On 06.08.2014, at 06:08, Gaetan Bisson <[email protected]> wrote:

[2014-08-05 20:55:00 -0700] Richard DePas:
On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 8:39 PM, Richard DePas <[email protected]>
wrote:

Ran one of my deeper dives through the planner to see how different mixes
would change deco. I know my normal SAC is about .40cuft/min so I assumed I
would need to put in 40 for a SAC rate. Said I would have been out of gas
pretty quick. I then adjusted it until I displayed .38cuft/min in the
graph. The result was putting 11 in the SAC rate. Is this a metric vs.
imperial thing or am I looking at this wrong?

[image: Inline image 1]


Looks to me like the SAC referenced in the planner is psi/min where the one
displayed in the graph is cuft/min. First time using the planner and this
is a bit confusing for me.

I believe it's in liters per minute: your 0.40 cuft/min convert to
0.40*28.3==11.3 liters per minute. Using psi/min would not make much
sense as that would make the SAC depend on the cylinder capacity.

Indeed this was the case. This patch makes the SACs be in cuft/min in imperial units. Some more comments in commit message.

Best
Robert

Attachment: 0001-Make-SAC-values-in-planner-settings-respect-unit-set.patch
Description: Binary data





-- 
.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oO
Robert C. Helling     Elite Master Course Theoretical and Mathematical Physics
                      Scientific Coordinator
                      Ludwig Maximilians Universitaet Muenchen, Dept. Physik
                      Phone: +49 89 2180-4523  Theresienstr. 39, rm. B339
                      http://www.atdotde.de

Enhance your privacy, use cryptography! My PGP keys have fingerprints
A9D1 A01D 13A5 31FA 6515  BB44 0820 367C 36BC 0C1D    and
DCED 37B6 251C 7861 270D  5613 95C7 9D32 9A8D 9B8F




Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

_______________________________________________
subsurface mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.hohndel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface

Reply via email to