92.69% efficiency

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

NYShooterGuy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2014
Messages
333
Reaction score
21
Location
HOLTSVILLE
I just figured I'd let the community know of my experience today achieving 92.69% efficiency with a 3.9 gallon BIAB recipe.

To start, I should say I've been brewing both extract and BIAB all grain for close to 1 year now, and this is my 10th BIAB batch. My usual brew house efficiency is anywhere between 64 and 78% depending on the size of the grain bill, with the less grain yielding higher efficiency.

The grain bill today was 2.85 lbs, white wheat malt, 3.33 us 2 row pale malt and 0.28 lbs crystal 15L. I use a 5 gallon economy kettle with 2.1 gallons filtered tap h20 (Britta style filter) strike temp @ 165 degree fahrenheit mashing at 150 degree fahrenheit for 90 minutes and mash out at 170 degree fahrenheit for 10 minutes.

After mash out, I raised the grain out of the kettle and tied the doubled-up bag (2 bags) into a knot and placed on a rack. For splarging, the bag is crushed over a large 10 gallon party bucket (one commonly found at a backyard BBQ filled with ice and bottled or canned beverages) with an oven rack and cookie cooling racks between the bag and the bucket. First I use silicone oven mitts to crush the bag between the mitts and the racks. I twist up the loose bag material frequently to make the grains more compact and squeezing out the sugars more efficient. After a satisfactory amount of squeezing, I un-twist the bag a bit and spread out the compact mass to make the splarging more effective.

I use a quart size Pyrex pouring container to dip into a second 3 gallon boil pot filled with 170 degree fahrenheit filtered h2o and i pour 2 quarts over the bag. I then repeat the same squeezing process and empty the fruits of my splarging to the boil kettle until I have approx 4.5 to 4.7 gallons total in my kettle.

Today's SG was 1.052 with 4.4 gallons in the kettle. I added about another 44 oz of filtered h2o to the kettle throughout the 60 minute boil just to make a total 3.9 gallons. OG was 1.050.

Hope this helps some of you out there. I know my descriptions aren't the best, but if anyone needs clarification, I'd be glad to help.
 
Your numbers are wrong.

Still good but not ridiculous.

81% BH efficiency assuming 3.9 gallons entered the fermentor and the gravity and volume readings are accurate.

More info on efficiency calculations can be found in my signature if you're interested in refining your calculations for future brews.

Beersmith calculations
Screen Shot 2015-09-01 at 9.40.45 PM.png
Screen Shot 2015-09-01 at 9.55.01 PM.png

Today's SG was 1.052 with 4.4 gallons in the kettle. I added about another 44 oz of filtered h2o to the kettle throughout the 60 minute boil just to make a total 3.9 gallons. OG was 1.050.
Also your measurements have to wrong as your gravity dropped from preboil to post boil. Not possible to lose sugars that way. One or more measures is off.

Gravity will always increase as water volumes are reduced.
 
OP, you must be using a BIAB regimen that is very similar to mine. I normally come close to 100% in efficiency with my BIAB system. There are many who scoff at the idea of high efficiency BIAB systems but many craft breweries are getting wise to this method and converting at least part of their operation to large scale BIAB for the simplicity and high efficiency. There is no other way to achieve such a high enzyme concentration in the thick mash.

Thank you
 
Are we talking mash efficiencies here? Otherwise I just don't see 100% brewhouse efficiency being physically possible...
 
OP, you must be using a BIAB regimen that is very similar to mine. I normally come close to 100% in efficiency with my BIAB system. There are many who scoff at the idea of high efficiency BIAB systems but many craft breweries are getting wise to this method and converting at least part of their operation to large scale BIAB for the simplicity and high efficiency. There is no other way to achieve such a high enzyme concentration in the thick mash.



Thank you


Which craft breweries are moving to BIAB? I haven't read or heard anything just wondering!!!
 
Yeah I'm pretty sure he / she is talking about mash efficiency. It is unlikely that the brewhouse efficiency is that high with a 60 minute boil.

Gavin - he is using top up water pre-boil so the mash SG could be higher than the post-boil SG.
 
Yeah I'm pretty sure he / she is talking about mash efficiency. It is unlikely that the brewhouse efficiency is that high with a 60 minute boil.

Gavin - he is using top up water pre-boil so the mash SG could be higher than the post-boil SG.

Not if the volumes are reducing, which the OP says they are. 4.4 in the kettle

3.9 final volume into the fermentor.

Not possible that the gravity would reduce. Regardless of top up. If the volumes are lower at the later point, the gravity has to increase. Measurement error is the only explanation.

Casts a bit of a question mark over the realistic 81% BH efficiency the OP's numbers actually equate to.
 
Not if the volumes are reducing, which the OP says they are. 4.4 in the kettle

3.9 final volume into the fermentor.

Not possible that the gravity would reduce. Regardless of top up. If the volumes are lower at the later point, the gravity has to increase. Measurement error is the only explanation.

Casts a bit of a question mark over the realistic 81% BH efficiency the OP's numbers actually equate to.

Ah, I missed that.
 
OP, you must be using a BIAB regimen that is very similar to mine. I normally come close to 100% in efficiency with my BIAB system. There are many who scoff at the idea of high efficiency BIAB systems but many craft breweries are getting wise to this method and converting at least part of their operation to large scale BIAB for the simplicity and high efficiency. There is no other way to achieve such a high enzyme concentration in the thick mash.

Thank you

No.. the measuring is wrong. 100% efficiency would taste TERRIBLE and undrinkable...

-------------

I for one want to advocate for the changing of efficiency from a % to a point system. A great tasting wort is at about 65%~80% and not too much higher (The range is debatable but that's not the point of this). With the % as the efficiency value, people want to shoot for the highest possible score. With a point system, we can say that we hit 75 efficiency points without feeling bad about not reaching 100%...
 
No.. the measuring is wrong. 100% efficiency would taste TERRIBLE and undrinkable...

Your forgetting @cannman that by squeezing the bag to form a singularity you will get 0.00 gallons/pound grain absorption, 0% hop absorption losses, 0 kettle trub, and as the fluid in your pot does not obey the annoying rules of thermodynamics you can control where the enzymes are distributed (apparently they like to hang around a tightly bag material for some reason). Don't worry about all those 100% of tannins you've extracted along with 100% of all the sugars. The singularity formed in the squeezing of the bag will remove those and heat the pot with a steady stream of Hawking radiation in a self sustaining boil.

No wonder all the craft breweries are doing this. The idiots obeying the laws of physics must be kicking themselves every time they use their obsolete setups.

:)
 
Your numbers are wrong.

Still good but not ridiculous.

81% BH efficiency assuming 3.9 gallons entered the fermentor and the gravity and volume readings are accurate.

More info on efficiency calculations can be found in my signature if you're interested in refining your calculations for future brews.

Beersmith calculations
View attachment 300494
View attachment 300495


Also your measurements have to wrong as your gravity dropped from preboil to post boil. Not possible to lose sugars that way. One or more measures is off.

Gravity will always increase as water volumes are reduced.

after reading a number of posts where people claim close to 100% or even over 100% efficiencies - most of those have serious mathematical errors in calculation - we all been there I think, I also realized that the way many of us do measurements, if we are not very careful or anal about calibration etc., we could have people with about 5% (or more) uncertainty in gravity - so you may think it's 1.052 when it's really 1.050 - perhaps your wort is not mixed well and is slightly inhomogeneous, 5% (or more) in volume (how did you measure/calibrate volume?) and 5% or so in grain weight.
Ok, maybe weight is calibrated well, but sometimes scales at LBS or even grocery stores are calibrated so it takes a fraction of an ounce or so (or maybe even full ounce) to get back to "zero", so you actually get a bit more grain than you intend to. Or maybe you add just a little bit extra to each ingredient, just to be sure.

If those errors all add up in the same direction, you can be easily 10-15% off. So your 80% efficiency may look like 95% efficiency. Or, 65% efficiency.
Add selection bias (nobody boasts online about hitting that 65% efficiency, but 95% is worth posting about), and possibility of making math mistake, and in a large group of brewers like HBT you will have a fairly regular occurrence of someone claiming to hit efficiency of 100% or above.

Not saying this is what happened here, but I am now taking posts about super-high efficiency with a grain of... barley.
 
after reading a number of posts where people claim close to 100% or even over 100% efficiencies - most of those have serious mathematical errors in calculation - we all been there I think, I also realized that the way many of us do measurements, if we are not very careful or anal about calibration etc., we could have people with about 5% (or more) uncertainty in gravity - so you may think it's 1.052 when it's really 1.050 - perhaps your wort is not mixed well and is slightly inhomogeneous, 5% (or more) in volume (how did you measure/calibrate volume?) and 5% or so in grain weight.
Ok, maybe weight is calibrated well, but sometimes scales at LBS or even grocery stores are calibrated so it takes a fraction of an ounce or so (or maybe even full ounce) to get back to "zero", so you actually get a bit more grain than you intend to. Or maybe you add just a little bit extra to each ingredient, just to be sure.

If those errors all add up in the same direction, you can be easily 10-15% off. So your 80% efficiency may look like 95% efficiency. Or, 55% efficiency.
Add selection bias (nobody boasts online about hitting that 55% efficiency, but 95% is worth posting about), and possibility of making math mistake, and in a large group of brewers like HBT you will have a fairly regular occurrence of someone claiming to hit efficiency of 100% or above.

Not saying this is what happened here, but I am now taking posts about super-high efficiency with a grain of... barley.

Agreed. If your going to take the time to collect data, collect good data. That was one of the reasons behind my recent article. We can all be precise in our collection of data if we want to be. No difficult concepts involved. Without precision, the figures are of minimal value.

Quite the opposite is true of quality brewing data. Very useful stuff IMO.
 
Back
Top