victoly

Maybe try tying it to a DDNS? I'm not sure how that helps, but as it is it doesnt make sense. Soooo.

If you swing by my office I can test with some of our instrumentation.

threads dont get deleted.

picked up mine too

You also can't individually tweak alk/ca with acetate. You also get a pH drop when using it. It's kind of like a kalk inverse.

Pshhhh, don't listen to the man with the 5,000 gallon tank. I think the only utility fish you're gonna be able to keep is a 6 line or a 4 line in a 40. Foxface, tangs, tilefish,CBB all need more space.

What do y'all keep your house at?

I love (literally) my apex, and I don't know that I would trust it to autocalculate my dosing regime. Seems like a huge risk for them to take to build that functionality in.

I've been very happy with my bubble magus. I don't know how accurate the motors are, but I rarely have to adjust after i got my dosing quantities set up.

What do you keep your ambient temps at Ty and Jamie ?

When it comes to apexes, you can always play Ty.

By open i didn't mean open, confusing right? I meant unshaded.

Lol that tail end of your temp graph is what mine looks like all the time. 72 degree house tank kept at 78-79 means heater literally cycles every 30 minutes. Metal halides give the heater a break lol

Mine is typically in that 72 range as well. My tank volume is, uh, a bit smaller than yours and more beholden to the MH heating it. It's also on an exterior wall and near an open window.

I'd just see if you can replace the needle valve for now and then repair the other as a backup. I think you're gonna have a real hard time finding those specialty pieces off the shelf locally.

Your observations on coloration with respect to PAR is interesting, but I think it may be hard to assume that the rest of the measurable variables (temp, salinity, Alk, Ca, Mg, PO4) remain constant while the light (or flow in your other example) are the main drivers for coloration in the species that you mentioned. That totally neglects the "ether" parameters that we either don't know about or can't reasonably measure.

We are really in an impossible hobby that requires knowledge in impossibly diverse fields. We stack the deck in our favor as best we can, but ultimately the people who are really successful and have great tanks have great luck, unlimited time or unlimited funding.

dude. thats awesome!

Do you know how many bahn mi's that $50 would have bought me?

*pat pat*

Oh believe me, I'm going into the results with my fair share of skepticism. I think a thorough analysis of his process is still overdue by the academic experts as you have mentioned. I do like the potential that this concept may usher in a more precise level of scrutiny of our tanks but without reliable data, it may as well be doomed as any other "method" out there.

Still, my curiosity was worth the $50 and I hope to see a collaborative effort on deciphering the data and what is reliable and what is not as far as results are concerned.

Sent via Tapatalk

That's what gets me ragey though. You paid 50 bucks for the right to maybe have something that might be reliable pending analysis by pHd chemists, maybe but probably not pending scientific breakthrough.

Here's a great list of all the EPA approved methods for inorganic chemistry. Most of these are freshwater based and not NSW based because there tends to not be a whole lot of testable petroleum leaks in the ocean .

Calcium - EPA Method 215.2 (titration) - interesting to note that phosphate interferes with readings and is precipitated out of solution by adding lanthanum. Not sure how this is accounted for with home methods. The big picture problem here is not that it is impossible to measure calcium with an ICP. From what I understand you can get ICP accuracy at very low concentrations. However, when you get into the NSW range, there is a ton of interference which basically ruins your readings.

SO, the solution there is to dilute the sample and then extrapolate your readings amirite?lolnope.

Magnesium - EPA Method 242.1 (Flame Atomic Adsorption) - The preferred testing range for this method is really low, less than 1 PPM. So again, we're left with titration in the NSW range.

Alkalinity - SM 2320B (titration) - Alk is by definition a titration based calculation. For reef aquarists it's really just a proxy for measuring carbonate. Triton doesn't do alkalnity, which is a pretty crucial analyte. Why? Because it's not testable with ICP, it's cheap to do with good accuracy for in home kits. Not to mention shipping it to the fatherland is going to ruin the readings.

To circle things back around, what I'm getting at is that there is potential for *some* of these elements to be accurate when tested in a marine matrix because their NSW concentrations are very low. How do we know which those are? For most of those who cares ? How do your source a problem? How do you remediate the problem? I kind of see this as analogous to someone who goes in and gets full CT scans when they don't have have a headache. Do you have some weird lumps in your body? Sure. Are they cancer? Probably not. But now you want to go in and get biopsied, which is causing more damage than the original non-issue. RHF ripped triton a new on on the r2r thread with the triton america rep. They don't even try to refute RHF, they just straight up straw man him into talking about something else.

Where I have the major issue is that the sell themselves as this hyper accurate, all inclusive package of analytes which may only be tangentially related to the health of our livestock. If this analysis was accurate, it would cost hundreds of dollars per sample using currently acceptable lab procedures.

In conclusion, I'll leave you this:

There are such a huge number of scientifically comical statements in the MAIN FAQ.

Triton has got me turnt up and salty.