I'll never complain about SMD parts after seeing this watch making video. - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / projects

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2014, 07:25:37 am
content: I don't even want to know the price. One nice piece of precision craftsmanship there, but I doubt it will be an every day wear watch. It likely will live out it's life in a watch display case, and if it is an automatic it will twirl around mesmerisingly in doing so.

author: AndyC_772
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2014, 07:34:24 am
content: It's about US$2.5 million, and they're only making 6 units for sale, and one to keep in their own museum.Next time someone complains to me about having to solder 0402s, I'll send them a link to this video.

author: Rerouter
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2014, 07:44:17 am
content: Is it just me or is it funny how they were constantly resizing holes and bending and filing components? one would think a professional watch making company would have the shapes and sizes right the first time....As i commonly work on automotive clocks i can say its not that hard, most of the parts have chamfered metal bearings so the pieces fit into place and stay there fairly well as long as you know the right order, cleaning / reworking an older unit however is much harder,

author: Kremmen
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2014, 07:49:58 am
content: Have to admire the skill and effort put into this but at the same time i can't help thinking the same i always think about custom car and MC shows - very skilled guys putting endless hours to produce an ultimately useless end result. Shiny things to catch the eye of those to whom the bling is what matters.Well, it is of course the way of the world that when form and content compete, form wins every time.

author: sleemanj
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2014, 07:56:59 am
content: So much skill, time, patience and expense, to produce something which is indescribably UGLY.

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2014, 08:01:37 am
content: Quote from: Rerouter on October 19, 2014, 07:44:17 amAuto clocks have the luxury of only needing to work for a decade before meeting the crusher, and the power available to drive the mechanism is very high. To get a mechanical unit to the precision of the quartz crystal used in the auto clock you have to get the tolerances down to the clearances being measured in angstroms, and the play has to be the same, so that losses are all kept constant. Note that the only places they used a lubricant was on large slides, where they used a dry lubricant crayon to add just a tiny smear of PTFE lube to give a low friction surface, but which still will not migrate through the unit easily. The actual lubrication on that movement is the precisely controlled air film and water vapour that is in the air, which keeps the parts from chemically bonding together. Run it in a vacuum and it will seize.

author: Artlav
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2014, 08:03:45 am
content: Obscenely useless and completely impractical, but quite a work of art.No wonder it costs more than ten houses in Moscow.

author: German_EE
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2014, 08:45:58 am
content: The engineering is fascinating but the style is not to my taste. As a child I once dismantled an antique clock belonging to an aunt and my parents arrived back to find me in tears with bits of clock all over the floor. Reassembly was somewhat harder and more expensive.

author: VK5RC
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 19, 2014, 09:11:32 am
content: Interesting craftsmanship to an extreme, one thing that struck me was the use of eye/glass loupes, with really poor torso positioning, eg chin on the desk, hunched over. The positions may not be real but done for the video I suppose.I wouldn't mind one of each of those cnc mills and lathes. With a watch as well! HiHi.

author: KedasProbe
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2014, 09:25:59 am
content: The first 3 years of development, the manager looked at the designs and said to the engineers, 'NO, start over, too simple!'

author: mikerj
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2014, 09:43:47 am
content: That is one exquisitely constructed, vulgar and ugly watch. Nothing says "My wealth/class ratio is approaching infinity" like a Patek.TBH I'd much rather have one of the large scale acrylic models of the movement they were using near the start.

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2014, 09:59:13 am
content: The very first job I had was working for a watch Horologist (watch maker) He would make replacement gears and balance staffs completely by hand with a file. As to the constant filing and fitting being done in that video, I was told by him that if car gear boxes were made to the same tolerances as a watch they would not work due to either the gears not meshing or being too tight, watches have to be sloppy in order to work as the forces involved are so small.I learnt to work with an eye loupe and still do for a lot of things I find it far easier for soldering small smd parts than a magnifying glass or microscope in many situations.

author: amyk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2014, 03:42:12 pm
content: ...all that and it's still a watch you have to manually wind?If CNCs can make parts with sub-micrometer accuracy, and similar automation can be used to assembel them, I wonder how difficult it would be to turn this into mass-production...here's someone who has built his own watch on a CNC.

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2014, 04:47:26 pm
content: If you want precision electronics and incredible hand assembly look at the original peanut gyros that were developed for Boeing for the 747 autopilot. Small, accurate and with such low drift that you could easily use one to detect the motion of the earth around the sun if you turned off the correction, and if you summed a few you could get an idea of the motion of the solar system around the galaxy as a trend in the noise. You could set the autopilot to get you on a runway half way around the world with an error of less than the width of the runway, and you had an ILS that was so precise that they had to add a dither into it as the constant landing on the same 10m spot was damaging runways where they landed.

author: joshhunsaker
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2014, 04:51:32 pm
content: That's actually a rather inspiring video. Wow.

author: FrankBuss
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 19, 2014, 04:55:37 pm
content: This watch looks really chunky. Maybe it looks good if you are fat or a budy builder and wear it on your upper arm instead your wrist

author: lapm
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2014, 07:08:33 pm
content: Now that's compares to complexity of building commercial satellite.. Loved how clock smith had to do little tweak here and there to make it fit.Just curious how much is that watch? Probably more then i make in two decades working at factory..Edit: Yep i was right more then i make in lifetime at current job...Now that's not watch to wear, that's watch to keep under class dome to be admired...

author: Mr Smiley
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2014, 12:29:07 am
content: After all that, it didn't workas shown at the end of the videoIf it did, they would have shown something moving on the watch face

author: senso
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2014, 12:47:27 am
content: Its nice to see such craftmanship, but IIII instead of IV is awfull, never understood why they love to use roman numerals and then half ass it with IIIIEDIT:And why is the engraving hand made, it might be a chore to model, but those CNC machines would gladly cut them as precise as they wanted to.

author: TerraHertz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2014, 12:01:16 pm
content: Quote from: senso on October 21, 2014, 12:47:27 amBecause one percenter wankers. The type of people who like to think that some skilled guy slaved for months manually carving the minute scrollwork on their ugly-arsed wrist watch.All that watchmaking 'perfection', and I still can't buy a sensible, rugged cheap pocket watch.

author: ampdoctor
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2014, 12:57:04 am
content: While the craftsmanship is remarkable in this video, what blows my mind is that in 1850 there was a watchmaker sitting in a room lit with an oil lamp and no electricity and certainly no CNC equipment making watches of the same quality and precision. I can't even imagine how they did it.My daily wear watch is a $2k dollar Omega. Didn't cost nearly that much when I got it but now it's vintage, as am I. Ironically, the watch's value seems to be going up a lot faster than mine.Point being, nobody even notices the watch because it's not tacky or flashy nor has a trendy name like Rolex that screams look at me look at me aren't I special. If anything it's noticed because I'm actually wearing one!Younger people don't even seem to wear watches anymore because they've got smart phones and mobile apps. Yeah, show me how well that smart phone works in 100 years. My watch is going to work as well as the day it was purchased, and be more accurate by a very large margin too.

author: fs
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 22, 2014, 01:52:28 am
content: Quote from: SeanB on October 19, 2014, 04:47:26 pmWould really appreciate some links/ references/ vids on this - Thanks!

author: c4757p
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2014, 02:10:14 am
content: Quote from: ampdoctor on October 22, 2014, 12:57:04 amYou know, I've never really been able to get past feeling like a complete doofus pulling out my phone every time I want to know the time, and I'm only 22. It makes me look like the sort who spends all day texting BFF Jill...My daily wear watch was $40 new and worth significantly less now though.

author: BradC
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2014, 02:22:45 am
content: Quote from: senso on October 21, 2014, 12:47:27 amBecause the whole thing is a product of Artisans. Each one is to a degree completely unique. You have to stop looking at it as a product that can be mass produced and look at it as a piece of art you can wear.It's not a piece of art that particularly takes my fancy, but I bet if I had the opportunity to see it in the flesh I'd still be impressed by the craftsmanship.Why do Lamborghini still hand cut and fit all their leather? I'm sure there are CNC machines that might do an adequate job, but I guarantee they can't do all the little bits that give it that quality feel.

author: Jebnor
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2014, 03:04:26 am
content: Quote from: senso on October 21, 2014, 12:47:27 amSomething itches the back of my brain about the IIII vs. IV thing. From what I can Vaguely recall, the IIII was traditional for watches as it is easier to read from far away. I wish I could remember more. I'm pretty sure it was not an oversight.

author: Corporate666
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 22, 2014, 05:53:35 am
content: Quote from: TerraHertz on October 21, 2014, 12:01:16 pmAnyone who buys something simply for how they like it is a wanker? I'm sure we didn't all buy the most efficient/cheapest cars we could have bought. And I am sure we spend money on lots of luxuries in our lives... like the clothes we buy, the food we buy, the test equipment we buy, and more.I don't think there is anything wrong with indulging one's self. That watch is beautiful (from an engineering standpoint). And what's more, it will probably just continue to appreciate in value. A lot of the high end watches from the really high end guys are like that - special edition Audemars Piguet's, Patek's, A Lange and Sohne, Panerai's and such often just keep appreciating. I know a very wealthy guy who has over $10 million in watches. As he says... "one of the most expensive things you can buy that doesn't have a title and there need be no record that you ever bought it, or sold it.... and it appreciates".

author: mzzj
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2014, 11:54:11 am
content: 2,5 million and you can get more accurate and more reliable watch for less than 50 dollars. Not my style

author: baljemmett
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 22, 2014, 01:37:15 pm
content: Quote from: Jebnor on October 22, 2014, 03:04:26 amThe most common claim I've seen was that IIII balances out the opposing VIII better than IV does - although I'm not sure that holds too much water given the other figures nearby. Another suggestion is simply that IV vs. IIII in general hadn't always been the settled question we take it to be today, and that traditional clock face design just reflected common usage at the time.(Also worth noting that not all clock faces use IIII - one obvious example of a IV, for a Brit at least, would be the one towering over the Palace of Westminster... I seem to recall seeing more IVs than IIIIs on those small parts of the continent that I've had a nose around, as well.)

author: jolshefsky
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2014, 03:20:59 pm
content: Just passing page 2 and no trolls yet have said they can get it on AliBaba for €2 ... where are all the "get it made in China" fanboys? Yeesh! What is this board coming to?

author: gxti
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2014, 07:28:20 pm
content: Quote from: ampdoctor on October 22, 2014, 12:57:04 amIntheory, smart and dumb phones alike should be quite tightly synchronized to standard time and traceable to NIST or USNO's atomic clock ensembles by any number of means (cell radio, GPS, NTP over internet). That'll beat the pants off any dumb old mechanical watch.But just because it's easy to get it right, doesn't mean it doesn't get bungled anyway. My first smartphone would synchronize once on boot, then drifted multiple minutes per month. Eventually a software update fixed it.

author: BillyD
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2014, 08:32:14 am
content: Quote from: jolshefsky on October 22, 2014, 03:20:59 pmYes, I was also wondering if the internet was broken. We all remember the thread where some poor guy innocently described fixing his wireless mouse and was immediately overwhelmed by a mob of people who'd been using the same serial ball-mouse for the past 15 years, or tracker pads, track pointers, light pens, etc, and why the hell would anyone be so stupid as to want to use a wireless mouse when the wired ones did none of them any harm. Where are all the people who are still wearing the $10 watch they bought in 1983 (in fact the bidding may have gone below $10 by now), or who've stopped wearing watches cos they're surrounded by time, etc etc etc?This watch may not be to everyones taste, including mine, but I still think the craftmanship and skill is a joy to look at. Thanks to the OP for the vid.