RO Water TDS

[jbritt]

I've been brewing for a while and have recently started learning about water chemistry and making adjustments. I never did before because I lived in western ny and the water was decent. Now living in Phoenix I quickly realized the water is terrible and really had no choice.

I have water softener and RO system with recently replaced filters. I also recently got TDS meter and RO water reads 25.1 tds. Tap water reads 800+ (varies) so maybe user error/meter error but if not thats pretty impressive for ro system.

So assuming the reading is accurate my question is the reading low enough to assume 100% ro water in water chemistry software? I don't have time to get a water report at the moment because I need to brew asap. If not low enough could I assume chemistry breakout of tds reading from local water report?

 

[day_trippr]

I think 25 tds output from 800+ source water is hella impressive!

I use Bru'n Water water tool which provides a place to enter source water parameters. It has some "canned" parameter sets including one for RO water that can be modified to suit actual user values. My RO system consistently provides 11 tds output from our ~250 tds well, and I used a Ward's test result from the latter to create proportional values to fill in my source water parameter set. I think you could do the same if your local water report has enough info for it.

Cheers!

 

[MaxStout]

25.1 ppm from 800 ppm feed water is almost a 97% rejection rate. Anything over about 95% is good. Your RO system is doing its job.

 

[tracer bullet]

So assuming the reading is accurate my question is the reading low enough to assume 100% ro water in water chemistry software?

I would. Any amount you are incorrect is going to be an amount you'd never taste the difference.

It could be interesting to have an analysis done on it but I wouldn't be too worried. A quick TDS check each brew will ensure things stay constant.

 

[VikeMan]

My RO system consistently provides 11 tds output from our ~250 tds well, and I used a Ward's test result from the latter to create proportional values to fill in my source water parameter set.

Not that it matters one bit at 11 ppm, but from a theoretical perspective, I wonder if it would be proportional. I suspect it would not, because the salts being removed are of different sizes. But I am not an expert in RO membrane theory/tech.

 

[day_trippr]

Right, it's 11 ppm, so even if I'm wrong, close enough for home brewing

Cheers!

 

[VikeMan]

Right, it's 11 ppm, so even if I'm wrong, close enough for home brewing

Or commercial brewing. I know quite a few pros who pay less attention to their water than many of us on the forum.

 

[Dgallo]

I've been brewing for a while and have recently started learning about water chemistry and making adjustments. I never did before because I lived in western ny and the water was decent. Now living in Phoenix I quickly realized the water is terrible and really had no choice.

I have water softener and RO system with recently replaced filters. I also recently got TDS meter and RO water reads 25.1 tds. Tap water reads 800+ (varies) so maybe user error/meter error but if not thats pretty impressive for ro system.

So assuming the reading is accurate my question is the reading low enough to assume 100% ro water in water chemistry software? I don't have time to get a water report at the moment because I need to brew asap. If not low enough could I assume chemistry breakout of tds reading from local water report?

Have you ever thought of hooking the the RO system up prior to hitting the softener. You may be able to get a lower tds. The bigger molecules that get pulled out by the softener like calcium and magnesium will get trapped in your ro filter anyway but you won’t have the salts added and then have to be pulled out by the ro system as salts are smaller molecules.

By no means am I saying 25 tds is a lot lol but I genuinely believe you’ll have a lower tds by having the ro system before it goes into the softener.

But to answer your direct questions, 25 is low and I wouldn’t be concerned, that said on dark beers I would just air on the side of caution with the na and cl and just think about the 25 when adjusting

 

[jbritt]

Awesome. Thanks!

 

[Whisky River]

I’m no water expert but there used to be some systems on the market putting out 0 or close to 0 and the experts here trashed them as being unnecessary.

 

[day_trippr]

You're probably remembering "RODI" systems which add a deionization (ion exchange) stage after the membrane to push the TDS down to zero. Definitely not necessary.

As for where to connect a RO system given an existing softener: always after the softener, as that provides the greatest membrane performance and lifespan...

Cheers!

 

[Mark3885]

I have a small RO system from Buckeye Hydro , I’m on well water after my water softener and get 1-2 tds. I add 10 grams gypsum, 10 grams calcium chloride and 6 grams kosher salt, as a general rule to all my brews. I’m from WNY , living in the southern tier near Salamanca and Jamestown. Where were you before the move?

 

[hottpeper13]

Since you don't have time on your first brew to get a water report I would do what Gordon Strong does with his RO recipes. He adjusts 5 gal of brewing liquor at a time to a pH of 5.5 with an acid. You can add your seasonings after the report on the next ones.

 

[Buckeye_Hydro]

Not that it matters one bit at 11 ppm, but from a theoretical perspective, I wonder if it would be proportional. I suspect it would not, because the salts being removed are of different sizes. But I am not an expert in RO membrane theory/tech.

you are correct. Rejection of different ions varies.

 

[VikeMan]

Since you don't have time on your first brew to get a water report I would do what Gordon Strong does with his RO recipes. He adjusts 5 gal of brewing liquor at a time to a pH of 5.5 with an acid. You can add your seasonings after the report on the next ones.

Does he really do that? Adjusting 5 gallons of good RO (or distilled) water to a pH of 5.5 would take only about 0.005 ml of 88% lactic acid (just try measuing that out!), because distilled/RO water has essentially no buffering capacity. The resulting 5.5 pH acidified water would be so weak (in buffering capacity) that the mash pH would end up being essentially whatever the Distilled Water pH of the malt(s) would have been. For most grists, this is going to result in a mash pH that's too high. I'd be pretty surprised if this is actually what Gordon does. But if he does, I don't see the point in it.

 

[tracer bullet]

... Adjusting 5 gallons of good RO (or distilled) water to a pH of 5.5 ...

I'm taking that to mean adding adjustments to the water to prep for a mash that will have a targeted pH and not caring about the actual water itself before then.

 

[James_AZ]

I’m in the Phoenix valley. My RO water ends up 11-25 TDS depending on how bad the tap water is that day. I always add minerals as if it were 0 TDS and go from there. Seems to of worked out for me so far. BTW - using RO water for your star san makes it clear.

 

[mabrungard]

Does he really do that? Adjusting 5 gallons of good RO (or distilled) water to a pH of 5.5 would take only about 0.005 ml of 88% lactic acid (just try measuing that out!), because distilled/RO water has essentially no buffering capacity. The resulting 5.5 pH acidified water would be so weak (in buffering capacity) that the mash pH would end up being essentially whatever the Distilled Water pH of the malt(s) would have been. For most grists, this is going to result in a mash pH that's too high. I'd be pretty surprised if this is actually what Gordon does. But if he does, I don't see the point in it.

Gordon is an avowed Luddite and he isn't interested in doing it in a better way. The only thing you can say for his method is that its better than nothing.

The problem that I see with other brewers adopting Gordon's approach is that they may overlook the nuance that he always starts with RO water. If a brewer starts with a typical tap water and adjusts to 5.5, the outcome could be far worse.

For some darker beer styles, Gordon's method could be fine. But for pale beers, it almost certainly won't produce a good result. The wort pH into the kettle is certain to be too high and the resulting beer is likely to be 'dull'.

Another thing to consider is that brewers should NOT infer that Gordon is a great BEER brewer from him winning Ninkasi awards. He actually won those awards via his Mead and Cider entries and by spending a sh*t ton of money and effort in entering dozens of beers, meads, and ciders. I can't say that he's a great BEER brewer, but I'll concur that he has an impeccable palate and is very skilled at amending and blending beers, meads, and ciders to produce end products that can win medals. Most of the rest of us brew and enter what we can make in a single shot. Great brewers can make that single shot count.

 

[ITV]

Gordon is an avowed Luddite and he isn't interested in doing it in a better way. The only thing you can say for his method is that its better than nothing.

The problem that I see with other brewers adopting Gordon's approach is that they may overlook the nuance that he always starts with RO water. If a brewer starts with a typical tap water and adjusts to 5.5, the outcome could be far worse.

For some darker beer styles, Gordon's method could be fine. But for pale beers, it almost certainly won't produce a good result. The wort pH into the kettle is certain to be too high and the resulting beer is likely to be 'dull'.

Another thing to consider is that brewers should NOT infer that Gordon is a great BEER brewer from him winning Ninkasi awards. He actually won those awards via his Mead and Cider entries and by spending a sh*t ton of money and effort in entering dozens of beers, meads, and ciders. I can't say that he's a great BEER brewer, but I'll concur that he has an impeccable palate and is very skilled at amending and blending beers, meads, and ciders to produce end products that can win medals. Most of the rest of us brew and enter what we can make in a single shot. Great brewers can make that single shot count.

I feel that Gordon is great at recreating a receipe based on a classic beer that he has had. I brewed his replication of U Flek Czeck Dark Larger that I received a 48 from a National beer judge at a local competition. The only deviation I did was a kettle mash instead of a decoction.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

He adjusts 5 gal of brewing liquor at a time to a pH of 5.5 with an acid.

Details matter (see below).

88% lactic acid (just try measuing that out!)

FWIW, on p 11 of Modern Homebrew Recipes:

"I [Strong] adjust my RO water with 10% phospheric acid ...​

"I [Strong] use the more dilute acid since it is easier to measure ...".​

that they may overlook the nuance that he always starts with RO water

From my reading / studying of his two books (and the related HomeBrewCon presentations), RO water is one of a number of nuances in his brewing process that often get overlooked in home brewing forum discussion.

Maybe it's best for the home brewing community to view these books as classics (in the past) that many never actually read and move forward. Equations that model water (pH, etc) during the brewing process have come a long ways since 2013.

 

[VikeMan]

FWIW, on p 11 of Modern Homebrew Recipes:

"I [Strong] adjust my RO water with 10% phospheric acid ...​

"I [Strong] use the more dilute acid since it is easier to measure ...".​

So, easier to measure with phosphoric than lactic, but still pointless if all he's doing is acidifying RO water to 5.5 and not adding any salts (to reduce mash pH) to the mash. Which is why I asked @hottpeper13 if that's really what Gordon is doing.

Equations that model water (pH, etc) during the brewing process have come a long ways since 2013.

They have certainly improved. But even in 2013, anyone paying attention to mash pH wouldn't have been acidifying RO water to 5.5 and calling it a day. EZWater and some others were around and none of them would have led a user to do that. Even the old Palmer sheet could more often than not get you in the ballpark.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

if all he's doing is acidifying RO water to 5.5 and not adding any salts

If you have read the books, you know the answer.

eta: I didn't see your addition ("They have certainly improved."). I'll repeat a comment

Maybe it's best for the home brewing community to view these books as classics (in the past) that many never actually read and move forward​

and move forward.

 

[VikeMan]

If you have read the books, you know the answer.

I haven't read them, or at least I've never read a book that advocated that. Which, again, is why I asked if that's what he's really doing. Perhaps you could enlighten us.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

If you have read the books, you know the answer.

I haven't read them,

While a couple of the specific techniques didn't "stand the test of time", the thought process (in the books) for understanding and enhancing a brewing process may still be worth the time it takes to read (and understand) the content.

Although, honestly, it may be that the simplest thing possible is for

[...] the home brewing community to view these books as classics [...] and move forward

 

[VikeMan]

Although, honestly, it may be that the simplest thing possible is for [...] the home brewing community to view these books as classics [...] and move forward

Yes, you keep saying that. But I want to figure out more precisely what this supposed process is/was, as my read of @hottpeper13's post seems to be that it's something current. If you don't want to participate, fine, but feel free to stop playing gate keeper and telling me to move forward.

I imagine @hottpeper13 will be back sooner or later to clarify.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

But I want to figure out more precisely what this supposed process is/was, as my read of @hottpeper13's post seems to be that it's something current

A fair and accurate summary of Strong's process (from his two books) is probably 3 to 5 printed pages, a long list of detailed footnotes, and a couple of technical review cycles.

Which is why I suggest reading the books - as one can get the information directly from the source [in 2013/2016].

#18 (above) has a lot of "food for thought" for those looking to brew with those 2013/2016 techniques in the mid-2020s.

but feel free to stop playing gate keeper and telling me to move forward.

Not telling anyone specifically, just suggesting that the community (as a whole) move forward.

 

[VikeMan]

A fair and accurate summary of Strong's process (from his two books) is probably 3 to 5 printed pages, a long list of detailed footnotes, and a couple of technical review cycles.

Which is why I suggest reading the books - as one can get the information directly from the source [in 2013/2016].

#18 (above) has a lot of "food for thought" for those looking to brew with those 2013/2016 techniques in the mid-2020s.

I get that you don't want to talk about the details. Great. But I'm not going to read the books just to clarify what @hottpepper13 meant about Gordon's RO water acidification, if in fact he is even quoting the books you are talking about. So for the love of God, stop advising me right now.

 

[Bramling Cross]

Does he really do that? Adjusting 5 gallons of good RO (or distilled) water to a pH of 5.5 would take only about 0.005 ml of 88% lactic acid (just try measuing that out!), because distilled/RO water has essentially no buffering capacity. The resulting 5.5 pH acidified water would be so weak (in buffering capacity) that the mash pH would end up being essentially whatever the Distilled Water pH of the malt(s) would have been. For most grists, this is going to result in a mash pH that's too high. I'd be pretty surprised if this is actually what Gordon does. But if he does, I don't see the point in it.

I strongly agree. I tried Gordon's method several years ago when I decided to start monkeying around with RO--everyone else is doing it, right? Trying to hit pH 5.5 with RO left me spitting nails. It was like boxing a Bobo doll. Fortunately, I'm lucky enough to have some quite passable tap water, so I've never tried it again.

 

[Bramling Cross]

Another thing to consider is that brewers should NOT infer that Gordon is a great BEER brewer from him winning Ninkasi awards. He actually won those awards via his Mead and Cider entries and by spending a sh*t ton of money and effort in entering dozens of beers, meads, and ciders. I can't say that he's a great BEER brewer, but I'll concur that he has an impeccable palate and is very skilled at amending and blending beers, meads, and ciders to produce end products that can win medals. Most of the rest of us brew and enter what we can make in a single shot. Great brewers can make that single shot count.

Savage!

 

[day_trippr]