improving efficiency

[matc]

I've done about 7 all grain brews so far using a manifold in my mash tun. Today was my 1st brew with a ss braid. I got 63 % for my mash efficiency as oppososed to like 75 % with the manifold. How can I improve this ?

Here's what I did :

Milled my grain, (maris otter and crystal that's it)
Pour strike water (1.25 qt/lbs) at 180F in mash tun,
Add grain at 166F to mash at 154 F
Stir like crazy for 5 minutes, no dough balls
After 30 minutes, I opened the lid, stirred again and verified temp at 154F

At 45 minutes, vorlaufed, drained and added half my sparge water, stirred again, drain, added remaining sparge water, stirred and drained !

I got my pre boil volume correctly but my gravity was 1.034, 10 points lower than expected. This is the 1st time I lose that much points. Is this all because of the braid ? Could I crush thighter with the braid ? I noticed during the vorlauf that the wort was much more clearer so maybe I could tighten the mill

edit, just checked my mill and it's at about 0.033"

 

[tgmartin000]

Maybe try extending your mash to 60 min? Also, really stir the sparge like crazy. I usually stir for a good 5 minutes, really hard, to knock all those sugars loose. Stir it like it owes you money.

I don't know anything about mill gaps, sorry.

 

[Oginme]

So if I am following what you wrote you replaced a manifold with a single SS braid. Can I assume it goes straight down the center of the mlt? If so, you are not getting good drainage from the corners which will reduce your efficiency. You may also be getting some channeling. Did you get the gravity readings on the first runnings versus your sparge gravity?

 

[Wyrmwood]

Calibrate your thermometers. Don't open until at least 60m, longer if using lower mash temp (< 150 use 90m). Stir sparge and voulauf just like mash. Check volumes. If volume is high, gravity will be (should be) low and vice versa. Once you correct for volumes, you'll get more accurate efficiency estimations. (actual volume/ expected volume) * calculated efficiency.

If the only thing that changed was the manifold/braid and the efficiency, then that certainly sounds suspect.

 

[matc]

volumes are spot on...thermometer is a thermapen and is extremely accurate. The ss braid is like 8" and sits flat against the bottom. I also updated my deadspace in beermsith when upgrading to the braid. Also, channeling has nothing to do with batch sparging so this theory can be discarded I believe.

So...overall what was new during this brewday was the ss braid and the fact that I did a 45 minutes mash instead of 60 minutes as I've read i would get a sweeter beer this way. Isn't conversion supposed to be over in like 15 minutes anyway with today's malts ?

 

[diS]

Sure, but you'll have to have ideal mash condition (temp., pH..) and you wont get 100% conversion in 15 mins since conversion timeline is not linear.

 

[Wyrmwood]

volumes are spot on...thermometer is a thermapen and is extremely accurate. The ss braid is like 8" and sits flat against the bottom. I also updated my deadspace in beermsith when upgrading to the braid. Also, channeling has nothing to do with batch sparging so this theory can be discarded I believe.

So...overall what was new during this brewday was the ss braid and the fact that I did a 45 minutes mash instead of 60 minutes as I've read i would get a sweeter beer this way. Isn't conversion supposed to be over in like 15 minutes anyway with today's malts ?

According to the wiki, depending on temperature, the mash is "generally converted" after 15-30 minutes, depending on rest temperature. According to the chart it looks like 65 minutes or so. Perhaps I've been reading that wrong. Further down it also mentions,

Most brewers do however mash 60-90 minutes to ensure complete conversion

I typically do 60 for most beers, but 90 if it's low mash temp or high gravity, as it seems to help attenuation as well for bigger brews.

 

[BroStefan]

I want the other way, from a SS braid to a manifold and my efficiency went up. Fluid dynamics tells that a single central pickup can't be as effective at picking up wort from the outer edges of the tun. See John Palmer "how to brew" for a through description of this.

 

[arborman]

I want the other way, from a SS braid to a manifold and my efficiency went up. Fluid dynamics tells that a single central pickup can't be as effective at picking up wort from the outer edges of the tun. See John Palmer "how to brew" for a through description of this.

Agreed. My efficiency took a huge increase with my new copper manifold vs. using my old stainless braid

 

[stpug]

If you have 1 quart of "deadspace" in your MLT and are batch sparging, then the filtering method (braid, FB, manifold) doesn't make a difference. It's still only 1 quart of left-behind wort. It doesn't matter what kind of filter you're using, 1 quart of high sugar wort is the same regardless of filter method. Fly sparging is very different in this regard.

I guess my question to the OP would be: are you certain that you drained adequate runnings from each draining? Failing to drain adequate runnings means you are leaving them behind for further dilution on subsequent sparges. This can be hard to determine because once your siphon breaks when the liquid is low in the MLT you basically cannot get it going again. One way you can estimate if you are getting sufficient runnings is to know what you expect to get and then compare once you collect your first runnings (same thing for seconds runnings).

BUT, I think the most important question I have for you is: why did you switch from manifold to braid?

 

[BrewFuerte]

I am a brand new member of this forum, but not a brand new brewer, and I have experience with a 10 gallon cooler all-grain setup with both a braid, a mesh "bazooka tube" screen and, later, a copper manifold using both batch sparging and fly sparging. For the sake of the conversation, I will pretend the braid and the bazooka screen are the same thing, which they pretty much are in terms of lautering results.

As stpug wrote, the screen versus manifold method of lautering should not make a difference in batch sparging aside from the differences in dead space in the lauter tun between the two setups. It makes sense that given this, a brewer would experience a loss in overall efficiency by leaving more sugar water in the lauter tun with the braid than with the manifold. You can quantify this difference by calculating the difference in dead space between the two methods. Even so, if you are not no-sparging and leaving a ton of dead space with the braid, the small amount of weak wort kept out of the boil kettle by the additional dead space of the mesh screen method should not impact efficiency more than a percentage point or two. The more batches in your batch sparge, the less the difference matters.

When continuous sparging, there will be efficiency differences due to preferential flow in the grain bed and certain portions of the mash being exposed to more rinsing than others by the sparge water. As others have written, Palmer covers this pretty extensively, and for continuous/fly sparging the rule of thumb is that a false bottom is most efficient, followed by a well designed slotted copper pipe manifold, followed by a mesh screen or braid, with a single point of collection being the worst.

When I switched from a tubular screen to a copper manifold my efficiency increased by 5+ points. I now employ a recirculating mash and fly sparge using a copper pipe manifold and I am very happy with a typical efficiency of 83%-85%. Theoretically, with a false bottom I could do even better. BTW, I abandoned the braid early on. For a number of reasons, it just didn't seem to work as well in my setup. I have stuck with the manifold and even made a larger one rather than go to a false bottom when I designed my "new and improved" rig. YMMV...

 

[corax]

My batch-sparge efficiency increased when I switched from a manifold to a hose braid.

I started with a long braid (~18 inches), but I would get inconsistent results. I shortened it to about 4 inches, and I now hit my numbers every time.

What I think was happening was that the long braid was flopping around during stirring and sometimes came up off the bottom of the cooler. Now the shorter braid stays in place every time -- and as others have pointed out, you really don't need more than a single drainage point with batch sparging.

One thing I make sure to do every time while draining is to prop up the back of the cooler with a piece of wood, to make sure the drainage point is as low as possible.

 

[TrubHead]

Made a IIPA using almost 10 lbs of grain mashed in a 5 gallon igloo circular cooler. Got an 87% extraction vs the regular 90%. Think an upgraded wooden mash paddle over the flimsy plastic one would have helped stirring here. Might try a small braid vs the cpvc manifold since there seems to always be a bit of wort left in the mash tun.

 

[TrubHead]

Sticking to the manifold after reading the following thread. https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f36/ss-braid-vs-cpvc-manifold-297690/index2.html