Question about the necessity of the manifold

So here's the gist. I've brewed all grain about two or three times before using a cooler one of my guys converted to a tun. I was then showing it to my dad so he could help build me one, since my know how in handyman work is severly lacking. However, he said that since the manifold is acting primarily as a filter, I could just use a nylon mesh thread to collect my grains and just sprage that way, letting the wort drain out my bottling bucket back into the brewpot. He suggests this rather than going through the process of building a manifold, via copper or a stainless braid.

I wonder if any of you have ever tried such a procedure or can list any potential pros or cons with experimenting with a new way to filter the grains that doesn't rely on the mainfold or braid. Thanks.

I'm not sure what you mean by using nylon mesh thread, but your father is correct that the only real purpose of the manifold in a batch sparging system is to keep the spent grain in and to let the liquid out. Many people use a nylon bag instead. Search for "brew in a bag".

I agree: search for BIAB

My own experience has been that BIAB = convenience and good strain but low efficiency; manifold = not always the best strain but very good efficiency

You are also trying to spread out the "input points" to the drain system to avoid channeling.

I do smaller 3 to 5 gallon batches and use a 5 gallon igloo MLT. I use a 5 gallon nylon paint strainer from lowes rather than a manifold but you do need to create a fluid channel/resevoir at your outlet or else it can very easily slow and block. I bought one of those stainless sink drain screens that look like a small mesh dome when upside down for a couple of bucks from the hardware and put a small hole in it and enclose my outflow. I place the nylon bag in the tun and mash and sparge as everone else. works great and everything cleans up well.

with the MLT bought it at low cost at walmart I did add some expanding foam insulation to the lid and it holds temps easily for an hour and many times to 90 min losing only 2 to 4 degrees over that time at most
I did buy the parts to change the spigot to a valve with barb/nipple so that I can adjust the flow rate. whole system works great without me having to lift out the bag hold it up to drain etc like the BIAB method. this is more like using a manifold or false bottom that lines the entire tun

Not sure if it's in the online version of How to Brew or not, but Palmer has a whole section of the book dedicated to different manifold designs vs false bottom vs nothing but a single line of exit for the wort. He's got an awful lot of science backing up the utility of using a false bottom or well designed manifold to get maximum efficiency and minimize the chances of blocking things up and producing stuck sparges.

joety said:

You are also trying to spread out the "input points" to the drain system to avoid channeling.

Click to expand...

stratslinger said:

Not sure if it's in the online version of How to Brew or not, but Palmer has a whole section of the book dedicated to different manifold designs vs false bottom vs nothing but a single line of exit for the wort. He's got an awful lot of science backing up the utility of using a false bottom or well designed manifold to get maximum efficiency and minimize the chances of blocking things up and producing stuck sparges.

Click to expand...

Are you guys having problems with channeling and efficiency with batch sparging? Those seem like fly sparging concerns to me.

I batch sparge so have not had any problem with channeling etc esp with the resevoir I now have
my efficiency is usually in the low to mid 70's(i think from my crush using a corona mill) but one batch did get as high as 83%.

with the nylon bag in the tun if there is any concern or problem with a stuck batch sparge it can be lifted up and out just like BIAB and drained. I added the small resevoir to avert this and have not had a stuck sparge since the first time when the nylon covered the valve opening and did slow things up. I originally had a SS braid befor this but this is much better for me

MalFet said:

Are you guys having problems with channeling and efficiency with batch sparging? Those seem like fly sparging concerns to me.

Click to expand...

I have no problems with efficiency or channeling with my manifold setup and I do batch sparge. I regularly get 80-87% BHE depending on the grain bill.

Here's my opinion on the situation:

I keep reading people suggest that when batch sparging a manifold is unnecessary because we just want to be able to get the liquid out of the tun. I don't believe that. The key to getting all available sugars out of the grist (in my opinion) is to realize that the grain will always have more sugar in it than the water. As such, you will always benefit from evenly lautering throughout the WHOLE grain bed (not just the part of the bed surrounding the braid) and lautering at a slower rate.

Again, my opinion....and I'm certainly willing to admit that I'm wrong.

stinkynathan said:

I keep reading people suggest that when batch sparging a manifold is unnecessary because we just want to be able to get the liquid out of the tun. I don't believe that. The key to getting all available sugars out of the grist (in my opinion) is to realize that the grain will always have more sugar in it than the water. As such, you will always benefit from evenly lautering throughout the WHOLE grain bed (not just the part of the bed surrounding the braid) and lautering at a slower rate.

Click to expand...

I'll admit to being skeptical, but if it works for you than I've got no gripes. Wouldn't an infusion with a proper stir be lautering throughout the whole grain bed, as you say? It seems like sugar equilibrium is more a function of proportional mathematics than of mash tun design.

stinkynathan said:

I keep reading people suggest that when batch sparging a manifold is unnecessary because we just want to be able to get the liquid out of the tun. I don't believe that. The key to getting all available sugars out of the grist (in my opinion) is to realize that the grain will always have more sugar in it than the water. As such, you will always benefit from evenly lautering throughout the WHOLE grain bed (not just the part of the bed surrounding the braid) and lautering at a slower rate.

Again, my opinion....and I'm certainly willing to admit that I'm wrong.

Click to expand...

Do you stir the mash after adding sparge water? If not that's your problem. The manifold is unnecessay, but I find it more convenient.

I've tried BIAB, manifold, strainers, whatever to drain and sparge and they all work. But (for me) nothing beats batch sparging with a stainless steel hose braid for ease and efficiency. I'll never go back.

MalFet said:

I'll admit to being skeptical, but if it works for you than I've got no gripes. Wouldn't an infusion with a proper stir be lautering throughout the whole grain bed, as you say? It seems like sugar equilibrium is more a function of proportional mathematics than of mash tun design.

Click to expand...

I guess I might have explained it poorly. My thought is that drawing the liquid from the mash through the whole grain bed gives you better efficiency because you're drawing sugars out of all the grain evenly, instead of just the stuff above the braid.

There's less dead space with a manifold too. I think my 12 gallon rectangular cooler has 1 cup of dead space if I level it. Yes, call my picky, but I use a 4' level to level out my mash tun every time I brew.

MalFet said:

Do you stir the mash after adding sparge water? If not that's your problem. The manifold is unnecessay, but I find it more convenient.

Click to expand...

Yes I stir....but I don't HAVE a problem with my setup. I have very minimal dead space (~1 cup) and regularly get 80-87% BHE with my setup. I batch sparge with a CPVC manifold.

But if you sparged the grains correctly, wouldn't you still get the same result since the nylon is full of little holes that allow all the sugar to be properly absorbed by the water and then flushed out via a spigot? I've read in a couple places that manifold give you better efficiency, but I'm having trouble understanding why.

So you attached that mash part on the inside to prevent the bag from clogging up the valve to release the water, in essence? Also, what did you do to help improve the efficiency of your mash, just up the grains by a bit?

You need to understand the different sparging methods to understand why manifold design is important.

Batch sparging is essentially just adding your sparge water in "batches" and stirring, then draining as fast as your mash tun will allow. Filtering is the only concern when batch sparging.

Fly sparging is continually adding hot "liquor"(water) to the top of the grain bed and simultaneously draining out the bottom of the tun at the same rate. Manifold design becomes important with this method as "channeling" is something that you want to avoid. Channeling is basically when the wort takes a single or very few pathways through the grain bed when draining. When this happens there are areas of the grain where very little water is flowing, thus leaving this sugar behind and not getting into your wort, reducing efficiency. Efficiency is the measure of how well you are converting and then collecting the sugars that are available in a particular mash.

smizak said:

You need to understand the different sparging methods to understand why manifold design is important.

Batch sparging is essentially just adding your sparge water in "batches" and stirring, then draining as fast as your mash tun will allow. Filtering is the only concern when batch sparging.

Fly sparging is continually adding hot "liquor"(water) to the top of the grain bed and simultaneously draining out the bottom of the tun at the same rate. Manifold design becomes important with this method as "channeling" is something that you want to avoid. Channeling is basically when the wort takes a single or very few pathways through the grain bed when draining. When this happens there are areas of the grain where very little water is flowing, thus leaving this sugar behind and not getting into your wort, reducing efficiency. Efficiency is the measure of how well you are converting and then collecting the sugars that are available in a particular mash.

Click to expand...

Exactly, and to add to that. It seems to me that you could gain efficiency points by using a well-designed manifold while batch sparging. The same channeling that happens during fly sparging also occurs during batch sparging. If you're into squeeking out every efficiency point you can, using a good manifold will help.

Maybe it's not enough to matter, but grain = money, even if it's not very much. My manifold probably cost me less than $10 and maybe an hour of time. It's definitely paid for itself.

stinkynathan said:

I guess I might have explained it poorly. My thought is that drawing the liquid from the mash through the whole grain bed gives you better efficiency because you're drawing sugars out of all the grain evenly, instead of just the stuff above the braid.

There's less dead space with a manifold too. I think my 12 gallon rectangular cooler has 1 cup of dead space if I level it. Yes, call my picky, but I use a 4' level to level out my mash tun every time I brew.

Click to expand...

Just to clarify, that second quote you attributed to me was actually from bja. As for me, I don't imagine that you would get lower efficiency by using a manifold, but I still can't say that I buy that flow-path is a significant consideration when batch sparging.

Here's an experiment: If you stir your infusion thoroughly and then take refractometer readings at various points in the grain bed, you should get identical readings everywhere. When you drain, you aren't drawing sugars out of the grain bed (evenly or unevenly); those sugars have already been drawn out. Unless you're suggesting that the sugars drop out and go back into the grain to stay behind somehow, then all the liquid you pull from a batch sparge should be homogenous in gravity.

I've done tested this a couple of times and have always gotten results consistent with this. If you've got data to the contrary, though, I would certainly love to hear about it.

Obviously the situation is completely different with fly sparging. And of course, if you are getting less deadspace with a manifold, that's a good thing, but a different issue. I hope this doesn't come off as pedantic nit-picking. FWIW, I use a false-bottom on a direct-fired recirculation tun so none of these questions really apply to me. I do think it is interesting to figure out what is and what isn't a relevant concern in a simple mash system, though, and I'm not convinced that the OP should see any reason to use a manifold if it seems inconvenient to him.

stinkynathan said:

The same channeling that happens during fly sparging also occurs during batch sparging. If you're into squeeking out every efficiency point you can, using a good manifold will help.

Click to expand...

Not really, the issue with channeling and fly sparging is the sparge water never hits some of the grain, it is just flushing right out.

On a batch sparge, if you stir, it would make no difference, the stir just killed your grain bed, you are starting over.

camus said:

Not really, the issue with channeling and fly sparging is the sparge water never hits some of the grain, it is just flushing right out.

On a batch sparge, if you stir, it would make no difference, the stir just killed your grain bed, you are starting over.

Click to expand...

If you are fly sparging correctly, all of the grain is wet because there's enough water in the MLT to cover the grain plus an inch or whatever your preference is.

stinkynathan said:

Exactly, and to add to that. It seems to me that you could gain efficiency points by using a well-designed manifold while batch sparging. The same channeling that happens during fly sparging also occurs during batch sparging. If you're into squeeking out every efficiency point you can, using a good manifold will help.

Click to expand...

If you stir the mash after adding sparge water, channeling is a moot point. All the water now has the same concentration of dissolved sugars. All the grain has been rinsed equally. You can't do any better than that with batch sparging.

MalFet said:

Are you guys having problems with channeling and efficiency with batch sparging? Those seem like fly sparging concerns to me.

Click to expand...

I fly sparge.