Monday 8th February- AG Summer Ale (moderate mineral count)

[orlando]

One thing I have though just realised is that none of the recipes seem to account for boiler dead space. Beersmith accounts for it through looking at volume loss but presumably that just waters down the beer to make up lost volume- ideally boiler dead space would be compensated by increasing ingredients as well as liqour......

BS bases the recipe on total volume of liquour used, as long as you account for boiler dead space in the "loss to trub & chiller" setting it will be accounted for.

[BenB]

I've been playing around with Beersmith this AM. Increasing the losses (trub and chiller losses) does decrease the SRM and the IBU but the estimated ABV stays the same. If you make the loses 50% of the brew length (rather extreme I grant it) the total water significantly to compensate and the SRM/IBU drops off but the ABV stays the same despite the grain bill staying the same.

I recognise I might be being pedantic... I just realised that the recipes I'm following might not take into account dead space. If the brewer who developed them had a false bottom and bottom / deck drain type setup with virtually no dead space their beer (from the same grain bill, hops etc) will be significantly more. My kettle has a dead space of 1.6L so on a 16L brew length if I want the right amount in my FV I have to make nearer 18L. But the grain bill stays the same.. End result is my brew has 88% of the SRM/IBU/ABV of the original design. Which isn't insignificant- 4.4% instead of 5% for example. It also means my efficiency decreases...

I wonder whether what I should just do is measure the volume in the kettle (I use a dip ruler and can easily create a new chart to account for the presence of the I/C), make sure I've got the desired brew length in the kettle and accept losses in the kettle are just that- lost.

[orlando]

I've been playing around with Beersmith this AM. Increasing the losses (trub and chiller losses) does decrease the SRM and the IBU but the estimated ABV stays the same. If you make the loses 50% of the brew length (rather extreme I grant it) the total water significantly to compensate and the SRM/IBU drops off but the ABV stays the same despite the grain bill staying the same.

I recognise I might be being pedantic... I just realised that the recipes I'm following might not take into account dead space. If the brewer who developed them had a false bottom and bottom / deck drain type setup with virtually no dead space their beer (from the same grain bill, hops etc) will be significantly more. My kettle has a dead space of 1.6L so on a 16L brew length if I want the right amount in my FV I have to make nearer 18L. But the grain bill stays the same.. End result is my brew has 88% of the SRM/IBU/ABV of the original design. Which isn't insignificant- 4.4% instead of 5% for example. It also means my efficiency decreases...

I wonder whether what I should just do is measure the volume in the kettle (I use a dip ruler and can easily create a new chart to account for the presence of the I/C), make sure I've got the desired brew length in the kettle and accept losses in the kettle are just that- lost.

FWIW I have set up my kit profile and attendant losses, then I create recipes, usually from scratch, to hit whatever EBC, IBU or ABV I desire and leave BS to tell me what volumes I will require. If you want to follow a recipe enter that as is and then just increase bitterness or ABV using the sliding scales, this will then adjust the recipe to hit the originals specification. Remember that they may have used Malts or Hops with a different EBC or AA% so you will of course have a different outcome by just inputting them straight.

[BenB]

Aaaaagh. So here was me thinking I was all clever. Got the grains measured out yesterday, ditto the salts, filled the HLT with the tap water / Ashbeck combination and put it on a timer.... Started the brew bright and early this morning, didn't twig that my water level was lower than it should have been. My mash pH came out at 5.5 when I was aiming lower. Suddenly dawned on me.... when I was filling up the HLT in the shed I stuck 15L of Ashbeck in the HLT before going back to the house with the empties to check the amounts needed and to fill the empties. I needed 7L more of Ashbeck and 10L of tap. I filled the two empties with tap water and measured 2L of Ashbeck from the house stash into the third empty and took them to the shed. Stuck them in the HLT and closed up for the night. Yup! Forgot to stick one of the shed Ashbecks in the HLT. So instead of 22L Ashbeck 10L tap I've got 15L Ashbeck 10L. Which is quite a difference when the Alkalinity this AM came back (as it always does at 210ppm). No wonder the small amount of CRS didn't have as much impact as planned.

So my carefully designed water is now wrong. I've now stuck the missing 5L of Ashbeck in to the HLT so the end profile will right but it's a bit late for the mash pH. Oh well. 5.5pH at room temperature is alright I reckon. Just different to what was in the first attempt so the salt levels will not be the only change.. Hohum. Every day is a school day...

Looks like I'll be getting a sight glass kit for my upcoming birthday to avoid such mistakes!

[BenB]

Okay, so I'll post a photo of the brew later. It's fairly clear but not crystal clear- I'm going to try cold crashing one for a few days to see if that helps. It's a month since brewday, it's had 1 week in the FV, 1 week secondary fermentation at 20 degC in bottles then 2 weeks "conditioning" at 12 degrees. It was going to be 3 weeks but I was impatient. Perhaps too impatient!

Initial reactions are

1) It's under-carbonated- I know to style it doesn't need to be a Weiss but it's too low. Via a beer engine it would be fine but from a bottle to give a bit of head it needs a wee bit more. I suspect I knocked out too much of the starting volumes when stirring in the priming sugar and need to adjust to suit (or stir less vigorously).
2) I served it at 12 degrees and although clear it wasn't crystal clear- I'm going to try cold crashing one to see if it's just a bit young
3) it starts malty and slightly sweet which is nice
4) it's refreshing and light which was the aim
5) the Progress is overwhelming in the mid-section

I suspect #5 will fade a bit with time. When I tasted the beer I wrote down "minty and fruity". Britishhops.org.uk for Progress has "sweet grass, floral, mint and earthy flavour tones". Not sure I get the earthy or grassy flavours but there sure is mint- it's quite shocking on the palette! I'm hoping it's going to mellow with time.