Waterproofing Woes

[Anonnn]

Any bottling company out there can make a container that seals liquid TOTALLY in or out with no problem. You can close the cap of an empty 20 oz bottle and take it underwater to any depth, for all intents and purposes, of your choosing and you will observe no leakage. With that said, why is it so difficult for flashlight companies to leave the IPX-8 standard in the dust (or the...murky water) and make a similar achievement?

 

[CheepSteal]

Always wondered this. A plastic bottle can seal out anything, but Surefire's nitrolon G series are the least water resistant of their products. Why?

 

[enomosiki]

A bottle has only a single point of weakness, where the cap and lid meet. A flashlight has multiple weakpoints, including the lens, head, tailcap, switch, etc., and their resistance against water pressure vary between locations depending on the surface area that is exposed to water and the strength of the seal. If the water pressure exceeds what the seal can handle, then you have a leak.

The same applies for bottles as well, except that the effect will differ depending on if the seal is breached or not. Given enough water pressure, if the seal is breached, then water will get inside the bottle. If it's not, then the bottle will end up getting crushed due to compression of the air inside.

 

[gcbryan]

It isn't all that hard. It's called a dive light :)

There are some issues however. If you take a plastic bottle without it being completely filled with liquid it will implode without having to get very deep at all. A glass bottle will fair well for quite some distance if it's a thick bottle. It will leak if the cap isn't property sealed however.

If a cap is crimped on like an old soda bottle that's not really applicable for a flashlight :) The difference of course is that we have to have a clear lens at one end and a switch somewhere along the way and a means of changing the batteries.

However, it isn't hard to make a dive light. You can't do it with a reverse clicky however as water pressure will turn it off and keep it off. A forward clicky is possible but it will always be on and it is hard to keep non-magnetic switches from leaking. Twistys are much easier to waterproof.

In general you just need a thicker lens particularly if it's a larger diameter light and reasonably long threads with decent o-rings. In the head you need a proper design for where the o-ring goes. It doesn't have to be more expensive. Light companies just have to want to do it.

However since most expensive lights have a bunch of features requiring buttons to be pressed that's the hard part.

I have proper dive lights however just for fun I bought a cheap Rominsen RC-K4 (or something like that). It costs $15 and is a single mode XR-E using 3 AAA's. It was a reverse clicky. I took the entire switch out which left a hole that I filled in with marine epoxy.

Now I had a twisty! This light happened to have long enough threads and decent o-rings. The glass in the head was thin but the head diameter was rather small. I ended up taking it to 100 fsw (feet sea water) but if I was going to take it much further or use it where it might be bumped at depth I would want a thicker lens.

This particular light couldn't accommodate a thicker lens however. The o-ring design in the head of this light was crap. There was no lip or ledge to compress the o-ring as water pressure increased on the lens so I just took it out and used marine grade silicone in the o-ring groove and around both side of the glass (only around the perimeter).

That's all I had to do to be able to dive with it to 100 fsw including being able to twist it enough to turn it on and off at depth with no leakage.

The real solution for lights with a more complex interface however would be with a magnetic switch so the body isn't compromised. Other than that just add a thicker lens and improve the o-ring design a bit and any light can be a dive light.

 

[duro]

try using plumbers tape along the threads.

 

[Mr Bigglow]

Another issue: while I'm no battery chemistry expert, I've observed that batteries do give off chemical vapours. In my Pelican using days, I had no fewer than 2 Miti-lites that were damaged, specifically split apart, by what had to be expanding gasses that could only have come from their alkaline AAAs, and also I observed that other tightly sealed lights in that product line were either vented or had special chemical absorbers- I assume to prevent that damage from happening in a larger and more spectacular fashion. Plus, when disassembling lithium powered flashlights with expired or nearly expired batteries, I almost always notice a distinctive smell that I assume has the same sort of chemical origin.

 

[HotWire]

I bought a cheap light with a magnetic switch that was sold as a *diving light.* My plan was to play with it in the pool. After the first 10 minutes of underwater fun..... it was 1/4 filled with water! After I dried it out it still works, but also still leaks. Get a good diving light if you need one.

 

[f22shift]

Any bottling company out there can make a container that seals liquid TOTALLY in or out with no problem. You can close the cap of an empty 20 oz bottle and take it underwater to any depth, for all intents and purposes, of your choosing and you will observe no leakage. With that said, why is it so difficult for flashlight companies to leave the IPX-8 standard in the dust (or the...murky water) and make a similar achievement?

put your flashlight in a water bottle? done. ;)

 

[gcbryan]

I bought a cheap light with a magnetic switch that was sold as a *diving light.* My plan was to play with it in the pool. After the first 10 minutes of underwater fun..... it was 1/4 filled with water! After I dried it out it still works, but also still leaks. Get a good diving light if you need one.

At least the switch didn't leak :)

 

[petersmith6]

most people thing the depth is the only sorce of pressure, as you move you light around you will increase any pressure build up. simple things such as o rings are taken for granted but if not correctly cleaned and lubed will leak. it should also be noted that there is a World of diference between keeping somthing in a container(gas or liquid) and keeping to keeping somthing out of the same container.

 

[jamesmtl514]

put your flashlight in a water bottle? done. ;)

WIN

It isn't impossible, but I fear we wouldn't want a completely waterproof light. The lens would have to be thicker, held in place with an adhesive/caulking. there would most likely be a retaining ring inside to keep the lens in place despite the pressure.
The head would probably be built into the body.
double o-ring twisty body to tailcap.

This seems like it wouldn't be fun to mod.

 

[dannn]

Maybe the manufacturer needs to submit their products for testing for these standards. I wouldn't be surprised if there are some lights that meet or exceed certain standards but the manufacturer didn't want to pay for certification.

 

[Blue72]

There are many flashlights that are have excellent water resistance....many of them are very affordable as well. They just do not get discussed on cpf often because they dont often come out with the latest led and have fancy user interfaces. Look for lights that have an actual depth rating. Ipx ratings are not very good indicators of water resistance. Look for something that has a water resistance depth rating of at least 50 feet.

 

[davecroft]

I have a diver's watch. Very waterproof but weighs a lot and because of that I hardly ever wear it. As long as my regular watch can stand a bit of a shower or an accidental splash in the sink its fine. Same with my flashlights, as long as i don't need to worry about them getting wet in the rain or splashed into a puddle that is good enough for me.

If I was planning to swim with a light I would get one built for the job, but like my diver's watch, i would expect it to be heavier and cost a lot more. The other thing is that when my diver's watch needs a new battery it has to be pressure checked afterwards and that is more expense.

I suppose the manufacturers reckon that the current level of waterproofness is enough for 99% of users.

 

[DM51]

We have a dedicated Dive Light section on CPF.

None of the IPxx ratings claimed by manufacturers are worth the paper they are written on, and it is completely pointless discussing using ANY light underwater unless it is dive rated.

 

[davecroft]

We have a dedicated Dive Light section on CPF.

None of the IPxx ratings claimed by manufacturers are worth the paper they are written on, and it is completely pointless discussing using ANY light underwater unless it is dive rated.

Well.....if I accidentally dropped my Fenix into a sink full of water and it stopped working, I'd expect it to be replaced no questions asked.

 

[petersmith6]

the problem with many of the IPxx test is that they are done static not in operation. ie the light may be tested in a stream of water or a fixed submerged depth but its not tested with some one pushing puttons or acualy operating the thing. i picked up a cheap and nastey led light with blue led, if i dived to 50meters with it off no probs or if i turned it on befor diving to 50 meters still no problems.....but of i tryied to turn it on or off at depth it would leak. and there is a world of diference betreen water resistance/water proof and a dive rated light.

 

[gcbryan]

Most of the non-dive rated lights are just tested in a pressure pot. Some dive lights seem to be just tested this way as well. It's a static test but doesn't account for dynamic pressures of actually moving the light around, bumping into things, etc. There is a lot more pressure on the front glass of a dive light if you are moving the light around than if it is motionless. The greater the diameter the more pressure as well.

Some lights not rated as dive lights could be used but most could not due to the switch if for no other reason.

I don't think it's pointless to discuss however (no offense DM51) :) It's an interesting discussion IMO. It isn't that hard to waterproof a design but as was mentioned earlier it doesn't necessarily fit in with other design requirements if it's not a dedicated dive light.

A thicker lens means it's less efficient as a flashlight. Ruling out mechanical switches is an issue as well. If it increases the cost for no reason that is an issue. It's no problem at all to make a light so it can be dropped in a 3 foot puddle of water and most lights do meet that standard and that is sufficient for most uses.

 

[Anonnn]

Perhaps a remote switch would solve all of the issues at the tail end. That would ensure access to all of the regular modes, a watertight seal (like of the renowned water bottle persuasion), and convenient accessibility (unlike those magnetic switches that require you to carry a magnet around with you to engage it). Word?

 

[Anonnn]

We have a dedicated Dive Light section on CPF.

None of the IPxx ratings claimed by manufacturers are worth the paper they are written on, and it is completely pointless discussing using ANY light underwater unless it is dive rated.

DM51, I may not speak for the others here, but I don't necessarily want a dive light. I want a flashlight that raises the bar of all flashlight-kind: one that can survive on land and does not need to be limited to the proverbial box of only diving; one that can go on the deepest of dives with an absence of anxiety should it ever desire to do so. I want a flashlight whose design commands respect and makes all quality-minded flashlight engineers alike ask in unison, "Why didn't I even try to think of that before seeing it? What's wrong with me? Why do I only copy what other flashlight engineers engender? ...Oh well, I guess I'll do it one more time." I'm talking about a change in status quo here.

Okay, perhaps I got a little carried away...