What's The Best Way To Post Efficiency On Ahb?

[Thirsty Boy]

You know what Pat,

I think that besides opening a whole off topic can of worms.. you have probably achieved what you set out to achieve in the first place. You were hoping for an AHB standard for posting efficiency, well, I dont think you are going to get that, people are a bit clingy about sticking to their own method.

BUT. What you have managed to make us all do, is realise that not everyone actually means the same thing when they use the word efficiency.

So, from now on, if I post a recipe. I'll probably just stick to using the "into the kettle" figure that I'm comfortable with. But instead of just saying efficiency, I will try to remember to say Pre-boil Efficiency. Whereas Trent would need to say Total Brewhouse Efficiency.

As long as we all say which type we are quoting, people can do the conversion for themselves. That even takes care of those of you with the mystery efficiency loss.

I know you wanted something easy for newbies to interpret, but bugger it, they can just ask what we mean. At least if we are making it plain that we are talking about different efficiency figures, they know that they HAVE a question to ask.

I think that you have once again done a service to the AHB community here mate. Well done.

Thirsty

 

[Trent]

Thirsty Boy
I whole heartedly agree with you. If people wanna post their efficiencies, its probably best to state which kind. Ya shoulda piped up with that 6 pages ago! Good stuff (simple, but very smart).
All the best
Trent

 

[Thirsty Boy]

On the topic of a new poll or whatever. I think you are asking the question in the wrong way. By using the word efficiency, you are confusing the issue. Forget about losing efficiency, you are losing extract (or sugar if you want). Efficiency is all about how much extract you get, as compared to how much it would be possible to get in a perfect setup. There's a whole bunch of factors there that are completely irrelevant to what you are experiencing.

So when your efficiency (no matter which type you mean) drops, it is because you have lost sugar somewhere.

So the question should be - Do you suffer an unaccountable loss of extract during the boil?

Then you can stop worring about the possible vagaries of Promash or Beersmith and whether people are entering their losses to deadspace etc. you just calculate extract Gravity x Volume. It doesn't even matter what unit you measure gravity in. SG, Plato, Brix... all effective for the purpose at hand.

If you have less points of extract at the end of the boil than the start... where the hell did they go??

Then make them think about where they might have gone. Tell them to account for...

Trub
Hopbag
Deadspace
Chillers
Samples
Thermal expansion/contraction
Spills/boilovers
Leaks
anything else you can think of

When they have accounted for all that, if there are still missing extract points

Then they have to think about how accurate they are actually able to be in measuring. If they really take into account all their possible areas of uncertainty and their loss is greater than could be accounted for by systemic inaccuracy, then.... well then they have an unaccountable loss.

And they can tick the "yes" box on the poll.


Or something like that anyway

Thirsty

 

[bayWeiss]

It is my belief as well that "pre-boil"efficiency should be the only "efficiency" number ever quoted for recipe giving/taking/trading.

"Post-boil" efficiency numbers carry all of the potential error baggage as listed in Thirstyboy's post... and it would be almost impossible to replicate things based on that number.

Even if there were no errors in measuring, there is still the question (does this measurement take into account the break material?) Whereas the only question needed when using "pre-boil" efficiency numbers is of grain potential.

cheers!

 

[Ross]

Excellent post as always Thirsty Boy - shame you & Pat aren't neighbours, then maybe some of these threads would gell a bit better & would attract a wider input.
Brewhouse efficiency is all that matters to the brewer (me anyway) putting his recipe together - what you get in your fermenter for the ingredients mashed & volumes used. Personally i couldn't give a damn whether i lose sugars in the boil, if you do, you do. i just want accurate predictabillity/repeatabillity of results & that i have.
I'm looking forward to Thirsty Boys controlled experiment; toyed with doing it myself, but he has the technical resources to give it true credibillity. Personally, as mentioned before, I believe it's down to measuring inaccuracys, if it isn't & we do lose sugar to the wort, i'll have learnt something which is always good.

cheers Ross

 

[PistolPatch]

Rossco, that's two long posts in a row - good on ya mate! I reckon it's a shame Thirsty and I aren't neighbours as well. He's just sent me a 3 page PM on another topic we've been mucking around with which is another great read - going to take me a good hour to digest! If we were neighbours we'd spend the whole night talking instead of posting. Perfect!

Thanks very much Thirsty, Trent, Bayweiss and Rossco for your comments today and prior. Before I try and get my head around all the info provided re a new poll, have you any thoughts on the following?...

I mean, it would be great if everyone explained what efficiency figure they were using but they don't. I've suggested this before. In fact, about 6 months ago I pushed that point a few times (purely through ignorance as you will see below) but of course, no one does it. People still say, 'My efficiency was 76%.'

So, how about the following to temporarily, until we get more figures, summarise this thread? (I haven't given any credits or whacked in links to anyone's top posts. We can do this in the airlocked thread that will inevitably result from all this )

Here's the edit I plan to whack at the beginning of Post #1. Any improvements before I add it?

EDIT: AN ANSWER TO THE THREAD QUESTION (Based on the First Eighty Posts to this Thread)

The poll shows clearly that currently there is no standard way in which people post their, 'AHB Efficiency.'*

I began this thread because my efficiency into boiler figure is always about 10% higher than my, 'final efficiency.'* I never put much thought into this until now as I when I do measure I am fanatical - I thought at the time of posting, that everyone's 'efficiency,' dropped during the boil. Theoretically though, this shouldn't happen. But, a few people are getting similiar figures to myself including one professional brewer. Other people are finding that their efficiency into boiler and final efficiency do match. Other people don't know as they only take one efficiency measurement per brew.

So, at this stage, the answer as to the best way to post your efficiency on AHB depends on your figures.

*Final Efficiency or AHB Efficiency

One thing that the overwhelming majority of posters here agree on is that when measuring your, 'Efficiency Into Fermenter,' you should include your losses to trub. So, in other words, if you end up with 23 litres in your fermenter and you have left 2.6 litres in your kettle or in pipes etc, then you should call your final volume 25.6 litres. This figure does not have a name so I will call it your, 'Final Efficiency,' or your, 'AHB Efficiency.'

So...

If Your Efficiency Into Boiler Figure Equals Your Final Efficiency Figure

Obviously, if with your measurement regime, these two figures match, then you can post either figure as it will equal your 'AHB Efficiency.' Things are easy for you guys!

If Your Efficiency Into Boiler Figure is Higher than Your Final Efficiency Figure

Those of us who are finding their Efficiency Into Boiler figure is considerably higher than their Final Efficiency figure should, when posting publicly, use their final efficiency figure. If we do this then everyone's figures will be in agreement.

Why Isn't Everyone Getting the Same Figures?

At this stage we don't know. We have only a few figures to work from so far and so are currently trying to get more brewer's figures. If you are interested in this question or in contributing your efficiency figures then you should read this thread from Post #59 onwards. Post #59 contains a very pedantic template of how to measure your efficiencies. The less pedantic measurers can forget the hop adjustments contained in that post. The figures you come up with will be close enough.

END OF EDIT. The original post is as follows...

Is that OK guys? (God knows who will read that much anyway - lol!)

Spot ya,
Pat

 

[PistolPatch]

Is that OK guys? (God knows who will read that much anyway - lol!)

From the total lack of replies, I think I may have the answer to the second part of the question above. I must have put everyone to sleep - lol!

Anyway, no one has said it's wrong so unless I hear anything in the meantime, I will add the edit proposed in the post above with a few small changes later this morning.

I was hoping we'd have some more figures by now (Anyone brewing today?) To get some more info/figures, I'll probably start that other poll as well later this morning so please chuck your vote in there. Will also incorporate Thirsty Boy's suggestions to the poll with the exception of one thing I'm uncertain on and have just emailed him about. (Thanks mate!)

Spot ya later,
Pat

 

[Thirsty Boy]

Its very very sad Pat, both of us are posting when any reasonable human being would be in bed.

Your format for posting efficiency is fine. It means that we are all talking about the same figures no matter what has happened on the way to getting them.

All you have to do now is get people to start using the convention. I suggest that everyone who has been following this thread, make an effort to ask.... if you dont see an explanation of what type of efficiency is being quoted... ask. Eventually people will get into the habbit.

TB

 

[MHB]

Just a thought about the "Missing Mass".
I havent sat down and run the numbers through however:-

The hot break material is in solution at the start of the boil, it's on the bottom of the kettle at the end of the boil.

This mass does contribute to the sweet water density.
But it is missing from the wort density.

It might account for some of the change in calculated efficiency.

MHB

 

[Hogan]

Runnings off the mash Brix 18 (1.075)

1st sparge Brix 9 (1.037)

2nd sparge Brix 4 (1.017)

combined runnings Brix 9.4 (1.038) Beersmith predicted SG of 1.037

Volume into kettle 32.5 litres (Beersmith predicated 31.76 lts.)

Kettle bought up to boiling Brix 9.2 (1.037)

15 minutes into boil Brix 9.4 (1.038)

30 minutes into boil Brix 9.6 (1.039) First Hop Addition...

45 minutes into boil Brix 10.4 (1.042) Notice gravity leap after hops added.

60 minutes into boil Brix 10.8 (1.044)

75 minutes into boil Brix 11.0 (1.045)

80 minutes into boil Second hop addition

90 minutes into boil Brix 12.2 (1.050) Flame Out. (Beersmith predicted 1.048)

30 minutes after flame out - Brix 12.2

Wort volume post boil 24 litres.
View attachment 12082

After trying some different figures in BeerSmith I find that to get exactly the same efficiency % pre and post boil can be achieved by increasing my listed post boil volume by only 700 mls. As I cannot guarantee that my volume figure of 24 lts is 100% accurate I cannot say with any degree of certainty that there was a difference in the efficiency figures.

Cheers, Hoges.

 

[PistolPatch]

OK, I've chucked the new poll up here and added the edit to Post #1 of this thread. I didn't put Thirsty's points in the first poll of the new thread. I thought it might be wise to keep them in reserve. This reserve has now just been used - lol!

MHB: That'd be great if you could do some calcualtions on it. I suppose the only way for the average home brewer to ensure there is no discrepancy there would be to either take the sample just before the boil ends as I wrote in Post #59 or stir the hell out of it at the end of the chill.

On that last brew though, I think I took the sample just after the end of the boil - maybe a minute or two after. Would a lot of stuff drop put of suspension in those few minutes. I hope so as this could be what is going on. Might do a brew on Wednesday and get some more figures. Need more kegs though!

Spot ya,
Pat

Hoges: Just caught your post. Yeah that's only a small difference. Mine needed about a 3 litre change. If I were you, I'd vote that there is no change in your efficiency. Thanks to you, I've just added an instruction that if people have less than 5% change then to consider this as no change. Thanks for this and your figures mate.

 

[MHB]

Ref Kunze; Technology Brewing and Malting
Hot Break is typically about 1.42 Kg/100 L
Cold Break about 0.22 Kg/100 L

Just a quick play with the numbers (I realise that there are some other factors, but I think they are below the resolution of the measuring equipment in use)
Total break material ~1.64 Kg/100L,
If the sweet wort was say 1.050
You loose from the solution about 1.42g/L on Boiling and another 0.22g/L on Cooling a total of 1.64g/L.
So you loose some apparent density, the true value for the sugar content of the sweet wort should be ~1.04836, rather than 1.050.
0.05-0.04836 = 0.00164
(0.00164 / 0.050) X 100 = 3.28%

About a 3.3% apparent loss in efficiency; caused by break formation.

Break once it forms can't be stirred in and measured; it has come out of solution, it has no more effect on the gravity reading than would a teaspoon of sand in the bottom of your hydrometer tube.
Even if it's stirred into suspension, it won't affect the gravity reading.

MHB

 

[Hargie]

....doubt that this will help....




....yesterday i brewed the house Weizen....

....9.38 kg grain....my recipes are always set at 80% efficiency...

....48 ltrs for pre boil of 1.052 = 85% efficiency ( pro-mash)

....39 ltrs "final efficiency" 1.064 = 91% efficiency.....

....minus 3 ltrs kettle/hop/trub losses = 36 ltrs...

....add 10 ltrs dilution to get 46 ltrs @ 1.050 = 83 % efficiency....




.....buggered if i know.....

 

[PistolPatch]

Hargie: These are just the figures we are after. It looks as though yours are going up during the boil but a few other people have got this too.

It would be great if you could, while it's fresh in your memory, have a look at how the way you took your measurements differed from the guide given here and also consider the things that Thirsty Boy mentioned in his post here

Thanks for taking the time to post. From what I see of the polls so far, everyone's figures are a bit all over the place. The only way we will find out why is if people like yourself take the time to post their figures and then have a good think on the above (or vice-versa if they haven't already done their measurements.) Many thanks to you Hargie and please post here again if you can either find any criticism of the way you measured your own figures or if you are confident in them. Either way will give us valuable info.

MHB: Great to see a post like yours. I was actually pretty excited about this until Adamt and I were talking earlier today and he pointed out that the theory actually worked the opposite way to explaining a decrease in gravity during the boil. Agh!!!! Oh well! The info you provided though is certainly valuable. I love posts like that.

:super:
Pat

 

[Thirsty Boy]

MHB: Great to see a post like yours. I was actually pretty excited about this until Adamt and I were talking earlier today and he pointed out that the theory actually worked the opposite way to explaining a decrease in gravity during the boil.

Sorry... hows that? You just gave me a damn headache.

If you precipitate out some dissolved solids from a liquid, the liquid becomes less dense. If you were measuring density in order to determine sugar content and from that efficiency (god I wish we could just use points of extract...) then less density due to protien break formation, would read on your hydrometer as less sugar and therefore a loss in efficiency accross the boil.

But you say the other way?

To quote another confused Australian - - - Please explain.

Thirsty

PS. Am I insane, or has thre been a bit of an error. 1.64kg/100L doesn't equate to 1.64g/L it equates to 16.4g/L MHB, does that mean that everything is out by a factor of 10? or did you mean per 1000L ??

BTW, the loss of protien break wouldn't effect a refractometer reading would it? The refracto is actually reading dissolved sugar, not inferring dissolved sugar from specific gravity

 

[PistolPatch]

Ah excellent! You are right Thirsty. It does work in favour of explaining a decrease in efficiency. Shame it's only 3.3%. Adam and I mustn't think too well when sober

Thanks mate :super:

 

[Gulf Brewery]

....9.38 kg grain....my recipes are always set at 80% efficiency...
....48 ltrs for pre boil of 1.052 = 85% efficiency ( pro-mash)
....39 ltrs "final efficiency" 1.064 = 91% efficiency.....
....minus 3 ltrs kettle/hop/trub losses = 36 ltrs...
....add 10 ltrs dilution to get 46 ltrs @ 1.050 = 83 % efficiency....
.....buggered if i know.....

Folks

If you use promash correctly, the efficiency includes all of your water additions (dliutions) and losses (sparge, grain absorption). You must have the correct batch size set otherwise you will get these variations. eg - change the amount of water added to kettle and you efficiency doesn't change, your calculated SG doesn't change, but your OG does. This is not the easiest program to use in this area.

Cheers
Pedro

 

[Hargie]

....i always brew full( 2x23 ltr) batches , so i have Batch size set to 46 ltrs and wort size set to 36 ltrs. With my system i boil 48 ltrs down to 36ltrs (39ltrs minus 3ltrs trub/hop crap etc) over 90 mins. Then i add 10 ltrs refridgerated water (helps get pitching temp lower)to fermenters to get 46ltrs. Does this mean i should set Batch size to 36 ltrs..???

...i love Promash and it gives me very reliable results. My recipes are almost always set at 1.050 and 80% efficiency and this what i get.Any variances are usually a slightly higher OG & recorded efficiency...


...i have noticed that my pre boil gravity is a very good indicator of what my OG will be, with the OG being within a point or two either way of the pre boil grav. I think MHB's post may explain that very well for me.

Ref Kunze; Technology Brewing and Malting
Hot Break is typically about 1.42 Kg/100 L
Cold Break about 0.22 Kg/100 L

Just a quick play with the numbers (I realise that there are some other factors, but I think they are below the resolution of the measuring equipment in use)
Total break material ~1.64 Kg/100L,
If the sweet wort was say 1.050
You loose from the solution about 1.42g/L on Boiling and another 0.22g/L on Cooling a total of 1.64g/L.
So you loose some apparent density, the true value for the sugar content of the sweet wort should be ~1.04836, rather than 1.050.
0.05-0.04836 = 0.00164
(0.00164 / 0.050) X 100 = 3.28%

About a 3.3% apparent loss in efficiency; caused by break formation.

Break once it forms can't be stirred in and measured; it has come out of solution, it has no more effect on the gravity reading than would a teaspoon of sand in the bottom of your hydrometer tube.
Even if it's stirred into suspension, it won't affect the gravity reading.

MHB

 

[Tony]

I dont worry about efficiency too much

I just set it at 75% and i usually get around 74 to 78% Higher if i do a decoction.

I have always wondered why i get fluctuations in efficiency.

I just put it down to the crack of the malt and if i stired it enough.

Interesting to see that break has an effect.

I have been adding the irish moss tablet later in hte boil latley and getting great break and very clear beers but lower efficiency.

that explains part of it i guess.

generally if i can get within 1.002 of my target im happy and i usually do.

cheers

 

[bugwan]

I'm with Thirsty Boy on the measurements side of things. I went back to the maths books and calculated my kettle graduations using Pi x R squared x depth!! Do you think I could get that to match a graduated container of 5L amounts? Hell no!

My dipstick is worth it's weight in paper..pretty useless but it's an estimate (which suits my current brewing style).

For what it's worth, I note all efficiencies, but the 'into fermenter' is the one most important to me...as it's the one I drink!