Is your system steam heated, direct-fired, or electric and what would be your preference? I'd definitely like to go with steam, but not sure if I have room for a boiler (working with a very small space here)..
It doesn't look like it from your avatar photo, but I'll ask just in case, does your mash/lauter tun have rakes or do you think that's overkill on a brewhouse that size?
Is there anything you wish you could change about your current setup?
Thanks again, brother!
I have worked on both steam and direct-fired brewhouse's. I work on the direct-fired Bohemian 5BBL for the last 16+ years, but I also worked at another brewpub for a few years at the same time I was working here. So I got to play with 2 different system's at the same time. By the way they have a 10BBL Bohemian Steam jacketed Mono-Bloc. All three vessel's are steam jacketed, the kettle/whirlpool,mash/lauter tun, and hot liquor tank. I hardly ever used the steam on the mash tun, as I mainly was doing single infusion mashes. If you use steam in the mash tun, you must have motorized rakes to keep it stirring, to prevent scorching and over & un-even heating of the mash.
I would say that steam is way more efficient and quicker, but also cost's way more. You also have a boiler to fire up, that has boiler certificates, inspection's,etc. I believe steam better suit's larger brewpub's and production
brewery's that brew everyday. Smaller brewer's that are 10BBL & under that may not brew for a few day's at time's would probably be better off with direct-fire. At the other brewery, I would only brew about 3-4 times a month, which everytime I brewed I would have to fire-up a ice-cold boiler, and wait a while to get her up to temp., just too have steam. Seem's like alot of energy to use at this small level!! At my level, it may be better to just have to turn on the 200,000-450,000 B.t.u burner and shut it off when your done. the drawback is that you have only 1 heatable vessel to heat water with, unless you have a seperate hot water source. In short, a steam system cost's more$$$ and use's a little more space.
As far as the next questions, I can answer them both with same answer. If I could go back in time. We would have paid the extra $$5000 for the grain handling system, which comprised of a motorized rake, flex-auger that connect's to malt mill, and grist hydrator. No more sore arms, canoe paddles, and dust in the air!! This is the number one thing that I would have done differently. It takes me 20-30 minutes to mash in 350 .lbs by hand on the 5BBL system, it only took me 15 minutes to mash 700 .lbs on the 10BBL system with rake's and auger. I would say get this option if the manufacturer offer's it on a smaller system, which some do not, even if cost a few extra buck's$$$ I hope that made some sense!! Cheer's!!!