Boil Time 60 min or longer?

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
TipsySaint

TipsySaint

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2010
Messages
483
Reaction score
20
Location
Portland
Hi All,

So I've been brewing for several years now, all grain and I make my own recipes, one thing I haven't been able to figure out is why some beers and some brewers do a boil that is longer than 60 minutes......What is the reason for a boil longer than that?
 
TipsySaint said:
Hi All,

So I've been brewing for several years now, all grain and I make my own recipes, one thing I haven't been able to figure out is why some beers and some brewers do a boil that is longer than 60 minutes......What is the reason for a boil longer than that?
Click to expand...

Some malts (like Pilsner) require a 90 minute boil to drive off DMS.

A longer boil can also help increase hop isomerization.

I've also been known to do a 75 minute boil from time to time - just for the hell of it.
 
Higher gravity: If you plan properly this shouldn't be an issue.
Hop utilization: Same here. Are there any hops that need longer than 60 min?
DMS boil off (for pilsners) did not know this!
Maillard reactions (i.e. melanoidin formation) I thought this only happened if you boiled until it was thicker than normal?

Thanks for the input!
 
From

http://homebrewers-haven.com/wpress/how-to-make-beer/melanoidins-101-home-beer-brewers/

"The maillard reactions happen in nearly every aspect of brewing, specifically:

Kilning of the grain during the malting process
Drying of the grain during the malting process
Decoction style mashing
Extended boil times
Roaring boil where evaporation rate exceeds 15%"

Also, first runnings are only about 1.080
How are you planning to make a huge beer (i.e. OG = 1.15) without extended boil? DME? Sugar? Perhaps. But extended boil affords you full control of your ingredients.

Hops do not need to be boiled for more than 60 minutes (or 10 if you can afford it) but it is an option and you get higher utilization as a result.
 
You'll also get better coagulation of proteins which will lead to a better cold break...you will lower ph and drive off oxygen. Finally, it can darken the color. I regularly do 90 minute to 2 hour boils.
 
TipsySaint said:
Higher gravity: If you plan properly this shouldn't be an issue.
Click to expand...

I disagree, it's nothing about planning properly. With large grain bills you have less available sparge water per pound of grain, and this is what kills efficiency for big beers. Sparging with extra water then boiling that water off can help a lot.
 
I do 60 for most beers and 90 for pilsner malt based beers. I ususally get a 2% point boost in efficiency with a 90 minute boil since I'm collecting more runnings and sparging further.If you know what you're doing, planning for the change is not a problem. However, just from a time factor, I'm not in a rush to lengthen every boil.

I also always understood that the difference between boiling hops 60 and 90 minutes is negligible in terms of actual utilization. Maybe I'm wrong though. In any event, even with a 90 minute boil, I just take it easy until I hit the 60 minute mark before making the first hop addition.

I know a couple guys who do 90 minute boils for everything just from a consistency standpoint.
 
When each of you are "boiling" your wort, do each of you take the boiling temperature to it's maximum degrees F that it will go?

For example, I live at 5300. ft in elevation. Water boils at a lower than sea level of 212 f. In turn, my wort achieves boiling at a lower point. Personally I keep my wort boiling at 206 degrees f. Why? Because it's a good rolling boil but not violent to make a mess. I have never tried to see how high of a boiling temp I can go. That said, under the Maillard reactions, will I get different flavors then any of you at lower elevation (Say we are making the exact same brew) because I potentially boil at a lower temperature?

Remember to answer the top question too please.
 
There is some great info in this thread that I did not know!

Smithy i'm pretty much a sea level and I can get a good rolling boil at around 212 but can push up to 216. I usually maintain 212. You are correct, from what i understand about Maillard reaction, yes technically you will get a different beer, but these reactions are subtleties that beer nerds argue about....they are they but they are not a MAJOR flavor in your brew.

Qhrumphf: great info! thanks!
 
I though that, at sea level, it was impossible to go above 212F in an open-pot boil. Am I remembering my physics wrong or is something else going on.

Wait--212F is for water, not wort. With the additional sugars, shouldn't the boiling point be above 212F and you should not get a "good rolling boil" at 212F?
 
Smithy said:
When each of you are "boiling" your wort, do each of you take the boiling temperature to it's maximum degrees F that it will go?

For example, I live at 5300. ft in elevation. Water boils at a lower than sea level of 212 f. In turn, my wort achieves boiling at a lower point. Personally I keep my wort boiling at 206 degrees f. Why? Because it's a good rolling boil but not violent to make a mess. I have never tried to see how high of a boiling temp I can go. That said, under the Maillard reactions, will I get different flavors then any of you at lower elevation (Say we are making the exact same brew) because I potentially boil at a lower temperature?

Remember to answer the top question too please.
Click to expand...

A boil is a boil... If it's boiling, it's the same temperature as any other boil at your elevation, you shouldn't really be able to "push" your boil to higher temps... The amount of dissolved sugar will elevate the boiling temp, and the pressure of the wort on itself may elevate it a few degrees too... But in general, a boil is a boil.

That being said, scorching is a possibility, higher heat can burn wort/hop material, or give you different mallard reactions, but your boil won't be increasing in temperature much... The part closest to the heat source might, but I'm general, it'll just be more vigorous (you can measure that by your percentage boil off over time boiled if you want to compare 2 of the same recipes heated at different levels).

That might actually be a pretty cool experiment, I doubt you would notice much in darker beers, but in pilsners you might notice something. You would have to top the one beer up to meet the volume (and gravity) of the first to be objective.
 
I though that, at sea level, it was impossible to go above 212F in an open-pot boil. Am I remembering my physics wrong or is something else going on.
Click to expand...

So I thought too. Even at my elevation I have never tried to crank the heat and see where the temp stops climbing.

A boil is a boil... If it's boiling, it's the same temperature as any other boil at your elevation, you shouldn't really be able to "push" your boil to higher temps...
Click to expand...

My wort here at this elevation begins to show a boil at 198. It has climbed to 220 f before and is a very violent boil. I guess a question at this point would be what exactly is the definition of a "boil"? When it begins gurgling consistently and steam is rising is a boil to me. Scientifically that may not be the exact case. I believe I could take it higher than 220 f but I don't as I don't want to burn or scorch the wort. That said I can push a boil but exactly how high remains to be seen. I just settled with 206 f because it's boiling and churning the hops but not blowing out all over.

I don't want to get nerdy about this subject (Well maybe a little...) but as I learn more chemistry about brewing this thread just created a curiosity for me. Some of my beers have a terrific aroma, nice bitter start, boring in the middle and a nice malty finish. Looking to change this and thought maybe I could change something using the information and experience of others in this thread. Currently I am refining a specific recipe I came up with so I brew the same thing over and over. As Matt3989 suggested I just might experiment as he said at the bottom of his last post!

Cheers everyone!
 
Ok, I'll get my nerd on.


Keep in mind boiling has as much to do with temperature as it does atmospheric pressure. If you put fluid in a sealed container and apply suction, thereby decreasing the relative atmospheric pressure in the container, you will see the water start to boil when the vapor pressure of the water exceeds the relative atmospheric pressure within the container.

You can boil water at room temperature.

For the application of brewing you need your water to boil, temperature is almost irrelevant. The act of the vapor pressure of water exceeding the atmospheric pressure is what drives off DMS.

At the same time you want a high enough temperature to kill any funk.

Ok sorry, had to geek out;)
 
60 - 90 minutes whatever it takes...I don't so much time the boil as I boil to a finished volume...usually about an hour, but as i said, I don't really time it FWIW...
 
wilserbrewer said:
60 - 90 minutes whatever it takes...I don't so much time the boil as I boil to a finished volume...usually about an hour, but as i said, I don't really time it FWIW...
Click to expand...

How do you measure the volume of boiling wort? I know you can measure the depth of the wort in the pot and do the math, but if it is boiling, there is no way the surface would be calm enough to get a reliable depth measurement.
 
smyrnaquince said:
How do you measure the volume of boiling wort? I know you can measure the depth of the wort in the pot and do the math, but if it is boiling, there is no way the surface would be calm enough to get a reliable depth measurement.
Click to expand...

I wonder the same thing. My thoughts have been to take off the heat, get volume using a premarked measuring stick, subtract displacement by things in the wort, subtract contraction (~4%).... but it seems like a bunch of work for precision when I'm fine just being "pretty close" :D
 
smyrnaquince said:
How do you measure the volume of boiling wort? I know you can measure the depth of the wort in the pot and do the math, but if it is boiling, there is no way the surface would be calm enough to get a reliable depth measurement.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure you could do it mathematically by weight.
 
Qhrumphf said:
I'm pretty sure you could do it mathematically by weight.
Click to expand...

I totally agree and thought about mentioning this, then I thought of the logistics of actually doing this with a pot full of boiling wort (lifting, putting on a scale that can be read with the pot on it, subtracting your variable weight). But, you are right that it could be done mathematically by weight for someone more inclined than myself. Again, I'm personally content with "pretty close" :D
 
stpug said:
I totally agree and thought about mentioning this, then I thought of the logistics of actually doing this with a pot full of boiling wort (lifting, putting on a scale that can be read with the pot on it, subtracting your variable weight). But, you are right that it could be done mathematically by weight for someone more inclined than myself. Again, I'm personally content with "pretty close" :D
Click to expand...

Assuming you have a scale that can do it (and do it safely), I'd leave it all on the scale the whole time. No moving anything. Alternatively, measure by suspension, and just lift the kettle that way.

I don't know the math off hand, but I'd think knowing the pre-boil gravity and the mass you could figure out the volume, no? And then it's just a matter of adjusting for expansion/contraction for temperature.
 
OMG...you guys must work for NASA, this is only beer...through experience I know my preboil is roughly 4" below the rim of my kettle, and my post boil is 6", I have some marks on my mash paddle for various kettles relating to batch size as well, buy its really pretty simple.

Cheers and happy brewing!
 
So an update to my previous posts about boiling. Right now I am brewing and the boil kettle is going currently. So the boil starts at like 205.something here at 5300 ft in elevation. Now I have a much better thermometer now then I did before. I was trying to push the temp higher to see how high I could push the temp as before I believed I was at 212 f. in the past. I also believed that I could push the temp higher.

Well, physics (if you remember them) wins out! Temp peaked at 206.7 and could go no higher. Only thing that changed was the vigor of the boil! That changed with heat (flame of the burner) maxed out but temp did not! It's not that I thought physics was wrong, I just believe that with all the added sugars of the wort that the temp would go higher.

So someone earlier made a statement like :"I always thought a boil was a boil"! Well it is! LOL... In my observations only the vigor changes not the temp. Hope this helps anyone. It did me...
 
Smithy said:
So an update to my previous posts about boiling. Right now I am brewing and the boil kettle is going currently. So the boil starts at like 205.something here at 5300 ft in elevation. Now I have a much better thermometer now then I did before. I was trying to push the temp higher to see how high I could push the temp as before I believed I was at 212 f. in the past. I also believed that I could push the temp higher.

Well, physics (if you remember them) wins out! Temp peaked at 206.7 and could go no higher. Only thing that changed was the vigor of the boil! That changed with heat (flame of the burner) maxed out but temp did not! It's not that I thought physics was wrong, I just believe that with all the added sugars of the wort that the temp would go higher.

So someone earlier made a statement like :"I always thought a boil was a boil"! Well it is! LOL... In my observations only the vigor changes not the temp. Hope this helps anyone. It did me...
Click to expand...

I'm glad you posted this, because I was going to point out how your earlier post violated several well-established laws of physics. :)

I live within 10 feet of sea level. My wort always boils between 212.5 and 213 degrees according to my thermapen. I assume the small margin of error comes from varying atmospheric pressure. It boils higher than the established 212 because we're not boiling water, we're boiling water with a lot of sugar and other stuff in it.

If I turn the burner up or down, the only thing that changes is how much water is boiled off. The temperature never varies even by a little.

Also, if you want an accurate way to measure the volume of a boiling kettle of wort, get a sightglass. That's what they're designed for.
 
I'm glad you posted this, because I was going to point out how your earlier post violated several well-established laws of physics.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I felt a little silly after the fact. I fabricated a nice brew bench but lacking on my instrumentation as I am in the planning stages of automating it so using crappy thermometers and such. The readings I was getting before were just not accurate on the boil but I wanted to clarify my past posts (more like correct them) just in case somebody was trying to learn something. Last thing I want to do is get somebody off their path!

Brewing to me is a scientific observation and experimentation every time as well as a tool to bring my mind back into physics and chemistry as well as having my two boys observe along with me.
 
This has been a well discussed topic already, but I just wanted to add that a longer boil can improve hot break and lead to better protein coagulation and therefore clearer beer and reduced chill haze.
 
wilserbrewer said:
60 - 90 minutes whatever it takes...I don't so much time the boil as I boil to a finished volume...usually about an hour, but as i said, I don't really time it FWIW...
Click to expand...

I would love to do this method as i have some issues getting correct volumes. How do you time your hops????
 
TipsySaint said:
I would love to do this method as i have some issues getting correct volumes. How do you time your hops????
Click to expand...

Well kinda fast and loose to be honest,,,
Boil or bittering hops go in at the beginning of course.... Then after 45 or 50 or 60 minutes when the volume is near post boil, I begin timing the late additions and Whitlock...I usually only do 5 or ten minute late hop adds so it is centered on flame out timing...sounds difficult, but it is kinda RDWHAHB
 
Oh just thought I would add, not much difference in bittering hops whether boiled for 60 or 70 minutes, but late additions should be times with flame out on the back end.
 

Similar threads

F
do i need to boil 2 row longer than 60 mins
Replies
19
Views
1K
doug293cz
doug293cz
shrews824
Hop addition question
Replies
9
Views
726
shrews824
shrews824
J
NEW MEMBER
Replies
2
Views
165
JOHNWALDNER95
J
T
Mash Volume Higher than Boil Volume eHERMS
Replies
5
Views
549
Town9
T
kgranger
Lower than expected OG
2
Replies
40
Views
3K
hottpeper13
H
Williams Brewing 300

Latest posts

Back
Top