Post subject: Re: Tutorial on Specific Gravity Using the Hydrostatic Metho
Posted: Wed Sep 30, 2015 5:03 pm
Valued Contributor
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2014 4:12 am Posts: 102
Yes i agree with you Stephen in all aspects, its modern technology, so as modern times, gemologists can now identify gemstones of their respective treatments and so as if they are synthetic, that maybe was not possible couple of decades back if i'm not wrong, i'm in gemology as well and would definitely seek an advice from experienced people like you.
Post subject: Re: Tutorial on Specific Gravity Using the Hydrostatic Metho
Posted: Wed Oct 07, 2015 11:42 am
Valued Contributor
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 1:41 pm Posts: 172
Bill Hanneman wrote:
Nathan Renfro wrote:
Bill, I still don't understand why you think gemologists don't use SG anymore.
How about these reasons?
1. GIA does not consider SG a necessary instrument for basic gem identification.
2. I have never encountered a GG who could easily identify mineral specimens, i.e. faceting rough.
3. quote=Brabra Voltaire "… we all make mistakes. Specific Gravity is still a major pain in the butt for me. (Thank gawd for the gemmoraman.) …”
Quote:
I can confirm that myself, and all the gemologists I work with use SG every day. The wire basket is practical, which is why it is used, especially when measurements on several stones in a production environment is required.
It is interesting to note that in the latest Kassoy advertisement for Gemological Instruments, there is no mention of SG or how to measure it. On the other hand, they have shown nine different Scales, but not a single one claims to be useful for SG work, so I guess the secrete lies in the wire basket. I say eliminate it, as very few are interested in production. Use Relative Density. It is cheaper, faster, more easily understood and should be taught to all budding gemologists.
With the advent of Hodginson's new book, I believe GIA will be forced to revise their teaching methods of gem characterization involving SG, filters, dispersion, Luster, and B:D ratio. If I can be of any help, perhaps we should talk. Be aware, I have in little interest in artificial gems or appraising. I am only interested in what a matrial should be called.
Well Bill, it seems some clarification is order.
Regarding point number 1, it would seem that if the GIA didn't think SG were necessary for gem identification, they would have removed that section from their course material and spared the lives of a few trees. Also, if they felt it unnecessary, I imagine there would not be a hydrostatic scale in each GG classroom for the purpose of making SG measurements. However, there is information on SG measurements in the course material and a hydrostatic scale in each GG classroom, so apparently your impression of GIA and the importance of SG is not correct.
Regarding point 2, I have no difficulty in identifying rough material (for faceting or otherwise) and also am a proud GG. However, your claim has some merit as we have yet to actually meet.
Regarding point 3, I'm quite confident Barbra can make an accurate SG measurement especially now that she has her hydrostatic scale permanently set up.
_________________ Professional Gemologist and Microscopist
The views expressed here are the author's opinions and do not necessarily reflect those of the his employer.
Post subject: Re: Tutorial on Specific Gravity Using the Hydrostatic Metho
Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2015 9:26 am
Gemology Online Veteran
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 11:43 pm Posts: 514 Location: North Carolina
Bill, For about $300 one can have the best of both worlds.
I have a Ohaus SPJ303 scale, good to 0.001g, The scale has a hook on the bottom that is connected to the weighing platform, so anything hanging from the scale is weighed. I put the scale on a little platform with an opening in the middle and hang some wire and a lower 'platform' from it. When I want to take a S.G. determination I put water in the container below the scale -- weigh the stone on the platform first; note the weight; zero the scale (with the stone on it); put the stone on the lower platform under water and the scale shows the difference in weight, air versus water. Divide the air weight by the difference and get the S.G.
I have successfully determined S.G. for stones as low as .3 carats, thought because it was strontium titanite the high S.G. might have made it easier than if it was lower density...
I am a faceter and I check the S.G. of any and all rough I buy, This setup makes it easy and I still have full use of the standard weighing capability with no fuss.
I have built your direct reading balance (pp 51-64) and found it easy to use, but it takes up a lot of room so I found myself clearing off a desktop and assembling the balance every time I needed S.G. readings. The Ohaus just needs to have water added to the container AND is a good milligram scale.
Post subject: Re: Tutorial on Specific Gravity Using the Hydrostatic Metho
Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2015 3:25 pm
Gold Member
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2015 10:52 pm Posts: 1131 Location: Central Queensland, Australia
Thank you Barbra, these are exactly the sorts of things I need to understand how to perform, given the amount of digging for different things in different localities that I do. I have seen various methods but they seemed much more complicated than the ones in the video and I wasn't certain of the accuracy of my scales (I had only kitchen scales back then, I have much better ones now).
Interesting and unusual things pop up, often when you're looking for something else altogether. The more basic tests I can do at home, the better and the more information I can provide to accompany photos.
Post subject: Re: Tutorial on Specific Gravity Using the Hydrostatic Metho
Posted: Sun Nov 22, 2015 7:51 am
Gold Member
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2015 10:52 pm Posts: 1131 Location: Central Queensland, Australia
I must be a bit of a dunce, I can't get any of these methods to return a value even remotely close to that of materials I already know the identity of Quartz is rather heavier than 1.8 and zircon a lot heavier than 0.4.
My scales seem pretty accurate but I'm having some difficulty seeing exactly what is happening in the photos and video - the water vessel in which the stone is suspended in the video does not appear to be actually touching the scale.
Post subject: Re: Tutorial on Specific Gravity Using the Hydrostatic Metho
Posted: Sun Nov 22, 2015 10:24 pm
Gold Member
Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 11:00 am Posts: 1133 Location: Monterey, CA
Lefty wrote:
I think I need better scales for starters
You are wasting you time.You don't need a scale to determine density. You can make your own relative density balance for less than $5. No weights, unlimited range, and direct reading.
Post subject: Re: Tutorial on Specific Gravity Using the Hydrostatic Metho
Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2015 10:27 pm
Gold Member
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2015 10:52 pm Posts: 1131 Location: Central Queensland, Australia
Well I did the test again, this time making sure the ceiling fan was off and the air in the room was still. Same unknown stone returned three readings very much closer together, consistent with the SG of topaz. I haven't gotten around to doing a bunch of known stones again yet, busy trying to finish a stone for someone. I'll have another play when I'm finished.
Can you tell me meore about this relative density balance Bill?
Post subject: Re: Tutorial on Specific Gravity Using the Hydrostatic Metho
Posted: Fri May 10, 2019 2:07 am
New to the Forum or The Quiet Type
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2019 10:45 pm Posts: 8
So here is another really dumb question. Why go though all the fuss and why not just drop the stone in a vial of water after it is tared out? Do you really need wire holders, etc.?
That does not work. The stone's weight does not vanish in water, if it is not supported by anything all the weight is pushing down on the scale whether it is in or out of water.
Post subject: Re: Tutorial on Specific Gravity Using the Hydrostatic Metho
Posted: Wed Feb 05, 2020 4:29 pm
New to the Forum or The Quiet Type
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2020 4:06 pm Posts: 2
Hi, i have a question regarding hydrostatic measurement method of gems. In some videos online the weight in air is divided to the weight in water, in other videos the weight in air is divided to the of w.in air minus weight in water. Why are there two different methods, which one is correct and why? Thank you in advance.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum