I'd expect better from a $16K system.It appears that Spike didn't intend to utilize the RIMS as it was designed, more so to "top-off" the mash temp.
Is there a Spike Nano forum where you could get other users input?
Brew on

I'd expect better from a $16K system.It appears that Spike didn't intend to utilize the RIMS as it was designed, more so to "top-off" the mash temp.
Is there a Spike Nano forum where you could get other users input?
Yeah I think there’s user group on FB that my wife checks in on occasionally. We’ll see what others say.It appears that Spike didn't intend to utilize the RIMS as it was designed, more so to "top-off" the mash temp.
Is there a Spike Nano forum where you could get other users input?
If you decide to go with relocating the RIMS heater temp probe, you may wish to use the existing thermowell in the mash tun to verify when the target mash temp is reached.To be fair, as system size goes up, the ability to step mash is way more challenging. The larger systems are using steam jackets around the entire mash tun with spinning rakes to keep the whole mash fluid and moving away from the intense heat source. The nano is right in that dead zone where it's too small to be steam jacketed and too large for RIMS/HERMS to make any fast moves.
I think it's reasonable to use infusions to make big changes quickly. Don't overfill the HLT so that you can get it up to boiling pretty quickly. Boiling water infusions will make pretty good work of step mashing. The RIMS can make the fine adjustments. No matter what, the probe still needs to be after the heater in the RIMS. Now.. just be prepared for some adjusting the temp setpoint to deal with offset. You will need to run the RIMS controller set point a few degrees higher than your target once you figure out what that is.
Nit picky... I think the enzymes are everywhere so it's important for the average temperature of the entire mash liquor to be in the right range. Monitoring post heat source is the right solution, but even if the mash needs a few degrees of upward bump, it's impractical to hold the RIMS output (or HERMS for that matter) at exactly the desired setpoint. It will never get there. When temp ramps are required, especially on larger systems, it's typical of the wort closest to the heat source be momentarily heated quite a bit above set point.With regarding to your temperature step, the only thing that matters is the wort temperature coming out of the element chamber. That is where the step occurs. The temperature of the overall grain bed will step up to the upper step temperature eventually, but its important to recognize that the enzymes that you're trying to manage, reside in the wort, not the bed.
Yeah for sure! I'll snag a picture of it tomorrow when I'm at the brewery.@Rob2010SS Do you mind posting pictures?
I have been having the same scorching problem and am interested in your solution but I have one question. Do you preheat your water before adding your grain bill?I've been using a RIMS for several years now.
The first thing that I do is to adjust the recirc flow before turning on the heating element. This will set the grain bed and establish a flow throught the RIMS tube. Once the flow is established I turn on the element and keep a close eye on the flow.
When the mash is complete I turn off the heating element while keeping the recirc pump running to "cool down" the heating element.
Depending on the thickness of the mash and gravity of the beer that I am brewing I adjust the recirc flow to establish "adequate" flow through the RIMS tube.
The slower the flow the greater chance of scorching. If the flow is too great then there is a chance of channeling of the grain bed.
For increasing the mash temps with my RIMS, I just set the desired mash temp on the PID controller and let the process ramp up the mash temp.
It is important that you don't leave it unattended as a lack of flow can result in a scorched wort.
I am not familar witht he Spike system, but for mine there is a method to "calibrate" the PID controller to have it cycle the heating element "properly" so that it doesn't overshoot or undershoot the target temp.
I am seeing this scorching but I believe that it is happening when circulation drops due to my grain bed sticking when mashing. I had set up my system with a tri-clamp filtering gasket just after a site glass and the ability to back flush. This configuration is actually exacerbated the scorching problem.Looking to tap into some of vast knowledge/experience here on the forum. We have a Hefeweizen recipe that we've tweaked a few times and have it nailed down. We always start with a ferulic acid rest at 112F and ramp up to 154F for the sacch rest. Previously, we had a HERMS system and it worked really well for ramping up the temps. Now, we have a RIMS system - the Spike Nano system.
Full transparency, we tried to brew the recipe yesterday and to say the least, it didn't go well. Ended up scorching the element to the point we need a new element. Additionally, the wort went down the drain. As interesting as a Hefe with a burnt/ashy flavor sounded, we weren't about to invest the additional $$ into this one.
We mashed in and performed the FA rest successfully. Where it went bad was trying to increase from the 112 to the 154 rest. How should this be done on a RIMS system to avoid scorching?
I had a thought that maybe, we needed to start with only a portion of the mash water to get the FA rest complete, then to bring the rest of the mash up to 154, use additional hot water from the HLT to top up the mash volume and get that temp up. However, I just went on the BF calculator and I don't think that's feasible. It's telling me I need a butt load of water to do that. See below...
View attachment 815375
So, I don't think that's an option. Ultimately, from what I've read thus far, the problem is most likely the debris that was getting by the false bottom and it just scorched to the element.
We used to brew with a bag in the mash tun. However, the amount of grains we're using on the Nano system, that's not an option. We'll never be able to lift them out of the mash tun. (EDIT: I shouldn't say this isn't an option. We could do this and then just scoop out the grains by hand until the bag is light enough to pull out...)
I did buy some TC clamps with screens built into them. I could use those to clamp the RIMS tube onto the mash tun but if those clog and block flow, were screwed as there's no way to get it out and clean it without losing all of the mash.
All that said, those of you with RIMS systems, how do you step up your mash temps while avoiding this issue?
Yes I preheat the water in my boil kettle and pump it to the mash tun. I undershoot the target mash temp by a few degrees since the RIMS will bring it up to the target temp which is easier then trying to cool the mash temp back down. I did this once and had to use my plate chiller to cool the temps back down.I have been having the same scorching problem and am interested in your solution but I have one question. Do you preheat your water before adding your grain bill?
Sorry took a bit longer to get a picture. Attached is a picture of how we set that up.@Rob2010SS Do you mind posting pictures?
Results?Sorry took a bit longer to get a picture. Attached is a picture of how we set that up.
We’ve actually tried two methods thus far so I’ve attached pictures of both.
View attachment 817836
View attachment 817837
It can make a difference. With the liquid exiting the side arm of the "T", the temp probe tip can extend into the RIMS tube (if it's long enough), and right up next to the end of the heating element. This is the location that will have the minimum time delay between wort heating and the detection of that heat up. Least time delay means the fastest controller response to temperature changes, which means you have the best chance of not overheating the wort locally.Results?
Both methods results should be the same since the only difference is what side of the T the thermocouple and valve are located.
As a side note, from this video Link the 15 gallon spike trio setup has the same RIMS configuration as you currently have.
The first photo has a sight glass between the T and the heating element, I didn't notice that at first. I prefer to move the sight glass either before or after the valve to allow the temp probe to be closer to the heating element.It can make a difference. With the liquid exiting the side arm of the "T", the temp probe tip can extend into the RIMS tube (if it's long enough), and right up next to the end of the heating element. This is the location that will have the minimum time delay between wort heating and the detection of that heat up. Least time delay means the fastest controller response to temperature changes, which means you have the best chance of not overheating the wort locally.
Brew on![]()
The first photo also has the temp probe on the "T" side arm, so it's not the optimal configuration anyway.The first photo has a sight glass between the T and the heating element, I didn't notice that at first. I prefer to move the sight glass either before or after the valve to allow the temp probe to be closer to the heating element.