helgymatt

I've seen plenty of the wood burning stove. And no this is not off topic. The thread is about the +/- of drop checkers vs. ph controllers and what each can and CAN'T do.

I think everyone here would like a "real" explanation so do us all a favor and try to answer that question.

ray-the-pilot

Have a nice day!

pjbc

ray-the-pilot:
To keep things On-Topic, I moved my message to the other thread.




But I kept here my opinion:
-With controller the PH will not fluctuate much, maybe 0,2PH(?)
-Without controller you have bigger PH fluctuation, maybe 1PH,
but you will have the same death/hot spots than you had with controller.


(if moderators wish to delete this post, no problem!)

ray-the-pilot

I think I already did all that. I'm not sure why you cannot open the word files. It is probably something to do with your virus protection.
I wanted to post the documents as PDF but the file size limitation made it impossible.
If you want PDF copies PM me and I'll send them to you.

helgymatt

It's a beautiful one here

inkslinger

You need a good water circulation to start , I had always use a PH Controller in my 110g tank it keeps my PH at 6.5
I have a Mag 5 in a close loop system with a co2 reactor,uv light, and heater, My filter is a Eheim Pro 2 2028. I decided to buy a DC I install it in my tank and for the whole month it did not change color Blue?? I even went by BPS without the controller by the end of the day my PH was at 5.9 and that did not change the color it was still Blue??
Now I run my controller just to read the PH an run my CO2 {BPS} only when the lights come on. The DC is still in my tank for looks.

Supercoley1

This is an old one. lol

I haven't read your papers as I don't have time for that nor need to. All I will say that Ph Controller vs drop checker. Which is more accurate? Neither are more accurate than each other but the drop checker is more likely to be accurate r.e. CO2 because ituses a controlled solution (4dKH) whereas the Ph probe is in the tank water.

To try and assimilate CO2 to a certain Ph drop in the tank is useless. This drop can be from many variables of which CO2 is only one. There are many acids at work. Secondly the KH of your tank water changing can affect how much the drop will be.

Therefore as we know the solution in the drop checker is a certain KH then we know what the drop will be. In the tank water if there is a slight change in KH then the process is flawed immediatley.

To suggest that a setup with a Ph controller will have equal CO2 all the way round the tank whereas a tank with a drop checker and permanent injection will not is ridiculous. They will be the same.

The Ph controller will turn on/off relevant to the PH drop in the probe's area. Just as a drop checker will only give you the reading of the DCs area. You could add more probes around the tank and let the average control the CO2 but by the same argument you can use several drop checkers to see your levels.

The CO2 concentration in the water is dependent on the efficiency of the diffusion method and the circulation around the tank wether using a Ph controller or not.

The problem with using a Ph controller is that we want stable CO2 but this does not mean exactly the same all around a tank. This would be impossible without having a Tornado style circulation which would not let you have any plants or fish. We are aiming at an average and like Tom says in his article the further from the diffusor you are the lower the ppm is. Nearer to the diffusor is at toxic levels but the fish will not stay in this area. They will go in and out if they feel uncomfortable with it.

A Ph controller will turn on and off with the assumption that a certain drop is the relevant level of CO2 and therefore the further areas may fluctuate to the point that the plants in this area are constantly having to adapt to different levels and therefore not growing properly. non limiting the CO2 so that there is enough plus a bit more in the further areas means that they will grow really well.

I would say that the Ph controller used in conjunction with CO2 is nothing more than a glorified (and expensive) version of the Ph /KH chart which we all know (or at least should by now) is flawed!!!

Use it to monitor Ph levels, Use it as a safety mechanism so that it will cut off CO2 in the event od something else causing a Ph crash (but set it lower than your assumed Ph drop for CO2) but don't use it to control CO2 on or off!!!

I don't see this equipment being used in many of the succesful scapes around. I only see it being promoted by the same companies that promote substrate heating cables, and fertilisers with no N or P in them (using the no N or P as a selling tool.)

My suggestion would be save your S110. Get a coule of cheap thermometers for $2 each so you can check them against each other and get 3 or 4 cheap drop checkers $5 each. Now you've saved money there and can now afford the extra CO2. It will also save you the frustration of trying to work out why algae is growing your tank

It's not rocket science. The Ph in the tank is not solely controlled by CO2 injection and therefore the tank water cannot be used to take a Ph drop reading for use with CO2. Therefore the Ph controller although being a clever piece of kit renders itself worthless in conjunction with controlling CO2!!!!

Do I have drop checkers? Yes but more for visual signs than anything else. When I setup the CO2 level I push it until I can see the fish going to the surface and then back it off a little. Then I leave it until the bottle has run out. The DCs (and me watching the plants/fish) will tell me if anything untoward is happening!!

AC

ashappard

you can say that again.

you aren't missing anything Supercoley1. I read it and winced at the flawed conclusion. No, I'm not a chemist / science guy but I can see through all the puffery. A flood of numbers does not equal a valid conclusion. The paper's experiments lack control and comparison. I'm used to seeing comparisons of dry weights of plant mass after a growth cycle / O2 charts showing how one tank differs from another during growth cycles.. etc and so forth. The 'paper' reaches too far without collecting valid experimental data and makes a predetermined conclusion. That is not good science and it is misleading.

absolutely. better to save money on the bells and whistles - and work to manage good flow / efficient diffusion / and stable delivery of gas. That is what really matters.

ray-the-pilot

First off let me apologize if I sound critical. I’m not trying to put you down.

Almost everything in your post is your opinion. While I value your opinion and you are certainly entitled to it I have to point out that you do not own a CO2 controller so your opinion is not based on fact, only hearsay.

I do own a controller. I have collected data over time and made conclusions based on direct observations. I think that if you can afford one and have a tank big enough to support it they are extremely helpful in maintaining controlled levels of CO2.

One other point, now I know how Galileo felt when he told people that the Sun didn’t revolve around the earth! (This is supposed to be a joke so don’t take it seriously).

Engold

taken from Ray The pilot


I don't think you are being tooo critical, after all, this is a free forum for all to share thoughts/opinion and most of all experience. I love this debate about CO2 chkers vs pH meters. I personally use pH and perfer it, but I have used a Drop Checker as well.

Ultimately, How good does your tank look with whatever set up inplace to control proper CO2 concentration. Right now.... my tank is pearling O2 like AAA tracers rounds in Baghdad during a night raid...... and my plants are flourishing..... enough about my tank.


If your tank is Lush and green.... awesome

Later!