My experience is that if the hose is long enough to reach the bottom of the kettle and be submerged in the collected wort, it kinda forms a siphon and improves drainage.
I have other reasons for using a piece of tubing. Ever change the oil on a car, direct the stream into a drain pan, then have it miss the pan once it starts to trickle out? Or fail to estimate just how far the oil will shoot out of the oil pan and have it miss the catch can entirely?
Without tubing, collecting the wort is aiming at a moving target. The hose makes it foolproof.
I started all grain by watching a guy named Don Osborn on YouTube after seeing him on Northern Brewer’s Brewing TV videos with Jason Keeler, Michael Dawson, and Chip Walton. Don said he used a guy named Denny Conn’s method. I immediately looked up Denny Conn and found his website. It looked like the cheapest and easiest way to break into all grain. So…my set up is about the same as theirs. This system has worked pretty good for the last cpl years and 43 batches later. Good to see my mash in and sparge method is the same as Denny’s. I also see no reason to change.
Don O videos are great. He hasn’t been very active lately, but his older videos are still good. I like his casual approach to what he does.
I agree that a longer piece of tubing may help with draining the wort. I had a piece of tubing that was long enough to reach the bottom of my 10 gallon kettle, and curve around the bottom of the kettle about one foot (mash tun about 30" above kettle). When I opened the valve from the mash tun, it created a siphon, and drained the wort rather quickly. After batch sparging, same thing: siphon drained the liquid quickly, maybe too fast, not sure. Each time it only took a few minutes to drain, 2.5 gallons and 4 gallons respectively.
Gravity is a wonderful thing, I hope.
Fantastic stuff. Thanks for sharing!
Yeah, I always liked his videos, too. Pretty laid back.
It depends on your mash tun/system set up. Try it both ways several times and decide for yourself if there is an advantage or not.
David, can you generalize about what type of lauter system might benefit?
Nice video, pretty much identical setup and process to mine. After the recent brulosophy experiment with a 9-gallon (surely a typo??) vorlauf produced much clearer beer than the non-vorlaufed beer, I now take more time and care with the vorlauf and try to get the wort clear before running off.
Cooler boxes are great for holding temp, but I put extra insulation around mine when I mash overnight - a couple of blankets or coats work fine.
Denny, I can tell you specifically what type of lautering system would benefit from letting the grain bed settle: mine. I have a pair of original Zymico Bazooka T’s in a 70 quart cooler that feed a central manifold in an H configuration. Were I to add sparge water, stir, and “let 'er rip” there’s a 50/50 chance I would end up with a stuck sparge. So allowing the grain bed to settle and develop is necessary for my system. A grain bed that is given time to settle creates a natural filter and is advantageous in a couple ways.
First, it allows the sugars in the grist to dissolve into the liquid, time is a factor in solubility of sugar in a liquid as it reaches concentration equilibrium between the grist and liquid. This is a minor concern as the value is low and on the homebrew scale nearly negligible. And while I have noted a 1-2 point increase in efficiency when allowing 5 minutes to pass in order for the grain bed to establish, (years ago when I noted every time, temp and volume), the more significant result was and is consistency in efficiency.
The second advantage is clear beer. Using the grain bed as a natural filter does just that, filters the liquid extract for clear run off into the kettle. A vigorous boil, quick chill, and after 2-3 weeks in the ferementers I rack directly into the keg(s) and my beer is crystal clear from day one. No cold crashing necessary. This is rarely the case when I use my small-batch mashtun, a 5 gallon round cooler with a SS braid, and with that system I don’t wait for the grain bed to settle. Those beers have always needed time to clear.
So again I will state: it depends on your mash tun/system set up. Seems obvious not everyone is driving the same car.
david
I missed that vorlauf test, but based on hundreds of batches of experience, I don’t believe it.
David, I understand that with your system a wait is worth it. But having experimented dozens of times, I got neither higher efficiency nor clearer beer by adding the rest time. I average 83% efficiency and even without the rest the grain bed forms a great filter.
I was expecting more bongs and hobbit posters.
:::coffee spit take:::
Pretty much the same process my friend taught/showed me circa '96 ish. IIRC he used a custom crimped stainless steel mesh clamped to a tube. There was an article by Ken Schwartz that explains the math behind the madness. I don’t think the web site is up any more but found the summary at HBD archive - HOMEBREW Digest #3105 Mon 09 August 1999.
It was very early and I had to get ready for work, so I watched the video with auto-captions and at 2x speed. Highly recommended. Denny stirs maniacally, waves his arms, vorlaufs like a maniac. My favorite auto-caption: “porous limestone and stereos same time helps reduce the chance of snowfall.” If that ain’t classic hippy, I don’t know what is.
This was a fun and useful video (even at normal speed with regular audio).
I actually shot Ken data when he was developing those.
Is that what I said? 