Ion-specifc electrode array: control ALL water parameters

I don't know if you've seen it, but I review the Pinpoint Calcium ISE device here:

Electronic Calcium Monitoring
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2005-04/rhf/index.htm


The real trick is in the algorithm that calculates the concentrations based on looking at the whole picture, and the calibration scheme that you have to use which is a bit complex. It doesn't need to LOOK complicated though

Maybe. I'm not sure that interference is the only or primary problem, and it is the only one your method eliminates. The Pinpoint calcium one, for example seems to not have especially large interference problems, but it is not like using a pH or ORP probe. Stability of the reading seems to be a barrier to continuous measurement.
 
First thing, I'm not really married to the idea of continuous readings, in fact I think it's a bad idea to keep them in the tank 24/7 because of the possibility of biofilm build up if for no other reason. In fact, the best method may be to build them into a small container (1-2ml) and fill it with tank water, then dump it when done, and refill with DI water.... either that, or put the head into a still area in the sump, make a measurement, rinse, and then store in a conditioning solution until the next reading. Either one can be automated.

Here's a simplified version of the calculations...

1) Check the temp, salinity and pH, then measure ORP (which is pH dependent, as are most other readings). Salinity will give an approximation of Na+ conc. (on a log scale, the deviation of Na from one tank to another at the same salinity is negligible). Salinity will also allow correction of Cl- ref. electrode.

2) all below will be corrected for temp, pH and salinity

3) Next pull K+ and NH4+ concentration from the K/NH4 pair (NH4 will need correction using Na, K, and pH - but no other significant interferences).

4) Next, PO4--- and SO4-- from their electrodes. SO4 can be done I am quite sure (CuSO4 electrode for instance), PO4 may be a problem, but is not present in significant concentration compared to SO4, so only needed for its own sake.

5) Ca++/Mg++ measurement with corrections for cross-sensitivities. (most folks end up dosing Mg with 2-part or Kalk to prevent it from getting too low, so it's good to have anyway). Correct these values using the information you obtained in steps 1-4

6) Measure NO3- and I- pair (Major interferences for NO3 are Cl (known) Br (negligible in this case), ClO4- (not present), SCN- (not present), salicylate (not significant), I-, and NO2-. NO2 is backed out from NO3 and ORP, and I- is measured, then NO3 can be corrected.

7) Measure CO2 or HCO3- (maybe both for a cross-check since it sounds so problematic). Correct for all above.

8) Feed all above parameters into a neural network algorithm for final corrections to all values. "Neural network" sounds complex but it's not. Think of it as a series of voltage sources (12) all linked to every other one through resistors (12!). In this example the voltage source represents the electrode reading, and the resistor represents the cross-sensitivity factor (except the resistance must be allowed to be negative which isn't possible for actual resistors), and the reference electrode is help at "ground". What you really know is the voltage at any node in the network, and what you back out is the voltage produced by each source, which is actually concentration. The methods for this are well known and not computationally intensive (though I wouldn't want to try to work it out on paper :)).

9) The system must be calibrated against a "known" solution before hand. In this way you know the voltage sources and nodes, and back out the resistors. The only tricky part to this is getting approximate values for cross-sensitivities. I will need to do that myself using about 30 different solutions with different known concentrations of key ions, but the user need not know how to do it.

Now, has someone truly already done this?
 
Last edited:
If you get this device to work as you have detail it to be. It will open up more doors beside reef keeping. I hope that you will come up with it.
 
Now, has someone truly already done this?

Not exact what you propose, not that I've ever seen. There was a lot of work in the 1970's and early 80's, but little since then that I've seen. Most scientists now use other machines for such measurements in seawater (such as ICP AES, ICP-MS or ion chromatography).

I think a good start would be to just try to get step 3 to work with reasonable accuracy at a reasonable cost. An ISE pair for potassium and ammonia in seawater would by itself be a very nice step forward.

Here's a typical older paper:




Use of ion-selective electrodes for oceanographic studies. Kosov, A. E.; Konnov, V. A. Inst. Okeanol. im. Shirshova, Moscow, USSR. Okeanologiya (Moscow, Russian Federation) (1980), 20(5), 943-6.

Abstract

Electrodes selective towards Ca2+, Mg2+, Na+, K+, or F- were obtained and used to det. the concns. of ionic forms and their assocn. in seawater. The 5 electrolytic cells used were: (1) Ca2+-selective: Ag; AgCl/KCl satd.//Ca2+ soln./liq. membrane/CaCl2 (0.01M)/AgCl; Ag; (2) Mg2+-selective: Ag; AgCl/KCl satd.//Mg2+ soln./liq. membrane/MgCl2 (0.01M)/AgCl; Ag; (3) Na+-selective: Ag; AgCl/KCl satd.//Na+ soln./glass membrane/NaCl (0.1M)/AgCl; Ag; (4) K+-selective: Ag; AgCl/KCl satd.//K+ soln./liq. membrane/KCl (0.01M)/AgCl; Ag; (5) F--selective: Ag; AgCl/KCl satd.//F+ soln./LaF3/NaF(10-4M), KCl (0.1 M)/AgCl; Ag. The cells exhibited considerable sensitivity to temp. changes and had to be thermostated. They also had to be protected against loss of electrolytes by evapn. The anal. values of Ca2+, Mg2+, Na+, K+, and F- concns. and their assocn. consts. with anions were used to obtain a chem. model of seawater at 25.




This somewhat more recent one for potassium (the most recent paper I could find referring to potassium selective electrodes being used in normal seawater) suggest that they can measure the titration of potassium in seawater, but do not claim it can be a direct reading ISE:


Characteristics and preparation of potassium ion selective liquid membrane electrode based on polyurethane matrix. Yoo, Kwang Sik; Lee, Yong Taek; Kang, Chul Yong. Dep. Chem., Ulsan Univ., Ulsan, S. Korea. Journal of the Korean Chemical Society (1991), 35(2), 128-34.

Abstract

Previous matrixes of potassium ion selective electrodes are generally based on PVC. In this study, however, the electrode membrane was prepd. with polyurethane matrix contg. KBPh4 as sensing materials and dibenzo-18-crown-6 and 2-nitrophenyl-n-alkylethers as solvent mediator. The av. life time of the K+-selective based on polyurethane was 75 days which is significantly longer than PVC based one. The slope factor in linear dynamic range (1 10-1 10-4 M) was 52 mV/decade. The electrode was successfully applied to find the end point in potentiometric titrn. of K+ with BPh4- soln. in sea water, even in the presence of several interfering cations (NH4+, Na+, Li+, Ca2+, Mg2+, Cu2+).




Here's a K+ electrode used in something similar to seawater:

Development of composition-determining system in seawater concentrating process of salt-manufacturing factories. (I). Fundamental study of determination system. Yoshikawa, Naohito. Sea Water Science Research Laboratory, The Salt Industry Center of Japan, Japan. Kaisui Sogo Kenkyusho Kenkyu Hokoku (1999), 1 13-20.

Abstract

In Japan, salt-manufg. factories produce salt from brine obtained by concg. seawater through an ion-exchange membrane electrodialyzer. Detg. the compn. of the brine, seawater and the desalted water is important in the operation of the electrodialyzer. The author studied a detn. system in the seawater concg. process. Chloride ion concns. in the brine can be detd. by using a d. meter. Calcium and potassium ion concns. in the brine can be detd. by using ion selective electrodes and a d. meter. Sodium and magnesium ion concns. in the brine can be calcd. by detg. the values of other ion concns. The chloride ion concn. of seawater and of the desalted water can be detd. by using a cond. meter. From the above results, a system constructed with these sensors can det. the compns. of the brine and chloride ion concns. in seawater and the desalted water accurately.
 
This paper does something similar to what you suggest for martian soil testing:

Mars Surveyor Program '01 Mars Environmental Compatibility Assessment wet chemistry lab: a sensor array for chemical analysis of the Martian soil. Kounaves, Samuel P.; Lukow, Stefan R.; Comeau, Brian P.; Hecht, Michael H.; Grannan-Feldman, Sabrina M.; Manatt, Ken; West, Steven J.; Wen, Xiaowen; Frant, Martin; Gillette, Tim. Department of Chemistry, Tufts University, Medford, MA, USA. Journal of Geophysical Research, [Planets] (2003), 108(E7), 13/1-13/12.

Abstract

The Mars Environmental Compatibility Assessment (MECA) instrument was designed, built, and flight qualified for the now canceled MSP (Mars Surveyor Program) '01 Lander. The MECA package consisted of a microscope, electrometer, material patch plates, and a wet chem. lab. (WCL). The primary goal of MECA was to analyze the Martian soil (regolith) for possible hazards to future astronauts and to provide a better understanding of Martian regolith geochem. The purpose of the WCL was to analyze for a range of sol. ionic chem. species and electrochem. parameters. The heart of the WCL was a sensor, array of electrochem. based ion-selective electrodes (ISE). After 20 mo storage at -23 and subsequent extended freeze/thawing cycles, WCL sensors were evaluated to det. both their phys. durability and anal. responses. A fractional factorial calibration of the sensors was used to obtain slope, intercept, and all necessary selectivity coeffs. simultaneously for selected ISEs. This calibration was used to model five cation and three anion sensors. These data were subsequently used to det. concns. of several ions in two soil leachate stimulants (based on terrestrial seawater and hypothesized Mars brine) and four actual soil samples. The WCL results were compared to stimulant and soil samples using ion chromatog. and inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectroscopy. Flight qualification and prolonged low-temp. storage conditions had minimal effects on the sensors. The anal. optimization method provided quant. and qual. data that could be used to accurately identify, the chem. compn. of the stimulants and soils. The WCL has the ability to provide data that can be used to read the chem., geol., and climatic history of Mars, as well as the potential habitability of its regolith.
 
Great stuff, that's all really helpful. I especially like the one on the Mars rover. For the beginning, I was planning on using commercial probes. For Salinity, pH, ORP, K, and NH4 as they seems to be readily available and quite enough to be getting on with.

The main thing at the beginning will be getting the electronics, programming and dosing systems to work properly. After that, I will try adding in as many commercial probe pairs as I can. (Ca, NO3 and I- are fairly common) I see two problems there. The first is that I'm not aware of a commercial Mg probe, but I would prefer to do the Ca/Mg pair next after K/NH4. The second is that I- levels in seawater are right at the detection limit for most commercial I- probes which is worrying, I wonder if there's any bad effect from purposefully running the I- level a few times too high (say 0.1-0.2 ppm instead of 0.05ppm) in a reef aquarium.

After that, I will need to start developing my own probes and membranes from literature recipes and figuring out how to correct all the readings. There are some cool tricks published by the Japanese using "urushi" membranes (Japanese natural lacquer) which have much londer lifetimes than the PVC or polyurethane ones you listed.

Assuming I can get all that to work, I will integrate everything onto PCBs, probably with NH4+, Ca++, and I- on one and K+, Mg++, and NO3- on the other. That will let me use 2 different "re-conditioning" solutions, which contain a high concentration of each measured ion, but without it's pair partner.

Depending on how I need to use them for best effect I can either stick them in the tank directly or, I can make a small chamber that will be pressed against it and sealed with an o-ring so that I can pump in a small volume (<1ml) of calibrant or tank water pumped in for measurement, or DI water flowed through for cleaning. I expect it to look something like this:

picture.php


I may incorporate an ORP probe here or elsewhere. I expect pH, conductivity, and CO2/HCO3 to be a bit bigger, so they will be seperate.
 
Yes, Randy can feel free to speak for me :D

Foxy

I don't see why this should cost such big money

How do you define big money ? If one looks at your list, i.e. Ca++, Mg++, NH3-, K+, SO4-, I, PO4-, Alk, Cl-, Salinity, ORP, pH and NO3- and you left out Na+ and Br-, also Sr++. That is at least a dozen or so probes plus a meter, cables and the software, etc. The avg cost /probe may be ~$100 x ~12 = $1,200 for just probes. For the whole system I see at least ~ $2000 min. And based on what I know I see no price at that level but much higher ~ $3,000 -$ 4,000. Unless it is a bunch of cheap crap made in China.

4) Next, PO4--- and SO4--

Why a SO4 probe to begin with ? For the addition of only Magnesium Sulfate correct ? If that is the case the addition of Chloride ions and Sodium ions will be greater and further complicated buy the addition of Bromide from CaCl2 sup's.

Salinity will give an approximation of Na+ conc. (on a log scale, the deviation of Na from one tank to another at the same salinity is negligible). Salinity will also allow correction of Cl- ref. electrode.

No, it really will not. This will all skew from the addition of buffers and sup's. So, it will have a substantially bearing on the Salinity in regards to how much of each there really is. Meaning, if there is a reason for a SO4 probe then there is the same reason for a Na+, Cl- and Br-probes also.

Br (negligible in this case)

I will have to disagree with that. Br- in NSW is ~ 65 ppm and that is " negligible" ? Br- is # 7 on the list of the highest concentration of ions in seawater. Many reef tanks may be much higher than that from CaCl2 sup' s. Most are not dealing anymore with Br- of ~ 100 ppm in CaCl2 sup's but in the ~ 5,000 -8,000 ppm since the DOW change. So, you would need to look at that also. You can not just be thrown out.

Me, I would dump all of these and look at only K+, Ca+, Mg+, Alk, PO4- and NO3-. We really do not have to deal with Salinity, pH and ORP in new probes we know they work fine. The real issue is for PO4, NO3-, Alk and the MDL we need to get too. Meaning, NO3-and PO4 0.01 ppm res and +/-0.02 ppm or better and Alk +/- 0.1 meq /l. I consider a NH3+ probe almost silly but it would be a nice thing. I would start as Randy suggested, to shoot for K+ probe that work correctly in NSW. Once there if there I would tackle a means for Alk if at all feasible, despite what we have said. I also see no real reason for an I probe but would much rather see an Sr++ probe.

On another note have you ever seen this ?

My Dialyseas Saga: Pros and Cons
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-04/pr/index.php
 
First, for me (the developer) I would have to pay several thousand to get it all done. I would be doing that anyway. I already have some of the probes and a lab-grade ion analyzer so it's no biggie to buy more probes. Second (as explained above) the user WOULD NOT have to buy all that stuff.... that's the whole point. It will all be integrated. NO software to buy, because I'm writing it. What qualifies me to do that? 6 years of graduate work plus a few more to follow this testing it all to be sure it's right. It's not only possible to DIY the meter, it's not even terribly difficult if you've built scientific instruments before (which I have).

pH ORP and salinity are important in their own right and most people measure them anyway, so why not use them and correct for them?

Please keep in mind that the importance of measuring any particular ion is based on 2 things. 1) Do we want to know what it is for its own sake. 2) Does it pose a significant source of error for something we do want to know.

To answer the second question, we must look not only at that ion's expected concentration but also at how strongly it interferes. The effect of Br on NO3 readings has factor of 1E-5 to 1E-6 depending on the probe design, so at 100ppm, yes it is negligible (ppb). Often, NO3 probes are more sensitive to I- than they are to NO3 (hoffmeister series) and so it might actually be a more important interference than Br, since it could easily be orders of magnitude higher than normal and not pose the problem below.

Please also keep in mind that salinity is purposefully and actively held constant in this project. That means that the total equivalents of ions must always add up to the same number. For everything that is added, something else must come out. If you were to add enough Na to change the magnitude of error induced by Na in the other readings (say 10% or 1000ppm) you must remove an awful lot (most) of the other major cations in the system.... you could keep some Mg, but the rest have to go.

For the same reason, I have a very difficult time believing in 5000-8000ppm for Br since that would mean there's more Br than Cl, because every Br would have to replace 1 Cl or 1/2 SO4, etc (there are Cl and SO4 electrodes in the list BTW). Otherwise, your salinity goes through the roof. Moreover, do you never do water changes? Is your salt mix completely off? I will admit that Br impurities in additives can bump up the level, but I doubt it can be that much. If it is and water changes don't bring it back down, then the salt producers are not delivering what they say they are. However, I have admit to never having actually measured it in my own tank, so all I can do is doubt.

Lastly, we are measuring the concentration of nearly all the major ions in the system. Exactly which ones are you pulling out to make these kind of giant concentration fluctuations possible?

And no, I've never seen the dialyseas... interesting concept.
 
pH ORP and salinity are important in their own right and most people measure them anyway, so why not use them and correct for them?


I said there is no need for you to make/develop them we already have them. Unless, you are implying, they HAVE to buy your probe.

Please keep in mind that the importance of measuring any particular ion is based on 2 things. 1) Do we want to know what it is for its own sake. 2) Does it pose a significant source of error for something we do want to know.

I am keeping that in mind. I stated earlier probes we need and their interferences. The jest of this thread is /was to to make probes to measure ions we are concerned about that can be connected to a meter or monitor. So, my question or remark was why do you want to have a Cl- probe or a Sulfate probe. There is not need for one, unless we want to monitor the accumulation of those ions. If that is the case, fine but then you also need a Na+ probe and Br probe. They are not on your list. Na+ is the second major ion in seawater @ 10 ppt and Br- # 7 @ 65 ppm. Since there is a concern of various ions accumulating or those we are concerned about, then Si is also in the picture, as is Fe++ and Cu++.

If you were to add enough Na to change the magnitude of error induced by Na

You are adding allot of Na++. What do think most common buffers are that we add as sup's on a daily bases are ? NaHCO3 and Na2CO3. Sulfate is not added on a daily bases, as it is only added as Magnesium Sulfate and Mg++ has a very, very, low daily demand. And not all Mg++ is as sulfate. So, as I implied, there is more need for a Na+ probe than a Sulfate probe.

You made this statement earlier

Salinity will give an approximation of Na+ conc. (on a log scale, the deviation of Na from one tank to another at the same salinity is negligible). Salinity will also allow correction of Cl- ref. electrode.

And I said not it will not be negligible. You want to have a Cl- probe but no Na+ probe. If one is using a calcium reactor, for example, there will be no increase in Cl- or Sulfate, other than a few ions but there will can a marked increase in Na+ from the addition of more carbonate buffer, if the reactor does not meet the daily demand in Alk, which many do. So, the off-set in Na++ will be much greater than Sulfate or Cl- when measuring Salinity or what makes up Salinity.

For the same reason, I have a very difficult time believing in 5000-8000ppm for Br since that would mean there's more Br than Cl

That is NOT what I said. I said CaCl2 sup's are very high now in Br- on the order of 5000 - 8000 ppm and use to be ~ 100 ppm. I figured you would know or should know that is from 100 ppm Br- / kg CaCl2 to 5000 -8000 ppm Br- / kg CaCl2. That is how as assay reads/means, 1,000,000 parts of something. Look at the top of the chem forum page. There is a sticky on top about Br- and our concerns.


Otherwise, your salinity goes through the roof. Moreover, do you never do water changes? Is your salt mix completely off?

You are talking silly now.

If it is and water changes don't bring it back down,

And on the same spot, right below it, you will find Reef Chemistry Articles. You need to go there an see what has been written and what we know about on water changes ( and other things) and the accumulation of ions sups' over time and what WC do or do not do. We know that about a 30 % WC / m fixes about all. So, if one is doing WC as they should, there is no real need for SO4-, Na+, Br-, Cl- probes. Would it be cool to have all of these ? Yes for sure. But we need to look at here the the reality of the avg reefer. If for the sake of argument, we look at all the is proposed here, that is like 20 probes:eek2:

Lastly, we are measuring the concentration of nearly all the major ions in the system. Exactly which ones are you pulling out to make these kind of giant concentration fluctuations possible?

That is what the thread seems to have turned into. If that is the case then you have left some out, Na+, Br-, Sr++, Boron and even F- as these are also Major Ions in Seawater.

the user WOULD NOT have to buy all that stuff.... that's the whole point. It will all be integrated. NO software to buy, because I'm writing it

That was my point, they would not have to buy all the probes, only those they wanted. I figure you would right the software also. However, the avg reefer is gong to be looking at, pH, Salinity, Ca++, Mg++, Sr ++, Alk, K+, , Si, Cu++, NO3- and PO4 and *maybe Fe++. And that is 12 probes as I stated earlier. And such a system is no going to be cheap. They could care less about Na+, SO4, Cl- and Br-. And most DO NOT measure ORP. The only time you really need to monitor ORP is in Ozonated Systems. An O2 probe would be of much more interest.

And more than likely just Salinity, pH, NO3-, PO4- Ca++, Mg++ and Alk. So, that is 7 and what would be a ball par figure price for such a unit ?
 
Last edited:
OK, one thing I didn't mention so no reason for you to know, is that at least on my own design, I will be automating water changes. I'm a BIG believer in water changes because there are huge numbers of organic contaminants that might not be pulled out by skimming. I seriously doubt that even after all the research that's been done that we know everything organic contaminant that can build up in the water, and the only way to be sure is to replace it.

So, I have taken it as a given that the really major ions will not vary greatly... perhaps that's naive or maybe just wishful thinking that anyone else who's trying to do these measurements would be equally worried about water quality. My real bottom line is that I travel alot, and want to be able to go out of the country for a few weeks and not have to bother my wife with maintaining everything.

Sorry for the misunderstanding about the whole Br issue. I'm sure you can recognize that the idea of 8000ppm of Br in the actual aquarium is a bit unrealistic (taking that as what I thought you were saying), which is why I took issue with it. Since the only large interference it provides is against NO3, and since we are dividing its effect by about 10,000 - I really don't think I need to measure it. Since no one else in the hobby that I know does, that tends to support the idea. I recognize it's a major component in the water, but it's influence as an interference should not be large in this case.

The main thing you seem concerned about at this point is price. So let's forget how much it will cost for me to develop, since I will be trying it no matter what.

In the ISE array I posted above, the actual cost for the PCBs and ICs alone is around $20-30. Based only on the prices for the raw materials, I expect the membranes to cost around $10-15 each. Your list calls for 4 ISEs, making my cost $70-80 just for that part... but lets round up to $100 because it always costs more than you think. Then lets add commercial probes for salinity and pH at $50 each.

Alk is all that's left on your list. I'm less sure about that now (thank Randy :)). I originally planned to use another ISE, but now my electrode design is getting more complex, so lets say another $50 for materials. Finally, we have the microcontroller that will run the software, and it needs an LCD for readout (I could almost certainly do it for $50, but for $100 I can make it look really slick). So adding it up... $350.

I left Na and Br out, and will stand by that until my testing proves to me that I'm wrong. But, I certainly accept that I may be. I had not thought much about Sr before now, but I may have to re-think that later because it is important in its own right. I left B out on purpose.

I think alot of people would actually be interested in K and NH4 anyway, but since NH4 can be an important interference in some CO2 probes, it may be important if it gets high (which the software wont know without a probe). K is a HUGE interference for NH4, so if you add one, you must have the other. I think that since SO4 has important effects on the activity of Ca, Mg, Sr, etc. plus interferes a bit with PO4 (and hopefully PO4 will be near zero), it may turn out to also be important. Finally, while I- is generally very low, it's another thing people often want to measure, and its also an important interference for nitrate. Lastly, the more measurements I do, the more accurate the algorithm becomes. So lets go crazy and add double the number or ISEs and add another $100.

ORP is actually very cheap to measure ($5) since I already have the reference electrode so why not? Especially since I do plan on using ozone. As for O2, that's not the first mention, but it's also commercially available. I wonder if anyone who uses proper a skimmer and ventilation has had any trouble with dissolved O2 levels?

So, grand total for the full system and alot of rounding up is around $400-500 depending on the final probe count. For the average hobbyist this is a bit pricey. But, how much do most of us spend on our systems including lights, pumps, chillers, sumps, refugia, RO/DI system, and the tank itself? What about LIVESTOCK? We certainly want to keep that investment safe, for its own sake at least as much as for the replacement cost. How much do we spend monthly on electricity, and other consumables (test kits)? $500 doesn't sound that bad to me - if people want to go cheap, FW is much easier.

Now if we want to talk about dosing pumps, reactors, ATO, ozonizer and such, that's obviously going to increase the cost, but there are already commercial systems available for that task.

I would absolutely love to hear from any casual reefers on this thread about whether they disagree over the importance of NH4, K, Sr, or any of the above as well as their thoughts on price.
 
I just really wanted to make sure the point on sulfate is clear... I really don't care about the sulfate level. The point is that SO4 is at about 2700 ppm. Even with a selectivity of 1000:1 for a phosphate probe vs. sulfate, that throws your reading off by 2.7ppm. If you want to read low-levels of phosphate, you MUST account for sulfate. Since Ca bind with sulfate, it lowers its chemical activity, and throws that off to. It was one of the points Randy made earlier. You can't say something is important, and then contradict it later.

Most of the reason the ISEs have such a bad reputation, is because people don't do a proper job of correcting for exactly this sort of error, and that's the whole reason I have so many probes in the design... half of them are not because I care about the levels, but because there is no choice about measuring them.

If you're not someone who likes counting the correct number of drops of several different solutions into a test-tube and then looking at a color chart (tons of error there for the average Joe), then ISEs are a great way to go. If they could be made as easy and reliable as pH probes I think more people would find it worthwhile to do these measurements routinely. Please understand that this is the real point of the project.
 
Last edited:
I'm a BIG believer in water changes because there are huge numbers of organic contaminants that might not be pulled out by skimming. I seriously doubt that even after all the research that's been done that we know everything organic contaminant that can build up in the water, and the only way to be sure is to replace it.

I certainly agree with that. :)
 
Pardon my bad grammar, by the way. I'm a horrible proof-reader. IF ti weren't for spell check no one would be able to read anything I write.
 
I just really wanted to make sure the point on sulfate is clear... I really don't care about the sulfate level. The point is that SO4 is at about 2700 ppm. Even with a selectivity of 1000:1 for a phosphate probe vs. sulfate, that throws your reading off by 2.7ppm. If you want to read low-levels of phosphate, you MUST account for sulfate

OK, if that is the reasoning behind the SO4 probe great.



Alk is all that's left on your list.


Nope, it is on all my lists :)

"the avg reefer is gong to be looking at, pH, Salinity, Ca++, Mg++, Sr ++, ***Alk***, K+, , Si, Cu++, NO3- and PO4 and *maybe Fe++."

"And more than likely just Salinity, pH, NO3-, PO4- Ca++, Mg++ and ***Alk***"


I left Na and Br out........I left B out on purpose.

That is fine with me also, as is Cl-, unless you have some reason, as as needed for interference corrections, such as the Sulfate.


I think alot of people would actually be interested in K and NH4 anyway

I agree but much more so on the K+. There is really not much use for a NH4-/NH3 unless one wants to monitor it in case there is a rise from some death. Tanks can run for years showing no Ammonia.


If you're not someone who likes counting the correct number of drops of several different solutions into a test-tube and then looking at a color chart (tons of error there for the average Joe)



I use to use digital titrators :)



then ISEs are a great way to go. If they could be made as easy and reliable as pH probes

OH, I agree on that 100%. And our issues CAN they.



I think more people would find it worthwhile to do these measurements routinely. Please understand that this is the real point of the project.

I agree on that 100%

Pardon my bad grammar, by the way. I'm a horrible proof-reader. IF ti weren't for spell check no one would be able to read anything I write.

Try not to take away what I'm the best at, as many will attest to. :lol:
 
I must applaud you all for the hard work you all do for this hobby. If you do succeed Foxy, there will be a long list of people who will be thanking you for making this happen. Alk test or not.
 
Could you post some pic on your project?

I'd be happy to. What exactly would you like to see? I have circuit and PCB diagrams, CAD drawings and such, but not much actual equipment yet except for a few commercial probes and an analyzer.

I'm trying to set up an account with Sigma to buy the chemicals I need to get started making my own probes, but they don't like selling to individuals - only companies. Guess I'll have to incorporate myself.

I'll actually have to synthesize at least one of the ionophores (HPO4--) myself since I can't just buy it. But at least it's not complicated.
 
I would absolutely love to hear from any casual reefers on this thread about whether they disagree over the importance of NH4, K, Sr, or any of the above as well as their thoughts on price.

Foxy,

I'd consider myself a casual reefer (by which I assume you mean non-chemistry/biology professional), although based on the time/money I plow into this hobby it doesn't feel casual. :lol:

My undergraduate degree was a double major in chemistry/biology, so I have been following this thread with great interest, although I'm no longer at all current in the field, I've been driving jets for a living for the last 22 years.

To answer your question above... I agree with Boomer, I don't monitor NH4 in my show tank at all. Absent a major die-off, a well-cycled tank will show no NH4 at all. It's so toxic to fish, I can see the need for NH4 monitoring visually (surface gasping) and there will be other visual signs as well.

As far as K and Sr, the livestock I keep are not sensitive to these parameters, as far as I know. That could certainly change in the future.

Price point? I dunno. Like you, I travel a lot, and my wife is in command of the reef in my absence. I can see paying something of a premium for an all-in-one monitor that would allow her to read parameters to me when I'm traveling. I think it would need to be well under $1000, though.

Thanks for an interesting thread, keep up the great stuff! :thumbsup:
 
Foxy

I forgot this part. importance of NH4, K, Sr

K+, it is not that we need to worry about it but many reefers are, as K+ and a few others (MH) intensify coral color. There has been lots of talk here on K+.

Sr++, corals do not need it, it just fits real nice in the Aragonite crystal lattice. It is nothing more than a substitute ion, cause it is there. You also find about zippo Mg++ as it does not fit into the Aragonite crystal lattice. Just like you find zippo Mg++ in Aragonite but a high level of Mg++ in soem Calcites and zippo Sr++ in Calcite. They do not fit right due to their ionic radius in those types of crystal lattices. Some have suggested Sr ++ is a "poison". So, precip it into the Aragonite removes it. There also seems to be some evidence that they can somewhat control the uptake of Sr++. Recent studies have shown that coral growth is reduced in the absences of Sr++. There have also been many post here on it and other forums, just like K+.
 
Back
Top