Topics Topics Help/Instructions Help Edit Profile Profile Member List Register  
Search Last 1 | 3 | 7 Days Search Search Tree View Tree View  

Visit The Brewery's sponsor!
Brews & Views Bulletin Board Service * Brews and Views Archive 2010 * Archive through April 28, 2010 * Purists . . Look Away < Previous Next >

  Thread Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post
  ClosedClosed: New threads not accepted on this page        

Author Message
 

dhacker
Senior Member
Username: Dhacker

Post Number: 2092
Registered: 11-2002
Posted From: 98.66.36.122
Posted on Sunday, April 25, 2010 - 02:24 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Getting ready to make the Scottish 80 as a ramp up to a Wee Heavy.

I'm trying to streamline the process of the Wee Heavy and the boil down of the first runnings.

So, what if . . .

Instead of waiting for the first runnings, one were to start a boil down on an equivalent gravity 2 gallon batch of amber DME (or LME) based wort to get the benefits of the maillard reactions then add that back to the main boil. Could save some time and tun space, and maybe not compromise the quality too much??
 

Skotrat
Senior Member
Username: Skotrat

Post Number: 1116
Registered: 07-2007
Posted From: 173.9.91.69
Posted on Sunday, April 25, 2010 - 03:48 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hacker,

I think that this would work just dandy if you needed to. The big question is will the quality of the final product in a good, bad or better way than if you just boiled down the first runnings
 

dhacker
Senior Member
Username: Dhacker

Post Number: 2093
Registered: 11-2002
Posted From: 98.66.36.122
Posted on Sunday, April 25, 2010 - 04:42 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Skot,

Glad you weighed in on this since I consider your Traquair clone to be the best example ever. Besides the time element, I'm worried that even my new 70qt. tun is gonna be stretched to accommodate the grain bill. An eleven gallon batch will take right at 30 lbs.

Very tight!
 

Patrick C.
Advanced Member
Username: Patrickc

Post Number: 952
Registered: 01-2001
Posted From: 99.170.160.145
Posted on Sunday, April 25, 2010 - 11:48 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Tight? I can do 30 pounds in my 48 qt cooler, so you have plenty of room. :-)

You may need to reduce the water to grain ratio from what you normally use, but this will give you a head start in the boil down- a thicker mash means a higher gravity for the first runnings. When I've made this recipe I start the main boil while the boil-down is going on, and dump the syrup in when it is ready. Since you'll be boiling for a long time anyway, boiling the first runnings doesn't really add much time to the process.
 

dhacker
Senior Member
Username: Dhacker

Post Number: 2094
Registered: 11-2002
Posted From: 98.66.36.122
Posted on Monday, April 26, 2010 - 12:09 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

30 pounds in a 48qt.?? NO WAY!!

Even a quart per pound ratio only gives you 18 quarts of volume remaining for 30 pounds of grain.

I can barely do 26 pounds in my 60 quart Gott right now. Of course there's blades and shafts taking up some room in my tun, but I'd NEVER get 30 pounds in there unless it was a pasty mix from lack of water.
 

Bill Pierce
Moderator
Username: Billpierce

Post Number: 11616
Registered: 01-2002
Posted From: 24.141.103.148
Posted on Monday, April 26, 2010 - 12:40 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I ran the number through my spreadsheet. A 48 qt. cooler has a useful capacity of about 43 qts. If you mash 30 lbs. of grain at a thickness of 1.05 quart per pound, the total volume is 41.73 quarts (that's just about full). After draining the first runnings the volume of the remaining grain is 22.85 quarts. That leaves room for batch sparging in two batches, or of course no problems at all if you fly sparge.
 

dhacker
Senior Member
Username: Dhacker

Post Number: 2095
Registered: 11-2002
Posted From: 98.66.36.122
Posted on Monday, April 26, 2010 - 01:42 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Wonder why I struggle to do 26 lbs. in a 60 qt. with 1.5 quarts per pound??
 

Patrick C.
Advanced Member
Username: Patrickc

Post Number: 953
Registered: 01-2001
Posted From: 99.170.160.145
Posted on Monday, April 26, 2010 - 02:30 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Yeah, I have to do 1.0 qt/lb to fit 30 pounds in there. It is very thick- I don't think I'd do it again if I had to mix it all by hand, but if you have a built in stirrer it should be no problem. I use a paint mixer on my drill.

Sipping on a pint of my latest attempt at Skot's recipe now. Too bad it isn't still cold outside :-)
 

Bill Pierce
Moderator
Username: Billpierce

Post Number: 11617
Registered: 01-2002
Posted From: 24.141.103.148
Posted on Monday, April 26, 2010 - 03:55 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

It should be all right, DH. The mash volume with 26 lbs. of grain and a thickness of 1.5 qts. per pound is 48.1 quarts. I always assume the useful volume of a cooler is 10-12 percent less than its rated volume, but you should still have a little room to spare. Does your stirrer displace that much volume?
 

dhacker
Senior Member
Username: Dhacker

Post Number: 2096
Registered: 11-2002
Posted From: 98.66.36.122
Posted on Monday, April 26, 2010 - 11:43 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Don't think so.

Hmmm . . something is rotten with this Gott cooler.
 

John Baer
Intermediate Member
Username: Beerman

Post Number: 319
Registered: 03-2003
Posted From: 65.96.82.180
Posted on Monday, April 26, 2010 - 01:26 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hacker,
You're not alone, 20 lbs is about all I do in my 60 qt cooler. But then I do two steps and a mash out. I'd rather mash and sparge once to get my pre-boil volume as opposed to screwing around packing my cooler to the rim.

I tried mashing 30 lbs in my cooler last weekend and it was pretty much a PITA when you factor in the extra work. It was like trying to get 10 lbs of in a 5 lb bag.

JB
 

Bill Pierce
Moderator
Username: Billpierce

Post Number: 11619
Registered: 01-2002
Posted From: 24.141.103.148
Posted on Monday, April 26, 2010 - 01:56 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

If you're going to brew high gravity beers via step mashing in a cooler, you have to accept a much smaller initial mash volume and final batch size. Of course a single temperature infusion is all that is required with many modern malts and recipes.

Hack may be on to something with his steam injection project if he intends to continue step mashing in a cooler. There are also some advantages to a mash tun that can be directly heated.

(Message edited by BillPierce on April 26, 2010)
 

ChriSto
Advanced Member
Username: Christo

Post Number: 668
Registered: 02-2006
Posted From: 216.176.226.154
Posted on Monday, April 26, 2010 - 01:59 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I have similar, ahem, size issues in the tun department, and tend to fortify my bigger beers with DME (only 5 gal cooler - so I max out at 1.060 or so for a 5 gal batch). For one of my Scottish attempts, I tried the boil-down of 1 gal of DME wort to create the caramelization while the mash was going on in my cooler. Tasted pretty nice, but different than my "cheater" Scottish Ales with lots of caramel (talk about purists' revolts).

I was doing it for the time factor as well, boiling the small wort volume while the mash was going and saved about 1.5-2 hours of time I would think. Time is my usual enemy in brewing, especially if it's something I need to be constantly checking on (like stirring constantly to avoid scorching), so many of my decisions on how to brew or what ingredients to use are based on that priority.
 

Paul Erbe
Senior Member
Username: Perbe

Post Number: 1364
Registered: 05-2001
Posted From: 173.165.51.161
Posted on Monday, April 26, 2010 - 03:33 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

So back to the original question.

Would it be better to boil down the first runnings and use the DME to give you the added gravity?
 

Chumley
Senior Member
Username: Chumley

Post Number: 6103
Registered: 02-2003
Posted From: 63.118.227.254
Posted on Monday, April 26, 2010 - 03:38 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

On a similar note, several years ago I took an 8 lb. pouch of William's Scottish LME and caramelized it on the stove top with some diammonium phosphate, then added it to the wee heavy wort I was brewing. Ended up with an OG of 1.123. The beer came out pretty good, but took about a year of aging in the bottle before it got there.

I'm sorry to see that Williams no longer is selling that extract...it was all Golden Promise, if I remember correctly. They seem to have quit selling their 100% Maris Otter extract as weel.
 

dhacker
Senior Member
Username: Dhacker

Post Number: 2097
Registered: 11-2002
Posted From: 98.66.36.122
Posted on Monday, April 26, 2010 - 03:55 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Would it be better to boil down the first runnings and use the DME to give you the added gravity?

See . . I thought about that as well. Just trying to save a little time as boiling down 2 gallons of first runnings to a syrup can take awhile. If I could start the extract boil down while I'm mashing it could save waiting on the first runnings.

Not sure which way to go . .
 

Joakim Ruud
Senior Member
Username: Joques

Post Number: 1748
Registered: 10-2005
Posted From: 84.208.79.242
Posted on Monday, April 26, 2010 - 05:53 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Just had a sudden thought: Aren't proteins an important part of browning/caramelization processes? And aren't there way more proteins in raw wort that in processed extract? Just a thought.
 

Chumley
Senior Member
Username: Chumley

Post Number: 6104
Registered: 02-2003
Posted From: 63.118.227.254
Posted on Monday, April 26, 2010 - 07:16 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

That is true, Joakim....but that can be overcome by adding a nitrogen source to the extract....which is why I added diammonium phosphate, in my case.
 

Joakim Ruud
Senior Member
Username: Joques

Post Number: 1749
Registered: 10-2005
Posted From: 84.208.79.242
Posted on Monday, April 26, 2010 - 07:23 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Ah, didn't see your post there!
 

Nephalist
Intermediate Member
Username: Nephi

Post Number: 316
Registered: 12-2005
Posted From: 162.116.29.68
Posted on Monday, April 26, 2010 - 09:00 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I was about to post this:
Chumley,
Wikipedia states that the amino acid involved in the maillard reaction determines the flavor. On paper it would seem that maillard reactions involving a sugar and ammonium would make a 1-dimensional flavor. You found otherwise?

Then I thought for a minute about how little protein might be required for maillard reactions and that the LME must supply enough. If the ammonia adds nothing to the flavor, at least it's there for the yeast.
 

Dan Listermann
Senior Member
Username: Listermann

Post Number: 7107
Registered: 03-2004
Posted From: 75.246.13.93
Posted on Tuesday, April 27, 2010 - 02:01 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Nephalist, careful about quoting Wiki, you could be mocked!
 

Nephalist
Intermediate Member
Username: Nephi

Post Number: 317
Registered: 12-2005
Posted From: 71.136.20.1
Posted on Tuesday, April 27, 2010 - 05:58 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Dan,
Deservedly so. But I understand there is a great flavor impact from amino acids. That is why MSG is so popular. And if MSG is undesired, look for hydrolyzed soy isolate on the label. Amino acids have a low flavor theshold. Aspartame is another example (phenylalanine-aspartate).
 

dhacker
Senior Member
Username: Dhacker

Post Number: 2100
Registered: 11-2002
Posted From: 98.66.36.122
Posted on Tuesday, April 27, 2010 - 12:07 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

The beer came out pretty good, but took about a year of aging in the bottle before it got there.

Is that the stuff you sent me? If it is, it was outstanding!
 

Steve Jones
Advanced Member
Username: Stevej

Post Number: 694
Registered: 08-2001
Posted From: 199.190.8.12
Posted on Tuesday, April 27, 2010 - 12:21 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I'm sure this isn't really a substitute for boiling down the first runnings, but one thing I do with my scottish ales is to begin heating the dry kettle before running anything into it.

Then when the wort begins to collect, it hits the hot metal and I get an instant carmelization of the first wort. The first few cups of wort dance around for maybe 15-20 seconds before settling down, and I've noticed a richer caramel flavor since I've been doing this. It doesn't reduce the volume hardly at all, and after maybe a pint or so it has 'normalized'. The tricky part is getting the kettle hot enough without it being too hot. I will drop a half teaspoon or so of water in it to see how it reacts before starting the wort.

I'm making a 80 shilling on Saturday for Big Brew and will be using this method.

Edited to add:

I have mashed 40 lbs of grain with 40 qts water in a sanke keg before (62 qts), but it was so full you couldn't get another quart of water into it. after the mash I removed about half the mash (into a cooler), sparged what was left and dumped it, then added the first half back and sparged again. It was a little more time-intensive, but it worked well.



(Message edited by stevej on April 27, 2010)
 

Bill Pierce
Moderator
Username: Billpierce

Post Number: 11629
Registered: 01-2002
Posted From: 24.141.103.148
Posted on Tuesday, April 27, 2010 - 12:55 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Steve, that sounds about right to me. I measured the "useful capacity" of my converted keg mash tun at 56 quarts. That would allow me to use 41 lbs. of grain at 1.0 quarts per pound for a calculated O.G. of 1.099, assuming 65 percent efficiency (about all you can expect with a really big beer) in a 10 gallon batch. Of course I always keep some DME on hand in case I miss the target O.G. with a beer that big.