How Dive Kit compares to MultiDeco

What it is

Dive Kit’s deco engine is an independent implementation of Bühlmann ZH-L16C, written from the published papers and equations rather than borrowed from another tool. To check an independent implementation, you compare it against something established. So we run the same dives through Dive Kit and through MultiDeco, a mature planner that many divers use and trust, and line the two up scenario by scenario.

MultiDeco is a useful reference because it is well-established and widely used, not because it is a gold standard. It is another model in another tool, with its own conventions, and we do not treat it as ground truth. The comparison is deliberately narrow: it shows Dive Kit loads gas, places stops, and runs the oxygen clocks the way an independent, established implementation does. Matching MultiDeco does not prove a schedule is safe, and we do not claim Dive Kit is more accurate than any other engine.

How the cross-check is run

Dive Kit and MultiDeco are run side by side on the same scenarios, with the same dive profile, gases, and settings matched as closely as the two tools allow. MultiDeco’s output is recorded by hand. Dive Kit’s output is generated automatically from the real engine by a reproducible pipeline. The results are then compared scenario by scenario.

The comparison is honest in one important way: the two tools are run at the same ascent speeds, so the comparison is fair. The deep ascent speed that decides where your first stop lands is 9 m/min in both tools.

The scenario set

The set covers 24 dive profiles, deliberately spread across the situations the engine has to handle:

• Air, nitrox, and trimix
• Single-gas and multi-gas dives
• Multi-level profiles
• Repetitive dives
• Closed-circuit rebreather (CCR) and open circuit
• Salt water and fresh water
• Sea level and altitude
• 3 m and 6 m last stops
• Gradient factors (GF) of 20/75, 30/70, 35/75, 40/80, and 50/80

Where they agree

Across the scenario set:

• Gas-switch depths match on standard deco gases (EAN50 around 21 m, oxygen around 6 m).
• The depth where your decompression obligation first begins agrees closely, within about one stop step on 25 of the 26 scenarios. One deep multi-level profile differs by more for a documented reason (the two tools read this depth at a different point in the dive), and even there the operational first stop still matches. This quantity has no stop grid, no rounding, and no gradient-factor choice in it, so it is a clean check that the tissue model loads gas the same way. It is not shown in the app.
• The oxygen clocks agree within a few percent (central nervous system oxygen toxicity (CNS) and the pulmonary oxygen-toxicity unit count (OTU)), and total time-to-surface agrees within a few minutes on the large majority of dives.

When where decompression begins, when you switch gas, and how much total decompression you owe line up this consistently with an independent engine, that is the signal the implementation is correct. The exact per-scenario figures are in the published comparison.

Where they differ, and why

The differences are deliberate, documented conventions, not disagreements about the physics. We report them rather than hide them.

Difference	Direction vs MultiDeco	Why
First listed stop	Often shallower, on deep helium dives	Dive Kit integrates off-gassing continuously through the ascent, the way a dive computer does. On helium-rich dives the deep ceiling recedes faster than the diver climbs, so Dive Kit does not list the brief, sub-minute deep stops MultiDeco shows. The total decompression is the same; it is just distributed shallower. Compare total time-to-surface, not first-stop depth.
CNS %	A little higher (more conservative)	Dive Kit uses ambient pO₂ for the CNS clock (Baker’s method). The gap shows most where a high-oxygen gas sits on a steep part of the NOAA curve. The more conservative number is intentional.
Total time at a 6 m last stop	Shorter (less conservative)	Both tools reach 6 m with the same tissue loading. Dive Kit releases the 6 m hold once it projects the leading tissue will surface at or below GF High, where MultiDeco holds the stop longer. This is the one axis where Dive Kit is the less conservative planner.
In-between trimix gas switch	Within one deco step	Dive Kit caps each gas switch by the gas’s O₂%-band PPO₂ (1.4 / 1.5 / 1.6). Intermediate mixes switch within one deco step of MultiDeco; the small residual is stop-grid snapping.
Gas density reading	Slightly higher	The two tools assume a different gas temperature in the density formula. This is a reference figure, not a safety boundary; the small offset comes from the assumed gas temperature, not the model.
Gas used (litres)	Differs	Purely a function of your breathing-rate (SAC / SRMV) setting, a personal preference, not part of the decompression model. Compare the schedule, not the litres, unless the breathing rates match.

Why MultiDeco lists more deep stops

This is the difference people notice first, and it looks alarming until you trace it. The obvious guess, that one engine is simply more conservative, turns out to be wrong. One honest limit on what we can say: we can read our engine line by line, but we cannot see MultiDeco’s code. So what follows describes exactly what the Dive Kit engine does, and what we observe in MultiDeco’s output. We do not claim to know how MultiDeco works inside.

Take the most extreme dive in the data, 80 m on 15/55 trimix (15% oxygen, 55% helium). MultiDeco puts its first stop at 48 m. Dive Kit’s first stop is at 36 m, twelve metres shallower. That looks like a real disagreement, so we traced the engine step by step to see where the two split.

They agree on where decompression starts. At the bottom, with the tissues fully loaded, Dive Kit’s GF-Low ceiling sits at 45.9 m, which rounds up to a 48 m stop on the 3 m grid. That is exactly MultiDeco’s first stop. Both engines agree on the deepest stop and the ceiling that sets it; there is no disagreement about where you first owe a stop.

They split on the way up, because Dive Kit keeps recalculating as you climb. Dive Kit does not jump from stop to stop. It recomputes all sixteen tissues every second as you ascend, the same way the computer on your wrist does while you move, so it counts the gas you breathe off during the climb itself, not only the gas you breathe off while parked at a stop. Helium leaves your fast tissues quickly, so on a 55%-helium dive the ceiling drops faster than you can climb. By the time you would reach 48, 45 or 42 m, the ceiling is already below you, so there is nothing to stop for. Dive Kit follows the dropping ceiling up without stopping, and only starts holding around 36 m, where the slower tissues take over and the ceiling settles. From 36 m it then holds longer at each stop than MultiDeco does.

So the total decompression is the same. It just sits at different depths. The way to check that nothing was skipped is the surfacing limit, not the total time: Dive Kit’s leading tissue still reaches the surface at exactly your GF-High, the same limit MultiDeco respects, and total time-to-surface comes within a minute or two either way.

The gap is biggest on deep dives with lots of helium, which is what you would expect: the more helium and the deeper the dive, the more gas your fast tissues breathe off on the way up. It is 12 m on the 80 m / 55% dive, about 6 m on the 60 m / 45% and 50 m / 35% trimix dives, and at most one 3 m step on the air and nitrox dives, which have no helium to drive it.

It is not caused by ascent speed. Both tools run at MultiDeco’s deep rate of 9 m/min. Re-running the 80 m dive at 3, 6, 9 and 12 m/min moves the first stop only between 30 and 39 m, and at the matched 9 m/min it is 36 m, still well shallower than MultiDeco’s 48 m. A faster climb lowers the total time but not the first-stop gap; the gap comes from recomputing every second, not from how fast you climb. It is also not the one-minute minimum stop: re-running with no minimum at all leaves the first stop at 36 m.

The published comparison

The full cross-reference is published and interactive, not just summarised. The interactive comparison on the Dive Kit website lets you pick any scenario and see its inputs, MultiDeco’s output, and Dive Kit’s output side by side, with a per-scenario note explaining any difference. Every scenario carries a real Dive Kit share link that loads the exact plan, so you can reproduce any schedule yourself. The comparison stands on the data, not on trust.

Behaviour and limits

• Matching MultiDeco shows the implementation is faithful to the shared Bühlmann model. It does not prove either tool’s schedule is safe to dive.
• Bühlmann is a model fitted to data, and decompression sickness is probabilistic. No deco model guarantees safety, and a clean cross-reference does not change that.
• Where the literature is settled, Dive Kit follows it and cites it. Where there is a genuine modelling choice, it makes a defensible one, documents it, and validates the result against an independent reference. The differences above are those documented choices.

Related

• How the engine works explains the model these comparisons are testing.
• The decisions that shape your schedule explains the conventions behind the differences above.
• Assumptions and limits is the consolidated list of everything the engine assumes, plus the primary sources.
• The interactive MultiDeco comparison is the published, scenario-by-scenario cross-reference.