Author Topic: Whirlpool/ 0 Minute Addition Difference  (Read 3151 times)

Offline flbrewer

  • Brewmaster General
  • *******
  • Posts: 2161
    • View Profile
Whirlpool/ 0 Minute Addition Difference
« on: December 19, 2015, 02:02:49 PM »
On my upcoming brew, the recipe calls for about 3 ounces of hops to be added at the end of the boil. Can anyone tell me from an aroma/ taste difference would either method make a difference?

I'd prefer to just dump them in at flameout just from a logistics standpoint, it would be easier.
« Last Edit: December 19, 2015, 02:25:11 PM by flbrewer »

Offline erockrph

  • Official Poobah of No Life.
  • *
  • Posts: 6185
  • Chepachet, RI
    • View Profile
    • The Hop WHisperer
Re: Whirlpool/ 0 Minute Addition
« Reply #1 on: December 19, 2015, 02:08:47 PM »
If that's what the recipe calls for, then I'd go with that. But a whirlpool is going to get you loads more hop flavor and more aroma as well than a simple flameout addition followed by immediate chilling.
Eric B.

Finally got around to starting a homebrewing blog: The Hop Whisperer

Offline tesgüino

  • Assistant Brewer
  • ***
  • Posts: 137
    • View Profile
Re: Whirlpool/ 0 Minute Addition Difference
« Reply #2 on: December 19, 2015, 03:18:38 PM »
Whirlpool and flame-out additions are not always mutually exclusive. You have the choice to do a whirlpool addition at flame-out in addition to any lower temperature. A flame-out addition can be done with or without whirlpooling, but is a single addition done at flame-out. As erockrph says, whirlpooling will increase the efficiency regardless of when you do the addition.
« Last Edit: December 19, 2015, 10:56:14 PM by tesgüino »

Offline dmtaylor

  • Official Poobah of No Life.
  • *
  • Posts: 3224
  • Two Rivers, WI
    • View Profile
Re: Whirlpool/ 0 Minute Addition Difference
« Reply #3 on: December 19, 2015, 08:44:33 PM »
Not much difference if any.
Dave

The world will become a much more pleasant place to live when each and every one of us realizes that we are all idiots.

Offline klickitat jim

  • I must live here
  • **********
  • Posts: 8460
    • View Profile
Re: Whirlpool/ 0 Minute Addition Difference
« Reply #4 on: December 20, 2015, 12:21:31 AM »
I'm a huge fan of my pump.

I'm not going to claim this as fact and I dont have hard evidence to prove it, but I think that there are subtle to obviously noticeable differences between the various times added to the boil, flame out, etc. Flame out then chill vs flame out and stand is different. Dropping the wort to various temps then adding hops, whirlpooling or not, whirlpooling continuously with a pump vs occasionally stiring... they all produce differences. Some subtle some not.

« Last Edit: December 20, 2015, 12:47:47 AM by klickitat jim »

Offline MarvinSwordenski

  • 1st Kit
  • *
  • Posts: 24
    • View Profile
Re: Whirlpool/ 0 Minute Addition Difference
« Reply #5 on: December 27, 2015, 01:49:08 PM »
to borrow a tad of klickitat Jim.... almost scientific.

The reason for our whirlpool and stands are to add the hops 'after' the boil at different temps to retain the volatile oils that are otherwise boiled/ evaporated off at higher temps. When we develop a specific goal in our flavor and aroma profiles we are considering the different components of the hops used.
Our house Pale Ale is meant to greet you with a bouquet of flowers and have a nice, smooth bitterness supported by a full pallet of malt sweetness and a piney finish. (dang! make me want one right now!) 
To accomplish this we whirlpool specific hops at specific temps to retain the oils we're after.
Humulene – (210F/99C boil point) – think spicy perfume
Myrcene – (147 F/63.9 C) - slight piney/citrus flavor. High volatility so it quickly disperses into the air (Sniff)
Anyways... you get the jest. So, when analyzing a hop for a recipe, using adds at lower temps will bring out the best of what you chose that hop for.
If you simply throw in the hops at flameout the temps are still close to boiling and will vaporize some essential oils you may be after. Hop stands are proven to retain those oils with additions at lower temps. Whirlpool makes sense to better extract those oils with better efficiency.

 8) So.... my take on all that - Whirlpool = opportunity for fine tuning  YMMV

Offline klickitat jim

  • I must live here
  • **********
  • Posts: 8460
    • View Profile
Re: Whirlpool/ 0 Minute Addition Difference
« Reply #6 on: December 27, 2015, 07:55:38 PM »
to borrow a tad of klickitat Jim.... almost scientific.

The reason for our whirlpool and stands are to add the hops 'after' the boil at different temps to retain the volatile oils that are otherwise boiled/ evaporated off at higher temps. When we develop a specific goal in our flavor and aroma profiles we are considering the different components of the hops used.
Our house Pale Ale is meant to greet you with a bouquet of flowers and have a nice, smooth bitterness supported by a full pallet of malt sweetness and a piney finish. (dang! make me want one right now!) 
To accomplish this we whirlpool specific hops at specific temps to retain the oils we're after.
Humulene – (210F/99C boil point) – think spicy perfume
Myrcene – (147 F/63.9 C) - slight piney/citrus flavor. High volatility so it quickly disperses into the air (Sniff)
Anyways... you get the jest. So, when analyzing a hop for a recipe, using adds at lower temps will bring out the best of what you chose that hop for.
If you simply throw in the hops at flameout the temps are still close to boiling and will vaporize some essential oils you may be after. Hop stands are proven to retain those oils with additions at lower temps. Whirlpool makes sense to better extract those oils with better efficiency.

 8) So.... my take on all that - Whirlpool = opportunity for fine tuning  YMMV
Till proven otherwise, this is my theory. Time temp and let of stand doesn't just vary between bitterness flavor and aroma, but type of bitterness, type of flavor, type of aroma. It has to exist in the specific hop you are using, but if its there it will vary depending on usage. I think...

Offline brewinhard

  • Official Poobah of No Life.
  • *
  • Posts: 3217
    • View Profile
Re: Whirlpool/ 0 Minute Addition Difference
« Reply #7 on: December 27, 2015, 07:58:34 PM »
I'm a huge fan of my pump.

I read that waaaaay too fast and thought it said "I'm a huge fan of my PIMP."

Offline klickitat jim

  • I must live here
  • **********
  • Posts: 8460
    • View Profile
Re: Whirlpool/ 0 Minute Addition Difference
« Reply #8 on: December 27, 2015, 08:04:42 PM »
I'm a huge fan of my pump.

I read that waaaaay too fast and thought it said "I'm a huge fan of my PIMP."
Nice!

Offline Wheat_Brewer

  • Assistant Brewer
  • ***
  • Posts: 240
  • Bad Bunny Brewing
    • View Profile
Re: Whirlpool/ 0 Minute Addition Difference
« Reply #9 on: December 29, 2015, 09:28:36 PM »
to borrow a tad of klickitat Jim.... almost scientific.

The reason for our whirlpool and stands are to add the hops 'after' the boil at different temps to retain the volatile oils that are otherwise boiled/ evaporated off at higher temps. When we develop a specific goal in our flavor and aroma profiles we are considering the different components of the hops used.
Our house Pale Ale is meant to greet you with a bouquet of flowers and have a nice, smooth bitterness supported by a full pallet of malt sweetness and a piney finish. (dang! make me want one right now!) 
To accomplish this we whirlpool specific hops at specific temps to retain the oils we're after.
Humulene – (210F/99C boil point) – think spicy perfume
Myrcene – (147 F/63.9 C) - slight piney/citrus flavor. High volatility so it quickly disperses into the air (Sniff)
Anyways... you get the jest. So, when analyzing a hop for a recipe, using adds at lower temps will bring out the best of what you chose that hop for.
If you simply throw in the hops at flameout the temps are still close to boiling and will vaporize some essential oils you may be after. Hop stands are proven to retain those oils with additions at lower temps. Whirlpool makes sense to better extract those oils with better efficiency.

 8) So.... my take on all that - Whirlpool = opportunity for fine tuning  YMMV

Found an article in a quick search at the link below which re-states but expands upon what you stated.

http://beersmith.com/blog/2013/01/21/late-hop-additions-and-hop-oils-in-beer-brewing/

For what it's worth I also wonder if hop additions at low temperatures such as 65F (i.e. dry hopping) is too low to pull some of the oils from the hops we are after. I certainly get the aroma from dry hopping so I assume we get some of the oils. Last...I haven't done much research in this arena despite years of brewing so I'm asking a question blindly only because this community has extensive knowledge and will probably give a highly educated answer faster and more in depth than the research I would stumble thru.
AHA Lifetime Member

Offline HoosierBrew

  • Global Moderator
  • I must live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 13030
  • Indianapolis,IN
    • View Profile
Re: Whirlpool/ 0 Minute Addition Difference
« Reply #10 on: December 29, 2015, 10:08:39 PM »
For what it's worth I also wonder if hop additions at low temperatures such as 65F (i.e. dry hopping) is too low to pull some of the oils from the hops we are after. I certainly get the aroma from dry hopping so I assume we get some of the oils. Last...I haven't done much research in this arena despite years of brewing so I'm asking a question blindly only because this community has extensive knowledge and will probably give a highly educated answer faster and more in depth than the research I would stumble thru.


Well, the oils obviously have a much longer extraction time when dry hopping (as in days, not minutes). But I see whirlpool hopping and dry hopping as having different character and not as interchangeable techniques. FWIW I use whirlpool hopping alone on most beers and use it along with dry hopping for hop forward American styles.
Jon H.

Offline klickitat jim

  • I must live here
  • **********
  • Posts: 8460
    • View Profile
Re: Whirlpool/ 0 Minute Addition Difference
« Reply #11 on: December 29, 2015, 10:24:06 PM »
For what it's worth I also wonder if hop additions at low temperatures such as 65F (i.e. dry hopping) is too low to pull some of the oils from the hops we are after. I certainly get the aroma from dry hopping so I assume we get some of the oils. Last...I haven't done much research in this arena despite years of brewing so I'm asking a question blindly only because this community has extensive knowledge and will probably give a highly educated answer faster and more in depth than the research I would stumble thru.


Well, the oils obviously have a much longer extraction time when dry hopping (as in days, not minutes). But I see whirlpool hopping and dry hopping as having different character and not as interchangeable techniques. FWIW I use whirlpool hopping alone on most beers and use it along with dry hopping for hop forward American styles.
Fully agree that dry hopping vs low temp whirlpool are not equally interchangeable. Never will be. But I'm working on a hunch that for people who don't want to sacrifice clarity, you can get different but enjoyable and acceptable aroma from a low temp whirlpool. It will never be just like dry hopping, but...

Once I get a couple more brew projects done, I'm going to brew two side by side APAs. One will get 2oz dry hop for 4 days after TG, the other will get those 2oz in whirlpool at 120 for 15 min. The dry hopped beer gets no gelatin fining, the other does.

The blind triangle questions will be Is one of the three different? If yes, is the different beer more drinkable? Why/Why not?
« Last Edit: December 29, 2015, 10:34:45 PM by klickitat jim »

Offline HoosierBrew

  • Global Moderator
  • I must live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 13030
  • Indianapolis,IN
    • View Profile
Re: Whirlpool/ 0 Minute Addition Difference
« Reply #12 on: December 29, 2015, 10:32:07 PM »
For what it's worth I also wonder if hop additions at low temperatures such as 65F (i.e. dry hopping) is too low to pull some of the oils from the hops we are after. I certainly get the aroma from dry hopping so I assume we get some of the oils. Last...I haven't done much research in this arena despite years of brewing so I'm asking a question blindly only because this community has extensive knowledge and will probably give a highly educated answer faster and more in depth than the research I would stumble thru.


Well, the oils obviously have a much longer extraction time when dry hopping (as in days, not minutes). But I see whirlpool hopping and dry hopping as having different character and not as interchangeable techniques. FWIW I use whirlpool hopping alone on most beers and use it along with dry hopping for hop forward American styles.
Fully agree that dry hopping vs low temp whirlpool are not equally interchangeable. Never will be. But I'm working on a hunch that for people who don't want to sacrifice clarity, you can get different but enjoyable and acceptable aroma from a low temp whirlpool. It will never be just like dry hopping, but...


Yeah, I hear ya. When I fine before crashing, I'm finding the dry hop character lasts longer and the beer still ends up being fairly clear, unless it's a big dry hop charge for IPAs of course.

Jon H.

Offline klickitat jim

  • I must live here
  • **********
  • Posts: 8460
    • View Profile
Re: Whirlpool/ 0 Minute Addition Difference
« Reply #13 on: December 29, 2015, 10:36:03 PM »
For what it's worth I also wonder if hop additions at low temperatures such as 65F (i.e. dry hopping) is too low to pull some of the oils from the hops we are after. I certainly get the aroma from dry hopping so I assume we get some of the oils. Last...I haven't done much research in this arena despite years of brewing so I'm asking a question blindly only because this community has extensive knowledge and will probably give a highly educated answer faster and more in depth than the research I would stumble thru.


Well, the oils obviously have a much longer extraction time when dry hopping (as in days, not minutes). But I see whirlpool hopping and dry hopping as having different character and not as interchangeable techniques. FWIW I use whirlpool hopping alone on most beers and use it along with dry hopping for hop forward American styles.
Fully agree that dry hopping vs low temp whirlpool are not equally interchangeable. Never will be. But I'm working on a hunch that for people who don't want to sacrifice clarity, you can get different but enjoyable and acceptable aroma from a low temp whirlpool. It will never be just like dry hopping, but...


Yeah, I hear ya. When I fine before crashing, I'm finding the dry hop character lasts longer and the beer still ends up being fairly clear, unless it's a big dry hop charge for IPAs of course.
I added some stuff... edited while you were typing

Offline HoosierBrew

  • Global Moderator
  • I must live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 13030
  • Indianapolis,IN
    • View Profile
Re: Whirlpool/ 0 Minute Addition Difference
« Reply #14 on: December 29, 2015, 10:38:06 PM »
And I meant to post 'when I gelatin fine before dry hopping'.
Jon H.