Bru N Water spreadsheet

[Cevan65]

I have a question using this spreadsheet. I am using flaked oats in my recipe and there is no place to enter that info in the grain bill section. How are others handling this?

It estimated my mash ph at 5.32 but in reality it was 5.6.

 

[ESBrewer]

Did you replace oats with something else on the sheet or did you leave 'em out of the calculation? Seems that people generally enter flaked, unmalted grains as low colored base malts. Now that you have some experience you can be prepared next time. I have used Bru'n Water in my first batches with good results (without flaked grains, though).

 

[suprchunk]

It estimated my mash ph at 5.32 but in reality it was 5.6.

Did you measure that pH at mash temps? Supposedly it is off by a factor of .25 to .35 when hot. There was a huge writeup (read correction) in the latest BYO about just this.

 

[Cevan65]

I measured at 15 minutes into the mash. I pulled a small amount and let reach room temp before testing. So when a recipe calls for say a mash pH of 5.3, is that measured hot or room temp?

Edited: So a bit of research seems to indicate that target mash pH refers to hot samples, and that a .35 correction factor brings mine to 5.25. Am I correct on this?

 

[Upthewazzu]

I have a question using this spreadsheet. I am using flaked oats in my recipe and there is no place to enter that info in the grain bill section. How are others handling this?

It estimated my mash ph at 5.32 but in reality it was 5.6.

Wondering this myself. I brewed up a big NEDIPA this weekend and used Bru'n Water to calculate mash pH, etc. The spreadsheet predicted 5.3 on the nose, and my pH meter measured 5.8, quite a large difference (yes it was calibrated, and left to cool to room temp). My recipe called for 1.25lbs in flaked oats and .75lbs Simpson Golden Naked Oats (about 13% of the grist in total). I added the flaked oats as base grains and the golden naked oats as crystal malt. All told, I missed my OG by 10 points and missed the mash pH by 5-tenths, quite a large margin on both. Any thoughts, @mabrungard ?

 

[schematix]

might want to post complete recipe including all grains, mash thickness, mineral additions and acid additions.

 

[Upthewazzu]

7lbs Pale Hi-Color (Great Western Malting)
6.25lbs Pale Malt (Great Western malting)
8oz Caramel 15L (Briess, I think. Maybe Great Western)
1.25lb Flaked Oats
.75lb Golden Naked Oats (milled, of course)

1.33qt/gal mash thickness

The rest I don't have in front of me; but Gypsum, calcium chloride, and lactic acid were added to mash and sparge per Bru'n Water

 

[schematix]

Those mineral and acid additions are going to be needed in order to determine where the error is.

 

[Upthewazzu]

The major question here isn't so much where the error came from, it's what should I be inputting flaked oats as?

 

[schematix]

I've always treated it just like 2-row base malt.

 

[ajdelange]

Edited: So a bit of research seems to indicate that target mash pH refers to hot samples, and that a .35 correction factor brings mine to 5.25. Am I correct on this?

Where did you do your research? I thought by now most sources had been corrected on this. Unless specifically stated otherwise mash pH is referred to room temperature. One of the obvious reasons that room temperature is used is that mash temperature can be anything from 50 °F to 157 °F but we all know what room temperature is and even if my crazy Canadian wife thinks it's 65 °F that's not far off from a more reasonable number (20 °C). The amount of 'correction' thus depends on the mash temperature but it also depends on the malt. A shift of 0.0055 pH /°C is typical but I've seen twice that.

 

[FunkedOut]

The major question here isn't so much where the error came from, it's what should I be inputting flaked oats as?

The spreadsheet's comments instruct the user to input them as base malt.
Briess flaked oats claim a 1.4 lovibond.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

As far as I can tell, all mash pH assistant software presumes a room temperature sample for verifying the predicted pH measurement.

 

[Big Monk]

As far as I can tell, all mash pH assistant software presumes a room temperature sample for verifying the predicted pH measurement.

DeClerck was talking room temp samples as far back as A Textbook of Brewing. Even if it wasn’t explicitly stated anywhere, it shouldn’t take much more than common sense to realize that room temp standardizes the pH optima by removing the temperature variable.

It’s been said a million times: “mash temp” means nothing unless that temperature is specified.

 

[ajdelange]

In De Clerck's day it had to be room temperature because pH measurement was done in the laboratory, not the brewery. Anyone who reads De Celrck (and every brewer should IMO) will quickly realize that in those times there was more to pH measurement than whipping you Pocket Pro out, dunking it into a couple of buffers and then into a sample. In De Clerks time the sample had to be transported to the lab during which time it cooled and thus it made sense to let it cool to some standard temperature before making a reading. Another aspect of this may have been that reference electrodes at that time often used calomel which melts at fairly low temperature.

 

[bitteritdown]

Some may be interested in reading this:

https://www.omega.com/Green/pdf/pHbasics_REF.pdf

"pH TEMPERATURE ERROR TABLE" may be of interest.

 

[ajdelange]

Reminds me of the old days when every engineer had 1.5 to 2 feet of shelf space in his office occupied by the Omega data books (catalog) each volume dedicated to one type of measurement e.g. pH, temperature, pressure... These were brightly colored so that they were very noticeable especially as they were so voluminous. The linked page here looks familiar for sure. Now if it looks familiar that means it hasn't been completely updated in a long time. It leads off the statement that pH electrode technology hasn't changed much in 60 years. That's ridiculous.. It also says that you can expect electrode life of 6 months to a year and while that was true when this material was written it isn't, thank heavens, true any more. I'm still using eletrodes I've had for 5 years. So while it's true that a pH electrode still consists of a glass bulb filled with acid, a reference junction and some wires there have clearly been dramatic improvements in the nature of those components.

There's lots of stuff on pH electrode error. Just keep in mind when looking at that material that 'error' in its context means the difference between a reading made at 25°C and whatever temperature you are measuring at. This isn't really an error at all. It simply reflects that the voltage produced by an electrode exposed to a given pH depends on the temperature. The math is given in the sticky on calibration. Brewers tend to measure at room temperature which is 20 °C. It really doesn't matter what temperature you measure at or calibrate at with a modern meter as ATC takes care of all that. It didn't in the day when this catalog page was originally written.

My main reason for posting all this is that I wouldn't want a pH meter user reading the linked page to think that he is subject to an error for which he should be making a correction because he is working at 20 °C rather than 25. Or that his 9 month old electrode is likely to go TU by the end of a year (though it may).

 

[mabrungard]

Yep, I've got a gel-filled, double junction Milwaukee pH probe that is well over 5 years old. I'm guessing that we're all beneficiaries of advancing technology. Reading the history of the pH meter, it appears that they only existed in the commercial market after the mid '30s and I'm sure they were super expensive. Thus they were probably initially only available at research universities and labs.

 

[tld6008]

Can someone familiar with Brun Water look at the attached sheets from the program? I made this beer the other day and being a novice with water calculators I ran the particulars through all the various programs I could find, EZ water, Mash made easy, Brew Cipher and the Brewers Friend Advanced water chemistry calculator. I tried to keep all ingredients the same where I could and used the same desired water ion levels. The recipe I was making had a 5.2 predicted mash ph. All the programs except Brun Water recommended lactic acid additions in the 4-6ml range to get the 5.2 mash ph. Brun Water suggested 1.4 ml which turned out was way to low, I ended up using 4.5 ml and still did not get to the 5.2 level.
Anyway I am asking if anyone can see where I made a mistake in the Brun Water inputs or explain why the large discrepancy. I was happy to see that the salt amounts in all the programs were very close.

 

[bitteritdown]

The Lovibond values and grain type selections on your grains are incorrect:

2 Row Pale Malt - Base Malt - 1.8
Golden Promise - Base Malt - 3
aromatic - Crystal Malt - 38
carapils - Crystal Malt - 1.3

Unless you really do have 20 L Aromatic and 8 L Golden Promise?

The Total Batch volume is incorrect - it should be your post boil volume (home much beer do you intend to make) 5 gallons?

Correct those items and then add salts to reach your desired levels.

Targeting a room temp pH of 5.45-5.55 would be a better bet, simply remove the lactic acid. This would give a mash temp pH of 5.2 - 5.3.

 

[tld6008]

The Lovibond values and grain type selections on your grains are incorrect:

2 Row Pale Malt - Base Malt - 1.8
Golden Promise - Base Malt - 3
aromatic - Crystal Malt - 38
carapils - Crystal Malt - 1.3

Unless you really do have 20 L Aromatic and 8 L Golden Promise?

The Total Batch volume is incorrect - it should be your post boil volume (home much beer do you intend to make) 5 gallons?

Correct those items and then add salts to reach your desired levels.

Targeting a room temp pH of 5.45-5.55 would be a better bet, simply remove the lactic acid. This would give a mash temp pH of 5.2 - 5.3.

I screwed up on the Golden Promise but the Aromatic is 17-20L. I reset the GP to 2L and the water volume to what post boil was -6.5g. and the only change in the program was the estimated ph went from 5.21 to 5.3. I also adjusted the acid addition to get a 5.22 ph and it only took 2 ml and I know from brewing this that is not correct. All the other calculators I used had 2L for the GP. My intention was to get a room temp mash ph of 5.2. As I stated, or tried to, all the other programs were very close in results only Brun Water was markedly different.

 

[bitteritdown]

Not sure what to tell you tld6008.

A test mash is always the best.

Measuring the DI pH of each grain and performing your own calculations is probably a close 2nd. (I think the Mash Made Easy spreadsheet allows entry of each grains DI pH.)

Using spreadsheets is like playing the lottery.

Most spreadsheet are based off of Kai Troester's work. It makes an interesting read, if you desire to know how these spreadsheet arrive at their conclusions.

The large discrepancy is most probably caused by each spreadsheet using different calculations to determine the amount of alkalinity needing to be neutralized.

If your intent is to use all RO or Distilled then you'd need to enter 100 in the 'percent dilution water' box on the water adjustment tab.

Do you have 88% lactic selected in the other spreadsheets as well?

Just some suggestions, perhaps Martin or AJ would have additional advice.

 

[tld6008]

Not sure what to tell you tld6008.

A test mash is always the best.

Measuring the DI pH of each grain and performing your own calculations is probably a close 2nd. (I think the Mash Made Easy spreadsheet allows entry of each grains DI pH.)

Using spreadsheets is like playing the lottery.

Most spreadsheet are based off of Kai Troester's work. It makes an interesting read, if you desire to know how these spreadsheet arrive at their conclusions.

The large discrepancy is most probably caused by each spreadsheet using different calculations to determine the amount of alkalinity needing to be neutralized.

If your intent is to use all RO or Distilled then you'd need to enter 100 in the 'percent dilution water' box on the water adjustment tab.

Do you have 88% lactic selected in the other spreadsheets as well?

Just some suggestions, perhaps Martin or AJ would have additional advice.

I appreciate your time responding and knowledge on the subject. My initial thought was I was using Brun Water incorrectly and as you pointed out I had a couple incorrect inputs. I still have a hard time accepting the large discrepancy between this one calculator and all the others I have tried. This is the 4th batch I have brewed with all RO water and salt additions, each time I have used at least 3 calculators to check my work and I have the lactic acid selected in all. This last batch was the only one that had the large difference which still makes me think its human error.

 

[ajdelange]

I am using flaked oats in my recipe and there is no place to enter that info in the grain bill section. How are others handling this?
It estimated my mash ph at 5.32 but in reality it was 5.6.

Practically speaking you are at the mercy of the authors of the several spreadsheets that are available to you which, as has been noted here, give differing answers based on differing models of the malts. It is quite simple to put together a spread sheet calculator much more robust than any of the available ones but there is a catch. You must have detailed data on the acid based characteristics of the malts. You would have to make a set of measurements on the flaked oats using a procedure like the one described in MBAA TQ vol. 52, no. 1, 2015, pp. 3-12 Predicting and Controlling Mash pH Using Simple Models for Mash Component Acid/Base Characteristics A. J. deLange. You would also most probably need to make the investment of time required to understand acid base chemistry to the point where you fully understood the article and to acquire the equipment though at least one correspondent has made these measurements with nothing but a Hach pH Pro+.

Otherwise, you will have to use one of the existing spreadsheets. Mash pH depends on the shape and 'location' (pHDI - deionized water mash pH) of each malt's titration curve. As all curves are, at least approximately, linear in a small pH regions with approximately the same slope one can get a fair picture of the titration curve by assuming it is a straight line with slope -40 mEq/kg•pH crossing the 0 axis at pHDI. Thus a program which allows one to enter pHDI is going to give a better prediction than ones that don't given, of course, that one knows pHDI. That must be measured too but the procedure is much less involved than the full one given in the paper. The only spread sheet that I am aware of, other than my own, that allows the entry of pHDI is the Mash Made Easy one mentioned in #22. All the others try to guess at it based on malt type, malt color...

 

[tld6008]

that allows the entry of pHDI is the Mash Made Easy one mentioned in #22. All the others try to guess at it based on malt type, malt color...[/QUOTE]
Ahhh..... A light bulb just turned on!

 

[Big Monk]

Practically speaking you are at the mercy of the authors of the several spreadsheets that are available to you which, as has been noted here, give differing answers based on differing models of the malts. It is quite simple to put together a spread sheet calculator much more robust than any of the available ones but there is a catch. You must have detailed data on the acid based characteristics of the malts. You would have to make a set of measurements on the flaked oats using a procedure like the one described in MBAA TQ vol. 52, no. 1, 2015, pp. 3-12 Predicting and Controlling Mash pH Using Simple Models for Mash Component Acid/Base Characteristics A. J. deLange. You would also most probably need to make the investment of time required to understand acid base chemistry to the point where you fully understood the article and to acquire the equipment though at least one correspondent has made these measurements with nothing but a Hach pH Pro+.

Otherwise, you will have to use one of the existing spreadsheets. Mash pH depends on the shape and 'location' (pHDI - deionized water mash pH) of each malt's titration curve. As all curves are, at least approximately, linear in a small pH regions with approximately the same slope one can get a fair picture of the titration curve by assuming it is a straight line with slope -40 mEq/kg•pH crossing the 0 axis at pHDI. Thus a program which allows one to enter pHDI is going to give a better prediction than ones that don't given, of course, that one knows pHDI. That must be measured too but the procedure is much less involved than the full one given in the paper. The only spread sheet that I am aware of, other than my own, that allows the entry of pHDI is the Mash Made Easy one mentioned in #22. All the others try to guess at it based on malt type, malt color...

Ours does too. I am now personally using the calculations based on the Riffe spreadsheet from Homebrewing Physics. I have modified it to accept DI pH for each base malt. Then it calculates DI pH by weight and sums those as the input to the pH algorithm.

I also account for the pH Δ from antioxidants and added Sauergut. We extended the calcs out to include Kettle and KO additions as well with a measured pH bypass cell for attempting quick adjustments

I’m hoping to get this new system into our main sheet by the end of the month.

 

[Upthewazzu]

I'm going to bump this thread since I did another NEIPA with 2lbs of flaked grains (1lb flaked oats, 1lb flaked barley; roughly 8% of total grainbill) and I once again missed my target mash pH by a wide margin. Bru'n Water predicted 5.2 and I got a reading of 5.8. The flaked oats were entered as 1 lovibond and the flaked barley was entered at 1.7 lovibond. The reading was taken 15 minutes into the mash, cooled to room temp, and read by a pH meter that was calibrated 4 hours prior. Other minerals such as gysum, calcium choride, canning salt, and epsom salt were added as well as lactic acid (acid was added to strike water prior to heating).

Anyone else have issues with flaked grains affecting mash pH by such a wide margin?

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

It would be interesting to see what mash pH your recipe would yield if the two flaked grains were replaced by an equal weight of your recipes lowest color barley base malt. With all other things being kept exactly the same.

Would you be able to share full details for the specific recipe, including your strike waters analysis, strike and sparge water quantities, and your added mineralization and acid?

 

[mabrungard]

The minor percentage of oats and barley are unlikely to have created that large pH excursion. In addition, if you added the various minerals and acid to the grist, its very unlikely that the pH would have remained at a level that would be coincident with untreated distilled water. What was the source water and are you sure of its profile?

 

[Upthewazzu]

The minor percentage of oats and barley are unlikely to have created that large pH excursion. In addition, if you added the various minerals and acid to the grist, its very unlikely that the pH would have remained at a level that would be coincident with untreated distilled water. What was the source water and are you sure of its profile?

The details of the water and the spreadsheet are at home, but I used 25% municipal tap water and 75% distilled. The tap water was analyzed by Ward Labs in December 2017. Our muni water comes from an aquifer and doesn't vary that much (I also have a water report from 2014 that is much the same as the one from 2017).

The distilled water that I used had a pH of 6.3.

I should add that I've checked the mash pH on 5 or so other beers that do not include flaked grain, and those all matched what Bru'n Water predicted.

 

[ajdelange]

I've measured flaked barley and found it ti have a DI mash pH of about 5.6 and buffering at that pH of about -36 mEq/kg•pH. Thus it would not pull the mash pH down to 5.2 (and it didn't as you saw) nor should a spreadsheet program arrive at a prediction of 5.2 unless it, and/or the flaked barley (which I have not measured) are terribly mis-modeled by the spreadsheet. Simple way to find out: run the spreadsheet with these two components quantities reduced to 0.01 pound or some similarly small value. What happens to the pH estimate if you do that?

Another suggestion is to try a different spreadsheet.

The pH of the distilled water (nor that of the tap water) have very little to do with the mash pH. It is their alkalinities that count. DI water has virtually 0 alkalinity (1 or 2 ppm as CaCO3)

 

[ScrewyBrewer]

The details of the water and the spreadsheet are at home, but I used 25% municipal tap water and 75% distilled.

Why not use 100% distilled water and be done with it? Knowing that your source water properties are consistent eliminates a lot of variables and makes life easier.