As the topic states what % efficiency is considered ideal? Also if you find that after your boil and taking OG that your efficiency is too low (if that indeed is a thing) what do you do about it?
Greg Sagram
Greg Sagram
What % efficiency is considered poor or great?
- Thread starter Gunshowgreg
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk:
The better your efficiency the less grain it'll take to achieve the same target gravity. In home brewing the difference in grain consumption is negligible and just amounts to bragging rights. In a production setting higher efficiency means lower production costs where 90% brewhouse efficiency or better is common. Home brewers are usually achieving between 75 and 85%.
OP
OP
Also I misspoke. I should have said specific gravity not original gravity.
OP
OP
Thanks for the reply!
Manufacturedevolution
Cooper
BLL is right on point. I'll just add that knowing your own efficiency and equipment helps to hit targets with recipes. The tough thing is if you are sourcing milled grain from different vendors. Each source will likely have a different crush. Before I started milling my own grain my efficiency was all over the place. Consistency is most important to me.
Many recipes are written with an expected efficiency of around 70%. I'd consider anything less than that to be low and I would expect to add some DME to make up the difference and then make changes to ensure it didn't happen again. The biggest factor in efficiency is the crush of the grain (mash efficiency) followed by tun and kettle losses. I BIAB so I can mill my grains finely and have come to expect to have brewhouse efficiency above 85% every time.
65% or lower is poor.
90% is great.
75-80% is average.
My own average began at 68%, then as I learned more over the years rose to 92%. For various reasons, I opened the gap on my mill to arrive at a new current average of 82%.
It's all good. Consistent performance is more important than the actual number. The extent of crush and quality of sparge (or squeeze for BIAB) matters the most. Other stuff not so much.
90% is great.
75-80% is average.
My own average began at 68%, then as I learned more over the years rose to 92%. For various reasons, I opened the gap on my mill to arrive at a new current average of 82%.
It's all good. Consistent performance is more important than the actual number. The extent of crush and quality of sparge (or squeeze for BIAB) matters the most. Other stuff not so much.
OP
OP
Are you a BIAB guy your self?
Yes, but I'm a unique one -- I don't squeeze at all. I do a dunk-sparge.
wilserbrewer
BIAB Expert Tailor
Until you get a feel for things I suggest you take a preboil gravity so you know where your driving before you get there.
Silly to brew on and at the end of the day take a post boil and realize your off, when if you had this info sooner you could have done something about it.
Boiled longer perhaps...or boiled less / added top up water or sparge more or best yet made more beer.
Point being don’t progress blindly with your head buried in a brewing app.
Frankly I could care less about efficiency, I just know I want X gallons at Y gravity...
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2008
- Messages
- 64,955
- Reaction score
- 16,524
Great = consistently repeatable
Poor = inconsistent, non-repeatable
I'd rather get 72% consistently than 96%, 68%, and 79%...
Also, defining "efficiency" is important as there's several kinds measured during the process....conversion efficiency (sometimes called mash efficiency), lauter efficiency, into-the-kettle efficiency, post boil efficiency, into-the-fermenter efficiency, etc...
Even the term "brewhouse efficiency" isn't agreed upon by all...
Poor = inconsistent, non-repeatable
I'd rather get 72% consistently than 96%, 68%, and 79%...
Also, defining "efficiency" is important as there's several kinds measured during the process....conversion efficiency (sometimes called mash efficiency), lauter efficiency, into-the-kettle efficiency, post boil efficiency, into-the-fermenter efficiency, etc...
Even the term "brewhouse efficiency" isn't agreed upon by all...
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2013
- Messages
- 1,987
- Reaction score
- 965
Absolutely this! It does not matter what the number is as long as you can consistently repeat it. Otherwise, you cannot duplicate that great brew you last made or if you make a change and end up with a different efficiency, how do you know if your change actually improved the beer (or made it worse...).
Desert_Sky
Since 1998
I'm perfectly happy with 78-82%
Dcpcooks
Well-Known Member
AZ is on point with his opinion. To keep it simple I focused on grain crush to help me quantify my mash efficiency, which is how well you extracted the sugars from the grain. That’s pretty consistent with BIAB achieving a higher or faster extraction than a sparge based brew since the grain is usually milled fine in biab applications.
You also need to understand your brewhouse efficiency. Which is mash efficiency minus system losses. That’s a bigger factor in 3tier systems where you can leave wort in hoses, pumps and under false bottoms.
What’s important is 1) Your efficiency and your ability to consistently repeat it.
2) recognizing the difference between your efficiency and a recipes efficiency and being able to adjust for the difference. That’s pretty simple if your using software.
At that point you input the grain bill into your software and compare the og to your estimate and scale the recipe up or down to hit your targets.
You also need to understand your brewhouse efficiency. Which is mash efficiency minus system losses. That’s a bigger factor in 3tier systems where you can leave wort in hoses, pumps and under false bottoms.
What’s important is 1) Your efficiency and your ability to consistently repeat it.
2) recognizing the difference between your efficiency and a recipes efficiency and being able to adjust for the difference. That’s pretty simple if your using software.
At that point you input the grain bill into your software and compare the og to your estimate and scale the recipe up or down to hit your targets.
Similar threads
