bru'n water vs. brewer's friend

[str1p3s]

Hey all,
Trying to make sense of water chemistry (again). I put the following grain bill into both bru'n water and the calculator on brewersfriend.com:

10.6 lb. (4.82 kg) Great Western pale malt 2 °L
1.3 lb. (600 g) Best Malz Munich malt 8 °L
14.1 oz. (400 g) Great Western pale malt (or similar) Crystal 40 °L
10.6 oz. (300 g) Briess chocolate malt (or similar) 350 °L
7 oz. (200 g) Briess black patent malt (or similar) 525 °L

starting from distilled water and 2 grams of gypsum and 3 grams of calcium chroride (a starting rule of thumb that I read on here) bru'n water says the mash pH is too low at 4.05 but brewersfriend says it is 5.51.

Any ideas why it's different? Which to trust? The easiest way to go about this with distilled water?

Be gentle, this water stuff is confusing the hell out of me...

 

[lari]

i think in brunwater you enter amounts as grams per litre so your total amount of salts is probably very high hence low ph

 

[DemonsRun]

I have used brewers friend for the simplicity and have seriously wondered about this. posting mainly to follow the discussion.

None of the beers I've made using BF's water calculations have been bad, I tend to shoot for 5.4 for many beers and 5.5-5.6 for stouts. and it seemed to be accurate for the year my PH meter worked.

It would be great to know if I'm off, now I'll have to plug everything into Bru'n water, get a new PH meter, and see.

 

[jmark]

With that grain bill and a mash thickness of 1.5qts/lb, I get a pH of around 4.57 in Bru'nWater before adding anything (including using RO water) and adding those minerals in the amount you mentioned, I get to around 4.11 which is close to what you're seeing. The roasted malts really drop the acidity, but that does seem quite low... If I play with it a bit, I see adding 1.00g/gallon of Pickling Lime gets the pH right back in range and then adding .4g/gallon of Gypsum and 1.6g/gallon of Calcium Chloride, the pH gets to 5.32 and a reasonable profile for a Black Balanced beer.

I've used Brun'Water for the last few years and it's consistently close to my desired pH when measured but I know the latest version has a new model for roasted grains that has them providing more acidity to the mash. I wonder if that's the difference here... If you can try a mini-mash with the same proportions of the grain and the salts, maybe that'll give you a better idea of the true pH.

 

[ajdelange]

Neither is more right than the other and neither is spot on. Brewer's Friend was done by Kai Troester who was the first to use the basics of proton counting to estimate mash pH and so this program when compared to a robust pH estimator tends to give closer results. Bru'n water is, I believe, also based on Kai's work but is somehow different as it gives different answers. 5.51 is a reasonable pH for water of reasonable alkalinity. pH 4.05 isn't. An error of that size is not explainable by the difference in the way the programs model proton transfer so it is likely, as has been suggested, that you entered some data wrong.

 

[jmark]

The amount of salts the OP entered was definitely high, but even without them, Bru'nWater gives a prediction of ~4.6 which seems awfully low in comparison.

I know there's a different model for roasted grains in the latest version and I've yet to brew a darker batch yet since I started using v4, so can't speak to the predictability, but I think I'll run a test mash the first time I do since this does seem to be a big difference from the older model. Incidentally, with the same grain bill in Bru'nWater v3, I get a predicted pH of 4.98 with RO and the same 1.5qt/lb mash thickness, so there's definitely a difference in the model.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

My guess is that this batch (with minerals added to distilled as listed) will mash at about pH 5.35, and not lower than 5.25.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

The DI mash pH range for the roasted malts isn't much lower than the same for the range of lighter colored caramel/crystal malts.

For example, a 470 L roasted malt mashes in at about the same DI pH as a 120 L caramel malt.

 

[dmr]

Hey all,
Trying to make sense of water chemistry (again). I put the following grain bill into both bru'n water and the calculator on brewersfriend.com:

10.6 lb. (4.82 kg) Great Western pale malt 2 °L
1.3 lb. (600 g) Best Malz Munich malt 8 °L
14.1 oz. (400 g) Great Western pale malt (or similar) Crystal 40 °L
10.6 oz. (300 g) Briess chocolate malt (or similar) 350 °L
7 oz. (200 g) Briess black patent malt (or similar) 525 °L

starting from distilled water and 2 grams of gypsum and 3 grams of calcium chroride (a starting rule of thumb that I read on here) bru'n water says the mash pH is too low at 4.05 but brewersfriend says it is 5.51.

Any ideas why it's different? Which to trust? The easiest way to go about this with distilled water?

Be gentle, this water stuff is confusing the hell out of me...

I input your data into both MpH Water Calculator and BrunWater (BW) versions 1.17b and 1.18. In my experience MpH gives predictions close to Brewer's Friend, while Brun Water typically predicts slightly lower pH. Brunwater 1.18 handles dark roasted grains differently than earlier versions of BW -- it models them as having more acidity than in earlier versions.

Here's what I got for 5 gallons mash water:

5.44, 5.20, and 5.01 (MpH, 1.17b, and 1.18, respectively)

For 4 gallons of mash water:

5.43, 5.06, and 4.82.

While Brun Water 1.18 predicts the lowest pH, it is not nearly as low as your calculation. If I input 2 g gypsum per gallon of mash water and 3 g CaCl2 per gallon of mash water, then BW 1.18 predicts a mash pH of 4.08.

I believe the problem can be chalked up to user error. As someone mentioned above, in Brunwater you are asked to input salts in g/gallon.

Cheers!

 

[str1p3s]

Thanks for the replies folks.

At first I entered the numbers in not noticing that it was g/gallon. Before I posted here, I fixed it though and made sure the mash/sparge breakdown to the right of where you enter those values equaled 2g gypsum and 3g calcium chloride total like I said in the OP. I was hoping that was my issue and it obviously changed it a lot, but my original post contains the numbers I was getting after correcting the error. So still a mystery for me. I know the two wouldn't be identicle, but one is in range and one is far out of range. Something's got to be off I would think.

 

[jmark]

What version of Bru'n Water are you using? I came very close to your numbers when using the latest supporters version (v4.1), so I'm thinking the issue, if there is one, is the model in BW. The only way to tell is to do a small mini-mash like I said with proportionally the same grain bill (leave all the salts out for now) and see how it compares.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

Using RPIScotty's new 'Water-Beta 1.4' spreadsheet from www.********************, I get a predicted mash pH of an acceptable 5.24 for this batch.

The only way to figure out which software is working best will be to mash it. Have a wee bit of pre-measured baking soda standing at the ready, and use a calibrated pH meter.

RO water generally has a tad of alkalinity, and perhaps it would prove to be a better choice than distilled for this batch. My homes very high alkalinity RO water would lift it to pH 5.36 per RPIScotty's spreadsheet.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

But if you do use RO water, then we will all be left hanging, and the suspense of determining which software package actually modeled it best for distilled water will be killing us.

The real test here is how well the software package handles roasted malts/grains. They do not behave like base or crystal malts, so this will not prove which software package best handles (quasi-empirically mirrors) batches that do not contain higher levels of roasted malts.

The quasi-empirical fraction of the equation would be more highly removed if each malts DI mash pH was known, and fully removed if titration data for several other pH endpoints was also available.

 

[dmr]

Thanks for the replies folks.

At first I entered the numbers in not noticing that it was g/gallon. Before I posted here, I fixed it though and made sure the mash/sparge breakdown to the right of where you enter those values equaled 2g gypsum and 3g calcium chloride total like I said in the OP. I was hoping that was my issue and it obviously changed it a lot, but my original post contains the numbers I was getting after correcting the error. So still a mystery for me. I know the two wouldn't be identicle, but one is in range and one is far out of range. Something's got to be off I would think.

If not user error, then there must be a bug in the version of Brun Water you are using. The two free versions I have (1.17b and 1.18) both give reasonable results. Cheers.

 

[McKnuckle]

With so many pH calculators now - five at last count - I definitely don't want brewing beer to become an exercise in validating which software is the most accurate. It is, after all, a means to an end. So for those of us who don't measure pH directly with a meter, it probably makes sense to aim for a "safe" pH like 5.4 that would stand up to margin of error in either direction.

I've been using BF for a long time now with great success in my finished beers. I have no clue if the actual mash pHs have been as predicted, I just have observed the outcome of the final product. BF does have a simple interface, which counts for something. The new "Water" sheet is promising as well. And I check Bru'n because it's well-established, even though its screens are very busy and invite mistakes.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

EZ Water actually invites you to freely change the default DI mash pH values, and it will prove to be much better if you simply take the time to do so. It is so much easier to use than the rest of them that this small effort is a slam dunk. And while you're at it, you can change out the names and DI mash pH's of base malts that you don't use, to the names and DI mash pH's of base malts that you do use. If this is done correctly, no longer will it read typically 0.15 to 0.20 pH points higher than all of the others.

Quoting from the EZ Water spreadsheet.

The above values are used to calculate mash pH. They may vary depending on maltser or other factors - for example Rahr 2-Row has been found to be 5.56. Modify if necessary.

 

[hezagenius]

Maybe I missed it, but what volume of water are you using to mash? What is your final batch size?

 

[str1p3s]

Time to eat a little crow... when I changed the values to reflect grams/gallon to fix the error, it didn't save. So I was in fact putting the wrong numbers in. I fixed it and still came out with 4.92. So the question still remains, it's just not off by that much.

For the record, it was 4 gallons of mash and 4 gallons of sparge.

 

[jmark]

Time to eat a little crow... when I changed the values to reflect grams/gallon to fix the error, it didn't save. So I was in fact putting the wrong numbers in. I fixed it and still came out with 4.92. So the question still remains, it's just not off by that much.

For the record, it was 4 gallons of mash and 4 gallons of sparge.

So that seems like the old BW model - I got around 4.98 when estimating your pH on v3. v4 has it WAY lower though so that has me questioning the new BW model since it's so far off of what the other models are showing. It would be nice if Martin would chime in here with some guidance.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

Regardless, mashing at 4.96 or 4.97 pH is probably too low, particularly for a stout where mashing at a bit higher pH (5.4 to 5.50 is more the accepted norm. I would think the bottom end of acceptability here to be 5.2. If you don't have a pH meter, simply go with RO water instead of distilled to gain the benefit of some likely to be present alkalinity, be happy, and leave the rest of us dangling in contemplation. Most of the spreadsheets and online calculators are saying you will be OK. Only Bru'n Water is the odd man out in this instance. And since none of us have DI mash pH values or titration slopes for your particular lots of malts, its all just a game, including for the various versions of the software assistants. They are in the dark just as we are, and they are merely defaulting to built in standardized guesses based upon generic malt categories and Lovibond color. They are not using rocket science. They will inevitably be off one way or the other.

I'm convinced that the means by which the developers of the software are accounting for the roasted portion of the grain bill is where nigh on all of the difference between them resides.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

As for the calculators, I'm aware of the following list. Are there others?

EZ Water
Bru'n Water
Kaiser Water Calculator
Brewers Friend
Water-v-Beta 1.4

The Kaiser Calculator probably handles the roasted portion issue better than most, but you need to properly understand how to determine the percentage of the batches final color that the roasted grains are contributing (as opposed to the percentage of contribution of the batches caramel and crystal malts), otherwise you will be leading it astray. Base malt color contribution is not factored into the Kaiser method. Kai Troester made the Kaiser Calculator and did the mathematical bull-work for the Brewers Friend calculator. And if the others have somehow seen farther, it is merely because they are standing upon the shoulders of a giant (by the name of Kai Troester).

 

[mabrungard]

The old algorithm used in Bru'n Water very consistently overpredicted the mashing pH of dark worts for hundreds of users that actually check their pH. Pale wort pH predictions were always pretty accurate.

For that reason, along with data from Briess, the roast acidity setting in the latest versions of Bru'n Water was increased. You should see predictions for dark worts are lower and they are closer to truth.

 

[PlinyTheMiddleAged]

I recently brewed a Dark Lord clone (from Jan 2016 BYO). It requires two separate mashes; the second one has a lot of dark roasted malts. I prepped for my brew day using the old version of Bru'n Water and targeted a pH of 5.6. A few days later, Martin sent me the new version - I plugged data from the old workbook into the new workbook and the pH was much lower. I adjusted my salt additions to hit 5.5 with the new workbook and then did a test mash with a small sample of the grist and the right proportion of water to hit the same mash thickness. The test mash came in at 5.46. Next day, I did the real deal and (not surprisingly) that mash came in at 5.46.

Based on my sample of one - I'd say the new workbook is pretty accurate.

PlinyTheMiddleAged

 

[dmr]

As for the calculators, I'm aware of the following list. Are there others?

EZ Water
Bru'n Water
Kaiser Water Calculator
Brewers Friend
Water-v-Beta 1.4

The Kaiser Calculator probably handles the roasted portion issue better than most, but you need to properly understand how to determine the percentage of the batches final color that the roasted grains are contributing (as opposed to the percentage of contribution of the batches caramel and crystal malts), otherwise you will be leading it astray. Base malt color contribution is not factored into the Kaiser method. Kai Troester made the Kaiser Calculator and did the mathematical bull-work for the Brewers Friend calculator. And if the others have somehow seen farther, it is merely because they are standing upon the shoulders of a giant (by the name of Kai Troester).

I know of one other calculator: MpH Water Calculator, which available at Homebrewingphysics.blogspot.com.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

Wow, it seems quite sophisticated. Are you the developer? Thanks!!!

 

[Big Monk]

I think the biggest advantage "Water" has over others is biological acidification using Sauergut. We integrated the Kolbach/Kai/Kunze acidity calcs for Sauergut into our spreadsheet and have verified its usefulness in many trials.