# Losses To Trub, Advice Needed.



## Acasta (26/11/10)

Hi guys,
Just complete a good brew day. However, when i was draining wort i had to leave about 5L of wort behind. Previous batch to this i only lost about 3.5L. The difference i have put it down it is the percent of malt that went into the grinder. I used 88% ground malt from the coffee grinder wheres last time i used about 60%.
Anything, i use whirfloc and whirlpooling. I put the tablet in a bit late (about 10 min of the boil) and for whirlpooling, once the beer was off the flame i waited about 10-15min, whirlpooled and waited another 20min before draining the wort into a cube. 
Obviously im no chilling. Im also doing BIAB. This was planned to be 20L. and had about 23L in the kettle before draining.

My thoughs for so much trub are; 
a.) Grinding up such a large portion of the malt may have caused all the trub, as it goes through the bag.
b.) Incorrect whirlpooling method, or too hot to whirlpool effectivly.

Anyway, what are your thoughts and advice? If i've missed any info please ask and ill provide info.


----------



## beerdrinkingbob (26/11/10)

Acasta said:


> Hi guys,
> Just complete a good brew day. However, when i was draining wort i had to leave about 5L of wort behind. Previous batch to this i only lost about 3.5L. The difference i have put it down it is the percent of malt that went into the grinder. I used 88% ground malt from the coffee grinder wheres last time i used about 60%.
> Anything, i use whirfloc and whirlpooling. I put the tablet in a bit late (about 10 min of the boil) and for whirlpooling, once the beer was off the flame i waited about 10-15min, whirlpooled and waited another 20min before draining the wort into a cube.
> Obviously im no chilling. Im also doing BIAB. This was planned to be 20L. and had about 23L in the kettle before draining.
> ...




I leave mine for longer after the whirlpooling because it settles better and i get more wort, that said lots of members don't wait very long at all


----------



## Nick JD (26/11/10)

Acasta said:


> Hi guys,
> Just complete a good brew day. However, when i was draining wort i had to leave about 5L of wort behind. Previous batch to this i only lost about 3.5L. The difference i have put it down it is the percent of malt that went into the grinder. I used 88% ground malt from the coffee grinder wheres last time i used about 60%.
> Anything, i use whirfloc and whirlpooling. I put the tablet in a bit late (about 10 min of the boil) and for whirlpooling, once the beer was off the flame i waited about 10-15min, whirlpooled and waited another 20min before draining the wort into a cube.
> Obviously im no chilling. Im also doing BIAB. This was planned to be 20L. and had about 23L in the kettle before draining.
> ...



Tip your kettle on an angle and pour the trub into a separate container through some voile. Let it settle, pour the clear stuff off and use it for starters or give it a quick boil and cool and add it into your fermenter - until you get your technique sussed out.

My freezer has about 8-10L of random trub savings in old yoghurt containers in it. I'm going to chuck them all in the kettle, boil then for ten minutes, cool and ferment a batch called "Allsorts"  .


----------



## Acasta (26/11/10)

Nick JD said:


> Tip your kettle on an angle and pour the trub into a separate container through some voile. Let it settle, pour the clear stuff off and use it for starters or give it a quick boil and cool and add it into your fermenter - until you get your technique sussed out.
> 
> My freezer has about 8-10L of random trub savings in old yoghurt containers in it. I'm going to chuck them all in the kettle, boil then for ten minutes, cool and ferment a batch called "Allsorts"  .


doesn't need to go on an angle as all the shit was at the tap level. Where do you put the voile? I tried that last brew but it wouldn't pass though. Whats your filtering process?

Bob, do you no chill? Is your grain ground in a grinder or crushed?

How can i get tighter more compact trub? I'm thinking 6L is a large loss, right?


----------



## beerdrinkingbob (26/11/10)

Acasta said:


> Bob, do you no chill? Do you wait longer after flame out or after whirlpool? Is your grain ground in a grinder or crushed?



Not really no chill more of a slow chill, I throw the pot in the laundry tub and replace the water a few times in the first ten minutes until the wort stops rolling around from the residual heat in the base etc. 

Then whirlpool, then wrap it in glad wrap a lot whilst it is still a little steamy (kill some bugs hopefully), place the lid on, glad wrap some more drain the water a few more times and get it fairly cool (maybe 40 degrees) pull it out and place it on tiles and come back in the morning.

Works for me, no infections to date (touch wood) and no sourness (pretty damn air tight with all that glad wrap).

I use water in the tub to speed up the cooling and get aroma from and taste in my beers


----------



## Acasta (26/11/10)

Well im buying a wort chiller off a fellow member tomorrow, do you think chilling then whirlpool will help? I did notice the stuff kinda moving around from the heat.


----------



## beerdrinkingbob (26/11/10)

Acasta said:


> Well im buying a wort chiller off a fellow member tomorrow, do you think chilling then whirlpool will help? I did notice the stuff kinda moving around from the heat.




Not sure but have read that people do both way, it definitely helps if it's not rolling around though, things will settle where they should.

Are you doing singles or doubles?

Also forgot to add it last post, i use a coffee grinder.


----------



## Acasta (26/11/10)

Singles. What about you? Whats the diameter of your tun? How much of the grist do you use the grinder on? how much trub losses do you have?


----------



## beerdrinkingbob (26/11/10)

Acasta said:


> Singles. What about you? Whats the diameter of your tun? How much of the grist do you use the grinder on? how much trub losses do you have?



All of the grain gets put through the grinder, not sure if i will keep doing this though because my efficiency compared to just cracked hasn't really jumped, I sit on about 70% into the fermenter no matter which way. 

I still use the 19 ltr big W pot method, have a keggle etc but can't be bothered until the new house is built and i have the gas line, bottled gas is too expensive. 

I normally loose around 2.5 to 3 litres but run it through paper towel and use them for starters, don't count this in efficiency though.

good luck hopefully someone has the answer, 5 litres is a lot


----------



## felten (26/11/10)

if you have more particulate matter that can fall through the bag, then you're going to have more trub, I've used a coffee grinder before as well and I'm of the opinion that they really suck. Mills are cheap, get one!


----------



## Acasta (26/11/10)

Ahh kk, how do you calc your efficiency?

Felton, i am considering a mill. Also in this batch there was about 50g of hops in there, as the last one only had 20g.


----------



## beerdrinkingbob (26/11/10)

Acasta said:


> Ahh kk, how do you calc your efficiency?
> 
> Felton, i am considering a mill. Also in this batch there was about 50g of hops in there, as the last one only had 20g.




Hop pellets make bugger all difference, more the grain.

I just adjust my efficiency until my brew matches breersmith estimates, I know this isn't correct but asked a few times and no one has been forthcoming with a formula <_<


----------



## Acasta (26/11/10)

I've been working with beersmith trying to get the right efficiency. Not sure what the correct way to calc it is. But for now im going with mash efficiency. Into fermenter eff for me is really bad because of the loss from trub.

Has anyone got a similar setup and a way to tackle this problem? really i just need a tighter trub cone.


----------



## beerdrinkingbob (26/11/10)

Acasta said:


> Has anyone got a similar setup and a way to tackle this problem? really i just need a tighter trub cone.



What gear are you running, including pot, grain to water, do you sparge etc ?


----------



## Acasta (26/11/10)

50L kettle, BIAB, 20L mash around 5-6kg grain, then 2 x 8L sparge


----------



## rosswill (26/11/10)

One Whirfloc tablet for a 20L batch is way too much. Try half a tablet. More is not better for kettle finings.


----------



## Acasta (26/11/10)

I did use half, forgot to mention that.
I only boiled for about 8-10 min, is this enough time?


----------



## Nashmandu (4/12/10)

Ok, just going to throw it out there....
if you use a coffee grinder as apposed to a mill then you will be destroying your husk which in turn will cause you to extract alot more protiens during run off. these protiens then become solulible during you boil and hey presto, more trub.
you have also upped all ingredients used (hops 60%) (malt 30%)which oh my god... wait for it.... will also give you more trub.
A rookie mistake I know


----------



## seemax (4/12/10)

My trub loss is around 2-3L, even with my last brew where I used 150g+ hops.

How high is your tap off the bottom? Do you have a pickup tube of sorts? Ideally you want the pickup to be at the outer edge of the pot and facing radially outwards and low (if that makes sense) to keep it away from the trub. This can be achieved with a bent piece of copper tube or a few right angle brass/stainless attachments... or buy a hop screen or similar.

I've used a basic strainer to filter the remaining wort, it gets most it. The voile is too fine and will take ages to drip filter, squeezing is a pain.

Alternatively you could just drain some of the crap into your NC cube, numerous posters are convinced it has no ill effects.

PS How did the chiller go?


----------



## pk.sax (4/12/10)

Yea, all the trub settles into the feet of the cube and is deadset easy to to get the wort off from above if you have a tap fitted. From my exp, that stuff at the bottom is at least 50% wort. U could even try crash chilling the no chill cube to try and compact the trub in there.


----------



## seemax (4/12/10)

practicalfool said:


> Yea, all the trub settles into the feet of the cube and is deadset easy to to get the wort off from above if you have a tap fitted. From my exp, that stuff at the bottom is at least 50% wort. U could even try crash chilling the no chill cube to try and compact the trub in there.



For lagers this works out well... dump as much as you want into the NC, crash chill to settle all the trub ... let it warm to 8C or so then pitch your starter! Too easy...


----------



## bcp (4/12/10)

"Stupidity is the the stepmother of invention" (me).

I don't use a hopsock, this recipe has some sweetened orange peel & i tossed it straight in. :blink: and only realised my stupidity when pouring off to the cube & it jammed the tap of my urn. Ended up scooping out with a jug into the cube, no whirlpooling, and got pretty much all the trub in the cube. 

So when i tipped into the fermenter, (similar to Nick JD's voile), I found the kitchen sieve fits perfectly (absolutely snug) with the lid of my fermenter and i just poured through. Just a normal kitchen sieve filters it beautifully. It works so well i had to stir it to let more liquid through and it still filtered it. 

Question: is there any harm in having so much trub in the cube? Otherwise, stuff whirlpooling - this does a much better job & is simpler. Loss to trub completely negligible - pretty much just solid matter.


----------



## Dazza_devil (4/12/10)

I use a hop sock for hop pellets but I'm thinking of going commando and using the sock to strain the wort into my fermenter after whirlpool and chill.


----------



## ekul (4/12/10)

The best thing i've found to make whirlpooling easy, and minimising trub loss is to use some flowers in the boil. The flowers really help the trub stick together after whilpooling. So much so that i use flowers for every batch, even 5g of something will help. ( I use at least 5g of super alpha @ 60 for bittering).

Also, use less whirfloc. I got told to use around a quarer tab for a 23L batch. It means the wort isn't as clear, but whats a little cold break in the fermenter anyway? If you use heaps of whirfloc its flocs everything out and makes very clear wort, but the trub will be light and fluffy and stir up easily (in my experience), making it hard to differentiate between hot and cold breaks.

And another easy way to minimse losses, have a really wide bottom kettle! I was using a wide kettle and the trub at the bottom after whirlpooling leaves a good 2 inches of space around the edges, even without hop flowers.

I used to lose 5-6L of wort to trub every time, now i'm lucky to lose any (especially using the hops flowers!). The trub is dry of wort and i get everything in the cube.


----------



## RdeVjun (4/12/10)

bcp said:


> I found the kitchen sieve fits perfectly (absolutely snug) with the lid of my fermenter and i just poured through. Just a normal kitchen sieve filters it beautifully. It works so well i had to stir it to let more liquid through and it still filtered it.


Indeed I found that too, a big kitchen sieve is an excellent trub/ hops filter and use one quite a lot (sometimes a colander) but I pour the whole lot through after kettle- chilling (in a 19L stockpot), so not No- Chilling as per the OP. Using leaf hops (so whole flowers or plugs) is a must though I find, forms quite a decent filter bed which traps much of the break and eventually every drop of wort can be poured through, so really quite efficient. Its also a very simple process, has no exotic or expensive components and so is well- suited to beginners, but actually suits me just fine too. Also, using WhirlFloc or similar seems to get it all aggregating nicely, fairly sure that helps but as ekul says, don't OD on it. I'd like to say I have some pictures of some nice clean wort filtered like this but I don't (task for self...).


bcp said:


> Question: is there any harm in having so much trub in the cube? Otherwise, stuff whirlpooling - this does a much better job & is simpler. Loss to trub completely negligible - pretty much just solid matter.


No, no such harm as far as I'm aware, I leave the wort to cool on the whole lot. Yep, quite right- very efficient and simple recovery of clear wort. B)


----------



## np1962 (4/12/10)

Acasta said:


> Well im buying a wort chiller off a fellow member tomorrow, do you think chilling then whirlpool will help? I did notice the stuff kinda moving around from the heat.


This will definitely work better. 
While you want to get the wort into a cube at as high a temp as possible if no chilling the convection movement while it is still near boiling will keep stirring up the trub.
Let your wort cool a little more before whirlpooling, then let it settle for at least ten minutes before running off.
If your sanitation is up to scratch the wort will still be hot enough when transferring that you should have no problems with infection.
Nige


----------



## Acasta (6/12/10)

seemax said:


> My trub loss is around 2-3L, even with my last brew where I used 150g+ hops.
> 
> How high is your tap off the bottom? Do you have a pickup tube of sorts? Ideally you want the pickup to be at the outer edge of the pot and facing radially outwards and low (if that makes sense) to keep it away from the trub. This can be achieved with a bent piece of copper tube or a few right angle brass/stainless attachments... or buy a hop screen or similar.
> 
> ...


Haven't had a brewday since the swap actually, so i'll find out, but it bent to a nice shape easy haha.

My pickup faces flat, ie, straight into the pot. Its welded, so i can't fit a angled piece. I'm hoping the chiller will help some of the trub settle out, if not ill get a grain mill. Thanks guys.


----------



## np1962 (6/12/10)

Acasta said:


> Haven't had a brewday since the swap actually, so i'll find out, but it bent to a nice shape easy haha.
> 
> My pickup faces flat, ie, straight into the pot. Its welded, so i can't fit a angled piece. I'm hoping the chiller will help some of the trub settle out, if not ill get a grain mill. Thanks guys.


Some of your problems are being caused by the pick up tube, it will be pointing straight into the trub cone.
The trub is made up of hop debris, hot break, grain particles in your case and once you start chilling you will also have cold break.
Is there any way you could slide a bent tube over the existing pickup so you are siphoning from the outer edge of your pot?
Nige


----------



## Thirsty Boy (6/12/10)

Or, take your mash paddle, and after you whirlpool, put it into your pot between the outlet and the trub cone to act as a diverted plate. Similar effect as the pick-up tube facing outwards.

Also, I always wait till I can't see any movement from heat, then whirlpool, giving your big arsed metal burner/stand a quick squirt with the hose can speed that period of waiting up. There is still a hell of a lot of heat trapped in a burner after the flame is put out, that will go up into your pot and cause even more convection currents.


----------



## Acasta (6/12/10)

NigeP62 said:


> Some of your problems are being caused by the pick up tube, it will be pointing straight into the trub cone.
> The trub is made up of hop debris, hot break, grain particles in your case and once you start chilling you will also have cold break.
> Is there any way you could slide a bent tube over the existing pickup so you are siphoning from the outer edge of your pot?
> Nige


hmmm, can't really add that piece, as its RIGHT at the bottom, and the whole is quite small, about a 5cent piece, but not round haha. if problems persist, ill try fitting something in.



Thirsty Boy said:


> Or, take your mash paddle, and after you whirlpool, put it into your pot between the outlet and the trub cone to act as a diverted plate. Similar effect as the pick-up tube facing outwards.
> 
> Also, I always wait till I can't see any movement from heat, then whirlpool, giving your big arsed metal burner/stand a quick squirt with the hose can speed that period of waiting up. There is still a hell of a lot of heat trapped in a burner after the flame is put out, that will go up into your pot and cause even more convection currents.


i did this mash paddle trick too (near the end of draining) and it somewhat worked. I also took the pot right off the burner onto the bricks to cool. However, i must have whirlpooled while it was too hot.


----------



## Thirsty Boy (6/12/10)

Acasta said:


> hmmm, can't really add that piece, as its RIGHT at the bottom, and the whole is quite small, about a 5cent piece, but not round haha. if problems persist, ill try fitting something in.
> 
> 
> i did this mash paddle trick too (near the end of draining) and it somewhat worked. I also took the pot right off the burner onto the bricks to cool. However, i must have whirlpooled while it was too hot.



Is your 50L pot a converted keg??

Because no matter how hard I tried, no matter what tricks i used... I never got a whirlpool to work in my converted keg kettle. It always just ended up a uniform layer of sludge.

One of of the reasons I traded up to a flat bottomed stock pot instead.

At any rate - 4L to trub is not out of order for BIAB brews. With time and using all the tricks in the book, you might get it down a fair bit lower - but even in a big arsed flat bottomed pot where I get a good whirlpool and good cone formation.. I still lose 2 or more liters to trub in a BIAB brew. Mind you, I do not like getting trub into the cube, so I am fairly fussy.


----------



## Acasta (6/12/10)

Its vertical sides, but the bottom is kind of dome-ed on the bottom. I did get s decent trub cone, however, there was also a layer of trub on the bottom. This could have been due to my hot whirlpool.


----------



## Thirsty Boy (6/12/10)

Domed up? Convex from the inside?

Thats a good thing for whirlpools.... If the bulge is very very slight? If it's more than that, then the trub cone tends to fall to bits as the edges can slide off down the slope once the wort levels drop below the top of the cone, or if the cone gets a bit battered by currents from draining out the wort.

The other way, domed down... Well, as i said, i could never get a proper result from whirlpooling in something as deeply "dished" as a converted keg - but that could just be my lack of skill - but a quite shallow bowl, that shouldn't be an inherent problem, you will lose more wort to trub than flat or domed, but it should be a little easier to get very "clean" wort from the stuff you do recover.


----------



## Acasta (6/12/10)

Domed down, sadly. About 1cm down.


----------



## Acasta (9/12/10)

I did another batch after using my immersion chiller. While i was happy with how the beer was chilled super fast, it meant i got some cold break and a whirl pool didn't help with the insane amount of trub i had. I used .5 Whirfloc for 20min in about 30L, could this have screwed it up? Not sure. Anyway, i'm considering a grain mill again.

Any thoughts?


----------



## seemax (9/12/10)

When i used my insinkerator mill which made almost flour I got loads of trub using BIAB.
Since getting a monster mill I get very little even when i've used a stack of hops. My typical waste is around 2L.

Why not just drain the 4L or so "waste" wort into a sanitised container, crash chill to settle the crap... that should get you another 3L almost. Add this to your fermentor prior to pitching?

I love my mill... in conjunction with bulk grain buys and imported hops... it's now a case of brew whatever i want whenever i want


----------



## Acasta (9/12/10)

Yeah i guess so. I think i might get a grain mill. Do you no-chill seemax? the copper coil is amazing.
I was going to collect wort and chill it but i got lazy haha.


----------



## peaky (10/12/10)

Thirsty Boy said:


> Is your 50L pot a converted keg??
> 
> Because no matter how hard I tried, no matter what tricks i used... I never got a whirlpool to work in my converted keg kettle. It always just ended up a uniform layer of sludge.



My kettle is a converted keg and the whirlpool trick dosen't really work that well. I also get a uniform layer of sludge on the bottom of the kettle instead of a cone, even when I stir the crap out of it and leave it for 30 minutes after chilling and using whirfloc. I was losing about 4 litres to trub. I made a small hop screen/false bottom the other day at work, test drive next weekend, hopefully that will lower the amount I lose to trub.


----------



## Acasta (10/12/10)

I ended up siphoning the wort off the top, i guess it was easier.


----------



## themonkeysback (10/12/10)

Acasta said:


> I used .5 Whirfloc for 20min in about 30L, could this have screwed it up?



No expert but from reading I have done previously (can't remember if it was on AHB or elsewhere) the recommendatios for how long to boil whirlfloc seemed to be a lot shorter than this, as longer boiling apparently decreases how effective it is. I am sure they advised <10 mins and potentially even 5mins or less.

Adam.


----------



## hazard (10/12/10)

RdeVjun said:


> Indeed I found that too, a big kitchen sieve is an excellent trub/ hops filter and use one quite a lot (sometimes a colander) but I pour the whole lot through after kettle- chilling (in a 19L stockpot), so not No- Chilling as per the OP. Using leaf hops (so whole flowers or plugs) is a must though I find, forms quite a decent filter bed which traps much of the break and eventually every drop of wort can be poured through, so really quite efficient. Its also a very simple process, has no exotic or expensive components and so is well- suited to beginners, but actually suits me just fine too. Also, using WhirlFloc or similar seems to get it all aggregating nicely, fairly sure that helps but as ekul says, don't OD on it. I'd like to say I have some pictures of some nice clean wort filtered like this but I don't (task for self...).No, no such harm as far as I'm aware, I leave the wort to cool on the whole lot. Yep, quite right- very efficient and simple recovery of clear wort. B)


Yep, I usually follow same process - pour the whole kettle contents through a sieve into the fermenter. Pellet hops clog up the sieve so leaf hops, as you say, work better. Zero losses to trub with this method, and no need to whirlpool. And a bit of break material in the fermenter is OK according to most modern thinking.


----------



## Acasta (10/12/10)

Yeah i used a sieve before, but i really like the clear wort haha. Im thinking my whirfloc addition was too long in the boil. Trying again today.


----------



## craigev (10/12/10)

I used to loose about 5L to trub. Then I got a hopblocker and now only loose 2-3L. So, saving 10% of each batch will pay off the cost of the blocker quite quickly.

Only catch is that you need a very wide kettle to accommodate both a wort chiller and the hopblocker - or use a plate chiller. I have a 15 gallon kettle which is just big enough for both.


----------



## MHB (10/12/10)

hazard said:


> Yep, I usually follow same process - pour the whole kettle contents through a sieve into the fermenter. Pellet hops clog up the sieve so leaf hops, as you say, work better. Zero losses to trub with this method, and no need to whirlpool. *And a bit of break material in the fermenter is OK according to most modern thinking*.


Only if you think of Nick JD as a leading modern thinker, FFS that's one of the dumbest things I've seen on AHB in a long time.

MHB


----------



## Acasta (11/12/10)

MHB said:


> Only if you think of Nick JD as a leading modern thinker, FFS that's one of the dumbest things I've seen on AHB in a long time.
> 
> MHB


Don't shit in my thread please.


----------



## beerdrinkingbob (11/12/10)

Acasta said:


> Don't shit in my thread please.



sorry to state the obvious but you brew the nickjd method ( grinder etc..), don't piss on him unless he pissed on u, regardless of some crazy statements!!


----------



## MHB (12/12/10)

Acasta said:


> Don't shit in my thread please.



The people shitting in your thread as you so nicely put it are those giving advice (whether through ignorance, stupidity or sheer tightarsed perversity) that will make your beer worse not better.
There is no amount of Hot Break that will in any way improve your beer; there is well understood researched and proven damage to the flavour, stability and enjoy ability of beer directly linked to increasing amounts of hot break material.
When we brew we always make tradeoffs, a certain amount of loss to trub is just one of the costs of doing business, for me on my system it's about 4% of the knockout wort, and like grain and hops it's something that I budget for when I'm designing a beer.
This is a public forum, you don't own it or the thread, if people hand out bad advice they will get called on it, if you follow it well frankly that's your problem.

MHB


----------



## RdeVjun (12/12/10)

IMO: Hot break = bad for beer, cold break = benign, i.e. undesirable however it doesn't seem to have a beer- destroying ability at all as evidenced by NCers, plate chillers and various amateur experiments. Now, kettle- chilling and carefully pouring the whole lot through a sieve or colander with some leaf hops does indeed trap a considerable amount of aggregated break material (nb. both hot and cold), not all of it by a long shot but certainly the majority, while it also maximises wort recovery as a welcome bonus.
An observation: If this simple break material and hops debris filtration method is beset with profound problems, I doubt the beer treated in this way and entered in QABC would've then qualified for AABC and then scored reasonably at both levels, so I wouldn't say the method is better or worse, however in the non- professional competitive arena there wasn't any obvious or attributable penalty. On the other hand though, if I was looking at aspects which may contribute to an overall incremental improvement, them wort filtration is one which I would look at closely and eliminate the potential source of fault as it just doesn't filter completely.

I have a question though: Are there components of hot break material which are soluble at 20C? That's a serious question as I just don't know the answer, apologies for digressing however I feel it is relevant to the thread.


----------



## MHB (12/12/10)

I think you have given a very fair and reasonable summation. Hot break material isnt going to instantly transform good beer into bad, but it is definitely one of the many incremental steps on the way. Because the harm from a little isnt perhaps instantly identifiable doesnt mean its good or that a lot wont do harm.

Take Paracetamol its great for a headache too much will kill your liver, even a small amount does liver damage but past a certain dose and the harm gets done faster than it gets repaired and youre in serious trouble. Is Paracetamol good or bad?

Your question, well break material is mostly not very soluble; if it was it wouldnt fall out of the wort. However as the beer ferments there is less Sugar in solution blocking solubility and you start to make alcohol which is a wonderful solvent and yeast will metabolise some of the break material looking for nutrients that will both change the way the yeast works and put products into the beer that we as brewers dont want in there.

I dont think you need to go to ridiculous lengths to eliminate hot break, just take the normal sensible steps to reduce it as far as practicable. If beer coats about $1/L to make Id rather pay $20 for a keg of good beer than $19 for keg of second best.

MHB


----------



## manticle (12/12/10)

Who said hot break is good or will improve your beer?

When I first started AG on very primitive equipment I chucked the lot in (through a seive but I'm sure material made it through).

I'm not suggesting this is best practice at all - having improved my equipment and knowledge along the way, I now leave as much hot break shit behind as I can. You can recover lost wort if you need by taking out the trub bit with wort still in it into a different vessel, letting it settle then collecting only the clear wort again or you can just leave it behind as a sacrifice to the beer gods. Generally in my beer now I only have clear wort and both hot and cold break are generally left behind.

However it's a long way from 'a bit of break material is OK in your beer' to hot break will improve your beer which I don't think anyone claimed. Shoot me down if I'm wrong.


----------



## MHB (12/12/10)

Hot break material is generally in the order of 30-80 m (0.03-0.08 mm), holes in a sieve what 1-2 mm. If it wasn't for the fact that some hot break material sticks to hop fragments, how much break material do you think a sieve is going to catch?
Recommending using a sieve is recommending adding quite a lot of break material to the fermenter. I'm going to continue arguing that there is no beneficial amount of hot break that you can add to beer, that you will make better beer if you take all practical steps to reduce or eliminate hot break transfer to the fermenter.

I really can't understand why people get so fired up over 1-2 litres of wort, I'm not advocating waste just a focus on making the best beer you can.
MHB


----------



## manticle (12/12/10)

MHB said:


> Hot break material is generally in the order of 30-80 m (0.03-0.08 mm), holes in a sieve what 1-2 mm. If it wasn't for the fact that some hot break material sticks to hop fragments, how much break material do you think a sieve is going to catch?
> Recommending using a sieve is recommending adding quite a lot of break material to the fermenter. I'm going to continue arguing that there is no beneficial amount of hot break that you can add to beer, that you will make better beer if you take all practical steps to reduce or eliminate hot break transfer to the fermenter.
> 
> I really can't understand why people get so fired up over 1-2 litres of wort, I'm not advocating waste just a focus on making the best beer you can.
> MHB



I agree with the above. I used a sieve a few times early on and certainly don't believe it was an effective hot break catcher. I also used to use two small pots, do two boils with each and use a wood fired weber so you can understand that everything I did was primitive. I'm not advocating repeating what I did.

I also agree that nothing I've read suggests hot break is beneficial (or indeed anything but harmful) to the brew. My own experience says your beer will not automatically die because it gets hot break in it but I still make an effort to keep all of it out and can now easily do so.

I recover a bit of extra wort in a separate vessel to use in my starters - again compromise as I could use malt extract but my understanding is that the yeast will benefit from being grown/started in the same wort as it will be eventually fermenting. I still make an effort to leave all break material behind (which includes settling overnight, boiling again, chilling then racking off the trub).

What I was asking is how you inferred that 'a bit of break material is OK' meant that hot break was in any way beneficial. I think your interpretation of hazard's post was a little unfair. While the post certainly needed clarification, it wasn't (at least as I interpreted) the worst thing anyone has written on this forum.


----------



## Tony (12/12/10)

I use a SS mesh insert around the outlet from my kettle. It asts as a kind of false bottom in the kettle. When i drain, i open the valve 100% to get full pipe to the bottom of the fermenter, then shut it off to slow the flow to a few liters a minuite. This, as you can see from the pic below of what i drained just now while reading this thread, stops most of the break material getting through, as the hops form a fantastic filter bed, which the lighter break settles on while chilling.

100% runoff to the fermenter, no crap in the fermenter, problem solved!

cheers

PS.... brew only had 90g of PoR in it. h34r: 

ducks for cover


----------



## MHB (12/12/10)

It was the "most modern thinking" bit that really annoyed me; it's totally baseless, wrong and misleading.
Anyone who knows anything about brewing can or should in my mind allow that sort of rubbish to go unchallenged. Especially here, AHB is or should be about making beer, hopefully good beer, not about how cheaply you can get maggoted. Which is sadly the focus of most of the conversations hereabouts of late.
Any discussion where the aim is to get volume or to reduce cost, without reference to quality is the opposite of everything I believe in

MHB


----------



## Tony (12/12/10)

MHB said:


> Any discussion where the aim is to get volume or to reduce cost, *without reference to quality *is the opposite of everything I believe in



+1

nothing wrong with cutting costs............ but there is always a cost!


----------



## manticle (12/12/10)

MHB said:


> It was the "most modern thinking" bit that really annoyed me; it's totally baseless, wrong and misleading.
> Anyone who knows anything about brewing can or should in my mind allow that sort of rubbish to go unchallenged. Especially here, AHB is or should be about making beer, hopefully good beer, not about how cheaply you can get maggoted. Which is sadly the focus of most of the conversations hereabouts of late.
> Any discussion where the aim is to get volume or to reduce cost, without reference to quality is the opposite of everything I believe in
> 
> MHB



Again I agree with you on most points. The statement needed qualification and challenging the poster to qualify it makes absolute sense.

Despite being on a constant budget, I also am more interested in making good beer than cheap beer and would rather spend the money that I do have on improving ingredients and process or on qualitative yield rather than quantitative. No issue with that whatsoever.

I just thought you made a bit of a leap (presumably through exasperation) from 'is OK' to 'is good'.

Anyway the ensuing discussion has hopefully made some things a little more clear to people who have read the thread. You've expanded on your original point, RDJVun expanded on his etc and that benefits others.


----------



## Acasta (12/12/10)

beerdrinkingbob said:


> sorry to state the obvious but you brew the nickjd method ( grinder etc..), don't piss on him unless he pissed on u, regardless of some crazy statements!!


You don't know my system or method. Just because i use a coffee grinder doesn't mean i'm doing 20L brews in a 19L bigW pot does it?



MHB said:


> The people shitting in your thread as you so nicely put it are those giving advice (whether through ignorance, stupidity or sheer tightarsed perversity) that will make your beer worse not better.
> There is no amount of Hot Break that will in any way improve your beer; there is well understood researched and proven damage to the flavour, stability and enjoy ability of beer directly linked to increasing amounts of hot break material.
> When we brew we always make tradeoffs, a certain amount of loss to trub is just one of the costs of doing business, for me on my system it's about 4% of the knockout wort, and like grain and hops it's something that I budget for when I'm designing a beer.
> This is a public forum, you don't own it or the thread, if people hand out bad advice they will get called on it, if you follow it well frankly that's your problem.
> ...


I have no problem with any advice you or anyone has to offer, its just i see alot of threads shoot off topic with this issue being raised.



Tony said:


> +1
> 
> nothing wrong with cutting costs............ but there is always a cost!


I'm interested in your design, could you please show me a few more pics of it?


----------



## RdeVjun (13/12/10)

MHB said:


> Hot break material is generally in the order of 30-80 m (0.03-0.08 mm), holes in a sieve what 1-2 mm. If it wasn't for the fact that some hot break material sticks to hop fragments, how much break material do you think a sieve is going to catch?


I try not to criticise something unless I've tried it for myself or observed someone else doing it, you evidently haven't done either in this case whereas I have- and I say it traps sufficient break, I just don't have a picture, if I knew it was going to be such a drama I would have thousands... 
You're obviously not prepared to take my word for it, or any others that have put their hand up reporting good results. FFS, you're obviously not prepared to take the word of the state and national judges either, if they're not acceptable as a barometer of beer quality then I don't know what is any more.


MHB said:


> I really can't understand why people get so fired up over 1-2 litres of wort, I'm not advocating waste just a focus on making the best beer you can.


I'm actually not getting fired up over the few litres of wort, no, what I've been doing is trying to help novice brewers with a process for getting into all- grain brewing sooner than they otherwise would without compromising quality, I think that's a worthwhile thing. It means they can skip any kettle mods and try all- grain with cheap and off- the- shelf components, translating into less risk as well. Cheaper and less risk means more novice brewers try all- grain, which is probably a good result for everyone, retailers included.


----------



## MarkBastard (13/12/10)

I find the best way to learn about brewing is to try things the 'wrong' way from time to time and see if you notice a difference.

The worst that can happen is a bad batch which isn't the end of the world.


----------



## Thirsty Boy (13/12/10)

RdeVjun said:


> I try not to criticise something unless I've tried it for myself or observed someone else doing it, you evidently haven't done either in this case whereas I have- and I say it traps sufficient break, I just don't have a picture, if I knew it was going to be such a drama I would have thousands...
> You're obviously not prepared to take my word for it, or any others that have put their hand up reporting good results. FFS, you're obviously not prepared to take the word of the state and national judges either, if they're not acceptable as a barometer of beer quality then I don't know what is any more.
> 
> I'm actually not getting fired up over the few litres of wort, no, what I've been doing is trying to help novice brewers with a process for getting into all- grain brewing sooner than they otherwise would without compromising quality, I think that's a worthwhile thing. It means they can skip any kettle mods and try all- grain with cheap and off- the- shelf components, translating into less risk as well. Cheaper and less risk means more novice brewers try all- grain, which is probably a good result for everyone, retailers included.



I have tried it though - and what i found is

Any sort of seive - be it a bag or a hard seive does one of two things when you pour wort through them.

Its either not fine enough and lets almost all of the break material through, or it is fine enough & clogs up almost instantly & the wort that goes through is clear, but it takes hours to drain. Just a "sieve" is basically useless for break separation.

A sieve with hop flowers in it is a different story, then it becomes essentially a hopback and works perfectly well, still not lightning fast, but a proven and quite traditional method of trub separation if you are careful about your technique.

Fairly large surface area seives in the bottom of kettles seem to be an exception - like Tony's rig. The pellet hops form the actual filter bed, and there is enough surface area and pressure differential to make the wort come out in a reasonable period of time. I never managed to make it work very well for me... But other people seem to. Tony knows what he's doing and if he can make it work, it works. You just have to keep on tweaking till you get a result.

The way i read his posts, is that MHB (who knows perfectly well that hopbacks work for this purpose) has in fact been fundamentally agreeing with you RdeVjun - he has been disagreeing with people who are simply saying that pouring your wort through a sieve will do the job properly - it wont, you know it wont and said as much, MHB knows it wont and said as much.


----------



## Gretschem (13/12/10)

practicalfool said:


> U could even try crash chilling the no chill cube :unsure: .


----------



## TidalPete (13/12/10)

Thirsty Boy said:


> I have tried it though - and what i found is
> 
> Any sort of seive - be it a bag or a hard seive does one of two things when you pour wort through them.
> 
> ...



TTBOMM Tony drains from the centre of his kettle & combined with his (Termimesh?) filter this seems to be the secret of his success? Care to comment Tony?
Have always had problems in this area of brewing with my 70 litre Robinox kettle & for the last 18 months have been adding hops to a hopsock & filtering through a tea ball with quite reasonable success (the remaining 4 litres of trub poured into a jug for overnight settling before being frozen for starters). Apologies for the bad pic.




*Enquired re Beer Belly some time ago to ask if their ss filters (2mm holes) would work with full pellet additions & was told they would but with an initial burst of pellet residue into the fermenter using an initial slow drain?*
Before forking out the multidollars for a Beer Belly filter need to know of other brewers experiences with the BB filter\All pellet additions. 
I am merely looking for the most efficient way to filter before setting up my plate chiller & any advice in this area would be greatly appreciated.

TP


----------



## Acasta (30/12/10)

Firing this thread up again, if anyone is interested.
I've finally got the mill going, and still chilling. I noticed less trub with the mill, however, the chilling is causing cold break which is ok, but its hard to distinguish from the hot break. After re-reading this thread, i'n going to try and use less whirfloc. Maybe about 1qtr tablet and see what happenes.

The trub at the bottom is quite fluffy and stirrs up very easily. Also, i'm finding it hard to get a good whirlpool going. Maybe my technique is bad, but since i started chilling, i get no cone. Just flat layer of fluffy trub.


----------



## goomboogo (30/12/10)

Try starting your whirlpool from the edge of the kettle and gradually build up speed. As the wort begins to rotate well, gradually reduce the size of your stirring. That is, whilst stirring, gradually move your stirrer away from the side of the kettle until you are eventually stirring near the centre of the pot with a small diameter on the stir. By this stage there should be quite a lot of speed to the wort rotation.

Other aspects to consider are; leaving sufficient time between flameout and beginning the whirlpool so as to allow for the convection current to subside and allowing enough time after whirlpooling to allow everything to settle.

The description of the technique may not make sense. I struggled to put it into words.


----------



## Acasta (30/12/10)

goomboogo said:


> Try starting your whirlpool from the edge of the kettle and gradually build up speed. As the wort begins to rotate well, gradually reduce the size of your stirring. That is, whilst stirring, gradually move your stirrer away from the side of the kettle until you are eventually stirring near the centre of the pot with a small diameter on the stir. By this stage there should be quite a lot of speed to the wort rotation.
> 
> Other aspects to consider are; leaving sufficient time between flameout and beginning the whirlpool so as to allow for the convection current to subside and allowing enough time after whirlpooling to allow everything to settle.
> 
> The description of the technique may not make sense. I struggled to put it into words.



I do work from the outside in, maybe im not whirlpooling long enough? How long should it be stirred for?

There are no convections as the wort is cooled, i left the wort for 30min after whirlpool, sound like long enough?

Your description is fine, thanks! :icon_cheers:


----------



## bcp (30/12/10)

RdeVjun said:


> IMO: Hot break = bad for beer, cold break = benign.



I'd like clarity (no pun intended) on this. I thought they were essentially the same proteins. This is what i've gleaned so far, but i'm still getting my head around it, so haven't worked out which proteins are which:

Protein flocculation is affected by pH - usually it's too high to be optimal, which is 4.9 - but we don't want to get down that low anyway for other reasons.
Most of the proteins go out with the grain. I think about 30% of the spent grain is protein.
Hot break in the boil only accounts for about 10% of the proteins removed
Cold break is essentially the same composition. (Essays in brewing science p9)
Sterols in cold break are useful for growth of cell walls for yeast amongst other things - at least that's just from memory.
Protein can be also lost by the trub & krausen
Finings can also reduce proteins
*So i'm curious to know if using a sieve for cold break is a bad idea. Is it letting too much through? *

I totally agree with MHB - i don't mind leaving stuff behind that doesn't contribute to the quality of the final product. I'd rather have less but with quality, than squeeze trouble into my brew. 

Disclaimer: There are people on this site who genuinely understand this stuff. I don't. I'm just have pockets of information at this stage, not the big picture.
Edit: i repeated myself


----------



## RdeVjun (30/12/10)

bcp said:


> *So i'm curious to know if using a sieve for cold break is a bad idea. Is it letting too much through? *


I don't use a sieve for cold break, I use a sieve and whole hops targeting as much as possible of any break, so I really can't answer your question directly. But seeing as you quoted my earlier post, [*nb. context*] if you use a goodly amount of whole kettle hops in your sieve then no, I don't believe it lets too much through and IMO together they work rather well. As related earlier, the state and national judges didn't disagree. If you don't use the hops in conjunction with the sieve then yes, perhaps it is letting through too much break. 
The whole hops makes all the difference, the sieve is just a convenient mechanical containment. If you expect a sieve to trap a significant amount of break without any other filter media/ matrix, well I'd be preparing for a little surprise... 
As Thirsty related earlier, whole hops in a sieve isn't that different to a hopback.


----------

