5.2 Ph Stabilizer In Mash

[alowen474]

Isn't it tow the Lyne?

 

[NickB]

Look speedie, I know you think you're raking everyone's brains here, but low and behold, for all intensive porpoises you're rain of terroir needs to be served its just desserts. You are reeking havoc all over this forum, and we are all waiting on tender hooks for you to tow the line - you don't really have free reign here. Hey, it's a doggie dog world out there, and to be honest, people could care less about what you have to say.

You only have yourself to blamed.

Gold, pure gold, you've made my phucking day mate

 

[Nevalicious]

Look speedie, I know you think you're raking everyone's brains here, but low and behold, for all intensive porpoises you're rain of terroir needs to be served its just desserts. You are reeking havoc all over this forum, and we are all waiting on tender hooks for you to tow the line - you don't really have free reign here. Hey, it's a doggie dog world out there, and to be honest, people could care less about what you have to say.

You only have yourself to blamed.

QB for the phuckin win!!!

ǝıpǝǝds ooʇ uʍop ǝpısdn ǝʇıɹʍ oʇ ʇoƃɹoɟ noʎ

I love it. Nearly fell off my chair... :lol:

 

[bradsbrew]

ǝıpǝǝds ooʇ uʍop ǝpısdn ǝʇıɹʍ oʇ ʇoƃɹoɟ noʎ

pHuck how da ya do that? I'd like to send a few emails like that

 

[bum]

http://www.fliptext.org/

Then cut and paste.

 

[dalpets]

I
....................I'm using 80% food grade Lactic Acid and taking Kunze at face value: -
60mL (72g) will reduce the pH of a mash made with 100 Kg of malt by 0.1pH.
So 6mL will drop the pH of 1 Kg by the same 1pH.
30mL (36g) will reduce the pH of the kettle wort made with 100 Kg of malt by 0.1pH.
So 3mL will drop the pH wort made from 1 Kg by the same 1pH.
Makes the maths really easy
In the Mash (6ml)*(Kg Malt)*(Desired change in pH) = mL of 80% Lactic Acid
In the Kettle (3ml)*(Kg Malt)*(Desired change in pH) = mL of 80% Lactic Acid
I.e. to drop the pH of a 5Kg mash by 0.4pH
6*5*0.4 = 12mL


Hope I haven't dropped a decimal
MHB

Hi MHB,

I'm very interested in your comments about lactic acid use in the mash & in the kettle. Could you please advise how you make allowance for temperature when you are taking your pH readings.

Thanks & cheers
dalpets

 

[Online Brewing Supplies]

Hi MHB,

I'm very interested in your comments about lactic acid use in the mash & in the kettle. Could you please advise how you make allowance for temperature when you are taking your pH readings.

Thanks & cheers
dalpets

I hope this is what you are getting at ? If doing a pH readings at mash temps (65c ish) you will be looking at a reading which is approx 5.6 pH which equates to approx 5.3 pH when sample is cooled to 20C.So these readings are pretty close to ideal mash pH depending on your view on ideal. You would need to confirm this with a pH meter as there can be some slight difference between meters. Once you have established this bench mark you are away.
Be aware taking hot pH readings will decrease the life of your pH probe.
GB

 

[[email protected]]

I hope this is what you are getting at ? If doing a pH readings at mash temps (65c ish) you will be looking at a reading which is approx 5.6 pH which equates to approx 5.3 pH when sample is cooled to 20C.So these readings are pretty close to ideal mash pH depending on your view on ideal. You would need to confirm this with a pH meter as there can be some slight difference between meters. Once you have established this bench mark you are away.
Be aware taking hot pH readings will decrease the life of your pH probe.
GB

GB I think your statement about mash pH is back to front. The H+ ions have greater dissociation at the higher mash temperatures and therefore will give a lower pH than if measured at room temperature. Please see the quote from www.braukaiser.com which refers to Brewing: Science and Practice by Briggs et al.

"In mashing we tend to target the mash pH to optimize the effectiveness of the most important mash enzymes: the amylases which convert starch into sugar. In room temperature tests the pH optima for alpha amylase has been found at 5.3 and for the beta amylase it is between 5.1 and 5.3 [Briggs, 2004] (see pH and brewing water in Starch Conversion). But when their activity is evaluated at mashing temperatures and the pH of a cooled mash sample is measured it shows their pH optima at 5.7 and 5.4-5.6 respectively. This is the result of a pH shift in the mash that takes place when the mash is heated. In addition to that, the pH optimum of the enzyme is likely to shift as well. As a result, at common starch conversion temperatures (65C/150F) the pH of the mash appears 0.35 units lower than that of a room temperature mash sample [Briggs, 2004]. This needs to be taken into account when looking at pH optima for various mash enzymes. Most commonly, however, the pH optima that are reported in the literature were determined by testing cooled mash samples."

 

[MHB]

Ive been using fairly high end Merck narrow range strips good to probably 0.2 pH, the good thing is they arent affected by temperature; the bad part is when I went to order more they now cost about $4/dip. Hence my comment that Im looking to upgrade to a reasonably good ATC pH meter, I want to get one with ISE (Calcium), conductivity and ATC to about 80^oC.

MHB

 

[Online Brewing Supplies]

GB I think your statement about mash pH is back to front. The H+ ions have greater dissociation at the higher mash temperatures and therefore will give a lower pH than if measured at room temperature. Please see the quote from www.braukaiser.com which refers to Brewing: Science and Practice by Briggs et al.

"In mashing we tend to target the mash pH to optimize the effectiveness of the most important mash enzymes: the amylases which convert starch into sugar. In room temperature tests the pH optima for alpha amylase has been found at 5.3 and for the beta amylase it is between 5.1 and 5.3 [Briggs, 2004] (see pH and brewing water in Starch Conversion). But when their activity is evaluated at mashing temperatures and the pH of a cooled mash sample is measured it shows their pH optima at 5.7 and 5.4-5.6 respectively. This is the result of a pH shift in the mash that takes place when the mash is heated. In addition to that, the pH optimum of the enzyme is likely to shift as well. As a result, at common starch conversion temperatures (65C/150F) the pH of the mash appears 0.35 units lower than that of a room temperature mash sample [Briggs, 2004]. This needs to be taken into account when looking at pH optima for various mash enzymes. Most commonly, however, the pH optima that are reported in the literature were determined by testing cooled mash samples."

Oop's , I am on morphine from my shoulder operation, could explain my explanation.
GB

 

[[email protected]]

That Morphine is good stuff. Makes you see penguins walking through the ward!

 

[Online Brewing Supplies]

That Morphine is good stuff. Makes you see penguins walking through the ward!

Didnt make the nurses look any better :lol: I was pushing that self administer morphine button so much I got RSI Now I am on orals.
GB

 

[QldKev]

Didnt make the nurses look any better :lol: I was pushing that self administer morphine button so much I got RSI Now I am on orals.
GB

Nothing like good oral too :lol:

QldKev

 

[goomboogo]

Maybe Speedie's on morphine. Although I'm now leaning towards troll as an explanation.

QB, fantastic post. Last week, I heard a lawyer use the phrase 'for all intensive purposes'. Not as funny as porpoises but silly nonetheless.

 

[speedie]

Pethidine is more like it

Ether and snuff now you are cooking

Phuckit

speedie :lol:

 

[Leigh]

I made up 5L of water at 500% and used the aforementioned 100ml and 1000ml measuring cylinders to dilute the dosage down to the target levels. It so happens that 5L is one fifth of my end ofnboil kettle volume... So I actually didn't even need to weigh the 5.2 at all. The recommended dose for my brew (its a heaped spoonful) into the 5L gave 500%. Now I did weigh it... But I didn't need to.

Conversion time is irrelevant - the point of a buffer or any other means of changing your mash pH, is so that its at the desired level from the beginning, or very close to the beginning of the mash. If the product does its job, its already done it at the 5 min mark, if it takes fifteen minutes to have it's effect, its not doing it's job.

You have to look at the question I was asking too. I wasn't trying tomfind out at what dose the product becomes effective, I wasn't trying to work out the degree to which it influenced the mash pH. I was trying to work out whether it did it's job or not. So a black and white, yes or no answer. Either the product buffers the mash to optimum brewing levels, or it doesn't. And I was working in massive increments of the recommended dose. Not trying to see whether 90% of the dose worked vs 100% trying to see if any dose at all became effective. If it did... Then a more finicky experiment might be needed to see what that level was. But in my experiment, it really didn't matter - Want to include the error range?? OK assume that the closest I could get was +/- a whole 100% of the dose.

I re-state my results as: At any tested dosage rate between 50 and 500% (+/- 100%) of the recommended dose, the product failed to bring the pH of the mash to within the optimum brewing range.

And the newly stated result loses none of its meaning.

But thanks for pointing the possibilities out - i tend to get slack about that sort of stuff if people don't keep me on my toes. And if my response still leaves stuff to be desired, please let me know where, so I can either further explain, or do the experiment again with a solution in place.

Cheers

TB

IIRC, buffers don't work too well outside of a set buffer concentration. If I am reading your method correct, as QB pointed out, your concentrations may already be outside of the effective buffer concentration range.

More food for thought, scale up is not necessarily linear (as chemistry may imply) due to physics, so doing a "small" batch with scaled down volumes and masses may not be a direct correlation of what may or may not occur at size...I see so many companies caught out by scaling laws every week!

That said, I wouldn't expect anybody on Silvan water to not notice much effect with buffers on light malts, but those of us on Cardinia water may see a difference as it is (in my personal experience) slightly harder water...

I'd also like to read more on CM2's hypothesis...the use of 5.2 with dark malt v light malt with everything else held constant.

 

[speedie]

Straight a way you have introduced a different set of variables dark v light malt

Forget what is posted and think about what this marvelous 5.2 stuff can do

Raise or lower the mash pH

Next it will be sugar is good meter

speedie

 

[mika]

Ok... so now we have another contender for 'requires breathlyser reading before posting' title.

I wondered what all the 'Harsh' was for. I get it now.

 

[Thirsty Boy]

IIRC, buffers don't work too well outside of a set buffer concentration. If I am reading your method correct, as QB pointed out, your concentrations may already be outside of the effective buffer concentration range.

More food for thought, scale up is not necessarily linear (as chemistry may imply) due to physics, so doing a "small" batch with scaled down volumes and masses may not be a direct correlation of what may or may not occur at size...I see so many companies caught out by scaling laws every week!

That said, I wouldn't expect anybody on Silvan water to not notice much effect with buffers on light malts, but those of us on Cardinia water may see a difference as it is (in my personal experience) slightly harder water...

I'd also like to read more on CM2's hypothesis...the use of 5.2 with dark malt v light malt with everything else held constant.

Mashes do scale though - most mash and brewing experimentation and analysis is done at small scale. Point taken that for this particular experiment it might not... But i strongly suspect it would. Besides, the more casual experiments i have done at full scale also show 5.2 doing pretty much the same thing- ie, nothing.

My concentrations were in fact decent enough from an error point of view, and the experiment used as at least one of the experimental values - the recommended dose of the product, which presumably is at the set buffer concentration? The reason i mainly tested at higher and significantly higher dose rates, is because the chemists i have heard arguing that 5.2 probably wont work - argued that the dose was way too low and that you'd need massively higher doses to have the stated effect.

At any rate - the stuff didn't work at any concentration i tried - less than recommended, recommended or several versions of 100% increases. It didn't work as it is supposed to work, and adding more didn't make it work either - perhaps it does have a delicate range in which it does work and my crass steps leapfrogged that range... But what use is something so difficult to get right to a homebrewer? As far as i am concerned, you add it at the rate it says on the tub - and if that doesn't make it go, it doesn't do the job.

 

[alowen474]

Didnt make the nurses look any better :lol: I was pushing that self administer morphine button so much I got RSI Now I am on orals.
GB

Nothing like good oral too

QldKev

Not from that nurse apparently!!