A Guide To All-grain Brewing In A Bag

[PistolPatch]

Morning katzke,

All these things have been covered very thoroughly in those thread links I provided three or four days ago. We better not get into that here, otherwise we will be just repeating the hundreds of posts there.

For me, the point of all this here is just to find out the best figures to quote for guys starting out and the safest place for them to take their measurements so they don't take a year or so of confusion to discover this for themselves. Be nice to see new brewers getting on track very early.

Cheers,
Pat

P.S. You are correct on the hops absorbing sugar. I have only seen a figure on this once and can't remember what it was now. I think it was given in some weird measure per hectolitre. From memory though it didn't solve the problem unfortunateley.

 

[katzke]

Morning katzke,

All these things have been covered very thoroughly in those thread links I provided three or four days ago. We better not get into that here, otherwise we will be just repeating the hundreds of posts there.

For me, the point of all this here is just to find out the best figures to quote for guys starting out and the safest place for them to take their measurements so they don't take a year or so of confusion to discover this for themselves. Be nice to see new brewers getting on track very early.

Well I guess you want to be technical. Me I just want to make beer.

I measure after the bag is out. I then can find out how my mash went. If I waited until the boil started then turned off the heat to get a volume measurement and then waited for the sample to cool I think I would give it up and go back to extract. The reason I do it this way is simple. If my gravity is low I boil longer to get it up to where I expect to start out at. I can then do my hop schedule as normal and at the end of the boil my gravity will be close to what I want. If my gravity is high I know I will be ok as I can add water at the end or just have a stronger beer. Once I get a better handle on my system I will have to do this less but I know enough now to not even have to check the gravity after boiling for a while because I know about how much water I boil off.

No surprises this way when I check starting gravity as it goes in the fermentor. I know if I need to make any adjustments to the recipe for next time.

When I started I was worried about making so much beer. Now I am not worried about the amount as much as I am in getting the gravity correct. I also know that getting a nuts on accurate volume with a dip stick is not possible with out putting more effort into calibrating it to a smaller increment (Maybe you can measure the amount or wort in your kettle down to the half liter). I also know it would not be worth the effort because I am only guessing at what line the hydrometer sample is at. Maybe some of you are better at guessing if it is 1.040 or 1.039, or 10.41. Then the little bubbles and the thing deciding to get stuck to the side of the sample tube, or it stops spinning and the scale I want is on the back side. No matter how I try and move the tube it always spins around.

So I guess if you need to teach people to BIAB and be that technical about when to take a sample then you need to tell us how to be able to read a hydrometer down to .001. Cause with mine marked at .002 increments and how the sample curves as it leaves the side of the sample tube and touches the hydrometer I am lucky to get it to .002 or so depending on where the levels looks like it is resting at. Then I am distracted by all that goes on when I brew and not even considering if I am sampling the fruits of my last brew.

It is home brewing and it is supposed to be fun. You technical guys can make it as hard as you want but it does not have to be done that way. So make sure you do not scare people away by saying so.

 

[tumi2]

Hi all

On Saturday I did my 2^nd AG using BIAB (second AG ever). I made English bitter and copied the exact same recipe that I used for my first attempt. The wrap up of my first attempt is described on pages 59 60 including my successes, failures and a summary of the process.

This time round everything went very well and I had none of the problems I had in my first attempt.

I aimed for 1039 and got 1040 which I was happy with. I got 23 litres of clear wort in the fermenter and that was my target. The wort tasted very different to last time and was nice and sweet with a slight bitterness and did not have a thick syrupy mouth feel about it as it did last time. I attribute this to mashing at 64- 66 degs rather than 68 69degs.

The mash was easy, started at 66 degs, 45 mins later it dropped to 64 degs I lit the smallest ring of my 3 ring burner and ran it for about 15 mins. This bought it back to 66 degs and then turned the fire off and it dropped back to 64 over the next 45 mins. I had it wrapped in a thick blanket. Overall a pretty easy mash. I did agitate it a great deal more than last time and quite aggressively also.

The transfer of hot wort to my cube from kettle was done using a silicone hose that I got from one of the sponsors of this site assisted by my friend gravity since I don't have a tap on my pot. It worked a treat and smoothly transferred the liquid into the cube with no splash at all and importantly no burns. This overcame my biggest difficulty in my first attempt.

I pitched the yeast the next day at 20 degs and this time used my new aeration plastic stone on high setting and the wort was almost frothing over the top of the fermenter. I aerated for about 15 mins, pitched the yeast and the next morning there was a thick froth on top. 24 hours after pitching the wort the bubbles coming through the waterlock woke my wife and I up. It was going troppo and has been since. This is by far the best fermentation I have ever had compared to all my kit brews. Aerating the work certainly makes a big difference.

Anyway, it is now a waiting game for a week or so then rack to a secondary and then bottle. Then I get to drink my first successful AG. Overall a very happy chappy and will now think about a 3^rd effort but this time I will try and different style of beer.

 

[katzke]

Hi all


This time round everything went very well and I had none of the problems I had in my first attempt.

Glad to hear it went well this time. Keep it up and let us know if things go bad after you make soup or sauce in the brew kettle.

 

[tumi2]

Could someone please check over this for me.

I want to work out my efficiency for the brew in the post above. Is the first time i have done it and not sure i am getting it correct. I only got 62% so need to know if i am calculating correctly.

Calculations:

4kg of Pale malt = 8.82 pounds
700gr of light crystal = 1.54 pounds

Max Yield
This is a bit of a guess because i dont know exactly what type of grain i used but it was Pale Ale Malt and light crystal from Daves Home brew.

My assumptions for yield:

Pale Ale malt = 1038
Light Crystal = 1034

Gravity after chill and before pitching yeast
1040

Total volume into fermenter after taking out trub and cold break in cube
22.7 ltres = 6 gallons


38 * 8.82 / 6 = 55.86
34 * 1.54 / 6 = 8.7

55.86 + 8.7 = 64.56

40/64.56 = .62

The volume i used was what i put in my fermenter after subtracting the 2 liters i left in my kettle and the 1 liter i left in my cube.

If someone can help im sure i wont need to ask again.

 

[PistolPatch]

katzke: I think you might have missed my point old mate! I personally don't get worried about measuring. I know what works for me and I think that, as a broad generalisation, the more brews under your belt, the less you worry about measurements etc. BUT, when new brewers start out, they are very worried and usually bewildered by this whole efficiency business. Like I said above, we are just trying to establish the best time to measure, the best efficiency measurement to use on the first few brews, the best volume to use on the first few brews and the least confusing way of putting this all together. Hope that makes sense

tumi2: Thanks for letting us know of your progress. Great to hear that number 2 went a bit more smoothly than the first.

Your efficiency calculations are correct - good on ya!

BUT! What you have measured here is your efficiency into fermenter which is a lot lower than the "Brewhouse Efficiency," figure that brewing software programs use and which many brewers simply call efficiency.

Their brewhouse efficiency figure and the one you should use if using software is based on the volume after the boil. This means it includes all the kettle trub. What we don't know, is how much trub you had left in the kettle. Here's what your Brewhouse Efficiency figures would be if....

you had 2lts of trub you would have had a BE of 67.4%
you had 3lts of trub you would have had a BE of 70.1%
you had 4lts of trub you would have had a BE of 72.9%
you had 5lts of trub you would have had a BE of 75.6%

Your 62% into fermenter efficiency figure is fine - no problems at all. BUT, you shouldn't use that figure in your brewing software and you shouldn't use 23lts as your batch size in software. You should use 23lts plus trub (let's pretend 4lts). You should use 27lts.

I can't see any problems with your measuring or results so you are certainly on track. Next time you do a brew, use the template in the BIAB Brewer Register thread. Have a look at that thread from about this post on.

So relax mate, you are doing very well.

:icon_cheers:
Pat

 

[Thirsty Boy]

TB, this tiny fraction of measuring anomaly, did you adjust for the difference in volume due to temperature along the lines: change in volume=(coefficient of volume expansion)(initial volume)(change in temperature) or ΔV = V0βΔT

Layman's: from 0C - 100C you would see a 4% change in volume...

No, OK, I'll get me coat...

Yes I did take it into account - by measuring all the volumes at the same temperature (ie immediately after the wort had been boiling... 100C) and made sure all top up water was freshly boiled from the kettle. Everything at teh same temp. All the samples analysed at the same temperature - 20C

Because the idea was a comparison of the two values - it really doesn't matter that the 2.0L would shrink by 4% .. it would do so for both samples

TB

 

[katzke]

Could someone please check over this for me.

I want to work out my efficiency for the brew in the post above. Is the first time i have done it and not sure i am getting it correct. I only got 62% so need to know if i am calculating correctly.

62 % into the fermentor is good.

To be able to tweak recipes using your software you need to know your mash efficiency. Will let Pat help you with that as he has his way and software can be a bit different to use with BIAB.

And while this may be what people consider brew house efficiency it does not take into consideration what you get out of your fermentor. I do not consider it beer until it is bottled or keged.

 

[katzke]

katzke: I think you might have missed my point old mate! I personally don't get worried about measuring. I know what works for me and I think that, as a broad generalisation, the more brews under your belt, the less you worry about measurements etc. BUT, when new brewers start out, they are very worried and usually bewildered by this whole efficiency business. Like I said above, we are just trying to establish the best time to measure, the best efficiency measurement to use on the first few brews, the best volume to use on the first few brews and the least confusing way of putting this all together. Hope that makes sense

Well if you are just trying to establish the best time to take a gravity reading, to measure mash efficiency, then it would have to be after the bag is pulled and any drained wort is added back into the kettle. It would also have to be with out a boil so a good guess of volume can be made.

Now consider the people who are brewing with urns and fight to get to a boil or those with out high BTU burners and also fight for a boil. Do you really want to ask them to bring the wort up to boil and then turn it off just to get a gravity reading?

The volume to use depends on the grain bill and the kettle. It also depends on how well they crush and squeeze. It also depends on how well they separate the break material. To be honest I thought TB already gave the answer to that. The formula he gave works better then any software I have tried. Sorry I do not have the particulars in front of me but I am sure he would be willing to give it again.

If there is a loss of sugar in the boil it should be consistent, at least as consistent as other losses. So it can be added up to brew house losses. This will give a reasonable figure for mash efficiency for them to use while it is all changing anyway. After all if you have a 75% efficiency in your recipe that does not say I can use your recipe and amounts to brew on my system. What I need to brew one of your recipes is the grain bill with mash schedule, the hops as well as the hop schedule, yeast & temp, the IBU estimate, the starting gravity into the fermentor, and the volume into the fermentor. It is nice to know what final gravity should be as well as the color. Then I can make any changes in the recipe I need for my system.

If you are going to spend a lot of time and effort to get all the calculations down you should be working on telling people how to calibrate their kettle measuring device and boil off. Then how to use the different software programs to get the correct amounts to brew with. Figuring how much water to use by hand is the easy part if you follow TBs formula. I could never get my software to agree with what worked (TBs calculations).

 

[tumi2]

......

tumi2: Thanks for letting us know of your progress. Great to hear that number 2 went a bit more smoothly than the first.

Your efficiency calculations are correct - good on ya!

BUT! What you have measured here is your efficiency into fermenter which is a lot lower than the "Brewhouse Efficiency," figure that brewing software programs use and which many brewers simply call efficiency.

Their brewhouse efficiency figure and the one you should use if using software is based on the volume after the boil. This means it includes all the kettle trub. What we don't know, is how much trub you had left in the kettle. Here's what your Brewhouse Efficiency figures would be if....

you had 2lts of trub you would have had a BE of 67.4%
you had 3lts of trub you would have had a BE of 70.1%
you had 4lts of trub you would have had a BE of 72.9%
you had 5lts of trub you would have had a BE of 75.6%

Your 62% into fermenter efficiency figure is fine - no problems at all. BUT, you shouldn't use that figure in your brewing software and you shouldn't use 23lts as your batch size in software. You should use 23lts plus trub (let's pretend 4lts). You should use 27lts.

I can't see any problems with your measuring or results so you are certainly on track. Next time you do a brew, use the template in the BIAB Brewer Register thread. Have a look at that thread from about this post on.

So relax mate, you are doing very well.

:icon_cheers:
Pat

Thanks for that Pistol patch. I indeed did not include the trub and also i left a liter or so in the cube that i did not include in the figures. I will have another go at that tonight. I know i had about 2.5 ltrs to trub and about another 500 ml left in the cube. So i need to add on another 3 liters to my volume.

I read your thread about wanting those efficiency figures. I wil put mine up if you like but they are only from a single brew and an inexpienced brewer so not sure if you want them. I do take all the measurements in your list though. I have not adjusted my volume figures for the temperature so will start doing that.

Also i read that you can use Beersmith to work out the efficiency. I cant find out how to do this in the program. I reckon i would be better off using a program than relying on my maths. It is good to try and understand what it is actually measuring though.

 

[tumi2]

So Batch size in Beersmith that you put in Beersmith is what you expect to get at the end of the boil not what you want in your fermenter.....

and Efficicency includes full volume at end of boil after subtracting 4% for liquid volume increase at 100 degs.

When i take this into my calculations i end up with 73.4% Brewhouse Efficiency and a 27 liter batch rather than a 23 liter batch which i originally used in Beersmith.

Makes sense now!!!

 

[katzke]

So Batch size in Beersmith that you put in Beersmith is what you expect to get at the end of the boil not what you want in your fermenter.....

and Efficicency includes full volume at end of boil after subtracting 4% for liquid volume increase at 100 degs.

When i take this into my calculations i end up with 73.4% Brewhouse Efficiency and a 27 liter batch rather than a 23 liter batch which i originally used in Beersmith.

Makes sense now!!!

I guess everyone has his own idea of what brew house efficiency should be and when to test it.

I want to know how much beer I get out of my grain. So my figure is based on my final drinkable beer volume.

A brewery may consider it as the amount of beer they send to the bottling/kegging line. So that would be what you get out of the fermentor.

The only time you take off the 4% is if you are checking boiling wort. Heat expands and all that.

I think it is only logical for home brewers to say it is the amount of beer they can possibly drink. It should at least be what comes out of the fermentor as the yeast sediment does have some beer in it and we do not ring out the yeast cake like the big breweries do.

 

[PistolPatch]

So Batch size in Beersmith that you put in Beersmith is what you expect to get at the end of the boil not what you want in your fermenter.....

and Efficicency includes full volume at end of boil after subtracting 4% for liquid volume increase at 100 degs.

When i take this into my calculations i end up with 73.4% Brewhouse Efficiency and a 27 liter batch rather than a 23 liter batch which i originally used in Beersmith.

Makes sense now!!!

[Excuse the delayed reply tumi - internet has been playing up.]

Yep, you have got it :super: That is what Beersmith means by the term Brewhouse Efficicency. It gets very confusing because this is not what everyone means by the term. A search on the internet of the term will give you varied definitions.

Another confusing thing with Beersmith is that it asks you for figures like mash tun deadspace, losses to trub and chiller etc but it does not use these figures. For example, try setting mash tun deadspace to 0 and see how much water it asks you to prepare. Now change it to 50 lts, You would think it adds 50lts to the amount you need to prepare but it doesn't!

I basically use brewing software to check efficiency figures and to scale recipes I get from others to achieve the same original gravity as they recorded whilst allowing for my efficiency and my trub level. Unfortunateley, even scaling is a bit laborious as you pretty much have to play a game of "20 questions" to get the right OG.

So, when using brewing software, the brewhouse efficiency definition is as you have found - it includes all trub and you were correct to set your batch size to 27lts as this equals your brew length (how much beer you want to drink) plus trub.

You've done well!

And yes, I would be wrapped if you could record your figures in the BIAB Brewer Register thread especially as you are taking all those measurements. Doing this will be really helpful. Once you post your first figures up, I'll send you a spreadsheet with all the figures to date and continue to do so. You'll find it very interesting.

I'll look forward to it.

:icon_cheers:
Pat

P.S. It sounds as though you worked out how to get Beersmith to do the efficiency calcs for you. Is that right or do you still need a hand?

 

[tumi2]

[Excuse the delayed reply tumi - internet has been playing up.]

Yep, you have got it :super: That is what Beersmith means by the term Brewhouse Efficicency. It gets very confusing because this is not what everyone means by the term. A search on the internet of the term will give you varied definitions.

Another confusing thing with Beersmith is that it asks you for figures like mash tun deadspace, losses to trub and chiller etc but it does not use these figures. For example, try setting mash tun deadspace to 0 and see how much water it asks you to prepare. Now change it to 50 lts, You would think it adds 50lts to the amount you need to prepare but it doesn't!

I basically use brewing software to check efficiency figures and to scale recipes I get from others to achieve the same original gravity as they recorded whilst allowing for my efficiency and my trub level. Unfortunateley, even scaling is a bit laborious as you pretty much have to play a game of "20 questions" to get the right OG.

So, when using brewing software, the brewhouse efficiency definition is as you have found - it includes all trub and you were correct to set your batch size to 27lts as this equals your brew length (how much beer you want to drink) plus trub.

You've done well!

And yes, I would be wrapped if you could record your figures in the BIAB Brewer Register thread especially as you are taking all those measurements. Doing this will be really helpful. Once you post your first figures up, I'll send you a spreadsheet with all the figures to date and continue to do so. You'll find it very interesting.

I'll look forward to it.

:icon_cheers:
Pat

P.S. It sounds as though you worked out how to get Beersmith to do the efficiency calcs for you. Is that right or do you still need a hand?

Thanks for that. No, i have it sorted now. Thanks for the explanation.
I will post my figures once the beer is in the bottle.

 

[eamonnfoley]

[Excuse the delayed reply tumi - internet has been playing up.]

Yep, you have got it :super: That is what Beersmith means by the term Brewhouse Efficicency. It gets very confusing because this is not what everyone means by the term. A search on the internet of the term will give you varied definitions.

Another confusing thing with Beersmith is that it asks you for figures like mash tun deadspace, losses to trub and chiller etc but it does not use these figures. For example, try setting mash tun deadspace to 0 and see how much water it asks you to prepare. Now change it to 50 lts, You would think it adds 50lts to the amount you need to prepare but it doesn't!

I basically use brewing software to check efficiency figures and to scale recipes I get from others to achieve the same original gravity as they recorded whilst allowing for my efficiency and my trub level. Unfortunateley, even scaling is a bit laborious as you pretty much have to play a game of "20 questions" to get the right OG.

So, when using brewing software, the brewhouse efficiency definition is as you have found - it includes all trub and you were correct to set your batch size to 27lts as this equals your brew length (how much beer you want to drink) plus trub.

You've done well!

And yes, I would be wrapped if you could record your figures in the BIAB Brewer Register thread especially as you are taking all those measurements. Doing this will be really helpful. Once you post your first figures up, I'll send you a spreadsheet with all the figures to date and continue to do so. You'll find it very interesting.

I'll look forward to it.

:icon_cheers:
Pat

P.S. It sounds as though you worked out how to get Beersmith to do the efficiency calcs for you. Is that right or do you still need a hand?

Pat, I have been reading up a bit on this lately.

From the beersmith site - article by the guy who wrote beersmith

"The actual brewhouse efficiency is measured for an entire system. Unlike the dry grain yield or potential measured in a lab, real brewers achieve only a percentage of the ideal number due to real considerations such as efficiency of the mashing process, and losses due to boiling, deadspace or trub. This percentage of the potential, as measured across the whole system into the fermenter, is the brewhouse efficiency."

from:
http://www.beersmith.com/blog/2008/10/26/b...n-beer-brewing/


This is why I am taking the trub losses in my brewpot into account (i.e. batch size = into fermenter) - because the recipe is forumated using a specified brewhouse efficiency figure. I dont have beersmith here at work to confirm, but I remember there being a discrepancy between the equipment boil volume, and the recipe boil volume, if you dont take out the trub losses from the batch size. And recipes lifted from other sources seem to match better when I do this. There is some conflict on this though - from what I have seen on other forums, so im not 100% convinced. Should be easy enough to confirm with a hand calculation and a proven recipe from a book such as Jamils, which i will do when I get some time!

 

[PistolPatch]

Yep, don't be 100% convinced

This has been going on for a while and I keep hearing that changes are going to be made with the program but they still haven't been. When you get home, pull up a recipe and change your losses to trub and chiller from say 0 to 5 lts. You'll find this has no effect on the calculated Brewhouse Efficiency. The article you found says that it should though - lol!

So, if you lift a recipe from another source and the batch size says 19lts and the brewhouse efficiency figure is the same as yours, you won't get 19lts into your fermenter. You'll get 19lts minus your trub.

All this means that knowing how much trub you get is an important figure to get to know. Those with taps on the kettle will often end up with less trub in the kettle but more in the cube/fermenter. Those who can control a syphon, may get more trub in the kettle but less later on.

All good fun eh?

I hope you are saving me some of your beer?

:icon_cheers:
Pat

 

[katzke]

Yep, don't be 100% convinced

This has been going on for a while and I keep hearing that changes are going to be made with the program but they still haven't been. When you get home, pull up a recipe and change your losses to trub and chiller from say 0 to 5 lts. You'll find this has no effect on the calculated Brewhouse Efficiency. The article you found says that it should though - lol!

:icon_cheers:
Pat

Part of the problem I had and why I dumped BeerSmith. That and the poor responses when I asked questions.

When you play with losses in the program they will not automatically change a recipe. Can not remember what needs to be done or if it can be done to update a recipe. Supposed to be that way to keep from changing old recipes that have already been brewed. I guess it has merits either way. Just bothered me that when working on a recipe any changes did not effect the recipe. I also found that I had more problems with the program and so changed to an equally quirky free one. I still have to work out water by hand or give a good guess.

 

[PistolPatch]

I asked a mod to delete my Friday night post here. And just to think, I thought it was actually really interesting at time of writing. A sober re-read lead me to believe otherwise

katzke noticed in the BIABrewer Register thread that I have a very high evaporation rate on my brews. I thought it better to answer in this thread....

My pot is a 70lt Robinox with a diameter of 45cm (not 50 like I said in the other thread sorry). A standard keggle, from memory, has a circumference of 33cm. This means that the surface area of my pot is almost double that of a keggle - (1590 versus 855.)

Tom replied...

I would guess your aroma and flavor additions suffer from such a high boil off. Have you noticed any difference in your brews to others that brew the same recipe? Do you make any changes?

Have you ever thought of putting a lid on part way to decrease the boil off? I know DMS and all that but you are on the high end of the boil off rate.

There don't seem to be any worries with the higher boil-off although your gas bill is a bit higher

I have done a few brews side by side with others and tasted beers from others using the same recipes. There is no problem on the hop side.

The thing to remember with these big pots is that to get 19% evaporation rate, you are not doing a wildly vigorous boil. It is probably the equivalent of a 14% boil in a keggle, maybe even less. The surface area of my pot is almost double that of a keggle and surface area is the major factor that will affect your evaporation rate.

Like troopa [in the other thread], I used to worry about it and went through a period of partially covering the pot and just simmering the boil. It seemed to make no difference to the evaporation rate and all it did was give me cloudy beer! Now I know not to worry at all. Every pot has it's advantages and disadvantages. My 70lt pot allows me to double batch and this is a great plus.

If I do a double batch in my pot, the evaporation rate, using the same boil vigour, will drop down to about 12% from memory. (I'll measure the next doubles I do properly.)

Evaporation percentages are too often quoted without consideration to kettle geometry of which I have always found it hard to get info on. In the old days, commercial breweries would have up to 20% evaporation, now the highest they go is about 8%. The main push for this was economy.

It's an interesting area but I think getting the right boil vigour is probably more important than evaporation rate for us home brewers. The little info you do get, always seems to refer to evaporation rates which always has me scratching my head as they don't refer to kettle geometry. ThirstyBoy might know more about the commercial kettles (diameter versus depth, chimnneys, fans etc). The only ones I know are the old copper kettles at Matilda Bay which were squat and tapered into a chimney at the top.

The long and short of it is that if you have a high surface area pot, your evaporation rates are going to be much higher even at the same boil vigour. The beer tastes great and if you can do both single and double batches in it, then that is a real plus for some brewers.

Boiling your beer in a bath tub shaped kettle has got to be wrong. Boiling your beer in a rain guage shaped kettle has got to be wrong. As to where the happy medium lies, I dunno!

Spot,
Pat.

 

[eamonnfoley]

Part of the problem I had and why I dumped BeerSmith. That and the poor responses when I asked questions.

When you play with losses in the program they will not automatically change a recipe. Can not remember what needs to be done or if it can be done to update a recipe. Supposed to be that way to keep from changing old recipes that have already been brewed. I guess it has merits either way. Just bothered me that when working on a recipe any changes did not effect the recipe. I also found that I had more problems with the program and so changed to an equally quirky free one. I still have to work out water by hand or give a good guess.

Been having a closer look at this. Beersmith calculates the original gravity based on the grain yield multiplied by the brewhouse efficiency figure that you have specified. Confirmed this by hand. So if you have previously determined your brewhouse efficiency figure (actual not calculated) including your trub loss, then your batch size should be "into fermenter". If you haven't consider included your trub loss in your brewhouse efficiency determination, then its "in boiler" batch size.

I find the equipment field handy for boil-off calculations only, and its better to use it independently to the recipe.

This sound reasonable?

 

[PistolPatch]

This sound reasonable?

Yep you are right. You can do your recipe to whatever efficiency you like as long as you set the batch size accordingly. eg use 75-85% if your batch size includes trub. Use more like 60% if it doesn't. (I haven't tried the latter but I would imagine it works???)

Did you try changing those figures I mentioned? Losse to mash tun, kettle, trub, chiller etc.?

That is where the problem lies. You should be able to set all this up and the program should tell you what your efficiency will be into boiler, into fermenter etc etc. But you fill all those in and it makes no difference!

This is where all heads start spinning!!!


Pat

P.S. I am still waiting for one of your, "new" beers?