Stepping up mash temp on RIMS vs HERMS

[Rob2010SS]

Just as an update here, did as others mentioned and added a T to the output of the RIMS and moved the controlling temp probe to this location. Due to the limited clearance around the sides of the brew cart provided with the Nano, the T went on to the front of the valve that was in front of the RIMS element with the top of the T running straight out ( as if you took the T and rotated 90 deg counter-clockwise), the temp probe was on the opposite end and the wort flowed through the RIMS and took a right turn as it exited out of the tube and went through the pump. The control of the wort temperature, while the element was definitely kicking on and off more often, this definitely seemed to have been a better way to control the temp. After @mabrungard 's comment that it's the temperature of the wort and not the grain bed that matters, made it so I didn't necessarily check the temp of the grain bed as much either. Thanks to all for the feedback here.

 

[swimIan]

@Rob2010SS Do you mind posting pictures?

 

[Rob2010SS]

@Rob2010SS Do you mind posting pictures?

Yeah for sure! I'll snag a picture of it tomorrow when I'm at the brewery.

 

[Tropicpine]

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 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?

 

[Tropicpine]

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?

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.
My current solution to this problem is to add rice hulls to my grain bill. It works but does not necessarily solve the problem. I was about to try attaching a thermostat to my heating element but am going to try the suggestion below to set the grain bed with the heating element off.

 

[ITV]

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?

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.

Then I start the recirc through the RIMS tube with the heating element off. This allows the mash temps to stabilize and set the bed of the mash. Once I see the temp in the mash tun stabilize and verify flow through the RIMS I switch on the heating element. At this point it is easy to do step mashes or a mash out by adjusting the setpoint temp on the PID controller.

Before turning the pump off, I switch off the heating element for a few minutes to help prevent the heating element from scorching the wort in the RIMS tube.

I also use rice hulls when using flaked wheat or oats to prevent a stuck mash.

 

[EccentricDyslexic]

i often get debris in my rims system, even with a fine false bottom and no gaps, that’s why I’m going to try reversing my flow, to take wort from the top and reheated wort back in under the mash bed. Will report back once I’ve tried this.

 

[Rob2010SS]

@Rob2010SS Do you mind posting pictures?

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.

 

[ITV]

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

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.

 

[doug293cz]

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.

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

 

[ITV]

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 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.

 

[doug293cz]

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.

The first photo also has the temp probe on the "T" side arm, so it's not the optimal configuration anyway.

Brew on

 

[Rob2010SS]

So both methods worked for us. At least, worked significantly better than the stock setup, I should say. It seems like it's way more efficient and we're worrying less about temps overheating. You can hear the element kicking on and off regularly and I'm happy with both methods.

In the setup with the sight glass, the only reason we added that was because if you don't have some kind of extension there pushing the butterfly valve past the cart frame, the butterfly valve body sits on the cart frame and doesn't line up with the RIMS tube.

The photo without the sight glass was actually our first attempt. We tried the second attempt (with sight glass) to keep the liquid flowing straight out. But come to find out, the setup with the sight glass, you can't get a bin in front of the system to pull grains out through the grain door. You have to rebuild that section and make it shorter to utilize the grain door. Kind of a PITA...

So ultimately I think we'll stick with the setup without the sight glass in it.

 

[sibelman]

All told, @Rob2010SS's story sounds like an opportunity for @SpikeBrewing to improve their system -- or at least their instructions.