Mandatory safety stop vs. deco

[William Perry]

On Sep 9, 2013, at 11:21 AM, Miika Turkia <miika.turkia at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 6:11 PM, Dirk Hohndel <dirk at hohndel.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-09-09 at 18:07 +0300, Miika Turkia wrote:
> > I have one dive that according to libdivecomputer/subsurface goes into
> > deco. However, the dive was actually a non-deco dive with a bit of
> > extra excitement caused by heavy up current (roughly from 13 to 8
> > meters in 10 seconds). Due to the rapid ascent, Suunto gave a
> > mandatory safety stop that is currently considered as going into deco.
> 
> That's almost a philosophical question...
> 
> If a safety stop is "mandatory", how is it different from a "deco stop"?
> 
> To my understanding, when one is in deco, some tissues have absorbed too much nitrogen to safely ascent to surface. In  case of rapid ascent such over-saturation has not happened. (correct me if I am wrong)

The over-saturation at depth is not the only thing that could throw you into a situation where you would end up with a soft ceiling / deco.  What probably happened is that the suunto model said you were not super-saturated @ 13 meters.  But take those same tissues up to 8 meters and some of them ARE super-saturated.  Add in a rapid ascent causing micro-bubbles and the suunto model gets very unhappy very quickly.

-Bill

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.hohndel.org/pipermail/subsurface/attachments/20130909/eea9289a/attachment.html>