• Welcome to the new forum! We upgraded our forum software with a host of new boards, capabilities and features. It is also more secure.
    Jump in and join the conversation! You can learn more about the upgrade and new features here.

Modified Decocotion (of sorts)

Wildrover

Grandmaster Brewer
Joined
Jun 8, 2008
Messages
480
Reaction score
0
This question stems from the conversation in the other thread about batch sparge volumes but since the topic has drifted from that and this forum is a little slow I figured I'd just start a new thread.

Anyway, I was thinking about the water volume in the mash if I use the protein rest and mash out options.  This is really going to give a large volume of water for the first runnings with not much left over to sparge with. 

I was wondering what the good or bad consequences would be if I modified this mash profile a little to allow for greater sparge volumes (and hopefully greater efficiency).  My plan would be to take some of the liquor from the mash tun after the second infusion which is supposed to bring the mash up to the sach rest.  I could then use the liquor that I've taken and use it to mash out as well as allow for greater batch sparge volumes.

For example, if the protein rest calls for 2.5 gallons of water and the second infusion calls for 2.25 gallons.  If I have a 10 lb grain bill, at this water volume I'm close to 2.0 qts per gallon.  Since the convention is 1.0 - 1.5 qts per lb I'm a little over that convention.  So, I'm wondering if I removed say 6.5 qts (a little over a gallon and a half) from the mash tun, brought that liquor up to a temp that will allow for the mash out when the sach rest is complete, if there would be any problems or perhaps benefits to doing it this way?

My thinking is that bringing the water volume back down to 1.25 qts per gallon and using some of the liquor from the protein rest will allow from greater batch sparge volumes but I'm not sure if removing the liquor and using it this way isn't without its hazards or down side either?
 
Wildrover said:
This question stems from the conversation in the other thread about batch sparge volumes but since the topic has drifted from that and this forum is a little slow I figured I'd just start a new thread.

I'm on a motorcycle forum where the ANPTH (avg number of posts to hijack) is 1.2. At least here we stay on subject for 3 or even 4 posts... most of the time. ;)

Wildrover said:
My thinking is that bringing the water volume back down to 1.25 qts per gallon and using some of the liquor from the protein rest will allow from greater batch sparge volumes but I'm not sure if removing the liquor and using it this way isn't without its hazards or down side either?

I wouldn't use protein rest water for this. Another term for the initial infusion is "doughing in." That water is going to have a lot of unconverted starch in it. First, it's not going to convert if you keep it until mash out (reducing your efficiency) and second, I imagine you're going to add a sticky mess back into your finished mash (gumming up your beer).

I am mashing in the same pot that I use for the boil which is barely 7 gals. My grain bills are in the 13-15 lb range so I modify my mash profiles to use less water in each step because of the limited volume. The limit on that is, of course, that you can't add water hotter than 100C. By the time I mash out with a relatively small amount of boiling water, my mash tun/kettle is full to the rim. Still, I can run quite a bit of sparge water through in the lauter tun and get decent if not stellar efficiency.

Caveat emptor: I've never tried what you suggest and the "BeerSmith Master Brewer" designation has to do with number of posts and nothing to do with skill, talent or knowledge!"
 
That was my main concern actually, the fact that I might be pulling unconverted starch from the mash which, if its not in the mash tun at the right temp (which it wouldn't be if I was using it to mash out) then I might actually be doing more harm than good regarding efficiency. 

Having said that I have actually tried this and my efficiency was around 79%.  Now I have to wonder what it could of been had I not done that?

As far as being a master brewer is concerned, hey if we all keep posting our thoughts, ideas, questions and answers here maybe we can all become master brewers, in practice as well as post count  ;)
 
Wildrover said:
...

Having said that I have actually tried this and my efficiency was around 79%.  Now I have to wonder what it could of been had I not done that?

Sometimes I think brewing is just FM. Do what werks.

- Hare
 
How bout this for a thought?  Not removing protein rest water for the mash out but removing sach rest water?  That way the starches I'm removing will already be converted and this will allow for decent enough batch sparge volumes to really rinse the grain?  Any down side to this? 

thanks
 
I dunno. I thought about that. I've not done much with decoction and I basically don't like the beer styles that are brewed that way. I'm afraid of adding color when I'm going for pales. I much prefer to play with the mash profile to use less water in each step so that I have room in the mash tun. If I can't get the mashout to 168, I'm not that concerned. I use a pretty hot water in my sparge.

I have a big enough lauter tun to accommodate all my grain (5 gallon bucket drilled full of 3/16 holes that fits right over my bottling bucket) so I can do a true sparge. I think a good continuous sparge (I recirculate until the wort runs clear then start to add 180 to 190F water) is the key to efficiency.


- Hare
 
The simplest thing to do would be just use a single Infusion mash profile and skip the Protein rest. Most of today's malts are going to be fine with this. Which is why it is the most widely accepted in the HB community. The extra steps are not necessary and only add to the length of the brew day.

That being said, You probably are asking yourself, then why do it? If you want average beer, buy a craft beer (there are times that I do). But I like to think that I make Great Beer, so I do what I think makes Great Beer. A Protein Rest/Doughing in is used to break up proteins which might otherwise cause chill haze and can improve the head retention. You can read this at John Palmer's how to brew http://www.howtobrew.com. I don't mind adding an extra hour if I get better beer for it. I usually stop the Sparg when I reach the boil volume. But there are things you can do to increase your Sparg water. You can always vorlaugh or like you said, or do a Mini Decocotion by pulling off 1/3 "thick" mash at the end of the Saccrification rest and boil it. Then add it back in to bring the temp up for mash out. I have done this when my Sparg watter goes under 2G. Or increase your boil times to add extra water.

harebare said:
(I recirculate until the wort runs clear then start to add 180 to 190F water)
I try not to be to high over my Mash Out temp. Just to be sure I don't get to many tannins from the spent grains.

Cheers

Preston
 
Preston, Preston, Preston,

You HAD to bring up chill haze, didn't you? It's like a stake of oak through my heart. I'm going to bottle that Rye IPA as soon as I get a free hour or two. Polyclar, Sparkaloid, SuperKleer... Nothing takes the haze out of this thing. (Although it's mighty clear at cellar temp!)

I'll send you a pvt msg when it's capped and ready to go.

- Hare
 
harebare said:
Preston, Preston, Preston,
You HAD to bring up chill haze, didn't you? It's like a stake of oak through my heart. I'm going to bottle that Rye IPA as soon as I get a free hour or two. Polyclar, Sparkaloid, SuperKleer... Nothing takes the haze out of this thing. (Although it's mighty clear at cellar temp!)
I'll send you a pvt msg when it's capped and ready to go.
- Hare
Tried to sneak it past you LOL. (BTW: It's the RYE or the HOPS one of the two)
 
Back
Top