George Farmer
ad aqua
ADA £45, Fish Vet £35, Boyu £18. I've got a Boyu, my only gripe is the black suction cap.
Permanent Co2 Test....
- Thread starter MoreCoffee
- Start date
plantbrain
Fishaholic
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2003
- Messages
- 476
- Reaction score
- 0
Mr G, now you have 5 liters of reference solution to sell!!
Or share, or RAOK.
Seems good.
Glad you cooked the Baking soda?
It's bone dry in CA, USA most of the time.
I wonder if that was due to the fog and moisture in the UK?
That was a lot, more than expected(you as well).
The colormetric test seems different also, I'm alway leary of test kits and interptations.
This appears to show my worry to be true, Vaughn claimed not too, but then again, 4-8ppm of error is not going to equal the error involved here.
I wanted at least 1ppm or less.
Now you can calibrate KH test kits instead of the other way around.
Nice, work, job and details.
Now the CO2 will be much less of an issue.
Sell the KH solution to folks, say 3 pounds for 500mls.
Or be nice
Regards,
Tom Barr
Or share, or RAOK.
Seems good.
Glad you cooked the Baking soda?
It's bone dry in CA, USA most of the time.
I wonder if that was due to the fog and moisture in the UK?
That was a lot, more than expected(you as well).
The colormetric test seems different also, I'm alway leary of test kits and interptations.
This appears to show my worry to be true, Vaughn claimed not too, but then again, 4-8ppm of error is not going to equal the error involved here.
I wanted at least 1ppm or less.
Now you can calibrate KH test kits instead of the other way around.
Nice, work, job and details.
Now the CO2 will be much less of an issue.
Sell the KH solution to folks, say 3 pounds for 500mls.
Or be nice
Regards,
Tom Barr
plantbrain
Fishaholic
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2003
- Messages
- 476
- Reaction score
- 0
Ok, Here's a quick update having tried Tom Barr's method for mixing up a solution.
I used some digital scales to measure out 4.99g of bicarbonate of soda (baked) and measured out 5ltrs of Di water. If you buy a 5ltr container from the garage, dont 'assume' that it contains exactly 5ltrs ..... mine certainly didnt !
I took the measured 5ltrs of DI water and mixed in 4.99g of Bicarbonate of Soda to make a 40dKH stock solution. I then diluted this down to make a 4dKH reference solution and added a few drops of PH liquid reagent. This went into the drop checker and then into the tank ......
Within 2 - 3 hours I was pleased to see a nice bright green (30ppm) CO2 indication.
(Another drop of PH reagent has since been added to give a clearer green indication)
I think Tom's method for making the reference solution will be much more accurate.
Measuring larger quantities of water & bicarb leaves much less room for error.
Having tried both methods, I certainly found it far easier to mix 5ltrs of water and 4.99g of bicarb than trying to adjust the KH of 100ml of water !!
A few notes/observations:
Tom's suggestion of baking the powder to remove water & Co2 obviously works. Initially I baked 7g of bicarb, but afterwards I was left with less than 4.5g, so I had to bake off more bicarb. I'd suggest anybody trying this should bake off about twice as much as you think you'll need .... bicarb isn't expensive and it saves another 3 hours of baking
As soon as I added the PH reagent there was a distinct difference.
My initial ref solution went blue with a PH approx 7.5, but with Tom's method it turned purple for PH of 10.
Putting these measurements through Chucks calc showed the following
Initial ref solution 4dKH & PH 7.5 = Co2 4ppm
Tom's ref solution 4dKH & PH 10 = CO2 0ppm
I left some of the new 4dKH ref solution in a jug overnight and checked it in the morning and the PH had dropped to about 8, I presume this was because CO2 from the air had diffused into the solution
Obviously the baking removes a good deal of CO2 from the solution.
So this morning I decided to check the PH of my old solution and the new solution.
Spot the difference !!!!
The one of the left is my original solution, on the right is Tom's method.
I can assure you Tom's is far more purple than it looks in the pic, either way the difference is clear!
This is certainly the method I'll be using from now on ..... good job, I've got a sealed container with almost 5Ltrs of 40dKH solution to get through
One last point ... I used a Nutrafin KH test kit as a double check on the solution and it showed 4dKH, however I have less faith in test kits than I used to have !
Thanks to Tom for posting this method
Al
Re Reading this, a pH of 10 should not be possible. Not with baking soda anyway, about a pH of about 8.1-8.3 or so perhaps.
I think you will want to check using a pH meter.
That would be better.
Neither seems to add up well.
Regards,
Tom Barr
George Farmer
ad aqua
Sell the KH solution to folks, say 3 pounds for 500mls.
Or be nice
RadaR
The things we do for our fish..
Im sure people will buy it.
I know i am definetly considering it.
I know i am definetly considering it.
MoreCoffee
Fishaholic
Tom,
I've just checked it again and it's perhaps closer to a PH of 9, but certainly looks higher than 8.5.
I'm investigating getting some of the solution checked with a calibrated PH probe.
I'll post the results once I have them.
Al
Yes, I can't measure how much difference the baking actually makes, but with the amount of moisture/Co2 it removes I'm sure it must be a factor.
Cheers and thanks for the input/guidance.
I'll just be nice with this batch ..... afterall, it is Christmas
I've just checked it again and it's perhaps closer to a PH of 9, but certainly looks higher than 8.5.
I'm investigating getting some of the solution checked with a calibrated PH probe.
I'll post the results once I have them.
Al
Themuleous
Fish Connoisseur
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2006
- Messages
- 6,130
- Reaction score
- 0
I'll buy some, far cheaper/easier than getting scales and the rest of the kit!
You could even sell ready made 4KH solution!
Sam
You could even sell ready made 4KH solution!
Sam
voo
Fish Herder
I'd certainly buy some, lot cheaper than buying the scales etc. Buying the drop checkers will be expensive enough 
Thinking about it, a 100ml solution of 4KH solution, with less than 4ml in the drop checker would give around 25 parts. If you change the solution every other week, that's almost a years supply! That's just from a high estimate, the drop checker looks like it holds more like 2ml.
Thinking about it, a 100ml solution of 4KH solution, with less than 4ml in the drop checker would give around 25 parts. If you change the solution every other week, that's almost a years supply! That's just from a high estimate, the drop checker looks like it holds more like 2ml.
Hey, that's a good discussion guys.
And a big thank you to Al for doing the tests, most interesting indeed.
In Al's post #9
That 3.9ppm I guess is due to the atmospheric CO2 above the 24hr.standing water.
I also guess that the difference between 30ppm give or take, and 35-39 is probably not critical ?
Now comes the puzzling bit, my question, why introduce the need for the KH4 solution with all its attendant complexity ( accuracy of weighing device, purity of baked baking soda, purity of distilled water (or DI water) cost of the wee glass bulb and so on.) ?
Dont get me wrong, for those who have the stuff then fine, but do the rest need to get it really ?
I should declare an interest at this point, Ive been using the 1pH drop method for a while now and it has seemed ok to me !
Oh, and the weighing scales what should they be calibrated with/against, because although they show a measurement to 2 decimal places is it actually accurate in that 2nd decimal place.
What I mean is, it can show a difference between two 'dollops' of something ! to 2 places, but I doubt the absolute accuracy of that 2nd place ( not to sure about the first deci place either to tell the truth ! )
Just another little source of error to test for
basically, I think what I am asking is, should I go and buy one of those glass gadgets (ive got the soda and ive got laboratory scales and ref lab weights as well ), is it going to do more for me ? Or just confuse me more ! !!
Something more for me to break, get wrong, tip indicator inadvertently into tank ! etc. Murphys law
PS(edit) not to mention shipping surplus soda solution round the country ( the Mail wont be too keen on that ! )
And a big thank you to Al for doing the tests, most interesting indeed.
In Al's post #9
This suggests to me that we could aim for a ph drop of just a little less than 1pH and get a result that is in good agreement with the reference method of test #1 ?
That 3.9ppm I guess is due to the atmospheric CO2 above the 24hr.standing water.
I also guess that the difference between 30ppm give or take, and 35-39 is probably not critical ?
Now comes the puzzling bit, my question, why introduce the need for the KH4 solution with all its attendant complexity ( accuracy of weighing device, purity of baked baking soda, purity of distilled water (or DI water) cost of the wee glass bulb and so on.) ?
Dont get me wrong, for those who have the stuff then fine, but do the rest need to get it really ?
I should declare an interest at this point, Ive been using the 1pH drop method for a while now and it has seemed ok to me !
Oh, and the weighing scales what should they be calibrated with/against, because although they show a measurement to 2 decimal places is it actually accurate in that 2nd decimal place.
What I mean is, it can show a difference between two 'dollops' of something ! to 2 places, but I doubt the absolute accuracy of that 2nd place ( not to sure about the first deci place either to tell the truth ! )
Just another little source of error to test for
basically, I think what I am asking is, should I go and buy one of those glass gadgets (ive got the soda and ive got laboratory scales and ref lab weights as well ), is it going to do more for me ? Or just confuse me more ! !!
Something more for me to break, get wrong, tip indicator inadvertently into tank ! etc. Murphys law
PS(edit) not to mention shipping surplus soda solution round the country ( the Mail wont be too keen on that ! )
plantbrain
Fishaholic
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2003
- Messages
- 476
- Reaction score
- 0
Well, if you discuss "need" it quickly becomes the old semantics anatics game.
I see this often on line.
I do not need CO2 to begin with.
Nor do I personally need a way to measure CO2, other than plants themselves, Riccia is a very good visual measure method for CO2.
Pearling after 2 hours of lights on, good, no fish gasping near the end of the day, good.
No other test kit needed.
So many folks need no test kit kit at all.
But many seem to.....and it gives them more methods to gauge things and not stress their fish out if they do use CO2.
For others, it's a means to look more critically at the measure of CO2 with less intereferences.
There are other ways not doubt, but a small change in the start and end points of the pH drop method can quickly lead to outside the desired range/s.
It has some more issues and it is much more relative.
If you have good pH measure with the KH ref method, your measure should be pretty darn close to the real value. That assumes you made the KH ref correctly to begin with
Always lots of assumption.
But are they good or not is a good question and can you say confidently within reason, what you did is safe to say? Hopefully
Regards,
Tom Barr
I see this often on line.
I do not need CO2 to begin with.
Nor do I personally need a way to measure CO2, other than plants themselves, Riccia is a very good visual measure method for CO2.
Pearling after 2 hours of lights on, good, no fish gasping near the end of the day, good.
No other test kit needed.
So many folks need no test kit kit at all.
But many seem to.....and it gives them more methods to gauge things and not stress their fish out if they do use CO2.
For others, it's a means to look more critically at the measure of CO2 with less intereferences.
There are other ways not doubt, but a small change in the start and end points of the pH drop method can quickly lead to outside the desired range/s.
It has some more issues and it is much more relative.
If you have good pH measure with the KH ref method, your measure should be pretty darn close to the real value. That assumes you made the KH ref correctly to begin with
Always lots of assumption.
But are they good or not is a good question and can you say confidently within reason, what you did is safe to say? Hopefully
Regards,
Tom Barr
MoreCoffee
Fishaholic
Bowman,
Hi and thanks for the comments ...
Here's my point of view on some of your comments ........
Then why do it ? Well, I initially tried it becuase 'I like trying things out' I was also looking for a way to monitor the level of Co2 in my tank to see if it was stable, without having to test every time, I already had everything I needed (apart from the DI water), so 'why not' !
If I'm going to monitor the level then I might as well do it with some degree of accuracy, especially if it's fairly straight forward to do.
What I have now is a very easy way of seeing that my CO2 levels are Ok and stable. I simply walk past the tank and have a look. If it's green then all is OK, if it's not then something has changed and it's time to act !
Having done it once, I think that making the solution isn't really very complicated, or time consuming.
Make a soluion using 4.99g of bicarb of soda mixed into 5Ltrs of Di water.
Mix 10ml of that solution with 90ml of DI water and you've got 100ml of 4dKH ref solution.
The measuring and baking simply increase the accuracy of the final solution.
If you already have the scales and they are calibrated (most come with calibration weights) then all you need to do is bake off the bicarb.
Tom's original posting called for 4.9923g ..... I could only measure down to 4.99.
However as it's mixed with 5Ltrs of water any slight errors in the weight will be have far less of an impact than in a smaller volume of water.
For highly accureate measuring/testing then the increased accuracy is probably a 'must', but for my purposes of 'monitoring' then it's perhaps not so critical. I still think my 'monitoring' is more accurate than my (now disused) test kit
As for the 'Mail', well it's an inert liquid and not pressurised, so nothing dangerous.
I've sent one 250ml bottle out already in an old Seachem Trace bottle and not had any problems.
Cheers
Al
Hi and thanks for the comments ...
Here's my point of view on some of your comments ........
To be honest, probably not ! Lots of people have been adding CO2 into tanks for years, without this method.
Then why do it ? Well, I initially tried it becuase 'I like trying things out' I was also looking for a way to monitor the level of Co2 in my tank to see if it was stable, without having to test every time, I already had everything I needed (apart from the DI water), so 'why not' !
If I'm going to monitor the level then I might as well do it with some degree of accuracy, especially if it's fairly straight forward to do.
What I have now is a very easy way of seeing that my CO2 levels are Ok and stable. I simply walk past the tank and have a look. If it's green then all is OK, if it's not then something has changed and it's time to act !
The reason for having the reference solution, rather than using tank water (as some other kits do) it that you are dealing with a known quantity. There are many things in the tank that can affect your KH, the solution removes these from the equasion.
Having done it once, I think that making the solution isn't really very complicated, or time consuming.
Make a soluion using 4.99g of bicarb of soda mixed into 5Ltrs of Di water.
Mix 10ml of that solution with 90ml of DI water and you've got 100ml of 4dKH ref solution.
The measuring and baking simply increase the accuracy of the final solution.
If you already have the scales and they are calibrated (most come with calibration weights) then all you need to do is bake off the bicarb.
Personally I'm not too worried about the accuracy down to 2 decimal places.
Tom's original posting called for 4.9923g ..... I could only measure down to 4.99.
However as it's mixed with 5Ltrs of water any slight errors in the weight will be have far less of an impact than in a smaller volume of water.
For highly accureate measuring/testing then the increased accuracy is probably a 'must', but for my purposes of 'monitoring' then it's perhaps not so critical. I still think my 'monitoring' is more accurate than my (now disused) test kit
You dont actually NEED to ship it to anybody.
As for the 'Mail', well it's an inert liquid and not pressurised, so nothing dangerous.
I've sent one 250ml bottle out already in an old Seachem Trace bottle and not had any problems.
Cheers
Al
Hi Al.
Great job, excellent stuff and I agree with you
I didnt mean to imply any crit. ! It was a stirling job you did.
It was just that you had put so much effort into your tests and evaluation etc.
I thought that maybe not enough discussion ( exposure !) had been given to your test number 5 and its possibilities that was all you see
A few little comments (for what they are worth, no big deal )
>>called for 4.9923g
That is 4 decimal places and not easy to achieve consistency even in labs !
>>only measure down to 4.99
Yep, it is those two decimal places (.99) that I am concerned about
If you got a lab 5g weight I bet it wouldnt show 5.00 on most domestic scales, not even the electronic ones, it probably wouldnt even show 5.05 or 4.95 !
I would hope it could achieve 5.1 or 4.9 though, if you see what I mean.
It may be worth bearing in mind that the Royal Mail will hold the sender responsible for any leakage damaging other mail and will recover costs !
There is (or was) if I remember correctly a method of "without mail" stickers and special proceedure for sending stuff like that through the mail (poultry hatching eggs etc for example) which meant that they carried it outside the normal mail bag and then it was their responsibility.
Mind u, (more thoughts bubbling about in my brain !) modern suckers are a lot better than they used to be but I still view them with suspicion when required to hold anything important in place !!
Great job, excellent stuff and I agree with you
I didnt mean to imply any crit. ! It was a stirling job you did.
It was just that you had put so much effort into your tests and evaluation etc.
I thought that maybe not enough discussion ( exposure !) had been given to your test number 5 and its possibilities that was all you see
A few little comments (for what they are worth, no big deal )
>>called for 4.9923g
That is 4 decimal places and not easy to achieve consistency even in labs !
>>only measure down to 4.99
Yep, it is those two decimal places (.99) that I am concerned about
If you got a lab 5g weight I bet it wouldnt show 5.00 on most domestic scales, not even the electronic ones, it probably wouldnt even show 5.05 or 4.95 !
I would hope it could achieve 5.1 or 4.9 though, if you see what I mean.
It may be worth bearing in mind that the Royal Mail will hold the sender responsible for any leakage damaging other mail and will recover costs !
There is (or was) if I remember correctly a method of "without mail" stickers and special proceedure for sending stuff like that through the mail (poultry hatching eggs etc for example) which meant that they carried it outside the normal mail bag and then it was their responsibility.
Yes, I agree, that is a big plus for it !
Mind u, (more thoughts bubbling about in my brain !) modern suckers are a lot better than they used to be but I still view them with suspicion when required to hold anything important in place !!
MoreCoffee
Fishaholic
Hi Bowman,
This isn't my method, I was just giving it a try. I have to say, I'll continue using it.
As for the 2 or 4 decimal places.
Well I never even tried for 4 places as I dont have the scales for it.
But I do have some digital jewellery scales ( 0.001 - 100g) and these come with precise calibration weights.
These are used to recalibrate the scales to make sure they remain accurate.
We also get them calibrated at the jewellery wholesaler once a year, so there pretty reliable.
I know these scales can be purchased on Ebay (with the test weights) for a reasonable price (from about £16).
The sucker on the drop checker seems fine (I'd prefer it if it wasnt black though) and if it did come off, well you've only got a few ml's of 4dKH solution with 2 or 3 drops of PH reagent in there.
Actually with the design it would probably just float. Also having tried to empty these drop checkers out, i've found it's not anywhere near as easy as you'd expect. I ended up having to shake it and use some rolled up paper kitchen towel to absorb the solution out. It really doesnt pour out easily
Al
Absolutly no problem, the more questioning and discussion the better on any method, not just this one! I'm happy with any comments ........ and I dont pretend to have all the answers. Question away !
This isn't my method, I was just giving it a try. I have to say, I'll continue using it.
As for the 2 or 4 decimal places.
Well I never even tried for 4 places as I dont have the scales for it.
But I do have some digital jewellery scales ( 0.001 - 100g) and these come with precise calibration weights.
These are used to recalibrate the scales to make sure they remain accurate.
We also get them calibrated at the jewellery wholesaler once a year, so there pretty reliable.
I know these scales can be purchased on Ebay (with the test weights) for a reasonable price (from about £16).
The sucker on the drop checker seems fine (I'd prefer it if it wasnt black though) and if it did come off, well you've only got a few ml's of 4dKH solution with 2 or 3 drops of PH reagent in there.
Actually with the design it would probably just float. Also having tried to empty these drop checkers out, i've found it's not anywhere near as easy as you'd expect. I ended up having to shake it and use some rolled up paper kitchen towel to absorb the solution out. It really doesnt pour out easily
Al
I said "damaging other mail "
I should, of course have said ,,"damaging other mail and equipment"
They wont be best pleased with even plain water going walkabout !
I see we are online together ! I'll go and read and inwardly digest your latest ,,,
,, back soon ,,
I should, of course have said ,,"damaging other mail and equipment"
They wont be best pleased with even plain water going walkabout !
I see we are online together ! I'll go and read and inwardly digest your latest ,,,
,, back soon ,,
>> "Absolutly no problem,"
Good, good, thought I'd best check, all good fun isnt it !
>>"get them calibrated at the jewellery wholesaler once a year, so there pretty reliable."
OK, I'll allow that <big grin emoticon>
Stands back and watches as the whole TFF community rush off to their local jewlry emporium, heheee, make a change to pestering the LFS
I was thinking previously of getting you to go to your mates house and measuring his weight with your scales and he doing the reverse and if they agreed to .01g I'd buy you a pint * But I withdraw that thought now !!
* a virtual one of course, I wouldnt post it
Seriously though :
I've been thinking some more ( they all gasp in horror, this aint usual !) about your wandering past and observing that green means that all is well.
Yes that is good and convenient AND it doesn't need ultra crittically accurate 4kH ref. because if one has satisfied oneself (by whatever other means, be it test kits, bubble counts, volumetric measures, 24hr-1pH drop, accurate KH whatsits etc. whatever) that one has the right CO2 level ( say 30ppm) then all one needs is a continuing stable colour in the gizmo.
I mean it could be a little yellowish green, or apple green, or a little on the deeper bluish green, wouldnt matter if it was 4.1KH or 3.9KH as long as it remained stable from day to day and that particular KH level had previously conformed to your expected CO2 level
Am I making sense ?
Good, good, thought I'd best check, all good fun isnt it !
>>"get them calibrated at the jewellery wholesaler once a year, so there pretty reliable."
OK, I'll allow that <big grin emoticon>
Stands back and watches as the whole TFF community rush off to their local jewlry emporium, heheee, make a change to pestering the LFS
I was thinking previously of getting you to go to your mates house and measuring his weight with your scales and he doing the reverse and if they agreed to .01g I'd buy you a pint * But I withdraw that thought now !!
* a virtual one of course, I wouldnt post it
Seriously though :
I've been thinking some more ( they all gasp in horror, this aint usual !) about your wandering past and observing that green means that all is well.
Yes that is good and convenient AND it doesn't need ultra crittically accurate 4kH ref. because if one has satisfied oneself (by whatever other means, be it test kits, bubble counts, volumetric measures, 24hr-1pH drop, accurate KH whatsits etc. whatever) that one has the right CO2 level ( say 30ppm) then all one needs is a continuing stable colour in the gizmo.
I mean it could be a little yellowish green, or apple green, or a little on the deeper bluish green, wouldnt matter if it was 4.1KH or 3.9KH as long as it remained stable from day to day and that particular KH level had previously conformed to your expected CO2 level
Am I making sense ?
Similar threads
Most reactions
-
383 -
237 -
228 -
224 -
211 -
171 -
146 -
129 -
117 -
111 -
101 -
99 -
98 -
92 -
F
92