dieselndix
Member
you guys should all just get hydrometers...they are super accurate, and even make julian fries!
:hilarious
:hilarious
SWF.com water - specific gravity on recent order off!!
- Thread starter jamie814
- Start date
fishieness
Active Member
Originally Posted by dieselndix
you guys should all just get hydrometers...they are super accurate, and even make julian fries!
:hilarious
i think the statement i put is bold is funnier than them making julian fries.
O
oreo12
Guest
ok so my Refractometers has a scale with salt and pg. right side by side so if i set it to 1.025 each time this means the salt would be the same each time vas well since the scale dose not move. hum. Maybe I am mising something here.
pyro
Active Member
I'm just curious. Are most of the stories about people buying refracometers and finding their swing arm horribly inaccurate due to that then Bang? It would make sense at least. Is the temperature/density relation also why they are so inaccurate for the most part?
I'm curious. I use a swing arm hydrometer and normally I don't temperature match my water change...
I'm curious. I use a swing arm hydrometer and normally I don't temperature match my water change...
bang guy
Moderator
Not really. The large floating glass hydrometers are pretty accurate. Temperature still needs to be considered to determine the true Salinity of the water though.
IMO the swing arms are just so variable in their reading month to month that they are only good for a quick estimate of S.G.
IMO the swing arms are just so variable in their reading month to month that they are only good for a quick estimate of S.G.
zman1
Active Member
ATC - Information on one manufactuers handheld models -
Temperature compensated by means of a bi-metal strip that expands or contracts depending on the temperature of the instrument. This bi-metal strip moves the optics inside the instrument to adjust for temperature variations.
(One of the drawbacks to this type of compensation is that the compensation is designed for a single fluid and compensates only in a straight line (linear) not taking into account changes in the temperature coefficient for differing volumes.)
[hr]
My model has the scale of S.G left and ppt on right.
Temperature compensated by means of a bi-metal strip that expands or contracts depending on the temperature of the instrument. This bi-metal strip moves the optics inside the instrument to adjust for temperature variations.
(One of the drawbacks to this type of compensation is that the compensation is designed for a single fluid and compensates only in a straight line (linear) not taking into account changes in the temperature coefficient for differing volumes.)
[hr]
My model has the scale of S.G left and ppt on right.
saltwater8
Member
Ok, so back to the original posters question/comment...
You are telling him, and the rest of us, that it is OK to keep inverts at 1.028 and fish at 1.018?
***)
You are telling him, and the rest of us, that it is OK to keep inverts at 1.028 and fish at 1.018?
***)
ophiura
Active Member
I personally feel that 1.018 is artificially low to keep fish in LONG TERM. It is very common in shipping and at LFS, and some keep FO tanks this low. But I don't personally care for it.
As for inverts, salinity, as Bang Guy mentioned is important. But a specific gravity of 1.028 short term - assuming a lot of things like inaccuracies and temperature blah blah blah - fine. IMO better than a lower specific gravity like 1.023. Even 1.024, IMO.
As for inverts, salinity, as Bang Guy mentioned is important. But a specific gravity of 1.028 short term - assuming a lot of things like inaccuracies and temperature blah blah blah - fine. IMO better than a lower specific gravity like 1.023. Even 1.024, IMO.
fishieness
Active Member
yes. those levels are not bad. I would not keep them there for a very long time, but the levels will not hurt them for a little bit.
dogstar
Active Member
Sure the accuracy of the testing equipment is important....but,
If one trust the equipment and finds those levels when receiveing livestock, it " would/should be a consern..." not much you can do about but hope for the best at that point...
Of course we never know what these critters have been subject to BEFOR we recieve them but can only hope that its not been too stressfull to cause permanent damage. Esp. with inverts. What regions of the world they have been collected from like the Red Sea or Gulf of M. or previous acclimation procedures ect. can greatly effect the health depending on how they have been treated after collection and up to when we recieve them.
Im not a Mod and dont feel obligated to take SWF's side here and I do say that with respect to all.....
And I have know way of knowing even if jamie was correct with his/hers numbers but with the death of the shrimp it does sound like a possibility....
But as I said earlier, I would not be happy with discovering those levels in the bag and would cause me consern and if nothing else will turn a simple 1 or 2 hour acclimation in to an all day thing and thats not something one expects to need to do.
Its a good thing that jamie tested the bag water and I recomend everyone do this with new stuff because you never can know and if levels are that bad then you should adjust the acclimation to what you feel should be needed as to what type of system there going into.
How long should an proper acclimation for a fish take to go from 1.018 to 1.025 ?????
Again, these are just my personal thoughts on this matter....
If one trust the equipment and finds those levels when receiveing livestock, it " would/should be a consern..." not much you can do about but hope for the best at that point...
Of course we never know what these critters have been subject to BEFOR we recieve them but can only hope that its not been too stressfull to cause permanent damage. Esp. with inverts. What regions of the world they have been collected from like the Red Sea or Gulf of M. or previous acclimation procedures ect. can greatly effect the health depending on how they have been treated after collection and up to when we recieve them.
Im not a Mod and dont feel obligated to take SWF's side here and I do say that with respect to all.....
And I have know way of knowing even if jamie was correct with his/hers numbers but with the death of the shrimp it does sound like a possibility....
But as I said earlier, I would not be happy with discovering those levels in the bag and would cause me consern and if nothing else will turn a simple 1 or 2 hour acclimation in to an all day thing and thats not something one expects to need to do.
Its a good thing that jamie tested the bag water and I recomend everyone do this with new stuff because you never can know and if levels are that bad then you should adjust the acclimation to what you feel should be needed as to what type of system there going into.
How long should an proper acclimation for a fish take to go from 1.018 to 1.025 ?????
Again, these are just my personal thoughts on this matter....
ophiura
Active Member
I understand that these are your opinions and I have long respected your perspectives. I hope that you will allow me to make a few points with no ill will. But one line of your post, in particular, did bother me somewhat....
Originally Posted by Dogstar
Im not a Mod and dont feel obligated to take SWF's side here and I do say that with respect to all.....
I am a mod, and do not feel obligated to take SWF's side. I disagree quite strongly with the sale of some of their animals, and discourage their purchase on this board (eg sand sifter stars, horseshoe crabs, white sebae anemones, etc). But people do buy them, there is a demand, so they have them. I respect the store and this board because they provide a forum where people can ask questions about what they sell, and I can say "don't buy that!"
If there is an implication that we must take SWF's side and that is why we are saying this, that's plain and simply wrong. I don't think that was not the intent, but it could be implied.
And I have know way of knowing even if jamie was correct with his/hers numbers but with the death of the shrimp it does sound like a possibility....
What about other parameters? I go into local LFS' all the time and see dead shrimp. They sometimes die in shipping. Might be salinity, might not be.
I don't think the reading is all that off if I recall, but I have not had problems with invert livestock that is out of the ordinary. I think I was quite pleasantly surprised when I saw this reading on my first order.
But as I said earlier, I would not be happy with discovering those levels in the bag and would cause me consern and if nothing else will turn a simple 1 or 2 hour acclimation in to an all day thing and thats not something one expects to need to do.
My tank is at 1.026, which is what I recommend for inverts. So the acclimation time is not long. My LFS has specific gravity for inverts (which I don't tend to buy there) at 1.021. Which is the longer acclimation? And which is more stressful for the invertebrates? I would probably think long and hard about buying an invert from a place at 1.023. People should be interested in these numbers, but I will stick by what I said. Given two extremes for inverts, 1.023 versus 1.028...I'd take the 1.028 any day. Doesn't mean everything will live though. Its not the nature of this business I am afraid. It is not always a simple matter for sure...there are a lot of steps along the way and other considerations...but in a simplified either/or situation, that is what I would do.
How long should an proper acclimation for a fish take to go from 1.018 to 1.025 ?????
The average LFS commonly does this without any acclimation. 1.018 is a very common specific gravity for FO systems and SWF is by no means unique in this. Fish can generally handle drastic changes in salinity, hence the "popularity" of the freshwater dip. For most fish, this change is not one that requires huge acclimation times. If it is a particularly delicate fish, then I would be buying it in person anyway. If this was a reading on an invert system, I would no way no how every take any animals from it.
Again, I am not challenging your opinion but providing my own, and making clear that fact that this is in NO WAY due to being a moderator on this board.
Originally Posted by Dogstar
Im not a Mod and dont feel obligated to take SWF's side here and I do say that with respect to all.....
I am a mod, and do not feel obligated to take SWF's side. I disagree quite strongly with the sale of some of their animals, and discourage their purchase on this board (eg sand sifter stars, horseshoe crabs, white sebae anemones, etc). But people do buy them, there is a demand, so they have them. I respect the store and this board because they provide a forum where people can ask questions about what they sell, and I can say "don't buy that!"
And I have know way of knowing even if jamie was correct with his/hers numbers but with the death of the shrimp it does sound like a possibility....
What about other parameters? I go into local LFS' all the time and see dead shrimp. They sometimes die in shipping. Might be salinity, might not be.
But as I said earlier, I would not be happy with discovering those levels in the bag and would cause me consern and if nothing else will turn a simple 1 or 2 hour acclimation in to an all day thing and thats not something one expects to need to do.
My tank is at 1.026, which is what I recommend for inverts. So the acclimation time is not long. My LFS has specific gravity for inverts (which I don't tend to buy there) at 1.021. Which is the longer acclimation? And which is more stressful for the invertebrates? I would probably think long and hard about buying an invert from a place at 1.023. People should be interested in these numbers, but I will stick by what I said. Given two extremes for inverts, 1.023 versus 1.028...I'd take the 1.028 any day. Doesn't mean everything will live though. Its not the nature of this business I am afraid. It is not always a simple matter for sure...there are a lot of steps along the way and other considerations...but in a simplified either/or situation, that is what I would do.
How long should an proper acclimation for a fish take to go from 1.018 to 1.025 ?????
The average LFS commonly does this without any acclimation. 1.018 is a very common specific gravity for FO systems and SWF is by no means unique in this. Fish can generally handle drastic changes in salinity, hence the "popularity" of the freshwater dip. For most fish, this change is not one that requires huge acclimation times. If it is a particularly delicate fish, then I would be buying it in person anyway. If this was a reading on an invert system, I would no way no how every take any animals from it.
Again, I am not challenging your opinion but providing my own, and making clear that fact that this is in NO WAY due to being a moderator on this board.
dogstar
Active Member
Originally Posted by ophiura
I understand that these are your opinions and I have long respected your perspectives. I hope that you will allow me to make a few points with no ill will. But one line of your post, in particular, did bother me somewhat....
.....Again, I am not challenging your opinion but providing my own, and making clear that fact that this is in NO WAY due to being a moderator on this board.
Never any ill will from me.
I do have respect for all the Mods and members here.
That line was mainly to explain where I was comeing from and I understand how it would catch your attention, I do apologize.
The point of my post was what it was ( the acclimation of livestock when extream levels (( again, IMO )) are discovered.....)
No one else has detailed that point in the thread and " I " thought it should be rather than just saying the levels are fine and dont worry about them....Not saying that anyone perticular was saying that, but to me, thats where the thread in whole was going.
Even If others do feel that one should not worry about them, I would be one to respect them for saying so and also one to debate them, as I do....you know me...
I know that there are many different ways people see and understand the hobby and always try to keep that in mind when posting. But its hard to always know feelings and emotions ect. in print and that I and hope all can understand when useing the site.
Thanks ophiura for the kind way you responded and I have always respected you above all for the way you always try to explain in respectfull manner and be a peace keeper here ect. Not saying the other Mods dont try to do the same but IMO, you are the best.
I better shut up befor I get banned uhh ?? haha.
I understand that these are your opinions and I have long respected your perspectives. I hope that you will allow me to make a few points with no ill will. But one line of your post, in particular, did bother me somewhat....
.....Again, I am not challenging your opinion but providing my own, and making clear that fact that this is in NO WAY due to being a moderator on this board.
Never any ill will from me.
I do have respect for all the Mods and members here.
That line was mainly to explain where I was comeing from and I understand how it would catch your attention, I do apologize.
The point of my post was what it was ( the acclimation of livestock when extream levels (( again, IMO )) are discovered.....)
No one else has detailed that point in the thread and " I " thought it should be rather than just saying the levels are fine and dont worry about them....Not saying that anyone perticular was saying that, but to me, thats where the thread in whole was going.
Even If others do feel that one should not worry about them, I would be one to respect them for saying so and also one to debate them, as I do....you know me...
I know that there are many different ways people see and understand the hobby and always try to keep that in mind when posting. But its hard to always know feelings and emotions ect. in print and that I and hope all can understand when useing the site.
Thanks ophiura for the kind way you responded and I have always respected you above all for the way you always try to explain in respectfull manner and be a peace keeper here ect. Not saying the other Mods dont try to do the same but IMO, you are the best.
I better shut up befor I get banned uhh ?? haha.
ophiura
Active Member
Originally Posted by Dogstar
I better shut up befor I get banned uhh ?? haha.
Banned? LOL. Not unless you filled your posts with curses and links, or cursed links.
shhhhhhh watch out for Bang Guy especially.....he's the one who comes down hard.
People do have different opinions, no doubt. And everyone will benefit from the discussion when civil and rational, IMO...even if, or especially if, there is disagreement.
I better shut up befor I get banned uhh ?? haha.
Banned? LOL. Not unless you filled your posts with curses and links, or cursed links.
shhhhhhh watch out for Bang Guy especially.....he's the one who comes down hard.
People do have different opinions, no doubt. And everyone will benefit from the discussion when civil and rational, IMO...even if, or especially if, there is disagreement.
bang guy
Moderator
After pondering this I've come up with a few thoughts. I have no idea if this is the reason behind the levels.
Low Salinity -
1 - Fairly low Salinity is harmless to most fish in the short term, even months.
2 - Water for fish at a Salinity of 26ppt (S.G. of 1.018 @ 77F) has a few advantages
2a - Water at this Salinity changes PH toward the low end detoxifying Ammonia.
2b - It will make it difficult for many inverts to survive the trip. Flukes, flatworms, etc.
3 - I need to look this up but I thought less salty water can hold more O2. Not sure though.
High Salinity -
1 - Natural seawater is typically 35ppt to 38ppt in tropical reef regions.
2 - I don't know what the temp of the water was when you tested it but if it had cooled off 1.028 at 70F is a Salinity of about 37.6ppt. This is in the normal range, on the high side, but still normal.
3 - Is a worthy experiment. I'm going to fill a large plastic bag with water at 35ppt, let it sit a day, open it up and see if the Salinity changes.
Low Salinity -
1 - Fairly low Salinity is harmless to most fish in the short term, even months.
2 - Water for fish at a Salinity of 26ppt (S.G. of 1.018 @ 77F) has a few advantages
2a - Water at this Salinity changes PH toward the low end detoxifying Ammonia.
2b - It will make it difficult for many inverts to survive the trip. Flukes, flatworms, etc.
3 - I need to look this up but I thought less salty water can hold more O2. Not sure though.
High Salinity -
1 - Natural seawater is typically 35ppt to 38ppt in tropical reef regions.
2 - I don't know what the temp of the water was when you tested it but if it had cooled off 1.028 at 70F is a Salinity of about 37.6ppt. This is in the normal range, on the high side, but still normal.
3 - Is a worthy experiment. I'm going to fill a large plastic bag with water at 35ppt, let it sit a day, open it up and see if the Salinity changes.
bang guy
Moderator
One mistake...
I noticed that the original S.G. reading was taken with a refractometer so temp doesn't apply. I looked at my refractometer scale and S.G. of 1.028 is about even with a Salinity of 37ppt, so it's normal.
Of course since the S.G. scale on a refractometer is only accurate at a specific temp your scale may differ from mine.
I noticed that the original S.G. reading was taken with a refractometer so temp doesn't apply. I looked at my refractometer scale and S.G. of 1.028 is about even with a Salinity of 37ppt, so it's normal.
Of course since the S.G. scale on a refractometer is only accurate at a specific temp your scale may differ from mine.