Grain Mill

[Iliff Avenue Brewhouse]

My dual roller mill is set to almost as tight as it will go at around .03 which is where I set it when I got it. I have been getting mash efficiencies in the upper 80s which is a huge improvement for me. I mash in a cooler with a bag and batch sparge. Stuck sparges or tannin extraction have never been a problem for me but I say experiment a bit and figure out what will work best for you and your system.

 

[Finn B]

I literally powder my grain and I've got a bunch of medals from competitions so I suspect tannin extraction is not the issue people present it as.

Edit: However I doubt there is any real value to what I'm doing beyond the fact it works for me and I don't care enough to change it.

"Interesting" is my reaction.

 

[BOB357]

So my mill has three settings .025, .05, .01. I'm guessing .05 would be the standard setting? That would give me a good crush to mash with? If I have the larger grains ie. maris otter start out at .01 then run through a second time at .05?

Same as the Malt Muncher, probably just relabeled. The markings for gaps are references. You can adjust anywhere between too. I mash in a brewing bag and have mine set at .025.

 

[Finn B]

hmm - it's interesting to see how much narrower gaps you guys use. To be exact, I use .047 (1.2 mm), and my crush looks very much like the one on top of p.282 in the latest edition of How to Brew. I might add that this setting is what most homebrewers I know here in Norway, use. Few, if any, go below .04. May the difference in kernel size between European and US barley varieties really be that big?

Palmer maintains that crush is not a very important factor infuencing yield - or need not be. He cites an experiment he conducted with help from Briess, that showed no conclusive difference between different grinds. (p.283) He says that when homebrewers in spite of this often report big differences, one explanation may be that a coarser grind requires more time. This seems right to me, based on my own experiences.

As for the risk of increased tannin extraction, that will depend on several factors; time, temperature and pH. A short infusion mash at 150F with care taken not to oversparge, will minimize the risk. But if you skirt the limits on any or all of these factors, then the shredding of the husks may matter. I guess that with ordinary good brewing practices, you can get away with shredding the husks.

Brad Smith warns against the dangers of tannin extraction when using a fine crush, but he doesn't cite any sources. He's not the greatest of authorities, I guess. But there's a couple interesting comments there.
http://beersmith.com/blog/2015/10/2...ains-oversparging-and-hot-sparging-your-beer/

 

[GFHomebrew]

Yep I shred literally with a thermomix on reverse speed 10 10 seconds for last 60 Or so brews. I have had tannins in a negative comment in an IPA I've entered before but thats it.

 

[Finn B]

s

I ran this through the mill at .05. I tried to setup at about .036 but seemed a bit to fine. I thought this crush looked good. what do you all think?

It looks very good to me, though I would have liked to test those kernels that look like they may not have been crushed. I get some of those, but when I squeeze them just a little, they easily spill the starch.

You might also take a look at the grain after the mash.

 

[Finn B]

Yep I shred literally with a thermomix on reverse speed 10 10 seconds for last 60 Or so brews. I have had tannins in a negative comment in an IPA I've entered before but thats it.

A test with different grinds of a Helles or a Kølsch would have been interesting - though I'm not going to do it; I'm too lazy. In heavily hopped American styles you're not likely to notice minor differences, I think - and probably the differences will be minor, if any.

 

[GFHomebrew]

A test with different grinds of a Helles or a Kølsch would have been interesting - though I'm not going to do it; I'm too lazy. In heavily hopped American styles you're not likely to notice minor differences, I think - and probably the differences will be minor, if any.

I guess it comes down to your pallet mine convinces me the way I'm milling in a (glorified blender) is just fine. Don't get me wrong I'd (probably) use a mill if I had one sitting around if only to get me out the kitchen on brew days.
I've scored well in the pilsner category albeit at local competition in the past so I'm guessing any tannins in the pilsner are going to be picked up.

Tannins were talking about I've herd described as the sucking on a tea bag mouth Pickering type?

Anyhow we live we brew we drink repeat and hopefully in the middle we learn.

 

[HighVoltageMan!]

There has been a lot of talk of tannin coming from the grain. There is science to it, but it is much more complicated then it first appears and there has been a lot of unnecessary fear of getting too much tannin from the mash.

Rule number 1: Do not exceed 170F in your mash to avoid extracting tannin, unless you want to make a delicious, smooth and delightful Oktoberfest. Then boil the majority of the grain to get more malt character.

Rule number 2: Do not crush your grain too fine to avoid extracting tannin, unless you are Budweiser or a German brewery that wants to get +95% efficiency from the mash, then create a flour like consistency for the mash. You may need to hydraulically compress the mash to maximize extraction.

Both rules are commonly broken on a regular basis without any excessive tannin. All beer contains tannin, it is the main source of chill haze, but too much can lead to astringency and excessive chill haze. So how is it that tannins are not extracted in the mash under these conditions?

Tannins are acidic, so if the mash is between 5.0 and 5.6pH the tannin are kept where they belong, in the husk. If the pH rises to too high, tannin becomes soluble because the mash is becoming more alkaline, allowing the tannin to react to the higher pH and dissolve into the wort. The vast majority of tannin in beer come from the hops, a single ounce of a bad hop can release a lot of tannin. That's why, IMHO, some hops like Chinook, should never be used to bitter the beer. They are astringent and it may be due to excessive tannin.

 

[thunderwagn]

Dogma.

 

[Finn B]

There has been a lot of talk of tannin coming from the grain. There is science to it, but it is much more complicated then it first appears and there has been a lot of unnecessary fear of getting too much tannin from the mash.

Rule number 1: Do not exceed 170F in your mash to avoid extracting tannin, unless you want to make a delicious, smooth and delightful Oktoberfest. Then boil the majority of the grain to get more malt character.

Rule number 2: Do not crush your grain too fine to avoid extracting tannin, unless you are Budweiser or a German brewery that wants to get +95% efficiency from the mash, then create a flour like consistency for the mash. You may need to hydraulically compress the mash to maximize extraction.

Both rules are commonly broken on a regular basis without any excessive tannin. All beer contains tannin, it is the main source of chill haze, but too much can lead to astringency and excessive chill haze. So how is it that tannins are not extracted in the mash under these conditions?

Tannins are acidic, so if the mash is between 5.0 and 5.6pH the tannin are kept where they belong, in the husk. If the pH rises to too high, tannin becomes soluble because the mash is becoming more alkaline, allowing the tannin to react to the higher pH and dissolve into the wort. The vast majority of tannin in beer come from the hops, a single ounce of a bad hop can release a lot of tannin. That's why, IMHO, some hops like Chinook, should never be used to bitter the beer. They are astringent and it may be due to excessive tannin.

Interesting about Chinook!

Seems I may have been a little too concerned about the tannin danger from shredded husks. It probably may matter if you disregard ph and temperature ranges - and especially if you sparge for too long with a little too hot water - but normally it shouldn't matter much, if any. As you say, there's tannin in the beer anyway - and it's actually necessary if the beer is to taste right.

Still, as the yield gain would be small if I got a finer crush, I think I'll stick to my .05 gap setting. It just may matter a tiny bit - and I'm after those bits.

About the yield: The findings of this guy seems to corroborate the result of Palmers experiment: http://homebrewtechniques.com/mashing/impact-of-milling-on-mashing-efficiency/

 

[Mark Farrall]

There's also the people who confuse other flavours as tannins. I've hit a number who tell me a beer has tannins when it only has roasted flavours or something else (one of the advantages of being a wine wanker for many years is lots of tannins drunk, many of them enjoyed). It's generally over-diagnosed.

 

[Nosybear]

There's also the people who confuse other flavours as tannins. I've hit a number who tell me a beer has tannins when it only has roasted flavours or something else (one of the advantages of being a wine wanker for many years is lots of tannins drunk, many of them enjoyed). It's generally over-diagnosed.

That, and confusing pure bitterness for it. Astringency is the most over-diagnosed flaw in beer.