Max Efficiency: Braided hose vs. copper manifold?

Hey everyone,

What's a better way (more efficient) to separate the liquid form the grains in my igloo cooler? Right now I have the braided hose, but will a copper manifold work better?

Thanks!

If you batch sparging it will make zero difference (if dead space is the same.) If your fly sparging you really should have a more complex manifold than a braid. With batch sparging the whole run off is the same gravity regardless.

Well I batch sparge 90% of the time... so thanks!

Conroe said:

If you batch sparging it will make zero difference (if dead space is the same.) If your fly sparging you really should have a more complex manifold than a braid. With batch sparging the whole run off is the same gravity regardless.

Click to expand...

Agreed.

I've had both, and I really prefer my manifold simply b/c it tends to run off a bit faster than the braid. If it was a matter of price and ease, braid wins hands down.

Yep, for batch sparging, IMO, the braid is the way to go. Much cheaper and easier to build, and your efficiency will be the same.

JJL said:

Yep, for batch sparging, IMO, the braid is the way to go. Much cheaper and easier to build, and your efficiency will be the same.

Click to expand...

Cheaper if compared to a copper manifold, but not a CPVC. I made the inside manifold for my MLT out of CPVC for probably around $3. The braids I looked at were a lot more expensive

+1 CPVC. Very cheap and simple to assemble. A couple bucks, a saw and 20 minutes. Easy.

Would a CPVC manifold benefit batch sparging? what size holes or cuts do you put in the manifold?

Zeppman said:

Would a CPVC manifold benefit batch sparging? what size holes or cuts do you put in the manifold?

Click to expand...

With batch sparging, the design really doesnt matter. A manifold will allow you try fly sparging if you you ever choose to do so. I used a dremel tool to cut slits in the CPVC tubing about every inch or so. I also Drilled one, 1/16" hole in the corner of all my 90 degree elbows. Here is what mine looks like



its about 4 1/2" wide and sites in a 9" coleman cooler. Done 3 all grains, batch sparge, haven't used rice hulls and haven't had a stuck sparge. Used 30% adjucts on one of the beers.

Sorry for the stupid question, but can someone tell me why it won't make a difference for batch sparging? I know "dead space" and "gravity" was described before, but I'm not quite following...

Zeppman said:

Sorry for the stupid question, but can someone tell me why it won't make a difference for batch sparging? I know "dead space" and "gravity" was described before, but I'm not quite following...

Click to expand...

You should read Bobby_M's all grain guide he has a good description. But in sparging, you are rinsing the sugars off of the grains. Batch sparging simply means you add the water all at one time, stir the grains, vorlauf and collect your wort. Fly sparging is where you vorlauf and then at a steady rate (equal to you run off) apply/pour/filter water over the top of the grainbed and the water will filter down and rinse the grains. Depending on your manifold design, it will cause different "currents." A poor design could lend to certain parts of your grainbed not being rinsed. The design doesnt matter in batch sparging because you are applying all of the sparge water at once. How to brew also has good info on this

Bobby_M's guide: http://www.suebob.com/brew/Bobby_Mallgrainprimer.pdf

How To Brew: http://www.howtobrew.com/appendices/appendixD-1.html

when making my CPVC manifold i cut slits in the tubing about every 3/8 in with a sharp saw. Your average hand saw is perfect. The cuts are almost half way through the pipe. It works nicely.

I fly sparge with a braided hose without any issue. I tried both (my friend's mash tun has a copper manifold) and didn't see any improvements in efficiency or beer quality using either the hose or the manifold. I may upgrade to a manifold anyway just because it's more sturdy and durable, but the results have been the same for me. My 2 cents.

I also tried both manifold and braided hose and didn't notice any difference in efficiency. This is my manifold I'm using now. The rubber hose is flexible, so the manifold lays on the bottom, so there is no dead space. The slits are on the other side of the manifold, the top slits are for easy removal of air when you pour the strike water in. I never glued this thing, this way it's easy to take it apart and rinse it off or just throw it into the dishwasher.

The reason that it doesn't mater with batch sparging is because the mash will equalize at a certain gravity. No amount of stirring or recirculation will change that. You can only get that gravity higher with better conversion and that has nothing to do with the launter device.

Conroe said:

The reason that it doesn't mater with batch sparging is because the mash will equalize at a certain gravity. No amount of stirring or recirculation will change that. You can only get that gravity higher with better conversion and that has nothing to do with the launter device.

Click to expand...

And what I'm saying is that I didn't see any difference when I fly sparged with either the manifold or the braided hose.



At this very moment, something seemingly genius just occurred to me. What if we designed a mash tun by insulating a conical fermentor and placed some kind of screen at the bottom? Of course it wouldn't work if you're big into step mashing, but for a single step infusion mash, I'd bet it would be great. It would significantly reduce problems caused by having to drain from the side of a cooler. Instead, you would drain directly from underneath. Just a thought...

mithion said:

What if we designed a mash tun by insulating a conical fermentor and placed some kind of screen at the bottom?

Click to expand...

Sounds like a false bottom (Blichmann's being one of the premiere examples) or the old "Zapap" double-bucket design...

[QUOTE

At this very moment, something seemingly genius just occurred to me. What if we designed a mash tun by insulating a conical fermentor and placed some kind of screen at the bottom? Of course it wouldn't work if you're big into step mashing, but for a single step infusion mash, I'd bet it would be great. It would significantly reduce problems caused by having to drain from the side of a cooler. Instead, you would drain directly from underneath. Just a thought...[/QUOTE]

I think a lot of the pro. models work that way. A new MLT I saw at a local brewery basically has four conicals built in to the bottom of the vessel.

I believe a manifold makes a difference because you can manipulate geometry, position of slits or holes, etc depending on your tun and anticipated grain bed depths. This allows you to use a continuous sparging method in a manner that ensures a good rinse of all sugars and optimizes your efficiency. The braids are just too localized to get a good set of channels going.

I have a copper manifold I cut by hand; I usually do something in between. Like to stop, stir, rest, and vorlauf once or twice during the lauter.