[PATCHES] Two patches for dive plan

[Anton Lundin]

On 23 November, 2016 - Robert Helling wrote:

> From 404205c8f1aa37be374c2ba17acceb3541620bce Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: "Robert C. Helling" <helling at atdotde.de>
> Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 11:50:50 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Show effective gradient factors for VPMB-plans
> To: subsurface at subsurface-divelog.org
> 
> For each stop, this computes an effective gradient factor
> that gives the same ceiling. Then, it does linear regression
> to find values for GFlow and GFhigh that give a similar deco
> profile.
> 
> Note that this optimises the average gradient factor. The
> runtime however depends strongly at the gradient factor at
> the last depth. So we don't necessarily to get the runtime
> right.
> 


There's something wonkey in this patch. Try to plan a deco dive, 18/40
25min @60m with a 50% as deco gas, and then click on the VPM-B
Conservatism level spinbox. As you step it up and down the effective GF
field in the plan details just jumps all over the place.

I can provoke it into producing:

Subsurface dive plan
based on VPM-B at +1 conservatism, effective GF=25/89
Runtime: 78min

Subsurface dive plan
based on VPM-B at +1 conservatism, effective GF=18/85
Runtime: 78min


It depends if i step to +1 from +0 or from +2. Timing issue somewhere?
Weird numeric instability? 


//Anton


-- 
Anton Lundin	+46702-161604