My efficiency may not be what I thought it was ...

[Otto Von Blotto]

I think BIAB brewers are kidding them selves if they think there getting 80%+ efficiency expecialy with no sparge!

Ive been wrong many a times but 80%+ sounds out there...

High 70% sounds good results from BIAB' date='

 

Large breweries are getting around 90% with there large mega vessel systems...

Running smaller scale 3V HERMS is going to get you around similar results but the mid to 80s to high 80s% is great going!

depending on when you stop sparging...

You can keep sucking the grain mash dry of sugars in mash but at risk of getting crap flavours...[/quote']

 

Well, it happens mate. I measure my post-boil SG and the volume into the FV on every batch and use Beersmith to calculate the overall efficiency. 80% would be about my upper limit, but as I said since I refined my processes a bit, I've not gone below 74%, with most batches being around 76-77%. The only exception being my stout brew which was 66% but that was expected anyway due to the larger grain bill. Occasionally it might creep over 80% but it's rare. I don't really care about getting the biggest efficiency number - as long as it's consistent and not too low which it is now, I'm happy. Mash efficiency is usually up in the high 80s.

 

I don't believe the crap about squeezing the bag causing astringency or whatever. I reckon it's an old wives tale really. I squeeze the crap out of my grain bag every batch and never get astringency, and I haven't heard of anyone else having it happen either. Maybe it's because the grain has cooled by the time I do squeeze it most times, but it still doesn't extract any crap flavours.

 

I can see where you're coming from Jeremy but I partly disagree with it too. I brew all sorts of styles too, all the way from Bo pils to heavy stouts, but with the exception of the higher ABV beers, I get around the same efficiency number on every style and the processes are pretty much the same. I don't worry about SMB but at the same time I don't shake the hot wort around like a British nanny either.

 

Inconsistent efficiency won't necessarily lead to problems in the finished beers, it just makes recipe design a PITA because you don't know how much grain to use to get the beer to taste how you want it to. It could lead to unbalanced beers if you extract too much or too little sugars from the grains in the mashing process.

 

Cheers

 

Kelsey

[jeremy-o]

I can see where you're coming from Jeremy but I partly disagree with it too. I brew all sorts of styles too' date=' all the way from Bo pils to heavy stouts, but with the exception of the higher ABV beers, I get around the same efficiency number on every style and the processes are pretty much the same. I don't worry about SMB but at the same time I don't shake the hot wort around like a British nanny either.

 

Inconsistent efficiency won't necessarily lead to problems in the finished beers, it just makes recipe design a PITA because you don't know how much grain to use to get the beer to taste how you want it to. It could lead to unbalanced beers if you extract too much or too little sugars from the grains in the mashing process. [/quote']

 

Not gonna lie, hitting an expected OG has been hard for me basically since my first brew. First two were way over the top and required dilution and the next couple were weak (low 1040s). Since then I've kinda figured to hell with it and just pushed forward with an acceptance that the numbers can vary greatly... For now I'm happy with what I get but if it comes to replicating something precisely, I might have a hard time.

 

With properly temp-controlled all-grain beer it's pretty hard to end up with something bad, so it's been easy to feel cavalier when it comes to numbers. It's probably the same reason I'm terrible with pastry and baking; everything's roughly measured and I can never follow the same recipe twice

[Otto Von Blotto]

The numbers can certainly vary a lot, no doubt about it. At the same time, if your process is the same on every batch, then you should be getting a similar efficiency on similar sized grain bills regardless of the style of beer. I don't think different styles need different processes. Other than my pilsners where I use a Hochkurz mash and 90 minute boil, everything else gets a 90 minute mash and 75 minute boil, regardless of what the style of beer is. The only thing I change is the temperature of the mash depending on how fermentable I want the wort to be.

 

For some reason though, you seem to keep getting wildly varying numbers. It could be due to trying a lot of different things all the time rather than just getting a process worked out to use on all batches. I do understand the experimentation angle, but sometimes it's better to take a step back and get a consistent process down pat first, and then start trying different things.

 

Cheers

 

Kelsey

[ben 10]

BIAB is not ideal for efficiency yet is a quick simple method for brewing basics small batches of beer...

And agreed takes less time and effort!

 

Have you made BIAB beers? I crack around 80% without a lot of effort.

 

Braumeister is blinged BIAB and they have 500 litre systems.

I doubt that would sell if it was as inefficient as you say,

[King Ruddager]

... LODO?

[Otto Von Blotto]

It's basically low oxygen brewing, i.e. minimising the amount of oxygen the wort is exposed to over the whole brewing process. It seems to be mainly aimed at German lagers. I found this comment on a thread somewhere about LODO brewing that pretty well sums up what I've been trying to get across in my previous couple of posts here;

 

And this is the icing on the cake of brewing. You have to already have things together, then this is dialing it all in further.

 

In other words get the basics down pat before mucking around with more technical shit.

[jeremy-o]

... LODO?

 

LODO = Low Dissolved Oxygen

 

Oxidising reactions seem to tear up some malt flavour compounds very quickly, especially at hot and even moreso at boiling temperatures. Water comes out of the tap with around 10ppm of oxygen dissolved in it but you can reduce that to under 1 pretty easily by pre-boiling the strike water and adding a very small amount of sodium metabisulphite before you dough in. Essentially the SMB acts as an oxygen buffer - it reacts with the oxygen before flavours are affected. But there's only so much of it in a reasonable dose, and it has to last all through the process, so you can't go splashing your wort around and wasting its reactivity. Hence my last two experimental LODO brews have been basically just in and out with the bag, no stirring or squeezing.

 

I don't think the 'icing on the cake' analogy is a bad one, but at least on the hot-side LODO is pretty straightforward as long as you're willing to take a hit on your yield.

 

[captsensible23]

Sorry to highjack the thread.

 

I have a question aimed at OVB.

I also have the Crown urn and do BIAB, with no-chill in a 20L cube.

 

In Beersmith, what do you put as your batch size, when using no-chill?

 

When writing a recipe, I use 21L as my batch size, but normally finish my boil with about 35L. I have alot of wort left over that gets dumped, and I completely fill the cube. I'm not sure if I should have that as my batch size (after boil volume) or what makes it to the FV.

 

The estimated numbers are also out of whack. I have a mate who works in the lab at a brewery and the alcohol, and colour are quite different than what predicted. He is unable to test IBU's right now.

 

Thanks

[ben 10]

I also have the Crown urn and do BIAB' date=' with no-chill in a 20L cube.

[/quote']

 

I have the same set up.

What is your strike water if you have 35 litre at the end of boil?

 

I use 33 litres and get around 23 litres in the cube. OG as predicted and thus ABV. IBU we have no way of knowing about unless it is tested. Colour for me is in the right area too.

[Waylon]

Yeh IBUs in cubing is an interesting one! especially if based on a normal chilled recipe

 

I just cubed my first cubes from a batch... One was 26 litre the other was 30 litre which left me 7 litres to ferment strait away in my 10litre fermenter!

 

The uncubed wort has finished and all gone sadly... the other two cube are in fermenters ATM

So it will be interesting to see the bitterness differences, would have been smart to do side by side sadly!

 

Ive been following some well known recipe's as well as improvising my own... it wopuld be a shame if cubing distorts the original recipe too much...

Im now going to cube part of my batches and trial the differences!

 

Perhaps ill end up choosing either go all cube or all chill, but in summer chill is a no option here

[headmaster]

Well' date=' it happens mate. I measure my post-boil SG and the volume into the FV on every batch and use Beersmith to calculate the overall efficiency. 80% would be about my upper limit, but as I said since I refined my processes a bit, I've not gone below 74%, with most batches being around 76-77%. The only exception being my stout brew which was 66% but that was expected anyway due to the larger grain bill. Occasionally it might creep over 80% but it's rare. I don't really care about getting the biggest efficiency number - as long as it's consistent and not too low which it is now, I'm happy. Mash efficiency is usually up in the high 80s.

 

Kelsey[/quote']

 

Kelsey,

 

are you quoting brewhouse efficiency in your first numbers here, being what you get into the FV or maybe the keg? When you say high 80's for mash efficiency, that is what I was referring to in my post and I suspect what others are referring to in this thread I'm assuming?

 

[Otto Von Blotto]

Sorry to highjack the thread.

 

I have a question aimed at OVB.

I also have the Crown urn and do BIAB' date=' with no-chill in a 20L cube.

 

In Beersmith, what do you put as your batch size, when using no-chill?

 

When writing a recipe, I use 21L as my batch size, but normally finish my boil with about 35L. I have alot of wort left over that gets dumped, and I completely fill the cube. I'm not sure if I should have that as my batch size (after boil volume) or what makes it to the FV.

 

The estimated numbers are also out of whack. I have a mate who works in the lab at a brewery and the alcohol, and colour are quite different than what predicted. He is unable to test IBU's right now.

 

Thanks[/quote']

 

You will need to fix those numbers then. Or fix the process that's causing you to end up with that much wort after the boil. Something certainly isn't adding up which is why your numbers are out of whack. For batch size I use what I intend to put into the fermenter. I use either 21 or 25 litres depending on whether I use my 20 or 25 litre cubes. I normally use about 11L more than the batch size in strike water, so for the 21L size ones I use 32L strike water, and 36L strike water for the 25L batches. This 11 litres accounts for losses to trub, grain absorption, hop absorption to a degree, boil off and cooling shrinkage.

 

Kelsey' date='

are you quoting brewhouse efficiency in your fist numbers here, being what you get into the FV or maybe the keg? When you say high 80's for mash efficiency, that is what I was referring to in my post and I suspect what others are referring to in this thread I'm assuming?

[/quote']Yes mate, brewhouse efficiency. It is based on the volume and SG of the wort that I get into the FV. That's the number I always quote when I'm referring to efficiency because that's what I design my recipes on - what I'm aiming for into the FV. My mash efficiency is pretty much always up in the high 80s, and the brewhouse efficiency usually is about 10% less in the high 70s.

 

This wasn't always the case though. For a while I was struggling in the mid-high 60s with brewhouse efficiency and couldn't work out why at first. Turned out that I inadvertently changed some of my process at some stage a couple of years ago which dropped my batch volumes, I also wasn't aware that my hydrometer was reading 2 points too low, and my mill was not working properly either. I was also using a finer crush than I am now. Improvements were made by returning to my original process, adjusting hydrometer readings to account for the error, and fixing the mill in conjunction with moving to a coarse crush on the grains. These changes saw it jump by about 10% on average and it has stayed up there ever since.

 

Cheers

 

Kelsey

 

 

[captsensible23]

Sorry for the last message, the numbers were not correct. I didn't have my notes with me.

Last brew I started with 36L at strike, which gave me 34L pre boil. The post boil was 31L.

 

I think next brew, I'll input 21L as batch size, and use your quoted 32L as strike. Hopefully that will put me more into the ball park.

 

Thanks

[Otto Von Blotto]

How long did you boil it for? Assuming 60 minutes that's a boil off rate of about 3L per hour - pretty standard for the Crown urns I think. Mine's about the same. That info can be put into Beersmith in your equipment profile. I have two Crown urn profiles on there, one for my 21L size batches and the other for the 25L ones.

 

For the 21L size batches I probably end up with about 25/26L in the urn post-boil. The other few litres are mainly just trub and shit that I don't want in the cube or fermenter. I do boil for 75 minutes though.

[King Ruddager]

Hmmm, would a longer boil affect efficiency due to more water being boiled off?

 

On reflection I did seem to have an extra litre somehow for this last brew. It could be because I put the lid back on the urn while I brought it up from mash temps to boiling, therefore lost less H2O to the atmosphere, therefore lower OG?

[captsensible23]

How long did you boil it for? Assuming 60 minutes that's a boil off rate of about 3L per hour - pretty standard for the Crown urns I think. Mine's about the same. That info can be put into Beersmith in your equipment profile. I have two Crown urn profiles on there' date=' one for my 21L size batches and the other for the 25L ones.

 

For the 21L size batches I probably end up with about 25/26L in the urn post-boil. The other few litres are mainly just trub and shit that I don't want in the cube or fermenter. I do boil for 75 minutes though. [/quote']

 

Yeah standard 60 minutes. In the profiles for your urns, do you have a number for loss to trub/chiller? or deadspace?

 

Thanks again.

[Otto Von Blotto]

Deadspace is zero because it's a full volume mash in one vessel, the trub/chiller loss is set to 3 litres. For 21 litre batches I normally start with about 29/30 litres pre-boil, boil off my 3.75 litres over the 75 minutes to get around 25/26 litres post boil, 22 or so of which goes into the urn and the other 3 or 4 litres is chucked out as it mostly contains trub. I probably do lose a litre of good wort, but I'd rather do that than ferment on hot break. Obviously all the volumes are 4 litres more for 25 litre size batches aside from boil off and trub loss.

 

I don't think putting the lid on would affect it too much, since efficiency is based on volume as well as the SG of the wort. So if you had an extra litre with a lower SG, potentially this could result in the same efficiency as if you had the intended volume at a higher SG, in this instance it depends on the difference in SG.

 

In your case, the extra litre only moves the efficiency up to 67.7%, still way short of the 76% you thought you were getting. 76% would have had it at 1.049 in 27 litres. At 1.042 you'd have to have 31.5 litres to get the 76%.

 

 

[headmaster]

Yes mate' date=' brewhouse efficiency.

[/quote']

 

Thanks Kelsey. I would avoid using the dregs from the kettle as the FG sample though, I think you might have mentioned that you have done this? I continue to get readings that are 2 to 4 pts higher from the dregs/trub when compared to the main body of wort.

 

Regardless, those numbers you are hitting are very good, I don't think going to 3V better them. Anything high 80's for mash efficiency is probably as good as you can get at home.

 

I think we should all be talking mash efficiency when quoting numbers, as there are less variables to affect the comparison and it relates to conversion efficiency only.

[Morrie]

Kelsey,

I'm not exactly sure how you are determining overall efficiency but this is what I've been doing. I am making a 26 litre batch so am left with 26 litres in the kettle of which 23 litres goes into the FV after the immersion chilling. So I plug the OG and the 26 litres into Beersmith to determine my total efficiency or measured efficiency. If I just went on what went into the FV the number would be lower for sure as I am leaving around 3 litres of trub/wort in the kettle. I think only calculating what is going into the FV would be giving an artificially low number.

 

I am also using a refractometer and find it makes the process of measuring wort SGs much easier.

[King Ruddager]

LHBS recommended stirring it 15 minutes into the mash - I reckon I'll give this a "whirl"

[Waylon]

is blinged BIAB and they have 500 litre systems.

Yep agreed... its a bloody great setup that is almost fool proof benny boy!

 

Braumeister V Single infusion BIAB crown urn or stove top brewing... WTF no comparison

 

Braumeister is the bomb Mate, if your brew in a bag is to the same standard or better than Braumeister then that awesome benny,

 

I believe BIAB has its great application for a lot of small scale brewers doing all grain, guys like Kelsey have fine tuned the setup...but in a lot of cases it is vary poor in efficancy comes from poor mashing and as far as bag squeezing Ive never tried that as it horrifies me!

 

Im sure some have it down pat but most will get inconsistent results

[ben 10]

 

Im sure some have it down pat but most will get inconsistent results

 

Absolutely bollocks Waylon.

You have some good advice but don't be so certain regarding your thoughts on BIAB.

[Waylon]

ALL IN GOOD FUN BENNY, im sure you make good brew mate!

 

Just seeing is I could ruffle some feathers Benny

 

Ide probly be learning BIAB if I could run enuff watts to do a decent boil...

But I went all gas with 3V apart from the pump that runs the HERMS, The main thing is we love and enjoy using our own setups...

[Otto Von Blotto]

Kelsey' date='

I'm not exactly sure how you are determining overall efficiency but this is what I've been doing. I am making a 26 litre batch so am left with 26 litres in the kettle of which 23 litres goes into the FV after the immersion chilling. So I plug the OG and the 26 litres into Beersmith to determine my total efficiency or measured efficiency. If I just went on what went into the FV the number would be lower for sure as I am leaving around 3 litres of trub/wort in the kettle. I think only calculating what is going into the FV would be giving an artificially low number.

 

I am also using a refractometer and find it makes the process of measuring wort SGs much easier.[/quote']You should be using what goes into the FV mate. It is based on batch volume and SG. Overall efficiency is affected by trub loss and cooling shrinkage, and since the trub doesn't go into the fermenter, it is not considered part of the batch volume. Set the batch volume in your software to the volume that goes into the fermenter, not the volume left in the kettle post-boil.

 

Pretty well all AG recipes I've ever seen are designed around brewhouse, or overall efficiency %, because the aim of the recipe is what goes into the fermenter, not what the pre-boil wort composition is. That's why I always quote it, and why I always list it in my recipe write ups.

 

Yeah, I usually do use the dregs from the kettle for post boil readings although I let it settle out and cool down in the jug first so I only use clear wort, however, these actually line up better with my pre-boil readings (which obviously aren't taken from dregs) than the times I've taken samples from the FV as well and had them read a couple of points lower. There's no way in the world I'm boiling for 75-90 minutes, losing near on 4 litres and only getting a drop of 5 SG points.

 

Cheers

 

Kelsey

[Morrie]

Kelsey' date='

I'm not exactly sure how you are determining overall efficiency but this is what I've been doing. I am making a 26 litre batch so am left with 26 litres in the kettle of which 23 litres goes into the FV after the immersion chilling. So I plug the OG and the 26 litres into Beersmith to determine my total efficiency or measured efficiency. If I just went on what went into the FV the number would be lower for sure as I am leaving around 3 litres of trub/wort in the kettle. I think only calculating what is going into the FV would be giving an artificially low number.

 

I am also using a refractometer and find it makes the process of measuring wort SGs much easier.[/quote']You should be using what goes into the FV mate. It is based on batch volume and SG. Overall efficiency is affected by trub loss and cooling shrinkage, and since the trub doesn't go into the fermenter, it is not considered part of the batch volume. Set the batch volume in your software to the volume that goes into the fermenter, not the volume left in the kettle post-boil.

 

Pretty well all AG recipes I've ever seen are designed around brewhouse, or overall efficiency %, because the aim of the recipe is what goes into the fermenter, not what the pre-boil wort composition is. That's why I always quote it, and why I always list it in my recipe write ups.

 

Yeah, I usually do use the dregs from the kettle for post boil readings although I let it settle out and cool down in the jug first so I only use clear wort, however, these actually line up better with my pre-boil readings (which obviously aren't taken from dregs) than the times I've taken samples from the FV as well and had them read a couple of points lower. There's no way in the world I'm boiling for 75-90 minutes, losing near on 4 litres and only getting a drop of 5 SG points.

 

Cheers

 

Kelsey

 

OK - looks like what goes into the FV is the standard way of inputting the numbers then. I'll change my batch volume in BS2 to 23 litres in the equipment profile, what is going into the FV. So I guess the less trub/wort I leave behind will increase my efficiency.