mho = siemen, they are the same thing. Marshall
[email protected] wrote: > Thanks for clearing that up Fred. I was taught that the mho (ohm spelled > backwards) was the reciprocal of resistance. I hadn't heard of the > micro-Siemens/cm before. > > Do you check the Tyndall effect after it is filtered? I've been running it > through a coffee filter as suggested by others on the list. > > You're probably right about the specific gravity. I have the instrument that > floats in a solution to a depth determined by how "thick" the solution is. > PPM probably wouldn't register. I'll try it anyway just for fun. > > Best wishes, > Andy > > In a message dated 12/10/1999 9:14:27 AM Pacific Standard Time, > [email protected] writes: > > Sorry Andy, never know who is familiar with what - uS/cm referred to > micro-Siemens/cm, the common unit of measurement for electrical > conductivity, the reciprical of electrical resistivity! For CaCO3 the > conversion to PPM is 2uS/cm = 1 PPM. For Cs it is less then 2 but > subject to debate, I prefer 1.6uS/PPM. Basically an ohmmeter with > conversion but calibrated to compare to a one sq. cm electrode, to > measure the conductivity of one cubic cm of the solution. At $50 each > and 2% accuracy the TDS meters are a bargain, but get the PWT or > pure water tester as that has a lower range and thus is more accurate! > > For Tyndall, any beam of light is fine, a flashlight or laser pointer is OK > but I prefer the flash light as the beam is big enough to see contaminates > such as crystals or other larger particles, which will sparkle. You aim for > a fog type cloud only, as the finer the particle, the better the product, > the > more stable and thus longer storage life. > > Not sure about beer making equipment, but specific gravity would not be > measurable with the typical spigmomanometer (spelling?), as you need an > accuracy of better then 1 PPM or 0.00001%. > > [email protected] > > Andy said: Thanks for responding Fred, > > I'm confused. Is us/cm the same thing as microseconds/centimeters? Wouldn't > that be a time measurement? How can you convert that to PPM? Are TDS meters > just ohmmeters that do a conversion or is there more to it than that? > > How about the "Tyndall affect of "light dispersion"?" Can I measure that > with > the gizmos that winegrowers use out in the field to measure the sugar > content > of grape juice? I'm trying to figure this all out on a budget. > > I have some old beer making equipment. Do you think the specific gravity > will > tell me anything? > > I was planing on using my test results for quality control but I am looking > forward to hearing the results of your extreme tests. Keep us posted. > > Best wishes, > Andy > > In a message dated 12/09/1999 6:38:35 PM Pacific Standard Time, > [email protected] writes: > > Welcome Andy, > > There are a lot of expensive scientific instruments that could be used for > the > testing but for such extreme limits of testing simple stuff can be used! > > We use two separate TDS digital meters, as made by Hanna Instruments, which > measure in us/cm, which can be translated into PPM. TDS or "total dissolved > solids" measures via conductivity, what is in the solution, not settlement > , > so > it would detect agglomeration, settlement, crystallization, plate out, etc. > > We > > of course had to bring the solutions back to room temeperature, as the temp. > effect is around 1%/degree F and we went from 70 to 212F. > > We check the Tyndall affect of "light dispersion" when a strong beam of > light > is shown thru the solution and we can see the beam of light, as if shown > thru > a fog. A visual color check is also made, against part of the same batch, > in > the same size jar. > > The former is good for any time of test, even to check a year later, while > the > latter being visually subjective can only be relied on for very short term > tests, > where you can keep some of the batch to compare to! Both of these used > together provide a good low budget measure of extreme outside effects > such as freezing, heating, strong magnetic fields, strong UV light, etc. > (Our > UV light test was actually from last year, but 3 weeks at 1/2" away, which > would be equivilant to years of bright room light levels. > > The other important element to consider in simple tests, is to use the > extremes, as we did, so any effect would tend to be profound! All of these > outside forces definately have an effect, but being so trivial should not be > of a concern. There is a possibility these forces could exhibit a profound > effect on less "pure a silver colloid", since we tested with the best we > could > make. I will repeat the tests next week with some low quality product that > has been produced with silver salts only (starting with high PPM water) and > then some with silver crystals (heavy cloud formation and stringing) and > finally some good stuff but with the "sludge" mixed into it. That should > cover (guess I > snipped................................................................. > the extremes of all of the home brew, unmetered stuff. > > Will report back! Others may wish to run a few of these simple extreme tests > on their production, before I get back to it. > > [email protected] > > -------------------- > > Sorry Andy, never know who is familiar with what - uS/cm referred > to > micro-Siemens/cm, the common unit of measurement for electrical > conductivity, the reciprical of electrical resistivity! For CaCO3 the > conversion to PPM is 2uS/cm = 1 PPM. For Cs it is less then 2 but > subject to debate, I prefer 1.6uS/PPM. Basically an ohmmeter with > conversion but calibrated to compare to a one sq. cm electrode, to > measure the conductivity of one cubic cm of the solution. At $50each > and 2% accuracy the TDS meters are a bargain, but get the PWT or > pure water tester as that has a lower range and thus is moreaccurate! > > For Tyndall, any beam of light is fine, a flashlight or laser pointer isOK > but I prefer the flash light as the beam is big enough to seecontaminates > such as crystals or other larger particles, which will sparkle. You aimfor > a fog type cloud only, as the finer the particle, the better the product,the > more stable and thus longer storage life. > > Not sure about beer making equipment, but specific gravity would notbe > measurable with the typical spigmomanometer (spelling?), as you need an > accuracy of better then 1 PPM or 0.00001%. > > [email protected] > > Andy said: Thanks for responding Fred, > > I'm confused. Is us/cm the same thing as microseconds/centimeters?Wouldn't > that be a time measurement? How can you convert that to PPM? Are TDSmeters > just ohmmeters that do a conversion or is there more to it thanthat? > > How about the "Tyndall affect of "light dispersion"?"Can > I measure that with > the gizmos that winegrowers use out in the field to measure the sugarcontent > of grape juice? I'm trying to figure this all out on a budget. > > I have some old beer making equipment. Do you think the specific gravitywill > tell me anything? > > I was planing on using my test results for quality control but I amlooking > forward to hearing the results of your extreme tests. Keep usposted. > > Best wishes, > Andy > > In a message dated 12/09/1999 6:38:35 PM Pacific Standard Time, > [email protected] writes: > > Welcome Andy, > > There are a lot of expensive scientific instruments that could beused > for > the > testing but for such extreme limits of testing simple stuff can beused! > > We use two separate TDS digital meters, as made by HannaInstruments, > which > measure in us/cm, which can be translated into PPM. TDS or"total > dissolved > solids" measures via conductivity, what is in the solution,not > settlement , > so > it would detect agglomeration, settlement, crystallization, plateout, > etc. > We > > of course had to bring the solutions back to room temeperature, asthe > temp. > effect is around 1%/degree F and we went from 70 to 212F. > > We check the Tyndall affect of "light dispersion" when > astrong beam of light > is shown thru the solution and we can see the beam of light, as > ifshown thru > a fog. A visual color check is also made, against part of the > samebatch, in > the same size jar. > > The former is good for any time of test, even to check a yearlater, > while > the > latter being visually subjective can only be relied on for veryshort > term > tests, > where you can keep some of the batch to compare to! Both of theseused > together provide a good low budget measure of extreme > outsideeffects > such as freezing, heating, strong magnetic fields, strong UV > light,etc. (Our > UV light test was actually from last year, but 3 weeks at > 1/2"away, which > would be equivilant to years of bright room light levels. > > The other important element to consider in simple tests, is to > use the > extremes, as we did, so any effect would tend to be profound! Allof > these > outside forces definately have an effect, but being so trivialshould > not be > of a concern. There is a possibility these forces could exhibit > aprofound > effect on less "pure a silver colloid", since we testedwith > the best we > could > make. I will repeat the tests next week with some low qualityproduct > that > has been produced with silver salts only (starting with high PPMwater) > and > then some with silver crystals (heavy cloud formation andstringing) and > finally some good stuff but with the "sludge" mixed intoit. > That should > > cover & > nbsp; (guess > Isnipped................................................................. > the extremes of all of the home brew, unmetered stuff. > > Will report back! Others may wish to run a few of these simpleextreme > tests > on their production, before I get back to it. > > [email protected] > > > > ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- > Return-Path: <[email protected]> > Received: from rly-yb02.mx.aol.com (rly-yb02.mail.aol.com [172.18.146.2]) > by air-yb01.mail.aol.com (vx) with ESMTP; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 12:14:27 -0500 > Received: from mx1.eskimo.com (mx1.eskimo.com [204.122.16.48]) by > rly-yb02.mx.aol.com (v66.4) with ESMTP; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 12:13:22 1900 > Received: (from smart...@localhost) > by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA30544; > Fri, 10 Dec 1999 09:13:13 -0800 > Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 09:13:13 -0800 > Message-Id: <[email protected]> > X-Sender: [email protected] > X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 > Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 12:17:39 -0500 > To: [email protected] > From: Fred <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: CS>Electric Blanket / O.T. > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: multipart/alternative; > boundary="=====================_77204353==_.ALT" > Resent-Message-ID: <"ftBT31.0.4T7.eIJKu"@mx1> > Resent-From: [email protected] > Reply-To: [email protected] > X-Mailing-List: <[email protected]> archive/latest/17513 > X-Loop: [email protected] > Precedence: list > Resent-Sender: [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] > Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html > List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]>
