No-scale water
-
- Posts: 8
- Joined: 2 years ago
Hi
I wanted to make sure I was correctly analyzing my water in order to make water which will not produce scale in my machine. We have well water, and based on my water test results below, my plan is to cut my water 50/50 with distilled water. Just need confirmation from some experts that this will work as intended. TIA! I was unable to post a pic of the PDF, so I did my best copying the results, and it looks like I can't put spaces in between the names and results to make it look pretty.
Arsenic 0.00214 0.01 mg/L 0.001
E. Coli ABSENT MPN/100 mL 1
Total Coliform ABSENT MPN/100 mL 1
Barium 0.0402 2 mg/L 0.001
Cadmium ND 0.005 mg/L 0.001
Chloride 3.87 250 mg/L 1
Chromium 0.00218 0.1 mg/L 0.001
TDS 192.4 700 mg/L 1
Copper 0.0474 1.3 mg/L 0.001
Fluoride ND 4 mg/L 1
Calcium 21.9 mg CaCO3/L 0.1
Hardness 88.3 mg CaCO3/L 1
Magnesium 8.15 mg CaCO3/L 0.1
Iron 0.0276 0.3 mg/L 0.01
Lead ND 0.015 mg/L 0.001
Manganese 0.00169 0.05 mg/L 0.001
Mercury-ICPMS ND 0.002 mg/L 0.0001
Nickel ND 0.1 mg/L 0.001
Nitrate 3.34 10 mg/L 1
Nitrite ND 1 mg/L 1
pH 6.83 ph Units
Potassium 1.43 mg/L 0.5
Selenium 0.00115 0.05 mg/L 0.001
Silver ND 0.1 mg/L 0.001
Sodium 22.5 mg/L 0.1
Sulfate 5.21 250 mg/L 1
Uranium 0.00207 0.03 mg/L 0.001
Uranium Activity 1.39 20 pCi/L 0.67
Zinc 0.0687 5 mg/L 0.001
I wanted to make sure I was correctly analyzing my water in order to make water which will not produce scale in my machine. We have well water, and based on my water test results below, my plan is to cut my water 50/50 with distilled water. Just need confirmation from some experts that this will work as intended. TIA! I was unable to post a pic of the PDF, so I did my best copying the results, and it looks like I can't put spaces in between the names and results to make it look pretty.
Arsenic 0.00214 0.01 mg/L 0.001
E. Coli ABSENT MPN/100 mL 1
Total Coliform ABSENT MPN/100 mL 1
Barium 0.0402 2 mg/L 0.001
Cadmium ND 0.005 mg/L 0.001
Chloride 3.87 250 mg/L 1
Chromium 0.00218 0.1 mg/L 0.001
TDS 192.4 700 mg/L 1
Copper 0.0474 1.3 mg/L 0.001
Fluoride ND 4 mg/L 1
Calcium 21.9 mg CaCO3/L 0.1
Hardness 88.3 mg CaCO3/L 1
Magnesium 8.15 mg CaCO3/L 0.1
Iron 0.0276 0.3 mg/L 0.01
Lead ND 0.015 mg/L 0.001
Manganese 0.00169 0.05 mg/L 0.001
Mercury-ICPMS ND 0.002 mg/L 0.0001
Nickel ND 0.1 mg/L 0.001
Nitrate 3.34 10 mg/L 1
Nitrite ND 1 mg/L 1
pH 6.83 ph Units
Potassium 1.43 mg/L 0.5
Selenium 0.00115 0.05 mg/L 0.001
Silver ND 0.1 mg/L 0.001
Sodium 22.5 mg/L 0.1
Sulfate 5.21 250 mg/L 1
Uranium 0.00207 0.03 mg/L 0.001
Uranium Activity 1.39 20 pCi/L 0.67
Zinc 0.0687 5 mg/L 0.001
-
- Posts: 8
- Joined: 2 years ago
- homeburrero
- Team HB
- Posts: 4892
- Joined: 13 years ago
You are missing an important measure here - you have no numbers for bicarbonate or alkalinity. Doing a quick calculation of your cations vs your low chloride, sulfate, and nitrate anion numbers, it's probable that you have 80 mg/L or more alkalinity. You could double check that with a KH drop titration kit but probably not necessary. Your pH is a little low for a water with that much alkalinity, but that's likely from dissolved CO2 in your well water. It will come up as the water gasses off CO2 into the air.Borg wrote:I wanted to make sure I was correctly analyzing my water in order to make water which will not produce scale in my machine. We have well water, and based on my water test results below, my plan is to cut my water 50/50 with distilled water. Just need confirmation from some experts that this will work as intended.
Mixing this 50/50 with distilled would give you a total hardness in the 45 mg/L as CaCO3 ballpark, with a calcium hardness in the 30 mg/L as CaCO3 ballpark (calcium ion of 22 mg/L is equivalent to 55 mg/L as CaCO3). Your alkalinity by my guess would be in the 40 mg/L ballpark. This should not deposit much if any limescale even in a hot steam boiler. You have nice low chloride, which is good (high chloride is sometimes a corrosion concern).
Pat
nínádiishʼnahgo gohwééh náshdlį́į́h
nínádiishʼnahgo gohwééh náshdlį́į́h
- homeburrero
- Team HB
- Posts: 4892
- Joined: 13 years ago
P.S.
Looking closer at that report. It's clear they got their units screwed up in a couple places. They indicate that the calcium and magnesium measures are 'mg CaCO3/L' and that just can't be, because if that were true you would have a total hardness of 21.9 + 8.9 = 30.8 mg/L, not the 88.3 mg/L that they reported.
A calcium value of 21.9 as ion would be a calcium hardness of 54.75 mg/L as CaCO3
A magnesium value of 8.15 as ion would be a magnesium hardness of 33.58 mg/L as CaCO3
Add these and you get a total hardness of 88.3 mg/L which is what they reported.
So clearly the proper units for calcium and magnesium in this report is simply 'mg/L' not 'mg CaCO3/L'
Looking closer at that report. It's clear they got their units screwed up in a couple places. They indicate that the calcium and magnesium measures are 'mg CaCO3/L' and that just can't be, because if that were true you would have a total hardness of 21.9 + 8.9 = 30.8 mg/L, not the 88.3 mg/L that they reported.
A calcium value of 21.9 as ion would be a calcium hardness of 54.75 mg/L as CaCO3
A magnesium value of 8.15 as ion would be a magnesium hardness of 33.58 mg/L as CaCO3
Add these and you get a total hardness of 88.3 mg/L which is what they reported.
So clearly the proper units for calcium and magnesium in this report is simply 'mg/L' not 'mg CaCO3/L'
Pat
nínádiishʼnahgo gohwééh náshdlį́į́h
nínádiishʼnahgo gohwééh náshdlį́į́h
-
- Posts: 8
- Joined: 2 years ago
I truly appreciate your replies on this. That "insanely long water FAQ" was a tough read for someone who has no background in chemistry, and it's reassuring to have you confirm my understanding!