Is Sparging Obsolete?

[Owly055]

I get about a quart or two from squeezing the bag. That's not immeasurable in a 5G system, although if I didn't have to sparge I would probably just do full volume and let it gravity drain naturally Although I just put a pot lid on it and press down to squeeze.

I put my bag in a colander, and use a stainless steel bowl to squeeze it pressing it down on the bag in various places. I get a considerable amount of wort doing this. Squeezing a bag is not something you can realistically do by hand. It does pay.

H.W.

 

[pricelessbrewing]

Agreed, definitely suggest pressing with something else.

 

[TexasWine]

Can you really get much (or anything) out of squeezing the grain. I tried it a couple of times when I used to do BIAB, and found it was way too hot and messy to mess with, and ob the couple of occasions I actually did it, I didn't really get anything from it. I really didn't need it, I regularly got 80 to 90% efficiency - I sparged.

You bring up a concept that I've been tossing around in my head, and I think it deserves a separate thread, but here goes the concept.

I sparge because I'm limited to how big a pot I can use in my kitchen. In the few batches I've done, I always squeezed. But I've been wondering lately, what if I just did a pour over sparge until I hit my preboil volume, but did NO squeezing?

Logically it seems that I'd be accomplishing the same thing as squeezing but I would use just a tad more water when doing the sparge. I do think squeezing will get a little more sugar from the grain, but I predict the incremental gain will be so small that it won't register on a refractometer nor hydrometer.

I'll start another thread asking the squeezers out to help me crowd source an experiment. Don't squeeze, just sparge, and post your results.

 

[pricelessbrewing]

You bring up a concept that I've been tossing around in my head, and I think it deserves a separate thread, but here goes the concept.

I sparge because I'm limited to how big a pot I can use in my kitchen. In the few batches I've done, I always squeezed. But I've been wondering lately, what if I just did a pour over sparge until I hit my preboil volume, but did NO squeezing?

Logically it seems that I'd be accomplishing the same thing as squeezing but I would use just a tad more water when doing the sparge. I do think squeezing will get a little more sugar from the grain, but I predict the incremental gain will be so small that it won't register on a refractometer nor hydrometer.

I'll start another thread asking the squeezers out to help me crowd source an experiment. Don't squeeze, just sparge, and post your results.

You'll get slightly less total sugar from the grains, ie lower efficiency. Probably not much, but a definitely lower gravity via higher volume in the sparge non squeeze batch.

I'd suggest doing two identical batches, measuring gravity and volume of intial post mash wort(after pulling bag) in both. One will drain the bag naturally, then squeeze, and the other will let it drain naturally than sparge.

 

[Black Island Brewer]

I'm very new to brew in a bag, just four batches. I've been brewing since '96 though, and have my fly sparging dialed in pretty well. I typically get 85-90% mash/lauter efficiency from fly sparging, and so far about 75+% from full volume BIAB no sparge squeeze the bag enough to get preboil volume. I've only done one side by side batch of the same recipe, and found the BIAB to be a little maltier, but otherwise the same in color and mouth feel.
I'll keep doing both because I like both, but I like three vessel & fly sparging more.
Sparging obsolete? Hardly. Will different methods yield different results? Of course. Does it matter to me? Only in that I want to like what I make, can make it predictably and consistently, and win a medal now and again. Life is Good!

 

[Magnus314]

All of this arguing back and forth is ridiculous. The defenders are as corny with their knee-jerk reactions as Owly's initial post. The question is, "Is sparging obsolete?"

The answer is, "test it on your system and see."

I get much different results with a fine grind and a Wilserbrewer bag and no sparge than with my cooler mash tun, LHBS grind and a double batch sparge.

Full volume gives a different result - even in the same mash tun or BIAB bag - than sparging. If I do an hour long mash with a fine grind in a bag and full volume, I get high efficiency and dry beer~ 1.002 FG +/- regardless of OG.

The same hour with ~ 1.25-1.5qt/lb ratio in a cooler with a sparge or two and I get 72-74% efficiency and normal 80%'ish attenuation.

To dial it all in ON YOUR SYSTEM is going to require a few test batches.

Then report back your results, please

 

[RM-MN]

All of this arguing back and forth is ridiculous. The defenders are as corny with their knee-jerk reactions as Owly's initial post. The question is, "Is sparging obsolete?"

The answer is, "test it on your system and see."

I get much different results with a fine grind and a Wilserbrewer bag and no sparge than with my cooler mash tun, LHBS grind and a double batch sparge.

Full volume gives a different result - even in the same mash tun or BIAB bag - than sparging. If I do an hour long mash with a fine grind in a bag and full volume, I get high efficiency and dry beer~ 1.002 FG +/- regardless of OG.

The same hour with ~ 1.25-1.5qt/lb ratio in a cooler with a sparge or two and I get 72-74% efficiency and normal 80%'ish attenuation.

To dial it all in ON YOUR SYSTEM is going to require a few test batches.

Then report back your results, please

Is this because your fine grind converts so fast that the conversion of starches to dextrines by the alpha amylase is over in a few minutes but the beta amylase continues to break down the dextrines during the remainder of that hour long mash? I'd like to see what results you get if you shorten that BIAB mash. Will you get a less fermentable wort with a shorter mash?

 

[Magnus314]

Is this because your fine grind converts so fast that the conversion of starches to dextrines by the alpha amylase is over in a few minutes but the beta amylase continues to break down the dextrines during the remainder of that hour long mash? I'd like to see what results you get if you shorten that BIAB mash. Will you get a less fermentable wort with a shorter mash?

1) Yes, I think so.

2) With a 30 min. mash and fine grind/full volume I get ~80% attenuation (perfect in my book).

3) And yes, definitely, the answer to #2 above shows that. I am testing even shorter times now to be sure!

Will report back in a couple of weeks when it's definite...

 

[jbaysurfer]

All of this arguing back and forth is ridiculous. The defenders are as corny with their knee-jerk reactions as Owly's initial post. The question is, "Is sparging obsolete?"

The answer is, "test it on your system and see."

I get much different results with a fine grind and a Wilserbrewer bag and no sparge than with my cooler mash tun, LHBS grind and a double batch sparge.

Full volume gives a different result - even in the same mash tun or BIAB bag - than sparging. If I do an hour long mash with a fine grind in a bag and full volume, I get high efficiency and dry beer~ 1.002 FG +/- regardless of OG.

The same hour with ~ 1.25-1.5qt/lb ratio in a cooler with a sparge or two and I get 72-74% efficiency and normal 80%'ish attenuation.

To dial it all in ON YOUR SYSTEM is going to require a few test batches.

Then report back your results, please

The original post asked a universal question. The universal answer is "No". It is not "test it on your system and see". That's the answer to "Is sparging right for you?". Which, btw, would've been a far less obnoxious question stirring just as much if not more conversation, that would've been much more civil as well.

 

[Magnus314]

The original post asked a universal question. The universal answer is "No". It is not "test it on your system and see".

YOU WISH that's what he said. It would be so simple if you could dismiss him ass a brewing "universalist". What he actually said is much more "subversive" to the traditionalist cause.

Either you didn't read it or you were just pissed off when others and I backed him up with results, or when we said "test it for yourself" or both...

But he did NOT ask a universal question.

You should read it again.

 

[mdbrewer1]

YOU WISH that's what he said. It would be so simple if you could dismiss him ass a brewing "universalist". What he actually said is much more "subversive" to the traditionalist cause.

Either you didn't read it or you were just pissed off when others and I backed him up with results, or when we said "test it for yourself" or both...

But he did NOT ask a universal question.

You should read it again.

The title of the thread is "Is Sparging Obsolete?"

I'm actually very interested in how he is brewing and will likely go that way myself, but I feel he could do a much better job of communicating his ideas and presenting his results. When trying to broach new ideas to an established audience, there are ways to productively get the ball rolling and there are ways that unneccesarily put the target audience on the defensive. A perfect example is using quotes around "upgrade". Simply swapping that with 'move to', conveys a less adversarial posture. The same goes for his universal statement of "I've come to realize that this is a complete waste of time and money." What's a complete waste of time and money for him might be a useful endeavor for those with different equipment, batch sizes, etc. as evidenced in the thread.

I've run into this situation in the workplace. You can't go charging in like a bull in a china shop. It usually takes time and a fair bit of evidence to get people to consider doing things differently. The testimony of a handful of people will almost always be met with skepticisim. Trying to lead the horse to water, rather than jumping on his back right away, tends to be a lot more successful.

 

[jbaysurfer]

YOU WISH that's what he said. It would be so simple if you could dismiss him ass a brewing "universalist". What he actually said is much more "subversive" to the traditionalist cause.

Either you didn't read it or you were just pissed off when others and I backed him up with results, or when we said "test it for yourself" or both...

But he did NOT ask a universal question.

You should read it again.

LOL...ok then. I'll go back and read the thread title again. Yup. It's a universal question.

Not sure why so combative. Don't hate-don't divide. We're all brewers.
Brew the way you like. I BIAB and I do traditional 3 vessel. It's amazing I can even function. Cats and dogs living together!

Edit: I love the "subversive to the traditionalist's cause" statement. That's symptomatic of this whole bruhaha. Some folks think that a brewing technique is a cause to be championed, the seeds of division...lol...others see it merely as a tool in the tool box we all use to make beer.

 

[Yooper]

LOL...ok then. I'll go back and read the thread title again. Yup. It's a universal question.

Not sure why so combative. Don't hate-don't divide. We're all brewers.
Brew the way you like. I BIAB and I do traditional 3 vessel. It's amazing I can even function. Cats and dogs living together!

I was just going to pop in and say something similar. Let's stop the snarkiness and insults.

I think that when anybody has an attitude of "This IS the way to do this and the rest of you are dumb", it raises hackles.

Remember that we all in different places in our brewing hobby. Some do extract batches, or Mr. Beer, while others brew on a 3 BBL pro system. None of us are wrong, if we like the results. I am not condescending to Cooper's kit users, or to BIAB folks, or to people with RIMS set ups. We're all here for the beer.

Let's remember that. We are a pretty laid back and friendly bunch, but let's keep the Golden Rule in mind.

 

[b-boy]

I BIAB and I do traditional 3 vessel. It's amazing I can even function. Cats and dogs living together!

BIAB and 3-vessel? You sir do not belong in polite society! If I saw you walking down the street I'd probably cross to the other side.

 

[Yooper]

BIAB and 3-vessel? You sir do not belong in polite society! If I saw you walking down the street I'd probably cross to the other side.

Haha- that reminds me!

I have a three vessel with a tippy dump. My false bottom is great (made by Jaybird), but even with a stand I'm getting grain going under it due to the MLT being an "upside down" version. As a result, I'm getting some issues with my bottom draining MLT and clogging. So, tomorrow, I also am doing a BIAB in a three vessel!

I bought the bag from Wilserbrew and while it will not be a traditional BIAB, I'm going to line the MLT with this bag so that the grain can't "seep" under the stand through the ripples in the bottom of the MLT.

It may or may not work well. If the mash part works well, I'll batch sparge to save some time.

But that is also an example of doing something traditionally, but not really. Am I wrong for doing a 60 minute recirculating mash, using a bag, and batch sparging? Is my beer going to suck unbearably? I bet not. I've won competitions with my beer, and I would bet that a couple of minor changes in the procedure to enhance lautering won't impact that a bit.

 

[b-boy]

Haha- that reminds me!

I have a three vessel with a tippy dump. My false bottom is great (made by Jaybird), but even with a stand I'm getting grain going under it due to the MLT being an "upside down" version. As a result, I'm getting some issues with my bottom draining MLT and clogging. So, tomorrow, I also am doing a BIAB in a three vessel!

I bought the bag from Wilserbrew and while it will not be a traditional BIAB, I'm going to line the MLT with this bag so that the grain can't "seep" under the stand through the ripples in the bottom of the MLT.

It may or may not work well. If the mash part works well, I'll batch sparge to save some time.

But that is also an example of doing something traditionally, but not really. Am I wrong for doing a 60 minute recirculating mash, using a bag, and batch sparging? Is my beer going to suck unbearably? I bet not. I've won competitions with my beer, and I would bet that a couple of minor changes in the procedure to enhance lautering won't impact that a bit.

Heresy! This forum is getting a little too freaky for me. Who let all these hippies join up anyway? Next thing you know people will start adding fruit to their beers.

 

[Tegra]

I do BIAB with a bag that has four handles sewn to the top.

Stick a bar through the handles, put it in a large pail and twist the ball of grain until it tightens and the liquid drips out.

I am done when the weight of the spent grain equals the beginning grist weight.
(If I brew with 20 pounds of grain the bag come out of the kettle weighing about 25 pounds and then I "twist squeeze" 5 pounds of liquid to dump back in the kettle and have 20 pounds of wet grain left)

(Tried a pulley but it just seemed redundant)

Tom

 

[bja]

(If I brew with 20 pounds of grain the bag come out of the kettle weighing about 25 pounds and then I "twist squeeze" 5 pounds of liquid to dump back in the kettle and have 20 pounds of wet grain left)

Sorry, but you'll never remove every bit of moisture from the grain by squeezing it. Not even close.

 

[Black Island Brewer]

Sorry, but you'll never remove every bit of moisture from the grain by squeezing it. Not even close.

Of course not. But that 20 pounds of grain has had the sugar removed and the water added, so is still possible to end with the same weight you started with.

 

[eko]

So, tomorrow, I also am doing a BIAB in a three vessel!

I bought the bag from Wilserbrew and while it will not be a traditional BIAB, I'm going to line the MLT with this bag so that the grain can't "seep" under the stand through the ripples in the bottom of the MLT.

It may or may not work well. If the mash part works well, I'll batch sparge to save some time.

I'd love to hear how this works for you. I've considered doing the same thing, bag-line the MLT, to cut down on vorlauf or stuck sparge issues and further reduce the risk of grain slipping through to the boil.

You say if the mash works well, you'll batch sparge. What do you normally do?
Am I right in thinking this time you'll be stirring in the sparge water and expect the bag to eliminate the escaping grain?

 

[hannibalmdq]

I'd love to hear how this works for you. I've considered doing the same thing, bag-line the MLT, to cut down on vorlauf or stuck sparge issues and further reduce the risk of grain slipping through to the boil.

You say if the mash works well, you'll batch sparge. What do you normally do?
Am I right in thinking this time you'll be stirring in the sparge water and expect the bag to eliminate the escaping grain?

I call this Mash In a Bag I've done it several times and it's great. Makes cleanup a piece of cake. Pull the bag, squeeze it out. Not worries about stuck sparges, no dead space in the MLT to worry about.

As long as the bag properly fits the vessel you can stir like crazy when you batch sparge. I think I hit 80% efficiency the last time I did it this way which is in line with what my system normally gives me when I use a bozooka screen.

 

[KeninMN]

I call this Mash In a Bag I've done it several times and it's great. Makes cleanup a piece of cake. Pull the bag, squeeze it out. Not worries about stuck sparges, no dead space in the MLT to worry about.

As long as the bag properly fits the vessel you can stir like crazy when you batch sparge. I think I hit 80% efficiency the last time I did it this way which is in line with what my system normally gives me when I use a bozooka screen.

This is the method I use, as I have limited space, so I don't I have anywhere to use or store a three tier stand, and I didn't want to spend hundreds of dollars on a burner and 10 gallon brew kettle to do full volume BIAB. I use a 5 gallon round drink cooler from Menards ($12.99 on sale with rebate) fitted with a stainless steel bulkhead fitting/ball valve kit from Amazon ($20 with free shipping) for a mash tun, a 24" X 24" course mesh grain bag from Northern Brewer ($5.99) and a 7.5 gallon aluminum turkey fryer/propane burner combo from Menards ($59.99). With 85% efficiency I can easily brew beers up to 1.074 at a mash thickness of 1.25 qt/pound of grain (13 pounds total.) Since I generally prefer lower ABV and session beers, this will never be an issue with me. If I ever did want to brew something with a monster ABV I figure I can always add DME. I usually do one to three batch sparge/mash out steps, resting for ten minutes prior to draining the first sparge. If I don't hit my desired preboil volume I sparge again, resting for 5 minutes. If I still don't hit my desired volume I'll sparge with room temperature water. The benefits are that I have less equipment to clean and store, I can use the standard LHBS crush and still have great efficiency, stuck sparges are never an issue, even when I brewed a pumpkin ale with real pumpkin in the mash, zero losses to dead space in the equipment, fast, easy clean up and an equipment cost of under $110 including tax.

 

[jbaysurfer]

I do BIAB with a bag that has four handles sewn to the top.

Stick a bar through the handles, put it in a large pail and twist the ball of grain until it tightens and the liquid drips out.

I am done when the weight of the spent grain equals the beginning grist weight.
(If I brew with 20 pounds of grain the bag come out of the kettle weighing about 25 pounds and then I "twist squeeze" 5 pounds of liquid to dump back in the kettle and have 20 pounds of wet grain left)

(Tried a pulley but it just seemed redundant)

Tom

Rule of thumb: 10lbs of grain absorbs 1.2G of water. So 20lbs of grain is going to weigh just over 40lbs when removed from the mash tun.

If it weighs 25lbs coming out of the water, you're probably starting with a little over 12lbs of dry grain?

 

[jbaysurfer]

Of course not. But that 20 pounds of grain has had the sugar removed and the water added, so is still possible to end with the same weight you started with.

???
It's impossible to end with the same weight you started with..assuming the starting weight you're referring to is dry grain weight....but maybe I'm missing something...

 

[peterj]

???
It's impossible to end with the same weight you started with..assuming the starting weight you're referring to is dry grain weight....but maybe I'm missing something...

That's what I thought when I first read it, but like Black Island Brewer said, you're going to be removing all of the starch that was originally in the grain, converting it to sugar, and then rinsing it into your brew pot. So you're losing all of that weight and you should be left with wet husks.

 

[MrSnacks]

I mash in a bag in a cooler. Full volume mashes. Works for me.

 

[bja]

Of course not. But that 20 pounds of grain has had the sugar removed and the water added, so is still possible to end with the same weight you started with.

OK, 20 lbs of grain will absorb 2-1/2 gallon of water (1/8 gallon per pound). Water weighs 8.3 lb per gallon so that's 20.75 lb for a total of 40.75 lb. To get back to 20 lb, you'll need to remove 20.75 lbs of sugar from 20 lbs of grain.

Something's not adding up.

 

[jbaysurfer]

That's what I thought when I first read it, but like Black Island Brewer said, you're going to be removing all of the starch that was originally in the grain, converting it to sugar, and then rinsing it into your brew pot. So you're losing all of that weight and you should be left with wet husks.

Can someone else check the math on this for me? My mash tun is one heck of a lot heavier when I'm done draining it (and I do push down on the mash to squeeze as much water out as possible) then it is before I mash in. Something's gotta give. Is the weight of the sugars comparable to the weight of the water grain absorbs? (1.2G per 10lbs of grain).

Edit: just saw bja's post. Yeah, agreed. Not adding up.

 

[hunter_le five]

I like the direction this thread went. This is fun.

 

[pricelessbrewing]

Ok math to the rescue.

inputs, 5G batch, 12 lbs, OG of 1.060. 75% efficiency.

Another assumption here, I'm going to assume 7.5lb of corn sugar and 1.060 of mashed sugar weight the same. Probably correct within 20% at most.

The smallest grain absorption rate I've seen quoted under an extreme squeeze was 0.07 or so. I'm going to go with my calculators default of 0.8.
=12 lb of grain - 7.5 of sugar which is now in solution + (12 *0.08 * 8.345 (Lb/gal of water))

=So on a 75% efficiency, and a fairly normal squeeze, a 12 lb mash will weight 12.5112 lbs.

If however you can use a motor powered squeeze, or have a higher efficiency, you MAY be able to get slightly under the original weight.

Actually I don't think the efficiency will matter, as it'll carry over through the formula.