Using Spreadsheet with mash

[Marty_G]

2 hours ago, Journeyman said:

This one was (I thought) as needed to give time for the malt conversion to sugars to happen. (just to clarify)

That is purpose of the mash at 66⁰ . No need to boil at all after that.  The purpose of the boil is for hop bittering. The bittering affect through the isomerisation of the Alpha Acids does not happen until the wort temp is over 90⁰ .   So the hops in water under 80 will add flavour and aroma and over 90 bitterness. The higher the AA% the less hops needed to bitter the brew.  So bittering hops usually but not always have higher AA%.  Hops like Saaz which is used to bitter and flavour Pilsner is a very low AA% hop. Think the last I used were 2.9% .  Where say a bittering hop like Northern Brewer is 7.8% and Nuggett is in the 12% range.    

So to reinterate the boil does not convert malt to sugar the mash does. The temp for this is between 63-72⁰. The higher the temp in that range the lower the efficency. The boil is for hop bitterness

[Journeyman]

2 hours ago, MartyG1525230263 said:

That is purpose of the mash at 66⁰ . No need to boil at all after that.  The purpose of the boil is for hop bittering.

So to reinterate the boil does not convert malt to sugar the mash does. The temp for this is between 63-72⁰. The higher the temp in that range the lower the efficency. The boil is for hop bitterness

OK. However I thought there were multiple reasons for a biol, not just bittering. From memory there's stopping the enzymes, sterilising, reducing the size, hot break & remove proteins as well as bittering. I seem to recall it changes the colour as well.

Do I have all that wrong?

[Norris!]

29 minutes ago, Journeyman said:

OK. However I thought there were multiple reasons for a biol, not just bittering. From memory there's stopping the enzymes, sterilising, reducing the size, hot break & remove proteins as well as bittering. I seem to recall it changes the colour as well.

Do I have all that wrong?

Yeah you are right, I think Marty was focused on the mash issue and left out the other parts to keep it simple.

Here is an article from my LHBS about mash efficiency and how to improve it or current better practice. In the 'mash in' section they discuss dough balls a little clearer than I did. https://cheekypeakbrewery.com.au/blog/post/improving-mash-efficiency

[Marty_G]

1 hour ago, Journeyman said:

Do I have all that wrong?

No you are right but as Norris said I deliberatley left that out to keep it simple.  100% there are other benefits to boiling.  

[BlackSands]

18 hours ago, MartyG1525230263 said:

 The temp for this is between 63-72⁰. The higher the temp in that range the lower the efficency. The boil is for hop bitterness

I don't think temperature, (assuming it's within the saccharification range) effects the efficiency so much.  It does however impact on the fermentability of the resultant wort.   

Edited February 5, 2020 by BlackSands

[Marty_G]

36 minutes ago, BlackSands said:

I don't think temperature, (assuming it's within the saccharification range) effects the efficiency so much.  It does however impact on the fermentability of the resultant wort.   

Moot point,  in turn doesn't that impact efficency?

I may have this wrong, what with my vast experince of 3 AG brews, but the way i understand it is: if the mash spends a good part of the time in the lower ranges say 63 effiiciency increases, higher SG, as opposed to being in the higher end of the range say at 70 where it decreases, lower SG.    Or am I confusing something here.  

[BlackSands]

31 minutes ago, MartyG1525230263 said:

Moot point,  in turn doesn't that impact efficency?

I may have this wrong, what with my vast experince of 3 AG brews, but the way i understand it is: if the mash spends a good part of the time in the lower ranges say 63 effiiciency increases, higher SG, as opposed to being in the higher end of the range say at 70 where it decreases, lower SG.    Or am I confusing something here.  

Hmmm... I don't think the SG is affected, or at least not significantly.    You still end up with more or less the same SG regardless of the temperature, it's just that the sugars contributing to that SG reading vary in their degree of fermentability. 

So... it's the ABV (and mouth feel) that will vary according to mash temp.

Edited February 5, 2020 by BlackSands

[Journeyman]

3 minutes ago, BlackSands said:

Hmmm... I don't think the SG is affected, or at least not significantly.    You still end up with more or less the same SG regardless of the temperature, it's just that the sugars contributing to that SG reading vary in their degree of fermentability. 

I read somewhere, (maybe in Palmer?) that ideally the mash starts lower and finishes higher but can't recall exactly why. And busy day with Melb trip tomorrow so will have to work it out later. (the where and why)

There was also a protein rest stage which I think from on here isn't really needed with more recent grains used. But I figure I might try it anyway because, (in best Jewish grandmother Yiddish accent) "It couldn't hurt!"

[Marty_G]

22 minutes ago, BlackSands said:

it's just that the sugars contributing to that SG reading vary in their degree of fermentability. 

Now with the way I think that impacts efficiency.  If the definition of mash efficiency is  the measurement of the percent of available sugars obtained. Then if the sugars are not availble for fermentation is it less efficient?  I get that they contribute to flavour and body but they are not/less fermentable so unavailabe.   Or is my definition wrong.   As I say it is a moot point and probably more to do with the meaning of available.  Available to the wort solution or available to the yeast.  

Edited February 5, 2020 by MartyG1525230263

[BlackSands]

11 minutes ago, MartyG1525230263 said:

Now with the way I think that impacts efficiency.  If the definition of mash efficiency is  the measurement of the percent of available sugars obtained. Then if the sugars are not availble for fermentation is itless efficient?  I get that they contribute to flavour and body but they are not/less fermentable so unavailabe.   Or is my definition wrong.   As I say it is a moot point and probably more to do with the meaning of available.  Available to the wort solution or available to the yeast.  

I think the efficiency is simply referring to the conversion, the percentage of starches converted relative to a theoretical maximum, regardless of the final fermentability of the wort.  I'm not claiming any particular expertise though and may not have this 100% correct.   

One reason I query the suggested impact of mash temp on wort OG is that Beersmith etc don't appear to have this varying the OG when mash temp is changed.

Edited February 5, 2020 by BlackSands

[Marty_G]

2 minutes ago, BlackSands said:

I think the efficiency is simply referring to the conversion, the percentage of starches converted relative to a theoretical maximum, regardless of the final fermentability of the wort.  

I that is right on the money.   The efficency must do with what has been converted and is in solution of the wort.  Right we have that settled.  So what impacts the efficiency if temp doesn't? 

[BlackSands]

2 minutes ago, MartyG1525230263 said:

I that is right on the money.   The efficency must do with what has been converted and is in solution of the wort.  Right we have that settled.  So what impacts the efficiency if temp doesn't? 

Grain crush, sparging are two things that immediately come to mind.  I'm actually just looking into the issue of grain crush.  Up until now I have always considered it to have a fairly small effect maybe a couple of gravity points either way, but based on stuff I've read it might actually be more significant than I'd previously thought.  I source my grain from two different stores and have been getting wildly varying efficiency results lately.... so, I wonder....   ?   

[Marty_G]

12 minutes ago, BlackSands said:

sparging

I am happy with the grain i am getting and the crush. I get it from a guy here on the Sunny coast who is a grain brewer and has a side business selling grain.  From what I have got off him he sells good quality grains with a markup that covers his costs so he basically brews for free.   he sells Weymmans Pilsner for $4.00/kg which to me is reasonable and $2.50 under the LHBS.  The problem with living regionally is the bloody fraight so having him close selling at that price then I can pick up is great. 

Now sparing is something I have been thinking about.  Do you have to use clean water of can you sparge with wort.  I have a whirlpool arm on my BIAB set up and have attached an old lawn sprinkler arm to it that effectlively is a wort reticulation arm during the mash.  I was wondering if I raised the bag out of the mash and ran the wort through the bag via the reticulation arm I should get more sugary goodness from that grain, right?   

Edited February 5, 2020 by MartyG1525230263

[BlackSands]

I don't use a brewing system and just simply pour the appropriate amount of pre-heated water over the grain once it's drained.  Apparently fly sparging is supposed to be the most efficient method. 

The other thing of course in all this is the mash duration.  A cooler mash would generally need longer to achieve the same level of conversion as one done at a higher temperature.   

Meanwhile, getting back to grain crush...

From an article on Beer And Brewing:

Quote

The crush of the grain can have a huge impact on the efficiency you will see from your brewing system. I’ve had cases where a grind that is too coarse, often from grains crushed at a store, can result in low gravity numbers.   The ideal grain crush is actually pretty fine...

But when Brulosophy compared a fine vs coarse crush:

Quote

It was at this point I took hydrometer measurements, admittedly expecting to find a stark difference, yet was shocked to discover both batches at the exact same OG.

 

Edited February 5, 2020 by BlackSands

[BlackSands]

But wait!   Years later... another fine vs coarse crush gave this result:  

 

Ten gravity points is huge!  And the course crush FG finished much higher too.

Edited February 5, 2020 by BlackSands

[Marty_G]

Funny i just read a good little article about sparging with BIAB and it explained a great deal but the final line was the kicker.  The reality is sparging is an extra step which makes the brew day longer and the loss of a few SG ponits can be easily off set by adding a small amout of extra grain.  Don't think i will be sparging my BIAB  

[Marty_G]

2 minutes ago, BlackSands said:

Ten gravity points is huge!  And the course crush FG finished much higher too.

So that goes back to my point does it really increase efficiency if the sugars are not fermentable.    Intial reaction ripper my available sugars are huge look 1090.  The the fement FG is 1025.  Or look my efficiency is crap 1080 but the ferment FG is 1010.    

[BlackSands]

1 minute ago, MartyG1525230263 said:

Funny i just read a good little article about sparging with BIAB and it explained a great deal but the final line was the kicker.  The reality is sparging is an extra step which makes the brew day longer and the loss of a few SG ponits can be easily off set by adding a small amout of extra grain.  Don't think i will be sparging my BIAB  

Yes, this is in fact a choice many BIAB brewers make.  For the sake of a few 100 extra grams of grain, is it really worth it?  As mentioned I think fly sparging, which seems to be a kind of 'sparge-as-you-mash' process is the best option.  In my case the time involved is minimal. My sparge water is heated during the mash and when I have lifted the grain bag out and let it drain I simply pour over the heated water... takes all of 5 minutes.   I'm of course only mashing 3 -3.5kg grain.  

[BlackSands]

1 minute ago, MartyG1525230263 said:

So that goes back to my point does it really increase efficiency if the sugars are not fermentable.    Intial reaction ripper my available sugars are huge look 1090.  The the fement FG is 1025.  Or look my efficiency is crap 1080 but the ferment FG is 1010.    

Well, how is the effiiciency calculated?  As far as I know it's simply just the actual gravity points attained / potential gravity points.   Attenuation is another thing altogether -  just to complicate things further!  The yeast strain has a part to play with regard to the wort fermentability and hence impacting on the FG.  Some strains attenuate more than others, and other strains (e.g. champagne yeast) can chomp through sugars that are not ordinarily fermentable by most beer strains.   

[Journeyman]

37 minutes ago, BlackSands said:

The ideal grain crush is actually pretty fine...

I've seen that comment before - I think next time the grains are going through my coffee grinder. (spare one) I'll remove the shims and set it max coarseness and then do the mash. 

AFTER buying one of those big pots from BigW and a decent size grain bag from Bunnings.

[BlackSands]

3 minutes ago, Journeyman said:

I've seen that comment before - I think next time the grains are going through my coffee grinder. (spare one) I'll remove the shims and set it max coarseness and then do the mash. 

AFTER buying one of those big pots from BigW and a decent size grain bag from Bunnings.

Isn't this contrary to what was said? i.e. the ideal crush is pretty fine ...     

Edited February 5, 2020 by BlackSands

[Marty_G]

11 minutes ago, BlackSands said:

Well, how is the effiiciency calculated?  As far as I know it's simply just the actual gravity points attained / potential gravity points.

Yep mash efficiency is all about extracting sugars and we both understand that.   However, I suppose I am throwing in a novel concept like percieved efficency.   If under controlled conditions using the same yeast etc the ABV is lower in the sample that had the higher OG has the mash been efficient?   

[BlackSands]

1 hour ago, MartyG1525230263 said:

Yep mash efficiency is all about extracting sugars and we both understand that.   However, I suppose I am throwing in a novel concept like percieved efficency.   If under controlled conditions using the same yeast etc the ABV is lower in the sample that had the higher OG has the mash been efficient?   

Only if you redefine what is meant by "mash efficiency" I guess.    What you're proposing is an efficiency figure that is determined by the final ABV. 

I can't really get a definitive answer on the mash temp vs mash efficiency question.   However, here's another brulosophy result of a 64º vs 72º mash. Pretty much the same OG was obtained which lends support to my belief that mash temperature doesn't really effect OG very much.  But the important difference here was the FG which was MUCH lower in the low temp mash (9 points).  This strongly supports the science which tells us that a lower temp mash produces a far more fermentable wort.  

Efficiency seems to be independent of temperature.  Whatever it is that determines your systems efficiency, crush, pH, sparging etc it's going to apply equally (more or less) across the full range of mash temperatures. 

 

Edited February 6, 2020 by BlackSands

[Journeyman]

1 hour ago, BlackSands said:

Isn't this contrary to what was said? i.e. the ideal crush is pretty fine ...     

I don't think so - coarse on the grinder is going to be way finer than what I got from beerbelly. If I get time later today I will pull out the grinder and run some through for a pic. 

I was more concerned it could be TOO fine, even on coarsest grind.

[BlackSands]

1 minute ago, Journeyman said:

I don't think so - coarse on the grinder is going to be way finer than what I got from beerbelly. If I get time later today I will pull out the grinder and run some through for a pic. 

I was more concerned it could be TOO fine, even on coarsest grind.

Ahh... yeah. Gotcha.  I haven't tried using my grinder for grain so have no idea what it's default crush would be like...