Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The majority of brewers utilise six roller mills, mash tuns and lauter tuns as processing equipment
for malted barley in the brewhouse. This paper describes the operation and objectives of this
equipment and discusses the brewers raw material needs in order to optimise the process for cost
efficiency and quality.
Milling
In practical terms, the milling operation is designed to reduce the malt to particle sizes suitable for
rapid extraction and enzymic digestion, maximum extract yield and throughput. However,
maximum extract yield is achieved with a fine grind while maximum throughput is achieved with
a coarse grind, thus the brewer needs to find a balance.
The objectives of milling are to:
1. Split the husk longitudinally, exposing and separating the endosperm, without tearing the hulls
2. Crush the endosperm allowing complete wetting and therefore rapid extraction and enzymic
digestion.
3. Minimise the quantity of fine flour produced.
Therefore the ideal grist for wort filtration in a lauter tun would contain:
1. No intact kernels
2. The majority of husks split end to end with no endosperm attached
3. The endosperm reduced to a uniform small particle size, called grits
4. A minimum of fine flour.
Figure 1. Six roll mill schematic F, flour; G, grits; H, husks; F.G, fine grits (Adapted from
Briggs et al. 1981)
When used in combination with lauter tuns, the majority of brewers use six roller dry mills, as
shown in Figure 1. A fluted feed roller aligns the grain so they are presented in a lengthwise
manner to the first pair of reduction rollers. The grain is split longitudinally and kept reasonably
intact. The mixture is then separated through vibrating screens, with fine flour falling through to
the grist case and small grits being screened to the third pair of rollers. Hard endosperms are
separated from the husk in the second pair of rollers, along with coarse grits. The mixture is again
separated through vibrating screens, with flour and husks falling to the grist case and remaining
grits being delivered to the third pair of rollers.
For good lauter tun performance Briggs et al suggest that the grist should contain 15% husks, 23%
coarse grits, 30% fine grits and 32% flour, while Kunze suggests that the grist should consist of
18% husk, 8% coarse grits, 56% fine grits and 18% flour. In fact, the optimum grist size
distribution is dependent on a brewerys specific requirements for extract yield and throughput, the
modification of the malt and the loading on the lauter tun.
Mashing
The objective of mashing is to convert the malt into a fermentable extract suitable for yeast growth
and beer production, in a controlled and predictable manner. The majority of Australian brewers
use single temperature infusion mashing, where the grist is mixed with water at 65 - 70C. At this
temperature amylolytic conversion of starch to fermentable sugars and dextrins takes place as well
as the enzymic and physical solubilisation of protein to give soluble polypeptides, peptides and
assimilable amino acids. To control this complex range of biochemical reactions the brewer uses
the simple control techniques of time, temperature and pH.
As the grist falls into the mashing vessel (mash tun) it is intimately mixed with water in a vessel,
known as a Foremasher. This assures instantaneous and complete wetting of the grist and prevents
starch from balling. The mash tun is a cylindrical dished bottom vessel with large slow rotating
agitator. The mash must be treated gently as any shear during agitation or transfer will damage the
husks, causing wort filtration difficulties. However a mash that is stirred too slowly can result in
loss of extract and problems with heat transfer causing local hot spots.
Wort Recovery
Wort recovery or wort filtration is the process of separating the soluble material (wort) from the
insoluble material (spent grain). The three objectives of wort recovery are:
1. To maximise extract yield.
2. To produce clear or non turbid quality wort.
3. To minimise wort filtration time, commonly called run off time.
Clear wort and maximum extract efficiency can be obtained by slow run offs however, considering
that wort separation is often the rate determining process, this will be at the expense of brewhouse
throughput. Therefore, as with milling, the brewer has to find a balance that will suit their specific
requirements.
The most commonly used equipment for wort filtration is the lauter tun, Figure 2. The lauter tun is
a cylindrical vessel of large diameter and comparatively shallow depth. Suspended approximately
10 cm from the true bottom is a false bottom of slotted stainless steel plates. These plates allow the
wort to flow through, but retain the grain husks. Inside the lauter tun is a raking machine, this can
be raised, lowered and rotated. Connected to the main shaft are radial arms that support the blades
or rakes. While a brew is being run off the radial arms are rotated and the blades slice through and
slightly lift the bed. This assists in preventing compaction, which can result in a slow or stalled run
off and also provides access for the sparge water, thus increasing extract efficiency.
while longer stand times can result in damage to the husks due to shear and subsequent problems
with wort filtration.
The protein profile of the wort determines the foam quality and to some extent the shelf life of the
final beer it also has to be suitable for yeast growth. While there have been reports on some
specific proteins that affect foam quality (Evans et al., 2000) and beer stability, such as protein Z4,
LTP1 and hordein derived polypeptides respectively, these are not routinely analysed, so the
brewer relies on a soluble and total nitrogen specification that will provide enough protein for
foam quality and yeast nutrition, while not adversely affecting beer stability.
Impact of malt quality on cost efficiency
Obviously, the available hot water extract of the malt has the greatest impact on cost. As
mentioned previously cost efficient beer production requires a balance between extract yield and
throughput. When using dry mills, which have a tendency to damage the grain, in combination
with lauter tuns, which need the husk to be intact, consistency of grain size (grain plumpness) has
a large impact on extract yield and throughput. During the milling process variable grain size can
result in the following:
1. Small grains may not be effectively crushed. Wetting of large grain particles or grain with the
husk still intact is slow, and often incomplete. Therefore the access of enzymes to starch is
restricted. This leads to lower extract yield and higher extract cost.
2. Large grains tend to be crushed too severely. This causes the grain to shatter resulting in too
much fine flour and shredded or torn husks. Fine flour can ball in the mash leaving unconverted
starch, which can cause irreversible carbohydrate hazes in the beer. Fine flour also blocks the
lauter tun resulting in slow run offs and further problems during diatomaceous earth filtration.
Torn husks are not effective in forming a filtration bed for wort separation and so also result in
slower run offs. Inefficient filtration will also result in dirty wort, with an increase in
polyphenols, which contribute to a harsh palate in the beer and increase the potential of the beer to
form polyphenol protein hazes.
For grain size which follows a normal distribution, a greater standard deviation will result in a
greater proportion of grain either being to small or too large, with the resulting problems
mentioned above. For example, normal distributions with standard deviations of 1 and 1.5 will
result in 5% and 19.4% of grain falling outside 1.96 standard deviations from the mean
respectively, Figure 3. Screening alleviates problems with small grain however, it does not provide
a solution for malt batches with a large grain size distribution.
diatomaceous earth filtration, resulting in short filter runs and therefore greater DE usage
micro filtration, resulting in short filter runs with the need for more regenerations, thus
increased use of cleaning chemicals and reduced filter life.
Considering Australian brewers mash in at 65-70C the natural beta glucanases and proteases,
which are heat labile, will be inactivated and have little effect. Therefore, it is imperative that the
malt is well modified. Exogenous heat stable enzymes can be added to the mash, but at a cost.
Hazes that result from protein / polyphenol complexes have been well documented (Siebert 1999).
Polyphenols originate from malt and hops, however the levels in the malt are not specified or
routinely measured. It has been reported that grain with a thick husk contains more polyphenol.
Never the less, to ensure good shelf life, the use of expensive treatments, such as
polyvinylpolypyrrolidone (PVPP) may be required. Proteins are equally important in the formation
of haze. High protein malts contain relatively more hordein protein and it is the fragments derived
from hordein proteins that have been reported to be haze active. So, while the brewer specifies
an upper protein limit, to ensure good final product stability, haze active proteins may still require
treatment with silica gel. Higher protein malts require larger doses of silica gel. High protein
barleys also consist of more small starch granules relative to large starch granules. Examination of
spent grain, reveals that unconverted starch is mainly small starch granules, which unlike large
starch granules are not fully gelatinised during mashing. Therefore high protein barleys may result
in lower extract yield. Small starch granules have also been implicated in haze and particle
formation in the final beer.
Conclusion
In this paper the operation and the objective of six roller mills, mash tuns and lauter tuns has been
described. To optimise cost efficiency the brewer needs to find a balance between extract yield and
throughput. Hot water extract has the largest impact on cost however, consistency of grain size,
beta glucan, polyphenol and haze active protein levels will also affect the cost of production. In
order to optimise the process for quality the brewer needs malt where the starch conversion is
easily and consistently controllable, a nitrogen profile that provides enough nutrition for yeast
growth, fermentation, and foam quality while not adversely impacting on product stability.
Currently these needs are met with broad parameters such as diastatic power and total and soluble
nitrogen. More research leading to a greater fundamental understanding of the biochemistry of
malting and brewing is needed to define the raw material needs more closely.
Abstract
Brewing apparatus and a method of brewing in which mash cooking and wort boiling are carried
out in a single vessel (2), the vessel having an agitator (202), a heater preferably formed as a steam
jacket (220, 224) and as an external through flow heater (8), the wort being circulated through the
heater and back into the vessel by means of a tangential feed inlet (56) which causes the vessel's
contents to whirl whilst the wort is boiling. The apparatus and method reduces the requirement for
separate mash cooking and wort boiling vessels.
Images(3)
Claims(10)
1. Brewing apparatus comprising an at least part cylindrical vessel mash agitation means within
the vessel, means for raising the temperature of the vessel contents and means for causing a rapid
circulation of the contents of the vessel by whirling the contents.
2. Apparatus as claimed in Claim 1 further comprising a lauter tun connected to an outlet of said
vessel, the tun having an outlet connected to an inlet of the vessel whereby wort from the tun can
be fed back into the vessel.
3. Apparatus as claimed in Claim 1 or 2 wherein said means for raising the temperature of the
vessel contents comprises a steam jacket at least partially surrounding said vessel, said jacket
connected to a source of steam.
4. Apparatus as claimed in any one of claims 1 to 3 wherein said means for raising the temperature
of the vessel contents comprises an external through flow wort boiler, the wort boiler connected to
a tangential input into a cylindrical side of said vessel and wherein a pump is provided to pump the
contents through the boiler and input, said input and pump comprising said circulation means.
5. Apparatus as claimed in any one of claims 1 to 4 wherein said mash agitation means comprises
blade means having at least one blade mounted to a vertical shaft connected for rotating to a
motor, said blade means being connectable with raising means to raise blade means from a lower
position engageable with vessel contents to an upper position disengaged with said vessel
contents.
6. Apparatus as claimed in any one of claims 1 to 5 wherein said agitation means is mounted to a
vertical shaft the axis of which is offset to the axis of the vessel, the shaft being connected for
rotating to a motor and wherein further blade means are provided at a lower extremity of said
shaft, said further blade means being rotatable in an area surrounded by a sump of said vessel
provided in an outwardly dished bottom.
7. Apparatus as claimed in any one of claims 1 to 6 wherein said vessel is dimensioned so that its
height without a sump is related to its diameter and so that H:D is about 1:1, a lowest point of said
height defining a reference point R, and wherein a tangential input is provided for said circulation
means at an input level above point R where said input level relates to D as about 55 to 230 and to
H as about 55 to 235.
8. A method of brewing comprising using a single vessel with agitation means to agitate mash
whilst cooking said mash, to boil the wort and to circulate said wort through said vessel whilst
boiling, and including the steps of:
(a) filling said vessel with a mash charge of grist and hot water whilst activating said agitation
means,
(b) raising said mash temperature to cook said mash,
(c) emptying said vessel into a lauter tun,
(d) cleaning said vessel,
(e) running off wort from said tun into said vessel to a level,
(f) raising said agitation means above said level,
(g) circulating said wort through said vessel by pumping,
(h) boiling said wort,
(i) ceasing pumping and allowing circulation to continue for a period,
(j) transferring said boiled and clarifying wort through cooling means to fermentation vessel
means.
9. A method according to claim 8 wherein after step (a) said charge is allowed to stand for about
15 minutes, in step (b) said mash is raised to about 650C in about 20 minutes after which said mash
is allowed to stand for about 30 minutes.
10. A method according to claim 8 or 9 wherein in step (b) said mash is raised to about 650C in
about 20 minutes after which said mash is allowed to stand for about 30 minutes and with said
agitation means still running said mash is raised to about 760C in about 11 minutes prior to step (c)
and wherein step (g) is continuous with step (e) after about 50% of the final wort volume is
reached and step (g) continues after the final wort volume is reached, step (h) continuing after said
final wort volume is reached for about an hour.
Description
[0001]
Advantages of the invention over known apparatus and methods are reduction in
construction costs, space utilization and heat losses, heat losses being quite considerable in
known apparatus between individual vessels. Energy conservation is utilized to the
maximum since the structural heat requirements of the vessel are combined plant utilization
for prime movers, that is pumps, and ancillary equipment, that is valves, is maximised since
components may be used for multiple functions.
[0002]
An embodiment of the invention will now be described by way of example with reference to
the accompanying drawings in which:-
Figure 2 is a side view in partial cross section of a combined mash mixer, kettle,
whirlpool vessel for the apparatus of Figure 1, and
[0003]
A brewing apparatus is qhowp generally in Figure 1 which comprises two main vessels
namely a combined mash mixer, kettle and whirlpool vessel 2 and a lauter tun 4. Associated
with these vessels are grist feed means 6, a flow through wort boiler 8, a combined transfer
and circulation pump 10 (shown as two separate pumps 12 and 14 in Figures 2 and 3), a
wort run-off or transfer pump.16,
[0004]
The present invention relates to brewing apparatus and 3 method of brewing using such an
apparatus.
[0005]
Traditionally the process of mash cooking, wort boiling and whirlpool separation have been
carried out in separate vessels. Recently we have successfully combined the wort boiling
process and whirlpool separation in a single vessel, this has resulted in heat savings whilst
there has been some saving in plant cost.
[0006]
Brewing apparatus according to the present invention comprises an at-least part cylindrical
vessel, mash agitation means within the vessel, means for raising the temperature of the
vessel contents, means for causing a rapid circulation of the contents of the vessel by
whirling the contents.
[0007]
A method of brewing according to the present invention comprises in a single vessel
agitating mash whilst cooking the mash, boiling the wort, and circulating the wort through
the vessel whilst boiling.
[0008]
Preferably the apparatus also comprises a lauter tun into which the mash may be run off and
from which wort is returned to the vessel.
[0009]
The means for raising the temperature of the contents preferably comprises a steam jacket at
least partially surrounding the vessel and an external through flow wort boiler, the wort
boiler having a tangential input into a cylindrical side of the vessel.
[0010]
a lauter tun spent grain removal device 18 and wort cooling means 20.
[0011]
The lauter tun 4 with associated device 18 are conventional and need no further description.
[0012]
Grist feed means 6 comprising a feed in device 30, a grist case 32, an outlet valve 34, a
vortex feed unit 36 with mash liquor input line 38 controlled by valve 40, a mono pump 42
and a static in line mixer 44 feeds line 46 into the combined vessel 2. The liquor is normally
fed from a separate guaged liquor tank where the liquor can be treated to 65 - 750C. The
cooling.means 20 comprising a two stage cooler 50 is fed from wort run-off line 52
controlled by valve 54.
[0013]
The wort boiler 8 which may be either steam heated (suitable for larger installations
e.g.1000 barrel output) or gas fired for smaller installations e.g. 30 barrel output is coupled
to the combined vessel 2 by a vessel input 56 which feeds tangentially into a cylindrical
wall 58 of the vessel and is fed by vessel outlet line 60 having valve 62, common line 64,
pump line 66 having valve 68, pump inlet line 70, pump 10, pump outlet line 72 having
valve 74 and boiler inlet line 76. A bypass valve 78 separates lines 76 and 64. Line 80 joins
line 82 having valve 84 for feeding mash from the vessel 2 to tun 4.
[0014]
Wort is run-off from the lauter tun 4 through run-off line 90 through valve 92 in line 94, line
96 in which is valve 100. Lines 96 and 90 are connected also by by-pass valve 98. Line 96 is
connected to wort run-off pump inlet line. Wort run-off pump 16 then pumps through outlet
line 104, line 106 (which is connected to underlet line 108 through underlet line valve
110),wort run-off 112 in which are valves 114 and 116 and thence back through line 66 or
70 into vessel 2.
[0015]
Within vessel 2 is an off-centrally mounted shaft 200 on which are mounted agitator blades
202 and trub sump blades 204. The off-centred mounting of the shaft improves agitation.
Shaft 200 is arranged to be raised from the firm line position A shown in Figure 2 either by
attaching a tackle or chain hoist to eye 201 or when fully raised the blades 204 are at the
broken line position B of Figure 2. An external motor and gearing 206 is provided on the
vessel top to drive shaft 200 to rotate the blades.
[0016]
Around the cylindrical wall 58 at its lower part is a steam jacket 220 and on the outside of
the dished bottom wall 222 is a second steam jacket 224. Jackets 220 and 224 are fed by a
main steam line 226.
[0017]
Trub sump 228 is fitted with a drain line 230 closed by valve 232 and isolation from line 64
by its valve 234.
[0018]
A typical operating cycle using the above apparatus ; would be as follows:-
[0019]
Starting with a vessel 2 being clean, agitator blades 202 are at position A and running whilst
malted grist and liquor (hot water) are pumped in through line 46. The hot water is normally
at about 65-750C and is a preset quantity gauged at a liquor tank (not shown).
[0020]
When the charge of grist and water is complete in vessel 2, the charge is allowed to stand at
45C for 15 minutes.
[0021]
With the agitator blades still running the charge, that is the mash, is raised to 65C in 20
minutes by means of jackets 220 and 224.
[0022]
[0023]
With the agitator running the mash is then raised to 760C in 11 minutes by means of jackets
220, 224. On reaching 76C the mash is pumped by means of pump 10 or 12 to lauter tun 4.
On emptying vessel 2, the vessel is flushed clean - suitable cleaning fluid can be pumped
into the vessel 2 through lines 250 and 252 using pump 16.
[0024]
Within 15 or 20 minutes wort run-off from the lauter tun 4 is commenced returning the wort
back to vessel 2 by means of pump 16, this will continue for about 120 minutes.
[0025]
When 50% of the wort volume is reached in vessel 2 the agitator blades 202 are raised from
lower position A to the upper position B so that they disengage from the contents of the
vessel.
[0026]
Wort circulation is now commenced by running pump 10 or 14 and heat is applied to the
wort by means of boiler 8 to commence pre-heating the wort from 76C to 100C.
[0027]
When the full wort volume is reached, the adjuncts -e.g. sugar and hops are added and the
whole volume is boiled for about 60 minutes whilst continuously circulating through the
boiler 8.
[0028]
On completion of the boiling phase, the heater and circulating pump 10 or 14 are isolated
and the wort continues to rotate due to inertia for about 15 minutes.
[0029]
The clarified wort is then transferred through the cooling means 20 to fermentation vessels
(not shown).
[0030]
The trub.residue collected in the trub sump 228 is then discharged through drain valve 232
and the system flushed clean ready for the next batch of mash.
[0031]
It will be appreciated that the cylindrical diameter D of vessel 2 is dimensioned so as to
provide optimum flow characteristics when whirling the wort. Taking the effective bottom
the vessel at a calculated point approximately where the dishing of the bottom wall 222
would indicate a reference point or bottom level R can be determined. The optimum wort
level L is then at a height above R where
In Figure 2 vessel 2 is dimensioned so that L /D (34 barrel wort level) is about 0.65 and
L"/D (30 barrel wort level) is about 0.60. A lower level L"'(for a-half charge of 15 barrels) is
such that L"'/D is about 0.33. At this lower level of optimum wort level may not be
achieved.
[0032]
On initial trials L/D may preferably be about 0.73.
[0033]
In the example given in Figure 2 D is 2300 mm. The height of the whirlpool inlet above R is
about 550 mm whilst L' is 1485 mm.
Once the mash is complete, let it settle for about five minutes. This allows the grain bed to sort of settle out. At the end of the five minutes, open the spigot
and start running off slowly. The lautering process should take about an hour; its not a race. A common mistake made in lautering is to zip the water through
the lauter and into the boil as fast as possible.
At the start of the lautering process, you should use a quart container to catch the first runnings. These will be cloudy and have bits of husk in them. Pour the
cloudy, husky material back into the top of the lauter. This process is called vorlauf, a German word that means temporary. The mash materials will act like a
filter and clear the runnings.
Repeat this process until you are satisfied with the clarity of your wort. Some worts never become totally clear, while others can become almost crystal clear.
It depends on your lauter tun design and the type of malt and adjuncts you are using. However, as a general rule you should at least vorlauf long enough to
get the husky material out of the runoff. Fifteen minutes is a reasonable time for the vorlauf.
Once you have reached the desired clarity, you can start running off into the brew kettle. Again, this is not a race. You should take at least 45 minutes to run
the rest of the water through the lauter vessel. You will notice that the water level in the lauter tun will begin to get low as you drain off the bottom liquid.
At this point you should be adding hot water back into the top of the lauter. One of the simplest methods is to put boiling or near-boiling water into your
quart vorlauf jug and add the water as needed to the lauter vessel. It is a good idea to keep the water level in the lauter about an inch above the grain bed.
This is one simple method for adding water to the lauter tun. There are many tools available to help the brewer add water evenly over the top of the lauter
bed. Some are as complicated as another bucket attached to a tube that runs into a second, T-shaped tube. When water is added to the bucket, the T-tube
spins around like a lawn sprinkler. For the most part these devices work well.
You can also use an ordinary gardening water can, plastic not galvanized. If you use this method, the water will cool down significantly between the time its
on the stove and it gets to the lauter, so overshoot your target temperature a bit.
The important thing is to evenly distribute the water over the top of the lauter. This allows the water to flow evenly through the grain bed. The whole purpose
of adding the extra water is to extract more sugar. Therefore, it makes sense to evenly distribute the water. If the water does not get to a certain spot in the
lauter bed, you will get what are called sweet spots. Sweet spots represent lost extract.
One way to prevent sweet spots is to stir up the top of the grain bed with a fork. You can go as far as halfway down the bed and not disturb it too much. But
its important to move gently. Some people might be afraid that this will disturb the bed too much. If you feel that way, this is by no means a necessary
procedure. It just helps you get the most out of your extraction. Also, only do this early, during the vorlauf. Doing it later may cause setting of the disturbed
layers, leaving you with a stuck lauter.
Finishing Up
So when do you stop lautering? You have been adding water for quite some time now. How can you tell when it is time to stop? There are two schools of
thought on when to stop: when you reach a certain volume or when you reach a certain gravity. Of course if all goes well, youd like to hit both at the same
time. However, this takes a lot of practice.
If you decide to aim for volume, the question becomes: Which volume is correct? This depends on how much energy you can stuff into your boiling kettle. If
you are using a five-gallon fermenter, you need 5.5 to eight gallons of starting wort. Generally if you are boiling on a stove top, you wont need much more
than 5.5 gallons. Thats because the boil on most stoves is fairly weak. However, if youre cooking on a propane burner, especially one of those 150,000-BTU
flame throwers, and you have a large enough kettle to contain the boil, you can easily extract eight gallons of wort and boil it down to five in an hour. You will
also get good hop extraction this way.
If you decide to aim for a specific gravity, you wont know in advance, especially when you first try this, how much volume youll end up with. With time, as
you get more used to yoursystem, you may become successful at predicting the volume.
However, aiming for specific gravity will make your results more consistent with the recipe, if youre using one. It will also make it easier to repeat your
results the next time you brew the same beer.
The specific gravity method entails taking periodic gravity readings in the boiling kettle. The general method for this is to take a sample of wort, put it in the
measuring device, and immerse the measuring device in ice or ice water until the temperature is correct. Then, take a gravity reading and throw the wort back
into the boiling kettle. Continue to take gravity readings until you have reached the desired gravity. Keep in mind that the gravity after boiling will be higher
than the gravity at the start of the boil. This is due to evaporation of water during the boil.
As the measuring device, its helpful to use a copper tube with one closed end. Copper has a tremendous heat-exchange capacity, which allows the wort inside
it to cool much more rapidly than wort cools in plastic. Also, stirring helps greatly. Convective heat exchange, heat passed by a current or flow, is much faster
than conductive heat exchange, the passive process of giving off heat without the aid of a current.
There is also a third method that is used to decide when to quit lautering. It involves neither volume nor gravity of the extracted wort. This one is practiced by
those fearful of tannin being in their beer. This method involves either tasting or taking a gravity reading of the wort as it exits the lauter tun. It is generally
accepted that when the readings get down to a specific gravity of 1.008, there are more tannins and other unwanted material flowing from the lauter vessel.
If you are tasting the wort, at the point when you can no longer perceive a sweet flavor the gravity ranges from 1.012 to 1.006, depending on your ability to
perceive sweetness. If you fear tannin, stop the lauter at this point.
If you still need more water to reach the volume you desire, then you can make up that amount of water by using hot tap water, or take the excess sparge
water and pour it directly into the brew kettle. The important point is that you are not losing too much fermentable sugar at this point. It is completely
acceptable to use this practice. Many professional brewers use this method.
Nothing But Time
What if the lauter is taking too long? First, its important to emphasize that a lauter that goes too fast is a more common problem than one that goes too slow.
If you lauter for 15 minutes, youre going to leave a lot of sugar behind, and your extraction efficiency will be closer to 50 percent than 60 or 70 percent.
The two most likely reasons for a slow lauter are:
1. The grain was milled too small.
2. The protein layer that forms on top of the grain bed has set thick and is restricting the flow of wort through the grain bed, thus leaving Lake Lauter in its
flood stage.
Both of these problems are easily rectified. If your milling size is too small, simply make it larger. Many people try a small milling size because they are
dissatisfied with their yield and want to get more extract out of their grain. But a larger mill setting (the actual setting varies based on the type of mill and
grain) combined with a slow lauter will result in substantial extraction.
The second problem of the protein layer on top of the lauter is easily remedied by taking a fork and periodically stirring the top of the grain bed. A side note
on this problem: Wheat is notorious for gumming up lauters, so expect some delays in lautering a wheat mash. Also, grind the grain a bit larger than normal
for wheat beers.
There is yet one more way that you can slow your lauter down, and that is by sticking your lauter bed. This basically means that the wort is removed too fast
from the bottom of the lauter, causing the top of the lauter bed to push down on the sieve. This stops all flow through the lauter.
The most common way that this happens is that people take a long tube from their lauter spigot and put it into their brew kettle on the floor. Then they open
the lauter spigot. The wort in the tube creates a great suction and,whammo, a stuck bed is formed.
To get rid of a stuck bed, underlet the lauter by pushing water back up through the spigot. This helps clear the sieve holes. After underletting you should wait
about five minutes, then resume lautering.
Heres one last suggestion to make the lautering process easier. As soon as you are done using your lauter tun, clean it. Procrastination about cleaning the
lauter tun will almost inevitably cost you more time next time you brew. Also, there tends to be a fascinating array of molds that are willing to spring up in as
little time as a day or two if the lauter tun is left even partially dirty.
Finally, if you still have trouble going slowly through the lautering process, try drinking some of your previous work during this time and making it a social
event. Most all social events are known to cause time to elongate.
Randy Whisler is a brewer and microbiologist at Smuttynose Brewing Co., Portsmouth, N.H. He holds an M.S. in brewing from the University of
California, Davis.
Department of Plant Science, Adelaide University, Waite Campus PMB1, Glen Osmond, SA 5064
Adelaide Malting Company, Cavan, SA 5094
3
Lion-Nathan Australia, Milton, QLD 4007
1
2
Abstract
Lautering remains a bottleneck in brewery operations. The malt factors contributing to reduced performance in the lauter tun have been
incompletely characterised, and breeding of barleys with improved brew-house performance largely overlooked. By gaining a complete
understanding of the processes involved, malt characteristics that promote or retard lautering can be targeted within existing breeding
programs to produce barleys more closely attuned to the needs of brewers. A laboratory-scale lautering device with a capacity of 1 kg malt
has been built, which replicates the grain bed depth and run-off rates of commercial lauter tuns. Lautering performance is assessed by
recording differential pressure across the grain bed. The effects of barley variety, malting, milling and mashing conditions, and parameters
of lauter tun operation are being assessed for their contributions to lautering performance. Preliminary results have shown that it is possible
to discriminate the lautering performance of malts using the small-scale device developed. A number of Australian malts have been
examined, and the outcomes of these trials will be presented. By operating the device at temperatures used commercially, it has been
possible to minimise interference from -glucans, and thereby more accurately examine those malt factors of importance to lautering in the
brewery.
Introduction
The common thread linking each new malting variety released by barley breeders is an improvement in levels of extract or diastase activity
when compared with the variety to be replaced. Traditionally this is achieved through selection specifically for these factors, with little or no
emphasis placed on the likely performance of the variety when it is malted and passes into the brew-house. Modern-day brew-houses may
operate at up to 10-12 brews per day, and it is generally accepted that the rate-limiting step of the processes from milling to chilling lies
with the separation of sweet wort and spent grains following mashing. The means by which this is achieved has varied with brewing styles
and the advent of hydraulically actuated press-filters, but in each case there is a premium to be had by recovering the maximum extract in
the minimal cycle time.
In the unending quest for improved malting barley varieties, there has to the best of our knowledge been no attempt made to select directly
for improved performance during the wort separation process. We have recently started a research project that aims for the first time to
provide barley breeders with a measurable parameter for the prediction of potential efficiency in the wort separation process. This will be
achieved by developing an operational understanding of the most common form of wort separation, namely lautering, and determining the
role of individual barley and malt factors in the process. Subsequently, tests to detect the presence or absence of desirable or deleterious
components will be developed or adopted from existing analytical protocols, and applied to barley lines undergoing evaluation within our
breeding programs.
(ii) ii) An initial free-flow run-off (ca 600 ml min-1, equivalent to 72 hl m-2 hr-1) for 15-30 secs followed by recirculation, run-off and sparge at 80100 ml min-1 (equivalent to 9.6 to 100 hl m-2 hr-1) (see Figure 2)
Using a constant run-off rate, a clear difference in differential pressure was seen for the two rates, but a ca 20% increase in the final depth
of spent grains occurred at the lower rate. The difference in maximum differential pressure across the spent grains bed between the two
run-off rates was only 0.35 psi, suggesting that accurate discrimination of malts by this protocol would be very difficult
An initial free-flow run-off with the outlet tube placed 35 cm above the false bottom gave a higher differential pressure for the same malt than
with constant-rate run-offs. Additionally, the final height of the spent grains bed was lower, suggesting that bed formation was more
complete using this protocol than with a constant-rate run-off.
At constant run-off rates, differential pressure (DP) across the spent grain bed varied with flow rate. Maximum DP across the spent grain
beds differed by only 0.35 psi between the two run-off rates (Figure 1)
Figure 2. Lautering performance of Harrington malt using a 30-second free-flow run-off to initiate grain bed formation
.
Reproducibility between duplicate runs using either protocol was low, with unacceptably high variation in differential pressure and spent
grain bed formation. Further trials are underway in an attempt to improve the reproducibility of the SSLT.
Conclusion
Experimental lautering protocols have been developed that reflect those used in Australian breweries. Only very small differences were
seen in the experimental lautering performance of a number of commercial Australian malts. We are currently addressing the remaining
technical shortcomings with the experimental lautering apparatus and parameters needed to ensure reliable and consistent data. Our
research efforts will now be directed towards the precise determination of malt factors influencing lautering efficiency, and developing
assays for their rapid and accurate measurement, thereby providing breeding programs with a valuable tool in the search for improved
malting barley varieties.
Acknowledgments
This work is supported by the Grains Research and Development Corporation of Australia.
Design
Construction
It is usually built of stainless steel or copper. It is insulated to prevent heat loss of the mash.
There is a vent to discharge vapour. It has a false bottom.
Plates
The false bottom is built
up of interlocking plates.
These may have either
milled slots or they may
be built up of wedge
wire.
The advantage of wedge
wire over cut slots is that
wear on the wire does
not produce an "
opening" of the gap.
The plates are made in
sections so that they can
be lifted. This enables
them to be thoroughly
cleaned if required.
Sparge
It has a sparging system. This is used to spray water over the mash to wash out the worts.
Rakes
It has a raking
system. These are
knives which can
cut the bed. This,
when used
properly, helps the
filtrationprocess.
There is a CIP system installed. There are spray balls or jets which clean the internal surface
and under the plates.
Raking can be continuous or using a number of discrete steps. The sparge can be added
continuously or as a batch addition.
Cleaning
The vessel is normally thoroughly cleaned and descaled once a week with Caustic
Draw off
All Lauter tuns are fitted with a draw off device. This enables the operator to balance run off
to the differential pressure of the bed over the plates. Too much differential pressure will pull
the bed onto the plates. This will cause a set mash. Modern Lauter Tuns are computer
controlled.
Mash inlet
There is an inlet for the mash. This is normally through the bottom. This cuts down on
oxidation during the transfer from the mash tun.
Operation
The mash is transferred from the Mash tun into the Lauter Tun. The filter bed in the lauter
tun is shallow and has a large surface area. A fine grind increases the resistance to flow and
this is compensated for by the use of rakes. These open the bed to allow faster filtration. The
rakes must operate in such a way that sparge is not channelled and the filter bed is not
totally disrupted. A slight increase in wort viscosity Ability of a liquid to flow freely. Water has
a high viscosity, porridge has a lower viscosity. can have a dramatic effect on run off
performance.
Most lauter tuns are fully automated. The wort run off rate is controlled.
Also the differential pressure above and below the lauter plates is measured and controlled.
When this pressure falls below a set pressure it has reached a "set bed condition. The run
off is stopped and the rakes are lowered to the bottom of the bed and used to break up the
bed for 5 to 10 minutes before normal filtration is resumed.
The typical run off sequences and control are shown below.
Another measurement often used to control run off is haze Cloudy particles sometimes seen
in beer or other products, caused by long protein chains that have not been removed at
filtration.. The wort turbidity is measured. The contents of the lauter tun are re-circulated to
ensure that only bright (haze less than 5 to 12 EBC) wort runs to the kettle.
A typical lauter tun cycle to collect 1000 hl is described below.
Event
Duration
Volume HI
Underletting
3 minutes
23
11 minutes
4 minutes
20
41 minutes
200
74 minutes
475
10 minutes
141
16 minutes
179
8 minutes
93
25 minutes
5 minutes
197 minutes
1000