On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 12:08:40 GMT, (Sponix) wrote:

On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 14:43:17 +0000, Peter Parry
wrote:

Electronic - No evidence they work at all, none have ever been shown
to work in properly conducted tests. No credible theory why or how
they could work.

A couple of UK Universities (Portsmouth was one, I forget the other)
have shown that electronic conditioners *sometimes* have an effect but
have been unable to come up with a definitive explaination as to why
they work in some applications but not in others.

Portsmouth is quoted in a number of advertisements (usually saying
rather ambiguously that it has been "tested" rather than found to do
anything). Last time this subject came up I e-mailed Portsmouth to
try to get a copy of the report but they said they could find no
record of any such study or test.

The only test I could find was at
http://www.hnd.usace.army.mil/techin...Treatment1.pdf.

This tested two magnetic and one electronic device. The conclusion
was:-

"The results of this study do not indicate any clear advantage for
any of the three devices tested versus a control for the inhibition
of mineral scale formation or the corrosion of copper.

The test protocol was designed to simulate the method of production
of hot water used in many larger institutional type settings that
employ a shell and tube heat exchanger for the production of
hot water. The findings do not support the claims of the
manufacturers regarding the ability of their respective devices (to)
prevent mineral scale formation in hot potable water systems.

The amount of mineral scale formed for the control versus device heat
exchange tubes was relatively constant, and proved to be an effective
insulator of heat transfer across the tube surface. The scale formed
was found to be a type of calcite (calcium carbonate), and had the
same crystalline structure for each heat exchange tube. There was no
discernible effect on the crystalline structure of the scale formed
by any of the tested devices."

The American Water Quality Association set up a Task Force to study
these devices which reached the startling conclusion that "there are
indications that physical water treatment works, that it does not
work..and that it may work sometimes"

At this point they decided to recommend the task force be dissolved!!

http://www.wqa.org/pdf/GovRelations/...orceReport.pdf

(the report does include references for a lot of other work so is
useful in that respect).

The DVGW report (www.dvgw.de) I couldn't locate on their website but
anything that turns "monitoring" into "Überwachungsanforderungen" and
uses words like Formbeständigkeitsprüfung and
Zertifizierungsanforderungen lacks simplicity.








--
Peter Parry.
http://www.wpp.ltd.uk/