Add sugar, when you can activate beta amalayse to break down native long chained starches into simpler, tastier and more fermentable maltose? (Along with small amounts of acetic acid)
And don’t you realize unless you add maltose or fructose, to create a directly fermentable sugar you must invert the molecule in the presence of a weak acid?
Diluting and measuring may work. Another option is measuring density, in g/cm3 (or so), and looking up in tables; for that however you still need to turn the slurry into something liquid.
I’d suggest extraction of known amount of slurry to known amount of water, then operating with a clear solution. Extraction of the sample is a common approach in analytical chemistry.
Okay, I am going to use some jargon and ideas that may be unfamiliar to most. But bear with me.
To accurately measure fermentation, time units are frustrating and bordering on pointless. Fermentation is done when sugar has been converted to co2, alcohol, and Esther’s in a pleasing ratio.
So how do accurately measure when your ‘rise’ and ‘proof’ are done? (This is the genius bit)
Ferment in a vessel inside of another vessel filled with water at a specific temp. Imagine a giant double boiler.
Have a tight fitting lid on the interior vessel, like a pressure cooker. But have a say 0.5 psi outlet valve on the top.
Put a balloon on the outlet valve.
By measuring the volume of the balloon you can accurately gauge where in the fermentation process you are, and avoid problems with weak yeast, over active yeast, inconsistencies with flour, etc.
There are setups with optical gate, using measurement of frequency of bubbles in the airlock. That could be pretty handy. If you measure both this and the volume of the gas, you can calibrate the bubble volume and then just count the bubbles.
To a degree. You may also consider using brazing, if your parts are made of thinner material. Silver or brass brazes will do a good job. For food consumption or work in enclosed spaces, avoid cadmium-bearing ones.
May I observe that we may have significantly overlapping backgrounds?
But when it comes to gas measurement systems, or really measurements of any kind, I prefer as passive as possible. Counting bubbles in an airlock is cool, but it requires either a human or electronic device (which I don’t need to tell you come with their own challenges).
A balloon is a passive device, and even upon failure (popping or blowing off) give you data about the system (you over proofed your dough).
On the other hand, a sensor board can stream the data to you from your basement or the remote mass-production-booze forest-site right to you, and you have graphs to devise operation’s progress from. Easier to got the derivation; the balloon is simple but only an integrator (but good as a backup). And you can even add a classical bang-bang heater controller (optionally augmented with a fan if the yeasts decided to overheat) to keep the thing at the right temperature. And a webcam, and a pair of LEDs to shine trough or from the front to watch the liquid’s behavior, and to watch the surface foam.