Sparge-less 2 pot Contra-Flow RIMS based system idea!

The forum for discussing all kinds of brewing paraphernalia.
Post Reply
EccentricDyslexic

Sparge-less 2 pot Contra-Flow RIMS based system idea!

Post by EccentricDyslexic » Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:01 am

Hi all,

I'm a newbie to brewing but have been doing lots of research on All-Grain brew systems so i can eventually build my own. I have come up with some ideas that should reduce the number of pots and therefore space required for the system to operate at the same time as keeping efficiency as high as possible and I'd like some feed back from you chaps!

Basically there are 2 pots, a boiler to heat the liquor and do the wort boil and a mash tun with a recirculating pump that will work backwards during the mash ie take wort from the top of the grain and put it back in though the false bottom. :shock:

Heres how i envisage the set up working in more detail-

1 - Lets assume for example; i want 25 liters of boiled wort for the FV, 5 liters will be lost to the grain and 5 liters will be lost to the boil (closer amounts will be calculated when i done some practice runs). i fill the boiler to the 35litre mark and heat it to circa 80degrees.(some experimentation needed here)

2 - I then pump the whole 35liters into the Mash Tun add the grain and check it is at the 66degress or so i am looking for. The idea behind adding the whole amount of liquor now rather than keeping some back for sparging is that by keeping the sugars moving and the dilution higher, one should be able to extract more of the sugars i.e. keep the efficiency high., it also should help me be sure i will have the right volume in the FV after the mashing and boiling.

3 - I then start the recirculation pump; this will take wort from the top of the grain mass and return it to the false bottom. The idea behind this is to keep the finer bits of mash away from the false bottom and thereby aid the clarity of the wort to the FV and prevent blockages of the false bottom screen. Also by not sparging i am able to use the boiler after the mash for the boil.

4 – After the mash, I pump the wort back to the boiler for the boil.

Simples!

I would appreciate feedback chaps! Am i heading for a fall here? Or do i sound like i might have something worth trying? [-o<

Cheers chaps!

Steve

Scooby

Re: Sparge-less 2 pot Contra-Flow RIMS based system idea!

Post by Scooby » Wed Sep 16, 2009 2:49 pm

I'm no expert on these type of systems but 2 things spring to my mind.

By circulating backwards aren't you constantly circulating turbid wort? as I see it it's the grain bed that filters and not the false bottom. Or are you going to reverse the circulation prior to transferring the wort? When circulating from bottom to top the coarser husk and grain settle first and the finer stuff gets filtered through it.

Your efficiency will still be low as sugars will still be trapped. Sparging at a higher temp extracts the sugar.

You could trial a batch but I reckon you'll end up with turbid wort with 40-50% mash efficiency

EccentricDyslexic

Re: Sparge-less 2 pot Contra-Flow RIMS based system idea!

Post by EccentricDyslexic » Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:24 pm

Ta for the reply Scooby, i am open to ideas to perfect the system, i see where your coming from regarding the mash creating its own filter bed, i was thinking of possibly running it backwards for the first half of the mash soak time, then forwards for the second half. Maybe fit a sight glass so i can monitor turbidity in the flow...after a few brews I'd be able to judge what amount of time i can get away with one way then the other.

I was actualy considering fitting a kettle element in the flow line to kick in if the mash temp needs uping a tad. Maybe i could somehow mount an element in a glass vesel and do the two things in one go...hmm.

Regarding the poor efficiency how about running the pump in reverse for half an hour then the right way around for the other half and hour and then increasing the temp of the return to the top of the wort to 80degrees. When the flow from the bottom of the tun is about 76degrees (after say 20mins)divert flow to the boiler, kinda like emulating the action of a sparge.

What do you think?

Steve

Scooby

Re: Sparge-less 2 pot Contra-Flow RIMS based system idea!

Post by Scooby » Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:41 pm

When you transfer the wort sugars will still be trapped in the upturned husks and I just think efficiency will be low what ever you do. I think you'll find the only way to release the sugar is to sparge.

User avatar
Aleman
It's definitely Lock In Time
Posts: 6132
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 11:56 am
Location: Mashing In Blackpool, Lancashire, UK

Re: Sparge-less 2 pot Contra-Flow RIMS based system idea!

Post by Aleman » Wed Sep 16, 2009 7:01 pm

This has been tried in the past (The last one I read about was in the US on the HBD), and the issue is that the grain bubbles around at the surface and blocks the inlet to the pump. IIRC he solved it by putting a mesh basket around the pickup.

I don't think it will be all that efficient and would guess at around 60-65% which is what I get when I do a very dilute mash.

flything

Re: Sparge-less 2 pot Contra-Flow RIMS based system idea!

Post by flything » Wed Sep 16, 2009 7:17 pm

This is just a 'no sparge' as opposed to fly sparge or batch sparge, in that you are not rinsing the sugars from the grain (the word sparge originally meant sprinkle). I think this is supposed to result in a better quality wort, but is likely to be less efficient. You pays yer money and takes yer choice.

That said, 60-65% efficiency is ok, might mean a batch of beers costs a few quid more than someone who hits 80% but it's not the end of the world (especially if the beer is better in the end).

Not sure why you wouldn't recirculate from the bottom to the top though.

Why don't you do it, and update the thread when you've got some results?

User avatar
vacant
Even further under the Table
Posts: 2167
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 5:39 pm

Re: Sparge-less 2 pot Contra-Flow RIMS based system idea!

Post by vacant » Wed Sep 16, 2009 7:56 pm

I've done many BIABs where I add all 35 litres to the grain for the mash. This is a "no sparge" method, only needing two pots. Strike temp of 80C is way too high with that amount of water to 5Kg grain, try 70C for a 66 C target.

Batch sparge gives me 75 - 78% efficiency. WIth BIAB I get 65 - 68% so need roughly 10% more grain (not a huge expense) or I could use a finer crush as the net curtain used as a grain bag will never get stuck. I'm not sure how good filtering would be with a reverse recirculation but it would be interesting to experment!
I brew therefore I ... I .... forget

EccentricDyslexic

Re: Sparge-less 2 pot Contra-Flow RIMS based system idea!

Post by EccentricDyslexic » Sun Sep 20, 2009 10:51 am

Thanks for the replys, my reason for posing the reverse circulation idea was because i had just read Dave Line's book the big book of brewing and took on board his coments about upturned husks acting as bowls for sweet wort to become trapped in and husks turned the other way around acting as umbrellas shielding sweet wort from being rinsed out. When i read about that i thought that sparging in both directions would result in better efficency than flow in just in one direction. However, due to peoples comments and surprise at my logic, i have rethought about this. One should have critiqued Dave Lines logic too; surely when the grain is rolled, the grains dont split into nice halves husks likley to hold sweetness like bowls? Having seen countless youtube vids of freshly ground & spent grain, virtualy no husks look like they could hold fluid like a bowl. Can you chaps reflect on this for me? Initially when reading Daves theory, i thought batch sparging must be the most effective method of sparging as stirring is involved - but why do most people fly sparge then and why is it notably more efficient?- Because his logic doesnt hold true(although it may have done in 1972!) it seems to me at this stage in my research that fly sparging is the way to go if i want the best efficency.

Steve

flything

Re: Sparge-less 2 pot Contra-Flow RIMS based system idea!

Post by flything » Sun Sep 20, 2009 10:04 pm

I think you are worrying about this to much :D, so what if you get 70% efficiency or 80%; the difference in cost is pretty tiny for homebrew. However, you're right, just because Dave said so don't necessarily make it so, systems and processes are all different, if you set your system up so it's flexible you could try it, up, down, both, it would be interesting to see what difference it makes to efficiency.

Post Reply