CH of 525

jagger2005

LifeTime Supporter
Oct 5, 2014
450
San Antonio, TX
#1
I received new test reagents recently and my tests with new CH reagents gets 525 and my old reagents was 250. I simply moved on, but after reading another thread about high TA, I think I might test my tap water. I tested tap at pool startup 2 years ago and CH was 225. Last year when I was getting quotes for a home water softener, the tap was also CH = 225.

My old reagents were 2 years old. 2 summers ago I was at 425 and last summer at 325 and now 250. The numbers seemed to have dropped relative to my loss in CYA and salt. Added 5lbs of stabilizer and 120 lbs of salt last year. 3lbs of stabilizer and 80 salt so far this year. We have had so much rain since 2 summers ago, I have added very little tap water t the pool.

Reagents are stored in kitchen cupboard and never go outside.

So other than testing the tap water with both sets of reagents, is there anything else I can do to make sure I do not have an issue with any of the 3 new reagents? I can manage my CSI with CH= 525 no problem, but if it is closer to 250, I need to manage it a little different. I got identical results for TA, CYA, and FC tests, so I have already discarded the old reagents. Here are my lasted results
FC 5.5
CC 0
PH 7.8
TA 80
CYA 60
CH 525
Salt 3200

Thanks in advance for any advice
 

duraleigh

Admin
Mod Squad
TFP Expert
Platinum Supporter
LifeTime Supporter
In The Industry
Apr 1, 2007
31,321
Sebring, Florida
#2
I would disregard your old tests. So then, if you just pay attention to the new results, do you have any reason to believe your testing is bad? What is the CH of your pool refill water?
 

jagger2005

LifeTime Supporter
Oct 5, 2014
450
San Antonio, TX
#3
I plan on checking the CH in the tap water tonight. I received the new reagents about a month ago and had essentially moved on - kept the old reagents just in case I discussed on the forum. My testing has been very consistent the last 2 years - with the SpeedStir.
 

Texas Splash

Mod Squad
TFP Expert
LifeTime Supporter
#5
Me personally, I can be a pack-rat when it comes to pool supplies. I hate to waste money or throw things out. But when it comes to reagents, and the consequences they have on adjusting chemicals based off of old products test results, I'm compelled to toss the old stuff whenever I'm in doubt. You know the new stuff is good so I'd rely on that as well. I will also confirm ...... I've had to watch my CYA and CH much more the past season or two from all the rain. Keeps us on our toes.

I also am thankful for my speedstir. :stirpot:
 

jagger2005

LifeTime Supporter
Oct 5, 2014
450
San Antonio, TX
#6
Ok. Old reagents on the tap water
CH 175
New reagents
CH 325
I swear the drops on the new R0012 look noticeably smaller. Should I try switching the tip on the old R0012 to the new bottle?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

OTPirate

Admin
In The Industry
Oct 2, 2013
1,330
Creedmoor, NC
#7
Jagger, we haven't changed tip manufacturer of the TF-100 reagents, so the size should be the same. You can easily pop off the tip and switch it (make sure you rinse the tip with distilled water if you do so), but I don't think it will make a difference. One thing I started doing that really has helped me check my reagents and my testing method was using CH Standard. It is basically "pool water" developed with a set CH ppm. So, it is like having the answers to the test. I found out I had some ineffective R-0012 not long ago. Contact me at tftestkits@gmail.com if I can help in any way.
 

jagger2005

LifeTime Supporter
Oct 5, 2014
450
San Antonio, TX
#8
Rebecca, thanks for reaching out. I switched the tips and here are the various results on my fill water:
old R-0012, old tip, and old reagents 10 and 11 - CH = 175
new R-0012, new tip, and new reagents 10 and 11 - CH = 325

I then switch the tip on the old R-0012 to the new R-0012
new R-0012, old tip, and new reagents 10 and 11 - CH = 200

For the testing on the fill water, I paid close attention to each drop from all 3 reagents and new R-0012, new tip did have smaller drops - I am blind and noticed a difference. I examined the tips and my first instinct was the new tip looks thinner than the old tip. However, when I had both off and started examining both closely, they looked very similar. So I asked my wife (who had zero clue on what I was doing), "do you see a difference in these tips?" And she immediately thought the new tip looked thinner.

So the new results (using old R-0012 tip) of 200 is almost identical to what I tested last year and the year before (225). I guess what I do not know is what tip is actually accurate.

What if I brought another tip into play? Does another one of the reagents have the same tip size?

I know it is probably a little over the top, but out of habit, I do an old v. new check with everything - salt test strips, reagents, beer, margaritas, etc. The FC, TA, pH, and CYA were identical. New beer a little colder and new margarita a little saltier.
 

DanL

Active member
Nov 23, 2016
35
Las Vegas NV
#9
.....What if I brought another tip into play? Does another one of the reagents have the same tip size?

I know it is probably a little over the top, but out of habit, I do an old v. new check with everything - salt test strips, reagents, beer, margaritas, etc. The FC, TA, pH, and CYA were identical. New beer a little colder and new margarita a little saltier.
Maybe try this....approximately, 20 drops is equal to 1cc. So maybe use the graduated cylinder and drop in 100 drops of the reagent. That should be 5cc. Do it with each tip to see if there is a difference. If everything kept clean, the reagent should be able to be added back to its bottle.
 

panamax53

Gold Supporter
LifeTime Supporter
Dec 10, 2015
57
Doral, FL
#10
I just got a set of CH test bottles from TFPTestKits. I noticed the same thing you did about the drops on the R-0012. It seemed as though the new tip drops seemed smaller and at first fell out of the bottle with less squeezing.!! I tested several times untill I got some consistency.
Despite that, I did get a valid test using the Calcium Hardness Standard (200ppm). Maybe a little less volume helped drop size?

I just cant believe how high my Calcium became by just adding water.
Still cant figure how my salt climbed 1000 ppm. Could that have been baking soda or stabilizer additons? I'll post new question.
 

jagger2005

LifeTime Supporter
Oct 5, 2014
450
San Antonio, TX
#12
I just got a set of CH test bottles from TFPTestKits. I noticed the same thing you did about the drops on the R-0012. It seemed as though the new tip drops seemed smaller and at first fell out of the bottle with less squeezing.!! I tested several times untill I got some consistency.
Despite that, I did get a valid test using the Calcium Hardness Standard (200ppm). Maybe a little less volume helped drop size.
Panama, I think you solved the problem. I tried DanL suggestion to measure out 100 drops using old and new tip on the old R-0012 reagent - bottle is about 1/4 full. Both measured just shy of 5 ml - identical. So I poured out just a tad of my new reagent and measured pool water. Got CH = 300 using new tip.

Thanks for all the help, everyone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

duraleigh

Admin
Mod Squad
TFP Expert
Platinum Supporter
LifeTime Supporter
In The Industry
Apr 1, 2007
31,321
Sebring, Florida
#20
What if I brought another tip into play? Does another one of the reagents have the same tip size?
All tips in the TF-100 (R-0007,8,9,12) are identical.

Off the subject a little, but informative, the drop size is NOT determined by the hole size. Held up side down, the drop is formed on the tip and the falls by gravity when the drop weighs too much for the "surface tension" to hold the drop any longer.

If you hold the bottle sideways, you will not get the drop to form as symmetrical as it should and you will most likely negate the test.