Full Volume No-Sparge in a GF?

Get advice on making beer from raw ingredients (malt, hops, water and yeast)
User avatar
Eric
Even further under the Table
Posts: 2873
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2009 1:18 am
Location: Sunderland.

Re: Full Volume No-Sparge in a GF?

Post by Eric » Fri May 27, 2022 9:03 am

Hi Alan, glad to hear you continue to keep Lancashire alive with good beer. Presently I find myself challenged to follow PeeBee's endeavours to uncover what historic beers really were, and in particular those published by Ron Pattinson of Hancock from 1888 which appear to have had a massive proportion of sugar.

I've used sugar in most of my brews for some years now, and in my opinion, to good effect. I'm sure you would significantly ease your current plight with some sugar and a bit of thought.
Without patience, life becomes difficult and the sooner it's finished, the better.

WallyBrew
Hollow Legs
Posts: 473
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 11:30 pm
Location: Surrey

Re: Full Volume No-Sparge in a GF?

Post by WallyBrew » Fri May 27, 2022 10:00 am

Eric wrote:
Fri May 27, 2022 9:03 am
Presently I find myself challenged to follow PeeBee's endeavours to uncover what historic beers really were, and in particular those published by Ron Pattinson of Hancock from 1888 which appear to have had a massive proportion of sugar.
As in the following where ratio of malt to condensed wort to sugar is given as
21 : 3 : 3
and
18 : 4 :4
From A systemic Handbook of Practical Brewing
2nd edition published 1885


There are numerous makers of invert cane sugar, and this article is very popular with most brewers. It ought to be prepared from cane sugar free from any admixture of beet. It is inverted by the action of sulphuric acid, which is afterwards neutralised, and the sugar is then refined more or less by char filtration.

The best qualities of invert sugar are excellent brewing materials for certain classes of beer provided they are used in moderate proportions. Their most valuable property is that they enable the brewer to send out his running ales very much earlier than he otherwise could do. Running ales, brewed with twenty to twenty-five per cent of invert sugar, can be sent out in brilliant condition within the week from the date of mashing, thus saving two or three days as compared with all malt beers, and economising space in the brewery to a corresponding extent

An excellent mixture for running ales required to be sent out at the earliest possible moment consists of seven quarters of malt, three cwt of Condensed wort, and three cwt of Invert Sugar; or if very rapid clarification is required, six quarters malt and four cwt. each of Condensed wort, and Invert sugar.

Even the latter proportion will give a yeast crop of good average strength, the condensed wort correcting the weakening effects of the Invert sugar on the yeast.

Both Condensed wort and Invert sugar possess another useful property when used in brewing beers which it is intended to export in bottle. Such beers if brewed from all malt have to be kept for nine months, or even longer before they are bottled, for if bottled earlier they throw down an objectionable amount of deposit.

If a proportion of Condensed wort, or of Invert sugar, or of both combined, is used, the beers may be bottled several months earlier, and yet will not throw down more deposit than the older beers brewed with all malt.

aamcle
Drunk as a Skunk
Posts: 904
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2013 11:42 am
Location: Newton-le-Willows ( St Helens/Warrington)

Re: Full Volume No-Sparge in a GF?

Post by aamcle » Fri May 27, 2022 11:38 am

I'm having to rethink some of my plans, small batches excepting occasional beers like a quad aren't going to be enough.

I'm going to need to brew at a minimum every 6 weeks (~20litres) plus fit in some smaller batches I want to be overstocked by the start of November.

Eric are you able to recommend any bitters with a longer than average life in a bottle?


Atb. Aamcle

User avatar
Eric
Even further under the Table
Posts: 2873
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2009 1:18 am
Location: Sunderland.

Re: Full Volume No-Sparge in a GF?

Post by Eric » Fri May 27, 2022 4:25 pm

Thanks Neil, another of the fabulous offerings you so often have at your fingertips.

Assuming Ron managed to correctly decipher Hancock's handwritten brewing books, their 1888 XX has a ratio of 6 quarters of malt to 4 cwt of sugar. Your text of 1885 advises 6 quarters of malt with 4 cwt of sugar and 4 cwt of condensed wort for very rapid clarification. Funnily, last night I was eyeing and pondering my tin of Cooper's Malt Extract in need of being used before much longer, but wasn't thinking in terms of equal amounts of that and invert.

My other concern with such a proportion of sugar was reduced malt taste and aroma, but I settled for 70% of the base malt being Vienna with 2% of ingredient total to be Amber Malt. After reading your text I'll likely reduce the sugar addition to 25% by weight.

Alan, I can only bring to mind one Bitter that was bottled, that was brewed on the 6th of last month and the last was polished off a fortnight yesterday. That was Big Lamp Bitter from 3rd edition of BYOBRA, but think yours might be earlier.
IMG_20211203_204828903m.jpg
IMG_20211203_204828903m.jpg (145.07 KiB) Viewed 1818 times
Simple enough to be worth a try? Not much thee to cause trouble I would have thought.
Without patience, life becomes difficult and the sooner it's finished, the better.

aamcle
Drunk as a Skunk
Posts: 904
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2013 11:42 am
Location: Newton-le-Willows ( St Helens/Warrington)

Re: Full Volume No-Sparge in a GF?

Post by aamcle » Fri May 27, 2022 6:27 pm

Downloaded :)

patto1ro
Steady Drinker
Posts: 49
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 11:21 pm

Re: Full Volume No-Sparge in a GF?

Post by patto1ro » Sat May 28, 2022 8:40 am

Eric wrote:
Fri May 27, 2022 4:25 pm
Assuming Ron managed to correctly decipher Hancock's handwritten brewing books, their 1888 XX has a ratio of 6 quarters of malt to 4 cwt of sugar. Your text of 1885 advises 6 quarters of malt with 4 cwt of sugar and 4 cwt of condensed wort for very rapid clarification. Funnily, last night I was eyeing and pondering my tin of Cooper's Malt Extract in need of being used before much longer, but wasn't thinking in terms of equal amounts of that and invert.
I'm not sure I did interpret it correctly. I assumed the brewing records listed quarters of sugar - 224 lbs - but in the later book they specified hundredweights of sugar, 112 lbs. So I suspect I might have doubled the quantity of sugar. But it's impossible to know for sure, given the ambiguity of the records.

User avatar
Eric
Even further under the Table
Posts: 2873
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2009 1:18 am
Location: Sunderland.

Re: Full Volume No-Sparge in a GF?

Post by Eric » Sat May 28, 2022 11:03 am

patto1ro wrote:
Sat May 28, 2022 8:40 am
Eric wrote:
Fri May 27, 2022 4:25 pm
Assuming Ron managed to correctly decipher Hancock's handwritten brewing books, their 1888 XX has a ratio of 6 quarters of malt to 4 cwt of sugar. Your text of 1885 advises 6 quarters of malt with 4 cwt of sugar and 4 cwt of condensed wort for very rapid clarification. Funnily, last night I was eyeing and pondering my tin of Cooper's Malt Extract in need of being used before much longer, but wasn't thinking in terms of equal amounts of that and invert.
I'm not sure I did interpret it correctly. I assumed the brewing records listed quarters of sugar - 224 lbs - but in the later book they specified hundredweights of sugar, 112 lbs. So I suspect I might have doubled the quantity of sugar. But it's impossible to know for sure, given the ambiguity of the records.
Thanks Ron, and I just made that same error in my last post you quoted. Your 1888 XX recipe is not the 6 qtrs of malt to 4 cwt of sugar I wrote, but 6 qtrs of malt to 4 qtrs of sugar, a qtr of sugar weighing 2 cwt, as is made abundantly clear in the likes of Nimmo's brewing logs. I must get back to sending those.
Without patience, life becomes difficult and the sooner it's finished, the better.

User avatar
PeeBee
Under the Table
Posts: 1575
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:50 pm
Location: North Wales

Re: Full Volume No-Sparge in a GF?

Post by PeeBee » Mon May 30, 2022 9:50 am

Invert Sugar "project" went to "Phase Two" over the weekend. 20L Hancock XX brewed with emulated Invert, 20L Hancock XX with Ragus Invert kegged. I'm fortunate in not getting tangled with the possible cwt/qtr mix-up 'cos the recipe is 1897 one (ten years later) and perhaps came from the later book Ron mentions? Certainly the 13-14% invert seems more normal (than 40%!). This wasn't amazing intuition from me, my Ragus Invert benefactor fortunately didn't supply me enough invert to attempt the maniac "40%" 1888 recipe.

The second batch took longer to start fermenting, 12 hours against six, which might be expected as the yeast got sucrose to deal with not the easy glucose/fructose from "real invert". But the slower start might also be yeast starter (it's hardly an exact science).

But, to put the thread back on track: The Hancock XX copy was brewed "Full Volume No-Sparge in a GF" as this is how I normally brew in a Grainfather. Okay, so a 1.045 OG beer is hardly the high OG beers discussed in the OP, but the other adaptions might help.

I couldn't do an entire brew on the same day as cask the previous brew and prepare the fermenter for the new brew. I had to employ the two day method (mash one day, boil the second). Given "aamcle" wants to reduce the stress of brewing rather than increase the speed by turning brewday into a race, thus increasing the stress ("Mashbag" take note!), brewing over two-days might be the answer? Not over-night mashing but splitting the processes of mash and boil over two days (perhaps heating the newly mashed wort to 75C to pasteurise before leaving it over-night). This would work with "reiterating mashes" too. I don't have the head for extended brewdays or "races" anymore, and it works for me. The pause allows clearing up and getting things together before over-loading on "what needs doing next" chaos.
Cask-conditioned style ale out of a keg/Cornie (the "treatise"): https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwzEv5 ... rDKRMjcO1g
Water report demystified (the "Defuddler"; removes the nonsense!): https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/ ... sp=sharing

User avatar
Eric
Even further under the Table
Posts: 2873
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2009 1:18 am
Location: Sunderland.

Re: Full Volume No-Sparge in a GF?

Post by Eric » Mon May 30, 2022 11:15 am

PeeBee wrote:
Mon May 30, 2022 9:50 am
Invert Sugar "project" went to "Phase Two" over the weekend. 20L Hancock XX brewed with emulated Invert, 20L Hancock XX with Ragus Invert kegged. I'm fortunate in not getting tangled with the possible cwt/qtr mix-up 'cos the recipe is 1897 one (ten years later) and perhaps came from the later book Ron mentions? Certainly the 13-14% invert seems more normal (than 40%!). This wasn't amazing intuition from me, my Ragus Invert benefactor fortunately didn't supply me enough invert to attempt the maniac "40%" 1888 recipe.

The second batch took longer to start fermenting, 12 hours against six, which might be expected as the yeast got sucrose to deal with not the easy glucose/fructose from "real invert". But the slower start might also be yeast starter (it's hardly an exact science).

But, to put the thread back on track: The Hancock XX copy was brewed "Full Volume No-Sparge in a GF" as this is how I normally brew in a Grainfather. Okay, so a 1.045 OG beer is hardly the high OG beers discussed in the OP, but the other adaptions might help.

I couldn't do an entire brew on the same day as cask the previous brew and prepare the fermenter for the new brew. I had to employ the two day method (mash one day, boil the second). Given "aamcle" wants to reduce the stress of brewing rather than increase the speed by turning brewday into a race, thus increasing the stress ("Mashbag" take note!), brewing over two-days might be the answer? Not over-night mashing but splitting the processes of mash and boil over two days (perhaps heating the newly mashed wort to 75C to pasteurise before leaving it over-night). This would work with "reiterating mashes" too. I don't have the head for extended brewdays or "races" anymore, and it works for me. The pause allows clearing up and getting things together before over-loading on "what needs doing next" chaos.
Good to read PeeBee. You've obviously been busy of late. Hope all goes well with that project.

A brief rundown on yesterday's attempt at a revised version of Hancock's 1888 XX, began after afternoon tea.
3850 gm of various grains were mashed in a 25 litre Klarstein. 17 litres of 1051, over hopped, wort were transferred to a thermostatically controlled 50 litre FV with attenuator coil. Meanwhile 1200gm of homemade invert No 3 were simmered for 10 minutes in some dealkalised water on the gas hob, then cooled and further diluted to 8 litres with cold dealkalised tapwater, then added to the FV. After mixing, a wet top fermenting yeast was pitched. This seems to have produced 25 litres of 1050, suitably hopped wort that is currently just below 20C and fermenting.
Without patience, life becomes difficult and the sooner it's finished, the better.

User avatar
Eric
Even further under the Table
Posts: 2873
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2009 1:18 am
Location: Sunderland.

Re: Full Volume No-Sparge in a GF?

Post by Eric » Sun Jun 19, 2022 4:02 pm

Hi Alan, hope you have successfully managed to improved the efficiency at higher gravities and you will forgive me for a further interruption to your thread.
IMG_20220619_103824167_HDR.jpg
IMG_20220619_103824167_HDR.jpg (288.69 KiB) Viewed 1603 times
A picture and comment on my attempt at 1888 Hancock XX. Ragus #3 invert wasn't used, instead a home made version I think was close in colour and content, yet does not a very dark beer. However, having tasted the resulting beer, I'll suggest that beer would have been dark, not from No. 3 invert, but because of all the invert was No. 3.

1000g Pale Malt
1725g Vienna Malt
1000g Munich Malt type 2
100g Amber Malt
1200g Home Made Invert Syrup No 3.

From the Ragus site.
Brewing Sugars are produced from Raw Cane and Demerara Sugars, with colours ranging from light brown amber to dark brown, and with flavours ranging from mellow to robust treacle. They are fully inverted products; in liquid form they consist of 95% invert and 5% sucrose, while in crystalline block form they contain 75% invert, 5% sucrose and20% dextrose. Brewing Sugars are used for either economic reasons to produce the correct balance of colour and flavours, or as a nitrogen diluent to help clarify beer. They are 95% readily fermentable; lighter coloured types are used in brewing lager and pale ale, medium coloured in bitter and strong ale, and darker ones in mild ale, stouts and porters. Overuse of sugar, or using a mash with high levels of maltose, will produce thin beer. Adding dextrose or glucose can impart body and a nutty flavour. The higher the concentration of unfermented dextrose, the fruitier the beer will taste. When fermentation is complete, additional ‘priming’ sugar can be added to start secondary fermentation and increase flavour.

The above might be interpreted two ways, the more likely option from reading Home Brew Forums seem to imply that darker inverts make darker beers, while alternatively and in my own belief, darker invert sugars are most suited to already darkened beers. My version of this beer is sweet, and I suggest that with darker grains it would be a more balanced beer. I'm not suggesting that, for example, #3 invert has no place in paler beers, just used with caution and the majority should be #1.
Without patience, life becomes difficult and the sooner it's finished, the better.

aamcle
Drunk as a Skunk
Posts: 904
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2013 11:42 am
Location: Newton-le-Willows ( St Helens/Warrington)

Re: Full Volume No-Sparge in a GF?

Post by aamcle » Sun Jun 19, 2022 6:17 pm

:) :) no problem.

User avatar
MashBag
Even further under the Table
Posts: 2140
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2013 7:13 am

Re: Full Volume No-Sparge in a GF?

Post by MashBag » Mon Jun 20, 2022 6:34 am

aamcle wrote:
Fri May 27, 2022 11:38 am
I'm having to rethink some of my plans, small batches excepting occasional beers like a quad aren't going to be enough.

I'm going to need to brew at a minimum every 6 weeks (~20litres) plus fit in some smaller batches I want to be overstocked by the start of November.

Eric are you able to recommend any bitters with a longer than average life in a bottle?

Atb. Aamcle
I find most bitters will keep longer than 6 months, many improve with age, I have a few bottles of an award winning ale that are a few years old that are just going over...

I bought 12 plastic crates, which makes a nice 4 brew pattern, which enables me to be topped up nicely by November and not have to bother too much for 3-4 months. That and a much easier brewday routine.

User avatar
PeeBee
Under the Table
Posts: 1575
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:50 pm
Location: North Wales

Re: Full Volume No-Sparge in a GF?

Post by PeeBee » Mon Jun 20, 2022 9:01 am

Hi Eric. That's a dodgy quote from Ragus you've reposted there:
Eric wrote:
Sun Jun 19, 2022 4:02 pm
...
From the Ragus site... Adding dextrose or glucose can impart body and a nutty flavour. ...
Eh? I'm not quite getting that? But this is the "window" site for Ragus commercial operation, and they must know what they need to know about sugar?
Eric wrote:
Sun Jun 19, 2022 4:02 pm
...
From the Ragus site... The higher the concentration of unfermented dextrose, the fruitier the beer will taste. ...
Unfermented dextrose? The yeast eats dextrose (glucose) before any other sugars it can find. 100% fermentable and an excellent addition to thin out the body in beer. Now it's obvious Ragus have published this without properly proof reading. Shame on them! My guess is they probably meant "dextrin", not "dextrose". Or ... you haven't mis-quoted them, have you?


I'll be drinking Ragus Invert No.3 infused Hancock XX Mild (1898) today at a Mid-Summer picnic. If I'm lucky there might be naked ladies cavorting about ahead of the longest day? But the shell of the old Trawsfynnydd nuclear power station (a mile away) might put that sort of folk off.
Cask-conditioned style ale out of a keg/Cornie (the "treatise"): https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwzEv5 ... rDKRMjcO1g
Water report demystified (the "Defuddler"; removes the nonsense!): https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/ ... sp=sharing

User avatar
Eric
Even further under the Table
Posts: 2873
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2009 1:18 am
Location: Sunderland.

Re: Full Volume No-Sparge in a GF?

Post by Eric » Mon Jun 20, 2022 9:20 am

The smell around Hartlepool Nuclear Power Station is from the local landfill site. I'm not sure about the origins of any half naked ladies, I think some might hang about Middlesbrough railway station in the evenings.

No, the quote is as written, and yes, their site is a nightmare at the best of times.
https://www.ragus.co.uk/learning-zone/ and click on Customised Formulations, then Brewing Sugars.
Without patience, life becomes difficult and the sooner it's finished, the better.

User avatar
PeeBee
Under the Table
Posts: 1575
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:50 pm
Location: North Wales

Re: Full Volume No-Sparge in a GF?

Post by PeeBee » Tue Jun 21, 2022 4:02 pm

20220620_131002_WEB.jpg
20220620_131002_WEB.jpg (202.29 KiB) Viewed 1534 times
Whipee! Picnic time! That's Hancock 1898 XX, and about as dark as 13.5% Ragus "Dark" (No.3) Invert Sugar gets you. Brewed "Full Volume No-sparge in a GF", and over two days (mash first, boil second). All the beer I make from grain malted from that year's Chevallier barley (2019 harvest) comes out hazy ... honest! Transported in PET bottles, so not subject to a hand-pump (and so no head!).

Llyn Trawsfynydd in background, the old nuclear power station (the only in-land nuclear power station in the UK) is behind me at the other end of the lake (llyn). They are still decommissioning it ... after 25 years since shut-down!
Last edited by PeeBee on Tue Jun 21, 2022 9:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Cask-conditioned style ale out of a keg/Cornie (the "treatise"): https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwzEv5 ... rDKRMjcO1g
Water report demystified (the "Defuddler"; removes the nonsense!): https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/ ... sp=sharing

Post Reply