For me it's more about keeping the sugar and corn at 20% so we aren't making an OE 800 cloneI would also like to point out the idea of adding a sugar syrup to the big beer primary to kick up a second fermentation. This will allow us to produce a smaller beer with just grain, and make up the rest with the sugar. To me, it seems like a logical solution.
20-10 New Year's Community Brew : Grain Bill
#21
Posted 16 December 2009 - 04:07 PM
#22
Posted 16 December 2009 - 06:22 PM
Oh now there is a good point. ha.My calculations were based on adding the sugar to the boil, so the sugar would not have no bearing on the small beer. I think that was what you were getting at right jayb?EWW: On the lowering of the bill. I can see that. I started to tinker with the cap for the second beer and realized that it might need lowering to accommodate our specialties.This lead me to a question of calculation. How do you calculate the cap? From the previous calculation I posted, you can pretty easily get the contribution from the first mash. However, do you just calculate the straight extraction potential and efficiency as normal and add that to what you extract from the main mash? It would seem that there would be some dilution and you wouldnt get all that. The reason I asked is that I added something like 2# of various specialties and the OG of the small beer was already up at 1.059 or so.For me it's more about keeping the sugar and corn at 20% so we aren't making an OE 800 clone
Edited by ChefLamont, 16 December 2009 - 06:23 PM.
#23
Posted 16 December 2009 - 07:09 PM
Parti-Gyle Gravity Split Table Avg OG 1/2 - 1/2 Split (5+5,10+10) 1st half 2nd half1.0500 1.0600 1.04001.0510 1.0612 1.04081.0520 1.0624 1.04161.0530 1.0636 1.04241.0540 1.0648 1.04321.0550 1.0660 1.04401.0560 1.0672 1.04481.0570 1.0684 1.04561.0580 1.0696 1.04641.0590 1.0708 1.04721.0600 1.0720 1.04801.0610 1.0732 1.04881.0620 1.0744 1.04961.0630 1.0756 1.05041.0640 1.0768 1.05121.0650 1.0780 1.05201.0660 1.0792 1.05281.0670 1.0804 1.05361.0680 1.0816 1.05441.0690 1.0828 1.05521.0700 1.0840 1.05601.0710 1.0852 1.05681.0720 1.0864 1.05761.0730 1.0876 1.05841.0740 1.0888 1.05921.0750 1.0900 1.06001.0760 1.0912 1.06081.0770 1.0924 1.06161.0780 1.0936 1.06241.0790 1.0948 1.06321.0800 1.0960 1.06401.0810 1.0972 1.06481.0820 1.0984 1.06561.0830 1.0996 1.06641.0840 1.1008 1.06721.0850 1.1020 1.06801.0860 1.1032 1.06881.0870 1.1044 1.06961.0880 1.1056 1.07041.0890 1.1068 1.07121.0900 1.1080 1.07201.0910 1.1092 1.07281.0920 1.1104 1.07361.0930 1.1116 1.07441.0940 1.1128 1.07521.0950 1.1140 1.0760For calculation the gravity for the cap I typically do:2nd runnings + [last 2 digits of the OG of the cap figured at 75% efficency x .60] = Estimated total OG of small beerso basically I run the cap through my software at house efficiency to get the gravity of the the cap (use the same volume of water as you are pulling from your second split). Then I transpose the OG to GU (gravity units) and multiply it by 60% to get the adjusted efficiency. I then take that number add it to the estimated OG of the small beer as figured by the split table and get my estimated OG for the whole small beer. It is by no means a perfect system, but it has gotten me close in the past. Is that what you were asking Mr. Lamont? I forgot I had a vet appointment for my dogs so I am a few hours behind today, but will try to get this recipe posted tonightEDIT: if you all see anyway to improve this half assed logic of mine please let me know ... but make sure you refer to it as the Wanzel Method
Edited by EWW, 16 December 2009 - 07:20 PM.
#24
Posted 16 December 2009 - 08:46 PM
That's partly what I was getting at, although even if it ws a kettle addition it would still have no bearing on the small beer. I also thought adding to the fermenter would me a means of getting the attenuation very high in this brew.My calculations were based on adding the sugar to the boil, so the sugar would not have no bearing on the small beer. I think that was what you were getting at right jayb?
#25
Posted 16 December 2009 - 11:04 PM
#26
Posted 17 December 2009 - 04:44 AM
#27
Posted 17 December 2009 - 08:08 AM
60% is the general number that I use for all unsparged grains and is not tied to other calcs. In my experience the actual % is somewhere between 50-60% but I don't have enough data points to warrent doing the math to figure out the exact relationship.Re: the tweeks: I would be kosher with either carapils or roasted barley additions, thow out some concrete numbers re: how much and we can play around with the idea.I like it. The only question I would have would be about body. Do yall think we would need a little carapils in there so the second beer is not too thin? Also, we mentioned some roastiness, I think a couple to a few ounces of roasted barley could add a nice little touch that would complement the chocolate malt and the smoke malt.Other than brief discussion of those tweeks, I think we are pretty well there.Ok the 60% adjustment for the cap makes sense. Is that number emperical/accepted or is it somehow tied or calculated with this particular partigyle proportion?
#28
Posted 17 December 2009 - 10:30 AM
Edited by ChefLamont, 17 December 2009 - 10:30 AM.
#29
Posted 17 December 2009 - 01:22 PM
Edited by ChefLamont, 17 December 2009 - 01:37 PM.
#30
Posted 17 December 2009 - 02:50 PM
#31
Posted 17 December 2009 - 03:24 PM
Edited by ChefLamont, 17 December 2009 - 03:29 PM.
#32
Posted 17 December 2009 - 07:57 PM
I just recalculated the recipe with the numbers written in my post and got the same numbers, so my guess is the difference in the numbers may be the issue that caused your calcs to be off if we add .13# Roasted Barley and add a 1/2# of crystal 10 to the cap the OG of the small beer would raise to somewhere around 1.054 and my guess is that the color would be close to 18 srmJayb, Strange, harryfrog, and/or anyone else ... got feedback on any of this ... are you still in? If it is just me and Mr. Lamont well it ain't much of a community brew but we can move on the hopsOk. For some reason I got slightly different numbers for the grain bill you proposed. *note I did go from 8# to 7# of pale in the main mash.note 2: I just noticed that I punched in 2.25# of sugar rather than 1.25. oops
#33
Posted 17 December 2009 - 08:15 PM
Oh no you didn't!!! :smilielol:Yea lets run with this. It seems we have hit the original mark. Imperial Cream Ale from the first runnings and a smokey, slightly roasty, darker beer for the second. I will have to tweek the calcs anyway for my brewhouse efficiency. I dont want to bore others (more) to death as we beat the numbers. Given the concept, I would think hops and yeast should be pretty straight forward. Definitely not the mind-bend this was.Plus I am planning to take some time off next week. If we get this wreslted down, I might try to get it in the fermenters.blah blah..........your calcs to be off
#34
Posted 17 December 2009 - 10:32 PM
I want to wait for others to chime in on this (hopefully)...expect a hops thread to start in the next day or so, but what efficiency are you calclating for?Oh no you didn't!!! :smilielol:Yea lets run with this. It seems we have hit the original mark. Imperial Cream Ale from the first runnings and a smokey, slightly roasty, darker beer for the second. I will have to tweek the calcs anyway for my brewhouse efficiency. I dont want to bore others (more) to death as we beat the numbers. Given the concept, I would think hops and yeast should be pretty straight forward. Definitely not the mind-bend this was.Plus I am planning to take some time off next week. If we get this wreslted down, I might try to get it in the fermenters.
#35
Posted 18 December 2009 - 04:56 AM
Agreed. Why dont we (and by we I mean you ) post a final proposed grain bill so folks can see it. That way people dont have to wade through the above numbers.One thing I do like about the way you calculate it is the way you show the equivalent numbers for each beer. With that, someone could brew either beer individually without doing the partigyle. That may be helpful or desirable to some.I want to wait for others to chime in on this (hopefully)...expect a hops thread to start in the next day or so, but what efficiency are you calclating for?
#36
Posted 18 December 2009 - 04:59 AM
#37
Posted 18 December 2009 - 08:19 AM
#38
Posted 18 December 2009 - 08:41 AM
#39
Posted 18 December 2009 - 10:26 AM
You guys lost me with your number love fest . But...I like where the recipe is headed. I like the small amount of roasted barley in the cap, think the 1lb crystal will make a nice addition - am still a little leery of 1lb of smoked, but WTH.I think I can just about fit the whole f'ing thing in my mash tun (10 gallon igloo). I just brewed an american BW with 25lbs of 2-row and a couple pounds of specialty grain, so I figure the cap will just fit.The cap idea is a new one to me - so I'm hoping that when we've gotten the recipe fingered out you can post some advice on brew day operations. on to hops...Jayb, Strange, harryfrog, and/or anyone else ... got feedback on any of this ... are you still in? If it is just me and Mr. Lamont well it ain't much of a community brew but we can move on the hops
#40
Posted 18 December 2009 - 01:55 PM
Looks pretty good to me.If there is no further discussion I will post a hops and yeast thread later tonight (I figure we can combine the 2)
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users