Double Density Brewing

[ParishBrewingCo]

Anyone ever heard of double-density brewing being done on a commercial scale? The idea is that the wort is produced to double density and then transferred to fermenter normally - then the wort in FV is diluted by the same amount sterile water, doubling the volume. I think it is exclusively done with extract brewing. Any reason why it isn't done by grain-only production breweries? What effect would this technique cause to flavor? I'd love to be able to eliminate that 2nd brew when filling a double FV. Seems hair-brained but it got me thinkin'.

Andrew

[Roger Greene]

A lot of large breweries do high gravity brewing, this is producing a normal 11.5° beer at 15-18°. Although with this type of brewing, the dilution is done after filtration. One of the big issues with brewing high gravities is the size of your equipment. You can basically only go to the max load of your lauter tun, and then you need to think about getting all of the extract out (more sparging). You get lower hop utilization at higher gravities and blending the water can be tough without a dosing pump and static mixer. Depending on when you add the water, aeration could also be an issue.

[liammckenna]

What you're talking about is high gravity brewing as opposed to high gravity fermenting.

It works.

Hop utilization is lower.

Worked in a brewery once where strike volume was 22 hL whereas initial volume in the fermentor was about 30 hL. Conversion temps were high to mitigate the watering down effect on body. Head retention was not negatively impacted.

Don't know if I'd go as high as 'double' density.

Luck

Liam

[The BrewShed]

I think PBR does it

read "Product Information"... it leaves me confused . . .

http://pabstblueribbon.wordpress.com/2010/01/19/product-information/

[TL Services]

Just to agree with Roger and Liam - you can increase output capacity without increasing plant size.

The maximum dilution I've seen is ~50%, usually it's nearer 30-40% (so makes 100brls of final product beer from 60-70brls at conditioning/maturation).

Usual process is to dilute at filtration - either before or afterwards, depending on how good your water is.

Remember to use de-aerated water (<50ppb ideally) however as otherwise your DO2 will be enormous

[NinkasiSwain]

I'm definitely interested to hear more about your expectations and results, should you proceed.

On first glance, seems like it'd be tough to convert an existing recipe with an existing flavor profile and existing customers with existing expectations you're already selling without spending a goodly amount of time learning and tweaking due to "off"-flavor batches.

If it's a new beer style or new product you're looking at brewing, it seems like you could blend to whatever extent you're comfortable while achieving the desired flavor profile you expect or want to promote from then-on. And then, it is exactly what it was intended to be, and reproducible.

It's no so much about doing it "right", as it is doing it "right for what you want" and reproducibly, right?

Some additional malt, more energy and hot water during sparging, (possibly) some more hops to account for the lower utilization, you get green beer one batch-time earlier ... seems like that may be well worth the energy and time saved from a second brew malt-to-wort.

And, if he's doubling-down prior to fermentation in the fermenter itself, wouldn't any dissolved oxygen introduced in the water help out fermentation? Tap-/Sterile-water oxygen concentrations can vary muchly, but woulnd't they'd be lower than would negatively impact yeast, and below the maybe 7-14 ppm recommended for regular-gravity brewing? He'd still hafta make up for any DO gap with a stone and an oxygen tank. Unless he chose to brew this batch at whatever the combination of wort and water produced everytime from day one. Is that right? (I'm seriously asking ... I don't know.)

[TL Services]

And, if he's doubling-down prior to fermentation in the fermenter itself, wouldn't any dissolved oxygen introduced in the water help out fermentation? Tap-/Sterile-water oxygen concentrations can vary muchly, but woulnd't they'd be lower than would negatively impact yeast, and below the maybe 7-14 ppm recommended for regular-gravity brewing? He'd still hafta make up for any DO gap with a stone and an oxygen tank. Unless he chose to brew this batch at whatever the combination of wort and water produced everytime from day one. Is that right? (I'm seriously asking ... I don't know.)

Yes, high DO2 water would be needed in FV. Fresh mains-supply water is usually around 9ppm O2, so perhaps a little low, depending on target level for your particular yeast.

Low/deaerated water is the way to go if dilution is done later, eg. at filtration. This is the usual point for dilution as it doesn't need bigger FVs, etc.

[lagunabrewdude]

pH

Don't forget to treat the pH of your dilution water properly!

[Ted Briggs]

As Macro breweries do this alot, there are papers available on the MBAA site about this and related topics...

[Lavery Brewing]

Some re-assurance

We just dabbled in this the past 2 batches.
We are brewing on a 3bbl brewhouse, double batching into a 7 bbl FV.
The last two batches, we've mashed in an extra half bag of malt and then added ten gallons of hot, de-chlorinated water during whirlpool to each batch (20 gallons total). This has dropped our OG to where we want it.

However,I've been awake the past couple night worrying this is gonna have a huge detrimental effect I haven't planned for. I did mash a little hotter to account for body but did not account for lower hop utilization.

Any insights?
First batch of imperial amber tasted great; actually had a higher FG than normal (just .5 P).

Thanks

[Roger Greene]

As far as the temperatures go, they should stay the same if you want the same wort profile. Depending on how much bigger you go, you might need to give it some more time. Just don't go to big because you can only get up to about 18° while still remaining somewhat efficient. Any higher than that you would probably be looking at kettle adjuncts. Hop utilization will be less, but I don't know of any firm numbers. Just see how the final beer is, and if it needs more, add more. Also, when you add the water to dilute, try using cold water (dechlorinated). This can save you on cooling time and cost as well as possibly making the whirlpool quicker (density related). Hope this helps!

[Rob Creighton]

For some reason, we don't market it yet but I view this topic as the one defining characteristic between craft brewer and macro that separates us. High gravity brewing is the dominant characteristic in [U]all[U] macro beers since 1982. We pointed our fingers at pasteurization in the early days as an evil but that is a joke.

I will draw the line at high gravity non batch production. I will be the one outside your plant pointing the finger and screaming "mutant", "evil", "macro"!

[Ted Briggs]

For some reason, we don't market it yet but I view this topic as the one defining characteristic between craft brewer and macro that separates us. High gravity brewing is the dominant characteristic in [U]all[U] macro beers since 1982. :

Acctualy you have to go back over 200 years for the beginning of this practice. They were making high gravity beers and for lower gravity, second runnings beers, watering-down and/or blending at different stages and sometimes small beers were simply made by watering down when served.
Craftbeer IMHO is tide to the integrity of the ingrediants and product more than any individual process or teqnique.

[liammckenna]

Rob,

I'm with you on high gravity fermentation and then watering on the way to the filler. We make beer not beer concentrate (like orange juice - just add three cans of water - sosrt of thing).

Dilution in the fermentor prior to fermenting I think is different though. I don't currently do it but have no objection to it. Most of us have done Plato adjusts for brews where the gravity is abnormally high at strikeout. Isn't this the same thing?

Pax.

Liam

[Rob Creighton]

Dilution in the fermentor prior to fermenting I think is different though. I don't currently do it but have no objection to it. Most of us have done Plato adjusts for brews where the gravity is abnormally high at strikeout. Isn't this the same thing?

Hi Liam, Yup but this is the thin edge of the wedge argument. And of course I have read of many of the different variations of this that have been utilized over the last 200 years.

A classic example is a north eastern brewer making a beer for a rock star. In order to produce a larger knockout, they funded a tank to allow for a higher gravity wort to be diluted on the way to the fermentor. A cheaper answer than replacing the brewhouse for a beer that is meant to "taste like nothing" and it succeeds.

I was in the industry in the late 70's and witnessed the conversion to high gravity in Canada. It instantly created 40% more capacity with minimal investment. A great money saver tied to the movement to less flavor. The North American craft brewer has proven to be very resourceful at saving money and creating something out of nothing. This is one I know we must use to draw a line between them and us so we have some actual differentiation between our products and our price. I think I heard someone say crap in = crap out recently. I hope we have a real plank to stand on whether done in the brewhouse or at the labeler. The customer doesn't know the difference.