What grain bill?

[PMH0810]

Am in the middle of knocking up my 32ltr coolbox-mashtun and, mainly for first go ease, am planning a no sparge first brew sometime in the next 6-8 weeks.

If the tun holds 32ltr I'd expect to draw off around 25 litres of wort? After a 60 minute boil I'd expect this to be about 22 ltrs?

What grain bill would be suggested (I was thinking of about 5 kg) for what OG?

[maxashton]

Why a no sparge brew?

Most of the time people use 2.5x mash liqor to grain ratio. I've never done a mash that thin and i don't know the implications. I can only imagine the dilution would put you at risk for tannin extraction or reduced enzymatic action.

I will google to uncover my ignorance.

[PMH0810]

Why a no sparge brew?

Speed and simplicity for a 1st AG; I was under the impression that it was a valid technique?

[maxashton]

I've just been reading about it. Yes, it's a valid technique, but I don't think many people here do it. The calculations are quite different to normal brews. I don't see why you couldn't do it if you're confident of your figures, but there may be less help on here if you get into problems.

This being said, there are plenty of people on here who have some seriously arcane knowledge, and it DOES look nice and easy fundamentally.

[Grahame]

It could be argued that a simple batch sparge brew is just as simple, and carries the advantage of being a tried and tested technique by the forums members. There is even a calculator on this site that does all the math for you, giving you figures for the total liquor volume needed for the mash, plus both batches. I started this way and found it very easy.

Just my 2p

G.

[maxashton]

Same.

[steve_flack]

Why a no sparge brew?

Speed and simplicity for a 1st AG; I was under the impression that it was a valid technique?

It's a valid technique. It can give better flavour than a sparged beer but it is wasteful of malt. Its best use is to make seriously strong beers that would otherwise require long boils to concentrate down. You could then do a batch sparge afterwards to get a second weaker beer (or blend the two).

[maxashton]

Ahh is this an element of partigyle brewing, Steve?

[adm]

Why a no sparge brew?

Speed and simplicity for a 1st AG; I was under the impression that it was a valid technique?

It's a valid technique. It can give better flavour than a sparged beer but it is wasteful of malt. Its best use is to make seriously strong beers that would otherwise require long boils to concentrate down. You could then do a batch sparge afterwards to get a second weaker beer (or blend the two).

I'm thinking of doing a partigyle brew soon to get a "small beer" from the second run for my boys!

[steve_flack]

Ahh is this an element of partigyle brewing, Steve?

Well you can do it that way and that would be the way in the 1800's that many beers would have been made. Several brewers still do partigyle (Fullers for example) but my guess is they are fly sparging rather than batch sparging their different strength worts.

No sparge is not just a way of doing strong beers though as brewers more experienced than me have found the flavour of no sparge regular strength beers to be better than sparged ones. It's just far too wasteful to do no sparge commercially. I seem to recall reading in Kunze that German brewers prefer to have thinner mashes and sparge less rather than thick mashes and sparge more as they say the flavour is better. Maybe this is the best of both worlds? (Just arm waving here )

[Aleman]

I am one of those brewers that use no sparge techniques, and it is a great method of getting a nice malty beer . . . . it is incredibly wasteful of malt though, assume a mash efficiency of 50%( you will probably do better than this)

You do not alter your liquor/grist ratio at all, so If you use 2.5L/Kg in a batch/fly sparge that's what you use with a no sparge. . . I use 3L/Kg as its suits me.

When the mash is complete, you recirculate to get rid of the chunks, and then allow the sweet wort to run off into the boiler. once run off, you dilute the wort in the boiler up to your desired pre boil gravity, and off you go. (I found that my latest 5.7Kg No Sparge yielded 14.5L of 1.080 wort).

There is nothing to stop you doing a second 'mash' with the spent grain and making a smaller qty of table beer.

Of course this is where the technique of First Wort Hopping probably originated, the hops were added to the first wort run into the boiler. Then the grains were mashed again, and run off into a separate boiler, where it was reduced to the same gravity as the first wort, and added back to the first wort. Boiling would then have commenced.

[maxashton]

Hmmm. Perhaps i'll give it a punt next time i want to do a big brew.

[PMH0810]

Now I'm getting confused - with a no-sparge I wouldn't just float 6kg in a 32 ltr mass of hot water and leave it 60-90mins? I'd still have to mash 6kg in 15 ltr's and then effectively water the runnings down?

[Aleman]

No what you are describing is effectively a single batch sparge., and using a mash that is that dilute has some odd effects on enzyme activity, not to mention the possibility of tannin extraction.

This is one of the benefits of a no sparge, the amount of polyphenols/tannins that make it through to the final beer is very low, and consequently the malt profile is significantly improved. Is it better than a batch sparged beer? I can't say, I haven't done a side by side comparison of the same grist using the two techniques. I do know though that I like the effect, and it makes a significant difference to the beer.

[PMH0810]

Thant clarifies; thank you!