Question on Bru'n water vs. Brewers Friend

[nudarkshadowl]

So I am using Beersmith, Bru'n water, and Brewersfriend in order to modify my RO water profile to suit my first AG batch and have a few questions.

First off, I am using the Amber bitter target profile in Bru'n water because the Ingelwood IPA in Beersmith has an SRM value of 7.7 which puts it into more of an amber IPA, than a yellow bitter.

I used Bru'n Waters RO profile for both comparisons, so things should be equal in terms of source water, as well as the mash and sparge volumes.

After adding my additions to both programs, I am getting different mash PH values. 5.3 in Bru'n and 5.54 for Brewersfriend.

Here is my link to Brewersfriend and the same figures apply to Bru'n, so my question is, which software package is correct?

http://www.brewersfriend.com/mash-chemistry-and-brewing-water-calculator/?id=JWSZL1X

Does Brewer's friend account for the .1-.2 rise in PH over the mash period, where it seems that Bru'n is giving the first 15 min or so PH value so you have to account for the rise?

I more than likely just need to pick one type of software, and go with it; then see if I can actually hit my target numbers, lol. Just comparing user friendly-ness to figure out which software I plan to use.

Beersmith seems wonderful for recipe formulation among other things, but for my water profiles, bru'n water has some nice features that Brewer's friend doesn't include (mostly the ion affects that each type of addition will impart on the base water).

Cheers!

 

[ajdelange]

So I am using Beersmith, Bru'n water, and Brewersfriend in order to modify my RO water profile to suit my first AG batch and have a few questions.

First off, I am using the Amber bitter target profile in Bru'n water because the Ingelwood IPA in Beersmith has an SRM value of 7.7 which puts it into more of an amber IPA, than a yellow bitter.

The color of the beer has little to do with it. Note that I didn't say 'nothing' but rather 'little' and that is indeed the case.

After adding my additions to both programs, I am getting different mash PH values. 5.3 in Bru'n and 5.54 for Brewersfriend.

Not surprising.

... so my question is, which software package is correct?

Neither. They both use models which cannot accurately reproduce the chemistry in the real world. The question is really 'which is more accurate for the type of brewing I do?' and the answer is 'the one that gives better predictions'.

Does Brewer's friend account for the .1-.2 rise in PH over the mash period, where it seems that Bru'n is giving the first 15 min or so PH value so you have to account for the rise?

Not AFAIK. Sometimes pH rises after strike and sometimes it falls. That depends on the mash and water. For example, if you added acid to the strike water and then doughed in the acid in the water would immediately reach the pH electrode and the pH would read low. As, over time, the liquid accesses the grains and reacts the grains neutralize some of that acid and the pH rises. The same thing happens if you use sauermalz as a lot of the acid is on the surface of the grains and goes into solution quickly. Conversely, if the liquor is alkaline you can expect just the opposite effect. The pH will slowly fall as HCO3- ions in the water are 'neutralized'. In any case it takes several minutes (25 or more) for mash pH to stabilize.

Kai titrated malt in the cold (AFAIK) and did not wait (again AFAIK) for stabilization. Martins approach is, AFAIK, more empirical.

I more than likely just need to pick one type of software, and go with it; then see if I can actually hit my target numbers, lol. Just comparing user friendly-ness to figure out which software I plan to use.

I would use several and compare their predictions to the numbers you actually measure when brewing. Then go with the one that gives the best answers. Don't expect perfection from any.

 

[nudarkshadowl]

Sounds great, once again thank you for the advice!