Type 206 mechanical clockwork fuze

[synchronome]

Dear all,

I am new to the world of fuzes, but have a lot of experience with clocks (www.theclockworks.org). I am putting together a lecture on a range of clockwork devices made by S. Smith & Son, and would like to include the type 206 fuze as I have an example (and some foreign copies, I believe) and it forms part of a wider story I want to tell. I particularly want to video the release of the fuze and its running. I am loathe to start taking it apart without seeing if I can get any advice on its construction and operation (which I guess will be similar for the family of clockwork fuzes with similar numbers). Although I have watched the fuze run down, I do not know how it is wound, or indeed much about it altogether. Is anyone able to help guide me? I can be contacted direct at james.nye@kcl.ac.uk

With many thanks, in advance,

James

 

[Bellifortis]

Hallo James,
for quite some time I have been looking for somebody knowledgable in mechanical clockworks. I love mechanical watches, but know near to nothing about their technology. Since some time I'm researching the development of Rheinmetall electric time fuzes. This developmwent started in 1926 because Krupp held all the patents for the mechanical fuze clockwork. Even England paid royalties to Krupp after WW1 (a lots of money) for their use of the patented clockwork mechanism in fuzes. The precision of this clockwork ( Z.Z S/30) was taken as a precision baseline in the development of Rheinmetall electric time fuzes. I am looking for somebody to explain to me which of the patented parts in this clockwork are so indispensable that nobody could get around them in designing a clockwork movement. The Krupp movement is based on Baker patents 1906, which Krupp bought up. May be you are the person that is able to answer my questions. If you need drawings, pictures of the clockwork I can mail them to you.
With kind regards,
Bellifortis.

 

[Alpini]

I am putting together a lecture on a range of clockwork devices made by S. Smith & Son, and would like to include the type 206 fuze as I have an example (and some foreign copies, I believe)

Hello James,

the clockwork inside the british No. 206 fuze (and other british fuzes) is the foreign copy (I guess a well licensed production). The clockwork is a german Krupp-Thiel invention which was invented just with beginning of 1st WW. The first german fuze with this clockwork was the Doppelznder (19)16 (Dopp. Z. 16). Krupp was the official patent holder and the Thiel brothers from the Gebrder Thiel GmbH are the inventors.

@Bellifortis: Karl Bkers Patent has nothing to do with Krupp clockworks. There where two different Krupp clockworks, the more modern I described above. The Inventor of the older Krupp clockwork was Karl Wieser (he should have been a Krupp employee). This clockwork found use in the official introduced Dopp. Z. 08 but prooved not very successful. It was to fragile for artillery projectiles. Numbers of the Dopp. Z. 08 fuzes were converted for use with Zeppelin illumination bombs (these converted fuzes could be activated with a pull cord).

The royalities which Vickers paid to Krupp after 1st WW was not for mechanical clockworks (as far as I know Great Britain had no mechanical time fuze during WW1). Vickers paid the royalities for the Krupp pyrotechnical fuze design which was used in the No.80 fuzes.

Also during WW1 the Junghans company invented the centrifugal weight engine for mechanical time fuzes which solved the problem of breaking springs in the other clockworks. The Junghans clockwork was troop tested in the "Mechanischer Kopfznder"(M.K.Z) just at the end of 1st WW.

Both the Junghans and Krupp-Thiel design were spread to all major players around the world and I guess they are still in use today (may be even in production?).

 

[TimG]

In 1905 Vickers entered into a twelve year agreement with Krupp regarding the manufacture of the No. 80 fuze. Krupp were to be paid 1/- per small fuze and 1/3d per large fuze. After the war Krupp started two legal actions, one against Vickers for lost royalties ant the other against Coventry Ordnance Works for patent infringement/loss of royalties. Whilst the actions were started, there is no information as to how the actions were resolved. In the case of Vickers the initial sum sought was phenomenal but the final figure was in the region of 30K.

(I'm going from memory so might be some errors in figures)

As for the Krupp-Thiel, the British captured large stocks towards the end of the war. We tested it, were impressed, converted it to the No. 200 (bit of confusion here as to what was really done). The mechanism was 'reverse engineered' by Cambridge Scientific and subsequently manufactured by us. Still in use in the UK to the late 80's and maybe beyond.

TimG

 

[Bellifortis]

Hello James,

the clockwork inside the british No. 206 fuze (and other british fuzes) is the foreign copy (I guess a well licensed production). The clockwork is a german Krupp-Thiel invention which was invented just with beginning of 1st WW. The first german fuze with this clockwork was the Doppelznder (19)16 (Dopp. Z. 16). Krupp was the official patent holder and the Thiel brothers from the Gebrder Thiel GmbH are the inventors.

@Bellifortis: Karl Bkers Patent has nothing to do with Krupp clockworks. There where two different Krupp clockworks, the more modern I described above. The Inventor of the older Krupp clockwork was Karl Wieser (he should have been a Krupp employee). This clockwork found use in the official introduced Dopp. Z. 08 but prooved not very successful. It was to fragile for artillery projectiles. Numbers of the Dopp. Z. 08 fuzes were converted for use with Zeppelin illumination bombs (these converted fuzes could be activated with a pull cord).

The royalities which Vickers paid to Krupp after 1st WW was not for mechanical clockworks (as far as I know Great Britain had no mechanical time fuze during WW1). Vickers paid the royalities for the Krupp pyrotechnical fuze design which was used in the No.80 fuzes.

Also during WW1 the Junghans company invented the centrifugal weight engine for mechanical time fuzes which solved the problem of breaking springs in the other clockworks. The Junghans clockwork was troop tested in the "Mechanischer Kopfznder"(M.K.Z) just at the end of 1st WW.
Both the Junghans and Krupp-Thiel design were spread to all major players around the world and I guess they are still in use today (may be even in production?).

Hallo Alpini,
attached are drawings of the Krupp-Thiehl (Doppelznder 16) and the older Krupp time fuze. You state, that these are completely different developments and that nothing of the older fuze is used in the Krupp-Thiel. Is that right ? A clock movement for fuzes is made up of many parts. What I would like to know, which of those parts are so important that nobody seemed to get around these patents ? And, do you know which patents cover the Krupp-Thiel movement ?
Regards,
Bellifortis.
P.S.: I can't upload the Krupp fuze scans. I'll check the problem and try to upload the pic's later.

 

[synchronome]

Dear all,

Many thanks to all of you for taking the time to reply to my enquiry of yesterday - it's much appreciated. And through the attachments here and a kind e-mail from one of you I have drawings I did not have before which will definitely help me understand.

Just by way of a bit of back story, I am effectively official historian to Smiths Group, successor to Smiths Industries. My official history of the firm will come out later this year. In the wake of completing the book, I am pursuing various smaller stories that were left out of the main book - stories that fascinate me because of particular interests in technology. I was given a 206 fuze by a Smiths old-timer who worked in the factory where the firm made the 206 fuze during the Second World War. I recognised it was the same type I had seen mentioned in a documentary source, which described the career of Robert Lenoir, a senior Smiths engineer. This said, to quote:

‘It was some time before the outbreak of the war that Robert was requested to visit Mr Oliphant, the Director of the Woolwich Arsenal, later to be appointed Director of Royal Ordnance Factories. As a result, Smiths were invited to tender for tooling up and manufacturing the 206 anti-aircraft mechanical fuse for the Admiralty. Pre-production samples were made in Chronos and firing tests carried out at Shoeburynesss. Robert was privileged to fire a naval gun loaded with a shell fitted with one of the fuses made in the model shop and the results of the tests were very satisfactory. Following receipt of the first Contract manufacture commenced and the factory was geared up to full production just before the war started.’

Having been given the fuze, and with some background in horology, I was naturally curious to understand how it works, and you have all helped towards that, as well as explaining the ancestry of the device, of which I had no inkling. Bellifortis, with regards your question, I am not sure I am really in a position to offer any help - I am wholly nave in this arena at this stage!

Thanks again to everyone for the lightning responses.

Regards,

James

 

[Alpini]

@Bellifortis, yes these are the two types of Krupp clockworks. Some of the drawings are from the book "Mechanische Zeitznder" from R.Wille. I don't know if there are some small similarities between both clockworks but the persons involved are different. This patent drawing covers the main things of the Krupp-Thiel clockwork. There is a whole bunch of different patents regarding this clockwork and all are dated from the late 1920's - 1930's and I don't know why as it was completely invented in 1916. A interesting fact is, that foreign patents are all issued under the name of the Inventor Paul Liebergeld and the german patents are issued to the Company Gebr. Thiel. The inventor was employee of the Gebr. Thiel company in Seebach near Ruhla in Germany. The company survived more and less until today. After second WW it became the VEB Uhrenkombinat Ruhla and was still producing clocks and milling machines as in the first days. Now it is part of Deckel-Maho-Gildemeister (DMG) and they are not longer making clocks but still making very nice CNC milling machines.

 

[Alpini]

I do not know how it is wound

In factory after assembly it is wound with a "gear-key" (I don't know how this tool is called) through the small red surrounded hole. But once the clockwork was running your problem is the put the pointer back into it's safety position. I have a Czechoslovakian copy of the clockwork and it's possible (with some force) to rewind the clockwork by turning the pointer back. Sometimes this operation must be supported by stimulating the part one the hair spring on the bottom of the clockwork (see the other drawing). Due to it's nature rewinding was not really a intended functionality

 

[Bellifortis]

Hallo Alpini,
thank you for your instructive explanation. As I mentioned before, my interest in this clockwork mechanism is related with my Rheinmetall el.fuze research. In 1926 Rheinmetall saw no possibility in getting into the large mechanical time fuze market, because Krupp held all the patents. Did Krupp aquire all the patent rights to the Liebermann / Thiel patents before 1926 ? Also, does anybody here know the tip-shape and size of the winding key for the clockwork ? I remember that somebody here once showed a key he made for the (17) bomb fuze. I do not know if this key is differently shaped. Alpini, I did a fast check on the Patents. I still have to do some family searches, but that takes time. I found 2 german patents 1943 Liebermann/Thiehl and quite a few US starting in 1927. Nowhere any mentioning of Krupp. What do you think is the reason for this (mechanism produced since 1916) and Rheinmetall's opinion in 1926 that there is no way to manufacture a mechanical time fuze, even not on licence, because Krupp held all the pertinent patents. Do you have any explanation ?
Greetings,
Bellifortis.

@Bellifortis, yes these are the two types of Krupp clockworks. Some of the drawings are from the book "Mechanische Zeitznder" from R.Wille. I don't know if there are some small similarities between both clockworks but the persons involved are different. This patent drawing covers the main things of the Krupp-Thiel clockwork. There is a whole bunch of different patents regarding this clockwork and all are dated from the late 1920's - 1930's and I don't know why as it was completely invented in 1916. A interesting fact is, that foreign patents are all issued under the name of the Inventor Paul Liebergeld and the german patents are issued to the Company Gebr. Thiel. The inventor was employee of the Gebr. Thiel company in Seebach near Ruhla in Germany. The company survived more and less until today. After second WW it became the VEB Uhrenkombinat Ruhla and was still producing clocks and milling machines as in the first days. Now it is part of Deckel-Maho-Gildemeister (DMG) and they are not longer making clocks but still making very nice CNC milling machines.

 

[Dronic69]

In factory after assembly it is wound with a "gear-key" (I don't know how this tool is called) through the small red surrounded hole. But once the clockwork was running your problem is the put the pointer back into it's safety position. I have a Czechoslovakian copy of the clockwork and it's possible (with some force) to rewind the clockwork by turning the pointer back. Sometimes this operation must be supported by stimulating the part one the hair spring on the bottom of the clockwork (see the other drawing). Due to it's nature rewinding was not really a intended functionality

Hi Stefan,


The "gear-key" is referred to as a "spline key" (see photo) and it appears that the majority of the internal clock mechanisms were wound up during production, which is logical..............I state "majority" as there appears to be some exceptions, one being the Japanese Type 99 Mk3 [D-2(b)] used for aerial burst incendiary, which has a external key hole permitting the winding of the clock mechanism.

Why this would be performed in the field rather than in the factory I'm not sure.....there's an earlier thread of my and photos of the Type 99 mechanism:

Cheers

Drew


http://www.bocn.co.uk/vbforum/threa...D-2(a)-diagram?highlight=type+clock+mechanism

 

[Alpini]

Hello Drew,

I must have missed your nice photos of the Japanese clockwork. And yes you are right, the german clockworks and most others were of course wound in the factory with a special device to gain equal quality.

Why this Japanese fuze was wound manually I can only guess. I don't remember where but I remember that I was reading an article about german mechanical time fuzes in 2nd WW in Africa. There was written that they often had problems with broken spiral springs in Africa which gave dud shells. The same problem also happened when the fuzes had a long storage time after production. The conclusion of this article was that Junghans centrifugal weight clockworks should be preferred. If the spiral spring is not wound it won't break

 

[Alpini]

Nowhere any mentioning of Krupp. What do you think is the reason for this (mechanism produced since 1916) and Rheinmetall's opinion in 1926 that there is no way to manufacture a mechanical time fuze, even not on licence, because Krupp held all the pertinent patents. Do you have any explanation ?

That's not easy to find out as there are no early patents. There can be "business-political" reasons too - Krupp held a large part of Rheinmetall stocks. The treaty of Versailles also plays some role I just don't know which exactly (Krupp was forbidden to produce fuzes, Rheinmetall was the only allowed fuze production company). And there was also a connection between Krupp and Bofors after 1st WW. Bofors continued to produce Krupp type mechanical time fuzes after 1st WW. But that's an incomplete puzzle which I don't understand at the moment.

 

[Bellifortis]

Hallo Alpini,
there we come back to my original question. Rheinmetall, the only company that was allowed to manufacture fuzes in germany according to the Versaille treaty, wanted very much to get into the ever increasing mechanical fuze market, but saw absolutely no way to do this, even not in licence (probably commercial politics), because Krupp held all pertinent patents (1926).Which patents are this ? By 1926 the pyrotechnic delay fuze,which Smmerda was making, was out for AA work because of its inherent non precision. All Liebergeld-Thiele patents just start in 1927. And why is this mechanism called in all the literature "Krupp-Thiehl". As you also stated the basic mechanism was used since 1916 and sold by Krupp. I try to understand the background to the Rheinmetall electric fuze development which is based on the impossibility for them to manufacture a mechanical timefuze with the precision of the S/30. As I stated in the beginning, I know nothing about mechanical clockworks, not even the names of the many parts that make up a movement. You have to be a watchmaker to understand the duty of every single part and it`'s importance, especially for precision. I believe there is generally seen no difference between a fuze movement and a wrist watch movement what concerns the interaction of the many parts. That's why I answered on the original question in this thread and was hoping for answers by a specialist in clock movements.
Greetings,
Bellifortis.

 

[Gunnerwho?]

Before 1914 there were various attempts with varying success at mechanical time fuzes, see one or two of Bethell's book from that period, eg Modern Guns and Gunnery or better for this matter, Modern Artillery in the Field.

By the end of WW1 there seem to have been three satisfactory mechanisms. Thiel, a clockwork mechanism with an escapement, which was the design taken by UK, although the first fuzes don't seem to have entered service until after 1939 (at least for the army) and left service once the Electronic time fuze entered service and MT stocks were expended.

Junghans, which used gears and was taken by the US and provided the basis for all US MT fuzes. Both of these were German.

Then there was Dixi, which was Swiss, it uses balls as the driving mechanism. The first Dixi fuze entered UK service in early 1966 (I think I was the first operational user and the ammo came straight from Sweden in Swedish zinc lined boxes, 4 shells per box). Dixi also used a vernier scale. These fuzes are still in use (just I think, tenders for a replacement shell design capable of using ETF were invited last year) in UK service, they were only ever used with 105mm Illum.

 

[Bellifortis]

Hallo,
you say that the Liebergeld-Thiel-Krupp design did not enter service in the UK before 1939. When was the 203 fuze, which uses this design, introduced in England ?
Regards,
Bellifortis.

Before 1914 there were various attempts with varying success at mechanical time fuzes, see one or two of Bethell's book from that period, eg Modern Guns and Gunnery or better for this matter, Modern Artillery in the Field.

By the end of WW1 there seem to have been three satisfactory mechanisms. Thiel, a clockwork mechanism with an escapement, which was the design taken by UK, although the first fuzes don't seem to have entered service until after 1939 (at least for the army) and left service once the Electronic time fuze entered service and MT stocks were expended.

Junghans, which used gears and was taken by the US and provided the basis for all US MT fuzes. Both of these were German.

Then there was Dixi, which was Swiss, it uses balls as the driving mechanism. The first Dixi fuze entered UK service in early 1966 (I think I was the first operational user and the ammo came straight from Sweden in Swedish zinc lined boxes, 4 shells per box). Dixi also used a vernier scale. These fuzes are still in use (just I think, tenders for a replacement shell design capable of using ETF were invited last year) in UK service, they were only ever used with 105mm Illum.

 

[TimG]

I have the 203 introduced in 1921.

TimG

 

[Bellifortis]

Hallo Alpini,
I just have been again looking through that very nice belgian publication "Les Fusees Allemandes", which I consider the Best and most detailed of all allied "WW 1" fuze publications I have seen. Paragraph 87-Section F.-"Fusees a temps" shows and describes "Dopp.Z.08" which is detailed there as a Krupp design. Also this fuze uses most of the mechanism of the now called "Krupp-Thiel" movement. So, the general design of that movement was ready in 1908 and as Tim wrote, produced in GB from 1921 onwards. I collected all the pertinent patents and it seems very strange that the Thiel-Liebergeld patents seem to start in 1927. If you should ever find out the reason for this, I would be very glad to hear from you.
Bellifortis.

@Bellifortis, yes these are the two types of Krupp clockworks. Some of the drawings are from the book "Mechanische Zeitznder" from R.Wille. I don't know if there are some small similarities between both clockworks but the persons involved are different. This patent drawing covers the main things of the Krupp-Thiel clockwork. There is a whole bunch of different patents regarding this clockwork and all are dated from the late 1920's - 1930's and I don't know why as it was completely invented in 1916. A interesting fact is, that foreign patents are all issued under the name of the Inventor Paul Liebergeld and the german patents are issued to the Company Gebr. Thiel. The inventor was employee of the Gebr. Thiel company in Seebach near Ruhla in Germany. The company survived more and less until today. After second WW it became the VEB Uhrenkombinat Ruhla and was still producing clocks and milling machines as in the first days. Now it is part of Deckel-Maho-Gildemeister (DMG) and they are not longer making clocks but still making very nice CNC milling machines.

 

[greif]

Perhaps these scans are usefull for your discussion. I noticed that on the bottom of Blatt II it is marked Z. 295. 08. Could that stand for Zeichnung 295 1908? Greif