Spike Brewing 12.5 Conical Fermenter Giveaway - Enter Now!

Home Brew Forums > Home Brewing Beer > All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing > Malt Conditioning... WOW it rocks!

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 11-02-2009, 06:08 PM   #11
KingBrianI
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 3,488
Liked 76 Times on 56 Posts
Likes Given: 7

Default

don't confuse flow with filtering.

__________________

I'm too lazy and have too many beers going to keep updating this!

KingBrianI is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-02-2009, 06:10 PM   #12
Tonedef131
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Fort Wayne
Posts: 1,906
Liked 22 Times on 12 Posts
Likes Given: 3

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KingBrianI View Post
I've had very similar results. The crushed conditioned malt feels so fluffy. The downsides I've found are that crushing requires a bit more pressure, the rollers need to be cleaned afterwards since some grain will stick, and the grain bed doesn't filter as well, though. I've not noticed any astringency either way.
That doesn't seem right. Victory (as well as Sierra Nevada, Deschutes, and New Belgium) has a wet mill and spends A LOT of money on it for the purposes of improved lautering.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Victory
the malt is wetted very carefully so that the husk gets wet and soft, but not the kernel. This way, when the malt hits the rollers -- which are set quite tightly -- the kernel cracks as always, but the husk is not broken up, like it is in a dry mill. This makes for a better filter bed, and less tannins from the husk
__________________
Tonedef131 is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-02-2009, 06:13 PM   #13
remilard
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 3,655
Liked 38 Times on 37 Posts

Default

Just to reiterate, KingBrian is saying it filters worse because it flows better.

So need to recirculate longer perhaps to get the same wort clarity.

__________________
remilard is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-02-2009, 06:13 PM   #14
The Pol
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 11,616
Liked 53 Times on 50 Posts

Default

I dont think I will have a problem with particles in my wort after 90 minutes of recircualting. We will see! But I am completely blown away by the results, I have never seen such a nice crush and such whole husks!!!

__________________
The Pol is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-02-2009, 06:25 PM   #15
RighteousFire
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Jacksonville, NC
Posts: 224
Liked 2 Times on 2 Posts
Likes Given: 1

Default

Told you. It's freakin crazy.

Can't wait to here about the results. Won't be able to watch live though.

__________________

Cheers.

RighteousFire is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-02-2009, 06:26 PM   #16
The Pol
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 11,616
Liked 53 Times on 50 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RighteousFire View Post
Told you. It's freakin crazy.

Can't wait to here about the results. Won't be able to watch live though.
It will be recorded, and I will post the links for ya. I have a ton of rice hulls now too that Bad_Coffee sent to me, but I will leave them out and just condition the malt this time.

In the crush that was DRY milled, some husks are sorta intact, but most are broken into slivers. The WET milled grain is just about 90% intact husks at a BC setting of .035". Crazzyyyy
__________________

Last edited by The Pol; 11-02-2009 at 06:28 PM.
The Pol is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-02-2009, 06:39 PM   #17
scinerd3000
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Milton, De
Posts: 2,155
Liked 10 Times on 10 Posts
Likes Given: 29

Default

do you get increased efficiency doing this? If so im just curious how much

__________________
On Hiatus: Brewing at work....
scinerd3000 is offline
MattGuk Likes This 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-02-2009, 06:42 PM   #18
AZ_IPA
PKU
HBT_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
AZ_IPA's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: The Cold Part of AZ
Posts: 42,305
Liked 6075 Times on 5309 Posts
Likes Given: 717

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by scinerd3000 View Post
do you get increased efficiency doing this? If so im just curious how much
and if so, which efficiency?

Does it help with conversion efficiency (seems it might - with "fluffier" grain), or lauter efficiency (seems it might, since the grain bed acts differently).

So maybe both?
__________________
AZ_IPA is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-02-2009, 06:46 PM   #19
The Pol
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 11,616
Liked 53 Times on 50 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AZ_IPA View Post
and if so, which efficiency?

Does it help with conversion efficiency (seems it might - with "fluffier" grain), or lauter efficiency (seems it might, since the grain bed acts differently).

So maybe both?
It depends...

It will let you crush finer if you are looking to get a finer crush without sticking the mash, since it keeps the husks intact. My conversion eff. is about 97%, so that is not a factor for me. But for some, it would improve conv. eff. and allow them to keep a good filter bed at the same time.

It could definately improve lauter eff. since you are creating a less compacted grain bed. If your grain bed becomes too compacted, the water will flow by the path of least resistance... along the wall of the cooler or MLT. Keep a nice light grain bed and you will promote more even sparging of the bed. Again, in my case my lauter eff. is about 91% so this isnt a factor for me.

What is a factor for me is being able to get the MOST free flowing grain bed possible without sacrificing the crush that has come to allow me 97% conversion eff. The intact husks will allow me to maintain the eff. I have while allowing me to recirculate faster, which when running a HERMS, is of great value.
__________________
The Pol is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-02-2009, 06:48 PM   #20
The Pol
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 11,616
Liked 53 Times on 50 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by scinerd3000 View Post
do you get increased efficiency doing this? If so im just curious how much
I would think you MAY get better lauter eff. as stated above, but to what degree? I dunno. This is not to boost my eff. I am actually in the process of trying to lower my own eff. by 8%
__________________
The Pol 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
Malt conditioning Kaiser All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing 17 05-03-2010 06:49 PM
Conditioning: (dextrose or dried malt ext.)? oldschool Bottling/Kegging 3 08-22-2009 04:48 PM
Bottle Conditioning vs Carboy Conditioning. What's the difference? BrewOnBoard Beginners Beer Brewing Forum 7 12-13-2008 06:21 AM
My mom ROCKS Jester4176 General Chit Chat 1 10-26-2007 08:50 PM
Conditioning/Aging rocks! Brewing Clamper General Techniques 1 04-05-2007 04:51 PM