cdf Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 ...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jolt Posted February 6, 2016 Author Share Posted February 6, 2016 I just saw a guy on r2r that measured a delta old vs new of 4.65 dkh vs 7 dkh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasReef Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 Did it just come through usps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdf Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 ..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jolt Posted February 6, 2016 Author Share Posted February 6, 2016 Mine was UPS too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roy V Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 Mine was bad too. Just ordered. Mine had been reading low so I was adjusting my doser lately...last couple of months. Hopefully it's not off by much. Sent from iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jolt Posted February 7, 2016 Author Share Posted February 7, 2016 Mine was bad too. Just ordered. Mine had been reading low so I was adjusting my doser lately...last couple of months. Hopefully it's not off by much. Sent from iPhone using Tapatalk Hopefully it's only a little off like mine was! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juiceman Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 Be checking your mail! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juiceman Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 6.27 old 6.08 new.. Hmmm Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarmerTy Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 Just for perspective, I try to always test between batches of reagent and I sometimes get the same discrepancies people have been posting for the differences between the old reagents and the replacement reagents. Usually a variance in the neighborhood of +/- 0.25. We are working with hobbyists grade kits here, not quite the accuracy you'd get in a lab. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jolt Posted February 9, 2016 Author Share Posted February 9, 2016 Just for perspective, I try to always test between batches of reagent and I sometimes get the same discrepancies people have been posting for the differences between the old reagents and the replacement reagents. Usually a variance in the neighborhood of +/- 0.25. We are working with hobbyists grade kits here, not quite the accuracy you'd get in a lab. I do this too, and there is usually a few PPM difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasReef Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 I have been testing side by side with a Red Sea Alk test and they are always the same. I haven't got in my replacement yet so I am forced to do the double check and since I have them I think I will continue following the old adage measure twice cut once. Not sure if that applies completely to this but it makes sense to me, lol. I do hope the new one will come in soon, however, as I would like to test the new one and then send off a triton to test against all three as I have one in a drawer waiting to send off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarmerTy Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 I have been testing side by side with a Red Sea Alk test and they are always the same. I haven't got in my replacement yet so I am forced to do the double check and since I have them I think I will continue following the old adage measure twice cut once. Not sure if that applies completely to this but it makes sense to me, lol. I do hope the new one will come in soon, however, as I would like to test the new one and then send off a triton to test against all three as I have one in a drawer waiting to send off. Triton doesn't give you alk results. And if they did, I wouldn't trust it as bacterial interference should play a huge part in your sample result... especially when the sample probably won't get tested for almost 1+ weeks after you submit it as it will have to be shipped to overseas to be sampled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasReef Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 I didn't realize that. I guess we have to trust this hobby grade instruments. Now that you say that I think I read that somewhere but I am already sure I have forgot more than I know. Thankfully there is Google and arc (and r2r) haha. It will still be good to know the other stuff though. And I already bought it so.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarmerTy Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 I didn't realize that. I guess we have to trust this hobby grade instruments. Now that you say that I think I read that somewhere but I am already sure I have forgot more than I know. Thankfully there is Google and arc (and r2r) haha. It will still be good to know the other stuff though. And I already bought it so.... I use it to monitor annual trends as the data is precise but I'm still hesitant to say accurate. Basically, it'll tell me its 420 ppm consistently if testing the same water over and over but I'm not really believing that 420 ppm is really 420 ppm. It really could be 380 ppm. There's just too much interference with saltwater to conclusively get that precise of results from the equipment, or so the experts say.So I send in a sample one a year to see which elements are going up and down. Doing no water changes helps me minimize external sources of bias with my numbers. Anything decreases will mainly be because of usage and not because it was removed via water change. That's at least how I employ Triton results. I would never personally make any changes using the results I've gotten back from the annual tests though but that's just me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarmerTy Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Victoly pointed out this article by some guys that know way more about lab equipment than I do, discussing Triton. https://www.reefs.com/forum/mag.php?do=wp_post&articleId=159 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasReef Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 That triton article is a good read. I thought it was more strict with procedures. I was thinking of a quarterly test with it but now I am rethinking that. The article made me think of when you take a pool sample to Leslie's and they pour your sample in the same test tube they just tested the last sample in, without rinsing it out! I would like to see the sample data average on the tests they run, seems about 30, before recalibration. I would like to think it's negligible but when it comes to selling thing honesty and quality sometimes go out the window in pursuit of profit. And from what I 7nderstanf those machines aren't cheap so there is definetly motive to recoup cost. In the end nothing beats interpreting your own numbers along side observation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.