Big Mistake

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

SeaJay once bubbled...
Hmmmm... Spectre, I'm not sure how you got your numbers, but according to my software, which took all of the above into account, I had a SAC rate of .58 for the entire dive... And while it doesn't show me individual rates from one point in the dive to the next (it only shows me overall SAC from beginning to end), I'm confident that I lowered my SAC at the very end of the dive as much as possible.

Ok. What I used for my calculations was the profile that I adapted from your description of your dive. That profile indicated an average depth of 49 feet.

But you say 53. Ok.

53 feet = 2.606 ATA * 42.6667 = 111.192
77.4 cuft / 3000 psi = .0258 * 2950 = 76.11 cu ft

76.11/111.192 = SAC rate .684
----
600 psi - 150 psi = 450 psi.
10 feet = 1.303 ATA * 12 minutes = 15.636
77.4 cuft / 3000 psi = .0258 * 450 = 11.61

11.61/15.636 = .742
---
53 * 42.6667 = ~2261

Now you had 12 minutes @ 10 feet
10 * 12 = 120

2261 - 120 = 2141 / 30.6667 = 69.826 for the average depth of the working portion of your dive.

69.826 = 3.1159 ATA * 30.667 = 95.555

3100 - 600 = 2500 psi = 64.5 cuft

64.5 / 95.555 = .675 SAC rate.

------------------

Of course this is all with the assumed data from your posts and not the real data. I'll check the real data you posted...
 
Uncle Pug once bubbled...

You should plan using your highest SAC. Forget trying score a better average dude.

Well, that may be true, but I've had SACs at nearly 1.5... In a 6 knot current and while working like a madman.

Does that mean that I should plan my dives around a SAC of 1.5?


Your average SAC will have a whole range of values above that number and if you use it to plan your gas consumption you will continue to do things like this.

Well, I *didn't* "continue to do things like this." I did not have an OOA on this dive. In fact, I've never had an OOA, although I practice it regularly, and have needed to donate during someone else's OOA. This particular dive is the closest I've come to having an OOA myself... Hitting the surface at 200 psi... And that was because I obligated myself to a whopping extra twelve minutes of dive time. I think my gas planning is in fairly good shape when I'm able to handle "accidentally" doubling my dive time. Of course, the cause of the "accident," the fact that I did not stick to my original plan (or did not properly dive my computer, depending on how you look at it) is much more of an issue.

I typically plan for a SAC rate of about .625, or a halfway point between .50 and .75. It's easier to do in my head that way.

And so yes, I understand your point. I got it from the beginning. I'm telling you that my SAC rate is good, and may improve more. My planning relative to my SAC rate is not my current weak point, and was not the issue on this dive.
 
Looking at your logbook pages, I have an observation and a question. The first is that you did have an ascent rate violation on the second dive, the second is is reference to your pressure rating on your AL80 - I noticed that you have the 80's rated for 3300 PSI in your setup. What is/are your tank/tanks actually rated at? If they are rated for 3000 PSI, put this number in your setup, otherwise you *will* throw off the SAC calculations of the software, by a wide margin - if you have an overfill, put that as your starting tank pressure... The reason is that if the software thinks that the tank holds 77.4ft^3 at 3300 (42.64PSI/ft^3) and not 3000 (38.76PSI/ft^3), the software bases its calcs on the misconception that you are using less air per cubic foot than you really are. This would explain the differences between your calculations and the other people's calculations...
 
Spectre once bubbled...


My numbers were based on a standard aluminum 80, not a compact aluminum 80.

That's interesting. Are you talking about the fact that the AL cylinder that I'm using holds only 77.4 cuft?

I'm not using a compact AL80... I'm using a Luxfer S080... Which is standard, and holds 77.4 cuft of air at 3000 psi...
 
this facinating discussion of SAC rate, but besides one minor mention I haven't seen anyone really nail the point that computer NDL limits are not meant to be pushed!! I dive a computer but 5 minutes to NDL for me is for emergencies only. I prefer to stay well above those times and give myself the extra time by going up and staying not pushing times at depth. I have an Aeris computer which I know is more liberal, but I have no intention of ever getting close to the edge of the envelope with it, therefore I have more time if something comes up. To whomever thinks that 0 NDL means it's time to end the dive, you're already at least 5 minutes too late in my book.

Rachel
 
That's the point, it holds 77.4ft^3 at 3000PSI, but if you overpressure it to 3100PSI, it is holding 79.98ft^3...
 
to say this is the best thread I have read in a while-congrats to all for egos in check and focussing on the interesting, educational stuff!

now, back to our regularly scheduled program!

Ken
 
SeaJay once bubbled...
I'm not using a compact AL80... I'm using a Luxfer S080... Which is standard, and holds 77.4 cuft of air at 3000 psi...

Exactly. You have it set up as holding 77.4 cuft of air at 3300 psi.

Change that to 3000 and your going to see your SAC rate numbers change quite a bit.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/peregrine/

Back
Top Bottom