| |
Main
Date: 26 May 2006 03:25:18
From: Gwidman
Subject: Sparging, again?
|
I hate to be a lamer, but if you're batch sparging, and you don't have to do
a mashout, what difference does the temperature make?? I get no difference
in efficiency between 150 degrees F and 170 degrees F. Whoa, I think I just
answered my own question? I'll find out in the taste test in a few weeks.
I think probably somebody has already checked this out? Yes? No?
Gary
|
|
| |
Date: 26 May 2006 09:25:40
From:
Subject: Re: Sparging, again?
|
Gwidman wrote:
> I hate to be a lamer, but if you're batch sparging, and you don't have to do
> a mashout, what difference does the temperature make??
Even if efficiency is unchanged, you still have active amylase enzymes
until you get the temp up to mashout/sparge temps. If you sparge at low
temps, then this doesn't happen until you're heating up to boil in the
kettle. So efficiency aside, you want to hit those higher temps in your
sparge so that you don't have unpredictable conversion going on. At
least that's my take on it...
TC
|
| | |
Date: 27 May 2006 09:08:49
From: Wayne
Subject: Re: Sparging, again?
|
tkcbb77@hotmail.com wrote:
> Gwidman wrote:
>
>>I hate to be a lamer, but if you're batch sparging, and you don't have to do
>>a mashout, what difference does the temperature make??
>
>
> Even if efficiency is unchanged, you still have active amylase enzymes
> until you get the temp up to mashout/sparge temps. If you sparge at low
> temps, then this doesn't happen until you're heating up to boil in the
> kettle. So efficiency aside, you want to hit those higher temps in your
> sparge so that you don't have unpredictable conversion going on. At
> least that's my take on it...
>
> TC
>
If you are consistent in your batch sparge process, there won't be any
unpredictable conversion going on. Remember, in batch sparging, an
additional sparge is only about another 5-10 minutes at most, not enough
for enough additional conversion to make any difference. If this
additional sparge were to take an hour or so, then you might notice
something.
The reason for using a higher temperature water (around 170°) to sparge
is simply to make it easier to rinse the sugars out of the grain bed.
This is the temperature of the water, not the grain bed. Bringing the
grainbed to a temperature high enough to denature the enzymes (the
purpose of a mashout) is tricky involving lots of boiling water or using
direct heat (running the risk of scorching). In addition, to fully
deactivate the enzymes (to stop the "unpredictable conversion"), the
grain bed needs to sit at this temperature for 20-25 minutes.
In batch sparging, without a proper "mashout", your wort will be in the
brewpot approaching a boil by this time. The time from the end of your
mash until deactivation of enzymes is most like less if you skip the
so-called mashout.
Wayne
Bugeater Brewing Company
|
| | | |
Date: 29 May 2006 02:34:50
From: Gwidman
Subject: Re: Sparging, again?
|
"Wayne" <bugeaterbrewing@charter.net > wrote in message
news:54Zdg.13$kb6.8@fe02.lga...
> tkcbb77@hotmail.com wrote:
>> Gwidman wrote:
>>
>>>I hate to be a lamer, but if you're batch sparging, and you don't have to
>>>do
>>>a mashout, what difference does the temperature make??
>>
>>
>> Even if efficiency is unchanged, you still have active amylase enzymes
>> until you get the temp up to mashout/sparge temps. If you sparge at low
>> temps, then this doesn't happen until you're heating up to boil in the
>> kettle. So efficiency aside, you want to hit those higher temps in your
>> sparge so that you don't have unpredictable conversion going on. At
>> least that's my take on it...
>>
>> TC
>>
> If you are consistent in your batch sparge process, there won't be any
> unpredictable conversion going on. Remember, in batch sparging, an
> additional sparge is only about another 5-10 minutes at most, not enough
> for enough additional conversion to make any difference. If this
> additional sparge were to take an hour or so, then you might notice
> something.
>
> The reason for using a higher temperature water (around 170°) to sparge is
> simply to make it easier to rinse the sugars out of the grain bed. This is
> the temperature of the water, not the grain bed. Bringing the grainbed to
> a temperature high enough to denature the enzymes (the purpose of a
> mashout) is tricky involving lots of boiling water or using direct heat
> (running the risk of scorching). In addition, to fully deactivate the
> enzymes (to stop the "unpredictable conversion"), the grain bed needs to
> sit at this temperature for 20-25 minutes.
>
> In batch sparging, without a proper "mashout", your wort will be in the
> brewpot approaching a boil by this time. The time from the end of your
> mash until deactivation of enzymes is most like less if you skip the
> so-called mashout.
>
> Wayne
> Bugeater Brewing Company
Thanks for the info, guys. I always do an iodine test after 60 minutes, and
always find the conversion complete by then (with fully modified malts). I
fugured a few extra minutes between sparging and boiling might help my
efficiency up until the boil pot gets hot enough to stop all of that.
ProMash calculations have been right on the money with the info I've been
feeding into it, so I feel comfortable with my set-up. That's not to mean I
depend on ProMash, but it gives me a way to judge my progress. I've been
making good beer, so I'm happy.
Thanks for the help.
Gary
|
| | | | |
Date: 30 May 2006 14:17:01
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: Sparging, again?
|
On Mon, 29 May 2006 02:34:50 -0400, <gwidman@bellsouth.net > wrote:
> Thanks for the info, guys. I always do an iodine test after 60 minutes, and
> always find the conversion complete by then (with fully modified malts).
Iodine tests are a waste of time, and can often just create confusion. IMO,
don't do one.
> I fugured a few extra minutes between sparging and boiling might help my
> efficiency up until the boil pot gets hot enough to stop all of that.
Efficiency is not about conversion or enzymes, it's about how well you rinse
sugars from the grains. Extra time for the enzymes to work in your kettle
will change your sugar profile, but it should not change your efficiency.
> I've been making good beer, so I'm happy.
That's the important part. ;)
John.
|
| | |
Date: 30 May 2006 09:24:37
From: Denny Conn
Subject: Re: Sparging, again?
|
tkcbb77@hotmail.com wrote:
> Even if efficiency is unchanged, you still have active amylase enzymes
> until you get the temp up to mashout/sparge temps. If you sparge at low
> temps, then this doesn't happen until you're heating up to boil in the
> kettle. So efficiency aside, you want to hit those higher temps in your
> sparge so that you don't have unpredictable conversion going on. At
> least that's my take on it...
The typical homebrew mashout doesn't hold a high enough temp for a long
enough time to do much in the way of denaturing enzymes. One of the
beausites of batch sparging is that you start the boil more quickly,
compared to fly sparging. Obviously, boiling DOES denature the enzymes!
---------- >Denny
--
Life begins at 60...1.060, that is.
|
| |
Date: 26 May 2006 15:08:57
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: Sparging, again?
|
On Fri, 26 May 2006 03:25:18 -0400, <gwidman@bellsouth.net > wrote:
> I hate to be a lamer, but if you're batch sparging, and you don't have to do
> a mashout, what difference does the temperature make?? I get no difference
> in efficiency between 150 degrees F and 170 degrees F. Whoa, I think I just
> answered my own question? I'll find out in the taste test in a few weeks.
> I think probably somebody has already checked this out? Yes? No?
Beyond the mashout thing, theoretically higher temps will allow the
sugars to flow more easily. This may or may not be of any noticable
benefit depending on your sparge method and technique. If you don't see
any differences, then don't worry about it.
John.
|
|
