Membership questions? Log in issues? Email info@brewersassociation.org

Author Topic: Experiments, beer experiments and statistics  (Read 7706 times)

Offline Andy Farke

  • Brewer
  • ****
  • Posts: 472
  • Homebrewing Paleontologist
    • Andy's Brewing Blog
Re: Experiments, beer experiments and statistics
« Reply #60 on: February 09, 2017, 12:27:36 pm »
This is a fascinating thread, which coincidentally I found only after I posted this (provacatively titled) blog entry last night ("Are Homebrew Experiments Scientific?"): https://andybrews.com/2017/02/07/are-homebrew-experiments-scientific/

I completely agree with you Andy. I have worked in science for 25 years, lab setting for 7, and clinical research for the last 18, and know that "labs" are not much different from a homebrew setting.

The humble advice to Denny and the IGORs (sounds like Benny and the Jets  :) )
- Researchers must do a literature review to the extent that is possible, so it is clear in your mind how your experiment will add to the knowledge in the area (it is not that it was never done, but that it must be done for every experiment)
- Researchers must provide an objective evaluation of the quality of the beer whenever possible. Less flaws mean less statistical noise. Flaws in the beer may explain why a difference could not be detected.
- Researchers must maximize the odds of finding a difference should there be one (meaning, pick the best style). The argument that a more flavorful beer is more "real world"is not invalid, but research-wise, one does the experiment with the best chance first, and then does the extrapolation experiment.

Welcome to the forum, Andy !!

Nice to be more active on the forum, and to have some good discussion!

It is worth noting that my "lab" equipment includes everything from helicopters to jackhammers to binocular microscopes to CT scanners. Science is awesome. The only place I use an Erlenmeyer flask (that old science stereotype) is in brewing!

The issue of delving into the brewing literature is one I talk about in a bit more depth for my post, and have been thinking a lot on lately...a real challenge is that much/most of the brewing literature is paywalled (and thus not terribly accessible in any easy fashion for most users), much of it is highly technical (I certainly am not always in a good position to evaluate its quality, and I have a Ph.D. in science!), and a lot of the brewing literature centers on brewing at commercial scales. Of course, the latter point has me thinking--has anyone done a good review article on differences and similarities between commercial and homebrewing setups, in terms of chemistry, physics, biology, etc.? There are lots of scattered references, of course (e.g., pressure differences between a 5 gallon carboy and a 500 gallon conical), but if anyone knows of a single piece that ties this all together I'd love to see it!

And hey...is it time to start a peer reviewed, open access journal of homebrew science? (I'd love to help out!)
____________________________
Andy Farke, Homebrewer and Paleontologist
Website: http://www.andybrews.com
Twitter: @andyfarke
Facebook: Farke Brewing

Offline bayareabrewer

  • Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 535
Re: Experiments, beer experiments and statistics
« Reply #61 on: February 09, 2017, 12:32:53 pm »
This is a fascinating thread, which coincidentally I found only after I posted this (provacatively titled) blog entry last night ("Are Homebrew Experiments Scientific?"): https://andybrews.com/2017/02/07/are-homebrew-experiments-scientific/

I completely agree with you Andy. I have worked in science for 25 years, lab setting for 7, and clinical research for the last 18, and know that "labs" are not much different from a homebrew setting.

The humble advice to Denny and the IGORs (sounds like Benny and the Jets  :) )
- Researchers must do a literature review to the extent that is possible, so it is clear in your mind how your experiment will add to the knowledge in the area (it is not that it was never done, but that it must be done for every experiment)
- Researchers must provide an objective evaluation of the quality of the beer whenever possible. Less flaws mean less statistical noise. Flaws in the beer may explain why a difference could not be detected.
- Researchers must maximize the odds of finding a difference should there be one (meaning, pick the best style). The argument that a more flavorful beer is more "real world"is not invalid, but research-wise, one does the experiment with the best chance first, and then does the extrapolation experiment.

Welcome to the forum, Andy !!

Nice to be more active on the forum, and to have some good discussion!

It is worth noting that my "lab" equipment includes everything from helicopters to jackhammers to binocular microscopes to CT scanners. Science is awesome. The only place I use an Erlenmeyer flask (that old science stereotype) is in brewing!

The issue of delving into the brewing literature is one I talk about in a bit more depth for my post, and have been thinking a lot on lately...a real challenge is that much/most of the brewing literature is paywalled (and thus not terribly accessible in any easy fashion for most users), much of it is highly technical (I certainly am not always in a good position to evaluate its quality, and I have a Ph.D. in science!), and a lot of the brewing literature centers on brewing at commercial scales. Of course, the latter point has me thinking--has anyone done a good review article on differences and similarities between commercial and homebrewing setups, in terms of chemistry, physics, biology, etc.? There are lots of scattered references, of course (e.g., pressure differences between a 5 gallon carboy and a 500 gallon conical), but if anyone knows of a single piece that ties this all together I'd love to see it!

And hey...is it time to start a peer reviewed, open access journal of homebrew science? (I'd love to help out!)

I don't know you but I love you.

Big Monk

  • Guest
Re: Experiments, beer experiments and statistics
« Reply #62 on: February 09, 2017, 12:48:11 pm »
This is a fascinating thread, which coincidentally I found only after I posted this (provacatively titled) blog entry last night ("Are Homebrew Experiments Scientific?"): https://andybrews.com/2017/02/07/are-homebrew-experiments-scientific/

I completely agree with you Andy. I have worked in science for 25 years, lab setting for 7, and clinical research for the last 18, and know that "labs" are not much different from a homebrew setting.

The humble advice to Denny and the IGORs (sounds like Benny and the Jets  :) )
- Researchers must do a literature review to the extent that is possible, so it is clear in your mind how your experiment will add to the knowledge in the area (it is not that it was never done, but that it must be done for every experiment)
- Researchers must provide an objective evaluation of the quality of the beer whenever possible. Less flaws mean less statistical noise. Flaws in the beer may explain why a difference could not be detected.
- Researchers must maximize the odds of finding a difference should there be one (meaning, pick the best style). The argument that a more flavorful beer is more "real world"is not invalid, but research-wise, one does the experiment with the best chance first, and then does the extrapolation experiment.

Welcome to the forum, Andy !!

Nice to be more active on the forum, and to have some good discussion!

It is worth noting that my "lab" equipment includes everything from helicopters to jackhammers to binocular microscopes to CT scanners. Science is awesome. The only place I use an Erlenmeyer flask (that old science stereotype) is in brewing!

The issue of delving into the brewing literature is one I talk about in a bit more depth for my post, and have been thinking a lot on lately...a real challenge is that much/most of the brewing literature is paywalled (and thus not terribly accessible in any easy fashion for most users), much of it is highly technical (I certainly am not always in a good position to evaluate its quality, and I have a Ph.D. in science!), and a lot of the brewing literature centers on brewing at commercial scales. Of course, the latter point has me thinking--has anyone done a good review article on differences and similarities between commercial and homebrewing setups, in terms of chemistry, physics, biology, etc.? There are lots of scattered references, of course (e.g., pressure differences between a 5 gallon carboy and a 500 gallon conical), but if anyone knows of a single piece that ties this all together I'd love to see it!

And hey...is it time to start a peer reviewed, open access journal of homebrew science? (I'd love to help out!)

Many applications of commercial technique are scale invariant. There are however some "hacks" required to utilize certain methods described in textbooks on our scale.

At the end of the day you need to try things out in your brewery and document the results you get. These kind of empirical observations go a long way toward proving, to yourself of course, whether you think the application of these techniques is suitable for your brewing.

I'm am definitely of the opinion that commercial practices have relevance at our scale but not always direct application.

The Beerery

  • Guest
Re: Experiments, beer experiments and statistics
« Reply #63 on: February 09, 2017, 12:56:32 pm »
I wish Lupulus, Andy, I, and a few others could sit down in a room over some beers. I would love for you and Lupulus to start peer reviewing my stuff on Low Oxygen Brewing. Lupulus and I chat offline about my "claims" quite a bit!

Offline Andy Farke

  • Brewer
  • ****
  • Posts: 472
  • Homebrewing Paleontologist
    • Andy's Brewing Blog
Re: Experiments, beer experiments and statistics
« Reply #64 on: February 09, 2017, 01:16:47 pm »
I wish Lupulus, Andy, I, and a few others could sit down in a room over some beers. I would love for you and Lupulus to start peer reviewing my stuff on Low Oxygen Brewing. Lupulus and I chat offline about my "claims" quite a bit!

Any excuse to chat brewing science with a beer in hand is good by me!

I'm happy to provide what input I can...shoot me a DM or email if you like or have anything you want input on. I am full of opinions and pontification!
____________________________
Andy Farke, Homebrewer and Paleontologist
Website: http://www.andybrews.com
Twitter: @andyfarke
Facebook: Farke Brewing

Offline lupulus

  • Brewer
  • ****
  • Posts: 390
  • Think like a proton, stay positive!
Re: Experiments, beer experiments and statistics
« Reply #65 on: February 09, 2017, 02:17:02 pm »
Research is not done in commercial systems but in pilot breweries, generally slightly bigger than hb setups but much smaller than commercial.  So pros have to extrapolate too 😀.
I wish I could get access to Brauwelt international ed and the MBAA journal but there are many good books and some free papers and German dissertations ( in German).

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.”  Neil deGrasse Tyson

Offline kramerog

  • Brewmaster General
  • *******
  • Posts: 2262
    • My LinkedIn page
Re: Experiments, beer experiments and statistics
« Reply #66 on: February 09, 2017, 06:09:49 pm »
This is a fascinating thread, which coincidentally I found only after I posted this (provacatively titled) blog entry last night ("Are Homebrew Experiments Scientific?"): https://andybrews.com/2017/02/07/are-homebrew-experiments-scientific/

I completely agree with you Andy. I have worked in science for 25 years, lab setting for 7, and clinical research for the last 18, and know that "labs" are not much different from a homebrew setting.

The humble advice to Denny and the IGORs (sounds like Benny and the Jets  :) )
- Researchers must do a literature review to the extent that is possible, so it is clear in your mind how your experiment will add to the knowledge in the area (it is not that it was never done, but that it must be done for every experiment)
- Researchers must provide an objective evaluation of the quality of the beer whenever possible. Less flaws mean less statistical noise. Flaws in the beer may explain why a difference could not be detected.
- Researchers must maximize the odds of finding a difference should there be one (meaning, pick the best style). The argument that a more flavorful beer is more "real world"is not invalid, but research-wise, one does the experiment with the best chance first, and then does the extrapolation experiment.

Welcome to the forum, Andy !!

Nice to be more active on the forum, and to have some good discussion!

It is worth noting that my "lab" equipment includes everything from helicopters to jackhammers to binocular microscopes to CT scanners. Science is awesome. The only place I use an Erlenmeyer flask (that old science stereotype) is in brewing!

The issue of delving into the brewing literature is one I talk about in a bit more depth for my post, and have been thinking a lot on lately...a real challenge is that much/most of the brewing literature is paywalled (and thus not terribly accessible in any easy fashion for most users), much of it is highly technical (I certainly am not always in a good position to evaluate its quality, and I have a Ph.D. in science!), and a lot of the brewing literature centers on brewing at commercial scales. Of course, the latter point has me thinking--has anyone done a good review article on differences and similarities between commercial and homebrewing setups, in terms of chemistry, physics, biology, etc.? There are lots of scattered references, of course (e.g., pressure differences between a 5 gallon carboy and a 500 gallon conical), but if anyone knows of a single piece that ties this all together I'd love to see it!

And hey...is it time to start a peer reviewed, open access journal of homebrew science? (I'd love to help out!)
When literature review is not practical, couldn't peer review of the knowledge base be done?

Sent from my XT1095 using Tapatalk


Offline hopfenundmalz

  • Global Moderator
  • I must live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 10678
  • Milford, MI
Re: Experiments, beer experiments and statistics
« Reply #67 on: February 10, 2017, 08:42:43 am »
Research is not done in commercial systems but in pilot breweries, generally slightly bigger than hb setups but much smaller than commercial.  So pros have to extrapolate too 😀.
I wish I could get access to Brauwelt international ed and the MBAA journal but there are many good books and some free papers and German dissertations ( in German).

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
Some pilot systems are in the 10 to 20 bbl range. The main systems are 200 bbl.
Jeff Rankert
AHA Lifetime Member
BJCP National
Ann Arbor Brewers Guild
Home-brewing, not just a hobby, it is a lifestyle!

Offline stpug

  • Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 742
Re: Experiments, beer experiments and statistics
« Reply #68 on: February 10, 2017, 08:51:36 am »
Research is not done in commercial systems but in pilot breweries, generally slightly bigger than hb setups but much smaller than commercial.  So pros have to extrapolate too 😀.
I wish I could get access to Brauwelt international ed and the MBAA journal but there are many good books and some free papers and German dissertations ( in German).

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
Some pilot systems are in the 10 to 20 bbl range. The main systems are 200 bbl.
^^Yes, that IS much smaller that the commercial rig.  It makes sense why they would have to extrapolate.

Offline hopfenundmalz

  • Global Moderator
  • I must live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 10678
  • Milford, MI
Re: Experiments, beer experiments and statistics
« Reply #69 on: February 10, 2017, 09:48:03 am »
Research is not done in commercial systems but in pilot breweries, generally slightly bigger than hb setups but much smaller than commercial.  So pros have to extrapolate too 😀.
I wish I could get access to Brauwelt international ed and the MBAA journal but there are many good books and some free papers and German dissertations ( in German).

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
Some pilot systems are in the 10 to 20 bbl range. The main systems are 200 bbl.
^^Yes, that IS much smaller that the commercial rig.  It makes sense why they would have to extrapolate.
I had to point out that some places have pilot systems bigger than mant commercial breweries.
Jeff Rankert
AHA Lifetime Member
BJCP National
Ann Arbor Brewers Guild
Home-brewing, not just a hobby, it is a lifestyle!

Offline stpug

  • Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 742
Re: Experiments, beer experiments and statistics
« Reply #70 on: February 10, 2017, 10:12:29 am »
Research is not done in commercial systems but in pilot breweries, generally slightly bigger than hb setups but much smaller than commercial.  So pros have to extrapolate too 😀.
I wish I could get access to Brauwelt international ed and the MBAA journal but there are many good books and some free papers and German dissertations ( in German).

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
Some pilot systems are in the 10 to 20 bbl range. The main systems are 200 bbl.
^^Yes, that IS much smaller that the commercial rig.  It makes sense why they would have to extrapolate.
I had to point out that some places have pilot systems bigger than many commercial breweries.
You're absolutely correct, of course - but that's apples to oranges.  From the extrapolation point-of-view, the sum is the same.

Offline hopfenundmalz

  • Global Moderator
  • I must live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 10678
  • Milford, MI
Re: Experiments, beer experiments and statistics
« Reply #71 on: February 10, 2017, 10:31:39 am »
Research is not done in commercial systems but in pilot breweries, generally slightly bigger than hb setups but much smaller than commercial.  So pros have to extrapolate too 😀.
I wish I could get access to Brauwelt international ed and the MBAA journal but there are many good books and some free papers and German dissertations ( in German).

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
Some pilot systems are in the 10 to 20 bbl range. The main systems are 200 bbl.
^^Yes, that IS much smaller that the commercial rig.  It makes sense why they would have to extrapolate.
I had to point out that some places have pilot systems bigger than many commercial breweries.
You're absolutely correct, of course - but that's apples to oranges.  From the extrapolation point-of-view, the sum is the same.
Agreed. The point was these are much bigger than homebrew  systems. (typical ones)
Jeff Rankert
AHA Lifetime Member
BJCP National
Ann Arbor Brewers Guild
Home-brewing, not just a hobby, it is a lifestyle!