Jump to content

Waterproof Testers


omgiv

Recommended Posts

I understand that proper waterproof testing in today's dive watches is very important.  There seem to be quite a number of types of testers on the market now.  Everything from dry vacuum testers, wet vacuum testers, and were pressure testers that try to push the water inside of the case with pressure.  This last version is where my questions comes.  Both the Lititz Dive 125 and Roxer Natator 125 work the same way.  You put the watch in the chamber, cover it with water, and seal it up.  Pressure is created in the chamber trying to push the water inside of the case.  After the designated time, the pressure is released, and the watch is place on a temperature controlled hot plate for a period of time.  A drop of cold or room temperature water is placed on the crystal and it will be clear if it passes.  If it clouds up, the watch has failed the test.  

 

If the watch in question does indeed fail, does that mean that it is necessary to take apart the movement again and clean it?  A failed test to me says that water has made it into the case.  Is that the correct operating procedure?  I would think that one would use on of the other types of testers would be used first just to make sure everything seems okay before  submitting the case to such extreme pressure.  The other question I have is if the test is first performed without the movement in the case and then redone once everything is cased up.  I have never used one of these before but am interested in them.  Thanks for the help!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not used a Roxer but I have used both the Bergeon and Calypso wet testers.

 

The wet testers will push compressed air into the watch case IF there is a leak. 

Only when the air is compressed do you plunge the watch into the water.

If there is a leak then the watch case will be filled with compressed air and water cannot enter the leak.

Then with the watch still in the water, you slowly allow the air to de-compress. Any air in the watch will want to escape the case and it will do so through the leak.

Because air is escaping, water cannot enter.

You will see air escaping because bubbles will shoot out.

If you see air escaping then you know there is a leak and the location of that leak.

 

So - if the above is all done correctly then the test is safe and you should not get water in the watch as a result. You can then dry off the case and deal with the problem and try again.

 

If you suspect there is a leak before hand and you just want to know the location, you can do all of the above with the movement removed. This is easier if you have a screw-down crown, but if not then place the crown and stem in the case and secure it with a little tape - then perform the test.

 

 

 

The Dry testers (Elma, Witshi) are safe tests as they obviously do not involve water at all.

 

 

It is not a good idea to use the term "Water Proof" as no watch is water proof. We should describe it as "Water Resistance".

 

Here is some further information:

 

Water Resistance Classification

 

The "Water Resistant" mark has come to replace "Water Proof" and is now described by the following ISO-Standard 2281:

Declaration on dial or back:

 

 

NO DECLARATION

  • This model is NOT water resistant.

  • Any water contact should be avoided.

 

WATER RESIST

  • This model is resistant to minor and Accidental Splashes.

  • Greater water contact should be avoided

 

WATER RESISTANT 30M (3 ATM / 100 Feet) *

  • Protected in everyday life, bathing, accidental splashes, short swimming or car washing - it is resistant against perspiration, water vapor, rain drops.

  • It is tested for water resistance up to 3 ATM, and must be able to survive 30 minutes under water at a depth of 1 m (3 feet) followed by 90 seconds under a pressure corresponding to 30 meters

     

WATER RESISTANT 50M (5 ATM / 160 Feet) *

  • Protected in everyday life, bathing, accidental splashes, short swimming, car washing, parachuting, hang gliding and skiing - it is resistant against perspiration, water vapor, rain drops.

  • It is tested for water resistance up to 5 ATM corresponding to 50 meters

WATER RESISTANT 100M (10 ATM / 300 Feet) *

  • Protected in everyday life, swimming, snorkeling, mountain climbing, parachuting, hang gliding, skiing and all kinds of sports challenges

  • It is tested for water resistance up to 10 ATM corresponding to 100 m

WATER RESISTANT 200M (20 ATM / 660 Feet) *

  • Protected in everyday life, free diving without scuba gear, and all kinds of water sports.

  • It is tested for water resistance up to 20 ATM corresponding to 200 m

     

WATER RESISTANT 300M (30 ATM / 1000 Feet) *

  • Protected for scuba diving to a depth of 30 meters, for 2 hours.

  • It is tested for water resistance up to 30 ATM corresponding to 300 m

WATER RESISTANT 500M (50 ATM / 1650 Feet) *

  • Protected for scuba diving to a depth of 50 meters, for 2 hours.

  • It is tested for water resistance up to 50 ATM corresponding to 500 m

* The metres value does not relate to a diving depth but to the air pressure used in the course of the water resistance test. (DIN 8310, ISO 2281, NIHS 91-10) 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great reply mark.

I'd like to disagree with one thing though, I don't think that 30 meters is truly safe for swimming, I think it's generally okay, but there is still a small but significant chance that a 30 meter tested watch will take on water during swimming or other intentional/prolonged submersion, I always advise my customers against swimming in their watch unless it is 50 meters resistant, call me overly cautious.

But what I've just said is debated. Some professionals do promise 30 meters for swimming. 

Edited by Ishima
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fully agree with Ishima.

 

Personally I would not trust any watch specified as Water Resistant for wearing under water unless it has a working screw-down crown or a double o-ring crown, a minimum of 1.5mm glass or an armoured UB, and a screw-down back and rated at least 100M

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you gentlemen for the replies and for the information.  I usually use caution when get watches wet myself.  You never know when that day will come when it has "failed".  I currently have the Elma dry tester and the Calypso tester but have been studying the other types of testers.  If there is condensation under the crystal for the other types of testers, doesn't that mean that water has entered the case?  If that is indeed the case, I would think that the movement would have to be cleaned again to prevent rust and then tried again.  Would that be correct?  Thank you again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the watch is warmed up (have it in your pocket for a while until it is warm) and you put a dab of cold water on the glass, if the glass steams then it is possible there is a trace of moisture in the watch. This has happened to me in the past when I had not dried a case completely (turns out some moisture was still trapped in the pusher areas inside the case). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excellent, now I can use my Chinese wet tester with confidence. Thank you Mark!

 

I also had the same problem from the previous post (#7). Only, I use Windex (ammoniated and non ammoniated glass cleaners) so one more puff of air clear everything...careful with the glued on crystals and the ammoniated cleaner!

 

Cheers,

 

Bob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a heads up. The old rules for water resistance, ISO 2281, were superseded by ISO 22810:2010. This means that all watches made since 2010, that use the ISO standard, are real world water resistant to the depth marketed.

Thanks for the information, and welcome to the forum. :)

It would be good to know what you get up to in the horological world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

 

I have not used a Roxer but I have used both the Bergeon and Calypso wet testers.

 

The wet testers will push compressed air into the watch case IF there is a leak. 

Only when the air is compressed do you plunge the watch into the water.

If there is a leak then the watch case will be filled with compressed air and water cannot enter the leak.

Then with the watch still in the water, you slowly allow the air to de-compress. Any air in the watch will want to escape the case and it will do so through the leak.

Because air is escaping, water cannot enter.

You will see air escaping because bubbles will shoot out.

If you see air escaping then you know there is a leak and the location of that leak.

 

So - if the above is all done correctly then the test is safe and you should not get water in the watch as a result. You can then dry off the case and deal with the problem and try again.

 

If you suspect there is a leak before hand and you just want to know the location, you can do all of the above with the movement removed. This is easier if you have a screw-down crown, but if not then place the crown and stem in the case and secure it with a little tape - then perform the test.

 

 

 

The Dry testers (Elma, Witshi) are safe tests as they obviously do not involve water at all.

 

 

It is not a good idea to use the term "Water Proof" as no watch is water proof. We should describe it as "Water Resistance".

 

Here is some further information:

 

Water Resistance Classification

 

The "Water Resistant" mark has come to replace "Water Proof" and is now described by the following ISO-Standard 2281:

Declaration on dial or back:

 

 

NO DECLARATION

  • This model is NOT water resistant.

  • Any water contact should be avoided.

 

WATER RESIST

  • This model is resistant to minor and Accidental Splashes.

  • Greater water contact should be avoided

 

WATER RESISTANT 30M (3 ATM / 100 Feet) *

  • Protected in everyday life, bathing, accidental splashes, short swimming or car washing - it is resistant against perspiration, water vapor, rain drops.

  • It is tested for water resistance up to 3 ATM, and must be able to survive 30 minutes under water at a depth of 1 m (3 feet) followed by 90 seconds under a pressure corresponding to 30 meters

     

WATER RESISTANT 50M (5 ATM / 160 Feet) *

  • Protected in everyday life, bathing, accidental splashes, short swimming, car washing, parachuting, hang gliding and skiing - it is resistant against perspiration, water vapor, rain drops.

  • It is tested for water resistance up to 5 ATM corresponding to 50 meters

WATER RESISTANT 100M (10 ATM / 300 Feet) *

  • Protected in everyday life, swimming, snorkeling, mountain climbing, parachuting, hang gliding, skiing and all kinds of sports challenges

  • It is tested for water resistance up to 10 ATM corresponding to 100 m

WATER RESISTANT 200M (20 ATM / 660 Feet) *

  • Protected in everyday life, free diving without scuba gear, and all kinds of water sports.

  • It is tested for water resistance up to 20 ATM corresponding to 200 m

     

WATER RESISTANT 300M (30 ATM / 1000 Feet) *

  • Protected for scuba diving to a depth of 30 meters, for 2 hours.

  • It is tested for water resistance up to 30 ATM corresponding to 300 m

WATER RESISTANT 500M (50 ATM / 1650 Feet) *

  • Protected for scuba diving to a depth of 50 meters, for 2 hours.

  • It is tested for water resistance up to 50 ATM corresponding to 500 m

* The metres value does not relate to a diving depth but to the air pressure used in the course of the water resistance test. (DIN 8310, ISO 2281, NIHS 91-10) 

 

Thanks for the explanation Mark , that's a lot clearer than the instructions that came with my Chinese tester .

I didn't think i was doing it correctly , I was releasing the air after 3 minutes then immersing the watch and wondering why no bubbles came from the case but there was water in the watch.

Have done it as you say immerse the watch then release the air and can now see a steady stream of bubbles.

cheers Andy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
On 2015-03-26 at 7:57 PM, Mark said:

 .. but I have used both the Bergeon and Calypso wet testers ..

So which one do you prefer and why? I'm just about to get a machine of my own. Bergeron 5555/98 (3 atm) is about the same price as the Calypso (10 bar). Bergeon 5555/10 (10 atm) seems good but it's nearlly twice as expensive. 

Bergeon is known for creating solid tools but sometimes it seems that they are the double amount for just having that "Bergeon sticker". Calypso is from Italy? Can the Italiens really develope good, long lasting watchmaking tools? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Calypso is from Italy? Can the Italiens really develope good, long lasting watchmaking tools? 

Mispelling aside, that's kind of a condescending statement toward Italian products.

 

I use a 6 bar Chinese machine that works perfectly and cost less than $200.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, jdm said:

Mispelling aside, that's kind of a condescending statement toward Italian products.

 

 

That was not my intention. I'm not much for generalizations and would like to correct myself. My questions should have been: "Are Calypso tools any good". It's a totally unknown brand to me. Mark's answer gave me one opinion.

Based on my experience with Chinese tools (many of them seems to have weak steel?) I will keep away from the much cheaper Chinese version. But that is just me. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, alexndr said:

That was not my intention. I'm not much for generalizations and would like to correct myself. My questions should have been: "Are Calypso tools any good". It's a totally unknown brand to me. Marks answer gave me one opinion.

Based on my experience with Chinese tools (many of them seems to have weak steel?) I will keep away from the much cheaper Chinese version. But that is just me. 

No problem at all. We have often discussions about cheap tools and what matters most is being objective. I have many which serves me well (including the pressure one) and others which I have fun in ridiculing.  

I hope you can find the machine that works better for you at the right price.

Edited by jdm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the countries I used to travel to in a previous job was Italy. I used to design automated machinery most of which was for the production of electric motors. I visited many production facilities in Italy and was very impressed with the level of technology in their factories. Actually seeing what was going on in that country quickly dispelled many of the bad jokes about Italian products that I had heard throughout the years. They did first rate work that was on a par with any other country. Their food was also the best  I had anywhere else in the world. The borders of Italy and Switzerland join at the Alps mountains and it is possible (but challenging) to walk from Italy to Switzerland. 

david

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, david said:

One of the countries I used to travel to in a previous job was Italy. I used to design automated machinery most of which was for the production of electric motors. I visited many production facilities in Italy and was very impressed with the level of technology in their factories. Actually seeing what was going on in that country quickly dispelled many of the bad jokes about Italian products that I had heard throughout the years. They did first rate work that was on a par with any other country. Their food was also the best  I had anywhere else in the world. The borders of Italy and Switzerland join at the Alps mountains and it is possible (but challenging) to walk from Italy to Switzerland. 

david

The only Italian equipment I've ever owned is a Lapavoni Espresso machine. It's been serving me thousands of espressos and cappuccinos and it's a solid piece of machinery with very few problems over the years. Let's hope I will be equally satisfied with the Calypso tester :). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 5 months later...
I have that very machine & yes I always remove the bracelet because I guess it is a pain to dry if not removed. The only issue I have with the model I have is it only tests up to 6 bar which is not truly enough to test a diver watch.
Looks like I'll have to take them off then [emoji16]

Sent from my SM-T585 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • As far as I know, the only time an epilame treatment has potential drawbacks is when something is rubbing on the treated part w/o lubrication in between creating abrasive dust. That is, I don't believe in the method of "running the watch to make a groove through it first in the pallet stones where the lubrication is then placed". So, I think the rule would be; do not epilame treat parts where rubbing is going on without lubrication. Other than that I don't think we have anything to worry about. That said, I'm not an expert, and I'm always happy to learn more. Has any other repairer than Alex suggested or explained the "making-a-groove" method? My impression is that it's just something he constructed in his mind. I have not perceived it as a generally practiced method. Again, I could be wrong!
    • Post some pictures , some good close ones of the parts you've described. 
    • Ive never used epilame H only information i have read and mentally stored about it mostly from Nicklesilver here and elsewhere ( the fork horns thing ), maybe the residue powder that is removed has some grinding effect ? So probably a good idea to limit its application areas to only the absolute necessary. Yes as far as i know epilame rubs off relatively easy, the technique of running the watch to make a groove through it first in the pallet stones where the lubrication is then placed. This i understand creates the barrier for the lube to sit up to. If i can find a good balance of pros and cons of its use then thats one process i can avoid by using a thixotropic lube on the stones. The epilame i would say allows for a more fluid lubrication to be used that would increase amplitude on low beat movements. The stearic acid powder is extremely cheap, the problem is the fuming process to coat parts, is not selective , the whole part has to treated in this method. If epilame residue can cause wear then thats not good, if I remember the conclusion was not proved entirely just a general assumption between watchmakers. The thread is out there somewhere, the same discussion is also old on a facebook group. Ive never used epilame H only information i have read and mentally stored about it mostly from Nicklesilver here and elsewhere ( the fork horns thing ), maybe the residue powder that is removed has some grinding effect ? So probably a good idea to limit its application areas to only the absolute necessary. Yes as far as i know epilame rubs off relatively easy, the technique of running the watch to make a groove through it first in the pallet stones where the lubrication is then placed. This i understand creates the barrier for the lube to sit up to. If i can find a good balance of pros and cons of its use then thats one process i can avoid by using a thixotropic lube on the stones. The epilame i would say allows for a more fluid lubrication to be used that would increase amplitude on low beat movements. The stearic acid powder is extremely cheap, the problem is the fuming process to coat parts, is not selective , the whole part has to treated in this method. If epilame residue can cause wear then thats not good, if I remember the conclusion was not proved entirely just a general assumption between watchmakers. The thread is out there somewhere, the same discussion is also old on a facebook group. If its a potential problem for amateurs to use then i would prefer not to take the risk .
    • Following on from my question about identifying screws in the AS2063 movement that basically fell out of the case in bits, I’m pleased to report that I’ve got it all back together, and the movement is running pretty well.    But… There’s something wrong with the keyless works and hand setting. It’s fine in winding and quickset date position - these work - but in hand setting position winding the crown turns the whole gear train.  I don’t really understand how it’s meant to work. It doesn’t have a traditional friction fit cannon pinion.  The second wheel is unusual with a pair of smaller pinions on it, which seem to interact with the barrel and the motion works.    Could this be the problem? I must admit I just cleaned it and popped it in place when reassembling the gear train. I’ve lubricated the pivots but didn’t do anything to the extra bits on the second wheel.    Does this make sense and is anyone able to figure out what I’m doing wrong? Thanks in advance, as always.    ETA - the parts list calls it the Great Wheel, not second wheel. 
    • You're thinking metal to jewel in general I guess. Maybe it would be a good idea to peg the pallet staff jewel hole on the main plate after the epilame treatment. I think that could work as it is my impression that the epilame doesn't sit very hard, but I could be wrong about that so feel free to educate me. I didn't remember that 9501 was thixotropic (thanks for the link). That would mean it's even runnier during impact (lower viscosity) so perhaps it's time I get some fresh grease as mine seems a bit too runny. What I have seen is a whitish surface after washing but it goes away if I scrub the surface with a brush in a degreaser (Horosolv). I don't think it embeds itself in the metal but sticks very hard to the metal. I don't worry too much about the cleaning solution. I just want perfectly clean parts and my solution can be replaced for little money (ELMA RED 1:9). Anyway, I quite often need "to strip back and rebuild" and scrubbing parts by hand isn't exactly the most stimulating part of a service. Just got confirmation that Moebius 9501 has a lower viscosity (68 cSt at 20° C) than 9504 (305 cSt at 20°). The viscosity of Molykote DX is 285-315 cSt at -25° to +125° C. I was surprised to see that the viscosity of Moebius 9010 (thin oil!) is higher (150 cSt at 20°) than my 9501 grease!
×
×
  • Create New...