EZ Water and Bru'n Water Differ Drastically

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

TFrankMac

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2012
Messages
23
Reaction score
0
Location
Erie
Hello all,

I'm planning on brewing an English Dark Mild based off of John Palmer's (Belladonna Tooks Oaked Mild) recipe. My recipe below is based off an estimated overall efficiency of about 84% which I hit regularly.

5 lbs. Maris Otter
.85 lbs. English Medium
.45 lbs. Special Roast
.42 lbs. Flaked Oats
.42 lbs. Flaked Wheat
.25 lbs. Pale Chocolate

Est. OG 1.038
IBUs 19.6
Color 13 SRM


That being said I am getting two completely different estimated mash pH levels between EZ Water and Bru'n Water. Both factor in a 70% dilution with distilled water off my base water profile which can be seen on the EZ Water sheet. I have attached two pictures of the spreadsheets below. Any ideas on what I can do to remedy this?

Screen Shot 2012-10-01 at 8.19.PM.jpg


Screen Shot 2012-10-01 at 8.17.PM.jpg
 
EZ == 5.56, Bru'n = 5.0. My guess is the acid addition is entered wrong in Bru'n Water?
 
Hmm sorry about that, the pictures don't seem to load well. Anyways, the EZ water calculations lend a pH range in the 5.5 range where the Bru'n water lends a pH range of 5.0.

My base water profile is:
Calcium 33 ppm
Magnesium 9 ppm
Sodium 12 ppm
Chloride 21 ppm
Sulfate 24 ppm
Bicarb 122 ppm

I am diluting the 2.5 gallon mash with 70% distilled water and then adding 0.8 grams of gypsum and 1.1 grams of calcium chloride.
 
EZ == 5.56, Bru'n = 5.0. My guess is the acid addition is entered wrong in Bru'n Water?

I thought I had misentered a value as well, however I checked and I am not adding any acidulated malt (or any other acid for that matter) to the Bru'n water table. Not sure why I am so far off then?? :drunk::confused:
 
Hmm sorry about that, the pictures don't seem to load well. Anyways, the EZ water calculations lend a pH range in the 5.5 range where the Bru'n water lends a pH range of 5.0.

My base water profile is:
Calcium 33 ppm
Magnesium 9 ppm
Sodium 12 ppm
Chloride 21 ppm
Sulfate 24 ppm
Bicarb 122 ppm

I am diluting the 2.5 gallon mash with 70% distilled water and then adding 0.8 grams of gypsum and 1.1 grams of calcium chloride.

I can't see the Brun water spreadsheet, but for me it's always been more accurate. With that base water, and 70% distilled, I can't imagine it would say 5.0 for a pH. do you have the grains entered right?
 
It looks like you have 3L or something for pale chocolate. Am I seeing that correctly?
 
It looks like you have 3L or something for pale chocolate. Am I seeing that correctly?

Yes, from my experience the color of the malt (with the exception of crystal malts) has nothing to do with the pH outcome. I tend to only change the L of the crystal malts to make sure the pH outcome is correct. I put in the real value of pale chocolate (about 200ish SRM) and it had no effect on the pH. As long as the drop down box to the right indicates its a roasted malt I am usually good.
 
Yes, from my experience the color of the malt (with the exception of crystal malts) has nothing to do with the pH outcome. I tend to only change the L of the crystal malts to make sure the pH outcome is correct. I put in the real value of pale chocolate (about 200ish SRM) and it had no effect on the pH.

If you put the file somewhere I'll take a gander. I'm bored at the moment. I'll PM you an email address if you prefer.
 
Yes, from my experience the color of the malt (with the exception of crystal malts) has nothing to do with the pH outcome. I tend to only change the L of the crystal malts to make sure the pH outcome is correct. I put in the real value of pale chocolate (about 200ish SRM) and it had no effect on the pH. As long as the drop down box to the right indicates its a roasted malt I am usually good.

What happens if you put the 200 SRM in the 200L area?
 
What happens if you put the 200 SRM in the 200L area?

Not a darn thing haha. The color of the base malts and the crystal malts change the pH outcome on the sheet but if I change the color of the roasted malts it has no change. (I put everything from 100 to 500 and had no change)
 
Hmm, I looked at the files... I don't see anything entered incorrectly. Part of the difference maybe the value you used for the DI pH of Marris Otter. Some people, I believe, have reported a DI pH for MO of 5.6.
 
Hmm, I looked at the files... I don't see anything entered incorrectly. Part of the difference maybe the value you used for the DI pH of Marris Otter. Some people, I believe, have reported a DI pH for MO of 5.6.

Ya, I tried the same thing. Only puts the pH down to 5.45 in EZ water. :confused:
 
The water with 70 % DI dilution has very little alkalinity, so I'm not surprised that the mash pH is low. But the grist that was mentioned, does not seem to have enough acidity to push the mash pH that low. I'd look at how the grain bill is entered. Unfortunately, I can't see the posted graphic.
 
mabrungard said:
The water with 70 % DI dilution has very little alkalinity, so I'm not surprised that the mash pH is low. But the grist that was mentioned, does not seem to have enough acidity to push the mash pH that low. I'd look at how the grain bill is entered. Unfortunately, I can't see the posted graphic.

I'll have to mess with it some more. I believe afr0byte has posted some clearer images of my spreadsheet if you wanna take a look.
 
Can't explain the differences.

But, I have mashed very similar grain bills and used Maris Otter, even measured the pH of Crisp Maris Otter in distilled water and got about 5.6 pH.

I'm pretty confident that using 100% of your tap water with 0.5 grams of CaSO4 added per gallon of water & 0.25 grams of CaCl2 added per gallon of water would give you a mash pH of about 5.5 measured at room temperature.

I'd save the RO water for your sparge (100% RO), measure out the CaSO4 & CaCl2 using the same weights per gallon and add to your sparge water or boil kettle.

The final water profile would be about 60 ppm Ca, 40 ppm Cl & 90 ppm SO4.
 
I never had that big difference, but this is what ajdelange answered when I asked same question:

Wish I had a nickle for each time I've answered this one. Calculation of mash is theoretically fairly simple but there are practical difficulties in implementation. AFAIK neither of the two spreadsheets you are comparing uses a 'robust' model as this would required iterative solution and while that is easy enough to do with Excel it's probably not something the casual user will want to be bothered with. Even if they did use the robust model it would be very difficult to obtain the data the robust model requires (which among other things says the robust model isn't that robust). This is because the model needs to know the titration curve for each malt in the grist and that varies with malt type, barley cultivar, moisture content, maltings, crop, batch number and, most significantly, mash time and temperature.

Thus the spreadsheets and calculators must use a much simpler model which approximates the behaviour of, for example, a representative 40L crystal. The models are the province of the spreadsheet creators. Some use measured data, some use correlations with malt color, some have empirical tweaks etc. In modeling there are an infinite number of degrees of freedom. Different model, different results. The democrat's model of Obama care is that it will make excellent medical care available to everyone while dramatically reducing the costs. The republican model is that it will destroy our medical care system and take the rest of the economy down with it [just noticed you are in Croatia so this is probably not a terribly meaningful example to you]. Using that as an illustration makes the obvious question stand out in capital letters: which model do you use/accept/believe? Or should you average the results of the two. In the mash pH model the average of the two is 5.48 and that's about what you would get if you left out the baking soda. With baking soda, the mash pH will be higher - probably closer to what EZ predicts so in this case EZ is probably the better predictor but it is very likely Brun water will be the better predictor in other cases. Your best course is to use both spreadsheets while carefully measuring the actual mash pH you obtain when you brew. You will discover from this process which of the two better models your brewing materials and practices and this may depend on style. In the future you can then use that spreadsheet but by that time you will find the combination of your pH meter and experience more powerful than a spreadsheet and rely on them. Eventually the pH meter will go the same way.

The sodium calculation is very easy for a spreadsheet or calculator so if the two spreadsheets are giving you conflicting answers it's likely you are not entering the same data so check that.

Until such time as you get the spreadsheet thing sorted out you might want to just follow the recommendations of the Primer.

It is most important that you do not add any bicarbonate. This will drive mash pH as high or higher than the EZ prediction. Also there is no need for the magnesium sulfate. You can use some as an additional source of sulfate if you want that but beer generally tastes better with lower magnesium (though it may help you to live longer).

There is so much environment factors that affects pH and its pretty tough to make realistic calculation.

One of most variable factors is barely, it seems that the key to get right pH is reaction between Ca and Mg with malt phytin which produces acids to decrease alkalinity (left over alkalinity is RA). And result of that reaction would be part of the reason why calculators have diff. pH result.

Hope it helps.
 
Back
Top