Same generator run the same way. Mechanical stirring Intitial voltage is 32 VDC Max current 1 ma Automatic shutdown voltage 6 volts 6" [submerged length] x 2 x 12 gauge electrodes spaced 1 1/2" apart. Same batch of water.
Flat electrodes do the same thing where conductivity drop is concerned. Thermal stirring [without help] does a really nice job on pint and less batches, pretty good on taller quarts with some conductivity stratification that makes for a slightly weaker brew at the same shutdown point overall for two possible reasons. [A short squat quart acts the same as a pint.] 1] It tends to get a little warmer at the top when rising water currents mushroom out just over mid way up and loses some of its velocity. Warmer water is more conductive. 2] Particulates are heavier than dissolved ions, don't make it quite as high in the thermal updraft and may tend to displace the conductive ionic portion more towards the top where the electrodes are. The generator knows nothing about the water that's not directly between the electrodes. If all the water circulates between the electrodes and mechanical stirring does circulate all of the water, volume shouldn't matter in the end...and doesn't, where intitial pre stabilization conductivity is concerned. It does, however, make a difference days later. Thermal soak during process and cooling later could account for some volumetric differences in conductivity drop back except for the fact that the same phenomenon exists to virtually the same extent with even very vigerous mechanical stirring and follows pretty much the same amount of difference between half pints, pints and quarts. A quart takes roughly twice the time to reach 20 uS as a pint. The time difference between a pint and a quart beyond times 2 is because it takes longer to reach a conductivity thoughout the container where the generator will pull 1 milliamp max current in more water volume. ie "ramp up" time is definitely and quite reasonably volume dependant. If initial pre stabilization conductivity is the same per cubic centimeter, indicating the same ion and anion concentration thoughout the water...more cubic centimeters shouldn't make a difference...but it does. Each identical cubic centimeter of water should do the same thing. But they don't. To me, "that" doesn't make sense. [Humans don't make sense. That's an interesting "given". But, I ain't brewing humans. Would a human brewed in a smaller jar grow taller? Oh well, they don't fit into the jars anyhow. :-) ] For a larger batch to take longer to completely stabilize wouldn't surprise me 'too' much. Post stabilization uS meter reading numbers correspond to AA Spec PPM testing the same. [ie, lower numbers = the same lower total PPM] What would REALLY amaze me would be... if I immediately split a quart batch into two pint jars after it reaches 20 uS and have the volume difference in conductivity drop go away. [Never tried that..I will] Ode At 11:02 AM 12/9/2005 -0500, you wrote: > >Ode Coyote wrote: > >> Why the non "channeled" volumetric difference exists is still a mystery to me. [Is, is is and why don't matter] > >I think it may make sense, but I need some more data. Between a quart and a pint, do you use the same size and configuration of the electrodes and current and processing time, or do you half those as well. I suspect you are not halving the electrode size and current, but >if you did you would find the volumetric differences would go away. > >If I am correct in the above assumption let me know and I will tell you my theory as to why it occurs. > >Marshall > > > >-- >The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver. > >Instructions for unsubscribing are posted at: http://silverlist.org > >To post, address your message to: [email protected] > >Address Off-Topic messages to: [email protected] > >The Silver List and Off Topic List archives are currently down... > >List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]> > > > > >-- >No virus found in this incoming message. >Checked by AVG Free Edition. >Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.13.13/197 - Release Date: 12/9/2005 > > > > >-- >No virus found in this incoming message. >Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. >Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.13.13 - Release Date: 12/9/2005 > > Stop on in and visit! www.silverpuppy.com www.colloidal-silver-generator.com -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.13.13 - Release Date: 12/9/2005
