how i can measure the toc in water?
612146
Some info at http://www.aquapurefilters.com/contaminates/165/toc.html and at http://www.stateoftheart.it/toc-2.htm
481495
1. Perform vacuum distillation.  Place the solution in a vacuum flask; apply vacuum (removing air from vessel); apply heat and "boil" the water off.  Collect the condensate and measure its volume.  Weigh the remaining sugar that is left behind in the vacuum flask.\n  -or -\n2. There may be a way to measure the refractive index of the sugar solution.\n-or-\n3. Heat a sample of the solution to determine the boiling point elevation; if you have a table that compares molarity vs. boiling point elevation, you may be able to determine the molarity of the solution by knowing at what temp. the solution boils.\n\n4. You may be able to extrapolate by weighing exactly one cubic centimeter (cc) (volume) of the solution at 25 degrees C.  There may be a table comparing weight of a 1 cc solution at that temp (as the density of 1 cc of water is different than a 1cc sugar solution.
87390
There are several possible answers to this question, depending on what resources you have available to you.  If the solution you are measuring is known to contain only potassium carbonate dissoved in water, you can measure the potassium concentration by either atomic emission or atomic absorption methods and calculate to concentration of the potassium carbonate.  You could measure the carbonate concentration by titration or colormetric methods and calculate the potassium carbonate concentration.  Or you could simply evaporate a known quantity of the water to dryness, weigh the residue and calculate the concentration from those numbers.  \n\nIf you have other compounds in the solution, the last option, gravimetric, pretty much disappears.  The first two options are still practical, unless the other compounds contain potassium or carbonate.  Then, things get a little more complex.
93135
Try the Educator's Reference Desk
96567
got a dandy.....even though  it  seems  difficult   youll  break through  and  find  out  you can  almost  measure  anything....try  this  because  i dont  know  what  type  of  equipment  you have....in  search  bar  go.....vernier  read .. hit search..the  NTNU site java  is  excellentyou you can  even  practice  measuring  on  line.....reading  a  vernier  is  good too.....check  them  all
600243
unzip your pants and measure to your hearts content\nonly you have that answer
1033464
Whenever you make \na measurement, you have some error. How much the error is depends on \nthe equipment you are using to make the measurement and how you use \nthe equipment. If you are measuring the water in the beaker by looking \nat the volume markings, the accuracy of your measurement of the volume \nof water depends first on how you look at the water. That is, are you \nmeasuring at the top or the bottom of the meniscus? (The meniscus is \nthe curved shape of the water's surface caused by its surface tension \nand interaction with it's container. If you aren't sure what this \nmeans, go get yourself an ordinary glass of water and look at how the \nwater curves up where its surface touches the glass.) The second is \nhow accurately measuring lines are painted on the beaker. The third is \nhow thick the measuring lines are: i.e., is it the top, middle, or \nbottom of the measuring line that is the correct measurement?\n\nFor measurements you make in numerous steps that you add together, \neach additional step introduces more error. Let's look at the water in \nthe beaker again. If you have a 500ml (milliliter) beaker, but need 10 \nliters of water in a bucket, you will have to fill the beaker 20 times \nand empty into a bucket. If you consistently put in only 499ml, you \nwould end up 20ml short of water in your bucket. \n\nNow, let's look at measuring distances. If you measure your room with \na professional measuring tape, you will be more accurate than if you \ntry to measure it by laying meter sticks end-to-end. However, if you \nare measuring a real room, you also have to decide where you are going \nto measure it. Most people might measure it on the floor along one \nwall. But is the opposite wall exactly the same length? If you measure \nit at the ceiling, is that exactly that same length? Is the wall \ncurved? (Put your head against a wall and look down a hallway - you \nwill probably see waves and curves in the wall.)\n\nIn short, the term "greatest possible error" has no meaning unless the \nmeasurement method is specified, the error of the measurement method \nwhen done by properly trained people is known, and the people who are \ndoing the measurement have been trained properly.\n\nMy discussion has been based on the assumption that the room is \nreally seven meters long. But what if you are going to build a room \ndesigned to be seven meters long, then measure it. The room is built \nbase on a lot of measurements, so it may or may not be seven meters \nlong before you measure it. You now have more sources of error.\n\nMy discussion is also based on the the assumption that you were \ntalking about measurement error. On thing you have to know \nabout dimensions (e.g., length, diameter, radius, angle, etc.) when \nyou design something is that the dimension always has a tolerance \nstated or implied. That is, if you get a blueprint that says a \ndimension on a machine part is 37.2 millimeters (mm), some place on \nthat blueprint it will say something like "Tolerance for xx.x is \n+/- 0.03." (The "+/-" is read as "plus or minus.") That means that for \na dimension like 37.2 millimeters, you can actually build it so that \nit is anywhere between 36.9 and 37.5 millimeters. Alternately, it will \nbe stated with the dimension as 37.2 +/- 0.03. This means, once again, \nit can have the dimension between 36.9 and 37.5 millimeters.\n\nIf the question really has to do with tolerance, it may depend on how \nyour seven meters is written (i.e, 7m, 7.0m, 7.00m, or even as 700cm). \nIn these cases, you you might reasonably assume that the tolerance is \none-half the last digit. That is, for 7.0 meters, it is +/- 0.05m, for \n7.00 meters, it is +/- 0.005m, for 700cm it is +/- 0.5cm. This \nreasoning implies that 7 meters would have a tolerance of +/- 0.5m, \nbut you have to ask yourself if a tolerance of half a meter in seven \nmeters (about 7 centimeters in a meter) is
580603
stick it in a tank of water then measure the water displaced.archemedes law
519141
you can measure the volume if you are very quick.\n\ntake a scaled glass, preferably one used in labs with a scale in mm3 or cm3, pour some water in it and read on the scale the volume of water.\nThen put the pretzel in the water and quickly read again the scale. \nThe volume of the pretzel is the difference between the second reading and the first one.\nDo it fast because the pretzel may absorb water. Or paint the pretzel with nail polish to be waterproof! :-)\n\nThe surface area is more difficult, but you can use a millimeter paper to have an approximate value. Put the pretzel on it, and draw around carefully the shape. Then count how many little squares are inside the contour lines, and multiply it with the area of one little square (= 1 mm2) :-)))\n\nHave fun!!!
894074
Assuming the drop of water is a sphere or close to one...\n\nvolume of a Sphere = (4/3) * pi * radius^3\n\nTo find the volume of a drop, measure out a small volume of water into a graduated cylinder.\nUse a dropper to take drops and deposit them into another container.  Count the number of drops needed to empty the measured water.\nvolume of drop = measured volume / number of drops
701356
I think you mean OSMOSIS?\n\n1) go to www.google.com\n2) enter osmosis in the text box\n3) click the search button\n4) read
97726
I know of no way to determine this without a counter. Go to link below for quality counter that is hidden from viewer's site. FREE and gives you great reporting.
182862
First, weigh the liquid or solid. Then measure the temperature and record both values. Now, you need to set up a current. You need ampermeter and voltmeter in the current.(Make sure the current is not shorting, i.e. touching the ground.) Then run the current through the solid or liquid and measure the temperature after you are done. Calculate the electrical energy that you gave to the liquid or solid. \n\nFind heat capacity: Energy / change in temperature.\n\nThen find specific heat capacity: heat capacity / mass.\n\nIf you can heat it up, that way easier than an electrical method. If you have to use an electrical method, you need a lot of calculations, measurements, etc.\n\nGood luck!!!
325473
Measure the weight of 1 cup of sand and figure it from there.\n\n :-)
735291
The best way to measure its volume is to get a measuring cylinder with water in, pop the ring in the water (making sure that is is completely covered) and then measuring the change in the water level.\n\nThat will give you the volume of the ring.
644639
You could measure the volume of fuel in the tank by weighing the tank accurately as it is filled with fuel. The weight of a gallon of fuel is known accurately. Home heating oil tanks utilize crude floats to measure the height of the oil level in the tank, but more sophisticated level indicators are available for industrial uses.\nSearch http://www.ThomasNet.com for that application.\nhttp://www.thomasnet.com/nsearch.html?cov=NA&which=prod&what=tank+level+sensors&navsec=search&heading=96118542
11917
measure the height of the water in bucket or sink you're putting the model in BEFORE you put the model in.  Then put the model in and remeasure the water height.  Use the height and the dimensions of the vessel (bucket, sink, etc.) to calculate the volume of water that's displaced.  Using a perfectly circular or square vessel will be ideal.