Sorry, a friend of mine has discussed with me in regards of the amount of water to mash. He states that the water in the dead zone under the false bottom must count to calculate water/grain ratio, so if you have a false bottom water volume of 6 liters and you want to use a 3lts/kg water/grain ratio for 5 kg of grain to be mashed ,then you just need to add 9 liters to make the dough.I have never calculate this way, for five kgs of grain i have always added 15 lts without taking into a count the water to fill the false bottom.Am i wrong?
My 'dead zone' volume is very small. I do not include this dead zone volume when calculating my water to grist ratio. But I do count the dead zone loss when calculating total water (including sparge water).
6L is way too much dead volume, at that amount your gonna be diluting the enzymes in the mash quite a bit, me I like thicker mashes so I do 1 or <1qt/lb so very roughly 2L/kg, thicker mashes help break up proteins and convert faster among other things. If you can I would suggest trying to find a way to reduce your dead volume to 1L or less (preferably less)
6L is a lot of dead space but why would you say that a thicker mash helps break up proteins and convert faster?
The grist/water ratio is another factor influencing the performance of the mash. A thinner mash of >2 quarts of water per pound of grain dilutes the relative concentration of the enzymes, slowing the conversion, but ultimately leads to a more fermentable mash because the enzymes are not inhibited by a high concentration of sugars. A stiff mash of <1.25 quarts of water per pound is better for protein breakdown, and results in a faster overall starch conversion, but the resultant sugars are less fermentable and will result in a sweeter, maltier beer. A thicker mash is more gentle to the enzymes because of the lower heat capacity of grain compared to water. A thick mash is better for multirest mashes because the enzymes are not denatured as quickly by a rise in temperature. How to Brew, Chapter 14, 14.6 Manipulating the Starch Conversion Rest
I have always bel.ieved hat too, but http://braukaiser.com/wiki/index.ph...ncy_in_single_infusion_mashing#Mash_thickness single tes seems to point otherwise (and also cite commercial studies that support them). Never tested this theory of course...
Ive never had a problem with fermentability of a thick mash, and the palmer quote about fermentability seems to fly in the face of chemistry. Why would it matter the concentration of sugars in the wort? if the enzymes are catalyzing the breakdown into lesser sugars, faster access to sugars would be beneficial. To the brukaiser page, Ive never noticed an issue with efficiency, I normally get 85%+ with <1qt/lb mash (I do mash out though) maybe its an issue on a large scale?
So,it seems my friend was right,maybe this matter is the answer why even controlling all the other mash parameters i never get an efficiency beyond 75%.This way i am making the dough at 4l/kg.
Not one to want to pass up a chance to learn something; What is the significance that one is discussing the pros of a thick mash being the speed at which conversion and protein breakdown occurs and the other discussing the pros of a thinner mash being better efficiency and no apparent benefit to attenuation?
If you're goal is to increase your efficiency to something above 75% I would look to crush not water/malt ratio. Crush is much more significant for efficiency than malt/water ration. Or are you more concerned about conversion?
I crush very fine(almost flour),i hold a steady mash temp along the mash, get proper Ph( 5,4 - 5,6 at room temp), never mash less than 90 min, i use fresh grains but i never get more than 75% of efficiency
it could be tied to the malt, or your system then where do you get your malt? do they offer spec sheets? I dunno who would supply you in S America The other issue is your system. Lots of people are at that level and dont seem to get higher, it could be your simply not efficiently rinsing the grains. 75% isnt terrible though....
I can tell you after changing mash tuns, that the crush is important, but so is the thickness of your mash. A thinner mash will increase your mash efficiency...I think that is why > 10 gal brewers generally get better efficiency...because they are usually recirculating and you need a thinner mash to do that (and because they are also fly sparging usually)...more than 1 factor usually.
Maybe you are right,i get Cargill malt produced in Agentina but without any spec sheet.I have an aluminum tun (31 lts capacity).So i must discard the water/grain ratio of 4lts/kg as a problem in my brewhouse efficiency?, i would like to give a try to a 2,5lts/kg ratio,what do you think?
Really? If you are talking no-sparge I can believe it, but it is counter intuitive to my experiences that if I get to sparge more I get better efficiency...
I can only speak from experience, but obviously there is a point of diminishing returns if you go too thin...and I agree, it is counter intuitive.
