspect, really blew my mind
| 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.
| elSidCampeador wrote:
| Hi where can I learn more about the Japanese movements?
| rssoconnor wrote:
| It doesn't go into a lot of detail but the article does say:
|
| > Notice that when we turn the minute wheel only the cannon
| pinion turns. That pinion fits tightly inside its driving gear
| - it usually turns with that gear. 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.
|
| Personally, I was wondering how one can wind the watch from the
| crown without engaging the weight of the autowinding mechanism.
| I'm guessing that winding with the crown causes the ratchet to
| slip on both pairs of blue/yellow gears.
| 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.
| lvturner wrote:
| For those interested in watch assembly (I'm differentiating
| between assembly and watch making), I can highly recommend
| https://diywatch.club/ I bought one of their kits and was super
| satisfied with it.
|
| You could do it cheaper by buying random parts off eBay or
| Taobao, I did this for a second watch - using the following video
| from the "Watch Repair Channel"
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rieKmfaKMCY
|
| But having your initial attempt somewhat de-risked gave me the
| confidence to dive head first into other concepts and ideas.
|
| I'm not quite ready to do a tear down and service of a movement,
| but with a timegrapher on the way... it won't be long before I'll
| end up scratching that itch too!
| veltas wrote:
| Would love something like this for cars.
| komposit wrote:
| He has one on the combustion engine
| xwdv wrote:
| Wow, I didn't expect I would read all that but the visualization
| was so great and made it easy to follow, I learned more about
| mechanical watches than I ever thought I would!
|
| If every subject could have visualization like this I could learn
| anything!
| 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 2022-05-05 23:00 UTC)