Strike Procedure For Mash

[jasonharley]

Alcon


In John Palmer's HTB (Page 201 3rd Ed), it recommends that strike water be added to grain rather than grain added to the strike water because you may "thermally shock the enzymes". I regularly add grain to the strike water and suffer no yield efficiency problems.


Is this advice verging onto the bullshit fastlane or is there evidence to prove that adding strike water to the grain is superior?


Any mythbusting thoughts would be greatly appreciated


5 eyes

 

[manticle]

Question is on every forum at least ten times and from what I read and what I've tried, it matters not 1 whit. I add bit of water, bit of grain, bit of water etc. Have done it both other ways before too but never tried underletting.

 

[np1962]

Have done grain first, hot liquor first, liquor poured on top of grain, underlet....
Doesn't seem to make any difference to the finished beer IMO.
I do like underletting as I seem to be able to stir the grains in with no sign of dry grain balls.
Cheers
Nige

 

[argon]

I think of this question pretty much every time i brew. I dough in concurrently while underletting the water. As nige says, I get less dough balls this way. It's nice and easy that way, if you have a way of measuring your water other than measuring the mash tun; eg sight tube in hlt. Tend to get less temp drop this way too.

 

[seamad]

Biab and brewmasters seem to work ok

 

[MarkBastard]

It's safe to say a lot of these old 'home brew bibles' that everyone talks up are at least partly full of shit.

My philosophy is if you can't notice a problem, it doesn't exist. If you don't measure a drop in efficiency or notice a difference to the final beer in any way, it is not a problem. This goes for this topic as well as rehydrating dry yeast.

 

[drtomc]

I've been pondering, trying to figure out what possible mechanism could be at play. My best possible line of reasoning follows. I don't claim that there *is* a practical difference.

You have a desired mash temperature. The grain is cooler than the desired temperature; the water is hotter than the desired temperature. The important thing is that you don't want the enzymes in the grain to get too hot.

If you add some of the water to the grain, the cool grain will warm up, but approach the mash temperature from below, rising as you add more strike water.

If you add grain to the water, the grain that you first add will be heated above the desired mash temperature and gradually cool to the desired temperature as more cool grain is added.

Now, if you do BIAB, as one example, you tend to require your strike water to be only a couple of degrees above the desired mash temperature, so it won't make a great deal of difference.

At the other extreme, if you have a very thick mash, the strike water will need to be much hotter, and if much time elapses between when you start adding grain to the hot water and when things stabilise at mashing temperatures you will get some (maybe significant?) degredation of the beta-amylase.

If my reasoning is correct, it probably still doesn't matter, because you don't usually fart around for 15 minutes after adding the first bit of grain before all the grain is in.

2c.
T.

 

[argon]

I think what you've described is what Palmer is possibly getting at.

However, let's assume that the first portion of grain has it's enzymes zapped because it's added in too hot. There's still going to be plenty of enzymes available in the rest of the grain to convert all the sugaz available. Think of the same way decoctions work in that sense.

edit: So i think Palmer is possibly talking shit once again.

 

[MarkBastard]

If you add water to grain the hot water that first touches the grain will make that grain hotter surely. I really don't see the difference!

In fact I'd argue that with full volume mashes (BIAB) your strike temperature is much lower than traditional brewing so the temperature difference is much less, meaning less shock. My strike water is usually 69 degrees for a mash of 66-67 degrees.

 

[drtomc]

MB, I'm trying to find a good way of explaining it, but if you compute the time and amount of enzyme above the mash temperature (I guess the units I want to measure in the two scenarios are gram degree minutes), you'll find the integral over time is lower with the water-into-grain.

I agree, though that in practice it will make sod all difference, unless you really try.

If I get really excited, I'll play around and see if I can make an idealized model that I can run in R to generate some plots, but it's probably just a waste of time. Instead, I could get back to trying to find a cure for prostate cancer.

T.

 

[Nick JD]

I've found myself doughing in at lower than gelatinisation temperatures a lot lately, whether for an acid or a "protein" rest just because it increases my efficiency a tad and means I don't have to address the doughballs at all.

In my little 19L pot I mash in with 10L of water straight out of the hot tap ... then boil the coffee kettle 2 times to bring it to sacc temps. Easy as, don't have to even make any strike liquor.

Not sure if the extra efficiency is through less enzymes denaturing, zero doughballs, or enzymes being made more available earlier on in the more favourable temps and not locked up in micro-doughballs.

 

[drtomc]

(d) all of the above?

 

[RdeVjun]

Interesting discussion, chaps!
FWIW, after rapidly tiring of the novelty of raining in grain while stirring, I've been just lowering my BIAB bag of grain into the pot of strike water and then stirring, that in itself could be cause for Palmerists to blow a valve, but also consider that my strike water is usually a few degrees above an ordinary BIAB target strike temp, because I i) MaxiBIAB with a L:G ratio of around 3 to 4, so thicker than the stock BIAB (i.e. water must be hotter), but also ii) reserve a few litres of it to leave some room for temperature adjustment while filling the pot to the brim, so needs to be even hotter still. (This approximates the more conventional mashing, but that's entirely coincidental.) All of this means that the first grain to hit the water is at least 5C above the mash temp. If its all about preserving enzymes and being gentle to them for optimum mash performance, then I'm afraid I must be doing something wrong- seldom get efficiency below high 70s and mid 80s are routine.
Having said all that, despite some respectable competition gongs, I'm not convinced that the method I've described above is perfect (far from it in fact- MaxiBIAB as a method has a particular philosophy) its just that one issue I've had in the back of my mind is the degree of repeatability with respect to some characteristics such as residual sweetness, body and final gravity has been less than ideal. I don't think though that the mash in method is solely responsible.

I'd still refer novices to Palmer, but not in the biblical/ holy grail sense- if anyone has that sort of characteristic, its probably guys like Kai! :super: Oh, an speaking of Kai, this bit about the rate of enzyme denature is excellent, he also cites this. No mention of thermal shock in either of them though... :huh:

 

[Thirsty Boy]

i suspect, dont know but suspect - that NickJD has hit on the reason that this is some peoples point of view.

IF - you go all ultra traditional german style on your brewday's arse... you would in fact be doughing in at room temp or perhaps blood temp for a "hydration rest" before decocting up to your other rests. and most other traditional mash regimes start at lower than gelatinisation temp too - and they all tend to result in a slightly more efficient mash, a slightly more fermentable wort and better protien and glucan break down.

So if you then go homebrewer on it and drop your grain into your water at 10C above mash temp, and it doesn't work quite so well - then it must have been that the enzymes were "shocked" by the heat. or some such thing.

Easy one to deal with really - as others have said, if you aren't experiencing a problem, then you dont have one. If the enzymes were somehow "shocked" the result would be slow conversion, incomplete conversion or overly unfermentable wort. If thats not happening to you - then you have no problem with your enzymes.

If on the other hand you are having an issue or two - then its a bloody easy place to start your search for a reason and a solution.

 

[jasonharley]

Argon

I like your reasoning. Plenty of enzymes abound and considering that mashes generally are sustained for an hour there is plenty of opportunity for conversion to take place.


5 eyes

I think what you've described is what Palmer is possibly getting at.

However, let's assume that the first portion of grain has it's enzymes zapped because it's added in too hot. There's still going to be plenty of enzymes available in the rest of the grain to convert all the sugaz available. Think of the same way decoctions work in that sense.

edit: So i think Palmer is possibly talking shit once again.

 

[spog]

blooby hell,do you have a job,you are so quick to answer, ...cheers.....spog......

Question is on every forum at least ten times and from what I read and what I've tried, it matters not 1 whit. I add bit of water, bit of grain, bit of water etc. Have done it both other ways before too but never tried underletting.

 

[manticle]

blooby hell,do you have a job

Yes.

 

[stux]

FWIW I use full volume BIAB, so my strike is just a few degrees above initial rest

I just dump the grain in as fast as I can pour it out of the bucket without causing a mess

I get 99% conversion efficiency based on the Fine Grind As Is potential

 

[warra48]

Palmer's book is a good book in many ways, but it's not without faults including some of his own unproven theories.

I heat my strike water to about 8C above my mash temp, let about 4 to 5 litres into the tun, dump in half the grain, stir, dump in the rest of the grain as I gradually let in more water till I hit my desired mash temp.

Never have a problem getting over 90% conversion efficiency ( a la Stux).

In the end, it doesn't matter a darn what you do, so long as you are happy with your outcome.