Time saver in runoff?

[kanzimonson]

I can't believe it's taken me 6 years of brewing to think of this.

The facts:
-I fly sparge
-At the end of mashing, there's about 1-2gal of liquid above the set grain bed
-I runoff at a rate of about 1qt per minute, or slightly slower
-I don't start adding sparge water until the liquid level is near the top of the grain bed.

Is there any reason I can't quickly runoff that first 1-2gal until the level is down around the grain bed? Then slow down to my standard rate as I begin adding sparge water? I mean, I won't blast it at full bore because I want the bed to be maintained, but it'd be nice if I could save more time.

 

[kanzimonson]

Love it when I break the forum because my questions are sooooooo awesome.

So anyway, on a recent brew session I tried what I mentioned above and ran out the first runnings until the liquid level was just above the fairly set grain bed. Then slowed my runoff and started sparging. Efficiency was right at the 75% that I plan for, so I declare it to be valid for now.

 

[kombat]

I would be worried about disturbing the grain bed. I batch sparge, but I employ a grant so that once I've started running off wort, I never have to adjust or close the valve until I've collected all of the wort in the boil kettle. That is, I recirculate from the grant back to the grain bed until it's sufficiently clear, then I redirect the output from the grant from the mash tun to the boil kettle (while leaving the mash tun still draining into the grant the entire time, at the same rate). I end up with very clear wort.

 

[kanzimonson]

Well I use a pump to recirculate during the mash, so when it's time to runoff the wort is already running clear.

I agree that you want to be careful not to disturb the grain bed - that's why for the first runnings I still kept it at a medium pace of about 2-3 qts per minute.

I was brewing a 12gal batch and it took about 5 minutes to run out the first ~2.5gal of first runnings before sparging.

 

[grathan]

You should try batch sparging. Even quicker yet.

 

[Misplaced_Canuck]

I've notivced that the clarity of the run-off changes (for the worse) when I change the speed of the run-off. Doesn't mean it won't work, but keep an eye on it. Make slow adjustments.

MC

 

[kanzimonson]

You should try batch sparging. Even quicker yet.

Yeah at this point I'm kinda set in my equipment but I agree. Still I've been talking with batch spargers about this and you can't ignore the amount of time it takes to come to boil. Fly spargers can pretty much start boiling a few mins after lautering is complete but batchers have to heat quite a bit

 

[Rev2010]

Yeah at this point I'm kinda set in my equipment but I agree. Still I've been talking with batch spargers about this and you can't ignore the amount of time it takes to come to boil. Fly spargers can pretty much start boiling a few mins after lautering is complete but batchers have to heat quite a bit

For a second I thought you'd made an excellent point. Then I had a moment of thought... I double batch sparge and can be done in half the time of the average fly sparge, and if I weren't mashing indoors and boiling outdoors I could start heating the runnings right away. So overall there's really little difference in time to boil when you think about it. Unless I'm missing something, I'll admit I've never fly sparged.

Not trying to support or oppose either method. Just a thought after reading your post. Not that it matters but I run a pretty consistent 81% efficiency, though I chalk that up to my grain mill and bazooka tube in my mash tun.


Rev.

 

[kanzimonson]

For a second I thought you'd made an excellent point. Then I had a moment of thought... I double batch sparge and can be done in half the time of the average fly sparge, and if I weren't mashing indoors and boiling outdoors I could start heating the runnings right away. So overall there's really little difference in time to boil when you think about it. Unless I'm missing something, I'll admit I've never fly sparged.

Not trying to support or oppose either method. Just a thought after reading your post. Not that it matters but I run a pretty consistent 81% efficiency, though I chalk that up to my grain mill and bazooka tube in my mash tun.


Rev.

Tell me how long each step takes between the end of mashing and the start of the boil on your system. For me, I lauter a 6 gal batch in about 35-40 minutes, draining at a rate of 1-2 qts/min, and I'm probably boiling within 5-10 minutes after lautering is done. If I were super diligent, I could probably start the boil the second the lauter ends but I like to be cautious. But I only have to heat another 10-20 degrees to get to boiling.

So for double batch sparging, I imagine the first runoff is done in 3 min. Get this heating on the burner while you do the rest. You add the batch of sparge water, stir for 1-2 min, and let rest for 10? Then recirculate, which isn't long if you have a pump so maybe 3 more? Then another 3 to runoff. I'm guessing the first runnings are around 170-180 at this point so adding the second batch brings the temp around 160-170? So how long does it take to go from there to boil is the question. I'm counting 20-25 minutes of time spent lautering so even if you can boil within 10 minutes, the two methods are pretty close.

Does my timing estimate for batch sound right?

 

[kanzimonson]

Oh, I see that I'm not making it clear that I'm heating the runnings as they come out of the MLT. This is why I can be boiling the second the lauter ends. I've even had the heat on too high before and the BK started boiling before I was done running off.

 

[grathan]

Probably close unless you compare time you actually have to stand there paying attention.

 

[Rev2010]

You add the batch of sparge water, stir for 1-2 min, and let rest for 10? Then recirculate, which isn't long if you have a pump so maybe 3 more?

I don't need to stir for 1-2 minutes after adding sparge water. I literally stir for probably 20 seconds at most really. I also don't let it sit for ten minutes. I let it sit for 5 minutes max, many on here don't let it sit at all. They stir, then begin vorlaufing saying it sets the grainbed. I just let it sit a couple of minutes just to settle, but since I give one opposite direction stir to stop the whirlpool it's really not necessary to wait at all. To me waiting up to 5 minutes for each of the two sparges isn't a huge detriment to my brew day which is why I still give it a short rest. I don't use a pump and as mentioned I mash indoors and boil outdoors so I can't provide accurate time to boil. If I did it all in one spot however I could start heating my runoff so that it's much less time to get to a boil - basically same as what you're doing.


Rev.

 

[kanzimonson]

I see. I've never really batched so I don't know, but I thought you'd spend some time stirring to maybe break up the kernels and release that sugar, and then a longer wait so the sugar could migrate out. But I'm just conjecturing here.

I think if you compared two systems, one fly and one batch, completely optimized to not waste a single minute, the batch could probably save 20ish minutes over the fly. It's something, but not significant enough for me.

 

[Rev2010]

I think if you compared two systems, one fly and one batch, completely optimized to not waste a single minute, the batch could probably save 20ish minutes over the fly. It's something, but not significant enough for me.

I agree. I think the main advantage really is not having to buy/use a HLT and fly sparge arm. Like I said, wasn't trying to support/oppose one method over the other. I just had read your post and thought you'd made a great point about being able to start heating the runnings then thought, "Well duh... if I were mashing and boiling in the same location then I could just as easily start heating my runoff's as well to save time to get to the boil".


Rev.

 

[kombat]

Well I use a pump to recirculate during the mash, so when it's time to runoff the wort is already running clear.

I agree that you want to be careful not to disturb the grain bed - that's why for the first runnings I still kept it at a medium pace of about 2-3 qts per minute.

Right, but even stopping the flow (of recirculation) to reposition the output hose to the boil kettle, and restarting the flow, can disturb the grain bed. That's what the grant is for. Also, running the pump directly from the output line of the mash tun risks creating a suction on the grain bed, which again, disturbs it. By running the wort into a grant using gravity only (and then using a pump to recirculate it from the grant back to the mash tun) eliminates that suction risk and allows for the least possible disturbance to the grain bed.

 

[kanzimonson]

Right, but even stopping the flow (of recirculation) to reposition the output hose to the boil kettle, and restarting the flow, can disturb the grain bed. That's what the grant is for. Also, running the pump directly from the output line of the mash tun risks creating a suction on the grain bed, which again, disturbs it. By running the wort into a grant using gravity only (and then using a pump to recirculate it from the grant back to the mash tun) eliminates that suction risk and allows for the least possible disturbance to the grain bed.

I agree that all of these are potential risks, but empirically I haven't experienced them. My runoff is crystal clear throughout. I get an expected 75% efficiency with most beers. And most importantly I never get stuck sparges, and I frequently use 10-20% wheat malt in my beers with no rice hulls. I made a wit with 10% flaked oats, 17% flaked wheat, and 26% wheat malt, no rice hulls, and no problem with sticking. I think recirculating during the mash is helpful in getting a uniform grain bed, but I'm just guessing here.

 

[Eighty2Fifty1]

I fly sparge. I used to run mine full-bore for a minute or two, and then close it up to keep an inch of water above the grain bed. I had a spinning sparge arm, and my sparge was pretty slow because the sparge arm restricted flow so much. Last brew day, I had my HERMS rig finally ready, and I did away with the sparge arm, replacing it with a silicone hose. I ran the entire system fully open and was done with the sparge in 10 minutes. After I had run my numbers, I was less than thrilled to find my efficiency had dropped from 80% down to 60%. So yeah, slow sparging really does make a difference.

 

[kanzimonson]

Sounds like you used to experience the exact thing I'm asking about - good to know it works. Now you gotta slow that mess down!