Hop Steeping - a debate

[alikocho]

Well I've been doing the 80c steep for ages, and I've been continually disappointed in my hop flavour and aroma, considering the sheer amount of hops I've been chucking in.

Today I'm brewing a recipe quite similar to one I did a couple of months ago. I'm going to chill quickly and immediately while whirlpooling as best I can with a big spoon. Hopefully this will help dissolve all the hop oils before they scarper. The proof will be in the pint.

Keep us posted on the difference.

[simple one]

And while you dig those out, I'm going to call up some pro-brewers on the West Coast and see what they say...

Somerset, Wales or Cumbria?

[Dr. Dextrin]

Sorry, I should have been clearer. Could you point me at some references that aren't a Wikimedia article on distillation. Like some actual published science or brewing material. I'm not trying to be picky, I actually do want to read this stuff (I'm an academic, and so this is what I do).

And while you dig those out, I'm going to call up some pro-brewers on the West Coast and see what they say...

I think you'll find John Dalton published his work. Journal of The Royal Society, I wouldn't be surprised, although some time ago now. I'll leave you to find the reference, since apparently that's what you do.

[alikocho]

Sorry, I should have been clearer. Could you point me at some references that aren't a Wikimedia article on distillation. Like some actual published science or brewing material. I'm not trying to be picky, I actually do want to read this stuff (I'm an academic, and so this is what I do).

And while you dig those out, I'm going to call up some pro-brewers on the West Coast and see what they say...

I think you'll find John Dalton published his work. Journal of The Royal Society, I wouldn't be surprised, although some time ago now. I'll leave you to find the reference, since apparently that's what you do.

That's helpful. Thankyou. I could pull Dalton's papers from the archives. I was hoping for some more depth and recent papers that related to the brewing science. Could you point me to something that is a little more recent than 1801?

[Spud395]

I'll leave you to find the reference, since apparently that's what you do.

Made my night

[alikocho]

And while you dig those out, I'm going to call up some pro-brewers on the West Coast and see what they say...

Somerset, Wales or Cumbria?

That was actually funny.

I called brewers last night at Stone, Ballast Point, Red Hook, Alaskan, New Belgium, Brooklyn, Sixpoint, Captain Lawrence, Sierra Nevada, Elysian, and Deschutes. All of them gave me the same answer on their process, which is heat off, hops in, cool as fast as is humanly possible to avoid off flavours, infection and to prevent the loss of hop aroma. Only Brooklyn were concerned about the continued isomerization of alpha acids post boil, but even then not particularly so.

All of these brewers cool via a heat exchanger (i.e. not immersion). The brewer at Brooklyn pointed out that as one is only cooling part of the wort and there is still hot wort in the kettle for some time, the reality is a that there is a diminishing return of hop aroma as the wort is chilled in this way while there may be some AA utilization ongoing. He pointed out that there becomes an average of what goes on, but that on balance cooling as quickly as possible (the first runnings from the kettle are cold within seconds) locks in more aroma and flavour than there is bitterness produced in his experience. He also made the point that if increased bitterness is a concern post-boil, then all hops (not just the flameout addition) need to be taken into account.

[kebabman]

if increased bitterness is a concern post-boil, then all hops (not just the flameout addition) need to be taken into account.

I am wondering about post boil bitterness and how to calculate it in this thread, any thoughts would be welcomed
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=51918

[critch]

.

I called brewers last night at Stone, Ballast Point, Red Hook, Alaskan, New Belgium, Brooklyn, Sixpoint, Captain Lawrence, Sierra Nevada, Elysian, and Deschutes. All of them gave me the same answer on their process, which is heat off, hops in, cool as fast as is humanly possible to avoid off flavours, infection and to prevent the loss of hop aroma. Only Brooklyn were concerned about the continued isomerization of alpha acids post boil, but even then not particularly so.

All of these brewers cool via a heat exchanger (i.e. not immersion). The brewer at Brooklyn pointed out that as one is only cooling part of the wort and there is still hot wort in the kettle for some time, the reality is a that there is a diminishing return of hop aroma as the wort is chilled in this way while there may be some AA utilization ongoing. He pointed out that there becomes an average of what goes on, but that on balance cooling as quickly as possible (the first runnings from the kettle are cold within seconds) locks in more aroma and flavour than there is bitterness produced in his experience. He also made the point that if increased bitterness is a concern post-boil, then all hops (not just the flameout addition) need to be taken into account.

bear in mind that a lot (if not all) of these breweries use pellet hops and a whirlpool system, the oils are extracted quicker than using whole flower and steeping,(agitation of the wort in the whirlpool could be a factor?) as i wrote before one of the reasons for a steep in homebrewing is to mimic the length of time worts is in a copper in a comercial set up, with the best wort coolers available, its going to be over an hour in the copper(in admittedly smaller amounts as you say).ime utilisation is definately a factor with lots of steep hops, one of my beers has .28g/l of 14%aa hops @90 and nowt else till post boil then 4g/l of the same when independantly analysed it came out at 27 ibu, which was the same as a 14 minute addition, but with massive hop flavour and aroma, much more than when i tried to replicate the results by adding the hops at 14....

[kebabman]

.

ime utilisation is definately a factor with lots of steep hops, one of my beers has .28g/l of 14%aa hops @90 and nowt else till post boil then 4g/l of the same when independantly analysed it came out at 27 ibu, which was the same as a 14 minute addition, but with massive hop flavour and aroma, much more than when i tried to replicate the results by adding the hops at 14....

[/quote]

Sorry to be a bit dim but Critch are you saying that just the 4g/l gave the 27 IBU?

[alikocho]

as i wrote before one of the reasons for a steep in homebrewing is to mimic the length of time worts is in a copper in a comercial set up,

Which assumes that homebrewers are trying to mimic the results of a commercial setup, rather than simply make the best beer they can on their system.

And I guess the issue of what happens in a commercial setup against what happens at home flies both ways - how long does it take for five gallons of wort to pass through a commercial heat exchanger with a much bigger capacity than an average homebrew setup? It takes me 10 minutes to empty a five gallon batch through mine, but I'll wager that a commercial heat exchanger has a higher flow rate. My point is that the first five gallons when run through a heat exchanger (rather than immersion chilled) will likely not have sat in the kettle for very long in a large commercial setup, while much of the volume may be there for far longer. While the commercial scale to homebrew scale point isn't irrelevant in the debate, it's fraught with a huge number of variable factors.

[critch]

im probably looking at a flow of 15-20l/min through my exchanger, utilising mains water to chill(if i had a chilled cold liqour tank it would undoubtably be quicker) , id love to be able to do it quicker for the simple reason my day would be shorter! chill my beer in ten mins? not possible in any comercial set up ive ever seen, my point is that proportanately that 5 gall is only a tiny proportion of the overall amount so the majority of the wort sits there for an hour or more, also as i stated before a big difference about a lot of those brewers you quote is that theyre using pellets and a whirlpool, the agitation of the wort and the smaller hop particles(and more ruptured glands) is massively important to resultant hop aroma/ flavour as well as the pelletisation process itself changing hop charecteristics, as the majority of us lot are using whole flower and no whirlpool results will be different

[Dr. Dextrin]

Sorry, I should have been clearer. Could you point me at some references that aren't a Wikimedia article on distillation. Like some actual published science or brewing material. I'm not trying to be picky, I actually do want to read this stuff (I'm an academic, and so this is what I do).

And while you dig those out, I'm going to call up some pro-brewers on the West Coast and see what they say...

I think you'll find John Dalton published his work. Journal of The Royal Society, I wouldn't be surprised, although some time ago now. I'll leave you to find the reference, since apparently that's what you do.

That's helpful. Thankyou. I could pull Dalton's papers from the archives. I was hoping for some more depth and recent papers that related to the brewing science. Could you point me to something that is a little more recent than 1801?

I don't think you'll find much on Dalton's Law and fractionation in modern scientific publications. It may have been a big thing in the 1800s but it's now just a basic tool - schoolboy stuff, not a research area. You might find a standard undergraduate text on physical chemistry would cover it. No idea about the brewing science, though.

[critch]

Sorry to be a bit dim but Critch are you saying that just the 4g/l gave the 27 IBU?

yes the steep hops gave the majority of the ibus as there was only 500g @ 90 which would have given a whopping 10ibus in 1782 litres

[Befuddler]

It seems to me that the major factor in getting a solid aroma is making sure that the hop oils get into solution quickly. Once they're dissolved, they're likely to stay there and either partially isomerize as they wait to be cooled (as in critch's case), or stay almost entirely in their fragrant form as they get rapidly pumped through a chiller (as in the fancy american brewer's cases). Either way, it seems that what we're missing on a homebrew scale is the efficient dissolution of the hop oils. There must be something going on in big commercial kettles that we're failing to replicate in our little 5 gallon pots. Be it currents in the liquid or something to do with the big kettles being closed units with small chimneys rather than open top pots. I don't know, and I'm not going to attempt to speculate on the science. What I am going to do is make every effort from now on to make sure those oils end up in the beer as quickly as possible.

Yesterday I tried something new, I chucked a mass amount of flameout hops in, then went at them with a stick blender for a few seconds to try and juice all the, er, juice out. I chilled as quickly as possible, while thrashing with a spoon until my arms ascended to valhalla. This turned the wort to mud, so upon reaching pitching temperature I sealed the boiler and let it settle for an hour. There was none of the usual hop oil slick sitting on top of my wort, so I'm taking that as a good sign. I will report back my findings.

[alikocho]

im probably looking at a flow of 15-20l/min through my exchanger, utilising mains water to chill(if i had a chilled cold liqour tank it would undoubtably be quicker) , id love to be able to do it quicker for the simple reason my day would be shorter! chill my beer in ten mins? not possible in any comercial set up ive ever seen, my point is that proportanately that 5 gall is only a tiny proportion of the overall amount so the majority of the wort sits there for an hour or more, also as i stated before a big difference about a lot of those brewers you quote is that theyre using pellets and a whirlpool, the agitation of the wort and the smaller hop particles(and more ruptured glands) is massively important to resultant hop aroma/ flavour as well as the pelletisation process itself changing hop charecteristics, as the majority of us lot are using whole flower and no whirlpool results will be different

Again, you make the assumption that homebrewers are trying to replicate commercial practices (and possibly commercially available beers). And you make a lot of assumptions about what people use and what they do (although you may well be right). While what you say is the case for your commercial system may be accurate, can you really be sure how that translates into a homebrew setup? And into a finished homebrewer's beer?

My point is that while the relationship of commercial to homebrew is not irrelevant, the comparisons are tricky as the setups are different. The same applies from brewery to brewery (regardless of scale), as systems differ. And so do brewers.