My Trident Review

[MnFish1]

Not necessarily. What @rkpeterson is describing is increased precision (the amount of variability between measurements.) You're describing statistical averaging.

I think I'm discussing regression to the mean as well but in any case - The more values one has - the more likely one can determine whether any given one is a 'fluke' . For example if you test 1 x / week - and you have 4 values that are 6, 6, 6, and 7.5 you can be much less sure that the 7.5 is a potential error than if you tested every hour - and had 100 values that were 6 - and the last one 7.5

 

[User1]

Yes, three sets of reagents/calibration for $99 as I recall. I don't personally find that a set of reagents lasts a full two months - more like 6 weeks - so for me its 18 weeks for $99. Still a significant reduction. So, for me, that'd be broadly $300 per year. Well worth it for the sweat equity savings.

what is your frequency of testing?

I also like the idea of new package offering.

 

[User1]

I've found that the numbers are much more consistent if I let it test 6X a day rather than the minimum of 4.
I don't need that much testing or anything close to it, but this seems to be a design limitation of the test and device.

That is interesting and the first time I've read this. I was hoping to keep it at its lowest setting.

 

[Sleepydoc]

I think I'm discussing regression to the mean as well but in any case - The more values one has - the more likely one can determine whether any given one is a 'fluke' . For example if you test 1 x / week - and you have 4 values that are 6, 6, 6, and 7.5 you can be much less sure that the 7.5 is a potential error than if you tested every hour - and had 100 values that were 6 - and the last one 7.5

Thanks - regression to the mean was what I meant. It isn’t clear to me whether that’s what @rkpetersen meant or not. From his post, it sounded like he was talking about increased precision, but maybe not.

I’m sure it’s been done, but I haven’t seen an analysis of the actual accuracy and precision of the Trident’s measurements. Have you seen one? Along with that, it would be interesting to see if the accuracy and/or precision are affected by the testing interval.

 

[MnFish1]

Thanks - regression to the mean was what I meant. It isn’t clear to me whether that’s what @rkpetersen meant or not. From his post, it sounded like he was talking about increased precision, but maybe not.

I’m sure it’s been done, but I haven’t seen an analysis of the actual accuracy and precision of the Trident’s measurements. Have you seen one? Along with that, it would be interesting to see if the accuracy and/or precision are affected by the testing interval.

The Precision is posted (last time I looked) - and its similar to others. the accuracy - doesn't seem to be posted by many manufacturers. Including the one I just ordered (@MindStream)

 

[reefwreak]

BRS also added it to their test kit shootout videos that they completed a few weeks ago, so I'd recommend checking out their comparison of kits to Trident.

I've had the trident for 3 months or so now and have been loving it. The readings do get funky towards the end of reagent bottles (or it just happens to sometimes correlate with air bubbles in the intake line?), but I've never actually had to calibrate the trident, every time I manually test with salifert it lines up really closely, and it makes dialing up and down my calcium reactor super simple.

 

[Sleepydoc]

I’ve seen Neptune’s specs, I was more thinking of independent tests. Knowing accuracy would be nice, but for our purposes, precision is probably more important than accuracy, as long as it’s reasonably close.

BRS’s video compared several test kits but they had a major flaw in their methodology -Instead of using a reference lab or other standard to judge the accuracy, they simply took the average of all the tests and assumed that was the true value. They also didn’t do a great job of measuring precision. It basically invalidated the entire video.

 

[User]

Responded to a 5 month old comment. Apologies

 

[mrjoev]

I’ve seen Neptune’s specs, I was more thinking of independent tests. Knowing accuracy would be nice, but for our purposes, precision is probably more important than accuracy, as long as it’s reasonably close.

BRS’s video compared several test kits but they had a major flaw in their methodology -Instead of using a reference lab or other standard to judge the accuracy, they simply took the average of all the tests and assumed that was the true value. They also didn’t do a great job of measuring precision. It basically invalidated the entire video.

Though i thought it was a great video, I agree it was dumb of them to use the average of all users. I don't understand why they would do that other then its easier that way. How is that Precision? They should of used some expensive, highly accurate , commercial testing machine and calibrate that often.

 

[EliteSocial]

Hey,
Just got one yesterday.
Seems the test params of Trident are pretty off - I may need to calibrate.

Anyway, seems you have had about 6 months or so. Would love to hear your opinion now!
Thanks

 

[kkiel02]

I love mine. It’s helped me to really dial in my dosing.

 

[K7BMG]

Hey,
Just got one yesterday.
Seems the test params of Trident are pretty off - I may need to calibrate.

Anyway, seems you have had about 6 months or so. Would love to hear your opinion now!
Thanks

Run it for 5 to 7 days, then calibrate.
My Trident has matched my Hanna checkers within tenths after calibration.
The Trident has been the shining star of my Apex system.
The rest of the probes and ATK well that's for another thread....

 

[User1]

Hey,
Just got one yesterday.
Seems the test params of Trident are pretty off - I may need to calibrate.

Anyway, seems you have had about 6 months or so. Would love to hear your opinion now!
Thanks

Define "pretty off". What did you compare with and was the manual test done at or around the same time as the automated? I've had mine now for several months and it has been pretty consistent. The only time my CA drifted was when my reagent bottle was low and ignored the alert from the dashboard.

When I compare say ALK manually using my Hanna checker it is right on the Tridents numbers. I also sent in a ICP test to ATI - I do about 2 a year, using a water sample at the same time the trident fired. Even those results came back almost spot on. Make sure dosing line is on the other side of the sump or trident draw line (water sample line). Make sure there are not a lot of bubbles in the sump or that your skimmer empties in the draw line area. Little things like that will need to be looked at regardless of trident or other automated tool.

 

[User1]

Run it for 5 to 7 days, then calibrate.

This is correct. Instructions also call this out.

 

[EliteSocial]

Ok sweet, guess I just panicked seeing some really weird numbers this morning.
I will run for 7 then follow through with the calibration!
thanks

 

[leepink23]

This is correct. Instructions also call this out.

My new instructions said calibrate immediately after verifying 2 precise test, so it depends on which solution he has.

Get Started | Modified Trident Reagent Replacement

Modified Trident Reagent Replacement: Preface If you have been directed to this page, due to the card found in your reagent kit, it is because the Trident will need a slightly modified reagent replacement method to achieve the most precise and accurate measurements. The entire reagent...

www.neptunesystems.com

 

[chicago]

Love mine also. No more testing. And with my doses. I tweak it every week or so. Very happy.

 

[User1]

My new instructions said calibrate immediately after verifying 2 precise test, so it depends on which solution he has.

Get Started | Modified Trident Reagent Replacement

Modified Trident Reagent Replacement: Preface If you have been directed to this page, due to the card found in your reagent kit, it is because the Trident will need a slightly modified reagent replacement method to achieve the most precise and accurate measurements. The entire reagent...

www.neptunesystems.com

Are you referring to reagent change or the tridents first installation? I thought they wanted the 7 - 10 days because it is calibrated as part of the final checks before shipping. It needs time in your tank based on your installation and position.

Reagent replacement is different. At least that is what did and followed. Maybe they have since changed.

 

[leepink23]

Are you referring to reagent change or the tridents first installation? I thought they wanted the 7 - 10 days because it is calibrated as part of the final checks before shipping. It needs time in your tank based on your installation and position.

Reagent replacement is different. At least that is what did and followed. Maybe they have since changed.

Good point, actually I don’t know for new purchases.

 

[K7BMG]

We would need a person who just recieved their unit to verify this.
I have had my Trident for a while, and my unit said wait several days before INITIAL calibration.
I am sure that has to do with the jostling from transporting it, and the aclamation to its new envirnment. Including everthing from tempratur, humidity level and even altitude.

These factors would not be the same just for a reagent change, as the unit itself has settled into its environment.
I have always waited 24 hours after a Full three bottle reagent change before I calibrate the unit.