Filtering beer

The forum for discussing all kinds of brewing paraphernalia.
Post Reply
TheSumOfAllBeers
Lost in an Alcoholic Haze
Posts: 624
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 11:21 am

Re: Filtering beer

Post by TheSumOfAllBeers » Wed Aug 16, 2017 4:15 pm

Sadfield wrote:My question though, is a mash paddle whirlpool going to replicate the speed and duration of a brewery whirlpool in separating fine hot break particles?
No it won't replicate the process of a continuous 20/30 or 60 min whirlpool.

But it will deposit your hot break in a neat cone at the bottom of your kettle that you can rack clear wort off of.

In practice my no chill cubes, when left alone for a few days to settle, will deposit about 0.5 to 1cm of fine trub at the bottom that I just leave behind when I pitch to FV.

User avatar
Jocky
Even further under the Table
Posts: 2212
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 6:50 pm
Location: Epsom, Surrey, UK

Re: Filtering beer

Post by Jocky » Wed Aug 16, 2017 4:22 pm

Sadfield wrote:
Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:44 am
So if you immersion chill, being too greedy is a false economy. Yet, if you counterflow chill taking the cold break into the fv has little impact?

I do wonder how much hot break gets taken too, with most cfc setups. How efficient a whirlpool is created (if at all) and how much people bother skimming.

Sent from my E5823 using Tapatalk
It's a false economy to be greedy and pull in hot break, hops and cold break into the fermenter. Just cold break is probably not an issue, and commercial breweries don't seem to have an issue with it.

Filtering pellets is just a massive ballache that I've not had success with. I've advocated for hop bags for pellets on here before, and would certainly use them again instead of having to push pellets through a plate chiller, but I get better flavour without using the bags.
Ingredients: Water, Barley, Hops, Yeast, Seaweed, Blood, Sweat, The swim bladder of a sturgeon, My enemies tears, Scenes of mild peril, An otter's handbag and Riboflavin.

User avatar
Sadfield
Lost in an Alcoholic Haze
Posts: 707
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2014 3:16 pm

Re: Filtering beer

Post by Sadfield » Wed Aug 16, 2017 5:10 pm

Jocky wrote:
Wed Aug 16, 2017 4:22 pm
Sadfield wrote:
Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:44 am
So if you immersion chill, being too greedy is a false economy. Yet, if you counterflow chill taking the cold break into the fv has little impact?

I do wonder how much hot break gets taken too, with most cfc setups. How efficient a whirlpool is created (if at all) and how much people bother skimming.

Sent from my E5823 using Tapatalk
It's a false economy to be greedy and pull in hot break, hops and cold break into the fermenter. Just cold break is probably not an issue, and commercial breweries don't seem to have an issue with it.

Filtering pellets is just a massive ballache that I've not had success with. I've advocated for hop bags for pellets on here before, and would certainly use them again instead of having to push pellets through a plate chiller, but I get better flavour without using the bags.
I have a large stainless hop spider, but prior to that used a BIAB bag that fitted the kettle and didn't restrict movement of hops. I now prefer pellets, which is handy as that is the way the industry appears to be heading.

As long as the hot break forms flocs and the assertion that paddle whirlpooling is sufficient, then not pulling hot break and hops into the fermenter does in practical terms make each cooling method acceptable if managed properly.

"No chill" is an odd label, as there are numerous ways to cool a sealed container with a small amount of thought. And are probably an improvemnt on the coolships and vertical coolers of bygone days.

McMullan
Drunk as a Skunk
Posts: 874
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2015 7:48 pm
Location: Here

Re: Filtering beer

Post by McMullan » Wed Aug 16, 2017 5:54 pm

I've not attempted 'no chill'. My main concern would be unwanted microbes establishing themselves. Boiling wort is no guarantee for sterilisation and low temperatures simply delay population growth. Pitching yeast as soon as modifies the wort to reduce such risks. I imagine a method of quick chilling is easier than trying to maintain sanitary conditions over a number of unprotected days?

chris2012
Under the Table
Posts: 1111
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2012 10:13 pm

Re: Filtering beer

Post by chris2012 » Wed Aug 16, 2017 6:41 pm

McMullan - http://www.pencilandspoon.com/2012/02/d ... ilter.html the comments in that from the brewdog guys are quite interesting.

"Sterile filtration is 0.45 microns and as stated above", and I was using 0.1 micron.

What I would be kind of interested in, is tasting beers filtered with: 1, 0.45 and 0.1 micron, just for curiosity.

McMullan
Drunk as a Skunk
Posts: 874
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2015 7:48 pm
Location: Here

Re: Filtering beer

Post by McMullan » Wed Aug 16, 2017 8:05 pm

0.2 microns guarantees sterility. Even at 1 micron, any microbial population should be reduced to something approaching 'sterile'. The idea is not to actually filter beer sterile, but reduce any microbes to 'acceptable levels'. A level set by a brewery's own duty of care standards, based on their resources. A serious issue for a big brand. It may or may not be combined with pasteurisation. I've pushed beer though 1 micron filters. If the beer is filtrable, it has minimum impact on flavour with a slight improvement in clarity, relative to what was filtered. If the beer isn't bright, it can strip out flavour, relative to what was filtered. It's a waste of effort, for home-brewed beer, IMO. An exercise in diminishing returns.

User avatar
Jocky
Even further under the Table
Posts: 2212
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 6:50 pm
Location: Epsom, Surrey, UK

Re: Filtering beer

Post by Jocky » Wed Aug 16, 2017 11:40 pm

Even if it is bright you can be stripping out flavour when using a 1 micron filter, let alone sub-micron filtering. Visibly clear beer can still contain north of 1m cells of yeast per ml, and they will carry flavour too.

My other concern with filtering is the effectiveness beyond the first pint. Like trying to strain fruit through a sieve, the material held back will quickly clog a filter, with finer filters clogging quicker due to the greater amount held back.
Ingredients: Water, Barley, Hops, Yeast, Seaweed, Blood, Sweat, The swim bladder of a sturgeon, My enemies tears, Scenes of mild peril, An otter's handbag and Riboflavin.

chris2012
Under the Table
Posts: 1111
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2012 10:13 pm

Re: Filtering beer

Post by chris2012 » Sun May 05, 2019 11:01 am

Thanks a lot to everyone for helping here, to improve my clarity.

I think the brew I just made is the first since 2017. And it's a lot clearer :)

Image

I altered many things of my process:

* protofloc
* whirlpool
* salts
* I think the new element is a bit more powerful if I recall correctly (3kW).
* now have a float in my corny keg too to extract the beer from the top

I then fined with gelatin at around 0C.

User avatar
Goosey
Piss Artist
Posts: 148
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 9:29 am
Location: SW France
Contact:

Re: Filtering beer

Post by Goosey » Mon May 06, 2019 1:02 pm

I've never had a cloudy beer. I use Irish Moss 15 mins before flame out. No chill before fermenting, just get it down to around 20 degrees and then after initial fermentation, transfer to another fermentor for the last few days, leaving most of the trub behind.

Post Reply