Water Considerations for No-Sparge

[Pehlman17]

(Apologies if this is posted in the wrong category.)

When it comes to the amount salts added to mash water, what considerations should be made for No-Sparge brewing when performed with a base of RO or Distilled water?

In a more typical mash regime with a sparge, let‘s assume one would add enough salts to achieve at least 50ppm concentration of calcium in the mash. Then, one would presumably sparge with unsalted water, therefore diluting the overall concentration of salts in the resultant wort.

However for No-Sparge, one is starting with much more water in the mash which would increase the amount of salts required to achieve 50ppm calcium. Plus, because there is no sparge with untreated water, we don’t get that same dilution going into the kettle. So my assumptions here would be that the concentration of salts would be much greater in the pre-boil wort. Which will subsequently increase slightly from evaporation during the boil.

Because of this, in order to avoid over-salted/mineraly flavors, would it generally be best to keep salt additions at or near the bare minimum when performing No-Sparge? And perhaps lean on acid a bit more when it comes to pH adjustments?

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

For the hypothetical case where one process mashes in 5 gallons of 50 ppm Ca++ water, followed by sparging with 5 gallons of distilled, and another process mashes in 10 gallons of 25 ppm Ca++ water and doesn't sparge at all, the mash evolving wort for both cases is exposed to the exact same quantity in milliequivalents (mEq's) as to Ca++, and therefore both processes will liberate the exact same mEq quantity of H+ ions from the grist, and therefore they will both result in accomplishing the very same mash pH goal as a consequence. It is both "constant" mineral and acid based mEq's that have sole relevance to achieving extremely similar if not the very exact same mash pH outcomes across the entire spectra of weights (as to volume) chosen for mash and sparge waters. The same can not at all be said for "constant" targeted mineral (Ca++ and/or Mg++) ppm's.

It is a very great misfortune that an entire population of brewers (past, present, and hopefully not future) has been instructed to worship at the alter of the ppm (mg/L) driven "Water Profile", as in doing so they are worshiping at the alter of a false and highly misleading god (with the sole exception being made for identical processes). The true god of mashing outcome is the balancing of mEq's (or "mEq Profiles") such that all processes may play in the same ballpark and perform equally. And yet no one has likely heard of or been taught to understand this. And apparently ignorance is bliss.

Your post exposing this is quite refreshing and well appreciated by me.

 

[doug293cz]

...

It is a very great misfortune that an entire population of brewers (past, present, and hopefully not future) has been instructed to worship at the alter of the ppm (mg/L) driven "Water Profile", as in doing so they are worshiping at the alter of a false and highly misleading god (with the sole exception being made for identical processes). The true god of mashing outcome is the balancing of mEq's (or "mEq Profiles") such that all processes may play in the same ballpark and perform equally. And yet no one has likely heard of or been taught to understand this. And apparently ignorance is bliss.

...

Your second paragraph begs for a more in depth exposition.

Brew on

 

[VikeMan]

In a more typical mash regime with a sparge, let‘s assume one would add enough salts to achieve at least 50ppm concentration of calcium in the mash.

Calcium is a co-factor for alpha amylase, so a little calcium in the mash is a good idea. But the oft quoted 50 ppm for calcium is for yeast floculation. You don't necessarily have to build 50 ppm of calcium in your mash water, unless you actually need that much to hit your mash pH target (and you choose to do it that way rather than with a straight acid addition).

 

[Pehlman17]

Calcium is a co-factor for alpha amylase, so a little calcium in the mash is a good idea. But the oft quoted 50 ppm for calcium is for yeast floculation. You don't necessarily have to build 50 ppm of calcium in your mash water, unless you actually need that much to hit your mash pH target (and you choose to do it that way rather than with a straight acid addition).

Oh for sure. I was using that as more of a hypothetical/generalized scenario. Just a jumping-off point to compare the potential differences between classic mash & sparge vs no-sparge in terms of how the same concentrations of salts in the mash could potentially leave distinctly different levels/concentrations in the wort. And whether what would be considered ”ideal” levels in the mash would vary based on which method is used.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

Your second paragraph begs for a more in depth exposition.

Brew on

Chemical reactions between atoms and molecules occur on the basis of the reactants molar Equivalent Weights (abbreviated as EW's), or milliequivalent weights (abbreviated as mEq's) which may be expressed as the means of equalizing the reactants (ion groups) electrical charges by weight per unit volume in Liters.

To determine the extant milliequivalents (mEq's) of Ca++ for my hypothetical example:

The (Ca++) Calcium ions MW (Molecular Weight) is 40.078 grams/mol (whereby one 'mol' is defined as having exactly 6.02214076 x 1023 indivisible units (either atoms or molecules) of that substance).

The Calcium atom's electrical charge is +2, as can be seen by it's ion being represented by Ca++, whereby the ++ = +2.

Therefore the Equivalent Weight of Calcium is it's MW divided by it's 'net' charge of 2, which results in 20.039 grams/EW, or 20.039 milligrams (Mg.) per milliequivalent (mEq).

For the case of water with 50 mg/L (or 50 ppm) of Ca++ ions and the case of 5 gallons (= 18.927 Liters, or L's) of such water the total mEq's of extant Ca++ = 50 mg/L * 18.927 L = 379.278153 mEq's.

For the case of water with 25 mg/L (or 50 ppm) of Ca++ ions and the case of 10 gallons (= 37.854 Liters, or L's) of such water the total mEq's of extant Ca++ = 25 mg/L * 37.854 L = 379.278153 mEq's.

The mEq's between them are equal, thereby they both have the ability to react with equal mEq's of malt phosphates whereby to liberate (via the substitution of Ca++ ions for H+ ions) the exact same mEq's of H+ ions.

Overall, from the beginning of mashing until the end of the boil step (known as knockout) the German Brewing Scientist Paul Kolbach determined that for every 3.5 mEq's of extant Ca++ there will be 1 mEq of H+ (acid) liberated within the wort whereby to lower it's Wort pH at Knockout.

Notice critically here that the ppm's (mg/L's) of Ca++ are completely inconsequential, as it is only the mEq's of extant Ca++ that matter per Kolbach (as well as per any chemical reaction). Simple extension upon this would render so called ideal Water Profiles meaningless.

And thus my earlier statement that:

It is a very great misfortune that an entire population of brewers (past, present, and hopefully not future) has been instructed to worship at the alter of the ppm (mg/L) driven "Water Profile", as in doing so they are worshiping at the alter of a false and highly misleading god (with the sole exception being made for identical processes). The true god of mashing outcome is the balancing of mEq's (or "mEq Profiles") such that all processes may play in the same ballpark and perform equally.

I will note here in passing that nigh on all Mash pH assistant software presumes highly incorrectly that 3.5 mEq's of Ca++ ions in the Mash water will liberate 1 mEq of H+ ions within the mash. Paul Kolbach stated "Knockout", and never stated "Mash". The percentage of liberation of H+ which actually occurs as an effect of the mEq's of Ca++ during the Mash step proper is (per AJ deLange) on average about half of 3.5:1, or in other words it is 7 mEq's of Ca++ added for 1 mEq of liberated H+ ions (or 7:1). More recent research done by Chemists Barth and Zaman indicates that the ratio of 7:1 works well for Pale Malt, but for Pilsner Malt it is more like 14:1, and for Munich Malt it is more like 12:1 (and for all other malts, who knows?). Thus all Mash pH software (sans for mine, AFAICT, which is set at user download to match the findings of AJ deLange, but can be user altered to meet Barth and Zaman if you desire) is grossly overstating the pH drop to be anticipated within the Mash proper from the addition of Calcium to the mash water.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

I should clarify here that it is primarily the multiple generations of homebrewers and the many commercial microbrewers who directly evolved from among them (without first studying the actual science of brewing at the chemical level) who are likely to be caught up in the sin of worshiping so-called water profiles based solely upon mineral ppm's (mg/L's), as clearly the majors at the commercial level would fully understand and utilize EW's and mEq's as opposed to ppm (mg/L).

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

(Apologies if this is posted in the wrong category.)

(And setting aside the religious metaphor)

How does one translate this into something pragmatic on brew day?

 

[tracer bullet]

How does one translate this into something pragmatic on brew day?

I've tended to add "salts" to both mash and sparge all along, figuring I was looking for levels (Ca for example) in the final product. Varying that over time with a particular recipe to evaluate the changes and see what I like. I've used acid to specifically adjust for pH as needed of course. I hand't thought of the mash water as doing anything other than rinsing the grains, never even considered H+ ions and such.

I guess I'm not trying to answer your question, I'm not qualified. More want to say - I too would like to know what to adjust for achieving... more consistent beer. I know it'll be my own palate to say if it's better, but I'm all for consistency. Especially if I bounce between sparge and no sparge processes with a particular recipe that doens't otherwise change.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

(Apologies if this is posted in the wrong category.)

(And setting aside the religious metaphor)

How does one translate this into something pragmatic on brew day?

1) Convert Ca++ and Mg++ ppm's and your mash volume in Liters into mEq's of Ca++ and Mg++.
2) Presume (as per AJ deLange) that ~7 mEq's of Ca++ are the acid addition equivalent of 1 mEq of your acid of choice*.
3) Presume (as per AJ deLange) that ~14 mEq's of Mg++ are the acid addition equivalent of 1 mEq of your acid of choice*.

Application of the above yields:
1) Each gram of added CaSO4 (Gypsum) liberates ~1.659 mEq's of H+ ions into the wort during the mash.
2) Each gram of added CaCl2 (specifically as the Dihydrate CaCl2.2H2O) liberates ~1.943 mEq's of H+ ions into the wort during the mash.
3) Each gram of added MgSO4 (Epsom Salt) liberates ~0.580 mEq's of H+ ions into the wort during the mash. Remember here that MgSO4 forms a heptahydrate with water and its chemical formula is therefore MgSO4.7H2O

For reference:
*1 mL of 88% Lactic Acid liberates ~11.4515 mEq's of H+ ions into the wort during a mash for a targeted pH of 5.40.
*1 mL of 10% Phosphoric Acid liberates ~1.0903 mEq's of H+ ions into the wort during a mash for a targeted pH of 5.40.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

Short answer: Unfortunately, no one to date has generated nominal Water Profiles scaled in mEq's. But if such was done the cross process (as to variable mash and sparge volumes) usability of such profiles would dwarf the usability of Water Profiles scaled in ppm (mg/L).

Alternately, when given a Water Profile scaled in ppm (mg/L) the fixed mash and sparge volume ratios for which they are "purported to be" valid would need to accompany them. And the end user would be forced to comply.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

How does one translate this into something pragmatic on brew day?

I've tended to add "salts" to both mash and sparge all along, ..

I have a similar approach. Which, as a home brewer, provides tasty results. I may have time for more observations tomorrow.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

There are a couple of recent (and related) topics that may be of interest.

• Calcium Chloride Only | Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum
• Salt Additions | Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Without being able to directly measure the amount of ions in the wort (similar to IBUs), measuring the result seems to come down to tasting the final product and comparing it to estimated values (e.g. common lists of ppm of ions based on wort color).

Personally, I think about 'water chemistry' as potential water adjustments at each step in the brewing process:

1. what adjustments are needed for a quality source water?
2. what adjustments are needed for a proper mash?
3. what adjustments are desired for a flavorful beer?
4. what adjustments are needed for a quality fermentation?
5. (there is also the idea of making adjustment when packaging)

aside: this approach is useful, to me, when brewing all-grain, extract+steep, partial mash, double mash, cold extraction, ... I also use a custom spreadsheet when brewing (the math for the basic brewing models isn't complicated, it's tedious).

There is the interesting question of (and recent discussion on) where to apply the list of ppm ions when adjusting water/wort. With "no mineral" water, I currently add flavor salts after the mash is complete.