My Super Efficient 5-Gallon Mash Lauter Tun

[ChemE]

Question:

When using the HLT, how do you adjust for the temp changes? I use Beersmith. Typically, the temperature of my initial infusion of water is different than that of my sparge water temps. So what do you do? Heat all the water in the HLT to 168 and heat your initial infusion seperately?

Right now, I heat water to temp and dump it in. It's a little more time consuming, but I hit whatever temp that Beersmith tells me to hit......

I personally decoct because I don't make light beers. I strike at 104F for 20 minutes to let the enzymes leach into the strike water then I boil the thick part of that mash to get up to my sach rest.

One nice thing about decoction mashing is you aren't adding additional water to your mash. So you can make bigger beers in the same MLT and there is more sparge water available. I think this is part of what is helping me get the brewhouse efficiency that I get (92% on my last batch).

 

[nathan]

I use beersmith to calculate what I want my strike water at. Right now with my cooler I put in a half gallon of nearly boiling water first for 5-10 minutes while I get other stuff ready. I dump that (it's a nice hot rinse and heats the tun) and put in the measured amount of strike water, but a few degrees hotter than called for. I leave the lid open and let it cool to exactly the strike temp called for (can take 5 minutes or more, stir if you are impatient). Dough-in and it turns out pretty close to perfect.

 

[slnies]

I personally decoct because I don't make light beers. I strike at 104F for 20 minutes to let the enzymes leach into the strike water then I boil the thick part of that mash to get up to my sach rest.

One nice thing about decoction mashing is you aren't adding additional water to your mash. So you can make bigger beers in the same MLT and there is more sparge water available. I think this is part of what is helping me get the brewhouse efficiency that I get (92% on my last batch).

I will disagree on the grounds that I got that in my five gallon RIMS set up. Even doing a big beer. My opinion, is that you have developed a process that you are consistent with. This making refinement easier, making your process more efficient. This is all my opinion though. Great efficiency though, excellent process. Some of my best beers have been decocted. S.

 

[ChemE]

Still you can't argue the fact that when decoction mashing there is more water available to wash the grains with because you aren't infusing with it.

My last beer had an OG of 1.074 and if I had infused rather than decocted I would have used 5.00 additional quarts of water in the mash. The final gravity of my last running from fly sparging was 1.012 so even if we assume that the gravity didn't change during the last 5.0 quarts of runnings that gives 1.25(12) = 16 points out of a theoretical 404.75 points. So the extra sparge water upped my efficiency at least 3.7% and actually more since we know that my constant gravity assumption is ridiculous.

 

[craigd]

Maybe I'm not understanding this well but won't the Hartford loop only work to control the level in the MLT if there is a full free flow through the grain bed? I guess what I'm saying is that if your bed is draining slower than the incoming sparge water or your mash just gets stuck it could still overflow and you wouldn't be able to see the level rising in the cooler. I will freely admit that I haven't used anything like this so I may just be missing something...

 

[nathan]

with practice you'll have free mashes anyway, especially fly sparging with the extra fluid involved.

 

[slnies]

Still you can't argue the fact that when decoction mashing there is more water available to wash the grains with because you aren't infusing with it.

My last beer had an OG of 1.074 and if I had infused rather than decocted I would have used 5.00 additional quarts of water in the mash. The final gravity of my last running from fly sparging was 1.012 so even if we assume that the gravity didn't change during the last 5.0 quarts of runnings that gives 1.25(12) = 16 points out of a theoretical 404.75 points. So the extra sparge water upped my efficiency at least 3.7% and actually more since we know that my constant gravity assumption is ridiculous.

I would argue that you have good process as opposed to the equipment being the reason for the efficiency. I agree that the extra sparge water is the reason for the good efficiency, but I get 93+ percent batch sparging. I have done both. And batch over fly, is a decision of convenience. I can get better efficiency fly sparging, but the difference for my system was small, so I batch. S.

 

[slnies]

with practice you'll have free mashes anyway, especially fly sparging with the extra fluid involved.

Agreed, After a few, batches of brew, the fly will be adjusted just perfect. This assumes that the crush is consistent.

 

[TerapinChef]

Some of us were discussing internal sparge manifolds on cooler lids over the summer, bud none of us did it...

*Ahemm*
I managed to squeeze one in...no fancy pvc or ball valve, but it works...

 

[gruversm]

Great design! Thanks for sharing.

 

[mattmcl]

With all the talk of the Hartford loop, I was wondering if there isn't some kind of flowmeter available. You could get two of them, and just make sure the flow was the same for both.

 

[nathan]

my return for my blichmann looks just like that. I drilled, squirted water through, then drilled more until I could see it sprinkling nice and evenly over the top. Pretty easy! I did put threaded ends on the 4 ends of the H shape. Then I thread caps onto them, so I can remove them and get a brush in there as needed.

 

[user 29674]

With all the talk of the Hartford loop, I was wondering if there isn't some kind of flowmeter available. You could get two of them, and just make sure the flow was the same for both.

There are, but I'm not finding any (with pricing listed) that can handle particles in the liquid (such as during vorlauf), high temperatures, and are precise enough to accurtely measure the low flow of sparging for a reasonable amount of money. There are a lot out there designed for aquariums and liquid cooled PCs that look good but can't handle the temps. That being said, I've spent a total of 5 minutes on google, so I bet there's something out there.

This looks the most promising, but will set you back $92 and you need two of them... Water Flowmeters and Basic Visual Indicators

I like the idea though, adjust your valves until the two read the same and you're good. Something to keep in mind for when I graduate to AG.

 

[TommyBoy]

Wouldn't a flowmeter in some way restrict the flow?

 

[user 29674]

I wouldn't think so, as long as you use the proper size for your tubing. They couldn't do a very good job of measuring rate of flow if they slowed it down. The only thing I could think of is if you used an impeller type that wasn't rated for suspended particles and clogged the impeller. That would definitely restrict flow.

 

[TerapinChef]

Any update on the Harford Loop use? Does it work? I'm interested...I bet you could even get it to the point where you know where to set it just by the amount of grains in your grain bill...I can see my bracket marked now..."Porter" "Birthday Stout" "Hobgoblin"...

 

[TommyBoy]

I only have a parts list put together...

 

[TommyBoy]

I would plan on milling the "slider" bracket and tacking the bolt on to the top tee. This would then hook directly up to your 1/2" MPT

 

[TerapinChef]

Are you sure that you would want to put a ball valve on the output topside? Wouldn't the flow just be regulated by the Hartford Loop anyways? I feel if anything it should be on the bottom T leading to the H.L. so that you can close that open part of your system at the top, enabling a good siphon for when you are draining after sparging.

 

[ChemE]

Are you sure that you would want to put a ball valve on the output topside? Wouldn't the flow just be regulated by the Hartford Loop anyways? I feel if anything it should be on the bottom T leading to the H.L. so that you can close that open part of your system at the top, enabling a good siphon for when you are draining after sparging.

No ball valve is needed on the top at all. Flow out is regulated by flow into the top of the MLT.

 

[ChemE]

Any update on the Harford Loop use? Does it work? I'm interested...I bet you could even get it to the point where you know where to set it just by the amount of grains in your grain bill...I can see my bracket marked now..."Porter" "Birthday Stout" "Hobgoblin"...

I haven't had a chance to try it yet (another big project is kickin' my ass) but I plan to within the next few weeks. The one comment which was raised earlier which has given me pause is the question regarding back pressure from the grain bed. Especially with my very tall grain bed this is a valid concern and I'm not sure how badly it will effect the hartford loop. Here is a picture of the hartford loop from my skimmer just for illustrative purposes in case my awesome SketchUp drawing isn't very clear.

Hartford Loop from a Reef Aquarium Skimmer

 

[TommyBoy]

Are you sure that you would want to put a ball valve on the output topside? Wouldn't the flow just be regulated by the Hartford Loop anyways? I feel if anything it should be on the bottom T leading to the H.L. so that you can close that open part of your system at the top, enabling a good siphon for when you are draining after sparging.

I am trying to figure out why I put a valve up there...

...I guess you're right. No need for that one.

 

[TerapinChef]

I think that the ball valve at the top of the first tee would still be a good idea though. I'm not an expert in fluid dynamics or anything but I feel like you need that top part closed before you can siphon from the bottom effectively.

 

[Jersh]

OP, what size nipple did you to connect your plastic tube and still have it underneath your manifold? I just happened to have a 10 gallon version of that cooler in my storage closet and I'm trying to convert it, however the spigot hole on mine must be drilled a little higher, I can't get my manifold to sit down flat.

 

[volcar]

it looks like there is a divete in the bottom of the square cooler where the drainage tube lies, so that the copper tubing can lay snugg to the bottom.

 

[eschatz]

I plan on adding a Hartford Loop. These are commonly used in saltwater aquarium skimmers to maintain a constant water level in a vessel despite flow going both in and out. I tried to make how these work clear with notes on the SketchUp model but let me know if anyone has any questions. I really can't believe no one seems to use these for fly sparging. Once the height of the tee is set, that's it. There is no possibility of the fluid level changing.

How will you Vourlauf without opening the top of the cooler and pouring it in? I only batch so I'm just curious how you fly guys do that. Just tossing the vourlauf would go against the max eff esthetic.

 

[ChemE]

OP, what size nipple did you to connect your plastic tube and still have it underneath your manifold? I just happened to have a 10 gallon version of that cooler in my storage closet and I'm trying to convert it, however the spigot hole on mine must be drilled a little higher, I can't get my manifold to sit down flat.

Both nipples underneath the manifold are 3/8" barb fittings. They fit perfectly in the space; 1/2" wouldn't fit though.

 

[ChemE]

How will you Vourlauf without opening the top of the cooler and pouring it in? I only batch so I'm just curious how you fly guys do that. Just tossing the vourlauf would go against the max eff esthetic.

The lid is cracked for vorlauf but that's it. So what, ten seconds or so. If that much really bugged you, you could always dump it in the HLT or set up a valve above the MLT to receive the vorlauf.

 

[TommyBoy]

I think that the ball valve at the top of the first tee would still be a good idea though. I'm not an expert in fluid dynamics or anything but I feel like you need that top part closed before you can siphon from the bottom effectively.

At first I thought you might be right. After thinking about it for a few minutes (on the throne ) I can't figure out how siphoning would be affected by an open valve at the top.

Wouldn't there always be positive pressure comming out of the bottom valve thus preventing the issue of this? I honestly am not sure so if someone could elaborate on their reply to this, that would be great.

 

[nathan]

I run off into a gallon jug and pour it back into the top one jug at a time while it flows continually until I've returned (vorlauf) about 4 gallons usually. I go by clarity, which is easy to see in lighter beers.