"Short and Shoddy" Brewing

[ChristinaS1]

One thing I have changed though is that I have stopped doing flameout additions in favour of 2 or 3 minutes additions and rapidly cooling because I read' date=' "Rapidly cooling your wort after boiling is also important. [/quote']How rapid is 'rapid'?

 

My FO additions have been added DURING cooling. Once the temp drops below 75-80ºC I toss in my steeping hops and let them do their thing while the wort cools. Usually this is around 30 mins. By that time the wort is at around 35º, which when made up to volume is at a pitchable 22ºC.

 

There is some debate about that, but it seems you should try to cool as rapidly as you can to 60C, and then it is safe to cool more slowly after that.

 

http://www.homebrewtalk.com/showthread.php?t=132559

 

BlackSands, if you want to continue doing short boils and really like to start your FO additions at 80C, what about using plain water for them instead of wort?

 

I will be interested to see what information Kelsey finds about the best mash rest temp for foam stability.

 

Cheers,

 

Christina.

[Morrie]

The 72C rest is a glycoprotein rest' date=' nothing to do with converting starches into sugars. Basically all it does is release glycoproteins, which assist in head retention. I hadn't done a shitload of reading into it before I tried it, I mean it's not like it's gonna ruin the beer, but the brews that were done with these rests are starting to end up in the kegs now and there does appear to be improvement in the head retention compared to similar recipes done without this rest. My pilsners have always incorporated a rest at 72C, and they've always had decent head retention as well.

 

Despite old mate's deliberately rubbish brew day not turning out a complete disaster beer, I won't be changing anything in that regard in my own brewery. For me, how long it takes to get the beer in the keg from yeast pitching is far more important to keeping the supply up than how long it takes to brew the wort on a brew day. In my brewery it wouldn't matter if it took 3 hours or 8 hours, because due to no-chilling it doesn't go in the fermenter same day anyway.

 

Cheers

 

Kelsey[/quote']

 

Thanks Kelsey, Wotto and BlackSands for your input on this subject. I was ready to give the 72º rest a go until BlackSands made reference to the Wiley stuff. I started reading the Wiley stuff last night and I wasn't really in the mindset to absorb all that technical jargon and it started doing my head in so I gave up on it, but may take another read later. If you find anymore out on this subject Kelsey with your research then I'd be very interested. Its not as though I don't have enough beer foam, I'm using 4 to 8% wheat and mashing at 67º and frankly I have a tad too much beer foam at the moment. Could my 76º @ 10 mins mash out be releasing any glycoproteins?

[Otto Von Blotto]

I didn't have time last night to do any reading of that article or any more research either... I was busy with the microscope as posted in my staining thread . I may have time in my break today or later on after my shift is properly finished though.

[BlackSands]

There is some debate about that' date=' but it seems you should try to cool as rapidly as you can to 60C, and then it is safe to cool more slowly after that.

 

http://www.homebrewtalk.com/showthread.php?t=132559[/quote']

 

It's a widely discussed topic, maybe disproportionately so given I've never actually read any reports of anyone experiencing an issue with DMS/'creamed corn' off-taste in practice.

I certainly haven't in any of my ales which make up 99% of my brews.

 

BlackSands, if you want to continue doing short boils and really like to start your FO additions at 80C, what about using plain water for them instead of wort?

The only issue that I'm really wondering about and that may be an even bigger problem for me with my current late-addition method AND a shorter boil is increased chill-haze. It may well be that steeping a hop tea independently of the cooling worth might be a better approach... though I can't actually think of a reason why

[Otto Von Blotto]

Chill haze is made up of two parts remember, and one of those parts comes from the hops, so I don't think separately steeping the hops is gonna make any difference in that regard. The polyphenols are still gonna end up in the beer regardless, and even with a good hot break there are still proteins in the beer for them to bond with, so it is still possible that it could occur. I used to get it in every batch to varying degrees, even with a good hot break. Chill haze may well be worse without a good hot break, however. The levels may have been less in my brews if I'd rapidly chilled the wort too, but we'll never know now.

 

I can confirm for myself that I've had no DMS problems in any batch at all in my AG no-chill 'career', however in saying that I've never done a boil under 60 minutes either, let alone only 10 minutes. My standard is 75 minutes, and 90 minutes for pilsners. Perhaps a 10 minute boil would be an issue there, who knows. I'm not about to try it in any case .

[BlackSands]

...I've never done a boil under 60 minutes either' date=' let alone only 10 minutes..[/quote']

When I first got into PM I was actually doing shorter 30 min boils but more from the perspective of me thinking that was all that was necessary given my 'top-up' bittering hop additions were at 20 mins. I since moved to 60 min boils on 'best advice' but actually my haziest brews have all occurred since then. And, I'm now starting to think that the hazier brews are in fact the dry-hopped ones and the boil time whether that be 30 or 60 minutes hasn't really played much of a part.

 

I'm drinking several brews at the moment, all with 60 min boils: a blonde which is pretty darn clear by my standards. No dry hop. I've also got an American Brown, looks clear as best as you can tell with the darker colour, again no dry hop. That small batch APA I did a wee while ago suffers badly from chill haze - 50g dry hop, and another PM version of that APA just came ready - it was also dry hopped with 50g and it's got the usual chill haze, though not as extreme as the AG batch. I recently bottled a Golden, no dry-hop so will be interesting to see if when chilled how that one looks.

 

An amber currently in the fermenter I boiled for 30 mins, it won't be dry-hopped either so will be keen to see how that one behaves.

 

Oh, and I always use whirlfloc.

 

By the way, what is a "good hotbreak"? Is it even possible NOT to have a good hot break? Doesn't this just occur as a matter of course as soon as the wort breaks into a vigorous boil? Speaking of which, I'd read that if doing shorter boils making sure to maintain max vigor is a good idea.

[Quokka]

I have been following the thread over on AHB, as well as reading some other interesting articles. One which was supposed to be about step mashing, went into great details as to why we mash for longer than is theoretically necessary (and the steps are usually much shorter, he explains that well too - all enzymes are active to some degree up to the temperature at which they denature.) After going into great depth about the benefits of different single infusion mashes, he suggests sticking with the standard 60 minutes and/or doing an iodine test to determine when the conversion is complete - ordinary tincture of iodine from the pharmacy will change colour in the presence of starch, when conversion is complete it doesn't change colour.

 

As for the boil - I have had successfully clear beers down to about 20 minutes with partial mashing, it depends on the recipe. The main reason I have gone back up to 60 minutes or more with all grain is economy - I need less bittering hops with a longer boil. I do think it is more than coincidence that I have not had a less than crystal clear all grain beer except when a faulty thermometer caused me to stuff up the mash.

[BlackSands]

....he suggests sticking with the standard 60 minutes and/or doing an iodine test to determine when the conversion is complete

SO... if an iodine test shows no starch after 20 mins would you reduce your mash time? This is something I want to test for myself.

 

As for the boil - I have had successfully clear beers down to about 20 minutes with partial mashing' date=' it depends on the recipe. The main reason I have gone back up to 60 minutes or more with all grain is economy - I need less bittering hops with a longer boil. [img']joyful[/img]

Using my preferred bittering hop, Waimea - a high AA (17%)/low co-humulone hop, I can adequately bitter an amber to 34IBU with 30g in 30 mins at a cost of around $2.10. But using 15g boiled for 60 mins, well I can save a whopping $1.05 !!

[Quokka]

I actually have tested a number of single infusion mashes that appear to be finished at 20 minutes, but I worry that my sample may not represent the whole mash and that my eyes might be less than perfect. When you add that we are often relying on other enzymes to further break down the chains, I still let it go for 60 minutes.

 

As for your second comment - at the moment saving an extra dollar actually matters to me I also tend to use neutral bittering hops and by 60 minutes most flavour input has been eliminated. Ironically, I will miss one of the original high AA bittering hops for the subtle citrus note it would leave, even after an hour (POR of course, I have been using Magnum lately, which leaves no discernible flavour after 60 minutes.)

[Otto Von Blotto]

http://www.ibdlearningzone.org.uk/article/show/pdf/493/ if that decides to work, is a bit of an introduction into the functions of wort boiling.

 

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.2050-0416.1986.tb04419.x/pdf this one is older but on page three and into page four it explains hot break (coagulation of proteins).

 

As I understand it, a full hot break doesn't occur as soon as the wort comes to the boil, it's a reaction that occurs during the boil that does take time and is influenced by a number of factors... and I suspect it takes longer than 10 minutes. Along with all the other functions talked about in those articles, there isn't really any advantage to doing a short boil that I can see, only the potential to cause problems in the finished beer.

 

Dry hopped beers generally do tend to have more haze than their non dry hopped counterparts if nothing is done to counter it. Darker beers generally appear clearer as well, it's something to do with the dark grains used in them, it was explained to me once but I can't remember what it is now. I always noticed my red ale was clearer than my pale ales despite no change in brewing process between them.

 

Cheers

 

Kelsey

[Wobbly74]

SO... if an iodine test shows no starch after 20 mins would you reduce your mash time? This is something I want to test for myself.

 

Iodine will tell you that starches have been converted but not too what, our how far through any intermediate stages they may be. I'm not a chemist so don't really know what they might actually be though. For what is worth Palmer wrote about this to debunk 20 minute mashes, but I've not seen any empirical data relating back to wort fermentability or effect on long term ageing. Would be interesting to see some long term tests.

[Otto Von Blotto]

That's what I was getting at in an earlier post regarding mash temperature and time working together. The conversion itself might happen quite quickly but the breaking down of the long chains into shorter ones may take longer than that. This PDF from Braukaiser seems to support the theory that a longer mash results in a more fermentable wort than a shorter mash, even at the same mash temperature. It also reports an increased efficiency from longer mash times above 15 minutes (scroll to page 8 for these graphs).

 

http://www.boondocksbeer.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Effects_of_mash_parameters_on_attenuation_and_efficiency.pdf

[BlackSands]

As I understand it' date=' a full hot break doesn't occur as soon as the wort comes to the boil, it's a reaction that occurs during the boil that does take time and is influenced by a number of factors... and I suspect it takes longer than 10 minutes. [/quote']Yes, but... does it take longer than 30 minutes ??

[porschemad911]

That's what I was getting at in an earlier post regarding mash temperature and time working together. The conversion itself might happen quite quickly but the breaking down of the long chains into shorter ones may take longer than that. This PDF from Braukaiser seems to support the theory that a longer mash results in a more fermentable wort than a shorter mash' date=' even at the same mash temperature. It also reports an increased efficiency from longer mash times above 15 minutes (scroll to page 8 for these graphs).

 

http://www.boondocksbeer.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Effects_of_mash_parameters_on_attenuation_and_efficiency.pdf[/quote']

Hmmm, it's been a while since I was doing my Stats major at uni, but the shape of the curve on the limit of attenuation chart looks a little suspect. Perhaps a logarithmic regression is not the best model. That being said, it is a very small sample, so any sort of accurate modelling would not really be possible. What it does show is that beyond 90 minutes you would gain very little in terms of attenuation or efficiency. One interesting extrapolation would be that an overnight mash wouldn't do any harm to the wort (in terms of making it way too attenuative) as long as you could keep the temperature high enough to prevent spoilage.

 

As an aside, Kai's definition (in this paper as well as his other pages) of brewhouse efficiency is basically kettle efficiency, ie mash + lauter efficiency. Until Beersmith came along and decided to redefine this term to include kettle to fermenter losses, this was the standard and much more useful definition of brewhouse efficiency!

[Otto Von Blotto]

As I understand it' date=' a full hot break doesn't occur as soon as the wort comes to the boil, it's a reaction that occurs during the boil that does take time and is influenced by a number of factors... and I suspect it takes longer than 10 minutes. [/quote']Yes, but... does it take longer than 30 minutes ??

Probably not, given that milds are done with a 30 minute mash and 30 minute boil. I've never brewed a mild, but if I was to shorten a boil I don't think I'd go under 30 minutes.

[Otto Von Blotto]

Yes I think it should be taken for the small scale experiment that it is John, it's not necessarily definitive. It does appear to show that a 10-15 minute mash isn't really long enough and that the rate of increase in efficiency slows down the longer the mash goes on past that 30ish minute mark, and even less increase past 90 minutes.

 

FWIW I've never done a mash longer than 90 minutes, intentionally anyway. I did leave one for a few hours once but the temp dropped to about 50C, and there was a bunch of crud on the element making the boil a right PITA... can't remember how that batch turned out now .

 

I was interested to see the experiments show that a finer crush resulted in a higher efficiency as well, because my experience with a full volume mash has been the complete opposite. Interesting stuff.