Martin sent out the newest version 5.5 the other day, but I'm not seeing any improvement in prediction. Here is an example.
In version 4.2, a simple pils recipe was predicted to be pH 5.4. I measured 5.34. Not bad!
Plugging all the same data into version 5.3, the prediction is 5.21.
In version 5.5, the prediction is down to 5.09.
I am using a very thin mash, since I am doing 5 gallon batches in a giant recirculating EBIAB pot. Since I am making small batches in a big system, I have about 4 gallons of deadspace under the basket. In this recipe I used 9.68 gallons of water to 12.75 lbs of grain. That is 6.33 l/kg or 3.04 qt/lb.
(I have read that mash thickness/pH calculations should always use total water volume, but I have also read that it should disregard the recoverable dead space volume. Under that rule my thickness would be about 1.8 qt/gal.)
I don't know what to believe about that, but I do know that I am sticking with version 4.2 for the time being since it produced good predictions for my gear.
In version 4.2, a simple pils recipe was predicted to be pH 5.4. I measured 5.34. Not bad!
Plugging all the same data into version 5.3, the prediction is 5.21.
In version 5.5, the prediction is down to 5.09.
I am using a very thin mash, since I am doing 5 gallon batches in a giant recirculating EBIAB pot. Since I am making small batches in a big system, I have about 4 gallons of deadspace under the basket. In this recipe I used 9.68 gallons of water to 12.75 lbs of grain. That is 6.33 l/kg or 3.04 qt/lb.
(I have read that mash thickness/pH calculations should always use total water volume, but I have also read that it should disregard the recoverable dead space volume. Under that rule my thickness would be about 1.8 qt/gal.)
I don't know what to believe about that, but I do know that I am sticking with version 4.2 for the time being since it produced good predictions for my gear.