I have just received my new 38.5 litre Thermobox this afternoon from Germany and am ready to build it into a nice shiny new mash tun.
I have been reading all the various posts on this forum, but I am a little unsure as to the most efficient way of separating the wort from the grains?
I am lucky that the fabricator at my work is willing to manufacture whichever type I choose free of charge, so should I just opt for the standard slotted copper manifold, stainless false bottom bottom with 2mm holes with the standard outlet used, or go the whole hog with a the false bottom and outlet from the base which I have seen done here on an old post?
Pros and cons of each method would be much appreciated.
John.
Thermobox Mashtun question
-
Scooby
Re: Thermobox Mashtun question
In terms of grain stopping they will all do that equally well.
In terms of extraction of sugars If continuous sparging I would expect the perforated false bottoms to out perform the slotted manifold but not by much. if batch sparging there would be no difference
There may be a difference in the dead space i.e. the amount wort left when fully drained. My 22mm slotted manifold in a 24l thermobox has a dead space of 400ml, a well designed conventional false bottom would be less and the bottom drain zero. Imo factoring in for a 400ml loss is no big deal.
I have no experience of perforated false bottoms in use so can't comment on stuck mashes but I expect they can happen with either design.
So Imo there's no clear winner except the increased efficiency if continuous sparging, but if someone is making it for you and you can follow vossy's design with the side exit tap that would be my choice.
In terms of extraction of sugars If continuous sparging I would expect the perforated false bottoms to out perform the slotted manifold but not by much. if batch sparging there would be no difference
There may be a difference in the dead space i.e. the amount wort left when fully drained. My 22mm slotted manifold in a 24l thermobox has a dead space of 400ml, a well designed conventional false bottom would be less and the bottom drain zero. Imo factoring in for a 400ml loss is no big deal.
I have no experience of perforated false bottoms in use so can't comment on stuck mashes but I expect they can happen with either design.
So Imo there's no clear winner except the increased efficiency if continuous sparging, but if someone is making it for you and you can follow vossy's design with the side exit tap that would be my choice.
-
adm
Re: Thermobox Mashtun question
A slotted copper manifold will be the cheapest and easiest - and if you are batch sparging, will be no less efficient than a false bottom. I regularly get 85%+ efficiency with mine. (However I put this down to my electric drill powered mash mixing technique as opposed to my manifold design)
If you are fly sparging, a false bottom will technically allow better efficiency - although I'd say 85% would be tough to beat - not that it matters a jot on a homebrewing scale (See Palmer's "How to Brew" for lots of detail on this).
A bottom drain solution would be the most elegant, but won't make much difference to your efficiency. As Scooby says, these tuns have little deadspace even with a manifold design. Mine is about 500ml or so - effectively not enough to worry about!
However - fitting a bottom drain will be a right pain the arse. Whereas you can go to a decent manifold or false bottom design just by changing out the crappy tap for a 1/2" ball valve.
It all depends on your sparging technique, love of gadgets and DIY patience/capability.
If you are fly sparging, a false bottom will technically allow better efficiency - although I'd say 85% would be tough to beat - not that it matters a jot on a homebrewing scale (See Palmer's "How to Brew" for lots of detail on this).
A bottom drain solution would be the most elegant, but won't make much difference to your efficiency. As Scooby says, these tuns have little deadspace even with a manifold design. Mine is about 500ml or so - effectively not enough to worry about!
However - fitting a bottom drain will be a right pain the arse. Whereas you can go to a decent manifold or false bottom design just by changing out the crappy tap for a 1/2" ball valve.
It all depends on your sparging technique, love of gadgets and DIY patience/capability.
-
Bionicmunky
Re: Thermobox Mashtun question
explain pleaseadm wrote:I regularly get 85%+ efficiency with mine. However I put this down to my electric drill powered mash mixing technique as opposed to my manifold design
-
adm
Re: Thermobox Mashtun question
I just stir the crap out of it with a cheap paint mixer attached to a cordless drill when I mash in. Then again when I top up, and again when I add the second batch of sparge water. It works wonders, and I've only had 1 stuck sparge in 45 brews using this technique. I put that down to being the end of a sack of malt.
The mixer isn't fine/sharp enough to cut or shear the grain, so I don't think it has any impact that way, but it does make sure all the sugar gets into solution very effectively.
The mixer isn't fine/sharp enough to cut or shear the grain, so I don't think it has any impact that way, but it does make sure all the sugar gets into solution very effectively.
-
Zatoichi
Re: Thermobox Mashtun question
Yes the paint mixer drill method works wonders and saves a lot of work ....... especially with brews that are 10Gallon and above!!! 
-
garwatts
Re: Thermobox Mashtun question
Do you mean one like this?adm wrote:I just stir the crap out of it with a cheap paint mixer attached to a cordless drill when I mash in. Then again when I top up, and again when I add the second batch of sparge water. It works wonders, and I've only had 1 stuck sparge in 45 brews using this technique. I put that down to being the end of a sack of malt.
The mixer isn't fine/sharp enough to cut or shear the grain, so I don't think it has any impact that way, but it does make sure all the sugar gets into solution very effectively.
http://www.screwfix.com/prods/61617/Dri ... aint-Mixer