Flameout Hop Additions

[Shamus O'Sean]

The Notes tab of the spreadsheet says Off for Tinseth method of calculating IBUs, On for Gareth method, which supposedly allows for boil volume.  My guess is that the Tinseth method assumes a full boil.  

If it is on and boil volume is 10L the HCF is 1.2, if the boil volume is 20L the HCF is 1.1  Without the HCF on you might be extracting even less bitterness than expected, which @ChristinaS1 has already noted is pretty low.

Some say the BU:GU ratio (bitterness units to grain units, I think) should be around 0.5  but different beers have different ratios. 

[Otto Von Blotto]

It's bitterness units to gravity units. For example if you had a beer of 1.050 OG bittered to 50 IBU then the BU:GU ratio is 1.  I normally brew my pale ales to around 0.7-0.8 (35-40 IBUs, ~1.050 OG).

[MitchellScott]

Thanks for explaining guys.

To keep approximately 18.5 IBU's wouldn't the original 150 lashes be around 0.45 BU:GU?

Its 4.2% with 18.5 IBU so I'm thinking it will have a low BU:GU originally? Well at least that's how I understand it haha. Thanks again :).

[Norris!]

5 hours ago, Shamus O'Sean said:

The Notes tab of the spreadsheet says Off for Tinseth method of calculating IBUs, On for Gareth method, which supposedly allows for boil volume.  My guess is that the Tinseth method assumes a full boil.  

If it is on and boil volume is 10L the HCF is 1.2, if the boil volume is 20L the HCF is 1.1  Without the HCF on you might be extracting even less bitterness than expected, which @ChristinaS1 has already noted is pretty low.

Some say the BU:GU ratio (bitterness units to grain units, I think) should be around 0.5  but different beers have different ratios. 

So I keep the HCF off because I feel that for my brewing methods the tinseth formula is the most accurate, but that depends on boil temp and strength, two brewers with the same wort and same hops won't get the same bitterness.

I also keep it off because bitterness is an estimate that for most beers I brew, under 40 IBUs, the possible difference with a 10l boil vs 25l boil and the hops timing shouldn't affect the outcome to much, especially if you do mostly 15 minutes and down. My last reason for keeping it off is because I felt that with it on I was getting to much bitterness.

In Mitchell's case if he had the HCF on he would of added more hops which would of increased the bitterness, which is not what he wanted, so it is kind of pointless worrying about whether it should be on our off as it extracted more bitterness than he wanted with it off.

As for his bitterness levels BU:GU ratios, most of my beers are not balanced, nor do I want them to be, unless I am trying to get a style down or something like an old school lager.

If someone wants to brew a beer with 20ibus like a stone and wood Pacific ale then cool go get it, but once again his brew was too bitter already, so that is not the avenue to look down. I also feel that the BU:GU ratio is a tool that I look at for 2 seconds and move on, unless I see a red flag I don't stop, a red flag would be some crazy number like 0.20 or something.  A lot of ales I like and brew have crazy ratios that maybe 10 or 15 years ago would make people laugh/cry, in fact I am unsure if I ever brewed a 1:1 ratio beer. For my brewery and tastes I hover between 0.5 and 0.8 BU:GU ratio with huge flameouts and dry hops.

So with that said, I think there are a few options, cut the flameout additions and just drop them in for 5 minutes, I think Ian's spreadsheet goes in 5 or 3 minute intervals for adjusting the bitterness. Then cool the wort as soon as possible and add flameout hops below 80c.

Get beersmith or another software, Headmaster had a nice one brewcipher I think, I never used it but you get the idea. They calculate flameout additions.

You have to remember that each brewery is different so until you figure yours out you will hit and miss on bitterness until then. So estimate on the low side until you get it.

Cheers

Norris

[ChristinaS1]

I don't like bitter beer either. For most of my Pale Ales I aim for a BU:GU ratio of 0.7, similar to Otto.

Dry hopping doesn't add measurable IBUs, without a doubt it leads to more perceived bitterness. This bitterness is more resinous, and grassy. One way to reduce the bitterness of your beer is too reduce or eliminate the size of your dry hops. I notice that many APA and Session IPA recipes don't dry hop, or use only 15gm or so. 

Another thing with brewing low gravity beers is to pay attention to the final gravity. They shouldn't finish too dry. You could take a sample of 150 Lashes, degas it, and measure the FG. That may help guide your choice of yeast. US-05 may my be too attenuative for a low gravity beer. 

Cheers,

Christina.

[Beerlust]

7 hours ago, Shamus O'Sean said:

The Notes tab of the spreadsheet says Off for Tinseth method of calculating IBUs, On for Gareth method, which supposedly allows for boil volume.  My guess is that the Tinseth method assumes a full boil. 

Garetz theory for IBU calculation is based on hop weight vs liquid boil volume. If boiling at lower liquid volumes, certain weights of hops start to affect bittering outcomes.

Although the formula is still relevant, with the advent of higher alpha acid hops that effectively reduce the need for higher weights to create bitterness, many of the previous problems associated with small volume boils to create higher levels of bitterness can be almost eliminated.

That said, certain styles of beer with very high IBU levels do still create limits on what can be achieved from using lower volume boils.

For any brewer that has any concerns about the hop they are using with a certain lower volume boil to create bitterness, please don't hesitate to ask me for advice.

The door is always open. 

Cheers,

Lusty.

[Beerlust]

1 hour ago, ChristinaS1 said:

...Dry hopping doesn't add measurable IBUs, without a doubt it leads to more perceived bitterness. This bitterness is more resinous, and grassy.

I've spoken about this subject numerous times over the last few years & this conversation about IBU links with dry hop additions creating bitterness is simply BS (IMHO). Bitterness is created through the isomerisation of hop alpha acids that ONLY occurs on a sliding scale from boiling temp to an approx. mark of 80°C. Any links to increased IBU's from hop additions outside that mark are purely speculative against most of the proven science of how bitterness is created from hops.

Resinous aspects of hops usually come from a genetic trait of the hop, not specifically from dry hopping ANY/EVERY hop. Grassy aspects from dry hopping are generally caused by over-exposure times where the hop matter (particularly the vegetal matter) has been in contact with the wort or beer past a point where the aromatic oils have already leeched out & the physical hop matter should have been separated from the wort/beer to avoid this unwanted trait. Often an astringency comes along with this that is regularly confused with bitterness when tasting the final beer as it creates a similar puckering affect to REAL bitterness.

For those that wish to believe in this BS about dry hopping creating bitterness, then enjoy your space in that land of confusion & the varying problems your belief creates for you as you continue to brew. 

Just my 2 cents,

Lusty.

[ChristinaS1]

Okay Lusty, I agree (in part anyway) that resinous flavours may be variety specific, and that grassiness can come from leaving dry hops in too long, but I disagree with them not adding bitterness. I would like to see some links please to back up your claim about dry hopping not adding bitterness, as I have read and heard things to the contrary. It appears especially so when they are not super fresh, or when they are in pellet form, which is the only form I can get. 

I know you are not a fan of Scott Janish Lusty, but for for the sake of others I will link to his blog post on the subject: http://scottjanish.com/increasing-bitterness-dry-hopping/.  He references several scientific studies in his footnotes. In addition, the organic chemist of Yakima Chief Hops says the same thing in this podcast which I just listened to: http://www.thebrewingnetwork.com/hop-and-brew-school-ep5-hop-chemistry-101/  Thank you to the Captain who told me about this podcast in another thread. 

The parts of the podcast relating to the subject start at 9:30, and again at 18:00. To summarize, an IBU is a UV measurement of everything that is absorbs the 275 nanometer wavelength.  This is the method most commonly used to measure bitterness. Only 70% of that is iso-alpha acids, the remaining 30% is other stuff, most of it degradative compounds. You need a different method to measure these other compounds, called HPLC. These oxidized alpha acids, called humulinones, have 70% of the bittering capability of iso-alpha acids. Because of their small molecule size, they are very soluble, even at fermentation / dry hopping temperatures. 

One of the studies Scott Janish linked to found that commercial beers dry hopped at rates equivalent to 35gm / US 5 gallon (= 1.8gm/L)  had high levels of humulinones. Given that I still think it makes sense to be careful with how much dry hops you throw at a low gravity beer, especially if you are trying to avoid bitterness not accounted for by brewing software....

Cheers Lusty. I look forward to reading your links!  

Christina.

 

 

 

[porschemad911]

15 hours ago, MitchellScott said:

Its 4.2% with 18.5 IBU so I'm thinking it will have a low BU:GU originally?

Yes you're right there.

I use Tinseth for partial and full volume boils with the default constants. I don't attempt to calculate an IBU number for flameout additions, it's pretty much guesswork with the currently available calculators.  Taste the beer and adjust bitterness the next time. 

For a first go, I would drop your 10 min addition amounts to 10g of each hop and keep the flameout additions as is. 150 Lashes a definitely not a very bitter or hoppy beer. 

Good luck with the beer! See how it turns out and adjust it the next time. 

Cheers, 

John 

[MitchellScott]

52 minutes ago, porschemad911 said:

Yes you're right there.

I use Tinseth for partial and full volume boils with the default constants. I don't attempt to calculate an IBU number for flameout additions, it's pretty much guesswork with the currently available calculators.  Taste the beer and adjust bitterness the next time. 

For a first go, I would drop your 10 min addition amounts to 10g of each hop and keep the flameout additions as is. 150 Lashes a definitely not a very bitter or hoppy beer. 

Good luck with the beer! See how it turns out and adjust it the next time. 

Cheers, 

John 

I was going to roll with a 15g Nelson, Amarillo and Willamette 10min boil, then add nothing at flameout and dry hop another 10g of each. What are your thoughts of this?

I did download BeerSmith 3 last night as a trial so will try and have a play with it tonight and see what I can work out. But if I can get the bitterness I need from a 10min boil then just dry hop the rest, I don't see why that wouldn't work for me.

Thanks for the help again guys, some really interesting info in this thread :).

[Beerlust]

Hi Christina. 

7 hours ago, ChristinaS1 said:

I know you are not a fan of Scott Janish Lusty, but for for the sake of others I will link to his blog post on the subject: http://scottjanish.com/increasing-bitterness-dry-hopping/.  He references several scientific studies in his footnotes.

It's not that I'm "not a fan of Scott Janish", I just found the articles I've read of his to be more suggestive, rather than factual.

7 hours ago, ChristinaS1 said:

...In addition, the organic chemist of Yakima Chief Hops says the same thing in this podcast which I just listened to: http://www.thebrewingnetwork.com/hop-and-brew-school-ep5-hop-chemistry-101/  Thank you to the Captain who told me about this podcast in another thread. 

The parts of the podcast relating to the subject start at 9:30, and again at 18:00. To summarize, an IBU is a UV measurement of everything that is absorbs the 275 nanometer wavelength.  This is the method most commonly used to measure bitterness. Only 70% of that is iso-alpha acids, the remaining 30% is other stuff, most of it degradative compounds. You need a different method to measure these other compounds, called HPLC. These oxidized alpha acids, called humulinones, have 70% of the bittering capability of iso-alpha acids. Because of their small molecule size, they are very soluble, even at fermentation / dry hopping temperatures.

I had not listened to the brewing network podcast on this subject before, so out of respect & interest I did.

I don't have a spectrophotometer, nor do I ever think I'll need one. I use the Tinseth formula for IBU calculation as do a large whack of brewers on this planet. I have known for sometime that the figurative number that the Tinseth formula gives would not match the number spat out by a spectrophotometer if I was to have the final beer analyzed.

So if we assume that the current Tinseth formula I use to give me a figurative number is actually only calculating 70% of the total bittering compounds of the beer & that if a new formula was devised that could calculate the bitterness created by the other 30% of "degradative compounds" (found in the matrix from the podcast) & add it to the IBU number calculated by the Tinseth formula of the 70% of isomerized alpha acids from the boil, I would then have a new IBU number.

Would the sheer astonishment of a new figurative IBU number make one iota of difference to the way I brew my favourite beer(s)? NO.

I bitter my beer(s) inline with commercial levels I have often physically sampled. The figurative number attached to my beers is largely irrelevant to me.

I think a few of these guys are still trapped in the Matrix. Let's hope Neo & Morpheus unplug them soon. 

Cheers,

Lusty.

[ChristinaS1]

Thanks for listening to the podcast Lusty. 

Yes, the calculators are just models, which work pretty well for boiled additions, but are not perfect. There are so many variables, the best they can do is get you in the ballpark. There is always a certain amount of trial and error in brewing.

Calculators work less well for whirlpool additions, and not at all for dry hop additions. My point was that dry hops do add bitterness, from humulinones. Maybe some day they will figure out a model to predict that.

Cheers,

Christina.

[Beerlust]

2 hours ago, ChristinaS1 said:

...Yes, the calculators are just models, which work pretty well for boiled additions, but are not perfect. There are so many variables, the best they can do is get you in the ballpark. There is always a certain amount of trial and error in brewing.

Agreed.

2 hours ago, ChristinaS1 said:

...Calculators work less well for whirlpool additions, and not at all for dry hop additions. My point was that dry hops do add bitterness, from humulinones. Maybe some day they will figure out a model to predict that.

I'll agree to disagree about dry hops adding bitterness, but if others wish to work off of that premise then I wish them well with creating beers to currently immeasurable IBU levels in that space.

With any advice I offer, I try to give brewers ways to track, measure, & accurately quantify what they are doing so that perceivable adjustments can be made where necessary. If you throw in a miscellaneous, immeasurable, unquantifiable oddity with yet to be identified values into the mix, how do you expect people to adjust & correct in this unknown area?

Cheers,

Lusty.

[porschemad911]

8 hours ago, MitchellScott said:

I was going to roll with a 15g Nelson, Amarillo and Willamette 10min boil, then add nothing at flameout and dry hop another 10g of each. What are your thoughts of this?

Yep that would be another way to do it. Would yield a slightly different result but you'd have to brew it both ways and compare to see which you prefer.

I always like a flameout and dry hop addition as I find the hop aroma sticks around for longer as the beer ages (vs dry hop only). 

Cheers, 

John 

[ChristinaS1]

3 hours ago, Beerlust said:

Agreed.

I'll agree to disagree about dry hops adding bitterness, but if others wish to work off of that premise then I wish them well with creating beers to currently immeasurable IBU levels in that space.

With any advice I offer, I try to give brewers ways to track, measure, & accurately quantify what they are doing so that perceivable adjustments can be made where necessary. If you throw in a miscellaneous, immeasurable, unquantifiable oddity with yet to be identified values into the mix, how do you expect people to adjust & correct in this unknown area?

Cheers,

Lusty.

I am not throwing humulinones in Lusty, they have always been there.   And brewers will deal them the way they have always done: using their tastebuds, trial and error, and keeping careful notes. At least by being aware that they exist, they have more knowledge upon which to base their adjustments, like Mitchell with this recipe. 

Mitchell, I am not sure I would forego a hop stand addition. Like Porchemad, I think they are quite helpful. Maybe try a hop stand with 5gm of each variety, for 20 minutes, and reduce the DH a bit more. 

Because I bottle, I find that a 20 minute addition helps the flavour last longer in the bottle. I often do additions at 20-10-4, and then a hop stand. Good luck with the brew Mitchell. You will have to let us know how it turns out.

Cheers,

Christina.

[porschemad911]

9 hours ago, Beerlust said:

So if we assume that the current Tinseth formula I use to give me a figurative number is actually only calculating 70% of the total bittering compounds of the beer & that if a new formula was devised that could calculate the bitterness created by the other 30% of "degradative compounds" (found in the matrix from the podcast) & add it to the IBU number calculated by the Tinseth formula of the 70% of isomerized alpha acids from the boil, I would then have a new IBU number.

Unfortunately it's not simple. The difference would depend on the amount, makeup, addition timing and temperature and the age abs storage conditions of the hops used.

While Tinseth doesn't model the contribution of non iso-alpha acid bittering compounds, it also doesn't model the degradation of any bittering compounds (including iso-alpha acids). So these 2 factors sort of compensate for each other for normal boil additions, and that compensation resulted in the model fitted to his data gathered from industry as well as his own experiments.

However you cannot use Tinseth for the IBU contribution of non-boil additions because it was not built from that sort of data and it does not consider the factors affecting bitterness that those additions bring.

Cheers, 

John 

[Beerlust]

35 minutes ago, porschemad911 said:

Unfortunately it's not simple. The difference would depend on the amount, makeup, addition timing and temperature and the age abs storage conditions of the hops used.

While Tinseth doesn't model the contribution of non iso-alpha acid bittering compounds, it also doesn't model the degradation of any bittering compounds (including iso-alpha acids). So these 2 factors sort of compensate for each other for normal boil additions, and that compensation resulted in the model fitted to his data gathered from industry as well as his own experiments.

However you cannot use Tinseth for the IBU contribution of non-boil additions because it was not built from that sort of data and it does not consider the factors affecting bitterness that those additions bring.

Yep, I think I already covered this in my previous post.

Nice re-wording though John, & it got likes. 

Cheers,

Lusty.

[porschemad911]

1 hour ago, Beerlust said:

Yep, I think I already covered this in my previous post.

Nice re-wording though John, & it got likes. 

Cheers,

Lusty.

Haha... I was just trying to highlight some of the actual reasons there will be differences. I'm pretty sure you'd come up with the same list anyway. 

Cheers, 

John 

[BlackSands]

21 hours ago, ChristinaS1 said:

 

Yes, the calculators are just models, which work pretty well for boiled additions, but are not perfect. There are so many variables, the best they can do is get you in the ballpark.

Even that seems debatable.   Every Brulosophy trial I've read where they've sent the beer off to a lab for IBU analysis the numbers were usually way off compared to estimated values.  Seems it's a very big ballpark!   

[The Captain!!]

1 hour ago, BlackSands said:

Even that seems debatable.   Every Brulosophy trial I've read where they've sent the beer off to a lab for IBU analysis the numbers were usually way off compared to estimated values.  Seems it's a very big ballpark!   

Experimental Homebrew did the same thing and it was very different depending on process 

[Otto Von Blotto]

The tinseth formula calculates IBU pre fermentation. It's not gonna be the same once it's turned into beer. If they sent beer off then I'd expect it to be different, if they sent unfermented wort, I'd still expect some differences. It's pretty difficult to accurately predict something like that with the variables that exist.

Whether or not it's terribly accurate, once you work out your system and whatnot, it does, at least for me, result in predictable results at the glass. I know if I brew a pale ale to 35-38 IBUs using my usual hop schedule, the beer will turn out nicely balanced. Whatever it is in the glass I don't really care, the important thing is that it tastes how it should. It works with the other styles I brew as well. I've had a few turn out a bit sweet but rarely are they too bitter.

[BlackSands]

28 minutes ago, Otto Von Blotto said:

The tinseth formula calculates IBU pre fermentation. It's not gonna be the same once it's turned into beer. If they sent beer off then I'd expect it to be different, if they sent unfermented wort, I'd still expect some differences. It's pretty difficult to accurately predict something like that with the variables that exist.

Whether or not it's terribly accurate, once you work out your system and whatnot, it does, at least for me, result in predictable results at the glass. I know if I brew a pale ale to 35-38 IBUs using my usual hop schedule, the beer will turn out nicely balanced. Whatever it is in the glass I don't really care, the important thing is that it tastes how it should. It works with the other styles I brew as well. I've had a few turn out a bit sweet but rarely are they too bitter.

Surely the whole point is to estimate the IBU in the final product, i.e. beer as opposed to wort?  But either way, I agree - regardless of whether the numbers are accurate as long a you know what to aim for in your own system and processes then what the actual IBU numbers are is somewhat irrelevant.   

[Otto Von Blotto]

It would be great if there was a formula that could somewhat accurately predict the IBUs in finished beer but given the 10-30% scrubbing rate from fermentation among other variables, it would be pretty difficult to even guess it. All brewing software and the calculations on the Coopers kits are pre ferment IBUs. 

I'd be interested to have my beer tested and compare it to a 10-30% reduction on the IBUs calculated by Beersmith. Just not interested enough to either buy equipment to do it or take it somewhere and pay for it, as I'd imagine it's not cheap

[MitchellScott]

20 minutes ago, Otto Von Blotto said:

It would be great if there was a formula that could somewhat accurately predict the IBUs in finished beer but given the 10-30% scrubbing rate from fermentation among other variables, it would be pretty difficult to even guess it. All brewing software and the calculations on the Coopers kits are pre ferment IBUs. 

I'd be interested to have my beer tested and compare it to a 10-30% reduction on the IBUs calculated by Beersmith. Just not interested enough to either buy equipment to do it or take it somewhere and pay for it, as I'd imagine it's not cheap

So the IBU's generally given in spreadsheets/brewing software generally are 10-30% lower after its fermented?

Interesting if that's the case. So technical  hahaha.

[The Captain!!]

54 minutes ago, Otto Von Blotto said:

It would be great if there was a formula that could somewhat accurately predict the IBUs in finished beer but given the 10-30% scrubbing rate from fermentation among other variables,

These latest podcasts I’ve been listening to suggest up to double the amount predicted of ibus in the wort from boil then from there comes back down to what is predicted in most software. 

Just an interesting tit bit of info