Homebrewers Association | AHA Forum

General Category => General Homebrew Discussion => Topic started by: denny on August 15, 2017, 07:01:58 pm

Title: I think I have to have this....
Post by: denny on August 15, 2017, 07:01:58 pm
but what will I sell to be able to afford it?

http://hannainst.com/halo-ph-electrode-for-beer-analysis-fc2142.html?utm_campaign=BYO_2017&utm_source=Print%20Ad&utm_medium=Print%20Ad
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: Wilbur on August 15, 2017, 07:32:48 pm
I think I'd save the extra bucks over a standard pH meter and grab this guy from MoreBeer:

https://www.morebeer.com/products/easydens-anton-paar.html (https://www.morebeer.com/products/easydens-anton-paar.html)

Might need to get a few extra phones with all the blue tooth connected toys there are for brewing, blue tooth connected brewing system, water chemistry kit, pH meter, ABV/gravity readings...Just need one for DO and one for yeast cell counts.
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: mabrungard on August 15, 2017, 09:31:33 pm
I can report that it is a very nice instrument. Hanna gave me one to test and it performs very well. The integration with IOS is perfect. It is still a little pricey for most homebrewers, but does what its supposed to.
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: sn00ky on August 15, 2017, 09:55:00 pm
Can't help but think, compression fitting t'd into the Herms in line ....I like gizmos

Sent from my SM-G870W using Tapatalk

Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: ethinson on August 16, 2017, 11:52:11 am
$225 is not as expensive as I would have thought for "how can I afford it" level of lab equipment. 

Of course what I see is the glass probe and I know damn well I would break the thing.  pH Probes are finicky.
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: 1beerbaron on August 16, 2017, 02:26:58 pm
So when the probe needs replaced do you have to replace the whole thing?
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: mabrungard on August 16, 2017, 02:28:13 pm
So when the probe needs replaced do you have to replace the whole thing?

Yep. That's my largest concern with this otherwise very good product.
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: udubdawg on August 16, 2017, 02:30:08 pm
I think I'd save the extra bucks over a standard pH meter and grab this guy from MoreBeer:

https://www.morebeer.com/products/easydens-anton-paar.html (https://www.morebeer.com/products/easydens-anton-paar.html)

Might need to get a few extra phones with all the blue tooth connected toys there are for brewing, blue tooth connected brewing system, water chemistry kit, pH meter, ABV/gravity readings...Just need one for DO and one for yeast cell counts.

This was a prize for MeadMaker Of The Year this year.  I will not deny my jealousy.
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: Bilsch on August 16, 2017, 04:58:04 pm
I think I'd save the extra bucks over a standard pH meter and grab this guy from MoreBeer:
https://www.morebeer.com/products/easydens-anton-paar.html (https://www.morebeer.com/products/easydens-anton-paar.html)
Might need to get a few extra phones with all the blue tooth connected toys there are for brewing, blue tooth connected brewing system, water chemistry kit, pH meter, ABV/gravity readings...Just need one for DO and one for yeast cell counts.

For $400 less than the Anton-Paar.. I think I'd rather the Milwaukee MA871, which essentially does the same thing.
https://www.amazon.com/Milwaukee-Refractometer-Automatic-Compensation-Resolution/dp/B007Z4IN58
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: blatz on August 16, 2017, 06:19:50 pm
I want one too;  have it bookmarked.

but then again, I rarely desire to check pH these days - sort of have everything dialed in with brunwater.
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: HoosierBrew on August 16, 2017, 07:21:28 pm
They are definitely nice. So many purchases........
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: Horseflesh on August 17, 2017, 01:48:48 am
I assume that with a digital refractometer you still need to make use of a wort correction factor, right?

Someone needs to make a brewer-friendly version that lets you input a set of calibration data and automagically produces a corrected SG value.

Yes, I am lazy.
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: The Beerery on August 17, 2017, 01:05:45 pm
I assume that with a digital refractometer you still need to make use of a wort correction factor, right?

Someone needs to make a brewer-friendly version that lets you input a set of calibration data and automagically produces a corrected SG value.

Yes, I am lazy.

I have the refractometer. If alcohol is present, yes you do otherwise no you don't.
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: narcout on August 17, 2017, 04:40:41 pm
I don't really see the appeal.
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: denny on August 17, 2017, 04:59:45 pm
I don't really see the appeal.

Just cool factor...I don't actually think it would be worth the price to me.
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: JT on August 18, 2017, 03:08:28 am
So when the probe needs replaced do you have to replace the whole thing?

Yep. That's my largest concern with this otherwise very good product.
Deal breaker!  What is the probe life?  2 years?

  "If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world."

Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: brewsumore on August 23, 2017, 05:36:19 am
I'm still doing fine with ColorpHast strips.
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: Slow Willy on January 03, 2019, 07:59:46 pm
Just brushing the dust off of some older HALO pH meter posts as I am interested in getting one for myself. For those who have been using them when this post was created, are you still having the same good experience with months gone by?

Thanks
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: HopDen on January 04, 2019, 12:26:10 am
There goes my New Years resolution
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: mabrungard on January 04, 2019, 01:24:25 am
Still excellent performance. Definitely a quality instrument...just a questionable cost.
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: Slow Willy on January 04, 2019, 05:58:04 pm
I read somewhere you can order the probe made for water instead of beer as long as you take all your readings at room temperature. The beer probe ($230) is made to withstand the higher temps. The water probe ($185) is not. I emailed their technical department and they confirmed what I read.
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: mabrungard on January 05, 2019, 01:09:20 am
While you should NEVER take a wort pH measurement at anything but room temperature, I did look at that water probe and I'd say its not for anyone that wants it to last. It's an all-glass probe with a fully exposed bulb. I'd say it would last a day or so in brewery use. Buyer beware.
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: BrewBama on January 05, 2019, 01:25:39 am
While you should NEVER take a wort pH measurement at anything but room temperature, I did look at that water probe and I'd say its not for anyone that wants it to last. It's an all-glass probe with a fully exposed bulb. I'd say it would last a day or so in brewery use. Buyer beware.

While I pull a sample from the recirculating stream at about 15 minutes in and let it cool to room temp, I always wondered why we cool the pH sample vs measure what the enzymes are experiencing (except for the fact that it would trash the probe prematurely).  Excuse my ignorance but why do we care what the wort pH is at room temp. We should care what the wort pH is at the mash temp. Shouldn’t we?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: Robert on January 05, 2019, 01:59:16 am
I think the short answer is pretty simple.  When the concept of pH was first invented and embraced by brewers in the 1920s, well before the invention of instruments using electroconductivity as a proxy, the only way to measure it was by reactions that had to be  carried out at room temperature.  Therefore the seminal research and texts cited pH of a room temperature sample.   For the rest of history, it has been easier to retain the convention than to go back and rewrite all the literature, or wonder whether a given text is citing "old style" or "new," etc.  And yet there has still been much confusion.

Sent from my SM-J727V using Tapatalk

Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: BrewBama on January 05, 2019, 03:00:41 am
Yeah, I’m confused — especially when reading past articles like this: https://byo.com/mr-wizard/setting-record-straight-mash-ph/

Bamforth’s range is: 5.3 to 5.8 (mashtemp) / 5.55 to 6.05 (room temp)

Briggs’ range is: 5.2 to 5.4 (mash temp) / 5.45 to 5.65 (room temp)

Kunze’s range is: 5.25 to 5.35 (mash temp) / 5.5 to 5.6 (room temp)

Lewis’ statement: 5.2 to 5.5 (mash temp) / 5.45 to 5.75 (room temp)

I guess my point is I should be looking for ~5.6 at room temp to feel pretty good that my enzymes are being comfortably cared for at ~5.3 (mash temp).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: Robert on January 05, 2019, 03:33:29 am
Yeah, most shocking to our trained sensibilities is Briggs et al., which sort of shifts the frame of reference -- giving us a mash temperature pH where we expect a room temperature one to be.  But FWIW, I've been targeting 5.5-5.6 (room temperature per Bru'n Water) in pale beers of late (haven't pushed it in dark ones yet, that's harder.) Results so far are favorable.  Probably we need to reassess everything,  like I said this has been largely set in stone for 100 years.   Maybe Briggs incorporates newer science.   I trust Bamforth does. Then that much maligned, but still awkwardly confused  Ashton Lewis article (didn't look, I presume  that's your link) is if only accidentally not far from the mark.
Title: I think I have to have this....
Post by: The Beerery on January 05, 2019, 03:56:47 am
I was flabbergasted at his “technical editing” of our byo article. He literally told me boiling water does not get rid of DO among many other known (apparently not by him) scientific facts..  It got to the point of me requesting a new editor.  It was literally rediculous. 

I not surprised one bit he completely missed the mark here as well.  Mr Wizard huh.  Mind blowing.


All of Kunze figures in his book are room temp... as are most of the rest of the sources you list.  I think you have some stuff flipped. 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: Robert on January 05, 2019, 04:10:44 am
Briggs, et al., 2004 p. 115 "Infusion mashes are best carried out at pH 5.2-5.4 (mash temperature), and so will give cooled worts with pH values of about 5.5-5.8. It has been recommended that decoction mashes should not give worts with pH values less than 5.5"

Kunze 3.2.1.3.3 gives pH 5.5-5.6 (room temperature,  we must assume) as optimal as regards enzymes, but 3.2.3.1.8 advises reduction to 5.2 (again, we assume room temperature) to improve flavor stability, primarily by inhibiting LOX, which is of course less relevant with higher kilned malt or particular mash programs.  Sureley such a low mash pH is problematic with regard to protein coagulation,  hop utilization and other functions.   Kunze is complicated.   Again,  we probably need to reassess.
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: Big Monk on January 05, 2019, 03:47:12 pm
Yeah, I’m confused — especially when reading past articles like this: https://byo.com/mr-wizard/setting-record-straight-mash-ph/

Bamforth’s range is: 5.3 to 5.8 (mashtemp) / 5.55 to 6.05 (room temp)

Briggs’ range is: 5.2 to 5.4 (mash temp) / 5.45 to 5.65 (room temp)

Kunze’s range is: 5.25 to 5.35 (mash temp) / 5.5 to 5.6 (room temp)

Lewis’ statement: 5.2 to 5.5 (mash temp) / 5.45 to 5.75 (room temp)

I guess my point is I should be looking for ~5.6 at room temp to feel pretty good that my enzymes are being comfortably cared for at ~5.3 (mash temp).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

pH optima and targets are for room temp samples.

I thought this topic was put to bed? Obviously the variance in literature doesn’t help here but your target values should be measured at room temp.
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: Robert on January 05, 2019, 05:39:25 pm
Yes, but the point now is that we seem to have some differences on what those optima are.  The conventional wisdom around here is that pH should be somewhat lower (at room temperature of course) than the preponderance of the literature indicates.   And my experience is beginning to align with this.   Optimal room temperature pH 5.5-5.6, rather than 5.2-5.4.
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: Big Monk on January 05, 2019, 06:45:21 pm
Yes, but the point now is that we seem to have some differences on what those optima are.  The conventional wisdom around here is that pH should be somewhat lower (at room temperature of course) than the preponderance of the literature indicates.   And my experience is beginning to align with this.   Optimal room temperature pH 5.5-5.6, rather than 5.2-5.4.

I do all beers at 5.4, at room temp.
Title: I think I have to have this....
Post by: BrewBama on February 19, 2019, 01:57:09 pm
Yeah, I’m confused — especially when reading past articles like this: https://byo.com/mr-wizard/setting-record-straight-mash-ph/

Bamforth’s range is: 5.3 to 5.8 (mashtemp) / 5.55 to 6.05 (room temp)

Briggs’ range is: 5.2 to 5.4 (mash temp) / 5.45 to 5.65 (room temp)

Kunze’s range is: 5.25 to 5.35 (mash temp) / 5.5 to 5.6 (room temp)

Lewis’ statement: 5.2 to 5.5 (mash temp) / 5.45 to 5.75 (room temp)

I guess my point is I should be looking for ~5.6 at room temp to feel pretty good that my enzymes are being comfortably cared for at ~5.3 (mash temp).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

pH optima and targets are for room temp samples.

I thought this topic was put to bed? Obviously the variance in literature doesn’t help here but your target values should be measured at room temp.

Here’s another reference contradiction that room temp should be 5.2 (slide 18): 5.5-5.6 @ 68*F:

http://www.craftbrewersconference.com/wp-content/uploads/ImprovingBrewhouseEfficiency-Havig.pdf

Incidentally, it also contradicts BeerSmith (and others) Brewhouse Efficiency calculations.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: Robert on February 19, 2019, 02:21:31 pm


Yeah, I’m confused — especially when reading past articles like this: https://byo.com/mr-wizard/setting-record-straight-mash-ph/

Bamforth’s range is: 5.3 to 5.8 (mashtemp) / 5.55 to 6.05 (room temp)

Briggs’ range is: 5.2 to 5.4 (mash temp) / 5.45 to 5.65 (room temp)

Kunze’s range is: 5.25 to 5.35 (mash temp) / 5.5 to 5.6 (room temp)

Lewis’ statement: 5.2 to 5.5 (mash temp) / 5.45 to 5.75 (room temp)

I guess my point is I should be looking for ~5.6 at room temp to feel pretty good that my enzymes are being comfortably cared for at ~5.3 (mash temp).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

pH optima and targets are for room temp samples.

I thought this topic was put to bed? Obviously the variance in literature doesn’t help here but your target values should be measured at room temp.

Here’s another reference contradiction that room temp should be 5.2 (slide 18): 5.5-5.6 @ 68*F:

http://www.craftbrewersconference.com/wp-content/uploads/ImprovingBrewhouseEfficiency-Havig.pdf

Incidentally, it also contradicts BeerSmith (and others) Brewhouse Efficiency calculations.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

You just like that presentation because it mentions Darcy's Law.   ;)

As far as BS and many of the other homebrew efficiency calculations I see around here, I haven't been able to make heads or tails of them.  No idea what they think they're doing.  Standard definition in all the textbooks is very simple:  brewhouse efficiency = brewhouse yield/ CGAI.  As in the presentation I think, but they express it in an unnecessarily complicated way. (Which also makes me wonder how they're getting such low yields in a commercial setting, as my own brewhouse efficiency runs about 96%?  Kunze says BE should be within 1% of 100%, but that's on industrial equipment.)

BrewBama, have you started targeting the (also seemingly universal in the professional literature) pH of 5.5-5.6 room temperature,  5.3 mash temperature?   If so, has it made any appreciable difference?
Title: I think I have to have this....
Post by: BrewBama on February 19, 2019, 03:25:24 pm
Ok ...you caught me. LOL

My last brew, an all Mecca Grade malt Export style, came in at 5.5 pH @ 20 min into the mash @ 68*F. Depending on which correction factor is applied (.2-.35) I figure I am within tolerance.

I started at 1.056 and I’m at 1.011 now using Imperial Harvest. The pH is 4.3. @72.5*F.

Edit: my efficiency was 89.5%. (Calculated by BS which calls this “mash efficiency”)

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: I think I have to have this....
Post by: syncopadence on February 19, 2019, 11:49:03 pm
Titanium??? .........

Sent from my LM-V405 using Tapatalk