Different grain and up to 10% of the difference in mash efficiency

[Ninoid]

I would like to share some of my observations regarding mash efficiency.

I am a BIAB brewer and my mash efficiency is from the beginning mostly around 75%, more often and slightly lower. Basically, whatever I was trying to change in the mash process the efficiency didn’t change. However, in the last five brewing I have started using Pale Ale Best Simpson malt and my efficiency has risen well over 85%, without any other change in process or grain grinding size. And I think beer is clearer too. So far, I have mostly used Croatian, Weyermann or Pauls malt, but Simpson's malt really pleasantly surprised me.

Do you have such experiences?
That you changed the malt of another manufacturer and got such a big change in mash efficiency?

 

[VikeMan]

A 10% jump due to a change in maltster doesn't seem likely to me. Maybe if the old malt was an oddball malt with very small kernels that didn't really crush well, I could see it.

How are you computing your mash efficiency? Are you using the correct potential yields for both the new malt and the old malt? Are the grain bill sizes the same? Did you account for actual (not planned) post boil volumes in both cases?

 

[day_trippr]

I can totally vouch for significant unexpected changes in efficiency just by changing base malts.

Over the last decade or so I've brewed almost exclusively with GP, Weyermann Pilsner, and Briess two-row. But around 18 months ago I bought a bag of locally grown organic two-row Valley Malt (Hadley, Mass) just to support their effort. Did not give the malt much of an examination aside from noting it was clearly a pale ale malt (~3.5, imo), darker than my usual base malts. I relegated it to a classic IPA where the color would fit.

I used my normal 0.032" gap for barley malts, but on brew day found I was a good 8 points off the pre-boil gravity on a recipe that I'd brewed dozens of times and rarely missed high or low by more than a point or two.

What was lurking was a kernel size significantly smaller than my usual malts. Duh. I ran another quarter pound through the mill and gave it a close look: there were way too many barely molested kernels...

Cheers!

 

[DBhomebrew]

@Northern_Brewer shared this recently. All base malts. Note, while the one on the left is 6-row, the two on the right are both 2-row. GP in the center.

Leaving your mill on one setting for all of these would give very different results.

 

[bracconiere]

i get about 10% better effec with store bought malt of any kind.

 

[VikeMan]

i get about 10% better effec with store bought malt of any kind.

But don't confuse yield with efficiency. Mash Efficiency is the percentage of total potential sugars/dextrins that make it to the kettle. Different malts have different potentials. So you could have exactly the same mash efficiency with two different grains, but get different gravities (yield). (Unless you have done congress mashes with your home malted grains, you wouldn't have a basis from which to compute mash efficiency.)

 

[bracconiere]

But don't confuse yield with efficiency. Mash Efficiency is the percentage of total potential sugars/dextrins that make it to the kettle. Different malts have different potentials. So you could have exactly the same mash efficiency with two different grains, but get different gravities (yield). (Unless you have done congress mashes with your home malted grains, you wouldn't have a basis from which to compute mash efficiency.)

my homemalt is all over the place, i use 6-row in beersmith, and it's BH effec number....just got 75% this batch, was 82% last one...but with store bought 88%-90% everytime, way more consistent...

i'd imagine store bought could be similar between maltsters?

 

[day_trippr]

But don't confuse yield with efficiency.[...]

Totally correct...

Cheers!

 

[Ninoid]

A 10% jump due to a change in maltster doesn't seem likely to me. Maybe if the old malt was an oddball malt with very small kernels that didn't really crush well, I could see it.

How are you computing your mash efficiency? Are you using the correct potential yields for both the new malt and the old malt? Are the grain bill sizes the same? Did you account for actual (not planned) post boil volumes in both cases?

Over two years and a hundred batches the process is the same; BrewMate software, hydrometer for measuring OG and FG, BIAB no sparge, same cooking pot, same grain mill, same amount of tap water. The only difference is in the grain.

 

[Ninoid]

For all Pale Ale malt I use yield 1.037 and for Pilsner malt 1.038

 

[madscientist451]

I run everything though the mill twice. This extra step seems to solve any crush problems for me.
The OP question was about sources of malt and it appears he was comparing malt from the UK, Germany and Croatia. While the manufacturing process and size of grain may be slightly different, it is likely that the varieties of barley grown in each of these areas is different as well. I've noticed a big difference in flavor when comparing malt from Weyermann and Briess or even smaller "craft" malthouses.
I don't worry too much about efficiency, with some malts you just have to make some recipe adjustments. When using a new malt, I keep some DME on hand in case I don't hit my numbers and then make adjustments the next time.
Pro brewers that buy malt in bulk get analysis sheets with every batch so they can make adjustments, but at the homebrew level we have to use the averages that are (ususally) provided by manufacturers. Big manufacturers like Briess Cargill and Weyermann produce a pretty consistent product but smaller malt manufacturers are going to have some variations.

 

[dmtaylor]

Kernel size matters. You can help correct for this by setting your mill gap appropriately tight to adequately crush ANY kernel size. If you do not have your own mill, get one.

 

[VikeMan]

Over two years and a hundred batches the process is the same; BrewMate software, hydrometer for measuring OG and FG, BIAB no sparge, same cooking pot, same grain mill, same amount of tap water. The only difference is in the grain.

Then I'd bet a paycheck that your "more efficient" grain is plumper and getting a finer crush from your mill.

 

[rancocas]

@Northern_Brewer shared this recently. All base malts. Note, while the one on the left is 6-row, the two on the right are both 2-row. GP in the center.

Leaving your mill on one setting for all of these would give very different results.

View attachment 739919

In a previous life I worked with barley growers in western Canada. Kernel plumpness was a key criteria that determined whether the barley made malting grade or not.

 

[Ninoid]

Then I'd bet a paycheck that your "more efficient" grain is plumper and getting a finer crush from your mill.

I don’t think there’s a difference in grinding, but I can’t claim you’re wrong. The best way to determine if the difference is really in the type of base malt is to make some next beer again with some malt that I used before (Weyermann, ...).

 

[VikeMan]

I don’t think there’s a difference in grinding, but I can’t claim you’re wrong. The best way to determine if the difference is really in the type of base malt is to make some next beer again with some malt that I used before (Weyermann, ...).

Good luck. Pretty much every possibility has been discussed in this thread. When troubleshooting this, I would just remind you to make sure to use the correct potential yields for both the new malt and the old malt. If you don't know what that means, ask, and if you have to ask, you're most likely not doing it already.

And regarding the crush... to confirm or reject this, you really need to crush both malts and compare them side by side. Preferably using malt sieves, but since most people don't own those, at least compare visually, and count uncrushed grains per unit weight as a reasonable check.

 

[dmtaylor]

And regarding the crush... compare visually, and count uncrushed grains per unit weight as a reasonable check.

And pictures would help US help YOU, regarding your typical crush for any particular malt.

 

[DarrellQ]

For all Pale Ale malt I use yield 1.037 and for Pilsner malt 1.038

If you have a gauge and measuring process that you can differintiate between .001 between the rollers, please share?

 

[DBhomebrew]

If you have a gauge and measuring process that you can differintiate between .001 between the rollers, please share?

They're talking gravity yield per pound of grain, not roller gap size.

 

[DarrellQ]

They're talking gravity yield per pound of grain, not roller gap size.

No, I was talking about this from Ninoid: "For all Pale Ale malt I use yield 1.037 and for Pilsner malt 1.038"

 

[DBhomebrew]

No, I was talking about this from Ninoid: "For all Pale Ale malt I use yield 1.037 and for Pilsner malt 1.038"

Yep

 

[Ninoid]

If you have a gauge and measuring process that you can differintiate between .001 between the rollers, please share?

I don't have any measuring process.