|
|
|
|
Back to Diving Physics and Fizzyology Page 1
|
Diving Physics and "Fizzyology"
Page 2
|
|
"What it all boils down to, is that no one's
really got it figured out just yet."
- Alanis Morissette
The malady known as
Decompression Sickness, or more commonly,
the "bends", has been well-documented for many
years. Starting with early caisson workers
constructing bridges in pressurized chambers, it
was soon evident that if people breathed
compressed gas under elevated pressure for a
period of time, and then returned to normal
sea-level pressure, a wide variety of symptoms
(including fatigue, mild to severe pain in the
joints, rashes or itchy patches, dizziness,
nausea, disorientation, numbness, mild to severe
paralysis, loss of vision or hearing,
unconsciousness, and even death) often ensued.
The U.S. Navy and other organizations spent a
great deal of time and resources conducting
experiments in order to better understand the
physiological processes involved with this
mysterious syndrome. It was soon learned by
theory and empirical data that by slowing down
the rate of ascent back to surface pressure
after exposure to elevated pressure, the
symptoms could be reduced or eliminated.
A set
of "decompression tables" -- schedules that
describe slow, staged ascent patterns back to
the surface after exposures to various depths
for various lengths of time (a process called
"decompression") -- were eventually released for
use by the general diving public. Unfortunately,
no matter how "conservative" these schedules
were, they were not perfect. In many cases,
people following the schedules would suffer
decompression sickness symptoms anyway.
Moreover, a great many dives that followed
ascent patterns much less conservative
than the schedules suggested, resulted in no
decompression symptoms at all. Clearly, there
were many other factors to the decompression
"story" than simply depth and time. Thus began a
long and continuing effort to understand all the
actual factors involved, and produce a
mathematical model that was better able to
predict optimal ascent patterns (i.e,
decompression schedules). As it turns out, this
is an extraordinarily difficult undertaking.
If you ask a random, non-diving
person on the street to explain what's really
going on inside a diver's body that leads to
decompression sickness, the answer is likely to
be "I don't know".
If you ask the same question of
a typical scuba diving instructor, the answer
will likely be that nitrogen is absorbed by body
under pressure (a result of Henry's Law); and
that if a diver ascends too quickly, the excess
dissolved nitrogen in the blood will "come out
of solution" in the blood to form tiny bubbles;
and that these bubbles will block blood flow to
certain tissues, wreaking all sorts of havoc.
Pose the question to an
experienced hyperbaric medical expert, and you
will probably get an explanation of how "microbubbles"
already exist in our blood before we even go
underwater; and that ratios of gas partial
pressures within these bubbles compared with
dissolved partial pressures in the surrounding
blood (in conjunction with a wide variety of
other factors) determine whether or not these
microbubbles will grow and by how much they will
grow; and that if they grow large enough, they
may damage the walls of blood vessels, which in
turn invokes a complex cascade of biochemical
processes called the "complement system" that
leads to blood clotting around the bubbles and
at sites of damaged blood vessels; and that this
clotting will block blood flow to certain
tissues, wreaking all sorts of havoc.
You will
likely be further lectured that decompression
sickness is an unpredictable phenomenon; and
that a "perfect model" for calculating
decompression schedules will never exist; and
that the best way to calculate the best
decompression schedules is by examining
probabilistic patterns generated from reams of
diving statistics.
If, however, you seek out the
world's most learned scholars on the subject of
decompression and decompression sickness, the
top 5 or 6 most knowledgeable and experienced
individuals on the subject, the ones who
really know what they are talking about;
the answer to the question of what causes
decompression sickness will invariably be: "I
don't know". As it turns out, the random
non-diving person on the street apparently had
the best answer all along.
What follows is a very coarse
description of what seems to be going
on, and what we think might have
something to do with what causes decompression
sickness.
We can probably assume that
Henry's Law describes the nature of how gasses
actually dissolve in our blood reasonably well.
After that, however, things start to get
complicated. To begin with, the rules that apply
to oxygen are different from the rules that
apply to other gas constituents. A lot of the
oxygen that dissolves in our blood is
immediately bound by hemoglobin, the
important biomolecule that transports the
all-important oxygen throughout our bodies.
Furthermore, oxygen is constantly being
"consumed" by metabolism, so that the dissolved
concentrations are always somewhat lower than
the inspired concentrations. It is generally
assumed among diving specialists that oxygen
usually need not be considered in questions
about decompression and decompression sickness,
at least not when the inspired PO2 is
within safe limits for CNS oxygen toxicity.
Whether or not one could breathe 100% oxygen at
great depths without risk of decompression
sickness is moot, because risk of oxygen
toxicity mandates that dives to depths in excess
of about 20 feet (6 meters) should involve
mixtures containing a gas or gases other than
pure oxygen. For the purposes of this discussion
on decompression, we will only consider the
gases in the breathing mixture other than
oxygen.
|

Most divers breathe air when they go underwater.
As already discussed, this results in increased
concentrations of nitrogen dissolved in the
blood and tissues of the diver. If a diver
spends sufficient time at depth, the blood and
tissues will have elevated concentrations of
dissolved nitrogen in them.
These nitrogen
molecules are "held" in the blood by the ambient
pressure acting on the diver's body at depth
(represented by the bottom of the figure at
left). If the diver were to suddenly ascend to
the surface, the pressure which "held" the
nitrogen in solution would be greatly reduced.
In this situation, the nitrogen molecules would
either form bubbles, or (more likely) cause
pre-existing and harmlessly small "microbubbles"
in the blood to grow large enough to cause
problems.
Whether these bubbles cause harm
directly by blocking blood flow in capillaries,
or by causing clotting via the complement
system, it seems almost certain that the bubbles
are ultimately what leads to decompression
sickness.
The
solution to avoiding decompression sickness,
then, is to avoid bubble formation and/or
growth. Nitrogen does not instantaneously "fill"
a diver's body. The process of nitrogen
diffusing into the blood and tissues takes some
amount of time.
If a diver stays shallow enough,
or keeps the time at depth short enough, the
diver can usually ascend directly to the surface
without experiencing symptoms of decompression
sickness. Such dives are called
"no-decompression" dives.
When divers remain at
sufficient depth for sufficient time, however,
enough nitrogen dissolves into the blood and
tissues such that a direct return to the surface
leads to a high probability of decompression
sickness symptoms. When ascending from such
dives, divers must spend time at shallower
depths to allow the excess dissolved gas to
escape. This is called "Decompression", and is
illustrated in the figure at right.
As a diver ascends, the ambient
pressure begins to decrease. This means that the
pressure of the gas inside the lungs (and thus
the partial pressure of nitrogen in the lungs)
will also decrease. At this point, a reverse of
Henry's Law occurs: nitrogen molecules will move
from the blood and tissues into the lungs, and
will be vented from the diver with the exhaled
breath. The depth at which this decompression is
conducted is critical: it must be shallow enough
such that the PN2 in the lungs is
lower than the dissolved concentration of
nitrogen in the blood, but deep enough such that
the ambient pressure is sufficient to prevent
significant bubble growth. Usually decompression
is performed in "stages" -- at 10-foot (3-meter)
intervals. This allows the diver to
incrementally return to the surface, allowing
the excess dissolved nitrogen to escape from the
body.
|
|
It should be noted that, even
though a diver surfacing from a
"no-decompression" dive will usually not
experience symptoms of decompression sickness,
it doesn't mean that bubbles are not being
formed or are not growing in the blood. It
simply means that the bubbles do not grow large
enough to cause obvious symptoms.
Damage may
still be occurring even in the absence of
symptoms, so most divers are urged to spend some
time returning to the surface, even after
"no-decompression" dives. This practice is
referred to as "safety decompression stops", or
simply "safety stops".
The topic of decompression is
much, much more complicated than this.
Additional information can be obtained from some
of the references listed below under "Further
Reading".
|
|
Because of the
problems associated with oxygen toxicity,
nitrogen narcosis, and decompression sickness,
the maximum safe limit for breathing air is
about 200 feet (61 meters). To overcome these
problems, gas mixtures other than air should be
used. Perhaps the most severe and potentially
deadly of the limitations is CNS oxygen
toxicity. Air contains about 21% oxygen. The
maximum safe PO2 limit of 1.4 ATA is exceeded
with air when the ambient pressure is about 7
ATA, or 198 feet (60 meters). The nitrogen
narcosis at this depth has been likened to
drinking several Martinis; and, for each minute
spent at this depth breathing air, about 3 to 8
minutes are required for decompression.
|
| The first step is to solve the
CNS oxygen toxicity problem. This is actually
relatively easy: to increase the depth at which
the PO2 limit of 1.4 ATA is reached,
one need only reduce the fraction of oxygen in
the breathing gas. For example, a mixture
containing only 10% oxygen would reach a PO2
of 1.4 ATA when the ambient pressure is 14 ATA -
over 400 feet (120 meters) deep! The problem,
however, is that if the removed oxygen was
replaced by more nitrogen, the effects of
nitrogen narcosis would be increased. Thus, to
extend the maximum safe depth of diving, both
the oxygen and the nitrogen must be
reduced. The only was to do that is to introduce
another constituent to the breathing gas
mixture. That constituent is usually helium.
Helium has two fundamental advantages over
nitrogen for deep diving breathing mixtures. The
first advantage is that it does not cause
narcosis, even at very high inspired partial
pressures. The second advantage is that it is a
much smaller molecule, and therefore much
less dense.
Because gas molecules are more
closely packed together under higher pressures,
the density of the gas is increased. For
relatively large molecules, the increased gas
density can lead to a significant increase in
work of breathing. Helium is less dense at 300
feet (91 meters) than nitrogen is at sea level.
These two advantages make helium the gas of
choice for deep diving breathing mixtures.
Helium breathing mixtures generally come in
two forms: heliox -- helium and oxygen
without any nitrogen or other gas constituents;
or trimix -- a combination of three
primary gases, including helium, oxygen, and
usually nitrogen.
Heliox is more often used by
military and commercial divers, whereas trimix
is more often used by civilian "technical"
divers. Each has advantages and disadvantages,
but both achieve the same basic result: reduce
the concentration of oxygen, reduce or eliminate
the nitrogen, and reduce the overall gas
density.
Unfortunately, from the perspective of
decompression, helium is not an ideal gas for
the sorts of dive profiles most civilian deep
divers do (i.e., less than one or two hours at
depth). Because of its very small molecular
size, helium dissolves into the blood and
tissues much faster than nitrogen does.
More
dissolved helium in less dive time means lower
ratios of dive time to decompression time. If heliox or trimix were breathed for the entire
duration of the dive, including the
decompression, total dive times would be
extremely long. The rate of decompression from
deep dives using helium can be greatly increased
if, during the ascent, the breathing mixture is
changed to one that does not contain any helium.
Because most decompression time is spent at
relatively shallow depths, narcosis is not a
problem, so air would be adequate.
However, air is not an ideal decompression
gas either, because it contains so much
nitrogen. Even though the helium comes out of
the body quickly when decompressing while
breathing air, nitrogen is at the same time
entering the blood and tissues. The amount of
nitrogen added to the body can be reduced by
reducing the fraction of nitrogen in the
decompression breathing mixture.
Because oxygen
does not factor in to decompression dynamics,
the nitrogen can be replaced with oxygen.
Mixtures containing only nitrogen and oxygen,
with more than 21% oxygen, are popularly
referred to as nitrox. More and more,
recreational divers are using nitrox for dives
to moderate depths, where CNS oxygen toxicity is
not a major concern, and no-decompression times
can be extended.
For deep diving, nitrox is used
to accelerate decompression times.While nitrox
is useful for decompression at intermediate
depths, pure oxygen can be used at depths of 20
feet (6 meters) or shallower. Without any
nitrogen or helium, pure oxygen
maximizes the rate of decompression, cutting
total decompression times down dramatically.
Thus, by using different gas mixtures during
different portions of the dive, limits of
conventional scuba can be extended and
decompression can be optimized. A great deal of
additional information on these and related
topics is available in a wide variety of
publications, some of which are listed below. Divers who are interested in utilizing breathing
gas mixtures other than air are encouraged to
read as much material as possible, and to seek
out proper training in mixed-gas diving
techniques.
|
|
Note: This section
is not yet complete. More references will be
added later.
Bean, J.W. 1945. Effects of oxygen at
increased pressure. Physiol. Rev. 25:1-147.
Bennett, P.B. 1982a. Inert gas narcosis. In:
The Physiology and Medicine of Diving and
Compressed Air Work. (P.B. Bennett and D.H.
Elliot, eds), Balliere-Tindall, London. pp.
239-261.
Bennett, P.B. 1982b. The high pressure
nervous syndrome in man. In: The Physiology and
Medicine of Diving and Compressed Air Work. (P.B.
Bennett and D.H. Elliot, eds), Balliere-Tindall,
London. pp. 262-296.
Bennett, P.B. 1990. Inert gas narcosis and
HPNS. In: Diving Medicine, Second Edition (A.A.
Bove and J.C. Davis, eds.). W.B. Saunders
Company, Philadelphia. pp. 69-81.
Bennett, P.B, R. Coggin, and J. Roby. 1981.
Control of HPNS in humans during rapid
compression with trimix to 650 m (2132 ft).
Undersea Biomed. Res., 8(2): 85-100.
Bove, A.A. and J.M. Wells. 1990. Mixed gas
diving. In: Diving Medicine, Second Edition (A.A.
Bove and J.C. Davis, eds.). W.B. Saunders
Company, Philadelphia. pp. 50-58.
Clark, J.M.. 1982. Oxygen toxicity. In: The
Physiology and Medicine of Diving and Compressed
Air Work. (P.B. Bennett and D.H. Elliot, eds),
Balliere-Tindall, London. pp. 200-238.
Clark, J.M. and C.J. Lambertsen. 1971.
Pulmonary oxygen toxicity: a review. Pharmacol.
Rev. 23:37-133.
Hamilton, R.W. 1992a. Understanding special
tables: Some things you should know. aquaCorps
3(1):28-31.
Hamilton, R.W. 1992b. Rethinking oxygen
limits. technicalDIVER, v.3.2., pp. 16-19.
Hamilton, R.W. and J.T. Crea. 1993. Desktop
decompression review. aquaCorps no. 6: 11-17.
Hamilton, R.W. and D.J. Kenyon. 1990. DCAP
Plus: New concepts in decompression table
research. In: MTS: Science and Technology for a
New Ocean's Decade, Vol. 3., Marine Technology
Society, Washington, D.C.
Kindwall, E.P. 1990. A short history of
diving and diving medicine. In: Diving Medicine,
Second Edition (A.A. Bove and J.C. Davis, eds.).
W.B. Saunders Company, Philadelphia. pp. 1-8.
Lambertsen, C.J. 1978. Effects of hyperoxia
on organs and their tissues. In: Extrapulmonary
Manifestations of Respiratory Disease. Lung
Biology in Health and Disease. Vol. 8. (E.D.
Robin, ed.). Marcel Dekker, New York. pp.
239-303.
Lambertsen, C.J., J.M. Clark, R. Gelfand, et
al. 1987. Definition of tolerance to continuous
hyperoxia in man. An abstract report of
Predictive Studies. In: Underwater and
Hyperbaric Physiology IX (A.A. Bove, A.J.
Bacherach, and L.J. Greenbaum, eds), Undersea
and Hyperbaric Medical Society, Bethesda. pp.
717-735.
Menduno, M. 1992. Set theory: a look at
rigging options. aquaCorps 3(1):22-23.
Mount, T. 1993. Chapter 13. Operational
practices: Equipment configurations. In: Mixed
Gas Diving: The Ultimate Challange for Technical
Divers. (T. Mount and B. Gilliam, eds)
Watersports Publishing, Inc., San Dieago,
California. pp. 233-248.
Mount, T. and B. Gilliam (eds). 1993. Mixed
Gas Diving: The Ultimate Challange for Technical
Divers. Watersports Publishing, Inc., San Dieago,
California. 392 pp.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA). 1991. NOAA Diving Manual:
Diving for Science and Technology. Office of
Undersea Research, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, Washington, D.C.
Pyle, R.L. 1996. Section 7.9. Multiple gas
mixture diving, Tri-mix. In: Flemming, N.C. and
M.D. Max (Eds.) Scientific Diving: a general
code of practice, Second Edition. United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization (UNESCO), Paris; and Scientific
Committee of the World Underwater Federation
(CMAS), Paris, pp. 77-80.
Sharkey, P. and R.L. Pyle. 1992. The Twilight
Zone: The potential, problems, and theory behind
using mixed gas, surface-based scuba for
research diving between 200 and 500 feet. In:
Diving for Science...1992, proceedings of the
American Academy of Underwater Sciences Twelfth
Annual Scientific Diving Symposium. American
Academy of Underwater Sciences, Costa Mesa, CA.
Stone, W.C. 1989a. Deep cave diving:
Physiological factors. In: The Wakulla Springs
Project (W.C. Stone, ed.), U.S. Deep Caving
Team, Derwood, Maryland. pp. 25-53.
Stone, W.C. 1992. The case for heliox: a
matter of narcosis and economics. aquaCorps
3(1):11-16.
Thom, S.R. and J.M. Clark. 1990. The toxicity
of oxygen, carbon monoxide, and carbon dioxide.
In: Diving Medicine, Second Edition (A.A. Bove
and J.C. Davis, eds.). W.B. Saunders Company,
Philadelphia. pp. 82-94.
Yarbrough, O.D., W. Welham, E.J. Brinton and
A.R. Behnke. 1947. Symptoms of oxygen poisoning
and limits of tolerance at rest and at work. Nav.
Exp. Diving Unit Rep. 01-47.
|
Back to Diving Physics and Fizzyology Page 1
|
| By
Richard Pyle Copyright © 1997, by
Bishop
Museum |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|