Improved brewing process and mash filtration method

Abstract

The present invention relates to an improved brewing process and malt filtration method that enhance the efficiency of the malt filtration stage in beer production. By implementing innovative filtration techniques and equipment modifications, the invention addresses the challenges associated with traditional malt filtration methods, thereby improving clarity, reducing processing time, and increasing overall production yield. This patent application provides a detailed description of the components, operational steps, and unique features of the invention.

Description

Title of the invention: Improved brewing process and method of filtering mash Technical field

[0001] The present invention relates to the field of beer production and, more specifically, to an improved brewing process and a method of filtering malt during beer production. In particular, it relates to a method and a filtration system for producing beer more quickly, with a more stable wort flow, and for improving the yield and efficiency of the entire process. Prior art

[0002] Beer production is ancient in human arts. Some historians and anthropologists believe that it was the need to produce grain to ferment into beer that led to the establishment of civilization thousands of years ago.

[0003] In very general terms, beer production first involves the production of a "sweet wort." Sweet wort is formed by adding water to malted and unmalted crushed grains, such as, but not limited to, barley, to form a slurry or mash in a mash tun. Under the action of natural enzymes, this mash is then converted into sweet wort. The liquid in the sweet wort is then drained from the mash tun and directed to a kettle where hops are added. The hopped liquid is then boiled in the kettle to produce a "hopped wort." The final step in the brewing process is the addition of yeast to cause fermentation in a fermentation tank, resulting in the production of alcohol.

[0004] Over the years, the general process described above has been modified by brewmasters to produce beers with different flavors, colors, clarity, and alcohol content. Different pressures, temperatures, grains, yeasts, and fermentation times produce different beers, which include ales and lagers.

[0005] Mash filtering plays a crucial role in the beer production process, where separating the wort from solid malt particles is essential to obtain a clear liquid for fermentation. Conventional mash filtering methods often suffer from limitations such as low filtration efficiency, increased processing time, and reduced production yield due to clogging and channeling. It is therefore necessary to improve the brewing process and the method of filtering malt to overcome these drawbacks.

[0006] The prior art discloses an interruption of the brewing process in U.S. Patent No. 3,290,153 to Bayne, et al. In this patent, the brewing process is interrupted after the hopped wort has been produced. The hopped wort is then concentrated by passing it through continuous film evaporators or by boiling the water under high pressure to produce a wort concentrate having a solids content of about 80%. After concentration, the wort is cooled to a temperature below 105° F. The patent goes on to state that the wort concentrate may be stored on site or shipped elsewhere for later reconstitution and fermentation. It is not certain that this method has ever been implemented, but in any event, this method of production, however, presents many difficulties, not the least of which are taste, color, etc.of beer depend to a large extent on the quality of the water used for the production of the final product. Thus, producing beer at a location different from where the wort was originally produced using this process is prone to producing beer of varying quality and taste in the various final production facilities or to high costs to neutralize the effect of local water quality. In addition, the cost of producing concentrated wort is itself high, as it requires multiple evaporators or equivalent equipment to produce the concentrated wort.

[0007] Another question regarding the interruption of the brewing process after the production of hopped wort is found in Homebrew Digest. A homebrewer asks if it would be possible to store a small amount of wort after boiling and cooling it in order to sell it to customers of a local home brew shop. It is clear from the disclosure that the process has not been implemented. No process steps are disclosed and no apparatus is discussed. The nature of the disclosure, however, indicates that the storage of small amounts of wort is contemplated, with very short transportation to a "local" home brew shop for later storage and sale. The complications also make the proposed method impractical for home brew shops.

[0008] Many solutions have been presented in the prior art. However, these solutions are limited and restricted to their conventional architecture and installation system and have considerable defects which affect the convenience, performance and efficiency of the system.

[0009] It would therefore be advantageous to propose this new method which reduces the duration of this process by + / - 30 minutes, which represents a reduction of + / - 15%. It also aims to minimize the deterioration of the filter layer in the mash tun, which is made up of malt dregs, in order to obtain a wort as clear as possible. The current system allows for a faster and more stable flow of the must with at least 2 deep cutting phases.

[0010] None of the prior inventions and patents, taken individually or in combination, appear to describe the present invention as claimed. The inventor of the present invention therefore proposes to solve and overcome the existing technical difficulties in order to eliminate the aforementioned defects of the prior art. Summary of the invention

[0011] In light of the disadvantages of the prior art, the following summary is provided to facilitate understanding of some of the innovative features inherent in the present invention and is not intended to be a complete description. A complete appreciation of the various aspects of the invention may be obtained by considering the entire specification, claims, drawings and abstract as a whole.

[0012] The present invention provides an innovative brewing process and malt filtering method that significantly improves the efficiency of malt filtration during beer production. By implementing new techniques and modifying equipment, the invention overcomes the disadvantages of traditional methods, thereby improving clarity, reducing processing time and increasing production yield.

[0013] The main object of the present invention is to provide a new and improved form of a filtration method and system for the production of beers.

[0014] Another object of the present invention is to provide an improved method, in which the yield is improved by reducing the extract concentration of the last run from 1.8 to 0.5% °plato. This results in a significant reduction of COD in the brewhouse wastewater and a more efficient use of the malt.

[0015] The present invention also aims to provide a new and improved method in which the reprogramming of the mash clarification method makes it possible to reduce the duration of the process by + / - 30 minutes, which represents a reduction of + / - 15%.

[0016] One of the objectives of the invention is to provide a method in which emphasis is placed on minimizing the deterioration of the filter layer in the mash tun, which consists of the malt dregs, in order to obtain a wort that is as clear as possible.

[0017] The objective of the invention is also to provide an assembly allowing the user to adjust the temperature of the liquid according to his needs.

[0018] The objective of the invention is also to provide a faster and more stable wort flow with at least two deep cutting phases. In previous approaches, the wort is too clear, which can be counterproductive and lengthen the fermentation time.

[0019] Another aspect of the present invention is to provide a new and improved method in which the yield is improved by reducing the extract concentration of the last run from 1.8 to 0.5% °plato, which results in a significant reduction of COD in the brewhouse wastewater and more efficient utilization of the malt.

[0020] The objective is therefore to propose a new and improved method of producing and filtering beer. Other aspects, advantages and novel features of the present invention will emerge from the detailed description of the invention in light of the accompanying drawings.

[0021] This summary is for the sole purpose of summarizing certain exemplary embodiments, in order to provide a basic understanding of certain aspects of the subject matter described herein. Accordingly, it will be appreciated that the features described above are merely exemplary and should not be construed as limiting the scope or spirit of the subject matter described herein in any manner. Other features, aspects, and advantages of the subject matter described herein will become apparent from the detailed description, figures, and claims that follow. Description of the embodiments

[0022] Detailed descriptions of the preferred embodiment are provided herein. It is understood, however, that the present invention may be embodied in various forms. Therefore, the specific details disclosed herein are not to be construed as limiting, but rather as a basis for the claims and as a representative basis for teaching a person skilled in the art to use the present invention in virtually any system, structure, or manner suitably detailed.

[0023] The terminology used herein is for the sole purpose of describing particular embodiments and is not intended to limit the invention. As used herein, the term "and / or" includes all combinations of one or more of the enumerated elements associated therewith. As used herein, the singular forms "a," "an," "the," and "the" are intended to include the plural forms as well as the singular forms, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. It is understood that the terms "comprises" and / or "comprising," when used in this specification, indicate the presence of features, steps, operations, elements, and / or components given, but do not exclude the presence or addition of one or more other characteristics, steps, operations, elements, components and / or groups thereof.

[0024] The present invention aims to provide an improved beer filtration and production process which is efficient in its performance, reduces COD in brewhouse wastewater and allows efficient use of malt.

[0025] The first step, according to the preferred embodiments, is grinding. Grinding the malt is very important because it is the starting point of the process in the brewhouse. The grinding process exposes the content of the malt grains, which can then be extracted during mashing. The grinding process must be adapted to the subsequent brewing process, in particular to the mashing and selected clarification process, and vice versa. In general, the lauter tun grind should be composed as follows: Intact husks, as completely ground as possible; some coarse semolina, a lot of fine semolina; some flour.The husks should be as intact as possible for the following reasons: they form the filter layer in the clarification tank; minimization of leaching of polyphenols, bitter substances, silicates and proteins from the husks during mashing and clarification (intact husks have a smaller surface area). These substances have a negative influence on: color, flavor and stability. The husks should be completely ground, because the endosperm residues in the husks are protected from enzymatic attack during mashing, which leads to losses in brewing yield + the remaining starch can still be dissolved during filtration -> loss of iodine normality (turbidity of the mash in the beer).

[0026] According to other embodiments, the coarse grains consist mainly of the hardest parts of the grain which have undergone virtually no changes during malting. The cytolytic enzymes have not yet been able to develop their effect on these parts. The coarse grains are therefore only slightly accessible to the enzymes during mashing. The fines and flours, on the other hand, consist of the other parts of the endosperm which have undergone cytolytic changes during malting. These semolinas and flours contain a lot of starch-degrading enzymes and are easily accessible to them, which means that the extract yield of these flour batches is very high. The flours are even more accessible to the enzymes. However, the flours can have a negative effect on the clarification speed because they reduce the volume of the spent grains.In addition, flour easily forms lumps during mashing, into which water and thus enzymes cannot penetrate during mashing.

[0027] The next step, according to the preferred embodiments, concerns the malt plasters. It is essential to clean the malt before grinding: Metal parts can cause sparks in the mill -> risk of explosion. In addition, they can, Just like stones, they damage the mill rollers. In addition, dust and loose husks are removed. Especially during malt conditioning: wet impurities cause considerable loads in the mill.

[0028] The next step, according to the preferred embodiments, is conditioning. Conditioning increases the water content of the malt, in particular that of the husks. The husks become more elastic due to the increased water content and break less quickly in the mill. More intensive grinding of the husks without destroying them -> less husk flour, advantage for the taste and color of the beer; -> more fine grains compared to coarse grains without increasing the flour content; -> advantages during filtering: speed, yield and during mashing: less risk of clumping: better starch solution -> better brewing yield.

[0029] The equipment modifications required for the invention include the following: a. Improved Filtration System: The invention incorporates an improved filtration system that includes a combination of fine mesh screens, porous plates, and adjustable pressure differentials to achieve optimal filtration rates while minimizing clogging. b. Variable Flow Control: The filtration system is equipped with adjustable flow control mechanisms that regulate the flow of wort through the malt bed, thus avoiding excessive channeling and ensuring uniform distribution.

[0030] According to other embodiments, the following filtration techniques are used in the invention: a. Preconditioning: Prior to filtration, the malt undergoes a specific preconditioning process that involves steeping, mashing, or other treatments designed to improve its filterability and reduce particle size variations. b. Staged Filtration: The malt filtration process is divided into several sequential stages, which helps control the flow rate of the wort and gradually remove solid particles. Each stage uses progressively finer filter media, which improves clarity and reduces clogging.

[0031] Mash Clarification Method: After mashing, the present invention incorporates a reprogrammed mash clarification method that reduces the process time by about 30 minutes, a reduction of about 15%. The objective of this method is to achieve a faster and more stable wort flow by implementing at least two deep cutting phases. It has been observed that too much wort Clear can lead to longer fermentation times, and that's why the reprogrammed method strikes a balance between clarity and fermentation efficiency.

[0032] An additional deep cut occurs in the process depending on the wort flow rate and the rate of flow increase.

[0033] Increased Yield and Reduced Extract Concentration: In addition to improvements in filtration and clarification of the mash, the invention has increased yield by reducing the extract concentration of the final runoff water from 1.8 to 0.5% °Plato. This reduction in extract concentration not only improves the profitability of malt utilization, but also results in a significant reduction in COD (chemical oxygen demand) in the brewhouse wastewater. Therefore, the invention contributes to more sustainable brewing practices and efficient use of resources.

[0034] The next step, according to the preferred embodiments, concerns the grain mill (six-roller mill). The roller spacing of the respective roller pairs must be adjusted so that the grind has the desired fineness (grind calibration). A scale allows the roller spacing to be precisely adjusted. However, the composition of the grind depends not only on the roller spacing, but also on the malt type and the malt texture. Therefore, the grind must be checked regularly (grind sorting) and the mill must be readjusted if necessary.

[0035] The next step, according to the preferred embodiments, is mashing. The main task of mashing is to dissolve the fermentable components of the malt (sugar) from the grist and to convert the existing starch into sugar with the help of the malt enzymes. This creates a solution, the malt, in which the extract (sum of the dissolved components) is dissolved. With regard to protein degradation, during mashing, proteins are released from the malt. They are important for the roundness and fullness of the beer, as well as for the foam. They also serve as food for the yeast, but can also lead to cloudiness in the beer.

[0036] According to other embodiments, other degradation reactions during mashing are the Degradation of hemicelluloses and resins (supporting and scaffolding substances, including [3 glucans -> can cause problems in the filtering and clarification process, if present in high concentrations, due to gel formation). Phosphate modification (degradation of organic phosphates, formation of phosphoric acid and primary phosphates -> lowering of pH and increasing buffering of the mash). Lipid degradation (lipids have a negative effect on foam; oxidized lipids can negatively influence the taste; but lipids also stimulate yeast metabolism (especially unsaturated fatty acids));

[0037] According to other embodiments, the modification of phenolic substances (polyphenols contribute to the taste and bitterness of beer and improve the quality of the foam, oxidized polyphenols, on the other hand, have a negative influence on the taste, polyphenols also promote precipitation reactions during mashing and boiling -> increased stability). This also involves the release of zinc (important trace substance for yeast growth, cofactor of alcohol dehydrogenase).

[0038] According to other embodiments, the mashing process is determined according to the properties of the raw materials used (brewing water and malt), the equipment of the brewhouse and the type of beer to be produced. The malt undergoes qualitative variations over time, which means that the mashing process must be regularly monitored by means of a final fermentation and adjusted, if necessary (by modifying the rest times), in order to maintain a constant beer quality.

[0039] According to preferred embodiments, the milling step involves a mashing process that begins with mixing the malt grind with the mashing water, the mashing in. The temperature of the mashing water (mash temperature) is important, as is the ratio of the amount of malt used to the amount of water in the main run.

[0040] In its preferred embodiments, the infusion brewing process is opposed to decoction processes. Mashing is done in a single vessel, without boiling the mash. Infusion brewing processes result in the dissolution and degradation of malt components solely by the action of enzymes present in the malt (without mechanical decomposition of the starch grains by boiling).

[0041] According to the preferred embodiments, the next step is the breakdown of the starch. This is the skin transformation process and the most important process of mashing. The breakdown of starch that cannot be metabolized by the yeast into metabolizable sugars. The three sub-processes are: swelling of the starch grains; gelatinization of the starch (transformation of starch into solution / suspension); the actual enzymatic breakdown into soluble and fermentable sugars (liquefaction and saccharification). Furthermore, depending on the quality and composition of the malt, the mashing process is adjusted, in particular the standing times. The most important enzymes are: • a-amylase, degrades amylose / amylopectin "from the inside" -> oligosaccharides of 6 - 7 glucose residues, formation of dextrins during the degradation of amylopectin (optimum at pH = 5.6 - 5.8 and 70 - 75 °C, damage to the enzyme from about 70 °C, inactivity from about 80 °C); • [3-Amylase, degrades amylose / amylopectin from the reducing end, formation of border dextrins during amylose / amylopectin degradation (optimum at pH = 5.4 - 5.6 and 60 - 65 °C, deterioration above about 65 °C, inactivity from about 70 °C); • Border dextrinase, cleaves the α-(l->6)-glycosidic bonds of border dextrins. (Optimal at pH = 5.1 and 60 - 62.5 °C, inactive at 65 °C); Other enzymes, such as maltase or sucrase, are not relevant at the temperatures prevailing during mashing (over 60°C).

[0042] It can be assumed that the activity of the boundary dextrinase is very low compared to the amylases during mashing (low inact. temperature + few border dextrins present at the beginning of the process) -> many border dextrins remain in the mash. + few border dextrins present at the beginning of the process) -> many border dextrins remain in the wort. In addition, linear oligosaccharides remain (preference of amylases for larger chains). The goal of mashing is iodine neutrality (only branched dextrins up to 60 glucose residues, linear dextrins up to 9) and an ES value of 1.80 (below 2.00) (for Bofferding Pils). This means that there is enough fermentable sugar to achieve the desired alcohol content and there is no coagulation.

[0043] According to other embodiments, the mashing temperature and the 1st standing temperature of 64 °C, the β-amylase is at the optimum point and thus separates the maltose units from the non-reducing end of the amylose and amylopectin chains. The optimum temperature of α-amylase is between 70 and 75 °C, but it is also very active at lower temperatures and also degrades starch. The inactivation temperature of the limiting dextrinase is 65 °C. Its activity also decreases rapidly at higher temperatures. In addition, there are not many limiting dextrins in solution yet, since these must first be formed by the degradation of amylopectin by α-amylase, which means that only a relatively small amount of limiting dextrins can be degraded by the limiting dextrinases. The second rest takes place at 66°C. At this temperature, the limit dextrinase is inactivated.The activity of [3 amylase decreases more sharply at a temperature above 65 °C. However, alpha-amylase still functions below its optimum at 70 - 75 °C. The 3rd rest takes place at 72 °C. At this temperature, [3 amylase is inactivated. α-amylase functions optimally. Therefore, mainly only non-fermentable, iodine-neutral oligosaccharides are formed.

[0044] According to the preferred embodiments, the next step is the decomposition of the proteins. This step already takes place to a large extent during malting -> the Well-dissolved malts are of great importance. The protein content of barley is very important for the final protein concentration. Carboxypeptidases, which degrade peptides from the carboxyl end, are responsible for 80% of peptide degradation during mashing, as they are the only ones to show some activity at mashing temperatures, as well as relatively high resistance to higher temperatures. (Inactive above 70 °C). In addition, other peptide-degrading proteins have a lower inactivity temperature: • Aminopeptidases (inactive above 55°C); • Dipeptidases (inactive above 50°C); • Endopeptidases (inact. above 60°C, but still show some activity during mashing above 60°C), endopeptidases playing a major role in the degradation of peptides in barley and malting.

[0045] According to other embodiments, the degradation products can be divided into: • Free amino nitrogen (FAN), a nitrogen source for yeast, is important for good yeast growth and a normal spectrum of fermentation by-products; • High molecular weight peptides have a positive influence on foam quality (molecular weight 10,000 to 60,000); • Active protein bodies in the turbidity, often newly formed by the formation of disulfide bridges, with strong aeration of the mash, have a negative influence on the attackability of the starch, the settling speed (by blocking the pores in the spent grain layer), cause poor separation of hot and cold trub and therefore have a negative influence on the shelf life and taste of the beer (molecular weight above 60,000).

[0046] According to other embodiments, the objective of protein degradation involves the provision of the free amino nitrogen necessary for good yeast nutrition. The presence of sufficient amounts of high molecular weight peptides for good foaming. As low a residual amount as possible of turbidity-active protein bodies in order to reject their negative effects. It is therefore important to aim for neither too much nor too little protein decomposition. In principle, the following situation applies: at lower mashing temperatures and when inserting a "protein rest" at a relatively low temperature, the degree of protein degradation increases; from about 70 °C, there is no further protein degradation.

[0047] The next step, according to preferred embodiments, involves the degradation of hemicelluloses and resins. The degradation of hemicelluloses and resins can only be influenced to a limited extent by changing the mashing conditions. The compensatory action of the main enzymes [3-glucan solubilase (dissolves [3-glucan from its association with proteins) and endo-[3-1,3-glucanase (degrades [3-glucans but is more sensitive to temperature) (other [3-glucanases are even more sensitive to temperature and therefore do not play a major role). High [3-glucan concentrations and high shear forces promote gel formation. (-> Reduction of shear forces introduced by the brewer and pumps). Particularly low mashing temperatures result in a lower [3-glucan content in the malt and thus in the beer.However, these temperatures are associated with conversions of other substances, such as proteins and lipids, in the wort. The greatest influence on the [3-glucan] content is therefore the quality of the malt, in particular a complete malt solution. But above all, it is necessary that the friability value is high in the friability test.

[0048] According to preferred embodiments, further conversions involve the polyphenols being transferred to the malt in a favorable composition. Positive influences are, for example, a mash pH of 5.4, high brewing temperatures with good malt quality, no oxidation, few crushed grains. The degraded lipids should not be oxidized, if possible (e.g., by high brewing temperatures -> rapid inactivation of lipoxygenases; low mash pH; distance from 1'02), as this has a negative influence on the taste and stability of the beer. However, boiling the malt and precipitation of the lees can remove relatively large amounts of fatty acids. The solubility of zinc increases with reducing the pH (addition of acid) (the malt theoretically contains a sufficient amount of zinc).However, a large part of the dissolved zinc is excreted again during degerming or separation of the hot trub (mainly in the form of protein-phenol complexes), so that after the mashing process there is often not enough zinc in the malt to ensure optimal yeast growth and optimal and rapid fermentation (min. 0.15 - 0.18 mg / l).

[0049] According to the preferred embodiments, the purification involves the separation of the malt and the spent grains. The supply of water from below to expel air from the false bottom (blocking of the false bottom slots by air bubbles). The formation of a filter layer by the spent grains in the clarification tank -> malt filtering function. The trub cake consists of a lower layer of husks (denser, settle first) and an upper layer, the upper paste. (Fine husk fragments and excreted proteins).

[0050] According to its other achievements, the gentle introduction of the malt just above the false bottom, for a good formation of the spent grain layer and a low air inlet (avoiding oxidation). The constant settling speed due to chopping by the chopping machine (chopping without mixing the spent grain layers -> clogging of the pores of the integument layer, slower settling of the malt). Settling as fast as possible (less leaching of bitter and tannic substances from the husks), but without increased turbidity due to excessive chopping.

[0051] According to other embodiments, post-pouring (pre-washing, sweetening) to wash the remaining malt in the spent grain cake, with an adequate clarification speed to avoid dissolving undesirable components of the hull, but without too much cloudy substances due to excessive cutting of the spent grain cake, and with little water (dissolution of undesirable substances), but sufficient water to minimize yield losses (water temperature = 78 °C). The pre-pouring tank takes care of the filtered malt as long as the previous brew is still boiling / as long as the Merlin + WHFP is being rinsed.

[0052] According to the preferred embodiments, the cooking comprises the following steps: • Concentration of malt by evaporation of a certain quantity of water • Destruction of malt enzymes -> Fixation of malt composition • Sterilization of malt • Precipitation of coagulable nitrogen (“breakage”) • Hop administration • Evaporation of basic substances (undesirable aromatic substances of the malt / hops) • Side effects: • Increased color and acidity; • Thermal modification of malt ingredients; • Maillard reaction (coloring + aroma)

[0053] In its preferred versions, the Merlin step involves: • Thin film evaporator: The malt circulates in a thin film over a heating cone. • Large heating and evaporation surface -> gentle cooking, good evaporation • Clarification in the vortex (separation of hot trub) • Stripping on the heating surface -> post-evaporation of the replicated aromatic substances. • Shorter cooking time (35 - 40 min) than conventional cooking systems (reduction of protein precipitation; less formation of Maillard products). • Effective stripping (elimination of unwanted aromatic substances). • according to the preferred embodiments, the administration of Hops involves: • Isomerization (and dissolution) of insoluble α-acids into soluble iso-α-acids, determining factors for the bitterness of beer, a longer process during boiling. • Hop oils (aromatic substances) dissolve relatively quickly in malt, but are also volatile substances that evaporate quickly. • The time of addition of hops is therefore decisive in determining whether the beer contains more bitter substances or more aromatic substances from the hops.

[0054] According to its preferred embodiments, the Whirlpool Pan (WHPF) involves: • During the boiling process, the WHPF serves as a simple malt container from which malt is pumped in a circuit to the Merlin and vice versa. • Only after the boil has ended is a rotational movement created in the WHPF by the tangential pumping of the malt, which causes the trub to settle in a trub cone in the middle of the tank ("teacup" effect). • Lees separation is important for taste, full-bodied character and stability. • Trub consists mainly of coagulated proteins and remaining, undissolved hop residue / malt components. • Evacuate first through an upper valve (to avoid entraining the trub), then at a lower flow rate through a lower valve.

[0055] According to preferred embodiments, the cooling process involves: • Cool the malt to a fermentation temperature of 10°C. • In this process, the malt is first sent from the WHPF via the Merlin, to the stripping (post-evaporation of basic substances, e.g. DMS), then to the malt path and the plate cooler. After cooling: aeration (1800 1 / h), addition of yeast and transfer to the fermentation cellar.

[0056] Although a specific model has been shown and described, many variations are possible. Over time, additional features may be used. The particular shape or configuration of the platform or the interior configuration may be modified to suit the system or equipment with which it is used.

[0057] Having described the invention in detail, those skilled in the art will appreciate that modifications may be made to the invention without departing from its spirit. Accordingly, the scope of the invention is not limited to the specific form illustrated and described. Rather, the scope of the invention is determined by the appended claims and their equivalents.

[0058] The abstract of the disclosure is provided to enable the reader to quickly understand the nature of the technical disclosure. It is understood that it will not be used to interpret or limit the scope or meaning of the claims. Furthermore, in the foregoing detailed description, it may be expected that various features are grouped together in various embodiments in order to simplify the disclosure. This method of disclosure should not be construed as reflecting the intention that the claimed embodiments require more features than those expressly recited in each claim. Rather, as the following claims show, the inventive subject matter lies in less than all of the features of a single disclosed embodiment.Thus, the following claims are incorporated into the detailed description, each claim being considered separately claimed subject matter. Advantages of the invention:

[0059] The improved brewing process and malt filtering method, including the reprogrammed mash clarification method and the reduction of extract concentration, offer several advantages over conventional techniques, including, but not limited to:

[0060] Reduction of processing time by approximately 15% thanks to the optimization of the mash clarification method.

[0061] Improved wort stability and flow rate during filtration, resulting in increased overall efficiency.

[0062] Balanced wort clarity for optimal fermentation performance and reduced fermentation time.

[0063] Increasing production yield by optimizing the extraction process and reducing the extract concentration.

[0064] More sustainable brewing practices with reduced COD in wastewater and better use of resources. Conclusion :

[0065] The present invention introduces an improved brewing process and malt filtering method that revolutionizes the effectiveness and efficiency of malt filtering during beer production. By implementing new filtration techniques, equipment modifications, and mash clarification methods reprogrammed, the invention offers substantial advantages over traditional methods. The detailed description and operational steps described in this patent application enable skilled practitioners to implement the invention in a variety of beer production facilities.

Claims

Claims

1. A method of filtering mash during beer production, comprising: a. Preconditioning the mash by subjecting it to a specific treatment to improve filterability and reduce particle size variations; b. Transferring the preconditioned mash into a filtration system comprising fine mesh screens, porous plates, and adjustable pressure differentials; c. Initiating staged filtration by gradually passing the malt through a series of filtration stages using increasingly finer filtration media; d. Controlling the flow rate of the wort through the mash bed using adjustable flow control mechanisms; e. Collecting the filtered wort for subsequent brewing steps.

2. A method according to claim 1, wherein the process of preconditioning the malt comprises steeping or brewing the mash in water.

3. The method of claim 1, wherein the mash preconditioning process further comprises treatment to reduce particle size variations.

4. The method of claim 1, wherein the filtration system comprises a combination of fine mesh screens, porous plates and adjustable pressure differentials.

5. A method according to claim 1, wherein the stepwise filtration comprises several sequential filtration steps using increasingly finer filtration media.

6. A method according to claim 1, wherein the adjustable flow control mechanisms regulate the flow of wort through the mash bed to prevent excessive flow and ensure uniform distribution.

7. The method of claim 1, further comprising subjecting the filtered wort to additional clarification techniques to improve clarity.

8. A method according to claim 1, wherein the filtration process reduces the solid particle content in the filtered wort, thereby improving clarity.

9. The method of claim 1, wherein improving filtration efficiency reduces clogging and processing time.

10. A method according to claim 1, wherein the improved filtration process increases overall production efficiency by minimizing mash losses and ensuring uniform wort extraction.

11. The method of claim 1, wherein the mash bed in the filtration system comprises mash dregs.

12. A brewing system according to claim 1 comprising: a. A filtration system comprising fine mesh screens, porous plates and adjustable pressure differentials; b. Adjustable flow control mechanisms for regulating the flow of wort through the filtration system; c. A reprogrammed mash clarification method to reduce the process time by approximately 30 minutes; d. At least two deep cut phases to achieve a faster and more stable wort flow; e. An extract concentration reduction mechanism for reducing the extract concentration of the final rinse water from 1.8 to 0.5% °plato.

13. The brewing system of claim 12, wherein the reprogrammed mash clarification method comprises controlling the mash clarification process after brewing to achieve faster and more stable wort flow.

14. A brewing system according to claim 12, wherein the deep cutting phases are initiated as a function of wort flow and the rate of increase in flow.

15. The brewing system of claim 12, wherein the extract concentration reduction mechanism improves yield and reduces COD in brewery wastewater.

16. The brewing system of claim 12, wherein the improved filtration system, the clarification method The reprogrammed mash and extract concentration reduction mechanism allow for more cost-effective mash usage and more sustainable brewing practices.