Acid and Base Demand tests: Useful or Not?

[waterbear]

Evan,
I'm willing to take your chastisement about the test kit versions. Yes, I dropped the ball on that one, though I DO like the K1000 OTO kit best.

But I'm not a pool pro, and neither are my fellow mods, as you and Ben are. I'm a shade tree mechanic as it were (as I am with my motorcycles) and I am always thinking about what is easiest and simplest for the homeowner to use to run his / her pool.
Let's not forget that I am still a home pool owner and a lazy one at that!
But our gradualist approach permiates ALL of our recommendations for chemical additions, whether it's acid, borax, baking soda, soda ash, or CYA. And we teach POP as part of that. We teach that POP is CRITICAL for cleaning up an algae bloom or for a Baq conversion. Yet you would have us think that applying it to an acid or base demand situation is too much and they'll run back to the "Magic in a Bottle" and get it trouble.

Well, you are not wrong. Many people will. We see it all the time when those incapable of POP have a bloom and ignore our advice (including yours) and run back to the pool store for the magic bottle. There's really nothing you or I can do about that.
However, if we offer an 'advanced alternative' to save a bit of time that really is not THAT advanced it might keep a few more of them with us. I am not advocating using peroxide to clean a swamp, even though it works. (although I have mentioned Proteam System Saver, which is sodium percarbonate which forms peroxide when dissolved since it's a matter of just following package directions for a really badly foulded pool with a lot of debris on the bottom).
But does that mean we abandon the gradualist approach? Nobody likes to test two or 3 times a day. I sure don't. But when I have a problem (which usually happens when I come back from vacation or after a big storm, or days of storms) I test, add, test, add, etc.

So here's what I propose: You come up with a simplified, clear way to use acid demand that works for homeowners and I'll try it out. We can clean it up, simplify it, and make sure it's easy to use at pool side and not a white lab coat test. In other words, we can add it to the tool kit for those who want to use it as an alternate to the more gradual approach.
Carl, one thing I pride myself on is taking things and making them simple. An example is explanations for chemical processes in the pool. I usually let chem geek list all the chemical equations (not that I can't) and instead, explain things with simple analogies that just about anyone can grasp such as shaking up a bottle of club soda to make it go flat when explaining aerating a pool. I am not saying one way is better than another, I just want to exaplain complicated processes to the widest possible audience. Chem geeks equations and charts are needed and extremely useful to us! However, even my eyes have glazed over at first reading of some of them and it has taken a while to digest all the info, even with my chemistry background.

As far as KISS, I have been chastised for saying that in posts in the past! I am a firm believer that the easiest way is the best way. In this case I believe that using a demand test to reach a target pH is easier than adding a bit, waiting, testing, adding a bit more, waiting some more, and testing again. When newbies are adjusting their pools they want to know HOW MUCH of something to put in. To tell them just add a little bit and wait and retest can be frustrating. How much is a little bit? I tell them that start with a pint of acd per 10k gallons of water since that amount will usually make some change but not too much change in pH (with average TA it should not drop the pH more than about .4 and if they need to add acid then their pH is at least 7.8) If they are trying to lower a high TA this approach will take quite a long time and they really have no clue how much acid is ok to add all at once. If they do a demand test and find that they need a gallon of acid to lower the pH to the desired target we have then saved them at possibly a day or more of testing before they can start aeration, have we not?.
I don't mind having alternate approaches, though I do sometimes have to be reminded of that. But I do like alternates to be clear.

You see, I like simple, easy-to-remember approaches, preferably with a catch-phrase to help newbies and poolowners remember it. That's why I came up with "B-B-B" for Bleach, Borax, and Baking Soda. Is it complete? No. It omits acid, soda ash, polyquat and CYA. But it's catchy and easy to remember.
Then, when someone is using bleach for chlorinating just tell them to remember the ABCs of normal maintenace. Acid, Bleach, and CYA! (You're Welcome!)
It's a "hook" so to speak. "Ratchet down" for the TA lowering is similar to clarify the process. "Rule of Thumb" makes it easy to estimate the bleach or LC you need if you can't get to the Pool Calculator. "Shot Glass" encapsulates the method of dilution for extending OTO testing. Maybe this will be the "One-Shot" approach to raising pH. I don't know.

What I'm saying is I'm willing to work with you on it. I can't speak for the other mods or Ben, just me.

Carl

PS: I wrote this before Ben posted his last post. I should add that I will defer to Ben on modifying anything I put in this post. Still, if A/B testing is to be added to the tool box, even as an occasional test, it needs to robust and simple, not delicate and complicated, or it WILL cause more trouble than it's worth for the homeowner and non-chemist.C

If you have ever done the test is IS robust and simple! Even the treatment tables can be simplified. The only column you need to look at for a pool is the 1000 gal column and have a calculator handy to multiply the amount of acid or base needed by the number of "1000 gallons" in the pool in question! (If we are using borax for the base we then double that number). It's really not rocket science and is probably easier than testing calcium (it is certainly faster in many cases!) It is certainly easier to get a results that is not ambiguous then when testing CYA, is it not?