Comments on: Sparging

By: michael reinhardt

michael reinhardt — Tue, 25 May 2010 18:47:41 +0000

You’re welcome. I get pretty stella efficiency doing it this way. It really is interesting how so many things, including how one sparges, shapes a beer.

By: Billy Broas

Billy Broas — Mon, 24 May 2010 15:07:05 +0000

I see what you mean. It’s interesting to see all the different ways people do it. You’re right about having to add water. In your example, I would add enough mash out water to go from 2.4 gallons to 3.25, and then sparge with 3.25 to have equal runnings. I basically follow Denny’s batch sparge method: http://hbd.org/cascade/dennybrew/

I love how quick it is and I get ~ 73% efficiency. That said, I want to try out these other methods b/c experimenting is such a big part of brewing.

Thanks for the great info.

By: michael reinhardt

michael reinhardt — Mon, 24 May 2010 05:06:43 +0000

Peter,
I sort of do a take on fly sparging. What I do is recirculate the volume I’d expect from the result of the mash half a gallon at a time. Then, I empty to the top of the grain bed (water still above) and add water via sprinkling. While I don’t actually fly sparge, in the sense that I don’t add water to continuously match outflow volume, I don’t (procedurally) batch sparge either. If I’m not mistaken, batch sparging would require that I get my first running drained all the way and then add water. My goal is to always have water above my grain bed while I’m sparging…with the exception of the last little bit. I allow some time for the water to sit also, since I feel that I get great efficiency that way.

In principle, I’m trying to keep gradually pushing the gravity down as the new water is coming in, which is, of course, the point of sparging. But the difference is that I’m doing it in a layered way, rather than simply emptying and then adding volume and sparging the whole mash at once…I think what I’m saying makes sense.

Billy,
I don’t shoot for equal volume in first and second runnings because I don’t technically batch sparge. However, I can tell you that I always get more sparge water ready then I think I need. I run it down to about 2 degrees plato or my desired staring volume. I would think it could be difficult to get equal volumes. For instance, say I have 16 pounds grain @ 1 quart per pound (i.e. 4 gallons). At absorption of 1/10 gallon per pound grain, I’d be looking at 1.6 gallons of loss. With simple batch sparging, I’d be looking at 2.4 gallons of first runnings. If I matched that, I’d be looking at 4.8 gallons of starting volume. It make sense, in this context that you would have to add. I’m assuming this is always the case.

To both,
Although it might be brewing anathema to some of you, I really don’t freak about target gravity. I really count on my grain bill and experience to get me target gravity-ish.

By: Billy Broas

Billy Broas — Sun, 23 May 2010 20:02:28 +0000

Good explanation Mike. Peter is right, it can be pretty confusing until you actually do it. One thing that makes it much easier is brewing software. Plug in your assumptions and it will spit out all of the required volumes.

Here’s a question for you..Assuming you do batch sparge, do you shoot for equal volumes in your first and second runnings? I’ve always done it this way, and it usually requires a little bit of extra water at the end of the mash. I just make that my mash out water. I know some people do uneven batches though and just make their second runnings enough to hit their desired pre-boil volume. I’ve never tested to see if there was a noticeable difference between the two.

By: Peter at Simply Beer

Peter at Simply Beer — Sun, 23 May 2010 02:38:50 +0000

Very Concise, Mike. Well said! While it may seem confusing to some, once you’ve been brewing a while and understand what each step does or is intended to do, your brain has the capacity to comprehend this next technical level of brewing.

Do you do batch or fly sparging, sounds to me like batch. Maybe for a next post you could do the difference, pros cons of batch vs fly sparging.