Home Brew Forums > Home Brewing Beer > All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing > John Palmer vs BeerSmith Efficiency Question
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-15-2012, 06:55 PM   #1
scruff311
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Providence, RI
Posts: 100
Liked 2 Times on 2 Posts
Likes Given: 5

Default John Palmer vs BeerSmith Efficiency Question

I just read the section on All-Grain Brewing by John Palmer and saw that he has a somewhat simple equation for calculating efficiency shown here at bullet 14: http://www.howtobrew.com/section3/chapter18-6.html

I used this formula for my last couple of brews and found my numbers were horrible (22-24). I used the pre-boil gravity at a temp of ~150 F (I assume this is the gravity that should be used).

However, when I calculate my mash efficiency using BeerSmith I get ~75% which is pretty good. I was taking this gravity with a sample that was cooled to room temperature though.

Am I taking gravity at the wrong temperature for one of these methods?


scruff311 is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2012, 08:26 PM   #2
ajf
Senior Member
HBT_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
ajf's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Long Island
Posts: 4,643
Liked 103 Times on 97 Posts
Likes Given: 39

Default

You're comparing apples to oranges. Beersmith reports efficiency as a % of the theoretical maximum efficiency. Palmer's method calculates points per gallon. You can make a reasonable approximation of % efficiency by dividing his number (22 - 24) by 36.
The other thing, is that you should take hydrometer readings at thy hydrometer calibration temperature (usually 60 F). Taking a hydrometer reading at 150F will give you a very inaccurate figure.

-a.


__________________
There are only 10 types of people in this world. Those that understand binary, and those that don't.
ajf is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2012, 09:42 PM   #3
scruff311
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Providence, RI
Posts: 100
Liked 2 Times on 2 Posts
Likes Given: 5

Default

Ahh ok. Palmer simply states "Measure the gravity in the boiling pot" which implies just dropping the hydrometer in the kettle after sparging is complete, hence a temperature of ~150 F.

So in general, when taking any gravity reading (pre-boil, post-boil, etc) should you always try to get the sample to ~60 F?
scruff311 is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2012, 09:59 PM   #4
duboman
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Glenview, IL
Posts: 6,365
Liked 506 Times on 468 Posts
Likes Given: 226

Default

There is a known issue with the way BeerSmith calculates efficiency and it has been discussed at length in the Software forum, primarily by a poster-CWI. Follow this link and scroll down to his post. You can also search CWI, he/she has written at length in various threads regarding efficiency settings as well as solutions and work arounds.
http://www.homebrewtalk.com/f84/beer...roblem-357979/
__________________
Nothing Left to do but smile and drink beer.....

The Commune Brewing Company-Perfecting the "art" of beer since 2010
duboman is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2012, 07:55 PM   #5
scruff311
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Providence, RI
Posts: 100
Liked 2 Times on 2 Posts
Likes Given: 5

Default

Thanks for that link. It definitely seems more straightforward to configure BeerSmith that way. I always hated having to fuss with the Brew House Efficiency to get the Est. Mash Efficiency to match what I get with my system.

I'd still like to know as a general rule of thumb when measurements, Jim Palmer or otherwise, call for a pre-boil gravity reading, should you cool your wort sample to the hydrometer calibration temp (~60 F)? I get very different Mash Efficiency numbers depending on whether I use a sample at ~150 F or ~60 F (naturally).
scruff311 is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2012, 08:17 PM   #6
duboman
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Glenview, IL
Posts: 6,365
Liked 506 Times on 468 Posts
Likes Given: 226

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by scruff311
Thanks for that link. It definitely seems more straightforward to configure BeerSmith that way. I always hated having to fuss with the Brew House Efficiency to get the Est. Mash Efficiency to match what I get with my system.

I'd still like to know as a general rule of thumb when measurements, Jim Palmer or otherwise, call for a pre-boil gravity reading, should you cool your wort sample to the hydrometer calibration temp (~60 F)? I get very different Mash Efficiency numbers depending on whether I use a sample at ~150 F or ~60 F (naturally).
When checking gravity it is best to have your sample as close to 60 as possible as any adjustments made for temps of 100+ are not very accurate.

Many people will use a refractometer for this purpose. Personally I take a quick sample and throw it in the freezer for about 10-15 minutes to chill while the wort gets to boil.
__________________
Nothing Left to do but smile and drink beer.....

The Commune Brewing Company-Perfecting the "art" of beer since 2010
duboman is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2012, 08:26 PM   #7
TheBeerist
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Santa Ana, CA
Posts: 250
Liked 12 Times on 12 Posts
Likes Given: 4

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by scruff311 View Post
Ahh ok. Palmer simply states "Measure the gravity in the boiling pot" which implies just dropping the hydrometer in the kettle after sparging is complete, hence a temperature of ~150 F.

So in general, when taking any gravity reading (pre-boil, post-boil, etc) should you always try to get the sample to ~60 F?
For on-the-fly gravity readings, I'd highly recommend investing in a refractometer. No waiting to chill a sample and you get almost instant gravity readings as well.
TheBeerist is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 07:53 PM   #8
cwi
Registered User
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Austin
Posts: 845
Liked 34 Times on 28 Posts
Likes Given: 1

Default

After you break your hydrometer, post pics in the broken hydrometer thread, then go buy a refractometer. You can find them for ~$30, and they are the same as the LHBS $60 ones. Go off the Brix/Plato scale and convert to SG using an online converter, or mult by .004 and add 1 (i.e. (15 x .004) + 1 = 1.060) for ball park numbers. Refractometers aren't a complete replacement, since they don't work post fermentation- at least not without a bunch of effort. They do allow you to limit your hydrometer needs to only the more accurate/precise/readable 'final gravity' range hydrometers.

RE:BeerSmith. It's been awhile since I stirred up that hornet's nest. It was a lot of work, but it looks like it had the desired effect. I just checked some postings, and it seems BeerSmith is hinting he will be adding the ability to base things off of mash eff and batch volume in the kettle. I doubt it will get BIAB calcs right, but the Aussie's have a spreadsheet that will take an almost to scale recipe, and give the amount to up the grain bill by.

Another funny thing during that rantfest was that I mocked BeerSmith for their marketing manifesto of "No formulas!" and "We do the calcs for you!", when the one calc you have to do yourself, and aren't even given a formula or online tool for, is their "Brewhouse Efficiency". Shortly after I posted, a new calc tool quietly appeared on BeerSmith. No fessing up from BeerSmith himself, though. Strange little world over there.

I have hopes for the next version of the free/open source BrewTarget, but the current one does funny things if you play around with a recipe.
cwi is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 08:00 PM   #9
BigRedHopHead
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 290
Liked 19 Times on 18 Posts
Likes Given: 57

Default

+1 on the refractometer. I use mine for O.G. and F.G. but I use the calculator on Sean Terrill's website to get better accurate FG estimates.

www.seanterrill.com

I also like www.brewersfriend.com for the brewhouse efficiency calculator. easy enough to use from a reliable source.
__________________
Beer is the answer....but I can't remember the question.
BigRedHopHead is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 10:23 PM   #10
cwi
Registered User
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Austin
Posts: 845
Liked 34 Times on 28 Posts
Likes Given: 1

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigRedHopHead View Post
+1 on the refractometer. I use mine for O.G. and F.G. but I use the calculator on Sean Terrill's website to get better accurate FG estimates.

www.seanterrill.com
I have seen/used that guy's stuff before. Smart guy. He has some real good info on his site. I still think it is a bit iffy to use those charts for determining FG down to 0.00X resolution. It is different for different beer styles, so you would need to keep tabs on your own recipes to fine tune the chart. That is the 'extra' work required to use the refract for accurate FG. The refractometer can still be good for seeing if the beer is finished ferm'ing. The charts, and taste, can tell you if it is stuck well above predicted FG.

There is also the issue that the charts are specific to beer, and won't work for other things like cider. For cider, I need to know where it is to stop it early. I have logs to try and relate brix with FG, but it is a guess at this point. For beer I just let it go until it quits bubbling, then give it at least another week to clean up. If it hasn't finished completely by then (~18 days), it wouldn't do any good to know, since I wouldn't try to resuscitate it anyway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigRedHopHead View Post
I also like www.brewersfriend.com for the brewhouse efficiency calculator. easy enough to use from a reliable source.
I haven't been to brewersfriend in a while. Last I talked with them, they were going to change 'brewhouse efficiency' to mean 'lauter/kettle' efficiency, or at least add another efficiency field with the option to use lauter/kettle efficiency as the basis for calcs. They saw the light on why 'to the fermenter' Brewhouse eff was a stupid metric, but also have clients who already had recipes based on it. Just like adjusting trub loss in BeerSmith causes a cascade effect on 'to the fermenter' eff, brewersfriend's hop loss compensator (and trub loss field) also has/had issues due to using 'to the fermenter' efficiency.


cwi is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
John Palmer scorpien222 Beginners Beer Brewing Forum 30 07-06-2012 02:43 PM
John palmer recipe Chefjp Beginners Beer Brewing Forum 7 03-23-2012 10:09 PM
John Palmer Cincinatti Pale Ale question elproducto Beginners Beer Brewing Forum 17 09-09-2010 01:20 PM
Question on John Palmer book nasmeyer Beginners Beer Brewing Forum 5 02-25-2009 08:18 PM


Forum Jump

Newest Threads

LATEST SPONSOR DEALS