Last modified: 2024-12-04 22:41:43
< 2024-12-03 2024-12-05 >Just for some amusement I ran the clock this evening. The only change since last time is I moved the remontoire weight marginally closer to the gear, i.e. slightly less drive torque on the escape wheel.
I definitely want to be able to run this for longer so that I can spot environmental effects.
I am thinking that the big drawback of the Korfhage remontoire is that you need that extra shaft that spins faster than the escape wheel. I can easily imagine that my clock will be right at the very limit of how much torque it can squeeze out of the long geartrain, so having to spin another shaft 8x as fast just to control the remontoire is not ideal.
I could experiment with the endless-chain type.
Also, I think putting the drive weight on a pulley is an obvious win. You basically get an extra factor of 2 in runtime (equivalently, you take a factor of 2 off your train ratio) for free. Even if your pulley is really sticky, what's it going to do? Not fall downhill? You basically don't lose any torque even if the pulley is really bad, which is not something that can be said for the train.
As long as the pulley is not keyed to the rope then it can always just fall down the rope even if it's not rolling.
With a longer string and a pulley on the weight, and a longer winding drum to take advantage of it, I think the current prototype would easily run for 3 or 4 hours on twice the drive weight.
Would more stages of pulleys also help?