Multi Step Infusion Mash - Sparge Necessary?

[kgranger]

I have been doing a bit of research into the "no-sparge" technique, as it not only can reduce brew day steps, but also according to this article the thinner, higher volume mash will produce more high quality first wort, and require less sparging, reducing the chance of over-sparging to reach post boil volume and extracting tannins. The big difference in process, however, is that a larger grain bill is required to ensure the greatest efficiency, since the rinsing of grain is not occurring.

My question is about multi step infusion mashing using boiling water additions. Since this is inherently creating a larger volume of mash in the end, in some cases, it may be enough to fill the kettle completely without sparging.

If I employ the "no-sparge" technique after a multi step infusion mash, will my efficiency be ok, or would I need to increase the grain bill the same as if I were doing a no sparge and single infusion mash?

Sorry if this is an obvious answer. I am thinking I need to increase the bill like the article above explains in either types of mash, I just want clarification.

And I know some people may tell me to just forget about multi step mash and stick to single infusion because modern, modified grain doesn't require it. I do notice some subtle differences in German styles I've done in particular, benefiting from multi step. Also, I just like to be a bit more traditional with these styles

 

[Smellyglove]

A multistep can be needed for certain styles. And it's also up to how the brewer wants to brew. And it also depends on which steps etc etc. But that's off topic.

You'll se a higher yield when doing multisteps, because #1 you're mashing longer, and #2, it depends on which steps. If you have a step lower than saccharification temperature beforehand you'll see more action from the limit dextrinase, which will give you more extract, for instance, the two most obvious things..

So there's several variables at play here. I very often do multisteps, and they always give me more, but I use a HERMS and don't add water, so I don't know if that would be a variable one have to take into account.

 

[kgranger]

I'm sure most of this will come down to experimentation, checking post boil gravities. I guess worst case I could try the route of no sparge when doing the multi step, and if it ends up needing any more extraction I can add in a short sparge. I don't get many opportunities these days to brew and experiment, so I guess I overthink it ahead of time so I am not making any mistakes.

 

[Smellyglove]

I'm sure most of this will come down to experimentation, checking post boil gravities. I guess worst case I could try the route of no sparge when doing the multi step, and if it ends up needing any more extraction I can add in a short sparge. I don't get many opportunities these days to brew and experiment, so I guess I overthink it ahead of time so I am not making any mistakes.

Or you can have some DME on hand and add to the boil. A refractometer is a great tool for getting experience about gravities at different stages with different procedures during mashing.

But for instance, If you're reading low gravity after your saccarification rest, and planned to step up to mash out, skip the mash-out and rather go for a 72C rest. That temperature will give you some extra points (although of lower fermentability) comparing to if you just go from for instance 65C to mash out (77-ish C) by adding water, and not stepping through that temperature.

 

[RPh_Guy]

You don't need to sparge.

However, you should still keep mash pH in the appropriate range. (The article makes it sound like you don't)

FYI Batch sparging is a good middle ground. It doesn't have the risks/workflow issues of fly sparging, and provides higher efficiency than no-sparge.

 

[kgranger]

You don't need to sparge.

However, you should still keep mash pH in the appropriate range. (The article makes it sound like you don't)

FYI Batch sparging is a good middle ground. It doesn't have the risks/workflow issues of fly sparging, and provides higher efficiency than no-sparge.

If sticking with the multi step infusion mash, and having a larger volume of water in the mash, how should I go about calculating the sparge water volumes for batch sparging? I've never done batch sparging, so I am just reading up on it now. It sounds like you mash with enough water to runoff exactly half of the pre-boil volume (accounting for grain absorption loss), and then add in enough sparge water back into the mash to run off the other half of the pre-boil volume. If I am step mashing, essentially 80% of my pre-boil volume will be in the mash already, so do I just run off all of that, and add in the remaining amount needed as the sparge, let rest and run off again to reach total boil volume? Sorry if I am wording this in a way that is hard to follow, I am basically just laying out my thought process.

 

[Smellyglove]

If sticking with the multi step infusion mash, and having a larger volume of water in the mash, how should I go about calculating the sparge water volumes for batch sparging? I've never done batch sparging, so I am just reading up on it now. It sounds like you mash with enough water to runoff exactly half of the pre-boil volume (accounting for grain absorption loss), and then add in enough sparge water back into the mash to run off the other half of the pre-boil volume. If I am step mashing, essentially 80% of my pre-boil volume will be in the mash already, so do I just run off all of that, and add in the remaining amount needed as the sparge, let rest and run off again to reach total boil volume? Sorry if I am wording this in a way that is hard to follow, I am basically just laying out my thought process.

If you have the space for it, I wouldn't run off any wort first, it's just an extra step instead of adding sparge water, stir, vorlauf, then run off everything.

 

[RPh_Guy]

how should I go about calculating the sparge water volumes for batch sparging?

Let's assume you know your grain absorption, boil-off and other equipment losses. That allows you to calculate the total water needed.

Start with a thick mash for the first step. Use an infusion calculator for the amounts of boiling water needed to hit your additional steps. Any additional water remaining can be used to batch sparge.

FYI The sparge water doesn't need to be hot.

It sounds like you mash with enough water to runoff exactly half of the pre-boil volume (accounting for grain absorption loss), and then add in enough sparge water back into the mash to run off the other half of the pre-boil volume.

This is generally for single infusion mashing. When [single infusion] batch sparging I use a little over half the water to mash and the rest as a single batch sparge.

If I am step mashing, essentially 80% of my pre-boil volume will be in the mash already, so do I just run off all of that, and add in the remaining amount needed as the sparge, let rest and run off again to reach total boil volume?

Yep, sounds like you got it.
The thicker you make your first step, the more water will be available for sparging.

 

[doug293cz]

Equal runnings volume is optimal for batch sparging, but even if volumes aren't equal you get most of the benefit of sparging. I'd do what @RPh_Guy suggests, and start with the thickest mash you can for the initial temp step, use just as much boiling water as you need to reach each additional infusion temp, and use whatever water is left for your batch sparge. Total brewing water + target pre-boil volume - grain absorption.

Brew on

 

[kgranger]

Sounds good, thanks y'all!

 

[JimRausch]

If sticking with the multi step infusion mash, and having a larger volume of water in the mash, how should I go about calculating the sparge water volumes for batch sparging?

Channeling Denny: Drain your 1st (or potentially only runnings in your case) and measure the volume. Add whatever volume sparge you need to make up your preboil volume.
***Hopefully Denny would agree with my channeling***

 

[Soulshine2]

I have been doing a bit of research into the "no-sparge" technique, as it not only can reduce brew day steps, but also according to this article the thinner, higher volume mash will produce more high quality first wort, and require less sparging, reducing the chance of over-sparging to reach post boil volume and extracting tannins. The big difference in process, however, is that a larger grain bill is required to ensure the greatest efficiency, since the rinsing of grain is not occurring.

My question is about multi step infusion mashing using boiling water additions. Since this is inherently creating a larger volume of mash in the end, in some cases, it may be enough to fill the kettle completely without sparging.

If I employ the "no-sparge" technique after a multi step infusion mash, will my efficiency be ok, or would I need to increase the grain bill the same as if I were doing a no sparge and single infusion mash?

Sorry if this is an obvious answer. I am thinking I need to increase the bill like the article above explains in either types of mash, I just want clarification.

And I know some people may tell me to just forget about multi step mash and stick to single infusion because modern, modified grain doesn't require it. I do notice some subtle differences in German styles I've done in particular, benefiting from multi step. Also, I just like to be a bit more traditional with these styles

I started step mashing a couple brews ago. 122-125 30 mins, 138-140 15 mins, 152-154*F 20 mins.
I start with about 1/2-3/4 my intended finished batch amount then sparge until I hit my pre-boil volume. I have never used DME. Hardly ever have I missed my gravity targets.

 

[Hopalong]

"My question is about multi step infusion mashing using boiling water additions. Since this is inherently creating a larger volume of mash in the end, in some cases, it may be enough to fill the kettle completely without sparging."
Yup, that happens. Start out with a thick mash, a thick mash preserves enzymes. Boil mash instead of boiling water and use the boiling mash to increase mash temperature. Use boiling water additions for maintaining temperature.

"And I know some people may tell me to just forget about multi step mash and stick to single infusion because modern, modified grain doesn't require it. I do notice some subtle differences in German styles I've done in particular, benefiting from multi step. Also, I just like to be a bit more traditional with these styles."
I have been told by brewers that I do not need to use the decoction method. I tell them I don't use high modified malt. The statement about modern, high modified malt isn't exactly true. The story claims that modern, high modified malt is superior to the malt that brewmaster used back in the day with the decoction method. The truth of the matter is, brewmasters tested malt, they formed the IOB and on that day the word modern was attached to malt. Being brewmasters they used the finest malt. Brewers grader malt is richer and more expensive than high modified malt and to take advantage of the malt the decoction method is used. It's a waste of money to use a single temperature infusion method with the malt. The higher the modification (Kolbach number on a malt spec sheet) the less rich the malt is in enzyme content. The higher the percentage of protein, the less sugar content. The higher the modification the closer the seed comes to being a plant and enzymes are beaten to death.
A single temperature is used with high modified malt because Alpha is the enzyme left in the malt. Alpha releases simple sugar, glucose from simple starch, amylose during liquefaction and saccharification. Glucose is responsible for primary fermentation. Conversion, dextrinization, gelatinization and secondary fermentation are left out.
The step mash method covers liquefaction, saccharification and conversion. Dextrinization and gelatinization are left out.
The step mash method produces pseudo ale and lager. The decoction method produces authentic ale and lager. I'm not sure what single infusion and high modified malt produces, but, it's pretty much chemically and enzymatically impossible to make ale and lager with the method. To produce authentic Prohibition beer syrup is used.

 

[Big Monk]

I started step mashing a couple brews ago. 122-125 30 mins, 138-140 15 mins, 152-154*F 20 mins.
I start with about 1/2-3/4 my intended finished batch amount then sparge until I hit my pre-boil volume. I have never used DME. Hardly ever have I missed my gravity targets.

Any insight in why you chose those rests?

I would recommend the following:

145-149 °F for 30 minutes
162 °F for 30 minutes
171-172 °F for 10-15 minutes.

I don’t see your current tests at 122-125 °F and 138-140 °F doing anything constructive for you.