# Efficiency according to Brewmate



## BobtheBrewer (16/4/13)

Can somebody please explain to me how to use the efficiency tool in the Brew Day section of Brewmate? You have to input Actual volume in kettle, Actual OG, and this calculates Actual brewhouse efficiency. What has me puzzled is the definition of Actual volume in kettle. Going by todays brew, if it means actual volume in the urn (including trub) - I;m a BIABer - then my eff was 97%. If it means the hot volume in the cube then eff was 81%. If it means cooled volume in cub then eff was 78%. Any ideas? Randy Rob?


----------



## Bribie G (16/4/13)

I use BM and I take it as the efficiency you got if you followed the recipe and got 23L (or whatever batch size you specified) into the cube. 81% sounds about right. I get between 75 and low 80s depending on a number of variables like crush, mash time, liquor to grain ratio, mashout etc etc.

edit: so if my original BM recipe is set at 75% to get an OG of a 23L batch to be 1052, then I do a refrac reading that shows 1055 I've done well. So I fire up the recipe in BM to see what eff I actually achieved, and click the efficiency box up until it gets up to my 1055 and Praise the Lord I ended up with 79% so well pleased. (approx figures just to illustrate the point).


----------



## Rowy (16/4/13)

Buggered if I get anywhere near those I efficiencies. 65 is about right for me. What liquor grain ratio in brewmate are you blokes using.


----------



## Bribie G (17/4/13)

I use the BIAB option where it's full volume to grain I'd guess, never bothered calculating it. Whatever 33L to about 5kg of grain works out at, generally


----------



## Lord Raja Goomba I (17/4/13)

If I calculate what I strike (generally hovers around 18L for 5-5.5kg of grain) and sparge (generally around 12-14L), then it is about 30-32L (which seems to be a consistent figure) for about 5-5.5kg of grain. I have always sparged, even using BIAB-type methods.

My efficiency is generally high 70's-early 80's (bit like being part of Gen X). If I have a lower OG beer, I may dilute (or forget and make a Golden Strong Lager), if I need a higher OG beer, I'll boil for 90-120 minutes and get a bit of caramelisation as a bonus.


----------



## Crusty (17/4/13)

Birkdale Bob said:


> Can somebody please explain to me how to use the efficiency tool in the Brew Day section of Brewmate? You have to input Actual volume in kettle, Actual OG, and this calculates Actual brewhouse efficiency. What has me puzzled is the definition of Actual volume in kettle. Going by todays brew, if it means actual volume in the urn (including trub) - I;m a BIABer - then my eff was 97%. If it means the hot volume in the cube then eff was 81%. If it means cooled volume in cub then eff was 78%. Any ideas? Randy Rob?


If your batch size is 23lt @1.054, you need to have collected 24lt @1.054 for your calculated efficiency, mine is 80%.
24lt is the total wort you have on hand including trub. I no chill so 1lt of that is cooling loss (4%) & the rest that doesn't make it into my cube is trub loss.
I get 20lt into my cube, 4lt of trub (1lt is cooling loss = 3lt if chilling) so end up with 24lt of total wort @1.054 = 80% efficiency for my 23lt batch.
Remember that for a 23lt batch, I am no chilling so I will get 24lt of wort produced & if I let the 4lt of trub cool naturally, I will get 3lt of trub loss & achieve my 23lt batch size.


----------



## Bribie G (17/4/13)

Efficiency is a good method of checking how your mash procedures are going, if you suddenly get - for example - 65% then woooo, what's happening and the first area to investigate is the mash. Am I getting an accurate temperature reading, would a step mash have been better for that particular brew..... and so on.

Beersmith have an interesting article on efficiencies, they say that in effect most mashes will yield an overall efficiency of 75-80% when you take losses and trub etc into account (as described by Crusty) so the figures we are hitting with BIAB are well in the normal range.

I see members posting that they get efficiencies of 90% and upwards, wonder if we are all talking about the same thing here.


----------



## Liam_snorkel (17/4/13)

Bribie G said:


> I see members posting that they get efficiencies of 90% and upwards, wonder if we are all talking about the same thing here.


I use "the calculator" spreadsheet from _that other forum_ to calculate my efficiencies, and generally get between 80-90% mash efficiency. BIAB, single infusion w/ mashout - and a good squeeze of the bag.
it calculates it approx something like this:

[(start of boil gravity) x (start of boil vol)] / [(307) x (grain bill)]

I have NFI where the 307 comes from.


----------



## punkin (17/4/13)

You can set the trub loss in the losses to trub and chiller. That way the system takes it into account for you.


----------



## BobtheBrewer (17/4/13)

Bribie G said:


> Efficiency is a good method of checking how your mash procedures are going, if you suddenly get - for example - 65% then woooo, what's happening and the first area to investigate is the mash. Am I getting an accurate temperature reading, would a step mash have been better for that particular brew..... and so on.
> 
> Beersmith have an interesting article on efficiencies, they say that in effect most mashes will yield an overall efficiency of 75-80% when you take losses and trub etc into account (as described by Crusty) so the figures we are hitting with BIAB are well in the normal range.
> 
> I see members posting that they get efficiencies of 90% and upwards, wonder if we are all talking about the same thing here.



I was going to reply last night but somebody stole the forum. I have been using the cooled cube volume to work out my efficiency. Lately my efficiency has been way down and I couldn't figure out why. My absorption rate has been way up, ~0.05, whereas it used to be ~ 0.3. The boil off rate has been fairly constant around 11%. I have lowered my efficiency in brew mate to 65, and then 70, so have increased my grain bill. I aim for about 4.3% ABV, had a couple lower but then it came back up. Yesterday my absorption figure was 0.26. Have I discovered the ultimate way to squeeze a bag? I don't know, but at the end I had an OG of 1.046 v 1.044. I did let it boil for 15 mins before starting the timer. Guess it is a case of suck it and see, but I won't be changing my efficiency rate in brewmate anytime soon.


----------



## nala (17/4/13)

The instruction is...........volume in kettle, this includes trub.. et al. Input gravity of wort, this then calculates efficiency.
No point in kidding yourself that you have done something fantastic !
The real measure of efficiency is, brewing to a recipe and achieving the criteria as per the recipe.
I am not interested in getting a greater OG than what the recipe calls for, efficiency should to mind, be judged on achieving 
the recipe criteria. In terms of cost benefit per litre of an over gravity wort is so small it is not worth considering.
When everything is considered you will find that the data that you input to the recipe should show you how you are doing in terms of meeting the right criteria/efficiency.
Brewmate gives GU/BU which I find very helpful, it ceases to be helpful when you have a greater GU than planned as this affects the hop balance that you are trying to achieve.


----------



## BobtheBrewer (17/4/13)

??


----------



## Fat Bastard (17/4/13)

Just set your losses to trub and chiller to zero. Hitting the numbers for the recipe is the important thing. Your losses to trub will vary with the recipe and very few brewers have identical systems, so if its the first time you've brewed a particular recipe, it's unlikely you'll hit all your numbers on the first run anyway. That becomes your baseline and the recipe can be adjusted for volume, gravity and bitterness on subsequent runs. This way you can graph your mash efficiency vs grain bill and take a good guess at the efficiency for a given grain bill on your system. You could do the same for the system and trub losses, but there are far too many variables and you'd still be doing a blind run first up anyway.
As long as you do everything the same each time, you should hit your numbers every time you brew that recipe on your system.


----------



## yum beer (17/4/13)

I use the brew day eff to calculate my final efficency, ie: I use the actual amount into the FV and OG into the FV. I then work backwards and adjust evap amounts, trub and kettle losses, etc to more accurate numbers given physical leftovers. This allows me to put in a more accurate 'efficiency' in the recipe design area for the different styles I am making.
It takes a little fiddling to get the numbers right for your setup but once sorted you will hit right around your numbers every time.


----------



## Edak (18/4/13)

Correct me if I am wing but mash efficiency should be calculated pre-boil and total efficiency post boil.

Total efficiency should account for trub losses, based on what volume went into the fermenter at what gravity, so will always be lower than mash efficiency.

My mash efficiency is about 80-82% depending on style and total efficiency is about 72% because of losses to trub.

Correct or not?


----------



## Hawko777 (8/5/13)

I agree with Edak
Your brew should take into account losses in heat exchanger, chiller etc etc and compensate for this, and for this reason you might need to add extra malt
and water to counteract losses.
Grain efficiencies are all different too, depending on it's type, age and the mashing process. I don't like using Australian malts due to low efficiencies and it's
hit and miss aiming for a target S.G. Different malts respond to different mashing techniques which makes brewing an interesting, rewarding hobby. Wyermann Malts are what I use most and are more reliable in re-producing a recipe. I regularly attain an overall efficiency of between
80 - 83% using my HERMS system which is PID controlled. I have 300ml loss in my boiler, none in the HE and Plate chiller.


----------



## chunckious (8/5/13)

Edak's comments seem to resonate with my line of thinking.
My eff is set 72%. For a beer with an OG of say 1.050, this will get me my desired volume and gravity.
It's a sliding scale though, if my recipe has a OG of 1.060 or 1.070, I have to dial back my efficiency to say 70% to achieve my desired OG for the same volume.
It's still work in progress for me but this is the mindset I follow. 2c


----------



## jc64 (8/5/13)

Brewhouse efficiency is what matters, it's what I get into my fermentor, SG and volume, that is the most important factor. So I'm with Edak.


----------



## Crusty (8/5/13)

Brewhouse efficiency is what I use in BrewMate. It's the total amount of wort I have on hand & includes trub.
Some recipes for me will yield more trub loss than I have set in my trub loss column. I average 2.5lt of trub loss but sometimes get 3lt or more, it just depends on the recipe, the crush & how aggressive I get with squeezing the bag. At the end of the day, all that matters is that I have my required 23lt ( total wort produced ) & I have hit my expected gravity, this is brewhouse efficiency.
If you no chill like I do, remember that for a 23lt batch, you might have 24lt of total wort but 4%, or 1lt will be cooling loss.


----------



## GuyQLD (9/5/13)

This argument has been done to death. Brewhouse eff is pointless because no one can ever agree on what it means. I consider it efficiency into fermenter. This means NO trub. Crusty includes trub. Already we're talking two different measurements. Worry about your pre boil gravity and recovering whatever volume of wort you require at the gravity you want. The rest is moot.


----------



## Liam_snorkel (9/5/13)

I've kept a record of the last 18 brews and plotted my pre-boil efficiency & into-frementer efficiency against grain bill size. I brew in a bag, squeeze, & mash out. Never sparge. 

Aside from a couple of outliers, there is a definite downward trend as the grain bill goes up.

average mash eff = 86%
average into fermenter = 76%


----------



## Yob (9/5/13)

I agree with Liam, I also think it's system dependent to a degree, Ive noticed this myself that there seems to be a point of diminishing return, for my system, it's at about ~5.5 kg, after that you need significantly larger amounts to get much higher.

My last brew for example was one I wanted to do to use up some grains (and as an experiment) ahead of the looming BB down here, so I threw ~12kg into the esky, I ended up with ~20lt of 1090 wort (probably should have mashed longer and/or Partigyled it), I know I can get 23lt of a 1075-80 wort with ~7-7.5kg.

Being a homebrewer means (to me) that I dont really have to give 2 shits about eff and can adjust my hopping schedule on the fly to suit... which TBH I usually do regardless of the recipe... 

Its is a good number to know though and lets to dial in on a regular bill size which does help with formulating recipies etc... but TBH, I rekon there is more fun to be had in just banging recipies together on the fly and seeing what comes out.. well.. I think it's fun anyway.. 

:icon_cheers:


----------



## lukiferj (9/5/13)

I only ever measure into the fermenter these days. It doesn't really mean anything to anyone else except yourself and your system. Good for ensuring that your processes are working and helps to plan recipes.


----------



## Crusty (9/5/13)

GuyQLD said:


> This argument has been done to death. Brewhouse eff is pointless because no one can ever agree on what it means. I consider it efficiency into fermenter. This means NO trub. Crusty includes trub. Already we're talking two different measurements. Worry about your pre boil gravity and recovering whatever volume of wort you require at the gravity you want. The rest is moot.


Brewhouse efficiency is trub loss included, no arguments, no opinions, it's simply all inclusive.
The two methods of efficiency measurement are mash efficiency which I don't use & brewhouse efficiency. As you measure efficiency into the fermenter & don't include your trub losses, you're not measuring brewhouse efficiency.
I spoke to RandyRob ( BrewMate developer ) in relation to this & brewhouse efficiency is total wort + trub loss & measured gravity.
Brad Smith explains it here as well.


----------



## GuyQLD (9/5/13)

Yes it is. But you view this as 21.5+2.5 brewmate views it as 23+2.5. We had this argument almost 12 months ago and we couldn't agree then either. The fact that two people apart from me in this thread have stated it doesn't include trub should tell you something. I'll also mention that there's numerous places on the internet that provide different descriptions of brewhouse eff. I'll post a brewday log when I get home if you really want fight about it. But for what its worth I don't know why you would, at the end of the day preboil gravity and correct boil off for your desired volume of wort is all that matters. Brewhouse eff has too many variables to consider to be worth a damn. Your link to Brad Smith is also pointless. We established a long time ago beersmith and brewmate calculate differently.


----------



## Crusty (9/5/13)

GuyQLD said:


> Yes it is. But you view this as 21.5+2.5 brewmate views it as 23+2.5. We had this argument almost 12 months ago and we couldn't agree then either. The fact that two people apart from me in this thread have stated it doesn't include trub should tell you something. I'll also mention that there's numerous places on the internet that different descriptions of brewhouse eff. I'll post a brewday log when I get home if you really want fight about it. But for what its worth I don't know why you would, at the of the day preboil gravity and correct boil off for your desired volume of wort is all that matters. Brewhouse eff has too many variables to consider to be worth a damn.


I really couldn't be bothered arguing with you to be honest. I contacted RandyRob about the correct way to determine brewhouse efficiency using his software & I am correct in how you measure brewhouse efficiency. Contact him & find out for yourself if you need to put the matter to rest. If you use some other form of brewing software & measure efficiency differently, then go with that. For me, on my last APA, a 23lt batch was, 20lt into the no chill cube, 4lt loss to trub. Allowing for 4% of cooling loss or 1lt, this is 20+4-1=23lt. If I get 24lt of total wort @1.054 which is what I was aiming for, then I got 80% brewhouse efficiency for my 23lt batch. BrewMate doesn't calculate this as a 25lt batch ( 23 + 2.5 ) The 2.5lt is accounted for with your strike in volume not added to the final volume. The final volume is 23lt.
Post the brew day log for sure, I'm interested to see how you calculate things.


----------



## GuyQLD (9/5/13)

Because a picture is worth a thousand words. And now I think we should get back on topic.




Edit: Apparently I'm bad at uploading.


----------



## thedragon (9/5/13)

I thought I understood how to calc my efficiency, until I read this thread....

GuyQLD, the method that I use is the same as yours. I've always taken the 'actual volume in kettle' to mean how much wort goes in to the fermenter. I like to think that our method is right. Regardless of who's right, as long as we do it consistently for our own rigs it shouldn't really matter. 

Now lots get back to brewing (and drinking!)


----------



## Crusty (9/5/13)

GuyQLD said:


> Because a picture is worth a thousand words. And now I think we should get back on topic.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I wish it were a thousand dollars.
With all due respect, you are way off the money my friend. The programme is calculating for a 23lt batch so why on earth are you putting 26lt as your actual volume into the kettle ( 27-3-1 =23 ) when you are making a 23lt batch, it's obviously not correct if you want to measure brewhouse efficiency. You are double dipping your figures with trub loss. You have already told the software that you will be getting 3.0lt of trub loss so your strike in volume will account for this already. On the brewday sheet, it states from your example, that you should of produced 23lt after cooling loss @1.063.
According to you & your figures, you should have produced this right?
27lt after the boil - 3lt to trub = 24lt - 1lt cooling loss =23lt, correct?
Low & behold, you've got 23lt of wort @1.060, not 26lt @1.060, you have already accounted for the 3lt of trub loss. 23lt total wort produced. It doesn't matter one bit if you get 3.5, 4 or even 5lt of lost trub as long as the total wort in your fermenter + the losses = your batch size, ie: 23lt.
When you formulated this recipe, the trub loss corresponds to your strike volume, try it & see.


----------



## djar007 (9/5/13)

Very interesting. Thanks guys for all the info. Very informative.


----------



## nala (9/5/13)

Crusty said:


> I wish it were a thousand dollars.
> With all due respect, you are way off the money my friend. The programme is calculating for a 23lt batch so why on earth are you putting 26lt as your actual volume into the kettle ( 27-3-1 =23 ) when you are making a 23lt batch, it's obviously not correct if you want to measure brewhouse efficiency. You are double dipping your figures with trub loss. You have already told the software that you will be getting 3.0lt of trub loss so your strike in volume will account for this already. On the brewday sheet, it states from your example, that you should of produced 23lt after cooling loss @1.063.
> According to you & your figures, you should have produced this right?
> 27lt after the boil - 3lt to trub = 24lt - 1lt cooling loss =23lt, correct?
> ...


Crusty your my man !!!
Could not have put this better,these topics are all about how high people can piss up the wall.
The original question has been ignored by those who can piss the highest...in their opinion !


----------



## GuyQLD (9/5/13)

> If your batch size is 23lt @1.054, you need to have collected 24lt @1.054 for your calculated efficiency, mine is 80%.
> *24lt is the total wort you have on hand including trub*. I no chill so 1lt of that is cooling loss (4%) & the rest that doesn't make it into my cube is trub loss.
> I get* 20lt into my cube,* 4lt of trub (1lt is cooling loss = 3lt if chilling) so end up with 24lt of total wort @1.054 = 80% efficiency for my 23lt batch.
> Remember that for a 23lt batch, I am no chilling so I will get 24lt of wort produced & if I let the 4lt of trub cool naturally, *I will get 3lt of trub loss & achieve my 23lt batch size.*



You're making a 20L batch. Not 23L.



> *23lt total wort produced.* It doesn't matter one bit if you get 3.5, 4 or even 5lt of lost trub as long as the total wort in your* fermenter + the losses = your batch size, ie: 23lt.*




It's fermenter = batch size. Not Plus trub - You're not fermenting on the trub are you? You realise you contradict yourself in these two posts? 

The first picture is calculated MINUS trub. It's a 23L batch with 23L into the fermenter. I'm not sure how I can be any clearer. 
*edit: Math fail


----------



## BobtheBrewer (9/5/13)

djar007 said:


> Very interesting. Thanks guys for all the info. Very informative.


Yes, thanks for the input. I have always used the required batch size (into cube) as Batch Size in Recipe Specs, and final volume after cooling as Actual Volume in Kettle. Seems to me that if you use Wort Volume after Boil (- 4%cooling loss) as Batch Size, and Actual Volume in Kettle you get the same result but a better efficiency. My OP was inspired by the fact that I wasn't achieving target OG and so needed to lower the efficiency figure and/or increase the grain bill. My problem seems to have disappeared, who knows why.


----------



## Crusty (9/5/13)

GuyQLD said:


> You're making a 20L batch. Not 23L.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Brewhouse efficiency is: Total wort produced which includes all losses, boil off, grain absorption + trub loss.
In BrewMate, the Actual volume into kettle is your total collected wort not what's in the fermenter. Is it asking for volume into your cube or your fermenter...No, it's asking for how much wort you have sitting in that kettle. 20lt of wort for the cube, 3lt of that is trub & the extra 1lt is cooling loss so there's 24lt of wort in the kettle.
You're doin my head in dude & your robbing yourself of efficiency points & wasting grain while your at it.
I'm making a 23lt batch, that's what's in the kettle not 20lt.


----------



## Crusty (9/5/13)

nala said:


> Crusty your my man !!!
> Could not have put this better,these topics are all about how high people can piss up the wall.
> The original question has been ignored by those who can piss the highest...in their opinion !


The OP was asking how to correctly work out brewhouse efficiency.
The correct way using BrewMate is to input the total amount of wort in the Actual volume in kettle column.
This total after the boil will be will be wort + trub loss - cooling loss @ measured gravity.
I've answered the question over & over.


----------



## thedragon (9/5/13)

Crusty said:


> You're doin my head in dude & your robbing yourself of efficiency points & wasting grain while your at it.


No disrespect intended but I'm not sure how he's waisting grain. 

I know that the higher the ratio of grain to water, the lower the efficiency, but we've got to be talking around the margins. In fact we're not talking about how much grain is used or how we measure OG, we're talking about how we measure volume. Not how much grain is used to achieve the OG. 

if he is aiming for a specific OG, and he achieves it, I can't see that the way he interprets volume - be it volume in the kettle or volume in the FV - affects how much grain he's using to hit that OG. There may be other things that effect it such as technique, but not what volume numbers are input in to a program after the fact. 

But yes, we are off topic. There's more important things to worry about. Such as whether a 330ml bottle is better than a 750ml


----------



## Crusty (9/5/13)




----------



## Liam_snorkel (9/5/13)

posting in the Crusty thread.


----------



## Crusty (9/5/13)

Liam_snorkel said:


> posting in the Crusty thread.


Nah mate, not my thread. Just trying to point out how to correctly input figures into BrewMate.
The reason I am arguing with Guy is I've already spoken to Rob about correctly using brewhouse efficiency. It's not my spin on how it's calculated, it's Rob that developed the software so if he says that's how it's done, then that's how it's done.
If he wants to do it another way, that's entirely up to him but it's incorrect.
It looks like the OP has it sorted so all good.


----------



## GuyQLD (10/5/13)

I gave up on this thread last night, but since you posted that picture it just get's more humorous.

You've repeatedly stated that the Actual Volume field contains your Wort + trub loss. However in the picture you just posted, you have a post boil volume of 26.5. Since by your definition Actual Volume in Kettle = Post boil - losses to chilling based on your picture it should be 25.5L in the kettle. 

In the picture you posted how much wort is going into the cube? Is it 23L or the 21L that you've repeatedly stated. If that 23L you've stated in the Actual Kettle Volume field still includes trub your numbers are 2.5L out. 

If in your example that 23L is the actual volume into the cube then what the hell are you arguing about?


----------



## Crusty (10/5/13)

GuyQLD said:


> I gave up on this thread last night, but since you posted that picture it just get's more humorous.
> 
> You've repeatedly stated that the Actual Volume field contains your Wort + trub loss. However in the picture you just posted, you have a post boil volume of 26.5. Since by your definition Actual Volume in Kettle = Post boil - losses to chilling based on your picture it should be 25.5L in the kettle.
> 
> ...


Guy, the total batch size for this recipe is 23lt. I will make 23lt of total wort on brew day.
So when I have finished boiling, I will have 26.5lt of wort sitting in my Urn. 
It's 26.5 - 2.5 - 1 = 23lt.
The recipe sheet above yielded more than 2.5lt of trub, it was actually 3lt. I set my trub loss to 2.5lt as that's about average for most of my beers but it can vary depending on grain bill & how hard I squeeze the bag. So this recipe yielded 20lt into my no chill cube + 4lt of trub loss ( 1lt is cooling loss ) @ 1.055 so I ended up with 81% efficiency instead of the 80%.
The actual volume in the kettle is the total amount of wort you have produced & calculating brewhouse efficiency is this, in total including all losses.
The amount of wort you get into the fermenter or cube does not go in that column, you have set it up already & accounted for your losses.
26.5lt - 2.5lt - 1lt = 23lt. ( 23lt is total batch size, not the amount into fermenter or cube )

Look at cycleporo bigted's video, he's a member on here & take a look at his actual final volume of wort produced.
In BeerSmith, his 27lt is called measured batch size. In BrewMate, that column is called Actual Volume in Kettle. You will notice his 27lt is not what he has in the fermenter.
He has 22lt into the fermenter + 3lt of trub + 1lt in Braumeister + 1lt in his measuring cup, 27lt total for his 27lt batch. His 27lt batch is not in the fermenter dude, there's only 22lt in there.



Do you understand now?


----------



## GuyQLD (10/5/13)

Can someone else please explain to him that he's counting trub twice? 

I have better things to do.


----------



## Liam_snorkel (10/5/13)

:icon_offtopic: you guys should touch dicks already.


----------



## Crusty (10/5/13)

GuyQLD said:


> Can someone else please explain to him that he's counting trub twice?
> 
> I have better things to do.


Maybe you should watch the video again.


----------



## Parks (10/5/13)

Crusty said:


> Guy, the total batch size for this recipe is 23lt. I will make 23lt of total wort on brew day.
> So when I have finished boiling, I will have 26.5lt of wort sitting in my Urn.
> It's 26.5 - 2.5 - 1 = 23lt.
> The recipe sheet above yielded more than 2.5lt of trub, it was actually 3lt. I set my trub loss to 2.5lt as that's about average for most of my beers but it can vary depending on grain bill & how hard I squeeze the bag. So this recipe yielded 20lt into my no chill cube + 4lt of trub loss ( 1lt is cooling loss ) @ 1.055 so I ended up with 81% efficiency instead of the 80%.
> ...


You definitely seem to contradict yourself here.



Crusty said:


> Guy, the total batch size for this recipe is 23lt. I will make 23lt of total wort on brew day.
> So when I have finished boiling, I will have 26.5lt of wort sitting in my Urn.
> It's 26.5 - 2.5 - 1 = 23lt.


So you are saying the amount in the kettle minus trub and cooling loss is your total batch size



Crusty said:


> The actual volume in the kettle is the total amount of wort you have produced & calculating brewhouse efficiency is this, in total including all losses.


or not?



Crusty said:


> The amount of wort you get into the fermenter or cube does not go in that column, you have set it up already & accounted for your losses.
> 26.5lt - 2.5lt - 1lt = 23lt. ( 23lt is total batch size, not the amount into fermenter or cube )


or is it?



Crusty said:


> In BeerSmith, his 27lt is called measured batch size. In BrewMate, that column is called Actual Volume in Kettle. You will notice his 27lt is not what he has in the fermenter.
> He has 22lt into the fermenter + 3lt of trub + 1lt in Braumeister + 1lt in his measuring cup, 27lt total for his 27lt batch. His 27lt batch is not in the fermenter dude, there's only 22lt in there.


I think your terminology like 'wort produced' doesn't help.


----------



## mikec (10/5/13)

I get 100% efficiency in all my beers.

They're a bit crunchy though.


----------



## Parks (10/5/13)

I think maybe the main confusing this is that 23L above isn't "into the fermenter" when it seems like it should be.

27L actual kettle volume (at flameout?)
- 3L trub
- 1L cooling
= 23L total batch size

Is the reason that you can't account for losses to hops here? If I measure my start boil volume, add a shittonne of hops and measure the actual amount in the boiler when I finish there will be a fair amount of hop volume perhaps skewing the measurement.


----------



## Crusty (10/5/13)

I think the the term Actual volume in kettle in BrewMate is a little confusing.
In BeerSmith, that column is termed measured batch size so for example, 23 litres.
So in BeerSmith, a 23lt batch size is the total amount of wort that has been made on the day. Making up that 23lt is the amount you have in your fermenter + your trub loss etc.
Brewhouse efficiency, like BeerSmith, is asking for the total amount of wort produced, ie: 23lt. For me that is, 20lt into the cube or fermenter + 4lt of trub ( 1lt is cooling loss ) so after the boil and all cooled down, I have 23 litres produced for my 23lt batch size.
If you put the actual amount of wort you get into the fermenter ( 20lt ) you're not measuring brewhouse efficiency which is what I'm trying to explain.
As in cyclepros video using BeerSmith, he is doing a 27lt batch of beer. He ends up with 22lt into his fermenter + 3lt of trub + 1lt left in the BM + 1lt left in the measuring cup for a total batch size of 27lt. If you look at the figure he puts into beerSmith column, batch size, it's 27lt not 22lt that he has in the fermenter.
I'm not measuring mash efficiency & omitting trub etc, I'm measuring my total amount of wort produced which includes all losses = Brewhouse efficiency.
At the end of the day, Guy can please himself how he measures his efficiency & I mean no disrespect to him or anyone else but the way he's doing it is incorrect if he in fact wants to measure brewhouse efficiency.
The trub loss is still wort so why would you omit 3lt off the 23lt batch. In theory, you could simply dump the whole 23lt of wort made straight into your fermenter. I don't do it but it's 23lt of wort that's been made on the day not 20lt that's gone into the fermenter.


----------



## Bribie G (10/5/13)

Trub is actually sweet so it is robbing you of sugars. So if aiming for a 23l batch into the fermenter you really need to think what trub loss you normally get. For example when I used to do bottles before I went to kegs I needed my 23L to fill the 30 PETs so I did a 25L batch and entered such in BrewMate. Thus my 23L of clear wort was actually derived from a recipe for 25L and the efficiency was based on the 25L, even though I only got 23L at the end of the day.

To me efficiency is just a way of keeping on track from brew to brew in case the efficiency goes to shyte, then I can check my crush and my thermometer, whatever.


----------



## TSMill (10/5/13)

If brew house efficiency was based on post boil kettle volume, then it would be identical to mash efficiency, wouldn't it? The degree to which wort is separated from trub would seem to be a measure of efficiency, in which case it makes sense brew house efficiency would be based on volume into the fermenter. Bit of a moot point, as long as you consistently apply your own definition.


----------



## beerdrinkingbob (10/5/13)

Liam_snorkel said:


> I've kept a record of the last 18 brews and plotted my pre-boil efficiency & into-frementer efficiency against grain bill size. I brew in a bag, squeeze, & mash out. Never sparge.
> 
> Aside from a couple of outliers, there is a definite downward trend as the grain bill goes up.
> 
> ...


I might have missed this but what water volume?


----------



## Liam_snorkel (10/5/13)

Changes for each grain bill - for a 4kg about 31 litres. I use brewmate to work it out based on a 22 litre batch size.


----------



## beerdrinkingbob (10/5/13)

For what it's worth I get 68% into the fermentor everytime using BIAB, however my water to grain is only 4.7, always mashout gives an extra 2 to 4 points.


----------



## beerdrinkingbob (10/5/13)

Liam_snorkel said:


> Changes for each grain bill - for a 4kg about 31 litres. I use brewmate to work it out based on a 22 litre batch size.


ok got you, so almost 8 to 1 then reducing from there based on grain.


----------



## Parks (10/5/13)

TSMill said:


> If brew house efficiency was based on post boil kettle volume, then it would be identical to mash efficiency, wouldn't it? The degree to which wort is separated from trub would seem to be a measure of efficiency, in which case it makes sense brew house efficiency would be based on volume into the fermenter. Bit of a moot point, as long as you consistently apply your own definition.


I agree, logically. Logically, brewhouse efficiency should be the ability to convert grain into the finished, bottled/kegged product.

How the industry standard view it may or may not be the same thing. I mostly want to make sure I'm using my software how it's designed and get a proper grasp on what others use when they say x% efficiency.


----------



## GuyQLD (10/5/13)

Parks, pro tip.

Eff using my interpretation = eff using Crusty's method (as far as wort actually collected as x amount of sugar per kg of grain). I mearly present mine as the default mode brewmate uses based on my observation. 

frankly couldn't care less what method you use as long as you're consistent you'll get the results you're after.

That's the stupid part of this whole thing.


----------



## Parks (10/5/13)

GuyQLD said:


> Parks, pro tip.
> 
> Eff using my interpretation = eff using Crusty's method (as far as wort actually collected as x amount of sugar per kg of grain). I mearly present mine as the default mode brewmate uses based on my observation.
> 
> ...


I really only care because

a) I want to know I'm using Beersmith correctly
b) It's nice to compare apples to apples.

Further to b) I really mean it would be nice to know we're comparing the same thing. It probably is a dream though seeing as the range of equipment with losses to Mash Tun dead space and design, Kettle dead space & chiller / line losses are so varying.

I appreciate the discussion too as it gives me insight into what others may use under the blanket of "efficiency".


----------



## djar007 (10/5/13)

Its like state of origin started early. I am tipping the blues on this one. But what would a mexican know.


----------



## stm (15/5/13)

Crusty said:


> Capture.PNG
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So where BrewMate says "Actual Volume in Kettle", it means "Actual Volume in Fermenter"? Is this right? (Confused...)


----------



## Kudzu (15/5/13)

Crusty said:


> Guy, the total batch size for this recipe is 23lt. I will make 23lt of total wort on brew day.
> So when I have finished boiling, I will have 26.5lt of wort sitting in my Urn.
> It's 26.5 - 2.5 - 1 = 23lt.
> The recipe sheet above yielded more than 2.5lt of trub, it was actually 3lt. I set my trub loss to 2.5lt as that's about average for most of my beers but it can vary depending on grain bill & how hard I squeeze the bag. So this recipe yielded 20lt into my no chill cube + 4lt of trub loss ( 1lt is cooling loss ) @ 1.055 so I ended up with 81% efficiency instead of the 80%.
> ...


I'm confused.

I've finished my boil and there's 26.5lt in the kettle. Minus trub, gives me 24lt, minus cooling losses (1lt) gives me 23lt. Why on earth wouldn't I put the whole 23lt into the fermenter? What's left to come out?


----------



## jc64 (15/5/13)

Kudzu said:


> I'm confused.
> 
> I've finished my boil and there's 26.5lt in the kettle. Minus trub, gives me 24lt, minus cooling losses (1lt) gives me 23lt. Why on earth wouldn't I put the whole 23lt into the fermenter? What's left to come out?


No need to be confused, drain your kettle, leave behind the trub and than whatever you have in your fermentor is what it is!

I like to than pour the remaining trub and wort into a graduated jug so I can make a measurement of how much a particular recipe loses to trub. That way I can adjust my loss estimation for say a really hoppy beer vs a stout etc.


----------



## Crusty (15/5/13)

Kudzu said:


> I'm confused.
> 
> I've finished my boil and there's 26.5lt in the kettle. Minus trub, gives me 24lt, minus cooling losses (1lt) gives me 23lt. Why on earth wouldn't I put the whole 23lt into the fermenter? What's left to come out?


Well why don't you then.
You can ferment on the whole trub if you so desire. 
There's been a few trials on this recently & apparently the trub inclusive beers fermented out quicker, finished at a lower gravity & were supposedly crisper than the same wort that was racked off the trub into another fermenter.
I don't do it but others are reporting some surprising results with some side by side tests.





Top left, recipe specs.
We need to produce 23lt of wort ( not clear wort, just total wort ) @1.054 to achieve 80% actual Brewhouse efficiency.
From that 23lt of not clear wort, we will lose 3lt to trub & chiller & an extra 1lt to cooling loss ( 4lt total not going into the cube )
So for this 23lt batch we will get, 20lt into the cube ( crystal clear wort ) + 3lt after cooling loss = 23litres.
If you collected 24lt in total before cooling loss @1.054, you got [email protected] efficiency.

This example below is not how you work out Brewhouse efficiency.
If you take out the 3lt of trub & get 20lt into your cube, the programme is now assuming you should of made 23lt @1.054 ( which you did ) but you are now entering ( incorrectly ) the figures for a 20lt batch @1.054. Your efficiency has now diminished to 69% because you were supposed to get 23lt of wort. ( which you did )
The amount of trub will vary depending on the recipe but as long as you add up all the wort you have ( which includes losses ) you have Brewhouse efficiency. 23lt of total wort produced. Do as you wish with the trub, toss it all in if you want, it's still 23lt of wort produced.




BrewMate is asking for you to input your Actual volume in ketlle ( which is volume in the kettle ) it's not trying to determine what you got into the cube or fermenter. Brewhouse efficiency includes all losses so it's the volume you have in the kettle & the gravity that will determine your actual Brewhouse efficiency.


----------



## jc64 (15/5/13)

http://beersmith.com/blog/2008/10/26/brewhouse-efficiency-for-all-grain-beer-brewing/

A good explanation of the term brewhouse efficiency.


----------



## Kudzu (15/5/13)

Crusty said:


> Well why don't you then.
> You can ferment on the whole trub if you so desire.
> There's been a few trials on this recently & apparently the trub inclusive beers fermented out quicker, finished at a lower gravity & were supposedly crisper than the same wort that was racked off the trub into another fermenter.
> I don't do it but others are reporting some surprising results with some side by side tests.


But I wouldn't be fermenting on the trub. I had 26.5 litres after the boil, that's my total volume in the kettle. I cool it and loose 1 litre. I then rack 23 litres of clear wort into the fermenter, this leaves 2.5 litres of trub in the kettle. 1 + 23 + 2.5 = 26.5

Whether Brewhouse efficiency is supposed to include total wort after boil or not I have no idea. I think it's quite obvious however that Brewmate considers batch size to be the amount that goes into the fermenter and that "Actual Volume in Kettle" actually means "Actual Volume in Fermenter" Otherwise it should default to the "Wort Volume after Boil" field rather than the "Batch Size" field.


----------



## jc64 (15/5/13)

Kudzu said:


> But I wouldn't be fermenting on the trub. I had 26.5 litres after the boil, that's my total volume in the kettle. I cool it and loose 1 litre. I then rack 23 litres of clear wort into the fermenter, this leaves 2.5 litres of trub in the kettle. 1 + 23 + 2.5 = 26.5
> 
> Whether Brewhouse efficiency is supposed to include total wort after boil or not I have no idea. I think it's quite obvious however that Brewmate considers batch size to be the amount that goes into the fermenter and that "Actual Volume in Kettle" actually means "Actual Volume in Fermenter" Otherwise it should default to the "Wort Volume after Boil" field rather than the "Batch Size" field.


Correct, the link I posted say's your right so I'll go with that.


----------



## Crusty (15/5/13)

Kudzu said:


> But I wouldn't be fermenting on the trub. I had 26.5 litres after the boil, that's my total volume in the kettle. I cool it and loose 1 litre. I then rack 23 litres of clear wort into the fermenter, this leaves 2.5 litres of trub in the kettle. 1 + 23 + 2.5 = 26.5
> 
> Whether Brewhouse efficiency is supposed to include total wort after boil or not I have no idea. I think it's quite obvious however that Brewmate considers batch size to be the amount that goes into the fermenter and that "Actual Volume in Kettle" actually means "Actual Volume in Fermenter" Otherwise it should default to the "Wort Volume after Boil" field rather than the "Batch Size" field.


It doesn't matter what you rack to the fermenter, you can chuck the whole 26.5lt into the fermenter if you want to.
Measure the gravity of what's in the kettle ( take off 1lt of cooling loss ) so [email protected] measured SG = ? Put that figure into the Actual volume in kettle & there's your answer.
Let us know what it is.
Batch size is not what's gong into the fermeter, it's what you made including losses.
Rob's wording is a bit confusing.


----------



## Kudzu (15/5/13)

I was speaking hypothetically using the numbers from one of the screen shots you (i think it was you posted). You said your batch size was 23l yet the after boil amount indicated 26.5l.

Take this one for example:





Untitled.png


You're saying your batch size is 23l which includes all trub etc, but Brewmate says your after boil volume is 27l. According to you, after boil volume IS the batch size. You don't see the inconsistency?

Maybe this will make it easier, again using your screen grab as the example:


Starting Volume: 33
Loss to Grain: 3
Loss to Evap: 3
Loss to Cooling: 1
Loss to Trub: 3

Final Volume in FV = 33-3-3-1-3
Final Volume in FV = 23

Where does the 20l value come into it? Brewmate considers batch size to be the amount of clear wort that goes into the fermenter. Whether it's the correct way to do it or not I don't know, and I don't really care.


----------



## Crusty (15/5/13)

Kudzu said:


> I was speaking hypothetically using the numbers from one of the screen shots you (i think it was you posted). You said your batch size was 23l yet the after boil amount indicated 26.5l.
> 
> Take this one for example:
> 
> ...


I wish you would get the term final volume in the fermenter out of your head.
There is nowhere in BrewMate that asks for your final volume into the fermenter.
Your batch size is the total amount of wort you make on the day, ie: ( wort volume after boil, 27lt. )
From that 27lt, you will lose 3lt to trub, 1lt of cooling loss so you will have 23lt, that's your batch size, not fermenter volume, not final volume, it's batch size.
As we have now determined that we should of made a 23lt batch & we have, we can add all this to the fermenter if you want so 23lt of wort @1.054 = 80% efficiency.

*Put 23lt into the Actual volume in kettle......23lt*
*Put Actual Original gravity in it's column....1.054*
*Actual Brewhouse efficiency is then worked out for you......80%*

*End of entering any figures. You have made 23lt @1.054 & hit 80% efficiency.*
*You do not need to then re-enter any figures into the software like how many litres you got into the fermenter or cube, that's where you are getting confused.*



His working out his total wort produced which is measured batch size, exactly the same as BrewMate, batch size = 23lt for my example.
He then adds up all his losses, 3lt of trub + 1lt in Braumeister + 1lt in measuring cup + the 22lt in the fermenter & ends up with 27lt total.


----------



## jc64 (15/5/13)

I think you are both saying the same thing in a different way, that link I posted explains brew-house efficiency clearly.


----------



## GuyQLD (15/5/13)

Crusty, just out of curiosity in your latest example above, out of the 23L batch size(after cooling and removal of trub) what wouldn't go in the fermenter?


----------



## Kudzu (15/5/13)

GuyQLD said:


> Crusty, just out of curiosity in your latest example above, out of the 23L batch size(after cooling and removal of trub) what wouldn't go in the fermenter?


That's what I'd like to know as well. Please don't say the trub.


----------



## Crusty (15/5/13)

GuyQLD said:


> Crusty, just out of curiosity in your latest example above, out of the 23L batch size(after cooling and removal of trub) what wouldn't go in the fermenter?


The 23lt includes the trub so it's 23lt of total wort.
I got 20lt into the cube.
I then drained the urn & got 4lt of trub & 1lt of this would be cooling loss which doesn't make it to the cube or the fermenter.
20 + 4 - 1 = 23


----------



## spudfarmerboy (15/5/13)

Whatever isn't transferred from the kettle to the fermenter is a loss. Because it is a loss it will reduce your "Brewhouse" efficiency. 
Its called Brewhouse Efficiency for a reason.


----------



## Kudzu (15/5/13)

Crusty said:


> The 23lt includes the trub so it's 23lt of total wort.
> I got 20lt into the cube.
> I then drained the urn & got 4lt of trub & 1lt of this would be cooling loss which doesn't make it to the cube or the fermenter.
> 20 + 4 - 1 = 23


But it doesn't. The 27 litres included the trub, 23 litres is what's left after you remove the trub and the wort's cooled. You said as much yourself. You're counting the trub twice.


----------



## jc64 (15/5/13)

Spudfarmer is on the money


----------



## Parks (15/5/13)

Kudzu said:


> You're counting the trub twice.


This is what was is confusing me.


----------



## stm (16/5/13)

Kudzu said:


> But it doesn't. The 27 litres included the trub, 23 litres is what's left after you remove the trub and the wort's cooled. You said as much yourself. You're counting the trub twice.


Exactly. Crusty, you are saying that the 27L includes the trub and the 23L also includes the trub.


----------



## nala (16/5/13)

stm said:


> Exactly. Crusty, you are saying that the 27L includes the trub and the 23L also includes the trub.


The original poster of this topic asked : Can someone explain how to use the Brewhouse efficiency in the Brewday worksheet
in BREWMATE.
He did not asked how to calculate efficiency using : PROMASH - BEERSMITH or any other software, he did not ask how forum members calculate efficiency.
Crusty has explained, how to determine the efficiency using the BREWMATE calculator whether anybody likes it or not.
Hopefully Birkdale Bob has got his answer.
Thank you for your patience Crusty.


----------



## Parks (16/5/13)

nala said:


> The original poster of this topic asked : Can someone explain how to use the Brewhouse efficiency in the Brewday worksheet
> in BREWMATE.
> He did not asked how to calculate efficiency using : PROMASH - BEERSMITH or any other software, he did not ask how forum members calculate efficiency.
> Crusty has explained, how to determine the efficiency using the BREWMATE calculator whether anybody likes it or not.
> ...


So you understand why Crusty is counting trub twice?


----------



## Parks (16/5/13)

I'm not sure but are we getting confused between fermenter trub and kettle trub?


----------



## jc64 (16/5/13)

Brewhouse efficency is the same thing regardless of software used. It means the same thing everytime someone says it.


----------



## Parks (16/5/13)

jc64 said:


> Brewhouse efficency is the same thing regardless of software used. It means the same thing everytime someone says it.


If that was the case we wouldn't be in this mess of a topic.

If you can do a breakdown of Crusty's 27L then please do.


----------



## jc64 (16/5/13)

You have already I thought

No, Spudfarmer I think.


----------



## Parks (16/5/13)

No, Crusty said that his 27L became 23L at the end of the boil _after trub and cooling loss_

Then he said he got 20L in the cube which was 20L + 4L trub - 1L cooling loss = 23L at the end of the boil.

I am sure there is a simple oversight / disconnect in communication but it's certainly not resolved.


----------



## Kudzu (16/5/13)

nala said:


> The original poster of this topic asked : Can someone explain how to use the Brewhouse efficiency in the Brewday worksheet
> in BREWMATE.
> He did not asked how to calculate efficiency using : PROMASH - BEERSMITH or any other software, he did not ask how forum members calculate efficiency.
> Crusty has explained, how to determine the efficiency using the BREWMATE calculator whether anybody likes it or not.
> ...


Crusty's definitions might be spot on but his maths isn't.

If Brewhouse efficiency includes the trub minus cooling loss then in the example we've been discussing the correct value to enter into Brewmate is 26l. 27l in the kettle after the boil, minus 1l cooling loss.


----------



## jc64 (16/5/13)

Parks said:


> No, Crusty said that his 27L became 23L at the end of the boil _after trub and cooling loss_
> 
> Then he said he got 20L in the cube which was 20L + 4L trub - 1L cooling loss = 23L at the end of the boil.
> 
> I am sure there is a simple oversight / disconnect in communication but it's certainly not resolved.


I don't know what that second line would be, i only account for losses to trub and chilling once.


----------



## Parks (16/5/13)

jc64 said:


> I don't know what that second line would be, i only account for losses to trub and chilling once.


That's why we're all confused!


----------



## jc64 (16/5/13)

Well let's not be confused  I don't know how to get a screenshot of a brewday screen but what ends up in my fermentor is the Actual volume in the kettle, which is the after cooling figure of course.


----------



## Parks (16/5/13)

jc64 said:


> Well let's not be confused  I don't know how to get a screenshot of a brewday screen but what ends up in my fermentor is the Actual volume in the kettle, which is the after cooling figure of course.


So you ferment on the hot break etc and have no loss to chiller, or is your 'actual volume' accounting for those losses?

(serious question)

-edit-

Kinda like "the actual volume is the volume I can get out of my kettle"


----------



## nala (16/5/13)

Kudzu said:


> Crusty's definitions might be spot on but his maths isn't.
> 
> If Brewhouse efficiency includes the trub minus cooling loss then in the example we've been discussing the correct value to enter into Brewmate is 26l. 27l in the kettle after the boil, minus 1l cooling loss.


I am attaching a Brewday worksheet from Brewmate.
You will see the Brewhouse efficiency calculator....it calls for volume in kettle, it calls for OG, it then calculates the brewhouse efficiency from these two numbers, it does not call for any other factor, if people do not agree that this is not the way to calculate brewhouse efficiency, then that is another subject. I repeat what I said...the original question by Birkdale Bob, was how to calculate Brewhouse efficiency using BREWMATE !!!


----------



## jc64 (16/5/13)

wort volume after boil 25.9, loss to trub 4l, loss to colling 4%, leaving 21L. Into my fermentor goes 21L. When calculating brewhouse efficiency why count the losses??

http://beersmith.com/blog/2008/10/26/brewhouse-efficiency-for-all-grain-beer-brewing/


----------



## Parks (16/5/13)

nala said:


> I am attaching a Brewday worksheet from Brewmate.
> You will see the Brewhouse efficiency calculator....it calls for volume in kettle, it calls for OG, it then calculates the brewhouse efficiency from these two numbers, it does not call for any other factor, if people do not agree that this is not the way to calculate brewhouse efficiency, then that is another subject. I repeat what I said...the original question by Birkdale Bob, was how to calculate Brewhouse efficiency using BREWMATE !!!
> 
> 
> ...


Do you input those volumes in the 'Actual Brewhouse Efficiency' section or is it done by the software when you populate the boil section? (or is the boil section a guide on what you should expect?)

Sure the OP was asking about BREWMATE but as you said, "brewhouse efficiency is brewhouse efficiency' so it's good to know and I believe relavent.


----------



## Kudzu (16/5/13)

nala said:


> I am attaching a Brewday worksheet from Brewmate.
> You will see the Brewhouse efficiency calculator....it calls for volume in kettle, it calls for OG, it then calculates the brewhouse efficiency from these two numbers, it does not call for any other factor, if people do not agree that this is not the way to calculate brewhouse efficiency, then that is another subject. I repeat what I said...the original question by Birkdale Bob, was how to calculate Brewhouse efficiency using BREWMATE !!!
> 
> 
> ...



Yes I know that and your screenshot is perfectly correct. Notice your "Wort volume after Boil" and "Actual Volume in Kettle" are the same, which they should be if you hit all your targets. (and assuming brewhouse efficiency includes losses)

Now go back and look and Crusty's screenshot. His "Wort Volume after Boil" is 27l yet he is using 23l as "Actual Volume in Kettle", which in reality is his "After Cooling (4% Loss)" value.


----------



## Kudzu (16/5/13)

Parks said:


> Do you input those volumes in the 'Actual Brewhouse Efficiency' section or is it done by the software when you populate the boil section? (or is the boil section a guide on what you should expect?)
> 
> Sure the OP was asking about BREWMATE but as you said, "brewhouse efficiency is brewhouse efficiency' so it's good to know and I believe relavent.


The "Actual Volume in Kettle" field in Brewhouse Efficiency defaults to the batch size set on the recipe screen and won't change unless you do it manually.

Batch Size in Brewmate I'm 99.9% sure is volume after trub and cooling losses, i.e. volume in fermenter.


----------



## nala (16/5/13)

Parks said:


> Do you input those volumes in the 'Actual Brewhouse Efficiency' section or is it done by the software when you populate the boil section? (or is the boil section a guide on what you should expect?)
> 
> Sure the OP was asking about BREWMATE but as you said, "brewhouse efficiency is brewhouse efficiency' so it's good to know and I believe relavent.


You measure the actual volume in the kettle and input the actual OG.
My kettle is a Crown urn, I measure with a rule the volume of wort in the kettle from the rim to the wort level.
I take a refractometer reading of the wort, I input these figures into Brewhouse efficiency and get a reading.
I have brewed 67 brews now and have refined my system to achieve the volumes that I require, my aim has always been to be able to brew to a given recipe. I am confident that the default criteria of my system gives me the results that I want, I am not interested in producing wort which is of a higher gravity than I require,and not understanding how this happened.
We do have forum members who do not concern themselves with recipe details as long as the beer is drinkable, this is not my objective. Good brewing to them if that is what they want.


----------



## Parks (16/5/13)

nala said:


> I am not interested in producing wort which is of a higher gravity than I require,and not understanding how this happened


I couldn't agree more. Doing this is the only way to assure repeatability and be able to fix issues.


----------



## jc64 (16/5/13)

Why are people counting trub and cooling loss when calculating brewhouse efficiency? It's called a 'loss' for a reason. Count it if it's what you always do by all means. However if after a accurate gauge of the efficiency of your equipment than you need to discount the losses your setup causes in order to get your true 'Brewhouse Efficiency'.


----------



## browndog (16/5/13)

jc64 said:


> Why are people counting trub and cooling loss when calculating brewhouse efficiency? It's called a 'loss' for a reason. Count it if it's what you always do by all means. However if after a accurate gauge of the efficiency of your equipment than you need to discount the losses your setup causes in order to get your true 'Brewhouse Efficiency'.


Because Brewhouse Efficiency is in a nutshell amount of fermentables in to sg and vol of wort out. If you loose a lot of wort to trub and kettle geometry then you don't have a very efficient brewhouse.


----------



## jc64 (16/5/13)

browndog said:


> Because Brewhouse Efficiency is in a nutshell amount of fermentables in to sg and vol of wort out. If you loose a lot of wort to trub and kettle geometry then you don't have a very efficient brewhouse.


Which is thus reflected in your Brewhouse efficiency, I agree.


----------



## BobtheBrewer (16/5/13)

nala said:


> I am attaching a Brewday worksheet from Brewmate.
> You will see the Brewhouse efficiency calculator....it calls for volume in kettle, it calls for OG, it then calculates the brewhouse efficiency from these two numbers, it does not call for any other factor, if people do not agree that this is not the way to calculate brewhouse efficiency, then that is another subject. I repeat what I said...the original question by Birkdale Bob, was how to calculate Brewhouse efficiency using BREWMATE !!!
> 
> 
> ...



Thanks for trying to keep this on track. I read your later post but decided to quote this one. Like you, I use a 40L urn and measure as you do. My concern with using the actual kettle volume to measure efficiency is that if you , for instance, use 80% as your efficiency on the first page of Brew Mate, then you would have to be spot on with the absorption rate and evaporation percentage that you use as a basis for your recipe. I don't think that you can predict absorption rate, it depends on the grain that you are using and the temperatures you have mashed at, and how good your squeeze technique is, plus mashout. I know that some days I seem to get a better boil than on other days, so that is another factor. I am happy to use volume into cube rather than volume in kettle to calculate my efficiency.


----------



## Crusty (17/5/13)

Birkdale Bob said:


> Thanks for trying to keep this on track. I read your later post but decided to quote this one. Like you, I use a 40L urn and measure as you do. My concern with using the actual kettle volume to measure efficiency is that if you , for instance, use 80% as your efficiency on the first page of Brew Mate, then you would have to be spot on with the absorption rate and evaporation percentage that you use as a basis for your recipe. I don't think that you can predict absorption rate, it depends on the grain that you are using and the temperatures you have mashed at, and how good your squeeze technique is, plus mashout. I know that some days I seem to get a better boil than on other days, so that is another factor. I am happy to use volume into cube rather than volume in kettle to calculate my efficiency.


Yeah but if you don't hit the required numbers bang on, your volume at the end of the brew day will be more or less & I agree, volumes vary from brew to brew & there's so many factors that can swing it either way on the day. I just add my total volume I've made on the day, punch in the gravity of that collected volume & there's the Brewhouse efficiency. I set my efficiency to 80% & sometimes it's a touch more trub or slightly higher gravity but generally volumes & @80% efficiency are spot on.
I'm a tad baffled just how BrewMate calculates the values & I have been trying to contact Rob for input to this discussion but can't seem to track him down.
I'm not 100% sure how it works it out but every time I brew & set my recipe up @80% eff, 23lt batch, I get 20lt into my cube & 3lt to trub after cooling loss so the trub inclusion plays some part in that total batch size. If I was to set the recipe up for 20lt batch size ( into fermenter / cube volume ) I can almost guarantee that my volume into the fermenter / cube will fall short the exact amount I have my trub set to.
I've brewed with BeerSmith & Beer Tools Pro & set my recipes up so that trub excluded, I get 20lt into my cube but BrewMate is different & the calculation is not the same as some of the other software out there.


----------



## Liam_snorkel (18/5/13)

Crusty said:


> I'm not 100% sure how it works it out but every time I brew & set my recipe up @80% eff, 23lt batch, I get 20lt into my cube & 3lt to trub after cooling loss so the trub inclusion plays some part in that total batch size. If I was to set the recipe up for 20lt batch size ( into fermenter / cube volume ) I can almost guarantee that my volume into the fermenter / cube will fall short the exact amount I have my trub set to.


I think this is why you've caused so much controversy in the thread. When I set my recipes up as 22 litres - I get 22 litres in the fermenter, and I suspect the other guys get similar results too.


----------



## Crusty (18/5/13)

Liam_snorkel said:


> I think this is why you've caused so much controversy in the thread. When I set my recipes up as 22 litres - I get 22 litres in the fermenter, and I suspect the other guys get similar results too.


It's far from controversy.
22lt @ what efficiency?
Can you post a screen shot of your brew day sheet?


----------



## Liam_snorkel (18/5/13)

for this one I hit pretty close to the numbers.
pre-boil - 29.4l
post-boil - 25.6l
into fermenter - 22.5l
actual efficiency - 78.5%

like I said before - I've kept a track of my last 18 brews and use the efficiency after losses. It works for me, and makes sense on the brew sheet.


----------



## GuyQLD (18/5/13)

For what it's worth, if you do volume (inc trub) @ x O.G. = 80% you'll find that Volume (ex trub) @ x O.G = 70% (the % values are made up, I'd have to actually calculate it for proper values) due to trub loss "skimming" an amount of recovered extract straight off the top.

So if Crusty made his recipes in Beersmith (which uses the including Trub values) then he SHOULD be using the same method in Brewmate if he wants to be consistent (inc trub)

I started in Brewmate and have always calculated minus trub, so my efficiencies look lower however my conversion (preboil) efficiency would be similar/same.

(For example - the 67% IPA I posted when calculated according to the Beersmith Model is about 78% from memory)

Liam's values are just nuts. I bow to you good sir.


----------



## jc64 (18/5/13)

Liam_snorkel said:


> for this one I hit pretty close to the numbers.
> pre-boil - 29.4l
> post-boil - 25.6l
> into fermenter - 22.5l
> ...


That looks right, my boil off is higher and I lose 1 Liter more to trub. That why my Brewhouse efficiency is 72% rather than 78%. My Brewhouse is less efficient. If I wasn't a idiot I'd post a screenshot of my brewday sheet


----------



## Liam_snorkel (18/5/13)

Crusty?


----------



## Crusty (19/5/13)

It makes perfect sense Liam & looking at the brew day sheet, it looks simple enough. After volume boil - trub loss - cooling loss = your volume into fermenter. If that is the correct way to do it, I have some work to do in my brewery as my efficiency would now be 70%.
I still can't track down Rob & have sent him another email so hopefully he can explain it .
Next brew I'll set up the day for a 20lt batch @70% efficiency & see how that goes.
I know I can crush a tad finer & be more accurate with my cube volume so that's the plan for next brew.
Cheers for everyone's input.


----------



## chunckious (19/5/13)

jc64 said:


> That looks right, my boil off is higher and I lose 1 Liter more to trub. That why my Brewhouse efficiency is 72% rather than 78%. My Brewhouse is less efficient. If I wasn't a idiot I'd post a screenshot of my brewday sheet


I also read the the numbers as Liam does and set my Brewhouse Eff to 72.


----------



## TSMill (19/5/13)

70% brew house efficiency would translate to 80-85% mash efficiency which seems fine to me. If you are happy with your OG, quantity of grain per batch, and most importantly the quality of the end product, why change anything?


----------



## thedragon (19/5/13)

TSMill said:


> If you are happy with your OG, quantity of grain per batch, and most importantly the quality of the end product, why change anything?


TSMill, yours is probably the most sensible comment made in this thread.


----------

