Hanna Phosphate Colorimeters, differences and application.

[reefsaver]

Hello everyone, this is a lot to ask but I was hoping an experienced reefer could explain the jobs of these Coloremeters, why you use them and when you use them.
If it was formatted nicely it would be an epic bonus. For Example:
Marine Alkalinity (dKH) Checker HC - HI772

I use this to monitor Alkalinity/dKH every week or two so I can approximate my liquid KH buffer dose.

This is the Hanna Colorimeter Catalog https://hannainst.com.au/products/photometers/checker-colorimeters.html

It has all their colorimeters. If you even did the freshwater ones and the Maple Syrup colorimeter you will be referred to as Reef Demigod.

 

[lapin]

 

[BostonReefer300]

And if you want to check your phosphate levels, get the ULR PHOSPHORUS checker---not phosphate

 

[TCoach]

Personally, I use them so that I don't have to try and read faint color differences. At 48, my vision is not what it used to be. I have the Calcium, ALk, and Phosphate with plans to get more. Makes it so much easier to just run the test and have a digital reading of the results. .

I'm reading about the Reef Moonshine method of reef keeping and am really leaning towards that. If I don't do that, I'll get the new Nitrate tester and the Mg if they ever release one. Reef Moonshine leans heavily on ICP testing, so that would replace most non-emergency home testing I believe.

 

[PatW]

It depends on the specific calorimeter.

The Hanna ALK tester is very highly regarded. But I find that in my experience that it is no more repeatable in measurements than Red Sea Pro and Salifert (both of which are cheaper). I use all three to cross check (yeah maybe overkill).

I also use the Phosphorous ULR tester. It is the only test available that is sensitive enough to be useful (Except for the Hanna phosphate which is not quite as sensitive).

The calcium and magnesium tests are not as highly regared.

The nitrate test came out recently to high hopes but it is multistep and complex so many people gave it a pass.

I understand that the copper test is good.

So the ALK test is good. In my experience, when you go from one bottle of reagent, you get a different result by about plus or minus .3 DKH. Why can’t they standardize?

And the phosphorous test is good. Not everyone feels the need to test phosphorous.

 

[hhaase]

People aren't kidding when they say the low range nitrate checker is complex. Three reagents, two stages, and takes about 10 minutes to perform. I wouldn't recommend it for beginners or novices. It also gets significantly more complex if your nitrates are over 5ppm, and I wouldn't recommend this checker to anybody if that's their situation.

My low range phosphate checker, on the other hand, is super easy to use. Love it.

As some of my existing tests run out I plan on moving to more of these checkers (checking reviews first though to make sure they aren't like that nitrate nightmare).

But I'd really only get these for tests you do on a regular basis or can't be done via a constant monitor. I can't see spending $50 on a tester for nitrites or ammonia for instance.

 

[LuanFutemma]

And if you want to check your phosphate levels, get the ULR PHOSPHORUS checker---not phosphate

Wow , i just bought the ULR phosphate, why not use this one?

 

[BostonReefer300]

Wow , i just bought the ULR phosphate, why not use this one?

The ULR Phosphate one (HI774) doesn't have enough accuracy at the very low end---so it may show that you have 0.02 ppm when you actually have 0.00. The ULR Phosphorus (HI736) has much better accuracy and very low range. You just have to remember to convert your phosphorus reading to phosphate using the table provided or by a simple equation. I'd suggest returning your phosphate one and getting the phosphorus one instead

 

[LuanFutemma]

The ULR Phosphate one (HI774) doesn't have enough accuracy at the very low end---so it may show that you have 0.02 ppm when you actually have 0.00. The ULR Phosphorus (HI736) has much better accuracy and very low range. You just have to remember to convert your phosphorus reading to phosphate using the table provided or by a simple equation. I'd suggest returning your phosphate one and getting the phosphorus one instead

I appreciate the clarification and I’ll try change it

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

The ULR Phosphate one (HI774) doesn't have enough accuracy at the very low end---so it may show that you have 0.02 ppm when you actually have 0.00. The ULR Phosphorus (HI736) has much better accuracy and very low range. You just have to remember to convert your phosphorus reading to phosphate using the table provided or by a simple equation. I'd suggest returning your phosphate one and getting the phosphorus one instead

Really? Is it that much better than +/- 0.02 ppm phosphate?

The HI736 is +/- 0.005 ppm phosphorus, or +/- 0.015 ppm phosphate?

Is that a big difference? Not to me.

They may be identical, and the error for the HI774 is just rounded to 0.02 ppm.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I appreciate the clarification and I’ll try change it

Nothing wrong with changing it, but perhaps nothing gained either.

 

[BostonReefer300]

Really? Is it that much better than +/- 0.02 ppm phosphate?

The HI736 is +/- 0.05 ppm phosphorus, or +/- 0.015 ppm phosphate?

Is that a big difference? Not to me.

They may be identical, and the error for the HI774 is just rounded to 0.02 ppm.

The HI736 is +/- 0.005 ppm phosphorus, not 0.05 ppm. I struggle with low phosphate in my DT on two fronts, so the 3X greater error bars on the phosphate checker matter a lot to me. For me, the tipping point for a dino explosion is a very narrow band around 0.030 ppm phosphate and similarly for cyano around 0.100 ppm. It was super frustrating when using the phosphate checker because nothing made sense. It's still frustrating with the phosphorus checker because keeping phosphate within such a narrow range is tedious, but at least I'm not flying blind now when I'm near either end zone.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

The HI736 is +/- 0.005 ppm phosphorus, not 0.05 ppm. I struggle with low phosphate in my DT on two fronts, so the 3X greater error bars on the phosphate checker matter a lot to me. For me, the tipping point for a dino explosion is a very narrow band around 0.030 ppm phosphate and similarly for cyano around 0.100 ppm. It was super frustrating when using the phosphate checker because nothing made sense. It's still frustrating with the phosphorus checker because keeping phosphate within such a narrow range is tedious, but at least I'm not flying blind now when I'm near either end zone.

Sorry, I had a typo (fixed now), but the devices are nearly identical in uncetainty, if not actually the same device reading in different units.

HI774 +/- 0.020 ppm phosphate
HI736 +/- 0.015 ppm phosphate

The fact that the HI736 reads in phosphorus misleads a lot of folks to think it is better, and IMO, that was likely done as a marketing gimmick by Hanna to exaggerate its low end capabilities.

Note that the 774 is a newer device, and is not the older phosphate checker that did have higher uncertainty.