Hanna Parameter checkers facts

[winxp_man]

Don’t know if this has been discussed, I did look through the forum. Have not found info about this so I’ll post my findings here. Coupled with a member here giving me the info about the CA checker. Can’t remember who, but nice person after he was willing to DM with me about the CA checker.


One thing for accuracy, and I have tested this against the salifert CA checker. It’s crazy close, I’d call it a margin of error. Part one if this. Go to Amazon get certified pipettes. The Hanna cuvettes are off on the measuring amounts by almost 1ml!!!!! This is a must. You will one of two things. Over read or under read because the checkers are calibrated for 10ml of water! This coming from Hanna directly a guy named Rob if I recall his name correctly. He said the cuvettes are not marked accurately!!! So the No3 and Po4 will read more than you system might have, and the PH, Alk, Mg, and CA will reader under!!

So lastly for the CA reader. The reader is not meant to be used with RODI water! Distilled specifically is needed for the first part of the sample. Once you use distilled it’s dead on, as I stated above, with the salifert. Tested multiple times and same numbers.

One scary thing will be the copper for QTing fish’s. It’s possibly there are times when copper drops below the 2.25 being .5-1ml of extra sample water in the cuvette will read accurately, vs reading more in using the cuvette markings on the bottle.

Follow what I posted here and you will thank me later and the crying will stop about the Hanna checkers. You’re most welcomed!

 

[Dan_P]

Don’t know if this has been discussed, I did look through the forum. Have not found info about this so I’ll post my findings here. Coupled with a member here giving me the info about the CA checker. Can’t remember who, but nice person after he was willing to DM with me about the CA checker.


One thing for accuracy, and I have tested this against the salifert CA checker. It’s crazy close, I’d call it a margin of error. Part one if this. Go to Amazon get certified pipettes. The Hanna cuvettes are off on the measuring amounts by almost 1ml!!!!! This is a must. You will one of two things. Over read or under read because the checkers are calibrated for 10ml of water! This coming from Hanna directly a guy named Rob if I recall his name correctly. He said the cuvettes are not marked accurately!!! So the No3 and Po4 will read more than you system might have, and the PH, Alk, Mg, and CA will reader under!!

So lastly for the CA reader. The reader is not meant to be used with RODI water! Distilled specifically is needed for the first part of the sample. Once you use distilled it’s dead on, as I stated above, with the salifert. Tested multiple times and same numbers.

One scary thing will be the copper for QTing fish’s. It’s possibly there are times when copper drops below the 2.25 being .5-1ml of extra sample water in the cuvette will read accurately, vs reading more in using the cuvette markings on the bottle.

Follow what I posted here and you will thank me later and the crying will stop about the Hanna checkers. You’re most welcomed!

I have found the Hanna vials to contain very, very close to 10 mL. There is no way they are off 1 mL. Maybe I misunderstood your statement above.

 

[winxp_man]

I have found the Hanna vials to contain very, very close to 10 mL. There is no way they are off 1 mL. Maybe I misunderstood your statement above.

No you read as I intended. I know how much 1ml is after doing manual checking for the past year haha. I get it hard to believe. But they are off. And I think I posted .5-1ml. Some seem more .5ml. But regardless they are not to be trusted if you care for accuracy. My testing with the new methods for the CA reader especially vs the salifert kit, which many say is quite accurate tells the story.

Even at .5ml for copper as an example that is not something you want to really mess with in sensitive fish. Either way the tech on the phone stated simply use the most accurate measuring device you can. The checkers are calibrated for 10ml period.


Have a whole trident system im going to install soon, and from the last ICP testing I sent in, my findings seem accurate. I just got another ICP test that I will do once my trident system is set up. Then I will do the salifert kits, Hanna, trident and ICP comparison.

Looking forward to the chaos of numbers! Haha. Iight even send in two others for just copper readings. One with the Hanna cuvette “10ml” amount, and another for the calibrated pipette test. Will report findings.

Here is why I think even .5 ml can make a diff. Because of the stated margin of error Hanna themselves states that can occur. Then add .5ml and you will be off by just that much more.

 

[EnterName]

Just tested 4 vials and "verified" the used syringe using a measuring cylinder with ±0.2mL @ 20°C:

The camera perspective isn't the best to see the meniscus, but vials were relatively consistent compared to each other. I needed to add an additional 250µL to each vial to make the meniscus match the 10mL mark.

I think 0.25mL with a 10mL syringe operated by eye sight is definitely within the margin of error. Unfortunately I didn't have a 10mL pipette at hand to be more precise (just smaller ones), but will order one to see if there will be a noticeable difference in readings.

 

[winxp_man]

Just tested 4 vials and "verified" the used syringe using a measuring cylinder with ±0.2mL @ 20°C:

The camera perspective isn't the best to see the meniscus, but vials were relatively consistent compared to each other. I needed to add an additional 250µL to each vial to make the meniscus match the 10mL mark.

I think 0.25mL with a 10mL syringe operated by eye sight is definitely within the margin of error. Unfortunately I didn't have a 10mL pipette at hand to be more precise (just smaller ones), but will order one to see if there will be a noticeable difference in readings.

Going to mess around with more cuvettes later on today. Or tomorrow and post more findings. Again I’m doing the test for CA against the Salifert and numbers are close. Salifert read 435, Hanna 440. That can be margin of error. Which is the reader that everyone talks about mostly. Using the Hanna cuvette measuring line it’s off by more. Using the pipette is this close that you can call that margin of error. But again I’ll run more testing. But CA for me as of now reads well.

 

[Dan_P]

No you read as I intended. I know how much 1ml is after doing manual checking for the past year haha. I get it hard to believe. But they are off. And I think I posted .5-1ml. Some seem more .5ml. But regardless they are not to be trusted if you care for accuracy. My testing with the new methods for the CA reader especially vs the salifert kit, which many say is quite accurate tells the story.

Even at .5ml for copper as an example that is not something you want to really mess with in sensitive fish. Either way the tech on the phone stated simply use the most accurate measuring device you can. The checkers are calibrated for 10ml period.


Have a whole trident system im going to install soon, and from the last ICP testing I sent in, my findings seem accurate. I just got another ICP test that I will do once my trident system is set up. Then I will do the salifert kits, Hanna, trident and ICP comparison.

Looking forward to the chaos of numbers! Haha. Iight even send in two others for just copper readings. One with the Hanna cuvette “10ml” amount, and another for the calibrated pipette test. Will report findings.

Here is why I think even .5 ml can make a diff. Because of the stated margin of error Hanna themselves states that can occur. Then add .5ml and you will be off by just that much more.

Not sure how you checked. My vials are very accurate.

 

[StradicCi4]

This is interesting - you'd think the company who has become the "gold" standard in marine test kits would ensure accuracy across their cuvettes. Im interested to see how this pans out - I too have used a 10ml beaker to measure my sample water, and then added to the cuvettes. Never have I thought they were off as the meniscus was almost dead on.

 

[EnterName]

This is interesting - you'd think the company who has become the "gold" standard in marine test kits would ensure accuracy across their cuvettes. Im interested to see how this pans out - I too have used a 10ml beaker to measure my sample water, and then added to the cuvettes. Never have I thought they were off as the meniscus was almost dead on.

Beaker markings often aren't too accurate, that's why I tried the measuring cylinder to verify. The issue is that a single drop can make quite some difference in these small vials and you won't get all of the liquid out of the beaker (or measuring cylinder).

I will try with a 10mL pipette as soon as it arrives. To be honest: I always assumed the marking on the vial were approximate and tried to rely on the syringe markings instead, but they never differed much.

 

[EnterName]

Going to mess around with more cuvettes later on today. Or tomorrow and post more findings. Again I’m doing the test for CA against the Salifert and numbers are close. Salifert read 435, Hanna 440. That can be margin of error. Which is the reader that everyone talks about mostly. Using the Hanna cuvette measuring line it’s off by more. Using the pipette is this close that you can call that margin of error. But again I’ll run more testing. But CA for me as of now reads well.

I used a certified 10mL pipette this time. The 4 vials I got appear to be very precise. I feel like being off by 0.5mL or even more could be a user error in many instances. Reading the meniscus correctly on such a small vial is "difficult" and a few drops can get stuck on the vial's inner neck without adding to the measured volume at first.

 

[winxp_man]

I used a certified 10mL pipette this time. The 4 vials I got appear to be very precise. I feel like being off by 0.5mL or even more could be a user error in many instances. Reading the meniscus correctly on such a small vial is "difficult" and a few drops can get stuck on the vial's inner neck without adding to the measured volume at first.

Had a long work days. I’ll try to mess with mine some more today after work also did tank maintenance till 23:40 last night haha.