![]() ![]() ![]() The best recipes I have now put into the beersmith recipe cloud. The remaining 1 failure was my own fault due to insufficient sanitation. Of the remainder I have had 2 equipment failures (1 impeller failure and 1 thermostat breakdown) both of which were quickly fixed by replacement parts from my supplier (Humlegården in Sweden) with great support from Speidel. I have now been using my Braumeister 20l for 5 years and have brewed around 50 different beers. Given that in Brad's review of the BrewEasy he ended up at 65% to 67% BHE, you are not that far from typical values.If you are reading this then you have probably bought or are thinking of buying a Braumeister brewing kit and are wondering how to get the best out of it. From there you can make moves to improve your extraction or cut your process losses and note a change with confidence. The key is to try to make it repeatable and consistent. Having a 60% BHE is not a bad thing, though much depends upon where you are losing your extracted sugars: from the mash or from process losses. ![]() This is perfectly normal for the first times brewing where you are not familiar with the new equipment performance. The fact that you ended up with a different OG than BeerSmith's prediction is evidence of having the wrong estimate of Brew House Efficiency in your starting equipment profile. This also accounts for much of your volume loss into the kettle. In theory, it should act more like a mash tun than a BIAB bag, which I think your numbers demonstrate quite readily. There is also no compression of the grain bed following drainage to force more wort out of the spent grist. In contrast, the BrewEasy operates more like a traditional mash tun with drainage at the bottom only. The mesh bag with the grains is also compressed as it is raised from the kettle which further causes wort to be pushed out. With BIAB, the wort can escape in almost any direction thus draining from the sides as well as the bottom of the grain sack. What differentiates the two processes is the drainage of the wort from the grain bed, which is much less complicated with the BrewEasy system. ![]() There are several things which stand out from your description which I would like to note.įirst, though the BrewEasy system does a full volume mash, it is NOT BIAB. Whenever I change my process, it takes several brews to fully nail down the needed updates to the equipment profile. Are others seeing efficiencies this low? I know grain crush and chemistry affect gravity and I know there are tricks to squeezing out higher efficiencies from the BrewEasy, but I think I've followed all the suggestions. If I dial down the Brew House efficiency to match these OG values, I end up with 60% efficiency (for the second batch), which seems way low, even for the BrewEasy system. For both brews, the estimated OG was 1.054, yet I got 1.048 the first time and only 1.044 the second time. I use the Tilt Hydrometer to monitor gravity, have been very happy with it, and assume accuracy within 1 gravity point. My biggest issue that I'm having trouble getting my head around is that my actual OG (post-boil) value is much lower than the BeerSmith estimated OG. Are others seeing grain retention at this higher value? The default BIAB Grain Absorb factor (under ) of. In checking the actual preboil volume, I could see my grains were retaining more than BeerSmith was estimating. One thing I learned after the first batch was that I was short approximately 1/2 gallon (into the fermenter), when following the basic BrewSmith profile. My thinking was I could nail down my equipment profile and also get some consistency while familiarizing myself with the BrewEasy. I'm new to brewing and at this point have just two all-grain brews under my belt, using a 5-gallon BrewEasy system - both brews were the same American brown ale recipe. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |