Display posts from previous
Sort by

Lautering Loss vs Liquor to Grain Ratio

Post #1 made 13 years ago
by stux
I was curious about the shape of Lauter Loss curve as Liquor to Grain ratio changes...

Basically, the Lauter Loss is the largest component of BIAB Efficiency. Your Into Boil Efficiency is

= 100% - Lauter Loss% - Conversion Loss%

Conversion Loss has been set to 1% for this data, ie a Conversion Efficiency of 99%

For Full Volume BIAB the Liquor to Grain Ratio is controlled by the final volume you require, your evaporation and effciency... which is... complicated. But as you increase the OG you require at the end, your L:G in the mash will go down... and as it goes down, your Mash Efficiency (aka Into Boil Efficiency) will decrease due to increased loss of extract to absorption.

How much, and how quickly your losses mount up, will depend on your True Absorption for your system.

Traditional mash tuns have a true absorption of about 1.56L/KG of grain. BIAB seems to have between 1.2L and 1.4L depending on how vigourously you squeeze your bag.

So, the Lauter Loss is graphed... you can see that as the Liquor to Grain ratio decreases the lauter loss climbs very quickly.

Interestingly, traditional mashing uses a L:G ratio of about 3L/KG, and at 3, you can see you're just barely above 50% lauter efficiency.... combined with poor conversion efficiency because of not as fine milling and no agitation, any lower ratio and you would be going backwards!

Anyway, BIAB tends to be circa 5+ L/KG
Lauter Loss.png
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by stux on 17 May 2012, 14:51, edited 3 times in total.
Fermenting: -
Cubed: -
Stirplate: -
On Tap: NS Summer Ale III (WY1272), Landlord III (WY1469), Fighter's 70/- II (WY1272), Roast Porter (WY1028), Cider, Soda
Next: Munich Helles III

5/7/12

Post #3 made 13 years ago
by PistolPatch
In a rush atm stux but two quick questions...

1. What's the y axis label say? Even when I zoom in I can't read it unfortunately.

2. What was the little bug you found?

:peace:
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
by stux
PistolPatch wrote:In a rush atm stux but two quick questions...

1. What's the y axis label say? Even when I zoom in I can't read it unfortunately.
Sure? it zooms in quite a bit :)

Anyway, "Lauter Loss %"
2. What was the little bug you found?
Think I mentioned it to you, when grain has moisture in it, it means you're adding extra liquid to the mash when you add the grain, needs to be accounted for

makes more of a difference than you'd think :)
Last edited by stux on 17 May 2012, 21:50, edited 3 times in total.
Fermenting: -
Cubed: -
Stirplate: -
On Tap: NS Summer Ale III (WY1272), Landlord III (WY1469), Fighter's 70/- II (WY1272), Roast Porter (WY1028), Cider, Soda
Next: Munich Helles III

5/7/12

Post #5 made 13 years ago
by PistolPatch
I'm using Chrome Stux and the best I am seeing when I zoom in is this...
StuxCapture.JPG
As for the moisture content, yep, I've got that one under control ;).

Wish I had more time atm as I'm sure your first post has all the info I need but on a quick perusal I can't see the question you are asking or posing. Is there any chance you can summarise your first post for me?

That would be tops :thumbs:,
PP
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by PistolPatch on 17 May 2012, 22:30, edited 3 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 #6 made 13 years ago
by smyrnaquince
Zooms OK in Firefox.

Does the Lauter Loss for traditional brewing assume a sparge, or is this just what you get when you drain the wort off of the grains?

I am confused. A higher absorption means that more liquid is left behind in the grains. Why does that lead to lower lautering losses? Shouldn't the losses be higher because more is being left behind? Why does lauter efficiency increase with increased grain absorption?

Thanks. And thank you for your great responses over on homebrewtalk.com!

Post #7 made 13 years ago
by stux
The lauter loss %ge is always higher when absorption is higher, but as the liquor to grain ratio increases the loss decreases across the board
Fermenting: -
Cubed: -
Stirplate: -
On Tap: NS Summer Ale III (WY1272), Landlord III (WY1469), Fighter's 70/- II (WY1272), Roast Porter (WY1028), Cider, Soda
Next: Munich Helles III

5/7/12

Post #8 made 13 years ago
by stux
PP,

I'm not asking a question, I'm answering one :)

This graph shows the impact of higher OGs on efficiency
Fermenting: -
Cubed: -
Stirplate: -
On Tap: NS Summer Ale III (WY1272), Landlord III (WY1469), Fighter's 70/- II (WY1272), Roast Porter (WY1028), Cider, Soda
Next: Munich Helles III

5/7/12

Post #9 made 13 years ago
by smyrnaquince
stux wrote:The lauter loss %ge is always higher when absorption is higher, but as the liquor to grain ratio increases the loss decreases across the board
Sorry, Stux, I got flipped a bit when I was looking at the graph. Now I think I understand. The absorption rate for traditional mash tuns is higher than for BIAB. At any given liquor/grain ratio, the lautering loss is also higher for traditional mash tuns than for BIAB. The difference in lauter losses between the two methods increases as the liquor/grain ratio goes down, which corresponds to the OG going up.

So, your chart shows that BIAB lautering losses are smaller than the lautering losses for traditional mash tuns at any given liquor/grain ratio (equivalently, at any given OG). And, your chart shows that the BIAB lautering losses are significantly smaller than traditional mash tun lautering losses at lower liquor/grain ratios, meaning that the BIAB lautering losses are significantly smaller than traditional mash tun lautering losses at higher OGs.

I thought I understood that BIAB has an overall lower extraction efficiency than traditional lauter tuns at higher OGs, but your chart seems to say the exact opposite, i.e., that traditional mash tun lauter loss would be higher so overall extraction efficiency would be lower at higher OGs. Is this right?
Last edited by smyrnaquince on 18 May 2012, 09:39, edited 3 times in total.

Post #10 made 13 years ago
by datamichael
smyrnaquince wrote:Zooms OK in Firefox.

Does the Lauter Loss for traditional brewing assume a sparge, or is this just what you get when you drain the wort off of the grains?

I am confused. A higher absorption means that more liquid is left behind in the grains. Why does that lead to lower lautering losses? Shouldn't the losses be higher because more is being left behind? Why does lauter efficiency increase with increased grain absorption?

Thanks. And thank you for your great responses over on homebrewtalk.com!
Can you post a link to the thread over at homebrewtalk? Thanks!
Michael
Last edited by datamichael on 18 May 2012, 22:59, edited 3 times in total.

Post #12 made 13 years ago
by PistolPatch
smyrnaquince wrote:I thought I understood that BIAB has an overall lower extraction efficiency than traditional lauter tuns at higher OGs, but your chart seems to say the exact opposite...
Yes, I've seen that written a few times. The people who have theorised that (and it is only a theory, assume that once you get past a certain point, there will be advantages in multiple sparges.

There haven't been any experiments done that I have seen. Certainly not enough. I'll probably do one here on either my next double batch or the one after that. I don't brew high gravity beers so I'll just side by side two high OG versions of a robust recipe I have, sparge one (maybe twice if I'm not feeling lazy, and then dilute both brews down to the normal OG.

Doing the above won't be a good test though of comparing BIAB to a traditinal brew because, if a sparge or two is an advantage, a sparged BIAB will do better because of the following...

The efficiency of full-volume BIAB is actually really good. I think this is because the bag, when pulled, basically becomes a sphere. This is the perfect shape for an excellent lauter as the "grain bed" has a massive surface area. This means the liquid has less distance to travel to the 'outside'. In a traditional system, the grain at the top gets rinsed well but not the grain at the bottom. Also in BIAB you get no channelling so all of that full volume of water is getting the best possible contact with the grain. And, of course, you get less liquor retained by the grain because of this 'short' distance to the 'outside'. Finally there is no deadspace. (Traditional mash tuns come in all sorts of shapes and some of these also have a short distance to the outside however there are not as many outside escape points, manifold holes, as you get with BIAB.)

Because of the above, I'd be surprised if a traditional batch sparge would do much better, if any better, than full-volume BIAB on high gravity. But I really don't know. I think more real life experiments, preferably side by side ones, are the key.

;)
PP
Last edited by PistolPatch on 22 May 2012, 22:31, edited 3 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 Reply

Return to “Measurement, Mathematics and Records”

Brewers Online

Brewers browsing this forum: No members and 26 guests

cron