PDA

View Full Version : Proofing Parrot Tool for measuring Brix percentage of concentrate



fireant911
04-07-2023, 07:58 AM
Short version: Has anyone attempted to use a ‘proofing parrot’ to test the Brix level of the concentrate from their reverse osmosis machine?

Long version: As I am still very new to syruping, I have many questions and, occasionally, an idea will pop into my head… after a quick search, it becomes evident that many other great minds have already thought of this, tried it, and reported their success or failure with such an idea.

Yesterday, while I was researching a topic relating to that idea which consisted of modifying the principle of a p-trap to monitor the output of a reverse osmosis machine, I came across something that distillers have long been using to measure the alcohol content of their production in near real-time AND measuring continuously. This sounded like a nice approach that could be beneficial to others, like me, that frequently check the Brix value from the output of their reverse osmosis machine. Although testing using a low-scale refractometer is quick and requires not too much effort, it is, however, still an extra individual step that must be performed… so what if one was able to continuously monitor the Brix concentrate level without manually sampling?

Sap hydrometers are readily available and provide nice and relatively true readings for the Brix percentage of one’s concentrate bucket ONCE a sufficient level is accumulated that will float the hydrometer…. now, getting an accurate reading from a bucket that is one-third full will be challenging because of the viewing angle! Another downside to this bucket configuration is that the new reading resulting from any adjustment to the needle value will be much delayed because of the volume in one’s concentrate bucket PRIOR to the adjustment. Yes, samples could be extracted from the concentrate line, poured into hydrometer test cup, and the Brix level read BUT that is several steps long.

Now, finally, my question: has anyone attempted to incorporate a ‘proofing parrot’ to their reverse osmosis machine’s concentrate line? Prior to yesterday, I have never heard of such a device but it looks as if this could give me the ‘impact’ readings (i.e., actual Brix percentage and was the change an increase or decrease) resulting from changes to the needle valve. A gravity-fed proofing parrot paired with a sap hydrometer could be easily mounted on a reverse osmosis machine and, at least theoretically, provide constant Brix readings… yes, there will probably be some minor variations due to the density of the concentrate at the bottom of the hydrometer-holding chamber from that floating out of the weir-like top portion but, I posit, if the volume of the hydrometer-holding chamber is matched nicely with the volume of the submerged portion of the hydrometer this will be of minimal affect.

Many of the commercial proofing parrots are made from copper through I imagine that a similar model could be constructed using PVC material at a much lower cost. If warranted, I could actually make a custom design that is optimized for the exact sap hydrometer being employed on a 3D printer though with this year’s season practically over it is too late.

Here is a brief overview of a proofing parrot: https://www.clawhammersupply.com/blogs/moonshine-still-blog/how-to-measure-the-abv-of-distilled-alcohol. Why am I asking rather than building such a device… I do not yet have a sap hydrometer plus I am very, very much a novice at this maple-stuff! I did a search and saw no reference to a “proofing parrot AND maple sap” therefore I am asking if any of you way-more experienced syrupers have any wisdom to share about using a proofing parrot of a reverse osmosis machine?

DrTimPerkins
04-07-2023, 08:07 AM
Yup, thought about it quite a bit for both sap and syrup (taking careful measurements is pretty important in doing research). While the concept seems valid and straight-forward, I'm not convinced it would be so simple to do in reality. Probably less of an issue for sap/concentrate than for syrup. The main reason has to do with the liquid flow pushing up or across the hydrometer as it floats in the liquid. Alcohol is a good bit less dense than water. Once you add water and then sugar on top of that, you're increasing the density substantially, so any flow of liquid is going to push on the hydrometer more than in ethanol. The issue is WAY worse in syrup. So the problem becomes one of not having the flowing liquid impact the reading but having enough flow so the temperature of the liquid around the hydrometer is correct. Hopefully you'll have better luck coming up with a solution than I have.

harley2003rkc
04-07-2023, 08:08 AM
I considered having Oak Still make me a parrot with the correct fittings for our pan. But then I decided to grab a PID controller and automate the draw off valve instead. Now I barely even watch the draw off

fireant911
04-08-2023, 10:26 AM
Dr. Perkins,
In additional reading, I see that there is a rather large debate within the brewing community about the usability and practicality of a Proofing Parrot. To get around some of the shortcomings, I suppose that a designing a system with minimal volume in regards to the hydrometer sizing while concurrently incorporating a branch with a shut-off valve controlling the flow either to or away from the proofing parrot as well as adding a drain valve as well could enable the apparatus to provide readings with improved accuracy... but that would be akin to building a Rube Goldberg Brix measuring device:D!!!... or, I could use the well-proven simpler, less expensive, and more accurate method of using a refractometer!

Thanks for sharing your wisdom and guidance - it is most appreciated.

DrTimPerkins
04-08-2023, 12:36 PM
..I suppose that a designing a system with minimal volume in regards to the hydrometer sizing while concurrently incorporating a branch with a shut-off valve controlling the flow either to or away from the proofing parrot as well as adding a drain valve as well...

Yup, spent many sleepless hours lying in bed thinking about this before concluding that I should stop thinking about it, but wish anyone else who wants to give it a try the best of luck. It is always possible to solve the little problems...the issue is that these add complexity and cost, so eventually you end up with an unwieldy monstrosity that costs a huge amount, so less than useful and nobody could afford it.