The OFFICIAL Low Oxygen Brewing Thread, AKA lodo, lowdo, LOB

[schematix]

I've found it to be incredibly helpful to take a gravity sample every 10-15 minutes and plot the gravity vs expected.

I had some issues initially when i went to low oxygen that turned out not to be related to low oxygen as much as other process changes i had made around the same time. those were related to my grain mill (went from BC to MM-3 Pro), and a poor initial stir. Is this the first time you 'underlet'?

 

[The_Bishop]

Nope, I've been 'underletting' via slowly lowering the grain basket in for a long while now. Same thing with stirring; I just made extra sure not to splash but there weren't any doughballs when I was done.

 

[Big Monk]

Nope, I've been 'underletting' via slowly lowering the grain basket in for a long while now. Same thing with stirring; I just made extra sure not to splash but there weren't any doughballs when I was done.

That’s odd.

New malt? How’s your conversion η? Maybe try switching up the mash schedule a bit. Get it into β range.

 

[stpug]

I have contacted Wyeast regarding Brewtan B and they will only sell it to registered breweries. They have refused to sell it to homebrew stores on any grounds. I have a few friends that have breweries and I am going to try to buy some from them. The minimum quantity is 1# (= $ 66) Might you be able to drum up some interests from others so we could split a 1# quantity? I am looking to split it into (8) 2 oz packets or possibly (10) 1.5 oz packets.

Cheers
Bob

Brewtan B is readily available to homebrew supply shops in the USA via brewcraft USA. Ask your lhbs to bring some in for you on their next order. You can get 1oz or 1lb, but by the ounce should be plenty for many many batches. No need to deal with wyeast or overseas purchasing.

https://shop.brewcraftusa.com/brewtan-b-1-oz-pack-10391o
https://shop.brewcraftusa.com/brewtan-b-1-lb-pack-10391p

 

[stpug]

I *finally* got a chance to brew the pale ale incorporating the low oxygen methods. Start with RO that has a TDS of 4, preboil, chill to strike temps, add minerals and sodium metabisulfite targeting 20ppm. 'Underlet' the mash via slowly lowering the basket into the hot liquor, carefully stir to ensure no doughballs. Set recirculation arm so it's below the mash surface and recirculate for the whole mash, including mashout.

Aside from the pre-boiling/chilling/Na-Meta, this is my standard routine. I've brewed this pale ale numerous times. Incorporating the LoDo stuff, I hit a pre-boil gravity of 1.039. My usual run of this stuff clocks right in at 1.043, every time. The volumes are right on the money, too. My normal mash efficiency is right on 90% with a 1.050 range beer. This one clocked in at 84%.

Is this efficiency hit normal with the low oxygen process? The milling is the same as it always is; it's my own 3 roller mill. The adjustments are all correct on it. The mash PH clocked in at 5.40 when I'm usually in the 5.42 range which I attributed to the metabisulfite/measurement 'noise'. I'm pretty thorough with my process and I'm reasonably certain that it's nothing different aside from the LoDo addition.

Being as it is a simple pale ale, initial infusion at 152f (66.7c) for a 60 minute mash with a 10 minute mashout at 168(75.5).

What's odd is I didn't alter any other process steps in wort creation aside from the pre-boil/chill/NaMeta. I doughed in the same, recirculated the same. Hell, even the mineral profile was the same.

This is actually my second time around doing 'full blown' LoDo. I incorporated some of the steps into my current brewhouse process after my initial test run minus the preboil/NaMeta.

It's odd. Not sure I like having a 60% brewhouse after regularly being in the 79-80% range. Since my gravity readings were low, I had to extend the boil a bit to hit my intended starting gravity and as a result I'll have less than 5 gallons of beer in the keg. Not the end of the world but it irritates the perfectionist in me.

Nope, I've been 'underletting' via slowly lowering the grain basket in for a long while now. Same thing with stirring; I just made extra sure not to splash but there weren't any doughballs when I was done.

Of the first attempts at low oxygen brewing I've read from many homebrewers who found significant lower efficiencies, I would say the single most common issue is the lack of initial, complete mixing of the mash in combination with lack of stirring occasionally throughout the mash. The initial, complete mixing of grist with water at dough-in is very important, and subsequent stirring less so, especially when recirculating (since the recirc does the "stirring" for you during the mash). It certainly sounds like you were aware of this and accounted for it on this brew, which is where the real conundrum lies.

For me, on dough in, I also "underlet" via slowly lowering in my basket of grains. After they are fully lowered, I follow by a gentle and slow mixing until my thermometer reads the correct mash temp (this takes me about 3 minutes). As an example for my system (which is no recirc), this is very important because if I don't thoroughly mix everything then the mash/grist/grain would be sitting at ~136F when my aim is ~148F (for real, that big of a difference) while the liquid around the mash would be higher, maybe 152F or more. It's these large stratifications in temperatures inside my mashtun that require me to ensure complete initial mixing of the mash. It may be that your system doesn't require this kind of effort and is able to equalize better than mine.

Once you have a uniform mash temp throughout the grist, recirc should take care of any other mixing that would be needed on my system. The only caveat would be if your recirc is channeling and not getting a thorough mixing of the entire grist. Slow is good for recirculation (reduces compaction, reduces chance of channeling, less shearing of coagulates, etc).

I know you're a well-versed brewer and have probably already considered all of the above, but that's my only thought on why you would have had such a lower efficiency on this brew versus previous. The only other words of wisdom I might offer is that the sulfites are intended to serve as insurance against oxygen ingress during the brewing process, and as such, you should not be overly concerned with needing to tend to your mash in a direct and effective manner to achieve your intended goal (i.e. let the sulfites do their work while you're doing yours).

I hope this helps or sparks some thoughts on how you might attack a future low oxygen batch that doesn't suffer the same lower efficiency that you saw this batch. I know when I finally got things settled in to where they are, I saw a bump in efficiency from ~80% to ~82% (brewhouse/BK).

 

[thekraken]

Irt brewtan b what's their apprehension?

 

[stpug]

Irt brewtan b what's their apprehension?

Who's apprehension? Wyeast? It's probably a contractual thing is my guess.

The only apprehension I have about Brewtan B is when using in the BK due to the polyphenol load it will add to your wort. When used in the mash, I feel as though most/all is left behind in coagulates, and the little that gets through is chelated out in the break material in the BK. Granted, I wouldn't have the foggiest of how to measure this which is why some folks have taken to using Polyclar10 as a way to mitigate polyphenol load in the beer.

 

[thekraken]

What's the issue with polyphenols?

(Edit) so I did some brief googling, cu ions help create superoxidizers or something, but we use brewtan b to mitigate the negative effects of cu but brewtan b creates polyphenols which cause superoxidizers... Or something. My head hurts. Can any one help?

 

[The_Bishop]

That’s odd.

New malt? How’s your conversion η? Maybe try switching up the mash schedule a bit. Get it into β range.

Yeah, tell me about it. Everything should be identical to the previous iterations of this grain bill, unless the brew shop had some other grain in the bin? Beats me. Might try a type of step mash but I figured the best way for me to see a difference would be to change only one variable, that being the LoDo process.

Of the first attempts at low oxygen brewing I've read from many homebrewers who found significant lower efficiencies, I would say the single most common issue is the lack of initial, complete mixing of the mash in combination with lack of stirring occasionally throughout the mash. The initial, complete mixing of grist with water at dough-in is very important, and subsequent stirring less so, especially when recirculating (since the recirc does the "stirring" for you during the mash). It certainly sounds like you were aware of this and accounted for it on this brew, which is where the real conundrum lies.

With me mashing in a 400 mesh basket, I don't try to establish a grain bed. My recirculation arm is positioned in a way where the whole mash is constantly in motion. I found that I got the best conversion efficiency that way.

For me, on dough in, I also "underlet" via slowly lowering in my basket of grains. After they are fully lowered, I follow by a gentle and slow mixing until my thermometer reads the correct mash temp (this takes me about 3 minutes). As an example for my system (which is no recirc), this is very important because if I don't thoroughly mix everything then the mash/grist/grain would be sitting at ~136F when my aim is ~148F (for real, that big of a difference) while the liquid around the mash would be higher, maybe 152F or more. It's these large stratifications in temperatures inside my mashtun that require me to ensure complete initial mixing of the mash. It may be that your system doesn't require this kind of effort and is able to equalize better than mine.

My system is a BIAB single vessel with an electric heating element controlled by an Auber DSPR 120. For temperature stability, it's rock solid. I recirculate in a way that keeps the mash loose and fluid, to maximize 'rinsing' the sugars away to expose new starch. My conversion efficiency really shot up with this setup, and the temperatures are identical throughout the mash.

Once you have a uniform mash temp throughout the grist, recirc should take care of any other mixing that would be needed on my system. The only caveat would be if your recirc is channeling and not getting a thorough mixing of the entire grist. Slow is good for recirculation (reduces compaction, reduces chance of channeling, less shearing of coagulates, etc).

The way I recirculate (with it being no-sparge, a loose mash) makes channeling a non-issue as the whole grain bed is very fluid and in motion. It keeps temperatures very uniform.

I know you're a well-versed brewer and have probably already considered all of the above, but that's my only thought on why you would have had such a lower efficiency on this brew versus previous. The only other words of wisdom I might offer is that the sulfites are intended to serve as insurance against oxygen ingress during the brewing process, and as such, you should not be overly concerned with needing to tend to your mash in a direct and effective manner to achieve your intended goal (i.e. let the sulfites do their work while you're doing yours).

I hope this helps or sparks some thoughts on how you might attack a future low oxygen batch that doesn't suffer the same lower efficiency that you saw this batch. I know when I finally got things settled in to where they are, I saw a bump in efficiency from ~80% to ~82% (brewhouse/BK).

At this point I'm wondering is there was something amiss in my grain bill when it got pulled at the shop. This system is usually rock-solid at pulling off 80% brewhouse with a 1.050 beer.

Thanks for the pointers, though! At the end of the day, I still got the starting gravity I was looking for, I just have less beer than intended. There's always another brew!
Edit: Added a picture of the system for clarity's sake.

 

[stpug]

What's the issue with polyphenols?

(Edit) so I did some brief googling, cu ions help create superoxidizers or something, but we use brewtan b to mitigate the negative effects of cu but brewtan b creates polyphenols which cause superoxidizers... Or something. My head hurts. Can any one help?

My understanding on the polyphenol issue at this time is this:

• Polyphenols will bind and precipitate other staling agents in wort, rendering both benign
• Polyphenols will bind with some metals (copper, iron, maybe more) in wort that lead to early staling
• Excess polyphenols remaining in finished beer are said to quicken staling
• Not all polyphenols are created equal, nor are they all the same type
• Polyphenols from grain are different than those from hops
• Polyphenols from grain are beneficial prior to fermenter, afterwards are detrimental
• Polyphenols from hops are beneficial to packaged beer
• Brewtan B is polyphenols in purified/concentrate form
• Brewtan B is derived from gall nuts (i.e. not hops)
• Brewtan B is beneficial in slowing staling through binding/chelation, but excess is detrimental (i.e. it's a balancing act)

If you use water that contains any iron or copper, or you use any copper in your brewing system, then some amount of Brewtan B should prove beneficial to stability of your beer (i.e. if beers usually have a prime week of serving then this might be extended to several weeks). Malt contains some metals and the use of Brewtan B in the mash should help to bind with those metals and precipitate them so that they never make it into the BK.

All in all, it's a simple addition to try in your brewing process and something you can easily judge for yourself - regardless of any other brewing processes.

 

[suorangeguy]

Subscribed

 

[MSK_Chess]

My understanding on the polyphenol issue at this time is this:

• Polyphenols will bind and precipitate other staling agents in wort, rendering both benign
• Polyphenols will bind with some metals (copper, iron, maybe more) in wort that lead to early staling
• Excess polyphenols remaining in finished beer are said to quicken staling
• Not all polyphenols are created equal, nor are they all the same type
• Polyphenols from grain are different than those from hops
• Polyphenols from grain are beneficial prior to fermenter, afterwards are detrimental
• Polyphenols from hops are beneficial to packaged beer
• Brewtan B is polyphenols in purified/concentrate form
• Brewtan B is derived from gall nuts (i.e. not hops)
• Brewtan B is beneficial in slowing staling through binding/chelation, but excess is detrimental (i.e. it's a balancing act)

If you use water that contains any iron or copper, or you use any copper in your brewing system, then some amount of Brewtan B should prove beneficial to stability of your beer (i.e. if beers usually have a prime week of serving then this might be extended to several weeks). Malt contains some metals and the use of Brewtan B in the mash should help to bind with those metals and precipitate them so that they never make it into the BK.

All in all, it's a simple addition to try in your brewing process and something you can easily judge for yourself - regardless of any other brewing processes.

A Discussion of Polyphenols in Beer Physical
and Flavour Stability - Patricia M. Aron and Thomas H. Shellhammer

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.2050-0416.2010.tb00788.x/pdf

The ingress of oxygen during all stages of brewing and maturation should be limited to
ensure that beer maintains maximum flavour shelf life!

 

[frozyn]

So, regarding yeast deoxygenation, the process is to measure out (batch size *2) grams of yeast and dextrose each, and mix it in the strike water 2-3 hours before mash begins, right? My girlfriend is an epic baker, so we have mason jars (yep, plural) of dry bread yeast in the fridge, so this seems easier to me than heating/cooling quickly.

I'm just starting to look at how to adapt my brewing to the LODO process, so you can basically assume I know nothing. I no-sparge BIAB, so I have that going for me, and I've always preferred a slight boil vs. a rolling one, but there's a lot more about this process to work out for myself.

 

[jwalk4]

So, regarding yeast deoxygenation, the process is to measure out (batch size *2)

I think it's strike water volume you multiply by 2 to get your grams of dry yeast and sugar. The original experiment wasn't done with a full volume mash.

To quote @Bilsch on the other forum:

The amounts of yeast and sugar are not that critical really and you can err up and down quite a bit and still be fine. In my testing the amounts were calculated based on the mash water (strike) volume not packaged volume. But if you did use the strike volume for the calculations it would still work. Also you can use about any dry yeast for this. I chose bread because I knew it was tolerant to temperatures of at least 120f.

 

[MSK_Chess]

I have a question for the lodo guys who adhere to the Reinheitsgebot. How do you actually go about fining your beers?

 

[Die_Beerery]

I have a question for the lodo guys who adhere to the Reinheitsgebot. How do you actually go about fining your beers?

I don’t. Never had a problem with brilliantly clear beers.


View attachment IMG_3957.jpg

 

[passedpawn]

Brewed an octoberfest this AM with Brewtan B. 2g added to boil. I'm honestly not expecting to notice anything different because I don't brew this style often. I forgot to add it to the G. pils I made a month ago. I brew simple (SMASH) pilsners often, so that would have been a useful experiment.

Anyhoo, I'm gonna make a few attempts to avoid introducing O2 after fermentation. I already use CO2 to push beer into purge kegs. Not ready to go full monte like you guys yet, though

 

[Big Monk]

Brewed an octoberfest this AM with Brewtan B. 2g added to boil. I'm honestly not expecting to notice anything different because I don't brew this style often. I forgot to add it to the G. pils I made a month ago. I brew simple (SMASH) pilsners often, so that would have been a useful experiment.

Anyhoo, I'm gonna make a few attempts to avoid introducing O2 after fermentation. I already use CO2 to push beer into purge kegs. Not ready to go full monte like you guys yet, though

Pretty much the only things that aren’t just regular, good old brewing best practice are deoxygenating strike water and dosing with metabisulfite.

Cold side processing is certainly something everyone should do, even those not using low oxygen techniques.

 

[Dog House Brew]

I don’t. Never had a problem with brilliantly clear beers.


View attachment 417931

I guess the only issue you have to overcome is that thick, long lasting, shaving cream like foam. Almost there [emoji41]

 

[MSK_Chess]

I don’t. Never had a problem with brilliantly clear beers.


View attachment 417931

Ok do you attribute this brilliantly clear beer to the absence of oxygen or lagering? It seems plausible because as you are no doubt aware one of the ways chill haze occurs is through the polymerisation of flavanoids. Flavanoids themselves are too small and they remain soluble and thus invisible however when they oxidise and begin to polymerise the polyphenol produced is able to crosslink protein molecules and produce a much less soluble chain. We see this as chill haze. With time the oxidised flavanoids can even become tanniods and result in permanent haze, gulp!

Furthermore its my understanding that German breweries themselves at least the large ones use PVPP which is Reinheitsgebot compliant as it doesn't actually dissolve in water or alcohol and is completely removed by filtration. The curios thing is to my mind why you do not need to use finings like PVPP when they do and the answer is not readily discernable either.

I really wondered what German brewers used to fine their beers because clearly things like gelatine and isinglass must be out of the question. Perahaps lagering at -1C (30F) for a prolonged period would precipitate these chill haze forming elements out? I really wish i had the patience to try it.

 

[passedpawn]

I guess the only issue you have to overcome is that thick, long lasting, shaving cream like foam. Almost there [emoji41]

In the Netherlands, they'd swipe that foam off with a scraper before serving. For them, major faux pas to serve like that.

I'm drinking a homebrew pils at the moment that just has the perfect head. It's halfway gone, but still sporting this wonderful 1/4" foam. I probably should dispense more aggressively to get rid of some of the carbonation, but I've got these awesome flow control taps and they make a really nice glass.

 

[Big Monk]

Ok do you attribute this brilliantly clear beer to the absence of oxygen or lagering? It seems plausible because as you are no doubt aware one of the ways chill haze occurs is through the polymerisation of flavanoids. Flavanoids themselves are too small and they remain soluble and thus invisible however when they oxidise and begin to polymerise the polyphenol produced is able to crosslink protein molecules and produce a much less soluble chain. We see this as chill haze. With time the oxidised flavanoids can even become tanniods and result in permanent haze, gulp!



Furthermore its my understanding that German breweries themselves at least the large ones all use PVPP which is Reinheitsgebot compliant as it doesn't actually dissolve in water or alcohol and is completely removed by filtration. The curios thing is to my mind why you do not need to use finings like PVPP when they do and the answer is not readily discernable either. I really wondered what German brewers used to fine their beers because clearly things like gelatine and isinglass must be out of the question.

A high level clarity overview would be:

1.) Mash with a bag (pseudo mash filter)/gallotannins in mash (think Brewtan B)
2.) Remove hot break (whirlpool)
3.) Precipitate cold break and remove (chill fast and whirlpool)
4.) Use as high a floccing yeast as you can get away with
5.) Pitch trub free healthy yeast
6.) Carry over as little yeast as possible to serving vessel (while still getting the right carbonation)
7.) Lager properly (time and temperature)

 

[passedpawn]

I don’t. Never had a problem with brilliantly clear beers.


View attachment 417931

Yea, that's clear. Looks like a low gravity beer and only pils. I brew a lot of those. I do use gelatin as a fining agent. I highly recommend it.

 

[Big Monk]

Yea, that's clear. Looks like a low gravity beer and only pils. I brew a lot of those. I do use gelatin as a fining agent. I highly recommend it.

The issue with gelatin (or adding anything post fermentation) in Low oxygen brewing would be the oxygen introduced when adding it.

 

[MSK_Chess]

A high level clarity overview would be:

1.) Mash with a bag (pseudo mash filter)/gallotannins in mash (think Brewtan B)
2.) Remove hot break (whirlpool)
3.) Precipitate cold break and remove (chill fast and whirlpool)
4.) Use as high a floccing yeast as you can get away with
5.) Pitch trub free healthy yeast
6.) Carry over as little yeast as possible to serving vessel (while still getting the right carbonation)
7.) Lager properly (time and temperature)

Sure Scotty all good and valid procedures. However haze, at least chill haze is caused by the agglomeration of protein and polyphenolic materials as described above some of which will inevitably make it through to the fermenter i would imagine. Was reading this below.

Taken in combination, boiling and wort cooling remove 17-35% of the
total protein content, depending upon the malt variety and hop
product/variety used. Cold break formation is temperature
dependent, only forming in significant quantities below 20-30C,
and increasing dramatically in quantity as the temperature is
further decreased. The removal of these cold break particles can
be facilitated and enhanced by kettle finings allowing the re-moval of up to a further 20% of malt derived protein.

So what appears to be the case is that hot and cold break removal only account for so much removal of proteins and the use of kettle finings about another 20% Of real interest though is that these proteins dramatically precipitate out as the temperature decreases even further, so perhaps wort chilling prior to pitching is a really good idea. Just stick the fermenter in the fridge, let the protiens fall out of suspension, let the temp come up to pitching temp and pitch then? Seems plausible.

 

[MSK_Chess]

The issue with gelatin (or adding anything post fermentation) in Low oxygen brewing would be the oxygen introduced when adding it.

actually when adding PVPP you re-hydrate it in freshly boiled water and usually under a blanket of CO2 if possible. I actually added a small amount of SMB last time I used it. The same with gelatin, you are encouraged to use prebioled water that has cooled.

 

[Big Monk]

Sure Scotty all good and valid procedures. However haze, at least chill haze is caused by the agglomeration of protein and polyphenolic materials as described above some of which will inevitably make it through to the fermenter i would imagine. Was reading this below.

Taken in combination, boiling and wort cooling remove 17-35% of the
total protein content, depending upon the malt variety and hop
product/variety used. Cold break formation is temperature
dependent, only forming in significant quantities below 20-30C,
and increasing dramatically in quantity as the temperature is
further decreased. The removal of these cold break particles can
be facilitated and enhanced by kettle finings allowing the re-moval of up to a further 20% of malt derived protein.

So what appears to be the case is that hot and cold break removal only account for so much removal of proteins and the use of kettle finings about another 20% Of real interest though is that these proteins dramatically precipitate out as the temperature decreases even further, so perhaps wort chilling prior to pitching is a really good idea. Just stick the fermenter in the fridge, let the protiens fall out of suspension, let the temp come up to pitching temp and pitch then? Seems plausible.

You can certainly try to attack it from whatever angle you desire. No arguments there but if you adhere to that list I posted, you’ll be on your way. Those steps are the way to go. Clearest beer you can muster into the fermenter.

 

[Big Monk]

actually when adding PVPP you re-hydrate it in freshly boiled water and usually under a blanket of CO2 if possible. I actually added a small amount of SMB last time I used it. The same with gelatin, you are encouraged to use prebioled water that has cooled.

If you need finings in the finished beer then I’m sure there are a number of ways to attack it.

Cracking the vessel to add finings is something we advise against. That’s all. You’ve spent a ton of energy excluding oxygen so opening the keg goes against that.

 

[schematix]

What about injecting something like gelatin in through the gas port to avoid opening the lid? Seems like a safer route.

For the record, I am completely against the idea of adding finings after the boil.... seems like too much risk.

 

[MSK_Chess]

If you need finings in the finished beer then I’m sure there are a number of ways to attack it.

Cracking the vessel to add finings is something we advise against. That’s all. You’ve spent a ton of energy excluding oxygen so opening the keg goes against that.

yes i could skoosh them in under pressure via a PET bottle, panic over problem solved.