kjjohns5

Recipes 

So, my last two brews turned out to be 100%(+) efficiency and I don't know why. Wondering if someone can crunch these numbers for me and tell me what I'm doing wrong.

Both beers were a yield of 7 gallons from mash.

IPA:
11.5# 2-Row, 37 ppg - (11.5 x 37)/7 = 60.8
0.5# Caramel 40L, 34 ppg - (0.5 x 34)/7 = 2.4
0.5# CaraPils, 33 ppg - (0.5 x 33)/7 = 2.4
0.5# Munich 20L, 34 ppg - (0.5 x 34)/7 = 2.4
60.8 + 2.4 + 2.4 + 2.4= 68

Gravity reading was 1.072 with both refractometer and hydrometer after temperature conversion. That gives me 72/68 = 105.5%.

Brown Ale:
10# 2-Row, 37 ppg - (10 x 37)/7 = 52.9
1# Special Roast, 33 ppg - (1 x 33)/7 = 4.7
1# Victory Malt, 32 ppg - (1 x 32)/7 = 4.9
1# Caramel 60L, 34 ppg - (1 x 34)/7 = 4.9
0.5# Chocolate Malt, 34 ppg - (0.5 x 34)/7 = 2.4
0.5# x Caramel 80L, 34 ppg - (0.5 x 34)/7 = 2.4
52.9 + 4.7 + 4.9 + 4.9 + 2.4 + 2.4 = 72

Gravity reading was, as well, 1.072 after temperature correction with both refractometer and hydrometer readings. That gives me 72/72 = 100%.


Now, this can't be right, and I don't know what's wrong with my calculations. The only thing that would make sense to me is if I was never supposed to actually recalculate my true pre-boil OG based on temperature, however, everything that I read tells me to make sure and convert based on temperature. Help would be nice! Thanks!

Malticulous

Recipes 

Either our extract numbers, your scale or your volume numbers are incorrect. Your 2-row is probably yielding better than 37 ppg. The malt analysis will give you the laboratory extract for better calculations.

__________________
What's brewing

kjjohns5

Recipes 

All volume numbers and scales have been quadrupole checked, and beyond. By more than just myself, mind you. It must be the numbers of the actual malt. I pulled these numbers offline. Is there a place that I can get a more exact ppg?

Frodo

Recipes 

Your math looks right... Is 1.072 is your preboil gravity with a preboil volume of 7 gal?

If so, I'm guessing the volume is off. As for a note on something that affects the volume we're measuring at mash temps... the volume of the 170F wort is actually like 4% less at 60F (or so they say). So 7 gal at 170F is supposedly really 6.7 gallons at 60F. So I'm thinking you really should be using the 6.7 gal measurement in the calc. I've never actually worried about the 4% expansion, but a diff of 0.3 gallons isn't something to gloss over.

rustbucket

Recipes 

ok using your number i just got the same percentage as you. i would make sure your equipment is calibrated with some distilled water.

Stratotankard

Recipes 

It's (wort) Shrinkage!!!

The 0.3 gallon will make a bit of difference in your numbers. Also the extract potentials you're using for your grain are the typical average. I'm not sure how this affects the calculations, but how much water did you mash with? You say you got 7 gallons of runnings, how much was absorbed in the grain?

Terje

__________________
---------------------------------------------
Primary: Burned Mead
Secondary: Bourbon Barrel Porter
Bottled: More Bourbon Barrel Porter, New Pekin Common, Flat Tail Old Ale, Bad Monkey Banana Wine, Flanders Red, Pumpkin Ale
Drinking: Too Much
On deck: Something crazy to use up the 3+ pounds of hops sitting in my freezer

Malticulous

Recipes 

The malt analysis can be hard to get for homebrewers. It's for pros. Ask the place you bought it from or the place they bought it from. What exactly is it?

If I were you I'd up the ppg to 39 or 40 until your BHE seems realistic.

__________________
What's brewing

kjjohns5

Recipes 

The first beer was 1.054 pre-boil gravity of exactly 7 gallons of wort from my mash tun @ 146F. My calculator on Beer Alchemy says that at 59F that's 1.072.

The second beer was 1.056 pre-boil gravity of exactly 7 gallons of wort from my mash tun @ 141F. My calculator on Beer Alchemy says that at 59F that's 1.072.

I've calibrated my refractometer correctly because my hydrometer reading was exactly the same.

Frodo

Recipes 

Just clarifying... those gravities (1.054 and 1.056) were not taken with your refractometer right?

kjjohns5

Recipes 

Yes they were with my refractometer, initially. Then I took them again with my hydrometer. Same result.