Water treatment

[Graham]

:
Now this is what I like to see, a topic I can get my teeth into
There is a lot of misinformation on water treatment in the literature...

I agree entirely on both counts.

:
Regarding Calcium levels, I've seen values quoted from 50mg up to 300mg (With no hint of beer style).

Yes! Very impirical and worrying. Fortunately, the mash seems very tolerant though, and it is hard to overdo it.

:
Regarding pH 5.2 IIRC this is some sort of phosphate buffer, and as such using an excess will strip calcium from your liquor.

And possibly magnesium too. Probably why Vossy has trouble with yeast weakness when using it. There's not a busting lot of calcium in his water to start with. I can't help thinking that pH5.2 causes more than it cures. I wouldn't dream of using it when to do the job "properly" isn't too difficult, but perhaps that is just the Luddite within me.

:
Hence Grahams suggestion of adding Calcium salts to the boiler . . . and something I am going to consider in subsequent brews.

That was because when going for the minimum of 50mg/l calcium, it is likely that most of it will be precipitated in the mash. I also assume that above about 100mg/l sufficient will be carried across to the copper - that may not be the case though.

As you say, there are also implications when using pH5.2, which is something that I hadn't considered.

:
The Brupak information is derived as far as I am aware from the Murphy website who supply DLS and CRS, and is aimed at commercial brewers rather than craft brewers, as such I suspect that they are aimed at deriving the maximum extract from the mash rather than improving the flavour profile . . . And of course Murphys sell more salts if you use more . . .What am I implying

Again I have a problem with the principle of CRS inasmuch as it is easy to overdo it or underdo it by just using a water-utility analysis sheet. It aint accurate enough. An alkalinity test kit is essential in my view. I suspect that the instructions offered to home brewers are rather conservative too, to reduce the risk of overdoing it. Also, by adding this stuff you are also adding other ions to the water. Without knowing the acids used, their ratios and normality, you can't work out what these ions are and that makes designing a water profile difficult.

At least with boiling the water you are adding nothing, just taking carbonate away, and it is impossible to overdo it. Shame it takes so long to do though.

With DLS you have no control over the chloride sulphate ratio - not that that is a big issue in my view.

[RabMaxwell]

I got this after many E-mails & letters to scottish water there not the most helpful people this is from old results about 10 years or more ago when they used to test for these things. I have fished there in the last few years & it still looks like a Peat Bog so i doubt the water will change that much.
Mg /.870 mg/L S04 / 5.000mg/L Ca / 23.000mg/L Cl / 43.9mg/L Na / 3.450mg/L HC03 / 8.800mg/L
I have been hitting my mash ph bang on with bringing my HCO3 level up to 25 for beers of 9-11 SRM i found PH 5.2 did nothing. For dark beers stouts porters ect i get good results just leaving the darker malts to nearly the end of the mash. My idea is to get the right Ph for most of the mash without using tones of carbonate does the trick

[Vossy1]

I think it would be helpful to less experienced home brewers like myself if there were some guidline values based on styles.
Like Jim's house bitter, a average mineral composition which would get you into the right 'ball park'.
Tabulate the information with values for a standard' pale say, and then a further column with mineral additions for say a hoppier/more malty beer, a very hoppy/matly beer, etc, etc, etc.

Not to be seen as definative, but helpful as once in the right 'ball park' you can adjust to suit.

There must be enough experienced brewers on this forum to be able to come to some agreement on what could be seen to be a good 'standard' mineral composition, based on an average for a style.

I do realise that there are water profiles on various pieces of software, but based on comments so far, these may not be that accurate...but on the other hand they nmay be to accurate for a standard

TBC

[RabMaxwell]

Could the low level of Calcium in the water vossi has be causing his cloudy beer? I think i remember reading somewhere that insufficient Calcium can lead to problems with yeast flocculation

[Graham]

Could the low level of Calcium in the water vossi has be causing his cloudy beer? I think i remember reading somewhere that insufficient Calcium can lead to problems with yeast flocculation

True! calcium has opposite charge to yeast and helps it to floc.

[Aleman]

There must be enough experienced brewers on this forum to be able to come to some agreement on what could be seen to be a good 'standard' mineral composition, based on an average for a style.

I do realise that there are water profiles on various pieces of software, but based on comments so far, these may not be that accurate...but on the other hand they may be to accurate for a standard

The problem is, we can possibly agree on what would be a good mineral composition for style, but without knowing what you have in the water to start with makes a massive difference to what you want/need to add. As Graham has alluded to and I will say outright the water authority analysis are a waste of time, as often you see the averages for a period of 12 months and the samples as 1 or 2 in that period, they could draw water from 3 or 4 reservoirs throughout the year and in some areas get vastly different mineral compositions. The only way you will be able to know what you need to add is to measure the water each time you brew to determine the mineral composition at that time, then modify the additions to get the profile you want. Colorimeters and test kits to do this are available from Palintest . . . . At a price, and for that price I can have a lot more shiny and alter my water empirically, ie Well I'm going to add 150ppm of Calcium, and its for a Bohemian Pilsner so I'll get 90% of that from Calcium Chloride and the remaining 10% from Gypsum. For an IPA it might be the other way round

[Vossy1]

Could the low level of Calcium in the water vossi has be causing his cloudy beer?

I was also going to ask this question RM...I particularly like the use of the word 'cloudy' ...I've had enough 'H' to last a lifetime

The problem is, we can possibly agree on what would be a good mineral composition for style, but without knowing what you have in the water to start with makes a massive difference to what you want/need to add. As Graham has alluded to and I will say outright the water authority analysis are a waste of time, as often you see the averages for a period of 12 months and the samples as 1 or 2 in that period, they could draw water from 3 or 4 reservoirs throughout the year and in some areas get vastly different mineral compositions. The only way you will be able to know what you need to add is to measure the water each time you brew to determine the mineral composition at that time, then modify the additions to get the profile you want.

I can see that, but at some point we have to draw a line.
A lot of homebrewing is vague to say the least, alpha acid contents, grain etc, etc, etc. The point is that, based on what we are told, we can make a fair guesstimate, and that appllies to the water analysis.
Lets face it, even if no-one attempts a standard mineral addition we're still going to start with the water analysis as a base and then use taste to alter to our own preference

As an alternative we could use a particular brand of bottled water for brewing, but I don't think they're as regulated as water authorities, so I think I'd trust their figures even less

[bandit]

I use 0.9ml of hydrochloric acid in 10 litres of mash water to lower the pH of the water to 6.4 and then add 1 teaspoon of Gypsum and 1 of calcium chloride to the mash tun and my pH comes out at 5.2

Am I wrong or is the mash water pH more important than minerals. If I need more clacium shoul I add it to the boiler instead?

[Vossy1]

And possibly magnesium too. Probably why Vossy has trouble with yeast weakness when using it. There's not a busting lot of calcium in his water to start with. I can't help thinking that pH5.2 causes more than it cures. I wouldn't dream of using it when to do the job "properly" isn't too difficult, but perhaps that is just the Luddite within me

Graham, I don't think I'd ever of used Ph 5.2 if I'd have been able to understand the printed matter on the subject in the first place.
This thread has helped no end, in making it easier to understand

Could the low level of Calcium in the water vossi has be causing his cloudy beer? I think i remember reading somewhere that insufficient Calcium can lead to problems with yeast flocculation

To give you some idea of how long my beers are taking to clear, my last effort has been in secondary since the second of december. I added gelatin during the week of the 2/12/07 but the beer has only just dropped bright. Perhaps after all the comments on hazy beers my finings were simply overwhelmed by the yeast not floccing like it should.

Regards Alemans comments on differing water sources throughout the year, perhaps this is why every now and then I'd get a clear beer.

The only truly hoppy beers I've made so far were my original Styrian Stunner, Broadsword and the M. Ollosson IPA. I remember at the time of making them, comments about high IBU's and over hopped ales, yet these were some of the best beers I've made and certainly only on parr with SNPA for both bitterness and hops.
I would also add that all the darker ales including the latest hunky dory have been fabulous, much better taste wise than the pales I've made, and they've all been clear as a bell.

I still find it hard to lay all my issues at the water door though. Dan has very similar water to me and he adds minerals yet he still suffers cloudy issues, as I do. I'll have to pm him to chip in on this one.

I still think a ball park set of figures is a good idea for styles.

In the long run what's the best option.
Is a blank template water as those supplied by reverse osmosis filtration the best way to go

[iowalad]

Interesting and helpful post.

I am with Vossy a consensus that a consensus on what average mineral composition which would get you into the right 'ball park' would be most helpful. (not that I would be any help in creating the same).

We can each then sort out what sort of additions we each need to make to reach the suggested ranges.

[Graham]

I use 0.9ml of hydrochloric acid in 10 litres of mash water to lower the pH of the water to 6.4 and then add 1 teaspoon of Gypsum and 1 of calcium chloride to the mash tun and my pH comes out at 5.2

Am I wrong or is the mash water pH more important than minerals. If I need more calcium should I add it to the boiler instead?

Assuming that a teaspoon hold about 3 grams of either mineral, that adds 153 mg/l of calcium, 167mg/l of sulphate and 145mg/l of chloride to your water.

153mg/l of calcium is fine, virtually spot on; 200mg/l is the maximum that I would expect these days for a dry-tasting strong pale ale. Your mash pH is dead on, so it isn't worth mucking with that. Your sulphate / chloride ratio is roughly 1:1, whereas hereditary wisdom has it that it should be closer to 2:1, but that is subjective and I, for one, do not attach as much importance to it that some others do. Besides, it is based on historical stuff and few of us are making historical beers.

Mash pH is of primary importance, but so is the pH of the subsequent processes importance because all clarification actions, both yeast and protein are dependant upon the isoelectric point; that is the pH at which ionic charges cancel out and allow the particles to floc together and sediment. The isolelectric points are different for different haze components.

It is also important to have enough calcium throughout the whole brewing process because it is an important co-factor in just about every brewing process. You probably have enough calcium to carry across from the mash tun, but you won't do any harm by adding half-teaspoon of calcium sulphate to the copper if you have any doubts.

[Graham]

To give you some idea of how long my beers are taking to clear, my last effort has been in secondary since the second of december. I added gelatin during the week of the 2/12/07 but the beer has only just dropped bright. Perhaps after all the comments on hazy beers my finings were simply overwhelmed by the yeast not floccing like it should.

Almost certainly. Gelatine isn't as good as isinglass and you may well be adding it too early. You are certainly suffering from a calcium deficiency and probably magnesium as well. (although the malt might supply a bit of magnesium). Yeast needs both to perform properly and needs calcium to floc properly.

I still think a ball park set of figures is a good idea for styles.

In the long run what's the best option.
Is a blank template water as those supplied by reverse osmosis filtration the best way to go

You've already got a blank template. You've got gigger all in your water and what little is there you can safely ignore.

[Vossy1]

You've already got a blank template. You've got gigger all in your water and what little is there you can safely ignore.

That's great advice, thank you All it needed was another persons point of view.
I would be getting hung up about the small quantities of minerals due to my terrier like nature of 'having to know' and 'being precise'

Thanks Rab I think I'll take on your advice also and try just one style at a time until I'm happy with the taste I'm getting.

I'm itching to get brewing again now

[RabMaxwell]

Vossi i am planning brewing another Bluebird Bitter it was excellent the last time using Brupaks figures for a bitter Ca / 170 Mg / 15 Na /60 SO4 / 400 CL /200 HCO3 /25 . I find Promash easy enough to use /use this as your target with your water as source. I agree it can take a little fiddling to get it near as possible sometimes but once you have worked out the profile you prefer that's you sorted for that style. But with this brew i am going to add 1/4 more Gypsum Double my Epsom Salts & add 1/3 more Calcium Chloride as these absorb moisture (This was posted by Mr Edge) & explains why http://xrl.us/bdvoh

[Graham]

Ha! found a bodge to get a sort of a table displayed.
Here is an illustrative example for a typical pale ale water treatment.

Code: Select all

                                      WATER TREATMENT
                                           mg/l
               Calcium          Magnesium         Sodium       Chloride        Sulphate
PALE ALE         150               16               20            65             375

The above treatment can be realised by adding the following to soft water.

Calcium sulphate (as gypsum) = 550 mg/l
Calcium chloride (in dihydrate form) = 70 mg/l
Magnesium sulphate (as Epsom salts) = 170 mg/l
Sodium chloride (table salt) = 53 mg/l

Multiply the figures by the brew length in litres.
The calcium sulphate can be difficult to get into solution and should ideally be boiled into solution.

Alternatively it can be added to the mash, but in this case divide the salts in proportion to, and sufficient for, the mash liquor employed and put the balance into the copper.