False Bottoms Vs Manifolds

[winkle]

Batch sparging with braid in a cyclindrical cooler works for me. Easy basic setup with around 70-80% eff

 

[Coodgee]

well I don't want to hijack this thread with an efficency discussion, but I have tried just about everything else to get my efficency up and nothing to seems to work! I adjust my mash ph with phosphoric acid and calcium sulphate, I batch sparge with boiling (or very close) water. I've tried double crushed grain. I've tried grain from different sources. I've tried a new hydrometer.

The only thing I can think to try is a new mash vessel.

 

[Keifer]

Maybe your calculations are slightly off giving you a false reuslt coodgee?

 

[Guest Lurker]

If you are batch sparging, then you guys need to get out of 2 dimensions and think in 3 dimensions. You only need about a cm of grain bed to get a clean runoff, so short circuiting your flow paths is the go.

 

[dicko]

well I don't want to hijack this thread with an efficency discussion, but I have tried just about everything else to get my efficency up and nothing to seems to work! I adjust my mash ph with phosphoric acid and calcium sulphate, I batch sparge with boiling (or very close) water. I've tried double crushed grain. I've tried grain from different sources. I've tried a new hydrometer.

The only thing I can think to try is a new mash vessel.

Hi Coodgee,

A common area of efficiency loss in a mash tun is the amount of grain that sits BELOW the lowest point of pick up of the manifold / braid etc.
This grain is not sparged as is the grain ABOVE the lowest point and therefore lowers your efficiency.
I have got two mash tuns. One has a manifold with slots cut into the sides of the copper pipe and I get 72% true efficiency.
The other tun has the slots cut in the bottom of the pipe and the manifold sits basically on the floor of the mash tun. I get 78% true efficiency out of this one.
All else remains the same IE; grain crush, sparge temps etc.
It could be just manifold design or if you use a braid it could be floating up slightly in the mash.
I hope this helps.

Cheers

 

[warrenlw63]

so short circuiting your flow paths is the go.

Wouldn't throttling back the ball valve achieve something similar? :unsure:

Warren -

 

[Finite]

Well instead of brewing this week ive decided to work on constructing my 3 vessle AG system.

Ive spent a bit of time working out the design of my mash tun. Ive gone with a false bottom system with a seperate drainage stem which also has the ability to work as a backup to filter out any tricky husks that my by chance get through. The setup is designed to bottom drain, be able to underlet and be easierly removable for cleaning. I also wanted the false bottom tention to be ajustable so i can pull it toward the base of the tun at different tentions. Ive tested the flow and it runs through the tap as full pace so the holes arnt compromising the flow at all. After a test I messured the ammount of water left in the tun and it was less than 3ml.

I came up with with the following setup:


Whole bottom feeding stem with descriptions


Shot of the whole setup


the drainage stem

 

[AndrewQLD]

Blake, I used a similar idea on my bottom draining system originally, however I found that the drainage holes kept getting blocked by loose husk material that somehow managed to sneak through what I thought was my grain/husk tight false bottom :blink: , hopefully you won't have that problem, but be aware if your flow starts to restrict during sparging then that is probably why.

Cheers
Andrew

 

[razz]

G'day Blake. Why the adjustment on the bottom drain ? :blink:

 

[crozdog]

I started out with a PVC manifold. Efficiency was 60% for my 1st AG, but i got that up to 75% consistently. The PVC however started to warp with the heat, so I replaced it with stainless braid. The first use of the braid delivered 82% efficiency. :beerbang: I have had over 90% when doing massive brews (22kg grain) & having a thick grain bed. FYI, I batch sparge & found my efficiency also increased when I started to mill my own grain @ 0.8mm gap.

I vorlouf (sp?) very little with the braid as the runnings are very clear from the start.

I agree with Stuster re braid & the kiss principle. I only went for the PVC as I had a heap of it & the fittings left over from making fish tank filters. Now, I'd just go for the braid.

Blake, nice bit of engineering - let us know how it goes.

 

[Finite]

Andrew QLD, thanks for the tips. All this is theory atm so nothing is certain until shes had a few brews run through her. If what you mentioned does happen ive left myself the options to grind out some slits in the drain peice like this.

Razz, Sorry i forgot to mention my false bottom is a plastic base from a bucket which ive drilled 2mm holes in. Reason for this is 1. Price....gets me going untill I can afford a SS one (uni student budgets ). 2. I wanted only a small hole for the tun to help keep heat in, with a plastic bottom i can make the hole small and bend it to fit through the top. It is a bit fiddily to get it to sit flush with the bottom so Im thinking of adding some pvc tubing cut in half to seal the edge. Being able to adjust the pull on the bottom helps get it sitting flush with the bottom of the tun. Though that will all be redundant when I upgrade to SS.

 

[razz]

Ah-ha

 

[jimmyjack]

I went from a braid to false bottom. The braid worked reasonably well for 6 brews or so and then it was prone to being crushed and bent out of shape. I got about 65% effeciency with braid and get 80% with False Bottom. I dont think cloudy run off is that bad for a beer as long as I get most of the grain bits out, in which I use my Hop sock to help filter into the kettle. I also found that the braid was a PITA to take apart and clean where as my false bottom is a sinch!

Cheers, JJ

 

[thunderleg]

I use both. I have a braid loop for batch sparging and a phils phalse bottom for fly sparging. I change my sparging technique depending on what I'm making. I can get low 80s with the braid and I have hit 92% efficiency with the false bottom.