Author Topic: Trub Loss and Boil SG / Batch volumes  (Read 19442 times)

Offline rscot231

  • BeerSmith Apprentice Brewer
  • **
  • Posts: 4
  • Karma: 0
  • BeerSmith 2 Rocks!
Re: Trub Loss and Boil SG / Batch volumes
« Reply #30 on: September 23, 2012, 10:10:20 PM »
The formula that I just posted was pretty horked. When proposing "packaging efficiency", I should have probably quantified it as: (packaging sg * packaging vol) / (potential sg * packaging vol). The number would be low, but it would also be a more accurate representation of your system than anything that exists now.

Offline KnowItAll

  • BeerSmith Apprentice Brewer
  • **
  • Posts: 24
  • Karma: -19
  • BeerSmith 2 Rocks!
Re: Trub Loss and Boil SG / Batch volumes
« Reply #31 on: September 30, 2012, 03:00:56 PM »
I'm inclined to agree with KnowItAll. Riddle me this, MaltLicker (and I'm using your analogy here): why does trub loss count as "spilled wort" (and thus impact efficiency) while fermenter loss does not?

Perhaps the most accurate stat would be "packaging efficiency", which would be (packaging gravity points x packaging volume) / (expected gravity points x preboil volume).

Thoughts?
This topic is a confusing one.  The problem most users encounter is the one you have noticed- they expect BeerSmith to adjust for trub loss without having to change Brew House Eff (to the fermenter).  This is not the case.  BHE includes trub losses, and needs to be adjusted anytime trub loss is changed.  If you don't, BeerSmith adjusts 'mash efficiency' (to the kettle), a number the user doesn't control, to make the recipe match the Brew House Eff (to the fermenter).

My gripe is that not only is using 'to the fermenter' confusing and traps nearly every first time user (and is an issue many long time users are not even aware they are using incorrectly); but also that even if 'to the fermenter' Brew House Eff is used correctly, BeerSmith generates incorrect numbers.

The fanboys' argument is that not understanding that BHE is to the fermentor and that it needs to be adjusted for trub loss is a user error, and therefore it is not a 'bug'.

Here is more detail on the two issues:
One is a design choice (a poor one) to choose 'to the fermenter' for Brew House Efficiency.  It is a useless number, and causes unnecessary calculations to be made when changes to trub loss are made, or a new mash efficiency is to be used.  The effects of this are what confuses most new users.  When a change is made to trub loss, the 'to the fermentor' Brew House Eff needs to be adjusted accordingly (lowered for more loss, raised for less).  If this isn't done, you won't notice any difference to your recipe's OG, and only small qualitative differences (if any).  BeerSmith pulls this trick off by raising/lowering your mash efficiency (which is only a BeerSmith generated number) to match the same 'to the fermenter' efficiency but now with increased/decreased trub losses.

The second issue is that a true calculation error occurs even if your 'to the fermentor' efficiency is correct.  This error is small for 5 gal batches, but is still real, and the impact is greater for larger batch sizes.  Through some reverse engineering, I think I have found why this error occurs.  It is due to 'trub loss' being included twice.  Once at its true value, and a second time as a small percentage in the calculations.  This is a side effect of using 'to the fermenter' efficiency.

There is an even larger issue/error if using batch/no sparge of BIAB.  The only workaround for these methods is to adjust your efficiency for different OGs and grain bills.  Your fermentor efficiency, as well as kettle efficiency, are different for each OG and grain bill.  This is caused by the different amount of sugars left in the grain according to the OG in the mash tun.  Fly sparging is closer to the same 'kettle efficiency' for a range of OGs.

Offline rscot231

  • BeerSmith Apprentice Brewer
  • **
  • Posts: 4
  • Karma: 0
  • BeerSmith 2 Rocks!
Re: Trub Loss and Boil SG / Batch volumes
« Reply #32 on: October 01, 2012, 10:32:26 PM »
I believe we are in violent agreement. I'll try to restate my point of view more simply to verify.

My gripe is that using the default formulas, I can increase my brewhouse efficiency by dumping the entire contents of the kettle into the fermenter. I have zero kettle trub loss at that point, but the 4 inches of trub in the fermenter don't count against brewhouse efficiency. I end up with the same amount of packaged beer either way, but one way impacts my efficiency and the other doesn't. That doesn't seem right.

Offline rscot231

  • BeerSmith Apprentice Brewer
  • **
  • Posts: 4
  • Karma: 0
  • BeerSmith 2 Rocks!
Re: Trub Loss and Boil SG / Batch volumes
« Reply #33 on: October 26, 2012, 10:17:08 PM »
Bump. Hoping for a response from one of the BeerSmith guys.

Offline arnobg

  • BeerSmith Apprentice Brewer
  • **
  • Posts: 7
  • Karma: 0
  • BeerSmith 2 Rocks!
Re: Trub Loss and Boil SG / Batch volumes
« Reply #34 on: June 20, 2016, 09:02:13 PM »
Sorry to bring up an old topic but I still have an issue with this. Is there a fix?

Online Oginme

  • BeerSmith Grandmaster Brewer
  • *****
  • Posts: 1231
  • Karma: 61
  • Goats, guitars, and a home brew; Life is good!
    • Longvu LaManchas
Re: Trub Loss and Boil SG / Batch volumes
« Reply #35 on: June 21, 2016, 06:00:37 AM »
Reading through the many posts on this topic and I can understand where you are coming from.  Realize that this is not a 'bug' that needs a 'fix'.  Your issue is in how you personally view the process from input to output versus how others view it. 

Most breweries and homebrewers have fixed volume fermentors.  We cannot alter that volume to accommodate additional trub and in order to maximize the throughput of the fermentor, choose to leave much of the trub behind in the process.  Thus for most of us, the ending volume of wort TO the fermentor is a good volume to consider making it a constant for the purposes of modeling the process.

You can look at modeling it to provide "beer out" of the fermentor as your fixed constant, which means that you need to look for a different software package or come up with your own.  Plenty of others have done so.

The other variable in the process helps to determine the amount of sugars which are extracted from the grain or added into the kettle or any other point in the process.  BeerSmith opts to use BHE as this fixed variable.  Personally, I would prefer it to use mash efficiency as I think it is a more consistent value for me.  However, this is not what the designer selected and you must decide if it works for you or not.

after 110+ brews, I know what my expected loss to fermentor and loss to trub in my process is and for each recipe I can choose to adjust this or not based upon my past process data.  This does not make the software 'wrong' or its calculations 'incorrect' as some others would claim.  It just works the open process differently that what they would want or desire.

I've done process modeling for paper machines and pulping operations.  In processes such as these, there are many variables in the system and any type of control software must take some of these variables and fix them to fit common results in order to calculate the remaining figures and create control points so that the software can operate without spinning out of control.  The selection of these 'fixed variables' is a process option which is at the hands of the designer.  I've seen and worked with different control software that tackles the problem using different figures.  It did not make one 'right' or 'correct' as they all ended up doing what the software was intended to do -- control the process and predict the outcome.

So it comes down to you.  You can either work with the simulation design as it is published, continue to fight it, or find something else which fits your view of how the process should be modeled.
Recycle your grains, feed them to a goat!

Offline arnobg

  • BeerSmith Apprentice Brewer
  • **
  • Posts: 7
  • Karma: 0
  • BeerSmith 2 Rocks!
Re: Trub Loss and Boil SG / Batch volumes
« Reply #36 on: June 22, 2016, 08:07:39 AM »
I am curious what people do to work around this then. Do they adjust the trub loss number as well as the brewhouse efficiency for recipes that are hop heavy?

Online Oginme

  • BeerSmith Grandmaster Brewer
  • *****
  • Posts: 1231
  • Karma: 61
  • Goats, guitars, and a home brew; Life is good!
    • Longvu LaManchas
Re: Trub Loss and Boil SG / Batch volumes
« Reply #37 on: June 22, 2016, 11:33:47 AM »
There are a number of ways to tackle your process.

For my most common set-up, 10 liter BIAB, I set my equipment profile for 1 liter of trub loss.  This gives me essentially an 11 liter batch.  My trub loss ranges from 200 ml for lightly hopped, low gravity, malted barley recipes up to almost 1 liter for very heavily hopped and/or high adjunct recipes.  I transfer my 10 liters to the fermentor and then leave behind the 1 liter.  [OK, sometimes I cheat a little and pour out a couple of hundred cc' more into the fermentor if the trub is really low.]

This way I keep my mash efficiency, which is very predictable, constant.  My actual BHE result may vary a little bit but it is a planned excursion based upon my decision to allow a little more wort to ferment or not and does not impact the rest of the process calculations.

Recycle your grains, feed them to a goat!

Offline bougie1st

  • BeerSmith Brewer
  • ***
  • Posts: 33
  • Karma: 0
  • BeerSmith 2 Rocks!
Re: Trub Loss and Boil SG / Batch volumes
« Reply #38 on: September 29, 2016, 11:09:08 PM »
I haven't read all of this thread - I'm time poor at the moment and it is quite technical - but I'll get to why I think my question fits this thread at the end. It is about trub loss calculations and BHE, I promise  :)

One thing I have just noticed is that it seems to me that BS2 is including the loss to trub in the shrinkage calculation.  For example, in my latest brew, I have the following (measured variables) in BS2
Pre-boil vol 30.48L
Pre-boil gravity 1.051
Post boil volume 27.37L
Boil off 2.8L, evaporation rate 9.3% (note - I changed the est pre-boil vol to 30.17 to get the same post boil volume, in reality it was a boil off of 3.12L and 10.23%, but this doesn't affect my question, as the post boil volume is the same)
Shrinkage 2.47L, 9.01%
Trub loss 0.9L
Final volume (meas batch size) 24L

With my real numbers, I have taken the loss to trub from the post boil volume, then subtracted the shrinkage.  So this is 27.37 (post boil) - 0.9 (trub) - 2.46 (shrinkage value) leaving 24 L.  This gives me a shrinkage value of 9.31%, not 9.01%.

From this, it seems to me that the trub loss is included in the shrinkage (ie, everything at the end of boil undergoes shrinkage), then it is taken away.  Is this how it is supposed to be? 

Thinking about it, it probably works with an immersion chiller, but I am using a counter flow chiller, which means that the trub losses remain in the kettle and never undergo shrinkage (ok, maybe a few degrees as the whole thing cools down). 

As this influences the set variable (BHE, which I am actually coping with fine and am happy to continue to use), maybe there needs to be some consideration of cooling method in the equipment setup

Online Oginme

  • BeerSmith Grandmaster Brewer
  • *****
  • Posts: 1231
  • Karma: 61
  • Goats, guitars, and a home brew; Life is good!
    • Longvu LaManchas
Re: Trub Loss and Boil SG / Batch volumes
« Reply #39 on: September 30, 2016, 05:26:59 AM »

One thing I have just noticed is that it seems to me that BS2 is including the loss to trub in the shrinkage calculation.  For example, in my latest brew, I have the following (measured variables) in BS2


With my real numbers, I have taken the loss to trub from the post boil volume, then subtracted the shrinkage.  So this is 27.37 (post boil) - 0.9 (trub) - 2.46 (shrinkage value) leaving 24 L.  This gives me a shrinkage value of 9.31%, not 9.01%.

From this, it seems to me that the trub loss is included in the shrinkage (ie, everything at the end of boil undergoes shrinkage), then it is taken away.  Is this how it is supposed to be? 

Thinking about it, it probably works with an immersion chiller, but I am using a counter flow chiller, which means that the trub losses remain in the kettle and never undergo shrinkage (ok, maybe a few degrees as the whole thing cools down). 

As this influences the set variable (BHE, which I am actually coping with fine and am happy to continue to use), maybe there needs to be some consideration of cooling method in the equipment setup

Quite possibly it can be set that way.  The best thing to do is to write to Brad and request that option be made available in future updates or versions.

 
Recycle your grains, feed them to a goat!

Offline dgagnon

  • BeerSmith New Brewer
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Karma: 0
  • BeerSmith 2 Rocks!
Re: Trub Loss and Boil SG / Batch volumes
« Reply #40 on: September 04, 2017, 09:22:10 AM »
I really do not post often on boards, but I think I'll do an exception here.

While I do understand the geometry argument of the trub loss number and agree on the reason behind the trub loss number, it really does seems like a bug that adding more sparge water does not change the SG of the wort.

I think this is where the "bug" lies.  Where is this additional volume of water added ?  If it was added to Batch Size, then it would be accounted for in the OG calculation ( which is why I believe the fermenter loss trick works).  By adding this 2L trub loss, Beersmith adds 2L water to my sparge water, does not change the batch size, does not change the OG.

Physically, this means I add 2L water to my mix of grain and wort, definitively changing the SG of the wort.

EDIT: It does indeed change the mash efficiency when modifying the trub loss.  For a homebrewer, it feels counter-intuitive since it is not a variable we can reliably control.  Changing the grain bill does not affect the mash efficiency.  This does explain why I have been missing my OGs ever since I adjusted the trub loss.

So, what is the correct usage to account properly for loss volume ( before final wort ) and after final wort ?
« Last Edit: September 04, 2017, 09:30:28 AM by dgagnon »

Online Oginme

  • BeerSmith Grandmaster Brewer
  • *****
  • Posts: 1231
  • Karma: 61
  • Goats, guitars, and a home brew; Life is good!
    • Longvu LaManchas
Re: Trub Loss and Boil SG / Batch volumes
« Reply #41 on: September 04, 2017, 10:30:57 AM »
The way that I have done it in the past is to ratio the brew house efficiency based upon the increase in water usage.  So if my total water at my normal brew house efficiency of 82% is 15 liters and I want to add another liter of trub, this means that my 'new' brew house efficiency is 82% * 15 liters / 16 liters or 76.9%.  This keeps my mash/lauter efficiency in the same range that I would expect it to run (around 87% to 88%) and adjusts the calculations to accommodate the additional water requirements.
Recycle your grains, feed them to a goat!

Offline dgagnon

  • BeerSmith New Brewer
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Karma: 0
  • BeerSmith 2 Rocks!
Re: Trub Loss and Boil SG / Batch volumes
« Reply #42 on: September 04, 2017, 10:39:26 AM »
The way that I have done it in the past is to ratio the brew house efficiency based upon the increase in water usage.  So if my total water at my normal brew house efficiency of 82% is 15 liters and I want to add another liter of trub, this means that my 'new' brew house efficiency is 82% * 15 liters / 16 liters or 76.9%.  This keeps my mash/lauter efficiency in the same range that I would expect it to run (around 87% to 88%) and adjusts the calculations to accommodate the additional water requirements.

do you also edit the trub loss or you leave it at 0 ?

EDIT: Trub loss indeed needs to be edited for this trick to work.  Works great once you know the trick.
« Last Edit: September 04, 2017, 12:50:39 PM by dgagnon »

Online Oginme

  • BeerSmith Grandmaster Brewer
  • *****
  • Posts: 1231
  • Karma: 61
  • Goats, guitars, and a home brew; Life is good!
    • Longvu LaManchas
Re: Trub Loss and Boil SG / Batch volumes
« Reply #43 on: September 04, 2017, 12:52:41 PM »
Usually, when I am making a change such as this, I am doing so in anticipation of additional trub.  Normally, I end up at 11 liters finished, 1 liter of loss to trub and chiller, 10 liters in carboy.  When I do a predominantly wheat beer with high hop loading, for instance, I increase the loss to trub and chiller to 1.5 liters in anticipation of all the added protein left in the kettle.  In this case I scale the brew house efficiency accordingly to keep my mash/lauter efficiency the same.
Recycle your grains, feed them to a goat!

 

modification