Unique mash process help!!

[RabbitHole]

Ok looking for some tips on my process. Please read all....

-What I have been doing as of lately is heat all my strike water to about 180°, then transfer amount needed for a sparge over to the conical the beer will be fermented in. Then when it’s time to sparge I just transfer back with the basket hanging!! By the time it’s transferred it’s down to about 165° and I reheat through the rims to 168° Works really really well!!!

-I have 4gallons of dead space underneath the mash basket to cover the element. Do I need that much in there.... no because I have a RIMs tube for recirculating, but it’s way easier to maintain extremely consistent temps and rises with both RIMs tube and Kettle sharing the Heat!!! So this portion is up for debate!!!

-From here on out in the future because of small change in my software. I have a mash PID driving the RIMs PID, this will take out any chance of there ever being an inproper temp in my grain bed, so temp concerns are now a thing of the past. But had effected my efficiency in the past.

?????? So my question to you EXPERIENCED brewers. Would I benefit from having as little water as possible during mash (just enough to circulate with 1in above grain bed) which in turn would increase my sparge volume.... or would I be better off having more water.... or just roll the way that I am.

???? Or any other ideas or tips of things I could do to up the efficiency. It’s hard to say what I will get now with the new temp control. But when I first built this I was getting 75% on full volume. But recently with grain crush issues, temp issues. I was around 60%. But I exspect next brew day to be back up in the 75% range.

??? Do I need to be higher..... no. But I want to be as good as I can. It’s not just about making beer for me. It’s about doing it well and repeatedly!!!

Thanks!!!

 

[Jag75]

I've never brewed on a set up like that so I can't help . I just had to respond and tell you what a nice system you have ! Looks awesome.

 

[Lefou]

I noticed you didn't mention your mash times, grain, or water salts.
Higher diastatic levels and a slightly longer mashing period can improve efficiency to some degree and salt additions/pH levels can vary with style.

 

[micraftbeer]

OK, big post here. But your thinking was very similar to mine. I had gotten a new brew set-up and I wanted to hone in on a few process parameters to use with the new set-up. Below are the details of my experiment, all of these mashes were done from the same batch of grain, to try to remove that as a variable. I was focused on efficiency as well as process time. My brew rig was a standard mash tun with a RIMS attached, and then collected wort would be pumped over to my Boil Kettle.

My first baseline was a process where I would mash at a 1.4 qt/lb ratio, then dump the whole sparge water in on top, and then collect the runoff from that combined watery mash. I got a 5% efficiency gain by moving to a batch sparge process. I then saw another 8% efficiency gain with that batch sparge process when I went to a smaller crush. I was able to squeak out another 1% efficiency gain moving to a continuous fly sparge process for about 30 minutes.

Mash Efficiency Trials
7 lbs 2-row
1 lb Crystal 40L
0.5 lb White wheat

Mash @ 1.4 qt/lb for 60 minutes @ 150F
Sparge water @ 168F
Target pre-boil volume 7.5 gallons



Batch#1
- Crush 34 mil
- After mash, transfer all sparge water into mash tun, then drain
- Measured mash pH = 5.59
- Measured mash efficiency = 71.6%
- Time from mash to pre-boil volume collected = 20 minutes


Batch#1 (Repeat)
- Crush 34 mil
- After mash, transfer all sparge water into mash tun, then drain
- Measured mash efficiency = 70.4%


Batch#2
- Crush 34 mil
- After mash, fully drain runnings, add sparge water and thoroughly stir mash, vourlaf, then drain
- Measured mash pH = 5.63
- Measured mash efficiency = 75.3%
- Time from mash to pre-boil volume collected = 23 minutes


Batch#3
- Crush 26 mil
- After mash, fully drain runnings, add sparge water and thoroughly stir mash, vourlaf, then drain
- Measured mash efficiency = 82.7%
- Time from mash to pre-boil volume collected = 23 minutes


Batch#4
- Crush 26 mil
- After mash, collect runnings until 2” water above grain, then continuous fly sparge while draining
- Measured mash efficiency = 83.9%
- Time from mash to pre-boil volume collected = 28 minutes

 

[RabbitHole]

I noticed you didn't mention your mash times, grain, or water salts.
Higher diastatic levels and a slightly longer mashing period can improve efficiency to some degree and salt additions/pH levels can vary with style.

The reason I didn't mention this part is because i have a really good control on this because there is so much data out there about to do the process. Im more concerned with the amount of volume that i have underneath my basket.

@micraftbeer
This is great data and I really appreciate you taking the time to type all of that out. My grain mill was set to .038 and I hit 63% on my last brew which is F^%$&^ horrible in my eyes!!! so this next batch Im going to set it to the thickness of my license which is .0295. I was going to set it to a credit card which is .0325 but after reading your post I will just go to the license...

collect runnings until 2” water above grain

This Part confuses me a bit. how much water did u have on top of your mash during your sach period of 150. When I'm doing my mash I circulate keeping no more then 1in of wort on top of the mash. At mash out i slowly rise to 168 then sparge on top again keeping it no more then 1in about the mash!!

After the vast amount of research that i have done over the course of the last week has led me to believe a few things are also F%$#^% in my process.
-my ph meter not being calibrated
-me being retarded and shooting for a mash ph of 5.2 hahahaha

but i have sense learned exactly what i am supposed to be doing after reading about 6hours about what exactly ph is and how and what all things effect the ph and what and all things the ph effects!!!

CHEERS

 

[micraftbeer]

Yeah, that '2" above the mash" seems strange, but those were my notes. The amount of water is probably relative to the set-up of your false bottom, but at 1.4 qt/lb, that's a looser mash than my typical 1.25 qt/lb. So the amount of wort collected before I started fly sparging was probably not much.

And speaking of grain crush, after the above experiment, I was running my 2-roller mill on the 26 mil gap. But I would occasionally get stuck mash during recirculation. I then checked out a 3-roller mill to see if I could get the husk cracked without pulverizing the grains as much. Below link to my review on the Monster Mill MM-3, but I was able to get equal conversion efficiency with a 0.033" gap on the 3-roller mill as I was getting on my 2-roller mill that needed a 0.026" gap. And I haven't had any stuck mashes, so I'm quite happy now with this set up.

https://www.homebrewfinds.com/2020/04/hands-on-review-monster-mill-mm-3-grain-mill.html

 

[micraftbeer]

And while we're at it, here's another mash efficiency experiment I did. Different brewing system, this was when I was doing a review on the Anvil Foundry. Here's an excerpt from my trials on that one:

I’d heard anecdotes of improved mash conversion efficiency with recirculated wort, but I’d never seen numbers, so I did my own experiment. I used a simple mash of 5 lbs of Viking Xtra Pale Malt and 0.3 lbs of Briess 2-row Brewers Malt, along with brewing salts + acid to hit a mash pH of 5.57. The grains were from the same 55 lb sack of each malt. I mashed for 1 hour at 149F, followed by a ramp up to 168F for a 10 min mash out. I mashed 3 different batches: 1) Full volume mash, no recirc, 2) Full volume mash with recirc, 3) Loose mash with 2.4 qt/lb with recirc followed by 1.5 gal sparge poured through the mash basket while up on its posts. The mash efficiency difference was striking. The full volume mash without recirc achieved 72%, with recirc it increased to 74%, and the recirc + sparge reached 87%. From this data, it would appear that the sparge made a significant effect. Unfortunately, I didn’t have enough of the same batch of grain to do a 4th combination of no recirc + sparge.

 

[eric19312]

Nice kit and impressed by idea of using the fermentor as a HLT. I doubt the RIMS to heat the sparge water from 165 to 180 even matters but you have it right there so why not.

I think the issue with having 4 gallons under your mash is going to be efficiency limiting. I'm not sure that is technically deadspace, all that volume ends up as part of wort reaching the boil step, but it limits the amount of sparge water you will be able to use. In my thinking the highest fly sparge efficiency should come from mashing with minimum water to permit a good recirculation in order to maximize the amount of sparge water used.

But even if you are stuck with the 4 gallons under the mash I think you should be able to do much better than 60%. I would think the absolute worst case should be what you would get from a well run full volume no sparge BIAB. Those guys report efficiency typically about 70% maybe a bit higher for normal strength beers. With a little bit of sparging you should be able to do better than that.

I'd be considering crush and flow through the grain bed. They are related issues and not every system does best with grain pulverized to dust. I find my system does better with a fairly coarse crush that permits good recirculation without channeling but your system may respond differently. And check water chemistry if you haven't already.

 

[RabbitHole]

Below link to my review on the Monster Mill MM-3, but I was able to get equal conversion efficiency with a 0.033" gap on the 3-roller mill as I was getting on my 2-roller mill that needed a 0.026" gap. And I haven't had any stuck mashes, so I'm quite happy now with this set up.

I’m so glad u put this info in. Cause I have that exact mill. So I will adjust down to the .0325 and be done with it. And just build from there and not mess with the mill anymore.

I'd be considering crush and flow through the grain bed. They are related issues and not every system does best with grain pulverized to dust. I find my system does better with a fairly coarse crush that permits good recirculation without channeling but your system may respond differently. And check water chemistry if you haven't already.

Yes I agree with all you say for sure. It’s not “dead space” it’s “recoverable dead space” so BeerSmith3 counts it towards finished product!!
you can read through my last post that I talk about my mistakes in chemistry. I have my salts and what not figured out fine. But I was adjust my ph way to low which after allot of research was probably really screwing me. Along with the fact I mashed at 146 instead of my desired 152!
that being said. I have sense fixed all those issues and am excited to brew my next batch which will be a multi step mash Hefeweizen.

check this post out
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/threads/first-real-try-at-hefeweizen.687511/