victoly Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 You dun been hoodwinked. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarmerTy Posted November 5, 2014 Author Share Posted November 5, 2014 Where's your danger... danger robot? Or is that only for chloramines? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
victoly Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reburn Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 I find your results interesting. I will post a thread when I recieve mine. I test Fe, I, K with a Red Sea pro colors test kit and I constantly see Fe reading 0. I dose with Red Sea colors program and then next time I test it is back at 0. KZ is supposed to have a block coming out that has a constant dissolve time to slowly dose Fe into your tank. I have thought about experimenting with it when it hits the U.S. market. Also it's intresting on how far your Mg and Ca numbers are off but since they are within specs I wouldn't be too concerned with it. I can't comment on which test I feel to be more accurate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarmerTy Posted November 5, 2014 Author Share Posted November 5, 2014 Yeah, percentage-wise, the Mg result didn't concern me but how off my Ca and Iodine results were compared to Triton was concerning. I don't have much input either into which one to trust. I would normally tend to trust the lab results over a home hobbiest kit but since I don't know their quality control procedures, I don't inherently trust the results as much as I would trust lab results when I was consulting. On that note, no adjustments to my water or my tank will be made based on the results for now until we get more results back from the initial round of testing. A bunch of people have been collectively sharing their results on another forum and chemistry guru Randy Holmes Farley has been contributing to his thoughts on the results. I want to see if there is a trend of hobbiest results versus Triton results being off on certain parameters or any other common element throwing readings off, such as high aluminum results and the majority of the people running Cermedia blocks in their sump, myself included. Apparently, Cermedia uses Alumina as a binder in their ceramic block (was told that it was an often used binder for ceramic) and it is quite interesting the correlation of higher aluminum readings in certain tanks also coincided with most having one of these blocks in their tank. I may remove mine off of this result and discussion alone. I'd be surprised if the aluminum is actually affecting anything in the tank but I may still remove the block. Sent via Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
victoly Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Your home titration kits are likely to be more accurate than an analytical method that is not the right tool for marine aqueous chemistry. I need to double check, but in pretty sure that titration and/or photometry are the epa methods for ca, mg and alk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarmerTy Posted November 5, 2014 Author Share Posted November 5, 2014 I was thinking the same for the titration based home test for Ca and would trust that result much more than my Iodine home test which is purely based on visual perception of a degrading color due to reaction time. But both compared to an ICP spectrometer test... I don't know. In this scenario, I would think that my Ca is correct with my home test and the Triton result to be more correct for my Iodine result. Sent via Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
victoly Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 That's why i think it's salesmanship over substance. If part of your sales pitch is "we can do ALL these elements for $40", then one would assume or hope that the results are reasonable accurate and precise. If the fine print said *your home alk, mg,ca tests are probably more accurate* there wouldnt be the buzz that this guy is getting. The ivory tower academics have pretty thoroughly challenged triton to back up the results with some verifiable methodology. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarmerTy Posted November 5, 2014 Author Share Posted November 5, 2014 Oh believe me, I'm going into the results with my fair share of skepticism. I think a thorough analysis of his process is still overdue by the academic experts as you have mentioned. I do like the potential that this concept may usher in a more precise level of scrutiny of our tanks but without reliable data, it may as well be doomed as any other "method" out there. Still, my curiosity was worth the $50 and I hope to see a collaborative effort on deciphering the data and what is reliable and what is not as far as results are concerned. Sent via Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
victoly Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Here's a great list of all the EPA approved methods for inorganic chemistry. Most of these are freshwater based and not NSW based because there tends to not be a whole lot of testable petroleum leaks in the ocean . Calcium - EPA Method 215.2 (titration) - interesting to note that phosphate interferes with readings and is precipitated out of solution by adding lanthanum. Not sure how this is accounted for with home methods. The big picture problem here is not that it is impossible to measure calcium with an ICP. From what I understand you can get ICP accuracy at very low concentrations. However, when you get into the NSW range, there is a ton of interference which basically ruins your readings. SO, the solution there is to dilute the sample and then extrapolate your readings amirite?lolnope. Magnesium - EPA Method 242.1 (Flame Atomic Adsorption) - The preferred testing range for this method is really low, less than 1 PPM. So again, we're left with titration in the NSW range. Alkalinity - SM 2320B (titration) - Alk is by definition a titration based calculation. For reef aquarists it's really just a proxy for measuring carbonate. Triton doesn't do alkalnity, which is a pretty crucial analyte. Why? Because it's not testable with ICP, it's cheap to do with good accuracy for in home kits. Not to mention shipping it to the fatherland is going to ruin the readings. To circle things back around, what I'm getting at is that there is potential for *some* of these elements to be accurate when tested in a marine matrix because their NSW concentrations are very low. How do we know which those are? For most of those who cares ? How do your source a problem? How do you remediate the problem? I kind of see this as analogous to someone who goes in and gets full CT scans when they don't have have a headache. Do you have some weird lumps in your body? Sure. Are they cancer? Probably not. But now you want to go in and get biopsied, which is causing more damage than the original non-issue. RHF ripped triton a new on on the r2r thread with the triton america rep. They don't even try to refute RHF, they just straight up straw man him into talking about something else. Where I have the major issue is that the sell themselves as this hyper accurate, all inclusive package of analytes which may only be tangentially related to the health of our livestock. If this analysis was accurate, it would cost hundreds of dollars per sample using currently acceptable lab procedures. In conclusion, I'll leave you this: There are such a huge number of scientifically comical statements in the MAIN FAQ. Triton has got me turnt up and salty. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
victoly Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Oh believe me, I'm going into the results with my fair share of skepticism. I think a thorough analysis of his process is still overdue by the academic experts as you have mentioned. I do like the potential that this concept may usher in a more precise level of scrutiny of our tanks but without reliable data, it may as well be doomed as any other "method" out there. Still, my curiosity was worth the $50 and I hope to see a collaborative effort on deciphering the data and what is reliable and what is not as far as results are concerned. Sent via Tapatalk That's what gets me ragey though. You paid 50 bucks for the right to maybe have something that might be reliable pending analysis by pHd chemists, maybe but probably not pending scientific breakthrough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
victoly Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Do you know how many bahn mi's that $50 would have bought me? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarmerTy Posted November 5, 2014 Author Share Posted November 5, 2014 Enough to calm your Triton rage? Lol Sent via Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarmerTy Posted November 5, 2014 Author Share Posted November 5, 2014 It cracks me up how fired up you get about nonsensical data. I'm sure the pundits will prove a majority of his methods inaccurate in the end. For now, it's entertaining. Sent via Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
victoly Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarmerTy Posted November 5, 2014 Author Share Posted November 5, 2014 Victoly Smash! Victoly Bash! Sent via Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+brian.srock Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 I think i'll have Triton test my water so I can see how far off I am from your water Ty. It would be nice to see if I'm close or my water is junk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarmerTy Posted November 5, 2014 Author Share Posted November 5, 2014 Who says my water isn't junk Brian? Lol. Sent via Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reburn Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 Victoly........easy man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluemoon Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 (edited) dear lord in heaven...and Charlie strong, i move that victoly shall be ordained for conveying my emotions in a way never more exactly exercised, through ted. hear. hear. three cheers for the righteous scientists. Edited November 6, 2014 by Bluemoon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
victoly Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarmerTy Posted November 6, 2014 Author Share Posted November 6, 2014 I know! I'm just as shocked there are so many purple stylo frags! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+bigsby Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 Much better than the last time... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarmerTy Posted November 6, 2014 Author Share Posted November 6, 2014 I've actually reanimated them with the Triton revive treatment and it worked like a charm! The only side effect is they keep trying to eat my open brains... brains.... Sent via Tapatalk 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reburn Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 I didn't know triton was carrying the T-virus too. Cool, those guys have thought of everything. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.