# Pilsen Profile from RO



## mattjm (30/4/16)

Can someone check this for me please, Im starting from RO and assuming 0's (is there a better profile to use for RO?) and to reach pilsen or damn close I need for 30L: Calcium Sulphate 0.1g, Magnesium Sulphate 0.3g, Magnesium Chloride 0.5g, Calcium Carbonate 1g and Baking Soda 0.25g.

I understand these are minuscule quantities but I have a scale to measure them if Im going to get a good profile from it however Im open to other sugestions as Im really trying to get this one as perfect as possible.


----------



## Black n Tan (30/4/16)

Don't get carried away trying to emulate a water profile exactly. I certainly wouldn't be adding carbonate or baking soda. If using RO water I would add 5g CaCl2 for a 23L batch and leave it there. it will provide a nice rounded malt profile typical of a czech pilsner. You will need to add some acid or acidulated malt if using pale malts to hit an optimal mash pH.


----------



## danestead (30/4/16)

RO isn't all zeros, although it is close. The make up of your RO water is dependant upon the water out of your tap and the state of your RO filter.

To be honest, if I were to do Pilsen water, I'd use straight RO with no additions. The most I've ever used though is 75% RO mixed with 25% tap water as I want some minerals in there still like calcium. I'm not saying this is perfect, but it is what I've done.


----------



## manticle (30/4/16)

I'd add enough cal chloride to hit 30- 40 ppm of calcium and leave it at that.
Ditto to b&t regarding the whole water profile approach. Pilsen water is good for pilsner because it's soft, not because it contains a poofteenth of carbonate.

Focus more closely on yeast health, cell numbers and fermentation profile.


----------



## mattjm (30/4/16)

I'm fairly confident I have the other parts sorted so I'm concentrating on water profile, I'm attempting (from my other thread) a Stella clone as well as a Hahn super dry style clone. From my reading it seems getting calcium up to 50ppm for yeast health is actually a bit of a myth. For me I really just want two things: a base for ales and a base for lagers.


----------



## Black n Tan (30/4/16)

The wort may provide sufficient calcium for yeast health, but is unlikely to provide enough for proper yeast flocculation. For these styles I would use CaSO4 more to help dry out the finish. So it is really up to you and want you want to achieve.


----------



## manticle (30/4/16)

mattjm said:


> I'm fairly confident I have the other parts sorted so I'm concentrating on water profile, I'm attempting (from my other thread) a Stella clone as well as a Hahn super dry style clone. From my reading it seems getting calcium up to 50ppm for yeast health is actually a bit of a myth. For me I really just want two things: a base for ales and a base for lagers.


There is some evidence that lagers do not require 50 ppm minimum and that malt provides most/all the essentials but 40 ppm in the mash is still recommended as far as I understand. That's for lagers, ale still 50. Previously homebrew literature seemed to suggest calcium levels could be quite high (up to 250ppm) - you won't go wrong targetting 30 - 50 (total mash, not mash liquor).


----------



## danestead (30/4/16)

Black n Tan said:


> The wort may provide sufficient calcium for yeast health, but is unlikely to provide enough for proper yeast flocculation. For these styles I would use CaSO4 more to help dry out the finish. So it is really up to you and want you want to achieve.


I have a Kölsch on tap which was fermented with the white labs Kölsch yeast. I used my tap water diluted with RO water and my estimated calcium is 6ppm. That yeast is reported as a medium flocculator yet is really really struggling to clear, even with a gelatine addition. Calcium may play a part.


----------



## mattjm (30/4/16)

so just 5g of CaSo4 in 30L and have a play on different styles from there, tasting the RO water I think I will see a light and day difference just using that over my tap water.
Would love something definitive before I put this brew down as Im just guessing


----------



## Black n Tan (30/4/16)

danestead said:


> I have a Kölsch on tap which was fermented with the white labs Kölsch yeast. I used my tap water diluted with RO water and my estimated calcium is 6ppm. That yeast is reported as a medium flocculator yet is really really struggling to clear, even with a gelatine addition. Calcium may play a part.


Kolsch yeast is a bad flocculator: medium is generous IMO. I have been reading recently about the importance of calcium in flocculation and the evidence is clear that without calcium yeast will take longer to clear. One of the dry yeast manufacturers recommends 100ppm Ca to aid flocculation (can't remember which one). Recently my beers are taking longer to clear, mainly due to changing from a freezer to a fridge for fermentation (I just can't cold crash as low as I used to), so on my most recent lager I added 50ppm Ca in the mash (as normal) and an extra 50ppm just before cold crashing. Time will tell if I get a better result.


----------



## Rocker1986 (30/4/16)

I've done that whole water profile thing a number of times on my pilsners. I have a water still so I just distill water for them, and add those miniscule amounts back in. They've always turned out really well. No problems with yeast floccing out, although in saying that I did use isinglass in them for that. I did brew one with straight tap water as well, but it didn't turn out as nicely. That's just my personal experience though. It works for me, but YMMV.


----------



## mattjm (30/4/16)

just measured the ph of my water coming out of the RO unit and Im getting 9.2 with a cheap ATC PH meter I got from HBS, tap water is 8.0. Meter is reading both consistenly the same. Shouldnt my RO be more like 7?


----------



## manticle (30/4/16)

I doubt your ro water is really 9.2 unless you're somehow measuring the waste water.

My doubt would start at the measuring instrument.


----------



## mattjm (30/4/16)

Im getting 8.0 every time I measure my tap water and im getting 2.4 for white vinegar, the ro waste is actually coming out at 8.4 and Im now seeing 8.9 for my ro water.


----------



## manticle (30/4/16)

Either your filter or pH device is not working properly or you're not using them properly.


----------



## Kodos (30/4/16)

manticle said:


> There is some evidence that lagers do not require 50 ppm minimum and that malt provides most/all the essentials but 40 ppm in the mash is still recommended as far as I understand. That's for lagers, ale still 50. Previously homebrew literature seemed to suggest calcium levels could be quite high (up to 250ppm) - you won't go wrong targetting 30 - 50 (total mash, not mash liquor).


I'd be really interested to read some of this evidence, Manticle - can you point me to any of it?

It's not just homebrew texts: Peter Waldred from Uni of Ballarat talks about the need for calcium, and Fix and Bamforth explain it helps alpha amylase and yeast (but they don't give an amount).

I'd be genuinely interested to read newer sources on the subject.


----------



## manticle (30/4/16)

I'm familiar with many sources for the calcium requirement (and none of the new info negates that necessarily - just that the need for additions is overstated and lager requirements are much more minimal).

I'm not at a point where I can say it is definitive as my understanding previously was also from authors such as fix, bamforth, lewis, de clerck, etc but some of the referenced info from martin brungard suggests the requirement for additional calcium may be overstated, especially in regards to lagers.

At no point am I (nor do I believe is he) suggesting calcium does not play a major role in enzyme activity, yeast function and flocculation, pH adjustment, etc.


----------



## mattjm (30/4/16)

I dont really see how I could be misusing either, the filter is water in water out and a waste water line and the meter is placed in the water up to the line and gives a reading, am i missing something?


----------



## Goose (30/4/16)

mattjm said:


> I dont really see how I could be misusing either, the filter is water in water out and a waste water line and the meter is placed in the water up to the line and gives a reaing, am i missing something?


calibration ?


----------



## manticle (30/4/16)

RO water will be between pH 5 & 7 so something definitely is missing.


----------



## mattjm (30/4/16)

2.4 is spot on with vinegar though isnt it? can it be that it is struggling to get a read on the water because it is actually to pure, I read somewhere this can be the case with cheaper meters and ro. Pretty frustrated right now and really wanted to get the mash ph right.


----------



## danestead (30/4/16)

mattjm said:


> I dont really see how I could be misusing either, the filter is water in water out and a waste water line and the meter is placed in the water up to the line and gives a reaing, am i missing something?


What model PH meter do you have and do you calibrate it prior to each day of use? What is the accuracy of your meter (not resolution)?

I know that deionised or distilled water is hard to get an accurate PH from as there arent enough minerals in it which results in pretty much 0 buffering capacity hence easily influenced by other sources. Maybe your RO water is very low in minerals also and causeing the same sort of issues in getting a reading.

Edit: Also, where did you get your RO filter and what brand is it? Do you have a TDS meter to check that the RO filter is actually reducing the mineral content of your water?

Edit 2: How old is the probe in your PH meter? Have you tried testing the PH calibration solution to see how close it is measuring it?


----------



## mattjm (30/4/16)

Thats the only conclusion I can come to, I need some distilled water to calibrate with the buffering solution as Im now not confident to assume my ro water cuts it. It doesn't have a brand name on the package (which may be a big part of the problem) just says PHtester.
http://www.dhgate.com/store/product/100-brand-new-digital-ph-meter-tester-0-14/162111412.html
accuracy and resolution both .1.


----------



## danestead (30/4/16)

Just measured my Perth water with my Hanna 98128. 0.05 accuracy but not calibrated today. Last calibrated last brew 2 weeks ago.

Tap 6.23
RO 7.10
RO waste 6.9 but kept going up slowly over many minutes. Not sure why.


----------



## danestead (30/4/16)

mattjm said:


> Thats the only conclusion I can come to, I need some distilled water to calibrate with the buffering solution as Im now not confident to assume my ro water cuts it. It doesn't have a brand name on the package (which may be a big part of the problem) just says PHtester.
> http://www.dhgate.com/store/product/100-brand-new-digital-ph-meter-tester-0-14/162111412.html
> accuracy and resolution both .1.


Hmm $12. Im afraid to say that you arent going to get much more than a stab in the dark with a meter that cheap.


----------



## mattjm (30/4/16)

unfortunately it was the only option they had at TWOC when I was there and it cost $30 so looks like money down the drain.
Bit unsure now where to go with all this I still want to brew tomorrow so Im thinking maybe just add 5g of Calcium sulphate to 30 l of the RO brew a simple pilsner without worrying about mash PH and see where I end up.
So my plight for super accuracy seems to have ended up at RO system $460, stir plate $80, beaker $60, scales to measure water additions $120, ph meter $30 = back to what I was doing before and chuck in a pinch of salt lol


----------



## danestead (30/4/16)

mattjm said:


> unfortunately it was the only option they had at TWOC when I was there and it cost $30 so looks like money down the drain.
> Bit unsure now where to go with all this I still want to brew tomorrow so Im thinking maybe just add 5g of Calcium sulphate to 30 l of the RO brew a simple pilsner without worrying about mash PH and see where I end up.
> So my plight for super accuracy seems to have ended up at RO system $460, stir plate $80, beaker $60, scales to measure water additions $120, ph meter $30 = back to what I was doing before and chuck in a pinch of salt lol


Most people brew all grain without measuring the PH so dont stress too much. You will get beer and probably good beer at that.

It is interesting you paid $120 for the scales as I bought some 200g jewellery scale off ebay for about $7 plus some calibration weights and believe it or not, they are accurate to 0.01 of a gram. Unfortunately it sounds like you should have spent your money on the PH meter and saved on the scales. Ah well, we all live and learn!


----------



## mattjm (30/4/16)

Yeah im sure I could have saved a heap on the scales and ro unit buying online but best I could manage on a friday in perth.


----------



## Black n Tan (30/4/16)

You are going to need to add some acid (3% acidulated malt or thereabouts).


----------



## Mr B (30/4/16)

Pffff i'm sure the money you are saving on buying beer far outweighs the equipment cost


----------



## mattjm (30/4/16)

I think im a fair way off that point to date but hey its a passion not a money saving exercise.
Back to HBS for acid malt tomorrow then, was leaning towards just banging 5kg of pills malt into a low temp mash and see how it goes.


----------



## Danscraftbeer (30/4/16)

Yep. When PH accuracy really matters to you buy a decent one. I think I spent $180 with 2 bottles of calibration fluid.
Check the probe is calibrated in a shot glass of the fluid before each test. (Read all instructions and do it all properly).


----------



## mattjm (30/4/16)

Do you find you calibrate very often if you ae checking prior to every test?


----------



## manticle (30/4/16)

Pils.
Not pills.

Anal and I apologise for that but I have been very patient for a while.

Oxygen, yeast, cool fermentation.

Keys


----------



## Danscraftbeer (30/4/16)

mattjm said:


> Do you find you calibrate very often if you ae checking prior to every test?


Now after having good pH testing and done lots of experiments and testing just about every stage of the process I've got it down now. I only do 2 tests for a brew now. I test the mash after its sat for 5 or more minutes, gentle stir and a small Vaurlofed amount. With the water profile I use it gets bang on PH 5.2 each time now. I'm stoked with that. I also test the filtered water on its own. Its 6.8 this weekend. It varies between 5.8 to 6.8. Evidently that variation doesn't make any difference to the mash ph. 
I now use a water profile equivalent to 25% of the Burton on Trent profile and that's just for the mash water only. So end result for the entire wort will be something like 15% of the Burton on Trent profile. Why did I come to this profile? Toiling and brain straining to make a profile that has everything needed? :unsure: It seems to work perfect for the mash with the use of ~2% Acidulated Malt.
This is for Pale Ales so far but I will soon try it with lagers.

Added: I get good clarity and don't even use finings anymore. Just Whirfloc in the last 15min of the boil.


----------



## mattjm (30/4/16)

Ok I finally have something I think is going to work:
Mash volume 17L add equally 1.7g of Calcium sulphate and calcium carbonate
Sparge 15L same again but 1.5g of each.
5kg pils malt and 150g 2% acid for a mash ph of 5.44.


----------



## danestead (1/5/16)

Black n Tan said:


> You are going to need to add some acid (3% acidulated malt or thereabouts).


He can also use lactic acid. Thats what I use and is the same as using acidulated malt.

Personally though, if I didnt have an instrument to measure the PH with, I wouldnt bother dicking around with acids etc possibly making an incorrect assumption that you will need them.


----------



## mattjm (1/5/16)

from spreadsheets i think what I came up with gets me in the ballpark.


----------



## rude (1/5/16)

mmm I have been playing with R/O as well with no PH meter using Brun water calc

I have a meter coming hopefully a AD12 made in hungry thanks Danscraft trolled the internet though
& bought it through ServoVendi instead of Perth scientific

$154 through the perth mob same from the mob that make then ADWA in hungry 74 euro postage
e-mailed them & they wouldnt move on the postage option

ServoVendi $62 aus delivered havent got it yet going through spanish post fingers crossed

Last brew was a pale ale & used Brun pale ale profile got 137.7 ppm ca & my beers usually clear well
with time but with the extra ca bright within, well a lot quicker than usual , the photo is 2 weeks in keg no clearing agents except whirfloc at 10 mins then cubed





As Manticle quoted largers are better below 50ppm coming from Martin Brungaurd but triai
& error will prove this or you could take his word & also Black & Tan is switched on I'de like to
drink a few of his beers I recon

Do the google on R/O pils read up & good luck hope it turns out a ripper for you


----------



## Black n Tan (1/5/16)

danestead said:


> He can also use lactic acid. Thats what I use and is the same as using acidulated malt.
> 
> Personally though, if I didnt have an instrument to measure the PH with, I wouldnt bother dicking around with acids etc possibly making an incorrect assumption that you will need them.


Yep any acid is fine, liquid or acidulated malt. Using RO water the pH is likely to be a bit high (around pH5.6 according to Brun water), so I think he could safely add some acid even without a ph meter. Burn water or EZwater will help work out the additions and may be act on the conservative side and aim for mash ph of 5.3-5.4.


----------



## mattjm (1/5/16)

I have Weyermann acidulated malt PH 3.4, Im going to add 150g to the 5kg of wey pils to aim for approx 5.3 mash PH?


----------



## Dan Pratt (1/5/16)

Just as a side note, consider using rainwater instead of RO. Its free and neutral.


----------



## SBOB (1/5/16)

rude said:


> ServoVendi $62 aus delivered havent got it yet going through spanish post fingers crossed


seems like good value... keep us posted that it turns up successfully


----------



## mattjm (1/5/16)

Im also on the lookout for a good PH meter, so would appreciate an update also. Considering a couple from perth scientific and wondering if its a good idea to get a combo unit to measured TDS and use that as an idication of when to change filters/membranes.


----------



## rude (1/5/16)

No worries will keep all posted on delivery


----------



## Kodos (3/5/16)

manticle said:


> I'm familiar with many sources for the calcium requirement (and none of the new info negates that necessarily - just that the need for additions is overstated and lager requirements are much more minimal).
> 
> I'm not at a point where I can say it is definitive as my understanding previously was also from authors such as fix, bamforth, lewis, de clerck, etc but some of the referenced info from martin brungard suggests the requirement for additional calcium may be overstated, especially in regards to lagers.
> 
> At no point am I (nor do I believe is he) suggesting calcium does not play a major role in enzyme activity, yeast function and flocculation, pH adjustment, etc.


No worries, I realise now I misread your previous statement in part (I thought you were saying calcium wasn't important, but you were merely pointing out that the oft quoted 50ppm requirement was perhaps an overstatement when it comes to lagers, my bad).

Nor was I disputing it - I just like geeking out on some of the direct references. 

This looks like a topic worth keeping an eye out for.

Many of the original references (Fix, De Clerck etc) seem to be a bit dated now, so it's hard to find good new info, and much of it appears contradictory.


----------



## CmdrRyekr (3/5/16)

Could you go to Pilsen and get a water sample?


----------



## manticle (3/5/16)

Kodos said:


> No worries, I realise now I misread your previous statement in part (I thought you were saying calcium wasn't important, but you were merely pointing out that the oft quoted 50ppm requirement was perhaps an overstatement when it comes to lagers, my bad).
> Nor was I disputing it - I just like geeking out on some of the direct references.
> This looks like a topic worth keeping an eye out for.
> Many of the original references (Fix, De Clerck etc) seem to be a bit dated now, so it's hard to find good new info, and much of it appears contradictory.


There's a post by martin brungard which has a long list of the specific references relevant to this.

I'll see if I can find it.


----------



## manticle (3/5/16)

http://aussiehomebrewer.com/topic/79792-pilsner-and-acid-adjustment/?p=1168840


----------



## Jack of all biers (3/5/16)

mattjm said:


> Im also on the lookout for a good PH meter, so would appreciate an update also. Considering a couple from perth scientific and wondering if its a good idea to get a combo unit to measured TDS and use that as an idication of when to change filters/membranes.


Don't know about a combo unit, but I got my pH meter (LAQUAtwin) on E-bay for $186 delivered with two calibration solutions. Simple to use, compact and accurate. I got the pH 22 model (accurate to 0.01), but the pH 11 would suffice (accurate to 0.1) and it's cheaper. LAQUAtwin also do a TDS meter (Cond) and meters for Calcium ions, Sodium ions, amongst others. I went through E-bay, because to buy direct from the same mob was $10 more postage!!! (taking the piss really).

Made in Japan so can be trusted as opposed to other cheaper manufacturing countries nearby (no names, no pack drill.) http://www.horiba.com/fileadmin/uploads/Scientific/water_quality/Documents/Brochures/HIS/HORIBA_Brochure_PBT-12-2014A_-_LAQUAtwin_Pocket_Water_Quality_Meter__Low-Res_.pdf

I bought mine from Watertest systems in Sydney via E-bay (they charge more if you buy direct from them), but I see it's for $1 less if you want it cheaper from this mob http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/like/172061686951?limghlpsr=true&hlpv=2&ops=true&viphx=1&hlpht=true&lpid=107&chn=ps

I did a fair amount of research and found that for bang for your buck in the quality field testing pH units this one was the best quality for price.


----------



## mattjm (3/5/16)

Any thoughts on these:

http://shop.fantasticfarms.com.au/index.php/products/water-pumps-test-gear/digital-ph-meter-ph-test-meter.html
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/AU-Ship-pH-Meter-Waterproof-0-14PH-C-F-Replaceable-Thermometer-probe-Backlight-/322044126047?hash=item4afb53635f
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Digital-pH-Meter-Thermometer-Waterproof-IP65-Multi-Points-Calibration-Tester-/181741762474?hash=item2a50a737aa

Leaning towards the top one, though the others seem to have the accuracy that I'm after at a lower price point. Was considering the hanna 9128 but would much prefer if I can find something adequate under $100


----------



## Jack of all biers (4/5/16)

Only the top one seems to have much info on it and seems to be a good buy for the price. Like all things cheap it is made in China, but that does not mean anything really, but given they specialise in manufacture of meters, they will probably have it right. http://kedida.en.china.cn/ Just be mindful that with what ever pH meter you go for, if you test your pH at temps higher than room temp (25C) you will decrease the life of your electrode.


----------



## rude (5/5/16)

Mine still hasn't arrived was sent the 22nd of April according to tacking Number
was the 12 euro postage option though so you would think slower
anyone with experience with Correos registered mail

Top one looks good accuracy 0.02 then again why not 0.01 not sure price is good


----------



## rude (5/5/16)

Hey Jack looked at those LAQUAtwin recon they would be alright

Initially looked at the omega but they all look about the same sort of style ph meter price range

No micro biologist so just went with gut feeling bit of a punt really

Good point about the temp too

cheers Rude


----------



## mattjm (5/5/16)

Im picking up a meter tomorrow and Im between that top one and: http://www.perthscientific.com.au/product/waterproof-pocket-tester-2/.


----------



## Jack of all biers (6/5/16)

My opinion is that the ad12 would be the better buy. Whilst at $154 it is nearly twice the price it probably will be more reliable over the long term and when the probe does finally go it appears very easy to replace. I would check though how much replacement parts will cost you for each unit and how easy they are to obtain. It looks like you have time to think about it though, as Perth scientific seem to be out of stock today.


----------



## Jack of all biers (6/5/16)

My opinion is that the ad12 would be the better buy. Whilst at $154 it is nearly twice the price it probably will be more reliable over the long term and when the probe does finally go it appears very easy to replace. I would check though how much replacement parts will cost you for each unit and how easy they are to obtain. It looks like you have time to think about it though, as Perth scientific seem to be out of stock today.


----------



## Jack of all biers (6/5/16)

Sorry. Mobile phone double tap on the post button.


----------



## mattjm (6/5/16)

Very pricey but may be of interest to some, id be lying if I said I havnt been considering it lol:
https://www.hannainst.com.au/product/HI99151/pH%2BMeter%2Bfor%2BBeer%2BAnalysis%2B

Called the guys today at perth scientific and I was really impressed how helpful and great there customer service was. They have steered me towards the AD11 being the most suited to my needs and warned me against the claims of higher accuracy ph pens being slightly "cheeky". Missed them today after getting stuck at work so a bit more thought over the weekend and make a final decision Monday.


----------



## Jack of all biers (7/5/16)

mattjm said:


> Very pricey but may be of interest to some, id be lying if I said I havnt been considering it lol:
> https://www.hannainst.com.au/product/HI99151/pH%2BMeter%2Bfor%2BBeer%2BAnalysis%2B
> 
> Called the guys today at perth scientific and I was really impressed how helpful and great there customer service was. They have steered me towards the AD11 being the most suited to my needs and warned me against the claims of higher accuracy ph pens being slightly "cheeky". Missed them today after getting stuck at work so a bit more thought over the weekend and make a final decision Monday.


Yeah the Hanna would be good for a pro-brewer, who can claim it on tax and would use it everyday for reliably accurate pH and Temp readings, but for the homebrewer it is complete over kill (price wise at least). The AD11 ($121 after GST) appears to be the exact same (stats wise) as the pH 11 from Horiba, which I've seen for $125 (plus $10 postage) on e-bay.



Jack of all biers said:


> Simple to use, compact and accurate. I got the pH 22 model (accurate to 0.01), but the pH 11 would suffice (accurate to 0.1) and it's cheaper.


----------



## danestead (7/5/16)

Have you looked at the Milwaukee ones? As far as Im aware, Milwaukee are a well respected brand and I believe there is a meter with either 0.01 or 0.02 (cant rememeber) accuracy for basically the same price as my Hanna 98128. If I happen to be needing another meter, Ill be getting a Milwaukee.

Edit: It was the MW102.


----------



## mattjm (10/5/16)

Ended up settling for the AD11, will see how it goes on my next brew.


----------



## rude (12/5/16)

Woo Fu*ken who just got my AD 12
Having a quiet beer after work & looked over at my desk yes a package


----------



## Jack of all biers (13/5/16)

$62 delivered? Did that include all conversion fees taxes etc? If so, excellent buy.


----------



## rude (13/5/16)

Mate Im stoked that was it $62 delivered

Wish I got more solutions

So to all the ph meter owners Im going to wash with D/I water
Calibrate with 7.01 & 4.01 Q Can you use 4.0 & 7.0 buffer solution instead ?
Store with storage solution Q can you use 4.0 buffer solution to store probe in ?

Any info would be great as I got a quote for 3 lots of 10 satchels for $82


----------



## danestead (13/5/16)

I'm pretty sure 4.00 v 4.01 etc are the same thing. Ph varies with temperature so the ph difference is probably only due to quoting different temperatures (not that 0.01 is going to matter for brewing).

I would store in proper storage solution. I'm pretty sure it is a solution the same as what is inside the probe. Can't remember what it is though however potassium or something rings a bell.

Also, whilst I'm posting, a trap people fall into often is thinking that their new brute ATC ph meter corrects ph for measuring at mash temperatures. The ph of wort changes with temperature so you need to be comparing the ph at a set temperature. Room temperature (20-25ish degrees) is probably most common as measuring wort at mash temperatures isn't brilliant for the life of your probe.

Atc corrects for errors in the probe reading, not changes of ph in wort due to temperature.


----------



## fletcher (13/5/16)

i store my hanna in the 4.01 buffer solution. their storage information site said it could be used instead so i didn't bother with buying a storage solution.


----------



## danestead (13/5/16)

fletcher said:


> i store my hanna in the 4.01 buffer solution. their storage information site said it could be used instead so i didn't bother with buying a storage solution.


Or if their website says so I guess that is the next best thing.


----------



## fletcher (13/5/16)

danestead said:


> Or if their website says so I guess that is the next best thing.


definitely the next best thing. from their site:

"Storage solutions are designed to keep the pH electrode hydrated while minimizing growth on the electrode from bacteria and algae. Placing a probe in water will result in a growth on the electrode that might not be visible to the naked eye. This growth will affect the performance and accuracy. To minimize growth it is recommended to use pH 4 buffer if storage solution is not available. Solutions with lower pH values can inhibit growth. If pH 4 buffer is not available, it is advisable to use pH 7 buffer."


----------



## rude (14/5/16)

Thanks for feedback

Yes am aware of the ATC will be cooling to 25c before testing

Ended up buying from Hydro shop $22 for the 3 bottles 250ml


----------



## danestead (15/5/16)

I just placed an order for an AD12 as well. My Hanna 98128 probe needed replacing and was going to cost me $125 so I thought I'd give the AD12 a shot for half the price. The AD12 has 0.01 accuracy compared to the Hanna 98128 of 0.05 so win win!


----------

