Sanity Check on Bru'n Water Adjustmets

First time finally using Bru'n water but I need a sanity check. I'm going to use all distilled water. Grain Bill for an American Lager & Water adjustment sheet are below using v1.17b





I do have some questions:
1. Do the adjustments look correct? Is there a different/better way to get the same results?
2. Why isn't the Calcium cell turning Green? Not that big of a deal but I started with v1_16 where all the cells turned green and I'm used to that.
3. Did the formula for Calcium Chloride change? Is this because of making it "anhydrous"? In the notes in v17, it says you can bake it. Can you keep baking the whole batch every time, over and over? Or only once and then making sure it's in an air tight container?
4. In v17 there's no longer a SO4/CL ratio. Why?

Calcium chloride is amazingly grabby when it comes to water. Make a solution and check its strength as directed in https://www.homebrewtalk.com/showthread.php?t=501377.

Yes, you can bake the water of hydration out but the last one is pretty tightly bound and it takes quite a lot of heat to get it out. Plus unless you cool in a dessicator (or the relative humidity is very low) it will pick up water from the air tout suite.

There should be no limit to the number of times you can bake CaCl2.nH2O to get n back to, or close to, 0.

You may find the baking process less of a PITA than making the solution (which you only have to do once but you do need to keep the solution in a closed bottle) but that is really up to you to decide.

If you are making a lager, you don't need to boost the Ca content to 50 ppm. Lower is OK. In fact AJ and I both prefer Ca in the 20 to 30 ppm range for light lagers. I find that the flavor is better. Since mashing with that low Ca content may not drop the oxalate out of the wort during mashing, I've included an option on the Supporter's version by which you add all the salts to the mashing water to boost the Ca content to above 40 ppm. The low mineral content sparging water ends up diluting the wort back down to those low values I mentioned. None of the cells turn green in the free version.

After AJ pointed out that his analysis of CaCl2 samples indicated that the hydration state was often under 2, I decided that it would be safer to state that the calculations were based on Anhydrous version of CaCl2. That way you won't overdose the water. Baking the CaCl2 is easy. 375F to 400F for an hour should do it.

The SO4/Cl ratio was removed from the program so that brewers would not rely on it. As you are evidencing, brewers falsely use the ratio to validate their mineral additions and that is not a good thing. As AJ and I have pointed out hundreds of times, its the total concentrations of those ions that matters, not their ratio.

Thanks Martin & AJ! Especially responding so fast on Thanksgiving. I wouldn't have expected either of you two to be posting with your HBT family today, kudos to each of you And for putting up with all of these, what "if" questions. You guys are a true asset to the HBT community.

For me, the whole brewing process has been a trip through the "looking glass". Just how far down the hole do you want to go?

The differences between v16 & v17 through me for a loop. I had one version at work that I could study at work during lunch and the other at home.

If doing a lager and only doing a single infusion mash (which is what I'm doling), can you still go as low as 20 to 30 PPM? In the v16 comments it mentioned going lower if doing decocted mash.

On another note, what does it take for the supported version? No flat "fee"?

Where do you find magnesium chloride? I stopped in at a Walgreens and didn't seem to find something that would fit the bill.

I wouldn't argue with either Martin or AJ- so I'm not! But I don't see the need for the epsom salt or canning salt- I'd go with just the calcium chloride and gysum (if you want the sulfate). That would increase the calcium a bit, as there isn't any need to increase the sodium or magnesium in my opinion.

I don't see that magnesium chloride brings much to the party but if you can't find it in a health food store or on the net and still really want it probably the best way to get some is dissolve a bunch of epsom salts in DI water and add lye until a precipitate forms. Wash that a couple of times with more DI water and then add hydrochloric acid until the gel is all dissolved and the pH is approximately 7. Boil off the water.

I'm not a fan of mag chloride since it too is hygroscopic and sucks up water from the air. However, I know of one probrewer in the South Pacific who's water is virtually rainwater, and he swears that he gets better results for his Hefes by using mag chloride in the mineralization. I do raise an eyebrow to that. But I do still find that the minor levels of Mg and Na in brewing water add a nuance that helps the beer with flavor depth. You don't need them, but they certainly don't hurt at the low levels mentioned.

Couldn't help but notice your grain bill includes ~23% crystal malt, far too much for a lager IMHO. I'd shoot for more like 5-7% (or less!) might need a bit of acid malt (or other source of acid) to keep the pH in line.

On a different recipe, Brunwater predicted a mash Ph of 5.34. and I got 5.54. Now, I'm assuming that this is mostly related to the difference in the grain-correct? Will I be constantly off ~0.2 every time with Brunwater or is it going to vary too much based on the grain bill?

The problem with the grain models is very real but water can be a problem too if you are using water that is of variable composition because of seasonal variations or because your supplier used different sources for whatever reason. Using RO or DI water, of course, eliminates this source of inaccuracy and is one of the best reasons, IMO, for using it. If you see variation as large as 0.2 pH it is worthwhile to go over everything to make sure you aren't entering something in error. The programs are not consistently off by as much as ±0.2 pH.

I'm not "blaming" the program, just trying to understand, why the difference.
I double checked and I still don't see where I went wrong.
All the water was made from Distilled.
First time using a new M102 Ph meter, right after calibration.
Wort sampled was cooled down after mashing for 15 minutes.

The result was 0.2 higher? That is not typical of the deviation that I see. How were any minerals or acids incorporated into the mashing water? Were they added to the water or the mash itself?

Added to the water itself.
I may have found my error. I brewed today (although a different beer, but each used the same base malt-2 row) and used the results from Brunwater. But this time I calculated results towards the lower end of the desired Ph range (figured if I was a little high, I could try to error on the side just above the lower end). To achieve this, I added (.3 m/gal) or 1.1 ml total of lactic acid. Ph would have been 5.46 but the lactic dropped it to 5.3. This time I measured the Ph 15 minutes into the mash and at the end of the mash. At 15 min in, it was 5.42 and at the end it was 5.25. Guess I should have taken a sample on the first brew, more towards the end of the mash. It probably was "right". I was just hoping to "catch" a possible error ahead of time and be able to adjust it. Some of it may have been the initial "user error" on the Ph meter I did calibrate it and tried to double check the readings with the buffer solutions to make sure it was calibrated right. Seemed to be ok.

Is it best to test the Ph @ the end of the mash?

I brewed over the holidays again and my mash Ph was still .2 below the Brunwater calculation This was measured at the end of the mash, cooled close to room temp. The majority of the grain on this batch was Marris Otter instead of 2 row.

Ki-ri-n said:

I brewed over the holidays again and my mash Ph was still .2 below the Brunwater calculation This was measured at the end of the mash, cooled close to room temp. The majority of the grain on this batch was Marris Otter instead of 2 row.

Click to expand...

The pH should drop during the mash. You generally want to check the pH at the beginning, that way you can do any adjustments needed. If the adjustments are large, it may be a bit late if you're 10 minutes in, but in most cases you'll have a good idea if you'll be close.

The maris otter I use has an SRM of 3, rather than the 1.7 my regular two-row has. You can plug that in, to see if it makes a difference in the pH calculation.

pH doesn't always drop. If it starts out higher than 5.4, it tends to drop. But if it starts lower than 5.4, it will rise. I don't know why, I just know it does.

I dont mean to jump the thread but a question if i may?

Do the mash ions change at all when Sparging?.
Once i have my set profile Mash and mash ph dialed in does that change when sparging?.
Hope that makes sense.
Thanks

mabrungard said:

pH doesn't always drop. If it starts out higher than 5.4, it tends to drop. But if it starts lower than 5.4, it will rise. I don't know why, I just know it does.

Click to expand...

The mash pH will move towards the equilibrium pH as time progresses. Whether it goes up or down depends on how the proton sources and proton sinks are distributed throughout the mash and in particular which are available to the pH electrode at a given time. If, for example, you are using mostly base malt with with a high DI mash pH and thus adjust by using sauermalz or acid the initial pH you measure will be lower than the equilibrium pH because, in the case of added acid, it is already in solution and in the case of sauermalz it is on the surface of the corns and thus goes into solution faster. As the mash progresses this acid has time to find its way into the base malt portions of the grist where it is neutralized and the overall pH goes up. If, conversely, you have a beer with lots of dark malt and you add some bicarbonate to the liquor this is what the pH meter responds to in an early measurement and, as the reaction take place and the acids from the grist are released the pH drops.

If you have hard water the calcium + phytin reaction is an additional source of protons. As that reaction takes some time you will find in such cases that the pH tends to drift slowly downward over time. This may be superposed on the drift attributable to added acids or bases.

What path the pH trajectory takes depends on a lot of factors such as the ones I have just mentioned (largely mechanical) and others I haven't because I don't have anything to say about them. These are the kinematics of the actual acid base reactions. We can predict from themodynamics what the final pH will be but we (or to be more precise, I) cannot predict what the pH will be at any point in time.

Clearly Martin's observation is reasonable much of the time. as the target pH is often near 5.4 and we hope that eventually we will come to 4 but I've tracked enough pH vs. time data to know that anything can happen.

I did another batch today, and it was right on! Problem, Briess two-row being entered as 2 SRM. Changed it to 5 and everything fell into place. I think I may have miss read the notes in Brun water to raise Briess malt as much as three. Not adding three onto the two already (making 5). That seemed to do the trick. I'll have to double check on some other malt bills to make sure.....

I have been using Bru'n Water for about a year now and am usually spot on with mash PH unless I use Carafa Special 3 de-husked barley. Has anyone else noticed a difference in PH prediction with this malt?

If you are 'spot on' with a brewing program you are probably taking readings improperly by pulling the meter when it reads close to what the program has predicted. This is an aspect of 'confirmation bias' to which we are all subject and against which we must all consciously wage a continuous fight be it brewing or politics or, especially, our finances. You should be seeing errors with average magnitude of around 0.1. Be sure to take pH measurements in the same way every time i.e. be sure you are taking one at 15 minutes and that the reading is absolutely stable before you pull the probe. Do not rely on the feature in some meters that determines when the reading is stable for you.

I found that soaking the pH meter bulb, in a cleaning solution like Hanna HI7061, and storing it between use in a storage solution like Hanna HI70300, keeps a meter in good working order. Calibrating the meter at least once a month helps ensure the bulb has not dried out. Re-calibrating your pH meter several times during brewday is a good way to confirm consistency and accuracy in between readings. The effort needed to maintain a pH meter is a small price to pay for the increased confidence in its readings.

I wasn't referring to pH meter induced problems but rather what engineers often call 'headset errors'. The programs aren't inherently capable of accuracy better than about 0.1 rms and if one sees errors much less than that consistently it is probable that headset errors are being made.

ajdelange said:

If you are 'spot on' with a brewing program you are probably taking readings improperly by pulling the meter when it reads close to what the program has predicted. This is an aspect of 'confirmation bias' to which we are all subject and against which we must all consciously wage a continuous fight be it brewing or politics. You should be seeing errors with average magniutude of around 0.1. Be sure to take pH measurements in the same way every time i.e. be sure you are taking one at 15 minutes and that the reading is absolutely stable before you pull the probe. Do not rely on the feature in some meters that determines when the reading is stable for you.

Click to expand...

Thanks AJ, yes you are correct about confirmation bias (I have read many books about this topic so I try to avoid it), I should have stated I am in the same ballpark with all malts except carafa special.

Paulaner said:

I have been using Bru'n Water for about a year now and am usually spot on with mash PH unless I use Carafa Special 3 de-husked barley. Has anyone else noticed a difference in PH prediction with this malt?

Click to expand...

Which direction is the Carafa III Special skewing the mash pH towards? Higher or lower than calculated?

It's consistently .2-.3 points lower than predicted.

Paulaner said:

It's consistently .2-.3 points lower than predicted.

Click to expand...

How much of the dehusked Carafa is required for you to see this deviation? This may be why my last couple batches have come out a bit lower in pH than expected.

Paulaner said:

It's consistently .2-.3 points lower than predicted.

Click to expand...

Which Bru'n Water version are you using? The original acidity constant used for roast grains was understating the actual acidity and it was increased in the latest versions of the program.

mabrungard said:

Which Bru'n Water version are you using? The original acidity constant used for roast grains was understating the actual acidity and it was increased in the latest versions of the program.

Click to expand...

I was using the v 3.4 when I was .2-.3 off, but now I'm using V 4.2 and I'm closer to .15 - .2 off. One thing that could account for this is that I'm using RO water and I simply placed the 10% value in for all my cations and anions, so as an example my bicarbonate was 96 and I placed 9.6 into the program. I have been messing around with this lately and placed 0 in for all ion concentration levels and this estimates the PH to be in the same ballpark for what I am reading with my freshly calibrated meter. Would you recommend placing all zeros in for the concentrations, when I use my TDS meter the water reads 1? P.S I'm sure it's user error as to why I am off and I am simply using the carafa special as the scape goat.