Yes, I’m sure you can Denny. I only recently converted from fly to batch sparging (partly you’re fault, Denny! ;)) so forgive my ignorance of what’s possible. Also I suppose that I’m thinking in terms of getting as much sugar as you can from a high gravity batch; either in one beer or as a parti-gyle, while also avoiding an overly long boil.
Do you get reasonable efficiency as your gravity increases?
Again, I’m flying off of Kai’s chart here, and maybe looking at OGs that are above 1.095; but if you say you’ve done it then I have no hesitation about believing you.
Duh! I just realized I could make a direct link to Kai’s chart:
My efficiency stays around 85% up to maybe 1.085 OG. After that I either do a partigyle or sparge more (and of course boil longer) to keep efficiency up on bigger beers. Pretty much like you’d do with fly sparging.
Yes…that’s what I was proposing…tho I didn’t say it as concisely as you did ;D.
But I didn’t define how high of a high gravity…so that’s my fault.
Makes me wonder if we need to add a few terms to describe gravity:
(older folks will recognize the similarity to “HF” “VHF” & “UHF” from old radios and TVs)
HG: High Gravity…up to 1.085?
VHG: Very High Gravity…1.086 to 1.100?
UHG: Ultra High Gravity…1.101+
Also, I have to confess that the highest gravity I’ve ever brewed to was 1.084. :-\
I definitely think it would work. I’m less convinced that there would be a benefit over more conventional designs.
If lautering speed is the concern, I think all the same concerns that apply to fly sparging would also apply to batch sparging. The absolute best design is probably a false bottom, since you would effectively be able to drain the entire area of the mash simultaneously. And you’d want the shallowest grain bed possible.
As a practical consideration, I have a lautering system that’s optimized for fly sparging. (A slotted CPVC manifold.) Using a March pump, I average about eight minutes from starting the runoff to filling the kettle. That probably means each ~3.5 gal runoff takes about two minutes. I don’t see any reason to experiment with other designs.
I agree. I think the 10 gallon round Igloo cooler is experiencing mash bed compaction on the high gravity brews despite the use of a 12 inch x 1 inch SS Bazooka screen in the horizontal position. That’s why I wanted to look for ways to shorten the “wort travel” distance and increase lauter surface area by considering a 3-D lauter design (even though it might not be very practical to implement and use).
[quote]As a practical consideration, I have a lautering system that’s optimized for fly sparging. (A slotted CPVC manifold.) Using a March pump, I average about eight minutes from starting the runoff to filling the kettle. That probably means each ~3.5 gal runoff takes about two minutes. I don’t see any reason to experiment with other designs.
[/quote]
Is the suction from the March pump helping you drain the wort faster? I am just using gravity and time. My spigot is 3/8" (5/16"ID), but I am convinced the “bottleneck” during lautering is the grainbed compaction around the surace of the Bazooka screen. I have to scrape the screen with my mash spoon much like one has to scrape the fine nylon mesh screen on the funnels when transferring wort into the fermenter. That’s what intriques me about Denny’s comments regarding the rather short length of his SS braid in his mash tun. This tells me that there’s no grain bed compaction occurring in his system. His example (using water, i.e., a universal solvent) doesn’t quite prove the point to me as it does not reflect the fact that we’re actualy straining wort (a viscous colloidal solution) from the mash (a thick “suspension”) – a process which can be quite sensitive to grain bed compaction.
I am looking at two possible practical solutions to the problem of lautering high gravity brews:
1.) Use a rectangular cooler (to decrease grain bed height)
2.) Use a false bottom or CPVC pipe manifold (to increase lauter surface area) on the Igloo.
It may be as simple as slowing it down to eliminate your compaction issues. I always went full blast no matter the grist ratio and ran into problems- especially with stiff heavy mashes. Throttle back… no compaction issues. It is what it is. Headache gone.
This probably answers no questions, but I thought I’d mention I batch sparge in a blickmann kettle with a blickmann false bottom. Before that I was using a bazooka braid in said kettle. I saw no difference in efficiency after the switch.
Just to clarify and prevent confusion… I only opened it up full-bore after performing a vorlauf and setting the bed. Still got a stuck mash nearly every time. It was a real PITA so I adapted after struggling through many batches. :-\
I always seem to 65-70% efficiencies with my sparge. I mash/sparge in a 10 gallon round cooler with a bazooka screen and these days typically batch sparge, when I fly sparge my efficiencies might get up to 75%. I tightened up my mill to get a better crush which helped some but it always seems low to me compared to some of the numbers I see people posting. Do people find a big difference between rectangular vs round coolers as mash/lautertuns? I frequently don’t do a mash out, maybe doing that would help a little too.
This sounds very much like the design of a Strainmaster, a lauter device where the sweet wort is lautered through a set of perforated pipes that are located throughout the grain bed. Here is a diagram that I found in Narziss/Back’s book:
This type of lautering device has not been widely used, though.
Kai, thanks for the pic. It looks like a real pain to make and clean!
I was perusing my old beer mags this weekend and saw a 3-D MLT design in the BYO issue (OTTOMH, I think it was the July/August 2008 BYO issue, or there abouts). The pics are in the article on “Turbid Mashing”. It seems that they’ve incorporated the 3-D lautering manifold into the mash stirrers.
Regardless, I’m not sure it would be easily implemented on a homebrew level.
I actually ran into Dennys site by total accident when looking for Batch Sparge info and gave it a try. I have a rectangular Got 48 Qt cooler with a very nice manifold all set up the way John Palmers site tells you to for a fly sparge and it worked fine. No stuck runoff grate effency and no increased grain bill as was suggested may be required and no change of equipment. I just made a Bock , Imperial Stout and a porter last week doing it that way and the only thing I can see is it is best to start out slow and let your grain bed settle than just kick the valve open and let it rock. I did notice that running at such a high rate on the drain caused things to channel rather than drop down like it did on a fly sparge but being as your pulling everything out at once it didn’t really matter. Added the rest of my 3.5 gallons for a 7 gallon boil and the OG was almost identical on all three batches. Not more than a .007 split. Hats off Denny… ;D
