ICP testing

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

Man - I was just going to start a gofundme page to go and dive at the world renound reefs and provide water sample back to the various labs for testing, so we can all get an idea of exactly what waters are suppose to be based on these reefs. *Dream shattered*

oh well, back to day dreaming....

lol

Happy Reefing

 

[User1]

Man - I was just going to start a gofundme page to go and dive at the world renound reefs and provide water sample back to the various labs for testing, so we can all get an idea of exactly what waters are suppose to be based on these reefs. *Dream shattered*

oh well, back to day dreaming....

I don't want to derail the thread anymore but people are starting to abuse the gofundme pages. I mean just look at the recent headlines. In any case this doesn't stop you from getting a few good dives in If you haven't dove the cold waters of Northern California might I suggest you stop by and head to Monterey. There you will find some of the best diving in the world. I personally can recommend:

1. Point Lobos
2. Still water cove (overlooking Pebble Beach)
3. Monastery Beach (properly named, advanced divers recommended or by boat)

 

[User1]

Double post bug strikes again...sand panda

 

[RajV]

A comparison with large differences. Move to the 22nd minute for the results comparison

 

[MnFish1]

If your business model is that 99% percent of claims aren’t covered (I also used to own an insurance company), your real business is getting over on people. I personally wouldn’t be comfortable having a business like yours regardless of how profitable it is. Clearly steps need to be taken to better communicate what is and isn’t covered. If 99% of people misread what is covered, you aren’t explaining it well. That should be obvious to anyone with a degree in anything mathematical but you choose to blame 99% of people reading your literature instead. Your state clearly has a rather lax dept of insurance. Here in NY you’d need a really good defense atty to claim those stats aren’t criminal.

I only got to the above post in this thread but that’s enough for me. In my eyes you’re a criminal. Those are harsh words but again we’ve owned similar businesses and here in NY, that’s what it’s called. I believe that doing the right thing by people is the correct way to grow a business.

A BIT OFF TOPIC:
Though the guy is abrasive and doesnt inspire me to try his testing methods, I disagree with your post above. I don't think he said that 99% of his claims aren't covered - he said 99% of people that are upset with his business are complaining about things that weren't covered in the first place. He said that they have thousands of happy customers (who knows if thats correct or not). So I think you're a bit out of line calling anyone a 'criminal'.

I agree with him - the sales people DO oversell these products - and consumers DON'T read the 'fine print'. I would suggest that there are also people who stretch the truth when making damage claims on these types of policies as well. This is why most consumer agencies recommend that people no NOT purchase these types of products in the first place - because they are not cost-effective.

When you sell thousands of warranty programs a year there are always going to be unhappy customers. Examples of things we denied on a regular basis are children taking knives and scissors stabbing their furniture, manufacturing defects, such as leather bursting because it is too thin and pulled so tight that it can not handle the pressure of someone sitting on it, stiching coming undone. These are all happening within the first 2 years of furniture being in use. These examples make up 99% of upset people and these items are beyond an accidental coverage program. When people are happy with a program like ours they rarely take the time to post a positive review. When they are not happy with a denial reply from us they feel cheated and have a lot of negative emotions and they post negative things. If you look at any service company on the net you will find a majority of reviews to be negative for these reasons. Look at the average person and ask yourself how often do they go on line to post a reply about a good job the plumber, electrician, cable tech did when they fixed a problem? When people are happy they continue on with their life because we expect a proper job to be done and no further action is required.
The small percentage of unhappy customers we have is a result of people believing that we should cover something we tell them up front we do not cover and that the customer is always right. News flash, the customer is not always right.

 

[ATI North America]

A comparison with large differences. Move to the 22nd minute for the results comparison

As a reminder, ATI North America provides a shipping label with our tests. It is however slow, the only option we have is business reply mail which USPS handles slowly. If speed is critical for your results you can ship your test to us directly at the address below. Shipping to the address on the label will send it to the post office, not to ATI North America. We ship samples to Germany 2x per week.

ATI North America
16400 S Avalon Blvd
Gardena CA 90248

 

[furam28]

I have used both ATI and Triton in the last year. They were both very comparable in service and accuracy but ATI was the better one and $10 cheaper. ATI tests both tank water and RO. They also include prepaid shipping label which Triton doesn't. Total turnaround was exactly 7 days. I shipped out Tuesday. Got my results next Tuesday.

 

[MnFish1]

I have used both ATI and Triton in the last year. They were both very comparable in service and accuracy but ATI was the better one and $10 cheaper. ATI tests both tank water and RO. They also include prepaid shipping label which Triton doesn't. Total turnaround was exactly 7 days. I shipped out Tuesday. Got my results next Tuesday.

Here is a question. Did the testing change anything that you’re currently doing in your tank?

 

[RajV]

Here is a question. Did the testing change anything that you’re currently doing in your tank?

I use it to know that the home kit is in the ball park .

 

[MnFish1]

I use it to know that the home kit is in the ball park .

Then why not just ditch the home kit. I don’t see the rationale to this test unless there is a problem in the tank. If not there is no reason to pay more money. Funny I think those comparing costs of these tests ignore the fact that they are not comparing the cost of not doing the tests at all.

 

[RajV]

I wasn't comparing their costs . The video simply points to a possibility that there is no consistency across ICP , and that is true of home kits. There are several other elements that get tested with icp , which is impossible to do with home kits.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

I have used both ATI and Triton in the last year. They were both very comparable in service and accuracy .

How are you judging accuracy?

 

[dragon99]

How are you judging accuracy?

By which values come back where I want them to

 

[rkpetersen]

Here is a question. Did the testing change anything that you’re currently doing in your tank?

I will chime in here and say yes, absolutely it has, for me. On one occasion, it led me to a pump that was prematurely rusting. One one occasion, it showed that I had zero phosphorus in my water, not just low but actually zero by ICPOES, which led me to rethink my nutrient export strategy. At one point, I had elevated potassium levels, such that hobbyist test kits couldn't measure it; ICPOES tests helped me confirm that my actions to correct this were working. On multiple occasions, it has either confirmed or refuted results of hobbyist test kits, which has guided my subsequent choices regarding which ones to use. In my newest tank, it has confirmed that black sand does pose a risk of leaching potentially toxic metals; I have not removed the black sand yet, but if the levels continue to rise (third set of ATI/Triton retests going out next week), I will likely do so. And I'm sure I could come up with several more examples of how helpful it's been, if I checked my records.

 

[rkpetersen]

By which values come back where I want them to

lol, that's about it!

Seriously though, Randy's question is very legitimate. The only way I know to address this, within the limitations of an ordinary hobbyist without their own analytical lab at home, is to run several hobbyist tests and then send off several ICPOES tests concurrently. Discard any outliers and average the rest. Labor-intensive and expensive, but after a while you may get a sense of who to trust for which pieces of information.

 

[MnFish1]

I will chime in here and say yes, absolutely it has, for me. On one occasion, it led me to a pump that was prematurely rusting. One one occasion, it showed that I had zero phosphorus in my water, not just low but actually zero by ICPOES, which led me to rethink my nutrient export strategy. At one point, I had elevated potassium levels, such that hobbyist test kits couldn't measure it; ICPOES tests helped me confirm that my actions to correct this were working. On multiple occasions, it has either confirmed or refuted results of hobbyist test kits, which has guided my subsequent choices regarding which ones to use. In my newest tank, it has confirmed that black sand does pose a risk of leaching potentially toxic metals; I have not removed the black sand yet, but if the levels continue to rise (third set of ATI/Triton retests going out next week), I will likely do so. And I'm sure I could come up with several more examples of how helpful it's been, if I checked my records.

Thanks - My question would be - was your tank having problems leading to the testing - or was it just random. I guess your examples would be 'true positives' - where the testing showed actual problems in the tank. Yet there seem to be many many threads mentioning 'what to do with xxxxx level higher than recommended'. I appreciate your answer though...

 

[rkpetersen]

Thanks - My question would be - was your tank having problems leading to the testing - or was it just random. I guess your examples would be 'true positives' - where the testing showed actual problems in the tank. Yet there seem to be many many threads mentioning 'what to do with xxxxx level higher than recommended'. I appreciate your answer though...

Yes. In the case of the rusting pump, I believe I was seeing some negative effects on corals which cleared up when I replaced the pump. The pump had no visible corrosion that I could see until I actually removed it from the sump, and I only did so after I got the ICPOES results back. And I definitely saw bleaching when my phosphorus was zero (concurrent Hanna checker gave me a reading of 4, which was 4 too many!)

And I just remembered the very first event that sold me on ICPOES. Iodine. When I got back in the hobby a while ago, I had some preconceptions based on my experience decades earlier. One was dosing iodine, which I naively thought was important. Commercial products tend to be fairly liberal with their dosing recommendations, so I use less out of habit. One day, I dropped an iodine dose into the overflow. Within an hour, the effect on various corals was evident. Lots of polyp and tissue retraction, apparent new severe photosensitivity to previously acclimated lights. I really didn't know what was going on, but the iodine was the obvious suspect. I sent a Triton test (I wasn't using ATI yet), and discontinued minor/trace element dosing. 10 days later I got back the result, with the glaring inclusion of an iodine level of 323, 5 times normal. And remember, I was dosing less than the recommended amount (about half.)

It is true that there are at least two hobbyist iodine test kits available. I had them, had been using them, and also tried them at the time, but neither one registered the grossly elevated level. Both tests were complete fails.

 

[MnFish1]

Yes. In the case of the rusting pump, I believe I was seeing some negative effects on corals which cleared up when I replaced the pump. The pump had no visible corrosion that I could see until I actually removed it from the sump, and I only did so after I got the ICPOES results back. And I definitely saw bleaching when my phosphorus was zero (concurrent Hanna checker gave me a reading of 4, which was 4 too many!)

And I just remembered the very first event that sold me on ICPOES. Iodine. When I got back in the hobby a while ago, I had some preconceptions based on my experience decades earlier. One was dosing iodine, which I naively thought was important. Commercial products tend to be fairly liberal with their dosing recommendations, so I use less out of habit. One day, I dropped an iodine dose into the overflow. Within an hour, the effect on various corals was evident. Lots of polyp and tissue retraction, apparent new severe photosensitivity to previously acclimated lights. I really didn't know what was going on, but the iodine was the obvious suspect. I sent a Triton test (I wasn't using ATI yet), and discontinued minor/trace element dosing. 10 days later I got back the result, with the glaring inclusion of an iodine level of 323, 5 times normal. And remember, I was dosing less than the recommended amount (about half.)

It is true that there are at least two hobbyist iodine test kits available. I had them, had been using them, and also tried them at the time, but neither one registered the grossly elevated level. Both tests were complete fails.

Thanks - makes sense

 

[Scott Campbell]

Thanks - makes sense

I have had much the same experience as rkpetersen. The tests have helped me catch some problems in the making. But the main benefit to me has been identifying, with much greater precision, what my system uses above and beyond my water changes. Like I now know my tank needs an additional 80 ml of potassium each month to maintain a constant number - after water changes and feeding. And that number has been consistent for a long period of time now. I honestly have no clue what is actually using up all that potassium, I have no idea if the level I am maintaining at (NSW levels) is a good target number and I'm not sure what happens if I let the potassium deplete to roughly zero with small recovery bumps after every water change. Maybe it would all be fine. I suppose it was indeed fine before I started the tests. But I feel a lot better knowing the actual system usage as a consequence of the Triton tests and being able to maintain a level of consistency in tank parameters that I was obviously not maintaining prior to testing. Just an extra level of knowledge so if something unusual does happen in my tank I now know it probably isn't a potassium issue. That is worth $50 every 3 months for me.

 

[MnFish1]

I wasn't comparing their costs . The video simply points to a possibility that there is no consistency across ICP , and that is true of home kits. There are several other elements that get tested with icp , which is impossible to do with home kits.

But if there is no consistency - what is the purpose of doing the test?

 

[MnFish1]

An interesting test would be to send 5 identical samples to a single vendor - and then see how they compare to each other...