First All Grain batch after action report

[MikeScott]

Well, for one, I need to work on my time. It took something like 6 hours, but I could have shaved off a decent amount of time if I wasn't cooking a pork butt, grilling burgers, racking another beer, creating labels, etc. Still, it was great having a day of doing a ton of stuff I like!

Anyway, here's my issues:
1. I didn't have water heating up at the right times. It's a waste to have to wait for a pot of water to get going when it should have already been there.
2. I lost about 10 degrees in an hour in my MLT. More than I expected, but it's a big MLT. I'll have to think about adding boiling water, or steam heating it eventually.
3. I didn't measure the second runnings, so I don't actually know how much wort I collected, therefore I don't know my efficiency.

At least there's room for improvement.

 

[Scut_Monkey]

Yeah it still takes me a full 6 hours to do an all grain batch. My equipment sucks and I'm constantly changing things for each brew that take on time and aggravation. Congrats on the new technique and send some food my way!

 

[MarkSheffield]

...I didn't measure the second runnings, so I don't actually know how much wort I collected, therefore I don't know my efficiency.

Mike -I don't think that measuring your runnings is necessary to calculate efficiency. You boil all that down anyway. Measuring your OG into the primary will tell you what your efficiency is.

- Mark

 

[bbrim]

6 hours is not bad. I had one take me about 6.5 hours this past weekend. I ran a slow sparge and had a 90 minute boil though. The slow sparge is the good stuff, hit 78% eff. Glad to hear you were satisfied, there is no looking back!

 

[MikeScott]

Mike -I don't think that measuring your runnings is necessary to calculate efficiency. You boil all that down anyway. Measuring your OG into the primary will tell you what your efficiency is.

- Mark

Will it? I thought you have to:
1. Determine the total available Gravity Points are.
2. Divide the total available by the number of gallons of wort you collected.
3. Take your Gravity reading.
4. then divide #3 by #2.

How can I tell the efficiency by measuring the OG into the primary? I'm all about easy, and if you know a easier way, spill it.

and thanks Scut_Monkey, unfortunatly I ate all of that Pork :-( Maybe next time you can come over, it's only like a 20 hour drive.

 

[Lil' Sparky]

You can definitely get your times down with some practice. It takes me about four hours for a ten gallon batch. I can pipeline two ten gallon batches in six hrs using my stand. Now that is efficient!

 

[MikeScott]

If I just work out some better time management, I think I'll shave at least a hour or so off. I only have the one kettle, and if I just use it a little more efficiently it would help. Not to mention staying on the wort cooling, I didn't swap the water out nearly as fast as I could have.

 

[mthompson]

2. I lost about 10 degrees in an hour in my MLT. More than I expected, but it's a big MLT. I'll have to think about adding boiling water, or steam heating it eventually.

I had the same problem in my 10gal powerade cooler. I solved this by heating the strike water an extra 10 degrees and letting it rest in the tun. After ~ 10min. it should be closer to you dough-in temp...if it's high just leave the lid open for a minute or so. Dough-in when the temp is right.

I went from ~8°F drop in 1hr to ~1°F drop in 1.5hr. I also think I need to strike at ~3°F hotter, because I shoot low by that amount consistently.

3. I didn't measure the second runnings, so I don't actually know how much wort I collected, therefore I don't know my efficiency.

More data is always better in my opinion, but without the total volume and SG pre-boil, you won't be able to calculate an extraction efficiency directly...you could however, back calculate based on your (or an estimated) boil-off percentage, volume to fermenter, and the final OG before pitching....to the preboil volume and SG which would allow you to approximate your extraction efficiency. More inormation from Kaiser

Print off his brew logs and then you'll be more likely to take better notes, because there is a spot to write down each measurement.

At least there's room for improvement.

and don't forget it either!

Hope that helps,

 

[MarkSheffield]

Will it? I thought you have to:
1. Determine the total available Gravity Points are.
2. Divide the total available by the number of gallons of wort you collected.
3. Take your Gravity reading.
4. then divide #3 by #2.

How can I tell the efficiency by measuring the OG into the primary? I'm all about easy, and if you know a easier way, spill it.

Mike - see https://www.homebrewtalk.com/wiki/index.php/Efficiency

There's an example in there for a 3.5Gal batch

 

[kanzimonson]

You have enough data to calculate your efficiency. Just

1) Calculate total gravity potential of grains
2) Multiply your OG by the volume of wort in your fermenter
3) Divide 2 by 1 (and multiply by 100%)

The one thing that makes this a little imperfect is if your system has some losses, such as wort underneath false bottoms, left behind in transfer tubes, etc.

I know there are a lot of definitions of mash efficiency where people try to make their numbers look better by nitpicking, but all I care about is 1) What's the total gravity points available and 2) How many of them ended up in the beer?

 

[MikeScott]

Thanks a bunch for the efficiency links and notes! I don't know why I didn't think that instead of wort collected, I could use the amount going into the fermentor.

Thanks guys!

Thanks for the tips mthompson!

 

[MikeScott]

I went back over my numbers, and I estimated 5 gallons of wort in the fermentor, which is probably off. I put it in a 6.5 gallon carboy, and I'm unsure how much is really in there.

Anyway, with those numbers, I'm looking at a dismal 54% efficiency.

This week I'm planning on brewing a 2 gallon SMaSH recipe, so I'll take another look at my numbers then. It should be easier, because there will only be 1 grain to calculate.

Thanks again for all of the help!

 

[mthompson]

Next time you have your carboys and buckets empty, fill them up and mark every gallon and slash-mark every half-gallon (I just put another dashed line to approximate the quarters, and I usually start at 2 gallons for the large vessels).....this way you'll always be able to tell what your volume is reasonably well.

Your buckets with graduations are going to be off, and not the same on each one, too! I don't even know why they go through the trouble of putting them on there. For carboys, I make sure they are dry on the outside, then run a piece of packaging tape up the side, and mark on that.

 

[MikeScott]

Next time you have your carboys and buckets empty, fill them up and mark every gallon and slash-mark every half-gallon (I just put another dashed line to approximate the quarters, and I usually start at 2 gallons for the large vessels).....this way you'll always be able to tell what your volume is reasonably well.

Your buckets with graduations are going to be off, and not the same on each one, too! I don't even know why they go through the trouble of putting them on there. For carboys, I make sure they are dry on the outside, then run a piece of packaging tape up the side, and mark on that.

After I filled the Carboy, I figured I better do that, but I didn't realize the buckets may be off too. I'll take a look at that too.

I was also going to hit my kettle with my Dremel to get the capacities down.

Thanks for the suggestion!

 

[mthompson]

For my kettle, I just made graduations on my long plastic stirrer.....I used a solvent-resistant lab marker, but it managed to bleed off of the top portion that didn't touch the boiling wort or starsan?!?!? So who knows....I read somewhere that lipstick worked well, but perhaps that was sarcasm?

 

[MikeScott]

Ok mthompson, you've got a fan!

That's a great idea, and a hell of a lot easier than dremeling the pot, probably a lot less risky too.

 

[MarkSheffield]

That's a great idea, and a hell of a lot easier than dremeling the pot, probably a lot less risky too.

Yeah, but not nearly as exciting

 

[MikeScott]

Yeah, but not nearly as exciting

I originally wanted to use a "laser" but the surface was too reflective

 

[bob1852]

I know there are a lot of definitions of mash efficiency where people try to make their numbers look better by nitpicking, but all I care about is 1) What's the total gravity points available and 2) How many of them ended up in the beer?

True, but if you are trying to improve your overall brewhouse efficiency it helps to know where you are losing points.

For me, I had a poor brewhouse efficiency and attributed it to a poor lauter efficiency based on the data I took - but it more than likely turns out that my conversion efficiency is struggling; which I never would have considered until to a took a mash reading and compared to the theoretical potiential. In my situation, even if my lauter efficiency was 100% (which isn't really that possible), my brewhouse effecieny was still struggling, becasue my conversion efficiency was in the low 80s (meaning - I was leaving behind ~20% of the sugars BEFORE even starting to sparge)

 

[Scut_Monkey]

My fermentation buckets were wildly inaccurate. Like you said why do they even bother. You would be better off not putting them on there and misleading people.

I marked a dowel rod that I had around the house with 1/2 gallon increments to use during the boil. I also marked an old racking cane with the same to use after the boil right before I transfer to my fermentor. I didn't want to use an unsanitary dowel rod in my cooled wort. These have worked great and I'm actually able to calculate efficiency now with accuracy.