I have recently bought a new heater as a mash tun. This was before I had even heard of BIAB as a method of brewing.
Looking into this more, I have realised that whilst I will be putting my grain into a bag, my heater isn't big enough to efficiently do a BIAB mash.
Since I was planning on sparging anyway, I was wondering if a mixture of the 2 methods would work. This would be better for a batch sparge (IMHO).
The plan was something like this -
5kg Grain. Mash In with 14.50 litres (this would be what I would have done in the past)
After 1 hour, top up with 2 litres, stir this into the mash and leave to rest for 10 minutes
I'd then drain 9.5 litres (16.5 minus 5 (absorbed by grain at 1 litres/kilo) minus 2 litres dead space)
Next add 8.5 litres of sparge water, again stirring in and leaving to rest for 10 minutes.
Normally I would be only able to drain 10.5 litres however, if I lift the bag at this point, it should give me an extra 3 litres (this is based on BIAB absorbing 0.6 litres per kilo).
Years ago I created a spreadsheet to calculate exactly how much water I need for my grain bill. I have slightly modified this to take into account that the second sparge would culminate in me lifting the bag to drain the extra wort out (which in my original setup I couldn't do!)
Do the figures seem about right for what I am attempting?
Thanks
Post #2 made 13 years ago
Good Day PieOPah, if you don't have a kettle twice the volume of your brew volume, Then Yes!! Sparge.
The mash will be HIGH Gravity, of course. Use the remaining Full Volume BIAB water to Sparge.
Then drain the bag again, and add the sparge water to the Boiler as the boiler can take it....
This what we call MAXI-BIAB. Check out the Comentary... http://www.biabrewer.info/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=190
Good Luck with your Brew!!
The mash will be HIGH Gravity, of course. Use the remaining Full Volume BIAB water to Sparge.
Then drain the bag again, and add the sparge water to the Boiler as the boiler can take it....
This what we call MAXI-BIAB. Check out the Comentary... http://www.biabrewer.info/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=190
Good Luck with your Brew!!
Honest Officer, I swear to Drunk, I am Not God.
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From United States of America
-
Post #3 made 13 years ago
Hi there Pie and welcome to the forum 
,
We have 9.5 L collected then we add 8.5 L of which you can expect to get about 5.1 L (0.6 * 8.5 L). 9.5 + 5.1 = 14.6 L which then has to be boiled.
This would end up being a massively high gravity brew so I suspect something is wrong in the amounts.
Maybe let us know what OG you are chasing as well as how much wort you want to get into your fermentor and we can re-check the numbers.
All your thinking and logic looks great though Pie.
PP
,Later in the year, I am going to do a series of controlled side by side experiments on the efficiency (or lack of) effects of active sparging compared to full-volume BIAB (passive sparging). Preliminary results have shown no clear difference between the two processes so, at this point in time, I would encourage people not to sparge if they can avoid it. You are in a situation though where sparging is certainly necessary.PieOPah wrote:Since I was planning on sparging anyway
It will for sure! You are really just batch-sparging but using a bag as a manifold. If I had to return to batch-sparging, I would definitely replace my manifold with a bag as there are many advantages. Easy to clean, no deadspace and less wort retained by grain. I think quite a few batch-spargers have incorporated the bag now. So, your thinking is spot on here.PieOPah wrote:I was wondering if a mixture of the 2 methods would work.
Those figures look good to me in their logic (I'm assuming the 2 L addition is to get the mash temp towards mash out temp?) but something seems a bit askew in the amounts...PieOPah wrote:Do the figures seem about right for what I am attempting?
We have 9.5 L collected then we add 8.5 L of which you can expect to get about 5.1 L (0.6 * 8.5 L). 9.5 + 5.1 = 14.6 L which then has to be boiled.
This would end up being a massively high gravity brew so I suspect something is wrong in the amounts.
Maybe let us know what OG you are chasing as well as how much wort you want to get into your fermentor and we can re-check the numbers.
All your thinking and logic looks great though Pie.
PP
Last edited by PistolPatch on 06 Sep 2012, 19:10, edited 2 times in total.
If you have found the above or anything else of value on BIABrewer.info, consider supporting us by getting some BIPs!
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From Australia
-
Post #4 made 13 years ago
After collecting the first 9.5L then adding a further 8.5L, why would I only get 5.1? At this point, the grain would already be saturated (I wouldn't lift the bag on the first run off).PistolPatch wrote:
We have 9.5 L collected then we add 8.5 L of which you can expect to get about 5.1 L (0.6 * 8.5 L). 9.5 + 5.1 = 14.6 L which then has to be boiled.
To be quite honest, I can't remember why I add the extra 2 litres other than a calculator I wrote several years back had this addition. I think it was more to do with a certain amount of water for the initial mash was more efficient and the top up was to give the first runnings the right amount so that the second mash gave the correct amount (50% of boil volume).PistolPatch wrote:
(I'm assuming the 2 L addition is to get the mash temp towards mash out temp?)
My Mash Tun has a digital thermostat so if I just needed to raise the temperature for a mash out then I could just turn this up the required amount.
When I get home, I'll post my calculator so you can see how I arrived at my figures.
Thanks for the info so far. I didn't realise quite how much I had forgotten about brewing :-)
Last edited by PieOPah on 06 Sep 2012, 21:20, edited 2 times in total.
Post #5 made 13 years ago
Yep, I buggered up there Pie. I did a reverse calc. Should have been 1/0.6*8.5. Good on me 
. But...
... it still doesn't make that much of a diff. Still need the answers to my two prior questions (OG and wort into fermentor requirements) to make any headway here.
Once I have these, I'll look up an old batch-sparging guide I wrote about seven years ago that covered all this. Think I got most of it right at the time but re-visiting something I wrote that long ago sounds potentially very embarrassing.
. But...... it still doesn't make that much of a diff. Still need the answers to my two prior questions (OG and wort into fermentor requirements) to make any headway here.
Once I have these, I'll look up an old batch-sparging guide I wrote about seven years ago that covered all this. Think I got most of it right at the time but re-visiting something I wrote that long ago sounds potentially very embarrassing.
If you have found the above or anything else of value on BIABrewer.info, consider supporting us by getting some BIPs!
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From Australia
-
Post #6 made 13 years ago
I'm shooting for around 1.055 OG (this is assuming I have a 75% efficiency - I need to tweak figures as I brew and work out exactly what I am getting!)
I'd like to get a Final Volume of about 20 Litres for the fermenter.
I'd like to get a Final Volume of about 20 Litres for the fermenter.
Post #7 made 13 years ago
Okay, this is the calculator that I wrote. It was so long ago that I can't remember where I got all of the figures and I have recently adjusted it for the BIAB/Batch Sparge hybrid (Maxi-BIAB??)
I can't remember what the 'variables' tab was really for, but it isn't used in any of the calculations.
EDIT: Deleted file as I have since updated
I can't remember what the 'variables' tab was really for, but it isn't used in any of the calculations.
EDIT: Deleted file as I have since updated
Last edited by PieOPah on 07 Sep 2012, 20:15, edited 1 time in total.
Post #8 made 13 years ago
Looks like you've put some nice work into that spreadsheet Pie 
,
On your sheet, it is saying to use a total of 30.77 L (12.5 + 7.88 + 10.38) however the total of the water additions in post #1 seems to be only 25 L (14.5 + 2 + 8.5) which is not enough water. So, I'd do what your sheet says.
However...
I'd actually increase the total water needed from 30.77 L to about 33.5 L. I think your evaporation is a bit light on (unless your pot is very tall and thin). Maybe in your spreadsheet, change your evaporation from a percentage to a fixed amount of litres per hour as this is a more accurate way to go. (If your pot is 40 cm in diameter, you'd probably be looking at around 5.4 L per hour evaporation though other factors affect this besides diameter.)
PP
,On your sheet, it is saying to use a total of 30.77 L (12.5 + 7.88 + 10.38) however the total of the water additions in post #1 seems to be only 25 L (14.5 + 2 + 8.5) which is not enough water. So, I'd do what your sheet says.
However...
I'd actually increase the total water needed from 30.77 L to about 33.5 L. I think your evaporation is a bit light on (unless your pot is very tall and thin). Maybe in your spreadsheet, change your evaporation from a percentage to a fixed amount of litres per hour as this is a more accurate way to go. (If your pot is 40 cm in diameter, you'd probably be looking at around 5.4 L per hour evaporation though other factors affect this besides diameter.)
PP
If you have found the above or anything else of value on BIABrewer.info, consider supporting us by getting some BIPs!
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From Australia
-
Post #9 made 13 years ago
Thank you. I spent a lot of time on it back in the days when I was going through redundancy so had no 'real' work to do :-)PistolPatch wrote:Looks like you've put some nice work into that spreadsheet Pie
I think I have made a couple of modifications since my initial calculations (based on various advise from here and another forum)PistolPatch wrote: On your sheet, it is saying to use a total of 30.77 L (12.5 + 7.88 + 10.38) however the total of the water additions in post #1 seems to be only 25 L (14.5 + 2 + 8.5) which is not enough water. So, I'd do what your sheet says.
Looking at the calculator on this site, I did realise that my evaporation was wrong (the 10% was something I must have picked up way back when as an approximation). I'm currently looking into how I can incorporate the per hour figure based on the boiler size (I have made a start on this in my latest version).PistolPatch wrote: I'd actually increase the total water needed from 30.77 L to about 33.5 L. I think your evaporation is a bit light on (unless your pot is very tall and thin). Maybe in your spreadsheet, change your evaporation from a percentage to a fixed amount of litres per hour as this is a more accurate way to go. (If your pot is 40 cm in diameter, you'd probably be looking at around 5.4 L per hour evaporation though other factors affect this besides diameter.)
Thank you for all your help, it is greatly appreciated :-)
EDIT: Based on all the various calculations in my spreadsheet, I just can't work out how to get the fixed evaporation rate in there. Instead, I have increased this from 10% to 25%
EDIT: Worked it out :-) Rather than remove my percentage (which was causing the problems in the calculation), I have set this to 0% (and hidden the row). I have then added the fixed amount (calculated based on the boil time) and added this to the Boil Volume amount.
This gives me the following figures (based on 19.89 litres going into the FV)
Mash In Requirement 17.50 Litres
Top Up Volume 5.98 Litres
First Runnings 10.50 Litres
Sparge Requirement 13.48 Litres
Second Runnings 22.46 Litres
Total Sweet Wort Collected 32.96 Litres
Total Water Used 36.96 Litres
This puts me about 0.5L behind your suggested amount which I think means my calculator is pretty much spot on now :-)
I will need to put in the correct figures for my boiler size, but I now have something I can work with :-)
Again, thank you for your help with this.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by PieOPah on 07 Sep 2012, 18:18, edited 3 times in total.
Post #10 made 13 years ago
Good on you Pie! Those figures look great and should get you well within the ball park 
.
If you get a chance, please let us know how it goes.
PP
.If you get a chance, please let us know how it goes.
PP
If you have found the above or anything else of value on BIABrewer.info, consider supporting us by getting some BIPs!
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From Australia
-
Post #11 made 13 years ago
I intend to fully document my brew. It is looking less likely that I'll be able to do it this weekend - need to take my car in for an MOT so won't have the chance to get to my LHB to pick up some grain.
I should be free the following weekend though so intend to get everything I need.
The change in figures probably attributes to have such a low efficiency when I was originally brewing :-) Let's see if I can take the leap from about 60% to over 75% :-)
I should be free the following weekend though so intend to get everything I need.
The change in figures probably attributes to have such a low efficiency when I was originally brewing :-) Let's see if I can take the leap from about 60% to over 75% :-)
Post #12 made 13 years ago
[Note: I've been assuming a 90 minute boil Pie but you may have been working on 60. Sorry, I should have mentioned that in my last post when I referred to increasing the total water needed from 30.77 L to about 33.5 L.]
In the beta BIABacus, with your figures, including kettle trub and 'guessing' an evap rate of 5.38 L'hr, I am getting the following estimates if you want an OG of 1.055 and 20 litres into the fermentor...
5140 grams of grain needed for a 60 minute boil resulting in Efficiency into Kettle (EIK) of 81.9% and Efficiency into Fermentor (EIF) of 72.2% (assuming 2.68 L of kettle trub). Total Water Needed is 31.08 L.
If you go a 90 minute boil, more water is needed to cover the extra evaporation. This means the grain gets washed better and the estimated figures change to...
5042 grams resulting in an EIK of 83.5% and an EIF of 73.7% (assuming 2.68 L of kettle trub). Total Water Needed is 33.6 L.
Efficiency figures get very confusing as software may use EIK or EIF but they never make it clear which one. This means brewers are often talking at cross ends. For example, 60% Efficiency into Fermentor in a normal gravity brew with no kettle trub management and lots of hops is fine. A 60% Efficiency into Kettle on that same brew though would be extremely low.
So, your prior efficiencies of 60% would have been EIF ones and are perfectly fine especially considering you were using a traditional mash tun. Using a bag in a tun, on a normal gravity brew, will immediately increase both your EIK and EIF by about 5% due to the fact that more wort can be drained from a bag.
Hopefully now you are feeling better about your past 'efficiency'.
PP
In the beta BIABacus, with your figures, including kettle trub and 'guessing' an evap rate of 5.38 L'hr, I am getting the following estimates if you want an OG of 1.055 and 20 litres into the fermentor...
5140 grams of grain needed for a 60 minute boil resulting in Efficiency into Kettle (EIK) of 81.9% and Efficiency into Fermentor (EIF) of 72.2% (assuming 2.68 L of kettle trub). Total Water Needed is 31.08 L.
If you go a 90 minute boil, more water is needed to cover the extra evaporation. This means the grain gets washed better and the estimated figures change to...
5042 grams resulting in an EIK of 83.5% and an EIF of 73.7% (assuming 2.68 L of kettle trub). Total Water Needed is 33.6 L.
Efficiency figures get very confusing as software may use EIK or EIF but they never make it clear which one
. This means brewers are often talking at cross ends. For example, 60% Efficiency into Fermentor in a normal gravity brew with no kettle trub management and lots of hops is fine. A 60% Efficiency into Kettle on that same brew though would be extremely low.So, your prior efficiencies of 60% would have been EIF ones and are perfectly fine especially considering you were using a traditional mash tun. Using a bag in a tun, on a normal gravity brew, will immediately increase both your EIK and EIF by about 5% due to the fact that more wort can be drained from a bag.
Hopefully now you are feeling better about your past 'efficiency'.
PP
Last edited by PistolPatch on 07 Sep 2012, 21:15, edited 2 times in total.
If you have found the above or anything else of value on BIABrewer.info, consider supporting us by getting some BIPs!
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From Australia
-
Post #13 made 13 years ago
I used Beer Tools Pro to work out my efficiency - although to be honest I have no idea whether this was EIK or EIF.
IIRC, I would plug in my OG when putting it into the fermenter and that would give me my 60% (give or take)
I would have thought that the kettle would have a lower gravity and as the water evaporated, this would increase therefore the gravity of the FV would show a higher efficiency that the kettle gravity?
Despite the calculator, I am not really hung up on figures. For me it is all about the taste of the brew :-)
I just need to know how much water I need to use. Obviously the more efficient, the cheaper the brew, but it works out so cheap that even if I had to double the amount of grain, it would still be cheaper than store bought crap :-D
I tend to go for a ballpark gravity and go from there. I can always add a little water if I need to - or boil it a little longer!
IIRC, I would plug in my OG when putting it into the fermenter and that would give me my 60% (give or take)
I would have thought that the kettle would have a lower gravity and as the water evaporated, this would increase therefore the gravity of the FV would show a higher efficiency that the kettle gravity?
Despite the calculator, I am not really hung up on figures. For me it is all about the taste of the brew :-)
I just need to know how much water I need to use. Obviously the more efficient, the cheaper the brew, but it works out so cheap that even if I had to double the amount of grain, it would still be cheaper than store bought crap :-D
I tend to go for a ballpark gravity and go from there. I can always add a little water if I need to - or boil it a little longer!
Post #14 made 13 years ago
Your attitude on numbers above is great to see . No one should get overly worried about them but they can be very handy tools when used correctly. We've used them correctly in this thread - as a tool to get us in the ballpark of what we want to achieve.
Our estimates however will probably differ a bit from the actuals - see here.
EIK versus EOBE versus EIF
If you asked me for a cup of coffee with two sugars and I handed you a half cup of coffee with two sugars, you would just fill the cup up to enjoy your normal brew. Whether you drank the half cup with two sugars or the full cup with two sugars, there were still only two sugars you consumed
.
That's what efficiency is all about.
With Efficiency into Kettle (EIK) we have a less sugary solution but lots of it. (There's still only two teaspoons of sugar there though.)
With End of Boil Efficeincy (EOPBE) we have a much sweeter solution but there is less volume. (There's still only two teaspoons of sugar there though.) So, EIK basically equals EOBE.
With Efficiency into Fermentor (EIF) however, we've "spilt" a bit. In other words, we leave liquid in the kettle. There is no difference in the gravity of what is in the kettle at the end of the boil and that which goes into the fermentor. All we have lost is volume but that lost volume, of course, also holds some of our sugar.
So, any efficiency measurement is a combination of gravity and volume.
The difference between EIK (or EOBE) and EIF is simply a reflection of your kettle trub management.
The best way for brewers to communicate.
Current brewing language and terminology is very poor and causes much confusion. I live in Australia and the term, "efficiency" can mean two or three different things to any one brewer. This same problem occurs world-wide thanks to existing brewing software.
It is the most interesting 'elephant in the room' problem I have ever come across in my life - it still amazes me.
Hopefully what I have written above shows that words like "efficiency" are fairly meaningless unless they are accompanied with "into the kettle" or "at the end of boil" or "into the fermentor". The same problem holds for the term "batch size". Is this volume at the end of the boil, volume into fermentor or volume into packaging? Well, it could mean any of those three. It's a term with almost no value.
Some Good News
One of the many major aims of this site was to create an easy common language for brewers. I've been rostered on this weekend to see if we can start to get this new terminology and BIABacus out there now so no more posts from me for a few days. Wish us luck!
PP
. No one should get overly worried about them but they can be very handy tools when used correctly. We've used them correctly in this thread - as a tool to get us in the ballpark of what we want to achieve.Our estimates however will probably differ a bit from the actuals - see here.
EIK versus EOBE versus EIF
Any efficiency measurement is really a measurement of how much 'sugar' you have on hand at any one time.I would have thought that the kettle would have a lower gravity and as the water evaporated, this would increase therefore the gravity of the FV would show a higher efficiency that the kettle gravity?
If you asked me for a cup of coffee with two sugars and I handed you a half cup of coffee with two sugars, you would just fill the cup up to enjoy your normal brew. Whether you drank the half cup with two sugars or the full cup with two sugars, there were still only two sugars you consumed
.That's what efficiency is all about.
With Efficiency into Kettle (EIK) we have a less sugary solution but lots of it. (There's still only two teaspoons of sugar there though.)
With End of Boil Efficeincy (EOPBE) we have a much sweeter solution but there is less volume. (There's still only two teaspoons of sugar there though.) So, EIK basically equals EOBE.
With Efficiency into Fermentor (EIF) however, we've "spilt" a bit. In other words, we leave liquid in the kettle. There is no difference in the gravity of what is in the kettle at the end of the boil and that which goes into the fermentor. All we have lost is volume but that lost volume, of course, also holds some of our sugar.
So, any efficiency measurement is a combination of gravity and volume.
The difference between EIK (or EOBE) and EIF is simply a reflection of your kettle trub management.
The best way for brewers to communicate.
Current brewing language and terminology is very poor and causes much confusion. I live in Australia and the term, "efficiency" can mean two or three different things to any one brewer. This same problem occurs world-wide thanks to existing brewing software.
It is the most interesting 'elephant in the room' problem I have ever come across in my life - it still amazes me.
Hopefully what I have written above shows that words like "efficiency" are fairly meaningless unless they are accompanied with "into the kettle" or "at the end of boil" or "into the fermentor". The same problem holds for the term "batch size". Is this volume at the end of the boil, volume into fermentor or volume into packaging? Well, it could mean any of those three. It's a term with almost no value.
Some Good News
One of the many major aims of this site was to create an easy common language for brewers. I've been rostered on this weekend to see if we can start to get this new terminology and BIABacus out there now so no more posts from me for a few days. Wish us luck!
PP
Last edited by PistolPatch on 07 Sep 2012, 23:15, edited 2 times in total.
If you have found the above or anything else of value on BIABrewer.info, consider supporting us by getting some BIPs!
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From Australia
-
Post #15 made 13 years ago
That's the ticket! Not being worried about figures just taste!PieOPah wrote:
Despite the calculator, I am not really hung up on figures. For me it is all about the taste of the brew :-)
I just need to know how much water I need to use. Obviously the more efficient, the cheaper the brew, but it works out so cheap that even if I had to double the amount of grain, it would still be cheaper than store bought crap :-D
I tend to go for a ballpark gravity and go from there. I can always add a little water if I need to - or boil it a little longer!
I have measured gravity a few times for the record books but that is a rarity. But I have to admit that if you really love a beer and you want to replicate it properly than good record keeping and measurements are the way to go! The problem with that is that even if you seem to hit all the numbers the beers vary a little most every time. Oh what a lovely problem to have! 
Last edited by BobBrews on 07 Sep 2012, 23:20, edited 2 times in total.
tap 1 Raspberry wine
tap 2 Bourbon Barrel Porter
tap 3 Czech Pilsner
tap 4 Triple IPA 11% ABV
Pipeline: Mulled Cider 10% ABV
http://cheesestradamus.com/ Brewers challenge!
tap 2 Bourbon Barrel Porter
tap 3 Czech Pilsner
tap 4 Triple IPA 11% ABV
Pipeline: Mulled Cider 10% ABV
http://cheesestradamus.com/ Brewers challenge!
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From United States of America
-
Post #16 made 13 years ago
I think I will always measure gravity (I've recently ordered a refractometer as I have lost my old one - ex-wife most likely threw it away!). I think it's always good to know what strength I am drinking!
From all the different beers I have brewed, I don't think that I have yet made the same one twice. I prefer to try something new. Saying that, I am planning on trying to replicate one of my old stout recipes in the near future as that was really good!
From all the different beers I have brewed, I don't think that I have yet made the same one twice. I prefer to try something new. Saying that, I am planning on trying to replicate one of my old stout recipes in the near future as that was really good!
