Announcing 'Mash Made Easy', a mash pH adjustment assistant

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
RPIScotty said:
You IBU calcs seem to be estimating a touch high. I compared your calcs directly to the Tinseth equations and MME is going high by 3-4 IBU.
Click to expand...

Tinseth is only good for whole leaf hops. He openly stated that he never once tested a pellet hop, and then he proclaimed that for pellet hops "All bets are off!". My modification is intended only for pellet hops (due to their overwhelming popularity). There is a multiplicative factor built into mine that boosts the IBU's to bring them in line with several others expectations (not Tinseth's expectations mind you) for pellets. Have you compared MME with Brewer's Friend when it is set for pellets? In fact, I went on the conservative side vs. some of the IBU guru's multiplicative factor recommendations for pellets. Recommended multiplicative factors for pellet IBU's over whole leaf range from 1.1X to 1.5X depending on who you are willing to believe.

3-4 IBU over Tinseth sounds like it could be about right for a broadly typical level of IBU's.
 
Last edited:
As for pellet hop multipliers:

Garetz says 1.1X
Mosher says 1.33X
Noonan guesses it could be anywhere from 1.0 to 1.5X
Daniels says its likely somewhere between 1.0 and 1.25X
Tinseth never guessed, since "All bets are off".
 
This is speculation on my part, but I doubt that any of the hop IBU "formula" guru's ever tested a pellet hop. Their work spans mainly the 90's, and pellets were highly shunned and advised against back then. I have no information for Rager as to his comments with regard to pellets.
 
Last edited:
Silver_Is_Money said:
Tinseth is only good for whole leaf hops. He openly stated that he never once tested a pellet hop, and then he proclaimed that for pellet hops "All bets are off!". My modification is intended only for pellet hops (due to their overwhelming popularity). There is a multiplicative factor built into mine that boosts the IBU's to bring them in line with several others expectations (not Tinseth's expectations mind you) for pellets. Have you compared MME with Brewer's Friend when it is set for pellets? In fact, I went on the conservative side vs. some of the IBU guru's multiplicative factor recommendations for pellets. Recommended multiplicative factors for pellet IBU's over whole leaf range from 1.1X to 1.5X depending on who you are willing to believe.

3-4 IBU over Tinseth sounds like it could be about right for a broadly typical level of IBU's.
Click to expand...

I can only go by what I use, which is Tinseth and a 1.1 multplier for pellets. In that case, your calcs go a little high.

It could also be that you are using a dynamic volume and gravity as well. I use post-boil volume for my calcs and an average of Pre-boil gravity and OG, but have very low boil off so that should impact it much.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not busting chops, just trying to rectify a difference for my own sake. In the end it’s not that important anyway. IBU calcs are hardly firm ground.
 
RPIScotty said:
In the end it’s not that important anyway. IBU calcs are hardly firm ground.
Click to expand...

Agreed! When people send their beers off for actual analytical lab testing of IBU's (vs. using a math model to estimate IBU's) they are often surprised to see that they are off by as much as 35% or more vs. what they expected based on their chosen math model. In a podcast on IBU's (titled, from memory, "The IBU is a lie") from perhaps a year or two ago one guy commented that he was 70% off on his IBU for a beer he had tested.
 
Silver_Is_Money said:
Yes, MME progressively tracks specific gravity (cooled to room temperature) throughout the boil. No averaging. Here is a great resource on IBU's:

https://www.homebrewersassociation.org/attachments/0000/2501/IBUs.pdf
Click to expand...

Yup. I’ve read that many times. Michael Hall is the man.

When you target low boil off, the volume and gravity changes matter less. I’m at about 7% boil off even in my little kettle. I just average the pre and post boil gravities and if I’m feeling froggy, average the volumes as well.

I have done the IBU calcs where you enter BU instead of grams. I like that method too. You enter a value of BU for each hop and it calculates required grams. This is a good feature if you are targeting certain % BU hop schedules.
 
Announcing the release of 'Mash Made Easy' version 5.80 in both the Standard and Metric formats.

Changes made to the IBU calculator sheet include:
--------------------------------------------------------
1) Adds the ability to select (via 'drop down') for either "Pellet" or "Leaf/Plug" hops on all hop entry lines.
2) Adds user input as to their systems measured "boil off" rate, so original gravity prediction is correct for your system.
3) Final fixes made to all IBU calculation methodology and formulas. Satisfies the concerns raised by RPIScotty.

As always, the download is free, the spreadsheet is both free and complete, and it can be accessed at the web link seen below.
 
The IBU sheet fixes are getting to be a bit of a nightmare. I just killed another bug and uploaded MME version 5.81 to my website.
 
Announcing the release of 'Mash Made Easy' version 5.90 in both the Standard and Metric formats.

A major change has been made to the "Base Malt DI_pH" drop down selector switch to make it far easier and more intuitive to understand, and also to remove base malts from the realm of DI_pH's which vary with color, and as opposed to going off of color, assign "Base" malt DI_pH directly from the sub-category selected via the "drop down" cell seen in the lower right hand corner (where the DI_pH will be seen in conjunction with the base malt sub-category of your choosing).

Added a "Final Gravity" calculation on the "IBU Calculator" sheet. Also added Alcohol By Volume (ABV).

Since this is a major revision issue, all users are recommended to transition to version 5.90.

As always, the download is free, the spreadsheet is both free and complete, and it can be accessed at the web link seen below.
 
Last edited:
Silver_Is_Money said:
A major change has been made to the "Base Malt DI_pH" drop down selector switch to make it far easier and more intuitive to understand, and also to remove base malts from the realm of DI_pH's which vary with color, and as opposed to going off of color, assign "Base" malt DI_pH directly from the sub-category selected via the "drop down" cell seen in the lower right hand corner (where the DI_pH will be seen in conjunction with the base malt sub-category of your choosing).
Click to expand...

What should this selection be if your recipe contains multiple base malts? I'm doing a 10lb/1lb maris otter/vienna mix so I'm guessing use M. Otter, G. Promise, 5.75. But what about a recipe that had a 50/50 mix of maris otter/American 2-row?
 
pers said:
But what about a recipe that had a 50/50 mix of maris otter/American 2-row?
Click to expand...

Either choose one of the "drop down" DI_pH selections that lies between the two, or alternately (for more precision) you can manually enter a DI_pH for one of them, or for each of them, via the manual DI_pH override option.

For example:

If the drop down selector is set for 2-Row Brewers, then manually enter 5.75 for the Maris Otter.

Or if the drop down selector is set for Maris Otter, then manually enter 5.60 for the 2-Row Brewers.

The same could also be done for the case of your mix of Vienna and Maris Otter.

Anytime that a (non-zero) value is present within the manual override column, the manually entered DI_pH value takes precedence.
 
Last edited:
The base malt DI_pH drop down selector generalizes base malt categories/names as to their anticipated DI_pH. Your individual lot of any given base malt may vary noticeably from such a "canned" generalization, and may thereby require that a "drop down" selection with a lower or higher DI_pH is chosen in order to dial in MME more effectively. Or with experience you may fine tune MME's mash pH predictions to an even greater degree via utilizing the DI_pH manual override option (which is openly available to override for all malt classes, and is not restricted to only base malts).

Other manual overrides exist for:
-------------------------------------
1) The strength of your individual lot of acid malt
2) The downward pH shift you experience for a given level of mineralization. (some say 50-60% and some say 100%, or between)
3) The grist buffering value
4) The percentage of the computed output which is derived from the default logarithm based output, and the percentage which is based upon a linear calculation.

All of this is intended to permit MME to have great flexibility with regard to dialing it in, whereby to match your measured reality. I would advise that you alter these only one at a time, and only in small increments (or that you simply leave them as they were initially set when you first downloaded the spreadsheet). The object is always to make MME conform to measurement, and never to presume that your hard and factual measurement is questionable and that your reality must somehow have to be twisted in order to make it conform to MME.
 
Last edited:
Announcing the release of 'Mash Made Easy' version 6.00 in both the standard and metric formats.

This is a major update with significant new features, and all existing users should replace any previous edition with this one!

Major changes include:

1) Adds a radically new 'cut and paste' mineral profile capability which totally eliminates the typical "hunt and peck" mineralization for those who both desire the aid of mineralization profiles and build their brewing water via adding minerals to water which is based upon either distilled or RO. The use of these mineral profiles is totally optional. See the "Mineralization Assistant" sheet for details and simple instructions.

2) Adds Baking Soda (Sodium Bicarbonate, NaHCO3) and Slaked Lime (Calcium Hydroxide, Ca(OH)2) to the standard selection of user addable minerals, recognizing the end users occasional need to introduce either sodium ions, calcium ions, or alkalinity via the addition of these two minerals, either alone or in combination.

(both of the above features were added in direct response to end user requests)

As always, Mash Made Easy is free and complete. Find it at the web link seen below.
 
Announcing the release of 'Mash Made Easy' version 6.10 in both the standard and metric formats.

Changes include:

1) Adds a priming calculator with (drop-down switchable) "conservative" and "aggressive" sugar addition calculations reminiscent of the differing outputs seen for two quite popular online priming calculators.

2) Adds a color converter calculator which permits the user to determine color equivalence across Lovibond, SRM, and EBC.

As always, Mash Made Easy is free and complete. Find it at the web link seen below.
 
Announcing the release of 'Mash Made Easy' version 6.20 in both the standard and metric formats.

Changes include:

1) Adds two new acids for use in either (or both) acidifying the mash and acidifying sparge water.
a) CRS (also known as AMS)
b) Citric Acid

2) Fixes a situational error in sparge water acidification which first appeared in version 6.00.

It is strongly recommended to upgrade to version 6.20, even if only due to change/fix #2 above.

As always, 'Mash Made Easy' is free and complete. Find it at the web link seen below.
 
Version 6.25 is up. Correcting OG and remaining boil volume issues found on the IBU Calculator sheet/page.
 
Version 6.30 is now up on my website.

Fixes an error in IBU calculations which significantly impacts predicted IBU determination for high OG beers, but also has a degree of impact upon IBU determination for more normal gravity beers.
 
Announcing the release of 'Mash Made Easy' version 6.40 in both the standard and metric formats.

Major change:

Greatly simplifies the operation of the "IBU Calculator" worksheet by replacing cumbersome and confusing "gravity points" by an entry of the batches anticipated original gravity (O.G.) reading. Reformatted the data entry location on the IBU Calculator page for greater ease of operation also.

As always, the 'MME' spreadsheet is completely free and fully functional, and can be downloaded at the website link listed below.
 
Mash Made Easy version 6.45 is now up on my website. A minor change with respect to internal acid malt addition calculation leads to minor output difference for same. No other changes from version 6.40.
 
Just spitballing here:

For matching volumes and total grain amount, I get the following deltas WRT The Brewing Engine and MME:

Strike = 21.43 l
Grain = 5.44 kg

99.25% Euro Pils (5.80 pH DI)/0.75% Sauermalz w/ pHz = 5.70:

TBE = 40.8g Sauermalz
MME = 49.02g Sauermalz

99% Euro Pils (5.80 pH DI)/1% Sauermalz w/ pHz = 5.675:

TBE = 54.4g Sauermalz
MME = 63.69g Sauermalz

97% Euro Pils (5.80 pH DI)/3% Sauermalz w/ pHz = 5.453:

TBE = 163.2g Sauermalz
MME = 169.88g Sauermalz

96% Euro Pils (5.80 pH DI)/4% Sauermalz w/ pHz = 5.175:

TBE = 326.4g Sauermalz
MME = 305.99g Sauermalz

This is assuming 3% Lactic Acid content of Sauermalz in your sheet which seems to be stock. Obviously changing that changes the values.
 
RPIScotty said:
Just spitballing here:
Click to expand...

I just applied this same exercise to MpH 3.0 (modified only to permit the base malt to reach DIpH 5.80) and I was shocked by how much additional acid malt it computed for each targeted pHz setting vs either your spreadsheet or mine. The differences I witnessed make us appear very close overall by comparison.

I wonder how the other current/popular mash pH assistant software choices perform with this comparison?
 
Last edited:
Silver_Is_Money said:
I just applied this same exercise to MpH 3.0 (modified only to permit the base malt to reach DIpH 5.80) and I was shocked by how much additional acid malt it computed for each targeted pHz setting vs either your spreadsheet or mine. The differences I witnessed make us appear very close overall by comparison.

I wonder how the other current/popular mash pH assistant software choices perform with this comparison?
Click to expand...

The only issue I have what what you've done is that changing the acid % value changes the values considerably from my estimations. That's not to say that my estimation is the only one or even the best.

For instance:

Strike = 21.43 l
Grain = 5.44 kg

_________________________________________________________________
99.25% Euro Pils (5.80 pH DI)/0.75% Sauermalz w/ pHz = 5.70:

TBE = 40.8g Sauermalz
MME (3% Acid) = 49.02g Sauermalz
(Δ (%) by weight: 16.77%)

99% Euro Pils (5.80 pH DI)/1% Sauermalz w/ pHz = 5.675:

TBE = 54.4g Sauermalz
MME (3% Acid) = 63.69g Sauermalz
(Δ (%) by weight: 14.59%)

97% Euro Pils (5.80 pH DI)/3% Sauermalz w/ pHz = 5.453:

TBE = 163.2g Sauermalz
MME (3% Acid) = 169.88g Sauermalz
(Δ (%) by weight: 3.93%)

96% Euro Pils (5.80 pH DI)/4% Sauermalz w/ pHz = 5.175:

TBE = 326.4g Sauermalz
MME (3% Acid) = 305.99g Sauermalz
(Δ (%) by weight: -6.67%)

_________________________________________________________________
99.25% Euro Pils (5.80 pH DI)/0.75% Sauermalz w/ pHz = 5.70:

TBE = 40.8g Sauermalz
MME (2% Acid) = 73.53g Sauermalz
(Δ (%) by weight: 44.51%)

99% Euro Pils (5.80 pH DI)/1% Sauermalz w/ pHz = 5.675:

TBE = 54.4g Sauermalz
MME (2% Acid) = 91.87g Sauermalz
(Δ (%) by weight: 40.79%)

97% Euro Pils (5.80 pH DI)/3% Sauermalz w/ pHz = 5.453:

TBE = 163.2g Sauermalz
MME (2% Acid) = 254.82g Sauermalz
(Δ (%) by weight: 35.95%)

96% Euro Pils (5.80 pH DI)/4% Sauermalz w/ pHz = 5.175:

TBE = 326.4g Sauermalz
MME (2% Acid) = 458.98g Sauermalz
(Δ (%) by weight: 28.89%)

_________________________________________________________________
99.25% Euro Pils (5.80 pH DI)/0.75% Sauermalz w/ pHz = 5.70:

TBE = 40.8g Sauermalz
MME (4% Acid) = 36.76g Sauermalz
(Δ (%) by weight: -10.99%)

99% Euro Pils (5.80 pH DI)/1% Sauermalz w/ pHz = 5.675:

TBE = 54.4g Sauermalz
MME (4% Acid) = 45.94g Sauermalz
(Δ (%) by weight: -18.42%)

97% Euro Pils (5.80 pH DI)/3% Sauermalz w/ pHz = 5.453:

TBE = 163.2g Sauermalz
MME (4% Acid) = 127.41g Sauermalz
(Δ (%) by weight: -28.09%)

96% Euro Pils (5.80 pH DI)/4% Sauermalz w/ pHz = 5.175:

TBE = 326.4g Sauermalz
MME (4% Acid) = 229.49g Sauermalz
(Δ (%) by weight: -42.23%)
 
I find it a bit odd that you chose to radically vary the strength of the acid malt for MME while not also doing the very same thing within your spreadsheet. Since the default for MME is 3% (as equivalence to lactic acid), and end users would be advised to only vary this strength value very cautiously and minimally by which to better dial in a specific lot of (likely atypical) acid malt (as opposed to radically making changes as you have done), what relevance is there in your doing this?

Additionally, if you recall, I once had the permitted range of acid malt strength adjustments allowable to be made by the end user locked in at a span that was much narrower than at present (2.4% to 3.5% as I recall), but upon your direct urging I opened up the span of permitted user adjustment.
 
Silver_Is_Money said:
I find it a bit odd that you chose to radically vary the strength of the acid malt for MME while not also doing the very same thing within your spreadsheet.
Click to expand...

It wasn't a choice. I model Sauermalz as malt. I don't have a reliance on Acid % so I have no mechanism in which to alter it.

Silver_Is_Money said:
Additionally, if you recall, I once had the permitted range of acid malt strength adjustments allowable to be made by the end user locked in at a span that was much narrower than at present (2.4% to 3.5% as I recall), but upon your direct urging I opened up the span of permitted user adjustment.
Click to expand...

Right. My next suggestion would be to set the Acid % at a static value if you plan on using this new correction. When I made my suggestion to you previously, it was in order to give people options for manually doing what you did with the correction factor.

I'm still not entirely sold your correction works in reality but in order to eliminate any error, i would lock the range down again or just use 3%.
 
"Mash Made Easy' version 6.50 is now up on my website in the standard and metric formats.

Changes include:

1) Former malt category (drop down) "Munich/Specialty" is now called "Munich / Biscuit".
2) New malt category "Melanoidin / Honey (malt)" has been introduced to account for these specific malts greater overall acidity with respect to their Lovibond/EBC color.
3) Base malt DI_pH modifiers (drop down selector) have been altered/simplified.
4) The permitted acid malt strength modification range has been tightened (in accord with the above conversation/comparison).

This should be seen as a major upgrade, and all users are urged to transition to this new version.

NOTE: If you copy and paste, be sure to select a drop down in column 'B' for any malts impacted by changes #1 and #2 above. If you do not see the downstream columns for a grist components DI_pH and post Ca++/Mg++ addition pH properly populated with numerical pH values, the solution to this will be to re-select a new/altered malt category via drop down in column 'B' of the same row. Munich, Melanoidin, and Specialty will all require this adjustment (only) if you copy/paste recipes. If you do not copy/paste this will be a non-issue for you.
 
Version 6.51 with the following minor revisions is now up on my website.

1) Adds a Base Malt DI_pH "drop down" selection option titled "Generic 2-Row", with a DI mash pH value of 5.60.
2) Reverts the default Pilsner base malt DI mash pH value back to previous 5.80 (from 5.82).
3) Neatens up the "IBU Calculator" interface

There is no urgent need to upgrade to this minor revision issue unless you want to keep up with the very latest modifications.
 
Recommended settings changes to be made for 'Mash Made Easy' by all users:

1) Change the grist buffer value from 0.67 to 0.60
2) Change the Kolbach % from 100% to 70%

The current version 6.51 as revised at 8:45 AM EST this morning on my website has these two settings changes made, and also corrected a typo error which I discovered. The easiest way to assure that your copy has the most up to date default settings is to simply download a revised copy. If you had downloaded 6.51 earlier than 8:45 AM today, please either make the two requested revisions or download a fresh copy.
 
Hi Larry- Is the liquid CaCl2 calculation on MME 6.50 working properly? I'm not sure I'm smart enough to work out the chloride ion contribution myself, but I have to divide the volume of liquid CaCl2 by ~10 to get the same chloride concentration in the finished water as Bru'n Water calculates. The other mineral levels are pretty similar between the two. Of course, it could just be pilot error on my part...
 
darynsd said:
Hi Larry- Is the liquid CaCl2 calculation on MME 6.50 working properly? I'm not sure I'm smart enough to work out the chloride ion contribution myself, but I have to divide the volume of liquid CaCl2 by ~10 to get the same chloride concentration in the finished water as Bru'n Water calculates. The other mineral levels are pretty similar between the two. Of course, it could just be pilot error on my part...
Click to expand...

I just checked MME and it is giving correct calcium and chloride ppm results for liquid CaCl2 solutions. BW entry is per gallon, and MME entry is per total volume of mash water, so perhaps that may be where the difference is coming from.
 
I may be a bit thick here, so help me out. I have a solution of CaCl2 with a SG of 1.100 or 10.9% w/w. BW says I should add 5.8 gm total of this liquid to my mash water. MME uses volume measurement for liquid. Based on the equation AJ provided in a sticky, a solution with this SG should weigh 0.1245 gm/ml so 5.8/.1245= 46.6ml.

I enter this volume on the MME mash pH tab and then look at the Calcium Chloride selector tab. For liquid type with SG of 1.100, it confirms the gm/ml as 0.12 but says the "equivalent Anhydrous" is 5.80gm. Surely this is not correct, right? It's actually the weight of the 10.9% w/w liquid. It also calculates the Ca++ to be 95.16 and Cl- to be 168.17ppm.

If I change the type to be prills/crystal at 100% concentration and revise the amount on the mash pH tab to be 5.8gm, the Ca++ is 95.03ppm and Cl- is 168.18ppm. If I change BW to use Anhydrous, it gives similar concentrations -so I'm thinking MME really does think 46.6ml of this dilute solution is the equivalent of 5.8gm of Anhydrous CaCL2?
 
Actually MME calculates 46.6 mL of SG= 1.1000 solution to be internally 0.1245 grams/mL, though it only displays the rounded 0.12.

46.6 mL x .1245 g/mL= 5.8 g.

This should be fully correct. We apparently need @ajdelange to confirm if 46.6 mL of SG= 1.1000 calcium chloride solution delivers 5.8 grams of calcium chloride as the anhydride. If it does, then MME is correct. If not I will need to make an adjustment.
 
Last edited:
Try this calculator:
http://www.endmemo.com/chem/chemsolution.php

Set it for anhydrous CaCl2, with MW = 110.984 g/L
Then enter 5.8 anhydrous grams and 46.6 mL while leaving the molar concentration field empty, and hit calculate.

Molarity = 1.1214546 is the result

We know that 110.984 grams made up to 1 liter = 1.000 Molarity, so:

1.121456 molarity x 110.984 grams/mole = 124.464 grams of anhydrous calcium chloride added to 1 liter

124.464 g. / 1000 mL = .124464 grams/mL

.124464 g/mL x 46.6 mL = 5.8000 grams of pure anhydrous calcium chloride

Unless I'm still missing something, this online calculator seems to confirm that MME is on the money correct.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Silver_Is_Money
Announcing the release of 'Mash Made Easy' (MME) version 11.40
Replies
19
Views
2K
beervoid
beervoid
Silver_Is_Money
Announcing the release of 'Mash Made Easy' version 10.00
Replies
0
Views
676
Silver_Is_Money
Silver_Is_Money
Silver_Is_Money
Announcing the release of 'Mash Made Easy' version 11.10
Replies
0
Views
662
Silver_Is_Money
Silver_Is_Money
Silver_Is_Money
Announcing the release of 'Mash Made Easy' version 10.80
Replies
0
Views
475
Silver_Is_Money
Silver_Is_Money
Silver_Is_Money
Announcing the release of 'Mash Made Easy' version 10.60
Replies
5
Views
1K
Silver_Is_Money
Silver_Is_Money

Latest posts

Back
Top