Need help diagnosing lower than expected efficiency

[gifty74]

Long time all-grain brewer. Using Beersmith 3. Have a recirculating infusion mash setup. Have a good 3 roller mill, and am hyper focused on the crush, recently making it finer. My spike mash tun has a great false bottom and can go pretty fine, finer than most I've seen. So I do not think crush is the culprit. But I had been getting a brewhouse efficiency around 62%, and these past few batches I've been coming up short, even with that very conservative efficiency setting. Today had it set for 64%, and ended up getting 56%. Not sure what is going on. Today was pretty spot on for everything. 2.5lbs of wheat malt that I crushed super fine to almost a flour, and then the mix of 2 row and Pils was crushed pretty fine as well.

Recipe attached.

Just looking for some insight on why I constantly see efficiencies in the 70's, and i can barely get into the low 60's, with a focus on crush (studying pics online, comparing, etc), and a pretty good constantly recirculating infusion mash setup. I batch sparge, because I have that down pretty well. I know fly sparging will get me a few more points, but not sure i want the extra time involved. Shouldn't I be getting better eff with my batch sparge setup? Any other tips?

 

[doug293cz]

To diagnose efficiency issues, you need to collect the measurements that let you calculate both conversion efficiency (how much of the potential extract you actually created in the mash) and lauter efficiency (how much of the created extract actually made it into the boil kettle.) Mash efficiency equals conversion efficiency times lauter efficiency. To know where the problem was caused you need to know whether you had low conversion efficiency or poor lauter efficiency. The causes of these are different, and they require different remedial action to improve.

The data you should be collecting in order to do a complete analysis of your efficiencies is as follows:

• Grain bill weight
• Weighted average grain bill potential
• Weighted average grain bill moisture content (if you don't know this, using 4% is close enough)
• Strike water volume (measured at, or corrected to, room temp)
• End of mash wort SG, after thorough wort homogenization
• Sparge water volume (measured at, or corrected to, room temp)
• Sparge process details
• Pre-boil volume (corrected to room temp)
• Pre-boil SG, after thorough wort homogenization
• Post-boil volume (corrected to room temp)
• Post-boil SG (aka OG)
• Volume to fermenter (if you want to calculate brewhouse efficiency)

Your calculated values (efficiencies) can be no more accurate than your least accurate measurement (except for grain moisture), so taking accurate measurements is critical if you want to accurately calculate efficiency. Small SG samples for refractometers are prone to evaporation if not handled carefully, which can lead to erroneously high SG readings (as noted in previous responses.) If sparging, then pre-boil wort can also be non-homogeneous (i.e. stratified) so needs to be stirred aggressively to homogenize before taking a pre-boil wort SG measurement.

If you can provide us with the missing data from the list above, we can do a better job of determining where your efficiency issues originate.

Brew on

 

[day_trippr]

Post a tight picture of a typical base malt crush...

[edit] Also, if the OP has faithfully been filling in their BeerSmith recipe Session sheet, it has pretty near everything needed to figure out where the losses are...

Cheers!

 

[gifty74]

Thanks guys. And I guess I could've figured I'd need some missing data, that I'll definitely be collecting the next time. The biggest being the preboil SG. I know the final SG in the fermenter, 1.070 vs what 63% eff was to get me at 1.074. Undershot the volume a little, but that is pretty easy to figure out too. I guess more of my question is: is this eff and my setup decent, or am I missing it somewhere, and could be performing better. Not sure much concerned about calculating an exact efficiency, but just don't know how most of the eff I see people posting, and in recipes online, is all in the 70's, and i'm struggling to get 60. Just seems like I would be extracting as much as the next guy?

 

[micraftbeer]

You specifically mentioned "brew house efficiency", and most people talk "mash efficiency" . It's good that you spelled that out, because they're different. And @doug293cz broke mash efficiency down further into its components of conversion efficiency and lauter efficiency. Quick definitions starting from base and building up:

• Conversion Efficiency- how efficient the chemical reaction of the mash is at extracting all the potential sugar from your grain.
• Lauter Efficiency- how efficient your draining/sparging process is at rinsing out all the sugars from the mash conversion.
• Mash Efficiency- Combination of the above two, and seems to be the most common measurement people talk about when they discuss "efficiency".
• Brewhouse Efficiency- how efficient your complete brewing process gets you the most wort into your fermentor.

Brewhouse Efficiency you mention includes "non-mash aspects" like how much trub/wort you leave behind in your brew kettle, etc. If you change your brew rig, and you are getting less wort into your fermentor for the same amount of water + grain you put into your old setup, you will get a lower Brewhouse Efficiency. Even if the chemical process of creating sugars and rinsing them out is just as efficient.

I think BeerSmith calculates both Mash Efficiency and Brewhouse Efficiency. So if you're pulling Brewhouse Efficiency out of it, and you are entering your brew day results into it, it should also calculate your Mash Efficiency.

 

[hottpeper13]

You state that your crush has been getting finer and the eff. should go up. Are you letting the mash gelatanize before recirculation starts? Could it be possible there is channeling going on. Give it a stir!

 

[gifty74]

You state that your crush has been getting finer and the eff. should go up. Are you letting the mash gelatanize before recirculation starts? Could it be possible there is channeling going on. Give it a stir!

Huh, didn't know letting it gelatanize was a thing! I pretty much get it stirred in, wait a few min (maybe 3-5), and start recirculation immediately. Throughout then I stir the top layers, down about halfway into the grain bed, to keep it as clear as possible, and to not disturb it too much. Do this probably 3-4 times over the hour long mash.

 

[gifty74]

You specifically mentioned "brew house efficiency", and most people talk "mash efficiency" . It's good that you spelled that out, because they're different. And @doug293cz broke mash efficiency down further into its components of conversion efficiency and lauter efficiency. Quick definitions starting from base and building up:

• Conversion Efficiency- how efficient the chemical reaction of the mash is at extracting all the potential sugar from your grain.
• Lauter Efficiency- how efficient your draining/sparging process is at rinsing out all the sugars from the mash conversion.
• Mash Efficiency- Combination of the above two, and seems to be the most common measurement people talk about when they discuss "efficiency".
• Brewhouse Efficiency- how efficient your complete brewing process gets you the most wort into your fermentor.

Brewhouse Efficiency you mention includes "non-mash aspects" like how much trub/wort you leave behind in your brew kettle, etc. If you change your brew rig, and you are getting less wort into your fermentor for the same amount of water + grain you put into your old setup, you will get a lower Brewhouse Efficiency. Even if the chemical process of creating sugars and rinsing them out is just as efficient.

I think BeerSmith calculates both Mash Efficiency and Brewhouse Efficiency. So if you're pulling Brewhouse Efficiency out of it, and you are entering your brew day results into it, it should also calculate your Mash Efficiency.

And thank you! Great info, that I knew most of, but needed a little refresher on. And yes, my mash eff is usually in the low to mid 70s.

This next batch i'm going to focus a lot of effort on gravity checks throughout the brew day, not just at the end. For a while my setup was consistently at 63% brewhouse eff, but these last few it has dropped, not sure why. But I didn't really have a need to check gravity the fermenter because it was so consistent. Now I will be on top of it.

 

[Kickass]

If your mash eff is in the 70’s and your brew house is in the 50’s or 60’s, it sounds like you’re losing some sweet wort going into the FV. Do you have a large amount of liquid loss (not boil off) somewhere between boil kettle and FV?

 

[dmtaylor]

What is your mash pH? Are you adding acid? If not, I would guess your mash pH is around 6.0 which is way too high. Need to aim for 5.5-5.6 at most.

Volume matters a lot as well. It says you measured 5.85 gallons. Were you intending on brewing that much, or were you aiming for like 5.5 gallons, or...? If you didn't boil long enough or hard enough, your OG will be lower than expected of course due to the extra water diluting your sugars.

 

[kevin58]

When you said you use Beersmith I knew immediately what your problem is. It is essential, imperative, crucial, vital that you create a customized equipment profile if you want accurate estimates from Beersmith. Or any recipe software really.

It doesn't matter if you find your exact system in the equipment profile database. Even Beersmith creator Brad Smith says you should only use those as a starting point to build your own profile. Many, if not most of those equipment profiles in the supplied database were created by Beersmith users. Those profiles were developed and tuned on their systems using their brewing process. Your system and process will be different. It's boring but you must take the time to measure all of your volumes.

Here is one of the video tutorials that I have used to create three or more equipment profiles. Forget that the title of the video says Beersmith 2 and forget that his system may not match yours. The process is the same... measure the volumes... subtract the losses... do the math. Brian even gives you a spreadsheet to make those calculations. But you have to go through all the steps and then take accurate notes during your brew sessions so you can make fine adjustments to dial in your profile.

 

[doug293cz]

Can you describe your brewhouse equipment a bit more? It sounds from the limited information that you have provided so far that it is a traditional 3 vessel system. Is this correct? Is it safe to assume that your mash vessel does not have a basket/malt pipe?

It is very common for efficiency problems to come down to significantly lower than 100% conversion efficiency. However, malt pipe mashing vessels have known complications that can reduce lauter efficiency significantly below what is possible, and a sloppy fly sparge can also lead to lower than expected lauter efficiency. A batch sparge is easier to conduct in an optimal way.

Since you are batch sparging, it is most probable that your conversion efficiency is the root of your lower than expected mash and brewhouse efficiency. It is possible to predict the maximum end of mash SG (what you get with 100% conversion), and you can use this information to monitor the mash and determine when your mash is fully converted. The easiest way to insure mash completion is to start taking SG measurements (refractometers make this more convenient than using a hydrometer) at about 45 minutes into the mash, and then take measurements every 15 minutes. When you get two successive SG readings that are the same (SG is no longer increasing with time) your mash is probably done. However, if the flat-lined SG is lower than your predicted mash SG, then you may need to step up the temp to force gelatinization of "resistant" starch. Starch must be gelatinized before it can be hydrolyzed into fermentable sugars.

Definitively pinpointing the cause of your issue requires the data that I laid out in post #2 above.

Brew on

 

[gifty74]

Love that there are all these fellow brewers looking to help!!

Yes, it is typical 3 vessel system. My MT is a Spike, and has an excellent false bottom, with pickup tube that goes to the center of the false bottom and picks up underneath, with little to no losses. I have .2 gal lost in dead space.

I have very little losses getting into the BK. I have a march pump, but even after it taps out after moving all sparge volume over to the BK, I unhook the hoses and let the MT drain every last bit out into a pitcher I have down on the ground. So I get every last drop of out of the MT.

I usually shoot for 5.5 in the FV, and to get that, with an average hop bill, I generally need to start with 7.5 gal. I then get roughly 6 gal left after 1.5 gal/hr boil off. And then the cooling shrinkage, and about .3gal losses for trub/hoses/etc, to get about 5.5 into the FV.

This last batch had more hops than normal (hazy IPA), so went for 8.5 pre-boil, but only got 8 pre-boil. I think bc of the higher flaked oat content, and finer crush, I need to tweak my grain absorption setting a little. But anyway, only had 8 to start, so kept the boil off down more, and ended up with 6.75 post boil, and with the large amount of dry hops, got just under 6 into the FV.

So, this last one was a bit out of the ordinary, but still, ended up with 1.070 on 1.074 expected, and a little short on volume.

 

[gifty74]

Did two sessions this weekend. No improvement after more experimenting with crush and being focused on channeling through the mash bed, because i recirculate during the entire mash (direct fired). Stirred the second one so much, stopping pump and stirring probably 4-5 times. So it's not mixing. It's not channeling. I am just getting consistently now ~56% brewhouse efficiency. Used to be 62-64%, which is still low, but now it just seems much lower than it should be. It's consistent as heck now, but it just seems low. I hyper focused on crush, and not having any kernels in tact, making sure it's as fine as it can be, etc etc. Adjusted mash pH to 5.2-5.4 range for both batches, so it's not a pH issue. Just scratching my head.

 

[dmtaylor]

When's the last time you checked calibration of your hydrometer and/or refractometer in plain cool water to ensure they read 1.000 or 0.0 as applicable?

When's the last time you checked calibration of your mash thermometer in both ice water at 32 F and boiling water at whatever the boiling temperature is at your elevation above sea level? If that would be Lancaster, PA, then Google says... 212 F because you are close to sea level (lucky you). But you should check your thermometers at both extremes. My thermometer is off by 2 degrees low at one end and 2 degrees high at the other end, so by interpolation at mash temperature my thermometer should be just about perfect. But YOUR mileage may vary!

 

[gifty74]

Thanks for that idea. But yes, I've checked temperatures with multiple thermometers, yesterday specifically. They're within 1-2 deg F. The probe at the tee in my pump, which is what I go by for maintaining mash temp, was within a degree of another thermometer. My hydrometer and refractometer are within a few pts of each other, so thinking they gotta be close. I don't know what else to check.

 

[RM-MN]

Did two sessions this weekend. No improvement after more experimenting with crush and being focused on channeling through the mash bed, because i recirculate during the entire mash (direct fired). Stirred the second one so much, stopping pump and stirring probably 4-5 times. So it's not mixing. It's not channeling. I am just getting consistently now ~56% brewhouse efficiency. Used to be 62-64%, which is still low, but now it just seems much lower than it should be. It's consistent as heck now, but it just seems low. I hyper focused on crush, and not having any kernels in tact, making sure it's as fine as it can be, etc etc. Adjusted mash pH to 5.2-5.4 range for both batches, so it's not a pH issue. Just scratching my head.

Quit adding heat and don't recirculate for one batch. I suspect your heating is denaturing the enzymes.

 

[gifty74]

Really? That would do it?? I hadn't heard of that, but entirely possible. What's kinda odd though is that it's flowing at a pretty decent rate, and the burner which provides the head to the MT to maintain temp I have set pretty low, so it doesn't scorch. I guess I will try and not recirculate next time and see if that isn't it?!
.
Yeah, i don't know. My temp probe is in my pump, just after where it's drawing the wort from under the false bottom, where it's being heated. The controller is set to the temp (say 150) and the probe is reading that just after it's heated. Unlikely that the wort is heated much over that amount, because the probe is reading it right after the heating zone at the bottom of the MT.

 

[doug293cz]

Did two sessions this weekend. No improvement after more experimenting with crush and being focused on channeling through the mash bed, because i recirculate during the entire mash (direct fired). Stirred the second one so much, stopping pump and stirring probably 4-5 times. So it's not mixing. It's not channeling. I am just getting consistently now ~56% brewhouse efficiency. Used to be 62-64%, which is still low, but now it just seems much lower than it should be. It's consistent as heck now, but it just seems low. I hyper focused on crush, and not having any kernels in tact, making sure it's as fine as it can be, etc etc. Adjusted mash pH to 5.2-5.4 range for both batches, so it's not a pH issue. Just scratching my head.

Have you collected the data that was enumerated in post #2 of this thread? This is the data that is needed to properly diagnose where your efficiency issue originates. Without data, all you can do is speculate.

I also recommend rereading post #12 for information on how to tell when you mash is done.

Brew on

 

[gifty74]

Yes:

• 21lbs grain bill weight
• 21lbs fermentables
• 6.65 gal strike water
• 1.056 end of mash SG
• 4.88 gal sparge water volume
• Batch sparge: slowly drain into my BK, then use pump to add the 4.88 gal @ 190F on top of the mash, bringing it up close to 170F
• Pre-boil exactly to target at 8.75 gal
• Did not take pre-boil SG
• Post Boil volume of 7 gal exactly (1.75 gal/hr boil off rate)
• Post boil SG Of 1.074 (to be 1.080 at my 62% beersmith brewhouse efficiency setting)
• Volume to fermenter of exactly 6 gal. I'm finding that is just my system now, anywhere from .75 - 1.0 gal lost to cooling, transfer, etc. So I now make my less hopped batched .75 gal over, and my hopped ones like this one 1.0 gal over what i want in fermenter. For this IPA i wanted 6 gal in the fermenter due to all the hopping and losses

 

[doug293cz]

Yes:

• 21lbs grain bill weight
• 21lbs fermentables
• 6.65 gal strike water
• 1.056 end of mash SG
• 4.88 gal sparge water volume
• Batch sparge: slowly drain into my BK, then use pump to add the 4.88 gal @ 190F on top of the mash, bringing it up close to 170F
• Pre-boil exactly to target at 8.75 gal
• Did not take pre-boil SG
• Post Boil volume of 7 gal exactly (1.75 gal/hr boil off rate)
• Post boil SG Of 1.074 (to be 1.080 at my 62% beersmith brewhouse efficiency setting)
• Volume to fermenter of exactly 6 gal. I'm finding that is just my system now, anywhere from .75 - 1.0 gal lost to cooling, transfer, etc. So I now make my less hopped batched .75 gal over, and my hopped ones like this one 1.0 gal over what i want in fermenter. For this IPA i wanted 6 gal in the fermenter due to all the hopping and losses

According to my spreadsheet, with 21 lbs of grain (at typical potential and moisture content) mashed with 6.65 gal of strike water would have given you an end of mash SG of 1.094 at 100% conversion efficiency. Your value of 1.056 corresponds to a conversion efficiency of only 55-56%.

Brew on

 

[dmtaylor]

Here's what I see:

You're throwing away an awful lot of wort! Looking at your numbers, I see 3 quarts missing from your mash, followed by 3 quarts from the cold break after the boil. I might be a small batch brewer, but even if I weren't, I wouldn't lose anywhere near that much wort. I measure my own losses around 0.1 to 0.3 qt each. You're losing more on the order of gallons vs. quarts of wort. If you're not keeping all your wort, your efficiency will suffer greatly. My average efficiency is around 83%, something like that. You'll see higher results if you collect every last drop from your mash tun, and don't rack off of any trub but just keep most of it in there except perhaps a couple cups of hop matter, that's fine, but 3 quarts... no, that's too much.

Hope this helps.

 

[doug293cz]

According to my spreadsheet, with 21 lbs of grain (at typical potential and moisture content) mashed with 6.65 gal of strike water would have given you an end of mash SG of 1.094 at 100% conversion efficiency. Your value of 1.056 corresponds to a conversion efficiency of only 55-56%.

Brew on

I did the complete analysis of your data points with my spreadsheet, and the numbers don't add up. Here's the output from just using your grain bill weight, strike water volume, and end of mash SG:

Notice that the post-boil SG comes in way below your measured value of 1.074. If I force the sheet to your measured post-boil SG, then this is the result:

Note that the end of mash SG required to hit your measured post-boil SG is 1.085-1.086, which is way above what you have measured. Your conversion efficiency then comes in at a more respectable 89-90%.

There are a few things that could explain the discrepancies:

1. Your end of mash SG measurement was in error
2. Your post-boil SG measurement was in error
3. Other measurements were in error
4. You had very poor conversion efficiency in your initial mash, but conversion continued after draining and adding the sparge water, so that your sparge runnings were higher in SG than expected
5. A combination of one or more of the above

Brew on

 

[Bobby_M]

You had very poor conversion efficiency in your initial mash, but conversion continued after draining and adding the sparge water, so that your sparge runnings were higher in SG than expected

I saw this a few times on 3 vessel systems where the mash was actually held as a lower average temperature than the brewer thought. Only after the ramp to a mashout did the gravity increase. Monitoring wort gravity throughout the mash is extremely useful in this regard.

 

[Bobby_M]

• Batch sparge: slowly drain into my BK, then use pump to add the 4.88 gal @ 190F on top of the mash, bringing it up close to 170F

You are stirring the sparge water into the damp grain really well before running off the second runnings to the kettle right?

 

[gifty74]

You are stirring the sparge water into the damp grain really well before running off the second runnings to the kettle right?

Yes, stirring a lot (probably 5 min) to get it all mixed in with the sparge water.

 

[gifty74]

I did the complete analysis of your data points with my spreadsheet, and the numbers don't add up. Here's the output from just using your grain bill weight, strike water volume, and end of mash SG:

View attachment 874346

Notice that the post-boil SG comes in way below your measured value of 1.074. If I force the sheet to your measured post-boil SG, then this is the result:

View attachment 874347

Note that the end of mash SG required to hit your measured post-boil SG is 1.085-1.086, which is way above what you have measured. Your conversion efficiency then comes in at a more respectable 89-90%.

There are a few things that could explain the discrepancies:

1. Your end of mash SG measurement was in error
2. Your post-boil SG measurement was in error
3. Other measurements were in error
4. You had very poor conversion efficiency in your initial mash, but conversion continued after draining and adding the sparge water, so that your sparge runnings were higher in SG than expected
5. A combination of one or more of the above

Brew on

Ok, I think I mixed up numbers of the two sessions I did this weekend. For this batch, I actually didn't get a post mash SG. Just a pre-boil SG of 1.056. So, I think that'll explain the numbers mixup.

For my the batch Sunday, I was more focused on SG throughout the mash, and also did a no sparge. Just added 8.9 gal of strike water to the MT and did it no sparge. Much easier, and probably only lost a pt or two. However, I also did direct fire recirculation for that batch, and could've denatured the enzymes too. Got the same brewhouse eff of 57% w/ no sparge.

 

[Willy]

I had a few brews where efficiency wasn't what I expected (higher and lower)... And finally figured out my scale for grains was whacked, especially in the 2 lbs or lower weights. Got a new scale... And also some containers that approx expected weight for the grain (a 2 lb container, 3 and a 5 lb bin - this provides a rough double check)

Another area I messed up was adding sparge water (too much or too little) or not boiling off fast enough vs expected boil off rate.

Basically - 3 main variables are going to be:
Grains - water - or brew house or mash efficiency

 

[jerrylotto]

What about pH? Do you check it and adjust at all?

 

[gifty74]

What about pH? Do you check it and adjust at all?

Yes, adjusted to 5.3 temp corrected.

 

[doug293cz]

Ok, I think I mixed up numbers of the two sessions I did this weekend. For this batch, I actually didn't get a post mash SG. Just a pre-boil SG of 1.056. So, I think that'll explain the numbers mixup.

For my the batch Sunday, I was more focused on SG throughout the mash, and also did a no sparge. Just added 8.9 gal of strike water to the MT and did it no sparge. Much easier, and probably only lost a pt or two. However, I also did direct fire recirculation for that batch, and could've denatured the enzymes too. Got the same brewhouse eff of 57% w/ no sparge.

OK, with a pre-boil of 1.056 things look better efficiency wise, and the pre and post-boil SG are a lot more self consistent, but still not matching up quite as well as they should.

The predicted post-boil for your measured pre-boil SG & volume and post-boil volume is coming in a bit below your measured OG - 1.070 vs. 1.074. This indicates that there are some unidentified measurement errors. The most likely error is your pre-boil SG being somewhat lower that actual due to incomplete mixing of the first runnings wort and the sparged wort. It this in indeed the case, then your actual conversion efficiency was higher than 84%.

Brew on

 

[gifty74]

OK, with a pre-boil of 1.056 things look better efficiency wise, and the pre and post-boil SG are a lot more self consistent, but still not matching up quite as well as they should.

View attachment 874394

The predicted post-boil for your measured pre-boil SG & volume and post-boil volume is coming in a bit below your measured OG - 1.070 vs. 1.074. This indicates that there are some unidentified measurement errors. The most likely error is your pre-boil SG being somewhat lower that actual due to incomplete mixing of the first runnings wort and the sparged wort. It this in indeed the case, then your actual conversion efficiency was higher than 84%.

Brew on

Wow, ok, thank you for this analysis. So Beersmith is saying I have 63.3% mash efficiency, and 57.4% brewhouse eff. Not great, seems like a lot of grain to get 7 gal post boil of 1.074 wort, no?

 

[JohnDBrewer]

Deleted, sorry posted on wrong thread.

 

[micraftbeer]

You can check your volumes, too. I had a brewing unit with stamped volume markings on it. I just assumed they were right, never occurred to me to check them. I was doing some controlled experiment so I was specific about the volume of water I put in. I found the markings were off by 0.75 gallons. I reached out to the manufacturer, and they said their early units they had some welding issues and units were put together wrong.

Another volume problem I used to have in my early brew days with pots without volume markings, is I put marks on my mash paddle at the volume increments. I stick the mash paddle in to the bottom and read off the volume based on how far it came up against my volume marks on the paddle. But then I got a bigger pot, so I had to re-do the volume markings on the same paddle. Occasionally, I'd catch myself using the wrong markings for the pot I was using.

None of these stories may be the exact issue you're having. But you're double-checking everything else. Do a check on your volumes. Maybe buy a gallon jug of water from the store and refill it a bunch of times to see if your markings seem close.

 

[gifty74]

Ok, so another horrible day efficiency wise in my brewery. Just cannot figure out what is going wrong, and after 20 years of brewing, it's really bothering me. I don't know what else to try at this point to figure it out. Nothing I did was a major change, where i started to notice the efficiency issues. I feel i have a good handle on most of the factors that affect efficiency.

This time I was going for a simple DIPA recipe, and have my brewhouse efficiency set at 58% now, as bad as that sounds, and came up way short of even that. I'm not sure if it's easier to just attach my beersmith recipe with the session data in it, or try to summarize it here.

23.4 lbs of grain total, for a freaking 5.5 gal batch. Unreal, and still ended up with only 1.072 OG

Added 1lb of DME just to get the gravity to 1.080 so I could get into the DIPA realm.

23 lbs of grain for 1.072 OG. Basic freaking recipe, 60 min mash, 60 min boil. Nothing fancy. Tons of whirlpool hops.

But again, just keep coming up so short. This session's efficiency was 48%. What in the world is going on.

I was hyper focused on crush, have it very fine. Is too fine a thing?? I thoroughly inspected the crush and see no whole kernels. Tons of flour. I have a direct fired mash and was really careful about over heating as i'm recirculating, and the temp probe that reads the mash temp and kicks the burner on and off is right in the tee at the pump, so I know the wort i'm pulling from the bottom of the kettle, the hottest wort, is not being overheated by that much. Sure the wort under the false bottom gets a little warmer, but not enough to turn off enzymes i wouldn't think. And i've done it this way for many years, even when i did get decent efficiency. I mean i'd be so happy just to get 65% at this point. No way you should have to put 23 lbs of grain in to get 1.072 OG of 5.5 gal of wort. This is just crazy.

 

[RM-MN]

Stop with the recirculating and heating. Your mash doesn't need it.

 

[jerrylotto]

Chemistry? What is the salt profile snd pH?

 

[doug293cz]

Ok, so another horrible day efficiency wise in my brewery. Just cannot figure out what is going wrong, and after 20 years of brewing, it's really bothering me. I don't know what else to try at this point to figure it out. Nothing I did was a major change, where i started to notice the efficiency issues. I feel i have a good handle on most of the factors that affect efficiency.

This time I was going for a simple DIPA recipe, and have my brewhouse efficiency set at 58% now, as bad as that sounds, and came up way short of even that. I'm not sure if it's easier to just attach my beersmith recipe with the session data in it, or try to summarize it here.

23.4 lbs of grain total, for a freaking 5.5 gal batch. Unreal, and still ended up with only 1.072 OG

Added 1lb of DME just to get the gravity to 1.080 so I could get into the DIPA realm.

23 lbs of grain for 1.072 OG. Basic freaking recipe, 60 min mash, 60 min boil. Nothing fancy. Tons of whirlpool hops.

But again, just keep coming up so short. This session's efficiency was 48%. What in the world is going on.

I was hyper focused on crush, have it very fine. Is too fine a thing?? I thoroughly inspected the crush and see no whole kernels. Tons of flour. I have a direct fired mash and was really careful about over heating as i'm recirculating, and the temp probe that reads the mash temp and kicks the burner on and off is right in the tee at the pump, so I know the wort i'm pulling from the bottom of the kettle, the hottest wort, is not being overheated by that much. Sure the wort under the false bottom gets a little warmer, but not enough to turn off enzymes i wouldn't think. And i've done it this way for many years, even when i did get decent efficiency. I mean i'd be so happy just to get 65% at this point. No way you should have to put 23 lbs of grain in to get 1.072 OG of 5.5 gal of wort. This is just crazy.

What were your?:

• Strike volume
• SG at end of mash, before any sparge
• Sparge volume
• Sparge method
• Pre-boil volume
• Pre-boil SG
• Post-boil volume
• Volume to fermenter

These are the data points needed to isolate where your problem originated.

Brew on

 

[doug293cz]

Did you monitor the SG of the wort during your mash, as recommended in post #12 above? If so, what were the times and SGs measured?

Brew on

 

[gifty74]

Stop with the recirculating and heating. Your mash doesn't need it.

Did that 2 batches ago, no change. No recirc and no direct heating.