View Single Post
  #6 (permalink)   Report Post  
bobdrob
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Huh?" Might you chemists pls dumb down the discussion for us scientifically
impaired readers? Simple english preferred.... among the challenged,
bobdrob.


"Ray Calvert" > wrote in message
...
> Mathematically the answer is yes. You can use the Pearson's Square -- but
> not exactly as it is normally used. As you comment, the pH scales are log
> based. So first you need to take the exponent of each pH. Then use the
> Pearson's Square. Then take the log of the final number.
>
> There are "got'chus" however. pH is not going to blend like alcohol. As
> commented above, the different buffer systems and different acids that
> will interact differently when the wines blend will change the pH. You
> might blend them and check the pH and find it is quite far off from the
> predicted value. In fact you might blend them and check the pH and then
> check it again a week later and find that it has changed considerably from
> the first measure.
>
> It might work but I am not sure it is valid to talk about blending pH.
>
> Ray
>
> "Lee" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> This question gets increasingly complicated.
>>
>> I often end up with wines that have pH's that are either too high or
>> too low, and the best solution is to blend the two. My question is how
>> to predict the resultant pH.
>>
>> Obviously, pH is a log function, so blending equal parts of wines with
>> pH's of 3 and 4 DOESN'T produce a wine with a pH of 3.5. A wine with a
>> pH of 3 has 10 times the concentration of H+ ions than a pH of 4. Does
>> anyone know of an equation to predict a resultant pH of a blended wine
>> the following 4 variables:
>>
>> X = volume of wine with pH of A
>> Y = volume of wine with pH of B
>>
>> My goal is to work backwards and aim for a specific pH, knowing the
>> pH's of the original components and then calculating the necessary
>> volumes of the two components. While bench trials are another
>> solution, there should be some science to predict the results.
>>
>> Thanks for your help,
>>
>> Lee
>>

>
>