Co2 Profile and water changes on new scape

[aquascape1987]

Your results have high precision but accurate - who knows unless compared to validated standards.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accuracy_and_precision

Well, like I said, I’m validating the accuracy of my pH results using pH 7 and pH 4 buffers.
The alkalinity test comes with its own calibration fluid that is manufactured to an exact colour, to give a certain dKH reading. So the same principle as tHe pH buffer solutions.

Unless you are suggesting that you cannot trust pH buffer solutions, I’m not sure what you mean?

 

[Zeus.]

Well, like I said, I’m validating the accuracy of my pH results using pH 7 and pH 4 buffers.
The alkalinity test comes with its own calibration fluid that is manufactured at a certain colour to give a certain dKH reading. So the same principle as tHe pH buffer solutions.

Unless you are suggesting that you cannot trust pH buffer solutions, I’m not sure what you mean?

Been there done that also with two pH probes, calibrated them both and in the buffer solutions I got the same results both had the same degree off accuracy yet when in the tank and not at the same reference pH as the buffers they gave different pH readings, so which one was correct. hence I dont trust either off them and hence I just use the pH probe as a number that indicates stable/unstable pH from lights on till CO2 off. If you have no algae out of control and plants are healthy/thriving a stable/unstable pH is irrelevant, but a stablish pH has a better chance of healthy plants.

 

[aquascape1987]

Are you a Flat Earther @Zeus. , by any chance?

I mean I understand that two ph probes in the same tank water may not deliver exactly the same pH value to the decimal place, but they should deliver the same result in terms of the devices accuracy tolerance. If one says pH 6.0 and one says pH 7.0 either one, or both are wrong. If one says pH 6.1 and one says ph 6.17, both can be deemed correct to within the accuracy tolerance of the device you are using

 

[Matt C]

Well, like I said, I’m validating the accuracy of my pH results using pH 7 and pH 4 buffers.
The alkalinity test comes with its own calibration fluid that is manufactured to an exact colour, to give a certain dKH reading. So the same principle as tHe pH buffer solutions.

Unless you are suggesting that you cannot trust pH buffer solutions, I’m not sure what you mean?

I'm just saying that colorimetric tests are notorious for being inaccurate - give the same result to 5 people, get 5 different results - just a factor of human eyesight etc. Unless you are running them through a spectrophotometer you can't really mitigated this.

In regards pH, I'm used to using high grade oceanographic instruments and anything greater than 0.015 error would be considered poor. One issue some people may experience is that in low conductivity waters, some pH probes really struggle. This probably explains why they sometimes read the same in buffer but differ in tank, as Zeus observed

 

[Zeus.]

Are you a Flat Earther @Zeus. , by any chance?

Nope, well not until some provides strong evidence to show it is flat and the evidence that isn't flat is disproved OFC

If one says pH 6.1 and one says ph 6.17

They are the same , but 6.56 and 6.44 are not

 

[aquascape1987]

I'm just saying that colorimetric tests are notorious for being inaccurate - give the same result to 5 people, get 5 different results - just a factor of human eyesight etc. Unless you are running them through a spectrophotometer you can't really mitigated this.

In regards pH, I'm used to using high grade oceanographic instruments and anything greater than 0.015 error would be considered poor. One issue some people may experience is that in low conductivity waters, some pH probes really struggle. This probably explains why they sometimes read the same in buffer but differ in tank, as Zeus observed

@Matt C I don’t think you read my post correctly, as I did say that I’m not reading the result by eye! The device reads it electronically and displays the result on a screen.

As for a pH meter needing to be accurate to 0.015pH, I don’t think that degree of accuracy is required here, is it?

Guys, this isn’t my thread, and to be honest, I think that some of these comments are now deviating the direction of this thread away from the original purpose of the OP. Especially when we are pointlessly debating the accuracy of devices to 0.015pH, which is completely irrelevant in the context of what we are attempting to do here. Accuracy to with 0.1 pH will do to identify a starting point, which then can be tweaked based on intuition from how the plants and livestock respond, whilst still consulting the drop checker.

And whether or not individuals prefer to measure co2 using a drop checker, pH profile or whatever method, or whether individuals think one way is good and one way is rubbish, the fact is that the OP asked the original questions whilst clearly stating he was estimating Co2 using PH and Alkalinity, hence the reason I commented, because I’m attempting to do the same.

 

[aquascape1987]

Hi all, I'm not a CO2 user, but that sounds a plan. I'll cc. in @Zeus. as he has <"practical experience"> and there is @Carpman <"New scape pH profile"> thread as well. I think that is what Tom Barr @plantbrain said, have a look at this one <"amount of CO2....">.

This recent thread <"Determination of CO2......"> isn't finished (in other words we don't have an answer) but it looks at whether "30 ppm CO2" really is 30 ppm CO2.

I'd be honest the more I read about the chemistry of dissolved CO2 the more it confuses me.

cheers Darrel

Cheers Darrel, some good thread sources there.

 

[Matt C]

@Matt C I don’t think you read my post correctly, as I did say that I’m not reading the result by eye! The device reads it electronically and displays the result on a screen.

Apologies, I did miss that, but I think the point is valid for future readers - the titration tests are a bit vague at times as the end point is sometimes not great and the colorimetric tests are tricky to read. The Hanna device you have probably is a spectrophotometer, nice bit of kit!

@Matt C Accuracy to with 0.1 pH will do to identify a starting point, which then can be tweaked based on intuition from how the plants and livestock respond, whilst still consulting the drop checker.

Depends on what you are trying to achieve, but a difference of ~0.1pH at kH of ~4 will be the difference of ~8 to 10ppm CO2, given that most people are targeting something around 30ppm, that's a huge margin. I believe the OP was looking to understand the pH profile, so some indication of the importance of the accuracy of the measurements is important to understand the weakness in any approach chosen.

 

[Hudson]

Apologies, I did miss that, but I think the point is valid for future readers - the titration tests are a bit vague at times as the end point is sometimes not great and the colorimetric tests are tricky to read. The Hanna device you have probably is a spectrophotometer, nice bit of kit!



Depends on what you are trying to achieve, but a difference of ~0.1pH at kH of ~4 will be the difference of ~8 to 10ppm CO2, given that most people are targeting something around 30ppm, that's a huge margin. I believe the OP was looking to understand the pH profile, so some indication of the importance of the accuracy of the measurements is important to understand the weakness in any approach chosen.

Cheers for the Info @Matt C, thats part of the information I'm trying to understand on my Co2 knowledge quest.

As things stand with the tank, I've got a very stable ph during the photo period but only in the upper levels as there is a massive deadspot under the lily pipes caused by poor scape design and the tank now only running on a filtosmart thermo 100 (rated at 600LH) due to the head on my biomaster being faulty.

I've been in contact with Oase who have been great and sent a replacement updated head out me on Thursday, So hopefully will have this soon.

Also the stems have took a battering at the bottom and may not recover, although the top half look fine so I'm going to grow these on and replant.

 

[Hudson]

 

[Hudson]

Big shout to Oase UK. It Took 7 day to get a replacement head out to me which considering the current issues out there I'm more than happy with.

So the heads fitted and the difference in flow compared to the old style head is night and day.

 

[aquascape1987]

View attachment 133664

Looks a really healthy tank overall to me mate. You will have to update us as to how you get on now that you are back up to full flow

 

[aquascape1987]

Just a thought, but what livestock do you currently have in there? When I set up my current scape, after an initial 2 months ‘honeymoon’ period of really nice, algae free growth, I started to get a few different types of algae that I then struggled to get control of for 2 or 3 months. This seemed to coincide with when I added the first decorative fish to the tank. Not entirely the same as your issues, but the main offender for me was brown fuzzy diatoms, which got onto everything, plants, rocks and worst of all my HC carpet. This stuff was literally suffocating everything in the tank.

After seeking help on here, and feeling like I’d tried everything, I was ready to pick the tank up and throw it out in the garden, my frustration with the situation was that bad.

In the end, everything changed when I put in 3 Siamese algae eaters. Within two weeks all of the fuzz was gone.

I’m not 100 percent sure whether these fish solved my my problem, or whether or not it was just coincidence that the diatoms started to disappear shortly after adding them, or a mixture of both. But the anecdotal evidence was that they played a big part. They would visibly eat the fuzzy brown algae. Im wondering perhaps, if these fish might eat the green fuzzy stuff that you have growing?

Don’t get me wrong, even if they did clear the fuzz, they aren’t a cure for the root cause, but for me, getting rid of the fuzzy coating to everything allowed me to get back control of my tank, and allowed it to grow better again.

This then allowed me to address the other algae issues I had.

 

[Hudson]

Been a while since I installed the new filter head a let things settle down.

On the Algae side things are looking stable but is still there in the background. I had to do a trim on the Monte Carlo and the stem plants due to growth and flow reduction.
This revelaled that the stems where still struggling with algae right at the base and TBH they just looked in real poor health.

With the new head and trimmed plants I've managed to get a failry stable profile profile somedays and other days I'm over injecting and seeing a drop down from 6.6 at lights on to about 6.4 about 5 hours into the photo period (with no effects on livestock). This is triggering a bit of BBA on the lower leaves of the buce and Alternanthera Reineckii "mini"

This looks like a suspect needle valve on the Co2 art regulator, I've got a spare Aquamedic Reg and Solenoid Valve that came with the tank I'm just waiting for some Co2 pipe to arrive and will switch to that.

I'm also still getting trapped air in the filter still somehow although the flow output is better, I'm guessing the trapped air is due to the Co2 micro bubbles getting sucked up by the intake, I plan on clearing any air locks pre Co2 switch on and monitor until Co2 switch on.

I ordered some stem plants from the bay, that was a disaster so lets not go there.

I'm thinking of a slight replan in plants used and a bit of a rescape to improve flow.