[Stevie]

I'll go against the grain; I don't think it always makes sense to keep the relative percentages the same.

I’m with you too.

Simple example
90/10 - 2row/c40 - 1.050 OG
80% efficiency 7.1 SRM
60% efficiency 8.6 SRM

Small, but that is a difference.

How much of that comes just from increasing the pale malt?

About 1/3 of the increase if only the pale is adjusted. This is just a simple example. Other recipes could be affected more.

What I’m saying is scaling isn’t perfect. There may be some adjustments needed. No matter how the recipe is communicated, knowing the efficiency is helpful.

[brewinhard]

I'll go against the grain; I don't think it always makes sense to keep the relative percentages the same.

I’m with you too.

Simple example
90/10 - 2row/c40 - 1.050 OG
80% efficiency 7.1 SRM
60% efficiency 8.6 SRM

Small, but that is a difference.

Good example there. So in that scenario, would almost be best to increase base malt for efficiency, and color adjust with crystal?

[Robert]

I'll go against the grain; I don't think it always makes sense to keep the relative percentages the same.

I’m with you too.

Simple example
90/10 - 2row/c40 - 1.050 OG
80% efficiency 7.1 SRM
60% efficiency 8.6 SRM

Small, but that is a difference.

How much of that comes just from increasing the pale malt?

About 1/3 of the increase if only the pale is adjusted. This is just a simple example. Other recipes could be affected more.

What I’m saying is scaling isn’t perfect. There may be some adjustments needed. No matter how the recipe is communicated, knowing the efficiency is helpful.

Please enlighten.  I had indicated my belief that lautering efficiency being the issue, it should scale equally across the whole grain bill.   I don't understand how this would not be the case.  Intuitively I'd think you are leaving more or less extract behind, but the composition of what you get out would be the same.  Scratching my head, awaiting help.

[Stevie]

I'll go against the grain; I don't think it always makes sense to keep the relative percentages the same.

I’m with you too.

Simple example
90/10 - 2row/c40 - 1.050 OG
80% efficiency 7.1 SRM
60% efficiency 8.6 SRM

Small, but that is a difference.

Good example there. So in that scenario, would almost be best to increase base malt for efficiency, and color adjust with crystal?

There is no right answer here.

[Stevie]

I'll go against the grain; I don't think it always makes sense to keep the relative percentages the same.

I’m with you too.

Simple example
90/10 - 2row/c40 - 1.050 OG
80% efficiency 7.1 SRM
60% efficiency 8.6 SRM

Small, but that is a difference.

How much of that comes just from increasing the pale malt?

About 1/3 of the increase if only the pale is adjusted. This is just a simple example. Other recipes could be affected more.

What I’m saying is scaling isn’t perfect. There may be some adjustments needed. No matter how the recipe is communicated, knowing the efficiency is helpful.

Please enlighten.  I had indicated my belief that lautering efficiency being the issue, it should scale equally across the whole grain bill.   I don't understand how this would not be the case.  Intuitively I'd think you are leaving more or less extract behind, but the composition of what you get out would be the same.  Scratching my head, awaiting help.

I’m not an expert in chemistry or fluid dynamics. My numbers are based on the commonly accepted formulas. With roasted and specialty grains sugar extraction is secondary to color and flavor. Yes, some sugars come along as well, they are just secondary here.

[Robert]

^^^^^
Guess I'm generally skeptical of "commonly accepted" knowledge!  I'm not an expert in fluid dynamics either.  Seems that's who we need.  I rarely use significant amounts of specialty malts,  but now that I think about it,  my worts are sometimes paler than I'd expected (or feared) and my efficiency is pretty high.  So maybe I am missing something.

[Stevie]

Morey is what we have until somebody else finds another way.

[Robert]

Yep.

[narcout]

Below is what I was thinking, but please correct me if I'm off base.

Say you are following a recipe for a stout that calls for 10 lbs. of base malt and 1 lb. of roasted barley (ignoring the other specialty grains to simplify).  Rounding the percentages, that would be roughly 90.9% base malt and 9.1% RB.

On your system, you might 13.2 lbs. of grain instead of 11 lbs. to reach the desired OG.  If you kept the ratios the same, you would use 12 lbs. of base malt and 1.2 lbs. of RB. 

Assume you're brewing no-sparge and your plan is to mash with 7 gallons of strike water plus .1 gallon/lb. to account for absorption.  That would total 8.1 gallons and 8.32 gallons total strike water respectively.  So you'd be using 20% more RB in 2.7% more water, but ending up with the same pre and post-boil volumes. 

Couldn't that increase the overall roast character?  Yes, you're also using 20% more base malt, but the base malt is delivering more fermentable sugars than flavor.

[denny]

Below is what I was thinking, but please correct me if I'm off base.

Say you are following a recipe for a stout that calls for 10 lbs. of base malt and 1 lb. of roasted barley (ignoring the other specialty grains to simplify).  Rounding the percentages, that would be roughly 90.9% base malt and 9.1% RB.

On your system, you might 13.2 lbs. of grain instead of 11 lbs. to reach the desired OG.  If you kept the ratios the same, you would use 12 lbs. of base malt and 1.2 lbs. of RB. 

Assume you're brewing no-sparge and your plan is to mash with 7 gallons of strike water plus .1 gallon/lb. to account for absorption.  That would total 8.1 gallons and 8.32 gallons total strike water respectively.  So you'd be using 20% more RB in 2.7% more water, but ending up with the same pre and post-boil volumes. 

Couldn't that increase the overall roast character?  Yes, you're also using 20% more base malt, but the base malt is delivering more fermentable sugars than flavor.

I think that last clause may be where you're off.  I think it would contribute as much flavor as sugar, thereby diluting the RB flavor back to the correct proportion.

[mabrungard]

While I adhere to keeping the percentages of ALL the grain bill the same when I need to alter their amount to match my system efficiency, I know that Jamil advocated keeping the specialty grain content constant while varying the base malt content when brewing the various Scottish Ale variants (60, 70, 80). I seem to recall his thinking that the smaller versions would benefit from the increased specialty percentage.

[narcout]

Assume your plan is to collect 7 gallons of 1.050 wort pre-boil and to steep 1 lb. of roasted barley in the wort as it comes up to a boil.

Would you adjust the amount of RB you plan to steep depending on how many lbs. of base malt it takes you to obtain 7 gallons of 1.050 wort (not a rhetorical question)?

[Robert]

^^^^
I think there's a difference here.  You're assuming a given  volume of a preexisting  wort and adding a certain amount of colorant.  This is different, logically, from producing a wort.

**EDIT: As an exercise,  think of your example and substitute Sinamar for RB.  Would you change the dosage?

Also as to Martin's post above, I see that what Jamil advocates ASSUMES that the grain bills scale.  He's trying precisely to alter the balance, not scale an identical recipe.

[narcout]

^^^^
I think there's a difference here.  You're assuming a given  volume of a preexisting  wort and adding a certain amount of colorant.  This is different, logically, from producing a wort.

In addition to color, doesn't RB also add flavor and fermentable extract?

It's a different example, but I think related to what I posted in reply #23.

**EDIT: As an exercise,  think of your example and substitute Sinamar for RB.  Would you change the dosage?

No, I don't think I would.

I think that last clause may be where you're off.  I think it would contribute as much flavor as sugar, thereby diluting the RB flavor back to the correct proportion.

I see your point, but I can't tell which is correct.

This is a bit of a tangent, but I wonder what the flavor difference would be between two base malt only beers, both with the same OG but produced with differing amounts of malt due to efficiency differences.   

[Robert]

^^^^
I think there's a difference here.  You're assuming a given  volume of a preexisting  wort and adding a certain amount of colorant.  This is different, logically, from producing a wort.

In addition to color, doesn't RB also add flavor and fermentable extract?

It's a different example, but I think related to what I posted in reply #23.

Ok,  I was oversimplifying by just referring to colorant.  Sure it adds flavor, but I think the analogy holds.  By steeping the RB, you'd effectively doing the same thing as adding colorant, and, let's add, flavoring.  So imagine say, Sinamar and some kind of flavor concentrate?  You're still adding a fixed amount of something or other no matter what you add it to, I was thinking. That's different from producing a wort where efficiency is at issue.  When adding substances after the fact, efficiency is constant (call it 100%) across all base worts you might modify.

At least that makes sense to me.