Why don't we use deg Plato for gravities

Yakima 728
Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Kaiser

Kaiser

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2005
Messages
3,895
Reaction score
171
Location
Pepperell, MA
.... it's so much easier do work with in your head:

deg Plato = weight of extract x 100%/ (weight of extract + weight of water)

For lower gravities you can even aproximate it with weight of extract x100% / weight of water

I realized this when I was making a starter last night. I knew that I wanted to have the gravity of the starter around 9 deg Plato. Since I was using 2L of water I knew that I had to add a little less than 200g of extract.

Before, I even thought of printing a table that shows me how much DME to use with how much water to get a specific gravity.

I guess it has to do with the brewing literature available to us. Most of the english books and recipes I read use specific gravity and all of the german recipes and books I've seen so far use deg Plato. That's why I seem to have a stronger urge to use deg Plato anyway.

:tank: :tank: (I just had to use them;) )

Kai
 
Yes, I always confuse the prepub brewmaster where I get grains from by talking in gravity points instead of plato..or more likey I get way to confused when he starts taling in deg plato, aka balling.

I see the :ban: but where's the machine gun? :fro:
 
I don't use Plato because I don't use extract. Therefore, the calculations aren't any easier. I also like the decimal type system of gravity. Don't know why.
 
I guess I start using Plato from now on, and do a rough conversion (1.000 + Plato x 4) to get the specific gravity when I want to mention it in this forum.

ar15.gif
dancebacca8mt.gif
(I had to copy these from the "laid back" thread)

Kai
 
I use decimal for OG and balling for the finish. That's just because of the way my hydrometers are calibrated. You haven't been confused until you calculate gas additions in PPM per 1000 gallons, convert to liters at STP and add based on cubic inches and PSI! No more Navy for me!
 
catfish said:
>Why are you shooting Sasquatch?
[\quote]

I thought it was thing from Star Wars. Forgot it's name.

Yust playing around with the new annoying smilies :)

Kai
Click to expand...
 
david_42 said:
You haven't been confused until you calculate gas additions in PPM per 1000 gallons, convert to liters at STP and add based on cubic inches and PSI! No more Navy for me!
Click to expand...

I'll try to stick to metric as much as I can. Hopefullt the gauge will have a bar or pascal scale as well.

Kai
 
david_42 said:
I use decimal for OG and balling for the finish. That's just because of the way my hydrometers are calibrated. You haven't been confused until you calculate gas additions in PPM per 1000 gallons, convert to liters at STP and add based on cubic inches and PSI! No more Navy for me!
Click to expand...

Then, what is the conversion factor to get Furlongs per Fortnight?
 
casebrew said:
Then, what is the conversion factor to get Furlongs per Fortnight?
Click to expand...

I think you meant "Firkins per Fortnight".

Furlongs per Fortnight might be useful for measuring the velocity of a snail.
 
Now should we start the debate over the actual size of a cubit?
Duel.gif


Btw which one is walker? :fro: or
Afro.gif


I think the reason we don't use plato is that everyone was using gravity points. Kinda like why we used VHS when Beta was a better format.
 
Denny's Brew said:
I think the reason we don't use plato is that everyone was using gravity points. Kinda like why we used VHS when Beta was a better format.
Click to expand...

But only homebrewers use gravity points. Everyone else uses Plato.
 
You can also type in to google how many furlongs per fortnight you want to travel, and it'll give you the answer. i. e. "1800000000000 furlongs per fortnight" (without quotes) will give you the speed of light.

Yes, I'm a huge nerd.
 
I'm seriously trying to get myself to switch to metric for my brewing. A lot of the good recipes are in *c and L, so I'd rather not have to convert.*

B

*I don't have brewing software yet...
 
I like SG, probably because I used it all through school and now into my job I use SG daily for density measurements. I never heard of deg. Plato until I started brewing.
 
mpetty said:
But only homebrewers use gravity points. Everyone else uses Plato.
Click to expand...

But only brewers use Plato, everyone else uses specific gravity.

I think that's actually the reason we use it, too. Home brewers have exposure to specific gravity from science classes and might use it elsewhere in their lives. Only people involved in commercial brewing ever see Plato.
 
I don't know, Kai, but when I finally get around to brewing a barleywine I'm going to weight our two stone of Marris Otter as my base malt.

(those Germans and their PRECISION beer engineering! ;))
 
I think that's actually the reason we use it, too. Home brewers have exposure to specific gravity from science classes and might use it elsewhere in their lives. Only people involved in commercial brewing ever see Plato.
Click to expand...
That almost makes you think that Plato is better/easier for brewing...since that's what they choose to use. I'm not sure why it would be easier to use though...but then I prob could have said the same for metric before I went to college. When I was in college I did everything in metric just because it was so much easier.

Maybe I'll add a box in my spreadsheet for deg Plato and see if I start using it. Right now it's like metric...there's no mental connection with the number. When someone says 1.066 I have a good feel for that number and immediately know 'how big' that beer is...but when they say 16 Plato I think; "uh...16x4=64...oh a little over 1.064...that's a big beer".
 
odd bump of a rather old thread.

I guess that we got lucky that there is an almost linear relation between gravity points and Plato/Balling/Brix which allows us to calculate attenuation and efficiency the way we do. But there is an inherent approximation when you use gravity points or SG in your brewing calculations. But for home brewing purposes it seems good enough. Commercial brewers even need to worry about the differences between Plato, Brix and Balling. All these units are basically based on tables that show what SG corresponds to various levels of Brix/Plato/Balling and the differences arise from the substance that has been dissoved.

I'm actually interested in the weight % of extract in my wort or beer and Plato (or any of the other two) is a good enough approximation for that.

Kai
 
I'll try to stick to metric as much as I can. Hopefullt the gauge will have a bar or pascal scale as well.
Click to expand...

My brewing is all done in metric including carbonation.:ban:

Cheers,
ClaudiusB
 
ClaudiusB said:
My brewing is all done in metric including carbonation.:ban:
Click to expand...

Which I find so much easier. If you express carbonation in g/l (5 g/l is about 2.5 vol) you know that you need twice as much weight in sugar as you need additional CO2 weight.

if you have 20l beer and it has 2.3 g/l CO2 (being at 10C) you need to add 20 * 2 * (5 - 2.3) g = 108g sugar to get to 5 g/l.

Kai
 
All that is old will once again be new.

I use Plato when talking to my pro-brew buds, and points when discussing with HB buds.
 

Similar threads

J
Calculating Extract from Specific Gravity
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
ncbrewer
N
Gadjobrinus
3 potential new - Best, Strong Bitter, Imperial Stout
Replies
14
Views
1K
Gadjobrinus
Gadjobrinus
Gadjobrinus
Festbier - first lager back in.
Replies
17
Views
1K
Brooothru
Brooothru
D
First Recipe: 1 Gallon Maris Otter / Goldings SMaSH (Comments, suggestions?)
Replies
6
Views
332
Northern_Brewer
Northern_Brewer
D
Extract Brewing high original specific gravity
Replies
5
Views
568
mac_1103
mac_1103
Yakima 300

Latest posts

Back
Top