Hanna Checker Phosphorus vs Phosphate Reagent - Are they the same thing?

[AngryOwl]

I use the Hanna ULR Phosphorus Checker for phosphate testing - I was running low on the reagent and went to my LFS to check if they carry it, but they only carry the Hanna Phosphate Checker reagent. I was searching online with the shop owner to see if it would work in my checker still, we couldn't find any solid yes or no answer. I bought the reagent anyways and told him I'd test it out. So as a gift to the world I have CONFIRMED you can use the Hanna phosphate (774) reagent in a Hanna phosphorus checker (736).

The results read 190ppb with the 'correct' reagent (736) - and read 192ppb with the 'wrong' reagent (774). If this doesn't surprise you then congratulations, you are smarter than everyone else ;Bookworm


Please watch my video as evidence and a reward for this very difficult test I endured for the greater good

 

[LARedstickreefer]

Hmmm. I was using the wrong kind in my ULR phosphorus meter and had my ICP test report back at 0.22ppm when I thought I was at 0.05ppm.

 

[Terry Mattson]

What does Hanna say about this? Would be interesting to get their input.

 

[Marlon C]

I saw a video saying they were

 

[taricha]

I think @Dan_P also saw something similar with reagents for two different P checkers. That the results were close enough to maybe be the same.

 

[Dan_P]

I think @Dan_P also saw something similar with reagents for two different P checkers. That the results were close enough to maybe be the same.

I looked at the LR phosphate reagent and ULR phosphorous reagent in both the LR and ULR Checkers. The 4 numbers were all close. I did not run replicates, so, I can’t say the reagent and Checkers were perfectly interchangeable, but for our hobby purposes they are.

 

[Dan_P]

Hmmm. I was using the wrong kind in my ULR phosphorus meter and had my ICP test report back at 0.22ppm when I thought I was at 0.05ppm.

@Rick Mathew has ICP data from multiple vendors and recently demonstrated the effect of time and temperature on ICP results. The potential for variability is eye opening and might make the difference of 0.22 vs 0.05 ppm questionable.

 

[AngryOwl]

@Rick Mathew has ICP data from multiple vendors and recently demonstrated the effect of time and temperature on ICP results. The potential for variability is eye opening and might make the difference of 0.22 vs 0.05 ppm questionable.

Do you have a link to that?

 

[Dan_P]

Do you have a link to that?

I believe Rick will have some of the data in Part 3 of his latest article on quality and testing. The stability of tank water samples is a work in progress. Rick kindly let me have a peek at early trst results.

 

[AngryOwl]

I believe Rick will have some of the data in Part 3 of his latest article on quality and testing. The stability of tank water samples is a work in progress. Rick kindly let me have a peek at early trst results.

I'll standby for that write up - I had a quick look at his stuff and it makes your head start to spin. Let me also leverage that to caveat my simple home 'test' is what I consider conclusive enough for me personally and could be subject to many and all possible errors; but I'm comfortable with it.

 

[Rick Mathew]

I use the Hanna ULR Phosphorus Checker for phosphate testing - I was running low on the reagent and went to my LFS to check if they carry it, but they only carry the Hanna Phosphate Checker reagent. I was searching online with the shop owner to see if it would work in my checker still, we couldn't find any solid yes or no answer. I bought the reagent anyways and told him I'd test it out. So as a gift to the world I have CONFIRMED you can use the Hanna phosphate (774) reagent in a Hanna phosphorus checker (736).

The results read 190ppb with the 'correct' reagent (736) - and read 192ppb with the 'wrong' reagent (774). If this doesn't surprise you then congratulations, you are smarter than everyone else ;Bookworm


Please watch my video as evidence and a reward for this very difficult test I endured for the greater good

Had the same question...here are my results....Given the expected error of the test...I would say they are the same...Hanna Says that you need to use the prescribed reagents for each...I am going to simplify and use the 736 reagent until I am convinced otherwise...I did not check it the other way...using the 774 reagent in the HI-736 but I would guess the results are the same...only a guess!

HI-774 Checker (PO4 PPM)

REAGENT USED 774 REAGENT 736 REAGENT

TEST 1 .11 PPM .11 PPM

TEST 2 .12 PPM .14 PPM

TEST 3 .11 PPM .11 PPM

TEST 4 .08 PPM .06 PPM

TEST 5 .08 PPM .07 PPM

 

[AngryOwl]

Had the same question...here are my results....Given the expected error of the test...I would say they are the same...Hanna Says that you need to use the prescribed reagents for each...I am going to simplify and use the 736 reagent until I am convinced otherwise...I did not check it the other way...using the 774 reagent in the HI-736 but I would guess the results are the same...only a guess!

HI-774 Checker (PO4 PPM)

REAGENT USED 774 REAGENT 736 REAGENT

TEST 1 .11 PPM .11 PPM

TEST 2 .12 PPM .14 PPM

TEST 3 .11 PPM .11 PPM

TEST 4 .08 PPM .06 PPM

TEST 5 .08 PPM .07 PPM

Very nice! Thanks for these additional data points

 

[taricha]

Awesome work @AngryOwl and @Rick Mathew
This makes sense when you consider how little has to change to make different meters for different ranges, units and purposes. So much easier than the testing to verify a new chemical mixture packet works as intended.

 

[Rick Mathew]

I'll standby for that write up - I had a quick look at his stuff and it makes your head start to spin. Let me also leverage that to caveat my simple home 'test' is what I consider conclusive enough for me personally and could be subject to many and all possible errors; but I'm comfortable with it.

Makes my head spin also