Brutus 20 Constant Recirculation Direct Fired Mash Process Review

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.

Lil' Sparky

Cowboys EAC
Joined
Feb 6, 2006
Messages
3,952
Reaction score
107
Location
Honolulu, HI
I said I was going to try it out, and I did today. I posted a bunch of pics here, and the process is explained in detail here.

Overview
I used my 3-tier stand, but since CRDFM only requires 2 vessels I only used the bottom 2 tiers. I placed the MLT on the top and the BK/HLT on the bottom. The Brutus 20 uses a single tier design with 2 pumps, I just let the MLT gravity drain to the BK and used a pump to recirculate back up to the MLT.

I brewed a hefeweizen with pre-crushed grains from AHS (the BC is still under the tree!) I usually get ~ 65% effeciency. Today I got 58% efficiency, but I was also 1/2 gal short, and sometimes I'm a little lower on wheat beers anyway. More total sparge water might have helped a little.

I recirculated for ~ 35 mins. That was enough to reach specific gravity equilibrium between the MLT and BK.

Evaluation
The overall work involved was slightly less than batch sparging. Once the sparge started, you just let it recirculate until you're done. I didn't have to fiddle with the flow rates much - only 2 or 3 adjustments. I just tried to keep the BK within a qt of where it started, which was easy with my thermosights.

It DOES require at least one pump (2 for single tier setups), but makes up for that by eliminating the HLT and its associated burner and plumbing.

It required slightly more time vs batch sparging, maybe an extra 10-20 mins, but was still less than or equal to fly sparging.

I probably lost a little efficiency, but it's hard to tell how much. You really need to do identical brews to see for sure. I've never been a super high efficiency brewer anyway, but those of you who are probably won't like that fact. I'll do it again after I incorporate my Barley Crusher and see how things turn out with an all-barley grain bill.


Overall, I think this is a fairly simple, sound, viable process. For those who may be considering a stand with a small footprint, this may be something you want to think about.


Comments welcome. I know colplink (Brutus 10/20 creator) lurks here. Maybe he'll chime in.
 
I'm glad you posted this - I have been considering giving this a try. After reading the article in the latest BYO about doing multiple mashes using wort as the mash liquid, I wondered if this would be similarly able to give high grav wort without needing massive sparge volumes or crappy efficiency (undersparging on purpose to keep grav high).
 
Actually, I think with this process, you would need more sparge water to avoid crappy efficiency for big beers. :(
 
Very interesting. I'm getting ready to set up my system (pump is under the tree) and I have 2 kegs to convert. But, it looks like this would add a lot of time. Based on his explaination, he mashes for an hour, then sparges for an hour, then boils. That sparge hour is something you don't do when batch sparging. So it adds time and reduces your efficiency. I think I'll stick to a traditional 3 pot 2 teir system.
 
This is an interesting technique because it would allow you to make a very compact and less expensive brew structure. 2 burners, and pots vs 3. Time required would not be considerably more than a batch sparge but efficiency would suffer a little. Something to think about when I build a brew structure. With a pair of wheels even a 10gal structure would be very portable.

As for reiterative mashing, I'm not seeing how it would work any better in this environment. you would still have to drain every thing into the grainless pot so you could replace the grain in the MLT. If you are thinking of running two mashes in parallel, it is not the same as reiterative mashing. It is equivalent to a single mash with twice the grain. You will still have to drain both MLTs into the brew pot.

Craig
 
JnJ - it doesn't add as much time as you might think. Batch sparging usually takes me 25-30 mins (if I do 1st runnings + 2 batch sparges). I had SG equilibrium in 35 mins, and from the brutus 20 page - remember, he's doing larger batches, too:

In my system, 45 minutes is plenty of time to accomplish equilibrium and planet alignment.

The real trade-off I see is efficiency vs size+equipment. I would say there's also slightly less work than batch sparge.

I'm not trying to convince anybody that this is the way to go. I was curious and decided to gave it a try and report on how I thought things went. I'll be building a single tier stand soon and am still trying to decide if I want a 2 or 3 vessel system. I want to repeat things after I incorporate my barley crusher and see how the efficiency comes out. If I'm mid 70's, I may go with this.

I'd also really like to hear others thoughts if you decide to try this, too.
 
CBBaron said:
As for reiterative mashing, I'm not seeing how it would work any better in this environment. you would still have to drain every thing into the grainless pot so you could replace the grain in the MLT. If you are thinking of running two mashes in parallel, it is not the same as reiterative mashing. It is equivalent to a single mash with twice the grain. You will still have to drain both MLTs into the brew pot.

Craig

What I meant was not that the Brutus 20 setup would be good for doing reiterative mashing, but that perhaps it would be an alternative way to get to a high gravity wort without having excessive boil times or undersparged grains. :mug:
 
OK, I think I see what you're saying. Is this kind of what you were thinking?

Process: mash 1/2 the grains normally. Recirculate the sparge from the BK, ending up back in the BK. Empty grains, add other 1/2 of grains. Pump hot liquor from BK back to 2nd mash. After mash is complete, recirculate again with the rest of the wort already in the BK.
 
Sorry - not explaining myself well (nothing new!)

Mash full grain bill, but rather than drain and sparge in the normal fashion (which would result in a LOT of wort to boil for a really big beer) sparge using the recirc method.

The reiterative method lets you get lots of sugar out without excessive volumes, but you have to do multiple mashes. I was just thinking that the (brutus 20) recirculated mash would let you do one big mash, while still extracting the sugars without excess spage volume.

:mug:
 
What you're explaining is the (Brutus 20) process. The problem is, it really results in slightly lower efficiency, possibly worse with large grain bills. I think you can compensate with more sparge volume, but that's what you're trying to avoid.
 
Lil' Sparky said:
JnJ - it doesn't add as much time as you might think. Batch sparging usually takes me 25-30 mins (if I do 1st runnings + 2 batch sparges). I had SG equilibrium in 35 mins, and from the brutus 20 page - remember, he's doing larger batches, too:



The real trade-off I see is efficiency vs size+equipment. I would say there's also slightly less work than batch sparge.

I'm not trying to convince anybody that this is the way to go. I was curious and decided to gave it a try and report on how I thought things went. I'll be building a single tier stand soon and am still trying to decide if I want a 2 or 3 vessel system. I want to repeat things after I incorporate my barley crusher and see how the efficiency comes out. If I'm mid 70's, I may go with this.

I'd also really like to hear others thoughts if you decide to try this, too.
I can see the benefit for someone who is limited on brewing space. For me, I have the whole garage (next home we are building and I'll have a seperate brew shop, 5 years from now) so saving space isn't really a concern. I'm gonna stick with the plan of a 2 tier with 3 vessels. I'll keep an eye on this project of yours.
 
I think a 2-tier 3 vessel setup is a great design. What's your setup now?

Hey, weren't you one of the SA guys having infection problems? I haven't heard anything about it in a while. Did ya'll get everything sorted out? I hope so.
 
JnJ said:
I can see the benefit for someone who is limited on brewing space. For me, I have the whole garage (next home we are building and I'll have a seperate brew shop, 5 years from now) so saving space isn't really a concern. I'm gonna stick with the plan of a 2 tier with 3 vessels. I'll keep an eye on this project of yours.
Must be nice.
My brew shop is limited to one set of shelves in the basement storage room and a turkey fryer I have to pull out from in front of the car when I brew. Any brew sculpture I could have would have to take up less room than a gas grill and be portable so I could pull it out of the garage when I brew.

If I build a brew sculpture instead of the manual process I currently use I would like to go 10 gal which would take up even more space. If I could reduce that to 2 pots the size of the system starts to get reasonable.

This is still a ways in the future for me (kegging comes first) so I have time to plan.

Craig
 
Lil' Sparky said:
I think a 2-tier 3 vessel setup is a great design. What's your setup now?
Right now I'm heating strike water in my kettle and an additional pot. My MLT is a 5 gal gott cooler. I have 2 kegs that I will convert for my HLT and kettle and I'll either use a 10 gal gott or some other cooler for the MLT. I plan to gravity feed from HLT to MLT and then use the pump from MLT to HLT and HLT through chiller and into fermentor.

Lil' Sparky said:
Hey, weren't you one of the SA guys having infection problems? I haven't heard anything about it in a while. Did ya'll get everything sorted out? I hope so.
Yup, my next batch was bad and I got so discuraged about it that I stopped posting on the subject. Any way, in that batch I realized I did use an old airlock which might have caused the contamination. Also I put my IC in the wort for the last 15 minutes of the boil, so it is good, but the plasic hose and hose clamps sit over the wort and so I went ahead and sanitized that, used a new airlock, and used bottled water on the last batch. This batch I just transfered to the keg and it seems good. It had a slight "off" flavor, but it's been a while since I've tasted a green beer without infection. So I think this one is just green. (fingers crossed).
 
Why does going to this two pot setup make larger gravity brews harder? I am a newb and looking at using this setup theory, however, I certainly enjoy big beers above 8%, will this be a problem?
 
I think it would work fine for any kind of beer. The only thing mentioned was you'll have to use plenty of sparge water to get decent efficiency. I suggest giving it a try before you fully commit. If you don't like the process, it's easy to add the extra vessel for a HLT.
 
Lil' Sparky said:
I think it would work fine for any kind of beer. The only thing mentioned was you'll have to use plenty of sparge water to get decent efficiency. I suggest giving it a try before you fully commit. If you don't like the process, it's easy to add the extra vessel for a HLT.

Couldn't one just sparge for longer with this setup ?

TTT
 
Can this be done with a Cooler as the MLT? And the BK will be the only thing direct fired? I dont see why not. I guess it would just take longer to get things heated up.
 
trent said:
Couldn't one just sparge for longer with this setup ?

TTT
I don't think longer will necessarily get you more efficiency. Once the SG of both vessels are the same, recirculating longer won't be doing anything. With more sparge water, you have more to dissolve the sugars into.
 
bigben said:
Can this be done with a Cooler as the MLT? And the BK will be the only thing direct fired? I dont see why not. I guess it would just take longer to get things heated up.
Sure. I don't see why not.
 
This whole system sounds pretty cool to me. I'm not terribly concerned with efficiency as much as I am with repeatability and quality. My perception is that the finished product is worth much, much more than the components. I don't want to be wasteful, but if one were trying to make a world class beer in the Homebrew context, the last thing one would think about is efficiency. Granted, if I needed to make a living in a very competitive environment, my view would be different. This system allows for no-sparge or CRDFM, which is all I think I will need. I think I will take the plunge and start designing my one tier, two kettle, two pump system. Any help or links would be greatly appreciated. Thanks Sparky for the inspiration.
 
Any updates on the CRDFM process? Are you still experimenting with this? Have you been able to stabilize it to achieve expectations?
 
I haven't tried it again yet. I still think it's a good tradeoff between equipment/space and efficiency. If you don't mind losing a few points in efficienct and want a compact setup, then this is a good option.

I've had my 3 brewing vessels for a while and I'm finishing up a single tier stand, so I'll probably stick to the traditional 3 vessel setup for now, since I would need another pump (with a single tier setup) to do this.
 
Lil' Sparky said:
I haven't tried it again yet. I still think it's a good tradeoff between equipment/space and efficiency. If you don't mind losing a few points in efficienct and want a compact setup, then this is a good option.

I've had my 3 brewing vessels for a while and I'm finishing up a single tier stand, so I'll probably stick to the traditional 3 vessel setup for now, since I would need another pump (with a single tier setup) to do this.

Ok thanks. My single tiered is being welded now. It will be set up as Brutus 10 with 2 pumps, so this should be an easy option. Deciding on lid switch system with hoses or hard plumbed WWII submarine look.
KD
 
I'm planning on doing a CRDFM pretty soon, but instead of sparging with wort, I'm planning on doing a standard fly sparge.

Vessel 1: The Mash Tun
This will recirculate with heat applied as needed to maintain or ramp temperatures. Preliminarily, I'm planning to dough in to 122 or so, ramp to 150, rest, then ramp to mashout.

Vessel 2: The Hot Liquor Tank
This will have sparge water at 168 ready when the mashout is complete. The pump will get moved for sparging, and the runoff to the kettle will begin.


Any thoughts?
 
Funny, I was thinking about doing this today and realized that it's essentially my standard procedure anyway. I do a mash-out infusion to full volume after conversion, and recirculate in the MT for 10-15 minutes. It usually taxes the capacity of the mash tun, so I can see the two vessel transfer being good for larger batches or extremely high OG beers on my system. My efficiency is less than 65% normally, but I suppose I could squeeze a little more out of it.. It's basically a modified no-sparge mash, producing delicious, highly fermentable wort with no risk of over-sparging.
 
Anybody see a problem with starting the cross circulation at a lower
(say 163F)temperature until you know your gravity for the entire volume? I was thinking if you needed an extra point or two, you wight get it this way. Most of the conversion would have taken place at a much thicker grain/water ratio, of course. Measures would be taken to avoid HSA as well.

Thanks
KD
 
Got referred here when asking about 2 vessel setups. Let me see if I understand what you're doing.

You're taking your boil kettle and heating water to striker temps and then doughing into your mashtun, let the grain bed settle then add the remaining of the full volume of water needed to to the BK and start recirculating you mash runnings into your boil kettle and out of your boil kettle back over the mash until basically conversion is reached the the gravity evens out between the hole volume. So it's a constant sparge/mash with the complete volume. I like it. I don't care as much about efficiency either as long as it's consistent and 65% or above I'd say. I'll be doing all electric, so instead of direct firing my BK, it's just have a 55W element. In essence I could brew with 1 5500W heating element and two vessels and two pumps (want side by side single tier).

Or is it dough in as normal, let sit for mash time, then start the recirculation with the final volume until gravity is consistent through total volume, and then stop draining from the bk? After reading again I'm thinking it's this.
 
Or is it dough in as normal, let sit for mash time, then start the recirculation with the final volume until gravity is consistent through total volume, and then stop draining from the bk? After reading again I'm thinking it's this.

Right. Of course, you'd need to recirculate inside the mash tun during mash if it's direct fired.

I like the system and am interested in trying it. I'm still using a turkey fryer-cooler combo for my brewing. A BK with a drain and march pump are on the list of things to get, then I'll start experimenting...

:drunk:
 
There has been talk of this setup not being able to do high gravity beers. I am a big fan of belgian ales and typically brew 1.080-1.110 beers using extract right now. I am considering moving to all grain and am wondering if this setup would be able to handle these higher gravities without having to add extract?
 
This really isn't any different than doing a no-sparge. This is what I do on my RIMS system with just one cooler and one boil kettle. I've been doing it this way for a couple years. On a mid size 1.050ish beer the eff. is about 10% lower than batch sparging. On smaller beers the difference in eff. is less. On bigger beers the eff. difference between batch sparging is more.

After a few times of doing it like you describe, I stopped adding "sparge" water at the end. I just add all my water and grains at the beginning for a thin mash, recirculate the entire time, and then drain into my boil kettle. It comes out the same, except you don't have to worry about the pH changing when you start adding water at the end. Just get your pH right at the beginning of the mash and you are done.
 
There has been talk of this setup not being able to do high gravity beers. I am a big fan of belgian ales and typically brew 1.080-1.110 beers using extract right now. I am considering moving to all grain and am wondering if this setup would be able to handle these higher gravities without having to add extract?

I've been doing the 2 vessel no sparge (no direct fired mash) since I started AG a few years ago and love it. For big beers, the limiting factor is the size of your mash tun. My 1.055 beers or less get 70% efficiency while bigger beers get down to 60%-65% so you need a MT that can hold the extra grain to get high gravity. To give you an idea, my 10g MT cooler maxes out at 25 lbs of grain, 1.25 qts/lb, approx. 1.080 gravity considering 60% efficiency. My new system will have a 15g MT so I can get over 1.100 beers on occasion.

Arg - You don't have to direct fire. If get a drain for your BK and pump, you've got a 2 tier no sparge system. Just mash in your cooler and then recirc the remaining "sparge" water between the BK and MT with the pump for 30 minutes and drain.
 
I tried this on a few batches, as I thought it would make life a lot easier regarding the sparge process, but I wasn't happy with the efficiency and *already* had a three-vessel system, so I went back to my standard system.

But there's no reason why you can't do big beers... As long as your mash tun hold all the grain for a slightly lower efficiency, a big beer should work fine.
 
Back
Top