Wheat Neutral Spirit Recipe

Sam

@crozdog

Thanks for that, the Brewersfriend site is way easier to use!

I think from what you are saying I need to move past the initial recipe concept of heating up and softening the rolled/flaked wheat as a discreet step in the process and just combine all the grain (both malted and unmalted) in a single step. I had been thinking this would be the way to go as the original method was a pain, incidentally once the malted grain was added and the starches start to convert the liquid did become less viscus.

The other thought I have been having is like you suggest and just going with 100% malted grain which makes sense until I can get the process down pat. Incidentally I have been using malted barley not wheat that was a typo on my part!

Its also a heck of a lot easier to get hold of malted wheats here than the rolled wheat as I cant find anywhere locally that sells it and end up having to pay freight.

The reason I added the herms was because I was going to use alpha amylase in the mashing process and its bloody cold in the Hunter Valley at this time of year so I worried the temperature will drop to quickly. Also I'm keen to develop my skills and equipment so I can start mashing for beer and not just to run through the still.

At least I have stopped using turbo yeasts!

Thanks again for all your help, I will let you know how I get on.

crozdog

Hi @Sam yes mash all your grains at once - your'e not trying to gelatinise raw grains. If you're in in the hunter look for malted wheat to go with the malted barley. Use malts you can source easily, there's a brew shop in Maitland that might help.

As I mentioned, wrap your mash tun to keep the heat in. high percentages of wheat can also make the mash really thick - you might want to use some rice hulls to simplify lautering, but you should get a reasonable amount of wash out

DonMateo

@sam. I do what @crozdog that is I dump in water at 75degC and I have tanks wrapped in insulating expanded plastic that is about an inch thick. After about 90 mins the temp is normally around 65 deg. You loose some temperature with the grain and tank adsorbing heat. But its a process that seems to work.

Sam

Well I thought I would give you a bit of an update on how things have been going... I have done two mashes, one on 08/06/19 and another on 22/06/19. Rather than go into details on what I did I have posted the Wash Records which consists of all my notes as its easier than writing everything down again here.

I am slightly kicking myself because I made some changes to my process adding a couple of additional rests and using a different Alpha Amylase. However, like some excited schoolboy I changed up the quantities between the two batches meaning I cannot compare the efficiencies as easily... Being an engineer I should have known better and maintained a constant in order to compare apples with apples. I am also kicking myself for getting carried away with all the various grains in the first one, again excitement got the better of me.

Despite not being able to compare apples with apples, I did run them through the recipe calculator on Brewers Friend which seems to show that the mash on 08/06/19 had an efficiency of 90% whereas the one on 22/06/19 only seemed to have 78% efficiency. This surprised me as I thought the second one was a better process, I am not sure I'm using the program correctly though as I'm not sure of the volume of water is for the strike water or whatever ends up in the fermenter. I used the volume of strike water, if this is wrong then its wrong on both calculations meaning there is a 12% difference in efficiency regardless.

Obviously I'm going to keep on trucking until I nail this SOB but I am starting to think that for neutral adding a little sugar to boost yields isn't the end of the world. However I have another two neutral mashes to do do then I'm planning on trying a Single Malt where I really don't want to add sugar.

richard

Hi @sam ….. can you do a single page photo ….. it's a bit blurred when zooming into your double page.

I am trying to see your temperature's and hold times etc and when you added enzymes.

Cheers, Richard

richard

Has anyone mashing templates they can share PDF, XLS, DOC etc.

Feeling lazing and don't want to recreate that which is available elsewhere.

Many thanks.

Sam

@richard here try this: Wash Record (PDF)

Sam

@richard I have found that adding the Alpha Amylase with the grain at mash in seems to work best (last one I did I forgot and added them later and the mash efficiency was lower than when added at mash in).

I have been mashing at 63-65 for 1.5 hours then increasing the temperature to 71 over a 30 min period using a HERMS coil then leaving overnight. I haven’t recirculated overnight because I’m worried about leaks etc but now I’m getting confidence in the equipment I may well do and see if that boosts efficiencies.

I have found I need 17Kg of grain and 45L of strike water which usually yields about 28L at around 1.090-1.100 depending on a few factors. I then usually sparge at 80 Degrees with 20L drawing this off really slowly over about a 15 min period.

I then find the SG is somewhere around 1.075-1.080, lately I have started fermenting on the grain and usually end up with a wash of about 10% ABV.

With the enzymes Still Spirits seem to have released a high temp Alpha Amylase which I found really bad, didn’t significantly boost yields and I lost a lot of liquid to evaporation due to the high temps in the instructions. I would suggest avoiding the high temp one and use the Still Spirits simple one in the white sachets which denigrates at 85 Degrees.

I use the Mangrove Jack Glucoamylase adding when I pitch the yeast and double the recommended dose.

Hope that helps

richard

Thanks.

Just now starting to prepare and creating SOP / recipe for an all barley malt mash that will happen in the next few weeks. Finally ready to go and getting all ducks in a row.

Just bought 2 additional 1,800L HDPE conical fermenters, now am truly out of storage space.

Sam

With quantities like that if you are using enzymes maybe look up if you can get hold of the AB Vickers stuff as it will be easier than the 3g sachets!

Sam

So after a few stripping runs I put 45L of low wines at 39% through with 6 plates and pro-caps.

After airing for just over 24 hours I found that the hearts was really delicious, not harsh and and just so smooth. My issue is that there just wasn’t very much of it (4-5L) and the rest of the run was just not very pleasant at all.

My plan is to recombine everything (except the fore’s and heads) and cut it back to 40% with distilled water, filter the crap out of it with the carbon filter, put it through the ultrasonic cleaner and then run it through again.

Being new to this I am curious if this is normal (you often see triple distilled vodka)? Do you think my plan of filtering and ultra-sounding will work? I just feel there should have been more hearts and am wondering if maybe I didn’t have enough reflux or just didn’t run things as well as I should have.

DonMateo

There are other people out there with more experience than me, @grim is the go to guy on whiskey.

But as a comment I use ultrasound as well. What I have found with my scotch washes is the flavor changes a lot through a run and the harsh smoke you get at the end mellows out in the barrel, so you can make your top cut and your bottom cuts a bit wider. But I use a whiskey helmet and not a 6 plate column so the volume of the run is larger. Total volume of hearts looks about right which is why I use a whiskey helmet take larger cuts and let it smooth out in the barrel. I dont carbon filter as well as that will strip out flavor as well as nasties. But I try and go for more full flavor whiskey. I read a book on illegal scotch making in the 1750s in the mountains of Scotland. Those guys would find a water source. Dig a hole into the hill, make a little cave then feed in the water and do everything by fires with little 60 litre copper stills. Amazing history our industry has.

grim

I wouldn’t bother with Ultrasound for low wines.

Carbon can clean low wines, but you may be surprised by how much you need, and how quickly it will be exhausted.

DonMateo

I only ultrasound whiskey after the spirit run and then again before bottling if I remember.

CothermanDistilling

Procrastination has proved to improve low wines at our place...

Smaug

@CothermanDistilling said: Procrastination has proved to improve low wines at our place...

This^^^

Sam

Thanks guys, just to clarify this is for a Neutral not a whisky

Sam

Also the last thing I want to do is reopen the old ultrasound wounds...

@grim I am curious though, on another older thread you seemed to be all set to go for a double blind on some whisky (ultrasounded Vs ‘normal’) but the thread died off soon after.

I was wondering if you had those results or if you posted them on another thread somewhere.

Like I say, mindful not to reignite the old debate in the wrong place but am curious if there was a perceived difference in your tests.

FloridaCracker

I found ultrasound to make a difference BEFORE barrel aging. As far as if it makes a difference once it is out of the barrel, I can't say.

One thing I did find was that if I used US on rum after the barrel, I ended up with a murky spirit.

My understanding is that it may move the "aging" a little further down the road before either bottling or barreling.

YMMV

FC

grim

I posted my theory somewhere.

I think the impact is temporary or short-lived.