jwbeard
Well-Known Member
I'm planning my first brew on a new direct-fire RIMS system (15 gallon kettle doubling as a mash tun with a false bottom, and a 8 gallon kettle used as either a grant for the RIMS circulation or as a HLT for the sparge).
I remember seeing a system being described (and cannot, for the life of me, find a thread or webpage describing it now), where the wort was circulated continuously during the mash and then drained completely during mash-out. Effectively, I think it was a high efficiency no-sparge system (since the ability to heat during the mash and circulate made the wort a consistent gravity, even if the lack of a sparge left some residual sugars).
My question is how substantial the efficiency hit would be if I implemented the system above, and did the following:
Alternatively, if there's a big efficiency loss, I could add a step at the end before draining
Any benefits to doing the continuous no-sparge method? Is it worth doing the additional fly sparge steps?
I remember seeing a system being described (and cannot, for the life of me, find a thread or webpage describing it now), where the wort was circulated continuously during the mash and then drained completely during mash-out. Effectively, I think it was a high efficiency no-sparge system (since the ability to heat during the mash and circulate made the wort a consistent gravity, even if the lack of a sparge left some residual sugars).
My question is how substantial the efficiency hit would be if I implemented the system above, and did the following:
- Dough-in to the 15 gallon mash tun kettle
- Gravity feed to the 8 gallon grant kettle
- Pump from 8 gallon grant through a sparge arm back onto the mash
- Circulate until the end of the mash
- Mash out by raising to 168
- Drain and begin boil
Alternatively, if there's a big efficiency loss, I could add a step at the end before draining
- Drain grant kettle completely into mash tun and let mash sit at 168
- Add and heat sparge water to grant kettle (now HLT)
- Fly sparge and collect wort
Any benefits to doing the continuous no-sparge method? Is it worth doing the additional fly sparge steps?