What percentage of brewers are using their pH meters properly?

[RevKev]

I'm the same. My wife has spent lots of time kicking me under the table. In society today if someone says something stupid you are not supposed to question him. But as a scientist in a scientific setting you are.

I have been asked incredibly naive questions by "professionals" more than once but I wouldn't give credit to the average home brewer for having their level of knowledge. Many of these guys are unpacking a new Hach or Milwaukee meter and these will be the first pH meters they have ever touched.

Oh absolutely, people never learn unless corrected. Many stories for another day lol.

And you're right the average HBer likely is more inexperienced, they didn't likely learn it a long time ago and simply forgot it, they were never taught to start with. I'll give a HBer credit in application though, first time with the proper SOP a lot of people can get results. If they can interpret and understand why they got what they got, that's another issue, but industry unfortunately is the same.

 

[Cavpilot2000]

I did have a question I wanted to ask about this earlier but forgot. If indeed BNW is accurate except for the bias of 0.5 pH why doesn't its author simply subtract this bias off?

Let me preface by saying I misspoke with my decimal point. I find BNW to be off by 0.05 pH with my setup, not 0.5 (that WOULD be a significant error). Editing original post.

There would be no need for the author to make any adjustment to the formula because that bias is unique to me based on the malts I use and my water SOP.
It isn’t a universal variance across all users, just for me. I don’t use the included optional tool to adjust for strength of acid malt and until recently it didn’t have a means of taking into account the decrease in pH from the addition of sulfites.
So again, it is proven predictable for me, if I factor in my own system variance, so I am happy with it.
Your mileage may vary, but a predictive tool that has been (in my case anyway) validated as reliable and repeatable is a good tool to me.

And likely since your background is in measurement, no tool is going to be accurate enough for you, and more power to you.
And even if I didn’t adjust for the predictable variance, I can’t tell the difference between a beer that was mashed at 5.32 and 5.37. Maybe you can, but I doubt it.
Or maybe that’s just my confirmation bias (I lukt it up ‘cuz big werds confoose me).

 

[JimRausch]

Covered that in No. 3. Here's the link


https://www.homebrewtalk.com/forum/threads/ph-meter-calibration.302256/

Thank You.

 

[ajdelange]

Let me preface by saying I misspoke with my decimal point. I find BNW to be off by 0.05 pH with my setup, not 0.5 (that WOULD be a significant error). Editing original post.

Hey, it was only one order of magnitude1

There would be no need for the author to make any adjustment to the formula because that bias is unique to me based on the malts I use and my water SOP.
It isn’t a universal variance across all users, just for me. I don’t use the included optional tool to adjust for strength of acid malt

You don't just adjust for the strength of acid malt. Lots of people (including those that write spreadsheets) that because sauermalz is labeled as 3% lactic acid that you can take its weight, multiply by 0.03 and use that amouint of lactic acid in calculations. It doesn't work that way. Sauermalz is a malt and has a titration curve dramatically different from that of lactic acid.and until recently it didn’t have a means of taking into account the decrease in pH from the addition of sulfites.

So again, it is proven predictable for me, if I factor in my own system variance, so I am happy with it.
Your mileage may vary, but a predictive tool that has been (in my case anyway) validated as reliable and repeatable is a good tool to me.

It's repeatable and predictable but my mileage many vary. Got it. The program has several flaws (they all do) some serious and some not so serious. If you are aware of them and can rationalize your way around that then all I can say is "Enjoy!" Of course you really don't have much alternative except to find a better program (and that's going to be tough) or write your own which is really the best option. The tools are freely available to you for the asking but will require you to have at least a rudimentary understanding of what determines pH in a mash.

And likely since your background is in measurement, no tool is going to be accurate enough for you, and more power to you.

Yes, always looking for ways to improve on things, have found them in this arena and continue to strive for even better.

And even if I didn’t adjust for the predictable variance, I can’t tell the difference between a beer that was mashed at 5.32 and 5.37. Maybe you can, but I doubt it.

Nope. And can't tell the difference between one mashed at 144 and 145 either but still buy thermometers with accuracy better than a degree.

Or maybe that’s just my confirmation bias (I lukt it up ‘cuz big werds confoose me).

You have misinterpreted what confirmation bias is. This is something that anyone who votes in an election, makes investment decisions or, in fact, any type of decisions really needs to understand. It is the constant nemesis to the scientist and elaborate protocols have been developed to combat it. If you take nothing else away from this discussion grasp that your life will be much improved if you understand what these "big werdz" mean to you.

I'll close with one final piece of advice. Trust but verify. That's the motto of some intelligence agency and really applies here. Especially verify if you change something e.g. new style of beer, new malt supplier, change in source water alkalinity or, particularly a change in mash thickness (BRUN water is known to have a problem with that).