Upgrading: Stay direct fire or go steam?

[fearless1]

I hear all the time that certain craft beers are great but, "Not as good as it used to be". The logical part of me has pondered this for years. I suppose the thought I have gravitated to is, as a brewery grows and equipment is expanded, the profile has to change somewhat due to different equipment. It is time for us to make a radical expansion. The 7bbl direct fire kettle will be replaced with? Would it be a mistake to go steam? Will our Scottish ales that have always been the backbone of our product line suffer? If one of you folks out there has been where I currently am, please let me know what you think. Thanks ahead of time!

Drink more beer,

Ken Johnson
Fearless Brewing Company

[Jephro]

I have worked with both and like the both, but if it was my money and i had the choice... I prefer steam, you may loose a bit of caramelization in the kettle, but i brew on a 7 bbl direct fire kettle and i really don't notice that much caramelization in the kettle unless i boil for 2+ hours. Today's malt options allow you to produce the same flavors without extended boils anyway.

My personal pros for steam:
- quicker heating and more consistant and uniform boil
- longer life span (less metal fatigue)
- no real risk (far far less anyway) to dry-fire
- easier clean-up
- little or no caramelization in the kettle (think pislners and wits)
- no scorching - lost a hefe when the kettle was turned off during boil and was re-fired scorching the trub that settled while flame was off -(DOH, still pissed about that one!)
... i'm sure i could come up with more, but that's just off the top of my head.


BTW - How long to you boil your Scotch? Do you really think you are getting that much color/flavor during the boil? All BK's are not created equal, and you may be getting more than i do. (the caramelization factor) --> good question for a sales person who deals both..

Good luck!!

[GlacierBrewing]

I have always been more satisfied with steam vs. direct fire. Could be my own psychosis, but I feel steam gives a more "even" heat all over the bottom and sides of my kettle. I was always concerned that I'd get too much caramelization of the wort with direct fire.
On a side note: It seems to me that the perceived change in product taste/quality of a brewery undergoing an expansion might have more to do with the economies of scale regarding higher quality/higher cost ingredients. IE "can you afford to make 100bbls of your beer using the same higher quality ingredients that you used to make 10bbls? Or do you need to make some sacrifices?"

my two cents.....

Prost!
Dave

[Vendetta]

indirect fire?

I don't know anything about it, but another thread mentions "indirect fire", which seems like an interesting option:

http://www.probrewer.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=10731&highlight=indirect

[beermkr]

I have brewed on basically all three. I do not like boilers. That being said I also hated dealing with a fire directly on the bottom of the kettle. The Peter Austin system I worked on was cool, but the heat on the bottom always left a hard cleanup.

I use a DME system now with an Economite power burner that blows into a baffled chamber. The stack damper is closed about 80% so it retains a lot of heat in the fire chamber. It is probably the most efficient and finest system I have brewed on. I brew a light colored lager on it and have no issues with darkening during the boil. Matter of fact it boils consistently with the burner turned down to 4.5 on a scale of 10.

Steam systems are hampered for me by the requirement to cover the jackets. If I want to make a half batch of beer in my current system I do it. The only issues I run into with smaller batches is mash tun dynamics (and I think I have a solution for that).

R/

[Jephro]

...Steam systems are hampered for me by the requirement to cover the jackets. If I want to make a half batch of beer in my current system I do it...

I don't quite agree with that statement, i, first would strongly recommend against it, but have seen steam jackets dry-fired and left on overnight with no resulting damage- just some discoloration that vanished with a mild acid CIP.

The Steam Jacketed Bohemian System i brewed on had 2 jackets. The main jacket covered the bottom and wrapped first 18" or so of the sidewalls. The second started at the halfway point up about 18". The steam supply pipe to the top jacket had been retrofitted with a simple gate valve, turn it and blammo- no steam for you. The return side was obviously left un-restricted to allow for thermal expansion and contraction.

Half batches we just kept the top jacket off. During runoff we ran just the bottom jacket until the runoff was mostly covering the top jacket.

I should also mention a couple other things i loved about that Bohemian sys and the boiler.

-Steam Jacket Mash Tun with Agitator (mash mixer)
-set the temp for 100°F the first rest (B-glucan Mash in) and turn on the tap water and auger
-step up setpoint on the for each rest and the mixer and steam jacket does the rest
- Steam heated CIP station

That said, and although i have never worked with Indirect fire it does sound kinda nice, a best of both worlds type thing maybe..? Boilers definitely do require regular maintenance and some extra TLC.

[fearless1]

I sure appreciate all the responses fellas. There have been numerous threads about fire -vs- steam. I was looking for actual experience on the change. I am still wondering, as I asked in my original post. Has anyone stepped up from a smaller direct fire system to a larger system with steam and noticed a change in their beers due to this?

Ken Johnson