Ideas on Small Scale, Side by Side Experiments.

MODERATOR NOTE 7th November 2012: This and other recent threads have resulted in the creation of a new forum purely devoted to research. Ideas on how we should structure this new forum can be made here (link to be provided.)

There's been more talk than usual here in the last week regarding side by side testing. Many things in brewing can really only be tested in such a manner and usually have to be repeated several times to get any valuable results.

Large scale side by side testing is impossible though for most home brewers and for those who can do it, it is impractical to do it regularly. Who wants to drink 20 gallons of the same beer?

So, it might be interesting in this thread to explore....

1. What side by side tests you'd like to do or have done.
2. What equipment would work on a small scale - kettle, bag, fermentor etc
3. What methodology would work on a small scale.

Maybe you can toss your ideas around in this thread?


PP

Note: Just in case this thread takes off, I'll reserve the next three posts and keep them updated with what you come up with. For example, if you have already done a side by side on something post or link the results here and I'll update the post below with it.

• • SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From Australia
  • Quote
• • • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0

• • SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From Australia
  • Quote
• • • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0

• • SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From Australia
  • Quote
• • • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0

• • SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From Australia
  • Quote
• • • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0

I have been conducting test's on late hopping verses dry hopping already. I may continue to do that as a reaffirmation of my results. We could do it as a group also? I think we may try testing FWH (First Wort Hopping) as compared to "Standard" hopping? We have lots of passionate brewers on this site and if we can come up with a valid and repeatable testing procedure we can learn from each other and become better brewers.

On a side note. We can enhance this forum and make it a Mecca for people interested in debunking brewing myths and legends? We have plenty to be proud of on this site. BIAB refutes many standard brewing myths already. Why not kick it up a notch and prove or disprove our inherited brewing practices? We don't have to go crazy but sometimes it's nicer to have a goal in sight to give us direction rather than just stumbling about?

Speaking of "Stumbling about" what do you think PP?

• • SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From United States of America
  • Quote
• • • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0

• • Quote
• • • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0

• • SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From United States of America
  • Quote
• • • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0

• • Quote
• • • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0

BobBrews wrote:BBH,

Good insight. Water is very different regionally. Store bought water might even have differences? But even if we have exactly the same water our taste buds will confuse matters as well as water. Genetically we taste the same substance's differently. That throws a monkey wrench into every taste test. I suppose our brew clubs or family gatherings can help by using a number of variable taste types?

Yeah, taste perceptions are the other MAJOR variable. I think experiments should measure, whenever possible, something quantitative (gravity, temperature, alcohol, pH, etc.) with the equipment homebrewers have available. Now that's almost impossible as we're really only concerned with taste in our beer and the taste compounds can only be measured in very expensive lab equipment. I guess that's where we need to be very careful in designing the experiment.

If taste perception is the result that's being reported, maybe the experimenters should report their perceptions of different tastes on a scale of 1 to 10. That would be the job of the lead person to come up with a list of detailed taste perceptions that can be detected. Maybe the BJCP has a list somewhere of common tastes and what they are most commonly associated with (i.e., butterscotch, citrusy, etc.).

I guess the point here is that the experiment becomes more and more viable, trustworthy, and meaningful the more careful we are about designing the experiment. Plus, I think its fun to try to hammer out these details (most other people might get annoyed by it though )

• • Quote
• • • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0

• • SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From United States of America
  • Quote
• • • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0

• • SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From Greece
  • Quote
• • • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0

joshua wrote:If one batch really sucks....Dump it, 11L is not a big worry.

No way is that not a big worry,, I hate dumping beer I won't do it I tell yea, I just won't do it, ...... I'm all for taking one for the team but 11L... ... I'm feeling faint, I'm going for a lie down

• • SVA Brewer With Over 50 Brews From Great Britain
  • Quote
• • • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0

• • SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From United States of America
  • Quote
• • • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0

Bob,,
I've only had to dump beer once in the last 2 years. It was a batch where the fermentation temp got away from me and it ended up more fruity than monkey droppings. Anyway that was a full keg and a dozen bottles down the drain which broke my heart . I think I need therapy, this has brought it all back, I can still see it when I close my eyes, ....got ...to ....lie ...down..now...

• • SVA Brewer With Over 50 Brews From Great Britain
  • Quote
• • • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0

Seriously,,

Good thread,

The hardest thing is to get a good balance between a manageable amount of ale for a decent test and not too much in case it goes wrong. But hey are we really talking about brewing a bad beer, if we are going to just test the naunces of hopping, mash PH and the like I don't think we will go wrong by much, My thinking is the same as Joshua, 20L brew split over 4 x 5L which will fit into a demijon or one of those small wine fermenters. And if we do it correctly we will always have a control batch and 5L of drinkable beer.

• • SVA Brewer With Over 50 Brews From Great Britain
  • Quote
• • • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0

BobBrews wrote:We don't have to go crazy but sometimes it's nicer to have a goal in sight to give us direction rather than just stumbling about?

I think not going crazy and having direction are two very important points.

Not Going Crazy

There are many simple experiments that any brewer can do that won't require any special skills, water, equipment etc, but that will give very quick and valuable information to a wide audience. For example...

1. Mash Gravity Figures - Whilst primitive, the figures being collected on this here are already telling a story. Anyone can contribute to that experiment.

2. Active Sparging versus Full-Volume (Passive Sparging) - There are a lot of brewers out there active sparging who could be full-volume brewing. I've done several side by side brews on this and found bugger all efficiency difference. This needs to be tested many times on a small scale to get valuable results though. How do we do that?

Experiments like these are really easy as it doesn't even matter if everyone's hydrometers read differently. All we are looking at is percentages.

Water experiments such as the impressive one BBH linked above are at the hardest end of the scale and pose many difficulties. For example, the pH meter I recently bought, even when calibrated disagrees with my pH strips which do agree with my mate's very expensive pH meter .

Other experiments are half-way between. For example, wort-splitting as joshua mentioned above followed by triangle testing can be used to give very valuable feedback on many taste experiments as it can answer the most basic question of all, "Can anyone taste any difference at all between the way I brewed these two beers?" Any brewer can answer that question. If all of them say no then we already know a lot. If there is a difference then describing it is obviously harder and in many cases, brewers like myself would struggle to put it into words.

Having Direction

I'm thinking that having just one experiment every three months or so would be limiting. Why not have a structure that allows members to participate in the areas that interest them when they want?

Enabling this probably boils down to how things are laid out on the forum. Let's look at two examples...

1. BrickBrewHaus's Experiment - This is an advanced experiment. BBH has designed it already and conducted it once. It will be of great interest to a niche of brewers. So, should he start a new thread? Should he reserve the first few posts of the new thread to post updates? Where should he post it? How should he title it so as a reader knows it is advanced? Can the forum structure be set up so as his work and the work that anyone else contributes can be quickly found by anyone looking for such information?

2. Active/Passive Sparging Experiment - Here we have a simple experiment but no design. Do we design it here or start another thread straight away? All the questions asked in 1 above re thread placement, title etc apply here as well.

Setting up a structure where things won't get lost and are easily found is something we should bear in mind. BIABrewer has been looking at this on other areas of the forum. For example, if you look at this forum, you'll see that it now has 'Announcements' as well as stickies. Maybe this additional 'structural' layer can be used to our advantage here?

I've edited Post 2, 3 and 4 with what has been mentioned so far. Let me know if I have missed anything.

Donya ,
PP

• • SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From Australia
  • Quote
• • • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0
    • 0