Author: Cade Jobe

IPA is a style known for showcasing pungent hop character, which is accomplished in part by huge dry hop additions. Some commercial brewers boast using upwards of 4 lbs/bbl (2 oz/gal; 15 g/L) in their IPA, though a few homebrewers push it even higher than that. Considering the cost of hops, particularly the most sought after varieties, as well as the yield lost to so much vegetative matter, these usage rates have an undeniable impact on the bottom line for each batch. Is it really worth it?

Dr. Tom Shellhammer, hop science expert from Oregon State University’s Department of Food Science and Technology, has led research looking into the impact various dry hop quantities have on beer aroma and flavor. Dr. Shellhammer’s team ran an experiment comparing beers with dry hop rates ranging from a low of 2 g/L (0.28 oz/gal; 0.5 lbs/bbl) to a high of 16 g/L (2.14 oz/gal; 4 lbs/bbl) then analyzed the objectively measurable and organoleptic effects. Ultimately, it was concluded that dry hop rates higher than 8 g/L (1.1 oz/gal; 2.1 lbs/bbl) is an “inefficient use of raw materials,” which is believed to be due to saturation of hop oils in the beer.

Brülosophy contributor Ray Found conducted an xBmt comparing dry hop rates of 2.9 g/L (0.4 oz/gal; 0.78 lbs/bbl) to 8.7 g/L (1.2 oz/gal; 2.2 lbs/bbl) that yielded significant results, indicating higher dry hop rates have a perceptible impact. Considered in light of the previously discussed experiment findings, our results aren’t surprising, as one batch was made with a dry hop quantity lower than the suggested saturation threshold while the other was made with a quantity just over said threshold. Curious to more specifically explore Dr. Shellhammer’s conclusion, I designed an xBmt to compare beers dry hopped with different quantities where both received an amount higher than the suggested saturation point.

| PURPOSE |

To evaluate the differences between an IPA dry hopped at a rate of 10 g/L (1.34 oz/gal; 2.6 lbs/bbl) and the same beer dry hopped at a rate of 15 g/L (2 oz/gal; 3.9 lbs/bbl).

| METHODS |

Having heard many good things about it, I went with an adapted version of MACC IPA for this xBmt.

Triple Stamp A Double Stamp IPA

Recipe Details Batch Size Boil Time IBU SRM Est. OG Est. FG ABV 5.5 gal 60 min 75.8 IBUs 5.3 SRM 1.070 1.019 6.9 % Actuals 1.07 1.011 7.9 % Fermentables Name Amount % Pale Malt (2 Row) US 12.5 lbs 89.29 Munich Malt - 10L 1.5 lbs 10.71 Hops Name Amount Time Use Form Alpha % Magnum 17 g 60 min First Wort Pellet 12.6 Citra 56 g 15 min Aroma Pellet 13.9 Amarillo 50 g 15 min Aroma Pellet 8.8 Mosaic (HBC 369) 50 g 15 min Aroma Pellet 11.7 Centennial 20 g 15 min Aroma Pellet 10.2 Amarillo 70 g 5 days Dry Hop Pellet 10.2 Citra 70 g 5 days Dry Hop Pellet 13.9 Mosaic (HBC 369) 70 g 5 days Dry Hop Pellet 11.7 Yeast Name Lab Attenuation Temperature Independence (A15) Imperial Yeast 74% 60°F - 72°F Notes Water Profile: Ca 89 | Mg 17 | Na 38 | SO4 138 | Cl 50 Download Download this recipe's BeerXML file

I started off this brew day by collecting water, adjusting it to my desired profile, then putting it over a flame to heat up.

Next, I weighed out and milled the grain.

Once the water was appropriately heated, I incorporated the grains then checked to ensure I hit my target mash temperature.

During the mash rest, I measured out the kettle hop additions.

When the 60 minute mash was complete, I fly sparged to my pre-boil volume then boiled the wort for another 60 minutes before chilling it with my IC.

A refractometer reading showed the wort was right at the expected OG.

I then transferred equal amounts of chilled wort to identical Brew Buckets that got placed in my temperature controlled chamber. Once the worts had stabilized at 66°F/19°C, I pitched a single pouch of Imperial Yeast A15 Independence into each.

After 5 days of fermentation, I made the dry hop additions, one receiving 7.5 oz/210 g while the other was hit with 11 oz/312 g, both containing the same ratio of the different hop varieties.

I let the beers sit for 2 days before ramping the temperature in the chamber to 72°F/22°C. After another 5 days, both beers were sitting at the same 1.011 FG, so I proceeded with cold crashing and packaging under pressure to avoid oxidation. The beers were burst carbonated overnight before I reduced the gas to serving pressure where they were left to condition for 5 days before being served to tasters.

| RESULTS |

A total of 28 people of varying levels of experience participated in this xBmt. Participants were served 2 samples of the beer dry hopped at 10 g/L (1.34 oz/gal; 2.6 lbs/bbl) and 1 sample of the version dry hopped at 15 g/L (2 oz/gal; 3.9 lbs/bbl) in different colored opaque cups then were asked to identify the unique sample. While 15 tasters (p<0.05) would have had to identify the unique sample in order to reach statistical significance, only 13 (p=0.10) made the accurate selection, indicating participants in this xBmt could not reliably distinguish an IPA made with a 7.4 oz/209.4 g dry hop charge from one made with an 11 oz/311.8 g dry hop charge.

My Impressions: Out of the 3 semi-blind triangle tests I attempted, I identified the odd-beer-out exactly 0 times. Even knowing the variable and having brewed these beers, I could not tell them apart. The beers tasted and smelled identical to my senses, which wasn’t a bad thing because they were quite tasty!



| DISCUSSION |

The concept of a dry hop saturation point as proposed by Dr. Shellhammer’s research team flies in the face of the commonly accepted idea that more is better, which on the surface, seems to make some sense. While their experiment results and reasons they provide are quite convincing, dry hop dogma runs deep, making it all the more difficult to break away from what we “know.” Supporting Dr. Shellhammers claims, tasters in this xBmt were unable to tell apart beers dry hopped at different rates when both received quantities higher than the suggested dry hop saturation point.

There are a couple of pretty big implications of these findings. First, hops aren’t cheap, so any opportunity to cut back in a way that doesn’t impact beer quality is undeniably beneficial, regardless of whether one is a professional or homebrewer. Also, there’s a negative correlation between dry hop amount and final beer yield– as one goes up, the other goes down. As such, by reducing dry hop quantity, a brewer will likely increase the volume of beer from each batch, meaning more for the homebrewer to drink and more money for the commercial brewer to make.

As a science guy, I didn’t necessarily doubt Dr. Shellhammer’s findings, but even so, the fact an IPA hit with nearly 4 oz/113 g more dry hops was indistinguishable from the same beer made with less dry hops was pretty surprising to me. While both beers tasted great, I’ll be sticking with dry hop rates at or under the 8 g/L dry hop saturation point recommended by Dr. Shellhammer, as it seems the most economical option.

Note: The term “dry hop saturation point” is used in this article to explain Dr. Shellhammer’s empirically based concept that dry hopping at a rate higher than 8 g/L leads to diminishing returns.

If you have any thoughts about this xBmt, please do not hesitate to share in the comments section below!

Support Brülosophy In Style!

All designs are available in various colors and sizes on Amazon!

Follow Brülosophy on:

If you enjoy this stuff and feel compelled to support Brulosophy.com, please check out the Support page for details on how you can very easily do so. Thanks!

Advertisements

Share this: Facebook

Twitter

Pinterest

Tumblr

Email



Like this: Like Loading...