Semi-transparent patches floating on water

[Jjnol]

I will do it. Yeah the Taylor kit does sound better. I'm a software engineer and work for Apple and wish there were an electronic way to do all this testing. Frequency of testing for the normal owner of a pool is probably directly proportional to how easy it is to do. I sense there is an immense dislike for the litmus strips and I don't doubt they are not as precise but what they loose in exactness they make up for in ease of use. And I'm not making it up I've never gotten a reading from the regent-based kit that was at complete odds with the test slivers I've been using. The fruit of the tree has been pretty good in my case so I've not questioned the readings I'm getting.

Still I will upgrade the kit. It seems prudent and I'm pretty pedantic so it fits.

I'm pulling the floater from the pool today. It's still on the mildly chilly side here in North Carolina (very uncharacteristic for this time of year) so we've not been in the pool much so having the dispensers in there all the time considering I shock once a week is probably not needed.

So hopefully an easy question: The pool is 23,000 gallons and the shock calls for 1 pound per 10,000. I've been rounding down (the stuff is pricy). The readings after a night time shock with the filter running all night is as high as you would expect it to be for super chlorination so I assume rounding down is OK?

Justin )

[PoolDoc]

I'm a software engineer and work for Apple and wish there were an electronic way to do all this testing.

You, and a million other people. Unfortunately, the 'wet-end' technology for turning chemical conditions into PRECISE electrical signals is 50+ years old, and has not improved. The anitique IT acronym "GIGO" (Garbage in; garbage out!) applies directly here: no amount of digital technology on the 'dry end' can make up for randomly bad data originating on the 'wet end'!

But, where there's a desire to buy, there will be a willingness to sell 'snake oil'. And, until the 'wet end' tech advances, that's about all that digital pool sensing and control will be.

Meanwhile, lots of companies are separating lots of pool owners, from lots of money, by selling them lots of 'snake oil' tech.

Frequency of testing for the normal owner of a pool is probably directly proportional to how easy it is to do. I sense there is an immense dislike for the litmus strips and I don't doubt they are not as precise but what they lose in exactness they make up for in ease of use.

That is precisely what they don't do: they don't make up for it at all. "GIGO" applies here, too. Bad data from 'guess-strips' ==> bad treatment decisions ==> bad pool conditions ==> unhappiness with how nasty the pool is, and how hard pool care is.

With experience, testing frequency will be very low. I'd be embarrassed to tell you the testing frequency I follow on very large commercial pools, once I've serviced them for years. (Chlorine levels ARE tested 4x or more per day, though!) Once you've learned how to care for your pool, you probably won't need to test CH or CYA more than 3x per year. If you have a vinyl pool and no heater . . . you probably won't test TA at all, unless you have some indication of an issue. You'll ALWAYS need to test chlorine 3x per week, and pH at least 1x per week, but 2 of those events can usually be done with an OTO/phenol red kit (2 minutes!)

BUT . . . if you want to have an enjoyable, relatively inexpensive and trouble free pool THIS summer, you're going to need to test more than that, and to test accurately.

[CarlD]

Justin,
I actually know the area where you live reasonably well, having lived in Carrboro, and still having family in the area. But I did move away a long time ago--a lifetime! But I have been back as recently as last June. I loved living in the area but the population has exploded over 30 years now.

You get a full 2 months more of pool season than we do--a full 5 months!

[Jjnol]

You, and a million other people. Unfortunately, the 'wet-end' technology for turning chemical conditions into PRECISE electrical signals is 50+ years old, and has not improved. The anitique IT acronym "GIGO" (Garbage in; garbage out!) applies directly here: no amount of digital technology on the 'dry end' can make up for randomly bad data originating on the 'wet end'!

But, where there's a desire to buy, there will be a willingness to sell 'snake oil'. And, until the 'wet end' tech advances, that's about all that digital pool sensing and control will be.

Meanwhile, lots of companies are separating lots of pool owners, from lots of money, by selling them lots of 'snake oil' tech.



That is precisely what they don't do: they don't make up for it at all. "GIGO" applies here, too. Bad data from 'guess-strips' ==> bad treatment decisions ==> bad pool conditions ==> unhappiness with how nasty the pool is, and how hard pool care is.

With experience, testing frequency will be very low. I'd be embarrassed to tell you the testing frequency I follow on very large commercial pools, once I've serviced them for years. (Chlorine levels ARE tested 4x or more per day, though!) Once you've learned how to care for your pool, you probably won't need to test CH or CYA more than 3x per year. If you have a vinyl pool and no heater . . . you probably won't test TA at all, unless you have some indication of an issue. You'll ALWAYS need to test chlorine 3x per week, and pH at least 1x per week, but 2 of those events can usually be done with an OTO/phenol red kit (2 minutes!)

BUT . . . if you want to have an enjoyable, relatively inexpensive and trouble free pool THIS summer, you're going to need to test more than that, and to test accurately.

Yes I've seen a few "electronic testers" for certain pool chemical metrics. Good to know good they are not. So all this discussion about testing and kits and how best to do it forced me to pull out the regent based kit again and go through all the tests. Alarmingly I found that according to the alkalinity titration test (which I performed twice) my alkalinity is at 150 (took 15 drops to make the pale blue go clear). It is supposed to be 80 to 120. So I went to Taylor's site and looked for relationship between alkalinity and Cyanuric acid and found this link https://www.taylortechnologies.com/C...SP?ContentID=5.

I don't have a CYA test kit yet but if I'm reading the Taylor page correctly a big part of that 150 could be attributable to Cyanuric acid levels in my pool. Sort of a shadow effect. So then the question becomes is my alkalinty really that high because the strips don't say that (both versions). Seems the straight forward TA test does not account for a Cyanuric byproduct titrating out cumulatively with the alkaline.

Still at 150 that's high so will probably need to get that down just a little until the CYA kit gets here. Yet the pool looks and acts fine. Even the floaters are gone.

[PoolDoc]

The "total alkalinity" test is just that; not a "carbonate alkalinity" test. In water treatment, "alkalinity" is a measure of a solution's resistance to pH change, over a specific range. As long as it's not massively high or zero, a non-ideal alkalinity is not a crisis.

Regarding electronic testing . . . until there are major advances in the part of the test that gets wet, those tests have little value to most pool owners. They are used in labs, because they are potentially very, very accurate, but achieving that accuracy requires frequent and complicated calibration to match the electronics to the signals. If you think messing around with a drop-based (titration) test kit is a pain, you ought to try double buffer electrode and temperature calibration, or maintaining and calibrating against other lab-standard solutions.

[CarlD]

If you think messing around with a drop-based (titration) test kit is a pain, you ought to try double buffer electrode and temperature calibration, or maintaining and calibrating against other lab-standard solutions.

Would there be any time left over to swim?????