Measuring Efficiency

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Joined
Oct 22, 2019
Messages
5
Reaction score
1
I`m wandering through and looking over some things has got me feeling insecure. I think this is by design to get me to hire a personal trainer or buy products. My brew equipment consists of a large pot, a 5 gallon bucket and I've been buying muslin bags to "steep". I dont even test with iodine or own any meters. What's got me feeling insecure is how low tech. my setup is and no way of knowing if I`m wasting grain potential. Considering muslin bag steeping is supposedly inefficient compared to brew in a bag or false bottoms. But I wonder how Egyptians brewed beer or even as close in history as moonshine technology mash in process and can't imagine or find evidence that this wasn't a simple process of dissolving sugars and starches and natural sedimentation. Buying equipment to become more efficient or measure efficiency seems like fools logic here, since that money could also go to buying more grain and I don't scale enough to eventually make it worth the investment.

What's got me concerned is attempting to crudely measure my own efficiency here:
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/forum/threads/re-brewing-with-spent-grains.641012/

leads me to believe I`m running 66% efficiency and makes me think switching to a paint straining bag or ditching bags all together and relying on purely sedimentation in the wort process and fermentation could yield a higher efficiency. Looking at what efficiency to expect
I look to be just shy of the low end of modern "normal" efficiency

A mash efficiency of 70-80% is typical for most homebrewers, though it is possible to get upwards of 90%. And seeing claims of 90% efficiency with brew in a bag and wondering if it's a miscalculation or exaggeration. Considering the math here starts with potential gravity of a grain. And this feels like a logical fallacy, appeal to authority. Considering, if the way they measured the original potential of the grain yielded only 90% of the potential of the grain, you would be at 100% efficiency through the process of measuring brewing efficiency in the standard model.

My processes seem so off the rail and reinventing the wheel it seems to be wholly unrelated to be almost incomparable to measures of efficiency in the standard model of efficiency measurements. So I question whether a 66% measurement of efficiency the way i've measured can be compared to the standard model of measurements as the same measurement. Since I`m getting anomalous anecdotal readings. 1: lies within standard grain bill recipe models. 2: is why and how is my homebrew supply charging more for grain then LME and how is LME able to beat price points of grain on the same shelf unless there is this lost sugar potential in the all grain process that LME extractors are yielding? and all grain processes are declaring 100% efficiency on.

To answer this I have a few ideas.
1. is to buy gravity measuring equipment to establish a control on the standard model of efficiency and then run the experimental measure of efficiency and find any deviation.

2. Piggy back off a recipe that declares an efficiency level and compare that efficiency measure with my own technique that derived the 66% efficiency levels. Unlikely since reproducing it exactly requires me buying equipment.

3. Get someone nervous enough to measure their own efficiency levels using the malt extraction measurements of spent grain to compare with what efficiency levels they think their working with and hope they post and I read it.

4. Run my next run with no bag or a paint strainer bag(probably definitely doing this) and repeating the crude made up efficiency measuring process to see if there's an increase in efficiency.

5. Obtain grain declared spent from another brewer that's measured efficiency from a standard model and attempt to recover malt extract. This one seems to be the most unlikely.
 
I`m wandering through and looking over some things has got me feeling insecure. I think this is by design to get me to hire a personal trainer or buy products. My brew equipment consists of a large pot, a 5 gallon bucket and I've been buying muslin bags to "steep". I dont even test with iodine or own any meters. What's got me feeling insecure is how low tech. my setup is and no way of knowing if I`m wasting grain potential. Considering muslin bag steeping is supposedly inefficient compared to brew in a bag or false bottoms. But I wonder how Egyptians brewed beer or even as close in history as moonshine technology mash in process and can't imagine or find evidence that this wasn't a simple process of dissolving sugars and starches and natural sedimentation. Buying equipment to become more efficient or measure efficiency seems like fools logic here, since that money could also go to buying more grain and I don't scale enough to eventually make it worth the investment.

What's got me concerned is attempting to crudely measure my own efficiency here:
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/forum/threads/re-brewing-with-spent-grains.641012/

leads me to believe I`m running 66% efficiency and makes me think switching to a paint straining bag or ditching bags all together and relying on purely sedimentation in the wort process and fermentation could yield a higher efficiency. Looking at what efficiency to expect
I look to be just shy of the low end of modern "normal" efficiency

A mash efficiency of 70-80% is typical for most homebrewers, though it is possible to get upwards of 90%. And seeing claims of 90% efficiency with brew in a bag and wondering if it's a miscalculation or exaggeration. Considering the math here starts with potential gravity of a grain. And this feels like a logical fallacy, appeal to authority. Considering, if the way they measured the original potential of the grain yielded only 90% of the potential of the grain, you would be at 100% efficiency through the process of measuring brewing efficiency in the standard model.

My processes seem so off the rail and reinventing the wheel it seems to be wholly unrelated to be almost incomparable to measures of efficiency in the standard model of efficiency measurements. So I question whether a 66% measurement of efficiency the way i've measured can be compared to the standard model of measurements as the same measurement. Since I`m getting anomalous anecdotal readings. 1: lies within standard grain bill recipe models. 2: is why and how is my homebrew supply charging more for grain then LME and how is LME able to beat price points of grain on the same shelf unless there is this lost sugar potential in the all grain process that LME extractors are yielding? and all grain processes are declaring 100% efficiency on.

To answer this I have a few ideas.
1. is to buy gravity measuring equipment to establish a control on the standard model of efficiency and then run the experimental measure of efficiency and find any deviation.

2. Piggy back off a recipe that declares an efficiency level and compare that efficiency measure with my own technique that derived the 66% efficiency levels. Unlikely since reproducing it exactly requires me buying equipment.

3. Get someone nervous enough to measure their own efficiency levels using the malt extraction measurements of spent grain to compare with what efficiency levels they think their working with and hope they post and I read it.

4. Run my next run with no bag or a paint strainer bag(probably definitely doing this) and repeating the crude made up efficiency measuring process to see if there's an increase in efficiency.

5. Obtain grain declared spent from another brewer that's measured efficiency from a standard model and attempt to recover malt extract. This one seems to be the most unlikely.

You lost me. Do you have a question?
 
My advice is to get a hydrometer.

I know a lot of new brewers who are still putting their gear together don't want to do that until after a couple batches. I'm pretty sure I started out as one of those brewers. You seem like someone who is rather invested in the hobby and has no plans to stop brewing anytime soon.

A quick glance at my usual online homebrew supplier shows a test jar for sale at about $4, and a hydrometer for about $7. With a little digging you might be able to find something cheaper.

Get a hydrometer.
 
probably the solid advice to get the hydrometer. Since this is now going to burn a hole in brain trying to figure out who's math is off. Will a 250ml plastic test jar be adequate? Im seeing one for $7 total for hydrometer and a test jar provided I wait for 2 months. I've been a little shy of buying one since it's glass and I will break it and afraid it will ship broken since I know how packages can get kicked around and afraid of having to go through the process of a 6 month ordeal of getting scammed and refunded until one of these guys delivers and unwilling to shed the extra cash to buy in store.

A huge part of this for me is breaking down the cost for efficiency meaning 44 cents a pint for something along the lines of a professionally brewed in store purchase is my win here. To the point i've been debating the logistics of planting my own barley some day to obtain magical free beer.
 
Blazinlow, I guess my question is have anyone been measuring their efficiency levels and willing to check that model by attempting a LME extraction on their spent grain?
 
If you don't own a hydrometer, how do you figure your efficiency is low?

I would (in this order)
Get a hydrometer
Forget LME or DME.. buy milled grain, and then mill it again. If you are doing BIAB, then you have the best, simplest system there is, and efficiency should be in the 80%+ range easily.
If you are going to continue this hobby, buy a grain mill and then bulk sacks of two-row and grind your own. This will be the cheapest way to get good grains milled the finest your system can handle (finer = efficiency). Just get small quantities of your crystal malts or whatever small adjuncts & specialty malts you need for your LHBS.
If you want to grow something to save money, forget about the grains... grow some hops. They are easy to grow and come back every year.
Also, gather, freeze and re-use the yeast cake. If you are hygienic, it's really easy.
Then you can relax and have a home brew.
 
Blazinlow, I guess my question is have anyone been measuring their efficiency levels and willing to check that model by attempting a LME extraction on their spent grain?
I'm sorry, you want people to waste their time and their resources (think energy costs) to verify your bizarre ideas because you're too cheap to spend 15$ on a hydrometer? Are you for real??
 
Blazinlow, I guess my question is have anyone been measuring their efficiency levels and willing to check that model by attempting a LME extraction on their spent grain?

I look at the gravity points in the wort divided by the to maximum potential gravity for an efficiency. I do check the gravity of the final runnings as a secondary indicator. Typically 1.015 or less and I’m happy I got most of the good stuff out of the grain.
 
Measurements are key to understanding your own efficiency. Other people's claimed efficiencies are interesting but not really all that useful. Who knows if they are measuring accurately or not?

You need to measure
Grist weights
Wate/wort/beer volumes - how much used in mash, sparge, pre boil, post boil, transferred to fermentor and packaged final product
Specific gravity - nice to check first runnings, pre boil and must know post boil.

Actually an inexpensive refractometer is easier to use than a hydrometer...you really only need the hydrometer for end of fermentation gravity if you care about ABV and proving your beer is actually done fermenting.

The accuracy of the above measurements will determine how much you truly know about your efficiency and help you identify places to improve. In the end grain is pretty cheap and chasing an extra 5-10% efficiency seems like a waste of time at homebrew scale but everyone approaches the hobby from a different angle and if that's your thing go for it. What I care about is predictability of efficiency. If I target 1.050 I'm pretty much always between 1.048 and 1.052 which is good enough for me.
 
gotta admit just read the first post by OP...

Buying equipment to become more efficient or measure efficiency seems like fools logic here, since that money could also go to buying more grain and I don't scale enough to eventually make it worth the investment.

for me even saving a nickel on a twelve pack is fun....

you would be at 100% efficiency through the process of measuring brewing efficiency in the standard model.

i think for 100% you'd spend more on heat to boil it down....

and they say BIAB is better because being able to crush finer, and 66% is what i got before i learned to sparge right....so, maybe sparge, get something else than muslin....
 
Back
Top