Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.electronics.design > #446610

Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision

Path csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>
Newsgroups sci.electronics.design
Subject Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision
Date Tue, 7 Feb 2017 02:43:33 -0500
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Lines 58
Message-ID <o7btns$k90$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References <o792ut$ooh$1@news.albasani.net> <f50a1321-ae5e-4968-b0f0-39d20cb28a7a@googlegroups.com> <o79nlk$1f5$1@news.albasani.net> <o7bn7d$op4$2@gonzo.alcatraz>
Mime-Version 1.0
Content-Type text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding 7bit
Injection-Date Tue, 7 Feb 2017 07:41:48 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="b6443822665b11d600c80c1d7678cd9f"; logging-data="20768"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX185etdTncKM9w0frbzOn+0l"
User-Agent Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.2; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0
In-Reply-To <o7bn7d$op4$2@gonzo.alcatraz>
Cancel-Lock sha1:sqAk8ylBg1rQ2WduRo9oPcHYFDE=
Xref csiph.com sci.electronics.design:446610

Show key headers only | View raw

On 2/7/2017 12:50 AM, Jasen Betts wrote:
> On 2017-02-06, Pimpom <Pimpom@invalid.com> wrote:
>> On 2/6/2017 11:43 AM, Phil Allison wrote:
>>> Pimpom wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What would be considered a "good" wristwatch today in terms of
>>>> timekeeping precision? Forget about build quality, price, shock-
>>>> and waterproofing, etc.
>>>>
>>>> Half a century ago, a wristwatch with a-minute-a-month accuracy
>>>> might have been labelled a chronometer. What standard would you
>>>> apply now?
>>>>
>>>
>>> ** The Quartz standard, of course.
>>>
>>> Goolge has heaps of info on this topic:
>>>
>>> http://www.chronocentric.com/watches/accuracy.shtml
>>>
>> Perhaps I should rephrase the question. I meant to ask what level
>> of accuracy would be considered good for a consumer wristwatch
>> nowadays.
>>
>> For example, I bought a Chinese analog-digital wristwatch from
>> www.aliexpress.com last month and have been monitoring its
>> accuracy. I do this by comparing it to a freshly synced computer
>> clock. It's now exactly one month since I synced it to the
>> computer clock. The analog section is ahead by 6 seconds and the
>> digital one is behind by 35 secs. The errors may not be linearly
>> cumulative but I think it's pretty good for a US$7 watch.
>
> about half a second per day was typical of inexpensive quartz crystal
> watches in the 1980s
>
> About 1987 I decided watches were't worth the bother, especially
> cheap watches that pulled hairs from my arm.

I remember a *long* time ago I had one that had a trimmer cap in it.  I 
would tweak that until it barely gained or lost time at all.  But like 
all watches on my wrist, eventually it got beat up and quit working.

I also remember building a clock with a vacuum florescent display with a 
trimmer.  I was adjusting it by beating a 60 Hz output against the power 
line.  I could get it very, very close, but then ten or fifteen minutes 
later it would drift again!  It took me awhile before I realized that 
wasn't the clock, it was the power line.  lol

Does the power line still drift like that?  Is there a reason why it 
would in this day with the many sources of accurate timing available? 
I'd expect the many generators could do a much better job of not running 
up and down in frequency so much, or is this an inherent aspect of a 
widely distributed network?

-- 

Rick C

Back to sci.electronics.design | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

OT: Current standard for watch precision Pimpom <pimpom@invalid.com> - 2017-02-06 11:22 +0530
  Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> - 2017-02-05 22:13 -0800
    Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Pimpom <Pimpom@invalid.com> - 2017-02-06 17:15 +0530
      Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 05:11 -0800
        Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Pimpom <Pimpom@invalid.com> - 2017-02-06 19:30 +0530
          Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 06:33 -0800
            Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision nub12 <nub12@null.com> - 2017-02-07 07:57 +0800
        Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com> - 2017-02-08 20:06 -0800
      Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2017-02-06 20:16 +0200
        Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Pimpom <Pimpom@invalid.com> - 2017-02-07 00:12 +0530
        Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-06 11:58 -0700
      Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2017-02-07 05:50 +0000
        Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 02:43 -0500
          Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Pimpom <Pimpom@invalid.com> - 2017-02-07 14:53 +0530
            Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-07 12:32 -0500
          Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 02:33 -0800
          Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision upsidedown@downunder.com - 2017-02-07 17:56 +0200
            Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 17:32 -0500
              Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-02-07 14:52 -0800
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision upsidedown@downunder.com - 2017-02-08 10:25 +0200
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 03:37 -0500
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-02-08 09:01 +0000
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 05:24 -0500
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-02-08 09:08 -0800
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 16:04 -0500
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-02-09 08:12 +1100
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 17:28 -0500
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision pcdhobbs@gmail.com - 2017-02-08 16:19 -0800
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 00:36 -0500
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 00:38 -0500
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-02-09 18:39 +1100
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 04:16 -0500
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-02-09 09:46 +0000
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 05:03 -0500
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2017-02-09 11:45 +0100
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 07:12 -0500
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2017-02-09 13:31 +0100
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-02-09 12:14 +0000
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 07:25 -0500
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-02-10 09:17 +0000
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2017-02-10 10:45 +0100
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-10 21:56 -0500
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2017-02-11 02:06 +0000
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-10 22:24 -0500
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2017-02-11 01:54 +0000
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-02-10 18:10 -0800
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Cursitor Doom <curd@notformail.com> - 2017-02-08 23:34 +0000
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-02-08 15:49 -0800
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision pcdhobbs@gmail.com - 2017-02-08 15:55 -0800
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-02-08 16:08 -0800
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Ralph Barone <ralph@invalid.com> - 2017-02-09 03:24 +0000
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-02-08 20:34 -0800
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2017-02-08 23:26 -0600
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-02-08 23:28 -0800
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2017-02-09 00:48 -0500
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision George Herold <gherold@teachspin.com> - 2017-02-09 06:52 -0800
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-09 20:37 -0500
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Cursitor Doom <curd@notformail.com> - 2017-02-10 17:11 +0000
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision upsidedown@downunder.com - 2017-02-09 23:13 +0200
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-08 20:17 -0500
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-02-08 19:29 -0800
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-02-08 20:16 -0800
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-02-08 17:13 +0000
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision kevin93 <kevin@whitedigs.com> - 2017-02-08 12:54 -0800
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-08 12:35 -0500
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-02-08 09:50 -0800
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-08 13:14 -0500
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-02-08 11:35 -0800
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision upsidedown@downunder.com - 2017-02-08 23:16 +0200
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2017-02-09 09:59 +0100
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-02-08 09:41 -0800
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-08 13:15 -0500
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2017-02-11 01:46 +0000
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-10 22:12 -0500
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-02-09 15:25 -0800
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-02-10 10:38 +1100
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-02-09 17:42 -0800
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2017-02-08 11:01 +0100
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2017-02-11 04:06 +0000
              Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-07 21:02 -0500
          Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-02-07 10:24 -0800
            Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-02-07 10:48 -0800
              Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision George Herold <gherold@teachspin.com> - 2017-02-07 11:12 -0800
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Mikko OH2HVJ <mikko.syrjalahti@nospam.fi> - 2017-02-08 09:33 +0200
                Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision George Herold <gherold@teachspin.com> - 2017-02-08 06:31 -0800
      Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-02-07 09:58 +0000
    Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com> - 2017-02-08 20:00 -0800
  Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-02-05 23:01 -0800
  Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2017-02-06 03:21 -0800
    Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Pimpom <Pimpom@invalid.com> - 2017-02-06 17:25 +0530
  Re: Current standard for watch precision "Tim Williams" <tiwill@seventransistorlabs.com> - 2017-02-06 06:57 -0600
    Re: Current standard for watch precision Pimpom <Pimpom@invalid.com> - 2017-02-06 19:10 +0530
      Re: Current standard for watch precision "Tim Williams" <tiwill@seventransistorlabs.com> - 2017-02-06 08:13 -0600
        Re: Current standard for watch precision Pimpom <Pimpom@invalid.com> - 2017-02-06 21:04 +0530
      Re: Current standard for watch precision Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2017-02-06 09:30 -0500
        Re: Current standard for watch precision George Herold <gherold@teachspin.com> - 2017-02-06 06:56 -0800
      Re: Current standard for watch precision Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com> - 2017-02-08 20:11 -0800
    Re: Current standard for watch precision Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-06 12:04 -0700
      Re: Current standard for watch precision Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> - 2017-02-06 14:58 -0700
        Re: Current standard for watch precision Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-06 15:21 -0700
          Re: Current standard for watch precision Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> - 2017-02-06 16:06 -0700
            Re: Current standard for watch precision Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-06 17:19 -0700
              Re: Current standard for watch precision Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> - 2017-02-06 17:52 -0700
                Re: Current standard for watch precision Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-06 17:55 -0700
      Re: Current standard for watch precision krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-06 21:44 -0500
    Re: Current standard for watch precision Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com> - 2017-02-08 20:04 -0800
  Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2017-02-06 09:06 -0500
    Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Pimpom <Pimpom@invalid.com> - 2017-02-06 21:04 +0530
  Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision TTman <pcw1.cad@ntlworld.com> - 2017-02-06 14:31 +0000
    Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-02-07 08:54 +1100
  Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Tim Wescott <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> - 2017-02-06 17:33 -0600
  Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision krw@notreal.com - 2017-02-06 21:23 -0500
  Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision prairiesky <outgoing.server@mozilla.com> - 2017-02-06 23:00 -0800
  Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Cursitor Doom <curd@notformail.com> - 2017-02-07 18:29 +0000
  Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com> - 2017-02-08 19:59 -0800
    Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 00:48 -0500
      Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2017-02-08 23:54 -0600
        Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2017-02-09 00:00 -0600
        Re: OT: Current standard for watch precision rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 04:57 -0500

csiph-web