Efficiency Mash v. Total

[MEPNew2Brew]

When home brewers talk about efficiency, are they typically talking about mash efficiency of brew house efficiency? For example, in a recent brew, my mash efficiency was 74.8% (Beersmith numbers), which is completely acceptable to me. My overall efficiency was 71.4%, which is not so good.

I am thinking people talk about mash efficiency, but I am not sure.

Thank you for the responses.

 

[MalFet]

Most people are measuring the quantity of sugar that makes it into the kettle. I assume that's what Beersmith is calling mash efficiency.

 

[clarksc4]

What makes it into kettle is also dependent on lautering efficiency

 

[Yooper]

Dumb question, maybe, but why is 71.4% brewhouse efficiency "not good"?

It seems fine to me. I'd be more worried about 61% today and 87% tomorrow, as the key to brewing great beer is consistency and predictability. If you get 70-73% every time, that's great. On my previous system, I got 70% and on the current system I get 75%. Chasing a number isn't important, as the difference between 70% brewhouse efficiency and 75% efficiency may be "fixed" with 80 cents worth of grain so it's really immaterial what the number is. As long as you get the same number, or close to it, all the time, that's all that is needed.

 

[MalFet]

What makes it into kettle is also dependent on lautering efficiency

Does BeerSmith distinguish this from mash efficiency? The terminology is sometimes inconsistent, but in my experience at least when people talk about "mash efficiency" they're referring to the whole mash process into the kettle, conversion + lautering.

 

[Yooper]

Does BeerSmith distinguish this from mash efficiency? The terminology is sometimes inconsistent, but in my experience at least when people talk about "mash efficiency" they're referring to the whole mash process into the kettle, conversion + lautering.

Yes, beersmith has "mash efficiency" which is the preboil reading and the volume of wort. Then, it gives the "brewhouse efficiency" which takes into account deadspace in the kettle, trub losses, shrinkage, etc.

 

[MalFet]

Yes, beersmith has "mash efficiency" which is the preboil reading and the volume of wort. Then, it gives the "brewhouse efficiency" which takes into account deadspace in the kettle, trub losses, shrinkage, etc.

Right, BeerSmith's "mash efficiency" includes lautering, no?

 

[Yooper]

Right, BeerSmith's "mash efficiency" includes lautering, no?

Yes, of course.

 

[MEPNew2Brew]

Thank you for the responses. Yooper - thanks for the reminder that consistency is key.

 

[smyrnaquince]

Is there a way in Beersmith to set the mash efficiency? I've only found where to change the brewhouse efficiency.

 

[stpug]

I believe if you make your MLT (and BK too, I think) losses ZERO then it should effectively make your mash efficiency your brewhouse efficiency.

 

[smyrnaquince]

I plugged in a recipe last night and got an 83% mash efficiency. This being my first mash tun/sparge batch, I'd rather assume something like a 75% efficiency out of the mash to be safe. That was why I asked about adjusting the mash efficiency.

So it sounds like I can play with the losses and brewhouse efficiency to make the mash efficiency come out where I want?

 

[Yooper]

I plugged in a recipe last night and got an 83% mash efficiency. This being my first mash tun/sparge batch, I'd rather assume something like a 75% efficiency out of the mash to be safe. That was why I asked about adjusting the mash efficiency.

So it sounds like I can play with the losses and brewhouse efficiency to make the mash efficiency come out where I want?

No, the mash efficiency is the mash efficiency. That means how well you converted and then lautered out the sugars. The brewhouse efficiency is the one that takes into account your losses to trub, etc. Some people leave wort behind in the kettle, so that reduces the brewhouse efficiency, but it doesn't impact the actual mash efficiency.

 

[BrewKnurd]

When home brewers talk about efficiency, are they typically talking about mash efficiency of brew house efficiency? For example, in a recent brew, my mash efficiency was 74.8% (Beersmith numbers), which is completely acceptable to me. My overall efficiency was 71.4%, which is not so good.

I am thinking people talk about mash efficiency, but I am not sure.

Thank you for the responses.

One thing to keep in mind is that your overall efficiency can't be greater than your mash efficiency. So essentially, in order to get a total efficiency of 71.4 with a mash efficiency of 74.8 on a five gallon batch, you can only lose a couple cups of wort from the kettle to the fermenter, which would include any hop losses and hot/cold break material that get left behind.

In other words, if you consider 74% mash efficiency to be good, there's no reason to look at 71% overall efficiency as bad. Honestly, that would be, IMO, a very high overall efficiency relative to a 74% mash efficiency.

 

[BrewKnurd]

I plugged in a recipe last night and got an 83% mash efficiency. This being my first mash tun/sparge batch, I'd rather assume something like a 75% efficiency out of the mash to be safe. That was why I asked about adjusting the mash efficiency.

So it sounds like I can play with the losses and brewhouse efficiency to make the mash efficiency come out where I want?

As long as you're asking about the program's calculated mash efficiency when you ask if you can make it come out where you want, then yes. Otherwise, what Yooper said.

Honestly, from an overall perspective, it doesn't matter too much whether you factor it in on the losses, or on the mash efficiency, the important thing, if you want to be on the safe side (that is, end up erring on the high side of gravity/volume), is to lower the overall efficiency in the recipe. Whether you do that via mash efficiency, or system losses, will just change where the error appears if you're wrong. i.e. if you plan for a lower mash efficiency but get a higher one, you'll have an higher pre-boil gravity. If you plan for higher system losses than you get but get mash efficiency right, then you'll get the right pre-boil gravity and volume but still have extra wort left at the end.

 

[stpug]

I plugged in a recipe last night and got an 83% mash efficiency. This being my first mash tun/sparge batch, I'd rather assume something like a 75% efficiency out of the mash to be safe. That was why I asked about adjusting the mash efficiency.

So it sounds like I can play with the losses and brewhouse efficiency to make the mash efficiency come out where I want?

No, the mash efficiency is the mash efficiency. That means how well you converted and then lautered out the sugars. The brewhouse efficiency is the one that takes into account your losses to trub, etc. Some people leave wort behind in the kettle, so that reduces the brewhouse efficiency, but it doesn't impact the actual mash efficiency.

Like, Yooper said, the mash efficiency is the mash efficiency. However, sometimes your brewhouse efficiency is also identical to your mash efficiency if you count ZERO losses. BIAB brewers who dump in their entire BK into the fermenter would be an example.

I find that most folks don't specify what efficiency number they're referring to when providing their efficiency so you need to consider that when comparing your efficiency to theirs. Many people use many different calculations/software to determine their efficiencies, AND those efficiencies are HIGHLY dependent on accurate volume measurements. Soooo, if they're using a different software/calculation than you and/or not measuring as accurately as your are, then the comparison is pointless. Additionally, I think it's human nature to want to boast about your accomplishments and when given the choice of providing your 3-vessel lossy system brewhouse efficiency (e.g. 74%) versus your mash efficiency (e.g. 84%), most folks will opt for the latter - it just LOOKS better

If you want to adjust your mash efficiency and use it as a guide in brewing then, like I said before, you can set your MLT and BK losses to ZERO. This will make your brewhouse efficiency be exactly the same as your mash efficiency. Therefore, when you're designing a recipe and want to adjust your mash efficiency to a "safer" level, then you can simply adjust your brewhouse efficiency number and your mash efficiency will match it (NOTE: Iin BeerSmith, you will either need to save your recipe, or change tabs in order for the changes to be reflected in the estimated mash efficiency number - this is a software refresh issue). While this is useful for estimating a more comfortable mash efficiency zone (i.e. so you don't grossly undershoot your target), it's unneeded once you brew a few/several batches to determine appropriate losses and real brewhouse efficiency, and create a more useful equipment profile for yourself, IMO.

 

[MEPNew2Brew]

Thanks all for the responses. To me, it seems that it is a shortfall of BeerSmith to not have a mash efficiency input, rather than making it only a calculate value. But, I have started to figure out how to back into the mash efficiency using brewhouse efficiency (that is, figure out real brewhouse efficiency as suggested by St. Pug).

I only have a few AG brews under my belt with the my AG system and do not mill my own grain. Some of my AG batches are mail order (which has had about 75% mash efficiency) and others are LHBS milled (71.2 - 74.8 mash efficiency).

I suspect the cure for my issues with mash efficiency is to by my own mill. Cost isn't really the issue. I am just trying to avoid accumulating more equipment.

 

[afr0byte]

Thanks all for the responses. To me, it seems that it is a shortfall of BeerSmith to not have a mash efficiency input, rather than making it only a calculate value. But, I have started to figure out how to back into the mash efficiency using brewhouse efficiency (that is, figure out real brewhouse efficiency as suggested by St. Pug).

I only have a few AG brews under my belt with the my AG system and do not mill my own grain. Some of my AG batches are mail order (which has had about 75% mash efficiency) and others are LHBS milled (71.2 - 74.8 mash efficiency).

I suspect the cure for my issues with mash efficiency is to by my own mill. Cost isn't really the issue. I am just trying to avoid accumulating more equipment.

Shoot for whatever you want, but 75% isnt bad.

 

[stpug]

Shoot for whatever you want, but 75% isnt bad.

Totally agree!! I was hitting a consistent 74% brewhouse efficiency from my LHBS and was pleased as punch. A good 3-vessel brewhouse efficiency, and it was CONSISTENT. I could rely upon hitting my 74% everytime and be within a point or so of expected.