Is there Something magical that happens at the hour mark? Do the beer gods relize that a pot of colorful liquid has been boiling for one hour freeze time And replace the colorful water with amazing beer? (ok prob not the second one) but really is it just an algirytham that some one figrued out one day in brewholla?
Why one hour for boil?
- Thread starter krops13
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
Wellshooter
Well-Known Member
Because we've always done it that way !! 
Actually some beers it's better to boil for 90 minutes. Like with a large amount of pilsner in the grain bill you do that to drive off the dms precursors.
It takes a vigourous 60 minute boil to fully isomerize the alpha acids in your bittering hops.
If you play around with hop additions in any brewing software you can see the difference in the ibu's of beers, depending on when you add you bittering hop additions.
It takes a vigourous 60 minute boil to fully isomerize the alpha acids in your bittering hops.
If you play around with hop additions in any brewing software you can see the difference in the ibu's of beers, depending on when you add you bittering hop additions.
jaginger
Well-Known Member
so it's all about the hops? no other real reason (other than DMS in a pils)?
Sometimes rather than "time" the boil for 1 hour, I will just boil till I reach my required final volume. Later addition hops are moved to be at the appropriate time before flame out.
ChshreCat
Well-Known Member
What Revvy said. In general, one hour is enough time to get the bitterness out of your first hops addition. More won't do much better and less won't do as well. Some beers will do better with more or less time, but 60 is a good general rule of thumb.
Also, like wilserbrewer said, to achieve a certain final volume.
Hopheader
Well-Known Member
As a hophead, I like that question!
Yes, I've found out through my first three brews as 'head' of our crew, doing the calculations and supervision, boil is a good factor in determining final volume of wort.
JonK331
Well-Known Member
I've been experimenting with adding my bittering hops at for 40 mins instead of 60 in some hoppy pale ales (I still do a 60 min boil, just don't add bittering hops until 40 mins in). The result is a smoother and not quite so sharp of a bitterness. Quite pleasing really.
+2, my boil-off varies so much depending on the season I have found myself playing it by ear lately.
If you look at this curve, you'll see that the isomerization rate is much higher in the first 60 minutes and there is little to be gained with longer boils. Longer boils also use more energy, increase caramelization, and take more time.
In all grain brewing, the more preboil volume you collect, the more efficient your lauter is. If you don't care, you can go ahead and collect say 1/2 gallons less and boil for 45 minutes. Of course, you'll have to figure your hopping based on a 45 minute addition and not 60, but hops are cheaper now.
Good point Bobby, for a buck or two of hops and grain, I could in theory shave 20 - 30 minutes off my session and also save a bit of power. Sounds good to a lazy brewer like me.
all malt produces DMS. Pils just has more, so it needs even more boiling.
double your hops and only boil for 30 mins, you'll probably taste cooked corn/cabbage in your finished beer. That's the DMS.
Bensiff
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2008
- Messages
- 4,835
- Reaction score
- 411
I don't pay much attention, when I hit a certain volume in the kettle I put in my hops and go from there...plenty of times I end up with 75-90 minute boils depending on how the sparge went.
And because my master's master said so
And because my master's master said so
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2008
- Messages
- 1,899
- Reaction score
- 21
This is an excellent point.
Go ahead and sparge yourself stupid and just boil off the excess water. Of course you'll need quite the sophisticated system to know at what point you've driven off to a 60-minute boil benchmark and can begin adding hops.
remilard
Well-Known Member
Black malt certainly has no SMM.
I think the boil time and its effect on DMS is being waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay overstated here. By far the most important factor is vigor of fermentation. You just don't get DMS in ales.
For example, Berliner Weiss is held at temperatures at which SMM converts to DMS, then is not boiled at all, and has no perceptible DMS in the finished product.
Problem is the scale slides rapidly towards diminished returns for a longer boil. Kinda silly to boil away for half an hour for 75 cents worth if grain?
EBloom97
Well-Known Member
When I did 60 minute boils I usually produced cloudy beer. Once I upped it to 90 minutes my final product was always extremely clear. I don't know if that is a documented effect, but it has been my experience.
Some beers benefit from a bit of extra carmelization you get from a longer boil - Scottish Ales come to mind. On other beers, I do find you get better utilization from the extra 30 minutes. It is not 1 for 1 - 50% longer boil does not get you 50% more utilization as the chart posted earlier shows - but you do get roughly 10 to 20% more from the longer boil and that is always helpful on very hoppy beers or high gravity beers that need some hop balance.
hbomb
Well-Known Member
Besides all the reasons already stated, longer boiling means increased maillard effects and different carmelized malt flavors/melding. Not necessarily better, just different. Consistent length of boil helps with consistency in all these factors and helps us to replicate great beers again and again.
martinworswick
Well-Known Member
listen to the brewstrong podcast on melanoidins,
if i remember correctly you want to boil off between 10 and 15 percent per hour to get the melanoidin content in your beer, i'm only getting 5-6 percent loss and it may be one reason the flavours in my beer are a bit lacking.
until i listened to that podcast i thought a boil was a boil no matter how vigorous, now i'm looking for a bigger element!
if i remember correctly you want to boil off between 10 and 15 percent per hour to get the melanoidin content in your beer, i'm only getting 5-6 percent loss and it may be one reason the flavours in my beer are a bit lacking.
until i listened to that podcast i thought a boil was a boil no matter how vigorous, now i'm looking for a bigger element!
samc
Well-Known Member
If you boil for 55 or 64.5 minutes the world will not end and beer will be made. It is just an easy number to standardize on. 90 is also easier then telling someone to boil for 87.3 minutes.
Most of my beers are 90 minute boils, last one was Jamil's Evil Twin with 90 minute boil and no hops until last 20 minutes. Can't wait to try the finished product.
Most of my beers are 90 minute boils, last one was Jamil's Evil Twin with 90 minute boil and no hops until last 20 minutes. Can't wait to try the finished product.
jaginger
Well-Known Member
I think I am going to try some 40-45 min boils.
It will cut the brewday slightly, save propane, and let me start with slightly smaller volume (my pot is very full at the beginning.)
Maybe combine with FWH and see what happens.
It will cut the brewday slightly, save propane, and let me start with slightly smaller volume (my pot is very full at the beginning.)
Maybe combine with FWH and see what happens.
Nah, just add the hops at the beginning. The difference in IBU extraction between 60 and 90 minutes will not have that great of an impact as you can see by the previously posted curves. All you need to know is the level for adding late boil hops. I can tell when I can see my thermometer stem clearly that I have 10/15 minutes to go.
I error on the side of a larger starting volume since I want to boil at least 60 minutes. I'm sure people will tell me I'm risking tannin extraction but I haven't picked up on anything.
jkarp
Well-Known Member
listen to the brewstrong podcast on melanoidins,
if i remember correctly you want to boil off between 10 and 15 percent per hour to get the melanoidin content in your beer, i'm only getting 5-6 percent loss and it may be one reason the flavours in my beer are a bit lacking.
until i listened to that podcast i thought a boil was a boil no matter how vigorous, now i'm looking for a bigger element!
A percentage is completely meaningless w/o a volume. 10 - 15% of a 3 gallon batch is VERY VERY different than 10 -15% of a 10 gallon one.
Same for me - I am a n00b and doing 2 gallon recipes right now. I only have an 8qt pot so my boil volume is 1.25 gals. I did a 45 minute boil and then topped off the last couple quarts. Glad I didn't do 1.5 gals also because I STILL nearly had a boilover!
Here is a related question - what happens if after say 30 minutes I add another quart of water to the boil and then do the full 60 minutes. Is this any different that topping off? Better? Worse?
martinworswick
Well-Known Member
yes it is but if you have a burner that can bring 10 gallons to a rolling boil at full power you would adjust its power for 3 gallons to try and get the same boil off ratio.
regardless,i do recommend the podcast.
jkarp
Well-Known Member
Nope. The heat of vaporization of water is 2260 J/g. Volume makes no difference, except for thermal loss of the system.
Think of it this way. 15% of a 10 gallon batch would be 1.5 gallons per hour. With your logic, I should be boiling off less than a half gallon per hour in my system. That's not even a simmer, let alone a boil!
% boil-off numbers are only useful for evaluating identical volume batches on your system and are not relevant for comparison to other brewers. That's why we use gal/hr instead. From memory, that Brew Strong 'cast discussed this as well.
Edcculus
Well-Known Member
Didn't feel like reading all of the pages. Here is the definitive answer.
This is taken from the BJCP study guide Wort Production, by David Houseman and Scott Bickham
http://www.bjcp.org/study.php#exam
This is taken from the BJCP study guide Wort Production, by David Houseman and Scott Bickham
http://www.bjcp.org/study.php#exam
Synovia
Well-Known Member
It doesn't seem to slide at all until well after 90.
