70 replies to this topic

[Brauer]

I suppose, but this is kind of not what I am talking about 1.5 qt/lb is thick? Damn! I always mash at 1.25 and sometimes even lower if I really need the tun space. I don't think I have ever mashed over 1.5

I could totally see that raising efficiency. The problem that I (and I assume brewers for millenia) have often encountered is an undersized mash tun

I was going to say that the only reason that I could think of to mash at 1.25 qt/# would be having an undersized mashtun. I don't make huge beers, and a 1.25 qt/# mash, for me, would mean I was making a 1.080+ wort, which I never make.1.75-2 qt/# gives me a wort of 1.048-1.058, which more than covers the high end of my range. In addition to the advantages for conversion, more mash water means less sparge volume, which should reduce tannin extraction, for which I seem to have an ever lower tolerance.

[MtnBrewer]

In addition to the advantages for conversion, more mash water means less sparge volume, which should reduce tannin extraction, for which I seem to have an ever lower tolerance.

I'm not sure that's true. Whether you start with more concentrated wort and then dilute more or start with a less concentrated wort and dilute less, it seems like you'd end up at the same place either way.

[SchwanzBrewer]

Here's a humdinger for you guys...Since lautering efficiency decreases with batch sparging, is there a crossover point where there are diminishing returns for adding more grain? In other words, will increasing the grain bill will net you a lower original gravity in the kettle than if you used less grain? (given the same grist ratio in qt/lb)

Edited by SchwanzBrewer, 21 February 2013 - 07:07 PM.

[djinkc]

Here's a humdinger for you guys...Since lautering efficiency decreases with batch sparging, is there a crossover point where there are diminishing returns for adding more grain? In other words, will increasing the grain bill will net you a lower original gravity in the kettle than if you used less grain? (given the same grist ratio in qt/lb)

This'll be fun. B)Seriously though, I've been mashing in at 1.33/1 for quite a while. And for no particular reason. I think I'll try 1.75/1 this weekend and see what happens. Flying here still.

[SchwanzBrewer]

This'll be fun. B)Seriously though, I've been mashing in at 1.33/1 for quite a while. And for no particular reason. I think I'll try 1.75/1 this weekend and see what happens. Flying here still.

You are right, I need to amend that. In batch sparging, lautering efficiency decreases with an increase in the weight of the grain bill. I'm not comparing lautering techniques.

[SchwanzBrewer]

You can figure out the target gravity for your specific mash with a little math, but it is slightly complicated by the fact that the sugar increases the total volume as it goes into solution.If you always mash at the same thickness, it's easy to just learn the target gravity for that thickness. For example, if you mash at 1.75 qt/#, the mash will be fully converted when it hits ~1.071. 2 qt/# is more typical for me, so I look for a gravity of ~1.064. Realistically, I look for at least 90-95% conversion, so I'd consider a 2 qt/# mash done as soon as the mash gravity gets near 1.060.For those of you that mash thick, 1.5 qt/# would be fully converted just over 1.080.

So far the data I've collected this year agree with the table almost exactly.

[Brauer]

I'm not sure that's true. Whether you start with more concentrated wort and then dilute more or start with a less concentrated wort and dilute less, it seems like you'd end up at the same place either way.

You are correct, of course. I should have thought that through more. The second runnings should be essentially the same gravity within a reasonable range of thicknesses, so you would expect that the buffering ability of the wort would be the same. It's kind of cool how batch sparging does things like that.So, sinse the second running gravity would be the same, I wouldn't expect a greater pH shift with more sparge water in a single batch sparge, so it shouldn't risk greater tannin extraction. As long as you don't add all that sparge water by performing 2 sparges.

[SchwanzBrewer]

I'm confused. Are you all saying that the 2nd and 3rd runnings would have nearly if not the same gravity, or that the 2nd runnings would have the same gravity as the first runnings?

[denny]

I'm not sure that's true. Whether you start with more concentrated wort and then dilute more or start with a less concentrated wort and dilute less, it seems like you'd end up at the same place either way.

The thinking is that the earlier the qrot is drawn, the "better quality" it is. That's the way Ki explained it in his mash efficiency troubleshooting analysis. But I guess it depends on what you mean by sam place. If all you mean is gravity/efficiency, you're right. Efficiency can be thought of as (mash efficiency) x (lauter efficiency). If mash efficiency is kow, you can make up the difference by increasing lauter efficiency. But that is (supposedly) at the expense of wort quality.

[denny]

You are right, I need to amend that. In batch sparging, lautering efficiency decreases with an increase in the weight of the grain bill. I'm not comparing lautering techniques.

But it does with fly sparging, too, doesn't it?

[SchwanzBrewer]

The thinking is that the earlier the qrot is drawn, the "better quality" it is. That's the way Ki explained it in his mash efficiency troubleshooting analysis. But I guess it depends on what you mean by sam place. If all you mean is gravity/efficiency, you're right. Efficiency can be thought of as (mash efficiency) x (lauter efficiency). If mash efficiency is kow, you can make up the difference by increasing lauter efficiency. But that is (supposedly) at the expense of wort quality.

Expense of wort quality being more alpha rest via higher temps of the sparge (more dextrins and less fermentable wort)?

[SchwanzBrewer]

But it does with fly sparging, too, doesn't it?

I dunno, never fly sparged and haven't researched it as heavily.Edit:If I had to guess, I would say that so long as the lautering vessel dimensionally is set up to property sparge and so long as the PH was correct, the grain weight wouldn't matter as much.That is why commercial breweries still get good efficiency with large batches, right?

Edited by SchwanzBrewer, 22 February 2013 - 08:41 AM.

[Clintama]

I make 10 gallon batches and my boil kettle doubles as my HLT. I fill it with water, heat to my mash temp and transfer 28 quarts of water to my mash tun. The rest of the water is used for mashout and sparging, at which point it's empty and I refill it with sweet wort. I use this same quantity for all but my really heavy beers. My efficiency runs in the mid to upper 80's with an occasional jump into the 90's with lighter beers. .

[SchwanzBrewer]

Do you have a holding vessel for the wort when you sparge, or are you doing a no sparge mash out?

[Clintama]

I hold the first runnings in a couple buckets until after I sparge. Then I, wait for it........., dump the wort into the kettle. Yes, my wort gets splashed, but I've never had any issues with oxidation.

[SchwanzBrewer]

I hold the first runnings in a couple buckets until after I sparge. Then I, wait for it........., dump the wort into the kettle. Yes, my wort gets splashed, but I've never had any issues with oxidation.

:frantic:I think I heard Palmer in an interview say that HSA only occurs a little above 100*F. There is about a 10 degree window where a reaction can take place, but outside of it there isn't much chance of it being a problem.

[denny]

Expense of wort quality being more alpha rest via higher temps of the sparge (more dextrins and less fermentable wort)?

I believe Kai's point is that there's more flavor and fewer "undesirables" in earlier wort.

[SchwanzBrewer]

I believe Kai's point is that there's more flavor and fewer "undesirables" in earlier wort.

Yeah we know how things can get crotchety the older they get.

[Clintama]

:frantic:I think I heard Palmer in an interview say that HSA only occurs a little above 100*F. There is about a 10 degree window where a reaction can take place, but outside of it there isn't much chance of it being a problem.

That's interesting and something I've not heard before. My wort temperature would be considerably higher than 110 degrees, because it doesn't stay in the buckets for very long.

[denny]

Yeah we know how things can get crotchety the older they get.