Do people report mash efficiency or brewhouse efficiency? - Home Brew Forums

Register Now!
Home Brew Forums > Home Brewing Beer > All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing > Do people report mash efficiency or brewhouse efficiency?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-21-2011, 04:28 AM   #1
thisoneguy
 
thisoneguy's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Sep 2011
Macomb, MI
Posts: 274
Liked 26 Times on 18 Posts



Just what the question says... I made my second AG batch this weekend. I got a Barley Crusher and based on many of the posts on here, I expected (perhaps due to a misunderstanding of what people were posting about) to see my brewhouse efficiency hit the 80's.

My mash efficiency was about 82%, but my overall brewhouse efficiency was only 68% (both according to Beersmith). FWIW, this batch was a single infusion, batch sparge.

I know that there are things that I can change to increase my efficiency, but I'm really wondering if there was even a problem? When people are reporting mid- to high-80's for efficiency, should I just assume they're talking about mash efficiency only? Or should I be refining my process to aim for the 80's as my overall brewhouse efficiency?

Thanks! I'm new to brewing in the last 6 months or so, and you guys (and ladies) here on HBT have really helped shorten my learning curve... I feel like I'm on the road from "drinkable" beer to "good" beer - to my taste buds, at least - in a very short time. Cheers!

 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2011, 04:42 AM   #2
two_hearted
 
two_hearted's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Apr 2010
Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 2,251
Liked 192 Times on 155 Posts


In my opinion, people get too hung up on efficiency. As long as your in the 60s or 70s your doing just fine. I would shoot more for consistency and just adjust your recipe to your consistent brew house efficiency. If you're getting up in the mid to high 80s you probably need to start worrying about tannin extraction. I'd rather be consistently at 68% and have to buy an extra handful of base malt each time. You're still going to make good beer.

 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2011, 04:56 AM   #3
thisoneguy
 
thisoneguy's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Sep 2011
Macomb, MI
Posts: 274
Liked 26 Times on 18 Posts


Quote:
Originally Posted by maxam
I'd rather be consistently at 68% and have to buy an extra handful of base malt each time. You're still going to make good beer.
This is a good summary of how I feel. I'm not going pro and doing this for money anytime soon, so I'm not going to sweat it if my efficiency isn't super high. I'll just take some more base malt out of the giant 50-lb sack I just bought to make up for it.

This was just the first time I was able to take enough measurements to calculate efficiency, so I was curious what could have caused the discrepancy between what I expected and what I achieved. The more I read, I actually think there isn't any discrepancy... my mash eff was >80 and I think those #'s seem to be the most reported.

 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2011, 06:13 AM   #4
asterix404
Recipes 
 
Mar 2009
Natick, MA
Posts: 568
Liked 12 Times on 12 Posts


People report mash efficiency. Brew house efficiency is something I have read about but never really understood. I would agree whole heartedly about consistency. In this scale adding more grain is a perfectly viable option for a very long time. Eventually you will get an adjustable grain mill and start fiddling with it and condition your grain and fiddle some more with it and get into the high 80's or even high 90's.

They also report actual yield which is very different from theoretical yield. That has to do with taking out the parts of the grain which won't convert to anything if I remember from a book I read a long time ago.

 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2011, 01:59 PM   #5
stux
Recipes 
 
Sep 2011
Sydney, NSW
Posts: 94
Liked 3 Times on 3 Posts


People report both.

Unless they say "Into Fermenter" or "Into Boil" or words to that effect you can't really be sure
__________________
For in-depth BIAB info try http://biabrewer.info

 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2011, 02:12 PM   #6
broadbill
Recipes 
 
Aug 2007
Southern Maine
Posts: 3,921
Liked 531 Times on 358 Posts


This thread indicates that people are very confused about efficiency.

People report brewhouse efficiency, not mash efficiency (also know as conversion efficiency).

From Kaiser's website:

brewhouse efficiency = conversion efficiency * lauter efficiency

Conversion/Mash efficiency is the how effective you are at converting starches to sugars in the mash step.

Lauter efficiency is the how effective you are at removing/rinsing those sugars from the mash so the end up in your brew-pot.

If you are taking a gravity reading on a sample that has left the mash-tun (i.e. runnings), you are looking at brewhouse efficiency. This is because you can't separate the conversion efficiency from the lauter efficiency; whatever you get for gravity is a product of both of these factors.

Hope this helps...this is required reading if you want to understand this fully:

Troubleshooting Brewhouse Efficiency - German brewing and more

 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2011, 02:15 PM   #7
broadbill
Recipes 
 
Aug 2007
Southern Maine
Posts: 3,921
Liked 531 Times on 358 Posts


Quote:
Originally Posted by stux View Post
People report both.

Unless they say "Into Fermenter" or "Into Boil" or words to that effect you can't really be sure
The only reason those two numbers are different is because the volume has been reduced by a boil step. Efficiency has nothing to do with why these numbers are different. Your efficiency has already been determined by your process upstream of the boil step.

 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2011, 02:18 PM   #8
matalec1984
Recipes 
 
Jul 2011
Shrewsbury, Ma
Posts: 106

So in essence what you are saying broadbill is that after I finished my sparge and have collected all of my liquid from my tun. If I pull out a sample and take a pre-boil gravity reading of that sample (of course letting it cool down enough to get an accurate hydrometer reading) then I am taking a reading of my brewhouse efficiency?
__________________
Bottled:ESB, Rye Dog Pale Ale V.1, All the Kings Horses Pilsner v.1, Imperial Pumpkin Ale, Daywalker Red Ale v.1,Hazelnut Spiced Porter, 2009 Red Meritage, 2011 Dry Mead, 2009 New England Cyser, 2009 South African Shiraz, 2009 Chilean Chardonnay, 2011 Dry Johannisburg Riesling
Primary: Vanilla Milk stout v.2 and v.3, Chocolate Raspberry Port
Secondary:Italian Barolo, Cran-Blackberry Melomel, Peach Icewine
On Deck:Isla's Boon Strawberry Blonde v.1, Caramel Apple Mead

 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2011, 02:23 PM   #9
wilserbrewer
BIAB Expert Tailor
HBT_SPONSOR.png
 
wilserbrewer's Avatar
Recipes 
 
May 2007
Jersey Shore, Jersey
Posts: 9,436
Liked 1321 Times on 1013 Posts


The actual brewhouse efficiency is measured for an entire system. Unlike the dry grain yield or potential measured in a lab, real brewers achieve only a percentage of the ideal number due to real considerations such as efficiency of the mashing process, and losses due to boiling, deadspace or trub. This percentage of the potential, as measured across the whole system into the fermenter, is the brewhouse efficiency.

A related term is mash efficiency. Unlike brewhouse efficiency, mash efficiency measures only the efficiency of the mash and sparging steps. Mash efficiency can be through of as the percent of potential fermentables extracted during the mashing process that actually make it into the boiler.


excerpt from link below

Brewhouse Efficiency for All Grain Beer Brewing | Home Brewing Beer Blog by BeerSmith

 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2011, 02:39 PM   #10
broadbill
Recipes 
 
Aug 2007
Southern Maine
Posts: 3,921
Liked 531 Times on 358 Posts


Quote:
Originally Posted by matalec1984 View Post
So in essence what you are saying broadbill is that after I finished my sparge and have collected all of my liquid from my tun. If I pull out a sample and take a pre-boil gravity reading of that sample (of course letting it cool down enough to get an accurate hydrometer reading) then I am taking a reading of my brewhouse efficiency?
yep. Whatever your gravity is at that point (going into the kettle) is a result of the starches you were able to convert to sugars in the mash step (conversion efficiency) and what sugars you were able to rinse away from the grains/mash bed (lauter efficiency).

That number you calculate after mash/sparge is your brewhouse efficiency. As for a guideline, anything between 60-80% is good, and I agree with the others that consistency is the most important.

If you are interested in getting better efficiency, again I recommend that you read Kaiser's link I posted above. I will tell you that based on what I've seen on this forum--if you are batch sparging I would guess your problem is your crush (you aren't crushing fine enough). If you are fly sparging--it could very well be an issue with either crush or fly sparge technique.

Good luck!

 
Reply With Quote
Reply
Thread Tools



Forum Jump