2013
DOI: 10.5194/dwesd-6-167-2013
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessment of calculation methods for calcium carbonate saturation in drinking water for DIN 38404-10 compliance

Abstract: Abstract. The new German standard for calcium carbonate saturation in drinking water, DIN 38404-10, 2012 (DIN), marks a change in drinking water standardization from using simplified equations applicable for nomographs and simple calculators to using extensive chemical modeling requiring computer programs. The standard specifies the chemical outlines for the modeling and presents a dataset with 10 water samples for validating used computer programs. The DIN standard, as well as the Standard Methods 2330 (SM) a… Show more

Help me understand this report
View published versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Considering the strong correlation between [Ca] and EC ( R 2 = 0.98) in our samples and the acidity of peat water (mostly pH < 7), we considered calcium as a conservative tracer (de Moel et al, 2013; Hart et al, 2011) allowing to evaluate water and solutes transfer processes throughout the peat column by comparing vertical [Ca] variability with a constant source diffusive equation (Equation ) proposed by Crank (1975): C()x,t=C0italicerfc()x2D**t where C ( x , t ) is the calculated cation concentrations, C 0 (mg·L −1 ) the initial and assumed constant concentration at the substratum/peat interface, x (m) the distance from this interface, t (s) the time, erfc the complementary error function and D * the effective diffusion coefficient. D * was determined from the molecular diffusion in solution for cations adjusted by a tortuosity factor, both respectively set at 2.10 −9 m 2 ·s −1 and 0.22 according to Freeze and Cherry (1979) and Fraser et al (2001).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Considering the strong correlation between [Ca] and EC ( R 2 = 0.98) in our samples and the acidity of peat water (mostly pH < 7), we considered calcium as a conservative tracer (de Moel et al, 2013; Hart et al, 2011) allowing to evaluate water and solutes transfer processes throughout the peat column by comparing vertical [Ca] variability with a constant source diffusive equation (Equation ) proposed by Crank (1975): C()x,t=C0italicerfc()x2D**t where C ( x , t ) is the calculated cation concentrations, C 0 (mg·L −1 ) the initial and assumed constant concentration at the substratum/peat interface, x (m) the distance from this interface, t (s) the time, erfc the complementary error function and D * the effective diffusion coefficient. D * was determined from the molecular diffusion in solution for cations adjusted by a tortuosity factor, both respectively set at 2.10 −9 m 2 ·s −1 and 0.22 according to Freeze and Cherry (1979) and Fraser et al (2001).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…, and has higher kinetics in acid solutions (especially when pH is below 6 or 5) whereas, in basic and alkaline solutions, rather precipitation is favored [47][48][49][50][51][52]. Pyrite is the most common species involved in mudrock weathering, and can alter when exposed to air at any pH value, with higher kinetics when in contact with water and in framboidal minerals [53][54][55].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The saturation index depends on pH, being lower at alkaline and higher at basic conditions. 51 The precipitation of CC̅ inside the channel started after an induction time of t ∼ 90 min into the first hydrostatic phase. This was the time needed for the water in the channel to reach oversaturation and for the particles to grow to a detectable size.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%