Brew Day Numbers

[GreenSpyder]

I've recently upgraded my equipment from a bucket to conical fermenters, two 3 gallon pots to a 10 gallon brew kettle, a copper tube chiller instead of two sinks full of cold water and gotten off the stovetop and out to the garage with a propane burner. I also purchased a pH meter and refractometer. Now I'm curious about my numbers, and looking for opinions.

I brewed my favorite IPA:
10.5# Maris Otter 3L
6oz Munich Light 15L
7oz Crystal 20L
=11.3lbs

I've brewed this batch 12-15 times, but have never taken readings, these are what I've found today:
pH (10 minutes into mash)=5.35
1st lauter=1.059x4.25gal/11.3lbs=22.2 ppg
Batch sparge water = 1.022
Preboil mash=1.045x7gal/11.3lbs=27.9 ppg
OG (6 gallons going into fermenter)=1.056

Any insights or opinions are welcome.
Thanks,
Green Spyder

 

[pricelessbrewing]

Have to say I've never seen that definition of efficiency before. Ph can sometimes take a littke longer to stabilize.

Don't have much else to add.

 

[brewkinger]

I will offer my thoughts.

I agree with the above and not sure if I have ever seen efficiency measurements taken like that before, BUT your numbers are way off.

I put the recipe into BeerSmith and come up with an estimated OG of 1.048 (for a 6 gallon batch)
Assuming that you hit your 7 gallon pre boil volume and your 6 gal post boil....

That gives you a mash efficiency of slightly under 80%

Not sure how (or why) you calculate your numbers that way, but keep it simple.

You have a certain amount of sugars available to you that you CAN extract from the grains during the mash.

Only after the mash is complete and you have drained and sparged to get your pre boil volume should you try and figure out how much (what percentage) of the sugars that you DID get.

As far as testing the pH, I disagree and agree with the above post.
I test my pH at 5, 10 and 20 minutes.
In my experience, after that most of the conversion is complete and it takes too much time to adjust from there.. AND
my pH is usually spot on because of Brunwater. I have only ever had to add acid to my mash once and that was because I brain farted and forgot to add the acid to the strike water.

 

[cyanmonkey]

Your efficiency is based on the amount of potential sugars available to you.

The reason things like Beersmith is because they have a lot of grain information, like how much sugar you could potentially extract from a specific grain. A base malt will have more potential sugars than a roast malt, so dividing by the total grain weight is unfair to your brewery.

There are many brew house efficiency calculators online. Brewer's Friend has a pretty good one.

And is there something wrong with that ph?

 

[GreenSpyder]

Thanks guys...

Like I said, this is the first time I've taken readings, usually I just float a hydrometer in the wort just prior to fermentation. I got this efficiency calculation from John Palmer 12.5, although it meant little to me, and that's why I posted and asked. I'll use Brewer's Friend in the future. Is 73.57% considered okay?

brewkinger--I'm pretty certain OG is the gravity of the mash going into the fermenter. My reflectometer definitely showed 1.056. What factors do you think brought it to 1.048?

I've always used plain tap water, and never added anything to it in the past, which is why I didn't this time either. I wanted to see what I've been doing. Unless The Forum suggests something different, I don't think I need to change anything...of course this is why I'm asking.

I understand that some proteins are needed for "mouth feel", head, and other characteristics that make beers unique. So I imagine that 100% conversion isn't what we want???

Aren't 5.35 and 73.5% good numbers? Any suggestions to improve?

Thanks again

 

[cyanmonkey]

It's not good or bad as long as its consistent and repeatable. If you constantly got 30% and knew you'd hit that number every time I'd think it's better than bouncing around between 60% and 80%.

And if you're happy with the brews you make I don't see why you'd change your water.

 

[brewkinger]

Like I said, this is the first time I've taken readings, usually I just float a hydrometer in the wort just prior to fermentation. I got this efficiency calculation from John Palmer 12.5, although it meant little to me, and that's why I posted and asked. I'll use Brewer's Friend in the future. Is 73.57% considered okay?

I am not sure what Palmer 12.5 actually says, but there are several different "efficiencies" that can be calculated in brewing. Mash efficiency is what percentage of the total sugars available in the grains being used that are ACTUALLY removed from the grains and end up in our wort.[/COLOR]

brewkinger--I'm pretty certain OG is the gravity of the mash going into the fermenter. My refractometer definitely showed 1.056. What factors do you think brought it to 1.048?

OG is exactly that. The 1.048 is what BeerSmith is giving me when I input this recipe. My default settings for my system is 80% mash efficiency, so the 1.048 is what my system would get if I used those grains.
Reasons that you got 1.056 are hard to pinoint without knowing more specific information. Could be the temperature at which you took the reading. Most hydrometers are calibrated for 68 degrees. If you take the reading when it is hotter (or colder) then the numbers are off. There are conversion factors and calculators that can be used to correct the numbers.
Again, without knowing more, I would be simply guessing.

I understand that some proteins are needed for "mouth feel", head, and other characteristics that make beers unique. So I imagine that 100% conversion isn't what we want???

100% conversion is EXACTLY the dragon that we all chase. Damn near impossible to achieve, so 80% is good enough for me.

Aren't 5.35 and 73.5% good numbers? Any suggestions to improve?

pH of 5.35 is great for an IPA (and most paler style beers)

I must have either missed it before or you went back and edited the OP, but I did not see the ppg with your original numbers.
Now that I see that, the 22.2 ppg that you got after lauter gives you a mash efficiency of 63.4% (assuming a fairly standard 35ppg for most base malts).

The final amount of 27.9ppg = 79.7% mash efficiency (again assuming 35ppg) which is darn nice efficiency.

Like someone said above, repeatability is the focus.
If you can dial your system in to get 80% efficiency regularly then you are in good shape.
Even if you get 65% consistently, that is good too. It just means that you need to use more grains to get the same amount of sugars that you would be getting if you were getting 80% efficiency.

 

[GreenSpyder]

OG is exactly that. The 1.048 is what BeerSmith is giving me when I input this recipe. My default settings for my system is 80% mash efficiency, so the 1.048 is what my system would get if I used those grains.
Reasons that you got 1.056 are hard to pinoint without knowing more specific information. Could be the temperature at which you took the reading. Most hydrometers are calibrated for 68 degrees. If you take the reading when it is hotter (or colder) then the numbers are off. There are conversion factors and calculators that can be used to correct the numbers.
Again, without knowing more, I would be simply guessing.

I used a refractometer, not a hydrometer. A brand new "Beerfractometer", I calibrated it to 1.000 with distilled water, and when I took the reading, I left 6 drops on the plate for about 30 seconds after letting it cool for roughly 5 minutes in the dropper, so I'm sure the temp was right. I'm certain the reading was 1.056. Maybe you didn't enter the right numbers into BeerSmith? Maybe it's not accurate?

I did edit the OP, from "efficiency" to ppg. I misquoted that.

 

[brewkinger]

A brand new "Beerfractometer", I calibrated it to 1.000 with distilled water, and when I took the reading, I left 6 drops on the plate for about 30 seconds after letting it cool for roughly 5 minutes in the dropper, so I'm sure the temp was right. I'm certain the reading was 1.056.

Maybe you didn't enter the right numbers into BeerSmith?

Maybe it's not accurate?

Sounds like the calibration was OK.

I entered the recipe according to what you listed.

BS is an accurate program, but the difference could be because I have it set up for my equipment and therefore it can be a little bit off if I am trying to calculate for a different system.
It takes into consideration losses in the system where sugars are lost.
For instance under the false bottom in the mash tun and in the bottom of the boil kettle.

Not a big deal. Sounds like you made a delicious IPA.

 

[jironarcis]

Your efficiency is based on the amount of potential sugars available to you.