View Full Version : Batch Sparging (commercially)

09-10-2007, 09:46 PM
I know Kirin Ichiban is produced this way but is anyone else doing it? If so how much do you need to increase the grain bill compared to fly sparging. There is a lot of home-brew batch sparging related info out there on the internet. I just wonder if it translates to commercial sized batches.


09-20-2007, 10:37 AM
There are many commercial companies that batch sparge. In my opinion batch sparging gives greater control over the process and it is usually determined by equation before begining the process. Methodology can vary and usually is more time consuming than fly sparging. In my opinion though, its worth batch sparging.

09-20-2007, 11:25 AM
It may be more useful in breweries that pump the mash- ie. the breweries that have a separate mash tun from Lauter tun. These mashes don't lauter as easily as single step infusions.
It is less likely that it was chosen as a way to make better beer, more like a way to lauter faster. But that is just my opinion.

09-20-2007, 11:29 AM
I've always thought these looked like a cool idea.Mash Filter (http://www.meura.com/html/mash_filtration.html)

09-20-2007, 11:37 AM
I too have seen these things David, though I have not seen one action. It does look interesting and I would love to have the time to operate it. At any rate batch sparging can be accomplished by one or two batches depending upon methdology and your specific kettle gravity needed.

09-20-2007, 12:08 PM
Mash filters-the web page lists the benefits as high throughput and efficiency, esp. with high gravity worts. I didn't see anything about improved product quality being a reason for using one..

09-20-2007, 12:42 PM
What comes to mind imediately is the mash filters usage in large scale breweries. As it states- "high throughput and efficiency, esp. with high gravity worts"- which several ideas come to mind- "high throughput"- large scale batches (speed in process), "efficiency" justifying output vs. cost issues, "esp. with high gravity worts" ( In order to blend off high gravity worts to working strength beer, speed in process, again). Moreover, what does such a unit cost? I can not imagine that many regionals could afford this unit to justify its cost effectiveness for their business.

09-20-2007, 07:59 PM
If I'm not mistaken, you'd see these mash filters in action at Coors' brewing plant in Golden (world's largest brewery), and I'm sure I've seen this at Rodenbach in Belgium. They are fairly commonplace now. It's not new-age anymore, but out of the reach of a brewpub.

dick murton
09-21-2007, 11:43 AM
The point about continuous sparging is that the mash bed should not be seriously disturbed, so that the gravity drops progressively through the grain bed, and as it reaches a few degrees SG at the bottom, i.e the outlet, there is sufficient in the wort kettle for what you want. With batch sparging and mixing the mash up, you will always waste extract, and are more likely to get cloudy wort than with continuous sparging and gentle raking.

Re mash filters - big brewers only, not micros. The capital investment for hammer mills and automation would be prohibitive, but to be able to get another couple of percent extract out of large volumes can pay for the costs. Mind you, I don't think they are much more expensive, if any than a highly automated lauter tun.

09-21-2007, 11:49 AM
re Mash filter...
they can also produce >100% brewhouse yield, because the method is more efficient than the congress mash. amazing.

09-21-2007, 12:05 PM

I agree with you on the batch sparging statement that you will always waste some extract, however I have seen a few breweries rake, lauter and sparge to increase efficiency with minimal waste. If you intend to batch sparge and know what your kettle gravity is expected to be then you can adjust the grain bill accordingly. This has potential cost savings.

10-09-2007, 06:40 PM
I tried it once now I am hooked. You do "waste" some extract. It's quicker and easier than traditional sparging (on our very basic equipment).