Nitrox workshop dings - Divers Alert Network

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Rubicon Foundation Archive (http://rubicon-foundation.org)VI. Final Discussion and Workshop Recommendationsnodding of heads when that came up, but do we have agreement that the direction we shouldtake is from tables to computers?M. Lang: Please propose the wording of that recommendation.J. Hardy: The wording being that the training agencies encourage the use of dive computers overthe use of tables.T. Mount: I'm one of the world's greatest believers in, and user of, dive computers. Many of myinstructors feel very negatively about them. We also have agencies here that do not usethem, NO A A, for instance. We should not recommend that we encourage dive computer use.Most of us do it anyway. We should not prohibit them either. 95 percent of my students usecomputers where they're applicable. I'm concerned about becoming 100 percent dependenton computers. I've owned just about every computer on the market that supports technicaldiving and I've never had one that did not quit in the middle of a dive at some point where Ihad to fall back on tables.D. Dinsmore: I mentioned that NOAA does not use dive computers. We may in the future, butthat statement would not reflect how NOAA feels. Perhaps you could say something aboutdive computers can be used effectively with nitrox.E. Betts: I would accept that.J. Hardy: We might change that to recognize the usefulness of dive computers.M. Lang: Effectiveness?J. Hardy: Yes.M. Lang: Training agencies recognize the effectiveness of dive computers, is that better? Tom,is that okay with you?T. Mount: That's excellent.K. Shreeves: Agreed.M.Lang: Can everybody live with that? Show of hands, please. Very good.J. Hardy: Can we say something about not spending a whole bunch of time tracking long-termoxygen exposure?B. Hamilton: There's no need to. For recreational diving with oxygen enriched air, there is noneed to track whole body or long-duration oxygen exposure. At some point here we need totalk about tracking exposures to high oxygen contents. That's not part of this statementthough, that's good.K. Shreeves: In a sense, the so-called "CNS clock" does that. Shouldn't we be more specific andstate that in recreational diving of oxygen enriched air, there's no need to track OTU's?B. Hamilton: Use a parenthesis after whole body, yes.T. Mount: I would also add UPTD because that's still a common end.M. Lang: Can we live with this? Show of hands please. Very good, and counting.B. Gilliam: Something to the effect of teaching NOAA CNS limits. We don't have thataddressed yet. We have a maximum PO2.M. Lang: Would you re-word that please?B. Gilliam: Recognize NOAA oxygen limits in teaching exposures.M. Lang: Oxygen exposure limits.T. Mount: Tracking oxygen clocks may be based on NOAA exposure limits. We have repetitivetracking now thanks to Dr. Bill Hamilton and some other people who have been using divecomputers. The way the NOAA table is written, it doesn't explicitly imply that. It doesn't185
Rubicon Foundation Archive (http://rubicon-foundation.org)Lang (ed.): DAN Nitrox Workshop, Divers Alert Network, November 2000give you half times for oxygen tracking. You need to consider it because all the divecomputers use that technology. All our tables do when we plan dives. I would say changeuse of an oxygen clock based on NOAA.B. Hamilton: NOAA exposure limits. I would put oxygen clock in quotes since that's only oneway to express it.M. Lang: Concept after that?B. Hamilton: That's good, with the word concept there.D. Kesling: Add a CNS component to that just to differentiate.B. Hamilton: CNS oxygen clock.R. Moon: There's a bit of a danger in putting that down there because that implies that there is awell established relationship between time of exposure and CNS O2 toxicity, which there isnot. I'm not sure exactly what we're trying to impart by that bullet. I would say the opposite:Teach the fact that CNS O2 toxicity can be sudden and unexpected rather than predictablebased upon time of exposure.D. Kerem: I second that.B. Hamilton: Michael, why don't you just add that on? CNS oxygen toxicity can occur suddenlyand unexpectedly. I entirely agree with Richard Moon.M. Lang: Okay Richard?R. Moon: Fine.M. Lang: Good. Can everybody agree to that? Hands up, wait, hands down.D. Dinsmore: Does everybody teach the oxygen clock or do they teach the NOAA exposurelimits?B. Hamilton: They're taught simultaneously.M. Lang: Let's find that out.T. Mount: IANTD teaches the clock.J. Hardy: SSI, yes.B. Gilliam: TDLyes.E. Betts: ANDLyes.B. Wienke: NAUI, yes.D. Richardson: PADI, yes.M. Lang: There's the answer. Any other bullets?B. Gilliam: Do we have a consensus on the 40 percent oxygen-cleaning rule?M. Lang: We need to address the 40 percent rule.E. Betts: I certainly would suggest a 40 percent value. We need to say something about itsapplicability. I am opposed to the broad stroke approach that it's applicable for everything.That's the problem that's occurring with the ignition fires with regard to pumps, compressors,and filtration equipment. If we're going to make a statement about 40 percent, I don't thinkit's prudent to say it's a 40 percent rule across the board that applies to "recreational diving."J. Hardy: I suggest that we separate the user from the provider. Would that help out then?We're more concerned about the end user and what happens to the end user. For theprofessionals in the dive store, as Sergio separated those two entities, apparently the risks aredifferent. The volume handled is different. Would that satisfy your needs to talk only aboutthe end user as a recommendation to the field?E. Betts: I'm concerned about the liability of our ANDI dealers as we distribute enriched air as aproduct. There's a liability involved with dispensing procedures and proper gas analysis. For186
Page 1 and 2:
Rubicon Foundation Archive (http://
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134: Rubicon Foundation Archive (http://
Page 183: Rubicon Foundation Archive (http://
show all

Nitrox workshop dings - Divers Alert Network

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?