Water Profile Question of course

[NorsemenRugby58]

Hey all,

I've read all the stickies, John Palmer's section on how to brew, etc. Done my homework. I wanted to get someone with practical experience with adding salts as I have never done so. My beers have been plagued by a few problems ever since I started AG'ing a few years ago.

First, I noticed that whatever the recipe called for in terms of hops additions needed to be added upon. For example, 1oz centennial for 60, I had to adjust to maybe 1.5oz or even 2 to get the flavor I was looking for. Often times I wouldn't taste hops but I noticed by going overkill abit, I could get the result I wanted.

Second, the same problem pretty much holds true for Malt. My malt seems watery, weak, and lacks depth of flavor. I know my brewing techniques are solid, and have done much research/equipment purchase to help improve them. I hit my OG and FG and am usually overly efficient, I don't scorch, boil over, or have trouble pitching yeast, washing yeast, or doing any of these things.

My friend and brew partner were discussing that it could possibly be our water. After finding our local water profile online, we found out our water lacked a lot of things. The water profile is as follows...

*All measurements in mg/L*

Chloride-9
Sodium-18.1
Sulfate-16
Calcium-13.8
Magnesium-5.2
Total Hardness as CaCO3-55.9
Iron-0.010

Multiply CaCO3 by 1.22 to obtain HCO3 level=68.2 (rounded)

We like to make IPAs, PAs, Stouts, and Porters. Our best brews have always been the darker ones. Our Pales and IPAs always come out severely lacking malt character. They lack depth of flavor.

Thoughts on adjusting my brewing water? Recommendations?

Danke in advance.

 

[ajdelange]

Can't really make out what you have as you have confused alkalinity and hardness. Bicarbonate is 1.22 times alkalinity and not hardness. The other problem is that if you got your water analysis from Ward Labs the sulfate is "as Sulfur" and the actual sulfate is 3 times that. If I knew one or the other (sulfate or alkalinity) I could guess at the other. Thus I can't really comment on the water except in broad terms. The sort of problems you are describing are often attributable to high mash pH. If you are not adding acid to your mash then you are probably suffering the effects of high mash pH. If your water report comes from Ward Labs so that the sufate is actually 3*16 then your alkalinity is quite low at about 35 and the problem is not so serious as it would be if the report is not from Ward Labs as actual sulfate at 16 implies alkalinity of about 68 but acid would be needed in either case for most beers.

See the Primer here (stickies) to get an idea as to how to start out in water treatment.

 

[NorsemenRugby58]

The report is not from Ward Labs. Its just a local report that we found online, but it is from 2011 March-May, so quite current. I did mess up alittle with the definitions but all my numbers are there. I don't understand what you're missing.

Our HCO3 level (hardness, adjusted from CaCO3 value * 1.22) is 68, so we have that problem of which you speak. What do you reccommend?

 

[mabrungard]

I'm not following where the bicarbonate concentration is coming from, but it doesn't appear that its quite the right value since the ionic balance is off if the other concentrations are correct. It looks like a bicarbonate concentration in the 80 ppm range might be more correct.

In any case, the alkalinity of the water is a little excessive and the calcium concentration is too low. The OP's better experience with the darker beers agrees with the contention that the alkalinity is high. In my experience, brewing with water that doesn't contain enough calcium can produce a dull and lifeless beer. The combination of low calcium and elevated alkalinity would make a poorer pale beer and affect a number of finished beer qualities including hoppiness, bittering, and clarity.

This water is a perfect candidate for brewing usage as long as the alkalinity is reduced for paler beers. Considering the modest alkalinity, acid addition is quite suitable for alkalinity reduction without flavor impacts. The brewer should always bring the calcium content to at least 40 ppm for all brews and 50 ppm may be a safer bet. The rest of the ions in that water are nice and low and can serve as a good starting point for more mineralized water profiles.

Read Bru'n Water for more information on how and what to change in this water for brewing differing beer styles. It does not appear that it will be necessary or desirable to dilute this water with RO or DI water as recommended in the Water Primer.

Enjoy!

 

[ajdelange]

You didn't give an alkalinity number. You did list a bicarbonate value which you apparently calculated from the hardness but I reiterate that bicarbonate is not calculated from hardness - it is calculated from alkalinity. There should be a value for alkalinity on the report but sometimes this is not present. Having confirmed that your sulfate is "as sulfate" your alkalinity can be estimated at 68 ppm as CaCO3 which would put your bicarbonate at about 81 mg/L. These values are calculated by assuming that the report is electrically balanced. Often (more often than not) reports are not so your reported alkalinity might be different from my estimate.

The numbers you reported for calcium and magnesium correspond to a total hardness of 55.8 which is close to the value of 55.9 which you gave. 1.22*55.9 = 68.2 so that is why I assume that you are mistaking hardness for alkalinity. But it is possible that your reported alkalinity is also 55.9, i.e. identical to the total hardness value, or that your report lists bicarbonate at 68. This would result in a report imbalanced by 0.3 mEq/L but that level of imbalance is not atypical. If you post a link to the report I'll look at it and tell you exactly where the disconnect lies. Another thought occurs to me: if you are in Germany they call alkalinity Karbonat Hartung (KH) which translates as Carbonate Hardness but it is really alkalinity.

In any case you will need acid. Recommendations sufficient to get you started are given in the Primer which I mentioned in #2.

 

[NorsemenRugby58]

My bicarbonate level is 55.9 (56) multiplied by 1.22=68

link: http://www.pennichuck.com/PDF WQR/LockeLakeWaterSys.pdf

page 3, look to the "Airstrip" column, thanks for the help so far!

 

[ajdelange]

My bicarbonate level is 55.9 (56) multiplied by 1.22=68

link: http://www.pennichuck.com/PDF WQR/LockeLakeWaterSys.pdf

page 3, look to the "Airstrip" column, thanks for the help so far!

Roger. And there it says that the total hardness is 55.9 ppm as CaCO3 entirely consistent with the given calcium and magnesium numbers (which are in mg/L). But this does not have anything to do with the bicarbonate level. Multiplying that number by 1.22 does not give the bicarbonate. The number to multiply by 1.22 is the alkalinity which is not reported. This report gives no information about bicarbonate (a search for "alkalinity" or "bicarbonate" returns "not found").

You have seen somewhere that if one knows the alkalinity, which is expressed in parts per million as calcium carbonate, he can calculate the bicarbonate, expressed in mg/L by multiplying by 61(mg/mEq)/50(mEq/ppm as CaCO3) = 1.22 (mg)/(ppm as CaCO3). This is true. But total hardness is also expressed in ppm as CaCO3 and this often leads to the confusion of which you appear to be a victim.

Given that your report contains no information about alkalinity we can only estimate it by knowing that total anion charge and total cation charge must be equal. Using this principal I estimate the bicarbonate at 84.00 mg/L and the carbonate at 0.24. For the common definition of alkalinity you would have alkalinity of 71.25 ppm as CaCO3. Note that 1.22*71.25 = 86.92 which is not equal to 84.00. That's because the 1.22 is an approximation which works best when pH is lower than your 7.77.

 

[mabrungard]

Its still not your bicarbonate level. That value of 55.9 is Total Hardness, which only has to do with the calcium and magnesium levels. I don't see anything on that report that would provide bicarbonate or alkalinity levels in the water.

To balance, the bicarbonate level would be about 85 ppm since the report says the chloride level is 5 ppm.

PS: If the report had reported Temporary Hardness, then the 1.22 multiplier could have been used on that value to determine the bicarbonate level. It does not work on the Total Hardness value. Temporary Hardness is equal to Alkalinity when expressed as CaCO3.

 

[NorsemenRugby58]

Complicated, but I think I still get it. In terms of what that actually means for the flavor of my beers and my problems with my brews that I listed, and based off what you guys have told me, (please correct me if I am wrong) I am coming to the conclusion that

1) The pH of my lighter style beers (PAs and IPAs) is probably much too high.
2) I don't have nearly the ammount of calcium that I should have in my water (in fact, I need to quadruple that value)

yes/no?

 

[ajdelange]

1) Much too high may be an exaggeration of the situation but higher than optimum is probably the case. One of the biggest favors you can do yourself in terms of brewing better beer is to control mash pH properly.
2) You certainly can brew beers with this level of calcium and some of the finest beers in the world are made that way but higher levels of calcium do have their benefits. Most of my beers are done with about 30 - 35 ppm and that's plenty to my taste but most HB material advises 50. Again, the primer will give you some idea as to what's reasonable. For your water it would advise cutting 1:1 with RO (to get the alkalinity down under 50) and then building the calcium back up to a bit over 50 with gypsum/calcium chloride additions. Have a look.

 

[NorsemenRugby58]

Alright so I've gotta balance my pH and increase the calcium. In layman's terms, why is calcium so important to flavor? What does it do to malt/hops?

 

[ajdelange]

Alright so I've gotta balance my pH and increase the calcium. In layman's terms, why is calcium so important to flavor?

It isn't. That's why some of the very finest, most delicate beers are brewed with low levels of calcium. The benefits it confers are things like reduction of mash pH, promotion of bright runoff, better flocculation of yeast (faster clearing of the beer), protection of mash enzymes and precipitation of oxalate. Brewers who brew low calcium beers trade off those benefits for better flavored beer. They must compensate for loss of the benefits of calcium which they do, for the most part, by lagering.

OTOH a crisp, mineral profile is part of the style in some beers. In these cases calcium not only confers the benefits named above but also is important stylistically.

What does it do to malt/hops?

Where calcium is augmented by the use of calcium chloride there is a benefit to the beer flavor but that's because of the chloride. The only practical alternative is sodium chloride but most try to avoid sodium except for special applications. WRT hops it is sulfate that is the big driver and many brewers augment that by adding gypsum. But they do it to get the sulfate flavors. The calcium goes along for the ride (but does contribute as noted above).

 

[NorsemenRugby58]

So by better balancing the pH of my mash, I will achieve a better malt character and depth to my PAs and IPAs? I guess I lost you somewhere there.

 

[ajdelange]

As one guy put it after he adopted the recommendations of the Primer "All the flavors seemed brighter".

 

[mabrungard]

1) Again, the primer will give you some idea as to what's reasonable. For your water it would advise cutting 1:1 with RO (to get the alkalinity down under 50) and then building the calcium back up to a bit over 50 with gypsum/calcium chloride additions.

Just to reiterate, this tap water indicates only modest alkalinity. The amount of acid needed to reduce this water's alkalinity to workable levels suitable for pale beers is small. The acid addition is not likely to create a taste impact on the beer. Unless the brewer has a RO unit or likes buying and transporting RO water from the store, diluting the tap water with RO is not necessary.

Bru'n Water has the calculators needed to enable any brewer to figure how much acid they need to add to their water to resolve this issue.

 

[ajdelange]

All true. In fact he doesn't really need to adjust his alkalinity. I made decent beer at that level of alkalinity without treatment of any kind for years. Had I followed the Primer's recommendations, however, they would have been better. The specified amounts of sauermalz should carry him to close enough to proper mash pH.

IOW if OP wants to follow the Primer w/o RO dilution he will be fine. The last thing he needs at his current level of understanding is to be fiddling around with acidification (or other) calculations. There will be plenty of time for that as his knowledge grows. Also keep in mind that we don't even know what the alkalinity is. An estimate based on balance could be off ±15 ppm as CaCO3 or more. This is a factor here but KISS is the more important one. Following the Primer (including the dilution) is a safe course for this brewer. Neglecting the dilution is less safe but probably OK.

 

[NorsemenRugby58]

thanks guys, all good info. Next brew day I am going to have all these considerations in mind, and try a few things & see what happens. I'll post pics and details in this forum.