Different test Results

Branespikin

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
1,051
Reaction score
934
Location
Queens,NY
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I just recently started dosing AF Components 123 so i started testing more often to dial things in. Been testing with Hanna for Calcium and results have been high in 500s. So i cut dosage. I purchased Red Sea kit and had a Salifert Calcium that i found which is not expired. Red Sea shows 345. Salifert 335 and Hanna showed 556 then I tried again with Hanna and it showed 551 second time around. Are the Hanna checkers that much off. If so what a waste of money. Anyone have experience and which of the 3 should be my go to test kit.
 
I've had bad readings for both calcium and alk Hanna checkers. I only use salifert now yes I've had those readings too also
 
I recently bought both the Hanna Alk/Ca checkers to have something to compare to my Salifert kits and they came out basically identical, Alk was 9.7 on Hanna vs 9.6/9.9 on Salifert and Ca was 427 on Hanna vs 420/430 on Salifert. If you're sure you're doing the Hanna test properly like getting all the powder out of the little packet and such then I would just reach out to them with the discrepancy. It shouldn't be that far off if the checker is working correctly and if not they're a big brand with a lot of backers so hopefully not too hard to get a replacement.
 
Are you positive you're using the Salifert kit properly?
Yes im doing it correctly. The Salifert is comming vEry close to the Red Sea and i have been using Red Sea for a while. I had Hanna checker lying around and just perfered to use it because it was easier to use. I will try again tonight with Hanna checker.
 
Are u using distilled water? Are u sure ur using only a mg of tank water the Hanna calcium checker is a tough one
 
I recently bought both the Hanna Alk/Ca checkers to have something to compare to my Salifert kits and they came out basically identical, Alk was 9.7 on Hanna vs 9.6/9.9 on Salifert and Ca was 427 on Hanna vs 420/430 on Salifert. If you're sure you're doing the Hanna test properly like getting all the powder out of the little packet and such then I would just reach out to them with the discrepancy. It shouldn't be that far off if the checker is working correctly and if not they're a big brand with a lot of backers so hopefully not too hard to get a replacement.
My Alk checker is great always spot on but im afraid i got a bad batch or something. Im making sure i do everything correctly and getting every last grain out of the packages. I just purchased all new reagents might be them. Good thing i checked with other trsts today because i stopped dosing thinking im too high when in reality i am low on Calcium. Ill try one more time if same readings ill reach out to Hanna
 
Are u using distilled water? Are u sure ur using only a mg of tank water the Hanna calcium checker is a tough one
Yes i use RODI water and i use .1 ml of tank water not one ml. I suck up the syringe then i push it down to like .7 and squeeze.1 till it gets to .6
 
This is just my opinion regarding the Hanna Calcium checker, if you don't buy an automatic pipette to take the 0.1 ml tank sample then you are wasting your time and money with that thing. Even with the auto pipette I've gotten extra reagents for that kit that all of the granulated reagents appear to have been wet. All of those things combined means mine sits in the test kit toolbox not used much anymore, while I tend to favor the Red Sea now.


I mean If I wanted to check my calcium twice, maybe even three times then the Hanna Calcium checker would be what I would choose.
 
test your Mg level as well. If your Mg is low sometimes it throws interference to the Ca tests and will make them look sky high. But since it is only the Hanna checker, I would suspect that it is likely the reagents/innacuracy of the syringe at play.

I personally don't trust mine much, it ends up being quicker/easier for me to do a titration. Afterall when I don't trust the Hanna results I have to retest with a titration anyway.

Get yourself a nice little magnetic stirrer it makes titration tests fun (well I wouldn't go that far). But it is much easier/quicker.
 
I just did test again and did not rush made sure e everything was done correct. I got 502 calcium. Idk. Now i have no clue. I will test with Red Sea and Salifert again to see whats up.
 
test your Mg level as well. If your Mg is low sometimes it throws interference to the Ca tests and will make them look sky high. But since it is only the Hanna checker, I would suspect that it is likely the reagents/innacuracy of the syringe at play.

I personally don't trust mine much, it ends up being quicker/easier for me to do a titration. Afterall when I don't trust the Hanna results I have to retest with a titration anyway.

Get yourself a nice little magnetic stirrer it makes titration tests fun (well I wouldn't go that far). But it is much easier/quicker.
Hmmm magnetic stirrer. Sounds interesting
 
This is just my opinion regarding the Hanna Calcium checker, if you don't buy an automatic pipette to take the 0.1 ml tank sample then you are wasting your time and money with that thing. Even with the auto pipette I've gotten extra reagents for that kit that all of the granulated reagents appear to have been wet. All of those things combined means mine sits in the test kit toolbox not used much anymore, while I tend to favor the Red Sea now.


I mean If I wanted to check my calcium twice, maybe even three times then the Hanna Calcium checker would be what I would choose.
Automatic pipette. I didnt know that even exists
 
I love my Hanna checker for alkalinity but the small sample size (as noted above) makes the calcium checker much less reliable. Salifert is just too easy and too repeatable for me to use anything else for calcium.
 
This is the one I use. It is more consistent than using the syringe that they provided. Like I said though, after getting a couple bad batches of reagents, it's not worth it too me to test with it anymore.

IMG_4040_zps7e1ikqma.jpg
 
The Hanna checker is not good for calcium. But alk and phos are okay. That said i always have hanna, salifert, and my own diy alk standard on hand to verify accuracy.
 
I just recently started dosing AF Components 123 so i started testing more often to dial things in. Been testing with Hanna for Calcium and results have been high in 500s. So i cut dosage. I purchased Red Sea kit and had a Salifert Calcium that i found which is not expired. Red Sea shows 345. Salifert 335 and Hanna showed 556 then I tried again with Hanna and it showed 551 second time around. Are the Hanna checkers that much off. If so what a waste of money. Anyone have experience and which of the 3 should be my go to test kit.
There are several good threads on the Calcium Checker...I use it all the time....two critical steps...sample measurement and the RODI water you use in the test...check out the threads for details
 
Well yesterday i tried again to. BE super super careful of how much of Water i pit both sample and Rodi and made sure every bit if reagent was mixed correctly. This time i did get a more accurate reading. Salifert and Red Sea where bith at around 340 while Hanna came 461.
It took me 3 tries to get it to this close in my opinion its not worth the time and patience of getting every water drop/molecule in the vial making sure every single grain of powder reagent is in there and than not be sure if at the end i still got correct reading. Salifert and Red sea are simple enough and everytime were giving me a real close result without all the hassle. This checker is going in the closet
 
IME with Hanna Calcium checker the key to matching results with my Red Sea kit has been the 1ml tank sample using that weird syringe. When depressed you need to stop at the first point that gives you pressure. That's the 1ml mark. Anything beyond that and I also get numbers in the 500's.
marine depot has a good video for Hanna calcium testing.
One I found that video my test numbers starting lining up across brands +|- a few ppm.
 

IF YOU HAD TO TAKE A REEFING EXAM, WOULD YOU PASS?

  • Yes!

    Votes: 32 45.7%
  • Not yet, but I have one that I want to buy in mind!

    Votes: 9 12.9%
  • No.

    Votes: 26 37.1%
  • Other (please explain).

    Votes: 3 4.3%

New Posts

Back
Top