Accidentally poured wort sludge into fermenter. Any concerns?

That sludge is called "trub." your fermentation needs a little bit of it, but not all of it. I like to strain most of it out. Some people dump it all in. Too much trub can lead to off flavors, such as "soapy," because fatty acids from the trub can be converted into (literally) soap.

I wouldn't sweat over this one batch too much though, as plenty of people use trub-y worts all the time and claim to make great beer. I bet there's even a Brulosophy "exsbeeriment" result that implies that it doesn't matter.

 

As said above there is a Brulosophy exbeeriment about it and if I remember correctly there was no big difference. I put at least half the trub in my fermenter all the time with no ill effects. My understanding is that it adds nutrients that the yeast need.
Don't worry about it. It will all compact down at the end of the fermentation anyway.

 

Without encouraging you to 'rush' things along (DON'T RUSH YOUR FERMENTATION), you should not allow the trub to stay there for an extended period of time. If your circumstances won't permit you to package the beer in over a month, then I'd try to get the trub out now before you pitch the yeast. Extra O2 will be introduced during the transfer or straining, and that's always a good thing before fermentation. However, you open yourself up to contamination by messing with doing a transfer or straining. So, ONLY if your schedule won't permit a timely packaging of the beer once fermentation is complete, I'd remove the trub now before pitching the yeast.

 

I treat Brulosophy only as anecdotal and not an end all be all "science"...it's situational, small sample sizes and personal preferences of those that are involved create a bent "experiment" with results truly only representing that small group of people sampled IMO. It's a good reference to take into consideration, but definitely not the last word in homebrewing.

 

I personally view Brulosophy and Experimental Homebrewing (Denny and Drew) as demonstrations vs. experimental testing. There are simply insufficient controls in place for these efforts to be considered "science".

I have discussed the topic of putting proper controls in place (e.g., by creating proper protocols) with both Denny and Drew a number of times but they are satisfied with their current methods.

There is nothing inherently wrong about conducting demonstrations but the terminology of "experimental" is often construed as equating to science and this can be (and is) misleading.

Cheers!

 

I agree with most of this. But my bigger concern with Brulosophy results is that when their tasters fail to detect a difference to the stated target degree of statistical significance, many readers assume they have somehow proven there is no difference. If I were Brulosophy, I would state clearly, at the end of every entry, exactly what (if anything) has been proven, what hasn't been proven, a disclaimer about the lack of replication, and the potential limitations of testing only under one specific set of conditions.

 

I dump a lot of my trub in from the kettle to fermetor and never had an issue with beer clarity or flavor stability, etc... I used to be very careful but now I can care less what gets in!

 

I totally agree @VikeMan and @JackHorzempa. And @JackHorzempa, I've noticed on other forums and Facebook that Marshall gets EXTREMELY butt hurt if anybody criticizes (even constructively) Brulosophy in any form or fashion, so I'd say he's pretty happy with his current pseudo-science techniques and could care less about any improvements as well.

Sorry for being off topic in the thread y'all!

 

I have not communicated directly with Marshal but what you state here is consistent with what I have 'heard' from Denny Conn. It seems they have very similar perspectives here.

I can state that Denny is 100% consistent here. He has zero interest in changing how they do things.

Cheers!

 

Amen to all that above, Those 2 cults make me want to vomit.

Now on to the topic at hand.

Trub does contain nutrients, but also tons of staling matter as well.

Here is a blog article of mine, draw your own conclusions though.
http://www.lowoxygenbrewing.com/brewing-methods/trub-seperation-why-and-how/

I am of the pristine wort crowd.

 

Probably not the best practice, but beer is pretty forgiving. You'll probably be fine. I've never had a beer where I thought, "too much trub," but it is still my practice to avoid transferring a lot of it by leaving about half an inch of liquid in my kettle.

 

I do this all the time. Whatever is in the brew kettle is in the primary. But I also always rack to a secondary, then rack again to bottle.

RDWHAHB

 

Same here, except I never used to be careful. I just dump the whole thing into my fermenter. I think that it helps me that I recirculate/vorlauf well and use whole cone hops, but I never get that much trub at the bottom of my fermenter even though I make no effort to separate the wort from the cold-break material.

 

Although they certainly don't replace proper repeatable scientific studies, anecdotes are better than nothing. That said, they can sometimes serve to cause more controversy and lead away from an understanding of the situation at hand instead of towards it.

 

I think that they do a pretty good job at this. Curious as to why you don't. They definitely recognize the limitations of triangle testing (and of their other methodologies) and are more than willing to discuss their findings whether they be positive or negative, at the end of each exBEERiment.

 

I never separate my trub because my cooling method (and hop stand) require stirring. Additionally, I don't have a spigot on my brew kettle, so I have to siphon, which ends up getting clogged, leading to further agitation of the wort. I try to leave the worst of it in the kettle, but if I need the extra volume, I always transfer extra trub.

Of course, I use leaf hops for all of my hoppy brews. When I use pellets, I notice a lot more trub, which makes life more difficult. As long as you don't transfer that trub to your bottles, I think you'll be okay. I did that once and had gushers, I think because of all the nucleation sites the sediment created.

That said, I plan to upgrade my cooling method and add a weldless ball valve with kettle screen to my kettle as soon as I can justify the cost in order to get cleaner wort and make transferring faster/easier.

 

They are willing to discuss it. But I'd like them to state it more explicitly, as a part of the article, or as a standard disclaimer that appears with every article. (Not on a page that describes their general methodology that one would have to search for. And not as a passing mention in a comment section as a response to someone who might happen to raise the issue.) There are definitely people not getting the message, because I see them deciding on best practices to use (or not to use) based on what they believe is "proof" they gleaned from that site.

 

Although I could see that getting tedious, I understand why you think it is important.

Although empiricism has its merits, people need to understand that just because someone posts one "experiment" does not make it gospel just like they also need to keep in mind that just because a lot of people do it doesn't make it the right way. The fact that anecdotal/observational "evidence" needs to meet certain criteria and have sound scientific support is lost on many. As someone else said on this board not long ago, one data point is just that.

 

While I don't view those Exbeeriments as scientific fact, I appreciate what they are trying to do. There are so many brewing rules and methods that are assumed to be fact because that's what everyone has always done. @VikeMan have you brewed a batch filled with trub that tasted soapy and learned from your own experiences not to do it? Or do you avoid trub because that's how you learned to do it?
I try to read as much as I can and learn as much as I can about how to do this hobby but ultimately what I view as "fact" is based upon what works at my house on my system. It's entirely possible I would be against trub in my fermenter if I did a primary longer than 14 days. I have done both clear wort into my fermenter and trub-filled and since I can't tell the difference I don't bother keeping the trub out.
I would love to see someone do some real scientific experiments on some of these long held beliefs about brewing to put them to rest.