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

Come on in and introduce yourself!
General watch talk.
Post Reply
User avatar
bedlam
Posts: 1131
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 11:16 pm
Name: Carl
Location: Fremantle, Western Australia (GMT +8)

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

Post by bedlam » Sun Jul 15, 2018 12:58 am

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-tool-w ... 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?

User avatar
Ryeguy
Posts: 2783
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2011 1:03 pm
Name: Chris
Location: Rye

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

Post by Ryeguy » Sun Jul 15, 2018 5:28 am

I got into an internet argument on WUS (I know, shocking) about this.

Some folks fail to grasp the difference between “tests of the design”, such as the magnetic resistance test or the shock test which are done on sample watches and tests of manufacturing quality, such as the water resistance test which are done on all watches.

People seem to struggle to believe that Seiko can (and does) test the water resistance on a watch as inexpensive as an SKX007.

Ironically, I have an equal struggle believing any micro manufacturer actually water resistance tests any of their watches.

aztecknight
Posts: 1849
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 12:12 pm

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

Post by aztecknight » Sun Jul 15, 2018 6:04 am

I doubt submariner owners care too much.

Do you know why it calls out the 5 minute markings? Does this mean the minute ticks don't have to be clearly indicated? And if so what is the point?

IT SHALL HAVE A MINUTE SCALE GOING UP TO 60 MIN. The markings indicating every 5 min shall be clearly indicated...

User avatar
Ryeguy
Posts: 2783
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2011 1:03 pm
Name: Chris
Location: Rye

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

Post by Ryeguy » Sun Jul 15, 2018 6:27 am

Carl can correct me, but I assumed the requirement for the full 60 minute scale was to allow more precise time measurements, such as exactly 37 minutes rather than "a couple clicks past 35".

When I was learning underwater navigation techniques (granted, about a million years ago) you would use a compass heading and swim at a constant pace for X minutes. You might hit a landmark then modify your heading for another X minutes of swimming. It was easier to use the watch's bezel to set your timing marks than anything.

As an aside, Erika's wristbands were actually originally designed to be used with a diver's navigation board. This is a board which held your compass, watch, and a grease pencil for directions, notes, etc. Using this strap as a wrist strap is actually a non-standard use for it.

If you look at the military issued watches from Rolex and Omega from back in the '60's, they both offer fully indexed bezels.

As a matter of fact, most of the ISO standards have their origins and roots in military specifications, so the 60 minute bezel could have been brought forward from the original mil-spec for a dive watch.

aztecknight
Posts: 1849
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 12:12 pm

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

Post by aztecknight » Sun Jul 15, 2018 6:36 am

The spec is very poorly written. A minute scale does not necessarily imply that every minute must be marked. Reinforced by the fact that it only states that every five minutes be clearly marked.

A track that is clearly marked every five minutes is still a minute track. They should hire someone who knows how to write specs to clean this one up.

User avatar
jeckyll
Honorary Assistant Jr. Hall Monitor in Training
Posts: 10414
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 10:11 pm
Name: Björn

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

Post by jeckyll » Sun Jul 15, 2018 7:22 am

aztecknight wrote:
Sun Jul 15, 2018 6:36 am
The spec is very poorly written. A minute scale does not necessarily imply that every minute must be marked. Reinforced by the fact that it only states that every five minutes be clearly marked.

A track that is clearly marked every five minutes is still a minute track. They should hire someone who knows how to write specs to clean this one up.
That's how many standards are ... 'open to interpretation'. Been in many ISO audits (not for dive watches obviously) and it's a common occurrence to discuss the interpretation of the standard. I actually don't think this one is that bad.
Minute scale: needs dots / hash mark every minute. Clear 5 minute indicators, OK needs something larger, more obvious.

I'd say that anything that doesn't have an mark every minute doesn't have a minute scale.
If you believe the doctors, nothing is wholesome; if you believe the theologians, nothing is innocent; if you believe the military, nothing is safe.
--Lord Salisbury

User avatar
bedlam
Posts: 1131
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 11:16 pm
Name: Carl
Location: Fremantle, Western Australia (GMT +8)

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

Post by bedlam » Sun Jul 15, 2018 7:23 am

aztecknight wrote:
Sun Jul 15, 2018 6:36 am
The spec is very poorly written. A minute scale does not necessarily imply that every minute must be marked. Reinforced by the fact that it only states that every five minutes be clearly marked.

A track that is clearly marked every five minutes is still a minute track. They should hire someone who knows how to write specs to clean this one up.
It distinguishes between a minute scale and 5 min markings. Draw a minute scale to 60 mins. Then highlight the 5 minute intervals. Nothing about that is hard to understand.

User avatar
rain_maker
Posts: 2384
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 9:55 pm
Name: Fred
Location: NW of Boston

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

Post by rain_maker » Sun Jul 15, 2018 8:30 am

bedlam wrote:
Sun Jul 15, 2018 7:23 am
aztecknight wrote:
Sun Jul 15, 2018 6:36 am
The spec is very poorly written. A minute scale does not necessarily imply that every minute must be marked. Reinforced by the fact that it only states that every five minutes be clearly marked.

A track that is clearly marked every five minutes is still a minute track. They should hire someone who knows how to write specs to clean this one up.
It distinguishes between a minute scale and 5 min markings. Draw a minute scale to 60 mins. Then highlight the 5 minute intervals. Nothing about that is hard to understand.
I think it is not written in such a way that its clear without any chance for alternate interpretation. A "minute scale" can easily be interpreted as a 60 minute scale which most dive watches have. It does not specifically state "markings every minute", which it does for the 5 minute markers.

jeckyll wrote:
Sun Jul 15, 2018 7:22 am
That's how many standards are ... 'open to interpretation'. Been in many ISO audits (not for dive watches obviously) and it's a common occurrence to discuss the interpretation of the standard.
My experience as well. I think a manufacturer can easily argue compliance with the standard. Its not uncommon in my industry for companies to justify compliance based on interpretation of standards that are vague or open for interpretation.

User avatar
jimyritz
Masshole
Posts: 22358
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am
Name: Mike
Location: Boston

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

Post by jimyritz » Sun Jul 15, 2018 9:00 am

All you have to do is apologize and re-post correctly, just a mistake, no big deal..Deleting posts--petty...

JBZ
Mr. Tasseled Loafer
Posts: 9268
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:03 am
Name: Jeff

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

Post by JBZ » Sun Jul 15, 2018 1:59 pm

Two things.

First, I agree that the standard, as written, is a bit vague and open to interpretation. And I say this as someone who needs to write clearly for a living.

Second, despite that, it does matter how those in the industry interpret the standard (those who wrote it, manufacturers, divers, and other stakeholders). If the majority of people in the industry interpret it to mean that a hash mark is required for each minute, then that certainly would carry weight.
Image

aztecknight
Posts: 1849
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 12:12 pm

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

Post by aztecknight » Sun Jul 15, 2018 2:17 pm

JBZ wrote:
Sun Jul 15, 2018 1:59 pm
Two things.

First, I agree that the standard, as written, is a bit vague and open to interpretation. And I say this as someone who needs to write clearly for a living.

Second, despite that, it does matter how those in the industry interpret the standard (those who wrote it, manufacturers, divers, and other stakeholders). If the majority of people in the industry interpret it to mean that a hash mark is required for each minute, then that certainly would carry weight.
I would agree, and the fact that Seiko, who helped write the spec, violates the interpretation set forth by Carl only reinforces the interpretation that a minute track does not mean every minute is marked. They manufacture several watches that are sold as ISO6425 compliant, but don't meet the minute track definition of a hash mark for every minute.

Some examples:

The monster doesn't have every minute marked and is sold as ISO certified.

Image

The turtle:

Image

User avatar
jeckyll
Honorary Assistant Jr. Hall Monitor in Training
Posts: 10414
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 10:11 pm
Name: Björn

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

Post by jeckyll » Sun Jul 15, 2018 3:39 pm

Seikos you show clearly have every minute marked. Those dots are the markings past 15 minutes.

It clearly complies.

Welcome to the world of standards. Image

If you want to say that the numbers obscure some of the markings, maybe but it's nitpicking and I would reply that you can still count the numbers themselves as the markers.

As a recreational scuba diver, I want the little dots, and I can figure out that if it's pointing between the 4&5 for "45" it's _at_ 45 and if it's pointing at the "4", it's 44, while pointing at the "5" is 46



Here are a couple of watches that clearly don't follow;

Image

Image

Image

Difference is pretty clear between a diver with a minute scale and one without




Edited for clarity and to add images :)
If you believe the doctors, nothing is wholesome; if you believe the theologians, nothing is innocent; if you believe the military, nothing is safe.
--Lord Salisbury

aztecknight
Posts: 1849
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 12:12 pm

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

Post by aztecknight » Sun Jul 15, 2018 4:24 pm

What about on the monster? What do you use as a visual clue for the 43, 47,28, 32, 17 minute marks.

Your interpretation seems to only support my conclusion that it is a poorly written spec. One could easily argue that using the dial minute marks is sufficient to determine that minute mark your on the bezel.

User avatar
bedlam
Posts: 1131
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 11:16 pm
Name: Carl
Location: Fremantle, Western Australia (GMT +8)

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

Post by bedlam » Sun Jul 15, 2018 5:33 pm

Juan and I have had this discussion before. I'm not sure why he is acting like we haven't. He knows I agree with him re the Seiko Monster bezel. It's not compliant.

Seiko have 2 dive bezels; the 62MAS style (as used on the Turtle/SKX) and the fully indexed one (as seen on the Shogun).

Like the Submariner the 62MAS bezel predates the ISO, so it isn't compliant. Seiko seems to use the 62 style vs the compliant style almost randomly. At least I haven't been able to see a pattern.

I have less of an issue with the 62MAS bezel though as it is really easy to use accurately as the numbers substitute for the few missing index marks. Again, Juan and I have had this discussion.

I think the ISO is quite clear. If you proceed sentence by sentence using the ISO to design a bezel you get one that looks like the Shogun.

The only confusion seems to come from people who see the Submariner style bezel and then try to force the ISO wording to appear to allow for that too. What those people ignore is the most recent change to the ISO added the requirement for the minute track going to 60. Before that the Sub bezel was compliant. What does Juan think they were adding with the additional minute scale to 60 requirement?

Juan, draw a minute (or mm) scale going to 60. Does it look like a:

Shogun IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

Sub IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I I I I I I I

And which would you find the best for measuring minutes (or millimeters)?

Trying to bend words around what a 'minute' scale is seems pretty pointless once you actually draw a minute scale.
Last edited by bedlam on Sun Jul 15, 2018 7:15 pm, edited 3 times in total.

aztecknight
Posts: 1849
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 12:12 pm

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

Post by aztecknight » Sun Jul 15, 2018 6:11 pm

bedlam wrote:
Sun Jul 15, 2018 5:33 pm
He knows I agree with him re the Seiko Monster bezel. It's not compliant.
Actually we don't agree. I'm saying that the Seiko does meet compliance because the vagueness of the spec allows for interpretation that not every minute has to be marked.

User avatar
dnslater
Posts: 5324
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 6:52 pm
Name: Nick
Location: Indiana, USA

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

Post by dnslater » Sun Jul 15, 2018 6:18 pm

aztecknight wrote:
Sun Jul 15, 2018 4:24 pm
What about on the monster? What do you use as a visual clue for the 43, 47,28, 32, 17 minute marks.

Your interpretation seems to only support my conclusion that it is a poorly written spec. One could easily argue that using the dial minute marks is sufficient to determine that minute mark your on the bezel.
Is there a fully indexed bezel out there that isn’t missing marks for 9, 11, 19, 21, etc? I guess maybe Marathon divers. But you then end up with small numerals that aren’t as visually pleasing or legible as with Seiko and Rolex. I prefer the Seiko/Rolex way and agree that the standard is poorly written.

User avatar
bedlam
Posts: 1131
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 11:16 pm
Name: Carl
Location: Fremantle, Western Australia (GMT +8)

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

Post by bedlam » Sun Jul 15, 2018 6:28 pm

dnslater wrote:
Sun Jul 15, 2018 6:18 pm
aztecknight wrote:
Sun Jul 15, 2018 4:24 pm
What about on the monster? What do you use as a visual clue for the 43, 47,28, 32, 17 minute marks.

Your interpretation seems to only support my conclusion that it is a poorly written spec. One could easily argue that using the dial minute marks is sufficient to determine that minute mark your on the bezel.
Is there a fully indexed bezel out there that isn’t missing marks for 9, 11, 19, 21, etc? I guess maybe Marathon divers. But you then end up with small numerals that aren’t as visually pleasing or legible as with Seiko and Rolex. I prefer the Seiko/Rolex way and agree that the standard is poorly written.
Image
Image

User avatar
dnslater
Posts: 5324
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 6:52 pm
Name: Nick
Location: Indiana, USA

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

Post by dnslater » Sun Jul 15, 2018 6:31 pm

bedlam wrote:
Sun Jul 15, 2018 6:28 pm
dnslater wrote:
Sun Jul 15, 2018 6:18 pm
aztecknight wrote:
Sun Jul 15, 2018 4:24 pm
What about on the monster? What do you use as a visual clue for the 43, 47,28, 32, 17 minute marks.

Your interpretation seems to only support my conclusion that it is a poorly written spec. One could easily argue that using the dial minute marks is sufficient to determine that minute mark your on the bezel.
Is there a fully indexed bezel out there that isn’t missing marks for 9, 11, 19, 21, etc? I guess maybe Marathon divers. But you then end up with small numerals that aren’t as visually pleasing or legible as with Seiko and Rolex. I prefer the Seiko/Rolex way and agree that the standard is poorly written.
Image
That works great. Love the Shogun. Wonder why they are so all over the place with their bezels. Even the Tuna doesn’t comply.

User avatar
bedlam
Posts: 1131
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 11:16 pm
Name: Carl
Location: Fremantle, Western Australia (GMT +8)

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

Post by bedlam » Sun Jul 15, 2018 6:45 pm

aztecknight wrote:
Sun Jul 15, 2018 6:11 pm
bedlam wrote:
Sun Jul 15, 2018 5:33 pm
He knows I agree with him re the Seiko Monster bezel. It's not compliant.
Actually we don't agree. I'm saying that the Seiko does meet compliance because the vagueness of the spec allows for interpretation that not every minute has to be marked.
Fair enough.

I don't think the ISO is vague. I think some people aren't approaching it as written. Additionally they are confused by the history of other bezel designs in mind that they don't interrogate in terms of compliance - cos ISO compliance isn't really what they are focused on.

There is something aesthetically right about the Submariner bezel. With designers looking to sell watches (more to desk divers more than actual divers) I can see why they would go with that influence.

For me the issue is functionality. The closer things are to ISO compliance the better they tend to function for a diver. The 62MAS bezel is non-compliant but easy to read accurately, the Sub bezel is less compliant and that bit harder to read accurately as a result.

For me as a diver closer compliance is better.

User avatar
bedlam
Posts: 1131
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 11:16 pm
Name: Carl
Location: Fremantle, Western Australia (GMT +8)

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

Post by bedlam » Sun Jul 15, 2018 6:54 pm

dnslater wrote:
Sun Jul 15, 2018 6:31 pm
bedlam wrote:
Sun Jul 15, 2018 6:28 pm
dnslater wrote:
Sun Jul 15, 2018 6:18 pm
aztecknight wrote:
Sun Jul 15, 2018 4:24 pm
What about on the monster? What do you use as a visual clue for the 43, 47,28, 32, 17 minute marks.

Your interpretation seems to only support my conclusion that it is a poorly written spec. One could easily argue that using the dial minute marks is sufficient to determine that minute mark your on the bezel.
Is there a fully indexed bezel out there that isn’t missing marks for 9, 11, 19, 21, etc? I guess maybe Marathon divers. But you then end up with small numerals that aren’t as visually pleasing or legible as with Seiko and Rolex. I prefer the Seiko/Rolex way and agree that the standard is poorly written.
That works great. Love the Shogun. Wonder why they are so all over the place with their bezels. Even the Tuna doesn’t comply.
I think its a case of being experts in horology and engineering, not diving. It seems to escape some watch makers that the bezel on a dive watch will be used as an important minute measuring tool in a sometimes difficult environment.
Last edited by bedlam on Sun Jul 15, 2018 7:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
bedlam
Posts: 1131
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 11:16 pm
Name: Carl
Location: Fremantle, Western Australia (GMT +8)

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

Post by bedlam » Sun Jul 15, 2018 7:01 pm

Worn & Wound have now updated the article.

Good on them :-)

User avatar
59yukon01
1.21 gigawatts?!
Posts: 6569
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2015 8:49 am
Name: David
Location: Louisville, KY

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

Post by 59yukon01 » Sun Jul 15, 2018 8:10 pm

Technically then even their MM300 or Tuna doesn't have the full 60 minute marks, but is in their Professional line, but the Sumo does.

ImageImageImage








User avatar
bedlam
Posts: 1131
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 11:16 pm
Name: Carl
Location: Fremantle, Western Australia (GMT +8)

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

Post by bedlam » Sun Jul 15, 2018 8:30 pm

59yukon01 wrote:
Sun Jul 15, 2018 8:10 pm
Technically then even their MM300 or Tuna doesn't have the full 60 minute marks, but is in their Professional line, but the Sumo does.
Yup. The Solar Chrono and BFK are compliant too. There doesn't appear to be a pattern.

Image

Image

Juan is right, that Seiko seems to assume they are all compliant.

User avatar
dnslater
Posts: 5324
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 6:52 pm
Name: Nick
Location: Indiana, USA

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

Post by dnslater » Mon Jul 16, 2018 3:08 am

Of course, the Germans nail it, although I believe Sinn has their own standard.

Image

Image

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Americandave, Bing [Bot], Henryj, sierra11b and 51 guests