> I think I've worked out at least one difference in the programs' algorithms, > and sorry I doubt you'll like it. Subsurface calculates required stops > considering the ascent rate and the time to reach the stop. The Fortran > program calculates the 'instantaneous' ceiling, i.e. the depth corresponding > to the tolerated ambient pressure according to the current allowable > pressure gradient. More fun! > > Which approach is more justified? Debatable. The method used by Subsurface > should be 'better', but when the depth of the first stop/ceiling is given a > special significance thanks to the Boyles law compensation process, I'm not > so sure. The 'instantaneous' ceiling method is more conservative, and, > without having modified the code and tested, I'm guessing would produce deco > schedules more consistent with other VPM-B programs. > > R >
I expected something like this... calculations are checked, gradients are checked. It had to be something "mechanical". For the examples you've posted I got 16 vs 16min and 46 vs 49min after the fix (in trial_ascent I changed the segment time to 0 and added one more place for boyles_compensation). Thanks a lot for this, I spent many days on searching for bugs in this code. I suppose there can be some other small issues but this one explains a lot. Today there will be a patch for this. -- Jan Darowski _______________________________________________ subsurface mailing list subsurface@subsurface-divelog.org http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface