CRUSHED my efficiency on decoction mash.

I was doing the low DO thing for a while and not stirring my mash etc. I noticed that my both efficiency and Yeast Attenuation go up with the occasional stirring of my mash... and an extra 30 minutes to the mash time. My mash tun is rather large though so my grain bed is rather shallow for my typical brew. Regardless, I think mixing up the grain bed is a good step.
 
I do a constant recirc mash, but I do stir it a few times just to keep it mixed and break it up.

Almost always in the low 80s
 
I do a constant recirc mash, but I do stir it a few times just to keep it mixed and break it up.

Almost always in the low 80s
I often do an overnight recirc to shorten my actual brew day, even after an overnight mash I get better numbers from my fly sparge with a easy stirring and another 30 minutes recirc. I'm guessing that after several hours I have some sort od channelling.... It's hard to mess with it though as the wort is so clear after an all night recirc.
 
Last edited:
Double decoction today, used the heated tun, stirred every 10 minutes...went from my typical 73-74% post boil effeciency to 88%. Think I need to start actually using the heater and stirring all my mashes.
Decoction mashes typically increase efficiency, it's thought to "explode" starch molecules and allowing the amylose enzymes access to the starches that otherwise would inaccessible. As far as attenuation, that has many aspects to it. The biggest impact comes from yeast. Each strain has varying degrees of attenuation. Wyeast 2124 and W34/70 dry yeast are supposed to be the same strain, but 34/70 (@80-83% AA) will give a couple of points more than 2124 (@78-80% AA). Belgian strains are insanely high attenuation and English strains, not so much. The second impact is from the mash and that means targeting the beta amylose enzyme with a long, low temperature rest for increased attenuation.

There's a growing group among both professionals and homebrewers that hotside aeration is a problem. Stirring should be kept to a minimum, splashing should be eliminated. Sierra Nevada goes so far as flushing the grain with nitrogen as it's milled. I personally see a difference and have taken steps to minimize it.

Efficiency can be improved by the crush, targeted pH levels (5.6 at 80F) and recirculation. I think recirculation helps a lot. My average extraction efficiency is @ 85% on my RIMS system.

That's my 2 cents. But with inflation, I may need to increase it to 3 or 4 cents.
 
As we all know, every homebrewer has their own way of brewing that works for their system. I use an electric system with two 15 gallon pots, HLT and BK. I use a 10 gallon cooler, (Big Orange) with a false bottom. I recirc my mash with a HERMS coil in the HLT. I can keep the temp at a set point or increase in steps via the herms coil. There is about a five minute lag or ramp in the HLT and the mash tun follows. Volumes and flow rate determine how long it takes.

Now my questions:

Is there a benefit to decoction over step mashing?

I brew mostly IPAs or hoppy beers that are lighter crisper ales. Will decoction have a large change in the flavor of an IPA?
 
As we all know, every homebrewer has their own way of brewing that works for their system. I use an electric system with two 15 gallon pots, HLT and BK. I use a 10 gallon cooler, (Big Orange) with a false bottom. I recirc my mash with a HERMS coil in the HLT. I can keep the temp at a set point or increase in steps via the herms coil. There is about a five minute lag or ramp in the HLT and the mash tun follows. Volumes and flow rate determine how long it takes.

Now my questions:

Is there a benefit to decoction over step mashing?

I brew mostly IPAs or hoppy beers that are lighter crisper ales. Will decoction have a large change in the flavor of an IPA?
Just my personal feeling, no. A step mash will do just as well with the highly modified grains we have. Maybe a few more pts in efficiency, but not worth the work IMHO
 
As we all know, every homebrewer has their own way of brewing that works for their system. I use an electric system with two 15 gallon pots, HLT and BK. I use a 10 gallon cooler, (Big Orange) with a false bottom. I recirc my mash with a HERMS coil in the HLT. I can keep the temp at a set point or increase in steps via the herms coil. There is about a five minute lag or ramp in the HLT and the mash tun follows. Volumes and flow rate determine how long it takes.

Now my questions:

Is there a benefit to decoction over step mashing?

I brew mostly IPAs or hoppy beers that are lighter crisper ales. Will decoction have a large change in the flavor of an IPA?

I don't know how much difference it REALLY makes, it SEEMS to add a bit of color and a bit of nice "maltiness" to my lighter beers. Didn't really see much difference in efficiency until this batch when I combined it with direct heating and stirring(missed temp after first decoction).

Beersmith has a great article on decoction mashing.

http://beersmith.com/blog/2008/09/01/decoction-mashing-for-beer-recipes/
 
As we all know, every homebrewer has their own way of brewing that works for their system. I use an electric system with two 15 gallon pots, HLT and BK. I use a 10 gallon cooler, (Big Orange) with a false bottom. I recirc my mash with a HERMS coil in the HLT. I can keep the temp at a set point or increase in steps via the herms coil. There is about a five minute lag or ramp in the HLT and the mash tun follows. Volumes and flow rate determine how long it takes.

Now my questions:

Is there a benefit to decoction over step mashing?

I brew mostly IPAs or hoppy beers that are lighter crisper ales. Will decoction have a large change in the flavor of an IPA?
Not a benefit to IPA's, mostly for Germen/Czech lagers. I don't decoction mash anymore because it didn't make the beer better, only made a mess and took longer. But some people swear by it.
 
As we all know, every homebrewer has their own way of brewing that works for their system. I use an electric system with two 15 gallon pots, HLT and BK. I use a 10 gallon cooler, (Big Orange) with a false bottom. I recirc my mash with a HERMS coil in the HLT. I can keep the temp at a set point or increase in steps via the herms coil. There is about a five minute lag or ramp in the HLT and the mash tun follows. Volumes and flow rate determine how long it takes.

Now my questions:

Is there a benefit to decoction over step mashing?

I brew mostly IPAs or hoppy beers that are lighter crisper ales. Will decoction have a large change in the flavor of an IPA?
Where at in northern Ky?
 
I don't know how much difference it REALLY makes, it SEEMS to add a bit of color and a bit of nice "maltiness" to my lighter beers.
It should, without a doubt, add color because of the caramelization of the sugars present in the boiled portion of the mash. And I think that richer malt flavor is coming from some of the added reactions with the broken-down gelatins and starches.
 
Decoction does impart color and flavor. As already noted, an IPA might not benefit, while a hefeweitzen would.

Step mashing is less effort, and is mostly to convert different starches or proteins (each has its own temperature).

Those who still mash in an unheated cooler generally need to use a decoction to raise the mash temperature for a step mash.

My advice to you is to brew the same recipe once with a step mash and once with a decoction mash. Then you can know the difference for certain.
 

Back
Top