Hi All,
I'm looking for some clarity on a hop rod rye clone I've just brewed.
Normally when I brew using the BIABacus I always hit the expected OG perfectly.
This time I was expecting 1.072 and hit 1.065 and the only ingredient that was new to me in the recipe was flaked rye.
The total grain bill was 5844g and 490g was flaked rye.
So my question what should I have adjusted the FGDB column to for the rye?
Here's the Holland and Barrett link for the flaked rye:
http://www.hollandandbarrett.com/pages/ ... p?pid=2847
Sorry if this is covered elsewhere but any help appreciated
Andy.
Post #2 made 10 years ago
do you usually hit your OG when making higher volume beers like this? Im pretty much spot on when brewing beers up to about 1.055 but if I aim for any higher than that I usually fall short. Ive always found that my efficiency drops away the higher the OG and I have to compensate by adding more grain than the programs tell me I should be adding. I also find that a longer mash time helps. I leave it up to 4 or 5 hours mashing when I am making a high gravity beer (not that I make them very often these days)
Post #3 made 10 years ago
Thanks for the reply, normally I do hit the OG no problem, which is why I think it's something to do with the Rye flakes.
I did a 70m mash ... maybe that's not enough for the rye flakes?
The packet has this listed: Carbohydrates 77.5g /100g of which sugars 1.0g
Does that help? It's odd it missed the OG - first time ever TBH.
Thanks to all for their time
Andy.
I did a 70m mash ... maybe that's not enough for the rye flakes?
The packet has this listed: Carbohydrates 77.5g /100g of which sugars 1.0g
Does that help? It's odd it missed the OG - first time ever TBH.
Thanks to all for their time
Andy.
Post #4 made 10 years ago
Aces, the BIABacus auto-adjusts the efficiency according to the OG so that won't be the issue or aortey. (I'll get you onto the BIABacus one of these days - lol!)
Few things to say on this....
1. Firstly, the mantra, you can't trust the numbers form one brew. (FOr example, this could be a simple grain mis-measurement that in hindsight there is no way to track.
2. We don't know from the above if you had your expected volume. For example certain conditions may have meant your evaporation was much lower than expected. THis would mean you'd end uyp with more volume at lower gravity.
3. We don't know if you took one volume and gravity reading or more. A dingle reading can be pretty dodge.
4. The flaked rye won't be the problem.
5. What may be part of the problem is only doing a 70 minute mash. Some grains (and as you say rye might be one of them) do benefit a lot from the extra time. Pretty much all grain bills will give you a worthwhile increase in gravity between 60 and 90 minutes.
Try and come up with a system where you weigh your grains individually and then weigh the whole grain bill as a double -check.
Anyway, for now, I wouldn't give it another moment's thought. I still get the occasional brew with wild readings. Always they are ones where I haven't bothered double-checking the input weights.
PP
Few things to say on this....
1. Firstly, the mantra, you can't trust the numbers form one brew. (FOr example, this could be a simple grain mis-measurement that in hindsight there is no way to track.
2. We don't know from the above if you had your expected volume. For example certain conditions may have meant your evaporation was much lower than expected. THis would mean you'd end uyp with more volume at lower gravity.
3. We don't know if you took one volume and gravity reading or more. A dingle reading can be pretty dodge.
4. The flaked rye won't be the problem.
5. What may be part of the problem is only doing a 70 minute mash. Some grains (and as you say rye might be one of them) do benefit a lot from the extra time. Pretty much all grain bills will give you a worthwhile increase in gravity between 60 and 90 minutes.
Try and come up with a system where you weigh your grains individually and then weigh the whole grain bill as a double -check.
Anyway, for now, I wouldn't give it another moment's thought. I still get the occasional brew with wild readings. Always they are ones where I haven't bothered double-checking the input weights.
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 #5 made 10 years ago
Hi PP,
Thanks for the reply, there's a lot of sound logic in there!.
- The evaporation rate was fine ended up with just shy of 16L which was good.
- With regard the reading with a refractometer, when the wort was in the FV, prior to pitching. (I did ensure this was calibrated with water)
Now you've clarified the rye won't be n issue, I think you are right about it being a weights issue. The double check is a good idea.
Thanks again
Andy
PS. Aces, the BIABacus is quite poss. the best bit of 'kit' you'll ever own!
Thanks for the reply, there's a lot of sound logic in there!.
- The evaporation rate was fine ended up with just shy of 16L which was good.
- With regard the reading with a refractometer, when the wort was in the FV, prior to pitching. (I did ensure this was calibrated with water)
Now you've clarified the rye won't be n issue, I think you are right about it being a weights issue. The double check is a good idea.
Thanks again
Andy
PS. Aces, the BIABacus is quite poss. the best bit of 'kit' you'll ever own!
