EDAboard.com | EDAboard.eu | EDAboard.de | EDAboard.co.uk | RTV forum PL | NewsGroups PL

Citation stating the maximum conductivity or resistivity of

Ask a question - edaboard.com

elektroda.net NewsGroups Forum Index - Electronics Equipment - Citation stating the maximum conductivity or resistivity of

WayneL
Guest

Tue Jan 11, 2005 7:11 pm   



Hi

Over the past week the has been so excellent feedback(threads) on my
question of water conductivity.
In a few thread the value of 18.3MR (0.055uS) was mentioned, forgive me for
being pedantic but could somebody help by quoting a reference that cites
this figure (either in ohms, mhos or Siemens)?

Cheers

Wayne

Rich Grise
Guest

Tue Jan 11, 2005 7:55 pm   



On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 19:11:23 +0000, WayneL wrote:

Quote:
Hi

Over the past week the has been so excellent feedback(threads) on my
question of water conductivity.
In a few thread the value of 18.3MR (0.055uS) was mentioned, forgive me for
being pedantic but could somebody help by quoting a reference that cites
this figure (either in ohms, mhos or Siemens)?


This might help you find some references:
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22resistivity+of+water%22

Good Luck!
Rich

Tim Shoppa
Guest

Tue Jan 11, 2005 8:11 pm   



Quote:
the value of 18.3MR (0.055uS) was mentioned

That's only at 25 deg C... in fact the actual value is both temperature
and pressure dependent.

Some relevant references:

http://www.hach.com/fmmimghach?/CODE:LG0055829%7C1//true

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-ionization_of_water

Eigen, M. & de Maeyer, L. (1955) Untersuchungen über die Kinetik der
Neutralisation I. Z. Elektrochem. 59 986.

Geissler, P. L.; Dellago, C.; Chandler, D.; Hutter, J. & Parrinello, M.
(2001) Autoionization in liquid water. Science 291 2121-2124.

Stillinger, F. H. (1975) Adv. Chem. Phys. 31 1.

Rapaport, D. C. (1983) Mol. Phys. 50 1151.
Chen, S.-H. & Teixeira, J. (1986) Adv. Chem. Phys 64 1.

Tim.

WayneL
Guest

Tue Jan 11, 2005 8:51 pm   



Hi Can anyone send me a pdf of a paper (recent) to mail-nospam-@wlawson.
Remove -nospam-


Thanks again


Wayne
"Tim Shoppa" <shoppa_at_trailing-edge.com> wrote in message
news:1105474287.667040.184860_at_z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Quote:
the value of 18.3MR (0.055uS) was mentioned

That's only at 25 deg C... in fact the actual value is both temperature
and pressure dependent.

Some relevant references:

http://www.hach.com/fmmimghach?/CODE:LG0055829%7C1//true

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-ionization_of_water

Eigen, M. & de Maeyer, L. (1955) Untersuchungen über die Kinetik der
Neutralisation I. Z. Elektrochem. 59 986.

Geissler, P. L.; Dellago, C.; Chandler, D.; Hutter, J. & Parrinello, M.
(2001) Autoionization in liquid water. Science 291 2121-2124.

Stillinger, F. H. (1975) Adv. Chem. Phys. 31 1.

Rapaport, D. C. (1983) Mol. Phys. 50 1151.
Chen, S.-H. & Teixeira, J. (1986) Adv. Chem. Phys 64 1.

Tim.

Robert Baer
Guest

Wed Jan 12, 2005 7:59 am   



Rich Grise wrote:
Quote:

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 19:11:23 +0000, WayneL wrote:

Hi

Over the past week the has been so excellent feedback(threads) on my
question of water conductivity.
In a few thread the value of 18.3MR (0.055uS) was mentioned, forgive me for
being pedantic but could somebody help by quoting a reference that cites
this figure (either in ohms, mhos or Siemens)?


This might help you find some references:
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22resistivity+of+water%22

Good Luck!
Rich

Speaking about terminology, *silver* is most conductive, and
(relatively pure) water is rather NONconductive.
And "resistivity" is *NOT* interchangeable with "conductive" !!
What you should say is "the most *resistive*".
As far as units go, the common measure is for resistivity of water in
megohms.

Dieter Britz
Guest

Wed Jan 12, 2005 8:24 am   



WayneL wrote:
Quote:
Hi

Over the past week the has been so excellent feedback(threads) on my
question of water conductivity.
In a few thread the value of 18.3MR (0.055uS) was mentioned, forgive me for
being pedantic but could somebody help by quoting a reference that cites
this figure (either in ohms, mhos or Siemens)?

[reaches up to book shelf above desk, aha!]
Yes: Aylward & Finlay, "SI Chemical Data", p. 125 in the 2nd Ed.,
under Ionic Properties of Water. Note the SI units though, m, not cm.

I suspect the CRC "rubber bible" would also have it, but I have
only some rather old editions on the shelf.
--
Dieter Britz, Kemisk Institut, Aarhus Universitet, Danmark.

Dieter Britz
Guest

Thu Jan 13, 2005 9:16 am   



Robert Baer wrote:
Quote:
Correct; the CRC is stating the *SI* units.
BUT.
In the trade, the commonly used terminology (like i said) is
*megohms*.

Sure. I just pointed that out, not as a criticism of your "Megohms"
but to avoid Wayne's getting confused by the figure in Aylward &
FInlay, of 5.5, rather than 0.055. The units for 5.5 are microS/m,
and the resistivity figure of 18.3 must be MOhm.cm. If Wayne is writing
a paper, he must be more pedantic than trade jargon.

--
Dieter Britz, Kemisk Institut, Aarhus Universitet, Danmark.

Robert Baer
Guest

Thu Jan 13, 2005 9:28 am   



Dieter Britz wrote:
Quote:

WayneL wrote:
Hi

Over the past week the has been so excellent feedback(threads) on my
question of water conductivity.
In a few thread the value of 18.3MR (0.055uS) was mentioned, forgive me for
being pedantic but could somebody help by quoting a reference that cites
this figure (either in ohms, mhos or Siemens)?

[reaches up to book shelf above desk, aha!]
Yes: Aylward & Finlay, "SI Chemical Data", p. 125 in the 2nd Ed.,
under Ionic Properties of Water. Note the SI units though, m, not cm.

I suspect the CRC "rubber bible" would also have it, but I have
only some rather old editions on the shelf.
--
Dieter Britz, Kemisk Institut, Aarhus Universitet, Danmark.

Correct; the CRC is stating the *SI* units.
BUT.
In the trade, the commonly used terminology (like i said) is
*megohms*.

Robert Baer
Guest

Fri Jan 14, 2005 7:55 am   



Dieter Britz wrote:
Quote:

Robert Baer wrote:
Correct; the CRC is stating the *SI* units.
BUT.
In the trade, the commonly used terminology (like i said) is
*megohms*.

Sure. I just pointed that out, not as a criticism of your "Megohms"
but to avoid Wayne's getting confused by the figure in Aylward &
FInlay, of 5.5, rather than 0.055. The units for 5.5 are microS/m,
and the resistivity figure of 18.3 must be MOhm.cm. If Wayne is writing
a paper, he must be more pedantic than trade jargon.

--
Dieter Britz, Kemisk Institut, Aarhus Universitet, Danmark.

Check.

elektroda.net NewsGroups Forum Index - Electronics Equipment - Citation stating the maximum conductivity or resistivity of

Ask a question - edaboard.com

Arabic versionBulgarian versionCatalan versionCzech versionDanish versionGerman versionGreek versionEnglish versionSpanish versionFinnish versionFrench versionHindi versionCroatian versionIndonesian versionItalian versionHebrew versionJapanese versionKorean versionLithuanian versionLatvian versionDutch versionNorwegian versionPolish versionPortuguese versionRomanian versionRussian versionSlovak versionSlovenian versionSerbian versionSwedish versionTagalog versionUkrainian versionVietnamese versionChinese version
RTV map EDAboard.com map News map EDAboard.eu map EDAboard.de map EDAboard.co.uk map Opony