A Guide To All-grain Brewing In A Bag

[boobiedazzler]

My bag runs solid for at least a minute, and continues to stream slightly for another minute. Maybe I have the wrong material, but I still reckon it's ONLY about the retention properties of the grain.

Just a thought. The compaction of the grain when you draw the bag up for hoisting is sure to limit the flow of liqor. What do you think of the idea of a bag that is hoised but not drawn in at the top seam, perhaps four eyelets that would take a four-pronged steel hook to elevate the grain bed. You could then also 'fluff' the cereal easily, allowing a free flowing escape for the liquid.

 

[Ross]

Its mainly about deadspace Ross - and about the amount of liquor lost to the spent grain. If you leave 1L/kg behind in a mash tun - then by leaving only 0.5L/kg behind in a bag - the wort trapped can be anywhere up to twice as strong before you break even. And thats what it does... pretty much break even. And then where BIAB might nudge ahead... is with any deadspace in your tun.

As I said, a double batch sparge gives better efficiency ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL. If you squeeze the bag & get more liquor then yes you may get better efficiency, but it's equally easy to press your grain bed in a traditional set up. Likewise with dead space, I get zero dead space with my mash tun. As I pointed out, I've been doing the exact same brews on my new rig double sparging & full volume mashing with single sparge - Here all things are equal & the difference in efficiency is large EVERY TIME. Sorry but anyone claiming that a single flood sparge increases efficiency is just dead wrong!

For the record I've elected to go for a single flood sparge on my system as I find the convenience far out weighs the loss of gravity points, I've long since given up chasing efficiency points.

Cheers Ross

 

[PistolPatch]

I find the convenience far out weighs the loss of gravity points, I've long since given up chasing efficiency points.

Cheers Ross

Ha! We are finally in agreement Rosscoe ! That is the most important point. Arguing about efficiency detracts the new brewer from what they should be chasing which is simply two things - a great recipe and a great brewing method. Efficiency is a bullshit argument. Whilst I maintain that BIAB is very efficient, I would much prefer readers here looking for great recipes.

Ross, in those pioneering days when I had made a hundred posts here and rang you and asked if you thought BIAB could work and you said, "I can't see any reason why not," I really appreciated it. You even said I could try it with a pillow slip but then had the far better suggestion of using polyester curtain material. Thank God I didn't try the former .

What the new brewer should realise is that regardless of how right you or I think we are, (you think 3 vessel brewing always gives you a better quality beer whilst I think BIAB will, in most cases, actually give you a better quality beer,) a great all-grain recipe will always give you a great beer. Your Schwartzbier recipe, the first all-grain I ever brewed, is a fine example of this.

You can brew that beer with lager or ale yeast. You can stuff your mash temps up. You can even brew a low alcohol version of it as I did several times (don't know of anyone else who did that???) and still get an outstanding beer. That recipe is a robust recipe and one that I still brew today with only minor adjustments. You should be proud of that. The fact that I was the first to brew it with an ale yeast (US-56) is a testament to you providing me with a recipe that we now know actually tastes a tad better when brewed with the ale yeast. Recipes are the key to great all-grain.

We can argue all day about technicalities but a great recipe should be the Holy Grail of all brewers. This is the message we should be spreading and you Ross, should be proud that your Schwartzbier recipe (with slight variations) has a permanent place amongst my 8 taps. Regardless of how badly I sometimes brew it, it is always well received.

Anyone who bags the science of BIAB has a lot to refute. It is at minimum, a great brewing method. I actually think it is a better brewing method than batch or fly sparging for obvious reasons unless your sole concern is efficiency in which case, fly-sparging will win. If your primary aim is to make great beer for $9 a carton rather than $10 a carton then by all means, let's argue about efficiency until the cows come home!!!!

I'd prefer, in this thread, that we talk about great recipes such as your Scwartz, Ross or the ways in which BIAB offers superior control over mash temperature and efficiency than non-pumped traditional does.

[To Be Continued: AHB word count has jumped in. Continued a few posts below...]

 

[Cocko]

Sorry I and others have not worked ourselves entirely to the bone to enlighten you and give you an idiot's guide to BIAB. I am amazed at how stupid and inconsiderate myself and others are.

On behalf of all of us who have made BIAB work over a period of five years and written a heap with sweat on our brow, thank you for letting us know that idiots will never read what we have written. We can't believe you haven't even read or comprehended post #1 of this thread but what do we know?

If you had shown some respect, I would have spent some time answering your questions - an hour of my time at least and you would have had an instant but considered answer.

My goodness and my apologies,
Pat

GREATEST post of all time... easy.

PP at his best.. and its short!

 

[PistolPatch]

Sorry cocko, my computer is playing up so I have had enough trouble finishing the below let alone worrying about the above post you managed to save. Good on ya!

Hope the below turns out as I intended...

Continued from a few posts above...

Even if you want to go a pump, BIAB will almost always serve you better.

The guts of it all is that Ross is trying to say a 3 Vessel system is better. I think a lot, and I have also outlined very sensible, factually-based reasons why I think BIAB is better - my last post on this (#1772) should be enough to get anyone thinking. I reckon any brewer reading or wondering about this who wants to establish the credibility of any poster to this thread will really need to read it in its entirety or, alternatively, just stop for a second and think for themselves. There's a lot of nonsense that goes on here. One example is that you can buy hops for half the price seen advertised by any sponsor here. (You need to buy a 500gram minimum though sorry . That retailer has never tried to "invade" AHB, they have just done informative posts - see this site and ask them for a price list - half what you pay!)

If you want to argue instead of brew well then, of course, just post away. Here is as good a thread as any other

If you want to brew well and learn then reading this whole thread will get you familiar with some enthusiastic and honest brewers. Like a good recipe, they are very hard to find. You'll find some very quiet, skilled brewers who have contributed here. They don't post much anymore, if at all, but they are still brewing. Why not send them a PM? Ask them if they still BIAB and why? The worst you will get is no answer.

Cheers,
Pat

 

[PistolPatch]

[Took so long to edit and re-write the above post I ran out of the time limit. The below is my final crack.]

Sorry cocko, my computer is playing up so I have had enough trouble finishing the below let alone worrying about the above post you managed to save. Good on ya!

Hope the below turns out as I intended...

Continued from a few posts above...

Even if you want to go a pump, BIAB will almost always serve you better.

The guts of it all is that Ross is trying to say a 3 Vessel system is better. I think a lot, and I have also outlined very sensible, factually-based reasons why I think BIAB is better - my last post on this (#1772) should be enough to get anyone thinking. I reckon any brewer reading or wondering about this who wants to establish the credibility of any poster to this thread will really need to read it in its entirety or, alternatively, just stop for a second and think for themselves. There's a lot of nonsense that goes on here. One example is that you can buy hops for half the price seen advertised by any sponsor here. (You need to buy a 500gram minimum though sorry . That retailer has never tried to "invade" AHB, they have just done informative posts - see this site and ask them for a price list - half what you pay!) But any thread they have started here has failed.

If you want to argue instead of brew well then, of course, just post away. Here is as good a thread as any other

If you want to brew well and learn then reading this whole thread will get you familiar with some enthusiastic and honest brewers. You will pick up some gems like in two paras above. Like a good recipe, they are very hard to find. You'll also find some very quiet, skilled and unpretentious brewers who have contributed here. They don't post much anymore, if at all, but they are still brewing. Why not send them a PM? Ask them if they still BIAB and why? The worst you will get is no answer.

Just stop and think for a second is my advice.

Cheers,
Pat

 

[Thirsty Boy]

As I said, a double batch sparge gives better efficiency ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL. If you squeeze the bag & get more liquor then yes you may get better efficiency, but it's equally easy to press your grain bed in a traditional set up. Likewise with dead space, I get zero dead space with my mash tun. As I pointed out, I've been doing the exact same brews on my new rig double sparging & full volume mashing with single sparge - Here all things are equal & the difference in efficiency is large EVERY TIME. Sorry but anyone claiming that a single flood sparge increases efficiency is just dead wrong!

For the record I've elected to go for a single flood sparge on my system as I find the convenience far out weighs the loss of gravity points, I've long since given up chasing efficiency points.

Cheers Ross

But its pretty much part and parcel of the whole technique Ross - allow the bag to drain, give it a light squeeze... that's been pretty common BIAB advice from nearly day one. And even if you don't squeeze - you still lose less liquor to spent grain. Besides, we're not talking about what people might do, we're talking about what people do do. And I don't know any batch spargers who do squeeze their grain bed... but I know a numbers of BIAB brewers who squeeze their bags.

Anyway, we don't have any actual disagreement - I posted the graph (which I made after actually experimenting to see how this works, in order to answer precisely this question) and it agrees with your results. For any actually likely grist bill... if you don't have any deadspace (as you don't) , a two drain batch sparge will be better than a no-sparge BIAB at removing any sugars created. But if you do have any deadspace, and most mash tuns do, then the story isn't the same and up to a point a BIAB will be more efficient.

Oh - and I ran both double and single run-off (full volume) sparges through my mash tun system for quite a while and didn't get the same difference in results you do - my average efficiency into the kettle for double run-off sparges was 78% - and it only dropped to 75% for the no-sparge/full volume brews. So all things being equal.... the difference was only a few % on my system.

The main thing - isn't which is better or which is worse - that doesn't matter. Only that they are roughly comparable. And that they are. So people can take whichever technique they want to use and be confident that there isn't another way out there that is significantly better and that they are somehow ripping themselves off.

Of course - the elephant in the room is that there is another way out there that's significantly more efficient. Fly sparging... but who the hell wants to do that? (well me actually... but I shall say no more on the subject)

 

[Thirsty Boy]

My bag runs solid for at least a minute, and continues to stream slightly for another minute. Maybe I have the wrong material, but I still reckon it's ONLY about the retention properties of the grain.

Just a thought. The compaction of the grain when you draw the bag up for hoisting is sure to limit the flow of liqor. What do you think of the idea of a bag that is hoised but not drawn in at the top seam, perhaps four eyelets that would take a four-pronged steel hook to elevate the grain bed. You could then also 'fluff' the cereal easily, allowing a free flowing escape for the liquid.

You're not actually reading what I am writing - YES, the bag will flow for a minute or so.. and YES that is because of the liquid being trapped in the grain and not because of the material. That's exactly what I was saying in my last post about this... and the one before.

But if the FREE LIQUID - does not fall out almost immediately. Then you probably have the wrong material. The free liquid being trapped is what makes bags unmanageably heavy - and the sort of material that causes that - makes bags take extensive amounts of time to drain, or even to not drain at all without needing to squeeze the hell out of them.

In a proper BIAB bag - it should be the grain bed composition which determines the rate at which the bag drains... If it is instead teh material, then either something really weird is happening, or you have the wrong sort of material.

Your bag on the other hand sounds like it is behaving perfectly normally... and therefore any of the normal solutions offered in this thread should work just fine for you.

What Guide?

That would be the guide posted on the first page of this thread.. which is conveniently titled "A Guide to All Grain Brewing in a Bag, Downloadable guide to BIAB" specifically in order to give you a hint that such a guide might exist. And the discussions in the thread that follows.

Within that thread there are a number of discussions about how the bags should perform, about how bags, bag material and bag shape effect BIAB and about the various permutations of bags that people have tried and why.

You might also like to go to the excellent http://www.biabrewer.info/ site where you will find updated and seriously expanded and comprehensive versions of the guide along with targeted discussions about BIAB and most of its alternatives and variations.

You have to put up with it being an area where Pat is free to roam at will - but in his natural environment the big lug has a weird and lumpy beauty all of his own. Kind of like a wildebeest - ugly as sin but magnificent nonetheless. I highly recommend a visit there.

 

[katzke]

It is not what is better. It is about brewing.

BIAB is supposed to be easy. Some people always seem to want to make it more difficult then it is. Some just like to experiment and say so. Some have no idea what they are doing and so try to make it more like multi vessel brewing then ask why it is not working the way we say it does.

I do not mind people that want to experiment and say so. That is how we got instructions for brewing BIAB in a small kettle.

The problem is when people start to say BIAB does not work as described and try to tell people they need to do this or that. Or that BIAB is a good start but real brewers use mash tuns. They are the ones that I will correct.

So if you are trying to find out about BIAB then ignore all the arguing about if this or that is better. Go back to the beginning instructions and follow them to the letter. You will make good beer. I know because that is what I did. It worked then and it is still working now.

Sorry can not tell you where the step by step instructions are any longer. It was a 3 day read when I started to look, I am sure it is up to a week or more now. I think you can find the new and improved set on baibrewer.info.

 

[PistolPatch]

I love all this theoretical stuff

For what it is worth, of the three double-batches I submitted to the figures we were collecting last year, they yielded slightly higher than the single batches. This of course makes no sense but they were the figures that I and one other person checked. I think I can scrape up some figures from the last three double-batches I did with another brewer. If not, I'll be sure to do so on the next lot.

The point is that one or two brews do not tell a story. If they did, I could tell you that double-batching is 2% more efficient than a single batch even with 15lts of top up water. Of course, this is not so. Many brews need to be done with the same equipment to start getting reliable averages.

Thirsty, it was a shame you never contributed to that spreadsheet we had going last year. It yielded some good figures. Next four or five brews you do, if you have time to take the three measures we were asking for, please post them here or send them to me and I'll add them to the spreadsheet. Same goes for any other BIABrewers.

The more figures the merrier!


Pat

 

[Thirsty Boy]

I love all this theoretical stuff

For what it is worth, of the three double-batches I submitted to the figures we were collecting last year, they yielded slightly higher than the single batches. This of course makes no sense but they were the figures that I and one other person checked. I think I can scrape up some figures from the last three double-batches I did with another brewer. If not, I'll be sure to do so on the next lot.

The point is that one or two brews do not tell a story. If they did, I could tell you that double-batching is 2% more efficient than a single batch even with 15lts of top up water. Of course, this is not so. Many brews need to be done with the same equipment to start getting reliable averages.

Thirsty, it was a shame you never contributed to that spreadsheet we had going last year. It yielded some good figures. Next four or five brews you do, if you have time to take the three measures we were asking for, please post them here or send them to me and I'll add them to the spreadsheet. Same goes for any other BIABrewers.

The more figures the merrier!


Pat

I'm sorry too Pat - you ended up churning out that excellent spreadsheet as a result. I was just trying to save you from yourself though... you needed some sleep. I don't do much BIAB these days... a very occasional one to test a theory or to do a gluten free brew. Aside from that its the odd brew at Spill's place and demos @ G&G.

BIAB was only ever really a theoretical exercise for me... I've always been a mash tun brewer at heart. Nowadays I've pretty much tried out all the variations of BIAB, worked out that none of them are any better than the original no-frills version; and called it a day. I'll get back into it when someone dreams up something new to try out.

Mind you, I have a mild to brew in the near future... maybe I'll bust out the bag for that? 3kg of grain looks a little forlorn sitting in the bottom of my 50L mash tun. So much more cosy in the small BIAB rig.

 

[katzke]

I love all this theoretical stuff

For what it is worth, of the three double-batches I submitted to the figures we were collecting last year, they yielded slightly higher than the single batches. This of course makes no sense but they were the figures that I and one other person checked. I think I can scrape up some figures from the last three double-batches I did with another brewer. If not, I'll be sure to do so on the next lot.


Pat

Pat, cant you figure out why double batches are more efficient?

They have twice the grain so have twice the enzymes so must be twice as efficient. You only got 2.5 % so must be doing something wrong.

On a serious note. I bet it has to do with the double batch having a stable temperature during the mash. Stability is the one problem all home brewers have. Our small batch sizes are much harder to regulate then factory brewing. I am sure there are other technical reasons based on wort depth and more trivial brewing science no has discovered yet.

That or 2.5% is with in the statistical allowance for error. Things like hot wort expand and reading errors on refractometers and hydrometers.

One reason why I am happy if my gravity is with in a few points of predicted.

 

[PistolPatch]

I was just trying to save you from yourself though... you needed some sleep.

LOL! . And yep, 3kgs will look lonely. Save it for October 28th .

On a serious note. I bet it has to do with the double batch having a stable temperature during the mash.

LOL katz . It is great you have offered a serious hypothesis to this though. When I wrote my last post (part 1 I think) I was actually tempted to write, "For all we know, maybe double batches are more efficient," but I didn't even have a hypothesis to work from. Good on you!

Until we collect a lot more figures though we don't really know anything and collecting figures gets harder all the time. For example, I now nearly always do two double-batches with a fellow brewer and split the proceeds - it is rare for me now to do a single and double at the same time. In the interests of science, I'll have to start finding excuses to.

All this certainly keeps the brain wondering.

Thanks Tom and you Dan, Ross etc...

Pat

 

[bradk]

Well, just finished putting down my first BIAB. It has been a long time coming. I have spent a few months getting everything ready and then finding time!

I dont think it boiled off enough, but we will see. Hopefully I will have a good report in a few weeks!

 

[bradk]

Well, just finished putting down my first BIAB. It has been a long time coming. I have spent a few months getting everything ready and then finding time!

I dont think it boiled off enough, but we will see. Hopefully I will have a good report in a few weeks!

I cant see how to edit my post.. is it possible?

Anyway, what I wanted to add was that the OG of the wort is 1052. Bit heavier than what I imagined from the 5.5KG grain bill. Just waiting for it to cool and might add a bit of water to bring it down a tad. Smells fantastic though!

Brad

 

[Phoney]

Good one Brad! Welcome to the club :icon_cheers:

If your OG is higher than you expected, and you find that your volume in your fermenter is down by a litre or three - it's no big deal, you can always top up with water get your volume right and your OG down to where it should be.

 

[manticle]

I cant see how to edit my post.. is it possible?

The edit function has a limited timeframe and disappears after 30 minutes or so.

 

[malbur]

Anyway, what I wanted to add was that the OG of the wort is 1052. Bit heavier than what I imagined from the 5.5KG grain bill. Just waiting for it to cool and might add a bit of water to bring it down a tad. Smells fantastic though!

Brad

Keep up the great work Brad,nothing wrong with that, High OG is better than low OG a bit of water and it will be fine :beer:
malbur

 

[PistolPatch]

Well, just finished putting down my first BIAB. It has been a long time coming. I have spent a few months getting everything ready and then finding time!

I dont think it boiled off enough, but we will see. Hopefully I will have a good report in a few weeks!

Good on you Brad,

Don't get too hung up on the figures. There are a heap of things that can go wrong there. If you are BIABing well and by some miracle have an accurate/average hydrometer, you should be nearing 80% on your pre or post-boil efficiency. Your figs are fine and the beer will taste great.

All the best,
Pat

 

[Lord Raja Goomba I]

Another recent convert to AG via BIAB.

I just bottled a second batch last night - it was only a 9L batch. I do the 22L batches as quaffers and 9L to experiment and have some (more) fun.

The first batch I did was a balls up. Efficiency was poor, but (from drinking the non-conditioned wort) that it will still turn out okay and well drinkable.

The second batch (well actually I had a third batch running concurrently as well, but I haven't yet bottled it), was a 9L batch. Stupid me forgot to write down the OG, but off memory it was either 1.055 or 1.050 - meaning, for me, according to my calcs in qbrew - an efficiency of no less than 71% and possibly up to 78% (off memory, I don't have it in front of me).

The accountant in me thinks of the amortisation of the cost of a full 3V system over the life of the number of beers produced (and the time it will take to recover the cost) vs the extra grain I need to account for marginally reduced efficiency (and its cost). BIAB wins hands down.

As for Ross' support for 3V - good on him! As a retailer, if I get or build a 3V system, I'm going to buy less grain from him. He suffers as a result. But his honest love of brewing is such that he will still recommend what he thinks is the better method, regardless of economic impact to himself. That says volumes about the man.

Incidentally, I used a nottingham yeast in the above batch of beer and it attenuated down to 1.002 - no cane sugar, just pure malt. That equates to 6.3% to 6.96% - good, if unexpected, result. I don't think amber/red ales are supposed to be that strong. :icon_drunk: