Hi Nick,
Something strange happened to my MACDIVE... The software usually gives me a SAC rate calculation based on the Max Depth of a dive. However, last Sunday I imported a dive and all the SAC rates changed. I did some math ( ! ) and figured that it was using Average Depth instead of Max Depth to calculate the SAC number. This is strange since I had previously downloaded dives from this same Gekko to my Mac with nothing changing, even after upgrading to 2.0.5.
Is this normal? I'm used to calculating SAC from Max Depth and my planning is done accordingly. I'd love to have this "fixed" or perhaps you could add another column for SAC (Max Depth) vs SAC (Avg Depth)? Or (fingers crossed) I hope my database isn't corrupt...
HELP!
Thanks!
Max
Average Depth vs Max Depth used for SAC rate
- miraclemax
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 11:01 pm
- Dive Computer: xDeep Black EANx
- Location: Montreal, Canada
- Contact:
Average Depth vs Max Depth used for SAC rate
Best dive ever :
My Dos Ojos Cenote Dive : http://vimeo.com/22533046
My Dos Ojos Cenote Dive : http://vimeo.com/22533046
- nick
- Site Admin
- Posts: 4376
- Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 8:33 am
- Dive Computer: Shearwater Teric
- Contact:
Re: Average Depth vs Max Depth used for SAC rate
SAC has always been based on the average depth.
Re: Average Depth vs Max Depth used for SAC rate
Average or weighted average? If I do a 60 minute dive and 40 minutes of it is spent at 60 feet and the balance on descent, ascent and safety stop, I wouldn't expect that to be calculated as all being at 30 feet for SAC purposes. Weighted average, based on sample counts at depth, when available, right?nick wrote:SAC has always been based on the average depth.
--Richard
- nick
- Site Admin
- Posts: 4376
- Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 8:33 am
- Dive Computer: Shearwater Teric
- Contact:
Re: Average Depth vs Max Depth used for SAC rate
No, the overall average.
Re: Average Depth vs Max Depth used for SAC rate
Calculating SAC with the maximum depth makes no sense at all. Imaging a touch and go dive where you spend very little time at the maximum depth, and the majority of time at shallow depth. The resulting value would be overestimated compared to the real value. Using the average depth gives a much more realistic value.
In practice there is no difference between the two, because most dive computers have a constant samplerate throughout the dive and hence the weights (which would be equal to the length of each sample) are constant and drop out of the equation.rlmalisz wrote:Average or weighted average?
I'm pretty sure you use a real average (weighted or not), and not something stupid like maxdepth/2. I think this is what rlmalisz was asking for.nick wrote:No, the overall average.
libdivecomputer developer
Support the libdivecomputer project with a donation!
http://www.libdivecomputer.org/donate.html
Support the libdivecomputer project with a donation!
http://www.libdivecomputer.org/donate.html