Increasing efficiency with mash tun cooler.

[BlackDuck]

With the batch sparge, the videos showed that after stirring the grains in the sparge water, they would recirculate the runnings again to reset the grain bed.

I never did this...maybe that's part of my problem. Thanks for this.

[philm00x]

No problem! Hopefully this will do the trick for hitting our OGs.

[haerbob3]

Mr. Rufus a few points & questions. Most likely very PIA for you but my brain is Swiss Cheese so bear with me and have a brew for me.

1. Most magazines & books publish their recipes using:
a) a extract efficiency of 65% IE 1lb of 2 row with a PEV OF 2.037 in 1 gallon of water would yield a wort of 1.024
b) LME == 1.033 - 1.037
c) DME == 1.045

2. Sparge Method Ranking
a) Fly Sparge
b) BIAB
c) Batch Sparge
d) No Sparge

Of course the size of your crushed malt. The finer the higher the yield. To fine............Stuck sparge. This is one of the main reasons why I crush my own grains. Please remember that a refractometer is inaccurate once alcohol is present More Beer has a correction sheet in XLS Excel format at their site I find very helpfull

I sorry if this something you guys already checked

So what does the Bruamistier Herr Rufus say about all of this.

[philm00x]

I'll look that correction sheet up if I end up getting a refractometer. Didn't know that accuracy drops when alcohol is in solution. The LHBS I go to crushes my grains for me and I've never had problems with yield until I started using my mash tun (which I'm still learning how to use properly). I know certain types of grains like rye and oats can stick a sparge, as well as crushing them too fine, but I'm aware of using rice hulls and such to prevent it if I think it's necessary. With my minimal equipment, a batch sparge is my best option, and I don't like the idea of no sparge. Thanks for the review, Bob Helped to get all my ducks in a row. With time, I know I'll be able to use the mash tun as well as I was able to BIAB.

I'll have a Triple D for ya!

[rickbray66]

I believe the main thing is to not get too caught up about it. For me, consistency is key. And if that means consistently 72% versus 76%, so be it. A little more grain is cheap. But I do want to know that I can count on 72%, or 70% or even 65%. This will come in due time as you get more time with your tun under your belt.

Another item that I've run into with some brewing software (BrewTarget and Beersmith) is how some of the calculations come into play. Specifically, how using the "loss" parameters in the equipment profile can affect estimated or expected results. For example, both of these programs use "batch size" for calculating estimated OG. So let's say you set your batch size to 5 gallons, but you know through experience that you have 2 quarts of losses (chiller, trub, kettle deadspace, siphon level, etc), so you set the loss field to 2 quarts. These programs correctly tell you that you need 5.5 gallons of water total (actually more than that due to grain absorption and boil-off, but I'm simplifying things here). So the estimated OG is calculated using your estimated mash efficiency with your grain bill against 5 gallons of water. But you actually have 5.5 gallons of wort, and the little bit of extra water will equal of few points of OG (5 lbs of DME in 5 gallons of water = 1.045 whereas 5 lbs of DME in 5.5 gallons of water = 1.041). If you really want to see this in action, put in some ridiculous number in your losses field. You'll see that you need more post-boil volume, which means much more water. But the estimated OG doesn't change. Of course, you can adjust your estimated efficiency to compensate, as thus it looks like you're getting less efficiency than expected. It took me a little bit to figure this one out. In fact, it wasn't until I did an extract recipe when it dawned on me, and extract recipes you cannot adjust your expected efficiency. Because of this little flaw, and not wanting to change settings between AG and extract recipes, I have gone to setting my losses field to 0 and making the adjustment to the batch size. So for the example given, my batch size would be 5.5 gallons with losses set to 0. Now doing this doesn't give me an accurate "Brewhouse Efficiency" rating. But I could really give a flip about "Brewhouse Efficiency". What I want to know is my "Mash Efficiency", and specifically, my pre-boil gravity and my post-boil gravity. I really don't care that my "Brewhouse Efficiency" suffers because I leave a little bit of wort behind in the kettle. Ideally, it would be best to completely minimize or entirely eliminate any losses, and then this little flaw doesn't even come into play.

Hope this helps and sorry if I rambled too much.


Rick

[mashani]

I believe the main thing is to not get too caught up about it.

Absolutely, IMHO, The more you stress about beer, the less fun brewing beer becomes, at least to me. Consistency is more important the efficiency IMHO, unless you are a micro/macro brewer where the extra pennies or a buck adds up to a huge amount due to quantity.

[philm00x]

Agreeing with both of you, Rick and Mashani. I want to know that I'm able to get the most out of my process, so if I'm able to change something to get more, then I'm all about it. When I get to a point where my results are consistent, then I've learned the limits of my process and equipment, and I can change things accordingly in the software, but at least I know what to expect in future brew days.

[philm00x]

After today's brew day, it's safe to say that the sparge is the biggest factor in efficiency with brew AG in a mash tun. Vorlaufing the wort both during the first runnings and then again for the sparge made a world of difference and I hit my target.

[ScrewyBrewer]

As a single infusion mash fly sparger I always did vorlauf a few gallons of wort first to set the grain bed, then did a slow lauter into the kettle. Took me almost an hour to lauter about 6-7 gallons into the kettle but my efficiencies were always good, in fact they often matched what my brewing software had predicted. I burnished the mash tun with 2-3 gallons of 170F strike water for 15-20 minutes to warm it up first too. After stirring the mash and hitting my target temperature I covered my round cooler with a couple of beach towels for added insulation.

[Funky Skunk Brewing]

As ScrewyBrewer does, I believe that doing a vorlauf of a few gallons of wort first to set the grain bed seems to really help efficiencies out on our mashes as well. A slower lauter also seems to aid in those higher names as well. No since in rushing through a brew day in efforts to be done sooner at the loss of the beers quality. We also do this when sparging as well, meaning recirculation of the initial sparge run offs back into the mash tun.

[mtsoxfan]

OK, here's my thought, tell me if I'm wrong... When you vorlauf, you are just taking wort with mini grain bits, and putting back into the wort until there are no mini grain bits near the 'screen' so you get non mini grain bits wort into the brew kettle.
now, while it may seem like a wise ass question, and believe me, I'm not trying to be, I'm just looking for info.... how does vorlaufing increase efficiency? I vorlauf, but if it can increase efficiency, I will vorlauf more. (currently 1 gal or so, until the wort runs clear)

[haerbob3]

Vorlauf is just setting the grain bed. Your efficiency increases with fly sparging. Batch sparging is the least efficient, BIAB with the highest going to fly sparging.

[mtsoxfan]

I've been batch sparging. twice per brew. I'll have to put the old thinking cap on to figure out how to fly sparge with little $$ outlay...

[haerbob3]

I would do research on the sparging techniques. How you sparge affects your flavor profile. I batch sparge but I have efficiencies of 90% for the mash. I get this because I do recirculation mashing. To fly sparge all you need is a HLT and a piece of tubing. Maintain a matching flow rate so you have 1 to 1.5 inches of water above the grain bed. Take 60 to 90 mins to sparge. Also with stirring the grain bed with the batch sparge there is no need to vorlauf

[mtsoxfan]

HB, this is the norm for me... drain wort, add sparge water, stir well, let sit 10 minutes, vorlauf, drain, repeat. I taste the grain after I'm done, and it's as plain as all gid up. It seems like every little detail affects flavor profile. I'm not at a perfecting stage, more of a no off flavors stage right now. Beer tastes good. Not sure I want to get it perfect, but who knows. When I plug my numbers into qbrew, my mash efficiencies are way low, I think, low 60's. Fermenting usually around 70%. I had thermometer issues the first two batches, but I resolved that. I guess it's time to hit the books again so my mash efficiencies can get up.