5 replies to this topic

[ANUSTART]

Anyone try this? I'm not sure what the proper term is. I've seen it referred to as both. What it is essentially is getting the grain just a little moist before milling. Not enough water to soak the grain, but enough to get the husk leathery instead of brittle. The benefit is that the husks don't get torn apart, even at tight mill settings. Some people report closing the mill gap to 19 mils. Because the husks are intact and the grain is crushed very finely, efficiency goes way up and theres almost no chance of stuck sparges, and no need for rice hulls. Today I sprayed some water on the unmilled grain, mixed it with my hand, then repeated until it felt like it was good enough. It's my first shot at this, so I wasnt sure how much to use. I let it sit for 15 mins to soak it in. I then closed my mill gap to 28 mils (I was too chicken to go more) and milled it. The result: Everything looks very crushed, lots of flour, and lots of full split husks. It definitely looks different than my normal crush. Also, there was no gunk on the mill rollers because it was still "dry" going through, just less dry. I'll update after the sparge.

[denny]

I tried it a few times. I didn't notice any improvements anywhere so I stopped doing it. If you have a problem that it solves, it's a great thing. if you don't, it's wasted time and energy.

[beach]

I condition my malt for every brew. I take the total grist weight x 2% and use that much water (in fluid ounces.) I'm not sure what the gap on my mill is but it's tighter than the factory setting. My lautering has gone much smoother since I statred conditioning. I've done 50% wheat beers with no rice hulls. It takes very little time and effort and I condition while the strike water is heating up. But, like Denny says, YMMV. Beach

[Brauer]

I don't wet mill, but I malt condition every batch. I use 1-2% water from a small spray bottle (1.5-3 oz. or 45-90 mL for 10# of grain.) I usually just use 50 mL, no matter the grain bill, which is enough but never too much. That way I never have to waste any time thinking about it. At this rate, like Beach says, the grain won't actually be wet or even noticeably damp after a few minutes. I crush with a pretty tight gap, just large enough to pull grain through, I suppose. I have no idea what the gap actually is, though, I just stopped tightening the gap once I hit the 85-87% efficiency predicted for my typical batch sparge volumes and grain quantities. I don't actually need to condition the malt for most grain bills and I never had a stuck mash without it, but it does speed up my runoff to as fast as my tubing will allow and it has completely removed any threat of a stuck mash without compromising efficiency. You get these wonderful whole husks that keep the grain bed nice and fluffy. I also like to think that less shredded husks help make better tasting and clearer beer by reducing phenol extraction, but I've never really tested the theory.

[ANUSTART]

The sparge was uneventful. It didn't stick, but I usually don't get stuck sparges. Efficiency was exactly the same as I usually get, which was weird.

[Brauer]

Malt conditioning on it's own won't improve efficiency, but I'm surprised that you didn't get an improvement from tightening the mill gap. However, a better crush will only improve conversion efficiency, so you won't see any improvement from tightening the gap if you are already getting 100% conversion efficiency. Otherwise, malt conditioning is only insurance for an uneventful brewday. What kind of numbers do you get? Are you already in the 80's?