# Seneye Reef Review



## Immortal1 (Feb 18, 2015)

For those of you that have one of these things, you already know it's usefulness. For those that don't I figured I would do a small write up on what I am learning about the Seneye Reef now that I have one. Ok, it will probably be a multi-page writeup but you get the idea.

The pictures below are various sections of an Excel spreadsheet I put together in hopes of figuring out a better way to arrange my various LED lights - or determine if I was going to seel them and get something new. 

It seems the Satellite Plus light does not put out much PAR but having the Red and Blue LEDs at 100% and the White at 0% did have a positive effect on my overall PUR graph (which was my overall goal).

The Satellite Plus Pro surprisingly is a powerful light overall but simply does not have the power that the Fluval light has. Probably why things really perked up in my tank after I added the Fluval light.

The main thing that I discovered was having the Satellite Plus Pro at the front, the Fluval in the middle, and the Satellite Plus at the back did not give me as even of a light distribution as I thought it would. The PAR readings in the last 2 blocks of readings should summarize what I learned - too much PAR at the front / middle area and very little PAR towards the back.

So, I re-arranged the lights (kinda like re-arranging various T5 bulbs to fit ones needs) so that the Plus Pro was in the back and the Fluval was in the front. In the middle is the Plus light which is running the Red & blue lights only. Once everything was in place, the PUR graph looked a little better, and the PUR % increased by about 1-3% depending on where you took a reading. Guess we will give this arrangement a few weeks and see what happens.



































And this is the basic Seneye Graph that I was looking at for all the above readings. PAR is listed at the top left. This value represents how bright the light is to the plants overall. (LUX is how brite the light is to you and me). The Kelvin value is top middle. The PUR value is in the upper right. PUR, or Photosynthetically Usable Radiation is used to give an indication of the power of light present that is used by organisms which have *photosynthetic* cells such as plants. In my optimum case, about 60% of the PAR is being used by the plants (rough guess based on a bunch of math, ish).

I also installed the "chip" in the Seneye to begin getting Temp, Ph, and Free Ammonia readings. Was hoping to be able to graph the pH drop in the tank so that I could visually see how long it took to drop the pH about 1.0 I was also hoping to see if the Milwaukee controller shut off the CO2 at any point during the day. My intent was to drop the pH down to 6.3 from a degassed 7.6 and keep it there thru the lighting period. I do know from experience that at 6.1pH my bows spend a LOT more time at the surface (unhappy fish). Best I can tell I have the controller set about 6.2 ish (really hard to tell).

A down side to the Seneye is it will only read down to 6.4pH. So I used the correction factor adjustment within the software (which I had to adjust anyway) to give myself a 0.1pH offset (Milwaukee shows 6.3, Seneye shows 6.4). Hoping today to generate a better pH graph without me making various small changes.

The free ammonia graph is a bit interesting. It is VERY sensitive and I could actually tell on the graph when I did my water change this morning (free ammonia spiked up from 0.028ppm to 0.048ppm and is now slowly dropping back down).

Anyway, I will add more info as I learn more. So far, the setup of this product was not too difficult. One thing that I had to deal with is the part that goes into the tank and generates light readings does NOT come with a handy "stick" to hold it in various locations. I had to DIY something to hold the "eye" in various places while I took readings from the laptop. If you simply wanted to use this product for the pH/Temp/Water level/Ammonia tests, then you basically suction cup it to the side of your tank and leave it there.

As for the value of the product, I would say it is well worth the cost to me. I am now able to accurately determine actual lighting levels and nearly as important lighting quality on my various tanks.

Couple of side notes; Was very impressed with the Finnex Planted + light I have on my 20g low tech tank. The PUR graph and PUR % were better than any of the lights I have on my 75g tank. The FEIT Electric BR30/Grow/LEDG2 bulb I have over the wifes 5g betta tank with the moss tree in it showed a pretty goo PUR %, but it was VERY red heavy on the graph. I was also getting over 100 PAR at the top of the moss tree so I decided to raise the bulb a bit higher before I ended up with an algae tree.

Let me know your thoughts / questions / comments / gripes and I will do my best to answer them!


----------



## jeffkrol (Jun 5, 2013)

How was the temp calibration? Had to correct mine based on 3 different thermometers (analytical mercury, ect.)..
Needed to raise it 1.25 degrees..
word of caution: Temp in various spots can vary so all of them are just a ballpark

Dropped pH .4 unit as well.
Note to others.. Range is adj. and Seneye comes "reef centric" so its necessary for most tanks 6-7PH

I've got an issue w/ the LUX part (not really useable anyways) that it seems to be off by a factor of 2..
Really hard to tell since the optics are calibrated for in water and my LUX meter isn't waterproof..

Second verification is w/ LUX/PAR conversions.. Most "white" LED can be fairly well estimated using a conversion factor of 69.
LUX/60-ish.
Seneye is more like LUX/30 ish

Wrote to them awhile back.. Never got a response.. 

Kelvin readings.. Not sold on them yet..None of my COB's register very accurately but may be due to the optics/tank "tone" ect..
Consider this rated neutral.. 
Like the above I get either Not K or 4000-5000k even w/ 6500k chips..

Standard rant from a cheap person:
Slides are unreasonably expensive..
I know $10/month isn't terrible..but except for the chip they probably last a lot longer anyways..
Pretty sure 1 month is arbitrary..

I'm a horrible consumer.. 

Second the "someone" needs to make a wand for it for us lazy people..

GREAT work btw...


----------



## Immortal1 (Feb 18, 2015)

Thanks for your input Jeff! 
My temp adjustment currently is +0.69 degrees (trusting my Inkbird Conroller is more accurate).
My pH adjustment is currently -0.30 but really should be -.40 (trusting my recently calibrated Milwaukee MC122 is more accurate)

As for the LUX info I will really have to follow your lead on that one.

Just watching the Kelvin readings as I hold the optic in one position pretty much confirms the readings to be "approximate". They tend to jump around, sometimes more than a few hundred units. But, it atleast gives me a better idea what each light is generating as opposed to me guessing (I will admit, I am not a good guesser).

As for the slides, yes under good conditions they will likely last longer. Pumping CO2 into the tank seems to drastically shorten their life. Yes, the $10 per month is a bit much but I suspect just making those chips is worth almost that much. The advantage is you don't need to re-calibrate them - oh wait, we already covered that topic


----------



## jeffkrol (Jun 5, 2013)

Well 2 of us and your pH adj is identical to mine and your temp is in the right direction and close to mine..1/2 degree diff.


----------



## Immortal1 (Feb 18, 2015)

Just going to leave these here for awhile.


----------



## Chlorophile (Aug 2, 2011)

Gosh wish I had that meter, would love to check the kessil


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

Looks like once you go past 18" with the satellite pro your not even in medium light.


----------



## Immortal1 (Feb 18, 2015)

houseofcards said:


> Looks like once you go past 18" with the satellite pro your not even in medium light.


Yes, that is a bit surprising. And from what I can tell, the PUR level is also not that great either when compared to the Fluval. Was also surprised how low the PAR levels were when running just the red or blue diodes - almost pointless to have them.

Bump:


Chlorophile said:


> Gosh wish I had that meter, would love to check the kessil


If I had to guess, the readings would look kinda like the G3 version of the Radion lights - very focused. As for the PUR part, I dont have any guesses.


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

Immortal1 said:


> Yes, that is a bit surprising. And from what I can tell, the PUR level is also not that great either when compared to the Fluval. Was also surprised how low the PAR levels were when running just the red or blue diodes - almost pointless to have them.


I"m surprised too, but also not surprised because there were a number of members running those Pro lights on deep tank and it appears they were running low light and thought they had med/high to high. @Chlorophile didn't you have those lights on a tank that was 20+". I think I remember discussing it in that thread that the plants looked like they were under weak lighting.


----------



## Chlorophile (Aug 2, 2011)

houseofcards said:


> I"m surprised too, but also not surprised because there were a number of members running those Pro lights on deep tank and it appears they were running low light and thought they had med/high to high. @Chlorophile didn't you have those lights on a tank that was 20+". I think I remember discussing it in that thread that the plants looked like they were under weak lighting.


My tank is 24x18x18
I had one of the lights at first and then got two.. 
They were mounted on the Current mounting arm so about 22 inches from substrate through probably 17 inches of water... 
And then switched to the Kessil. 
Kessil gets better growth than two of them for sure, but that maybe a PUR vs Par thing since.. at the very least a reputable horticulture company making in house LED's should be able to get a good PUR rating even if it is low on the red.. 


Something else is tricky with my tank though, not sure what! 
I got amazing growth out of just one Sat + pro when the tank was cycling still. 

















Dense and colorful.


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

Chlorophile said:


> My tank is 24x18x18
> I had one of the lights at first and then got two..
> They were mounted on the Current mounting arm so about 22 inches from substrate through probably 17 inches of water...
> And then switched to the Kessil.


So yeah 22" you where lowish light.



Chlorophile said:


> Something else is tricky with my tank though, not sure what!
> I got amazing growth out of just one Sat + pro when the tank was cycling still.


That's just the magic of new Aquasoil. :smile2: Once the plants where off their ammonia high they realized there was no light.


----------



## Chlorophile (Aug 2, 2011)

houseofcards said:


> So yeah 22" you where lowish light.
> 
> 
> 
> That's just the magic of new Aquasoil. :smile2: Once the plants where off their ammonia high they realized there was no light.


Makes me so sad!
Thats why I started trying to dose Ammonium Sulfate lol. 
Might start again.. I feel like the plants likey likey


----------



## Wobblebonk (Feb 13, 2018)

jeffkrol said:


> Second the "someone" needs to make a wand for it for us lazy people..


Not a wand but this thing is kind of working for me... I also ordered an 11" one but they did free overnight shipping on this one for me on prime. I'll have to wait till I have more time, still kind of a pain to get it pointed at the light due to how slow it updates but seems to hold it in place fine for me way better than zip tying it to a rock was doing for me.









https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B013Y4S2RQ/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o02_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1


----------



## Immortal1 (Feb 18, 2015)

Very interesting alternative for holding the sensor in a specific location.


----------



## Immortal1 (Feb 18, 2015)

LightScience » AquaIllumination®

Found this web page the other day and thought I would share. Would be really cool if every available light was listed but those that are listed do give a pretty good idea on the type of output produced.


----------



## vijay_06 (Apr 11, 2017)

@Immortal1 Thanks for posting these numbers. 

My understanding is that the depth and offset cover 2 dimensions inside the tank. What do Bottom/Middle/Top Left Center represent?


----------



## Immortal1 (Feb 18, 2015)

vijay_06 said:


> @*Immortal1* Thanks for posting these numbers.
> 
> My understanding is that the depth and offset cover 2 dimensions inside the tank. What do Bottom/Middle/Top Left Center represent?


Yes, I probably could have explained that better. The Fluval light I am using is actually (2) 24" models joined together to sit on top of my 48" long tank.
So, Left Center - the sensor was placed under the middle of the left light. Bottom was at the substrate (approx 18" below the light), Middle was 12" below the light, Top was 3" below the light. Then I moved the sensor forward 6" and took readings at the previous elevations.


----------



## Wobblebonk (Feb 13, 2018)

Damn dude so you're running 4 lights on a 75g with one of the currents just there for the 2par red/blue channel?


----------



## vijay_06 (Apr 11, 2017)

Thanks! Bottom left center gave 71 PAR with 0 inches offset and 80 PAR with 6 inches offset at 18 inches depth? Is it supposed to work this way? I thought PAR might drop off with offset.

Apologize for too many questions, but just trying to understand this correctly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Wobblebonk (Feb 13, 2018)

vijay_06 said:


> Thanks! Bottom left center gave 71 PAR with 0 inches offset and 80 PAR with 6 inches offset at 18 inches depth? Is it supposed to work this way? I thought PAR might drop off with offset.
> 
> Apologize for too many questions, but just trying to understand this correctly.
> 
> ...


At the substrate with offset was probably getting bonus reflections off the glass... is my guess


----------



## Immortal1 (Feb 18, 2015)

Wobblebonk said:


> At the substrate with offset was probably getting bonus reflections off the glass... is my guess


That would be my guess as well. Also for what its worth, all 4 lights are now running 100% power for about 7 hours.

Bump, typically the lights are not THAT dirty ;-)
For reference....


----------



## vijay_06 (Apr 11, 2017)

Thanks again! 

I run 2 Fluval 2.0s through the Wifi Controller on my 75 Gallon. I am renting a PAR meter next week to measure PAR at various depths/offsets and at various intensities. Not sure whether there is a linear relation between PAR and intensity. I remember seeing PAR data for some other LED where it was not linear.


----------



## jeffkrol (Jun 5, 2013)

vijay_06 said:


> Thanks again!
> 
> I run 2 Fluval 2.0s through the Wifi Controller on my 75 Gallon. I am renting a PAR meter next week to measure PAR at various depths/offsets and at various intensities. Not sure whether there is a linear relation between PAR and intensity. I remember seeing PAR data for some other LED where it was not linear.


high PAR, low "intensity"...


----------



## Immortal1 (Feb 18, 2015)

vijay_06 said:


> Thanks again!
> 
> I run 2 Fluval 2.0s through the Wifi Controller on my 75 Gallon. I am renting a PAR meter next week to measure PAR at various depths/offsets and at various intensities. Not sure whether there is a linear relation between PAR and intensity. I remember seeing PAR data for some other LED where it was not linear.


I am assuming you are running (2) of the 48-60 units? If so, I would suspect your overall results will be better than my current arrangement - both in PAR and PUR. In other words, your plants should be happier than mine.

And in my case specifically - Jeff's statement above is spot on


----------



## vijay_06 (Apr 11, 2017)

Yes, I am running 2 48-60 inches.


----------



## Immortal1 (Feb 18, 2015)

vijay_06 said:


> Yes, I am running 2 48-60 inches.


Looks forward to your results. I suspect your 2 lights will put out more total light than my 4 lights (PAR) and I also suspect, depending on the meter you are renting, that the PUR% will probably be above 60% - hopefully above 64%.
Seeing as your are running the same WiFi controller I am, I do like the ability to adjust the ramps and intensities of the lights. I just wish you could adjust the color a bit as well on those 2.0 fixtures.


----------



## vijay_06 (Apr 11, 2017)

I will post the results. How to measure PUR? The one I am renting is a Apogee SQ222.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Wobblebonk (Feb 13, 2018)

vijay_06 said:


> I will post the results. How to measure PUR? The one I am renting is a Apogee SQ222.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


SQ222 is the old sensor that sucks at blue/red led? I'm not sure if you can measure PUR with a SQ222 and I'm not even sure if you can measure the PAR of your LEDs well...


----------



## vijay_06 (Apr 11, 2017)

Some one had mentioned that SQ222 can be used to measure PAR for LED lights, but the numbers could be off by 10%. 

I run two 48-60 inches Fluval 2.0 LEDs on my 75 gallon. The tank is 21 inches tall and 18 inches wide. The substrate is 18 inches below the lights. Below are the PAR values I observed at the substrate:

Both lights at 5% intensity - PAR varies between 5 and 8 (5 near the front/back walls and 8 at the middle of the tank)
Both lights at 10% intensity - PAR varies between 9 and 14 (9 near the front/back walls and 14 at the middle of the tank)
Both lights at 40% intensity - PAR varies between 45 and 55
Both lights at 50% intensity - PAR varies between 55 and 70
Both lights at 60% intensity - PAR varies between 65 and 85
Both lights at 100% intensity - PAR varies between 85 and 125


----------



## Immortal1 (Feb 18, 2015)

Well, I have found a small disadvantage to having a really cool Seneye sensor holder - some times your PAR values randomly drop to zero


----------



## Immortal1 (Feb 18, 2015)

On another thread there was a short discussion about how bright the morning sun was and how it might contribute to algae issues in your tank. No hard data - just discussion. Well this morning I fired up the Seneye to answer a few questions;

This is how bright (1) of my Radion XR15FW lights are at full power about 8" from the light (just above the water)









That is a lot of light for sure. So, I moved the Seneye into the direct path of sunlight coming thru my really dirty front window at 9am in the morning. I was guessing not THAT bright... but,









Ok, that was a LOT brighter than I thought it would be. To finish up this post I thought I would add a picture taken during the summer with the Seneye sitting on my back patio at noon pointed directly at the sun (no clouds)









So, if for some reason you are getting some algae growing along the front of your tank where the sun shines in before your lights turn on.......
Just a thought


----------



## MCFC (Feb 12, 2017)

Is the seneye accurate out of water?


----------



## Immortal1 (Feb 18, 2015)

MCFC said:


> Is the seneye accurate out of water?



That I do not know. But, it is atleast consistent. 

If I put the Seneye just above the water I get a specific reading. As I lower it into the water I get a consistent drop in PAR value.
Also, just found this thread https://www.plantedtank.net/forums/10-lighting/379313-par-natural-sunlight.html
I don't necessarily understand it, but....


----------



## MCFC (Feb 12, 2017)

Mine sends me an email every time it's taken out of water. Made me think it might be significant haha


----------



## Immortal1 (Feb 18, 2015)

MCFC said:


> Mine sends me an email every time it's taken out of water. Made me think it might be significant haha


Oh yeah, mine does the same thing. Finally turned of the WiFi on the Surface Pro tablet as I got tired of getting those emails every time I moved the sensor. I have not had a chip in the Seneye for several months now - just use the PAR sensor really


----------



## Greggz (May 19, 2008)

Linn nice post.

Another reason why every tank is different. 

Add a little sunlight coming in through the window means a lot more than most would expect.

Interesting stuff.


----------



## jeffkrol (Jun 5, 2013)

MCFC said:


> Is the seneye accurate out of water?


O/T a bit but I'll start w/ a VERY small observation:
Seneye PAR measurements were relatively consistent w/ LUX conversions using a LUX meter..
Certqainly nothing like 1.32x difference..(se below)

Seneye response is close to that of an Apogee 200 btw
This explains the "why" of sensor corrections:
https://www.apogeeinstruments.com/c...ection-Factors-for-Apogee-Quantum-Sensors.pdf


That said, the optical pathway of the seneye IS completely different. No cosine correcting filter or..apparently, any diffusion filter though
I can't guarantee that 'on chip" i.e sensor. There is more than one sensor btw.


Point is if it is calibrated w/ software correction I'm not seeing it.
Of course an error of 1.08 like w/ the Apogee 200 is impossible for me to detect..
The 500 and 1.32 would be a bit disconcerting..
I did have a "discussion" w/ someone who was using a immersion corrected 500 and measuring gobs of out of water PAR higher than physically possible due to not dividing by 1.32..


Considering the Seneye really relies more on "direct" light the scattering should be minimum..
Now hard evidence????? So mostly hearsay..

for fun if you are ever in Larnica, Cyprus:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct...aw0_MOKlfGP55n0icChjy4Ht&ust=1542653803893032


----------



## MCFC (Feb 12, 2017)

jeffkrol said:


> O/T a bit but I'll start w/ a VERY small observation:
> Seneye PAR measurements were relatively consistent w/ LUX conversions using a LUX meter..
> Certqainly nothing like 1.32x difference..(se below)
> 
> ...




Sorry Jeff, I often struggle to decipher the meaning behind your cryptic syntax haha. 

Are you saying you think it is or isn’t accurate out of water? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## jeffkrol (Jun 5, 2013)

AFAICT yes.. it seems pretty accurate for our uses..
Any likely immersion factor they use on their optical train is likely to be small, if any.

Now keep in mind that is just a one point observation..
One all set w/ it's own errors (LUX conversion factor)
Cosine corrected LUX meter vs Seneye
and using a high CRI COB as a light source.

Bottom line, any errors would not be "critical" to our uses.
Hypothesis at this point.. 

Seneye is already "inaccurate" in comparison for the simple fact it doesn't measure side light like a commercial PAR meter but this also isn't critical.
except w/ sensor placement..you know slight tilt is a major error..

As to syntax.. yea some weird left/right brain thing..Makes more sense in my head than what I type.. 

https://www.seneye.com/light/par

Well we shall see.. Wrote to Seneye.. hopefully they will understand my syntax..


----------



## MCFC (Feb 12, 2017)

So the reason I get an email any time the sensor is out of the water is more for people who are using it to monitor their aquariums 24/7? 

It's more like a failsafe for if the aquarium starts to leak than it has anything to do with the PAR sensor needing to be underwater to work properly?


----------



## Immortal1 (Feb 18, 2015)

Thank-you @jeffkrol for the seneye link. Oddly enough, my experience with the Seneye would indicate the focal range is more like about 20 degrees vs the 90+ degree shown in the bottom right image on that link. 

Either way, for our purposes, it is good enough. For me, it is more about comparing one light to another, or comparing one adjustment to another (is this setting brighter than the previous setting).

Regardless, sunlight thru the front window is still brighter than I expected ;-)

Bump:


MCFC said:


> So the reason I get an email any time the sensor is out of the water is more for people who are using it to monitor their aquariums 24/7?
> 
> It's more like a failsafe for if the aquarium starts to leak than it has anything to do with the PAR sensor needing to be underwater to work properly?



Yes, the various Seneye notifications are intended for those that would use the Seneye for "monitoring" your tank (i.e., sensor in the tank 24/7)


----------



## MCFC (Feb 12, 2017)

Immortal1 said:


> For me, it is more about comparing one light to another, or comparing one adjustment to another (is this setting brighter than the previous setting).


Apparently, that's all it's supposed to be used for! 



> "We recommend that the seneye PAR function is used only as a measure against light readings taken from other seneye devices or a seneye PAR organism table... the seneye device is more sensitive than most at light below 450nm (bluer)."


----------



## Immortal1 (Feb 18, 2015)

MCFC said:


> Apparently, that's all it's supposed to be used for!



In a way, yes. But, something I have found useful is when someone like @Greggz says he is getting 110 PAR at the substrate in his tank using a Seneye and I am also getting about 110 PAR I can assume that we both have about the same amount of light.


Now if Burr740 says he has 110 PAR in his tank with a different meter, well it might be about the same as ours. But realistically, I would guess we are not off by much.


----------



## Mighty Quinn (Jul 24, 2017)

Immortal1 said:


> I also installed the "chip" in the Seneye to begin getting Temp, Ph, and Free Ammonia readings. Was hoping to be able to graph the pH drop in the tank so that I could visually see how long it took to drop the pH about 1.0 I was also hoping to see if the Milwaukee controller shut off the CO2 at any point during the day. My intent was to drop the pH down to 6.3 from a degassed 7.6 and keep it there thru the lighting period. I do know from experience that at 6.1pH my bows spend a LOT more time at the surface (unhappy fish). Best I can tell I have the controller set about 6.2 ish (really hard to tell).


Hi Immortal1

Apologies for resurrecting an old thread. I am interested in doing exactly what you mentioned in the quote above. I read through this thread and it doesn't seem that you ever reached a conclusion regarding the pH monitoring capability of the Seneye. Since you have been using the Seneye for almost a year, I was wondering if you could comment on its usefulness in monitoring and logging pH. I was also wondering if you have tried any other devices for logging pH that you have liked.

Thanks in advance!

Cheers,
TMQ


----------



## Immortal1 (Feb 18, 2015)

Mighty Quinn said:


> Hi Immortal1
> 
> Apologies for resurrecting an old thread. I am interested in doing exactly what you mentioned in the quote above. I read through this thread and it doesn't seem that you ever reached a conclusion regarding the pH monitoring capability of the Seneye. Since you have been using the Seneye for almost a year, I was wondering if you could comment on its usefulness in monitoring and logging pH. I was also wondering if you have tried any other devices for logging pH that you have liked.
> 
> ...



Actually, I have not had the Seneye in the water the entire time. I did do some pH logging as part of this report but after that the Seneye has only been used for PAR readings. 

I currently have 2 Milwaukee pH controllers, one on my 75g and one on my wifes 40g. Once calibrated the Milwaukee units seem very accurate & consistent. To add to that, if I pull the probes out of the tanks and switch tanks, I accurately get the correct reading of the tank water.


With that said, it did seem that the Seneye did not accurately track the pH drop of the tank water when the CO2 was being used. I can't say exactly why this is, possibly due to a different way of reading the pH? Anyway, with the Seneye you can adjust the software calibration of the Seneye so that the chip is reading the same ph as the Milwaukee (i.e. 7.6ph). But, when the CO2 turned on, the Milwaukee would show what I would assume is a correct 1.2ph drop (6.4ph) but the Seneye would show a ph reading of say 6.8.


Hope this helps.


----------



## Mighty Quinn (Jul 24, 2017)

Immortal1 said:


> With that said, it did seem that the Seneye did not accurately track the pH drop of the tank water when the CO2 was being used. I can't say exactly why this is, possibly due to a different way of reading the pH? Anyway, with the Seneye you can adjust the software calibration of the Seneye so that the chip is reading the same ph as the Milwaukee (i.e. 7.6ph). But, when the CO2 turned on, the Milwaukee would show what I would assume is a correct 1.2ph drop (6.4ph) but the Seneye would show a ph reading of say 6.8.


Well that is certainly disappointing to hear. Have you come across a pH data logger that is reasonably accurate?


----------



## Immortal1 (Feb 18, 2015)

Mighty Quinn said:


> Well that is certainly disappointing to hear. Have you come across a pH data logger that is reasonably accurate?


Just guessing, I would think the Apex type products would work as I believe they use the same type of pH probe as the Milwaukee unit. I'm sure there are others besides Apex but its not my area of expertise.


----------

