Presents a hardness unit of "m/s" and the Editor LET IT PASS! Not "units" of hardness: In the June issue of FAMA, p. If THAT were not confusing enough, some authors MAKE UP their own Particular kit sufficient information? In my opinion NO. Specifies *which* degrees they are talking about, except, sometimes, the Them you can find the units expressed as GH, TH, dGH, etc. 17.9 = 79% difference!) isįurthermore, if one follows the postings on this (or any other) list, The possibility of serious error (10.0 vs. Out which degrees are used from the conversion factors - if they are Use the "German degree", but talk of "degrees". Used - and that creates substantial uncertainty! I have seen aquariumīooks published in England that use the "English degree" and others that Water hardness, offhand one DOES NOT know *which* "degrees" are being
Because there exist different scales of "degrees" of > GH and KH are odd units to use in lots of ways, but at least one is > in no doubt what they are. Think that the rest of the world follows suit. This is true in the US, Canada and most of Europe.
That it is expressed as mg/L of CaCO3 or ppm (weight/volume) - no Well, if one presents *water hardness* in ppm, then the convention is > ppm of _what_? The usual problem is that people don't say, and one > is left wondering. After hearing all the > interesting discussion about hardness, I decided to change my > opinion about units: ppm is really the preferred way to present > hardness. > Roger, thanks for answering my question. Plant Digest, V3 #370), I agree with the results of your calculations,īut not necessarily with your line of arguments and/or conclusions. In your answer to the Neil Frank/Roger Miller corerespondence (Aquatic