To Sparge or not to Sparge.

[steve_flack]

Its really quite simple then, basically you lose as many litres of water as you have kilos of grain.

Absolutely, there or thereabouts anyway.

[SteveD]

haha...Steve's succinct reply beats my long winded dirge to the post

[BarryNL]

Its really quite simple then, basically you lose as many litres of water as you have kilos of grain.

Absolutely, there or thereabouts anyway.

The Americans seem to calculate it as 0.1 US gallons per pound - which, if my conversion works, equals about 0.85 liters per kilo. So, in the same ballpark.

[delboy]

While i have the attention of both Steves, why in the sparging schedules do you have the smaller addition first and then have the second addition with the greater volume.
I've been doing the exact opposite, i've put in a large volume of water in the first addition (basically fill the cooler to the top) and then the second addition is with a small volume so as not to be too dilute.
Am i screwing up??

[Andy]

While i have the attention of both Steves, why in the sparging schedules do you have the smaller addition first and then have the second addition with the greater volume.
I've been doing the exact opposite, i've put in a large volume of water in the first addition (basically fill the cooler to the top) and then the second addition is with a small volume so as not to be too dilute.
Am i screwing up??

Smaller addition first as the mash already contains liqour - the object is to get two runoffs of the same volume. Topup 1 is smaller as mash is already liquid, topup 2 is larger as you've completely drained the mash tun in runoff 1.

(US brewers have done the calculations to show that two runoffs of equal volume provide the best efficiency - you don't want to see the calcs though, believe me )

[delboy]

While i have the attention of both Steves, why in the sparging schedules do you have the smaller addition first and then have the second addition with the greater volume.
I've been doing the exact opposite, i've put in a large volume of water in the first addition (basically fill the cooler to the top) and then the second addition is with a small volume so as not to be too dilute.
Am i screwing up??

Smaller addition first as the mash already contains liqour - the object is to get two runoffs of the same volume. Topup 1 is smaller as mash is already liquid, topup 2 is larger as you've completely drained the mash tun in runoff 1.

(US brewers have done the calculations to show that two runoffs of equal volume provide the best efficiency - you don't want to see the calcs though, believe me )

Thanks for the reply andy, sorry to be a PITA but why is the object to have two runoffs of equal volume, does it affect the finsihed product in any way to have unequal volume runoffs.

[Andy]

(US brewers have done the calculations to show that two runoffs of equal volume provide the best efficiency - you don't want to see the calcs though, believe me )

[delboy]

Hey i could have the swore that bit at the bottom wasn't there orginally did you edit that extra bit in .
Thanks for the swift answer twice

[Andy]

I did add the last bit

If you REALLY want to see the calcs then look here:-

http://home.elp.rr.com/brewbeer/files/nbsparge.html

I don't recommend it though

[Andy]

I really must give batch sparging a go! As my next beer was going to be Denny Conn's Rye IPA then it would be fitting to use the method for that one

[Exextractor]

I used batch sparging with two equal batches for my first AG. Once the boil was started I then, out of interest, added a further quantity of water to the grains. After standing 15 minutes the run off was 4 litres at 1012, i.e. 48 points. The main wort was 610 points, so 7% of the sugar had been left behind, pretty insignificant I would say. Later on I added this wort to the drained hops and did another short boil. This time I got 4 litres at 1030, 120 points, so a further 72 points (12%) had been left with the hops. I can't say if this is typical, but it gives some idea of what corrections might be needed to the grain bill. All the measuring and messing about with a secondary wort took forever, so next time I'm going to take the advice of just using plenty of grain and not worrying about it!

[mysterio]

I fly sparge and nothing has convinced me that batch sparging seems easier. Fly sparging is opening the water flow through a sparge arm, and opening the drainage on your mash tun - once you've done it once, you know how to control the flow rate of your system. Then go and lounge about/tidy up/have a homebrew for half an hour. Batch sparging seems like calculations, hauling hot water around, lots of stirring and vorlaufing...

[itmustbemagic]

next time I'm going to take the advice of just using plenty of grain and not worrying about it!

Now we are talking my language........... When I started this topic I thought it was going to be an easier and quicker option but you Guys have so much info at your fingertips I was becoming overwhelmed!

[steve_flack]

The reason I batch sparge is basically because it suits the design of my system. The fact for me that it's quicker and there's next to no way to oversparge using it are just pluses. The last three things you mention are also not an issue for me as I use pumps.

[delboy]

I find the volarufing when batch sparging a PITA, but i've not had much sucess balancing my fly sparge setup so im going to stick with the batch sparging for now.