Short mash tips/tricks

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Having been on this board a few years, I remember a couple of years ago the saying around here was "Crush till you're scared".:D

It came from multiple discussions where the idea that fine crush caused astringency was debunked, and that stuck sparges weren't as big of a threat as they were assumed to be. Worst come to worst, use rice hulls.

Everyone seemed (and still are) hung up on getting good efficiency, if for nothing else to brag about it on here;). So the way to do that is to crush the hell out of that grain.

I recall the same with other boards I belong to but it was always those pesky 90%+ efficiency guys talking about it. :D To me the bar is 80%. Anything past that is gravy. I hit 80%+ consistently before trying the short mash so I left it be. If I can hit 80% with a 30 minutes mash and no issues, I'll be happy. 85% and I am ecstatic and will try a single sparge and go for 80% and save another 15 minutes. I will still probably go for 60 on dry styles or maybe even longer on huge beers but I rarely do them.
 
When I say that I think that brewing is work it's because I am constantly doing something. Crush grain while strike water is heating, heating sparge water while mashing, etc.

I don't have much time each day, so each day I do a little
  • measure out and bag separately one day,
  • crush another day
  • prepare starter wort and store it
  • day before brewing I start the starter

brew day I can just heat and go.

And I do throw everything in sanitizing solution until the next day.
 
May have missed it in the thread, but something else to consider for time savings, especially for smaller beers is to use first wort hopping with the flame on as you're putting your 1st runnings into the BK; you can cut the rolling boil down to 30 minutes and still get full hop effect (adjust calculations accordingly!). Doing this, along with several other previously mentioned techniques can get an all-grain brew day done in 3 hours from start to finish including a 60 minute mash.

My $.02

J
 
I assume when you say this you are referring to over-attenuation. Do you do anything to prevent this?



I mash out to inactivate the enzymes before sparging. Otherwise I found my mash will continue to convert as I collect runnings, unless I begin to heat immediately (which I try to do but I'm usually shuffling pots of runnings around to do this).



You do BIAB, right?

I've tried to limit the overattenuation by using a higher mash temp but I haven't had time to explore it more. It might also be because I pitch a full packet of dry yeast that's been rehydrated into 2 1/2 gallons. Maybe I need to use a little less yeast?

Yes I do BIAB. I'd have problems getting the wort out of a conventional tun with the grains milled so fine.

I don't try to mash out but as soon as the bag of grains is out of the pot the heat is turned on and I'm on my way to boil. While the wort is heating I'm squeezing all the wort I can from the bag, doing a small amount of cold water for sparge, and collecting all that into the boil pot before it gets to boil.

I'd read about first wort hops and someone mentioned that it limited the hot break material and avoided boil overs so I tried it. First boil over in a long time. I must have done it wrong.
 
I'd read about first wort hops and someone mentioned that it limited the hot break material and avoided boil overs so I tried it. First boil over in a long time. I must have done it wrong.

I would not agree with that person. Quite the opposite, in fact (as you've experienced). I find a bigger hot break (i.e. foam up) with FWH when using pellets.
 
I don't have any comparative basis on First Wort Hopping and its affect on boil overs, but I will add that IMO, people worry too much about boil over; A small managed boil over purges the pot of excess proteins and hop residues and makes for a cleaner beer in my experience. I agree, it's messy, but that is what hoses are for.

All the best,

J
 
I don't have any comparative basis on First Wort Hopping and its affect on boil overs, but I will add that IMO, people worry too much about boil over; A small managed boil over purges the pot of excess proteins and hop residues and makes for a cleaner beer in my experience. I agree, it's messy, but that is what hoses are for.

All the best,

J

I'm sure my wife would be impressed it I brought a hose into her kitchen and hosed off her kitchen range.:cross:
 
I found taking the opposite approach ended up gaining me more non-brewing productive time. After all, nobody says that we can’t multitask during the brewing process.

In my case a 60-90 minute mash gives me time to do one or more of the following SWMBO friendly activities:
  • Mow the grass
  • Empty the dishwasher
  • Vacuum the house
  • Prep Dinner
  • Go to the gym
  • Run to the store
  • Brush the dog…etc…etc…

I also break up the measuring/crushing/setup process from the rest of the brew session.
  • I will measure out the grains in the brewshop on a Tuesday night (20 minutes)
  • I will crush the grains in the driveway the following Wednesday or Thursday night (20 minutes)
  • I will set up all of the brewing equipment, hook up gas lines to burners, measure out hops the night before I brew (say Friday night – 20 minutes)

Then Saturday morning I get up early, strike the mash and go do my 60-90 minutes worth of honeydo’s.
During the boil I’ll pay bills on line
During the chill I can walk away and do some more “stuff” around the house.

Total brew time from flame to clean up is 3 ½ hours on a 60 minute mash (…but I have very adequate burners and that helps).

So for me personally, working on SWMBO pleasing activities while the beer does its own thing, still allows me to dial in final malt profile through proper mash rest times. There is no way I get a very dry, very crisp blonde ale with a 30 minute mash. :mug:

+1 to everything here. My wife knows that when I say I'm brewing Saturday morning that also means I'm making coffee, eggs, hash browns, sausage/bacon, biscuits and gravy, waffles, pancakes (it varies but always a full breakfast) for the family. It also means she doesn't need to water her flowers since I do that with the chiller water. As soon as I started doing positive things like that for the family on brew days most of the griping about me brewing stopped.
 
One thing to consider is that conversion from starch to sugar is not the whole story. Yes in most mashes, 15 to 20 minutes will achieve a negative result with an Iodine test. The available starch has been converted to some form of saccharide. However at the early stage, at lot of the saccharide is in a relatively or actual unfermentable form...dextrins and polysaccharides. It is that longer mash rest time that THEN allows the wort composition to convert to a high percentage of maltose. That is what you lose when you fail to extend a mash long enough.

If fermentability is a concern in your brewing, then mashing duration also needs to be a consideration. Conversion from starch to 'not starch' is not a good measure.
 
One thing to consider is that conversion from starch to sugar is not the whole story. Yes in most mashes, 15 to 20 minutes will achieve a negative result with an Iodine test. The available starch has been converted to some form of saccharide. However at the early stage, at lot of the saccharide is in a relatively or actual unfermentable form...dextrins and polysaccharides. It is that longer mash rest time that THEN allows the wort composition to convert to a high percentage of maltose. That is what you lose when you fail to extend a mash long enough.

If fermentability is a concern in your brewing, then mashing duration also needs to be a consideration. Conversion from starch to 'not starch' is not a good measure.

At the middle of the mash temperature range, beta amylase works quickly and is quickly denatured. Once it is denatured it no longer matters how long you mash. My 10 minute mash at 152 got me a FG of 1.012 from an OG of 1.058. That would seem to indicate plenty of fermentables.
 
I agree with RM-MN. The types of sugars are more temp dependant than mash time dependent. Beta amylase makes maltose at the low mash temp range while alpha is dominant at the higher mash temp range and it makes a wide range of carbs. This is why mash outs are done on slow chill systems; to halt enzymatic activity and prevent dextrin formation, yes? Thereis overlap but this is why mashing at 145 gets you a very fermentable wort while mashing ay 155 is going to get you a dextrinous wort. The literature I've seen all says long mashes lead to lower FG, but none say why that is. Maybe longer mashes are seeing the complex carbs created by alpha being converted to more fermentable sugars by the few left over betas? But this is a different scenario than mashing sub 150 letting you fully convert a fermentable wort quite quickly.
 
I agree with RM-MN. The types of sugars are more temp dependant than mash time dependent. Beta amylase makes maltose at the low mash temp range while alpha is dominant at the higher mash temp range and it makes a wide range of carbs. This is why mash outs are done on slow chill systems; to halt enzymatic activity and prevent dextrin formation, yes? Thereis overlap but this is why mashing at 145 gets you a very fermentable wort while mashing ay 155 is going to get you a dextrinous wort. The literature I've seen all says long mashes lead to lower FG, but none say why that is. Maybe longer mashes are seeing the complex carbs created by alpha being converted to more fermentable sugars by the few left over betas? But this is a different scenario than mashing sub 150 letting you fully convert a fermentable wort quite quickly.

While its true that beta amylase makes shorter work of saccharide "shredding" into lower molecular weight sugars, alpha amylase also creates those sugars. It is incorrect to assume that time AND temperature don't matter. Take a peak at this journal article:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.2050-0416.1982.tb04104.x/pdf
 
I didn't say time and temp didn't matter. I said temp matters more. I also said that I don't understand the processes that are making extended mashes lead to lower FG (than a typical mash schedule). Do you think a 90 minute mash of normal crushed grains at 156F will lead to a lower FG than the same grain bill powderized and mashed for 20 minutes at 145F? maybe it will, I don't know, but I am skeptical.
 
While its true that beta amylase makes shorter work of saccharide "shredding" into lower molecular weight sugars, alpha amylase also creates those sugars. It is incorrect to assume that time AND temperature don't matter. Take a peak at this journal article:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.2050-0416.1982.tb04104.x/pdf

Gotta love a study which prefaces itself with an explanation that the process is still not completely understood... Makes sense why all the debate exists. That said, thank you for posting! Looks to be very pertinent.
 
I only glanced at it. It may be interesting to read but it's a pretty narrow focused study:
The purpose of this investigation was to study the initial stages of dextrinisation in the a-amylolysis of
large and small barley starch granules, compared with the respective gelatinised starches. The changes in molecular weight distribution of the starch hydrolysates were followed by means of gel chromatography.

It seems to be a comparison of the conversion effects from two different types of sources of starch from barley grains. Test scenarios apparently were at 45C (~113F) and 70C (~158F). They also isolated and tested ONLY alpha amylase for study. It may address that alphas can and do create a multitude of products from barley starches. We know that. It does not appear to address the topic at hand: The influence of mash temps, mash times, and the relationship of those to the other active enzymes.

I suppose mabrungard was linking this to show that alphas also create maltose? I think it's well understood that betas create a much, much higher fraction of maltose to alpha. mabrungard, why don't you give us your summary of the paper rather than blindly asking us to review and interpret it.
 
Ultimately you can do a 90 minute mash, but unless you're shooting for the most fermentable beer you can manage (as in a saison or something), you probably want to do it a few times and fine-tune it with experience, or you might undershoot your FG.

The temperatures people usually use to achieve a given fermentability are tuned to a 60 minute mash, and if you want to do 30 or 90 you will have to play with your temperature to get a predictable result.
 
....mabrungard....Bamforth has written a good article on enzymatic affects on starch. His article is easier for a layman to understand, than the 1982 experiments performed by the IOB. Bamforth's article is in the MBAA 1993. A-amylase is experimented on more so than beta as it is native to starch, beta comes along during malting, along with other enzymes. Bamforth is experimenting with beta glucanase. During his research he has found that certain types of malt are retaining beta glucanase after kilning. I recently began to use Crisp Euro Pils, low modified for decoctions. There is no evidence of beta glucanase surviving kilning. I rested the decoction mash at 122F for 20 minutes, before going to conversion temp. I ran the main mash temp up to 125F using the 1st decoction. Then, I fired the mashtun to hit 135F and rested for 30 minutes allowing proteolytic enzymes break down the jell, converting beta glucan to glucose. It worked well. The malt is tricky to work with. The malt pH with RO is 5.61 after a 30 minute acid/beta glucan rest at 105F. That was the pH of the 1st decoction. I added sauer malz during the main mash protein rest, lowering pH to 5.13, before pulling the 2nd decoction. Evidently, phytase is kilned out, too. My Kingdom for a pallet of Moravian Budvar. Thanks for the article from IOB.

Alpha, basically, turns starch (a polysaccaride) into carbohydrate stew. It liquifies starch. It, also, cuts the long starch chain at certain points. Even though, the optimum temp is around 155F, alpha will work at lower temps, only slower. When alpha cuts the long starch chain, a reducing end and a non reducing end are formed. Beta works on the non reducing end. It chops off two molecules of starch and combines them with one water molecule, forming maltose, a disaccaride. Beta, also, can chop off three starch molecules forming maltriose, a trisaccaride. Maltriose is what lager yeast works on during the lagering phase. There's another thing called amylopectin that goes along with starch and conversion phases. Some sugars that are produced, ale yeast won't ferment. However, they will convert them to non-fermentable sugars. The English infusion method limits a brewer when it comes to taking advantage of enzymatic activity. Methods like programmed or decoction take enzymes through their optimum pH and temps a few times. Those methods take hours to perform. So, how does the brewmaster ensure enzymes are not denatured by temp and time. It's done by controlling mash thickness at certain temps, controlling point of gelatinization, controlling pH suitable for enzymes being utilized during the rests, utilizing enzymes such as maltase, dextrinase, proteinase, beta glucanase, phytase, if they haven't been kilned out and probably by adding some calcium.

Certain malting firms will put on the malt data sheet, beta/alpha ratios, viscosity and conversion time. There is one malster claiming conversion, in a lab, in ten minutes. Most malsters claim 20 to 30 minutes depending on the testing method used.

Regarding FWH. It was never indended for use in wort bittering and pellet hops were never intended to be used. The brewer that had problems with pellet hops creating boil over, probably tossed them in loose, when he/she normally bags them up and tosses in the bag or hangs it off the bottom of the boiler after hot break. A very small portion of the bittering leaf hops are added to the boiler as soon as the wort covers the bottom. The hops reduce the surface tension of the wort. The method has been around a few hundred years. I use .25 oz. leaf in a 22 gallon boil, that has 6 to 8 ounces of leaf dumped into the boiler for bittering a Pils. A couple of ounces of crushed black malt will do the same thing. If you saw no reduction in hot break, one or two things happened. It wasn't done correctly or the brewing process needs to be cleaned up, as too much gunk is being carried over.

Over night mashing. Premashing is usually done with cold water or warm water when the brewmaster was certain of the time it would take for lacto to be active in reducing pH. The longer that mash stays gelatinized, the longer it takes to convert. Starch begins to gelatinize around 149F. The reason that a rest somewhere between 140 and 145F is used with the program or decoction method, is so that enzyme activity isn't hampered by gelatinization. Then, a rest is usually performed at 149F for 20 to 40 minutes, enzymatic activity is slower due to gelatinization, allowing a and b limit dextrins to be formed and reduced before denaturing of beta occurs. Then, another rest at 155F, held for 10 minutes (alpha II enzyme rest). Then, a rest at 160F, held for 10 minutes (alpha I enzyme rest).
 
I just don't get why people seek out under modified malts and the put themselves through the torture necessary to adequate mash under modified malts, which is all the whole reason why technological advances in the last 100 years finally let maltsters properly kiln malts and make all of the specialty malts. I guess its like people who swallow swords for a hobby, or that preacher who uses poisonous snakes in his shtick. Do any pro breweries still do all this?
 
Brewed the saison yesterday. 60 minute mash, 150F, pH of 5.3, 1.6qt per lb. The session went great and hit all my numbers with the exception of the sparge water getting a bit hot and temps went a little beyond 170F during lauter. I acidify sparge so I think I minimized most of it. Only run into this during warmer brewing days… Kinda funny how weather affect the brew session.

Gapped the mill at .020" and love the results! There were still plenty of husks intact. Vorlauf went insanely faster to clear wort. Basically I recirculated 1 pitcher (2qt) and then it was clear. Normally it takes 3 or 4 pitchers. And when I say clear, it was crystal clear. I am used to fairly clear runoffs, but this was UNREAL. Did an iodine test half way for giggles and it was negative, but I was going for fermentability. As fate would have it, I picked up another 5% efficiency bringing the total to 85%+. Gotta run some numbers and see if I can get away with a single batch sparge to 80%.
 
I just don't get why people seek out under modified malts and the put themselves through the torture necessary to adequate mash under modified malts, which is all the whole reason why technological advances in the last 100 years finally let maltsters properly kiln malts and make all of the specialty malts.

Because not everyone looks at it the same way you do. Some folks don't mind an involved or full brewday, and the time it takes whether it's 2 hours or 6 hours; I certainly do. I've tried various brewing techniques over the years and don't limit myself to any specific one, plus I gain the experience of the brewing technique by not limiting myself. I use a single-infusion mash when it's warranted; a step-infusion mash when I want utmost attenuation without a excessively dry end flavor profile; a cereal mash when using minimally-processed adjuncts; and a decoction mash schedule when the ingredients perform better or historical significance is relevant or I'm wanted to eek out some extra efficiency or melanoidin maltiness. Again, it's our/your hobby and you are only limited by your own decisions :D

I guess its like people who swallow swords for a hobby, or that preacher who uses poisonous snakes in his shtick.

Nope, not even remotely similar. But those are rhetorical questions anyway ;)

Do any pro breweries still do all this?

Yes, of course they do. Pilsner Urquell is the classic example.
 
I guess, but this thread is about how to save time in a brew day. A diatribe about the beauty of step mashing is a bit off topic, yes?
 
I guess, but this thread is about how to save time in a brew day. A diatribe about the beauty of step mashing is a bit off topic, yes?

I guess, but only as much as a diatribe about homebrewers using under modified malts is. Just didn't want your post to go unanswered ;)
 
I guess, but this thread is about how to save time in a brew day. A diatribe about the beauty of step mashing is a bit off topic, yes?

Not really, as we also need to talk about results.

If you can mash for 20 minutes and boil for 15 minutes, and get the beer you love, that's great. If Vlad can mash for an entire day, boil for 2 hours, and get the beer that he prefers, that's great. I'm in the middle- I decoct some beers, step mash a couple, but for the most part do a traditional single infusion mash.

Time savings is only worthwhile to those who make that a priority. There are trade offs. For some, a single infusion mash is "good enough" for them. For others, it's not. There WILL be a big difference in the beer to those who appreciate it, particularly German style lagers. In an IPA, it would not be perceptible. It really depends on the goal of each brewer, and the results they are looking for.
 
Wanted to post and update (and stir the pot back up :D)

Did a 1.048 grisette Saturday with a 30 minute mash @ 150F (briess 2 row brewers malt base) and a single batch sparge. Hit my numbers @ 80% efficiency. Brewday was about 3 hours with a 15m hopstand. Was interesting to time the lauter. The single batch sparge took same time as double batch with previous crush... Finer crush made runoff slower. In any event, my previous saison was 60m mash and went to 1.008 (3726). Hope I hit single digits with the grisette and that should confirm sufficient beta activity for my purposes.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top