Ss Brewing Technologies Giveaway!

Home Brew Forums > Home Brewing Beer > All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing > 2qt./LB Mash...
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 03-18-2009, 04:02 PM   #141
Saccharomyces
Be good to your yeast...
HBT_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Saccharomyces's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Pflugerville, Texas
Posts: 5,444
Liked 80 Times on 52 Posts
Likes Given: 2

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpanishCastleAle View Post
My mash thickness varies with how much grain I use. If it's a medium-to-low gravity brew I have to mash thin or I'll have too much sparge water and might over-sparge. But if it's a high-ish gravity brew I pretty much have to mash sort of thick...both because my lauter tun only holds so much liquid and also because I need a decent amount of sparge water to hit my efficiency. But my efficiency is pretty much always the same.
Good point! I did a cream ale and a blonde ale recently, I step mashed both by double infusion so after the second infusion I was at 2-2.1 qt/lb. 90% efficiency on both, and the last runnings were 1.014 or so.
__________________
[How to Calculate Mash Efficiency | Do I Need a Yeast Starter? | My Ghetto Fermentation Chamber | Twitter | 6 Gal. HDPE Fermenters | Slanting Yeast | No Sparge Brewing]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soperbrew
big brother only monitors facebook and untappd
Saccharomyces is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-18-2009, 04:19 PM   #142
ghpeel
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Gainesville, FL
Posts: 1,216
Liked 21 Times on 19 Posts
Likes Given: 2

Default

I'm new to real mashing, but I used a 1.825 qt / lb thin mash last Friday for a hefe, and my efficiency went from low 60's to low 80's.

I used the ratio above to hit 153 for an hour, then mashed out(?) by adding enough boiling water to make the mash 170 F. I drained that (about 3.25 gal), then batch sparged once with <2 gallons @170F again to collect another 1.25 gal of wort.

I did this in a regular, unmodified cooler with my grain inside a paint strainer AND a grain bag. Was easy to do and according to my numbers, I hit low 80's in efficiency. In fact, the hefe I was making is now starting at 1.064 instead of 1.055, so I hope it still stays true to the style.

__________________

=============================================

Kegged: Dunkelweizen
Primary: American Pale Ale

ghpeel is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-18-2009, 04:51 PM   #143
Kaiser
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Kaiser's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pepperell, MA
Posts: 3,904
Liked 114 Times on 71 Posts
Likes Given: 4

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ghpeel View Post
the hefe I was making is now starting at 1.064 instead of 1.055, so I hope it still stays true to the style.
You made yourself a Weizenbock

Another option would have been to dilute with watrer and freeze the excess wort to keep it for future yeast starters.

I’m glad that this thin mashing is getting so much traction and that most brewers do see an improvement of their efficiency.

I also encourage everybody who is curious where efficiency is lost in their mashing/lautering process (and not all of that loss is bad) to check out my efficiency analysis spread sheet: http://braukaiser.com/documents/efficiency_calculator.xls

With a few more measurements and tests you can determine the amount of efficiency loss during conversion (mashing) and lautering.

Kai

Last edited by Kaiser; 03-18-2009 at 05:34 PM.
Kaiser is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-18-2009, 05:17 PM   #144
TwoHeadsBrewing
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Chico, CA
Posts: 3,930
Liked 28 Times on 25 Posts
Likes Given: 2

Default

Hey, thanks a ton for that spreadsheet Kai...makes it very easy to see where my efficiency can be improved.

Just out of curiosity, how close to 100% should these calculated numbers be? Here are my values, I'm just wondering which ones would be the easiest ones to tackle first in order to improve my efficiency.

Conversion Efficiency: 90%
Efficiency into kettle: 80%
Lauter Efficiency: 85%

I would guess I'm converting most of the starches, only losing 10% there. However, I'm only getting 80% of that into the kettle. Should I be focusing on my sparging, or go after better conversion? Thanks for the help!

__________________

Fermenting: ESB
Kegged: Extra IPA, Brown Ale, American Wheat, Blackheart Stout
Coming Up: Dunkleweizen, 3C Pale Ale


DIY Fermentation Chamber
More Brew Stuff
TwoHeadsBrewing is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-18-2009, 05:52 PM   #145
Kaiser
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Kaiser's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pepperell, MA
Posts: 3,904
Liked 114 Times on 71 Posts
Likes Given: 4

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TwoHeadsBrewing View Post
Hey, thanks a ton for that spreadsheet Kai...makes it very easy to see where my efficiency can be improved.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TwoHeadsBrewing View Post


You’re welcome. showing where to tackle an efficiency problem was the intention.

Quote:
Just out of curiosity, how close to 100% should these calculated numbers be? Here are my values, I'm just wondering which ones would be the easiest ones to tackle first in order to improve my efficiency.

Conversion Efficiency: 90%
Efficiency into kettle: 80%
Lauter Efficiency: 85%


If the conversion and lauter efficiency numbers are correct the efficiency into the kettle should be 90% * 85% = 77%. There might be some measurement errors that skew the numbers a little. Especially trying to read the gravity of the test water that was added to the spent grain may have a fairly large error as the gravity is pretty low to begin with. That’s also why it is not adding up to 100%. I commonly see my total between 98 and 102%.

Quote:
I would guess I'm converting most of the starches, only losing 10% there. However, I'm only getting 80% of that into the kettle. Should I be focusing on my sparging, or go after better conversion?


Depends on how you sparge. If you fly sparge getting the lauter efficiency up to 90-95% seems reasonable. For batch sparging you can get to 90% (for 1040-1050 beers) w/o oversparging.

But there are still 10% of starches in the mash that you can go after. Try a tighter crush. Make sure the pH is between 5.4 and 5.6 (cool sample). I can get 95-98% conversion efficiency.

Mods, Is there a way to move this and TwoHeadsBrewing’s post into this thread: http://www.homebrewtalk.com/f36/effi...dsheet-107911/

Kai


__________________
BrauKaiser.com - brewing science blog - Twitter - water and mash chemistry calculator
Kaiser is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-18-2009, 08:01 PM   #146
Piotr
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Poland, EU
Posts: 463
Liked 4 Times on 3 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpanishCastleAle View Post
But if it's a high-ish gravity brew I pretty much have to mash sort of thick...both because my lauter tun only holds so much liquid and also because I need a decent amount of sparge water to hit my efficiency.
Good point. I did recently a doppelbock with thin mash (1:4), and I udershoot my OG by 4 points And the last runnings were 1.040.
__________________
Piotr is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-18-2009, 08:50 PM   #147
Kaiser
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Kaiser's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pepperell, MA
Posts: 3,904
Liked 114 Times on 71 Posts
Likes Given: 4

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piotr View Post
Good point. I did recently a doppelbock with thin mash (1:4), and I udershoot my OG by 4 points And the last runnings were 1.040.


Yes, the thin mash (4:1) won’t work for a Doppelbock. At 100% conversion your FW gravity will be 16 Plato and sparging will only dilute this. It may work if you did is as BIAB or no sparge since you will gain about 2-3 Plato during the boil. 3:1 works better for that beer.

Kai
__________________
BrauKaiser.com - brewing science blog - Twitter - water and mash chemistry calculator
Kaiser is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-20-2009, 04:11 PM   #148
Kaiser
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Kaiser's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pepperell, MA
Posts: 3,904
Liked 114 Times on 71 Posts
Likes Given: 4

Default

I just came across this patent description:

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4228188.html

Method of mashing and lautering

The interesting thing is that it contradicts the idea that thin mashed are more efficient in their conversion. Interesting read, but it is also from 1917.

I think what happened is that their mashing parameters were good enough that the thicker mashes didn’t inhibit the gelatinization and conversion speed as much as they prolonged the life of the enzymes. In the end the conversion efficiency differences between a 2 qt/lb and 1 qt/lb mash were only 2%. This just shows that this subject is not a simple “thinner is always better”. But for the way we mash it seems that the increase in enzymatic activity outweighs the loss in enzymes by them being less stable as we go to thinner mashes.

Kai
__________________
BrauKaiser.com - brewing science blog - Twitter - water and mash chemistry calculator
Kaiser is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-20-2009, 05:43 PM   #149
Saccharomyces
Be good to your yeast...
HBT_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Saccharomyces's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Pflugerville, Texas
Posts: 5,444
Liked 80 Times on 52 Posts
Likes Given: 2

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiser View Post
But for the way we mash it seems that the increase in enzymatic activity outweighs the loss in enzymes by them being less stable as we go to thinner mashes.
I'm still trying to wrap my head around the reason for the difference and one thing that comes to mind is the simple difference in volume of the mash tun. On a commercial scale, the mash tun is very large, so perhaps there are convection currents and such that occur that we don't see on a homebrew scale?
__________________
[How to Calculate Mash Efficiency | Do I Need a Yeast Starter? | My Ghetto Fermentation Chamber | Twitter | 6 Gal. HDPE Fermenters | Slanting Yeast | No Sparge Brewing]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soperbrew
big brother only monitors facebook and untappd
Saccharomyces is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-20-2009, 05:52 PM   #150
Kaiser
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Kaiser's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pepperell, MA
Posts: 3,904
Liked 114 Times on 71 Posts
Likes Given: 4

Default

A single infusion mash that just sits there is much different from a commercial mash that is continuously stirred. B/c the mash intensity is so low, all the other parameters need to make sure that the enzymes have it much easier to get to the starch and convert it.

But apparently this patent didn’t prevail in modern brewing. AFAIK commercial mashes are in the 1.5-2 qt/lb range. I’m not quite sure about smaller microbreweries though.

Kai
__________________
BrauKaiser.com - brewing science blog - Twitter - water and mash chemistry calculator
Kaiser is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply



Quick Reply
Message:
Options
Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How much mash can a mash tun mash? Need Help for Tomorrow's Brew! ryan_pants Equipment/Sanitation 8 09-19-2014 05:39 PM
Keeping Mash temp during 90min Mash in 5gal Cooler MLT KYB All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing 13 01-30-2013 04:57 AM
Noob Mash/sparge questions (partial mash) billpa Beginners Beer Brewing Forum 7 08-03-2011 06:41 PM
Mash in Keggle - False Bottom vs. amount of mash water Griffsta All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing 2 03-24-2009 01:09 PM
partial mash.OG,break material,mash tun efficiancy questions dzlater All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing 9 07-07-2008 12:15 AM