The Long March From 55 To 75.

[SpillsMostOfIt]

For ages, I have been talking about and meaning to do a ramp mash where I mash in at around 55degC and throw small amounts of heat at it until it eventually gets to 75, whereupon I let it sit for a while, then lift the bag and proceed with the mash.

Screwtop prodded my interest in a post he made yesterday and I thought about doing it for today's brew. I did.

I mashed in at 55 or so and let the second smallest ring of the 4-ring burner heat the mash while stirring it all the time. It took about 45 minutes to get to 69, at which point I had a rest and a sandwich and threw the laptop away (it died, deader than your long-dead mother). I then raised the temp to 75 and gave it a bit more of a rest, then lifted the bag and proceeded as per usual.

My efficiency went up from 70.5% on the past couple of brews to 78.5%. They have all been similarish grain bills...

Anybody else do this sort of nonsense?

 

[joecast]

not that sort of nonsense exactly, but it does sound interesting. i did find my efficiency increased when i went to a longer mash and do a mash out. may try increasing the temp as you did with my next brew and see what the results are.
joe

 

[Screwtop]

For ages, I have been talking about and meaning to do a ramp mash where I mash in at around 55degC and throw small amounts of heat at it until it eventually gets to 75, whereupon I let it sit for a while, then lift the bag and proceed with the mash.

Screwtop prodded my interest in a post he made yesterday and I thought about doing it for today's brew. I did.

I mashed in at 55 or so and let the second smallest ring of the 4-ring burner heat the mash while stirring it all the time. It took about 45 minutes to get to 69, at which point I had a rest and a sandwich and threw the laptop away (it died, deader than your long-dead mother). I then raised the temp to 75 and gave it a bit more of a rest, then lifted the bag and proceeded as per usual.

My efficiency went up from 70.5% on the past couple of brews to 78.5%. They have all been similarish grain bills...

Anybody else do this sort of nonsense?

Spills, the reason behind the mash regime is more aimed at increasing attenuation. Sweet/high finishing beers are a pet hate of mine, I like my beers crisp and dry and I consider under-attenuation a fault. The reason for mashing in low was to avoid adding hot water to high enzymic malts and having some enzyme activity occuring at higher than the desired mash temp during the time it takes for the hot water and grist to reach equalibrium at mash temp. (ie: adding 75C water to the grist to achieve a mash temp of 66C). Equilibrium can take 10 min and with high enzymic malts some conversion occurs during this time resulting is a less attenuative wort. I achieve much better results by mashing in for a 55C rest of 10 min then stepping the temp to my desired mash temp (say 66C) for a 60 min rest then again raising the temp to mash out of 77 for a 10 min rest before draining. Mostly I achieve mash effeciancy around the 85%, happy that you saw an increase in eff using this method.

Cheers,

Screwy

 

[SpillsMostOfIt]

Screwtop,

I was pleasantly surprised by the jump in extraction efficiency I achieved today - I guess it remains to be seen if it was just a fluke or if it was this particular change that rendered the increase.

However, that wasn't what I was looking for, although I can see that was clearly the focus of my original post. I was persuaded by your earlier argument (which I took to mean) that such a practice might render a more attenuative beer - I've certainly had no trouble making dry beers in the past! I have to say that effecting such a mash regime with BIAB is probably a bit more tedious than it would be with a more automated system, but it worked alright and now I have a radio in the brewery, the time passed happily enough.

Time will tell if it works for me as it did you and if it renders a desirable result. It was certainly interesting as it gave me a chance to watch the visual changes in the mash, but I think I will consider it a special process rather than a normal one (unless the beer is spectacular as a result)...

 

[Thirsty Boy]

Screwtop,

I was pleasantly surprised by the jump in extraction efficiency I achieved today - I guess it remains to be seen if it was just a fluke or if it was this particular change that rendered the increase.

However, that wasn't what I was looking for, although I can see that was clearly the focus of my original post. I was persuaded by your earlier argument (which I took to mean) that such a practice might render a more attenuative beer - I've certainly had no trouble making dry beers in the past! I have to say that effecting such a mash regime with BIAB is probably a bit more tedious than it would be with a more automated system, but it worked alright and now I have a radio in the brewery, the time passed happily enough.

Time will tell if it works for me as it did you and if it renders a desirable result. It was certainly interesting as it gave me a chance to watch the visual changes in the mash, but I think I will consider it a special process rather than a normal one (unless the beer is spectacular as a result)...

Although I know it wasn't the purpose....

Your efficiency jump may well have had a lot to do with the constant stirring - constantly stirred (or recirculated) systems tend to give a few more points of efficiency.

Be interesting to see how it turns out

 

[Jakechan]

Spills, the reason behind the mash regime is more aimed at increasing attenuation. Sweet/high finishing beers are a pet hate of mine, I like my beers crisp and dry and I consider under-attenuation a fault. The reason for mashing in low was to avoid adding hot water to high enzymic malts and having some enzyme activity occuring at higher than the desired mash temp during the time it takes for the hot water and grist to reach equalibrium at mash temp. (ie: adding 75C water to the grist to achieve a mash temp of 66C). Equilibrium can take 10 min and with high enzymic malts some conversion occurs during this time resulting is a less attenuative wort. I achieve much better results by mashing in for a 55C rest of 10 min then stepping the temp to my desired mash temp (say 66C) for a 60 min rest then again raising the temp to mash out of 77 for a 10 min rest before draining. Mostly I achieve mash effeciancy around the 85%, happy that you saw an increase in eff using this method.

Cheers,

Screwy

Thanks for this Screwy. I too am not a fan of overly sweet beers, and thought Id been mashing too high, this may be the very reason.
Cheers,
Jake

 

[warrenlw63]

Found similar things spills. I always incorporate a 55 degree rest for 20 mins these days and generally infuse to 65 for 45 mins then up to 68-70 for 15 mins and do a liquid decoction to mashout. I'm routinely getting around 78-80% efficiency. Up from probably around 72-75% from my single temp rest days.

Makes the brewday less boring too. B)

Warren -

 

[SpillsMostOfIt]

Your efficiency jump may well have had a lot to do with the constant stirring - constantly stirred (or recirculated) systems tend to give a few more points of efficiency.

I had that same thought at about 3:00am this morning when one of the neighbours' visitors left and our dog went berserk. An easy test to conduct, though...

 

[SpillsMostOfIt]

Makes the brewday less boring too. B)

There must be something seriously wrong if that is the difference for you between boring brewday and not...

I'm expecting to see a change in the head retention in this batch, which I think you've commented on before about your mash regime?

 

[Batz]

Spills, the reason behind the mash regime is more aimed at increasing attenuation. Sweet/high finishing beers are a pet hate of mine, I like my beers crisp and dry and I consider under-attenuation a fault. The reason for mashing in low was to avoid adding hot water to high enzymic malts and having some enzyme activity occuring at higher than the desired mash temp during the time it takes for the hot water and grist to reach equalibrium at mash temp. (ie: adding 75C water to the grist to achieve a mash temp of 66C). Equilibrium can take 10 min and with high enzymic malts some conversion occurs during this time resulting is a less attenuative wort. I achieve much better results by mashing in for a 55C rest of 10 min then stepping the temp to my desired mash temp (say 66C) for a 60 min rest then again raising the temp to mash out of 77 for a 10 min rest before draining. Mostly I achieve mash effeciancy around the 85%, happy that you saw an increase in eff using this method.

Cheers,

Screwy

+1
This has made the world of difference to my efficiency for the very reasons Mike states above.


Batz

 

[Screwtop]

Screwtop,

I was pleasantly surprised by the jump in extraction efficiency I achieved today - I guess it remains to be seen if it was just a fluke or if it was this particular change that rendered the increase.

However, that wasn't what I was looking for, although I can see that was clearly the focus of my original post. I was persuaded by your earlier argument (which I took to mean) that such a practice might render a more attenuative beer - I've certainly had no trouble making dry beers in the past! I have to say that effecting such a mash regime with BIAB is probably a bit more tedious than it would be with a more automated system, but it worked alright and now I have a radio in the brewery, the time passed happily enough.

Time will tell if it works for me as it did you and if it renders a desirable result. It was certainly interesting as it gave me a chance to watch the visual changes in the mash, but I think I will consider it a special process rather than a normal one (unless the beer is spectacular as a result)...

All good Spills, would expect BIAB wort to be a little more attenuative as it's a no sparge method with liquor to grist ratios higher than conventional mashing. Seeing as your eff has increased you're obviously doing something worth repeating.

Cheers,

Screwy

 

[Hashie]

Hey Spills, I've been doing a similar with my BIAB.

Been doing dough in at 52 with a short rest (10 mins.) All burners on and stirring to 64. Hold for 60 mins. Then all burners on and stirring to 75-77 with another short rest (10 mins.)

Nothing wrong with your method, just sore arms at the end from stirring for 45 minutes

Also noticed over my last 2 brews lower effiencies (~74-75%) by just allowing the mash to sit un-disturbed for 60 minutes.
Usually I will stir ever 10 minutes or so and get efficiencies of ~77-80%.

So it will be back to stirring for me

Edit; I also hate sweet beers!

 

[SpillsMostOfIt]

Also noticed over my last 2 brews lower effiencies (~74-75%) by just allowing the mash to sit un-disturbed for 60 minutes.
Usually I will stir ever 10 minutes or so and get efficiencies of ~77-80%.

So it will be back to stirring for me

When I first started brewing, I would stir every 5-10 mins throughout the mash. Lately, I've been just leaving it to do its thing. The 3:00am revelation, the posts here and some uncharacteristic thinking on my part while bashing around with the wife in some nearby scrub has me almost convinced that I owe it to myself to do a bit more stirring. Next brew is likely to be a bastardisation of warren's n shades of stout, so it might get the standard sacc rest plus mash-out but with muchos stirring. I guess that's tomorrow sorted...

 

[Kleiny]

I will be raising up to my mash temp the next time i brew, i have thought about it for a while and would like to see the results.

I will be mashing in for a protein rest around 55C and then heating my mash tun from the gas burner underneath and recirculating with the march pump to the top until i reach my target mash temp. I think from this thread and others i should see better attenuation and a higher efficiency.

If this gives me some good results i will continue wiith this method and put down the plans for a herms as this would be achieveing the same result. Interseing to read the reasons and results of others in this thread.

Kleiny

 

[RobB]

My BIAB efficiency (to kettle) jumped from 72% to 82% just by adding a mashout step. While I'm happy with these figures, I'm considering adding a protein rest to try to rectify the head retention problems which I am having at the moment, so I might just try what Spills has done.

FWIW, I always step up with water additions rather than direct heat because I find that the heavy base of my pot keeps throwing heat into the mash long after the flame is out, resulting in me overshooting the mark.

Screwtop, do you think that may be a reason why your mash takes so long to reach equilibrium? Mine gets there in a minute or two.

 

[bindi]

+1
This has made the world of difference to my efficiency for the very reasons Mike states above.


Batz

+2 and +3
Have always stepped up from 55c even when I was 'poo pood' for doing this yonks ago...... You know? Modified malts, no need etc etc ad nauseam. <_<

 

[Screwtop]

My BIAB efficiency (to kettle) jumped from 72% to 82% just by adding a mashout step. While I'm happy with these figures, I'm considering adding a protein rest to try to rectify the head retention problems which I am having at the moment, so I might just try what Spills has done.

FWIW, I always step up with water additions rather than direct heat because I find that the heavy base of my pot keeps throwing heat into the mash long after the flame is out, resulting in me overshooting the mark.

Screwtop, do you think that may be a reason why your mash takes so long to reach equilibrium? Mine gets there in a minute or two.

MC, I have used a modded Keg Style vessel for the past 2.5 years, mashing in using infusion around 9 higher than the required mash sacc temp in the plastic tun resulted in low attenuation, so I changed to the SS vessel. Still had the same problem, when I used to underlet it was worse. After contacting Jamil Zainasheff and some AU Commercial Brewers the advice was to add water to the tun and wait for heat to be absorbed before adding the grist. This helped but I still was not achieving good attenuation. Jamil suggested that I might use a lower Sacc temp, as high enzymic malts convert quickly and some conversion occurs during the time it takes for reaching equilibrium "a minute or two is absolutely unattainable in my system" thus the lower Sacc temp might average out a little higher (ie: Mash Sacc rest temp of 62 may avareage out at 65). I think it was Jamil who advised trying a lower mash-in temp then step using the HERMS setting the controller to the Sacc rest temp so as not to ever raise the mash temp above the Sacc Rest temp. This made an incredible difference, so the practice was adopted and I've been extremely happy with the results. The 55 rest is not designed to be a protoien rest it is just a point to start at before raising the temp.

For the BIAB guys - I never (READ NEVER) stir the mash, following the British style and rarely getting above 2.75L/Kg grist ratio. There is lots of info about if you like to google re the German style mash regimes where liquor to grist ratios are much higher, but they continually stir during mashing. Google it --- something to do with needing to stir with a watery (no-sparge/BIAB) mash to ensure enzymes come into contact with starches in the larger volume mash. So for BIAB'ers I would recommend stirring continuously following the German mashing model.

Hope this is usefull,

Screwy

 

[Kai]

Spills, the reason behind the mash regime is more aimed at increasing attenuation. Sweet/high finishing beers are a pet hate of mine, I like my beers crisp and dry and I consider under-attenuation a fault. The reason for mashing in low was to avoid adding hot water to high enzymic malts and having some enzyme activity occuring at higher than the desired mash temp during the time it takes for the hot water and grist to reach equalibrium at mash temp. (ie: adding 75C water to the grist to achieve a mash temp of 66C). Equilibrium can take 10 min and with high enzymic malts some conversion occurs during this time resulting is a less attenuative wort. I achieve much better results by mashing in for a 55C rest of 10 min then stepping the temp to my desired mash temp (say 66C) for a 60 min rest then again raising the temp to mash out of 77 for a 10 min rest before draining. Mostly I achieve mash effeciancy around the 85%, happy that you saw an increase in eff using this method.

Cheers,

Screwy

I'm not following... how will higher conversion during those first ten minutes result in lower attenuation when using malts with high diastatic power? Why would mash activity not proceed 'as normal' once the mash temp has equilibrated?

 

[Screwtop]

I'm not following... how will higher conversion during those first ten minutes result in lower attenuation when using malts with high diastatic power? Why would mash activity not proceed 'as normal' once the mash temp has equilibrated?

Conversion occuring during the 10 min or so while reaching equilibrium in my system meant that this was happening at higher temps than the desired Sacc temp. IE: mashing in using 77 infusion water, some conversion was occuring at higher temps during the time it was taking for the mash to reach 66C resulting in a less attenuative wort than if the sacc rest had been conducted for a full 60 min at a max of 66C.

Hope that's a better explanation,


Screwy

 

[SpillsMostOfIt]

Conversion occuring during the 10 min or so while reaching equilibrium in my system meant that this was happening at higher temps than the desired Sacc temp. IE: mashing in using 77 infusion water, some conversion was occuring at higher temps during the time it was taking for the mash to reach 66C resulting in a less attenuative wort than if the sacc rest had been conducted for a full 60 min at a max of 66C.

Hope that's a better explanation,


Screwy

So, because you're using a lesser amount of water (than, for the sake of the argument, me), to raise the lower temperature grain to your desired mash temp, you have to heat the water to a higher temperature. As this high-temp water hits your grain, some of the enzymes are subjected to 'mash-out' temps. Not so bad for the beta-amylase, but seriously annoying for the alphas.

Lots complex sugars, fewer simpler sugars. Unhappy Screwtop.