How consistent are Hanna Reagents?

[GobyGuy]

I have picked up a Phosphorus ULR colorimeter, and between the reagents that came included in the package that expire 6 months + from now and the reagents I just bought produced about 5 “lots” later (expiring late 2023) the tests in the same vials are 200ppb vs 30ppb within expected margins

how inconsistent are Hanna reagents? Is it because of shipping?

 

[mdb_talon]

I have not noticed a lot of inconsistency in phosphate but maybe have been lucky. I find the alk reagents useless and won't even use the alk checker anymore because of drastically different results even between brand new bottles with same lot #s

 

[Gtinnel]

No those readings are not even close to being within a margin of error. Either you did something wrong on one of the tests, or something was/is wrong with one of the reagents.

I use the phosphate ULR and I’ve never had an issue with consistency between different boxes of reagent.
I unfortunately have also noticed a difference in the consistency of alkalinity reagent. Which is a shame because I really liked the alk checker until I got a bottle of reagent that read significantly higher than the previous bottle.

ETA- I would be suspicious of the 200ppb reading since that is the max reading of the checker.

 

[GobyGuy]

No those readings are not even close to being within a margin of error. Either you did something wrong on one of the tests, or something was/is wrong with one of the reagents.

I use the phosphate ULR and I’ve never had an issue with consistency between different boxes of reagent.
I unfortunately have also noticed a difference in the consistency of alkalinity reagent. Which is a shame because I really liked the alk checker until I got a bottle of reagent that read significantly higher than the previous bottle.

I must’ve mis worded, I meant that multiple tests within each lot provided consistent results across that test. The 30ppb tests were 3/3 within 4 or 7% im not sure whatever Hanna states as the range of error and the 200+ppb tests were in the same vial using the same procedure (crease packet, cut, fill cuvette, 0 checker, then add packet shake for 2 min with Kleenex to avoid prints and tested on same desk surface)

Any help validating these older reagents or fixing my strategy would be appreciate as it about 30-40 packs of reagent lol

 

[stevolough]

I must’ve mis worded, I meant that multiple tests within each lot provided consistent results across that test. The 30ppb tests were 3/3 within 4 or 7% im not sure whatever Hanna states as the range of error and the 200+ppb tests were in the same vial using the same procedure (crease packet, cut, fill cuvette, 0 checker, then add packet shake for 2 min with Kleenex to avoid prints and tested on same desk surface)

Any help validating these older reagents or fixing my strategy would be appreciate as it about 30-40 packs of reagent lol

Make sure you bought the right one. There are 2 different ones. One is ppm and the other is ppb. The number on the package should be the same as the tester.

 

[Gtinnel]

I must’ve mis worded, I meant that multiple tests within each lot provided consistent results across that test. The 30ppb tests were 3/3 within 4 or 7% im not sure whatever Hanna states as the range of error and the 200+ppb tests were in the same vial using the same procedure (crease packet, cut, fill cuvette, 0 checker, then add packet shake for 2 min with Kleenex to avoid prints and tested on same desk surface)

Any help validating these older reagents or fixing my strategy would be appreciate as it about 30-40 packs of reagent lol

I’m no longer sure that I am even aware of what the question is.

The stated accuracy for that checker is +\- 5ppb +5%. So for a reading of 30 ppb your sample should actually be within the range of 23.5-36.5. So getting multiple tests that are within 4ppb is completely within margin of error.

So were the tests done with a reading of 200ppb tested from water from the same tank? I guess that’s the part that I’m confused about. I originally thought you tested your tank and got a reading of 30 with one batch of reagents and got a reading of 200 for the same tank from the other batch or reagents.

 

[olonmv]

I have not noticed a lot of inconsistency in phosphate but maybe have been lucky. I find the alk reagents useless and won't even use the alk checker anymore because of drastically different results even between brand new bottles with same lot #s

I’ve been keeping my liquid reagents in the fridge after opening and in defense of the alk test I think they’re pretty consistent. Last week I tested alk with a bottle that is kinda old and had leaked a lil due to tipping over and, then tested with a new vial of reagent yesterday……same reading as last weeks.

 

[nomad6]

I have picked up a Phosphorus ULR colorimeter, and between the reagents that came included in the package that expire 6 months + from now and the reagents I just bought produced about 5 “lots” later (expiring late 2023) the tests in the same vials are 200ppb vs 30ppb within expected margins

how inconsistent are Hanna reagents? Is it because of shipping?

I had issues with lot h050 giving me wack readings ranging from .2 to .9 and inbetween. Out of 25 packets I must’ve gotten 7 that worked. Emailed BRS and Hanna.

 

[Hellic]

t

I have not noticed a lot of inconsistency in phosphate but maybe have been lucky. I find the alk reagents useless and won't even use the alk checker anymore because of drastically different results even between brand new bottles with same lot #s

This happened on my most recent bottle of alk reagent. I was testing weekly and my tank shot up 2dkh. I was very concerned and wanted to drop the alk but i remembered hearing that the alk reagent can give bad results over time. (One month in my case)

I know my newly mixed salt mixes at 9 with a fresh bottle of reagent so i tested a new batch of water and it also was showing 10.5

Basically In a nutshell you could compare you DT results with newly mixed saltwater during water changes to make sure they are still in line with each other. That way your not having to buy new reagent all the time.

 

[mdb_talon]

I’ve been keeping my liquid reagents in the fridge after opening and in defense of the alk test I think they’re pretty consistent. Last week I tested alk with a bottle that is kinda old and had leaked a lil due to tipping over and, then tested with a new vial of reagent yesterday……same reading as last weeks.

I know some report no issues, but much more relevant in my opinion is how many do report issues including myself. In my case I had an old bottle and two never opened bottles with all three giving significantly different results.

 

[mdb_talon]

t
This happened on my most recent bottle of alk reagent. I was testing weekly and my tank shot up 2dkh. I was very concerned and wanted to drop the alk but i remembered hearing that the alk reagent can give bad results over time. (One month in my case)

I know my newly mixed salt mixes at 9 with a fresh bottle of reagent so i tested a new batch of water and it also was showing 10.5

Basically In a nutshell you could compare you DT results with newly mixed saltwater during water changes to make sure they are still in line with each other. That way your not having to buy new reagent all the time.

Again I had two brand new bottles give significantly different results. I also don't think alk of salt mix is reliable enough to essentially use that as a calibration or baseline.

For me its just a lot more sensible to use Salifert which I have never had an issue with. Precision is a bit less(but really not relevant) but accuracy is always good I don't have to worry about it being off 2dkh by bottle, refrigerating, testing new bottles, etc. I just use it and trust the result

 

[Gtinnel]

I know some report no issues, but much more relevant in my opinion is how many do report issues including myself. In my case I had an old bottle and two never opened bottles with all three giving significantly different results.

My experience is the same as yours. I was getting ready to run out of a bottle so I used the old bottle to test the tank with the result seeming to be correct based on my trident and Red Sea test. I then ran the same test with the brand new reagent bottle and my reading was over 1dKh higher than the previous test. I like the convenience of the alk checker and before that bottle I swore by it, but I can no longer trust it.

 

[jkobel]

I have many of these checkers and i find them to be fairly reliable, my biggest issues are when the battery gets low. Then i change it and its back to normal.

These forums are full of folks that will say they are reliable and others that say they are inconsistent. I will say you need to follow a process that is very consistent to make the most of it.

 

[olonmv]

I’ve read horror stories. Not trying to discredit anyone as I’ve also had 1 experience where the alk didn’t match up. Since I’ve been keeping liquid reagent in the fridge it’s seemed really consistent. I literally used a leaky bottle (it’s my aux fridge in garage and the kids, 9/10 times slam the door shut) that keeps tipping over. My alk always tested out consistently and I dipped into a different bottle yesterday and the test result was same level as week before with old leaky bottle of reagent. I for sure thought it being leaky would augment test results but it didn’t. Not sure if it’s a coincidence but it’s been pretty solid since refrigerating. I can’t recall who posted about refrigerating the reagent but I do recall him as being one of the very knowledgeable and A veteran reefers on here and I value his opinion.

 

[Gtinnel]

I’ve read horror stories. Not trying to discredit anyone as I’ve also had 1 experience where the alk didn’t match up. Since I’ve been keeping liquid reagent in the fridge it’s seemed really consistent. I literally used a leaky bottle (it’s my aux fridge in garage and the kids, 9/10 times slam the door shut) that keeps tipping over. My alk always tested out consistently and I dipped into a different bottle yesterday and the test result was same level as week before with old leaky bottle of reagent. I for sure thought it being leaky would augment test results but it didn’t. Not sure if it’s a coincidence but it’s been pretty solid since refrigerating. I can’t recall who posted about refrigerating the reagent but I do recall him as being one of the very knowledgeable and A veteran reefers on here and I value his opinion.

My problem isn’t with a reagent that the value gets farther off over time after opening the bottle. My problem was a brand new freshly opened bottle was giving a bad reading.
I believed it was @Lasse who originally posted to keep the reagent bottle in the fridge.

 

[olonmv]

My problem isn’t with a reagent that the value gets farther off over time after opening the bottle. My problem was a brand new freshly opened bottle was giving a bad reading.
I believed it was @Lasse who originally posted to keep the reagent bottle in the fridge.

Ah, I see. I don’t think I’ve encountered this problem and I can see the frustration. That’s exactly who I had in mind but I wasn’t 100%!

 

[Gtinnel]

Ah, I see. I don’t think I’ve encountered this problem and I can see the frustration. That’s exactly who I had in mind but I wasn’t 100%!

I swore by my alk checker until I got that bottle. I suspect I can get a new bottle and probably won’t have the issue but it’s frustrating that it’s hit or miss whether a bottle of reagent is usable.
I will say that I’ve never experienced the issue with the accuracy changing over time after the bottle is opened.
I rarely check alk anyway because I rely mostly on my trident (it’s not been foolproof for me either though).

 

[olonmv]

I swore by my alk checker until I got that bottle. I suspect I can get a new bottle and probably won’t have the issue but it’s frustrating that it’s hit or miss whether a bottle of reagent is usable.
I will say that I’ve never experienced the issue with the accuracy changing over time after the bottle is opened.
I rarely check alk anyway because I rely mostly on my trident (it’s not been foolproof for me either though).

I haven’t had any bad issues with it. I also don’t test alk often and even if it tested a lil outta range, I don’t think I’d be overly bothered by it. For me, it’s still worlds better than any of the others because of ease of testing procedure and I like a hard number instead of color matching. I always felt nervous that I was trying to color match in the wrong light and getting it wrong.

 

[Gtinnel]

I haven’t had any bad issues with it. I also don’t test alk often and even if it tested a lil outta range, I don’t think I’d be overly bothered by it. For me, it’s still worlds better than any of the others because of ease of testing procedure and I like a hard number instead of color matching. I always felt nervous that I was trying to color match in the wrong light and getting it wrong.

Over 1 dKh off is more than I’m willing be alright with. I went through several bottles of reagent before I had one that was an issue, and honestly I should just buy a new bottle and start using it again.
I can agree that it is easier than a titration test. Although even the titration test for alk isn’t that bad.

 

[olonmv]

Over 1 dKh off is more than I’m willing be alright with. I went through several bottles of reagent before I had one that was an issue, and honestly I should just buy a new bottle and start using it again.
I can agree that it is easier than a titration test. Although even the titration test for alk isn’t that bad.

Lol, just thinking of all the steps of Tritration is making my head spin! I don’t miss all the steps and the excessive cleanup. Take the L brother and come back to the dark side, lol. Have you tried emailing them? I’m sure they’ll have no problem sending a new one out to you.