EZ Water Calculator 2.0

[remilard]

The SRM -> RA model is not very good. That's really the entire story. I would be surprised if it was spot on every time. As an example, Kai has measured various base malts with similar light color .3 pH apart in a distilled water mash. How does the model account for that? It doesn't. Perhaps you are using one of these apparently high acidity pale malts (Rahr was the one Kai measured).

The better question is, if you have a pH meter and can observe pH, why are you modeling it?

 

[Parkinson1963]

I make beer because I like to and it is cheap, to dilute my tap water with RO/distilled adds to the cost and complexity of the process. Anyhow I would need to use about 90% RO to 10% my tap water and then add salts to the mix. Just way too complicated, especially in comparison to 1/2 a teaspoon HCL and 1/2 Gypsum to my tap water for perfect water.

 

[kal]

The SRM -> RA model is not very good. That's really the entire story. I would be surprised if it was spot on every time. As an example, Kai has measured various base malts with similar light color .3 pH apart in a distilled water mash. How does the model account for that? It doesn't. Perhaps you are using one of these apparently high acidity pale malts (Rahr was the one Kai measured).

Thanks remilard. The 3 base malts I used for these 4 beers were:

- Weyermann Organic Pils
- Weyermann Pale Ale
- Gilbertson & Page (Canada) 2-row

The better question is, if you have a pH meter and can observe pH, why are you modeling it?

It's always best to know what you expect the outcome to be. I want to use the pH meter to take measurements to see if I need to make small adjustments (like add a a bit of lactic acid to the mash to bring down pH just a .1 or .2).

Kal

 

[Trouble_Brewing]

Cost is a consideration of every option we have in our brewery process. I too have very hard water. However, for me I decided to switch over to all RO water and add minerals. I'm saving for a pH meter, but am using this spreadsheet for now.

Around here, I can buy 5 gallons of RO water for under $2 which makes it the cheapest ingredient I use. I can't make beer without water, so it's also the most important ingredient. If RO water is a lot more than $$ where you live then I can see why you might be hesitant to use it.

I want to have control over as many variables as I can. Switching to this method of water treatment has improved the overall quality and consistency of my beers.

 

[bruin_ale]

I think I can get away without using RO, but I use RO for Sanitizer water because it lasts longer. I can get 5 gallons for 0.65 - it'd be a bit of a PITA if I had to go to the water store and pick up 15 gallons of water before every brew session, but cost certainly wouldn't deter me.

 

[SpanishCastleAle]

FWIW, my mash pH is always a bit higher than the spreadsheet predicts. Seems the Canada Malting 2-row Superior Pale Ale yields even higher mash pH than the Bestmalz Pilsner I'm using (relative to the spreadsheet). Those just happen to be the sacks of base malt I'm using now. From what I can tell from the malt analysis sheets, the congress mash pH varies throughout each season and from season to season...and that end-of-2011 season CMG stuff is almost 6.0.

I like using the spreadsheet because I like to know the RA, predicted mash pH, etc for future brews to help me dial it in. I do find it useful. But I have to shoot for ~5.25-5.35 (per spreadsheet) to hit 5.45-5.55 (measured at room temp). Last weeks brew with a last bit of a bag of MFB Pils was only .1 too high though, but I used Belgian crystal malts as well.

EDIT: the above was using sauermalz. I brewed an 8 SRM ordinary bitter with .75 lb crystal malt this past weekend and used only lactic acid (1/2 tsp in 7.5 gal of 87% RO diluted water) and mash pH was 5.37 at the first infusion (fairly thick), still about a full point higher than the spreadsheet predicted. After adding the sparge water and boiling it was at 5.51. pH actually increased during the boil (preboil it was 5.46).

 

[Homercidal]

I too am confused with why HCL was taken out as an option. Is there a good reason for not having it in there?? I have fairly alkaline water and mixing with RO and then adding a bunch of stuff back in that I already had seems like a waste to me, when all I really need to do is modify the PH a bit and add a bit of this and that for magnesium/sulfate balance.

I have another question, just to be sure I'm doing this right. There is the option for determining additions in the Mash and/or the sparge. My question is, why would you need to do both? Which is better? Wouldn't it be easier to simply add the stuff at the mash and be done?

 

[VikeMan]

There is the option for determining additions in the Mash and/or the sparge. My question is, why would you need to do both? Which is better? Wouldn't it be easier to simply add the stuff at the mash and be done?

Depends on what you're trying to do. With the mash additions, you're generally trying to get to an RA/pH goal. With the 'sparge' additions, you're trying to get the overall (mash + sparge) numbers 'right', for example the Chloride to Sulfate ratio. And the two are interactive, so it takes some thought in how you approach both.

 

[nilo]

TH, I have just started looking at adjusting my water and I do like your tool.
I read several posts here from Kai and Ajdvelange and others, listened to Jamil/Palmer podcast and one thing that I think you could add to your tool is a suggested RA based on the usage of roasted malts and SRM of the final beer.
I know, this is a very controversial subject, but since it would be just a "Suggested" range of RA, those that like the idea can use it and those that dislike it can just ignore it.

I looked at Kai's work at Beer color, alkalinity and mash pH, added that info to a new tab to your file and wrote a small macro to look for the suggested RA range and list that to the main AZ calulation tab, as seen below.
The cell E40 was also changed to a conditional formating to set its color to blue if under the suggested RA, green if within the range and red if above the suggested RA.
I you think this is something you would like to add to your file, let me know and I can email you the whole file or the visualbasic macro only.

Thanks!

 

[Snafu]

After speaking with a few other folks on here I'm a little confused on the Mash and sparge values. As far as the mash goes, is this value ONLY the amount that i'm using for the saccharification rest? (45-60 mins) and NOT include the mash out amount? Now for the sparge, am I using the 4.25 gals thats shown in the attached pdf? Or do I subtract the 'mash' volume from the total amount in the kettle prior to the boil and use that as my sparge amount? I think Promask may be giving me too many values to look at and they may be where I'm confused.

 

[Snafu]

Forgot to upload the promash pdf sorry.

View attachment Print1_Printing.pdf

 

[-TH-]

After speaking with a few other folks on here I'm a little confused on the Mash and sparge values. As far as the mash goes, is this value ONLY the amount that i'm using for the saccharification rest? (45-60 mins) and NOT include the mash out amount? Now for the sparge, am I using the 4.25 gals thats shown in the attached pdf? Or do I subtract the 'mash' volume from the total amount in the kettle prior to the boil and use that as my sparge amount? I think Promask may be giving me too many values to look at and they may be where I'm confused.

The mash volume is the amount of water used for the 60 min saccharification rest. The sparge volume is for everything else. So in your case, your mash volume would be 3.5 gal, and your sparge volume would be 5.6 gal (9.1 gal total water minus 3.5).

 

[motobrewer]

hm, i've been doing it differently. i've been using Mash water as is, water in the 60 min sacc rest, but "sparge water" has been (target volume - mash water).

reason being is because I wanted to know my salt concentrations of my target volume, not preboil volume. right?

 

[nilo]

hm, i've been doing it differently. i've been using Mash water as is, water in the 60 min sacc rest, but "sparge water" has been (target volume - mash water).

reason being is because I wanted to know my salt concentrations of my target volume, not preboil volume. right?

This is what I'm doing also for the mash/sparge volumes.
One thing I'm wondering though is the RA that is calculated (cell F40) which seems to be the RA of the mash only. Shouldn't we be looking at the RA of the final wort volume ( batch size ) trying to make it fall within the recommended range for each beer style/SRM?

 

[mabrungard]

RA ONLY APPLIES TO THE MASH. It is unneeded and undesirable to try and adjust the RA of the sparge water to produce a targeted RA for the wort.

The RA of the sparge water should naturally be quite low since the alkalinity is typically reduced when the pH of the water is dropped into the desired 5.5 to 6.0 range. The other thing is that alkalinity producing minerals should NEVER be added to sparge water. That is counterproductive to the pH adjustment that brewers should perform on their water.

Bru'n Water has a new version that now correctly aids the brewer in both mash water and sparge water adjustments. Alkalinity increasing minerals (baking soda, chalk, pickling lime) are not allowed in the mineral additions for the sparge water and if the brewer desires the extra calcium that would have been provided by the chalk or lime, the program automatically calculates and adds the amount of gypsum and calcium chloride needed to make up for the lime or chalk deletion. And it keeps the sulfate/chloride ratio the same as where the brewer targeted.

Download Bru'n Water at the link in my signature line below.

 

[-TH-]

The heading "Sparge Water" in EZ should probably be explained better. It is really "Total water minus mash water, to be adjusted in boil". So when we're saying sparge water additions, that really means boil additions for sparge water volume.

The reason someone would want to adjust for the sparge water volume is if he/she wanted his/her total water to have certain characteristics or to match a certain profile.

BTW when emulating an existing water profile, or comparing your water to someone else's water, or matching what someone says your water should be like, etc., the reason we are not concerned with final, post-boil volume is because we are emulating/matching/comparing to someone else's starting water characteristics, not their post-boil water characteristics.

 

[motobrewer]

ah, that certainly makes sense, but i never concern myself with matching water and i'm just trying to get my concentrations in line

 

[Snafu]

The mash volume is the amount of water used for the 60 min saccharification rest. The sparge volume is for everything else. So in your case, your mash volume would be 3.5 gal, and your sparge volume would be 5.6 gal (9.1 gal total water minus 3.5).

Thanks for clearing that up! I noticed on Kai's sheet its the same way. Now everything is matching up.

 

[Snafu]

ah, that certainly makes sense, but i never concern myself with matching water and i'm just trying to get my concentrations in line

Over the last year (as I learn more) my focus has changed many times, in the beginning I was trying to match famous brewing water, mistakenly thinking that would match up to what they were doing. Didn't take long before I understood they were more than likely monkeying around with their water also. So then I was focusing on my ratios trying to get the malty, balanced, or bitter profile right. I guess that was ok, but now that I'm focusing on the pH, I hope that makes it easier. I just went and bought a digital pH meter this past weekend and calibrated it. I can't wait to see actually how it all actually works first hand now, up to now all I've had were those test strips, which aren't hitting on much. lol

 

[wbeeson23]

I haven't been able to get this spreadsheet to pencil out for me. I did a couple of stove top 1/4 size mashes of various grist bills and I am getting pH numbers higher sometimes and lower others.

I don't understand why the projected pH calculation goes up when you add a quantity into the roasted malt cell, F13. Roasted malts should bring down the pH not raise it, right? This seems like a mistake to me. Maybe TH can answer this one.

 

[bruin_ale]

I had a similar question when I started playing with the spreadsheet. The answer I came up with is that spreadsheet is heavily weighted towards the SRM of the brew, and I think it's because the darker roasted grains have a larger effect on the pH. So make sure that you also change SRM as well as lbs of roasted grain and you should see the pH calculation go down as expected.

 

[wbeeson23]

I did that. The thing is, when you add the lbs of roasted grain, the pH increases. When you delete it, it decreases. That doesn't make sense. Also, if you play around with the crystal lbs you'll notice that there is no change to the pH unless you have a quantity of roasted grains in there. Not following that logic either.

I'm just wanting to understand the logic in it's calculation so I can figure out how to use it. Forr now, I am just going to create a 1/4 size batch on the stove the night before and figure out my additions to get the pH right. But that gets to be a PITA.

 

[maida7]

There were a number of experiments done by Kai Troister on the effects of roasted malts and crystal malts on mash pH. The data from these and the idea that beer color effects pH are the basis for the way EZ calculates the mash pH. It's complicated and there are exceptions but crystal malt has a greater influence on lowering pH then dark roasted malts. So if you got your beer color mostly from crystal malt the pH will be lower then the same color beer that got it's color from mostly dark roasted malts.

Really you should look at Kai's website for more details. I'm not doing this justice. Also, Kai recently did a 2 part interview on Basic Brewing radio. Listen to those 2 shows and he explains it very well.

 

[remilard]

I haven't been able to get this spreadsheet to pencil out for me. I did a couple of stove top 1/4 size mashes of various grist bills and I am getting pH numbers higher sometimes and lower others.

I don't understand why the projected pH calculation goes up when you add a quantity into the roasted malt cell, F13. Roasted malts should bring down the pH not raise it, right? This seems like a mistake to me. Maybe TH can answer this one.

You shouldn't expect the spreadsheet to predict the actual mash pH correctly as there is in reality not a linear relationship between beer color and mash pH. This is a model and like all models it is wrong. It may be, like some models, useful.

 

[nilo]

I started using EZ tool recently and noticed that the prediction of mash PH was 0.2 points above the actual measured mash PH for few batches.
I added -0.2 constant to the PH formula and had spot on predictions ever since. Not sure if my water report is not good or the tool has an issue. But it works for me now.

 

[MNDan]

I will guess that the spreadsheet's estimated pH is at room temp and not mash temp - that would explain the shift I believe.

 

[kal]

I started using EZ tool recently and noticed that the prediction of mash PH was 0.2 points above the actual measured mash PH for few batches.
I added -0.2 constant to the PH formula and had spot on predictions ever since. Not sure if my water report is not good or the tool has an issue. But it works for me now.

For what it's worth I've had the exact same experience with the last half dozen brews. I simply assume that the spreadsheet is 0.2 too high. If the spreadsheet tells me the pH should be 5.4, I know I'll get around 5.2 in the mash (which is perfect).

Kal

 

[mabrungard]

I started using EZ tool recently and noticed that the prediction of mash PH was 0.2 points above the actual measured mash PH for few batches.
I added -0.2 constant to the PH formula and had spot on predictions ever since. Not sure if my water report is not good or the tool has an issue. But it works for me now.

Were your pH measurements made with pH strips? Both AJ and Kai indicate that typical pH strips report about 0.2 to 0.3 units lower than actual. The most accurate measurement is with a calibrated pH meter.

 

[kal]

Mine were done with a calibrated pH meter (the one described on my site here) and my measurements were (are) consistently 0.2 higher than expected.

Kal

 

[mabrungard]

Mine were done with a calibrated pH meter (the one described on my site here) and my measurements were (are) consistently 0.2 higher than expected.

Kal

Kal,

It sounds like a minor adjustment to the EZ Water pH algorithm may be needed. Bru'n Water has been calibrated, but more and better information is always welcome. If you haven't checked out Bru'n Water yet, you can download it from the link in my signature below.

By the way, I really like your electric brewery. That's the direction I'll be going when my basement buildout is complete.