| Literature DB >> 34885316 |
Marta Stachnik1, Monika Sterczyńska1, Emilia Smarzewska1, Anna Ptaszek2, Joanna Piepiórka-Stepuk1, Oleg Ageev3, Marek Jakubowski1.
Abstract
The boiling of beer wort with hops results in the formation of a hot trub, a sediment consisting mainly of water-insoluble tannin and protein conglomerates and hop residue. Hot trub is a waste product, removed in a clarifying tank and discarded. The use of barley malt substitutes in recipes for beer is associated with an increase in the amount of generated hot trub. In presented study, an analysis of the rheological properties of industrial hot trub was carried out. Samples varied with regard to the quantities of unmalted barley (0%, 35%, and 45%) and worts' extract (12.5, 14.1, 16.1, and 18.2 °Plato) in the recipe. The rheology of each type of sludge was determined using a hysteresis loop at four different temperatures. The results showed the shear-thinning and thixotropic properties of the hot trub. It was found that, regardless of the raw material and extract used, all samples exhibited the same rheological properties, but with different values. It was also proved that both raw material composition and temperature affected the hot trub's rheology. The highest values of viscosity were identified for malted barley, whereas the lowest apparent viscosity values were recorded for the hot trub with a 30% addition of unmalted barley. The Herschel-Bulkley model had the best fit to the experimental data.Entities:
Keywords: hot trub; non-newtonian fluids; rheology; thixotropy
Year: 2021 PMID: 34885316 PMCID: PMC8658480 DOI: 10.3390/ma14237162
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Figure 1Hot trub (a) in the whirlpool tank; (b) batch of 70% malted + 30% unmalted barley, water content adjusted to 76%.
Coding of hot trub samples.
| Extract (°Plato) | Composition of Raw Materials | Code |
|---|---|---|
| 12.5 | 70% malted + 30% unmalted barley | 12 |
| 14.1 | 100% malted barley | 14 |
| 16.1 | 55% malted + 45% unmalted barley | 16 |
| 18.2 | 55% malted + 45% unmalted barley | 18 |
Figure 2Viscosity curves of hot trubs as a function of shear rate at four temperatures: (a) hot trub from wort, 12.5° (70% malted + 30% unmalted barley); (b) hot trub from wort, 14.1° (100% malted barley); (c) hot trub from wort, 16.1° (55% malted + 45% unmalted barley); (d) hot trub from wort, 18.2° (55% malted + 45% unmalted barley).
Experimentally obtained values of limit, maximal, and recovery viscosity values, energy dissipated, and yield stress for hot trubs at different temperatures.
|
| ||||
| Hot trub | 20 (°C) | 40 (°C) | 60 (°C) | 80 (°C) |
| 12 | 340.8 | 213.9 | 136.7 | 219.6 |
| 14 | 4630.0 | 1970.1 | 919.6 | 979.5 |
| 16 | 559.2 | 341.3 | 223.5 | 330.2 |
| 18 | 557.6 | 310.8 | 215.5 | 320.1 |
|
| ||||
| 12 | 4.1 | 2.9 | 1.9 | 1.3 |
| 14 | 9.1 | 4.8 | 9.8 | 7.3 |
| 16 | 4.2 | 3.0 | 2.4 | 1.5 |
| 18 | 7.4 | 4.0 | 2.5 | 2.0 |
|
| ||||
| 12 | 157.2 | 103.6 | 84.57 | 62.17 |
| 14 | 557.4 | 271.2 | 490.5 | 383.2 |
| 16 | 158.7 | 92.55 | 110.2 | 66.38 |
| 18 | 277.7 | 200.6 | 111.3 | 105.6 |
|
| ||||
| 12 | 20,410.4 | 12,284 | 2735.2 | 7469.6 |
| 14 | 140,960.8 | 76,675.2 | 25,230.4 | 28,922.4 |
| 16 | 39,473.6 | 6729.6 | 1802.4 | 6317.6 |
| 18 | 33,344.8 | 9292.8 | 8056.8 | 10,033.6 |
|
| ||||
| 12 | 116.6 | 78.7 | 55.1 | 67.4 |
| 14 | 975.6 | 960.1 | 758.2 | 878.1 |
| 16 | 137.4 | 88.7 | 62.5 | 73.7 |
| 18 | 148.6 | 107.4 | 66.2 | 81.2 |
Figure 3Graphs of mean viscosity values of hot trubs grouped by (a) recipe and (b) temperature (n = 3, α = 0.05).
Figure 4Beer worts: (a) viscosity curve; (b) viscosity as a function of temperature.
Herschel–Bulkley model parameters for the tested hot trubs.
| Hot Trub | T (°C) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Parameters | ||||||
| τ₀ (Pa) | k (Pa·sn) | n (-) | χ2 | R2 | ||
| 12 | 20 | 112.3 | 14.5 | 0.5 | 391.4 | 0.99 |
| 40 | 76.7 | 34.0 | 0.5 | 259.3 | 0.99 | |
| 60 | 54.4 | 8.9 | 0.5 | 71.4 | 0.99 | |
| 80 | 66.6 | 13.4 | 0.6 | 243 | 0.99 | |
| 14 | 20 | 982.3 | 322.9 | 0.7 | 645.4 | 0.99 |
| 40 | 967.2 | 108.5 | 0.6 | 560.1 | 0.99 | |
| 60 | 767.5 | 72.8 | 0.4 | 717.2 | 0.99 | |
| 80 | 877.9 | 132.6 | 0.5 | 327.8 | 0.99 | |
| 16 | 20 | 135.6 | 18.5 | 0.7 | 114.3 | 0.99 |
| 40 | 89.5 | 19.2 | 0.6 | 528.2 | 0.99 | |
| 60 | 62.2 | 8.8 | 0.5 | 88.8 | 0.99 | |
| 80 | 73.3 | 18.2 | 0.6 | 118.7 | 0.99 | |
| 18 | 20 | 146.8 | 40.7 | 0.7 | 126.1 | 0.99 |
| 40 | 107.1 | 16.7 | 0.6 | 479.1 | 0.99 | |
| 60 | 66.06 | 12.0 | 0.5 | 67.3 | 0.99 | |
| 80 | 82.4 | 14.6 | 0.6 | 379.4 | 0.99 | |
Figure 5Herschel–Bulkley model fitted to flow curves of hot trubs as a function of shear rate at four temperatures: (a) hot trub from wort, 12.5°; (b) hot trub from wort, 14.1°; (c) hot trub from wort, 16.1°; (d) hot trub from wort, 18.2°.