View Poll Results: Would you buy a kit to make your TrueSmart REALLY IP67 compliant?
Yes, I'd pay $15-25 for a self-installed kit. 58 85.29%
Yes, I'd pay $25-50 for a pro-installed kit. 8 11.76%
No, $25 is too much. 1 1.47%
No, I'm not interested. 1 1.47%
Voters: 68. You may not vote on this poll

Post Reply

Hardware Hacking x201 : IP67 Compliance

29th April 2014, 06:47 PM   |  #31  
Junior Member
Thanks Meter: 8
 
26 posts
Join Date:Joined: Feb 2014
Unhappy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lokifish Marz

LLP sealed the all the holes then put it in a bucket with 15cm of water, no bands, no button, no PCB. Didn't leak so it must be IP67. So it wasn't tested as that does not meet IEC requirements for IP67.

I would say "unbelievable" but actually - now - I totally believe that.
29th April 2014, 07:51 PM   |  #32  
Senior Member
Thanks Meter: 77
 
399 posts
Join Date:Joined: Nov 2013
LLPen did say the test was done by them, Omate, and that it involved only 15cm on water over the top of the device. They neglected the additional test requirement where the bottom of the device must have at least 1 meter of water over it as well. He did not say publicly that I saw anything about sealing up all the holes, but I think one would have had too to get the watch to survive even the 15cm test they claim to have performed successfully.

In other words, the whole claim of ip67 is based on an inadequate self-performed test that did not really test for ip67. Par for the course for Omate. The TrueSmart is not even vaguely ip67 water-resistant as many owners have already discovered. The cake is a lie.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
29th April 2014, 08:00 PM   |  #33  
SparkyRih's Avatar
Senior Member
Flag Roermond
Thanks Meter: 70
 
516 posts
Join Date:Joined: Jan 2011
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lokifish Marz

LLP sealed the all the holes then put it in a bucket with 15cm of water, no bands, no button, no PCB. Didn't leak so it must be IP67. So it wasn't tested as that does not meet IEC requirements for IP67.

LOL

No but seriously, you have to send your device to some lab to get that rating right? And the AW420 should also have IP67 as I recall... And I think that I read sometime during the KS project that there was Nano coating on the electronics.....

I was planning on testing the waterproofness with one of my units, but I've seen too many people that messed up their TS, so than it's not worth it...

---------- Post added at 09:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:54 PM ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by trent999

LLPen did say the test was done by them, Omate, and that it involved only 15cm on water over the top of the device. They neglected the additional test requirement where the bottom of the device must have at least 1 meter of water over it as well. He did not say publicly that I saw anything about sealing up all the holes, but I think one would have had too to get the watch to survive even the 15cm test they claim to have performed successfully.

In other words, the whole claim of ip67 is based on an inadequate self-performed test that did not really test for ip67. Par for the course for Omate. The TrueSmart is not even vaguely ip67 water-resistant as many owners have already discovered. The cake is a lie.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

Do you think you can find that statement? Not that I don't believe you, it does sound plausible since the TS has never been proven to be IP67... Now that I think about it, if I would've manufactured an IP67 smartwatch a video of it being in water would be on the internet already (no, the guy in the swimming pool is wearing a dummy, don't fall for it!)
29th April 2014, 08:19 PM   |  #34  
Lokifish Marz's Avatar
Recognized Contributor / Recognized Developer
Flag Olympus Mons, Mars
Thanks Meter: 3,276
 
2,861 posts
Join Date:Joined: Mar 2011
Donate to Me
More
Here ya go

https://plus.google.com/u/0/+Laurent...ts/2HykEjSvtFF

Oh yeah. He also did not not test any of the lower certifications either which if I understand the IEC documentation (yes I do have a copy of the official docs) correctly, is a requirement.
The Following User Says Thank You to Lokifish Marz For This Useful Post: [ View ]
29th April 2014, 08:38 PM   |  #35  
SparkyRih's Avatar
Senior Member
Flag Roermond
Thanks Meter: 70
 
516 posts
Join Date:Joined: Jan 2011
More
Why am I laughing about something that isn't funny! Or is it? XD

I thought you were playing with me, but you were not! XD

Now I don't know what to say anymore... Now it's 100% clear to me that it's not water resistant...
29th April 2014, 09:45 PM   |  #36  
Senior Member
Thanks Meter: 77
 
399 posts
Join Date:Joined: Nov 2013
Sparky, I would be happy if mine could just survive being splashed repetitively while estuary kayaking. I'm not a swimmer, I mean not unless I fall out of my kayak.
Maybe if I can inject silicone around the buttons and somehow seal off the speaker grill (tape ?) it might survive such use ?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
29th April 2014, 10:43 PM   |  #37  
SparkyRih's Avatar
Senior Member
Flag Roermond
Thanks Meter: 70
 
516 posts
Join Date:Joined: Jan 2011
More
Yeah, I wasn't planning on swimming with it, even if it really had IP67 that wouldn't be a good idea, because of the added pressure of your arm movement it won't be IP67 compliant anymore...

But I expected it to survive rain, splashing of water at the pool/beach, or washing of hands and accidently pouring water over it, or if some other liquid pours over it like a glass of water...

But maybe it still can? I think the biggest issue is the pressure of the water, not really the leaking in right?
3rd May 2014, 03:53 AM   |  #38  
Junior Member
Thanks Meter: 8
 
26 posts
Join Date:Joined: Feb 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by SparkyRih

But maybe it still can? I think the biggest issue is the pressure of the water, not really the leaking in right?

Define pressure. Define leaking.

Next time you burn your hand in the kitchen and place it under the faucet to cool it off, I wonder if you're going to be doing differential equations in your head to determine if the covalent bond in the gap between the button and body of the watch holding it back versus the velocity of the cold water pressing through the gap. And of course, you're doing this while it feels like your hand is on fire.

Bottom line - if you're doing something where the integrity of the device is of more concern than the task you're undertaking, the device is wrong for the job. I'm not interested in an attention-grabbing tech accessory. I want a device I can forget about while I'm fighting for my last breath on the last stroke of my last lap on swim day.
Last edited by lphovercraft; 3rd May 2014 at 03:58 AM. Reason: edits for clarity
4th May 2014, 08:14 PM   |  #39  
Junior Member
Thanks Meter: 0
 
2 posts
Join Date:Joined: May 2014
Same issue on the Simvalley AW-420! Is it exactly the same version of the watch?

What about using silicone to get the IP67? I think the biggest problem will be the buttons on the right side
4th May 2014, 08:20 PM   |  #40  
Lokifish Marz's Avatar
Recognized Contributor / Recognized Developer
Flag Olympus Mons, Mars
Thanks Meter: 3,276
 
2,861 posts
Join Date:Joined: Mar 2011
Donate to Me
More
In looking at the case and other aspects, if done right you could probably get about 3ATM out of it. Would take an "overhaul" but it could be done.

Post Reply Subscribe to Thread
Previous Thread Next Thread
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes


Top Threads in TrueSmart General by ThreadRank