Getting Frustrated with Beersmith

[Gustatorian]

Wow! Have you reached out to Blichmann? I'm sure they would want to know about this!

Are you grinding your own grain or having it done by your LHBS? Poor crush can also give a very low efficiency.

Reached out to them on several forums. I've actually messaged with John Blichmann via Facebook and took all of his recs...I've heard people having the same issues with the system. Some people get their efficiency up to 70% but I'm at a loss on how to do it.

 

[jmitchell3]

Reached out to them on several forums. I've actually messaged with John Blichmann via Facebook and took all of his recs...I've heard people having the same issues with the system. Some people get their efficiency up to 70% but I'm at a loss on how to do it.

I have the 5 gal 240v electric breweasy and routinely get 74-80% mash efficiency, but it has taken a few batches to dial it in. Heres a video by Dana (danam404 on hbt forum) from greatfermentations.com http://www.greatfermentations.com/brew-day-tips-blichmann-breweasy/

I noticed you talk about a vigorous boil with BE...you can adjust boil power with the power selector on the top of the tower of power controller. When it is at max, it says "on". Hitting the down arrow will reduce the power to the coil and the screen will show power as percentage of max. With my 5gal system, 72-74% power gets me a good rolling boil with a 1gph boil-off rate.

Happy brewing!

 

[Gustatorian]

I have the 5 gal 240v electric breweasy and routinely get 74-80% mash efficiency, but it has taken a few batches to dial it in. Heres a video by Dana (danam404 on hbt forum) from greatfermentations.com http://www.greatfermentations.com/brew-day-tips-blichmann-breweasy/

I noticed you talk about a vigorous boil with BE...you can adjust boil power with the power selector on the top of the tower of power controller. When it is at max, it says "on". Hitting the down arrow will reduce the power to the coil and the screen will show power as percentage of max. With my 5gal system, 72-74% power gets me a good rolling boil with a 1gph boil-off rate.

Happy brewing!

Seen and spoke to Danam before. Still amazed on how people can get that efficiency.

 

[jmitchell3]

So this vexes me. Did you say what crush you get and who is milling your grain? Are you following and nail in you calcium and ph levels? How do you test ph?

 

[CA_Mouse]

I don't see this as much an issue with BeerSmith. This is more about process and equipment not being dialed in yet.

 

[Stillraining]

In one scenario, the math worked, in the second it didn't. The math didn't change, so something else must've.

I'm joining the chorus that says your boil off rate is excessive. I'm very curious about your brewhouse efficiency, since it seems staggeringly low.

You see, one of the usual benefits of a very high boiloff rate is a corresponding increase in mash efficiency. With more water for sparging, you should rinse more sugar. I would expect your mash efficiency in the low 90% range, but it seems to be around 60% from your profile.

Although there isn't enough information in your post to know for sure, the gravities you cited are off by 22%. Assuming that the gravity and the batch volume are indeed what you accomplished, this puts your mash efficiency around 45%. Less than half the sugar available was extracted with twice the water needed.

That's not just a processes problem, that's a crisis. Your batches are more than 2x as expensive as they should be in grain and gas. Half the beer at twice the price is called "Retail."

This^ Ive followed this thread with dumbfounded interest.

I use a 17" boil pot and a quite vigorous, probably 5th gear boil from the previously supplied video yet I'm less then you state for boil off by quite a bit at about 1.85 to 2 gallons per hour.

I have plenty of issues with beer smith as stated earlier but I have learned to put up with its idiosyncrasy's. Your mash efficiency is truly mind boggling though and something is just not right there. It has to be the crush IMHO.

I will get flamed for this as a heretic, but I have to set my BHE in BS to 90% for my numbers to come out right, and my volume inputs and outputs are pretty spot on. I'm working with Priceless-brewing via PM and using his BIAB calculator as well and its pretty much confirming those numbers. I personally double crush at my LHBS even though they tell me I don't need too nor probably like me too..Priceless thinks my water may be naturally perfect for mash efficiency as a possibility but 60% is horrid indeed no mater what water your using.

I will continue to follow this and I wish you nothing but the best with your system. I'm sure your very frustrated.

Click on image to compare your boil to mine.

[/URL][/IMG]

 

[GQT]

Guys I couldn't find a better thread to post my Q although it's going to distract you a bit. Sorry for that!

I'm trying out the BS (nice abbreviation, btw) and probably I will buy and register it anyway but there are a few snags.

Like, I'm trying to enter starter values... Screenshots 1 to 5 show gradual increase of number of cells following the increase of starter size. Then, at 1.7L it just stops adjusting and re-calculating the cell number. It freezes at 238.2 bln and stays constant no matter how big a starter I make.

Has anyone bumped into this? Am I doing anything wrong?

Thank you!

 

[Stillraining]

Well it maxes out at around 21 L on my system using slury...maybe it different with package yeast I didnt try, but do you really need a 5 liter one?

 

[GQT]

Well it maxes out at around 21 L on my system using slury...maybe it different with package yeast I didnt try, but do you really need a 5 liter one?

It is not that I need or no, it is that the program must calculate the cell number for whatever the starter I'm up to making.
Imagine a pocket calculator that would at some point stop working and start asking you whether you really need a house this big, or whether you're really going to eat up all this food you threw into your cart at Walmart.
Besides, those 238+ bln is still below the recommended number (270-something).

 

[Stillraining]

OK well I only looked at your last screen shot and saw 4.5 liters and thought holy cow.

Try setting a different yeast viability and see if that allows for a better outcome. If it does then it must be something Brad did within the program on purpose for some reasoning. Maybe he likes small houses if they are old..

 

[GQT]

OK well I only looked at your last screen shot

Had you looked at other screenshots you would've noticed that it came to the same result at 1.7L, and hasn't updated since. 4L is a random starter size I entered just to show that the calculations stopped. Might be 1.8, or 2, or 5, or 555L, no difference.

 

[NoIguanaForZ]

Had you looked at other screenshots you would've noticed that it came to the same result at 1.7L, and hasn't updated since. 4L is a random starter size I entered just to show that the calculations stopped. Might be 1.8, or 2, or 5, or 555L, no difference.

Mine updates up to 4L at least, but that's with an assumed 96% viability. Yours looks like it's around 29% from the screenshots. This may be relevant?

 

[GQT]

Mine updates up to 4L at least, but that's with an assumed 96% viability. Yours looks like it's around 29% from the screenshots. This may be relevant?

It might be relevant - in such case it is a bug and has to be corrected... but logically it should not matter. Even there is one yeast cell still alive in the pack it can be propagated, and a starter of any size can be made - that would be just a matter of time and mess.
What's more, the calculator stops at 1.7L or 238-smth bln cells, which by any means is NOT enough to reach the ideal pitch rate.
(I would understand <however not accept> if the calculator stopped at reaching the proper number - which is 270+bln - but it gets stuck in midair).

 

[Gustatorian]

This^ Ive followed this thread with dumbfounded interest.

I use a 17" boil pot and a quite vigorous, probably 5th gear boil from the previously supplied video yet I'm less then you state for boil off by quite a bit at about 1.85 to 2 gallons per hour.

I have plenty of issues with beer smith as stated earlier but I have learned to put up with its idiosyncrasy's. Your mash efficiency is truly mind boggling though and something is just not right there. It has to be the crush IMHO.

I will get flamed for this as a heretic, but I have to set my BHE in BS to 90% for my numbers to come out right, and my volume inputs and outputs are pretty spot on. I'm working with Priceless-brewing via PM and using his BIAB calculator as well and its pretty much confirming those numbers. I personally double crush at my LHBS even though they tell me I don't need too nor probably like me too..Priceless thinks my water may be naturally perfect for mash efficiency as a possibility but 60% is horrid indeed no mater what water your using.

I will continue to follow this and I wish you nothing but the best with your system. I'm sure your very frustrated.

Click on image to compare your boil to mine.

[/URL][/IMG]

Glad this is keeping you interested ;-) I have dialed in my minerals/salts perfectly, always have more than 100 ppm of Ca, pH is always between 5.2-5.6 (calculated on EZwater and Bru'N water and confirmed 20 minutes into the mash with a Milwaukee M102). I've thought it could be the crush, but my LHBS (Austin Homebrew Supply) does not allow anyone to change the crush settings and although I've never had a stuck mash on the BrewEasy system, I've had the system warn me (sightglass reading on Mashtun drop excessively and drain from MT drain tube slows). I'm wondering if I could put the grain in a bag in the mash tun and stir it around more, preventing any kind of stuck mash, or maybe double-crush? I've never heard anyone have an issue with the crush setting at Austin Homebrew Supply, that's why I don't think it's a crush issue.

 

[Oginme]

Guys I couldn't find a better thread to post my Q although it's going to distract you a bit. Sorry for that!

I'm trying out the BS (nice abbreviation, btw) and probably I will buy and register it anyway but there are a few snags.

Like, I'm trying to enter starter values... Screenshots 1 to 5 show gradual increase of number of cells following the increase of starter size. Then, at 1.7L it just stops adjusting and re-calculating the cell number. It freezes at 238.2 bln and stays constant no matter how big a starter I make.

Has anyone bumped into this? Am I doing anything wrong?

Thank you!

You are not doing anything wrong. There is a physical limit to how many times you can increase the yeast population which can be limited either by the amount of wort and/or the seeding population of yeast. For a stationary starter with ample wort, the best growth rate you will probably see is about a 3x increase in yeast count. This growth rate can be improved by using a stir plate, which will effectively double the yeast count of a stationary starter. Looking at the screen shots, this is essentially what you are running into: a cap on yeast growth as determined by the starting yeast population.

 

[brewfun]

It is not that I need or no, it is that the program must calculate the cell number for whatever the starter I'm up to making.
Imagine a pocket calculator that would at some point stop working

Great. Snarky and uninformed.

No, it isn't like a pocket calculator that stops working (though they do have an upper number limit due to how many figures they display). It's more like confusing an All-You-Can-Eat buffet with I-Must-Eat-It-All dinner at your in-laws.

This isn't the fault of this yeast calculator. This is exactly how yeast works. Regardless of how large the starter is, there is a limit of replications for a given cell count before the yeast is ready to switch to fermentation. The changeover is determined by pH, which is why decanting off the starter and repitching into a new one starts the process over.

Generally, it's 3x and with constant aeration or a stir bar it's 6x.

You will find that this is exactly how the Mr. Malty calculator works, too.

If yeast continuously multiplied as they do pre fermentation, then you'd get damn little beer out of any batch.

 

[GQT]

Great. Snarky and uninformed

Same goes to you Sir.

Would you then care to tell me how I managed to propagate buckets of yeast from a single cell?
I might indeed miss the logic of this limit in BeerSmith but the BeerSmith then clearly misses the logic (and the very fact) of some people propagating yeast by steps or by dilution.
From a starter calculator I would not expect a set limit, anyway. If this "3x" is really a reason for the calculator coming to stupor, then at least there should be a note, like "you've reached a limit on a single step starter".
Or, better even, it should just continue calculation. People who make starters generally know a thing or two about how to do it.

 

[GQT]

For a stationary starter...

That's exactly what drives me mad, why a calculator instead of humbly being a tool turns into a judge... I might make step starter or propagate by dilution (normally I do the latter) - but now it appears to me that the calculator knows better!

 

[brewfun]

Same goes to you Sir.
Would you then care to tell me how I managed to propagate buckets of yeast from a single cell?

No. That's for you to explain. I have no idea where your buckets have been.

I do propagate from single cells, using a continuous feed, closed inoculation system. In no stage do the yeast go past 5x population without a recharge of nutrient (wort) and rise in pH.

I might indeed miss the logic of this limit in BeerSmith but the BeerSmith then clearly misses the logic (and the very fact) of some people propagating yeast by steps or by dilution.

Nope. In a recipe software program, the yeast propagated is for that batch. Previous starter steps are omitted, as you set the viable cell count in this last addition step.

"Propagation by dilution" IS THE STEPPING UP process, whereby the full slurry is introduced into a new medium at the rate of between 10 to 100 million cells per ml, with a corresponding gravity range of 7 to 12P. The closer one is to the last step, the higher the cell count and gravity should be.

People who make starters generally know a thing or two about how to do it.

Yes, we do.

What I'm reading from you is a dig in your heels set of assumptions without any facts or experience to back it up. Let me know when you want information instead of validation.

 

[GQT]

In a recipe software program, (...) Previous starter steps are omitted, as you set the viable cell count in this last addition step.

That's probably the only thing I would consider worth attention.
Yes now I see some logic.
All the rest I simply prefer not to discuss with you; I'm not used to your tone and manner and don't think I'd be interested in getting used to it.
Thanks nevertheless for pointing at the above quoted point, it does make sense.

 

[Stillraining]

Tone is mostly added by the reader...I felt you were biting my head off from the get go...you probably were not....just saying it goes both ways.
Brewfun's a pretty sharp pencil and a pretty decent guy from what I have gathered so far my short time here.

Heck we probably pretty much all are.

Carry on

 

[gspot]

I've seen a lot of bickering on HBT today, kids. Must be something in the water.

 

[Yeastieboy]

Nerds...

[emoji42][emoji99][emoji99][emoji99]

 

[GQT]

Heck we probably pretty much all are

No lasting bad feelings. This is internet, after all.

 

[Gustatorian]

If anyone hasn't been able to glance at post #18 by Onigme, I highly suggest doing so. It definitely helps with honing in your system for a more efficient and repeatable brew day.

That being said, I need a small amount of help (again) with the intricacies of BeerSmith.

I recently figured out a way to massively improve my efficiency with my BrewEasy system, clocking my current BrewHouse Efficiency in at 78%. This number was calculated via an online calculator based on grains, gravities, and wort volume, so I'm confident it's correct.

Using post #18 by Onigme and taking meticulous notes on my brewday, I was able to calculate and apply the grain absorption rate and boil off rate to my system. And in his last calculation on the post (Based on Pre-Boil Gravity and OG), the error was roughly 8.7% (still very high).

Below, I've attached the photos of the BeerSmith recipe I used to determine my new efficiency. All the numbers are exactly the numbers I hit on brew day (Pre-Boil Gravity, OG, Total Volume, Pre-Boil Volume)...however, the OG initially was calculated to be 1.067 by BeerSmith. I had to adjust the batch size (from 6.0 to 6.7 G) in order to get the actual OG. Although the actual OG is a reflection of my brew day, the batch size is not. I know this because I hit the 6 gallon mark on my FV when the pump could not flow anymore wort into the fermentor.

My question is this: Is that 0.7 gallons lost somewhere else in the system? I know there is about 16 ounces of beer lost in the system/hoses/pump, but certainly not 0.7 gallons. Could there be more volume lost to the BK trub that I'm missing in the equipment profile? Is it part of the 8.7% error? Am I overlooking or miscalculating something?

I'm happy to keep the BeerSmith software happy by putting "6.70 gallons" in the batch size, but I'd rather have an answer for the discrepancy .

 

[laredo7mm]

If you are having to fudge your finished volume to match your actual OG, then your brew house efficiency is not 78%. If you have your volumes for your system profile dialed in for what you are actually seeing on your brew day, who cares what the efficiency is? The main goal of brewing software is to be able to predict the outcome reliably. If the actual brew house efficiency you need to enter into brewsmith is 78% or 58% it doesn't matter. Taking an efficiency from one calculator and then using that number in a different calculator and then falsifying your volume to match your actual OG seems a bit contrived and incorrect.

Instead of changing the final volume, what would your brew house efficiency have to be in beersmith to match your actual OG and 6 gallons into the fermenter? Whatever that number is, I would use that as my brew house efficiency.

 

[Oginme]

If I am reading correctly, you had to increase your batch size up to 6.7 gal, even though you actually yielded 6 gal into the fermentor? Check the 'session' tab for the actual mash efficiency calculated by BeerSmith. Set the batch size back to 6.0 gallons and check it again. This is most probably a combination of still needing another brew to confirm the numbers in your system. Maybe if you posted a screen shot of the 'session' tab, I can figure out where the error is.

 

[Gustatorian]

If I am reading correctly, you had to increase your batch size up to 6.7 gal, even though you actually yielded 6 gal into the fermentor? Check the 'session' tab for the actual mash efficiency calculated by BeerSmith. Set the batch size back to 6.0 gallons and check it again. This is most probably a combination of still needing another brew to confirm the numbers in your system. Maybe if you posted a screen shot of the 'session' tab, I can figure out where the error is.

Here you go. I changed the measure post mash and measure pre boil gravity to values measured by me. Let me know if I can send you anything else. Thanks!

 

[Gustatorian]

If you are having to fudge your finished volume to match your actual OG, then your brew house efficiency is not 78%. If you have your volumes for your system profile dialed in for what you are actually seeing on your brew day, who cares what the efficiency is? The main goal of brewing software is to be able to predict the outcome reliably. If the actual brew house efficiency you need to enter into brewsmith is 78% or 58% it doesn't matter. Taking an efficiency from one calculator and then using that number in a different calculator and then falsifying your volume to match your actual OG seems a bit contrived and incorrect.

Instead of changing the final volume, what would your brew house efficiency have to be in beersmith to match your actual OG and 6 gallons into the fermenter? Whatever that number is, I would use that as my brew house efficiency.

I care because the efficiency allows me to predict the pre-boil gravity and OG. How is it contrived and convoluted when setting up any equipment on BeerSmith initially asks for the brewhouse efficiency based on previous brew days? I don't know what the BHE would be based on actual OG and 6 gallons into fermentor because the software doesn't allow me to manipulate those values without it changing another variable to reflect those manipulations.

 

[laredo7mm]

I care because the efficiency allows me to predict the pre-boil gravity and OG. How is it contrived and convoluted when setting up any equipment on BeerSmith initially asks for the brewhouse efficiency based on previous brew days? I don't know what the BHE would be based on actual OG and 6 gallons into fermentor because the software doesn't allow me to manipulate those values without it changing another variable to reflect those manipulations.

Sure you do. Your known volume into your fermenter from your last brew day is 6 gallons. Instead of fudging your fermenter volume to 6.7 to match your known OG, set your batch to 6 gallons and change your brewhouse efficiency until beersmith gives you the correct OG. Whether that number is 78% or 58%, who cares? You seem to be stuck on the 78% that you got from some different calculator. If you want consistent and predictable numbers from beersmith, that is what needs to be done....you make your beer, record your volumes and specific gravities, and go from there.

I haven't read this whole thread but you have been messing with this for almost a year. It isn't that difficult. If you don't like the way beersmith calculates things, find a different piece of software. From the image above it looks like you should be using 70% and not 78% but that I'll probably change once you enter the correct batch size.

 

[pricelessbrewing]

What laredo said. If you're OG was correct, and you ACCURATELY MEASURED 6 gallons when at room temp... then youre brewhouse efficiency was not 78%.

Note that every recipe will have a different brewhouse efficiency. Brew a big RIS and a small englsh mild and you'll get very different efficiencies, and beersmith doesn't care. It will not warn you or let you know that what you got on the 5% stout will be lower than what you will get on this 10% RIS that you're planning. Beersmith requires user input on brewhouse efficiency, it will not predict this for you. As far as I know, my mash calculator is the only thing that will do so even somewhat accurately.

 

[Gustatorian]

Sure you do. Your known volume into your fermenter from your last brew day is 6 gallons. Instead of fudging your fermenter volume to 6.7 to match your known OG, set your batch to 6 gallons and change your brewhouse efficiency until beersmith gives you the correct OG. Whether that number is 78% or 58%, who cares? You seem to be stuck on the 78% that you got from some different calculator. If you want consistent and predictable numbers from beersmith, that is what needs to be done....you make your beer, record your volumes and specific gravities, and go from there.

I haven't read this whole thread but you have been messing with this for almost a year. It isn't that difficult. If you don't like the way beersmith calculates things, find a different piece of software. From the image above it looks like you should be using 70% and not 78% but that I'll probably change once you enter the correct batch size.

When I change the BHE t0 70% and batch size to 6.0 G, yes, it gives me my target OG. But it then drops my pre-boil gravity from 1.044 to 1.039. My measured pre-boil gravity was 1.044. How do you amend that?

 

[laredo7mm]

When I change the BHE t0 70% and batch size to 6.0 G, yes, it gives me my target OG. But it then drops my pre-boil gravity from 1.044 to 1.039. My measured pre-boil gravity was 1.044. How do you amend that?

That I am not sure of. I don't think your volumes look correct. Looking at your equipment profile picture you have a pre-boil volume of 9.51 with a total of 3.33 gallons of boil off, and a 0.25 gallon loss to trub.

9.51 - 3.33 = 6.18 gallons. This is while hot so divide by 1.04 to get the total gallons after shrinkage which would be 5.94. Then you have to subtract the trub loss to get 5.69 in the fermenter.

I don't enter anything in for trub loss in my profiles. Maybe that is why my numbers work out better. I just make a bigger batch like you are doing. I put 6 gallons into the profile knowing I will have trub loss, but I only expect to get 5.5 into my fermenter, and then lose another half a gallon in the fermenter.

Try enabling the "Calculate boil vol automatically" option in the equipment profile and setting the trub loss to zero >> set the batch size to 6 gallons >> save the profile >> open the recipe >> and then reload the profile. Does that change anything and make the numbers look better?

Adding trub loss will increase your mash efficiency numbers. I added 5 gallons of trub loss to my profile and it drove the mash efficiency to 134% just to compensate for having the gravity the same after adding an extra five gallons of water. It doesn't lower your BHE on its own. My BHE and my mash efficiency are usually the same number. 75% for both.

 

[laredo7mm]

Another thing to look into is your boil off rate. If you had 9.51 gallons in your boil kettle that is 9.144 gallons when cold. 9.144 of 1.044 wort reduced down to six gallons cold should give you 1.067 OG. You mention that your OG was 1.060 which would be a total boil off of 2.44 gallons not 3.33 like your equipment profile shows. 3.33 - 2.44 is a difference of 0.89 gallons. That with whatever effect the 0.25 gallon of trub loss has my explain why you needed to add 0.70 to your batch size to get the numbers to work.

 

[Oginme]

See the red circled section from your session sheet. This is your actual BHE.

Next, as Loredo7mm has correctly pointed out, your boil off rate is off by a bit which explains the need to increase the ending batch size in order for the gravity numbers to fit.

You are on the right track in getting your profiles under control. It does take several brew sessions to get a 'best fit' equipment profile which will give you good repeatable results. I continually track my grain absorption and boil off rate to watch the effects of season, ambient temperature and any process changes that I may have inadvertently made. It is surprising how small changes, such as getting a new bag for biab or a new stove, can make a significant step change in these factors.

 

[bigdaddybrew]

When trying to dial in Brewsmith the most important idea is that when you are done brewing a batch some of the numbers are actual "fixed" measurements for this actual batch...you used X lbs grain, X gals water total, collected X gals preboil with a gravity of X, X amount of liquid left in the mash tun (dead space), X minutes of boil time, collected X gals wort (batch size), X amount left in the boil pot (loss to trub/chiller), an original gravity of X. Assuming your mearsurements are accurate plug these into Beersmith. It will calculate various numbers using these numbers. Now you use these calculated numbers as your targets and you can play with the "fixed" measured variables to see how changes affect the theoretical outcome of this beer if you were to brew it again. Changing the MEASURED variables will change the calculated values in a predictable way and changing the calculated values will change the MEASURABLE variables in predictable ways. Now play with the varous values until you understand how each value affects the others. For example more grain increases gravity if all the other values remain fixed, or more boil time will require more water to maintain the other variables etc. Now for your next actual batch you use everything you know about this real batch of beer and make adjustments. For example I ended up with 6 gallons of a lower than desired gravity wort, I wanted 5 gallons of a higher gravity wort. Use the calculated variables provided from the last actual batch of beer and use Beersmith to adjust the MEASURABLE variables until it predicts the results you want and try again. Each time you brew, your predictions will get closer and closer. It is important to maintain the same procedures or you add a variable that will affect the results. For example mashing with 1 qt/pound then sparging with more water compared to mashing with 2 qts/pound and then sparging with less water. Each procedural change effects the outcome and determines how well Beersmith will predict that outcome. I hope this helps your understanding. Good brewing!

P.S. A higher gravity wort will often have a lower efficiency so for a while brew beers with similar target gravities. This will help bring the predictions in line.

P.P.S. In the end the most important values are predicting the number of pounds of grain and volume of water needed to produce a predictable volume of wort at a predictable gravity. These four numbers are what we are looking for. I have found some of the numbers like pre-boil gravity may not match perfectly. Don't sweat these numbers being off unless the big four are off.

 

[Gustatorian]

That I am not sure of. I don't think your volumes look correct. Looking at your equipment profile picture you have a pre-boil volume of 9.51 with a total of 3.33 gallons of boil off, and a 0.25 gallon loss to trub.

9.51 - 3.33 = 6.18 gallons. This is while hot so divide by 1.04 to get the total gallons after shrinkage which would be 5.94. Then you have to subtract the trub loss to get 5.69 in the fermenter.

I don't enter anything in for trub loss in my profiles. Maybe that is why my numbers work out better. I just make a bigger batch like you are doing. I put 6 gallons into the profile knowing I will have trub loss, but I only expect to get 5.5 into my fermenter, and then lose another half a gallon in the fermenter.

Try enabling the "Calculate boil vol automatically" option in the equipment profile and setting the trub loss to zero >> set the batch size to 6 gallons >> save the profile >> open the recipe >> and then reload the profile. Does that change anything and make the numbers look better?

Adding trub loss will increase your mash efficiency numbers. I added 5 gallons of trub loss to my profile and it drove the mash efficiency to 134% just to compensate for having the gravity the same after adding an extra five gallons of water. It doesn't lower your BHE on its own. My BHE and my mash efficiency are usually the same number. 75% for both.

This has been helpful, almost there! I zeroed the trub loss, set batch size to 6 gallons and after changing my BHE to 70%, it gave me the correct FG. Now my BHE and ME are the same (70%). However, there are some numbers that need tweaking. The one that irks me the most is that the estimated pre-boil gravity is 1.038 (I measure 1.043/44). Not sure how I can amend that. The estimated pre-boil volume is now 9.58 (Pre-boil volume is actually 9.87 – below is a explanation of an error I made about this number earlier), and total volume added is 11.41 (I carefully added 11.34 G, but 11.41 is damn near close). I could live with the total volume, somewhat ok with the pre-boil volume (especially since they're estimated from a sight glass on the Blichmann vessels), but that pre-boil gravity is way too far off.

ERROR I MADE EARLIER: 9.95 Gallons is the value of what I read on the sight glass of the Blichmann system, not the true volume within the boil kettle because there is a boil coil immersion heater within that takes up 10 ounces of space. Realistically, the pre-boil volume was 9.87G. From this new value, I recalculated a .9886 grain absorption rate, 3.25 G boil off in 90 minutes (2.1666 GPH boil off rate), and now an 8.2% error. Redoing the math you did above, but with new numbers, it looks like batch size is close to 6.11G after subtracting the 0.25 trub loss. 6.11G is probably damn near close to the batch I brewed, considering I left about .13 G (16 oz) of wort in the hoses during transfer to the fermentor.

So close to figuring this out! How can I figure out that pre-boil gravity value?

 

[Gustatorian]

Another thing to look into is your boil off rate. If you had 9.51 gallons in your boil kettle that is 9.144 gallons when cold. 9.144 of 1.044 wort reduced down to six gallons cold should give you 1.067 OG. You mention that your OG was 1.060 which would be a total boil off of 2.44 gallons not 3.33 like your equipment profile shows. 3.33 - 2.44 is a difference of 0.89 gallons. That with whatever effect the 0.25 gallon of trub loss has my explain why you needed to add 0.70 to your batch size to get the numbers to work.

I made a mistake. It wasn't 9.51 G. I read the gauge as 9.95G, when it really is 9.87G after the 10 ounce removal of the boil coil immersion heater. 9.51 shouldn't have ever been used in the first place– sorry about that.

What math are you using to figure out the 1.067 OG with the previous values mentioned?

 

[Gustatorian]

See the red circled section from your session sheet. This is your actual BHE.

Next, as Loredo7mm has correctly pointed out, your boil off rate is off by a bit which explains the need to increase the ending batch size in order for the gravity numbers to fit.

You are on the right track in getting your profiles under control. It does take several brew sessions to get a 'best fit' equipment profile which will give you good repeatable results. I continually track my grain absorption and boil off rate to watch the effects of season, ambient temperature and any process changes that I may have inadvertently made. It is surprising how small changes, such as getting a new bag for biab or a new stove, can make a significant step change in these factors.

What red circled section? Did you mean to attach something?

I'll take not to continue to track my grain absorption and boil off rate to monitor the changes. I brew inside with a door open, so the ambient temp is usually about the same. I assume my numbers won't fluctuate as much as brewers who brew outdoors.

 

[Gustatorian]

When trying to dial in Brewsmith the most important idea is that when you are done brewing a batch some of the numbers are actual "fixed" measurements for this actual batch...you used X lbs grain, X gals water total, collected X gals preboil with a gravity of X, X amount of liquid left in the mash tun (dead space), X minutes of boil time, collected X gals wort (batch size), X amount left in the boil pot (loss to trub/chiller), an original gravity of X. Assuming your mearsurements are accurate plug these into Beersmith. It will calculate various numbers using these numbers. Now you use these calculated numbers as your targets and you can play with the "fixed" measured variables to see how changes affect the theoretical outcome of this beer if you were to brew it again. Changing the MEASURED variables will change the calculated values in a predictable way and changing the calculated values will change the MEASURABLE variables in predictable ways. Now play with the varous values until you understand how each value affects the others. For example more grain increases gravity if all the other values remain fixed, or more boil time will require more water to maintain the other variables etc. Now for your next actual batch you use everything you know about this real batch of beer and make adjustments. For example I ended up with 6 gallons of a lower than desired gravity wort, I wanted 5 gallons of a higher gravity wort. Use the calculated variables provided from the last actual batch of beer and use Beersmith to adjust the MEASURABLE variables until it predicts the results you want and try again. Each time you brew, your predictions will get closer and closer. It is important to maintain the same procedures or you add a variable that will affect the results. For example mashing with 1 qt/pound then sparging with more water compared to mashing with 2 qts/pound and then sparging with less water. Each procedural change effects the outcome and determines how well Beersmith will predict that outcome. I hope this helps your understanding. Good brewing!

P.S. A higher gravity wort will often have a lower efficiency so for a while brew beers with similar target gravities. This will help bring the predictions in line.

P.P.S. In the end the most important values are predicting the number of pounds of grain and volume of water needed to produce a predictable volume of wort at a predictable gravity. These four numbers are what we are looking for. I have found some of the numbers like pre-boil gravity may not match perfectly. Don't sweat these numbers being off unless the big four are off.

Agree with your PPS. I feel most comfortable when I know the amount of water and grain I need to get the batch size and OG desired. My little halfway checkpoint is making sure the pre-boil volume and gravity are where they need to be too! When they're off, I start to worry about the batch size and OG.