2015PubMedRequires access

Diving at altitude: from definition to practice.

Salih Murat Egi, Massimo Pieri, Alessandro Marroni

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Diving above sea level has different motivations for recreational, military, commercial and scientific activities. Despite the apparently wide practice of inland diving, there are three major discrepancies about diving at altitude: threshold elevation that requires changes in sea level procedures; upper altitude limit of the applicability of these modifications; and independent validation of altitude adaptation methods of decompression algorithms. The first problem is solved by converting the normal fluctuation in barometric pressure to an altitude equivalent. Based on the barometric variations recorded from a meteorological center, it is possible to suggest 600 meters as a threshold for classifying a dive as an "altitude" dive. The second problem is solved by proposing the threshold altitude of aviation (2,400 meters) to classify "high" altitude dives. The DAN (Divers Alert Network) Europe diving database (DB) is analyzed to solve the third problem. The database consists of 65,050 dives collected from different dive computers. A total of 1,467 dives were found to be classified as altitude dives. However, by checking the elevation according to the logged geographical coordinates, 1,284 dives were disqualified because the altitude setting had been used as a conservative setting by the dive computer despite the fact that the dive was made at sea level. Furthermore, according to the description put forward in this manuscript, 72 dives were disqualified because the surface level elevation is lower than 600 meters. The number of field data (111 dives) is still very low to use for the validation of any particular method of altitude adaptation concerning decompression algorithms.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Diving above sea level has different motivations for recreational, military, commercial and scientific activities. Despite the apparently wide practice of inland diving, there are three major discrepancies about diving at altitude: threshold elevation that requires changes in sea level procedures; upper altitude limit of the applicability of these modifications; and independent validation of altitude adaptation methods of decompression algorithms. The first problem is solved by converting the normal fluctuation in barometric pressure to an altitude equivalent. Based on the barometric variations recorded from a meteorological center, it is possible to suggest 600 meters as a threshold for classifying a dive as an "altitude" dive. The second problem is solved by proposing the threshold altitude of aviation (2,400 meters) to classify "high" altitude dives. The DAN (Divers Alert Network) Europe diving database (DB) is analyzed to solve the third problem. The database consists of 65,050 dives collected from different dive computers. A total of 1,467 dives were found to be classified as altitude dives. However, by checking the elevation according to the logged geographical coordinates, 1,284 dives were disqualified because the altitude setting had been used as a conservative setting by the dive computer despite the fact that the dive was made at sea level. Furthermore, according to the description put forward in this manuscript, 72 dives were disqualified because the surface level elevation is lower than 600 meters. The number of field data (111 dives) is still very low to use for the validation of any particular method of altitude adaptation concerning decompression algorithms.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Diving above sea level has different motivations for recreational, military, commercial and scientific activities. Despite the apparently wide practice of inland diving, there are three major discrepancies about diving at altitude: threshold elevation that requires changes in sea level procedures; upper altitude limit of the applicability of these modifications; and independent validation of altitude adaptation methods of decompression algorithms. The first problem is solved by converting the normal fluctuation in barometric pressure to an altitude equivalent. Based on the barometric variations recorded from a meteorological center, it is possible to suggest 600 meters as a threshold for classifying a dive as an "altitude" dive. The second problem is solved by proposing the threshold altitude of aviation (2,400 meters) to classify "high" altitude dives. The DAN (Divers Alert Network) Europe diving database (DB) is analyzed to solve the third problem. The database consists of 65,050 dives collected from different dive computers. A total of 1,467 dives were found to be classified as altitude dives. However, by checking the elevation according to the logged geographical coordinates, 1,284 dives were disqualified because the altitude setting had been used as a conservative setting by the dive computer despite the fact that the dive was made at sea level. Furthermore, according to the description put forward in this manuscript, 72 dives were disqualified because the surface level elevation is lower than 600 meters. The number of field data (111 dives) is still very low to use for the validation of any particular method of altitude adaptation concerning decompression algorithms.

Key concepts: Altitude (triangle), Elevation (ballistics), Decompression sickness, Sea level, Effects of high altitude on humans, Low altitude, Adaptation (eye), Meteorology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Diving at altitude: from definition to practice. — Research Paper | ScholarLens