From martin@apdiving.com Thu Oct 30 18:34:25 2008 Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 16:31:10 +0000 From: Martin Parker To: inspiration@lists.drogon.net Cc: Peter.Downs@sgs.com, AM Subject: [Inspiration] AM conclusion Dear List members,   I would like to believe this is my last correspondence regarding AM.   Sorry that the following is a bit disjointed, it's due to the number of subjects.   The intention of this email is not to further discussion - it's just a statement to let the list subscribers know where we are.   As in my emails of the 13th October stated: ( they were forwarded by Gordon as my emails didn't get to the list)   1) There is evidence that the oxygen cells and lid were fine. We are 100% confident of this. Why? Because we can see the cells' performance during several calibrations, two before that dive and others before previous days' diving.  We can see their performance over previous dives and we can see there were  c.5 calibrations after the dive and the cells met expected outputs based on the their performance before leaving Teledyne and before leaving us. Furthermore,  during the dives,  two independent oxygen controllers measured the outputs from all three cells at 10 secs intervals, that is 6 readings for every 10 secs of each dive, the readings are excellently consistent with each other. There is also proof that the cells are not current limited.   I checked with all sources regarding the batch - there were no batch issues - in fact there never has been a batch issue - apart from the excessive conformal coating which resulted in a recall in Jan 2002.   I don't need to test AM's lid. I can see how it performed.   She claims we have fudged the data in the dive - to which I responded - check it yourself. Any diver can do this, take it to a known depth and flush with known gases and then download the dive. For her test I advised she gets someone else to do it, as I am not convinced that she is healthy and I advised that they should do it with gas switched on but mouthpiece closed, (they'd have to weight the unit and sink it - simple enough task but I have received no feedback on whether that test took place or not or what the results were). As far as fudging the data in that dive - I only have a copy - AM has the original file.   Her next move is to demand the raw data. She has the raw data. She can't interpret it - that's not really my problem. The files were studied by experts, by people who interpret the data on a weekly basis. I have extracted the calibration data out for her - she now claims I have given her the wrong data.  Sorry, I can only give her what I have got - if she thinks I am cheating her - there's not much I can do about that.   2) AM wasn't happy with the oxygen control, indeed it was over-reacting to bigger PO2 drops like when she ascends and when she  does a dil flush. I also said she was exaggerating the spikes so I prompted her to show the dive.   Here I would like to prompt her to show her previous dives as well, show us where she did her 6m cell check that she claims she did. Explain to us why she used her rebreather the way she did. - to which she kept telling me she was a highly trained and highly experienced advanced rebreather diver - well, I don't care how experienced she thinks she is - I can see where she can improve her techniques - I passed that on - she can take it or leave it.   On the overshoot issue - Version 2 had a proportional control band that was only 0.05 bar wide. So if the setpoint was 1.3 and the PO2 was below 1.25 the solenoid was opened until the PO2 reached 1.25 then it would have a variable open time depending on how far the PO2 was from the setpoint. So you can imagine, the timing of the breath and the speed of breathing would have a big influence on how much O2 was added before the solenoid closed. Having said that, the spikes weren't that excessive and only lasted for a very short period. On AM's dive, these PO2 spikes were 1) nothing to do with her symptoms, as she had them before they occurred 2) there was one starting at  3mins56 - 1.3 bar, at 4mins 11 secs= 1.42, at 4 mins 30 secs = 1.30 3) the 2nd one was at 4 mins 51 secs 1.3, 5mins00 secs 1.46, at 5 mins 5secs 1.3 4) the third one was at 7 mins 54 secs = 1.3, 8 mins 10 secs= 1.5 and 8mins 16 secs =1..3 Version 4 of the software solved these nuisance spikes by enlarging the proportional control band to 0.2 bar. i.e if the setpoint is 1.3, below 1.1 the solenoid opens and stays open until the PO2 reaches 1.1 then after 3 secs it makes a decision on how long to open for depending on how close to setpoint the PO2 is.   So my advice to AM was - if you want to avoid the spikes upgrade the software. She has extracted from that there is a safety issue with the version she uses.   3) I advised - CO2 could be the underlying issue here and the unit needs to be checked for backleaks. I also advised - get medically checked out.   4) Later, AM reacted to an email sent by SGS to Gian Ameri ( remember the battery discussions?). Before anyone asks - they are separate people, I have met both of them.  In that letter it stated the CE approval is not affected but she chose to extract just the parts she wanted to.   She wanted to know why we hadn't informed our users. I understand Gian Ameri got the email Friday. A notice was sent by SGS to us last Monday that we need to make some changes to the manual and they'd like to see the changes and notify the owners of such changes by the end of November. I got back home from the USA at 11pm on Monday and with jet lag working in my favour I then read the notice forwarded to me by one of our employees and then I get to AnneMarie's email  demanding to know why we haven't informed our customers. ( She wouldn't receive notification anyway as she still hasn't registered her 2nd hand unit).   5) I don't have control over what goes on this list.  - there is only one requirement to staying on this list - don't p*ss off Gordon - because he owns it and provides this service completely free of charge. So, please if you appreciate what he does for Inspiration owners please buy him a drink when you see him.   best regards   Martin Parker Managing Director Ambient Pressure Diving Ltd MartinParker@apdiving.com www.apdiving.com Tel: +44 (0)1326 563834 Fax: +44 (0)1326 565945 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This document is strictly confidential and is intended only for use by the addressee. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or other action taken in reliance of the information contained in this e-mail is strictly prohibited. Any views expressed by the sender of this message are not necessarily those of  the company. If you have received this transmission in error, please use the reply function to tell us and then permanently delete what you have received. Ambient Pressure Diving Ltd, is registered in England. Registration Number 4118978. Registered Office:Unit 2C, Water-ma-Trout Industrial Estate, Helston, Cornwall TR13 0LW,UK.   ________________________________________________________________________________ From: asainslie@gmail.com [mailto:asainslie@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Andrew Ainslie Sent: 30 October 2008 01:30 To: AM Cc: Gordon Henderson; Martin Parker; inspiration@lists.drogon.net; Peter.Downs@sgs.com; sarah.barfield@lrqa.com Subject: Re: [Inspiration] Re: IEC 61508 AM,   Surely there comes a point, as EVERY post goes against you and NO post goes for you, that somewhere in yourhead a light goes off, and you begin  to realise who is showing bias?   There's nothing wrong with the old, unused Inspiration you borrowed without getting serviced. There's a lot wrong with your health, as documented by yourself on other userboards.   I know you'll ignore this, but perhaps repetition will wear you out. Please go away. AP will do nothing to entertain your idiocy, and nor should they. There was nothing wroong with that unit that updating the software, servicing, and changing the cells wouldn't have fixed, Your disdain for safety nearly killed you, Your endless emails are killing us.   Andrew Ainslie On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 1:42 PM, AM wrote: Gordon I am as entitled as any other user on the list to request that the manufacturer of my equipment clarifies matters regarding testing and certification of that equipment. I must advise that you are doing APD no favours by selectively censoring content addressed for their attention. APD have announced today that their apparatus does not conform to EN14143:2003. It is perfectly appropriate that a customer asks for further clarification relating to other standards. This is a serious matter. As such, you have no reasonable justification for continuing to selectively block some of my communications to the list. Disinterested parties can hit the delete key or set up a filter. You complain about posts to the lists yet allow a multitude of personally abusive, non-constructive posts directed at me, to go onto the list.  You will note that I do not respond to those. Your biased agenda is clear here. Please stop censoring my perfectly valid questions relating to equipment testing and certification.  I have copied APD's certifying agencies into this communication so they are aware of the difficulties in facilitating any sensible discussion with their client and customers. For the record, I am still awaiting APD's provision of my .CCX data. Regards AnneMarie   ----- Original Message ---- > From: Gordon Henderson > To: AM > Cc: Martin Parker ; inspiration@lists.drogon.net > Sent: Wednesday, 29 October, 2008 20:24:57 > Subject: Re: IEC 61508 > > On Wed, 29 Oct 2008, AM wrote: > > > Martin >   > > I am somewhat disappointed that some of my communications make it to the > > list and others do not.  Could you please be so kind as to clarify why > > that is? > > Why are you asking Martin this when I have already told you explicitly in > no uncertain terms why some of your posts do not reach the list. > > Tell you what, I'll post my private emaiil to you to the list. Then > everyone can see it - you're good at posting others private emails to > lists and forums, so I'm sure you won't mind me posting my email to you to > the list. > > The list is currently being moderated by me and it will remain that way > until such time as this nonsense is over and done with. And for the > record, I have replied personally to the people who's emails I have > blocked to the list so they know why. > > So-far, you have caused the best part of 200 people to unsubscribe from > the list. You are killing this list and until you stop, then I will > continue to moderate posts to the list. I have already banned you once the > last time you had a hissy fit over cells (you were diving 2 year old cells > for goodness sake!) and I am right on the verge of banning you again - if > it weren't for the fact that the truth will be known soon, you'd be banned > already. > > You are not contributing in any way to sensible discussions at all. You > make post after post full of trivial minutia which contribute nothing to a > sensible discussion. Now, it's time to put up or shutup. You know that the > full cause and effect of the standards issues, you're clutching at straws > now. > > Have you posted your dive profile yet? > > Gordon -=-=-=- [        inspiration@lists.drogon.net                                  ] [  Full list details, etc. at http://lists.drogon.net/inspiration/     ] [    To leave, put: unsubscribe inspiration in the body of an email    ] [    and send it to majordomo@lists.drogon.net                         ] -- Associate Professor, Marketing 110 Westwood Plaza Room B412 L.A., CA 90095 (C) 310 9042982