Kamahido
Paladin of Soap
I was wondering what brand, make, model etc... scale people used. I have an Ozeri Digital Kitchen scale. Model ZK14-S.
Scale Quality
- Thread starter Kamahido
- Start date
Help Support SoapMakingForum:
snappyllama
Supporting Member
I use a KD8000 that I got on recommendation of folks here: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00VEKX35Y/?tag=skimlinks_replacement-20. It's fantastic - especially with the separately available power cord.
Last edited by a moderator:
For making batches of soap that are at least 1lb and up, I use this one: http://www.oldwillknottscales.com/my-weigh-kd7000-silver.htmlhttp://www.oldwillknottscales.com/my-weigh-kd7000-silver.html
And for making lotions, very small batches of lip balm, and for 8oz test-batches of soap, I use this one that can weigh accurately down to .01 grams: http://www.oldwillknottscales.com/jennings-jsr-200.html
IrishLass
And for making lotions, very small batches of lip balm, and for 8oz test-batches of soap, I use this one that can weigh accurately down to .01 grams: http://www.oldwillknottscales.com/jennings-jsr-200.html
IrishLass
cinnamaldehyde
Well-Known Member
I use a fairly cheap digital kitchen scale from Superstore/Loblaws, permanently "borrowed" from my kitchen. It measures to the tenth of a gram. Since the recipes from soapcalc.net come out to the hundredth, I round up to the nearest tenth on oils and down on lye. Throws off my superfat a wee bit, but I've never had an issue.
Steve85569
Supporting Member
http://www.ebay.com/itm/191054380227?_trksid=p2060353.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT
I'll chime in with that link.
I also have a scale that weighs to .01 ounce that I use since soapcalc batches to that.
I'll chime in with that link.
I also have a scale that weighs to .01 ounce that I use since soapcalc batches to that.
Deedles
Well-Known Member
This is the same one I have. In fact I think IL is the one who recommended it a while back. I love it.For making batches of soap that are at least 1lb and up, I use this one: http://www.oldwillknottscales.com/my-weigh-kd7000-silver.htmlhttp://www.oldwillknottscales.com/my-weigh-kd7000-silver.html
IrishLass
http://www.soapmakingforum.com//www.pinterest.com/pin/create/extension/
Arimara
Supporting Member
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2015
- Messages
- 3,400
- Reaction score
- 2,495
I have this scale and I don't recommend it. The calibration weight for is is expensive. I also managed to get oil inside of it. I bought my unit from amazon but I'm debating on if it's worth it to send it to the company to fix.
The Efficacious Gentleman
Lifetime Supporter
You want to avoid postal scales in general.
Arimara
Supporting Member
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2015
- Messages
- 3,400
- Reaction score
- 2,495
IT was certainly helpful with mailing things and I did buy it before coming here. But I still have a weight I have to sell off somehow.
The Efficacious Gentleman
Lifetime Supporter
I'm talking soaping - things to use for other things are all well and good, but the way a postal scale works makes it less than ideal for soaping, where we want to add more and more ingredients rather than just one item.
Steve85569
Supporting Member
I have a set of calibration weights left over from my working days. Way more than I need now but I'm going to hang on to them just so I can make sure my scales are accurate through the range that I use in soaping.
Over the years I've seen scales that developed some odd changes in the load cell over time. Not something I want to miss IF it happens when I'm dealing with lye and all it's abilities. Check weights are worth the cost in my humble opinion.
Steve
notapantsday
Well-Known Member
As long as you're weighing everything with the same scale, I don't see a problem if the scale is a little off. The important part is that the ratios are correct, it doesn't really matter whether you end up with 4g more or less batter.
Of course, a bad scale might also get the ratios wrong. But a calibration weight won't help with that, it can only bring everything closer to reality.
Imagine you have a scale that shows 104g instead of 100g and 520g instead of 500g. A calibration weight can make it show 100g and 500g, but it won't matter for the recipe because the ratios are the same. The only difference is the total amount of batter you get.
On the other hand, if you have 96g instead of 100g and 512g instead of 500g, you have a problem because the ratios will be different from the recipe. But a calibration weight can't fix that. It can make the scale show 100g for 100g, but then it will also show 533g for 500g. You would need several different weights and create a new calibration function, but I don't know of any affordable scale that can do that.
Calibration is important if you want to get the correct total amount and if you want to use different scales for the same recipe. But if you only use one scale at a time, it doesn't make a difference.
Of course, a bad scale might also get the ratios wrong. But a calibration weight won't help with that, it can only bring everything closer to reality.
Imagine you have a scale that shows 104g instead of 100g and 520g instead of 500g. A calibration weight can make it show 100g and 500g, but it won't matter for the recipe because the ratios are the same. The only difference is the total amount of batter you get.
On the other hand, if you have 96g instead of 100g and 512g instead of 500g, you have a problem because the ratios will be different from the recipe. But a calibration weight can't fix that. It can make the scale show 100g for 100g, but then it will also show 533g for 500g. You would need several different weights and create a new calibration function, but I don't know of any affordable scale that can do that.
Calibration is important if you want to get the correct total amount and if you want to use different scales for the same recipe. But if you only use one scale at a time, it doesn't make a difference.
Steve85569
Supporting Member
The "calibration weight" will point out the non-linear error you pointed out. That's the one I would be concerned with. The weights are being used as verification weights rather than calibration weights in this procedure. I place a graduated set cumulatively on the scale and check to see that the readout is correct or if the error is the same percentage of the total number of "counts" that the scale is performing. I would rather replace a set of scaled than to get a negative SF on a batch because the load cell had decided to give me random things. I have seen it a couple of times and it is usually caused by a bad power supply. I did have a load cell go crazy after a power surge too. Random "stuff"!
My experience comes from 30 years of running NIST traceable equipment in materials labs. Trust me I've seen some strange equipment failures.
Note to self: change the batteries frequently and remove when not being used.
Steve
My experience comes from 30 years of running NIST traceable equipment in materials labs. Trust me I've seen some strange equipment failures.
Note to self: change the batteries frequently and remove when not being used.
Steve
Steve85569
Supporting Member
Just got a new set in today and ran through the check weight routine. They have a linear error of .011% at 1 kilo and .012% at 2100 grams. More than accurate enough for soap making. Range is 3,000 grams and accuracy is 0.1 gram.
Cost with shipping was $24.99 ( eBay from previous link in this thread). Platform is big enough to hold a pitcher and still see the display clearly.
Makes me wish I told the DW I wouldn't be soaping on Thanksgiving.:roll:
I just had to do the check out of habit.
Cost with shipping was $24.99 ( eBay from previous link in this thread). Platform is big enough to hold a pitcher and still see the display clearly.
Makes me wish I told the DW I wouldn't be soaping on Thanksgiving.:roll:
I just had to do the check out of habit.
