Mediocre First Brew Day on the New E-HERMS Rig -- Could use some tips

[Blazinlow86]

That would actually make an interesting comparison: a 50-50 wheat-barley vs. wheat only at 0.050 gap.

Brew on

I'll give it a try after dinner

 

[Blazinlow86]

So the 1st 2 pics is half Pilsner and half wheat and the 2 pics on the bottom is pure wheat. Surprisingly the wheat crushed alot at the .050 setting. I was expecting it to just fall thru. fwiw i did not condition these but normally would .Cheers

 

[doug293cz]

Thanks for doing this. The crush is better than I thought it would be. I'm seeing a few uncrushed wheat grains in the mix, and a higher level of uncrushed in the pure wheat. So, there are likely to be some almost unconvertible grains, but not a huge fraction. I think I might try to find a suitable screen and do some quantitative testing.

Brew on

 

[Bobby_M]

If you mill your own grain, consider conditioning the grain first. If not, use rice hulls.

Recirc only needs to be about 1qt per minute.

Yes the locline is significantly better than the silicone hose method. I guarantee it. No you dont need the nozzle ring.

 

[ryanj]

If you mill your own grain, consider conditioning the grain first. If not, use rice hulls.

Recirc only needs to be about 1qt per minute.

Yes the locline is significantly better than the silicone hose method. I guarantee it. No you dont need the nozzle ring.

That's another vote for slow recirculation. I think I'll keep conditioning my grain (like I always do) and milling to .035 and try a much slower recirc (and see how that goes). Small changes with each batch will help me know if I'm moving in the right direction or not.

@Bobby_M Is locline really only rated to 170F? I mash out at about 168-170 so it's cutting it a bit close. Obviously it's probably fine, but any thoughts on that temp rating?

 

[stickyfinger]

Tell that to the op. Clearly it does or he wouldn't have asked....

true. i should have said that it is possible to mill fine and not jam up the mash. it just requires conditioning or rice hulls and not flowing too fast.

 

[stickyfinger]

I’m having a hard time considering 85% mash efficiency anything other than superb on any system.

We should be clear about what we mean when we say "mash efficiency." I usually refer the efficiencies as "conversion efficiency", "lauter efficiency", and "overall efficiency/system efficiency". The first is a measure of how well you are converting the starches in the grains into sugars, the second is how well you are extracting the sugars from the mash and the third is simply the product of the two efficiencies for a total measure of the conversion and lautering efficiency. I think the latter is what most refer to when they say "mash efficiency." I am usually at 90-95% conversion efficiency and then depending on the OG of the beer, I am usually in the 75-85% overall efficiency/"mash efficiency" range.

The 95% numbers for mash efficiency are almost certainly the result of using an unrealistically low value for the extract potential of the malt. 85% for an overall efficiency seems great to me. 85% for a conversion efficiency has room for improvement.

If you are interested in calculating the conversion efficiency and don't already do it or don't know how to do it, check out braukaiser's excellent writeup:

http://braukaiser.com/wiki/index.php/Understanding_Efficiency#Conversion_efficiency

 

[stickyfinger]

Yea the blichman false bottom is supposed to be the best. I've only ran about 40 1/2bbl batches on mine since building it but haven't had a issue with a stuck/ slow sparge since the first time. I normally mash in adjust ph and do chores or head out for errands. Cheers

From what I have seen and experienced on a friend's and my setup, the Spike Brewing false bottom is as good as the blichmann. The Spike kettle's also have the "stepped" bottom and a very small dead space. I love my Spike MLT! I've read that the slits in the blichmann are superior to the holes of the Spike, but I don't know if there is really any difference in performance, maybe. The Spike is the bomb though!

 

[SEndorf]

Looking through some past several beers, Beersmith reports my mash efficiency between 76% and 106%.
Frankly, I've never paid much attention to it. Focusing on Brewhouse efficiency as a constant (in my case 78%) takes into account all losses from my system, so dialing that in gives me consistent and accurate target numbers.

 

[stickyfinger]

Looking through some past several beers, Beersmith reports my mash efficiency between 76% and 106%.
Frankly, I've never paid much attention to it. Focusing on Brewhouse efficiency as a constant (in my case 78%) takes into account all losses from my system, so dialing that in gives me consistent and accurate target numbers.

your brewhouse efficiency is always 78%, regardless of OG and amount of hops used, etc. (assuming you are referring to brewhouse efficiency as the efficiency all the way through to the fermenter.)? That seems really weird to me. A hoppy barleywine would have a much lower lauter, overall, brewhouse, whatever for me than a hopless light lager (actually, the conversion efficiency could be as good or better but that is the only one.)

 

[MX1]

@ryanj

Not sure if it has been said, but when you start changing your process, change one thing at a time, and ride that change over a few brew sessions, you need to get a good shot group of what the change did and how your system reacts. It is a slow process, but the payoff is priceless once you dial in. Take the best notes of your life. record everything!

i had a 3 vessel, eHERMS built around 15gallon pots, with PID controls. It took me almost 2 years to get her humming the way I wanted. Then it took a lot of brews to figure out how each specific beer reacted to the system. It is work, but in all cases it should be a labor of love.

Make a list of things suggested to you in this thread as ways to improve your process. Figure out what seems most important to change, what is easiest to change, and what changes will be harder/cost more to implement, and then make a list of those changes ordered to what you feel is the best way to go about it.

I brewed a lot of simple beers for almost 3 years, 2 or 3 base malts, basic mash schedule, and simple hop additions....but keeping things simple and consistent was. for me, the key to learning basic brewing processes, learning brewing processes on my system, learning malt and hop profiles, and learning how my system reacted to brewing variables such as a large infusion of wheat or corn in the grist.

Take your time and enjoy the ride and education....

just my 2 cents, hope it helps

MX1

 

[SEndorf]

your brewhouse efficiency is always 78%, regardless of OG and amount of hops used, etc. (assuming you are referring to brewhouse efficiency as the efficiency all the way through to the fermenter.)? That seems really weird to me. A hoppy barleywine would have a much lower lauter, overall, brewhouse, whatever for me than a hopless light lager (actually, the conversion efficiency could be as good or better but that is the only one.)

Sorry... typed to fast and wasn't clear.
Brewhouse efficiency is the only "efficiency" in Beersmith that is inputted. Several batches and measurement losses to kettle, trub, hoses, etc. has determined (for my system) BE is entered at 78%.
This has consistently brought me to target numbers regardless of beer style, heavy or light.
For that reason (and I may be the outlier here) I really don't pay much attention to measured BE or ME as it varies depending on what you're brewing and therefore doesn't provide me any meaningful data.

 

[Genuine]

I also wonder about the false bottom. It sounds like I have the same one as you and I noticed when I attempted to do a full volume mash with 11-12lb's of grain, I think the false bottom flexed and it stopped flow all together. I may cut a section of 1.5" stainless pipe to add support if I choose to do that again.

 

[doug293cz]

Sorry... typed to fast and wasn't clear.
Brewhouse efficiency is the only "efficiency" in Beersmith that is inputted. Several batches and measurement losses to kettle, trub, hoses, etc. has determined (for my system) BE is entered at 78%.
This has consistently brought me to target numbers regardless of beer style, heavy or light.
For that reason (and I may be the outlier here) I really don't pay much attention to measured BE or ME as it varies depending on what you're brewing and therefore doesn't provide me any meaningful data.

Doesn't seem completely plausible to me that the BH efficiency can be constant no matter what the OG of the beer.

BrewHouse Eff = Conv Eff * Lauter Eff * Fermenter Vol / Post-Boil BK Vol​

The above applies whenever no sugar is added during the boil. For a constant pre-boil batch size the lauter efficiency has to go down as the grain bill weight increases (it's just physical chemistry.) Conversion efficiency can be independent of grain bill weight. So to maintain constant BH efficiency efficiency as grain bill increases, you either have to increase the pre-boil volume (and boil off the excess water), or take larger transfer losses (post-boil to fermenter volume losses) on smaller beers. Just can't be any other way. Can anyone find a flaw in this reasoning?

Brew on

 

[ryanj]

I also wonder about the false bottom. It sounds like I have the same one as you and I noticed when I attempted to do a full volume mash with 11-12lb's of grain, I think the false bottom flexed and it stopped flow all together. I may cut a section of 1.5" stainless pipe to add support if I choose to do that again.

I'm curious now... here's a pic of my cooler false bottom:

As you can see I have a high flow 45 degree street elbow, 1/2" silicone tubing, and a standard 1/2" hose barb on the bulkhead. I tried pushing on my domed false bottom and it didn't give. How could I tell if my false bottom is collapsing? I just can't see how this thing could collapse.

I considered maybe picking up one of those "true bulkheads" (https://www.brewhardware.com/product_p/truebulkheadbarb.htm) to help the flow even more, but I'm not sure how much longer I'll be mashing in a cooler, and it might be time to just go ahead and move to a better vessel.

Suggestions?

 

[SEndorf]

Doesn't seem completely plausible to me that the BH efficiency can be constant no matter what the OG of the beer.

BrewHouse Eff = Conv Eff * Lauter Eff * Fermenter Vol / Post-Boil BK Vol​

The above applies whenever no sugar is added during the boil. For a constant pre-boil batch size the lauter efficiency has to go down as the grain bill weight increases (it's just physical chemistry.) Conversion efficiency can be independent of grain bill weight. So to maintain constant BH efficiency efficiency as grain bill increases, you either have to increase the pre-boil volume (and boil off the excess water), or take larger transfer losses (post-boil to fermenter volume losses) on smaller beers. Just can't be any other way. Can anyone find a flaw in this reasoning?

There's no flaw in your reasoning..
My BHE is "set" at 78% based on my system losses. However measured efficiency varies between brew styles.
Perhaps it a Beersmith thing.

 

[doug293cz]

There's no flaw in your reasoning..
My BHE is "set" at 78% based on my system losses. However measured efficiency varies between brew styles.
Perhaps it a Beersmith thing.

Ok, I think I understand what you are saying now.

It's been known for a while that lauter efficiency can be predicted fairly accurately for no-sparge and batch sparge, and that the performance of a good fly sparge is slightly better than a 3x batch sparge. I think BeerSmith could be improved by using this efficiency predictive methodology rather than having the user input a fixed BH efficiency. The user would input their typical conversion efficiency, sparge process details, and the volume losses at mash and out of the boil kettle. BS would then more accurately predict mash efficiency and BH efficiency based on grain bill size vs. batch size. The Priceless calculator actually does this (and I helped make that possible.)

Brew on

 

[augiedoggy]

Interesting. I’m reading more and more that a lot of people don’t run their mash recirculation full bore (like I thought I was supposed to).

Do you stir your mash ocassionally or no? I’ve heard both yes and no. I didn’t have a choice with this last bath and had to stir multiple times and reset the grainbed.

I run mine at 1.5 to 2 gpm (i have a cheap flow meter inline which shows flow rate) no issues with a 20 dollar 24v dc pump and I get over 90% efficiency this way... I think most people make more headches for themselves trying to push the flow rate higher which gives zero benfit and many possible problems.. one reason is the 5-7 gallon per minute home brewing pumps are just too big for this and have to be throttled way down. think about it... theres what maybe 7-8 gallons or mash liquid in the MT for an 11 gallon brew? at 1.5gpm the mash is getting fully recycled through about every 5 mins.. the mash temp isnt going to drop much in 5 mins if at all. also the chance of channeling is pretty much eliminated as well as clogging the false bottom.

btw I never stir may mash once recirc starts.

also I have only ever used rice hulls once to see if I was missing anything and my mill is set to a standard credit card thickness.. I dont condition just like the breweries.. I think ricehulls and conditioning are work arounds for other process flaws myself but thats just based on my experience and not having a need for them.

I do have a large bayou false bottom and a 36" piece of braided line attached to my diptube under my false bottom to prevent anything from plugging my small pump up.

 

[ryanj]

I run mine at 1.5 to 2 gpm (i have a cheap flow meter inline which shows flow rate) no issues with a 20 dollar 24v dc pump and I get over 90% efficiency this way... I think most people make more headches for themselves trying to push the flow rate higher which gives zero benfit and many possible problems.. one reason is the 5-7 gallon per minute home brewing pumps are just too big for this and have to be throttled way down.

btw I never stir may mash once recirc starts.

Tell me about your cheap flow meter. For sake of consistency, I'd love to pick one up.

I have a pair of "china chugger" pumps (https://www.aliexpress.com/item/Hig...417.html?spm=a2g0s.9042311.0.0.2ad24c4dZMhWHY) which are rated at 4-5gpm because I felt like the chuggers cost twice the price and not necessarily worth the extra 2gpm. I love my pumps. Cheap and work well.

 

[MX1]

that links to pump not a flow meter.

I am interested the flow meter

T

 

[augiedoggy]

I use one of these however I see the 0 to 5gpm one I use is out of stock from this seller
https://www.ebay.com/itm/1-2-NPT-LZ...hash=item361afd3426:m:mAUQnZC3ytIje9MyDuZIG4A

 

[augiedoggy]

Tell me about your cheap flow meter. For sake of consistency, I'd love to pick one up.

I have a pair of "china chugger" pumps (https://www.aliexpress.com/item/Hig...417.html?spm=a2g0s.9042311.0.0.2ad24c4dZMhWHY) which are rated at 4-5gpm because I felt like the chuggers cost twice the price and not necessarily worth the extra 2gpm. I love my pumps. Cheap and work well.

those pumps are sold for all sorts of industrial applications as well . We use them in the machines I service (only they are marked up many times that cost with someone elses name on them) . nothing wrong with them... like I said no need for all that flow for our size brewing systems really.

 

[MX1]

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B014W2HCIO/?tag=skimlinks_replacement-20

This the same thing?

 

[ryanj]

https://www.amazon.com/0-5-5-1-8-18-Flow-meter-Water-Connector/dp/B014W2HCIO/ref=sr_1_20?ie=UTF8&qid=1527797818&sr=8-20&keywords=1/2+inch+flow+meter

This the same thing?

Rated to 150 degrees. :-/ I'm sure it would be fine, but pumping hot wort through that could be problematic.

 

[bbohanon]

Not sure if its been mentioned but I have run an e-herms system for over 2 years now (and I crush a bit finer) and my solution to this was is to bump up my water to grist ratio. I used to run 1.25qt/lb grain and struggled with the recirc much as you are but have moved to 1.4qt/lb grain and my recirc is wide open, no problems.
My brewhouse efficiency sits around 80% which is not bad at all.

The hose floating deal is not too big of a deal, you just dont want it jammed into the grain bed..Mine sits right below the water line most of the time.

 

[ryanj]

Not sure if its been mentioned but I have run an e-herms system for over 2 years now (and I crush a bit finer) and my solution to this was is to bump up my water to grist ratio. I used to run 1.25qt/lb grain and struggled with the recirc much as you are but have moved to 1.4qt/lb grain and my recirc is wide open, no problems.
My brewhouse efficiency sits around 80% which is not bad at all.

The hose floating deal is not too big of a deal, you just dont want it jammed into the grain bed..Mine sits right below the water line most of the time.

I've always run 1.75 qt/lb (including on the day of my first HERMS batch), but as the rest of the community has stated, with the wheat/oats in my grain bill, I was clearly just pumping too fast. I could see air pockets forming in the mash out/pump feed hose. I already have a decent false bottom with high flow plumbing, so I'm going to try pumping slower next batch see how things go.

 

[Blazinlow86]

I've always run 1.75 qt/lb (including on the day of my first HERMS batch), but as the rest of the community has stated, with the wheat/oats in my grain bill, I was clearly just pumping too fast. I could see air pockets forming in the mash out/pump feed hose. I already have a decent false bottom with high flow plumbing, so I'm going to try pumping slower next batch see how things go.

It's not pumping too fast your grainbed isnt flowing enough to keep up..... Don't overthink it. Not saying people aren't successfully making great beer throttling back there pumps but why settle for that if you don't have to. Mill looser next time and use rice hulls also if your using wheat. The whole reason I built my eherms system was not have to screw around with thing like stuck mash/sparge. It's supposed to be consistant and reliable

 

[ryanj]

It's not pumping too fast your grainbed isnt flowing enough to keep up..... Don't overthink it. Not saying people aren't successfully making great beer throttling back there pumps but why settle for that if you don't have to. Mill looser next time and use rice hulls also if your using wheat. The whole reason I built my eherms system was not have to screw around with thing like stuck mash/sparge. It's supposed to be consistant and reliable

Or...is the grainbed not flowing enough because it compacted as a result of pumping too fast? I’m quite convinced that’s what happened for me.

If you read through this thread, 50% of people say crush fine and pump slow. The other say crush coarse and run full bore. Both are making great beer.

Bottom line, avoid a stuck sparge by doing one or the other and...make great beer.

 

[Blazinlow86]

Correct it has compacted because it's not flowing correctly. my point is 50% of people confirmed they have the same issues you had on the brew day you refered to as mediocre and 50% of people confirmed milling looser will prevent it. if you do the same thing you did on the first brew its gonna be mediocre again. nothing changed.

 

[KevinP]

My system is similar and I fall on the high flow recirc side of this discussion.
Is it possible that your tube between the false bottom and mlt output is getting crushed? I believe this was happening to me so I slid a short piece of 1/2" stainless tubing inside that tube and that seemed to help.