Mailing List Archive

Mailing List: techdiver

Banner Advert

Message Display

Date: Mon, 19 Jan 1998 21:47:16 -0500
From: Ben Greenhouse <b.greenhouse@ut*.ca*>
To: "andrew@ce*.co*.jp*" <andrew@ce*.co*.jp*>
CC: TechDiver <techdiver@aquanaut.com>
Subject: Re: Argox for safer deco?
While I don't know enough about argon to speculate on it's uses, may I ask a
question that may be common knowledge out there?  While George and the WKPP
espouse the benefits of doing deeper stops on trimix (which makes a whole lot
of sense), why not take it one step further and increase the PN2 gradient by
eliminating Nitrogen altogether and decompressing on heliox?  As far as I know
(and that's not a whole lot on trimix), the reason for leaving Nitrogen in at
all is to reduce the symptoms of HPNS at extreme depths, and perhaps to negate
some of the poor thermal qualities given to the mix by helium.  But at
shallower depths (than bottom), and using argon, would the reduction in deco
time (if there is one(?)) be worth the reduction in thermal insulation.  I
imagine someone's given this some thought and could enlighten me.  Of course,
it could be simply more logistically feasible to use trimix  (that may have
been your bottom mix) rather than a separate stage of heliox.

Ben

andrew wrote:

> Will,
>
> Interesting idea.  Why not push it to the extreme?  We have already decided
> that doing the 3m stop at 6m was better.  If diving Argox50, why not do the
> whole deco at 20m?  (Or at least something that is reasonably safe
> considering the ongassing of Argon at 20m.)
>
> Andrew
> andrew@ce*.co*.jp*
>
> On Sunday, January 18, 1998 5:47 AM, William M. Smithers
> [SMTP:will@tr*.co*] wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 17 Jan 1998, William M. Smithers wrote:
> > >
> > > Anybody know why?  In theory, Argox should give
> > > all the advantages of deco on 100% O2, while
> > > totally eliminating O2 toxicity concerns.
> >
> > Actually, I should have been more precise, Argox
> > would give the same He/N2 off-gassing gradient (window)
> > as 100% O2, eliminate O2 tox concerns, and
> > offer less vasoconstriction.  The only thing
> > it wouldn't have going for it the slightly lessened
> > ability to directly oxygenate any tissues where bubble
> > formation was causing unnoticed circulation
> > blockages (if this does in fact occur).
> >
> > -Will
> --
> Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
> Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.



--
Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.

Navigate by Author: [Previous] [Next] [Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject: [Previous] [Next] [Subject Search Index]

[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]

[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]