ICP Result

[miller75]

I have just got my first ICP back and was looking for some advice on the results.

My RODI has 522.4 µg/l of Silicon - I was expecting this to be high because I just cant get rid of a Diatom bloom! I will be getting a silicate remover stage for my unit

The ones I am worried about are some metals showing
Tin - 14.15 µg/l
Barium - 49.59 µg/l
Cobalt - 1.34 µg/l

All the above are substantially higher than there calculated reference values, the tin is the one that's worrying me the most its 2887% higher than it should be

 

[Dan_P]

I have just got my first ICP back and was looking for some advice on the results.

My RODI has 522.4 µg/l of Silicon - I was expecting this to be high because I just cant get rid of a Diatom bloom! I will be getting a silicate remover stage for my unit

The ones I am worried about are some metals showing
Tin - 14.15 µg/l
Barium - 49.59 µg/l
Cobalt - 1.34 µg/l

All the above are substantially higher than there calculated reference values, the tin is the one that's worrying me the most its 2887% higher than it should be

From https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1687428515000199

This result indicated that the present investigated area suffered from pollution by Sn. However, fish toxicity test clearly shows that tin (IV) chloride is less toxic than the more soluble tin (II) chloride. In addition, 96 h LC50 for fish range from 35 mg of tin (II) per liter to 1000 mg of tin (IV) per liter. Embryo-larval test results (7–28 days LC50) for fish and amphibians range from 0.1 to 2.1 mg/l for tin (II) (WHO, 2005). It is clear that the concentrations of dissolved tin in the investigated area were much lower than the toxic concentration for organisms.

A couple thoughts. ICP results can be highly variable estimates of the actual concentration. If you are going to lose sleep over it, retest. If you are going to conduct a campaign to lower tin concentration, retest before you start.

The toxic levels seem to be much higher than the ICP results. This might on, be a case of hold off worrying about this until you get back ICP results from your next test in 6-12 months.

 

[rtparty]

How new is the tank? Was the tank new when started? New PVC?

Plate glass used on our tanks are floated in tin to move the glass around. If not properly cleaned, you will get tin readings early on in a tank's life

I fight high silica as well in my source water. A 7 stage RODI does wonders to fix this. Separate your DI resins and it will make a big difference. You will replace a lot more anion than cation but that's normal and saves money in the long run

 

[miller75]

How new is the tank? Was the tank new when started? New PVC?

Plate glass used on our tanks are floated in tin to move the glass around. If not properly cleaned, you will get tin readings early on in a tank's life

Tank is about 3 years old but I restarted it 3 or 4 months ago after some time away from the hobby. I did add a bit of new pipework, I built a manifold.

 

[miller75]

From https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1687428515000199

This result indicated that the present investigated area suffered from pollution by Sn. However, fish toxicity test clearly shows that tin (IV) chloride is less toxic than the more soluble tin (II) chloride. In addition, 96 h LC50 for fish range from 35 mg of tin (II) per liter to 1000 mg of tin (IV) per liter. Embryo-larval test results (7–28 days LC50) for fish and amphibians range from 0.1 to 2.1 mg/l for tin (II) (WHO, 2005). It is clear that the concentrations of dissolved tin in the investigated area were much lower than the toxic concentration for organisms.

A couple thoughts. ICP results can be highly variable estimates of the actual concentration. If you are going to lose sleep over it, retest. If you are going to conduct a campaign to lower tin concentration, retest before you start.

The toxic levels seem to be much higher than the ICP results. This might on, be a case of hold off worrying about this until you get back ICP results from your next test in 6-12 months.

I have to admit that most of that has gone straight over my head but I get that the levels of 14.15 µg/l seem to be not toxic to a reef

 

[rtparty]

I would not go crazy chasing down the tin levels. Test again in 2-3 months or sooner if you have unexplained coral deaths. Then it's time to try and track down what's going on.

In the meantime you can double check every magnet in the system. Look for even the smallest of cracks or issues.

 

[exnisstech]

Can't really help out but I will mention I just had My first ICP tests done recently by ATI . Different tanks but 2 samples of the same RODI water. The RODI results came back different even tho from the same batch of water so I'm doubting the accuracy of the tests

 

[miller75]

Can't really help out but I will mention I just had My first ICP tests done recently by ATI . Different tanks but 2 samples of the same RODI water. The RODI results came back different even tho from the same batch of water so I'm doubting the accuracy of the tests

I used ATI also. I am thinking the 522.4 µg/l of Silicon is somewhere near because I have tried everything to get rid of my diatoms and they just wont go, to be honest the RODI test was the main reason for me sending the test off.

I am going to order a Silicate stage for my RODI unit to bring them down

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I have to admit that most of that has gone straight over my head but I get that the levels of 14.15 µg/l seem to be not toxic to a reef

That's not really possible to conclude since you do not have any idea of the chemical form of the tin, but folks do not seem to have issues at the levels you report.

 

[chema]

I got my last ICP showing 15,5 ug/l of tin. For the last months I have been experiencing losses of some acros and montis due to STN and I began to wonder whether tin may be involved.

The curious thing about it is that my tank has suffered from tin contamination since a long time (up to 26 ug/l two years ago) but I did not see any STN by that time. That's why I suspect there may be something else involved.