Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - repo

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 22
1
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Poor efficiency/very soft water
« on: December 06, 2013, 09:12:10 PM »
That you believe no fermentable sugars come from Caramel or roasted malts????
Yeah get some sleep. Enjoy the holidays.

2
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Poor efficiency/very soft water
« on: December 06, 2013, 08:56:56 PM »
NNNNNNOOOOOO
No fermentable sugars, then what is the 30 +/- 5 %???????

You are familiar with long-chain unfermentable sugars, right?

From "How to Brew."

Chapter 20 - Experiment!
20.1 Increasing the Body

.

 
Dark caramel and roasted malts like Crystal 80, Crystal 120, Special B, Chocolate Malt, and Roast Barley have a high proportion of unfermentable sugars due to the high degree of caramelization (or charring). The total soluble extract (percent by weight) of these malts is close to that of base malt, but just because it's soluble does not mean it is fermentable. These sugars are only partially fermentable and contribute both a residual sweetness and higher FG to the finished beer. 


What exactly are you trying to say???

3
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Poor efficiency/very soft water
« on: December 06, 2013, 08:40:06 PM »
This was a full boil.  If you have access to Brewing Classic Styles, it's the Robust Porter recipe.  I think I mentioned the recipe in earlier posts.  I was not precise in measuring the volumes, and my 30% efficiency could be off by +-5%.  Something that I learned from this thread was that I'm not really mashing but steeping.  I called it mashing, because I thought I was actually getting fermentable sugars from the steep, but you guys have taught that I'm really just getting flavor/color.

NNNNNNOOOOOO
No fermentable sugars, then what is the 30 +/- 5 %???????
 

4
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Poor efficiency/very soft water
« on: December 06, 2013, 08:36:47 PM »
 
His process is sound, his thermometer failed him, even though he doesn't even need one.

I'm not sure what you're arguing.  Time and temp doesn't matter (according to Repo), except it does (reference Repo's quote from "How to Brew" a book I may have heard of).

Rather than attempt to create an argument how about some constructive advice? 

If his process is sound and steeping is as simple as running room temp water over grains (your contention), why is his gravity low?  Do you have advice for the OP?  Or do you prefer to argue with those of us who have attempted to give advice?

I stand by my previous statements.  The gravity he will get from steeping grains is not something to worry about.  He is not mashing, so worrying about the efficiency of his steep is worrying too much.  He will not extract significant fermentable sugars from steeping and that is not the point of steeping.  If he wants to mash, he should go ahead and do it but the grains he is steeping are not grains you mash.

Your turn.  Constructive this time.

"con·struc·tive
adjective \kən-ˈstrək-tiv\

: helping to develop or improve something : helpful to someone instead of upsetting and negative"

From the Merriam Webster dictionary.  A book you may have heard of.
[/quote]

lol, I am sure JP would change a few things in his book.  The quote was for the extract efficiency chart from steeping grains, you "never heard anyone talk of before"  I have offered advice. Not following yours here will help him improve his brewing in this particular instance, sorry if that upsets you.
[ [/quote]
This is some misleading and erroneous advice. There is absolutely no need to mash those grains, and you will absolutely get some gravity points from steeping them. The starches have already been converted by the maltster.  While 30% is a little low, 50% would probably be an average  expectation for a muslin bag of those grains. It is very difficult to get all the sugars out of a "ball" of grain. 
[/quote]

5
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Poor efficiency/very soft water
« on: December 06, 2013, 06:53:17 PM »

 
Those grains do not need to be mashed

No one said he should mash those grains.  The OP said he mashed.  He appears to be unclear on mashing. If the OP wants to worry about efficiency and extraction, he should mash grains that will convert.  Steeping I would not worry about.  For me, that's the take away here.  Relax, you're not mashing.  You'll get what you get from steeping.

You are correct, though, that there are sugars in the roasted grains.  Will those sugars give 6 points?  It's possible, but we don't know what he was expecting nor what he acheived.  I don't know your source for steeping grains for 5 minutes in room temp water, but if that works for you, great.  I've never before heard anyone discuss the efficiency of steeping.  IME, one does not steep grains to get fermentables but to get the flavor contributions to make an extract beer more complex. 

 


 

   
Chapter 13 - Steeping Specialty Grains

13.2 Mechanics of Steeping
To use the caramel and roasted specialty malts, the grain must be crushed to expose the sugars to the water. While the grain is soaking, the hot water is leaching the sugars out of the grain and dissolving them into the wort. The factors that influence how well the sugars are extracted are the steeping time, temperature and the particle size. Obviously, the finer you crush the malt the more completely you can extract the sugars. However, most supply shops have their mills adjusted for mashing and lautering purposes and if the particle size where much smaller, it would be difficult to contain within the grainbag.

Table 10 - Nominal Malt Steeping Yields in Points/Pound/Gallon

Malt Type
 
PPG Steep

Brown Malt
 
8*

Dextrin Malt
 
4*
 
Light Crystal (10 - 15L)
 
14*
 
Pale Crystal (25 - 40L)
 
22
 
Medium Crystal (60 - 75L)
 
18
 
Dark Crystal (120L)
 
16

Special B
 
16
 
Chocolate Malt
 
15
 
Roast Barley
 
21
 
Black Patent Malt
21
 
Malto - Dextrin Powder
 
(40)
 

Sugar (Corn, Cane)
 
(46)
Steeping data is experimental and was obtained by steeping 1 lb. in 1 gal at 160°F for 30 minutes. All malts were crushed in a 2 roller mill at the same setting.
 

From a book you might have heard of, or maybe not ::)  "How To Brew". You can read it on line. The OP referenced this book as well as the recipe was from "Brewing Classic Styles".  The flavor contributions you want come from the sugars. Make beer however you want.

 
 
 

6
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Poor efficiency/very soft water
« on: December 04, 2013, 01:02:49 PM »
Sorry for the late reply.  I was making the robust porter recipe in "Brewing Classic Styles", which I believe is 8.6lbs LME + 1 lb Munich + 0.5lb Black Patent + 1.0lb Crystal 40 + 0.75lb Chocolate malt.  I have been hitting my gravities pretty well.  I calculated my efficiency from "How to Brew", where I took the Congress Mash expected points and compared that to what I actually got.
when I estimated the efficiency of extraction for just the mashed grains, my efficiency came to around 30%

You've answered Duboman's question.  You are not mashing those grains.  You are steeping them.

There is no base grain in there to give you the diastatic power you need to convert the starches to sugar.  You are only getting color and flavor from steeping those grains.  I suppose you may extract some starches which could contribute to gravity, but you're not going to get much if anything.

If you want to mash, you'll need to include some base grains and hold the temp for 60 minutes.  Like I said in a previous post, the difference between mashing and steeping is really just time and what grains you've got in there.
So by your term of efficiency and with confirmation of steeped grains, not mashed for conversion it appears perhaps you are calculating you expected OG incorrectly assuming the steeped grains will contribute to the gravity when it really won't.

Also, you mention various volumes of wort being adjusted on the fly which will also affect your gravity readings and result in either lower or higher efficiencies results.

So to summarize it seems you need to work on your recipe creation and calculations as well as fine tuning your process to be more consistent.



This is some misleading and erroneous advice. There is absolutely no need to mash those grains, and you will absolutely get some gravity points from steeping them. The starches have already been converted by the maltster.  While 30% is a little low, 50% would probably be an average  expectation for a muslin bag of those grains. It is very difficult to get all the sugars out of a "ball" of grain.

So to some degree I will agree with your statement but I do not think my final reply is misleading at all or erroneous as the OP does need to refine his process to improve his efficiency. I am not really sure your assessment of 50% would be true based on steeping at 130 for 30 minutes, adjusting temps and then taking more wort then necessary from having to raise the temp (Really diluted wort) into the kettle.

This thread to me, having re-read it again, sounds as though more contribution was given to steeped grains then realistic, too much wort was collected making a diluted wort, not enough was boiled off and total efficiency suffered as a result, hence my suggestion to improve overall process. The Op's pre-boil gravity was stated as spot on and that is because all the gravity came from the recipe's DME/LME, not the grains. Once the OP then added the steeped grain wort with the extra water added he threw everything off and it wasn't accounted for. (At least this is how I am reading it, perhaps the OP might clarify in response)

I suppose we are both nitpicking or semantics are getting in the way, hard to say since some of the info is a little disjointed........... :-\

No, I disagree with all you are saying. You are trying to help but there seems to be lots of confusion.  Those grains do not need to be mashed, steeping temperature is irrelevant, 5 minutes in room temp water will easily allow for 80% plus extraction of the sugars with a decent crush(the muslin bag was my 50%).  It is not his recipe, nor does it have unrealistic gravity expectations from the grains. 2 pounds at 50% extract efficiency would add about 32 points to 5 gallons, raising the og by a little over 6 points.  His process is sound, his thermometer failed him, even though he doesn't even need one. I don't know where the op talks about his postboil volumes or "overall efficiency" you reference. Hope this helps clear up something :-\

7
Yeast and Fermentation / Re: Another thread about plastic buckets (sorry)
« on: December 04, 2013, 09:17:08 AM »
The bakery departments at Costco/ Sam's clubs get their icing in  2 and 5 gallon food grade buckets. They will let you have them and they work great for storing grains as well as fermenting beer. FREE

8
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Poor efficiency/very soft water
« on: December 04, 2013, 09:07:01 AM »
You've answered Duboman's question.  You are not mashing those grains.  You are steeping them.

There is no base grain in there to give you the diastatic power you need to convert the starches to sugar.  You are only getting color and flavor from steeping those grains.  I suppose you may extract some starches which could contribute to gravity, but you're not going to get much if anything.

If you want to mash, you'll need to include some base grains and hold the temp for 60 minutes.  Like I said in a previous post, the difference between mashing and steeping is really just time and what grains you've got in there.
So by your term of efficiency and with confirmation of steeped grains, not mashed for conversion it appears perhaps you are calculating you expected OG incorrectly assuming the steeped grains will contribute to the gravity when it really won't.

Also, you mention various volumes of wort being adjusted on the fly which will also affect your gravity readings and result in either lower or higher efficiencies results.

So to summarize it seems you need to work on your recipe creation and calculations as well as fine tuning your process to be more consistent.



This is some misleading and erroneous advice. There is absolutely no need to mash those grains, and you will absolutely get some gravity points from steeping them. The starches have already been converted by the maltster.  While 30% is a little low, 50% would probably be an average  expectation for a muslin bag of those grains. It is very difficult to get all the sugars out of a "ball" of grain. 

9
All Grain Brewing / Re: Bicarbonate HCO3
« on: November 26, 2013, 08:26:20 PM »
I'll just give you the numbers I look for when making an Ipa. In ppm

Mash ph 5.3-5.5  The ph is the most important number.
Calcium- 50 -100  My 2nd most important, it's needed throughout the life of the beer.
Sulfate 150-300    This is for the hops, so lets have lots
Chloride 0-50       This is for the malts, so usually Ipa not so much

It's all about getting the the mash ph, then its straight flavoring in the kettle if necessary. If the ph is right you are basically just flavoring to taste. Calcium though is necessary so its always above 50

10
The Pub / Re: Let the Games Begin!
« on: November 20, 2013, 06:22:49 PM »
You gotta lay off the puna butter.  It's good to see you are still bitter about a game in way back in 1981 though :o

1981?  Was that the year the bolts went undefeated, or won the Super Bowl?  Oh wait... that's right.  There musta been some kind of a blown call, and the Dolphins got cheated!   ;D

Not bitter.  Just bored with the "bad call" whiners.  I mean, people (Raiders fans) are still whining about the Immaculate Reception really being an incomplete pass.  That was in 1972. 

1972... hmmm, there's something about that year...

Except the only whining here has been you, whining about "phantom whining". 
So you must be really sick of this:  The dollphins played the 2nd easiest schedule of a super bowl winner in the 40 plus year history, best team they faced was 8-6, 14-0 was certainly no coincidence. They are no where near one of the best teams ever. They had a special season they were not a special team. It was 41 years ago, let it go.   :(

Of course I don't believe all of that,nor am I a chargers fan, cmon san diego gets blacked out all the time, there are no charger fans. I grew up a niner fan on Oahu.  Since you like to beat the super bowl thing to death, you should know that.


11
The Pub / Re: Let the Games Begin!
« on: November 20, 2013, 04:46:24 PM »
    My team hasn't been relevant in 40 years, so I gotta be a hater.

No need to be a hater, the lightning bolts aren't really all that bad.  Except last Sunday...   ;D

You're right, as a fins fan you know about decades of being irrelevant. And the bolts did win the greatest game ever ;D


Did the bolts get a Super Bowl ring for that game?  Oh wait.  The bolts have not won any Super Bowl rings. That would make them irrelevant since at least 1967, no?

But,isn't the greatest NFL game ever played considered to be the NFL Championship game in 1958?  The bolts won that game?  I thought the Colts beat the Giants 23-17 in overtime in that one.

Colts - Bolts. Kinda the same.  I guess you look for relevancy wherever you can find it.  8)

You gotta lay off the puna butter.  It's good to see you are still bitter about a game in way back in 1981 though :o

12
The Pub / Re: Let the Games Begin!
« on: November 20, 2013, 01:32:55 PM »
    My team hasn't been relevant in 40 years, so I gotta be a hater.

No need to be a hater, the lightning bolts aren't really all that bad.  Except last Sunday...   ;D

You're right, as a fins fan you know about decades of being irrelevant. And the bolts did win the greatest game ever ;D

13
The Pub / Re: Let the Games Begin!
« on: November 20, 2013, 11:25:13 AM »
 
  My team hasn't been relevant in 40 years, so I gotta be a hater.

14
The Pub / Re: Let the Games Begin!
« on: November 19, 2013, 11:28:59 AM »
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-patriots-got-screwed-non-141509835.html

Happy the Pats lost, but they got cheated of the chance to win.

15
Beer Recipes / Re: How low can I go?
« on: November 16, 2013, 01:56:23 PM »
I agree Denny, but not just for your reason. If you hand someone something called X but it tastes like Z, they are going to be surprised. Replace someone's milk with oj and watch the reaction.
Its not so much guarding the guidelines as it is preparing the mind for what the mouth is getting.
But you are right too, hard to give advice on Z when its actually X and just calling it Z.

And one could argue that just as milk can be whole, 2% or skim for example. Ipa can be double, session or black.

But those still fall within the definition of mile.  IPA is defined as having an ABV from 5 (English) to 7.5 (American).  As always, I say make what you like to drink.  But for the sake of clarity, don't call it something that it's not.

To the original question.....I'd use a heavy dose of crystal and mash high, kinda like you were making mild.

Somewhere in England on old curmudgeon is explaining the same thing to a kid who wants to make an American IPA.  ;)   

I find it entirely clear what to expect when I order a session ipa, double ipa or black ipa. 

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 22