Cost of batch

I use Cargill pale 2-row for mase grain I batch sparge in 1 10 gallon Rubbermaid cooler.

Reply to
Yeah Right
Loading thread data ...

Reply to
Yeah Right

Don't worry about it. Over several batches, if you have trouble meeting your expected final gravities, then you can add more grain for the next batch (or boil on down and have less volume). I get 85% batch sparging - as much as I ever got fly sparging anyway.

Bottom line is that you have to adjust for your system's efficiency, no matter what sparging method you use. BUT - you can do that over time after you get some experience.

Derric

Reply to
Derric

Thanks! Just how DO you calculate efficiency? Also, I've looked at some all grain recipes, and they really don't tell what size batch they make, such as this one:

Ingredients:

8 pounds of English 2-row 1 pound of wheat 2 1/2 pounds of clover honey 1 oz Willamette 1 oz of hallertau Irish moss gelatin (secondary) WYeast 1007

Procedure: The mash schedule was:

95 degrees for 15 minutes (Acid Rest) 122 degrees for 30 minutes (Protein Rest) 152 degrees for 45-60 minutes (until passed iodine test)

Specifics: OG: 1064 FG 1010 ABV: 7.09%

Comments: While this beer did have some honey character, the alcohol taste was stronger. I don't think creating a brew so high in alcohol that the yeast quit, thereby giving the honey flavor is the way to go. I think we just need to find a good yeast that will leave some of the honey profile. This one did mellow a bit, but was not one of my better beers. I just recently brewed a honey beer from canned malt..... Don't remember the specifics but it was something like 3.3 pounds liquid malt extract, 2 1/2 pounds clover honey and other goodies...... I again used WYeast 1007, this time is was 3 times removed from the packet. It fermented everything. I now have a very pleasant brew, but no honey profile. One side note..... I don't know if it's because of the honey, but the brews I have used it in all seem to be a bit more clear. Then again, it could just be the gelatin!!!

So, what do I do, keep sparging until I hit the OG, then whatever wort there is, is what I get??

Reply to
basskisser

I have found that when I use the clover honey, I have to let the brew sit for a while before it's consumed. Generally I find the taste of the batch to be a little harsh until it's mellowed. Orange blossom honey however didn't need nearly as much time before that went away. I would expect that the honey from the clover has some trace compound in it that needs to be broken down before consumption that the orange blossom didn't need. I would consider trying it again with a different honey. I tried buckwheat honey once, it was interesting, but needed a long sit on the shelves before it was ready and the honey flavor was definately buckwheat honey. D

Reply to
Daffaed

As I said, I wasn't calling copper bad. I was actually attempting to point out something I observed and actually was wondering if anyone else had some comparitive data. I wasn't meaning to imply that the copper was bad for us. After all, copper is an essential nutrient, check you multivitamins. I was pondering the effect on the yeast and weather it inhibited their reproduction. My experiential data implies that it does, slightly, but it's in no way enough data to make a judgement. Last night I tried an experiment. I brewed two identical batches, one was in my CPVC constructed lauter tun, and the second was in my buddy's copper manifolded tun. Otherwise these batches were identical recipies and processes, or at least as near as we could make it. I pitched the yeast, (cultivated from my private stock) in equal quantities to each fermentor at 6:00 as the snow fell outside. By

9:45 the CPVC batch had begun bubbling, and the copper batch didn't start by the time I went to bed at 11:45 but was rolling along nicely this morning when I went out to shovel snow off my drive.

Please don't think that I'm advocating my system over the anyone else's. If you make beer that's good. If you make good beer that's better, but a lot of good beer is best. I wasn't indicating that the copper was bad for you or that it was not a time proven brewing material. Then again, why call lead bad, it was used in plumbing for thousands of years.(rhetorical question, please don't bother to respond to that, I know why lead is bad.) If no-one experiments, we'll never discover anything.

I'll let you know if there's a flavor difference between the two batches. D

Reply to
Daffaed

The formula I am aware of is (Post boil volume * 0.96 * original gravity(Original Extract in deg Plato/100))/mass malt*100 All units are SI(liters and KG). If you want to use gallons (US) and pounds multiply the top by 3.75, and the bottom by 2.2 the 0.96 is a fudge factor to account for how much is lost into the trub in the fermentor.

Degrees plato can be calculated by: (deep breath) degrees P=-676.67 + 1286.4 SG -800.47SG^2 + 190.74 SG^3

The easy way is to download a copy of the spreadsheet like byorec.xls from byo.com and let your computer do it. ;)

Reply to
Daffaed

A good question! :) First, I'd suggest looking at howtobrew.com where he'll explain all the details. But, in general, you: * Calculate the IDEAL amount of sugar you could extract from your fermentables. * Measure the sugar you get out of your mash. * Compare (divide) the two. * It's easiest to use sugar "points" (points of sugar per pound of grain per gallon). You just drop the "1.0" from a SG measurement, like 1.040 is 40 points.

For example, for 9# pale malt, 1# crystal, the ideal sugar points for those two are 38 points and 24 points, so: Theoretical: (9*38+1*34)76 points, that's the TOTAL POSSIBLE sugar points you might get from these grains.

I measured 1.041 in my boil pot out of the mash and 7.5 gallons, so: Actual: 7.5 gal * 41 pts = 307.5,

So the calculated efficiency is: 307.5/376 = 81.8%.

(I used qbrew PPG values, howtobrew.com has a table of point values also and all the brewing software has them built in as well - they are not always the same and your grain will even vary a little too.)

The above is your "mash" efficiency, which is most often referred to. If you calculated from the ideal until your actual fermenter, you'd be calculating your total "brewhouse" efficiency (which includes any losses in the boil kettle, absorption by hops, etc.).

Most make 5 or 6 gallons. That recipe has 9# grain and 2.5# honey, so it probably makes a 5 - 6 gallon batch.

Go put some recipes into the spreadsheet at:

formatting link
and play with grain and batch size. You can do this and tweak the recipe until you get what you want out of it. (Ie., by putting in 8# 2-row,

1# wheat, and 2.5# honey and since you know he got 1.064 out, you can tweak the batch size until it comes out that way, then you'll have it!).

For purposes of this, you should probably use about 75% efficiency for your system until you know exactly what you're getting.

Not exactly...

Here's a brewlog of a recent pale ale. I have most of the details in there (you can see the batch sparge, efficiency, and other calculations):

formatting link

Note that I batch sparge a little differently than some others, I boil for 90 minutes, and I try to end up with around 6 gals at the end of the boil (so I need 7.5 gals of wort to start with)... I: 0. I mash-in with a 1.5:1 water:grain ratio, usually about 3.75 gals water. 1. When the mash is done, without adding water, I vorlauf (recirculate) and drain. At 1.5:1 water:grain mash-in ratio, I usually get 2.5 gals of wort out from this. 2. Knowing I want 7.5 gals, I need 5 gallons more. So I then add 2.5 gals to the mash, stir, vorlauf, and drain. 3. Finally, I add the last 2.5 gals, stir, vorlauf, and drain, for a total of 2.5 + 2.5 + 2.5 = 7.5 gals into the boiler. 4. Stir the boiler very well, then measure the gravity and the total volume (should be 7.5 gals) and record it.

I do NOT worry about the final gravity in the mash and I do NOT worry about the gravity in the boil pot (but you DO need to measure gravity and volume if you want to calculate efficiency).

If my gravity is a little bit light, then I can boil longer and reach it, but with less volume into the fermenter. If the gravity is too high, you can dilute with some water. (This will mess with your hops bitterness, but usually it isn't a noticable problem).

The best thing for you to do is just make yourself a lauter tun and do a batch! Everything will become clear very quickly! :) You don't even have to worry about any of this stuff the first time or two!!!!!

Derric

Reply to
Derric

Okay, I just went through the exercise to see IF I'm on track. Given the data in the recipe I posted, I ended up with 4 gallons in the primary, given some waste and a gallon of evaporation. Do you get about the same?

Reply to
basskisser

I put the numbers into "qbrew" (a Linux brewing program) and got, for

75% efficiency, that it would produce about 4.5 gallons of 1.065 wort. Using: 1# Honey @ 35 PPG, 8# 2-row @ 38 PPG, 1# wheat @ 39 PPG.

At 85% efficiency, the result is 5 gallons @ 1.065.

There are a lot of variables. No doubt, when you really do it, you'll be somewhere in-between. Depending upon the recipe and how I'm feeling, sometimes I try to adjust to hit the gravity, and other times I adjust to try to hit a certain volume.

Again... don't sweat it, just take all your measurements and adjust the next time. If you do several similar recipes, you'll pretty quickly get a good feeling for how your system is going to work. ((Again, anything you do is probably going to produce GOOD BEER - tho' maybe not exactly what your recipe predicts.))

Derric

Reply to
Derric

Thanks! I used Suds 6.0 to get just a tad over 4 gallons. I bought a

60 qt. ice chest that instead of the bottom being wide and long, is actually the same size footprint as the 40 qt, just taller. I believe, that by taking your advice to batch sparge, there will be enough grain depth when I do five gallons, and it will hold enough to let me do ten gallons. I'm going to build a baffle this weekend. I'm stoked!
Reply to
basskisser

DrinksForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.