S3 Water resistance test

[Resqu2]

I’m sure it’s going to fail that test as the speaker is designed to keep water out, not an Apple Watch made would pass it. The test is more for testing a regular completely sealed watch like a dive watch. Go swim away OP, you won’t have any issue unless the machine damaged it by pressurizing it three times.

 

[Beerstalker]

That is EXTREMELY rare and expensive equipment and without pictures I do NOT believe the OP has access to this nor was it used.

He never said he had direct access to this machine. He said his friend, who works on high end watches for a living has it. I would think that anyone who works on high end watches for a living is very likely to have a test device like this so they can verify their work. I know if this was my business I wouldn't want to be on the hook for a very expensive watch because the inexpensive repair work (relatively speaking) I did on it may have caused it to fail.

None of what you posted actually makes sense to me. You said you tested the Apple Watch three times and it failed all three times. How can it fail three times if it fails on the first time? You also mentioned something in regards to a battery replacement or repair, did you have a battery replacement or repair concluded on your Apple Watch?

Can You discuss the process of actually how you physically tested the Apple Watch three times?

He said he used a test device like I talked about (and linked to and article about) in my post above.

Since the test device he was using does not use water, no water was introduced to the inside of the watch so the watch does not get damaged. That is why he was able to test it multiple times. The test device is pressurized, air gets into the watch and deflects the screen, the test device says the watch failed, the air pressure is reduced, and the air that leaked into the watch case is released and the watch face goes back to normal. No permanent damage to the watch.

I’m sure it’s going to fail that test as the speaker is designed to keep water out, not an Apple Watch made would pass it. The test is more for testing a regular completely sealed watch like a dive watch. Go swim away OP, you won’t have any issue unless the machine damaged it by pressurizing it three times.

This is a very good point, that I had not thought about. The speaker and microphone in the watch are not rigid materials. As the air around the watch is pressurized they most likely are allowed to deflect into the watch case, which would cause the air pressure inside the watch to increase in line with the air outside the watch. As that air pressure increases the watch face is probably going to deflect since it will be less rigid than the aluminum/steel casing (not sure which watch he has). Since the face of the watch deflects, this test device reads that as a failure of the waterproof seals.

This test device is probably not suitable to test the water resistance of an Apple Watch because of this.

Like the others have said, you shouldn't worry about the watch failing this test. Unless you actually plan on wearing this watch on deep dives I probably wouldn't worry about the water resistance. For regular swimming, bathing etc. I'm sure it is fine.

 

[Strelok]

Water and air are two very different fluids, which most likely is a factor since the Apple Watch has openings. Water might not get through until 50m+, but air certainly can.

 

[44267547]

He said he used a test device like I talked about (and linked to and article about) in my post above..

Which The OP did not indicate from their initial start of the thread any details how the watch failed, processing and/or what type of machine , which is what I was questioning after the fact after multiple posts was not clear to any specific process they use and or tested until later in the thread.

 

[Shirasaki]

It just doesn't make any sense how you could test something three times if it fails on the first time.

Imagine you run a benchmark to test pc functionality multiple times. Failing first time does not mean a lot (maybe an error, wrong sensor reading etc). Failing more than once does mean something. This is very simple.

Water and air are two very different fluids, which most likely is a factor since the Apple Watch has openings. Water might not get through until 50m+, but air certainly can.

And we are in the deep bottom of air just like deep water, as the air pressure at the sea level is the highest, then drops when latitude rises.

 

[44267547]

Imagine you run a benchmark to test pc functionality multiple times. Failing first time does not mean a lot (maybe an error, wrong sensor reading etc). Failing more than once does mean something. This is very simple.

When a device fails, there is only one time that it fails and can't be resurrected if it's defective to conduct further testing. UnLess it's a test in itself to test again, that specific test might be able to be tested multiple times as long as it doesn't affect the operability of the device from performing as intended. That in itself is exactly what others were questioning.

 

[Strelok]

Maybe I'm missing something, but it seemed clear to me from the beginning that this test wouldn't destroy the device in the process. Otherwise, why not just drop it in a bucket of water?

 

[Beerstalker]

Water and air are two very different fluids, which most likely is a factor since the Apple Watch has openings. Water might not get through until 50m+, but air certainly can.

Yes they are, but I would assume that equipment such as this takes that into account (as far as the difference in the fluids). I'm sure the pressure of the air used to simulate being 50 meters underwater is actually lower than the actual pressure that water would be placing on the seals at that depth since the air molecules would be smaller and easier to slip by the seals than water molecules would be.

Also, for those of you still thinking this test was run in water, it probably could be run using distilled water. Distilled water is actually a pretty good insulator at lower voltages like what is used in the watch. You could most likely run a test like this in distilled water and not cause any damage to the watch even if water did get inside the case. You would just need to take it apart and dry the watch out after.

It is the impurities like iron, calcium, magnesium, and sodium in tap water that make it a good conductor, and causes damage when it comes in contact with circuit boards causing shorts.

 

[honglong1976]

Water damage is not covered under AppleCare. I think you made a bad move testing the watch like you did. If you had suspicions or concerns about the fitness of the watch, you should have taken it to the Apple Store or made a phone call.

how does one know if a watch rated to be water resistant to 50m has a problem without submerging it in water?

I don't believe there is a dry waterproof test

It's rated to be water resistant to 50m. If the seal doesn't work, water will go inside. So of course it would be covered.
[doublepost=1515746689][/doublepost]

I’m sure it’s going to fail that test as the speaker is designed to keep water out, not an Apple Watch made would pass it. The test is more for testing a regular completely sealed watch like a dive watch. Go swim away OP, you won’t have any issue unless the machine damaged it by pressurizing it three times.

The watch is water resistant to 50m, it failed.

Warranty wise he would tell Apple is swam and it failed. Replacement on the way

 

[Resqu2]

how does one know if a watch rated to be water resistant to 50m has a problem without submerging it in water?

I don't believe there is a dry waterproof test

It's rated to be water resistant to 50m. If the seal doesn't work, water will go inside. So of course it would be covered.
[doublepost=1515746689][/doublepost]
The watch is water resistant to 50m, it failed.

Warranty wise he would tell Apple is swam and it failed. Replacement on the way

The watch failed some kind of air pressure test it isn't made to pass. Nothing has failed till he gets in the water and it fails which I'm pretty sure it wont.

 

[BugeyeSTI]

If anyone is interested in how a mechanical watch should be pressure tested.. A proper test should use both dry and wet testing.
https://omegaforums.net/threads/pressure-testing-a-watchco-sm300.45375/

 

[macTW]

The Apple Watch was tested in the machine 3 times for conclusive results. No water was involved,just pressurised air and some sensors, hence why the Watch is still functional.
[doublepost=1515630460][/doublepost]Anyway, I came here for some friendly advice in regards to my Apple Watch but I’m not getting anywhere. According to Julien, it seems I’ve got some reason to lie about the equipment that was used for whatever reason because it is “EXTREMELY RARE”, therefore without photographs I must be lying! Why would I lie about the equipment that was used.

Any helpful comments in regards to the Apple Watch series 3’s water resistance would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks

Not everyone here understands science or testing. They can be the type to read a headline about a one-time event and cry to Apple for refunds or better batteries.

That being said, I've worn my S3 in the ocean without a problem. However, I haven't gone 50 meters deep.