Author Topic: Fauxpils results and discussion  (Read 20960 times)

Offline tomsawyer

  • Senior Brewmaster
  • ******
  • Posts: 1694
    • View Profile
Re: Fauxpils results and discussion
« Reply #60 on: August 06, 2012, 10:39:38 PM »
All you gotta have is an MLT that is nearly twice the size needed for a conventional brew.
Lennie
Hannibal, MO

Offline morticaixavier

  • I must live here
  • **********
  • Posts: 7782
  • Underhill VT
    • View Profile
    • The Best Artist in the WORLD!!!!!
Re: Fauxpils results and discussion
« Reply #61 on: August 07, 2012, 02:56:44 PM »
All you gotta have is an MLT that is nearly twice the size needed for a conventional brew.

seriously! I have been doing no sparge of late. mostly out of laziness honestly (I can treat all my brewing liqour at once, don't have to use two kettles etc.). I did an 1.080 old ale a couple weeks ago, 30 litre batch and my 70qt extreme was full to the tippy top.
"Creativity is the residue of wasted time"
-A Einstein

"errors are [...] the portals of discovery"
- J Joyce

Offline nateo

  • Brewmaster General
  • *******
  • Posts: 2214
  • Denver, CO
    • View Profile
Re: Fauxpils results and discussion
« Reply #62 on: August 07, 2012, 03:45:58 PM »
I'm not sure if it was clear from my writeup, but with moderately soft water and 5% melanoidin malt and no-sparge I was able to hit my target mash and sparge pH without any fiddling or acid additions. Just from a practical point of view for people without reliable pH measurements, no-sparge offers some advantages over traditional sparging, although batch sparging probably won't raise your pH too much.
In der Kürze liegt die Würze.

Offline nateo

  • Brewmaster General
  • *******
  • Posts: 2214
  • Denver, CO
    • View Profile
Re: Fauxpils results and discussion
« Reply #63 on: August 07, 2012, 09:36:28 PM »
A couple people asked about color, so here's a picture of the two next to each other (3X on the left, 5% on the right):


They're pretty close. In the sun you can tell them apart, but in lower light they're harder to tell apart.
In der Kürze liegt die Würze.

Offline morticaixavier

  • I must live here
  • **********
  • Posts: 7782
  • Underhill VT
    • View Profile
    • The Best Artist in the WORLD!!!!!
Re: Fauxpils results and discussion
« Reply #64 on: August 07, 2012, 10:42:29 PM »
so much for more color from 3X eh? the one on my right is noticably darker.
"Creativity is the residue of wasted time"
-A Einstein

"errors are [...] the portals of discovery"
- J Joyce

Offline nateo

  • Brewmaster General
  • *******
  • Posts: 2214
  • Denver, CO
    • View Profile
Re: Fauxpils results and discussion
« Reply #65 on: August 07, 2012, 10:58:37 PM »
so much for more color from 3X eh? the one on my right is noticably darker.

Well, I didn't have a control beer, so it's possible 3X would've been darker than a regularly mashed/sparged beer. Both had chill haze that faded quickly when the beers warmed a bit, so I'm not convinced decoction mashing makes a clearer beer, as some claim.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2012, 11:00:26 PM by nateo »
In der Kürze liegt die Würze.

Offline Kaiser

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1797
  • Imperial Brewing Geek
    • View Profile
    • braukaiser.com
Re: Fauxpils results and discussion
« Reply #66 on: August 08, 2012, 02:07:27 AM »
so much for more color from 3X eh? the one on my right is noticably darker.

I have not found much increased color from decoction mashing and nateo's decoction boils weren't all that long either. I actually mentioned to him that there will be more color from 5% melanoiden malt than from decoction.

Kai

Offline malzig

  • Brewer
  • ****
  • Posts: 466
    • View Profile
Re: Fauxpils results and discussion
« Reply #67 on: August 08, 2012, 02:26:49 AM »
Both had chill haze that faded quickly when the beers warmed a bit, so I'm not convinced decoction mashing makes a clearer beer, as some claim.
With that degree of chill haze it looks like tannin extraction might have been a problem with both beers.

Offline nateo

  • Brewmaster General
  • *******
  • Posts: 2214
  • Denver, CO
    • View Profile
Re: Fauxpils results and discussion
« Reply #68 on: August 08, 2012, 02:37:22 AM »
With that degree of chill haze it looks like tannin extraction might have been a problem with both beers.

If so, what's the cause?
In der Kürze liegt die Würze.

Offline malzig

  • Brewer
  • ****
  • Posts: 466
    • View Profile
Re: Fauxpils results and discussion
« Reply #69 on: August 08, 2012, 10:40:32 AM »
With that degree of chill haze it looks like tannin extraction might have been a problem with both beers.
If so, what's the cause?
I only brought it up because you said that the pH was okay without adjustment.  Is it possible the pH measurement was off, because that seems unusual for such a light colored beer.   But there are other related factors, like low calcium concentration that may decrease polyphenol precipitation enough to lead to chill haze.

Not to knock either technique, but it might be worth noting that both thin mashes and decoctions have the potential to lead to increased tannin extraction, which can cause chill haze if they don't precipitate out well.  Chill haze is supposed to be a very good marker for tannins before they show up as astringency.

Offline nateo

  • Brewmaster General
  • *******
  • Posts: 2214
  • Denver, CO
    • View Profile
Re: Fauxpils results and discussion
« Reply #70 on: August 08, 2012, 01:48:58 PM »
Is it possible the pH measurement was off, because that seems unusual for such a light colored beer.   

It's possible, but I don't think it's likely. I calibrated my meter before measuring the pH with brand new calibration solution.

But there are other related factors, like low calcium concentration that may decrease polyphenol precipitation enough to lead to chill haze.

Not to knock either technique, but it might be worth noting that both thin mashes and decoctions have the potential to lead to increased tannin extraction, which can cause chill haze if they don't precipitate out well.  Chill haze is supposed to be a very good marker for tannins before they show up as astringency.

How low are you talking about for the calcium? I had about 60ppm Ca.

I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around how a thinner mash would increase tannin extraction, for a given gravity and pre-boil volume. Thick mash + regular sparge means thick first runnings, thin second runnings. Thin mash + no-sparge means one medium runnings. I don't get why one would have more tannins than the other. 
In der Kürze liegt die Würze.

Offline Hokerer

  • I spend way too much time on the AHA forum
  • ********
  • Posts: 2650
  • Manassas, VA
    • View Profile
Re: Fauxpils results and discussion
« Reply #71 on: August 08, 2012, 04:03:06 PM »
I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around how a thinner mash would increase tannin extraction, for a given gravity and pre-boil volume. Thick mash + regular sparge means thick first runnings, thin second runnings. Thin mash + no-sparge means one medium runnings. I don't get why one would have more tannins than the other.

The thinner the mash, the less the grains can bring down the pH. Too high a pH leads to tannin extraction.
Joe

Offline nateo

  • Brewmaster General
  • *******
  • Posts: 2214
  • Denver, CO
    • View Profile
Re: Fauxpils results and discussion
« Reply #72 on: August 08, 2012, 04:22:57 PM »
The thinner the mash, the less the grains can bring down the pH. Too high a pH leads to tannin extraction.

For a given pH though, how would a thinner mash extract more tannins?

Unless my calibration solutions were manufactured improperly or my pH meter was busted, I don't see how pH would've been an issue. If tannins were an issue in these beers, I suspect that there is more to tannin extraction than just pH and sparge temperature.
In der Kürze liegt die Würze.

Offline Kaiser

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1797
  • Imperial Brewing Geek
    • View Profile
    • braukaiser.com
Re: Fauxpils results and discussion
« Reply #73 on: August 08, 2012, 05:10:32 PM »

The thinner the mash, the less the grains can bring down the pH. Too high a pH leads to tannin extraction.

It's more useful to think about it the other way around: The thinner the mash the more water and with it the more minerals that can push up the grain's pH. But given Nateo's statement about pH, this was not the case.

Tannins are always extracted and they are actually needed to precipitate haze.

Kai

Offline erockrph

  • Official Poobah of No Life.
  • *
  • Posts: 6229
  • Chepachet, RI
    • View Profile
    • The Hop WHisperer
Re: Re: Fauxpils results and discussion
« Reply #74 on: August 08, 2012, 07:22:04 PM »
The thinner the mash, the less the grains can bring down the pH. Too high a pH leads to tannin extraction.

That is really dependant on the mineral content of the water in question. pH of a weak acid/base solution isn't a strict function of concentration the way a strong acid solution is. It is much more dependant on the pKa of the various buffers in solution.
Eric B.

Finally got around to starting a homebrewing blog: The Hop Whisperer