# Fly Vs Batch



## sosman (23/10/05)




----------



## vlbaby (23/10/05)

Duh? Please explain!


----------



## sosman (23/10/05)

vlbaby said:


> Duh? Please explain!
> [post="84837"][/post]​


I ran a poll on a US board (we could run the same one here and add the results together I guess) asking about mash efficiency.

The results above are summaries after 73 people "voted". Fly spargers do better on average, but both batch and fly sparges can achieve high efficiencies.

It seems the most common range is 75-80% remembering that the poll asked people to vote only after their brewhouse had settled into some consistency.

When brewers first start mashing it can take a few goes to get a good handle on your equipment (brewing equipment that is).


----------



## sluggerdog (23/10/05)

would be good to see the results from the AHB'er. Could ya run the same poll here sosman?

Cheers


----------



## sosman (23/10/05)

sluggerdog said:


> would be good to see the results from the AHB'er. Could ya run the same poll here sosman?
> [post="84843"][/post]​


I just tried to but AHB is limited to 10 questions, the poll has 18.


----------



## Kai (23/10/05)

Just outline the options in the first post and get people to answer in the message body. I'd be interested to see the results from here, too.


----------



## sosman (23/10/05)

Kai said:


> Just outline the options in the first post and get people to answer in the message body. I'd be interested to see the results from here, too.
> [post="84850"][/post]​


Oh yeah, I can just see myself, scratching through the replies to see who voted what.

I'm sure if enough *mods read this* they might consider upping the poll size to 20 - its not like we have millions of polls or anything.


----------



## Aaron (23/10/05)

Can you put it on brewiki then put a link here?


----------



## sosman (23/10/05)

Aaron said:


> Can you put it on brewiki then put a link here?
> [post="84877"][/post]​


Two polls, one study
fly poll
batch poll


----------



## Kai (23/10/05)

That works even better, it gets around the fact that people can't vote more than once in a poll.


----------



## sosman (24/10/05)

Alrighty then, the top plots were from brewboard. Here are the AHB results:


----------



## sosman (24/10/05)

And the combined results:





Thanks to everyone who took part in the poll.


----------



## Batz (24/10/05)

OMG sosman !

I've worked with very efficient people like you , you have to be an engineer

Batz


----------



## big d (24/10/05)

great stuff sos.
so what should i do?
batch or fly?

im confused  :unsure: 

big d
btw i batch


----------



## mudsta (24/10/05)

I batch sparge and have never fly sparged. I would be interested to hear about fly v's batch beer flavour comparisons. Ive heard that batch gives a better quality beer but loses a little efficency. (backed up by your results) I run low to mid efficency but get good results in flavour.

Looking forward to other view points,

Mudsta :beerbang:


----------



## Jye (25/10/05)

Good stuff sosman :beerbang: 

Just want to make sure I am reading the mash efficiency plot correctly, the box is 1 SD, the outer limits 2 SD and the thick line the mean? Are the dots outliers?

I hated stats in uni :angry:


----------



## sosman (25/10/05)

big d said:


> great stuff sos.
> so what should i do?
> batch or fly?
> 
> ...


Big D - don't switch from what you are doing if it works for you. I batch and don't plan to fly. My brewday goes very smoothly (unless I drink too much and hook up my CFC the wrong way round :blink: ).


----------



## chiller (25/10/05)

mudsta said:


> I batch sparge and have never fly sparged. I would be interested to hear about fly v's batch beer flavour comparisons. Ive heard that batch gives a better quality beer but loses a little efficency. (backed up by your results) I run low to mid efficency but get good results in flavour.
> 
> Looking forward to other view points,
> 
> ...




The ultimate for "clean" flavour is true no sparge -- that is the true first runnings from the tun and then topped up in the kettle with water to the boil volume. Efficiency can be as low as 38% and hard to calculate over different beers.

Geoffery Donovan the Promash authour did a piece on this subject. And no i don't have a link but I do hear that Google is a reasonable search engine. 

Steve


----------



## warrenlw63 (25/10/05)

Slightly uneconomical way to make beer though. That said the malt flavours would be very clean indeed. I guess you could also sparge the remants for a "small beer" or keep them for future starters. :beerbang: 

I follow a similar philosophy at the expense of a dollar or two of grain. With paler beers I stop the sparge at between 1.025-1.030 and for darker beers about 1.020-1.025.

Refractometers make this practice a piece of piss so to speak. :super: 

Warren -


----------



## pint of lager (25/10/05)

Jeffrey Donovan's Mechanics of No Sparge Brewing 

Thanks Chiller for suggesting having a read. Google is my friend.


----------



## peas_and_corn (25/10/05)

Just a question- how do I measure efficiency??


----------



## chiller (25/10/05)

.


peas_and_korn said:


> Just a question- how do I measure efficiency??
> [post="85392"][/post]​




I'm actually thinking of organising a bulk buy peas_and_korn.

You measure efficiency with a digital actl interfaced efficiency meter. Thay aren't cheap but as a bulk buy on e-bay I'm sure we can find some/

You will also need a Cray super computer attached to the out flow of your mashtun, boiler and fermenter. If you cannot afford a Cray then get loads of your brewing mates together and get a "free" copy of Linux and form your very own cluster. Now this is not anything at all like cluster the hop or cluster the bush kangeroo.

Just to summarise A cray super computer or a cluster driven by linux and some high end software and perhaps friends with time on their hands.


Now failing all that BS you can use a computer with Beersmith,Brewsta,Promash or any other good brewing software.

Now do you want to calculate mash efficiency -- kettle efficiency or brewhouse efficiency?

Steve

PS I must drink later in the day.


----------



## peas_and_corn (25/10/05)

my head hurts.

kettle/brewhouse efficiency??

I'm still relatively new to brewing, and these terms are new to me...


----------



## deadly (25/10/05)

search and you will find....


----------



## chiller (25/10/05)

peas_and_korn said:


> my head hurts.
> 
> kettle/brewhouse efficiency??
> 
> ...




Ok -- the important one to me as a brewer is Brewhouse efficiency.

All the others are meaningless if you have a low or inconsistent brewhouse efficiency figure.

When you calulate a recipe the amount of grain water time of boil -- everything -- plays a role in the efficiency of your entire system. The efficiency is your personal brewhouse efficiency.

If I make a beer and my brewhouse efficiency is 65% and Pint of Lager makes the same beer from my recipe using the same methods [same grain weights, same water amounts, same, everything] but her brewhouse efficiency is 80% she will get a far higher gravity final wort into her fermenter and as a consequence the beer will be nothing at all like the beer I made.

Now if she want to make the same beer as I made she has to scale that recipe that I gave her to an 80% brewhouse efficiency. Good software will do that very simply for you.

Just having someones award winning recipe will not give you an exact copy of that beer. Hope that gives you some info.

Steve


----------



## sosman (25/10/05)

peas_and_korn said:


> Just a question- how do I measure efficiency??
> [post="85392"][/post]​


Since this thread is about extraction efficiency, you are interested in how much sugar you convert/extract from the mash. Malts and adjuncts have specs which includes one or more figures (potential, ppg, hwe are all different ways to express this) that indicate how much sugar you could extract under laboratory conditions.

If you achieve that figure into your kettle, then you have 100% efficiency. From the poll you can see that different brewers get different figures.

To measure the sugar in the kettle, you need to measure the sugar concentration (using hydrometer or refractometer) and the volume.

The overall efficiency will come out lower into the fermenter because sugars usually get left behind in the kettle.

Brewsta can do the maths for you (as can other brewing software) but you should work it out yourself at least once.


----------



## Simon W (9/2/06)

Resurecting an old thread here, Is fly sparging what John Palmer refers to as 'continuous sparge'? Where the water level always remains an inch or two above the grain while sparging?
It's the method I use, but never knew the correct term for it.


----------



## Trent (9/2/06)

Simon
I am pretty sure that it is called fly sparging. I started out fly sparging, but now batch cause it saves me a little bit of time (or at least saves me arms from getting tired of drizzling water over the mash for an hour!)
All the best
Trent


----------



## Zwickel (9/2/06)

hi brewmates,

so far, I do batch sparging and my brewhouse-efficiency ist about 78%, so Im very satisfied.

How do I calculate the brewhouse-efficiency?

well, Ill try to explain, despite of my poor english, for that I must apologize.

first I have to explain that we reckon the extract in %, not like most of Australian homebrewers do in gravity.
the percentage is approxymately 1/4 of your readings behind the 1000
for example, your reading is 1048, that means 12% extract.

first we measure the Wort in litre, but we need it in kg.
approxymately we may calculate the density of wort as follows:

0 Mass % --> density = 1
1 Mass % --> density = 1.004
2 Mass % --> density = 1.008

we may calculate:

(1) Mass [kg] = Volume[l] * (1 + Mass% * 0,004) [kg/l]

but stop, this only if the wort is at 20C
if the wort is still boiling or very hot, we have to calculate a contraction-factor of 0,96
that means: (2) Volume [l, 20] = Volume [l, 100] * 0,96

Now we may reckon the weight of the wort:
(1)+(2) 
(3) Mass [kg, 20] = amount of wort[l, 100] * 0,96 * (1 + Mass% * 0,004)

In this amount of wort is contained:
(4) Extrakt [kg] = Mass [kg, 20] * Extrakt-readings[%] / 100 

or easier:
(5) Extrakt [kg] = amount of wort[l, 20] * 0,96 * (1 + Mass% * 0,004) * Extrakt-readings[%] / 100

now we can conclude:
(6) brewhouse-efficiency = Extrakt [kg] / amount of grain [kg] * 100 %

I have made an simple Excel-sheet, you may just put in your datas:

take any result-cell and put in this formula (for cold wort):
=((B4*0,004+1)*B4)*A4/C4

and for hot or boiling wort:
=((B4*0,004+1)*B4*0,96)*A4/C4

You may put in your datas in Cell A4, B4 and C4,
where the cell A4 is the amount of wort in litre
and the cell B4 is the reading of extract in %, for example your reading ist 1048, so you put in 12 (%)
and the cell C4 is the total amount of grain (kg) 

the result will show you the brewhouse-efficiency in %

puhhh, hard work for me writing in english....


----------



## Uncle Fester (9/2/06)

Zwickel said:


> well, Ill try to explain, despite of my poor english, for that I must apologize.
> 
> .............
> 
> ...




Maaaate....
Trust me..... your English is as good as anybody's on this site, and I would suggest that your German is considerably better ! h34r: 

Beifallsrufe!


----------



## Zwickel (9/2/06)

> Trust me..... your English is as good as anybody's on this site,....


thank you very much, mandrakar, very kind  



> Beifallsrufe!



hehe, dankeschn, Prost :beer:


----------



## Simon W (9/2/06)

Trent said:


> Simon
> I am pretty sure that it is called fly sparging.



Thanks Trent.
I'm still fly sparging due to equipment limitations, did try to batch sparge with my gear once, but when trying to fill my lauter tun(if you could call it that!) with water again, it wouldn't go thru! Just sat on top. Never have a problem with fly runoff.




Zwickel said:


> How do I calculate the brewhouse-efficiency?


Hi Zwickel,
Very interesting post, thanks, will play around with that and see if I like it.
Your English is perfect, I only wish I could learn Deutch as proficiently as your English in the next two weeks before I get to Munich!
You might know this already, but Australia officialy uses the metric system too. You wouldn't know it by looking at this thread. Our extract (gravity/pounds/gallon) is a kind of defacto standard that we've picked up, probably due to the huge amount of American information out there.

I would prefer to use Kg/L, just to reduce confusion between US and UK gallons!

Edit: spelling


----------



## tangent (9/2/06)

> first we measure the Wort in litre, but we need it in kg.
> approxymately we may calculate the density of wort as follows:
> 
> 0 Mass % --> density = 1
> ...



can someone put that in "stupid english?"
my cray supercomputer is all tied up with a game of pong.


----------



## Zwickel (9/2/06)

tangent said:


> can someone put that in "stupid english?"



hello tangent,

Ill try to explain a little bit easier:

to know the efficiency, basically means: how much sugar can I get out of a certain amount of grain.

for example: if you can get 10kg sugar out of 10kg contained in the grain, it would be 100%, but that is unreachable.

because we are measuring the grain in kg, we have to calculate the amount of sugar in kg as well.

the above mentioned formula is just a conversion of the amount of sugar dissolved in the wort in kg, standing in relation to the amount of grain.

comprehencible?

Cheers


----------



## sosman (9/2/06)

Without going through the calcs (I am sure zwickel has done a fine job) it comes down to the mass of extract you end up with.

I get about 85% of the available extract from the malt into my kettle. Depending on how I feel on the day, I might leave up to 5 litres in the kettle, which means the fermenter ends up with say only 80% of what was in the kettle which means a system efficiency of 0.85 * 0.8 = 0.68 or 68%.

Hey Zwickel - I thought you were heading downunder around this time?

And of course Brewsta calculates this for you in the observations page.


----------



## Zwickel (9/2/06)

sosman said:


> Hey Zwickel - I thought you were heading downunder around this time?



yeah, I had to change my schedule a little bit.
The new schedule is: leaving Germany at 22.Feb and arriving Sydney at 24.Feb.

Right before Im gonna leave, Ill post it here, so there are maybe some opportunities to meet some homebrewers and have a beer together.

Cheers


----------



## tangent (9/2/06)

i understand the principle idea Zwickel 
it's when you turn it into numbers and signs that i lose the plot!
can you PM me and ask me some questions and work out my brewhouse efficiency for me? 
me no do numbers


----------



## Simon W (9/2/06)

Zwickel said:


> The new schedule is: leaving Germany at 22.Feb and arriving Sydney at 24.Feb.



Hey we're swapping places, be crossing path's somewhere over India.


----------



## Zwickel (9/2/06)

Simon said:


> Hey we're swapping places, be crossing path's somewhere over India.


hey Simon, are you leaving behind some homebrew-gear somwhere in Australia?
in case if I get homesick....for brewing beer....

Maybe well meet in Singapore and may exchange our house-key?

Ive plenty of beer stored in my cellar


----------



## Simon W (9/2/06)

Haha! I'm in Perth not Sydney, so not really swapping places but we're swapping countries atleast.


----------



## Darren (9/2/06)

Zwickel said:


> Simon said:
> 
> 
> > Hey we're swapping places, be crossing path's somewhere over India.
> ...





Zwickel, If you make it to Adelaide there are plenty of Hbers (best in the country  who would welcome you)

cheers
Darren

(PS there are some great microbrewers over here too)


----------



## Screwtop (9/2/06)

Zwickel, are you venturing to Queensland, in particular the Sunshine Coast or Noosa, du sind willkommen.


----------



## tangent (10/2/06)

BBQ at Darrens house!


----------

