|
|
|
|
#1
11/08/2007, 07:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
AWT results
Ammonia (NH3-4) 0.013 Good
Nitrite (NO2) 0.009 Good Nitrate (NO3) 1.4 Good Phosphate (PO4) 0.05 Good Silica (SiO2-3) 0.7 High Potassium (K) 384 Good Calcium (Ca) 428 Good Boron (B) 0.4 Low Molybdenum (Mo) 0.3 High Strontium (Sr) 9.1 Good Magnesium (Mg) 1113 Good Iodine (IŻ) 0.02 Low Copper (Cu++) 0.03 Good Alkalinity (meq/L) 3.51 Good ___________________________________ Ammonia (NH3-4) Natural Seawater Value: 0.010 mg/L Acceptable Range: 0.000 to 0.050 mg/L Tested: 0.013 mg/L (GOOD) Nitrite (NO2) Natural Seawater Value: 0.010 mg/L Acceptable Range: 0.000 to 0.100 mg/L Tested: 0.009 mg/L (GOOD) Nitrate (NO3) Natural Seawater Value: 0.050 mg/L Acceptable Range: 0.000 to 25 mg/L Tested: 1.4 mg/L (GOOD) Phosphate (PO4) Natural Seawater Value: 0.030 mg/L Acceptable Range: 0.000 to 0.250 mg/L Tested: 0.05 mg/L (GOOD) Silica (Sio2-3) Natural Seawater Value: 0.040 mg/L Acceptable Range: 0.000 to 0.500 mg/L Tested: 0.7 mg/L (HIGH) Potassium (K) Natural Seawater Value: 390 mg/L Acceptable Range: 350 to 450 mg/L Tested: 384 mg/L (GOOD) Calcium (Ca) Natural Seawater Value: 400 mg/L Acceptable Range: 350 to 450 mg/L Tested: 428 mg/L (GOOD) Boron (B) Natural Seawater Value: 4.6 mg/L Acceptable Range: 3.0 – 6.0 mg/L Tested: 0.4 mg/L (LOW) Molybdenum (Mo) Natural Seawater Value: 0.01 mg/L Acceptable Range: 0.0 to 0.12 mg/L Tested: 0.3 mg/L (HIGH) Strontium (Sr) Natural Seawater Value: 8.1 mg/L Acceptable Range: 5.0 to 12.0 mg/L Tested: 9.1 mg/L (GOOD) Magnesium (Mg) Natural Seawater Value: 1280 mg/L Acceptable Range: 1100 to 1400 mg/L Tested: 1113 mg/L (GOOD) Iodine (IŻ) Natural Seawater Value: 0.060 mg/L Acceptable Range: 0.030 to 0.090 mg/L Tested: 0.02 mg/L (LOW) Copper (Cu++) Natural Seawater Value: 0.030 mg/L Acceptable Range: 0.000 to 0.030 mg/L Tested: 0.03 mg/L (GOOD) Alkalinity (meq/L) Natural Seawater Value: 2.5 meq/L Acceptable Range: 2.5 to 5.0 meq/L Tested: 3.51 meq/L (GOOD)
__________________
~Jason |
|
#4
11/08/2007, 11:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Which salt or NSW are you using? What's your w/c? I'll bet that AWT have changed their Si measuring scheme somehow due to the many complaints, maybe a new probe or something. You might just want to adjust the Mg up a tad, but you have awesome results, congratulations!
__________________
"If you have more than one tank in your livingroom, you might be a reefneck" Last edited by reef_doug; 11/08/2007 at 11:51 PM. |
|
#5
11/09/2007, 08:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Your boron was super low as was mine. I've used Kent salt for some time with decently frequent water changes, but am trying out Tropic Marin Pro now. I purchased a Sailfert test kit to verify the results and supplemented with "Borax" (you probably can get it at your local Target) which is available in the laundry section.
__________________
-Eric- CORA Member |
|
#6
11/09/2007, 10:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I really like to know how his is sooo low compared to everyone else. DrBegalke post your secret!! 
|
|
#7
11/09/2007, 12:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hey USC-fan...
Yes, that is water from my NC 12g. I use two units of Chemipure Elite (with GFO) on that system... maybe that is why the silcia is relatively low? I try to do a 2-2.5g water change once a month, but sometimes it goes longer... I use a mix of IO/oceanic, grocery store and/or LFS supplied RO and/or DI water. What I don't understand is the B and Mo levels? and BTW, I am excited that Ohio State plays USC in 2008 and 2009!
__________________
~Jason |
|
#9
11/09/2007, 03:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
The elevated Mo is coming from your salt mix. Most synthetic salts have a little higher Mo than NSW. Not a concern IMO.
The Boron issue might well be explained better in one of Randy's older articles. Boron in a Reef Tank http://www.advancedaquarist.com/issues/dec2002/chem.htm |
|
#10
11/10/2007, 11:51 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ya, I have read Randy's article... what's strange is that I use two-part to adjust Ca/alk, so I would think that would replace boron.
I am not very concerned with it though, since all my livestock is doing great...
__________________
~Jason |
|
#11
11/11/2007, 02:07 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
You know what Doc.
You hit the nail on the head (so to speak) I always say...... if it looks good........ It is good. 
|
|
#12
11/11/2007, 12:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to drop this remark again
AWT gives Mo as .01 ppm and that is NSW by most sources. I see they changed that after my e-mail that they where off a decimal as they use to give it as .10 ppm. Mo Most seasalts have nowhere near that. past values thye gave Molybdenum (Mo) Natural Seawater Value: 0.100 mg/l Acceptable Range: 0.080 to 0.120 mg/l Tested: 0.311 mg/l All salt studies over the last few years show them to be around .001ppm . What I'm saying is the numbers that you guys are getting from them are wrong, just like their silica and PO4 numbers are wrong. There is no way, IMHO, someone has .3 ppm Mo unless they are adding it. That is 30 x NSW. You may get it you have crap loads of algae dying off and then their is the GAC, which most use, that sucks up Mo like a sponge They give NSW silica as 0.040 mg/L, sorry it is way higher than that , @ 3 ppm in NSW. Yon only get that 0.04 or so where their have been massive diatoms blooms as they suck all the silica out ot the water. We ask to try not to let it get higher than 1 ppm for diatoms sake. Most salt test out to around 0 .5 - 1.5 ppm or so. I would not worry about Mo anymore than one should worry about Iodine or Boron or even potassium and in most cases silica. I have sent them crap loads of info and data to back me up and as to the why's. They are bringing in an outside source to re-look at their testing procedures. As I told them, seawater is NOT FW and you have to know what you are doing as the salt in seawater interferes with many test. I think once they get everything in order it will be great service. They are working at it hard. They just need some more time. |
|
#15
11/11/2007, 01:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I agree Eric. Most of the tests are worthwhile. Some should not be tested at all. It only confuses the aquarist.
|
|
#18
11/13/2007, 07:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Would you tell me if they state my phosphate (3 tests) is Tested: 0.040 mg/l, Tested: 0.061 mg/l, and then last month it's Tested Phosphate (PO4) 0.13 Good is that totally wrong? It matches my Merk kit pretty much. Thanks, Ralph
__________________
click on red house for pics! |
|
#19
11/13/2007, 11:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
It looks like the test value you guys for PO4 is off and they are working on it. Meaning, your PO4 is lower than what they state for your water. Same for Molybdenum.
__________________
If you See Me Running You Better Catch-Up An explosion can be defined as a loud noise, accompanied by the sudden going away of things, from a place where they use to be. |
|
#20
11/14/2007, 07:27 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
click on red house for pics! |
|
#22
11/17/2007, 01:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I would say no, but read Randys article on Boron in the Reef Tank and decide for yourself.
|
|
#23
11/17/2007, 05:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
is mg/ml the same as ppm? they measure in mg/ml
|
|
#24
11/17/2007, 08:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I've read Randy's article.. I've read all of his articles, most of them many times over. LOL.
__________________
~Jason |
|
#25
11/18/2007, 01:14 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
mg/l is very close to ppm and for our purpose is samo samo. Doc, I question the boron results in your results. I find it hard to believe it is that low. It would be interesting to know how they tested for that. |
|
|
Linear Mode
