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 mash filtering method. Technical field

[0001] The present invention relates to the field of beer production and, more specifically, to an improved brewing process and a method for filtering malt during beer production. It relates in particular to a filtration method and system that enables faster beer production, with a more stable wort flow, and improves 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 grains for fermentation 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 "soft wort." The soft wort is formed by adding water to crushed malted and unmalted grains, such as, but not limited to, barley, to form a mash or slurry in a mash tun. Under the action of natural enzymes, this mash is then transformed into soft wort. The liquid contained in the soft 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 initiate fermentation in a fermentation tank, resulting in the production of alcohol.

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

[0005] Mash filtration plays a crucial role in the beer production process, where separating the wort from the solid malt particles is essential to obtaining a clear liquid for fermentation. Conventional mash filtration 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 malt filtration method to address these drawbacks.

[0006] Prior art discloses an interruption of the brewing process in U.S. Patent No. 3,290,153 by Bayne et al. In this patent, the brewing process is interrupted after the production of the hopped wort. The hopped wort is then concentrated by passing it through continuous film evaporators or by boiling water under high pressure to produce a wort concentrate with a solids content of about 80%. After concentration, the wort is cooled to a temperature below 105°F. The patent then indicates that the wort concentrate can be stored on-site or shipped elsewhere for subsequent reconstitution and fermentation. It is not certain that this method has ever been implemented, but in any case, this production method presents numerous difficulties, not least of which are taste, color, etc.The quality of beer depends largely on the quality of the water used in the production of the final product. Therefore, producing beer in a location different from where the wort was originally produced using this process is subject to the production of beer of varying quality and taste in different final production facilities, or to high costs to neutralize the effect of local water quality. Furthermore, the cost of producing concentrated wort is itself high, as it requires several evaporators or equivalent equipment to produce the concentrated wort.

[0007] Another question concerning the interruption of the brewing process after the production of hopped wort is found in Homebrew Digest. A homebrewer asks whether it would be possible to store a small quantity of wort after boiling and cooling it for sale to customers of a local homebrewing store. It is clear from the disclosure that the process has not been implemented. No steps of the process are disclosed, and no apparatus is discussed. The nature of the disclosure, however, indicates that the storage of small quantities of wort is envisaged, with very short transport to a "local" homebrewing store for subsequent storage and sale. The complications also render the proposed process impractical for homebrewing stores.

[0008] Numerous 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 that impair 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, representing a reduction of + / - 15%. It also aims to minimize the deterioration of the filter layer in the mash tun, which consists of the malt grains, in order to obtain a wort that is as clear as possible. The current system allows for a faster and more stable flow of the must with at least 2 deep cut 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 resolve 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 drawbacks of the prior art, the following summary is provided to facilitate understanding of some of the innovative features of the present invention and is not intended to be a complete description. A full appreciation of the various aspects of the invention can be obtained by considering the entire specification, claims, drawings, and abstract as a whole.

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

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

[0014] Another objective 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 the COD in the brewhouse wastewater and more efficient use of the malt.

[0015] The present invention also aims to propose a new and improved method in which reprogramming 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 the emphasis is placed on minimizing the deterioration of the filter layer in the mash tun, which consists of the malt grains, in order to obtain a wort that is as clear as possible.

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

[0018] The objective of the invention is also to provide a faster and more stable wort flow with at least two deep-cut phases. In prior 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 concentration of extract from the last run from 1.8 to 0.5% °plato, resulting in a significant reduction of COD in the wastewater from the brewhouse and more efficient use of malt.

[0020] Characteristics of the invention - The method of filtering the mash during beer production includes: a. Preconditioning the mash by subjecting it to a specific treatment to improve filterability and reduce particle size variations; b. The transfer of the preconditioned mash into a filtration system comprising fine mesh sieves, porous plates and adjustable pressure differentials; c. The initiation of a staged filtration by progressively passing the malt through a series of filtration stages using increasingly finer filtration media; d. Controlling the flow of wort through the mash bed using adjustable flow control mechanisms; e. The collection of the filtered wort for subsequent brewing steps. - The malt preconditioning process includes soaking or mashing the mash in water. - The mash preconditioning process also includes a treatment aimed at reducing particle size variations. - The filtration system includes a combination of fine mesh screens, porous plates and adjustable pressure differentials. - Step filtration includes several sequential filtration stages using increasingly finer filtration media. - Adjustable flow control mechanisms regulate the flow of must through the mash bed to prevent excessive flow and ensure even distribution. - The mash filtration method further includes subjecting the filtered wort to additional clarification techniques to improve clarity. - The filtration process reduces the content of solid particles in the filtered must, which improves clarity. - Improving filtration efficiency reduces clogging and processing time. - The improved filtration process increases overall production yield by minimizing mash losses and ensuring uniform must extraction. - The mash bed in the filtration system includes the spent grains from the mash. - The mixing system includes: a. A filtration system comprising fine mesh screens, porous plates and adjustable pressure differentials; b. Adjustable flow control mechanisms to regulate the flow of must 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. A mechanism for reducing the concentration of extract to reduce the concentration of extract in the final rinse water from 1.8 to 0.5% °plato. - The reprogrammed mash clarification method includes controlling the mash clarification process after mashing to achieve a faster and more stable wort flow. - The deep cutting phases are initiated according to the must flow and the rate of increase of the flow. - The mechanism for reducing the concentration of the extract improves yield and reduces COD in the brewery's wastewater. - The improved filtration system, the reprogrammed mash clarification method and the extract concentration reduction mechanism allow for more cost-effective use of the mash and more sustainable brewing practices.

[0021] The objective is therefore to propose a new and improved method for the production and filtration of beer. Other aspects, advantages, and novel features of the present invention will become apparent from the detailed description of the invention in light of the accompanying drawings.

[0022] This summary is intended solely to summarize certain examples of implementation, in order to provide a basic understanding of certain aspects of the object described herein. Consequently, it should be noted that the characteristics described above are merely examples and should not be interpreted as limiting the scope or intent of the object described herein in any way. Other characteristics, aspects, and advantages of the object described herein will become apparent from the detailed description, figures, and claims that follow. Description of the implementation methods

[0023] Detailed descriptions of the preferred embodiment are provided in this document. It is understood, however, that the present invention can be implemented in various forms. Therefore, the specific details disclosed herein should not be interpreted as limiting, but rather as a basis for the claims and as a representative basis for teaching a person skilled in the art how to use the present invention in virtually any suitably detailed system, structure, or manner.

[0024] The terminology used herein is solely for the 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 listed associated elements. 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 "includes" and / or "comprising", when used in this specification, indicate the presence of given features, steps, operations, elements, and / or components, but do not exclude the presence or addition of one or more other features, steps, operations, elements, components, and / or groups thereof.

[0025] The present invention aims to provide an improved beer filtration and production process that is efficient in its yield, reduces COD in brewhouse wastewater and allows efficient use of malt.

[0026] The first step, according to preferred embodiments, is milling. Milling the malt is very important as it constitutes the starting point of the process in the brewhouse. The milling process exposes the contents of the malt grains, which can then be extracted during mashing. The milling process must be adapted to the subsequent brewing process, in particular to the selected mashing and clarification process, and vice versa. In general, the mash in the lauter tun should be composed as follows: intact hulls, as thoroughly ground as possible; a little coarse semolina, a lot of fine semolina; a little flour. The hulls should be as intact as possible for the following reasons: they form the filter layer in the clarification tun; minimizing the leaching of polyphenols, bitter substances, silicates, and proteins from the hulls during From mashing and clarification (intact husks have a smaller surface area). These substances negatively influence color, flavor, and stability. Husks must be completely crushed because endosperm residues within them are protected from enzymatic attack during brewing, leading to yield losses. Furthermore, remaining starch can still dissolve during filtration, resulting in a loss of iodine normality (turbidity of the mash in the beer).

[0027] According to other embodiments, coarse grains consist mainly of the hardest parts of the grain that have undergone virtually no changes during malting. Cytolytic enzymes have not yet been able to exert their effect on these parts. Coarse grains are therefore only slightly accessible to enzymes during brewing. Fines and flours, on the other hand, consist of the other parts of the endosperm that have undergone cytolytic changes during malting. These semolinas and flours contain many starch-degrading enzymes and are readily accessible to them, which means that the extract yield from these batches of flour is very high. Flours are even more accessible to enzymes. However, flours can have a negative effect on the clarification rate because they reduce the volume of the spent grains.Furthermore, flour easily forms lumps during kneading, into which water, and therefore enzymes, cannot penetrate during the kneading process.

[0028] The next step, according to preferred embodiments, concerns the malt plasters. It is essential to clean the malt before milling: Metal parts can cause sparks in the mill -> risk of explosion. Furthermore, they can, like stones, damage the mill rollers. In addition, dust and loose husks are removed. This is particularly important during malt conditioning: moist impurities cause considerable loads in the mill.

[0029] The next step, according to preferred embodiments, is conditioning. Conditioning increases the moisture content of the malt, particularly that of the husks. The husks become more elastic due to the increased moisture content and break less easily in the mill. More intensive grinding of the husks without destroying them results in less husk flour, which is beneficial for the taste and color of the beer; more fine grains compared to coarse grains without increasing the flour content; and advantages during filtering (speed, yield) and during mashing (less risk of clumping, better starch solution, and improved brewing yield).

[0030] 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 sieves, 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.

[0031] According to other embodiments, the following filtration techniques are used in the invention: a. Preconditioning: Before filtration, the malt undergoes a specific preconditioning process which 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, allowing for controlled wort flow and the gradual removal of solid particles. Each stage uses progressively finer filter media, improving clarity and reducing clogging.

[0032] Mash clarification method: After mashing, the present invention incorporates a reprogrammed mash clarification method that reduces the process time by approximately 30 minutes, representing a reduction of about 15%. The objective of this method is to obtain a faster and more stable wort flow by implementing at least two deep cut phases. It has been observed that excessively clear wort can lead to longer fermentation times, and therefore the reprogrammed method establishes a balance between clarity and fermentation efficiency.

[0033] An additional deep cut occurs in the process depending on the flow rate of the must and the rate of increase of the flow rate.

[0034] Increased Yield and Reduced Extract Concentration: In addition to improvements in mash filtration and clarification, the invention has made it possible to increase 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 cost-effectiveness of malt use but also leads to a significant reduction in COD (chemical oxygen demand) in the brewhouse wastewater. Consequently, the invention contributes to more sustainable brewing practices and efficient resource use.

[0035] The next step, according to preferred embodiments, concerns the grain mill (six-roller mill). The spacing of the rollers in the respective roller pairs must be adjusted so that the grind has the desired fineness (grind calibration). A scale allows for precise adjustment of the roller spacing. However, the composition of the grind depends not only on the roller gap, but also on the type and texture of the malt. Therefore, the grind must be checked regularly (grind sorting) and the mill readjusted as needed.

[0036] The next step, according to preferred embodiments, is mashing. The main task of mashing is to dissolve the fermentable components of the malt (sugar) from the milled grain and to convert the existing starch into sugar using the enzymes in the malt. This creates a solution, the malt, in which the extract (the sum of the dissolved components) is dissolved. Regarding protein degradation, during mashing, proteins are released from the malt. These are important for the body 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.

[0037] According to other embodiments, the other degradation reactions during brewing are: Degradation of hemicelluloses and resins (supporting and scaffolding substances, including 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, leading to a decrease in pH and an increase in mash buffering). Lipid degradation (lipids have a negative effect on foam; oxidized lipids can negatively influence taste; but lipids also stimulate yeast metabolism (especially unsaturated fatty acids)).

[0038] According to other embodiments, the modification of phenolic substances (polyphenols contribute to the taste and bitterness of beer and improve foam quality; oxidized polyphenols, on the other hand, have a negative influence on taste; polyphenols also promote precipitation reactions during mashing and boiling -> increased stability). This also involves the release of zinc (an important trace substance for yeast growth, a cofactor of alcohol dehydrogenase).

[0039] According to other embodiments, the mashing process is determined based on the properties of the raw materials used (brewing water and malt), the brewhouse equipment, and the type of beer to be produced. 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 resting times), in order to maintain a consistent beer quality.

[0040] According to preferred embodiments, the milling step involves a brewing process that begins with mixing the malted grain with the brewing water, the mashing (mashing in). The temperature of the brewing water (brewing temperature) is important, as is the ratio between the amount of malt used and the amount of water in the main pour.

[0041] In its preferred embodiments, the infusion brewing process differs from decoction processes. Mashing takes place in a single vessel, without boiling the mash. Infusion brewing processes result in the dissolution and degradation of the malt components solely through the action of enzymes present in the malt (without mechanical decomposition of the starch grains by boiling).

[0042] According to preferred embodiments, the next step is starch degradation. This is the skin transformation process and the most important process in mashing. It involves the degradation of starch that cannot be metabolized by the yeast into metabolizable sugars. The three partial processes are: the swelling of the starch grains; the gelatinization of the starch (transformation of the starch into a solution / suspension); and the actual enzymatic degradation into soluble and fermentable sugars (liquefaction and saccharification). Furthermore, depending on the quality and composition of the malt, the mashing process, in particular the resting times, is adjusted. The most important enzymes are: • α-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, enzyme damage from about 70 °C, inactivity from about 80 °C); • [3-Amylase, degrades amylose / amylopectin from the reducing end, formation of border dextrins during amylopectin degradation (optimum at pH = 5.4 - 5.6 and 60 - 65 °C, deterioration above about 65 °C, inactivity from about 70 °C); • Limit dextrinase, cleaves the α-(1->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 that prevail during mashing (over 60°C).

[0043] It can be assumed that the limiting activity of dextrinase is very low compared to amylases during mashing (low inactivity temperature + few edge dextrins present at the beginning of the process) -> many edge dextrins remain in the mash. Furthermore, linear oligosaccharides remain (amylases prefer longer chains). The brewing objective is iodine neutrality (only branched dextrins up to 60 glucose residues, linear dextrins up to 9) and an ES value of 1.80 (less than 2.00) (for Bofferding Pils). This means that there is sufficient of fermentable sugar to obtain the desired alcohol content and that there is no coagulation.

[0044] According to other embodiments, at a mashing temperature and a first resting temperature of 64 °C, α-amylase is at its optimal point and thus separates the maltose units from the non-reducing end of the amylose and amylopectin chains. The optimal 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 limiting dextrinase is 65 °C. Its activity also decreases rapidly at higher temperatures. Furthermore, there are not yet many limiting dextrins in solution, as 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 limiting dextrinases. The second resting period takes place at 66°C. At this temperature, the limiting dextrinase is inactivated.The activity of [3]amylase decreases more sharply at temperatures above 65 °C. However, alpha-amylase still functions below its optimum at 70–75 °C. The third resting state occurs at 72 °C. At this temperature, [3]amylase is inactivated. Alpha-amylase functions optimally. Consequently, only non-fermentable, iodine-neutral oligosaccharides are formed.

[0045] According to preferred embodiments, the next step is protein degradation. This step already occurs to a large extent during malting – well-dissolved malts are of great importance. The protein content of the 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 brewing, as they are the only ones to exhibit some activity at brewing 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 (inactive above 60 °C, but still show some activity during mashing above 60 °C), endopeptidases playing a major role in peptide degradation in barley and malting.

[0046] According to other embodiments, the degradation products can be divided in: • Free amino nitrogen (FAN), a source of nitrogen 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 of 10,000 to 60,000); • Active protein bodies in turbidity, often newly formed by the formation of disulfide bridges, with strong aeration of the steeping, have a negative influence on the attackability of starch, the speed of settling (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 beer (molecular weight greater than 60,000).

[0047] According to other embodiments, the objective of protein degradation involves supplying the free amino nitrogen necessary for proper yeast nutrition. It also involves the presence of sufficient quantities of high molecular weight peptides for good foaming, and a residual quantity of turbidity-active protein bodies as low as possible to counteract their negative effects. Therefore, it is important to aim for a protein degradation that is neither too extensive nor too minimal. In principle, the following applies: at lower mashing temperatures and when a "protein rest" is inserted at a relatively low temperature, the degree of protein degradation increases; above approximately 70 °C, protein degradation ceases.

[0048] 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 modifying 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 concentrations of 3-glucans 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 therefore in the beer.However, these temperatures are associated with the conversion 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, particularly a complete malt solution. But above all, a high friability value is essential in the friability test.

[0049] According to preferred embodiments, other conversions involve transferring polyphenols to the malt in a favorable composition. Positive influences include, for example, a mash pH of 5.4, high brewing temperatures with good malt quality, the absence of oxidation, and minimal crushed grains. 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 negatively affects the taste and stability of the beer. However, boiling the malt and precipitating the lees can remove relatively large amounts of fatty acids. The solubility of zinc increases with a reduction in pH (addition of acid) (malt theoretically contains a sufficient amount of zinc).However, a large portion of the dissolved zinc is excreted again during degermination or separation of the hot trub (mainly in the form of protein-phenol complexes), so that after the brewing 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).

[0050] According to preferred embodiments, purification involves separating the malt from the spent grains. Water is introduced from below to expel air from the false bottom (air bubbles block the false bottom vents). A filter layer is formed by the spent grains in the clarification tank, thus filtering the malt. The trub cake consists of a lower layer of hulls (denser, they settle first) and an upper layer, the top mash (fine hull fragments and excreted proteins).

[0051] According to its other achievements, the gentle introduction of the malt just above the false bottom ensures good formation of the spent grain layer and minimal air ingress (preventing oxidation). The constant settling rate is achieved through milling by the milling machine (milling without mixing the spent grain layers prevents clogging of the pores in the hull layer, resulting in slower malt settling). Settling is as rapid as possible (minimizing leaching of bitter and tannic substances from the hulls) without increasing turbidity due to excessive milling.

[0052] According to other embodiments, post-pouring (pre-washing, sweetening) is used to wash the malt remaining in the grain bed, with a clarification rate adequate to avoid dissolving undesirable hull components, but without excessive cloudiness due to over-cutting of the grain bed, and with little water (dissolving undesirable substances), but a sufficient quantity of water to minimize yield losses (water temperature = 78 °C). The pre-pouring tank handles the filtered malt while the previous brew is still boiling / while the Merlin + WHFP is being rinsed.

[0053] According to preferred embodiments, the cooking process includes the following steps: • Concentration of malt by evaporation of a certain quantity of water • Destruction of malt enzymes -> Fixation of malt composition • Sterilization of the malt • Precipitation of coagulable nitrogen ("breakage") • Hop administration • Evaporation of base substances (undesirable aromatic substances from the malt / hops) • Side effects: • Increased colour and acidity; • Thermal modification of malt ingredients; • Maillard reaction (coloration + aroma)

[0054] In his preferred versions, the Merlin stage involves: • Thin film evaporator: The malt circulates in a thin film over a heating cone. • Large heating and evaporation surface area -> gentle cooking, good evaporation • Clarification in the vortex (separation of the hot trub) • Stripping on the heating surface -> post-evaporation of replicated aromatic substances. • Shorter cooking time (35-40 min) than conventional cooking systems (reduced protein precipitation; less formation of Maillard reaction products). • Effective stripping (removal of undesirable aromatic substances). • Depending on the preferred implementation methods, the administration of Hops involves: • Isomerization (and dissolution) of insoluble α acids into soluble iso-α acids, which determine the bitterness of beer, a process that takes longer during boiling. • Hop oils (aromatic substances) dissolve relatively quickly in malt, but are also volatile substances that evaporate rapidly. • The timing of hop addition is therefore crucial in determining whether the beer contains more bitter substances or more aromatic substances from the hops.

[0055] According to its preferred embodiments, the whirlpool pan (“WHPF”) involves: • During the boiling process, the WHPF serves as a simple malt vessel from which the malt is pumped in a circuit to the Merlin and vice versa. • Only after the end of boiling 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 (the "tea cup" effect). • Separation of the lees is important for taste, full-bodied character and stability. • Trub consists mainly of coagulated proteins and undissolved hop residues / remaining malt components. • First discharge through an upper valve (to avoid trub entrainment), then at a lower flow rate through a lower valve.

[0056] 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 dehulling area (post-evaporation of base substances, e.g., DMS), then to the maltway and plate cooler. After cooling: aeration (1800 l / h), addition of yeast, and transfer to the fermentation cellar.

[0057] 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 internal configuration may be modified to suit the system or equipment with which it is used.

[0058] After describing the invention in detail, a person skilled in the art will appreciate that modifications can be made to the invention without departing from its spirit. Therefore, 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.

[0059] The abstract 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 preceding detailed description, it may be necessary to group various features into different embodiments to simplify the disclosure. This method of disclosure should not be interpreted as reflecting the intention that the claimed embodiments require more features than those expressly mentioned in each claim. On the contrary, as the following claims show, the inventive subject matter lies in fewer than all the features of a single disclosed embodiment.Thus, the following claims are incorporated into the detailed description, each claim being considered as a separately claimed subject matter. Advantages of the invention:

[0060] The improved brewing process and malt filtration method, including the reprogrammed mash clarification method and the reduction of extract concentration, offer several advantages over conventional techniques, including, but not limited to:

[0061] Reduction of processing time of approximately 15% thanks to the optimization of the mash clarification method.

[0062] Improved stability and flow rate of the must during filtration, resulting in increased overall efficiency.

[0063] Balanced must clarity for optimal fermentation performance and reduced fermentation time.

[0064] Increased production yield by optimizing the extraction process and reducing the extract concentration.

[0065] More sustainable brewing practices with a reduction in COD in wastewater and better use of resources. Conclusion :

[0066] The present invention introduces an improved brewing process and a malt filtration method that revolutionizes the effectiveness and efficiency of malt filtration during beer production. By implementing new filtration techniques, equipment modifications, and reprogrammed mash clarification methods, the invention offers substantial advantages over traditional methods. The detailed description and operational steps outlined in this patent application enable skilled practitioners to implement the invention in a variety of beer production facilities.

Claims

Demands

1. A method of filtering the mash during beer production, comprising: a) Preconditioning the mash by subjecting it to a treatment configured 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 progressively passing the malt through a series of filtration stages using progressively finer filter media; d) Controlling the flow of the wort through the mash bed using adjustable flow control mechanisms; e) Collecting the filtered wort for subsequent brewing stages.

2. Method according to claim 1, wherein the malt preconditioning process includes soaking or mashing the mash in water.

3. Method according to claim 1, wherein adjustable flow control mechanisms are configured to regulate the flow of wort through the mash bed to avoid excessive flow and ensure uniform distribution.

4. Method according to claim 1, further comprising subjecting the filtered must to additional clarification techniques to improve clarity.

5. Method according to claim 1, wherein the mash bed in the filtration system comprises the mash grains.

6. Brewing system characterized in that it comprises: 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) Means for implementing a reprogrammed mash clarification method to reduce the process time by approximately 30 minutes; d) Cutting means to implement at least two deep cutting phases to obtain a faster and more stable wort flow; e) An extract concentration reduction mechanism to reduce the extract concentration of the final rinse water from 1.8 to 0.5% °plato.

7. Brewing system according to claim 6, wherein the means for implementing the reprogrammed mash clarification method include means for controlling the mash clarification process after brewing to obtain a faster and more stable wort flow.

8. Brewing system according to claim 6, wherein the deep-cutting means are initiated as a function of the wort flow and the rate of increase of the flow.