dent
Under Pressure
- Joined
- 20/6/08
- Messages
- 954
- Reaction score
- 467
I wanted to see on my system the relationship between the grist, water, calcium and pH. I have read helpful articles and two things have troubled me, the remarks that the mash pH at sacc temps and room temps are different by 0.3-4 or so, and the fact that even with a large proportion of RO water my (pils) mashes have measured "high" (5.6 or so) with cooled samples.
Inspired somewhat by similar experiments on the above site, I prepared 14 sample mashes with a variety of grists, water, and CaCl additions.
Ingredients are Weyermann Premium Pils, and Munich 2. All water in the samples was made up to 100ml. pH tested with Milwaukee SM101. Mashed the samples by floating the cups in the mash tun of my herms system.
I don't have the water analysis of the Bassendean tapwater on hand at the moment, it isn't terrible, but a long way from optimal.
Results:
I am using the efficiency to gauge the enzymatic activity and thus optimum pH since it is a pretty small range of pH.
Basically to me confirms somewhat that 0.3-4 or so offset between cold and hot mash pH. The first four or five samples were a bit warmer (40-50 degrees) when I pulled them out, the rest had cooled to 25 degrees or so - kind of ruins the experiment on that end, but 7-14 were at a consistent 25 degrees or so. Next time I will make sure they are all at the same temp before testing.
Results 1 and 2 show the munich 2 has more buffering toward acid as you'd expect - results in more efficiency with a given water.
Looks like the calcium in the tapwater is helpful compared to the lack thereof in the RO, according to results 7-10, until the carbonates overcome the buffering power when you use 100% tapwater.
The CaCl additions between 9 and 11-14, I think show the optimum room temp pH is somewhat over the canonical 5.2 - looks like 5.4-5.6 is about right at 25 degrees.
Looks like 50% RO with no extra CaCl is a pretty good choice from a mash pH perspective, however there is also the hop bitterness quality - whether this is related to water hardness or pH (not necessarily the same thing), I don't know. If it is not just pH, then more RO water would be the go.
I use g/kg on the CaCl since by my figuring it reacts with the grist, not the water.
Noteworthy is the difference between thicker mashes - result 1 vs result 8 - I am thinking due to the increased buffering capacity of more grain against the carbonates in the water.
I am kind of using the results to justify my suspicions rather than the other way around which would be just a little more scientific, but I have only so many data samples. I am well aware this is very flawed experiment, but I thought I'd share anyhow.
This is a good read for those interested in the topic - it has real science.
Inspired somewhat by similar experiments on the above site, I prepared 14 sample mashes with a variety of grists, water, and CaCl additions.
Ingredients are Weyermann Premium Pils, and Munich 2. All water in the samples was made up to 100ml. pH tested with Milwaukee SM101. Mashed the samples by floating the cups in the mash tun of my herms system.
I don't have the water analysis of the Bassendean tapwater on hand at the moment, it isn't terrible, but a long way from optimal.
Results:
I am using the efficiency to gauge the enzymatic activity and thus optimum pH since it is a pretty small range of pH.
Basically to me confirms somewhat that 0.3-4 or so offset between cold and hot mash pH. The first four or five samples were a bit warmer (40-50 degrees) when I pulled them out, the rest had cooled to 25 degrees or so - kind of ruins the experiment on that end, but 7-14 were at a consistent 25 degrees or so. Next time I will make sure they are all at the same temp before testing.
Results 1 and 2 show the munich 2 has more buffering toward acid as you'd expect - results in more efficiency with a given water.
Looks like the calcium in the tapwater is helpful compared to the lack thereof in the RO, according to results 7-10, until the carbonates overcome the buffering power when you use 100% tapwater.
The CaCl additions between 9 and 11-14, I think show the optimum room temp pH is somewhat over the canonical 5.2 - looks like 5.4-5.6 is about right at 25 degrees.
Looks like 50% RO with no extra CaCl is a pretty good choice from a mash pH perspective, however there is also the hop bitterness quality - whether this is related to water hardness or pH (not necessarily the same thing), I don't know. If it is not just pH, then more RO water would be the go.
I use g/kg on the CaCl since by my figuring it reacts with the grist, not the water.
Noteworthy is the difference between thicker mashes - result 1 vs result 8 - I am thinking due to the increased buffering capacity of more grain against the carbonates in the water.
I am kind of using the results to justify my suspicions rather than the other way around which would be just a little more scientific, but I have only so many data samples. I am well aware this is very flawed experiment, but I thought I'd share anyhow.
This is a good read for those interested in the topic - it has real science.
