Deep-stops vs shallow-stops: an interesting read.

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!

Oh, it happens to be VPM-B. Not really relevant, though.
My dives are to a maximum depth of 180 feet!
And I tend to spend some extra time in the shallows!
 
Oh, it happens to be VPM-B. Not really relevant, though.
My dives are to a maximum depth of 180 feet!
And I tend to spend some extra time in the shallows!

Of course it is relevant.

If you state "I am relying on software by so-and-so to stay alive" that presupposes that the computer / algorithm you are using was either designed or implemented by them. If you are on a computer using VPM-B, then that might be true.

In my case, I'm not relying on "software designed by RH to stay alive."

- brett
 

Outside of technical diving, it looks like a deep stop may reduce bubbles in recreational divers.
 
Outside of technical diving, it looks like a deep stop may reduce bubbles in recreational divers.
Deep stop reduces peak bubbles. No deep stop reduces total time with bubbles, especially if you reduce GF High on the no deep stop to make the total deco times equal (which also equalizes the peek bubbles some). <all this based on the video and consistent with other data>

Peak GF and time at elevated GF seems to correlate better with DCS than bubbles do. <other data>
 
Of course it is relevant.

If you state "I am relying on software by so-and-so to stay alive" that presupposes that the computer / algorithm you are using was either designed or implemented by them. If you are on a computer using VPM-B, then that might be true.

In my case, I'm not relying on "software designed by RH to stay alive."

- brett
Using VPM-B with conservatism or Buhlmann with gradient factors both can give quite similar deco profiles on these "shallow" max 180 feet dives. If the software had major flaws, I could be dead, on some dives, though. If the implementation is flawless, choice of deco model isn't a huge deal. I am not bounce-diving to 600 ft.

There are many things to consider beyond the deco model. What's your hydration status? Have you been drinking enough water during the last week? Have you avoided alcohol and mid-day sun? Any steam baths before/after the dive? Any strenuous sports after the dive (my friend got hospitalized for that)? What's your BMI? And age?
 
The world of off-gassing is complicated.
 
This thread has brought back memories...

Regardless, MultiDeco is fine decompression planning software. Like many, I use it with Buhlmann ZH-L16C with GF. It was fun being able to look at VPM calculations during all the past discussions about deep stops.
 

Outside of technical diving, it looks like a deep stop may reduce bubbles in recreational divers.
Marroni's work is highly regarded by DAN Europe, but not by DAN America. DAN Europe supports deep stops in recreational diving; DAN America does not.

After I wrote the article about deep stops in decompression diving with Simon Mitchell, I asked him to help with a similar article on deep stops in recreational diving. He declined, saying that there was no research on it that was strong enough to draw a conclusion. That includes Marroni's research, which has been cited in the past for methodological flaws.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/perdix-ai/

Back
Top Bottom