covered95
Well-Known Member
Can someone point me to a thread that explains the pros and cons of batch sparging vs fly sparging? I have looked, but can not find. If it doesn't exist could someone give me some info? Thanks
Batch vs Fly Sparge help
- Thread starter covered95
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
You can look in the wiki but this is a highly debated topic.
I'll give you what I believe are the pros/cons.
Fly pro:
Given perfect equipment/technique it yields the highest possible efficiency (mid 90% plus).
Fly con:
Equipment/technique is a little touchy and can actually lower effeciency due to channeling.
Have to ensure sparge inflow/outflow are close to identical.
Takes a bit longer (if you're going for max efficiency)
Requires gravity/pumping and 3 distinct vessels.
Batch pro:
Harder to screw up.
Takes less time per efficiency points (can get high 80's, low 90's% in 20 minutes of sparging)
Can come quite close to fly efficiency
No need for 3-tier gravity or pumps.
Batch con: Not the highest efficiency possible (but darn close).
Faster
I'll give you what I believe are the pros/cons.
Fly pro:
Given perfect equipment/technique it yields the highest possible efficiency (mid 90% plus).
Fly con:
Equipment/technique is a little touchy and can actually lower effeciency due to channeling.
Have to ensure sparge inflow/outflow are close to identical.
Takes a bit longer (if you're going for max efficiency)
Requires gravity/pumping and 3 distinct vessels.
Batch pro:
Harder to screw up.
Takes less time per efficiency points (can get high 80's, low 90's% in 20 minutes of sparging)
Can come quite close to fly efficiency
No need for 3-tier gravity or pumps.
Batch con: Not the highest efficiency possible (but darn close).
Faster
Brew-boy
Well-Known Member
Not always true as in my case. I built my mashtun based on Palmers book. Batched sparge twice and my efficiency sucked 50-60%. Switched over to fly sparge and efficiency went up to 85%. Like I said this is on my system your miles may vary. I like to do the fly, as it gives me time to prep other things in my brew day. Pros for me, better efficiency, Con more time involved.
Would the soluton then maybe be ( because I am asking these same Q's ) be to batch sparge first, see how it goes, it is also cheaper and quicker to do. THEN go to fly sparge, if the Eff, is not up to par?
I am always looking to save a buck.
I am always looking to save a buck.
I'd always recommend batch sparging because that's what I do and it's worked out really well for me. Of course I have no reason to try fly because i'm not going to benefit from 3% more efficiency. I wish I could troubleshoot people who get 50% with batch sparging.
I guess I don't understand how you could only get 50% to 60% batch sparging and jump to 85% fly sparging, as we all know strange things happen.
Both processes simply rinse sugars from the grain, batch sparging is easier uses less equipment and is faster. Fly sparging uses more equipment and if done properly takes longer, you may see higher efficiency with fly sparging but there is no guarantee, some claim fly sparging produces better wort again there is no proof of this.
Both processes simply rinse sugars from the grain, batch sparging is easier uses less equipment and is faster. Fly sparging uses more equipment and if done properly takes longer, you may see higher efficiency with fly sparging but there is no guarantee, some claim fly sparging produces better wort again there is no proof of this.
jdoiv
Well-Known Member
I fly and always have. But I would suggest trying batch first as it is faster and uses less equipment. If you decide you want to try fly sparging, you can just pick up the equipment you need and give it a shot. The important thing is that you are comfortable with your process and that you can get consistent results.
Got Trub?
Well-Known Member
Joe;
Despite what your LHBS said your process sounds correct for batch sparging. You want about equal volumes in the first and second sparge. This requires adding some hot water to your mash. You want to vorlauf (return initial cloudy runnings to the lauter tun). Draining the bed dry is fine in batch sparging - anethema in fly as you get channeling. My one recommendation would be to increase the temperature of the water you add to more like 190-195F, this will bring your mash temp up to about 168-170 which will help stop further enzymatic reactions and decrease the viscosity of your wort. The second sparge would then be 3.25g at 168-170.
Assuming your final volume was 5.5g I calculate your efficiency at 67% which is not great but not shabby for a first attempt. I couldn't get much better then that until I bought my own mill. You will also find that the higher the gravity beer you are brewing the lower your efficiency gets unless you are willing to increase your boil volume - this is because increasingly concentrated sugars are still left behind after the second sparge. With your refractometer I would recommend checking your pre-boil gravity and if it is low add DME to hit your target gravity until you dial a recipe in.
GT
Despite what your LHBS said your process sounds correct for batch sparging. You want about equal volumes in the first and second sparge. This requires adding some hot water to your mash. You want to vorlauf (return initial cloudy runnings to the lauter tun). Draining the bed dry is fine in batch sparging - anethema in fly as you get channeling. My one recommendation would be to increase the temperature of the water you add to more like 190-195F, this will bring your mash temp up to about 168-170 which will help stop further enzymatic reactions and decrease the viscosity of your wort. The second sparge would then be 3.25g at 168-170.
Assuming your final volume was 5.5g I calculate your efficiency at 67% which is not great but not shabby for a first attempt. I couldn't get much better then that until I bought my own mill. You will also find that the higher the gravity beer you are brewing the lower your efficiency gets unless you are willing to increase your boil volume - this is because increasingly concentrated sugars are still left behind after the second sparge. With your refractometer I would recommend checking your pre-boil gravity and if it is low add DME to hit your target gravity until you dial a recipe in.
GT
Yeah, you calculated your efficiency incorrectly apparently. I too agree that the simplest thing you can do is use sparge water near 185-190F as mentioned above. I know, I know, it's breaking the theoretical tannin extraction limit of 170. However, it equalizes with the 150F grain temp very quickly somewhere in the mid 160's if you stir it relatively quickly. You could easily jump 10% in efficiency doing this. Just for your own sanity, give it a try and measure the equalized temp after those hot sparge infusions just to see that you are in the safe temp zone.
Are you using software to calculate efficiency or doing the math long hand? BTP says that with 10lbs malt and 5.5g final volume at 1.042 was actually 63.7% brewhouse.
edit... holy sheeet man, $2 for a pound of two row? I think I pay 70 cents.
Are you using software to calculate efficiency or doing the math long hand? BTP says that with 10lbs malt and 5.5g final volume at 1.042 was actually 63.7% brewhouse.
edit... holy sheeet man, $2 for a pound of two row? I think I pay 70 cents.
Get beersmith or wait until BTP is updated to include the inventory feature.
Waldo said:
My best guess on this is full conversion hasn't occured and the batch sparge shut the door on conversion (especilally if doing a mash out). I fly sparge but don't mash out. My fly water is usually around 170 so as it sprinkles on it's probably retaining about the same temp as the rest so I'm probably doing more like a 2 hour conversion with this approach.
Bobby_M said:
Don't forget the crush and ph are very big factors in tannin extraction. If you're ph levels are fine, then you'll be alright using that hot of water. For me, I bring the water almost to a boil before dumping it in. Also, I do multiple batches (mostly because I don't have another large pot). I typically do three batches.
DesertBrew said:
You'd be surprised just how fast conversion happens, I've experimented with mashes as short as 20 minutes and have had good results but of course the magic number for me is still 60 minutes.
I think the 3 most important things in batch sparging are.
1. Crush, you can't rely on the LHBS people are always messing with the settings on those mills, best to buy your own mill.
2. stir for at least 2 minutes before each sparge to get the sugars in solution.
3. Only wait a couple of minutes after stirring before vorlaufing and the drain as fast as you can.
AlaskaBrewing
Well-Known Member
Waldo said:
Why do you want to drain as fast as you can?
So you can watch Giants kickoff without TIVO.
One batch sparging negative not mentioned: for a given tun size you have slightly less grain capacity. When you stir the grain after adding sparge water it fluffs up a bit, whereas with fly sparging the bed stays settled. This really limited my bills until I got the 48-qt Ice Cube.
One additional positive for batch sparging, the manifold configuration becomes less important. Stirring & complete draining makes it possible to work with a bazooka tube. And, of course, you can drain faster regardless of the configuration.
One additional positive for batch sparging, the manifold configuration becomes less important. Stirring & complete draining makes it possible to work with a bazooka tube. And, of course, you can drain faster regardless of the configuration.
I really don't know why, its just what I've always read, I assume it has to do with getting the sweet wort out before the sugars start to fall out of solution. When they say "drain as fast as you can" that doesn't mean wide open. On my system I can only drain a little over half open on my valve, anymore and the wort starts to get really cloudy.
Joe Dragon said:
You can use Total Gravity Values to figure this out. The basic equation is GU(beg)*Volume(beg)/Volume(end) = GU(end)
For example if your pre-boil wort S. G. is 1.038 and pre-boil volume is 6.5 gallons, and your final volume is 5.5 gallons then your final S. G. should be:
38*6.5/5.5 = 44.9 which is a final S. G. of 1.044.
Can someone explain to me how you get better eff. batch sparging with equal volumes? I think this is a myth. I can see having issues if you don't add enough sparge water for one or more of the drainings, as you wouldn't extract too much sugar, but in general, I can't see how equal vol. makes a difference?
Sea, It's not a myth. I've experimented with various sparge configurations and the higher number of fresh water infusions you do (to a degree), the higher the efficiency. I haven't researched the scientific principal but it has something to do with the fact that fresh water pull more sugar into solution than water with sugar dissolved. All my batches with a single large batch sparge resulted in 76-80% efficiency. All my batches with two half-batch sparges were 82-92%. There's really no overlap and I haven't seen any anomolies in this pattern. Test it for yourself before you say it's a myth.
Lil' Sparky
Cowboys EAC
How about the brutus 20 sparge technique? I may give this a shot soon to see how it works.
From: http://www.alenuts.com/brutus20.htm
From: http://www.alenuts.com/brutus20.htm
Concept
So what’s in a concept? Brewing with only two pots is relatively easy; actually easier, as I will explain. Too there are many benefits to this method I have found. This two pot method may not be cheaper, as in any single tier system a pump or two is required, and in a two tier, at least one pump will be required using this method. Basically as you can see in the diagrams, the system utilizes cross recirculation. After the normal mash resting period and the HLT/kettle is heated to 168/170 mash-out temp, the flow rates can be set in the mash tun and the HLT/kettle. The flow rates in each are set to a very slow trickle, each recirculating back to itself at this point. Once this rate is constant between the two, you can simply switch lids. Now the HLT/kettle water is flowing gently over the grains in the mash tun, out of the mash tun and back to the very same supply from the HLT/kettle. The HLT/kettle water will slowly become the wort. In the end, all will equalize between the two pots and all will be one in harmony! Recirculate the system until you are satisfied that the OG is the same anywhere in the system; HLT/kettle or mash tun, it will eventually equalize. In my system, 45 minutes is plenty of time to accomplish equilibrium and planet alignment.
Benefits…
Indeed your efficiency will be slightly less than fly sparging utilizing this method. Not really a benefit per say, but no more or so less efficiency than batch sparging in general. I have bumped my efficiency down from my normal fly sparging using traditional methods of 78% back to about 74% or so. This is no real deal to me anyway as anyone who knows Lonnie Mac, knows that I can give a rat’s butt about efficiency! This ain’t a grain race here; it’s about beer man! I collect the sugars that my recipe needs and no more. As far as PH, as we know during a long extended fly sparge the PH will rise. Much over 6.0 and we start to see astringency. This method utilizes the benefit of batch sparging in that respect. Likewise, I won’t be stripping my grain of every sugar molecule as this is not my intention. Let’s face it. I am a fly sparger from way back; pushing the limit, I have over-sparged a time or two like most have or will at some point. This method combines the two traditional sparge methods, in essence, a culmination, giving us a continuous batch sparge without the work involved, continuous natural grain bed filtration, slams the hammer down on PH and over-sparge astringency problems, heating of the wort can begin sooner too, in effect increasing efficiency during final recirculation sparging, the benefit list goes on… And too, the smaller footprint of a two pot system may allow patio and small space brewers a better option.
This illustration shows Brutus 20 all set up at the beginning of the brew day. Pumps recirculating among themselves, HLT/kettle water heating to 170 and the Mash maintaining my preset mash temp for 1 hour. Both are recirculating VERY slowly and each flow rate is matched.
After an hour long mash, HLT/kettle water heated, the lids are switched to allow the HLT/kettle water to gently flow into the mash tun, and the mash to gently flow into the HLT/kettle.
This diagram represents a 1 hour recirculation sparge, when ALL things are at total equilibrium and all OG readings are the same no matter where you take it in the system.
After equilibrium, the remaining sugars can be pumped from the mash tun to your recipe volume. Then top off water can be added and the brew day begins!
So there we are! Don't b afraid to try new things man! We are only 10,000 years into beer. There are thousands of years left to go! Things are bound to change!!
I guess that's a recirculated fly sparge. It's an elegantly simple process I suppose once you get the two flow rates pretty close to the same but in a way it still has some of the cons for fly sparging and batch.
When you sparge with 1.0 gravity liquid (water), you're as far away from solubility equilibreum (i've been doing some reading) as you're going to get. IOW, from the moment you infuse the sparge water, sugar begins dissolving towards saturation. If I understand correctly, the closer to saturation you get, the slower it happens. I can imagine that brutus 20 wouldn't care because its run for 60 minutes. In a typical batch sparge, you're trying to get it overwith in 15-20 minutes so infusing smaller freshwater batches speeds up the sparge. I'm working backwards to try to figure out the "why" because I've run enough batches to realize it's not "if".
When you sparge with 1.0 gravity liquid (water), you're as far away from solubility equilibreum (i've been doing some reading) as you're going to get. IOW, from the moment you infuse the sparge water, sugar begins dissolving towards saturation. If I understand correctly, the closer to saturation you get, the slower it happens. I can imagine that brutus 20 wouldn't care because its run for 60 minutes. In a typical batch sparge, you're trying to get it overwith in 15-20 minutes so infusing smaller freshwater batches speeds up the sparge. I'm working backwards to try to figure out the "why" because I've run enough batches to realize it's not "if".
Lil' Sparky
Cowboys EAC
I hear ya. I think physically, it's just a fact that the brutus 20 method won't/can't achieve as high efficiency, but it's only costing him 4% vs fly sparging.
You have to admit there are some pros. Namely, less equipment and smaller brewery footprint. You eliminate the HLT and it's associated burner if you've got a dedicated stand. That could be a big sellng point for many space-limited brewers. It's also very hands-off after you get things set compared to batch sparging.
Now, the cons as I see them. Takes longer than batch sparging (akin to fly). Slightly lower efficiency. Requires one or two pumps, depending on whether or not you've got a 1 or 2 tier setup (this isn't really a con in my book since a pump is nice regardless). There are a lot of off-the-shelf 2-burner stands like these that may be ideal, especially the folding model!
I think the idea of a less complicated, smaller brewery with a more hands-off sparge is very appealing. I think I will test it soon with a recipe I've used several times and see what I think.
You have to admit there are some pros. Namely, less equipment and smaller brewery footprint. You eliminate the HLT and it's associated burner if you've got a dedicated stand. That could be a big sellng point for many space-limited brewers. It's also very hands-off after you get things set compared to batch sparging.
Now, the cons as I see them. Takes longer than batch sparging (akin to fly). Slightly lower efficiency. Requires one or two pumps, depending on whether or not you've got a 1 or 2 tier setup (this isn't really a con in my book since a pump is nice regardless). There are a lot of off-the-shelf 2-burner stands like these that may be ideal, especially the folding model!
I think the idea of a less complicated, smaller brewery with a more hands-off sparge is very appealing. I think I will test it soon with a recipe I've used several times and see what I think.
I think getting the flow rights near equal is a pain but I suppose running them both at full throttle would keep you from having to play with valves.
Similar threads
