So tired of crummy efficiency...

Brewer's Friend 728
Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Tactical-Brewer

Tactical-Brewer

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2015
Messages
802
Reaction score
173
Location
St. Louis
Ok, so I know this topic is like beating a dead horse. But I've watched so many hours of all grain brewing on YouTube, have brewed a few batches, and truly think I've got technique and Temps down.... But I still keep getting crappy efficiency.

This last beer I did, a bmc clone, 5lb 2 row, 2.5lbs instant rice, 1lb quick grits mashed at 150 in 3 gallons of water for 90min, stirring every 20 minutes . Fly sparged nice and slow with 173 degree water. Grain bed looked awesome, eventually had crystal clear water at the top at about the midway point. Honestly at the time I was thinking man, this is awesome! I'm going to get crazy good efficiency!

Boiled for 60 minutes and Boiled down to 4.5 gallons, topped it off to 5 gallons and ended up getting 1.037. Brewer's friend said I should have gotten 1.041 at 70%, which means I only got like 60% efficiency.

I just am lost as to what I'm doing wrong. The guys at the lhbs says their grain crush yields them 80% no problems. Maybe it was the brand of instant rice? Maybe it doesn't have as much obtainable sugar as flaked rice? Maybe it was the grits? Heck if I know.

I think my technique is solid but, then again, maybe it's not?

Any help or tips would be awesome! I've got to start getting better efficiency!

Thanks,
Tac
 
Why instant rice and quick grits instead of regular rice and grits? Your gonna mash it for a while. No need to rush it.

From Wikipedia instant rice article.
Code: 
Rice naturally has minerals like phosphorus, magnesium, and potassium. Instant rice has fewer of the calories, carbohydrates, and protein than regular rice. Companies make up for the loss of nutrients by adding their own nutrients such as the B-vitamins, as well as iron.
 
Your BMC clone is like my Cream ale (I use more corn than rice though), but I add some Amalyse enzyme to the mash since a good % of the mash is adjuncts not contributing any enzymatic power. Next time you brew this beer, maybe try some amalyse enzyme and see if that ups your efficiency.

Edit: For the record I use flaked maize and flaked rice. I have never used instant rice or quick grits, so I cannot attest to their contribution. I usually get 85% on my system. My last Cream Ale brew though netted a hefty 91%.
 
If you're really below 70% then maybe look at the recipe and Brewers Friend settings first then system and then process. You have a process you use in your brewery to make beer. You seem to understand that process and the system you use. I agree with @m1k3 for the most part. If your system is solid, meaning you have made several batches and it works for you. You can chase efficiency but I would chase consistency first, then efficiency then chase recipe design. I mean if your getting 70-75% brew house efficiency then adding a couple pounds of malt to the grain bill is cheap and easy. If you are really in the 60's I would take a look at BF settings first to see if you REALLY are at 60%. Brew an easy 5 gallon batch using ONLY known malts and see where you really stand.


Cheers
Jay
 
Thanks for the replies guys! The reason for the quick grits and instant rice is just cause it's cheap and readily available.

I'll go ahead and buy brewsmith and be done with trying to guess stuff.

I don't really care to chase efficiency past 75-80% but it just sucks thinking there's 40% sugar being wasted and going down the drain if I'm truly at 60%.

I'll take your advice and make an easy peasy, known, recipe and see what I come up with.

Thanks again all,
Tac
 
When you top off with water you're going have inconsistent mixing. Your OG compared to the calculated one is pretty close. It could be that the sample you pulled for testing was a little more watery.
 
Crush finer. Mash thinner. Tried and true and frequently overlooked.

Crush as fine as your system allows without getting lautering issues.

Accurate measures are key if you actually want to dial in you system and measure useful data. More about that in my sig.

I don't sparge and for a 1.050 beer formulate recipes at 80% BH efficiency. Not hard to achieve.

Understand the efficiency terms and how they are measured. otherwise they are like farts in the wind. Unapproachable.
 
Gavin C said:
Crush finer. Mash thinner. Tried and true and frequently overlooked.



Crush as fine as your system allows without getting lautering issues.



Accurate measures are key if you actually want to dial in you system and measure useful data. More about that in my sig.



I don't sparge and for a 1.050 beer formulate recipes at 80% BH efficiency. Not hard to achieve.



Understand the efficiency terms and how they are measured. otherwise they are like farts in the wind. Unapproachable.
Click to expand...


He's using LHBS crush though
 
A few things struck me that may not really be issues, but just that I don't know the details.

Is it mashing or sparging that is the problem. Have you done an iodine test on the grains at end of mash to see if there is unconverted starch? Corn grits, even quick ones, can require a bit of boiling to become tender; maybe cook it first until tender? else use flaked, which are (sometimes) prepared by steaming until tender and then rolling/drying - so starch should be more easily accessible.

Are you sure about your thermometer calibration (accuracy)? I'm not sure about this but my old Dave Miller book says that 149F is the minimum to get starch gelatinization, so 150F as a starting point with any error at all may not give full access to the starch grains. The temperature is only going to sag from there (with your periodic bumps back to 150F). Check your thermometer against a good lab-quality one. Temperature is one of those things where 5 thermometers are likely to give 5 slightly different readings...

Water pH, brewing quality? You didn't mention the water. If the pH is not optimal (5.3-5.5) the conversion will be less efficient per time. Other ions (presence/absence/levels) can affect the mash too. Be sure of the brewing quality of your water. The iodine/starch test should show this result.

How are you fly sparging? What apparatus? Flow patterns can easily make the kind of difference you are seeing. If you have any sense that there is any stickiness to the spent grains in the "corners" then you may be leaving sugars in the grain bed. You didn't say what volume of sparge water you use. I mash that amount of grain in about 10.5qts water and sparge with 4.5gal, collect a bit over 6gal and get much better yields. I use a lauter tun I built that gives really good flow and efficiency; there are no dead corners: http://people.umass.edu/~dac/projects/lauter-tun/LauterTun.html

Check your malt specs. I've gotten 2-row malt bags in various years from the same source company with extract percentages from 84.3 to 80.0. I don't know how widely these numbers will range, but it tells you what to expect.

Cheers!
 
My efficiency was all over the place when I started brewing, I have always been a technical guy and was exacting in my process even when I first started brewing... To that end my root issue was with my LHBS crush, they were milling at high rpm, and with a big gap, their goal was to sell more grain I think, I bought my own mill and have never varied much from 87% efficiency. I mill my grain at approx. 200rpm and with a gap of .024".

Because of the fine crush I malt condition to keep the husks intact for a good grain bed, and I batch sparge rather slowly to keep from pulling bits of grain into my kettle.

To me brewing is all about precision, without precision repeatability goes out the window, and without repeatability developing and tweaking a recipe becomes nearly impossible.
 
I had huge efficiency issues also when I first started all grain. I spent hours searching threads on here and tweaking different things. There are two changes I made that I feel made the biggest difference. First was stirring the living crap out of the mash at the end of the 60mins and between each sparge (I do 2 batch spares). That was an instantaneous 5% change. Then the biggest change was that I bought a corona mill (works great despite what people say) and started grinding my own. That was a 10% jump. Now I am getting high 70's to low 80's every batch. During all this experimenting I found out 1 thing--I made beer at 60% efficiency and I made beer with 80% efficiency. I am not a beer judge but what I will tell you is that a 60% beer and an 80% beer taste strikingly similar. In the long run, for me anyway, chasing efficiency caused a lot of stress and took away from a lot of the hobby. Now, I often forget to even take a sample and I rarely calculate an efficiency--and I am having a lot more fun brewing because of it.
 
I also had low efficiency when I started all-grain, in the mid to high 60's (although most were bigger beers with 1.075+ OGs and bigger beers tend to hit your efficiency a bit). I believe that consistency and having fun are the most important things to focus on. But i also like the challenge of trying to improve a number, just for the sake of improving it, like my efficiency. Here are a few easy things that I did that helped me rasie my efficiency in to the high 70s-low 80s, even with big beers.

1. I started double crushing my grains at my LHBS, which had a few points impact on my efficiency.

2. I mashed thinner 1.4-1.5 qts./lb. as long as I had room in my tun

3. I let my final sparge (I batch sparge) run longer. This had the biggest impact to my efficiency as I was getting the most volume of wort from my grains. I realized that I could often get another 3 qts. from my tun as my boil was heating. I simply let the mash tun drain into a gallon measuring cup, then dump it in right before boil kicks off. I know you are fly sparging, so maybe let it run a bit longer?

Pretty simple things to do, but have helped. But I still think consistency is more important than efficency, and having fun is the most important thing.
 
Thanks for all your responses guys,

On the water, I have no idea. I need to send a sample off and get a reading.

Right now I'm fly sparging with a metal colander and pouring the sparge water through that, making sure to go in a circular motion so I get even spread on the grain bed. But I think I'm going to move to batch sparging if it's just as good efficiency wise and easier. I just enjoy the thought of fly sparging more I guess.

I just ordered beersmith and will be setting it up to a T with my system, and bought two waterproof thermometers to be more accurate with my Temps.

I'll keep everyone posted.
 
"batch sparging if it's just as good efficiency wise and easier"

Not sure if its easier or if its more efficient. I have my equipment that I've been using for a few years and it is what it is. Good enough I guess. ...but I get great mash efficiency and consistent 70%-ish brewhouse efficiency batch sparging. I'd get better brewhouse efficiency if I simply poured the kettle contents into the fermenter but I don't - I leave trub in the kettle so I gladly take the hit.

Either way its more about what you enjoy vs the cpl dollars worth of grain difference.
 
If I ever had got that kind of efficiency out of that grain bill I would be happy. Just add grain and pay attention to water volumes until you get what you want.
 
Tactical-Brewer said:
View attachment 353420

Usually takes me 45 minutes to fly sparge
Click to expand...

I would say to at least try batch sparging. Your false bottom looks decent but it could be channeling quite a bit. One of my favorite cheap false bottoms is made from an aluminum pizza pan, very efficient.

I"m guessing your already sparging with water that's 170F or so?

I brew a lot of BMC clones, (kind of a fetish) and I usually cook my rice first, but I usually don't use instant either. A 90 min mash with instant, should be fine I would think.

Wish I knew of anything else but really don't.
 
Im sure its been said but its worth repeating. Make sure your not fudging the water volumes its the easiest way to throw all the numbers off. And I mean in practice not when your calculating things. Some people will do all the numbers right on paper but then start rounding things off when they actually measure out their water. Next thing you know an extra liter or 2 of water crept in and the numbers are off.
 
estricklin said:
I would say to at least try batch sparging. Your false bottom looks decent but it could be channeling quite a bit. One of my favorite cheap false bottoms is made from an aluminum pizza pan, very efficient.



I"m guessing your already sparging with water that's 170F or so?



I brew a lot of BMC clones, (kind of a fetish) and I usually cook my rice first, but I usually don't use instant either. A 90 min mash with instant, should be fine I would think.



Wish I knew of anything else but really don't.
Click to expand...


Yep, sparged with 173. I'm thinking next time I do it, I'll just either cook the grits and rice first, or fork over the money for the stuff at the lhbs. Was really trying to make this for about 15 bucks and came close after I wash this yeast and just use the washed yeast next time. Main goal was a quick easy, cheap, BMC clone.

This'll still be a good 4% beer, and I don't want to get caught up in the "chasing efficiency" dream. It's more of a, "when I'm doing an imperial stout and have 30-40 bucks wrapped up in a single beer, I want the most out of the grains I can get. I couldn't imagine throwing 40% of 40 bucks ($16.00) out the window which is how I look at crap efficiency.

If I can get to consistently 75-85% I'll be happy.

Thanks for all the info guys! I really do appreciate it and I'll be the first to tell you, I round up/down water volumes.

I mashed this with 3 gallons of water and sparged with about 6 gallons.

Next brew I'm taking dead serious, measuring everything, and won't fudge anything at all. I want to get this dialed in.
 
I always like to come into these discussions and remind everyone that efficiency comparison is like comparing the size of your Johnson. If you're wife/ladyfriend buys it, who cares about it's size!? If you are brewing great beer, don't worry about efficiency!

:cheers:

That's just IMHO... but then again I'm pushing 73% these days...
 
My understanding of any braid type filter system as opposed to a false bottom is better with batch sparging than fly sparging.

Another thought, you mashed, did your fly sparge, boiled, then had to use top up water??? Why? You should collect enough wort preboil so that you end up with the proper volume into the fermenter.
The mix of the top up water was probably not even so your OG could be off - either high or low....

Until you collect the right volume I would not even concern yourself with efficiency.

That said, I have been brewing for 5 years and 1.037 to 1.041 would only be a slight concern to me. I would assume measurement errors on my part.
 
Maybe I'm reading your original post wrong, Tactical, but it looks like when you're topping off, you're adding 10% of 1.000 gravity to your 4.5 gals to get to 5 gallons. If you're not accounting for that, then that may explain the efficiency loss.
 
In all truthfulness, I guess I can't even really accurately predict my efficiency.

I know this sounds like a total newb thing to say, but I didn't realize there were so many slight nuances that actually effect efficiency. Again, I know that's a total newb thing to say.

Basically how I came up with my efficiency was by putting in the ingredients on Brewers friend and just basing it on that information, not accounting for my system or anything like that.

I ordered beer smith yesterday and will be setting it up for that and doing batch sparges from now on I suppose until I get a false bottoms and proper fly sparging system.

I know that kinda means that makes this all this chasing a tale since my only guesstimation of my efficiency was plugging some ingredients in Brewers friend but I'd think it would be a decent approximation?

Anyways, I'm going to try and brew a simple, well documented beer next and set beer smith up and not fudge any of my numbers to see where I'm at.
 
Hey guys, on the batch sparge, do you let your second batch or whatever you call it, set in the tun any length of time or just pour the sparge water in, stir like crazy, and drain?
 
Tactical-Brewer said:
Hey guys, on the batch sparge, do you let your second batch or whatever you call it, set in the tun any length of time or just pour the sparge water in, stir like crazy, and drain?
Click to expand...

Kind of up to you, I've let it sit for 5-10 minutes before, not really on purpose. Main thing is just to stir...stir...then stir more.
 
McKnuckle said:
Pour it in, stir well, vorlauf, then drain quickly to kettle. Letting the batch sparge volume sit is not productive.
Click to expand...

Agreed, I haven't noticed any benefit to letting it sit - and that's what I've seen from Yooper and Denny comments
 
KeyWestBrewing said:
I would so your collecting clean wort. Not the biggest deal in the world but it's not much effort either.
Click to expand...

OK awesome. I love vorloufing anyways so that'll be cool.

Can't wait to try out batch sparging on my next brew.

Also, I should have beer Smith by tomorrow so I'll be spending the evening getting accustomed to it and setting up my system in it.
 
One thing you can do to help with accuracy is measure your gravity and volume pre-boil. It won't be your OG but it will tell you exactly how much sugar you got out of the mash.

How are you measuring volume?
 

Similar threads

D
First Recipe: 1 Gallon Maris Otter / Goldings SMaSH (Comments, suggestions?)
Replies
6
Views
611
Northern_Brewer
Northern_Brewer
PashMaddle
Brew day #2 is done.
Replies
22
Views
1K
lumpher
lumpher
N
Stuck recirculation BM’s Cream of 3 Crops
Replies
10
Views
1K
Niatras
N
Clint Yeastwood
Kill Mash Out but Raise Temperature to Improve Efficiency?
2
Replies
43
Views
2K
Clint Yeastwood
Clint Yeastwood
PashMaddle
Brewday got postponed.
Replies
22
Views
1K
sibelman
sibelman

Latest posts

Back
Top