I currently use a rotating sparge arm and I'm happy with my efficiency but I know it could definitely be better. How many folks have gone from one to the other (either way) and which do you prefer more? Just looking at batch sparging, it seems that you collect more liquid overall which means more boil time.
Question on sparging (fly vs batch)
- Thread starter surf71
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
KarlHungus76
Well-Known Member
Maybe more boil time, but certainly much less sparge time.
I don't collect more liquid than I would if I was fly sparging. I collect just the amount of liquid I need to boil to my target volume after a 75-minute (usually) boil. Actually I don't recall ever hearing that the common wisdom was that you'd collect more runnings for batch sparging.
I've never fly sparged so I can't offer a comparison. But I like batch sparging because it's easier, quicker, and you don't have to worry about things like extracting tannins from the grain in the last runnings.
I've never fly sparged so I can't offer a comparison. But I like batch sparging because it's easier, quicker, and you don't have to worry about things like extracting tannins from the grain in the last runnings.
I started with fly sparging, and tried batch sparging a few times to see if I could save some time on brew day.
Batch sparging was slightly faster, but I lost about 5% in efficiency, and I found it more difficult because I wasn't used to it. With my 5g MLT, I couldn't brew a 5g batch with an OG > 1.060 with a batch sparge, whereas I could get up to 1.075 with a fly sparge.
If I didn't have a false bottom, I would batch sparge. The one thing I did that improved my efficiency considerably (with a fly sparge) was a mash out by adding some near boiling water and stirring it in really well before starting the sparge, raising the grain bed temperature up to about 165. This increased my mash/lauter efficiency from 75% to 85%
-a.
Batch sparging was slightly faster, but I lost about 5% in efficiency, and I found it more difficult because I wasn't used to it. With my 5g MLT, I couldn't brew a 5g batch with an OG > 1.060 with a batch sparge, whereas I could get up to 1.075 with a fly sparge.
If I didn't have a false bottom, I would batch sparge. The one thing I did that improved my efficiency considerably (with a fly sparge) was a mash out by adding some near boiling water and stirring it in really well before starting the sparge, raising the grain bed temperature up to about 165. This increased my mash/lauter efficiency from 75% to 85%
-a.
forstmeister
Well-Known Member
Equipment will dictate your method usually. I use a bazooka screen in my mash tun and found that I get significantly better efficiency with a batch sparge due to channeling when fly sparging. A false bottom will usually achieve better efficiency with a properly done fly sparge.
I have a 10 gallon igloo with a false bottom. I started out fly sparging, but have recently started batch. For me, it has been a desire to simplify my brew day. Batch sparging really is easy and foolproof (thank you Denny Conn). I don't end up with any more wort to boil, and I can easily rectify my loss in efficiency with a finer crush or by adding more base malt. For me, it is the way to go.
I really think either fly or batch works equally well, it boils down (lol) to personal preference.
I really think either fly or batch works equally well, it boils down (lol) to personal preference.
I use a cpvc manifold in my 10gal cooler and batch sparge, only hit between 65-70% efficiency, sure wish I could get those numbers up.
First AG, 65%, pretty poor crush, added strike water at 169* in 2 equal batches
Second AG, 69%, crush much better for sure, added strike water at 183* in 2 equal batches
Third AG, 69%, great crush, same as second
Toy4Rick
First AG, 65%, pretty poor crush, added strike water at 169* in 2 equal batches
Second AG, 69%, crush much better for sure, added strike water at 183* in 2 equal batches
Third AG, 69%, great crush, same as second
Toy4Rick
I have a 5gal round mash tun with false bottom. With larger grain bills a double batch sparge will barely get me to preboil volumes. It's also difficult to stir a completely full cooler. That's a total of vorlauf 3 times. Add stirring and a 10 min rest for each sparge. I find it easier to vorlauf once and then do a continuous sparge until I get my preboil volume. It takes me the same amount of time either way. I get about 8% more efficiency with fly. My next upgrade will be to no-sparge.
There's no reason the amount of wort you boil should be any different between the 2 methods. If it is, you're doing batch sparging wrong! I started out fly sparging, then switched to batch. I've batch sparged 425 batches now and I have no desire to do it any other way. I average 85% efficiency and make award winning beer.
I'd say your next upgrade should be a bigger mash tun!
Agreed. I'll need that to go no-sparge!
y2jrock60
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2009
- Messages
- 100
- Reaction score
- 5
I started out fly sparging because I thought it would be more efficient than batch sparging. The longer process and extra equipment tricked me into believing that. However, once I got my keggle and started making 10 gallon batches, lifting the fly sparge water pot above my mashtun became unfeasible. I decided to give batch sparging a go. I was pleasantly surprised by the results. My efficiency rose, surpassing my estimated Beersmith gravity by a few points, and the process was easier. Also, I'm not boiling anymore water than I did when fly sparging. I usually mash with around 5 gallons, do a 2 gallon mashout, then batch sparge with ~8 gallons.
Another reason I decided to give batch sparging a try came after talking to long time homebrewers at a local beer meeting. Almost all of the seasoned homebrewers batch sparged. Here is basically what they said, "you get about the same efficiency batch sparging and it's easier".
I'm definitely not going back. I've spilled 170 degree sparge water on myself numerous times while fly sparging. I recently purchased a pump, but it's still easier to just pump batch sparge water into my mash tun.
Another reason I decided to give batch sparging a try came after talking to long time homebrewers at a local beer meeting. Almost all of the seasoned homebrewers batch sparged. Here is basically what they said, "you get about the same efficiency batch sparging and it's easier".
I'm definitely not going back. I've spilled 170 degree sparge water on myself numerous times while fly sparging. I recently purchased a pump, but it's still easier to just pump batch sparge water into my mash tun.
425 batches...that is impressive sir:rockin: What is your typical batch size? Thanks!
I doubt you want to use my general usage for yourself, but I use about 6 qt near boiling water for a 10 lb grain bill mashed at 1 qt per lb at 150F.
You probably mash hotter, in which case you wouldn't need as much water. You probably mash thinner, in which case you will need more water, and the thermal mass of my MLT is probably different than yours in which case you would need more or less water.
I use Promash to perform the strike and mash-out calculations, but because I pre-heat the tun when doughing in, I specify the thermal mass of the tun as 0. This works well for the strike water temperature. (I heat the strike water about 10 degrees hotter than the calculator says, pour in in the MLT, wait for the temperature to drop to the calculated temperature, and stir in the grains. I always hit the correct mash temperature without any problem.
For the mash out, I tell Promash I want to raise the temperature to 168, and dial down the infusion water temperature to about 205F. Then I round off the qt required to something that I can measure easily. This always gives me something pretty close to 165.
One of these days, I may write a program to calculate everything accurately, but that's pretty low on my list of priorities.
-a.
98% of the time I brew 5.5 gal. batches.
Similar threads
