Braumeister settings

[Crusty]

Hi Mr Spisey,

Definitely 1.2mm is the go for grain crush. On the 20l I fill to the 25litre mark and mash in. I then calculate final volume (23l mostly) less grain absorption (1litre per kg) and boil off (3 litres per hour) and then sparge the difference to bring it back to the final volume. Never fails. On another forum, I think this is called "the Dicko Method". Never fails. Mash efficiency usually 75% on the knocker.

Can you post your Braumeister equipment profile Andy?
Cheers

 

[dicko]

When using Beersmith do you add the sparge water suggested to the mash water then minus the amount of water, grain mass, from the total?

What I do is have beersmith calculate the total water needed and measure it accurately into the BM then drain the amount that is the difference between the top mark on th BM centre rod and the total water needed.
In my case, 20 litre BM, I use the total minus the 25 litres recommended for the sparge.
This is usually around 7 to 8 litres, depending on the amount of grain.
I have my grain absorption at .65 litres per kilo aproximately which will get you close and you may fine tune from there.

Cheers

 

[Andy_Chil]

Well close to the Dicko method. It think there is a tad more accuracy with the actual Dicko method!! I have never seem to get my grain absorption numbers that low. I use 1 litre per kg, but the actual figure is closer to 900g per litre.

 

[Cervantes]

I have never seem to get my grain absorption numbers that low. I use 1 litre per kg, but the actual figure is closer to 900g per litre.

Do you squeeze down on the top filter plate after you sparge?

This makes a big difference to your grain absorption rate.

 

[Dan Pratt]

Note to self!.......Do not drink that extra glass & jump on the forum & talk about beer & equipment. I posted my 50lt BM profile which is not correct. Loss to Trub & Chiller should be 0. The profile for the BM for me is Lauter Tun Deadspace 2lt & Fermenter loss 2lt.

50lt BM Settings.PNG

Hi crusty, no losses to trub and chiller seems weird, I get that you do have losses but place those to lauter tun and fermented. effectively your brewhouse eff is at 78% and if you include the real losses of trub and chiller that %would be sub 70% right?

Unless ofcourse you don't have losses to trub and chiller

 

[Mr. No-Tip]

I find this thread pretty interesting from an approach point of view. Seems you guys generally treat a sparge as a constant, like mash volume. For me, sparge is a variable correction - I hit my target OG through sparge. It's probably within 500ml every time, but I never really think of it as X litres in, I think of it as Y OG out...

 

[dicko]

Hi crusty, no losses to trub and chiller seems weird, I get that you do have losses but place those to lauter tun and fermented. effectively your brewhouse eff is at 78% and if you include the real losses of trub and chiller that %would be sub 70% right?
Unless ofcourse you don't have losses to trub and chiller

I am like Crusty and I ignore the losses to trub and chiller.

IMO this figure is useless at the home brew level and really just goes to cause confusion when a newby is setting up Beersmith 2.

In a commercial situation it becomes a lot more relevant as this figure will come into play with your profit (or loss) factors.

In the HB situation as long as you achieve the amount of beer you need to fill your keg or your required amount of bottles then that is really all that matters.
Many BM brewers let the trub settle out and can gain a litre or two of wort for starters or just add that wort to the fermenter during fermentation.
This, of course, is only my opinion

Cheers

 

[Spiesy]

I am like Crusty and I ignore the losses to trub and chiller.

IMO this figure is useless at the home brew level and really just goes to cause confusion when a newby is setting up Beersmith 2.

In a commercial situation it becomes a lot more relevant as this figure will come into play with your profit (or loss) factors.

In the HB situation as long as you achieve the amount of beer you need to fill your keg or your required amount of bottles then that is really all that matters.
Many BM brewers let the trub settle out and can gain a litre or two of wort for starters or just add that wort to the fermenter during fermentation.
This, of course, is only my opinion

Cheers

But knowing your losses help you calculate how much you need to hit your target volume and subsequently fill that keg.

 

[Dan2]

The way Beersmith is set up, every loss affects your efficiency.
This means that your efficiency on a very hoppy boil/whirlpool brew with dry hop additions too will give you a much lower eff. than say a weizen or something with very little losses after the boil.
Which is not true - your mash efficiency should stay constant (given a consistent crush and enough time to convert).
So the best we can do for consistency for now is as Dicko and Crusty have said - don't put in trub or fermentor losses.
I have set up several profiles, all with exactly the same eff, boil off, (zero) losses after boil etc, but with different end of boil volumes to account for trub, dry hop, and filter losses.
I have emailed Brad about this and he is working on setting up the equations linked to mash eff. to work separate from brewhouse eff.

 

[Spiesy]

The way Beersmith is set up, every loss affects your efficiency.
This means that your efficiency on a very hoppy boil/whirlpool brew with dry hop additions too will give you a much lower eff. than say a weizen or something with very little losses after the boil.
Which is not true - your mash efficiency should stay constant (given a consistent crush and enough time to convert).
So the best we can do for consistency for now is as Dicko and Crusty have said - don't put in trub or fermentor losses.
I have set up several profiles, all with exactly the same eff, boil off, (zero) losses after boil etc, but with different end of boil volumes to account for trub, dry hop, and filter losses.
I have emailed Brad about this and he is working on setting up the equations linked to mash eff. to work separate from brewhouse eff.

Got you. Yeah, spot on - there should be difference between mash and total brewhouse efficiency.

I use BeerAlchemy, so this doesn't affect me.

 

[Cervantes]

In Beersmith there is a difference between mash efficiency and Brewhouse efficiency and it does quote both numbers.

Unfortunately though, Beersmith tends to rely more on Brewhouse efficiency numbers and almost ignores the mash efficiency figures.

I tend to work the other way around and ignore the Brewhouse efficiency numbers.

Your mash efficiency tells you how well you are converting your mash and is important.

As mentioned by Dan2 your Brewhouse efficiency can be affected by many variables such as the amount of hops used and even things like how far you tip the BM whilst draining into the fermentor.

 

[Black n Tan]

More than one way to skin a cat, but for me I dial in my losses to trub. Really hoppy beers can have greater trub losses, so I add a couple of litres to the batch size volume to compensate. A very full mash pipe (>13kg) may lose a couple of points in efficiency so I reduce the brewhouse efficiency for that recipe by a couple of percent. I keep an eye on mash efficiency (but this changes little), but for me brewhouse efficiency for a given recipe style is more important as this tells me how much grain I will need next time to hit my gravity and volumes. I have my profile set-up such that my pre-boil gravity is usually slightly high (1-2 points) so then I can add 1-2 litres of water to bring it to target gravity. This works for me, but I agree BS profiles can be a little daunting to start, but once you have it set up right, it just works well.

 

[Black n Tan]

I find this thread pretty interesting from an approach point of view. Seems you guys generally treat a sparge as a constant, like mash volume. For me, sparge is a variable correction - I hit my target OG through sparge. It's probably within 500ml every time, but I never really think of it as X litres in, I think of it as Y OG out...

I sparge at a constant 1L/kg, but target a slightly high gravity and then adjust pre-boil to hit target (add up to 2-3 L water). I could add it to the sparge volume, but I take my gravity pre-boil (immediately before the boil commences). I enter these figures into beer smith which tells me my mash efficiency. This way I account for any variabilities brought in through the sparge.

So I assume you take your gravity at the end of the mash and then adjust your sparge volume accordingly. Do you use BS to work this out or calculate manually? Does it allow you to constantly hit target OG? How do you handle different grain weights and 'sparge efficiency'?

 

[Dan2]

The 2 efficiencies do not operate independently in Beersmith - this is the issue I raised with Brad.
Your mash efficiency should stay the same (mine does anyway - I do from 3.5kg mashes up to 6.5kg mashes and the always 83% +/-1).
But if you change your brewhouse eff by punching in losses to suit what you know you will get from each different style, BS automatically adjusts the mash eff up or down too, thereby changing your expected pre boil figures.

 

[Crusty]

Hi crusty, no losses to trub and chiller seems weird, I get that you do have losses but place those to lauter tun and fermented. effectively your brewhouse eff is at 78% and if you include the real losses of trub and chiller that %would be sub 70% right?

Unless ofcourse you don't have losses to trub and chiller

I do have losses to trub & to chiller & fermenter losses too, around 4lts or so, total.
Lauter Tun is basically the BM & I leave a couple of litres behind. I get a really good clean break & leave very little wort behind. Trub can vary from one recipe to the next but I've set it up @2lt. The fermenter loss is also @2lt so for me, mashing in with 55lt of water takes into account that I'm leaving 2lt behind when I transfer to the fermenter. I hit those numbers every time, 52lt into the fermenter. I will again lose around 2lt of yeast / trub in the fermenter so I get to keg or bottle 50lt of useable wort. I've tried a couple of different profile setups for the BM in BeerSmith but if I set my Lauter Tun Deadspace loss to 2lt, it's the volume left behind in the BM. It's the Mash Tun really. I then set my fermenter loss to 2lt as this is what is getting left behind in the fermenter & doesn't make it to the keg / bottles. I have set loss to trub & chiller in the fermenter / bottling volumes column & my volumes were off so I left it at 0. I'm not sure what that calculates but it certainly calculates wrong for my volumes. Why is says loss to trub & chiller is a bit confusing & I think it should be called something else. Losses to trub & chiller for me means what I lose in my kettle. If I get 52lt into my fermenter @expected gravity, I hit 78% Brewhouse efficiency. It's the total volume of wort I have after all my losses.
I'm not saying that this is the only way to work it out with BeerSmith but my volumes & losses are spot on so I'll stick with it.

 

[paulgcorfu]

crusty do you find your pre/post boil specific gravities are as predicted by beersmith using this method of setting profile
I continually find my pre boil S.G is spot on but I fall short by a few points after the boil even though my volume is correct.
I believe there is a bug/mistake in the way beersmith calculates this figure and I am wondering if your method overcomes this

 

[danestead]

crusty do you find your pre/post boil specific gravities are as predicted by beersmith using this method of setting profile
I continually find my pre boil S.G is spot on but I fall short by a few points after the boil even though my volume is correct.
I believe there is a bug/mistake in the way beersmith calculates this figure and I am wondering if your method overcomes this

I use promash and experience the same issue.

The preboil gravity that promash predicts is literally a simple calculation of volume of wort and evaporation. Basically, the preboil gravity is the final gravity corrected for the difference in volume of wort corrected for evaporation during the boil.

Even though this is simple maths, I find that I need to be 2 points above the promash predicted gravity at preboil, to achieve the post boil gravity spot on. I believe there is more to it such as hot break etc which causes us to lose a couple of points of gravity during the boil.

 

[Crusty]

crusty do you find your pre/post boil specific gravities are as predicted by beersmith using this method of setting profile
I continually find my pre boil S.G is spot on but I fall short by a few points after the boil even though my volume is correct.
I believe there is a bug/mistake in the way beersmith calculates this figure and I am wondering if your method overcomes this

I really dont bother with pre-boil gravity & never bother to measure how efficient the mash actually is. I'm only concerned with brewhouse efficiency & focus on x amount of wort into my fermenter at x gravity. If I get those numbers, that's all I'm interested in. My last Cream Ale ended up being over 78% & if I measured gravity correctly with temp adjusted correction, I hit 80%. I just leave it be at that & work on the usual & consistent 78%. There are a number of flaws in BeerSmith's calculations as with all the other software programmes out there & a back to back brew can yield different results even though the process is exactly the same as the brew before.
If your pre boil is correct & your post boil volume is correct, it would certainly rule out your boil off figure which is where I would have been looking. What losses are you entering & in what columns using BeerSmith. Trub in the BM left behind after transferring to the fermenter can vary too & because I mill my grain with a drill, I probably go quicker or slower than the last crush & I may leave a touch more behind & it might be more than my set loss of 2lt. BeerSmith focuses it's calculations more at Brewhouse than Mash efficiency as mentioned previously so I concentrate on that. My volumes were spot on with the Cream Ale but I got 2 extra points.

 

[paulgcorfu]

crusty
I have my beersmith settings as
boil off 5 litres/hr
grain absorbsion 0.66 litres/kilo
loss to trub 2 litres (Itip the BM)
loss to fermenter 1 litre for 25 litre batches 2 litres for larger batches

 

[Florian]

A little off topic but still related somehow, just played around with the grain absorption setting (settings/advanced settings) and found that once you change it in beersmith2 it is changed in all recipes, even the old ones in the brewing log.
This shouldn't happen, right? Should really only change for new recipes after change was done.

Also find that BS2 displays grain absorption in fl oz/oz, even though I have set all units to l/ml etc. Any way to change that?

 

[Mr. No-Tip]

I sparge at a constant 1L/kg, but target a slightly high gravity and then adjust pre-boil to hit target (add up to 2-3 L water). I could add it to the sparge volume, but I take my gravity pre-boil (immediately before the boil commences). I enter these figures into beer smith which tells me my mash efficiency. This way I account for any variabilities brought in through the sparge.

So I assume you take your gravity at the end of the mash and then adjust your sparge volume accordingly. Do you use BS to work this out or calculate manually? Does it allow you to constantly hit target OG? How do you handle different grain weights and 'sparge efficiency'?

Way less scientific than that. This thread is pointing out that I really nee to better understand the dynamics of efficiency and how it works in software...but here goes...I have a BM profile that sits at about 70% efficiency. I use that to design a recipe and usually end up about 5.5kg for the 25l pipe, or 11/12kg on the 60l pipe. When I complete a mash, I take a temperature compensated gravity reading. I then sparge a couple litres and often my gravity rises. I take another gravity reading, ensuring the sparge has fully homogenised. I continue to sparge in 2-3l lots until I get to my target preboil.

I generally hit my target OG unless I fail to fully mix those last few sparge litres and overshoot. Obviosuly this method introduces variability to the final volume, but I am OK with that.

Perhaps this is a part of my process that could use some discipline and prediction..

 

[Dan2]

A little off topic but still related somehow, just played around with the grain absorption setting (settings/advanced settings) and found that once you change it in beersmith2 it is changed in all recipes, even the old ones in the brewing log.
This shouldn't happen, right? Should really only change for new recipes after change was done.

Also find that BS2 displays grain absorption in fl oz/oz, even though I have set all units to l/ml etc. Any way to change that?

Damn - I'd forgotten that. The absorption figures are changed in every old recipe, but not equipment profile adjustments.
I've been getting 1/2 L more pre boil volume consistently but also 0.4 L more boil off (so evens out - but OCD made me change both settings a few days ago).
Old absorbption 0,66 - new 0.6 - Old boil off 3.5L for 90 min - new 3.9 (20L BM)
Looking back - It's messed up the required water volume as boil off hasn't changed. I could ignore it, or I could waste time changing the boil off in every old recipe - I'll probably waste time when I get some spare - damn OCD.

There is no way to change absorption units unfortunately (floz/oz to L/kg) but they are very similar.
To convert take L/kg figure and divide by 1.04 - eg from old calculations I had 0.69 (L/kg) divided by 1.04 = 0.666 (floz/oz)

 

[dicko]

Ah ha! Thats why I have a variance if I go back to an old recipe.

I read on another forum that some yanks with the BM's are using metric rather than their own messed up standard of measurement.

They recon it is easier, I though it was a no brainer

If only someone would write a software program that was BM specific I would be on it like a fat kid on a Macca.

Cheers

 

[Batz]

If only someone would write a software program that was BM specific I would be on it like a fat kid on a Macca.

Cheers

+1

Surely it's not that difficult for someone in the know.