• Welcome to the new forum! We upgraded our forum software with a host of new boards, capabilities and features. It is also more secure.
    Jump in and join the conversation! You can learn more about the upgrade and new features here.

Adding "No-Chill" Option

ChuckE

Apprentice
Joined
Sep 24, 2009
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
Location
Alabama
Hi,
Could "No-Chill" be added as an option?
For an explanation of no-chill;
http://www.aussiehomebrewer.com/forum/index.php?autocom=ineo&showarticle=56
http://www.homebrewtalk.com/f13/exploring-no-chill-brewing-117111/

Those of us who use Beersmith and no-chill use this chart and make adjustments.
 

BeerSmith

Staff member
Administrator
Grandmaster Brewer
Joined
Apr 5, 2003
Messages
5,887
Reaction score
67
Location
Virginia
Thanks!
  I just took a look at it - what would you like to see other than a custom step asking you to move it to the cube or storage container overnight before pitching?

Brad
 

ChuckE

Apprentice
Joined
Sep 24, 2009
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
Location
Alabama
The question comes up because to "no-chill" one should make adjustments to the hop schedule to account for increased hop utilization. Rather than plugging the recipe into BS and then making adjustments to the hop schedule with an exterior chart, couldn't BS account for the changes?

Two requests come to mind.

1) For BeerSmith to make time adjustments for hop utilization. If no-chill is selected as an option, maybe a note would appear beside the hop additions with more info? Something like  (30 min) (no-chill=10 min) or (5 min) (no-chill=dry hop)

2) Perhaps to adjust the amount of bittering hops needed to equal normal chilling. For *bittering hops* it seems that, rather than deduct 20 mins, one could deduct the amount of hop used, not alter the boil time and still attain the needed IBUs.
 

BeerSmith

Staff member
Administrator
Grandmaster Brewer
Joined
Apr 5, 2003
Messages
5,887
Reaction score
67
Location
Virginia
Hi,
  I don't completely understand why the "no chill" option would change the hops utilization?  It seems to me that hop utilization is a function of boil time and not the method used to chill the beer after the boil.  Can you clarify please?

Thanks,
Brad
 

ChuckE

Apprentice
Joined
Sep 24, 2009
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
Location
Alabama
If one boils hops in wort longer, one gets increased bitterness. No-chill keeps the wort at near boiling until it cools on its own. Hops that are added at 30 mins or 5 mins will continue to isomerize in the cube. OK, not at the same level as a full boil, but enough to matter.

Most brewers No-chilling deduct 20 mins from each hop addition. A 60 min addition becomes 40 min. It gets a bit dicey when you get to 20 minute and less additions. Here’s a chart. http://www.homebrewtalk.com/f13/exploring-no-chill-brewing-117111/index47.html#post1542375

Here’s a thread relating to the issue.  http://www.aussiehomebrewer.com/forum//index.php?s=&showtopic=26483&view=findpost&p=363139

Additionally, for bittering hops, I believe the amount of hops could be decreased instead of altering boil time.
 

MaltLicker

Forum Moderator
Grandmaster Brewer
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
2,004
Reaction score
0
ChuckE
Ever have a problem with DMS?  The hot wort continues to offput DMS from boiling down to the low 100's *F, so I'd be concerned with DMS production.  I had this very problem before I started using an IC wort chiller. 
 

ChuckE

Apprentice
Joined
Sep 24, 2009
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
Location
Alabama
No, DMS is only an issue when brewing light lagers... then do a 90 min. boil to take care of the problem.

Full disclosure- I'm a self-described lazy brewer. My info on DMS is second hand. I only brew American ales, English ales and weizenbier. Within those styles, DMS has never reared its ugly head.
 

MaltLicker

Forum Moderator
Grandmaster Brewer
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
2,004
Reaction score
0
I think what you may mean is that DMS is acceptable (in small degrees) in American lagers and cream ales. 

All beers create the precursor to DMS, which is SMM, and during the boil, it forms DMS and is burned off.  Once you stop the boil, the SMM is still being created by the heat, and if you cover the boil pot and do not cool it quickly, the SMM builds up, condenses on the pot cover and drops back into the brew.  Since it is no longer boiling, if the SMM converts into DMS, it is not boiled off.  Maybe it is most likely in lagers with lots of pilsner malts.  But other than sanitation, I think DMS is the other major reason people recommend cooling quickly. 

http://www.bjcp.org/docs/OffFlavorFlash.pdf
page 8
 

ChuckE

Apprentice
Joined
Sep 24, 2009
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
Location
Alabama
MaltLicker said:
I think what you may mean is that DMS is acceptable (in small degrees) in American lagers and cream ales. 

“If a tree falls in the woods and nobody is around it to hear it, does it make a sound?”

Perhaps a non-discernable amount of DMS is produced in all but light lagers. If it’s not detectable, what does it matter? For most home-brewers who look at results, it's not an issue.
 

///

Apprentice
Joined
Oct 8, 2008
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Just got a not to have a look.

I have filled thousands of these things as part of a former company.

For the Hop Utilisation;

* the 12hl DME system we used ran a whirlpool which is effective in collecting the majority of hops. The fill time was about 1.5 hours, so the commercially produced packs I say might be higher than expected. But I know from my HB setup, the whirlpool drops the majority of hops and the pack is filled in a few minutes. So, without contact with the source of the Iso-alpha acids then how does bitterness increase?

For DMS;

* Firstly I am a fan of it ... the more the meerier
* IF based on Aussie Malts, the DMS precursor is nearly non-existant. The precursur is not encouraged by the major maltings as Aussie Mega-Brewers who source thier malt do not appreciate the profile .... the heathens. So with rates of precursor so low, I wonder if it really any there.
* I also know from doing enough beer comps and tastings that a large percentage of the brewers out there confuse DMS with Diacetyl ... had this happen only a few months ago and had a rather heated discussion with the brewer who could not be told any better.

There must be someone out there can get a commercial brewery to test bitterness, the brewery I work with lab comprises of a hydrometer, pH meter and refractometer ... its by the seat of your pants brewing that is for sure.

Scotty


 

Wastegate

Grandmaster Brewer
Joined
Mar 14, 2008
Messages
1,115
Reaction score
0
Location
Houston
I briefly went through the OP on HBT (OPH). I have to say that I don't agree with what I read. The OPH's reasoning was he did not have fermenters and was going to store the unfermented wort in containers. It sounded like he was making large batches (maybe even for commercial use)If you have already done all the work.

Why not spend the 15-30min chilling your wort?

If you are going to store it without adding the yeast, there is a VERY large part of me saying that an infection is coming and you are wasting your time and good beer!

I know Brad wants to make the software as versatile as possible, and feature rich. But is this really needed? How many people will actually use this, Or better yet, how many people think I'm totally off base here?

I hate to be the nay sayer, IMO it does not sound like a sound brewing technique.

2c.

Cheers
Preston
 

MaltLicker

Forum Moderator
Grandmaster Brewer
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
2,004
Reaction score
0
/// said:
For DMS;
* IF based on Aussie Malts, the DMS precursor is nearly non-existant. The precursur is not encouraged by the major maltings as Aussie Mega-Brewers who source thier malt do not appreciate the profile .... the heathens. So with rates of precursor so low, I wonder if it really any there.

Interesting if true that Aussie malts have much less of the precursors.  Makes sense that all growers and/or maltsters would attempt to reduce that nasty thru hybridization or malting techniques.  Perhaps we'll see an overall decline due to those improvements. 

To each his own, but the other big advantage of fast cooling is the cold break of unwanted proteins and the reduction of chill haze later. 
 

ChuckE

Apprentice
Joined
Sep 24, 2009
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
Location
Alabama
Hi Preston,
Let’s go through each of the points-
UselessBrewing said:
I briefly went through the OP on HBT (OPH). I have to say that I don't agree with what I read. The OPH's reasoning was he did not have fermenters and was going to store the unfermented wort in containers. It sounded like he was making large batches (maybe even for commercial use)If you have already done all the work.

Why not spend the 15-30min chilling your wort? 
I have an immersion chiller and used it until I came across the no-chill method. Since I’ve tried it and seen that it works, my question is, “Why should I waste 30 minutes, time and water, chilling wort when I can no-chill and save time and water?”

There are more benefits to no-chill, other than time savings. Before getting into them, let first say- no-chill isn’t for everyone. Think it’s a bunch of hooey? Think it’ll produce bad or infected beer? If it’s not for you- fair enough. I will say this; I have yet to see one brewer who tried it or saw it in action, who wasn’t convinced.

Here are some advantages of using the no-chill technique, other than time savings;
-The biggest one;  no-chill really adds flexibility to your brew schedule. Scenario 1, you have time to brew but you don’t have a yeast starter ready. No problem- just brew and no-chill the wort. Pitch when your yeast is ready, be it a day, two days or a couple weeks. Scenario 2, you have time to brew but don’t have room in your fermentation fridge. Not a problem- brew, no-chill. When space opens up in the fridge, pitch and go.

-You don't have to *make* a yeast starter. Just divert a bit of the wort into a separate container and use it for a "real wort starter." No more "making beer to make beer."

-No-chill means less equipment is used during the brew. No hauling out the hoses and no running hot water on the lawn.

-It could mean less start up costs for a new brewer.


If you are going to store it without adding the yeast, there is a VERY large part of me saying that an infection is coming and you are wasting your time and good beer!

When one uses proper no-chill technique, infection is not an issue. Keep in mind; the wort, which is at near boiling temperature, is being transferred into a clean container and sealed. The heat of the wort kills any bacteria that may be in the container.

I know Brad wants to make the software as versatile as possible, and feature rich. But is this really needed? How many people will actually use this, Or better yet, how many people think I'm totally off base here?

I hate to be the nay sayer, IMO it does not sound like a sound brewing technique.

What can I say? No-chill works. Brewers who try it see the benefits and add it to their repertoire. The numbers of brewers who use it is increasing. If BeerSmith were to include a no-chill option, no-chill brewers looking to buy brewing software would be more likely to buy BeerSmith.


 

MaltLicker

Forum Moderator
Grandmaster Brewer
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
2,004
Reaction score
0
ChuckE said:
If it’s not for you- fair enough. I will say this; I have yet to see one brewer who tried it or saw it in action, who wasn’t convinced.

Found one.  When I started, back in mid-90's, I didn't have a chiller, and the ice/bath/sink thing never got cold enough, so I would let it finish cooling over night.  I thought I was genius b/c the break material all fell out and I'd transfer it and pitch yeast into fairly clean wort.  And you're right it separates the boil day from getting yeast ready.  I didn't brew that often, then stopped until 2007.  Did same process I'd done before, got some DMS comments on my first competition feedback, and had to look up DMS online.  Now, knowing about all the benefits of speedy chilling (cold break, reduced infection risk, getting yeast on wort sooner, etc.) I know I'd never go back to no-chill.  If it works for you, great, run with it.  It is easier. 

Cooling does take me 25 minutes, but I capture 30 gallons of hot water and use it for cleaning the mash pot, watering plants later, or I'm recycling ice water. 
 

ChuckE

Apprentice
Joined
Sep 24, 2009
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
Location
Alabama
Not to put too fine a point on it, but leaving wort in the brew pot overnight to cool isn’t the no-chill technique being discussed. (I don’t mean to seem like I’m arguing semantics, but the difference is important.) The difference being the transfer of near boiling wort into a HDPE container, such as
75038p.jpg
or
75030p.jpg


This step, unlike just leaving wort in a brew pot, creates a closed environment that protects the wort from infection for a couple days or a couple weeks.

Like you said, “If it works for you, great, run with it.” No-chill isn’t for everyone. But more and more home brewers are using this technique and most of those brewers us some sort of brewing software. It would be great if BS could make no-chill an option… and I think it would lead to more sales.
 

wyzazz

Apprentice
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
I'd also like to see a "No Chill" option added.  Maybe something like a button along the top, that allows you to convert the recipe to "No Chill" by change the hop additions outlined in the aforementioned chart on the HBT Forum.  Also maybe adding the tag (No Chill) to the recipe name to differentiate it from a standard recipe? 
 

///

Apprentice
Joined
Oct 8, 2008
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
/// said:
There must be someone out there can get a commercial brewery to test bitterness, the brewery I work with lab comprises of a hydrometer, pH meter and refractometer ... its by the seat of your pants brewing that is for sure.

Scotty

Can add to this, new brewery I am working on as a photospectormeter. Without a BU contirbution in BM for Whirlpool hops was getting 30-60% BU contribution from late hops. the newer Aussie varieties (ie. Topaz/Galaxy) with AA at 15-17% has been tough to handle, throwing BU's out significantly.

I would say the wort pack method would see massive over bittering with the excess dissolution and contact time of the AA's.

Scotty
 

orenb

Apprentice
Joined
Sep 8, 2013
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
+1 on this suggestion.

This has become such a popular technique, that it would be great to see it in BeerSmith, specifically for calculating hops adjustments.
 

HeraldOfChange

Apprentice
Joined
Nov 27, 2013
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
It's been a while since the last comment, but I'd like to add my 2 cents worth.

1. I've previously raised this issue as well, with Brad, and its not so easy an issue to resolve.

2. Let's clarify "No -Chill" for our non-Aussie brethren. The simplest way to describe No Chill is to describe it as hot canning your wort. That is, while the wort is at or near boiling point, it is transfered to an HDPE food grade container, most os the air is evacuated from the container and then the container is sealed. As the container and wort inside cools, it creates a vacuum within the container and vacuum seals the container. The surface to air ratio/exposure is very small or almost zero, this means that anything that is volatile essentially remains in solution and doesn't evaporate off. If there is a small air sack in the container anything that does evaporate off quickly reaches saturated equilibrium and the process comes to a stop. This is relevant to the DMS discussion raised earlier.

3. Hop isomerization will continue, at a decreasing rate as long as the temperature remains above 80°C, or so the literature seems to indicate. This is where the ball park figure of an additional 20min additional bittering comes into play. this is relevant whether you use No Chill, a Coolship, an icebath, or just "leave it in the pot" to naturally cool. I've used all these methods and found No Chill to be superior in every way, both from a hygine/sanitary/infection risk scenario through to a simply reliable and practical way of wort management. The other methods have their place especially if you're into historic brewing reenactments, but No Chill is better.

4. I've also used an immersion circulator, a counterflow chiller and plate chiller, and while I love my plate chiller, for its superior cooling to these other flow methods, I can not countenance the amount of water that is needed to cool the wort - quickly to pitching rates. It is eventually a phenomenal waste of water, and if you live in drought prone regions that means you can not, in good conscience brew on water restriction days. This is an overlooked, and imho, an intregral reason for using the No Chill method. All the other benefits are nice, but simply put No Chill is the greenest method on hand to coo beer well, repeatably, predictably, and safely.

5.The latest update of Beersmith is out and this is the reason I am here, posting. I love it, but what I'd like to see, in the Equipment Design Module is a segment that allows the user to select their Chilling Method. I believe this is just as important as our choice of Mash Schedule. Emersion chillers have a certain efficiency at cooling, flow rate has a direct effect on the cooling rate. Same with Counterflow Chillers and Plate Chillers (plate chillers increase their effectiveness with the number of plates.) At the other end are the passive methods: Coolship, In-the-Pot, Icebath, and No Chill. Again each of these have a predictable rate of cooling based on surface area and/or the addition of ice. In end effect, the rate and efficiency of cooling directly controls the rate of decrease in hop isomerization in the wort while the wort is above 80°C This is the factor that I think brewers are looking for to be added to the IBU calculations. As these are additional bitterness, then the final IBU's should be able to be calculated with a simple sum, and this chiller module can be developed and tweaked independently of the rest of the program, either outputting a zero sum, or a greater number (if and when its working).

6. Now, you might call this extended bittering "hop steeping" but what's the factor for that, in each of the above scenarios? And if you Whirlpool, that also has a timed factor to be taken into account prior to cooling.

All in all I love the new changes, I look forward to seeing how the whirlpool/steeped hops factor works in brewing calculations and hope, that "Cooling" as an important, and controllable, factor is eventually worked into Beersmith down the road.

Cheers!

Ad:HOC Brauerei
Hamburg, Germany.

(yes, I'm an Aussie, AND I live in Germany)
 
Top