VPM deco software

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!

100days-a-year

Contributor
Messages
2,679
Reaction score
1,414
Location
NE Florida
# of dives
5000 - ∞
Hey Doc,have you had the opportunity to try any of the VPM programs out there?I am always looking for stuff to get me out sooner.I ran some profiles against conventional programs and it really only seemed to add short deep stops ,but the total times were significantly shorter.Is this "good science" or is it only applicable to theory?THanx
 
Dear

The Variable Permeability Model has only recently appeared as a decompression method for the general diver. While the theory behind this method has been described, there have not been any controlled, laboratory dives with this system (to my knowledge). As I understand it, the parameters for the model were determined from an analysis of dives performed by others and analyzed to construct the model.

Because decompression studies involving humans are expensive and time consuming, it is understandable that these have not been performed. However, it is necessary to perform this if one really wishes to know that the theory is working as stated.

1. For example, at NASA we have found that test subjects who are not walking (at simulated altitude in a chamber) are at less risk for DCS than those who are ambulatory. Recreational divers are likewise not walking and could be considered at less risk during decompression if this decompression is conducted in the water.

2. US Navy divers who make long decompression are generally in a chamber and are walking, at least part of the time.

3. Therefore, I would think that a good side-by-side comparison of the VPM and Haldane model would require that a cross-over study be performed. One time the subject would be standing and decompress on the US Navy profile, and another time the same subject would be standing and decompress on the VPM model. This might be repeated with subjects seated under both decompression schedules


As you see, this is different from what I understand to be the current comparison of US Navy tables in a chamber and VPM divers hanging in the water. There is a considerable difference in the possible generation of tissue micronuclei in these two situations. These arguments only apply to technical diving with long decompression stops.

While I believe in the idea of deep stops, I am not completely certain of other aspects of the algorithm. My main argument would be with the regeneration of nuclei that have be shrunk by pressure. In the original VPM algorithm, once shrink the nuclei remain this way, except for growth during decompression. I suspect that nuclei grow and/or are generated by musculoskeletal activity while on the boat after surfacing. This activity is much more unpredictable and could add variability to the model. It does not add any more than one would encounter in any other model, however.

Dr Deco:doctor:
 
It was my understanding that VPM (by Yount) and RGBM (by Weinke) are "basically" the same thing and produce similar tables. Hasn't there been a fair amount of research on RGBM since it's being incorporated into various computers and tables? I read something by Weinke that the recreational RGBM had a DCI rate of 1/10,000, but that was a few years ago.

Mike
 
Dear Yooper:

[sp]1. The Reduced Gradient Bubble Model (RGBM) of Bruce Weinke PhD is a derivative of the Varying Permeability Model (VPM) of David Yount PhD. Both use the concept of a population of preformed tissue gas micronuclei whose size and number vary. In the RGBM version of the algorithm, the increasing number and/or size of microbubbles is incorporated into the algorithm during gas washout. Since dissolved nitrogen diffuses where it wants in a tissue, there is always a chance that the nitrogen molecule will find its way into a microbubble (and cause it to grow) or into a capillary (and be carried away).

As the number of decompressions increase, so do the number of microbubbles. Because of this, the dissolved nitrogen gradient (tissue to capillary) is reduced so that the microbubbles do not grow too big. Should this occur, too much of the free gas would be sequestered in the microbubbles and prevent efficient inert gas elimination.

[sp] 2. I am not aware of the failure rate of the RGBM, although I have also heard that number. I am not aware of how it was derived. To my knowledge, there have not been trials in a hyperbaric chamber, so the data must be coming from the field. If correct, that would be a very good set of tables. :)

Dr Deco
 
THanx Doc, if I run in to a few mil, I'll fund the study. It must be a pain to look for a way to fund this stuff. LY,do you have access to any Non-recreational RGBM programs? I'd like to compare them against some others and then see if I could get a few fellas to come off a specific profile, even if I can't have the software, I'd like to be able to duplicate their results. Still & all my sole motivations are the quest for shorter decos and mo...knowledge.
 
I have dug up this letter from Bruce Weinke where he discusses his program and some of the testing that's been done. You're right, doc, he doesn't state any chamber tests having been done. I'll see if I can e-mail him -- I think he's still kickin'. Yount is gone, right?

Enjoy.

Folks,
This is FYI -- thanks.
Cheers.
Bruce And Tim

RGBM Validation And Testing Update

The past few weeks following release of the NAUI RGBM ranged trimix, helitrox, (soon EANx) Tables have been hectic, so accept our apologies for not getting this out sooner. Some important facts about RGBM validation and testing are listed for your information:

1) -- counterterror and countermeasures (LANL) exercises have used the RGBM (full up iterative deep stop version) for a number of years, logging some 327 dives on mixed gases (trimix, heliox, nitrox) without incidence of DCI -- 35% were deco dives, and 25% were repets (no deco) with at least 2 hr SIs, on forward profiles.

2) -- NAUI Technical Diving has been diving the deep stop version for the past 2 yrs, some estimatd 200 dives, on on mixed gases down to 250 fsw, without a single DCI hit. Five intensive days of 2 mixed gas dives by 20 divers using the RGBM were completed in France last spring.

3) -- modified RGBM recreational algorithms (Haldane imbedded with bubble reduction factors limiting reverse profile, repetitive, and multiday diving), as coded into SUUNTO, ABYSS, Cochrane decometers lower an already low DCI incidence rate of approximately 1/10,000 or less. More RGBM decompression meters, including mixed gases, are in the works (know of 3)

4) -- a cadre of divers and instructors here in mountainous New Mexico, Utah, and Colorado have been diving the modified (Haldane imbedded again) RGBM at altitude, an estimated 350 dives, without mishap. Again, not surprising since the altitude RGBM is slightly more conservative than the usual Cross correction used routinely up to about 8,000 ft elevation, and with estimated DCI incidence less than 1/10,000.

5) -- within decometer implementations of the RGBM, not a single DCI hit has been reported in the multidiving category, beyond 1000 dives or more, up to now.

6) -- extreme chamber tests for mixed gas RGBM are in the present works, and less stressful exposures will be addressed shortly -- extreme here means 300 fsw and beyond.

7) -- probabilistic decompression analysis of some selected RGBM profiles, calibrated against similar calculations of the same profiles by Duke, help validate the RGBM on a computational basis , suggesting that the RGBM has no more theoretical risk than other bubble or dissolved gas models (ala Weathersby, Vann, and Gerth methodology at USN/Duke) This will be reported in a very technical paper/journal.

8) -- all divers and instructors using RGBM decometers, tables, NET software have been advised to report all their profiles to DAN Project Dive Exploration (Vann and Gerth and many others at Duke).

9) -- ABYSS is a NET sotware package that offers the modified RGBM (folded over the Buhlmann ZHL) and soon the full up, deep stop version for any gas mixture, and has a fairly large contingent of tech divers already using the RGBM and has not received any reports of DCI.

10) -- outside of proprietary (commercial) and RGBM Tables, mixed gas tables are a smorgasboard of no longer applicable Haldane dynamics and discretionary stop insertions, as witnessed by the collective comments of a very vocal and extremely competent, experienced technical diving community.

This process of testing and validation is ongoing, and we appreciate, make that, ask for your help in reporting your RGBM dives to DAN Project Dive Exploration and certainly to us with any "duress". Thi sreceives immediate attention.
Permit Tim and me a few comments about the RGBM and its roots, since real pioneers very often go without proper recognition – those of us that follow reap the benefits of their insight and perspectives, and our benefits of hindsight and modern diving developments. The RGBM builds upon the work of Brian Hills and David Yount, skillful work performed on phase mechanics, bubbles, and ultimately, first translations
of their findings to the diving arena and particularly, diver staging. They didn't have all the answers (who does), but they underlined basics. Both applied computer studies and simulations to diving profiles, though much has not been recognized (til recently). True warriors, they labored in difficult times, and under enemy fire, so to speak. Hats off to you, Brian and David (and all your co-workers).
Further for your information, Tim And I will be releasing all existing RGBM Tables (ranged trimix and helitrox) and a suite of others (EAN24 to EAN36, constant PO2 heliox, and other ranged trimix and heliox) to the Net, as with the Technical Diver Series, and under NAUI Technical Diving auspices. The format is "groupless" with 2 allowable repets per day, plus some other simple protocols.

Thanks for your interest.

Bruce Wienke and Tim O'Leary

Los Alamos National Laboratory And American Diving And Marine Salvage
NAUI Worldwide Technical Training Operations
3/24/00
 
Tony,

I haven't actually gotten my hands on any of the programs yet. I haven't tried too hard. Based on my readings and discussions, our profiles follow those tables -- somewhat. I'm sure we're more conservative though. We take Z Plan, manipulate some numbers, add some time here and there, subtract here and there, and add some different procedures -- poof!! we're out and feeling great!

We're going to continue to refine things and try to get out faster, but always keeping track of how we feel. I really want to compare GUE's Deco Planner to the RGBM stuff. Even with Deco Planner, some things have to be done to get a better deco.

Take care.

Mike
 
Dear Yooper:

Many thanks for the posting of the material from Dr Weinke concerning the Validation and Testing Update of the RGBM. It indicates that there is more behind this than simply calculations. :mean:

I was not aware of the extensive field data that had gone into this.

Dr Deco
:doctor:
 

Back
Top Bottom