Suunto EON Core? Where did this come from?

[tbone1004]

What computers are you using for tech dives?

see this post where I ran decompression comparisons between Suunto RGBM and ZHL. Doesn't keep you any deeper any longer, but it gets you out of the water a helluva lot faster than 50/80 which has bent people. Suunto on -2 is roughly approximate to 50/100 for the dive that I compared.

More importantly, the fused RGBM is actually RGBM, so while you are correct about the "suunto RGBM" you are not about the "fused rgbm" which is marketing point for the Steel and Core since they are capable of running true RGBM vs. dissolved gas profiles that the others use.

I ran calculations against the dive planner in DM5 and fused behaves like you would expect RGBM to behave when doing decompression dives. Very wonky compared to ZHL, so to you, RTFM on the fused algorithm

 

[BoltSnap]

@BurhanMuntasser am I going to have to pay a bounty in order to get you to post a review of that iX3M? I've been eyeing it as a replacement for my shearwater petrel for some time now.

Please check your PM.

 

[RonR]

Until recently Suunto, and most other “RGBM” computers on the market (there is one exception) were using only a dissolved gas calculation with factors layered on top that allow it to approximate the results that would be given if one were running the fully iterative RGBM calculations. You could argue that this approach is based on a different model- and it is at some theoretical level- but the actual calculations are based on the same structure as Buhlmann. How you parse that difference depends on your perspective.

Fully iterative RGBM (or VPM, for that matter) is very computationally intensive and is difficult to implement in a real time system. That’s why almost nobody has done it. So far as I am aware, the Atomic Cobalt was the first generally available dive computer to ship with a fully iterative RGBM implementation, starting back in 2010. In the Cobalt, “full” RGBM only kicks in on dives deeper than 150’- for shallower dives it uses a “folded” RGBM, which is based on dissolved gas calculations with factors added to map to bubble calculations, just like other RGBM computers. This sounds very much like the approach Suunto is now marketing as their “fused” RGBM. That is to say they would be using M-value based calculations at shallower depths, only switching to an actual bubble calculation when deeper. This is a better fit in the recreational realm- “full” RGBM doesn’t give you no-stop times, for instance. There are some other fully iterative aftermarket bubble model implementations, VPM and RGBM, available for some tech computers, but none, to my knowledge, ship with them.

Exactly how any RGBM implementation compares to a Buhlmann algorithm is going to be dependent on the choices made by the manufacturer as to how those additional factors are implemented, on conservatism settings, and, for bubble calculations, on how the conservatism handles in the full RGBM code are set. There is latitude for variation.

It’s a fact that RGBM is a proprietary, closed system, and that alone gives rise to some level of skepticism in many circles. There are other factors that are unrelated to technical issues, but that’s another story… All of these algorithms have a good record in dive computers.

-Ron

 

[jebernot]

I just ordered two. One for me and one for my shop for sale. I was impressed playing with it. I can't wait to try it on a real cave dive. I think Suunto has a winner.

 

[Tom Ahola]

I'm amused how my clarification about differences between Eon Steel and the new Eon Core stirs up a dive algorithm discussion. I don't want to get involved in a religious debate but I feel I have to correct some misinformation for the readers of this thread.

It is true that in Suunto Fused RGBM the bubble model is only taken into use gradually for deeper dives. But the Suunto implementation of RGBM has been iterative at least since Suunto DX, which I know for sure, but probably for earlier models too. It is based on the Fortran code that Bruce Wienke has released to many parties. The RGBM algorithm itself is not proprietary. It has been published by Bruce Wienke of the Los Alamos National Laboratory in a series of publications: DECOMPRESSINO THEORY, RGBM TECHNICAL UPDATE from PHASE MECHANICS AND DECOMPRESSION THEORY IN DEPTH, MODERN DECOMPRESSION ALGORITHMS: MODELS, COMPARISONS, AND STATISTICS. But of course, the code implementations often are proprietary like with most products. And there are differences in the implementations. Suunto has some additional safety margins that in some cases will add up making things perhaps more safe than necessary or desired. We are reviewing these currently and there may be some updates at some point. As the Fortran code implementation of Bruce Wienke has been validated against US Navy dives database we are using that as a reference and always validate our implementation against that Fortran code. Naturally we also run comparisons against other algorithms like Bühlmann GF and VPM to see where we stand.

In my work I have run elaborate comparisons between different Bühlmann GF implementations. And it is surprising how large variations there can be although the algorithm is supposed to be very simple and well defined. The depth where the gradient factors begin seems to be very differently implemented by different parties. So there are variations regardless of algorithm.

-Tom from Suunto

 

[Glenn Williams]

Not trying to stir the pot. Reading this thread about the core vs the steel and the Perdix. There’s been a lot of talk about the core being a technical dive computer and a lot of debate comparing it to the Perdix. The core and the steel share the same software/firmware and although the core can and does perform technical dives to include multiple gasses, closed circuit etc. it is NOT meant to be a technical dive computer. If you read the owners manual in the cautions and warnings if memory serves on page 5 it specifically states that the core is for recreational purposes only. The Perdix, petrel, and predator from shearwater have technical bones and technical lineage. The Suunto Eon core is a great and awesome computer. I love mine. For anyone that has aspirations of becoming a tech diver then currently the Perdix or other tech computers may be a better choice. However if your out to enjoy your diving and have aspirations to advance your ratings the eon core will be just fine. Now as for recreational diving, I personally don’t want to be staring at a computer screen every moment of the dive. My focus is to look at the coral and the fish and wildlife. I really believe the core is a great computer and if your on the fence go to a dive shop or two, hold one play with it and do some research and maybe check out a few videos on YouTube that are not “factory” biased. Once you’ve made up your mind, pull the trigger and don’t second guess your decision. At the end of the day it’s your decision to make anyway. Have fun with it. My 2 cents worth. Y’all be safe.

Glenn

 

[Father]

it is NOT meant to be a technical dive computer. If you read the owners manual in the cautions and warnings if memory serves on page 5 it specifically states that the core is for recreational purposes only.Glenn

Curious if they mean recreational vs. technical or recreational (to include technical, which is just deeper/longer recreational) vs. commercial, PSD, etc.

On the site is says

FOR ALL DIVING

• Gauge/Air/Nitrox/Trimix/CCR (fixed point)
• Suunto Fused™ RGBM for maximizing dive time
• No-decompression dive planner
• Tilt compensated 3D digital compass
• Guaranteed to 80 m depth

As far as I know there's not such thing as "recreational trimix". It is a certification/level of technical diving.

While I understand what technical means, I think at the end of the day it's become more of a marketing term to separate itself from recreational as being more extreme diving. But at the end of the day, people doing technical dives are still doing it recreationally (for fun). So I'd be curious how Suunto defines recreational.

Personally, I don't need a reason to buy a Suunto over a Shearwater, but given the legal issues with Suunto lately, I have one less reason. I'll admit I like the GUI of the Suunto, but not enough to buy one.

 

[Diving Dubai]

I would agree with @Father with regard to the term Technical. I know (in the US) it's deemed that over 40M and or Deco is non Rec diving, however that's not a universally accepted definition.

I personally use the "line" of Tri Mix being Tec.

I have friends who regularly take their Eon Steels to 100m on OC TriMix (the term regularly is dependant upon wanting to splash out on Helium)

Given the Core and teh Steel use the same firmware, as long as you abide by the depth rating, yes the core can be used for Tec. Later in 2019 the Steel (only) will get Buhlmann

Personally, I don't need a reason to buy a Suunto over a Shearwater, but given the legal issues with Suunto lately, I have one less reason. I'll admit I like the GUI of the Suunto, but not enough to buy one

So I run both a Perdix and Eon Steel, I brought the Perdix because I was inquisitive. After 150 dives with it, It hasn't' grown on me. I'm not saying it's a bad computer, but weighing up all the Pro's and Con's I rate the Steel as the better computer. I'm also playing with the OSTC Plus, I only have 30 dives on it, so it's really too early to make statements, but my initial impressions are that it's nicer than the Perdix. However a lot boils down to personal preferences. The Eon Screen and GUI is however miles better than the competition currently. Maybe for the next iteration of the Perdix, Shearwater will use the lessons they've learned with the Teric which will change my opinion.

But again this is just my opinion as a user of both for Rec and basic Tec (50m max and less than 20 mins deco)

 

[victorzamora]

As far as I know there's not such thing as "recreational trimix". It is a certification/level of technical diving.

There are a couple of agencies that teach a variant of "Advanced Recreational Trimix" and sell it to the TekLite and Advanced Rec crowds. The IANTD link I provided shows the list of requirements, which are: Deep Cert, Nitrox Cert, and 30 logged dives. No "Intro to Tek" and no AN/DP. This is blurring the lines between Tec and Rec pretty hard, but ART is technically a Rec cert, despite being listed in the TekLite category on IANTD's site.

GUE also certs Trimix (they call it Triox, not sure what mix limits are, but assume low max-FHe) with Rec2.

 

[JohnnyC]

There are a couple agencies that teach recreational trimix as a way to mitigate narcosis, without incurring a decompression obligation. True recreational trimix dives.

The IANTD course says "recreational" but it allows a decompression obligation. In my mind recreational means within NDL (in terms of decompression only). This is not within NDL.

The addition of helium does not a technical dive make. Personally I'd like to see trimix as commonplace as nitrox. People do enough stupid stuff underwater as it is, at least with a little chipmunk gas they can't use narcosis as an excuse.