Hi, > Am 28.08.2014 um 15:51 schrieb Guillaume Gardet <[email protected]>: > > Ok, currently, there is only one model, but I think people would be > interested to be able to switch with other models. One usage would be to have > a deco planner matching (more or less) the dive computer used. > > What do you think about that ?
There might be less use than what one might think in the first place: for example there is very little point in voluntarily crippling your model by using fewer compartments (exception: your hardware is so rudimentary that it cannot handle at least 16). Then, the details if the implementation of hardware dive computers are unknown do you will never be able to guess the right fudge factors they are implementing. But tuning gradient factors should already give you a lot flexibility to emulate any reasonable algorithm. This I believe to a degree that even a "true" bubble model implementation like VPMB is purely of academic use and a possible "because we can" as the resulting profiles differ from buehlmann with appropriate gradient factors less then the unknowns of empirical decompression research, I.e. It is unknown which is the better profile beyond anecdotal evidence. So, yes, if somebody wants to tackle VPMB, be my guest, and I will try to contribute by $.02. We already got to some point in the past, see the mailing list archive, but we will need more than just linking against the existent VPMB code (fortran or machine translated from that), in particular if we want more than basic dive planning. Best Robert _______________________________________________ subsurface mailing list [email protected] http://lists.hohndel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface
