Using Standard CYA - Dot disappears at 40, not 50

Jump to latest Follow Reply
M

mgmoore7

0
Bronze Supporter
May 9, 2015
552
Land O Lakes, FL
I just got the Cyanuric Acid Standard 50 ppm solution.

Added Standard 50 ppm solution (R-7065) to the sticker, then added CYA Reagent (R-0013), shake wait 30 seconds, shake again, then test. Sun to my back at waist level.

Ran the test 2 times with new reagent each time. Both times, the dot disappeared at 40 ppm, not 50.

I know there is a swing factor but if I am off by 10 and then a swing factor of 10, I could be off by 20 and that could have a impact.

Should I just relabel the CYA test tube?
 
I found the same thing when I did it several times. On a really sunny day I was able to get it halfway between 40 and 50. The key is holding it at the top so as much light can flood in as possible. Taylor says that their standard sample is correct so what you are seeing is actually 50 ppm. So, I just round up to the next 10 if in doubt. A little more is better than a little less in my opinion.
 
That's kind of what works for me too. I've just started to need glasses for reading so it's important that I do the test with glasses. I stand infront of a window or in full light to get as much light into the vial as possible. Fill it up till the dot disappears, look away and look back a few times and adjust to make sure it's disappeared. This is changing and readjusting my focal length. I then add two extra drops for good measure and I'm done. This won't work for everyone but it works for me and I'm going to keep running the test with the standard solution every so often just to make sure that that method is still the best for me.
 
I didn't have a lot of confidence in my CYA test results so I ordered up the CYA standard solution to confirm I was doing it correctly. Like you, I couldn't find proper lighting, hold technique, star alignment etc...to make it work correctly. I found that filling the CYA reagent to the top of the label was very inconsistent. Specifically, getting the bottom of the meniscus to the label top results in the liquid level encroached on the neck of the bottle throwing everything off.

Long story short, grab a graduated cylinder and fill the Standard Solution to 15ml and then the reagent to 30. Pour it into the normal CYA mixing/measuring bottle and then run the test as usual.

This made the test accurate for me and now I have much more confidence in my CYA tests.

Good luck!
CFM
 
CFM56-7 said:
I didn't have a lot of confidence in my CYA test results so I ordered up the CYA standard solution to confirm I was doing it correctly. Like you, I couldn't find proper lighting, hold technique, star alignment etc...to make it work correctly. I found that filling the CYA reagent to the top of the label was very inconsistent. Specifically, getting the bottom of the meniscus to the label top results in the liquid level encroached on the neck of the bottle throwing everything off.

Long story short, grab a graduated cylinder and fill the Standard Solution to 15ml and then the reagent to 30. Pour it into the normal CYA mixing/measuring bottle and then run the test as usual.

This made the test accurate for me and now I have much more confidence in my CYA tests.

Good luck!
CFM
Click to expand...
Interesting that you describe it this way, i agree completely. . I redid the test 3 tumes because i kept "missing the mark" wirh the fill bottle as well.
 
mgmoore7 said:
I just got the Cyanuric Acid Standard 50 ppm solution.

Added Standard 50 ppm solution (R-7065) to the sticker, then added CYA Reagent (R-0013), shake wait 30 seconds, shake again, then test. Sun to my back at waist level.
Click to expand...

Ive got a K-2006, the instructions say to shake for 30 seconds then slowly fill the view tube. I was coming up short with the sun to my back to, it works better for me with the sun infront of me or where I'm not blocking direct light but not nessarary direct sun.
 
Last edited:
Interesting, I guess it depends on time of day. My best results are with the most light flooded in from the sides but no light going in the top of the tube
 
We are still doing some experiments. It appears the K-2006 comparator is yielding 50 more often and the TF-100 test tube and the Taylor 9193 (20-100 ppm) are yielding 40.

We don't yet have conclusive info but we are doing some more work to get to the bottom of it.
 
well, I am not sure "affected" is any part of what we are doing.

We are simply doing side by side comparisons of the various view tubes and reporting what we see as our results. We'll report what we see with the 9197 soon - it is not an item we inventory.

Everyone remember that this is a very subjective test and there may be no absolutely "right" answer. The precise amount of CYA in your pool will only be your best judgement.

You are looking for stability with CYA so if your readings are consistent, you are reading the CYA test correctly.

CYA results from 30-80 can all work just fine in different pools so we all may have to be a little subjective when we do this test.
 

Enjoying this content?

Support TFP with a donation.

Give Support
duraleigh said:
well, I am not sure "affected" is any part of what we are doing.

We are simply doing side by side comparisons of the various view tubes and reporting what we see as our results. We'll report what we see with the 9197 soon - it is not an item we inventory.
Click to expand...

That 9197 looks similar to the CCL one available to us in Aus. I was thinking of getting one and do away with the view tube / pH comparator combo that came with the K-2006 since I don't use the pH comparator. When using the view tube in the comb there is no need to directly hold the tube where the 9197 or CCL equivalent would need to be held, possibly reducing light transmission. I wonder if we will now get specific instructions on how to hold this tube.

The instructions that come with the CCL CYA kit don't offer any specific instructions on how to hold the view tube but do say that the accuracy of the test is dependant on the brightness of the ambient light - nothing new there I guess. I guess I would just have to test my method with some standard solution.
 
As we all know, the CYA test is a subjective test as everyone has a different "opinion" as to when the black dot disappears. Personally, to me, the 9193 and 9197 view tube seem to yield closer to 40 ppm and the K-2006 comparator seems to yield closer to 50 ppm using the CYA standard, R-7065. With that being said, TFTestkits is going to hold off on selling the R-7065 as it also yields closer to 40 ppm using our TF-100 view tube.
 
OTPirate said:
As we all know, the CYA test is a subjective test as everyone has a different "opinion" as to when the black dot disappears. Personally, to me, the 9193 and 9197 view tube seem to yield closer to 40 ppm and the K-2006 comparator seems to yield closer to 50 ppm using the CYA standard, R-7065. With that being said, TFTestkits is going to hold off on selling the R-7065 as it also yields closer to 40 ppm using our TF-100 view tube.
Click to expand...

I think all of us wish there was a better way. The CYA has a notable impact on the TFP way yet so many of us and even experienced TFPers appear to have difficulty.

Just this last weekend, my CYA dropped 20 ppm compared to the last time even while attempting to keep all variables the same. I effectively just through it out as a testing inconsistency and will try again this weekend. I tried to use the standard solution to help but it just added more confusion... :(
 
While knowing the CYA level is critical to TFPC pool management for setting FC level the accuracy of the CYA number is not so important, +/- 10 ppm, etc. It just doesn't make that big of a difference to the FC level in the pool. Generally, each increase of 10ppm CYA calls for 1 ppm increase in FC. So, if in doubt keep your FC 1 or 2 ppm higher and you will be well covered on the margin of error. And as we know it is safe to swim with FC up to shock level for your CYA.

CYA 40 min 3 target 5 shock 16
CYA 50 min 4 target 6 shock 20

If you aren't sure if CYA is 40 or 50 then keep FC above 4 instead of above 3 and/or target 6 or 7 instead of 5 or 6 and the margin of error is covered.
 
pooldv said:
While knowing the CYA level is critical to TFPC pool management for setting FC level the accuracy of the CYA number is not so important, +/- 10 ppm, etc. It just doesn't make that big of a difference to the FC level in the pool. Generally, each increase of 10ppm CYA calls for 1 ppm increase in FC. So, if in doubt keep your FC 1 or 2 ppm higher and you will be well covered on the margin of error. And as we know it is safe to swim with FC up to shock level for your CYA.

CYA 40 min 3 target 5 shock 16
CYA 50 min 4 target 6 shock 20

If you aren't sure if CYA is 40 or 50 then keep FC above 4 instead of above 3 and/or target 6 or 7 instead of 5 or 6 and the margin of error is covered.
Click to expand...

This is what I am doing and that is fine but I have tons of reading now, maybe more interest in this than some and dozens of tests under my belt. Still a newbie compared to many, but not for the new reader of TFP needing to get a kit, test and then start a SLAM.

For example, if they are off by 10-20ppm, and then add a +/- 10, the impact could be notable. In the charts, it does not say, if you are not sure on your CYA, keep your FC higher. I have figured that out but that is after a few months of consistent effort and reading and "getting it" in regard to the relationship of CYA to FC, daily FC loss, target and minimum.

I have concluded now what most of you probably have already concluded, we just have to do the best we can with what we have and allow experience in testing and managing our own pools to teach us.
 
Just this last weekend, my CYA dropped 20 ppm compared to the last time even while attempting to keep all variables the same.
Click to expand...
If your variables were consistent, then your CYA dropped 20 ppm.

So, since that really makes no sense, it is pretty safe to assume some variables changed.
 
OTPirate said:
As we all know, the CYA test is a subjective test as everyone has a different "opinion" as to when the black dot disappears. Personally, to me, the 9193 and 9197 view tube seem to yield closer to 40 ppm and the K-2006 comparator seems to yield closer to 50 ppm using the CYA standard, R-7065. With that being said, TFTestkits is going to hold off on selling the R-7065 as it also yields closer to 40 ppm using our TF-100 view tube.
Click to expand...

So are the 9193, 9197, and TF view tubes wrong or is the R-7065 solution not 50 ppm?
 
mgmoore7 said:
This is what I am doing and that is fine but I have tons of reading now, maybe more interest in this than some and dozens of tests under my belt. Still a newbie compared to many, but not for the new reader of TFP needing to get a kit, test and then start a SLAM.

For example, if they are off by 10-20ppm, and then add a +/- 10, the impact could be notable. In the charts, it does not say, if you are not sure on your CYA, keep your FC higher. I have figured that out but that is after a few months of consistent effort and reading and "getting it" in regard to the relationship of CYA to FC, daily FC loss, target and minimum.

I have concluded now what most of you probably have already concluded, we just have to do the best we can with what we have and allow experience in testing and managing our own pools to teach us.
Click to expand...

What we always say is to round up your CYA to the next 10. Your CYA test will always be better than the pool store, more consistent and more accurate. We have seen pool store test results of the same water vary by 50, 100 and more. And test strips? Might as well dip a finger in the pool and take a guess.

Each pool does have its own variables, climate, sun, shade, pets, birds, wild animals, number of swimmers, with or without lotion, perfume, hair products, chemistry of fill water. It is important to learn and understand your own pool and it's variables. That is why nearly everything has a recommended range and not just a number.

In all cases TFPC is always better than being pool stored. :)
 

Enjoying this content?

Support TFP with a donation.

Give Support
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread Status
Hello , This thread has been inactive for over 60 days. New postings here are unlikely to be seen or responded to by other members. For better visibility, consider Starting A New Thread.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply