Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I haven’t scheduled another call with them. I’ve been a little busy, and I’ve kinda. Just been living with the mental calibration being that my trident currently reads .6dkh below my actual tank reading. I might have time to schedule a call later in the week. They are wearing me down which I think is their plan.This thread seems to have slowed. Gophish, did you get to any resolution with your unit?
I am struggling the same as you and bought the Trident for the reasons listed below:
Unfortunately I have been down the calibrate with the calibration bottle, tank water, on a Tuesday or Thursday with holy water, only with the sump lights on but room lights off, take the unit apart and clean (only been online for 7 weeks) .... UGH!
Here are my latest results and to say I am disappointed is an understatement:
The above manual test data was done 3 times each and manual tests were always accurate per the calibration solution bottle. I have to believe my tank water is accurate as it was done three times as well with the same test kits.
I have another call scheduled with Neptune for this week Thursday.
Now that is curious. When I calibrate with Neptune’s solution, it will hold those values. Problem is, the solution is wrong. But say I test the calibration solution with my Hanna and salifert and it is .6 higher than what Neptune claims on the bottle. After I calibrate with that solution, trident reads .6 lower than my other tests. It’s only when I try to calibrate using my tank water or another reference solution (fauna Marin) that it starts reading 1.5 lower then my manual tests.I really do not understand this at all. Test with 24 hour old (since opened) calibration solution resulted with 8.14 dKh. Bottle says 8.3 dKh. My Red Sea test kit on same bottle shows 8.2 dKh. Tank water with Red Sea test 8.0 dKh. Trident 7.29 dKh! UGH!!
I really do not understand this at all. Test with 24 hour old (since opened) calibration solution resulted with 8.14 dKh. Bottle says 8.3 dKh. My Red Sea test kit on same bottle shows 8.2 dKh. Tank water with Red Sea test 8.0 dKh. Trident 7.29 dKh! UGH!!
So you ran a single Alk test using left over calibration and the result was 8.14? Reference solution says 8.3? Good.
You then ran a series of tests and the Trident said Alk was 7.29. Was this back to back or did the Trident run the test at a later scheduled time? Also is the sample line in a similar position location when in the sump to the reference bottle?
Tests were back to back and primed in between. The water line is at the exact same height for both tests. I simply take the sample line out of the sump and place it in front at the same height.
But when I test with my manual kit on two different reference solutions (both Neptune), I get very close to the bottle readings. I then manually test my tank water. The Trident tests tank water. Results are not close.
Ugh. Makes no sense at all. I give up.
not really chasing number because when i use the calibration liquid and calibrate all number match up but when you run it again it doesnt show the same number. if it was off by less then 1dkh i can live with it but its off by more than 1dkh. just have a feeling its a bad batch. i will let it run until the next reagent change and see if i can calibrate again to see if it still have the same problem. it is consistence for me but value is not correct so i guess have to deal with it. As you can see i calibrate it and it went exactly at 8.5 but when test again it drop by 2dkh so I try to do it again but put 2dkh more but still get down to around 6.5dkh when tested again.Not sure what to suggest to you other than stop chasing numbers across test kits. The trident reported correctly after a series of tests when placed into the reference solution.
Is it ok to use the Fauna cal solutions? I was under the impression that Neptunes cal solution is specific to the month supply that you are using at that time. My dKh tests almost exactly 1ppm lower than Hanna consistently. The owner of my LFS has said that his tridents also do similar low calculations. Generally just use the trident to look for consistency
I think this is the issue...a bad photo eye. It explains all of the issues in a way that no other explanation could. There is no rational on why if you test the exact same solution that you calibrated with that you are getting drastically different readings. I think Trident knows they have a bad batch but are pushing this off on their unwitting customers. I had my Calc go from 520 to 468 overnight with no dosing in 3 days.Sorry -- I am just at my wits end here. Being an electrical engineer, I suspect an issue with the photo "eye" that is used to do the test and "see" the color change, possibly. Water pickup problem is doubtful since I took the unit apart per Neptune's video and made sure all connections were good and the pick up line was back flushed. None of that work showed anything suspicious,
Calibration was run at 4:11 PM on this graph. You can see it is better afterwards than prior to calibration but still off.
Can this photo eye be easily replaced? Or are you saying it is a bad design?I think this is the issue...a bad photo eye. It explains all of the issues in a way that no other explanation could. There is no rational on why if you test the exact same solution that you calibrated with that you are getting drastically different readings. I think Trident knows they have a bad batch but are pushing this off on their unwitting customers. I had my Calc go from 520 to 468 overnight with no dosing in 3 days.
I honestly dont know the answer to replaceability. I think the design is fine as people have previously had a lot of success with the Trident. I am merely speculating and have no concrete answer whatso ever as to the root cause. This just seems to make the absolutely most logical sense to the issues that we have seen. Given this has been a big issue recently, i am speculating that it is just the latest production run. Again..speculation all around...but appears to be a logical conclusion.Can this photo eye be easily replaced? Or are you saying it is a bad design?
As I have been concentrating on ALK to start with, I haven't even brought up the fact that my Calc and Mg are not within spec either - 82 ppm low on Calc and 187 ppm low on Mg.I had my Calc go from 520 to 468 overnight with no dosing in 3 days.
This is why I thought purchasing a Trident was a good choice! I hope Neptune Support on Thursday has some answers. Fingers crossed!I think the design is fine as people have previously had a lot of success with the Trident.
I think this is the issue...a bad photo eye. It explains all of the issues in a way that no other explanation could. There is no rational on why if you test the exact same solution that you calibrated with that you are getting drastically different readings. I think Trident knows they have a bad batch but are pushing this off on their unwitting customers. I had my Calc go from 520 to 468 overnight with no dosing in 3 days.