Is 2 vessel system basically no-sparge?

So I'm looking on what changes I want to make as I re-build my BK as a better bottom drain pot (basically cutting the bottom out of a keg, using the existing sanke port and a tri-clover clamp to make a nice big bottom drain). My original plan was just to re-build my HLT and BK in this configuration to have a much easier clean in place setup for those two.

My current MLT is a 10 gallon cooler, I love how it holds temp, would like it to be bottom drain as well, but I don't want to have to deal with a keg as a MLT; due to temperature holding ability and the issues with emptying it. Currently I can easily carry the whole MLT out to the compost pile.

So I'm thinking of building something Brutus 20ish. One pump, perhaps having the system 2-tier, with the MLT higher than the BK so I can gravity drain from the MLT and pump from the BK up to the MLT for recirculation. Any thoughts on this type of setup?

2 vessel doesn't mean no sparge. It could, if you didn't want to sparge. But your efficiency will suffer if you do that. Since it sounds like you're doing 5 gal batches, just collect the first runnings in a bottling bucket. After you add the sparge water to the MLT, then drain through some tubing from the bucket to the BK. Gravity drain the second runnings from the MLT strait to BK.

I had a brutus 20. Continuous batch sparge. You put all of your sparge water in play at once and recirculate for about half an hour. You can get 70% efficiency this way. Sometimes more.

Bottom drain is the way to go! Your going to love the ease of a bottom drain. Primes easy. Easy to clean. I did the same thing and CIP is simple.

Dgonza9 said:

I had a brutus 20. Continuous batch sparge. You put all of your sparge water in play at once and recirculate for about half an hour. You can get 70% efficiency this way. Sometimes more.

Bottom drain is the way to go! Your going to love the ease of a bottom drain. Primes easy. Easy to clean. I did the same thing and CIP is simple.

Click to expand...

Honestly at our volume, efficiency doesn't matter. Whats an extra 2# of grain? $4 tops? (with my bulk price its $1.42) I get about 80% with a 90minute sparge on my "traditional" system. I almost wish I went with a brutus 20 system because its quicker, and honestly it seems more predictable/consistent.

Go for it man. Honestly, I may switch eventually.

HHP said:

Honestly at our volume, efficiency doesn't matter. Whats an extra 2# of grain? $4 tops? (with my bulk price its $1.42) I get about 80% with a 90minute sparge on my "traditional" system. I almost wish I went with a brutus 20 system because its quicker, and honestly it seems more predictable/consistent.

Go for it man. Honestly, I may switch eventually.

Click to expand...

I don't think Brutus 20 is really any faster. It's about the same as a normal batch sparge. The hard part is that you have to equalize the flow between your two vessels so you don't drain the mash tun too much or put too much water in play into your tun. I actually considered getting an autosparge at one point.

It's a great system, though.

Thanks guys! I do 5 gallon batches, but sometimes I like to do 10 gallons, which is why I tend away from BIAB as it is hard to do a 10 gallon batch.

Am I right in saying that a brutus 20 setup makes step mashes in a cooler possible? Also should I start mashing out at 45 minutes or so?

I figure I can just make sure my pump up to the MLT is going slower than the drain, that way I always tend to have more in the BK during the sparge.

Since my cooler is currently a side drain with dip tube (and stainless mesh inside) would there be any good way to make it a bottom drain without complicating the system too much and get less dead space?

I recirculate between both vessels for the entire mash, heating occasionally as needed. Flow matching is pretty easy. I set my mash valve and leave it, all adjustments are made with the pump valve. Just monitor you sight glass to keep it balanced. I used to use a cooler MLT also, but switched to a Blichmann because I like shiny things. Also this makes me more flexible for 5 an 10 gallons. For 5 gal I put all water in the mash tun and recirculate, firing the mash burner for temp adjustments. For 10 gal I split the water between both vessels and fire BK burner for temp adjustments. Small footprint, easy to use, I love my Brutus 20.

conpewter said:

Thanks guys! I do 5 gallon batches, but sometimes I like to do 10 gallons, which is why I tend away from BIAB as it is hard to do a 10 gallon batch.

Am I right in saying that a brutus 20 setup makes step mashes in a cooler possible? Also should I start mashing out at 45 minutes or so?

I figure I can just make sure my pump up to the MLT is going slower than the drain, that way I always tend to have more in the BK during the sparge.

Since my cooler is currently a side drain with dip tube (and stainless mesh inside) would there be any good way to make it a bottom drain without complicating the system too much and get less dead space?

Click to expand...

You can do step mashes with brutus 20 as you can add heat through recirculation. I use a RIMS, so it's easy.

As for the bottom drain, I'm curious to hear what people say. I've not seen any designs for this, but it seems like more trouble than it's worth. I use a manifold with slits and then put it in a grain bag. No stuck sparges and dead space is pretty limited. I don't think it's worth it to try a bottom drain, but hey, to each his own.

Demon is right, you just watch the sight glass, but if you're recirculating 40 minutes as I used to, it's usually a bit off and I didn't like having to monitor mine, although it was pretty close most of the time. I wound up making a valve I used as a gauge for the pump and MT valve.

I kinda miss the brutus sometimes, although my new setup allows me to do Brutus if I want to.

Cool photo, thanks for the explanation; that'll come in handy when I'm designing this new setup.

As far as putting a bottom drain on a cooler, I guess it would be more trouble than it's worth, especially since my cooler MLT works fine as is, I just hate the deadspace.

With a brutus 20 if you are doing a bigger beer, is it a good idea to put the first runnings in a separate bucket as stated above, then run your sparge water from your BK through the MLT then re-combine in the BK? This way you leave less sugars in the grain and less concentrated wort in the MLT deadspace.

It's a good idea to get to know your system and what it can do. Brutus 20 is a great style of brewing for any beer. If you know what efficiencies you typically get, you can adjust the recipe accordingly.

Beersmith is a fantastic resource. I've really only started using it in the last 6 months or so, but the ease with which the software can scale a recipe to account for system lost, overall efficiency, batch size, etc., is really amazing.

Personally, I prefer to keep the brewing technique the same and adjust the recipe. But there's nothing at all wrong with collecting the runnings and doing a more typical sparge if you prefer that.

I suppose my thought was that I've topped out my MLT doing RIS or barleywines and am worried with not having enough space if my efficiency is significantly lower with a 2 vessel vs 3 vessel system.

I'm trying to understand the two vessel gravity/ pump system. so you heat your water to strike temp in in the mlt then add grain then turn pump on and recir. through bk and back up just to keep temp even. Then you turn off pump heat sparge water in bk then recir. Again?

Generally you start with your full volume of water in the BK, then you heat up to whatever temp you need for mash. Then you pump up to the mash tun and mash for one hour, during that time you can bring up your BK to mash-out temps. Then you start to let the mash tun drain into the BK, and the BK is pumped up to the mash tun. Once the wort is all consistent (I read 30 minutes or so) you let it all drain to the BK and start your boil.

Hmm. I don't get it why not just heat up the water in the mlt otherwise whats the pt. of it even having a burner

Mine wouldn't have a burner in the MLT, I'd be using my 10 gallon cooler.

kjones said:

Hmm. I don't get it why not just heat up the water in the mlt otherwise whats the pt. of it even having a burner

Click to expand...

My upper burner is only for five gallon batches. With those I do a full volume mash and recirculate with all liquid in the mash tun. I fire that burner for minor temp corrections. Nothing is in the boil kettle until its time to boil.

For 10 gallons I do as previously described and split the liquid between both vessels and recirculate across, firing the lower burner for temp correction.

Demon said:

My upper burner is only for five gallon batches. With those I do a full volume mash and recirculate with all liquid in the mash tun. I fire that burner for minor temp corrections. Nothing is in the boil kettle until its time to boil.

For 10 gallons I do as previously described and split the liquid between both vessels and recirculate across, firing the lower burner for temp correction.

Click to expand...

So you are recirculating during the whole mash time with the entire amount of water used in the batch? If wanted a true sparge and not just a "mash out" then a third vessel is required

conpewter said:

Generally you start with your full volume of water in the BK, then you heat up to whatever temp you need for mash. Then you pump up to the mash tun and mash for one hour, during that time you can bring up your BK to mash-out temps. Then you start to let the mash tun drain into the BK, and the BK is pumped up to the mash tun. Once the wort is all consistent (I read 30 minutes or so) you let it all drain to the BK and start your boil.

Click to expand...

So at the beginning of your sparge, you have the runnings from your mash going into your sparge water? You are then sparging with diluted runnings throughout your mash?

Just making sure I understand correctly? I've been contemplating the brutus 20 system.

broadbill said:

So at the beginning of your sparge, you have the runnings from your mash going into your sparge water? You are then sparging with diluted runnings throughout your mash?

Just making sure I understand correctly? I've been contemplating the brutus 20 system.

Click to expand...

That's the idea. It's called "continuous batch sparge." I've always been doing ten gallon batches so during the mash I only use the strike water and heat of the "sparge" water separately.

If you have a RIMS tube, recirculation, temp control, mash out, and sparge are really easy.

I eventually added a third vessel to do traditional batch sparging. Efficiency is a bit better, but honestly not tremendously different. Only thing I really love about my three vessel system are the bottom draining keggles and the BK dump valve for easy clean in place.

Give it a shot. This is a great way to brew.

I don't get the terminology "continuous batch sparge". If you mash with a reduced volume and then add additional water to the system to dilute the gravity, it's closer to no sparge. The only difference is that you've mashed at a lower ratio. Maybe something like "thick mash, no sparge" or "recirculating no sparge". I know it's not that important. In any case, this is pretty close to a single vessel BIAB no sparge system but getting more capacity by splitting between two vessels. You'd get the same result from two 10 gallon vessels or one 20 gallon (BIAB).

Bobby_M said:

I don't get the terminology "continuous batch sparge". If you mash with a reduced volume and then add additional water to the system to dilute the gravity, it's closer to no sparge. The only difference is that you've mashed at a lower ratio. Maybe something like "thick mash, no sparge" or "recirculating no sparge". I know it's not that important. In any case, this is pretty close to a single vessel BIAB no sparge system but getting more capacity by splitting between two vessels. You'd get the same result from two 10 gallon vessels or one 20 gallon (BIAB).

Click to expand...

But doesn't it just give you a way to mash out?

Bobby_M said:

... In any case, this is pretty close to a single vessel BIAB no sparge system but getting more capacity by splitting between two vessels. You'd get the same result from two 10 gallon vessels or one 20 gallon (BIAB).

Click to expand...

I agree, also no need to pull 20-30 lb bags out of the BK. Still will have some of the issues BIAB has with higher gravity beers. I plan to stick with the 3 vessel setup as I like to do 10 gallon batches of 1.060+ beers sometimes. And when I do RIS I go really high in gravity for 5 gallon batches.

I am thinking of doin a two vessel system. I am currently doin biab and love it but since I just ordered a pump for a plate chiller I figured I should try brewing with my pump too.

My idea is to use a pid temp controlled e mlt on top that is gravity fed into a propane bk then use the pump to recirculate to reach mash out temp after. Any thoughts?

Bobby_M said:

I don't get the terminology "continuous batch sparge". If you mash with a reduced volume and then add additional water to the system to dilute the gravity, it's closer to no sparge. The only difference is that you've mashed at a lower ratio. Maybe something like "thick mash, no sparge" or "recirculating no sparge". I know it's not that important. In any case, this is pretty close to a single vessel BIAB no sparge system but getting more capacity by splitting between two vessels. You'd get the same result from two 10 gallon vessels or one 20 gallon (BIAB).

Click to expand...

I gave you the wrong idea. You don't mash with a reduced volume. I generally mash at 1.25 quarts/lb. I recirculate through a RIMS and then heat the sparge water separately.

As to whether this is different than BIAB, that's tougher. I think that when you begin the sparge, you are doing more than just lifting the grains out of your full volume of water. The process starts with fresh water rinsing the grains. Over time, the two vessels equalize. I would say that's different than just lifting the grain basket in a BIAB and starting to boil. But I've never done BIAB, so maybe I don't understand the process.

I think "continuous batch sparge" is reasonably accurate. You have a batch of sparge water you introduce continuously.

I'm still trying to understand the process, could someone please tell me if this is correct.

mash as usual for your one hour or whatever recipe calls for. Then, instead of running off then sparging you add your sparge water and recirculate

To me, what makes a process "no sparge" is the fact that your total derived preboil wort is derived from a single homogeneous runoff (I know BIAB wort isn't run off but the definition still holds).

A fly sparge has the lauter process where wort runs off at high concentration and slowly gets lower and lower.

A batch sparge has discrete runoffs with concentrations that start high and get lower and lower with each addition of sparge water and runoff. This counts if you run off twice or three times or more.

I don't care how many vessels you use, if you use a voile bag, etc.... if the wort is all the same gravity when it comes out of the tun, or when you remove the grain bag, it's a no sparge process.

The only benefit to holding a mash at a reduced liquid volume is so that you can protect against pH swings by keeping a reasonable buffer in less than optimal water chemistry.

I guess the first part of your argument answers my ? Only one runoff. But I guess it could still be considered a sparge somewhat BC it is still introducing water at the end of the mash so it isn't instantly homogenous like it would be when you just lift a bag out?

It's the recirculation part the makes it homogeneous. If you laid all the water on top carefully and slowly drained it, that would be a fly sparge.

Bobby_M said:

.... if the wort is all the same gravity when it comes out of the tun, or when you remove the grain bag, it's a no sparge process.

Click to expand...

Thank-you Bobby. Finally a simple definition that I think we all can agree on.

kjones said:

I'm still trying to understand the process, could someone please tell me if this is correct.

mash as usual for your one hour or whatever recipe calls for. Then, instead of running off then sparging you add your sparge water and recirculate

Click to expand...

KJ - Think of it this way (your BK and HLT are combined as one)...
1 - Heat the initial mash-in volume OR total brewing volume (mash in and sparge) to mash-in temps, we'll say 153 deg in your HLT/BK.
2 - Pump or drain (depending if the MLT or HLT/BK is above) the mash-in volume into the MLT. Mix grains and mash for a period of time.
3 - Fill the HLT/BK to the appropriate volume if you didn't heat it all in the first step. Heat it to Mash-out/sparge temps.
4 - Depending on the configuration, which is on top, start to recirculate the total volume of water/wort between the two vessels. Continue until sparge temps are met.

Variations: (note times are subject an only for example purposes)
- You could, at step 4, drain the MLT into a temp vessel, and then either batch (close the valve add sparge water, stir and let the sparge sit for 20 mins per sparge) or fly (slowly drain/pump sparge water into the MLT for 60-ish mins, draining into your temp vessel) sparge. Once either of the sparge steps are complete, the wort will need to be transferred back to the HLT/BK for boiling.

The above is the process I am going to, haven't decided on which should go on top, MLT or HLT/BK though. Mine will be electric though.

Bobby_M said:

To me, what makes a process "no sparge" is the fact that your total derived preboil wort is derived from a single homogeneous runoff (I know BIAB wort isn't run off but the definition still holds).

A fly sparge has the lauter process where wort runs off at high concentration and slowly gets lower and lower.

A batch sparge has discrete runoffs with concentrations that start high and get lower and lower with each addition of sparge water and runoff. This counts if you run off twice or three times or more.

I don't care how many vessels you use, if you use a voile bag, etc.... if the wort is all the same gravity when it comes out of the tun, or when you remove the grain bag, it's a no sparge process.

The only benefit to holding a mash at a reduced liquid volume is so that you can protect against pH swings by keeping a reasonable buffer in less than optimal water chemistry.

Click to expand...

I understand now. It's making me question my typical practice now that I have 3 vessels. I had been draining the mash tun to a separate vessel, then putting all my sparge water into the mash tun, then recirculating for about 20 minutes, then draining and boiling.

I might get better efficiency if I split the sparge water into to two batch sparges. Stirred and let each one sit for 15-20 minutes, etc.

Dgonza9 said:

I might get better efficiency if I split the sparge water into to two batch sparges. Stirred and let each one sit for 15-20 minutes, etc.

Click to expand...

Better efficiency, yes.

But better beer? You'll have to see for yourself.

If your recipes are calculated for the efficiency you now get, and you're making good beer, is it worth readjusting the recipe to save a couple of bucks in grain. But most important, will it make better beer?

@ Dgonza9: Yeah, Bobby has a great write-up on his personal blog on his take. Good reading. See the links below his signature.

Thanks sd, that clarifies for me. I just ordered a pump and I already have a temp. Controlled electric mlt and I use propane for boiling so I think I'm gonna put them together to build this.

My plan is to put the elec mlt on top and add my water to it then set my pid to dough in temp then at the end of the mash add "sparge" water to bk and set temp on mlt to 170 then recir until I reach the temp. Least that's my idea anyway, I hope that works and its correct

I'm in the process of going from a traditional 3-vessel system to a 2-vessel system.

The "what to call it" question has me stumped but I would have to say that in my opinion it is "no sparge".

I'm starting with my full volume of water and recirculating through a RIMS tube to maintain mash temp. If the liquid never leaves the loop and is just recirculating, I don't see how it's a "true sparge". In a fly sparge or batch sparge, the sparge water is added to the mash and then drained either slowly (fly) or all at once (batch). With a 2-vessel system, it never drains until the final transfer to the kettle.

AnOldUR said:

Better efficiency, yes.

But better beer? You'll have to see for yourself.

If your recipes are calculated for the efficiency you now get, and you're making good beer, is it worth readjusting the recipe to save a couple of bucks in grain. But most important, will it make better beer?

Click to expand...

Good point, there. I get low 72% or so with recirculating sparge. I'm going to do some experimenting now that I have three vessels. I've always made good beer no sparge, so you are absolutely right. The efficiency does bother me a bit, though.

I don't think the definition of the word sparge says that it has to be a totally separate process like everyone is arguing