Hi,
So I was wondering why when I changed the value for trub loss from the boil kettle the grain bill never changed. The significant effect of this was to add an equal amount of water to makeup the loss from trub and beer below the spigot, etc. Yet a corresponding amount of grain and hops was not added. The amount of beer needed increased but this was only offset by adding more water, thus diluting the strength of the beer in the kettle. This is an obvious error. I won't end up with the same beer in this kettle as I would had I not said I would loose any wort to the kettle.
Didn't make sense to me so I thought I'd search the subject and see what I could find. Wow, this is no small subject. The more I read the more I was confused (shocked really) as to why so many people seem to think this is OK and are willing to use a weird hack to work around it.
In fact Brad even says on his website ...
"Next you would need to account for all of the losses in the system from boiling forward. This would include boiling, which concentrates the wort (losing volume, but not gravity points), trub loss (which takes both gravity points and volume away) and any top up water added (which dilutes the wort). The calculation is a bit more complex, but can be done by tracking the changing volumes as well as gravity points remaining in the wort."
Notice he says trub loss which includes gravity points and volume. He acknowledges in writing that trub loss includes gravity points yet when you tell the program you have trub loss it only increases the water, not the grain.
Every batch I have brewed with this has been off because of the trub loss issue. Anyone who brews with this program and enters a trub loss will be brewing a weaker version of the original recipe. The more trub loss, the weaker the beer will be.
The only way to correctly use this program as-is would be to enter zero for trub loss and shoot for the volume you want in the kettle at the end of the boil (after shrinkage from cooling). Period. Not some hack whereby you makeup a total efficiency to hide the error. That works until you change brewpots or trub loss or make a larger/smaller batch. If you do that you need to hack another total efficiency number because it's not linear since it includes a fixed trub loss amount.
If you want 10 gallons of beer in your keg and you leave a gallon in the fermenter you need 11 gallons in the fermenter. If you leave a gallon in the kettle when transfering to the fermener you need 12 gallons in the kettle after the boil (and cooling). And your batch size needs to be 12 gallons. Now if you are off in gravity you adjust the brewhouse efficiency, which at this point is really mash efficiency. Mash efficiency in my opinion is what should adjusted to begin with. This is the number that is variable depending on how well you extract the sugar from the grain. That is the only efficiency variable. After the mash the efficiency is solely based on a direct percentage of final boil volume to fermenter volume.
In fact, why stop at the fermenter for batch size? I don't drink out of the fermenter. What makes it into the keg to drink is the important part. The losses in the fermenter don't even effect the brewhouse efficiency. I could loose half the wort in the fermenter and my efficiency will be the same as if I didn't. It seems to me its just an arbitrary decision to pick the fermenter as the batch size.
It seems unnatural to tweak the brew house efficiency to makeup for the trub loss. The only variable in the whole process is how well you can extract the sugar out of the grain. That's the percentage we should be entering. After that it is all predetermined by simple ratios that can be applied to the adjusted mash efficiency. That is the only thing that makes sense to me.
It is just plain wrong for the program to tell you to add water to your recipe without a proportional increase in grain. It is setting you up to fail from the start. Else so many people would not be posting asking why they constantly fall short of the predicted OG.
Say I want to make a batch of cookies. I want 24 cookies so I decide to make a batch of 24 cookies worth of dough. But I know that 4 cookies worth of dough will stick to the sides of my bowl. So if I want to end up with 24 cookies in the oven I need 4 more cookies worth of dough. Brad would tell me all I need to do is add 4 cookies worth of milk and I'll be fine. No I won't. I'll have soup. My cookies will be runny. The recipe will be off. Can you see now why this makes a difference? The program is telling you to add water to your recipe to make up for lost water AND sugar. Does that seem right to you? Do you think something like this will affect the composition of your beer? Are you really saying no????
Since there seems to be so much disagreement on this perhaps the s/w could accommodate both sides and provide the option to base the recipe on the amount we want in the fermenter plus the amount we will leave in the kettle, taking the trub loss into account. That way those of us who think it's broke can use the program like we think it should work and those who want to continue brewing their recipes short and compensating by increasing the brewhouse efficiency (which will bump the grain up to the same values as the proper recipe volume will show you) can blissfully continue doing their way.
Thanks,
Bob
So I was wondering why when I changed the value for trub loss from the boil kettle the grain bill never changed. The significant effect of this was to add an equal amount of water to makeup the loss from trub and beer below the spigot, etc. Yet a corresponding amount of grain and hops was not added. The amount of beer needed increased but this was only offset by adding more water, thus diluting the strength of the beer in the kettle. This is an obvious error. I won't end up with the same beer in this kettle as I would had I not said I would loose any wort to the kettle.
Didn't make sense to me so I thought I'd search the subject and see what I could find. Wow, this is no small subject. The more I read the more I was confused (shocked really) as to why so many people seem to think this is OK and are willing to use a weird hack to work around it.
In fact Brad even says on his website ...
"Next you would need to account for all of the losses in the system from boiling forward. This would include boiling, which concentrates the wort (losing volume, but not gravity points), trub loss (which takes both gravity points and volume away) and any top up water added (which dilutes the wort). The calculation is a bit more complex, but can be done by tracking the changing volumes as well as gravity points remaining in the wort."
Notice he says trub loss which includes gravity points and volume. He acknowledges in writing that trub loss includes gravity points yet when you tell the program you have trub loss it only increases the water, not the grain.
Every batch I have brewed with this has been off because of the trub loss issue. Anyone who brews with this program and enters a trub loss will be brewing a weaker version of the original recipe. The more trub loss, the weaker the beer will be.
The only way to correctly use this program as-is would be to enter zero for trub loss and shoot for the volume you want in the kettle at the end of the boil (after shrinkage from cooling). Period. Not some hack whereby you makeup a total efficiency to hide the error. That works until you change brewpots or trub loss or make a larger/smaller batch. If you do that you need to hack another total efficiency number because it's not linear since it includes a fixed trub loss amount.
If you want 10 gallons of beer in your keg and you leave a gallon in the fermenter you need 11 gallons in the fermenter. If you leave a gallon in the kettle when transfering to the fermener you need 12 gallons in the kettle after the boil (and cooling). And your batch size needs to be 12 gallons. Now if you are off in gravity you adjust the brewhouse efficiency, which at this point is really mash efficiency. Mash efficiency in my opinion is what should adjusted to begin with. This is the number that is variable depending on how well you extract the sugar from the grain. That is the only efficiency variable. After the mash the efficiency is solely based on a direct percentage of final boil volume to fermenter volume.
In fact, why stop at the fermenter for batch size? I don't drink out of the fermenter. What makes it into the keg to drink is the important part. The losses in the fermenter don't even effect the brewhouse efficiency. I could loose half the wort in the fermenter and my efficiency will be the same as if I didn't. It seems to me its just an arbitrary decision to pick the fermenter as the batch size.
It seems unnatural to tweak the brew house efficiency to makeup for the trub loss. The only variable in the whole process is how well you can extract the sugar out of the grain. That's the percentage we should be entering. After that it is all predetermined by simple ratios that can be applied to the adjusted mash efficiency. That is the only thing that makes sense to me.
It is just plain wrong for the program to tell you to add water to your recipe without a proportional increase in grain. It is setting you up to fail from the start. Else so many people would not be posting asking why they constantly fall short of the predicted OG.
Say I want to make a batch of cookies. I want 24 cookies so I decide to make a batch of 24 cookies worth of dough. But I know that 4 cookies worth of dough will stick to the sides of my bowl. So if I want to end up with 24 cookies in the oven I need 4 more cookies worth of dough. Brad would tell me all I need to do is add 4 cookies worth of milk and I'll be fine. No I won't. I'll have soup. My cookies will be runny. The recipe will be off. Can you see now why this makes a difference? The program is telling you to add water to your recipe to make up for lost water AND sugar. Does that seem right to you? Do you think something like this will affect the composition of your beer? Are you really saying no????
Since there seems to be so much disagreement on this perhaps the s/w could accommodate both sides and provide the option to base the recipe on the amount we want in the fermenter plus the amount we will leave in the kettle, taking the trub loss into account. That way those of us who think it's broke can use the program like we think it should work and those who want to continue brewing their recipes short and compensating by increasing the brewhouse efficiency (which will bump the grain up to the same values as the proper recipe volume will show you) can blissfully continue doing their way.
Thanks,
Bob