Question: small scale measurement

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

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

pedrovic

Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2020
Messages
21
Reaction score
2
Hello,
I need to measure the most accurate grain absorption in my BIAB system, but the total grain weight I currently have allows only a regular batch and a leftover that I thought of doing this measurement, only reducing the scale to that.
I learned an equation (initial volume - volume post_mash / grain weight) and I was wondering if a small-scale measurement would give me a result equal to use the normal volume of a regular mash.
Example: calculate the grain absorption using only 100g (3.5 oz) of grain in 1 liter (1 quart) of water give me a usefull grain absorption result similar to a large scale calculation?
Has anyone ever done that?
Thank you.
 
Last edited:

DBhomebrew

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
2,075
Reaction score
3,961
Location
St Louis, MO
I haven't tried it, but in my theoretical estimation it would not.

For example, with BIAB the size and weight of the grain bed causes the bottom of the bag to distend downward with the walls of the bag pulling inward. This adds a little natural squeeze to the effect of gravity.

If you're going for most accurate...

I have attained very repeatable results by measuring the height of the wort with a stainless ruler to the nearest millimeter. This is dropped into the formula for a cylinder and in my kettle is accurate to the nearest ~1.7oz. My pre-boil volume is regularly within a few hundredths of gallon of the target.

Don't forget to account for temp induced expansion. Volume taken at mash temps are adjusted by 2.7% over room temp, boil by 4%.
 

doug293cz

BIABer, Beer Math Nerd, ePanel Designer, Pilot
Staff member
Mod
HBT Supporter
Joined
May 14, 2014
Messages
13,277
Reaction score
10,088
Location
Renton
You could measure the absorption on a mini-batch, but then you have to go back and demonstrate that the mini-batch draining gives the same absorption rate as a full batch. The mini-batch will have a lot lower grain weight in the draining bag, so less squeezing from the bag being pulled taunt by the weight of the grain. Thus it is likely that the mini-mash may end up with a higher absorption. And you have to do the full mash measurement anyway, to confirm the validity or invalidity of the mini-mash method.

Unless you are doing an academic study on the effects of bag size and grain weight on free draining of BIAB, you are better off just measuring the actual runoff volume the way @DBhomebrew suggests. And don't forget to correct for temperature expansion of the hot wort. Here is a table where the left column shows the temp of the measured wort, and the right shows the multiplier to use to converted to the volume at room temp (68°F.)
1659637302991.png
Brew on :mug:
 
OP
OP
P

pedrovic

Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2020
Messages
21
Reaction score
2
Wow, thank you very much @DBhomebrew and @doug293cz for the information! I will read and reread very carefully.

I am not doing an academic study, but I am happy to know that my curiosity about the subject looks like this.
I'm just an old homebrewer who sometimes asks too many questions :-D
Cheers! :bigmug:
 

hotbeer

Opinionated Newb
HBT Supporter
Joined
Mar 10, 2021
Messages
1,306
Reaction score
938
@hotbeer do you measure the weight difference?
Just with respect to the grain. I measure the weight of my malts going into the mash and then after draining everything from them I weigh them again and find the difference. That pretty much is my loss due to grain absorption isn't it?

I know the tare for my various vessels used. But if I use something different, the tare function on the scale makes it easy enough.
 

doug293cz

BIABer, Beer Math Nerd, ePanel Designer, Pilot
Staff member
Mod
HBT Supporter
Joined
May 14, 2014
Messages
13,277
Reaction score
10,088
Location
Renton
Just with respect to the grain. I measure the weight of my malts going into the mash and then after draining everything from them I weigh them again and find the difference. That pretty much is my loss due to grain absorption isn't it?

I know the tare for my various vessels used. But if I use something different, the tare function on the scale makes it easy enough.
In a word, no. It's much more involved than that. I will write more later, when I am not in the middle of brewing.

Brew on :mug:
 

IslandLizard

Progressive Brewing
Staff member
Mod
HBT Supporter
Joined
Jan 9, 2013
Messages
19,411
Reaction score
9,716
Location
Pasadena, MD
Just with respect to the grain. I measure the weight of my malts going into the mash and then after draining everything from them I weigh them again and find the difference. That pretty much is my loss due to grain absorption isn't it?
Not quite!
For example you'll need to add the weight of the extracted sugars and dextrins back in, those are now in your lautered wort. Also dust and other small particles that made it through. Most of that will settle out in your kettle trub.
 
OP
OP
P

pedrovic

Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2020
Messages
21
Reaction score
2
What I understood in the previous responses is that there are several factors that must be taken into account when measuring. The mash water expansion multipliers are a new concept for me and I wanted to understand more.
 
OP
OP
P

pedrovic

Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2020
Messages
21
Reaction score
2
You could measure the absorption on a mini-batch, but then you have to go back and demonstrate that the mini-batch draining gives the same absorption rate as a full batch. The mini-batch will have a lot lower grain weight in the draining bag, so less squeezing from the bag being pulled taunt by the weight of the grain. Thus it is likely that the mini-mash may end up with a higher absorption. And you have to do the full mash measurement anyway, to confirm the validity or invalidity of the mini-mash method.

Unless you are doing an academic study on the effects of bag size and grain weight on free draining of BIAB, you are better off just measuring the actual runoff volume the way @DBhomebrew suggests. And don't forget to correct for temperature expansion of the hot wort. Here is a table where the left column shows the temp of the measured wort, and the right shows the multiplier to use to converted to the volume at room temp (68°F.)
Brew on :mug:
About this table, how I can use? Multiplying the temp (°F) by the multiplier? After that, I must add to the pre-boil volume (gal)? Thanks
 

DBhomebrew

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
2,075
Reaction score
3,961
Location
St Louis, MO
About this table, how I can use? Multiplying the temp (°F) by the multiplier? After that, I must add to the pre-boil volume (gal)? Thanks

Take your measured volume and multiply that by the appropriate amount in the table to find your standardized volume to be used in further formulae such as finding your lauter efficiency or absorption.

It's a matter of apples and oranges. Heat 1G of room temp water to 212° and it will be ~1.04 gallons.
 

hotbeer

Opinionated Newb
HBT Supporter
Joined
Mar 10, 2021
Messages
1,306
Reaction score
938
Not quite!
For example you'll need to add the weight of the extracted sugars and dextrins back in, those are now in your lautered wort. Also dust and other small particles that made it through. Most of that will settle out in your kettle trub.
Not certain I fully understand. I thought grain absorption was all about just figuring water losses at the mash time so that you wind up with the amount of wort you wish to start your boil with.

Of course there are losses too for evaporation and for solids from the mash process that make their way with the wort to the boil kettle. Those get accounted for at that time. Just like the losses in the FV for trub, yeast, hydrometer samples and etc.

All these just get tallied up and used to make better estimates for how much total water will be needed for subsequent batches.

So maybe I'm looking from too simplistic a viewpoint.
 
Joined
Oct 6, 2017
Messages
3,995
Reaction score
2,991
Location
_
From a different perspective

If I have
1.04 gal water at of 212°F.​

that same amount of water at 68°F is
1.04 * .96​
or roughly one gallon

1659720670781.png

(multiplier for calculating water
volume at room temp (68°F.)
 
Top