How can I improve my mash efficiency?

Discussion in 'Homebrewing' started by chrisjws, Jan 11, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Brew_Betty

    Brew_Betty Initiate (0) Jan 5, 2015 Wisconsin

    The fastest sparge impedes the sugar escape route via excessive grain bed compaction. A slower sparge encourages a more porous grain bed and a slightly more efficient extraction of sugar. These are indisputable FACTS envisioned and verified by Brew_Betty via rigorously controlled xBeerImentz.

    The good news for the fast sparge camp is a slow sparge doesn't make a big difference. However, it is practically guaranteed to be 1.21-2.24 points mo' better!

    Failure to duplicate these results indicates my sparging skill and / or the efficiency of my proprietary lauter apparatus is superior to yours.
     
  2. atomeyes

    atomeyes Initiate (0) Jul 13, 2011 Canada (ON)

    a discarded drink straw from McDonalds?
     
    chrisjws likes this.
  3. Brew_Betty

    Brew_Betty Initiate (0) Jan 5, 2015 Wisconsin

    Another way to improve efficiency is a double batch sparge. Basically divide your normal sparge water in half and sparge twice.

    [​IMG]
     
  4. Brew_Betty

    Brew_Betty Initiate (0) Jan 5, 2015 Wisconsin

    That would produce off flavors and wouldn't lauter at all. :rolling_eyes:
     
  5. VikeMan

    VikeMan Grand Pooh-Bah (3,067) Jul 12, 2009 Pennsylvania
    Pooh-Bah

    No. With fly sparging, the runoff gravity is not constant, and the gravity within the lauter tun is not homogeneous. You have to be careful not to make a channel that allows the sparge water to cut through and drain before mixing thoroughly with the rest of the wort. With batch sparging, the wort (and its gravity) in the tun is homogenous after stirring. Exit path doesn't matter, as long as the sparge doesn't get stuck/leave puddles. OTOH, fast fly sparging can cause weak wort to drain while strong wort stays behind.

    Yes, with batch, if the bed compacts to the point that less volume escapes, that would affect mash efficiency. I would consider that to be a form of stuck sparge, though maybe not obvious. Allow me to quote myself, with added bold text...

    If you do not acknowledge this, I will quote myself again, but without direct attribution so as to make it seem like someone else said it, and with italics added.

    That certainly improves mash efficiency vs single batch. I once modeled the process, and it turns out, IIRC, that the most efficient multi-sparge strategy is where the runoff volume in each step is exactly equal.
     
  6. atomeyes

    atomeyes Initiate (0) Jul 13, 2011 Canada (ON)

    curious, then. any data about the contact time of water with grain in order to have an efficient sparge?
     
  7. chrisjws

    chrisjws Grand Pooh-Bah (3,302) Dec 3, 2014 California
    Pooh-Bah Trader

    So I picked up new grains from the local homebrew place and crushed them there. Opinions on this crush? I can post more pics if that's helpful.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  8. VikeMan

    VikeMan Grand Pooh-Bah (3,067) Jul 12, 2009 Pennsylvania
    Pooh-Bah

    That's a pretty weak crush. Looks like quite a few grains are completely intact. I would either adjust the mill's gap. Or if they won't let you do that, run them through again.
     
    DunkelFester likes this.
  9. Brew_Betty

    Brew_Betty Initiate (0) Jan 5, 2015 Wisconsin

    [​IMG]

    That is a good example of an LHBS crush that will produce lower efficiency. The white parts should be mostly the size of coffee grounds.
     
    DunkelFester likes this.
  10. hopfenunmaltz

    hopfenunmaltz Pooh-Bah (2,647) Jun 8, 2005 Michigan
    Pooh-Bah

    Well, he won't have a stuck mash with his false bottom. :wink:
     
    DunkelFester and JackHorzempa like this.
  11. MostlyNorwegian

    MostlyNorwegian Pooh-Bah (2,236) Feb 5, 2013 Illinois
    Pooh-Bah

    That kind of crush is a big part of your issue. Definitely run it through again.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.