Is greater than 100% efficiency possible?

[Brewsmith]

I think the problem with everyone's efficiency numbers is that you guys are over complicating it.

On my system I brew 5.5 gallons and I know that if I start with 7.0 gallons, I get 5.5 after I boil for an hour and chill. I set the efficiency in my recipe to somewhere between 78-80% on most recipes. When I check the gravity post-boil my mash efficiency is determined by comparing that reading to the recipe.

Example:

Pale Ale Recipe
5.5 Gallons
OG: 1.050
80% mash efficiency

In fermenter:
5.5 Gallons @ 1.050 = 80% efficiency
5.5 Gallons @ 1.048 = 77% efficiency
5.5 Gallons @ 1.052 = 83% efficiency

The short answer is if I set my recipe at 80% and I get the gravity I estimated in the recipe, then my mash efficiency is what it is. If I pull a quart for a sample, or the hops suck up a ton of wort, my efficiency is still the same.

Know the volumes of your system
Make it repeatable
Compare OG to recipe efficiency estimate and adjust as necessary.

 

[menschmaschine]

Anyone claiming much more than 85% is either wrong or extracting a huge amount of tannins.

This assumes the brewing liquor is in a "normal" to high pH range since tannin extraction requires a high pH. If your water pH is below 6.0, you can sparge well into the 90s (efficiency) without tannin extraction.

 

[Brewsmith]

This assumes the brewing liquor is in a "normal" to high pH range since tannin extraction requires a high pH.

Correct. I doubt that most of the reports of high efficiencies are people doing special water treatment to get there. The posts usually read "I batch and/or fly sparge and get X% efficiency", not "I treat my brewing liquor with process Y and get X% efficiency." I, and most people have "normal water" which would extract a detectable amount of tannin at their 90%+ efficiency report.

 

[Malticulous]

For quite a few batches my efficiency has been 85% and higher (ever since I got my crusher,) 93% was the highest. I do monitor pH and have gotten a good Idea of how to adjust my watter with a number of different grain bills. I am very suspect of PPG numbers and try to use the best info I can. Volume measurements may be off a few percent. I perceive no tannins. The highest being mostly pils and/or wheat malt. 2-row based beers are always lower than 90%. Inaccurate PPG numbers may play a part, I can't be sure.

 

[Kaiser]

I didn't expect this thread to get active again, but let me comment on the statements that were made.

Griffsta, did you correct the volume measurement for temperature? At 212F wort is about 4% larger than the same wort at 68F. I'm not sure if Beersmith does that for you.

I just checked your numbers. If I correct the volume for temp and assume 80% extract potential for the base malt and 75% for the crystal I get to 95% efficiency. Seems to match Beersmith. Certainly possible. If you got lucky and got a base malt that actually has 82% extract potential your efficiency drops to 93%. I don't think your efficiency is that unrealistic.

homebrewer_99, Yes you can separate husks and endosperm and only mash the latter and then add all or some of the husks for lautering. There are a small number of breweries that do that and they claim that their beers are better because of that. But most of the worlds greatest beers are brewed without that process.

Brewsmith, I don't think that getting above 85% efficiency requires you to get into the danger zone with respect to tannin extraction. It depends on how efficient your mash is. I normally get 87% (and that is with pretty precise measurements) with 1 batch sparge. As for Brewhouse efficiency, it is based on the extract potential of the grain and not the amount of extract that you have on the brew kettle. But there is debate if Brewhouse efficiency should be assessed in the brew kettle or the fermenter. The difference are the volumes and the transfer losses. Both sides have valid arguments and I circumvent this discussion by explicitly talking about the efficiency into the kettle as the efficiency that we should be discussing when talking about mash and lauter performance.

Kai

 

[homebrewer_99]

Thanks, Kaiser...I thought so...

 

[Griffsta]

Kaiser, I am considering my volume after it has cooled. Thanks for checking those numbers for me. One thing that I have noticed, I definitely dont get as high of efficiency if I only bre a 5 gallon batch. Im not sure why that is, but I do.

Well, I am happy getting anything over 75%. If I get way lucky and get over 90%, then the beer gods are shining down on me.

 

[Brewsmith]

I'm not trying to be disagreeable or beat a dead horse...

Kai, you are right on, and I don't disagree with your process or efficiency numbers. For more experienced brewers that are checking pH levels, yes these numbers are possible without negative flavor impact.

It just seems like it is a contest sometimes to get the highest efficiency possible without regard to all of these other issues that we have been discussing. For a new brewer that sees their 70% efficiency numbers and assumes that they can just sparge more to get up to 90% is the wrong appproach, and I think untimately just leads to bad beer, especially when they are trying to only save $1-2 a brew.

My advice for everyone trying to accurately measure efficiency is to take accurate measurements of everything. If you are using software, make sure the data is entered in the correct places. Ultimately, do the same recipe a couple times and compare the numbers. Make your process repeatable before you start tweaking things. If your brews are hit and miss to begin with, changing more variables will not necessarily help.

 

[phatuna]

Brew, I don't think that you're beating a dead horse, your points are valid (except for this blanket "I think the problem with everyone's efficiency numbers is that you guys are over complicating it.")

In all seriousness, many inexperienced brewers including myself do use software to input our numbers. I'm conviced that many of these efficiency numbers that spit out of the software are way off due to the fact that it takes weeks trying to figure out how to run the software.

I don't have the time or patience to dig down into brewsmith to try to find out where the hell to set up a double batch sparge for a medium bodied beer with 40% of my cooler space being used in my kitchen with the fan blowing but 14% humidity and blah blah blah.

Somebody's gotta develop something that can be used, easily by novices. Even if it gets us + or - a few eff. %

Would one of you programmers out there take some time to develop a simple, dumbed down piece of software? Or even a website, choose your setup from a dropdown list of 10 of the most common options, estimated efficiency, ingredients. hit go, it spits out recommended temps (both mash and sparge) and target OG. Enter your OG, spits out efficiency. Done.
Upgrade to the premium addition if you give a rats a$$ if you are using water from timbuktu or mars.

Does something like this exist?

 

[Malticulous]

The first time e brewed all grain I used a zapap and got 70% I was happy. After over 200 or so brews I'd be disapointed with that. It's not a contest. It's part of the personal progress in the hobby.

For a new brewer that sees their 70% efficiency numbers and assumes that they can just sparge more to get up to 90% is the wrong appproach, and I think untimately just leads to bad beer, especially when they are trying to only save $1-2 a brew.

We all need to learn one way or another. I've gotten flack over posting a thing or two because "what will the noobs think?" I don't think we should have to woory about that. You can lead a horse to watter...