I know this forum is not generally on-board with electronic water testing devices, but I recently saw a tester called PooLab 1.0 that looked pretty interesting. My friend who works in pool maintenance recently picked one up and absolutely loves it. I was curious if anyone on this forum happened to have some experience with it yet and if so what type of results they are getting as far as testing accuracy. It's certainly not the cheapest option for water testing out there but I always have issues with my standard test kit and never seem to get it correct (definitely user error) so I find myself relying on test strips for the daily tests and weekly checks at the pool store on their machine for more specific results. I'd love the ability to have something similar to what my pool store uses at home without having to spend a few hundred bucks or more.
Poollab 1.0
- Thread starter lisevolution
- Start date
Pool stores and test strips are not reliable (digital pool store testing doubly so), so if your test kit isn't aligning with those it sounds like it's working just fine to me. Stop going to the pool store and throw the test strips out.
As far as the item, I doubt any digital meter in that price range is very accurate.
As far as the item, I doubt any digital meter in that price range is very accurate.
What test kit are you trying to use?
Please add your pool and equipment details to your signature.
Please add your pool and equipment details to your signature.
The Pool Lab 1.0 i will only test chlorine 0-6ppm. Not great for TFP methods...Unless you are cool with just knowing if it says over read your chlorine is over 6. The other issue is that these units are calibrated at the factory and then you have no way of calibrating it yourself. Unless you send it in...I guess. A drop test kit like Taylor or TF-100 will not ever require calibration.
I have a poollab 1.0 and it works just fine. You are right, it can only test Chlorine from 0-6 ppm, but that is easily solved by taking just 2ml of poolwater and 8ml og distilled water - and then multiply the result with 5. I really like that you get PH, TA and CYA very precise, and also the FC and TC.
Your definition of "easily" is pretty lax. I don't consider having to have distilled water on hand to be a reasonable expectation for any pool water test.
Your also buying in to the false precision of the test. No matter how much you want to believe it this device is not measuring to the precision it is spitting out. The cost alone should clue you in to that. No, they just put that in to convince you it's accurate. And it works wonders, people assume that if it shows a number to the hundredths place then it must be measuring to that. It is not that precise, nor is it very accurate. Nothing in that price range is going to give you the accuracy that a much cheaper liquid test will.
So…having a bunch of chemical reagents on hand is “reasonable”, but a gallon of distilled water is crossing the line?
Dilution of a sample and using simple math happens to be a very common method to get a reasonably accurate reading of said sample when the concentration is over the tests limit. I don’t see the necessity of disputing jetola on this point.
…and you know this because you’ve collected actual data and have proven it? I’m not disputing your knowledge or experience in pool chemistry… but before making statements like that, maybe collect some data to back it up.
I’m not very optimistic about this product and it’s claims, but I’m not going to say it’s junk just because….
I’m going to purchase this item from Amazon since it’s returnable. I’ll compare its readings vs. my TF-100’s and come back to post my findings. Will it be accurate? I doubt it, but it IS 2021 after all. If it turns out to be junk, I’ll send it back.
So I should have results by the end of next week.
Mostly I dislike when people dredge up a year old thread just because they feel compelled to argue against some long forgotten thing they disagree with.
Speaking of which...
Ok…received the PoolLab 1.0 and reagents. Performed Chlorine, Combined Chlorine, Alkalinity, Calcium Hardness, CYA and pH using my TF-100 kit (w/ Hanna Instruments pH probe) and the PoolLab 1.0. Performed tests on 2 different days, 3 days apart. (Note. PL 1.0 tests total chlorine, so CC reading is obtained by subtracting free chlorine from total chlorine
Day 1:
TF-100————|————-PoolLab 1.0
fCl- 6—————|————-5.41
CC- 1—————|————-.82 (tCl 6.23)
Alk- 90————|————-86
CaCO3- 225———-|————-219
CYA- ~50———-|————-67
pH- 7.8————|————-8.15
Day 2: (Today)
fCl- 2.5————|————-3.14
CC- .5———— |————-.13 (tCl 3.27)
Alk- 90————|—————87
CaCO3- 225———-|—————220
CYA- ~50———-|—————64
pH- 7.67———-|—————7.75
So….. as you can see they are very close to each other. Initial testing shows this device is definitely accurate when compared to the drop tests. We aren’t looking for laboratory level results here. In my opinion, the PoolLAB 1.0 would be a very good device for the average pool owner. NOW, I understand this isn’t a huge amount of data. I plan to test more, to verify the results will remain “accurate”. Of coarse there is going to be the question of how long will the device keep its accuracy. I’ll have to use it for a few seasons to know.
One thing I do know, I use 4 different photometers from Hanna Instruments for my planted aquarium. I’ve found that photometers (at least the Hanna ones) don’t lose calibration. I’ve used them for 3 years now and when I check with a known standard, they pass the test. So, it’s possible this photometer could be similar. You could very easily get some standards and perform the tests to verify accuracy. This unit also has the capability to test numerous other parameters. You need to purchase the reagents to perform those tests, but if you need to… it’s there.
So in conclusion…. I don’t see why this device should be shunned by the pool community. I, for one, now plan to keep this. So much easier than pulling out the drop test kit. If you’re having problems….cloudy water…algae, etc. Then break out the drop tests to verify your readings.
Day 1:
TF-100————|————-PoolLab 1.0
fCl- 6—————|————-5.41
CC- 1—————|————-.82 (tCl 6.23)
Alk- 90————|————-86
CaCO3- 225———-|————-219
CYA- ~50———-|————-67
pH- 7.8————|————-8.15
Day 2: (Today)
fCl- 2.5————|————-3.14
CC- .5———— |————-.13 (tCl 3.27)
Alk- 90————|—————87
CaCO3- 225———-|—————220
CYA- ~50———-|—————64
pH- 7.67———-|—————7.75
So….. as you can see they are very close to each other. Initial testing shows this device is definitely accurate when compared to the drop tests. We aren’t looking for laboratory level results here. In my opinion, the PoolLAB 1.0 would be a very good device for the average pool owner. NOW, I understand this isn’t a huge amount of data. I plan to test more, to verify the results will remain “accurate”. Of coarse there is going to be the question of how long will the device keep its accuracy. I’ll have to use it for a few seasons to know.
One thing I do know, I use 4 different photometers from Hanna Instruments for my planted aquarium. I’ve found that photometers (at least the Hanna ones) don’t lose calibration. I’ve used them for 3 years now and when I check with a known standard, they pass the test. So, it’s possible this photometer could be similar. You could very easily get some standards and perform the tests to verify accuracy. This unit also has the capability to test numerous other parameters. You need to purchase the reagents to perform those tests, but if you need to… it’s there.
So in conclusion…. I don’t see why this device should be shunned by the pool community. I, for one, now plan to keep this. So much easier than pulling out the drop test kit. If you’re having problems….cloudy water…algae, etc. Then break out the drop tests to verify your readings.
Last edited:
This you think is "very close"?!? Amazing what you'll say is a good result when you have an agenda you're trying to push.
You can use whatever you'd like, but we will continue to recommend and require testing methods that are inexpensive, accurate, repeatable, and don't rely on false precision to convince people they are more accurate than they are capable of being. No digital tester under a couple thousand dollars has ever shown to be anywhere near as useful as a Taylor test kit. There's no reason to have two kits at more than twice the cost of a single kit that can provide the necessary data to properly manage a pool. If you'd like to spend your money on such things, that's your money to spend. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone as more than a novelty that creates extra work for no benefit.
EDIT: BTW, you're letting your FC drop too low for your CYA level. You may want to concentrate on properly maintaining your own pool before trying to convince random people on the internet that a digital tester you've had for whole hours is a worthwhile investment.
Last edited:
I have the PoolLab 1.0 as well. The only issue I have had is it's inability to test CH at levels recommended by TFP, that and the poor consistency of the Alkalinity reagent tablets. I have been going back and forth with the manufacturer for almost a year. I finally gave up and ordered a Taylor drop test kit. When the PoolLab reagent tablets are a light brown in color, the results match the Taylor drop test. See attached picture.
Attachments
I also noted the reliability issue with the PoolLab alkalinity test, and have also discontinued using that test. The User Manual alludes to "measurement deviations" for the alkalinity test when values are in certain ranges, but no workaround is provided (p. 60).
As for the concerns raised about USMCMarc's comparisons between PoolLab and TF-100 CYA measurements, who knows which of those is more accurate? However, we do know that the TF-100 is a rounded estimate.
Also, I noticed on p. 66 of the PoolLab User Manual that the device can be calibrated. While that's easy to do, it's unclear how it works and whether it results in more accurate measurements. The manual also mentions that when readings are out of the range of the device, the test sample can be diluted with distilled water (p. 62).
I would love to see more comparison data on PoolLab measures, and not just with TF-100, but with other measurement systems that consensus suggests are accurate and reliable, as PoolLab 1.0 is a convenient and affordable tool.
As for the concerns raised about USMCMarc's comparisons between PoolLab and TF-100 CYA measurements, who knows which of those is more accurate? However, we do know that the TF-100 is a rounded estimate.
Also, I noticed on p. 66 of the PoolLab User Manual that the device can be calibrated. While that's easy to do, it's unclear how it works and whether it results in more accurate measurements. The manual also mentions that when readings are out of the range of the device, the test sample can be diluted with distilled water (p. 62).
I would love to see more comparison data on PoolLab measures, and not just with TF-100, but with other measurement systems that consensus suggests are accurate and reliable, as PoolLab 1.0 is a convenient and affordable tool.
Last edited:
2 things I noticed about these test results...
Day 1
fCl- 6—————|————-5.41
Pool lab was .59 "Higher" than tf100
Day 2
fCl- 2.5————|————-3.14
Pool Lab was .64 "Lower" than tf100
That seems significant..
Putting both days into TFP pool math app at 75 deg
Day 1 - tf100 = 0.00
Pool lab = .27
That seems significant.. It is close to the recommended limit.
Day 2 - tf100 = 0.12
Pool lab = .10
Certainly closer but the inconsistencies seem significant....
I think the bottom line would be that the advice given on this site is based on Tf100 results. So to have members posting for help with Pool lab supposedly more accurate results could lead to poor advice and most likely having members micro manage there pools adding chemicals when not needed and creating a seesaw affect. Just My Humble Opinion... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯