[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TimeZone Public Forum ] [ FAQ ]
Posted by Curt on September 12, 2000 at 22:48:31:
In Reply to: That's not the point ... posted by Conrad C. Nobili
on September 12, 2000 at 22:16:29:
Posted from Host: dip235.inav.net (205.160.208.105)
If we are talking about deformation of the container (crush strength) as the primary "fault" mechanism for inducing a leak, then I would agree that the inherent strength (or rigidity) of the basic structure and the internal volume are important factors. However, my hypothesis (and it is only that) is that at or near sea-level, where most people wear their watches when in the water, the rigidity/strength of the container will be of little consequence; rather the water resistance will be almost entirely dependent on how well all of those little o-rings are doing their job.
Good discussion, by the way.
: I know nothing about mechanical or structural engineering, but it's pretty clear that you're going to have to do more to seal a big thin box against pressure than you will to a small thick box. A camera or flashlight is a much bigger, thinner box than a watch. That's why I didn't think those were very relevant examples here.
: --cn
: Conrad C. Nobili Conrad_Nobili@Harvard.EDU Harvard University NDTL/NOC