[Slowbrew]

My stainless steel braid has always worked great.  Until yesterday, when it collapsed in a Rye IPA.   

The current braid has to have been used 100+ times and I've never seen that happen before.  I'll replace it and cross my fingers on the next batch.

I don't calculate my efficiency very often.  I regularly hit my targets so I just assume it's good enough.  I'm basically a lazy brewer. 

Paul

[HoosierBrew]

  I bought a brew bag to put in the cooler and now I drain too fast!.

I'm a few batches in on my Brew Bag, and I'm really pleased. Definitely drains quickly and gives clearer looking wort IMO.

[BrewBama]

  I bought a brew bag to put in the cooler and now I drain too fast!.

I'm a few batches in on my Brew Bag, and I'm really pleased. Definitely drains quickly and gives clearer looking wort IMO.

+1 ...and high efficiency as well.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[HoosierBrew]

  I bought a brew bag to put in the cooler and now I drain too fast!.

I'm a few batches in on my Brew Bag, and I'm really pleased. Definitely drains quickly and gives clearer looking wort IMO.

+1 ...and high efficiency as well.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yep, I got an efficiency bump, too!

[juggabrew303]

Let's start off with equipment...batch sparge
Recipe: Gose

Igloo 10 gallon yellow cooler with perforated false bottom. It is hard piped to the valve and held to FB with nut (from Adventures in Homebrewing). Everything seemed fine with mash but when I sparged with 180*F water it drained from the perimeter. My efficiency has also been a little low around 62-65%, but this batch was 58%.  The plastic cooler-to-false bottom was loose after dumping the grains.
So with all the wheat it found the weekesst link in the system (around perimeter). This must be happening on a regularly basis but was very noticeable this time.
So my question is has anyone experienced this and how did you correct it?  Thought about switching to a bazooka style screen but I may get stuck spares plus I like what I have.

Do you check your mash PH? I noticed I had a bump in efficiency once I started shooting for optimal PH ranges. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[denny]

  I bought a brew bag to put in the cooler and now I drain too fast!.

I'm a few batches in on my Brew Bag, and I'm really pleased. Definitely drains quickly and gives clearer looking wort IMO.

+1 ...and high efficiency as well.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yep, I got an efficiency bump, too!

How do you explain that, Jon?

[HoosierBrew]

  I bought a brew bag to put in the cooler and now I drain too fast!.

I'm a few batches in on my Brew Bag, and I'm really pleased. Definitely drains quickly and gives clearer looking wort IMO.

+1 ...and high efficiency as well.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yep, I got an efficiency bump, too!

How do you explain that, Jon?

In my case, by reducing my dead space to basically zero. I took out the braid which I admit was extended further into the cooler by the bulkhead conversion I did. But just by pulling the bag over a small amount away from the drain, it puts a gentle pressure on the grain bed (without squeezing) that I couldn't have done before.

[Joe Sr.]

What kind of braid, Joe?  I've found the Lasco brand (part number 10-0121 or 10-0321) very reliable.  Still using the same one after nearly 20 years and 512 batches.

I'm not certain.  Whatever they carry at the hardware store.  I've got two mash tuns, as I usually brew two batches at the same time.  One of them always drains better than the other. They both have the same braid, I think.

[denny]

In my case, by reducing my dead space to basically zero. I took out the braid which I admit was extended further into the cooler by the bulkhead conversion I did. But just by pulling the bag over a small amount away from the drain, it puts a gentle pressure on the grain bed (without squeezing) that I couldn't have done before.

So basically the increase isn't from the bag itself, but from the new setup the bag allows you to have?

[HoosierBrew]

In my case, by reducing my dead space to basically zero. I took out the braid which I admit was extended further into the cooler by the bulkhead conversion I did. But just by pulling the bag over a small amount away from the drain, it puts a gentle pressure on the grain bed (without squeezing) that I couldn't have done before.

So basically the increase isn't from the bag itself, but from the new setup the bag allows you to have?

Mostly, but there is an ability (while figuring zero dead space) to drain the grain bed more completely than you could before - the bag tends to get sucked into the drain somewhat and they recommend to pull the bag away from the drain a couple inches to let it drain freely. Doing that gets a little more wort/sugar out by gently squeezing the grain bed . Regardless, I like it pretty well.

[denny]

Mostly, but there is an ability (while figuring zero dead space) to drain the grain bed more completely than you could before - the bag tends to get sucked into the drain somewhat and they recommend to pull the bag away from the drain a couple inches to let it drain freely. Doing that gets a little more wort/sugar out by gently squeezing the grain bed . Regardless, I like it pretty well.

I guess what I'm getting at is that there are other ways to accomplish the same thing.  The bag is one of them.  But so is a good braid correctly configured.  In the end, it's whatever works.

[HoosierBrew]

Mostly, but there is an ability (while figuring zero dead space) to drain the grain bed more completely than you could before - the bag tends to get sucked into the drain somewhat and they recommend to pull the bag away from the drain a couple inches to let it drain freely. Doing that gets a little more wort/sugar out by gently squeezing the grain bed . Regardless, I like it pretty well.

I guess what I'm getting at is that there are other ways to accomplish the same thing.  The bag is one of them.  But so is a good braid correctly configured.  In the end, it's whatever works.

For sure.

[Pricelessbrewing]

Some general disclaimers for stuff that I see all the time...

If step mashing improves your efficiency, then you weren't getting good conversion. Check your mill gap, and mash pH. Likewise if you're benefiting from a mash duration longer than an hour. Likewise if mashouts.

Batch sparging works via dilution, there's a hard limit on efficiency due to the laws of physics. I just don't see how it's possible for a mashtun brewer that batch sparges to get more than the mid to high 80s. It's just not possible for a 12 lb 1.050-1.060 5.5 gal brew, with no deadspace or mashtun losses other than grain absorption, to get that high without fly sparging or having a lower absorption rate than 0.125 gal/lb.

@Hoisierbrew, have you measured to see if your lifting the grain bag lowers your absorption rate at all? 

If your changing your mash process, and want to see how it changes your efficiency, you should be looking exclusively at conversion efficiency, and not mash/brewhouse as that will vary with different recipes and sparging process. Conversion isolates those out, and just looks at how well your gelatinization, extraction, and conversion (ie the mash) went.

There's no way to get a single brewhouse efficiency for every recipe. You can have a typical brewhouse, for a typical brew (11-13 lbs for example), but a session brew will always have a higher %, and a big 1.090 brew will always have a lower %. This is unavoidable.

- Brew on.

[HoosierBrew]

Some general disclaimers for stuff that I see all the time...

If step mashing improves your efficiency, then you weren't getting good conversion. Check your mill gap, and mash pH. Likewise if you're benefiting from a mash duration longer than an hour. Likewise if mashouts.

Batch sparging works via dilution, there's a hard limit on efficiency due to the laws of physics. I just don't see how it's possible for a mashtun brewer that batch sparges to get more than the mid to high 80s. It's just not possible for a 12 lb 1.050-1.060 5.5 gal brew, with no deadspace or mashtun losses other than grain absorption, to get that high without fly sparging or having a lower absorption rate than 0.125 gal/lb.

@Hoisierbrew, have you measured to see if your lifting the grain bag lowers your absorption rate at all? 

If your changing your mash process, and want to see how it changes your efficiency, you should be looking exclusively at conversion efficiency, and not mash/brewhouse as that will vary with different recipes and sparging process. Conversion isolates those out, and just looks at how well your gelatinization, extraction, and conversion (ie the mash) went.

There's no way to get a single brewhouse efficiency for every recipe. You can have a typical brewhouse, for a typical brew (11-13 lbs for example), but a session brew will always have a higher %, and a big 1.090 brew will always have a lower %. This is unavoidable.

- Brew on.

I've lowered my absorption number to .1 gal/lb (from
.12) to compensate. Volumes are spot on now.

[Pricelessbrewing]

I've lowered my absorption number to .1 gal/lb (from
.12) to compensate. Volumes are spot on now.

Thought that might be the case Good explanation for your lauter efficiency increase.