• Welcome to the new forum! We upgraded our forum software with a host of new boards, capabilities and features. It is also more secure.
    Jump in and join the conversation! You can learn more about the upgrade and new features here.

mash conversion %

K

KernelCrush

This is from another thread, I have been wondering about it for a while

You don't actually want everything that's soluble from the grain. Tannins and gums, for instance, are best left behind. So, the brewer's mash efficiency will always be less than 100%. 

I've been interpreting the idea of 'mash till conversion is complete' to heart recently, since seeing Kai's First Wort Table.  Using a refractometer to try to hit Kai's targets of 100%, testing every 15 minutes till the refract stops indicating any change, gets me 86-94%.  Sounds like I should rethink this.  Is there an ideal % to target for the best quality wort?
 
Gordon Strong's book suggests everyone should try the no-sparge method at least once as he claims it has a more pronounced malt flavor. But he also says mash hops have nowhere's near the flavor first wort hops have so advice to be taken with a grain of salt... I still haven't tried this method, but definitely intend to. I have made a lot of beers with tannins and can say that the flavor is absolutely dreadful.

One thing I have been wondering about lately is unconverted starch in the final beer. I always over-mash and at highly-convertible temp ranges, so I may not notice at the moment, but certainly beers in the past have not been as clean-tasting as I would have hoped.

I have only seen the use of a gravity reading on mash liquor mentioned a few rare times and its something I have wondered about, (mainly because I've struggled with iodine). Perhaps you have a link to Kai's mention of this?
 
I think the quote went from zero to out-of-context in one thread!  ;D

KC, what you're asking about isn't what was being said in that other thread. The question there was what do the efficiency percentiles mean.

What you're asking about is the two parts of mash efficiency: conversion and lauter. The stuff you don't want is accounted for with lauter efficiency, meaning the gravity where your lautering stops.

If you have full conversion for the water ratio in your mash, then you have full starch conversion. Lautering just rinses the sugars from the grain.

As for Kai's mash conversion targets, the full article is http://braukaiser.com/wiki/index.php?title=Troubleshooting_Brewhouse_Efficiency and has been referenced in the mash efficiency thread pinned to the top of this sub forum.

The relevant chart is:


 
the no-sparge method
  I tried it 3 or 4 times, not sure why I stopped, I guess I just like to work through the pain of additional steps on brewday.  It produced some fine beer I thought, richer tasting

Ive read recently in several books about the unreliability of the iodine test.  Evidently there are some starches that wont create a reaction, especially those involved in mashing for fermentability or dryness. I forget the scientific explanation but Mr Google should have more details.

Attached is Kai's table in word format.

He also has a gem of a spreadsheet on total process efficiency.  The man is legendary.
 

Attachments

  • first wort table.docx
    65.3 KB · Views: 213
  • efficiency_calculator.xls
    63.5 KB · Views: 318
What you're asking about is the two parts of mash efficiency: conversion and lauter. The stuff you don't want is accounted for with lauter efficiency, meaning the gravity where your lautering stops.

Hmm.  I see that now...you were discussing total mash efficiency, and I was thinking first wort efficiency.  I musta been pretty anxious to pose the question.

In a home brew setting is the 100% conversion in Kai's first wort table a realistic goal and is it attainable and is it desirable?  I cant. 
 
KernelCrush said:
In a home brew setting is the 100% conversion in Kai's first wort table a realistic goal and is it attainable and is it desirable?  I cant.

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes, you can.

Careful measurement of your water is a major key. It doesn't take much water to dilute a mash and "miss" the target OG. However, if you are hitting your volume and your pre-boil gravity, then it's all good.

As Tom Hampton would point out, mash pH stability is key to consistent and quick conversions. Taking measurements and tracking helps find inconsistencies in your procedure. ...I miss that guy...

 
Well I'd like to blame it on my old refract then, it was just retired.  Havent had a chance to brew with the new one yet.  We'll see.  You did say that model read low.

...I miss that guy...

Me too.  What an asset to this Forum!  Tom needs to quit that dreadful job of his and spend more time brewing beer.

 
And another thing.  Lot analysis sheets, when they state a conversion time, it is pretty short.  Are they really talking about 100% conversion?  If they are I need to go back to stamp collecting.
 
Thanks for the links. I might start tracking mash OG before sparging. Too bad Beersmith doesn't have a spot for this data. I see End of Run Gravity, but not sure how that ties into any calculations...


Another thought is how accurate is your scale? I just got a couple standards from amazon though I have yet to throw them on.
 
Thanks for the idea Grathan, I calibrate my mini gram scale, but the heavy scales I have only ever checked them against each other.  Can you provide an Amazon link, I must have searched for the wrong terms, didn't see much, just the small ones.  Thanks
 
They are small. I would use a gallon plastic milk and 5 gallon pail to calibrate the larger end of the scale. If they check each other that is probably fine. My bathroom scale is off 20#, but only when it gets above 200#
 
Yea, I found some bigger ones, pretty pricey. I'll pass on that.  I'll check them by taring a container and just use water scaling up at 1 kg/liter.

By the way, I remembered later that when I read/heard about the iodine test I tried it one day and it came back negative, yet the refract kept rising, cant recall how much or how long, failed to record.
 
grathan said:
My bathroom scale is off 20#, but only when it gets above 200#
That's whats happening to me too!  And my wife was trying to tell me I've gained weight!
 
Can we assume that the short conversion times stated on malt analysis sheets are results from a congress mash under lab conditions?
 
KernelCrush said:
Can we assume that the short conversion times stated on malt analysis sheets are results from a congress mash under lab conditions?

Yes.
 
A few months ago I mashed 5kg of Crisp Clear Choice malt for 90 minutes in a quantity of water that Beersmith calculated would give me a pre boil gravity of about 1040. It passed an iodine test and I accurately measured the quantities but I could only get a gravity of about 1028. I couldn't work out why and put it down to poor malt. I ditched it and started again using MO and hit the numbers perfectly. That was my second attempt with Clear Choice malt and both times gave similar poor results. I'll never use it again.

The analysis figures on the Crisp web site give very similar values for the two malts so I'm curious to understand what went wrong. I can only put it down to a bad or more likely stale batch of malt.
 
Don't we all wish we could..unless you have the best job in the world as a pro brewer.
 
Roadrocket said:
A few months ago I mashed 5kg of Crisp Clear Choice malt for 90 minutes in a quantity of water that Beersmith calculated would give me a pre boil gravity of about 1040. It passed an iodine test and I accurately measured the quantities but I could only get a gravity of about 1028. I couldn't work out why and put it down to poor malt. I ditched it and started again using MO and hit the numbers perfectly. That was my second attempt with Clear Choice malt and both times gave similar poor results. I'll never use it again.

The analysis figures on the Crisp web site give very similar values for the two malts so I'm curious to understand what went wrong. I can only put it down to a bad or more likely stale batch of malt.


Could be the kernel size. They claim less polyphenols which means they probably have genetically altered the barley kernel. Perhaps you didn't adjust your mill gap, or perhaps the grain bed was finer.
 
That might be it.

I bought it crushed so I'll have a word with the supplier. I used it as an experiment so I won't be buying any more in any case. I'll stick to what I know works in future.
 
Back
Top