Hot answers tagged

9

Your high efficiency is due to using a lot more water than you need, washing every last bit of sugar out of the mash. Ultimately, you want to collect less wort. This will result in a lower efficiency. As such, you'll need to use more grain to account for the lower efficiency. If you had 22L at 17°Bx, then you started with 35L at 10°Bx with 90% efficiency. ...


5

"... so far above an efficiency that BeerSmith is aware of" I'm not exactly sure what you mean by this, I'm positive BeerSmith is aware of efficiencies above 73%. It's very common to get higher efficiency on low-alcohol beers with smaller mashes since you're running proportionally more sparge water through each unit of volume of the mash bed, giving ...


3

I think that the issue is how both are calculated. http://www.brewersfriend.com/brewhouse-efficiency/ is not accounting for losses in your equipment while beersmith is accounting for losses. I think if you took out the losses in beersmith, you would get the same efficiency as brewersfriend.


3

I can see that your post mash and post boil gravities are really off. For example you state an estimated post mash gravity 1.037 after correction, but then have 1.030 post boil. This would only be possible if you diluted with water. Post boil will always be higher from the boil off evaporation. In any case, I think the hydrometer calculator is setting you ...


3

Looks like you are doing it right to me, using those calculators. The only thing that might change your actual # is the calibration temp of your hydrometer. Be sure that it is 20C. Some hydrometers are closer to 15 or 18C, depends on the manufacturer. Although that won't change your OG much. 67% mash efficiency does seem like a normal for BIAB. If the ...


2

If you split a 15 gallon batch into two 7.5 gallon batches, the 30lb grain alone will take up 2.34gallons of volume (30 * 10 / 128), as according to sizing the tun from HowToBrew, grain volume is 10 fluid oz per pound. Plugging in a 7.5 gallon batch at brew365, at a mash thickness of 1.5qt/lb, the water alone is 11.25 gallons. In order to get the mash to fit,...


2

If your brewhouse consitantly achieves 95% just use that setting in your recipe/brew software and it will cascade to the grains allowing you to reduce their wieghts to hit a target OG. This will mainly result in a reduction in the base malt, while keeping most specialty grains close to original weights. Or you can estimate by hand, if a recipe is calculated ...


2

First, I can't see your images from my work computer so I'll explain it from scratch. Each type of grain (base malt and adjuncts) have a potential yield of sugar. For simplicity's sake, we'll use the "point system" (that is Specific Gravity minus 1 times 1000), so for a Specific Gravity of, say, 1.040, we would say that you have 40 point (1.040-1 = .040, ....


1

I do BIAB and my efficiency has varied around 70% from 65% to 75%. I've found that something as simple as stirring my mash 3 times in the 60 minute rest and not stirring it can affect that number greatly. You're outside of the realms of common efficiencies in what you're doing. Certainly I know of people using Beersmith who have efficiencies into the 80's....


1

Might be possible, if you are brewing two batches, one just after another. If you will try to store wet hops, you are giving mold time to grow. Isomerisation continues to occur when hops are hot, so no way to dry them without loses. So then there is freezing, but that's troublesome. If done fresh, from one brew to another directly, would work, but you ...


1

I don't think there was much you could do on the fermentation side to fix anything. I'd still have planned ferment it out, plan to dry hop it heavily to try and create a little more balance. Then I'd learn form the experience and get ready to re-brew the beer I wanted to brew. To limit your efficiency, you could sparge a little faster or ease up on the ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible