Wet Pressure Test

[Sipper]

Went to the local AD today and asked questions about pressure testing. Never had a pressure test done before outside of a regular service at RSC Dallas. Was told by the local AD that Rolex requires ADs to wet test (remove movement and change caseback gasket) to "factory" specs, for a Sub 300m. I was surprised that an AD would not do a dry test. Just passing this along and was wondering if anyone has had a dry test done at an AD? Thanks.

[Ron P]

nope

[Tools]

Originally Posted by Sipper

. . . Was told by the local AD that Rolex requires ADs to wet test (remove movement and change caseback gasket) to "factory" specs, for a Sub 300m. I was surprised that an AD would not do a dry test. Just passing this along and was wondering if anyone has had a dry test done at an AD? Thanks.

Not sure what you are talking about. A simple wet pressure test only doesn't mean the movement is removed or the gasket is changed, thats typically after a full service. If you take the movement out, then how would you be testing if it will leak when you put it back together?

A dry test only looks at some movement of the crystal up or down.

Here are some being wet tested at Rolex. Your watchmaker does the same, but with a smaller chamber.

Sub water testing.jpg

[Pepperjack]

We do not do dry testing on Rolex in my shop. I'm sure there is more accurate information out there than I can provide, but I can relay what I have been told.

A dry tester measures the deformation of the case. If the vacuum cannot pull air out of the case, the case will deform, indicating that the watch is resistant to the testing parameters. Rolex is supposedly too robust to consistently deform and may give a false negative.

The water testing procedure is a bit more involved than the dry tester, but it yields more accurate and visible results. I'll detail the procedure below for anyone interested.

The Rolex pressure testing is therefore done using three machines. The first is a jar of water with a vacuum attached. When the vacuum is turned on, the air will be sucked out of the jar. If the watch is not resistant to the vacuum, a stream of air bubbles will come out of the watch. This will not only show you that there is a failure, but also where that failure is.

Once this passes, it goes into a pressure chamber that gets cranked to the pressure according to the model. After several minutes in that chamber, the watch head is placed on a heater for several more minutes, before transitioning the watch to a cooling plate for a minute. After the minute elapses, any moisture inside the case will be clearly seen on the crystal. It will dissipate momentarily. The time it takes for that moisture to disappear from the crystal is indicative of if the watch is considered water resistant.

[SubDate]

Great info thanks!

[Sipper]

Originally Posted by Pepperjack

We do not do dry testing on Rolex in my shop. I'm sure there is more accurate information out there than I can provide, but I can relay what I have been told.

A dry tester measures the deformation of the case. If the vacuum cannot pull air out of the case, the case will deform, indicating that the watch is resistant to the testing parameters. Rolex is supposedly too robust to consistently deform and may give a false negative.

The water testing procedure is a bit more involved than the dry tester, but it yields more accurate and visible results. I'll detail the procedure below for anyone interested.

The Rolex pressure testing is therefore done using three machines. The first is a jar of water with a vacuum attached. When the vacuum is turned on, the air will be sucked out of the jar. If the watch is not resistant to the vacuum, a stream of air bubbles will come out of the watch. This will not only show you that there is a failure, but also where that failure is.

Once this passes, it goes into a pressure chamber that gets cranked to the pressure according to the model. After several minutes in that chamber, the watch head is placed on a heater for several more minutes, before transitioning the watch to a cooling plate for a minute. After the minute elapses, any moisture inside the case will be clearly seen on the crystal. It will dissipate momentarily. The time it takes for that moisture to disappear from the crystal is indicative of if the watch is considered water resistant.

Thank you, Pepperjack. May I ask what your AD charges for a wet test of a Sub?

[Rolex1982]

Originally Posted by Pepperjack

We do not do dry testing on Rolex in my shop. I'm sure there is more accurate information out there than I can provide, but I can relay what I have been told.

A dry tester measures the deformation of the case. If the vacuum cannot pull air out of the case, the case will deform, indicating that the watch is resistant to the testing parameters. Rolex is supposedly too robust to consistently deform and may give a false negative.

The water testing procedure is a bit more involved than the dry tester, but it yields more accurate and visible results. I'll detail the procedure below for anyone interested.

The Rolex pressure testing is therefore done using three machines. The first is a jar of water with a vacuum attached. When the vacuum is turned on, the air will be sucked out of the jar. If the watch is not resistant to the vacuum, a stream of air bubbles will come out of the watch. This will not only show you that there is a failure, but also where that failure is.

Once this passes, it goes into a pressure chamber that gets cranked to the pressure according to the model. After several minutes in that chamber, the watch head is placed on a heater for several more minutes, before transitioning the watch to a cooling plate for a minute. After the minute elapses, any moisture inside the case will be clearly seen on the crystal. It will dissipate momentarily. The time it takes for that moisture to disappear from the crystal is indicative of if the watch is considered water resistant.

Great info, thanks for sharing!

[Oldfellow]

Originally Posted by Pepperjack

We do not do dry testing on Rolex in my shop. I'm sure there is more accurate information out there than I can provide, but I can relay what I have been told.

A dry tester measures the deformation of the case. If the vacuum cannot pull air out of the case, the case will deform, indicating that the watch is resistant to the testing parameters. Rolex is supposedly too robust to consistently deform and may give a false negative.

The water testing procedure is a bit more involved than the dry tester, but it yields more accurate and visible results. I'll detail the procedure below for anyone interested.

The Rolex pressure testing is therefore done using three machines. The first is a jar of water with a vacuum attached. When the vacuum is turned on, the air will be sucked out of the jar. If the watch is not resistant to the vacuum, a stream of air bubbles will come out of the watch. This will not only show you that there is a failure, but also where that failure is.

Once this passes, it goes into a pressure chamber that gets cranked to the pressure according to the model. After several minutes in that chamber, the watch head is placed on a heater for several more minutes, before transitioning the watch to a cooling plate for a minute. After the minute elapses, any moisture inside the case will be clearly seen on the crystal. It will dissipate momentarily. The time it takes for that moisture to disappear from the crystal is indicative of if the watch is considered water resistant.

Many thanks for this information.

[kilyung]

Wet > dry

[Andad]

Originally Posted by Pepperjack

We do not do dry testing on Rolex in my shop. I'm sure there is more accurate information out there than I can provide, but I can relay what I have been told.

A dry tester measures the deformation of the case. If the vacuum cannot pull air out of the case, the case will deform, indicating that the watch is resistant to the testing parameters. Rolex is supposedly too robust to consistently deform and may give a false negative.

The water testing procedure is a bit more involved than the dry tester, but it yields more accurate and visible results. I'll detail the procedure below for anyone interested.

The Rolex pressure testing is therefore done using three machines. The first is a jar of water with a vacuum attached. When the vacuum is turned on, the air will be sucked out of the jar. If the watch is not resistant to the vacuum, a stream of air bubbles will come out of the watch. This will not only show you that there is a failure, but also where that failure is.

Once this passes, it goes into a pressure chamber that gets cranked to the pressure according to the model. After several minutes in that chamber, the watch head is placed on a heater for several more minutes, before transitioning the watch to a cooling plate for a minute. After the minute elapses, any moisture inside the case will be clearly seen on the crystal. It will dissipate momentarily. The time it takes for that moisture to disappear from the crystal is indicative of if the watch is considered water resistant.

Can you expand on the test steps?

The watch case only is under water during the pressure test?

The movement has been removed prior to the pressure test?

The case is then opened and the movement replaced?

It would then require testing again?

How can you be sure that the caseback gasket has resealed correctly?

Can you give me the model numbers for the testing equipment?

I would expect a crystal watch seal to be more efficient under pressure than under a vacuum?

The vacuum test is just quick check of the seals prior to high pressure testing of the case only?

Thanks.

[SearChart]

Vacuum wet test first, without movement, then fathometer to the rated depth (again without movement) then condensation test to see if there was even the slightest leak. Then movement goes back in, once again fathometer test to rated depth and the condensation test.

This is the official way to test them, dry tests are useless.

[Andad]

Originally Posted by SearChart

Vacuum wet test first, without movement, then fathometer to the rated depth (again without movement) then condensation test to see if there was even the slightest leak. Then movement goes back in, once again fathometer test to rated depth and the condensation test.

This is the official way to test them, dry tests are useless.

Thanks Bas.

Now I understand.

The post did not mention watch movement removal or retesting after replacing the movement.

The second test in the Fathometer with the movement installed now makes sense providing the resealing of the caseback is successful.

So many times we read here about inspecting a watch movement for confirmation of authenticity and making a point of pressure testing the watch when the caseback is replaced.

This infers that even replacing a case back can compromise pressure resistance if not done correctly so why would you take the chance of just testing it again under water to full specification depth?

The stem is also removed and reinstalled?

[Pepperjack]

Originally Posted by Sipper

Thank you, Pepperjack. May I ask what your AD charges for a wet test of a Sub?

There's no pricing in our service book for just water testing, and we get maybe one in a year. Because of that, I just do it as a courtesy if the watch looks good. If I have concerns about the gaskets, I'll quote $100 and change all of the gaskets. That's the cost of a crystal replacement minus the cost of the crystal and is otherwise the same procedure.

Regardless of the situation I always test movement out before movement in. As has been stated, there is a risk compromising the seals when casing the movement back up or just removing the caseback. I do the the exact same tests with movement out or movement in.

[Pepperjack]

Originally Posted by Andad

The watch case only is under water during the pressure test?

The movement has been removed prior to the pressure test?

The case is then opened and the movement replaced?

It would then require testing again?

How can you be sure that the caseback gasket has resealed correctly?

Can you give me the model numbers for the testing equipment?

I would expect a crystal watch seal to be more efficient under pressure than under a vacuum?

The vacuum test is just quick check of the seals prior to high pressure testing of the case only?

Thanks.

The watch is in water through both the vacuum and pressure tests.

If the watch is in for a full service, the case will get tested once it's reassembled, then again after the watch has finished all of it's timing tests and otherwise ready to leave the shop. If the watch is just in for a pressure test, I'll decade, test, because, test again. This is slower, and I don't think the service book requires us to test the case empty first, but I would rather be cautious.

The machines I have are Fathometre WPT1, Monitor CST3, and Vacuum Tester 1050

Between vacuum and pressure, I would wager more watches fail during the pressure test, but they fail more gloriously during the vacuum test. Maybe that's just because I do that first.

I have seen watches that pass one and not the other, but I have heard other watchmakers say they've never seen a watch fail pressure that passed vacuum, so they stopped doing the vacuum test. To me, they're both essential and test different qualities. A pressure test won't pull the crystal off, and a vacuum test won't force water past gasket weaknesses.

[Phlippe]

How often should a water test be done?

[Pepperjack]

Originally Posted by Phlippe

How often should a water test be done?

I'm interested in seeing other answers to this. My gut says that if you dive with your watch, get it checked once a year. If you don't, it should be fine until your next service.

I have seen many watches that had a movement with moisture damage. One was because a piece of fabric was caught inside the crown and prevented a proper seal. The others were from broken crystals and pieces well past their service time. Gaskets do become brittle, but that takes quite some time in my experience.

[Phlippe]

I too am curious what others answer. Any professional or former professional divers answers are welcome.

[jimcameron]

Originally Posted by Phlippe

How often should a water test be done?

How often do you snorkel or scuba?

[Phlippe]

In a pool a few times per week.

[piratfisk]

Originally Posted by Phlippe

In a pool a few times per week.

I think as long as you rinse/shower with clean (non pool, non salinated) water, you'll be ok 'til your next service. I wouldn't unscrew the crown underwater, though

[0nly5iv3Digits]

My thesis has always been that wet testing is superior to dry for the aforementioned reasons. Yes, it is more involving and labor intensive, but the surest way to confirm WR.

On the point about having WR checked, annually is overkill imo. Once every 5 years is probably also overkill depending on how you treat your watch (climate, heat exposure etc).

Around the 10 year mark is when I’d begin to have a think about having a watch pressure tested - on the basis that rubber o-rings have a certain “natural” lifespan wherein which they remain “rubbery”.

[Andad]

Originally Posted by Pepperjack

The watch is in water through both the vacuum and pressure tests.

If the watch is in for a full service, the case will get tested once it's reassembled, then again after the watch has finished all of it's timing tests and otherwise ready to leave the shop. If the watch is just in for a pressure test, I'll decade, test, because, test again. This is slower, and I don't think the service book requires us to test the case empty first, but I would rather be cautious.

The machines I have are Fathometre WPT1, Monitor CST3, and Vacuum Tester 1050

Between vacuum and pressure, I would wager more watches fail during the pressure test, but they fail more gloriously during the vacuum test. Maybe that's just because I do that first.

I have seen watches that pass one and not the other, but I have heard other watchmakers say they've never seen a watch fail pressure that passed vacuum, so they stopped doing the vacuum test. To me, they're both essential and test different qualities. A pressure test won't pull the crystal off, and a vacuum test won't force water past gasket weaknesses.

Watch or watch case only for vacuum and pressure tests?

Or is it watch for vacuum test - watch case for first pressure test - watch for second pressure test? As post 11.


'I'll decade, test, because, test again'

What does this mean?

[Phlippe]

Originally Posted by piratfisk

I think as long as you rinse/shower with clean (non pool, non salinated) water, you'll be ok 'til your next service. I wouldn't unscrew the crown underwater, though

Historically that’s what I have done but recently I’ve had multiple AD’s SA tell me it should be annually if you’re getting your watch wet regularly.

[Pepperjack]

Originally Posted by Andad

Watch or watch case only for vacuum and pressure tests?

Or is it watch for vacuum test - watch case for first pressure test - watch for second pressure test? As post 11.


'I'll decade, test, because, test again'

What does this mean?

The case without movement is tested, then the case with movement is tested. Both pressure and vacuum. Sorry, I was typing on my phone and autocorrect must've had fun at my expense. I intended it to read something like "I'll de-case, test, re-case, test again."

[77T]

I am of the mind that a diver, scuba or free or snorkel, who routinely descends to 2 ATM should have the watch tested annually.

The cost of failure with a Rolex is greater than the risk - maybe a slight risk on a “like new” one year old Sub - but even a one year old scuba tank gets at least a VIP. And every 5 years a HYDRO.

When I dove, I tested annually.
Not worth the risk.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Andad]

The case without movement is tested, then the case with movement is tested. Both pressure and vacuum. Sorry, I was typing on my phone and autocorrect must've had fun at my expense. I intended it to read something like "I'll de-case, test, re-case, test again."



I think you are starting to get the hang of this pressure testing thing.

But your explanation in post 4 made no sense to me when compared to the actual tests that are done or the test sequence.

[jimcameron]

Originally Posted by Phlippe

In a pool a few times per week.

Okay, then take the watch off when you swim, problem solved.

[aehaas]

I spoke to a Rolex Service Center person in Dallas. They told me that any new Rolex watch will be waterproof for at least 10 years as long as it was not opened. At about that time it should be serviced (by a bona-fide Rolex RSC) and will then be safe for another 10 years.

I bought a used watch once and immediately sent it to the OEM service center for a full service, part of the cost of buying a pre-owned used watch. I'm sure it will be good until I get it serviced again in 10 more years.

'One of the reasons I hate quartz watches, they are opened every year or two. It will never be safe in the water unless you sent it to the OEM for the replacement.

Historically, water intrusion is very rare. And it seems to occur only after a Local watch service. No shop can stock Fresh Gaskets of every watch available. It is just not possible.

The key is that the watch has never been opened. If there is any doubt then the only answer, if water integrity is concerned, is a full OEM service. Then the "yearly needed" pressure test, of any type, is really superfluous.

Ali

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by SearChart

Vacuum wet test first, without movement, then fathometer to the rated depth (again without movement) then condensation test to see if there was even the slightest leak. Then movement goes back in, once again fathometer test to rated depth and the condensation test.

This is the official way to test them, dry tests are useless.

Thank you Bas. Interesting info

[geoach]

I check mine using the ice cube test............not the best way but at lest it tells me if its not air tight any more...........done once a year before summer