Subject: Rehydrating Yeast
Date: 1992-04-01 13:50:00 GMT
To: Homebrew Digest
Fm: Jack Schmidling
From: R_GELINAS@UNHH.UNH.EDU (Russ Gelinas)
>I *do* pull out my chiller after it's done its job. I
then pitch the yeast, stir the wort into a vortex, and let settle for an hour
or 2 before transferring to a carboy.
That is an interesting alternative but I do not see the advantage of
resuspending the trub by churning it up when you take out the chiller.
Somehow I doubt that you will have the same amount of trub after one hour.
>I don't really see why Hot/Cold break "stuff" is better than just Hot/Cold
break. Discussions of break time deal only with the stuff produced at that
Because there needs to be a distinction between the process state and the
>There's little room for confusion.
Tell me, when does the hot break become the cold break? Clearly, the cold
break stuff stuff contains hot break stuff.
>Now I've got a question for you. In your easymash setup, have you ever had
any problems with the window screen drain/spigot setup getting clogged with
hops/trub when you transfer off to the carboy?
Never! If the mash doesn't get stuck, why on earth would a little hops?
>Three comments on EASYMASH:
>1. The "screen-around-the-pipe" lauter tun is indeed simple, but I want
to again point out that the advantage of a more elaborate system would
be better extraction (drawing all the runoff from the center of the tun
reduces the amount of sugar you extract from the grains at the sides of
the tun). This is not a big deal for beginners, but you may want to
mention the trade-offs that you make going with a simple system. It
validates why your system is so much simpler -- some are sceptical when
you offer "something for nothing."
I am skeptical about your assumption that simple is necessarily less
efficient. Visualize the following:
A kettle with 5 inches of mashed grain and six inches of liquid. The grain
is totally saturated with the liquid and it does not make any difference at
what point the liquid is removed as long as the mash remains submerged in the
liquid. Osmotic pressure will always attempt to maintain a balance by
diluting the sugar no matter where it is in the kettle.
Just to test my theory, I have thouroghy stirred the spent grain and upon
settling again and re-establishing the proper temp, there is no increase in
the SG of the runoff. This would indicate that the extraction is homogeneous
throughout the mash.
I suspect the reason people believe what you are suggesting is because,
again, the experience of a commercial brewery does not extrapolate to the
home brewery. Most commercial operations sparge by spraying water on the top
of the mash not by covering with water. Spraying seems far less efficient to
me than submerging in water and would require capturing the trickle down over
the entire bottom area.
>3. "Strike" temperature, is not the temperature of the mash, rather,
the temperature of the "hot liquor" (water) before mixing with the
milled grains. If you correctly calculate the strike temperature
(based upon the mass of the water you will use, mass of the grain you
will use and the initial temperature you want your mast to be), upon
mashing-in, your mash will be at the correct, pre-calculated, initial
temperature and you won't have to add heat unless it is a very long
rest or if your mash tun is uninsulated. I think what you meant was:
"When the 'saccharification' temperature is reached, reduce the heat
and stir occassionally..."
All of the above is totally irrelevant to my process and sounds more like
rocket science than EASYMASH. Why on earth would anyone want to or need to
go through all that, when he/she can simply heat the mash to any temp
The answer is obviously that you are ignroing the fact that I am mashing in a
kettle and you are dumping your stuff in a bucket.
The posts that comprise the Homebrew Digest Searchable Archive remain the
property of their authors.
This search system is copyright © 2008 Scott Alfter; all rights reserved.