Ivan, you are flipping back and forth on the uS/PPM issue - can you define a little more your numbers vs. material tested. Below you agree with K Watson that 1.8uS/PPM may be correct (if heavy Tyndall) or as low as 1uS/PPM (if not heavy?) yet in a post minutes earlier you revert to the 0.59uS/PPM based on silver nitrate in solution.
A lot of us rely on your technical expertise, and those not following all your posts will get off to different "correct" values! I realize you consider TDS to be particle size dependent but what would help is your opinion on the conversion for "typical" Cs. It is nice being an agreeable chap, but now we can't argue "But Ivan said...." Thanks, f...@health2us.com Ivan said: K. Watson, I should think that if you have a heavy Tyndal effect then that could be the case. Otherwise the concentration could be as high as 10ppm. If you have a consistent generating regime then perhaps having one or two samples professionally tested would give you a good benchmark. Ivan. ----- Original Message ----- From: "James K. Watson" <jk...@earthlink.net> To: <silver-list@eskimo.com> Sent: Friday, 14 April 2000 11:55 Subject: Re: CS>Hanna meter > Ivan, > I have the Hanna PWT. If I have a reading of 10.0 on the meter this means > the solution is about 5.5 PPM. Is this correct ? > K. Watson
