Batch sparging convert!

[McCall St. Brewer]

I did my first batch sparge yesterday, and, depending of course on how the beer turns out, I think I may now be a convert. For my first AG batches I tried fly sparging. I was pretty happy with the results, but I never was too confident that I was really doing it correctly.

So I did a batch sparge yesterday. Three steps. First drain the mash tun. Then I added sparge water in two steps, stirring up the mash a bit each time before draining it again.

First observation: man, does that ever save time.

Second observation: for the first time I used up almost all of my sparge water to collect 6 gallons of wort. That was one of the biggest things that made me wonder about fly sparging was that I always ended up with a sh*t-load of sparge water left over after collecting all my wort. My general rule is to mash with 1.3 quarts per pound of grain and heat 2 quarts per pound for sparging.

Third observation: while I understand the theory behind fly sparging-- gently sprinkling water onto the mash and letting it slowly filter through-- in practice my common sense tells me that batch sparging may actually work better. After all, it's during the mash that the starches are supposed to be converted to sugars, right? Sparging is supposed to rinse those sugars off the grain husks and into the wort. I know this is a subject for intense debate, but it just seems to me that pouring in a couple of gallons of water, stirring everything up and then draining if out is probably more likely to shake out all the sugars into the water than putting a little drizzle of water on the grain for an hour.

Anyway, assuming of course that things turn out well, I think it's pretty likely that I'll continue to batch sparge from now on.

 

[Kevin Dean]

Sparging is supposed to rinse those sugars off the grain husks and into the wort. I know this is a subject for intense debate, but it just seems to me that pouring in a couple of gallons of water, stirring everything up and then draining if out is probably more likely to shake out all the sugars into the water than putting a little drizzle of water on the grain for an hour.

Brew Your Own ran an article this month by John Palmer about sparging and lautering. It goes in depth on effeciency using various equipment setups. No-sparging (which actually interests me enough to "waste" $$ on a batch and be okay if it fails horribly), fly sparging and batch sparging were all covered. the general gist I got from it was that effecincy is more signifigantly influenced by your equipment than you method assuming for a moment all things are done properly.

They did point out one other thing that is obvious but never quite occured to me: the volume of sugars in the mash is finite. This is extremely important for fly spargers because if you get channelling (which is almost always the case with a single outlet from the tun) there comes a point where you hit 100% of all sugars extracted and begin pulling out just water while sugars are "trapped" in the bed still.

For me, I batch sparge and I'm quite happy (except for over sparging and collecting too much... Still refining my process. ) because it seems easier to do it with decent results.

 

[jdoiv]

The article also pointed out that for the highest efficiency, you should use a false bottom and fly sparge. Though with a pound more of grain and less time and equipment involved, batch sparging works very well. Just depends on what you are trying to accomplish, making good beer at a decent efficiency, or shooting for the highest possible efficiency and still getting good beer.

 

[david_42]

I've done it both ways and settled on batch sparging. My efficiencies were about the same, but batch sparging cuts an hour or more off of the process. Watching wort drizzle for 90 minutes isn't my idea of a good time and with a 12 gallon mash tun, the extra volume required for batching isn't a consideration.

 

[Mutilated1]

I've never done anything other than batch sparging and I'm consistently in the mid 80s with my efficiency - anything else seems like too much trouble and I don't see what I'd have to gain by changing.

 

[Orfy]

I have nothing new to add to the topic but I'll say what I say in every other thread on this subject. (Maybe 40+)

After much researching before going AG I settled on batch sparging.

I have never felt the need to do other wise.
KISS BABY

 

[McCall St. Brewer]

3 days later... my beer has been steadily bubbly at 1 per second for over 24 hours now. So far it's looking good. Looking to be a long, steady ferment. The temp in my carboy is 57 F.

One thing I realize now that I didn't do is re-circulate before running off each of the sparge additions as Orfy suggests doing here:

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/showthread.php?t=45921

I think I will try that in the future, although my runoffs didn't seem cloudy or have any grain husks visible.

 

[Ruddles]

I have always used fly-sparging. I understand the desire to hasten things up (and be willing to use more grain in the process). But in fly-sparging great importance has been put on recirculating wort until the run-off was clear, before starting the collection. In batch sparging this is not done. Does anyone have any information on the real down-side of collecting cloudy wort?

 

[SuperiorBrew]

I have always used fly-sparging. I understand the desire to hasten things up (and be willing to use more grain in the process). But in fly-sparging great importance has been put on recirculating wort until the run-off was clear, before starting the collection. In batch sparging this is not done. Does anyone have any information on the real down-side of collecting cloudy wort?

I batch sparge and have always recirculated till very clear, even before I went to a RIMS setup.

 

[Warped04]

I was under the impression you recirced with batch sparging as well

 

[billtzk]

I was under the impression you recirced with batch sparging as well

Not generally. You put the grains and the water together and mix them up and let it sit.

Are you thinking of vorlaufing, perhaps?

 

[Warped04]

Not generally. You put the grains and the water together and mix them up and let it sit.

Are you thinking of vorlaufing, perhaps?

Probably...I'm still an extract brewer, so all I know about AG is from what I've read.

 

[CBBaron]

Not generally. You put the grains and the water together and mix them up and let it sit.

Are you thinking of vorlaufing, perhaps?

Vorlauf and recirculating are the same thing when you are refering to recirc at the end of the mash.
It is usually recommended that you vorlauf atleast a couple qts before starting each drain in batch sparging. I'm not entirely convinced that it is absolutely necessary but I doubt it hurts and it does produce much clearer wort. Vorlaufing has the added benefit in fly sparging in setting up your grain bed so that the grains are rinsed evenly.

Craig

 

[bradsul]

I can't speak for anyone else, but I certainly vorlauf when I batch sparge. I do it after each batch addition before I start to run off into the kettle (so usually 3 times).

I do both batch and fly sparging, I fly sparge mostly in the summer when I just want to sit around and enjoy the brewing process and have a few beers on the lawn. Most of the time I batch sparge however, it's just easier and for the sake of the 3-4% increase in efficiency I get fly sparging, I'm willing to sacrifice a bit more grain and batch sparge.

 

[Got Trub?]

I've done both and batch sparge only now for the convenience. Historically fly sparging arose as a method to gain a few extra points of gravity from each pound of grain which is crucial for a commercial brewery as that amounts to significant $'s.

GT

 

[Spyk'd]

I fly sparge and quite frankly, I find the "gentle rain" of water trickling into my mash tun very relaxing. I also find that heating up my sparge water and holding it in a cooler while I'm mash holding makes things more relaxing to me. I know that I just have to throw a valve once conversion is complete and not have to worry about hitting a temperature on the 'fly', so to speak. By preparing things ahead of time, my enjoyment factor is increased.

I don't mind the extra time of fly sparging, because I'm never in a hurry when I brew. If I don't have all day, then I don't brew. I also don't mind the 83-86% efficiencies I hit.


You see, I brew as an enjoyable hobby for my own relaxation. I put music on and dedicate the time to ME. It is my time. More time brewing is more time for me.


I'm sure other married with children folks will chime in on this one.

 

[Willie3]

I do both. If I am in a hurry I will Batch. If I have all day I will fly. I seem to get the same efficiency or couple less points when I batch. I just had a mini brew off yesterday. I batched and my B-i-l flyed. I was done some 10 minutes before he was but that is only because I took my time and dilly dallied while helping him.

Both seemed to be the same. His hydro read 1.066 and mine read 1.060. Same batch same recipe etc.

Not too bad of a difference.

- WW

 

[billtzk]

Vorlauf and recirculating are the same thing when you are refering to recirc at the end of the mash.
It is usually recommended that you vorlauf atleast a couple qts before starting each drain in batch sparging. I'm not entirely convinced that it is absolutely necessary but I doubt it hurts and it does produce much clearer wort. Vorlaufing has the added benefit in fly sparging in setting up your grain bed so that the grains are rinsed evenly.

Craig

I agree that "vorlauf" and "recirculate" mean the same thing in that context. But there is a potential source of confusion when you use the term "recirculate" that way.

The reason a distinction is beneficial is that many brewers have begun to use continuous recirculation during the mash to help control temperatures. The 'R' in "HERMS" and "RIMS" refer to recirculation. RIMS is Recirculating Infusion Mash System. HERMS is Heat Exchange Recirculating Mash System. In this context, "recirculate" does not imply the same thing as "vorlauf", even though it also accomplishes what vorlauf does. Continuous recirculation serves a distinct purpose in the mash process, so I try to encourage people to use the term "vorlauf" when they mean recirculation at the end of the mash to clear the wort and/or settle the grain bed, and to use "recirculate" in the temperature control sense implied by HERMS and RIMS.

but that's just my .02 - I'm no authority.

 

[eurc51]

Currently, I have a very simple single pipe manifold (if you can even call it that) in my cylindrical mash tun. I've been planning to upgrade my manifold to have a more efficient design and avoid channeling. But, now I'm considering going to batch sparging. So, my question is this: if I batch sparge, will the simple (single pipe) manifold hurt me? My understanding is that the grain is stirred between batches. And, since the entire tun is drained each time, can you even get channeling?

Thanks.

 

[Greenglass]

Not generally. You put the grains and the water together and mix them up and let it sit.

Are you thinking of vorlaufing, perhaps?

I guess that's what was meant. I've been vorlaufing after mashing and after each batch addition, and it doesn't seem to take very long at all to make the runoff completely clear.

If you didn't do it, though, I don't think there'd be a whole lot of difference; the total amount of grain husks you'd let through would be very small compared to the volume of runoff, and it's all going to settle out eventually. Since it's no big deal to vorlauf, I do it anyway, but if you have a batch of beer for which you didn't bother, I wouldn't think it would be something to be worrying about.

 

[Got Trub?]

Currently, I have a very simple single pipe manifold (if you can even call it that) in my cylindrical mash tun. I've been planning to upgrade my manifold to have a more efficient design and avoid channeling. But, now I'm considering going to batch sparging. So, my question is this: if I batch sparge, will the simple (single pipe) manifold hurt me? My understanding is that the grain is stirred between batches. And, since the entire tun is drained each time, can you even get channeling?

Thanks.

Channeling is not a problem in batch sparging. The design of your manifold is not crucial as it is in fly sparging so your simple manifold will work fine.

GT

 

[Jolly McStanson]

By vorlaufing your also rinsing the grains over and over as the wort passes through the mash to the fawcett and out into your cup/pitcher. The liquid is in motion and moving through the grains and grabbing more sugar.

I vorlauf two gallons minimum just to clear and concentrate the wort. I think my brew house % was close to 90% the last batch.

The water I use is also quite good at rinsing things off such as soap. The water here will wash soap off in no time flat. When I go away, it takes me forever to wash soap off.

Also with my water its hard to get soap to bubble up.

 

[Greenglass]

That's an interesting way of looking at it. I haven't been vorlaufing quite that much. I don't get anything close to 90% BH efficiency either...

Couldn't you get the same effect just by stirring, though?

 

[nosmatt]

That's an interesting way of looking at it. I haven't been vorlaufing quite that much. I don't get anything close to 90% BH efficiency either...

Couldn't you get the same effect just by stirring, though?

????

one thing has nothing to do with the other.

vorlaufing keeps grain husks and bit out of your boil. just using the grain as a filter.
i do it every time, mash out, sparge one, and sparge two, UNLESS i do not stir between the first and second sparge.

 

[Ruddles]

Well, if you re-circulate till clear with batch sparging, I don't see how you can save much time or effort vs fly sparging. Please tell me how long your batch sparge takes for a 5 or 10 gallon batch of beer.