72 replies to this topic

[neddles]

Thanks

 

I guess I would start off by using a water profile I had used before and see where the final beer came out taste wise and then adjust from there...

 

Sounds like a smart approach to me.

[Big Nake]

Yeah, that 64ppm of sulfate would be huge in some of my beers. I have absolutely no idea but I think that neddles is correct that you may see "some" of that depending on what was left behind. I wonder if pkrone has looked at that. On this blonde ale I see that my total chloride number was 58ppm and my sulfate was 43ppm (with my additions). If the above chart is correct then my sulfate would have been 107ppm which is a level that is higher than I would ever go intentionally. I did not detect super high levels of sulfate in this beer so there must be a variable there.

[HVB]

Yeah, that 64ppm of sulfate would be huge in some of my beers. I have absolutely no idea but I think that neddles is correct that you may see "some" of that depending on what was left behind. I wonder if pkrone has looked at that. On this blonde ale I see that my total chloride number was 58ppm and my sulfate was 43ppm (with my additions). If the above chart is correct then my sulfate would have been 107ppm which is a level that is higher than I would ever go intentionally. I did not detect super high levels of sulfate in this beer so there must be a variable there.

See, this is why I asked the original question

[Big Nake]

See, this is why I asked the original question

Yeah, I see your point. When I made these two beers I didn't make any changes at all. I think that I would notice something VERY off if my sulfate was 107ppm on the blonde ale. I realize 107ppm is not very high compared to some other brewers or styles but it's WAY, WAY out of bounds for beers that I make... even pale ales so something is still uncovered on this subject.

Another thought: My water's Na number is only 12ppm. I have researched a number of times whether I should be adding a bit of Na to my beers. Some have mentioned that you don't want to go much higher than 75ppm but that adding Na can have a pleasant impact on the beer almost the same as adding salt to food... it enhances the flavor. But I never really got a good read on a good ppm would be for Na so I just left it. If I really did get 15ppm additional Na from using the SMB that might actually be good.

[Big Nake]

Okay so maybe someone can check my math and check out THE WATER SECTION OF THIS ARTICLE. By adding the .66g of SMB in my trifecta mix I thought my SMB level was around 25ppm or so. The water section in that link shows that 100ppm of NaMeta "has potential for" adding 101ppm of SO4. The wording makes me wonder if there is something squishy about it and whether it's a hard value or if it depends on something else. If I have 25ppm of SMB in my water then I could see a spike in SO4 of 25ppm and a spike in Na by about 6ppm (which is nothing considering my Na is now 12ppm). But that SO4 could be something to look at. Personally I would lower my additions of gypsum.

[HVB]

Martin ( Bru'n Water creator)  responds to the same question I had here - https://www.homebrew...uestion.625177/

[Big Nake]

Martin ( Bru'n Water creator)  responds to the same question I had here - https://www.homebrew...uestion.625177/

Mmm, you guys are challenging my scientific shortcomings. Drez, it sounds to me like the amount of sulfate you may get depends on the amount of O2 left in the wort... or something. Is there a variable? When the SMB is added and it scavenges O2, is it "used up" and therefore it disappears and takes some amount of sulfate with it... lowering the amount of sulfate remaining in the beer? I was hinting around that yesterday both here and on the Low-O2 site but I'm still unclear. Hep me, hep me!

[HVB]

OK, then if that is the case the "tighter" the system gets then the more of the SO4 will translate over and at that point it should be noticeable (imo) in the final beer.

[neddles]

OK, then if that is the case the "tighter" the system gets then the more of the SO4 will translate over and at that point it should be noticeable (imo) in the final beer.

Yes but the tighter the system the less NaMeta (or KMeta) you need to begin with. 

[HVB]

Yes but the tighter the system the less NaMeta (or KMeta) you need to begin with.

Agree. I guess what my poorly worded comment (commenting when I should be paying attention during a meeting) was getting at was the perceived more SO4 in the final product would be a good trigger to the brewer to back down on the NaMeta amount.

[Big Nake]

Okay. If all of that is true then we're on the same page. I'll go back to this blonde ale I tasted earlier this week where the trifecta mix (actually, only SMB and BTB... no AA) was used. I do not get any sulfury character and I feel like my SO4 level is exactly how it might be for one of my normal beers. That tells me (if we're sniffing around the right fire hydrant) that my SMB was very fully utilized which also tells me that my equipment and my process need more tweaking which totally understandable. It also tells me that as your system tightens up that you MIGHT notice some sulfur and some added SO4 and that would be the signal to back off. Right?

[Big Nake]

Not sure if anyone saw it but I asked this question directly over there. The answer I received is that we have it backwards... as the SMB is utilized and scavenges O2, it leaves behind sulfate. So the more of your SMB that gets used, the more sulfate will end up in your beer. The less of your SMB is used, the more SULFITES (fart beer) are left in the beer. Clearly as brewers we'll take the sulfate over sulfites and as the system tightens the less SMB you could use. Also, going back to that water section, their suggested dosing went from 100ppm of SMB to 50ppm to 25ppm. So the largest sulfate bump you'll get is 25ppm which could be an issue for some styles and depending on your water (I'm thinking helles) but for most of us we could simply assume that your sulfate is 25ppm higher at the start. This also explains why many brewers over there discuss lowering your GYPSUM amount and just using CaCl (but remember that many are German lager brewers so APA and IPA brewers can ignore that). Finally, when someone crunched my .66g of SMB in 7.5 gallons of brewing water, they arrived at 23ppm so my sulfate bump would be even lower. Does this clarify things or make it muddier?

[neddles]

Not sure if anyone saw it but I asked this question directly over there. The answer I received is that we have it backwards... as the SMB is utilized and scavenges O2, it leaves behind sulfate. So the more of your SMB that gets used, the more sulfate will end up in your beer. The less of your SMB is used, the more SULFITES (fart beer) are left in the beer. Clearly as brewers we'll take the sulfate over sulfites and as the system tightens the less SMB you could use. Also, going back to that water section, their suggested dosing went from 100ppm of SMB to 50ppm to 25ppm. So the largest sulfate bump you'll get is 25ppm which could be an issue for some styles and depending on your water (I'm thinking helles) but for most of us we could simply assume that your sulfate is 25ppm higher at the start. This also explains why many brewers over there discuss lowering your GYPSUM amount and just using CaCl (but remember that many are German lager brewers so APA and IPA brewers can ignore that). Finally, when someone crunched my .66g of SMB in 7.5 gallons of brewing water, they arrived at 23ppm so my sulfate bump would be even lower. Does this clarify things or make it muddier?

 

Makes perfect sense to me.