I eventually learned that I could leave the induction "hob" settings on 2 or 3 (out of 9) in order to stop heat loss. Initially though it would drop to about 62/63C and I could fire it for about 10-15 seconds to bring it back in line.

I took measurements from both pans every 5 minutes for 60 minutes, with a refractometer. rinsed every time with tap water and dried with a clean towel.

At the 40 minute mark, it appeared that there was some tailing off for the conversion so I decided to ramp the temp up to 70C (this is usually done to denature Beta amylase) and to step into more alpha territory to see if we can get any more conversion.

after 60 minutes I ramped the temp up to 78C to do a mashout (65 minute reading is therefore a post mashout reading) bags were squeezed and hops were added (3g cascade, bittering, and 3g cascade at knockout)

The boil was for 60 minutes, and after "flame/hob out" the wort was strained through a colander to remove the hop flowers and dispensed into Erlenmayer flasks.
There were obvious differences in boil off rates so I decided to top both flasks up to the 1L mark with freshly boiled water.

Flasks were then immediately chilled in the sink with tap water (2X), then tap water with ice. They are curently crash chilling in the fridge for tomorrow, where I will take the S.G. and pitch yeast.
Picture of the topped up flasks, left is "blitzed", right is "normal". Already I can see some differences in trub. I never realised how blurry the pictures were, but you can just make out the congealing trub in the "normal" (left hand side of the 500ml mark). The blitzed is much more fluffy and easily disturbed. It is worth noting that I did not use any copper finings (whirlfloc).

Here are the results of the conversion.
I can make some deductions from the data, but the one thing I must point out, is that there may be some evaporation effect to consider here. The pans were not covered during the mash, and therefore the increasing gravity cannot purely be attributed to conversion. I am, however, quite surprised by how little difference there is between a normal mash & a finely ground mash.

Mally, I just saw your Pictures, the Blender Version of your grains look close to what I use.

Note: "Fully Convert" means the Specific Gravity No longer changes in the Mash process.

My Experiment(that was not worth Posting) found the Finer the Grain(Flour) can Fully Convert in around 25-30 Minutes, where the LHBS grind takes 45-65 minutes to MOSTLY convert, and May take 75-80 Minutes to (Fully Convert).

I hope your Wort Finishes Very well!

Well, I just decanted the wort off the trub and took gravity readings and piched yeast.
normal = 1.038
blized = 1.033

Must be a discrepancy with volumes/trub here.
In hindsight I should have made a better effort to measure volumes with gravity, but I just wanted to get the yeast pitched ASAP.

I squeezed the remining wort from the dropper into my mouth to see if i can detect any odd flavours in the wort.
Normal - seemed quite bitter (which is something I normally find anyway).
Blitzed - I was readying myself for a huge tannin explosion, but , actually seemed a little smoother, but that could be due to the weaker gravity or the fact I had just previously been exposed to bitterness.
Maybe the tannin is more subtle (if it even exists), and can be more easily detected in carbonated & conditioned beer?

Next is to see how they ferment. BTW, I pitched a teaspoon of very thick slurry into each, so even if under/overpitched, they have the same rate.

Awesome, on it already.

Rick: I added an edit to the beginning of this thread which hopefully might make the intention of it clearer. Having fun?

mally: I was going to write here yesterday and then saw you were into the experiment already. Nice job mally .

I'm wondering if you had the same volumes going int the boil? In other words, did the fine crush retain more liquor? Or do you think the volume loss was from more kettle trub?

Haha, nice. I want to go over there and show those guys how malleable we are to critique, but they'll probably tell me to get off my knees/buy some knee pads ... or something.

I think the fine grind has less absorption.
Possibly more of the husk material that gets retained by the bag under normal conditions (and thus retains more liquid) is shredded so that more of it can pass through the bag and into the kettle. I didn't weigh the spent grain, but I could definately tell there was less material remaining in the blitzed version.

As you said though; I think this leads to more trub.
I would love to hear of any theories as to why the trub should differ between the two. The blitzed one really was fine and powdery almost like fluffy yeast appears. Surely all the components that make up trub (lipids, proteins, poly's etc). are soluble, or at least pass through the bag under normal conditions?

I am not too worried about the differences though. I think some of those can be attributed to the small volume, and there was some "wicking" as well. so maybe one lost more than the other?

For me it will be the taste.

What I am hoping to achieve from this experiment though is to just determine whether it is worth going further. If the taste is the same or better, then there is at least some milage in going further.
I would think about doing a little larger volume, and a more standard liquor/grain ratio just to see if the conversion differences stand out.
My current thinking is that it is not worth doing. I buy my grain crushed, and there seems to be no advantage in crushing any further.

Mally, a pound of Grain will absorb the same amount of water, no matter how fine it is ground.

If the Husks are ground to Dust, AND the bag Is too coarse for that Grind, you will get more Trub in the Kettle, and Tannins in the Beer.

The Finely Ground Starch Will convert faster.....Think about rock candy(sugar) and Powdered Sugar, in hot water.
If you can check the Course Ground stuff left in the Bag, see if there are any pieces of Starch.

The grind from your LHBS is good enough.....If you can "Winnow" the Husks from the Grind, you will get less Trub, and Less Tannins, and IMHO better beer.(just My experience, so far)

I Forgot, Much less Stuff in the Bag after mashing.

Joshua, thanks for that, but your comment still confuses me

I agree that the grain will hold exactly the same amount of water regardless of grind. In fact you could argue the finer ground holds slightly more as there will be more surface area? However, the fact that there is less material left behind after mashing means that either more material (including liquid) has left the bag, or it is the same and more compacted.


BTW
The fermentation of the samples is well underway; here is a pic of them 12 hours in.
24 hours in and it could be nearly done.

Mally, A bucket can only hold as much water as it's size..

If you have WAY more time than Money.....

On your next brew, squeeze the Snot out of the bag...How snot get's in the bag is another story.

Let the grain dry out....maybe in an Oven for a couple of Hours.

I am sure you will find...the weight of the dried USED grain will by MUCH less then the Original Grain bill....All the Starch should be gone.

I started with 1 KG of grain, when finished mashing, and dried, there was 585gr left.

There was a tablespoon of Sludge in the Kettle after the Boil. Protiens and husk dust......from my old bag, I guess.

There were no hops used until I transferred the Wort to another kettle to Late/Whirlpool Hop

What I am trying to say is a finer grind can Convert faster....But, not any more depending on Mash timing.

Longer Mashes are Better.....Very Much Longer, even better so far.

__________________________________________
If I had to Run for My LIFE......I would Die!

Like your signature Josh

mally

Surprised there weren't more comments on your graph in post #51. I thought that was excellent . I've never seen anyone do a side by side on this. Sure, a few more replications would be needed but it's already very interesting. Side by sides are the most valuable of experiments.

[This is also one case where refractors readings are far more practical than hydrometer ones. If you took hydro ones, you'd have to let them cool in the freezer for 20 or 30 minutes and during that time, the mash is still continuing in some way though it might be small.]

Let's say that your results were repeated several times on side by sides, then there really is no advantage on a fine grind. Even if you wanted to do a twenty minute mash, the grinds are almost even. The real question is not one of crush size but more one of what does extra mash time add to beer quality apart from some extra efficiency into boil? Lylo has already mentioned attenuation and I know I have read other stuff but have no time to rack my memory banks or research atm.

Anyone else got some links or references?

PP, there is a Hydrometer Correction program available at http://hbd.org/cgi-bin/recipator/recipa ... l?17259723

So you do not need to Cool the Hydrometer Liquid!!

The Grind IS possibly important.....In my last small batch 1.25 Gallon/4.75L I added 200gram if Toasted "General Purpose" flour to the Mash At 104F....Since it is all protein and Starch, there was Nothing Left in the Bag or Kettle.

It is the fermenter now.

The Idea, I have going is....First remove ALL husk Material, and see how much junk is left in the Bag.

Second, grind the Grain bill to dust, and see how long it takes to convert Fully and How much is left Behind.

Lastly, Lose the bag, and and run the Sweet Liqueur, thru a filter(if necessary), and Boil.

__________________________________________
If I had to Run for My LIFE......I would Die!

The BIABacus also has a temperature correction tool Josh but, unlike other correction tools, it will warn you when you are trying to correct at too high a temperature (the further you are away from the ideal temperature, the less accurate the correction). Also many hydrometers will crack at high temperatures (over 50 C / 122 F) and you can be heading into snapping territory) .

Another interesting thing here is the over-valuation of time given to making sweet liquor. For example, trying to remove all the husk from the grain and then crush it is going to be a lot of work. Just doing a normal crush and waiting for 90 minutes (or 60 minutes if you want to sacrifice a little efficiency etc) is not a big deal especially when compared to the time that goes into the other parts of brewing, the main one being cleaning .

As mentioned above, if mally's experiment can be duplicated, at 60 mins there is no advantage or disadvantage, kettle-efficiency wise between blitzed and normal crush so the question becomes all about quality versus mash length.

PP, I have seen the Correction, but, the Link seems more accurate, so far.

If you have a "roller" crush from the LHBS or a home roller crush, you can Winnow the Grain bill in front of a Fan/Blower, and Greatly lower the Amount of stuff left in the bag.

We don't need Husks and it causes temperature problems in the Mash.

I am trying a few ideas to remove the Husk Before the Crush(De-Husk)see http://www.biabrewer.info/viewtopic.php?f=41&t=2994

With No husk, there is a color loss, and the slight Tannin Flavor, some of us have, is also reduced.

__________________________________________
If I had to Run for My LIFE......I would Die!

Got to race but you'll find the link and the BIABacus temp correction are within a gravity point of each other (it's a simple density formula) but the terminology used in the BIABacus is a lot clearer. Hydros are calibrated to a certain temperature and this is the temperature that you need to type in. Regardless, as I mentioned above, large temperature adjustment correction is not great practice .

I'm glad we have some discussion at least

I have just tipped the samples into 2 bottles each, sediment and all.
Probably about 400ml in each bottle.

I will crash chill these in a few days for a couple of weeks and see what we have.
I must remember to take a gravity reading though. I have not primed them, I want to keep things as "unaltered" as possible.

You've got me worried now mally .

400ml in what size bottle? Why crash-chilling for two weeks? (Two/three days in a bottle will be fine).

From memory, you don't have a CO2 bottle but if you did, you could force-carb them but, in this case, I think tasting them uncarbonated would be fine. i.e, get the final gravity reading (wet and shake the hydrometer and the jar first) and then do a taste test.

Great job you are doing ,
PP

Don't worry Pat!

The beer is still producing C02, and I wanted to capture them in bottles so that they can naturally carbonate.
These are 500ml PET so as soon as I get a good head of pressure (bottle squeeze test), I can vent quickly to eliminate most of the headspace (the hope here is that more oxygen is vented than C02).

Firstly I am not worried about oxidising as they will be consumed young.

I am crash chilling because they are very cloudy, and I want to get these as close to a "normal" beer as I can.

You are way ahead of me mate - good on you .

Oh, hold on, when to get the gravity reading? You'll have to "flatten" them to get a proper FG and you'll need 250 mls to do that with a hydro. Bugger that! Maybe use your refractometer to see if there is some difference. If so, take a couple of small samples to double-check?

At this stage of the game, I think taste is what matters (and about three other brewers, to put their hand up to spend the time you have to see if they can replicate your results.)


PP

Geez, I definitely sensed some hostility at HBT when I suggested to some other BIAB newbies that they might like to check out Biabrewer. Weird All I know is my first 2 Biabrewer beers have come out great (in my humble opinion) so you guys are doing something right. I actually came across this thread cuz I was wondering about doing Yooper's APA using BIAB...

shetc wrote:Geez, I definitely sensed some hostility at HBT when I suggested to some other BIAB newbies that they might like to check out Biabrewer. Weird All I know is my first 2 Biabrewer beers have come out great (in my humble opinion) so you guys are doing something right. I actually came across this thread cuz I was wondering about doing Yooper's APA using BIAB...

There will always be an "us vs them" loyalty found on any forum, the difference is how the discourse is processed.

On HBT, I was in PM with a few of those guys after the thread died. I extended an olive branch, received nothing but illogical ramblings and insults. All I could do was walk away from it.

What happened here? Pat added a disclaimer to his thread on recipe integrity, and created a thread on how he was worried about general perception while asking for patience as restructuring would help with these issues.

Constructive criticism was taken here, there .. not so much.

They can't be bothered to understand or help with our quest to help create a better learning environment. Sad really.

Ha, and now we have this thread ... http://www.homebrewtalk.com/f244/10-min ... wn-492255/

Just as we warned, people respond to dogmatic posting. "Revolutionary"?

Ugh, well .. I hope we see some results that we can use at least.

I hope that wasn't our "Squared" tiptoeing around the dark side!!

Someone should tell all of the worlds large brewery's. They will be excited to hear about a 3 min conversation and 10 min mash.

Some Day Soon, I Hope I can Post the Specific Gravities of a Mash, that Starts a 104F and 1.000, and Ends at 1.050 after 8-12 hours.

Work Still in Progress.