trident way off !

[acropora4u]

trident reads alk at 7.85...hanna at 8.5..calculated trident and still reads at 7.85 with hanna at 8.4.. this sucks

 

[BroccoliFarmer]

trident reads alk at 7.85...hanna at 8.5..calculated trident and still reads at 7.85 with hanna at 8.4.. this sucks

i have been experiencing the same thing. I know it comes off as disappointing (for which it is) but the bigger benefit of this is the ability for monitoring for consistency. It would be nice is Trident just gave us a 'plug number' that we could add on to the calibrated number to resolve these issue...instead, you get a 3 paged email telling you to do mental math and live with it.

All said and done..i am gonna keep the trident. Consistency is the more important factor than accuracy.

 

[Arcu2]

Try a different test kit. I have had 3 bottles of reagent from Hanna reading 9.4 when my alk with Red Sea, salifert, and trident are around 8.1-8.3

 

[acropora4u]

Try a different test kit. I have had 3 bottles of reagent from Hanna reading 9.4 when my alk with Red Sea, salifert, and trident are around 8.1-8.3

i did that with a brand new bottle..same 8.4

 

[Arcu2]

i did that with a brand new bottle..same 8.4

Like I said I wouldn’t trust the Hanna completely. The first bottle I had was almost expired so I was like whatever I’ll get another bottle locally and sure enough same thing. So I contacted Hanna they replaced the reagent through warranty and got the same readings. I picked up a reference solution because I couldn’t believe 3 bottles were all off and same story. The trident, salifert, and Red Sea alk tests were all giving me acceptable readings.

 

[vetteguy53081]

I seem to have the same. My calcium hovers after calibration at 562 (was always 414) and my hanna shows 421

 

[Thales]

Comparing testing devices and methodologies will make you crazy. Compare some aquarium thermometers and you will also go crazy.

 

[areefer01]

Agree with above - don't chase numbers across devices. One has to be mother.

If you want to test your Trident what I would recommend is to use their reference solution, or one from Fauna Marin, and do a manual test using a 'known' number. Remove the sample line, wipe it off using a damp cloth with warm water, take a picture of the reference solution numbers, place Trident draw line into bottle, run a manual combined test, compare the Trident numbers to the reference solution.

As already noted anytime you start testing across other tools this get screwy. They have different margin of errors and ways to test. This is why many say it is a waste of time. Use one source and isolate. Thus my recommendation if you think something is off with the Trident then test and debug it.

 

[Oldreefer44]

My Trident always read about .8 below Hanna. An issue I discovered over time is that the needle in the reagent bottle would start to go off center which affected the readings. Important that it is always straight down into the bottle. Bought 3d printed guides which fixed the issue.

 

[areefer01]

My Trident always read about .8 below Hanna. An issue I discovered over time is that the needle in the reagent bottle would start to go off center which affected the readings. Important that it is always straight down into the bottle. Bought 3d printed guides which fixed the issue.

Here is an example of differences

Hanna Instruments HI755 advertises accuracy @ 25°C/77°F is ±5 ppm (mg/L) or ±5% of reading
Neptune Trident +/- 0.05 dKH

 

[BroccoliFarmer]

Agree with above - don't chase numbers across devices. One has to be mother.

If you want to test your Trident what I would recommend is to use their reference solution, or one from Fauna Marin, and do a manual test using a 'known' number. Remove the sample line, wipe it off using a damp cloth with warm water, take a picture of the reference solution numbers, place Trident draw line into bottle, run a manual combined test, compare the Trident numbers to the reference solution.

As already noted anytime you start testing across other tools this get screwy. They have different margin of errors and ways to test. This is why many say it is a waste of time. Use one source and isolate. Thus my recommendation if you think something is off with the Trident then test and debug it.

although i would generally agree with you, I would say that once the difference between two systems are significantly outside the margin of error, i have a problem with it. I think the other issue here is that the test immediately after calibration are providing significantly different results when testing the same sample. (ie callibrate at 8.5 but get a 7.2 reading from the sample). Completely blows away any trust you have in the system..and if you dont have trust...why bother.

 

[Reefer Matt Verified Media Partner]

The Trident must be calibrated in a very specific way. Place the calibration solution bottle at the same height that the sample tube is when in normal operation. Keep hose routing similar to normal operating configuration.
Place sample tube in calibration solution bottle. Prime sample line twice. Go into calibration menu and calibrate as usual. After calibration is complete, return sample line to normal tank configuration and prime sample line twice. After prime is complete, perform testing.
The back pressure on the sample line matters a lot for accuracy. The hose must be ran similar for testing as it is normally when in sump/tank.The Trident, when calibrated properly, is much more precise than the Hanna.