Beersmith 3 acid additions4/17/2024 Added new option under Options->Brewing to make it easier to import a language XML file to use BeerSmith in other (non english) languages.The ability to customize cloud views with most recipe fields including recipe date for better sorting/management of cloud folders.New Backup/Restore from Zip on file menu for easy backup.Dry hop additions can not specify time of addition and length of addition and they also now show up on the calendar.Support for “sparge” grains – a technique used where dark grains are added at the end of the mash/early sparge to reduce harshness.You can now import TILT hydrometer/temperature data from either a CSV file or Google Spreadsheet link directly into your session data.New pH acid model options to select either MPH or BW models.Moved default data storage default away from Documents directory in the interest of better security.Incremental transaction based data system that is more secure, less prone to data loss in the event of a crash or computer shutdown.The plot of roasted malt pH versus color looks more like a scatter diagram, which may be indicative of the base malt used or process differences in the kilning/roasting. It is a slight error, but they all tend to add up after a while. Likewise, my data sense indicates that making a straight line regression for caramel/crystal malts introduces another error into the mix. I currently have a few pounds of several base malts that I plan on doing some testing on to see how much scatter there is in their contribution to mash pH. My main issue is the wide range of pH results from base malts in general and the programs sort of lumping them all into one category. There does seem to be a difference with the way they calculate the acid contributions, but neither is really too far off the mark that it is unusable. At this same acid content of the malt, Bru'n water ended up well below my actual results. In the end, I calculated that increasing the acid content value of the malt to a little above 3% brought the pH prediction from BeerSmith into alignment with my actual results. Overall, it seems like all of the water adjustment tools are lacking somewhat when it comes to the use of acidulated malt. You can see my analysis of a pilsner recipe which I had brewed a couple of times and measured pH with and without acidulated malt on this thread: so I always recommend actually measuring your mash pH and adjusting again if needed. In the real world a lot of factors come into play that we don't really know including the actual acidity of each grain addition, the precise composition of your water, crush of the grain, etc. ![]() That being said - these are models folks. When using any model, I do the research first and pick the best one I can find which I did in this case. If you read the paper and understand the chemistry involved, you will see why the other models have problems and why I went with the one I did. I've already had a number of people ask me why didn't I just make my model match the BNW (or EZ Water, or KW or pick your favorite tool)? This is a pretty significant problem with BNW - not the other tools. In fact it calculates almost double the acidity change (which means half the acid needed) for the particular comparison case with phosphoric that the other water tools or models did. If you go to page 7 you will see the acidity delta in the table changes pretty dramatically with BNW for phosphoric, meaning it will calculate a lot less phosphoric. BeerSmith uses the model described in the paper which does include the effects of acid density: I've discussed this in other threads, but the here's a comparison of the models (page 7). ![]() BNW ignores the acid density which has a particularly large effect when using phosphoric acid.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |