Coldbreak Brewing HERMS Giveaway!

HomeBrewSupply AMCYL Brew Kettle Giveaway!


Home Brew Forums > Home Brewing Beer > All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing > Conditioning grain == awesome.
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-24-2011, 02:10 PM   #21
Randar
Damn right I got da brews
HBT_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 1 reviews
 
Randar's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Wheeling, IL
Posts: 33,193
Liked 4808 Times on 4692 Posts
Likes Given: 2882

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nickharbour View Post
Its actually the opposite, conditioned grain is less effective as a filter. The light fluffy grain allows for easier flow so you reduce your chances of a stuck sparge but you need to recirculate for a lot longer to get clear wort flowing.
I have not found that to be true whatsoever.


Randar is online now
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2011, 02:32 PM   #22
nickharbour
Troll
HBT_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 157
Liked 10 Times on 8 Posts
Likes Given: 7

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Randar View Post
I have not found that to be true whatsoever.
Bigger fluffier crush with more hulls suspended in the mash = lest small particles and partial hulls settled at the bottom = less dense mass at the bottom = more porous bottom = less effective filter.

We're not talking about a huge difference but it takes me about 1:30 to get a clear recirculation with conditioned malt as apposed to :30-1:00 with unconditioned.

Even if you argue that it filters the same as unconditioned I don't see how you can make the argument that conditioned malt improves the filtration.


nickharbour is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2011, 03:29 PM   #23
Randar
Damn right I got da brews
HBT_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 1 reviews
 
Randar's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Wheeling, IL
Posts: 33,193
Liked 4808 Times on 4692 Posts
Likes Given: 2882

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nickharbour View Post
Bigger fluffier crush with more hulls suspended in the mash = lest small particles and partial hulls settled at the bottom = less dense mass at the bottom = more porous bottom = less effective filter.

We're not talking about a huge difference but it takes me about 1:30 to get a clear recirculation with conditioned malt as apposed to :30-1:00 with unconditioned.

Even if you argue that it filters the same as unconditioned I don't see how you can make the argument that conditioned malt improves the filtration.
Are you confusing "setting the grain bed" with "filtration" or am I?
Randar is online now
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2011, 04:27 PM   #24
williamnave
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Springfield, Oregon
Posts: 130
Liked 2 Times on 2 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Randar View Post
Efficiency compared to LHBS? Yes. Efficiency compared to doing the crush myself on the same mill? Only a little. Getting a reliable and trustworthy crush from batch to batch? Hell yeah.

For some folks, though, the biggest benefit is in the filtering capability of the grain bed (and although I haven't tested this theory, I am guessing it helps conversion complete more quickly especially if you tighten the gap). The bigger and fluffier the hull output is the better your grain bed will be as a filter and the fewer rice hulls you'll have to add for things like wheats and ryes.

You don't have to spend $200 on a nice mill. You can get a barleycrusher with 7# hopper for $115+shipping, IIRC, just as one example. Plus you can buy in bulk, which is where the savings really start piling up.
I take it I'm in the minority here, but my LHBS has a decent, reliable mill. they've probably got the gap set a little open to sell more grain, but I am getting 80+% effciency regularly. I also buy in bulk, and weigh it at home, and take it in with me and crush it there when I'm getting brew day stuff hops, yeast, dextrose, etc. I know I'm in the minority and I've heard the horror stories about HBS's with mill gaps you could stick your finger through. I am sure also that I could get a little better eff. by crushing myself, but honestly being in the 80's I'm ok with.

True, I could buy a Barley Crusher, but I'm a go-big-or-go-home kinda guy. If I break down and buy one, I'm eyeing the MM3. Plus I'm motorizing, if I go there.

I am mostly curious about the other benefits - filtering, flavor, & extraction of malt that has been conditioned vs. un-conditioned malt.
williamnave is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2011, 04:35 PM   #25
wildwest450
Registered User
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 9,099
Liked 170 Times on 155 Posts
Likes Given: 4

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nickharbour View Post
Its actually the opposite, conditioned grain is less effective as a filter. The light fluffy grain allows for easier flow so you reduce your chances of a stuck sparge but you need to recirculate for a lot longer to get clear wort flowing.
Complete and utter nonsense. You're living up to your user title with that post.


_
wildwest450 is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2011, 05:05 PM   #26
nickharbour
Troll
HBT_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 157
Liked 10 Times on 8 Posts
Likes Given: 7

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wildwest450 View Post
Complete and utter nonsense. You're living up to your user title with that post.


_
I'm all ears. Explain to me how a light and fluffy grain filters out particles better than the denser settled grain bed of unconditioned malt in a vorlauf. Would love to learn because it seems counter-intuitive.
nickharbour is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2011, 05:12 PM   #27
Randar
Damn right I got da brews
HBT_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 1 reviews
 
Randar's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Wheeling, IL
Posts: 33,193
Liked 4808 Times on 4692 Posts
Likes Given: 2882

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by williamnave View Post
I take it I'm in the minority here, but my LHBS has a decent, reliable mill. they've probably got the gap set a little open to sell more grain, but I am getting 80+% effciency regularly. I also buy in bulk, and weigh it at home, and take it in with me and crush it there when I'm getting brew day stuff hops, yeast, dextrose, etc. I know I'm in the minority and I've heard the horror stories about HBS's with mill gaps you could stick your finger through. I am sure also that I could get a little better eff. by crushing myself, but honestly being in the 80's I'm ok with.
I think, as you noted, you are in the minority with being able to buy in bulk but crush at the LHBS and having a tight enough setting to get 8-+ efficiency. A couple online vendors have pretty reliable crushes, but I don't consider it worth the risk of going from 80-85% efficiency to 65% and not being able to have any recourse once the grain is sitting in my MT. Also, you have a very convenient LHBS to your residence as well I take it!

But, cheers on the nice situation you have!
Randar is online now
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2011, 05:16 PM   #28
Randar
Damn right I got da brews
HBT_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 1 reviews
 
Randar's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Wheeling, IL
Posts: 33,193
Liked 4808 Times on 4692 Posts
Likes Given: 2882

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nickharbour View Post
I'm all ears. Explain to me how a light and fluffy grain filters out particles better than the denser settled grain bed of unconditioned malt in a vorlauf. Would love to learn because it seems counter-intuitive.
Your assertion is that shredded and maimed hulls are a better filter mechanism than intact ones. Every brewing-related literature written contradicts this.

Here it is put succinctly:
"This allows the grain to form a "bed" where the spent hulls support each other and form a filtration structure"

Shredded hulls will compact and just like water filter media, once it is totally compacted it loses filtration effectiveness.
Randar is online now
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2011, 05:16 PM   #29
wildwest450
Registered User
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 9,099
Liked 170 Times on 155 Posts
Likes Given: 4

Default

Come watch me re-circ my mash at over a gallon per minute. Explain that.


_
wildwest450 is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2011, 05:24 PM   #30
nickharbour
Troll
HBT_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 157
Liked 10 Times on 8 Posts
Likes Given: 7

Default

It seems like the consensus from the previous threads I've read on this topic was opposite of what you guys are saying.

for example: http://www.homebrewtalk.com/f36/malt...-rocks-144752/

Search down the page for "filter".


nickharbour is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Just have to say that AG of AWESOME!!! Rob_B All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing 7 03-20-2011 12:33 PM
Malt conditioning, Awesome! Beerbuck All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing 9 07-05-2010 04:45 AM
Grain Conditioning.....I'm Sold Poobah58 All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing 2 03-08-2010 06:13 AM
You guys are awesome! First all grain alee All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing 5 03-29-2009 11:07 AM
Conditioning all-grain kegged beer jeffg All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing 11 02-04-2006 01:44 PM


Forum Jump

Newest Threads

LATEST SPONSOR DEALS