What ph number to believe

[YOYOYOReefer]

well the thread stared on december 14th, post #2 nails it , then its all down hill from there

Lionfish hunter said:
My api test shows 7.7-8.1, .... My Hanna ph probe calibrated with 2 different fluids shows 7.6-8.0.

Sounds like these two are telling you the same story.



then this classis here:

Aside from temp effects, you also used different calibration fluids. If one or more of those are off (and they can be), then that could explain it.

Do you have to use those specific pH values (7 and 10 vs 7 and 9) for calibration of these devices, or do you have a choice?

I was able to calibrate the ghl with 7 and 10. It did move the ghl down .1 but still a .18 difference between the 2. Still not pleased and don’t know what to believe.

 

[Lionfish hunter]

You have told me I am wrong so many times, and it is proven over and over again that you either misunderstand what was said or don’t understand. I made a thread on how to get better results from ph testers that were no performing and how to verify which product is giving the better result. And you have completely highjacked it with this holy I am god attitude. You have been absolutely no help and have contributed nothing to the purpose of the conversation.

dude you are hung up on accuracy , you also trip over resolution and some basic reefing concepts like you think ph is more important than alk,, and you whine and cry when when people tell you your wrong

whats the actual method you plan to implement to achieve your high ph goal that you are so concerned about accuracy.
what will your meter being "perfectly calibrated" gain you and how would you go about accomplishing this high ph what ph do you expect to maintain?

if you want to do research like this https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmars.2019.00150/full
get your self some chemistry classes and drop some money on some toledo mettler gear..

if you want to have an aquarium hobby use what everyone else uses and dont pretend none of the gear is accurate enough.. compared to when i stared 30 years ago so much of this was all trial and error , you know before they had the internet..

 

[Lionfish hunter]

well the thread stared on december 14th, post #2 nails it , then its all down hill from there





Sounds like these two are telling you the same story.



then this classis here:


I was able to calibrate the ghl with 7 and 10. It did move the ghl down .1 but still a .18 difference between the 2. Still not pleased and don’t know what to believe.

I gave multiple reasons why I didn’t believe the numbers I was getting. Get lost dude, wait you already are.

 

[Lionfish hunter]

I have proven you wrong on so many of your accusations, and after days of you telling me I am confusing accuracy and precision, you can’t give me a single example of it actually happening.

you can have the last word, I will not respond, I have proven you wrong enough for an entire lifetime. Good luck

 

[YOYOYOReefer]

dude you called me and bean out last night and this morning wanting us to reply which is it?

 

[YOYOYOReefer]

Lionfish hunter said:
In fact I was never concerned with how precise the ph reading was. So please quote me saying I wanted a precise ph reading. I went out of my way multiple times to say I was worried about accuracy and not how precise the ph reading was.

Let me get this straight: Let's say the "true" pH of your tank water is 8.20. For the sake of this thought experiment, let's also assume that your pH is rock solid, and doesn't deviate all day long. Now, let's say that you had two pH probe+meter devices named "DeviceA" and "DeviceB" that gave the following readings over a number of hours:

DeviceA: 8.01 8.34 8.25 8.07 8.15 8.33 8.24 8.22
DeviceB: 8.00 7.99 8.00 7.99 8.00 8.01 7.99 8.00

DeviceA is quite accurate: The average of all those readings is right at 8.20. But, it is imprecise: The standard deviation is 0.12, giving a 95% confidence interval of 0.24. DeviceB, on the other hand, is inacccurate: The average of all those readings is 8.00, but it is quite precise: The SD is 0.007, with a 95% confidence interval of 0.014!

Are you really saying that you would prefer DeviceA over DeviceB? I certainly would not.

 

[JimWelsh]

@YOYOYOReefer he didn't say that, I did. Then, he quoted me, but the formatting of the quote somehow got messed up. But, he didn't answer the question, either.

 

[YOYOYOReefer]

Does this make sense to you now? you really dont get the concept look you start article complaining about the accuracy of your testing devices, and we all have told you the accuracy is fine , what matters is precision... yet you will want me to quote you again right?


Lionfish hunter said:
In fact I was never concerned with how precise the ph reading was. So please quote me saying I wanted a precise ph reading. I went out of my way multiple times to say I was worried about accuracy and not how precise the ph reading was.

 

[YOYOYOReefer]

@YOYOYOReefer he didn't say that, I did. Then, he quoted me, but the formatting of the quote somehow got messed up. But, he didn't answer the question, either.

10-4 he sure did not..It might be awhile im sure hes searching google for a comeback. lol
Hes gonna have to Pick A or eat some crow.

 

[JimWelsh]

Not necessarily. He may be saying something like that he has a DeviceB already, but is concerned about the whole accuracy part. If I had a DeviceB, and I believed that I wanted my pH to be as high as possible within reasonable, stable alk numbers, then I'd use my DeviceB to simply get as high a DeviceB pH value I could by opening a window, skimming with fresh air, using a CO2 scrubber, photosynthesis in refugium, kalk, dosing with the hydroxide formula, whatever..... all the known ways to increase pH in a reef tank. I wouldn't stress about the exact pH value that my very precise probe gave me. Higher is better. Lower is worse. Done and done. But, that's just me....

 

[YOYOYOReefer]

Not necessarily. He may be saying something like that he has a DeviceB already, but is concerned about the whole accuracy part. If I had a DeviceB, and I believed that I wanted my pH to be as high as possible within reasonable, stable alk numbers, then I'd use my DeviceB to simply get as high a DeviceB pH value I could by opening a window, skimming with fresh air, using a CO2 scrubber, photosynthesis in refugium, kalk, dosing with the hydroxide formula, whatever..... all the known ways to increase pH in a reef tank. I wouldn't stress about the exact pH value that my very precise probe gave me. Higher is better. Lower is worse. Done and done. But, that's just me....

exactly, i dont even run one on my tank itself, it doesnt tell me much... but it works just fine on calcium reactor ( to be 'close enough " to 6.5 and on my kalk reactor , to make sure its north of 11 and doesnt need a refill.

 

[South Carolina reef]

I think you are chasing numbers that don’t matter and using hobby toys to do it. i get how frustrating it is, but walk away and enjoy your aquarium.

Exactly. Way over complicating it. Stick with a Sera test or something and average it out. Geezer

 

[Lionfish hunter]

The issue is that these pH measurement devices aren't all that accurate and go out of calibration fairly quickly. Given any 2 devices with +/-0.2 an actual 8.2pH could read 8.0 or 8.4 and they are both "right" within their accuracy.

As mentioned before. A great was to assess your pH probe measurement is...

A simple way to assess your pH measurements

A couple of facts: There is a mathematical model for pH, Alk, and CO2. Given any two of these you can calculate the 3rd. Most pH meters and test kits have an accuracy of +/- 0.2. A pH measurement below 7.8 is most likely a measurement error (or 7.6 due to the accuracy of your meter or test kit)...

www.reef2reef.com

You're Alk measurements of 8.5dKH with a +/- 0.5 accuracy would put your outdoor aerated cup of water between 8.27 and 8.31 NBS.

Go aerate a cup of water and measure its pH to see which probe is working best...

Bought a Milwaukee ph meter, claims accuracy +-.02. It shows .18 higher than my apex ph and .9 lower than my GHL.

Just aerated a cup of water outside and my alk is 8.5. Milwaukee shows 8.21 ph and GHL shows 8.3. How reliably is seawater aerated outside with a 8.5 alk between 8.27-8.31 ph? @Randy Holmes-Farley do you have input on this last sentence?

My apex ph number seems to be the odd man out, much further off on the aeration test, can’t keep calibration, and can’t even read the buffers properly right after calibration. I feel confident that of the 3 numbers I have to work with, the apex is the problem.

 

[arking_mark]

Bought a Milwaukee ph meter, claims accuracy +-.02. It shows .18 higher than my apex ph and .9 lower than my GHL.

Just aerated a cup of water outside and my alk is 8.5. Milwaukee shows 8.21 ph and GHL shows 8.3. How reliably is seawater aerated outside with a 8.5 alk between 8.27-8.31 ph? @Randy Holmes-Farley do you have input on this last sentence?

My apex ph number seems to be the odd man out, much further off on the aeration test, can’t keep calibration, and can’t even read the buffers properly right after calibration. I feel confident that of the 3 numbers I have to work with, the apex is the problem.

Very reliable assuming you Alk measurement accuracy is +/-0.5.

Which Milwaukee meter?

 

[Lionfish hunter]

Very reliable assuming you Alk measurement accuracy is +/-0.5.

Which Milwaukee meter?

kh director shows 8.5 hanna 9.5. Probably somewhere in between

 

[Lionfish hunter]

Very reliable assuming you Alk measurement accuracy is +/-0.5.

Which Milwaukee meter?

Mw102. It was 120$. If it is actually accurate to .02 seems like a good value.

 

[Lionfish hunter]

Very reliable assuming you Alk measurement accuracy is +/-0.5.

Which Milwaukee meter?

It is cold out, so the water was cold. Not sure if that matters, the ph meter temp probe was showing 11 Celsius.

 

[arking_mark]

It is cold out, so the water was cold. Not sure if that matters, the ph meter temp probe was showing 11 Celsius.

At 11c, 8.24 to 8.29 for an Alk of 8.5 +/-0.5.

 

[arking_mark]

Mw102. It was 120$. If it is actually accurate to .02 seems like a good value.

I might have to buy one of these....

 

[Lionfish hunter]

At 11c, 8.24 to 8.29 for an Alk of 8.5 +/-0.5.

Thanks for the information. It seems the true ph likely lies somewhere between the Milwaukee and the ghl. A week ago I didn’t know if my apex was right or wrong. I would have had to push my ph up to an average reading of around 8.5 (likely reading .2 low) on my apex to get 8.3. That would take substantially more work and would be almost impossible. People argued to death about how an accurate ph number didn’t matter. Maybe not to them it doesn’t, but it certainly does to somebody trying to get their ph to natural seawater. Figuring out which ph reading to believe is certainly important to my situation.

I might have to buy one of these....

Looks like saltwateraquarium has it on sale for 103$ lol.