Discussion:
fao rickman
(too old to reply)
Gareth's Downstairs Computer
2017-08-08 15:37:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Since you asked, the Woodward account agrees with your assertion
that the synchroniser on a hit acts to increase the force of gravity,
although I think it would be better expressed by expressing the total
restoring force resultant.

Just purchased a Synchronome clock so need to take time off to
go and collect it and then play with it.

Would be interested to know your own involvement in horology
as you profess in some depth?
Chris
2017-08-08 16:01:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gareth's Downstairs Computer
Since you asked, the Woodward account agrees with your assertion
that the synchroniser on a hit acts to increase the force of gravity,
although I think it would be better expressed by expressing the total
restoring force resultant.
Just purchased a Synchronome clock so need to take time off to
go and collect it and then play with it.
Would be interested to know your own involvement in horology
as you profess in some depth?
I would be interested to hear what sort of accuracy you get it rated
to. Can't find any links on the web, but the 1930's IBM I have here
was still within a second after 4 weeks, though it has slipped a
few seconds now. Varied around 1/2 second from time to time, but
that averaged out over the month. Have a Pulsynetic as well, similar
design to the Synchronome, but not running it at present. The IBM
series were speced at 15 seconds a month for the solenoid wound model,
but they are much better than that. The weight driven models are quite
a bit better...

Chris
Gareth's Downstairs Computer
2017-08-08 16:28:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Chris
Post by Gareth's Downstairs Computer
Since you asked, the Woodward account agrees with your assertion
that the synchroniser on a hit acts to increase the force of gravity,
although I think it would be better expressed by expressing the total
restoring force resultant.
Just purchased a Synchronome clock so need to take time off to
go and collect it and then play with it.
Would be interested to know your own involvement in horology
as you profess in some depth?
I would be interested to hear what sort of accuracy you get it rated
to. Can't find any links on the web, but the 1930's IBM I have here
was still within a second after 4 weeks, though it has slipped a
few seconds now. Varied around 1/2 second from time to time, but
that averaged out over the month. Have a Pulsynetic as well, similar
design to the Synchronome, but not running it at present. The IBM
series were speced at 15 seconds a month for the solenoid wound model,
but they are much better than that. The weight driven models are quite
a bit better...
I need "time" to evaluate that!

But I'm more interested in it as a museum piece for I doubt
that SWMBO will tolerate a 30 second clunk for 24 / 7 :-)
Rambo
2017-08-08 18:58:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 17:28:10 +0100, Gareth's Downstairs Computer
Post by Gareth's Downstairs Computer
Post by Chris
Post by Gareth's Downstairs Computer
Since you asked, the Woodward account agrees with your assertion
that the synchroniser on a hit acts to increase the force of gravity,
although I think it would be better expressed by expressing the total
restoring force resultant.
Just purchased a Synchronome clock so need to take time off to
go and collect it and then play with it.
Would be interested to know your own involvement in horology
as you profess in some depth?
I would be interested to hear what sort of accuracy you get it rated
to. Can't find any links on the web, but the 1930's IBM I have here
was still within a second after 4 weeks, though it has slipped a
few seconds now. Varied around 1/2 second from time to time, but
that averaged out over the month. Have a Pulsynetic as well, similar
design to the Synchronome, but not running it at present. The IBM
series were speced at 15 seconds a month for the solenoid wound model,
but they are much better than that. The weight driven models are quite
a bit better...
I need "time" to evaluate that!
But I'm more interested in it as a museum piece for I doubt
that SWMBO will tolerate a 30 second clunk for 24 / 7 :-)
This may be of interest Gareth, used to see them everywhere.

http://www.britishtelephones.com/clocks/clock36.htm
Gareth's Downstairs Computer
2017-08-08 19:55:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Rambo
On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 17:28:10 +0100, Gareth's Downstairs Computer
Post by Gareth's Downstairs Computer
Post by Chris
Post by Gareth's Downstairs Computer
Since you asked, the Woodward account agrees with your assertion
that the synchroniser on a hit acts to increase the force of gravity,
although I think it would be better expressed by expressing the total
restoring force resultant.
Just purchased a Synchronome clock so need to take time off to
go and collect it and then play with it.
Would be interested to know your own involvement in horology
as you profess in some depth?
I would be interested to hear what sort of accuracy you get it rated
to. Can't find any links on the web, but the 1930's IBM I have here
was still within a second after 4 weeks, though it has slipped a
few seconds now. Varied around 1/2 second from time to time, but
that averaged out over the month. Have a Pulsynetic as well, similar
design to the Synchronome, but not running it at present. The IBM
series were speced at 15 seconds a month for the solenoid wound model,
but they are much better than that. The weight driven models are quite
a bit better...
I need "time" to evaluate that!
But I'm more interested in it as a museum piece for I doubt
that SWMBO will tolerate a 30 second clunk for 24 / 7 :-)
This may be of interest Gareth, used to see them everywhere.
http://www.britishtelephones.com/clocks/clock36.htm
Yes, bookmarked.

And, if you have the "contacts" to get me (at least :-) ) one,
I'll even QSO with you as an intermediate! :-)
Rambo
2017-08-08 20:34:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 20:55:27 +0100, Gareth's Downstairs Computer
Post by Gareth's Downstairs Computer
Post by Rambo
On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 17:28:10 +0100, Gareth's Downstairs Computer
Post by Gareth's Downstairs Computer
Post by Chris
Post by Gareth's Downstairs Computer
Since you asked, the Woodward account agrees with your assertion
that the synchroniser on a hit acts to increase the force of gravity,
although I think it would be better expressed by expressing the total
restoring force resultant.
Just purchased a Synchronome clock so need to take time off to
go and collect it and then play with it.
Would be interested to know your own involvement in horology
as you profess in some depth?
I would be interested to hear what sort of accuracy you get it rated
to. Can't find any links on the web, but the 1930's IBM I have here
was still within a second after 4 weeks, though it has slipped a
few seconds now. Varied around 1/2 second from time to time, but
that averaged out over the month. Have a Pulsynetic as well, similar
design to the Synchronome, but not running it at present. The IBM
series were speced at 15 seconds a month for the solenoid wound model,
but they are much better than that. The weight driven models are quite
a bit better...
I need "time" to evaluate that!
But I'm more interested in it as a museum piece for I doubt
that SWMBO will tolerate a 30 second clunk for 24 / 7 :-)
This may be of interest Gareth, used to see them everywhere.
http://www.britishtelephones.com/clocks/clock36.htm
Yes, bookmarked.
And, if you have the "contacts" to get me (at least :-) ) one,
I'll even QSO with you as an intermediate! :-)
If you'd have asked me 25 years ago..... !
Gareth's Downstairs Computer
2017-08-08 20:50:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Rambo
On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 20:55:27 +0100, Gareth's Downstairs Computer
Post by Gareth's Downstairs Computer
Post by Rambo
On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 17:28:10 +0100, Gareth's Downstairs Computer
Post by Gareth's Downstairs Computer
Post by Chris
Post by Gareth's Downstairs Computer
Since you asked, the Woodward account agrees with your assertion
that the synchroniser on a hit acts to increase the force of gravity,
although I think it would be better expressed by expressing the total
restoring force resultant.
Just purchased a Synchronome clock so need to take time off to
go and collect it and then play with it.
Would be interested to know your own involvement in horology
as you profess in some depth?
I would be interested to hear what sort of accuracy you get it rated
to. Can't find any links on the web, but the 1930's IBM I have here
was still within a second after 4 weeks, though it has slipped a
few seconds now. Varied around 1/2 second from time to time, but
that averaged out over the month. Have a Pulsynetic as well, similar
design to the Synchronome, but not running it at present. The IBM
series were speced at 15 seconds a month for the solenoid wound model,
but they are much better than that. The weight driven models are quite
a bit better...
I need "time" to evaluate that!
But I'm more interested in it as a museum piece for I doubt
that SWMBO will tolerate a 30 second clunk for 24 / 7 :-)
This may be of interest Gareth, used to see them everywhere.
http://www.britishtelephones.com/clocks/clock36.htm
Yes, bookmarked.
And, if you have the "contacts" to get me (at least :-) ) one,
I'll even QSO with you as an intermediate! :-)
If you'd have asked me 25 years ago..... !
I know what you mean, because 30 years ago I was working on PABX
software interfacing with the old way of doing things, DASS, DPNSS,
SSDC and SSAC, and I treasure my copy of Atkinson's Telephony!
Rambo
2017-08-08 20:55:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 20:55:27 +0100, Gareth's Downstairs Computer
Post by Gareth's Downstairs Computer
Post by Rambo
On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 17:28:10 +0100, Gareth's Downstairs Computer
Post by Gareth's Downstairs Computer
Post by Chris
Post by Gareth's Downstairs Computer
Since you asked, the Woodward account agrees with your assertion
that the synchroniser on a hit acts to increase the force of gravity,
although I think it would be better expressed by expressing the total
restoring force resultant.
Just purchased a Synchronome clock so need to take time off to
go and collect it and then play with it.
Would be interested to know your own involvement in horology
as you profess in some depth?
I would be interested to hear what sort of accuracy you get it rated
to. Can't find any links on the web, but the 1930's IBM I have here
was still within a second after 4 weeks, though it has slipped a
few seconds now. Varied around 1/2 second from time to time, but
that averaged out over the month. Have a Pulsynetic as well, similar
design to the Synchronome, but not running it at present. The IBM
series were speced at 15 seconds a month for the solenoid wound model,
but they are much better than that. The weight driven models are quite
a bit better...
I need "time" to evaluate that!
But I'm more interested in it as a museum piece for I doubt
that SWMBO will tolerate a 30 second clunk for 24 / 7 :-)
This may be of interest Gareth, used to see them everywhere.
http://www.britishtelephones.com/clocks/clock36.htm
Yes, bookmarked.
And, if you have the "contacts" to get me (at least :-) ) one,
I'll even QSO with you as an intermediate! :-)
Could have done it easily 25 years ago......most disappeared off the
wall as soon as the exchange changed over! A receipt for
"miscellaneous scrap" covered everything.

rickman
2017-08-08 17:55:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gareth's Downstairs Computer
Since you asked, the Woodward account agrees with your assertion
that the synchroniser on a hit acts to increase the force of gravity,
although I think it would be better expressed by expressing the total
restoring force resultant.
Just purchased a Synchronome clock so need to take time off to
go and collect it and then play with it.
Would be interested to know your own involvement in horology
as you profess in some depth?
My interest in horology came from a project I have worked on intermittently
over the years to design a self powered timepiece. I believe there is one
in existence that uses variations in air pressure to generate power to keep
a mechanical clock running. My interest is in an electronic clock that will
not only power itself, but will synchronize with radio time signals.
Researching an appropriate antenna design was also what brought me to the
various ham radio groups. At one point I developed an interest in becoming
a ham but the extreme rancor displayed in many of the ham groups has dulled
my interest.

While researching some aspects of these clocks, I ran across the Shortt and
Fedchenko clocks. Both amazing time pieces. The more I examine the Shortt
clock simulation the more I learn about it. I recently understood that it
does not need to use electricity. The electrical components simply provide
a means of transversing the vacuum seal of the master pendulum housing. The
secondary gravity arm could be used as a mechanical escapement to directly
control a clock mechanism inside the vacuum chamber. I'm sure this was not
done because they wanted the electrical contacts anyway since it was derived
from a Synchronome clock to begin with which is used to drive many other
clocks from one high accuracy master.

I think the functionality of the Shortt clock could be duplicated by an all
mechanical equivalent using strong magnets to relay mechanical movement
across the vacuum barrier. It would involve large movements of magnets
which is the antithesis of normal clock works, but I expect it could be
managed if one were obsessed. lol

BTW, when you say you bought a "Synchronome clock", do you mean one of the
approximately 100 Shortt free pendulum electric astronomical regulators
built by Synchronome Co. Ltd? Synchronome built many types of clocks.
--
Rick C
Gareth's Downstairs Computer
2017-08-08 18:06:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rickman
Post by Gareth's Downstairs Computer
Since you asked, the Woodward account agrees with your assertion
that the synchroniser on a hit acts to increase the force of gravity,
although I think it would be better expressed by expressing the total
restoring force resultant.
Just purchased a Synchronome clock so need to take time off to
go and collect it and then play with it.
Would be interested to know your own involvement in horology
as you profess in some depth?
My interest in horology came from a project I have worked on
intermittently over the years to design a self powered timepiece. I
believe there is one in existence that uses variations in air pressure
to generate power to keep a mechanical clock running. My interest is in
an electronic clock that will not only power itself, but will
synchronize with radio time signals. Researching an appropriate antenna
design was also what brought me to the various ham radio groups. At one
point I developed an interest in becoming a ham but the extreme rancor
displayed in many of the ham groups has dulled my interest.
While researching some aspects of these clocks, I ran across the Shortt
and Fedchenko clocks. Both amazing time pieces. The more I examine the
Shortt clock simulation the more I learn about it. I recently
understood that it does not need to use electricity. The electrical
components simply provide a means of transversing the vacuum seal of the
master pendulum housing. The secondary gravity arm could be used as a
mechanical escapement to directly control a clock mechanism inside the
vacuum chamber. I'm sure this was not done because they wanted the
electrical contacts anyway since it was derived from a Synchronome clock
to begin with which is used to drive many other clocks from one high
accuracy master.
I think the functionality of the Shortt clock could be duplicated by an
all mechanical equivalent using strong magnets to relay mechanical
movement across the vacuum barrier. It would involve large movements of
magnets which is the antithesis of normal clock works, but I expect it
could be managed if one were obsessed. lol
BTW, when you say you bought a "Synchronome clock", do you mean one of
the approximately 100 Shortt free pendulum electric astronomical
regulators built by Synchronome Co. Ltd? Synchronome built many types
of clocks.
Please do not be put off ny the rancour you see in radio groups. I, for
one, have been campaigning for years that the discussion in
uk.radio.amateur whould be both gentlemanly and technically relevant,
and, as you say, my detractors pile in on me, unfortunately.

Again Philip Woodward describes in his books a variation of the Shortt
but using mechanical coupling between the master and slave, and to
prevent the pendulums coming into joint resonance because of vibrational
coupling via the backplate, has them going at different prime numbers of
period.

I should be so lucky! ...

It is just the same type of Synchronome used as the slave in the Shortt
system, but with no sign of any other coupling. I'd suspect that should
a Shortt come to market it would sell for many £$000s!

Not sure which NG you are reading, perhaps limit to just alt.horology
to keep things civilised?
rickman
2017-08-08 18:40:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gareth's Downstairs Computer
Again Philip Woodward describes in his books a variation of the Shortt
but using mechanical coupling between the master and slave, and to prevent
the pendulums coming into joint resonance because of vibrational
coupling via the backplate, has them going at different prime numbers of
period.
That makes sense. With the Shortt clock electrical connection the units can
be in entirely different rooms or even buildings to isolate any mechanical
coupling.

One point I forgot in my thinking was that the slave pendulum times the
release of the gravity lever. So even if the gravity level were armed
mechanically, it still requires the slave pendulum to control its timing.
Otherwise some sort of escapement is required that will load the free pendulum.
Post by Gareth's Downstairs Computer
I should be so lucky! ...
It is just the same type of Synchronome used as the slave in the Shortt
system, but with no sign of any other coupling. I'd suspect that should
a Shortt come to market it would sell for many £$000s!
--
Rick C
Loading...