All grain

[Beerdrinker32]

would the strike temps remain the same after upping the batch size from 15L to 25L? was messin with pro mash and it seemed to lower the strike temp slightly to get the same mash temp? although it doesnt let you key in the exact values? am confusing myself here you need to be a damn scientist

[Ed]

After a quick Google it seems that the quoted optimum temperature's for Alpha & Beta Amylase vary quite a lot. Maybe this is because of differing mash thicknesses between tests?

Don't know but I would've thought the enzymes are either active or not regardless of thickness (even though it effects speed). Perhaps it depends of what each test used as measurement parameters for activity

Thanks Ed. That IBD site has a few papers of interest. Will make some good sober reading

Some of it is pretty heavy reading and goes way over my head, although that's not difficult.

............... downloaded beersmith a coupla monts ago and didnt really use it ...............

Qbrew is a free calculator BD, is easy to use, you can change settings to metric, etc. Not as fancy as the top end programs but it certainly calculates out the same. I use it and a spreadsheet for designing all my brews. Download from http://www.usermode.org/code/qbrew-win32.zip

Cheers, Ed

[Ed]

would the strike temps remain the same after upping the batch size from 15L to 25L? was messin with pro mash and it seemed to lower the strike temp slightly to get the same mash temp? although it doesnt let you key in the exact values? am confusing myself here you need to be a damn scientist

I wouldn't worry about what the program says too much, they are just guides. Best to take your own notes and make adjustments next time if you want to fine tune. Or don't add all the water and check temp as you near the full volume. That way, you can either add extra hot or cold to bring it where you want.

Cheers, Ed

[Beerdrinker32]

good idea ed! add like 3/4 then adjust the last 1/4 to get the right temp! will give it a go

[Duane]

beerdrinker, how can I contact you direct. I can help you with your beersmith problem

[ACTbrewer]

What's the date today?

[chris.]

After a quick Google it seems that the quoted optimum temperature's for Alpha & Beta Amylase vary quite a lot. Maybe this is because of differing mash thicknesses between tests?

Don't know but I would've thought the enzymes are either active or not regardless of thickness (even though it effects speed). Perhaps it depends of what each test used as measurement parameters for activity

Not 100% sure myself Ed. I only say this because of a piece from this article http://byo.com/feature/480.html

"It is hard to say that beta-amylase activity will be expected to drop off at a particular temperature, because the thickness will determine what temperature activates maximum beta-amylase activity. Thicker mashes tend to retain more beta-amylase activity at high mash temperatures than do thin mashes. This is because beta-amylase is more stable when joined with its substrate than when it is not.

Because beta-amylase encounters substrate less frequently in a thin mash, there is more opportunity for it to be destabilized and inactivated."

It's rather brief article. If you happen to find anything more indepth please post.
Cheers

[Ed]

Thanks for the link chris, an interesting read. It does seem that the thickness plays a role in temp range for activity then, along with minerals and pH. So it looks as though your interpretation is correct there. Certainly explains the different quoted parameters.

Something in that article I thought was interesting "and decoction mashes usually are thinner to make it easier for mash mixing and mash transfer." I always thought a decotion was run thick at least that's what I did on the 3 tackled to date. They really thin out during the boiling of the decotion and because you are really only interested in transferring the very thick part of the mash, I can't understand why it should be thin to start with

I've run mashes from as thick as 1.8:1 up to around 2.7:1. Yeah I know, that 1.8:1 was way too thick, but I'd run out of tun. Stirring was fun

Found something further on proteins relating to foam stability if you're interested in a read.

Snip:
"It is neccessary to avoid excessive wort boiling or excess use of kettle finings which increase the amount of protein removed as hot and cold break".

The file can be downloaded here
http://www.ibd.org.uk/igbsite/business/ ... 20July.pdf

Cheers, Ed

[chris.]

Something in that article I thought was interesting "and decoction mashes usually are thinner to make it easier for mash mixing and mash transfer." I always thought a decotion was run thick at least that's what I did on the 3 tackled to date. They really thin out during the boiling of the decotion and because you are really only interested in transferring the very thick part of the mash, I can't understand why it should be thin to start with

I've run mashes from as thick as 1.8:1 up to around 2.7:1. Yeah I know, that 1.8:1 was way too thick, but I'd run out of tun. Stirring was fun

Found something further on proteins relating to foam stability if you're interested in a read.

Snip:
"It is neccessary to avoid excessive wort boiling or excess use of kettle finings which increase the amount of protein removed as hot and cold break".

The file can be downloaded here
http://www.ibd.org.uk/igbsite/business/ ... 20July.pdf

Cheers, Ed

I havent attempted as decoction yet (My brew day is long enough as is but have plans for trying it with a pilsener when I can find the time) So I don't really know. But I would assume that a thinner mash would be easier to work & would help to distribute the heat evenly when adding the boiled grain back to the mash? & maybe also help to retain more enzymes in the mash when drawing off the decoction?

I mash at 2.5-3L per kilo myself. I find it easier to handle & the results work for me. I have tried 1:1 protein rests & stepping up to 2.5:1 but didn't really find much of a difference in efficency.

Thanks for the link Ed.

Cheers

[Beerdrinker32]

almost got my brewrey set up!!! just need to solder up the manifold and seal the keggle tap,thanks for the beersmith offer duane! got it workin after you you mentioned it could be fixed kinda complex, still trying to up the batch size,beer smith gives me a different sparge temp with the extra grain, does that sound right?

[Beerdrinker32]

ive upped the grain to 6.79kg water to grain ratio of 2.5 to 1 target temp 68.7C infusion water temp 75.8C water to add 17L sparge water 18.42L not sure what temp sparge water to add? is this looking ok for a 25L batch??? 15L would not last too long cheers

[Aussie Claret]

Beerdrinker,
The sparge water should be above 90c, I usually have mine closer to boiling, it helps to rinse the grains better.
AC

[Duane]

Aussie, do you get any astringency or tannin issues from sparging so hot?
I usually sparge at 80c.

Cheers.

[Ed]

I sparge hot like AC does. Studies have shown that pH > 6 is the culprit, temp is not the factor but having said that, it raises pH. I wouldn't think that there's a problem to batch sparge very hot because there remains sugars available. Also, the temp of the grain bed will bring down the overall temp of the sparge addition. That would be my take anyway.

Because I fly sparge and extract as much as I can, I keep the water pH in range and taste the runnings towards the end.

Cheers, Ed

[Aussie Claret]

Duane,
No because I batch sparge, fly sparging is a different kettle of fish.

You don't and can't extract any tannins during a batch sparge as you always have some residual sugar, tannins are only extracted after all the sugars are rinsed out.
When you add your sparge water stir and allow to sit for a few minutes, the second running gravity is usually above 1.020, this gravity is the gravity of all the wort left in the mash tun, whereas in fly sparging the gravity of the wort is lower at the top than the bottom of the tun due to the flushing of the sparge water.
You run a risk of extracting tannins when fly sparging or continuous sparging because when the grain bed is set you are flushing the sugars from the top of the grain bed down through the bed to the bottom where it is collected. Tannins may be extracted primarily from the grains at the top of the grain bed; hence the need when fly sparging to constantly measure the run off gravity (most people stop at 1.010) but you still run the risk of tannin extraction.

AC

[Ed]

Well I better stick up for the fly spargers here, even though I do both

It's the rising pH that promotes the risk of tannin extraction. Adjusted pH values to <6 negate risk. Commercial breweries continuous sparge to very high extraction yeilds without abnormal tannins. They acheive this from acidifying the sparge water.

Very good tech article with this link http://www.mbaa.com/TechQuarterly/Artic ... 3-0058.pdf

And some comment from Graham Sanders below. There are also many articles on BYO covering this.

Cheers, Ed

G'Day All

Poor Colin Ponders

>>>>>Yesterday I slightly oversparged and ended up with final runnings of 1.008. Given that I adjust all my water to a pH in the mid 5s, need I be concerned about astringency?<<<<<<<<<



I always get a little bemussed with this thread when it comes up. The theroy here is if you let your finally runnings out of your sparge run below a "magical feature" you will extract bad things. This magical figure varies, but tends to fall arround 1.015 to 1.010. Everyone will talk about tannin extraction as the bad guy here. ( yet there are other bad guys to really worry about).

This gets interesting when you consider the vast majority of flavours are extracted disproportionately early on in the sparge. Our roast flavours and melonoidan in particular come early on. Its the reason batch sparging can be effective, and even better why "first running" brewing, or Party-gilying makes the fist running sooooo flavoursome. Sugars tend to follow a more predictable extraction rate, high first up but sliding on a predictable dilution scale as the sparge progresses.

Protein extraction is interesting. Even well down the sparge, you will notice the good head and foaming of your runnings. Proteins seem to be released more linear, with an advantage of sparging as far as you good, is better protein extraction from the mash, hence, mouthfeel and head retention. I personally believe this is one benefit of a good sprage below the "magic number", however some believe you can also extract high MW proteins over sparging, causing haze in beers. and stability problems.

Now all this is largly unaffected by pH, although proteins are slightly affected. Its our next baby that is pH affected.

Tannin extraction seem far more affected by pH. It seems above pH 6, tannin extraction increases. So if one is using sparge water that hasn't been pH adjusted, The pH of the mash your sparging slowly increases til it gets to a level where the Tannins come out. Strangely this is about where the gravity hits that magic number 1.010 ish. So this golden rule has come into play for those brewers that dont control pH. ie dont collect your sparge water once the gravity hits this number.

But I cant find any evidence of increases in tannin extraction if the pH is controlled. No wirtten evidence I can find that supports this. Certainly my own brewing doesn't show this, and I extract well below 1.010. As Colin is pH controlling his water, he has no problems.

BUT - silicate extraction does increase as gravity drops. Not sure the mechanism, but I think its just a steady increase. Anyway, I dont believe this is a great problem, as if your water if properly balanced with recommended Ca and Mg, these should preciptate in the boil.

So my advice is if your pH is controlled, and you do treat your water with salts (if needed) there is no problem just sparging til you get your boil volume.

Shout
Graham Sanders