Help with efficency

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.

mrbugawkagawk

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
136
Reaction score
1
Location
Crown Point
i know many things can affect this but i am using .31 gallons or 1.24 quarts for the grain to water ratio , i know that not enough water can make your efficiency go down, is this too little?
 
So what's the deal with efficiency and water to grain ratio? I was originally taught to use 1 quart of water to 1 pound of grain. Is this ratio wrong??
 
I have seen people on here experiment with up to 2 qts/lb. I believe The Pol has had good results with that ratio. Others have seen their efficiencies drop. From what I've gathered, if you are getting good efficiency with a lower ratio, stick with it. Otherwise you can experiment with a thinner mash. Personally I use 1.5 and get somewhere in the high seventies if I mill the grain twice, low seventies if I mill once.
 
I have consistently achieved an 80% effeciency on my brewdays with a 1.25qt/lb ratio. I have read many threads about people having efficiency issues, and IMO a good crush and correct mash temperature along with proper pH should bring about a decent efficiency.

Assuming your crush is suitable and you hit your mash temp check your pH, if that isn't your issue try allowing your mash to rest for 75 minutes opposed to the standard 60 to see if it improves your conversion.

If you aren't crushing your own grain, that will be the most probable explanation for your less than ideal efficiency. Try milling your own grain, or borrowing a friends mill to see if the crush is a factor in your efficiency plight.

pH is always a factor, but will not affect efficiency in the way crush, temps and sparge technique will. However, try to make certain you are in the proper range to elimante pH as an issue.

Also a decent sparge technique can improve efficiency. Assuming you are batch sparging and "no sparge' brewing, try a single or double sparge. If you are fly sparging, well, I don't fly sparge so I can't really offer up any experience/advice on that. I'm assuming you are batch sparging.

IMHO, achieving a brewhouse efficiency in the upper 70's to lower 80's really shouldn't be that difficult to achieve with an appropritae crush, correct temperatures, and a suitable mash pH.

Good luck, and I am sure you will find our efficiency woes to be a thing of the past soon!
 
I had some issues with my effeciency until my last brew. I looked at my grain. I didn't feel it was crushed great so I grabbed an empty beer bottle and put some grain in my 10 gallon kettle and went to crushing it. What an inprovement! I used 2 quarts of water per pound this time. I also let grain soak for 1.5 hours (due to having to pick up my daughter from school) I got a 8% increase in my effeciency. Now I am looking at buying a grain mill. Sears has a mill that will work really cheap!! You might want to look at it. Also how fast are your draining? Hope this helps you out.

http://www.sears.com/shc/s/p_10153_...01&sid=I0084400010000100600&aff=Y&origin=prod
 
I have seen people on here experiment with up to 2 qts/lb. I believe The Pol has had good results with that ratio. Others have seen their efficiencies drop. From what I've gathered, if you are getting good efficiency with a lower ratio, stick with it. Otherwise you can experiment with a thinner mash. Personally I use 1.5 and get somewhere in the high seventies if I mill the grain twice, low seventies if I mill once.

I have been promoting thinner mashes for a while now. The advantages that I see from mashing as thin as 2.5 qt/lb are:

- easier to stir
- more stable temperatures
- less sparging which may lead to better wort quality
- faster and potentially more complete conversion.

Once concern that many brewers raise is, that thin mashes create a more fermetable wort. In my experience that is not true and the literature that I read doesn’t make that claim either. At least not unanimously. In fact, we just had that discussion on the AHA board (http://www.homebrewersassociation.org/forum/index.php?topic=411.0)

My advice to brewers is to give thin mashes at least a try. 1.25 qt/lb is neither an optimal mash thickness nor a standard mash thickness. It seems that it has become a quasi-standard b/c brewers didn’t really question it and, for some reason, have been afraid of thin mashes. On the other hand 2.0 qt/lb is not an optimal mash thickness either. The optimal mash thickness is what works best for you after you considered the pros and cons of mashing with different water/grist ratios.

Kai
 
1.25 qt/lb is neither an optimal mash thickness nor a standard mash thickness. It seems that it has become a quasi-standard b/c brewers didn’t really question it and, for some reason, have been afraid of thin mashes.

I don't recall what Palmer, Papazian, et al have said about optimal thickness, but it doesn't hurt that that is the standard default setting in Beersmith (and possibly other software I haven't used). I always have to switch mine to 1.5; haven't looked to see if I can change it globally.
 
I have consistently achieved an 80% effeciency on my brewdays with a 1.25qt/lb ratio. I have read many threads about people having efficiency issues, and IMO a good crush and correct mash temperature along with proper pH should bring about a decent efficiency.

When I bought my barley crusher my efficiency not only went up but became very consistent at 75% batch after batch mashing at either 1.25 or 1.33 qt/lb. Prior to that I was having my LHBS precrush my grains and i was averaging anywhere between 55-65% efficiency.
 
When I bought my barley crusher my efficiency not only went up but became very consistent at 75% batch after batch mashing at either 1.25 or 1.33 qt/lb. Prior to that I was having my LHBS precrush my grains and i was averaging anywhere between 55-65% efficiency.

I went ahead and purchased a BC before my first AG to eliminate any efficiency problems from the crush.

TheSanch here on HBT recently sent me a pic of the crush from our LHBS and there were whole grains of barley cracked in half with the endosperm still enveloped in the husk. He had a less than ideal efficiency from his last brew.

Next time he brews we're going to crush his grain with my BC and see how much of an improvement it makes with his efficiency.

I would agree, that crush, especially if you are having a LHBS do it for you, is probably the largest contributing factor, but I have much respect for the Kaiser so heeding his advice would also be beneficial to anyone having efficiency issues!
 
TheSanch here on HBT recently sent me a pic of the crush from our LHBS and there were whole grains of barley cracked in half with the endosperm still enveloped in the husk. He had a less than ideal efficiency from his last brew.

I've done a few AG's all with grain from this same LHBS and my efficiency has been pretty poor. Next time I'm going to see if I can adjust the crush or run it thru a couple times.
 
I've only been taking note of my mash efficiency for the last three or four batches. I've been consistently getting 72-73%. I have more beer crush my grain for me. I've also been using the 1q/p ratio.
 
I have been using between 1.35 and 1, and have never really noticed a difference. What made a big difference was again the crush.
After a 60% efficiency batch, I looked closely at the crush the next time I went to the LHBS. It was barely cracked. I had the owner check and it was set to around .50mm.
I think some people think the on switch for the motor is the adjustment dial.
I got into an ongoing bet with the owner who is a friend of mine on what the best setting is, and I made him set the mill to .39 or lower and my efficiency jumped by 10%.
The last time I went in there I asked him to reset it for me and OH, the default now is .39mm, I'm still trying to remember how many beers we bet. :)
 
I've only been taking note of my mash efficiency for the last three or four batches. I've been consistently getting 72-73%. I have more beer crush my grain for me. I've also been using the 1q/p ratio.


Mash efficiency?
Conversion efficiency?
Lauter efficiency?
Efficiencty to the boiler?
Brewhouse efficiency?

Which one is 72-73%?

Thinner mashes CAN increase eff., they can to a large degree depending on your system. I wrote an article explaining this on www.brewersfriend.com, search "Thin Mashing" and you will see what it is all about.

When I started milling my own grain, my conversion eff. jumped, then I started mashing thin, 2-3 quarts/lb my conversin eff. jumped again. You really need to dial it in for YOUR system.
 
Mash efficiency?
Conversion efficiency?
Lauter efficiency?
Efficiencty to the boiler?
Brewhouse efficiency?

Which one is 72-73%?

Thinner mashes CAN increase eff., they can to a large degree depending on your system. I wrote an article explaining this on www.brewersfriend.com, search "Thin Mashing" and you will see what it is all about.

When I started milling my own grain, my conversion eff. jumped, then I started mashing thin, 2-3 quarts/lb my conversin eff. jumped again. You really need to dial it in for YOUR system.

I take a gravity reading from my pre boil wort(cooled). Then I do the math. So mash efficiency?
 
I had the owner check and it was set to around .50mm.

Are you sure you don't mean .050"? .50mm is only about .020" which is very fine. .35mm would only be .014" which is the thickness of about 4 sheets of 20# bond paper.

Just so someone else doesn't go home and try to make some cake flour...
 
I take a gravity reading from my pre boil wort(cooled). Then I do the math. So mash efficiency?

Problem with that number is that it doesnt tell you anything about the process. It is simply a combination of 2 processes, conversion and lauter.

You could have poor conversion (75%) and excellent lautering (98%), meaning that your mash is messed up... or just the opposite. You cant tell from a simple pre-boil number.

It is like shooting in the dark when you make changes to a process like the mash, or the lauter, when you have no way to quantify each of them. Pre-boil efficiency is a good way to test the consistency of your brewhouse, but poor way to judge any process and make changes.
 
Problem with that number is that it doesnt tell you anything about the process. It is simply a combination of 2 processes, conversion and lauter.

You could have poor conversion (75%) and excellent lautering (98%), meaning that your mash is messed up... or just the opposite. You cant tell from a simple pre-boil number.

It is like shooting in the dark when you make changes to a process like the mash, or the lauter, when you have no way to quantify each of them. Pre-boil efficiency is a good way to test the consistency of your brewhouse, but poor way to judge any process and make changes.

I'm open to suggestions.
 
Pre-boil efficiency is a good way to test the consistency of your brewhouse,

Please correct me - I thought brewhouse efficiency was a measure from grain to primary (including trub, cooler losses, etc)? If not, what do you call it?

thanks,
 
I don't recall what Palmer, Papazian, et al have said about optimal thickness, but it doesn't hurt that that is the standard default setting in Beersmith (and possibly other software I haven't used). I always have to switch mine to 1.5; haven't looked to see if I can change it globally.

Click on 'Mash Profiles' on the left. Global changes galore.

I mash at around 2q/lb, most just cause of reading the Pol and Kaiser. I haven't much messed with it, but will start as I get more brews under my belt on the new system.
 
Please correct me - I thought brewhouse efficiency was a measure from grain to primary (including trub, cooler losses, etc)? If not, what do you call it?

thanks,

Yes, it is... but I am not talking about brewhouse eff., I am talking about brewhouse consistency, those are two different ideas.

Brewhouse eff. will be affected by the amount of hops you use, whether you are using leaf or pellet etc. This really means nothing in terms of the process of making the wort, this wont tell you anything about your processes. Brewhouse is a good number to have so that you can plan final volumes, because it is basically just your systems eff. corrected for losses.

The eff. to the BK, if it remains consistent, will tell you how consistent your brewhouse is. Brewhouse eff. is not good as a measure of brewhouse consistency since there are factors from batch to batch that can change it drastically.

You can have a very consistent system but have wildly varying brewhouse eff. because you used 6oz of leaf hops instead of say 1 oz of pellet.

You are right, we were just talking about consistency compared to efficiency.
 
TheSanch here on HBT recently sent me a pic of the crush from our LHBS and there were whole grains of barley cracked in half with the endosperm still enveloped in the husk. He had a less than ideal efficiency from his last brew.

Next time he brews we're going to crush his grain with my BC and see how much of an improvement it makes with his efficiency.

I got 82% efficiency to the kettle! There were actually a few differences between my first AG and my second. First, The crush. Schnitzengiggle milled my grain. I was surprised to see how different it was from LBHS crush. Second, I had a longer mash (90 min vs 60 min) in order to aid in converting the sugars in the oats. Third, I used a blanket to wrap the mash tun since it lost 4 degrees (154 to 150) last time over the 60 minutes. My temps were a little more controlled this time around (153.5 to 152/151.5).

My PH should have been similar if not the same since I used around a tablespoon of 5.2 in the mash both times.
 
Back
Top