Impossible Efficiency... ?

[kjjohns5]

So, my last two brews turned out to be 100%(+) efficiency and I don't know why. Wondering if someone can crunch these numbers for me and tell me what I'm doing wrong.

Both beers were a yield of 7 gallons from mash.

IPA:
11.5# 2-Row, 37 ppg - (11.5 x 37)/7 = 60.8
0.5# Caramel 40L, 34 ppg - (0.5 x 34)/7 = 2.4
0.5# CaraPils, 33 ppg - (0.5 x 33)/7 = 2.4
0.5# Munich 20L, 34 ppg - (0.5 x 34)/7 = 2.4
60.8 + 2.4 + 2.4 + 2.4= 68

Gravity reading was 1.072 with both refractometer and hydrometer after temperature conversion. That gives me 72/68 = 105.5%.

Brown Ale:
10# 2-Row, 37 ppg - (10 x 37)/7 = 52.9
1# Special Roast, 33 ppg - (1 x 33)/7 = 4.7
1# Victory Malt, 32 ppg - (1 x 32)/7 = 4.9
1# Caramel 60L, 34 ppg - (1 x 34)/7 = 4.9
0.5# Chocolate Malt, 34 ppg - (0.5 x 34)/7 = 2.4
0.5# x Caramel 80L, 34 ppg - (0.5 x 34)/7 = 2.4
52.9 + 4.7 + 4.9 + 4.9 + 2.4 + 2.4 = 72

Gravity reading was, as well, 1.072 after temperature correction with both refractometer and hydrometer readings. That gives me 72/72 = 100%.


Now, this can't be right, and I don't know what's wrong with my calculations. The only thing that would make sense to me is if I was never supposed to actually recalculate my true pre-boil OG based on temperature, however, everything that I read tells me to make sure and convert based on temperature. Help would be nice! Thanks!

 

[Malticulous]

Either our extract numbers, your scale or your volume numbers are incorrect. Your 2-row is probably yielding better than 37 ppg. The malt analysis will give you the laboratory extract for better calculations.

 

[kjjohns5]

All volume numbers and scales have been quadrupole checked, and beyond. By more than just myself, mind you. It must be the numbers of the actual malt. I pulled these numbers offline. Is there a place that I can get a more exact ppg?

 

[Frodo]

Your math looks right... Is 1.072 is your preboil gravity with a preboil volume of 7 gal?

If so, I'm guessing the volume is off. As for a note on something that affects the volume we're measuring at mash temps... the volume of the 170F wort is actually like 4% less at 60F (or so they say). So 7 gal at 170F is supposedly really 6.7 gallons at 60F. So I'm thinking you really should be using the 6.7 gal measurement in the calc. I've never actually worried about the 4% expansion, but a diff of 0.3 gallons isn't something to gloss over.

 

[rustbucket]

ok using your number i just got the same percentage as you. i would make sure your equipment is calibrated with some distilled water.

 

[Stratotankard]

It's (wort) Shrinkage!!!

The 0.3 gallon will make a bit of difference in your numbers. Also the extract potentials you're using for your grain are the typical average. I'm not sure how this affects the calculations, but how much water did you mash with? You say you got 7 gallons of runnings, how much was absorbed in the grain?

Terje

 

[Malticulous]

The malt analysis can be hard to get for homebrewers. It's for pros. Ask the place you bought it from or the place they bought it from. What exactly is it?

If I were you I'd up the ppg to 39 or 40 until your BHE seems realistic.

 

[kjjohns5]

Your math looks right... Is 1.072 is your preboil gravity with a preboil volume of 7 gal?

If so, I'm guessing the volume is off. As for a note on something that affects the volume we're measuring at mash temps... the volume of the 170F wort is actually like 4% less at 60F (or so they say). So 7 gal at 170F is supposedly really 6.7 gallons at 60F. So I'm thinking you really should be using the 6.7 gal measurement in the calc. I've never actually worried about the 4% expansion, but a diff of 0.3 gallons isn't something to gloss over.

The first beer was 1.054 pre-boil gravity of exactly 7 gallons of wort from my mash tun @ 146F. My calculator on Beer Alchemy says that at 59F that's 1.072.

The second beer was 1.056 pre-boil gravity of exactly 7 gallons of wort from my mash tun @ 141F. My calculator on Beer Alchemy says that at 59F that's 1.072.

I've calibrated my refractometer correctly because my hydrometer reading was exactly the same.

 

[Frodo]

Just clarifying... those gravities (1.054 and 1.056) were not taken with your refractometer right?

 

[kjjohns5]

Just clarifying... those gravities (1.054 and 1.056) were not taken with your refractometer right?

Yes they were with my refractometer, initially. Then I took them again with my hydrometer. Same result.

 

[v2comp]

so what was your final volume after the boil?

 

[kjjohns5]

so what was your final volume after the boil?

Post boil for both beers was 5.5 gallons. Does that matter with efficiency, though?

 

[v2comp]

I wasnt looking at it from that perspective, I just plugged in your grain bill into beertools pro and with 7 gallons of 1.056 wort, after a 90 minute boil and an evaporation loss of 1.27 gallons, a final volume of 5.5 gallons of 1.072 wort equals 87% effeciency.
if this isnt what you were asking, I am sorry but I dont see you actually hitting 100% effeciecncy regardless of how you mash it.

 

[Frodo]

Yes they were with my refractometer, initially. Then I took them again with my hydrometer. Same result.

I guess I should clarify again. Sorry... Are you correcting your refractometer brix (converted to gravity) reading for temperature using your Beer Alchemy program?


EDIT: the reason i keep trying to clarify this is that you do not correct refractometer readings for temperature.

Also, the temperature correction charts for hydrometer readings above about 90F can be extremely off. With a hydrometer it's pretty much the only option to cool it down to at most 90F if you want some confidence in the measurement.

 

[kjjohns5]

I wasnt looking at it from that perspective, I just plugged in your grain bill into beertools pro and with 7 gallons of 1.056 wort, after a 90 minute boil and an evaporation loss of 1.27 gallons, a final volume of 5.5 gallons of 1.072 wort equals 87% effeciency.
if this isnt what you were asking, I am sorry but I dont see you actually hitting 100% effeciecncy regardless of how you mash it.

First, 1.072 was my pre-boil reading, not post-boil. Also, I boiled 7 gallons of wort for 60 minutes and yielded 5.5 gallons after the boil. Post boil gravity was 1.066 for the first beer, and 1.061 for the 2nd.

So, plug it into your beertools pro again, but this time with a pre-boil 7 gallon reading of 1.072, 60 minute boil, 5.5 gallon yield, and a post-boil gravity of 1.066.

 

[v2comp]

I guess I should clarify again. Sorry... Are you correcting your refractometer brix (converted to gravity) reading for temperature using your Beer Alchemy program?


EDIT: the reason i keep trying to clarify this is that you do not correct refractometer readings for temperature.

Also, the temperature correction charts for hydrometer readings above about 90F can be extremely off. With a hydrometer it's pretty much the only option to cool it down to at most 90F if you want some confidence in the measurement.

I was thinking the same thing when I looked at it, if his refractometer was showing 13.5 or 1.054 and 14 and 1.056 preboil, then this whole thing makes more sense.

 

[kjjohns5]

I guess I should clarify again. Sorry... Are you correcting your refractometer brix (converted to gravity) reading for temperature using your Beer Alchemy program?


EDIT: the reason i keep trying to clarify this is that you do not correct refractometer readings for temperature.

Also, the temperature correction charts for hydrometer readings above about 90F can be extremely off. With a hydrometer it's pretty much the only option to cool it down to at most 90F if you want some confidence in the measurement.

I'm correcting my refractometer brix reading for temperature with Beer Alchemy, yes. I converted the 1.056 (13.6%) @ 141F in Beer Alchemy to 1.072 (18.2%) @ 59F. Concordantly, I converted the 1.054 (13.4%) @ 146F in Beer Alchemy to 1.072 (18.2%) @ 59F.

 

[Malticulous]

First, 1.072 was my pre-boil reading, not post-boil. Also, I boiled 7 gallons of wort for 60 minutes and yielded 5.5 gallons after the boil. Post boil gravity was 1.062 for the first beer, and 1.061 for the 2nd.

So, plug it into your beertools pro again, but this time with a pre-boil 7 gallon reading of 1.072, 60 minute boil, 5.5 gallon yield, and a post-boil gravity of 1.056.

There is a problem there. Post boil has to be higher. You can't boil off sugar. Your readings are wrong.

 

[v2comp]

First, 1.072 was my pre-boil reading, not post-boil. Also, I boiled 7 gallons of wort for 60 minutes and yielded 5.5 gallons after the boil. Post boil gravity was 1.062 for the first beer, and 1.061 for the 2nd.

So, plug it into your beertools pro again, but this time with a pre-boil 7 gallon reading of 1.072, 60 minute boil, 5.5 gallon yield, and a post-boil gravity of 1.056.

sorry but thats not how it works, the gravity readings go up after the boil and the evaporation not down!
at 1.061 post boil,
your numbers indicate an effeciency of only 75% for the first beer.
if I input 1.056 post boil it equals only 68%!

 

[Frodo]

First, 1.072 was my pre-boil reading, not post-boil. Also, I boiled 7 gallons of wort for 60 minutes and yielded 5.5 gallons after the boil. Post boil gravity was 1.062 for the first beer, and 1.061 for the 2nd.

So, plug it into your beertools pro again, but this time with a pre-boil 7 gallon reading of 1.072, 60 minute boil, 5.5 gallon yield, and a post-boil gravity of 1.056.

Gravity goes up during the boil... the temp corrections are screwing up the preboil gravity readings. Don't correct refractometer readings. And don't correct hydrometer readings at temps over 90F (the tables are way off).

 

[kjjohns5]

Ok, let me see if I get this straight: When using refractometers you DO NOT convert the numbers based upon temperature?

 

[kjjohns5]

So all of my OG readings, fresh out of the mash tun with a refractometer are the actual numbers? So, for the first beer, even though I took the reading at 141F, it's still accurate? So a gravity reading with a refractometer of 1.054 @ 141F is the same as a refractometer reading of the same solution @ 59F?

 

[v2comp]

I think this is where your confusion comes from and I can understand why. I have to honestly say that I have never manually calculated those extract numbers the way that you did.
beertools pro has always handled my math and the only things I input are the refractometer readings to understand my effeciency based on their calculations.

 

[Frodo]

When the couple/few drops of wort hit the glass on the refractometer, they are instantly cooled to the temp of the refractometer. Also, most refractometers are ATC (auto temp correction).

 

[v2comp]

So all of my OG readings, fresh out of the mash tun with a refractometer are the actual numbers? So, for the first beer, even though I took the reading at 141F, it's still accurate? So a gravity reading with a refractometer of 1.054 @ 141F is the same as a refractometer reading of the same solution @ 59F?

Basically yes

 

[kjjohns5]

Ok, so for the first beer, the OG is 1.054 (my reading at 146F), and for the 2nd beer the OG is 1.056 (my reading at 141F), regardless of the temperature?

Interesting.

 

[kjjohns5]

Whew! Thanks guys!!! I think I understand now! DON'T CHANGE THE GRAVITY BASED ON TEMP WHEN USING A REFRACTOMETER!

 

[Frodo]

So all of my OG readings, fresh out of the mash tun with a refractometer are the actual numbers?

That's part of the beauty of refractometers. No fuss. Just a couple of drops, no temp correction needed.

Good on you for doing the efficiency calcs by hand by the way. There's something cool about jotting it all down on paper.

 

[v2comp]

no problem!

 

[Yooper]

Ok, let me see if I get this straight: When using refractometers you DO NOT convert the numbers based upon temperature?

It's all figured out now- you've got it.!
For accurate readings, temperature adjustment corrections are useless over about 90 degrees. Try it yourself with a hydrometer- take the reading at 146, and then let it cool to under 90 degrees and take it again. You'll find that the "correction" at 146 is not even close to a true reading. So only take a hydrometer reading at 90 degrees or less. You can cool it fast in a pitcher of ice water.

For a refractometer, mine has ATC, too, but not as quickly as you think. I pull out the sample in the pipette, let it sit a few seconds and drop it onto the refractometer. Keep in mind that tha ATC has a range of about 60-90 degrees. That's ok, because a drop of wort cools quickly, but it refers to the room temperature of the refractometer NOT the temperature of the wort. Which means if you're outside in the 20 degree weather, the refractometer will not be accurate- or outside in 100 degree sun.

As far as the actual ppg of the grain, when you buy a sack of grain you can ask for a "malt analysis sheet" for your batch of grain. They vary from batch to batch, even in the same maltster. For most of us, it's close enough but when you've got an issue you may to look at the malt analysis sheet for your grain.

 

[kjjohns5]

Awesome. Thanks for the help, guys. I knew I was doing something wrong and it was stressing me out trying to find it online. You guys rule!