drk5036
Contributor
I don’t think calling it 21% nitrox is inaccurate. Calling it enriched air would be.I think this is the big question. To the OP, you DO realize 21% nitrox is the same as air right? There’s nothing wrong with your log...
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
I don’t think calling it 21% nitrox is inaccurate. Calling it enriched air would be.I think this is the big question. To the OP, you DO realize 21% nitrox is the same as air right? There’s nothing wrong with your log...
But a programming constraint is something that the programmers decided, for some reason, to incorporate into their program. It is not some immutable natural law but a human decision.
My question is why did they make this decision? If it is tracking PO2, why not simply continue tracking the PO2 while on air which is what is happening when you use 21% Nitrox?
If accuracy is important, then you are incorrect to say it’s inaccurate. Calling an air dive as Nitrox 21% couldn’t be more accurate. Air is Nitrox. Calling it enriched air nitrox, or EAN21 wouldn’t be accurate because it’s not enriched, but air is Nitrox.I realize that Nitrox 21% is air, hence the title of the thread.
When I want to say get a count of Nitrox dives the log is incorrect. I am an engineer, accuracy is important to me and calling an air dive as Nitrox 21% is inaccurate.
With all due respect, that is just silly. I'm an engineer too....and what you say is just silly.I realize that Nitrox 21% is air, hence the title of the thread.
When I want to say get a count of Nitrox dives the log is incorrect. I am an engineer, accuracy is important to me and calling an air dive as Nitrox 21% is inaccurate.
Yes, the decision for preventing the switch from EAN to air is of course a human decision. What I meant was from a purely programming perspective there is no reason to make that decision based solely on the programming itself. In my spreadsheet the basic drivers for calculating oxygen accumulation are depth, ppO2, and time. The gas mix, air or nitrox, is irrelevant. Any difference in programming will make no difference in battery life. Since the display is a big user in power, dropping the O2 accumulation from the display would increase battery life provided some other data wasn't taking its place.
And this seems to present the question: why does a nitrox capable computer even have an "air" mode?
Is it merely because the marketing people at the manufacturer thought we are too stupid to set the mix to 21%?
On of my models of computers is air only. No issues. The other models are nitrox capable and allow you to set your mix. They do not have an "air" mode.
Is having an air mode popular?
Which really sucks on a liveaboard, but better than reverting back to 79% N2 and 50% O2 like they used to. That’s the whole reason I got rid of all of my suuntosMy computer automatically reverts back to 21% after 2 hours.