Pebble Smart Watch As A Dive Computer

[pwfletcher]

Anyone else notice that the new Pebble Smartwatch is rated down to 165 ft.? Any way we can get some dive tables and/or depth monitoring on it? At only $150, this could be a nice affordable little back up computer.

 

[superspeed]

I really doubt it has a depth sensor in it. Would be nice, but doubt it.

 

[pwfletcher]

I really doubt it has a depth sensor in it. Would be nice, but doubt it.

It doesn't, but it has has bluetooth. So it wouldn't be that difficult for some company to come up with a depth/air pressure sensor that could feed it data wirelessly. Not sure how well bluetooth works under water though ...

 

[Damselfish]

Depth ratings on watches are misleading. They are based on static pressure, so you actually need a rating many times deeper than you will go. 165ft rating is barely suitable for swimming. See this chart. You can find variations on that chart all over, but they all basically say the same thing.

 

[pwfletcher]

Depth ratings on watches are misleading. They are based on static pressure, so you actually need a rating many times deeper than you will go. 165ft rating is barely suitable for swimming. See this chart. You can find variations on that chart all over, but they all basically say the same thing.

I think that wikipedia chart is a crock ;-)

 

[DiveNav]

..... So it wouldn't be that difficult for some company to come up with a depth/air pressure sensor that could feed it data wirelessly. ...

something like this ?

..... Not sure how well bluetooth works under water though ...

Not too well.:depressed:, but, with some tricks you can make it work

Alberto (aka eDiver)

 

[RonR]

It doesn't, but it has has bluetooth. So it wouldn't be that difficult for some company to come up with a depth/air pressure sensor that could feed it data wirelessly. Not sure how well bluetooth works under water though ...

Bluetooth, like all other systems utilizing high frequency RF, doesn't work at all underwater to any practical distance (like from a tank to your wrist, or for Bluetooth, more than inches). The only way to use something like the Pebble as a computer during a dive would be to physically connect the sensor(s), and their circuitry to the watch. It's the same situation as with the dive computers that use an iPhone for display- it can be made to work, but you need to build much of a dive computer, hardware wise, just to get the signals to the smart device, and you must have them physically connected or sharing the same air space. While the unit may be rated to 165', I would doubt (but I don't know) that it is designed for waterproof button use underwater. From the software/ firmware side, making a dive computer is a very challenging undertaking, far more than just implementing an algorithm. You need to account for every possible action a diver could take that might possibly alter their decompression status, and display the appropriate information in real time. It would be great if it were easy to use these sort of devices for display, but it isn't.

Data recorders that would download to the smart device, like Dive Nav's, are another thing entirely, and there is no reason that they couldn't download your logs to the bluetooth smart watch just as they will to a phone.

Ron

 

[Innovasub]

In fact both Bluetooth and wifi can work on a "practical" distance. That makes the patented "Divephone" to work as a dive computer. It is in the market since 3 months and available from DivePhone

 

[RonR]

In fact both Bluetooth and wifi can work on a "practical" distance. That makes the patented "Divephone" to work as a dive computer. It is in the market since 3 months and available from DivePhone

It's my understanding that this is transmitting through an airspace in the enclosure, not through water. That of course would work fine and is a perfectly reasonable solution for connecting sensors to a smart device.

I think the original poster was asking about sending tank data from a transmitter to the watch, as is done on other watch type dive computers, but using the watch's Bluetooth- that would be a lot more problematic.

Ron

 

[DiveNav]

Bluetooth, like all other systems utilizing high frequency RF, doesn't work at all underwater to any practical distance (like from a tank to your wrist, or for Bluetooth, more than inches). ....

"practical distance" could also have different definitions. As an example practical distance could be few millimeters (0.1") ..... the thickness of an underwater housing. In this scenario, as long as there is no salt water in the middle, 2.4GHz works fine and you could add depth information to a smartphone. Nothing magic ... just laws of physics (well, a bit of magic is indeed present ... in the modern semiconductor devices implementing wireless communication standards.)

.....Data recorders that would download to the smart device, like Dive Nav's, are another thing entirely, and there is no reason that they couldn't download your logs to the bluetooth smart watch just as they will to a phone.

Thank you for mentioning our bluebuddy wireless datalogger device

Alberto (aka eDiver)

---------- Post added March 17th, 2013 at 08:17 AM ----------

..... I think the original poster was asking about sending tank data from a transmitter to the watch........ that would be a lot more problematic.

That would NOT work!
In our calculations (and real life testings), the max usable "water gap" is few (very few) millimeters for salt water and a bit more for fresh water.

Alberto (aka eDiver)