only got 62% efficiency tonight....

hoboscratch · Post by **hoboscratch** » Sat Mar 31, 2012 8:47 pm

So I brewed a Sculpin IPA clone tonight, here's the recipe:

Ingredients
Amt Name Type # %/IBU
13 lbs 4.0 oz Pale Malt (2 Row) US (2.0 SRM) Grain 1 82.8 %
1 lbs 4.0 oz Caramel/Crystal Malt - 10L (10.0 SRM) Grain 2 7.8 %
1 lbs Cara-Pils/Dextrine (2.0 SRM) Grain 3 6.3 %
8.0 oz Caravienne Malt (22.0 SRM) Grain 4 3.1 %
0.95 oz Columbus (Tomahawk) [14.60 %] - Boil 60.0 min Hop 5 37.5 IBUs
0.32 oz Magnum [13.10 %] - Boil 60.0 min Hop 6 11.2 IBUs
0.32 oz Northern Brewer [9.40 %] - Boil 60.0 min Hop 7 8.0 IBUs
0.32 oz Centennial [8.70 %] - Boil 30.0 min Hop 8 5.7 IBUs
0.32 oz Crystal [2.00 %] - Boil 30.0 min Hop 9 1.3 IBUs
0.32 oz Simcoe [12.20 %] - Boil 30.0 min Hop 10 8.0 IBUs
0.28 tsp Irish Moss (Boil 10.0 mins) Fining 11 -
1.00 oz Amarillo Gold [8.50 %] - Boil 0.0 min Hop 12 0.0 IBUs
1.0 pkg California Ale (White Labs #WLP001) [35.00 ml] Yeast 13 -
1.10 tsp Yeast Nutrient (Primary 3.0 days) Other 14 -
2.00 oz Amarillo Gold [8.50 %] - Dry Hop 7.0 Days Hop 15 0.0 IBUs
1.00 oz Simcoe [13.00 %] - Dry Hop 7.0 Days Hop 16 0.0 IBUs

Beer Profile

Est Original Gravity: 1.067
Estimated Alcohol by Vol: 7.0 %
Bitterness: 71.8 IBUs
Est Color: 6.2 SRM

I set my brewhouse efficiency to 70%, since that's pretty much what I seem to be at most of the time. I mashed in at 151 for 60 minutes. I skipped a mash out, recirculated, drained, and did a batch sparge. I had 2 sparges at 2 gallons each. The first came in a bit low, at 158. I held that for maybe 5 min while I recirculated, then drained. My second came in right at 170 or so. I held that for 10 min-ish, recirc'd, then drained. I hit my target volume and my OG came to 1.060. Its not uncommon for me to miss my target on a beer like this but to miss it by almost 10 percentage points bothers me. It changes the beer too much, imo.

I have experimented over the years to do different things to boost my efficiency. I've done mashouts, no mashouts, no sparges, single or multiple sparges, mashed for 60 min or 90 minutes, thin mashes, thick mashes, etc etc etc. I've never reliably gotten above 75% with my system. It is frustrating to me because I primarily use efficiency as a measurement to how successful my brewday was.

So, one thing that could be an issue is my non-adjustable malt mill. It's factory set at .045". I've read on forums that people use spacings as tight as .032" or tighter. Maybe that's part of my issue. I'm not sure, I just know its a point of frustration almost every brew day...

bf514921 · Post by **bf514921** » Sat Mar 31, 2012 9:20 pm

well. maybe a simple thing to try if you haven already, double mill your grain. Running it through twice might give you a better crush to work with. other easy question, when is the last time you calibrated your thermometers? i think they grain crush would definatly help, think i run mine at .39 thou.

prieff · Post by **prieff** » Sat Mar 31, 2012 9:47 pm

I am probably not qualified at all to speak to this...

I have done 150+ extract beers but only about 10 all grain.

I think I understood right that you said you had 1.060 after the sparge? 15# of grain for how big of a batch? If you had 1.060 preboil, I would say the target OG of 1.067 on the recipe was pretty close post boil. Did you measure again after the boil?

I brewed a double batch of NB Chinook IPA sunday. Memory serves me that it was 22# of grain with target on the recipe being 1.053. After sparge I had 13.5 gallons of 1.052 and post boil was 1.064 at 11 gallons (some dead space and trub. I will have to look at my notes but I think I got that right. I have my mill set at .028 roughly. I condition my grain the night before with a spritz bottle and a handful or 2 of rice hulls (I've had slow lauter and channeling before). It seems like I always do better than the recipe calls for gravity wise. I've always done NB kits though and never bothered to much with figuring out efficiency. So far I figured they say 70% and my OG has always been better than the recipe target so I didn't worry about it. My calc comes in at around 85+% for my brew. It is important to note that boiling off a gallon or two makes a big difference.

Maybe my math is all wrong, but 15# for a 5 gallon batch would be 6.5 gallons preboil and if you had 1.060 it would be about 70% preboil and 5.5 gallons post boil would be closer to 1.070?

Someone correct me? At work and don't have my notes and doing some of this from memory but isn't efficiency measured by wort collected post boil volume and gravity and amount of grain used?

I think it sounds like you did much better than 62%. Has to be a math or method error in there somewhere. Could be on my part for sure. Crush a bit more and get a bit more? I'd like to try your beer

Cheers! Cheer up...I think you did fine.

Paul

hoboscratch · Post by **hoboscratch** » Sun Apr 01, 2012 8:10 am

That 1.060 was post boil, calibrated for temperature.

I have recently calibrated my thermometers, but not within the last 6-8 months, so I'll make sure they're still spot on. One thing I have not done in a while is calibrate my hydrometer. I'll do that too. And I've tried the double crush in the past, and if I recall I think that it did get me a few more points here and there...

Maybe it is just a matter of dialing in Beersmith. I have a copy of Beer Tools Pro as well, on my small laptop without a mouse though, the interface of Beersmith is more accommodating. I'll enter my recipe in it as well and see if anything comes out any different.

I'm not sure of the math, but I set my batch size to 6 gal. I did adjust my grain bill for that as well. I had a pre-boil volume of around 7.5 gal. After boiling for an hour, with shrinkage, along with trub loss, I ended up just a hair over 6 gal.

bf514921 · Post by **bf514921** » Sun Apr 01, 2012 8:58 am

another quick thought, maybe its not a single thing?
maybe a grain crush gets you 3 points, hydrometer calibration gets you another 3 points? or maybe all your homebrew is bad ans should be sent to me for proper disposal

hoboscratch · Post by **hoboscratch** » Sun Apr 01, 2012 11:21 am

Haha nope I better just dump it! Down my throat...1

On Apr 1, 2012, at 9:58 AM, bf514921 <brew-tech@crbeernuts.org (brew-tech@crbeernuts.org)> wrote:

another quick thought, maybe its not a single thing?
maybe a grain crush gets you 3 points, hydrometer calibration gets you another 3 points? or maybe all your homebrew is bad ans should be sent to me for proper disposal

Brandon Franklin

Post generated using Mail2Forum (http://www.mail2forum.com)

jjbuck · Post by **jjbuck** » Sun Apr 01, 2012 12:48 pm

I am maybe not doing this right but I chose the lower end of ppg s for your grain bill and used your 70% efficiency and got an OG of 1063-64. I always mash (single infusion) less than 150 and always for 90 minutes. Could your strike water have been higher than you thought? Just spitballin' some possibilities (that you have probably already eliminated). I've read that a second pass through the malt mill, even without a spacing change can improve the grist. Lastly, if nothing else works, you might try a very slow (30-60 min) fly sparge with 168-170 water.
My mash efficiency always seems to be 75-80%. I hope your beer turns out well, good luck.

hoboscratch wrote:So I brewed a Sculpin IPA clone tonight, here's the recipe:
Ingredients
Amt Name Type # %/IBU
13 lbs 4.0 oz Pale Malt (2 Row) US (2.0 SRM) Grain 1 82.8 %
1 lbs 4.0 oz Caramel/Crystal Malt - 10L (10.0 SRM) Grain 2 7.8 %
1 lbs Cara-Pils/Dextrine (2.0 SRM) Grain 3 6.3 %
8.0 oz Caravienne Malt (22.0 SRM) Grain 4 3.1 %
0.95 oz Columbus (Tomahawk) [14.60 %] - Boil 60.0 min Hop 5 37.5 IBUs
0.32 oz Magnum [13.10 %] - Boil 60.0 min Hop 6 11.2 IBUs
0.32 oz Northern Brewer [9.40 %] - Boil 60.0 min Hop 7 8.0 IBUs
0.32 oz Centennial [8.70 %] - Boil 30.0 min Hop 8 5.7 IBUs
0.32 oz Crystal [2.00 %] - Boil 30.0 min Hop 9 1.3 IBUs
0.32 oz Simcoe [12.20 %] - Boil 30.0 min Hop 10 8.0 IBUs
0.28 tsp Irish Moss (Boil 10.0 mins) Fining 11 -
1.00 oz Amarillo Gold [8.50 %] - Boil 0.0 min Hop 12 0.0 IBUs
1.0 pkg California Ale (White Labs #WLP001) [35.00 ml] Yeast 13 -
1.10 tsp Yeast Nutrient (Primary 3.0 days) Other 14 -
2.00 oz Amarillo Gold [8.50 %] - Dry Hop 7.0 Days Hop 15 0.0 IBUs
1.00 oz Simcoe [13.00 %] - Dry Hop 7.0 Days Hop 16 0.0 IBUs

Beer Profile

Est Original Gravity: 1.067
Estimated Alcohol by Vol: 7.0 %
Bitterness: 71.8 IBUs
Est Color: 6.2 SRM

I set my brewhouse efficiency to 70%, since that's pretty much what I seem to be at most of the time. I mashed in at 151 for 60 minutes. I skipped a mash out, recirculated, drained, and did a batch sparge. I had 2 sparges at 2 gallons each. The first came in a bit low, at 158. I held that for maybe 5 min while I recirculated, then drained. My second came in right at 170 or so. I held that for 10 min-ish, recirc'd, then drained. I hit my target volume and my OG came to 1.060. Its not uncommon for me to miss my target on a beer like this but to miss it by almost 10 percentage points bothers me. It changes the beer too much, imo.

I have experimented over the years to do different things to boost my efficiency. I've done mashouts, no mashouts, no sparges, single or multiple sparges, mashed for 60 min or 90 minutes, thin mashes, thick mashes, etc etc etc. I've never reliably gotten above 75% with my system. It is frustrating to me because I primarily use efficiency as a measurement to how successful my brewday was.

So, one thing that could be an issue is my non-adjustable malt mill. It's factory set at .045". I've read on forums that people use spacings as tight as .032" or tighter. Maybe that's part of my issue. I'm not sure, I just know its a point of frustration almost every brew day...

hoboscratch · Post by **hoboscratch** » Mon Apr 02, 2012 12:30 pm

I am maybe not doing this right but I chose the lower end of ppg s for your grain bill and used your 70% efficiency and got an OG of 1063-64.

Could you elaborate on that?

DrPaulsen · Post by **DrPaulsen** » Mon Apr 02, 2012 1:54 pm

I double-checked your numbers in Beer Tools Pro. For a 6 gallon batch, at 70% efficiency, the predicted OG was 1.064. To get down to an OG of 1.060, I dialed down the efficiency to 66%. To compare the effect of volume on OG, you can hit 1.060 with a 70% efficiency if the volume were 6.25 gal instead of 6.

My guess is you were very close to your predicted efficiency, but the points-per-gallon of the grain might have been a bit off in the tool. Here are the OG potentials in ppg (points-per-pound-per-gallon) used in BTP.

Briess Pale Ale Malt : 34.8
Briess Caramel 10L : 31.6
Briess Carapils : 31.2
(generic) Caravienne : 32.0

For what it's worth, I've had good luck dialing in my system by taking very careful volume and gravity measurements immediately before the boil has started and just after it is completed. A trick I sometimes use to make sure I don't miss my gravity is to assume a low efficiency when building my grain bill (e.g. 65%) so I'll either hit my OG or be high. After the sparge is complete, I pump/stir the boil kettle very thoroughly and take a gravity reading. If the OG is high, I calculate how much water is needed to pull down the pre-boil OG. After adding the water, I double-check the gravity and then just dump off the added volume. The extra water is typically on the order of 1 quart of water so it's no big deal. Checking the pre-boil gravity also allows you to add some DME/sugar/etc to boost the gravity back up in case you are low.

Have you previously had good luck with the base malt you're using? I only ask because I hit a 62% efficiency last week when I brewed a beer using some 3-year-old Briess Pilsen malt I had been holding onto and hadn't used in over a year. The wort tasted fine, but I'm guessing either the diastatic power had dropped over time or something else happened to the malt (it actually looked like it had started sprouting, which seems impossible). My point is that the extract potential for grains are just a predicted range and they change from season to season. I'm not sure about the other homebrewing software tools out there, but I don't believe BTP updates their extract potentials every year. If you haven't used that particular base malt a lot, it's possible that the extract potential used by Beer Smith is just a little too optimistic.

One last question -- how certain are you in your grain measurements? Is it possible you were a pound or two short on your base malt?

hoboscratch · Post by **hoboscratch** » Mon Apr 02, 2012 2:14 pm

Thanks for checking into the BTP measurments, Lee. You bring up some good points. I actually had not used this malt before. Since I was out, I'd picked some up at Beer Crazy in Des Moines. I don't know the brands of any of the malts they sold me. I didn't think to ask at the time, honestly.

Also, I have a cheaper digital scale that I calibrated around Christmas time, since I was going to package up some hops with my FoodSaver I got at the same time, I wanted it to be fairly accurate. I think the scale is pretty close to spot on.

It could very well be some mis-measurement of the wort going into my fermenter. I am using a 6.5 gal bucket and don't have an exact measuring stick or anything so I'm just guessing by where I've measured in the past. I didn't realize that a mere .25 gal could make such a large difference in gravity.

Now that I'm thinking back to my brew day and my process, I have tried to eliminate as much as possible any dead space in my MLT. I tip my cooler up and let it drain until there is nearly nothing left over. When I dump my grains into my yardy, there is really no extra wort going along with it. I was looking through my BS settings the other day and I'm fairly certain my MLT deadspace is set to .25 gal. I'll have to circle back and check. That might be part of my problem as well. Maybe like bf514921 said, maybe its a combination of a few things.

Also, thanks for the tip on what ppg means...

-MG- · Post by **-MG-** » Mon Apr 02, 2012 2:23 pm

DrPaulsen wrote:I double-checked your numbers in Beer Tools Pro. For a 6 gallon batch, at 70% efficiency, the predicted OG was 1.064. To get down to an OG of 1.060, I dialed down the efficiency to 66%. To compare the effect of volume on OG, you can hit 1.060 with a 70% efficiency if the volume were 6.25 gal instead of 6.

My guess is you were very close to your predicted efficiency, but the points-per-gallon of the grain might have been a bit off in the tool. Here are the OG potentials in ppg (points-per-pound-per-gallon) used in BTP.

Briess Pale Ale Malt : 34.8
Briess Caramel 10L : 31.6
Briess Carapils : 31.2
(generic) Caravienne : 32.0

For what it's worth, I've had good luck dialing in my system by taking very careful volume and gravity measurements immediately before the boil has started and just after it is completed. A trick I sometimes use to make sure I don't miss my gravity is to assume a low efficiency when building my grain bill (e.g. 65%) so I'll either hit my OG or be high. After the sparge is complete, I pump/stir the boil kettle very thoroughly and take a gravity reading. If the OG is high, I calculate how much water is needed to pull down the pre-boil OG. After adding the water, I double-check the gravity and then just dump off the added volume. The extra water is typically on the order of 1 quart of water so it's no big deal. Checking the pre-boil gravity also allows you to add some DME/sugar/etc to boost the gravity back up in case you are low.

Have you previously had good luck with the base malt you're using? I only ask because I hit a 62% efficiency last week when I brewed a beer using some 3-year-old Briess Pilsen malt I had been holding onto and hadn't used in over a year. The wort tasted fine, but I'm guessing either the diastatic power had dropped over time or something else happened to the malt (it actually looked like it had started sprouting, which seems impossible). My point is that the extract potential for grains are just a predicted range and they change from season to season. I'm not sure about the other homebrewing software tools out there, but I don't believe BTP updates their extract potentials every year. If you haven't used that particular base malt a lot, it's possible that the extract potential used by Beer Smith is just a little too optimistic.

One last question -- how certain are you in your grain measurements? Is it possible you were a pound or two short on your base malt?

Great points Lee. I like your methods for ensuring you hit your numbers.

Slightly off subject, my electric setup has been hitting 89% efficiency lately. I picked up some 5.2 stablizer just to see its effects. Some people have reported picking up some points of efficency using that.

hoboscratch · Post by **hoboscratch** » Mon Apr 02, 2012 2:36 pm

I'd considering using the 5.2 in the past, but I've run a few recipes through a couple different water calculators and they always seemed to come back right around 5.4-5.5, so I didnt bother. I'd be interested to see how it works for you though.

Derek · Post by **Derek** » Mon Apr 02, 2012 3:36 pm

Lee,

If you are using older malt, the humidity at which you store the grain can have a large impact. Malt kilned to 5% moisture content may absorb another 10% or more, so when you weigh your malt you're getting less malt and more water weight than you would have when new. Enzymatic power may dimishish by 20% to 30% over the first year, but I don't know that I've ever heard how much it dimishes over longer periods .

jjbuck · Post by **jjbuck** » Mon Apr 02, 2012 3:57 pm

Not knowing who the maltster was for your grain I referenced the range of ppg from Palmer's "How to Brew" for pale ale, crystal 10, carapils and caravienne. I did the calculation with my clculator rather than entering the data into "Beer Smith" I just recalculated a total of 453.75/5gal at 70% to be 63.5. Can you access the malt report on the internet for your malster.? The numbers I used were 29 for the pale ale, 26 for crystal 10 24 carapils and 26 for caravienne.

jjbuck wrote:I am maybe not doing this right but I chose the lower end of ppg s for your grain bill and used your 70% efficiency and got an OG of 1063-64. I always mash (single infusion) less than 150 and always for 90 minutes. Could your strike water have been higher than you thought? Just spitballin' some possibilities (that you have probably already eliminated). I've read that a second pass through the malt mill, even without a spacing change can improve the grist. Lastly, if nothing else works, you might try a very slow (30-60 min) fly sparge with 168-170 water.
My mash efficiency always seems to be 75-80%. I hope your beer turns out well, good luck.
hoboscratch wrote:So I brewed a Sculpin IPA clone tonight, here's the recipe:
Ingredients
Amt Name Type # %/IBU
13 lbs 4.0 oz Pale Malt (2 Row) US (2.0 SRM) Grain 1 82.8 %
1 lbs 4.0 oz Caramel/Crystal Malt - 10L (10.0 SRM) Grain 2 7.8 %
1 lbs Cara-Pils/Dextrine (2.0 SRM) Grain 3 6.3 %
8.0 oz Caravienne Malt (22.0 SRM) Grain 4 3.1 %
0.95 oz Columbus (Tomahawk) [14.60 %] - Boil 60.0 min Hop 5 37.5 IBUs
0.32 oz Magnum [13.10 %] - Boil 60.0 min Hop 6 11.2 IBUs
0.32 oz Northern Brewer [9.40 %] - Boil 60.0 min Hop 7 8.0 IBUs
0.32 oz Centennial [8.70 %] - Boil 30.0 min Hop 8 5.7 IBUs
0.32 oz Crystal [2.00 %] - Boil 30.0 min Hop 9 1.3 IBUs
0.32 oz Simcoe [12.20 %] - Boil 30.0 min Hop 10 8.0 IBUs
0.28 tsp Irish Moss (Boil 10.0 mins) Fining 11 -
1.00 oz Amarillo Gold [8.50 %] - Boil 0.0 min Hop 12 0.0 IBUs
1.0 pkg California Ale (White Labs #WLP001) [35.00 ml] Yeast 13 -
1.10 tsp Yeast Nutrient (Primary 3.0 days) Other 14 -
2.00 oz Amarillo Gold [8.50 %] - Dry Hop 7.0 Days Hop 15 0.0 IBUs
1.00 oz Simcoe [13.00 %] - Dry Hop 7.0 Days Hop 16 0.0 IBUs

Beer Profile

Est Original Gravity: 1.067
Estimated Alcohol by Vol: 7.0 %
Bitterness: 71.8 IBUs
Est Color: 6.2 SRM

I set my brewhouse efficiency to 70%, since that's pretty much what I seem to be at most of the time. I mashed in at 151 for 60 minutes. I skipped a mash out, recirculated, drained, and did a batch sparge. I had 2 sparges at 2 gallons each. The first came in a bit low, at 158. I held that for maybe 5 min while I recirculated, then drained. My second came in right at 170 or so. I held that for 10 min-ish, recirc'd, then drained. I hit my target volume and my OG came to 1.060. Its not uncommon for me to miss my target on a beer like this but to miss it by almost 10 percentage points bothers me. It changes the beer too much, imo.

I have experimented over the years to do different things to boost my efficiency. I've done mashouts, no mashouts, no sparges, single or multiple sparges, mashed for 60 min or 90 minutes, thin mashes, thick mashes, etc etc etc. I've never reliably gotten above 75% with my system. It is frustrating to me because I primarily use efficiency as a measurement to how successful my brewday was.

So, one thing that could be an issue is my non-adjustable malt mill. It's factory set at .045". I've read on forums that people use spacings as tight as .032" or tighter. Maybe that's part of my issue. I'm not sure, I just know its a point of frustration almost every brew day...

hoboscratch · Post by **hoboscratch** » Sat Apr 28, 2012 3:00 pm

I calibrated my hydrometer. Its 2 points higher than what it should be, adjusted for temp. So that means I got even worse than I'd expected. Calibrating my thermometer now, going to brew tonight. A 1.077 ipa. Going to double crush, and got some DME on hand to boost the post boil gravity if needed.

Cedar Rapids Brewing Society