Ratio deco for ccr?

That or it really doesn't work all that well.

I used RD for a few years with much success. It works very well within the parameters I used it (OC. Above 200).

I was hoping one of the anointed GUE members would have more directly commented towards your original inquiry. I'd like to know as well if it can be worked into a set PO2 paradigm, for academic reasons.

Since the "anointed" GUE members don't dive CC, why on earth would you expect them to be able to answer the question?

Brian
(lost the secret DIR handshake when I bought my KISS)
 
As for our rude American friends, I will take the passion and forthrightness of a Monkey over what some might describe as passive aggressive or even pompous .

I am not smug. I am the even harder to take golly gee whiz. I do this because I am aware of just how much I am pushing it and I am trying to develop some best practices for those few years I have left.

I have learned a lot on this thread. Much of it not expected. Thank you all who have contributed.

Peter

Peter, I have been accused of being Passionate, Forthright, Agressive, and pompous. I am good for 3 out for 4.

I do not wish to be "I agree with Monkey" "I don't agree with monkey"

What I want is call it like you see it.

kick something to the debate that makes the surfing of this forum worth it.

What we all share here is FREE WILL. I want all of us to leverage that free will to advance shit. (Or put it to rest)

[unhelpful comments removed - edited by GLOC]

If it came down to it, I have to believe all things being equal, If we as a group got together we would act as brothers in arms.

Let's be realistic, CCR is still in its infancy relative to OC. So polarizing opinions should be the norm rather than the delta.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'll give you this one - TTS calculations are flawed on any computer because they don't account for the 'slop' which occurs during real decompression stops, and they plan on the diver making a fixed ascent rate that the diver never adheres to. This is highly irritating, and I hope the computer programmers are going to wake up to this issue. However this is mitigated by properly planning the dive beforehand.

Not really, my OSTC calculates TTS as if I followed the plan but made the stops one metre deeper than the plan mandates.

This is the default behaviour I can modify this variable to have a higher margin if needed.

D


Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
 
Guys, keep it civil. There are lines in the sand which the majority are aware of when it comes to being respectful of others. Please don't cross them as they will be taken out to maintain the board & community cohesion. However, more important is that if those negative tones continue, contribution will be limited as people do not take to being talked at in these tones.

Robust debate, sure. Firm opinions, go for it. Using derogatory terms because you think it adds to the debate, not acceptable.

There may be cultural issues at play here, until recently CCRx was predominately European in nature, who populations/membership have a very different view on how people should interact. That may appear to be pompous or reserved to our US membership, but that is how the board evolved and how the previous tone has been established. Not saying that this has to continue, it will be for Randy et al to determine that, but just pointing out why there is some resistance to some of the more 'black and white' comments being made.

Regards

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
Best explanation on OC ratio deco I've found so far..........if this is correct, or how this can be used on CCR buggered if I know,....so I'll stick to vplanner, computer(s) & backup slate.

If your computer or depth timer goes tits up isn't this irrelevant as you don't know time & depth etc?

Thread #1

Tech1 Ratio Deco - Explained - Page 5

David.
 
No point. I'm more likely to make a mistake than my computer under stress.

think he was saying use the computer to run the numbers ,:720icon:

crr and bail can be all most the same, all comes down to your bail out gas ,
and the SP your run on the breather ,
 
No point. I'm more likely to make a mistake than my computer under stress.

you're commenting on a post where i was suggesting that people run schedules on a desktop for cc and oc bailout then compare the schedules.

If you run appropriate gasses you will find the oc schedule is often shorter.

The reason I said 'run the numbers yourself', is you need to see if this is true for the gas/setpoint YOU choose to run.
 
Last edited:
you're commenting on a post where i was suggesting that people run schedules on a desktop for cc and oc bailout then compare the schedules.

If you run appropriate gasses you will find the oc schedule is often shorter.

The reason I said 'run the numbers yourself', is you need to see if this is true for the gas/setpoint YOU choose to run.

Misunderstanding. I was referring to no point me running numbers to look for ratios before a dive because I've no intention of using rd, prefering to let the computer take the strain. In reality, my tts on bail will be quicker because I'll be following a more aggressive ascent profile. Having said that, I'll re-look at some recent dives as the planned bail time for them was longer than cc if I stayed on the same gf.
 
Last edited:
Quote from Gloc: "you are going to have to do something in your head to reduce the figures unless in water you can change the GF and you know what is an acceptable short-cut."

and my response to this comment is dive a shearwater, in the lower right we have A GF number of 99 and that lets you know in a millisecond how hard you can push to reduce your deco,

The OSTC equivalent to this is the beta version with an alternate gradient factor, allowing a more aggressive profile to be pre-set before the dive. It is also possible to pre-set custom function 6 (?) to 2% which allows the actual gf to be displayed during decompression. Flexibility is the key to...gloc knows the rest ;)
 
Last edited:
The OSTC equivalent to this is the beta version with an alternate gradient factor, allowing a more aggressive profile to be pre-set before the dive. It is also possible to pre-set custom function 6 (?) to 2% which allows the actual gf to be displayed during decompression. Flexibility is the key to...gloc knows the rest ;)

The OSTC also has the capability to show the GF number like the Shearwater does. I used to use it back on OC in the way Monkey describes. This has been there for a long time, but maybe you need to switch it on.
 
Can you tell me which cf this is on the ostc?

CF08: Threshold for display of the gradient factor for decompression calculation
"This value sets the threshold for the display of the gradient factor. When reaching this value, the OSTC displays the gradient factor during dive mode.
Example: CF08=20 - When the gradient factor reaches 20 or more percent the value is displayed during the dive mode.
Default value: 20%
Suggested range: 1%...99%"


Just set it to something low and it will show up after reaching that point.

You can also make it red after a while by setting CF45. Set it to say 85% if that is your normal GF High and if you go up above that in an emergency the GF will be shown clearly in red to the left side of the display

CF45: GF warning
GF output is color coded if GF reading is bigger then this value.
Example: CF45=101% - If the GF is bigger then 101%, the output will be
colored with Color# Warnings (Default: Red)
Default value: 101%
Suggested range: 50%...101%
 
Last edited:
The OSTC also has the capability to show the GF number like the Shearwater does. I used to use it back on OC in the way Monkey describes. This has been there for a long time, but maybe you need to switch it on.

Yes, that's what I was referring to with changing the cf from 20% to 2%. From memory I thought it was 6 but above says 8. On a later version you can also turn it on to show during an ndl dive using a higher cf. The actual gf shows up mid-left of screen.
 
Last edited:
The shearwater now allows you to change GF high.

Janos

Higher than 100?
we recently had same topic, tc vs rd on DIR-GER
it was mentioned ostc in theory allows up to 255/256.
thx
hoffi

p.s. we're all in wheelchairs @ DIR-GER,
so only hemmoor e1 it is for us :agree:
 
Last edited:
Best explanation on OC ratio deco I've found so far..........if this is correct, or how this can be used on CCR buggered if I know,....so I'll stick to vplanner, computer(s) & backup slate.

If your computer or depth timer goes tits up isn't this irrelevant as you don't know time & depth etc?

Thread #1

Tech1 Ratio Deco - Explained - Page 5

David.

You can simplify that even more.

Background

RD for T1 splits the ascent up into three phases:

- the 20fpm "deep stops" phase
- the gas switch at 70 feet to 20 feet
- the time spent hanging at 20 feet.

The start of the 20fpm ascents is determined by 80% of ATA and just continues up to 70 feet. For a 150 foot dive this is 110 feet. For a 170 foot dive this is 130 feet. Taking depth minus 40 feet is a way to keep it simple for tech1 dives.

The time spent going from 70->20 is set to be equal to the time spent hanging at 20 feet. Or, alternatively, half your deco time is awarded to 70->20 and half to hanging at 20. You linearize all the stops from 70->20.

The total deco time at 150 feet is equal to the bottom time (20 mins @ 150 = 20 mins deco, 30 mins @ 150 = 30 mins deco). For every 10 feet deeper/shallower you add/subtract 5 mins of deco time.

Standard Profiles

You wind up with basically three profiles, 10 minute deco, 20 minute deco and 30 minute deco:

1-1-1-1-1-5 = 10 mins
2-2-2-2-2-10 = 20 mins
3-3-3-3-3-15 = 30 mins

Examples

So for 20@150 (20 min deco):

110->70: 20fpm
70->20 : 2 min stops
20: 10 mins

For 30@150 (30 min deco):

110->70: 20fpm
70->20: 3 min stops
20: 15 mins

for 10@170 (20 min deco):

130->70: 20fpm
70->20: 2 min stops
20: 10 mins

for 20@170 (30 min deco):

130->70: 20fpm
70->20: 3 min stops
20: 15 mins

for 30@130 (20 min deco):
90->70: 20 fpm
70->20: 2 min stops
20: 10 mins

for 40@130 (30 min deco):
90->70: 20 fpm
70->20: 3 min stops
20: 15 mins

Restrictions

T1 is a single 50% deco gas class, with a max depth of 180, and max planned deco of 30 mins. The ratios only work around 10-30 minutes of bottom time and 130-170 feet, as you get outside that window they work less well.

Interpolation

And if you need 25 minute of deco, interpolate something like:

2-2-2-3-3-13

But generally with RD you're doing "too much" deep deco anyway, so I'd also be fine doing this:

2-2-2-2-2-15

Planning

This makes it generally easy to plan a dive with someone else that knows ratio deco. Generally you do it backwards and you figure your deco time to be 20 or 30 minutes (which tells you if you're doing 2s and 10 or 3s and 15). Based on your max depth you adjust your runtime to hit your deco time (if you're doing a 30 minute deco you're typically doing 20@170 or 30@150). Based on actual runtime you'll have the deco captain call a bit more or less deco.

That last paragraph there is really how you go about doing ratio deco.

Theory

A lot of it is just due to playing around with deco planners and inserting deeper stops and noticing that it doesn't change the overall deco time much, which gives the divers leeway to move stops deeper in order to simplify things. The 50/50 split from 70->20 and 20 foot stops keeps it easy, but 60/40 and 40/60 will also work. What v-planner spits out works, linearized deco works, and just about anything else reasonable that approximates a curve and gets the total time right will work. *BUT* if you play around with edge conditions and find a profile that doesn't work in v-planner, then *DON'T* do that -- *DO* play around with v-planner to find the edges.

HTH
 
Last edited:
I've found this thread alternatively hilarious and horrifying!

Couple of nice expositions on the mechanics of ratio deco in it's OC form, and unanswered questions on it's applicability to CC:

I think it's useful to separate the safety & efficiency of a ratio deco profile from the logistics of using ratio deco to calculate the profile. The logistics part is inherent to a system I choose not to dive, and to comment on it in isolation would be unfair. But regarding the efficacy of ratio deco profiles, this is certainly not voodoo, nor is it some clever-clever new decompression model.

If I want to convert between Celsius and Fahrenheit, I can do it precisely:

C = (F-32)*5/9

Or I could choose to restrict the scope to, say around 50F +/- a few degrees and then use:

C = (F-30)/2

The approximation method is quicker and easier to calculate. And it's fairly accurate if I choose the range carefully.

This is the essence of ratio deco. It is a simple way to compute how to get and stay reasonably in the deco zone. It is not a decompression model. It is a super simple algorithm for approximating the results that a decompression model would predict. The price of this simplicity is a narrowing of scope: in order to produce reasonable outputs, the inputs must be carefully restricted. This is the case with standard gasses & depth ranges.

A small amount of mathematical analysis on various ratio deco algorithms would demonstrate the extent to which their results align with proven models and, better, indicate where deviations occur. I'm surprised that more has not been done here. Without this analysis, the process is best regarded as inductive inference, and mathematically unverified.

So can ratio deco work in the same way with CC as it does with OC? Of course... it's the same process of restriction and approximation. The be main area of concern would be the inductive nature of it's construction, coupled with lack of sensitivity analysis on deviations. It's the second of these which might prove interesting. I suspect the volatility might be very different from OC.
OC ratio deco at least has the benefit of being very widely known (if not dived). It may lack formal verification, but enough people like me prod and probe it to see what it does. Which is not the case for CC ratio deco.

DLK
 
Back
Top