From the HBD Archive
From: ephram@violet.Berkeley.EDU
Subject: re: SG adjustments
Date: 1989-09-08 06:18:53 GMT

>From: Darryl Richman <darryl@ism780c.isc.com>

>From: ephram@violet.berkeley.edu
>">and on Doug Roberts (HBD #236)
>">
>"> (T x 1.449E-4 - 0.009) + SG(uncorrected) = SG(corrected)
>"
>"This formula does not hold true for 60 degrees F. ...
Here I state the formula does not conform to the published refrence that
I have (Byron Burch).

>My goodness! Do you really think that your measurements are accurate
>beyond 3 places on a hydrometer?
No, I do not even think that I can accurateley read to .001 with one (although
I do anyway :-).
Daryl goes on to say things about signifigance and accuracy of hydrometers.

My reply:
That a hydrometer only measures in increments of .002 and the #'s I am
talking in my posting are well below signifigance here I do not argue.
I _do_ however like my sources to agree with each other. All that I
have read, and seen, has said SG v. temp is not linear. Maybe it
approaches linearity over some range of temps but not over the whole scale.

Now if the formula represents close enough for temps between 60 and 100 F
then it should say so. I might even use it. My point is that the formula
is not correct for the whole range of temp's (32 - 212 F) and should
come with some kind of caveats.

I would like to add that this forum has been wonderfully free of flames,
and, it is not my intention to start any now. If this posting (or my
pprevious one) was too strong I appologize. My intent was mereley to
point out my observtion about the formula.

We must prevent those commies from compromising the integrity of our
precious bodily fluids. -Gen. Jack D. Ripper
Ephram Cohen ephram@violet.berkeley.edu
466 44th St. #1 3210 Tolman Hall
Oakland, CA 94609 Berkeley, CA 94720


Back New Search

The posts that comprise the Homebrew Digest Searchable Archive remain the property of their authors.
This search system is copyright © 2008 Scott Alfter; all rights reserved.