Eco-Aqualizer Testing
- Thread starter MattM
- Start date
Very nice experiment Matt.
To make this an acceptable scientific test of the magnetic Eco-Aqualizer you will need to use a meaningful control in addition to the "shortcut loop" you have adapted to the plumbing.
You must also use an Eco-Aqualizer that has had its magnets removed. This serves to exactly replicate the physical properties of the Eco-Aqualizer housing that the water flows through.
IOW, you need to order another Eco-Aqualizer and remove its magnets and test that against one that contains the magnets.
To make this an acceptable scientific test of the magnetic Eco-Aqualizer you will need to use a meaningful control in addition to the "shortcut loop" you have adapted to the plumbing.
You must also use an Eco-Aqualizer that has had its magnets removed. This serves to exactly replicate the physical properties of the Eco-Aqualizer housing that the water flows through.
IOW, you need to order another Eco-Aqualizer and remove its magnets and test that against one that contains the magnets.
John_Brandt":1ltmu2n0 said:
Not sure I agree John. Assuming there is any effect, I don't care if it comes from the magnets, the tubing, the "white powder", whatever.
The goal for this first test is to see IF the Eco-Aqualizer has any effect, not to determine the SOURCE of the effect.
Matt, you want to test the effects of the magnets. The magnets are supposed to be the cause of the benefits that are claimed.
The plastic material contruction of the housing may affect the redox somehow. Anyway you have to see if it does without the magnets.
I understand your position about just wanting to see what the thing will do and possible budget issues. But a bona-fide scientific lab testing would use a housing with the magnets removed. As silly as that may sound.
The plastic material contruction of the housing may affect the redox somehow. Anyway you have to see if it does without the magnets.
I understand your position about just wanting to see what the thing will do and possible budget issues. But a bona-fide scientific lab testing would use a housing with the magnets removed. As silly as that may sound.
Matt,
Are you planning on measuring any other parameters, just to be thorough? Seems to me a lot of folks don't put too much weight in ORP values anyway...
John,
FWIW, this wouldn't be truly scientific anyway unless they were running 10-20 separate tanks with sterile substrate and carefully measured amounts of nitrogen or ammonia. The addition of live rock, coral, etc.; it's all unrepeatable.
Are you planning on measuring any other parameters, just to be thorough? Seems to me a lot of folks don't put too much weight in ORP values anyway...
John,
FWIW, this wouldn't be truly scientific anyway unless they were running 10-20 separate tanks with sterile substrate and carefully measured amounts of nitrogen or ammonia. The addition of live rock, coral, etc.; it's all unrepeatable.
Matt,
Hats off for doing this. It would be even better if you also attempted to identify any effect of the EcoA on an unstocked tank. Because even a bit of LR makes it quite a complex system, and the simpler the better.
Running on a stocked system, as you plan, is also useful, but the results of the two, together, might be nice.
Some in the UK do report enhanced ORP using the EcoA, and say they no longer need ozone (reality or the "placebo" effect....). Personally, I'm not about to throw away all my physics books just yet. Way too expensive....
Best of luck,
kim
Hats off for doing this. It would be even better if you also attempted to identify any effect of the EcoA on an unstocked tank. Because even a bit of LR makes it quite a complex system, and the simpler the better.
Running on a stocked system, as you plan, is also useful, but the results of the two, together, might be nice.
Some in the UK do report enhanced ORP using the EcoA, and say they no longer need ozone (reality or the "placebo" effect....). Personally, I'm not about to throw away all my physics books just yet. Way too expensive....
Best of luck,
kim
Please keep in mind that this is just the first test. We have others in mind already.
The ORP idea came about because of the postings by British aquarium keepers. FWIW, I don't think any of them have an Eco-Aqualizer. They were informed about our web site where the photos are posted and one of them said "O.K., if that works, then so would taping a cleaner magnet to my PVC plumbing!" Several people then did this and some reported a change in ORP. Several others reported no change in ORP.
So for this first test, I'm just trying to remove some of the uncontrolled variables from those experiments to see if we can measure any ORP effects at all that are tied to having the Eco-Aqualizer in the system or not. The way that we plumbed it, the Eco-Aqualizer is the only variable - its the same tank, same pump, same water, etc.
We'll let the results from this first test help to guide subsequent tests, but another I have in mind is to prepare two identical 10 gallon tanks, one with a powerhead driving an Eco-Aqualizer and one with an identical powerhead driving a closed loop of tubing. 20 gallons of new saltwater is prepared and every parameter we can measure is tested. Then the 20 gallons is split into the two tanks and we re-test every parameter every couple of days in both tanks.
Actually, they claim benefits from both the magnets and far-infrared radiation from some ceramic component. After taking it apart, there is no ceramic I can identify save for the white powder coating on the inner part of the tubing.
FYI - "far infrared radiation" is also called "heat" and as a passive device, the only heat the Eco-Aqualizer supplies is the ambient temperature of the device itself. But if we limit ourselves to a rational analysis of the functioning of the device we'd already be done and I think you know our conclusion.
So in answer to your post, no, I don't want to test the effects of the magnets. At this point I am only interested in testing the system as a whole. If after every test we can throw at it, we find that the system has no effect, then there is no point in isolating a test to a specific part of that system.
Stay tuned....
The ORP idea came about because of the postings by British aquarium keepers. FWIW, I don't think any of them have an Eco-Aqualizer. They were informed about our web site where the photos are posted and one of them said "O.K., if that works, then so would taping a cleaner magnet to my PVC plumbing!" Several people then did this and some reported a change in ORP. Several others reported no change in ORP.
So for this first test, I'm just trying to remove some of the uncontrolled variables from those experiments to see if we can measure any ORP effects at all that are tied to having the Eco-Aqualizer in the system or not. The way that we plumbed it, the Eco-Aqualizer is the only variable - its the same tank, same pump, same water, etc.
We'll let the results from this first test help to guide subsequent tests, but another I have in mind is to prepare two identical 10 gallon tanks, one with a powerhead driving an Eco-Aqualizer and one with an identical powerhead driving a closed loop of tubing. 20 gallons of new saltwater is prepared and every parameter we can measure is tested. Then the 20 gallons is split into the two tanks and we re-test every parameter every couple of days in both tanks.
John_Brandt":2ewhm6dr said:
Actually, they claim benefits from both the magnets and far-infrared radiation from some ceramic component. After taking it apart, there is no ceramic I can identify save for the white powder coating on the inner part of the tubing.
FYI - "far infrared radiation" is also called "heat" and as a passive device, the only heat the Eco-Aqualizer supplies is the ambient temperature of the device itself. But if we limit ourselves to a rational analysis of the functioning of the device we'd already be done and I think you know our conclusion.
So in answer to your post, no, I don't want to test the effects of the magnets. At this point I am only interested in testing the system as a whole. If after every test we can throw at it, we find that the system has no effect, then there is no point in isolating a test to a specific part of that system.
Stay tuned....
Matt,
One of the arguments that the manufacturers could use is that the EA should be on at all times; thus, I think the idea to have separate tanks is a good one. However, if it's simply a matter of a powerhead and 10 gallon tank you may consider repeating it with several tanks or repeating the test several times.
One of the arguments that the manufacturers could use is that the EA should be on at all times; thus, I think the idea to have separate tanks is a good one. However, if it's simply a matter of a powerhead and 10 gallon tank you may consider repeating it with several tanks or repeating the test several times.
Righty":1m56sszq said:
I suppose it's possible. But the effect would be very short-lived and minor -- were talking about maybe 2 ounces of water.
Since we're recording the ORP at 30 minute intervals, I would expect that any momentary fluctuation from the stagnant water would be lost.
Righty":2zjsj166 said:
That's the whole problem....complex, highly stocked systems. As for what else changed....well, that's a tricky one ! However, some reported a strong and and otherwise inexplicable relationship between rising/falling ORP and installation/removal of the EcoA. Others did not, btw.
It was quite funny that only after Matt/Inland Reef posted a pikky of a disassambled EcoA quite a few started wrapping magnets around their pipes ! After all, the producers always said it was just a few magnets and a bit of ceramic powder, so in fact the photo confirmed to me that you get precisely what you sign up for. Assuming, of course, that the dust is ceramic powder - a finely-ground teacup, maybe ?
kim
Matt, setting up two seperate tanks as comparisons or controls creates another problem. You are actually going to have to run pre-experiments to see if you can actually get two tanks to have coincidental ORP levels. IOW, you first have to see if you can get two "identical" tanks to have the same ORP in the very first place. No assumptions can be made about anything. I was going to mention what Righty did, about the affect of stagnant water in the closed loop. You are going to have to find out what affect that may have, not assume anything.
If you don't cover all your bases, and make assumptions, you set yourself up for being accused of poor experimental design. And this is true for any type of experiment you may do on aquarium related devices. You cannot make assumptions that your controls are functional controls. You have to test your control itself, before you compare it to your variable. This is a common flaw with bona-fide scientific experimentation in the field. I know one particular study of wild reefs that included Veron as one of the experimentors that is horribly flawed in this respect.
Will you be using multiple ORP probes in these multiple tanks?
If you don't cover all your bases, and make assumptions, you set yourself up for being accused of poor experimental design. And this is true for any type of experiment you may do on aquarium related devices. You cannot make assumptions that your controls are functional controls. You have to test your control itself, before you compare it to your variable. This is a common flaw with bona-fide scientific experimentation in the field. I know one particular study of wild reefs that included Veron as one of the experimentors that is horribly flawed in this respect.
Will you be using multiple ORP probes in these multiple tanks?
Sponsor Reefs
We're a FREE website, and we exist because of hobbyists like YOU who help us run this community.
Click here to sponsor $10:
