Batch sparge not working well

[diS]

Palmer gives the illusion that he's covering both fly and batch sparge methods equally but what happened was that his own preference for fly sparging caused enough bias that he forgot to insert caveats such as "when fly sparging" when he talks about manifold design, runoff speed, and sparge temps. Simple mistake, but it does cause a lot of confusion for people trying to batch sparge.

I can tell form my experience that I"ve read that chapter several times and things haven't settled up until I asked here.
I don't want to be nitpicker, but in AG primer batch John says that he use ~12.5 quarts of strike water for 1.5 ratio and 7.25 lbs of grain, if I understood it correctly it should be ~11 quarts (10.87).. or it is simply tip-feller and instead of 1/4 there should be 1.4 lb of Chocolate Malt... but that is really tinny side note due to great reading in whole book.

CidahMastah and Denny, thanks for link, I"ll read it with pleasure while drinking my morning coffe (its 8 AM here).. also thanks for all great advices.

One thing is still is my mind but I have felling that I"ll have to figure it out on my own- crush size that works best for batch sparge. I set my mill on .040, but it tackles me is it still coarse since I"ve read some posts where people set their gaps in .030 and .035 range..

 

[Jklinden]

The barely crusher factory setting is .039 and brewers routinely get over 80% with that roller gap distance at least I have FWIW

 

[tchuklobrau]

I use the bobby m method of 2 sparges. I mash with the volume that my software says I need to get my usual 1.3 ratio. software also tells me how much wort to expect from 1st runnings and how much total water is needed. i then split the remaining water needed in two so i have a double sparge. Have been getting 80's for efficiencies since starting this(oh yeah and i got a corona style mill and started crushing my own grains)

 

[Bobby_M]

Yup, two sparges (3 distinct runnings) is usually worth 3-4% higher efficiency than a single sparge with all other things being equal (e.g. already good conversion efficiency, relatively equal runoff sizes, etc). As Denny says, it's not worth it the effort to some folks and I don't blame them. The other deciding factor is tun design. If you've got a design that allows for a full or near full drain (no deadspace) then you get maximum benefit from more distinct sparges. In my Keg MLT, which relies on a dip tube siphon and has a lot more "slack" space below the false bottom, it's very much now a pain in the ass to do more than one sparge. In fact, I tend to fly way more often now.

 

[Denny]

There are some graphs on Kaiser's web page that show that multiple (2) sparges give you about 4% more efficiency than a single sparge. This matches my own data exactly.

So I think your increased efficiency is due to the mash ratio. How thin of a mash do you wind up with?

Rich

I agree with your conclusion. I usually mash at around 1.6-1.75 qt./lb.

 

[Denny]

One thing is still is my mind but I have felling that I"ll have to figure it out on my own- crush size that works best for batch sparge. I set my mill on .040, but it tackles me is it still coarse since I"ve read some posts where people set their gaps in .030 and .035 range..

There is no crush size "for batch sparge"...it's no different than it would be for fly or no sparge brewing. I don't even know what my mill is set to. After all, you're making grist, not gaps! You just need to learn what a good crush looks like and set your mill to produce that result. In my case, I kept closing down the gap on my mill on successive batches until I started having trouble with runoffs. I opened it back up slightly and that's where it's remained for the last 12 years.

 

[Bobby_M]

And then you discover wet milling and the damn gap argument goes out the window.

 

[Homercidal]

And then you discover wet milling and the damn gap argument goes out the window.

I will be trying this soon, but got a bunch of other things to worry about before the brewing starts, usually. The pictures I've seen sure make it look nice.

After I built my crusher I got word of setting the gap around .036 I think, and tried it out and thought it could go finer, so I set it in I think at .032 and I've been fine with that.

Depending on your mash tun design, you may not be able to go that fine without getting stuck sparges on some grainbills. Also, since I built my crusher, the rollers may have a different size knurling than one of the retail crushers, so gap may be somewhat different.

The nice thing about having your own crusher is that you can tweak it down to suit your system. If you don't have one, I still recommend finding a supplier with a gap that works best for you. I don't think there is enough price difference between the big sellers to cause one to remain loyal to a coarse crush.

 

[RJS]

Denny, your page suggests an infusion of water before first runoff to reach the desired half of the pre-boiled volume, making up for whats lost in the mash, so your sparge and mash are equal, or something like that... For your example recipe, why not just mash with a gallon more instead of infusing. Would the mash be too thin? Is there such a thing as a mash that's too thin.

The first part is specific to Denny's recipe, but anyone can have a go at both questions.

 

[Denny]

And then you discover wet milling and the damn gap argument goes out the window.

I've tried wet milling and for me it made no difference whatsoever. Needless to say, I mill dry these days.

 

[Denny]

Denny, your page suggests an infusion of water before first runoff to reach the desired half of the pre-boiled volume, making up for whats lost in the mash, so your sparge and mash are equal, or something like that... For your example recipe, why not just mash with a gallon more instead of infusing. Would the mash be too thin? Is there such a thing as a mash that's too thin.

The first part is specific to Denny's recipe, but anyone can have a go at both questions.

You're absolutely right. I used to be a lot more concerned about that than I am these days. My philosophy now is that as long as the mash ratio is under 2 qt./lb. and the runoffs are within a gal. or so of each other, it's close enough to not really matter.

 

[RichBenn]

I've tried wet milling and for me it made no difference whatsoever. Needless to say, I mill dry these days.

I tried it too, but did find a difference -- my drill would overheat!

I'm back to dry, of course. Maybe it makes a difference for fly sparging, but it never did for me for batch (low sample size - twice).

Rich

 

[Bobby_M]

I've tried wet milling and for me it made no difference whatsoever. Needless to say, I mill dry these days.

For my false bottom setup, it made a huge difference in how fast I can recirculate without significant compaction.

 

[diS]

I"ve finished my 1st batch yesterday. Single step infusion with double sparge, and I got ~80% efficiency.
I am more than satisfied for 1st time.
Thanks to Denny, CidahMastah, Bobby_M (for his AG primer) and others for great tips on this thread!!

I"ll try to improve next time and maybe test another process (fly sparge, multi step, diff. gap on mill..) on some of next batches to find what suits best to me..

 

[Denny]

Try doing a single batch sparge and see how much difference there is.