In article >,
"Paul E. Lehmann" > wrote:
> Wildbilly wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > "Paul E. Lehmann" > wrote:
> >
> >> Wildbilly wrote:
> >>
> >> > In article >,
> >> > "Paul E. Lehmann" > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Wildbilly wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > In article >,
> >> >> > "Paul E. Lehmann" > wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> fishziblu wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > it is my second go at making wine,and i've noticed that after the
> >> >> >> > first fermentation,the ph increases. When i crushed the grapes my
> >> >> >> > reading was 3.4, however on my first racking the ph has gone up
> >> >> >> > to 3.9. Is there a reason for this? Should i check the wine more
> >> >> >> > often? i have added some tartaric now. During the time it spent
> >> >> >> > with a high ph could it spoil itself?
> >> >> >> It is common for the pH to rise during or after fermentation. If
> >> >> >> you did not add any Malo Lactic culture, your grapes probably
> >> >> >> underwent a ML fermention from the natural culture on the grapes.
> >> >> >> You did the right thing by adding
> >> >> >> tartaric. You also need to protect your wine with SO2 and the
> >> >> >> amount you use depends on the new pH of your wine after you added
> >> >> >> the tartaric.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Good news is that the pH is just about right for Robert Parker;O)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > You need some way of measuring the "free" SO2. The Ripper method
> >> >> > calls for a starch indicator, sulfuric acid, an Erlenmeyer flask,
> >> >> > and a burette. Otherwise you risk O.D.ing your wine on SO2. Nothing
> >> >> > like 100 parts per million (ppm) of SO2 in your wine to give you a
> >> >> > blinding headache.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > For the addition, I use 1 lb potassium metabisulfite per 1 gallon of
> >> >> > water to make a 5% solution.
> >> >>
> >> >> WHOA, Wildbilly. Are you sure of your units? I believe that one
> >> >> POUND of
> >> >> Potassium metabisufite would give you a LOT more that a 5% solution.
I think we can agree that it is a 6.4% SO2 solution.
> >> >> Try
> >> >> 100 GRAMS in one LITER for a standardized solution. This is a 10%
> >> >> solution.
You will see that it is a 5.76% SO2 solution. (see below)
> >> >> See
> >> >>
> >> >> http://www.brsquared.org/wine/Articles/SO2/SO2.htm
> >> >>
> >> >> section 19 on the details.
> >> >>
> >> >> Paul
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> > Then the formula is ppm of SO2 that you
> >> >> > want to add, times the gallons added to, times the fudge factor of
> >> >> > .063 equals the number of milliliters of 5% SO2 solution to add
> >> >> > (#ppm X gallons X .063 = # mls). Initially the SO2 will bind to
> >> >> > aldehydes, sugars, proteins, etc. and you won't see the number of
> >> >> > ppm of SO2 expressed, but once these compounds become saturated with
> >> >> > SO2, you'll get more of a linear response. The bound SO2 has little
> >> >> > effect on micro-organisms, which is the job of the "free" SO2. The
> >> >> > effectiveness of the SO2 is dependent on the pH of the wine. For a
> >> >> > pH of 3 to 4, use 30 to 40 ppm SO2. This is a rough rule of thumb
> >> >> > but should serve you well.
> >> >
The calculations are here Paul.
> >> > 19. Stock Solutions, third paragraph, fifth line, "Since potassium
> >> > metabisulphite is only 57.6% SO2," your 100 grams per liter is a 5.76%
> >> > solution.
(100g X .576)/1000g H2O = .0567 = 5.76%
> >> > My suggestion was 1 pound of metabisulfite/gallon H2O. A
> >> > gallon is eight pounds plus the pound of metabi = 9 lbs. 1/9 =
> >> > 0.11111111. Mutiply this by the efficency of 57.6%, (1/9) X .576 = 6.4%
> >> > SO2. This is wine making, not rocket science. If you are trying for 32
> >> > ppm and get 30ppm or 34ppm, it's no big deal.
> >> >
> >> > You'll also notice I was much more bref than
> >> > http://www.brsquared.org/wine/Articles/SO2/SO2.htm ;O)
> >>
> >> The above link takes the 57.6%, you correctly reference, into
> >> consideration when he gives the formulae for additions using the "Stock
> >> Solution" he makes.
> >
> > Uh, Paul, YOU said above, that 100 grams of metabi per 1 litre would
> > give a 5% solution of SO2.
>
> No, If you read the link
This is wearisome. You made a statement, **"AND"** you gave a link
> you would see that one puts 100 grams in a liter
> container and fills it up to the one liter mark. In other words, it is 100
> grams IN a liter not 100 grams TO a liter. Also it is not a 5% solution
> but a 10% solution.
>
> >
> > My point is that 1 lb/1 gallon is easier to remember than 86.8
> > grams/100ml (which you didn't).
>
> I believe most amateur wine makers are more likely to have 100 grams on hand
> rather than one pound and the one liter solution will last a long time for
> most amateur winemakers. One gallon is a LOT to make - unless you use it
> to bathe with also :-)
>
> > There is rarely a direct correspondence
> > between SO2 added and SO2 measured. If you add 15ppm SO2 to a new wine,
> > you may get a 5ppm or 10ppm of SO2 rise in the wine. If you want to
> > remember 86.8g/100ml, go for it.
>
> True, I never argued the bound issue.
????? To paraphrase our murderous ex-vice president, "accuracy is a
virtue".
>
> >
I think everyone else gets it.
>
> I think than anyone who wants to read and have a good knowledge will read
> the link I referred to. I am not interested into getting into a ****ing
> contest with you
You are, and you have.
> but I would appreciate if you read the link instead of
> commenting off cuff. I belive the author has a LOT of knowledge on the
> subject.
You don't think that someone might try a 1/4 lb in a quart? Don't even
need a balance.
I read the link Paul, otherwise I wouldn't have been able to quote
"19. Stock Solutions, third paragraph, fifth line, "Since potassium
metabisulphite is only 57.6% SO2," ".
Yes it is a good site to begin learning about the technical side of wine
making.
Don't think there is much more fun to be wrung out of this post. Bye.
--
"When you give food to the poor, they call you a saint. When you ask why the poor have no food, they call you a communist."
-Archbishop Helder Camara
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satelli...cle%2FShowFull
http://countercurrents.org/roberts020709.htm