Sparge device question

[dstar26t]

I've always stirred and have gotten very good efficiency. 90%+ up to 1.070 beers. Up at 1.100 beers, still getting 80%. I inject steam into the mash for step mashing. Normally just doing a typical temp conversion rest and then going up to 158 for 10 minutes to make sure everything is finished, taking refractometer readings along the way. Then up to mash out. I read about people getting 70% and wonder how that is possible. I even started fly-sparging (used to batch sparge) in order to lower efficiency (for a "better" wort) but it didn't work. A friend brewer thought there was something magical about steps with steam, I think it's just all the stirring and making sure conversion is 100%. I use the following graph I made to see what 100% conversion gravity should be. I could never do the iodine test since I'm color blind.

I also calculate my own potential extract numbers so I can calculate efficiency very accurately

A grant helps with recirculating so there's never more suction on the grain bed then what gravity can do.

 

[Catt22]

I've always stirred and have gotten very good efficiency. 90%+ up to 1.070 beers. Up at 1.100 beers, still getting 80%. I inject steam into the mash for step mashing. Normally just doing a typical temp conversion rest and then going up to 158 for 10 minutes to make sure everything is finished, taking refractometer readings along the way. Then up to mash out. I read about people getting 70% and wonder how that is possible. I even started fly-sparging (used to batch sparge) in order to lower efficiency (for a "better" wort) but it didn't work. A friend brewer thought there was something magical about steps with steam, I think it's just all the stirring and making sure conversion is 100%. I use the following graph I made to see what 100% conversion gravity should be. I could never do the iodine test since I'm color blind.

I also calculate my own potential extract numbers so I can calculate efficiency very accurately

A grant helps with recirculating so there's never more suction on the grain bed then what gravity can do.

I have the conversion table also, but after checking it a number of times and always finding that I'm getting 99-101% conversion I no longer bother with it.

I am color blind as well. You don't need perfect color vision to do the iodine test. The sample will turn from dark amber to black. It's difficult to miss the black. Much the same as with the conversion check, I've never had a mash fail to convert, so I no longer bother with that test either.

I use a vacuum gauge in lieu of a grant. This allows me to pump about twice as fast as gravity flow alone would provide. I like to circulate the wort as fast as possible for quick temp ramp ups and a more uniform grain bed temperature.

I was only able to achieve about 75-80% efficiency before I began the thorough stirring routine and I was perfectly happy with that. I sort of accidentally discovered that stirring immediately prior to the sparge caused a big jump in efficiency. This was the result of the mash sticking at that particular point while I was attempting to raise the grain bed temp for the mash out. Needless to say, I was quite surprised to see it happen. I do not strive for very high efficiencies at all. It was a serendipitous thing only, but now I find I need to back off on my expected efficiency when formulating the recipes. I've had to dump considerable excess wort recently just to get down to the upper range of the style gravities. That's how much of a difference this makes. I'm going to try 85% for the recipes from now on and cut the sparge short if I'm still too high. I can easily add water during the boil to hit the target gravity.

 

[Bru]

I brewed on Friday night but I had some issues with a stuck sparge (thick mash) so I didn't get to stir etc.
I normally get +-75% for anything over 1.060 and +-80% for lower than 1.060. I use a 40L cooler with a copper manifold which I assume is not as efficient as a full false bottom. My plan is to change to a 25gallon pot with a full false bottom.
My cooler is not big enough to mash with a consistent 3L/kg everytime - I suspect my bigger beers have lower efficiency because of the resultant thicker mash.
What you say makes sense - the grain bed slowly compacts during the mash and stirring before the sparge loosens it up. I use gravity to sparge adding water with a float switch controlled pump. Next 1.050 Im going to try stirring before sparging - Ill report back.
I don't agree 100% that too fine a crush won't reduce efficiency. IMO the grain bed becomes compacted too easily and doesn't flow properly but not to the point where it gets completely stuck.
I realise some commercial breweries mill the grain to nearly powder and get close to 100% but their systems are different.

 

[dstar26t]

I use a vacuum gauge in lieu of a grant. This allows me to pump about twice as fast as gravity flow alone would provide. I like to circulate the wort as fast as possible for quick temp ramp ups and a more uniform grain bed temperature.

I was only able to achieve about 75-80% efficiency before I began the thorough stirring routine and I was perfectly happy with that. I sort of accidentally discovered that stirring immediately prior to the sparge caused a big jump in efficiency. This was the result of the mash sticking at that particular point while I was attempting to raise the grain bed temp for the mash out. Needless to say, I was quite surprised to see it happen. I do not strive for very high efficiencies at all. It was a serendipitous thing only, but now I find I need to back off on my expected efficiency when formulating the recipes. I've had to dump considerable excess wort recently just to get down to the upper range of the style gravities. That's how much of a difference this makes. I'm going to try 85% for the recipes from now on and cut the sparge short if I'm still too high. I can easily add water during the boil to hit the target gravity.

I like the use of a vacuum gauge.
I've been fighting something ever since implementing a different mash tun a year ago. Maybe you have some advice that would help? My procedure at the end of the mash is to hit mash out at 170F (steam + stirring) and rest there for 10 minutes. I start recirculating after that rest and it takes about 5 minutes or so to get crystal clear wort out of the mash tun. It'll run clear for the first 3-8 gallons (out of 14) into the kettle and then every time, bits of grain start coming out. It gets so bad that I have to re-recirculate for another 10-15 minutes and then continue sparging. Any idea what causes this? It's quite annoying and time consuming. I almost want to ditch the perforated plate false bottom and go back to a manifold. I never had issues with my old cooler and manifold combo. The false bottom is full diameter and hinged with a dip tube through the center. I figured it was due to stirring toward the end of the mash which disturbs the grain bed. I assumed nobody else had this problem because they either single infuse and don't touch the grain or they recirculate for the whole mash which sets the bed nicely. Do you ever have an issue part way through sparging like I describe?
Brewed a 1.044 Pale Ale yesterday with 92.3% efficiency into the kettle but had the same bits-o-grain issue after 4 gallons.


Bru,
I used to mill at .039". Then I started conditioning the grain and milling at .028". Never had a stuck sparge either way.

 

[Catt22]

I don't agree 100% that too fine a crush won't reduce efficiency. IMO the grain bed becomes compacted too easily and doesn't flow properly but not to the point where it gets completely stuck.
I realise some commercial breweries mill the grain to nearly powder and get close to 100% but their systems are different.

It has been well documented that a finer crush will improve efficiency. A good friend of mine manufactured malt mills at one time and he did actual testing in this regard and on the home brewing scale. Obviously, there will be a practical limit to milling the grain very fine due to sticking issues, but the efficiency will increase right up to the sticking point. The bottom line though, is that at some point it simply isn't worth the trouble to chase a small increase in efficiency at the expense of a big hassle with the sparge. Most of us settle for somewhat of a compromise and mill the grain a little on the coarser side, giving up some efficiency in exchange for an easier sparge.

 

[Catt22]

I like the use of a vacuum gauge.
I've been fighting something ever since implementing a different mash tun a year ago. Maybe you have some advice that would help? My procedure at the end of the mash is to hit mash out at 170F (steam + stirring) and rest there for 10 minutes. I start recirculating after that rest and it takes about 5 minutes or so to get crystal clear wort out of the mash tun. It'll run clear for the first 3-8 gallons (out of 14) into the kettle and then every time, bits of grain start coming out. It gets so bad that I have to re-recirculate for another 10-15 minutes and then continue sparging. Any idea what causes this? It's quite annoying and time consuming. I almost want to ditch the perforated plate false bottom and go back to a manifold. I never had issues with my old cooler and manifold combo. The false bottom is full diameter and hinged with a dip tube through the center. I figured it was due to stirring toward the end of the mash which disturbs the grain bed. I assumed nobody else had this problem because they either single infuse and don't touch the grain or they recirculate for the whole mash which sets the bed nicely. Do you ever have an issue part way through sparging like I describe?
Brewed a 1.044 Pale Ale yesterday with 92.3% efficiency into the kettle but had the same bits-o-grain issue after 4 gallons./QUOTE]

No, I never have a problem with particulates in the runoff at any point after doing the vorlaugh. Stirring will disturb the grain bed and some particulates will pass through the false bottom, but IME a brief vorlaugh eliminates them as the grain bed resets and traps the particles as the wort flows through. The only thing that I can think of might be that the FB is not being held firmly in place or it does not fit tight enough to eliminate any gaps around the edges. It's unlikely that the particles are making it through the grain bed as you do the vorlaugh. The other possibility is that some particulates make it past the FB and lurk in the space below the FB. These don't get flushed out completely during the vorlaugh and later in mid-sparge they somehow get back into the stream flow where you detect them. You might try vorlaughing at a higher flow rate in order to better flush out the space below the FB. Backing off a bit on the fineness of the crush might help some too. I'm guessing here, so take that into consideration.

 

[Bru]

dstar26t - I recently found that when recirculating during the mash I would get grain coming through the lines if the circulation was too fast. Circulation would work well innitially but as the grain bed compacted it would suck more and more grain into the pipes to the point where the pipes for completely blocked.
It would take about 5 minutes to get stuck even though it innitially looked fine.
I found this out during a thicker than normal mash. The thinner ones have been fine.
Im using a slotted manifold.

 

[Bru]

Interesting. Something else to try - malt conditioning.

It has been well documented that a finer crush will improve efficiency. A good friend of mine manufactured malt mills at one time and he did actual testing in this regard and on the home brewing scale. Obviously, there will be a practical limit to milling the grain very fine due to sticking issues, but the efficiency will increase right up to the sticking point. The bottom line though, is that at some point it simply isn't worth the trouble to chase a small increase in efficiency at the expense of a big hassle with the sparge. Most of us settle for somewhat of a compromise and mill the grain a little on the coarser side, giving up some efficiency in exchange for an easier sparge.

BTW - where on your system is your vacuum gauge installed (I couldn't see clearly in the pic you posted). Im assuming on the inlet side of the pump ?
What calibration does the gauge have ? Most gauges Ive seen are from 1 to 20 psi which is way too high if you're maintaining 1 psi.

 

[Catt22]

Interesting. Something else to try - malt conditioning.



BTW - where on your system is your vacuum gauge installed (I couldn't see clearly in the pic you posted). Im assuming on the inlet side of the pump ?
What calibration does the gauge have ? Most gauges Ive seen are from 1 to 20 psi which is way too high if you're maintaining 1 psi.

I have the vacuum gauge mounted on suction (inlet) side of the pump. It could be mounted anywhere between the MT drain and the pump. I wanted to locate the gauge where it would be out of the way and also easy to view.

The vacuum gauge scale is 0-30" Hg (inches of mercury). Atmospheric pressure at sea level is 14.7 psi, so the conversion is roughly 2" hg = 1 psi. I shoot for 0.5-1.5 psi which reads 0-3" hg on the gauge. IOW, the gauge needle barely moves off of zero. When I see the gauge begin to climb, I know the grain bed is starting to compact, which it will inevitably do and usually more than once during the mash.

 

[dstar26t]

I tried something new with my system yesterday. Instead of recirculating with the grant inline after mashout, I hooked the pump up directly to the mash tun. After 15 minutes of full flow recirculating, it was crystal clear so I put the grant back in line and sparged. There were still some grain bits coming through at about the half way point but it was a fraction of what I've been getting and they were caught in the grant. I saved close to 45 minutes yesterday. I guess it takes more than gravity flow on my set-up to get the bed to compact enough to filter. Thanks for the suggestion to increase recirc flow rate Catt!
Still got 93.6% efficiency for 14.1 gallons at a 1.058 pre-boil gravity and I was finally able to sparge in just an hour.

 

[thenatibrewer]

dstar and bru can you post some pics of your plumbing and sparge device on this thread i would be interested in seeing them. i am taking my stand to get powder coated today!!! so i am really close to being finished. i also am using a false bottom that is hinged. this has been some great discussion. thanks

 

[dstar26t]

FYI - I've brewed over 40 batches on my current system (in one form or another) and am still learning to do it more efficiently obviously.
The pic I posted earlier (post #31) shows the plumbing best. Boil Kettle on left (out of view), HLT on right, MLT top center and the Grant is in the center. The pic is showing sparging. Right pump is pulling from the HLT and feeding the sparge/recirc manifold. Left pump is emptying the grant and pumping to the Boil Kettle. During recirc, the outlet hose of the pump on the left is hooked to the sparge/recirc manifold.
Here's the MLT empty:

 

[Sawdustguy]

These sparge devices must have cost between $10 and $20 to build. There was a thread about silicone tubing on Ebay for dirt cheap. About two feet would have done it. I don't understand.

 

[Bru]

At this point I can't post pics but I that will change soon.
In the mean time - for recirc and fly sparging I use a 1/2" T-peice that goes through the lid of my MLT (QD ontop). The wort/sparge water gets pumped through the T-peice which I can lower or raise, depending on the size of the mash, using sockets so that it sits at the right height above the grain bed. I originally used two peices of silicone - one on each side of the T-peice but it was splashing over the sides of the MLT so I removed it.
At the bottom of the MLT I have a copper pipe manifold with slits cut into it. At some stage Im going to upgrade to a 25gallon pot MLT with an FB but in the mean time this set up works perfectly.

dstar and bru can you post some pics of your plumbing and sparge device on this thread i would be interested in seeing them. i am taking my stand to get powder coated today!!! so i am really close to being finished. i also am using a false bottom that is hinged. this has been some great discussion. thanks