Hello Ode, Just when I think I am beginning to understand EIS, you throw out another curve ball. At least hydrogen and oxygen are somewhat stable and uniform in distilled water.
My experience so far is that I am able to get consistent conductivity from batch to batch. My electrodes are dissolving away, so I can only assume that there is some silver present too. However, I guess the only way to know for sure is to send samples in for testing... Does Frank give discounts for multiple samples? Tom ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ode Coyote" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 2:16 AM Subject: Re: CS>Which layer of skin for silver deposit? > In the spirit of ballparks...1 to 1 isn't that far off from 1.2 to 1 > > Trems SG7 samples came out as 98.6% Ionic > http://www.silver-colloids.com/Reports/cpr21/cpr_21.html > > 13.8 uS/cm =14.6 ppm [Total silver content] [.95uS to 1 PPM ] > > 14.4 ppm ionic content. > > Since there can be many environmental reasons more or fewer particles to > form out of ions, % particulates will very likely be different from batch > to batch. > Not only that, but the particles themselves are mostly only one half to one > third Silver...so even at 15%, particles that's only 5 to 7% of that 15% > as Silver and the balance Hydrogen and/or Oxygen. > > ode > > > > At 01:17 PM 2/20/2010 -0800, you wrote: > >Hello Dick, > > > >uS is micro siemens, and is a measure of the conductivity of water. Since > >the electrodes are spaced 1 cm apart the results come out in uS/cm. > > > >Some instruments are set up to display PPM. They do this by measuring the > >conductivity of a salt solution, then multiplying it by a factor number to > >arrive at PPM. If you are measuring the same salt concentration that the > >meter was set up for, you will get reasonably accurate PPM results. > > > >Unfortunately, none of the standard calibration solutions are set up for > >EIS. > > > >Trem (SilverGen) made several batches of EIS, tested them with a uS meter, > >then sent them off for laboratory analysis. He uses a Hanna PWT meter. > >Since EIS is mostly ionic, and since the PWT meter mostly responds to ions > >rather than particles, the theory is that the uS value should be close to > >the actual PPM of silver in the solution once correction factors are > >applied. > > > >The process involves measuring the water you are starting with. When your > >batch is finished, let it sit for a day or so, then measure it and subtract > >the initial reading you got for your water. This should be an indicator of > >the ions in the solution. When Trem got the lab sample reports, he > >discovered that a "typical" batch has about 85% ions and 15% particles. He > >suggests using a 1.2 correction factor for EIS made with his generators. > > > >While fine in theory, there is some controversy over this. Ode has also had > >lab samples done, and does not find the correction factor valid. On top of > >that, the lab people say that a conductivity measurement will only provide a > >"ball park" estimate of the concentration of silver in solution, and the > >only way to know for sure is to spend the $200/sample and have it analyzed. > > > >This is why I gave my results in uS/cm rather than PPM. > > > >The main question is to determine what ion contamination can be introduced > >into the solution when you heat it up. If there is no contamination being > >introduced, then it is reasonable to believe the concentration is being > >increased by removing water from it. > > > >Tom -- The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver. Rules and Instructions: http://www.silverlist.org Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/maillist.html Off-Topic discussions: <mailto:[email protected]> List Owner: Mike Devour <mailto:[email protected]>
