Happy HolidaySs Giveaway - Last Sponsor Giveaway of the Year!

Come Enter the BrewDeals/FastFerment Giveaway!


Home Brew Forums > Home Brewing Beer > All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing > First AG - 95% efficiency - Am I the son of god or calculation mistake
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 09-27-2010, 12:47 AM   #1
lone_wolf
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 67
Default First AG - 95% efficiency - Am I the son of god or calculation mistake

Brethen, after mucking around with a handful of partial mashes I rustled up my first AG batch last night.
So everything went relatively smoothly - technique-wise I use what you could describe as a stovetop-stepmash - to explain:
Ingredients:
Pale 2 row - 4.5 pounds
Wheat - 0.8 pound
Roasted barley - 0.3 pounds
Chocolate Malt - 0.5 pound
Vienna Malt - 2 pounds
Mash Process:
30 minute mash of Pale, Vienna and Wheat in 10 litres @ 145f
30 minutes mash of Pale, Vienna and Wheat in 11 litres @ 155f
then add the Choc Malt and Roasted barley and mash the lot for 30 mins at 160f
"Lautering"
dump the grain bag into 8 litres of 180f degree water and leave it for another 20 minutes, drain the lot into boil kettle (I'll admit to applying a little pressure to the grain bag)

I ended up with 4 gallons of wort and reserved a little of that and let it cool overnight to 20c celcius for the OG test
And that was the interesting part - I get: 1070

based on my J Palmer PPG figures driven manual calculation that equates to 95% efficiency does it not??
I simply cannot/will not believe this - I expected something like 70%.
My assumption is that some overnight evaporation might have increased the OG sample a little - but surely not by a margin of 15 - 20%??

Is my hydrometer lying?

I appreciate that my mash schedule is relatively long - is in in fact possible to get this sort of efficiency with my caveman methods??

It would be great if someone could challenge my math before I quit my day job

thanks!

__________________
lone_wolf is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-27-2010, 01:03 AM   #2
Marsdude
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Fort Collins, CO, Colorado
Posts: 478
Liked 2 Times on 1 Posts

Default

Your hydrometer is fine - you actually are the Son of God.

Welcome, we have been waiting for you and have a lot of stuff we need you to deal with.

__________________
Shambles Brewing

You can tell by the look on their face -
this brew's a Shambles
Marsdude is offline
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-27-2010, 01:21 AM   #3
twoodward15
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: turnersville nj
Posts: 187
Default

It's looking like your calcs are off a bit and you may have gotten 85% efficiency.....which is normal. Good job for your first try though!!! Keep on doing it!

__________________
twoodward15 is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-27-2010, 01:26 AM   #4
lone_wolf
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 67
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by twoodward15 View Post
It's looking like your calcs are off a bit and you may have gotten 85% efficiency.....which is normal. Good job for your first try though!!! Keep on doing it!
Ok 85% relegates me to love child of Saint Peter status - can you please tell (me or point me) to your calculation method - I plugged my figures into this: http://www.brewersfriend.com/brewhouse-efficiency/ and it gave me 93%.
thanks
__________________
lone_wolf is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-27-2010, 01:31 AM   #5
pkeeler
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 740
Liked 4 Times on 3 Posts
Likes Given: 4

Default

Your hydrometer could be wrong, you could check it. Another possibility is that you collected less than 4 gal. I don't know if it is possible to get 95%, but I agree with you that it is unusual. I've heard on these forums that when wort sits after lautering it can stratify into different SGs at different depths. So, if you didn't stir well before drawing your sample, it is possible you got an unrepresentative sample. You will find out post boil.

__________________
pkeeler is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-27-2010, 01:31 AM   #6
pkeeler
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 740
Liked 4 Times on 3 Posts
Likes Given: 4

Default

BTW, I calculated it at 95% too.

__________________
pkeeler is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-27-2010, 01:33 AM   #7
pkeeler
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 740
Liked 4 Times on 3 Posts
Likes Given: 4

Default

Might want to check your receipt and make sure you didn't have extra grain.

__________________
pkeeler is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-27-2010, 01:37 AM   #8
lone_wolf
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 67
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pkeeler View Post
Your hydrometer could be wrong, you could check it. Another possibility is that you collected less than 4 gal. I don't know if it is possible to get 95%, but I agree with you that it is unusual. I've heard on these forums that when wort sits after lautering it can stratify into different SGs at different depths. So, if you didn't stir well before drawing your sample, it is possible you got an unrepresentative sample. You will find out post boil.
Only one way to find out about the hydrometer - in fact I should have tested the damn thing in 20c water before ranting about it possibly being at fault

interesting remark about strata generating in the wort - thing is I set the sample aside in a glass and then the following morning tipped that into the hydrometer tube, so it was thoroughly re-agitated at point I took the reading.

I collected 4 gallons (a smidgeon under 15 litres to be exact). I always make a point post-lauter of dumping collected wort into my (marked) bottling bucket for volume measurement.

maybe I just need to accept my fate and take my place in the holy trinity
__________________
lone_wolf is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-27-2010, 03:00 AM   #9
ajf
Senior Member
HBT_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
ajf's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Long Island
Posts: 4,643
Liked 99 Times on 93 Posts
Likes Given: 39

Default

Are you using Imperial gallons or US gallons for your volume measurements?

-a.

__________________

There are only 10 types of people in this world. Those that understand binary, and those that don't.

ajf is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-27-2010, 03:34 AM   #10
lone_wolf
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 67
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ajf View Post
Are you using Imperial gallons or US gallons for your volume measurements?

-a.
US Gallons - as I say I collected a little under 15 litres and translated that to 4 Gallons for my calculations.
I'm thinking of targeting > 100% efficiency on my next brew at this rate
__________________
lone_wolf is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply



Quick Reply
Message:
Options
Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Efficiency Calculation Mistake? Bmorebrew All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing 5 04-26-2010 10:55 AM
Efficiency calculation for my weird first AG brew Rick500 All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing 3 07-14-2009 03:17 AM
efficiency calculation correct? planenut All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing 3 09-24-2008 05:32 PM
Efficiency Calculation in Beer Smith? Aaron1983 All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing 23 04-14-2008 03:10 AM
Efficiency Calculation Jayfro21 All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing 3 11-18-2007 05:00 PM



Newest Threads

LATEST SPONSOR DEALS