# Rice starch



## _HOME_BREW_WALLACE_ (10/3/13)

Hi all, Just a quick question about using rice as an adjunct. It is the starch (white gloopy stuff when its cooked) that we are converting isn't it? If so is there any reason why we can't strain it off after cooking and collect/freeze it, and when we are ready to use it add it directly to the mash?


----------



## Bribie G (10/3/13)

What would be left when you strain it? If you are preparing rice for a mash you should cook it far beyond what you would do for Chinese food or a Curry, you cook it to a porridge - otherwise you really haven't cooked it enough for adjunct purposes. If you cook to "Indian Restaurant" consistency and strain, then I'd guarantee that 90% of the starch is still left in the grains.

However I can see the point of cooking up a batch in a big stockpot and just freezing the mush in portions if you are regularly doing rice brews. Do once and use many, as I sometimes do when I'm milling - set up the mill once and do two or three grain bills at the same time to get the agony [first world problem] over with in one hit :lol:


----------



## Nick JD (10/3/13)

Will rice flour gelatinise at mash temperatures? Other flours do...


----------



## manticle (10/3/13)

High mash temp is the low end of the range

http://www.brewery.org/brewery/library/GelTemps_RL0796.html


----------



## Nick JD (10/3/13)

Interesting - I like to add flour to my mashes (mainly belgians) seperately just to watch it disappear. It's kinda cool to pour it into a 65C mash.

EDIT: why does potato have such a wide range? Different potatoes?


----------



## DUANNE (10/3/13)

the problem i see with using the rice cooking water is that trying to judge how much starch is in the water is going to be a guess at best. If youre willing to take a suck it and see aproach and accept any gravity points added to a recipe as a bonus of sorts then it could be a good idea. im sure that repeatability of any brew using the rice water would be out of the question though. after a few brews you may get an idea of whats being added but it would be difficult to nail down im sure.


----------



## hoppy2B (16/6/13)

The starch source needs to be ground up finely in order for effective gelatinization to occur. Corn flour is easily obtained and quite cheap.
The imported maize corn flour will give you a higher yield of fermentables than the Australian wheaten corn flour.


----------



## Yob (16/6/13)

hoppy2B said:


> The imported DWARF maize corn flour will give you a higher yield.


Fixed


----------



## hoppy2B (16/6/13)

You know everything Yob. :blink:


----------



## manticle (17/6/13)

The depth of your knowledge is pretty astounding too mate.


----------



## Blackened (17/6/13)

A direct answer to Wallace, yes, but you're probably not adding a significant amount of fermentables without the rice solids IMHO.

When using rice as the primary fermentable, say for sake or Lao Cao (sp?) etc.... you soak the rice over night, steam until cooked (still firm texture, not a gloopy mess), then add your culture. The rice remains as discrete grains and the starch is still available for conversion. The main difference here of course, is contact time, weeks usually, and at room temperature. Its been a long time and I can't really remember the consistency of the rice post-ferment. 

Has anyone used steamed or boiled rice cooked in the usual manner, and added to the mash? Compared conversion efficiency between whole grain and flour? It might be interesting. My personal expectation would be pretty thorough conversion of whole grains. I'm going to have to try it next mash. Maybe a small amount in cheese cloth just to see how degraded the rice becomes.

hth
Peter


----------



## dth (17/6/13)

Every time I've added rice to my mash I just cooked it until its sticky rice, never gone so far as porridge. Still seems to convert just fine from there, hit all my targets just fine. Looking at it in the mash it still looks like there is whole grains of rice left, but on closer inspection its all pretty much gone. What looks like whole pieces of rice are just empty, everything inside is gone.


----------



## Nick JD (17/6/13)

dth said:


> Every time I've added rice to my mash I just cooked it until its sticky rice, never gone so far as porridge. Still seems to convert just fine from there, hit all my targets just fine. Looking at it in the mash it still looks like there is whole grains of rice left, but on closer inspection its all pretty much gone. What looks like whole pieces of rice are just empty, everything inside is gone.


Totally - looks like some kinda tiny reptile egg shells where the critter has wriggled out.

I once did a 35% rice lager and the bag was left with not much in it. Haven't used rice in a mash for years now.


----------



## Yob (17/6/13)

I know I've read it before bit cant recall, what sort of percentage of weight of rice as an adjunct is common?


----------



## Byran (17/6/13)

Does rice attribute to the creamy flavour rice lagers tend to have? I had a couple of different ones on tap the other day and they all seemed to have a creamy smooth flavour. Hokkaido seemed to be my personal favorite and im keen to see if I can make one similar.


----------



## hoppy2B (23/6/13)

Byran said:


> Does rice attribute to the creamy flavour rice lagers tend to have? I had a couple of different ones on tap the other day and they all seemed to have a creamy smooth flavour. Hokkaido seemed to be my personal favorite and im keen to see if I can make one similar.


I don't know if rice does or not but I think yeast is important. A mash regime that contributes to body may help.


----------



## Nick JD (24/6/13)

Yob said:


> I know I've read it before bit cant recall, what sort of percentage of weight of rice as an adjunct is common?


Ive done 30% before. With BB Ale providing the enzymes and it all converted.

Much more and I'd not be confident. Also, much more and you're making some limp-wristed beer. Like Coors or Miller.

With cereal mashing techniques you can probably push 50%, but then you're making saki not beer.


----------



## Nick JD (24/6/13)

Byran said:


> Does rice attribute to the creamy flavour rice lagers tend to have? I had a couple of different ones on tap the other day and they all seemed to have a creamy smooth flavour. Hokkaido seemed to be my personal favorite and im keen to see if I can make one similar.


Yes.


----------



## Bribie G (24/6/13)

The use of rice really took off in the USA with the likes of the original Budweiser, which had the German immigrant brewers struggling with the local six row malts. Encyclopaedia Britannica 1911 edition has a bit to say on the American beers.


In America the common system of brewing is one of infusion mashing combined with bottom fermentation. The method of mashing, however, though on infusion lines, differs appreciably from the English process. A very low initial heat—about 100° F. —at which the mash remains for about an hour, is employed. After this the temperature is rapidly raised to 153-156° F. by running in the boiling "cooker mash," _i.e._ raw grain wort from the converter. After a period the temperature is gradually increased to about 165° F. The very low initial heat, and the employment of relatively large quantities of readily transformable malt adjuncts, enable the American brewer to make use of a class of malt which would be considered quite unfit for brewing in an English brewery. The system of fermentation is very similar to the continental "lager" system, and the beer obtained bears some resemblance to the German product. To the English palate it is somewhat flavourless, but it is always retailed in exceedingly brilliant condition and at a proper temperature. There can be little doubt that every nation evolves a type of beer most suited to its climate and the temperament of the people, and in this respect the modern American beer is no exception. In regard to plant and mechanical arrangements generally, the modern American breweries may serve as an object-lesson to the European brewer, although there are certainly a number of breweries in the United Kingdom which need not fear comparison with the best American plants.

I'm sure I read somewhere that they pushed beyond 50% with some brews. 
Weyermann Pisner will convert up to 30% according to the Wey guy when I asked him at the lecture. 

Edit: quite off topic, but the "somewhat flavourless" comment is interesting. The "party line" seems to be that American beers were full flavoured full bodied hoppy delights, that didn't survive Prohibition, and that when the breweries re-opened they produced the modern bland megaswill. The above article gives an interesting window into pre prohibition beers which suggests, to me anyway, that they weren't the malt and hop nirvana that many modern craft beer "campaigners" in the USA claim that they were.


----------

