Very low efficiency,beer smith equipment for biab does not make sense.

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

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

chef1978

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2017
Messages
73
Reaction score
6
Soo frustrated,it's the second time I'm trying BIAB after 15 years of ice cooler and pot set up,and I just can't hit more than 52% efficiency. I mill my grains my own ,I wet condition them before milling,and crush on finest setup.
I follow beersmith equipment for BIAB 13 gallon pot.at first the voles of water did not made sense to me,than I discovered this set up uses 90 min boil! Why!? Than is the evaporation rate24% in hour, any was ,my mash efficiency is at 87.2% but brewhouse efficiency at 52% this is really low,the only think I did not try is to adjust water ph because I don't have reliable ph meter.

Do any of you had similar problems? How did you fix it? Cheers.
 

VikeMan

It ain't all burritos and strippers, my friend.
Joined
Aug 24, 2010
Messages
4,849
Reaction score
4,294
For boiloff rate, you need to tell the software what your boiloff rate is. As for your boil length, you decide how long you will boil and tell the software.

What was your grain bill, i.e. can you please list all of the malts/grains and the amounts? What was the measured volume of wort that actually made it into the fermenter. Also, what was the gravity and what was the temperature when you measured it?
 
OP
OP
C

chef1978

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2017
Messages
73
Reaction score
6
For boiloff rate, you need to tell the software what your boiloff rate is. As for your boil length, you decide how long you will boil and tell the software.

What was your grain bill, i.e. can you please list all of the malts/grains and the amounts? What was the measured volume of wort that actually made it into the fermenter. Also, what was the gravity and what was the temperature when you measured it?
3kg of English pale malt
200 gr crystal 60
11 liters in to fermenter
1056 og
Around 20 degrees Celsius

Now after all the mesurement it turned out it is actually 64% ,much better but not awesome.i also readjust the boil off from 23% to 17.8 which is my actual measured one.
 

doug293cz

BIABer, Beer Math Nerd, ePanel Designer, Pilot
Staff member
Mod
HBT Supporter
Joined
May 14, 2014
Messages
13,643
Reaction score
10,658
Location
Renton
Soo frustrated,it's the second time I'm trying BIAB after 15 years of ice cooler and pot set up,and I just can't hit more than 52% efficiency. I mill my grains my own ,I wet condition them before milling,and crush on finest setup.
I follow beersmith equipment for BIAB 13 gallon pot.at first the voles of water did not made sense to me,than I discovered this set up uses 90 min boil! Why!? Than is the evaporation rate24% in hour, any was ,my mash efficiency is at 87.2% but brewhouse efficiency at 52% this is really low,the only think I did not try is to adjust water ph because I don't have reliable ph meter.

Do any of you had similar problems? How did you fix it? Cheers.
Is that 52% brewhouse efficiency the estimated value (which you are supposed to input) or the measured value?

The difference between measured mash efficiency and measured brewhouse efficiency is all due to wort volume that didn't make it from the BK to the fermenter. Are you leaving a lot of wort behind?

Brew on :mug:
 

PCABrewing

Recreational Brewer
Joined
Oct 28, 2021
Messages
549
Reaction score
545
For boiloff rate, you need to tell the software what your boiloff rate is. As for your boil length, you decide how long you will boil and tell the software.

What was your grain bill, i.e. can you please list all of the malts/grains and the amounts? What was the measured volume of wort that actually made it into the fermenter. Also, what was the gravity and what was the temperature when you measured it?
I noticed when looking at the BIAB listed equipment profiles in Beersmith, several of them default to a 90 min. boil.
It's not clear why since once you're in boil phase, the bag is out of the picture, so the driver seems to be random entry of the defaults at the time they were defined rather than the BIAB method.
Really shows that you need to review the parameters before you use a profile so you can change them to what makes sense for your batch and environment. Once you have them weaked to match your environment and protocols you will get much better results. After all the GIGO rule applies to process control software as much as anything.

Probably a good question (defaults) to pose to Dr. Smith.

edit; this was aimed at the OP, just trying to build on VikeMan's input.
 

VikeMan

It ain't all burritos and strippers, my friend.
Joined
Aug 24, 2010
Messages
4,849
Reaction score
4,294
3kg of English pale malt
200 gr crystal 60
11 liters in to fermenter
1056 og
Around 20 degrees Celsius

Now after all the mesurement it turned out it is actually 64% ,much better but not awesome.i also readjust the boil off from 23% to 17.8 which is my actual measured one.

You measured exactly 11 liters here? When computing efficiencies, volume accuracy matters. For example, if 1.056 at 11 liters is 64% efficiency, @10.5 liters it would be ~61%, and @ 11.5 liters it would be ~67%.
 

Bobby_M

Vendor and Brewer
HBT Sponsor
Joined
Aug 3, 2006
Messages
26,559
Reaction score
6,613
Location
Whitehouse Station
It's already been said, but it's a folly to assume any existing equipment profile in any software is going to represent how your system behaves. It's best to create a copy, name it, and then fill out parameters you know to be true. After brewing and recording as much data as you can stand to collect, modify the profile to better conform to how it went. Then, never stop doing that.
 

hotbeer

Opinionated Newb
HBT Supporter
Joined
Mar 10, 2021
Messages
1,654
Reaction score
1,202
If you are having issues with your BIAB draining fully then that might be a place to start discussing. As well, how you handle different methods of brewing with a bag might make a difference. Especially if you a mixing up things that the particular BIAB mash process you are doing with procedures for another type BIAB mash process.
 

bwible

I drink, and I know things
HBT Supporter
Joined
Oct 31, 2017
Messages
2,292
Reaction score
4,995
Location
Oxford, PA
I’m not a BIAB guy, but are you doing any kind of sparge? Whether you sparge by pouring hot water over the bag or do a dunk sparge in a seperate pot. Many of the BIAB guys do.
 
OP
OP
C

chef1978

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2017
Messages
73
Reaction score
6
You guys are right,you really have to check.at every parameters in beersmith equipment setup,the boil off values are off,the boil time ,true loss,and after fermentation loss.

I will definitely work on that.
On the other hand ,my bag really suck,is there good place to find the real deal?
 

seilenos

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2016
Messages
208
Reaction score
139
If it helps, as an example attached is my BIAB equipment profile for my SS Brewtech 10 gallon kettle.

I do full volume, no sparge, 5 gallon batches (6 gallons into the fermenter) using a wilserbrewer bag.

My actual is a little off from the profile but my process is close enough.
BH efficiencies range from 75-85% depending on grain type and amounts.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2022-10-03 at 11.53.41 AM.png
    Screen Shot 2022-10-03 at 11.53.41 AM.png
    860.5 KB · Views: 0

VikeMan

It ain't all burritos and strippers, my friend.
Joined
Aug 24, 2010
Messages
4,849
Reaction score
4,294
It may be worth reiterating that OP's stated issue is that his brewhouse efficiency is much less than his mash efficiency. If that's the case, and if his mash efficiency is really at 87.2% as stated, this is not a problem with a lack of sparging (or a poor sparge, or crush, etc.). It would be an issue of wort not making it from the kettle to the fermenter.

@chef1978 it would be helpful if you could answer @doug293cz's question from post #4.
 
OP
OP
C

chef1978

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2017
Messages
73
Reaction score
6
If it helps, as an example attached is my BIAB equipment profile for my SS Brewtech 10 gallon kettle.

I do full volume, no sparge, 5 gallon batches (6 gallons into the fermenter) using a wilserbrewer bag.

My actual is a little off from the profile but my process is close enough.
BH efficiencies range from 75-85% depending on grain type and amounts.
Thanks bunch,which program are yiu using again? This doesn't look lime beersmith.
 
OP
OP
C

chef1978

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2017
Messages
73
Reaction score
6
Is that 52% brewhouse efficiency the estimated value (which you are supposed to input) or the measured value?

The difference between measured mash efficiency and measured brewhouse efficiency is all due to wort volume that didn't make it from the BK to the fermenter. Are you leaving a lot of wort behind?

Brew on :mug:
This was measured value.
 

seilenos

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2016
Messages
208
Reaction score
139
Thanks bunch,which program are yiu using again? This doesn't look lime beersmith.

Beersmith v3.1.08
Mac OS X v12.6 (Monterey)
Profiles -> Equipment -> Open " My BIAB Equipment" (which is the configuration I added for my setup)
 

jambop

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2021
Messages
224
Reaction score
120
Location
S W France
I find that BH eff is very much dependent on sparging . If you sparge well you get a much better BH EFF. Your 85% mashing eff indicates that you have lost a lot during sparge and some bound up in the boil hops. Just my opinion though.
 

jambop

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2021
Messages
224
Reaction score
120
Location
S W France
One other thing does cross my mind is how are these volumes measured? Just because one vessel says 25 L and the other says 25 L does not mean that they are both actually 25 L volumes ... have you calibrated you measured volumes ? I have one vessel, the boiling kettle, that is reading 26.5 L when the volume is actually 25 L and the other vessel, the fermenter, is more or less bang on so I have to subtract to measure mash eff and the BH eff is more or less correct.
 

doug293cz

BIABer, Beer Math Nerd, ePanel Designer, Pilot
Staff member
Mod
HBT Supporter
Joined
May 14, 2014
Messages
13,643
Reaction score
10,658
Location
Renton
I find that BH eff is very much dependent on sparging . If you sparge well you get a much better BH EFF. Your 85% mashing eff indicates that you have lost a lot during sparge and some bound up in the boil hops. Just my opinion though.
87% mash efficiency is pretty good. It's possible to get higher with a really good fly sparge or multiple batch sparges, as long as your conversion efficiency is better than 95%. But sparging really has very little to do with OP's very low BH efficiency. OP lost 40% of volume going from BK to fermenter (assuming stated efficiency values are correct.) Even at 100% mash efficiency (not possible) OP would have only had 60% BH efficiency.

Absorption of wort by hops will affect BH efficiency. But I don't think anyone uses enough hops to absorb 40% of their wort.

Brew on :mug:
 

jambop

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2021
Messages
224
Reaction score
120
Location
S W France
87% mash efficiency is pretty good. It's possible to get higher with a really good fly sparge or multiple batch sparges, as long as your conversion efficiency is better than 95%. But sparging really has very little to do with OP's very low BH efficiency. OP lost 40% of volume going from BK to fermenter (assuming stated efficiency values are correct.) Even at 100% mash efficiency (not possible) OP would have only had 60% BH efficiency.

Absorption of wort by hops will affect BH efficiency. But I don't think anyone uses enough hops to absorb 40% of their wort.

Brew on :mug:
Yes I see where you are coming from however looking at my second post on the subject....
Nobody can lose 40% of their volume without noticing that loss ... it is not possible . So I am saying he either had a lot lot less in the boiling kettle or a lot more in the fermenter . I know that when I am brewing I know nearly precisely how much is in the boiler pre boil and how much is in it post boil and how much is actually transferred. Nobody can possibly not know that they had say 25 L in the kettle post boil and then only have 15L transferred to the fermenter it is just not possible a complete imbecile would detect that sort of loss ! So I think this person has completely messed up his measured volumes I would say he has not measured either his post boil volume or transferred volume properly because as I have said even an idiot would notice a volume loss of that magnitude simply going from one vessel to another. If the person did evaporate off 40% then that would be reflected in the increase wort gravity to the fermenter which would also be reflected in the calculated BH eff the two are completely linked . In short the OP's figures for the calculations he made are not correct .
 

doug293cz

BIABer, Beer Math Nerd, ePanel Designer, Pilot
Staff member
Mod
HBT Supporter
Joined
May 14, 2014
Messages
13,643
Reaction score
10,658
Location
Renton
Yes I see where you are coming from however looking at my second post on the subject....
Nobody can lose 40% of their volume without noticing that loss ... it is not possible . So I am saying he either had a lot lot less in the boiling kettle or a lot more in the fermenter . I know that when I am brewing I know nearly precisely how much is in the boiler pre boil and how much is in it post boil and how much is actually transferred. Nobody can possibly not know that they had say 25 L in the kettle post boil and then only have 15L transferred to the fermenter it is just not possible a complete imbecile would detect that sort of loss ! So I think this person has completely messed up his measured volumes I would say he has not measured either his post boil volume or transferred volume properly because as I have said even an idiot would notice a volume loss of that magnitude simply going from one vessel to another. If the person did evaporate off 40% then that would be reflected in the increase wort gravity to the fermenter which would also be reflected in the calculated BH eff the two are completely linked . In short the OP's figures for the calculations he made are not correct .
Which is why this parenthetical phase "(assuming stated efficiency values are correct.)" was included in my post. If the volume measurements are off, then the calculated efficiencies will be wrong (GIGO.)

And, boil-off has no effect on efficiency, since efficiency is defined in terms of actual mass of extract (sugar, protein, etc.) at each stage of the process vs. the maximum potential extract in the grain bill. Boiling does not change the amount of extract in the BK, only the amount of water.

Brew on :mug:
 

RogerGrahl

Active Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2021
Messages
37
Reaction score
27
Which is why this parenthetical phase "(assuming stated efficiency values are correct.)" was included in my post. If the volume measurements are off, then the calculated efficiencies will be wrong (GIGO.)

And, boil-off has no effect on efficiency, since efficiency is defined in terms of actual mass of extract (sugar, protein, etc.) at each stage of the process vs. the maximum potential extract in the grain bill. Boiling does not change the amount of extract in the BK, only the amount of water.

Brew on :mug:
Nice RV-12. Did you build it?
 

doug293cz

BIABer, Beer Math Nerd, ePanel Designer, Pilot
Staff member
Mod
HBT Supporter
Joined
May 14, 2014
Messages
13,643
Reaction score
10,658
Location
Renton
Nice RV-12. Did you build it?
Thanks. No I didn't build it. It was built by a group called "TeenFlight Puyallup", which is high school kids mentored by a bunch of RV builders. Great and easy flying little airplane with fantastic visibility.

Brew on :mug:
 

jambop

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2021
Messages
224
Reaction score
120
Location
S W France
Which is why this parenthetical phase "(assuming stated efficiency values are correct.)" was included in my post. If the volume measurements are off, then the calculated efficiencies will be wrong (GIGO.)

And, boil-off has no effect on efficiency, since efficiency is defined in terms of actual mass of extract (sugar, protein, etc.) at each stage of the process vs. the maximum potential extract in the grain bill. Boiling does not change the amount of extract in the BK, only the amount of water.

Brew on :mug:
"If the person did evaporate off 40% then that would be reflected in the increase wort gravity to the fermenter which would also be reflected in the calculated BH eff the two are completely linked . "

Which is exactly what I stated in my post ?? If you reduce the volume the gravity must increase and thus the eff is maintained .
 

doug293cz

BIABer, Beer Math Nerd, ePanel Designer, Pilot
Staff member
Mod
HBT Supporter
Joined
May 14, 2014
Messages
13,643
Reaction score
10,658
Location
Renton
"If the person did evaporate off 40% then that would be reflected in the increase wort gravity to the fermenter which would also be reflected in the calculated BH eff the two are completely linked . "

Which is exactly what I stated in my post ?? If you reduce the volume the gravity must increase and thus the eff is maintained .
My point was that for OP's efficiency numbers to be correct, they had to lose 40% of the post-boil volume between the BK and the fermenter. Boil off doesn't come into play trying to reconcile the two efficiency numbers.

As you note a 40% volume loss should have been obvious and raised a red flag. I asked OP in post #4 about wort left behind, and again in post #15 about "lost" wort. OP hasn't responded. If they respond that the volume difference was nowhere near 40%, then the only conclusion is that some of the values input for efficiency calculations had serious errors.

Brew on :mug:
 

jambop

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2021
Messages
224
Reaction score
120
Location
S W France
My point was that for OP's efficiency numbers to be correct, they had to lose 40% of the post-boil volume between the BK and the fermenter. Boil off doesn't come into play trying to reconcile the two efficiency numbers.

As you note a 40% volume loss should have been obvious and raised a red flag. I asked OP in post #4 about wort left behind, and again in post #15 about "lost" wort. OP hasn't responded. If they respond that the volume difference was nowhere near 40%, then the only conclusion is that some of the values input for efficiency calculations had serious errors.

Brew on :mug:

And my point is quite obvious as I have pointed out if the OP's eff's dropped so badly it would be so noticeable it could not be a post boil loss. So there are two possibilities ... his measured volumes are totally wrong OR he did not determine the pre or post boil gravity's properly, which is a distinct possibility as a massive loss of volume would be very noticeable whereas a badly taken SG reading would not. If he made an error in his pre boil gravity reading there is a very good chance this alone could account for the displacement in eff's .
 
Top