Will Air Integration in dive computers replace the SPG?

[agilis]

Yes, you both surface with nothing left.

No, it is a PSI value that changes with where you are in your dive. It truly represents just how far as you can stretch your available gas. Nothing warm or fuzzy about it. Buddy divers calculate this number assuming a rescue. Two people breathing off one supply to the next gas switch or surface. So a buddy diver's rock bottom will seem generous to you, a solo diver.

Your personal, solo, rock bottom includes your plan for a direct return to the surface or a need to ascend the anchor line, safety stops and whatever else it takes to allow you to slide into home base while breathing hot and heavy and just running out of gas.

To make it manageable, you just calculate it for the very worst point in your dive. For example, at the furthest distance from the upline. This will limit how long you can stay there.

I did not mean the simple way a J valve functions, only the concept of an artificial rock bottom instead of the actual depletion the term suggests to underscore its inviolability. I understand the calculations used in setting this imaginary but indispensable floor are complex and comprehensive.

Few things are as fatuous as a semantic dispute.

 

[lowviz]

I did not mean the simple way a J valve functions, only the concept of an artificial rock bottom instead of the actual depletion the term suggests to underscore its inviolability.

I assume very little these days, pardon me that.

Few things are as fatuous as a semantic dispute.

Please remember that this is ScubaBoard.

 

[Diving Dubai]

I'm inclined to disagree. I think that people find it easier to interpret data if presented in a display they are familiar with receiving.

I wear an analogue watch and have done so my entire life. My brain is very accustomed to interpreting the needles. I read, and interpret, an analogue display many times per day. I've never owned a digital watch.

Many people don't wear analogue watches nowadays. They use their phones etc... So they will probably find a digital display more familiar and easier to assimilate that data.

Most divers are familiar with, and used to, analogue SPGs..... so there's no issue interpreting that data. It's very logical and perfect for beginners to expert alike.

This is too many numbers on too many screens?

It will be too many numbers (on 1 screen, actually), if they add a tank pressure readout?

Both Excellent points.

Below is a screen grab of an Eon Steel in Graphical mode. Ignore the numbers In this example the tank pressure is shown as a graphical dial (blue) along with the actual pressure. You can set teh machine to display what they call classic, which is just numbers. The user has a choice depending on preference

Much like an SPG you can glance at it and read the position of the display rather than the numbers. On an SPG you don't always care to what precise number to needle is pointing, rather the position. If its around to the right near the "2 O clock" position you have lots of gas. Over to the left at the " 9 O clock" position then not so much gas. If the needle is pointing to the Red area time to surface.

Likewise in a car. You look at your fuel gauge. It doesn't tell you exactly how many liters or gallons you have. you just see that its either Full, at the Half way point or near the reserve. You experience (for the most part) tells you if you have enough fuel for the journey your about to do or whether you have enough to reach your destination.

Similarly your ascent rate even battery life on computers is generally a bar graph already.

So, assuming/ accepting that OLED/TFT screens will be more prevalent in the future then the manufacturers, and it gives then the opportunity to allow the user's a CHOICE in how they want the data displayed.

For instance. There is no reason(in theory) why a screen couldn't just have bar graphs for all - including depth. You could set your max depth on MOD, Qualification or Dive Plan for instance. I'm not saying its right but they could.

Likewise some people want numbers. Perhaps a technical wants his ascent rate displayed as actual ft/m per minute. Easy. Choice.

The Suunto screen isn't perfect but it and others are the 1st generation of graphical displays. In the future they may become more refined after feedback from users as well as ideas and innovations from other manufacturers

Moving back to AI and the car analogy. 20 years ago electric windows were only on the top level cars and seen as a luxury item. There was noting really wrong with the mechanical winder. Yet now only the most basic of cars have a mechanical winder everyone else presses a button. And its accepted as the norm

New drivers have no other experience. Yet electric windows are more costly and more complex (generally speaking)

In the future I see that AI transmitters will be bundled with the computer as a standard package. If there were 2 computers of capability and of the same price - if one came with a TX and one didn't then the average user is more likely to pick up the one with the TX as it looks to be better value.

Now the purest/ experienced Diver may see through this, but given that they account for a low volume of sales do they care? No when you make something you're in business to sell it.

There may well be a place for low volume manufacturers serving a specialised market and rightly so.

The choices and desires of one group shouldn't be enforced on another. As long as the manufacturers can still make money on the low volume require to serve a smaller uptake (subsidised by the higher volume of the other group) then that's fine.

 

[Diving Dubai]

Thirty years ago I used a mechanical depth gauge. I still do. I have a computer, but I rely on the mechanical gauge. It's just plain superior, just like the SPG. Computers are useful for no deco calculations and when diving a jagged profile. Otherwise, it's too many numbers on too many screens, a plastic gizmo.

Computers in cars can be annoying. I like carburetors, rotors, points, timing lights; honest straightforward technology that I can work on myself.

And another thought....

Another topic that comes up is the simplicity of the mechanical over the "complexity of the electronic" which Aglis demonstrates above.

People like mechanical it's simple you can see it working but does that mean it's better?

Years ago I worked on aircraft engines at the switch over between mechanical and flyby wire.

Setting up a mechanical control was almost an art form requiring 2 men 8 hrs with rigging pins to hold the rods i the right place, spring balances, vernier adjustments on the linkages etc just to get it right. 50 hrs later you needed to check everything again after it had bedded in.

Move to flyby wire. No more mechanical linkages. just stepper motors, wires and a computer. you could set the engine up more accurately in 2 hours on the computer. And because it knew its calibration setting it could adjust as settings moved over time.
When a mechanical control failed it was bad - very bad. A fly by wire was designed to fail in a safe way.

I presume a AI computer tests itself in the background where as an SPG doesn't I wonder how many SPG's are calibrated and have a fluid range of movement.

Sometimes there is understandable suspicion if you can't see the way it works as you can a mechanical device. Because you can't see electronic devices work (without test equipment) that doesn't mean electronics are less reliable.

Which you wish to use is of course again personal choice. In the future I can see mechanical SPG's being the high price alternative. Some will pay for a high quality hand assembled item ratther than an electronic device easily made by machine at a lower cost..

 

[AJ]

Below is a screen grab of an Eon Steel in Graphical mode. Ignore the numbers In this example the tank pressure is shown as a graphical dial (blue) along with the actual pressure. You can set teh machine to display what they call classic, which is just numbers. The user has a choice depending on preference

It's nice, can't deny that. But what if I happen to dive with backmount gas, 2 or 3 stages? I would need 3 to 4 AI transmitters. Does the EON know what gas I am usingat any moment Or do I have to switch manually? It would be a costly solution to a problem no existing as far as I am concerned.

I like it, but do not consider it as a solution right know.

 

[CT-Rich]

It's nice, can't deny that. But what if I happen to dive with backmount gas, 2 or 3 stages? I would need 3 to 4 AI transmitters. Does the EON know what gas I am usingat any moment Or do I have to switch manually? It would be a costly solution to a problem no existing as far as I am concerned.

I like it, but do not consider it as a solution right know.

I imagine that AI transmitters and associated computers will actually be very appealing to tech and cave divers. If you were going to carry four tanks into the water and you could monitor them with a single device (along with a redundant back up computer) that allowed you t scroll through all your bottle on your wrist wouldn't that be an attractive feature? An added utility would be that you would be identifying the tanks with correct gas mixture on the surface, reducing the likelihood of breathing the wrong gas. Or better, having a sensor that could monitor the gas blend of the gas you are pulling air from. An instructor or DM could monitor the gas consumption of his students/guests. Dive buddies could also monitor each others gas with ease. The right mix of features could make AI transmitters a killer app that would make it a no brainer.

All that "I want something where I can see how it works" is lovely. I bemoan that kids can't take apart there toys any more to learn about how it works. But, you cannot make a car that get 40 mpg and is tolerable to drive with a carburetor, rotor and timing light precision. The ability to make a consumer rebreather is dependent on sensors and computers.

 

[CuzzA]

Again AJ, I haven't heard anyone disagree with that point for today's AI, but my question was will it become standard in the future and what requirements will be necessary to make it standard. Just about every advertisement I see these days offers the TX for free. Of course it's built into the cost of the computer, but still that seems to be the direction the manufacturers are going.

Diving Dubai makes an excellent analogy with car windows. I'm sure hand cranks are more reliable, cheaper and have fewer failure points, but if the dealer offered you a $25,000 vehicle for $400's less for hand crank instead of power windows would you do that deal? I wouldn't and I'm sure most people feel the same way so power windows are now standard, despite not really being necessary.

To recap again, in order for AI to become the standard our requirements so far are the TX must be...

1. Universal Technology
2. Smaller Size
3. Equally as Durable to an SPG
4. Equal in Price to an SPG (~$100)
5. Proven Reliability Equal to an SPG

As with most things the new tech has to have benefits over the old. It already has convenience, real time gas tracking and gas planning over an SPG. I don't know if any computer recognizes a physical gas switch, but I'm sure it could be implemented with relative ease. When the PSI drops on a tank for x amount of time the computer could assume that gas is either being consumed or free flowing and the operator could confirm on the computer.

We're spinning in circles here a little bit, so perhaps we can shift directions... What would be some really cool calculations that could be performed by the computer actually having gas consumption data that would improve the function of a dive computer and/or provide more data to the operator?

 

[CuzzA]

One feature I liked about the old SB was you could see everyone that was reading a thread, before the switch I could see computer manufactuers were reading this thread, so consider that when posting.

 

[Diving Dubai]

It's nice, can't deny that. But what if I happen to dive with backmount gas, 2 or 3 stages? I would need 3 to 4 AI transmitters. Does the EON know what gas I am using at any moment Or do I have to switch manually? It would be a costly solution to a problem no existing as far as I am concerned.

I like it, but do not consider it as a solution right know.

You raise a fair point. I do dive with back gas plus 2 stages with transmitters on each. Yes you need to manually switch gasses - as you have to do with a non AI computer. TBH the multi gas management (and thus the transmitter management) could be better, but lots of us have given feedback an I presume that they will add new features aimed at sidemount but will read across in the near future

Do the TX give you anything other than gas pressure? No, not as far as I know at the moment. In the future perhaps.

I (and my wife) made a personal choice. Could I recommend it given the added financial cost? Of course not. I happen to be an early adopter of this unit and thus have to accept the pitfalls of such a decision

 

[Diving Dubai]

To recap again, in order for AI to become the standard our requirements so far are the TX must be...

1. Universal Technology
2. Smaller Size
3. Equally as Durable to an SPG
4. Equal in Price to an SPG (~$100)
5. Proven Reliability Equal to an SPG

Another example. In my industry to get data to lights above a stage, we use data cables (and a standard protocol). Then some manufacturer introduced a wireless box to receive data from a transmitter plugged into the control desk but it only reduced the cabling by a little - you still needed to run cables from it to the lights. The cost of this receiver and transmitter could buy an awful lot of cable. So it didn't' catch on in a big way.

Now the manufacturers build the wireless receiver into their light. The receiver card is cheap, power is already there. Now not only can we send data over wireless, but the lights report back with faults and auto set themselves up. Most people use it.

Maybe (with a stretch of the imagination), the Transmitter could be inbuilt into the 1st stage rather than being screwed into a port.

I don't know what makes the TX the size they are (they all appear to be a similar size)

Again all my TX have been as reliable as my SPG and thee display is easier to read. Yes I could spend less and get correction lenses in my mask but then I'd have to admit getting older

I'm not sure the price will come down, rather that you get added value and more functionality which helps sweeten the deal. Such as
you get a freeflow the TX sees this and could possibly do something. Maybe your computer gives you a surface alarm IF you haven't breathed gas to ensure your tank is on. I'm throwing possibilities about.

Sure AI can have issues from the user and wear on the O rings etc. But so can a tank valve (leaking and not turned on).

I wonder how many AI users have had an out of air incident (with its alarms chirping) over an SPG user not paying attention...


The DC is undergoing a revolution - if this thread is resurrected in 5 years time I wonder what we'd all think then