Digital Guaging

[NathanAEmery]

What Digital devices are accurate enough for digital gauging? I know of the Anton Paar models, but are there cheaper options?

[bluestar]

Not all Anton Paar's can be used for final proofing. The portable units, as nice as they are to use, do not provide the required accuracy. I have had detailed correspondence on this with TTB. They have no current official approved list of current models, but they will tell you the Anton Paar 5000 is used by their laboratory. On the other hand, this is spec'd far beyond the legal requirement. If you go by Anton Paar's specs, the 4500 and 4000 benchtop models should also meet the requirement. Unless you exactly follow the gauging manual with classic calibrated hydrometers, however, you use them at your own risk. The same could be said of any recent asian densitometer that functions similarly to the Anton Paar (but different enough to avoid patent infringement). I don't know this for a fact, but I suspect on reason the TTB won't yet make statements on these is because there is no real competition, and they don't want to endorse a specific vendor. Also, even if you could use the 4000, it is frustrating that Anton Paar won't sell a model of a hand held with 2x the precision and accuracy, to meet TTB requirements. Honestly, it is probably just a change in the programming of the device. Again, lack of competition may be the issue.

JMO

[NathanAEmery]

That's the response I figured I would get. And with the cost of the 5000...I can't believe another company hasnt stepped in yet with an alternative.

[bluestar]

That's the response I figured I would get. And with the cost of the 5000...I can't believe another company hasnt stepped in yet with an alternative.

Not until their patents expire (quartz u-tube and ancillary). I did see an asian alternative being used at one small distiller, but it did not seem anywhere as easy to use, but I haven't followed up. He had just started using it.

I use APs handheld for non-tax measuring as most do.

[bjoseph]

The following is from ttb.gov

ATF Ruling 91-2

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) has been asked whether Anton-Paar density meter DMA-58 may, in addition to Mettler-Paar density meters DMA-55, DMA-46, and DPR-2000, be used in lieu of a hydrometer and thermometer to determine the proof of distilled spirits.

By way of background, ATF Rul. 82-3, A.T.F.B. 82-1 15, authorized the use of the DMA-55 for determining the proof of high solid distilled spirits products which contained solids in excess of 600 milligrams per 100 milliliters at gauge proof. ATF Ruling 82-3 was superseded by ATF Rul. 85-12, A.T.F.B. 1985-3 44, which held that the DMA-55 could be used for all proof determinations, including tax determinations. ATF Ruling 85-12 also held that the DMA-46 could be used to determine the proof of all distilled spirits, but that the instrument was too unreliable to be used for tax determination purposes. ATF Ruling 85-12 was amplified by ATF Rul. 86-2, A.T.F.B. 1986-1 95, which authorized the use of the DPR-2000 in determining the proof of all distilled spirits for tax determination purposes.

27 C.F.R. 30.31 prescribes a number of procedures to be used in determining the proof of spirits. These procedures vary depending on the extent to which the proof is obscured due to the presence of interferences such as dissolved solids. All of the procedures described in section 30.31 utilize a hydrometer and thermometer, unless the Director authorizes or recognizes a different approved method to determine the proof of distilled spirits.

Anton-Paar submitted technical information regarding the specifications and performance data of the DMA-58. This information, which was evaluated by the ATF laboratory, demonstrates that the DMA-58 provides accuracy comparable to the hydrometer and thermometer method. As a result of these studies, ATF has concluded that the DMA-58 is reliable to the extent that it can be used in lieu of the hydrometer and thermometer to determine the proof of all distilled spirits for tax determination purposes.

Held, Anton-Paar density meter DMA-58, in addition to Mettler-Paar density meters DMA-55, DMA-46, and DPR-2000, is recognized as an approved method under 27 C.F.R. section 30.31 to determine the proof of distilled spirits whenever a proof determination is required, with the exception that the DMA-46 density meter may not be used to determine the proof of spirits for tax determination purposes.

Provided, these density meters are not approved for use in determining the proof of denatured spirits solutions in those instances where a hydrometer and thermometer do not provide an acceptable method of proof determination under the regulations.

Provided further, use of the density meters does not eliminate the need to add obscuration to the apparent proof determined by such meters when spirits contain more than 400 milligrams, but not in excess of 600 milligrams of solids per 100 milliliters at gauge proof (27 C.F.R. section 30.31().

Provided furthermore, that to make a true proof determination of spirits with such a high solids content, the spirits are first distilled in a small laboratory still and restored to the original volume and temperature by the addition of pure water to the distillate (27 C.F.R. section 30.31©).

ATF Rulings 85-12, A.T.F.B. 1985-3 44 and 86-2, A.T.F.B. 1986-1 95 are superseded.

27 CFR 30.31: (Also 30.32, 19.91, 19.383, 19.454, 19,517, and 19.537)

[NathanAEmery]

You are my new best friend...thanks!

[nabtastic]

Old Post but figured I should update.. not sure if anything has changed but would like to note that the DMA 4500 (and 4000) are not on the list. Straight from the TTB's mouth http://www.ttb.gov/pdf/2014-7-21-device-approval-guidlines.pdf

Side note: I have been told that for distillates with solubles (liqueurs/cordials specifically) you need to distill and add distilled water to restore volume or you can use a calibration table to adjust for specific brix...anybody have recommendations on either?

Thanks,

NAB