Two vessel HERMS system idea

[corneyl]

Most HERMS systems use a 3-vessel system, but I was wondering whether it's also possible to do it with 2 vessels. I couln't find a lot of info on this. But one needs less valves, just two vessels, but a separate heat exchanger, so it could be more cost effective. A disadvantage is that sparging is harder to do, see the attachment for my idea.

As far as I understood the process, with these 8 steps it should be possible to brew a beer. In step 5 I add the sparge water while the mash water (is that the correct term?) is still in the pot. So sparging probably works out a bit less effective, but still better than no sparging at all.

In total I would need two vessels, a heat exchange, two pumps and 8 valves.

Do you guys think that this would work out ok? Has anyone (used) a 2V-HERMS?

BTW: please correct me if I'm using wrong terms, beginner here

 

[doug293cz]

If you mix your sparge water with the mash, which you appear to be doing in step 6, you effectively end up with a no sparge, full volume mash (think about it.) Your efficiency will suffer.

The grain absorption rate for a traditional MLT is about 0.12 gal/lb of grain. The chart below shows the lauter efficiency difference between full volume no-sparge, and an equal run-off volume, single batch sparge. On average you will lose about 8 points of lauter efficiency with your system compared to a proper batch sparge, and even more vs. a well conducted fly sparge.



Brew on

 

[corneyl]

In step 6 a very low amount is recirculated, so I think this won't mix the whole thing.

But let's say we skip step 6, would the efficiency be higher than no sparge?

 

[doug293cz]

If you can get all your sparge water on top of the original mash with minimal mixing, and then drain slowly (so as to avoid channeling), you would get some of the benefit of the sparge. The more minimal, the mixing the better the efficiency you would get. Lauter efficiency is all about how much sugar you leave behind in the MLT. The more concentrated the wort absorbed by the grain, the lower the efficiency. If the remaining liquid in the grain mass had zero sugar, then your lauter efficiency would be 100%.

Since you are recirculating the mash during mashing, you shouldn't really need a vorlauf step prior to beginning run-off.

Brew on

 

[jangevaa]

Kind of a mash up of BRUTUS-20, and Counterflow-HERMS. I think it'd work well for you. I currently use a Kettle-RIMS design, and I have been considering modifying my current brewery to switch to essentially the same design as this. My previous brewery was counterflow-HERMS and that worked incredibly well for me, so I have some experience with this kind of design. I used a heat exchanger from zchillers in that previous brewery.

 

[corneyl]

Thanks for the answers!

I've rethought the system a bit, and came up with a new idea. This one uses just 6 valves, 3 one-way valves, and can do sparging . The only thing is that the wort shouln't cool down too much in step 6...

 

[BrunDog]

Are you looking for just one heating element? If two, I would recommend a 2 vessel RIMS like my design.

I honestly don't understand why anyone would do a HERMs anymore, but in your case I could see it to eliminate the the second element and associated controls.

 

[corneyl]

Well I thought that it would be easier to control the temperature of the wort. Is that not the case?

 

[Dfitz]

I'm using a 2 vessel system that is neither RIMS or HERMS. I've modified a steam kettle to electric to heat my mash tun. It's more direct heat by use of hot water/glycol. It gets my 20 gal water to strike temp in about 1/2 hour. I use this 60 gal. Groen Kettle for single barrel but can make as little as a 20 gal batch. This combined with my 50 gal. boil kettle takes brewing to a much simpler level. Twice the beer with half the work of a 10 or 15 gallon batch.

 

[BrunDog]

Well I thought that it would be easier to control the temperature of the wort. Is that not the case?

I am going to bite my tongue (thumbs, actually) and avoid what I would love to be a philosophical discussion. This has nothing to do with you corneyl... you just lit my fire with the 2-vessel thing which has been on my mind.

So let's help you out... I think 2 vessels is the way to go. All the benefits of multi vessel without a wasted on (the HLT). I think your idea is sound, and as you noted sparging is the only hiccup. The problem you have fundamentally is no third place for water or wort. So you have to make a choice during the sparge:

1. Drain you initial runnings into a bucket.
2. Drain your runnings in into the BK, along with the remaining sparge water.
3. Put all your sparge water into the MLT and drain into the BK.
4. Batch sparge once.

Given these choices, I would NOT do #2 or #4. As Doug said 2 is like a full volume mash. I don't agree it is the same, but you won't get the best efficiency doing this because of course, you are pumping extracted sugars back on to the mash surface. 4 is just plain silly to me. #1 is more manual than I like but you could do a normal fly sparge.

But i see no downside to #3 other than some lost efficiency. Put your entire sparge volume on top of the grain bed without mixing, then drain into your BK until you hit your pre-boil volume. I think that will work well.

 

[303Dan]

I'm basically doing a "2.5 vessel eHERMS" and I really like it. The .5 vessel is just a cheap 10 gallon pot sitting on a simple 120v infrared cooktop that can hold rough temperatures. Here's how it works, if this at all helps:

Vessel 1 is my MLT, nothing out of the ordinary. Just a 15 gallon Blichmann Boilermaker G2 with the False bottom and auto-sparge installed. Vessel 2 is what makes my process work. It's another 15 gallon Blichmann G2, but with the 240v BoilCoil and HopBlocker installed, as well as 4 additional valves:
1. HERMS in
2. HERMS out
3. HERMS water recirc for keeping uniform temps top to bottom
4. Whirlpool port for post boil whirlpool/hopstand

I got a 50 foot stainless HERMS coil and mounted it with 1.5" triclamp fittings so that it can be easily and quickly removed and the holes covered with TC end caps when converting from HLT to boil kettle.

So, basically, when mashing, vessel 2 has the HERMS coil installed and is full of water and the mash takes place exactly as it would in any 3 vessel HERMS system. My controller regulates the HERMS water temp via a sensor at the output of the HERMS coil. When the mash and mash out are complete, I stop both pumps, reconfigure the hoses (all quick disconnects so it is easy) and pump the HERMS water back through the coil to rinse it out and then into the pot on the infrared cooktop which starts to heat it from mash temps to sparge temps. Once vessel 2 is empty, I quickly remove the HERMS coil and reconfigure hoses for fly sparring. From there it functions like a 3 vessel system would. But I only need to control one element in my system so I was able to get a very simple controller.

That's just the design I came up with for now, but I really do like it and the couple of extra steps that are involved because the HLT and Boil Kettle are the same vessel are quick, easy and take just a few minutes to complete.

For what it's worth. If you have any questions, I'd be happy to help you narrow in on a design.

Dan

 

[bheinecke]

I am in the process of building a 2 vessel system with 1x heating element and using a heat exchanger to transfer heat from the shared HLT/BK to the MLT during mash. Attached is a PDF. Not sure how the PDF I uploaded will appear but it is a 3D pdf. If you can open it in adobe it is a 3d model you can spin/zoom.

Please note:
-I am automating so the plumbing is likely a little more complex than truly necessary
-While building I found that I was actually able to eliminate 1 valve so there is one less than what you see
-I only have 2x heat exchangers b/c I received one for free. You shuold be able to do this with one.

 

[bheinecke]

sorry...attachment isn't sticking for some reason.

 

[oylerck]

Most HERMS systems use a 3-vessel system, but I was wondering whether it's also possible to do it with 2 vessels.


Yes! However I use a 2 vessel rims system. Check out the BlichMann breweasy. That's the same thing (in one conjoined unit.)

I have a 7.5 mash tun and a 10 gallon boil kettle. I have 4 valves, one at the top and bottom of each kettle. In the mash tun you could get a blichman autosparge to slow the rate of flow or be stubborn like I am and do it all manual. Instead I have an Ss recirculating manifold to evenly distribute the wort over the grains.

This method only takes one pump. Use all the water for a batch sparge. (BeerSmith actually has settings for the breweasy in its latest update.) Gravity feeds the heated water into the pump to the top of the mash tun until you get the proper mix for dough in. Leave the rest in the kettle. Dough in. Hook Hose from bottom of mash tun to top of boil kettle. After 15 minutes open the valves to a slow stream on both mash tun and kettle. .5 gallon stream max I believe

Edit: Efficiency is supposedly the same as BIAB if not better. (I cannot prove this yet still working on grain crush. 2nd brew with a mill.) if you know water chemistry you might have to lower PH for even better efficiency. (Haven't tried this either)

Try it if you already have the pump and see what you think. I can brew 5 gallons with at least 16 lbs of grain. It's about 33 quarts of water. The kettle is heavy as hell, but I paid $150 max for this system so it's worth it.(kettles were cheap, I lucked out.)

Edit: if you are installing an element you might have an easier time than me. Just figure out where the thermocouple is on a breweasy and install it there.

 

[doug293cz]

Yes! However I use a 2 vessel rims system. Check out the BlichMann breweasy. That's the same thing (in one conjoined unit.)

...

This method only takes one pump. Use all the water for a batch sparge. (BeerSmith actually has settings for the breweasy in its latest update.) Gravity feeds the heated water into the pump to the top of the mash tun until you get the proper mix for dough in. Leave the rest in the kettle. Dough in. Hook Hose from bottom of mash tun to top of boil kettle. After 15 minutes open the valves to a slow stream on both mash tun and kettle. .5 gallon stream max I believe

Efficiency is supposedly the same as batch sparge if not better. ...

If I am reading this correctly, it sounds like you are draining your mash into the top of the boil kettle, while at the same time pumping sparge water out of the bottom of the BK/HLT into the top of the MLT. Is this correct? If so, there is no way this can be as efficient as a traditional batch sparge. The reason is that you cannot prevent mixing of the run-off wort with the sparge water. As a result of the mixing you start adding sugar back into the mash, and more sugar left in the mash results in lower lauter efficiency. For best efficiency, you always want to be adding pure water to sparge with, never dilute wort.

Brew on

 

[oylerck]

If I am reading this correctly, it sounds like you are draining your mash into the top of the boil kettle, while at the same time pumping sparge water out of the bottom of the BK/HLT into the top of the MLT. Is this correct? If so, there is no way this can be as efficient as a traditional batch sparge. The reason is that you cannot prevent mixing of the run-off wort with the sparge water. As a result of the mixing you start adding sugar back into the mash, and more sugar left in the mash results in lower lauter efficiency. For best efficiency, you always want to be adding pure water to sparge with, never dilute wort.



Brew on

It's a "no-sparge" system. Better than BIAB efficiency. http://www.blichmannengineering.com/sites/default/files/BrewEasy_manual_V2.pdf this is essentially the same thing my system does, except I control the fire and the flow manually at this point.

Sorry my efficiency is between BIAB and fly sparging. I misspoke.

 

[swimIan]

I had a 2 vessel similar to the breweasy with 2 keggles. I switch to ebiab with a 15 gallon kettle. Ebiab is easier clean up but batch/OG has limitations. I think if I were to do it again I'd either do a larger ebiab (with a very low mounted element) or a 2 vessel like Brundog (2 elements).

 

[doug293cz]

It's a "no-sparge" system. Better than BIAB efficiency. http://www.blichmannengineering.com/sites/default/files/BrewEasy_manual_V2.pdf this is essentially the same thing my system does, except I control the fire and the flow manually at this point.

Sorry my efficiency is between BIAB and fly sparging. I misspoke.

The claim that one no-sparge system (BrewEasy) has better efficiency than any other no-sparge system (like full volume BIAB) is BS, and cannot be supported by either measurements or theory. And in fact, full volume BIAB with bag squeezing will have better efficiency than a BrewEasy. This is because a traditional MLT has a grain absorption rate of about 0.12 gal/lb, whereas a squeezed BIAB can have grain absorption rates of 0.06 - 0.08 gal/lb. Less wort left in the grain mass means less sugar left in the grain mass, and lauter efficiency is completely determined by what percentage of the total sugar created is left in the grain mass after lautering.

The above assumes that both systems have equal conversion efficiencies (percent of grain potential actually converted to sugar during the mash), and equal grain bill weight to pre-boil volume ratios. If you use more water for the same amount of grain, your lauter efficiency will be higher, but you have to boil off more water to get the same post-boil volume. BIAB systems can relatively easily meet 98% - 100% conversion efficiency when using a very fine crush (I do it most of the time.)

The chart below shows lauter efficiency for both no-sparge and equal runnings volume, single batch sparge processes as a function of grain bill weight to pre-boil volume ratio for several different grain absorption rates. No-sparge in a traditional MLT (0.12 gal/lb, lowest curve on the chart) is what you can expect with a BrewEasy type system. Typical squeezed BIAB systems will be between the solid 0.08 and 0.06 gal/lb curves.



Brew on

 

[oylerck]

.



View attachment 393914



Brew on

I have never used Biab. I'm just going off what I've read.

How hard is it to clean the grains out of the bag. That just seems like a pain in the ass, but once again I've never looked into it.

 

[doug293cz]

I have never used Biab. I'm just going off what I've read.

How hard is it to clean the grains out of the bag. That just seems like a pain in the ass, but once again I've never looked into it.

Pretty easy. Just dump the bag in compost (or wherever), then spray off with a hose. When dry, shake off the last few bits of grain.

Brew on

 

[Wizard_of_Frobozz]

Thanks for the answers!

I've rethought the system a bit, and came up with a new idea. This one uses just 6 valves, 3 one-way valves, and can do sparging . The only thing is that the wort shouln't cool down too much in step 6...

It looks to me like you plan to move the post-boil wort through the water side of your chiller - is that correct?

I've currently got a 3 vessel system and I want to eliminate the HLT. Unfortunately, I'm limited to 30 amp, so going Brundog's route of a RIMS/Sparge heater is out. I've been thinking about a very similar system to what you have here but I keep running up against how to connect the CFC chiller so that wort stays on the wort side without getting super complicated with valves. Your solution looks simple as long as there are no issues with putting wort through the water side of the chiller. I would think that possibly plug up with hop debris if not filtered well. How sanitary would that side of the chiller be? I guess it depends on what chiller you plan to use - do you already have it?

 

[corneyl]

It looks to me like you plan to move the post-boil wort through the water side of your chiller - is that correct?
(...) How sanitary would that side of the chiller be? I guess it depends on what chiller you plan to use - do you already have it?

I actually didn't think about that, but was planning on using a platechiller/plate heat exchanger. Both sides are used for both wort and water in my design. And cleaning has to be done anyway, which is why I want to have valves to the sewer, so I can create some sort of auto clean program.

 

[Wizard_of_Frobozz]

I actually didn't think about that, but was planning on using a platechiller/plate heat exchanger. Both sides are used for both wort and water in my design. And cleaning has to be done anyway, which is why I want to have valves to the sewer, so I can create some sort of auto clean program.

With a plate chiller, I would be worried about plugging up both sides; grain bits from the mash tun and trub & hop debris on the other side. A good hop spider or equivalent could work to minimize that, but I would still be concerned about grain plugging up the plate chiller when recirculating the mash. Maybe an inline filter before the chiller?

On the plus side, you have an added feature by piping everything up this way - you could put ice in your mash tun after the boil and use it to chill to lager temperatures.

 

[BrunDog]

...I've currently got a 3 vessel system and I want to eliminate the HLT. Unfortunately, I'm limited to 30 amp, so going Brundog's route of a RIMS/Sparge heater is out.

Hold the phone... you don't need 50A to do on the fly sparging. My system is 50A but I only use it if I am running a clean cycle, or if doing back-to-back batches, which I personally never do. The only requirement is a 120V/240V switch or relay for the RIMS element. Let me know if you need more info.

 

[Wizard_of_Frobozz]

Hold the phone... you don't need 50A to do on the fly sparging. My system is 50A but I only use it if I am running a clean cycle, or if doing back-to-back batches, which I personally never do. The only requirement is a 120V/240V switch or relay for the RIMS element. Let me know if you need more info.

Ok, true one 5500W element doesn't need 50 amps. I'd rather not get into the complexity of using flowmeters like you did - my programming skills are less than adequate for that kind of automation. Based on my reading of your system thread and my own experience with RIMS, you need the ability to control flow rate in order to have a shot at hitting your sparge temps. Without flowmeters, I think I would need a 2nd element running at the same time as the RIMS, and that means 50 amps if I want enough power to do that heating in a reasonable time. My current system uses a 3500w RIMs (which is adequate for step mashes) and 1500w HLT that takes forever to heat up.

I would also argue that your system isn't truly 2 vessel, since you are storing your RO water in tanks - those are effectively a 3rd vessel. I do the same (using RO water) and if I've got the 3rd vessel, it seems like it's much simpler to just heat that water in a tank vs. do the inline heating and flowmeters.

Don't get me wrong however - I'm in awe of your system and think it's awesome. Just beyond my skill set to do the arduino programming and integration with my BCS. I know I could learn that eventually but I'd rather put my time and energy into other things.

 

[BrunDog]

Fair enough! A few comments in return though.... You don't necessarily need to use flowmeters, you just need to get to a consistent-ish flow rate. This can be done with a regular ball valve. I don't use PID for the RIMS when sparging on-the-fly - I use duty cycle (PWM). Because the flow is consistent, you can apply consistent heat. And sparge temp is not critical, so being many degrees colder or a few warmer is no biggie. The draining is another hurdle, but can also be done with ball valves to match the flow rates just like any other fly sparge. Better of course is an electrical or mechanical autosparge.

You are absolutely correct about it not being a true 2 vessel. I figured I would be busted some day! But, I don't clean those, they don't take up brewing space, and they were inexpensive at ~$25 for the pair. If I had quality tap water, I could just feed it in directly which would eliminate the tanks, but I don't.

This can all be done without automation at all, but since you have the BCS you of course want to use it. Anyway, lots of ways to skin the cat, each with its pros and cons. I am happy to offer any help if/when you need it.

 

[Wizard_of_Frobozz]

Fair enough! A few comments in return though.... You don't necessarily need to use flowmeters, you just need to get to a consistent-ish flow rate. This can be done with a regular ball valve. I don't use PID for the RIMS when sparging on-the-fly - I use duty cycle (PWM). Because the flow is consistent, you can apply consistent heat. And sparge temp is not critical, so being many degrees colder or a few warmer is no biggie. The draining is another hurdle, but can also be done with ball valves to match the flow rates just like any other fly sparge. Better of course is an electrical or mechanical autosparge.

You are absolutely correct about it not being a true 2 vessel. I figured I would be busted some day! But, I don't clean those, they don't take up brewing space, and they were inexpensive at ~$25 for the pair. If I had quality tap water, I could just feed it in directly which would eliminate the tanks, but I don't.

This can all be done without automation at all, but since you have the BCS you of course want to use it. Anyway, lots of ways to skin the cat, each with its pros and cons. I am happy to offer any help if/when you need it.

Thanks for the comments - this friendly back and forth is what makes HBT so useful! I don't want to hijack the OP's thread too much here so I'll keep my comments brief:

1. My own attempts to control my RIMS to heat sparge water have not been very good - temps fluctuate too much for my liking.
2. I'll try again using duty cycle vs. PID and see how that goes
3. I think I'm going to have to find a way to go to 50 amps - 30 is limiting my design options too much. Sounds like a good excuse to build a new brew room!

 

[Wizard_of_Frobozz]

Just finished a brew session where I pumped all of my sparge water into my mash tun at the end of the mash. I wanted to see how it would work with a 2 vessel system where the boil kettle did double duty as a HLT. I didn't mix the mash tun after putting in the sparge water, so it just sat on top till I started draining the wort. Had no issues - my efficiency was the same as it usually is - 85%. For reference, I have a RIMS, so the mash was recirculated prior to putting in the sparge water.

 

[BrunDog]

Just finished a brew session where I pumped all of my sparge water into my mash tun at the end of the mash. I wanted to see how it would work with a 2 vessel system where the boil kettle did double duty as a HLT. I didn't mix the mash tun after putting in the sparge water, so it just sat on top till I started draining the wort. Had no issues - my efficiency was the same as it usually is - 85%. For reference, I have a RIMS, so the mash was recirculated prior to putting in the sparge water.

Nice. I think this was mentioned earlier in this thread as an idea. You just validated it!

 

[Wizard_of_Frobozz]

Nice. I think this was mentioned earlier in this thread as an idea. You just validated it!

That was the idea. I figured it should work as long as I didn't mix up the mash after putting in the sparge water. The wort has sugars in it, so it's higher density and should stay below the sparge water and basically act like a fly sparge. You do need a fairly big mash tun to hold it all. I have a 10 gallon cooler - it had 11.5 lbs of grain + about 7 gallons of water in total. Filled up almost full. Batch size was 5 gallons.

Next is to try and duplicate your on demand sparge heating but I have to upsize the RIMS heater first. It's too small for that right now.

 

[BrunDog]

Please do! I want a club of on-demand fly spargers!!

 

[oylerck]

That was the idea. I figured it should work as long as I didn't mix up the mash after putting in the sparge water. The wort has sugars in it, so it's higher density and should stay below the sparge water and basically act like a fly sparge. You do need a fairly big mash tun to hold it all. I have a 10 gallon cooler - it had 11.5 lbs of grain + about 7 gallons of water in total. Filled up almost full. Batch size was 5 gallons.

Next is to try and duplicate your on demand sparge heating but I have to upsize the RIMS heater first. It's too small for that right now.

My mash tun is only 7.5 gallons. I've been recirculating from the mash tun into the boil kettle and back with full boil volume. Any explanation why I can only get 62% while you get 80+? I doubt I can hold all the water in that mash tun as I like a little higher gravity.

 

[doug293cz]

My mash tun is only 7.5 gallons. I've been recirculating from the mash tun into the boil kettle and back with full boil volume. Any explanation why I can only get 62% while you get 80+? I doubt I can hold all the water in that mash tun as I like a little higher gravity.

For one thing, you are doing a no-sparge process, whereas @Wizard_of_Frobozz is sparging. That alone is good for a 9 percentage point difference in lauter efficiency (see the chart in post #2 in this thread.) Also, are you leaving significant liquid volume in the bottom of your MLT? That will reduce you lauter efficiency below what is shown in the referenced chart.

Remember that your mash efficiency is your conversion efficiency times your lauter efficiency. It's quite possible that your conversion efficiency is low (it should be 95% or better.) You need to measure your conversion efficiency using the method here to know where you stand.

Things you can to do to improve conversion efficiency:

• Crush as fine as you can without getting a stuck mash
• Mash for longer time
• Control mash pH (if you don't already)

Finally, are you talking mash efficiency or brewhouse efficiency? Brewhouse efficiency equals mash efficiency times fermenter volume divided by post-boil volume. The more wort/trub you leave in your BK the bigger the difference between your mash efficiency and your brewhouse efficiency. Comparing your brewhouse efficiency to someone else's mash efficiency can make things look worse than they actually are (I don't know if Wizard is stating mash or brewhouse.)

Brew on

 

[oylerck]

Finally, are you talking mash efficiency or brewhouse efficiency? Brewhouse efficiency equals mash efficiency times fermenter volume divided by post-boil volume. The more wort/trub you leave in your BK the bigger the difference between your mash efficiency and your brewhouse efficiency. Comparing your brewhouse efficiency to someone else's mash efficiency can make things look worse than they actually are (I don't know if Wizard is stating mash or brewhouse.)



Brew on

Im talking brewhouse. I dump everything in from my boil kettle to the fermenter. I account for loss in my mash tun but I do the best I can draining it.

I may keep my rims the same and just add a hlt.i have a five gallon cooler, I would just have to put a ball valve on it. Then I could at least fly sparge. Would there be enough liquid to recirculate? I don't know yet, but it's worth a shot.

Another thought... could I mash for say 30 minutes and heat a batch sparge to my target temp then recirculate the whole thing? I could still raise the temp to mash out towards the end. Still be two vessel and not have to worry about hoses so much.

 

[doug293cz]

Im talking brewhouse. I dump everything in from my boil kettle to the fermenter. I account for loss in my mash tun but I do the best I can draining it.

I may keep my rims the same and just add a hlt.i have a five gallon cooler, I would just have to put a ball valve on it. Then I could at least fly sparge. Would there be enough liquid to recirculate? I don't know yet, but it's worth a shot.

Another thought... could I mash for say 30 minutes and heat a batch sparge to my target temp then recirculate the whole thing? I could still raise the temp to mash out towards the end. Still be two vessel and not have to worry about hoses so much.

If you mash with say 4.5 gal strike water, and then add and mix (recirculate) 3.5 gal of additional water, the lauter efficiency will be the same as if you mashed with 8.0 gal of strike water initially. Sparging involves rinsing residual sugar out of the grains with fresh water. To do something like a fly sparge, you need an HLT separate from the BK, or an MLT capable of holding the total mash volume plus sparge volume. In the second case the sparge water would get added (potentially from the BK) on top of the mash with care taken to minimize the mixing. Then when you run-off, the concentrated wort drains first, and then the fresh water that was on top of the mash washes thru the grain bed. Since the top water has very low sugar concentration, it picks up residual sugar from the grain, much like a traditional fly sparge. This is what @Wizard_of_Frobozz described a few posts above.

Brew on

 

[Wizard_of_Frobozz]

Please do! I want a club of on-demand fly spargers!!

It will be a while - have to make some control panel changes before I can upsize the RIMS heater and I've got a new brew room to build first...

My mash tun is only 7.5 gallons. I've been recirculating from the mash tun into the boil kettle and back with full boil volume. Any explanation why I can only get 62% while you get 80+? I doubt I can hold all the water in that mash tun as I like a little higher gravity.

For one thing, you are doing a no-sparge process, whereas @Wizard_of_Frobozz is sparging. That alone is good for a 9 percentage point difference in lauter efficiency (see the chart in post #2 in this thread.) Also, are you leaving significant liquid volume in the bottom of your MLT? That will reduce you lauter efficiency below what is shown in the referenced chart.

Remember that your mash efficiency is your conversion efficiency times your lauter efficiency. It's quite possible that your conversion efficiency is low (it should be 95% or better.) You need to measure your conversion efficiency using the method here to know where you stand.

Things you can to do to improve conversion efficiency:

• Crush as fine as you can without getting a stuck mash
• Mash for longer time
• Control mash pH (if you don't already)

Finally, are you talking mash efficiency or brewhouse efficiency? Brewhouse efficiency equals mash efficiency times fermenter volume divided by post-boil volume. The more wort/trub you leave in your BK the bigger the difference between your mash efficiency and your brewhouse efficiency. Comparing your brewhouse efficiency to someone else's mash efficiency can make things look worse than they actually are (I don't know if Wizard is stating mash or brewhouse.)

Brew on

I was talking mash efficiency, since the experiment was in mash technique. I should have stated that - sorry!

A lot of variables can affect things, like doug293cz said. Losses post-mash can be affected by amount of hops, length of hoses, size of kettle, use of secondary fermenter, etc.

My brewhouse efficiency is typically around 75%. Hard to pin down why you see different results without knowing the details.

 

[rshortt]

Hi everyone,

How's all your 2 vessel HERMS systems going?

I've been planning on going this route for a couple of years now. Up until now I'm indoor electric 19 gallon BIAB.

I finally ordered a nice 50' 1/2" stainless coil for my next BK/HLT that will be 25 or 30 gallons depending on what deal I can find. At first I think I'll just use my existing BK as a MT with a custom made false bottom. Right now I'll make due with one pump (march center inlet) but envision eventually using two.

I like what I'm reading in this thread and I think a system like this has a lot of potential and many combinations of mash volume, thickness, no/sparging.

Have you guys seen these videos? A source of inspiration, for sure.

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=28kYMdQsqjQ[/ame]

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqO8r5TocIc[/ame]

Cheers!

 

[Wizard_of_Frobozz]

I've been doing a 2 vessel brew session for a while now, although my system is still built as a 3 vessel (I'm just not using the HLT anymore!). A full redesign is underway, but the new brew room construction comes first.

My setup is similar to what he was doing in the videos, with some exceptions:

1. I use a RIMS heater vs. HERMS coil in the boil kettle
2. My mash tun is a 10 gallon Rubbermaid cooler
3. I don't recirculate the mash after the entire sparge water volume has been added to the mash tun

I've found that by gently pumping the sparge water onto the top of the grain bed, it's just like a fly sparge - the grains get rinsed as the mash tun is pumped out from below. I have to go about 1 qt/min or else my efficiency drops off, but that's no different than fly sparging anyway. I get about 85% mash effeciency. That's been pretty consistent over several batches now.

My biggest limitation is the size of the mash tun. I brew in 5 gallon batches, and the 10 gallon mash tun can only fit about 15 lbs of grain plus all the water required to get about 6.25 gallons in the kettle (pre-boiling). At my efficiency, that limits me to about 1.080 for original gravity. That's fine with me, as I'm not a "big" beer drinker, but it is a limitation worth pointing out.

I'd also like to point out that the HERMS coils in the boil kettle looks like it would be a PITA to clean. You might be able to have it do double duty and be an immersion chiller, but the prospect of cleaning that coil doesn't appeal to me. I like RIMS over HERMS anyway because it's direct temperature control of the mash; never had any scorching issues.

 

[swimIan]

I have a question about your BK. You said that you use a RIMS heater on the BK to heat the mashtun. Do you also use another heat source in your BK for boiling? Electrice? Gas?

 

[Wizard_of_Frobozz]

I have a question about your BK. You said that you use a RIMS heater on the BK to heat the mashtun. Do you also use another heat source in your BK for boiling? Electrice? Gas?

No, the BK has it's own heating element in it (4500W element). The RIMS tube is separate with a 2500W element (which I limit to 50% duty cycle, as I don't really need that much power on the RIMS). RIMS tube is only used for the mash. Sorry about the confusion - I was trying to state that I have a RIMS vs. HERMS system.

During the mash, I'm recirculating the mash through the RIMS tube while the boil kettle is heating up the sparge water. I then transfer the entire sparge volume to the top of the mash tun, then pump the mash tun over to the boil kettle. Max. current with both heaters at the same time is just under 30 amps. My next upgrade is going to go to 50 amp service, which will make it much more flexible with regards to heater sizing.