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
We are only arguing over the meaning of GF and how the interpolation ought to work. These are minute details of the implementation which don’t make a significant difference and rather below Simon’s pay grade. It is actually the stuff that Ross would be able to help withthis has been a very informative thread id like to hear from @Dr Simon Mitchel to correct any errors in our thinking
@Shearwater , I'd be interested in your comments. It was my impression that having set a GF of 30/80, the computer runs a continuous determination of the GF Lo ceiling, giving you a first stop depth at the closest rounded depth below a GF of 30 (in this example) and interpolating that on the fly to generate your 80% GF Hi surfacing overpressure. In other words, the Perdix will compute a real-time 30/80 plan based upon your max depth/time theoretical tissue loading. Why can't they do that?
NOW I see why you have been so persistent on this issue. You have an interesting point! So let's examine that.Now what if I ascend gently on a sloping site? I am never near the ceiling so never at the first stop so where should GF lo apply? My first stop might be quite shallow. Do I want to be at 9m with a GF max of 30 when the planner would have had me at a GF max of 65 or so?
So if they eliminated the dotted line to the right of the first stop, would the graphic be more correct? I think that's all we're debating here.However, if people want to put out graphs which are supposed to aid understanding then they ought to be correct or the literal interpretation of the graph will not match what is happening.
So if they eliminated the dotted line to the right of the first stop, would the graphic be more correct? I think that's all we're debating here.