Advice on best ways to control my mash (LONG)

I've had a few low-efficiency brew days lately, and I'm working on improving my control over the consistency of my mash process.

I batch sparge with a Rubbermaid cooler; I'm not looking to add any automation at this point, but I know I can do more to improve my awareness of efficiency and gravity before everything's in the fermenter.

I use Beersmith, and have calibrated it fairly well for my equipment, so things like tun dead space should be well accounted for.

One variable I don't have much control over is crush. I almost always get my grains from my LHBS, and he never changes his crush, and won't double-crush; the good news is it's consistent, and when everything goes well I typically get 70-75%, which is dandy for me.

Regardless, I've had a few surprises lately, and I'd like to minimize them to whatever extent I can. I've gotten more familiar than I like with using DME additions to compensate mid-ferment for a lackluster OG I lacked the time or will to handle pre-pitch.

To make my goal clear:

Echoloc8 said:

I am telling the thread three times: I'm not going for maximum efficiency, but for maximum consistency. I apologize for doing a poor job of making that point from the start.

Click to expand...

Any help would be appreciated! I'm looking for the best-payoff things I can do for measurement and control without having to make big equipment purchases.

To start with, here are my mash-related tools:

• Beersmith 2.1
• Mash tun: either 5-gal or 10-gal cylindrical cooler, depending on batch size and whether we're at my buddy's place (the 10-gal is his). Both use "torpedo" braids [edit: actually, "bazooka screens"].
• Digital probe thermometer, calibrated against an analog thermometer every other brew or so
• Boil pot: 10-gal aluminum
• 4-gal pot and 5-gal stainless pots for strike/sparge heating
• Heat source: electric range with electric bucket warmer/heat stick
• Hydrometer
• Temp-correcting refractometer (new Christmas present, not yet used)

And here's my current process:

• Heat strike water
• Dump all grains into mash tun
• Once strike water is to temp, pour whole strike addition onto grains
• Stir mash vigorously with mash paddle, destroying dough balls, using both rowing and slicing motions (paddle perpendicular to stroke, or parallel, respectively)
• Check temp of mash: add hot water if low, or stir/add cool water if high (seldom needed if I follow Beersmith's numbers)
• Cover tun, wait for entire mash duration (I don't stir at the halfway point)
• Heat mash-out/sparge water midway through mash time
• Open tun, check finishing mash temp
• Add mash-out water if Beersmith calls for it
• Vorlauf until wort is clear (~2 quarts, usually)
• Run off first runnings into boil pot
• Add sparge water; stir; let settle; vorlauf; run off. <-- Repeat for as many sparge batches as Beersmith says
• Move full boil kettle onto stove; add heat stick; crank 2 eyes
• Boil, adding hops, adjunct syrups, whirlfloc, etc.
• Chill, stirring wort with sanitized mash paddle (~15 min)
• Pull chiller; whirlpool; wait 20 min
• Autosiphon into fermenter
• Top up to volume with water if needed
• Check OG
• Freak out about numbers (as required)
• Pitch

Here are the steps I know I can change/add to minimize surprises:

• Add grains to strike water instead of vice versa; downside, this can take 2 people to do well, and might cause loss of temperature, right, if it takes too long?
• Do a mid-mash stir
• Do pH tests of the mash
• Do iodine/conversion testing
• Use refractometer to check preboil and midboil gravity (will need to read up; I know it can be fiddly)
• Do some real calibrating of volumes for my 10 gal boil pot; right now I eyeball based on the height of the vessel, and I know it's bitten me

Thanks for reading, if you've lasted this far! :rockin:

Anything I've missed, or any suggestions which of these ideas make the most sense for consistent mash results, and which the least?

-Rich

I lasted the read and have to say that all the things you listed in terms of improving your efficiency are spot on and all are important.

If you make those changes you should see improvement but that being said 70-75% efficiency is still a good place to be and if the beer is good don't lose sleep over chasing numbers!

Thanks for getting through it!

70-75% is when everything goes well. I've had some days where I was going for 1.065 and wound up at 1.050, which is a significant efficiency hit, and nowhere near 70%. That's the sort of thing I'm looking to head off at the pass.

-Rich

DME additions during fermentation?
Have not heard of that before. Sure it is a good idea?
Seems like lots could go wrong.

Until you have your own mill and purchase grain by the bag,
maybe don't worry so much about efficiency. Instead keep that DME
and some treated water handy on brew day. After you have collected
all the wort from sparging, adjust the gravity and/or volume before
you start the boil.

You will want to calibrate your boil pot (I use a dip stick), and figure
out your evaporation rate so you can hit your original volume and
gravity after the boil without more adjustments.

Do you stir after adding sparge water, let settle for a bit, then vorlauf?
Stirring after sparge water addition might help with grains making contact with water and increasing extraction.
A personal mill does help, but only 5-10 percent with my experience. Otherwise, I just plan for it, buck up for the few dollars of extra grain, and remember that mid-range efficiency is good for quality of your extraction.

The thing that immediately jumps out to me is the volumes. "Eyeballing" just doesn't cut it if you are going for consistency. Get a measuring stick for each pot and calibrate it. eg add a quart at a time and mark it off.

After that, stirring is good for maximizing efficiency but GREAT for consistency.

bob352 said:

DME additions during fermentation?
Have not heard of that before. Sure it is a good idea?
Seems like lots could go wrong.

Click to expand...

This is the thread that taught me the method I use for post-pitch grav corrections:

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f36/help-me-troubleshoot-undershot-gravity-361948/

Basically, calculate the DME needed to bring your addition to the target grav, then how much you need to offset the SG points you missed, boil, chill, and add while the fermenter is still at high kraeusen.

I've used it three times now, and it's pretty bulletproof if you're careful about sanitation.

-Rich

rdkopp0153 said:

Do you stir after adding sparge water, let settle for a bit, then vorlauf?
Stirring after sparge water addition might help with grains making contact with water and increasing extraction.

Click to expand...

Sorry, yes, I always stir and settle sparge additions before vorlauf.

-Rich

billl said:

The thing that immediately jumps out to me is the volumes. "Eyeballing" just doesn't cut it if you are going for consistency. Get a measuring stick for each pot and calibrate it. eg add a quart at a time and mark it off.

After that, stirring is good for maximizing efficiency but GREAT for consistency.

Click to expand...

Yeah, consistency is what I'm after. I don't really care about efficiency, except insomuch as it means predictability.

What's the method you prefer for marking a stick? A dedicated dowel? Using a Sharpie on the mash paddle? Notching? In my experience Sharpie fades/dissolves in the mash or boil, which is scary. But then making notches in something I sanitize to stir my chilled wort with is no good: can't sanitize it any more.

I guess the dedicated dowel approach makes the most sense.

-Rich

bob352 said:

You will want to calibrate your boil pot (I use a dip stick), and figure out your evaporation rate so you can hit your original volume and gravity after the boil without more adjustments.

Click to expand...

This is a big one. I'm on an indoor electric setup (range + heat stick), and the good news is this means I can adjust the eyes' dials to get very close to the same boiloff rate each time, but what's the best way to get a read on that rate? Pre-and-post-boil volume measurements over a few brew sessions?

-Rich

I guess I always have to scratch my head when small-batch brewers make a stink about efficiency.

Efficiency matters if you're brewing 15bbl batches and need to maximize efficiency for your budget's sake. It doesn't matter when you're brewing 5 gallon batches and only need to increase your base malt by a 1/2 pound to make-up for poor efficiency.

TastySalmon said:

I guess I always have to scratch my head when small-batch brewers make a stink about efficiency.

Efficiency matters if you're brewing 15bbl batches and need to maximize efficiency for your budget's sake. It doesn't matter when you're brewing 5 gallon batches and only need to increase your base malt by a 1/2 pound to make-up for poor efficiency.

Click to expand...

True, but he's not making a stink about it and he doesn't care about the number.

He's trying to be consistent. That's important. It's hard to be 75% in one brew, and 50% in another. He's trying to hit a steady % each time, whatever that number is.

I hit 72% all the time when I batch sparge, always. And 75% when I fly sparge. Always. The actual efficiency isn't important, as grain is cheap, but being consistent IS important.

Anyway:
What kind of braid/false bottom/manifold do you have?

Yooper said:

I hit 72% all the time when I batch sparge, always. And 75% when I fly sparge. Always. The actual efficiency isn't important, as grain is cheap, but being consistent IS important.

Anyway:
What kind of braid/false bottom/manifold do you have?

Click to expand...

That's the consistency I'm looking for!

I've got one of these in a Rubbermaid:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B003ISY2DC/?tag=skimlinks_replacement-20

Never yet had a stuck sparge.

-Rich

One thing that might help, if it wasn't brought up, is to pull the wort to your boil pot slowly, like one gallon every 12 minutes or so. I regularly pull 7.5 to 8 gal of wort, so this should be at least an hour to hour and a half process. My efficiency is always 80-85%, though I do crush my own grains. I also use Beersmith, which has done me well. As far as your vorlauf, I would pull at minimum at least 5 quarts, or about 15-20 minutes worth. Though I now have a pump, I always used this method and was close to 80% even then. Something to consider.

frankieboy007 said:

One thing that might help, if it wasn't brought up, is to pull the wort to your boil pot slowly, like one gallon every 12 minutes or so.

Click to expand...

I know this is so for fly sparging, but my understanding is that a slow runoff makes no (or very little) difference when it comes to batch sparging. All the batch advice I've gotten is to vorlauf and set the grain bed, and then let it rip wide-open.

I do know that adding an additional 90 minutes to my brew day isn't happening. My process is already in the 5-6 hour range. Moving to 7-8 hours for a few more efficiency points just isn't worth it to me.

As was said above, consistency is the point of this post, not maximum efficiency. I should probably edit the FP to state that more clearly.

-Rich

[Edit: edited the first post to make the consistency point better.]

frankieboy007 said:

One thing that might help, if it wasn't brought up, is to pull the wort to your boil pot slowly, like one gallon every 12 minutes or so. I regularly pull 7.5 to 8 gal of wort, so this should be at least an hour to hour and a half process. My efficiency is always 80-85%, though I do crush my own grains. I also use Beersmith, which has done me well. As far as your vorlauf, I would pull at minimum at least 5 quarts, or about 15-20 minutes worth. Though I now have a pump, I always used this method and was close to 80% even then. Something to consider.

Click to expand...

But for batch sparging, which doesn't rely on the principle of diffusion like fly sparging does, a longer lauter isn't beneficial. Neither does a super long vorlauf.

Let me get this straight...your LHBS _won't_ double crush? I mean, whose grain is it anyway? You're paying them, right? Crush is the #1 factor in efficiency and until that's right, none of the other stuff will help all that much.

Denny said:

Let me get this straight...your LHBS _won't_ double crush? I mean, whose grain is it anyway? You're paying them, right? Crush is the #1 factor in efficiency and until that's right, none of the other stuff will help all that much.

Click to expand...

I am telling the thread three times: I'm not going for maximum efficiency, but for maximum consistency. I apologize for doing a poor job of making that point from the start.

I also mentioned in the FP that I'm happy with his standard crush, because it doesn't change. The fact that I can't change a crush that yields 70-75% efficiency doesn't bug me. I mentioned it to make the point that I can't change it.

Anyway, if it was his crush that was going all over the place, then double-crushing with an inconsistent gap wouldn't improve consistency either.

-Rich

PS. Thanks to everyone trying to help with my efficiency, but that's a battle for another time, once I know I can do the same thing twice running.

Echoloc8 said:

I am telling the thread three times: I'm not going for maximum efficiency, but for maximum consistency. I apologize for doing a poor job of making that point from the start.

I also mentioned in the FP that I'm happy with his standard crush, because it doesn't change. The fact that I can't change a crush that yields 70-75% efficiency doesn't bug me. I mentioned it to make the point that I can't change it.

Anyway, if it was his crush that was going all over the place, then double-crushing with an inconsistent gap wouldn't improve consistency either.

-Rich

PS. Thanks to everyone trying to help with my efficiency, but that's a battle for another time, once I know I can do the same thing twice running.

Click to expand...

That's not really how it works, though. A coarse crush (even a consistently coarse crush) is exactly the kind of thing that can give you significant variation in efficiency, especially in a non-recirculating system. The purpose of a fine crush is to get you complete conversion. Everyone, regardless of system type and sparging method, should be getting 95%+ conversion on every batch regardless of recipe. If you're not getting that, something isn't working right. If your LHBS's crush is coarse, you become very vulnerable to efficiency drops brought on by variations in grist composition, malt protein content, and even just your own stirring.

From there, lautering efficiency is mostly just a matter of time, system, and personal preference. (Likewise, if you really want to diagnose efficiency problems, you might consider doing some diagnostic work to figure out *where* exactly you're getting variation. Check out Kai's troubleshooting guide for a very comprehensive checklist: http://braukaiser.com/wiki/index.php?title=Troubleshooting_Brewhouse_Efficiency)

Echoloc8 said:

I am telling the thread three times: I'm not going for maximum efficiency, but for maximum consistency. I apologize for doing a poor job of making that point from the start.

...

PS. Thanks to everyone trying to help with my efficiency, but that's a battle for another time, once I know I can do the same thing twice running.

Click to expand...

I think what people are alluding to is that you will almost certainly find that to start with, they are one in the same. Consistency starts with efficiency and they are inextricably linked. Not to imply that you need to go for peak efficiency straight away, but to nail consistency, you need to start with finding the core of the efficiency issue.

As others have said, crush is the first thing to look at. Invest in a malt mill if you can, otherwise beg your LHBS to double crush or search around for a brew club where you can ask someone to use their mill (you could also probably ask another customer at the brew shop - strike up a conversation, and then bribe them with a couple of beers in exchange for using their mill .

MalFet said:

[...]Everyone, regardless of system type and sparging method, should be getting 95%+ conversion on every batch regardless of recipe. If you're not getting that, something isn't working right.[...]

Click to expand...

I have the feeling I'm misreading, and falling prey to terminology issues. Did you just say that no one should be happy with less than 95% efficiency (even if like Yooper above you get something like 72% every time), or are you making a point about conversion that's separate from sugar extraction?

-Rich

cyclonite said:

As others have said, crush is the first thing to look at. Invest in a malt mill if you can, otherwise beg your LHBS to double crush or search around for a brew club where you can ask someone to use their mill [...]

Click to expand...

More than getting my volumes right, or technique (stirring/pH monitoring/gravity testing) in the mash?

I started the thread specifically not wanting to make a big purchase, and $150ish for a milling setup is just that when I've never had any indication that my LHBS's crush is anything but workmanlike and consistent.

Other downsides to home milling include:

• Making a lot of noise the night before or first thing in the morning of brew day (wife acceptance fail)
• Making a lot of dust if done indoors (also a wife fail)
• Drawing attention if done outdoors (I live in Alabama and do not need busybody attention on my brew day)
• Storage for the beast and its hopper
• Wear and tear on my nice, expensive power drill

...all of which make getting my own mill a non-starter. I know people in my local club who mill, but they all live 30-50 miles from me, which would significantly complicate the prep for each batch.

The owner of my LHBS is actually very cool, and I could probably wheedle or cajole him into double-crushing or letting me do it, but I'm pretty sure there are cheap or free things I can change about my process that will pay off with less grief.

I don't mean to trigger a "well, if you truly cared about efficiency or consistency you'd pony up for a mill" response, but crush changes aren't worth it for me at this point.

If I get to the point where I know I've improved my processes and I'm still getting efficiency swings I can't otherwise account for, I'll look into crush tuning.

-Rich

Echoloc8 said:

I have the feeling I'm misreading, and falling prey to terminology issues. Did you just say that no one should be happy with less than 95% efficiency (even if like Yooper above you get it every time), or are you making a point about conversion that's separate from sugar extraction?

-Rich

Click to expand...

Right, the terminology needs to be precise here. When people talk about "efficiency", they usually mean "mash efficiency" or something like it. Mash efficiency is usually defined as the mass of sugar that ends up in your kettle divided by the mass of sugar that could be theoretically extracted in your grain. If you've got a tun full of grain that could potentially yield ten pounds of extract and eight of them end up in your kettle, you've got 80% efficiency.

The trouble is, just knowing mash efficiency is almost useless for troubleshooting. You really want to consider conversion and lautering efficiency separately because they have very different causes and very different implications for a consistent process. To troubleshoot efficiency problems you need to figure out where the missing sugar went. There are really only two possibilities:

1) Conversion losses: Conversion is a biochemical process, and you can measure your conversion efficiency by testing the gravity of your first runnings and doing a bit of math on the value you get. Whatever distance you are from 100% conversion efficiency is caused by the failure of some starches to be converted to sugar. This number really shouldn't be much below 95% under any circumstances, and if it is it is a sign that something isn't right.

2) Lautering losses: Lautering, on the other hand, is simply a mechanical process, and in batch sparging it is ultimately just a function of how much water you leave behind absorbed in the grain or in deadspaces. This number should vary considerably from system to system and also a bit depending grist bill size, but there's nothing *better* about a high lautering efficiency except for a bit of savings on grains. Two years ago I had a schmancy fly sparge system that sat at 88% efficiency batch over batch, but over time I've torn it down into a no-sparge 68% efficiency system. I usually brew in my kitchen while taking care of a three-year-old, and the simplicity is worth a few bucks in malt.

Ultimately, (2) is just a choice you make in balancing equipment, time, and preferences. (1), however, should be pretty much the same for everyone. When people see significant swings in mash efficiency from batch to batch, the issue is *usually* conversion. When people are having problems with conversion, the issue is usually crush. It's fine and dandy for your lautering process to be as efficient or inefficient as you find important, but if you are losing points to conversion you will have exactly the kinds of inconsistent results you are describing.

You shouldn't run out and buy a mill, because it could be a lot of different things. If I were in your position, I'd take the time to do the proper diagnostics to figure out where the missing sugars are going. It's worth getting into the habit of checking conversion on every batch, and if you come up low you can extend the mash, test your pH, check your measurements, etc.

MalFet said:

Ultimately, (2) is just a choice you make in balancing equipment, time, and preferences. (1), however, should be pretty much the same for everyone. When people see significant swings in mash efficiency from batch to batch, the issue is *usually* conversion. When people are having problems with conversion, the issue is usually crush. It's fine and dandy for your lautering process to be as efficient or inefficient as you find important, but if you are losing points to conversion you will have exactly the kinds of inconsistent results you are describing.

You shouldn't run out and buy a mill, because it could be a lot of different things. If I were in your position, I'd take the time to do the proper diagnostics to figure out where the missing sugars are going. It's worth getting into the habit of checking conversion on every batch, and if you come up low you can extend the mash, test your pH, check your measurements, etc.

Click to expand...

Awesome, thanks for this. I know that one of the weaknesses in my current process is that I don't check gravity until post-boil, when it's too late and there are too many varying factors that have already had their say. Since I have a refractometer that will be easy to do from now on.

From my first runnings and preboil gravity measurements I can compare with matching Beersmith calcs to check for incomplete conversion, right? Seeing this number vary would then point to a crush issue, if I'm understanding you. (Also presuming my thermometers aren't 20 degrees off in either direction.)

The sugars are the sugars, once lautering finishes. This really helps me understand the value of the Gravity Points figure I see bandied about, e.g., 1.045 * 6.5 gallons = (45 * 6.5) = 292.5. That same 292.5 GP will apply if I reduce to 5.5 gallons (1.053 SG then), or increase to 7.5 (1.039 SG). Eureka!

This eases my worries about boil volume control. Get my extract right, and then I really just need to dial in my boiloff rate, and err on the side of too much boiloff than too little. Dilution is easy once the range is off; concentration less so.

Okay, a follow-on question: let's say I've got my first runnings, and used an accurate volume measurement and refractometer reading to determine that I've undershot on conversion. Should I heat the runnings (running off will have cooled them) and add them back for additional mashing? Sparge water (already heated to near-170) would be denaturing-hot, right? I guess I could get the temp of the grains and add enough sparge water to get back to saccharification temps... What's the best method short of pumped recirculation to extend the mash?

-Rich

I don't think that Beersmith will do that. You need to compare your redings to the chart at braukaiser.com linked to in Malfet's earlier post.

Echoloc8 said:

Awesome, thanks for this. I know that one of the weaknesses in my current process is that I don't check gravity until post-boil, when it's too late and there are too many varying factors that have already had their say. Since I have a refractometer that will be easy to do from now on.

From my first runnings and preboil gravity measurements I can compare with matching Beersmith calcs to check for incomplete conversion, right? Seeing this number vary would then point to a crush issue, if I'm understanding you. (Also presuming my thermometers aren't 20 degrees off in either direction.)

Click to expand...

I don't know what numbers Beersmith offers or how it calculates them, so I can't say for sure on that. But, it's not too hard to calculate your first runnings gravity. The formula and its explanation are posted on Kai's website, and I think he's got a spreadsheet up there too. If Beersmith gives you expected first runnings gravity, that *should* be the same thing.

(As a side note, don't get too hung up on hitting your expected conversion numbers exactly. Extract potential (and moisture content) for malt varies more from sack to sack than most people realize, and likewise unless you do your own congress mash you're just using average values. You can expect your calculated conversion efficiency to be +/- 5% from the actual value.)

Echoloc8 said:

Okay, a follow-on question: let's say I've got my first runnings, and used an accurate volume measurement and refractometer reading to determine that I've undershot on conversion. Should I heat the runnings (running off will have cooled them) and add them back for additional mashing? Sparge water (already heated to near-170) would be denaturing-hot, right? I guess I could get the temp of the grains and add enough sparge water to get back to saccharification temps... What's the best method short of pumped recirculation to extend the mash?

-Rich

Click to expand...

Depends on your process. The easiest thing to do would probably be to open your cooler at the end of mash, give it a crazy big stir, vorlauf a bit, and then take a reading from that. You don't have to wait for the whole thing to have run out. If you think you need more time and your temperature has dropped a bit, you can add a smaller quantity of hot water to bump it back up a few degrees.

Wow, nothing like reading the instructions!

Read Kai's article, and fiddled with the spreadsheet he provides. I'll be digesting this for a while, but I'm beginning to see both the complexities of efficiency calculation and the rationale. It's great to see Kai lay it out all the way to "Here's where all the sugars went, adding up to 100%." Nice to know there's no magic involved, just some complexity.

Time to put on my big-boy-brewer pants and A) calibrate a stick for my boil kettle, and B) learn to use my refractometer for mid-process SG readings.

Now if only I had a brew day planned. All my fermenters are full!

-Rich

Echoloc8 said:

Wow, nothing like reading the instructions!

Read Kai's article, and fiddled with the spreadsheet he provides. I'll be digesting this for a while, but I'm beginning to see both the complexities of efficiency calculation and the rationale. It's great to see Kai lay it out all the way to "Here's where all the sugars went, adding up to 100%." Nice to know there's no magic involved, just some complexity.

Time to put on my big-boy-brewer pants and A) calibrate a stick for my boil kettle, and B) learn to use my refractometer for mid-process SG readings.

Now if only I had a brew day planned. All my fermenters are full!

-Rich

Click to expand...

Buckets are cheap!

divrguy said:

Buckets are cheap!

Click to expand...

Ha! This is true, but I'm also out of space to keep new fermenters.

-Rich

Echoloc8 said:

Yeah, consistency is what I'm after. I don't really care about efficiency, except insomuch as it means predictability.

What's the method you prefer for marking a stick? A dedicated dowel? Using a Sharpie on the mash paddle? Notching? In my experience Sharpie fades/dissolves in the mash or boil, which is scary. But then making notches in something I sanitize to stir my chilled wort with is no good: can't sanitize it any more.

I guess the dedicated dowel approach makes the most sense.

-Rich

Click to expand...

This has helped me a lot. I just found a cheap piece of 1x1 that I had laying around the garage and used that to mark off volumes. I also went to a restaurant supply store and bought a 22 Qt bucket with qt. volumes marked on it. I tested that by adding water from a 2Qt bowl I know is accurate and it was spot on. Then I would fill up a gallon, dump it in my boil pot and mark with a sharpie, each subsequent gallon. Since I only use that for measuring water, the marks haven't faded on it at all. Just measure the wort you get in the kettle from your first mash, then subract that from what you want your pre-boil volume to be and that will tell you exactly what you need to sparge with.

Volumes are a big deal and until I did this, I found I was always, off, even using water calculators I always had more water left in the tun than I wanted. The two things that seemed to have helped my efficiency the most were correct water volume and my own mill to crush to my preference.

As others have said though, once you get to the 70-75% range, you are doing OK. At that point, rather than chasing the numbers, just enjoy the consistency. I think bein consistant is better for making good beer than getting higher efficiencies, but being of by 5% + or - every time.

Clonefan94 said:

Volumes are a big deal and until I did this, I found I was always, off, even using water calculators I always had more water left in the tun than I wanted. The two things that seemed to have helped my efficiency the most were correct water volume and my own mill to crush to my preference.

As others have said though, once you get to the 70-75% range, you are doing OK. At that point, rather than chasing the numbers, just enjoy the consistency. I think bein consistant is better for making good beer than getting higher efficiencies, but being of by 5% + or - every time.

Click to expand...

Yeah, that's my plan after this discussion.

First, I'm going to make a calibrated dowel for my boil kettle. I'm going to be using it for hot wort as well as water, and I've watched my buddy's stick need remarking, so I'm buying a set of letter and number punches so I can actually stamp the numbers and lines into the wood. I may make more for my other pots, but boil kettle is first.

Second, I'm going to get familiar with my refractometer and use it at each stage: first runnings, post-sparge/preboil, etc. along with a calculator like Kai's to be sure of my numbers and allow adjustments early.

And consistency is indeed my goal. I'm using someone else's crush and batch sparging, so I don't expect anything over 70-75% brewhouse efficiency, But I do want to hit conversion and volume numbers within narrow bands each time.

-Rich

Brewing a Russian Imperial Stout today. Got 94.7% mash efficiency, and I have a nicely calibrated dipstick to be certain of my volumes. Bodes well for the brew.

I need a little less than 2 gallons' boil off (7.21 at mash temp down to 5.2 gal at boiling=5 gal at pitching temp), and with a 15" diameter pot my 90 minute boil ought to make it happen.

-Rich

Forgot to post my post-mortem. Wound up hitting very close to my intended gravity (1.090 of 1.093), which is the best I've ever done for an all-grain beer this size. It was a huge grain bill, too: 22.2 lbs of grain and 6.8ish gallons of water in a 10-gallon MLT made for less than 2 inches of head space, barely enough to screw the cooler's lid on!

I forgot to collect my mid-lauter SG, so I couldn't fill out Kai's entire spreadsheet, but it's good to know I could have. Unsurprisingly, my 60% estimate of brewhouse efficiency wasn't far off: with that much grain it's just hard to lauter well.

Calibrated and used my refractometer for the first time, and learned to convert from Brix to SG. Great to be able to get a quickie gravity reading without risking my hydrometer in hot liquid.

The dipstick did its job. I marked it in quart increments, and it's awesome to know I don't need to guess at volumes any more! :rockin:

Thanks again to everyone who pitched in on this thread.

-Rich