2.5 years of Sutro tests chart comparing to other methods.

[Alset2]

This is a bit unsolicited, but I have spent a few days lurking around and reading up on all the stuff I have missed since I have been away and realized I had a bit of data that might be useful to someone.
It's not meant to be a scientific caliber comparison. It's just something I did because I sometimes am a geek with nothing better to do I suppose lol.
I also never meant to share it so if things don't make since feel free to ask.

 

[Newdude]

This is a bit unsolicited,

Bullfeathers it is, we LOVE data. THANKS.

 

[reggiehammond]

Shows the real range of fluffy numbers possible from other non-drop based testing methods.

 

[Newdude]

Shows the real range of fluffy numbers possible from other non-drop based testing methods

The summer of 22 was particularly spread out. The TA was ranging from 4 to 140 and the FC from 3 to 10 on some tests. The CH was unpredictable as well with 4 to 375.

 

[Alset2]

Good catch. To be honest those "4" entries are certainly a mis type on my part. I am certain it would have been forty-something and not actually 4 (on the TA).
The CH would have been 4 hundred -something.
While Ill withhold my over all perception for a while (as not to color other peoples- which I am very interested in) I can say that there was never any number that low for any of those high number tests.
So let this be my first apology for bad data lol

Also just noticed a lot of the CH hardness numbers are victim of the same thing. I am not sure what happened. At one point the SS did get corrupt so something might have happened in the rebuilding of the data??
Ill see if I have any older files that cover those time periods.

EDIT: after going back through my hard copies of these tests it appears those low CH numbers on Q7 are actually correct. I made notes that I purchased new regents when they snapped back to a normal range, but those low numbers are in fact what the Q7 was displaying. But since the Q7 is not reading actual calcium hardness (its reading total hardness) I didn't care much anyway.
I have attached a revised file, but the only thing that was mis typed (So far) was 07/16/22 TA reading was entered as 4, it was actually 51. I fixed and changed color to different shade of green to highlight change.
Alos fixed Sutro entry next to it

 

[Newdude]

So let this be my first apology for bad data lol

A couple of typos are fine. Lol. There's still some neat variance in there at times. Other times they are more tight grouped than I would have expected.