# Low Cost General Tools Moisture Meter?



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

I've been shopping around for moisture meters, and I know the Electrophysics CT33 (and its much higher priced American version) are sort of the standard for marine surveyor use. But I found this other one that have very similar specs (pinless design, penetration depth very similar) at much lower cost:

Highly Accurate Non-Invasive Digital Moisture Meter for Wood Lumber & Timber - General Tools & Instruments

It can be found at online discounters for around $63. Digital readout instead of analog. Also has a "hold" button which could be VERY useful for getting readings in places that are out of the line of sight.

Has anyone used this brand of meter? Obviously these things are mostly used by carpenters to get moisture in wood, so any brand (including Electrophysics) needs a conversion chart for fiberglass applications. But this one is about a third the cost of the other ones, and could potentially use the same chart found here.

It seems to me that these tools are basically just upgraded stud-finders (just read US patent #4099118, with quantitative readouts instead of LEDs. Also you need to set an absolute zero instead of zeroing it on hollow drywall like you do with a stud-finder. But this isn't rocket science - it should be easily done. And for about $60, its cost is peanuts in boat dollars.


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

The readings do you little to no good unless they come with a conversion scale to read fiberglass, which that meter does not, nor do most meters only intended for wood. The CT-33 has specific translation scales for reading fiberglass..

You can not use the chart from one meter to translate another as they all interpret moisture in their own way.. The cost is only peanuts if you are not wasting it...


----------



## davidpm (Oct 22, 2007)

I have the Electrophysics CT33 and I taped the conversion scale to the front of the unit. In reality you are only really interested in maybe four numbers. Soaked, kinda wet, kinda dry and dry.
The problem is that false reads are still very possible.
It can read soaked if it is picking up a piece of stainless on the other side of the glass your are measuring.
It can read dry if due to the curve etc you can't get a good contact or because the core was so wet at one time and is it gone now and is just air.

In general I have not had much luck with General products, they are the low of the low end. But in truth with a lot of testing you may be able to figure out the four numbers for your meter. Worse case you could make up or find a piece of glass and put wet and dry core under it and test until you feel you can read it properly. I'm planning on doing that with my Electrophysics as it is more about if the numbers make sense and their relationship than the specific number.

That being said I've found it good advice to not argue with MS as he has been doing this for a long time. And if $60 is peanuts then double that is what, two peanuts. It seems the wrong tool to experiment on as it is so fuzzy to begin with.


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

The General meter would probably suffice for baseline/then future tracking and monitoring but would require much work and comparison with another mete,r with known values, to get some accuracy out of it for spot readings without a base line..

On any boat you can almost always find some known dry core. That could become a baseline but then the question becomes what is elevated, moist, wet, saturated? Is it 25, 30, 44, 68? Unless you had a meter to compare it to that defines those ranges, it would be very hard to guess at how wet the deck was without core samples..

A small brass or phenolic (plastic) sounding hammer can tell you a lot if you train your ear well and they really do cost peanuts. I have used lots of different meters over the years (Tramex, Soverign, JR Overseas etc.) and the CT-33 is the best bang for the buck I've come across. It replaced my old JR Overseas GRP-33 that I accidentally dropped off a boat and the CT-33 works just as well, for about half the price.

I agree with the comments on General Tools. They are Generally mediocre to Harbor Freight Quality with the occasional decent tool thrwin in the mix. That meter may be decent on glass but would not be high on my priority list, due to the unknowns. If I really wanted to map and monitor my boat or use it when looking at new used boats I would wait a while and save up for a meter desigened to read glass laminates.

One other thing to consider is digital vs. analog. I much prefer analog in a MM. The digital ones are very hard to track as the numbers on screen are an ever moving target vs. a needle. You'd probably need to use both side-by-side to see what I mean..


----------



## davidpm (Oct 22, 2007)

Maine Sail said:


> One other thing to consider is digital vs. analog. I much prefer analog in a MM. The digital ones are very hard to track as the numbers on screen are an ever moving target vs. a needle. You'd probably need to use both side-by-side to see what I mean..


This is a great tip. And yes it makes total sense.
Any tips on interpreting readings.
For example I took a reading about 2" from a chain plate it showed soaked, pegged the meter. 
I took out the chain plate and could find no moisture around the chain plate.
So it seems unlikely it was dry at the chain plate but wet two inches over. So I'm trying to figure out what happened.

At first I thought someone may have filled right next to CP but left the rest of wet core. It didn't look like resin in the CP hole, it looked like plywood.


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

davidpm said:


> This is a great tip. And yes it makes total sense.
> Any tips on interpreting readings.
> For example I took a reading about 2" from a chain plate it showed soaked, pegged the meter.
> I took out the chain plate and could find no moisture around the chain plate.
> ...


What was under the deck? Backing Plate, wire chase? Moisture comes from many places some of them though not the most obvious, like the chain plate. The cool thing is that it usually leaves a trail and you can often follow it back to the source. Unless vacuum bagged or scrimp built there are always voids and pockets where water can collect as it wicks along this could have been one of those pockets too.. Did you compare the surrounding area with soundings?


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

Electrophysics makes a digital version that I have used for years and the numbers do not "jump" around. Over the years I have had the opportuniy to see what the numbers actually mean as I have been present when the suspect area was opened up for inspection. A number of times I ahve seen erroneous readings with no discernible cause. below are a couple of related articles I wrote.

Moisture Meter Mythology 

FACT: Moisture meters do not measure moisture.
FACT: Fiberglass is not waterproof. 
There are a couple of different types of meters and several brands and detailed discussion would include terms like impedance, dielectric constant, capacitance, resistance and conductance but basically they measure how much electricity a material can store or conduct, so for the purposes of this article we will say they measure something most of us understand.........."conductivity". Of the two basic types of meters, "capacitance" and "resistance" , we will concentrate on the former as resistance type meters have pin sensors ( O.K. for wood, not a great idea for FRP) that must be inserted into the material being tested 
A simple analogy would be to suggest that they send out a signal and measure the difference in the sent signal and the return signal, thereby measuring the conductivity of the material (boat surface) between the sending and receiving units. Wet fiber glass or core would be more conductive in theory than dry materials and therefore show a higher reading on the meter.
There are many things that can confuse a moisture meter and considerable experience is required to make proper use of them. Given that they actually measure capacitance rather than moisture, highly conductive materials will show higher readings on the meter whether or not they are wet.

The "Code of Practice for the Measurement and Analysis of the Wetness of FRP Hulls" ( * International Institute of Marine Surveyors (1998) Witherby & Co., London, 17p. ) which specifies the methods necessary. 
These include: 
"The surface must be carefully cleaned. A large number of random 4" x 4" areas must have paint or other coating removed down to the gel coat. The vessel should be out of the water at least 24 hours. Minimum number of measurements must be = approx. one per sq. meter (3.3 feet) or 50-100 on the average 35-40 foot boat".

Few sellers will allow bottom coatings to be scraped as necessary for an accurate determination. Generally buyers are also unwilling to pay the costs necessary for the yard to first block the boat and scrape the paint, then re-coat after analysis. If there are reasons to suspect a serious moisture problem, such as water intrusion in a cored hull, you may have to take core samples to be sure of the condition and many sellers also resist this.
Some examples of meter confusion.........
if there is heavy condensation on the underside of an otherwise sound and dry structure the meter may show high moisture levels.

if your boats gelcoat contains a lot of titanium dioxide (a common white pigment made of metal) the meter may read high depending on the pigment concentration.

if the non-skid on your deck is very deeply moulded or if the non-skid paint is very rough, meter contact may be limited so that a false low reading is shown on the meter. Some non-skid paints are rubber based and as this is an insulator again false low readings may show.

if you place a meter on the outside of a hull and there are metal fittings, anchor chain, water hoses or fuel tanks in contact with the inside, the meter may read high.

if a large saturated blister is deep in a very thick laminate the meter may show "dry" as the moisture is too deep for the weak signal of the meter to reach..

if water saturated core has separated from the FRP skin, the meter may read "dry" as there is no contact for conductivity.

if your bottom is epoxy coated, the meter may read low depending on the insulating properties of the epoxy.

if the core is frozen: A number of years ago I did a lot of testing with frozen blocks of bits of decks and hulls and was convinced that I could determine moisture content of frozen core ..... I was wrong ! What worked in the kitchen did not work in the field. In the kitchen at ambient temperature the meter was warm enough to create a thin film of moisture on the frozen bit and register on the meter. Outside in below freezing temperatures this did not occur. 
When water freezes it expands by about 8%, The crystalization that causes the expansion results in a lot of non-conductive space within the water thereby greatly reducing the effectiveness of the meter. When meters are unreliable we can use the percussive sounding method, unfortunately this too goes out the window because frozen core whether balsa or plywood sounds solid. I need the work as I don't have much in the winter months and will survey a frozen boat (balsa cored hulls excepted) as long as you are willing to live with the limitations. My best advice .... wait til' spring.
As they send out a very weak signal, these meters do not read reliably much more than 1/4" deep and not more than 1/8" deep on some laminate schedules although some manufacturers claim up to 1" ( not in my experience). Many unnecessary epoxy bottom jobs are initiated by the improper use of moisture meters and many more of these jobs fail for the same reason.
A high reading on the meter in conjunction with a dull sounding report from my little brass hammer is an almost certain indication of a problem. If you find a little brass hammer in your bilge could I please have it back ?
Remembering that the meter is actually measuring the conductivity (or capacitance) of the material, we must also consider that the fiber/resin ratio, whether chopped strand, roving or mat and different types of resins will all have an affect on conductivity. Also remember that bottom, topsides, decks and superstructure of the same boat will often have different laminate schedules and construction techniques all of which again affect conductivity and therefore meter readings.
The average 30' uncored hull can absorb a maximum of about 3% water as contrary to popular beliefs, polyester resin is hygroscopic. For a 30' uncored boat this is somewhere between 20 and 30lbs. and it can take months to dry out ... if ever. The only way to accurately measure moisture content is to cut a piece from the hull, weigh it, bake it for a couple of weeks or burn it, weigh it again and measure the difference.
These meters can give an indication of relative moisture content or at least point out anomalies across a given area but this is just the beginning. Once anomalies have been identified we must confirm the reasons by examining the inside surface of that area for causes other than moisture or perhaps removing an area of bottom paint and re-testing.
It should be remembered that proving a 6" X 6" area wet or dry does exactly that and only that !
Assuming the same substrate (the layup is likely different in several areas of the bottom), these meters can show different levels of moisture across a given area. This can be useful if the bottom has been stripped of gelcoat and we are trying to determine if it is dry enough to to accept an epoxy barrier coat. If the meter reads XXXX when the hull is first stripped and XX two months later then moisture content has been reduced. If after another two months the meter still reads XX it does not mean the hull is dry, just as dry as it's going to get. Whatever the reading, it is relative and does not actually show 5% or 30% water content or whatever other number the meter generates. Let me repeat ....These meters CANNOT give a moisture percentage in FRP !

Moisture content is NOT a predictor of blisters and don't let anyone tell you different. While blisters without moisture are highly unlikely, thousands of boats out there have had high moisture levels for decades without a blister in sight.

I use the meter in my left hand and a hammer in my right. I use it as a backup and second guess and yes I make mention of the readings in my survey reports but only because so many people ask for them. I don't personally believe they are of much value on the bottom of a boat unless the previously mentioned "Code of Practice" is followed and even then it's only going to tell you what we already know.....boat bottoms are wet !

There are several places now advertising these meters to the general boating public suggesting they are cheaper than hiring a surveyor. Don't waste your money, even an untrained ear can detect soft balsa core under FRP in most cases. Invest about $9.00 in a small brass hammer instead.

I am often surprised by the ignorance of many marine surveyors regarding these issues. Even the hammer is not infallible, if the laminate is thicker than usual or wet core has separated from a thicker than usual FRP laminate or even how the boat is blocked or supported may affect percussive soundings. What we are really dealing with is an educated guess. Sometimes there is just no way around taking a core sample but the meter should never be used as the sole arbiter.

Cored bottoms are different animals all together and one day I will post my opinions on cored hulls vs. moisture meters Why on earth do so many builders think putting balsa below the waterline is a good idea ?

OSMOSIS TESTING
( a highly simplified explanation )

If I knew what an osmosis test was I could be doing a lot more business as I get asked for it all the time. Dock talkers often use "blisters" and "osmosis" as interchangeable terms however, there are different types, causes and degrees of blisters and using the word "osmosis" just confuses the issue. I am often asked if I can perform an osmosis test to which my response is " What's an osmosis test ?". This response is met with a blank look as the people asking the question really don't know what they are asking. Many people also think that "osmosis" can be predicted by using a moisture meter unfortunately these meters do not measure moisture and the only way to determine actual moisture content is to cut out a chunk of your hull and send it to a lab.
This is one of the reasons I dislike the word "osmosis" as applied to boats, it has become a generic term to describe all types of blisters and moisture content in fiberglass hulls cored and uncored. Strictly speaking for osmosis to occur you need fluid on both sides of a membrane. If you have this situation on a boat, you better start bailing. What you are really encountering is simply water soaking into a porous material. Polyester, epoxy and vinylester resins are not waterproof, they are hygroscopic ie. They can absorb and retain water! (less so with epoxy and vinylester). I have heard many convoluted definitions of osmosis in attempts to justify the use of the word but what we really have is simply a process of absorption.
OSMOSIS : The tendency of fluid substances, if separated by a porous membrane to filter through it and become equally diffused.

So lets forget about the semantics and get to the issue................
There are many of causes of blistering, To list a few ....... trapped moisture during moulding, under cured resin, over cured resin, aerated resin, incorrect timing of subsequent layers, absorbent fillers, voids, trapped moisture in core materials, stale catalyst, emulsion bound mat, dusty mould, hygroscopic dust, cold mould, inadequately mixed resin, uncontrolled temperature and humidity levels during moulding process, uncontrolled temperature and humidity of raw materials in shipping, orthopthalic (cheap) resins. OK .... enough ! If I really thought about it I am sure I could come up with more but let's just say this, it is an extremely complex issue and "osmosis" just does not cover it. all you need to know is about blisters.

If you insist on calling it osmosis then it follows that all fiberglass boats have it !

NO VOIDS = NO BLISTERS (maybe) : There are dozens of reasons for voids in a laminate (some chemical) and they can range from tiny champagne size bubbles to several square feet although most are less than 1/2" in diameter. The average laminate may be 8-15 layers of various types of glass fabric made up of millions of miles of microscopically thin glass strands wetted out with resin. It is unreasonable to assume that all voids will be filled whether the wet-out is accomplished by five guys with rollers or one of the admittedly better (but not perfect) vacuum bag processes. All fiberglass layups have voids, some more than others. The higher the void content, bigger the voids and the more likely and earlier you will see blisters.

Polyester resin is hygroscopic, it can absorb water. A typical 30' , uncored sailboat hull can absorb about 30lbs. of water or roughly 3% maximum weight of the laminate. The glass fibers do not absorb any water and the resin is chemically incapable of absorbing more than 3% so theoretically 3% water content is saturation point of the material (voids excluded). As all polyester reinforced glass fiber and gelcoats are water permeable to some degree, all fiberglass boats left in water long enough will absorb water and probably develop blisters. This is rarely a structural issue (at least in our lifetime) although it can drive the sailboat racers nuts !

If the hull is cored with balsa or the laminate is all chopped strand (read - very cheap boat) then you may have a more serious and expensive issue to deal with as the balsa rots when wet and in the case of chopped strand fiber, the millions of exposed fiber ends wick water like so many straws.

The more common gelcoats are simply pigmented polyester resin of varying levels of quality and these pigments combined with the aeration caused by spraying the product into the mold can make it more permeable than the resin used in the laminate and therefore most blisters appear in the gelcoat. These blisters are usually small (1/8 - 1/4" dia.) and round in shape. While this does have an effect of the sale value of the vessel it is rarely a cause for concern. Vinylester gelcoats are becoming more common and are much more resistant to blistering.

Under the gelcoat is usually a "skinout" mat of chopped strand glass fibers that does not contribute much to the strength of the hull but is used primarily to hide the basket weave pattern of the heavier woven fiber which (hopefully) makes up most of the laminate. When water passes through the gelcoat it may wick up the chopped strand fibers of the "skinout" mat. These blisters are usually small, elongated and again not a major concern except to the value of the boat as they can scare buyers.

Water that has passed through the gelcoat and skinout mat into the structural laminate may combine with soluble elements that may occur in the voids. These elements could be uncatalysed resins, silane, glycol or salts (not the table variety) or any of the other chemical soup of ingredients that results from the resin curing (or uncured) process. When water combines with these molecules a new, usually larger molecule forms (hydrolysis), thus preventing escape of the fluid since the molecule is now bigger than the microscopic hole it came in through.

HYDROLYSIS : A chemical process by which the oxygen or hydrogen in water combines with an element or some element of a compound to produce a new compound.

As these newer, larger molecules multiply deep in the laminate they can get big enough to start to pushing apart the various layers of the laminate as the resin dissolves. This can be a serious issue, it is however relatively rare.

Put on a pair of safety goggles and puncture a few blisters. If they are dry or release a clear fluid, you likely do not have the serious type of blister. If an acidic vinegar like fluid appears this could be the more serious "Hydrolysis" type blister. Be careful as some of these blisters contain fluids under tremendous pressure. If the blister is very large and cannot be punctured with an ice-pick, it is likely very deep in the laminate, in this case drilling a hole for closer inspection may be warranted.

THE CURE ? Sorry..... regardless of the chemical companies hype there is no cure. You can only delay the inevitable but a very high percentage of blistered boats will still outlast you. I have surveyed one local boat three times over the last 10 years and each time it was getting another $10k "epoxy bottom job". I refused to survey it a fourth time because a well respected shop was about to do it again using the same improper techniques as the previous three jobs done by others. Whoever buys this 42' motor yacht will be doing it again soon (if there is any laminate left).

The more dry a boat is the better chance you have of getting a barrier coat to stick. Unfortunately once a boat has been in the water for a few years the water is deep in the skin at a molecular level and I believe its impossible to get out. Many years ago I peeled my own boat in September, put it in a heated shop with heat lamps on it until the following May then applied 8 coats of interprotect ...... five years later the blisters were back !
Small blisters in the gelcoat may be repaired by sanding, drying and applying an epoxy or vinylester bottom coat. This may help the resale value of your boat. Blisters in the skinout mat can be repaired by the same method but with much more aggressive sanding and perhaps some patching. The larger hydrolysis blisters require complete removal of the gelcoat and probably the skinout mat and perhaps a layer of the laminate (perhaps in local areas or over the entire hull in which case new cloth may be needed). The hull must then be dried to the point where the epoxy or vinylester bottom coat will adhere and washed frequently with fresh water during the drying process to wash off as much of the hydrolytic fluid as possible. This fluid and water may weep from the hull for weeks, months or even years so washing is crucial to providing a clean surface to ensure the adhesion of the new barrier coating.
This can be a bit of a gamble. Many bottom coats fail because the hull was not dried or washed properly. I have seen boats put under heat lamps for six months before bottom coating and new blisters appeared within a few years. The moisture is so deep in the laminate at a molecular level that it is not easily evacuated. A new system of applying heat under vacuum holds promise for drying hulls but for the most part it's still a gamble.

Although blisters will have a negative effect of the the resale value I have only ever seen two cases where I thought they posed a structural threat to the hull.

Give this careful consideration before plunking down $5,000.00 - $10,000.00 - $20,000.00 or more for a bottom job and always ask for a written guarantee (unlikely). Consult an Accredited Marine Surveyor® before spending you're hard earned money.


----------



## davidpm (Oct 22, 2007)

I just gave you a rep point BP. Even if you cut and pasted from something else you wrote and even if some folks disagree with parts of what you wrote I really appreciate the straight talk and passion for doing the right thing. Thanks.


----------



## Jasper Windvane (Mar 2, 2006)

Rhythm .. buy the good one. I did , and I love it. Tools are a good investment, especially when you own a boat. Good tools = good job.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

I have a CT33 coming to me on loan (along with a calibration plate), so I will get to see for myself how well it works.

The benefit of the General Tools device is not so much its low cost, but the "hold" button and audio feedback it gives when trying to locate a peak. Among the several things I want to check out on one of the boats, there is one spot that is not in my line of sight. So the option to reach around a corner, locate the peak via audio feedback, press the hold button, and then look at the reading sounds very useful. But I would need to try it to see if this procedure actually works as well as it sounds.

I may buy the General Tools one from a place with a liberal return policy to compare them side-by-side. Then I'll do some comparisons with the calibration plate and various spacers (to test the effect of the different reported depth sensitivities) as well as some readings on different parts of my two current boats, and see if the two correlate close enough. Hopefully, with the 10 different material calibrations, there will be one that approximates the readings close enough. Like I said, the main interest is in looking for relative gradients to trace the source of leaks. I also realize that there are a whole lot of factors that can lead to false positives and false negatives, regardless of what brand of meter you use.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

*more meter complications*

I just re-typed the following from The Masthead - Journal of the Westlawn Instition of Marine Technology, December 2009 issue. Although there are a few things I mildly disagree with, it generally supports my position that a great deal of experience is required to use these meters effectively.
Note : The "CoreMat" referred to is a very commonly used glass fabric that looks like a very thick paper towel.

Know it All Contest Solution to the September 2009 Question
Wet Moisture Readings
By Dave Gerr, © 2009 Dave Gerr

The Know It All questions and correct answers are important design tips for students as well as other marine professionals. We suggest that you file them away for future reference.

The question from the September issue was :
It's early spring on a cool clear day. The weather has been dry for a couple of weeksand you are surveying Dancing Daisy, a 1992, 38 foot,cruising sailboat with a moderate fin keel. The hull, deck and cabinare all cored fiberglass except for the solid glass region at the centerline (in the keel and stem area). Dancing Daisy has been hauled out all winter and is well ventilated under an open shed.

You have taken moisture meter readings high on Dancing Daisy's topsides as a baseline and find that - in comparison - most of the deck and cabin top, as well as the hullbottom are reading wet (though not the cabin sides). There are no signs of water penetrationproblems. Are the meter readings an indication that these regions are suffering from water saturation or is there some other explanation ? If so, what is it ?

The correct Answer Is :

The answer is no. Though a number of "no" answers were submitted, the explanations were based on the presence of condensation which is not the likely cause. In fact condenstation on the hull surface shouldn't through readings too far off. The most likely explanation for the apparent wet readings is that the builderhas used a layer of CoreMat on the topsides and on the cabin sides where the smoothest possible surface with no print-thru was desired. (There are better ways to achieve this end but using CoreMat as a print blocker is common and acceptable.) CoreMat wasn't used on the deck or cabin top where print through is less of a concern. (The hull bottom is out of sight. The decks have non-skid as well as fittings which break up the surface so print through doesn't show as easily.)

CoreMat reads notably drier than standard glass so taking the baseline readings on the dry topsides is giving a poor reference in comparison with other laminate areas without CoreMat.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

I thought I should circle back with an update. The General Tools meter was very disappointing. Horrible reproducibility and readings were so noisy that the audio feedback feature just made a constant clicking noise. I returned it immediately. Mainesail was right about it.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

Sorry to wake the dead...but I've seen comments that most of the moisture meters, including the Electrophysics, are actually capacitance meters. Oddly enough I have a capacitance meter, and a multimeter with a capacitance scale. Both read in microFarads, the standard measure of capacitance.

Which leaves me to wonder, does anyone know how the readings from some of these moisture meters actually translate into real capacitance (mF) and would it then be practical to just use the c.meter as a moisture meter, correlating say x mF as "dry, xx as "damp", xxx as soaked ?

Anyone have both types of meter, to make a comparison with?


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

hellosailor said:


> Sorry to wake the dead...but I've seen comments that most of the moisture meters, including the Electrophysics, are actually capacitance meters. Oddly enough I have a capacitance meter, and a multimeter with a capacitance scale. Both read in microFarads, the standard measure of capacitance.
> 
> Which leaves me to wonder, does anyone know how the readings from some of these moisture meters actually translate into real capacitance (mF) and would it then be practical to just use the c.meter as a moisture meter, correlating say x mF as "dry, xx as "damp", xxx as soaked ?
> 
> Anyone have both types of meter, to make a comparison with?


You are correct that all pinless moisture meters actually measure capacitance. So a moisture meter will read high moisture levels where there are backing place, ribs, stringers.

I played around with the cheapo General Tools meter listed above, and with a $50 Ryobi, along with a borrowed CT33. None of them correlate with each other particularly well, and I think the reason is that they all have different "depth perception" based on their sensitivity. The GT meter was totally useless - readings were noisy and irreproducible. The Ryobi could be a useful tool for finding the source of water intrusion via gradients of moisture. But it does not correlate well with the CT33, which is sort of the "gold standard" that all surveyors use.

Electronic stud finders work on the same principle. I've used mine occasionally to track down moisture locations.


----------



## JimsCAL (May 23, 2007)

hellosailor said:


> Sorry to wake the dead...but I've seen comments that most of the moisture meters, including the Electrophysics, are actually capacitance meters. Oddly enough I have a capacitance meter, and a multimeter with a capacitance scale. Both read in microFarads, the standard measure of capacitance.
> 
> Which leaves me to wonder, does anyone know how the readings from some of these moisture meters actually translate into real capacitance (mF) and would it then be practical to just use the c.meter as a moisture meter, correlating say x mF as "dry, xx as "damp", xxx as soaked ?
> 
> Anyone have both types of meter, to make a comparison with?


The DMM is not "pinless" so unless you want to drill holes all over your deck to get to the core, it won't work.


----------



## Curly Furler (Dec 7, 2012)

It's been over a year since the CT33 was last recommended and I spotted this:
Electrophysics Model GRP200 Fiberglass Moisture Meter for $199. 

Does anyone know if this is a better tool than the CT33 for the novice hoping to save on boat survey costs? 

Thank you!


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

Apprently the CT33 is designed for wood and the GRP for glass-reinforced-plastic but you might want to ask the maker directly if the range they are measuring is the same.


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

Curly Furler said:


> It's been over a year since the CT33 was last recommended and I was spotted this:
> Electrophysics Model GRP200 Fiberglass Moisture Meter for $199.
> 
> Does anyone know if this is a better tool than the CT33 for the novice hoping to save on boat survey costs?
> ...


Personally I just prefer a needle/analog moisture meter to one with a digital scale. Perhaps just because I am used to it but I like to watch for changes on the needle vs. a digital read out.. The GRP200 also reads deeper, to 1.5", which you'll likely not need for a simply cursory check of a deck...


----------

