Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
On 8 Feb 1995, HeimannJ wrote: > Dave Giddy writes: > > >... > >My primary suggestion is that in the range of 50-80m (160'-260'), something > >like Nitrox-10 or even Nitrox-5 may be a safer breathing gas than air. > >... > > Why would 5-10% O2 Nitrox be safer than 16-18% O2 Nitrox (PP02=1.4-1.6 ATA at > 80m, the deepest depth in your range)? The basic nitrox rule of using the max > FO2 possible within CNS tox constraints still applies here. EAN16-18 has > acceptible PPO2s as depth, and much friendlier decompression (which I consider > to be "safer") than EAN5-10. Moreover, EAN16-18 can be breathed at the > surface, which EAN5 or EAN10 cannot be. To carry it one step further.... ...and if you plan to use EAN16-18, then the logistical difficulties of creating the mix are probably not worth the tiny reduction in probability of a CNS hit to just using plain old air (which is *much* easier to put in a tank). There is such a tiny window of circumstance that reduced-oxygen nitrox would be beneficial (and such benefit would be ambiguous at best), that there really aren't many applications for it in *deep* diving. Now, if you're talking about saturation dives at moderate depth...then reduced-oxygen nitrox has some real advantages... Aloha, Rich deepreef@bi*.bi*.ha*.or*
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]