Direct fired single vessel BIAB. - Brewery Hardware Discussions on Home Brew Forums

C_B

I've proven repeatedly that I can't/won't brew outside like I'm set up now. I've been thinking about RIMS, all electric, BIAB, basically any combination that would allow me to brew 5 gallon batches in the kitchen without using the stove. So follow me on this...

Keggle with a 5500+ watt element mounted as low as possible. (i could easily pull in a 50A circuit to run a hotter element)
False bottom build to sit about 1" above the element.
Control the element with a PID.
BIAB mash while recirculating from the bottom and returning on top of the grain.
Pull the bag and ramp to boil.

Why won't that work?

CurlyFat

C_B said:
I've proven repeatedly that I can't/won't brew outside like I'm set up now. I've been thinking about RIMS, all electric, BIAB, basically any combination that would allow me to brew 5 gallon batches in the kitchen without using the stove. So follow me on this...

Keggle with a 5500+ watt element mounted as low as possible. (i could easily pull in a 50A circuit to run a hotter element)
False bottom build to sit about 1" above the element.
Control the element with a PID.
BIAB mash while recirculating from the bottom and returning on top of the grain.
Pull the bag and ramp to boil.

Why won't that work?

Sounds reasonable. Do you plan to sparge at all? Or just say screw efficiency?

C_B

DrCurly said:

C_B said:
I've proven repeatedly that I can't/won't brew outside like I'm set up now. I've been thinking about RIMS, all electric, BIAB, basically any combination that would allow me to brew 5 gallon batches in the kitchen without using the stove. So follow me on this...

Keggle with a 5500+ watt element mounted as low as possible. (i could easily pull in a 50A circuit to run a hotter element)
False bottom build to sit about 1" above the element.
Control the element with a PID.
BIAB mash while recirculating from the bottom and returning on top of the grain.
Pull the bag and ramp to boil.

Why won't that work?

Sounds reasonable. Do you plan to sparge at all? Or just say screw efficiency?

I've seen some BIAB setups that don't sparge and still get reasonable efficiency. I can't find any of those examples right now...

CurlyFat

C_B said:

DrCurly said:

C_B said:
I've proven repeatedly that I can't/won't brew outside like I'm set up now. I've been thinking about RIMS, all electric, BIAB, basically any combination that would allow me to brew 5 gallon batches in the kitchen without using the stove. So follow me on this...

Keggle with a 5500+ watt element mounted as low as possible. (i could easily pull in a 50A circuit to run a hotter element)
False bottom build to sit about 1" above the element.
Control the element with a PID.
BIAB mash while recirculating from the bottom and returning on top of the grain.
Pull the bag and ramp to boil.

Why won't that work?

Sounds reasonable. Do you plan to sparge at all? Or just say screw efficiency?

I've seen some BIAB setups that don't sparge and still get reasonable efficiency. I can't find any of those examples right now...

I'm suspicious, but intrigued.

I would think you could still sort-of sparge by pouring water over it or something.

C_B

DrCurly said:

C_B said:

DrCurly said:

C_B said:
I've proven repeatedly that I can't/won't brew outside like I'm set up now. I've been thinking about RIMS, all electric, BIAB, basically any combination that would allow me to brew 5 gallon batches in the kitchen without using the stove. So follow me on this...

Keggle with a 5500+ watt element mounted as low as possible. (i could easily pull in a 50A circuit to run a hotter element)
False bottom build to sit about 1" above the element.
Control the element with a PID.
BIAB mash while recirculating from the bottom and returning on top of the grain.
Pull the bag and ramp to boil.

Why won't that work?

Sounds reasonable. Do you plan to sparge at all? Or just say screw efficiency?

I've seen some BIAB setups that don't sparge and still get reasonable efficiency. I can't find any of those examples right now...

I'm suspicious, but intrigued.

I would think you could still sort-of sparge by pouring water over it or something.

That's option two. My understanding is BIAB is usually mashed thin anyway, like quite thin. That will improve efficiency. I would think higher gravity brews would see drastically lower efficiency with no sparge.

C_B

Plus, in the setup I'm describing I'd lose at least 2 gallons below the false bottom. The mash would be epic thin assuming those system constraints.

CurlyFat

C_B said:

DrCurly said:

C_B said:

DrCurly said:

C_B said:
I've proven repeatedly that I can't/won't brew outside like I'm set up now. I've been thinking about RIMS, all electric, BIAB, basically any combination that would allow me to brew 5 gallon batches in the kitchen without using the stove. So follow me on this...

Keggle with a 5500+ watt element mounted as low as possible. (i could easily pull in a 50A circuit to run a hotter element)
False bottom build to sit about 1" above the element.
Control the element with a PID.
BIAB mash while recirculating from the bottom and returning on top of the grain.
Pull the bag and ramp to boil.

Why won't that work?

Sounds reasonable. Do you plan to sparge at all? Or just say screw efficiency?

I've seen some BIAB setups that don't sparge and still get reasonable efficiency. I can't find any of those examples right now...

I'm suspicious, but intrigued.

I would think you could still sort-of sparge by pouring water over it or something.

That's option two. My understanding is BIAB is usually mashed thin anyway, like quite thin. That will improve efficiency. I would think higher gravity brews would see drastically lower efficiency with no sparge.

I recall a mash that was too thin caused problems, but I'm so far out of the nerdery of brewing I can't remember what that problem was.

C_B

DrCurly said:

C_B said:

DrCurly said:

C_B said:

DrCurly said:

C_B said:
I've proven repeatedly that I can't/won't brew outside like I'm set up now. I've been thinking about RIMS, all electric, BIAB, basically any combination that would allow me to brew 5 gallon batches in the kitchen without using the stove. So follow me on this...

Keggle with a 5500+ watt element mounted as low as possible. (i could easily pull in a 50A circuit to run a hotter element)
False bottom build to sit about 1" above the element.
Control the element with a PID.
BIAB mash while recirculating from the bottom and returning on top of the grain.
Pull the bag and ramp to boil.

Why won't that work?

Sounds reasonable. Do you plan to sparge at all? Or just say screw efficiency?

I've seen some BIAB setups that don't sparge and still get reasonable efficiency. I can't find any of those examples right now...

I'm suspicious, but intrigued.

I would think you could still sort-of sparge by pouring water over it or something.

That's option two. My understanding is BIAB is usually mashed thin anyway, like quite thin. That will improve efficiency. I would think higher gravity brews would see drastically lower efficiency with no sparge.

I recall a mash that was too thin caused problems, but I'm so far out of the nerdery of brewing I can't remember what that problem was.

Tannins probably. It's always tannins

CurlyFat

C_B said:

DrCurly said:

C_B said:

DrCurly said:

C_B said:

DrCurly said:

C_B said:
I've proven repeatedly that I can't/won't brew outside like I'm set up now. I've been thinking about RIMS, all electric, BIAB, basically any combination that would allow me to brew 5 gallon batches in the kitchen without using the stove. So follow me on this...

Keggle with a 5500+ watt element mounted as low as possible. (i could easily pull in a 50A circuit to run a hotter element)
False bottom build to sit about 1" above the element.
Control the element with a PID.
BIAB mash while recirculating from the bottom and returning on top of the grain.
Pull the bag and ramp to boil.

Why won't that work?

Sounds reasonable. Do you plan to sparge at all? Or just say screw efficiency?

I've seen some BIAB setups that don't sparge and still get reasonable efficiency. I can't find any of those examples right now...

I'm suspicious, but intrigued.

I would think you could still sort-of sparge by pouring water over it or something.

That's option two. My understanding is BIAB is usually mashed thin anyway, like quite thin. That will improve efficiency. I would think higher gravity brews would see drastically lower efficiency with no sparge.

I recall a mash that was too thin caused problems, but I'm so far out of the nerdery of brewing I can't remember what that problem was.

Tannins probably. It's always tannins

It's always the tannins....

No, really, i think it was efficiency concerns, but those kinds of things are de-bunked all the time, so who knows.

CurlyFat

Enzymes too diluted or something scientific sounding...

C_B

DrCurly said:
Enzymes too diluted or something scientific sounding...

That might be. I'd like to see @ceannt opinion.

CurlyFat

C_B said:

DrCurly said:
Enzymes too diluted or something scientific sounding...

That might be. I'd like to see @ceannt opinion.

we're going to need a bigger page.

Jayrizzle

DrCurly said:
Enzymes too diluted or something scientific sounding...

That sounds bogus to me. And if it was a real problem, just add a little time.

CurlyFat

Dr_Jerryrigger said:

DrCurly said:
Enzymes too diluted or something scientific sounding...

That sounds bogus to me. And if it was a real problem, just add a little time.

Exactly. Like I said, I don't remember why I use to care about grain/water ratio. There was some reason for it.

Jayrizzle

DrCurly said:

Dr_Jerryrigger said:

DrCurly said:
Enzymes too diluted or something scientific sounding...

That sounds bogus to me. And if it was a real problem, just add a little time.

Exactly. Like I said, I don't remember why I use to care about grain/water ratio. There was some reason for it.

better efficiency if you go thick and do three batch spagres.

Jayrizzle

Seems like BIAB could have a quick dip in some water to really up the efficiency, but I get that would also make it far more complex.

C_B

Dr_Jerryrigger said:
Seems like BIAB could have a quick dip in some water to really up the efficiency, but I get that would also make it far more complex.

Just pulling it up and rinsing it with a gallon or two might do the trick. I haven't mathed any of this, I'm just wondering if the single vessel idea makes a lick of sense.

Jayrizzle

Just do it. You'll see if it works. Worst case, you get wimpy beer.

C_B

Dr_Jerryrigger said:
Just do it. You'll see if it works. Worst case, you get wimpy beer.

To do this is would need appropriate bulkheads installed into the kettle. A heating element. PID wired to the element. A false bottom custom made and a huge grain bag.

That's a couple hundred away? That's workable.

Oh, and clean the pump. Because I think that is where I'm getting the funk.

Thym

C_B said:

Dr_Jerryrigger said:
Seems like BIAB could have a quick dip in some water to really up the efficiency, but I get that would also make it far more complex.

Just pulling it up and rinsing it with a gallon or two might do the trick. I haven't mathed any of this, I'm just wondering if the single vessel idea makes a lick of sense.

Thats what i did to start brewing all grain. Single vessel system biab. Sparge by pouring filtered water through the top of the bag after letting it drain. Worked great. Not sure why i switched to a two vessel system.

Oh i thought a more complex meant more better. I was wrong

Thym

C_B said:

Dr_Jerryrigger said:
Just do it. You'll see if it works. Worst case, you get wimpy beer.

To do this is would need appropriate bulkheads installed into the kettle. A heating element. PID wired to the element. A false bottom custom made and a huge grain bag.

That's a couple hundred away? That's workable.

Oh, and clean the pump. Because I think that is where I'm getting the funk.

Honestly, unless you plan on doing complex step mashes, the pump is not necessary.

Thym

Oh and thebfalse bottom isnt really necessary either. You're brewing in a bag.thats the best false bottom you can find.

Thym

From the wayback machine.

http://homebrewforums.net/discussion/27/simple-brew-in-a-bag-method/p1

C_B

Lakewood said:

C_B said:

Dr_Jerryrigger said:
Just do it. You'll see if it works. Worst case, you get wimpy beer.

To do this is would need appropriate bulkheads installed into the kettle. A heating element. PID wired to the element. A false bottom custom made and a huge grain bag.

That's a couple hundred away? That's workable.

Oh, and clean the pump. Because I think that is where I'm getting the funk.

Honestly, unless you plan on doing complex step mashes, the pump is not necessary.

I don't really. But I need the pump to chill the batch, so I might as well recirc the whole time to insure even heat distribution.

C_B

Lakewood said:
Oh and thebfalse bottom isnt really necessary either. You're brewing in a bag.thats the best false bottom you can find.

Agreed. But I'd like to make absolutely sure the bag won't sink down far enough to sit on top of the heating element. Plus, the false bottom would be an extra line of filtration at the end.

Jayrizzle

C_B said:

Lakewood said:
Oh and thebfalse bottom isnt really necessary either. You're brewing in a bag.thats the best false bottom you can find.

Agreed. But I'd like to make absolutely sure the bag won't sink down far enough to sit on top of the heating element. Plus, the false bottom would be an extra line of filtration at the end.

Borrow the rack from your toaster oven.

ceannt

The biggest drawback to a thin mash, is it screws up the ph.

ceannt

To a point, a thinner mash will give you a better efficiency for a no sparge brew.... but you sacrifice flavor

ceannt

The optimum ratio for flavor is between 1.25, and 1.4 to 1

ceannt

I see no real issues with the setup you are proposing, as long as the bag is big enough to allow you to stir the shucks out of it. But I don't understand why you would want to recirculate... keep it simple

ceannt

The simpler, the more versatile

ceannt

The biggest drawback to a "single vessel" system, is you won't be able to do a decoction mash

ceannt

But... you could of course cheat... and use a pot on the stove for that

C_B

ceannt said:
I see no real issues with the setup you are proposing, as long as the bag is big enough to allow you to stir the shucks out of it. But I don't understand why you would want to recirculate... keep it simple

I would have to stir it every couple minutes I would think to avoid temperature stratification. Also, the pump will be sitting there hooked up for chilling anyway. But that brings up a point... You do five gallon batches, right? How do you chill?

ceannt

Yes, I do 5 gallon batches. I use an immersion chiller.

ceannt

Silly question. .. but why not use a cooler to mash in, and use the electric pot as a boil kettle, and to heat up the strike water?
You could still do it inside, and it might be easier in the long run...

ceannt

And.... rust forming on the element bits would not be as much of an issue

C_B

ceannt said:
Silly question. .. but why not use a cooler to mash in, and use the electric pot as a boil kettle, and to heat up the strike water?
You could still do it inside, and it might be easier in the long run...

Extra vessel equal more complexity. And I like the idea of single vessel BIAB.

C_B

ceannt said:
And.... rust forming on the element bits would not be as much of an issue

I'll spend a little more on the element and get one with a stainless base.

ceannt

C_B said:

ceannt said:
Silly question. .. but why not use a cooler to mash in, and use the electric pot as a boil kettle, and to heat up the strike water?
You could still do it inside, and it might be easier in the long run...

Extra vessel equal more complexity. And I like the idea of single vessel BIAB.

Equipment wise, yes, it's an extra component. .. but your brewday becomes a little more complex with the single vessel. However, if you just like the idea... you need no more justification.

ceannt

C_B said:

ceannt said:
And.... rust forming on the element bits would not be as much of an issue

I'll spend a little more on the element and get one with a stainless base.

That works, if you can find one

C_B

ceannt said:

C_B said:

ceannt said:
And.... rust forming on the element bits would not be as much of an issue

I'll spend a little more on the element and get one with a stainless base.

That works, if you can find one

http://www.theelectricbrewery.com/stainless-steel-heating-elements

ceannt said:

C_B said:

ceannt said:
Silly question. .. but why not use a cooler to mash in, and use the electric pot as a boil kettle, and to heat up the strike water?
You could still do it inside, and it might be easier in the long run...

Extra vessel equal more complexity. And I like the idea of single vessel BIAB.

Equipment wise, yes, it's an extra component. .. but your brewday becomes a little more complex with the single vessel. However, if you just like the idea... you need no more justification.

This is kinda where I am. I would say the complexity is a wash and I like the idea.

ceannt

There you go!

Thym

Seems like you have a good plan then. It'll work and aside from the pump and plumbing, it should be easy to clean.

ceannt

Just saw this.... not quite as cheap as your plan though....
http://brewhaequipment.com/products/biac-all-in-one-brewing-system-package

C_B

Next stop. Figuring out exactly how I want the kettle set up. Weldless/soldered/TIG'd. I think I'm going to go with a bottom drain set off to the side coming out 45* through the handle hole. Element in the side, thermometer and site glass in the side.

C_B

ceannt said:
Just saw this.... not quite as cheap as your plan though....
http://brewhaequipment.com/products/biac-all-in-one-brewing-system-package

Ha. That's sweet.

Thym

ceannt said:
Just saw this.... not quite as cheap as your plan though....
http://brewhaequipment.com/products/biac-all-in-one-brewing-system-package

I like it.

Thym

C_B said:
Next stop. Figuring out exactly how I want the kettle set up. Weldless/soldered/TIG'd. I think I'm going to go with a bottom drain set off to the side coming out 45* through the handle hole. Element in the side, thermometer and site glass in the side.

You cant do the angle with weldless. Beyond that, it depends on the equipement you have or the guy you'll be taking it to.

Thym

Fwiw, assuming you are going to the same person for both, it shouldnt cost more to tig weld than to braze it. The temp of the process and the material makes no difference in how much time it takes. If they quote a significant price difference between the two they are trying to con you.

C_B

Lakewood said:
Fwiw, assuming you are going to the same person for both, it shouldnt cost more to tig weld than to braze it. The temp of the process and the material makes no difference in how much time it takes. If they quote a significant price difference between the two they are trying to con you.

I meant solder myself. TIG I can't do. I have a couple guys that do excellent work on what I've taken to them. Not sure about TIGing stainless. I'm assuming they can, I just need to call.

Thym

C_B said:

Lakewood said:
Fwiw, assuming you are going to the same person for both, it shouldnt cost more to tig weld than to braze it. The temp of the process and the material makes no difference in how much time it takes. If they quote a significant price difference between the two they are trying to con you.

I meant solder myself. TIG I can't do. I have a couple guys that do excellent work on what I've taken to them. Not sure about TIGing stainless. I'm assuming they can, I just need to call.

Ah, gotcha. Then the price difference with be noticeable.

Thym

I have a small mig welder that ive used on kettles. It does a mediocre job

jeepinjeepin

C_B said:
Next stop. Figuring out exactly how I want the kettle set up. Weldless/soldered/TIG'd. I think I'm going to go with a bottom drain set off to the side coming out 45* through the handle hole. Element in the side, thermometer and site glass in the side.

Inverted with bottom cut out and draining through triclamp fitting from the sprear/tap.

jeepinjeepin

http://www.brewhardware.com/product_p/sankebdrain3.htm

C_B

jeepinjeepin said:

C_B said:
Next stop. Figuring out exactly how I want the kettle set up. Weldless/soldered/TIG'd. I think I'm going to go with a bottom drain set off to the side coming out 45* through the handle hole. Element in the side, thermometer and site glass in the side.

Inverted with bottom cut out and draining through triclamp fitting from the sprear/tap.

I've seen that. And considered it. Both of my kegs are already modified (with the top removed).

jeepinjeepin

C_B said:

jeepinjeepin said:

C_B said:
Next stop. Figuring out exactly how I want the kettle set up. Weldless/soldered/TIG'd. I think I'm going to go with a bottom drain set off to the side coming out 45* through the handle hole. Element in the side, thermometer and site glass in the side.

Inverted with bottom cut out and draining through triclamp fitting from the sprear/tap.

I've seen that. And considered it. Both of my kegs are already modified (with the top removed).

That's tough to recover from.

Thym

jeepinjeepin said:

C_B said:

jeepinjeepin said:

C_B said:
Next stop. Figuring out exactly how I want the kettle set up. Weldless/soldered/TIG'd. I think I'm going to go with a bottom drain set off to the side coming out 45* through the handle hole. Element in the side, thermometer and site glass in the side.

Inverted with bottom cut out and draining through triclamp fitting from the sprear/tap.

I've seen that. And considered it. Both of my kegs are already modified (with the top removed).

That's tough to recover from.

There are more kegs to be had.

C_B

Lakewood said:

jeepinjeepin said:

C_B said:

jeepinjeepin said:

C_B said:
Next stop. Figuring out exactly how I want the kettle set up. Weldless/soldered/TIG'd. I think I'm going to go with a bottom drain set off to the side coming out 45* through the handle hole. Element in the side, thermometer and site glass in the side.

Inverted with bottom cut out and draining through triclamp fitting from the sprear/tap.

I've seen that. And considered it. Both of my kegs are already modified (with the top removed).

That's tough to recover from.

There are more kegs to be had.

Correct. And I do have a third keg. But I don't want to mess with it.

Fuzzy

C_B said:

Lakewood said:

jeepinjeepin said:

C_B said:

jeepinjeepin said:

C_B said:
Next stop. Figuring out exactly how I want the kettle set up. Weldless/soldered/TIG'd. I think I'm going to go with a bottom drain set off to the side coming out 45* through the handle hole. Element in the side, thermometer and site glass in the side.

Inverted with bottom cut out and draining through triclamp fitting from the sprear/tap.

I've seen that. And considered it. Both of my kegs are already modified (with the top removed).

That's tough to recover from.

There are more kegs to be had.

Correct. And I do have a third keg. But I don't want to mess with it.

because you want to give it to me...

Fuzzy

Lakewood said:

jeepinjeepin said:

C_B said:

jeepinjeepin said:

C_B said:
Next stop. Figuring out exactly how I want the kettle set up. Weldless/soldered/TIG'd. I think I'm going to go with a bottom drain set off to the side coming out 45* through the handle hole. Element in the side, thermometer and site glass in the side.

Inverted with bottom cut out and draining through triclamp fitting from the sprear/tap.

I've seen that. And considered it. Both of my kegs are already modified (with the top removed).

That's tough to recover from.

There are more kegs to be had.

they're too expensive here. apparently brewing is popular now.

Thym

FromZwolle said:

Lakewood said:

jeepinjeepin said:

C_B said:

jeepinjeepin said:

C_B said:
Next stop. Figuring out exactly how I want the kettle set up. Weldless/soldered/TIG'd. I think I'm going to go with a bottom drain set off to the side coming out 45* through the handle hole. Element in the side, thermometer and site glass in the side.

Inverted with bottom cut out and draining through triclamp fitting from the sprear/tap.

I've seen that. And considered it. Both of my kegs are already modified (with the top removed).

That's tough to recover from.

There are more kegs to be had.

they're too expensive here. apparently brewing is popular now.

they've always had a widely varying price range. I spent $60 on one from a 3rd party, and got 4 for free from a brewery. There are no rules.

C_B

In other news, why do I need a full on false bottom? I don't if I'm going BIAB. SS pizza pan and some SS bolts to protect the bag from the element. Done and done.

jeepinjeepin

C_B said:
In other news, why do I need a full on false bottom? I don't if I'm going BIAB. SS pizza pan and some SS bolts to protect the bag from the element. Done and done.

Sounds good to me. The bag is providing the filtering. You may have to lift the bag for the last to drain, but maybe not.

C_B

jeepinjeepin said:

C_B said:
In other news, why do I need a full on false bottom? I don't if I'm going BIAB. SS pizza pan and some SS bolts to protect the bag from the element. Done and done.

Sounds good to me. The bag is providing the filtering. You may have to lift the bag for the last to drain, but maybe not.

Most likely.

My larger concern now is being able to do 5 gallon batches in a keggle. I'm going to loose at least two gallons under the element guard. More to come once I get the element in I suppose.

Thym

C_B said:

jeepinjeepin said:

C_B said:
In other news, why do I need a full on false bottom? I don't if I'm going BIAB. SS pizza pan and some SS bolts to protect the bag from the element. Done and done.

Sounds good to me. The bag is providing the filtering. You may have to lift the bag for the last to drain, but maybe not.

Most likely.

My larger concern now is being able to do 5 gallon batches in a keggle. I'm going to loose at least two gallons under the element guard. More to come once I get the element in I suppose.

I'm not sure i get the "lose 2 gallons" thing. Do you mean losing space for the mash or actual wort loss? Etiher way, a 15 gallon keggle which comfortably holds 12.5 to 13.5 gallons is gonna make easy work of a 5 gallon batch unless you are shooting for all-grain barley wine.

C_B

Lakewood said:

C_B said:

jeepinjeepin said:

C_B said:
In other news, why do I need a full on false bottom? I don't if I'm going BIAB. SS pizza pan and some SS bolts to protect the bag from the element. Done and done.

Sounds good to me. The bag is providing the filtering. You may have to lift the bag for the last to drain, but maybe not.

Most likely.

My larger concern now is being able to do 5 gallon batches in a keggle. I'm going to loose at least two gallons under the element guard. More to come once I get the element in I suppose.

I'm not sure i get the "lose 2 gallons" thing. Do you mean losing space for the mash or actual wort loss? Etiher way, a 15 gallon keggle which comfortably holds 12.5 to 13.5 gallons is gonna make easy work of a 5 gallon batch unless you are shooting for all-grain barley wine.

Losing space for the mash. Lets say 5.5 gallons strike water for a 15# grain bill. If I loose two gallons below the false bottom, won't that turn into a seriously thick mash? Or can I just up it to 2qts/lb?

C_B

In this case, bigger would be better. Huh.

ceannt

Ok.... are you going to port this thing?
If so, will the port be above, or below the false bottom?

ceannt

Don't guess at the volume below the false bottom, freaking measure it.

ceannt

Calculate your strike water volume normally, taking grain absorption into account. To that volume add one half of the volume below the false bottom.

ceannt

If the port is above the false bottom, add the total volume lost to your sparge water to account for the losd.

ceannt

If below, don't worry about it

ceannt

But I would be tempted to discard the first little bit that drains.

ceannt

We're it me, I would either not port it at all... and syphon. .. (bad things can happen with ports and valves) or put the port above, barely.

ceannt

During the mash, you are not really losing that volume, it is still available, since you will be stirring, and such, but it will limit the total amount of water making contact with the grain at any given time. Hence the one half increase in strike water volume.

ceannt

Not sure if any of that makes any sense at all written out...

C_B

You think you could put that in one damn post?

C_B

It does. I'm planning to put a bottom drain in at the edge of the kettle. Overall loss will be minimal. During a recirculating mash all of that water will be functional in the mash, but not a factor in mash thickness.
I want to pull off the bottom because that is where the heating will occur so I want make sure the wort is circulating around the element.
I'm guessing because I don't have the element yet so an actual mock up gives me a rough guess of 2 gallons.

ceannt said:
During the mash, you are not really losing that volume, it is still available, since you will be stirring, and such, but it will limit the total amount of water making contact with the grain at any given time. Hence the one half increase in strike water volume.

This is really the crux of my concern. All of the water will be recirculating through the mash, just not all of it all the time. Can I go north of 1.5qts/lb in order to obtain an appropriate mash thickness given so much wort below the bag/FB?

C_B

I need to start building the damn thing already.

ceannt

Don't need a mock up. Build it. Fill it with water up to the false bottom. Measure that volume, and base your calculations accordingly. If you are concerned with an overly thick mash, calculate the total strike water volume such that you have a 1.25 quarts per pound of grain above the false bottom. (Add that volume to the equation)
But you have to know what that volume is.... relatively accurately.

C_B

ceannt said:
Don't need a mock up. Build it. Fill it with water up to the false bottom. Measure that volume, and base your calculations accordingly.

But I don't have the stuff in my possesion yet and I wanna talk about it now because I'm bored.

ceannt said:
If you are concerned with an overly thick mash, calculate the total strike water volume such that you have a 1.25 quarts per pound of grain above the false bottom. (Add that volume to the equation)
But you have to know what that volume is.... relatively accurately.

That's the answer I was looking for. Or at least some confirmation that it would be ok to do that.

ceannt

Ok, I did a little figuring for an example:
Say you want 15 pounds of grain. 1.25 gt/pd = 4.688 gal. If the measured volume below the false bottom is exactly 2 gallons.... use 4.688 + 2 = 6.688 gal.
This will give you a total mash volume of 7.886 gallons, with a relative mash thickness of 1.78.
I will assume that after conversion, you are going to heat everything up to mash out temp. Then sparge. One 2.5 gallon sparge will give you a post boil volume of roughly 5.5 gallons.
The maximum volume in your vessel amounts to 10.39 gallons with the grain still in there.

This is of course a bit rough, but will give you an idea of what you are up against. Once you have an accurate volume below the false bottom, just tweak the calculation accordingly.
The relative mash thickness may seem really thin, but the actual thickness around the grain is not, so it shouldn't have a negative impact on the beer's character. You may also get some crazy good efficiency.

C_B

ceannt said:
Ok, I did a little figuring for an example:
Say you want 15 pounds of grain. 1.25 gt/pd = 4.688 gal. If the measured volume below the false bottom is exactly 2 gallons.... use 4.688 + 2 = 6.688 gal.
This will give you a total mash volume of 7.886 gallons, with a relative mash thickness of 1.78.
I will assume that after conversion, you are going to heat everything up to mash out temp. Then sparge. One 2.5 gallon sparge will give you a post boil volume of roughly 5.5 gallons.
The maximum volume in your vessel amounts to 10.39 gallons with the grain still in there.

This is of course a bit rough, but will give you an idea of what you are up against. Once you have an accurate volume below the false bottom, just tweak the calculation accordingly.
The relative mash thickness may seem really thin, but the actual thickness around the grain is not, so it shouldn't have a negative impact on the beer's character. You may also get some crazy good efficiency.

Boom. Thanks.
I was not taking absorption into account, giving me a stupid low sparge and thus confusing me.
The bold part is what I no clue on other than I knew it may/may not be a problem...

Fuzzy

C_B said:
You think you could put that in one damn post?

banned.

ceannt

To a point, a thinner mash will give you better efficiency.
To a point, a thicker mash will give you a better beer with more flavor.
I like to keep it between 1.25 and 1.3... mostly so I end up with an easily measured strike water volume.

C_B

ceannt said:
To a point, a thinner mash will give you better efficiency.
To a point, a thicker mash will give you a better beer with more flavor.
I like to keep it between 1.25 and 1.3... mostly so I end up with an easily measured strike water volume.

I used to aim for 1.25 and usually did a double batch sparge. I don't remember the math, I think that was in a cooler that was really too small.

Mainly though, I don't want to make a kettle that will require a 1.75qts/lb mash overall just to make up for the liquid below the FB if that will seriously degrade the overall flavor of the beer. "To a point..." I want to know what that point it.

Maybe I'll just have to always make big beers. [-O<

Thym

I never worried much about the mash thickness. just get enough water in there to get everything wet. but dont add so much that you can't sparge a bit at mash out. In my rig i dont even measure the amount of water going into the mash.

ceannt

C_B said:

ceannt said:
To a point, a thinner mash will give you better efficiency.
To a point, a thicker mash will give you a better beer with more flavor.
I like to keep it between 1.25 and 1.3... mostly so I end up with an easily measured strike water volume.

I used to aim for 1.25 and usually did a double batch sparge. I don't remember the math, I think that was in a cooler that was really too small.

Mainly though, I don't want to make a kettle that will require a 1.75qts/lb mash overall just to make up for the liquid below the FB if that will seriously degrade the overall flavor of the beer. "To a point..." I want to know what that point it.

Maybe I'll just have to always make big beers. [-O<

It shouldn't degrade the flavor, since the mash is still "thick" around the grain. Sure that water is there, but it isn't in contact at any given time. This may give you very good efficiency, since the wort won't be as loaded with sugars and stuff.
The real issue, is that until you make it, and measure that volume, you have no idea what it is. .. it may only be 1 gallon, or a half gallon... it could also be more than your wild ass guess of 2.... you just don't know.
You can also just do a thicker mash... might be a little more difficult to stir, but you can go down a good bit from the optimum 1.25, and still get good results.
I say go for it. Build the sucker. Experiment with it. Have fun. Stop freaking stressing out over what sounds like a hell of a good idea.
Write it up. Take lots of pics during the build. Document the whole thing, and post it. Who knows, you may be on to the next big thing, and help a lot of folks out. You could also fail miserably, but so what... you don't know until you follow through with the idea.

CurlyFat

Lakewood said:
I never worried much about the mash thickness. just get enough water in there to get everything wet. but dont add so much that you can't sparge a bit at mash out. In my rig i dont even measure the amount of water going into the mash.

I measure. It's exactly "about half full in my mash tun." Unless I'm doing a big beer, then it's exactly "a little more than half full."

Thym

DrCurly said:

Lakewood said:
I never worried much about the mash thickness. just get enough water in there to get everything wet. but dont add so much that you can't sparge a bit at mash out. In my rig i dont even measure the amount of water going into the mash.

I measure. It's exactly "about half full in my mash tun." Unless I'm doing a big beer, then it's exactly "a little more than half full."

i shoot for "i can see a little liquid on top of the grain"

Jayrizzle

Lakewood said:

DrCurly said:

Lakewood said:
I never worried much about the mash thickness. just get enough water in there to get everything wet. but dont add so much that you can't sparge a bit at mash out. In my rig i dont even measure the amount of water going into the mash.

I measure. It's exactly "about half full in my mash tun." Unless I'm doing a big beer, then it's exactly "a little more than half full."

i shoot for "i can see a little liquid on top of the grain"

that's the best density I've found.

Jayrizzle

Then I do slightly less than that for a batch sparge, then do that again.

Jayrizzle

DrCurly said:

Lakewood said:
I never worried much about the mash thickness. just get enough water in there to get everything wet. but dont add so much that you can't sparge a bit at mash out. In my rig i dont even measure the amount of water going into the mash.

I measure. It's exactly "about half full in my mash tun." Unless I'm doing a big beer, then it's exactly "a little more than half full."

Y U Do half batches?

CurlyFat

Dr_Jerryrigger said:

DrCurly said:

Lakewood said:
I never worried much about the mash thickness. just get enough water in there to get everything wet. but dont add so much that you can't sparge a bit at mash out. In my rig i dont even measure the amount of water going into the mash.

I measure. It's exactly "about half full in my mash tun." Unless I'm doing a big beer, then it's exactly "a little more than half full."

Y U Do half batches?

No, that's how much water I put in before I add the grain.