As you know Gazza that's not literally my point, though this particular cap is onesize just in case!
Chi
orp & contributing factors
Moderators: B.Scott, vippymini, Gazza, Manky Sanke
hi i am just out the door again ( nights)
i see your point
its like again adding PP to a pond once the organic load is gone and there is nothing left to be oxized the PP will remain active till its half life is finished that could be half hour active or hours and hours which is why i use redox for my PP treatments i can see whats going on over four hours
i once kept a pond purple for three days and had to reverse it with sodium thiosuphate to bring it back down and the pond started off dirty< no fish present of course> othere wise the pp would have gone on working on them
also somebody said their RO water was producing a PH of 5-6 ( me thinks) that should be pH 7 unless there is a lot of CO2 in solution in the water Since RO membranes will reject dissolved ions but not reject dissolved gases
i see your point
just where would these free electrons be coming from? and if that were the case and they was absorbed bu the acceptor then the orginal donor would retain the electronsif we introduce a stream of "free electrons" that are captured by the recipient compound, what happens to the donor electrons from the anion?
its like again adding PP to a pond once the organic load is gone and there is nothing left to be oxized the PP will remain active till its half life is finished that could be half hour active or hours and hours which is why i use redox for my PP treatments i can see whats going on over four hours
i once kept a pond purple for three days and had to reverse it with sodium thiosuphate to bring it back down and the pond started off dirty< no fish present of course> othere wise the pp would have gone on working on them
also somebody said their RO water was producing a PH of 5-6 ( me thinks) that should be pH 7 unless there is a lot of CO2 in solution in the water Since RO membranes will reject dissolved ions but not reject dissolved gases
OK Duncan, catch you on the flip.
I really have never considered the low PH of the product water, other than as stated, a bonus!
Just checked and confirmed, reads 6.0 and if I agitate a little it will drop to 5.8 then steady back at 5.9. All readings were taken after temp compensation had settled, and checked with both online probe/meter and dip meter, both Hanna and both calibrated, to perfection!
Same result if I take sample from storage tank, which is 125 gallons, this has been stood for several hours at this time.
Gazza, have you checked yours? This would establish if the peculiar 3 x RO membranes in series had anything to do with it. Or could it be the exceptionally high quality final carbon block filter cartridge supplied by RO man?
If not then I shall look for clues as to why, so any suggestions from readers might save me thinking time.
Note: any suggestions involving a requirement for vaseline will be ignored!
Chi
I really have never considered the low PH of the product water, other than as stated, a bonus!
Just checked and confirmed, reads 6.0 and if I agitate a little it will drop to 5.8 then steady back at 5.9. All readings were taken after temp compensation had settled, and checked with both online probe/meter and dip meter, both Hanna and both calibrated, to perfection!
Same result if I take sample from storage tank, which is 125 gallons, this has been stood for several hours at this time.
Gazza, have you checked yours? This would establish if the peculiar 3 x RO membranes in series had anything to do with it. Or could it be the exceptionally high quality final carbon block filter cartridge supplied by RO man?
If not then I shall look for clues as to why, so any suggestions from readers might save me thinking time.
Note: any suggestions involving a requirement for vaseline will be ignored!
Chi
-
Fish4Friends
- Sandbar shark
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 10:38 pm
- Location: Leeds
- Contact:
Hi Duncan
Just a quick reply to say again, without a reference the "free electrons" again did not fall within a framework, and whilst I can see your reference to a repeated PP treatment this is pond wide effect, I am actually referring to the tiny volume surrounding a probe or electrodes on test meters, the free electrons are the current within the reference voltage applied through the water body to obtain the results for that particular meter (again very abbreviated) I have made a start on this subject that I hope makes sense for everyone so rather than divert I will continue there!
Just a quick reply to say again, without a reference the "free electrons" again did not fall within a framework, and whilst I can see your reference to a repeated PP treatment this is pond wide effect, I am actually referring to the tiny volume surrounding a probe or electrodes on test meters, the free electrons are the current within the reference voltage applied through the water body to obtain the results for that particular meter (again very abbreviated) I have made a start on this subject that I hope makes sense for everyone so rather than divert I will continue there!
Ok Gazza, have you checked the ORP / Redox of your RO water yet?
John, whilst there is certainly an alignment between RO usage, ORP / REDOX and PH, there are variables which can sway things sideways.
In the summer I had an ORP / REDOX of 340 to 350, with a PH of 6.8 to 7.0, TDS 150, GH 4 to 5 and KH 2 to 3, this at a temp of 24c.
I now have ORP / REDOX 360 to 370, PH 7.3, TDS 110, GH 4, KH 2 and temp 17c. Theoretically the ORP / REDOX should have risen due to the lower temp and reduced feeding, all other factors being constant. This effect should also have been increased by the reduction in TDS, (mainly the removal of calcium) so we can see why the ORP rose from 345 avg to 365 avg.
But as TDS was also reduced why did the PH rise? Remember feeding was reduced 50% also during this period, reducing the effects this can have on PH.
There are so many variables it's difficult to isolate factors which can be used as constants, which makes simple maths pretty useless!
Chi
John, whilst there is certainly an alignment between RO usage, ORP / REDOX and PH, there are variables which can sway things sideways.
In the summer I had an ORP / REDOX of 340 to 350, with a PH of 6.8 to 7.0, TDS 150, GH 4 to 5 and KH 2 to 3, this at a temp of 24c.
I now have ORP / REDOX 360 to 370, PH 7.3, TDS 110, GH 4, KH 2 and temp 17c. Theoretically the ORP / REDOX should have risen due to the lower temp and reduced feeding, all other factors being constant. This effect should also have been increased by the reduction in TDS, (mainly the removal of calcium) so we can see why the ORP rose from 345 avg to 365 avg.
But as TDS was also reduced why did the PH rise? Remember feeding was reduced 50% also during this period, reducing the effects this can have on PH.
There are so many variables it's difficult to isolate factors which can be used as constants, which makes simple maths pretty useless!
Chi
Feeling really rough but you deserve an answer Chi.
I think we all know how your pond is kept so we don’t have to go into any detail.
Your summer readings are showing how hard your filter is working by producing 8 to 11 ppm co2 (so much for gassing off)
The co2 brings your ph down combined with your low kh will give a fernominal orp reading, which it does but you haven’t taken into account the reducing affect of all the food going in. ( the reducers will out way the oxidizers any day of the week )
The winter reading gives you 3ppm of co2 which accounts for the ph rise
You still have a very low ph & kh combined with a decent reading of co2 less food going in = less reducers which gives you the higher orp reading.
I didn’t want to include the reducers because I though this was the most easy to understand out of it all. I know you certainly understand it chi.
John
I think we all know how your pond is kept so we don’t have to go into any detail.
Your summer readings are showing how hard your filter is working by producing 8 to 11 ppm co2 (so much for gassing off)
The co2 brings your ph down combined with your low kh will give a fernominal orp reading, which it does but you haven’t taken into account the reducing affect of all the food going in. ( the reducers will out way the oxidizers any day of the week )
The winter reading gives you 3ppm of co2 which accounts for the ph rise
You still have a very low ph & kh combined with a decent reading of co2 less food going in = less reducers which gives you the higher orp reading.
I didn’t want to include the reducers because I though this was the most easy to understand out of it all. I know you certainly understand it chi.
John
Ah ha, so there is life on Mars!
I suspected your understanding was a little above basic John, the point highlighted is not as obvious as you make it appear. Especially as I confess to not presenting the readings in the simplest manner! I have just added another media bay to the mix, so we'll see how that affects things this summer.
I am delighted that keepers are taking ORP / REDOX seriously, at last. It's a fine tool and I've no doubt that if Graham and others with the time and knowldege to share can persevere it's usage will grow.
I tend to use it more to test for improvements, I try variations on everything and watch the ORP / REDOX meter, it will tell me in short shrift if the idea is good or bad. As a reference tool it's the ultimate for the purpose, it has provided me with a shortcut to results which nothing else can do so well.
As to the original point, I am now considering changing food during the winter to see how far that effects the scenario. Ultimately I can simply reduce the amount of none RO water added or increase RO product input, but i'd like to see how other options can effect the situation.
Thanks for the input
Chi
I suspected your understanding was a little above basic John, the point highlighted is not as obvious as you make it appear. Especially as I confess to not presenting the readings in the simplest manner! I have just added another media bay to the mix, so we'll see how that affects things this summer.
I am delighted that keepers are taking ORP / REDOX seriously, at last. It's a fine tool and I've no doubt that if Graham and others with the time and knowldege to share can persevere it's usage will grow.
I tend to use it more to test for improvements, I try variations on everything and watch the ORP / REDOX meter, it will tell me in short shrift if the idea is good or bad. As a reference tool it's the ultimate for the purpose, it has provided me with a shortcut to results which nothing else can do so well.
As to the original point, I am now considering changing food during the winter to see how far that effects the scenario. Ultimately I can simply reduce the amount of none RO water added or increase RO product input, but i'd like to see how other options can effect the situation.
Thanks for the input
Chi
Duncan, in an earlier post on this thread you made the following comment:
"ok you cannot achieve high values whats going on?
nothing you are simply normal like the rest of us your fish wont die any faster than normal its mearly showing you that your water has a certain level of pollution by virtue of the fact you cannot get to Nirvana
its showing you that you may be over stocked, you maybe dont have enough O2 going in or it cannot achieve saturation, you may have very high TDS readings, you may just simply be over feeding as chi points out"
Whilst I concur the statement is generally accurate, I do have a concern that any novices reading it might become a little complacent because of it. Primarily because it does not identify a level at which you think good keeping and koi health can be achieved. In my experiences I have yet to see a pond below 270 ish without either ulcers or bacterial outbreaks generally, fungus or parasite problems, or at best a lot of work to keep such at bay. I have seen this cycle of heartache broken several times simply by raising ORP / REDOX over the 320 mark in a pond, of course this is more reliably achieved and maintained over 350.
I raise the issue simply because I recognise that comments can be taken out of context by the innocent. It would not be good for anyone if some such innocent were to propagate the idea that ORP / REDOX doesn't matter, Duncan said so!
Chi
"ok you cannot achieve high values whats going on?
nothing you are simply normal like the rest of us your fish wont die any faster than normal its mearly showing you that your water has a certain level of pollution by virtue of the fact you cannot get to Nirvana
its showing you that you may be over stocked, you maybe dont have enough O2 going in or it cannot achieve saturation, you may have very high TDS readings, you may just simply be over feeding as chi points out"
Whilst I concur the statement is generally accurate, I do have a concern that any novices reading it might become a little complacent because of it. Primarily because it does not identify a level at which you think good keeping and koi health can be achieved. In my experiences I have yet to see a pond below 270 ish without either ulcers or bacterial outbreaks generally, fungus or parasite problems, or at best a lot of work to keep such at bay. I have seen this cycle of heartache broken several times simply by raising ORP / REDOX over the 320 mark in a pond, of course this is more reliably achieved and maintained over 350.
I raise the issue simply because I recognise that comments can be taken out of context by the innocent. It would not be good for anyone if some such innocent were to propagate the idea that ORP / REDOX doesn't matter, Duncan said so!
Chi
-
Gazza
- architeuthis moderator
- Posts: 5306
- Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 7:24 pm
- Location: Essex,UK
- Contact:
Ho could they all come out at a PH 7 if we have differing RO units and water????
This is mine as done today with two types of calibrated meters:
[img]http://www.koipix.com/gallery/albums/userpi ... G_2465.JPG[/img]
[img]http://www.koipix.com/gallery/albums/userpi ... G_2466.JPG[/img]
[img]http://www.koipix.com/gallery/albums/userpi ... G_2467.JPG[/img]
This is mine as done today with two types of calibrated meters:
[img]http://www.koipix.com/gallery/albums/userpi ... G_2465.JPG[/img]
[img]http://www.koipix.com/gallery/albums/userpi ... G_2466.JPG[/img]
[img]http://www.koipix.com/gallery/albums/userpi ... G_2467.JPG[/img]
