Fly vs. Batch sparging

[SantaClaus]

I'm new to AG brewing and thought I'd ask you all which you prefer.

From what I've read in books I got the impression fly sparging is the better (aka more advanced) technique, but from looking around here get the impression batch is just as good.

In the few batches I have done, I've fly sparged; percolating the water over the mash using a colander, making sure to develop a 2" cushion of water on top of the mash, and match flow rate of water in and wort out. I realize this isn't the best technique, but my setup is a work in progress.

My last batch was a couple hundreths off my target OG....

Is it worth it to develop a better fly system or scrap it all together and go to batch?


Thanks guys - I've caught the brewing bug and finding this site has been awesome.

 

[passedpawn]

Batch sparging is super easy... just try it once and see for yourself. Add water, stir, wait a minute, drain. Repeat if necessary.

 

[Dynachrome]

Fly sparging is like ballet. It has to be timed and choriogrpaed.

Bartch sparge is like hop scotch. You go from one step to the next in defined stages, (you can even back up if it works fr you.) It takes a litle less timing and practice.

My guy down at the LHBS asked me if I checked to make sure I was getting conversion with my batch sparging. The only ay I check is when I get my final OG. So far I am getting decent conversion.

Batch sparging just seems easier.

 

[SantaClaus]

Batch sparging is super easy... just try it once and see for yourself. Add water, stir, wait a minute, drain. Repeat if necessary.

Seems it -- I watched some videos on youtube and it looks easy and just as good.

Next brew I'm batching

 

[passedpawn]

My guy down at the LHBS asked me if I checked to make sure I was getting conversion with my batch sparging. The only ay I check is when I get my final OG. So far I am getting decent conversion.

Conversion should be done before you start sparging of any type. I have iodine, but I haven't checked a batch for conversion in a long time. If you hit your temps (or anywhere close), the enzymes will take care of the rest.

 

[david_42]

The main advantage of fly sparging is you don't need much extra room in your mash tun. The pros fly sparge for exactly that reason. If you have a 5 gallon tun and like to make big beers, it's the only choice. If you're like me, with a 48 qt cooler, batch sparging is a no-brainer.

 

[dstar26t]

pH drift at the end of sparging is less of a worry when batch sparging also.

 

[Homercidal]

I Batch Sparge. Not against Fly Sparging, but seems a bit more complicated to understand if you want to do it "right". However, I may end up switching, just to make my future RIMS system a bit less complicated. After all, neither of them are THAT difficult. With Fly sparging, just have to keep control over the amount of sparge water replacing the outgoing wort.
(unless you have an "autosparge")

 

[ian-atx]

My guy down at the LHBS asked me if I checked to make sure I was getting conversion with my batch sparging. The only ay I check is when I get my final OG. So far I am getting decent conversion.

Batch sparging just seems easier.

Batch or Fly, conversion happens before you sparge. That question your LHBS guy posed doesn't make sense.

To the OP, either way works. Both make beer, both can be efficient. To me batch sparging is easier and makes the step up to all grain much less daunting.

 

[funkswing]

Like it has been said: batch sparging is the way to go with smaller batch sizes, b/c mash tun size isn't really a limitation. With micro-brew/brew-pub size batches, mash tun size is a limitation, so they fly sparge.

I talked to the local brew pub brewer in town about batch sparging and he didn't even know what it was. He was like, "so, you're setting the grain bed twice? That sounds like its more work than necessary."

But he is working with many many pounds of grain at once. Its a lot easier for a homebrewer to stir up the mash grist for 5-15 gal batch than it is for him to stir up his 5-7 bbl. batches! Plus he doesn't have the head space in is MT to batch sparge.

In the end, batch sparging requires less equipment, so many homebrewers choose it.

 

[JVD_X]

I fly-sparge when I brew on my outdoor rig and batch sparge small batches during the deep winter inside.

I believe there is a misconception that you need to "keep an inch of sparge water" on top of the mash during fly-sparging. It should read "keep AT LEAST an inch (or two) of sparge water on top of the mash". The purpose is to allow the heavier sugar-laden wort to sink and be pushed out by the lighter water on top.

Occasionally, I will rake the top 2 inches of the grain with a meat fork during the sparge to avoid channeling.

I routinely have 4-5 inches of sparge on top of the mash during fly-sparging. It really doesn't take that much babysitting.

EDIT - I have to also say that I have just started brew-in-a-bag and have had great results. If you are happy with batch sparging then BIAB is even easier and just as effective.

 

[Dynachrome]

Batch or Fly, conversion happens before you sparge. That question your LHBS guy posed doesn't make sense.

To the OP, either way works. Both make beer, both can be efficient. To me batch sparging is easier and makes the step up to all grain much less daunting.

generally he was just making sure I knew about checking for conversion. I had never thought about it. I just figured if my OG went up, I had fermentables. Can you get high specific gravity without conversion?

 

[DrJerryrigger]

Can you get high specific gravity without conversion?

Yeah, if you have a lot of flour in your wort . It sounds like your doing alright with conversion (though everyone has some room for improvement).

I batch sparg, but would like to set up a fly sparg soon. Fly seems great if you mash in a cooler with a false bottom (big if). One big advantage to Fly is that you can toss the first sparg back through until it clears up. Other than that your results should be about the same.
I like batch sparging because I get in a good rhythm, though it messed up my back on Sat. I check PH and SG wile the next sparg is soaking.
If I go to fly I'd like to set up a hydrometer and PH meter in the out flow. I would have to make a chiller for this to work well, but anyway that project is not happening soon...

 

[JonK331]

I fly-sparge when I brew on my outdoor rig and batch sparge small batches during the deep winter inside.

I believe there is a misconception that you need to "keep an inch of sparge water" on top of the mash during fly-sparging. It should read "keep AT LEAST an inch (or two) of sparge water on top of the mash". The purpose is to allow the heavier sugar-laden wort to sink and be pushed out by the lighter water on top.

Occasionally, I will rake the top 2 inches of the grain with a meat fork during the sparge to avoid channeling.

I routinely have 4-5 inches of sparge on top of the mash during fly-sparging. It really doesn't take that much babysitting.

I totally agree. I don't know why so many people like batch sparging so much. It doesn't seem like it would save any time either. Especially since you have to do everything two to three times including vorlauf. It is very easy to keep enough water on top of the grain bed while fly sparging. If the grain bed is deep enough you don't even have to "sprinkle" the water. I just pour it in gently with a pitcher. My grain bed is typically around twelve inches deep so I can even stir the top few inches.

 

[DrJerryrigger]

I totally agree. I don't know why so many people like batch sparging so much. It doesn't seem like it would save any time either. Especially since you have to do everything two to three times including vorlauf. It is very easy to keep enough water on top of the grain bed while fly sparging. If the grain bed is deep enough you don't even have to "sprinkle" the water. I just pour it in gently with a pitcher. My grain bed is typically around twelve inches deep so I can even stir the top few inches.

The larger the mash; the more they don't like it.
I feel as though there are fewer things that can go wrong with a batch sparg, and the problems are easier to fix when they happen. For me it seems like the best choice when I'm brewing small.

 

[funkswing]

I don't know why so many people like batch sparging so much. It doesn't seem like it would save any time either.

Its not about saving time, its about simplicity. You cannot over-sparge with batch sparging (unless you are a total idiot); batch sparging requires less equipment; and you don't have to babysit the sparge. If you already fly sparge, there isn't any reason to switch to batch sparging.

If the grain bed is deep enough you don't even have to "sprinkle" the water. I just pour it in gently with a pitcher.

You don't have to do any of that "babysitting" if you are batch sparging, you just dump it in all at once, then drain it. You should be fly sparging with a sparge arm so you don't have to waste time pouring multiple pitchers, hence the "fly sparging requires more equipment" argument compared to batch sparging. But if you like pouring multiple gallons of hot water over a hot mash, go for it. Both methods make the same quality wort.

The larger the mash; the more they don't like it.

That's where things change. Once you start brewing batches larger than your typical homebrewer (>15 gal). And its only because of the ridiculous amount of volume batch sparging takes up with the additional lbs of grain.

 

[Germelli1]

I feel like fly sparging is much easier and makes way more sense than batch sparging (to me due to my thermo/fluid mechanics/etc engineering courses).

It takes no more equiptment than batch sparging...I use my bottling bucket as a vessel to hold and distribute the hot fly sparg water (HLT). Just open the valve at the bottom of the bottling bucket to control the flow rate and do the same with the valve at the bottom of my mash tun.

Takes 5 minutes of babysitting to get the flow rates correct and once you have a nice level of water over the top of the grain bed then you don't have to worry about the less force of gravity slowing your flow rate as the bottling bucket drains

 

[JonK331]

You don't have to do any of that "babysitting" if you are batch sparging, you just dump it in all at once, then drain it. You should be fly sparging with a sparge arm so you don't have to waste time pouring multiple pitchers, hence the "fly sparging requires more equipment" argument compared to batch sparging. But if you like pouring multiple gallons of hot water over a hot mash, go for it. Both methods make the same quality wort.

I actually enjoy being able to sit down, and have a beer and a smoke while I do this. Also, the sparge arm doesn't add any value except that you don't have to pour. Doesn't increase efficiency, doesn't help maintain temp, etc. It's way easier to get a pitcher out of the cupboard than it is to assemble/store another piece of equipment. Especially with limited space such as is my situation in an apartment. People seem to be intimidated by fly sparging but it's really quite simple.

 

[funkswing]

Germelli1: typical for an engineer to not understand the way that most people think is simpler......

Batch is for homebrewers, fly is for pros

Then you must be a pro. Solidified by this statement:

Especially with limited space such as is my situation in an apartment.

Both methods make the same quality beer if done right

 

[JonK331]

Germelli1: typical for an engineer to not understand the way that most people think is simpler......


Then you must be a pro. Solidified by this statement:

Both methods make the same quality beer if done right

Agreed!

 

[defenestrate]

i used to batch sparge, and then one day i tried the "hybrid" fly sparge method thats tossed around the forum a little(i think started by biermuncher). I consider it more of a lazy fly sparge, but i've had great results.

i have my sparge in one cooler, pump over top the mash and use foil to disperse the water. it was a little tricky getting the flows matched and figuring out how fast to do it, but after one time i was hooked. i sparge right into my kettle (this was into a bucket just for measuring purposes). getting the flows to match now is cake, the clarity is amazing (after running over the mash for about 10 min), and adding heat right as it goes into the kettle allows for a boil almost instantly when i have my volume collected. once i have everything going smoothly i check the gravity a few times and make sure the runnings don't go below 1.015; thats my only maintence. I'm not knocking batch sparging at all, but i'm happier with this technique.

do what works for you.

 

[Germelli1]

Germelli1: typical for an engineer to not understand the way that most people think is simpler......

Both methods make the same quality beer if done right

Psh, I dropped out of engineering a week ago

I agree both methods make equal quality beer! I am not flaming batch sparger, I just wanted to show that it doesn't take much more equiptment...just your standard bottling bucket and ~2 feet of siphon tubing over a bowl, dish, collander, etc (as a water diffuser).

To me personally it is just more fun, and more fun to me to see where I can pick up effiency points without lessening the quality of my wort.

Plus I like sparging until the wort quality starts declining and then keep going to collect the extract for my next yeast starter. Even if it is low gravity, I still save on DME!

 

[JonK331]

Germelli1: typical for an engineer to not understand the way that most people think is simpler......


Then you must be a pro. Solidified by this statement:

Both methods make the same quality beer if done right

I agree but the original poster asked what each of us prefer. Not to get in argument about it. I prefer fly sparge and therefore that is what I recommend. If you don't mind spending a few extra bucks on grain, go for the batch. If you want to brew more like the professionals do, with maximum efficiency, go with fly.

 

[funkswing]

How is this a hybrid method? Just looks like fly sparging to me. What is your eff. with this sparging method and your previous batch sparging?

Is the beer any better, or do you just think the wort is clearer? Did you vorlauf both the mash runnings and sparge runnings when you used to batch sparge?

 

[Brew-boy]

I tried both and for me and my system fly works better and is more consistence.

 

[bernerbrau]

I've been fly sparging for a year or so now, and I'm starting to get sick of it. For one thing, it requires a very precise mashout range that's difficult to hit. For another, my fly sparges tend to stick and take 90+ minutes to complete, resulting in over-lautering and unwanted tannin extraction. I really think it's back to batch for my next brew.

 

[funkswing]

I agree but the original poster asked what each of us prefer. Not to get in argument about it. I prefer fly sparge and therefore that is what I recommend. If you don't mind spending a few extra bucks on grain, go for the batch. If you want to brew more like the professionals do, with maximum efficiency, go with fly.

No arguments were meant! What eff. do you get with fly v. sparge? What is a "good" eff. IYHO?

I batch sparge and get 75% on 1.056 brews, more as the OG goes down, a bit less as I go >1.070. I get my grain crushed at my LHBS, so I don't control that variable, but the local brewpub usees the same mill; so I know the crush can make excellent beer.

 

[Germelli1]

How is this a hybrid method? Just looks like fly sparging to me. What is your eff. with this sparging method and your previous batch sparging?

Is the beer any better, or do you just think the wort is clearer? Did you vorlauf both the mash runnings and sparge runnings when you used to batch sparge?

You sound exactly like some of the posters in the original thread! I use the same method but use gravity instead of pumps...although I never considered tin foil as a diffuser!

My beer is definitely not any better than someone who batch sparges, but i have noticed it is much more clear.

I have to add the difuser first because I always kick up some grain when doing it. Then I start adding the sparge water slowly until I get the water level just over the grain bed, then I vourlauf so those runnings add to the water level.

 

[JonK331]

No arguments were meant! What eff. do you get with fly v. sparge? What is a "good" eff. IYHO?

I batch sparge and get 75% on 1.056 brews, more as the OG goes down, a bit less as I go >1.070. I get my grain crushed at my LHBS, so I don't control that variable, but the local brewpub usees the same mill; so I know the crush can make excellent beer.

75% is great for batch sparging. That's about where I come in, maybe a bit better but not a lot. My LHBS has an adjustable mill that is usually set a bit coarse for me. I always adjust it to come out a little finer but I couldn't claim to get it exactly the same every time so the efficiency is not consistent. My next move is to buy a grain mill, find the right setting, and keep it exactly the same to remove that variable.

 

[defenestrate]

How is this a hybrid method? Just looks like fly sparging to me. What is your eff. with this sparging method and your previous batch sparging?

Is the beer any better, or do you just think the wort is clearer? Did you vorlauf both the mash runnings and sparge runnings when you used to batch sparge?

thats why i put the hybrid in quotes, that was the original title https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f36/hybrid-fly-sparge-technique-75454/ its really just in reference to not using a sparge arm.

i see 85-90% effeciency consistantly... when i batched sparged more in the 70-75%. yes, when i batch sparged i vorlaufed each time.

i dont think i can answer whether the beer is "better", but its more consistant. I would also attribute the efficiency increase to a slightly finer crush, and just being better and brewing. the reason i use this technique is that its simply less work for me-less stirring, one vorlauf, very clear run off, and i find it easier to control the gravity.... i'm not doing it for effciency but i do enjoy the increase.

 

[funkswing]

So, when all is said in done, there is less defenstration of beer and more drinking of it when you fly sparge?

 

[JonK331]

Why on earth would I throw beer out of a window? Of course there is more drinking of it.

Defenstration: the throwing of a person or thing out of a window
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/defenestration

And yes, I did have to look that one up.

 

[defenestrate]

So, when all is said in done, there is less defenstration of beer and more drinking of it when you fly sparge?

Why on earth would I throw beer out of a window? Of course there is more drinking of it.

Defenstration: the throwing of a person or thing out of a window
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/defenestration

And yes, I did have to look that one up.

come on guys, the definition is in my sig!

i did try a defenestrating fly sparge, letting the mash run out of a second story window into the kettle below, but i found that i was creating far too much hot side aeration

 

[funkswing]

Hot side aeration my ass!

So, I just read the Biermuncher post about "hybrid" (fly) sparging. Getting 5-10% more eff. is damn tempting. I may check this out in the near future.

 

[Germelli1]

Hot side aeration my ass!

So, I just read the Biermuncher post about "hybrid" (fly) sparging. Getting 5-10% more eff. is damn tempting. I may check this out in the near future.

Even if you find any increase in efficiency and don't stick with it as your sparge method, homebrewing is all about experimentation. I find experimentation fun...(damn camp counselors)

 

[DrJerryrigger]

Okay I'm getting lazy, so: Fly Sparging = "FS" and Batch Sparging = "BS " (ha ha ha, okay, I'm over it)

Plus I like sparging until the wort quality starts declining and then keep going to collect the extract for my next yeast starter. Even if it is low gravity, I still save on DME!

I do this with BS too, I keep going until I'm get kicked out of the kitchen. Just remember you can boil a 1.001 down to what ever you want, and it takes less room to store at 1.150 or so. Also; keep (or make it have) a low PH to reduce chance of infection.
With BS the "cuts" are very very clear, even if you want to change them you can't. This makes it good for the indecisive, I would be tempted to separate every 100ml that came out of a FS.
I would like to FS, but I'm BSing (but it's more of a BS BS (the first BS means the feces of a male ruminant animal(how grammatically wrong is this?(but it works in math)very, I think)you know; bull poo)because I need better equipment) now.
If any one can follow that on a first read; I give you a gold star!

 

[Germelli1]

I followed it perfectly!

(but I assume I've had almost as many as you tonight [unless you havn't had any, then this is just awkward] (because I would be implying that your diction [or is it syntax...or just sentance structure in general] is that of a drunken fool, either way, no offense meant!)

 

[funkswing]

Alright, I don't know what to say about DrJerryRiggers post.....so, I'll skip it it :cross:

Back to this "hybrid" method: Is the increase in eff. due to the fact that you are using the sparge water to "push" the sugary water (wort) out of the MLT?

Since, with a BS you add it all at once, mix it, and drain it; it is all the same density (more or less). BUT with the Hybrid sparge you are getting a few extra eff. points b/c you are "pushing out" a bit more sugar (refer to the image in BierMuncher's original post about this method, which is Stickied on the All Grain Forum).

But in the end you are still using the same amount of sparge water for the hybrid method as you are for the BS method, right? (opposed to FS where you have leftover sparge water)

 

[defenestrate]

Alright, I don't know what to say about DrJerryRiggers post.....so, I'll skip it it :cross:

Back to this "hybrid" method: Is the increase in eff. due to the fact that you are using the sparge water to "push" the sugary water (wort) out of the MLT?

Since, with a BS you add it all at once, mix it, and drain it; it is all the same density (more or less). BUT with the Hybrid sparge you are getting a few extra eff. points b/c you are "pushing out" a bit more sugar (refer to the image in BierMuncher's original post about this method, which is Stickied on the All Grain Forum).

But in the end you are still using the same amount of sparge water for the hybrid method as you are for the BS method, right? (opposed to FS where you have leftover sparge water)

you are getting more of the sugars out, yes. if you sparge slow enough you can actually see the layer of water on top of the wort as its being slowly pushed through the grain, its pretty cool actually i do end up with water left over simply becuase i like to have extra and i just have always kept an inch of so of water above the mash... you just need to make sure that you arent over sparging, which i havent yet. i generally split my mash and sparge water fairly equally and mash fairly thin, around 1.7 qt/lb.

 

[funkswing]

defenestrate: so you follow BierMuncher's method in his post? Did you read about WildWest's true hybrid approach? I was leaning towards that method just so I didn't oversparge the first time. The water volumes are the same as a true BS, but you add about 1/2 of your sparge water, vorlauf, then start collecting. Then you use the rest of your sparge water to FS for the rest of the sprage. But I assume you still drain the MLT completely as in BS.

Comprende? (I don't know spanish......)