Normandy Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 Currently my Alk is sitting around 6-7 based on my API test kit. It has been around the 7 range for as long as I've had my tank set up. I used to use Red Sea Coral Pro salt and changed to Tropic Marin about 1.5 months ago. Everything else is very steady and good: Amm., ite, Ate - all @ 0 pH - 8.2 Ca - 440-460ish Phosphate - 0 Mg - 1380ish I'm about to start adding some additional SPS and want to make sure they have a good environment. What is reccomended to get this to the 9-10 range? I have 1 monti now that is showing decent growth, various LPS, and a Crocea...all are in good health. Thoughts? Thank you in advance for your time. Link to comment
vangvace Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 1) Verify test kit results with a different kit (buddies, lfs, NIB...) 2) Choose dosing method of choice (kalc, 2part, etc) 3) Measure and dose for straight alk bumps without changing pH. I like 4 parts baking soda to 1 part washing soda. But you so need to verify your Alk levels first Link to comment
Normandy Posted November 13, 2008 Author Share Posted November 13, 2008 1) Verify test kit results with a different kit (buddies, lfs, NIB...) 2) Choose dosing method of choice (kalc, 2part, etc) 3) Measure and dose for straight alk bumps without changing pH. I like 4 parts baking soda to 1 part washing soda. But you so need to verify your Alk levels first Thank you for your help. I checked it Vs. a LFS and it was the same. I've dosed A&H Baking Soda...2.4 tsp per dosing calculator linked to by Propogator on another thread. What is really odd to me is why it would be at that level w/ pH, Ca, Mg, all being in the range that they are. Also, I've used 2 different salt mixes with the same result. Both measurments were the same w/ and w/o livestock as it has held in that range since I started. Link to comment
bdare Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 Why would you think it should be higer based on your Ca etc? Alk is a seperate "component" all together. That's why 2 part dosing schemes are just that... 2 parts. Keep dosing the Alk to get it where you want. Then wait 48 hours and test again. Divide the difference by 2 and that's what you should be dosing daily... Link to comment
Normandy Posted November 13, 2008 Author Share Posted November 13, 2008 Why would you think it should be higer based on your Ca etc? Alk is a seperate "component" all together. That's why 2 part dosing schemes are just that... 2 parts. Keep dosing the Alk to get it where you want. Then wait 48 hours and test again. Divide the difference by 2 and that's what you should be dosing daily... Am I wrong in understanding that there is a balance between Ca and Alk.? Also that there is a relation between Mg, Alk., pH, and Ca? Not that they are completely tied together, but one can and does influence the other? Link to comment
bdare Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 Am I wrong in understanding that there is a balance between Ca and Alk.? Also that there is a relation between Mg, Alk., pH, and Ca? Not that they are completely tied together, but one can and does influence the other? Yes... There is a lot of talk about "balance", but just by increasing one or the other you will not make the others rise or fall. The one exception to this rule is if you OVER dose and cause precipitation. The balace that Randy Holmes-Farley talks about is in thier consuption rates. That is for every 20ppm of Ca consumed Alk will drop by, I believe, 1 dkh or 2.8 meql. Other than that, Mg plays an important role because it allows Alk and Ca to exist in higher concentrations without precipitation. Ph is tied it because it is directly related to Alk. In general the higher the alk the less of a swing you should see with Ph. Precpitation is also more likely with higher Ph. Baically you can dose each of these independant of one another without affecting the levels of the other. I keep my Alk around 10 and Ca at 420. I don't know if this is balanced or not, but I dose 2 part in equal parts and my levels remain constant. If I wanted to I could keep Alk at 8 dkh and Ca at 460 without any ill effects. (clearly not in balance) The most important factor is to keep all params within the accptable RANGE. Link to comment
Normandy Posted November 13, 2008 Author Share Posted November 13, 2008 Yes... There is a lot of talk about "balance", but just by increasing one or the other you will not make the others rise or fall. The one exception to this rule is if you OVER dose and cause precipitation. The balace that Randy Holmes-Farley talks about is in thier consuption rates. That is for every 20ppm of Ca consumed Alk will drop by, I believe, 1 dkh or 2.8 meql. Other than that, Mg plays an important role because it allows Alk and Ca to exist in higher concentrations without precipitation. Ph is tied it because it is directly related to Alk. In general the higher the alk the less of a swing you should see with Ph. Precpitation is also more likely with higher precipitation. Baically you can dose each of these independant of one another without affecting the levels of the other. I keep my Alk around 10 and Ca at 420. I don't know if this is balanced or not, but I dose 2 part in equal parts and my levels remain constant. If I wanted to I could keep Alk at 8 dkh and Ca at 460 without any ill effects. (clearly not in balance) The most important factor is to keep all params within the accptable RANGE. Bdare, thank you! Link to comment
Normandy Posted November 13, 2008 Author Share Posted November 13, 2008 NP! Good to see another DFW reefer and golfer on the on N-R. Link to comment
bdare Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 Good to see another DFW reefer and golfer on the on N-R. Ahh yes. And my new found love.... PAINTBALL! Link to comment
Normandy Posted November 13, 2008 Author Share Posted November 13, 2008 Dosed the amount stated above last night and checked @ lunch today...right @ 10 dKh. Thanks again for your help. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.