Author Topic: A ratiofor the numerically adept please.  (Read 582 times)

A ratiofor the numerically adept please.
« on: September 10, 2019, 01:35:56 pm »
In beekeeping there is a classic "recipie" for making up winter syrup which is two pounds to a pint of water.

Some say that that is the same as 2 kilos to a litre or 2000gms to 1000 mls. Which is again 2:1

However.... Playing with some numbers.

Two kilos of sugar to a litre of water is 2:1

Two pounds of sugar to a pint converted to metric is: 907: 568 which in turn is

1.59 : 1

Quite a difference. But am I right??

PH
Bees do nothing invariably.

Re: A ratiofor the numerically adept please.
« Reply #1 on: September 10, 2019, 01:43:12 pm »
you are mixing and matching volume and weight, but you are right it is a different ratio.

Re: A ratiofor the numerically adept please.
« Reply #2 on: September 10, 2019, 02:03:22 pm »
Different, yes.

A pound is 16oz, and pint (imperial) 20 fl.oz, so the ratio could be said to be 32/20, or 1.6:1

So it would be 1.6kg / 1l water

Of course if the "formula" is from the US, then the ration is 2:1, a US pint being 16fl.oz.
We are making a New World (Paul Nash, 1918)

hellymedic

  • Just do it!
Re: A ratiofor the numerically adept please.
« Reply #3 on: September 10, 2019, 02:55:55 pm »
An English fluid ounce of water weighs 28.4 grams.
IIRC an American fluid ounce does not...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_ounce

Re: A ratiofor the numerically adept please.
« Reply #4 on: September 10, 2019, 03:02:08 pm »
US: "A pint's a pound the whole world around"
UK: "A pint of water is a pound and a quarter"

http://www.jilleduffy.com/2009/03/pint-is-not-pound-world-around.html
"Yes please" said Squirrel "biscuits are our favourite things."

Re: A ratiofor the numerically adept please.
« Reply #5 on: September 10, 2019, 03:08:15 pm »
Woah guys its nothing to do with the friends over the pond this is imperial measure and metric.

PH
Bees do nothing invariably.

Tim Hall

  • I want to eat the fleeting shade of your lashes
Re: A ratiofor the numerically adept please.
« Reply #6 on: September 10, 2019, 03:31:34 pm »
Ok, a pint of water in the UK is 1lb 4oz. ( A gallon of water weighs 10lb, 8 pints in a gallon, so a pint is 10/8 lb = 1.25 = 1lb 4oz.

Thus for 2lb sugar you have a weight of 1.25lb water, giving a  sugar/water ratio of 2/1.25 = 1.6

Using 1kg sugar you'll need 1/1.6 kg of water, or 625g.  Handily 1g of water is 1ml (at 4°C, but don't worry about the temperature), so you want 625ml water.
There are two ways you can get exercise out of a bicycle: you can
"overhaul" it, or you can ride it.  (Jerome K Jerome)

Re: A ratiofor the numerically adept please.
« Reply #7 on: September 10, 2019, 04:29:51 pm »
In beekeeping there is a classic "recipie" for making up winter syrup which is two pounds to a pint of water.

…..
Quite a difference. But am I right??


yes, but once the bees get a taste for it (they don't always, it doesn't smell like 'food' to them) they may not care regardless of the exact ratio.  IIRC it isn't a bad idea to dribble some of the syrup over the bees directly; when cleaning themselves up they usually get the idea that it is food after all.

Remember also that the bees when foraging will (at best) only ever find nectar that is about 50% sugar.  They are not that keen on weak nectars (eg that found in some fruit tree blossoms) but they will use it just the same, if it is the only close source.  Obviously they are not treating the syrup the same way as nectar but I have always thought that they must normally feed on honey that is still moisture rich. It really wouldn't make sense any other way, because it costs the bees a lot of energy to get the moisture content of honey right down so that it will keep, and if it doesn't need to keep, I don't see why they would bother.

cheers

T42

  • Tea tank
Re: A ratiofor the numerically adept please.
« Reply #8 on: September 10, 2019, 05:07:59 pm »
Get a winemaker's hydrometer, measure the specific gravity of your 1lb/pint and then you can make any amount of solution you like.
I've dusted all those old bottles and set them up straight.

caerau

  • SR x 3 - PBP fail but 1090 km - hey - not too bad
Re: A ratiofor the numerically adept please.
« Reply #9 on: September 10, 2019, 05:12:17 pm »
I'm pretty sure the answer to this just needed to be


Yes.
It's a reverse Elvis thing.

Kim

  • Timelord
Re: A ratiofor the numerically adept please.
« Reply #10 on: September 10, 2019, 05:22:14 pm »
I suppose the optimum ratio depends on whether they're African or European bees...  :D
To ride the Windcheetah, first, you must embrace the cantilever...

Re: A ratiofor the numerically adept please.
« Reply #11 on: September 10, 2019, 05:26:06 pm »
Not spelling?

Re: A ratiofor the numerically adept please.
« Reply #12 on: September 10, 2019, 05:30:19 pm »
Quite a difference. But am I right??

The numbers of kilos per litre and pounds per pint would be the same if, and only if, there were as many pounds in a kilo as there are pints in a litre.

Sadly, the metric system has contrived otherwise.   >:(

Re: A ratiofor the numerically adept please.
« Reply #13 on: September 10, 2019, 05:33:08 pm »
Thanks all. Umm Brucy it was an arithmetic question not bees in general. After 30+ years I have sort of a handle on that. It was just the metric to imperial that has caused confusion elsewhere and I wanted to double check my figures. Thanks all.

PH
Bees do nothing invariably.

caerau

  • SR x 3 - PBP fail but 1090 km - hey - not too bad
Re: A ratiofor the numerically adept please.
« Reply #14 on: September 10, 2019, 05:38:07 pm »
I suppose the optimum ratio depends on whether they're African or European bees...  :D


Under which wind direction?
It's a reverse Elvis thing.

ian

  • fatuously disingenuous
    • The Suburban Survival Guide
Re: A ratiofor the numerically adept please.
« Reply #15 on: September 10, 2019, 08:28:18 pm »
I see no accounting for gravity, nor for that matter, general relativity.
!nataS pihsroW

Re: A ratiofor the numerically adept please.
« Reply #16 on: September 10, 2019, 11:13:00 pm »
Thanks all. Umm Brucy it was an arithmetic question not bees in general. After 30+ years I have sort of a handle on that. It was just the metric to imperial that has caused confusion elsewhere and I wanted to double check my figures. Thanks all.

PH

yebbut...

a) if you have been keeping bees for thirty years (something that you wouldn't necessarily guess from the nature of your question) then you will presumably have been doing something that worked already, why not just carry on doing that? [If you are in doubt you can always weigh the amount of water you are using and compare with a 'known good' recipe ratio.] Also

b) it only actually matters if the exact strength of the syrup matters (beyond basic things like how runny it is or how likely it is to start fermenting).  This is to my mind at least as interesting a question.  I've always made up syrup to some 'by rote' type recipe and have not  (not  intentionally) varied it. Nor have other beekeepers I know, either, but if folk get confused about it they may have done so without realising..?.

 if the bees quite happily feed on syrup that varies in moisture content then that is one thing, but if the bees need to work to change the moisture content of the syrup (in either direction) before it is useful to them as food, that is quite another.

I'm wracking my brains here but I do remember someone describing experiments with dry sugar as a winter feed, and there was a problem of some kind, either the bees wouldn't always take it or it caused them another problem in some way. If they would take it dry (or in 'cakes' perhaps), it would make life  easier in some respects.  The bees need to control humidity within the hive, and more humidity = a greater ventilation requirement and that presumably stresses the bees more, because they lose heat when they ventilate to control humidity.  Dry (or dryer) sugar would act as a desiccant to some extent, as well as alter the amount of moisture (net) within the hive.

cheers

Re: A ratiofor the numerically adept please.
« Reply #17 on: September 11, 2019, 01:28:26 pm »
Well Brucey it's like this.

I have used 2:1 for many years and probably have mixed over 20 tonnes of sugar so no stranger to that ratio. On another site a discussion got up and it was claimed that 2 kilos to one litre was the same ratio, I never gave it a thought TBH. Then it was disputed so I thought I had better do some figures hence my please cross-check question in the first place.

Now I'm off to feed the thymolated syrup to the bees.

PH
Bees do nothing invariably.

ElyDave

  • Royal and Ancient Polar Bear Society member 263583
Re: A ratiofor the numerically adept please.
« Reply #18 on: September 13, 2019, 08:20:09 am »
you are mixing and matching volume and weight, but you are right it is a different ratio.

There is absolutely no problem expressing solutions as g/l when looking at soluble solids,

The key is whether you are looking at mass in the final volume, or mass to volume when making up the solution. The classic homebrewing connundrum.
“Procrastination is the thief of time, collar him.” –Charles Dickens