Antigravity Hangzhou Tourbillon

roadwarrior

Grand Tyme Master
Founding Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2014
Messages
55,570
Wing mentioned he has a Central Tourbillon he is working on for 2023.

-1x-1.jpg



H0ad6aa219da444b3ba1ca0bb7d2ada99A.jpg
H0f03f1ea9e104615a5cafc36cb8cc99ea.jpg


 
Last edited:

roadwarrior

Grand Tyme Master
Founding Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2014
Messages
55,570
Can't believe I'm saying this, but I've got +5 seconds on this Hangzhou tourbillon. Wasn't expecting that.
It's hard to say how accurate these are without being able to hack and not having a standard seconds hand.


The tourbillon is often regarded as one of the most prestigious complications and a demonstration of the skill and craftsmanship of the watchmakers capable of manufacturing this captivating mechanism. Invented by Breguet in 1801, its aim is to negate the influence of gravity on the regulating organ of watches. Changes in position have significant effects on the way watches keep time. In a tourbillon, a mobile carriage rotating at slow speed (most often once per minute) houses the balance, balance-spring and escapement to average out positional errors. Tourbillon watches are, therefore, built to keep time with superior precision, but, until very recently, they had one significant drawback. It was impossible to set the time with to-the-second accuracy with a classic stop-seconds function. Indeed, it would seem logical and obvious to be able to synchronize the movement to a time signal.

The ability to stop the balance wheel and the seconds hand of a mechanical movement is critical. Traditionally, pulling the crown of a watch with a hacking mechanism causes a brake to come in contact with the rim of the balance wheel and bring it to a standstill. When pushing back the crown, the brake is released and the balance wheel and seconds hand instantly start running again. But stopping the balance wheel in a tourbillon is not simple because the balance is oscillating inside a rotating cage. There is the risk that the brake hits one of the cage pillars getting in the way and, as a result, cannot perform its function. Stopping the cage itself would not be the solution. The balance would remain free to oscillate, it would eventually slow down, lose amplitude and come to a halt, which is seen as not satisfactory (at least for some). There is also a risk that the escapement would be damaged.
 

bigbasshunter

Tyme Master Jr.
Joined
Nov 25, 2014
Messages
11,656
It's hard to say how accurate these are without being able to hack and not having a standard seconds hand.


The tourbillon is often regarded as one of the most prestigious complications and a demonstration of the skill and craftsmanship of the watchmakers capable of manufacturing this captivating mechanism. Invented by Breguet in 1801, its aim is to negate the influence of gravity on the regulating organ of watches. Changes in position have significant effects on the way watches keep time. In a tourbillon, a mobile carriage rotating at slow speed (most often once per minute) houses the balance, balance-spring and escapement to average out positional errors. Tourbillon watches are, therefore, built to keep time with superior precision, but, until very recently, they had one significant drawback. It was impossible to set the time with to-the-second accuracy with a classic stop-seconds function. Indeed, it would seem logical and obvious to be able to synchronize the movement to a time signal.

The ability to stop the balance wheel and the seconds hand of a mechanical movement is critical. Traditionally, pulling the crown of a watch with a hacking mechanism causes a brake to come in contact with the rim of the balance wheel and bring it to a standstill. When pushing back the crown, the brake is released and the balance wheel and seconds hand instantly start running again. But stopping the balance wheel in a tourbillon is not simple because the balance is oscillating inside a rotating cage. There is the risk that the brake hits one of the cage pillars getting in the way and, as a result, cannot perform its function. Stopping the cage itself would not be the solution. The balance would remain free to oscillate, it would eventually slow down, lose amplitude and come to a halt, which is seen as not satisfactory (at least for some). There is also a risk that the escapement would be damaged.
Yep, there's some guessing involved, but that's the number I came up with. If that number is off and of course that's possible, it's only off a couple of seconds.
 
Top Bottom