HI772 bad results

[SashimiTurtle]

I've gotten bad reagent before. I always open a new bottle before I run out of my current and compare readings. That way if I've been testing at 8.0 and all of a sudden I pull a 8.5 I won't try and adjust my dose. They actually vary quite a bit from batch to batch.

 

[kenchilada]

I've gotten bad reagent before. I always open a new bottle before I run put of my current and compare readings. That was if I've been testing at 8.0 amd all of a sudden I pull a 8.5 I won't try and adjust my dose. They actually vary quite a bit from batch to batch.

That's shocking to me. For me to get a reading of 3.2dKH on ~8dKH water tells me zero testing is being done on the batches. Even if the Hanna colorimeter is 100% accurate it is worthless without dependable reagent.

Lesson learned, buy the alk test kit with the best reagent rather than the best interpretation method. Titration kits are just as easy as colorimeters to me so I'm fine either way.

 

[MrStoffel]

Yeah i'm just here to report i have recently discovered the same issue with my Alk checker.
I had finished the original reagent bottle a few weeks ago and got a fresh bottle.
Everything looked ok, untill i got a higher reading of 0.5 higher than expected.
So i double checked and eventually lowered my 2 part dosing: WRONG!
My ICP test from last week shows a dKh of 6.5 instead of the 7.5 my checker was reading.
Double check with salifert: yup 6.5
I hope Hanna understands i will never trust them again from now on. I lost 2 seriatopora's because of this. Luckily my acro's have not shown any ill effects yet, but they could still suffer the consequences in the comming weeks.
So sad i bought into this rubbish

 

[homer1475]

Yeah i'm just here to report i have recently discovered the same issue with my Alk checker.
I had finished the original reagent bottle a few weeks ago and got a fresh bottle.
Everything looked ok, untill i got a higher reading of 0.5 higher than expected.
So i double checked and eventually lowered my 2 part dosing: WRONG!
My ICP test from last week shows a dKh of 6.5 instead of the 7.5 my checker was reading.
Double check with salifert: yup 6.5
I hope Hanna understands i will never trust them again from now on. I lost 2 seriatopora's because of this. Luckily my acro's have not shown any ill effects yet, but they could still suffer the consequences in the comming weeks.
So sad i bought into this rubbish

Ok so I have to know....

Did you use all the regent, or just the stated 25 tests?

I only ask because I had issue with my hanna checker. It was only when I started marking the bottle and only using 25 tests did I get much more consistent results between regent bottles. If you try to use it all up(think you can actually get 30 tests out of a bottle), the last bit always reads low compared to a new bottle. Now if thats due to contamination, regent hardening(the little floaties you sometimes see), or something else I do not know.

This is just my experience with using the hanna egg.

And FYI I am in no way defending hanna(there has been well documented problems with their reagents), but an ALK of 6.5 did not kill your corals. Slow down growth, sure, but low alk will not kill corals.

 

[MrStoffel]

Hi Homer, i did use up all the reagent, and funny enough i was still getting normal readings then. It was also the original reagent bottle that came with my checker.
It was only after i started using the replacement reagentfor a week or two, that things started to go weird.
However, i should have double checked when i got the "high" readings where i thought the Kh was rising, but i had recently started using kalk for its Ph benefits and contributed the Kh rise to that. (although that effect is only very small with the amount i used)
Yesterday i did a side by side test between salifert and the hanna, and got again a 1dKh difference (7.0 Salifert, 8.0 Hanna) The reagent bottle is now half full, but i can no longer use it like this.
I switched to Hanna because i found the colour change on Salifert harder to read than reading a number, but since the precision is not there with Hanna, i can just as well read the Salifert.

 

[homer1475]

And my hanna and salifert line up close enough that I can trust the hanna.

Have you tried the standard? You can't actually calibrate the hanna egg, but the standards will let you know if the meter is reading wrong.

Standards measure 7.5(I think, been a while since I used mine), and my meter came back as 7.4.

Perhaps you have bad meter, and not reagent?

 

[Scdell]

And my hanna and salifert line up close enough that I can trust the hanna.

Have you tried the standard? You can't actually calibrate the hanna egg, but the standards will let you know if the meter is reading wrong.

Standards measure 7.5(I think, been a while since I used mine), and my meter came back as 7.4.

Perhaps you have bad meter, and not reagent?

If the checker is bad then there's a lot of bad checkers out there. I do monthly ICP tests.
Hanna is always way off.

 

[homer1475]

If the checker is bad then there's a lot of bad checkers out there. I do monthly ICP tests.
Hanna is always way off.

And who's to say the ICP is right? Who's to say something doesn't happen to the sample while it's in the mail waiting to be tested? I would only trust an ICP testing ALK if it was done immediately upon the sample being taken.

ICP(admitting I have only ever done 2 as I find them mostly useless), salifert, and hanna all pretty much line up with each other.

Look I get it, you don't like the hanna egg(I've seen many a post by you stating how bad the egg is), yet thousands of people use them without issue. They can't all be bad?

 

[MrStoffel]

I have nothing against the Hanna, i use it for Phosphorous as well and that works fine and lines up perfectly with the ICP result. However, i am in the hobby for 25 years and have been using salifert for kH for a very long time with good results. The salifert result lines up with the ICP. Hanna did not.
The only conclusion i can make is either the egg is bad, or the reagent is bad. (yes i know how to use it properly)
But since it agreed with my salifert when it was new, i am quite certain it is the reagent that is off.
I might order a new bottle with my next order of maintenance products, but i will never make any adjustments based on its reading alone from now on.

 

[Scdell]

And who's to say the ICP is right?

Hmmm. ICP test machine costs thousands. Hanna checker $50. Not really an argument there.

 

[homer1475]

Price of a machine does not equate to quality.

Take for instance the salifert test. $16.45 for 100 tests, or the hanna egg(since this is what were talking about) $49.95 for the "machine", and 19.95 for 25 tests.

By your comparison the hanna egg should be better because it costs more, but you say it isn't. An ICP machine that costs 1000's should be better, yet what do we as hobbyist have as a guarantee that that thousand dollar machine is better? We have seen many threads on here about the absurd values ICP gives at times. You can't have it both ways, sorry.

I find that idea to be absolutely absurd.

Look I'm not arguing the hanna has faults, we all know it does. But to compare an ICP test that we have no way to garantee the results are accurate(other then to believe it is so says the manufacturer), to a $50 piece of equipment that can be tested as accurate(Hanna standards) is just absurd.

 

[homer1475]

I think at this point, we can agree to disagree.

 

[Scdell]

It's not the point of any test being accurate really. It's the people that swear Hanna is never wrong. Yet they stand on their head and perform all kinds of rituals with this tester to get the right results. Then swear how good Hanna is.

Reality?? Hanna is a cheap $50 hobby grade tester. That's all It is and that's all it ever will be. No matter how much peeps want it to be a "lab" grade tester.

 

[homer1475]

It's not the point of any test being accurate really. It's the people that swear Hanna is never wrong. Yet they stand on their head and perform all kinds of rituals with this tester to get the right results. Then swear how good Hanna is.

Reality?? Hanna is a cheap $50 hobby grade tester. That's all It is and that's all it ever will be. No matter how much peeps want it to be a "lab" grade tester.

On that, I would agree with you 100%.

I have never said hanna is the absolute best, I know it has faults, as with any hobby grade test kit.

I myself after years of comparing salifert to hanna(I have used salifert for years have come to trust it's numbers), for me the hanna just works and is easy as heck to use, and is somewhat inline with salifert(one is always off from the other, but not wildly off).

 

[Scdell]

I'd still take my chances on an ICP test over a Hanna one. 999 Times out of 1000.

 

[MrStoffel]

I am unsure how ATI "measures" the Alkalinity result of the ICP, since the Kh value is made up of a combination of elements & ICP measures elements seperately. Its possible that they just calculate it based on the measured elements contributing to Kh. Or they do a Kh measurement with one of the vials, since ATI gives you 3 vials to analyse.
But this is going to far off topic