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
This might help you find some references:
Good Luck! Rich
That's only at 25 deg C... in fact the actual value is both temperature and pressure dependent.
Some relevant references:
Eigen, M. & de Maeyer, L. (1955) Untersuchungen =FCber 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
That's only at 25 deg C... in fact the actual value is both temperature and pressure dependent.
Some relevant references:
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.
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.
[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.
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.
Check.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required