Partigyle Recipe Question

[traviswalken]

I will brew Brewing Classic Styles Old Monster American Barleywine next week. The recipe has 2 lbs crystal, .25 lbs pale choc, and .25 lbs special b. I want to make a pale ale with the second runnings. I will add dme to the barleywine and/or pale ale if I don't hit gravity targets.

Should I consider steeping some crystal in the second runnings beer? I have heard that second runnings beers can be a little thin?

On the other hand, if the second runnings beer gets about 1/3 of the sugars/malt, then it would have .67 lbs crystal plus a little pale choc and special b. That seems like a reasonable pale ale malt bill without adding crystal.

I've never done a partigyle before, so hoping for some help.

Thanks.

 

[doug293cz]

How about some more details:

• Batch or fly sparge?
• Total grain bill?
• Target batch size and OG for the big beer?
• Mash tun volume?

Brew on

 

[stoneBriar]

My suggestion would be to mash the base malt plus the crystal malts. Run that off into a kettle (do the calculations for a no-sparge batch of the strong beer). Steep your .25 lbs pale choc, and .25 lbs special b in that wort for 10-15 minutes (feel free to start the flame at a low level and set your immersible thermometer to beep at you around 170°F ish).

Now batch sparge yourself about 3-4 gallons for that second runnings pale ale (add 175°F water, stir, wait, vorlauf till clear, drain to second kettle). If you get enough sugar out of it move on, if not try a 3rd batch sparge of 1-2 gallons.

Don't be afraid to boil both beers for 90+ minutes to concentrate the wort just be sure to add the hops at the correct times. Also dig the idea of having DME on hand to hit gravity. Don't be afraid to add straight table sugar to that barley wine to hit gravity. This is a personal preference but I'd drink an "too-dry" beer over a "too-sweet" beer any day of the week, big beers included.

 

[hanuswalrus]

Are you planning to collect your entire pre-boil volume for the first beer all from the first runnings? And then batch/fly sparge to collect the entire pre-boil volume for the second beer? That's how I did it with RIS / Dark Mild the only time I ever did a parti gyle brew. The second beer turned out pretty nice, had a subtle roasty-ness to it, but I kind of wish it had more malt character. If I were to do another parti gyle, I would plan to have some extra Crystal/Special B etc (just about any specialty/crystal malt you like) on hand to throw in the mash tun before I begin the sparge. Always good to have a pound or 2 of DME on hand as well.

 

[Qhrumphf]

Here's what I do for partigyles-

1. Determine batch sizes and gravities you want (I usually do two 5.5 gallon batches)
2. Convert both to gravity points and combine (for example, 5.5 gallons at 1.040 and 5.5 gallons at 1.080 would be 220 and 440 gravity points respectively, for a combined 660 points)
3. Develop recipe for total volume with grain bill sufficient to reach the above gravity points (11 gallons, 660 points, means a grain bill that will give you 1.060 for an 11 gallon batch)
4. Tweak water to grist ratio and sparge volumes for two batch sparges (for three groups of runnings) such that you get a combined volume equal to the total of both preboil batches, and that each volume of runnings is approximately the same. (Doing 90 minute boils, I want 7 gallons for 5.5 gallon batches, so I want 14 total gallons at just under 5 gallons per group of runnings)
5. After collecting all runnings, measure gravities, check gravity points against projected total, and then blend the runnings together in appropriate ratios to hit desired preboil gravities. Both beers should get a portion of the 1st runnings.

 

[traviswalken]

BIAB, 25 lbs grain, 5 gal 1.1 og barleywine, 5.5 gal 1.055 pale ale, 15 gallon pots.

How about some more details:

• Batch or fly sparge?
• Total grain bill?
• Target batch size and OG for the big beer?
• Mash tun volume?

Brew on

 

[traviswalken]

Thanks for all the responses. My goal is to produce a good barleywine, and get a bonus batch of apa. My priority is the barleywine.

My plan is to collect first runnings in pot 1. I haven't finalized all my numbers, but here is my approximate plan. Based on past experience, I think it will be around 8 gallons of 1.08 wort. I will boil this down to about 5.5 gallons of 1.1. By using only 1st runnings, I hope to avoid a 3 hour boil.

In pot 2, I will add the grains/bag to about 6 gallons water. I am not sure what kind of gravity I will get, but I expect it will be about 1.04. I will squeeze the bag and collect about 7 gallons wort.

If needed, I will adjust gravity with DME.

Based on a couple responses above, I think I will steep some crystal 15 in pot 2.

 

[sikkingj]

I usually add honey to my second runnings. I find it rounds out the second beer. If you want more gravity point you can add more 2row and mash it in...

 

[Bill_in_VA]

Here's my experience with partigyles. Always keep a bag of DME on hand for gravity corrections (sound like you intend to). The small beer will have a lighter color and lower body than predictions say. I normally add straight maltodextrin at packaging if I don't want a light body body beer and for color cap with dark malt if was supposed to have color (not applicable for your APA). Sounds like a good plan though. The one time I did a barleywine partigyle I did a ln ESB as the small beer.

 

[doug293cz]

BIAB, 25 lbs grain, 5 gal 1.1 og barleywine, 5.5 gal 1.055 pale ale, 15 gallon pots.

Gonna be tough to get that without some added sugar. You've got about 900 pts of potential (25 lb * 36 pts/lb), and 802 pts of finished wort (5 * 100 + 5.5 * 55), for a needed brewhouse efficiency of 802/ 900 = 89%. It can be done if you can hit 98% conversion efficiency. Here's strike/sparge plan that will get you there (volumes are listed as measured@68°F [measured@150°F]), and assumes a grain absorption of 0.08 gal/lb.

1. Mash in with 8.0 gal [8.15 gal] of strike water
2. Mash until wort SG of 1.091 is achieved (this gets you 98% conversion eff.)
3. After mash, drain/squeeze to obtain 6.0 gal [6.11 gal] of first runnings wort @ 1.091 SG
4. Batch sparge with 4.25 gal [4.33 gal] and drain/squeeze to obtain 4.25 gal [4.33 gal] of second runnings wort @ 1.0414 SG
5. Batch sparge with 4.25 gal [4.33 gal] and drain/squeeze to obtain 4.25 gal [4.33 gal] of third runnings wort @ 1.0188 SG
6. Mix 5.1 gal [5.2 gal] of first runnings and 1.9 gal [1.95 gal] of third runnings to create 7 gal [7.13] gal of wort that will boil down to 5.0 gal [5.2 gal @ 212°F] at ~1.100 SG
7. Mix the balance of the first, second and third runnings to create 7.5 gal [7.64 gal] of wort that will boil down to 5.5 gal [5.73 gal @ 212°F] at ~1.055 SG

The above does not allow for any kettle losses (got to dump it all in the fermenter), so you won't have 5 or 5.5 gal at packaging.

Brew on

 

[traviswalken]

Gonna be tough to get that without some added sugar. You've got about 900 pts of potential (25 lb * 36 pts/lb), and 802 pts of finished wort (5 * 100 + 5.5 * 55), for a needed brewhouse efficiency of 802/ 900 = 89%. It can be done if you can hit 98% conversion efficiency. Here's strike/sparge plan that will get you there (volumes are listed as measured@68°F [measured@150°F]), and assumes a grain absorption of 0.08 gal/lb.

1. Mash in with 8.0 gal [8.15 gal] of strike water
2. Mash until wort SG of 1.091 is achieved (this gets you 98% conversion eff.)
3. After mash, drain/squeeze to obtain 6.0 gal [6.11 gal] of first runnings wort @ 1.091 SG
4. Batch sparge with 4.25 gal [4.33 gal] and drain/squeeze to obtain 4.25 gal [4.33 gal] of second runnings wort @ 1.0414 SG
5. Batch sparge with 4.25 gal [4.33 gal] and drain/squeeze to obtain 4.25 gal [4.33 gal] of third runnings wort @ 1.0188 SG
6. Mix 5.1 gal [5.2 gal] of first runnings and 1.9 gal [1.95 gal] of third runnings to create 7 gal [7.13] gal of wort that will boil down to 5.0 gal [5.2 gal @ 212°F] at ~1.100 SG
7. Mix the balance of the first, second and third runnings to create 7.5 gal [7.64 gal] of wort that will boil down to 5.5 gal [5.73 gal @ 212°F] at ~1.055 SG

The above does not allow for any kettle losses (got to dump it all in the fermenter), so you won't have 5 or 5.5 gal at packaging.

Brew on

Thanks for taking a look at it. I forgot to mention that the recipe calls for a pound of sugar. That will help get me there. I will probably add a couple more lbs of base malt and use the DME to get me all the way to 1.1 if needed. I would rather buy a few dollars worth of grain/dme to avoid a double sparge.

Thanks again.

 

[Mexibilly]

My limited experience is with DIPAs and pale ales.
I get 8% - 10% DIPA, 6 gallon to fermentor and ~1.05 pale ale, maybe 2.5 gallons.
I wouldn't want to waste grain and an opportunity to make more 'free' beer

 

[D-Train]

Here's what I do for partigyles-

1. Determine batch sizes and gravities you want (I usually do two 5.5 gallon batches)
2. Convert both to gravity points and combine (for example, 5.5 gallons at 1.040 and 5.5 gallons at 1.080 would be 220 and 440 gravity points respectively, for a combined 660 points)
3. Develop recipe for total volume with grain bill sufficient to reach the above gravity points (11 gallons, 660 points, means a grain bill that will give you 1.060 for an 11 gallon batch)
4. Tweak water to grist ratio and sparge volumes for two batch sparges (for three groups of runnings) such that you get a combined volume equal to the total of both preboil batches, and that each volume of runnings is approximately the same. (Doing 90 minute boils, I want 7 gallons for 5.5 gallon batches, so I want 14 total gallons at just under 5 gallons per group of runnings)
5. After collecting all runnings, measure gravities, check gravity points against projected total, and then blend the runnings together in appropriate ratios to hit desired preboil gravities. Both beers should get a portion of the 1st runnings.

I've decided to start parti gyle brewing in 2016 after first considering doubling my batch size. I like the idea of two different beers out of one brew session. After research I think the way you've described blending will be best for me. I've played with Kaiser's spreadsheet and was just wondering, have you ever used it and if so have you found it accurate for batch sparge parti gyle mashes?

 

[Qhrumphf]

I've decided to start parti gyle brewing in 2016 after first considering doubling my batch size. I like the idea of two different beers out of one brew session. After research I think the way you've described blending will be best for me. I've played with Kaiser's spreadsheet and was just wondering, have you ever used it and if so have you found it accurate for batch sparge parti gyle mashes?

Yes, that's what I use. If you know your system very well it can be very accurate. You have to put in good data (accurate grain extract potential, system deadspace, etc). For me and my system, assuming 98-99% conversion efficiency, my projected gravities and volumes for each gyle are usually +/- 0.1 gallon and +/- 0.25 °Plato. Mashing at approx 1.5 qt/lb plus deadspace with three approximately equivalent gyles I usually end up around 20°P, 6.5°P, and 2.5°P (i think, not looking at notes) and around 90% brewhouse efficiency.

 

[Big Monk]

I agree with the blending technique. Leave the spreadsheets closed though. Some of the fun of partigyle is winging it. Don't worry about gravity, etc.

Fill that mash tun up, no sparge and reinfuse and then blend to get your numbers. No fuss. No muss. No stress.

 

[Qhrumphf]

I agree with the blending technique. Leave the spreadsheets closed though. Some of the fun of partigyle is winging it. Don't worry about gravity, etc.

Fill that mash tun up, no sparge and reinfuse and then blend to get your numbers. No fuss. No muss. No stress.

To each their own. But I don't wing anything with brewing.

 

[Jwin]

My first and only gyled beer was a 10.5g dipa, followed by a 5 g ipa. Worked well except I had more grain absorbtion then what I thaught I would.
But that was with a cool mlt, so all I can say is good luck and hope it goes well.

 

[Big Monk]

To each their own. But I don't wing anything with brewing.

I think the point I was trying to make is that spreadsheet calcs for partigyle are convoluted. Mine was a ***** to make and basic high school algebra suffices.

The "winging it" comment was a bit tongue in cheek.

Blending makes exact calculations for gravity prior to blending unnecessary.

 

[Big Monk]

I think the point I was trying to make is that spreadsheet calcs for partigyle are convoluted. Mine was a ***** to make and basic high school algebra suffices.

The "winging it" comment was a bit tongue in cheek.

Blending makes exact calculations for gravity prior to blending unnecessary.

 

[Qhrumphf]

I think the point I was trying to make is that spreadsheet calcs for partigyle are convoluted. Mine was a ***** to make and basic high school algebra suffices.

The "winging it" comment was a bit tongue in cheek.

Blending makes exact calculations for gravity prior to blending unnecessary.

The spreadsheet we're referring to helps to determine based on grain and mash conditions (water, grain, equipment, etc), what volumes and gravities to expect out of the mash and sparges. It's helpful for optimizing your efficiency and at least getting you in the ballpark from the start. Once you have your runnings, yes, basic algebra will get you the ratios that you need.

 

[D-Train]

For me the spreadsheet is helping with a game plan. For example I can see that I should be able to make my big beer with just a blend of the first and second runnings and should hit my target gravity. Then it hits the burner while I'm doing the final sparge. The small beer gets the remaining which is a blend of three runnings, containing enough of the first and second that it shouldn't suffer from the oft cited watered down quality of a beer made entirely with final runnings.

 

[Big Monk]

I have the original Kai spreadsheet and the pricelessbrewing revision. Both solid sheets.

Everyone has their own preferences.

With a nice, big no sparge first runnings it's an easy process either way you do it. For me it's nice to just do it with a pen and paper.

Partigyle is a great method no matter your process for accomplishing it.

 

[D-Train]

I'm trying to envision what no sparge parti gyle brewing means. Care to elaborate on your process?

 

[Qhrumphf]

I'm trying to envision what no sparge parti gyle brewing means. Care to elaborate on your process?

He's saying unsparged first runnings, not entirely no sparge.

Otherwise I'm just as confused as you.

 

[Big Monk]

We're getting tied up with semantics because I'm foolishly putting my words together. My apologies.

You are correct. No sparge in this case is a bad choice of words because it implies I'm not going to reinfuse. Sorry about that. What I want is big no-sparge like malty 1st runnings. Them reinfuse with another volume of water to get a still fairly substantial 2nd runnings.

Then blend it into 3 beers pre-boil.

I'm still getting the hang of the HBT app. I keep trying to quote and getting some issues. Most of the time those first responses are better!

 

[JKaranka]

Gonna be tough to get that without some added sugar. You've got about 900 pts of potential (25 lb * 36 pts/lb), and 802 pts of finished wort (5 * 100 + 5.5 * 55), for a needed brewhouse efficiency of 802/ 900 = 89%. It can be done if you can hit 98% conversion efficiency. Here's strike/sparge plan that will get you there (volumes are listed as measured@68°F [measured@150°F]), and assumes a grain absorption of 0.08 gal/lb.

1. Mash in with 8.0 gal [8.15 gal] of strike water
2. Mash until wort SG of 1.091 is achieved (this gets you 98% conversion eff.)
3. After mash, drain/squeeze to obtain 6.0 gal [6.11 gal] of first runnings wort @ 1.091 SG
4. Batch sparge with 4.25 gal [4.33 gal] and drain/squeeze to obtain 4.25 gal [4.33 gal] of second runnings wort @ 1.0414 SG
5. Batch sparge with 4.25 gal [4.33 gal] and drain/squeeze to obtain 4.25 gal [4.33 gal] of third runnings wort @ 1.0188 SG
6. Mix 5.1 gal [5.2 gal] of first runnings and 1.9 gal [1.95 gal] of third runnings to create 7 gal [7.13] gal of wort that will boil down to 5.0 gal [5.2 gal @ 212°F] at ~1.100 SG
7. Mix the balance of the first, second and third runnings to create 7.5 gal [7.64 gal] of wort that will boil down to 5.5 gal [5.73 gal @ 212°F] at ~1.055 SG

The above does not allow for any kettle losses (got to dump it all in the fermenter), so you won't have 5 or 5.5 gal at packaging.

Brew on

Nice to see proper partigyle with blending. It will depend on what gravities you get out of your runnings but at least you will always hit the specified gravities for the blends.

 

[D-Train]

We're getting tied up with semantics because I'm foolishly putting my words together. My apologies.

You are correct. No sparge in this case is a bad choice of words because it implies I'm not going to reinfuse. Sorry about that. What I want is big no-sparge like malty 1st runnings. Them reinfuse with another volume of water to get a still fairly substantial 2nd runnings.

Then blend it into 3 beers pre-boil.

I'm still getting the hang of the HBT app. I keep trying to quote and getting some issues. Most of the time those first responses are better!

Got it thanks. That sounds like a good technique. In my case 3 smaller runnings would be more of a necessity to make up for a 13 gallon mashtun.

 

[Jimbodaman]

Ya know this thread makes me want to partigyle. It is done I shall partigyle.

 

[Jwin]

Ya know this thread makes me want to partigyle. It is done I shall partigyle.

Oh yeah! Do it. Now, I don't worry so much as others. I just consider it free beer. I like the idea of doing a 5g gyle off a 10g beer. Still get a decent SG that way.

 

[Big Monk]

I think the key is blending wort to mitigate the flavor impacts of a 2nd runnings only beer. Blending also removed the big beer/small beer constraints.

Blending preboil is nice because you can produce wildly different beers based on yeast choice, hopping, sugars (think partigyle Trappist beers), etc.

 

[Qhrumphf]

I think the key is blending wort to mitigate the flavor impacts of a 2nd runnings only beer. Blending also removed the big beer/small beer constraints.

Blending preboil is nice because you can produce wildly different beers based on yeast choice, hopping, sugars (think partigyle Trappist beers), etc.

This.

As much as I respect the Fullers method of blending after the boil, I like having the ability to hop each beer individually.

 

[Big Monk]

This.

As much as I respect the Fullers method of blending after the boil, I like having the ability to hop each beer individually.

Yes.

Think about doing a Trappist run: Dubbel, Tripel, BDSA. Use Pils and Pale malts. Blend preboil to get the correct volume and gravity for the Tripel. Add simple sugar to the Tripel and dark syrups to the Dubbel and BDSA. Hop differently if you like.

That's 3 distinct beers allmade from one mash and a little pre-boil creativity and because you blended your unlikely to have any 2nd or 3rd runnings flavor impacts.

That is a lot of variety and flavor margin provided you have enough vessels and burners or have a plan for staggered boils.

 

[JKaranka]

Fullers do pretty well by having different hops in the boils and additions post blending, though. They used a lot of sugars back in the day but I think they went all malt not that long ago?