Talk:Pendulum clock

Time High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Time, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Time on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TimeWikipedia:WikiProject TimeTemplate:WikiProject TimeTime articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Technology

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles

Untitled

If 1656 was the date of the invention of hte first pendulum clock, then they have not been around "since ancient times". Nik42 04:02, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Any one willing to put something in about clock work? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.129.45.215 (talk) 11:45, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problems?

I've submitted the possible problem, then I did this: Googling these two strings with quotes, first from the about.com site "This allows the master pendulum" and this slightly different string from the article: "This allowed the master pendulum" both give many copies of the disputed text. It's hard to know which one would legitimately hold the copyright, or if it's public domain and now on sites that surely claim copyright to all their material such as about.com. Now I don't know if I did the right thing.

A couple of comments

According to R.T.Gould ("the Marine Chronometer") the mercury bob pendulum came before the gridiron, but the gridiron worked better if the temperature changes rapidly.
I don't see how the grasshopper escapement is an exception to the general description (which is excellent). The animation referenced in the Grasshopper escapement article shows that. If you meant to say that there are escapements where the impulse to the pendulum does not directly come from the gear train, that's true -- those are gravity escapements. The Big Ben escapement is a classic example, and so is the Shortt clock. I don't think the Grasshopper is, though. Actually, a gravity escapement could be viewed as the limiting case of a remontoire -- rewound each tick.
Nice description of the Shortt clock. It would be worthwhile to mention that it's a derivative of the Synchronome, invented by Frank Hope-Jones. Both are described in Hope-Jones's book "Electric Timekeeping". Paul Koning

Fedchenko?

Is there a source for the Fedchenko clock? The Shortt clock is well documented but I haven't succeeded in finding details about Fedchenko's clock. The one article I found (about a hobbyist's copy of the design) didn't sound like anything that could come close to challenging the Shortt clock. Paul Koning 16:44, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

take a look here: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1957SvA.....1..637F HH93.216.76.154 (talk) 19:59, 11 February 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Torsion-spring pendulum or Torsion pendulum?

Hope this isn't nitpicking, but I think the more widely-used term for this type of pendulum is 'torsion pendulum', although 'torsion-spring pendulum' is more specific and distinguishes it better from the ordinary type of pendulum. I googled both terms and there are a lot more webpages that refer to 'torsion pendulum' clocks. Also, there is a Torsion pendulum clock article that should be linked to this section. What about changing the name of this well-written section to Torsion pendulum? --Chetvorno 21:18, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think either name makes sense. The object described there is a balance, not a pendulum. So I would call it either torsion balance, or torsion spring balance -- because the thing is a balance and its balance spring is a torsion spring. Paul Koning 14:26, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the difference is functional, not structural. Torsion pendulums used in scientific experiments as sensitive balances to measure forces, as in the Cavendish experiment, are generally called torsion balances. Torsion pendulums used as harmonic oscillators, for their vibrating, timekeeping properties, as in anniversary clocks are called torsion pendulums. --Chetvorno 14:01, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hope no one minds, I changed the term. --Chetvorno 14:01, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"pushes"?

Is there a good reason to use the fuzzy term "pushes" instead of the precise term "impulses"? Paul Koning (talk) 12:00, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

homework

hey i had to answer this question on my homework about this clock and this has got to be the most orignal name ever i mean penuloum i spelt that wrong i no but i think u get my point and i rly want a clock like this one for my house when i get older! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.56.210.205 (talk) 01:06, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

plagiarised section

I just removed a section entitled "pendulum parts" which was located below "escapement". It was a less-informative rehash of the mechanism section, which had apparently been taken directly from another website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.246.103.93 (talk) 18:22, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Something wrong with the maths here?

"at an amplitude of 23° it loses 1% or about 1 minute 25 sec. per day, compared to its rate for small swings" Roly (talk) 16:25, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No reply to this so I assume 1% should be 0.1%. I have changed this. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Roly (talk) 15:20, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good try, and something is cleary wrong as 1% of a day is 14 minutes 24 secs. However, as Pendulum makes clear, the time period of a pendulum is increased by about

100\times \theta ^{2}/16

percent (

\theta

in radians), so it is indeed a 1% increase that corresponds to a swing of 22.9°. For a 0.1% increase we need a more realistic 7.2°.

As it happens, this information was deleted entirely a few hours after you changed it, which I think is a pity. A simple statement to the effect that a swing with amplitude 7.2° is sufficient to cause an error of 0.1% or 1 minute 25 sec. per day does point up the fact that a simple pendulum is nowhere near as isochronous as you might think. Wellset (talk) 15:11, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Language problem

From its invention 1577 by Bryan Piczon which uses gravity as the second hand rises up the pendulum swing slower and when the second hand is going down the pendulum swing faster, note the clock only works with only one hand, the seconds hand, and in 1656 complete with hour and minute hand by Christiaan Huygens until the 1930s, the pendulum clock was the world's most precise timekeeper, accounting for its widespread use.

What? 50.255.135.49 (talk) 15:27, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like vandalism. I've reverted it. --Roly (talk) 16:27, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pendulum clock. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.geocities.com/mvhw/anchor.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:11, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Pendulum clock. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:49, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pendulum clock. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110927062444/http://tf.nist.gov/timefreq/general/pdf/1485.pdf to http://tf.nist.gov/timefreq/general/pdf/1485.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:25, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]