Citation stating the maximum conductivity or resistivity of

W

WayneL

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

Good Luck!
Rich
 
the value of 18.3MR (0.055uS) was mentioned
Click to expand...
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.
 
Hi Can anyone send me a pdf of a paper (recent) to mail-nospam-@wlawson.
Remove -nospam-


Thanks again


Wayne
"Tim Shoppa" <shoppa@trailing-edge.com> wrote in message
news:1105474287.667040.184860@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
the value of 18.3MR (0.055uS) was mentioned
Click to expand...
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 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)?
Click to expand...
[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.
 
Robert Baer wrote:
Correct; the CRC is stating the *SI* units.
BUT.
In the trade, the commonly used terminology (like i said) is
*megohms*.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Dieter Britz wrote:
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.
Click to expand...
Check.
 
Rich Grise wrote:
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
Click to expand...
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 wrote:
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.
Click to expand...
Correct; the CRC is stating the *SI* units.
BUT.
In the trade, the commonly used terminology (like i said) is
*megohms*.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top