• Please visit and share your knowledge at our sister communities:
  • If you have not, please join our official Homebrewing Facebook Group!

    Homebrewing Facebook Group

refractometer question

Homebrew Talk

Help Support Homebrew Talk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Glad I stumbled on this thread, and that its a fresh thread. Totally forgot that many of the refracs on the market are calibrated for wine and not beer. Just used mine (same model that this thread was starated with). Pre-boil gravity was 1057, right where I should have been. Added 2.5 lbs of DME as planned (to 12.25 G of pre-boil wort) and my refrac had a reading of 1073. Beersmith says I should have been 1079.

I'm guessing the SG side is slightly more accurate, by accident, in the 1050 range. But a little further off further from that point. Or something along those lines. Did not think to grab the hydrometer to take a reading to calibrate this.

I agree that it is interesting. I was going to run a series of experiments, making a large number of small (1 liter) batches. I think I shall add refractometer readings for each batch, taking refractometer and gravity readings both pre and post boil; and see if I can see any patterns.

I'll be looking forward to reading these results as well!
 
So it seems that many people had refractometers where 23 Brix = 1.088 and many had 23 Brix = 1.096. The earlier posts seemed to indicate that 1.096 was closer (and matched conversion tables) but the experiment seemed to show that 1.088 was closer? Mine reads 1.088 and is always low compared to my hydrometer so I thought that 1.096 would be closer. Which is the best starting point in terrms of requiring the lowest correction?
 
Jsbeckton said:
So it seems that many people had refractometers where 23 Brix = 1.088 and many had 23 Brix = 1.096. The earlier posts seemed to indicate that 1.096 was closer (and matched conversion tables) but the experiment seemed to show that 1.088 was closer? Mine reads 1.088 and is always low compared to my hydrometer so I thought that 1.096 would be closer. Which is the best starting point in terrms of requiring the lowest correction?

The trouble with that question is that everyone is just going to give you the number that works for them. Some of the variation is driven by wort parameters, and some by the (mis)calibration of the instrument at manufacture. At least until ajf gets done, there's no principled way to guess ahead of time.
 
Well, I ordered the new hydrometers, and received one that measures from 1.050 to 1.100. (The other one is out of stock).

I wrote a couple of simple programs; one to calculate the grain weights, water weights, and strike temperatures to produce a mash at a certain thickness and temperature using my mini mash system. This program needs a certain amount of tweaking to get the strike temperature correct.
The other program accepts inputs of wort weight, wort specific gravity, and Brix (from refractometer) both pre and post boil. It then calculates a Brix Correction Factor (BCF) based on the gravity and Brix readings such that dividing the measured Brix by the BCF produces a corrected Brix reading that can be converted to S.G. by the formula
Specific gravity = (Brix/(258.6-(Brix/258.2)*227.1))+1
This is the definition of the Brix Correction Factor used by both Beersmith and Promash.
The program also reports any gravity points gained or lost during the boil.

I mashed 225g Maris Otter with 587g water (= 1.25 qt/lb) at 152F for 60 minutes, sparged in a French Press and recorded the weight, specific gravity, and Brix reading prior to the boil.

I then boiled the wort for 60 minutes, and again recorded the weight.
The following screen shot shows the results.

8Ht2UsK3qScZQAAAAASUVORK5CYII=


I don't think that losing 2 points during the boil is anything to worry about as the two gravity readings were taken with two different hydrometers, one of which has not been accurately calibrated.

However, when it comes to the calculated BCF's there is a big difference.

If I use the pre-boil BCF to estimate the post-boil S.G. from the post-boil Brix, then it gives an error of > 5 gravity points.

Why there is such a difference in the BCF's I don't know.

It could be that my refractometer is faulty, but I don't think so because it was reasonably accurate in post 25
It could be that the refractive index of the wort changes during the boil and needs to be accounted for when estimating a gravity reading from Brix.
It could be that the very small batch size exaggerates the difference. (Not many people boil down from a S.G. of 1.015 to end up at 1.060)
It could be caused by any number of other factors that I haven't even considered.

I intend to brew a full size batch this weekend, and will take pre and post boil S.G. and Brix readings to see if I get similar results on a full scale batch.

-a.

View attachment Untitled.bmp
 
There appears to be a problem attaching screen shots. My computer shows the results of the calculator, but my wife's computer shows X
If I try to edit the post, it show nothing.
This is what the screen shot showed:
Pre-boil weight (grams): 3418 Pre-boil S.G: 1.0155 Pre-boil Brix: 4.250 Pre-boil BCF: 1.0760
Post-boil weight (grams) 914 Post-boil S.G: 1.0600 Post-boil Brix: 14.500 Post-boil BCF 0.9836
Points added in boil -2

-a.
 
My last brew day, my refract was off on the SG side..

It works great on Brix.. Reads it accurate when I take the Brix and compare it to my calculator that gives me the SG. It was spot on everytime.

So I'm just going to use the calculator in my BS2 program and go from there. Pre and Post gravities in Brix, convert, check final post gravity and it's all good to go.
 
So it seems that many people had refractometers where 23 Brix = 1.088 and many had 23 Brix = 1.096. The earlier posts seemed to indicate that 1.096 was closer (and matched conversion tables) but the experiment seemed to show that 1.088 was closer? Mine reads 1.088 and is always low compared to my hydrometer so I thought that 1.096 would be closer. Which is the best starting point in terrms of requiring the lowest correction?

I have just realized that if I use my pre-boil BCF of 1.076 (using a calibrated hydrometer), 23 Brix translates to 1.089 which is very close to 1.088.
If I use the post-boil BCF of 0.9836 (using an uncalibrated hydrometer), 23 Brix translates to 1.098 which is very close to 1.096

This leads me to believe that the boil significantly changes the refractive index of the wort, and the conversion from Brix to S.G. depends on whether you use a pre-boil or post-boil BCF.

However, there is a lot of experimentation to do in order to differentiate my gut feelings from actual facts.
-a.
 
This leads me to believe that the boil significantly changes the refractive index of the wort, and the conversion from Brix to S.G. depends on whether you use a pre-boil or post-boil BCF.
-a.

Interesting.. I'll start to keep notice on my BCF pre- and post- boil.
If at least part of folks who read this thread would take readings, in month or two we would maybe be able to get more representative results, and conclude whether boil changes BCF significantly.
Anyhow, it is worthwhile to explore it more detailed...
 
I know this is not the topic of this thread but it may be helpful to someone, I noticed huge difference between my hydrometer and refractometer post-fermentation readings:

Post-boil gravity: hydrometer reading- 1.066; refractometer- 15.8 Brix, this matches up 0,96 BCF

Post-fermentation gravity: hydrometer reading- 1.018; refractometer- 8.2 Brix

According to calculator (http://onebeer.net/refractometer.shtml) corrected FG for Brix reading is 1.012, which is 6 points lower than actual.
It is pretty huge so I think I'll start using hydrometer again for my FG readings.
Suppose that refractometer can be used just to check is there change in gravity after hydrometer and refractometer reading are taken.
 
It is closer.
I see that you put 0.96 as correction factor, how do you know it multiplies correction factor and not dividing it (default value is 1.04 which correlates with 0.96 if reading is divided with CF)?
 
See http://braukaiser.com/blog/blog/2012/03/23/dont-trust-your-refractometer-blindly/

If I enter a Brix value in Promash or Beersmith, adjust the BCF upwards, then the estimated S.G. for that Brix value increases if I reduce the BCF, and decreases if I increase the BCF.
In fact, Promash doesn't even accept a BCF < 1.0 as this is theoretically impossible if the refractometer reports Brix accurately. Beersmith (1.4) does allow a BCF < 1.0.


-a.
 
Well, I ordered the new hydrometers, and received one that measures from 1.050 to 1.100. (The other one is out of stock).

ajf, where did you order your hydrometers from? I was looking at Fisher Scientific...there are hundreds of them. Hard to know which one is which.
 
The first time I use my refractometer (measures BRIX only) is after hop boiling and cooling to 20 deg C. I then take a reading each subsequent day and plot them on a graph. The readings eventually confirm what I can see with my eyes anyway, that it is time to bottle, typically on day 5 or 6.
 
The first time I use my refractometer (measures BRIX only) is after hop boiling and cooling to 20 deg C. I then take a reading each subsequent day and plot them on a graph. The readings eventually confirm what I can see with my eyes anyway, that it is time to bottle, typically on day 5 or 6.


Wow.. you bottle that early!?
 
Yes - no probs at all, but I have an insurance policy, 2 bottles are one litre PET bottles, so I can feel the pressure. Never had to open and degas and reseal for 30 years or more, brew once a week.
 
OK, I have completed a 5g brew, and taken Brix and S.G. readings both before and after the boil. The results are shown below.

In my previous experiment, it appears that the differences between the pre-boil and post-boil BCF's was caused by the very small sample size (or I screwed up taking a reading).

With the 5g batch, there is very little difference in the BCF's, and even if I switch them (or use my calibrated default settings) I get predicted S.G. readings within 1 point of what the hydrometer says.

-a.

View attachment Untitled.bmp
 
Why there is such a difference in the BCF's I don't know.

I found this thread by pingback to the refractometer calculator, so I'm sorry to be so late to the party.

I suspect that any variation you're seeing is due to measurement technique, rather than a physical property of the wort. I would look at stratification (do you pull the wort sample from the kettle before it comes to a boil?) or evaporation (is the sample chilled in a sealed container?).

I hadn't checked my refractometer against a hydrometer in several batches, so I did for the brew day today.

Pre-boil: Refractometer 7.6°Bx, hydrometer 1.0300 (WCF 1.035)
Post-boil: Refractometer 10.3°Bx, hydrometer 1.0400 (WCF 1.052)

Granted, it's only a single set of measurements, but if there is any variation, it appears that it's so small as to be within the error bar for the other measurements (±0.05°Bx for the refractometer, ±0.00025 SG for the hydrometer). Both were calibrated at the beginning of the brewday.
 
I brewed twice this weekend, using both the refractometer and the hydrometer. Using MalFet's 1.05 correction factor is very, very close. Now you've confirmed for me that this thing is usable. It is interesting to see that the correction factor is lower postboil, but not enought to make a huge difference. At least I'll know if it is slightly off, this is probably why.

Thanks for doing this!

:mug:
 
Thanks to all those who posted matching S.G. and Brix values. The Brix Correction Values based on those readings vary widely from 0.9792 to 1.0497.
This range is not surprising as different hydrometers and refractometers were used to collect the data. Using the same instruments to measure Brix and S.G. results in a much closer range; and taking multiple readings and averaging the results, gives a very accurate approximation (in my experience).

I found this thread by pingback to the refractometer calculator, so I'm sorry to be so late to the party.

I suspect that any variation you're seeing is due to measurement technique, rather than a physical property of the wort. I would look at stratification (do you pull the wort sample from the kettle before it comes to a boil?) or evaporation (is the sample chilled in a sealed container?).

I hadn't checked my refractometer against a hydrometer in several batches, so I did for the brew day today.

Pre-boil: Refractometer 7.6°Bx, hydrometer 1.0300 (WCF 1.035)
Post-boil: Refractometer 10.3°Bx, hydrometer 1.0400 (WCF 1.052)

Granted, it's only a single set of measurements, but if there is any variation, it appears that it's so small as to be within the error bar for the other measurements (±0.05°Bx for the refractometer, ±0.00025 SG for the hydrometer). Both were calibrated at the beginning of the brewday.

If we are going to use a refractometer to estimate specific gravity, then we need an acceptably accurate method for converting Brix (or whatever the refractometer displays) to Specific Gravity. Because of the inaccuracies in the instruments, we cannot take just a singe pair of readings, we need to take several pairs of readings, and average the results.
The two sets of readings that I used were pre-boil and post-poil on a very small match where I boiled away about 75% of the pre-boil volume.
The pre-boil measurements gave me a correction factor much higher than I have ever seen before, and the post boil measurements gave me a correction factor much lower than I have ever seen. This is what puzzled me. Investigating further, I notice that the pre-boil gravity was very low (1.0155) and using a very low gravity to calculate the correction factor is likely to introduce significant errors. The post-boil gravity is reasonable, but there was very little wort left in the bottom of the kettle after the 1 hour boil, and there was a lot of scorching of the wort. I suspect that this may have caused an unacceptable correction factor calculation (or I made a mistake in taking one or both of the readings).
What I was trying to determine by taking pre and post boil samples, was does the precipitation of break material during the boil affect the conversion.
I'm sure it does, but based on the 5g test results I think the difference is so small that it cannot be detected with my instrumentation, and can be ignored. I shall perform some more tests later to verify this.
Stratification and evaporation during cooling could certainly have an effect of the accuracy of the measurements if they were used to measure some attribute of the wort as a whole, but in this case the experiment is to determine how to convert Brix to S.G using a sample. The conversion just relates to the sample, not the whole wort.
Incidentally, your examples show a BCF of 1.0059 (pre-boil) and 1.0308 (post-boil). Based on my experience, this shows a much larger variation than I have ever seen when calculating pre and post-boil BCF's from a single full size batch.

-a.
 
This has been a very educational thread. I haven't used my refractometer yet.
Mine just reads brix.
I think I'm just going to use it along side the hydrometer for a while and see how it does.
I thought about it when I made my last batch, but as usual it was late and I took a hydrometer reading and went to bed.
Next time I'll take the extra minute and read the hydrometer.
I still haven't even calibrated it. I bought distilled water to do it and it's sitting with the rest of my gear.
 
Yes, it does have ATC. I don't know if the ATC works or not because I use it indoors where the temperature stays fairly constant. I do however check it at the start of most brew sessions, and have always got a 0 Brix reading with distilled water.

-a.
 
I have recently come to the realization that people need to stop trying to convert between brix and S.G. It's like speaking multiple languages, if you're fluent you don't translate to and from your native language, instead you think in the language you speak in. Also IIRC, some of the conversions between all of these units aren't linear, which mostly has to do with the fact that we are measuring the optical density for brix and the mass density for SG/plato.

As such, it makes much more sense to just measure in whichever way you plan on doing everything (if you want accuracy). If you use SG/plato, use the hydrometer for anything you care about and just use the refractometer for ballpark numbers. If you want to use the refractometer for details, then adjust your brewing to use the refractometer for all of your important measurements including "OG" and "FG". I'm currently trying to switch to an all refractometer setup, but the process involves trying to figure out what the numbers mean and ensuring there is not validity in people saying there are issues with extreme beers (dark or strong).

The main thing that I see would throw a wrench in my plan is if the same assumptions that are used when measuring with a hydrometer (3 part solution of water/sugar/alcohol) no longer hold true from an optical standpoint. I need to figure out how all of the other variables affect the optics, so for the mean time I am taking every measurement with both hydrometer and refractometer and keeping very careful notes (I plan to analyze my measurements at a later time when I have enough data).
 
Incidentally, your examples show a BCF of 1.0059 (pre-boil) and 1.0308 (post-boil). Based on my experience, this shows a much larger variation than I have ever seen when calculating pre and post-boil BCF's from a single full size batch.

You're right... not sure where I went wrong doing the math there. At any rate, it's still about on par with measurement errors. Based on previous results, I know that a 1.03 correction will get me within 1% almost every time.
 
The main thing that I see would throw a wrench in my plan is if the same assumptions that are used when measuring with a hydrometer (3 part solution of water/sugar/alcohol) no longer hold true from an optical standpoint. I need to figure out how all of the other variables affect the optics, so for the mean time I am taking every measurement with both hydrometer and refractometer and keeping very careful notes (I plan to analyze my measurements at a later time when I have enough data).

This may be helpful:
http://seanterrill.com/2011/04/07/refractometer-fg-results/
 
Well, I received the other hydrometer just in time for all hell to break loose at work, and I had to work 7 days per week, and up to 12 hours per day for several weeks in order to get the problems sorted out. I did take some more readings with the triple scale hydrometer during that time, and have since taken some readings with a more accurate hydrometer. Now the work problems are behind me, I hope to get on with investigating things on a regular basis.

First, the equipment I am using:

  • Refractometer: RHB-32ATC - reports readings in 0.25 Brix increments
  • Hydrometers: 1 * 1.000 - 1.050, and 1 * 1.050 - 1.100 graduated in 0.0005 increments
  • Eyesight: Not too bad if I use a magnifying visor to read the hydrometers

Next, what I have learned and changed since mid November:

  • I used to used 3 decimal places for the resolution of hydrometer readings. I now realize that this can introduce significant errors when calculating the Brix Correction Factor, so I have increased it to 5 decimal places.
  • Hydrometers are difficult to use. First, you have to apply a calibration adjustment using arithmetic, then you have to apply temperature correction using a calculator. I wrote a simple calculator program where I can select the hydrometer, and enter the observed reading and temperature, and it reports the correct calibrated and temperature adjusted gravity for the selected hydrometer

What I have done.

So far, I have taken pre and post boil readings of 6 * 5 gallon brews, and 2 small scale experimental brews. In each case, I measured the Brix and S.G. both pre and post boil, and used these measurements to calculate a Brix Correction Factor.
Three of the 5g batches and both of the experimental batches were measured with a triple scale hydrometer with a resolution of 0.002, and truncating gravity measurements to 3 decimal places. These were not very accurate. The remaining 3 5g batches were measured with the accurate hydrometers, and gravity measurements truncated to 5 decimal places. These should be more accurate.

What I have yet to do.
I want to do a number of small experimental batches using either Maris Otter, Pilsner, or US 2 row at various mash temperatures and thicknesses, and also test some specialty malts in isolation, and then in combination with some base malts to see what effect the malts and mashing conditions have on the Brix Correction Factor and the % attenuation. Before I do this, I need to establish a procedure that allows me to produce small batches with a reasonable pre-boil and post-boil gravities. (The previous attempt to do this started with a gravity of 1.0155 and ended with a gravity of 1.060 which is not very typical.)

Here are the results that I have come up with so far.

5 gallon batches using 95% Maris Otter and 5% Muntons Crystal 55. Each batch mashed for 90 minutes at 150F. The measurements were taken with the triple scale hydrometer and gravity corrections were truncated to 3 decimal places.
Code:
Pre-boil
Brix           11.5        11.5        11.5
S.G.            1.043       1.044       1.042
BCF             1.0733      1.0497      1.0979
Post-boil
Brix           14.6        14.75       14.6
S.G.            1.057       1.056       1.056
BCF             1.0399      1.0684      1.0576

The next 3 batches used the accurate hydrometers, and 5 decimal places for the SG's. All 3 were mashed at 1 qt / lb. The first was mashed for 90 minutes at 150F, and contained 95% M.O, and 5% Muntons Crystal 55.
The second brew was mashed at 148F for 90 minutes, and contained 93.7% M.O. and 6.3% Muntons Crystal 55.
The third brew was mashed at 148F for 90 minutes, and contained 86.8% M.O. 5.7% Muntons Crystal 55, and 7.5% Flaked Barley.

Code:
Pre-boil
Brix           11.4         9.5        13.5
S.G.            1.04368     1.03637     1.05226
BCF             1.0480      1.0425      1.0446
Post-boil
Brix           14.125      11.5        16.75
S.G.            1.05475     1.04618     1.06732
BCF             1.0454      1.0020      1.0189

Conclusions:
  • The pre-boil correction factors with the more accurate hydrometers and using 5 decimal places for the S.G. seem to be pretty consistent. Those measured with the triple scale hydrometer and 3 decimal places varied widely.
  • Reducing the mash temp from 150F to 148F appears to substantially reduce the post-boil correction factor
  • The post-boil correction factor appears to be lower than the pre-boil factor (except for in one case measured with inaccurate equipment, and truncated hydrometer readings)
Over the weekend, I hope to do a mini-batch using just M.O. at 1 qt per lb at about 148 - 150F (I don't have the mash temp calibration worked out yet for my 1 liter vacuum flask so the mash temp could be a bit off).
Sometime during next week, I hope to do a small test using just crystal malt.

-a.
 
Started to do the same - measured end of mash, and post boil with hydrometer and refrac. Did not get pre-boil with the hydrometer, partly due to high temps, and because was worried about how much DME to add.

Belgian Strong
End of Mash:
SG= 1079
Brix = 18.35
BCF = .98086

Post Boil:
SG = 1067
Brix = 15.9
BCF = .97766

75% MO
4.5% Aromatic malt
4.5% Special B
6.5% Crystal 60
2% chocolate malt
2% DME
4.5% Candi Sugar

Realizing two things - how did I get an 18.35 reading? I'm using the same model from the start of this thread, from Amazon. reads in increments of .20. So that is eyeballing a small difference - loads of human error using either instrument. But should be plenty within any tolerance I care about.

And using the candi sugar may throw it off. But my post mash and my post boil BCF were similar, which may be good?

Didn't calibrate my next batch well, or maybe I did but I took bad notes. Can't win 'em all.

batch from this past weekend included a broken hydrometer, so use my first BCF and ran with it. Couldn't re-calibrate with the new recipe.

I do plan to keep recording this with various recipes, to see the difference pre and post boil for my specific refrac on different beer styles. Maybe next year I'll be able to stop using my hydrometer pre fermentation......
 

Latest posts

Back
Top