26 Comments

One of my hobbies is watch/clock making. The “slop” (technically “gear lash”) that you observe in the second hand is due to how the clock movement (motor) is designed/built - the motor is designed to step one second each second, and the minutes and hours are all driven from that point. For a battery powered clock like this, the gearing is intentionally built loose, to minimize the gear friction that you’d otherwise have if the gears were built tighter. If the gear friction is higher, then the batteries wouldn’t last as long and the clock would wear out its gears quicker.

As for the alignment of the second/minute/hour hands - for this kind of clock the alignment is entirely set by the placing of hands on the dial. The hands are placed in the stack order: hour first (for this clock), then minute, then second. The clockmaker will place the hour hand (usually randomly), and then fine tune the position so it points directly at an hour marker. Then they will place the minute hand so it points at 12 o’ clock exactly, then will put the seconds hand on last so it also points at 12.

If you see a clock with hands misaligned, either the factory was careless in setting the hands, the hand has slipped on its shaft, or the gears have jumped a tooth.

For mechanical clocks, there is always a spring or weight which keeps tension on the gear train at all times, so there won’t be slop due to loosely fit gears.

Finally for sweep seconds, the second hand is on the shaft of a constantly turning motor (with speed usually based on the wall 120V AC 60Hz power frequency from the outlet), so again the second hand won’t have any slop - BUT, there could be some slop in the minute and hour hands…

Ed

Expand full comment

Such great info -- thanks, Ed!

Expand full comment

I feel like watch/clock making is the sort of trade where people who do it care enough about craftsmanship and precision to get into things like Inconspicuous Consumption.

Expand full comment

The sweeping second hand makes for the one and only (to my knowledge) dynamic iPhone app icon. Sweeping hands are pretty, I like the dynamic iPhone clock, and I like that that is the only app icon that is dynamic. It would instantly get out of hand otherwise, but seeing the clock icon work like a watch is calming in a sea of crazy apps on a small but powerful computer

Expand full comment

Calendar is also technically a dynamic icon, I guess, but it only changes once a day, because ... that's how calendars work.

Expand full comment

Hmm…or does the icon change once a day from one static piece of info (the date) to the next?

Expand full comment

Good point.

Expand full comment

I missed you, Paul.

Expand full comment

In college we had an old clock that would tick it's way up to the top and then around to about the 2 and then it would fall down to the 6 where it would wait for the mechanism to catch up and bring it back up to the top just to fall again. It kept perfect time as the mechanism didn't actually know the seconds hand was not attached tight enough. We loved it. And as irksome as you may have found it, I really think you would have loved the quirkiness of it at the same time.

Expand full comment

Is it too soon to declare something peak Inconspicuous Consumption, because this feels like it? Great read.

Expand full comment

In thinking through the gravity explanation, I would expect the second hand to "fall" as it crosses the 7, but that's not what happens. It seems to be mostly aligned through about 35 seconds, but then it jumps to 36 1/2 on the next tick. If gravity was pulling the hand down, you'd expect there to be a "short" second as the balance shifts, but instead there is a "long" second. Perhaps the thicker, shorter back half of the second hand is actually exerting more force than the thinner, longer side? I wonder then if the defect is in the balance of the second hand.

Either way, when when I watched the first video, I was so distracted by the "bouncing" second hand that I didn't even notice the misalignment at first!

Expand full comment

I became passionate about this for a minute at some point when I needed a wall clock to replace my cheap IKEA one that annoyed me. I ended up with a Seiko with a silent sweeping second hand that is very satisfying.

Expand full comment

Love the topic and the content. Possibly because I grew up looking at ticking hands and got used to them, I always had the sense that the sweeping hands were more new-fangled and fancy somehow. I thought they were the latest innovation in clocks, which made them unnecessarily bougie for a simple task. So I've always been partial to ticking hands for that reason, even though I've also noticed the hand being slightly off.

Expand full comment

Sweep seconds used to be common especially in schools or offices, before quartz took over starting in the 70s. They are based on the frequency of the AC power out of the wall, which tends to be pretty accurate (more accurate than quartz), and also tends to stay synchronized because the power to a building is usually all on the same AC phase reference.

A step beyond that for schools is centrally controlled clocks - where there is a master clock (eg in the principal’s office) and the classroom clocks are all driven from signals from the master clock.

I’ve seen the sweep second clocks that are battery powered, and wonder whether they consume batteries more quickly.

Expand full comment

It’s very interesting that the lining up of the various hands is what is so frustrating for you. Honestly, in looking at a distance I wouldn’t have even noticed the hour and minute hands being slightly misaligned. It’s not like they are wildly off. And who actually watches a secondhand? Answer: Paul Lukas of course. Anyway, the part that bugged me in watching it was the bouncing nature of the secondhand. Like you said, it is more of a precision thing. The second hand should sort of snap to its next position, so the bouncing motion is odd, but again, I don’t really stare at the secondhand with these kinds of clocks. The best part about this is that I’m not sure I ever even noticed that these clocks have a sweeping secondhand versus a tick style. One more in a series of things I’ll never unseen now thanks to Paul!

Expand full comment

I noticed the bouncing as well. Instantly. And it bothered me. Then I read the whole article and now the clock in my office bothers me because it's all out of whack too. Thanks, Paul... Hahaha!

Expand full comment

Before I got to the first video, I guessed it would be that the second hand bounced back and forth too much as it moved. Never guessed it would be misalignment with the numbers. Great article to start the day!

Expand full comment

I have a nice watch that I like a lot. I had to return two of them before I received one where the hands lined up with the markings. I just knew seeing that flaw every time I looked down would drive me insane. Or more insane that I actually was/am. Thanks to Paul and all of you for validating my actions that, at the time, felt petty and eccentric.

Expand full comment

I've always found the ticking second hand far more aesthetically (and auditorily) pleasing than the sweeping hand, but what you describe has bugged me for essentially that entire time. I love that you put this all into words!

Expand full comment

It's a Tibor Kalman clock so maybe it's all intentional...

Expand full comment

Tibor: An avowed fan of the Brannock Device!

Expand full comment

Absolutely loved this article. Thanks, Paul, and welcome back!

Expand full comment

Paul this makes me wonder if you might happen to be a "watch guy." I have become interested in automatic watches in the past couple of years and the differences between as well as the craftmanship of the various makers is quite fascinating.

Expand full comment

Never been a watch guy and haven't even worn a watch in many years. But I do like the word "horology"!

Expand full comment

Fair point lol

Expand full comment

Well, even a broken clock is yadda, yadda, yadda.

Expand full comment