Parti-Gyle (Big beer/Little beer)

Help & advice
,
1

Hi guys.

I’ve been looking but can’t seem to find any guidance on ‘parti-gyle’ brewing wherein the runnings from a ‘big beer’ are used to create a ‘small beer’. In our example the last runnings from a 300L batch of 1.098 stout, which came out at 1.066, were being used to create 400L of a 1.040 porter.

I can’t create 2x recipes in this example as the ingredients would be deducted twice.

All I can think of is splitting the recipe proportinally based on literage yield i.e if 100kg of Maris was used in total, the two recipes would be split with a 3/7 and 4/7 respective split (42.86 + 57.14). Bit more complex in our scenario as 12 malts were used but it would be doable!

Just messaging in case I’m missing a feature or obvious fix.

Thanks for your help.

Laurie

2

Hi Laurie,
Thanks for the question!

Breww has the ability to split a batch up into two batches, where you can then assign a different beer and recipe to the new batch. The ingredient cost of the transferred beer is brought through to the new batch, where you can then add more ingredients to the new batch (with their costs just applying to the new batch). Does this sound like a solution for your situation? If I’m understanding your situation correctly, on the ‘big beer’ recipe, you’d only need what went in to the big beer, including the runnings. Then anything only used only on the small beer could be added separately to the new after separating the batches.

If this sounds like it might work to you (you can always roughly test out this process and then undo all your actions), a split batch is made by transferring an amount of beer from the big beer batch when it is in a vessel. You’ll be prompted to confirm if this is to make a new batch. When on the new batch, you can then click Actions > Edit batch details, to change the beer and recipe. Ingredients won’t be automatically added to the new batch from the recipe, so you’d need to add these manually from the Ingredients tab on the batch.

I hope this helps, let me know if you’ve got any questions.

Matt

3

Old thread, but…
Just splitting the batches doesn’t work just how we’d want it. Consider:
I do one mash, first runnings to big beer. Wet my mash again, take it off to a second beer. Although I’ve not done this before on this kit, so am guessing,
but I’m not sure my ingredients cost should be split 50:50. I’m expecting rather more than half my extract in the first beer. Even though I’m expecting them both be the same volume.
Any ideas anyone?

4

I was thinking about this the other day, and I landed on something like this, (but I haven’t tested it yet), so maybe this would work?

I think you would have to do a bit of retroactive recording, and you’d need three recipes -

  1. The Partigyle (this would just contain a Mash Stage)
  2. Runnings/Beer 1/P1(sparge, kettle, post stages.etc)
  3. Runnings/Beer 2/P2 (as Beer 1)

So, Brew your Partigyle recipe in breww, to give your mash stage costings - we know how much extract we have from this for both beers.
E.g.
P1 yields 500L @ 1.060
P2 yields 500L @ 1.035

(500x60)=30,000
(500x35)=17,500
30,000+17,500=47,500 (total extract from our mash)

We can then estimate the split:
P1 = 30,000/47,500 = 63.16%
Therefore P2 = 36.84%

I’d make this a calculated field in the Partigyle Mash recipe.

Then it gets a bit sticky, and I haven’t finished my thoughts, but I see some options, but none of them are perfect. I think the best solution might be:

Assuming you are creating two batches of even volume, transfer 500L to a holding Vessel (afaik you can’t split a brew house transfer), then Transfer out to your actual vessels, at the % split, then add volume as appropriate (reflecting the additional liquor in the brewhouse process). Edit recipes on the new batches to Beer 1/Beer 2 and complete actual sparge/kettle records, and specific batch ingredients (kettle hops, yeast etc).

E.g.
P1 transfer (500x63.16%)= 315.8L
Add Volume 184.2L

P2 transfer (500x36.84%)= 184.2L
.etc

Let me know your thoughts and any refinements we could make. I appreciate it’s a little fiddly and not exactly, but it should apportion the costs better…

5

Yeah, 3 recipes. Good one, Steve. Thank you. That works I think. I have a dummy vessel for doing split transfers out of Brewing. So yes, I could transfer (rather less than the final combined volume) out of the Partigyle Mash batch into my dummy.

Come to think of it, do we need the add volume steps?

With the Mash Batch in Dummy, I run my first of the mashless recipe batches… transfer that to FV1 (with some appropriate volume covering what we’d have added).

Similarly for the second of the mashless recipes into FV2

Then transfer from Dummy the appropriate volume split reflecting the extract split, into FV1 & 2

Would that work?

… oh thinking again, we probably do need the volume additions, don’t we? You’re right. So the two mashless “batches” would be smaller than the volume we’d be wanting to add ( i.e. a nominal volume to make sure all their pre-transfer costs carry through), then we’d “top up” FV 1 & 2 for our final volumes.

6

Exactly my thinking.

7

OK, I’ve got my two mashless recipes set up for 1L volume… just to carry the costs. We’re doing it tomorrow :crossed_fingers:

Ahh, make them derived in vessel… that’ll do it.