Cold water sparge

[japhroaig]

THANK YOU! (I just saw this thread, even though it is old)

This will help settle an argument with a friend, as I have always maintained it is coagulation/gelatinization, and not sugar liquification.

 

[MikeRoBrew1]

Thanks this helps me to know that if my sparge water isn't hot enough - dont worry!

 

[EarthBound]

This thread has blown my mind! I had to go over it twice to make sure I wasn't trippin!

 

[BrewAlchemy]

I cold sparged 3 weeks ago when i ran out of hot water, i have been biting my teeth in anticipation of the taste. This post has relaxed alot of my nerves. I did notice the primary is much more cloudier then usual, which you mentioned in the thread. Very excited that nothing was ruined. Happy I built up the courage to google the question and found the answer i wasnt anticipating.........a good one.

 

[Jtd6628]

Fear the alot monster aaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhh.

 

[stamandster]

The other thing I'm thinking of, and sorry for bringing an older thread back from the dead, is that even if you put in cold water (sub 100f) that you'll get a equalization from the residual grain heat. So it's not going to be that[/] cold. I'm thinking of doing this and just adding another pound of grain for the extra points instead of buying an HLT.

However, I always thought it was sugar/water solubility that was the reason for sparging with 165-170f water. Not to extract anything else, but as described it seems it does. So maybe a cold water sparge may benefit from a 90 min mash to help with complete conversion. Palmer describes how you get some benefit from the extra 30 minutes and could explain the added points. I bet you could correlate that to the extra mash time and sparge temp.

We'll see what happens with my next brew I'll be batch sparging too.

 

[EarthBound]

The other thing I'm thinking of, and sorry for bringing an older thread back from the dead, is that even if you put in cold water (sub 100f) that you'll get a equalization from the residual grain heat. So it's not going to be that[/] cold. I'm thinking of doing this and just adding another pound of grain for the extra points instead of buying an HLT.

However, I always thought it was sugar/water solubility that was the reason for sparging with 165-170f water. Not to extract anything else, but as described it seems it does. So maybe a cold water sparge may benefit from a 90 min mash to help with complete conversion. Palmer describes how you get some benefit from the extra 30 minutes and could explain the added points. I bet you could correlate that to the extra mash time and sparge temp.

We'll see what happens with my next brew I'll be batch sparging too.

I look forward to finding out your results.

 

[kerant]

That just tells me it's not the end all if you don't nail your sparge temps- good to know!

 

[stamandster]

I look forward to finding out your results.

Definitely! And some information for my reasoning. Hoping I'm not stepping on toes or other peoples research. Though I was doing research and stumbled across the same site that BeerWars did (https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f39/sparging-155f-instead-170f-198096/index3.html#post2306167) @ The Solubility Of The Sugars

So it seems that our solvent (cold water) has enough potential to dissolve all sugars that would be converted during the mashing. However, I was reading another paper on solvation, or the speed of which a substance goes into a solution. It stated that heat does not necessarily mean more solvation and would also depend on the content (if it had other minerals, etc) of the solvent (cold water).

I find something not adding up in regards to the reason for sparging with 170f water. As was described to me it's to "wash" the sugars from the grain, dissolving them into water solution. But I seem more inclined now to think that we're more likely increasing enzymatic production with the alpha amylase and conversion of starches to maltose, letting it sit for 10-15 minutes. Or the solvation, or quickness of dissolution, of these sugars is increased with 170f water.

If either of these are the case perhaps it's possible to mimic a fly sparge with a batch sparge by increasing the length of the time the cold water is in contact with the grain to dissolve the left over sugars (instead of 10-15 minutes, 15-30, stirring well and often). Also to increase the primary mash rest time from 60 to 90 minutes to help with a more complete conversion.

I was looking at Kaisers results and was thinking of the clarity issue. Perhaps the lipids, pectins and gums aren't "binding" to the grain at a colder temperature? Oddly, I would expect the opposite to be true.

 

[masonsjax]

Bumping this necro thread since the topic has been coming up a lot recently. I've been cold sparging for quite some time now with excellent results.

 

[shooting4fun]

How long did you cold sparge? How long in the fridge in the kettle?

 

[toxdoc49]

Wow. yes I am new to the all grain brewing, but, with the science background, I understand the idea. I may at some point in the future have to try the cold water sparge.

 

[Desert_Sky]

You want to know why I sparge with 170° water as opposed to cold? It takes me less time to bring the kettle to a boil while Im sparging. Time is a huge thing for me, I try to keep a brew session to 4 hours

And, If we are only talking about 2 or 3 efficiency points because of the temps then who tf cares. I brew 11 gallons, not 700 so those few points dont cost more than $1.50 Rinse those sugars however you want. If you know your system then adjust accordingly