Author Topic: 109% Efficiency!  (Read 7589 times)

Offline Malticulous

  • Brewer
  • ****
  • Posts: 361
    • View Profile
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #30 on: December 16, 2010, 09:48:03 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 ;)

I don't understand what you don't get. Longer boil requires more wort from the mash. More wort from the mash increases efficiency. Therefor the root of the increase is the longer boil.  Can't see the forest..there's a tree in your face.
« Last Edit: December 16, 2010, 09:49:40 PM by Malticulous »

Offline bonjour

  • Administrator
  • Senior Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1771
  • Troy, MI, 37mi, 60.9deg AR
    • View Profile
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #31 on: December 16, 2010, 10:05:40 PM »
Without question, the volume of wort collected is what determines efficiency.  What usually causes me to collect more wort is my choice to boil longer.  Therefore this causes my efficiency to increase.  I rarely collect more wort to increase efficiency.

But what ever the cause of the increased wort collection, efficiency is dependent on the volume of wort collected, not the length of boil.  Even though a long boil is the cause of my increased efficiency the amount on increase is determined by the volume of wort collected.
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 #32 on: December 16, 2010, 10:30:25 PM »
The true cause of the effect is the boil length. I thought that to be understood in my first post in this thread but I was wrong.

It can be useful in big beers. Most of my beers are under 1.060. The 90 minute boils can bring my BHE over 90%. I've decided to top them off pre-boil. I am going to try to shoot for 80% BHE for every brew but still tend to hit 85%.

Offline jeffy

  • Brewmaster General
  • *******
  • Posts: 2440
  • Tampa, Fl
    • View Profile
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #33 on: December 17, 2010, 05:12:01 AM »
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.

I don't think that things floating in the wort (like hops or break material) will change the sugar content of the liquid, so specific gravity will not be effected.  You may gain or lose final volume by leaving some wort in the kettle or not, but it still doesn't change the efficiency. 
Jeff Gladish, Tampa (989.3, 175.1 Apparent Rennarian)
Homebrewing since 1990
AHA member since 1991, now a lifetime member
BJCP judge since 1995

Offline MDixon

  • Senior Brewmaster
  • ******
  • Posts: 1005
    • View Profile
    • Mike's Homebrewing Page
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #34 on: December 17, 2010, 05:30:58 AM »
Malt...let's make it really easy...collect your wort...now we have an efficiency...boil a minute...same efficiency..boil 10 min...same efficiency...boil two hours...same efficiency...boil 5 hours...same efficiency...

Sure the amount one collects has bearing on efficiency, but the boil does not...whether you choose to boil for a minute or forever, the efficiency will remain the same.

Now someone later spoke about losses after the boil. The boil did not affect those either, it's losses in hoses, to trub, etc. which may make it appear the boil had something to do with it, but in reality, the efficiency is EXACTLY the same pre and post boil.

--

Malt - glad to see that spell checker workin for ya ;)
It's not a popularity contest, it's beer!

Offline Mikey

  • Brewer
  • ****
  • Posts: 397
    • View Profile
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #35 on: December 17, 2010, 05:38:15 AM »
I always check my efficiency after I've collected all the runnings and before the boil. To me it easier to gauge a dip stick in calm liquids, rather than boiling ones. 

Sometimes I'll check it again right before cooling, but guess what, it's always the same. :D

Offline jrskjei

  • 1st Kit
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #36 on: December 25, 2010, 09:57:25 PM »
...the efficiency is EXACTLY the same pre and post boil.
Right.  The efficiency is calculated based on numbers obtained before any boiling occurs.  If you're factoring anything else into the equation then you're calculating efficiency differently than what is conventional.  And if you're using more water to sparge than you normally would in an attempt to get more sugars out of the mash, you're really decreasing your efficiency. 

Offline bonjour

  • Administrator
  • Senior Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1771
  • Troy, MI, 37mi, 60.9deg AR
    • View Profile
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #37 on: December 26, 2010, 06:19:37 AM »
...the efficiency is EXACTLY the same pre and post boil.
Right.  The efficiency is calculated based on numbers obtained before any boiling occurs.  If you're factoring anything else into the equation then you're calculating efficiency differently than what is conventional.  And if you're using more water to sparge than you normally would in an attempt to get more sugars out of the mash, you're really decreasing your efficiency. 
Then why does my efficiency go up when I collect more wort for my big beers?
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 beerocd

  • Senior Brewmaster
  • ******
  • Posts: 1400
    • View Profile
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #38 on: December 26, 2010, 07:25:33 AM »
Three pages of efficiency discussion without a single equation?
The moral majority, is neither.

Offline hopfenundmalz

  • Official Poobah of No Life.
  • *
  • Posts: 4522
  • Milford, MI
    • View Profile
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #39 on: December 26, 2010, 07:38:55 AM »
Kai has "some" equations on his page.  ;D

I am with Fred on this discussion.  If you sparge more, you get more sugar into the kettle.  Longer boil and you lose the extra water. 

http://braukaiser.com/wiki/index.php/Understanding_Efficiency
Jeff Rankert
Ann Arbor Brewers Guild, AHA Member, BJCP Certified
Home-brewing, not just a hobby, it is a lifestyle!

Offline kerneldustjacket

  • Assistant Brewer
  • ***
  • Posts: 179
    • View Profile
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #40 on: December 26, 2010, 09:31:27 AM »
A syllogism:

Major premise:   Longer boils increase efficiency
Minor premise:   Adding 2 gallons of distilled water will increase my boil time
Conclusion:       Therefore, adding distilled water increases my efficiency

Longer boils can't "cause" efficiency, but a particular brewer's habits can lead to him/her using methods that in turn typically produce higher efficiency.
So the "practice" of wanting to conduct a longer boil requires the running off of more sugar-entrained wort from the mash tun, and it is here -- in the running of more water through the mash and it's collection of more sugars -- that the increased efficiency comes from. What "caused" the brewer to make that decision is immaterial where efficiency is concerned.

Of course, there's another way to put it:
Q: What caused that guy to get more efficiency?
A: He wanted to do a longer boil, so he used more sparge water.
« Last Edit: December 26, 2010, 09:39:07 AM by kerneldustjacket »
John Wilson
Savannah Brewers League
Savannah, GA

Offline Mikey

  • Brewer
  • ****
  • Posts: 397
    • View Profile
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #41 on: December 26, 2010, 09:41:18 AM »
Next time I brew I'm adding 5 gallons of distilled water, so I get really good efficiency.

Offline beerocd

  • Senior Brewmaster
  • ******
  • Posts: 1400
    • View Profile
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #42 on: December 26, 2010, 09:55:03 AM »
Ah, you guys are just arguing two different things and being stubborn about it.
What we have here is .....

Mash efficiency(into the boiler) VS Brewhouse efficiency(into the fermenter)

But by all means carry on - I am enjoying this.  ;D

The moral majority, is neither.

Offline jrskjei

  • 1st Kit
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #43 on: December 26, 2010, 09:56:36 AM »
If you use more water to sparge, then you will collect more sugars, but at the cost of having to boil off the extra water.  That's where the efficiency goes down.  An example:  say we're brewing a batch with 8 pounds of pale malt which yields 6 gallons of wort at a gravity of 1.036.  The yield and gravity is measured before any boiling happens.  We calculate the total sugar extraction as 36 points multiplied by 6 gallons equals 216 points.  All pale malt has a potential extraction of about 1.036.  So in this case, the total potential efficiency would be 36 points multiplied by 8 pounds yielding 288 points.  The efficiency is then 216/288 * 100% = 75%.  

If you use more water to sparge, then you will certainly get more sugars out of the mash.  But the gravity of the wort that is extracted using the extra water (the wort at the end of the sparge) is lower than the gravity of the wort drawn off previously.  This would be different for batch sparging, but the gravity of the wort for the second batch would be lower for 3 gallons of batch sparge water than for 2 gallons of batch sparge water.  With big beers, this may be less noticeable because you may be using a thicker mash or just more grain and there would therefore be more sugars to be extracted (or less left in the tun).  With normal gravity beers, adding additional water will cause the gravity of the wort that is extracted using the extra water to be very low in gravity.  In both cases, it depends on what gravity you would normally stop the sparge and how much further you're willing to take that.  Using the example above, if you collect 7 gallons but at a lower gravity of 1.030 the total sugar extraction would only be 210 points instead of 216.  It comes down to trying to find the balance between these two factors without letting the pH go too high or letting the gravity of the runoff go too low .

Correcting for (possibly) less efficient mashes by boiling longer does create a beer that may have an equal or even higher OG, but that doesn't have anything to do with the mash efficiency.  However it's done, it's about the process that works on a given system and the final product.


Offline kerneldustjacket

  • Assistant Brewer
  • ***
  • Posts: 179
    • View Profile
Re: 109% Efficiency!
« Reply #44 on: December 26, 2010, 11:57:44 AM »
jrskjei: thanks, a reasonable argument presented in a civil manner. Glad you're here.
But I do disagree with a few of its points.

Using the example above, if you collect 7 gallons but at a lower gravity of 1.030 the total sugar extraction would only be 210 points instead of 216.

I assume you mean from the same mash, i.e., run off 7 gallons instead of 6.

Question: If you take your example of 6 gallons with 216 points, and add a gallon of pure water to it, you would have 7 gallons of 1.0308 wort...still 216 points. How then can you take the same 6 gallon 216 point wort, add a gallon of water to it by running that water through the lauter tun, and somehow lower the total points to 210?

I'll agree that there may be limited gain from running additional water through the lauter tun, maybe even zero sugars, but no way it'll "subtract" from what you already have, and lower the points you've already extracted.


I like the page Kai has created on the subject.
His findings, for both batch and fly sparging, support the contention that "The more water that is available for sparging, the more extract can be rinsed from the grain."

http://braukaiser.com/wiki/index.php/Understanding_Efficiency

Ah, you guys are just arguing two different things and being stubborn about it.
What we have here is .....

Mash efficiency(into the boiler) VS Brewhouse efficiency(into the fermenter)

But by all means carry on - I am enjoying this.  ;D

A very good point beerocd.

I have assumed that mash efficiency -- pre-boil -- was the type in question...but I may be wrong!
« Last Edit: December 26, 2010, 12:08:30 PM by kerneldustjacket »
John Wilson
Savannah Brewers League
Savannah, GA