Easier Decoction Mash

The best beer I've ever tasted was in a little brew pub in Homburg, Germany (not Hamburg, Homburg). It was malty without being sweet, subtly hoppy (maybe dry hopped), and moderately full-bodied. I've been told that much that I liked was probably due to decoction mashing. I've tried decoction mashing a few times and have not been impressed with the results. I suspect the less than impressive results are due to my difficulty hitting the rest temperatures during each decoction.

So, I've been trying to come up with a way to hit my rest temperatures accurately and get the benefits of decoction. My plan is to use my HERMS setup to raise the mash to saccrification, pull out most of the grain and boil it, cool it to the saccrification temperature and return it to the mash tun to complete saccrification of the decoction.

Here are my steps:
Dough-In: 10 pounds less modified Pilsner malt, .75 pounds Munich malt, .25 pounds melanoid malt, 22 qts water. Let sit for ten minutes to absorb water and settle the grain bed
Acid Rest: heat to 100 degrees F. Hold for 10 minutes
Protein Rest: heat to 122 degrees F. Hold for 10 minutes
Saccrification I: heat to 153 degrees F. Hold for 20 minutes
Decoction: remove most of the grain with sufficient wort to cover. Boil grain for 15 minutes. Cool to about 154 degrees by adding about10 qts water and using immersion chiller. Return to main mash.
Saccrification II: hold at 154 degrees for 30 minutes.
Mash-out: raise to 168 degrees F
Run-off

My rationale is that most of the wort - with most of the enzymes - will be held at about 153 degrees F for about an hour-and-a-half. Hopefully, the dilute wort will prevent excessive conversion that could produce a thin beer. Hopefully, the boiling of the grain will give most of the benefits of multiple decoctions without the difficulties of holding at conversion temps.

Questions:
1. I'm using Jamil Z's recipe for Munich Helles (Jamil Zainasheff;John Palmer. Brewing Classic Styles: 80 Winning Recipes Anyone Can Brew (p. 53). Kindle Edition), which calls for 4 oz Melanoid malt to provide the melanoidin typically produced by decoction. Should I omit the melanoid malt?
2. Will the single decoction at the end of the mash give the same benefits as multiple decoctions throughout the mash?
3. Any suggestions?

Dan

Looks like a long brew day to me.

Theres a kindle edition of brewing classic styles?  Ive searched amazon and the kindle store with no luck.

did a lot of decoctions last year trying to do urquell when it was cool in florida. Your doing a single decoction taking direct to boil, then cooling to sac temp?  If i read you wrong sorry I have no clue about how herms works.  I take my decocs thru the rests then boil. My problem is I never boil long enough cause I worry about too much.  Others disagree, but I taste a definite difference on my system vs infusions.

Hi Durrettd,
I am not quit sure if I am able to follow your ideas regarding decoction.
What I always have understood is that the decoction method was used in a time when malt quality was not consistent and temperatures could not be measured accurately. Boiling the grain made the starches more accessible for the enzymes (nowadays with the modified malts not necessary anymore). Boiling a defined portion of the wort and returning it to the main wort and so raising the temperature also helped creating consistent temperature steps in the mash scheme before accurate measurements of the temperature was possible.

However, in order to optimize the alpha-/beta-amylase activity and interdependency to produce fermentable sugars for a crispy beer (pilsner type), I have experimented a couple of times by using the following mashing scheme (looks like decoction but without a boil):

12 liter water of 50C and 4000gr German pilsner malt

Mash scheme A+B (A=6L wort B=6L wort):
50c(20min A+B together)
50c(40min A separate) 73c (40min B separate)
63c(45min A+B together)
73c(40min A separate) 63c(40min B separate)
70c (40min A+B together)

Iodine test turns black.

After the final mash rest the mash is collected in the drain tun. Initial runnings are collected and added back on top of the mash until the wort runs clear and free of grain for about 10minutes.
Maintaining the slow flow rate 11L sparge water of 77c is added to cover the grains by 2cm. Maintaining temperature on 77c by slightly heating up the runnings. This took 70 minutes, after-leaking took 10 minutes.

Exactly 20 liters collected wort
OG = 1043

If you would like to know more about decoction the following link could be of use.

http://braukaiser.com/wiki/index.php?title=Decoction_Mashing

Regards,
Slurk

Thanks for the observations and questions. The reference to the wiki is great. If you're looking for the kindle version of Brewing Classic Styles, go to amazon and search for: Brewing Classic Styles.

As has been pointed out by my English 101 prof and a couple of Air Force generals (actually, several of them), my writing sometimes leaves a lot to be desired.

My plan is to complete the mash steps normally up through the first 20 minutes of saccrification using my HERMS set up (HERMS = Heat Exchanger RIMS [Recirculation Infusion Mash] System - using a pump to circulate the wort through a copper coil submerged in a thermostatically controlled water bath).

While most of the wort continues an extended alpha amylase saccrification step I'll boil most of the grain separately, cool it back to the temperature of the main mash and return the boiled and cooled grain to the main mash to complete saccrification of the starches released by boiling. I'll not be using the decoction to raise the temperature for any step, so maybe it isn't a real decoction.

As I understand it, most of the enzymes will be in the liquid wort by the time I pull the grain out to boil it separately. Boiling the grain will not denature the enzymes; they'll still be sitting in the liquid wort, munching away, waiting for me to feed them the stuff released from the grain by boiling.

Boiling the grains will hopefully free up more starch for conversion, add some melanoidin flavors associated with boiling, and maybe add a bit of caramalization. I'll cool the decoction to my saccrification temperature and return it to the enzyme-rich wort in the main mash. The majority of the wort will be at a temperature suitable for alpha amylase conversion for about 95 minutes: 20 minutes before I pull out the grain, + 15 minutes while I bring the grain to a boil, + 15 minutes boiling, + 15 minutes to cool it back to the saccrification temperature, + 30 minutes after I return the grain to the main mash.

Adding the partial boil/decoction to the end of the mash will add a little time to the saccrification step, but I'd normally hold it at about 155 for an hour anyway, so I'd say the decoction only adds about 35 minutes to my usual process. One of my concerns is that the long alpha amylase rest may give a lighter body than I want in this beer. The other concern is that I may not get the flavor of a real decoction because the boiled fraction will not be going through the protein rest, and beta amylase rest. It will go through a 30 minute alpha amylase rest and mash out.

I'm attaching a temperature versus time graph that may clarify what I have in mind. The grain temperature follows the black line, then gets heated along the red line and returns to the black line to finish mashing. The majority of the liquid wort follows the black line.

Hi durrettd,

What about your beta-amylase?

Enzymes in general have different temperature optima (alpha- amylase [154-162°F] and beta-amylase [131-150°F]). Enzymes are shaped in a particular way which allows them to hold onto their substrate during the reaction. This shape is held in place by weak bonds. These bonds are easily broken if the temperature gets too high and the enzyme looses its shape and becomes unable to catalyse the reaction it was made for (denatured). Beta-amylase gets denatured at 155F.

For more info I refer to John Palmer's

http://www.howtobrew.com/section3/chapter14-5.html

Regards,
Slurk

I make a pils that I do a "Hybrid Decoct". Because today's malts are well modified, It is not necessary (Stay with me here) to do a decoction. However, if you don't you miss some of the carmelization that happens when during the decoction (IMO).

I make a beer using my normal infusion process. Then I decot for the Mash Out only, and boil the grains for 30 min. I have made a copy of one of my mash profiles and modified it by adding a decoct for 30 min as a MO step. This step adds an extra 30 min to the Sacrification.

Cheers
Preston

Preston,

Thanks for the info. How'd your pils turn out? Did you get the carmelization you wanted? Did the extended time at saccrification produce a thin-bodied beer?

I considered a decoction for my MO step, but wanted to give the alpha amylase some time to work on the boiled grain. By cooling the decocted grain portion I still had active alpha amylase available to chew on the broken-down starches from the decoction. This should have increased my efficiency. It didn't.

I brewed this last Sunday, so I won't know for a while whether or not it worked. My concern is that having spent some time in the beta amylase temperature range as I raised the mash to 153 degrees F, plus the extended time at 153, I could end up with a thinner beer than desired. I'll post my results in about four weeks.

I've shared the recipe on the BS Recipe page as Summer 2012 Z's Munich Helles (Munchen Grobes Bier). If you download the recipe you may see the decoction listed as the last step; it should be between Dextrinization I and Dextrinization II. BeerSmith insists on rearranging the steps to put the decoction at the end. To make the mash steps appear as they were actually completed, click on the decoction step then hit the "Move Step Up" button twice. Note that the temperature of the step is listed as 180 degrees F; the decoction itself goes to boiling, gets cooled by adding about 2 gallons of water, then gets returned to the mash. The main mash stays at 153 while the decoction gets boiled and after it's returned to the mash. BeerSmith didn't envision such a bizarre system, so I had to play some games with it to approximate what I actually did.

Dan

Hi Durrettd,

I am very interested. Please post your (early) results!
Regards,
Slurk

durrettd said:

Preston,

Thanks for the info. How'd your pils turn out? Did you get the carmelization you wanted? Did the extended time at saccrification produce a thin-bodied beer?

Click to expand...

It has always been a great beer that disappears way to fast... The A&B enzymes work on a Bell curve. It is my understanding that you will always have both in every mash no matter what you do. The trick is activating the most of the right ones. In this case the Sacrification was finished and all I was doing adding the carmelization flavors from the Decoct. Pilsners are typically light bodied beers and was the profile I was going for.

durrettd said:

I considered a decoction for my MO step, but wanted to give the alpha amylase some time to work on the boiled grain. By cooling the decocted grain portion I still had active alpha amylase available to chew on the broken-down starches from the decoction. This should have increased my efficiency. It didn't.

Click to expand...

If you are using it for a MO, then there is no reason for letting it cool down because all the starches should be converted.

durrettd said:

I brewed this last Sunday, so I won't know for a while whether or not it worked. My concern is that having spent some time in the beta amylase temperature range as I raised the mash to 153 degrees F, plus the extended time at 153, I could end up with a thinner beer than desired. I'll post my results in about four weeks.

Click to expand...

The Thinner beer would depend on how long you stayed in the Beta range. Typically the light bodied beers take a longer time in the Beta range to get the job done. So if you were only there for 10-20 min I dont think it would have thinned it out (IMO).

durrettd said:

I've shared the recipe on the BS Recipe page as Summer 2012 Z's Munich Helles (Munchen Grobes Bier). If you download the recipe you may see the decoction listed as the last step; it should be between Dextrinization I and Dextrinization II. BeerSmith insists on rearranging the steps to put the decoction at the end. To make the mash steps appear as they were actually completed, click on the decoction step then hit the "Move Step Up" button twice. Note that the temperature of the step is listed as 180 degrees F; the decoction itself goes to boiling, gets cooled by adding about 2 gallons of water, then gets returned to the mash. The main mash stays at 153 while the decoction gets boiled and after it's returned to the mash. BeerSmith didn't envision such a bizarre system, so I had to play some games with it to approximate what I actually did.

Click to expand...

I'm headed to the brewery tonight so I wont get a chance to look at it in BS tonight. I should have some time tomorrow and will check it out.

Cheers
Preston

Hi Durrettd
I downloaded your recipe moved the decoct to the middle of the Sacrification like you noted. Here are my thoughts. Please dont take them to seriously, everyone brews differently and I tend to keep things simple.

First of all I would avoid the Dough-in and Acid rest (per your recipe) like the plague (IMO)! The "less modified Pilsner" (Where did you find this stuff and who makes it?) should not need either of these two rests. Furthermore, anything below 115F will activate Beta Glucanase enzymes which create large proteins that are unfermentable and contribute primarily to chill haze in beer.

Your next step in the mash is a protein rest at 122. This is where I start when I have adjuncts that equal more than 15% of my grist. However this rest will also make your beer thinner if you have any barley in the grist while at these temps. At this temp you are activating "Protease Enzymes" which break up large proteins to medium proteins (long chains contribute to Mouthfeel). As stated above, I use this step is for adjuncts only. I don't subject any barley to this rest for two reasons. It is not necessary, and it will change the mouthfeel which may or may not be what you want.

At this point it looks like you have a 30 min window and almost two hours total time thus far climbing to the sacrification temps. IMO thats a lot of work and time for not a lot of gain. Sure its complicated and cool, but totally not necessary (IMO).

Then you have thirty minutes at 153 (IMO this is too low) before taking another 40 minutes climbing for the 15 minutes at boiling temp then cool to sacrification temps and another rest before MO.
I think this is a interesting idea and I will probably try it with my pils (Thanks!), however I think I would move it one more step up the ladder to the front of the sacrification and increase the boil to 30 min, then cool it to sacrification temp. This would give the alpha enzymes a longer time to chew up what you created.


As for your questions in the OP
1. I'm using Jamil Z's recipe for Munich Helles (Jamil Zainasheff;John Palmer. Brewing Classic Styles: 80 Winning Recipes Anyone Can Brew (p. 53). Kindle Edition), which calls for 4 oz Melanoid malt to provide the melanoidin typically produced by decoction. Should I omit the melanoid malt?

              I would leave it there because it can only add to the beer... Just saying!

2. Will the single decoction at the end of the mash give the same benefits as multiple decoctions throughout the mash?
             
                I believe so

3. Any suggestions?

              See above...  ;D

Cheers
Preston

Hi Preston,

Wow what an answer! Could you say something about the role of beta-amalyse in this all. Especially when you are talking about:
- long chains that gives mouthfeel (beta-amylase breaks larger chains). What about crispyness?
- that you would like to have a higher sacrification temperature then 153F.

Regards,
Slurk

Slurk said:

Wow what an answer! Could you say something about the role of beta-amalyse in this all. Especially when you are talking about:
- long chains that gives mouthfeel (beta-amylase breaks larger chains). What about crispyness?
- that you would like to have a higher sacrification temperature then 153F.

Click to expand...

Thanks, but it is not original... Just trying to help!

Not much to say, because the HERM's system is raising the temp between the protein rest and the Sacrification, and the thirty minutes is nominal. There will be some Beta enzymes but after around 150F the majority of the enzymes being activated should be Alpha's. Think of it as a being on a bell curve. You will get Beta's and Alpha's, however where the peak of the Bell Curve is, determines what you get the most of. So if you stop in the Beta range you will get more of the Beta's.

The "perceived" crispness in beer is a function of Proteins (Long chain and Short), fermentable sugars, Carbonation, and oils in the beer (Like Hops and any other fats that come from the grains). By making a beer with highly fermentable sugars, and using a high carbonation profile,  the beer will have a perceived crispness than a beer that is maltier and has longer chain proteins and Long chain sugars like dextrins that come from a higher mash temp wont. For instance, If you make an IPA with something that has a high AA content and mix it with a beer that is say 1.040 with a light bodied mash profile. It wont have any complexity because there are not enough malts to balance out the hops and it will be "hopwatter"... Not very refreshing IMO... Its a balancing act. One of my favorite IPA's is the 90 min from DFH. It is complex because there are malts there that compliment the Hops.

The reason I suggested a higher sacrification was because Munich Helles are traditionally a malty sweet beer. And it would have benefited by having a higher sacrification. Also after seeing the recipe and seeing that the OG is only 1.043 and it has a bitterness ratio of 483, which would be very hop forward for the gravity. This by no stretch of the imagination says it wont be a good beer, because the amount of love and attention durrettd put into it will make it shine I'm sure (Hats Off to you durrettd!).  Any one that puts that much patience (4 hours of tinkering) into his Grist I am sure makes good beer. It is obvious to me he has a passion for it!

Cheers
Preston

The "Less Modified Pilsner Malt" is from Briess via MoreBeer (http://morebeer.com/view_product/17118/102155/Less_Modified_Pilsner_Malt).

Thanks to all for the info. I've re-read Palmer concerning the acid and protein rests, pH, and water chemistry. It's amazing how much I missed the first time or two. I had also interpreted MoreBeer's discussion of the malt to say it needed a protein rest; it doesn't say that. Had my students done such a poor job, I'd have given them my "critical reading" lecture. It sounds like skipping the protein rest will contribute to the fuller mouth feel I want from this.

Concerning the OG: I got some bizarre readings with my auto temp correcting refractometer (my hydrometer experienced an unfortunate encounter with a tile floor). They varied from 1.064 to 1.043, depending on what I used to collect the sample. Any insights on what's going on?

My HERMS equipment is pretty flexible, so although it looks complicated most of it consists of hearing the timer ding, putting down my book, and pushing a couple of buttons. Nevertheless, simpler is better, especially for amateurs. Speaking of amateurs: I'v noticed that lots of love and attention does not guarantee a good outcome - visit any museum of modern art for proof.

I'll incorporate lots of these suggestions next time I brew this and compare the beers. I assume you all realize that if I follow your suggestions, you'll be responsible for helping drink the results.

Thanks to all for the insights and suggestions!

Dan

Hi Preston,

Thank you so much for your answers and clarifying parts of my crispiness puzzle!
I will check the 90 min IPA from FDH.
Regards,
Slurk

Melanoid is terrible stuff.  I certainly would discourage anyone to add it to the mash.

The Schneider brewery boils their decoction at 95C for 5 mins.  Note that it's not 100C -- which is too high and will give bad results.  A longer boil at 90C is also something to consider instead

Hope this helps!

I didn't follow up on this as I promised: the beer was thin and uninteresting. It was way too close to Bud! I've abandoned the strange decoction as a bad idea.

npg,
I'm very interested in the idea of a 90C decoction. I have assumed that the active boil - in which water vaporizes - plays an important part in bursting the grains. When you refer to boiling at 90 or 95C is the water bubbling? I'm at about 9 m above sea level, so I have to hit 100C to get an actual boil. Would that give me the same effect? I can get my mash to 210F/99C with my HERMS, so maybe I'll try it.

I wrote about the mash schedule the Schneider brewery does for pretty much all their wheat beers.

http://edelstoffquest.wordpress.com/2014/05/02/the-schneider-mash-profile/

Note how the Decoction itself is converted and handled.  95C for 5 minutes.  I'd start with that first.

If you think you get a better tasting beer by adding melanoidin malt, then you are in for a surprise.

My main reasons for using decoctions are:

• flavour from he green matter for a more rustic taste
• higher efficiency means brighter beer since you need less grain
• making a wheat beer, a short Decoction helps dealing w the stubborn wheat malt
• less hot break in the wort - usually the last thin Decoction is boiled until hot break occurs.  This hot break ends up in the grain bed after the sparge

Careful with today's highly modified grains!  Mash in at 57C or even 62C - effectively a hochkurz schedule.  An unnecessary protease rest will destroy your beers body.

Hope this helps! 

npg,
Thanks for the article. Very informative.