This application relates generally to water purity qualitative analysis, and in particular to water used for medical applications.
Water purity qualitative analysis determines the presence or absence and the amounts of chemicals and their mixtures in water. Water purity qualitative analysis can require field kits for testing the water facilities. The field test kits are known in general to have disadvantages including inaccuracies in data, false positives, limitations of single-factor testing, e.g., in measuring chlorine levels in pools and spas, and overall accuracy. Disadvantages of field qualitative testing kits also include an inability to reproduce statistics. Outdoor and indoor conditions, such as humidity, temperature, wind, rain and noise add to the inherent disadvantages of test kit qualitative field-type water monitoring.
Testing can alternatively be done by mixing water with powders in vials. Both strips and vials change the color of water to indicate if the water purity meets safe levels. Color change analysis leaves open the possibility that the person viewing the change cannot see color well and that multiple viewers may compare the water color to the test markers differently. Color viewing test results accordingly provide low to moderate accuracy in measuring amounts of chlorine, bacteria and acidity (pH levels), which each affect water purity.
Sensors are used in municipal, industrial and residential water systems to test variables affecting water purity for human consumption and use, as well as to monitor water purity for healthy ecosystems of other living organisms. Sensors measure temperature, pH levels and desalination (salt control) compounds. However, using sensors in qualitative water purity field testing can result in drawbacks due to moderate measurement accuracy for multiple types of water purity statistics.
Using chemistry-based field-testing to gather qualitative water-purity data gives incomplete statistical outcomes, similar to the pH colorimetric qualitative testing. Operating at a neutral pH, chemistry-based testing, like colorimetric testing, measures particular aspects of inorganic substances in water, rather than all its characteristics. As an example, at neutral pH, both of the chemistry-based and colorimetric tests measure dissolved iron amounts, but not iron particles. In addition, ammonia levels from biological decay compromise qualitative measurements using chemistry-based field testing of nutrients in wastewater.
As discussed above, known water testing techniques have multiple drawbacks. In a medical setting in which the testing techniques are relied upon, for example before allowing a therapy to take place, the ramifications associated with inaccurate testing can be serious. If the water testing underreports the level of a certain substance in the tested water, the water can be allowed to be used when it should not be, resulting in a potentially unsafe condition for the patient or in the malfunctioning of a machine running a medical treatment for the patient. The reverse situation is also problematic. If the testing is oversensitive, or in any case gives false positive or overreported results, the system may needlessly alarm or erroneously prevent a treatment from occurring.
Another problem with the above testing is its manual nature. Even if the testing assay is otherwise sound, the patient or caregiver can introduce error. And even if the testing and the operator performance are sound, manual testing still requires extra steps, adding time, complexity and cost.
An improved water quality system and method are needed accordingly.
USPTO Backgrounds
USPTO Backgrounds