Homebrewers Association | AHA Forum

General Category => All Grain Brewing => Topic started by: natebrews on March 18, 2017, 09:30:00 PM

Title: No Sparge Single Infusion Efficiency
Post by: natebrews on March 18, 2017, 09:30:00 PM
I'm curious, what others using that mashing method are getting for efficiency?  I seem to be getting 60% pretty consistently (brew house efficiency).  When I was doing batch/fly sparging, I was up in the high 70s but after switching to no-sparge (easier for low oxy techniques) I have been at about 60.
Title: Re: No Sparge Single Infusion Efficiency
Post by: HoosierBrew on March 18, 2017, 09:47:11 PM
I can get around 70% no sparge efficiency for most average strength beers.
Title: Re: No Sparge Single Infusion Efficiency
Post by: pkrone on March 18, 2017, 10:31:52 PM
Yeah.   I'm having the same issues since trying some no-sparge batches.   I'm a little perplexed by it.   Starting to wonder if I need a finer crush (been trying the grain conditioning thing too) and some rice hulls so I don't get stuck.
Title: Re: No Sparge Single Infusion Efficiency
Post by: natebrews on March 18, 2017, 10:40:18 PM
As a bit of a tangent, and hijacking my own thread:

On the subject of getting stuck and rice hulls, today I did a 3lb rye, 3lb wheat, and 4lb Maris Otter grist with about 2oz of rice hulls (not too much, just what I had laying around) and had no problems at all with the run off.  I had thought that it might be more of a problem with such a large huskless mass in there, but after the crush it looked pretty rich with husks and was fine. 

I did condition the grain for about 10 minutes before I used it.  I'm not sure how much it matters for things without a husk beyond keeping the dust down a bit.
Title: Re: No Sparge Single Infusion Efficiency
Post by: narcout on March 18, 2017, 11:30:29 PM
I've been in the low 70's with no sparge, down from the low 80's with a batch sparge.
Title: Re: No Sparge Single Infusion Efficiency
Post by: brewinhard on March 18, 2017, 11:33:23 PM
I hover right around 60% with average gravity beers.
Title: Re: No Sparge Single Infusion Efficiency
Post by: bucknut on March 19, 2017, 12:13:13 AM
Around 60% most of the time, but haven't done one since buying my own mill so may give it another go and crush finer.
Title: Re: No Sparge Single Infusion Efficiency
Post by: Pricelessbrewing on March 19, 2017, 02:58:01 PM
Depending on your conversion efficiency (crush, pH, dough in), and how much wort you leave behind in the kettle, it should be ~67% mash/brewhouse efficiency for a typical 12lb grain bill.

https://pricelessbrewing.github.io/BiabCalc/#EfficiencyEvaluation my mash calculator has a pretty nifty new feature, it will graph your expected efficiencies from your user inputs to define your equipment and mash/sparge procedure. Check it out
Title: Re: No Sparge Single Infusion Efficiency
Post by: The Beerery on March 19, 2017, 03:01:00 PM
I don't have a single infusion data point since I have no done one in many years. I step mash, keep my WTG ratios under 3qt/lb,  have no deadspace in the mash tun and .08 grain absorption. 100% conversion/90% mash/85% brewhouse.
Title: Re: No Sparge Single Infusion Efficiency
Post by: brewinhard on March 19, 2017, 08:12:00 PM
I don't have a single infusion data point since I have no done one in many years. I step mash, keep my WTG ratios under 3qt/lb,  have no deadspace in the mash tun and .08 grain absorption. 100% conversion/90% mash/85% brewhouse.

Damn you again, Bryan!    :)
Title: Re: No Sparge Single Infusion Efficiency
Post by: stpug on March 19, 2017, 08:46:58 PM
I don't have a single infusion data point since I have no done one in many years. I step mash, keep my WTG ratios under 3qt/lb,  have no deadspace in the mash tun and .08 grain absorption. 100% conversion/90% mash/85% brewhouse.

Granted, your (unmentioned) caveat is this:

(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170307/ebfebbd90791d349a5e2841d74cc607e.jpg)
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170307/d59eeeaf07fcc9a337792f3fbf2898cf.jpg)
Title: Re: No Sparge Single Infusion Efficiency
Post by: natebrews on March 19, 2017, 09:27:30 PM
So shiny...

Back when I tried running my system like a BrewEasy (or any other BIAB system), I was getting around 80%.  The big things, I think, is the recirculation of the whole thing.  With the stuff just sitting there and no agitation, the efficiency drops notably.  I have considered "investing" in the doo-dads I need to run my system recirculating.  But, that is just more stuff to clean and to leak and to <blah blah blah>.  Eventually I'll cave and do it.
Title: Re: No Sparge Single Infusion Efficiency
Post by: leejoreilly on March 20, 2017, 12:56:18 PM
So shiny...

Back when I tried running my system like a BrewEasy (or any other BIAB system), I was getting around 80%.  The big things, I think, is the recirculation of the whole thing.  With the stuff just sitting there and no agitation, the efficiency drops notably.  I have considered "investing" in the doo-dads I need to run my system recirculating.  But, that is just more stuff to clean and to leak and to <blah blah blah>.  Eventually I'll cave and do it.

For me, a consistent efficiency is more important than a higher efficiency. I can certainly see the value of high efficiency to a commercial brewer, no question. I can also see the value of indulging an attraction to shiny brew-dads, and adding more "advanced" equipment/techniques (forgive me, Denny). So my consistent 70% might cost a couple of bucks in additional base malt to get to the same OG as compared to, say, 80%, but I'm happy with my equipment and process.

That having been said, a consistent high efficiency is pretty cool, too.
Title: Re: No Sparge Single Infusion Efficiency
Post by: pkrone on March 20, 2017, 02:00:26 PM
I agree with you on the consistency thing.   I'm just still surprised by how my efficiency has dropped from 80% for  fly sparging to mid-60's for no sparge.   If this is what it's going to be, then fine, I'll adjust my recipes.   I'm just wondering why such a drop.    Is it a solubility thing?  Don't know.
Title: Re: No Sparge Single Infusion Efficiency
Post by: natebrews on March 20, 2017, 02:09:02 PM
Have you eaten a spoonful of the use grain from the tun after?  It is still notably sweet in my case, so the efficiency hit seems to just be that the 1.25gal of water left in the wet grain were at your pre-boil gravity rather than at 1.010 or something. 
Title: Re: No Sparge Single Infusion Efficiency
Post by: Pricelessbrewing on March 20, 2017, 02:20:31 PM
I agree with you on the consistency thing.   I'm just still surprised by how my efficiency has dropped from 80% for  fly sparging to mid-60's for no sparge.   If this is what it's going to be, then fine, I'll adjust my recipes.   I'm just wondering why such a drop.    Is it a solubility thing?  Don't know.

It's not about solubility, it's about dilution. Solubility limit of sugar solutions are around 1.300, so it's definitely not that.

When you mash, the starches are converted into sugars and that sugar dissolves into the wort. The resultant wort volume is higher than the original strike water volume by approximately

WortVolume=Strike + (0.0016 * GrainPotential*GrainWeight)

Then the run off volume is Strike Volume - absorption rate, leaving behind a known volume in the grain, and grain bed. When you sparge (batch), you're diluting this reminding wort volume with the new sparged wort volume (retained wort volume + sparge volume). It's all 100% dilution based.

Fly sparging is unique since it relies more on even water dispersion and should exceed the lauter efficiency of a batch sparge process when done properly, in equipment suited to fly sparging

Again, if you check out my calculator above you can see how a batch sparge and no sparge should go. Something I'm learning recently is that, for whatever reason, recirculation seems to improve lauter efficiency in some way similar to fly sparging. Haven't quite figured out how yet.
Title: Re: No Sparge Single Infusion Efficiency
Post by: erockrph on March 21, 2017, 06:15:48 PM
I get about 80-84% efficiency (based on my preboil volume/gravity). But I use a grain bag in my mash tun (BIAB-style), so I effectively have zero dead space.

What mash thickness are you guys using? Are you using your full volume of liquor in the mash, or are you topping off in the kettle? Thinner mashes will leave less extract in the mash tun. I shoot for ~ 3 qt/lb on most beers.
Title: Re: No Sparge Single Infusion Efficiency
Post by: natebrews on March 21, 2017, 06:25:20 PM
I put in the full volume, 8.5gallons or so.
Title: Re: No Sparge Single Infusion Efficiency
Post by: VictorBrew on March 22, 2017, 02:49:37 PM
Anything 1.055 and under I go full volume.  Up to 1.070 I employ a thicker mash and  I have to top up in the kettle purely based on mash tun size limit.  I very seldom brew anything bigger then 1.070, but if needed I will swap in a bigger mash tun and go full volume.
Title: Re: No Sparge Single Infusion Efficiency
Post by: 802Chris on March 23, 2017, 11:11:19 AM
I don't have a single infusion data point since I have no done one in many years. I step mash, keep my WTG ratios under 3qt/lb,  have no deadspace in the mash tun and .08 grain absorption. 100% conversion/90% mash/85% brewhouse.

FWIW these are almost exactly what I hit consistently. I mash in a cooler with a Brew Bag. I only drop to about 87% mash eff when I no sparge, but I do this by extending to at least a 90 minute mash or stirring a few times when I'm in a hurry. I shoot for a WTG of around 2 when batch sparging.

EDIT: Oh yea, and I crush the living P** out of my grain with a corona mill. Only possible now with the Brew Bag