Efficiency according to Brewmate

Australia & New Zealand Homebrewing Forum

Help Support Australia & New Zealand Homebrewing Forum:

Liam_snorkel

كافر
Joined
16/9/08
Messages
5,800
Reaction score
2,874
I've kept a record of the last 18 brews and plotted my pre-boil efficiency & into-frementer efficiency against grain bill size. I brew in a bag, squeeze, & mash out. Never sparge.

Aside from a couple of outliers, there is a definite downward trend as the grain bill goes up.

average mash eff = 86%
average into fermenter = 76%

Untitled.png
 

Yob

Hop to it
Joined
14/11/09
Messages
15,036
Reaction score
6,410
Location
Ringwood, Melbourne
I agree with Liam, I also think it's system dependent to a degree, Ive noticed this myself that there seems to be a point of diminishing return, for my system, it's at about ~5.5 kg, after that you need significantly larger amounts to get much higher.

My last brew for example was one I wanted to do to use up some grains (and as an experiment) ahead of the looming BB down here, so I threw ~12kg into the esky, I ended up with ~20lt of 1090 wort (probably should have mashed longer and/or Partigyled it), I know I can get 23lt of a 1075-80 wort with ~7-7.5kg.

Being a homebrewer means (to me) that I dont really have to give 2 shits about eff and can adjust my hopping schedule on the fly to suit... which TBH I usually do regardless of the recipe...

Its is a good number to know though and lets to dial in on a regular bill size which does help with formulating recipies etc... but TBH, I rekon there is more fun to be had in just banging recipies together on the fly and seeing what comes out.. well.. I think it's fun anyway..

:icon_cheers:
 

lukiferj

Self Made Alehouse
Joined
22/6/12
Messages
1,745
Reaction score
664
Location
Rochedale South
I only ever measure into the fermenter these days. It doesn't really mean anything to anyone else except yourself and your system. Good for ensuring that your processes are working and helps to plan recipes.
 

Crusty

Well-Known Member
Joined
29/6/08
Messages
2,623
Reaction score
607
Location
Gulmarrad, NSW
GuyQLD said:
This argument has been done to death. Brewhouse eff is pointless because no one can ever agree on what it means. I consider it efficiency into fermenter. This means NO trub. Crusty includes trub. Already we're talking two different measurements. Worry about your pre boil gravity and recovering whatever volume of wort you require at the gravity you want. The rest is moot.
Brewhouse efficiency is trub loss included, no arguments, no opinions, it's simply all inclusive.
The two methods of efficiency measurement are mash efficiency which I don't use & brewhouse efficiency. As you measure efficiency into the fermenter & don't include your trub losses, you're not measuring brewhouse efficiency.
I spoke to RandyRob ( BrewMate developer ) in relation to this & brewhouse efficiency is total wort + trub loss & measured gravity.
Brad Smith explains it here as well.
 

GuyQLD

Well-Known Member
Joined
13/5/12
Messages
504
Reaction score
152
Yes it is. But you view this as 21.5+2.5 brewmate views it as 23+2.5. We had this argument almost 12 months ago and we couldn't agree then either. The fact that two people apart from me in this thread have stated it doesn't include trub should tell you something. I'll also mention that there's numerous places on the internet that provide different descriptions of brewhouse eff. I'll post a brewday log when I get home if you really want fight about it. But for what its worth I don't know why you would, at the end of the day preboil gravity and correct boil off for your desired volume of wort is all that matters. Brewhouse eff has too many variables to consider to be worth a damn. Your link to Brad Smith is also pointless. We established a long time ago beersmith and brewmate calculate differently.
 

Crusty

Well-Known Member
Joined
29/6/08
Messages
2,623
Reaction score
607
Location
Gulmarrad, NSW
GuyQLD said:
Yes it is. But you view this as 21.5+2.5 brewmate views it as 23+2.5. We had this argument almost 12 months ago and we couldn't agree then either. The fact that two people apart from me in this thread have stated it doesn't include trub should tell you something. I'll also mention that there's numerous places on the internet that different descriptions of brewhouse eff. I'll post a brewday log when I get home if you really want fight about it. But for what its worth I don't know why you would, at the of the day preboil gravity and correct boil off for your desired volume of wort is all that matters. Brewhouse eff has too many variables to consider to be worth a damn.
I really couldn't be bothered arguing with you to be honest. I contacted RandyRob about the correct way to determine brewhouse efficiency using his software & I am correct in how you measure brewhouse efficiency. Contact him & find out for yourself if you need to put the matter to rest. If you use some other form of brewing software & measure efficiency differently, then go with that. For me, on my last APA, a 23lt batch was, 20lt into the no chill cube, 4lt loss to trub. Allowing for 4% of cooling loss or 1lt, this is 20+4-1=23lt. If I get 24lt of total wort @1.054 which is what I was aiming for, then I got 80% brewhouse efficiency for my 23lt batch. BrewMate doesn't calculate this as a 25lt batch ( 23 + 2.5 ) The 2.5lt is accounted for with your strike in volume not added to the final volume. The final volume is 23lt.
Post the brew day log for sure, I'm interested to see how you calculate things.
 

GuyQLD

Well-Known Member
Joined
13/5/12
Messages
504
Reaction score
152
Because a picture is worth a thousand words. And now I think we should get back on topic.

Brewmate.gif

Edit: Apparently I'm bad at uploading.
 

thedragon

Off topic...
Joined
25/9/10
Messages
798
Reaction score
139
I thought I understood how to calc my efficiency, until I read this thread....

GuyQLD, the method that I use is the same as yours. I've always taken the 'actual volume in kettle' to mean how much wort goes in to the fermenter. I like to think that our method is right. Regardless of who's right, as long as we do it consistently for our own rigs it shouldn't really matter.

Now lots get back to brewing (and drinking!)
 

Crusty

Well-Known Member
Joined
29/6/08
Messages
2,623
Reaction score
607
Location
Gulmarrad, NSW
GuyQLD said:
Because a picture is worth a thousand words. And now I think we should get back on topic.

Brewmate.gif

Edit: Apparently I'm bad at uploading.
I wish it were a thousand dollars.
With all due respect, you are way off the money my friend. The programme is calculating for a 23lt batch so why on earth are you putting 26lt as your actual volume into the kettle ( 27-3-1 =23 ) when you are making a 23lt batch, it's obviously not correct if you want to measure brewhouse efficiency. You are double dipping your figures with trub loss. You have already told the software that you will be getting 3.0lt of trub loss so your strike in volume will account for this already. On the brewday sheet, it states from your example, that you should of produced 23lt after cooling loss @1.063.
According to you & your figures, you should have produced this right?
27lt after the boil - 3lt to trub = 24lt - 1lt cooling loss =23lt, correct?
Low & behold, you've got 23lt of wort @1.060, not 26lt @1.060, you have already accounted for the 3lt of trub loss. 23lt total wort produced. It doesn't matter one bit if you get 3.5, 4 or even 5lt of lost trub as long as the total wort in your fermenter + the losses = your batch size, ie: 23lt.
When you formulated this recipe, the trub loss corresponds to your strike volume, try it & see.
 

nala

Well-Known Member
Joined
16/2/10
Messages
262
Reaction score
46
Crusty said:
I wish it were a thousand dollars.
With all due respect, you are way off the money my friend. The programme is calculating for a 23lt batch so why on earth are you putting 26lt as your actual volume into the kettle ( 27-3-1 =23 ) when you are making a 23lt batch, it's obviously not correct if you want to measure brewhouse efficiency. You are double dipping your figures with trub loss. You have already told the software that you will be getting 3.0lt of trub loss so your strike in volume will account for this already. On the brewday sheet, it states from your example, that you should of produced 23lt after cooling loss @1.063.
According to you & your figures, you should have produced this right?
27lt after the boil - 3lt to trub = 24lt - 1lt cooling loss =23lt, correct?
Low & behold, you've got 23lt of wort @1.060, not 26lt @1.060, you have already accounted for the 3lt of trub loss. 23lt total wort produced. It doesn't matter one bit if you get 3.5, 4 or even 5lt of lost trub as long as the total wort in your fermenter + the losses = your batch size, ie: 23lt.
When you formulated this recipe, the trub loss corresponds to your strike volume, try it & see.
Crusty your my man !!!
Could not have put this better,these topics are all about how high people can piss up the wall.
The original question has been ignored by those who can piss the highest...in their opinion !
 

GuyQLD

Well-Known Member
Joined
13/5/12
Messages
504
Reaction score
152
If your batch size is 23lt @1.054, you need to have collected 24lt @1.054 for your calculated efficiency, mine is 80%.
24lt is the total wort you have on hand including trub. I no chill so 1lt of that is cooling loss (4%) & the rest that doesn't make it into my cube is trub loss.
I get 20lt into my cube, 4lt of trub (1lt is cooling loss = 3lt if chilling) so end up with 24lt of total wort @1.054 = 80% efficiency for my 23lt batch.
Remember that for a 23lt batch, I am no chilling so I will get 24lt of wort produced & if I let the 4lt of trub cool naturally, I will get 3lt of trub loss & achieve my 23lt batch size.
You're making a 20L batch. Not 23L.

23lt total wort produced. It doesn't matter one bit if you get 3.5, 4 or even 5lt of lost trub as long as the total wort in your fermenter + the losses = your batch size, ie: 23lt.

It's fermenter = batch size. Not Plus trub - You're not fermenting on the trub are you? You realise you contradict yourself in these two posts?

The first picture is calculated MINUS trub. It's a 23L batch with 23L into the fermenter. I'm not sure how I can be any clearer.
*edit: Math fail
 

BobtheBrewer

Well-Known Member
Joined
3/11/07
Messages
326
Reaction score
15
djar007 said:
Very interesting. Thanks guys for all the info. Very informative.
Yes, thanks for the input. I have always used the required batch size (into cube) as Batch Size in Recipe Specs, and final volume after cooling as Actual Volume in Kettle. Seems to me that if you use Wort Volume after Boil (- 4%cooling loss) as Batch Size, and Actual Volume in Kettle you get the same result but a better efficiency. My OP was inspired by the fact that I wasn't achieving target OG and so needed to lower the efficiency figure and/or increase the grain bill. My problem seems to have disappeared, who knows why.
 

Crusty

Well-Known Member
Joined
29/6/08
Messages
2,623
Reaction score
607
Location
Gulmarrad, NSW
GuyQLD said:
You're making a 20L batch. Not 23L.




It's fermenter MINUS losses = batch size. Not Plus. You realise you contradict yourself in these two posts?

The first picture is calculated MINUS trub. It's a 23L batch with 23L into the fermenter. I'm not sure how I can be any clearer.
Brewhouse efficiency is: Total wort produced which includes all losses, boil off, grain absorption + trub loss.
In BrewMate, the Actual volume into kettle is your total collected wort not what's in the fermenter. Is it asking for volume into your cube or your fermenter...No, it's asking for how much wort you have sitting in that kettle. 20lt of wort for the cube, 3lt of that is trub & the extra 1lt is cooling loss so there's 24lt of wort in the kettle.
You're doin my head in dude & your robbing yourself of efficiency points & wasting grain while your at it.
I'm making a 23lt batch, that's what's in the kettle not 20lt.
 

Crusty

Well-Known Member
Joined
29/6/08
Messages
2,623
Reaction score
607
Location
Gulmarrad, NSW
nala said:
Crusty your my man !!!
Could not have put this better,these topics are all about how high people can piss up the wall.
The original question has been ignored by those who can piss the highest...in their opinion !
The OP was asking how to correctly work out brewhouse efficiency.
The correct way using BrewMate is to input the total amount of wort in the Actual volume in kettle column.
This total after the boil will be will be wort + trub loss - cooling loss @ measured gravity.
I've answered the question over & over.
 

thedragon

Off topic...
Joined
25/9/10
Messages
798
Reaction score
139
Crusty said:
You're doin my head in dude & your robbing yourself of efficiency points & wasting grain while your at it.
No disrespect intended but I'm not sure how he's waisting grain.

I know that the higher the ratio of grain to water, the lower the efficiency, but we've got to be talking around the margins. In fact we're not talking about how much grain is used or how we measure OG, we're talking about how we measure volume. Not how much grain is used to achieve the OG.

if he is aiming for a specific OG, and he achieves it, I can't see that the way he interprets volume - be it volume in the kettle or volume in the FV - affects how much grain he's using to hit that OG. There may be other things that effect it such as technique, but not what volume numbers are input in to a program after the fact.

But yes, we are off topic. There's more important things to worry about. Such as whether a 330ml bottle is better than a 750ml ;)
 

Crusty

Well-Known Member
Joined
29/6/08
Messages
2,623
Reaction score
607
Location
Gulmarrad, NSW
Liam_snorkel said:
posting in the Crusty thread.
Nah mate, not my thread. Just trying to point out how to correctly input figures into BrewMate.
The reason I am arguing with Guy is I've already spoken to Rob about correctly using brewhouse efficiency. It's not my spin on how it's calculated, it's Rob that developed the software so if he says that's how it's done, then that's how it's done.
If he wants to do it another way, that's entirely up to him but it's incorrect.
It looks like the OP has it sorted so all good.
 

GuyQLD

Well-Known Member
Joined
13/5/12
Messages
504
Reaction score
152
I gave up on this thread last night, but since you posted that picture it just get's more humorous.

You've repeatedly stated that the Actual Volume field contains your Wort + trub loss. However in the picture you just posted, you have a post boil volume of 26.5. Since by your definition Actual Volume in Kettle = Post boil - losses to chilling based on your picture it should be 25.5L in the kettle.

In the picture you posted how much wort is going into the cube? Is it 23L or the 21L that you've repeatedly stated. If that 23L you've stated in the Actual Kettle Volume field still includes trub your numbers are 2.5L out.

If in your example that 23L is the actual volume into the cube then what the hell are you arguing about?
 

Latest posts

Top