Dosing copper power to main display.

OP
OP
jsanchez

jsanchez

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
May 1, 2014
Messages
377
Reaction score
68
Location
Chicago, IL
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I had better results doing the opposite, water changes first then Cuprisorb and carbon.
2-3 big water changes gets it 0.3- and then let the Cuprisorb and carbon take over.

Following up on this post. Just today I tested a 90-gal DT that had been treated with CopperSafe for 21-days at 2.0. It's had four(4) 25% water changes in three weeks, running 200 ml of Cuprisorb in the fine mesh bag hanging inside the tank itself, and three(3) lbs. of carbon at 1-lb each week. After 3-weeks copper is undetectable (0.0) based on Hanna and Exact iDip testing.

Thanks for the update man. Very much appreciated. Was thinking about stopping at 30 days but saw a white spot on my blue tang. Once I've done the full time I'm considering dropping a few black mollies in and seeing if they get ich at all.

Today's copper level is 2.58 with no dosing since Sunday.

Think I'll give the, water change first and then media reduction, a try.
 

Jay Hemdal

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 31, 2020
Messages
25,292
Reaction score
25,190
Location
Dundee, MI
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Yes - @DaddyFish is correct - always perform water changes to remove the bulk of the copper, then, if need be, use absorbents/binders to remove the rest. As you learned, carbon is highly overrated as a copper remover.

I need to do some additional testing on the Hanna Checker. I use a spectrophotometer to measure copper in my lab, but I bought as Hanna Checker to see if it could test for less cost. I was impressed by the two decimal place reading, but now I'm wondering if that second decimal place has any real world use? I can test tanks that I know have different copper readings, yet I get the exact same reading on the Hanna. I also sometimes get different readings on my spec compared to the Hanna. Trouble is, I would need to run dozens of tests on both devices in order to come to any real conclusion, and I don't have the time/money for that.

Jay
 

DaddyFish

“5 percenter”
View Badges
Joined
May 6, 2020
Messages
1,238
Reaction score
1,717
Location
Dallas NC
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Yes - @DaddyFish is correct - always perform water changes to remove the bulk of the copper, then, if need be, use absorbents/binders to remove the rest. As you learned, carbon is highly overrated as a copper remover.

I need to do some additional testing on the Hanna Checker. I use a spectrophotometer to measure copper in my lab, but I bought as Hanna Checker to see if it could test for less cost. I was impressed by the two decimal place reading, but now I'm wondering if that second decimal place has any real world use? I can test tanks that I know have different copper readings, yet I get the exact same reading on the Hanna. I also sometimes get different readings on my spec compared to the Hanna. Trouble is, I would need to run dozens of tests on both devices in order to come to any real conclusion, and I don't have the time/money for that.

Jay
I ran a bunch (20-30) back-to-back copper tests between the Hanna and Exact iDip using different tank waters and dilutions with RO/DI. The Hanna was consistently reading higher by roughly 0.1, but the two tracked together.

I didn't learn that much (except how expensive that gets!), but I did learn that timing/consistency is way more critical on the Hanna than the iDip. Sorta makes sense because the Hanna reads results much faster, which I interpret to mean there's a higher concentration of reagent or the Hanna reagent is more reactive.

Anyway, I get the best results from the Hanna when I concentrate on having the reagent packets pre-cut and pre-formed ready to dump, limit the handling time between steps and worry most about consistent timing of each step leading up to the final result countdown.

The Exact iDip takes much longer to read results, but it's also much more tolerant of preparation inconsistencies.
 

JumboShrimp

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Aug 12, 2018
Messages
5,806
Reaction score
8,224
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Same here @DaddyFish. I have the packet pre-cut, opened into a nice funnel, ready to go 'tap-tap' with my finger and get the reagent in fast, and the cuvette returned to the checker fast (no fingerprints, no bubbles, pointed in the same direction). :cool:
 

Jay Hemdal

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 31, 2020
Messages
25,292
Reaction score
25,190
Location
Dundee, MI
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I ran a bunch (20-30) back-to-back copper tests between the Hanna and Exact iDip using different tank waters and dilutions with RO/DI. The Hanna was consistently reading higher by roughly 0.1, but the two tracked together.

I didn't learn that much (except how expensive that gets!), but I did learn that timing/consistency is way more critical on the Hanna than the iDip. Sorta makes sense because the Hanna reads results much faster, which I interpret to mean there's a higher concentration of reagent or the Hanna reagent is more reactive.

Anyway, I get the best results from the Hanna when I concentrate on having the reagent packets pre-cut and pre-formed ready to dump, limit the handling time between steps and worry most about consistent timing of each step leading up to the final result countdown.

The Exact iDip takes much longer to read results, but it's also much more tolerant of preparation inconsistencies.
Have you figured out a way to open the Hanna packets and not have a bunch of reagent spill?
Jay
 

JumboShrimp

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Aug 12, 2018
Messages
5,806
Reaction score
8,224
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
59D0B68C-2F8E-4E2C-AD99-363AC188C13E.jpeg


I actually cut along the dotted line, then use my finger to bend a ‘delivery chute’ to tap the powder down out of. :)
 
OP
OP
jsanchez

jsanchez

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
May 1, 2014
Messages
377
Reaction score
68
Location
Chicago, IL
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
What I do to keep all (most) of the reagent in the packet is grab one side and flick the crap out of it like I'm trying to get bubbles out of a syringe. Then I cut along the dotted line, make a V when pouring and I don't spill any.
 

piranhaman00

2500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Jun 24, 2019
Messages
4,846
Reaction score
4,802
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Copper in DT no problem. The whole copper leaching out forever is not true. I ran a qt with live rock and I never found copper to leach into it in any measurably quantitiy.
 

DaddyFish

“5 percenter”
View Badges
Joined
May 6, 2020
Messages
1,238
Reaction score
1,717
Location
Dallas NC
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Have you figured out a way to open the Hanna packets and not have a bunch of reagent spill?
Jay
Sorta, kinda... still working on the technique. It goes like this...

1. Before opening, pat the packet briskly to separate the contents from clumping. Think BC Headache Powders or artificial sweetener packets.
2. Scissor cut two sides with a singular motion and a nice curved point in the middle, similar to the dotted cut line printed on the packet.
3. Insert just the tip of scissors or a letter opener or a toothpick or something between the two layers of the packet at the curved cut. Just enough to separate them and start them opening in opposite directions.
4. Gently squeeze the opposing corners to separate the cut edges like a paper puppet.
5. Tap the packet with your finger to dislodge the contents and get them started down one side/chute BEFORE you tilt it downward and attempt to dump it out.
6. Squeeze the sides of the packet to get just the right size "chute" to fit the cuvette opening and tap the packet to slide the contents into the mouth of the cuvette.

I know, it needs a video. Problem is I'm sure I'll spill 200 of those darn packets trying to produce one good video. Maybe I should buy some BC Powder to use for videos!!!

IMG_20210409_164310251.jpg

IMG_20210409_164343710.jpg


IMG_20210409_164614935.jpg
 
Last edited:

Jay Hemdal

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 31, 2020
Messages
25,292
Reaction score
25,190
Location
Dundee, MI
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Sorta, kinda... still working on the technique. It goes like this...

1. Before opening, pat the packet briskly to separate the contents from clumping. Think BC Headache Powders or artificial sweetener packets.
2. Scissor cut two sides with a singular motion and a nice curved point in the middle, similar to the dotted cut line printed on the packet.
3. Insert just the tip of scissors or a letter opener or a toothpick or something between the two layers of the packet at the curved cut. Just enough to separate them and start them opening in opposite directions.
4. Gently squeeze the opposing corners to separate the cut edges like a paper puppet.
5. Tap the packet with your finger to dislodge the contents and get them started down one side/chute BEFORE you tilt it downward and attempt to dump it out.
6. Squeeze the sides of the packet to get just the right size "chute" to fit the cuvette opening and tap the packet to slide the contents into the mouth of the cuvette.

I know, it needs a video. Problem is I'm sure I'll spill 200 of those darn packets trying to produce one good video. Maybe I should buy some BC Powder to use for videos!!!

IMG_20210409_164310251.jpg

IMG_20210409_164343710.jpg


IMG_20210409_164614935.jpg
That’s similar to how I do it, but I mess up pretty often. The Hach powder pillows are much easier for me to use.
Thanks,
Jay
 
OP
OP
jsanchez

jsanchez

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
May 1, 2014
Messages
377
Reaction score
68
Location
Chicago, IL
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
So being the impatient man that I am. I did a 50% water change today and am now in the process of removing the copper. Copper is currently reading at 1.27ppm. Let's see how long it takes to constantly read zero.

Bought some corals that are in QT waiting for the display.
 

Attachments

  • 20210418_203215.jpg
    20210418_203215.jpg
    140 KB · Views: 34

Saltyanimals

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Jun 4, 2016
Messages
1,001
Reaction score
455
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
So being the impatient man that I am. I did a 50% water change today and am now in the process of removing the copper. Copper is currently reading at 1.27ppm. Let's see how long it takes to constantly read zero.

Bought some corals that are in QT waiting for the display.


Looks like you're likely keeping a log of the Cu levels which is interesting. I'm reading up/down trends. I'm curious to the absorption of your rocks. Rocks are said to absorb and leech at some point. Are you seeing Cu numbers go up *without* adding additional copper? i.e. leaching from your rocks or sand for days that are fluctuating. We know Alk can fluctuating throughout the day/night thus should be taken at the same time for accuracy, but not sure if Cu is the same way. We know it doesn't evaporate so trying to better understand impact your rocks are having to your QT and CU levels.
 
OP
OP
jsanchez

jsanchez

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
May 1, 2014
Messages
377
Reaction score
68
Location
Chicago, IL
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I try and take Cu at the same time daily. So far I have not noticed an increase, aside from one day that was just outside the margin of error. Cu was 1.27 last night and this morning (10 hours later) it was 1.25. That's with cuprisorb running through a brs reactor and poly pad in all filter cups. So I don't know if it's not being abdorbd by the media or if it's leaching out at a similar rate.
 

Saltyanimals

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Jun 4, 2016
Messages
1,001
Reaction score
455
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I try and take Cu at the same time daily. So far I have not noticed an increase, aside from one day that was just outside the margin of error. Cu was 1.27 last night and this morning (10 hours later) it was 1.25. That's with cuprisorb running through a brs reactor and poly pad in all filter cups. So I don't know if it's not being abdorbd by the media or if it's leaching out at a similar rate.

You had a drop on March 28th beyond the 0.05 margin of error of the device which you thought back then it may have been the rocks absorbing it. Was that reading a fluke and was appropriate the next reading without additional Cu?

Do you think your rocks absorbed any Cu through the process and leaked back before you started removing Cu?
 
Back
Top