midgetwaiter |
11-25-2006 11:27 PM |
You're over thinking things, the amount of dissolved minerals in the local water is on the high side but not high enough to throw things too far out. Trying to get much closer than .002 or so to "ideal" with the tools we have available is probably more a matter of luck anyway. Obviously you understand that a density measurement starting with anything other than RODI will always be flawed, you can't account for what else is in the water to start with but there are just as many things wrong with trying to measure this with a refractive tool.
My hydrometer will usually measure the SG of the tap water a little above 1.003 but my refractometer (calibrated with RO) will read 1.000. Measuring a mixed salt solution, either brackish or full marine, they are bang on to each other. This can probably be explained by the different way the two tools work, the minerals dissolved in the tap water either do not refract enough light to make the refractometer work or they do it differently than a saline solution would and as such don't result in a useful measurement . In this particular situation I would suspect the hydrometer to be more accurate, if it is a good one.
Give the calibration method Pescador linked to a try, it's probably the best bet you have but in the mean time just mix the salt as directed, it will be close enough.
EDIT: One other thing, I live in the south so my water comes from the Glenmore Reservoir, if your water comes from the Bearspaw it should have considerably less dissolved calcium, 160ppm compared to 220ppm IIRC.
|