Validation of Dive Computers: Findings and Recommendations

Rubicon Research Repository/Manakin Repository

Validation of Dive Computers: Findings and Recommendations

Show simple item record


dc.contributor.author Various en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2013-01-11T05:30:06Z
dc.date.available 2013-01-11T05:30:06Z
dc.date.issued 2012 en_US
dc.identifier.citation In: Blogg, S.L., M.A. Lang, and A. Møllerløkken, editors. 2012. Proceedings of the Validation of Dive Computers Workshop. August 24, 2011, European Underwater and Baromedical Society Symposium, Gdansk. Trondheim: Norwegian University of Science and Technology. en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://archive.rubicon-foundation.org/10155
dc.description The publication of the Proceedings of the Validation of Dive Computer Workshop is cosponsored by NTNU and the Norwegian Labour Inspection Authority. The symposium was convened by the Baromedical and Environmental Physiology Group of NTNU on August 24, 2011, at the 37th Annual Meeting of the European Underwater and Baromedical Society in Gdansk, Poland. en_US
dc.description.abstract General community-­‐specific requirements: * Accept that at present decompression sickness (DCS) is the measurable negative outcome; * Specify acceptable level of DCS risk and how it is measured; * Define window of applicability for the dive computer (DC); * A dive planner to support the DC is required; and, * Equipment functionality/functional safety must be documented and verified. Findings applicable to commercial diving: * A DC is a risk management tool. The operational risk of DCS in the recreational and scientific diving communities is no worse than previous experience with sub -­‐no-­‐ decompression diving compared to table use, primarily as the DCs are not pushed to their model or algorithm limits. There is no evidence that multi-­‐level dives with DCs are more risky than square dives following the same algorithm; * Documentation of theory (i.e., logic and equations) is required – what’s in the box; * This documentation must include methods to test the implementation of the theory in the DC; * Use a DCS-risk indicator model to validate the algorithm, or manufacturers may produce a DC with a validated and documented algorithm; * Specify platform technical requirements; and, * Develop and implement a configuration control plan. Recommendations: * The workshop advocates that a validated dive computer would be a useful tool for providing real-time decompression guidance for working divers; * A mechanism for making judgment should be part of the system; and, * Institute a Configuration Control Board to assess conformance with validation requirements, monitor DC operational performance, and specify diver education and training. en_US
dc.language.iso en en_US
dc.publisher Norwegian University of Science and Technology. en_US
dc.subject diving computer en_US
dc.subject equipment en_US
dc.subject Recommendations en_US
dc.subject community en_US
dc.subject application en_US
dc.subject occupational diving en_US
dc.subject decompression sickness en_US
dc.subject DCS en_US
dc.subject function en_US
dc.subject validation en_US
dc.subject Configuration Control Board en_US
dc.subject education en_US
dc.subject training en_US
dc.title Validation of Dive Computers: Findings and Recommendations en_US
dc.type Article en_US

Files in this item

Files Size Format View
VDC_2012_13.pdf 565.4Kb PDF View/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Browse

My Account