I've never read anything that definitively proves that clear wort into the boil (or fermenter) is better than cloudy wort, or vice versa. There are however a lot of opinions that are based on personal preferences, or unsupported beliefs. Do what makes you feel comfortable.
I noticed the asterix I left in my previous post. So for completion:
I don't think anyone has done any conclusive or convincing testing on this front. Brulosophy did several comparisons of inclusion/exclusion of kettle trub in the fermentation process and the only result was that the more kettle trub in the fermenter, the faster it fermented and cleared. Having more or less grain fine grain sediment in during the boil apparently hasn't been tested all that much or I haven't seen anything on it. It's one of the first experiments I plan to conduct on my 4-way small batch brewing system.
I was talking more in terms of clear wort during the mash vs the boil, but good info/food for thought nonetheless. I've seen many brewers talk about nice clear wort recirculating over the top of the grain bed during the mash. I currently BIAB, and I'm stirring a few times during the mash, then again when I pull the bag. At that point, the wort draining through the bag is definitely not clear. I want to know if there is an advantage to having the wort clear during mash recirculation. My guess would be that clear wort means you've flushed the grain of starch for maximum conversion?
There are many brewers who firmly believe boiling grain bits produces superior beer.
During the mash, most of the wort volume has grain bits suspended in it. And any clear wort returned to the top of the mash quickly makes its way back into the bulk of the grain. The clearness is transitory.
) at that point with some solids included and see how close to complete it actually is at that time. I'm assuming it isn't all that close yet...
Why not just test the SG of the wort in the mash. The max wort SG @ 100% conversion is determined just by the strike water to grain wt ratio, and the weighted average grain potential of the grain bill (which is pretty darn close to 37 for most typical grain bills.) Note that the full volume of the wort needs to be well homogenized to get accurate results. Recirculation in traditional false bottom MLTs insures good homogenization, but not so much in AIOs with solid sided malt pipes (water between the pipe and vessel wall does not participate in the recirculation.)I do my first mash pH check 20 minutes after strike and roughly 15 minutes of recirculation, and on Tuesday's brew noticed the sample had already gone nearly bright and tasted very sweet. Next time I might try a starch test (something I've never done in almost 20 years of brewing
Cheers!
It's kind of a moving target. If someone quotes anything from Kunze or Narciss, the retort is that it's less applicable on a homebrewing scale. If someone quotes results of Brulosophy, the controls were too loose for the data to mean anything. I think the right approach is to assume the results in all cases MIGHT mean something. I'd say if you have your mind made up about something, there's such an instinct to right things off and pick apart the parameters of an experiment. I do it all the time.
Yes, decoction throws a wrench in some arguments. But the practice is viewed as a device for the mash and I wonder how they view the grain boiling post enzyme activity? Otherwise, why lauter at all? The lauter process is to not have all of the mash "stuff" in your boil kettle to clear way for hops and trub formulation. To what extent of 'clean wort' makes a difference? The answer is about what difference one is looking to examine. I will have to get back with you after some research.There are many brewers who firmly believe boiling grain bits produces superior beer.
See decoction.
Brew on
This makes me want to add a hop sock full of spent grain to the boil. For science.There are many brewers who firmly believe boiling grain bits produces superior beer.
See decoction.
Brew on
Once you get the decocted fraction to a boil, the enzymes are denatured. At that point there is no enzymatic action taking place during the decoction boil, so the chemistry isn't going to be significantly different than during a wort boil with some grain present.
Once you mash-out, which denatures the enzymes, there will be no more conversion of starch to soluble starch, dextrin, or sugar, and no more hydrolysis of soluble starch and dextrin to fermentable sugar. SG stops rising once all available starch has been reduced in molecular wt to soluble starch, or shorter carbohydrates. Thus your effective mash time is only 70 minutes, no matter how long your sparge/lauter takes.Actually testing for conversion has always struck me as not only unnecessary (given my processes) but potentially misleading if it's used to decide when to actually end a mash. I always mash for a full hour, followed by a mashout that at Δ2°F/minute takes another 10 minutes to rise to 170°F, and then by the time I get the wort in the bk (at 1 qt/min and a preboil of 13 to 14 gallons depending on the recipe) that's nearly another hour! I figure it's as converted as it's gonna get
Cheers!
My biggest gripe with my 120v AIO system was the ramp times. But I recently added a hotrod heat stick to my arsenal and put it in during ramp times (start to mash and mash to boil) and it cut those times in half, maybe more.
That's a great explanation. That's what I was looking for. Thanks
I meant overall enzyme activity as when you add the decoction back in to the mash. But it still is an interesting situation.Once you get the decocted fraction to a boil, the enzymes are denatured. At that point there is no enzymatic action taking place during the decoction boil, so the chemistry isn't going to be significantly different than during a wort boil with some grain present.
Brew on
I know it’s not the primary topic, but I’m curious. I own a 1 bdrm condo and have lived here (and brewed!) for 8 years. I’ve been involved with my condo board, ran and lost in an election and, sorry to say, pay $600/month in dues. It pays for NOTHING
None that I know of!
