Nitrox tank labeling

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!

Yep, agreed with most of the others here. I plan and teach 1.4. Diving to 1.6 is not considered unsafe, but the agencies I know teach 1.4 for a planning limit, and 1.6 for contingency purposes. So maybe have a read back through your manual as Oldbear suggested and use the one applicable to you.
 
I did a live aboard last year with mostly Estonian, French and Turkish divers. They all filled the nitriox fill log out to reflect a MOD of 1.6 ATA. In practice they seldom exceeded 1.4 ATA. I can't say the same of the Costa Rican DMs. Anyway Anglo American trained divers use 1.4 ATA mostly but this is not global.
 
1.4 is the current standard for recreational diving ...

And is probably what the shop wants you to use in the EANx log book. Consider that the purpose of logging the MOD - whether in the shop's log or on the tank label - is making sure you understand...
- what mix is in your tank
- how deep you can safely dive it

The number that you write on the tank is immaterial. That label cannot prevent you from exceeding the MOD - either on purpose or accidentally.

If I were your instructor/shop owner, I'd want you to use 1.4. Why? Because if I taught you 1.6, let you log 1.6, and let you leave my shop with a tank of 32% that you logged as having an MOD of 132FSW (32% at 1.6) and then you dove it to 132FSW and you tox-ed... someone would sue me. They would call NWGratefulDiver as an expert witness, and he would testify that...

1.4 is the current standard for recreational diving ...

Now, I mention fear of a lawsuit as the reason for pushing 1.4, but I say that somewhat tongue-in-cheek. The real reason I'd go with 1.4 is that it is empirically safer than 1.6.
 
I am using P02 @ 1.6 as MOD for Deco, PO2 @ 1.5 for dive planning and finding the best EANx mix. If the dive is with effort or special, then my planning P02 is 1.4.
 
My blender puts both on the label:
MOD = depth for 1.4%
COD = depth for 1.6%

Then I test the tank and write in the depths.


(COD = Contingent Operating Depth, I believe)

I always stay shallower than MOD.
 
1.4 for bottom mix and 1.6 for deco. I don't know about you guys but, personally, there's no reason for me to push o2 toxicity. You guys talking about 1.7 ~ 2.0 are asking to be put into graves. That's OC, on breather it's different. 1.6 for my hollis explorer and 1.1 with my prism2
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/perdix-ai/

Back
Top Bottom