Does squeezing or pressing eliminated need for sparging?

[doug293cz]

Sugar will be left behind, yes, but not more than is left behind by a perseon with a two-three vessel setup who gets the same efficiency.

This is almost a tautology. Since efficiency, by definition, is a measure of sugar not left behind. The percentage of sugar left behind is 100% - mash efficiency.

Brew on

 

[balrog]

This is almost a tautology. Since efficiency, by definition, is a measure of sugar not left behind. The percentage of sugar left behind is 100% - mash efficiency.

Brew on

Great. I *HATE* it when I have to look up words like "tautology" when reading these forums.

 

[doug293cz]

I've read that squeezing grain bags can extract unwanted tannins. Wouldn't that be an issue with squeezing/pressing BIAB bags?

same goes for extended sparge times, or so I've heard...

Tannins get extracted only if the pH gets too high (above about 6), and the temperature is over about 170°F. Keep your pH in the correct range (by controlling your water chemistry vs. grain bill), and you will not extract tannins. You can't press hard enough during a squeeze to mechanically extract tannins. Alaskan Brewing actually uses an industrial scale filter press to extract wort from the mash. This represents the ultimate in squeezing capability.

If you use hot sparge water with too high alkalinity, then the sparge can extract tannins, because the pH goes up when using high alkalinity sparge water, since the grain's pH buffering capability is greatly reduced after initial run off. Fly spargers have to be particularly careful about this, as towards the end of the sparge the grains have essentially no pH buffering capability left.

Brew on

 

[doug293cz]

Great. I *HATE* it when I have to look up words like "tautology" when reading these forums.

Your vocabulary word for the day: Tautology

You're welcome, and brew on

 

[balrog]

Alaskan Brewing actually uses an industrial scale filter press to extract wort from the mash. This represents the ultimate in squeezing capability.

I was just reading about that. Man, I wish I could get some Alaskan Amber shipped to MA without having to sell the wife and kids to pay shipping.

 

[balrog]

dbl post hell

 

[wardens355]

This isn't quite true. The efficiency is lower because the mash water container a higher percentage of sugars and some of that water remains in and on the grain when you drain/strain it.

When you sparge you recover some of, or most of, the sugars from the spent grain. That's it's purpose.

So even though you do a full mash some of the sugars that are converted are still on, and in, the spent grain and you don't rinse it out.

Therefore more grain is needed to make up the difference.

I used to mash -> drain -> sparge -> drain, now I mash -> mashout full volume -> drain. I used to get around 80% brewhouse efficiency, now I get around 70% brewhouse efficiency and adjust up the grain accordingly. It's like rinsing with one large volume vs a bunch of small volumes equal to that large volume. You will remove more of the contaminant (sugar in this case), if you rinse in a bunch of smaller volumes, but rinsing more is a PITA and homebrewing gains between 70% to 80% efficiency is small potatoes, so I stopped.

 

[Homercidal]

I used to mash -> drain -> sparge -> drain, now I mash -> mashout full volume -> drain. I used to get around 80% brewhouse efficiency, now I get around 70% brewhouse efficiency and adjust up the grain accordingly. It's like rinsing with one large volume vs a bunch of small volumes equal to that large volume. You will remove more of the contaminant (sugar in this case), if you rinse in a bunch of smaller volumes, but rinsing more is a PITA and homebrewing gains between 70% to 80% efficiency is small potatoes, so I stopped.

I haven't settled on any one method. I still go between 1-2 sparges depending on the strength of the beer and what equipment I'm using at the time.

I could see me doing a full volume sparge if it will fit my mash tun.

I do have plans to build a hydraulic fruit press before the summer ends (again this summer...) and I could use that to squeeze the bag. I'm not sure it's worth it, though.

How much more do you get from squeezing versus just letting it drain?

 

[wardens355]

I haven't settled on any one method. I still go between 1-2 sparges depending on the strength of the beer and what equipment I'm using at the time.

I could see me doing a full volume sparge if it will fit my mash tun.

I do have plans to build a hydraulic fruit press before the summer ends (again this summer...) and I could use that to squeeze the bag. I'm not sure it's worth it, though.

How much more do you get from squeezing versus just letting it drain?

I don't do BIAB, so don't know. I would guess that you would get some small increase in efficiency if you squeeze, maybe more so if you squeeze on the first runnings than the sparge runnings (since the absorbed water is higher strength during first running). More volume and more overall sugar. Boil for a few mins longer, higher final gravity. You should be able to determine the boost in efficiency if you can estimate the maximum amount of water you can squeeze out per lb of grain used.

 

[Gavin C]

This type of thread crops up all the time because of the oft touted disadvantages of BIAB which are demonstrably not the case.

Low efficiency being front and center.

Solution crush fine.

Sparge or no sparge debate is really of secondary importance

With full-volume no-sparge brewing with a fine crush conversion efficiency will be 90+ % and you will lose sugars to absorption. That amount will depend on the volume of sweet-wort retained by the grain. This sweet-wort will have the same gravity as that in the boil kettle/ mash-tun.

Typically this is about 0.045 gallons per pound of grain in my simple squeezer's setup.

0.4 gallons lost to absorption in 9lb of grain

If you are not doing full volume mashing then the absorbed wort is higher gravity. More sugars are in the grain. A sparge to the desired pre-boil volume will extract some more of these sugars. It's a little extra work but you will get more sugars out from that higher gravity sweet-wort retained by the grains.

The question of benefit of a sparge relates to the extra sugars extracted by the process versus the extra sugars that would not have been lost in the first place if a thinner full-volume mash had been used. A thinner mash means a lower gravity sweet-wort retained by the grains, less sugars retained.

Depending on the planned OG and associated grain-bill a sparge or no-sparge may be of more benefit.

In my setup, with 5.5 gallons batches, full-volume no-sparging equates to me formulating my recipes at 80% brewhouse efficiency and hitting my numbers. (i.e.: Brewing the beer that was intended in the volume I intended).

I am willing to accept a lower BH eff. figure with bigger beers and will adjust the grain-bill accordingly. This is a moot point however as I brew beers with OG under 1.060

PS: Mill fine. (Coarse corn meal is what my grain looks like with a single pass at my mills narrowest setting) The rest is all tweaking the process. Therein lies the fun and debate.

 

[DurtyChemist]

Full vine mash, mash out and knowing your volumes should do 80% of the work to get 70%. I do a single crush at my brew shop and start with 8 gallons of water. I twist the bag to hold itself shut and put it on a fridge shelf above the mash/boil and let it drain. My software is set to 70% efficiency and I'm typically +/-0.002 gravity points. I don't see a need to change the simplicity of brew in a bag to include dunk sparge, multiple pots, step mash or anything else. Strike at mash temp, stir to ensure no clumps, let it sit 75 minutes and boil.

 

[balrog]

I don't see a need to change the simplicity of brew in a bag to include dunk sparge, multiple pots, step mash or anything else.

I agree, but must add that some of us have only 5G pots & use stove top, requiring a little different BIAB.

 

[JPicasso]

This is an incorrect question, as it assumes there is a "need" for sparging, whether BIAB or 3-vessel. For example, technically, you could make a complete beer with a 3-vessel system with the first runnings of a large mash. Many group brews will do just that, first runnings for the high-gravity beer, and sparge and second runnings for a lower gravity brew. There was no "need" to sparge and get the second runnings, it's just there is enough sugar on the grains to pull more useable wort, so they do.

So for BIAB, you don't "need" to sparge anything, but many choose to do so, and they like it. You could also not squeeze. You could sparge AND squeeze. It's up to you.

I think the underlying question is: If I sparge will I get the supposed increase in my efficiency as I think I do from squeezing the grains.
Answer: It depends. Depending on everything, right? You might not actually be getting much more from the squeeze.
With 5 pages of responses to this question, it's obvious lots of people do things lots of different ways.
So the honest answer is, try sparging and try and measure if you get the same expected efficiencies as you do with squeezing or not squeezing.

I see efficiency in the upper 70's and up to 80%, squeezing without sparging, so I'm not about to add more process to my days. I may give up squeezing even, and just toss the bag remnants when the boil starts.

Good luck, happy brewing!

 

[jaydlaw]

Sometimes i squeeze, sometimes still do it, but don't put forth as much effort to be honest.
Maybe I'll try not squeezing