Mash Efficiency of 95%. Does this sound right?

[NotSure]

Hi all,
In another thread I was enlightened to the proper way of calculating Conversion Efficiency as described on Braukaiser here: Understanding Efficiency - German brewing and more (braukaiser.com)

I normally only take a gravity reading when I transfer to my Fermenter, but today I was making a Session IPA for my better half and took a gravity reading before boil. I plugged-in the numbers and get 95%. I did sparge with a little water and did include the water volume into the Braukaiser equation. I also squeezed the hell out of the bag as usual by putting all my weight on it (picture of my set-up from a different brew day is below). I realize this is not Conversion Efficiency, but Mash Efficiency since this is pre-boil and I included the sparge water.

Since this was a BIAB Session IPA , the mash was quite thin and according to doug293cz's chart (Lauter Efficiency) I should have done pretty well. 95% seems a bit too high for me though for a Mash Efficiency. Here are the details to the brew:
Water:
36 Litres
Grist:
2 kg of Vienna DBCG 79% 4%MC
2.5 kg of Golden Promise 306 IoB HWA, 2.5% MC
No special milling apart from the "crushed" malt I always get from my brewshop.
Pre-Boil Gravity:
1.032 @ 24.9C (1.033 adjusted)

My question being... should I be happy, or should I be scratching my head?

 

[VikeMan]

What was the pre-boil volume in the kettle?

 

[NotSure]

What was the pre-boil volume in the kettle?

The volume I used was the total water used. Not wort.

 

[VikeMan]

The volume I used was the total water used. Not wort.

You can't compute mash efficiency unless you know how much wort made it to the kettle.

 

[NotSure]

You can't compute mash efficiency unless you know how much wort made it to the kettle.

OK. Then is what I really measured Conversion Efficiency?

 

[VikeMan]

OK. Then is what I really measured Conversion Efficiency?

I don't know exactly what you did. But probably.

ETA: What Kai calls "Brewhouse Efficiency" is actually Mash Efficiency.

 

[NotSure]

I don't know exactly what you did. But probably.

OK. Thinking more about it....the inputs are water volume and gravity, so yeah it'd probably be Conversion Efficiency as that quantifies extract. So, 95% could be better, but is reasonable. Makes sense. Thanks!

 

[doug293cz]

To properly compute conversion efficiency, you use only strike water volume, grain bill weight, grain bill weighted average extract potential, and end of mash gravity.

Including the sparge water volume will artificially lower your calculated conversion efficiency.

Brew on

 

[NotSure]

To properly compute conversion efficiency, you use only strike water volume, grain bill weight, grain bill weighted average extract potential, and end of mash gravity.

Including the sparge water volume will artificially lower your calculated conversion efficiency.

Brew on

Groovy. Thanks!

 

[AZ Maverick]

Yep. It's mash conversion efficiency, what you might get compared to what you did get.
I made an excel spread sheet to enter the values as described in the Braukaiser web site.
As a newbie to BIAB (and thanks to Doug) I'm using it to determine my mash conversion efficiency and I'm presently at 94% to 95% most of the time.