Continuing the lab I started describing in Conductivity of saline solution, a couple of days ago I tried repeating the lab with 0.1M NaCl instead of 1M NaCl. expecting about a 10-fold increase in resistance. The results I got mystified me:

I spent much of yesterday being mighty puzzled by the behavior with the known load of (4.7µF || 24kΩ), so this morning I add some more measurements in that series (confirming the old ones) and did another series with a 22.08Ω load. The results with the 22Ω load were not exactly consistent, but were equally confusing. [**Correction**: Steve P. asked me if nulled my ohm-meter to cancel the resistance of the leads. I had not—you can see I’m not an experienced lab technician! After doing that (using the “REL” button on the Fluke 8060A), I found the resistance of the 22Ω nominal resistor was actually 21.94Ω, rather than 22.08Ω. I’ve not redone the fits, so the reported results are off by about 0.6%—well within the goodness of the fit.]

I finally noticed, however, that the readings on the multimeter were getting quite small at the higher frequencies, but the oscilloscope trace was not getting smaller. When I plotted the voltage measured across the 22Ω resistor as a function of frequency, it looked like a classic 2-pole low-pass filter. It seems that the cheap Radio Shack multimeter I was using can’t measure AC voltages above about 1kHz. I guess there is a reason that cheap meters are cheap! (They no longer sell that model, and I’ve no idea what their current models can do.)

So I changed my setup slightly so that I could use my old Fluke 8060A multimeter for both frequency measurements and voltage measurements. With this setup, I could measure out to much high frequencies (I’m limited mainly by the frequency measurement limitations, not voltage measurements). Note, the closest equivalent I could find to the 8060A is the Fluke 175, which is a $265 meter. I believe that the Agilent 34401A bench meters that the students will have in the lab are much better quality, so they should not have the problems I had with the cheapo RadioShack multimeter. I’m not about to spend $1000 for a bench meter for myself, though, so it’s good to know that the Fluke 8060A is adequate for this task.

Now the measurements made more sense:

Although I can now do 3-parameter fits fairly well, we aren’t getting out to high enough frequencies for fitting the 1M NaCl curve. I tried adding a 4th parameter as before, but the visual fit did not improve. The (R1 || C1) values, which correspond to the electrode/electrolyte interface, are very similar for all three concentrations (135–150Ω and 20–40µF). The R2 values, which correspond to the electrolyte resistivity vary roughly as expected, getting larger for lower concentrations. Note that we can met the R2 values fairly well using just a single high frequency, since the impedance of R2+(R1||C1) is asymptotically just R2, as frequency goes to infinity. For lower NaCl concentrations that works fairly well, but for high NaCl concentration, even 125kHz wasn’t in the flat region.

The concentrations were only made to sloppy-kitchen-worker accuracy using table salt and tap water, not lab-quality accuracy, so are not good enough to claim that there is or is not linearity of the R2 values with the inverse of concentration as we would expect.

Can I use the same setup to measure the conductivity of tap water? I calculated (in Trying to measure ionic current through small holes) that the 1M NaCl solution should have a resistivity of about 0.13Ωm (77 mSiemens/cm). According to the City of Santa Cruz Water District’s 2011 Consumer Confidence Report, the conductivity of the tap water they deliver is 280–760 µSiemens/cm averaging 390 µSiemens/cm (they use the older term µmhos/cm—I’ve always been partial to “mho” for conductance myself), about 200 times the resistivity of my 1M NaCl. I wonder whether my setup could measure that, using a 1kΩ resistor as a load. At 55.12kHz, I get 0.5094V across the electrodes and 0.6281 V across the 1kΩ resistor, for a resistance of 811Ω (about 150 times what I get for the 1M NaCl, so within the range of what the water district reports). For this large an R2 value, I should be able to get similar measurements for almost any reasonable frequency—it is only for high salt concentration that the RC time constant gets small enough to need high frequency measurements.

### Thoughts about this lab

Students will need to know how to use a good model-fitting program. Gnuplot is nice, but installing it will be too painful for those with Macs (unless the gnuplot community has finally gotten around to making a Mac installer that doesn’t require gigabytes of downloads). We’ll need to scaffold the model-fitting process in any case.

Here’s the code I used for the gnuplot fitting (click to expand):

set title "Magnitude of impedance for electrodes, varying NaCl, 22ohm load" set xlabel "frequency [Hz]" set ylabel "impedance [ohms]" set key bottom left unset parametric set logscale xy set xrange[10:200000] set yrange [*:*] j=sqrt(-1.0) zpar(z1,z2) = z1*z2/(z1+z2) zc(c,f) = 1/(j*2*pi*f*c) z_known(f)=zpar(24000, zc(4.7e-6,f)) ohmic(f) = 22.08 rcr(r1,r2,c1,f) = abs(r2+zpar(zc(c1,f), r1)) twoc(r1,r2,c1,c2,f) = abs(zpar(zc(c2,f), r2+zpar(zc(c1,f), r1))) power_law(a,b,f) = b*f**a # a=-1 # b=300 # # fit log(power_law(a,b,x)) 'electrode-22-1M-table' using 1:(log(abs($3/$2*ohmic($1)))) via a,b # r1=170 r2=50 c1=3e-5 fit log(abs(ohmic(x)/rcr(r1,r2,c1,x))) 'electrode-22-0.1M-table' using 1:(log($2/$3)) via c1 fit log(abs(ohmic(x)/rcr(r1,r2,c1,x))) 'electrode-22-0.1M-table' using 1:(log($2/$3)) via r2 fit log(abs(ohmic(x)/rcr(r1,r2,c1,x))) 'electrode-22-0.1M-table' using 1:(log($2/$3)) via r1 fit log(abs(ohmic(x)/rcr(r1,r2,c1,x))) 'electrode-22-0.1M-table' using 1:(log($2/$3)) via r1,c1,r2 r1=abs(r1); r2=abs(r2); c1=abs(c1) r1_1=r1; r2_1=r2; c1_1=c1 r2 = 0.1 *r2 fit log(abs(ohmic(x)/rcr(r1,r2,c1,x))) 'electrode-22-1M-table' using 1:(log($2/$3)) via c1 fit log(abs(ohmic(x)/rcr(r1,r2,c1,x))) 'electrode-22-1M-table' using 1:(log($2/$3)) via r2 fit log(abs(ohmic(x)/rcr(r1,r2,c1,x))) 'electrode-22-1M-table' using 1:(log($2/$3)) via r1 fit log(abs(ohmic(x)/rcr(r1,r2,c1,x))) 'electrode-22-1M-table' using 1:(log($2/$3)) via r1,c1,r2 r1=abs(r1); r2=abs(r2); c1=abs(c1) r1_10=r1; r2_10=r2; c1_10=c1 r2=20*r2 fit log(abs(ohmic(x)/rcr(r1,r2,c1,x))) 'electrode-22-0.02M-table' using 1:(log($2/$3)) via r2 fit log(abs(ohmic(x)/rcr(r1,r2,c1,x))) 'electrode-22-0.02M-table' using 1:(log($2/$3)) via c1 fit log(abs(ohmic(x)/rcr(r1,r2,c1,x))) 'electrode-22-0.02M-table' using 1:(log($2/$3)) via r1 fit log(abs(ohmic(x)/rcr(r1,r2,c1,x))) 'electrode-22-0.02M-table' using 1:(log($2/$3)) via r1,c1,r2 r1=abs(r1); r2=abs(r2); c1=abs(c1) r1_02=r1; r2_02=r2; c1_02=c1 unset label # set label sprintf("r1=%.0f, r2=%.1f, c1=%.3g, c2=%.3g", r1,r2,c1,c2) right at 12000,200 plot 'electrode-22-1M-table' using 1:(abs($3/$2*ohmic($1))) title "1M", \ 'electrode-22-0.1M-table' using 1:(abs($3/$2*ohmic($1))) title "0.1M", \ 'electrode-22-0.02M-table' using 1:(abs($3/$2*ohmic($1))) title "0.02M", \ rcr(r1_10,r2_10,c1_10,x) lt 1 title sprintf("1M: %.3g ohm + (c1=%.3g F || %.2f ohm)", r2_10,c1_10,r1_10) ,\ rcr(r1_1,r2_1,c1_1,x) lt 2 title sprintf("0.1M: %.3g ohm + (c1=%.3g F || %.2f ohm)", r2_1,c1_1,r1_1), \ rcr(r1_02,r2_02,c1_02,x) lt 2 title sprintf("0.02M: %.3g ohm + (c1=%.3g F || %.2f ohm)", r2_02,c1_02,r1_02)

It looks like a salinity-measurement lab will be doable fairly early in the quarter, without them having to build any circuitry (just a series resistor). They may want to use different resistors for different salinity ranges.

The two 316L stainless-steel welding rods stuck through a piece of plastic works fairly well, though it would be difficult to compute the relationship between the conductivity of the solution and the measured resistance. I think most official conductance probes use a simpler concentric cylinder geometry, but even then there are fringing fields at the end of the inner cylinder that are hard to compute, so they rely on calibration with known test solutions.

I’m still wondering whether it would be worthwhile to get some silver wire and soak it in bleach to make Ag/AgCl electrodes. Comparison of stainless steel and Ag/AgCl electrodes would probably be useful to bioengineers, whether they go into medical or biomolecular applications.

I should buy a small amount of fine silver wire (about $5.50/foot for 18 gauge, which is about 1mm diameter) to experiment with, and see if I come up with anything interesting.

[…] idea for measuring Ag/AgCl electrode characteristics than I mentioned in yesterday’s post Better measurement of conductivity of saline solution. Rather than buying fine silver wire and soaking it in bleach (though that may still be worth […]

Pingback by Measuring Ag/AgCl electrodes « Gas station without pumps — 2012 August 15 @ 13:46 |

[…] Better measurement of conductivity of saline solution […]

Pingback by Order and topics for labs « Gas station without pumps — 2012 August 16 @ 23:38 |

[…] mentioned in Better measurement of conductivity of saline solution that I would try buying fine sliver wire and making Ag/AgCl electrodes, either with bleach or by […]

Pingback by Making Ag/AgCl electrodes « Gas station without pumps — 2012 September 6 @ 12:11 |

[…] the inductance using the same techniques I used for characterizing loudspeakers and electrodes (see Better measurement of conductivity of saline solution or Characterizing tactile transducer again), making a number of measurements of RMS voltage across […]

Pingback by Negative resistance oscillator « Gas station without pumps — 2013 January 7 @ 06:50 |

[…] since we’ll be measuring the amplitude of sine waves up to about 100kHz. I tried doing the lab with a cheap multimeter, and it failed miserably—the readings were way off at the higher frequencies, hiding the […]

Pingback by Doing the hysteresis lab without a scope « Gas station without pumps — 2013 January 19 @ 15:12 |

[…] had a little time to show them the plot of data that I had taken on the stainless steel electrodes and the somewhat poor fit I got. I also explained (a little) what the resistances and capacitance […]

Pingback by Ninth day of circuit class « Gas station without pumps — 2013 January 28 @ 21:23 |

[…] about a more automatic way to measure the conductivity of a saline solution than what I reported in Better measurement of conductivity of saline solution and Conductivity of saline solution. The original lab is suitable for the circuits class, because […]

Pingback by Towards automatic measurement of conductivity of saline solution | Gas station without pumps — 2013 September 3 @ 21:28 |

[…] Better measurement of conductivity of saline solution for the variation in the magnitude of impedance with frequency for polarizable stainless steel […]

Pingback by More on automatic measurement of conductivity of saline solution | Gas station without pumps — 2013 December 21 @ 17:48 |

[…] difference. This is one I’ll have to check out with cheap meters—I know I already ran into trouble with the Radio Shack meter on this lab, so I’ll have to check it out with the DT-9250A meter. The chapter will have to […]

Pingback by Reworking electronics class for cheap equipment | Gas station without pumps — 2015 July 17 @ 23:09 |