Slightly off water profile

[killspice]

I've been looking into water profiles as I slowly gain more knowledge in how to improve my brews. At this stage I think my water is 'generally OK' but there are some factors that I think might be contributing to my mash efficiency being a bit low.


I full volume BIAB, mill (in thermomix) to a fair amount of flour, no sparge, no chill. I do not (yet) have any sort of water 'testing' gear, but entering everything into Bru'n'water shows some points that I would like to address.

Any thoughts / advice would be appreciated.

Part 1: Mash PH
In my usual 30L mash the calculated acidity in Bru'n'Water is 5.9, which is too high. I am thinking this is the cause of my lower than expected mash efficiencies (~70%). It would take ~8% acidulated malt (400g) to bring this down to 5.5 for a 4.5kg grist. I'm not sure whether acidulated malt or acid adjustments would be best but it seems like any acid additions can cause major flavour changes so I'm a bit concerned here.

With a moderate hardness I don't want to add 5.2, as I have heard it can cause off flavours.


Part 2: Flavour Profile

My water profile according to the WA Water Corp 2014 published details should be close to:
Hardness: 122

Total Alkalinity (as CaC03): 61
Ca: 24.5
Mg: 14.8
Na: 100
K: (unknown)
Fe: 0.02

Reported PH: 7.5

Bicarbonate: 73.7 (report matches the value calculated from Total Alkalinity)
Carbonate: 36.6
Sulphate: 100 (I got this from a different source, so may be suspect - I did a quick calculation using the AlS04 molecular weights and ended up with 0.48, but that seems a very low sulphate value)
Cl: 174
Nitrate: 0.2
Nitrite (unknown)
F: 0.8

I am a bit confused by the Carbonate and Mg values - Bru'n'water states "Carbonate/Magnesium may be reported in (as CaCO3) units and must be converted to (ppm) by multiplying by x"
Does this statement mean I can take the "total alkalinity as CaCO3" and calculate the Carbonate/Magnesium values, or does it mean that along with "Total alkalinity as CaCO3" you may also have "Carbonate as CaCO3" and "Magnesium as CaCO3". I took it to mean the former.

The above values end up with a cation/anion difference of 2.68 which is clearly wrong, if I 0 out the Mg/Carbonate/Sulphate I get 0.58 which is still outside the expected values.

Bru'n'water suggests that my calcium is low (24ppm), my sodium is bordering on high (100ppm), sulphate is bordering on high (100ppm), chloride is high (174ppm). The only way I can see to fix this is dilution with ~50% distilled water (barring my own RO which I don't plan on getting, is 'spring water' acceptable?) and then top up with gypsum. At 50% dilution + .1g/L I end up with:
Ca, Mg, Na, Sulphate, Chloride, Bicarbonate
35.5, 7.4, 50, 105.8, 87, 67.4

Sulphate is amber (high) and Calcium is probably still a bit low, but everything else looks within parameters. This would also end up with a calculated mash PH of 5.7 which would reduce the need to add as much acidulated malt.

 

[Rocker1986]

I'd be hesitant about using spring water. Apart from it being a huge waste of money, it also contains minerals in varying amounts.

I got a small water still off eBay and use that to distill a batch worth of water for the occasions when I want to have exact control over the water profile. Otherwise the plain tap water does fine, but then my tap water would be different to yours as well.

Other than that, I will leave it to those with more knowledge. I neither use Bru'n water nor worry too much about my mash pH. Either it's where it should be or if it's not, it isn't having any noticeable negative effects on the beer, so I haven't worried about it.

 

[Black n Tan]

I am a bit confused by the Carbonate and Mg values - Bru'n'water states "Carbonate/Magnesium may be reported in (as CaCO3) units and must be converted to (ppm) by multiplying by x"
Does this statement mean I can take the "total alkalinity as CaCO3" and calculate the Carbonate/Magnesium values, or does it mean that along with "Total alkalinity as CaCO3" you may also have "Carbonate as CaCO3" and "Magnesium as CaCO3". I took it to mean the former.

Carbonate does not exist in water with a pH below 8.0, so you should enter '0' for this (it indicates this in Brun Water). The 'Total alkalinity as CaCO3" is your alkalinity value and not your magnesium value. I don't believe you can use it to calculate your magnesium value. Does you report indicate a magnesium value? I think it is best to think of 'as CaCO3' as a way of expressing the amount of a specified component (eg. magnesium) as the equivalent value of CaCO3. I hope that helps, but you may be limited by the information in your water report.

 

[drsmurto]

Before spending any money playing around with your water, measure the pH in your mash tun. If it is incorrect, then take steps to correct it.

 

[killspice]

Carbonate does not exist in water with a pH below 8.0, so you should enter '0' for this (it indicates this in Brun Water). The 'Total alkalinity as CaCO3" is your alkalinity value and not your magnesium value. I don't believe you can use it to calculate your magnesium value. Does you report indicate a magnesium value? I think it is best to think of 'as CaCO3' as a way of expressing the amount of a specified component (eg. magnesium) as the equivalent value of CaCO3. I hope that helps, but you may be limited by the information in your water report.

Cheers, that makes sense, in glad to have it clarified. It struck me as odd but the wording threw me.

My water profile shows manganese not magnesium, so I'll just leave it at 0 I guess.

 

[killspice]

Before spending any money playing around with your water, measure the pH in your mash tun. If it is incorrect, then take steps to correct it.

Thanks DrSmurto, good advice.

I hadn't planned on making changes until I had taken some ph measurements, but at the same time was looking to understand the available options. If for example my water profile suggested that any changes would screw up my beer more than help it then I might have just given up there

You are right though. Even if I can't do anything, a definitive test would at least give me a starting point.

 

[motman]

I've been looking into water profiles as I slowly gain more knowledge in how to improve my brews. At this stage I think my water is 'generally OK' but there are some factors that I think might be contributing to my mash efficiency being a bit low.


I full volume BIAB, mill (in thermomix) to a fair amount of flour, no sparge, no chill. I do not (yet) have any sort of water 'testing' gear, but entering everything into Bru'n'water shows some points that I would like to address.

Any thoughts / advice would be appreciated.

Part 1: Mash PH
In my usual 30L mash the calculated acidity in Bru'n'Water is 5.9, which is too high. I am thinking this is the cause of my lower than expected mash efficiencies (~70%). It would take ~8% acidulated malt (400g) to bring this down to 5.5 for a 4.5kg grist. I'm not sure whether acidulated malt or acid adjustments would be best but it seems like any acid additions can cause major flavour changes so I'm a bit concerned here.

With a moderate hardness I don't want to add 5.2, as I have heard it can cause off flavours.


Part 2: Flavour Profile

My water profile according to the WA Water Corp 2014 published details should be close to:
Hardness: 122

Total Alkalinity (as CaC03): 61
Ca: 24.5
Mg: 14.8
Na: 100
K: (unknown)
Fe: 0.02

Reported PH: 7.5

Bicarbonate: 73.7 (report matches the value calculated from Total Alkalinity)
Carbonate: 36.6
Sulphate: 100 (I got this from a different source, so may be suspect - I did a quick calculation using the AlS04 molecular weights and ended up with 0.48, but that seems a very low sulphate value)
Cl: 174
Nitrate: 0.2
Nitrite (unknown)
F: 0.8

I am a bit confused by the Carbonate and Mg values - Bru'n'water states "Carbonate/Magnesium may be reported in (as CaCO3) units and must be converted to (ppm) by multiplying by x"
Does this statement mean I can take the "total alkalinity as CaCO3" and calculate the Carbonate/Magnesium values, or does it mean that along with "Total alkalinity as CaCO3" you may also have "Carbonate as CaCO3" and "Magnesium as CaCO3". I took it to mean the former.

The above values end up with a cation/anion difference of 2.68 which is clearly wrong, if I 0 out the Mg/Carbonate/Sulphate I get 0.58 which is still outside the expected values.

Bru'n'water suggests that my calcium is low (24ppm), my sodium is bordering on high (100ppm), sulphate is bordering on high (100ppm), chloride is high (174ppm). The only way I can see to fix this is dilution with ~50% distilled water (barring my own RO which I don't plan on getting, is 'spring water' acceptable?) and then top up with gypsum. At 50% dilution + .1g/L I end up with:
Ca, Mg, Na, Sulphate, Chloride, Bicarbonate
35.5, 7.4, 50, 105.8, 87, 67.4

Sulphate is amber (high) and Calcium is probably still a bit low, but everything else looks within parameters. This would also end up with a calculated mash PH of 5.7 which would reduce the need to add as much acidulated malt.

The above looks good to me As a starting point.. Get your calcium up to around 100 through adding either gypsum or cacl to choose the so4 to Cl ratio that suits your beer (American pales more sulphate, malty styles more Cl). With a mostly base malt grist I'd imagine you will hit 5.2 or 5.3.

Strips are a good start... Cool you wort sample pre check though, I think temp influences ph.

 

[ebyelyakov]

Bru'n states that Sulphates under 350 is OK.... And yes, calcium is low (many sources state at least 60 ppm)... A solution would be using CaCl which could pose problems with perceived bitterness (actually lack of it).... If I were to reduce PH without considering the balance between suphate and chloride I'd use phosphoric acid -- there's plenty of this stuff is created using phosphorous so abundantly present in the malted grain

 

[waggastew]

+1 on Dr Smurto's advice. Water chemistry is probably the LAST thing you want to worry about, even the legendry Jamil Zanisheff (Brewing Classic Styles) says this.

Check your mash pH by collecting some wort mid-mash, cooling it, and dipping in a strip (cheap from sponsor CB). If it is anywhere near ballpark you should be sweet. If not give 'pH5.2' a go as quick fix, it lifted the efficiency figures overnight of a friend of mine who BIAB's.

On another topic, in your original description you say you mill in a Thermomix????????? Apart from risking your significant other busting your balls for f*%king the thermomix, its hardly a good device for milling grain. Spend a coupla hundred on a proper mill and you may see a lift in efficency.

 

[Jack of all biers]

Before spending any money playing around with your water, measure the pH in your mash tun. If it is incorrect, then take steps to correct it.

Totally agree with DrSmurto on this one. Don't let a software calculator send you astray without the physical evidence. Your water profile sounds good to me and don't forget that the grains you mash contain a lot of minerals (calcium included) so your yeast are probably getting enough of the nutrients/minerals they need from your mashes. Jamil Z is not the only well known brewer with his opinions on water chemistry. If you carefully read Palmer he is no advocate for water treatment and Graham Wheeler actively advises against it.

Also for further opinions and a handy water hardness calculator see this thread http://aussiehomebrewer.com/topic/85468-confused-mash-ph-and-mineral-content-vs-beer-style/

Just remember it's not a science, it's homebrewing. Your efficiency of around 70% is pretty good and can be affected by many things as I found out recently [cough, cough, embarassingly refer to my thread on sparge inefficiency]. If the flavour of your beer is affected by astringincy AND your Mash pH tests show that your pH is way out (actual tests, don't rely on what the calculator tells you), or you want to improve your efficiency that last 10-15% then start doing something otherwise you are probably wasting time, time, time, time and a little money too.

 

[mabrungard]

Your tap water has a couple of problems. First is the sodium and chloride are a fairly high, second is the alkalinity is a little high. For some styles, you should still be able to use that tap water. More delicate styles may benefit from dilution with RO or distilled water. The sodium and chloride levels are approaching the level where minerally flavor may develop. This is especially true if you add more sulfate to the water.

The alkalinity level isn't crazy high, but it does require some attention for the paler styles. The first problem I see is that you are showing bicarbonate and carbonate concentrations that do not correlate to the alkalinity level. According to the alkalinity level and water pH, they indicate the bicarbonate level is 74 ppm and the carbonate level is virtually zero. Hopefully you had not been entering the carbonate value listed above (it should be zero). That bicarbonate level is not too difficult to neutralize with acid malt or many other acids.

The advice to concentrate on other aspects of your brewing before considering water treatment can be OK for some brewers that happen to have great brewing water. However, there are plenty of waters around the world that will easily ruin batch after batch of beer and there is no hope of creating a good one without learning to deal with the water. And this applies to water that tastes fine too! The problem is that while water is typically a tasteless component of your beer, it can and does have the ability to ruin all the other beer components: malt, hops, and yeast. For that reason, I strongly all of you previous posters to reconsider that blanket advice to not worry about your water. If your water is not suited to brew, all the other things that we recommend new brewers to worry about will not matter when they make batch after batch of crap beer. That is truly a quick way out of the hobby.

Efficiency is a poor determinant for brewing success. In my book, taste is the only determinant to the drinker. Efficiency is an accountant's concern.

 

[drsmurto]

The OP should worry about his water after measuring mash pH not relying on a predicted result.

@mabrungard - Do your calculations take into account the buffering capability of the mash phosphates and other naturally occurring buffers? Are the results in your spreadsheet obtained from experimentally derived data or is it all calculated?

 

[killspice]

Thanks everyone so far. I have pH strips now to get an indication of my mash pH.

I've yet to do a brew with them though. Is the general consensus that 10m into the mash is a good time to wait before testing?

I believe that the 5.2-5.6 ideal range is at 20deg, how close to that do you need to be I.e is anywhere from 10-30 deg fine or should I try get it as close to 20 as possible?

I do have some star labs 5.2 if I do get a high reading, at what level should I be concerned and use some (5.7+?)

 

[motman]

The OP should worry about his water after measuring mash pH not relying on a predicted result.

@mabrungard - Do your calculations take into account the buffering capability of the mash phosphates and other naturally occurring buffers? Are the results in your spreadsheet obtained from experimentally derived data or is it all calculated?

I don't disagree that changing water based on calculated ph only, not measured, is counter productive. But In my case, I have found ph quite forgiving and tend to mess with water for flavour. I find it has a significant impact and is like getting seasoning and spice balance correct in cooking.

 

[drsmurto]

I don't disagree that changing water based on calculated ph only, not measured, is counter productive. But In my case, I have found ph quite forgiving and tend to mess with water for flavour. I find it has a significant impact and is like getting seasoning and spice balance correct in cooking.

Exactly the reason I adjust water chemistry. Nothing to do with pH.

 

[manticle]

The OP should worry about his water after measuring mash pH not relying on a predicted

Quoted for truth as the saying goes.
I hate the saying but prefer it to +1.
Guess I could say 'I agree'.

Anyway measure what you think needs changing, before changing to see if it needs changing.
Also agree with the seasoning comment motman. I'm used to soft water with low mineral content so a touch of appropriate calcium salt and a hint of acid where needed is as complex as my adjustments get.

 

[killspice]

In last nights brew I had (assuming I read the strips right) a mash pH of 5.4 at room temp, so that is certainly not a problem - this was with 3.75kg Pilsner/2kg Munich for an 18L batch (Helles bock).

I did mash a little thicker than usual at 4kg/L instead of the usual full volume mash as the fit for >5kg grain is a little tight so I decided to mash thicker and dunk sparge. Obviously different grain bills and full volume mashing might have a different result, but for now I'm relatively happy that my pH isn't completely screwed.

In terms of efficiency I ended with 71% mash and 62% brewhouse efficiencies but I can't really use this as any sort of indicator because it turns out my thermometer started throwing some strange numbers and I ended up adding an unnecessary 2L to bring the temp down but mashing at about 60 for 45min instead of 69. I didn't realise anything was wrong until starting my mash out rise and reading 90deg (it wasn't, it was 70deg). I left this for 10 more minutes before doing a proper mash out and sparge so in the end I think I just ended up with an inadvertent step mash.

Due to the low efficiency and extra 2L I ended up with 20L @ 1.056 instead of 18L @ 1.070 so with that and the mash schedule it certainly won't be a bock, but hopefully it still turns out good.

Thanks for all the advice.

 

[mabrungard]

The OP should worry about his water after measuring mash pH not relying on a predicted result.

@mabrungard - Do your calculations take into account the buffering capability of the mash phosphates and other naturally occurring buffers? Are the results in your spreadsheet obtained from experimentally derived data or is it all calculated?

All pH predictions are based on empirical observations. Therefore, all buffering from the components in the typical mash is incorporated into the result by default.