Referring to the "stirring" question. Our resident "experimenter"
evaluating colloidal silver generation techniques, informs me he has
encountered an acceptable substitute yielding repeatable results. He has
procured a very small, low output, aquarium pump which he employs to keep
the parent solution in a gentle circulation mode. He reports best results
when using a two (2) liter jar as his process solution container. He
employs a simple orifice-restriction technique on the suction (input) side
of the pump, to establish a gentle circulation pattern. He reports that
the cheaper pumps work just fine. Good wishes to all.Brooks Bradley.
At 08:33 AM 8/4/98 -5, you wrote:
>Bill Kingsbury wrote:
>
>> ... the bulb actually does not function as a current limiter,
>> because 25 or 40 milliamps ... is too high ...
>
>That paralells my thinking, Bill. The bulb is part of Becker's
>original design. He used salt to speed things up, so he probably
>ran higher currents than we are talking about.
>
>Using only distilled water, the bulb doesn't glow unless I'm running
>way longer than I'm comfortable with. I bet that most of what get's
>made at those higher currents is what settles out on the bottom of
>the jar a day or two later.
>
>We're measuring current and voltage while making these test batches.
>There is no reason not to use the current to decide when to stop the
>run, since, with a given electrode surface area, it is directly
>related to the concentration of silver particles/ions.
>
>> I've thought of a simple current limiting design ... 2 or 3 pairs
>> of electrodes ... increasing the center anode surface area ...
>> using larger sized .999+ silver coins and ingots, or a longer
>> length of silver wire(s) for a center anode. ... try a (nickel
>> free) stainless steel sleeve ... for a cathode, with a large silver
>> (several coins in a row?) anode positioned along the vertical
>> center line of the cylinder.
>
>Good, sensible suggestions. For that matter, just use a good
>stainless beaker for the container and connect it to serve as the
>cathode, just like some of the high voltage DC designs use.
>
>The important thing is we're beginning to think in terms of current
>per unit of surface area. This will probably be the best way we'll
>find to predict performance. Experiments with different electrode
>spacings, wetted lengths, and wire gauges will tell us a lot.
>
>HOWEVER! This first protocol needs to be as simple as possible. We
>need to start out trying to understand the behavior of a low end
>system before we'll know if we're improving things or not.
>
>> Question: Can the range of effects of the shipping of samples be
>> predicted? ... I wouldn't place any bets without at least several
>> ... tests. Could all of our experimental results become skewed or
>> compromised by introducing so many unknowns and variables ??
>
>Brrrr! I wouldn't bet either. That's why I hope our microscopists
>will duplicate our experiments so they can compare what we send them
>to the behavior they're seeing and we are describing in e-mail.
>
>If 4 or 5 of us set up the same apparatus, make the same runs, and
>compare the behaviors in detail, I'll bet we'll see a lot less
>variation than people *think* we'd see. The key will be making sure
>all the variables of the setup are identified and controlled.
>
>> I use a one quart (1 litre) bottle that can hold electrodes with 5
>> inches (125 mm) of wetted length, leaving a 1/2 inch (12 mm) gap to
>> the bottom of the bottle.
>
>These are the variables that nobody has ever tried to standardize.
>You can use just about anything to generate good CS, but for two of
>us to do the same thing requires that we agree on the details of the
>electrode length, size, and spacing, and the volume and shape of the
>container. The choice is arbitrary over a wide range!
>
>> Perhaps a larger gap between the electrode and the bottle might be
>> desirable -- to minimize any tendency to conductive silver and/or
>> silver compound plating on the bottle, etc. ?
>
>I've seen that, and I agree. You might want to shorten them a bit.
>
>> ... heating the CS during production ... condensation ... using a
>> small sheet of high temperature ... relatively inert material. ...
>> By piercing this sheet, or drilling ... electrodes can be 'held
>> fast' by pushing them through the holes ... 'Alligator clips ..
>> onto the electrode ends ...
>
>Good design. I have one holder that is the lid to the canning jars
>I'm using. The electrodes go up through a couple of small rubber
>grommets in the lid, which keeps the moister inside, and are held
>rigidly on top by a thin block of wood with holes drilled in it.
>
>I would like to identify a *really common* easy to find and make
>electrode holder design, or several such designs.
>
>However, since this first test will be at room temperature, I don't
>think condensation will hurt us just yet.
>
>> There must be a small, low cost, snap-in, analog or digital
>> 'meter component' ...
>
>Digital panel meters you can buy from most of the electronic supply
>catalogs. Radio Shack doesn't carry one any more, unfortunately, but
>they're easy to mail order. Cost $10-15.
>
>If everything works out like we hope, anyone doing this procedure
>carefully will get the same results without having to measure
>anything but the length of time. If they can follow a well documented
>and thoroughly tested procedure, they'll get predictable results.
>
>> ... 'observing' under various ambient light levels ... with
>> multiple experimenters desiring meaningful ... results, lighting
>> will at some ... point become a significant variable.
>
>OUCH! That's another very good thought. We'll have to see just how
>bad things are after our first attempts. We know better than to work
>in direct sun, but having to work in darkroom conditions would be a
>bit of a hardship. For now, let's hope it won't be that crucial.
>
>> ... what DOS or Windows freeware, and low cost circuit boards (or
>> plans), are available for 'process monitoring' and logging
>
>There are any number of single board computers and data acquisition
>boards that can be connected up to your PC to do process monitoring.
>Good for the researchers among us, but...
>
>> Of course our 'standard protocol' should not require these
>> gadgets, that would only be a 'necessity' in a manufacturing
>> engineering situation. However, this type of monitoring could be
>> extremely useful to those wanting to pursue it.
>
>Exactly.
>
>> Manual stirring is not a 'repeatable' process that can be used
>> 'blind' by multiple experimenters.
>
>The only stirring I talked about was at the *end* of the process, to
>disperse the concentrated "cloud" of cs particles that was near the
>electrodes. So there would be no need to standardise procedures.
>
>> It would be complicated to 'standardize' an automated stirrer
>
>... or stirring protocol for *during* the run. Thus I advocate just
>leaving it alone for now, while we learn what's going on. Maybe
>later, when we understand more, we can lift this restraint.
>
>> I think 'no stirring at all' is the only simple and repeatable
>> protocol that can be easily done by multiple experimenters -- if
>> they'll all agree not to stir, thereby to provide meaningful
>> (totally 'repeatable') results.
>
>We agree.
>
>>> Let's hear your input on any or all of the above and see what
>>> kind of consensus we can reach. Thanks everyone!
>
>Indeed! Thanks Bill. I think we can get started soon. I'll put forth
>"Proposed CS protocol version 1.2" shortly.
>
>Be well,
>
>Mike
>[Mike Devour, Citizen, Patriot, Libertarian]
>[[email protected] ]
>[Speaking only for myself... ]
>
>
>--
>The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver.
>
>To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to:
>[email protected] -or- [email protected]
>with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the subject: line.
>
>To post, address your message to: [email protected]
>
>List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]>
>
>
>
--
The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver.
To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to:
[email protected] -or- [email protected]
with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the subject: line.
To post, address your message to: [email protected]
List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]>
