Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

Think of you clothes washer when batch sparging


  • Please log in to reply
31 replies to this topic

#21 positiveContact

positiveContact

    Anti-Brag Queen

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 68886 posts
  • LocationLimbo

Posted 15 October 2014 - 04:20 PM

As far as copying what brewies do in most cases I would suspect they represent a best practices. As a homebrewer we need to decide if something is worth adapting. Normally complex procedures with expensive equipment for an efficiency gain is not worth the cost/effort so we just use a little more grain. I may also question why homebrewers use a grain mill when a rolling pin would also crack the grain and the poor efficiency from that can just be make up by using more poorly milled grain? The answer is a mill is reasonably priced and easy to use.

 

the easy to use is a REALLY big part.  I can't imagine trying to crack 20lbs of grain with a rolling pin.  even with a mill it takes 5 minutes or so and that's with a drill on pretty much full throttle.



#22 MakeMeHoppy

MakeMeHoppy

    Redundancy Comptroller of Redundancy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 10681 posts
  • LocationSlower Lower Delaware

Posted 15 October 2014 - 04:59 PM

I didn't mean to answer that specific example. My point is there must be some things that translate from breweries to home brewers. I read an article about a brewery process and thought that maybe I had a need in my homebrew environment. My mash tun being a round cooler is more thin and tall than a long rectangle cooler and I thought maybe I was exposed to poor conversion because my grains and wort were seperating significantly during the mash.



#23 MakeMeHoppy

MakeMeHoppy

    Redundancy Comptroller of Redundancy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 10681 posts
  • LocationSlower Lower Delaware

Posted 15 October 2014 - 05:03 PM

As far as copying what brewies do in most cases I would suspect they represent a best practices. As a homebrewer we need to decide if something is worth adapting. Normally complex procedures with expensive equipment for an efficiency gain is not worth the cost/effort so we just use a little more grain. I may also question why homebrewers use a grain mill when a rolling pin would also crack the grain and the poor efficiency from that can just be make up by using more poorly milled grain? The answer is a mill is reasonably priced and easy to use.

 

 

I should also note that I am about the last person to add unneeded equipment or processes. I actually chill my wort by putting my kettle on the floor and gravity feeding ice water from a bottling bucket on the counter. I collect the output water in 5 gallon water cooler bottles to be reused for the next chill.  All because I don't want to add a valve to my sink or buy a pump.



#24 denny

denny

    Living Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9090 posts
  • LocationEugene OR

Posted 16 October 2014 - 08:34 AM

I noted when I open my mash tun that the grain it typically fairly settles with the grain compacted at the bottom and the wort mostly floating on top. My thinking is it would clearly work better if is was mixed better. Opening the cooler and stirring does that well, but then I lose a few degree on my mash temp. Seemed like an easy solution to something that may improve conversion.

 

But are you having a problem that solves?  I have found absolutely no benefit to stirring during the mash.  And the performance without stirring is so good I don't see how it could help.  I just hate  doing something that seems to have no benefits.

I didn't mean to answer that specific example. My point is there must be some things that translate from breweries to home brewers. I read an article about a brewery process and thought that maybe I had a need in my homebrew environment. My mash tun being a round cooler is more thin and tall than a long rectangle cooler and I thought maybe I was exposed to poor conversion because my grains and wort were seperating significantly during the mash.

 

some things, sure.  But all too many homebrewers slavishly copy commercial breweries without realizing that there is no benefit for them.



#25 Brauer

Brauer

    Frequent Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1857 posts
  • Location1 mile north of Boston

Posted 16 October 2014 - 03:19 PM

We're talking about sparge right, not mash? Sparge is just rinsing the sugars from the mash. In a batch sparge there are possibly places for sugars to be trapped. Stirring up the mash after you add the sparge water helps to release all those sugars. There's a point where you won't get anymore efficiency from doing that though.

Yes, I'm really only commenting on the common misconception that mash efficiency has anything to do with dissolving sugars better or worse.

#26 SchwanzBrewer

SchwanzBrewer

    Grand Duke of Inappropriate Announcements

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 34299 posts
  • LocationKnee deep in business plans

Posted 17 October 2014 - 07:41 AM

Yes, I'm really only commenting on the common misconception that mash efficiency has anything to do with dissolving sugars better or worse.

 

Lautering efficiency does and it's part of overall efficiency. I was pretty sure though that the OP wasn't talking about conversion and neither was I.

 

To the point of the OP, I think some mechanical action does help make sure your wort, when sparging, has as much sugar in it as possible from the mash. But, there's an upper limit to how much it helps, and I believe letting the wort settle for a while after you add the 1st or second sparge has the same net effect. All this is post conversion and assumes 100% conversion at the time of sparging. 



#27 Brauer

Brauer

    Frequent Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1857 posts
  • Location1 mile north of Boston

Posted 17 October 2014 - 08:57 AM

Lautering efficiency does and it's part of overall efficiency. I was pretty sure though that the OP wasn't talking about conversion and neither was

I guess that was part of the point I was trying to make. Lautering efficiency of a sparge depends on effectively diluting a sugar solution, not dissolving sugar.

#28 positiveContact

positiveContact

    Anti-Brag Queen

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 68886 posts
  • LocationLimbo

Posted 17 October 2014 - 09:34 AM

I guess that was part of the point I was trying to make. Lautering efficiency of a sparge depends on effectively diluting a sugar solution, not dissolving sugar.

 

which is why you can use cold water to sparge with and it doesn't seem to affect efficiency much.



#29 SchwanzBrewer

SchwanzBrewer

    Grand Duke of Inappropriate Announcements

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 34299 posts
  • LocationKnee deep in business plans

Posted 17 October 2014 - 09:40 AM

I guess that was part of the point I was trying to make. Lautering efficiency of a sparge depends on effectively diluting a sugar solution, not dissolving sugar.

 

You got me there. I was hesitant to use "diluting", but I see its the correct term.



#30 denny

denny

    Living Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9090 posts
  • LocationEugene OR

Posted 17 October 2014 - 09:43 AM

which is why you can use cold water to sparge with and it doesn't seem to affect efficiency much.

 

By George, I think he's got it!  :)



#31 positiveContact

positiveContact

    Anti-Brag Queen

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 68886 posts
  • LocationLimbo

Posted 17 October 2014 - 10:34 AM

By George, I think he's got it!  :)

 

I play dumb most of the time.  it seems as though it's working!



#32 Genesee Ted

Genesee Ted

    yabba dabba doob

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 49850 posts
  • LocationRochester, NY

Posted 18 October 2014 - 03:07 PM

Because we need to save those few precious pennies by upping our efficiency! :P

*ahem*  Mic?  Dude loves his pennies  :deadhorse:

 

I agree that a lot of processes used in commercial breweries have no application for homebrewers.  Brewing is as simple as can be.  The complications start to arise when you have a massive amount of grist, mash, wort, etc. to handle.   So processes are developed.  It seems like a lot of people chase efficiency as a point of pride.  I guess it gives you bragging rights or something, but more importantly you just need to know what your efficiency is with your standardized process.  This is so you can formulate recipes.  Other than that, efficiency has no impact on beer flavor, texture, head retention, or whatever else.  




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users