Disappointed in TF100 test kit

[gkoulomz]

It does. Sounds like some confusion here.

Technically, yes. But it's sort of useless. Scale goes 6.8, 72, 7.5, 7.8, 8.2. While it is labeled "8.2", resolution is very poor as many TFP users will attest. Increment in the upper end is 0.4, (i.e. +- 0.2), but the colors are all already very hard to distinguish. Do I add 1,2, or 3 liters of Muriatic if I am somewhere in the 7.8-8.2 range? Yes, you say, add some, wait, re-test, and adjust accordingly. Its a pain. Maybe what I'm really saying is that comparators are not accurate,

 

[Bperry]

Maybe what I'm really saying is that comparators are not accurate,

thats true, though thats the best there is at the monent. All the electronic meters have an even more of a painful calibration and storage process to stay accurate.

If you follow the TFP guidance that any pH below 8.2 and above 7.0 is ok, than its easy to add a little acid if it over 8.2 without measuring an exact amount and then test again in a few days since youre testing chlorine anyway. I wouldnt ever bother trying to accurately calculate acid additions anyway.

 

[Donldson]

You are confusing accuracy and precision.

 

[bobloblaw42]

I find the color block for the Taylor 9781 to be superior to the TF block. This block is available alone at the link below or as part of a Taylor K-1000 test kit.

I still only use 4 drops of R0014 with the Taylor block.

Taylor 9781 Comparator Block

tftestkits.net

 

[cwswifty]

Technically, yes. But it's sort of useless. Scale goes 6.8, 72, 7.5, 7.8, 8.2. While it is labeled "8.2", resolution is very poor as many TFP users will attest. Increment in the upper end is 0.4, (i.e. +- 0.2), but the colors are all already very hard to distinguish. Do I add 1,2, or 3 liters of Muriatic if I am somewhere in the 7.8-8.2 range? Yes, you say, add some, wait, re-test, and adjust accordingly. Its a pain. Maybe what I'm really saying is that comparators are not accurate,

I much prefer the Taylor Comparator model # 9056 to the comparator that comes with the TF Test Kits (model 9781). You'll need to use R-0004 instead of the R-0014 reagent.

Also, I purchased an Apera pH 60 back on May 8th, 2024. It has proven to be remarkably accurate (within 0.01) and has not needed to be re-calibrated since I've owned it. I also purchased some 8.2 pH buffer solution so I can spot check it close to the range that I need it.

 

[dndrich]

I think the TF 100 is a fantastic kit. It has allowed me to maintain a wonderful pool for so many years now using the TFP method. My pool is 17 years old and is just perfect. The most important parts for me are getting the salt right at the beginning of the season, which is a no brainer with the salt kit and obvious endpoint with the reagents. Then, CYA is easy to deal with using pool math and the CYA test. Free chlorine is so well done with a great endpoint using the powder and reagent. I mean, it goes from pink to clear. Obvious endpoint. PH is in many ways so irrelevant. Yeah, the test block is not very precise, but as long as pH is above 7 or below 8.2, who cares? Most pools, especially salt pools, head for basic towards the 8 end of the scale. It does nothing to the equipment or anything else. About the only thing it does is precipitate calcium, which can make your tile scale. I had mine cleaned professionally last year after 16 years of ownership. Looks brand new. If I test the pH, which I almost never do, it is usually a bit high. I just dump like half a bottle of muriatic acid in there and call it a day. Let’s not overthink this. The key is the free chlorine level. That will keep your pool pristine. So good.

 

[Flying Tivo]

But it's sort of useless. Scale goes 6.8, 72, 7.5, 7.8, 8.2. While it is labeled "8.2", resolution is very poor as many TFP users will attest. Increment in the upper end is 0.4, (i.e. +- 0.2), but the colors are all already very hard to distinguish.

You remind me of myself when i joined TFP. OCD will subside with time and 7.2 and 7.8 will end in the same result which is to do nothing. Try to use 8 as an acid addition required result. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[jtpipkin]

someone correct me if this doesn't actually work, but if my PH gets high and I can no longer distinguish 8 or above, I add a drop of the acid demand reagent. If it comes down to 7.8, I know it was 8, if it takes 2 drops, I assume 8.2. Again, this may be bad advice and others can correct me if it's wrong, but it's worked for me for years. As long as my test results in 'less than' coloring, I'm good.

 

[Bperry]

someone correct me if this doesn't actually work, but if my PH gets high and I can no longer distinguish 8 or above, I add a drop of the acid demand reagent. If it comes down to 7.8, I know it was 8, if it takes 2 drops, I assume 8.2. Again, this may be bad advice and others can correct me if it's wrong, but it's worked for me for years. As long as my test results in 'less than' coloring, I'm good.

You can do that if you want, or just let pool math tell you how much to add to drop it from 8.2 to 7.8 and add what it says. Then do it again next week if it needs it.

 

[jtpipkin]

You can do that if you want, or just let pool math tell you how much to add to drop it from 8.2 to 7.8 and add what it says. Then do it again next week if it needs it.

point is differentiating between 8 and anything upwards. The TFP system, in my opinion, is set up to allow users to 'kind of know what their pool needs, when it needs it' and doesn't really require 100% accuracy once it's established. OP was complaining about the test not being precise - was just trying to get them to understand how to dial it in easier.

 

[gkoulomz]

You remind me of myself when i joined TFP. OCD will subside with time and 7.2 and 7.8 will end in the same result which is to do nothing. Try to use 8 as an acid addition required result. Nothing more, nothing less.

Ha!!!
BTW, how long do I need to wait for the OCD to subside? We've determined that the best OCD meter is the TF100 Comparator; but we have no heuristic for how long the reaction takes....

 

[gkoulomz]

You are confusing accuracy and precision.

Accuracy is always best; precision (what I would call repeatability) is a close second; the worst is displaying digits which are meaningless. I get that. But as Flying Tivo said, OCD has not subsided enough yet....

 

[phonedave]

Thanks for everyone's comments!
My critique of the CYA test was incorrect, and I withdraw it!
I stand by my critique of the comparator tests, esp. pH. I am thinking I will either use my ColorQ for those, or get a pH meter.
Nate at TFTests says the kits were designed before SWG became a common thing. I suggest he should tailor the "salt" version to be more useful to SWG users.

I have had pH meters. My advice: Get a lot of calibration solution, because the ones I have had drift all over the place.

 

[phonedave]

The chlorine side of the compararor block is good to see if there is chlorine in the pool water and as a check against the FAS-DPD test at super high (above SLAM level) FC. Still, it's just a is there chlorine or not test. Some of us, once ywe get really comfortable with testing and knowing our pool's needs, can use the chlorine side of the comparator block as a close estimate of our chlorine level - but FAS-DPD tests for FC are still more accurate.

For normal levels of chlorine, I can usually get within +/- 0.5 ppm by looking at the color of the sample after I add the powder, before I start the drop test.

 

[phonedave]

Perhaps a Borates test as well, as TFP tends to recommend Borax, and my understanding is that Borates also can act as a buffer and resist pH change.

Borates is an add on test. People use or don't use borates regardless of if they use liquid chlorine or a SWCG.

If you put your borate concentration in Pool Math it will adjust the calculations accordingly.