I use an electric hoist and let it drip while the wort is coming to a boil. Works like a charm, no need to squeeze.
Do any of you accurately measure your volumes and can provide your squeezed loss to grain absorption?
I measured OG of the squeezed wort (vs what was in the mash kettle) once recently. The two OGs were about the same. eta: I also sparged those grains (result was OG 22-ish). And it was a 60 min mash.Are they?The squeezin's are sugar-heavy
Are they?
There is a valid critique to be made here. If the gravity inside the bag differs from the gravity outside the bag, it is possible that you have not mashed long enough. The mash should allow the little sugars and starches to swim freely and they should not be impeded by the bag. IMO
Nothing too overly accurate. It's more whether I feel like squeezing it or not.You mean the amount you expect, based on accurate measurement of previous batches and consistent process?
I thought we were all just participating in a discussion about what we do ourselves. Then the OP and others can decide what ever they want from the comments.Do you guys always run with false inferences and implications? lol
What is inferred from "sugar-heavy" is that the spent grain is still surrounded by wort after extraction, and that wort is dense with sugars. Whatever else you've decided for yourselves after reading that is entirely and solely self-revealing. If you're desperate for a win though, feel free to ignore me and high five each other and ****.
Obviously you weren't the one making assumptions, congratulating the previous person on their assumptions, building on that assumption further, and adding to that initial assumption in a novel way afterwards; I just found the whole thing annoying. Brewing forums can be so judgmental and cliquish, not addressing those things just tacitly encourages them in my experience.I thought we were all just participating in a discussion about what we do ourselves. Then the OP and others can decide what ever they want from the comments.
Certainly you shared some very enlightening information about your ways.
Doesn't matter if I was or wasn't the person or persons you were talking about. It's a public forum. Just like life and conversation anywhere it's going to happen.Obviously you weren't the one making assumptions, congratulating the previous person on their assumptions, building on that assumption further, and adding to that initial assumption in a novel way afterwards; I just found the whole thing annoying. Brewing forums can be so judgmental and cliquish, not addressing those things just tacitly encourages them in my experience.
Do you guys always run with false inferences and implications? lol
What is inferred from "sugar-heavy" is that the spent grain is still surrounded by wort after extraction, and that wort is dense with sugars. Whatever else you've decided for yourselves after reading that is entirely and solely self-revealing. If you're desperate for a win though, feel free to ignore me and high five each other and ****.
Personally, I'm intrigued by your pot-sparge-BIAB method, it's like the old English first and second runnings being added to the final boil method. Never considered it before..
Before I lift the bag and place it in the colander, I lift the M&B malt pipe, sit it on the M&B’s supports an use a pot lid to press down on the top of the grain bed. Then I pull out the malt pipe, remove the bag from it and place it in a colander on top of the Mash & Boil and squeeze it. The astringency some talk about from over squeezing isn’t something I’ve been able to detect.Dancy - if you are draining through a colander you can just add some weight to press more wort from the bag. I use a panini press, but you could use a stack of plates.
No. Not unless your conversion was incomplete when you called the mash "done", and you got some additional conversion between when you raised the bag and when you squeezed. Or, you didn't stir before your initial draining. Best practice is to test your mash SG to insure complete conversion, and stir well before both the SG checks and draining.Are they?
Actually, I agree though the M&B doesn’t heat up that fast so using heated water saves a bit of time. Not really a big deal to me though. I concluded after the last batch to not heat the sparge water anymore as I don’t like unnecessary steps. I’ve brewed maybe only 6 times on the M&B so I’m still honing how I want to do things. Apparently, there’s been evidence heating sparge water isn’t necessary, at least based on my memory of HBT discussions a while ago.There is no need to heat the sparge water. When you add cool water for sparge to the bag of hot, wet grains the sparge water heats plenty for extracting the sugars. It only adds a few minutes to bring the collected sparge water plus your first runnings up the the boil.
Do any of you accurately measure your volumes and can provide your squeezed loss to grain absorption?
Obviously you weren't the one making assumptions, congratulating the previous person on their assumptions, building on that assumption further, and adding to that initial assumption in a novel way afterwards; I just found the whole thing annoying. Brewing forums can be so judgmental and cliquish, not addressing those things just tacitly encourages them in my experience.
Personally, I'm intrigued by your pot-sparge-BIAB method, it's like the old English first and second runnings being added to the final boil method. Never considered it before...
I do measure but am still honing my accuracy, finally taking into account water expansion at temp and etc. I run a home-made spreadsheet for a bunch of my calculations, and I use 0.4 qts of water remaining in each pound of grain when I calculate how much wort to expect to come out of the mash itself. It's been working quite well in general - actually I think it's almost perfect for my propane brews where I let gravity do the job for the initial mash tun drain, which I stop when it goes from running to slowly dripping. The shape of the mash tun might affect things vs. typical Igloos with false bottoms.
For my Anvil brews, the squeezing puts me slightly over my target boil start wort volume, but not too much. It's a 6.5 gallon unit and if I squeeze a typical 6-7 pounds of grain I'll get right around a 1/2 quart or 1/8 gallon. That'd be in the low 0.3 qts of water left in the grain I think. The little bit of extra wort I get, which I boil down, helps me hit my target OG. And by target, I mean what I'd get if I was doing a propane brew.
Not sure exactly what you are asking but maybe that answers?
No, weighing the wet grain is not a good way to figure out grain absorption. This is because a large fraction of the initial grain weight ends up in the wort in the BK. You could do it this way, but the math is convoluted. Also, the grain absorption rate we use isn't the actual volume of retained wort divided by the grain weight (the "true grain absorption rate.") We use what is known as the "apparent grain absorption rate." We do this for two reasons:Good ol math! Seems to be that a good average is .08 gallons of water retaine for every pound of grain.
How would one measure this? Just weight the grain wet, then divide by 8.33lbs?
...
(Strike_Water_Volume - First_Runnings_Volume) / Grain_Bill_Weight