On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 04:30:31PM +0200, Guillaume Gardet wrote: > > For Bühlmann there are multiple models : > * number of tissue compartments (8, 12 or 16) > * A/B/C variants (at least for ZHL-16): A is theoretical only, B is for > tables generation and C is for dive computer (more conservative). > > So, we could implement those variants.
The biggest challenge here is "who would implement this". We have learned that the discrete implementation of these models is rather tricky (as a divelog we only get the samples at the sample rate the dive computer returns to us). And because of that, even if we know exactly which model a dive computer is designed to implement, we still usually don't match the deco data the dive computer shows, as it has access to the continuous depth information. Additionally many divecomputers have rather under-powered CPUs (to say the least) and they are taking serious shortcuts when calculating the compartment values - which also leads to different results. Long story short: it's not clear to me if there is value in implementing other variations of the Buhlmann algorithm - it's unlikely we'll ever perfectly "match" any dive computer you are diving. I'd be more interested in a VPM implementation (that is reasonably well documented). We had a GSOC proposal to do just that and decided not to accept it but it's still something that we are open to if there's a developer with the necessary math / physics background willing to tackle the problem. /D _______________________________________________ subsurface mailing list subsurface@hohndel.org http://lists.hohndel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface