[Kaiser]

you may also play around with this: http://braukaiser.com/wiki/index.php/Batch_Sparge_and_Party_Gyle_Simulator

Kai

[oscarvan]

Hmmm, that didn't translate into Numbers very well, and don't have a working copy of Excell right now.... oh well.

[malzig]

I am not sure how you arrived at the 60% number. I agree that it is somewhere in that range, but don't see where the hard number comes from.

If you use Kai's spreadsheet, you'll see that using 10# of grain to make about 6.5 gallons of wort, pre-boil, from equal runnings, should yield about 63% of the total available sugar.  I rounded that to 60%.  My experience has been that ~60%-63% is a realistic real world figure as well. I was also taught that 60% of the available sugar per running was a good way to calculate the expected gravity for partigyle mashes.

Kai's spreadsheet calculates that a similar no-sparge wort, could yield 77% efficiency.  I reliably get about 70-75%.

Essentially, the ~60% and ~75% comes from the percent of the volume of water you drain from a tun relative to that added to the tun (i.e., minus grain absorption), with a correction made for the volume added by the dissolved sugar.

Open Office is a free alternative to Excell.  I think that works with Kai's spreadsheet.

[Kaiser]

Open Office is a free alternative to Excell.  I think that works with Kai's spreadsheet.

Open Office works with these spreadsheets. That's what I use to develop them

Kai

[euge]

Open Office is a free alternative to Excell.  I think that works with Kai's spreadsheet.

Open Office works with these spreadsheets. That's what I use to develop them

Kai

It's what I use.

Thank you for the spreadsheet Kai! This is pretty useful for me as I'm sure others. I'm planning to do some parti-gyle beers- but in small batches.

[oscarvan]

Very cool..... Thanks for all the info. Learning is taking place.

[Kaiser]

You may also upload this to Google Docs. Here is a link to the spreadsheet where I entered my typical beer: 4 kg grist, 16l strike, 13l sparge:

https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0AiZTxwiYv8bvdFBMMHVrd3dKOEpaRG00eE5XZWdaWGc&hl=en&authkey=CJCY4JAK

In case you see the GoogleDocs framework in Russian, I don't know why this is happening. I checked the language preference and it is set to English.

Kai

[Kaiser]

This Google Docs is really nice. But what bothers me that other users cannot make changes to the copy of the spreadsheet that they are seeing unless I make it writeable for everyone which won’t be feasible if they end up modifying the master copy.

Before I start looking for that, does anyone know if one can copy a shared document to their own Google Docs account and edit it there w/o having to download it to the computer first?

Kai

[malzig]

This Google Docs is really nice. But what bothers me that other users cannot make changes to the copy of the spreadsheet that they are seeing unless I make it writeable for everyone which won’t be feasible if they end up modifying the master copy.

Before I start looking for that, does anyone know if one can copy a shared document to their own Google Docs account and edit it there w/o having to download it to the computer first?

Kai

A viewer of the spreadsheet can go to File>Make a copy... and they will have an editable copy of the spreadsheet that can't be saved over your original, with your current settings.

They do need to have a google documents account and be signed in, though.

[tomsawyer]

I tried this sparge-in-the-mash method today.  Mashed at 2qt/lb, then added an additional 1.2qt/lb 190F water and ran the whole thing off at once.  I believe I got somewhere around 80% efficiency.  I guess that is consistent with having 3.2qt/lb in the tun and only leaving 0.125qt/lb behind.  All you need is a big enough MLT.

[bluedog]

I tried this experiment again yesterday and added the correct amount of sparge water this time. I mashed 11.5 lbs in 4 gallons for 60 minutes (21 Brix) then added water to the 9 gallon mark for compensate for displacement and absorption. I should also add my mash temp was at 170 after adding sparge water. Then I recirculated and collected 7 gallons at about 11 Brix which wound up being 1.052 after a 75 minute boil. The original recipe stated a 1.053 OG. I'll have to try this with a bigger beer to what happens. The process took about 15 minutes between adding sparge water, recirculating and running off.

[tomsawyer]

I can't really say this method is any faster than a single sparge.  About the best thing you get is the ability to do a step mash or mashout without adding another step.  I know the sparge should give better efficiency too, but I tend to get a little less than theoretical efficiency numbers so the difference was really minor.  I'd say this method would avoid potential extraction of undesirable compounds but I can't say I've ever experienced that so its more of a theoretical benefit.

The down side is a mashtun that is only 1/2 to 2/3 full during the mash.  I wouldn't mind trying a 3qt/lb mash some time, I understand this kind of mash is used commercially.

[euge]

Getting 80% on a single sparge is pretty awesome! The have bigger Coleman Extremes for cheap too...

[malzig]

I can't really say this method is any faster than a single sparge.... 

The down side is a mashtun that is only 1/2 to 2/3 full during the mash.

I can't say that No-Sparge is a huge time saver over a Single Batch Sparge, but at the very least you save the small amount of time it takes for adding the sparge water and stirring in the sparge (since they can occur during the mash of a No-Sparge), as well as the second vorlauf.  Not a 10 minutes I really worry about one way or the other, though.

Why would the mashtun be only 1/2 to 1/3 full with one method and not the other?  I can mash at the same thickness if I want whether I choose to go No-Sparge or Batch Sparge.

[tomsawyer]

My "no-sparge" was like a sparge but without lautering off the first runnings first.  Mash at 2qt/lb, then add another 1qt/lb or so and stir then lauter.  If I skipped the addition of water after the mash I'd get a poorer yield.  2qt/lb would theoretically give you 75% efficiency tops.  I need a MLT that hold 3-4qt/lb instead of 1.5-2qt/lb to do this.

That 80% was a rough estimate, then again I use the same estimate for my regular batch sparge and typically get 75-85% depending on my mash schedule.  What I have noticed is that a mashout or near mashout where I raise the temp into the high 150's to high 160's, seems to add a good 5% or more on top of a normal single infusion at 150F.  I was surprised at this initially but it seems to be a consistent thing.  Its making my FG just a touch higher though so I am using it in selected situations.