{"id":1321,"date":"2018-11-18T19:04:10","date_gmt":"2018-11-18T09:04:10","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/petaguy.info\/blog\/?p=1321"},"modified":"2019-02-12T09:39:36","modified_gmt":"2019-02-11T23:39:36","slug":"journey-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/petaguy.info\/blog\/trivial\/brewing\/journey-2","title":{"rendered":"Brewing Journey Pt 2"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Experiments<\/h2>
<\/div><\/div>

Learning about brewing and how to get it all right<\/p><\/div>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Experiment 1 Malt Milling<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Grain milling<\/strong>
Some\n of what I want to do is to test a few theories and see for myself what \nworks. Not that I do not trust the knowledge of others … just that \nthere is often something that matters t me and not to others.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I \nhave now tested the results from milling a pale malt via my KitchenAid \ngrain mill and comparing it with a three roller grain mill that I \nborrowed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pictures below are of the two results. Which was done \nin the KitchenAid and which was done in the three roller grain mill? Is \nthis a good grain crush size (the grain mill was adjusted to the \nrecommended setting). Results were slightly different for crystal malt.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mill A
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"IMG_0003.JPG\"\/<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Mill B
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"IMG_0004.JPG\"\/<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Mill A (oval bowl) was the 3 roller mill. Mill B (circular bowl) was the KitchenAid.

There are indeed whole grains in the sample from the 3 roller mill. This is probably because the rollers are a little too far apart in order to operate the mill or because of the wrenching required to move the rollers. There is also more flouriness from the 3 roller mill.

KitchenAid<\/strong>
There is less flouriness overall from the KitchenAid grain mill and it was easy to do the milling. However it only does about 300g at a time. The consistency is very even. Time taken to do 1 kg was around 6 minutes on speed 6. Speed 2-6 seemed to produce the best results. Cleanup and setup was fast and simple. The milling was done on the maximum setting so there is no scope to try and get larger pieces of crushed grain. Crystal malt grains that are smaller crushed well on the second coarsest setting.

3 Roller Mill.<\/strong>
This produced an inconsistent crush at the recommended settings and I closed the gap a little. When I closed the gap more there was more flouriness.Resetting to the recommended gap, some grains got through uncrushed but this could have been because I had to wrench the handle hard to move the rollers and therefore the crushing was probably uneven an perhaps pushed through some grains. The smaller gap was very hard to move – for me, at least. I could do 3-4 kg at a time if I was able to manage to crank the handle for long enough. I understand that there is a motor coming for these mills that will improve ease of use. The roller gaps are infinitely variable so there should be a lot of flexibility fo rdifferent grain types and sizes. Setup is finicky with a strong table and clamps needed to use the mill. Cleaning is not much of an issue. Cost is around $180-220 for the mill according to websites I saw.

Overall, I think the KitchenAid mill is the best. It is of course not as flexible but it is certainly easy. I think the attachment costs about $240 now. I think I paid less than $100 when I bought mine for making bread over 10 years ago.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Experiment 2 – Measuring and managing ferment<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

\nAfter the experiment with grain milling, I have two more interesting \nideas to explore. Firstly to try continuous monitoring of SG so that I \ncan pick the time to transfer to a keg or Fermentasaurus for the \nfinishing\/secondary\/maturing phase. Secondly, I want to try out a clean \nGerman ale (Kolsch style) brewed with ESB and Nottingham yeasts. More \ndetails in the following, however the main thing to note is that I am \ndoing this with a new process that first ferments with a Grainfather \ntemperature controlled fermenter for as short a time as possible and \nthen transfers under pressure (ideally) to a secondary vessel \n(Fermentasaurus or perhaps a 19l keg) to further ferment and mature \nunder pressure and with minimal spent yeast.
Experiment #2<\/strong>
This\n was done using a Tilt monitoring device that sits in the fermenter and \ncomparisons with the previous process of checking 2-3 times a day to see\n the SG while measuring the temperature of the fermenter sitting under a\n blanket and warmed with a heat pad. Now that I am using a highly \ntemperature controlled fermenter (heating and cooling) I have the \nability to do a lot more manipulation of the ferment process in a less \nclunky way. The Tilt has built in temperature monitoring as well as the \nSG, which is the thing I am most interested in.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I will give a \nmore thorough review of the Tilt in another post. For now the important \nthings to note are that it does what it says. It is accurate. It does \nNOT work well in a double walled stainless steel fermenter but it is \nusable. It is more suited to plastic containers because it relies on \nBluetooth to communicate. It integrates with Brewfather which is where I\n was able to graph the ferment in the picture below. The ferment was \nwith an extract recipe for a German ale of a Kolsch like style … only \nthe ales made in Cologne and surrounds can be called a Kolsch. Anyway \nthe style is an ale and it is one that is supposed to be clear and free \nfrom any off flavours. It is also highly fermentable and … different \n… the intention is to drink it rather than pour down the sink. I need a\n new baseline to work with the new setup because nearly everything is \ndifferent in detail. It is in part a learning exercise and in part an \nexperiment in its own right that will lead on to Experiment #3 which is \nthe really interesting one. One last thing. I used the Lallemand ESB \nyeast. It is not a Kolsch style yeast at all but this is the \nexperimental part.
Objective<\/strong>
The\n objective is to use the Tilt and manual testing of the ferment in a \nGrainfather fermenter to see how long I need to ferment a controlled \nsample of wort to full attenuation and know when it is “right” to \ntransfer to another vessel to complete secondary ferment and maturing. \nAlong the way, I want to know how well the Tilt works and how best to \nuse the Grainfather fermenter features. For this exercise I am going to \nonly use the heating on the fermenter so the process is closer to the \none I already understand.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Method<\/strong>
I\n made up a wort consisting of two tins of light pilsner malt and 30g \nhallertau hops. I boiled 10l of water and added the extract to this \nalong with hops for a total boil of 15 minutes … theoretically at \nleast. There was about 25 minutes more of steeping while the temperature\n reduced to a bit over 85 degrees. I then transferred to the \nGrainfather, straining the wort to remove hops – the wort was fairly \nclear and light. I let the wort cool to 70 degrees and added cold water \nthat got the temperature to just over 22 degrees and overall volume to \n20l. I rehydrated the yeast at 25 degrees and set the fermenter to 21 \ndegrees for the initial growth stage. I added some Go Ferment to the \nwort because I forgot to add it to the rehydration jug. I splashed the \nwort to aerate it a bit more. Pitched the yeast and added the Tilt. I \nhad to be careful to sanitise everything because of the temperatures. I \nliked the ability to put hot wort into the fermenter. The Grainfather \nhas that over a fermentasaurus. However it is much more of a bulky item \nand awkward to maneuver. I expect that with cooling pipes and all the \nrest attached, it will have to stay in place and the wort carried to it.\n Doing that via a robobrew may not be a lot of fun. Will have to think \nthat part of the process through when doing grain only brewing. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

I\n planned to leave the fermenter at 21 degrees (on the Grainfather \ndisplay) for 6 hours then reduce to 18 degrees, however it was only 4 \nhours before the airlock started loudly popping. I turned the \ntemperature down to 18 and was almost kept awake at night by the \nfermenter – even behind a closed door two rooms away. Monitoring of the \nTilt was a bit tricky, requiring a visit to the fermenter to get a \nreading. That part of the Tilt operation is not as good as I would like.\n The rest is good for what I want. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Grainfather fermenter is a\n pain to use for racking. I ordered a pressure transfer kit but it is \nnot arriving until October. I found that I could only rack the brew to \nsmall vessels by sitting th efermenter on a box 50cm high. Getting the \nale into a 19l keg or fermentasaurus was impossible because of the \ndifficulty of lifting a heavy weigh to bench height. This is also not \nfeasible with cooling tubing attached. I will have to rig up a pump to \ndo the transfer … of course the fittings for the pump are not in stock\n either. Bunnings may be my friend or a specialist plumbing supplier. \nAqua Safe maybe. That is another story. Malt, hops, water and yeast<\/em>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Results<\/strong>
The\n two pictures below show it all, Really. I was surprised by two things. \nFirstly how violently the ESB yeast fermenteed. Secondly, the heat \ngenerated by the ferment was more than I was expecting. The Grainfather \nfermenter has an insulated layer inside a stainless jacket. This meant \nthat the fermenter heated up despite an ambient temperature of 14 \ndegrees and then down to 12 after I opened an external window to cool \nthe laundry down! I was finding out what I needed to know.
1. use the cooling – even for ales
2. ESB ferments fast. The ferment was over in 1 and a half days with attenuation from 1.041 to 1.008. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

I\n think the high ferment temperatures mean the ale will be less than \nclean but it is in small kegs with some dextrose to see if that can \nclean things up a bit over 2-3 weeks. Otherwise I am happy enough with \nwhat I managed to find out. I know what I need to do for subsequent \nferments and I know that the process can work well with a few more \ntweaks. That brings on Experiment #3. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Theory
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"EFC.png\"\/<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\"GF<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

A couple of things warrant an explanation. A lovely \nsmooth curve for fermentation against time looks good. However \nfermentation is a dynamic thing and measurement is a chancy thing as \nwell. A hydrometer is indirectly measuring SG by using buoyancy as the \nmeasure wit a scale reading to get the SG, assuming a temperature and \nthen requiring further calculations to get an accurate answer. The Tilt \nuses bouyancy as well but then calculates SG from its tilt angle and \ndoes the adjustment calculations for me. The Tilt device has the \nadvantage of not requiring any draw off of the ale and therefore offers \nthe ability to take frequent measurements without touching anything. It \ndoes require my phone to be close to the fermenter to do a test. They \nrecommend that you do not leave a phone nearby permanently because it \nruns the Tilt batteries flat faster. Besides, I kind of need the phone \nfor other things. The Tilt can be disturbed by bubbles clinging to the \nside and krausen is that kind of bubble. The early readings were \nfrequent then the next one was overnight. Subsequent readings were late \nin the day and several times in the evening. I think the Brewfather \n“smooths the curves” to resemble the theory. The early morning single \nreading seems to have been a bit low and was probably due to a short \nsample time as well as some krausen clinging to the device. Later \nmeasures taken over longer times showed a lot of variation but then \naveraged out (the device and app handle this fairly well). A later \nglitch where there seemed to be no attenuation over 3 hours is due to \nanother short sample period. Lesson – take the samples over 5 minutes or\n so, not 10 seconds.
Interestingly, the temperature profile tells me a\n lot about what was happening. A large rise in temperature as the \nferment went wild (the airlock was almost hissing) and then falling once\n the fermentation was nearing completion. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Second part of baselining is to do a proper Kolsch ferment and see how close to the theory I get. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

This\n was done Sunday 12 August. I used pre-prepared 15l Zeirholtz wort with \n5l of water added. I will be using this wort as a standard for \nExperiment #3 to ensure that I have almost identical starting conditions\n and therefore can make sure that the differences will reflect yeast \nrather than other factors. The Grainfather fermenter will be used on its\n own for this baselining. I want to see the effects of using the chiller\n to keep temperature steady and to then do a rapid cold crash of sorts. \nThe profile will be to start the ferment at 20 degrees and rapidly move \nto 17 degrees as recommended by Zeirholtz. The yeast was 21 degrees when\n pitched mid afternoon and the wort 20 degrees. Setting the temperature \nfor fermentation to 17 degrees, it took 14 minutes to reach that. Maybe \ntoo fast for propagation to happen. We shall see.
Courtesy of \nBunnings, I have fittings to pump from the Grainfather to a keg or \nFermentasaurus. That will mean minimal exposure to oxygen and be more \nconvenient. I need more kegs! <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Using While Labs Kolsch yeast the \nferment looks like the graph below as the temperature is being raised \nfor cleanup and a day prior to 4 degree crashing. The rather ewild \nswings in temperature are due to the Grainfather fermenter having \ndifficulty handling the thermal effects of the cooler, I think. overall a\n very sedate ferment compared to the ESB ferment on the same wort.
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Screenshot_2018-08-17<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Next weekend I will commence Experiment #3.\n\n<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Experiment 3<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Experiment #3 was delayed due to the novel concept of having to do some work … imagine letting that interfere with brewing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Experiment #3 changed. It changed because I have more things to measure with and new things to try. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Here\n is what it will be. I want to nail down a process for fermenting that \nis tied into a rapid brewing method that produces as good a fermentation\n environment as I can manage while seeing whether fermentation \nadditions, filtering wort and methods of cooling the wort to pitch and \nferment a standard yeast. I mentioned previously that I was going to use\n US05 (first idea) then Nottingham. Now I think London ESB is the yeast \nof choice for my ultimate goal of making the Amber Porter (my name) \nwhich is probably a Strong Ale and could be an Old Ale. It seems to \ncross that line and also have similarities to a lighter porter too. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

So here are the three stages of the experiment and my plan:
Standard Brew Process:
The brew process is to use a recipe of:
5.5 kg Joe White Pale Malt
300g Voyager Voodoo melanoidan malt
200g medium crystal malt
100g Joe White Chocolate malt
London ESB yeast<\/p>\n\n\n\n

crush all that in the kitchenaid (takes 15 minutes)
Prepare chemical additions.
Prepare hop additions
Wash and disinfect brew equip

Mash\n in at 70C then 65 degrees for an hour and back to 74 to mash out for 10\n minutes. 17l of water and water adjusted (3g Calcium Chloride, 2g \nMagnesium Sulphate, 3g Calcium Sulphate). Sparge with 11l of similarly \ncorrected water. Bring to a boil while draining sparge into the wort \nover about 20 minutes.
Add 50g of EK Goldings for 75 minutes after 5\n minutes for the boil to settle down. Recirculate on 1900w (using the \ninsulating jacket) for 75 minutes then add 30g of Fuggles after the \npower is turned off to cool and the wort is around 90 degrees. Hop \nadditions in small bags. I should have 20l after the longer boil and it \nshould be around 1.065 OG and 70-80 degrees hot. Then the experiment \nstarts …<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Stage 1 is to do the standard brew with a defined \ngrain mix and brewing process up to a relatively long Hopstand of 30 \nminutes. Then try idea #1 of simply transferring into the SS fermenter \nand cooling within the fermenter. It should work.Set the temperature for\n initial fermentation to 21 degrees. Add Fermaid 3g. When the \ntemperature is 23 degrees in the wort, hydrate the yeast at 30 degrees \nand follow the guide to then add wort to bring the temperature from 30 \ndegrees to between 21 and 25 degrees. Pitch at whatever the temperature \nof the wort is at this time(this is the recommendation). Only stir the \nyeast in. After 3 hours at 21 degrees, shift to the primary fermentation\n temperature of 19 degrees.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Stage 2 will vary the fermentation process by filtering the wort aggressively to remove hop and malt particles. Keep the Fermaid<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Stage 3 will vary by not filtering and not using Fermaid but aerating the wort.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Stage\n 4 will try cooling wort directly from the robobrew and transferring to \nthe fermenter at around 23-25 degrees, using the best of the previous \nprocesses. I do not expect to see a difference but may taste one.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Stage\n 5 will take into account what was learned by the previous fourand see \nif there is an optimum combination or something else to investigate. If \nnothing else, then I will see the effect of a cold crash after a 5 day \nferment without a second vessel ferment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

During fermentation the \nactivity and timing of the ferment will be tracked in detail so that I \ncan see what effect it has. This monitoring will be for the first \nferment and the second vessel ferment, see below.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The experiment \nis to see how techniques in the first ferment and transfer to the \nfermenter affect fermentation as a whole. I will use a second vessel \nferment step in a fermentasaurus to let the yeast clean up. This will be\n for a week at around 18 degrees but not with high precision as with the\n first ferment vessel. The purpose of this step is to take the ale off \nthe trub\/yeast so as to reduce the impact of that material while it \nshould be able to drop the suspended yeast from suspension over a week. \nAfter this it goes into a keg and a few bottles. Taste testing will be \nthe final arbiter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That is the plan. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

A trial using Stage 1\n is complete and it came out at at 1.063 OG. Temperature at transfer was\n just under 70 degrees. It cooled down to 23 degrees in 2 hours and the \nglycol chiller handled it well. I prepared the yeast a bit early so it \nsat ready for 20 minutes and it was Nottingham because my London ESB has\n been delayed. I would have to have redone it later anyway. Simple \nprocess and relatively fast with some waiting to do in between short \nbursts of activity. I will report on the progress over the next week. \nFirst measurements show that the ferment started 7-8 hours after \npitching. 15 hours after pitching the fermentation was going quickly.\n\n<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Post\"\/<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Full run of Experiment #3 Stage 1 underway after an eBay order of ESB yeast. I am proceeding with the planned Stage 1 although I think I know how i want to tweak the process in the end. Yesterday I got a very efficient transfer to the fermenter and ESB yeast going well 6 hours after pitching the yeast. This is Batch #12. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Cooling in the fermenter with glycol works well enough but I think that adopting the Grainfather method of cooling:
<\/p>\n\n\n\n