Specialty Grains and fermentation.

[Ottis]

Does the amount of specialty grains in a recipe have much effect on the level of fermentation?
There's a reason I'm asking...

I like making small one gal batches in 1 gal glass cider jugs, just to try different stuff. The most recent of which I thought I'd see what different kinds and amounts of specialty grains would have on taste;

2-3 qt boil
~4 oz Cristal 10L, steeped at 155-160f for 30 min in a muslin bag.
1 lb light DME
1/4 oz cascade pellet hops for 40 min
1/4 oz cascade pellet hops at -3 min
cooled with ice cubes
filtered through cheescloth lined strainer & aireated (sp?)
1/2 pack Saflager 34/70

I put it in the growler, topped up with water to abt 4" from the top, and waited for the bubbling to start, then put it in my lagering fridge at 58F.

The next morning.....

Wow! foam all over.

To quote the famous philosopher H.I. McDunnough;
"It was kinda' horrifyin'.. "

I'v made this same basic one gal batch quite a few times, with some variations, but this time was the first using the grains.

So, just what are these specialty grains (besides good tastin') and how do they effect fermentation? at my LBS (local being a relative term) I saw bags of grain labeled "Unmalted grains", as well as specialty grains, and malted grains..

What's the difference in all these different grains???

 

[Reno_eNVy]

Speciality grains won't make fermentation explode like that. Every fermentation is different in speed, temperature, size of krausen (what you experienced), etc., especially at small batch levels that we homebrewers stick to. It will seem especially different if it's a yeast strain you've never used before. Some strains are known to ferment violently while others are subdued.

The difference in grains has to do with how long and at what temperatures they are kilned. Crystal malts add unfermentable sugars that contribute to the body and malty sweetness of a beer.

 

[jaycount]

Speciality grains won't make fermentation explode like that. Every fermentation is different in speed, temperature, size of krausen (what you experienced), etc., especially at small batch levels that we homebrewers stick to. It will seem especially different if it's a yeast strain you've never used before. Some strains are known to ferment violently while others are subdued.

The difference in grains has to do with how long and at what temperatures they are kilned. Crystal malts add unfermentable sugars that contribute to the body and malty sweetness of a beer.

This. Specialty grains are normally "specialty" because they add little in FERMENTABLE sugars to the wort.

Don't know why your batch went crazy. Sometimes it just happens, depends on the health of your yeast.

 

[Ottis]

I had used 34/70 before, but this time was the first for a 1 gal batch, maybe it just wasn't so noticeable in a larger fermenter.

Plus, now I see why 3-piece airlocks are more popular, easier to clean the schmutz out then as s-type airlock.

..........Crystal malts add unfermentable sugars that contribute to the body and malty sweetness of a beer.

Cool, I like a good malty brew!

 

[jaycount]

I had used 34/70 before, but this time was the first for a 1 gal batch, maybe it just wasn't so noticeable in a larger fermenter.

Plus, now I see why 3-piece airlocks are more popular, easier to clean the schmutz out then as s-type airlock.

You've got it :rockin:

 

[jfowler1]

Check out this thread - it is one of the most interesting things I have ever read on HBT.

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f128/testing-fermentability-crystal-malt-208361/

Basically, through a ton of experiment, the brewer concluded that when mashing crystal malts in the presence of a base grain, the overall fermentability is actually quite high. It seems like there is a large amount of starch in (lighter) crystal malts that is still convertable in the presence of a base malt with diastatic power. On the other hand, when steeped by themselves, the sugars (and starches) that derive from a crystal malt are much less fermentable - as expected. The gravity points may register the same, but the components of those gravity points are much different.

One of the other things I took out of the experiement is that the "curse of 1.020" that many extract brewers run into may be more due to the steeping grains than a supposedly "less fermentable" extract.

I had seen mini-mashing as pretty pointless, but after reading through the link above, I may have changed my mind.

Joe

 

[jaycount]

Depends on whether you want those grains to be more fermentable or not, could be a good thing.

 

[unionrdr]

But if specialty grains used for color are made more fermentable by mashing,would the color derived from them be less,or about the same?

 

[badhabit]

Check out this thread - it is one of the most interesting things I have ever read on HBT.

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f128/testing-fermentability-crystal-malt-208361/

Basically, through a ton of experiment, the brewer concluded that when mashing crystal malts in the presence of a base grain, the overall fermentability is actually quite high. It seems like there is a large amount of starch in (lighter) crystal malts that is still convertable in the presence of a base malt with diastatic power. On the other hand, when steeped by themselves, the sugars (and starches) that derive from a crystal malt are much less fermentable - as expected. The gravity points may register the same, but the components of those gravity points are much different.

One of the other things I took out of the experiement is that the "curse of 1.020" that many extract brewers run into may be more due to the steeping grains than a supposedly "less fermentable" extract.

I had seen mini-mashing as pretty pointless, but after reading through the link above, I may have changed my mind.

Joe

When I brewed extract I would often add a little six row to take advantage of the sugar in the specialty grains and crystals.

 

[dcp27]

But if specialty grains used for color are made more fermentable by mashing,would the color derived from them be less,or about the same?

its unrelated. the color will be the same.

 

[Reno_eNVy]

its unrelated. the color will be the same.

This. Fermentation does not alter Maillard Reactions (the most delicious of all reactions)

 

[unionrdr]

I was referring to the boil. I thought the un-fermentable sugars made the color along with the roasting of the malt. So I figured if more of them are made fermentable,the color would be lighter from decreasing un-fermentables. So,you're saying that the color is from the drying/roasting?

 

[Reno_eNVy]

Most definitely. Most of the color in your beer comes from the varied lengths and temperatures of kilning malt. Some color is added on long boils (especially using extract) but it's really not that much.

 

[onipar]

A bit off topic, but what is "the curse of 1.020?"

 

[jfowler1]

Go to the search field, and type...

"BEER STOPPED FERMENTING AT 1.020"

...and let me know how many hits you get.

Joe

 

[unionrdr]

A bit off topic, but what is "the curse of 1.020?"

Something I've never,ever been stuck with. Some get stuck fermentations at SG 1.020,a little high on the FG for an average gravity extract ale. Some can't be re-started by swirling the yeast,& bringing the temp down within range.
Just remember to pitch enough yeast at the right temp,& keep it there.

 

[dcp27]

A bit off topic, but what is "the curse of 1.020?"

it basically refers to a tendancy for extract brews to finish at 1.02 vs their intended lower FG. its more than likely related to poor pitching & other beginner techniques than extracts, but it pops up alot.

 

[unionrdr]

it basically refers to a tendancy for extract brews to finish at 1.02 vs their intended lower FG. its more than likely related to poor pitching & other beginner techniques than extracts, but it pops up alot.

Yup. Imho,that's it more often as not. That's why we give them the 20 questions routine. It usually comes down to new brewer error. That's why some of us say,"blame the brewer,not the brew".

 

[ChickenArise]

Most definitely. Most of the color in your beer comes from the varied lengths and temperatures of kilning malt. Some color is added on long boils (especially using extract) but it's really not that much.

And if I'm not mistaken, the compounds produce by the Maillard reaction that add color are also not fermentable.

 

[onipar]

it basically refers to a tendancy for extract brews to finish at 1.02 vs their intended lower FG. its more than likely related to poor pitching & other beginner techniques than extracts, but it pops up alot.

Thank you dcp27 and unionrdr for answering my question.

That's interesting that it occurs so often that it got its own "curse." :cross: I've never had that problem (knock on wood) either, but it's good to know what to watch out for.

 

[unionrdr]

you're welcome. The more I'm around home brewing,the more I learn. (best Arnold voice)

 

[jfowler1]

it basically refers to a tendancy for extract brews to finish at 1.02 vs their intended lower FG. its more than likely related to poor pitching & other beginner techniques than extracts, but it pops up alot.

Correct.

That is why I said, "One of the other things I took out of the experiement is that the "curse of 1.020" that many extract brewers run into may be more due to the steeping grains than a supposedly "less fermentable" extract."

Excuse me for getting off topic, but I think this could be interesting. I may have to run the numbers a little, and it would be great if an extract brewer experimented a bit with this, but I really wonder if (as the fermentability article illustrates) typical steeping quantities (1-1.5 lb?) would yield enough unfermentable gravity points to make up the difference between 1.020 and say, 1.014 - with the assumption that had those steeping grains been mashed, they would have been fermentable enough to get you down to the desired 1.014.

One of the most telling stats from the experiment comes from evaluating attenuation rates of 1 lb steeped crystal 40 (40%), vs 1 lb mashed 2 row (80%) vs a 50/50 split of mashed 2 row and crystal (70%). If the mashing played no role, you would have assumed that the 50/50 split would have been right between the attenuation of steeping crystal vs mashing 2 row (60%), but it wasn't - it was 10% higher. Is that 10% difference enough to create the 1.020 issue?

I have heard malt extract getting blamed for the 1.020 phenomenon since I started brewing, but I have never heard someone say that it could be due to the make-up of the gravity contribution of the steeping grains.

Any thoughts?

Joe

 

[onipar]

I have heard malt extract getting blamed for the 1.020 phenomenon since I started brewing, but I have never heard someone say that it could be due to the make-up of the gravity contribution of the steeping grains.

Any thoughts?

Joe

This is by no means scientific, but for what it's worth, my first brew was pure extract (LME and DME) with no specialty grains, and I was able to hit 1.013 FG after two weeks.

My second brew had LME and specialty grains, and I only got as low as 1.017 after three weeks.

I have a partial mash kit coming in the mail, as well as another extract + specialty grains kit, so it'll be interesting to see if the partial mash gets to a lower FG, and if the other extract kit gets stalled around that 1.017-1.020 area again.

 

[dcp27]

good thought, but I'd think it'd need to be a pretty fair amount. IIRC, steeped crystal will yield about 20ppg. so 1lb in a normal 5gal batch would only be 4 pts. at 40% attenuation its even less, 2.4. so for your example of 1.02 instead of 1.014, there'd need to be 2.5lbs crystal. dark malts will attenuate even less, but theres also less extraction so its probably similar quantity.

however, since its only 10% higher attenuation w/ AG which the FG is presumably based on, the quantity would need to be even higher since most of that bump is already compensated for. on the other hand, you also extract more from it in a mash so it probably evens out.

 

[jfowler1]

This is by no means scientific, but for what it's worth, my first brew was pure extract (LME and DME) with no specialty grains, and I was able to hit 1.013 FG after two weeks.

My second brew had LME and specialty grains, and I only got as low as 1.017 after three weeks.

I have a partial mash kit coming in the mail, as well as another extract + specialty grains kit, so it'll be interesting to see if the partial mash gets to a lower FG, and if the other extract kit gets stalled around that 1.017-1.020 area again.

That is great info. It would be nice to form a bit of a trend, but your earlier findings fall right in line with what I was saying. Were the starting gravities and yeast similar? Those two things are important too, and would help support me even more.

It would be great if you would follow up and let us know how your upcoming batches work out.

Thanks,
Joe

 

[onipar]

That is great info. It would be nice to form a bit of a trend, but your earlier findings fall right in line with what I was saying. Were the starting gravities and yeast similar? Those two things are important too, and would help support me even more.

It would be great if you would follow up and let us know how your upcoming batches work out.

Thanks,
Joe

Yeah, I'll definitely follow up. I'm planning on doing a batch this Sunday, though i don't yet know if it'll be the partial mash or the extract. Depends on time.

As for the first two brews, unfortunately they are very different.

The first brew was a Belgian White with an OG of 1.040. I'm not even sure what the yeast was because I used the packet that was under the lid of the can. The code was 05310W...not sure that means much. (This was one with an FG of 1.013).

The second Brew was a Nut Brown Ale with an OG of 1.052. I used a slap pack of yeast for this one: Wyeast #1098 British Ale Yeast. (FG 1.017)

I agree the best way to test this would be if they were the same beer, same yeast, same OG, (not to mention fermentation temps, etc) with the only difference being one with specialty grains.

 

[hector]

Ohhh !!!

Is it really so ?!

F.G. would be always 1.020 by an all-Extract Batch ?!

Perhaps that's why my Beer which is brewed with DME has always low Alcohol .

What should I do to have more Attenuation ?

Hector

 

[Reno_eNVy]

Hector,

Many extract brewers hit the curse of 1.020... this can't necessarily be alleviated by proper pitching rates. As a general rule, with all other variable accounted for, yeast will ferment available fermentable sugars. 1.020 just means you have too many unfermentables in your extract, which is quite common.

An easy way to take care of this is to dry it out using dextrose (i.e. corn sugar, "priming" sugar) in the boil.

 

[jfowler1]

An easy way to take care of this is to dry it out using dextrose (i.e. corn sugar, "priming" sugar) in the boil.

That's right, but to clarify, you substitute the dextrose point for point with the extract. In other words, don't add the dextrose on top of the given recipe. If you simply add the dextrose on top of the extract, you just have a higher alcohol beer with a still high FG.

Joe

 

[unionrdr]

Idk why "most extract brewer's" can't get below 1.020? I just never have that problem,& I use 3lbs of plain DME with to ounces/types of hops in a 23L batch. I try hard to keep close to 70F,I make small starter to get the lil yeasties reproducing well by pitch time.
so "we" don't all get the "curse". It's a procedure problem for the most part.