Yes to the above! Also if the wort is stratified with a higher concentration of sugar, the absorbed wort within the grain is also at a higher concentration.
Stirring well twice is a good thing IME.
Stirring well twice is a good thing IME.
Mill Gap for BIAB (Efficiency Problems)
- Thread starter Epos7
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
Cheers guys. I did stir the wort for several minutes at 15 minute intervals throughout the mash. I also raised and lowered the bag when I refired the burner at 15, 30, and 45 minutes to keep it off the bottom of the kettle. The tradeoff with extra stirring is you lose a lot of heat when doing so, but I'll give it a shot!
Glad you are progressing. This thread should be retitled, "Efficiency problems w/ Monster Mill Slotted Helical Rollers"
I'm a little disappointed MM didn't rectify the situation promptly, and yet charged you shipping to sub the rollers on a $400 purchase. doesn't sit well with me....jmo
Cheers!
Ps The Captain Crush went the way of the dinosaur, maybe this will also unless they retool.
I'm a little disappointed MM didn't rectify the situation promptly, and yet charged you shipping to sub the rollers on a $400 purchase. doesn't sit well with me....jmo
Cheers!
Ps The Captain Crush went the way of the dinosaur, maybe this will also unless they retool.
I wasn't all that enamored with the service. Despite mentioning it multiple times, they wouldn't acknowledge that their website advertises being able to set the mill gap as low as 0, while I couldn't get it below 0.022" on the slotted rollers.
They did agree to replace the rollers quickly when I asked, but ignored my request for a refund for the difference three times before I finally received one. It wasn't until I received the replacement rollers and requested a refund for the fourth time that they sent it.
They wouldn't acknowledge my suggestion that perhaps the helical cutters in the rollers are too deep. They claimed on the lowest setting with the helical rollers the mill should produce flour, but when I responded with a picture of the crush I was getting on the lowest setting they wouldn't acknowledge that either. Just completely ignored it.
One flaw I've noticed on both sets of rollers is that the flats ground into the shaft are not ground to an equal depth. This doesn't affect operation if using a Lovejoy coupler like I am on my mill table, but in a drill chuck it causes the drill to wobble a little bit as the unequal flats make the shaft off center in the chuck.
I'm glad I now have a mill that works, and I do think their mill with knurled rollers is a good product. The path to getting here has been pretty frustrating however, and if I could go back I might pick a different brand. If you assume about 5 hours of time per batch, I spent 40 hours trying to make a mill that was poorly designed work, and that's ignoring the ingredient cost of those 8 batches that didn't come out quite as they should due to low conversion efficiency. The beer still tasted good though, so perhaps I shouldn't complain about that too much
I did get my mill table finished, and am very happy with how that turned out. On a positive note, the service from All American Ale Works was absolutely fantastic when I had a few questions about their PowerGrinder motor I am using on the table.
I dropped the mill gap to 0.025" and should have a chance to brew another batch in a few days.
Your conversion efficiency, pre-boil efficiency, or brewhouse efficiency?
That's an awfully nice looking piece of furniture for mill table....
I did get my mill table finished, and am very happy with how that turned out. On a positive note, the service from All American Ale Works was absolutely fantastic when I had a few questions about their PowerGrinder motor I am using on the table.
I dropped the mill gap to 0.025" and should have a chance to brew another batch in a few days.
Brew on
Brewhouse
The weather warmed up enough here that I was able to get two batches in over the last two days. This time I made sure to stir the mash well prior to taking any samples.
Sticking with my Zombie Dust clone, and a target of 5.25 gallons into the fermenter for both batches.
10.24 lb Great Western Organic 2-Row
1.05 lb American Munich (10L)
0.42 lb CaraFoam
0.42 lb Crystal 60
0.42 lb Melanoidin
Total grain bill: 12.55 lb
Starting water volume: 8.4 gallons
Target OG: 1.065
Mash temp: 152F
Batch #1: mill gap set to 0.025"
I refired the burner at 15, 30, and 45 minutes
Mash:
15 min: 151F, 8.3 brix refractometer, pH 5.24
30 min: 151F, 10.0 brix refractometer, 10.3 brix hydrometer
45 min: 151.4F, 10.9 brix refractometer, pH 5.27
60 min: 151.5F, 11.5 brix refractometer
post-squeeze: 11.5 brix refractometer
Conversion efficiency per Braukaiser formula: 90.7%
Volume after boil and chilling wort: 6 gallons
I was barely able to collect my 5.25 gallons, with about .75 gallons left in the kettle which was composed mostly of hop leaf, plus maybe a pint of wort.
After chilling wort: 14.2 brix refractometer, 14.0 brix hydrometer
Batch #2: mill gap set to 0.022"
I refired the burner at 15 and 45 minutes (must not have stirred well enough while reheating at 15 minutes, as it was still above target temp at 30 minutes)
Mash:
15 min: 150.4F 11.3 brix refractometer, pH 5.31
30 min: 153.0F, 10.6 brix refractometer, 11.0 hydrometer - not sure why I went backwards here
45 min: 150.6F, 11.3 brix refractometer
60 min: 11.9 brix refractometer
Conversion efficiency per Braukaiser: 94.3%
Volume after boil and chilling wort: 5.75 gallons (more vigorous boil for this batch)
I used pellet hops for this batch rather than whole leaf, and was easily able to collect my target volume with some left over in the kettle, probably because with pellet hops most of them get sucked into the fermenter.
After chilling wort: 15.3 brix refractometer, 15.3 brix hydrometer
Some observations:
- I try to take all measurements with the wort temperature within 1 degree of 20C. A hydrometer tube sample takes some time to cool, and I then pull the refractometer sample from the top of the hydrometer tube. I almost always get a lower reading on my refractometer doing this, likely because while the tube is sitting to cool, more sugary dense wort collects near the bottom, so the refractomer sample I pull from the top reads lower. When I take a hydrometer sample after boiling and chilling the wort with my immersion chiller, I don't have to wait for the sample to cool, so there is less chance for stratification within the hydrometer tube. I find I get very similar readings between my refractometer and hydrometer on these measurements. In the future if I pour the hydrometer tube into a second vessel prior to pulling a refractometer sample, I may see more consistent results.
- There appears to be some disagreement on brix to SG conversion. BYO cites this formula as the most accurate. The same formula is referenced here:
SG = 1.000019 + [0.003865613(brix) + 0.00001296425(brix) + 0.00000005701128(brix)]
Taking the OG from my second batch, this formula says 15.3 brix = 1.059 SG. I believe this formula is accounting for a wort correction factor of 1.04.
On a different page, BYO cites a different formula:
{Plato/(258.6-([Plato/258.2]*227.1)}+1 = Specific gravity
This formula says 15.3 brix = 1.062 SG
This calculator uses an iterative technique to convert between the two:
Its calculator says 15.3 brix = 1.062 SG
Most conversions seem to put 15.3 brix at 1.062 SG, so I'm going with that
edit - lots of good information on the various ways to convert between brix and sg here.
- I wonder how much volume loss occurs during mash. There is a decent amount of evaporation happening, and when stirring the wort and taking measurements, the lid is off allowing some to escape. If the amount lost is significant, that would mean my conversion efficiency measurements are on the generous side.
- When boiling the second batch, I noticed that by the end of 60 minutes my boil was not nearly as vigorous as at the start. I would think that as the volume decreases, it would be easier to maintain a vigorous boil, as I had my propane burner turned on full blast for the full 60 minutes. I still have about a quarter of a tank left, but it could be lower pressure out of the tank as it runs lower. I'm not sure how to solve this without the inconvenience of not using the second half of a propane tank for brewing. Another explanation is that as the density of the wort increases, so does its boiling point.
- Brewer's Friend appears to have corrected the conversion efficiency calculation in their Brew Session tool. Their brewhouse efficiency calculator still reports a different result. For batch #1 I calculated a conversion efficiency of 90.7% using Braukaiser's formula. Brewer's Friend's Brew Session tool reports 91% conversion efficiency. Their brewhouse efficiency calculator reports 83% with the same inputs.
Sticking with my Zombie Dust clone, and a target of 5.25 gallons into the fermenter for both batches.
10.24 lb Great Western Organic 2-Row
1.05 lb American Munich (10L)
0.42 lb CaraFoam
0.42 lb Crystal 60
0.42 lb Melanoidin
Total grain bill: 12.55 lb
Starting water volume: 8.4 gallons
Target OG: 1.065
Mash temp: 152F
Batch #1: mill gap set to 0.025"
I refired the burner at 15, 30, and 45 minutes
Mash:
15 min: 151F, 8.3 brix refractometer, pH 5.24
30 min: 151F, 10.0 brix refractometer, 10.3 brix hydrometer
45 min: 151.4F, 10.9 brix refractometer, pH 5.27
60 min: 151.5F, 11.5 brix refractometer
post-squeeze: 11.5 brix refractometer
Conversion efficiency per Braukaiser formula: 90.7%
Volume after boil and chilling wort: 6 gallons
I was barely able to collect my 5.25 gallons, with about .75 gallons left in the kettle which was composed mostly of hop leaf, plus maybe a pint of wort.
After chilling wort: 14.2 brix refractometer, 14.0 brix hydrometer
Batch #2: mill gap set to 0.022"
I refired the burner at 15 and 45 minutes (must not have stirred well enough while reheating at 15 minutes, as it was still above target temp at 30 minutes)
Mash:
15 min: 150.4F 11.3 brix refractometer, pH 5.31
30 min: 153.0F, 10.6 brix refractometer, 11.0 hydrometer - not sure why I went backwards here
45 min: 150.6F, 11.3 brix refractometer
60 min: 11.9 brix refractometer
Conversion efficiency per Braukaiser: 94.3%
Volume after boil and chilling wort: 5.75 gallons (more vigorous boil for this batch)
I used pellet hops for this batch rather than whole leaf, and was easily able to collect my target volume with some left over in the kettle, probably because with pellet hops most of them get sucked into the fermenter.
After chilling wort: 15.3 brix refractometer, 15.3 brix hydrometer
Some observations:
- I try to take all measurements with the wort temperature within 1 degree of 20C. A hydrometer tube sample takes some time to cool, and I then pull the refractometer sample from the top of the hydrometer tube. I almost always get a lower reading on my refractometer doing this, likely because while the tube is sitting to cool, more sugary dense wort collects near the bottom, so the refractomer sample I pull from the top reads lower. When I take a hydrometer sample after boiling and chilling the wort with my immersion chiller, I don't have to wait for the sample to cool, so there is less chance for stratification within the hydrometer tube. I find I get very similar readings between my refractometer and hydrometer on these measurements. In the future if I pour the hydrometer tube into a second vessel prior to pulling a refractometer sample, I may see more consistent results.
- There appears to be some disagreement on brix to SG conversion. BYO cites this formula as the most accurate. The same formula is referenced here:
SG = 1.000019 + [0.003865613(brix) + 0.00001296425(brix) + 0.00000005701128(brix)]
Taking the OG from my second batch, this formula says 15.3 brix = 1.059 SG. I believe this formula is accounting for a wort correction factor of 1.04.
On a different page, BYO cites a different formula:
{Plato/(258.6-([Plato/258.2]*227.1)}+1 = Specific gravity
This formula says 15.3 brix = 1.062 SG
This calculator uses an iterative technique to convert between the two:
Its calculator says 15.3 brix = 1.062 SG
Most conversions seem to put 15.3 brix at 1.062 SG, so I'm going with that
edit - lots of good information on the various ways to convert between brix and sg here.
- I wonder how much volume loss occurs during mash. There is a decent amount of evaporation happening, and when stirring the wort and taking measurements, the lid is off allowing some to escape. If the amount lost is significant, that would mean my conversion efficiency measurements are on the generous side.
- When boiling the second batch, I noticed that by the end of 60 minutes my boil was not nearly as vigorous as at the start. I would think that as the volume decreases, it would be easier to maintain a vigorous boil, as I had my propane burner turned on full blast for the full 60 minutes. I still have about a quarter of a tank left, but it could be lower pressure out of the tank as it runs lower. I'm not sure how to solve this without the inconvenience of not using the second half of a propane tank for brewing. Another explanation is that as the density of the wort increases, so does its boiling point.
- Brewer's Friend appears to have corrected the conversion efficiency calculation in their Brew Session tool. Their brewhouse efficiency calculator still reports a different result. For batch #1 I calculated a conversion efficiency of 90.7% using Braukaiser's formula. Brewer's Friend's Brew Session tool reports 91% conversion efficiency. Their brewhouse efficiency calculator reports 83% with the same inputs.
1MadScientist
Well-Known Member
You say you have a hydro measuring degrees Brix (°Bx). What's wrong with using this PDF table?
http://braukaiser.com/download/Kaiser_Brix_Plato_SG_table.pdf
http://braukaiser.com/download/Kaiser_Brix_Plato_SG_table.pdf
pricelessbrewing
Brewer's Friend Software Manager
I have several issues with brewers friends math, this is definitely the biggest one though. I see it all the time as it's usually one of the first google results for brewhouse efficiency, a lot of brewers use it and get incorrect results.
[...] I did get my mill table finished, and am very happy with how that turned out. On a positive note, the service from All American Ale Works was absolutely fantastic when I had a few questions about their PowerGrinder motor I am using on the table.
I dropped the mill gap to 0.025" and should have a chance to brew another batch in a few days.
That table, mill, machined bottom plate, motor, everything belongs in your parlor, not the brewhouse!
The 0.025" gap on 2" rollers should give you the best BIAB crush there is. Even wheat and rye will be crushed to perfection!
The brix column in that table is assuming you are using a refractometer with a wort correction factor of 1.04, which I don't believe mine has. Further, I think Braukaiser has applied the correction factor in reverse.
Brewer's Friend states that you should divide your refractometer reading by the WCF rather than multiply, so a reading of 15.3 brix with my refractometer would equate to 14.7 brix on the hydrometer. If that's the case, then the table is backwards, as it converts a refractometer reading of 15.3 brix to 15.9 plato. If Braukaiser has it right, Brewer's Friend has it backwards. Based on dmtaylor's discussion of WCF previously in this thread, and his references to Sean Terrill's work, I think Brewer's Friend may have the right of it, which would mean Braukaiser's table is backwards.
The plato to SG conversion in the Braukaiser table seems accurate. At least it's in agreement with the majority of formulas I found.
Thank you! Gotta say it beats the hell out of trying to balance the mill on top of a bucket with a drill attached
@Epos7,
Brix = Plato out to like 6 or 7 significant digits. The conversion factor of 1.04 quoted by Kai is either A) wrong or B) misunderstood. In either case, ignore it because 12.0000 Brix = 12.0000 Plato (for example).
As I understand it, the correction factor of 1.04 that Sean Terrill uses is based on an average correction factor from numerous different brewers, but is specific to each individual refractometer. My own refract. seems to be the opposite with a factor less than 1.000, maybe 0.94 or thereabouts. More experiments are needed. If you want to know the factor for your own refractometer, you'll need to measure Brix simultaneous with a calibrated hydrometer and compare readings over numerous batches to come up with your own average, which may be 1.04 or may be something completely different.
As far as I know, Brewer's Friend's calculator is doing things right from what I can tell, assuming you know the WCF to put in to give you accurate results.
Brix = Plato out to like 6 or 7 significant digits. The conversion factor of 1.04 quoted by Kai is either A) wrong or B) misunderstood. In either case, ignore it because 12.0000 Brix = 12.0000 Plato (for example).
As I understand it, the correction factor of 1.04 that Sean Terrill uses is based on an average correction factor from numerous different brewers, but is specific to each individual refractometer. My own refract. seems to be the opposite with a factor less than 1.000, maybe 0.94 or thereabouts. More experiments are needed. If you want to know the factor for your own refractometer, you'll need to measure Brix simultaneous with a calibrated hydrometer and compare readings over numerous batches to come up with your own average, which may be 1.04 or may be something completely different.
As far as I know, Brewer's Friend's calculator is doing things right from what I can tell, assuming you know the WCF to put in to give you accurate results.
@Epos7,
Brix = Plato out to like 6 or 7 significant digits. The conversion factor of 1.04 quoted by Kai is either A) wrong or B) misunderstood. In either case, ignore it because 12.0000 Brix = 12.0000 Plato (for example).
As I understand it, the correction factor of 1.04 that Sean Terrill uses is based on an average correction factor from numerous different brewers, but is specific to each individual refractometer. My own refract. seems to be the opposite with a factor less than 1.000, maybe 0.94 or thereabouts. More experiments are needed. If you want to know the factor for your own refractometer, you'll need to measure Brix simultaneous with a calibrated hydrometer and compare readings over numerous batches to come up with your own average, which may be 1.04 or may be something completely different.
As far as I know, Brewer's Friend's calculator is doing things right from what I can tell, assuming you know the WCF to put in to give you accurate results.
My understanding is that Brix = Plato specifically for sucrose solutions. Wort is not a sucrose solution, so has a slightly different index of refraction. So, you need a wort correction factor to adjust for that index of refraction difference, in order to get more accurate SG measurements.
Brew on
My understanding is that Brix = Plato specifically for sucrose solutions. Wort is not a sucrose solution, so has a slightly different index of refraction. So, you need a wort correction factor to adjust for that index of refraction difference, in order to get more accurate SG measurements.
Brew on
Hmm.... you may be right! I wasn't thinking about it very hard. You may be right. Thanks!
pricelessbrewing
Brewer's Friend Software Manager
The correction factor is necessary because refracts are typically designed with the refractive index of a sucrose solution. Since wort is not a sucrose solution, it won't be entirely accurate. Wort is composed of a variety of different sugars, each of which has a different index and the overall index will vary with grain bill, OG, SRM, and mash temp.
With that said, 1.04 matches most refractometers and the typical 8-15srm @ 1.05-1.065 within a certain amount of uncertainty. I don't really worry about it for the most part, as I'm okay with +- 0.001 to +- 0.002 sg.
edit: Doug beat me to it. Serves me right for typing up a response, then playing a game before hitting send reply.
With that said, 1.04 matches most refractometers and the typical 8-15srm @ 1.05-1.065 within a certain amount of uncertainty. I don't really worry about it for the most part, as I'm okay with +- 0.001 to +- 0.002 sg.
edit: Doug beat me to it. Serves me right for typing up a response, then playing a game before hitting send reply.
My understanding is that Brix = Plato specifically for sucrose solutions. Wort is not a sucrose solution, so has a slightly different index of refraction. So, you need a wort correction factor to adjust for that index of refraction difference, in order to get more accurate SG measurements.
Brew on
I think this is correct! Brix does equal Plato for all intents and purposes, but when taking wort measurement with a refractometer, the idea as I understand it is that you need to adjust for the different index of refraction to get the true measurement, which could be in either Brix or Plato.
I think the way Braukaiser's table is set up is the Brix column is intended to be the measured value with a refractometer. The Plato column is then the adjusted "true" value, but could also be thought of as the adjusted "true" Brix value. This adjusted Brix/Plato value is then converted to SG in the third column. My issue with the table is that I believe the standard 1.04 wort correction factor is applied backwards, ie you should see a lower value in the Plato column, not a higher value. A more accurate WCF for the way the table is designed would be 0.96.
I have taken many measurements with my refractometer (Milwaukee MA871) and a hydrometer, and I think it's WCF is about 1.
1MadScientist
Well-Known Member
Yeah, your refrac is near 1 like mine. I use the Plato to SG part of Kia's table for my refrac and short range Brix hydros
This is a nice online calculator with the formulas they use and a table; http://www.straighttothepint.com/specific-gravity-brix-plato-conversion-calculators/
This is a nice online calculator with the formulas they use and a table; http://www.straighttothepint.com/specific-gravity-brix-plato-conversion-calculators/
The problem I have with the linked page is that it says the equations for converting Brix to SG and Plato to SG are exactly the same (except for the ordering of terms), but the equations for converting SG to Brix and SG to Plato are different. That makes no sense.
Brew on
Just wanted to post an update. I brewed a batch yesterday where I dropped my mill gap to 0.015". Previously I had it set to 0.020". My conversion efficiency jumped to over 97%. With a gap of 0.020" I was anywhere from 88-93%. I also noticed dough balls for the first time.
I'd say I've finally hit the sweet spot
I'd say I've finally hit the sweet spot
Just wanted to post an update. I brewed a batch yesterday where I dropped my mill gap to 0.015". Previously I had it set to 0.020". My conversion efficiency jumped to over 97%. With a gap of 0.020" I was anywhere from 88-93%. I also noticed dough balls for the first time.
I'd say I've finally hit the sweet spot
A stiff wire whisk annihilates doughballs.:rockin:
Yeah, I may have to look into one of those comically large whisks. I have a homemade mash paddle that works fairly well, but I think the whisk would be better.
I'd try a small one first. The doughballs, being dry in the center, tend to float to the top. Break up the ones on top so the next in line can float.
