Should i use 5.2 mash ph adjuster?

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.

firemostale

Active Member
Joined
May 13, 2012
Messages
26
Reaction score
1
Hey out there in beer world... I'm planning on doing my first decoction mash soon and was wondering about something.

I normally use tap water for my brews (public city water). I normally add one Camden tablet and one tablespoon of 5.2 ph adjuster to my water for mashing and sparking. (Not sure if I should do this for my sparge water or not in reference to the 5.2, any opinions on this are welcome too)

Since I will be doughing in at around 90 degrees and doing an acid rest, should I forget about the 5.2, or should I still use it?

Also, do Camden tablets effect ph in anyway? I've never done any kind if tests for ph. I blindly use 5.2 due to the fact that I have never had a problem with any of my mashes, I usually hit to within three points of my target gravity (.003) With about 40 AG brews.

Any thoughts are welcome!
 
Funny thing is I use it and great results. Also, I check my PH with strips and it is always on the high side (Above 6.5). Given that and I also use softened water (potassium) which I hear is a no-no yet I still turn out beer I consider really good. I have also had really good feedback from many others including a couple different home-brew clubs in the area. Eventually I will spring for a water analysis but for now I stick with using the 5.2. My beer never tastes like Gose and I always get good malt character. Now what works for me, may not work for others. I just know not using it causes a very astringent flavor and 20% reduction in mash efficiency in my environment.

I have read the water chemistry primer and when I get in to competition lagers then I will head down that path with probably an insane reverse osmosis system with a 100 gallon tank. For that, I will want to start with a blank canvas.

Now I would at least get some of the litmus type test strips and test mash PH without the 5.2. If your mash is staying in the acceptable range, you are probably spending money you don't need to. If you see it getting above 5.4 I would add it. When I use 5.2, I use it in both mash and sparge water.
 
Forget the Campden tablets. They hydrolyse in water and release sulfur dioxide, which some folks use as a sterilant(depending on the concentration). Your concentration may be too dilute to cause problems, but it is an unnecessary complication to your water chemistry.
Good luck,
Al, MS, chem.
 
Theoretical considerations (the two relevant pK's of phosphoric acid are 2.4 and 7.2 so that attempting to design a phosphate buffer, which is what the 5.2 product is, to buffer at 5.2 is bad practice and makes it clear that it will have little buffering ability at 5.2) and careful laboratory experiments with malt reveal that this product does not do what it claims to do. It's use is at best a waste of money and at worst an unnecessary source of additional sodium ions. If one wants to use the phosphate system to control mash pH that is fine but use phosphoric acid - not a mix of the monobasic and dibasic salts (composition of the 5.2 product). This does allow you to reach pH 5.2 (on the low side) if you want to go that low and does not introduce any sodium.

Metabisulfite (Campden tablets) does indeed decompose into bisulfite ion and sulfur dioxide at acidic pH in aqueous solution. Metabite is often referred to as 'solid sulfur dioxide' and that is why is used in brewing when chloramine is present. The bisulfite and sulfurous acid are capable of reducing chloramine to chloride and ammonium ions with the metabite being oxidized to sulfuric acid:

S2O5-2 + 2H2NCl +3H2O -->2SO4-2 + 2H+ +2Cl- + 2NH4+

This is the simplest and most effective means of dealing with chloramine (with the other being GAC filtration). Thus, if your water supplier uses chloramine, do not forget the Campden tablets.

Campden tablets are also effective against chlorine (reducing it to chloride) but are not necessary since simply heating water in the HLT or letting stand overnight will remove chlorine (this does not work with chloramine unless the water is boiled for an hour or so or allowed to stand for several days).There is more on Campden tablet use, doses, the effects of the product ions etc. at
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f128/campden-tablets-sulfites-brewing-water-361073/
 
Thanks all for the input. I think I will continue doing as I have been for the time being... Using Camden tabs and 5.2.

I do have a small crash bag RO unit from when I was in the navy ( I was a submariner). We had these units for crash bags and I am not really sure of their capacity or even if it works at all.

I guess I should dig it out and give it a shot. Hopefully it doesn't take too long or too much of an effort to use to get approximately 10 gallons per batch!

Second I thing I will be doing is contacting my city water company and getting their numbers for chemistry and finding out if they add chloramine or chlorine to the water.

Then I would like to send a sample drawn from the tap and one from the earlier mentioned RO unit and see what I h e to work with. I will also be buying a pH meter for my own checks as well.

Does anyone recommend a particular meter that is easy to use and reliable????

I'll keep posts in my progress in this endeavor.

Thanks everyone for their input.
 
Thanks all for the input. I think I will continue doing as I have been for the time being... Using Camden tabs and 5.2.

You have to admire a man who, after having been told that 5.2 can only detriment his beer and why decides to continue to use it.


Second I thing I will be doing is contacting my city water company and getting their numbers for chemistry and finding out if they add chloramine or chlorine to the water.

This is wise. You do not need Campden tablets if there is no chloramine. Chloramination is becoming more prevalent overall but while it is quite common in some states in others it is quite rare. Municipal water reports are designed to satisfy governments, not brewers. Depending on how thorough the report is you may want to send a sample off to Ward Labs. The expense is minimal.

Then I would like to send a sample drawn from the tap and one from the earlier mentioned RO unit and see what I h e to work with.
Sending a sample off from an RO unit is sort of a waste because if the unit is working then the analysis comes back full of 0's (or small numbers). If it isn't working you will discard it or replace cartridges. RO units can be simply checked for function with an inexpensive TDS meter. If the TDS test is passed then you don't really care what the analysis is.


I will also be buying a pH meter for my own checks as well.
This is also wise. And if you do it you will stop wasting money on 5.2. As I first observed a couple of years ago 5.2 seems to work for people who don't own pH meters but stops working as soon as they get one.

Does anyone recommend a particular meter that is easy to use and reliable????
Most modern pH meters are pretty easy to use. The main problem with them seems to be stability IOW they don't hold calibration very long. The workaround for this is frequent calibration checks and recal if necessary. See https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f128/ph-meter-calibration-302256/ for more information on this.

I can't really make a recommendation because the units I use are laboratory instruments which cost a lot more than most home brewers want to spend but they are very good instruments.

An interesting new approach uses your i-phone as the meter. The electrode and associated electronics package are available at http://www.hach.com/ph-1-module-for...d-ph-electrode/product-details?id=15010961384 but the cost is $300. As a good (stable) electrode seems to cost at least $100 this looks like a good deal to me but I haven't checked it out.

The only inexpensive meters I have any experience with are the Hanna pHEP meters. They work, seem to have decent life, are easy to use but they are, as is the case with every under $100 meter I have ever checked, not too stable. They are useable though with frequent recal.
 
I thought the FTC was supposed to prevent advertisers from making false claims.
5.2 is a proprietary blend of buffers that will lock in your mash and kettle water at a pH of 5.2 regardless of the starting pH of your water.
http://www.fivestarchemicals.com/breweries/homebrewing/products/

I can see how people are fooled, that’s pretty enticing. A little magic powder and your problems are solved.

IMO it’s worse than nothing, because it provides false hope. It could prevent people from using techniques that actually work.
 
ajdelange said:
You have to admire a man who, after having been told that 5.2 can only detriment his beer and why decides to continue to use it.

Just want to clarify... The beer I brew has been good and I enjoy it. I was not born with inherent water chemistry knowledge. I am learning. Since I learn mostly on my own, I have used the 5.2 and I have not had any "detrimental" effects from it. Furthermore; since I started using it I have gotten a better efficiency in my mashes. (From about 65 to 78 efficiency now).

I agree yes it does sound too good to be true, and I know that it is not chemically possible to just throw in magic 5.2 powder and get Ideal pH no matter what beginning pH is, like the explanation on the can.

I realize there are a lot of knowledgable people on this forum, and that is why I post my questions. I appreciate the helpful information but the smart remarks I can live without.

I will look into a pH probe and a TDS probe to test my RO unit. But In the meantime, I will continue to use the 5.2 stuff until I get a probe. Like I said before, I enjoy the beers I brew and so do people who I share it with. I have used the 5.2 stuff for over a year and have not had any detrimental effects that I can tell.
 
Generally someone has to file a complaint before the FTC can investigate and take action against a business. They can't just automatically screen every product out on the market.

It also has to be deemed totally false which it is not. My water is a case in which it works and actually makes a difference of 20% realized efficiency gain and better tasting beer. I have made beers without it that were absolutely bad, turn around with the same recipe and repeatably made great beers with it. Never had a score sheet that said beer was salty and that was even before I switched to potassium in my water softener. So according to a few people on here using the 5.2 and softened water should make all of my beer taste like and over salted Gose. Well it is not.

Oh no, I am never going to get a good crush on my grain either since I have a corona mill. Firemostale, take the information you find useful and laugh at the stuff meant as insults. If you are making good beer, find out why it is good and improve that process little bits at a time.
 
I'm fairly new to this hobby. After 2 batches of extract brew I moved on to partial mash. I contacted my local city H2O dept concerning water content. The only thing they test for that applies to beer knowledge/usefulness is sodium. So, I'm in the dark not matter how hard I try.

I'm using it...period. It's either do something, or do nothing. And I had to do something...my beers were coming out darker than they should. Since I started using 5.2, the color is closer to what they should be.
It wasn't a huge difference, but noticeable. Which leads me to believe the mash PH was indeed effected/corrected by it.
 
I realize there are a lot of knowledgable people on this forum, and that is why I post my questions.

And then declare publicly that you are going to ignore the answers given to you by people who have done the research and experiments and taken the trouble to answer your questions.

I appreciate the helpful information but the smart remarks I can live without.

I'm sorry you were offended but if you put a 'kick me' sign on your backside you are going to have to expect to be kicked from time to time. Has it occurred to you that when you tell someone who has tried to help you that you are going to ignore his advice that such a person may be offended?

But In the meantime, I will continue to use the 5.2 stuff until I get a probe. Like I said before, I enjoy the beers I brew and so do people who I share it with. I have used the 5.2 stuff for over a year and have not had any detrimental effects that I can tell.

You must do as you see fit. There are lots of other useless things you can do while brewing too.
 
It also has to be deemed totally false which it is not. My water is a case in which it works and actually makes a difference of 20% realized efficiency gain and better tasting beer.

I always have allowed the possibility that there may be some circumstances under which it actually does what it says it does. You are the first to observe this that I know of and so your observations are important. If you would be willing to post some comparative pH numbers for small mash samples i.e. take a small amount of the grain you normally use when you have success, mash with a small (but in normal proportion) amount of water and measure pH with 5.2 and without we might be able to vindicate this product which, at this point, has a pretty terrible reputation. Please make sure your meter is calibrated per the manufacturer's instructions with fresh buffers and that you do the stability checks discussed at
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f128/ph-meter-calibration-302256/. Also, if you wouldn't mind checking the pH of some DI water with a normal concentration of 5.2 that might give us some insight. Please tell us which pH meter you are using and the temperature at which you took the measurements.
 
I get my brew water from the RO machine at the store and pay 37 cents a gallon. Sure, it can be a pain to have to make a trip to grab it but I usually remember to get it while I am out and about. My water is very alkaline and makes it tough to make good light lagers. I build my water up based on AJ's primer and Brunwater and don't have pH issues any longer. I'd recommend trying a batch this way and see if you are happy with the results. I have been very happy.
 
I'm using it...period. It's either do something, or do nothing. And I had to do something...my beers were coming out darker than they should. Since I started using 5.2, the color is closer to what they should be.
It wasn't a huge difference, but noticeable. Which leads me to believe the mash PH was indeed effected/corrected by it.

As you are new to the hobby you can't be blamed for coming to the conclusions you did. There are, however, lots of things you can do to improve your beer (none of which involve 5.2). For starters, you can learn what is in your water by sending a sample off to Ward Labs. The cost is minimal. Armed with this you will know whether your water is suitable for brewing. Not everyone's is. Sometimes it is best to just throw it away and use another source which for most people means installation of an RO unit. This is the simplest solution in terms of getting you to the point where you are producing good beer unless you have to drive miles and miles to get RO water. The Primer at https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f128/brewing-water-chemistry-primer-198460/ shows you how to get started with that approach. Beyond the Primer there are many approaches (decarbonation, lime treatment, calcium supplementation, sulfate and chloride adjustment, pH adjustment (which can be done with sauermalz, lactic or phosphoric acid but not, apparently, 5.2 in most peoples experience - remember that it doesn't work for people who own pH meters).

People who are making palatable beer with water from the output of a home softener and 5.2 don't know how much better their beer can be because they haven't been there.
 
Hi AJ, quick question for you: I've read over and over (including in your posts in this thread) that I should be using campden tablets if there is any chloramine present in my tap water. Well, according to my city's latest water report (which can be found here: http://www.charlestonwater.com/down...2011_annual_drinking_water_quality_report.pdf), they do use chloramine.

Is there some threshold for this measurement that I need to be aware of before using campden tablets, or should I just use them if there's any chloramine present whatsoever?

Thank you, sir!
 
The best thing to do is obtain a test kit (be sure it tests total chlorine and not just free). These are available from a number of sources and are pretty inexpensive. With a kit you would experiment with doses until the kit indicates 0 total chlorine after treatment.

In general, 1 campden tablet will treat 20 gal but campden tablets are of different weights and different chemical (sodium vs. potassium metabisulfite) compositions. I usually suggest that people crush the tablet (I just talked this weekend to a club member who uses the round end of a White Labs vial as pestle and a 1 tbsp measuring spoon as pestle), suspend it in some water and add the water incrementally until the chlorine aroma is gone or until the water begins to smell, when agitated, of sulfur dioxide. That should be enough to take care of the chloramine. See
Home Brew Forums > Home Brewing Beer > Brew Science > Campden Tablets (Sulfites) and Brewing Water.
 
Also, do Camden tablets effect ph in anyway? I've never done any kind if tests for ph.

I never did answer this question. Yes, they have a slight effect on pH. As the table at https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f128/campden-tablets-sulfites-brewing-water-361073/ shows use of campden tablets in sufficient quantity to neutralize 3 ppm chloramine as chlorine also neutralizes 1.43 ppm as CaCO3 alkalinity. This is insignificant given typical mash buffering capacities.
 
Thanks, AJ! You're most helpful as always, and I for one sincerely appreciate your contributions!

I have never detected the smell of chlorine in my tap water, so I'm not going to worry about it. I also will likely begin using RO water anyway, so it's sort of a moot point.
 
ajdelange said:
And then declare publicly that you are going to ignore the answers given to you by people who have done the research and experiments and taken the trouble to answer your questions.

I'm sorry you were offended but if you put a 'kick me' sign on your backside you are going to have to expect to be kicked from time to time. Has it occurred to you that when you tell someone who has tried to help you that you are going to ignore his advice that such a person may be offended?

You must do as you see fit. There are lots of other useless things you can do while brewing too.

Ok...

Not really sure where you get the idea I am ignoring info. I have a system right now that works for me FOR THE TIME BEING! I am gleaning information slowly to improve it over time. I do plan on taking advice from this post when I can afford the proper equipment and have water analyzed. I'm just in the planning phases of that.

All I am saying is you don't have to make wise cracks about how people are going about their brewing. You have already impressed me with your vast knowledge of brewing chemistry. There's no need to have a condescending tone to one whom you are teaching. It doesn't jive with the whole idea of sharing said knowledge.

I do truly appreciate your time in helping me learn. And thanks for the clarification on the use of Camden tabs.
 
Ok...
Not really sure where you get the idea I am ignoring info.

Probably here:

Thanks all for the input. I think I will continue doing as I have been for the time being... Using Camden tabs and 5.2.

You ask for opinions and input. The thread explicitly asks if you should use 5.2. You get some holy-crap-well-researched answers. Then say you're not going to change anything. The people trying to help you feel like they wasted their time. Their answers aren't just subjective "I don't like it" comments.

Maybe a better course of action would be to take a recipe you are happy with using your current process, and try to apply their process. Even if it means you have to buy RO water for one batch. No need to buy probes or equipment first. Post your results back in this thread. You never know, you might find out that your beer could be even better. If it isn't, then it would contribute to the data about 5.2 - maybe you've found a corner case where 5.2 is perfect.

At any rate, enjoy your beer.

Cheers,
mj
 
All I am saying is you don't have to make wise cracks about how people are going about their brewing. ... There's no need to have a condescending tone to one whom you are teaching. It doesn't jive with the whole idea of sharing said knowledge.

Actually sometimes it does. In this case I've apparently gotten under your skin to the point where you have posted a couple of times about it. That in itself is not a positive thing but if in your displeasure you have decided you are going to check this out and find out if that arrogant SOB knows what he is really talking about, IOW if I have, by my condescending tone, caused you to think then I have achieved my goal. I'll bet you've had teachers who used this technique - I surely did. But maybe that's not politically correct any more.
 
ajdelange said:
Actually sometimes it does. In this case I've apparently gotten under your skin to the point where you have posted a couple of times about it. That in itself is not a positive thing but if in your displeasure you have decided you are going to check this out and find out if that arrogant SOB knows what he is really talking about, IOW if I have, by my condescending tone, caused you to think then I have achieved my goal. I'll bet you've had teachers who used this technique - I surely did. But maybe that's not politically correct any more.

I'll give you that...

But I am excited to tweak this aspect of my brewing methods. I actually was looking to buy an RO unit for my house anyway about a year ago. Now I have more of a justification to do so.

Just out of curiosity, with using the 5.2 it was said earlier about salty beer... I know it wouldn't be salty like adding table salt... Table salt is NaCl. I didn't think 5.2 had chemicals that would react to for NaCl. I thought it mainly used potassium salts to buffer pH?

I know ionic compounds are called salts in general. What would these "salty" compounds taste like in beer since I still have beer where I used 5.2.

It very possible I just don't have a good enough palate to pick these "salty" flavors up. Would it be a chemical-like flavor or even a texture in my mouth when I finish?
 
Table salt is NaCl. I didn't think 5.2 had chemicals that would react to for NaCl. I thought it mainly used potassium salts to buffer pH?

They do, AFAIK. This I deduced by measuring the pH of a DI water solution of 5.2. This allows me to calculate the ratio of monobasic to dibasic phosphate and with that in hand knowing the weight I used to make the solution sodium would not 'close' the calculation. Thus it must be potassium. Also a test for potassium shows that there is lots and lots but there could be some sodium too.

I know ionic compounds are called salts in general. What would these "salty" compounds taste like in beer since I still have beer where I used 5.2.
In beer/brewing water we find calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium, chloride, sulfate, carbonate, bicarbonate, and phosphate (mono and di basic). Any of the first 4 (cations) can form a salt with any of the last 6 (anions) for a total of 24 salts. All of them are going to taste 'salty' but salty in this context is much broader than your perception of table salt. People trying to reduce sodium intake often use 'co salt' which is potassium chloride instead of sodium chloride. It tastes 'salty' but it quite unlike the salty taste of sodium chloride and not a very good substitute for it with food. You might want to buy some of this at the super market and taste it. You can also taste sodium bicarbonate and calcium chlorde/sulfate solutions and, of course, you can taste a solution of 5.2.

There is lots of debate about how much sodium and how much potassium is 'too much'. The answer is the amount that makes the beer taste less good. One finds all sorts of conflicting reports - even in the professional literature. One text book, for example, says that brewers should limit the use of potassium salts to no more than 10 mg/L. Yet malt contributes something like 200 mg/L to beer (IIRC). Plants have lots of potassium in them. I find it hard to believe that increasing the potassium level in beer by 6% as opposed to 5% is going to ruin the beer.
 
Why not go to your local Wally World and pick up a carbon filter for 20 bucks and run your tap water through it. I bought an RV drinking water filter and some drinking water hose for about 25 bucks. Yes I know it won't remove chloramine but it does remove most everything else untitled I can ge a nice RO system. Beer has been turning out great. Cheers.
 
GAC does remove cloramine (and chlorine and organics) but it does not remove bicarbonate, chloride, sulfate, calcium, magnesium, sodium... Thus, while it may be of benefit, it in no way replaces an RO system. Also note that RO systems will contain a GAC filter to, among other things, protect the membrane(s) from chloramine and chlorine.
 
I immediately regret my decision to add 5.2 to my last beer >_<. I have never used it before, but wanted to try it out and see if it made a difference to my beers. Hope this one does not suck :(
 
Don't worry too much. Phosphate is pretty tasteless and unless you overdosed greatly I doubt you'll taste the sodium. Yes, the beer would have turned out better if you had controlled pH by a more effective means but I'm sure you'll be OK.
 
I used it in a recent partial mash IPA. So far...it's okay. I opened one after 2 weeks in the bottle. While carbonation was lacking, there was no "salty" taste. I hate salty foods! So, if it's salty...I'll notice.
Anyway, like I said....so far, so good.
 
I agree with AJ. You are going to have beer that tastes good but you can do better with other means. Now if you are brewing Belgian beers like I do a lot, I think you can make great beers with the 5.2. The only challenge I have had is getting that really "grainy" flavor I like with light lagers. Seems lagers and lighter ales with clean yeasts mute that flavor with 5.2 or at least it seems that way and I am not sure why yet other than higher sodium. The stabilizer is easy to use but as you progress you are going to find flavor characteristics you are trying to achieve and that is when you have to really buckle down and learn the ins and outs of water. Seems it is not always clear :D

Now like I have said before, the product did help me get much better efficiency without buying a PH meter. I am still trying to figure out the best and most reasonably priced deal for a PH meter without sacrificing accuracy. Until I do, I will use the 5.2 stabilizer as I can make good beer with it.
 
I plan on continuing to use it as well. I am only adding 1 Tbl. at the most so I see now harm in it. I am pretty new to the hobby...only been brewing about 4 months now. So I'm still trying to learn other aspects of the hobby...not to mention recovering some of my investment cost. As time goes on, I am sure I will do the water profile/ph tester and the likes of that. But until then, Ph 5.2 is fine with me....even cheaper than buying bottled water to lower the Ph.
 
Until I do, I will use the 5.2 stabilizer as I can make good beer with it.

But you can make better beer without it. It cannot improve your beer.

I plan on continuing to use it as well. I am only adding 1 Tbl. at the most so I see now harm in it. But until then, Ph 5.2 is fine with me....even cheaper than buying bottled water to lower the Ph.

As noted above it cannot improve your beer so the fact that it is cheap seems immaterial to me. Adding clean sand to your mash won't hurt the beer either and is even cheaper than 5.2. I have always wondered how 5 Star is able to continue to sell this stuff given that it is, among the knowledgeable at least, widely known to be useless. These last two posts have given me some insight: people don't seem to care!

An interesting new approach uses your i-phone as the meter. The electrode and associated electronics package are available at http://www.hach.com/ph-1-module-for...d-ph-electrode/product-details?id=15010961384 but the cost is $300. As a good (stable) electrode seems to cost at least $100 this looks like a good deal to me but I haven't checked it out.

I couldn't resist and picked one of these up. It is pretty cool, seems to work (haven't done a formal stability test yet) and, best of all - a feature you will use every day I'm sure - let's you e-mail pH readings from the phone e.g.:


Reading from ODM PH sensor:

Time: 5/16/13, 6:21 PM
pH: 4.40
Temperature: 15.7 &#730;C
Coordinates: 38.9447,-77.1579
Location: McLean
Comments: Pils day 7
Ambient temp: 22.3 &#730;C
Millivolts: 145
Calibrated: 5/16/13, 6:14 PM


Sent from my iPhone
 
Ain’t that a kick in the head? You tell ‘em they’re being robbed and they come back for more.

The insidious thing about the magic powder is that it gives people a false sense of confidence. It might prevent them from doing something that, you know, actually works.

It is certainly illegal to make false and misleading claims. Problem is the FTC doesn’t care much.
The FTC concentrates on cases that could affect consumers' health or safety (for example, deceptive health claims for foods or over-the-counter drugs) or cases that result in widespread economic injury.
http://business.ftc.gov/documents/bus35-advertising-faqs-guide-small-business/
So if nobody’s getting poisoned, the FTC has bigger fish to fry.

AJ, the cartridge filters are not GAC (Granular Activated Carbon).They are extruded carbon block, which work a lot better than GAC. No channeling, less pressure drop.
 
Back
Top