Brown ale Bru'n Water vs. Mash Made Easy

[Rob2010SS]

I'm brewing a brown ale next weekend, 11/30. I'm working on the water additions and I'm comparing Bru'n Water to Mash Made Easy.

The values are significantly different comparing the two programs. To achieve a pH of 5.5, Bru'n water says to add 9.3g baking soda and Mash Made Easy is saying to add 5.8 grams baking soda. If I change Bru'n Water to say 5.8g baking soda, it drops the pH to 5.33.

They're significant differences and I am just not sure which one to use. Screenshots are shown below.

Am I missing something in either sheet? (Screenshots below and sheets attached).

Previously, I was thinking Bru'n Water was not accurate when it came to darker beers (no offense @mabrungard). Is Bru'n Water accurate when it comes to dark beers? Does anyone have any real life measurements showing that it's accurate?

Same question applies to Mash Made Easy. Does anyone have any measured proof that MME is accurate with dark beers?

Thanks for the help.

 

[CodeSection]

^^^^^I use Mash Made Easy exclusively as it has worked for me. I'm thinking you may want "proof" of both rather than just MME.....that may be hard to accomplish.

I see you are using MME 6.70. That is so old that you might want to use MME 7.30 that just came out today.

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/forum/threads/mash-made-easy-is-solid.670256/

Good luck.

 

[Rob2010SS]

I downloaded 7.3 and it didn't make much difference...

 

[Rob2010SS]

It did change slightly though

 

[Rob2010SS]

Im going to run with the numbers that mash made easy gave me. My logic is that if needed, I can always add more baking soda to the mash. That brings me to my next question...

If you check your mash pH at 15 minutes in and it comes in low, are you already screwed because the damage has been done or is it still worth while to adjust the pH and get it to the desired value for the last 30-40 mins?

 

[CodeSection]

From what I understand, at that point you are just noting the results so as to adjust for the next batch of the same recipe. I believe it has been discussed at great length and 15 minutes in isn't enough time. I measure the mash pH at 30 minutes and cool to 68F and then take another pH measurement at the end of the mash and cool to 68F.

 

[Rob2010SS]

From what I understand, at that point you are just noting the results so as to adjust for the next batch of the same recipe. I believe it has been discussed at great length and 15 minutes in isn't enough time. I measure the mash pH at 30 minutes and cool to 68F and then take another pH measurement at the end of the mash and cool to 68F.

That's how I understood it as well. I thought there wasn't much you can do to adjust once you're already mashing.

 

[Oginme]

No program perfectly predicts your mash pH. There are too many factors which cannot be accurately described (grain variety, growing region, malting process, kilning/roasting process) by a model to give you exact predictions every time. I would pick one of them and get to know how it works for you. If you want to track the other models to see if one performs more accurately for you, that would help you decide which program to rely on in the long run. Once you learn the offset between your process, water, grain supply, etc. and the model, then you can get better at dialing in to where you want to be.

I have mashed at many pH targets from 4.9 up to 5.8 over 120 or so brews and found very little effect on the conversion and extraction of sugars from my mash across the whole range. The variations I do get do not exceed my normal expected values (basically +/- 1.1% mash/lauter efficiency) for a full 60 minute mash. So as long as I mash in a reasonable pH range for enzymatic activity with my crush, water, process I get a consistent result. At least from my experience, a few tenths of a unit pH in the mash will not explain nor cause a significant drop or rise in mash/lauter efficiency.

This has lead me to target the mash pH on the basis of what I want to emphasize for flavor in the ending beer: dry and crisp I will target lower pH, Malty with more body a higher pH.

Given this if you check your mash pH at 15 minutes and want to make an adjustment you may be too late to change much of the conversion results, but an adjustment may have some affect on the ending flavor profile of your beer.

 

[Rob2010SS]

No program perfectly predicts your mash pH. There are too many factors which cannot be accurately described (grain variety, growing region, malting process, kilning/roasting process) by a model to give you exact predictions every time. I would pick one of them and get to know how it works for you. If you want to track the other models to see if one performs more accurately for you, that would help you decide which program to rely on in the long run. Once you learn the offset between your process, water, grain supply, etc. and the model, then you can get better at dialing in to where you want to be.

I have mashed at many pH targets from 4.9 up to 5.8 over 120 or so brews and found very little effect on the conversion and extraction of sugars from my mash across the whole range. The variations I do get do not exceed my normal expected values (basically +/- 1.1% mash/lauter efficiency) for a full 60 minute mash. So as long as I mash in a reasonable pH range for enzymatic activity with my crush, water, process I get a consistent result. At least from my experience, a few tenths of a unit pH in the mash will not explain nor cause a significant drop or rise in mash/lauter efficiency.

This has lead me to target the mash pH on the basis of what I want to emphasize for flavor in the ending beer: dry and crisp I will target lower pH, Malty with more body a higher pH.

Given this if you check your mash pH at 15 minutes and want to make an adjustment you may be too late to change much of the conversion results, but an adjustment may have some affect on the ending flavor profile of your beer.

Thanks for the input. I think that's one thing I always get a little obsessed about is the mash pH. I fear that if I'm not in the right range, I'm going to make crap beer. It's good to hear that your experience says otherwise, makes me relax a little bit.

At what point does pH start pulling tannins? Is it when its too low or too high? ...or both?

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

Roughly 20 minutes into a typical single infusion mash it's often pretty much over, and pH adjustments made post that time will not alter what is already in the past.

If you are using the free version of BW I 'believe' it presumes CaCL2 to be 100% pure (anhydrous, or the anhydride state) whereas MME defaults to the more generally accepted dihydrate state of CaCl2.2H2O, the latter for which by weight is close to 75.5% CaCl2 and 24.5% water. MME can be set to any hydration state for CaCl2, which unfortunately continuously absorbs moisture over time from the humidity in the air until eventually it becomes a liquid goo at somewhere around CaCl2.6H2O or so. You can never really know the current hydration state until it does go liquid goo, as there is no visual difference. I've tested fresh stuff from unopened packages at 94% to 96% CaCl2, so even fresh is not quite likely to be anhydrous. This matters because more calcium (less water complexed with the CaCl2) means a bit lower pH and thereby a bit more baking soda requirement. I doubt the difference will bridge the gap between the two softwares, but you should be aware of it.

I'm putting out a recommendation today to set MME version 7.30's "Grist Buffer Multiplier" to a value of 0.67 (which was originally at 0.60), and a fresh download as of a half hour ago or so (and going forward) will give you a copy pre-set to the 0.67 value, but it's likely easier to just change this value yourself. This minor change will also make for a small increase as to MME's baking soda adjustment recommendation (which again will not bridge the gap between the two softwares).

Lastly, BW presumes that 100% of the downward pH shift impact induced by adding calcium and magnesium to the mash water occurs within the mash, but Kolbach, the scientist who quantified this phenomenon, measured the impact at "knock-out" well down stream of the mash, and in the mash I therefore presume 75% of the downward shift will be realized. A.J. deLange is of the opinion that this impact could be realized at as little as 50-60% of Kolbach during the mash, so 75% is a safe midrange between the extremes of BW and deLange. The effect here is that less downward pH shift due to Ca and Mg in the mash means less baking soda needed to counter it.

 

[Oginme]

The effect here is that less downward pH shift due to Ca and Mg in the mash means less baking soda needed to counter it.

This matches my observations of mash pH and post boil wort pH when using baking soda to adjust pH upwards to account for dark roasted and highly colored caramel/crystal malts.

 

[Rob2010SS]

I'm putting out a recommendation today to set MME version 7.30's "Grist Buffer Multiplier" to a value of 0.67 (which was originally at 0.60), and a fresh download as of a half hour ago or so (and going forward) will give you a copy pre-set to the 0.67 value, but it's likely easier to just change this value yourself. This minor change will also make for a small increase as to MME's baking soda adjustment recommendation (which again will not bridge the gap between the two softwares).

Thank you for the clarification. I'm going to take your suggestion of changing that multiplier to .67 and go with the numbers it gives me.

I honestly started to lose faith in MME after my last batch. The reading was so far off from what MME told me it would be. Then I started looking at everything and realized that the issue was me. I screwed up something on my last batch (and presumably all batches in which I've used MME) and that's what gave me a bad pH reading. Now that I know what I did, I think this batch will be much better.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

I honestly started to lose faith in MME after my last batch. The reading was so far off from what MME told me it would be. Then I started looking at everything and realized that the issue was me. I screwed up something on my last batch (and presumably all batches in which I've used MME) and that's what gave me a bad pH reading. Now that I know what I did, I think this batch will be much better.

Would it be possible for you to PM me with the issue you were having with MME that led you way off base?

 

[Rob2010SS]

Would it be possible for you to PM me with the issue you were having with MME that led you way off base?

Yeah, absolutely, but you'll see, it was because I was an idiot lol.

 

[cheesebach]

I've switched from Bru'N Water to MME earlier this year, since one of the BW updates seemed to suddenly be predicting much lower mash pH for the same grain bill than earlier releases. Not sure if that is still the case, but it sounds like it probably is, given the amount of baking soda it's estimating for you. Not saying that either program is right for every case, but the ability to select the base malt DI pH in MME seems to be giving me more consistent results across a wider range of recipes than I was able to get with BW, so I've stuck with it since I made the switch.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

Yeah, absolutely, but you'll see, it was because I was an idiot lol.

Clearly it was just a mistake, and you are not alone in making it, but upon reviewing it via the PM, the same mistake seems just as likely to have occurred with any other mash pH assistant software package as well. At least now you know to never do it again. Best of luck with your upcoming Brown Ale.

 

[Rob2010SS]

Clearly it was just a mistake, and you are not alone in making it, but upon reviewing it via the PM, the same mistake seems just as likely to have occurred with any other mash pH assistant software package as well. At least now you know to never do it again. Best of luck with your upcoming Brown Ale.

Oh yeah it would have happened with bru'n water as well, no doubt. I just had a huge brain fart.

Thanks for the help man

 

[WeHeavy]

Those 2 programs drove me crazy because they would never agree with each other. I made some beer with them that I wish I hadn't made. The answer for me was BeerSmith 3. Design the recipe, then do the water chemistry. Easy Peasy. I've had my water tested and added it to the water profile. I then select it for source water and then pick the target. BS 3 figures out the rest. I don't try to adjust the PH of the mash water before mashing. I wait until 10-15 minutes into the mash then I enter that value into BS3 and it spits out the answer. It nails it 100% every time.
I will adjust the PH of the sparge water.
One thing I've done that has made a difference is, I put my PH meter in a glass of distilled water the day before I brew, leaving it overnight. I check the accuracy before brewing with those PH packets you can get off e-bay for pennies. By doing that it gives me fast, accurate, rock solid numbers, no more waiting for the numbers to stabilize.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

@Rob2010SS, how did the Brown Ale brewing session go? What was your baking soda addition, and what mash pH reading did it yield per your meter?

 

[Rob2010SS]

@Rob2010SS, how did the Brown Ale brewing session go? What was your baking soda addition, and what mash pH reading did it yield per your meter?

Thanks for asking, I appreciate that!

Session went well. Did still have an issue with the pH but not severe.

I was aiming for pH 5.5 and MME told me to add 5.6g baking soda. I added this to my mash tun ONLY once I transferred my strike volume over. I pulled the sample 20 min in and chilled it. When I checked pH it was at 55*F and pH read 5.3. Not terrible and in an acceptable range so I wasn't concerned.

I was going to play around with MME and see if I could mess with the base malt drop down and see if I could get my actual reading.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

Not bad when you consider that some of the other mash pH assistant software packages might have had you either adding less baking soda, zero baking soda, or even acid as your recommended adjustment.

Did you take any later pH readings, such as at 60 minutes into the mash, or pre-boil?

If more data points come in on the low pH side from others with similar grists I may have to reconsider AJ's contention that baking soda does not fully dissociate, and therefore more of it is required. It would be interesting to repeat the recipe with the exception of using Ca(OH)2 as the pH adjuster, and see what mash pH that yields. That would be helpful in determining if all of the baking soda dissociated or not.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

I was going to play around with MME and see if I could mess with the base malt drop down and see if I could get my actual reading.

I doubt that you will make up the entire difference by that method, but that option is available to you. If you mashed 50 grams of crushed MO in 200 mL of distilled H2O and took a mash pH reading after it cooled that would be a greater help than just stabbing in the dark for solutions.

Briess lists Victory at 28 Lovibond. That change will correct it some. And perhaps MME did not assign sufficient acidity to your brown malt. I made some homemade "Victory Like" biscuit malt for which I measured its DI_pH at 5.07. MME assigns 5.19 to 28L Biscuit malt, so perhaps adjustment is required for MME and Biscuit type malts to get them closer to 5.07(ish), but more data is necessary first.

In the end your mash pH wasn't bad, and more data from people making similarly dark and robust recipes is what is required such that modification of MME becomes justified.

 

[mabrungard]

Roughly 20 minutes into a typical single infusion mash it's often pretty much over, and pH adjustments made post that time will not alter what is already in the past.

If you are using the free version of BW I 'believe' it presumes CaCL2 to be 100% pure (anhydrous, or the anhydride state) whereas MME defaults to the more generally accepted dihydrate state of CaCl2.2H2O, the latter for which by weight is close to 75.5% CaCl2 and 24.5% water. MME can be set to any hydration state for CaCl2, which unfortunately continuously absorbs moisture over time from the humidity in the air until eventually it becomes a liquid goo at somewhere around CaCl2.6H2O or so. You can never really know the current hydration state until it does go liquid goo, as there is no visual difference. I've tested fresh stuff from unopened packages at 94% to 96% CaCl2, so even fresh is not quite likely to be anhydrous. This matters because more calcium (less water complexed with the CaCl2) means a bit lower pH and thereby a bit more baking soda requirement. I doubt the difference will bridge the gap between the two softwares, but you should be aware of it.

I'm putting out a recommendation today to set MME version 7.30's "Grist Buffer Multiplier" to a value of 0.67 (which was originally at 0.60), and a fresh download as of a half hour ago or so (and going forward) will give you a copy pre-set to the 0.67 value, but it's likely easier to just change this value yourself. This minor change will also make for a small increase as to MME's baking soda adjustment recommendation (which again will not bridge the gap between the two softwares).

Lastly, BW presumes that 100% of the downward pH shift impact induced by adding calcium and magnesium to the mash water occurs within the mash, but Kolbach, the scientist who quantified this phenomenon, measured the impact at "knock-out" well down stream of the mash, and in the mash I therefore presume 75% of the downward shift will be realized. A.J. deLange is of the opinion that this impact could be realized at as little as 50-60% of Kolbach during the mash, so 75% is a safe midrange between the extremes of BW and deLange. The effect here is that less downward pH shift due to Ca and Mg in the mash means less baking soda needed to counter it.

Kohlbach was slightly correct in that pH shift is a time-dependent phenomena. Sadly, he was quite wrong in stating that its not realized until the kettle. I have reams of data that show that the pH shift to its final degree is largely complete at the 45 minute mark and is fully stable by the 60 minute mark. Always use the full predicted pH and be sure to evaluate pH performance with measurements late into the mashing period.

Rob2010SS, are you saying that the mash that you conducted was as you originally proposed in your initial post? Didn't you state that Bru'n Water predicted that the pH would be 5.33 with the baking soda amount recommended by MME? Your 5.3 pH sounds pretty accurate to me. ;-)

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

Much information of relevance can be gleaned from this similar thread:
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/forum/threads/mash-made-easy-is-solid.670256/

In this similar thread the MME prediction for baking soda resulted in a smidge high actual vs. predicted mash pH, wherein it might be inferred that BW, with its likely even higher baking soda prediction, would have been even higher still vs. the desired mash pH target.

Then further down within my linked thread someone compared a plethora of such mash pH predicting software on about 20 consecutive mash pH monitored batches, and from that respectably significant sample size a better accuracy prediction for each software emerges (albeit for batches generally [if not exclusively] requiring mash water acidification as opposed to baking soda).

But in all of this it is clear that in the realm of recipes/grists with loads of deep roasted and caramel malts only MME and BW appear to be playing on what appears to be the right side of the mash prediction fence as to predicting a need to add fair amounts of baking soda.

 

[Rob2010SS]

Did you take any later pH readings, such as at 60 minutes into the mash, or pre-boil?

If more data points come in on the low pH side from others with similar grists I may have to reconsider AJ's contention that baking soda does not fully dissociate, and therefore more of it is required. It would be interesting to repeat the recipe with the exception of using Ca(OH)2 as the pH adjuster, and see what mash pH that yields. That would be helpful in determining if all of the baking soda dissociated or not.

No, I did not take any additional reading. I have only been taking 1 reading 20-30 min into the mash. Is it beneficial to take additional measurements throughout? Any particular times?

Kohlbach was slightly correct in that pH shift is a time-dependent phenomena. Sadly, he was quite wrong in stating that its not realized until the kettle. I have reams of data that show that the pH shift to its final degree is largely complete at the 45 minute mark and is fully stable by the 60 minute mark. Always use the full predicted pH and be sure to evaluate pH performance with measurements late into the mashing period.

I suppose this answers my first question. I'll incorporate readings later into the mash, somewhere in the 45 min to 60 min mark.

Rob2010SS, are you saying that the mash that you conducted was as you originally proposed in your initial post? Didn't you state that Bru'n Water predicted that the pH would be 5.33 with the baking soda amount recommended by MME? Your 5.3 pH sounds pretty accurate to me. ;-)

Yes, i ran the mash as originally stated. I just went back into my Bru'n Water sheet for this recipe and changed the baking soda addition to read 5.6g and yes, the pH value given by Bru'n Water is in fact 5.32.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

For any single observational data point, correlation simply can not and does not imply causation. Martin and I both understand this, but the unaware end user who is amazed to find correlation from a single data point with a single software may not. The old sayings that even a stopped clock is right twice a day, and even a blind squirrel finds a nut now and then find application here. That is why I referred to a more valid comparison of 20 measured data points against the predictions of multiple mash pH predicting softwares, the data for which also has issues (among which are confirmation bias). For example, the data indicate that for (at least) the first 4 batches (if not for all batches), BF was the software of first preferential choice (as can be seen by BF predicting precisely 5.40 pH each time, or 5.50, 5.35, 5.45, etc..., always ending in a very non-random numeral 5), and as such we might infer that the actual metered readings may have to some degree (be it conscious or unconscious on the behalf of the tester) all been favorably cherry picked in time or in temperature or by stirring or other means so as to slightly better reflect what was desired from the very onset (I.E., a close agreement with BF). From there we can presume the other softwares were tossed in only as random afterthoughts at a later time, potentially to further support the initial confirmation bias.

My single baking soda reference within in my provided link also does not imply causation, and my link to it expresses only my own confirmation bias tendency driven by my pride in MME, but at least I'll admit to as much.

 

[Coastalbrew]

@Rob2010SS , I'm curious how your batch turned out? I am getting ready to brew a brown rye ale at the end of the week and have just put together my water profile in Brun' Water. I used the brown balanced profile and distilled water for my base, but my mineral additions turned out way different from what you were looking at. Here are my specs. Any feedback anyone has is appreciated. Cheers!

 

[Rob2010SS]

@Rob2010SS , I'm curious how your batch turned out? I am getting ready to brew a brown rye ale at the end of the week and have just put together my water profile in Brun' Water. I used the brown balanced profile and distilled water for my base, but my mineral additions turned out way different from what you were looking at. Here are my specs. Any feedback anyone has is appreciated. Cheers!
View attachment 656148
View attachment 656149

Hey man. Mine is still in the fermenter. I'll be kegging it next weekend so I can't give you a definitive answer just yet.

As far as pre fermentation taste, I thought it was pretty good. Im not sure if it's as nutty as I wanted but we'll see next weekend.

I went with the brown full profile and mine was a 12 gallon batch so our minerals will be a bit different. Hard to read the screenshots you included (using my phone to type this, not a computer) but I would say as long as your following what bru'n water is telling you, you should be good.

 

[Coastalbrew]

Thanks! Hope your batch turns out well.
Cheers!

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

@Rob2010SS, for future reference what would have been the caustic addition recommendations between MME and BW for your Brown Ale if you had chosen to add Ca(OH)2 instead of baking soda?