orp & contributing factors

Moderators: B.Scott, vippymini, Gazza, Manky Sanke

Fish4Friends
Sandbar shark
Sandbar shark
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 10:38 pm
Location: Leeds
Contact:

Post by Fish4Friends »

Hi Duncan

I do not really want to abbreviate as we have already met this problem before! However if we take a basic part of any measurement by "electronic meter" there must be an electron flow! Without this there can be no measurement!

Now irrespective of whether you have a 100gal 10,000gal 100,000gal pond the only component that maters to an electronic measurement is the few ml around the probe/sensor/electrodes, I asked this a while ago, if you have "free electrons" being supplied from the meter as the measuring current, being accepted by positive ions in a stationary sample they will soon become neutral! However if the sample is constantly changing through current (water) flow (for instance within the filter system) then you have a constant depletion of electrons purely from the water movement! I ask then how accurate can your measurements be?

Please believe me when I say that a) you are correct in that the top end meters do make a compensation b) you are incorrect in assuming that the builders of these meters can compensate for all the eventualities (not even on the top end models) but what manufacturer will state that there meter is inaccurate under "these" conditions

However if you read through the usage instructions I believe you will find a "static" water sample is specified!

How do I know, I helped design some of the early sensors in the late 70's early 80's and still program a few EEPROM for this type of study for academic units around Leeds

I will add this! There can be no direct comparison between Hi-end units costing £k to the DIY unit pond keepers buy! This is the same comparison to my Fluke multimeter that cost £300+ and a digital meter from Argus costing £8, Serviced 1 a year (£25) I get a certified accuracy certificate to enable legal entries for test certificates!

I hope this helps!
User avatar
chita
Hammer Head shark
Hammer Head shark
Posts: 268
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 10:45 pm
Location: UK

Post by chita »

I must have failed to provide sufficient clarification, or I misread your response John, so ill try again, others may benefit also. My offering assumes the application of common sense, we must understand at the onset that you can't join this ride halfway through. It's a ride from A to Z that has a start and an end point, but it isn't rocket science so I wish folk would stop waving formulae around. And incidentally, UK water has no need for any clay whatsoever, I wish folk would start reading books published in this century. The Japanese may need clays because their water is technically dead on arrival, we don't, unless of course as some do, produce virtually virgin water and then put nutrients in. Even the softest and most mineral deficient water in the UK has many times more nutrients than Japanese water.


Step 1.

We must first remove deposits of any sort from filters and pond, then take action to prevent the re formulation of such deposits ongoing. This includes any settlement within the pond, ALL settlement must be defeated to get the higher ORP / REDOX benefits.

If anyone requires one to one advice about how this can readily be achieved on a reasonable budget just ask.


Step 2.

At this point we can start to implement those things which maintain the status quo ongoing, generously rated filtration, preferably with varied media, high flowrates and excellent in pond current flows. (good isn't good enough)

If anyone requires one to one advice about how this can readily be achieved on a reasonable budget just ask.


Step 3.

Better water management technique's, it can't be difficult, I've achieved it, and without any ion calculations whatsoever, I keep telling you, it isn't complex science that's required here, simple domestic science will do. For example, anyone who has mulm etc which can be disturbed as you put it should be keeping flounders or mussels not koi, and spending money on an ORP / REDOX meter would be a waste.

Step 3 can be harder to achieve than some may think, as the water you are dealt from the tap is very significant. Many will need at least a water treatment unit and some will also require RO equipment. At the end of the day the more you reduce the TDS and associated dissolved components the better the koi health will be. They will digest their food better, which in turn will contribute to lower waste which will promote the higher ORP / REDOX levels etc etc etc. Of course whilst one can achieve an almost self cleaning system management skills must be improved to keep things on course, as we are working with finer tolerances at this point. I think you can see where I'm going here, I'd need to right a book to cover all the relevent facts. Most of the rest is common sense, no science degrees needed, just the ability to absorb and follow simple information like this.

If anyone requires one to one advice about how this can readily be achieved on a reasonable budget just ask.

John, can I ask what your ORP / REDOX readings are, assuming you have a meter of course?

Can I also ask when you last had to treat a koi in your pond and what for?

Indeed it migt be interesting to see all of your parameters at this stage, as we may need to make comparisons in order to reach conclusions.

Duncan, not sure where your last post was aimed so cannot respond.

Chi
co2
Nurse Shark
Nurse Shark
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 6:37 pm

Post by co2 »

First thing first Chi.
I would like to apologies to all for my last post, it seems I was on an ego trip and one too many cans. :oops: :oops: :oops:
I would consider it a personal favor if some kind person would delete it.
Many thanks
John
poey
Lemon Shark
Lemon Shark
Posts: 26
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 9:49 am
Location: mansfield,notts

Post by poey »

????????????
B.Scott
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1012
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 9:26 pm
Location: Holland
Contact:

Post by B.Scott »

John there is a little button on the upper right of your post if I'm not mistaken, should you ever wish to delete your own post?
(hard to be sure, my screen is for mods and a bit different.) :?

B.Scott
User avatar
Duncan
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 2883
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 5:40 pm
Location: west Midlands UK
Contact:

Post by Duncan »

Graham

I am bowing out of this thread I see it going nowhere fast, its very interesting but alas nowhere, unless at the end of it you can offer a tangible piece of advice or a formula we can apply to the errors in the readings we are getting (and yet again I don’t doubt you are right ) that will gives something meaningful so if our readings are out what can we apply something to correct it? Somehow I don’t think this is going to be the case, but I reserve the right to be wrong again!


Ok just to right a wrong, just for CO2 then i am truly as my post suggests taking some time off

Q Where does orp come from?
How do we achieve this?

A. This has been explained in all the missals in this thread

Q Duncan it seems a long with the rest of us you have a high regard for orp but are not too keen on the meters idiosyncrasies in picking up every thing.

A. Correct its not high on my list of priorities

Q. If I ask enough questions does this mean I will be able to print your book of for free lol.
A. No you will have to buy it like the rest<GRIN>

Q. Duncan, gazza and chi have all stated that lowering the hardness of the water has raised the orp reading

A. sorry was that a question or a statement? Chi and gazza may have said that I have no views on this one way or the other

Q. ( I think) a. A high orp is a measurement of how clean the water is.
b. A high orp is the waters ability to keep itself clean.

A yes, on the nail

Q. Duncen you said that if water could be raised naturally to around 450mlv it could be used in nuking parasites and bacteria achieving the same as chemical orp.

A. yes! Without a doubt..

Q. Orp has a fixed relation ship with ph

A. Sorry again, was that a question or a statement?

Q. If you are prepared to go low enough you would achieve this.

A. if you went high enough with your ORP reading you would achieve more than the nuking of parasites and bacteria. Life as always is about balance

Q. What kills the filter in a ph crash the high ORP or the lack of carbonates?
A. no idea! it depends what kind of a crash your talking about 6 or 5 maybe? Or lower

As many tropical fish discus and some cichlids and angels ETC live in low Ph water I have to presume the bugs that process ammonia in there existence must be magic bugs as this is not the first time I have heard of filters not being able to perform when the pH drops below 7 true the bug will take time to adjust

Q. Pp and ozone are very powerful oxidizers which reflect in the orp reading.
A. yes

Q Hydrogen peroxide is also a very powerful oxidizes yet this drops the orp reading in the pond.
A yes and no, you are half right but yes it a powerful oxidizer

Heres a little chemistry 101 for ya, its not hard in fact its childs play go get a pint of water from the tap and let the ORP probe settle for a reading add a glug of H2O2 50 ml of (9or 6% should do it) and watch.. I promise it will start to rise in milli seconds as you would expect H2O2 break down in water to form H2O+O and adds oxygen to the water hence the rise in ORP

Now repeat the test with KMnO4 in the tap water record the redox reading then add the H2O2 you will see it drop as you would expect cuz its neutralizing the PP and spending itself

Q. O2 gets a lot of credit for raising ORP but I don’t believe it is because of its oxidizing capabilities.
A. do tell! See above answer

Q If b weed is photosynthesizing in daylight hours with o2 possibly past saturation point why does orp plummet.

A . you seem to have conveniently forgot plants use Oxygen and produce co2 at night when they cant photosynthesise so there is an O2 deficit when daylight comes

Q or S As yet I don’t think Dunken has answered one of my questions

A. I do apologies I thought I had ay least I thought I had given enough info you to muse on

lets take an earlier question you posed

Q. Duncen you said that if water could be raised naturally to around 450mlv it could be used in nuking parasites and bacteria achieving the same as chemical orp.

Don’t forget if you treat with a chemical and achieve 400-450 MV like it or not the bugs and critters are not the only thing your are nuking! At the same time you are having an adverse effect on things like filters and soft delicate tissue like gill filaments which are only one cell thick

And if you prolong this reading the worst its going to be

Lets put it another way an oxidant is indiscriminate it looks for something to oxidize its cares little if that’s a gill or a bug or a piece of pond scum, and will do both at the same time other wise instead of going for pp pink for 4 hours, why not go for 8 hours PP activity or even 12 hours?

Like I say chemotherapy like everything is about balance

Its seem to me you want the benefits of High ORP without any of the work involved

You mention the detritus built up in ponds not being effected by a high ORP. how could they? Do you know how anaerobic and aerobic bacteria function in harmony in say a bakki shower? if you do! this will answer your question why you cant have your cake and eat it, and its exactly why ORP or high ORP cannot penetrate deep detritus

The smart money keeps the detritus out of the pond in the first place ORP is great but its no substitute for keeping things clean and high ORP will never correct this predicament


Q. O2 is mentioned in being the main contributor in having a high orp
If this is the case why in winter an unheated pond does the orp reading not shoot through the roof. ? Combined with little organic loading. Should increase this still further.

A, says who?

My pond is heated all year round in the summer its kept at 22c in the winter 15 c and as I mentioned my ORP in the summer with my feeding regime and stocking levels is not more than 200-ish

For all the reasons you mention its winter the temp is 15c the feeding is cut i just checked my ORP with my meter and guess what its 365 Mv with my newly announced crappy Japanese matting and I have done nothing to encourage this at all, indeed I have been ill since xmas and my fish have been neglected

A question you may want to ask me

Q. Would you Duncan like a high ORP reading

A. yes would I like 450 Mv permanently? Not on your life 300-350 will do for me

I hope I got it all! if I missed something I apologise and you have my permission to put me against a wall and shoot me
User avatar
Gazza
architeuthis moderator
architeuthis moderator
Posts: 5306
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 7:24 pm
Location: Essex,UK
Contact:

Post by Gazza »

I think that about covers it :lol:

When i first got an ORP meter my pond was running at around 200-220 this has now increased as i have a better way of stopping the crap getting into the bio stages and also by doing regular maintenance and keeping the pond clean....i hope.As long as i can keep to about 300 i will be happy anything else is a bonus.

CO2 so come on what is what with your water which is something i have asked you before and your answer was very high i think :?: :?: :?:

As you will see you post has be deleted as you wished all i can ask for is please next time you've been on the beer just read and don't type as we don't want this BB going down the line of some of the others.

This is a great place to come and play and learn and thats exactly how we want it to stay so come on folks lets play nicely and all get along with helping each other and learning :D
Fish4Friends
Sandbar shark
Sandbar shark
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 10:38 pm
Location: Leeds
Contact:

Post by Fish4Friends »

Hi Duncan

I can appreciate your frustration on this subject! I like frank statements and it is a difficult subject area! You are correct I cannot offer some magic formula to ensure accuracy, however if it helps I can offer one piece of advice that will get the best out of any instrument a keeper has!

Find an area that has the absolute "Minimum" water movement, a good pond system will have no area that is static! But there are a few areas where water flow is low (the slower the better) then put your sensors here! (A corner of the pond is usually quit low flow)

99% of sensors I find within the filter system where water flow is at the maximum within the entire system (for convenience),

I believe if you try this then your readings will be stable and accurate (at least) to the ability of the instrument you are using!

Because of construction the least affected is the pH meter probe/sensor, but seriously water movement does affect the readings with all sensors/probes!

Hope this helps!
User avatar
Al
Nurse Shark
Nurse Shark
Posts: 123
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:41 am
Location: Preston, Lancs

Post by Al »

Hi all,

I have been watching this with interest, i bought myself an orp meter earier this year for one reason, if i need to use PP. I do have it in-line tho, just to see whats going on in the pond. Now, do i trust it, no not really. I calibrate to a high standard (thanks to Chi and Gazza) but i still dont believe an accurate result can be achieved, near enough, yes.

I suppose it all boils down to what you use the meter for, my in-line ph meter helps me a great deal as i have low kh and do not buffer, i can see if the ph starts to drop and up the flow of the tap water going in, i now have this down to a tee. Is the meter accurate, no, not according to a laboratory sample of my water, but i know how much its out so its not a problem.

Its the way you use em at the end of the day, i think Chi has said this before, once you know the idiosyncracies of the meters, your half way there....
Fish4Friends
Sandbar shark
Sandbar shark
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 10:38 pm
Location: Leeds
Contact:

Post by Fish4Friends »

Hi Al

The point you are introducing is called the "meter offset" which I have not reached within the other column but may well be introduced as an addition to my previous post for Duncan

It is not a magic formula to remove all error, However if you have the resources/desire to get the best results from a meter there is a way to get "maximum" resolution from any meter you have!

That is get your water readings to as near "ideal" as you can, then bearing the previous post on sensor position get the readings for all the parameters being electronically monitored, record them! Then get a water sample to send to a lab!

When sending specify that there are certain results needed TDS ORP pH etc as the first 2 may be split into individual components as lab analysis tends to reduce to component level

When the results return compare to the readings your instruments gave at that time! the difference is the "offset" and if applied in the future will give the most accurate information you will get from your meters!

I say try get the ideal conditions first as all meters have discrepancies through the scale and the closer your comparison is to "wanted" reading the closer accuracy will be!
User avatar
chita
Hammer Head shark
Hammer Head shark
Posts: 268
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 10:45 pm
Location: UK

Post by chita »

Graham, I think I have to point out for the benefit of all that you are new to the forum, which partially explains why you are introducing stuff today that we discussed in some detail months ago. You're a naughty, lazy boy, you didn't read every related post in the archives did you?!!

No really, I know it's difficult to enter a new forum, and reading every thread and post related to a subject you wish to raise is difficult in practice. However I find this one a little more frustrating than usual, as within the last week or so I personally reiterated the point re taking measurements in a static area of water, including a variety of methods by which this can simply be achieved. This is a matter I have also introduced on previous occasions, but I am want to repeat such items from time to time lest they are missed by some members in a particular thread

At the moment I feel plagiarised, we are just going over and over stuff previously discussed in depth, no new knowledge is being introduced. Like Duncan my time is too valuable to myself and others to waste in this way, I'm not sorry if that is a little near the mark, as it's as nice as I can say it.

My only regret is that the thread has gone nowhere, I am left trying to understand why folks pop up, introduce a subject previously well covered, take it round in circles for a week to no avail, and finally the only answer to Duncan's key question on possible solutions to your theoretical problem is one literally extracted from a previous post of my own!

Enough, I shall not be revisiting this thread, you know from my email response to your own to me Graham that I suffer fools not gladly.

Chi
Fish4Friends
Sandbar shark
Sandbar shark
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 10:38 pm
Location: Leeds
Contact:

Post by Fish4Friends »

Hi Chita

It is satisfying that to know you consider me a fool, and that the material is reiterated rubbish! I will at least thank you for removing the need to type out long passages of text!

As for plagiarism this can only be applied if the person has read previous material then copied and not reached the same conclusion through independent research!

So conclusion! Not needed!

Good Bye! To all!
User avatar
chita
Hammer Head shark
Hammer Head shark
Posts: 268
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 10:45 pm
Location: UK

Post by chita »

Duncan is apparently taking a break, so I would not wish to be the cause of any ill feeling in his absence, I think therefore some clarification may be required from me.

Comments, observations and opinions expressed by myself are my own, not necessarily those of the board operators, it's agents or it's members, who I'm sure will post any contradictions should they see fit.

Chi
Post Reply