New to Grainfather G30

[Saisonator]

I would endorse a full volume mash, may cost a couple of dollars more for the grain bill but well worth it.
Once you understand the workings of the GF you can discard the overflow pipe and the top plate, don't understand why the top plate is there, I presume its 'monkey see monkey do' when copying the BM. The BM is different it stirs its self and the top plate is integral to how it works.
I have the BM and three other SVB's and to get the same efficiency as the BM I have to manually stir the grist. The BM automatically stirs every 15 minutes so copying this will achieve a higher efficiency. Bevie actually recommend a few stirs of the GF to get the best possible performance of the grain bill.
Getting rid of the top plate, the grain bed is the filter, the overflow pipe is there as an assurance of the dead space not running dry, choking the return does this also. Having no overflow pipe makes for easier stirring. As the starch converts you can get a feel for this in the stirring, towards the end of the mash the grain tends to become more buoyant so no more stirring is needed.

If you have discarded the overflow pipe, what have you used to plug the hole in the bottom plate?

 

[foxy]

If you have discarded the overflow pipe, what have you used to plug the hole in the bottom plate?

A plug 1/2 " BSP with a nut under the screen.

 

[Saisonator]

A plug 1/2 " BSP with a nut under the screen.
View attachment 33634

I have found full volume mashing easier and the overflow pipe is now redundant because the mashing is so wet the liquor easily flows through the grain bed.
When I previously used the Grainfather to mash with sparge, I often had to add rice hulls to the grain bill due to stuck mash.

 

[peebee]

This is what I like about forums: I post suggestions of shortcuts expected responses damning what I'm doing, and instead get good natured responses high-lighting my shortcuts to be "not-so-short"!

Next time the top-plate goes along with the over-flow pipe. Good riddance, they were a pain anyway. Even my imaginary concerns about the grain-bed clogging and the recirculation pump emptying the deadspace causing the element to expose and overheat is nonsense. Any overflow (which just wont happen if I'd thought through it) will overflow the malt-pipe and cascade down its sides (18L+ batches that is).

The setup might not be feasible for outrageously strong beers (but smaller batches would work?), but I wouldn't use the GF for them anyway.

I might even stir my mash now and again; something I've never done before (and "never" extends back a few decades for me!).

 

[xozzx]

have a problem with the heater I ordered, in that the one delivered isn’t the one I ordered (ordered a Grainfather water heater but a Still Spirits T500 boiler was delivered). I’ve been stuck between wanting to do a brew this weekend and returning it to get the one I ordered, as I thought the visible volume indicator the Grainfather unit has would come in useful. The only other descernable difference I can see between the 2 units is the GF is 18L and the T500 is 24.

Personally Id keep the T500, it looks a lot better than the GF one. The sight glass (on mine anyway) is very inaccurate so I use a measuring jug to get the volumes right anyway. I guess the T500 has volume markings on the inside? If so you can just fill to the correct level and sparge until its empty.

As far as I understand sparging cold is fine, only downside is it will take a lot longer to reach the boil as you are adding a large volume of cold water to the GF.

 

[Saisonator]

This is what I like about forums: I post suggestions of shortcuts expected responses damning what I'm doing, and instead get good natured responses high-lighting my shortcuts to be "not-so-short"!

Next time the top-plate goes along with the over-flow pipe. Good riddance, they were a pain anyway. Even my imaginary concerns about the grain-bed clogging and the recirculation pump emptying the deadspace causing the element to expose and overheat is nonsense. Any overflow (which just wont happen if I'd thought through it) will overflow the malt-pipe and cascade down its sides (18L+ batches that is).

The setup might not be feasible for outrageously strong beers (but smaller batches would work?), but I wouldn't use the GF for them anyway.

I might even stir my mash now and again; something I've never done before (and "never" extends back a few decades for me!).

I think if you give it 15 mins after the last stir, that’s enough time for the wort to run clear again.
The mash is so wet it will stir freely, unlike when you use the standard water to grain ratio.

 

[Saisonator]

My routine for working out my water and additions are to build the recipe on Brewers Friend, then calculate water required on Grainfather online calculator. Finally I use this forums calculator to work out acid and other salts required.
Bit long winded when I think about it now.

 

[HoppingMad]

I would endorse a full volume mash, may cost a couple of dollars more for the grain bill but well worth it.
Once you understand the workings of the GF you can discard the overflow pipe and the top plate, don't understand why the top plate is there, I presume its 'monkey see monkey do' when copying the BM. The BM is different it stirs its self and the top plate is integral to how it works.
I have the BM and three other SVB's and to get the same efficiency as the BM I have to manually stir the grist. The BM automatically stirs every 15 minutes so copying this will achieve a higher efficiency. Bevie actually recommend a few stirs of the GF to get the best possible performance of the grain bill.
Getting rid of the top plate, the grain bed is the filter, the overflow pipe is there as an assurance of the dead space not running dry, choking the return does this also. Having no overflow pipe makes for easier stirring. As the starch converts you can get a feel for this in the stirring, towards the end of the mash the grain tends to become more buoyant so no more stirring is needed.

With my limited knowledge of AG brewing, I don’t think I’d be able to do full volume mashes in the GF, as the water volume required would be too great, or am I wrong on that?

 

[peebee]

With my limited knowledge of AG brewing, I don’t think I’d be able to do full volume mashes in the GF, as the water volume required would be too great, or am I wrong on that?

Well … you are wrong on that or those doing it wouldn't be admitting to do it. Or enthusiastically recommending it.

But the technique is as I said earlier, "isn't a technique to start out with". Though you might keep it in mind for later, and meanwhile not spend wads of money on setups to heat your "sparge" water because the temperature of "sparge" water isn't at all critical (perhaps avoid too hot, above 75-80C might cause less than desirable things to happen).

 

[HoppingMad]

Well … you are wrong on that or those doing it wouldn't be admitting to do it. Or enthusiastically recommending it.

But the technique is as I said earlier, "isn't a technique to start out with". Though you might keep it in mind for later, and meanwhile not spend wads of money on setups to heat your "sparge" water because the temperature of "sparge" water isn't at all critical (perhaps avoid too hot, above 75-80C might cause less than desirable things to happen).

Hi @peebee , apologies, I hadn't realised people had said they were doing it in a Grainfather G30 so I wasn't trying to imply people were misleading. I thought the earlier comments had mentioned larger brewing operations and from my, as I admit limited knowledge, it looked like the water volumes required for a full mash would be greater than the 30L available in Grainfather. I needed 26L for the brew I did yesterday, so I'd, clearly incorrectly, assumed I wouldn't be able to do a full mash volume in under 30 litres.

Clearly I need to do a bit more reading on that subject, although as you say it's not something I'd plan to do now, but I'll definitely look at the advantages of doing it in the future. Good to know re the sparge water temperature too, although it's too late for me as I've already spent the cash on a separate water heater; we live and learn!

 

[xozzx]

Good to know re the sparge water temperature too, although it's too late for me as I've already spent the cash on a separate water heater; we live and learn!

If you consider that it takes the sparge heater about 30 mins to heat the water to the correct temp (in my experience) then having the sparge heater reduces brew time by 30 mins every brew - worth it in my opinion

 

[foxy]

Hi @peebee , apologies, I hadn't realised people had said they were doing it in a Grainfather G30 so I wasn't trying to imply people were misleading. I thought the earlier comments had mentioned larger brewing operations and from my, as I admit limited knowledge, it looked like the water volumes required for a full mash would be greater than the 30L available in Grainfather. I needed 26L for the brew I did yesterday, so I'd, clearly incorrectly, assumed I wouldn't be able to do a full mash volume in under 30 litres.

Clearly I need to do a bit more reading on that subject, although as you say it's not something I'd plan to do now, but I'll definitely look at the advantages of doing it in the future. Good to know re the sparge water temperature too, although it's too late for me as I've already spent the cash on a separate water heater; we live and learn!

It is worth the effort to go for full volume no sparge, except it isn't an effort and you get a better beer. Get to know your unit and its limitations first and then give it a go maybe a 19 litre batch.
Another advantage is only one lot of salt additions to think about, and if you add your none fermentables at mash out it makes it even easier.

As for cold water sparging, lots of home brewers do it with seemingly no adverse effect here is a link to a Braukaiser blog.
http://braukaiser.com/blog/blog/2009/05/12/cold-water-sparging/

 

[Lesinge]

I would endorse a full volume mash, may cost a couple of dollars more for the grain bill but well worth it.
Once you understand the workings of the GF you can discard the overflow pipe and the top plate, don't understand why the top plate is there, I presume its 'monkey see monkey do' when copying the BM. The BM is different it stirs its self and the top plate is integral to how it works.
I have the BM and three other SVB's and to get the same efficiency as the BM I have to manually stir the grist. The BM automatically stirs every 15 minutes so copying this will achieve a higher efficiency. Bevie actually recommend a few stirs of the GF to get the best possible performance of the grain bill.
Getting rid of the top plate, the grain bed is the filter, the overflow pipe is there as an assurance of the dead space not running dry, choking the return does this also. Having no overflow pipe makes for easier stirring. As the starch converts you can get a feel for this in the stirring, towards the end of the mash the grain tends to become more buoyant so no more stirring is needed.

"don't understand why the top plate is there " I like it for sparging - used to brew on an open mash in a converted tea urn and all that shaking to get the sparge water in every part of the grain bed was a pain - I figure the holes in the top plate take my work away!

 

[peebee]

"don't understand why the top plate is there " I like it for sparging - used to brew on an open mash in a converted tea urn and all that shaking to get the sparge water in every part of the grain bed was a pain - I figure the holes in the top plate take my work away!

Aye, perhaps, but you are "selectively reading". "No top plate" was being discussed alongside "no sparge" ("full boil volume mash"). For sparging the top plate does diffuse the flow of water across the grain-bed which makes sense; but for "no sparge" …

 

[Lesinge]

Aye, perhaps, but you are "selectively reading". "No top plate" was being discussed alongside "no sparge" ("full boil volume mash"). For sparging the top plate does diffuse the flow of water across the grain-bed which makes sense; but for "no sparge" …

Yep..missed that bit so therefore I agree :-)

 

[Saisonator]

Had another full volume mash brew day with my Grainfather on Friday.
Definitely easier than using the machine this way than the way on the instructions.
As foxy recommended, I will be doing away with the overflow pipe, as it is redundant using this method. It just gets in the way and is another thing to clean. Just about to order a 3/4” stainless hex head plug off eBay to fill the hole.
I stirred the mash twice during the hour and I could definitely feel the grain bed had become looser during second stir. The wort was as clear as needed after mash out.
I was thinking with this method, someone could go down to even small batch sizes than they can using the micro pipe work, if they wanted.
Also wheat beers would be a breeze, I bet you could do away with the need for rice husks.

 

[foxy]

Should be no need for rice hulls with a more fluid mash, and a regular stir.

 

[Baz Chaz]

I was thinking with this method, someone could go down to even small batch sizes than they can using the micro pipe work, if they wanted.
Also wheat beers would be a breeze, I bet you could do away with the need for rice husks.

That caught my eye, because I only do 15 litre brews nowadays (I had enquired about small batches and was told not enough liquid to circulate?) so maybe going to 18 litre it could be possible? But there again, an All in one system would be a bit OTT if going down the 'no sparge' method ? Just thinking out loud here guys, trying to get the grey matter working and not taking the plunge buying a system (still trying to decide) then finding I've dropped a clanger!

 

[Saisonator]

That caught my eye, because I only do 15 litre brews nowadays (I had enquired about small batches and was told not enough liquid to circulate?) so maybe going to 18 litre it could be possible? But there again, an All in one system would be a bit OTT if going down the 'no sparge' method ? Just thinking out loud here guys, trying to get the grey matter working and not taking the plunge buying a system (still trying to decide) then finding I've dropped a clanger!

If you are talking about 15 litres of water in the mash then you could do it easily. You could do 10 litre batch sizes of smaller.
I don’t think buying one of these for no sparge method is OTT, it is pretty much what the thing is made for. With recirculating, you can do no sparge and still get good efficiency. No need to buy and store a sparge water heater and doing two lots of water.
No reason to buy the Grainfather either, I have bought kegs from Kegland and I think they are great quality so I would buy their equivalent of the Grainfather.

 

[Saisonator]

Looking at the Brewzilla, it has extras you don’t get with the Grainfather like cam lock fittings, carrying handles, and a tap to empty the thing if the pump fails. I see a package online with hop spider and jacket, both very useful.
All for £369.
The Grainfather has the fancy WiFi controller, which I don’t have or want, mine is an early model. Also a counterflow chiller, which is very efficient and fast but I am not completely sold on it being sanitary enough.