Low extraction from malt

[rburrelli]

I have used Epiphany Craft malt a couple of times. The Foundation malt. Both times I came up short on gravities. Anybody have a similar experience?

My processes are pretty consistent and dialed in.

 

[Big Monk]

I have used Epiphany Craft malt a couple of times. The Foundation malt. Both times I came up short on gravities. Anybody have a similar experience?

My processes are pretty consistent and dialed in.

How was your first wort gravity? Which malt sheet value are you using for extract %? Fine Grind Dry or As-is?

 

[rburrelli]

How was your first wort gravity? Which malt sheet value are you using for extract %? Fine Grind Dry or As-is?

Not much on the website as far as those specs. One of the reasons I posted here.

 

[Big Monk]

Not much on the website as far as those specs. One of the reasons I posted here.

How did your first wort gravity compare to the estimate?

If you purchased the malt in a full sack, I’d hit up Epiphany with the lot number and get the analysis. If you got it from your LHBS in small amounts, they may still have the sack and lot number. Lastly, if all else fails, ask Epiphany for a typical analysis showing their extract potential numbers.

Once you have that in hand you can troubleshooting your conversion efficiency. Where are you low on gravity and how bad?

 

[rburrelli]

Fell 10 points low on gravity post boil even after adding cane sugar (was part of the Belgian IPA recipe). Should have been 1.074, got 1.064. Instead of adding more or extending the boil I just ran with it.

 

[Big Monk]

Fell 10 points low on gravity post boil even after adding cane sugar (was part of the Belgian IPA recipe). Should have been 1.074, got 1.064. Instead of adding more or extending the boil I just ran with it.

Next time around I would compare Estimated vs. Actual values for the following:

First Wort Gravity
Pre boil Gravity and Volume
Post boil gravity and volume

Did you measure gravity before the post boil measurement? Does your brewing software predict first wort and preboil Gravity? Are your volumes on point?

 

[doug293cz]

Next time around I would compare Estimated vs. Actual values for the following:

First Wort Gravity
Pre boil Gravity and Volume
Post boil gravity and volume

Did you measure gravity before the post boil measurement? Does your brewing software predict first wort and preboil Gravity? Are your volumes on point?

Also need:

• Grain bill weight
• Strike volume

Grain bill weight, strike volume, and first wort gravity allow you to calculate conversion efficiency - how much of the potential sugar actually got converted in the mash. Grain bill weight, pre-boil gravity, and pre-boil volume allow you to calculate mash efficiency. Once you have those you can calculate lauter efficiency (= mash efficiency / conversion efficiency.) You can also calculate mash efficiency from grain bill weight, post-boil gravity, and post-boil volume, if no extra fermentables were added during the boil. In the case of no boil additions, then pre-boil SG * pre-boil volume should equal post-boil SG * post-boil volume. If they are not equal, then you have significant measurement errors.

Brew on

 

[Big Monk]

Also need:

• Grain bill weight
• Strike volume

Grain bill weight, strike volume, and first wort gravity allow you to calculate conversion efficiency - how much of the potential sugar actually got converted in the mash. Grain bill weight, pre-boil gravity, and pre-boil volume allow you to calculate mash efficiency. Once you have those you can calculate lauter efficiency (= mash efficiency / conversion efficiency.) You can also calculate mash efficiency from grain bill weight, post-boil gravity, and post-boil volume, if no extra fermentables were added during the boil. In the case of no boil additions, then pre-boil SG * pre-boil volume should equal post-boil SG * post-boil volume. If they are not equal, then you have significant measurement errors.

Brew on

Keep in mind you need Fine Grind Dry Basis % and Moisture % for the malt as well. The total grain weight doesn’t represent the possible extract from the grain since moisture is part of that weight and the extract % is less than 100%.

Although that may be more important for the way I calculate gravity. I use conversion efficiency as a user input.

 

[doug293cz]

Keep in mind you need Fine Grind Dry Basis % and Moisture % for the malt as well. The total grain weight doesn’t represent the possible extract from the grain since moisture is part of that weight and the extract % is less than 100%.

Although that may be more important for the way I calculate gravity. I use conversion efficiency as a user input.

The chart at the link in my previous post assumes 80% fine grind, dry basis potential, and 4% moisture. This is usually good enough in most cases to tell you if you have a conversion issue or not. If you have actual data, you can do a more accurate calculation. My spreadsheet takes FGDB potential, and moisture content as inputs. My spreadsheet also accepts an assumed conversion efficiency. To calculate actual conversion efficiency with my spreadsheet you use the "Goal Seek" tool to adjust the assumed conversion efficiency to a value that makes the calculated first wort SG match the measured first wort SG. I even go so far as to compensate for the water consumed by the hydrolysis of starch to sugar in my sheet, so I don't think I am overlooking anything (although if anyone finds anything amiss in my spreadsheet, I want to know about it.)

You need to assume a conversion efficiency and lauter efficiency, or the mathematical product of them - mash efficiency, for recipe formulation and SG estimation. To diagnose mash/lauter issues, you need to determine the actual conversion and lauter efficiencies in order to determine where in your process the issue lies.

Brew on

 

[rburrelli]

Also need:

• Grain bill weight
• Strike volume

Grain bill weight, strike volume, and first wort gravity allow you to calculate conversion efficiency - how much of the potential sugar actually got converted in the mash. Grain bill weight, pre-boil gravity, and pre-boil volume allow you to calculate mash efficiency. Once you have those you can calculate lauter efficiency (= mash efficiency / conversion efficiency.) You can also calculate mash efficiency from grain bill weight, post-boil gravity, and post-boil volume, if no extra fermentables were added during the boil. In the case of no boil additions, then pre-boil SG * pre-boil volume should equal post-boil SG * post-boil volume. If they are not equal, then you have significant measurement errors.

Brew on

Grist was 8.5 lbs of the Epiphany malt. 3 lbs Vienna and 3/4 lb of aromatic malt. Also 2 lb of cane sugar which I left out of my grist calculation and added with 10 minutes left in boil. So 12.25 lbs at 1.5 qt/lb. approx 4.6 gal strike water. Pre boil gravity after 60 minute mash and batch sparge was 1.044. My software (Windows version of Brewers Friend does not give First wort or pre boil estimates.) 7.5 gallons to boil kettle.

90 minute gentle boil reduced 1 gallon. As I said, I added the sugar and took gravity and got 1.063 instead of estimated 1.074.

 

[doug293cz]

Grist was 8.5 lbs of the Epiphany malt. 3 lbs Vienna and 3/4 lb of aromatic malt. Also 2 lb of cane sugar which I left out of my grist calculation and added with 10 minutes left in boil. So 12.25 lbs at 1.5 qt/lb. approx 4.6 gal strike water. Pre boil gravity after 60 minute mash and batch sparge was 1.044. My software (Windows version of Brewers Friend does not give First wort or pre boil estimates.) 7.5 gallons to boil kettle.

90 minute gentle boil reduced 1 gallon. As I said, I added the sugar and took gravity and got 1.063 instead of estimated 1.074.

Putting your numbers in my spreadsheet, I get your conversion efficiency at about 87%, using an assumed dry potential of 1.037. At 1.035 potential, your conversion efficiency would be about 92%. This gives you an idea how important good potential data is if trying to determine efficiencies accurately, or predict SG's accurately. In any case, your efficiency is well below a reasonable target of 95% - 100%.

Brew on

 

[rburrelli]

Putting your numbers in my spreadsheet, I get your conversion efficiency at about 87%, using an assumed dry potential of 1.037. At 1.035 potential, your conversion efficiency would be about 92%. This gives you an idea how important good potential data is if trying to determine efficiencies accurately, or predict SG's accurately. In any case, your efficiency is well below a reasonable target of 95% - 100%.

Brew on

Which takes me back to my original question. I have not had issues with hitting or exceeding gravity targets with other malts.

 

[Big Monk]

Which takes me back to my original question. I have not had issues with hitting or exceeding gravity targets with other malts.

Contact epiphany and get a typical analysis for the foundation malt. Could be you are assuming higher potential than it actually has.

 

[rburrelli]

Contact epiphany and get a typical analysis for the foundation malt. Could be you are assuming higher potential than it actually has.

Thanks. As you did, I assumed 1.037 potential points so maybe it’s not that or another issue. I appreciate your responses though. Thanks. Gave me some good things to think about going forward.