Riding GF99 instead of mandatory/safety stops

[boulderjohn]

My understanding of the oxygen window is that it is an isobaric phenomenon based on Henry's Law. which relates to the solubility of gases into liquids.

Isobaric phenomenon also explains isobaric counter diffusion (a different phenomenon) encountered in gas switch from HE mixes to N2 mixes during ascent from deep dives.

Dalton's Law relates to the partial pressure of gases in a mixture and only partly explain the O2 window. You need to view the two laws together plus Boyles Law which comes into effect when you ascend.

I understand all three laws, but I have no idea how what you wrote here explains why this theory, which has been dismissed as inaccurate by everyone in authority for about 15 years, is actually valid.

 

[Wallowa]

Shearwater Dive Computer Settings: Become A GF Power User!

An illustrated guide to getting the best out of your Shearwater dive computer settings. Don't be intimidated by the advanced display options!

scubatechphilippines.com

Micro-Bubbles When Scuba Diving: Mild Bends & Sub-Clinical DCS

The effect of micro-bubbles when scuba diving. Sub-clinical DCS may not merit a medical emergency, but should be understood and respected.

scubatechphilippines.com

What Are The Benefits Of Nitrox When Scuba Diving?

The three benefits of nitrox as a breathing gas for scuba diving. Is it worth the cost of training and more expensive cylinder fills?

scubatechphilippines.com

 

[boulderjohn]

Shearwater Dive Computer Settings: Become A GF Power User!

An illustrated guide to getting the best out of your Shearwater dive computer settings. Don't be intimidated by the advanced display options!

scubatechphilippines.com

Micro-Bubbles When Scuba Diving: Mild Bends & Sub-Clinical DCS

The effect of micro-bubbles when scuba diving. Sub-clinical DCS may not merit a medical emergency, but should be understood and respected.

scubatechphilippines.com

What Are The Benefits Of Nitrox When Scuba Diving?

The three benefits of nitrox as a breathing gas for scuba diving. Is it worth the cost of training and more expensive cylinder fills?

scubatechphilippines.com

I am not clear on the point of posting these articles. An explanation would be nice.

 

[Wallowa]

I am not clear on the point of posting these articles. An explanation would be nice.

Explanations/descriptions of how manipulating the GFs along with dive profile affects DCS/DCI and also micro-bubble asymptomatic damage. Applicable to "riding GF 99" value.

 

[TrimixToo]

While I hesitate to jump in here, as I am very short on time to engage in much discussion for the foreseeable future, there is one point I think important that I have not noticed as I skimmed the posts to get here. My apologies if someone has brought this up already.

One of my tech instructors once told me that there are sometimes real advantages to following the crowd. Decompression practices and gas choices were what we were talking about. There is a *huge* body of experience with staged decompression. Theoretically optimal or not, we have empirical evidence that it's more than "just good enough."

Stepping outside the mainstream here is riskier. There just isn't that much experience with riding the GF of your choice to the surface. The statistics are not on your side even if some theory or another "shows it's better."

So ya pay yer money and take yer pick. But I know which one I will choose unless and until enough empirical evidence clearly shows that something else is better.

 

[rjack321]

But I know which one I will choose unless and until enough empirical evidence clearly shows that something else is better.

1. VPM not empirically proven valid, in fact the reverse
2. Higher GF low is empirically better. 50% or greater. The 20% Gf low of the 1990s and 2000s is not so good. A low GF low is in fact not "more conservative"
3. Oxygen windows and S-curve ascents have no basis in reality
4. A given pair of GFs is not iso-risk. A 100m dive on 50/80 is much more likely to result in DCS than a 60m dive on 50/80

 

[TrimixToo]

1. VPM not empirically proven valid, in fact the reverse
2. Higher GF low is empirically better. 50% or greater. The 20% Gf low of the 1990s and 2000s is not so good. A low GF low is in fact not "more conservative"
3. Oxygen windows and S-curve ascents have no basis in reality
4. A given pair of GFs is not iso-risk. A 100m dive on 50/80 is much more likely to result in DCS than a 60m dive on 50/80

I did not suggest otherwise. If you think I did, please show me where.