• Welcome to the new forum! We upgraded our forum software with a host of new boards, capabilities and features. It is also more secure.
    Jump in and join the conversation! You can learn more about the upgrade and new features here.

Beersmith Grainfather Efficiencies

andyn2001

Brewer
Joined
May 27, 2016
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
Can anyone explain why the Estimated Mash Efficiency in my recipes is way above the max yield for my grains, max yield for the pale malt 80%, est mash efficiency 85%?

Then, when my Actual Mash Efficiency is about 10% lower (75%, which seems about right), I am above the Estimated Mash Gravity?? 1.037 est, 1.041 actual.  My est Mach Efficiency is 85% giving an Estimated Mash Gravity of 1.037, I am 10% lower in Mash Efficiency, but 4 points higher in gravity!!

This does not seem logical to me...which means I probably have something set up incorrectly, or just not understanding!

 

Attachments

  • GF1.PNG
    GF1.PNG
    138.3 KB · Views: 558
  • GF2.PNG
    GF2.PNG
    22.5 KB · Views: 479
What were your volumes?

in relation to the first question, you can extract 85% of an 80% yielding grain.

you could also adjust your profile to brew 75% mash efficiency, I would say you just need to work on a few adjustments here and there with your equipment profile.

Its essentially impossible to tell anything accurately without a full representation of your recipe, and profile. Maybe export the bsmx file of each here for a better look.
 
Please see attached recipe.

So, for my understanding, how is the Estimated Mash Efficiency calculated? Doesn't it use the %Yield of each grain in the recipe? And if it does, how can it be higher than the highest yield of the base malt?

 

Attachments

  • Kolsch Export.bsmx
    24.3 KB · Views: 198
Estimated mash efficiency is back calculated from the brew house efficiency.  You set the brew house efficiency which defines the percentage of available sugar from the malt bill which makes it to the fermenter.  It is possible that you can apply too much loss of wort (and therefore sugar) in the process to drive this calculated number above 100% and the program will not flinch at that.

 
your measured preboil gravity is 5g whereas the recipe and equipment profile is suggesting 6. That's where your numbers are off.
 
I've converted your session data to metric, here's what i've come up with, hopefully it answers your questions!

You've extracted a higher gravity wort than expected, but less of it. It's calculations were based off of having 22.8L of wort pre-boil, this comes from the expected mash liquid, plus the calculated sparge quantity to reach 22.8L at 1.037, you have 19L entered as a pre-boil volume at 1.041

per standard dilution you would need even higher gravity wort (1.044@19L) to reach the estimated mash efficiency of 85% which is why your measured mash efficiency is lower even though your reading is higher. (23L of 1.037 = 19L of 1.044)

Also, although i've never used a grainfather, some of the equipment profile numbers seem off. I'd suggest doing a dry run with water to calculate the EXACT amounts of loss. some of your numbers seem to differ from the base grainfather profile as well
 
Thanks for checking my data, I did collect 23 litres after sparging, sorry, didn't update that in session data. I've been playing around with the data for a few hours tonight and wondering if it because I use the grainfather, and Beersmith is set up for separate MTs and Kettles?

I suppose as long as  I get the correct OG I planned, I shouldn't fret too much?!
 
I feel you need to take far more accurate measurements and be sure you're accounting for temperatures when checking your Gravity. If you enter 23L at 1.041 then you had a mash efficiency of 91.7%

There's hundreds, if not thousands of grainfather users out there. The software can only be as accurate as you make it.
 
Further, if you are using the premarked volume indicators, I would suggest you check on their accuracy by adding a known volume and looking at the marks vs your measured amount.  I've seen enough premarked kettles and vessels which are significantly off to cause major issues trying to get your system dialed in.
 
And if you are using an equipment profile for something other than the system you are using then you will never get accurate results from the software. Selecting the appropriate profile from the list provided in Beersmith is better than guessing. Even better still is to take that profile and refine it by taking your own measurements. Its not the most glamorous of brew tasks to fill vessels with water and take measurements but if you do you will have far more confidence when using the software.
 
Kevin58 said:
Its not the most glamorous of brew tasks...

Just out of curiosity, Kevin, what DO you consider to be a glamorous brew task? None of my brewing is particularly glamorous, but I guess I could make it so if I tried hard enough. Perhaps I need to dress differently... :)

--GF
 
GigaFemto said:
Kevin58 said:
Its not the most glamorous of brew tasks...

Just out of curiosity, Kevin, what DO you consider to be a glamorous brew task? None of my brewing is particularly glamorous, but I guess I could make it so if I tried hard enough. Perhaps I need to dress differently... :)

--GF

lol. I guess what I meant was given the choice of making beer or weighing water... I would much rather make beer. One of my favorite brew-isms is this: "If you like washing dishes you'll love making beer".
 
Heck no!  I have to work hard to keep hay chaff and goat manure from falling into the brew kettle.  That is the most glamorous part of brewing!
 
Back
Top