DreBourbon
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2015
- Messages
- 143
- Reaction score
- 21
Maximizing Efficiency when Batch Sparging
- Thread starter FlyGuy
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
What's that pic got to do with batch sparging (the focus of this thread)? Looks like a fly sparge distribution manifold.
Brew on
DreBourbon
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2015
- Messages
- 143
- Reaction score
- 21
What's love got to do with it?
Just getting into batch sparging and really focusing on my efficiency. I work in liters, but I'm just wanting to make sure my assumptions are correct. My aim is to get about the same amount of wort from the first runnings and the sparge? I was within a half liter on my last batch, first time using the new system. Is that good enough?
Plenty good enough. If you're within 4-6 liters, it will make a negligible difference.
Awesome, thanks man! So then, if I shoot for about that 1.65 qt/lb and I'm within 4 liters, then I should be good?
Absolutely.
hio3791
Well-Known Member
A little over a year since reading this thread and 11 batches later, my efficiency into the kettle has been steady in the 88% - 90% range. Before, I was all over the place, all I was hoping for was consistency.
As Denny has said time and time again, crush is the one thing you can control that impacts efficiency the most. I bought a set of feeler gauges and check the mill each time. I've found 0.024 works well for my system. What I discovered was that the spacing in my mil shifts over time. Maybe it's caused by the torque the drill is applying, nonetheless, checking and adjusting the spacing has made for consistency batch after batch.
Thanks again everyone!
As Denny has said time and time again, crush is the one thing you can control that impacts efficiency the most. I bought a set of feeler gauges and check the mill each time. I've found 0.024 works well for my system. What I discovered was that the spacing in my mil shifts over time. Maybe it's caused by the torque the drill is applying, nonetheless, checking and adjusting the spacing has made for consistency batch after batch.
Thanks again everyone!
pricelessbrewing
Brewer's Friend Software Manager
Congrats on reaching your goal.
I think we put an over emphasis on consistency vs predictability, ie the difference between getting 88-90% on your typical 1.055-1.065 brew (consistent), and being able to scale that efficiency for a bigger brew and know that you should get 79-81% mash efficiency on a 1.105 brew.
Graduating from BIAB to using my newly built mash tun for an all-grain brew tomorrow. Going to batch sparge using the petented DennyBrew(tm) method.
A couple of things I've noted in this monster thread:
- The rule of thumb is to try and equalize the volumes of both wort and sparge in to the kettle... i.e. for my 12 gal pre-boil volume aim for 6+6. However, being within a gallon or so between the two steps seems "close enough".
- Seems like folks are also preferring to mash with higher water:grain ratios... in some cases up to 2 qts/lb.
My question: Given my 15 gal tun and 32 lb grain bill, I'd have to mash at 1.25qts/lb to get an equal mash/sparge ratio. That seems to still be within the "acceptable" range, but on the low end.
Would I be better off giving my mash 6.5 gallons, and doing a 5.5 gal sparge? Or should I aim for a strict 6 +6?
Thanks.
-sc
A couple of things I've noted in this monster thread:
- The rule of thumb is to try and equalize the volumes of both wort and sparge in to the kettle... i.e. for my 12 gal pre-boil volume aim for 6+6. However, being within a gallon or so between the two steps seems "close enough".
- Seems like folks are also preferring to mash with higher water:grain ratios... in some cases up to 2 qts/lb.
My question: Given my 15 gal tun and 32 lb grain bill, I'd have to mash at 1.25qts/lb to get an equal mash/sparge ratio. That seems to still be within the "acceptable" range, but on the low end.
Would I be better off giving my mash 6.5 gallons, and doing a 5.5 gal sparge? Or should I aim for a strict 6 +6?
Thanks.
-sc
6.5/5.5 will work fine, and you won't be able to detect the difference in efficiency.
Brew on
Either way is fine. It just doesn't matter that much.
pricelessbrewing
Brewer's Friend Software Manager
There's very little difference in later efficiency betwen a 2:1 ratio and a 1:1 ratio. Mash at whatever you'd like, then sparge appropriately. Personally Ive found 1.75 qt/lb to give the fastest conversion rate, and highest ending conversion efficiency so I usually use that.
Thanks gents.
Now to figure out why my pre-boil gravity was 25 points below what Beersmith suggested it should have been.
-I used 42 qts of water for 32lbs of grains, or a 1.3:1 ratio.
-Heated up my mash tun with 175 degree water, let it settle to my strike temp of 168, added my grains and it settled to 155.5, and only dropped to 150 by the end of the hour
-My water was bottled water, to which I added some PH5.2 conditioner
-Double-milled my grains at LHBS to improve my crush
-I stirred vigorously when adding the grains, and every 15 minutes along the way. No dough balls.
-At the end of 60 minutes, I stirred one last time, vourlauf'd, and then drained in to my kettle, only yielding 5.5 gallons instead of the 6.5 I expected.
-Sparged with ~180 degree water, using 6.5 gals to make up for my missing volume. Stirred in the hot water, let it set a minute and then drained.
I ended up with 12gals of 1.042 wort. BS suggested 1.067 using 73% mash efficiency. Measured eff = 46%
So I'm trying to figure out what happened. Temps seemed right on.
I had hoped the double-crush would do it... I'd estimate the mill roller gap as having been 2 credit-card thicknesses.
The fact that I got 1gal less volume out of the initial mash is odd. I don't think that was a stuck manifold, as when I sparged, that extra water didn't "show up". Would 32 lbs of grains really absorb 25% more water than the calculators suggest?
Even if it did, as long as I sparged with the right amount to hit the correct volume, absorption shouldn't throw off my sugar extraction like that, right?
Is 60 mins too short for a mash of that amount of grain?
I've read that lack of calcium in the water can stifle conversion... I don't have a water profile. My buddy had pH test strips that only had a "color key" up to 4.4, but the strip color was off the end of the scale so it was above 4.4, but not sure how close to exactly 5.2...
Any other thoughts/suggestions? To have been THAT low was a bit of a bummer.
I compensated by running another gallon of left over hot sparge water thru to get every last bit of sugar I could out, and then boiling vigorously as I could, for longer than normal before starting my hop schedule. I also tossed in a bit of DME I had. The result was slightly less than planned volume, but actually exceeded my target OG gravity by 4 points... so I'll still have some good beer, just a bit less of it.
-sc
Now to figure out why my pre-boil gravity was 25 points below what Beersmith suggested it should have been.
-I used 42 qts of water for 32lbs of grains, or a 1.3:1 ratio.
-Heated up my mash tun with 175 degree water, let it settle to my strike temp of 168, added my grains and it settled to 155.5, and only dropped to 150 by the end of the hour
-My water was bottled water, to which I added some PH5.2 conditioner
-Double-milled my grains at LHBS to improve my crush
-I stirred vigorously when adding the grains, and every 15 minutes along the way. No dough balls.
-At the end of 60 minutes, I stirred one last time, vourlauf'd, and then drained in to my kettle, only yielding 5.5 gallons instead of the 6.5 I expected.
-Sparged with ~180 degree water, using 6.5 gals to make up for my missing volume. Stirred in the hot water, let it set a minute and then drained.
I ended up with 12gals of 1.042 wort. BS suggested 1.067 using 73% mash efficiency. Measured eff = 46%
So I'm trying to figure out what happened. Temps seemed right on.
I had hoped the double-crush would do it... I'd estimate the mill roller gap as having been 2 credit-card thicknesses.
The fact that I got 1gal less volume out of the initial mash is odd. I don't think that was a stuck manifold, as when I sparged, that extra water didn't "show up". Would 32 lbs of grains really absorb 25% more water than the calculators suggest?
Even if it did, as long as I sparged with the right amount to hit the correct volume, absorption shouldn't throw off my sugar extraction like that, right?
Is 60 mins too short for a mash of that amount of grain?
I've read that lack of calcium in the water can stifle conversion... I don't have a water profile. My buddy had pH test strips that only had a "color key" up to 4.4, but the strip color was off the end of the scale so it was above 4.4, but not sure how close to exactly 5.2...
Any other thoughts/suggestions? To have been THAT low was a bit of a bummer.
I compensated by running another gallon of left over hot sparge water thru to get every last bit of sugar I could out, and then boiling vigorously as I could, for longer than normal before starting my hop schedule. I also tossed in a bit of DME I had. The result was slightly less than planned volume, but actually exceeded my target OG gravity by 4 points... so I'll still have some good beer, just a bit less of it.
-sc
Well this is interesting. I hadn't corrected my hydrometer reading for temp. I've actually never taken a hot reading before (only a couple of BIAB brews before this... always extract brews previously).
According tp the Brewers Friend online calculator, at 150deg. (a guess after draining my 155deg wort) my pre-boil gravity would be 1.058.
Still 9 points low.. but way better than 25. That makes my mash eff 63.5%
Sanity check request on aisle 5!
ON EDIT: The Beersmith Hydrometer adjust tool says 1.061 @ 150deg for s 68deg calibrated hydrometer...
According tp the Brewers Friend online calculator, at 150deg. (a guess after draining my 155deg wort) my pre-boil gravity would be 1.058.
Still 9 points low.. but way better than 25. That makes my mash eff 63.5%
Sanity check request on aisle 5!
ON EDIT: The Beersmith Hydrometer adjust tool says 1.061 @ 150deg for s 68deg calibrated hydrometer...
pricelessbrewing
Brewer's Friend Software Manager
Hydrometer correction tools are not reliable at all. Don't take hot samples.
pricelessbrewing
Brewer's Friend Software Manager
Sorry poor phrasing on my part, don't take gravity readings of a hot sample.
Make sure the wort is mixed up thoroughly, stir if needed. Take a sample. Cool the sample to 60F or 68F, whichever your hydrometer is calibrated at. Then take a gravity reading.
Make sure the wort is mixed up thoroughly, stir if needed. Take a sample. Cool the sample to 60F or 68F, whichever your hydrometer is calibrated at. Then take a gravity reading.
Or use a refractometer. It only uses a couple of drops of sample, which will cool very quickly.
Brew on
Nope...what I do is pull about 8 oz. with a Pyrex measuring cup. Pour that into a metal cocktail shaker. Put the lid on the shaker and swirl it around in a bowl of ice water. In about 60 seconds, the sample will be cooled to about 60-65F and you can get an accurate reading. Some people use a refractometer, but I have 3 and none of them agrees with my hydrometer, so I've found this method to be easy and accurate.
And PLEASE ditch the 5.2! It doesn't work and adds an odd off flavor to your beer.
Hmmm.. ok, good to know on both counts.
So... any ideas on why 32lbs of grain only yielded 5.5 gallons of wort with a 10.5 gallon water infusion?
Is the 1gal/lbs absorption rule of thumb really that far off? Like I say, it didn't appear that there was another gallon of water somewhere at the bottom of my tun, otherwise I would have assumed it would have showed up in my sparge step?
So... any ideas on why 32lbs of grain only yielded 5.5 gallons of wort with a 10.5 gallon water infusion?
Is the 1gal/lbs absorption rule of thumb really that far off? Like I say, it didn't appear that there was another gallon of water somewhere at the bottom of my tun, otherwise I would have assumed it would have showed up in my sparge step?
Any volume that is undrainable after the mash, is also undrainable during sparging. But, you won't lose any of the sparge volume as the undrainable volume is already full, and the grain is already saturated.
Brew on
Hmm... the measured deadspace in my tun when I tested it with water was 1.5 cups.
I'm trying to figure out why that would be a full gallon of liquid once I mashed. My thought was perhaps the manifold got clogged (i.e. stuck sparge)at the 1 gallon point. If so, would have assumed that unclogging it when I stirred my grains during sparge would have unleashed that gallon were it still in there.
If it wasn't a clog holding that water back, then that maybe my deadspace with grain in there is significantly greater?
One person on my mash tun build thread suggested I'd lose less liquid with grain present.
Is it common for deadspace to go up by a factor of 10x with grain present?
I'm trying to figure out why that would be a full gallon of liquid once I mashed. My thought was perhaps the manifold got clogged (i.e. stuck sparge)at the 1 gallon point. If so, would have assumed that unclogging it when I stirred my grains during sparge would have unleashed that gallon were it still in there.
If it wasn't a clog holding that water back, then that maybe my deadspace with grain in there is significantly greater?
One person on my mash tun build thread suggested I'd lose less liquid with grain present.
Is it common for deadspace to go up by a factor of 10x with grain present?
No.
Could be a combination of weight and volume measurement errors and/or higher absorption rate for some reason. Your apparent absorption rate works out to about 0.156 gal/lb (vs. 0.125 typical.) Sorry, don't have any good ideas what might cause this, if it is really that high.
Brew on
Dcpcooks
Well-Known Member
I haven't experienced a change in dead space with or without grain. But you should measure your losses in the mash, trub post boil and boil off. Then input those numbers into beersmith under equipment profiles. Once you've done that you should have some consistency. As to your efficiency you need to measure it and look at that over time. It should stabilize at "your number". Every system is different so it's tough to say how yours will perform.
Why are you sparging at 180? That a little hot and you run the risk of tanin extraction.
Palmer says you'll lose .5 qts per 1lb of grain or 16 oz per lb. with 32 lbs of grain you should have lost 16x32= 512 oz or 4 gallons. So it appears that you have lost a gallon somewhere. How long did you take to drain and sparge? It should be an hour or so process. If you went quick it might have still be in the mash tun and just didn't completely drain.
Your sugar looks low so he mill might be the problem. Two credit card are .60ish thick. I mill at .36. And I have friends who mill below .3. I'd check that setting if possible. The other thing to consider is mash PH. You want to be between 5.1-5.5 ish. If your not in that range your conversion suffers. You might want to look at that as a potential factor.
Why are you sparging at 180? That a little hot and you run the risk of tanin extraction.
Palmer says you'll lose .5 qts per 1lb of grain or 16 oz per lb. with 32 lbs of grain you should have lost 16x32= 512 oz or 4 gallons. So it appears that you have lost a gallon somewhere. How long did you take to drain and sparge? It should be an hour or so process. If you went quick it might have still be in the mash tun and just didn't completely drain.
Your sugar looks low so he mill might be the problem. Two credit card are .60ish thick. I mill at .36. And I have friends who mill below .3. I'd check that setting if possible. The other thing to consider is mash PH. You want to be between 5.1-5.5 ish. If your not in that range your conversion suffers. You might want to look at that as a potential factor.
I indeed would like to mail down my efficiency... have already done that via BS for this last batch and will continue to.
As I mentioned earlier, I'm following the famed Dennybrew method. He states:
"6.) As the first runoff progresses, start heating your batch sparge water. In this case, were going to heat 5 gal. to about 185F to try to get to a grain bed temperature in the 165-168F range. "
4 gallons is what I calculated too. Again as per Denny, after vourlof:
"5.) Completely drain the mash tun as fast as your system will allow. "
I actually was a bit cautious, and only drained about half as fast as my system would allow, after first just cracking it open to see what it wanted to do.
Agreed... I did a double crush, but they wouldn't let me adjust the mill... so that's a potential problem point.
Thanks for the response.
-sc
Dcpcooks
Well-Known Member
I'd stick with Denny!
Good advice.
Tannin extraction requires a pH above about 6.0. Acidify your sparge water to a pH of 5.8 or less with lactic, phosphoric, etc. acid, and you won't get tannins even with boiling water.
Slow draining is only important for fly sparging (to avoid channeling and allow the sugar to diffuse from the grain remnants into the sparge water.) Slow draining has no benefit for batch sparging (which OP is doing) as long as the mash is stirred well after the sparge water is added.
Coarse crush is most likely the primary cause of low efficiency (conversion efficiency specifically.) pH is usually lower on the list of causes, and has less of an effect.
Brew on
shorestyle
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 3, 2015
- Messages
- 46
- Reaction score
- 7
Thought I'd chime in to answer a few questions on here. I don't batch sparge but some of my advice is still applicable. I'm also an assistant brewer at a commercial brewery.
1: Hitting a high efficiency is not at important as having a consistent efficiency and knowing how efficient your system is to be able to calculate how much grain you should be using to hit your expected gravity. My homebrewing mash efficiency is consistently in the 75-78% range. Nothing to write home about but I know exactly how much grain to use every time and always hit my expected pre boil gravity. Don't obsess over the numbers. Just be consistent.
2. You don't need a 1:1 strike water to sparge water ratio. I don't when I'm home brewing and we don't at the brewery. It won't affect your efficiency.
3. Don't rush your sparge. It's not a race. It takes time to extract those sugars.
4. Your gravity readings will be accurate at ~20 degrees for most hydrometers. Anything out of that range use the appropriate adjustments to get an accurate reading. At home I just stick a hydrometer full of wort in the freezer for 10 mins or so.
Not related to the batch sparging method at all but would like to get some feedback on the importance of a mash out when fly sparging if anyone has any input. I never mash out at home and we don't at the brewery. Efficiency is never an issue.
1: Hitting a high efficiency is not at important as having a consistent efficiency and knowing how efficient your system is to be able to calculate how much grain you should be using to hit your expected gravity. My homebrewing mash efficiency is consistently in the 75-78% range. Nothing to write home about but I know exactly how much grain to use every time and always hit my expected pre boil gravity. Don't obsess over the numbers. Just be consistent.
2. You don't need a 1:1 strike water to sparge water ratio. I don't when I'm home brewing and we don't at the brewery. It won't affect your efficiency.
3. Don't rush your sparge. It's not a race. It takes time to extract those sugars.
4. Your gravity readings will be accurate at ~20 degrees for most hydrometers. Anything out of that range use the appropriate adjustments to get an accurate reading. At home I just stick a hydrometer full of wort in the freezer for 10 mins or so.
Not related to the batch sparging method at all but would like to get some feedback on the importance of a mash out when fly sparging if anyone has any input. I never mash out at home and we don't at the brewery. Efficiency is never an issue.
pricelessbrewing
Brewer's Friend Software Manager
1. Agreed. Although lately I've been trying to use the phrase predictable efficiency instead of consistent, as consistent would only apply to doing the same recipe repeatedly.
2. Agreed, there's very little difference in lauter efficiency for a run off ratio of 1:1 and 1:4.
3. Doesn't really apply for batch sparging. Just stir very well, then drain as fast as you want. Doesn't really matter if you drain slowly or quickly if you batch sparge.
4. I always cool my samples.
For long fly sparges, the argument is that a mashout will lock in the wort fermentability and makes sure it attenuates as desired.
2. Agreed, there's very little difference in lauter efficiency for a run off ratio of 1:1 and 1:4.
3. Doesn't really apply for batch sparging. Just stir very well, then drain as fast as you want. Doesn't really matter if you drain slowly or quickly if you batch sparge.
4. I always cool my samples.
For long fly sparges, the argument is that a mashout will lock in the wort fermentability and makes sure it attenuates as desired.
shorestyle
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 3, 2015
- Messages
- 46
- Reaction score
- 7
I can see it being effective if you're lautering into a BK that isn't being heated as you're filling it.
That's an old myth that has been disproven. pH is the factor to worry about in tannin extraction. Have you ever heard of decoction mashing? You boil the grain, which as we both know is a lot hotter than 180! I regularly use 190-200F water to sparge and have no tannin problems.
I start out by just cracking the valve, then after a couple minutes open it up full.
Doing a double crush should theoretically eliminate crush as a factor.
Your #3 doesn't matter in batch sparging. It's becasue you're draining, not rinsing, the sugars.
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2008
- Messages
- 64,951
- Reaction score
- 16,516
You don't mash out, either, correct?
So using 190-200*F sparge water isn't a big deal if your pH remains <6, AND your mash is ~150ish because you haven't done a mash out.
IF you do a mash out (raising the temp to ~170*F), there's really no need to use ~190*F sparge water, but without the mash out, using really hot sparge water in essence is performing a mash out without the added time.
In a way, I combine mashout with the sparge like you say. But I'm not really doing it as a mashout. There's no need for that since you get to a boil so quickly when you batch sparge. I do it to be sure I get the last little bit of conversion from my grains. Remember, to do a true mashout, you not only have to raise the temp to 170+, you need to hold it there for at least 20 min.
bucketnative
Well-Known Member
I was reading through the last few pages of this thread because I have had abysmal efficiency with my first few batches of all-grain brews mashing in a 5-gal cooler and batch sparging. Last night I think I had an epiphany while cleaning my equipment.
I had mashed 1.4 qt/lb at 150 F for 1-hr, and I was targeting a 5-gal kettle volume. My ultimate target was a 4-gal ferment at OG of 1.050. What I ended up with was a 2.75-gal ferment at OG of 1.050. Awful...
I was muttering to myself about this inefficiency while cleaning. I still had some leftover sparge water in my mash tun that had been there about 2 hours. I had sparged (170 F in the grain bed) until the runnings were 1.020 (somewhere I read not to go below that), but there was probably a gal still left in the tun. I started draining it, and as the last bit ran out, I put a cup under there and grabbed a taste. It was nearly as sweet as the first runnings.
So, am I correct in thinking that I could gain a big step in efficiency by letting the sparge water sit for 30 min before draining?
OR could this be a sign that the LHBS doesn't have an optimal crush?
Similar threads
