GHL ION Director - "Build thread"

[BeanAnimal]

I was (honestly) shocked when I did my back of napkin math on the unit and consumables cost, best case with minimal failed tests, advertised probe life, conditioning, etc. If was already kind of a deal breaker for me, but consumption over the spec and possible shorter probe life... I decide to hard pass.

Looking forward to your continued test results though.

 

[PurePleX]

Actually, looking back at my posts and screenshots, I see the consumption of the reference fluids during 2 measurements as follows:

Reference A: 259 (after 21:00) - 170 ml (now) = 89 ml -> 44.5 ml per measurement
Reference B: 275 - 187 = 88 ml -> 44 ml per measurement

Thus, quite exactly 31 ml (or 238%) more per measurement. Makes me right now go and see if I have a pond of fluid under the unit or somewhere else.

 

[PurePleX]

OK - 10 measurements down the line and some thoughts.

1. Seems (using Hanna as reference) we have a case of low accuracy, high precision (like situation B in the attached illustration). This is actually very good - especially so given that a) the Hanna might not be the golden standard and b) the software allows for an offset; thus the accuracy can be improved. The final say of this is of course the ICP sample that I sent yesterday. Will get back on this issue, including some graphs and statistical analysis. Actually, my gut feeling is that the results are exceptionally good with a very good precision and offsetable accuracy. We'll see.

2. Reference consumption. Oboy! We are pouring out the stuff! And, to note, we are not pouring it out nowhere else than in the waste container... The tissue is now merely a hint of moist (and I'll absolutely use the silicone trick as advised by BeanAnimal and, as it turns out, deep into the troubleshoot guide), so leakage is not a problem. Waking up this morning the GHL-logo is angrily red and the 500 ml reference solutions A+B are all but gone (see screenshot).

In summary, the 10 samples has consumed 420 ml of Reference A and 402 ml of Reference B - giving 42.0 ml (Ref A) and 40.2 ml (Ref B) per measurement. Way above (some 216%) stated consumption.

3. Graph presentation is in my opinion highly misleading. A graph is an excellent and (to table) superior way to present data - using non cognitive and visual/analogue method of analysis. For example, for all the complexity of aircraft or medical equipment, an analogue scale is superior and my brain can find a deviating value among 400 gauges in the blink of an eye. BUT, that requires the gauges to not fool my eye, and that's exactly what the graph in myGHL does. Look at the graph attached - at least I get the impression that the values are jumping quite much. However, looking at the table (which should be an inferior way to present the data) the high precision is obvious! The error (not strictly error of course, more the reason my brain is fooled) lies of course in the scale of the vertical (y) axis.

With that said, here is what I'll do now!

1. Do some new Hanna tests (NO3, Mg, Ca) and then offset the ION Director according to that.
2. Await the results of the ICP and do more graphing and statistical analysis. Maybe/probably also tweaking of the offset in myGHL.
3. Empty the measurement cell and do the silicone thing
4. Recalibrate the doser - can that be the error of reference consumption? But more than 200%?!
5. Switch to low precision mode - the stated precision is definitely good enough.
6. Order more reference fluid... But to be honest, if the reference consumption remains like this (I have hope for the recalibration of the pumps and, less so, stopping the micro leak) it's both an economic issue as well as a logistic!

Cheers for now!

 

[PurePleX]

Next update!

1. I've done an other batch of Hanna tests (NO3, Mg, Ca) and they came out quite the same as last time (Ca -0.2%; Mg +3.9%; NO3 +12.9% [6.2 to 7.0 mg/l) - so at least my Hanna readings are just as precise as the IOND - but maximum one can be accurate (both can be inaccurate!).
2. I've done the silicone thing on the sensor and I can confirm it worked wonders! Not at all so tight with the wrench and 100% leak free. Me happy!
3. Doser recalibrated - only tank water in more than marginally off (and only 10%). This time I didn't weigh the solution (before used saltwater, now used what-ever was in the tube), but instead measured the volume accurately using syringes.
4. I read somewhere that the volume of input water was irrelevant - as long as at least real volume; thus I changed it to 40 ml (instead of 21 ml) and did a test - same same! (see IOND 240923 11:30 in the table).
5. Now I switched to low precision mode and only once per day - will of course continue to follow and note values meticulously.
6. Otherewise waiting for the results from the ICP (and also of course waiting for the arrival of more reference fluid...).
7. To note: after 2 days of monitoring and one additional emptying of the sensor chamber the reported sensor quality is down to 83%. Don't know if that is good or bad, expected or unexpected.

 

[PurePleX]

Me like the CSV export!

 

[IKD]

It's definitely eating reference fluid - this is after 2 tests. Might/should also include any run-in-fill-setup phase.

Ignore…I see this question was already asked and answered. LOL

 

[IKD]

.

 

[IKD]

OK - 10 measurements down the line and some thoughts.

1. Seems (using Hanna as reference) we have a case of low accuracy, high precision (like situation B in the attached illustration). This is actually very good - especially so given that a) the Hanna might not be the golden standard and b) the software allows for an offset; thus the accuracy can be improved. The final say of this is of course the ICP sample that I sent yesterday. Will get back on this issue, including some graphs and statistical analysis. Actually, my gut feeling is that the results are exceptionally good with a very good precision and offsetable accuracy. We'll see.

2. Reference consumption. Oboy! We are pouring out the stuff! And, to note, we are not pouring it out nowhere else than in the waste container... The tissue is now merely a hint of moist (and I'll absolutely use the silicone trick as advised by BeanAnimal and, as it turns out, deep into the troubleshoot guide), so leakage is not a problem. Waking up this morning the GHL-logo is angrily red and the 500 ml reference solutions A+B are all but gone (see screenshot).

In summary, the 10 samples has consumed 420 ml of Reference A and 402 ml of Reference B - giving 42.0 ml (Ref A) and 40.2 ml (Ref B) per measurement. Way above (some 216%) stated consumption.

3. Graph presentation is in my opinion highly misleading. A graph is an excellent and (to table) superior way to present data - using non cognitive and visual/analogue method of analysis. For example, for all the complexity of aircraft or medical equipment, an analogue scale is superior and my brain can find a deviating value among 400 gauges in the blink of an eye. BUT, that requires the gauges to not fool my eye, and that's exactly what the graph in myGHL does. Look at the graph attached - at least I get the impression that the values are jumping quite much. However, looking at the table (which should be an inferior way to present the data) the high precision is obvious! The error (not strictly error of course, more the reason my brain is fooled) lies of course in the scale of the vertical (y) axis.

With that said, here is what I'll do now!

1. Do some new Hanna tests (NO3, Mg, Ca) and then offset the ION Director according to that.
2. Await the results of the ICP and do more graphing and statistical analysis. Maybe/probably also tweaking of the offset in myGHL.
3. Empty the measurement cell and do the silicone thing
4. Recalibrate the doser - can that be the error of reference consumption? But more than 200%?!
5. Switch to low precision mode - the stated precision is definitely good enough.
6. Order more reference fluid... But to be honest, if the reference consumption remains like this (I have hope for the recalibration of the pumps and, less so, stopping the micro leak) it's both an economic issue as well as a logistic!

Cheers for now!

Do you have the ability to change to y-axis scale on the graph? If you could scale it to range from 400-450 say, it may help reflect the picture more accurately

 

[PurePleX]

Do you have the ability to change to y-axis scale on the graph? If you could scale it to range from 400-450 say, it may help reflect the picture more accurately

Not in any way I can figure out. There is the chance to select/zoom time period (horisontal/X axis) and of course parameters. There is a menu button, but only for full screen display and print. So, I have to answer no. But maybe somebody else can help us on this? And, not to forget, the CSV-export of course solves that, but it should (in my opinion) not be necessary.

 

[PurePleX]

Interesting read on the x-axis issue: https://digitalblog.ons.gov.uk/2016/06/27/does-the-axis-have-to-start-at-zero-part-1-line-charts/

And the interesting introduction answer to the title (should the X-axis start at zero?): "At the risk of ruffling a few data vis feathers … no? But there are often occasions when it should."

 

[nickm]

Hello!

First of all a disclosure: I'm deeply into the GHL/Profilux ecosystem. Some out of tradition, some out of experience, some out of reasons, some out of no reason at all. Just want to state that clearly to make clear that this is no post in the pro/con this-or-that controller.

That given, this is a "build thread" of my recently aquired ION Director (gen 2 probe). I've read a lot of bad reviews, unreliable values, terrible setup experience and plain don't-go-there-opinions.

So, I don't know why I went there anyway, but I guess I want to stick to the GHL/Profilux ecosystem and I can't resist trying the ION Director given the potential of automatic and regular testing.

First some baseline on my GHL/Profilux ecosystem!

Pro
* Have yet to experience an error or crash in the system itself. It doses always as programmed. The ATO works like a solid rock. The AWC continues flawlessly as programmed. The lightning (Mitras LX7) does it thing. The pumps, skimmer, RODI-tank-fill, heater, levelsensors, what-ever, do their on/off thing without error or tweaks.
* The customizability (is that a word?) is endless with programmable logic. When taking samples for my ReefFactory SmartTester or KH Keeper (yes, I have in parallell some Reef Factory for some independent testing) the ATO fills with saltwater instead of RODI - endless ways to customize and tweak the response. Again, without every finding a flaw or crash (except occationally my own defuncted cerebral logic...)

Con
* Connectivity is unreliable. Yes I know there are several ways to connect (and I use them all), but nevertheless what-ever-method I choose it runs into occational problems. Sometimes it won't find myGHL, sometimes it takes several retries to connect to the PC via USB.
* Setup/connection. Oboy! Expect some cursing, frustration and need for network/WiFi knowledge. and then some more cursing or a beer or two. But then you will get it to work; in my case often without knowing why.
* pH/salinity sensors. Just find them unreliable and needed frequent calibration to the point of just not finding any reason to use them. Yes, probably/definitely LARS (LAzy Reefer Syndrome), but unfortunately for me a reality and I just found it defied the purpose of the probe in the first place. I just stick with my Milwaukee refractometer for salinity, Hanna tests, or Reef Factory sensors (yes, they also need calibration, so I really can't explain this point even to myself...)

So, with that info done with, let's begin the "build thread". Here is the wonder. Let's begin! But, realize that my reason to get automatic testing is that my calendar is very aggressive, and so I can't make any promise how or at what rate this build thread will progress!

I too have acquired an IonD and will be setting up as soon as my fitting come in for my new sump. I will be using the probe that came with it. But will order the newest probe, Sub'd and cant wait for updates.

 

[KStatefan]

Not in any way I can figure out. There is the chance to select/zoom time period (horisontal/X axis) and of course parameters. There is a menu button, but only for full screen display and print. So, I have to answer no. But maybe somebody else can help us on this? And, not to forget, the CSV-export of course solves that, but it should (in my opinion) not be necessary.

Auto range can make it look like a stable parameter is very unstable. I wish there was a way to set the range so it was always the same. I do not have an IOD but the same issue with the P4

 

[PurePleX]

Tx for your interest!

Now an additional two days of running - low precision mode and once daily.

Still no leakage from the sensor - 100% dry tissue under the sensor as should be. Very good and the vaseline thingie (still) works! I now declare it a permanent fix.

I've offset the values as per screenshot to match my Hanna/ICP - not saying it's correct, but at least I get the same values. Still happy with the very consistent results!

However, the reference solution consumption is continuing. 4 measurements + measurement cell filling when siliconing the sensor + calibration, and we have a consumption of 277 ml (Ref A) and 202 ml (Ref B). Will now let it be and get a more per-measurment-accurate-reading. Does anybody have a suggestion what affects Reference fluid consumption (except precision mode high/low)? Anything I can have done wrong? Anything I can do?

As previously stated I have ordered more Reference fluid (...!), but I've also ordered Reference solution - thus a way to objectively against known concentrations do a measurement - just per the instructions of GHL. Will of course post the results when they are in.

However, and quite a big however: the sensor performance as reported by myGHL is down to 72%! And per the text I should be prepared to replace the sensor soon! Again, so far I've only installed the sensor, done 10 measurements, re-installed the sensor (for the silicone thingie) and then done an other 4 measurements. The sensor has been soaking and everything else as per instructions. So, 5 days and 14 measurements and I should soon replace the sensor? I've checked all I should check as per the instructions and besides, since I get really good measurements there really can't (?) be any issues of dirty filters, tubes or air? Maybe it's just a transient dip in performance - we'll see.

 

[zsoltBp]

Tx for your interest!

Now an additional two days of running - low precision mode and once daily.

Still no leakage from the sensor - 100% dry tissue under the sensor as should be. Very good and the vaseline thingie (still) works! I now declare it a permanent fix.

I've offset the values as per screenshot to match my Hanna/ICP - not saying it's correct, but at least I get the same values. Still happy with the very consistent results!

However, the reference solution consumption is continuing. 4 measurements + measurement cell filling when siliconing the sensor + calibration, and we have a consumption of 277 ml (Ref A) and 202 ml (Ref B). Will now let it be and get a more per-measurment-accurate-reading. Does anybody have a suggestion what affects Reference fluid consumption (except precision mode high/low)? Anything I can have done wrong? Anything I can do?

As previously stated I have ordered more Reference fluid (...!), but I've also ordered Reference solution - thus a way to objectively against known concentrations do a measurement - just per the instructions of GHL. Will of course post the results when they are in.

However, and quite a big however: the sensor performance as reported by myGHL is down to 72%! And per the text I should be prepared to replace the sensor soon! Again, so far I've only installed the sensor, done 10 measurements, re-installed the sensor (for the silicone thingie) and then done an other 4 measurements. The sensor has been soaking and everything else as per instructions. So, 5 days and 14 measurements and I should soon replace the sensor? I've checked all I should check as per the instructions and besides, since I get really good measurements there really can't (?) be any issues of dirty filters, tubes or air? Maybe it's just a transient dip in performance - we'll see.

hi
I have similar problems to you, I've been testing for 2 weeks, 1 probe has already broken for me, the potassium measuring part starts to decrease, at the end the probe shows a value of 20%
3 measurement look how much reagent use, look diagram
the measurement not accurate about 5-10 % i was setup for hanna test

 

[PurePleX]

hi
I have similar problems to you, I've been testing for 2 weeks, 1 probe has already broken for me, the potassium measuring part starts to decrease, at the end the probe shows a value of 20%
3 measurement look how much reagent use, look diagram
the measurement not accurate about 5-10 % i was setup for hanna test

Yes, obviously the same problem: Reference solution consumption and sensor longevity. Given the possibility of giving an offset, the accuracy is not so much of a problem as long as the measurements are precise. However, you done two weeks of measurements and already consumed a sensor is highly worrisome. We'll see how my sensor behaves in the near future. But I really have no idea on how I can treat it better... Give us updates on how yours is doing!

 

[zsoltBp]

hi
I have similar problems to you, I've been testing for 2 weeks, 1 probe has already broken for me, the potassium measuring part starts to decrease, at the end the probe shows a value of 20%
3 measurement look how much reagent use, look diagram
the measurement not accurate about 5-10 % i was setup for hanna test

I noticed an interesting thing, it measures the ion director test liquid quite accurately, but it underestimates calcium and magnesium in the aquarium water. I tested the ion director test liquid and it tests saifer, which was accuratefor calcium, undermeasurement by about 20-30 ppmfor magnesium, 150-200 ppm, so it must be set at offset

 

[zsoltBp]

Yes, obviously the same problem: Reference solution consumption and sensor longevity. Given the possibility of giving an offset, the accuracy is not so much of a problem as long as the measurements are precise. However, you done two weeks of measurements and already consumed a sensor is highly worrisome. We'll see how my sensor behaves in the near future. But I really have no idea on how I can treat it better... Give us updates on how yours is doing!

sure, i am testing every day, i read if probe performance dropped, wait 5,6 hours next measurement maybe air bubble around the probe, and maybe probe will be better.

 

[PurePleX]

sure, i am testing every day, i read if probe performance dropped, wait 5,6 hours next measurement maybe air bubble around the probe, and maybe probe will be better.

Hallelujah! My sensor has had its beauty sleep! What I don’t understand is that if it for some reason was bothered with bubbles (or something else), why was the reading good?

Anyhow, it’s again pristine, the accuracy great (with offset) and the precision exceptional (as well as the Reference fluid consumption…)!

 

[zsoltBp]

Hallelujah! My sensor has had its beauty sleep! What I don’t understand is that if it for some reason was bothered with bubbles (or something else), why was the reading good?

Anyhow, it’s again pristine, the accuracy great (with offset) and the precision exceptional (as well as the Reference fluid consumption…)!

super! test every day ,and later we look results....

 

[PurePleX]

From good to excellent