Astringency killer?

[Fore]

Got it. Slowly coming together. Thanks everyone. It turns out my next 2 planned brews are essentially golden bitters @ ~3.8% ABV, so it sounds like the high chloride might suit well in any case. I like sweeter fuller bodied low gravity pales, and have been struggling to replicate.

So it seems CRS really isn't a problem. So let me ask this... if you had the choice between CRS and my previous acid of choice, phosphoric, which would you go for? From what I understand, CRS adds least flavour change so long as you can keep your ions in recommended range, which it seems I can. Seems I never quite make my mind up, but unless you tell me otherwise, I swing back to CRS as best acid option.

 

[chthon]

As far as I know (and experience, as I always use phosphoric acid), phosphoric acid is also neutral in taste. Hydrochloric acid (increases Cl), and sulphuric acid (increases SO4) are also used in professional breweries. Lactic acid can also be used, but there is an upper limit, due to the taste.

Btw. is CRS this:
"Carbonate Reducing Solution (CRS). An acid blend that neutralises carbonates without the need to boil. Available in 250ml bottles.".

I find that somewhat dubious marketing. Every acid neutralises carbonates without boiling.

 

[Fore]

Yes that's CRS. In fact, it is a mix of Hydrochloric acid (6.3%) & Sulphuric acid (8.6%). I just started using it, and my default water adjustment calculator (Brun Water) doesn't offer CRS as an option on the free version. So I'm relearning. I thought CRS was pushing me over the chloride limit, but it seems not.

I'm now looking much closer at my Murphy Water Report and wondering how close I should target what they say. For instance, I always aimed for 50ppm calcium, but they quote a minimum of 180ppm for bitters. That would mean me adding a whole load more gypsum & calcium chloride. I could do that and remain in their quoted limits for chloride & sulphate, but I'm just a bit worried to make that move. I started this thread wondering if I was adding too much, and now I'm wondering if I'm adding too little. Go figure.

 

[strange-steve]

I find that somewhat dubious marketing. Every acid neutralises carbonates without boiling.

From a chemistry perspective it does seem to be worded a bit strangely, but not so much from a brewing perspective because boiling the water and decanting off the precipitation is an alternative method of reducing carbonates.

 

[chthon]

It's not even from a chemistry perspective that my BS-meter gets tilted by that statement. I find it a quote in the same category as labelling water "Light in calories".

 

[strange-steve]

labelling water "Light in calories".

Obviously it's not light enough for some people:

 

[andyn2001]

Hi Fore, did you get to the bottom of this. I too am getting some beers with an astringent taste using the Grainfather. Initally when I got it no probs for a year, then in the last 6 months about 1 in 3 has this prob, and I am racking my brains to work it out.

I suspect two things, sparge water over 75.6C, so going to closely watch this on next brew, and not just trust the temp display on my boiler. Secondly, when sparging I try to turn off the heater until Mash has finished so I can get grain bits out of the wort sometimes I forget but sure this wasn't an issue in the first year. Apart from this, I am baffled to the point of getting rid of grainfather and switching back to a three tier system.

I notice in your opening post you mention you measure the pH of the runnings, how do you do this with the grainfather....this is one thing I didn't think you could do, and of course my runnings could be under 1.010 and I have no idea,

 

[Saisonator]

I have issues with that, also have a Grainfather.
I made a Rye IPA brew before last, still horrible and astrigent after 2 months conditioning outside.
The last brew was a stout, came out good but I think it will be better with a couple of months cold conditioning.
I just bought some phosphoric acid because I would rather my chloride and sulphate levels be left alone, also use lactic acid in low doses.

 

[Fore]

Hi Fore, did you get to the bottom of this.

Hi. Not enough further brews under the belt to say for sure, but I didn't pick up any astringency on my last 2 completed brews. I have decided that any focus on efficiency is ridiculous until I first brew beer I like to drink, so I have decided to ditch all the activities I carry out mostly for efficiency purposes. This is particularly relevant to the Grainfather, as the efficiency is so blindingly high anyways. So I will no longer do a mash-out, and I will sparge with water no hotter than 60 degrees (I might even drop that further, as most reports suggest it hardly makes a difference).

My last two brews did however have a strange tang to them. I'm no expert, but the extra CRS I used to acidify my sparge water is the first thing that comes to mind. So I'm now opting for the sparge water temperature reduction only, and no CRS in the sparge.

I'm going to keep attacking these parameters until I brew smooth beer.

What I measured in final runnings was the gravity (not pH). I understand you risk tannin extraction below 1.010. I have a refractometer, which really helps with this, as you only need a drop or 2. It would be difficult to measure without one. After a bit of experience, I have a feeling that the 1.007 I measured was a false reading from too little wort. Most readings I have taken since show I don't come close to 1.010, so I've started to worry less about that.

 

[Saisonator]

So when I do my sparge, I can be putting through as much water as there is for the mash.
The last of the flow is pretty much clear, so for sure will be below 1.010?
So how do you have to stop sparging at some point?
Next time I might sparge with half the water and just pour the other half in the boil. I will take a small hit on efficiency, but better to spend a few more pence on grain that have beer I can't drink.

 

[peebee]

… What I measured in final runnings was the gravity (not pH). I understand you risk tannin extraction below 1.010. I have a refractometer, which really helps with this, as you only need a drop or 2. It would be difficult to measure without one. After a bit of experience, I have a feeling that the 1.007 I measured was a false reading from too little wort. Most readings I have taken since show I don't come close to 1.010, so I've started to worry less about that.

It's cobblers. Your own words cover it: It's a "risk", not a certainty, but collecting anything at 1.010 or lower is a waste of time so why take the risk too. But, as I understand it, the pH is important. If your sparge water is acidified to pH5-6 there is not much (no) chance of leeching tannins. I also have a Grainfather and do not even attempt to sample the "end-of-runnings": If it was that important do you think the manufacturer of the GF would have intentionally neglected to make "end-of-runnings" sampling easily possible?

Keep up the "worry less" policy. Perhaps there are some others who can learn to do that too?

 

[Saisonator]

It's cobblers. Your own words cover it: It's a "risk", not a certainty, but collecting anything at 1.010 or lower is a waste of time so why take the risk too. But, as I understand it, the pH is important. If your sparge water is acidified to pH5-6 there is not much (no) chance of leeching tannins. I also have a Grainfather and do not even attempt to sample the "end-of-runnings": If it was that important do you think the manufacturer of the GF would have intentionally neglected to make "end-of-runnings" sampling easily possible?

Keep up the "worry less" policy. Perhaps there are some others who can learn to do that too?

Easy to say when your beers are going well, but when not, you have to find out why?

 

[Sadfield]

It appears that there is an assumption being made that you can't extract tannins at below, pH 6 and 75°c. This isn't true, tannin extraction is a product if pH, temperature and time. I'm not massively familiar with the GF, but I suspect that it's efficiency of removing sugar from grain, can also be directly applied to extracting other things.

Boil vigour, or lack of it, can be an issue as tannins aren't precipitated out of the boil. I guess this can't be an issue with the GF? Should be the same across all systems, however not everyone lives at the same altitude.

I would imagine on a recirculating system, bits of husk making their way into wort might be an issue.

 

[JonBrew]

Just a thought: why not try a couple of no sparge batches to see if you still get the astringency? You can still vorlauf to clear the wort and just up your grain bill to account for the drop in efficiency. If you do this and you don't get the astringency, at least you can be (almost) certain it's an issue with your sparging. If not, you can then focus your attention elsewhere in the process.

I should add, I've not read the whole thread in detail so apologies if you've already attempted this and I've missed it.

 

[Saisonator]

It appears that there is an assumption being made that you can't extract tannins at below, pH 6 and 75°c. This isn't true, tannin extraction is a product if pH, temperature and time. I'm not massively familiar with the GF, but I suspect that it's efficiency of removing sugar from grain, can also be directly applied to extracting other things.

Boil vigour, or lack of it, can be an issue as tannins aren't precipitated out of the boil. I guess this can't be an issue with the GF? Should be the same across all systems, however not everyone lives at the same altitude.

I would imagine on a recirculating system, bits of husk making their way into wort might be an issue.

You get a good boil on a a Grainfather, efficiency can be really good, taste the grain sometimes and there is almost nothing left.

 

[Sadfield]

You get a good boil on a a Grainfather, efficiency can be really good, taste the grain sometimes and there is almost nothing left.

Exactly my point, there's a possibility to extract more than you want, especially if you sparge an exhausted grist. Chasing numbers isn't always a good thing.

 

[Fore]

Yes, I have similar thoughts. In my old 3 tier system, one of my best beers was one of my worst for efficiency. I think in the grainfather, the constant flow of wort through the grain, while returning great efficiency, could well drag out tannins also. It won't all be through that, and certainly a mash-out and high temp sparge will play a big role. So I'll start with cutting those out, and see what it gives.

 

[peebee]

Easy to say when your beers are going well, but when not, you have to find out why?

Point taken. I guess I was effectively "kicking you when you are down". Although I was trying to specifically answer @Fore and also move the finger off less than optimum sparging as the reason. Although @Sadfield doesn't appear to agree with the point I was making. In my defence I do understand very well that the processes we deal with don't work on the on/off principal but have a range where the ends of that range don't have any relevance to us. But (not in my defence) I don't really know where that range begins and ends in this case, but if normal brewing practices got close to being in that relevant bad bit, I think we'd know about it (and you wouldn't have to dig deep to find the problem).

… I think in the grainfather, the constant flow of wort through the grain, while returning great efficiency, could well drag out tannins also. …

Might be damned for saying so: But I don't think a Grainfather is any more impressive efficiency-wise than RIMS or HERMS systems that have a constant flow of wort through the grain too (Grainfathers and the like are only oddly proportioned RIMS systems).

You don't hear HERMS/RIMS users constantly complaining of "astringency". I go as far as to say RIMS and HERMS systems can create greater flows through the grains because they usually don't have the overflow bypass system that sets Grainfathers apart.

 

[Sadfield]

My comment wasn't aimed at anyone in particular @peebee. Tannins are a part of the flavour of beer, we all extract them from our mashes, just not to problematic levels. Some will then be removed as break in the boil. However, extraction is considerably higher outside the accepted parameters.

Good point regarding HERMS/RIMS. I wonder if the 3 vessel nature of these systems is part of the answer, and the grain bed filter remains more stable. Do you think the upward lifting of the grain basket of the GF, could allow finer particles of husk to wash through the grain bed into the wort?

 

[Sadfield]

http://beerandwinejournal.com/tannins/
http://beerandwinejournal.com/tannins-mash/
http://beerandwinejournal.com/tannins-in-the-boil/