30% efficiency! Help!

I'm relatively new to brewing; I've been brewing about 3 years, all grain for about a year now, and I've read a few books, watched youtube videos, etc. My all grain beers have had horrible mash efficiency, average around 30%. I use a 2 gallon igloo cooler to mash in with a braided stainless steel line as the manifold (I've tried other manifolds but have also gotten horrible efficiency). I batch sparge and typically mash for 60 minutes at 152* (depending on style of beer). I've read that crush has a large impact on efficiency, so I've gotten grain from different suppliers (I always get in milled by them). I don't keep track of mash ph, and I use brewgr to calculate strike/sparge water volume. As a result of low efficiency, I've upped my grain bill (typically 3.5-4 lbs), but I still struggle to make a 1.050 beer. My grain bed depth is around 7 inches. Any ideas?

Do you test for unconverted starches? I'd suggest that. If the test shows that there are, keep mashing. Also, you might want to use a larger cooler. I'm not sure what size batches you are making, but mashing in a 2 gallon cooler seems like it wouldn't hold enough grain and you may have too thick of a mash.

I'd also try continuous sparging, as it is known to give you better efficiency. Lastly, you might want to check that mash PH, and adjust there as needed.

I fooled around with several all-grain starter systems before deciding on BIAB years ago. I now brew 10-12 gllon batches in a three kettle system.

How large are your batches? A 2 gallon cooler will not hold enough grain and water to get anywhere close to 5 gallons of 1.050 beer.

You really need to mill your own grain or at least it double crushed at a local shop. The pre-milled stuff you get direct from suppliers might be OK for adjuncts or steeping in partial mash, but really isn't going to get good efficiency as a base malt in all grain. If you aren't going to mill your own, you might as well stick with extract/partial mash, in my opinion.

Also agree with above, 2 gallon cooler seems small, even if you are only brewing 1 gallon batches. How much water are you mashing with? Efficiency goes up with higher volume. I would rather do some variation of BIAB in your boil pot.

Even so, 33% sounds terribly low. I wonder if there is some kind of measurement error. Are you adjusting for temperature? How does the beer taste? What are you doing if you miss your target?

OP is most likely doing 1-gallon batches, guys.

OP, check your grain crush and water:grain ratio. Those two things have a huge impact on efficiency. Also, be sure that you are hitting your mash temps.

Also, how are you measuring your efficiency?

What was your target batch size? What was your grain bill? What were your water volumes for both strike and sparge water? Pre-boil and Post-Boil Volumes? When and how do you take the gravity readings? Are you adding top off water to the fermenter and not mixing well before taking the gravity reading? Do you have pictures of the crush?

Your thermometer could also be off. My last one had a 20 degree difference, causing me to mash at like 135 for who knows how many brews.

To fully diagnose efficiency issues, the following measurements are needed:

• Grain bill weight
• Strike water volume (everything prior to initial run off)
• SG of wort at end of mash, or first runnings SG
• Sparge process (fly, batch, none)
• Sparge water volume (for each batch sparge if more than one)
• Pre-boil volume
• Pre-boil SG
• Weight & type of any sugar added to the boil
• Post-boil volume
• Post-boil SG (OG)
• Volume into fermenter

Accurate measurements are critical, since the efficiency calculations cannot be better than the measurement accuracy. All volumes should be corrected for thermal expansion to 68˚F, or the volume measurement temperature reported, so that corrections can be made. Hydrometer measurements should be taken with the wort temp within 20˚F of the hydrometer's calibration temperature, and then corrected for the temperature at which the measurement was made.

Mash Efficiency = Conversion Efficiency * Lauter Efficiency
Brewhouse Efficiency = Mash Efficiency * Fermenter Volume / Post-boil Volume

With the measurements listed above, all of the factors in the above equations can be calculated. Conversion efficiency should be greater than 95%. Lauter efficiency is a function of sparge process and grain weight to pre-boil volume ratio, and maximum achievable can be predicted (but not as accurately for fly sparge.) Once you know which efficiency factor is lower than what should be achievable, then you know what part of your process needs to be addressed.

If your efficiency is really as low as 30% (and there is no way to double check that since none of the information above was supplied) you are almost certainly having problems with conversion. It would be very difficult to lauter poorly enough to explain that low an efficiency.

Too coarse a crush is very often the major problem with conversion efficiency, but even with poor crushes, brewers can get 50% - 60% efficiency or higher. So you must have something contributing besides just crush.

Mash temperature being way off (due to an uncalibrated thermometer) is one likely cause. Check your thermometer's readings in boiling water (should be 212˚F, unless you are at high elevation), and in a glass full of crushed ice with little water (should be 32˚F.)

Mash pH could be contributing to lower conversion efficiency. What is your water source, and do you have a mineral and alkalinity report for it? Are you doing any mineral or acid additions to your water, and if so, how are you determining what you add?

With more information, the HBT community should be able to recommend more specific actions to improve your efficiency.

Brew on

Here is some additional info that may help:
Grain bill weight--3 lbs
Strike water volume--5 qts@ 161
First runnings gravity--1.052
Sparge process--batch sparge
Sparge water volume--6 qts@ 161
2nd Runnings gravity--1.020
Pre-boil gravity--1.032
Pre-boil volume--2 gallons
60 min. Boil
Post-boil volume--1.5 gallons
Post-boil SG (OG)--1.040
Volume into fermenter--1 gallon

According to brewgr, this put me at 36% brewhouse efficiency. I didn't add any sugar to this beer. The last couple beers have been lower, so I've added table sugar at flame out. I've been increasing grain weight in the last couple batches to try and make up some gravity points, but mash efficiency continues to drop. I've also tried changing lautering methods (straining, a homemade false bottom, a straining bag, and getting grains from other suppliers) with no luck. Is it possible that my grain bills are too large for a one gallon batch, and that's what is making efficiency low?

Can typical iodine be used to test conversion, or does it have to be a specific type of iodine?

appalachianbrewer said:

Here is some additional info that may help:
Grain bill weight--3 lbs
Strike water volume--5 qts@ 161
First runnings gravity--1.052
Sparge process--batch sparge
Sparge water volume--6 qts@ 161
2nd Runnings gravity--1.020
Pre-boil gravity--1.032
Pre-boil volume--2 gallons
60 min. Boil
Post-boil volume--1.5 gallons
Post-boil SG (OG)--1.040
Volume into fermenter--1 gallon

According to brewgr, this put me at 36% brewhouse efficiency. I didn't add any sugar to this beer. The last couple beers have been lower, so I've added table sugar at flame out. I've been increasing grain weight in the last couple batches to try and make up some gravity points, but mash efficiency continues to drop. I've also tried changing lautering methods (straining, a homemade false bottom, a straining bag, and getting grains from other suppliers) with no luck. Is it possible that my grain bills are too large for a one gallon batch, and that's what is making efficiency low?

Click to expand...

3lb x 1.036 PPG is 108 points max / 1.25 gallons dilution means at 100% conversion your first runnings gravity should be 1.086. No one gets 100% conversion but 1.052 is pretty low. I'd be looking at the crush, thermometer accuracy, and calcium.

appalachianbrewer said:

Here is some additional info that may help:
Grain bill weight--3 lbs
Strike water volume--5 qts@ 161
First runnings gravity--1.052
Sparge process--batch sparge
Sparge water volume--6 qts@ 161
2nd Runnings gravity--1.020
Pre-boil gravity--1.032
Pre-boil volume--2 gallons
60 min. Boil
Post-boil volume--1.5 gallons
Post-boil SG (OG)--1.040
Volume into fermenter--1 gallon

According to brewgr, this put me at 36% brewhouse efficiency. I didn't add any sugar to this beer. The last couple beers have been lower, so I've added table sugar at flame out. I've been increasing grain weight in the last couple batches to try and make up some gravity points, but mash efficiency continues to drop. I've also tried changing lautering methods (straining, a homemade false bottom, a straining bag, and getting grains from other suppliers) with no luck. Is it possible that my grain bills are too large for a one gallon batch, and that's what is making efficiency low?

Click to expand...

Using the numbers supplied I get your efficiencies as follows:So, it looks like your brewhouse efficiency was as bad as you thought. Numbers don't match up perfectly due to some degree of measurement error.

Transfer efficiency (Fermenter Volume / Post-Boil Volume) is very low because you left 1/3 of your wort in the boil kettle. Typical transfer losses range from 0% - 10%, so your taking a big hit there.

You are losing about 12 percentage points in lauter efficiency by leaving (5 qt + 6 qt) / 4 qt/gal - 2 gal = 0.75 gal in the MLT vs. a typical value of 0.35 - 0.5 gal. A lot of that retained wort appears not to be due to grain absorption which should have been about 0.33 gal to 0.38 gal. So, about 1/2 of the MLT retained wort should have been recoverable. Try tilting the MLT at the end of run-offs to minimize undrained wort.

And it appears you took a big hit on conversion efficiency, which should exceed 90%, and 95% - 100% is achievable. Finer crush usually brings the biggest benefit to conversion efficiency, but you could also be off on mash temp due to thermometer errors, and depending on your water source, your mash pH could be out of whack. Rather than using an iodine test to check for degree of conversion, check out the mash wort SG method described here.

Brew on

The big number that stands out to me is the difference between post-boil volume and volume in the fermenter. You should not lose a whole half gallon (33%) due to trub. If you are just dumping a third of your wort, of course you are going to have bad brewhouse efficiency. Your mash efficiency is 54%, which isn't too bad (I was getting about 60% when I first started all grain using pre-crushed grains). I would aim for a post-boil volume of about 1.125 gallons and transfer as much as possible into the fermenter. You can use hop bags if you don't want to minimize the sludge.

Wow, thanks for putting in the time and effort to get me all that information. I tested my thermometer in boiling and ice water and it looks like it's on; I use a typical 10inch, mercury-filled thermometer from Brooklyn Brew shop. I should be brewing again Sunday (6/26/16), and I'll post pictures of the process, particularly stuff like grain crush and gravities. Its going to be a Maris Otter (4lbs)/ centinnenial (1oz) SMaSH with US-05 dried yeast. I use brewgr for measurements and typically mash with a 1.5qts/ lb ratio. Any specific advice? I'm going to try to use less sparge water to give me a 1.5 gallon boil; hopefully that will help lauter-efficiency and transfer-efficiency. Any advice to assist conversion-efficiency?

appalachianbrewer said:

......; I use a typical 10inch, mercury-filled thermometer ....

Click to expand...

I'd stop using this and switch to alcohol filled...
Mercury is known to yield toxic compounds. ..
So in the event of a breakage you may have problems...

I definitely see what's been said about your volumes - you'd definitely benefit (especially at this small a volume - 1 gallon batches always surprise me by their gravity numbers!) by adjusting your sparge to get you closer to "Volume into fermenter" + "kettle boil-off volume". Assuming you get roughly the same amount of sugar into 25% less pre-boil volume, your OG should improve pretty significantly!

One other thing: just to be certain here - what tool are you using to measure your gravity? Hydrometer or Refractometer? If Hydro - are you measuring at or close to its calibrated temperature? If Refrac, have you checked it against samples of known gravity to calibrate it?

Chanoc said:

I'd stop using this and switch to alcohol filled...
Mercury is known to yield toxic compounds. ..
So in the event of a breakage you may have problems...

Click to expand...

I seriously doubt his thermometer has mercury. They haven't made those for decades.....

I think that's what I'm going to do next time; use less pre-boil volume. I'll be sure to post back, and let you guys know how that affects my wort.

I use a hydrometer to measure gravities, and I measure at 60-70*. I've read that sometimes the paper in a hydrometer can shift, but I don't think that's a problem; I've tried to get it to move but can't.

With batches this size there really is no rationale to using a multi-vessel setup.

Single vessel setup (you probably already have a suitable pot in your kitchen) will simplify things greatly and eliminate any MT losses.

If you don't have a mill, no biggie, run it through your blender. Crush as fine as you want. You've only got a few pounds of grain so it wont take too long.

Get a bag, a good one will run you less than $20. @wilserbrewer makes great ones.

Mash in the pot with the full estimated volume of water you need.

Stir the mash intermittently

Before pulling the bag, fire up the heat and pull the bag when you get to 168F (stirring while you heat)

When done, lift the bag out and squeeze it or allow it to drain over the pot. This gets more sugars out of the sponge-like grain in the bag.

If you're short on volume in the pot do a small pour over sparge (pour water through the damp grain as it hangs/sits over your BK) till you rech your planned preboil volume.*

I absolutely guaruntee your efficiency numbers will increase via this simplification.

I am all for multi-vessel brewing, there are pros and cons to any system but for 1 gallon batches where volume losses, even small are significant, it makes absolutely no sense to me.

*you need to be able to measure volumes accurately regardless of what method you use.

Add the entire post boil contents of the BK to the fermentor and eliminate volume losses there.

appalachianbrewer said:

I think that's what I'm going to do next time; use less pre-boil volume. I'll be sure to post back, and let you guys know how that affects my wort.

Click to expand...

Oops, I misphrased my post above. It has been edited. My concern was the difference between post-boil (1.5 gallons) and volume in fermenter (1.0 gallons). That tells me you are dumping too much trub as well as diluting your wort. So yes, use less water pre-boil, but also make sure as much as possible goes into the fermenter.

appalachianbrewer said:

I use a hydrometer to measure gravities, and I measure at 60-70*. I've read that sometimes the paper in a hydrometer can shift, but I don't think that's a problem; I've tried to get it to move but can't.

Click to expand...

Easy way to check that is to measure plain old water. Distilled for the best accuracy, but most any water will do. At the hydro's calibrated temperature water should read 1.000. If it doesn't, use this to determine your conversion factor. For example, I've got one that measures distilled at 1.001, another at 1.002 - so I've labeled the first to always subtract .001 from the measurement, the other to subtract .002.

Bobby_M said:

3lb x 1.036 PPG is 108 points max / 1.25 gallons dilution means at 100% conversion your first runnings gravity should be 1.086. No one gets 100% conversion but 1.052 is pretty low. I'd be looking at the crush, thermometer accuracy, and calcium.

Click to expand...

How did you get 1.036 ppg?

Gavin C said:

With batches this size there really is no rationale to using a multi-vessel setup.

Single vessel setup (you probably already have a suitable pot in your kitchen) will simplify things greatly and eliminate any MT losses.

If you don't have a mill, no biggie, run it through your blender. Crush as fine as you want. You've only got a few pounds of grain so it wont take too long.

Get a bag, a good one will run you less than $20. @wilserbrewer makes great ones.

Mash in the pot with the full estimated volume of water you need.

Stir the mash intermittently

Before pulling the bag, fire up the heat and pull the bag when you get to 168F (stirring while you heat)

When done, lift the bag out and squeeze it or allow it to drain over the pot. This gets more sugars out of the sponge-like grain in the bag.

If you're short on volume in the pot do a small pour over sparge (pour water through the damp grain as it hangs/sits over your BK) till you rech your planned preboil volume.*

I absolutely guaruntee your efficiency numbers will increase via this simplification.

I am all for multi-vessel brewing, there are pros and cons to any system but for 1 gallon batches where volume losses, even small are significant, it makes absolutely no sense to me.

*you need to be able to measure volumes accurately regardless of what method you use.

Add the entire post boil contents of the BK to the fermentor and eliminate volume losses there.

Click to expand...

THIS ^^!!

appalachianbrewer said:

How did you get 1.036 ppg?

Click to expand...

36ppg is a typical yield of common base malt...I think he was just giving an estimation.

Bobby_M said:

3lb x 1.036 PPG is 108 points max / 1.25 gallons dilution means at 100% conversion your first runnings gravity should be 1.086. No one gets 100% conversion but 1.052 is pretty low. I'd be looking at the crush, thermometer accuracy, and calcium.

Click to expand...

The correct math is more complicated than this, as the potential SG is defined based on wort volume, not strike volume. You can't just divide the total potential points by the strike water volume, since the wort volume is more than strike water volume (the sugar in the wort adds volume.) The easiest way to get the correct answer is the following:

• Divide the total potential points of the grain bill by 46.2 (the potential of pure sugar) to get the lbs of potential sugar
• Convert strike water volume (gal) to weight (lb) by multiplying by 8.33 lb/gal
• Calculate potential ˚Plato from the potential sugar weight and strike water weight.
  Potential ˚P = 100 * Sugar_Weight / (Sugar_Weight + Water_Weight)​
• Use a Plato to SG calculator to convert potential ˚Plato to potential SG.

Using the above method, a 1.037 potential (dry basis), and correcting for 4% grain moisture content, I calculate the maximum potential (100% conversion) first runnings SG as 1.074.
Brew on

doug293cz said:

The correct math is more complicated than this, as the potential SG is defined based on wort volume, not strike volume. You can't just divide the total potential points by the strike water volume, since the wort volume is more than strike water volume (the sugar in the wort adds volume.) The easiest way to get the correct answer is the following:

• Divide the total potential points of the grain bill by 46.2 (the potential of pure sugar) to get the lbs of potential sugar
• Convert strike water volume (gal) to weight (lb) by multiplying by 8.33 lb/gal
• Calculate potential ˚Plato from the potential sugar weight and strike water weight.
  Potential ˚P = 100 * Sugar_Weight / (Sugar_Weight + Water_Weight)​
• Use a Plato to SG calculator to convert potential ˚Plato to potential SG.

Using the above method, a 1.037 potential (dry basis), and correcting for 4% grain moisture content, I calculate the maximum potential (100% conversion) first runnings SG as 1.074.
Brew on

Click to expand...

This is much more accurate then how Beersmith calculates it.

Yup. Brewers friend is worse.

I used this calculation to review some of my previous brews and figure out a more accurate mash efficiency. One of them came out to near 105%. Can this be accurate?

Since I have time...for your review:

Recipe: Yooper's Oatmeal Stout

Marris Otter - 7.00 lbs. - 37 ppm
Flaked Oats - 1.00 lbs. - 37 ppm
Victory Malt - 12 Oz. - 34 ppm
Chocolate Malt - 12 Oz. - 28 ppm
Flaked Barley - 8 Oz. - 32 ppm
Black Barley (stout) - 8 Oz. - 25 ppm
Crystal 80L - 8 Oz. - 34 ppm

Total Potential Pts. = 388
Potential Sugar Weight = 8.4 lbs.
Strike Water (7.5G) weight = 62.475 lbs.

Potential Plato = 11.85
Plato Adj (4%) = 11.38
Plato to SG = 1.046

My refractometer (calibrated) read 12 brix or 1.048 at preboil. What's the deal here?

Either the calculation is wrong or there was an error in measurement.

Biscuits said:

I used this calculation to review some of my previous brews and figure out a more accurate mash efficiency. One of them came out to near 105%. Can this be accurate?

Since I have time...for your review:

Recipe: Yooper's Oatmeal Stout

Marris Otter - 7.00 lbs. - 37 ppm
Flaked Oats - 1.00 lbs. - 37 ppm
Victory Malt - 12 Oz. - 34 ppm
Chocolate Malt - 12 Oz. - 28 ppm
Flaked Barley - 8 Oz. - 32 ppm
Black Barley (stout) - 8 Oz. - 25 ppm
Crystal 80L - 8 Oz. - 34 ppm

Total Potential Pts. = 388
Potential Sugar Weight = 8.4 lbs.
Strike Water (7.5G) weight = 62.475 lbs.

Potential Plato = 11.85
Plato Adj (4%) = 11.38
Plato to SG = 1.046

My refractometer (calibrated) read 12 brix or 1.048 at preboil. What's the deal here?

Click to expand...

What was your preboil volume?

PreBoil Volume was @ 6.5 Gallons

Biscuits said:

PreBoil Volume was @ 6.5 Gallons

Click to expand...

I put your grainbill in the Brewersfriend calculator and got 89.78% for pre-boil efficiency.

http://www.brewersfriend.com/brewhouse-efficiency/

Aristotelian said:

I put your grainbill in the Brewersfriend calculator and got 89.78% for pre-boil efficiency.

http://www.brewersfriend.com/brewhouse-efficiency/

Click to expand...

Yes, this was the dispute. The formula I used to calculate a 105% efficiency is way more detailed than what brewers friend and even beersmith use. I guess I am wondering if it is in fact more accurate.

I think somethings missing from the formula, but I don't have time to go through it atm.

As usual, brewersfriend is several percent above what should be expected from the given information. IDK if it's an ingredient discrepency betwen ppg in their database and what was listed above, or something missing from their formula.

Assuming 6.5G is the "hot" volume, as in it was 6.5 gallons at boil temp, then it should be ~80% mash efficiency. If it was 6.5G chilled, actually ~6.8 gallons at boil temp, then it would be around 84% mash efficiency.


@doug293cz

I'm getting a discrepancy from the posted formula previous and what we use.

pricelessbrewing said:

I think somethings missing from the formula, but I don't have time to go through it atm.

As usual, brewersfriend is several percent above what should be expected from the given information. IDK if it's an ingredient discrepency betwen ppg in their database and what was listed above, or something missing from their formula.

Assuming 6.5G is the "hot" volume, as in it was 6.5 gallons at boil temp, then it should be ~80% mash efficiency. If it was 6.5G chilled, actually ~6.8 gallons at boil temp, then it would be around 84% mash efficiency.


@doug293cz

I'm getting a discrepancy from the posted formula previous and what we use.

Click to expand...

@pricelessbrewing

PM me about the discrepancy. I get the same answer from my spreadsheet as the formula posted earlier in this thread.

Brew on

Biscuits said:

I used this calculation to review some of my previous brews and figure out a more accurate mash efficiency. One of them came out to near 105%. Can this be accurate?

Since I have time...for your review:

Recipe: Yooper's Oatmeal Stout

Marris Otter - 7.00 lbs. - 37 ppm
Flaked Oats - 1.00 lbs. - 37 ppm
Victory Malt - 12 Oz. - 34 ppm
Chocolate Malt - 12 Oz. - 28 ppm
Flaked Barley - 8 Oz. - 32 ppm
Black Barley (stout) - 8 Oz. - 25 ppm
Crystal 80L - 8 Oz. - 34 ppm

Total Potential Pts. = 388
Potential Sugar Weight = 8.4 lbs.
Strike Water (7.5G) weight = 62.475 lbs.

Potential Plato = 11.85
Plato Adj (4%) = 11.38
Plato to SG = 1.046

My refractometer (calibrated) read 12 brix or 1.048 at preboil. What's the deal here?

Click to expand...

Not sure what your "Plato Adj" is all about; can you explain? But, in any case, using your grain potentials (assuming they are dry basis and applying a 4% moisture correction) and assuming volume measurements adjusted to 68˚F, I get a max potential wort SG of 1.0457. If I assume water volume measurements at strike water temp, I get 1.0467.

There are a number of sources of potential errors:

• Grain potential inputs different than actuals. Just looking at the BS database, I see Maris Otter listed at 1.036 or 1.038 depending on supplier, and for flaked oats 1.037 or 1.039.
• Errors in water volumes, either due to measurement or incorrect temperature compensation.
• Errors in grain weight measurements.
• More or less moisture in grain than assumed.
• Grain potentials are for "as is" rather than "dry basis."
• Errors in SG measurements.
• Probably others.

Given all the possible sources of error, the calculations can only be used as rough estimates. In your case it's safe to assume that you are near 100% conversion efficiency, but not likely over 100%.

I get your mash efficiency (conversion efficiency * lauter efficiency) at 79% - 82% depending on water volume thermal expansion correction assumptions.

Grain Potential Discussion/Question:

Anyone know if amylase enzymes are added to low/zero DP grains when doing the Congress Mash to determine grain potential? If not, the potentials reported could be significantly lower than when those grains are mashed with high DP malts. This would cause our weighted grain potential calculations to underestimate total grain potential.

Brew on

doug293cz said:

Not sure what your "Plato Adj" is all about; can you explain? But, in any case, using your grain potentials (assuming they are dry basis and applying a 4% moisture correction) and assuming volume measurements adjusted to 68˚F, I get a max potential wort SG of 1.0457. If I assume water volume measurements at strike water temp, I get 1.0467.

There are a number of sources of potential errors:

• Grain potential inputs different than actuals. Just looking at the BS database, I see Maris Otter listed at 1.036 or 1.038 depending on supplier, and for flaked oats 1.037 or 1.039.
• Errors in water volumes, either due to measurement or incorrect temperature compensation.
• Errors in grain weight measurements.
• More or less moisture in grain than assumed.
• Grain potentials are for "as is" rather than "dry basis."
• Errors in SG measurements.
• Probably others.

Given all the possible sources of error, the calculations can only be used as rough estimates. In your case it's safe to assume that you are near 100% conversion efficiency, but not likely over 100%.

I get your mash efficiency (conversion efficiency * lauter efficiency) at 79% - 82% depending on water volume thermal expansion correction assumptions.

Grain Potential Discussion/Question:

Anyone know if amylase enzymes are added to low/zero DP grains when doing the Congress Mash to determine grain potential? If not, the potentials reported could be significantly lower than when those grains are mashed with high DP malts. This would cause our weighted grain potential calculations to underestimate total grain potential.

Brew on

Click to expand...

Thanks for clearing that up. The adjusted "Plato Adj" was for the 4% moisture correction. I probably misunderstood what that meant.

Also, my strike water measurement is at room temp, not strike temp.

Biscuits said:

Thanks for clearing that up. The adjusted "Plato Adj" was for the 4% moisture correction. I probably misunderstood what that meant.

Also, my strike water measurement is at room temp, not strike temp.

Click to expand...

The moisture adjustment is properly applied by multiplying the grain weight by 0.96. Applying it to the estimated Plato gives a small error.

Brew on

@doug293cz I'll run the numbers again, might've had a typo

I would really hope they add enzymes to get the max yield. Otherwise the test would be severely limiting