Analysis of Carakale’s

Lautering Practices on
Differential Pressure and
Mash Efficiency

DISCUSSION DOCUMENT

Carakale Fermentation Engineers

Discussion of Carakale’s Historical
Lautering Practices & Roadmap Forward

Overview
This paper will first explore the historical data for insight into current lautering practices and the impact
on brew time and mash efficiency. Various changes to our current lautering practices will then be
discussed with the goal of minimizing the differential pressure above and below the false bottom. It is
proposed that the roadmap presented will reduce the amount of undesirable particles making it into the
kettle, reduce or eliminate the number of stuck mashes, and improve brew house efficiency.

Exploration of Historical Lautering Data (June 2019-Present)

In the table below, every bit of valid data for Blonde Ale was extracted from the Brew Logs going back to
last June (valid means nothing but good numbers for all readings).
17.06.201918.06.201903.07.201904.07.201910.07.201911.07.201931.07.201910.08.201922.08.201928.08.201915.09.201916.09.2019 30 Oct 31 Oct 6Nov 7Nov 11-13-19 14Nov 27Nov 17 Feb 2020 3 Mar 2020 4 Mar 2020 10 Mar 2020
Lauter Blonde AleBlonde AleBlonde AleBlonde AleBlonde AleBlonde Ale Blonde Blonde Pale Ale Blonde Blonde Blonde Blonde Blonde Blonde blonde Blonde Blonde Blonde Blonde Blonde Blonde Blonde
0 1.084 1.082 1.086 1.084 1.08 1.083 1.081 1.081 1.086 1.074 1.08 1.087 1.09 1.083 1.097 1.086 1.083 1.085 1.083 1.084 1.084 1.089 1.087
1000 1.083 1.081 1.086 1.084 1.078 1.079 1.08 1.08 1.087 1.073 1.074 1.077 1.086 1.088 1.093 1.085 1.078 1.077 1.081 1.078 1.084 1.091 1.083
1500 1.075 1.077 1.082 1.084 1.074 1.076 1.076 1.078 1.08 1.063 1.06 1.073 1.075 1.081 1.089 1.077 1.068 1.075 1.079 1.062 1.072 1.06 1.087
2000 1.06 1.067 1.072 1.071 1.065 1.067 1.075 1.071 1.072 1.054 1.046 1.066 1.059 1.057 1.065 1.065 1.058 1.055 1.061 1.048 1.062 1.032 1.078
2500 1.048 1.054 1.055 1.061 1.058 1.055 1.05 1.055 1.065 1.044 1.04 1.059 1.053 1.04 1.05 1.055 1.055 1.042 1.047 1.043 1.051 1.045 1.051
3000 1.037 1.045 1.045 1.047 1.045 1.045 1.037 1.041 1.056 1.032 1.035 1.05 1.043 1.035 1.04 1.047 1.047 1.036 1.04 1.039 1.046 1.043 1.042
3500 1.031 1.037 1.035 1.036 1.037 1.037 1.029 1.033 1.049 1.025 1.029 1.04 1.035 1.028 1.028 1.034 1.043 1.035 1.031 1.036 1.035 1.042 1.033
4000 1.025 1.028 1.027 1.024 1.03 1.027 1.023 1.025 1.04 1.024 1.02 1.03 1.031 1.025 1.026 1.025 1.035 1.028 1.028 1.034 1.018 1.034 1.024
4500 1.02 1.021 1.023 1.016 1.023 1.02 1.018 1.018 1.032 1.021 1.02 1.02 1.025 1.029 1.024 1.02 1.022 1.023 1.021 1.029 1.015 1.034 1.02
5000 1.016 1.017 1.018 1.011 1.022 1.017 1.018 1.014 1.024 1.018 1.02 1.016 1.016 1.027 1.02 1.016 1.017 1.018 1.015 1.024 1.014 1.023 1.016
5500 1.013 1.012 1.013 1.009 1.012 1.012 1.017 1.013 1.02 1.013 1.019 1.01 1.015 1.022 1.017 1.013 1.013 1.014 1.012 1.02 1.017 1.017 1.01
6000 1.011 1.01 1.01 1.006 1.008 1.009 1.01 1.009 1.015 1.011 1.017 1.007 1.01 1.02 1.013 1.01 1.013 1.015 1.011 1.015 1.011 1.013 1.008
6500 1.01 1.008 1.008 1.005 1.007 1.008 1.01 1.008 1.014 1.011 1.018 1.006 1.008 1.02 1.01 1.014 1.008 1.02 1.014 1.013 1.01 1.016 1.007
7000 1.009 1.007 1.006 1.004 1.005 1.007 1.01 1.01 1.012 1.014 1.02 1.005 1.009 1.015 1.008 1.015 1.006 1.02 1.007 1.016 1.007 1.015 1.013

Next, the data was reviewed for anomalies by computing the average, standard deviation, minimum
value and maximum value. For the data set only one specific gravity data point was erroneously entered
as 1.860. This was corrected to 1.086. While variation can be seen in the data below, it is for reasons
related to practice and not anomalous data. In cases where the minimum value seems relatively small
compared to the average, it will later be shown to be related to issues of differential pressure and a
stuck mash.
Litres Average Standard Deviation Minimum Maximum
0 1.084 0.004 1.074 1.097
1000 1.082 0.005 1.073 1.093
1500 1.075 0.008 1.060 1.089
2000 1.062 0.010 1.032 1.078
2500 1.051 0.007 1.040 1.065
3000 1.042 0.006 1.032 1.056
3500 1.035 0.005 1.025 1.049
4000 1.027 0.005 1.018 1.040
4500 1.022 0.005 1.015 1.034
5000 1.018 0.004 1.011 1.027
5500 1.014 0.004 1.009 1.022
6000 1.011 0.003 1.006 1.020
6500 1.011 0.004 1.005 1.020
7000 1.010 0.005 1.004 1.020
In the graph below, the average of the specific gravity across all Blondes was plotted against Litres of
wort runoff. Even with the “smoothing” effect inherent in calculating an average, there is a noticeable
breakpoint in the graph at 2000 litres.

To get some insight into what was happening at 2000 litres, the drop in average gravity at each volume
of wort collected was calculated from the previous reading. For example, as shown in the table below,
the 2000 litre reading tended to drop .013 gravity points from the 1500 liter reading.
Litres Average Gravity Delta from Previous Gravity Reading
0 1.084
1000 1.082 0.002
1500 1.075 0.007
2000 1.062 0.013
2500 1.051 0.011
3000 1.042 0.009
3500 1.035 0.008
4000 1.027 0.007
4500 1.022 0.005
5000 1.018 0.004
5500 1.014 0.004
6000 1.011 0.003
6500 1.011 0.000
7000 1.010 0.001
Sidebar Note: The lowest average wort gravity we collect is 1.010. According to sources such John
Palmer, lautering should stop when the gravity of the runoff falls below 1.008. In this regard, our
lautering practices are on target.

Next, insight into what is happening during our lautering process will be gained by evaluating the drop
from the previous gravity reading against the volume of wort collected.
The graph below is a real eye opener! After the initial collection of wort, the average gravity rapidly
drops, reaching a maximum differential of 1.013. This suggests that the grain bed has already become
over compacted due to too fast an initial runoff, in particular during vorlaufing. This will then negatively
impact the sparging process as flow through the grain bed has already been impeded. This problem,
and corrective actions, will be discussed after exploring how to evaluate the current grain crush.

Are We Crushing the Crush?

A good crush is essential for getting the best mash efficiency and extraction. There is a trade-off
between particle size and extraction efficiency when mashing crushed grain. Fine particles are more
readily converted by the enzymes and yield a better extraction. However, if all the grain were finely
ground you would end up with porridge which could not be lautered. Coarse particles allow for good
fluid flow and lautering but are not converted as well by the enzymes. A good crush has a range of
particle sizes that allows for a compromise between extraction and lautering. After trying a range of mill
gap settings ranging from 0.065mm to 0.75mm, we settled on 0.70mm as a gap that seemed to produce
a reasonable mix of husk, coarse particles, fine particles, and flour. How can we evaluate if our visual
inspection of the crush is in fact optimal?

Mechanical separation of a sample of crushed grain has been suggested by Rock Bottom Brewing at the
Craft Brewers Conference and Expo. A 100 gram sample of
crushed grain should be placed in a stack of 8”dia x 2” deep
testing sieves No 10, 14, 18, 30, 60, 100 and pan. These are
available from McMaster-Carr for $44 per sieve and $25 for the
pan and lid.
 After shaking the stacked containers side-to-side for 15 seconds, tapping,
and repeating the process for a total of 3 minutes, the grist will separate
into the individual pans. After weighing each fraction and calculating
percentage by weight, Rock Bottom found that having 70% of the
material being retained in the coarse grind #14 sieve produced mashes
with the highest efficiency. Purchasing a single #14 sieve would enable
us to migrate from visual inspection of the crush to a more accurate and repeatable way to adjust the
mill gap.

Calculating our Mash Tun Loading, Wort Velocity, and Lautering Rate
This section will evaluate the production capabilities of our mash tun from a raw engineering
perspective. I.e., how should our equipment be performing given its physical dimensions against our
most popular recipe? The characteristics to be evaluated are:
• Mash Depth – For a given recipe, how far above the false bottom does the combined grain mass
and water stand? What is the mathematical relationship to mash tun loading, and how does
this impact lautering velocity and rate of flow?
• Mash Tun Loading - What is the ratio of dry grist weight to surface area (kg/m2).
• Wort Velocity - What is velocity of the wort through the mash bed (mm/minute)?
• Lautering Rate – What is the rate of flow (litres/minute) of wort that can be expected given
industrial performance benchmarks for commercial mash tuns?

Mash Depth. Using the radius of the mash tun provided by Yazeed (138 cm), the mash depth for Blonde
Ale is calculated by first determining the surface area of the mash tun:
Mash Tun Radius (cm) Mash Tun Area (cm2) Mash Tun Area (m2)
138 59,798 5.98

Next, the total volume (litres) for a single batch of Blonde Ale is calculated by noting the volume of
water used and converting the total grain weight to litres of volume occupied1:
Blonde Recipe Weight (kg) Volume (Litres)
Grain Weight 1250 807
Water Weight (above false bottom) 3100 3100
Total Mash Tun Content 4350 3907

Next, the height (cm) of one litre of water poured on top of the false bottom is calculated by dividing the
volume of one litre of water by the surface area of the mash tun2:
Volume of 1 Litre of Water (cm3) Surface Area of False Bottom (cm2) Height of 1 Litre of Water (cm)
1000 59798 0.016724743

1
Calculation of volume of litres for grain weight was extracted from BeerSmith 3.0
2
Yes, one day we were very mean to Abu Omar and had him weld closed all of the holes in the mash tun.
Finally, by knowing the height that one litre of water would stand above the false bottom, we may
calculate the total height of the grain bed by multiplying this value by the total mash tun volume.
Further in this document, the relationship between grain bed height, velocity of wort through the grain
bed, and resultant rate of lautering flow will be calculated. Peaking ahead: Maintaining the same rate
of flow through the grain bed across different recipes with different grain bed heights can result in a
stuck mash (therefore, different flow rates for initial runoff should be independently determined for a
given recipe).
Height of 1 Litre of Water (cm) Total Mash Tun Volume (litres) Height of Blonde Recipe (cm)
0.016724743 3907 65

Mash Tun Loading. For a given recipe, mash tun loading is calculated by dividing the dry grain weight by
the surface area of the false bottom. The table below contains this calculation for the Blonde Ale recipe.
Blonde Recipe Grain Weight (kg) Mash Tun Area (m2) Mash Tun Load (kg/m2)
1250 5.98 209
It will later be shown that lauter times can be scaled to commercial benchmarks using a given recipe’s
mash tun loading factor as a basis for comparison.

Lautering Rate. The lautering rate, rate of flow, or runoff rate into the grant is a by-product of the
velocity of the wort through the grain bed. And velocity is related to force. A mash is a slurry of solid
particles in liquid. When you open the lauter tap, the faster the wort velocity, the higher the pressure -
that is, the harder it pushes those particles into the false bottom and filter bed. Lautering the wort too
quickly, whether by gravity or a pump, will over-compact the grain bed causing a stuck mash and/or
channeling.

As noted, the wort velocity describes the rate that wort flows through the grain bed. Since the flow of
wort through the grain bed creates a downward pressure, the goal ideally would be to equalize the
pressure above and below the false bottom [or zero differential pressure). Since Carakale’s mash tun is
not at this time setup to measure differential pressures, this topic will be visited in the next section and
two alternative benchmarks for wort velocity will be discussed instead.

Benchmark #1 - Dave Miller of Blackstone Brewing. Dave notes the following:

At Blackstone, our lightest recipe loads the lauter tun at 29 lb./sq. ft.. For this brew, we set the initial
wort velocity to .12 in/minute. (flow rate 7 bbl./hr.) We have found that at this rate, differential
pressure is zero. The wort clarifies quite acceptably with eight minutes' recirculation. Kettle fill begins at
this rate, then after one barrel we begin raising the flow rate, rather sharply at first, then gradually
tapering off. Sparge commences when there is an inch of wort above the grain bed. As differential
pressure rises we lower the rakes a bit at a time to control it. By the end of the sparge the flow rate is 36
bbl/hr. and the rakes have been dropped from 200 mm to 125 or 100 mm. Differential Pressure on a
good run remains below 100 mm (4 in.)

Using his initial wort velocity of .12 inches/minute, we first translate this benchmark into mm/minute:
Wort Velocity (in/min) Wort Velocity (mm/min)
0.12 3

The initial lautering rate (the amount of wort collected in the grant) may then be estimated by dividing
the wort velocity by the height of 1 litre of water in our mash tun.
Height of 1 Litre of Water (mm) For a wort velocity of 3.0 mm/minute, Wort Collected (litres/min) is
0.167247429 18

Using Blackstone Brewing’s approach to lautering, we may also estimate our final lautering rate by
converting Blackstone Brewing’s final lautering rate of 36 Bbl/hr to what our wort velocity would need
to be.
Blackstone Lautering Carakale Final Carakale Final Wort Velocity
Final Lautering Lautering Rate Rate Lautering Rate (based on Height of 1 Litre of Water in our System)
Rate (gal/hr) (litres/hr) (litres/min) (mm/min)
36 1116 4224 70 12

Benchmark #2 - Pegasus Lautering System Benchmark. Scouring Probrewer for other benchmarks for
wort velocity, and hence lautering rate, yielded the following.
Probrewer user “jwalts” noted:
A typical lauter, in my experience, is around 90 minutes. If the
associated false bottom load is 155 kg/m2 (I just found a
brochure on the Pegasus that says it operates at 1.3x the load
of a classic lauter tun), the lauter rate [wort velocity, sic.]
would be 90/155 = 0.581 min/(kg/m2).

Note that the increased mash tun load of 1.3x for a Pegasus Lauter tun is due to the unique design of
the vessel in which the inner area is removed and mash spread out in a wider and more shallow,
doughnut-shaped ring. Let us assume then that the wort velocity (expressed as a function of time) of
0.581 min per kg/m2 derived from Pegasus literature is an industry benchmark. This wort velocity can
then by multiplied by Carakale’s mash tun loading for various recipies to determine typical lautering
times.
Dry Grain Weight Mash Tun Area Mash Tun Load Wort Velocity Estimated Time to Lauter
Recipe (kg) (m2) (kg/m2) (min per kg/m2) (min)
Blonde Ale 1324 5.98 209 0.581 121
Pale Ale 1632 5.98 273 0.581 159
Light Weight Ale 800 5.98 134 0.581 78

If the Pegasus benchmark is to be believed, note the projected lautering times for Blonde and Pale ales.
Even if the estimated time is imprecise, it does show that a longer time can be expected for recipes with
increased mash tun loads. For illustrative purposes, the fictitious recipe of “Light Weight Ale” (about
3.2% ABV) has been added to demonstrate the impact reduced mash tun loading has on estimated
lautering time. We should re-evaluate our lautering times to reflect mash tun loading and the need to
avoid compressing the grain bed, especially at the early stages of lautering.
For the Future, Controlling Lautering Rate through Differential Pressure
A grain bed is not like a gravel bed. It is compressible. This is why
wort velocity during the first few minutes of runoff is so crucial. If
the wort is pulled too quickly from under the mash, the risk is
compacting the mash, reducing or minimizing the space between
grains for the wort to run through and ultimately, a stuck mash. As
noted by Dave Miller of Blackstone Brewing “In most lauter tuns,
the ‘degree’ of grain bed compression cannot be measured directly,
but must be inferred from the bed's resistance to flow. That
resistance in turn is indicated by differential pressure.”

Dave further states:

“Differential Pressure is the difference between the pressure beneath the false bottom, as measured by a
gauge of some sort, and what the pressure would be, if the grain bed offered no restriction to the flow of
wort. The rule of thumb in commercial breweries is that one to two inches is optimal, four is fine, and six
is okay. When you get to eight it's past time to drop the rakes and start backing down the flow rate. As a
matter of fact, at Blackstone I start lowering the rakes when the DP hits 3 inches. At 10 we're talking
remedial measures -- stop the runoff, do a deep cut with the rakes, maybe underlet to lift the bed.”

In the figure above, assume that Tube (6) had a reading of 6 inches of wort and Tube (7) had a reading of
9 inches of wort. Also assume that the outlet of Tube (6) sits four inches above the outlet for Tube (7).
Differential Pressure (DP) would then be:
• DP = (Tube (6) Level in inches) + (Outlet Distance between Tube (6) and Tube (7)) -
(Tube (7) Level in inches)
• DP = (6) + (4) – (9) = 1
For differential pressure to be zero, Tube (6) would have to read five inches. Converting Blackstone’s
recommendations into metric yields the following table.
Differential Differential
Pressure Pressure
(inches) (cm) Recommendation
1 - 2.9 2.54 - 7.4 All is well
3 7.6 Start lowering rakes
10 25.4 Stop the runoff, do a deep cut with the rakes, maybe underlet to lift the bed
With all due deference to the calculations in the previous sections, the real time feedback provided by
two simple fluid filled tubes has a certain appeal that is hard to ignore.
Roadmap Forward
In the discussion below, the Blonde Ale recipe will be used for benchmark parameters of wort velocity,
total lauter time, etc. Please refer to earlier in this document to see how these calculations were
determined.

Grain Crush
Current Practice – Visual inspection of the crush is used to evaluate if current mill gap settings are
optimal for both extract potential and ease of lautering.
Future Practice – Mechanical separation of a 100 gm sample of crushed grain through a #14 Sieve is the
way to go. 70% of the crushed grain content should remain on the screen after three minutes of shaking
and tapping.

Mash In
Current Practice – Mash is stirred constantly during mash in at a relative speed of 12.1 and continued for
a period of five minutes.
Future Practice – Rock Bottom Brewing noted at the Craft Brewer’s Annual Conference that excessive
stirring of the mash results in tighter mash beds - minimal stirring, just enough to ensure consistency,
resulted in looser beds. One purpose of stirring of the mash is to break up any dough balls that may
have formed upon introduction of dry grain to the strike water. However, Carakale’s hydrator largely
serves this function by pre-wetting the grist and avoiding clumping. Mash will therefore, be stirred for a
two minutes after the completion of mash in unless dough balls can be observed or additional heat
through the steam jacket must be applied to achieve a proper and uniform mash temp. Proposed speed
of mash rake is one revolution per minute. At completion of the mash stir, the mash rake should be
raised to the top most height to be positioned for subsequent steps.

Mash Tun Configuration and Equipment

Future Practice
• Mash Tun Entrance – Remove singular ladder under manway hatch. This will allow mash rake to
extend as high as possible during lautering (see below for discussion). Adjust mash rake height
sensors to allow rakes to raise as high as possible.
• Differential Pressure Manometers – Install manometer outlet, stop cock, and sight glass tubing
at a level below false bottom to measure pressure under the false bottom. New manometer
should be installed next to current mash temp sight glass. Create a simple laminated card
delineated in centimeters that would be attached with an adjustable clamp to the newly
installed manometer. After mash in, this laminated card would be raised to indicate zero
pressure between below and above the mash tun.
Mash In Process through Vorlauf Time Frame
Current Practice
The timeline below represents our current standard practice. It is a reasonable assumption that
whatever starch conversion and enzymatic activity on sugars that has not taken place during mash in
has completed by the end of the rest and certainly by the end of vorlauf.
Mash In
Stir (5) Rest (10) Vorlauf (30)
Stir Continuous

Future Practice
The timeline below represents future practice. Note that the overall timeline is identical to the current
practice timeline. As discussed earlier, stir time and stir speed has been reduced to ensure a looser bed.
The rest phase has been extended to thirty five minutes although an iodine test may show that this time
can be reduced. Vorlauf time has also been greatly reduced to limit undue compaction of the grain bed.
Vorlauf speed should approximate initial lautering speed with the goal to only transfer the volume of
weak wort from under the false bottom to on top of the grain bed. During current practice a constant
flow rate was used throughout vorlauf through the end of lautering. By attempting to recirculate and
filter the relatively viscous first wort through the grain bed, we were likely well into the danger zone for
differential pressure and unduly compressing the grain bed.
Mash In Stir Vorlauf
Rest (35)
Stir Continuous (2) (8)

Lautering Process
The changes discussed below leverage the analysis presented in previous sections. While the
mathematical calculations of wort velocity, lautering rate, and lautering time for a given recipe are a
great benchmark to start with, our art of brewing would be greatly advanced by dialing in time frames
and practice with insight gained from differential pressure.
• Differential pressure manometers and laminated gauge should be set to indicate initial
differential pressure.
• Initial wort velocity should be set to 3 mm/min with an associated lauter flow rate of 18
litres/min.
• Based on previous calculation, total lautering time is estimated to be 121 minutes. The initial
wort velocity will be used to runoff the higher gravity and viscous first wort at a slower rate to
reduce the rise of differential pressure through the grain bed. As gravity and viscosity decline,
wort velocity and lautering flow rate will be increased. As noted in the table and chart below, it
is anticipated that first wort runoff can take as long as forty five minutes.
• Sparging will commence once wort on top of the grain bed reaches a depth of 3 cm. Lautering
rakes should be at the highest position and start rotating once sparging commences at a
rotational speed of approximately 1 rotation every 4 minutes. The goal is stop channels from
forming and open up different pathways through the grain bed. Sparge water speed should be
set to match lautering flow rate and maintain a level of 3 cm of sparge water above the grain
bed.
• Once first wort has been run off (approximately 3000 litres for Blonde Ale), wort velocity will
slowly be increased throughout the process to a final wort velocity of 12 mm/min with an
associated lautering rate of 70 litres/min. Once the wort velocity has been increased, the
lautering rakes should progressively lowered into the mash bed while maintaining a rotational
speed of one rotation every 4 minutes. The lautering rakes should temporarily be raised if the
turbidity of the wort increases unduly.
• As noted earlier, differential pressure should be monitored throughout the lautering process
and corrective action taken as appropriate.