DheereCrossing
New member
I'll check my refractometer but I think it's still in calibration. That was my thought too, that the numbers looked so weak maybe the salinity is off.
A General Guide to Salt Mixes
- Thread starter Billybeau1
- Start date
- Status
Billybeau1
Premium Member
I would want to know what you are using to calibrate your refractometer ?
DheereCrossing
New member
RO/DI from my home system.
washingtond
New member
I used my RO/DI water in the past to calibrate but discovered that it was off by .02 low when using Pinpoint 53.0mS calibration fluid. Using the fluid we calibrate to 35 PPM.
I have some and you are welcome to come by to calibrate your meter, I live in Carrollton. Wish I would have known because I was at the meeting last night and we could have done it there. Just let me know.
Billybeau1
Premium Member
That would be my advice David, thats why I asked 
35 ppt or 1.0264 is what you should see with the pinpoint.
My refract is .003 off when using ro/di.
35 ppt or 1.0264 is what you should see with the pinpoint.
My refract is .003 off when using ro/di.
DheereCrossing
New member
I can't see that kind of resolution on a refractometer. I appreciate the offer David - we'll have to get together again. I could use a meter - my birthday is in a few weeks...hummm.
washingtond
New member
I can't get you one for your birthday but you are welcome to come by a calibrate it when you get it, just let me know.
My refract is .003 off when using ro/di.
I can't see that kind of resolution on a refractometer.
You have trouble distinguishing 1.026 from 1.029?
I can't see that kind of resolution on a refractometer.
You have trouble distinguishing 1.026 from 1.029?
DheereCrossing
New member
No, but I may have trouble between 1.0255 and 1.0264 kind of resolution - 0.0001ths . I almost see a double line or it fades right at the end of the color bar.
Billy posted the .003 comment.
. I almost see a double line or it fades right at the end of the color bar.Billy posted the .003 comment.
Billybeau1
Premium Member
Usually when you see a double bar, there is an air bubble between the instrument and the lid. Make sure to put enough of the test sample on it before you close the lid.
Billy posted the .003 comment.
Yes, I know. I thought you were referring to his 0.003 comment specifically. You should be OK reading to 0.001, and do not necessarily need to read the next digit over.
Yes, I know. I thought you were referring to his 0.003 comment specifically. You should be OK reading to 0.001, and do not necessarily need to read the next digit over.
DheereCrossing
New member
OK, I'll play with it again tonight. Thanks for the tip.
What about your WATER?
I re-submit this original thread for its relevance to this subject; since there exists such a potential for variation in purity among even purportedly reliable sources, shouldn't a serious assessment of synthetic seawater solutions take this into consideration?
And what about phosphates and silicates? Their importance merit the attention of many commercial purveyors of salt mixes (read the labels- Phosphate and Silicate free!...) but seems to have eluded the scrutiny of almost all the contributors to this thread...
________________________________________________________________________________
Ever since setting up our BioCube29, I have used only R.O. water for its salt mix. Not possessing my own R.O. filter, I purchased my water from a couple LFS's. After about the first 4 months of running this tank, I grew increasingly concerned about the proliferation of green filamentous algae. The dozen or so snails and four small hermit crabs, although somewhat effective, were not enough to really control this stuff. I was having to pull this algae out by hand weekly, off the live rock, off the aragonite sand, off the glass. So I got curious and ordered an API Reef Master test kit, and a Red Sea silicate test kit (Why these reef test kits never include a silicate test is beyond me). I wanted to know more about my water. Ultimately this led to my testing the R.O. water I was purchasing. In performing these tests, I thought it would be prudent to include bottled distilled water for comparison. In addition to the distilled water and the two different sources of R.O. water, I also performed tests on Primo brand purified water (sold in 3 and 5 gal. bottles at a local homecenter) and plain tapwater from our kitchen faucet. In other words, samples from 5 different sources. the results are as follows:
So, as you can see, for four months I had been paying around a buck a gallon for "R/O" water with basically the same composition as tapwater (chlorine or chloramine notwithstanding-I don't know how to test for that). Just look at the phosphate and silicate levels! Needless to say, I have only used the Primo since (@$6.00 per 5 gal.) with the exception of occasionally using distilled in my ATO.
The afformentioned algae issue has abated over the ensuing months, and it would probably be unfair and over-simplistic to attribute the algae's rise and fall solely to the aquarium's sourcewater (these little boxes just have too much going on inside for any easy explanations), but it could have been a contributing factor. I guess the real lesson is not to assume anything- caveat emptor!
( and yeah... I KNOW I should invest in a d..n R/O system...)
.
I re-submit this original thread for its relevance to this subject; since there exists such a potential for variation in purity among even purportedly reliable sources, shouldn't a serious assessment of synthetic seawater solutions take this into consideration?
And what about phosphates and silicates? Their importance merit the attention of many commercial purveyors of salt mixes (read the labels- Phosphate and Silicate free!...) but seems to have eluded the scrutiny of almost all the contributors to this thread...
________________________________________________________________________________
Ever since setting up our BioCube29, I have used only R.O. water for its salt mix. Not possessing my own R.O. filter, I purchased my water from a couple LFS's. After about the first 4 months of running this tank, I grew increasingly concerned about the proliferation of green filamentous algae. The dozen or so snails and four small hermit crabs, although somewhat effective, were not enough to really control this stuff. I was having to pull this algae out by hand weekly, off the live rock, off the aragonite sand, off the glass. So I got curious and ordered an API Reef Master test kit, and a Red Sea silicate test kit (Why these reef test kits never include a silicate test is beyond me). I wanted to know more about my water. Ultimately this led to my testing the R.O. water I was purchasing. In performing these tests, I thought it would be prudent to include bottled distilled water for comparison. In addition to the distilled water and the two different sources of R.O. water, I also performed tests on Primo brand purified water (sold in 3 and 5 gal. bottles at a local homecenter) and plain tapwater from our kitchen faucet. In other words, samples from 5 different sources. the results are as follows:
So, as you can see, for four months I had been paying around a buck a gallon for "R/O" water with basically the same composition as tapwater (chlorine or chloramine notwithstanding-I don't know how to test for that). Just look at the phosphate and silicate levels! Needless to say, I have only used the Primo since (@$6.00 per 5 gal.) with the exception of occasionally using distilled in my ATO.
The afformentioned algae issue has abated over the ensuing months, and it would probably be unfair and over-simplistic to attribute the algae's rise and fall solely to the aquarium's sourcewater (these little boxes just have too much going on inside for any easy explanations), but it could have been a contributing factor. I guess the real lesson is not to assume anything- caveat emptor!
( and yeah... I KNOW I should invest in a d..n R/O system...)
.
but seems to have eluded the scrutiny of almost all the contributors to this thread....
Kind of a strong statement. I think that most of us are well aware of the need for purity of the source water, and in the tests reported on page 1 of this thread, the source water was adequately pure to not impact the readings. It is certainly true, however, that if you use impure water you may get somewhat different results.
Kind of a strong statement. I think that most of us are well aware of the need for purity of the source water, and in the tests reported on page 1 of this thread, the source water was adequately pure to not impact the readings. It is certainly true, however, that if you use impure water you may get somewhat different results.
I just tested a new bucket of IO and I'm getting
(all Salifert)
Alk 13.2
Ca 325
Mg 1350
My tank also reads about 1650 Mag, which when using the Seachem kit was 1350. The previous salt I was using was supposed to be 1350, although I never tested it.
Should I assume my kit is off by about 300ppm and boost the new IO?
(all Salifert)
Alk 13.2
Ca 325
Mg 1350
My tank also reads about 1650 Mag, which when using the Seachem kit was 1350. The previous salt I was using was supposed to be 1350, although I never tested it.
Should I assume my kit is off by about 300ppm and boost the new IO?
Hi dma,
Try to use a inexpensive low range conductivity meter on all your source water prior to use for top off or salting mixing. You want it to read 0. The one at the bottom of this page is about $20:
http://www.buckeyefieldsupply.com/showproducts.asp?Category=207&Sub=149
and very easy to use/maintain.
Billybeau1
Premium Member
NCN, What salt mix were you using previously ?
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14414221#post14414221 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Randy Holmes-Farley
but seems to have eluded the scrutiny of almost all the contributors to this thread....
Kind of a strong statement. I think that most of us are well aware of the need for purity of the source water, and in the tests reported on page 1 of this thread, the source water was adequately pure to not impact the readings. It is certainly true, however, that if you use impure water you may get somewhat different results.
RHF- Please do not mistake my observations as impertinent, but I 'm not sure what to conclude about the provenence of the source water in Billyb's tests based on his description in the post referred to above. Adequately pure? I only read that these products were "tested under the same conditions", which obviously merits value as a constant within the scope of HIS tests (providing a baseline upon which the tested values of the solutions could be reliably compared).But my concern is twofold:
1) By not addressing the sourcewater's integrity, we miss an opportunity to communicate the importance of its role in captive aquaria to the less experienced, the perceptions of "most of us" notwithstanding.
2) That the results of this test, without documentation of its sourcewater values, provides us with a good comparative gauge of the tested product's values, but cannot be relied upon for absolute values. This may seem trite to some, but considering the wide-ranging interaction that this forum entertains, this situation courts the potential for comparing "apples to oranges" in the various postings of water tests from individuals who maybe, probably or almost certainly (or not) have assiduously adhered to the use of "pure" water for their results.
Still waiting on this one:
"And what about phosphates and silicates? Their importance merit the attention of many commercial purveyors of salt mixes (read the labels- Phosphate and Silicate free!...) but seems to have eluded the scrutiny of almost all the contributors to this thread..."
Well?...
Finally, to RHF, whose generous contributions to this website have been an invaluable aid to me in my nascent pursuit of this "hobby" ( what an inadequate word!), and to all who contribute to this forum, please accept my gratitude for all you do. It is a privilege to live at a time and in a place which permits such a free and immediate interchange of ideas with individuals of shared passion, please don't think I take any of it for granted, or take my directness or rhetorical inadaquecy for offense.
mcarroll
Member
Just a thought after wading through this long+excellent thread:
Settling is a known issue and it seems (for logical if unproven reasons) to be an issue mostly/only with the large buckets.
I suspect many reports of "inconsistency" in this thread could be traced back to the salt settling between the manufacturer and the consumer.
Check out these two threads in the Tunze forum for further reference:
Older thread. Longer thread, all the info.
Newer thread. Summary for those of us with short attention spans. ;-)
In essence I believe that all of the salt packages we buy are intended to be mixed "all at once". By "buying in bulk" we make natural settling a potential problem.
So, make sure you're re-mixing your salt (especially if you buy by the bucket) before you start using it to avoid these issues!
Thanks to all for this great thread!
-Matt
Settling is a known issue and it seems (for logical if unproven reasons) to be an issue mostly/only with the large buckets.
I suspect many reports of "inconsistency" in this thread could be traced back to the salt settling between the manufacturer and the consumer.
Check out these two threads in the Tunze forum for further reference:
Older thread. Longer thread, all the info.
Newer thread. Summary for those of us with short attention spans. ;-)
In essence I believe that all of the salt packages we buy are intended to be mixed "all at once". By "buying in bulk" we make natural settling a potential problem.
So, make sure you're re-mixing your salt (especially if you buy by the bucket) before you start using it to avoid these issues!
Thanks to all for this great thread!
-Matt
- Status
