Understanding M-values

By Erik C. Baker, P.E.

In conjunction with an array of hypothetical "tissue" compartments, gas
loading calculations and M-values compose the major elements of the
dissolved gas or "Haldanian" decompression model. Through the use of
widely-available desktop computer programs, technical divers rely on this
model for their decompression safety. A good understanding of M-values
can help divers to determine appropriate conservatism factors and evaluate
the adequacy of various decompression profiles for a particular dive.

What are M-values?

The term "M-value"

was coined by Robert D. Workman in the
mid-1960's when he was doing
decompression research for the U.S. Navy
Experimental Diving Unit (NEDU).
Workman was a medical doctor with the
rank of Captain in the Medical Corps of the
U.S. Navy.
The "M" in M-value stands for
"Maximum." For a given ambient
pressure, an M-value is defined as the
maximum value of inert gas pressure
(absolute) that a hypothetical "tissue"
compartment can "tolerate" without
presenting overt symptoms of
decompression sickness (DCS). M-values
are representative limits for the tolerated
gradient between inert gas pressure and
ambient pressure in each compartment.
Other terms used for M-values are "limits
for tolerated overpressure," "critical
tensions," and "supersaturation limits."
The term M-value is commonly used by
decompression modelers.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
In the dissolved gas or "Haldanian"
decompression model, gas loading
calculations for each hypothetical "tissue"
compartment are compared against
"ascent limiting criteria" to determine the
safe profile for ascent. In the early years
of the model, including the method
developed by John S. Haldane in 1908,
the ascent limiting criteria was in the form
of "supersaturation ratios." For example,
Haldane found that a diver whose
"tissues" were saturated by breathing air
at a depth of 33 fsw could ascend directly
to the surface (sea level) without
experiencing symptoms of DCS. Because
the ambient pressure at 33 fsw depth is
twice that at sea level, Haldane
concluded that a ratio of 2:1 for tolerated
overpressure above ambient could be
used as the ascent limiting criteria. This
approximate

ratio was used by Haldane to develop the

first decompression tables. In later years,
and up until the 1960's, other ratios were
used by various modelers for the different
half-time compartments. Most of the U.S.
Navy decompression tables were
calculated using this supersaturation ratio
method.
However, there was a problem.
Many of the tables produced by this
method were deficient when it came to
deeper and longer dives. Robert
Workman began a systematic review of
the decompression model including
previous research that had been
performed by the U.S. Navy. He arrived at
some important conclusions. First of all,
he recognized that Haldane's original ratio
of 2:1 (based on air) was really a ratio of
1.58:1 if you considered only the partial
pressure of the inert gas in air - nitrogen.
[By that time in decompression research it
was known that oxygen was not a
significant factor in DCS; it was the inert
gases like nitrogen and helium
that were the culprits.] In his review of the
research data, Workman found that the
"tissue ratios" for tolerated overpressure
varied by half-time compartment and by
depth. The data showed that the faster
half-time compartments tolerated a greater
overpressure ratio than the slower
compartments, and that for all
compartments the tolerated ratios became
less with increasing depth. Then, instead
of using ratios, Workman described the
maximum tolerated partial pressure of
nitrogen and helium for each compartment
at each depth as the "M-value." Next, he
made a "linear projection" of these Mvalues as a function of depth and found
that it was a reasonably close match to the
actual data. He made the observation that
"a linear projection of M-values is useful
for computer programming as well."

THE WORKMAN M-VALUES

Workman's presentation of M-values in the
form of a linear equation was a significant
step in the evolution of the dissolved gas
decompression model. His M-values
established the concept of a linear
relationship between depth pressure [or
ambient pressure] and the tolerated inert
gas pressure in each "tissue"
compartment. This concept is an
important element of the present-day
dissolved gas model as applied by a
variety of modelers.
Workman expressed his M-values
in the slope-intercept form of a linear
equation (see Figure 1). His surfacing
value was
designated MO [pronounced "M naught"].
This was the intercept value in the linear
equation at zero depth pressure (gauge) at
sea level. The slope in the linear equation
was designated M [pronounced "delta M"]
and represented the change in M-value
with
change in depth pressure.

THE BUHLMANN M-VALUES

Professor Albert A. Buhlmann, M.D.,
began doing decompression research in
1959 in the Laboratory of Hyperbaric
Physiology at the University Hospital in
Zurich, Switzerland. Buhlmann continued
his research for over thirty years and
made a number of important contributions
to decompression science. In 1983 he
published the first edition (in German) of a
successful book entitled Decompression Decompression Sickness. An English
translation of the book was published in
1984. Buhlmann's book was the first
nearly complete reference on making
decompression calculations that was
widely-available to the diving public. As a
result, the "Buhlmann algorithm" became
the basis for most of the world's in-water
decompression computers and do-ityourself desktop computer programs.
Three more editions of the book were
published in German in 1990, 1993, and
1995 under the name Tauchmedizin or
"Diving Medicine." [An English translation
of the 4th Edition of the book (1995) is in
preparation for publication].
Buhlmann's method for
decompression calculations was similar to
the one that Workman had prescribed.

This included M-values which expressed a

linear relationship between ambient
pressure and tolerated inert gas pressure
in the hypothetical "tissue" compartments.
The major difference between the two
approaches was that Workman's M-values
were based on depth pressure (i.e.
diving from sea level) and Buhlmann's Mvalues were based on absolute pressure
(i.e. for diving at altitude). This makes
sense, of course, since Workman was
concerned with the diving activities of the
U.S. Navy (presumably performed at sea
level) while Buhlmann was concerned with
diving activities in the high mountain lakes
of Switzerland.
Buhlmann published two sets of
M-values which have become well-known
in diving circles; the ZH-L12 set from the
1983 book, and the ZH-L16 set(s) from the
1990 book (and later editions). The "ZH"
in these designations stands for "Zurich"
(named after his hometown), the "L"
stands for "limits," and the "12" or "16"
represents the number of pairs of
coefficients (M-values) for the array
of half-time compartments for helium and
nitrogen. The ZH-L12 set has twelve
pairs of coefficients for sixteen half-time
compartments and these M-values were
determined empirically (i.e. with actual
decompression trials). The ZH-L16A set
has sixteen pairs of coefficients for sixteen
half-time compartments and these Mvalues were mathematically-derived from
the half-times based
on the tolerated surplus volumes and
solubilities of the inert gases. The ZHL16A set of M-values for nitrogen is further
divided into subsets B and C because the
mathematically-derived set A was found
empirically not to be conservative enough
in the middle compartments. The modified
set B (slightly more conservative) is
suggested for table calculations and the
modified set C (somewhat more
conservative) is suggested for use with inwater decompression computers which
calculate in real-time.
Similar to the Workman M-values,
the Buhlmann M-values are expressed in
the slope-intercept form of a linear
equation (see Figure 1). The Coefficient a
is the intercept at zero ambient pressure
(absolute) and the Coefficient b is the
reciprocal of the slope. [Note: the
Coefficient a does not imply that humans

can withstand zero absolute pressure!

This is simply a mathematical requirement
for the equation. The lower limit for
ambient pressure in the application of the

Buhlmann M-values is on the order of 0.5

atm/bar.]

Pressure Graph: Workman-style M-values

versus Bhlmann-style M-values
Li

ne

ine

ue

eL

-v

al

va
lu

an

Man

Am

y
x

hl

rkm
Wo

Compartment Inert Gas Pressure, absolute

Surface Pressure at Sea Level

bi

P
nt

su
s
e

re

Li

ne

y
x

slope = 1.0

Workman
slope

M=

Workman M O = intercept at
zero depth pressure (gauge)

y
x

Bhlmann Coefficient b =
reciprocal of slope (1/b = slope)
Bhlmann Coefficient a = intercept at
zero ambient pressure (absolute)
0
0

Ambient Pressure, absolute

Figure1
many custom decompression tables in use
by technical divers.

DCAP AND DSAT M-VALUES

Many technical divers will recognize the
11F6 set of M-values used by Hamilton
Research's Decompression Computation
and Analysis Program (DCAP). This set
or "matrix" of M-values was determined by
Dr. Bill Hamilton and colleagues during
development of new air decompression
tables for the Swedish Navy. In addition to
air diving, the 11F6 M-values have worked
well for trimix diving and are the basis for

Many sport divers are familiar with

the Recreational Dive Planner (RDP)
distributed by the Professional Association
of Diving Instructors (PADI). The Mvalues used for the RDP were developed
and tested by Dr. Raymond E. Rogers, Dr.
Michael R. Powell, and colleagues with
Diving Science and Technology Corp.
(DSAT), a corporate affiliate of PADI. The
DSAT M-values were empirically verified
with extensive in-water diver testing and
Doppler monitoring.

COMPARISON OF M-VALUES
Tables 1 thru 4 present a comparison of
M-values for nitrogen and helium between
the various Haldanian decompression
algorithms
discussed in this article. All M-values are
presented in Workman-style format. An
evolution or refinement in the M-values is
evident from Workman (1965) to
Buhlmann (1990). The general trend has

been to become slightly more

conservative. This trend reflects
a more intensive validation process
(empirical testing) and includes the use of
Doppler ultrasound monitoring for the
presence and quantity of "silent bubbles"
(bubbles which are detectable in the
circulation but are not associated with
overt symptoms of decompression
sickness).

M-value Mathematics
Linear Equations:

y = mx + b format

x = (y - b) / m format

Workman-style:

M=

Tolerated Depth = (P - M O ) / M

Bhlmann-style:

Pt.tol. i.g. = (Pamb. / b) + a

Workman to Bhlmann
a = MO b=1/

M Depth + M O

Conversions

M Pamb. (surface at sea level)

M

CONSISTENCY OF M-VALUES
One observation that can be made about
the comparison between the M-values of
the various algorithms is that there is not a
great difference between them. In other
words, there appears to be a certain
consistency between the values
determined by various independent
researchers around the globe. This is a
good sign as it indicates that the science
has determined a relatively consistent
threshold for symptoms of decompression
sickness across the human population.

FORMAT FOR M-VALUES

M-values are often expressed in the form
of a linear equation as in the Workmanstyle or the Buhlmann-style. This format is
ideal for computer programming since it
allows the M-values to be calculated "onthe-fly" as they are needed. The linear
format permits the display of M-value lines
on the pressure graph as well.
M-values can also be expressed
in the form of a "matrix" or table. This is
simply where the M-values for each halftime compartment and each stop depth
are pre-calculated and arranged in
columns and rows. This format is useful

Pamb.tol. = (Pt.i.g. - a) b
Bhlmann to Workman
M O = a + Pamb. (surface at sea level) / b
M=1/b

for detailed comparisons and analysis.

Some of the early dive computers and
desktop computer programs used the
table format to "look up" M- values for
each stop during the calculation process.
Workman Definitions:
P = inert gas pressure (absolute)
in hypothetical "tissue"
compartment
M = tolerated inert gas pressure
(absolute) in hypothetical
"tissue" compartment
Depth = depth pressure (gauge)
measured from surface at sea
level
Tolerated Depth = tolerated depth
pressure (gauge) measured from
surface at sea level
M O = intercept at zero depth
pressure (gauge); surfacing
M-value at sea level
M = slope of M-value line

Bhlmann Definitions:
Pt.tol. i.g. = tolerated inert gas
pressure (absolute) in hypothetical
"tissue" compartment
Pt.i.g. = inert gas pressure
(absolute) in hypothetical "tissue"
compartment
Pamb. = ambient pressure (absolute)
Pamb.tol. = tolerated ambient
pressure (absolute)
a = intercept at zero ambient
pressure (absolute)
b = reciprocal of slope of
M-value line

Table 1: Comparison of M-values for Nitrogen Between Various Haldanian Decompression Algorithms
American System of Pressure Units - feet of sea water (fsw)
Bhlmann ZH-L 12
DSAT RDP
DCAP MF11F6
M-values (1983)
M-values (1987)
M-values (1988)

Workman
M-values (1965)

M Cpt HT M O
M Cpt HT
Cpt HT M O
No. min fsw slope No. min fsw slope No. min
1 2.65 111.9 1.2195
1
2

5
10

104
88

1.8
1.6

20

72

1.5

40

56

1.4

80

54

1.3

6
7
8
9

120
160
200
240

52
51
51
50

1.2
1.15
1.1
1.1

Cpt = Compartment

2
3
4
5
6
7
8

7.94
12.2
18.5
26.5
37
53
79

89.1
75.2
68.8
63.5
57.3
53.2
51.9

1.2195
1.2121
1.1976
1.1834
1.1628
1.1494
1.1236

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

114
146
185
238
304
397
503
635

51.9
50.2
50.2
47.3
42.6
42.6
42.6
42.6

1.1236
1.0707
1.0707
1.0593
1.0395
1.0395
1.0395
1.0395

HT = Half-time

MO
fsw

1
2

5
10

99.08
82.63

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

20
30
40
60
80
100
120
160
200
240

66.89
59.74
55.73
51.44
49.21
47.85
46.93
45.78
45.07
44.60

13 360 43.81
14 480 43.40

Cpt HT
No. min

Bhlmann ZH-L16
M-values (1990)
A
B
C
MO
MO
MO
fsw
fsw
fsw

MO
M Cpt HT
fsw slope No. min

1
2

5 104.0 1.30
10 80.5 1.05

25

62.3 1.08

55

48.6 1.06

95

45.4 1.04

6
7

145 44.7 1.02

200 44.1 1.01

8 285 44.0
9 385 44.0
10 520 44.0

1.0
1.0
1.0

M
slope

1
1b
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

4.0
5.0
8.0
12.5
18.5
27.0
38.3
54.3
77.0
109

106.4
97.3
83.2
73.8
66.8
62.3
58.5
55.2
52.3
49.9

106.4
97.3
83.2
73.8
66.8
62.3
57.4
54.1
51.7
49.9

106.4
97.3
83.2
73.8
66.8
60.8
55.6
52.3
50.1
48.5

1.9082
1.7928
1.5352
1.3847
1.2780
1.2306
1.1857
1.1504
1.1223
1.0999

10
11
12
13
14
15
16

146
187
239
305
390
498
635

48.2
46.8
45.6
44.5
43.5
42.6
41.8

48.2
46.8
45.6
44.1
43.5
42.6
41.8

47.2
46.1
45.1
44.1
43.1
42.4
41.8

1.0844
1.0731
1.0635
1.0552
1.0478
1.0414
1.0359

11 670 43.5 1.0

M O = Surfacing M-value (sea level = 1 atm = 33 fsw = 1.01325 bar)

M = slope of M-value line

Table 2: Comparison of M-values for Nitrogen Between Various Haldanian Decompression Algorithms
European System of Pressure Units - meters of sea water (msw)
DSAT RDP
DCAP MM11F6
Bhlmann ZH-L 12
M-values (1988)
M-values (1987)
M-values (1983)

Workman
M-values (1965)

Cpt HT M O
M Cpt HT M O
M Cpt HT
No. min msw slope No. min msw slope No. min
1 2.65 34.2 1.2195

MO
msw

1
2

5
10

30.42
25.37

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

20
30
40
60
80
100
120
160
200
240

20.54
18.34
17.11
15.79
15.11
14.69
14.41
14.06
13.84
13.69

1
2

5 31.7
10 26.8

1.8
1.6

20 21.9

1.5

40 17.0 1.4

80 16.4 1.3

6
7
8
9

120
160
200
240

15.8
15.5
15.5
15.2

1.2
1.15
1.1
1.1

2
3
4
5
6
7
8

7.94
12.2
18.5
26.5
37
53
79

27.2
22.9
21.0
19.3
17.4
16.2
15.8

1.2195
1.2121
1.1976
1.1834
1.1628
1.1494
1.1236

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

114
146
185
238
304
397
503
635

15.8
15.3
15.3
14.4
12.9
12.9
12.9
12.9

1.1236
1.0707
1.0707
1.0593
1.0395
1.0395
1.0395
1.0395

Cpt = Compartment

HT = Half-time

13 360 13.45
14 480 13.33

Cpt HT M O
M Cpt HT
No. min msw slope No. min

1
2

5 31.90 1.30
10 24.65 1.05

25 19.04 1.08

55 14.78 1.06

95

6
7

145 13.66 1.02

200 13.53 1.01

13.92 1.04

8 285 13.50 1.0

9 385 13.50 1.0
10 520 13.40 1.0

M-value sets can be classified into two

categories, no-decompression sets and
decompression sets. No-decompression
M-values are surfacing values only. The
DSAT RDP M-values are an example.
No-stop dive profiles are designed so that
the calculated gas loadings in the
compartments do not exceed the surfacing
M-values. This allows for direct ascent to
the surface at any time during

M
slope

1
1b
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

4.0
5.0
8.0
12.5
18.5
27.0
38.3
54.3
77.0
109

32.4
29.6
25.4
22.5
20.3
19.0
17.8
16.8
15.9
15.2

32.4
29.6
25.4
22.5
20.3
19.0
17.5
16.5
15.7
15.2

32.4
29.6
25.4
22.5
20.3
18.5
16.9
15.9
15.2
14.7

1.9082
1.7928
1.5352
1.3847
1.2780
1.2306
1.1857
1.1504
1.1223
1.0999

10
11
12
13
14
15
16

146
187
239
305
390
498
635

14.6
14.2
13.9
13.5
13.2
12.9
12.7

14.6
14.2
13.9
13.4
13.2
12.9
12.7

14.3
14.0
13.7
13.4
13.1
12.9
12.7

1.0844
1.0731
1.0635
1.0552
1.0478
1.0414
1.0359

11 670 13.30 1.0

M O = Surfacing M-value (sea level = 10 msw = 1.0 bar)

M-VALUE CHARACTERISTICS

Bhlmann ZH-L16
M-values (1990)
A
B
C
MO
MO
MO
msw
msw
msw

M = slope of M-value line

the dive. Some no-decompression

algorithms account for ascent and descent
rates in the calculations.
Decompression M-values are
characterized by having a slope parameter
which determines the change in M-value
with change
in ambient pressure. The value of the
slope parameter will vary depending on
the half-time of the hypothetical "tissue"
compartment. Generally, faster half-time
compartments will have a greater slope
than slower half-time compartments. This

reflects the observation that faster

Table 3: Comparison of M-values for Helium
Between Various Haldanian Decompression Algorithms
American System of Pressure Units - feet of sea water (fsw)
Workman
Bhlmann ZH-L12
Bhlmann ZH-L16A
M-values (1965)
M-values (1983)
M-values (1990)
Cpt HT M O
M Cpt HT M O
M Cpt HT
MO
M
No. min fsw slope No. min fsw slope No. min fsw slope
1 1.0 111.9 1.2195 1 1.51 134.5 2.3557
1b 1.88 121.9 2.0964
2 3.0 89.1 1.2195 2 3.02 102.5 1.7400
3 4.6 75.2 1.2121 3 4.72 89.4 1.5321
1 5 86 1.5
4 7.0 68.8 1.1976 4 6.99 79.7 1.3845
2 10 74 1.4
5 10 63.5 1.1834 5 10.21 73.6 1.3189
6 14 57.3 1.1628 6 14.48 68.2 1.2568
7 20 53.2 1.1494 7 20.53 63.7 1.2079
3 20 66 1.3
8 30 51.9 1.1236 8 29.11 59.8 1.1692
9 43 51.9 1.1236 9 41.20 57.1 1.1419
4 40 60 1.2
10 55 52.4 1.0799 10 55.19 55.1 1.1232
5 80 56 1.2 11 70 52.4 1.0799 11 70.69 54.0 1.1115
12 90 52.4 1.0799 12 90.34 53.3 1.1022
6 120 54 1.2 13 115 52.4 1.0799 13 115.29 53.1 1.0963
7 160 54 1.1 14 150 52.4 1.0799 14 147.42 52.8 1.0904
8 200 53 1.0 15 190 52.4 1.0799 15 188.24 52.6 1.0850
9 240 53 1.0 16 240 52.4 1.0799 16 240.03 52.3 1.0791
Cpt = Compartment
HT = Half-time
M = slope of M-value line
M O = Surfacing M-value (sea level = 1 atm = 33 fsw = 1.01325 bar)

Table 4: Comparison of M-values for Helium

Between Various Haldanian Decompression Algorithms
European System of Pressure Units - meters of sea water (msw)
Bhlmann ZH-L16A
Workman
Bhlmann ZH-L12
M-values (1990)
M-values (1965)
M-values (1983)
M Cpt HT
Cpt HT M O
M Cpt HT M O
MO
M
No. min msw slope No. min msw slope No. min msw slope
1 1.0 34.2 1.2195 1 1.51 41.0 2.3557
1b 1.88 37.2 2.0964
2 3.0 27.2 1.2195 2 3.02 31.2 1.7400
1 5 26.2 1.5
3 4.6 22.9 1.2121 3 4.72 27.2 1.5321
4 7.0 21.0 1.1976 4 6.99 24.3 1.3845
2 10 22.5 1.4
5 10 19.3 1.1834 5 10.21 22.4 1.3189
6 14 17.4 1.1628 6 14.48 20.8 1.2568
3 20 20.1 1.3
7 20 16.2 1.1494 7 20.53 19.4 1.2079
8 30 15.8 1.1236 8 29.11 18.2 1.1692
4 40 18.3 1.2
9 43 15.8 1.1236 9 41.20 17.4 1.1419
10 55 15.9 1.0799 10 55.19 16.8 1.1232
5 80 17.0 1.2 11 70 15.9 1.0799 11 70.69 16.4 1.1115
12 90 15.9 1.0799 12 90.34 16.2 1.1022
6 120 16.4 1.2 13 115 15.9 1.0799 13 115.29 16.1 1.0963
7 160 16.4 1.1 14 150 15.9 1.0799 14 147.42 16.1 1.0904
8 200 16.1 1.0 15 190 15.9 1.0799 15 188.24 16.0 1.0850
9 240 16.1 1.0 16 240 15.9 1.0799 16 240.03 15.9 1.0791
Cpt = Compartment
HT = Half-time
M = slope of M-value line
M O = Surfacing M-value (sea level = 10 msw = 1.0 bar)

compartments tolerate greater

overpressure than slower compartments.
If the slope is greater than 1.0 then the Mvalue line "expands" on the pressure
graph and that compartment will tolerate
greater overpressure gradientswith
increasing depth. A fixed slope of 1.0
means that the compartment will tolerate
the same overpressure gradient
regardless of depth. In all cases, the
value of the slope can never be less than
1.0. Otherwise, the M-value line would
cross under the ambient pressure line at
some point and this would represent an
"illogical" situation whereby the
compartment could not tolerate even the
ambient pressure.

THE AMBIENT PRESSURE LINE

The ambient pressure line is an allimportant reference line on the pressure
graph. Passing through the origin, it has a
slope of 1.0 and simply represents the

collection of points where the

compartment inert gas loading will be
equal to ambient pressure. This is
important because when the inert gas
loading in a compartment goes above the
ambient pressure line, an overpressure
gradient is created. An M-value line
represents the established limit for
tolerated overpressure gradient above the
ambient pressure line.

THE DECOMPRESSION ZONE

The "decompression zone" is the region
on the pressure graph between the
ambient pressure line and the M-value line
(see Figure 3). Within the context of the
dissolved gas model, this zone represents
the functional area in which
decompression takes place. In theory, a
positive gradient above ambient pressure
is desireable in order for a compartment to
"off-gas" or "decompress." In some
instances, such as with a high fraction of
oxygen in the mix, a compartment will be
able to off-gas even though the total inert
gas partial pressure is less than ambient
pressure. An "efficient" decompression
profile is characterized by leading
compartment gas loadings which plot
within the decompression zone. The gas
loadings for various half-time
ompartments will cross into and then
out of the decompression zone during the
decompression profile depending upon
which compartment is "leading" or
"controlling" at the time. Generally, the
faster compartments will cross into the
decompression zone first and be leading
(gas loadings closest to M-value lines) and
then the rest of the decompression profile
will be controlled by the slower
compartments in sequence.

MULTIPLE INERT GASES

Present-day dissolved gas models employ
a concept for multiple inert gases which
states that the total inert gas pressure in a
hypothetical "tissue" compartment is the
sum of the partial pressures of the inert
gases present in the compartment, even
though the various inert gases each have
a different half-time for that compartment.
Mixed gas decompression
algorithms must deal with more than one
inert gas in the breathing mix, such as
helium and nitrogen in trimix. M-values for
this situation are handled differently by the

An M-value Concept: A solid line drawn through a fuzzy, gray area;

a representative threshold beyond which a high frequency of symptoms
of decompression sickness (DCS) can be expected in a majority of divers
Bubbles

Symptomatic
Bubbles

Time

Risk

Less
Deco
Time

More
Risk

Massive
Symptoms
Limited
Symptoms

M-value
Line
Safety Margin*

DCS
Symptoms

"Silent"
Bubbles

Actual
Profile
No
Symptoms

More
Deco
Time

Less
Risk

Ambient
Pressure
Line
* varies according to individual disposition, physical condition, acceptable risk, etc.

various algorithms. Some methodologies

use the same M-values for both nitrogen
and helium; usually they are based on the
M-values for nitrogen. In the Buhlmann
algorithm, an intermediate M- value is
calculated which is an adjustment between
the separate M-values for nitrogen and
helium based on the proportion of these
inert gases present in the compartment.
In the M-value linear equation, the
Coefficient a (He+N2) and the Coefficient
b (He+N2) are computed in accordance
with the partial pressures of helium (PHe)
and nitrogen (PN2) as follows:
a (He+N2) = [a (He)PHe + a (N2)PN2] /
[PHe + PN2];
b (He+N2) = [b (He)PHe + b (N2)PN2] /
[PHe + PN2].

WHAT DO M-VALUES
REPRESENT?
A misconception among some divers is
that M-values represent a hard line
between "getting the bends" and "not
getting the bends." This might explain why
some divers routinely push the limits of
their tables or dive computer. The
experience of diving medicine has shown
that the established limits (M-values) are
sometimes inadequate. The degree of
inadequacy is seen to vary with the
individual and the situation. Accordingly, it
may be more appropriate to describe an
M-value as "a solid line drawn through a
fuzzy, gray area" (see Figure 2). The
reasons for this lack of definitude involve
complex human physiology, variations
among individuals, and predisposing
factors for decompression sickness.

Overall, the dissolved gas model

has worked well for divers and the
knowledge base has continued to grow.
For example, it was originally presumed
that all inert gas had to remain dissolved in
solution and that any bubbles were
indicative of DCS. However, we now
know that silent bubbles are present even
during symptom-free dives. Thus, the
reality is that there is a combination of two
conditions during a dive - most of the inert
gas presumably in solution and some of
the inert gas out of solution as bubbles.
An M- value, therefore, represents not only
a tolerable overpressure gradient, but a
tolerable amount of bubbles as well. Mvalues are empirically verified, meaning
that actual decompression trials are
carried out with human subjects. These
tests are conducted with a relatively small
number of subjects intended to represent
the much larger population of divers.
Even though good data is obtained about
the approximate threshold for symptoms of
decompression sickness (M-values), this
process cannot accurately predict or
guarantee an absolute threshold for
everyone. Also, we know from experience
that certain factors are predisposing for
decompression sickness: lack of physical
conditioning, fattiness, fatigue,
drugs/alcohol, dehydration, over-exertion,
very cold water, open patent foramen
ovale (PFO), etc. Individual susceptibility
can vary on a daily basis as well.

M-VALUES AND
CONSERVATISM
Limited symptoms, if any, and a
reasonably low level of risk are associated

Pressure Graph: M-value Relationships

y

Lin

t e
e n in
b i re L
Amssu
e
Pr

-v
a lu
e

"Decompression Zone"
is between
lines

Surface Pressure

Compartment Inert Gas Pressure, absolute

inert gas
loading for
typical deco
profile

M-value
Gradient
Inert Gas
Pressure
Gradient

M-value

Safety
Margin

Inert Gas Pressure

with M-values. This criteria, however, may

not be entirely acceptable to all divers.
Many divers would like to be in the range
of "no symptoms" and "very low level of
risk" when it comes to their decompression
profiles. Fortunately, it is well understood
among decompression modelers and
programmers that calculations
based on the established M-values alone
cannot produce sufficiently reliable
decompression tables for all individuals
and all scenarios. This is why
decompression programs provide for a
means of introducing conservatism into
the calculations.

% M-value =

% M-value
=
Gradient

Inert Gas
Pressure
M-value
Inert Gas
Pressure
Gradient
M-value
Gradient

x 100

x 100

Some of the methodologies

include increasing the inert gas fractions
used in the calculations, applying a depth
safety factor which calculates for a
deeper-than-actual dive depth, calculating
for a longer-than-actual bottom time, and
adjusting the half-times to be asymmetrical
during off-gassing (slower). Some
programs use more than one of these
methods combined. These methodologies
for conservatism are effective when
properly applied. The degree of
"effectiveness" is usually gauged by
divers in terms of how much longer and
deeper the decompression profiles
become, and through individual
experience with the outcome of the
profiles.

M-VALUE RELATIONSHIPS
Some fundamental relationships involving
M-values and decompression calculations
are indicated on the pressure graph in
Figure 3. The Percent M-value calculation
has been used by various decompression
modelers over the years. Professor
Buhlmann, for example, evaluated many
of his decompression trials on a Percent
M-value basis and reported the data as
such in his book(s).
The Percent M-value Gradient
calculation is a measure of how far a
decompression profile has entered into the
decompression zone." 0% M-value
Gradient is at the ambient pressure line
and represents the bottom of the
decompression zone. 100% M-value
Gradient is at the M-value line and
represents the top of the decompression
zone.

Ambient Pressure, absolute

ANALYSIS OF PROFILES
Many divers would like to know precisely
what the effect is of the conservatism
factors in their desktop decompression
program(s). They realize that longer and
deeper profiles are generated with
increasing conservatism factors, but more
fundamental information
is desired.
Both the Percent M-value and
Percent M-value Gradient relationships
are useful for the analysis and evaluation
of decompression profiles. Using a
standard set of reference M-values,
different profiles can be evaluated on a
consistent basis. This includes
comparison of profiles generated by
entirely different programs, algorithms,
and decompression models.

UNIVERSAL REFERENCE
VALUES
The Buhlmann ZH-L16 M-values are
employed in most, if not all, of the desktop
decompression programs in use by
technical divers. These M-values were
developed and tested for a broad range of
ambient pressure exposures; from high
altitude diving to deep sea
diving. When used with appropriate
conservatism, they have proven to be
"reliable" for technical diving (to the extent
that something can be reliable in an
inexact science). They have become the
de facto world-wide standard that can
serve as universal reference values
for the comparison and evaluation of
decompression profiles.

Table 5: Effect of Conservatism Factors in a Commercially-Available Program on Decompression Profiles

Referenced to Bhlmann ZH-L16 M-values (ZH-L16A Helium, ZH-L16B Nitrogen)
15/40 Trimix Dive (15% O 2 / 40% He) to 250 fsw for 30 min. Deco mixes - Nitrox 36% at 110 fsw, 100% O 2 at 20 fsw

0% Conservatism Factor
Deco
Stop
(fsw)

Run
Time
(min)

Maximum *
% M-value
(Cpt No.)

Maximum *
% M-value
Gradient
(Cpt No.)

110

36

85.8% (4)

59.4% (4)

89.0% (4)
90
38
80
41
89.5% (5)
70
44
88.3% (5)
60
48
89.8% (6)
50
55
91.1% (6)
40
64
90.3% (7)
30
79
90.7% (7)
20
94
90.9% (8)
10
119
91.1% (9)
0
120
93.6% (11)
* Upon Arrival at the Stop

69.3% (4)
69.1% (4)
65.6% (5)
67.2% (6)
72.2% (6)
67.7% (7)
70.7% (7)
70.7% (8)
72.2% (9)
80.2% (11)

50% Conservatism Factor

Deco
Stop
(fsw)

Run
Time
(min)

Maximum *
% M-value
(Cpt No.)

Maximum *
% M-value
Gradient
(Cpt No.)

120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

35
38
39
41
45
49
55
64
75
95
113
144
145

81.6% (4)
84.5% (4)
79.0% (5)
82.1% (5)
83.2% (5)
82.2% (6)
83.2% (6)
83.1% (7)
83.1% (7)
84.5% (8)
84.2% (9)
85.8% (10)
88.6% (12)

47.0% (3)
55.7% (4)
39.4% (4)
46.0% (4)
49.1% (5)
42.5% (5)
45.1% (6)
44.1% (6)
42.8% (7)
46.0% (7)
47.1% (8)
51.7% (10)
62.6% (12)

It is a relatively easy task for

programmers to include Percent M-value
and Percent M-value Gradient calculations
in summary form with the decompression
profiles. Table 5 is an example of this and
shows the effect of conservatism factors
used in a commercially-available desktop
decompression program. At 0%
Conservatism Factor, the decompression
profile is in the 90% M- value range and
has entered approximately 70% into the
decompression zone (70% M-value
Gradient). It is evident that this program
employs a level of baseline conservatism
since none of the values reaches 100%.
At 50% Conservatism Factor (which is
recommended in the user's manual), the
profile is in the 85% M-value range and
has entered approximately 40-50% into
the decompression zone. At 100%
Conservatism Factor, the profile is in the
77% M-value range and has entered
approximately 20-35% into the
decompression zone. Note that the values
given in Table 5 are upon arrival the
respective stops which is the worst-case
condition. This correlates with the edges
of the "stair-steps" in the gas loading
profile on the pressure graph (see
example in Figure 3). The highest values
across all profiles are calculated upon
arrival at the surface which illustrates why
a very slow final ascent from the last
decompression stop to the surface is
always prudent.

MARGIN OF SAFETY
Using the M-value relationships and a
standard set of reference M-values, divers

100% Conservatism Factor

Deco
Stop
(fsw)
140
130
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

Run
Time
(min)
35
37
40
43
45
49
53
58
68
78
96
124
147
189
190

Maximum *
% M-value
(Cpt No.)
74.3% (4)
76.0% (4)
77.4% (4)
77.6% (4)
75.4% (5)
76.5% (6)
76.3% (6)
77.0% (6)
78.2% (7)
76.9% (7)
78.4% (8)
78.3% (8)
78.9% (9)
81.2% (11)
84.9% (13)

Maximum *
% M-value
Gradient
(Cpt No.)
29.3% (3)
31.0% (3)
33.9% (4)
35.5% (4)
22.6% (4)
26.3% (5)
20.3% (5)
22.1% (6)
24.9% (6)
17.6% (7)
22.5% (7)
22.4% (8)
24.4% (9)
32.6% (10)
46.6% (13)

can determine personal decompression

limits which are both well-defined and
transportable. The margin of safety
selected will depend on individual
disposition and prior experience
with profiles. An honest assessment of
one's fitness for decompression diving is
always in order. For example, this
author/diver (an office worker) has chosen
a personal limit of 85% M-value and 5060% M-value Gradient for typical trimix
dives.
To ensure a fixed margin of
safety, a decompression profile can be
calculated directly to a predetermined
percentage of the M- value Gradient. The
advantage of this approach is complete
consistency across the entire ambient
pressure range and precise control over
the resultant profile.

About the Author

Erik C. Baker is an electrical engineer with
an architecture/engineering firm in
Pennsylvania. He pursues research into
decompression and diving physiology as a
hobby, and has developed several
FORTRAN computer programs for
decompression
calculation and analysis. Erik is a certified
cave diver and trimix diver.

Decompression References:
Bennett PB, Elliott DH, eds. 1993. The
Physiology and Medicine of Diving.
London: WB Saunders.

Boycott AE, Damant GCC, Haldane JS.

1908. The prevention of compressed air
illness. J Hyg (London) 8:342-443.
Buhlmann, AA. 1984. DecompressionDecompression Sickness. Berlin:
Springer-Verlag.
Buhlmann, AA. 1995. Tauchmedizin.
Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Hamilton RW, Muren A, Rockert H,
Ornhagen H. 1988. Proposed new
Swedish air decompression tables. In:
Shields TG, ed.
XIVth Annual Meeting of the EUBS.
European Undersea Biomedical Society.
Aberdeen: National Hyperbaric Center.
Hamilton RW, Rogers RE, Powell MR,
Vann RD. 1994. Development and
validation of no-stop decompression
procedures for
recreational diving: The DSAT
Recreational Dive Planner. Santa Ana,
CA: Diving Science and Technology Corp.
Schreiner HR, Kelley PL. 1971. A
pragmatic view of decompression. In:
Lambertsen CJ, ed. Underwater
Physiology IV. New
York: Academic Press.
Wienke BR. 1991. Basic decompression
theory and application. Flagstaff, AZ:
Best.
Wienke BR. 1994. Basic diving physics
and applications. Flagstaff, AZ: Best.
Workman RD. 1965. Calculation of
decompression schedules for nitrogenoxygen and helium-oxygen dives.
Research Report
6-65. Washington: Navy Experimental
Diving Unit.
Workman RD. 1969. American
decompression theory and practice. In:
Bennett PB, Elliott DH, eds. The
physiology and
medicine of diving and compressed air
work. London: Bailliere, Tindall &
Cassell.x