• Please visit and share your knowledge at our sister communities:
  • If you have not, please join our official Homebrewing Facebook Group!

    Homebrewing Facebook Group

A Brewing Water Chemistry Primer

Homebrew Talk

Help Support Homebrew Talk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Towards the end he talks about importance of magnesium for yeast and some new theory on why calcium/magnesium ratio is important for yeast health. This might include bringing up magnesium levels up to 50ppm in the mash liquour

I was in a recent online talk by John Palmer and he was saying that you get a lot of magnesium from the malt, but I am not sure any of us know how much magnesium our malt contains. I do know that when doctoring beer with salts, it did not take much Epsom Salt to where I was getting an odd metallic-like character. I am not sure what ppm I added, but I would be cautious about adding magnesium.
 
I just went to morebeer.com to order brewing salts. All I find is gypsum, Oxyclean and filters. What's a better source or am I just not doing the search correctly?
 
I just went to morebeer.com to order brewing salts. All I find is gypsum, Oxyclean and filters. What's a better source or am I just not doing the search correctly?
1643819296266.png
 
I am doing a Dunkelweizen this weekend. I am trying to find the Dunkelweizen water profile for Munich. I can only find for dark lagers. Anyone have a link to where I can find it.

Here is my current water profile. It is a mix of my carbon filtered and RO Water at 25/75 on percentages.

Ca 30.7 Magnesium 14 Sodium 11 Chloride 26 Sulfate 4 Biocarbonate 112 and Ph 7.6

Thanks

Erik
 
I am doing a Dunkelweizen this weekend. I am trying to find the Dunkelweizen water profile for Munich. I can only find for dark lagers. Anyone have a link to where I can find it.

Here is my current water profile. It is a mix of my carbon filtered and RO Water at 25/75 on percentages.

Ca 30.7 Magnesium 14 Sodium 11 Chloride 26 Sulfate 4 Biocarbonate 112 and Ph 7.6

Thanks

Erik
Given your base water profile this would be a good target profile for a Dunkleweizen:

Suggested Water Profile (PPM):
Calcium........................62.5
Magnesium................16.0
Sodium........................11.0
Sulfate.........................52.4
Chloride......................52.4
Bicarbonate............112.0
Target pH...................5.38

That's a lot of bicarbonate. Your going to need some acid to achieve proper pH.

I have a water calculator at:

http://www.phantomwingbrewing.com/Calculator
 
The water profile seen directly above does not balance as to it's cation and anion mEq/L's. Therefore it is not a good target profile for any beer because it is impossible to replicate it in the real world.
 
The water profile seen directly above does not balance as to it's cation and anion mEq/L's. Therefore it is not a good target profile for any beer because it is impossible to replicate it in the real world.
Actually, that's not correct. It's the additions needed to reach the target profile that need to be balanced, and they are. It's his starting water profile that appears unbalanced but there are several reasons why this may be. Usually, it's due to the fact that not all ions are reported in the water analysis. For instance, if a source of Ca has an associated anion that is not of the type that's reported, the Ca would show on the report but not the anion. This would cause the ions to appear to be unbalanced. The additions, however, do need to be balanced. Given his initial water profile, the target profile above is, in fact, achievable.

I'm actually surprised at the amount of bicarbonate he has being that he's using mostly RO water. If only distilled water were used, I would suggest the following water profile:

Calcium........................62.5
Magnesium................10.0
Sodium...........................0.0
Sulfate..........................80.4
Chloride.......................80.5
Bicarbonate..................0.0
 
Actually, that's not correct. It's the additions needed to reach the target profile that need to be balanced, and they are. It's his starting water profile that appears unbalanced but there are several reasons why this may be. Usually, it's due to the fact that not all ions are reported in the water analysis. For instance, if a source of Ca has an associated anion that is not of the type that's reported, the Ca would show on the report but not the anion. This would cause the ions to appear to be unbalanced. The additions, however, do need to be balanced. Given his initial water profile, the target profile above is, in fact, achievable.

I'm actually surprised at the amount of bicarbonate he has being that he's using mostly RO water. If only distilled water were used, I would suggest the following water profile:

Calcium........................62.5
Magnesium................10.0
Sodium...........................0.0
Sulfate..........................80.4
Chloride.......................80.5
Bicarbonate..................0.0
You should see my water profile if 100% carbon filter. Water here is very hard. Without a softner it turns utensils that are plastic white. Our drinking water is on hard water with the filter. If I just do RO Water from the store. Not sure what to use besides Calcium Chloride and since german wheats do not need sulfate(gypsum). Sulfate brings out harshness in bittering. That is why English Pale Ales use it.
 
You should see my water profile if 100% carbon filter. Water here is very hard. Without a softner it turns utensils that are plastic white. Our drinking water is on hard water with the filter. If I just do RO Water from the store. Not sure what to use besides Calcium Chloride and since german wheats do not need sulfate(gypsum). Sulfate brings out harshness in bittering. That is why English Pale Ales use it.
You certainly don't want the sharp bitterness that a Pale Ale would have but their sulfate levels are generally around 225-275ppm, way more than the 80ppm I suggested. The generally accepted sulfate levels for a Dunkleweizen are around 50-150ppm.
 
This has possibly been addressed in a different thread but I couldn’t find it. Is there any water software/calculators that just give you grams per liter? I’m sure I’m missing something but even the “simple” water calculators involve manipulating ppm numbers to match a profile. Is there something that you can just enter a profile and it will give you grams per gallon of each of the required salts?
 
The Brewers Friend calculator works fine . If you put in the total volume as 1 l, the output will be grams per liter
Just reread the question and realized that it was a little bit more involved. I don't know any calculator that will give you concentrations of individual salt solutions directly out of a profile without fiddling around with the amounts of each salt. Problem is there's more than one way to get there depending on what salt you have on hand and your starting border profile.
 
Exactly. Brewers friend's calculator is so easy to use. Just type in you're amount of water and stay playing with the different type of salts.

For ease of use, I recommend staying with gypsum and NaCl2 dihydrate.
 
Just reread the question and realized that it was a little bit more involved. I don't know any calculator that will give you concentrations of individual salt solutions directly out of a profile without fiddling around with the amounts of each salt. Problem is there's more than one way to get there depending on what salt you have on hand and your starting border profile.
Ahh, that makes sense.
 
Exactly. Brewers friend's calculator is so easy to use. Just type in you're amount of water and stay playing with the different type of salts.

For ease of use, I recommend staying with gypsum and NaCl2 dihydrate.
CaCl2 comes from the factory as the anhydride. By the time you open up the bottle and use it just once, it will already be down to about 94%-96% CaCl2, so perhaps you can sort of ballpark figure that with each use it looses about 5% due to water adsorption. But you can't ever buy it as the dihydride (to my knowledge). When it is down to about 75.5% it is at the dihydride state. But it doesn't stop adsorbing water at that juncture. It continues until it turns into a mush water/salt goo.
 
Last edited:
CaCl2 comes from the factory as the anhydride. By the time you open up the bottle and use it just once, it will already be down to about 94%-96% CaCl2, so perhaps you can sort of ballpark figure that with each use it looses about 5% due to water adsorption. But you can't ever buy it as the dihydride (to my knowledge). When it is down to about 75.5% it is at the dihydride state. But it doesn't stop adsorbing water at that juncture. It continues until it turns into a mush water/salt goo.
Yes that's true. However, my plastic bag seals very well and since years it's not changing much, judged simply by the looks of it. I know it continues to attract water but I close it quickly and push all the air out before so it seems to stay within limits that are ok. I just overdose it by about a quarter or a third compared to the anhydrate and so far I seem to be doing pretty fine with that approach.
 
CaCl2 comes from the factory as the anhydride. By the time you open up the bottle and use it just once, it will already be down to about 94%-96% CaCl2, so perhaps you can sort of ballpark figure that with each use it looses about 5% due to water adsorption. But you can't ever buy it as the dihydride (to my knowledge). When it is down to about 75.5% it is at the dihydride state. But it doesn't stop adsorbing water at that juncture. It continues until it turns into a mush water/salt goo.
The *label* on my 1kg tub of CaCl2 says "CaCl2.2H2O". Of course, that doesn't meant it is, for reasons you explained. I guess I could bake it or get a hydrometer that's actually accurate and calculate what it really is (= was), but as long as it's a reasonably loose solid powder, I don't think it's off enough for me to care. (I rarely use Cl salts anymore anyway, after I started using HCl for pale beers).
 
The *label* on my 1kg tub of CaCl2 says "CaCl2.2H2O". Of course, that doesn't meant it is, for reasons you explained. I guess I could bake it or get a hydrometer that's actually accurate and calculate what it really is (= was), but as long as it's a reasonably loose solid powder, I don't think it's off enough for me to care. (I rarely use Cl salts anymore anyway, after I started using HCl for pale beers).
I could be wrong about no one retailing the dihydrate. But it seems like it would take a lot of effort (not to mind expense) to arrive at precisely the dihydrate state, and what might be gained in doing so?
 
Make a CaCl2 solution and keep in the fridge. Then you do not need to worry about the water absorbtion.

This is true. But you would have to determine the amount of CaCl2 actually in the solution somehow (e.g. by measuring the gravity) when you first make it, or else you still have the same uncertainty about how much water was in the "dry" CaCl2.
 
This is true. But you would have to determine the amount of CaCl2 actually in the solution somehow (e.g. by measuring the gravity) when you first make it, or else you still have the same uncertainty about how much water was in the "dry" CaCl2.
Yes - that is exactly how you do it. Plug the gravity into a calculator and it will give you the concentration. Enter the concentration into your preferred water calculator.
 
Sorry if this isn't the right place for this, but I'm wondering about saving time with my chlorinated water.

I live in a rental, and on low wage, so RO is out of the question. I don't have a car so picking up enough water is also difficult. I use a jug filter which is time consuming (which removes chlorine and other contaminants, supposedly leaving minerals intact, one day I'll pay for a water test for a filtered sample.)

I'm wanting to remove the chlorine and in my area, the chlorine level is about 0.57mg/L, 0.5 is the average across the UK. I understand chlorine evaporates at room temperature, but it takes a while. Boiling does it faster, but then I have to wait for it to cool down unless I use my chilling coil, which is my fall back.

I do 15L (3 gallon) batches, which requires about 22L water upfront. How long would it take to evaporate 0.5mg/L chlorine from 22 litres of water at, say, 60C? How would I calculate this?
 
Sorry if this isn't the right place for this, but I'm wondering about saving time with my chlorinated water.

I live in a rental, and on low wage, so RO is out of the question. I don't have a car so picking up enough water is also difficult. I use a jug filter which is time consuming (which removes chlorine and other contaminants, supposedly leaving minerals intact, one day I'll pay for a water test for a filtered sample.)

I'm wanting to remove the chlorine and in my area, the chlorine level is about 0.57mg/L, 0.5 is the average across the UK. I understand chlorine evaporates at room temperature, but it takes a while. Boiling does it faster, but then I have to wait for it to cool down unless I use my chilling coil, which is my fall back.

I do 15L (3 gallon) batches, which requires about 22L water upfront. How long would it take to evaporate 0.5mg/L chlorine from 22 litres of water at, say, 60C? How would I calculate this?
None of your described methods is effective.

Use campden tablets instead. You only need very little of it, google "campden tablets chlorine removal" and you will find descriptions of the right dosage.
 
None of your described methods is effective.

Use campden tablets instead. You only need very little of it, google "campden tablets chlorine removal" and you will find descriptions of the right dosage.
Since when was boiling ineffective at removing chlorine?

And when you say "none", the filter jug does.
 
Last edited:
Since when was boiling ineffective at removing chlorine?

Boiling is effective at removing chlorine (but not chloramines). Whether or not boiling is an efficient method of removing chlorine is debatable.
 
Boiling is effective at removing chlorine (but not chloramines). Whether or not boiling is an efficient method of removing chlorine is debatable.
Yes, well, efficient is very subjective. Everything is give and take, boiling may not be efficient on energy, but it's efficient with time. Meanwhile campden tablets are cost and energy efficient, but definitely not time efficient. Regardless, Miraculix said effective. Since they do the job at removing chlorine, they are effective. I'm not really worried about "efficient" for reasons mentioned above.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top