1. V.G.Levich, “Concerning a sensational effect”, Soviet Physics, USPEKHI, 9 (1966), 316.
This short note by a highly regarded Russian physicist of international repute, analyses the intensity of a magnetic field required to produce a measurable effect on water molecules and reaches the conclusion that the field intensities of commercial devices are far below the required intensity. In a personal communication, the late Professor Levich gave me to understand that most of the extensive USSR literature glorifying magnetic treatment was unreliable.
2. D. Hasson and D. Bramson, “Effectiveness of magnetic treatment in suppressing CaCO3 scale deposition”, Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Design & Development, 24 (1985), 588-592.
This is an extensive study we carried out on a widely advertised magnetic conditioner under the full supervision of the technical representative of this equipment. The effectiveness of magnetic treatment in suppressing CaCO3 scale deposition was examined under fully controlled conditions in numerous experiments. Magnetic treatment failed to produce a scale suppression effect.
3. O. Sohnel and J .Mullin, “Some comments on the influence of a magnetic field on crystalline scale formation”, Chemistry and Industry, 6 June, 1988, pp 356-358
This is a highly regarded critical review paper written by an eminent expert, author of the well-known book on crystallization. It was prompted by the extreme claims made by a Chemistry Professor on the effectiveness of magnetic treatment, without providing hard scientific data.
4. G. Limpert and J. Raber, “Tests of a non chemical scale control devices in a once through system”, CORROSION/85,
Paper 250, March 1985
These are probably the most extensive reliable tests on the effectiveness of various devices carried out in an industrial environment (the 3M Company) under well-controlled conditions. All devices tested failed to show a meaningful scale suppression effect.
5. W. Wagner and M. Schmidt carried out in the eighties for the DVGW (the German Association for gas and water) a similar extensive study at
the Water Research Institute of the University of Karlsaruhe.
Again, no meaningful scale suppression effect was detected.
6. “Water Conditioning and Purification”, the magazine of the American Water Quality Association published in the October1989 issue a news item announcing that they were banning exhibition of MFC and related devices from their trade shows. The reason given was lack of evidence on the effectiveness of that such devices.
7.
P.W. Krauter, J.E. Harrar, S.P.Orloff and S.M.Bahowick, "Test of a Magnetic Device for the Amelioration of Scale Formation at Treatment Facility D, Environmental Protection Department, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, University of California, UCRL-ID-12551, December 1996, 19 pages
This study evaluated the effect the Descal-A-Matic magnetic device on the formation of calcite scale at LLNL Treatment Facility D. To evaluate the magnetic treatment technique, the ground water was passed through the Descal-A-Matic device before treatment by the air stripping unit, and the resulting scale formation and other water characteristics were compared with those found during a test with no water treatment and a test with chemical treatment with a polyphosphate additive. No beneficial effect was found when using the magnetic device.
8. Brent E. Corbett, Charles D. Moody, Michael D. Morris, " Evaluation of RO Scaling Prevention Devices at High Recovery", Bureau of Reclamation, Science & Technology Program, Denver CO, ADVANCED WATER TREATMENT PROGRAM REPORT NO. 91 (R-03-01), 36 pages, March 2003
This study evaluated the effectiveness of a magnetic device (MD) and a high voltage capacitance device (HVC) as possible alternatives to the dosing of chemical antiscalants for preventing scaling during reverse osmosis (RO) operation at high product water recovery. The tests were conducted on feedwater to the Bureau of Reclamation’s 72-MGD Yuma Desalting Plant. High overall recoveries of greater than 90 percent were achieved. In these tests, neither the MD nor the HVC were effective in preventing calcium sulfate scaling at 91-percent water recovery. In contrast, the addition of 2 mg/L of sodium hexametaphosphate (SHMP) to feedwater was successful in avoiding scale at recoveries of 93 percent.
9. Gil-Ju Jeong, Tae-jin Lee, Ki-hoon Han, Young-Ju Ahn, Kee-yong Park, Seok-lyong Song, "Magnetic Treatment of Seawater to Control Scale Formation", Proccedings International Desalination Association World Congress on Desalination and Water Reuse, Singapore, September 2005 Paper SP05-140, 9 pages
The Effect of magnetic field on the control of scale formation in the seawater was investigated to find any possible application in the desalination process. The experiments have been carried out with two types of thermal desalination process. One is MED (Multi Effective Distillation) process and another is MSF (Multiple Stage Flashing) process. Heated seawater (about 90oC) was fed to two pipes with 1/2 inch diameter. One has a commercially available permanent magnet before entering the pipe, control does not have it. The flow rate was 1,300 kg/hr and the velocity inside the pipe was maintained to be 1.9 m/s. After over 2,000 hours operation, the scale formed inside the pipes was examined to find the effect of permanent magnet. Thickness, chemical compositions, and micro-structure of scale were examined. The results showed that permanent magnet tested in this study did not prevent nor considerably reduce mineral scale formation in the seawater when compared to the control experiment.
