FLOUR MASH?

All about grains. Malting, smoking, grinding and other preparations.
Which grains are hot, which are not.

Moderator: Site Moderator

brantoken
Novice
Posts: 44
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 9:34 am
Location: secret volcano base

FLOUR MASH?

Post by brantoken » Mon Mar 24, 2008 9:57 am

Wandering around the local sam's club, lookin' about. I noticed that flour is extemely inexpensive. Has anyone tried a wheat flour mash? I was thinking of trying it with some premanufactured enzymes. My wife say's if will make a dough ball in the bottom of the carboy , I'm unconvienced. Being ground so fine , would give a larger surface area and thus should comvert very effeciently. I think that if I used whole wheat or maybe added some corn meal that should prevent it from clumping up too much. Any opinion's? :roll:
"I like to make really big messes, do hopeless stuff so I can sing the blues with heart"

Brantoken

arkansas
Bootlegger
Posts: 149
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 5:17 pm
Location: Arkansas

Post by arkansas » Mon Mar 24, 2008 1:22 pm

Hate to say it, but think your wife is one up on ya. Dough ball it is and hard as hell to seperate.
The day you quit learning something new is the day you die. And, if you don't die, then you might as well.

brantoken
Novice
Posts: 44
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 9:34 am
Location: secret volcano base

dang it

Post by brantoken » Mon Mar 24, 2008 1:38 pm

my never ending searh for effeciency has once again be stifled.....oh well....
"I like to make really big messes, do hopeless stuff so I can sing the blues with heart"

Brantoken

Dnderhead
retired
Posts: 13667
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 8:07 pm
Location: up north

Post by Dnderhead » Mon Mar 24, 2008 1:52 pm

only way that flour mite be used is having some way to keep mixed
( to keep suspended) While fermenting as it just settles to bottom
as a past

muckanic
Swill Maker
Posts: 433
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 1:19 am
Location: Canberra

Post by muckanic » Mon Mar 24, 2008 8:08 pm

Try this - pretend you are making a cup of gravy rather than mashing. So, you add small amounts of cold water to all the flour, with stirring, until you have a smooth paste. Next, you can add a larger amount of water until the proportions are about right. Do we have a sub-surface dough ball at this stage? Nope. Next, we can boil the gravy to try and make it coagulate. Do we have a sub-surface dough ball at this stage? Nope, but we do have a cup of viscous liquid. Is that a problem after letting the enzymes work for a while? Nope.

Mashing, however, is not quite the same as gravy, because (a) the flour: water ratio is probably higher (so more viscosity in principle), but (b) boiling is not required (cracked or floured raw wheat will convert perfectly happily at mashing temperatures). Viscosity is an over-rated problem anyway because, as was previously observed, these sort of conditions favour enzyme attack. Glutenous wheat will make sparging a nightmare, but stillers don't necessarily have to sparge. Or, they can do what the breweries do and use non-glutenous wheat.

Hack
Trainee
Posts: 904
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 7:45 pm

Post by Hack » Mon Mar 24, 2008 10:08 pm

I think the flour is worth a try. I just made a successful batch of whiskey using the powdered malt you get at the brew shop. Isn't powdered malt essentially flour made out of germinated grain? I had no problem with dough balls. I just mixed in the malt to hot water slowly and kept stirring as I did. Flour would probably work the same way.

goose eye
Master Distiller
Posts: 2799
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 3:19 am

Post by goose eye » Tue Mar 25, 2008 2:38 am

muckanic what you usein to clean your ketle


so im tole

Uncle Remus
Trainee
Posts: 787
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 8:38 am
Location: great white north

Post by Uncle Remus » Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:25 am

Flour is too fine. I tried using a bag of rye flour in a mash once, it was too hard to try to filter out after, it ended up being a mess. I also tried barley chop once which isn't near as fine as flour and it to was too finely ground. I'm sure you can go to a feed store and buy yourself a sack of rolled or cracked wheat cheaper than a bag of flour.
Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he will sit in a boat all day and drink beer.

brantoken
Novice
Posts: 44
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 9:34 am
Location: secret volcano base

does this make any sense ?

Post by brantoken » Tue Mar 25, 2008 9:37 am

Maybe, I haven't explained enough of what I am thinking and or of doing.

First of all I have been successfully mashing corn meal in a 5 gallon plastic bucket. I am not boiling a darned thing. I put it in a large igloo drinking water cooler which has a gallon or so of hot water( boiling water) added. I usually strike the mash with boiling water so I am in a good mashing temperature range.

I can just add boilng water to the water cooler and keep the mash in the "zone" for as long as I need to. I have a hole cut in the top of the cooler and bucket lid to accomodate a long stemed therometer. That way I can moniter the mash temp without removing the lids and loosing heat. It works pretty darned good and keeping a mash going for 24 hour isn't that hard to do. 24 hours at 125 to 155 degree should be enought to cook just about anything, so I figuare preboiling is not necessary.

I usually just go straight to a carboy and ferment, then I let everything settle out after fermentation and don't have to sparge either( as long as I can siphon without makin a mess). So nothing gets in the boiler either.

In my last batch o corn, I added about a quarter pound of rye flour ,
no lumps bumps or clump could be seen and it seemed to work our real well. It fermented really quik( could be a coincidence).

I have been adding sugar as well , about 2.5 lbs of meal and about 5 to 7 lbs of sugar. It has been working real well , untill I started to try the sour mash bit. The second fermentation hasn't been working out that well. It has been sticking, I been adding stuff and it still has been sticking.

I was thinking that since yeast like grain , and flour is made from grain. It would make sense to add some flour to feed it , instead of buying a lot of other additives. So in other words when I go back to add sugar I add do a little mash and then add the sugar to that. I get two possible benifits , the enzyemes help break down the sugar and also break down the flour as well.

That idea got me to thinking why couldn't I just use flour and sugar in the first place , kinda like adding grain to beer for flavor except I am using it to add flavor and support the friendly little beast.

Should make a great nutral spirit, I was thinkin. I can mix rye and wheat flour pretty easy . It is also cheaper than malt and other whole grain here in the burbs. The closest feed store is like 35 to 40 miles. flaked corn,wheat and rye are darned expesive a tthe brew store( too many mark ups). Sam's club has flour cheap.

I was just wondering if anyone else has done such a thing and made it work . I was wondering how much flour and how much sugar to use as a rule. I am going to try it, I am an idiot that way sometimes. I was just looking for ideas about how much flour would be good for flavoring
( 1,2 or 3 lbs) a sugar wash.

any input appreicated....
"I like to make really big messes, do hopeless stuff so I can sing the blues with heart"

Brantoken

junkyard dawg
Master Distiller
Posts: 3080
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 11:40 am
Location: Texas

Post by junkyard dawg » Tue Mar 25, 2008 10:24 am

flaked grains are not too expensive at the feed store.

Wheat flour won't add a whole lot of flavor. Its very mild. Rye might work better for flavoring.

rad14701
Master Distiller
Posts: 20866
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:46 pm
Location: New York, USA

Post by rad14701 » Tue Mar 25, 2008 1:23 pm

For a straight sugar wash flavor is of little concern because you are shooting for neutral spirit anyway... I have used small amounts of Bisquick pancake mix in a sugar wash before... Probably only 1 tablespoon per gallon because I had added other nutrients as well...

Old_Blue
Rumrunner
Posts: 500
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 2:30 pm
Location: High Ground

Post by Old_Blue » Tue Mar 25, 2008 3:35 pm

Isn't powdered malt essentially flour made out of germinated grain?
No. Powdered malt is dried liquid malt. Malt barley is mashed in the usual way and then the liquid is dried and the result is basically barley malt sugar solids that is reconstituted by adding water.
Fire is the devil’s only friend - Don McLean
Jump in where you can and hang on - Brisco Darling

zymos
Swill Maker
Posts: 258
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 8:19 am

Post by zymos » Tue Mar 25, 2008 4:01 pm

I've used cornmeal before, and it wasn't THAT much of an extra hassle.
Granted, it doesn't contain gluten, but with some patience and cheescloth, I was able to recover most of my mash.

I'd say go for it-but pay attention to the "doughing in part" so you don't start out with a big gluey lump...

muckanic
Swill Maker
Posts: 433
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 1:19 am
Location: Canberra

Re: does this make any sense ?

Post by muckanic » Wed Mar 26, 2008 5:39 pm

brantoken wrote:I usually just go straight to a carboy and ferment, then I let everything settle out after fermentation and don't have to sparge either( as long as I can siphon without makin a mess). So nothing gets in the boiler either.
Which answers the question about how to clean the boiler. Alternatively, you could filter through something like sand or polyester wool.
brantoken wrote:I was thinking that since yeast like grain , and flour is made from grain. It would make sense to add some flour to feed it , instead of buying a lot of other additives. So in other words when I go back to add sugar I add do a little mash and then add the sugar to that. I get two possible benifits , the enzyemes help break down the sugar and also break down the flour as well.

That idea got me to thinking why couldn't I just use flour and sugar in the first place , kinda like adding grain to beer for flavor except I am using it to add flavor and support the friendly little beast.

Should make a great nutral spirit, I was thinkin.
Disclaimer: I hate sugar with a vengeance, so if I want to get the gravity up for some reason, then I would use something mild-flavoured like wheat, rice or potatoes. All of these can be used to make vodka, but of course that typically involves either refluxing or a triple distill. A single or double distill contributes a bit more flavour. The reason that I hate sugar is that it is empty calories and so you wind up diluting the flavour at best, and producing a heap of byproducts if you don't ferment it really carefully. The end result is that you can discard nearly as much in the heads/tails as the extra hearts that you were hoping to gain. For that matter, bumping the gravity up much beyond 1070 by using bland starch sources isn't such a great idea either, as you can get a smaller amount of these byproducts simply from the high gravity.
brantoken wrote:I was just wondering if anyone else has done such a thing and made it work . I was wondering how much flour and how much sugar to use as a rule. I am going to try it, I am an idiot that way sometimes. I was just looking for ideas about how much flour would be good for flavoring ( 1,2 or 3 lbs) a sugar wash.
As I indicated, wheat flour wouldn't be my first choice for adding flavour. Maybe rye flour like someone else mentioned. In either case, the contribution to gravity should be slightly better than that for barley malt, ie, something like 75% fermentable sugar yield.

Old_Blue
Rumrunner
Posts: 500
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 2:30 pm
Location: High Ground

Post by Old_Blue » Wed Mar 26, 2008 6:07 pm

The reason that I hate sugar is that it is empty calories and so you wind up diluting the flavour at best, and producing a heap of byproducts if you don't ferment it really carefully.
I always thought the opposite. A plain sugar wash has little to no byproducts compared to fruit or grains.

Of course, I could add this to list of things I'm wrong about.
Fire is the devil’s only friend - Don McLean
Jump in where you can and hang on - Brisco Darling

muckanic
Swill Maker
Posts: 433
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 1:19 am
Location: Canberra

Post by muckanic » Wed Mar 26, 2008 9:31 pm

Old_Blue wrote: I always thought the opposite. A plain sugar wash has little to no byproducts compared to fruit or grains.
A sugar wash obviously has relatively little flavour, but that is not quite the same thing as proportion of fermentation byproducts (which is better measured by how much is thrown away). This depends on factors such as the yeast, nutrients, and fermentation technique employed. Turbos may work acceptably when used correctly, but in general brewing yeasts don't like refined sugar too much. Dunno about bread-making yeasts. Both fruit and molasses washes are more or less a sugar wash with added nutrients and flavour, so those are two areas where I would say use sucrose to get the gravity up if you must - but the choice of yeast could be fairly crucial. I was mainly objecting to the mixture of starchy wash and sugar originally.

muckanic
Swill Maker
Posts: 433
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 1:19 am
Location: Canberra

Post by muckanic » Thu Apr 03, 2008 8:40 pm

Having just caught up on some of the DWWG discussion, it is obvious that some folks are successfully using wheat to flavour their sugar washes, which has some relevance to this topic. I suspect the wheat-germ is providing a couple of things that haven't been spelled out all that well; namely, the high lipid (oil) content of the germ could be supplying a lot of the flavour, whilst fine particulate matter is also useful in sugar washes to expell CO2 and speed-up ferments. So, the moral here would seem to be that the less refined the flour, the better.

Another thought that occurs is that, once you have worked out how to deal with the sludge from flour, then you can probably deal with almost anything sludgy or viscous, like oats. In other words, this could be a way around the double-boiler dilemma. In saying this, I am assuming that most of the flavour (like from lipids) dissolves into the alcoholic solution; however, I am aware that some folks maintain that you actually have to boil the sludge to release the flavour. Dunno, haven't tried it ...

phanmo
Novice
Posts: 89
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 4:01 am
Location: Nantes, France

Re: FLOUR MASH?

Post by phanmo » Mon May 19, 2008 10:18 pm

I made a very small wash from rye flour last month, I read somewhere that ginger and the white part of banana skins both had some of the enzymes necessary for starch conversion. I mixed the flour and distilled water, heated it up a bit then chucked in a couple of teaspoons of grated ginger and the same of minced banana peel white, then pitched the yeast(standard bread yeast). It wasn't a very active fermentation but it worked. I only ended up with about 2 or 3%ABV but it smelt pretty good. Unfortunately it was too small and weak to run through the still but I chucked it in with the next wash. Didin't notice much taste but then again it was with a sunchoke wash, which is pretty veggie smelling. I might try a larger wash again sometime if I get bored.
"I look up to the heavens for a ray of hope to shine; and there it is in neon: Liquor, Beer and Wine"

Dnderhead
retired
Posts: 13667
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 8:07 pm
Location: up north

Re: FLOUR MASH?

Post by Dnderhead » Tue May 20, 2008 6:44 pm

I thank you need raw ginger most of the ginger from the store is" cooked" to make it look nice and clean

brantoken
Novice
Posts: 44
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 9:34 am
Location: secret volcano base

Update flour mash

Post by brantoken » Tue Oct 28, 2008 9:46 am

I did a test run with nothing but whole wheat flour in a 2 quart jar, Mashed it for 24 hours in a cooler . I put boiling water in the in cooler after I struck the flour and added enzymes.
It worked, added yeast and it fermented vigoriously, and settled to the bottom in about two days( I used wiskey yeast). This shows me that it is possible on a larger scale. Unfortunately it all went sour before I could distill it. So I tossed it, smelled of dirty diapers. I think I am going to take the advise given here and add whole grain rye flour. This should be interesting.....
"I like to make really big messes, do hopeless stuff so I can sing the blues with heart"

Brantoken

theholymackerel
retired
Posts: 1431
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 7:39 pm

Re: FLOUR MASH?

Post by theholymackerel » Tue Oct 28, 2008 9:51 am

The problem with usin flour to mash to make whiskey is how hard it is to settle and how easy it is to burn.

Anyone that's burnt a whiskey mash will tell ya that's it's impossible to get rid of that burnt flavour.

So: yes, flour can be mashed, but it adds several serious problems to a process that many find difficult in and of itself.

Puma
Bootlegger
Posts: 108
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:36 am

Re: FLOUR MASH?

Post by Puma » Tue Oct 28, 2008 12:11 pm

brantoken wrote:I did a test run with nothing but whole wheat flour in a 2 quart jar
What was the starting gravity on that mash? And what was the flour to water?
brantoken wrote:Unfortunately it all went sour before I could distill it.
If you do a quick boil after mashing, and are good about sanitation, you should be able to keep it frome souring. The way you did it would make the ideal place for nasties and grains have a lot of nasties to begin with :mrgreen:

Thanks for asking this I was thinkn' of trying this with rye flour myself, just wasn't sure about it.

brantoken
Novice
Posts: 44
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 9:34 am
Location: secret volcano base

Re: FLOUR MASH?

Post by brantoken » Tue Oct 28, 2008 1:02 pm

I used a cup of whole wheat flour. The reason I selected whole wheat , was to break up the material so that water could get in between the grain particles much the same way a grain allows water to flow in sparges.

I didn't take the gravity, hydrometer wasn't handy at the moment, I just tasted it, and it was sweet like a beer wort, which means that I did get good conversion, and I got more than just the top surface of the flour in the bottom converted. My reasoning was I wouldn't have enough suger to taste if only the top surface of the flour in the bottom had converted (or said another way the flour bed was porus).

I also tasted it after the it had worked off , it tasted like a strong wheat beer, and yes I could taste the alchohol and it tasted more achoholic than wheat beer ( which I drink a lot of ) .

I don't plan on gettin any of the flour in the boiler in the first place, as part of the process I will let it settle out after it has worked off. I have been siphoning for a while and I
don't expect that I will have any major problems, maybe a bit will get in but once the fluid in the boiler start to circulate that should prevent it from settleing to the bottom . I also have a boiler with a removable lid finally, so I can scub if I must, an experiment won't do too much damage.

I really didn't want to do wiskey anyway, I was aiming for a top shelf vodka. I know some say you can't taste the grain, but I believe that I can. So maybe the distillers don't really go all the way to 190 for top shelf( like Wyborough or gray goose , who knows?) or I have an overactive imaginization. Not sure which, but I tried to make it from corn (or corn and sugar) and it just didn't taste right after quadruple distillin and charcoal filtering.

Also what i am thinking that with the smaller size of the particles and with a 24 hour high temp mash( I target 135F), I achieve two things, first I cook it without a burner ( no risk of scortch here), and mash it at the same time so I save heat and time . Also The smaller particles of grains should hydrate easier and thus mash more completely. With a big water cooler and boiling water I can mash pretty much to what ever temp I want and for as long as I care to. I just pour boiling water in cooler , drop a 5 gallon bucket in the cooler and put the lid on. I have hole bored in the top of the cooler so I can moniter the temperature of the mash in the center of the bucket or on the edges. I can also use the same system too cool the mash to pitch temp, just use cold water. I pitch yeast in the same bucket and off she goes. I have used this for mashing corn meal several times and it works very well. I wil give it a shot just as soon as the current UJSM batches are finished. The UJSM really goes fast and it has been keeping me busy.
"I like to make really big messes, do hopeless stuff so I can sing the blues with heart"

Brantoken

Puma
Bootlegger
Posts: 108
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:36 am

Re: FLOUR MASH?

Post by Puma » Tue Oct 28, 2008 4:19 pm

Just an FYI, at that mash temp you are only getting about 1.5hr out of your enzimes, so you don't need 24hr. :D

135*f is a low mash temp, nothin' rong with that, however, it didn't sound like you raised the temp high enuf to kill any bacteria. And you would have had lots of bacterial growth derin' that long mash. Without the yeast to compeat with them, they would have had the run of the place. Little bastards. This is most likely why is soured.

I think I may try this with some rye and see if I can't get it to work out.

The process I have been thinking about is:

11 lbs rye flour and enzimes,
4 gal water
Rest at 135*f for 1.5 hr
mash out at 190*f for 15 min
Chill to 75*f
pitch yeast
mix it up twice a day wile fermenting

I have no idea if that would work or not. I am thinkin' that the starting gravity would be 1.075 with a mash efficiency of 80%. That should ferment out to around 7.5 ABV

I am hoping that the high mash-out temp will lower the viscosity (although that might be too high and do the oposit :shock: ) It should, all so, lessen the bateria in the wash.

I think I'll try it and see

brantoken
Novice
Posts: 44
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 9:34 am
Location: secret volcano base

Re: FLOUR MASH?

Post by brantoken » Wed Oct 29, 2008 5:37 am

puma,


Where did you glean that information about the life of the enzyme? I can't find anything so far. There is a new type called gluco at mile high, I can't find any specs on the product.
I have been looking for a source for that exact information. I used 24 hours as it is convient for the way I do things ( ie work, exercise ...life in general) and I wanted to go longer than a traditional mash. I can't help but wonder if enzyme life is realated to the type of enzyme, is it possible that one type could continue to work indefinitely ( or untill the starch was gone).....etc? Got lots of question, some reading would be appreciated. I do know I am getting a very good conversion by the amount of product that I seem to be getting form my mashes.

Also the reason the test batch went bad is that it was about 3 weeks before I remembered that I had done it , got busy at work ya know.
Not too sure that the 24 hour mash had anything to do with it going sour.
"I like to make really big messes, do hopeless stuff so I can sing the blues with heart"

Brantoken

Dnderhead
retired
Posts: 13667
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 8:07 pm
Location: up north

Re: FLOUR MASH?

Post by Dnderhead » Wed Oct 29, 2008 7:08 am

enzymes are not consumed, only destroyed by heat but can be diluted to the point that there no longer useful.(for us)
enzymes work as a catalyst to speed up the reaction that whould happen any way but mite take weeks,months , even years with out.
even a small amount of enzymes work, just takes longer.frutes/grains have a natural tendency to convert starch to sugar, (as ripening)
but we can control this by using additional enzymes. (food for the plant is stored as starch (different types in different plants) ,and converted to sugar for the plants food, as the seed sprouts more enzymes are produced , if stopped at the right stage then we have what we call "malt". most commercial enzymes are produced from fungi witch apparently produces more ( thank rotting) they are activated by moister/ and worm temps

Puma
Bootlegger
Posts: 108
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:36 am

Re: FLOUR MASH?

Post by Puma » Wed Oct 29, 2008 9:37 am

Dnderhead is right, heat will make the enzimes inactive.

Enzimes are not live things so they don't "die." They do degraide though and heat will do that. They are also more active at certan temps. At 135*f you will have full convertion befor 90 min. You may be able to keep the enzimes active longer (maybe 120 min or so), but you don't need to if you have full convertion.
brantoken wrote:Where did you glean that information about the life of the enzyme?
Got that from brewing and brewing books. :wink:
brantoken wrote:is it possible that one type could continue to work indefinitely
No. That's ok though, all we need is full convertion which will happen befor they becom inactive.
brantoken wrote:There is a new type called gluco at mile high,
That would be alfa and beta-amylase. Beta-amylase works well for producing fermentable sugars. It will brake off sugar molicules from the end of starch chains, wile alfa-amylase will brake the chains at random locations. Chains that are less than 4 molicules long are highly fermentable. Longer chains are not and the time it would take for them to degraid makes them, for our perposses, unfermentable. The two work well together though.

There are both types of enzimes in wheat, so you don't have to worry as much about that. Adding the extra just helps it along though.

Ideal temps for each enzimes are:

Alfa-amylase 149*f-153*f
Beta-amylase 126*f-149*f

Both enzimes will work at other temps, this is just the range that they are most active. So, as a hole, the lower the temp the more fermentable the sugars, and the longer it takes. If you have a mash temp of 150*f you will have both enzimes working, however the beta enzimes will not stay active very long (maybe 30min); wile the alfa enzimes will stay active longer(maybe 60 min). I supose, if you wanted the most fermentables posable the best way would be to mash at 150*f for 60 min. for Alfa-amylase, then lower the temp to 130*f, add more enzimes and mash for the beta-amylase. I don't konw that it would be worth the truble for the little it would do. But if you wanted to see what the best efficancy you could get was, that would be the way to do it.

Anyway, I think I digressed there. Here is wiki's artical on amylase enzimes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amylase" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow

Oh ya, 3 weeks or even 3 years would not matter if you had boiled after mashing and made sure the sanitize well. :mrgreen:

Because you didn't get your wash up to a temp that would kill bacteria, they took over. Bacteria will continue to populate after the yeast are done. In other words they are better at fermenting than the yeast, so sanitation is importaint. Li'l bastards :evil:

Dnderhead
retired
Posts: 13667
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 8:07 pm
Location: up north

Re: FLOUR MASH?

Post by Dnderhead » Wed Oct 29, 2008 10:56 am

I thank that if you keep temps down 60-70f or below? that enzymes whould last forever --- but whould be very slow.
most do not want to Waite several days to convert. some mashes (as all malt) is not cooked at all and kept at ferment temp
and the enzymes do just fine. working along with the yeast.as nature intended. when pushing the temps to 130--150F they
work faster but with shorter life. this is no problem as long as they do their job. I have used malt this way.just malt/grain /yeast and worm water.
if enzymes did not work this way you whould have to have the ground at 130-150F before seeds whould sprout.(infections was no problem had
tons of yeast)(it was one of the old ways of making a mash.) this "new" way of cooking /converting /fermenting is just faster.and less chance
of infection. (more control) If you read about "the old way" of placing a bag of grain in the "branch" until it sprouted,dumped in fermenter
with water and add yeast.(some used wiled yeast,but that is chancy untill you have a "bed" started)

brantoken
Novice
Posts: 44
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 9:34 am
Location: secret volcano base

Re: FLOUR MASH?

Post by brantoken » Wed Oct 29, 2008 10:59 am

Well just to let you know this is what I was actually using:

http://www.milehidistilling.com/Gluco_A ... /13220.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow

http://www.milehidistilling.com/Product ... Code=13215" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow

Just in case anyone else tries this.

It is not beta, and from what I can understand, it works from 135 to 140F( see note on ignorance below), I forgot that I read this, and is supposed to work better the the traditional enzymes. (?)

the gluco is listed as γ-Amylase on that Wiki page, and it seem readily available.

I have been doing some reading this afternoon ( I have been motivated by my ignorance) and it apears that there are other new enzymes that have hit the maket that are more effecient than these. I am still trying to get a grasp, will post when I think I can make sense of it.


I understand now why I have been mashing out beer all these years, but I probably won't waste the time on wash, If it goes in the boiler in a timely fashion mashing out may not be necessary. Thanks for pointing the bacterial thing out, it eluded me ........I should have known that.... duh.

Dnderhead
retired
Posts: 13667
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 8:07 pm
Location: up north

Re: FLOUR MASH?

Post by Dnderhead » Wed Oct 29, 2008 11:52 am

I did some research my self and found that enzymes do the "most work" at 37c (98.6 f) but can be faster at higher temps. (more activaty)
( sort of like being at a dance the faster you go around the flour the more people you meet,, but you wont last the night )

Post Reply