New recirculating rig with terrible efficiency

[gotbags-10]

Just put together a brew rig based kinda of the Brew Easy. Entire volume of water recirculating between MLT and BK for the mash then drain and boil. Sounds simple enough. Brewed 3 batches on it so far. I'm getting really bad efficiency though. My batch yesterday was supposed to have an OG of 1.079 and I got 1.063. I even sparged with an extra gallon of water and boiled an extra 30 min. I'm able to maintain mash temps really well. I've been stirring the grains 3 times during the mash thinking that would help. My first batch I crushed really fine and got stuck. Second I crushed slightly bigger and it went fine but still terrible efficiency. Yesterday I set my rollers even bigger as I read you want a bigger crush for recirculating mash. Still terrible. I'm using a bazooka screen in my MLT. I build my water from RO using Bru'n water. Pulling my hair out a little on this one. I did way better when I just used a regular batch sparge. Any suggestions? View attachment ImageUploadedByHome Brew1442423721.343459.jpgView attachment ImageUploadedByHome Brew1442423761.665153.jpgView attachment ImageUploadedByHome Brew1442423794.178750.jpg

 

[day_trippr]

Going strictly on intuition, I don't think a bazooka tube would support a recirculating mash system of any type very well.

It's so prone to channeling that it's rarely (read: never) recommended with fly sparging.
I'd think the same issue applies to recirculation...

Cheers!

 

[gotbags-10]

That thought actually crossed my mind as well but that's why I stop it and mix everything up real good several times during the mash. But I may just have to get one anyways.

 

[doug293cz]

Post the recipe, your strike water volume, pre-boil volume, and pre-boil gravity. Might be able to help you figure out what is going on based on the data.

Brew on

 

[gotbags-10]

I've brewed 3 different recipes. 1.070, 1.079, and a 1.053. The two higher gravities were disasters. The smaller one I missed by 3 points. Strike water is typically about 8-10 gal depending on the recipe. Pre-boil is 7.75g to end up with 5.5 after boil and cooling in the fermenter. I was just reading about the Brutus 20 system which is similar and a lot of people say it only worked for 1.050 gravity beers because the water becomes to saturated with sugar to rinse the grains any more. I wonder if that's my problem? But if that's the case then I would think it would be the same for BIAB and the Brew Easy as well.

 

[Bobby_M]

A recirculating full volume no sparge system is inherently less efficient than batch sparging and more so as the intended OG goes up. This is calculable based on the gravity of the whole volume of the mash multiplied by the predictable absorption ratio of the grain.

 

[gotbags-10]

A recirculating full volume no sparge system is inherently less efficient than batch sparging and more so as the intended OG goes up. This is calculable based on the gravity of the whole volume of the mash multiplied by the predictable absorption ratio of the grain.

Sorry not sure I follow.

 

[Bellybuster]

I've brewed 3 different recipes. 1.070, 1.079, and a 1.053. The two higher gravities were disasters. The smaller one I missed by 3 points. .

what were the gravities on the higher ones? I certainly don't consider 3 points a bad day. Any brewing software can help you with that, maybe another buck or two of grain.
Are you using software? If not, how do you calculate expected gravity?

 

[elerten]

This video might be helpful.

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDJLzAXZbFw[/ame]

I also read about some water chemistry stuff, and some people were talking about using more....... to buffer the PH I'm looking for the darn post and explanation right now.

Here we go same dang site.
http://www.greatfermentations.com/brew-day-tips-blichmann-breweasy/

 

[Gavin C]

I was just reading about the Brutus 20 system which is similar and a lot of people say it only worked for 1.050 gravity beers because the water becomes to saturated with sugar to rinse the grains any more.

No this is not the case. The sugar in the water will not reach the saturation point regardless of the type of beer you are making.

Whatever the cause of the problem this is not it. 100% certainty on that.

For me it's the bazooka screen. I've not seen that before in a recirculation setup. Yours is a bit of an outlier in that regard.

 

[gotbags-10]

what were the gravities on the higher ones? I certainly don't consider 3 points a bad day. Any brewing software can help you with that, maybe another buck or two of grain.

Are you using software? If not, how do you calculate expected gravity?

The 1.079 came in at 1.063 and the 1.070 was 1.060. I use beersmith BIAB profile and they predicted much higher SG's.

 

[Gavin C]

The 1.079 came in at 1.063 and the 1.070 was 1.060. I use beersmith BIAB profile and they predicted much higher SG's.

Don't use some random default setting in beersmith. Make your own profile unique to your system.

 

[Gnomebrewer]

When I switched to HERMS I also had a bazooka screen. It didn't work very well at all - I had cold patches due to channelling of the wort. It works much better now with a false bottom.

However, if you are mixing the grain several times during the mash, the HERMS coil shouldn't be the issue. I'd still suggest changing to a false bottom though.

I could be wrong, but I thought a full volume recirculating mash would put compress the grainbed too much causing stuck runoff. Why not try mashing with less strikewater and doing a single batch sparge? Also, try crushing finer and adding some rice-hulls.

 

[Bobby_M]

One way to test if the bazooka screen has anything to do with lower efficiency is to take a sample of the preboil wort after you've mostly emptied the cooler. Let's say it's 1.050. Then stir the thick mash a bit and pour some of remaining wort out (through a screen if you have to) and test that sample. If it's much higher than 1.050 then you know you had dead zones that remained at high gravity (and didn't flush out). I don't think that's the primary case because after a long recirculation with full volume, the odds of substational dead zone is pretty low.

Full volume mashing is just inherently less efficient when it's NOT a BIAB that can be fully squeezed out. Here's a chart that illustrates it well without going into the math. Credit Braukaiser.com

Of course this also assumes that you've achieved full conversion. To know if you have reached full conversion you just need to multiply your grain weight x 36, then divide by your total water volume. If your gravity is testing lower than that, you're not there yet.

 

[Bellybuster]

What is your efficiency setting in beersmith

 

[gotbags-10]

I thought I read somewhere that you should have a larger crush with a recirculating mash so it wouldn't compact so much and the water could get through the grains easier. Either way I will deff pick up a false bottom.

 

[doug293cz]

A recirculating full volume no sparge system is inherently less efficient than batch sparging and more so as the intended OG goes up. This is calculable based on the gravity of the whole volume of the mash multiplied by the predictable absorption ratio of the grain.

Sorry not sure I follow.

Which part is confusing? That no-sparge is less efficient than sparging? Or, that higher OG recipes (more grain) are less efficient than lower OG recipes?

Brew on

 

[gotbags-10]

Which part is confusing? That no-sparge is less efficient than sparging? Or, that higher OG recipes (more grain) are less efficient than lower OG recipes?



Brew on

No just on how to calculate. I know it's going to be less efficient and don't mind spending a few bucks on grain. I just want to get some consistency first.

 

[acidrain]

No sparge is less efficient than sparge.
Larger crush takes way longer to fully convert than tight crush (i.e. lower efficiency).
Higher gravity beers require more grain, therefor more sugar laden wort is retained and not rinsed with a high gravity full volume brew.

Why the full volume brew? Why not split the volumes and do a sparge?

 

[acidrain]

Oh, and Beersmith does what you tell it to... not the other way around.
If you are using a recipe that has higher efficiency than your system, you will not hit the gravity.
If you tell Beersmith what your efficiency is, then scale any recipe to your system, it will increase or decrease the grain amount accordingly.

 

[gotbags-10]

I just liked the idea of a 60 min mash, drain and boil. Trying to save some time. Plus I don't have a HLT so before I would drain the mash into a bucket then do my sparge and dump buckets into the BK. Trying to save a few steps. I did put my volumes into beersmith and set my efficiency at 70%. I figure if I can't get at least 70% then I'll go back to traditional batch sparge. Hope that's not the case though

 

[wilserbrewer]

70% may be a bit optimistic for a full volume recirculating system making a higher gravity batch.
Ymmv