Trident reagent A empty notification...almost 100mL left in bottle

[User1]

And this means (HA)?

your mileage may vary

Of course then we are getting into electric vs dino fuels vs local, state, and of course federal taxes, and then we go down another rabbit hole

 

[Gareth elliott]

your mileage may vary

Of course then we are getting into electric vs dino fuels vs local, state, and of course federal taxes, and then we go down another rabbit hole

If you are fox hunting and it goes down a hole remember to bring a terrier not just a hound. Ok i think i am done after that comment [emoji23]

 

[Entz]

Oh. I don't think that would change without changing the unit completely and making it more expensive. The solution they came up with is really pretty elegant and keeps costs down. YMMV

They have to know exactly how much reagent they are putting in otherwise there is no way for them to accurately measure the Alkalinity.

Some programming logic could probably be added based on consumption math. But given this would be mathematically calculated you would always have to have extra left over, so not sure if would that many more tests even if they did this.

Well of course that is for them to figure out to balance safety margins but I would expect the number could be quite high if its leaving almost 1/3 left (i.e. 2/3 between the two).

/horse flogged

 

[Caravanshaka]

This seems to be getting a little out of hand. Let's revisit what we know:

Problem: Trident triggered an alarm for "Reagent A Empty" after approximately 3.5 weeks testing 4x per day. When the reagent was swapped out, the remaining liquid in the bottle was 92mL, about 30% of the total volume. The question posed to Neptune/ @Terence is "What is an acceptable amount of reagent to be left when the Empty Alarm is triggered?". Some people are okay with any amount as long as you get the stated 120 tests in that bottle....others are wondering why there is 30% waste.

Neptune's Stated Reagent volume: "2-months supply testing 4x per day, with a little extra in each bottle to handle calibrations and priming"

Potential Cause: Alarm Trigger is based on number of tests performed, which allows for a wide range of daily dKh levels to be tested on one bottle. In other words, while higher dKh may use more reagent to test daily, the alarm is still triggered after the same number of tests as if daily dKh was lower and used less reagent. This is all speculation, as we don't know exactly how the test works. I do know that the Trident has a colorometer installed (similar to Hanna), so we may all be speculating wrong anyway.

Solution to Potential Cause: Currently, there is a variable stored in the system to track "Tests Remaining", which you can view on the Trident Tile. If the speculation above is correct, then it simply tracks to 120 tests (maybe +/- based on calibrations and primings ran as well), and counts down after each test. Let's also assume that the system knows how much reagent has been used for any given test, as that volume will be necessary to compute the results of the test. That being said, it should be a simple coding change to track actual reagent mL usage compared to the total of a reagent bottle instead of simply tracking the number of tests. In the case above, if 208 mL were used to conduct 120 tests, another 70mL would give approximately 40 more tests, a 33% increase in the number of tests the Trident could perform on that bottle of reagent.

Current Status: Waiting on Neptune to answer the question regarding the volume of liquid that is acceptable to be remaining in the bottle after it has been deemed empty.

 

[Thales]

This seems to be getting a little out of hand. Let's revisit what we know:

Problem: Trident triggered an alarm for "Reagent A Empty" after approximately 3.5 weeks testing 4x per day. When the reagent was swapped out, the remaining liquid in the bottle was 92mL, about 30% of the total volume. The question posed to Neptune/ @Terence is "What is an acceptable amount of reagent to be left when the Empty Alarm is triggered?". Some people are okay with any amount as long as you get the stated 120 tests in that bottle....others are wondering why there is 30% waste.

Neptune's Stated Reagent volume: "2-months supply testing 4x per day, with a little extra in each bottle to handle calibrations and priming"

Potential Cause: Alarm Trigger is based on number of tests performed, which allows for a wide range of daily dKh levels to be tested on one bottle. In other words, while higher dKh may use more reagent to test daily, the alarm is still triggered after the same number of tests as if daily dKh was lower and used less reagent. This is all speculation, as we don't know exactly how the test works. I do know that the Trident has a colorometer installed (similar to Hanna), so we may all be speculating wrong anyway.

Solution to Potential Cause: Currently, there is a variable stored in the system to track "Tests Remaining", which you can view on the Trident Tile. If the speculation above is correct, then it simply tracks to 120 tests (maybe +/- based on calibrations and primings ran as well), and counts down after each test. Let's also assume that the system knows how much reagent has been used for any given test, as that volume will be necessary to compute the results of the test. That being said, it should be a simple coding change to track actual reagent mL usage compared to the total of a reagent bottle instead of simply tracking the number of tests. In the case above, if 208 mL were used to conduct 120 tests, another 70mL would give approximately 40 more tests, a 33% increase in the number of tests the Trident could perform on that bottle of reagent.

Current Status: Waiting on Neptune to answer the question regarding the volume of liquid that is acceptable to be remaining in the bottle after it has been deemed empty.

You should open a support ticket with Neptune.

 

[MnFish1]

This seems to be getting a little out of hand. Let's revisit what we know:

Problem: Trident triggered an alarm for "Reagent A Empty" after approximately 3.5 weeks testing 4x per day. When the reagent was swapped out, the remaining liquid in the bottle was 92mL, about 30% of the total volume. The question posed to Neptune/ @Terence is "What is an acceptable amount of reagent to be left when the Empty Alarm is triggered?". Some people are okay with any amount as long as you get the stated 120 tests in that bottle....others are wondering why there is 30% waste.

Neptune's Stated Reagent volume: "2-months supply testing 4x per day, with a little extra in each bottle to handle calibrations and priming"

Potential Cause: Alarm Trigger is based on number of tests performed, which allows for a wide range of daily dKh levels to be tested on one bottle. In other words, while higher dKh may use more reagent to test daily, the alarm is still triggered after the same number of tests as if daily dKh was lower and used less reagent. This is all speculation, as we don't know exactly how the test works. I do know that the Trident has a colorometer installed (similar to Hanna), so we may all be speculating wrong anyway.

Solution to Potential Cause: Currently, there is a variable stored in the system to track "Tests Remaining", which you can view on the Trident Tile. If the speculation above is correct, then it simply tracks to 120 tests (maybe +/- based on calibrations and primings ran as well), and counts down after each test. Let's also assume that the system knows how much reagent has been used for any given test, as that volume will be necessary to compute the results of the test. That being said, it should be a simple coding change to track actual reagent mL usage compared to the total of a reagent bottle instead of simply tracking the number of tests. In the case above, if 208 mL were used to conduct 120 tests, another 70mL would give approximately 40 more tests, a 33% increase in the number of tests the Trident could perform on that bottle of reagent.

Current Status: Waiting on Neptune to answer the question regarding the volume of liquid that is acceptable to be remaining in the bottle after it has been deemed empty.

And the question from the beginning - is/was - was this the first bottle? or a re-order of the reagent. IMHO its too early to ask based on one bottle. They said that they provided extra in the first bottle (I think - but honestly not sure). In any case - if its a recurring issue - it could be a problem. If its a one time deal - it's not. If you're getting accurate readings - I would suggest (though you might be throwing some out) - its not a problem.

 

[Brett S]

They said that they provided extra in the first bottle (I think - but honestly not sure).

They clarified this in one of the videos. They said that the reagent supplied with the unit is exactly the same quantity as the two month replacement reagent kit, but they label it as a “one month supply” because they figure that with calibration and people getting excited and running extra tests at first to see how it works they might go through their first reagent bottles more quickly than normal. But they said that if you just install it and don’t do extra tests you’ll get the same two month usage out of the first bottles of reagent.

 

[MnFish1]

They clarified this in one of the videos. They said that the reagent supplied with the unit is exactly the same quantity as the two month replacement reagent kit, but they label it as a “one month supply” because they figure that with calibration and people getting excited and running extra tests at first to see how it works they might go through their first reagent bottles more quickly than normal. But they said that if you just install it and don’t do extra tests you’ll get the same two month usage out of the first bottles of reagent.

One of the issues here - and - though its probably impossible for a company to refrain from posting on multiple sites - there are multiple questions and multiple answers. People are concerned about wasting money because their first bottle wasnt completely used. I agree with the question... That said - for gods sake - is it really that imporatant? They are trying to give the average user a certain amount of product. If some have something left over - either its a one off - or perhaps the person buying the product should have done more research,,,,,

My opinion. I'm waiting to order a unit... I think this is a classic razor blade razor analogy. I am waiting (personally - and perhaps has nothing to do with the thread) - to buy until I see - these issues are resolved (though this is a minor issue IMHO) that people have fantastically better coral growth etc with this. Kind of like Triton - which seems to have lost a bit of excitement.

 

[BZOFIQ]

Epson and HP do the same - it's perfectly normal

 

[Entz]

One of the issues here - and - though its probably impossible for a company to refrain from posting on multiple sites - there are multiple questions and multiple answers. People are concerned about wasting money because their first bottle wasnt completely used. I agree with the question... That said - for gods sake - is it really that imporatant? They are trying to give the average user a certain amount of product. If some have something left over - either its a one off - or perhaps the person buying the product should have done more research,,,,,

My opinion. I'm waiting to order a unit... I think this is a classic razor blade razor analogy. I am waiting (personally - and perhaps has nothing to do with the thread) - to buy until I see - these issues are resolved (though this is a minor issue IMHO) that people have fantastically better coral growth etc with this. Kind of like Triton - which seems to have lost a bit of excitement.

I am playing the waiting game as well but anything helps my laziness the better.

Is it really that important prob not Some napkin math shows it would save you between 1 and 2 reagent packs a year (going with exactly 60 days for a normal kit and 80 with the extra 10 per bottle at 4/2/2). I am gonna say 1 with extra testing room. So $3.75 a month give or take. If you put that money towards a being a R2R supporter ... WIN!

 

[Brett S]

that people have fantastically better coral growth etc with this.

For me it’s all about convenience and piece of mind. If I get fantastically better corals, then that’s even better, but really I’m not expecting a huge improvement there.

But I am notoriously bad about testing my water parameters. I would routinely go weeks, and sometimes even months between tests. For the most my dosing is pretty well dialed in and things don’t change a whole lot from one test to the next and I can get away with this, but that’s only when things are going smoothly.

One time a few months ago I had a bad batch of alkalinity supplement that I had been using for several weeks before I did a test and realized that my alkalinity had dropped 3 or 4 dkh. This upset all of my corals and I lost 90% of a large colony.

So for me the fact that I no longer even have to manually check those three parameters is a big deal to me. And knowing that I’ll be alerted right away if something happens and my doser fails or I get another bad batch of supplement is huge.

Those are the reasons that I threw my money at Neptune the minute that BRS gave me the opportunity.

But I know that there are some people who do test frequently and regularly on their own. And even some people who actually enjoy testing the water. If you’re one of those people then these reasons probably aren’t a big draw to you.

 

[MnFish1]

For me it’s all about convenience and piece of mind. If I get fantastically better corals, then that’s even better, but really I’m not expecting a huge improvement there.

But I am notoriously bad about testing my water parameters. I would routinely go weeks, and sometimes even months between tests. For the most my dosing is pretty well dialed in and things don’t change a whole lot from one test to the next and I can get away with this, but that’s only when things are going smoothly.

One time a few months ago I had a bad batch of alkalinity supplement that I had been using for several weeks before I did a test and realized that my alkalinity had dropped 3 or 4 dkh. This upset all of my corals and I lost 90% of a large colony.

So for me the fact that I no longer even have to manually check those three parameters is a big deal to me. And knowing that I’ll be alerted right away if something happens and my doser fails or I get another bad batch of supplement is huge.

Those are the reasons that I threw my money at Neptune the minute that BRS gave me the opportunity.

But I know that there are some people who do test frequently and regularly on their own. And even some people who actually enjoy testing the water. If you’re one of those people then these reasons probably aren’t a big draw to you.

same here . im waiting

 

[TTNuge]

your telling me if something costs lets say $100 but the manufacturer said o but you only get $66 dollars worth out of it you would be fine. from what he said he is losing one third of the reagent do to this. thats a waste of money in my opinion
im not trying to start a argument or anything but most people wouldn't be ok with throwing out something they paid for that is still perfectly good to use.

But what is happening here is they are saying something cost $66, you are getting $66 worth out of it, but are saying it should be fine to be upset they aren't getting $100 out of it.

so what happens if your alk is real high and you don't get 120 tests. you paid for 120 test but didn't get it.

Hence the reason for the extra reagent, so that doesn't happen.

 

[Caravanshaka]

I am playing the waiting game as well but anything helps my laziness the better.

Is it really that important prob not Some napkin math shows it would save you between 1 and 2 reagent packs a year (going with exactly 60 days for a normal kit and 80 with the extra 10 per bottle at 4/2/2). I am gonna say 1 with extra testing room. So $3.75 a month give or take. If you put that money towards a being a R2R supporter ... WIN!

I understand it was napkin math and not meant to be exact, but just so it isn't marginalized by a small monthly figure:

365/80 = 4.5625 reagent purchases required at $48 per ($45 + shipping) = $219
365/60 = 6.0833 reagent purchases required at $48 per ($45 + shipping) = $292

That's a $73 (or 25% of the expected $292) annual savings testing at the minimum rate by just using the reagent you purchased instead of dumping the excess.

I don't know about you, but I'd be pretty happy saving 25% on anything I'm putting my money towards. Or to think of it a different way, I'd be pretty upset getting charged 33% more and being told to dispose of the extra without saying how much extra is normal.

 

[TTNuge]

I understand it was napkin math and not meant to be exact, but just so it isn't marginalized by a small monthly figure:

365/80 = 4.5625 reagent purchases required at $48 per ($45 + shipping) = $219
365/60 = 6.0833 reagent purchases required at $48 per ($45 + shipping) = $292

That's a $73 (or 25% of the expected $292) annual savings testing at the minimum rate by just using the reagent you purchased instead of dumping the excess.

I don't know about you, but I'd be pretty happy saving 25% on anything I'm putting my money towards. Or to think of it a different way, I'd be pretty upset getting charged 33% more and being told to dispose of the extra without saying how much extra is normal.

But what happens when you get to the end of the 2 months, have half a bottle of Reagent A remaining but still run out of B and C? Your savings just went to zero because you can't buy them separately.

 

[Entz]

I understand it was napkin math and not meant to be exact, but just so it isn't marginalized by a small monthly figure:

365/80 = 4.5625 reagent purchases required at $48 per ($45 + shipping) = $219
365/60 = 6.0833 reagent purchases required at $48 per ($45 + shipping) = $292

That's a $73 (or 25% of the expected $292) annual savings testing at the minimum rate by just using the reagent you purchased instead of dumping the excess.

I don't know about you, but I'd be pretty happy saving 25% on anything I'm putting my money towards. Or to think of it a different way, I'd be pretty upset getting charged 33% more and being told to dispose of the extra without saying how much extra is normal.

Oh I agree, I did a lot of rounding (cant use half a pack etc). If you extend that over 2 years it actually worse: 3 full packs trashed . It really is throwing away money.

But what happens when you get to the end of the 2 months, have half a bottle of Reagent A remaining but still run out of B and C? Your savings just went to zero because you can't buy them separately.

This is still an unknown as I don't believe anyone is at the point, or at least has thought to measure, B&C after being out of A

 

[Caravanshaka]

But what happens when you get to the end of the 2 months, have half a bottle of Reagent A remaining but still run out of B and C? Your savings just went to zero because you can't buy them separately.

You can't now because they don't have a market for it. If there is a market for it, they would be more inclined to do it.

 

[MnFish1]

I understand it was napkin math and not meant to be exact, but just so it isn't marginalized by a small monthly figure:

365/80 = 4.5625 reagent purchases required at $48 per ($45 + shipping) = $219
365/60 = 6.0833 reagent purchases required at $48 per ($45 + shipping) = $292

That's a $73 (or 25% of the expected $292) annual savings testing at the minimum rate by just using the reagent you purchased instead of dumping the excess.

I don't know about you, but I'd be pretty happy saving 25% on anything I'm putting my money towards. Or to think of it a different way, I'd be pretty upset getting charged 33% more and being told to dispose of the extra without saying how much extra is normal.

Right - but you bought a product with these rules -------- should I say 'suck it up'???? ----- that wouldn't fly here. but. its the answer if you are using this product. Im amazed that the question dosent relvolve around the Cs Mg the answer is the same - - - its the product you bought. So complaints make little sense

 

[MnFish1]

But what happens when you get to the end of the 2 months, have half a bottle of Reagent A remaining but still run out of B and C? Your savings just went to zero because you can't buy them separately.

YOu throw it away - and realize the your bought a product that suggests you do this. I meant - its not unreasonable - there are arguments pro and con depending on the alk you're using...

 

[TTNuge]

Curious, does anyone know how much something like 100ml of reagent, the actual liquid, costs? If you don't count the packaging or the labor involved in making it and testing it, and you make it in bulk I'm curious to know if we're talking a couple pennies or if it's more.

Another interesting thought..... what if they had to purchase or make a specific amount of reagent at a time. And this reagent only lasts for so long. And currently there aren't a ton of Tridents in the wild. So in theory maybe they have more reagent then they need right now so they are just adding a bit more to the bottles for now but over time it could potentially decrease. Just a wild thought.