10 Minute Mash? Mind Blown...

[kaconga]

Yes. The flaw I see is that the mashes are not the same, if a gallon of runnings is drawn off. The mash thickness, for example, would be different and probably the mash pH would vary too when taking wort off but not grain.

In order for them to be the same, three mashes need to be done, side by side. The same grainbill, the same volume, the same pH, etc. Then, one mash for 15 minutes, one for 30 minutes, and one for an hour would be a valid test. You still couldn't see the sugars that you get out of them, but the FG might be a good test as to which mash produces more maltriose than the others.

I had considered that option yooper, but figured three separate mashes would actually create more variables than one mash with varying times. As you are more experienced than I, I will defer to your judgement on this and go with three separate mashes with the same grain bill and water ratio. Then, if this yields inconclusive results, I will try the one mash method and see how that differs.

 

[kaconga]

Since it only takes a drop or 2 of wort, may I suggest you test for conversion with iodine starting at 1 minute and each minute past that until you show conversion? If you show conversion earlier than 10 minutes, draw off your gallon at 10, 20, 30, and 60.

With my fine grind with the Corona mill I find conversion in less than 3 minutes with iodine. I've tried 10, 20, 30, and 60 minutes but not from the same batch but I can't say I have noticed much if any difference in the beers. I'd like someone else to give the short mashes a try to see if I'm onto something or just "on" something.

My goal is to first determine if shorter mashing does produce similar results. Then I can toy around with how short I can go. For this experiment I will use the standard crush from my lhbs as that is my current baseline and I don't want to introduce more variables than I have to.

 

[Weezy]

I'd think the mash and pH would be stable to permit drawing off multiple times from a single mash if its full volume, no sparge. The thickness would consistent and pH could be monitored as well.

 

[Magnus314]

Hydrometer samples to test extraction and conversion rates at certain intervals won't change anything in the mash.

You'll see right away what effect the shorter or longer mash times have on extraction, conversion, and efficiency. If your extraction/conversion efficiency was similar, then on a future batch it's worth testing shorter mash times, knowing you're not losing anything OG-wise.

If extraction was significantly lower for the shorter mash time(s), you probably won't want to do it that way in the future, even if the attenuation is similar.

Then you can ferment the full "long" mash batch and you will have answered the "what effect does a longer mash have on ____" questions (such as attenuation, head retention, etc).

That will knock out about 80% of the questions on one batch.

 

[kaconga]

Hydrometer samples to test extraction and conversion rates at certain intervals won't change anything in the mash.

You'll see right away what effect the shorter or longer mash times have on extraction, conversion, and efficiency. If your extraction/conversion efficiency was similar, then on a future batch it's worth testing shorter mash times, knowing you're not losing anything OG-wise.

If extraction was significantly lower for the shorter mash time(s), you probably won't want to do it that way in the future, even if the attenuation is similar.

Then you can ferment the full "long" mash batch and you will have answered the "what effect does a longer mash have on ____" questions (such as attenuation, head retention, etc).

That will knock out about 80% of the questions on one batch.

Well my understanding is that a hydrometer/refractometer can only tell you how much sugars you have, not the make up of those sugars. So you can have two samples of 1.050 wort but one might be mostly dextrins and the other could be mostly glucose. This will drastically alter the FG of the sample and is one of the concerns with short mash times.

I am not to the point RM-MN is, where I can be certain conversion can happen in 3-10 minutes with the right crush. But I believe some beers may not only be good enough with shorter mashes but might actually benefit from them. But that is just conjecture at the moment. The real test will be what exactly happens when mash time is changed while all other variables remain constant. If that can be nailed down then mash time can move from being an absolute (one hour) to another tool used to adjust the beers we make.

 

[Demon]

To those that are saying they will continue to do 60 minutes because that's what pro brewers do, many pro brewers, including me do not do 60 minute mashes. This actually came up the other day on pro brewer.
http://discussions.probrewer.com/showthread.php?41266-10-minute-mash&highlight=minute

 

[TexasWine]

To those that are saying they will continue to do 60 minutes because that's what pro brewers do, many pro brewers, including me do not do 60 minute mashes. This actually came up the other day on pro brewer.
http://discussions.probrewer.com/showthread.php?41266-10-minute-mash&highlight=minute

Oh man. This is great! My favorite part...

"Haha this is why I always get a kick out of homebrew/nano setups where the guy's all "Check out my sweet HERMS!"

Uh huh.
And are you using severely undermodified malt in a mash tun the size of a swimming pool?
No?
So you realize conversion is basically over in a couple minutes right? And you're mostly just wasting time?
No?
You also realize that a percent or two increase in efficiency will save you about 50 cents?
No?
Well at least you have disposable time and income. Say, does that mean your fermenters are glycol jacketed too? Or in a controlled fridge or something?
No?
Sigh."

 

[wobdee]

Brewed a Pils with Best Pils malt the other day and the iodine said it was done in 15 min mashing at 150. I continued on with my Schmitz Decoction mash anyways which took about 1.5 hours total.

All this extra mash time may seem like a waste of time to some but for me it seems to give me some extra flavor and aroma I've been missing from my German lagers.

 

[Magnus314]

Well my understanding is that a hydrometer/refractometer can only tell you how much sugars you have, not the make up of those sugars. So you can have two samples of 1.050 wort but one might be mostly dextrins and the other could be mostly glucose. This will drastically alter the FG of the sample and is one of the concerns with short mash times.

That's what I said, only you said it better

Once you know you're getting 1.050 wort at every step, you've answered the "am I getting better efficiency with a longer mash?" question.

That's half the answer. Then once you ferment the 90-min batch, you'll know whether or not you get or even want the (potentially) higher attenuation, head retention, etc.

If not, go shorter next time, a little at a time, until you get the most efficiency and the right attenuation in the shortest time.

That's what I did, and I'm at 30 min. mashes now, with 84% efficiency, somewhat high attenuation, and identical head retention, storage, etc. from when I did longer BIAB mashes, or when I did traditional cooler mashing.

The last couple of batches I wanted to try even shorter mashes, but I'm at the point now where by the time I get the mill and everything cleaned up and weigh the hops and stuff, it's time to pull the bag.

 

[AnOldUR]

Oh man. This is great! My favorite part...

"Haha this is why I always get a kick out of homebrew/nano setups where the guy's all "Check out my sweet HERMS!"

hmmm . . . but they also talk about short mash rests, but long (up to 30 minute) vorlauf. When you recirculate with a HERMS or RIMS, isn't it pretty much the same as an extended vorlauf?

The one guy talks about a 20 minute dough-in while mixing, a short rest and then 15 minutes of vorlauf. Probably 45 minutes right there of time while conversion is taking place. Another one say "5 minute mash, 30 minute vorlauf, lauter within 90 minutes." 90 minutes!

Just saying that going by what the pros do to either support or condemn short mash times on a homebrew level doesn't make sense.

 

[epratt]

Here is a homebrewer's results from an experiment similar to the one being discussed (he does a 30 min vs 60 min mash, not 10 unfortunately.)

Does Mash Length Matter?

His results, while not definitive, conclude that he see's little to no difference.

 

[sikkingj]

So this means if I have boinked my mash temperatures in the first 5 or 10 minutes, I've screwed the pooch and no amount of ice and stirring will change it? Continuing this thought any temperatures fluctuations after the first 15 would have little or no impact on the mash.

This would gel with some of my experience with low attenuating batches, but I'm curious what others have experienced...

Maybe I don't need to insulate my mash tun now.


Sent from the window of an airplane...

 

[kaconga]

Here is a homebrewer's results from an experiment similar to the one being discussed (he does a 30 min vs 60 min mash, not 10 unfortunately.)

Does Mash Length Matter?

His results, while not definitive, conclude that he see's little to no difference.

Thanks, this illustrates the need for a "control" beer when having the tastings. One thing he didn't test that I will attempt to is how the beers age over a six month period. Since it was posited that haze/foam stability would be negatively effected by shorter and shorter mashes. I don't really know what to expect but that is why I wish to experiment.

 

[wobdee]

So this means if I have boinked my mash temperatures in the first 5 or 10 minutes, I've screwed the pooch and no amount of ice and stirring will change it? Continuing this thought any temperatures fluctuations after the first 15 would have little or no impact on the mash.

This would gel with some of my experience with low attenuating batches, but I'm curious what others have experienced...

Maybe I don't need to insulate my mash tun now.


Sent from the window of an airplane...

Good point, I think I've experienced this as well. I tend to overshoot my temps by a couple degrees and it can take 10 or so minutes to cool it back down.

 

[JohnSand]

I like the idea, but haven't tried it yet.
Kaconga, when you do your mash time test, I recommend that you start your boils right away, or at least mash out to denature the enzymes. Otherwise you may stop extraction, but not conversion.
My last few batches are all over in mash temps while I get used to a new system. But the results are on target both for OG and FG. So I don't believe that I'm getting very quick conversion. Maybe with a finer crush.
I do admire all of those who test the rules and boundaries of brewing. There is always resistance, but if it works well, others will follow.

 

[Siberian]

To those that are saying they will continue to do 60 minutes because that's what pro brewers do, many pro brewers, including me do not do 60 minute mashes. This actually came up the other day on pro brewer.
http://discussions.probrewer.com/showthread.php?41266-10-minute-mash&highlight=minute

True, but even the ones that report a relatively fast system allow for about 40-minutes of conversion through the whole process.

It may be a 5-10 minute mash rest, but it doesn't sound like it's 10 minutes of mashing, immediately start ramping up heat for a boil, they are spending a lot of time at conversion temperatures. It's taking them nearly 20 minutes just to dough in, during which there will be some conversion. Something most home brewers can do in minutes. They are vorlaufing to clear the wort for 25 minutes, during which conversion is still happening.

Basically the guy in that thread who is talking about a relatively fast mash, is even stating he's allowing for 40 minutes of conversion, I'm in agreement with WaterEng and the paper he linked in that thread. There's more to it then just converting the starch.

RM-MN I'm curious how your process compares to this, is your 10 minutes from start of dough in to lifting the bag? Post dough in to bag lift? How long does it take you to go from say raising the bag to drain to >170 (which is where conversion stops) on your system?

I think the Brulosophy test is telling too at this point in particular:

While I really wanted the short-mash beer (Carl) to come out ahead or at least taste the same as the long-mash beer (Fritz), my honest opinion is that I perceived Fritz as having more of the characteristics I expect in a good Oktoberfest– it had more toasty/Munich malt charcter, slightly more body, and I just enjoyed it more than the other beer.

I'm interested in this though, I think there is certainly evidence that I'm spending way too long recirculating the wort on my system during my mash. However, I don't think I'll ever get down to a process where I could dough in and be draining wort out of my bag only 10 minutes later.

I may try pushing the process down to 30-40 minutes from dough in to completion here at some point though, which would be basically 50% of the time I spend now.

By comparison my process is tremendously slow.... 60-75 minutes in a recirculating mash, ramp up to 168, hold for 10 minutes, raise bag and drain....

So, speeding that up would buy me a ton of time, I'm certainly interested.

Probably give cutting it down a try the next time I do a small beer, I'm brewing a large batch of stout this weekend, but it's with my Father-in-Law so not really the time to be experimenting with my process too much. :cross:

 

[RM-MN]

True, but even the ones that report a relatively fast system allow for about 40-minutes of conversion through the whole process.

It may be a 5-10 minute mash rest, but it doesn't sound like it's 10 minutes of mashing, immediately start ramping up heat for a boil, they are spending a lot of time at conversion temperatures. It's taking them nearly 20 minutes just to dough in, during which there will be some conversion. Something most home brewers can do in minutes. They are vorlaufing to clear the wort for 25 minutes, during which conversion is still happening.

Basically the guy in that thread who is talking about a relatively fast mash, is even stating he's allowing for 40 minutes of conversion, I'm in agreement with WaterEng and the paper he linked in that thread. There's more to it then just converting the starch.

RM-MN I'm curious how your process compares to this, is your 10 minutes from start of dough in to lifting the bag? Post dough in to bag lift? How long does it take you to go from say raising the bag to drain to >170 (which is where conversion stops) on your system?

I think the Brulosophy test is telling too at this point in particular:



I'm interested in this though, I think there is certainly evidence that I'm spending way too long recirculating the wort on my system during my mash. However, I don't think I'll ever get down to a process where I could dough in and be draining wort out of my bag only 10 minutes later.

I may try pushing the process down to 30-40 minutes from dough in to completion here at some point though, which would be basically 50% of the time I spend now.

By comparison my process is tremendously slow.... 60-75 minutes in a recirculating mash, ramp up to 168, hold for 10 minutes, raise bag and drain....

So, speeding that up would buy me a ton of time, I'm certainly interested.

Probably give cutting it down a try the next time I do a small beer, I'm brewing a large batch of stout this weekend, but it's with my Father-in-Law so not really the time to be experimenting with my process too much. :cross:

Dough in is pretty fast, from starting to add grains until I put the lid on the pot probably takes between a minute and a minute and a half. I stir like a madman. Ten minutes later I pull the bag and as soon as I have the bag of grains sitting in the colander, I turn up the heat. It takes between 5 and 7 minutes to reach 170 (only an estimate, I'm too busy squeezing out the wort from the grain bag to keep close track on that).

I more often do a 20 minute mash than 10 but I want to explore just where the best results lie. Since so many brewing concepts have been changed recently, I think this is a neat thing to try now that I have gotten clear beer with no chill and shorter boils.

 

[JohnSand]

I read the links, and their links. While there were various views, there was also certainly evidence to support a shorter mash. Even if I do a 30 minute mash, and a 40 minute boil, the 50 minutes saved can mean the difference between fitting in a brew day or waiting.

 

[Siberian]

Gave this a try this weekend brewing a Special Bitter. Probably was done with conversion at 30 minutes, but I must not have had enough coffee and wasn't thinking straight.

I did my first iodine test at 30 minutes using a paper plate. Iodine correctly detected the presence of starch in paper....

At 40 minutes I tested again, there was still starch in the paper. At this point I realized my error and switched to testing to real plate. No sign of purple. Moved onto mashing out by raising the mash to 168 and holding it there for 10 minutes, lifted the bag out and let it run off for about 10 minutes.

Was basically on target for pre-boil gravity, it came in at 1.043 and I was targeting 1.042.

 

[hio3791]

Interesting thread. I decided to give it a shot this past weekend. I crushed the grain very fine, which led to dough-ball heaven. That took about 5 min of stirring to get it all mixed before closing the lid. 30 min later, I gave it a quick stir and lifted the bag to let it drain while raising the temperature to a boil. Total mash time, approx 35 min. OG was 1.050 which was right on target for the recipe.

I didn't do an iodine test so time will tell. Hydrometer sample was great though and I was done 30 min earlier than expected!

 

[RM-MN]

Interesting thread. I decided to give it a shot this past weekend. I crushed the grain very fine, which led to dough-ball heaven. That took about 5 min of stirring to get it all mixed before closing the lid. 30 min later, I gave it a quick stir and lifted the bag to let it drain while raising the temperature to a boil. Total mash time, approx 35 min. OG was 1.050 which was right on target for the recipe.

I didn't do an iodine test so time will tell. Hydrometer sample was great though and I was done 30 min earlier than expected!

Next time use a wire whisk. It breaks up doughballs as fast as they can form. I no longer use a spoon.

My last brew was a rye saison, brewed October 3rd. I gave it a 20 minute mash and pitched half a packet of Belle Saison that had been opened 6 months or so ago so it wasn't the best viability. In 17 days it took the saison from 1.057 to 1.000 so I think I have plenty of fermentability.

 

[Magnus314]

The fact that you got doughballs surprises me. Usually the very high water/grain ratio makes it all stir in pretty quickly.

Just today I did an 11 gal batch of IPA and it only took me about 60 seconds to mash in, even just dumping it in and sitrring like crazy.

20 min. mash + mash out about 8-10 mins and a single sparge. I have to with a big grain bill and a double batch, to get it all in my 15 gal kettle.

Efficiency was either 88% or 93% depending on whether Ashbourne Mild malt is 30 ppg potential like some say, or 37-ish ppg like other base malts.

 

[Chris7687]

The fact that you got doughballs surprises me. Usually the very high water/grain ratio makes it all stir in pretty quickly.

Just today I did an 11 gal batch of IPA and it only took me about 60 seconds to mash in, even just dumping it in and sitrring like crazy.

20 min. mash + mash out about 8-10 mins and a single sparge. I have to with a big grain bill and a double batch, to get it all in my 15 gal kettle.

Efficiency was either 88% or 93% depending on whether Ashbourne Mild malt is 30 ppg potential like some say, or 37-ish ppg like other base malts.

Magnus - with a 25+ pound grain bill, how do you sparge out. Sorry to get off-topic, just curious.

 

[Magnus314]

I have a ladder and the clip/pulley deal from Wilserbrewer. I raise the bag, let it drain a minute or two so I don't make a mess, and lower it down into my old lonely mash cooler ;-) with the rest of the water in it, and stir.

Raise it up and transfer runnings to kettle with my high tech 1gal pitcher.

Since my efficiency is so high, I'm going to try just doing a pour-over sparge with the remaining water next time. I don't really need the gravity points, but I don't want to pour just straight top-up water into my wort to get my my pre-boil volume.

EDIT: It was 23# of grain. I ended up with 11 gals at 1.066 post boil.

 

[wilserbrewer]

Try the pour "through" sparge. I was very surprised how well the sparge water goes right through the bag and rinses the grain. I was also skeptical, thinking that the sparge water would shortcut over the outside of the bag, but it enters the grain bag and drains out the bottom nicely.

Much easier than a dunk sparge in a different vessel FTW!


Wilserbrewer
Http://biabbags.webs.com/

 

[Chris7687]

I agree with wilser. I do pour over sparge and get good points. The reason I ask, because on another thread a member was talking about doing the method you just mentioned, Magnus. It seems like extra work and time for set up/clean up.

Magnus - Wellington, aye? That's my hometown and recently moved back to SoFl to PB Gardens. You a part of a HBC? Was thinking of starting one in NPB, as PBDM in Boynton is a drive sometimes.

 

[Magnus314]

I'm not a member of any club.

They look like they're having fun on the website, a member named Jeff was a friend outside of that club, but I never made it to any meetings!

My mistake probably, I just never followed through.

 

[kevreh]

The fact that you got doughballs surprises me. Usually the very high water/grain ratio makes it all stir in pretty quickly.

Just today I did an 11 gal batch of IPA and it only took me about 60 seconds to mash in, even just dumping it in and sitrring like crazy.

20 min. mash + mash out about 8-10 mins and a single sparge. I have to with a big grain bill and a double batch, to get it all in my 15 gal kettle.

Efficiency was either 88% or 93% depending on whether Ashbourne Mild malt is 30 ppg potential like some say, or 37-ish ppg like other base malts.

I just don't get how anyone can get 93% efficiency with a quick sparge and BIAB. Best I got with BIAB was around 75%. Wonder whats different, technique? Water? Grains?

 

[RM-MN]

I just don't get how anyone can get 93% efficiency with a quick sparge and BIAB. Best I got with BIAB was around 75%. Wonder whats different, technique? Water? Grains?

Mostly what's different is the milling of the grain. Smaller particles are more efficient because it lets you leach more sugars out. I didn't figure out what my efficiency was for today's batch but I had the software set for 1.059 OG at 2.75 gallons and got 1.061 with about 3 gallons. I'll be watching this one for what the FG turns out because I only mashed for 10 minutes.

 

[kevreh]

Wish that applied to me. I have my monster mill and have been double grinding.