98% efficiency. Is this possible?

SSBrew - 728
Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
F

Fatt

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
52
Reaction score
1
Location
Las Vegas
So I'm wondering if I did my math wrong, but I've double checked by hand, and by online calculators. I somehow got 98% efficiency with my system and I'm wondering if this is even possible, or if anyone has had a similar experience. Don't get me wrong, if it's right then that's fantastic but I'd prefer to be consistent around my normal 80-85% so I know what to expect. Check it out.

Grainbill
Maris Otter- 6lb
Crystal 60L- 1lb 10oz
Munich 10L- 1lb 10oz
Pale chocolate- 9oz
Black Patent- 6oz
Chocolate- 4oz

Total grainbill- 10lb 7oz

Mashed with 14qts, sparged with 24 qts to collect 7.2 gallons wort at a corrected gravity of 1.051. Boiled till I had 5.75 gallons at which the gravity was 1.065. (65x5.75 = 373points) and the 100% potential is 1.069 for 5.5 gal or (69x5.5 = 379).... 373/379=0.98 or 98%

Am I wrong or is this real or is this some kind of fluke? Input?
 
Well seeing how maximum potential is tested in lab environments then yes it is possible. You can always go over procedures to make sure you read the right number (calibrate your hydro, read the bottom of the miniscus, correct for temperature, etc). I'd imagine though you'd have to have a very fine crush to get those numbers but many people regularly get in the 90s
 
There are many possible reasons, but the most likely answer is that there is a measurement error somewhere along the way.

Did you personally measure all your grain before milling it? How sure are you about those numbers? That is the mostly likely source of error, assuming your gravity readings are correct.

The other likely candidate is the volume measurement. Maybe you took your volume reading when the wort was still hot, and thus it would read a bit higher due to thermal expansion.
 
Yea I corrected for temps and all that good stuff. Read from the meniscus and what not. I guess I'm just blown away by the 98%. My last three brews were 76, 83, 80 and then a 98 from nowhere.
 
Also yea I measure my own grain at the lhbs and mill it myself at home. Like I said, I've over this a billion times and I can't find an error.
 
I'm much more inclined to believe there's an error somewhere. Have you checked and made sure your hydrometer is still accurate, that the paper hasn't slipped? Was the wort cooled to pitching temp before you took the hydro reading?


Rev.
 
Hydrometer is still accurate. Reads zero with water. I always correct my readings too. Pretty much always have my thermometer on hand which I know is accurate as well.
 
I just hit an ungodly number too and know in my bones I've got an error somewhere.

9lbs 2-row
1-lb Munich
1-lb Crystal-60L

6 gallons with an OG of 1.06 would give me an efficiency of 111%, which of course would mean I've broken the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.

I've either discovered a technology that will save the world, or the brew store slipped me a little extra in the grain bill. Still, I've struggled with my BIAB setup to get to 70%, and my post-mash grain weight was only 12.5lbs so regardless of the free 2-row my results remain anomalous.
 
How did you mill the grain? Do you use a flour mill? I use a Champion set very close to the course setting. By changing it towards fine the efficiency goes up along with the astringency so I shoot for about 80%.
 
You can get in the 90's, but 98 is pushing practical limits.

You've got around 1.3 gallons of wort absorbed by the grain plus whatever dead space you have. The gravity of that wort is whatever your final sparge was. For there to be only 6 points of sugar left in that wort, you would have had to sparge down to around 1.004. That isn't going to happen with any reasonable number of batch sparges and fly spargers usually stop well before then.

Do you have the actual lot numbers and potentials for your grains or are you going off averages? That could certainly be a source of a couple percent error. Combine that with the inherent error range of a hydrometer and you might be 98% +/- 5% or something.
 
Well, It may be highly improbable. Though 90's aren't too rare of an occurrence, I think my personal best was 92%. Typically, however, I get into the high 70's low 80's on most batches. Even with a large margin of error, that is some killer extraction, congrats.
 
111% effeciency makes you a minor deity of fermentation, and subject to worship and praise:rockin::D
 
That would be incredible, and I believe this smiley fits such results quite well:
xx9pqzs.gif
 
brewfreeordie said:
I just hit an ungodly number too and know in my bones I've got an error somewhere.

9lbs 2-row
1-lb Munich
1-lb Crystal-60L

6 gallons with an OG of 1.06 would give me an efficiency of 111%, which of course would mean I've broken the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.

I've either discovered a technology that will save the world, or the brew store slipped me a little extra in the grain bill. Still, I've struggled with my BIAB setup to get to 70%, and my post-mash grain weight was only 12.5lbs so regardless of the free 2-row my results remain anomalous.
Click to expand...

I plugged those numbers into an online spreadsheet and got 90%.
 
I remember a podcast with Bob Hansen who is the tech manager at Briess. I believe when malt is tested for content the scientist shoot for 80%. So if its 37 ppg that should only be 80% of the available sugar. Sorry I don't recall exactly what they said. Correct me if I'm wrong.
 
I am in the middle of buying equipment for my brewery. I am taking a trip to Cincinnati to look at a system that uses a mash filter to achieve 98% efficiency. This particular brewery makes damned good beer so there obviously aren't any astringency issues.
 
I've heard that it max's out basically at about 92% but I personally have only gotten about 90% before on lower gravity beers.
 
I'm a glass half full kind of guy and think you're just a rockstar. Screw science!
 
It's nice too my thread get a bump months later. Lol. Imma glass half full kind guy too but at 111%, the glass is overflowing.
 
Sparge water is almost double the volume of the mash water. I too get good efficiency with smaller grain bills, but they're in the low to mid 80s. You must have some good fly sparge system to rinse the grains that well.

My guess is you probably got great efficiency, but was a few % off in a number of different areas

Think if you were 3% off on a volume measurement, 1% on a hydrometer reading, 2% from temperature when you took a hydrometer reading, and 4% off weighing out grains. That's realistic. Typically, being a little off on each of these readings/measurements wouldn't amount to much as some would come in on the negative side, and some on the positive side and everything would average out. If they all lean one way, you could be looking at a fairly significant difference. I don't know if those %ages would just add up... been a while since I took calc or algebra... but if they don't add up to 10%, it wouldn't be far off. 88-90% is realistic for a homebrewer using a 5:3 ratio of sparge to mash water and a good crush.
 
i think i need to take some lessons from the 90+ % brewers. i could never hope to ascend to mt olympus and achieve 95+...
 
Bamsdealer said:
Sparge water is almost double the volume of the mash water. I too get good efficiency with smaller grain bills, but they're in the low to mid 80s. You must have some good fly sparge system to rinse the grains that well.

My guess is you probably got great efficiency, but was a few % off in a number of different areas

Think if you were 3% off on a volume measurement, 1% on a hydrometer reading, 2% from temperature when you took a hydrometer reading, and 4% off weighing out grains. That's realistic. Typically, being a little off on each of these readings/measurements wouldn't amount to much as some would come in on the negative side, and some on the positive side and everything would average out. If they all lean one way, you could be looking at a fairly significant difference. I don't know if those %ages would just add up... been a while since I took calc or algebra... but if they don't add up to 10%, it wouldn't be far off. 88-90% is realistic for a homebrewer using a 5:3 ratio of sparge to mash water and a good crush.
Click to expand...

I really do feel like my fly sparge system is pretty efficient. It took me a while to figure it out to and really dial it in. Now that I have my methods down I consistently get 90%+ efficiencies. And I agree with the Sparge to mash ratio. Rinsing the grains as best you can is prime. I crush myself and usually go a little more fine than I think is normal and I SLOWLY fly sparge. Generally takes about 1 to 1.5 hours or so.
 
My efficiency hovers around 95%. One thing to keep in mind, is that this is really based on the ~85% convertability of the grain as measured by the maltster. This is the value used by the various software packages, and it various from malt to malt. So 100% is in reality 85% (in this example) and is possible (well maybe not quite 100%).

ps. I crush the s##t out of my grain
 
pjj2ba said:
ps. I crush the s##t out of my grain
Click to expand...

Haha me too. My MLT I built myself and the only time I've ever had it get stuck was with a pumpkin lager beer I made. That damn pumpkin is some sticky stuff.
 

Similar threads

A
Efficiency Gremlins Persist
Replies
6
Views
1K
aceofspades9911
A
P
98% measured mash efficiency?
Replies
10
Views
2K
Pintabone
P
Blackdirt_cowboy
First All Grain Brew - Horrid Efficiency
Replies
31
Views
2K
eric19312
eric19312
J
Grainfather - Pre-Boil Gravity, Efficiency and ABV Issues
Replies
6
Views
7K
joegbeer
J
S
Is my fermentation stuck, or is it as finished as it will get?
Replies
9
Views
1K
Sideburnz
S
SSBrew 300

Latest posts

Back
Top