2nd BIAB. Question.

[Ungoliant]

Ok so I just brewed a Zombie Dust clone (see bottom for link). I did BIAB. I dialed in my equipment in a bit and only ended up 1/2 gal short this time, though I hit my OG.

Here are some stats on this brew with my question to follow:
Strike temp: 168 w/7.8 gal
Mashed at 154 for 60 minutes.
Grain/water absorption (I manually calculated it): 0.0556/lb of grain.
Pre-boil volume was 7 gal
60 minute boil.
Used 1 Whirlfloc and Yeast Nutrient (1tsp/gal wort) @ 15mins
Wort chilled in less than 20 minutes.
Post boil OG: 1.066
5 1/2gal in the fermenter.


Ok so it went really well, overall, but the wort was super cloudy before pitching (see photo). I'm a former extract brewer for about 5 years, and I've never seen beers turn out like this. My FBS clone has this same appearance. I don't think it's unconverted starches cause I definitely hit the recipe's OG. What could cause this?
View attachment ImageUploadedByHome Brew1442796683.491790.jpgView attachment ImageUploadedByHome Brew1442796696.024852.jpg

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/showthread.php?t=245456

 

[cannman]

You're looking at break material. The co2 from the fermenting yeast will keep it suspended, and after fermentation is done, it will fall to the bottom and become the TRUB.

Good going!

(make sure the trub does not get racked)

 

[pricelessbrewing]

It's just hot/cold break material (mostly proteins). It should all crash out when fermentation is completed, don't worry about it.

Side note: If you ended up .5G short, but hit OG, then you effeciency was higher than expected. Check it out and adjust for your next brew.

What are you using to determine your water volumes? How are you measuring accurately enough to determine your grain absorption rate?

 

[cannman]

It's just hot/cold break material (mostly proteins). It should all crash out when fermentation is completed, don't worry about it.

Side note: If you ended up .5G short, but hit OG, then you effeciency was higher than expected. Check it out and adjust for your next brew.

What are you using to determine your water volumes? How are you measuring accurately enough to determine your grain absorption rate?

yeah, if you use a brew software (which is 100% worth the $20 investment, I saw BeerSmith on sale on Amazon.com for $15.xx today!!!) you can adjust your brew so that you over brew to compensate for your deficiency by 1/2 gal.

But You're looking real good. That head looks like you might make use of that extra head space!

 

[Ungoliant]

I'm using the markings inside my kettle to measure volumes...The 7.8 is eyeballed, but I'm pretty good at eyeballing stuff. Lol....I have an SS Brewtech 10 gallon kettle, and I do also have Beer Smith but I haven't plugged in my all-grain stuff yet (it was pretty ****ing useless for extract brewing).

So what causes all that particulate to show up like that? Why don't you get that cloudy appearance with extract brews?

 

[cannman]

So what causes all that particulate to show up like that? Why don't you get that cloudy appearance with extract brews?

That's a pretty technical question that I don't know if I can answer effectively, but from what I understand, when Extract is made, this "Break Material" is not used in the concentration of the wort. I know DME is sprayed into the air and allowed to dehydrate on the way down forming the powder (or concentration for LME). Break material is essentially a protein coagulation byproduct of the sugar extraction process. John Palmer writes a good book called "how to brew" if you're interested in learning exactly what the break material is, and there is a new book called Malt: A Practical Guide from Field to Brewhouse (Brewing Elements) that will give you EVERYTHING you need and don't need to know about malting and it's process.

 

[Ungoliant]

Ah ok. I do have John Palmer's book. I guess it's time to break it out again.

 

[Ungoliant]

So my follow on question is...there's about a gallon of break material on the bottom of my FBS clone. It's been in primary fermentation for a week. Will the break material settle out more when fermentation is complete?

 

[dstockwell]

Did my second BIAB today and no doubt learned a few things. But one thing I did was use the same bag for the mash to strain the wort and with a easy squeeze I left behind about 1 quart of trub. I only brew 3.5 gal batches so will see how this works out.

For a measuring stick I added one gallon at a time and used a knife to scrape and a sharpie to mark a piece of PVC to help determine level.

 

[FatDragon]

Side note: If you ended up .5G short, but hit OG, then you effeciency was higher than expected. Check it out and adjust for your next brew.

Lower, not higher. Less wort at the same gravity means lower efficiency. In this case, it's about 8% lower (not x%-8%, but x%*0.92) than you had calculated for. Still, that's pretty good accuracy for a second go.

 

[pricelessbrewing]

Lower, not higher. Less wort at the same gravity means lower efficiency. In this case, it's about 8% lower (not x%-8%, but x%*0.92) than you had calculated for. Still, that's pretty good accuracy for a second go.

Sorry, that is correct. Less wort, lower effeciency.

 

[doug293cz]

So my follow on question is...there's about a gallon of break material on the bottom of my FBS clone. It's been in primary fermentation for a week. Will the break material settle out more when fermentation is complete?

Yes, the trub layer will compact with time. It will compact faster, and more densely if you cold crash.

Brew on

 

[douglasbarbin]

Yes, the trub layer will compact with time. It will compact faster, and more densely if you cold crash.

Brew on

This is absolutely correct. Although, next time, try not to let this stuff even make it into the fermenter(s). If you whirlpool after flame out, wait about 10 minutes to let the cold break settle, and you can leave most of this stuff behind when you drain to your fermenters. The trub won't actually hurt anything being there, but why waste the space in your fermenter(s)?

 

[Ungoliant]

Well I suppose I'd have to do this after cooling. The way I chill my wort is using an immersion wort chiller, as well as putting my kettle in an ice bath. I stir both the ice and the wort, and I'm able to get it cooled down to 72 in about 20 minutes. I guess I'll just have to whirlpool and let it settle after I take the chiller out.

Additionally, my kettle does have a trub dam, but I guess that I'm not using it properly.

 

[Nickyssix]

Ok so I just brewed a Zombie Dust clone (see bottom for link). I did BIAB. I dialed in my equipment in a bit and only ended up 1/2 gal short this time, though I hit my OG.

Here are some stats on this brew with my question to follow:
Strike temp: 168 w/7.8 gal
Mashed at 154 for 60 minutes.
Grain/water absorption (I manually calculated it): 0.0556/lb of grain.
Pre-boil volume was 7 gal
60 minute boil.
Used 1 Whirlfloc and Yeast Nutrient (1tsp/gal wort) @ 15mins
Wort chilled in less than 20 minutes.
Post boil OG: 1.066
5 1/2gal in the fermenter.


Ok so it went really well, overall, but the wort was super cloudy before pitching (see photo). I'm a former extract brewer for about 5 years, and I've never seen beers turn out like this. My FBS clone has this same appearance. I don't think it's unconverted starches cause I definitely hit the recipe's OG. What could cause this?
View attachment 304568View attachment 304570

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/showthread.php?t=245456

looking beautiful ! Sounds like a perfect brew day. That stuff is the protein break - don,t worry about it it'll sink to the trub and the yeast will even use some as nutrients. Your going to get a cracker beer.

 

[wilserbrewer]

But one thing I did was use the same bag for the mash to strain the wort and with a easy squeeze I left behind about 1 quart of trub. I only brew 3.5 gal batches so will see how this works out.
.

I would not use a mash bag to strain boiled wort. The mash bag is not sanitary.

IMO, best not to be concerned with trub, let it settle in the fermenter and rack the clear beer off the top. Let gravity do the work.

 

[dstockwell]

I would not use a mash bag to strain boiled wort. The mash bag is not sanitary.

Thanks, i never thought about that aspect.. But I guess if I wanted to I could clean it and sanitize right away sense the fermenting bucket is sitting with sanitizer in it prior to transfer.

 

[cannman]

Thanks, i never thought about that aspect.. But I guess if I wanted to I could clean it and sanitize right away sense the fermenting bucket is sitting with sanitizer in it prior to transfer.

I would leave it to feed the yeast should they get hungry.

 

[wilserbrewer]

But I guess if I wanted to I could clean it and sanitize right away sense the fermenting bucket is sitting with sanitizer in it prior to transfer.

Sorry, not really, not to be nit picky, but this is just bad practice. Not a good idea to re-use something from the unsanitary side of the brewery in the sanitary side of the brewery.

Yes, you could sanitize it....would it be sanitary enough for my beer....sorry no.

Intentionally infecting something with raw grain, then using it in the finished sanitary beer is NG IMO. I wouldn't consider letting a used mash bag near my finished beer, regardless of who / what "sanitized" it. Not sure you can really sanitize fabric very well?

 

[slym2none]

This is absolutely correct. Although, next time, try not to let this stuff even make it into the fermenter(s). If you whirlpool after flame out, wait about 10 minutes to let the cold break settle, and you can leave most of this stuff behind when you drain to your fermenters. The trub won't actually hurt anything being there, but why waste the space in your fermenter(s)?

Because doing so might (might) actually make your beer clearer, cleaner, and better tasting? Brulosopher did an experiment on this, and it was kind of surprising!

 

[dstockwell]

OK, guess i wont be doing that again, at least not with the one I mashed with. I will have to make sure there is enough room in my little 4 gallon pail for trub and fermentation. I just figured let the break material settle, and siphon the clear wort into your fermentor leaving the break/trub behind.

 

[wilserbrewer]

OK, guess i wont be doing that again, at least not with the one I mashed with. I will have to make sure there is enough room in my little 4 gallon pail for trub and fermentation.

Get a bigger fermenter and drink more beer instead of throwing it away with the trub

 

[douglasbarbin]

Because doing so can actually make your beer clearer, cleaner, and better tasting?

That's debatable at best.

Brulosopher did an experiment on this, and it was kind of surprising!

He actually did 2 exbeeriments on it as of this post, and the results were insignificant, which really didn't surprise me much. It's a single study using a very small sample size. I'm not a statistics guy, but the margin of error for a study of this size has to be huge.

In the most recent Brulosopher trub exbeeriment, the high-trub beer is actually less clear and more tasters preferred the flavor and aroma of the no-trub beer. That's pretty much the opposite results of the first exbeeriment, so you really need to take those exbeeriments with about a billion grains of salt.

 

[dstockwell]

Get a bigger fermenter and drink more beer instead of throwing it away with the trub

Oh wait, I go to Waly-Mart and get the stainless strainer - problem solved..

 

[slym2none]

OK, guess i wont be doing that again, at least not with the one I mashed with. I will have to make sure there is enough room in my little 4 gallon pail for trub and fermentation. I just figured let the break material settle, and siphon the clear wort into your fermentor leaving the break/trub behind.

I will say this - if you are happy with your process and the results you get from them, don't change anything because someone else did. You might want to test a smaller batch first to see if there's a difference noticeable to you.

 

[slym2none]

That's debatable at best.


He actually did 2 exbeeriments on it as of this post, and the results were insignificant, which really didn't surprise me much. It's a single study using a very small sample size. I'm not a statistics guy, but the margin of error for a study of this size has to be huge.

In the most recent Brulosopher trub exbeeriment, the high-trub beer is actually less clear and more tasters preferred the flavor and aroma of the no-trub beer. That's pretty much the opposite results of the first exbeeriment, so you really need to take those exbeeriments with about a billion grains of salt.

Notice my usage of the word "can". I never made a definitive statement. I should have used "might" instead. Going to edit that now.

Either way, if the brewer doesn't mind the extra step and they are happy with their process & results, I say, don't change a thing!

 

[doug293cz]

That's debatable at best.


He actually did 2 exbeeriments on it as of this post, and the results were insignificant, which really didn't surprise me much. It's a single study using a very small sample size. I'm not a statistics guy, but the margin of error for a study of this size has to be huge.

In the most recent Brulosopher trub exbeeriment, the high-trub beer is actually less clear and more tasters preferred the flavor and aroma of the no-trub beer. That's pretty much the opposite results of the first exbeeriment, so you really need to take those exbeeriments with about a billion grains of salt.

You can't justify the statement that two experiments, neither of which had statistically significant results, had opposite results.

The takeaway from each experiment alone, and both of them considered together, is that there is little to no discernible difference in the finished beer between fermenting with low amounts of trub vs. high amounts of trub. Even tho the results are not statistically significant, it does not mean they are useless. Absent any conflicting data, they give comfort that whichever option you choose will not adversely affect the outcome. So, the best action to take with your brewing is whichever one makes you happier. I choose to throw most of the trub in the fermenter, and sort it out after cold crashing and fining.

Brew on

 

[TexasWine]

That's debatable at best.


He actually did 2 exbeeriments on it as of this post, and the results were insignificant, which really didn't surprise me much. It's a single study using a very small sample size. I'm not a statistics guy, but the margin of error for a study of this size has to be huge.

In the most recent Brulosopher trub exbeeriment, the high-trub beer is actually less clear and more tasters preferred the flavor and aroma of the no-trub beer. That's pretty much the opposite results of the first exbeeriment, so you really need to take those exbeeriments with about a billion grains of salt.

I think you might be reading something into this exbeeriment that isn't there. You can't say most tasters prefer the flavor and aroma of the no trub beer because it was only the 8 who guessed correctly that those statistics were generated for. 5 of those 8 people preferred the aroma and flavor, all but 1 thought the aroma was somewhat similar and all 8 thought the flavor was somewhat similar.

Also when you say "That's pretty much the opposite results of the first exbeeriment", you're contradicting what was said in the blog post, quoted below for reference.

"Yet again, these results suggest there is no statistically significant perceptible difference between beers fermented with very high and very low amounts of kettle trub."

Not trying to be confrontational, but just trying to make sure you're not steering someone in the wrong direction.


Edit: Doug beat me to it! Typing in the phone is SLOW!

 

[douglasbarbin]

I guess I phrased that poorly. The results were not statistically significant in either case, but the stated preferences of the testers shifted. In either case, the preferences were so slight that you can't really say that either beer was definitively preferred. Regardless, the takeaway is that after 2 (small) experiments, there is no conclusive evidence that the amount of trub makes any noticeable difference in the finished product. I think that you guys might have missed the forest for the trees, although my poor word choice certainly didn't help to convey the point I was trying to make.

If you transfer the trub to the kettle and you like your beer, keep doing it. If you leave the trub behind and you like your beer, keep doing that. It would seem that it doesn't make a whole lot of difference either way.

 

[wilserbrewer]

This is exactly what I like about the Brulosophers exbeeriments, quite often they show statistical insignificance of time honored tradition. I often come away with a feeling of it doesn't really matter, and not so much either is better. What I really like is quite often, the easier approach does not show negative results, at least that's my misinterpretation