Major efficiency bump with continuous circulation/fly sparge

[drubes14]

Sharing some success and anecdotal evidence on efficiency gains from our latest 2 batches. This is more or less a process update, so let me know if you have any feedback or questions!

Bottom Line: Constant wort recirculation and doing a fly sparge (instead of batch sparge) appears to have consistently bumped up our BH efficiencies from low 60s to 80%.

Setup Change: Below is a photo of the latest configuration for our 3 vessel 2 pump single tier hybrid HERMS system. Previously, we only had 1 pump, and only propane as our heat source.

Over the last 2 weeks, we've added:

1) a second pump (Chugger CPSS-in-1, alongside our March 809)
2) a HERMS coil in hot liquor tank (not visible)
3) a control panel unit to the uprights of the brew cart, with a PID, SSR, 2 pump switches, and an outlet for the heating element, as well as a thermometer probe at the HERMS coil outlet. Electronics are configured for 120v circuit, and run under 13 amps.
4) a 1000 watt, 120v heating element inside hot liquor tank (not visible)

Benefits: Allowed us to:
1) continuously circulate our mash
2) maintain temp with mash recirculation, given temp additions from heating element
3) still ramp quickly on strike/step mash/mash out temps with propane burner, and
4) fly sparge!

Process Gains: Yesterday, we did our first brews with the new equipment installed. We brewed a 10 gallon batch of BM's Centennial Blonde and a dry irish stout. Historically, our efficiencies have been in the low to mid 60s. Yesterday, the blonde hit 80% brewhouse efficiency, while the irish stout hit 80.7% BH efficiency. That's, on average, a gain of 15% efficiency. We were very pleased with this.

Evaluating Process Changes: I believe the constant mash recirculation and steady fly sparge made the difference. We had been batch sparging before and had tons of channeling issues. All in all, we were super happy with the outcome. The fly sparge addition adds maybe 30-40 minutes to the brew day, but it was much less of a hassle than the batch sparge.

 

[Gadjobrinus]

Nice job drubes. You remind me I have to insulate my MLT. Nice changes.

 

[drubes14]

Thanks Gadjobrinus. When I autotuned the PID, I didn't have insulation on the HLT and it was taking 10-15 minutes to gain a degree of temp due to heat loss from the stainless keg. That shortened to about 2-3 minutes with the insulation on there. Hugely helpful.

 

[jabba11]

I have a Colorado brewing systems setup with a mash pipe that recirculates constantly. I use it with a manifold then do a quick fly sparge at the end. I consistently get 80 to 82% efficiency. I don't make many "big beers", most of mine are in the 4 to 5%. The bigger my grain bill is it reduces the efficiency some.

 

[day_trippr]

"Channeling" should never affect a batch sparge. All you're doing is diluting the residual sugars in the grain bed with a measured amount of water, thoroughly mixed, then draining all of it immediately. Repeat for the split sparge and you're done.

Channeling when fly sparging, otoh, is never a good thing and can easily lead to extract efficiencies way below a decent batch sparge.

I doubt recirculation per se had much to do with the improved extract efficiency. Holding the mash uniformly closer to target conversion temps and the successfully executed fly sparge likely account for the improvements...

Cheers!