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

[headmaster]

My personal opinion is that the best way to compare your efficiency is simply mash efficiency, or using volume left in the kettle at the end of the boil.

 

To be exact you could apply a fluid expansion factor for the fact that it's hot. I find with different recipes and styles I may have more or less trub that I have to leave behind, this has got nothing to do with mash conversion efficiency, which is the most important factor for me to gain an understanding of the best crush size and methods of mash etc to hit the best numbers.

 

I suspect you were talking mash efficiency numbers Waylon, and not brewhouse?

[Waylon]

I use a fractometer whilst sparging,

 

Then do a OG and FG

 

I Put my recipe into brewers friend and it tells me the efficiancy

 

[Otto Von Blotto]

Opinion is one thing, but all literature states that overall efficiency is affected by all losses through the entire brewing process, yes including trub loss, and is determined by the amount of wort in the fermenter and its SG reading. In other words it is a measure of how efficiently the brewing equipment produced the wort in the fermenter from the grains and water. If you want it accurate, you can't include volume that doesn't go into the fermenter, because it's not part of it.

 

I am of the other view that I don't think you'll find too many people quoting mash efficiency when talking about their brewing setups because it's only half the process. Chad usually hits mid 80s overall efficiency on his 3V set up as well.

 

I get different amounts of trub as well although not wildly, however, my mash efficiency is always pretty much the same. I don't design recipes off it, but I do record it and take note of what it is each batch. I always hit my intended pre-boil SG and volume, most times exceeding the SG. Even if my brewhouse efficiency is down a touch due to a reduced batch volume due to excessive trub, I still hit the intended OG, so I know that the mash is working as it should.

 

I have looked into some trub reduction techniques over the past few months, but have yet to actually implement any of them. I'll have to get around to that. It's not much of a problem in my 21 litre batches, but the 25 litre ones seem to suffer a bit from trub loss reducing the volume a bit. Maybe those cubes are bigger than I thought. I will have to try these techniques, because if I can get the same volume into the fermenter every time then my overall efficiency won't move very far from one batch to the next, except when brewing big OG beers of course.

 

Even now I don't get a lot of fluctuation, which means I can confidently use a figure in the brewhouse efficiency box in Beersmith to base my recipe design on and this way I know how much grain to use to hit a certain OG, if that's what I'm aiming for. Otherwise, I just make my usual recipes and know that I will hit the predicted OG every time (often going over it) and intended batch size almost every time.

 

My last two brews have achieved 80% and 77.7% overall efficiency respectively. The former would have been about 77% too, but I got an extra litre in the fermenter. Most other batches are around 76-78, so it's pretty consistent.

 

http://beersmith.com/blog/2008/10/26/brewhouse-efficiency-for-all-grain-beer-brewing/

 

Cheers

 

Kelsey

[King Ruddager]

So, do you guys see any problems with the suggestion that I give the mash a stir 15 minutes in?

 

It makes me wonder whether lifting the bag out at 15 minutes during the stepped mash compressed the grains in such a way that it affected the conversion.

[Otto Von Blotto]

That's why I have a false bottom Ruddy, so that when I do my Hochkurz mashes I don't have to remove the bag to heat it up. I can also leave the urn on at the wall during the mash so it can pump a bit of heat when needed, which is the main reason I bought it.

 

Anyway, I don't see any problem giving it a stir 15 minutes in. I usually stir the mash myself although not that soon into it. Due to having the false bottom I just give it a big stir around when I dough in, and then a few stirs during any ramping up of temps, more to try to equalise the temp of the whole thing as my thermometer probe sits near the top. I imagine it helps extract a bit more out of the grains as well though.

[King Ruddager]

I put that vegetable steamer of mine in to protect the bag from the bottom but then I lifted it out anyway - probably didn't need the lift. And you know what? I don't think the bag I use reaches the bottom of the urn anyway. Might be able to test that with magnets or something ...

 

Where do you measure the temperature? From the middle of the mash?

 

And what sort of false bottom do you have?

[Otto Von Blotto]

You could probably just put the empty bag in the empty urn and push it down with the mash paddle or whatever you use and see how far it reaches. I imagine having grains in it would pull it down a bit further, but the bags don't stretch really, or at least mine doesn't anyway.

 

I measure it from near the top of the liquor at the moment because I'm not sure if the wire connecting the temp probe to the thermometer would be ok to be submersed in hot liquid like that. It's not ideal but with some stirring up it seems to equalise it ok. I figure it can't be too far out because the FG always ends up either bang on predicted or a point or two either side.

 

I wouldn't mind getting a thermometer that I can submerse in the grains themselves though.

 

Edit: This is the false bottom I have. I got mine from Fullpint but Craftbrewer sells them too.

 

[GatorBrewing]

They also on National Home Brew

 

https://www.nationalhomebrew.com.au/beer/brewing-equipment-pots-and-hardware/crown-urn-drop-in-strainer

 

[ben 10]

 

I wouldn't mind getting a thermometer that I can submerse in the grains themselves though.

 

 

I use my stc probe and stir it in, seems to work well.

[Otto Von Blotto]

Problem is mine's always being used to control the brew fridge when I do brew days as at the moment there is constantly a fermenter in there, and if not that, I'm using it to chill a yeast starter.

 

But what I do seems to work so I'm happy with it for now.

[Waylon]

I just use a mash tun with false bottom and run temperature controlled recirculation through a heat exchange system, before sparging into a boiler pot,

 

Just so simple and more efficient! Not hard At all

[Otto Von Blotto]

Yes but we're talking about Ruddy's BIAB urn set up, not 3V. Not all of us have the desire to clean more things after a brew day

 

It annoys me a bit when efficiency talk starts becoming a pissing up the wall contest. For one thing, most of the time it's a difference of a glass or two worth of grain in a recipe; in other words SFA. Another thing is, sky high efficiency doesn't always mean better beer (not saying you're saying that, but some think it).

 

I've said it before, what you want is consistent efficiency, that isn't ridiculously low. I wouldn't be happy with 67% myself even though it's not hellishly low, and I wasn't when I was getting that, but I'm most happy with the mid-high 70s I'm getting now. It's consistent, I can easily design recipes around it, and the beers turn out great. Obviously there will always be a small amount of natural variation, and generally speaking smaller grain bills will be more efficient than larger ones, but as long as you are consistently at or close to the same number, it makes recipe design a breeze. That's the whole point of recording it in the first place really.

 

Cheers

 

Kelsey

[Waylon]

The topic is about efficiency or was it for BIAB only no..no 3V talk as we find this highly offensive!

 

Im not putting BIAB down at all Kelsey, perhaps you guys are not open minded into discussing different systems at the end of the daY quite frankly I don't care about whose system is best...

 

Home brewing is a journey one in that I continue to learn and share my knowledge...

I havnt brewed BIAB as I choose a different option! mainly being if im going to do one decent mash I may as well do a decent large one, and mainly because my power supply is not strong enuff for a crown urne...

 

I never hear anything praise worthy on 3V on here so I think its worth a mention, 3V systems are fun to use and extremely efficient... not hard to use at all infact dead simple, almost fool proof to stuff up your mash efficiency!

Yes it is a little more fiddling around but Im sure its not a hell of a lot more time consuming than BIAB

 

 

 

 

[Otto Von Blotto]

That's not the point I was making. Ruddy asked a question for help which related to his own set up, which is BIAB in an urn, not 3V. I figure it would be more constructive to offer solutions or ideas that may work for that set up than bang on about 3V and how great it is.

 

I have nothing against 3V, it's not for me mainly because I don't have the space to accommodate it and I can't be arsed with the extra cleaning, but if others want to do that then why would I have an issue?

 

Point being, no one is saying 3V is pointless or a bad way to brew, but when someone asks a question on how to improve efficiency (or whatever else for that matter) for BIAB in an urn, and then someone else comes along and says "Well I have this fancy bling bling 3V system that's way more efficient", it's not exactly helpful.

 

Ruddy I reckon you should get your own grain mill, not only will it allow you to purchase grains in bulk rather than per recipe, which is cheaper, you can tailor the crush to suit your own system. That's one thing you can do to improve the efficiency.

 

Cheers

 

Kelsey

[captsensible23]

After mucking around with Beersmith, formulas and calculators, I now know why my figures were all over the shop. I was inputting that I finished the boil with 31L (which is true) but my batch size was 21L. This made Beersmith assume my efficiency (both mash and brewhouse) was way lower than what it was.

 

It also explains why my est and measured gravities did not match.

 

When I input the figures but change my lauter tun loss to what I normally leave behind in the urn (excess wort and trub), the figures lined up. Originally it thought I had roughly 59% brewhouse efficiency, now that the gravities line up, it has bumped it up to 85%. Closer to what you guys are getting.

 

Now it assumes that I will expect 31L in the FV (I cube around 21L), so it is telling me to carbonate with a higher amount of dextrose. I just have to remember to use the carbonation tool to accurately determine the dextrose amount for a desired carbonation level.

 

Thanks everyone

[Otto Von Blotto]

Still sounds like it's not quite right. It shouldn't be assuming that you are getting 31 litres into the fermenter unless that's what you're actually getting. You need to set the batch volume to 21 litres (or whatever you're getting into the FV) in your equipment profile. As far as I'm aware there is no input in Beersmith for what's left in the kettle after the boil (before transferring the wort that is). The only volume inputs aside from trub loss relevant to efficiencies are pre-boil volume and batch volume, i.e. how much is in the FV.

[captsensible23]

Still sounds like it's not quite right. It shouldn't be assuming that you are getting 31 litres into the fermenter unless that's what you're actually getting. You need to set the batch volume to 21 litres (or whatever you're getting into the FV) in your equipment profile. As far as I'm aware there is no input in Beersmith for what's left in the kettle after the boil (before transferring the wort that is). The only volume inputs aside from trub loss relevant to efficiencies are pre-boil volume and batch volume' date=' i.e. how much is in the FV. [/quote']

 

I've been playing with all sorts of figures and this is the only that I have found to make it line up. In my next brew I will try to get my post boil to as close as I can to my cubed volume and see if it helps at all

 

Cheers

[Otto Von Blotto]

 

I've been playing with all sorts of figures and this is the only that I have found to make it line up. In my next brew I will try to get my post boil to as close as I can to my cubed volume and see if it helps at all

 

Cheers

What you need to do is measure what you get in the fermenter' date=' and use that as your batch volume. The post boil volume in the kettle sort of works itself out, usually going by the pre-boil volume minus the boil off figure. And my mistake on that one, I forgot there was an input for that. It doesn't have any effect on the efficiency calculation though, and it can't be edited either. It can be altered by changing the pre-boil volume and the boil off figure, though.

 

You don't want the post-boil volume as close as possible to the cubed volume either because this is not allowing for the kettle trub. As you'll see in my screen grab below, my post boil volume is between 25 and 26 litres, and I cube about 22-23 litres, in order to leave pretty well all the kettle trub in the kettle, and also allow for the cooling shrinkage of 1 litre. This allows me to get 21 litres of largely clear wort into the FV. What trub is in the cube after cooling is cold break, and this isn't an issue in the FV like hot break (kettle trub) is.

 

Beersmith and everything else calculates brewhouse (overall) efficiency based on the batch volume and SG, since that is the definition of the term - the efficiency that the brewing equipment produces the wort into the fermenter. This is a screen grab of what my 21 litre batch size equipment profile looks like in Beersmith. Using this in the recipe design page, I always hit my numbers, or even go over them, but never under. See if there are differences to yours; or get a screen grab of yours and I'll have a look at it. It doesn't sound like it's set up properly if you have to have wrong numbers in there to make it line up properly.

 

[img']https://scontent-syd1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13620724_10210349119672937_5899292173946913924_n.jpg?oh=8e9726caa9a1c63f370b78e68e666ee4&oe=583581BE[/img]

 

Cheers

 

Kelsey

[captsensible23]

Thank OVB.

 

I'll post a pic a bit later on.

 

As for my reasoning for this I was working opposite to how Beersmith works. I was starting what I wanted as a post boil volume rather than what I wanted in FV.

 

Future brews I will work from batch volume to pre boil volume.

 

I'll update my other few recipes to follow what I have done, to figure out an average efficiency, where I can base my new recipe off. Hopefully allowing me to hit the figures it predicts.

[King Ruddager]

Re-reverse-calculated my efficiency again ... I think.

 

72% this time ... maybe.

[Otto Von Blotto]

What was the OG and batch size, oh and the grain bill?

 

Does that spreadsheet not have a function where you can simply enter those readings and it spits out the efficiency for you? It would seem very strange if it didn't.

 

I have done something like what you've done in Beersmith though. I input my OG and actual batch size into it, then change the overall efficiency number to what it says it is based on those figures. The predicted OG then lines up with what I actually got. It's interesting to see how it slightly changes the IBU figure too, if the OG is up or down a bit from the original predicted number.

 

 

 

 

[King Ruddager]

Not 100% sure of the mash temperature, which is where my confusion stems from. Strike temp was 70°, I think it mashed at 65? The rest of the equation is 26.5L, 1.047, 5.35kg pils, 0.25kg carapils.

[Otto Von Blotto]

The mash temperature shouldn't make any real difference to the efficiency, unless you go way too high and denature the enzymes or something. As long as it is somewhere in either the beta or alpha amylase range (or both at once like 66ish), the same amount of sugars should be extracted from the grains over the course of the mash. The temperature pretty much only governs how fermentable these sugars are.

 

Those figures spit out a 70.5% brewhouse efficiency in Beersmith, so it's certainly an improvement over the last one. Keep recording the figures on each batch, even if you get it consistent. It's useful information to know.

[King Ruddager]

Mash temperature affects OG though doesn't it? Or is it just FG?

[headmaster]

It affects final gravity, for eg, I made an 'American Brown Ale' recently, they are supposed to be quite sweet. Mash temp guide was 68c, expected OG/FG was something like 1067/1017.

 

Because I was doing a protein rest at 50c and ramping at 1°c/minute, I ran a mash temp of 69°c. Because I have the electric RIMS, I can control the mash temp, throughout the whole grain bed for the whole 90 mins (in this case I think I let it go for 150 mins) so I know it was 69c for that whole time.

 

My FG was smack bang on 1017, and it is a sweet tasting beer, as designed.

 

If I had run 65c it would have been closer to 1012 FG and a lot dryer in taste, which I would run for an IPA or Pale Ale.