23% Effiiciency

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.

OctopusInk

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2008
Messages
47
Reaction score
0
Location
North Carolina
Partial Mash Recipe:

Rye Beer

4lbs Pale LME
2.8lbs 2 row
1lb munich malt
1lb rye malt
.5lb victory
.4lb honey malt
.6oz magnum 60min
.75oz fuggles 30min
.5oz east kent goldings 20min
.5oz east kent goldings 10 min
1oz cascade 3min

WLP051 California V


In beer smith with 60% efficiency in a 5 gal batch I should have 1.054OG
perfect right....wrong

At 3.5 gal in the fermentor I had 1.052 so I didn't add anymore water cause I still want a good beer. I did a 2.5 gal boil adding the LME at 20 min. I mashed the grain using deathbrewers method in 2.5 gal at 150F for 45 mins, and sparged with 1gal at 170F.

What the heck did I do wrong?

I have done partial grain before with much better results. I didn't change my practices any. My hydrometer has never failed me before and I have always had decent brews. Help me HBT, you're my only hope.
 
I took the OG at 70F in the fermentor. It was so little water the hydrometer barely floated. I usually take the gravity and add water to achieve the OG I want. This time I was shocked.
 
How is this even possible when half of your fermentables are in LME form?
 
Let's see. You had:
2.8lbs 2 row
1lb munich malt
1lb rye malt
.5lb victory
.4lb honey malt

Which equals 5.7 pounds of grain. That should have been mashed in 2 gallons of water. At 150, that would have been ok, but a tad bit low. Still, you should have had conversion.

Where the grains thoroughly wetted/soaked and loose in the bag?

You sparged with one gallon, which is a little bit low but still acceptable. You could have sparged with as much as 2.75 gallons or so, which might have improved the efficiency.

So, you had out about 2.5 gallons from the mash? About 1.5 gallons from the mash, and a gallon from the sparge?
 
I had about 2gal from the mash and about .75 from the sparge. I actually had to add water before the boil because it was so low in my pot. If my grain wasn't broken up enough or I had too much water in the mash do you think that would account for my lack of efficiency?
 
I had about 2gal from the mash and about .75 from the sparge. I actually had to add water before the boil because it was so low in my pot. If my grain wasn't broken up enough or I had too much water in the mash do you think that would account for my lack of efficiency?

No, I don't think so. More dumb questions, ok? You had two gallons from the mash? But you added about 2.5 gallons? The mash absorbed .5 gallons? that seems about right to me. But then you sparge with one gallon, and only got back .75 gallons? Where did the sparge water go? Was it absorbed in the mash?

What I'm thinking is this- there weren't enough "wetted" grains in the mash. Maybe the bag was too packed, so the grains weren't loose and free flowing. What makes me think this is that the sparge water shouldn't have been absorbed- I mean, once the grain is saturated, it doesn't absorb more water.

If you added 2.5 gallons of water, getting out 2 gallons is reasonable, though. I'm just trying to think out why your efficiency was so low.

You had enough base malt to convert the specialty grains, and Munich can convert itself. I'm just really wondering what could have happened. The only explanation I have is that you had very poor conversion. I'm now trying to figure out the "why" of it.
 
I have been racking by brain all day trying to figure out why. I had enough grain in there, it is almost like it was specialty grains that didn't convert. last time I did this I took a sample out and cooled to get a good efficiency reading and it was 60% that is why I set Beersmith to 60%. When I put the wort in the fermentor and added water, stirred and took a reading, imagine my surprise when I was already past my target OG.

I am crossing my fingers that this is a fluke.
 
Back
Top