Hi Mike, Thanks for your previous post on inductive and other sources of
(non)-interference with CS generators, I'll respond to that when I have a
little more time.
Meanwhile, regarding the presencc of headache producing mold and spores in
your environment, have you tried using the common copper-based garden spray
solutions (Kop-r-spray, Liqui-cop are ones around here)? They contain a
"copper ammonium complex" resulting in a content of 8% copper expressed as
metallic, and they are just plain effective. Their toxicity is low as far
as I can tell including my own personal bio-assay (yes I tasted some of the
properly diluted stuff years ago when I was -err - even dumber than I am
now) and could detect no bad effects or even significant taste. I don't
know what it would do to the color of laundered cloth, maybe I'll give it a
try on my work clothes, but it should be ok on floors and such household
surfaces.
Please note that I haven't delved into what a "copper ammonium complex" is,
these days, it may no longer be a simple inorganic (I know, I know)
compound. Just an idea in hope it will help.
Take care, Malcolm
At 07:13 AM 10/7/03 -0400, you wrote:
url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m63086.html
Re: CS>Measuring very high ppms
From: Ode Coyote
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 05:43:48
> If the PWT ignores oxides and there are a lot of oxides [or
> metallic silver micro particles] then the PWT reading equating uS
> to PPM will not be at unity.
> Hence, the fudge factors.
> At 3 uS, it's almost certain that the CS is 99+% ionic and the PWT
> will be very close to unity.
> At 27 uS, it's unlikely that the CS is more than 90% ionic and
> could be less than 80% ionic.
> In some cases the PWT can read 13 uS and the suspension can exceed
> 60% [even 80%?] non ionic silver content as an extremely heavy TE
> or display a lot of crud in the bottom or both.
> Ode
Hi Ken,
I'm sorry I have not been able to respond to your posts recently.
They force me to think, and the headaches from the mold spores made
that impossible. So I tackled the easy ones, like solar flares:)
I have been working with colloidal copper. It is tough to make, but
it is the only thing that has any effect on the spores. I have been
applying it to all the clothing, and the spore levels are finally
starting to decline.
I just spent four glorious hours with no headache, and I know how to
get rid of them when they do return. I also took Marshall's
suggestion and applied the cc to the floors. I didn't think it would
work, but it worked GREAT! I can go into the bathroom and kitchen
without collapsing from the headaches. It also works on my lab
floor.
Thanks, Marshall! You are the man.
Ken, you are right about the oxides messing things up. The goal is
to minimize them, which is why your silverpuppy design is so good. I
love your U-shaped electrodes.
That solved the problem of hot spots at the cut end of straight
rods, increased the rigidity and stability of the alignment, and
doubled the wetted area all at once. Such a simple idea, and so
elegant. I don't mind telling everyone I copied it for my mini-W
generator.
These advances allow pretty good ppm, and minimize the production of
oxides.
We are now left with the ions, and how to measure them.
There really should be a correlation between ppm and uS. Conductance
measures the number of ions, and ppm measures the mass of the ions.
Since all silver ions have the same mass, measuring one parameter
should give the other. (Unless there's something really wrong with
the process, but nobody adds salt to start their cs anymore:)
The only question left is what is the conversion factor between uS
and ppm?
Trem had his cs analyzed and found the correlation factor was unity
for the ionic portion.
Frank Key measured the uS and ppm on some commercial products and
posted the results at
http://www.silver-colloids.com/Reports/reports.html
He separated the ionic and particulate portions and gave their value
separately. I ignored the particulate data.
I selected five products that seem to correlate well. Here is the
list:
Product Name Conductivity Ionic PPM Ratio
~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~
Silver Lightning 3.3 uS/cm 3.71 ppm 0.889
Mesosilver 3.9 uS/cm 3.9 ppm 1.0
Sovereign Silver 9.7 uS/cm 9.22 ppm 1.052
ASAP Solution 11.4 uS/cm 10.65 ppm 1.070
ASAP Solution 20.1 uS/cm 19.59 ppm 1.026
The average is
0.889 + 1.0 + 1.052 + 1.070 + 1.026 = 5.037 / 5 = 1.0074
Ivan posted a table comparing uS and ppm. Note it tracks above 20
ppm within 1 ppm of measurement error:
20uS - 20ppm
21uS - 21ppm
25uS - 26ppm
26uS - 27ppm
http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m14498.html
I didn't find any information on how Ivan measured the ppm, but
since his data confirms and extends Frank's data, I assume Ivan also
separated the ionic and particulate portions.
The work by Trem, Frank, and Ivan firmly establishes the conversion
factor at 1 uS = 1 ppm. This is valid over a very wide range, using
many different cs processes from HVAC to LVDC. So that problem is
solved.
Now for your second topic. You said:
> Using Faradays equation should tell how much silver was liberated
> but won't say what happened to it.
> "IF" nothing has settled or plated out, it should still be in the
> water in whatever form and should be accurate but any visible
> fallout/plate out at all will amount to a highly significant
> percentage of the total that won't be contributing to the PPM in
> the water.
Yes, you are right. Faraday's equation only tells us how much silver
was liberated. We assume the current density is low enough to keep
the production of oxygen at the anode minimal, and the dw doesn't
have contaminants that plate out at the anode. I had that problem
recently, and it required changing suppliers.
The Faraday equation doesn't say what happens to the silver after it
leaves the anode. Our job is to keep most of it intact and in
solution where it does the most good.
> Darn it. It just ain't easy.
Sure it is.
The Hanna measures uS. We now know it correlates directly to ppm.
The Faraday equations give the ppm liberated.
The difference between them tells us how much was lost in the
process. This give us a target to improve, and troubleshooting
information when something goes wrong.
If something goes wrong with the Hanna, the salt test will show
it.
We can weigh the electrodes to confirm how much silver was
liberated. Mercury makes this calculation trivial. All we need is
a good scale.
We now have four simple ways that help determine the concentration
of silver ions in solution.
They are cheap, quick, available to anyone, reliable, self-checking,
and certainly accurate enough for our needs.
What could be easier:)
I'm also working on a fifth way to measure the ppm directly. I hope
to be able to start working on it soon, as long as the progress in
killing spores continues.
Best Regards,
Mike Monett
--
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: silver-list@eskimo.com
Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html
List maintainer: Mike Devour <mdev...@eskimo.com>
---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.516 / Virus Database: 313 - Release Date: 9/1/03
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.516 / Virus Database: 313 - Release Date: 9/1/03
