To all Camera Housing Manufacturers

Stop Us Flooding our expensive toys

It would be quite easy for the manufacturers of housings to give us a system similar to the safety checks on jam jar lids.

All that is necessary is
A metal cap with the dimple similar to the top of a jam jar
A valve and small hand (bicycle) pump to create a vacuum to pop the dimple in or out

Then when we assemble the camera we use the pump to lower pressure in the housing until the dimple pops in.

Use all the controls and wait a few minutes to let the air in the camera equalize. If the housing is leaking then the dimple will pop out after a short while.

After the dive, open the valve to release the vacuum so we can open the housing.

An added bonus of having a small vacuum is it preloads pressure on the seals thus making leaks due to jarring in the rinse tank or entering the water more unlikely.

I don't know what the pressure difference these dimples need, but it should not make much difference at the depths we are diving to.

Development cost minimal, maintenance minimal, cost for replacement cap and valve minimal.

Maybe I should apply for a patent. :blinking:

It would be possible to reverse the dimple and pressurize the housing. However I don't know what effect this would have on the cameras operation. The dimple would reverse when you exceeded the internal pressure when diving so you could not use it as a check when underwater, added to that at some points in the dive you would have neutral pressure difference so you would be relying solely on the catches to maintain the pressure on the O rings. No I don't like this option lets stick to a vacuum. :shakehead

Wouldn't the vacuum increase as you descended? I know some cameras already have trouble operating at depth. And if there is a vacuum in the housing, how would the air "equalize"? For me, another possible failure point (vacuum attachment point) is less attractive than making sure my o-ring seals are lubed and the sealing surface is clean and clear. JMHO.

merxlin:

Wouldn't the vacuum increase as you descended? I know some cameras already have trouble operating at depth. And if there is a vacuum in the housing, how would the air "equalize"? For me, another possible failure point (vacuum attachment point) is less attractive than making sure my o-ring seals are lubed and the sealing surface is clean and clear. JMHO.

Click to expand...

The "vacuum" needed in this idea is only a fraction lower than the normal air pressure, so it makes no difference while UW. I like it:14:

or make the cameras waterproof...i see olympus already has a "weather proof" one.....

Making an underwater digital camera would be great but the price would be prohibitive. A completely new lens attachement system would be required which would mean special lenses, etc. There are just not enough divers to make this economic. I doubt Nikon ever broke even on the Nikonos 1 to V and no chance with the RS.

No housings are the way to go.

Don't worry about the slight vacuum necessary to activate the dimple, that is insignificant to the 3 atmospheres we encounter at 100ft.

Come on Ikelite you know it's the right thing to do.

victor:

All that is necessary is
A metal cap with the dimple similar to the top of a jam jar
A valve and small hand (bicycle) pump to create a vacuum to pop the dimple in or out

Click to expand...

This adds yet other points of failure (e.g. that 'dimple' flexing back and forth is going to develop stress fractures over time). Not that good of an idea.... Since no system is 100% foolproof, a better idea is to buy DAN's equipment insurance. It's very reasonable.

AstroDad:

This adds yet other points of failure (e.g. that 'dimple' flexing back and forth is going to develop stress fractures over time). Not that good of an idea.... Since no system is 100% foolproof, a better idea is to buy DAN's equipment insurance. It's very reasonable.

Click to expand...

How much would a cap cost, 10cents, 1$ not very much.
If it fails then it's going to fail on the surface, so no great loss.
If I was DAN insurance then I would insist that this device is fitted before I would insure you, or charge you 500% extra.

User replacable, failure in on the surface so no loss.

DAN only insures US resident divers equipment, no equivalent for the rest of us.

Instead of putting a vacuum in the housing, why not pressurize the housing. Put a positive pressure in the housing, stick it in some water and look for bubbles.

With the vacuum and "dimple" you would have to wait long enough for the disk to pop back out. If the leak was slow enough it might not pop out immediately.

Also by pressurizing the housing you would reduce the pressure differential across the seals at depth, not increase it.

victor:

If it fails then it's going to fail on the surface, so no great loss.
User replacable, failure in on the surface so no loss.

Click to expand...

Maybe, maybe not. The cap would need to be flexible enough the move back and forth on the surface, but strong enough to withstand the pressure at depth. The light suction needed at the surface is nothing compared to 4 atmospheres of pressure at depth. And even then, some Ikelite housing go much deeper than that, necessitating a much stronger cap which would likely not work on the surface.

A second idea: What about a very rigid cap that covered some sort of small valve you could attach a small pump to in order to create a vacuum inside the housing. The pump might have a small pressure gauge to check for a good seal. I'd have confidence in a rigid cap with double o-rings. Any thoughts?

Or the rigid cap could cover the "dimple". I'm thinking of something like a garden sprinkler cap or the like. I just wouldn't want to trust my camera to a thin flexible piece of metal.