Means of dropping watch battery voltage by .2 Volts

On Wednesday, July 6, 2011 6:27:00 PM UTC-7, Arfa Daily wrote:

However, just because a design is 50 years old, and was 'elegant' in its
concept, that does not make it necessarily 'good', and by today's standards,
a design that purports to be an extremely accurate timepiece, but which runs
at an incorrect speed when the batteries are replaced, probably legitimately
counts as being 'crap'.
Click to expand...
Not really. The Accutron power supply was specifically a stable Hg cell,
and it isn't 'replace' that makes it run awry, it's 'substitute nonstandard
supplies' that causes the issue. There's only so much compensation you
can do with a total semiconductor complement of one transistor.
 
"Arfa Daily" <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:_Q7Rp.25097$NX1.20410@newsfe18.ams2...
"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:iv25or$ukb$1@dont-email.me...
"Gareth Magennis" <sound.service@btconnect.com> wrote in message
news:vW%Qp.24258$Rw7.4612@newsfe28.ams2...
"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:iv1k8c$aoh$2@dont-email.me...
"Phil Allison" <phil_a@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:97ip3pFp1rU1@mid.individual.net...

But do you know [whether] any voltage drop is really NEEDED?

Gee, Phil, I thought you were omniscient.

Though you'd think the mechanical nature of the Accutron's timekeeping
process would remove any interaction with the electronics, it's not so.

The user manual specifically states that the watch runs a bit fast with
new
cells, until their initially slightly high voltage "settles in" to its
nominal value. Therefore, an Accutron will run fast with modern cells.

What a crap design then.

How old are you?

The Accutron was designed 50 years ago. It uses a discrete circuit, which
seemed rather marvelously miniature at the time. And the Accutron was the
first wristwatch accurate to a minute a month -- quite an achievement for
a
"crap" design.



But apparently not when you stick new batteries in, which I think is the
"crap" characteristic that Gareth was alluding to ...

Arfa
Click to expand...

Sorry, guys, the comment was meant to be funny, if a little mischievous.
And I was, as Arfa understood, merely referring to the fact it ran fast
with new batteries.

No offence intended.


Gareth.
 
This is a common problem with old cameras too as they often relied on the
stable voltage of a mercury cell for exposure metering. If you google for
"PX625" (which was the type of cell many cameras used) you can find quite a
lot of information. Here's one pretty comprehensive document:
http://rick_oleson.tripod.com/batt_adapt_us.pdf

TimB
 
"D" <none@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4e152465$0$29255$c3e8da3$10cdda79@news.astraweb.com...
On 7/6/2011 6:27 PM, Arfa Daily wrote:
elegant' in its concept, that does not make it necessarily 'good', and
by today's standards, a design that purports to be an extremely accurate
timepiece, but which runs at an incorrect speed when the batteries are
replaced, probably legitimately counts as being 'crap'.

Arfa


What was I thinking, valuing this gorgeous piece of
electronic/mechanical/engineering/jewelery-art, when I could just go to
Walmart and buy a plastic POS which will be more accurate?

I wonder why NASA didn't just do that, back in 1958???

And while we're discussing it, who are those fools who will fork over 6
figures+ for certain cars from the '20's & '30's, when a 2011 Kia
Something-Or-Other has a higher top speed and better gas mileage?

I have a "disposable" plastic POS I wear while biking, etc. It has its
place, and I'm glad to have it. But judging a 50 year old wristwatch
which was at the cutting edge of its discipline when it was made by the
TECHNICAL standards of today is pretty myopic, and misses the point
entirely.

Dan
Click to expand...
I think perhaps it is you that misses the point that was being made here,
friend. I assume that you are from the left side of the pond ? Both myself
and Gareth are from the right side, and it seems to me that you might have
fallen into the usenet 'language trap', and are taking the word "crap" to
have an entirely different level of meaning to that which was intended. It
is used much less literally here than it is in the U.S. Calling your babies
"crap" was merely a tongue-in-cheek poke of fun.

As to cars, for sure, I appreciate a vintage model. I personally wouldn't
hand over large wedges of cash for one - unless I had so much that it was
meaningless in terms of 'real' value - but going down the road of
evaluation, just because a car is rare or was state of the art back when it
was made, doesn't alter the fact that compared to today's offerings - even
KIAs - it would have to count as "crap" in many respects, including
performance, reliability, comfort, economy, and although I hate to say it,
pollution.

Stop being so sensitive, and accept the remark for what it was. A simple
throw-away bit of leftpondian humour. Not a pop at you specifically, or your
hobby.

Arfa
 
"whit3rd" <whit3rd@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:83e9600d-f319-4e42-95d8-c8d3cd8b6e36@glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com...
On Wednesday, July 6, 2011 6:27:00 PM UTC-7, Arfa Daily wrote:

However, just because a design is 50 years old, and was 'elegant' in its
concept, that does not make it necessarily 'good', and by today's
standards,
a design that purports to be an extremely accurate timepiece, but which
runs
at an incorrect speed when the batteries are replaced, probably
legitimately
counts as being 'crap'.

Not really. The Accutron power supply was specifically a stable Hg cell,
and it isn't 'replace' that makes it run awry, it's 'substitute
nonstandard
supplies' that causes the issue. There's only so much compensation you
can do with a total semiconductor complement of one transistor.
Click to expand...
But that's not what was being said. The actual point that I was commenting
on was where a reference was made to a note in the user guide regarding the
specific condition of it running fast when a new (correct type) battery was
fitted, until its terminal voltage fell to the main life voltage. It is this
undesirable characteristic that causes the problem, if you try to use
alternative chemistry cells that have a *permanently* higher terminal
voltage than the original.

Arfa
 
"Arfa Daily" <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:DMeRp.43931$w86.3254@newsfe22.ams2...
"D" <none@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4e152465$0$29255$c3e8da3$10cdda79@news.astraweb.com...
On 7/6/2011 6:27 PM, Arfa Daily wrote:
elegant' in its concept, that does not make it necessarily 'good', and
by today's standards, a design that purports to be an extremely accurate
timepiece, but which runs at an incorrect speed when the batteries are
replaced, probably legitimately counts as being 'crap'.

Arfa


What was I thinking, valuing this gorgeous piece of
electronic/mechanical/engineering/jewelery-art, when I could just go to
Walmart and buy a plastic POS which will be more accurate?

I wonder why NASA didn't just do that, back in 1958???

And while we're discussing it, who are those fools who will fork over 6
figures+ for certain cars from the '20's & '30's, when a 2011 Kia
Something-Or-Other has a higher top speed and better gas mileage?

I have a "disposable" plastic POS I wear while biking, etc. It has its
place, and I'm glad to have it. But judging a 50 year old wristwatch
which was at the cutting edge of its discipline when it was made by the
TECHNICAL standards of today is pretty myopic, and misses the point
entirely.

Dan



I think perhaps it is you that misses the point that was being made here,
friend. I assume that you are from the left side of the pond ? Both myself
and Gareth are from the right side, and it seems to me that you might have
fallen into the usenet 'language trap', and are taking the word "crap" to
have an entirely different level of meaning to that which was intended. It
is used much less literally here than it is in the U.S. Calling your
babies "crap" was merely a tongue-in-cheek poke of fun.

As to cars, for sure, I appreciate a vintage model. I personally wouldn't
hand over large wedges of cash for one - unless I had so much that it was
meaningless in terms of 'real' value - but going down the road of
evaluation, just because a car is rare or was state of the art back when
it was made, doesn't alter the fact that compared to today's offerings -
even KIAs - it would have to count as "crap" in many respects, including
performance, reliability, comfort, economy, and although I hate to say it,
pollution.

Stop being so sensitive, and accept the remark for what it was. A simple
throw-away bit of leftpondian humour. Not a pop at you specifically, or
your hobby.

Arfa
Click to expand...
That should, of course, have read

.... throw-away bit of *RIGHT* - pondian humour ... :)

Arfa
 
"D" <none@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4e152465$0$29255$c3e8da3$10cdda79@news.astraweb.com...

I have a "disposable" plastic POS I wear while biking, etc. It has its
place, and I'm glad to have it. But judging a 50 year old wristwatch
which was at the cutting edge of its discipline when it was made by the
TECHNICAL standards of today is pretty myopic, and misses the point
entirely.
Click to expand...
The Accutron site referenced states that the stepper wheel was made using a
proprietary process that other companies were unable to duplicate. In fact,
the machine used to make it was deliberately destroyed by the company that
bought out Bulova.

I'm surprised no one has revived the Accutron. I have my father's, and when
my budget allows, I'll have a CLA performed.
 
"whit3rd" <whit3rd@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:83e9600d-f319-4e42-95d8-c8d3cd8b6e36@glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com...
On Wednesday, July 6, 2011 6:27:00 PM UTC-7, Arfa Daily wrote:

However, just because a design is 50 years old, and was 'elegant' in its
concept, that does not make it necessarily 'good', and by today's
standards,
a design that purports to be an extremely accurate timepiece, but which
runs
at an incorrect speed when the batteries are replaced, probably
legitimately
counts as being 'crap'.

Not really. The Accutron power supply was specifically a stable Hg cell,
and it isn't 'replace' that makes it run awry, it's 'substitute
nonstandard
supplies' that causes the issue. There's only so much compensation you
can do with a total semiconductor complement of one transistor.
Click to expand...
Your correction is not correct. The mercury cells did start out at slightly
higher voltage. It a period of operation (several days I believe) until the
voltage fail to its stable point.
 
The user manual specifically states that the watch runs a bit fast with
new cells, until their initially slightly high voltage "settles in" to
its
nominal value. Therefore, an Accutron will run fast with modern cells.

What a crap design then.
Click to expand...
I repost this to point out that, in this context, there is nothing remotely
humorous about "crap". No reasonable person would interpret it as anything
but a slap.
 
Arfa Daily wrote:
Not really. The Accutron power supply was specifically a stable Hg cell,
and it isn't 'replace' that makes it run awry, it's 'substitute
nonstandard
supplies' that causes the issue. There's only so much compensation you
can do with a total semiconductor complement of one transistor.
Click to expand...
Let's not forget that the concept of a three terminal voltage regulator,
which makes so many things possible these days was yet to be invented.

In the early 1960's a voltage regulator had to be built opon either a
zener diode (which required a higher battery voltage) or a gas filled
"vacuum" tube.

Today if you want 5 volts, you use a 7+ volt power supply and a three
terminal regulator. If you want 3.3 you use 5 volt supply and three
terminal regulator.

If you want three volts from a battery, you use a lithum cell, but it
"wanders" from around 3.7 volts off the production line, to around 3.0 volts
when almost exhausted. Most of it's life it produces 3.3 to 3.5 volts
depending upon the exact chemistry, load, age, etc.

In 1960, you had no such luxury. I'm sure they existed sooner, but I never
heard of a Litium battery until Canon started to use them in their EOS cameras
in the late 1980's.

Also note that a modern digital watch uses a more simple in concept circuit,
it just has a crystal oscilator that runs at 3.57mHz (the old NTSC color
burst frequency) and counts 3,570,000 (or whatever the exact number is)
clock pulses and moves the second hand.

Easily done with modern CMOS and SMT. Not easily done with Sputnik level
technology.

I had at one time a clock that worked that way, except with a lower
frequency oscillator (32kHz?) made by MacKay Dymek (part of HP and
their logo was an upside down HP logo).
It fit a 19 inch rack, was at least a foot tall and used Stroeger switches
to count.

You could hear it change the hour two floors away.

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson N3OWJ/4X1GM
Making your enemy reliant on software you support is the best revenge.
 
"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:iv4659$4sk$1@dont-email.me...
The user manual specifically states that the watch runs a bit fast with
new cells, until their initially slightly high voltage "settles in" to
its
nominal value. Therefore, an Accutron will run fast with modern cells.

What a crap design then.

I repost this to point out that, in this context, there is nothing
remotely
humorous about "crap". No reasonable person would interpret it as anything
but a slap.
Click to expand...
Say that again when you understand English English, rather than American
English, William. As someone from the same country as the person who said
it, I can assure you that it *was* intended as humour. I understood it as
that. You, and the OP obviously didn't. I can understand him getting it
wrong, as I don't think I've seen him as a regular poster on here, so maybe
doesn't understand the subtleties of transatlantic language exchanges, but
you know better, as you've been involved in these conversations many many
times. In fact, come to think of it, on more than one occasion, you have
been the instigator of such interchanges, having said something that others
have taken as offensive. Gareth has even posted to say that it was intended
as humour, and to apologise if it was taken as anything other than that. So
stop deliberately stirring the pot, will you ? The remark was *NOT* intended
to be offensive to the OP, any more than mine along the same lines was.
Accept that, both of you, and get over it ...

Arfa
 
The user manual specifically states that the watch runs a bit fast with
new cells, until their initially slightly high voltage "settles in" to
its
nominal value. Therefore, an Accutron will run fast with modern cells.

What a crap design then.

I repost this to point out that, in this context, there is nothing
remotely
humorous about "crap". No reasonable person would interpret it as
anything
but a slap.

Say that again when you understand English English, rather than American
English, William. As someone from the same country as the person who said
it, I can assure you that it *was* intended as humour. I understood it as
that. You, and the OP obviously didn't. I can understand him getting it
wrong, as I don't think I've seen him as a regular poster on here, so
maybe
doesn't understand the subtleties of transatlantic language exchanges, but
you know better, as you've been involved in these conversations many many
times. In fact, come to think of it, on more than one occasion, you have
been the instigator of such interchanges, having said something that
others
have taken as offensive. Gareth has even posted to say that it was
intended
as humour, and to apologise if it was taken as anything other than that.
So
stop deliberately stirring the pot, will you ? The remark was *NOT*
intended
to be offensive to the OP, any more than mine along the same lines was.
Accept that, both of you, and get over it ...
Click to expand...
Arfa, I think people too often take offense where none is intended. But if
you can't see that there is nothing even remotely suggesting humor or irony
in the exchange... It is you who needs to understand us, not the other way
around.

Believe me, as someone who has been a wise-cracker all his life, and
sometimes gotten into trouble over it, I know whereof I speak.
 
If something this minor upsets everyone, what will it take to start
another world war?????????
Click to expand...
The issue isn't what was said, but Arfa's insistence that WE are supposed to
accept an obscure British usage without complaint or offense. And worse,
that we are humorless fools if we don't.
 
"TimB" <tjb@tinymail.co.uk.NOSPAM> wrote in message
news:iv3s0l$cfj$1@dont-email.me...
This is a common problem with old cameras too as they often relied on the
stable voltage of a mercury cell for exposure metering.
Click to expand...



What a crap design then.



Gareth.
 
On 7/7/2011 9:06 AM, spamtrap1888 wrote:
No one could have predicted that mercury button cells would be pulled
from the market. The more so because mercury laden twisty bulbs are
becoming all but mandatory.
Click to expand...
That irony struck me as well. Not that I think any source of toxins
should be overlooked, or improperly dealt with, but some perspective
might be in order. I do think that in addition to being deposited in
landfills, there was concern about kids swallowing the cells. Something
only the most hardy are apt to do with compact fluorescents ;-)
 
On 7/7/2011 2:13 AM, Arfa Daily wrote:
Both myself and Gareth are from the right side, and it seems to me that
you might have fallen into the usenet 'language trap', and are taking
the word "crap" to have an entirely different level of meaning...
Stop being so sensitive, and accept the remark for what it was. A simple
throw-away bit of leftpondian humour. Not a pop at you specifically, or
your hobby.

Arfa
Click to expand...
More what I found troubling and what I was attempting to correct was the
ignorance regarding the significance of these timepieces, and the very
impressive technical achievement they represent, things which users of a
NG such as this one should find interesting. In terms of the "crap"
reference, you may be right about how the word is perceived in different
cultures, but if you and your friend made a bad choice of words, why is
it *ME* (and at least one other poster who also commented on the word)
who have "fallen into the usenet language trap". Perhaps you should
stop being so INsensitive.

Dan
 
"Geoffrey S. Mendelson" wrote:
Arfa Daily wrote:
Not really. The Accutron power supply was specifically a stable Hg cell,
and it isn't 'replace' that makes it run awry, it's 'substitute
nonstandard
supplies' that causes the issue. There's only so much compensation you
can do with a total semiconductor complement of one transistor.

Let's not forget that the concept of a three terminal voltage regulator,
which makes so many things possible these days was yet to be invented.

In the early 1960's a voltage regulator had to be built opon either a
zener diode (which required a higher battery voltage) or a gas filled
"vacuum" tube.

Today if you want 5 volts, you use a 7+ volt power supply and a three
terminal regulator. If you want 3.3 you use 5 volt supply and three
terminal regulator.

If you want three volts from a battery, you use a lithum cell, but it
"wanders" from around 3.7 volts off the production line, to around 3.0 volts
when almost exhausted. Most of it's life it produces 3.3 to 3.5 volts
depending upon the exact chemistry, load, age, etc.

In 1960, you had no such luxury. I'm sure they existed sooner, but I never
heard of a Litium battery until Canon started to use them in their EOS cameras
in the late 1980's.

Also note that a modern digital watch uses a more simple in concept circuit,
it just has a crystal oscilator that runs at 3.57mHz (the old NTSC color
burst frequency) and counts 3,570,000 (or whatever the exact number is)
clock pulses and moves the second hand.
Click to expand...

The NTSC burst frequency is 3,579,545 Hz.


I've never seen a watch with the color crystal. CMOS uses more power
at higher frequencies, which is why they use a 32,768 Hz crystal.
fifteen biniary dividers gives you the one second pulse needed at the
lowest power requirements.


Easily done with modern CMOS and SMT. Not easily done with Sputnik level
technology.

I had at one time a clock that worked that way, except with a lower
frequency oscillator (32kHz?) made by MacKay Dymek (part of HP and
their logo was an upside down HP logo).
It fit a 19 inch rack, was at least a foot tall and used Stroeger switches
to count.

You could hear it change the hour two floors away.
Click to expand...
--
It's easy to think outside the box, when you have a cutting torch.
 
On Jul 7, 10:29 am, "Arfa Daily" <arfa.da...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgee...@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:iv4659$4sk$1@dont-email.me...

The user manual specifically states that the watch runs a bit fast with
new cells, until their initially slightly high voltage "settles in" to
its
nominal value. Therefore, an Accutron will run fast with modern cells..

What a crap design then.

I repost this to point out that, in this context, there is nothing
remotely
humorous about "crap". No reasonable person would interpret it as anything
but a slap.

Say that again when you understand English English, rather than American
English, William. As someone from the same country as the person who said
it, I can assure you that it *was* intended as humour. I understood it as
that. You, and the OP obviously didn't.  I can understand him getting it
wrong, as I don't think I've seen him as a regular poster on here, so maybe
doesn't understand the subtleties of transatlantic language exchanges, but
you know better, as you've been involved in these conversations many many
times. In fact, come to think of it, on more than one occasion, you have
been the instigator of such interchanges, having said something that others
have taken as offensive. Gareth has even posted to say that it was intended
as humour, and to apologise if it was taken as anything other than that. So
stop deliberately stirring the pot, will you ? The remark was *NOT* intended
to be offensive to the OP, any more than mine along the same lines was.
Accept that, both of you, and get over it ...

Arfa
Click to expand...
If something this minor upsets everyone, what will it take to start
another world war?????????/
 
On Jul 6, 6:18 pm, "Arfa Daily" <arfa.da...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
"Gareth Magennis" <sound.serv...@btconnect.com> wrote in message

news:vW%Qp.24258$Rw7.4612@newsfe28.ams2...











"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgee...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:iv1k8c$aoh$2@dont-email.me...
"Phil Allison" <phi...@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:97ip3pFp1rU1@mid.individual.net...

 But do you know [whether] any voltage drop is really NEEDED?

Gee, Phil, I thought you were omniscient.

Though you'd think the mechanical nature of the Accutron's timekeeping
process would remove any interaction with the electronics, it's not so..

The user manual specifically states that the watch runs a bit fast with
new
cells, until their initially slightly high voltage "settles in" to its
nominal value. Therefore, an Accutron will run fast with modern cells.

What a crap design then.

Gareth.

Makes a bit of a mockery of the name "Accutron" ...
Click to expand...
No one could have predicted that mercury button cells would be pulled
from the market. The more so because mercury laden twisty bulbs are
becoming all but mandatory.
 
On Wed, 6 Jul 2011 17:19:47 +0100, "Gareth Magennis"
<sound.service@btconnect.com> wrote:

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:iv1k8c$aoh$2@dont-email.me...
"Phil Allison" <phil_a@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:97ip3pFp1rU1@mid.individual.net...

But do you know [whether] any voltage drop is really NEEDED?

Gee, Phil, I thought you were omniscient.

Though you'd think the mechanical nature of the Accutron's timekeeping
process would remove any interaction with the electronics, it's not so.

The user manual specifically states that the watch runs a bit fast with
new
cells, until their initially slightly high voltage "settles in" to its
nominal value. Therefore, an Accutron will run fast with modern cells.

What a crap design then.
Gareth.
Click to expand...
Sigh. If you have ever worn a spring wound watch of the period when
the Accutron was first introduced, you might change your opinion. When
compared to todays high accuracy, low power, LCD watches, the Accutron
is indeed inferior. When compared to the commodity watches of the
early 1960's, it was a miraculous improvement.

The Accutron has one transistor and one tuning fork. If you can build
a power supply voltage insensitive oscillator watch drive, with the
technology available in the early 1960's, you're welcome to try.

<http://www.elektron.demon.co.uk/accutron.html>

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top