76 replies to this topic

[denny]

So then why raise the temp with the addition? To get other sugars?Cheers,Rich

There was once a thought that raising the temp reduced the viscosity of the sugars, resulting in a more effective runoff. Kai Troester's experiments with cold sparging have shown me that that just isn't the case.

[BrewerGeorge]

There was once a thought that raising the temp reduced the viscosity of the sugars, resulting in a more effective runoff. Kai Troester's experiments with cold sparging have shown me that that just isn't the case.

Really? I'm surprised at this because I've seen increased efficiency from a mashout, although I rarely bother because a few percent isn't worth the trouble. If it's not viscosity, I wonder if it has to do with increased solubility at higher temps, then?

[BlKtRe]

I haven't noticed much difference in eff. with or without a mash out. As a matter of fact, if Ive nailed my mash temp. right off the bat (which is pretty much every time) then Ive even stopped using my HERMS pretty much all together, even for a mash out. My Cube maintains mash temp.

[MtnBrewer]

I don't think a lower viscosity runoff would improve efficiency but might reduce the risk of a stuck sparge. I do think there could be an effect due to increased solubility however.

[djinkc]

It took me a little googling but I knew I remembered this table. Going from 150df to 165df makes a significant difference in solubility.https://chestofbooks...ter-gillis.html

[denny]

Really? I'm surprised at this because I've seen increased efficiency from a mashout, although I rarely bother because a few percent isn't worth the trouble. If it's not viscosity, I wonder if it has to do with increased solubility at higher temps, then?

I've discussed this with Kai and the thought is that what's happening is an increase in conversion efficiency, not extraction efficiency. In other words, at the time you did the mashout, it's possible that your grist was not fully converted. By adding more water at a higher temp, it would enhance the final conversion. It also explains why some people see increased efficiency with a mashout, and others (like me) don't.

[Stout_fan]

... It also explains why some people see increased efficiency with a mashout, and others (like me) don't.

So any idea why you don't? Please don't tell me that you also have an eternal black cloud hovering over you like I do.Now I typically do 120 minute mashes. Not because I want the longer time, I just do things, for those two hours. Like eat lunch, sanitize the conical and hoses, ponder the meaning of life and heat the sparge water.And now that you mention it, I haven't really noticed any decrease in efficiency when I forget to do a mashout.And a link to Kai's topic would be great if you can find it easily, thanks.

[stangbat]

I know we're veering off the pH topic, but the talk of a mash out has made me review my last session. I was brewing a lower gravity beer than usual, OG 1.049. All things being equal, my efficiency should be better but I noticed it dropped. I didn't think much about it as I ended up hitting my numbers just fine. But the big difference between this beer and my usual routine is I didn't use my HERMS coil and do a mash out. Rain was headed my way and I needed to get the boil going so I did a quick vorlauf and started the sparge.This is only one data point, and there are other factors that could have contributed to my lower efficiency. So I'm not blaming all of it on just the fact that I didn't mash out. But this may be another factor that I hadn't taken into consideration.

[SchwanzBrewer]

I know we're veering off the pH topic, but the talk of a mash out has made me review my last session. I was brewing a lower gravity beer than usual, OG 1.049. All things being equal, my efficiency should be better but I noticed it dropped. I didn't think much about it as I ended up hitting my numbers just fine. But the big difference between this beer and my usual routine is I didn't use my HERMS coil and do a mash out. Rain was headed my way and I needed to get the boil going so I did a quick vorlauf and started the sparge.This is only one data point, and there are other factors that could have contributed to my lower efficiency. So I'm not blaming all of it on just the fact that I didn't mash out. But this may be another factor that I hadn't taken into consideration.

From what I am getting out of this thread, if you rush the mash and sparge before the conversion is complete without a mashout you will lose efficiency.Someone correct me if I am wrong, please.Cheers,Rich

[djinkc]

From what I am getting out of this thread, if you rush the mash and sparge before the conversion is complete without a mashout you will lose efficiency.Someone correct me if I am wrong, please.Cheers,Rich

It's possible. But most mashes will have converted in about 20 minutes. The sugar profile may change with a longer mash. If you're using UK malts for a base and a lot of adjuncts that need malt enzyme to convert it will of course take longer. A mashout won't hurt anything and of course keeps the mash in the tun longer too. I don't do it anymore, but used to occasionally do a 30 minute mash and my efficiency was right where I expected it.Just guessing, but from the chart link I posted, it would appear that a hotter mash (from the mashout - not your mash temp) and sparge water might help efficiency when you have a higher gravity wort. Hotter water will hold more sugar. May be a moot point though unless you have a super high gravity.

Edited by dj in kc, 27 May 2010 - 01:01 PM.

[denny]

So any idea why you don't? Please don't tell me that you also have an eternal black cloud hovering over you like I do.Now I typically do 120 minute mashes. Not because I want the longer time, I just do things, for those two hours. Like eat lunch, sanitize the conical and hoses, ponder the meaning of life and heat the sparge water.And now that you mention it, I haven't really noticed any decrease in efficiency when I forget to do a mashout.And a link to Kai's topic would be great if you can find it easily, thanks.

If I was guessing (which I guess I am!), I'd say that due to a combination of factors, my conversion is complete by the I lauter, so there's nothing to be gained by a mashout. And I'll try to find a link to Kai's experiment.

[Malzig]

It's possible. But most mashes will have converted in about 20 minutes.

It's a popular belief, because pulverized Congress Mashes can convert in such a short time, but for many brewers conversion rate is probably determined by starch gelatinization, which is often not complete in 60 minutes, let alone 20 minutes. Solubilized starches will probably convert in 20 minutes, though.I've seen a number of brewers report much less than 100% conversion, as measured by the gravity of first runnings relative to mash thickness, even after an hour. Some brewers find that they never reach complete conversion unless they step the mash temperature up into the mid-150's or higher, which is probably the bump that some brewers see with a mashout or equivalent. This might be why both finer crush and thinner mashes increase conversion efficiency, because they improve starch gelatinization.I suspect that Denny doesn't see an effect because he has complete conversion by the end of his mash, possibly because his system allows him to crush fine and he does 90' mashes.I hope a lot of people drag themselves out of bed for Kai Troester's talk on efficiency at NHC. He has some very good data on this subject.

[denny]

It's a popular belief, because pulverized Congress Mashes can convert in such a short time, but for many brewers conversion rate is probably determined by starch gelatinization, which is often not complete in 60 minutes, let alone 20 minutes. Solubilized starches will probably convert in 20 minutes, though.I've seen a number of brewers report much less than 100% conversion, as measured by the gravity of first runnings relative to mash thickness, even after an hour. Some brewers find that they never reach complete conversion unless they step the mash temperature up into the mid-150's or higher, which is probably the bump that some brewers see with a mashout or equivalent. This might be why both finer crush and thinner mashes increase conversion efficiency, because they improve starch gelatinization.I suspect that Denny doesn't see an effect because he has complete conversion by the end of his mash, possibly because his system allows him to crush fine and he does 90' mashes.I hope a lot of people drag themselves out of bed for Kai Troester's talk on efficiency at NHC. He has some very good data on this subject.

You make some excellent points and I agree with all of them. I know I'll be there for Kai's talk....I'll be introducing him!

[Malzig]

You make some excellent points and I agree with all of them. I know I'll be there for Kai's talk....I'll be introducing him!

Thanks! I heard that you would be getting up early. Hopefully you two won't be the only ones up that early! It should be a good talk.Just to keep on topic: I wouldn't worry about thin mashes and fermentability, either, until recipe and temperature issues have already been addressed. My understanding is that 2 qt/#, or even thinner, is pretty common for a German brewhaus. Here's some of Kai's data showing the potential efficiency increase that can come from thinner mashes, without any change in fermentability from 1.2 - 2.3 qt/#.

[djinkc]

Thanks! I heard that you would be getting up early. Hopefully you two won't be the only ones up that early! It should be a good talk.Just to keep on topic: I wouldn't worry about thin mashes and fermentability, either, until recipe and temperature issues have already been addressed. My understanding is that 2 qt/#, or even thinner, is pretty common for a German brewhaus. Here's some of Kai's data showing the potential efficiency increase that can come from thinner mashes, without any change in fermentability from 1.2 - 2.3 qt/#.

That's a lot of very interesting information. Thanks for posting it. Most mashes converting in 20 min was not one of my brighter posts - just that it's possible and can happen

Edited by dj in kc, 29 May 2010 - 03:06 PM.

[Malzig]

...it's possible and can happen

You won't get any argument from me there, it can and does happen. I just wouldn't count on it unless you really know your system.

[Nick Bates]

So currently I am not adding any water to raise the temp of the mash before the first running. All i do is drain and vorlauf with your method. Then in the second running I add the 180 deg water, stir in and then I guess i should drain and vorlauf again. (I only did it this way because I forgot to read your instructions again.) Am I leaving some sugars behind by doing that? I have been ok with the OG so far.If you let it sit for a few minutes, could that help in setting the grain bed in the second running so you get less chance of debris? Cheers,Rich

This is the exact same way I do it...