Bob Sandage and Phil Farrell AHA Conference 2015

Does the Type of Fermenter Affect Your Homebrew?

› Terrence Sullivan and Kimberly Bacigalupo

› Sierra Nevada Brewing in Chico, CA

Many Thanks to Our Friends

› Paul Chlup, Katherine Witrick & Troy Montrone.

› Sweetwater Brewing in Atlanta, GA

Many Thanks to Our Friends

Katherine Witrick and Troy Montrone.

› Daniel Howell Master Judge

› Indeed Brewing Minneapolis, MN

Many Thanks to Our Friends

› And of Course Bob, Neal, & Gavin

› The Wrecking Bar Atlanta, GA

Many Thanks to Our Friends

› Vinny

› Willy

Many Thanks to Man’s Best Friend

Wag More…….Bark Less

› It Only Took: – 17 Beer Drinkers

– A Sitting Governor

– 1000s of Inquiries

– And a Rubber Chicken

› Resumes due 12/31/15

› Feb 2016 Wynkoop Brewing

› Details Soon www.wynkoop.com

A Contest So Good It Will Never Die

› Where Did I Come Up With The Idea?

› How to Design an Experiment

› How to Limit Variables

› What Were the Results?

› What Do They Mean?

› What Should You Do As a Homebrewer?

› Follow On Experiments

TODAY

› Grand Rapids 2014 AHA Convention

› Drew Beechum & Denny Cohn

› Brewing Experiments at Home Presentation

› Mention of the Nathan Fermenter and 1927

› Commercial Breweries Have Research – Volume and Temperature Control

– Diameter and Cone Angle

– Column Height

› I Asked Myself What About Homebrew-Sized Vessels?

Inspiration

› Developed in 1927 by Leopold Nathan

› Patented in 1931

› Skeptically Received by Brewers

› Bad Timing – Prohibition – Great Depression – World War II – Brewery Consolidation – Tradition over Science

Look Familiar?????

Nathan Fermenter

Step One Find A Suitable Brewery

› Built 1901

› German Immigrant Engineer

› Home

› Then Antique Shop

› Bob Sandage – Homebrewer

– Engineer

– Likes Difficult Projects

The Wrecking Bar Before

› Loved My Graffiti in Basement

The Wrecking Bar Before

› Special Events Venue

› Pub & Restaurant

› Brewery & Beer Garden

The Wrecking Bar Today

› Rated World Class – Beer Advocate & Rate Beer

– 1 of Only 12 in the World

› 4th Anniversary June 19, 2015

The Wrecking Bar Today

How Homebrewers See Brewpub Owners

How They See Themselves

› Breaking Bob Kӧlsch (Always Been The Name)

› Brewed Regularly for Several Years

› Lots of Institutional Experience

› Recipe Improved as Necessary

› Great Representative of the Style

› Unexpected Fermentation Issues Should Stick Out

› No Post Fermentation Processing (Filtration, Dry Hopping)

› Wanted to Compare Apples to Apples

Experiment Design: The Beer

› Breaking Bob Kӧlsch Recipe

› 62.5% Heidelberg (not Heisenberg!) Malt

› 37.5% Cologne Malt

› 18.5 IBUs from Magnum for 60 minutes

› 2.5 IBUs from Tettnang for 20 minutes

› WLP029 Kӧlsch yeast

› Water profile matched closely to Köln Germany.

Experiment Design: The Beer

What to Call the Small Batches?

› Wrecking Bar Brew Pub

› Wort Goes Straight to Unitank

› Small Vessel Wort Drawn After Yeast Pitch

› Cool Room for Small Vessels With Temperature Control

› All Transfers Done Within Hours of Each Other

› Time On Yeast As Identical As Humanly Possible

› Bottling, Tasting Trials & Contest On-Site from Draft

Experiment Design: The Brewery

Al

Al

› Transfers Kept to a Minimum

› Duplicates of Each Fermenter For “Murphy-Proofing”

› Everything Mimics Handling of Commercial Portion of Batch

› Fining With Gelatin Only Post Fermentation Task

› 6 Common Homebrew Vessels/Lock Combinations Used – Plastic Bucket (Poppet Lock)

– Carboy (Both Poppet Lock & Blow-Off Tube)

– Cornelius Keg (Blow-Off Tube)

– 12.7 Gallon SS Conical Unitank (Both Poppet Lock & Blow-Off Tube)

Experiment Design: The Process

› All Small Batches Kegged at Same Time

› All Beer Bottled at Same Time

› Bottles Hand Carried to Sweetwater for Testing

› Bottles Overnight Shipped to Sierra Nevada – Minimal Time In Transit

– Cold Packs and Insulated Shipping Container

– Single Container to Save Cost

Experiment Design: The Process (cont)

› Similar to the Observer Effect

› How Do We Observe Without Affecting The Beer?

› Accepted Premise Bottled Versions Would Be Slightly Different

Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle

› Blind Triangle Testing – Subjects Were Mix of:

› BJCP

› Beer Industry

› Pub Patrons

– 3 Samples in Opaque Cups

– 2 are the Same

– Only 1 Sample is Different

– Much More Powerful than A/B Testing › Twice the reliability with half the samples

› Much easier to determine if there is discrimination between samples

– More Breaking Bob Available to Test Against

Human Trials

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Percent Correct

Bucket Carboy Pop Carboy Tube Corny Keg Conical Pop Conical Tube Commercial Unitank

Blind Trial Discrimination

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Percent Correct

Bucket Carboy Pop Carboy Tube Corny Keg Conical Pop Conical Tube

Blind Trial Breaking Bob

› Blind Triangle Testing Worked

› The Beers Were “Different” – But Only Slightly

– Many Tasters Couldn’t Tell

› Minimize Waste – Breaking Bob versus Small Fermenters

– Use Smaller Pitchers › Uptick in Discrimination Due to Temperature

– Opaque Cups Critical › Forces Discrimination to Aroma, Flavor & Mouthfeel

› Small Batch Clarity Issues

Lessons Learned

› BJCP Flight 8 Beers – 6 Homebrew Variations

– Breaking Bob Kӧlsch

– Reissdorf Kӧlsch

– Checklist Scoresheets

› GABF Medal/BJCP Mini-BOS – 8 Samples in Numbered Cups

– All Present at Same Time

– Pick 1st, 2nd, 3rd and HM

Human Trials

› BJCP Judges – Master and Grand Master

– 3 National Judges

– 6 Certified

– 14 Total

› Other Qualifications – 4 with Pro Brewing Experience

– 7 Media

– 6 With Industry Experience

– 18 Total Judges/9 Teams

Human Trials

› Scores – Highest 45 – Lowest 26 – Highest Variance (Top/Bottom) 15 – Lowest Variance 7 – 5 Pts Total Average Difference (1-8)

› Analysis – Non-BJCP had 2 Highest Variances – Average Variance was 10 – There WAS a Difference – But Only Slight

Results

› First Round – Breaking Bob 6th by Average Score

– 2nd by 1st, 2nd, 3rd Points

– Score Winner Carboy Tube Bob

– Point Winner Conical Pop Bob

– Reissdorf 2nd by Score 6th by Points

› Second Round – Conical Tube Bob 1st 3 of 9 Times

– Bob Beat Reissdorf 6 of 9 Times

– Breaking Bob Was 3rd

– Bucket Bob Had Lowest Finish

– But It Did Win Once

Results

– rth level

› Fifth level

Lab Results

› Breaking Bob “Standard” – ABV 4.79% – SG 1.007 – 4.48 SRM – IBU 25.85 – pH 4.39 – Haze 156

› Schraderbrau – SG was 1 or 2 Gravity Points Higher

› Except for Conicals

– Gravity Tracked With Alcohol – pH All Normal – No Micro Contamination (Yeah) – One Sample Haze/Color (My Bad)

Lab Results

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Free Diacetyl Precurser Total Diacetyl

5 Gallon 11 Gallon Conical 30 BBL Unitank

Diacetyl Levels (ppb)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Total Diacetyl (ppb)

Bucket Carboy Pop Carboy Tube Corny Keg Conical Pop Conical Tube Commercial Unitank

Total Diacetyl (ppb)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Total Pentanedione (ppm)

Bucket Carboy Pop Carboy Tube Corny Keg Conical Pop Conical Tube Commercial Unitank

Total Pentanedione (ppm)

› Biggest Difference – Flat Bottom vs Cone – 5 Gallon vs Larger Batches (The Cone)

› Slight Difference – Flat Bottom vs Hemispherical – Poppet vs Blow-off Tube

› Mitigation Strategy Homebrew – Transfer to Secondary – Higher Pitching Rate? – Agitation?

› Think Stir Plate

Conclusions

› Single Ale Yeast Strain – English Ale Styles?

– Belgian Ale Styles?

– What About Lagers?

› Standard Gravity – High Gravity?

– Low Gravity?

› Geometry 5 vs 11 Gal – Repeat w/SS Conical Fermenters

– 7, 14, 27 & Commercial 30 bbl

– Answers Once and For All Geometry vs Size Question (For That Yeast)

Caveats & Future Experiments

Questions ? ? ?

The End