About adding acid and alkalinity to the mash...

[jvincent825]

I'm new to making adjustments to my brewing water, but I'm beginning to experiment if for nothing else than to see differences with adjusted water. I'm using Bru'n Water for the basic calculations, and I am familiar with basic chemistry, stoichiometry, etc.

My base water is high in sodium and chloride because we have desalinated water where I live. Magnesium and sulfate are reasonable. Calcium is very low. To get calcium to what appears to be good levels for brewing most styles I have to dilute significantly and add minerals, or for some styles start with distilled or RO water.

To optimize calcium levels I need to in addition to adding sats add some alkalinity, i.e. CaCO3 or Ca(OH)2. Bru'n Water says not to add acid and alkalinity to the mash because they counteract one another.

If the only reason I'm adding the alkalinity is for the calcium in the compounds , is there any reason to not add the acid back to bring pH back into good mashing range? Thanks!

 

[ajdelange]

To optimize calcium levels....

Let's start by observing that there is no optimum calcium level. Many brewers believe that a minimum of 50 ppm is needed but that's not true. One can make excellent beers with less. Going in the other direction calcium doesn't contribute much flavor and while high calcium beers can taste somewhat mineralized one can tolerate a lot.

...I need to in addition to adding salts add some alkalinity, i.e. CaCO3 or Ca(OH)2.

I think that you are saying that in order to raise calcium levels you must add a salt such as calcium carbonate or the hydroxide of calcium. There is only one case where you would have to do so and that is if the calcium and sulfate levels are already so high that you cannot tolerate more of either of those anions. Adding the hydroxide of calcium or its carbonate does increase calcium but also increases mash pH much more than the pH lowering effect of calcium and this has to be neutralized by means of acid. If one adds calclum hydroxide or carbonate and then neutralizes with hydrochloric acid one winds up with calcium chloride. If one does the neutralization with sufuric acid one has effectively added calcium sulfate. So why not just add the salt and not bother with the acid? If you neutralize with lactic acid that is equivalent to adding calcium lactate (lactate is quite flavorful). If one uses phosphoric acid that is equivalent to adding calcium phosphate which, as it is insoluble, will, under the right circumstances just fall out of the solution.

There may be strange levels of chloride and sulfate in your water which cause you to conclude that you need to add calcium via the hydroxide or carbonate but certainly starting from RO water that would not be true. Suitable levels can be reached with the chloride or sulfate directly.

Bru'n Water says not to add acid and alkalinity to the mash because they counteract one another.

Yes, they do but if you only had calcium hydroxide and CRS (acid blend) but no gypsum or calcium chloride you could obtain the same effect as adding gypsum and calcium chloride at desirable pH by using the lime and CRS as noted above.

If the only reason I'm adding the alkalinity is for the calcium in the compounds , is there any reason to not add the acid back to bring pH back into good mashing range?

Yes, as noted above obtaining calcium from the alkali salts and metal hydroxide is not the way to get the necessary calcium levels except where the neutral calcium salts are not available.

 

[jvincent825]

Thanks a lot for the detailed response! I'll be brewing a Tripel this weekend that will be my first shot at building my own water profile. I'll update with my recipe, water and wort, in a couple days.

 

[jvincent825]

OK, my grain bill for the intended mash is:
12.5 lbs Pilsner
12 oz Abbey
12 oz White Wheat
8 oz Carafoam

Starting water is distilled. In the 6.5 gallons mash water I'll add:
2.1 g CaSO4
1.8 g MgSO4
0.3 g NaCl
2.6 g CaCl

For the 6 gallons Sparge water:
2.0 g CaSO4
1.6 g MgSO4
0.3 g NaCl
2.4 g CaCl

According to Bru'n Water that gives me the profile:
49.1 ppm Ca2+
7.0 ppm Mg2+
5.2 ppm Na+
76 ppm SO42-
59ppm Cl-
0.0 bicarbonate
152 total hardness
0 alkalinity
-39 RA
1.3 SO4/Cl ratio
pH 5.53

I'm curious what some more experienced think about the set up. The pH seems a little on the high side. According to Bru'n Water 4 oz acidulated malt puts the pH at 5.38, which seems solid for the style. Should I think about using some acidulated malt, or some lactic acid to bring the pH down a bit? 1.8 ml of lactic acid will bring the pH to 5.4. The alkalinity and RA then drop to -38 and -77 respectively. Are these numbers unreasonably low? Any suggestions?

BTW, I'll also be adding 8 oz sugar, 1 lb honey, and 4 lb pears later in the process. Hops will be Saaz and Bobek.

This is for a 6 gallon batch. Thoughts??

 

[ajdelange]

pH is going to be largely determined by the base malt which will have a DI mash pH between 5.6 and 5.8 most probably around 5.75 so you will need some acid to lower that (unless Abbey, about which I know nothing is appreciably acidic). The calcium (and magnesium to a lesser extent) will lower pH somewhat but not much. At knockout the rule of thumb indicates lowering of about 0.08 so perhaps 0.04 - 0.05 might be expected in the mash tun so lets say 5.70. The sauermalz rule of thumb says that 2% sauermalz added to the mash (or the equivalent in lactic or any other acid) would lower pH by 0.2 to 5.50 so 2% is probably a good place to start as you could be off ± 0.1 from the base malt. Broken record AJ pitch follows: to resolve the uncertainty you need a pH meter.

You don't need NaCl or MgSO4 but having a bit of them won't hurt anything either with the possible exception of the sulfate. As you are using Saaz hops you want to keep sulfate as low as you can get it as sulfate and noble hops don't usually mix well. In this same regard you should get most of your calcium from the chloride. Or at least do this the first time out. When you have a low sulfate beer ready to taste, put some in a glass and taste it with and without a pinch of gypsum. If you think the beer tastes better with gypsum then do quantitative tests with gypsum additions/tastings and use the results to guide you in adding gypsum to the next brew. I don't think you will find an improvement with sulfate but if there is one thing that is absolute in brewing it is that nothing is absolute in brewing.

 

[jvincent825]

OK, I brewed the Tripel today. Started with distilled water.

To the mash added:
1.1 g CaSO4
1.1 g MgSO4
0.3 g NaCl
2.2 g CaC
1.9 ml Lactic Acid

To the sparge water added:
1.3 g CaSO4
1.3 g MgSO4
0.3 g NaCl
2.6 g CaCl

Final concentrations according to Bru'n Water were:
41.1 ppm Ca
5.2 ppm Mg
5.2 ppm Na
50.1 ppm SO4
59 ppm Cl
RA -86
SO4/Cl 0.8

No acid went into the sparge water. My mash pH settled at 5.43. I did a 131˚F protein rest for 10 minutes, something else I haven't tried before but my last belgian had crappy head retention so I thought I'd give it a whirl. Brought it up to 150˚F with an infusion and checked and adjusted the pH. Then I decocted two and a half gallons for mash out.

I've brewed a similar Tripel before with my local water that was an award winner. My local water is only slightly lower in SO4 so I didn't worry about the sulfate levels with the Saaz. In this batch the Ca was higher and all other ions lower than my local water. I hit 79% efficiency over all.

After fermentation slows I'll add the honey and pear. I'll keep you posted on the results. Thanks for the advice!!

 

[jvincent825]

I forgot to mention before that my SG was 1.084. I realized that this is before addition of pears and honey, so my efficiency was actually quite a bit higher than Beersmith calculated. That put my efficiency closer to 84%.

I usually lose some efficiency in high gravity brews. Is this increase from properly managing mash pH? I'm guessing so. I don't know if my brief protein rest contributed as well. Too many variables to my usual process to know for sure.

Fermentation is starting to slow down now. I'll probably add the honey and pears tonight or tomorrow morning. I'll take gravity readings before and after to get a better idea of their contributions to the brew.

I may also top up with some clean water to adjust the gravity down a bit. I was shooting for 9.5%, but it will be even higher if I leave it. Still debating that one...

 

[jvincent825]

OK, I added the honey and pears on 11/13/13. I only wound up with about 2.5 lbs of pears. I peeled them, cored them and brought them up to a boil in about 3/4 gallon of water. I added the 1 lb of honey to that and pureed with an immersion blender, let it cool and added it to the carboy.

My volume and gravity before adding were 5.75 and 1.028 respectively. After adding they were 6.5 and 1.033. I checked it again on 11/17/13 and the gravity had dropped to 1.014. I will check the gravity again later and if it is still dropping I'll leave it, but if it is done I'll transfer it to secondary to clear.

I'm planning to use gelatin to help clear the beer. Can anyone help me figure out what the ABV is going to be after the changes from the pear and honey additions? I'll update with the FG once I'm sure its been hit. Thanks!

 

[mchrispen]

Well, if your numbers are correct, then you added 5 points with the honey/pear mixture to your OG. Then just figure based from that point. You are only 13 days into this fermentation - let this ride several more weeks. You will likely get a few more points out of it - and at 9.5% it absolutely needs to age. There are lot of benefits of leaving that on the yeast cake for a few weeks longer than normal as the yeast clean things up. I just finished a 9% tripel that went into bulk aging for 6 weeks after an 8 week primary. It dropped from 1.014 to 1.008 during that time, and it began to clear beautifully - with cold crashing, it looks pretty nice now - and tastes very good - however, needs some additional lagering (IMO). Tripels get much better with age.

Don't rack to secondary unless absolutely necessary to prevent potential oxidation.

Guessing your efficiency is either - a misreading of a measurement or a benefit from the decoction.

 

[jvincent825]

Thanks for the input, Matt. I had already racked to secondary when I saw this. I had planned to bulk age it for about a month in the secondary. I also always bring a little bit of the yeast cake with when I do so. It has a 1/4-1/2" mini cake at the bottom now. After 30 days I'll see how clear it gets and decide if I want to do the gelatin thing. This yeast strain does not leave a clear beer at all, at least it didn't the first time I used it. We'll see. After that it will go into a keg to lager for another 30 days before drinking. I'll keep posting as time goes by.

 

[mchrispen]

Let us know... That fruit/honey sounds interesting!

 

[jvincent825]

Ok, it's been a couple weeks, so I checked the Tripel. Wow! Really nice. The pears come across nicely in the nose and the honey is a subdued undertone on the palate. The gravity hasn't budged from 1.014, so I'm thinking ill do the gelatin fining soon. It's close to 11% ABV, but you would never guess it. There is a slight alcohol warmth in the aftertaste, but nothing to suggest its actual strength.

I'm torn whether to keg this or bottle condition it, leaning towards bottle conditioning. For something this high in gravity should I pitch more yeast before bottling after the gelatin fining? If so, how much? What kind? Can I just use some dry yeast? What about some Brett Brux or champaign yeast? Just throwing some ideas around.

 

[mchrispen]

If you are ready to fine it - then can I suggest a week cold crashing first? You might be very surprised at the results without gelatin, that said, not sure with the pectin added from the pears. You will want the beer pretty cold for the gelatin to work anyways. I use gelatin only on the most stubborn beers after a few weeks of lagering, rather than right up front. I did not need to gel my tripel and it is beautifully clear.

I seriously doubt you will need to add yeast to bottle condition, unless you want insurance to have a few ready for the holidays. Then I would, and use a little of whatever dry yeast is handy. 1-2 grams is sufficient for 5 gallons. If you use Brett, then you may need to adjust the priming or risk gushers - other will have far more experience than I with that.

I also bulk conditioned a gallon of my tripel on roselaire dregs for a month, then bottle conditioned. That dropped very clear, and dried out even more. Those are waiting at least 6 months before I crack em.

The rest went into kegs, lagered and force carbonated. I occasionally will pull 750 ml bottles out, fill them, cork and cage, to take to friends or on trips. Works well with a counter pressure bottle filler.

 

[jvincent825]

Yeah, definitely cold crashing first. Interested to see how that goes. The yeast strain for this beer was an unreleased Belgian strain from a new yeast company on the west coast, Gigayeast. Solid yeasts, good guys too. Our home brew club got to test run the strain and had a competition for Belgian styles. My Dubbel took the blue ribbon. My only complaint about that beer was that the yeast never dropped out much, even after a month of lagering. Cloudy as hell. I'm hoping to submit this Tripel for bigger competitions, so I want it looking amazing.

I've got a Russian Imperial Stout I need to get out of the freezer tonight, and I'll throw in the Tripel and crank it down to 34˚F. This was just a 5 gallon batch, so I think I'm going to just bottle condition. I might set aside a gallon to throw in some Brett and stow it away. Still have some time to think about that.

Since the gravity is 1.014, might it be ok to just pitch some Brett into that portion and give it some time, perhaps 6 months or so as you suggested, to munch on the remaining sugars without adding priming sugar? I've not done anything yet that required yeast at bottling, so I'll definitely have to look into that some before I proceed.