| |
Main
Date: 09 Jun 2006 08:44:34
From: dutchbrew/chicago
Subject: mash water/grain ratio
|
does it matter what water per lb of grain ratio you use for particular
styles or could one ratio be used for all the beers that i make ex.
1.50 quarts water/1lb of grain is what i always use. I find that using
1.50qts/lb grain works best in my lauter tun as far as not getting any
stuck sparges.
anyways im making an esb tonight and want to be on target with the style
|
|
| |
Date: 09 Jun 2006 08:53:36
From: Denny Conn
Subject: Re: mash water/grain ratio
|
dutchbrew/chicago wrote:
>
> does it matter what water per lb of grain ratio you use for particular
> styles or could one ratio be used for all the beers that i make ex.
> 1.50 quarts water/1lb of grain is what i always use. I find that using
> 1.50qts/lb grain works best in my lauter tun as far as not getting any
> stuck sparges.
>
> anyways im making an esb tonight and want to be on target with the style
The ratio is not dependent on style. Use whatever works for you. I
wouldn't go less than .75 qt./lb or more than 2 qt./lb., though.
---------- >Denny
--
Life begins at 60 - 1.060, that is.
Reply to denny_at_projectoneaudio_dot_com
|
| |
Date: 09 Jun 2006 13:30:27
From: dutchbrew/chicago
Subject: Re: mash water/grain ratio
|
well great ill use 1.5 qts then. that way im not all nervous when i
turn the spigot open on the double bucket tun. ive found that ratio
always settles the grain bed perfect.
|
| |
Date: 09 Jun 2006 17:45:15
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: mash water/grain ratio
|
On 9 Jun 2006 08:44:34 -0700, <vroomski1@yahoo.com > wrote:
> does it matter what water per lb of grain ratio you use for particular
> styles or could one ratio be used for all the beers that i make ex.
> 1.50 quarts water/1lb of grain is what i always use. I find that using
> 1.50qts/lb grain works best in my lauter tun as far as not getting any
> stuck sparges.
Some people say that a thinner or thicker mash will effect the conversion,
but I don't really see how. IMO, as long as you stick in the typical
range for mashing I don't think it makes a big difference. IMO, anywhere
between 1 - 2 qts/lbs should be fine.
John.
|
| | |
Date: 09 Jun 2006 13:23:49
From: Thomas T. Veldhouse
Subject: Re: mash water/grain ratio
|
John 'Shaggy' Kolesar <spam@shagg.net > wrote:
>
> Some people say that a thinner or thicker mash will effect the conversion,
> but I don't really see how. IMO, as long as you stick in the typical
> range for mashing I don't think it makes a big difference. IMO, anywhere
> between 1 - 2 qts/lbs should be fine.
>
It does, but I suspect it is a pretty marginal difference. Essentially, the
more concentrated the sugar in the wort, the larger amount of remaining
ingredients to be converted can exist to meet equilibrium; essentially, the
point of equilibrium is moved one way or the other favoring different results.
Since there are two basic enzymes at work for the conversion of starches, you
will get both equilbriums affected, and that means the wort character can
change with mash thickness. Having said that, I believe the differences are
probably marginal.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
|
| | | |
Date: 09 Jun 2006 18:52:25
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: mash water/grain ratio
|
On Fri, 09 Jun 2006 13:23:49 -0500, <veldy71@yahoo.com > wrote:
> John 'Shaggy' Kolesar <spam@shagg.net> wrote:
>>
>> Some people say that a thinner or thicker mash will effect the conversion,
>> but I don't really see how. IMO, as long as you stick in the typical
>> range for mashing I don't think it makes a big difference. IMO, anywhere
>> between 1 - 2 qts/lbs should be fine.
>>
>
> It does, but I suspect it is a pretty marginal difference. Essentially, the
> more concentrated the sugar in the wort, the larger amount of remaining
> ingredients to be converted can exist to meet equilibrium; essentially, the
> point of equilibrium is moved one way or the other favoring different results.
> Since there are two basic enzymes at work for the conversion of starches, you
> will get both equilbriums affected, and that means the wort character can
> change with mash thickness. Having said that, I believe the differences are
> probably marginal.
Equilibrium of what?
John.
|
| | | | |
Date: 12 Jun 2006 08:05:37
From: Thomas T. Veldhouse
Subject: Re: mash water/grain ratio
|
John 'Shaggy' Kolesar <spam@shagg.net > wrote:
>
> Equilibrium of what?
>
The equilibrium of conversion between starch and suguar and between sugar
types.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
|
| |
Date: 09 Jun 2006 10:37:55
From: Scott L
Subject: Re: mash water/grain ratio
|
dutchbrew/chicago wrote:
> does it matter what water per lb of grain ratio you use for particular
> styles or could one ratio be used for all the beers that i make ex.
> 1.50 quarts water/1lb of grain is what i always use. I find that using
> 1.50qts/lb grain works best in my lauter tun as far as not getting any
> stuck sparges.
I haven't found that it matters a whole lot. The agreed-upon "ideal" is
1.25 quarts per pound, but you can really stretch that range. An easy
calculation is to divide the pounds of grain by three, and use that
many gallons. This corresponds to 1.33 quarts per pound, which is well
within the usable range.
If you are working with equipment with a large dead-space (such as my
smaller mash tun which is a rectangular cooler with Bazooka screen), it
helps efficiency to use slightly more strike water because the wort in
the dead-space has a lower gravity. But it's not a huge factor.
If I'm making 5 gallons of an ale of gravity between, say, 1.040 and
1.060 (which is most of them in my case), I don't even do any math. I
mash in with 5 gallons, and I batch sparge with 5 gallons.
Scott
|
| | |
Date: 09 Jun 2006 12:55:48
From: Thomas T. Veldhouse
Subject: Re: mash water/grain ratio
|
Scott L <scott-sp02@neuralnw.com > wrote:
>
> If I'm making 5 gallons of an ale of gravity between, say, 1.040 and
> 1.060 (which is most of them in my case), I don't even do any math. I
> mash in with 5 gallons, and I batch sparge with 5 gallons.
>
Eh? What do you end up with? 8.5 gallons? All that grain will absorb water
....
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
|
| |
Date: 09 Jun 2006 12:19:42
From: Thomas T. Veldhouse
Subject: Re: mash water/grain ratio
|
dutchbrew/chicago <vroomski1@yahoo.com > wrote:
> does it matter what water per lb of grain ratio you use for particular
> styles or could one ratio be used for all the beers that i make ex.
> 1.50 quarts water/1lb of grain is what i always use. I find that using
> 1.50qts/lb grain works best in my lauter tun as far as not getting any
> stuck sparges.
>
I haven't found that it matters that much. However, it seems that you can get
a more complete conversion of fermentible dextrines with a thinner mash, at
the expense of taking a little more time to complete. So, if you are trying
to brew a sweet or very malty beer, I would consider using a thicker mash.
For me, I stick to about 1.25 to 1.33 as my initial step about 90% of the
time.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
|
| |
Date: 11 Jun 2006 18:50:23
From: John Krehbiel
Subject: Re: mash water/grain ratio
|
> Equilibrium of what?
>
>
All chemical reactions are, in principle, reversible. Enzymes catalyse
both the reaction we want, and the reverse reaction. The direction the
reaction goes depends on concentration and thermodynamic
considerations.
I've often thought that the ability of the enzymes to convert starch
might be limited by an excess of product (sugar). Maybe this summer
I'll have time to do an experiment along those lines. If I'm right,
that would explain why thinner mashes might convert more sugar, and how
a mashout might affect yield.
If I do the experiment, I'll certainly get back to the group with the
results.
|
| | |
Date: 12 Jun 2006 08:08:22
From: Thomas T. Veldhouse
Subject: Re: mash water/grain ratio
|
John Krehbiel <j_krehbiel@hotmail.com > wrote:
>
>> Equilibrium of what?
>>
>>
>
> All chemical reactions are, in principle, reversible. Enzymes catalyse
> both the reaction we want, and the reverse reaction. The direction the
> reaction goes depends on concentration and thermodynamic
> considerations.
>
> I've often thought that the ability of the enzymes to convert starch
> might be limited by an excess of product (sugar). Maybe this summer
> I'll have time to do an experiment along those lines. If I'm right,
> that would explain why thinner mashes might convert more sugar, and how
> a mashout might affect yield.
>
> If I do the experiment, I'll certainly get back to the group with the
> results.
>
That experiment has been done and thinner mashes are known to result in a more
complete conversion. I can't cite a reference off hand, as I forget exactly
where I read it. I believe it was "New Brewing Lager Beer" by Greg Noonan,
but I can not be sure. Anyway, it makes logical sense, so I never doubted
what I read.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
|
| | | |
Date: 12 Jun 2006 08:53:07
From: Denny Conn
Subject: Re: mash water/grain ratio
|
"Thomas T. Veldhouse" wrote:
>
> That experiment has been done and thinner mashes are known to result in a more
> complete conversion. I can't cite a reference off hand, as I forget exactly
> where I read it. I believe it was "New Brewing Lager Beer" by Greg Noonan,
> but I can not be sure. Anyway, it makes logical sense, so I never doubted
> what I read.
And keep in mind that of the 3 variables of temp, time, and ratio,
ration has by far the least effect.
---------- >Denny
--
Life begins at 60...1.060, that is.
|
| | | | |
Date: 12 Jun 2006 12:45:22
From: Thomas T. Veldhouse
Subject: Re: mash water/grain ratio
|
Denny Conn <denny.g.conn@ci.eugene.or.us > wrote:
>>
>> That experiment has been done and thinner mashes are known to result in a more
>> complete conversion. I can't cite a reference off hand, as I forget exactly
>> where I read it. I believe it was "New Brewing Lager Beer" by Greg Noonan,
>> but I can not be sure. Anyway, it makes logical sense, so I never doubted
>> what I read.
>
> And keep in mind that of the 3 variables of temp, time, and ratio,
> ration has by far the least effect.
>
You are definitely correct. Temp more than time which is much more than
ratio (if short enough).
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
|
| |
Date: 12 Jun 2006 09:07:53
From: Scott L
Subject: Re: mash water/grain ratio
|
Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
> Scott L <scott-sp02@neuralnw.com> wrote:
> >
> > If I'm making 5 gallons of an ale of gravity between, say, 1.040 and
> > 1.060 (which is most of them in my case), I don't even do any math. I
> > mash in with 5 gallons, and I batch sparge with 5 gallons.
> >
>
> Eh? What do you end up with? 8.5 gallons? All that grain will absorb water
I get about 3 gallons out of the first runnings, then 5 gallons from
the sparge. That 8 gallons boils down to 6 in one hour. I usually
target 6 gallon batches. If I end up with more or less due to recipe
variations I don't really care much :-)
Scott
|
|
