Re: CS>Test equipmentVery interesting. Thank you and others for your responses.
Gordon
----- Original Message -----
From: Jack Dayton
To: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, September 08, 2002 11:38 PM
Subject: Re: CS>Test equipment
From: "Gordon Gazard" <[email protected]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2002 22:55:59 +0200
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: CS>Test equipment
Resent-From: [email protected]
Resent-Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2002 14:00:31 -0700
Can anybody recommend a good tester for checking Parts per Million (silver)
then a silver tester and
an Ozone tester - to test ozone in the air.
I am at present using Hanna TDS equipment - but not terribly impressed. Any
recommendations?
Hi Gordon, from what I have seen posted on this list, you are right to
distrust Hanna's TDS meter for silver ppm. What has been recommended
is the Hanna PWT meter with a small conversion factor,- - see a post below
from May about this subject,
Jack
**********************************
Date: Wednesday,May 29,2002 10:32 AM
Subject: CS>TDS-1 versus PWT for measuring PPM
Hi James,
I don't mean to jump in when you addressed the post to Dean but the fact is
that the PWT reads CS much better than the TDS-1 for several reasons as pointed
out on our website. Also, you do NOT divide by half when using the PWT. You
ADD to the reading. In the case of our generators you add 20%. Hanna is right
in telling you to cut the reading in half IF you're measuring dissolved solids
such as minerals in the water. However, we as CS users are interested in
measuring the content of CS to determine what silver content we have. In this
case the meter only measures the ionic portion of CS. And that reading is
always less than the total amount of silver content because the meter will NOT
read the colloidal portion. Therefore one has to add to the reading to get the
total PPM. The correction factor will be the difference between how much of
the mix was colloidal versus ionic. We have had our CS analyzed by atomic
absorption spectrophotometry and it is generally always the same ratio.
Another thing I forgot to mention is the fact that the TDS-1 has an accuracy
tolerance of + - 2% of full scale. Since the TDS-1 reads from 0-999 that's + -
20 PPM. Since the PWT reads from 0-99.9 and has the same percentage of
accuracy that's + - 2 PPM. And the PWT gives you a decimal point in the
reading while the TDS-1 reads in whole numbers only.
I hope this helps clear up some of the controversy about the TDS-1 versus the
PWT. The PWT is the best choice hands down for measuring PPM.
Trem
www.silvergen.com <http://www.silvergen.com>
