Brew In A Bucket Why Not Indeed

[MarkBastard]

For sure Stux, if I had a skyhook or could easily install one things could be very different.

 

[Bribie G]

I'm doing a brew today, probably not till after lunchtime but I'll put up a series of pictures again with comments about ease/difficulties/glitches etc.

A skyhook with a controllable lifting system (not just a single pulley hoist and pray you can get it tied off quickly before your left hand slips) system and a pump would make the whole thing much easier. I'm still jugging.

To me it's all about clarity into the kettle i.e. remaining in the kettle as it's a one vessel system. I really want to get away from the "just throw an extra half kilo of grain at it, and she'll be right" mindset.

With any system you don't get free lunches. The various extremes seem to be

Quick and easy and cheap to get into and throw a couple of extra sacks of grain and a wheelbarrow of hops at it over the course of a year which end up at the Luggage Point treatment plant.

High efficiency and yield but a heap of dicking around with multiple vessels and a rather nasty clean up at the end

High efficiency, not much dicking around as the whole thing is controlled by Arduino, PIDs, pumps, gold plated thrust nadger recirculating thrummets hand-programmed in Haskell and a titanium frame with built in hydraulic stabilisers, with an air conditioned control room to house the Linux server that runs the entire system, and you have a really high paying job with the Government to pay for all this bling, and preferably no family life as it took 3 years to design and put together.

It all produces good beer at the end of the day, What Mark, Nala and to a certain degree myself are trying to achieve is more of a middle ground in efficiency vs dicking.

 

[MarkBastard]

Honestly what I'm going for is the easiest possible brew day for my circumstances. To the point where I'll take a hit in efficiency to not have to deal with a bag OR sparging if it comes to that. The problem with BIAB is if you have a low efficiency you need more grain, and more grain makes BIAB even more of a pain in the arse.

 

[SpillsMostOfIt]

... makes BIAB even more of a pain in the arse.

You must be doing it wrong.

If this endeavour results in a method of brewing that people find useful and interesting, then I am all for it. However, I am yet to find a circumstance in my brewery where BIAB makes my bottom hurt.

It is important to find a way of brewing that works for you, if only so that you can then hang shit on all the other methods.

 

[MarkBastard]

Haha, true.

I don't see a clear overarching benefit to either method. They're both very similar, one with a bag and one with a bucket. It's nothing to get worked up about either way. Good to have options.

 

[Bribie G]

Another advantage of bucket in Urn (perhaps not bucket in keggle or bucket in wider pot) is that you get a nice thin water jacket around the bucket, especially if you use the Non-Bunnings Handy Pail. Sit it on a low trivet to protect the element and with the lid on. Therefore, as there is little or no exchange of contents between the bucket and the water jacket, if the jacket is maintained at mash or a degree higher temperature and checked a few times, with a bit of heat burst no doubt required, then the swaddling and doonah lagging method might not be necessary. Just a lighter urn slipover or "parka" could be the go, I have a shitload of that metallised foam sheet from Clark Rubber, might pop out and get some octopus straps or whatever they are called and do one up for this afternoon's brew and report. Now I only have the one urn it can just stay on there permanently, and for the boil as well.

With BIAB the mash is virtually in direct contact with the urn wall save for a layer of voil and temperature drop is a problem even with good lagging. Can't go past a heated water jacket you'd have to suppose.

 

[bum]

Can't go past a heated water jacket you'd have to suppose.

In terms of physics, sure. Sounds reasonable. But how much effect does having volumes of water in your tun that are essentially isolated from the mash have? Or do you give the bucket the occasional lift? Assuming a gap width wide enough to have any serious insulating properties - you're talking a not insignificant amount of water, right? In the low order of litres, yeah?

 

[MarkBastard]

Bum, the handy pails are 20 litres and I am planning on starting with 30L of strike water, so yes there is a significant amount of water around the bucket that is potentially going to be a weak wort. Obviously somewhere between plain water and wort at the same SG as the wort in the bucket. Probably depends on how you work your mash paddle, whether you have a gap under the bucket, and whether heat from the element creates currents.

Although I like bribie's idea, I definitely will not be turning the element on at any point in an attempt to create a 'heat jacket' around the bucket.

However, with my bag I'd typically start with strike water at 69 degrees for a starting mash temperature of about 66 degrees. Considering the bucket has more mass than a bag I may have to start at 70 degrees, then add the bucket, which would say take the temperature down to 69 degrees for a 'true' strike temperature. I then add the grain to the inside of the bucket and mix it around as per normal. The water inside the bucket mixed with the cooler grain should then in theory by 66 degrees.

However, the water ouside the bucket, will it be 66 degrees or will it be somewhere between 69 and 66 degrees? I'd say it'd be closer to 69. It hasn't come in contact with the cooler grain, and if I haven't gone crazy with the mash paddle it should automatically be a slightly hotter jacket.

It may just work out that over the 60 minute mash this somewhat evens out. Who knows what affect it will have? With the lid on the pail as well, I'd be thinking the internal mash temperature is going to remain more consistent in a bucket than in an urn.

It would be really awesome if this was the case to the extent I no longer needed to lag the urn. I mean I have permanent lagging anyway but it'd be nice to not have to get the doona off the spare bed when I brew. Maybe it'll make enough of a difference that I can just throw a thick towel over the lid of the urn and only get 1 degree heat loss over a 60 minute mash compared to 1.5 degrees over a 60 minute mash with a bag + a doona?

I won't know until I try it.

 

[pk.sax]

easiest solution to avoid lifting bags/buckets is......

you guessed it, gravity

Cheapest flow system to work with gravity is.... you guessed it, siphon from manifold/false bottom.

As with anything cheap and simple, they need precise use. BIAB is not precise, its a throw a demo hammer at the nut solution. It works, It overkills the problem, its very tolerant of mistakes.

This bucket in urn system is like this (from my perspective): You try to create a grain bed, then you risk upsetting it by lifting/moving it etc. By the time you've lifted it, its at a height that is most likely not very suitable for sparging, so bring it down and sparge into yet another vessel...

then, because you are not doing it straight into the kettle, you have to move the wort to the tun, pour/pump it. More work again. Its simple things, but they are more steps.

Normal 3 tier gravity brewing is simply opening and closing valves apart from the compulsory temp readings, mashing, doughing in, hops etc...

Clean up of a 3v Mash tun is as simple as that for the plastic pail mash tun you are using, tip it out, then hose it. Albeit, if you use a keggle mash tun, it can be direct fired too. Another advantage.

There are practical (sic) reasons to avoid the whole buckets and holes dick around. Now, if you were simply pinching pennies, yea a pail is cheaper/free. But so was my mash tun

 

[MarkBastard]

We are all aware that 3V and 4V systems exist so no need to point that out.

This bucket in urn system is like this (from my perspective): You try to create a grain bed, then you risk upsetting it by lifting/moving it etc. By the time you've lifted it, its at a height that is most likely not very suitable for sparging, so bring it down and sparge into yet another vessel...

Wrong. The height of the bucket would be less than that of a mash tun that gravity feeds into a kettle. Your magical extra vessel for sparging makes no sense.

then, because you are not doing it straight into the kettle, you have to move the wort to the tun, pour/pump it. More work again. Its simple things, but they are more steps.

The bucket drains straight into the kettle.

Normal 3 tier gravity brewing is simply opening and closing valves apart from the compulsory temp readings, mashing, doughing in, hops etc...

Clean up of a 3v Mash tun is as simple as that for the plastic pail mash tun you are using, tip it out, then hose it. Albeit, if you use a keggle mash tun, it can be direct fired too. Another advantage.

This can be direct fired as well.

There are practical (sic) reasons to avoid the whole buckets and holes dick around. Now, if you were simply pinching pennies, yea a pail is cheaper/free. But so was my mash tun

Give me your mash tun for free or get out of the thread.

 

[Bribie G]

There seems to be some strange mindset that HLT / Mashtun / Kettle brewing is the "natural" method of brewing. If this is the case then why don't most small breweries use this system? In fact they normally have a hot liquor source, a vessel which is used as a mashtun, then later as the kettle. And a lauter tun which may or may not be heated. Personally I see nothing "natural" about 3 vessel, it's just an option amongst options.

 

[MarkBastard]

I couldn't give a shit about how natural or old or new a method is anyway. I only care about making my brew day less annoying so that I'm inclined to brew more and enjoy my hobby.

 

[sim]

However, I am yet to find a circumstance in my brewery where BIAB makes my bottom hurt.

Haha, Brew in a Bottom ! ! ! :lol:

 

[QldKev]

that is the best avatar i have ever seen, i am stuck in a booby trance

if you watch it long enough and then stare at the wall it starts moving like the boobies

 

[pk.sax]

lol.. ur a bit angry today... someone poke you hard?!

I was saying what it looked like to me. Simple ergonomics really, if the mash tun (Urn) is on a stand just high enough off the ground to fill cubes from, then the pail has to be raised enough out of it to drain (?? correct me if wrong mate, I haven't done your method, I always drained in colander).
At that height, you need to introduce a sparge that will not kill the grain bed or cause channeling/compacting whatever (I'm learning this stuff, take it easy). So, the HLT needs to be higher? or Pumped to sparge. Anyway, you get what I'm thinking I hope. Its just unnecessary work/bother through each mash for being too lazy to build a good hassle free tun from the start.

I'm not calling multi vessel brewing the "Proper" way. I don't know where you got that idea from. I am calling it "I think the easier way overall".

btw, I'm guarding that tun with my life... although.. there are plenty of empty kegs behind liquorland h34r:

 

[MarkBastard]

I was saying what it looked like to me. Simple ergonomics really, if the mash tun (Urn) is on a stand just high enough off the ground to fill cubes from, then the pail has to be raised enough out of it to drain (?? correct me if wrong mate, I haven't done your method, I always drained in colander).
At that height, you need to introduce a sparge that will not kill the grain bed or cause channeling/compacting whatever (I'm learning this stuff, take it easy). So, the HLT needs to be higher? or Pumped to sparge. Anyway, you get what I'm thinking I hope. Its just unnecessary work/bother through each mash for being too lazy to build a good hassle free tun from the start.

In a 3V/4V setup using gravity and following the same logic of the boiler being high enough to fill a cube, you would have the height of a cube, then the height of the boiler, then the height of the mash turn, then the height of the HLT. In this system you have the height of the cube, then the height of the boiler, then not even the entire height of the bucket (as the bucket sits partially inside the urn, not fully on top of it. Therefore the bucket is lower than your mash turn and considerably lower than your HLT.

Regarding sparging (which isn't a core part of this system, optional only, and I will test out whether it's worth it or not), you can manually recirculate by filling up a jug from the kettle, or use a pump. Sparging is not a core part of this system though as it's a full volume mash.

It's not about being lazy. I don't see anything lazy about experimenting with a brewing system. Lazy would be buying a premade mash tun, or a Braumeister, or even to some extent buying an eski, ball valve and false bottom.

 

[pk.sax]

Lets say we agree on most things here..

just saying, recirc =/= sparging.... recirc is a precursor to sparging to get clarity into the kettle.

With my 3v this last time, I just had the tun sitting on the burner, once finished, I put it on an upturned garden bin. This was right under the HLT that was on a bench, normal kitchen bench height. Replaced tun on burner with kettle on burner, started recirc with a jug (3-4 times) and started sparge when it looked good. Wasn't very high.

What I actually don't like about trying to make a grain bed in bucket system is that unless you sparge, the usefulness of doing that is very limited. As TB pointed out, BIAB no-sparge is already the easiest. so, if not sprging, I'd just stick with a bag. If I need to sparge, I'l take it to 3v. The in between just gains me the option to re-circulate, not enough benefit to me, all my BIABs that weren't meant to be cloudy have always come out very very bright, without absolutely any clearing additions, I don't even get to crash chill. Half tab of Irish moss in kettle is all it gets.

Couldn't justify all that effort for a benefit I already had with a bag.

Now, why am I posting in this thread???

I'm still space poor. My kettle and tun are sitting in a mate's hugantic shed. I could manage to do it at mine, but can't be arsed with the dicking around.
I'd have loved to see an option that is cheap and gave me no-sparge benefits that beat using a 19L pot and voile square. So far, I'm disappointed. Urn... nah.. another peice of electric junk to stow away that needs to be cleaned etc. Pot, easy, I just stick offs and ends in my 19L pot and it tucks away in a cupboard beautifully.

 

[Nick JD]

Problem with BIAB ... cloudy wort, messy bag/lifting.

Problem solved ... what will the multi-vessel folk have to whinge about that their method is superior? Nothing.

Hence the FEAR.

 

[DUANNE]

Problem with BIAB ... cloudy wort, messy bag/lifting.

Problem solved ... what will the multi-vessel folk have to whinge about that their method is superior? Nothing.

Hence the FEAR.

and this method would reqiure,if i read it right a - bucket(mash tun) pot full of hot water (hlt), kettle(kettle). i have used biab for several years and have nothing against it but this is sounding more and more like a 3v system to me. biab is about the cheap and easy entry level and absolute simplicity of use. each and every 'innovation' seems to go against this and closer to 'traditional' 3v systems imo. my only FEAR is that these new systems are more complicated than the system they are intended to replace.

 

[MarkBastard]

Lets say we agree on most things here..

just saying, recirc =/= sparging.... recirc is a precursor to sparging to get clarity into the kettle.

With my 3v this last time, I just had the tun sitting on the burner, once finished, I put it on an upturned garden bin. This was right under the HLT that was on a bench, normal kitchen bench height. Replaced tun on burner with kettle on burner, started recirc with a jug (3-4 times) and started sparge when it looked good. Wasn't very high.

Yes I realise recirculating is not the same as sparging (this is pretty basic stuff).

Haha, so you move your mash turn around and then talk to me about moving a pissy little bucket 20cm upwards?

What I actually don't like about trying to make a grain bed in bucket system is that unless you sparge, the usefulness of doing that is very limited. As TB pointed out, BIAB no-sparge is already the easiest. so, if not sprging, I'd just stick with a bag. If I need to sparge, I'l take it to 3v. The in between just gains me the option to re-circulate, not enough benefit to me, all my BIABs that weren't meant to be cloudy have always come out very very bright, without absolutely any clearing additions, I don't even get to crash chill. Half tab of Irish moss in kettle is all it gets.

THIS IS BIG AND BOLD SO THAT YOU READ IT. SPARGING AND EVEN RECIRCULATING IS NOT A NECESSARY FEATURE OF BUCKET BREWING. How is 'BIAB no sparge' easier than 'Bucket no sparge'? And in what ways are you qualified to make this call as a 3V brewer that presumably has not done BIAB plus Bucket to compare the two?

Couldn't justify all that effort for a benefit I already had with a bag.

Now, why am I posting in this thread???

I'm still space poor. My kettle and tun are sitting in a mate's hugantic shed. I could manage to do it at mine, but can't be arsed with the dicking around.
I'd have loved to see an option that is cheap and gave me no-sparge benefits that beat using a 19L pot and voile square. So far, I'm disappointed. Urn... nah.. another peice of electric junk to stow away that needs to be cleaned etc. Pot, easy, I just stick offs and ends in my 19L pot and it tucks away in a cupboard beautifully.

Hence why not everyone is a 3V brewer. We don't all have that much space in our houses or a magical friend that gives us use of their shed plus a magical source of free mash tuns that teleport to where ever you want them to while containing your mash.