BIAB Excessive Trub

[Matplat]

Ok, similar to what is used it a grainfather?

Any ideas where to get one from?

Cheers, Ryan

Mine is just a big W 19l pot. I cut slits in the bottom, then use bolts as legs so it stands over my element. It does however limit the gravity I can get in a standard single batch as it will only fit about 5.7kg of grain. But I'm not that interested in brewing really big beers and if I do ever get the urge, I just use DME to boost the gravity.

 

[wessmith]

I would be trying a different base malt from a different maltster, or maybe even an import for comparison.

Wes

 

[Lyrebird_Cycles]

At a Systems Wars back in 2011 or whenever for the Brisbane Conference, held at Bacchus we did the same recipe on BIAB, Ghetto, 3V and Braumeister.

Independent monitors took samples and refracted mercilessly with all systems coming in at about the same efficiency (around 73% IIRC).

I think this exercise would be worth doing again in the new year here in Vic: I'm confident I can beat 90%.

If you want >=35 litres you'll have to wait a bit as my current system is smaller than that.

 

[Dan Pratt]

LC are you talking mash or brewhouse efficiency?

Mash eff at >90% I would agree is possible.

Those kinds of numbers for brewhouse......doubtful, but if you try and explain how?

To me, boil off, losses to hops and trub will be at least 15% of your volume lost before it makes the FV.

 

[Danscraftbeer]

Hi,

I have recently gone from a 3 vessel system to a BIAB setup and have a lot of trub which is increasing my losses.

I am losing about 3.5L of wort due to the trub meaning i am having to add extra water at the beginning to account for the losses.

I am using a stainless steel hop basket, stirring the grain every 15 minutes during the mash and continuosly during the mashout.

Any ideas to reduce the true losses or do you use a strainer as it drains into the fermenter?

Cheers,

Ryan

This is one of the reasons I'm an esky masher rather than BIAB. Vorlauf is really cool. I drain/ Vorloauf until the wort is nearly as clear as the finished brew. Sometimes for ~10kg grain I will Vorlauf sometimes 6lt. Its not hard to do. Take advantage of the grain/husk natural filtering and watch how the run off gets clearer and clearer.
$0.02.

 

[Lyrebird_Cycles]

LC are you talking mash or brewhouse efficiency?

Those kinds of numbers for brewhouse......doubtful, but if you try and explain how?

To me, boil off, losses to hops and trub will be at least 15% of your volume lost before it makes the FV.

Brewhouse.

I was getting efficiency before trub losses around 96% but when I changed the lauter plate I lost a few percent. I'm making a new one hoping to get back over 95%, I'll see how I go.

There is no loss to boiloff, sugar isn't volatile.

Since I don't like American hops I'm probably not getting the hop losses others do; I use a traditional cast into the boil so they come out in the trub anyway.

Trub losses are currently a bit under 10%, I'm working on improving that, hoping for <5%.

In my experience the key to efficiency is running the lauter tun with a low differential pressure. I generally have my forerunnings (aka vorlauf) at under 3 kPa and main runnings around 5 kPa.

To the OP: I apologise for the threadjack.

If anyone's interested in the efficiency brew-off we should start a new thread.

 

[Dan Pratt]

Trub losses are currently a bit under 10%, I'm working on improving that, hoping for <5%.

Starting total water volume required minus ALL loses during the process to have fermentable wort is brewhouse efficiency %.

If your losing near 10% for trub you're at 90% eff, how can you not have further losses of volume through boiloff?? Not to mention losses to grain absorbtion....

 

[Lyrebird_Cycles]

Brewhouse efficiency = (wort oP * wort mass) / Σ (malt mass * extract FGDB * (1 - moisture)).

See for instance the Brewer's Friend calculator

 

[Dan Pratt]

^ ^

I ran that calc on my last beer.

19lts wort
1053 gravity
4.5kg of MO malt

70.5% brewhouse eff, about what BS2.0 calculated. To get 90% would achieve a wort of 1.066, not likely.

Are you suggesting that a super efficient lauter will extract more fermentables to the levels of 10-15% more?

 

[Lyrebird_Cycles]

Are you suggesting that a super efficient lauter will extract more fermentables to the levels of 10-15% more?

I'm saying that a properly efficient lauter process will extract 95%+.

As a direct comparison, a recent SMASH with 4.75 kg of Golden Promise yielded 24.2 kg of wort at 13.3oP but as I said my efficiencies have suffered with the new lauter plate, I'm hoping to do better with the new one.

With a 6 roller mill and good lauter tun control 98 - 100% efficiency is possible and in commercial world very much expected.

I mention the mill because for most of us this will be the limit on efficiency. Even a very good two roller will still cost a percent or two compared to a good 6 roller.

To get to super efficiency (>100%) normally requires a hammer mill and a mash filter.

 

[Matplat]

Did you just say greater than 100% efficiency? How does that work?

 

[Lyrebird_Cycles]

Yes it is possible, though it sounds strange. Remember that efficiencies are compared with extract FGDB (Fine Grind Dry Basis) from a congress mash as per EBC method 4.5.1*

Although the Buhler Diag disc mill used to prepare the grist for this mash is about as efficient as any mill could be, the mash itself does not extract 100% of the possible material from the grist since it is based on a simple paper filtration and washing procedure to ensure repeatability. Maltsters and their customers are far more interested in repeatability than absolute quantity, it being pretty easy to figure in a correction factor for your brewhouse (that is in fact what this discussion is largely about).

When the congress mash was established as the standard it was more efficient than any commercial brewhouse so it was held to be the maximal extraction achievable. As more efficient methods of extraction were developed they eventually surpassed the congress mash but by then it had been established so long it remained as the standard, especially as the differences are small and most brewers who care about quality won't touch a mash filter with a barge pole.

* I used to do 8 - 12 of these every day, I know whereof I speak.

 

[Bribie G]

So Coopers don't care about quality?

ed:

 

[Matplat]

Righto, I figured it had something to do with the reference point. It's incredible that such efficiency is achievable on industrial scales... I must be doing something fairly wrong to only be hitting 70% although doing so with consistency is still good.

 

[nosco]

What % of trub are other people getting in the final boil volume? Just wondering.

 

[Bribie G]

There used to be a thread on Show me your Drained Kettle or something.

 

[nosco]

It would depend on the beer being made i guess *slaps forehead*

 

[Markbeer]

Hi, that's 24.2kg of wort. How many litres is that?

I'm saying that a properly efficient lauter process will extract 95%+.

As a direct comparison, a recent SMASH with 4.75 kg of Golden Promise yielded 24.2 kg of wort at 13.3oP but as I said my efficiencies have suffered with the new lauter plate, I'm hoping to do better with the new one.

With a 6 roller mill and good lauter tun control 98 - 100% efficiency is possible and in commercial world very much expected.

I mention the mill because for most of us this will be the limit on efficiency. Even a very good two roller will still cost a percent or two compared to a good 6 roller.

To get to super efficiency (>100%) normally requires a hammer mill and a mash filter.

 

[Dan Pratt]

I really feel LC you are getting yield of extraction from the malt mixed up with brewhouse eff.

I'm perplexes to add up even a 90% eff when boil off, trub and loss to grain absorption is higher than 20% for most brewers.

Can you give me your numbers for a beer, let me take a look cos If I'm hitting 75 % and your pressing 90 then that is of interest.

 

[manticle]

Hi, that's 24.2kg of wort. How many litres is that?

If a litre of water equals 1000g then probably not far off the digits given.