All grain kit expects 100% efficency?

[V-Fib]

I've never use a premade kit but I was lucky enough to win one in an online give away. I plugged the grain bill into my phones app and to get the expected 1.050 efficiency at 5 gal I need to be at 100%. The grain bill is for an Irish Red and consists of:

6 lbs Pilsner
0.75 lbs Special Roast
1.5 oz Chocolate Malt

It seems odd to me that more grain wouldn't be added for some wiggle room cause I've never met anyone that hits 100% efficiency and gets 5 gallons from putting 5 gal in a carboy.

Is that common from kits or is it just an odd kit?

 

[Smellyglove]

It's odd.

I did the same numbers in beersmith and indeed, 99% mash efficiency.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

I don't have Beersmith, but by my calculations if you shoot for 5 gallons going to the fermenter after wort cooling, and your yeasts apparent attenuation hits 83%, and your brewhouse efficiency is 80%, then this kit is valid for an OG of roughly 1.050.

In the real world it would appear that you will need to supplement the kit with about 2 Lbs. of additional malt(s). The easiest one to bolster would be the Pilsner malt. Or to remain true to the recipe you can ratchet all of the malts upward by 25%. Or take it down to only at most 4 gallons going to the fermenter.

If it was me I would add 1 lb. of Pilsner and something along the lines of 1/2 lb of 20L CaraRed crystal and 1/2 lb. of Briess Victory malt or Simpson's Aromatic malt to it. But this should be up to you.

https://mashmadeeasy.yolasite.com/

 

[WestMichBrewer]

Maybe that's why the kit was a giveaway...

 

[Smellyglove]

I don't have Beersmith, but by my calculations if you shoot for 5 gallons going to the fermenter after wort cooling, and your yeasts apparent attenuation hits 83%, and your brewhouse efficiency is 80%, then this kit will hit an OG of roughly 1.050.

In the real world it would appear that you will need to supplement the kit with about 2 Lbs. of additional malt(s). The easiest one to bolster would be the Pilsner malt. Or to remain true to the recipe you can ratchet all of the malts upward by 25%. Or take it down to only 4 gallons going to the fermenter.

https://mashmadeeasy.yolasite.com/

I don't see how you ended up with 80%.

It seems like they just calculated the efficiency with the maximum extract available from the grains. Which is off. about 75% extract efficiency should be more closer to the "generic" homebrewer.

Of course it depends on the malt, what the potential extract is, but to me (and TS) it fell right at about 100% using "generic" malts of the same kind.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

I used a spreadsheet of my own making which is only in the early testing stage and could easily be way off base.

Regardless, the bottom line is that more malt is required. Something along the lines of 2 Lbs.

https://mashmadeeasy.yolasite.com/

 

[Smellyglove]

What does the AA of the yeast have to say?

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

My spreadsheet attempts to "back calculate" the quantity of grist which is required in order to achieve a given target OG input, given both the input of ones anticipated brewhouse efficiency and the yeasts anticipated apparent attenuation up front.

It is only for my own personal use and may not be correct.

https://mashmadeeasy.yolasite.com/

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

In the Brewers Friend recipe builder if you input the following (as I just quite rapidly did):

10.25 Lbs. 2-Row pale
67% brewhouse efficiency
83% apparent yeast attenuation
5 gallons to the fermenter

You get an OG of 1.051 and an FG of 1.008
(so allowing for a dribble of malts not as extraction efficient as 2-Row Brewers, 1.050 OG is a reasonable expectation from a grist at 10.25 lbs., and for novice level brewhouse efficiency)

This is the sort of thing that my personal spreadsheet does (albeit in reverse). But in the end Brewers Friend generally confirms a need for about 2 Lbs. of added malt(s), as well as generally confirming that my spreadsheet is on the right track.

NOTE: If one initially assumes a somewhat higher brewhouse efficiency and simultaneously a somewhat lower apparent yeast attenuation, then 10.25 lbs or thereabouts of grist is still a likely outcome, with the exception that the FG goes up for the specific case where one is forcing an OG of near 1.050. Very few yeasts will hit an apparent attenuation of 83%.

https://mashmadeeasy.yolasite.com/

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

For an OG of 1.050 and 5-1/2 gallons going to the fermenter, I would suggest that you bump your grist bill up roughly another pound, to 11.25 lbs. This presumes ballpark 70% brewhouse efficiency and ballpark 77% apparent attenuation.

Ballpark OG = 1.050 and ballpark FG = 1.012 for this scenario.

https://mashmadeeasy.yolasite.com/

 

[Smellyglove]

What has attenuation with the efficiency to do?

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

What has attenuation with the efficiency to do?

Brewhouse efficiency takes all of the various efficiencies into consideration, and among them is yeast efficiency.

https://mashmadeeasy.yolasite.com/

 

[Smellyglove]

Brewhouse efficiency takes all of the various efficiencies into consideration, and among them is yeast efficiency.

https://mashmadeeasy.yolasite.com/

What? No, why? That would be pretty weird. BH efficiency stops after the bottles are full, then it's about volume, after the brew-process. As I know that term at least, yeast has nothing to do with it.

That would mean that brewhouse efficiency is also about alcohol.

Take two batches with the same grist. One is at OG X, the other one is with OG X+5pts. First batch is fermented to end up at FG 1.000, second is fermented FG 1.014. The "brewhouse efficiency" would be pretty drastically differendt. What does this have to do with scaling a recipe to meet a target OG at a given volume?

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

What? No, why? That would be pretty weird. BH efficiency stops after the fermentor is full. As I know that term at least, yeast has nothing to do with it.

When you're measuring efficiency it's about extract which makes it way into the fermentor. BH should account for post mash efficiency and what you leave to trub.

However, when sharing a recipe coming with a kit. I feel that the only recipe given should be estimated mash efficiency. People leave different amounts of trub behind. So person A could hit target OG and leave for example 2L trub behind, and person B could also hit target OG and leave no trub behind. Person B would get a higher efficiency. How do you scale that? by changing the process?

All i know is that within the Brewers Friend recipe builder if you alter what they are referring to as Brewhouse Efficiency it alters your OG and FG expectations for a given weight of grist and a given yeast apparent attenuation. Perhaps they have brewhouse efficiency all wrong within their recipe builder. ???

What advice would you give to the OP with regard to grist bill weight for a nominal 5.5 gallons to the fermenter at an OG of 1.050, given his recipe, and given the assumption that he is relatively novice at this?

https://mashmadeeasy.yolasite.com/

 

[Smellyglove]

FG expectations are given the OG, higher OG higher FG given the same yeast, and vice versa. But how much the yeast munches has nothing to do with the brewhouse efficiency. If you look at the chart in Brewersfriend the diagram does not take attenuation into account, unless I'm totally blind. I'm too lazy to log in now, but it stops at the fermentor as far as i remember.

He just needs more grains, or brew a smaller batch size comparing to the batch size stated in the kit.

 

[Dcpcooks]

I don't think attenuation is part of brewhouse efficiency. It's a measure of volumes and losses to boil off, trub and lost wort. It shows how well you mashed and extracted sugars and accounts for what you left behind.

Attenuation will obviously impact abv. Perhaps that where/how your seeing things change in Brewer's Friend.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

FG expectations are given the OG, higher OG higher FG given the same yeast, and vice versa. But how much the yeast munches has nothing to do with the brewhouse efficiency. If you look at the chart in Brewersfriend the diagram does not take attenuation into account, unless I'm totally blind. I'm too lazy to log in now, but it stops at the fermentor as far as i remember.

He just needs more grains, or brew a smaller batch size comparing to the batch size stated in the kit.

I have concentrated only upon effectively mimicking specifically the Brewers Friend recipe builders output as regards its output for matters such as grist bill weight, OG, FG, AA, and what they are calling within that specific platform of theirs "brewhouse efficiency". And then running it in reverse to be able to determine my grist bill weights with regard to specific intended parameters, in a reverse fashion as to what they are doing with their program. It has permitted me to predict requisite grist bill weights in advance to within a highly respectable degree of certainty and accuracy and repeatability. This appears to me to be highly relevant to this thread.

https://mashmadeeasy.yolasite.com/

 

[Smellyglove]

I don't think attenuation is part of brewhouse efficiency. It's a measure of volumes and losses to boil off, trub and lost wort. It shows how well you mashed and extracted sugars and accounts for what you left behind.

Attenuation will obviously impact abv. Perhaps that where/how your seeing things change in Brewer's Friend.

I don't think boiloff should be accounted for in the total brewhouse efficiency. #A need to sparge a lot and boil down to reach target OG and volume
#B has higher mash efficiency and does not need to sparge as much, so also does not need to boil down as much.. Same OG same volume as #A, but A has a way higher boiloff.

Brewhouse efficiency is imho a bogus way to share a detailed recipe. All you need is grist percentages, and target OG. But that means that the one trying to brew it need to know how to scale it to his or hers setup.

Sharing a recipe with brewhouse efficiency means you need to tell how much wort is lost here and there. That's just adding more for the brewer to calculate.

 

[Smellyglove]

I have concentrated only upon effectively mimicking specifically the Brewers Friend recipe builders output as regards its output for matters such as grist bill weight, OG, FG, AA, and what they are calling within that specific platform of theirs "brewhouse efficiency". And then running it in reverse to be able to determine my grist bill weights with regard to specific intended parameters, in a reverse fashion as to what they are doing with their program. It has permitted me to predict requisite grist bill weights in advance to within a highly respectable degree of certainty and accuracy and repeatability. This appears to me to be highly relevant to this thread.

https://mashmadeeasy.yolasite.com/

I still don't see where AA comes into play. My sheet is just grist weight and predicted mash efficiency from that. It works.

So what I'm reading from you is that if you hit your volume, but a way lower OG than expected, but you swap you yeast from 002 to Belle, to compensate for the lower OG, you can still hit your "brewhouse efficiency"? That's way off when it comes to designing a recipe. Then it's just about ABV.

Or is it something I don't understand here?

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

I still don't see where AA comes into play. My sheet is just grist weight and predicted mash efficiency from that. It works.

So what I'm reading from you is that if you hit your volume, but a way lower OG than expected, but you swap you yeast from 002 to Belle, to compensate for the lower OG, you can still hit your "brewhouse efficiency"? That's way off when it comes to designing a recipe.

Or is it something I don't understand here?

It may all be an artifact of my trying to develop a spreadsheet that mimics Brewers Friend in reverse in order to predict in advance an appropriate and specific grist bill weight for the case of other relevant parameters being fixed, but for me it works. And I can't see where it shouldn't "generally" work for others as well.

With respect to this thread though, and in answer to the OP, would you at least agree that the OP is (with due consideration of the likelihood of novice status) more likely to put 5-1/2 gallons of 1.050 OG wort into his fermenter if he begins with 11.25 lbs. of malts than if he begins with 8.25 lbs.? That is likely all that really matters here.

https://mashmadeeasy.yolasite.com/

 

[Smellyglove]

It may all be an artifact of my trying to develop a spreadsheet that mimics Brewers Friend in reverse to predict in advance an appropriate grist bill weight for other relevant parameters being fixed, but for me it works. And I can't see where it shouldn't work for others as well.

With respect to this thread though, and in answer to the OP, would you at least agree that the OP is more likely to put 5-1/2 gallons of 1.050 OG wort into his fermenter if he begins with 11.25 lbs. of malts than if he begins with 8.25 lbs.? That is likely all that really matters here.

https://mashmadeeasy.yolasite.com/

I can share my sheet with you through google docs for some inspiration and an insight about how I'm thinking about efficiency (I'm just thinking mash efficiency). But I don't sparge, so It's easier for me to predict since the sparge factor is left out. But I'm 100% sure you need to leave the AA out. Stop calculating after your you sparge. Boiloff is another factor which should be left on the side, and only implemented when you need to know how much water to use.

When doing the numbers in beersmith at 75% mash effiency I'm getting 10lbs. Amount of water and boil of is irrelevant, to hit target OG with that grist he needs to know the boiloff, to use the desired amount of water.

 

[lump42]

I've never use a premade kit but I was lucky enough to win one in an online give away. I plugged the grain bill into my phones app and to get the expected 1.050 efficiency at 5 gal I need to be at 100%. The grain bill is for an Irish Red and consists of:

6 lbs Pilsner
0.75 lbs Special Roast
1.5 oz Chocolate Malt

It seems odd to me that more grain wouldn't be added for some wiggle room cause I've never met anyone that hits 100% efficiency and gets 5 gallons from putting 5 gal in a carboy.

Is that common from kits or is it just an odd kit?

Are you sure it isn't an extract kit with steeping grains? 100% efficiency for extract is normal, since the mash and lauter is done already. At 65% efficiency for an extract with steeping grains recipe in Brewers Friend, it comes out spot on for me. Here

 

[Dcpcooks]

I don't think boiloff should be accounted for in the total brewhouse efficiency. #A need to sparge a lot and boil down to reach target OG and volume
#B has higher mash efficiency and does not need to sparge as much, so also does not need to boil down as much.. Same OG same volume as #A, but A has a way higher boiloff.

Brewhouse efficiency is imho a bogus way to share a detailed recipe. All you need is grist percentages, and target OG. But that means that the one trying to brew it need to know how to scale it to his or hers setup.

Sharing a recipe with brewhouse efficiency means you need to tell how much wort is lost here and there. That's just adding more for the brewer to calculate.

I agree with you that I don't need to know your efficiencies just your grain percentages, and IBUs for each addition. I do need to know my brewhouse efficiency to hit your recipe targets.

Boil off is part of the equation for brewhouse efficiency because it impacts volume. It allows me to plug in your recipe using your percentages and hit OG, volume and FG based on my systems perimeters. Let's assume a big RIS. You boil for an hour but I want to boil for 3 hours. I plug that into my system and it adds the necessary volume of water needed for the boil off.

I don't need to know your losses or your efficiencies However If I see your running at 80% bh and I'm running at 70% the. I know I'll need more grain and hops than you did to hit the mark.

Cheers

 

[Smellyglove]

I agree with you that I don't need to know your efficiencies just your grain percentages, and IBUs for each addition. I do need to know my brewhouse efficiency to hit your recipe targets.

Boil off is part of the equation for brewhouse efficiency because it impacts volume. It allows me to plug in your recipe using your percentages and hit OG, volume and FG based on my systems perimeters. Let's assume a big RIS. You boil for an hour but I want to boil for 3 hours. I plug that into my system and it adds the necessary volume of water needed for the boil off.

I don't need to know your losses or your efficiencies However If I see your running at 80% bh and I'm running at 70% the. I know I'll need more grain and hops than you did to hit the mark.


Cheers

If I omit that I leave 50% of total kettle volume behind, you'll will be skewed when brewing my recipe after my "brewhouse efficiency". Since my BH efficiency will be way low, comparing to yours if you leave 0 trub behind.

The example with the RIS is what I mean that boiloff has nothing to say. I boil for 1hr, your boil for 3hrs, both meet target OG and volume.. The efficiency is the same after the boil, same volume and same OG. Difference is that you just started with more water, but we ended up with same volume/OG.

You just need to know your mash efficiency, and take it from there. If you use 1000L of water or 20L of water doesn't matter. It's about how many total points you can extract from the grains you use.

 

[V-Fib]

The directions say its all grain so I'm pretty sure its not meant to be steeped with extract. I have some pilsner, chocolate and I should have something similar to special roast to add what I need to to reach my normal efficiency. I'll email the company to see if this is normal in an attempt to educate them that this doesn't seem to the standard for kits. Thanks for all the responses.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

I can share my sheet with you through google docs for some inspiration and an insight about how I'm thinking about efficiency (I'm just thinking mash efficiency). But I don't sparge, so It's easier for me to predict since the sparge factor is left out. But I'm 100% sure you need to leave the AA out. Stop calculating after your you sparge. Boiloff is another factor which should be left on the side, and only implemented when you need to know how much water to use.

I went back into my spreadsheet and found an error in my formerly convoluted means of calculating efficiency. You are absolutely correct in that AA plays no part in it. Thanks to you I have now corrected my efficiency spreadsheet.