EZ Water Calculator 2.0

[RonRock]

I also will continue to use the spreadsheet. I am one of those that tried hard to match profiles. I always wondered how accurate the profiles truly are with current water treatment and quality control. But they seemed like a good target for any particular beer type.

 

[ajdelange]

They should be aware however that to match the profile exactly might be difficult to get right and might require a lot of salts/acids - in which case the resulting water might not end up a perfect match due to factors outside the realm of this spreadsheet.

One of those factors is that many, if not most, of the commonly published profiles do not represent physically realizable water. People wind up trying to match something that nature could never make. If nature can't make it you can't make it.

Also, I've read (can't remember source) that the well-known breweries in these regions most likely adjust their water now anyway so attempting to match the published profiles is somewhat pointless.

As an obvious example of this - Munich Helles and Dunkles are both (or were both) made from the same water but it was obviously decarbonated before making Helles. Today smaller breweries would be supplied with mains water which is very probably softened at the water treatment plant in order to protect the city's distribution system. Larger breweries may still operate from their own wells but I think that's becoming rare. And the question as to what an individual brewery does with its well or municipal water can only be answered by contacting the brewery itself. So when trying to match Burton water, for example, be aware that modern Burton style ales seem to be brewed today with much softer, lower sulfate water than the specs for Burton which you may have found would seem to indicate. Match those specs and you will have a historically authentic beer. Go with general water management principals and you will have a perhaps less authentic but nevertheless better beer.

 

[OneHotKarl]

So i've been following these EZ water calc spreadsheet updates and threads and now I've got a question. Using this newest spreadsheet (2.0) from what I understand you target your CL:S04 ratio to enhance your flavor profile, than you verify and/or adjust so that your mash pH is within range also. The newest spreadsheet emphasis is no longer placed on the RA to SRM correlation but rather the mash pH. And now the question, does the RA matter if your ph is in range? What I mean by this is does this affect the flavor similar to the CL:S04 directly?...or only does it only affect flavor by being off and therefore the mash pH being off and thus problems with incorrect mash pH (ie: acidic mash extracting tannins)?

This came up when I was trying to build a profile for a dry stout (Jamil's recipe) loosly based on the dry stout regional profile. My "balanced" profile based on balanced mash pH and a good malty CL:SO4 ratio resulted in a negative RA. From previous reading I have heard higher RA = darker higher SRM (more acidic mash).

Here are the profile details I built if relevant (please feel free to comment on them I could use any advise):
Ca: 52
Mg: 2
Na: 39
Cl: 100
SO4: 58

Cl:sO4: 1.72
CaCO3: 23
RA: -15
Est. pH: 5.32

Can someone with more knowledge please clarify?

 

[Bizoune]

I'm trying this on Sunday with a Robust porter. Can't wait to see if I can nail my mash pH using the spreadsheet.

Many thanks!

 

[jeffmeh]

Excellent work.

I am curious regarding the mash thickness disclaimer, "*** This spreadsheet becomes less accurate for mash thickness below 1.0 qt/lb or above 2.4 qt/lb."

I do full-volume, BIAB, with approximately 3.3 qt/lb when I am doing a 60-minute boil, and 3.7 qt/lb for a 90-minute boil. Is there any easy way to modify the spreadsheet based upon mash thickness?

 

[remilard]

Excellent work.

I am curious regarding the mash thickness disclaimer, "*** This spreadsheet becomes less accurate for mash thickness below 1.0 qt/lb or above 2.4 qt/lb."

I do full-volume, BIAB, with approximately 3.3 qt/lb when I am doing a 60-minute boil, and 3.7 qt/lb for a 90-minute boil. Is there any easy way to modify the spreadsheet based upon mash thickness?

It appears that -TH- based the spreadsheet on Kai Troester's experimental data which was limited to a range of mash thicknesses. So you could repeat Kai's experiments with thinner mashes.

Alternately you could measure the pH of the mash and make small adjustments as necessary.

In general with more water your mash pH will be higher.

 

[-TH-]

It appears that -TH- based the spreadsheet on Kai Troester's experimental data which was limited to a range of mash thicknesses. So you could repeat Kai's experiments with thinner mashes.

Alternately you could measure the pH of the mash and make small adjustments as necessary.

In general with more water your mash pH will be higher.

couldn't have said it better myself, thanks!

 

[motobrewer]

so, is chocolate malt "crystal" or "roasted"?

nice work TH

 

[maida7]

so, is chocolate malt "crystal" or "roasted"?

nice work TH

I would assume it's roasted

 

[mojotele]

I had the same question about chocolate malt as well as brown and amber malt. I would assume they are "roasted," but who knows?

Seems like the best thing to do is repeat Kai's experiment using those malts and decide where they belong from there. I don't really have the equipment to pull that off, though (no pH meter).

Anyway, fine work on this spreadsheet! It has already brought to light a couple minor mistakes I was making. I'm sure I can make good use of it. Thanks, TH!

 

[remilard]

I had the same question about chocolate malt as well as brown and amber malt. I would assume they are "roasted," but who knows?

Strictly speaking, neither.

Based on some anecdotal observations, if I were using the roasted vs crystal dichotomy I would put the toasted malts (biscuit, brown, amber, special roast) in the crystal category as they appear to have a fair amount of acid per SRM.

The lowest mash pH I have recorded was a baltic porter that used quite a bit of those (and crystal) even though it is substantially lighter than stouts or robust porter that I brew.

 

[DeafSmith]

I really like the spreadsheet - thank you TH. I'm trying to come up to speed on this whole water treatment subject. One thing I'm confused about right now is calcium chloride - there are several hydrate forms - apparently the two most common are anhydrous and dihydrate. Which one is assumed in your spreadsheet?

Also, I don't know which form the home brew stores sell. And I have a small bottle of Pickle Crisp from the grocery store which lists the only ingredient as calcium chloride, but doesn't say which form it is. Can anyone clear this up for me?

EDIT: I also have a bag of gypsum from AHS which just says calcium sulfate, but can I assume that this is the hydrate form CaSO4*2H2O as listed in Palmer's book? Is that what is used in the spreadsheet? And I assume the spreadsheet uses MgSO4*7H2O for Epsom salts?

 

[motobrewer]

crystal lowers pH, roasted increases pH? or maybe it just seems that way because its based on the ratio between crystal:roasted?

 

[Bobby_M]

Crystal and Roasted both potentially lower pH but if you look at Kai's chart, crystal malt acidity tracks pretty linearly with how dark they are while the roasts sit in a narrow band no matter what the color.

 

[DeafSmith]

I really like the spreadsheet - thank you TH. I'm trying to come up to speed on this whole water treatment subject. One thing I'm confused about right now is calcium chloride - there are several hydrate forms - apparently the two most common are anhydrous and dihydrate. Which one is assumed in your spreadsheet?

Also, I don't know which form the home brew stores sell. And I have a small bottle of Pickle Crisp from the grocery store which lists the only ingredient as calcium chloride, but doesn't say which form it is. Can anyone clear this up for me?

EDIT: I also have a bag of gypsum from AHS which just says calcium sulfate, but can I assume that this is the hydrate form CaSO4*2H2O as listed in Palmer's book? Is that what is used in the spreadsheet? And I assume the spreadsheet uses MgSO4*7H2O for Epsom salts?

After playing with the spreadsheet, I can see that it does assume dihydrate form for both gypsum and calcium chloride and the *7H2O hydrate for Epsom salts (and I know my Epsom salts are 7H2O because it says so on the box). So my only remaining questions are:
1. Is all gypsum sold by homebrew stores dihydrate?
2. Is all calcium chloride sold by homebrew stores dihydrate?
3. Is Pickle Crisp dihydrate? (I have sent the manuf. a query, but haven't yet received a reply).

 

[mojotele]

Strictly speaking, neither.

Based on some anecdotal observations, if I were using the roasted vs crystal dichotomy I would put the toasted malts (biscuit, brown, amber, special roast) in the crystal category as they appear to have a fair amount of acid per SRM.

The lowest mash pH I have recorded was a baltic porter that used quite a bit of those (and crystal) even though it is substantially lighter than stouts or robust porter that I brew.

I see. That makes a lot of sense. Thanks for the info!

 

[DeafSmith]

So my only remaining questions are:
1. Is all gypsum sold by homebrew stores dihydrate?
2. Is all calcium chloride sold by homebrew stores dihydrate?
3. Is Pickle Crisp dihydrate? (I have sent the manuf. a query, but haven't yet received a reply).

Still no reply from Ball (manufacturer of Pickle Crisp), but I have found the answer to #3 - it does seem to be dihydrate. I took 1 cc of Pickle Crisp, packing it down as well as I could, and weighed it. The amount I had was actually a little less than 1 cc because it is not a powder, but small granules so there was some empty space between the granules - just guesstimating, I would say about 10%, but it is impossible to determine accurately and the granules don't crush easily. Anyway, the 1 cc, or actually slightly less than 1 cc weighed in at 12.4 grains which is equal to 0.804 grams. This would be consistent with dihydrate which has a density of 0.835 g/cc and not with anhydrous which has a density of 2.15 g/cc.

 

[ajdelange]

I think it very likely that both forms of calcium chloride are the dihydrate. If you leave them exposed to nominally humid air and they don't turn to soup, they are dihydrate. As for the gypsum, if it's labeled gypsum it's the dihydrate. If it's plaster of paris (CaSO4.1/2H2O) adding a little water to some would cause it to get hot and harden.

If you have a hardness test kit you could add 300 mg of the chloride to 1 L of DI water. A hardness of 205 ppm as CaCO3 (plenty for measurement with even a 10 ppm per drop kit) would indicate the dihydrate, a larger number the anhydride and a smaller number the heptahydrate. Similarly, 400 mg of gypsum in 1 L would give about 230 ppm as CaCO3 hardness.

 

[DeafSmith]

Thanks - that's very helpful. I don't have a hardness test kit, but it seems I can safely assume I have the dihydrate forms of both CaCl2 and CaSO4. Now I just need to figure out whether to try to modify my tap water or start with RO water and build from there.

 

[motobrewer]

i'm still trying to figure out how this all works....

it seems the SRM is critical to mash pH, as is the ratio of crystal to roasted. Is it safe to say anything over 300 SRM is "roasted"?

 

[Trouble_Brewing]

What's the current thinking on the chloride/sulfate ratio that we've been led to believe is so important? It's been deemphasized in this spreadsheet and I've heard others suggest that it does more harm than good trying to adjust for malty vs bitter profiles. But no one seems to be willing to update or provide a better recommendation.

 

[remilard]

What's the current thinking on the chloride/sulfate ratio that we've been led to believe is so important? It's been deemphasized in this spreadsheet and I've heard others suggest that it does more harm than good trying to adjust for malty vs bitter profiles. But no one seems to be willing to update or provide a better recommendation.

It's not a current vs dated thing, it is a multiple schools of thought thing.

British School: ratio is king and we kinda like sulfate maybe
German School: absolute amounts are king and sulfate is bad
American School: meh

Note I am referring to professional brewing here. US home brewers have largely adopted the British thinking and this is because they were influenced primarily by British home brewing texts early on.

Contemporary to Palmer's How to Brew were texts by Fix and Noonan that took different approaches to the issue of water. Palmer's book was the least technical and ergo the most popular and influential. It is a mistake to think that it ever defined the only mode of thinking, however.

 

[bnut]

I have a question on this spreadsheet.
Background: I'm planning on doing by first brew this weekend with all RO water.
My plan was at put all my brew water into my brew kettle, add salts, and then transfer to the MLT & HLT (batch sparge). I've been reading people add salts to the mash and directly to the boil (not to the sparge water). Does it matter? What are the benefits?
Okay, I guess I had more than "a" question. Onto the spreadsheet ...
How does the "adjust for sparge water" checkbox work? How would I use it in my case?

And for bonus points, if anyone wants to do me a solid on my first RO attempt, what adjustments should I make to my water for a Rye Pale Ale? I don't have my numbers with me but I think its 17 gallons of total water.

Thanks!

 

[Douglefish]

Using this spreadsheet, many times it recommends a low RA for pale beers. What is everyone's take on this? I've heard people make statements about never having a negative RA, but that doesn't jive with the pH on the spreadsheets.

Thoughts?

 

[remilard]

Using this spreadsheet, many times it recommends a low RA for pale beers. What is everyone's take on this? I've heard people make statements about never having a negative RA, but that doesn't jive with the pH on the spreadsheets.

Thoughts?

In order to have an optimal mash pH (say, 5.4) pale beers would require either a highly negative RA or the addition of acid.

Who said negative RA is bad? That makes no sense.

Personally I brew with negative RA most of the time, but not a hugely negative RA. I use acid as I am not a fan of very minerally water.

 

[remilard]

I have a question on this spreadsheet.
Background: I'm planning on doing by first brew this weekend with all RO water.
My plan was at put all my brew water into my brew kettle, add salts, and then transfer to the MLT & HLT (batch sparge). I've been reading people add salts to the mash and directly to the boil (not to the sparge water). Does it matter? What are the benefits?
Okay, I guess I had more than "a" question. Onto the spreadsheet ...
How does the "adjust for sparge water" checkbox work? How would I use it in my case?

And for bonus points, if anyone wants to do me a solid on my first RO attempt, what adjustments should I make to my water for a Rye Pale Ale? I don't have my numbers with me but I think its 17 gallons of total water.

Thanks!

Does it matter? Very much so.

Why do people add salts to the mash? Either because:

1. They don't know how to dissolve chalk in water.
2. They would rather not dissolve chalk in water.
3. Somebody told them to and they do it without question.
4. They view the salts as a way to fix mash pH and not as additions to the water, per se.

Advantages to adding to the mash:
1. Don't have to dissolve chalk.

Disadvantages
1. Seems to take longer for pH to stabilize
2. Adding the salts that nominally make, say, Burton water to the mash is entirely different than brewing with Burton water. If your goal is accuracy, you need to actually build the water and then replicate the rest of the process accurately (is the water heated up prior to doughing in, is it treated with slaked lime, etc).

 

[motobrewer]

does the final ion count take into account that a bit of mash water is being absorbed and held by the grain? or does that not matter?

I use pure tap water for mashing, but then use pure distilled for sparging. Obviously, the grainbed holds onto about a gallon of mash water. Do the ions get held as well?

 

[jmo88]

does the final ion count take into account that a bit of mash water is being absorbed and held by the grain? or does that not matter?

I use pure tap water for mashing, but then use pure distilled for sparging. Obviously, the grainbed holds onto about a gallon of mash water. Do the ions get held as well?

I asked this very question on a Brewstrong Q&A episode on 6/28. Palmer advised that I assume most of the salts from the mash end up in the kettle after the runnings. The sparge will take the rest of the salts out, for the most part. Since then, I've greatly reduced the salts I add to the mash and stopped adding kettle additions altogether. My beer is much better now. The less I mess with my soft water, the better my beer is to my taste.

 

[Inhiding]

Does it matter? Very much so.

Why do people add salts to the mash? Either because:

1. They don't know how to dissolve chalk in water.
2. They would rather not dissolve chalk in water.
3. Somebody told them to and they do it without question.
4. They view the salts as a way to fix mash pH and not as additions to the water, per se.

Advantages to adding to the mash:
1. Don't have to dissolve chalk.

Teachable lesson here I think since you said that people don't know how to dissolve chalk in water, I don't. How does one dissolve chalk in water?

 

[ajdelange]

Perhaps more important than knowing how to do it is understanding that the method emulates the way nature dissolves limestone in water and that if you are not willing to do it the way nature does you cannot expect to be able to duplicate a natural water very closely.

Anyway, it is done with acid - in nature's case, carbonic acid. Suspend the chalk in the appropriate volume of water and then either sparge carbon dioxide through until the water is clear and the pH correct or put the water under CO2 pressure. You could, for example, suspend the chalk in water in a cornie keg and then pressurize it. A bit of shaking from time to time will, clearly, speed the dissolution. If you do it this way the water will be at lower pH than you want and you will have to let the water stand while the extra CO2 escapes. Again, you should monitor pH until the desired level is reached.

As a final note, the only time you should be dissolving chalk is if you are trying to emulate the water of some brewing city of reknown and you should only do that if you are striving for absolute authenticity and with an understanding of how the water is to be used. For example, there is little point in going to all that trouble with CO2 to emulate Munich water for a Helles when the first step in brewing a Helles is to decarbonate the water. Why put the carbonate in only to take it out again?