The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Forum > Rolex & Tudor Watch Topics > Rolex WatchTech

View Poll Results: Does your 32xx movement seem to be 100% ok?
Yes, no issues 1,099 69.29%
No, amplitude is low (below 200) but timekeeping is still fine 63 3.97%
No, amplitude is low (below 200) and timekeeping is off (>5 s/d) 424 26.73%
Voters: 1586. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10 April 2021, 05:59 PM   #1
saxo3
"TRF" Member
 
saxo3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: .
Posts: 3,248
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheldonsmith View Post
Sheldon
Thanks for coming back here. I agree with what Scott (aka Watchmaker) wrote "High amplitude is not analogous to good performance of a watch" I add that its starting value and time dependance is a very good indicator of movement health, see several graphs in this thread.

Interesting "that lower amplitude contributes to longer power reserve". I can't confirm but would like to see measurement data for this.

Your SD43 came back from RSC Dallas in Dec 2019. Lift angle 55 degrees gave:
DU: 284, +3
CL: 253, 0
CD: 267, +3
CR: 253, +1
DD: 293, +4
Your data yield to X = +2.2 and D = 3, which is very good.

I don't understand why you measured in position CR = 12U and not CU = 3U. Is that right?

For a watch serviced by a RSC in 12/2020 it would be interesting if you could measure for DU the amplitude decrease with time, i.e. from full caliber winding (t = 0) to the end of the power reserve (t = 70-72 h) using 53 degrees lift angle.
saxo3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11 April 2021, 04:09 AM   #2
sheldonsmith
2025 Pledge Member
 
sheldonsmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Member 202♛
Posts: 1,826
Quote:
Originally Posted by saxo3 View Post
Thanks for coming back here. I agree with what Scott (aka Watchmaker) wrote "High amplitude is not analogous to good performance of a watch" I add that its starting value and time dependance is a very good indicator of movement health, see several graphs in this thread.

Interesting "that lower amplitude contributes to longer power reserve". I can't confirm but would like to see measurement data for this.

Your SD43 came back from RSC Dallas in Dec 2019. Lift angle 55 degrees gave:
DU: 284, +3
CL: 253, 0
CD: 267, +3
CR: 253, +1
DD: 293, +4
Your data yield to X = +2.2 and D = 3, which is very good.

I don't understand why you measured in position CR = 12U and not CU = 3U. Is that right?

For a watch serviced by a RSC in 12/2020 it would be interesting if you could measure for DU the amplitude decrease with time, i.e. from full caliber winding (t = 0) to the end of the power reserve (t = 70-72 h) using 53 degrees lift angle.
I’ll see what I can setup. Essentially, take measurements in the timing machine with the watch running over a 72 hour period (correct?)

I wish I could repost Nick’s article from his email list, but Nick and the TRF owner had a falling-out years ago (the things you pick up from following this forum for the last 300 years). Below is an excerpt that might help explain:
There are two 'powers' in the balance wheel system. The first one is the balance power, which is the amount of power presented in the oscillator, calculated as a product of balance inertia, amplitude squared and frequency cubed. For the Rolex calibre 3135, the balance power is 372 micro Watts. The second power is the oscillator maintaining power - the power required to keep the oscillator running. Again, for the Rolex 3135 that is 1.24 micro Watts. Fine tuning the ratio between the two is an engineering challenge because extending the power reserve by reducing the energy consumption of the balance wheel will come with a trade-off: degraded performance and poor timekeeping.
I am sure the Daniel’s watchmaking book would have more detail. I’ll dig it up and see if I find any better explanation.

On your question regarding CR position, I’ll have to go back to my notes as well. My watchmaker pal says that measuring CR is not an official position because in that position, you would have to hold the watch in front of your face all the time for that timing position to be meaningful and thus is not considered.

-Sheldon
sheldonsmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11 April 2021, 05:28 AM   #3
saxo3
"TRF" Member
 
saxo3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: .
Posts: 3,248
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheldonsmith View Post
I’ll see what I can setup. Essentially, take measurements in the timing machine with the watch running over a 72 hour period (correct?)
Yes, full watch winding, timegrapher measurements in dial up position until the end of the PR. Watch always at total rest from t = 0.

If you can use in parallel a watch tracker app then you can log also timekeeping (accumulated deviation, see plot below)

Aim is to create new data to produce plots as follows. If you provide me with your results then I will make such graphs. Your data for a recently serviced caliber will be very interesting.



saxo3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 28 (0 members and 28 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Takuya Watches

My Watch LLC

DavidSW Watches

OCWatches

Wrist Aficionado


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2025, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.