[spurviance]

I’m 3 batches in with a new grain mill and have had to make some adjustments.   My efficiencies with this mill have been all over the place.   I’m thinking of taking 1 lb. of 2-row and doing a test mash to see what type of extraction efficiency I get.   I’m curious if anyone has experience doing this and if I can expect similar efficiency when I scale it up to my normal 10-15 lb. batches.....

[Andy Farke]

Never tried it, but I would guess you are going to (unfortunately) get the best idea of your "real" efficiency by doing full-volume brews. There are simply too many variables if you are doing ultra-mini mashes...temperature, etc., that I would think will make it hard to scale up in a predictable way.

For my mill, it took me a few batches to dial in where I wanted to be. And you likely know this already, but if you do high gravity mashes, your efficiency will suffer...I dial in for around a 1.050 beer, and then adjust my assumed efficiency down when I go higher gravity, or if I use a lot of adjuncts grains.

[KellerBrauer]

I’m 3 batches in with a new grain mill and have had to make some adjustments.   My efficiencies with this mill have been all over the place.   I’m thinking of taking 1 lb. of 2-row and doing a test mash to see what type of extraction efficiency I get.   I’m curious if anyone has experience doing this and if I can expect similar efficiency when I scale it up to my normal 10-15 lb. batches.....

I would like to mention, I use a Barley Crusher which also has an adjustable roller.  For me, it took about 5-6 brews before I finally found that sweet spot with each adjustment being on the thousands when measured with a feeler gauge between the rolls.  Also, I’m not sure what measures you’re using to determine your efficiency, but I use the tools in BeerSmith software.

So, micro adjustments, feeler gauge, software and patience were how I finally dialed in my mill.  Now that my mill is properly set I can brew the full range of gravity without worry and I’ll be dead-on accurate at 78%.  Can it improve? Sure.  But I’m okay with it as is.

Good luck!

[BrewBama]

My system will not recirculate or lauter if I close the mill to minimum gap and “crush till you’re scared”. So, over time, I determined the balance of a good lauter and mash efficiency for my system.

I did this by setting the mill at a certain gap, milling 100 grams of standard pale malt, placed the milled grain on a No 14 sieve, shook it side to side for 15 seconds – tap, shook it back and forth for 15 seconds – tap, and repeated this for 3 minutes. I weighed how much was left on top of the sieve and how much was sifted into the paper plate beneath it.

Then I brewed a batch. If I got stuck, I opened the gap on the mill and checked again. I ended up with 70% on top and 30% in the tray as my sweet spot. I imagine you can do the same thing with a feeler gauge between the mill rollers.

As a result, my crush ends up looking more like grits than flour to help create a permeable grain bed.

Also, I run the mill slow so I don’t shred the husks (I need them as whole as possible for a filter).

...but mill gap is just one factor of efficiency.

A while back I ran the same grain bill for several batches (changing hops for variety) to dial in several parameters to find my sweet spot. Pump setting, grain mill setting, strike water volume, measuring dead space, boil off rate at various power settings, cooling method, trub left behind from the boil and fermenter, yeast pitch rate and method, etc... 

Now that I have all that dialed in and I do it the same every time, I am very confident in my sweet and bitter wort production volume and quality, and of course the beer. I don’t think I could have done that by testing and scaling up.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[tommymorris]

My system (Picobrew Z) has a lot less knobs to dial in. To find the right crush to maximize efficiency I started at a 40 mil gap and brewed several brews dropping the gap each time by a few mils. I stopped around 30 mils (I think).  I went one step lower but was having trouble crushing some fat grain kernels. So, I backed off to the previous setting that worked and have been happy ever since.

While doing this I designed my recipes so that I wouldn’t mind if my OG was off by a few points.

[denny]

Did you brewc the same recipe with the same malt each time?  If not, you might be trying to adjust based on bad data.

[skyler]

Choice of base malt can make a difference, too. I get significantly better extraction from Fawcett Golden Promise, for example, than I do from Crisp Maris Otter and I am not sure why. My sense is that the Fawcett Golden Promise gets a better crush from my mill, but that's just conjecture.

[BrewBama]

Choice of base malt can make a difference, too. I get significantly better extraction from Fawcett Golden Promise, for example, than I do from Crisp Maris Otter and I am not sure why. My sense is that the Fawcett Golden Promise gets a better crush from my mill, but that's just conjecture.

+1. I get higher extract from Briess Full Pint than I do Rahr Standard 2-row using the same mill gap.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[denny]

Choice of base malt can make a difference, too. I get significantly better extraction from Fawcett Golden Promise, for example, than I do from Crisp Maris Otter and I am not sure why. My sense is that the Fawcett Golden Promise gets a better crush from my mill, but that's just conjecture.

I think it's just as likely due to different barley crops and prodessing.

[chinaski]

I recommend determining a level of crush that lauters well on your system and keep the mill set at that crush for multiple brews.  Make sure that your volumes and weights are measured accurately and see if efficiency still varies a lot. 

[Saccharomyces]

First and foremost, I cannot begin to describe how much I dislike BeerSmith because it takes the brewer out of the equation. In essence, BeerSmith keeps brewers stupid.  Extraction percentage is meaningless if one does not know the "extract, fine grind basis" for the actual grains being used.  For example a grain with an extract, fine grind basis of 80% means that the grain is capable of producing 0.80 * 46 = 36.8 points per pound at the most (a pound of sugar in a one gallon solution has a specific gravity of 1.046).  An extraction rate in points per pound is significantly more useful than some BS efficiency rating. All that maters when attempting to reproduce a batch's original gravity is points per pound and volume.  Why? Because points per pound allows us to determine the amount of grain needed for a batch at a desired gravity and volume.  For example, if we are used to achieving an extraction rate of 29 points per pound and we want to achieve of a original gravity of 1.050 for 6.25 gallons total, then we need 6.25 * 50 / 29 = 10.78 pounds of grist.  It is that simple.  Most brewhouse calculations can be performed with pencil and paper.  There is absolutely no need to involve software, and that is coming from a guy who holds BS and MS degrees in the computer engineering side of computer science. 

How do we determine our brew house points per pound value? We do so by averaging the (O.G. in points * volume collected) / pounds of grain used for successive brews and then summing those values and dividing by the number of values summed.  O.G. in points is calculated via the following equation (O.G. - 1) * 1000.

In the end, one should not worry about some BS efficiency rating that is spit out by BeerSmith.  One should worry about improving one's extraction rate in points per pound because that value is directly usable.

[KellerBrauer]

First and foremost, I cannot begin to describe how much I dislike BeerSmith because it takes the brewer out of the equation. In essence, BeerSmith keeps brewers stupid.  Extraction percentage is meaningless if one does not know the "extract, fine grind basis" for the actual grains being used.  For example a grain with an extract, fine grind basis of 80% means that the grain is capable of producing 0.80 * 46 = 36.8 points per pound at the most (a pound of sugar in a one gallon solution has a specific gravity of 1.046).  An extraction rate in points per pound is significantly more useful than some BS efficiency rating. All that maters when attempting to reproduce a batch's original gravity is points per pound and volume.  Why? Because points per pound allows us to determine the amount of grain needed for a batch at a desired gravity and volume.  For example, if we are used to achieving an extraction rate of 29 points per pound and we want to achieve of a original gravity of 1.050 for 6.25 gallons total, then we need 6.25 * 50 / 29 = 10.78 pounds of grist.  It is that simple.  Most brewhouse calculations can be performed with pencil and paper.  There is absolutely no need to involve software, and that is coming from a guy who holds BS and MS degrees in the computer engineering side of computer science. 

How do we determine our brew house points per pound value? We do so by averaging the (O.G. in points * volume collected) / pounds of grain used for successive brews and then summing those values and dividing by the number of values summed.  O.G. in points is calculated via the following equation (O.G. - 1) * 1000.

In the end, one should not worry about some BS efficiency rating that is spit out by BeerSmith.  One should worry about improving one's extraction rate in points per pound because that value is directly usable.

Nice rant!  But I would rather brew beer and leave the math to the software.

[BrewBama]

I use BeerSmith get into the ballpark. Same with Bru’n Water. I fine tune from there.

It’s nice to have an equipment setup that I can quickly plug in fermentables to get a confident prediction of the outcome.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[goose]

I use BeerSmith get into the ballpark. Same with Bru’n Water. I fine tune from there.

It’s nice to have an equipment setup that I can quickly plug in fermentables to get a confident prediction of the outcome.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I do the same here.  No offense Sacchromyces, as I can do all of the hand calculations as well.  However, BeerSmith will get me in the ballpark and that is what I am shooting for.  I normally hit my OG within a couple percent and that is good enough for me.  Plus it is less time getting the recipe designed and brewed.  I wonder what the comments are regarding Brewer's Friend?

[denny]

I use BeerSmith get into the ballpark. Same with Bru’n Water. I fine tune from there.

It’s nice to have an equipment setup that I can quickly plug in fermentables to get a confident prediction of the outcome.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I do the same here.  No offense Sacchromyces, as I can do all of the hand calculations as well.  However, BeerSmith will get me in the ballpark and that is what I am shooting for.  I normally hit my OG within a couple percent and that is good enough for me.  Plus it is less time getting the recipe designed and brewed.  I wonder what the comments are regarding Brewer's Friend?

We could use a horse and buggy, but I prefer a car