DLS or gypsum

[gunner]

I did my first few salifert tests last week,and had a big difference in water authority alkalinity figure of 236 caco3 to my tests which came out at 211caco3.

Do you add first gypsum addition to cold treated/ heated and treated brewing liquour,or to grain bill?If heating what sort of temperature is advisable?

Graham.

[Horatio]

FWIW I add the CRS and campden tabs to the total liqour that will be used (in the HLT) and the salts to the mash and a small amount of gypsum to the boil. I have looked at water reports and taken the latest one as a guide only. I then used Grahams calculator to to start with and I then fine tuned my additions based on the last brew's results. I have a basic treament that seems to work for four of my regular brews but I will be keeping an eye (tastebud) on them to note any changes in the water profile. I also never brew clones or try to replicate other water profiles; I just brew my own recipes and like the results.

[crookedeyeboy]

"I doubt the majority of commercial breweries are quite so fussy about their own water profiles."

Youd be surprised Chris. It is always the first place to start if breweries are having issues with their beers. Put crap in at the beginning and you get crap out! Simple as that. a 50ppm change in alkalinity on a commercial scale can cause alsorts of problems believe me! Ive had three phone calls in one week before all to do with water quality chaging and causing all kinds of ill effects later on down the line.

Bottom line: Do not underestimate the treatment of liquor but at the same time dont go over the top about it! (as is what a lot of people do!)

[Graham]

"Bottom line: Do not underestimate the treatment of liquor but at the same time dont go over the top about it! (as is what a lot of people do!)

Well, crooked, perhaps you can explain to me, and to others , why your employers' web site's recommended water compositions do not ionically balance. The recommended water profiles are impossible to obtain without adding shed loads of common salt. You might also explain why with several water samples sent to Murphy's for analysis, the figures again do not ionically balance; the calcium level value reported has been about half the true value.

Edited to make it more factually accurate and much less confrontational.

[crookedeyeboy]

Im sorry you feel this way Graham. If any of our customers have an issue with any service we supply to them they should contact us directly.
I am unaware out of the 700-800 micro customers we service of anyone ever questioning the carbonate result, we would gladly look into it if there was a formal issue or complaint.
Which water profiles are you talking about exactly? Our recommendations are more than likely based upon the use of our products DWB and AMS which have been formulated to 'Burtonise' water for an average liquor composition.
We have extremely knowledglable staff here and deal with a great deal of technical queries pertaining to problems in microbreweries. I feel that unfortunately in this area of brewing and home brewing there are always going to be contradictions/arguments and differing opinions.
I have your book Graham and have enjoyed the recipes greatly but to be honest there are things in there that I dont agree with due to practices here but again it is a difference of opinions.
Due to professional reasons I cannot get involved in an internet forum debate over certain attitudes towards the company I work for. I do not think this is the appropriate place to discuss this issue.
If anyone has any issues pertaining to any service Murphy & Son provide please forward them to my work email

[chris_reboot]

back down fellas!

It's only a bit of water!

[Graham]

Sorry Crooked, you are quite right; not only was it wrong for me to blame you for a little table on the web site and put you on the spot, but it is an inappropriate place too. This is your leisure place where, presumably, you (sort of) get away from work. A combination of frustration and alcohol is my only excuse.

You might wish to remove your e-mail address so that it is not visible to the spambots.

[chris_reboot]

you started early last night on the pop then Graham!?!

[crookedeyeboy]

Haha no worries Graham. I have now removed my email address.

[RichardG]

Well, I had a trial run with my Salifert kit this morning, and most interesting it was! For my first two AG brews I used the CaCO3 figure as given on my water company's website; we have South Staffs who give a figure of 163.7. I carefully followed the instructions in Chris-x1's excellent video on the subject, and the sample turned pink with the end point thus reached with the upper part of the black section of the syringe at 0.64. Cross reading gives a figure of 2.06meq/L, or a CaCO3 figure of 103! Quite a bit different from 163.7. So, unless anyone can see anything obviously wrong that I've done, it just proves that the figures provided by water companys are probably worthless.

[RichardG]

Many thanks Chris, and for clarification my reading came when the colour change started; I added a drop (or two? Can't remember now) to confirm I had reached the end point, which as it promptly went pink, I felt I had. Your final comment about adding back untreated water is most interesting and something I'll add to my 'knowledge bank'. Either way, what my experience would suggest is that testing your water each time with this simple procedure should be a 'must'. I would strongly recommend any AG brewer to have one of these kits, if they haven't already

[RichardG]

Just as a matter of academic interest; let us assume that the 103mg/l of CaCO3 my test today gave me was correct for my AG#1 (I realise, of course, that that cannot be confirmed). The figure I used came from my water boards website and was 163.7mg/l. That means I will have over administered the CRS addition. All other things being equal, (1) what effect is this likely to have, and (2) what difference would I notice were I to do exactly the same recipe again, but using the correct amount of CRS (what-ever that may be at the time)?