quick one sample handling on your end absolutely affects it. draw cleanly, ship fast, do not let it sit warm
#test-results 2025-02-10
Monday36 messages9 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- salt_bridge — do you test every order or sample it 08:47
- provincial_pat — update on the earlier thing i test roughly every tenth vial. it is a sampling strategy, not paranoia 11:12
- salt_bridge — my sheet has 8 lots from QST with a spread under a point, which is tight 12:24
- maintenance_mo — a point or two between the certificate and an independent result is inside what two labs disagree by 12:37
thats not great
do you test every order or sample it
📉14🎉1❤️1
one data point
slightly off topic but my read after three years of this: purity is mostly fine across the market and fill consistency is where suppliers differ
the widest spread in my data is about 2.6 percentage points across five lots from one supplier
99.2 against a certificate of 98.6 is fine. the same supplier landing low four times in a row is a question, from memory
thats within range
do the results in this channel skew because people test when suspicious
which lab
🧊10💀8
whats the worst result anyone has logged and what happened next
❤️2
the honest limits: hobby chain of custody is weak and any result here should be read with that in mind
how do you separate batch variance from supplier variance
i have never regretted spending the money on a test. i have regretted not testing twice
[edited]update on the earlier thing i test roughly every tenth vial. it is a sampling strategy, not paranoia
🤝1⚠️2🧊8
whats the underfill rate people are actually seeing
weigh it first
📈6❤️6
update on the earlier thing update from 20 months ago: retested the same supplier, result came back better, logged both
*VendorInvestigate not the other one
coming back after 13 months with a follow up result, where do i put it
if the vial has been through a bad transit you are testing the transit as much as the supplier
quantity testing is usually a separate line item and it is the one worth paying for
for the archive my vial assayed under label but the purity was fine, which matters more
if you are testing to settle an argument you will not settle it with n of 1, for what its worth
[edited]my sheet has 8 lots from QST with a spread under a point, which is tight
a point or two between the certificate and an independent result is inside what two labs disagree by
📉15✅1📈13
thats a fill problem
*that should say weekly
one bad test does not condemn a supplier. one good test does not clear one. both halves get ignored equally
posting my VendorInvestigate result on lot A-2418, what do people make of it
[edited]a single sample tells you about a single vial. that is genuinely all it tells you
post the lot, the purchase month, the lab, the number, and what you were expecting. that makes it useful later
i had a result i am fairly sure was a handling error on my side and i logged it as such, still working it out
my read after three years of this: purity is mostly fine across the market and fill consistency is where suppliers differ
a result without a lot number and a purchase date is an anecdote with a pdf attached