Very confusing

[Jag75]

Okay , so I'm using Bru N Water . For my 5.5 gallon IPA I'm using the following.

11.5 # grain bill
4.6 gallon mash - 3 gallons sparge

Gypsum
Mash = 5.9g
Sparge = 2.8g

CaCI
Mash = .5g
Sparge = .3g

Lactic Acid
Mash = 2.7ml
Sparge = 1ml

I get roughly 5.28 - 5.30 ph

Now I'm scaling my brew up to 66 gallons . The Gypsum comes out in this batch to 62g in mash and 60g in sparge . CaCI is 16g in mash and 15.8 in sparge . Lactic Acid 9.2ml in mash and 2.0ml in sparge . Giving me a mash ph of 5.3

The Gypsum is the only thing that bumped up somewhat linear. Is there something I'm missing ?

 

[VikeMan]

Is your mash thickness (mash water to grain ratio) the same for both batches? If not, what does your base water profile look like?

 

[Jag75]

Is your mash thickness (mash water to grain ratio) the same for both batches? If not, what does your base water profile look like?

5.5 gallon batch - 11.5 # grain bill
Mash 4.6 gallons and sparge 3 gallons

66 gallon batch - 139 # grain bill .
Mash 46 gallons sparge 45 gallons .

 

[VikeMan]

I don't use Bru'nWater, but taking the numbers from your posts and screenshots (and scaling the grain bill weights down from the big batch to hit 11.5 lbs) and putting it in BrewCipher...

For your small batch:
8.91676 lbs 2-Row
0.5833 lbs C-10
2.0 lbs Munich 10L
4.6 gallons base water: Ca 1, Na 8, Cl 4, SO4 1, HCO3 16
add 0.5 grams CaCl2, 5.9 grams CaSO4
add 2.7 ml 88% Lactic Acid
Predicted Mash pH: 5.38

For your big batch:
107 lbs 2-Row
7 lbs C-10
24 lbs Munich 10L
46.0 gallons base water: Ca 1, Na 8, Cl 4, SO4 1, HCO3 16
add 16 grams CaCl2, 62 grams CaSO4
add 9.2 ml 88% Lactic Acid
Predicted Mash pH: 5.51

As I said, I don't use Bru'nWater, but something that jumps out at me in your second screenshot is that the grain amounts don't add up to the total displayed and the "percentage of grain bill numbers" don't seem to work. I wonder if your sheet got corrupted somewhere?

 

[Jag75]

I don't use Bru'nWater, but taking the numbers from your posts and screenshots (and scaling the grain bill weights down from the big batch to hit 11.5 lbs) and putting it in BrewCipher...

For your small batch:
8.91676 lbs 2-Row
0.5833 lbs C-10
2.0 lbs Munich 10L
4.6 gallons base water: Ca 1, Na 8, Cl 4, SO4 1, HCO3 16
add 0.5 grams CaCl2, 5.9 grams CaSO4
add 2.7 ml 88% Lactic Acid
Predicted Mash pH: 5.38

For your big batch:
107 lbs 2-Row
7 lbs C-10
24 lbs Munich 10L
46.0 gallons base water: Ca 1, Na 8, Cl 4, SO4 1, HCO3 16
add 16 grams CaCl2, 62 grams CaSO4
add 9.2 ml 88% Lactic Acid
Predicted Mash pH: 5.51

As I said, I don't use Bru'nWater, but something that jumps out at me in your second screenshot is that the grain amounts don't add up to the total displayed and the "percentage of grain bill numbers" don't seem to work. I wonder if your sheet got corrupted somewhere?

Its very possible something is wrong with the program . I just got a chromebook and trying to run this program on it . 2 days in and im not crazy about this chromebook .

 

[Sammy86]

Your total water volume is wrong...45+46 is 91 not 64

 

[Jag75]

Ok Vike , I think I know what your talking about . Are you saying the grain doesn't add up to the 139.04 ? If you look at the column next to pounds its ounces . The pounds and ounces are in different boxes.

Sammy - the total volume is batch size , not the total amount of water used .

 

[Sammy86]

Ok Vike , I think I know what your talking about . Are you saying the grain doesn't add up to the 139.04 ? If you look at the column next to pounds its ounces . The pounds and ounces are in different boxes.

Sammy - the total volume is batch size , not the total amount of water used .

No its not...thats total water volume used for the batch...that's why those three are in a row...if it meant wort it would say wort...it says water volume meaning all your water added together

 

[VikeMan]

Ok Vike , I think I know what your talking about . Are you saying the grain doesn't add up to the 139.04 ? If you look at the column next to pounds its ounces . The pounds and ounces are in different boxes.

Ah. I'll re-run and repost.

 

[Jag75]

No its not...thats total water volume used for the batch...that's why those three are in a row...if it meant wort it would say wort...it says water volume meaning all your water added together

If thats the case then ive been running this program wrong for years .

 

[Sammy86]

If thats the case then ive been running this program wrong for years .

That's the case...LoL

 

[Jag75]

That's the case...LoL

I think I'm good Sammy , check this out .

 

[Sammy86]

I think I'm good Sammy , check this out .

I stand corrected...

 

[VikeMan]

Re-run in BrewCipher:

For your small batch:
8.8522 lbs 2-Row
0.6271 lbs C-10
2.0207 lbs Munich 10L
4.6 gallons base water: Ca 1, Na 8, Cl 4, SO4 1, HCO3 16
add 0.5 grams CaCl2, 5.9 grams CaSO4
add 2.7 ml 88% Lactic Acid
Predicted Mash pH: 5.38

For your big batch:
107.03 lbs 2-Row
7.58 lbs C-10
24.43 lbs Munich 10L
46.0 gallons base water: Ca 1, Na 8, Cl 4, SO4 1, HCO3 16
add 16 grams CaCl2, 62 grams CaSO4
add 9.2 ml 88% Lactic Acid
Predicted Mash pH: 5.51

Mash pH predictions (at two decimal places) didn't change.

ETA: On your latest pic, I see "Anhydrous" next to "What form of..." (the rest is blocked). If that's for CaCl2, it's pretty doubtful that you have anhydrous. It's expensive and very hard to keep in an anhydrous state.

 

[Sammy86]

Okay , so I'm using Bru N Water . For my 5.5 gallon IPA I'm using the following.

11.5 # grain bill
4.6 gallon mash - 3 gallons sparge

Gypsum
Mash = 5.9g
Sparge = 2.8g

CaCI
Mash = .5g
Sparge = .3g

Lactic Acid
Mash = 2.7ml
Sparge = 1ml

I get roughly 5.28 - 5.30 ph

Now I'm scaling my brew up to 66 gallons . The Gypsum comes out in this batch to 62g in mash and 60g in sparge . CaCI is 16g in mash and 15.8 in sparge . Lactic Acid 9.2ml in mash and 2.0ml in sparge . Giving me a mash ph of 5.3

The Gypsum is the only thing that bumped up somewhat linear. Is there something I'm missing ?

Could always ask the man himself @mabrungard

 

[Jag75]

@VikeMan - thats the calcium chloride from the brew store . Same as the stuff from morebeer .

 

[VikeMan]

@VikeMan - thats the calcium chloride from the brew store . Same as the stuff from morebeer .

It would be best to specify that as "dihydrate," if there's a choice in the sheet.

 

[Jag75]

It would be best to specify that as "dihydrate," if there's a choice in the sheet.

It is anhydrous

https://www.morebeer.com/products/calcium-chloride.html

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

It would be best to specify that as "dihydrate," if there's a choice in the sheet.

That used to be my thinking also, but if you actually test reasonably fresh CaCl2 it is more likely to be ~95% as opposed to 75.49% (Dihydrate).

 

[VikeMan]

It is anhydrous

https://www.morebeer.com/products/calcium-chloride.html

I do see that the web page describes it as anhydrous (though the packaging doesn't). Even assuming it started off as anhydrous, it absorbs moisture rapidly when exposed to air.

That used to be my thinking also, but if you actually test reasonably fresh CaCl2 it is more likely to be ~95% as opposed to 75.49% (Dihydrate).

In my experience, it gains water weight pretty fast. And I recently had a ziplock bag (which must have had a leak) of it go from apparently dry to the touch to literally wet in something less than a week. I assume humidity is a factor.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

In my experience, it gains water weight pretty fast. And I recently had a ziplock bag (which must have had a leak) of it go from apparently dry to the touch to literally wet in something less than a week. I assume humidity is a factor.

It changes quickly, but I've only seen it hydrate at that rapid a pace when left open and fully exposed to the prevailing humidity in the air. I too have watched it turn into goo.

 

[Chorgey]

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

But it doesn't go directly from Anhydrous to Dihydrate. It passes through every percentage from 100% to 74.49% (and does not stop there, but keeps declining until eventually it becomes a liquid goo). What is needed is the ability to select your CaCl2's actual percent. Which is not very likely to be either Anhydrous or Dihydrate.

 

[VikeMan]

I assume that capture is also from Bru'nWater? Interesting take... "It may be safer to select Anhydrous in order to avoid overdosing." It could just as reasonably say "It may be safer to select Dihydrate in order to avoid under dosing." It all depends on what state it's really in.

 

[Jag75]

Shoot , before today I didn't even know there was different types lol. I knew I should have paid more attention to science and biology in school haha.

 

[day_trippr]

One can bake out moisture from CACL fairly easily if in pearl form and not yet mushy

Cheers!

 

[VikeMan]

One can bake out moisture from CACL fairly easily if in pearl form and not yet mushy

Yep, one can. But nobody ever really does routinely.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

One can bake out moisture from CACL fairly easily if in pearl form and not yet mushy

Cheers!

I've never tried to do this, but from reading the comments of those who claim to have done it, it requires a minimum oven temperature of around 425 degrees F. as I recall. And it starts gathering moisture all over again as it is cooling. The best you can likely hope to achieve will be about 96-97%. Anhydrous is highly unlikely.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

The way to test the purity percentage of your CaCl2 prills is to add 25 grams to DI water and make it up to a total of 250 mL (or use 5 grams made up to 50 mL if you really trust your scales accuracy plus your ability to accurately assess that you have 50 mL). Stir to fully dissolve and then let all of the rather appreciable heat this causes cool back down to room temperature. Then take an SG reading. If it reads 1.081 SG it is Anhydrous. If it reads say 1.077 instead, it is right close to 95%.

SG's For various ~percents (weight by volume) for CaCl2 solutions made up as above (admittedly rather loosely rounded):
------------------------
100% = 1.081 SG
99% = 1.080 SG
97.5% = 1.079 SG
96% = 1.078 SG
95% = 1.077 SG
94% = 1.076 SG
92.5% = 1.075 SG
91% = 1.074 SG
90% = 1.073 SG
87.5% = 1.071 SG
85% = 1.069 SG
82.5% = 1.067 SG
80% = 1.065 SG
76% = 1.062 SG
73% = 1.060 SG
70% = 1.052 SG
60% = 1.049 SG
50% = 1.041 SG
40% = 1.033 SG
30% = 1.025 SG

If any fine white powder hazes it up and eventually drops out of solution at any juncture of storage, that is calcium carbonate. If the pH is above 7 it has CaCO3 contamination at some level. And of course that will throw off the SG's by some measure, but only to the degree that CaCO3 is soluble. Solids suspended in solutions do not impact SG.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

Dihydrate is 1.0616 SG for a solution made up as described above.
Anhydrous is in reality closer to 1.0809 SG for a solution made up as described above.

 

[Vale71]

Yep, one can. But nobody ever really does routinely.

It's also much easier to buy food grade CaCl2 as a 33% (i.e. saturated) solution. That way there is no uncertainty whatsoever.

 

[Jag75]

It's also much easier to buy food grade CaCl2 as a 33% (i.e. saturated) solution. That way there is no uncertainty whatsoever.

I totally got lost about about 12 posts up but the CaCI does say food grade on it . So that's a good thing I'm guessing.

 

[Reneauj62]

I have tried using Bru'n Water and it just seems heavy handed on the salts and is way more complicated than it needs to be. I created a spreadsheet based on John Palmer's book How to Brew. In the book he tells you what each gram of the salts contribute. Funny thing is, my spreadsheet comes out almost exactly the same as BeerSmith 3. I can get my information in less than 30 seconds and not 20 minutes (learning curve). It is possible that once you master Bru'n Water it becomes second nature and maybe you become much quicker in the process. But, I don't have that kind of patience... My Bad!

 

[day_trippr]

There is indeed a learning curve if you want to exploit the tool correctly. Totally worth it though.
Once you get to that point it's actually quite simple to modify or even create a whole new "recipe".

I could say the same about BeerSmith...

Cheers!

 

[Jag75]

Yes it was difficult at first . Its easy for me now . Once you learn your way around the program its a breeze .