A novel brewing process via controlled hydrodynamic cavitation
1–10 of 37 posts
Re: A novel brewing process via controlled hydrodynamic cavitation
#2An MITech-review article:
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/602464/this-technology-is...
Re: A novel brewing process via controlled hydrodynamic cavitation
#3I really only skimmed this very quickly, but it seems as though they are using a RIMS system for their cavitation based approach and an infusion mash (or maybe step controlled??? I'm not familiar with the Braumeister setup and their website is ridiculously slow) for their traditional approach. RIMS is already known by homebrewers to be dramatically more efficient than most other approaches. As interesting as it looks, I'm taking this with a huge grain of malt.
Re: A novel brewing process via controlled hydrodynamic cavitation
#4I really only skimmed this very quickly, but it seems as though they are using a RIMS system for their cavitation based approach and an infusion mash (or maybe step controlled??? I'm not familiar with the Braumeister setup and their website is ridiculously slow) for their traditional approach. RIMS is already known by homebrewers to be dramatically more efficient than most other approaches. As interesting as it looks…
Sorry to reply to my own post, but since I finished reading the paper I can answer most of my implied questions :-)
The main difference between this setup and a RIMS is that they don't mill the malt when they allow the grain to be circulated. The cavitation pulverises the malt. This is actually a massive benefit because dry milling malt is a major cause of infection in a brewery.
The other benefit is that they are able to mash at a much lower temperature and still get decent extraction. Even down to 48C (118F) allows them to get 91% efficiency in one case. This is on par with RIMS (most reports I've heard is that people can manage mid 90s efficiency), but of course rims has to maintain a temperature of about 65C (150F).
Side note: Their reported temperatures for mashing without recirculating the grains is a bit crazy -- in the mid 70's C -- all much over 160F. They are going to be deactivating enzymes at those temps and that probably accounts for their decreased efficiency. I really can't understand what they were thinking.
There is some mention of protein make up, but my main worry about mashing at such a low temperature is the break down of larger proteins. They have a picture of frothy beer with a caption about foam stability, but the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Also, that picture shows a very hazy beer.
The other thing they talk about is isomerising the hops without boiling. That's pretty cool and would definitely reduce power usage. But again... that picture of nearly opaque beer haunts me.
Finally they talk about cavitating the fermenting beer in order to remove CO2. That seems reasonable, but I would worry somewhat about how the yeast drops in that condition.
To be honest, I wish they had stuck to mashing in this paper. It's strange to see a paper cram as much as this one does in one place. Normally you want to stretch it out over as many publications as possible ;-)
The last thing I'm curious about is how they produce the cavitation. I really couldn't understand their description at all. Is it just a matter of the design of chamber in which they pump the wort? That would be extremely cool, but I'd like to see a better description. A mash system that depends only on pumps would be ridiculously nice to have.
Re: A novel brewing process via controlled hydrodynamic cavitation
#5I really only skimmed this very quickly, but it seems as though they are using a RIMS system for their cavitation based approach and an infusion mash (or maybe step controlled??? I'm not familiar with the Braumeister setup and their website is ridiculously slow) for their traditional approach. RIMS is already known by homebrewers to be dramatically more efficient than most other approaches. As interesting as it looks…
Sorry to reply to my own post, but since I finished reading the paper I can answer most of my implied questions :-) The main difference between this setup and a RIMS is that they don't mill the malt when they allow the grain to be circulated. The cavitation pulverises the malt. This is actually a massive benefit because dry milling malt is a major cause of infection in a brewery. The other benefit is that they are ab…
Is this something a layman hobbyist can get into or try?
Re: A novel brewing process via controlled hydrodynamic cavitation
#6I really only skimmed this very quickly, but it seems as though they are using a RIMS system for their cavitation based approach and an infusion mash (or maybe step controlled??? I'm not familiar with the Braumeister setup and their website is ridiculously slow) for their traditional approach. RIMS is already known by homebrewers to be dramatically more efficient than most other approaches. As interesting as it looks…
Sorry to reply to my own post, but since I finished reading the paper I can answer most of my implied questions :-) The main difference between this setup and a RIMS is that they don't mill the malt when they allow the grain to be circulated. The cavitation pulverises the malt. This is actually a massive benefit because dry milling malt is a major cause of infection in a brewery. The other benefit is that they are ab…
Found this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBSJHMfwNL0
The mechanism they use in the video has no moving parts! It's just a matter of forcing water through opposing nozzles.
Re: A novel brewing process via controlled hydrodynamic cavitation
#7I really only skimmed this very quickly, but it seems as though they are using a RIMS system for their cavitation based approach and an infusion mash (or maybe step controlled??? I'm not familiar with the Braumeister setup and their website is ridiculously slow) for their traditional approach. RIMS is already known by homebrewers to be dramatically more efficient than most other approaches. As interesting as it looks…
Sorry to reply to my own post, but since I finished reading the paper I can answer most of my implied questions :-) The main difference between this setup and a RIMS is that they don't mill the malt when they allow the grain to be circulated. The cavitation pulverises the malt. This is actually a massive benefit because dry milling malt is a major cause of infection in a brewery. The other benefit is that they are ab…
> This is actually a massive benefit because dry milling malt is a major cause of infection in a brewery.
Don't mill in the same area you're brewing and this is pretty much handled. Lacto carries with dust, but just don't do anything post boil in that area and you're fine.
>This is on par with RIMS (most reports I've heard is that people can manage mid 90s efficiency), but of course rims has to maintain a temperature of about 65C (150F).
I sit in low 90s with a rather low tech HERMS setup.
>but my main worry about mashing at such a low temperature is the break down of larger proteins. They have a picture of frothy beer with a caption about foam stability, but the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Also, that picture shows a very hazy beer.
I'm curious about the lower temp mashes and getting enough longer chain sugars for those of us that spend a lot of time working with brett.
As for the haze... Maybe the like NEIPA? ;)
Re: A novel brewing process via controlled hydrodynamic cavitation
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry to reply to my own post, but since I finished reading the paper I can answer most of my implied questions :-) The main difference between this setup and a RIMS is that they don't mill the malt when they allow the grain to be circulated. The cavitation pulverises the malt. This is actually a massive benefit because dry milling malt is a major cause of infection in a brewery. The other benefit is that they are ab…
Is this something a layman hobbyist can get into or try?
Second this.
Re: A novel brewing process via controlled hydrodynamic cavitation
#9Ok, so there has to be a comedy plot in there where two guys trying to make beer with hydrodynamic cavitation end up discovering a viable cold fusion reaction but keep drinking the experiment results :-)
That said, I found their off hand mention of using it as an alternate to high temperature pasteurization as much more intriguing. Mostly because I detest the "cooked" taste of ultra-pasteurized cream but have been finding it harder and harder to find cream that hasn't been over pasteurized in this way. Find me some cream that is "cold pasteurized" and tastes like cream, I'll be really happy.
Re: A novel brewing process via controlled hydrodynamic cavitation
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry to reply to my own post, but since I finished reading the paper I can answer most of my implied questions :-) The main difference between this setup and a RIMS is that they don't mill the malt when they allow the grain to be circulated. The cavitation pulverises the malt. This is actually a massive benefit because dry milling malt is a major cause of infection in a brewery. The other benefit is that they are ab…
> This is actually a massive benefit because dry milling malt is a major cause of infection in a brewery. Don't mill in the same area you're brewing and this is pretty much handled. Lacto carries with dust, but just don't do anything post boil in that area and you're fine. >This is on par with RIMS (most reports I've heard is that people can manage mid 90s efficiency), but of course rims has to maintain a temperature…
Do you know whether low pressure boiling can kill bacteria?