Mashing Out

...No...we're talking about mashing out...which is not as big a deal usually.

 

Not mashing out extends the mash length, with an uncontrolled mash temp for the extended time. So it's just as big a deal as mash temp and mash length, because it is those things. And no, most people can't heat their post-mash runnings as they hit the kettle up to and past 170F instantly. And even if they could, the part that hasn't run off yet (at any given time) is still converting.

 

Too late to ETA, so just adding...
Just to be clear, I'm not saying anyone should mash out or not mash out, only that the wort sugar/dextrin profile will be different between the two. If you don't mash out, you could adjust the pre-lauter mash time, mash temp, and other parameters to target the same profile as you would have got with a mashout. (Conversely, if you are mashing out, you can adjust these same parameters in a different way to target the results you would have got without the mashout.) For me, doing a mashout is a more controlled and predictable process from a fermentability standpoint.

 

@VikeMan -

Do you see a need for a mashout with BIAB? It will be my first migration into all grain and from what i've seen and read, most folks don't think that mashout is necessary as you will essentially be "mashing out" by raising the temperature during the boil 15-30 minutes after you pull the grain out of the kettle.

 

To use your example... If it takes 15 minutes after the main mash to bring the wort to 170F-ish, then you essentially did a mash that was 15 minutes longer. You could mitigate that by ending the main mash earlier. Of course, with BIAB, the wort is already in the kettle, so at least there's not an extended lauter time to compensate for. I assume the vast majority of BIABers do not do a mashout per se. Rather, they are dialing in their processes to get the results they want without mashing out.

 

If you are only mashing for 15 minutes, mashing out might help some, but for the typical hour mash or longer the fermentability profile is not changed significantly in my experience.

Note to self: standby for fermentability v. conversion discussion

 

I recommend checking out Greg Doss's fermentability study for some data on how much attenuability difference there is between a 60 minute and a 75 minute mash. To me, it can be significant. And the measured results from my batches after modeling his data tend to support his data, although my data is not A/B/controlled like his. Anyway, his fermentability study is a good read.

 

http://www.homebrewersassociation.org/attachments/presentations/pdf/2012/1616-04 Attenuation - Gregg Doss.pdf

Interesting, but use of a mashout was never mentioned...maybe the full study did??? What I did find interesting was the C-120 and Wheat data (grist part of the study). Thanks, and cheers...hopefully this was the study you were referencing...maybe not.

 

Why are there never error bars in any of these studies?? Hard to pin any significance on findings without at least some indication of statistical error for data points.

 

I think the big problem with that study was use of Saaz hops for the Mash Protocol

 

How does extracting a few extra gravity points by mashing out make for better beer?

As a public service, I can save you the trouble of answering.
It doesn't.

 

I think he's talking more about consistency and control of the malt profile, rather than increased efficiency.

 

Go ask that question to commercial brewers and see what ya get.

That's why I originally stated, it depends on what your goal is. Some home brewers have aspirations of turning their hobby into a lifelong career, while others just want to make mediocre beer to drink at home. If you are the former, you are wanting to know every detail about about process in brewing science and theory. If your the latter, you would probably not care enough to dive into the details.

FWIW, mash out helps fluid dynamics & mash consistency and it is important to know the dynamics of it & sparging. If you want a beer full of tannins, go sparge with 180 F, pH 8.0 water. I choose to control the variables as much as possible, that's just me though.

 

"mash out helps fluid dynamics & mash consistency"

Finally... we get to the real reason for mashing out...to help drain the mashtun!

BTW: 180*F WATER should not extract tannins and 8.0 sparge water is a little bit of an exaggeration, but if a brewer is concerned about it, sparge with adjusted water and don't try to get every last drop out of the mash tun, IMHO.

 

Totally irrelevant to the present discussion.

ICYMI...this is BA's 'home brewing' forum.

 

No, mashout wasn't mentioned IIRC. But attenuation differences for various mash times was. If longer mashes cause higher attenuation, then mashing out or not mashing out (which changes the amount of time the amylase enzymes are active) also affects attenuation. The reason I pointed to the difference between a 60 and 75 minute mash is that the lauter time plus kettle heating time, depending on setup, could easily be 15 minutes or more. You can pretty much measure the time between when the mashout would otherwise have been performed and when the wort in the kettle reaches 170-ish and think of that difference as an extended mash time (albeit with a fluctuating mash temp, depending on setup).

Again, I'm not claiming that mashing out is inherently better than not mashing out, only that there will be a different result. It's one of many parameters a homebrewer can control.

 

@hoptualBrew wasn't saying that homebrewers should mash out because pros mash out. He was saying that if one of your goals is higher mash efficiency (like it often is for pros), then mashing out is a factor that gets you there. (Mashing out also has other effects, previously discussed.) Referring to pro practices isn't necessarily irrelevant in a homebrewing discussion. It depends on context.

BTW, Thank You for your service.

 

Fair enough...but just because something CAN be controlled doesn't mean it MUST be controlled. In most cases, the numbers just aren't that SIGNIFICANTLY different either way. Cheers

 

I agree with this, but would add... Significance is a matter of opinion. Using Greg's results and the example we're already discussing, the difference between 60 minutes and 75 minutes was about 3.25% attenuability, which translates to the difference (for example) between 80% Apparent Attenuation and 82.6% Apparent Attenuation. To me, that's significant, and it's more or less the kind of difference that could result from mashout vs. non-mashout (depending on process/setup).

 

3.25 attenuability with no measure of error doesn't mean much. What if the error in the data points is 5%? He has an n of 3 for each fermentation, which, unless he has some god like control over experimental data, I really doubt his error is 0% or less, as indicated by a graph with no error bars.

He also has two significant figures on everything, no way he has that kind of accuracy.