Bio-Active CYA Reducer trial

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Results from Day 8:

Water 69F, clear, no algae
FC=2.5 no adjustment made
CC=0
PH=7.6 no adjustment made
CYA level average of 6 readings: 360 see comments below.

View attachment 35655


I am increasingly concerned regarding the accuracy, precision and tweakiness of the CYA test, and regarding my reported results for the first 3 days. I spend several hours today making multiple measurements using the K-2006 turbidity test and the strip color test under various conditions and dilution levels. My specific concern is that the readings I reported during for the first 3 days were probably a gauge of my testing acumen rather than indicative of the true CYA levels. It was only after Day 3 that I rigorously adopted JasonLion’s testing techniques, and as can be seen, the reported readings from that point forward have been flat.

I must reluctantly conclude that the readings I reported for the first 3 days should not be considered reliable. That said, they were indeed reported. Although probably erroneous, for trial reporting integrity, I am not deleting them from the historical chart.

I will continue with the trial and will continue reporting daily results here. As of today, however, I cannot say that the trial demonstrates any reduction in CYA level attributable to BA-CAR.

I would also say that someone vendor needs to develop a CYA test that is as simple, reliable and tolerant as the FC or PH tests.

Richard
 
Day 9 results: No Joy!

Readings on Day 1, Day 2, and Day 3 suspect due to less than optimal lighting conditions. After Day 4, measurements were made rigorously following JasonLion’s recommended procedure
One 8 oz pouch of BA-car added on Day 0
One 8 oz pouch of BA-CAR added on Day 6
All parameters held to BA recommendations during this trial

Measurements on Day 9:
Water 70F, clear, no algae
FC= 2.0 (adjusted up to 2.5 using Clorox after testing)
CC=0
CYA = 390 (average of 2 tests at 3:1 dilution)

I am unable to upload the updated chart. TFP site is sending me a message that I have exceeded my "quota" (whatever that means). Can a site administrator increase my quota? Thanks.
In any event, the readings have essentially been flat since day 4.

Richard
 
Rflasck,
I'd like to add my "thank you" for your posting your experience and results. I suffered from similar pool store advice, although no where near as bad as yours. After two years of using the BBB approach, still have somewhat elevated CYA readings, although less than 100. Any reduction in my levels was solely due to any backflushing and top up after winter closings. Just opened for the coming season, and might want to try what you are doing to get the CYA to optimal range this season.
Bill
 
Day 10 results: No Joy!

Measurements on Day 10:
Water 71F, clear, no algae
FC= 2.5 not adjusted
CC=0
CYA = 360 (average of 3 tests at 3:1 dilution)

Results summary to date (Daily CYA level):
Day 0: suspect
Day 1: not taken
Day 2: suspect
Day 3: Suspect
Day 4: 320
Day 5: 330
Day 6: 390
Day 7: 320
Day 8: 360
Day 9: 390
Day 10: 360
BA-CAR pouches dumped in skimmer on Day 0 and Day 6.

CYA test day 10.jpg

brauh01, at this point I could not recommend this product. I believe I am giving the product more than a fair opportunity to show what it can do, but so far it has failed to reduce the CYA levels in my pool to below 300.


Richard
 
Sorry to see the lack of results. What are you using for your dilution water?

At first I was using my tap water, however there is some sort of interference with it. When I did a CYA test on just my tap water I couldn't even fill the tube 1/4" before the dot disappeared. If you haven't done so you might do a cya test on it. I started using bottled water for my dilution which had no interference.
 
Day 11 results: Still No Joy!

Water clear, no algae

FC=2.0 (raised to 3.0 after testing)
CC=0.0
PH=7.6 no adjustment made
CYA = 387 (average of 3 readings at 3:1 dilution)

I did run a test with tap water only, and I could not make the black dot disappear (or every become a little blurry). I have very high quality tap water. No water softener.

Yes, I shake for 30 seconds, let it settle for 60 seconds, shake for 10 seconds, let it settle for 30 seconds, then check for bubbles (there never are any), then test.

I do not think the tap water or bubbles are interfering with the test. 8^((

Richard
 
Hopefully Jose can chime in with some insight??? Another member with no results contacted the company and was given another bag for free. Unknown if the second had any effect.

The only other thing I saw on the website was to make sure you cleaned your testing equipment as they claim the CYA can dry on the inside and then provide false high results when a new test is attempted.
 

Enjoying this content?

Support TFP with a donation.

Give Support
They have a list of things that can prevent it from working somewhere on their web site. Most of them were fairly obvious, like very high FC levels, but some were less obvious, like algaecide causes problems.
 
Day 11 CYA test re-run: No Joy confirmed.


Following the suggestions above, I re-ran the Day 11 CYA tests using distilled wate as the dilutant and making sure there were no bubbles in the tested liquid.

Average of 3 readingsat 3:1 dilution: CYA = 387, which is the same as the earlier tests today using tap water.

Richard
 
JasonLion said:
They have a list of things that can prevent it from working somewhere on their web site. Most of them were fairly obvious, like very high FC levels, but some were less obvious, like algaecide causes problems.
Click to expand...

Hi JasonLion,

I am aware of the conditions recommended by BA on their website and in the BA-CAR documents. See my post for Day 7 results. I have scrupulously and diligently adhered to all BA guidelines.

During this BA-CAR trial:
FC has always been between 2.0 and 3.0
The CC has been 0.0.
PH has always been between 7.2 and 7.6 (almost always between 7.4 and 7.6)
I have never used polyquat or silver in the pool.
I have not used copper in the pool in the last 5 years.
The pool water temperature has always been 68-72 degrees F during the trial.
My pool has never been covered.
The pool was not shocked during the trial or within a week prior to the trial.
The FC and PH was within BA recommended ranges at the beginning of the trial
The only chemicals added during the trial were Clorox to maintain the clorine level within the BA recommended range and Borox to maintain the PH tightly around 7.6.

I believe that I have adhered to all BA recommendations and that I am giving the product every opportunity to work.

Richard
 
JasonLion said:
Rflasck, we really appreciate your thoroughness, both in your posts and your procedures.

In my previous comment, I wasn't questioning anything you did, rather I was responding to heugeneo.
Click to expand...

I apologize, if I came off as defensive. I did not mean to. I just wanted to make sure everyone reading this thread was aware that I have been following the BA guidelines during this trial.

Richard
 
"On a side note, the original starting reading of 700 was taken in the evening, at a lower air temp (which I did not record at the time. It makes me suspicious that the CYA test results may be VERY sample temperature dependent."

Right! I can't find the reference, but I'm pretty sure I read that if water temp is under 70 degrees, you need to let the sample come to room temp before testing.
 
If the water is cold and you don't give it enough time the CYA level will read lower than actual. In this case I believe it came out higher than expected, which does not fit with being caused by cold water.

More likely this is a result of lighting, the illumination was presumably not as bright in the evening. The CYA level will read higher than actual when the lighting is dimmer than normal.
 
Day 12 results run at two sample temperatures (69F and 90F): Still No Joy

Water 71F, clear, no algae
FC=2.0 (increased to 3.0 with Clorox after tests)
PH=7.6

CYA was run at two different sample temperatures. In both cases, the temperature of the diluted, shaken, and rested sample liquid was taken just prior to testing with a digital thermocouple. Dilution 3:1, once with unheated tap water and once with slightly heated tap water:

At a sample temperature of 69F, average of 3 readings, CYA = 393
At a sample temperature of 90F, average of 3 readings, CYA = 320

So, although there is a temperature dependence, it is not major. All of my readings from Day 4 through today's Day 12 have been made in accordance with JasonLion's recommended procedure in bright sunlight, and the sample temperatures must have all been clustered tightly around 70F. Today's test of comparing a 69F sample with a 90F sample does not show a catastrophic difference. All of my readings from Day 4 through Day 12 have been between 300 and 400.

I do not believe the absence of CYA reduction is due to faulty readings resulting from variations in sample temperature.

Richard
 
borjis said:
Thats a difference of 73ppm which would be pretty critical when trying to nail the 50ppm ceiling for non-swg pools
Click to expand...
That is not true. There is so much error introduced in the CYA dilution tests that are happening in these Biowish threads. I very much doubt that the temperature between 70 and 90 is all that accounted for the 73ppm difference ... which is less than 20% error which is near the accuracy of the CYA test when doing it normally anyway.

So, for normal maintenance, do not draw any conclusions from these outlier threads.
 

Enjoying this content?

Support TFP with a donation.

Give Support
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread Status
Hello , This thread has been inactive for over 60 days. New postings here are unlikely to be seen or responded to by other members. For better visibility, consider Starting A New Thread.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply