WatchProSite|Market|Digest

WatchTech

Mostly in agreement

 
 By: aaronm : May 1st, 2012-15:53
I think for any of the functional pieces (springs, wheels, pinions) or the structural pieces (plates) all of the aformentioned issues make the technology at least 5-10 years out of the industry.  I think for the hands, direct 3-d printing might be possible, particularly if you rivet on the center tube so you are only printing the indicator piece, where tolerances are lower and there's no functional requirements.  It's possible that 3d printing/casting, where you 3d print a wax model and then cast it, is a viable technology for cases, but there'd still be some post processing needed. 

A

I think of 3D printing...

 
 By: grumio : May 1st, 2012-17:05

as a novel fabrication technique that watch manufacturers or restorers/repairers can chose to use where it provides advantages over the existing options. But not as a likely revolution in the manufacturing of watches or watch parts.

Quickly prototyping watch cases or case parts from resin or plastic is an examples of where it does seem to have advantages. But I'm a little sceptical about its potential use for manufacturing movement parts, at least based on the current capabilities of 3D printing that I've read of.

Perhaps if the technology matures further, particularly its capabilities when working with metals, then there may be some new options.

IMHO the availability of more conventional, relatively low cost, high accuracy CNC metalworking equipment is perhaps just as important as 3D printing.

Great topic John - interested to hear what others think.

grumio

fascinating topic

 
 By: long71 : May 1st, 2012-21:51
I tend to agree that at a point (undefined) in the future, technology will enable the dispersion of previous highly restricted manufacturing. This may represent a threat of sorts to some aspects of the watch industry, and many others besides. However, the industry has proven to be highly adaptable in restructuring after the advent of quartz movements albeit that not all of the industry survived.  I would anticipate that manufacturing changes will (probably) have a disruptive but not a calamitous effect, assuming that the industry proves sufficiently flexible. 

I think that the part of the existing industry most at risk is probably the servicing of older timepieces. The use of printers would probably eliminate any distinction between independent watch repair and the manufacturers. I would suspect that the wholesale copying of high end pieces will not prove a serious threat - if people want a replica rolex they can already get one today. If you dont care about authenticity, then you're already well served by the replica market.

Just my two cents worth

Conor

potential for progressive watchmakers

 
 By: jfsuperior : May 2nd, 2012-07:10
John and all,

I see a potential niche for budding, aggressive, and progressive watchmakers to incorporate this technology for 'watch repair and/or restoration'.

Just as the cost of sandblasting and laser welding machines have come down and more accessible to watchmakers, so, too, 3d printers are becoming more and more affordable to the general public. As a result, I envision the day when watchmakers may use this technology to reproduce a necessary part during service of a timepiece. And, with restrictions placed by watch manufacturers for spare parts, an aggressive watchmaker will do whatever he can to offer his unique skills to satisfy customers.

It also won't be long before some watch companies will turn to it as a cost effective way of producing watch parts, etc. in order to beat the rising cost of standard materials and labor.

Thanks for posting this interesting subject on the forum.

Best regards,
Jack Freedman

I hope I live...

 
 By: tempusfugit : May 2nd, 2012-08:06
to see the day when we all have a 3D printer in our homes and can print individualized timepieces at will.  After all, a decade or so ago, who among us thought individuals would be able to print documents wirelessly at home from a cellphone!
My hunch is that, for those interested, the ability to create individualized timepieces will be virtually unlimited.  And the ability  to repair older pieces will be a piece of cake! 
I am sure there are many obstacles. And the timeline is unknown and unlikely to be in a lifetime.  But human ingenuity seems unlimited and builds on previous achievements. 
Flights of fancy aside, I am squarely in ei8htohms' camp on this.

tempusfugit
 

Less watchmaking than watch repair ...

 
 By: Marcus Hanke : May 3rd, 2012-02:47
John's query is fascinating, and one I am dealing with since the first UN Freak with silicium components came out. Back then, most watch enthusaists dismissed the idea of silicium components, arguing that a repair of these components, or even re-crafting would be impossible, compared to traditionally-made components, that "any talented watchmaker is be able to produce".

Well, personally I place the independent "talented watchmaker" reproducing parts of a defective Rocal Oak or Lange movement into the same category of myths as the "bush mechanic" building a high-pressure fuel injection unit from scratch somewhere in Africa. Even today, watch repair is mostly based on the supply with spare parts, rather than the reproduction of damaged parts. Which watchmaker will bend a Nivarox hairspring, or make a new balance ring even for a valuable high-end timepiece? How many repair jobs remain undone, simply because the manufacturer doesn't exist any more, or won't supply independent watchmakers with spare parts?

Consequently, I thought that silicium parts would not make the situation worse than it already is, in the contrary: Here, 3d printing might become the means of choice for independent watchmakers to reproduce individual units of silicium parts. Not now, of course, but not too far in the future. Naturally, etching a silicium wafer with some hundreds of parts on it would always be the more inexpensive way, compared with printing parts one by one, even with the tolerance issue left aside. But 3d silicium printing would make it possible to replace a broken silicium hairspring, even when its producer is out of business since decades.

Regards,
Marcus


FWIW, I made this

 
 By: ei8htohms : May 3rd, 2012-03:12
Hello Marcus,

Such repairs are rare in my experience, but watchmakers do occasionally manufacture parts (watchmakers that do so serious restoration work do so much more often of course).  

I made the roller pictured here for an exceptionally rare Kew A Observatory Chronometer when the original roller broke during restaffing.  The two most challenging aspects of manufacturing this one were: 1.) It's steel for reasons unknown, they are mostly brass or nickel which are MUCH easier materials to make something like a roller out of and 2.) Since it was going into a Kew A piece, it had to be a perfect "drop-in" part (adjusting the escapement to match a non-original part would've been a travesty). I left it blue as a signpost for the next guy. smile


_john


Very nice, John! But ....

 
 By: Marcus Hanke : May 3rd, 2012-04:28
.... parts like these were not what I had in mind in my post. I am aware that good watchmakers sometimes really manufacture parts themselves, mostly to restore an old timepiece. rollers, pins, these are possible. For clocks, re-manufactured teethed wheels, too, are not that rare, but this is braille-scale. I do not know whether this effort is feasible in watches.

My comment regarding the lack of re-production abilities rather dealt with those parts that are made from specific alloys, like Nivarox or Glcydur. I still doubt that these parts are re-made by watchmakers when broken: I rather assume that they are simply replaced, or the repair job is denied, when spare parts are not available.

Regards,
Marcus

CNC making of one off parts

 
 By: Greg D : May 3rd, 2012-04:35

Several years ago I saw a presentation (at the only BHI regional meeting I ever went to!) of a watchmaker who was managing one of the vintage watch workshops in London, talking about making a missing part for a vintage Patek using CNC machining.

I think a simple visual scan of the broken part was a starting point in making the technical drawings required.

I think it was more of a personal experimental project than something that was economic at work.

I guess we will see more of this as more watchmakers become at home with 'small scale' CNC and 3D printing.

More than just shaped metal..

 
 By: nickd : May 3rd, 2012-05:06
But Marcus, most of these parts are more than just shaped metal, and the manufacturing processes confer the properties that make them eg a balance spring not just a coil of a given alloy.  The drawing, rolling, forming, annealing etc all contribute to the final properties, and I don't know if simply cutting a spiral with the appropriate dogleg etc would give the same properties, even after heat treatment.  A balance relies on its inertia which is a function of its mass.  A different manufacturing process would have to duplicate the mass so that the oscillatory properties of the balance/spring pair were the same.

nick

This was why ....

 
 By: Marcus Hanke : May 3rd, 2012-05:59
... I mentioned 3d printing as an option where the same material could be used, such as silicium, or nickel-phosphor in a LIGA process. Just because neither hairsprings nor balance rings are lumps of simple metal, I doubted that these parts are (commonly) remanufactured by even very good watchmakers, but they are replaced by stock parts from the manufacturers.

I am sure this will eventually pose a problem in, say, a hundred years when such parts are not available any more.

Regards,
Marcus

understood

 
 By: ei8htohms : May 3rd, 2012-10:12

Hello Marcus,

I was simply addressing the "myth" of watchmakers making parts. The more exotic the material, the less likely it is that someone will be able to re-manufacture a replacement part for it, at least with currently available technology, and that definitely includes Nivarox and glucydur. Alternative materials could generally be chosen for those two however. Applying traditional techniques to attempt to replace something manufactured using high-tech methods or materials is especially fraught with problems when the engineering embraces the technology at a fundamental level like with the dual-Ulysse escapement or the Pulsomax escapement.

A wheel is not too challenging to fabricate from scratch if one has the tools and training, but there is a huge time investment to set up and execute to an acceptable level of precision, so to do so for a single piece is generally cost prohibitive. Unless the secondary market for a given piece holds up exceptionally well, mostly they will be mothballed rather than being repaired when replacement parts are not available. Special pieces will of course continue to receive special care.

By the way, I realize now that the picture in my previous post doesn't show scale. The roller was for a 9 1/2 ligne wristwatch movement.

_john This message has been edited by ei8htohms on 2012-05-03 10:18:39

9.5'''

 
 By: nickd : May 3rd, 2012-10:26
When I had a guided tour of the PP museum they said that only the best watchmakers could work on small (ladies) movements because of the skills and dexterity needed at that size... 9 1/2'''... I'm impressed...

nick

sorry about that, I meant 10.5"'

 
 By: ei8htohms : May 3rd, 2012-14:49

But it was really hard is what I' m saying! smile

With merely 3D printing, I don't think it will be revolutionary in watchmaking.

 
 By: ling5hk : May 4th, 2012-02:08

But I believe it will make certain stages of watchmaking ralatively easier.

3D printing means lesser work which results in cheaper watch? I don't think so.

Interestingly, I would like to know whether independent watchmakers are using 3D printing in their watchmaking process.  If so, whether their watches will have less "soul" due to the usage of the 3D printing.

Regards

Ling