By considering the distribution of frictional losses
in a timepiece, the horologist could determine where a
high viscosity lubricant is appropriate, and where
thinner lubricants should be used because of low power.
In order to find the forces exerted onto each pivot
in the gear train of a watch, very sensitive measuring
equipment would be needed, much more sensitive than
what I have available to me. By creating a mathematical
model of the forces in a watch, however, I could get an
idea of what happens.
I will reverse the normal order of this project by
presenting the conclusion first, in order not to deter
those who are intimidated by the math. You would,
however, benefit much more by reading the entire
project.
Many watchmakers and clockmakers make the
mistake of using the same thin lubricant for the first and
second wheels as they do for the escapement. When
lubricating a watch or clock, consider using the
following rule of thumb:
1) use a heavy lubricant for high-torque, low-speed
applications (mainspring, 1st and 2nd wheel pivots), and
2) use a light lubricant for low-torque, high-speed
applications (3rd, 4th, escape wheel pivots, balance
pivots, escape wheel teeth, clock strike governor
pivots, etc.).
Also consider climate: Swiss watch oils are
formulated in the Swiss Alps, and even most clock oils
are almost as thin as water, at least in warm climates.
While clock and watch oils have some thickness in
colder climate conditions, they are very thin and less
effective in warmer climates. We are not told to use
different oils for timepieces intended for use in the cold
Alps than for use in the hot desert.
Most if not all of my customers live in homes that
today have climate control, so clocks in these homes do
not get cold in the winter. Clocks that are not intended
for use outside should be lubricated with thicker
lubricants than those you might use for a clock that does
not benefit from climate control. Watches used under
normal conditions and worn on the wrist should not be
lubricated with ultra-thin lubricants that you might use
to lubricate a watch for use in extremely cold
conditions, climbing high mountains or diving in cold
waters. Timepieces for expeditions to the North and
South Poles are usually not lubricated at all! When
considering how thick a lubricant to use, you need to
determine the thickness of that lubricant at the coldest
temperature that the timepiece would be subjected
to.
Why use a thicker lubricant if the timepiece were to
be used in conditions that would not require a thinner
lubricant? Thick lubricants have higher boiling points
and they vaporize less easily. Thin lubricants vaporize
easily: I have experienced problems with thin oils that
dry up prematurely. I have seen several different clock
oils dry up after only three years, and particularly one
very expensive synthetic clock oil that dried up after
only two years. A lubricant that fails after only two
years not only fails to lubricate (reduce friction), but
also fails to protect against oxidation. Thicker lubricants
also have better cohesive and adhesive properties: in
plain English, this means that a thicker lubricant stays in
its place better when applied to a bushing without
spreading or running off. If you consider the main
purpose of lubricants, the benefit of a thicker lubricant
becomes obvious: to reduce friction by providing a film
between the two rubbing metal surfaces that keeps the
metals apart. A good lubricant adheres to each metal
surface to create this film and is not squeezed out under
pressure. A good lubricant is cohesive so that it will
exhibit good capillary action that will keep it in its
place. A thicker lubricant has larger molecules (a longer
carbon chain in the case of petroleum-based lubricants)
and therefore provides a thicker film that keeps the
metals further apart and resists higher pressures. As
lubricant molecules slide over one another, some
resistance to movement is caused, which we call 'drag'
and which increases with the thickness of the lubricant.
In low-torque applications, drag can impair the
performance of the timepiece if the lubricant is too
thick.
A couple of years ago, I lubricated a 16-size Elgin
watch with a tower-clock oil, since I am not afraid to
experiment with my own timepieces. It worked very
well indeed and kept very good time. When I lowered
the temperature by 40� Fahrenheit (in the
refrigerator), this watch kept much better time than I was
expecting (about thirty seconds slower per day), and
there was a small decrease in the amplitude of
oscillation of its balance wheel. At about the same time,
I overhauled a Swiss watch of similar size and
lubricated it with a very expensive synthetic watch oil:
two years later, the watch hardly runs because the
lubricant appears to have dried up.
Use a heavier lubricant for high-torque, low-speed
applications. Clockmakers should consider using a
heavy oil or grease to lubricate the mainspring, the
pivots of the great wheel and second wheel. When
applying a grease, you should apply a film over the
entire area of the pivot and also over the entire area
inside the bushing before assembly, because a thick
lubricant will not spread by itself. Watchmakers should
consider using a heavier lubricant to lubricate the
mainspring, the pivots of the barrel and centershaft and
third wheel. The watch's winding parts should be
lubricated with a heavier lubricant. One problem
frequently encountered in automatic watches is wear in
the rotor arbor and its bushing: a heavier lubricant
should be used here because the rotor is relatively
heavy.
Use a thinner lubricant for low-torque, high-speed
applications. This includes the pivots of the fourth and
fifth wheels and of the pallet arbor in watches and
clocks, and also the impulse faces of the pallets and
escape teeth in clocks.
Use a light lubricant on the balance wheel pivots
and the impulse faces of the pallets and escape teeth in
low grade watches, such as a 7-jewel pocketwatch,
where a small sacrifice in timekeeping could reasonably
be made in order to use a lubricant of longer durability.
Use an ultra-light lubricant in these areas in high-grade
watches, such as a 23 jewel Railroad watch, where
precision timekeeping is a necessity, but be aware that
ultra-light lubricants have a tendency to dry up in the
short term. Use ultra-light lubricants in watches that are
subjected to extreme conditions of low temperature.
Take a moment to consider over-powered clocks
with recoil escapements (which require plenty of excess
power, as much as 50% more than a Graham
Escapement), versus a low power clock with a more
efficient Graham Escapement, such as a Vienna
Regulator clock. An over-powered recoil escapement
should be lubricated with a heavier lubricant,
particularly because of the enormous power losses in
recoil. A low-power clock should be lubricated with a
lighter lubricant in the escapement.
Consider a typical watch, in this case, a 16-size,
17-jewel pocket watch. Assuming that torque is
proportional to the normal force on the gear's pivot,
where a normal force is the force pushing the pivot
against the bushing or jewel, in the direction of the force
that acts upon that gear's pinion: if the torque that acts
upon the 2nd wheel pivots were taken as 100%, the
torque that acts upon the 3rd wheel pivots would be
smaller by the ratio of the number of teeth on the 2nd
wheel pinion and the number of teeth on the 2nd wheel,
or 10/80 x 100% = 12.5%. Using ratios, a chart (see end)
of percentage torque values could be created to show
the relative torque values that act upon the pivots of
each gear in the train, and also the pallet arbor pivots
and the balance staff pivots. Using ratios, another chart
showing the revolutions per minute (RPM) that each
gear would make could also be made.
Using typical pivot diameter sizes for a 16-size
watch, the circumference of each pivot could be
calculated, each of which could be multiplied by the
respective RPM value for that gear to find the amount of
sliding that each pivot makes inside each jewel in one
hour of operation, sliding that I refer to as 'displacement'
in the chart (see end), as if each pivot were traveling a
certain distance. A figure for each relative frictional loss
could be obtained by multiplying each value of torque
with each value of displacement or sliding. Each
relative frictional loss could then be expressed as a
percentage to reveal where the frictional losses really
take place.
To find the RPM value of the pallet arbor pivots,
take the degrees of rotation per beat, assumed here to be
18� (a high value), divide by 360� and
multiply by 300 beats per hour to get 15 revolutions per
minute. To find the RPM value of the balance pivots,
multiply 300 beats per hour by the amplitude of
oscillation of the balance wheel, assumed here to be 1.5
turns, to get 450 RPM.
If one third the torque of the escape wheel reaches
the balance wheel, multiply the torque value for the
torque that acts upon the pallets by 0.33.
Finding the frictional loss during impulse is more
complicated, since this requires us to find the
circumference of the escape wheel that is in contact
with the pallet during impulse, neglecting the power lost
during drop. Take the diameter of the escape wheel and
multiply its value by pi to find its circumference. Find
the circumference per beat by multiplying this by the
degrees during impulse (10�) and divide by 360�. This value must be divided by the cosine of the
impulse angle, which I have assumed to be 45�,
to find the length of impulse, or 'distance traveled'
during each impulse. Multiply this by 300 beats per
minute to find the total length of impulse in one minute
(the 'displacement per minute'), which you multiply by
the torque acting upon the pallet to find a friction value.
The same method is used to calculate a value for
the frictional loss in the fork horn and the roller jewel.
The frictional loss is determined by the amount of
sliding that takes place, which is assumed to be equal to
the amount of depthing. I have assumed the depthing to
be 0.07 mm. in this example.
The same method is used to calculate a value for
the frictional loss during draw. The relative value of this
loss is very small. The loss of efficiency caused by draw
is mainly caused by angle, which we do not consider
here, and not by friction. The loss by friction is
relatively small and less than expected because it does
not consider the total loss caused by draw.
The friction % values in the chart reveal nothing by
themselves, but their relative values can be compared.
The frictional losses in the pivots of the gear train are
very small. The frictional losses in the pivots of the
balance wheel are considerably more. Most
significantly, the frictional losses in the pallets during
impulse are very large because of two factors:
1) the 'displacement' during impulse is 85% more than
the 'displacement' during the rotation of the balance
wheel.
2) the torque during impulse is 2.75 times that which is
exerted onto the balance wheel.
The results might tempt the watchmaker to lubricate
the balance jewels and the escape wheel teeth only,
leaving all other jeweled bearings dry (not a good
idea!).
The values of torque show how much torque is
exerted on the pivots of the first three gears in the train.
It would make sense to consider lubricating these pivots
with a heavy lubricant or even a grease as these
high-torque, low-speed bearings would not suffer the
effects of a heavy lubricant. The remaining pivots and
friction surfaces are very low torque (less than 2%
each). It would make sense to consider lubricating these
pivots with a light lubricant as these low-torque,
high-speed bearings would certainly suffer the effects of
a heavy lubricant, which would cause drag.
The most important point to consider is that more
power is lost in the transfer of power from the escape
wheel to the pallets in a Swiss Lever type escapement.
There are two power losses:
1) Power losses caused by angle. When the direction
of the force exerted by the escape wheel onto the pallet
is different to the direction of movement of the pallet
(i.e. the direction in which the pallet receives the
power), there is a loss of efficiency: in a correctly
designed Lever Escapement the angle between the
directions of the forces is 90� and the maximum
achievable efficiency is only 50%. This power loss
considers only angle and nothing else.
2) Power losses caused by friction. When the power is
transferred in a 'rolling' action, as happens when the
escape tooth rotates and provides an impulse to the
impulse pallet of the balance wheel in a Chronometer
Escapement, the transferor (escape tooth) and the
transferee (impulse pallet of balance) appear to roll
together, which results in an almost frictionless transfer
of power. In the Lever Escapement, however, the
escape tooth slides across the pallet's impulse face,
causing a frictional loss that is determined by the
magnitude of the impulse, the coefficient of friction of
the two sliding surfaces and the displacement (or the
amount of sliding that takes place during impulse).
By the way, note that in the Chronometer
Escapement the direction of the forces is the same at the
mid-point of the impulse, which means that this design
experiences almost no power loss as a result of angle, in
addition to almost no power loss as a result of friction
(because there is almost no sliding taking place during
impulse). The escape teeth of the Chronometer
Escapement should not be lubricated.
The escape teeth of the Lever Escapement should
be lubricated most carefully. Each tooth should be
lubricated with a minute amount of lubricant because it
should not be assumed that the lubricant would spread
evenly over all the teeth otherwise. Since a light
lubricant must be used, the watchmaker must be very
careful not to lubricate in excess, as this might cause the
lubricant to run, or be drawn away from the intended
area.
As in any simplified hypothetical scenario,
assumptions are made to simplify the problem and to
overcome otherwise insurmountable or even
unquantifiable problems.
This scenario does not consider the efficiency loss
caused by the angle of the pallet impulse face because
the loss caused by angle is not reduced with lubrication.
The only efficiency loss that is reduced with lubrication
is friction, and it is therefore only the frictional losses
that are considered here.
It is assumed that the coefficient of friction is the
same for all the friction surfaces, that all the pivots are in
the same condition and that all the jewel surfaces are in
the same condition (with no variations).
It is assumed that there is no frictional loss when the
pivot shoulder rubs against the jewel, as if each jewel in
the train were capped.
It is assumed that the masses of the gears, pallets
and balance wheel have no impact upon friction. While
the masses of the first four gears are of negligible
influence upon the results, the masses of the escape
wheel, the pallets and the balance wheel are significant.
Their influence on the results is, however, ignored
because their relative effects are unquantifiable. Of
particularly significant impact is the mass of the balance
wheel, which in a 16-size watch is relatively large,
increasing the friction considerably as the balance
pivots rotate in the jewels. In the hypothetical scenario,
it is assumed that the balance wheel's torque percentage
is equal to the impulse received by the roller jewel,
which is probably an underestimation for a watch with a
heavy balance wheel. Despite this problem, the results
are still useful because its percentage of the total
frictional loss in the watch would not reach the level of
friction in the pallet impulse faces unless it were
increased by six times. Increasing the value of friction of
the balance wheel pivots would decrease the relative
friction percentage values of the other friction surfaces
but it does not change the conclusion (instead, it serves
to reinforce the conclusion):
The two areas where the most power is lost in a watch are
the balance pivots (in their jewels) and the pallet impulse
surfaces and the escape teeth during impulse.
I believe that much more power is lost during impulse
because of friction (in addition to losses caused by
angle) than anywhere else in the watch. The
watchmaker should pay most attention here.
I am including torque calculation charts for two
very common clocks so that clockmakers could see the
relationships between the torque and RPM values for a
typical American clock (a Seth Thomas 89) and a
typical German chiming clock with a floating-balance
(a Hermle 340-020). These differ from the watch chart in
order to show how the friction is distributed in the gear
train itself without considering the escapement: this
information would be more useful to clockmakers.
Notice how similar the friction percentage values are
for the Seth Thomas clock. In the Hermle, the torque
values have been adjusted to account for the stronger
chime mainspring. These charts have two RPM columns
to show that in the left column calculations were made
up the column, and that in the right column calculations
were made down the column. Observe how little torque
the escape wheel receives: in the Seth Thomas, 289
times more torque acts upon the second wheel's pivots
than upon the escape wheel's pivots. In the Hermle,
1650 times more torque acts upon the second wheel's
pivots than upon the escape wheel's pivots.
Since thicker lubricants cause more drag, consider
the bushings: a pivot turning in a longer bushing will be
more affected by lubricant drag than one turning in a
shorter bushing because of a larger area of lubricant
film. However, using a longer bushing reduces the
pressure on the bushing and the pivot because pressure
is force divided by area. Most American clocks have
very long pivots that protrude well beyond the bushing:
in high-torque, low-speed applications, you might
consider installing longer bushings that protrude
beyond the plates, since longer bushings would be more
durable, if the clock being repaired were not a
high-grade work of engineering art and repair-as-art
would not be called for. A mass-produced clock of
lower grade, such as the Seth Thomas 89, would be well
served by 3 mm bushings in the second wheel bushings.
The bushings must not be longer than the pivots,
however, so this could not be done to the Hermle
clock's second wheels, for example.
Last, but not least, consider the difference in the
rate of movement of the three trains of the Hermle
movement. Most of the time, the clock neither chimes or
strikes, but when it does, the gears move much faster.
Looking at the chart below, you could see the effect this
has on friction in the chime and strike trains. While
looking at this chart, you will also see that there is more
friction in the 3rd wheel pivots of the chime and time
trains than in the 2nd wheel pivots: you would expect
the reverse since more power acts upon the 2nd wheel
pivots and since more wear takes place in the 2nd wheel
bushings. If less friction takes place in the 2nd wheel
bushings, you would expect less wear. This suggests
that the increase in wear takes place not because of
friction but because of something else: the yield
pressure of the metal is exceeded, causing premature
failure which we see as small pits in the pivot. The
pressure on the pivot can be decreased by:
1) using a thinner mainspring (which we do not want to
do in this case),
2) increasing the diameter of the pivot (the new Hermle
2nd wheels have slightly larger pivots),
3) replacing the pivots with a different metal that has a
high yield pressure,
4) lubricating these pivots with a lubricant that has a
very high yield pressure (that is, a very thick lubricant, a
grease), keeping the metals apart so that this failure does
not occur.
No lubricant lasts forever, so lubricating these pivots
with a heavy lubricant would one day end in failure
unless the clock were maintained before the lubricant
fails. Since almost everybody uses their clocks until
they will not run at all before they bring them in for
repair, clockmakers should consider using a grease on
the 2nd wheel pivots that has graphite: the magic of
graphite is that it continues to work after the lubricant
has failed! Either buy a lubricant with graphite added,
or buy the graphite powder and mix some into the
lubricant before applying it to the pivots and bushings.
Many clockmakers do not like graphite because they
think it is messy and makes the clock look ugly. The
choice is yours, but I must say that I do not care much
for a beautiful clock that does not work.
I have very carefully avoided recommending any
particular lubricant or any particular brand of lubricant,
as this is a very volatile issue. I have, however, had very
unsatisfactory results with synthetic lubricants, and will
never use them on my clocks or watches.
I would like to thank Dan Henderson for his
suggestions. Dan is a mechanical engineer at 3M. He
collects and repairs mechanical clocks and watches
(and does not use synthetic lubricants). Many areas in this website would not have been possible without his suggestions!
A lot of work went into creating the charts below. I hope
they are useful to you.
|