Author Topic: 109% Efficiency!  (Read 7617 times)

Offline bonjour

  • Administrator
  • Senior Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1771
  • Troy, MI, 37mi, 60.9deg AR
    • View Profile
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #15 on: December 14, 2010, 11:18:38 AM »
Maybe I should repeat myself??? Boiling doesn't change efficiency, because sugars are conserved... ;D

The extracted amount of sugar does not change. Now if one COLLECTS more volume then they can potentially extract more sugars, but it has NOTHING to do with the boil. ;)
Gotta have some fun with this, but I do understand

The ONLY reason I collect more wort is because I boil longer. ;)  OK, well not the only reason  ;D

That changes the brewing process, which affects the resulting beer. 

Without question, given a certain amount of wort, no amount of boiling, or NOT boiling it will change the efficiency.




Fred Bonjour
Co-Chair Mashing in Michigan 2014 AHA Conference in Grand Rapids, Michigan
AHA Governing Committee; AHA Conference, Club Support & Web Subcommittees



Everything under 1.100 is a 'session' beer ;)

Offline Mikey

  • Brewer
  • ****
  • Posts: 397
    • View Profile
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #16 on: December 14, 2010, 12:17:45 PM »
Maybe I should repeat myself??? Boiling doesn't change efficiency, because sugars are conserved... ;D

The extracted amount of sugar does not change. Now if one COLLECTS more volume then they can potentially extract more sugars, but it has NOTHING to do with the boil. ;)

Exactly. Boiling should be completely left out of the discussion when referring to efficiency.

Offline blatz

  • Brewmaster General
  • *******
  • Posts: 2467
  • Paul Blatz - Jupiter, FL
    • View Profile
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #17 on: December 14, 2010, 12:32:04 PM »
I think the answer is yes and no.

I often leave behind a lot of sugars in the mash (which I sparge a little more to freeze for starters, but that's a different story), which I think is what fred is getting after.

for example, I generally collect 14gal for a 12gal batch, losing 1.5gal to evaporation over a 90min boil and .5gal to hop absorption and dead space to get 12 in the fermentor. 

For an average 1.065 batch of beer, I generally acheive 77% efficiency in collecting my 14gal, but can collect about 3qts of 1.025 starter wort with another sparge while the boil is going on.

if I sparged another 1.5gal through the mash grain bed, I could get another 1.5gal of 1.025ish gravity beer for 15.5 gal but then I would need to boil longer to get down to my batch volume, in this case 3 hours total of boiling given my boiloff rate. 

There would be a little more sugar in the wort at this point since I collected more sugars.

However, I think this is retarded since to save a few $2 in grain by being more efficient I wasted $5 in propane and polluted more as well.
The happiest people don’t necessarily have the best of everything; they just make the best of everything they have.

BJCP National: F0281

Offline bonjour

  • Administrator
  • Senior Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1771
  • Troy, MI, 37mi, 60.9deg AR
    • View Profile
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #18 on: December 14, 2010, 12:55:19 PM »
Yea but I like the flavor impact a long boil has on my BWs and Wee Heavys.  It is a secondary effect to increase efficiency utilizing a long boil, the efficiency increases because I have to increase my wort collection to compensate for the evaporation losses of a long boil.  Thus my efficiency increases because choose to alter my brewing procedures by performing a long boil (and the need to collect more wort to allow it). 

Energy efficient, nope, not that.
Fred Bonjour
Co-Chair Mashing in Michigan 2014 AHA Conference in Grand Rapids, Michigan
AHA Governing Committee; AHA Conference, Club Support & Web Subcommittees



Everything under 1.100 is a 'session' beer ;)

Offline blatz

  • Brewmaster General
  • *******
  • Posts: 2467
  • Paul Blatz - Jupiter, FL
    • View Profile
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #19 on: December 14, 2010, 12:57:58 PM »
Yea but I like the flavor impact a long boil has on my BWs and Wee Heavys.  It is a secondary effect to increase efficiency utilizing a long boil, the efficiency increases because I have to increase my wort collection to compensate for the evaporation losses of a long boil.  Thus my efficiency increases because choose to alter my brewing procedures by performing a long boil (and the need to collect more wort to allow it). 

Energy efficient, nope, not that.

I know - I should have put a smiley after the last sentence - I know there are other purposes, it just seems oxymoronic to put the words more efficient in the same context as boiling longer.  ;)
The happiest people don’t necessarily have the best of everything; they just make the best of everything they have.

BJCP National: F0281

Offline bonjour

  • Administrator
  • Senior Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1771
  • Troy, MI, 37mi, 60.9deg AR
    • View Profile
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #20 on: December 14, 2010, 01:18:24 PM »
no smilies needed, but in case I needed some  ;) ;D ;) ;D ;) ;D ;) ;D ;) ;D ;) ;D ;) ;D

This is similar to the argument that "adding" sugar gives you a drier beer, 
Swapping sugar for malt gives you a drier beer ;) ;D ;) ;D ;) ;D ;) ;D ;) ;D ;) ;D ;) ;D
Fred Bonjour
Co-Chair Mashing in Michigan 2014 AHA Conference in Grand Rapids, Michigan
AHA Governing Committee; AHA Conference, Club Support & Web Subcommittees



Everything under 1.100 is a 'session' beer ;)

Offline Malticulous

  • Brewer
  • ****
  • Posts: 361
    • View Profile
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #21 on: December 14, 2010, 07:32:52 PM »
Sorry I was so unclear.  ::)

I tend to look at efficiency in light of the grain to water ratio in the mash. Often I will top off pre-boil for long boils.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2010, 07:35:54 PM by Malticulous »

Offline MDixon

  • Senior Brewmaster
  • ******
  • Posts: 1013
    • View Profile
    • Mike's Homebrewing Page
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #22 on: December 14, 2010, 08:31:03 PM »
It was a good discussion and now everyone understands boiling does not affect efficiency (and why).
It's not a popularity contest, it's beer!

Offline tomsawyer

  • Senior Brewmaster
  • ******
  • Posts: 1684
    • View Profile
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #23 on: December 16, 2010, 01:18:03 PM »
Yea but I like the flavor impact a long boil has on my BWs and Wee Heavys.  It is a secondary effect to increase efficiency utilizing a long boil, the efficiency increases because I have to increase my wort collection to compensate for the evaporation losses of a long boil.  Thus my efficiency increases because choose to alter my brewing procedures by performing a long boil (and the need to collect more wort to allow it). 

Energy efficient, nope, not that.

Its a nice one-two punch, because needing more preboil volume lets you get more sugar out of the wort, which you need for those bigger styles.  Probably part of the reason why the styles evolved as they did.

Someone just needed to adequately define "boil" in the beginning.
Lennie
Hannibal, MO

Offline tomsawyer

  • Senior Brewmaster
  • ******
  • Posts: 1684
    • View Profile
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #24 on: December 16, 2010, 01:19:34 PM »
Not to change the subject, but the title of this post reminds me of one of the early Simpsons episodes where Homer is in a tank of water and the doctor says "this isn't right, this man is 104% body fat" because Homer is eating a turkey leg.  "Hey, no eating in the tank."  Sorry, nothing more of value to add!

Theres your answer, you must have been stirring with a turkey leg.  One coated with a sugary BBQ sauce.
Lennie
Hannibal, MO

Offline Malticulous

  • Brewer
  • ****
  • Posts: 361
    • View Profile
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #25 on: December 16, 2010, 05:40:58 PM »
It was a good discussion and now everyone understands boiling does not affect efficiency (and why).

I disagree. Overall boil off is part of the mash equitation and therefor also part of efficiency. At the point you stop filling the kettle efficiency is set.

Offline Mikey

  • Brewer
  • ****
  • Posts: 397
    • View Profile
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #26 on: December 16, 2010, 06:32:20 PM »
It was a good discussion and now everyone understands boiling does not affect efficiency (and why).

I disagree. Overall boil off is part of the mash equitation and therefor also part of efficiency. At the point you stop filling the kettle efficiency is set.

Overall boil may be part of YOUR perceived efficiency, but not part of the mash efficiency.

Offline MDixon

  • Senior Brewmaster
  • ******
  • Posts: 1013
    • View Profile
    • Mike's Homebrewing Page
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #27 on: December 16, 2010, 07:05:44 PM »
It was a good discussion and now everyone understands boiling does not affect efficiency (and why).

I disagree. Overall boil off is part of the mash equitation and therefor also part of efficiency. At the point you stop filling the kettle efficiency is set.

Explain in depth...

I'll repeat for what must be the millionth time...BOILING DOES NOT AFFECT THE EFFICIENCY.

The second part of your statement pretty much proves the point. You boil once you stop filling the kettle, so boiling plays no part in efficiency.

Boil off IS NOT part of a mash equation or equitation for those without a spell checker - therefore vs. therefor - less drinky before typy ;)
It's not a popularity contest, it's beer!

Offline Mikey

  • Brewer
  • ****
  • Posts: 397
    • View Profile
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #28 on: December 16, 2010, 07:23:44 PM »
For those that don't understand, enter your recipe into something like Promash. Collect your runnings and measure you volume and gravity. Note your efficiency.

Now boil the living $hit out of it and remeasure your volume and gravity. Plug those values into the program and note your efficiency. It will be the same, unless you screwed up. Your volume has gone down but your gravity has gone up, however your efficiency is the same.

Offline tomsawyer

  • Senior Brewmaster
  • ******
  • Posts: 1684
    • View Profile
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #29 on: December 16, 2010, 08:19:41 PM »
Doesn't hot break dropping out, change the specific gravity of the solution at all?  Not that we are counting protein in efficiency, but if you define efficiency by a specific gravity reading times volume then it would seem to have some small effect.  I know my brewhouse efficiency is typically slightly lowe than my preboil, and I pitch trub and all in the fermentor.  I figured it had to do with some protein being suspended versus dissolved.
Lennie
Hannibal, MO