Get your Geek on and control your grow room with Arduino!

ChiefRunningPhist

Well-Known Member
There are some positive contributions being made here. Good work!

That is a surprisingly high voltage difference. The actual electrochemistry can be driven by three volts or maybe less. Can you tell me what the benefit of the higher voltage is ? I may be missing something obvious for which my med-chem bias hasn’t set me up.
The electrical potential is dependent on the electrode spacing and surface area as well as the solution EC. The farther the electrode spacing, smaller the electrode surface area, lower the EC, the greater the voltage needed to pass a set current.

V = I·Ω
Ω = ρ·(L/A)

V = voltage in volts
I = current in amps
Ω = resistance in ohms
ρ = 1/EC
L = distance between electrodes
A = electrode surface area

EC = 1/ρ = [(submerged electrode Surface Area)/(distance between electrodes)]·Ω

As Ag concentration increases so does the EC. lf a voltage source were implemented, the reaction rate would increase with time. If a current source were utilized the reaction rate would maintain at a constant rate.

EDIT:
Temperature (& pH) also effects EC. Utilizing a current source mitigates this as well.
 
Last edited:

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
There are some positive contributions being made here. Good work!


The electrical potential is dependent on the electrode spacing and surface area as well as the solution EC. The farther the electrode spacing, smaller the electrode surface area, lower the EC, the greater the voltage needed to pass a set current.

V = I·Ω
Ω = ρ·(L/A)

V = voltage in volts
I = current in amps
Ω = resistance in ohms
ρ = 1/EC
L = distance between electrodes
A = electrode surface area

EC = 1/ρ = [(submerged electrode Surface Area)/(distance between electrodes)]·Ω

As Ag concentration increases so does the EC. lf a voltage source were implemented, the reaction rate would increase with time. If a current source were utilized the reaction rate would maintain at a constant rate.

EDIT:
Temperature (& pH) also effects EC. Utilizing a current source mitigates this as well.
I found this reference
which describes in poor detail the preparation of stabilized silver particles in water with two stabilizers (polyvinylpyrrolidone and sodium dodecyl sulfate). The Romanian team used a homemade “current pulse generator” to drive the synthesis.

From this I guess/deduce that the voltage has less to do with the minimum needed to push Ag(0) to Ag(+) and back to Ag(0c) with the last symbol denoting elemental silver colloid. Overvoltage drives the reaction kinetics to a practically acceptable value, with electrode area and spacing contributing as your post describes.

My training is in synthetic organic chemistry, so my knowledge of electrochemistry never advanced beyond the undergraduate level. It has since receded considerably, so your electrochemical primer is useful; thank you.

I lack the chemical knowledge andor intuition to answer where the optimum in particle size, and thus the tuning of the key parameters: electrode size, electrode spacing, current per area (current density) that drive the system toward an optimal nanosilver particle size distribution. So I cannot comment usefully on best preparation or use of the colloid. “Above my pay grade.”

For me, the take-home lesson is that applied voltage is not a thermodynamic but a kinetic control, one that sets the important I/A value.

I wonder if a pulse current generator would be of benefit here. It allows control of I and thus I/A better than using a fixed input voltage. All this is based on my assumption that achieving a certain particle size and concentration matters to get the final effect: sex-reversing female Cannabis.

Thoughts?
 

ChiefRunningPhist

Well-Known Member
I found this reference
which describes in poor detail the preparation of stabilized silver particles in water with two stabilizers (polyvinylpyrrolidone and sodium dodecyl sulfate). The Romanian team used a homemade “current pulse generator” to drive the synthesis.

From this I guess/deduce that the voltage has less to do with the minimum needed to push Ag(0) to Ag(+) and back to Ag(0c) with the last symbol denoting elemental silver colloid. Overvoltage drives the reaction kinetics to a practically acceptable value, with electrode area and spacing contributing as your post describes.

My training is in synthetic organic chemistry, so my knowledge of electrochemistry never advanced beyond the undergraduate level. It has since receded considerably, so your electrochemical primer is useful; thank you.

I lack the chemical knowledge andor intuition to answer where the optimum in particle size, and thus the tuning of the key parameters: electrode size, electrode spacing, current per area (current density) that drive the system toward an optimal nanosilver particle size distribution. So I cannot comment usefully on best preparation or use of the colloid. “Above my pay grade.”

For me, the take-home lesson is that applied voltage is not a thermodynamic but a kinetic control, one that sets the important I/A value.

I wonder if a pulse current generator would be of benefit here. It allows control of I and thus I/A better than using a fixed input voltage. All this is based on my assumption that achieving a certain particle size and concentration matters to get the final effect: sex-reversing female Cannabis.

Thoughts?
It would seem as though the addition of "PVP 55" at 5g/L, as well as the addition of "Na-LS" at 0.5g/L, will provide for a more consistent distribution of particle size (10nm - 55nm), but I'm not sure exactly how reactive (for feminizing) the resultant molecule will be as opposed to ionic Ag or Ag compounds without the stabilizers utilized. Perhaps your background can further this ambiguity to a point of more certainty for me.

I liked the idea of reversing polarity of the electrodes, but I'm not sure if this reversal is contributing to a greater colloidal content aside from distributing the reaction site within the solution more evenly, allowing for the stabilizers to have more impact? I'm curious how an increased stir rate might offset, or if the purpose stems from other intricacies at play?

Reversing the polarity essentially reverses which electrode is plated and which is oxidized. I'm guessing the addition of the stabilizers helps to reduce the reduction at the cathode while enveloping the Ag oxidized at the anode. This reversal, along with the stabilizer addition would ultimately reduce the plating effect noticed at the cathode, as well as what I'm partially assuming is the "film build up" at the anode (I've never made CS and just started to learn about it) from microbubbles ect.

Interesting the absorption spectra derived. It seems it was attained using a 7g/L PVP 55 stabilizer addition (no mention of Na-LS) and an electrolysis duration of 3hrs & 5hrs. The peak moved little while the absorption % was more influenced. Perhaps a 420nm laser/LED and a similarly wavelength sensative photodiode would give a decent estimate as to how much colloidal silver is present (with calibration).

I'm not sure how cyclic voltammetry, or the reduction of anodic current with polarity reversal, is evidence of increasing colloidal Ag content. Its my understanding that Ag will disassociate from the probes as Ag ions first, but then into Ag compounds as time progresses and these compounds are then being adsorbed by the stabilzers. This process of AgNP forming from Ag ions will ultimately reduce the EC which would drop the conventional current flow if voltage were constant, but if you're continually electrolizing the solution, shouldn't the current observed maintain (assuming the solution is initially in equilibrium)? Or are the stabilizers contributing to the overall EC, such that when they absorb to the AgNP's they are effectively reduced, and the ion concentration of the entire solution drops which then reduces the observed current flow as well?
Screenshot_2020-01-21-15-31-42~2.png
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
It would seem as though the addition of "PVP 55" at 5g/L, as well as the addition of "Na-LS" at 0.5g/L, will provide for a more consistent distribution of particle size (10nm - 55nm), but I'm not sure exactly how reactive (for feminizing) the resultant molecule will be as opposed to ionic Ag or Ag compounds without the stabilizers utilized. Perhaps your background can further this ambiguity to a point of more certainty for me.

I liked the idea of reversing polarity of the electrodes, but I'm not sure if this reversal is contributing to a greater colloidal content aside from distributing the reaction site within the solution more evenly, allowing for the stabilizers to have more impact? I'm curious how an increased stir rate might offset, or if the purpose stems from other intricacies at play?

Reversing the polarity essentially reverses which electrode is plated and which is oxidized. I'm guessing the addition of the stabilizers helps to reduce the reduction at the cathode while enveloping the Ag oxidized at the anode. This reversal, along with the stabilizer addition would ultimately reduce the plating effect noticed at the cathode, as well as what I'm partially assuming is the "film build up" at the anode (I've never made CS and just started to learn about it) from microbubbles ect.

Interesting the absorption spectra derived. It seems it was attained using a 7g/L PVP 55 stabilizer addition (no mention of Na-LS) and an electrolysis duration of 3hrs & 5hrs. The peak moved little while the absorption % was more influenced. Perhaps a 420nm laser/LED and a similarly wavelength sensative photodiode would give a decent estimate as to how much colloidal silver is present (with calibration).

I'm not sure how cyclic voltammetry, or the reduction of anodic current with polarity reversal, is evidence of increasing colloidal Ag content. Its my understanding that Ag will disassociate from the probes as Ag ions first, but then into Ag compounds as time progresses and these compounds are then being adsorbed by the stabilzers. This process of AgNP forming from Ag ions will ultimately reduce the EC which would drop the conventional current flow if voltage were constant, but if you're continually electrolizing the solution, shouldn't the current observed maintain (assuming the solution is initially in equilibrium)? Or are the stabilizers contributing to the overall EC, such that when they absorb to the AgNP's they are effectively reduced, and the ion concentration of the entire solution drops which then reduces the observed current flow as well?
View attachment 4461772
The way I read the cyclic voltammetry result is thus: CV gives a read of how much electrochemically active silver (which I would formalize as [Ag(+)] or the concentration of silver monoanion) is present. Total silver is up but CV read is down = most of the silver is unreactive and thus putatively colloidal neutral silver. So the curves that go low fast and stay low correlate with effective conditions for producing and maintaining detectable nanosilver.

The rest of your post contains questions that mirror my own. Just what is the correlation between nanoparticle size (silver atoms per) and biological activity using a basic measure like total silver ppm mass/volume?

Combine this with an investigation of ethylene-bonding thermodynamics and kinetics, and I think we have the grist here for a full-monkey Ph.D. thesis.

Add to this questions of nanosilver particle morphology. I’ve read about nanocubes and nanowires. I don’t imagine they’ll have a similar activity in terms of ethylene-binding speed or capacity. Ethylene is the hormone that silver selectively takes out of play by complication. Investigation of that bonding constant v. particle size and shape is work that is begging to be done (imo) in order to define what CS parameters are important to us weed handlers.

It is my intrinsic laziness that has me go with the much simpler ionic-silver tech for this use.

I like the 420-nm absorbance info. This means that with a student Spec-20 (a “student-rated“ unit that in skilled hands can give precise colloidal silver concentration values. I’ve had direct contact with them as an instructor, and remain in awe of the students’ capacity to test them into destruction and the plucky little unit’s will to survive.) one can get a good read on colloidal silver concentration. This datum will allow the interested amateur to correlate chemical species with success in shemaling weed.

On a personal note, now that you’ve seen that I play nice outside of Toke&Talk, you may want to quote your calumny against me in that thread and post a revision. That would be kind of cool, if it is credibly real. Tag you’re it.
 

ChiefRunningPhist

Well-Known Member
The way I read the cyclic voltammetry result is thus: CV gives a read of how much electrochemically active silver (which I would formalize as [Ag(+)] or the concentration of silver monoanion) is present. Total silver is up but CV read is down = most of the silver is unreactive and thus putatively colloidal neutral silver. So the curves that go low fast and stay low correlate with effective conditions for producing and maintaining detectable nanosilver.

The rest of your post contains questions that mirror my own. Just what is the correlation between nanoparticle size (silver atoms per) and biological activity using a basic measure like total silver ppm mass/volume?

Combine this with an investigation of ethylene-bonding thermodynamics and kinetics, and I think we have the grist here for a full-monkey Ph.D. thesis.

Add to this questions of nanosilver particle morphology. I’ve read about nanocubes and nanowires. I don’t imagine they’ll have a similar activity in terms of ethylene-binding speed or capacity. Ethylene is the hormone that silver selectively takes out of play by complication. Investigation of that bonding constant v. particle size and shape is work that is begging to be done (imo) in order to define what CS parameters are important to us weed handlers.

It is my intrinsic laziness that has me go with the much simpler ionic-silver tech for this use.

I like the 420-nm absorbance info. This means that with a student Spec-20 (a “student-rated“ unit that in skilled hands can give precise colloidal silver concentration values. I’ve had direct contact with them as an instructor, and remain in awe of the students’ capacity to test them into destruction and the plucky little unit’s will to survive.) one can get a good read on colloidal silver concentration. This datum will allow the interested amateur to correlate chemical species with success in shemaling weed.

On a personal note, now that you’ve seen that I play nice outside of Toke&Talk, you may want to quote your calumny against me in that thread and post a revision. That would be kind of cool, if it is credibly real. Tag you’re it.
TBH I was just being truthful, but lets maintain this thread for what it is and if there are things that you feel you'd like to discuss outside of the general intention of this thread feel free to IM me. Objectively speaking, you've contributed positively and it has been noted, and speaking for myself, valued.

I didn't know that ethylene was a hormone, interesting.
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
TBH I was just being truthful, but lets maintain this thread for what it is and if there are things that you feel you'd like to discuss outside of the general intention of this thread feel free to IM me. Objectively speaking, you've contributed positively and it has been noted, and speaking for myself, valued.

I didn't know that ethylene was a hormone, interesting.
You were not being truthful, and this deployment of your dishonesty to further your false witness disappoints me.

Ethylene is a plant hormone. They use it commercially to ripen fruit that was more cheaply transported firm and green, and then is locally forced ripe. I am ignorant of the underlying biochemistry. But the effect is that intercepting ethylene with silver ion (silver metal and silver ion are peculiarly good at binding ethylene) and thereby denying it to the relevant receptor drives the weed plant’s sex reversal phenomenon.
 

ChiefRunningPhist

Well-Known Member
Anyone good with inductors?
...
Ive been stuck on how an induced magnetic field collapses after initial current has been cut and not sure if the rate of collapse is dependent upon the amount of resistance/impedance in the electrical circuit in which the inductor is part of.

So if you're boosting voltage in a conventional boost topology, and lets say there's 2 scenarios, 1 scenario your storage cap is at 385V, and the 2nd scenario your storage cap is 40V, does the induced magnetic field about the boost inductor collapse at the same rate, regardless the opposing voltage in the inductor discharge path (from storage cap), or is the mag field collapse dependent on oppositional voltage? I think all the graphs and charts I've seen on inductor discharge characteristics are representing a discharge across a linear resistance, or linear load, and Ill be dealing with non linear loads so I'm not sure how this effects the discharge rate. I can determine energy stored in a magnetic field but I need to determine the rate at which that enegy is discharged so I can calculate switching Hz and PWM for the desired power needed. I think I can just assume that a 50% duty cycle will result in sufficient OFF time to allow a full inductor discharge. Its hard to get the answers for specific small details from Google sometimes, so I'm leaning towards just using a dedicated PFC IC, but I feel like I've put a bit of time into comprehending what's needed, so I'd like not to give up when I feel like I'm close, but then more time goes by so..
 

ChiefRunningPhist

Well-Known Member
Not me. I am curious though. What's up? A power supply or something?

Could your answer be here in this article, Automatic PFC for Single Phase Loads by Means of Arduino Based TRIAC Control of Capacitor Banks?
Yep offline SMPS, and thanks, that looks interesting. It's using a different method than I'm working on, but I need to look it over in more depth, if it's more efficient then I'll use it. I've not built an SMPS with PFC before so trying to determine the most efficient solution first, then the most cost effective. Right now I'm designing based on a bridgeless dual boost converter operating in CCM managed by an esp32. Maybe use an AT tiny, that would probably be better if it's capable, I've not messed with them at all though yet.
 

Timezone

Well-Known Member
Last edited:

ChiefRunningPhist

Well-Known Member
Why not just buy one? It sounds like you're reinventing the wheel or is this a learning thing? TRC Electronics is a good source.


@ChiefRunningPhist is building a switch mode power supply (SMPS), with power factor correction (PFC), running in constant current mode (CCM), probably for led lighting.
There's a few types of operation possible for boost converters. CCM means continuous conduction mode, DCM means discontinuous conduction mode, BCM means borderline conduction mode, ect. The terms point to how the current is being flowed through the boost inductor during PFC operation.

Haha and ya, mainly just a learning thing. I'd liken it to building a CS generator over buying one, or building an environmental control system over buying one. I could buy an SMPS but the efficiencies are lower than what I could build myself, also cost and form factor, or the actual shape. I could buy dedicated PFC chips to manage the waveform that achieve 99% efficiency (PFC stage), and they are not expensive, but I'd like to determine the how. It will translate into other areas of electronics and Id like not to think of them as little magical black boxes that somehow work, I'd like to understand fully. It will help with troubleshooting on top of me also just being super curious lol. I get why and what but the how is what I'm trying to re-invent as part of a test of my comprehension as well as satisfying other design requirements in the process. Ill take a peek at that link, max of ~93% efficiency is what I'm seeing (so far) from the models I've looked over. I'm designing for 97%+. Typically prebuilt PS's use more lossy components to cut costs and this results in lower efficiency. They aren't designing for uber efficiency in a 100W or 60W or 200W PS ect, because the cost would be more and saving 5% more power on a 100W PS doesn't really make much differnce in cost per kWh, and if you need a 100W PS for a stereo or something you're not concerned with the 9% efficiency loss, you just want your device to be powered, so intended consumer application also leads to designing for less than maximum efficiency. LED drivers are becoming more and more prevalent, but most LED are not used for horticulture applications so the drivers aren't designed with the intent on maximizing μmol/J, and again cost comes into play, if you just need a display light at your store you really don't care about the extreme efficiency so cost would factor in your PS decision more than efficiency.
 
Last edited:

etruthfx

Well-Known Member
I’ll be honest way to many posts and so much information to fully read through :):blsmoke: however I’d love to see some of the codes you guys are running
Here is a simple python script to control the relay and co2 meter via serial uart connection.
i've posted this in another thread but i'll post it here too for you all to take a look. It's a touchscreen Rpi with IOT Relay and Co2/temp/humidity sensor completely customizable with python. Uses teamviewer to be easily monitored and controlled by my laptop from anywhere.
83920807_2744843025595053_2911585791979290624_n.jpg83800331_222140565612435_7183283002414202880_n.jpg1580619595004.png
Code:
#import dependencies
#!/usr/bin/python
import serial
import time
import datetime
import os
import RPi.GPIO as GPIO

#functions for relay
GPIO.setmode(GPIO.BCM)   #initilize gpio to bcm number system
PWR = 17                 #Set input pin
GPIO.setwarnings(False)  #turn warnings off
GPIO.setup(PWR,GPIO.OUT) #initiate output mode
GPIO.output(PWR,False)   #turn off at start
ser = serial.Serial("/dev/serial0")
ser.write("M 4\r\n") # set display mode to show only CO2
ser.write("K 1\r\n") # set operating mode
ser.flushInput()
time.sleep(1)
i=0
def runTime():
    #time in seconds
    x = 300
    return x
    
def co2ppm():
    #value of ppm to set
    y = 1100
    return y

def readSerial():
    ser.flushInput()
    ser.write("Z\r\n")
    resp = ser.read(10)
    resp = resp[:8]
    multiplier = 10
    try:
        z = float(resp[2:])
    except:
        print("Error fltCo2 Is invalid")
        z = 0
    return z*multiplier

def checkStatus():
    print("Checking status.")
    if (GPIO.input(PWR) == True):
        relayStatus = True
        print("Relay status:",relayStatus)
    else:
        relayStatus = False
        print("Relay status:",relayStatus)
    return relayStatus
    
def dispenseGas():
    print("Dispensing Gas")
    relayStatus = checkStatus()
    #Check status
    if(relayStatus==True):
        #Shut off if already active
        stopRelay()
    else:
        #Dispense gas for X seconds
        GPIO.output(PWR,True)
        print("dispensing")
        relayStatus = checkStatus()
        timeAmmount = runTime() #seconds to activate
        for t in xrange(timeAmmount,0,-1):
            fltCo2 = readSerial()
            print(str(t),"CO2 PPM = ", fltCo2,"Running")
            time.sleep(1)
    #Shut off
    stopRelay()
            
def outputDateTime():
#Calculate day of week and time
    print("Printing day and time info")
    if (day==1):
          strWeek = "Monday"
          print(day,":",hour,":",minute,":",second, strWeek)
    elif (day == 2):
          strWeek = "Tuesday"
          print(day,":",hour,":",minute,":",second, strWeek)
    elif (day == 3):
          strWeek = "Wednesday"
          print(day,":",hour,":",minute,":",second, strWeek)
    elif (day == 4):
          strWeek = "Thursday"
          print(day,":",hour,":",minute,":",second, strWeek)
    elif (day == 5):
          strWeek = "Friday"
          print(day,":",hour,":",minute,":",second, strWeek)
    elif (day == 6):
          strWeek = "Saturday"
          print(day,":",hour,":",minute,":",second, strWeek)
    elif (day == 7):
          strWeek = "Sunday"
          print(day,":",hour,":",minute,":",second, strWeek)
    return strWeek
    
def stopRelay():
    print("Stopping Relay")
    #Stop RPi Power and error check
    GPIO.output(PWR,False)
    relayStatus = checkStatus()
    if(relayStatus==True):
         print("Cannot dispense, turning off")
         GPIO.output(PWR,False)
         while (relayStatus == True):
             GPIO.output(PWR,False)
             if(relayStatus==True):
                  #Shutdown Pi On critical Error
                  print("Critical error. Performed emergency Quit safety feature")
                  os.system("sudo shutdown - r now")
    


###############
#Call functions
print("Calling functions")
fltLast = 0
first = True
while True:
    if first==True:
        stopRelay()
        time.sleep(1)
        fltCo2 = readSerial() #Buffer first result
        
        #Create date/time variables
        day = datetime.datetime.today().weekday() #as int
        hour = datetime.datetime.now().hour
        minute = datetime.datetime.now().minute
        second = datetime.datetime.now().second
        
        #store variables for when script is first started
        timeStartedHr = hour
        timeStartedMn = minute
        print("Hour:",hour,"Minute:",minute)
        first = False
    else:
        #Create date/time variables
        day = datetime.datetime.today().weekday() #day as int
        hour = datetime.datetime.now().hour
        minute = datetime.datetime.now().minute
        second = datetime.datetime.now().second
        time.sleep(1)
        i = i+1                 #Value for seconds elapsed
        fltCo2 = readSerial()
        co2Ammount = co2ppm()
        
        #Check co2 vs last and output if changed
        if fltLast != fltCo2: 
            fltLast = fltCo2
            print(i,":", "CO2 PPM = ", fltCo2)
        #Compare co2 to threshold
        if ((fltCo2 < co2Ammount) & (fltCo2 != 0)):
            status = checkStatus()
            dispenseGas()
            stopRelay()
            status = checkStatus()
        #Check error
        elif (fltCo2 == 0):
            print("could not dispense")
            time.sleep(1)
 
Last edited:

TrippleDip

Well-Known Member
I can do my best, but I'll need to know your budget ;)
Ok, my previous scope was similar to the allsun 2 in 1 that's $325 on amazon right now. It has everything I want: class 3, 2 inputs, handheld, and >50MSPS

Right now I am working on something with nearly 30 data lines and two clocks and corresponding analog voltages up to 400V that are obviously well isolated from the electronics. More than 2ch would be nice but not necessary because I want to verify timings not logic. The clock rate is 4MHz which I believes requires a minimum of 40MSPS and in the future I might want to go higher.

Other options I have seen are the cheap sainsmart 4ch (big plus) units that vary from 150 to 250 dollars. The big downside is that they're not class 3 and I feel like they would be easier to break than the standard handheld units. Also the hantech pc oscilloscopes that are around 100-150 which are not portable and again have a low voltage range but they supply x10 to x1000 probes.

Is there any way to get something similar to the standard, heavy duty, class 3 oscilloscopes for under $250? Are the hantech pc oscilloscopes reliable? Everything that looks good seems like its more than $300.
 

TrippleDip

Well-Known Member
After reviewing the literature from the links posted and some googling, it seems that the mA flowed during the CS generation determines the time of electrolysis (15mA × 1min = 1mg Ag, thus 3mA × 5min = 1mg Ag, or 15mA·min = 1mg Ag; I'm not sure how true or accurate this rate is),
This is actually something I know something about. One thing to understand is that electrons are not moving from the metal to the water and back to the metal like in an electronic circuit.

At the cathode we have mostly
2H2O +2e -> 2OH- + H2(g) occuring at -0.8v

At the anode we have mostly
Ag(s) -> Ag+(aq) + e- occuring at 0.8v, and
2Ag(s) + 2OH- -> Ag2O(s) + H2O +2e- occuring at 0.3v
Ag(s) + 2H2O > Ag2O2(s) + 4H+ +e- occuring at 1.8v
This last equation should tell you immediately why higher voltages are bad - less silver in solution and more black oxidation on the wires. It should also tell you there is a minimum voltage required (~1.6v after accounting for other losses) It would be interesting to run experiments between 1.7v and 2.6v to see how much oxidation is produced but I believe it will increase significantly after 2.6v. If you want further reading look up an electrochemical series for silver and you can see why ac current is much preferred - it takes less energy to release electrons from the silver oxide than it does to split water.

Regarding how many ppms vs time and current. From the above you can see that ideally one electron is transfered per one silver molecule. To transfer 1mg of silver into solution you would need 9umol of electrons. 9 umol of electrons is 96C or 96 Amp-seconds (faraday constant). Thus under ideal conditions to prepare 1L of a 10ppm solution you would need to pass 96As or 100mA for 2.7h

Hope that helps. Also I like that you mentioned the tyndall effect / nephelometry. It would be interesting to know if anyone has rigged up a photodiode at 90 degrees to a laser beam to measure concentration or how one could go about separating concentration from particle size. I figure it would have to be calibrated by making large quantities of CS (10s of L) and evaporating the liquid to determine the mass of silver.
 

spek9

Well-Known Member
I started putting some of my grow monitoring, automation and security systems online this morning.

So far I've got temperature and light monitoring for two of my four tents, temperature and light monitoring for the basement the tents are in, basement motion sensor, basement door sensor, and an alarm button that shows whether the alarm is on or off (and allows me to toggle it).

The alarm is automatically enabled 30 minutes after lights-on (giving me 30 minutes to do my work), and disabled 30 minutes before lights-off (again, time to do any work). It's disabled throughout the day, but I enable it any time we're not at home (it's armed automatically when we arm my separate home security alarm). The alarm sounds a buzzer, enough to let someone know something has happened, a camera is enabled and streams video remotely, the basement lights turn on, and I get both email and text message notifications (including pictures).

Still need to add humidity sensors, widgets for all of the relays (humidifiers, fans etc), widgets for my nutrient tank mixture levels, my other flower tent, my clone tent, aerocloner water level, and everything I've forgotten to mention. Just testing the reliability of the IoT system before I add much more.

You can view the system as it is, here: https://cayenne.mydevices.com/shared/5e4c824733ed91791a9d83ec
 
Last edited:

etruthfx

Well-Known Member
Welcome @etruthfx and thanks for the contribution. I'm new to Python but I think I can follow what's happening. What CO2 sensor are you using?
I'm sorry for the delay I missed this. I'm using Cozir K30 from here.
 
Top