Fixed Efficiency Issues!

[dnye]

I've posted a few times about efficiency woes. I have been really frustrated, thought I was doing everything right. Tried improving my crush, milled it extra fine. I sent in a water sample for analysis and started adjusting my water profile accordingly. Added a sparge step at the end. Squeezed extra hard. etc. Nothing made much of a difference it seemed.

I think I have finally had the break through. I had seen a couple people post recommending trying removing pump and recirculation and just keep it simple. I didn't want this to be the culprit as I had a fancy set up with PID temperature control and recirculation. But I finally tried a batch with no pump. I got the strike temp and mashed in, stirred like crazy, then put it to bed in a blanket and just let it sit for an hour. To my surprise I nailed my numbers that day. With the pump my conversion efficiency according to brewers friend had been between 65-75. Without the pump I have done 4 batches now all with conversion efficiency at about 93%!

I'm not saying this is the fix for everyone, but anyone who has efficiency woes and is recirculating, here is another voice saying try it without the pump. One big thing I noticed is with the pump every time I went to stir, the grain was all compacted at the bottom and had to really stir it to mix it up. Without the pump the grain is much looser and free floating, just feels like a much better environment.

In any case I'm very happy now and feel like I finally have a repeatable system!

 

[LittleRiver]

Well done!

Some people refer to pumps and such as upgrades to a BIAB rig, but to me they're downgrades. They add unnecessary complexity, troubleshooting, and cleanup time -- all things I don't need or want.

 

[wilserbrewer]

Thanks for posting, this is in line with the KISS philosophy I have tried to promote for years.

I’ve often thought the answer to why are you recirculating is....”because I can” rather than the advantages of doing so lol....

I think some love to look at the pid output and see a temp display at near perfect mash temp and think they are achieving meaningful results.

 

[catalanotte]

I’m with you, worst efficiency I have seen in years was the first batch I attempted to recirculate. Always saw 75-80%, was around 68% with recirculating. My thoughts was it sparged too fast with the pump and the time spent recirculating didn’t add much in extraction. May try it again with some changes but wasn’t happy with results.

 

[RM-MN]

I think some love to look at the pid output and see a temp display at near perfect mash temp and think they are achieving meaningful results.

I also thing some have swallowed the line, "you have to maintain the temperature for the hour long mash period" which isn't true with grains milled properly for BIAB. Conversion doesn't take that long with grains that are milled fine.

 

[LittleRiver]

...Without the pump I have done 4 batches now all with conversion efficiency at about 93%!...

With that efficiency it's a safe bet that you are doing one or two sparge steps. If you're shooting for high ABV (or just like the thought of hitting a high number) that's the way to go.

For "normal" ABV beers you should be able to pick a recipe and hit or exceed the recipe target without sparging, without squeezing the bag (let gravity drain it over the kettle during the entire boil), and without modifying the recipe. I do it all the time.

A no recirculation, no sparge, no squeeze brew day is a beautiful thing!

... put it to bed in a blanket and just let it sit for an hour...

I found a kids sleeping bag for $15 that fits my rig perfectly (photos in this post). The zipper makes it super easy to put on and take off. If there's any reason to open the kettle lid, that can be done without removing the insulation.

 

[brewbama]

Interesting. I routinely hit 85-90% mash efficiency with constant recirculation and never squeeze a bag. However, I do not compact my grain bed.

I grind fairly course (.040) to maintain permeability, run the pump fairly slow (~.7 gpm), mash fairly thin (1.75/1), and use temp steps over a 90 min mash to target enzyme activity. I completely drain and do one batch sparge.

Best of all I get great yeast activity early and fully attenuated fermentation. Beers turn out crystal clear with great foam.

Just goes to show there’s more than one way to skin a cat.

 

[catalanotte]

Just goes to show there’s more than one way to skin a cat.

This is why am on these forums, it’s great to hear results from people that are trying different approaches. Too many people on these boards criticize techniques as wrong, even when they’re producing good results.

 

[dnye]

With that efficiency it's a safe bet that you are doing one or two sparge steps. If you're shooting for high ABV (or just like the thought of hitting a high number) that's the way to go.

For "normal" ABV beers you should be able to pick a recipe and hit or exceed the recipe target without sparging, without squeezing the bag (let gravity drain it over the kettle during the entire boil), and without modifying the recipe. I do it all the time..

I didn't sparge. Just hung the bag for a bit and let gravity do it's thing. To be clear that 93% was conversion efficiency not brewhouse.

I will say I definitely fell/fall into the camp of liking to see the temp numbers stay exactly where they are supposed to according to the recipe.

Based on what brewbama said, I'm curious if someone is hell bent on using a pump if the adage of mill it extra extra fine for BIAB doesn't hold, maybe if you want to pump you need to mill less fine. In any case I'm happy to ditch the pump and consistently hit my numbers.

 

[ice breaker]

I have a follow on question that relates to pumps and RIMS. For many years I was getting efficiency at about 81% after backing into the numbers with Brewers Friend doing simple infusions at 2qt per lb with continuous sparge.

I built a electric RIMS 240 volt 5500 watt PID controlled system, so that I could do some step mashes and manage temps better. I like the set up, but my efficiency has gone down to 61% with recirculation and the RIMS firing as needed to hold the desired temp. I am alright with poor efficiency as long as I have predictable results.

Yesterday I brewed a hefe, that I have done many times. The change was a step mash starting with 15 min at 111F, then 15 min at 122F, and then 30 min at 150F. This was all stepped with the RIMS. Before sparging I did a mash conversion test with iodine and it showed that it was all converted. Did a normal fly sparge. Efficiency on this batch was 50% which means I will have very weak beer. OG 1.037 Rims target was 1.042, infusion should be 1.055

I was wondering if anyone else using a RIMS was seeing similar results. I am wondering if the heating element is killing off the enzymes during recirculation, but if that were true my starch test should have shown plenty of unconverted starches.

Thoughts are welcome.

 

[brewbama]

I inadvertently omitted above I recirculate thru a RIMS to step mash. I do not use full volume. I mash in one vessel, transfer the ‘1st run’ to a BK (via pump without lifting the bag), batch sparge once (underlet), and transfer the ‘2nd run’ to the kettle to begin the boil (again without lifting the bag via pump). The last few batches were 90%, 86%, 94%, 87% mash/lauter efficiency. (These variations are recipe/weight differences. I brewed the same recipe numerous times to dial in the system with very consistent results)

My system is slow and easy. The RIMS element is a 1650w 115v. I use a chuggar pump throttled down by a Blickman linear flow control valve. 140*F mash in, 143.6*F 20 min, 147.2*F 20 min, 152.6*F 20-30 min, 161.6*F 20 min, 170.6*F mash out 10 min.

If I didn’t step mash (single infusion) I probably would not recirculate or use a RIMS.

 

[LittleRiver]

...maybe if you want to pump you need to mill less fine...

There are several previous discussions on HBT about that. I would say the concensus is that you need to grind coarser if you recirculate.

 

[blizz81]

Based on what brewbama said, I'm curious if someone is hell bent on using a pump if the adage of mill it extra extra fine for BIAB doesn't hold, maybe if you want to pump you need to mill less fine. In any case I'm happy to ditch the pump and consistently hit my numbers.

Yeah, I think it's fairly common amongst people that recirc that they crush a bit more coarse. I think as @augiedoggy also frequently mentions, flow rate and channeling play into things as well when recirculating, and that most people probably recirculate too fast / too much flow.


The reason I recirc (w/RIMS) is because the mash vessels I've had have all lost significant temp over the course of a 60 minute mash and I was sick of it. I probably could have bought a cheap-ish walled cooler that performed better in that respect. Would it still lose a couple degrees over the course of a mash? Probably. Would that make much of a difference in the end? Arguable. One other "benefit" from recirculating is the lautering you get that manual vorlauf really would never achieve. Does that provide any actual benefits? Again, arguable. For a few years I was at about a 78% brewhouse efficiency with the RIMS, had it dip recently, and with a new mill and stirring the mash bed a couple times during a mash, my last batch was back at that mark. Plenty of ways to skin this cat of homebrewing.

 

[augiedoggy]

I do recirculate myself... but at a very low MEASURED 1.8gpm which doesnt compact the grainbed and doesnt cause issues with my credit card thickness gap (.030) I get 91% consistently this way for a few years now.

 

[eric19312]

I do recirculate myself... but at a very low MEASURED 1.8gpm which doesnt compact the grainbed and doesnt cause issues with my credit card thickness gap (.030) I get 91% consistently this way for a few years now.

Same here...030 crush constant recirc at about 2 liters per minute. I think @augiedoggy showed me where to get the rotometer to keep track of flow. My grain bed stays loose and fluid from top to bottom so long as I keep the flow rate dow. I'm averaging about 85% mash efficiency (three vessel system but it still indicates acceptable conversion efficiency).