Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
I just want to take this opportunity to pick on a pet peeve of mine -- IANTD sez: > We have been advocating using mixes such as EAN 80 at 30-20 > and 10 feet to avoid ever being subjected to 1.6 + ata at deco. One > problem with o2 deco is the ceiling is 20 feet divers usually hang out > a little deeper say 23 feet at this depth the po2 is 1.696 ata. There is something very wrong if you are ever discussing O2 exposures to three significant figures, let alone four (or more). As has been discussed ad nauseaum on this forum, O2 exposures are not hard numeric science; we don't know the actual limits, and we can not even conventionally measure O2 content of breathing gasses reliably to three significant figures. So don't mislead with overly- specific numbers. IMNSHO, all of this stuff (O2 exposure, inert gas exposure, etc) should all be calculated with error bars and accomodated for worst-case error, but no one seems to do that -- does specifying exposures and times to 3 and more significant figures somehow make us feel more comfortable, more secure? If so, it is a very false sense of security.... -frank -- fhd@in*.ne* | A common fallacy is to equate a limitation of knowledge 1 212 559 5534 | with a knowledge of limitations. 1 917 992 2248 | -- Foster Morrison 1 718 746 7061 |
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]