Suunto Vytec and USN Tables compared

Please register or login

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

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

TexasMike

Contributor
Messages
2,997
Reaction score
5
Location
N. of Dallas, TX
In another thread about Nitrox capable computers (Click here to view) a question came up as to how the new Suunto Vytec would compute a dive profile that WreckWriter recently experienced.

This past weekend, I was able to get my hands on a Vytec and run the profile through the dive simulator and recorded the results.

(NOTE: The information presented here reprepsents a dive that involves mandatory decompression. DO NOT engage in these types of dives unless you have received the appropriate training. Always observe and respect your No Decompression limits (NDL's) and personal limits. Always dive within this limits.)

(NOTE the 2nd: This dive is definitely beyond my personal limites (though I am working on training for it). So if you see me referring to "I descended" and "I ascended" I am referring to using the Vytec's simulation features. I DID NOT PERFORM THIS DIVE IN PERSON. Sorry for that...But I got a few folks who like to dogpile on me when I appear to go beyond my experience and training when I contribute to this board.)

(NOTE the 3rd: The information presented here is an attempt to answer a question and do a little bit of user research in how the Suunto Vytec handles a particular profile. It is not intended to be a critique of functionality. Additionally, this information is not intended to replace proper dive planning for this type of dive. ALWAYS PLAN YOUR DIVE AND DIVE YOUR PLAN!!!)

WW's profile as he posted was a dive on air to 170 fsw for 20 minutes. Settings on the Vytec were Altitude = 0 (sea level) and Personal adjustment = 0 (fit diver and perfect diving conditions) and Model = Air (The Vytec can be set to model Air, Nitrox, or Guage).

I ran the simulator twice and here was the results:

(humorous side note: I forgot to turn off the air integrated feature on my first try. So when the simulation started, the computer "assumed" I had started the dive with 2900psi. Well, since we all know that at 170 fsw, your going through breathing gas very quickly. I "ran out of air" during the simulation 17 minutes in. Proved again that proper dive dive planning is a must! Especially on how much gas you need to take with you. So I turned off the air integration feature and started over)

1st try: This was my first time to use the dive simulator feature on a Suunto computer, so on this try, I pressed the button that caused the computer to "descend" one foot at a time at a moderate pace until the target depth of 170 was reached. (depth reached at 5 minutes into dive)

7 minutes into the dive while at 170 fsw the computer did provide the warning that the NDL's had been exceeded and began to add then lower the mandatory stop ceiling (10 feet) and tack on time (8 minute stop). The ceiling depth replaces the max depth display, and the ASC TIME replaces the NDL time.

As time at 170 fsw progressed, the ceiling kept dropping and more time was added to the ASC TIME display.

After 20 "simulated" minutes had elapsed (during simulation, 15 seconds real time = 1 minute simulated), I noted the first "stop" and the total ascent time. Which was 40 fsw and ASC TIME=39 min.

Then I started repeatedly pressing the button that caused the computer to ascened. Occasionally I got the ascent rate warning and would slow down my button pushing. When I reached 40 fsw, the ASC TIME had increased to 43 minutes (which I view as "correct" since I was still on-gassing at depth as I was rising to the first top).

The entire simulated run resulted in the following stops and remaining ascent times. I should point out that I would only ascend to the next stop (eg from 40 to 30 feet) when the computer said it was okay to be at that new shallower depth.

  • Ceiling depth -- ASC TIME remaining

    ===========================
    40 fsw................39 min (recorded while at 170 fsw & starting ascent)
    40 fsw................43 min (having reached 40 fsw)
    30 fsw................40 min
    20 fsw................37 min
    15 fsw................31 min
    10 fsw................27 min
An interesting note is that once the Vytec had established that I did satisfy it's deco obligation, it also ran down the 3 minute STOP time as we hung out at 10 fsw.



Second Dive: Same parameters at first dive, but this time I held down the buttons on both the descent and ascent to move as fast as the Vytec would go on the simulation.

170 fsw was reached in less than 3 minutes. NDL ran out at 5 minutes (again, 10 fsw ceiling, 8 minutes).

At 20 minutes elapsed time, I began the ascent by holding down the button...as expected, I got beeped at with an ascent rate warning. But there was an interesting result in the deco profile because of this as shown below. As before, I did not ascend until I was cleared for that depth.

  • Ceiling depth -- ASC TIME remaining

    ===========================
    43 fsw................48 min (recorded while at 170 fsw & starting ascent)
    45 fsw................48 min (the ceiling dropped during my fast ascent)
    48 fsw................48 min (it dropped again while at 45 fsw...probably due to fast ascent)
    40 fsw................47 min
    30 fsw................43 min
    20 fsw................40 min
    10 fsw................31 min

Now here is where we figured out how comparitively conservative the Vytec appears to be.

From the U.S. Navy Standard Air Decompression Table (2000) as published in the TDI A Diver's Guide To Decompression Procedures -- Theory, Equipment, and Procedures, (copyright J. Odom and International Training 2000, Rev 1b), this same dive results in the following decompression obligation:
  • Time to first stop: 5 minutes (assumes 30 ft/min ascent rate)
    20 foot stop for 4 minutes
    10 foot stop for 15 minutes
    Total ascent time: 24:40 minutes
So compared to USN tables, the Vytec is a more conservative.

Since I don't have any other other well known and respected decompression modelling sofware (such as V-planner), I wasn't able to do a comparison with those. But I would be interested in what someone who does have it comes up with.

Anyhow, this experiment was interesting and I enjoyed conducting it. Your questions and comments are welcome.
 
Wow! Thanks. I'm not planning on doing any decompression diving anytime soon, but it's nice to know how the Suuntos react.
 
One thing to remember is that the Vytec, like many of the Suunto computers available today, uses the RGBM which, from what I am finding out, is trying to address the concept of micro or silent bubbles. And according to the TDI Deco Procedures book referenced above, the USN tables are not that different than Haldane's original set.

As I mentioned, I am seeking training in planned decompression diving so that I can visit the underwater depths for a reasonable (and safe) amount of bottom time. So this experiment might be a good point of discussion with my instructor.

Finaly, the Vytec has the ability to alter RGBM algorithm from 100% to 50% to make the computer "less" conservative (I'll have to dig up the manual to see why Suunto things a diver would want to do that). I'm thinking of running the experiment with that change of settings to see what those results would be.
 
Originally posted by TexasMike
Since I don't have any other other well known and respected decompression modelling sofware (such as V-planner), I wasn't able to do a comparison with those. But I would be interested in what someone who does have it comes up with.

Anyhow, this experiment was interesting and I enjoyed conducting it. Your questions and comments are welcome.

Here's the v-planner profile using no deco gases other than air:

V-Planner by R. Hemingway, VPM code by Erik C. Baker.

DIVE PLAN

Surface interval = 2 day 0 hr 0 min.
Altitude = 0ft
Conservatism = + 2

Dec to 170ft (3) on Air, 50ft/min decent.
Level 170ft 16:36 (20) on Air, 1.29 ppO2, 170ft END
Asc to 100ft (21) on Air, -60ft/min ascent.
Stop at 100ft 0:50 (22) on Air, 0.85 ppO2, 100ft END
Stop at 90ft 1:00 (23) on Air, 0.78 ppO2, 90ft END
Stop at 80ft 2:00 (25) on Air, 0.72 ppO2, 80ft END
Stop at 70ft 2:00 (27) on Air, 0.65 ppO2, 70ft END
Stop at 60ft 3:00 (30) on Air, 0.59 ppO2, 60ft END
Stop at 50ft 3:00 (33) on Air, 0.53 ppO2, 50ft END
Stop at 40ft 5:00 (38) on Air, 0.46 ppO2, 40ft END
Stop at 30ft 6:00 (44) on Air, 0.40 ppO2, 30ft END
Stop at 20ft 28:00 (72) on Air, 0.34 ppO2, 20ft END
Asc to sfc. (72) on Air, -30ft/min ascent.

Off gassing starts at 118.7 ft
OTU's this dive: 32
CNS Total: 12.4%

147.2 cu ft Air
147.2 cu ft TOTAL

Tom
 
Originally posted by TexasMike
1st try: This was my first time to use the dive simulator feature on a Suunto computer, so on this try, I pressed the button that caused the computer to "descend" one foot at a time at a moderate pace until the target depth of 170 was reached. (depth reached at 5 minutes into dive)

Use a much faster descent rate.

Tom
 
It's a neat experiment but one must also consider that your "dive" was actually much more serious than mine as you did a full 15 min at 170' whereas I was probably only at that depth for a minute or 2. A swimming diver going up and down in and out etc of a wreck is almost never truly doing a static "single level" dive. It's obviously very hard to simulate it.

It does seem that your unit gave a much nicer profile than mine, although I'd still prefer deeper stops, but this may be due to several factors, the main one being what I noted above. I still think the Vytec and Vyper have the same algorythm.

Tom
 
If you go back and read the second try, you will see that I held down the button to make the Vytec descend as fast as it could increment the depth. A rough guess is that it was about 2 ATM (66ft) per minute since I hit the 170fsw target depth at approx 2-3 minutes within the dive time.
 
Originally posted by WreckWriter
It's a neat experiment but one must also consider that your "dive" was actually much more serious than mine as you did a full 15 min at 170' whereas I was probably only at that depth for a minute or 2. A swimming diver going up and down in and out etc of a wreck is almost never truly doing a static "single level" dive. It's obviously very hard to simulate it.
I'm in total agreement with these statements. And since I'm starting to learn about this type of diving, (including diving in and around wrecks) I'm going to keep my notes on this experiment and other dives to see how it kinda stacks up.
It does seem that your unit gave a much nicer profile than mine, although I'd still prefer deeper stops, but this may be due to several factors, the main one being what I noted above. I still think the Vytec and Vyper have the same algorythm.

Tom
I too am getting my mind wrapped around the deep stops concept and will most likely follow it once I start doing this style of diving.

Say, you're in Florida, right??? Any desire to link up with me, NetDoc, DivingGal and maybe a few others to do some diving in Mid July?
 
Originally posted by TexasMike
Say, you're in Florida, right??? Any desire to link up with me, NetDoc, DivingGal and maybe a few others to do some diving in Mid July?

You're part of that "wreckmania" trip, right? I was planning on trying to get up there to at least meet you guys and do a dive if I can. I saw part of the schedule and I note that all the dives are pretty shallow. Are you all doing a class or something?

Send me the full dates/times schedule and I'll see what I can do about making some time (not easy lately).

Tom
 
Originally posted by TexasMike

Then I started repeatedly pressing the button that caused the computer to ascened. Occasionally I got the ascent rate warning and would slow down my button pushing. When I reached 40 fsw, the ASC TIME had increased to 43 minutes (which I view as "correct" since I was still on-gassing at depth as I was rising to the first top).





I'd be curious to see your results compared to the same profile without ascent rate violations. The RGBM algorythm penalizes for ascent violations among others. I'd like to know just how much it really penalizes. Not that I plan on violating ascent rates. I'm just curious to see if the perception of Suuntos being overly conservative is a result of bad diving practices.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/perdix-ai/

Back
Top Bottom