closing tag is in template navbar
timefactors watches



TZ-UK Fundraiser
Results 1 to 30 of 30

Thread: Worn & Wound story on ISO compliance isn't ISO compliant :-)

  1. #1
    Master bedlam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Fremantle, Western Australia (GMT +8)
    Posts
    1,177

    Worn & Wound story on ISO compliance isn't ISO compliant :-)

    Worn & Wound talking about ISO and DIN compliance when making tool watches. All good, until they quote the old dive watch ISO instead of the current one.

    http://wornandwound.com/making-a-too...try-standards/

    I posted a critical comment suggesting they correct the error and giving them the current ISO requirements. They deleted the comment as I expected, but haven't updated the story. I guess they don't want to bite the hand that feeds them. Not the best 'journalism' though is it (I say journalism very tongue in cheek).

    Oh well.

    My deleted comment:

    Why have you misquoted the ISO 6425 for dive watches?

    The current ISO says "The presence of a time-preselecting device, for example a unidirectional rotating bezel or a digital display. Such a device shall be protected against inadvertent rotation or wrong manipulation. If it is a rotating bezel, IT SHALL HAVE A MINUTE SCALE GOING UP TO 60 MIN. The markings indicating every 5 min shall be clearly indicated..."

    Many watches described as dive watches only have the minute scale going to 15-20 mins and the 5 min markers clearly indicated. This makes sense in a Submariner as it is an iconic design that long predates the ISO, but there is no excuse for recent watch designs. Micro watch makers often copy the Submariner bezel rather than the Sea Dweller's ISO compliant design. I assume mistakes in ISO compliance in dive watches are mostly ignorance of the ISO requirements, but I'm not sure why W&W would fall into the same mistake.

    Did you not read the current ISO before writing the article?

  2. #2
    Master reggie747's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    The Mersey Riviera
    Posts
    7,184
    I appreciate you've discovered the mistake they've made but perhaps not such a pointy reply would have seen them correct it.
    I'm hardly surprised they deleted your comment.

  3. #3
    Master bedlam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Fremantle, Western Australia (GMT +8)
    Posts
    1,177
    Quote Originally Posted by reggie747 View Post
    I appreciate you've discovered the mistake they've made but perhaps not such a pointy reply would have seen them correct it.
    I'm hardly surprised they deleted your comment.
    I do agree. When I read it back it was pretty pointy and I assumed it would not be approved. The error remains in the story though, which is what concerns me more. A story on standards compliance should at least get the standard correct.

  4. #4
    Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Malvern
    Posts
    6,666
    Blog Entries
    1
    Reading the bit you have quoted, it doesn’t mention markers at minute increments, just clear markings at 5 minute increments up to 60. Perhaps I’m reading your comment incorrectly, were you saying all compliant dive watches should have a 60 minute scale with minute markers on other bezel?
    Last edited by phil h; 15th July 2018 at 09:08.

  5. #5
    Grand Master learningtofly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Everywhere & nowhere, baby
    Posts
    37,528
    Why on earth did you adopt such an aggressive tone? No wonder they deleted your comment.

  6. #6
    Master bedlam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Fremantle, Western Australia (GMT +8)
    Posts
    1,177
    Quote Originally Posted by learningtofly View Post
    Why on earth did you adopt such an aggressive tone? No wonder they deleted your comment.
    Fair point.

    Its an issue that comes up at points and I have addressed it many times in dive watch discussions. Seeing W&W perpetuating the error, rather than being on point annoyed me. As said above, I expected the comment would moderated and I see that as fair given my tone. It's the story not being corrected that leads me to post.

  7. #7
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Wakefield, West Yorkshire
    Posts
    22,498
    The opening sentence is certain to annoy the recipient. If they’re mistaken there’s a better way to point it out. Having said that, they ought to correct the error.

    I ‘m not a fan of jounalists, often they get things wrong because they’re too lazy to fet things right, but genuine mistakes do get made.

    Always pays to read something back to yourself before sending.

    Paul

  8. #8
    OP your interpretation of the standard might be wrong. Have you considered that? It is clear when you read the Din again that it does not say that every minute should be marked. But it does say every five minutes up to sixty should. This does not stop it from being a minute scale...

  9. #9
    Master bedlam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Fremantle, Western Australia (GMT +8)
    Posts
    1,177
    Quote Originally Posted by petespendthrift View Post
    OP your interpretation of the standard might be wrong. Have you considered that? It is clear when you read the Din again that it does not say that every minute should be marked. But it does say every five minutes up to sixty should. This does not stop it from being a minute scale...
    Draw a minute scale going to 60 (or draw a mm scale going up to 60 as it is the same concept), then highlight each 5 min marks. What does it look like?

    It doesn't seem that hard to understand what is intended. It certainly isn't hard to know what is most useful on the dive when you are trying to time minutes.

  10. #10
    Master bedlam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Fremantle, Western Australia (GMT +8)
    Posts
    1,177
    Worn & Wound have now updated the article.


    Good on them :-)

  11. #11
    Possibly, what you think it should mean and what is actually says differ. Some kind of confirmation bias. Markings every five minutes is perfectly readable for most as you can interpolate and use the dials minute scale to help you. Except on a very large watch marking every minute on the bezel can actually be harder to read as it ends up cluttered. Plus you have to question whether accuracy to exact minutes is needed for a diving bezel. One way to find out is to ask the people who devised the DIN what they mean. But really does it matter? Either way is perfectly adequate.

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by bedlam View Post
    Draw a minute scale going to 60 (or draw a mm scale going up to 60 as it is the same concept), then highlight each 5 min marks. What does it look like?

    It doesn't seem that hard to understand what is intended. It certainly isn't hard to know what is most useful on the dive when you are trying to time minutes.
    Not really the same concept, as resolution of scales changes according to practical needs and is not a factor of the units used. (i.e. aircraft altimeters measure in feet but the smallest scale markings are 10 ft).

    When presented with five minute spacings on a bezel, almost anyone can judge the minute hand against the space and mentally subdivide by five to get a result accurate to the nearest two minutes. We make these calculations without conscious effort or thought. If there is ever a need for more accuracy, minute markers for up to 15 or 20 minutes are provides if a diver wants to reset the bezel for the purpose of timing a decompression stop. These bezels where designed to be used with Buhlmann Decompression Tables that are based on an algorithm for a typical person with a built in safety margin. Consequently they are already approximations so timing to exact minutes (meaning reading the second hand as well) is hardly necessary, +/- 60 secs is fine.

  13. #13
    Master bedlam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Fremantle, Western Australia (GMT +8)
    Posts
    1,177
    double post
    Last edited by bedlam; 16th July 2018 at 15:26.

  14. #14
    Master bedlam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Fremantle, Western Australia (GMT +8)
    Posts
    1,177
    Quote Originally Posted by petespendthrift View Post
    Not really the same concept, as resolution of scales changes according to practical needs and is not a factor of the units used. (i.e. aircraft altimeters measure in feet but the smallest scale markings are 10 ft).

    When presented with five minute spacings on a bezel, almost anyone can judge the minute hand against the space and mentally subdivide by five to get a result accurate to the nearest two minutes. We make these calculations without conscious effort or thought. If there is ever a need for more accuracy, minute markers for up to 15 or 20 minutes are provides if a diver wants to reset the bezel for the purpose of timing a decompression stop. These bezels where designed to be used with Buhlmann Decompression Tables that are based on an algorithm for a typical person with a built in safety margin. Consequently they are already approximations so timing to exact minutes (meaning reading the second hand as well) is hardly necessary, +/- 60 secs is fine.
    Why should a diver have to 'judge' the minute hand because somebody chose not to index the bezel properly?? That would be the opposite of a good tool for the job.

    If I move the bezel to time the stop I lose my run time. Why not just index the bezel properly?

    The ISO is clear. It requires the bezel have a MINUTE scale (not a 5min, 12min, 25min, or 105min scale, a minute scale) going to 60, and each 5min mark to be highlighted. If you time a minute you will find it isn't 5 minutes, no matter how hard you try. The scale required is a minute scale. Its not hard.

    I have had several computer failures over the years and had to time stops using my watch - including short stops of a minute or 2. There are still a bunch of technical divers that like using a dive plan on a slate (pic of one of mine is below) and a watch.

    Buhlmann refers to an algorithm based on tables, it's not a table in itself. Most modern computers calculate decompression requirements using gradient factors that approach M values based on a chosen level of conservatism for 16 different conceptual body compartments. I know a fair bit about it, and the Buhlmann ZHL-16c algorithm has nothing to do with the fact a propely indexed bezel is easier to use than a partially indexed one, and Buhlmann has nothing to do with the ISO requirements.


  15. #15
    Master bedlam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Fremantle, Western Australia (GMT +8)
    Posts
    1,177
    Quote Originally Posted by petespendthrift View Post
    Possibly, what you think it should mean and what is actually says differ. Some kind of confirmation bias. Markings every five minutes is perfectly readable for most as you can interpolate and use the dials minute scale to help you. Except on a very large watch marking every minute on the bezel can actually be harder to read as it ends up cluttered. Plus you have to question whether accuracy to exact minutes is needed for a diving bezel. One way to find out is to ask the people who devised the DIN what they mean. But really does it matter? Either way is perfectly adequate.
    Have you had a computer fail and used your watch as a redundant timer to time decompression stops on ascent?

  16. #16
    No I have not and whilst I don’t doubt your claimed experience, I suspect that you might be over egging your pudding with this one...

  17. #17
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Wales
    Posts
    704
    Quote Originally Posted by bedlam View Post
    Have you had a computer fail and used your watch as a redundant timer to time decompression stops on ascent?
    I have, twice.

    But I have never bought a dive watch checking if it was ISO compliant I just bought a dive watch that was suitable for my purpose...Tag Aquagraph, it is bloody superb for diving and deco stops the chrono has the best minute hand out there for visibility.

    I still don't know if this is an ISO certified watch. Mind you the Rolex Sea Dweller is not and I would happily use that for diving ...though it is not as good as the Aquagraph for dual timing as it lacks the chrono.

  18. #18
    Master bedlam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Fremantle, Western Australia (GMT +8)
    Posts
    1,177
    Quote Originally Posted by Carl.1 View Post
    I have, twice.

    But I have never bought a dive watch checking if it was ISO compliant I just bought a dive watch that was suitable for my purpose...Tag Aquagraph, it is bloody superb for diving and deco stops the chrono has the best minute hand out there for visibility.

    I still don't know if this is an ISO certified watch. Mind you the Rolex Sea Dweller is not and I would happily use that for diving ...though it is not as good as the Aquagraph for dual timing as it lacks the chrono.
    Yeah, the Aquagraph is one of the few Tag's I'd consider having.

  19. #19
    Master bedlam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Fremantle, Western Australia (GMT +8)
    Posts
    1,177
    Quote Originally Posted by petespendthrift View Post
    No I have not and whilst I don’t doubt your claimed experience, I suspect that you might be over egging your pudding with this one...
    I am being stubborn on the issue, no doubt at all.

    Mostly, it pains me to watch dive tools being pushed towards being fashionable at the cost of function and then have their owners twist the dive watch standard out of shape to pretend otherwise. I have non-ISO compliant dive watches and they work, but having the bezel well sorted makes life easier when you need to use it. Its the core function of the watch after all.

    The second issue is that people discount them now, but dive watches work really well! Recreational divers in particular are very enamoured of dive computers but many technical divers remain wary. The more advanced the diving the more there is a preference for the simplest tool possible. Basic is best as more complexity adds increased risk of failure. A dive plan on a slate and a decent dive watch will always be (less efficient) and more safe than a computer. Safety trumps efficiency every time.

    Even the computer's instruction manual says clearly to never rely on the computer because it will fail. At which point the dive watch becomes important equipment. I prefer mine well sorted for the task.

  20. #20
    Fuss about nothing.

    Why should it be ok for Rolex not to be compliant because it’s an ‘iconic design’ whereas micro brands should comply?

    Plenty of iterations of the watches and opportunity to comply. Kind of illustrates that it’s a fashion watch.

  21. #21
    Master bedlam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Fremantle, Western Australia (GMT +8)
    Posts
    1,177
    Quote Originally Posted by Kingstepper View Post
    Fuss about nothing.

    Why should it be ok for Rolex not to be compliant because it’s an ‘iconic design’ whereas micro brands should comply?

    Plenty of iterations of the watches and opportunity to comply. Kind of illustrates that it’s a fashion watch.
    The Sub is iconic and Rolex also has the Sea Dweller that is more up to date (note the SD bezel now). If a micro is designing a dive watch today why copy the old Sub bezel design rather than the SD, especially given the ISO dive watch requirements?


  22. #22
    They’re copying an iconic design.

    If important Rolex would comply too.

  23. #23
    Master bedlam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Fremantle, Western Australia (GMT +8)
    Posts
    1,177
    Quote Originally Posted by Kingstepper View Post
    They’re copying an iconic design.

    If important Rolex would comply too.
    Cos Rolex decides what's important in diving. Mmm, sure.

    Regardless, Rolex did change the bezel on the SD towards ISO compliance. So I'm not sure what point you are trying to make?

  24. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by bedlam View Post
    Cos Rolex decides what's important in diving. Mmm, sure.

    Regardless, Rolex did change the bezel on the SD towards ISO compliance. So I'm not sure what point you are trying to make?
    To many people the Submariner is 'The' dive-watch. Why did you single them out? If it was important Rolex would have changed the bezel on that watch (iconic or not).

    I've hardly claimed they decide what's important - even mentioned it being a fashion watch - whereas you've claimed it is the dive watch being copied.

  25. #25
    Master bedlam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Fremantle, Western Australia (GMT +8)
    Posts
    1,177
    Quote Originally Posted by Kingstepper View Post
    To many people the Submariner is 'The' dive-watch. Why did you single them out? If it was important Rolex would have changed the bezel on that watch (iconic or not).

    I've hardly claimed they decide what's important - even mentioned it being a fashion watch - whereas you've claimed it is the dive watch being copied.
    I can't work out if you know what your own point is.

    You agree the Sub is an iconic design, then ask me why I focused on it. What the?

    Effectively the Sea Dweller is the updated Submariner. If you want the Submariner style in a more ISO compliant watch you buy the SD.

  26. #26
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Wales
    Posts
    704
    I believe I brought the Sea Dweler into the fray.

    Rolex do not seek an ISO certification. They do not need to with the Sea Dweller as it surpasses the industry standard. Lesser makes do need to demonstrate their worth.

    Rolex do not have a cert because it is an 'iconic design' I believe they do not have it because their watch is to such a high standard they do not need to prove its worth. I suspect their sales are such they do not worry about it either.

    For me the Sub Mariner is not 'the' dive watch. It can not be as the bezel is poorly marked. When I dive the watch is a back up, I need a full marked bezel, I need to easily read and see time passed.

    Hence the Tag Aquagraph!

  27. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by bedlam View Post
    I can't work out if you know what your own point is.

    You agree the Sub is an iconic design, then ask me why I focused on it. What the?

    Effectively the Sea Dweller is the updated Submariner. If you want the Submariner style in a more ISO compliant watch you buy the SD.
    My point is you saying that smaller brands aren't ISO compliant - so what - Rolex aren't in all of their 'dive' watches? That the Seadweller is, is no excuse, they have had chance to update new Submariners. At the end of the day buyers want a nice-looking 'dive' watch and will never go diving. Seems looks are more important than this standard and the smaller brands want this 'look' too (and why shouldn't they?).

    TBH I had no idea about this when buying watches but have just checked and think I have 3, possibly 4 such watches (and no Rolex)!

  28. #28
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Wales
    Posts
    704
    But, and this bit is crucial. To buy a dive watch that you use diving you must have 100 per cent confidence in the product which Rolex gives me, and my Tag but not a number of non certified micro brands.

  29. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Carl.1 View Post
    But, and this bit is crucial. To buy a dive watch that you use diving you must have 100 per cent confidence in the product which Rolex gives me, and my Tag but not a number of non certified micro brands.
    Never been diving but I've got an Aquagraph, also a Super Professional (presumably also certified?). Very underrated watches!

  30. #30
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Wales
    Posts
    704
    And let us be honest. Who needs to dive to have a dive watch, they have a bezel, it turns, it just makes watches more fun!

    I always wanted one of the super professionals after seeing a new one in a shop window in the lanes years ago, full kit box spare strap etc, it made really want one. Was skint though so it never happened.
    Last edited by Carl.1; 17th July 2018 at 13:52.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Do Not Sell My Personal Information