url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m60147.html
Re: CS>$$$ perpectives
From: Trem
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 09:30:35
> I test each SG7 individually by running a 1 1/2 gallon batch to
> assure the unit works properly before shipment. I also produce a
> batch every day or so to use around our household and also produce
> and give away as much as possible locally to those needing it. I
> conservatively estimate at least 500 gallons have been made using
> the test electrode which still looks original as far as shape is
> concerned. That is the edges of the electrodes (4) are not thin
> and sharp as you keep stating will be the fact. They started out
> at .013 inches and they are still that thickness as best I can
> measure.
You are right. The effect is more likely to show up on the smaller
system, which uses 0.25" plates. It won't sharpen the edge, but
rather smooth it and also tend to reduce the width. But the plates
are too thin to show much of a "V" due to the edge effect. They wear
through too fast.
The 1.5" plates on your production unit are much too wide to show
this effect, except you might see some rounding of the corners.
I calculated the loss in thickness assuming you run at 15 ppm, and
found you may have lost about 2.4 thousandths of an inch in
thickness on the inner pair of plates. This is negligible compared
to the 1.5" width. The outer plates may have lost 1.2 mils, which
might be hard to measure. This assumes no silver is lost on the
outward-facing sides.
But the edge effect shows where the current density is the highest.
If you shut off the stirring, you should to see misting occur first
at the edges of the cathode, then spread to the rest of the
electrode. Misting is a sign of particle generation, which tends to
limit the maximum ion concentration.
I have not had much success using stirring to prevent this. I get
strange side effects, such as the cs is not a strong as it should be
according to the number of Coulombs transferred. It is not as
effective as without stirring, and one sample coalesced and formed a
small silver lump at the bottom of the glass when it was placed in a
refrigerator. So I have abandoned stirring.
The significance of the edge effect is if you want to run below the
misting level, you have to reduce the current below the value you
could reach with round wires.
However, you could insulate the edges as Ole Bob has done, and your
production unit might be an unbeatable system, especially if you
added more plates - they are cheap and you have plenty of room.
I don't know if the large plates would block the dispersal and lead
to higher ion concentration, which could lead to misting. The
advantage of round wires is the space between the wires promotes
even dispersal of the ions without the need for stirring.
Reversing the polarity might delay the onset of misting. This needs
to be examined separately, but if so, it could also be applied to
round wires.
> And please don't tell me the ions made with your process are
> better than those made with mine. I don't believe it.
Heh - you must be used to dealing with kooks. I never said that or
implied it anywhere. I also don't believe that solar flares or the
phase of the moon has any effect on cs production. An ion is an ion.
> So once again I ask the question...why would one want to watch and
> wait for what would be an interminable amount of time for the
> product to be ready to use in order to keep the electrode clean
> when one can make it as fast as 2 gallons per hour and have a
> little residue which resides in the bottom of the vessel?
With a given volume of dw, the ppm is determined by the number of
Coulombs transferred. With constant current, the time is easily
calculated according to the number of Coulombs needed.
The real difference is that running at low current densities such as
100 uA/sq. in. produces no black crud. You can deposit more Coulombs
in the solution without running into misting. The electrodes stay
clean. Stirring is not needed, and the cs stays clear.
This means there are more silver ions in the water and available to
kill germs and virus.
I believe this is why it is much more effective than the stuff I
used to make at 1.4 mA/sq. in.
Best Regards,
Mike Monett
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix - Calculation of thickness lost on parallel plates
Convert 500 gallons to litres:
lt = 3.785 * gal
= 3.785 * 500
= 1892.5 litres
Calculate weight of silver assuming 15 ppm.
ppm = mg / lt ; parts per million
mg = ppm * lt
= 15 * 1892.5
= 28387.5 milligrams
= 28.3875 grams
Calculate volume of silver at 10.5 gr/cm^3
cc = gm / 10.5
= 28.3875 / 10.5
= 2.7035 cc
Calculate volume of silver in cubic inches.
cuin = 0.06 * cc
= 0.06 * 2.7035
= 0.1622 cu in
Calculate active area of anode plates during one cycle, assuming
zero current on outward facing side.
Plate P1 P2 P3 P4
Cycle 1 A1 C1 A2 C2
Cycle 2 C1 A1 C2 A2
area = w * h * n
= 1.5 * 5 * 3
= 22.5 sq in
Calculate total thickness of silver lost.
th = cuin / area
= 0.1622 / 22.5
= 0.0072 in
= 7.2 mils
Calculate thickness per side.
ea = th / 3
= 7.2 / 3
= 2.4 mils
Calculate loss due to duty cycle.
pc = ea / 2
= 2.4 / 2
= 1.2 mils
So plates P2 and P3 should lose 2.4 mils, and P1 and P4 1.2 mils.
The actual ratio will show how much current appears at the
outward-facing sides of P1 and P4.
--
The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver.
Instructions for unsubscribing may be found at: http://silverlist.org
To post, address your message to: [email protected]
Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html
List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]>
