Page 1 of 1
conservatism settings compared to other products
Posted: Saturday 11. October 2014, 09:39
by nodekh
I dived yesterday with 2N and xDeep Black EANx. In Black conservatism was set to level 3 which reflects 65/20 and OSTC 2N set to 70/30. The NDL in OSTC was shorter and the difference was sometimes arround 10min. The settings in OSTC were less conservative, so why shorter times? Both are using ZH-L16+GF.
Re: conservatism settings comared to other products
Posted: Saturday 11. October 2014, 10:22
by jb2cool
Because the gradient factors were set different. If they were the same then NDL and deco obligation would have likely been similar.
This is exactly what gradient factors do. They fine tune the ZH-L16 algorithm
Re: conservatism settings comared to other products
Posted: Saturday 11. October 2014, 12:12
by heinrichsweikamp
Differences between different computer brands (Even if they are set "identical" and use the "same" model) are
inexplicable unless we can compare the deco code.
Our's is here:
https://bitbucket.org/heinrichsweikamp/ ... at=default ...
Regards,
Matthias
Re: conservatism settings comared to other products
Posted: Saturday 11. October 2014, 19:23
by nodekh
I'm no software designer, so I won't be able to check anything, even if I tried to reverse engineer the balck's code. So there's no way for me to compare them...
Mind this, I'm not indicating that there's anything wrong with both computers...
Re: conservatism settings comared to other products
Posted: Monday 13. October 2014, 00:19
by nodekh
jb2cool, less conservative - longer NDL? More conservative - shorter NDL. Black was more conservative - 65/20 but shown more NDL than less conservative OSTC 70/30. As I said, the difference was sometimes around 10 minutes.
Re: conservatism settings compared to other products
Posted: Monday 13. October 2014, 08:59
by jb2cool
Sorry, I thought you were saying the OSTC was showing shorter deco, not less NDL remaining.
They were both set to the same gas weren't they?
Re: conservatism settings compared to other products
Posted: Monday 13. October 2014, 11:53
by nodekh
Yes they were, doublechecked before the dive.
Re: conservatism settings compared to other products
Posted: Monday 13. October 2014, 20:55
by wrobell
There are many factors affecting decompression calculation even with the same decompression model, for the start
- OSTC calculates your deco like you were 1m deeper (XDeep - I do not know)
- respiratory quotient used to calculate alveolar partial pressure (OSTC - ppWater = 0.0627; XDeep - no information)
- how NDL is calculated, i.e. is ascent to the surface included in desaturation calculations and at what speed? (OSTC - yes, 10m/min; XDeep - no information)
- bugs
And there can be more factors, I can imagine.
nodekh, IMHO your original question should be sent to XDeep, hard to guess what inside a black box (pun intended

).
Re: conservatism settings compared to other products
Posted: Tuesday 14. October 2014, 00:05
by jb2cool
wrobell Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> - OSTC calculates your deco like you were 1m
> deeper
This is the first time I heard this.
Re: conservatism settings compared to other products
Posted: Tuesday 14. October 2014, 09:40
by wrobell
jb2cool Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> wrobell Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > - OSTC calculates your deco like you were 1m
> > deeper
>
> This is the first time I heard this.
CF-16
Re: conservatism settings compared to other products
Posted: Tuesday 14. October 2014, 09:45
by Clownfish
I think that if CF-16 is set to 1, the deco shown as been required is worked out as if you are doing it one metre deeper than the depth it should be done at. That is, it assumes that you will do your 12 m stop at 13 m, 9 m at 10 m etc. It does not calculate your depth one metre deeper during the dive than reality.
I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong.
Re: conservatism settings compared to other products
Posted: Tuesday 14. October 2014, 13:12
by wrobell
Clownfish, you are right. I shall be more precise!