What They Say about INW

Whether they’re customers or USGS officials, people have plenty to say about INW’s quality.

I thought you might be interested in seeing this picture showing a “well-used” PT2X. I’ve also included some calibration/validation checks to show you how it still performs in spite of all the oxidized sand and silt forming a crud on the outside of the pressure sensing diaphragm. I don’t dare try to remove the debris—but hey, I guess if it is still in spec, why bother?
Rob D. Mackley / Scientist, Environmental Systems Group

The SDI-12 AquiStar sensors provided by INW performed as promised. No errors observed through regular QC testing. I’ve already received permission to deploy these sensors at our testing site.
Mark Carnley / Testing Section, US Geological Survey

I relied on an INW sensor for my research. I was investigating the environmental impacts associated with using salt in road and sidewalk snow melting, and needed accurate conductivity measurements worthy of publishing in a master’s thesis. Thanks for the great readings, INW!
James Cassanelli / Center for Integrative Geosciences, University of Connecticut

For the past two years, we have deployed four CT2X and PT2X sensors with WaveData radios in a wetland here in northern Wisconsin. Overall, I am quite pleased with the equipment, and I would recommend it highly.

The CT2X output has been remarkably stable, so we can discern very small changes in specific conductance. Physically, I have not noticed any corrosion on the sensor housing and the cables have held up well for two years.
Carl Watras / Research Scientist, University of Wisconsin