Brewzilla

[Philthebrewer]

Does anyone think it's a good idea to hold a sieve under the flow of wort as it's being transferred to the fermenter? Wanting to get any bits out but was worried I may be losing something that the yeast needs. Just a random thought!

I use a sieve bag when transferring to the fermenter. Obviously I clean and sterilise it. I use a large bag with hooks which go over the FV (bucket) rim and catch a very large amount of trub while being able to tip the full contents of the BZ into the fermenter. Wasted wort = wasted beer!

 

[hoppyscotty]

I do that to get the last half litre or so by tilting the vessel and getting the last dregs from the tap once the pump has sucked everything up it can. I use a hop spider and it has the added benefit of breaking up the flow and nicely aerating the wort too.

 

[Theoriginalrich]

Thanks everyone for your opinions and especially cleaning methods, most of which I was going to do. As it’s only £19 I’ll get one, since this is all new to me I don’t know any better. All I can do is soak up all the info on here, which there is a lot, and hope I can brew some better brews than my kit brews.

 

[Zorro]

I used the whirlpool arm for the first time at the weekend. It really helped maintining the temperature at 80 degrees. It did cone and definitely I have less trub in the fermenter.

 

[Pete9586]

I have a Grainfather and transfer through my CFC into my FV. I have a false bottom fitted and use pellet hops. Sitting on top of the FV, i have a large stainless sieve(from IKEA) lined with a muslin cloth which catches the finer crap coming from my kettle. This also gives very good aeration to the wort.

 

[Hop_it]

A couple of months ago I posted in another thread (Blockages - #110) that I had not found the BZ whirlpool arm to be very effective. I have to admit that I had based this remark on the fact that there was almost no visible movement of the surface of the cooling wort whilst running the pump, so I assumed that it wasn't doing very much, and the fact that I was still somewhat nervous about blocking the pump with hop debris (which had happened previously). . . . . . However, after reading the various posts above I'm very tempted to give it another try - but this time with some additional hop filtration.
I'm not too concerned about trub in the fermenter because I run it through a SS mesh sieve lined with a piece of muslin cloth (as suggested by Pete9586 above) which I position between the tap and a bucket, so that's not been a problem for me. However, I can see a real benefit from more efficient cooling when using an immersion coil chiller

 

[Rodcx500z]

A couple of months ago I posted in another thread (Blockages - #110) that I had not found the BZ whirlpool arm to be very effective. I have to admit that I had based this remark on the fact that there was almost no visible movement of the surface of the cooling wort whilst running the pump, so I assumed that it wasn't doing very much, and the fact that I was still somewhat nervous about blocking the pump with hop debris (which had happened previously). . . . . . However, after reading the various posts above I'm very tempted to give it another try - but this time with some additional hop filtration.
I'm not too concerned about trub in the fermenter because I run it through a SS mesh sieve lined with a piece of muslin cloth (as suggested by Pete9586 above) which I position between the tap and a bucket, so that's not been a problem for me. However, I can see a real benefit from more efficient cooling when using an immersion coil chiller

Hi Hop It, i have just ordered the whirlpool arm for my BZ along with a blanking plug for the mash tun bottom screen

 

[Hop_it]

Hi Hop It, i have just ordered the whirlpool arm for my BZ along with a blanking plug for the mash tun bottom screen

It will be interesting to get your take on both items. I tried the blanking plug in place of the central run-off tube for the first time ~3 weeks ago. I haven't reported back on it until now because I had a particularly bad brew day . . . . . . I brewed a pale ale with ~20% of malted rye in the grain bill. I attempted a step mash to do a beta-glucanase rest at ~45 degC in the hope that this would sort out most of the reported stickiness issues. Well, it didn't, and I had a hell of a job to get the temperature up the next step to 66 degC. It took ages, a lot of stirring, and the addition of a couple of kettles of boiling water. The mash would not drain, so circulation was very slow (hence the difficulty in getting the temperature up), and the final sparge took ~2 hours.
However, on a positive note, the absence of the central tube made stirring a lot easier So, I would like to try it again on a more conventional recipe before passing further judgement.
PS - And I used rice hulls as well
PPS - This beer better be good . . . . . If not, I will never touch malted rye again

 

[Rodcx500z]

It will be interesting to get your take on both items. I tried the blanking plug in place of the central run-off tube for the first time ~3 weeks ago. I haven't reported back on it until now because I had a particularly bad brew day . . . . . . I brewed a pale ale with ~20% of malted rye in the grain bill. I attempted a step mash to do a beta-glucanase rest at ~45 degC in the hope that this would sort out most of the reported stickiness issues. Well, it didn't, and I had a hell of a job to get the temperature up the next step to 66 degC. It took ages, a lot of stirring, and the addition of a couple of kettles of boiling water. The mash would not drain, so circulation was very slow (hence the difficulty in getting the temperature up), and the final sparge took ~2 hours.
However, on a positive note, the absence of the central tube made stirring a lot easier So, I would like to try it again on a more conventional recipe before passing further judgement.
PS - And I used rice hulls as well
PPS - This beer better be good . . . . . If not, I will never touch malted rye again

Hi Hop It, i have never used rye so can't comment on that, i mainly brew bitter and pale ale but that bloody tube winds me up, you just don't need it as in the new G40

 

[Hop_it]

Hi Hop It, i have never used rye so can't comment on that, i mainly brew bitter and pale ale but that bloody tube winds me up, you just don't need it as in the new G40

Hi Rodcx500z, I get what you say about the tube, but I'm still in two minds about it. I agree that it can be a pain in the ar5e at times, not least because it gets in the way when you want to stir the mash. But my own pet theory is that it serves a purpose when the flow through the mash is not very good because, by allowing some run-off down the tube*, it ensures that there is some circulation of liquid around the vessel. This (IMHO) should help to maintain a more even mash temperature because there should be some conduction of heat from the tube to the mash surrounding it, and the wort is being reheated continuously. This probably only matters with "difficult" mashes i.e. those containing a high proportion of wheat, oats or rye (as I found out), or having too fine a grain crush (as I also found out when I first got my grain mill). . . . . . then again I might just be spouting rubbish :tinhat:

* I made this filter device for the top entry to the tube which prevents grain and any larger particles getting to the pump:

 

[Rodcx500z]

Hi Rodcx500z, I get what you say about the tube, but I'm still in two minds about it. I agree that it can be a pain in the ar5e at times, not least because it gets in the way when you want to stir the mash. But my own pet theory is that it serves a purpose when the flow through the mash is not very good because, by allowing some run-off down the tube*, it ensures that there is some circulation of liquid around the vessel. This (IMHO) should help to maintain a more even mash temperature because there should be some conduction of heat from the tube to the mash surrounding it, and the wort is being reheated continuously. This probably only matters with "difficult" mashes i.e. those containing a high proportion of wheat, oats or rye (as I found out), or having too fine a grain crush (as I also found out when I first got my grain mill). . . . . . then again I might just be spouting rubbish :tinhat:

* I made this filter device for the top entry to the tube which prevents grain and any larger particles getting to the pump:

View attachment 54947

You know i think you are right that is it's exact purpose keeping the mash at the right temp, i also have a helix coil which i have not used yet, i will admit i have done 6 brews on mine using it as intended and have had no issues, i have hit all the numbers maybe i am over thinking it, i am brewing a mild tomorrow i will post pics, one thing i did learn is after the mash when you turn the pump of lift the tube out first or all the floaty bits get sucked into the pump

 

[Matt_W]

I purchased the pro screen for the bottom which basically doesn’t have the hole for the pipe.

I’ve brewed about a dozen beers like this now and it’s just easier to stir without the pipe and it’s one less thing to find on brew day.

The only time I’ve had issues was when I had a lot of oats and walked away from the mash. It backed up and overflowed through the handle holes. When bringing it up to the boil I hand the recirculation going through a sieve and it picked up most of it.

A handful of rice hulls and backing off the pump for a few minutes usually let’s it settle down for me.

 

[hoppyscotty]

So whats the benefits/thinking behind removing the overflow pipe and blanking off the hole? I've always thought the point of recirculating is you keep the malt well saturated with wort by keeping a head of wort on the top. This requires the bottom of the malt to be sat in the wort so if you suck the wort out too fast and leave a void in the bottom of the vessel the malt will compact down and potentially case a stuck mash or slow the recirculation flow. So by setting a steady overflow you ensure the bottom space is always flooded with wort and as much wort as possible is flowing through the malt. So by removing the pipework managing this and keeping an eye on it is much harder and a more manual process. I appreciate it gets in the way when you're mashing in and if you're stirring during the mash but they seem like pretty minor things to me.

 

[chillipickle]

You want the wort flowing through the grain bed not through the over flow pipe.If you are using a lot of rolled oats wheat etc, add a good few hadfuls of rice hulls.Start off with a slow recirculation then you can always up the flow.

If it starts backing up early in the mash turn your pump off and give the grain a stir, be carful not to get to close to the bottom of the grain bed, give a few mins then back on with the pump.You will get a nice flow through the grain bed.I have never once used the over flow tube.

edit, an old clip, this mash had over 1kg of flaked wheat oats.

 

[hoppyscotty]

Assuming you haven't got a stuck mash, I cant see how the overflow is taking away flow through the grain bed. Its not diverting the flow and preventing it from going through the grain bed and down the overflow. Its in addition to it. I think there are two things going on in the mash - the enzymatic reaction creating the sugars, then you've got to flush the sugars out of and away from the grain husk, which is the whole purpose of recirculation. I thought the thinking was by having an overflow you are ensuring you are maximising the flow through the grain and thus maximising the extraction and flushing away of the sugars from the grain and into the wort.

Of course by removing the overflow pipe you are ensuring the wort only has one way to go, but there isn't a lot of volume below the malt pipe. And my worry is that even if you don't run the bottom space completely dry, even if there is a gap then the malt column will compact as it will no longer be saturated in wort and that will reduce the flow through the grain and hit your efficiency.

To be fair I tend to set the flow rate to balance out so not to overflow and the overflow is there in case it starts to back up and I don't catch it immediately then you're into risking running the elements dry.

David Heath always says to let the flow run at max and let it overflow all it likes to achieve max efficiency, and the new G40 design clearly enables this with the perforations up the entire height of the malt pipe and the very fast running recirculation pump. So certainly by design there seems to be the intension to have the overflow 'active' all the time. I guess if you have your crush perfectly dialled in and your flow rate right then it wont matter, but if you grain is too course and the flow through the grain bed is not high enough then the husks will retain sugars, and if too fine the restriction will be too great.

Maybe I'm over thinking it.

 

[2Beers]

If the wort is being pumped from the bottom and then bypassing the grain by going down the overflow pipe then the mash is not taking place as we need it to, as we're looking to integrate the recirculated wort into the mash to homogenise the temperature.

The overflow is designed to prevent the heating elements running dry and scorching in the event of a stuck mash, whether you use it or not is a personal decision, but wort flowing down the overflow is an indication of a sub-optimal mash.

 

[sifty]

I've never had an issue with it overflowing. Just regulate the flow via the valve to keep the level right, and have always met (usually exceeded) predicted numbers...
And I've made Pilsners, Ales, Stouts and Wheat beers, not sure why people are modifying things. But fair play to all doing their own thing...

 

[Zorro]

Agree with regards to the overflow.

Personally I use the overflow and top screen. I tend to go for a thick mash and low flow rate with the pump. Last brew was 6kg grain including 20 percent flaked oats and wheat. I added rice hulls and 20 litres of water. I was just under my expected gravity.

Admittedly I had to watch it like a hawk and occasionally stop the pump.

The other way I've seen people go is with more water and with a finer crush. Levels similar to what is suggested on brew father and have achieved similar results.

Their is no right way and everyone has an opinion. Its just about finding something that works for you.

1 tip I saw Gash suggest which I liked, when the pipe is removed is to add a zip tie to the side and cut it to the same height as the overflow cone from the liquid. Then you can still keep track of the water level rising and stop/reduce the pump accordingly.

 

[fgoulding]

I don’t use the overflow pipe anymore nor the top plate. It makes it easier to stir a couple of times during the mash.

But I always add rice hulls. At least 5 or 6 handfuls and then I have no issues with overflowing.

Even for a large grain bill, I can run the pump at 75%. For small batches I’ve had the pump on full.

And my efficiency improved significantly.

 

[venkman100]

Assuming you haven't got a stuck mash, I cant see how the overflow is taking away flow through the grain bed. Its not diverting the flow and preventing it from going through the grain bed and down the overflow. Its in addition to it. I think there are two things going on in the mash - the enzymatic reaction creating the sugars, then you've got to flush the sugars out of and away from the grain husk, which is the whole purpose of recirculation. I thought the thinking was by having an overflow you are ensuring you are maximising the flow through the grain and thus maximising the extraction and flushing away of the sugars from the grain and into the wort.

Of course by removing the overflow pipe you are ensuring the wort only has one way to go, but there isn't a lot of volume below the malt pipe. And my worry is that even if you don't run the bottom space completely dry, even if there is a gap then the malt column will compact as it will no longer be saturated in wort and that will reduce the flow through the grain and hit your efficiency.

To be fair I tend to set the flow rate to balance out so not to overflow and the overflow is there in case it starts to back up and I don't catch it immediately then you're into risking running the elements dry.

David Heath always says to let the flow run at max and let it overflow all it likes to achieve max efficiency, and the new G40 design clearly enables this with the perforations up the entire height of the malt pipe and the very fast running recirculation pump. So certainly by design there seems to be the intension to have the overflow 'active' all the time. I guess if you have your crush perfectly dialled in and your flow rate right then it wont matter, but if you grain is too course and the flow through the grain bed is not high enough then the husks will retain sugars, and if too fine the restriction will be too great.

Maybe I'm over thinking it.

Just noticed you say on the new grainfather, that the perforations go all the way up the side of the malt pipe. They don't on any unboxing video I have watched. Just near the bottom...