Ghl, Neptune, and there a Hanna in the garbage.what probes are you using?
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.
Ghl, Neptune, and there a Hanna in the garbage.what probes are you using?
Also if they claim it is accurate to plus or minus .1. That means they should have taken the temperature error into account as that goes into their ph reading.You are misinterpreting what was said and unfortunately I have not been able to explain to you why. I have tried to help you to understand that level of precision that you seek cannot be offered by the devices that you are using. It is really that simple.
Your claim is that a GHL probe is only accurate to .2. Meaning it could be accurate from 7.9 to 8.3. Making the probe completely useless. If you are right, there is no point to anybody using one of these probes.Several of us have attempted to help you to understand:
- the limitations of the equipment
- what +/- accuracy means
- a bit of insight into why the decimal point in the pH units is rounded from the actual value being read.
-how this related to different devices being so far apart on the same test solution
If you feel the device, marketing or accuracy claims are problematic then I suggest opening a support ticket with the manufacturer. I don't wish to argue with you, I am just trying give you insight into why you can't get the readings you are hoping to get.
I tied... I am done. Happy reefing.
So to clarify, because this is what is being discussed. You believe the GHL has a manufacturer error of +\-.2? Meaning it is within its limits read either 7.9 or 8.3. Because I think GHL would have a big problem with that. And we are arguing about what their limits are.Have never seen someone so confuse on accuracy... your have it backwards its not the accuracy of the probe at all.
in this case what you are terming accuracy = electrode slope and offset from the zero point of 7.
Im not a GHL user but i just looked up some info about thier probes - the electrode slope at 25 degree C > 95% of the theoretical value (of the slope) and zero offset < 20 mV
to measure accuracy you would need to know more about the device thats reading the probes output to determine accuracy. There is a guy on here named Lasse who knows all about GHL , suggest talking to him about the accuracy of thier ghl computer device....
to dumb it down a bit.....if you dont understand electrode slope. (say you change to a different probe).. your accuracy is still going to be coming from the reader not the probe.
Are you trying to sound smart? Because what we are talking about is super simple. And I’m not talking to you about being confused. Your last message was one of the most confusing things I have ever read.Have never seen someone so confuse on accuracy... your have it backwards its not the accuracy of the probe at all.
in this case what you are terming accuracy = electrode slope and offset from the zero point of 7.
Im not a GHL user but i just looked up some info about thier probes - the electrode slope at 25 degree C > 95% of the theoretical value (of the slope) and zero offset < 20 mV
to measure accuracy you would need to know more about the device thats reading the probes output to determine accuracy. There is a guy on here named Lasse who knows all about GHL , suggest talking to him about the accuracy of thier ghl computer device....
to dumb it down a bit.....if you dont understand electrode slope. (say you change to a different probe).. your accuracy is still going to be coming from the reader not the probe.
I am telling you to open a support ticket and take it up with them. Several people here have tried to help you (including the moderator and resident expert of this forum) and are clearly not giving you the answer that you want to hear. As well, your posts are becoming increasingly combative which means meaningful conversation is over. Randy asked everyone to move on, as I assume he saw this coming from afar.Your claim is that a GHL probe is only accurate to .2. Meaning it could be accurate from 7.9 to 8.3. Making the probe completely useless. If you are right, there is no point to anybody using one of these probes.
Why would I open a ticket, we are talking about claimed accuracy. Good god nobody makes any sense today.
If it is only accurate to +\- .2(the entire usable range of reef ph ex7.9-8.3. Then it is not accurate enough for worldwide reef keeper sales.The only accuracy that probe can guarantee is that if its dipped in ph 7.0 fluid it should read between 6.95 and 7.05 and if you dip it in ph 9 buffer it should read 8.95 to 9.05 and thats only at 25degrees C.
the accuracy you crave is not in the probe, its in the device reading the probes output. in your case its a ghl computer.
whatever accuracy it can provide would be something that ghl might or might not even know, its obviously accurate enough for the users of there product which sells worldwide. the results are reliable enough.
,
understand the probe you have is a basically a toy. the probes that reefkeepers use are not "accurate" in the sub $100 range when real ph probes are $4digits. I design methane injection systems for waste water treatment plants. My probes at work all have cases that cost as much as an apex or ghl computer lol.
That is not what I said and I am not on anybodies side. If you feel that the manufacturer's claims are incorrect or that your device does not meet those claims, then you need to consult with them. I can't help you further and do not wish to continue a fruitless and circular conversation with you.You asking me to open a ticket is so confusing. We are arguing about what they claim! What is there to open a ticket about?
I love how somebody calls me pigheaded and I am combative because they are on your side.
And I will say it one last time. You claiming that GHL has a manufacturer acceptable range of +\-.2 meaning for example 7.9-8.3 is an acceptable reading for an actual ph of 8.0 is dead wrong and there is no way they would agree with you on their own claims. It is crazy to think they would be okay with such a massive error range. You can’t talk your way out of it, you’re wrong.
it was established earlier the reading of GHL is accurate to .1. From a screenshot from GHL. BeanAnimal believes that with rounding and temperature probe inaccuracies that the reading is only good to .2. Which again, gives such a huge range that is is literally not usable.again you misuse the word accurate ... what are you saying is accurate to .2.. , whats accurate to +-.2 the ghl , the probe, ?? the only published numbers i see from ghl is what i gave you a few posts ago on their probes
"
i looked up the specs on your probe you you have there the electrode slope at 25 degree C > 95% of the theoretical value (of the slope) and zero offset < 20 m
the ghl or apex or hydos (they all use similiar grade probes) are all accurate enough for thousands of reefkeepers, you seem to be the special one.
So a range of 7.9 to 8.3 for an actual ph of 8.0 is acceptable for everyone but me? Ha! Either that is not correct, which is what I am saying. Or nobody has any clue how important ph is to stony coral growth.again you misuse the word accurate ... what are you saying is accurate to .2.. , whats accurate to +-.2 the ghl , the probe, ?? the only published numbers i see from ghl is what i gave you a few posts ago on their probes
"
i looked up the specs on your probe you you have there the electrode slope at 25 degree C > 95% of the theoretical value (of the slope) and zero offset < 20 m
the ghl or apex or hydos (they all use similiar grade probes) are all accurate enough for thousands of reefkeepers, you seem to be the special one.
Temperature accuracy | |
---|---|
pH-range | -2.000 to 20.000 |
pH-resolution | Selectable 0.1, 0.01, 0.001 |
pH-relative accuracy | ±0.002 |
mV-range | -2000 to 2000 |
mV-resolution | selectable 0.1/1 |
mV-relative accuracy | ±0.1 |
Temperature Range | -30.0 to 130.0 °C |
Temperature resolution | 0.1°C |