Batch and Fly sparging. Whats the difference?

nopants...

But it smells so good baked onto the driveway.

Click to expand...

Haha, not if you had my dog around. He's the quicker-picker-upper.

ajf said:

For me, fly sparging is better because it is easier, gives higher efficiency, produces more consistent results (especially with higher gravity brews), and produces better tasting beer. That doesn't mean it is right for everyone.

Click to expand...

I'm not going to debate fly vs batch they are both fine ways of making beer. But please be so kind as to tell me how one way of rinsing grains makes "better" beer than another??

wildwest450 said:

I'm not going to debate fly vs batch they are both fine ways of making beer. But please be so kind as to tell me how one way of rinsing grains makes "better" beer than another??

Click to expand...

Glad you asked, I am wondering the same thing.

I tried both batch and fly sparging and I have to say that fly sparging is way better, easier and more efficient then batch sparging. I use a simple manifold to shower hot water onto the mash, very similar to the manifold I use to filter the wort out of the cooler:
http://img37.imageshack.us/img37/2585/0629091831.jpg

It depends! Just because batch sparging works better with your equipment doesn't mean it'll work better on someone else's. And just because fly-sparging works better on my equipment doesn't mean it'll work better on someone else's.

I use a simple manifold to shower hot water onto the mash, very similar to the manifold I use to filter the wort out of the cooler.

Click to expand...

That manifold is just showering water on top of...water (or wort). A shower isn't even necessary there, the couple of inches of water above the grain prevent the grain bed from being disturbed.. Some just ladle it in with a saucepot...works fine.

But trust me on the comfort-soft waistband.

It's an interesting read in some of the brewing books I've got. Although I really don't understand how one is different than the other, except for the potential to compact the grain bed, but I think that is a potential for either. Also channeling of water can be a concern...

I wish I could comment on the underwear thing, but the only time I forgot to check my efficiency is the day that I wore my thong while brewing. Sorry.

SpanishCastleAle said:

It depends! Just because batch sparging works better with your equipment doesn't mean it'll work better on someone else's. And just because fly-sparging works better on my equipment doesn't mean it'll work better on someone else's.


That manifold is just showering water on top of...water (or wort). A shower isn't even necessary there, the couple of inches of water above the grain prevent the grain bed from being disturbed.. Some just ladle it in with a saucepot...works fine.

But trust me on the comfort-soft waistband.

Click to expand...

True true... no shower needed if you have 1-2" of water above the grain bed... just water on water. I dont sprinkle, just a 1/2" return line to pour the water in at the water surface.

The sprinkling thing is just perpetuated by the HB books, which also recommend 1-2" of water above the grain bed during the sparge... apparently they never really thought about the sprinkling then being a non issue in that case.

Consider this as well. If you arent using a rotating sort of sparge arm, you arent even sprinkling the water evenly, again defeating the supposed purpose of sprinkling water, right? You just keep sprinkling it in one area, and not in others.

The Pol said:

I fly sparge because that is howe my system is set up, and it is hands off. I dont have to transfer water, stir, drain... and repeat or whatever. I turn on a pump and open 3 valves, walk away, 30 mins. later is it complete. The HLT is dry, the MLT is dry and my BK is full. I mean, it is hands off.

Click to expand...

Preach it!

Chosenwon said:

Preach it!

Click to expand...

Some systems arent built this way though, and some volume calculations are not this accurate. I used to end up with a gallon or so left in my HLT or MLT or both when I had reached my pre-boil volume in my BK. It wasnt hands off.

I just kept track of the #s so that I could turn it on to sparge and walk away. When I get back the pump is running, the tanks are empty and I flip the switch to boil. Again, only because I built/planned it that way.

The sprinkling thing is just perpetuated by the HB books, which also recommend 1-2" of water above the grain bed during the sparge... apparently they never really thought about the sprinkling then being a non issue in that case.

Click to expand...

Recently I've been thinking that much of reason for 'tiered' systems was fear of HSA...however HSA has been all but debunked. But I digress...

brrman said:

nopants...

Click to expand...

Correct, kilt FTW.

Before this thread devolves even deeper into inane drivel and the pertinent technical conversation get completely and totally buried under six pages of crap , I think the chosen method of sparging is dictated by the brewer's system. I don't have a sculpture or brewstand to facilitate a fly-sparge, so I choose to batch sparge with 80% as my baseline efficiency.

With any method there are tradeoffs:

-fly sparging necessitates a mashout to cease further enzymatic activity during the lengthier process, preserving the wort profile as the brewer intended.

- batch sparging isn't quite as 'set it and forget it'.

YMMV, as always.

SpanishCastleAle said:

Recently I've been thinking that much of reason for 'tiered' systems was fear of HSA...however HSA has been all but debunked. But I digress...

Click to expand...

How so? Your statement intrigues me.

The Pol said:

I turn on a pump and open 3 valves, walk away, 30 mins. later is it complete. The HLT is dry, the MLT is dry and my BK is full. I mean, it is hands off.

Click to expand...

geez - you might as well just go buy commercial beer then. I kid, I kid.

I like the hands on part of batch sparging personally.

AZ_IPA said:

geez - you might as well just go buy commercial beer then. I kid, I kid.

I like the hands on part of batch sparging personally.

Click to expand...

I used to love hands on brewing... I kept messing it up, so I engineered myself out.

There is another thing about fly sparging - no need for a giant cooler, especially when brewing 10 gal batches.

Scooby_Brew said:

There is another thing about fly sparging - no need for a giant cooler, especially when brewing 10 gal batches.

Click to expand...

Dude this thread is not about the virtues of fly or batch sparging, please re-read the op. He simply asked the difference between the two.

Conroe said:

Batch spaging is better!

Click to expand...

Here is the culprit! Get him!

How so? Your statement intrigues me.

Click to expand...

To add more inane drivel I was thinking that one of the main reasons for tiered systems was so you could move the wort around from vessel to vessel without pumps and would avoid HSA because you weren't splashing it around. It's a fairly gentle transfer. But it takes work to set it up in the first place and it takes work to get all the liquor up to the top tier.

But since HSA isn't a concern, a little splashing won't hurt and it may be less work overall to just move the wort from vessel to vessel by ladling/pouring or other method that causes a little splashing...thus eliminating or reducing the need for tiers in the first place.

fly sparging necessitates a mashout to cease further enzymatic activity during the lengthier process, preserving the wort profile as the brewer intended.

Click to expand...

Help a non-batcher understand...how does a mashout preserve wort profile in fly but not in batch? I assume by 'profile' you mean 'fermentability' and I agree that a mashout to some degree (imo >160 is enough...we're only trying to denature the beta-amylase right?) will 'lock-in' the fermentability even though the alpha-amylase is still working...even @ 170 F. Or is it mostly just a matter of time-spent-sparging? I'm at a rolling boil well within an hour of starting the vorlauf so in my case fly-sparging isn't that much lengthier of a process.

Help a non-batcher understand...how does a mashout preserve wort profile in fly but not in batch? I assume by 'profile' you mean 'fermentability' and I agree that a mashout to some degree (imo >160 is enough...we're only trying to denature the beta-amylase right?) will 'lock-in' the fermentability even though the alpha-amylase is still working...even @ 170 F. Or is it mostly just a matter of time-spent-sparging? I'm at a rolling boil well within an hour of starting the vorlauf so in my case fly-sparging isn't that much lengthier of a process.

Click to expand...

As a batch sparger, I hope you'll accept my hack hypothesis.

Because the rate of the sparge is ostensibly slower with a fly/continuous sparge at conversion temps, it is possible that beta - amylase can continue working on the wort. The mashout denatures the enzymes, 'fixing' the fermentability so to speak.

By heating the sparge water to 185° (or whatever it takes to get the grainbed to 168°), a batch sparger is, in effect, conducting a mashout with the sparge infusion.

The Pol said:

Here is a pretty comprehensive run down of both sparge procedures along with some pros and cons... good read.

Batch vs Fly is as rediculous as Aluminum vs Stainless, Pellet vs Leaf, HERMS vs RIMS or Chill vs No Chill. None of them, really matter or make that big of a difference. You will probably screw something up that is simple, that would contribute more to a difference in your final product than any of these differences combined.

People like thier soap boxes... but none of the above make an appreciable difference in your beer. Do what fits your style or your system. After all, this is just a hobby.

Sparging Methods | Brewer's Friend

Click to expand...

Rob,

Great link! Lots of good tools and info there. Thanks.

Rob (also)

A mash out can do more than stop beta-amylase, it can increase conversion efficiency. I believe the added stir can expose starches that were not easily reached during the mash. With alpha amylase in hyper drive they get converted in the short rest. That's not a lautering efficiency increase, it's the good stuff.

As far a fermentability goes I've had better luck adjusting the grain bill than using mash temps. It may be because I use a thiner mash that makes more fermentable wort anyway.

Using both a mash out and double batch sparge may be worth 6-8 points. Is it worth the extra 20-30 minutes? I don't know I guess that depends on how much grain and time I have on hand, but what is worth it is being able to hit my predicted gravity within three points.

wildwest450 said:

I'm not going to debate fly vs batch they are both fine ways of making beer. But please be so kind as to tell me how one way of rinsing grains makes "better" beer than another??

Click to expand...

Try thinking from the other side. Is there anything that could make a beer worse? I can think of oversparging, sparging too hot, changing the conversion profile during an extended sparge etc.

I have no doubt that I could have screwed up somewhere with my batch sparge attempts, and that adversely affected the quality of the brews.
As it happened repeatedly I gave up on batch sparging, and went back to fly.

Doesn't mean that others will be affected in the same way, which I said in my original post.

-a.

ajf said:

Try thinking from the other side. Is there anything that could make a beer worse? I can think of oversparging, sparging too hot, changing the conversion profile during an extended sparge etc.

I have no doubt that I could have screwed up somewhere with my batch sparge attempts, and that adversely affected the quality of the brews.
As it happened repeatedly I gave up on batch sparging, and went back to fly.

Doesn't mean that others will be affected in the same way, which I said in my original post.

-a.

Click to expand...

Wow, some brewing software will take care of all those problems. It's not as hard as you make it out to be. Also all the above mentioned problems can be made with fly sparging.

I don't disagree, but why should I change? I've had about 5 batches with a batch sparge, and over 300 batches fly sparging. I find fly sparging to be easier and gives better results; and with my current equipment it only takes a few minutes longer.
I don't think I said that batch sparging was particularly hard, just that I probably screwed up somewhere.
I also never said that the potential problems that can affect wort quality were specific to batch sparging. I was just answering your question. Oversparging and extended sparge times are much more likely to occur with a fly sparge as I'm sure you know.

-a.

Yambor44 said:

Rob,

Great link! Lots of good tools and info there. Thanks.

Rob (also)

Click to expand...

No problem, I knew that piece was there, because I wrote it.

Conroe said:

A mash out can do more than stop beta-amylase, it can increase conversion efficiency. I believe the added stir can expose starches that were not easily reached during the mash. With alpha amylase in hyper drive they get converted in the short rest. That's not a lautering efficiency increase, it's the good stuff.

As far a fermentability goes I've had better luck adjusting the grain bill than using mash temps. It may be because I use a thiner mash that makes more fermentable wort anyway.

Using both a mash out and double batch sparge may be worth 6-8 points. Is it worth the extra 20-30 minutes? I don't know I guess that depends on how much grain and time I have on hand, but what is worth it is being able to hit my predicted gravity within three points.

Click to expand...

This came up in another thread and in digging for info I found a post by Kaiser regarding this. I think Kaiser did experiments with cold-water sparges and his efficiency didn't take nearly the hit you would expect. Here's a comment he made in this thread basically agreeing with what you just said, just in a different context:

Kaiser said:

Just to clarify my claim: It (the sparge water temp) should not affect your efficiency if all the conversion is done in the mash. But especially when mashing thick you may not convert all the starches in the mash and subsequent conversion happens during lautering. This is when you see the sparge temp affecting efficiency. The hotter the faster and more complete that conversion will be.

Click to expand...

Totally agree on hitting the OG @ volume.

flyangler18 said:

By heating the sparge water to 185° (or whatever it takes to get the grainbed to 168°), a batch sparger is, in effect, conducting a mashout with the sparge infusion.

Click to expand...

It's not even that, really. You;d need to hold the temp at 170ish for 20 min. in order to truly denature enzymes. I dunno about you, but I've never done that. The reason that there's less need for batch spargers to denature enzymes is becasue batch sparging goes so much more quickly than your average fly sparge, you bring the wort to a boil much more quickly, which obviously will denature enzymes.

wildwest450 said:

Dude this thread is not about the virtues of fly or batch sparging, please re-read the op. He simply asked the difference between the two.

Click to expand...

Isn't his statement stating a difference?