Sie sind auf Seite 1von 23

PBL Brewing


A generic modelling and

simulation platform for
assessing novel malting
and brewing technologies
Mr. Eemeli Hytönen (PhD), Ms. Lotta
Sorsamäki and Ms. Marja Nappa

VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, Ltd.

EBC Symposium, Wrocław, 18-20 September 2016

Click to edit Master title style

 Background
 Click to edit Master text styles
 Objective
 Second level
 The platform
 Third level
 Examples  Fourth level
 Conclusions  Fifth level
 Acknowledgements

Hytönen E., et al., 20.9.2016, EBC Symposium
Click to edit Master title style

 The work presented here has been developed together with PBL
 Click to edit Master text styles
Brewing Laboratory and partially within an ongoing Eco-efficient
 Second level
malting and brewing processes -project
 Third level
 The overall goal level
 Fourth of the project is to create knowledge and
prerequisites that, compared to the present technology, enable
Fifth level
the development of ecologically more efficient processes for
malting and brewing
 Specifically research focus has been on purification and reuse of
malting process waters and opportunities for saving energy in
cooling and drying

Hytönen E., et al., 20.9.2016, EBC Symposium
Click to edit Master title style
 Key indicators and significant cost factors for the industry are water and energy use, e.g.
 116,8MJ/hl energy was needed on average in European breweries (2010). The variation is very
 Clicklarge,
to between
edit Master text styles
70,6 and 234,1MJ/hl, resulting from varying brewing landscape across Europe a)
 Energy use has been reported to equal 3…8,5% of beer production costs but varies very much
 Second
depending onlevel
for example the beer type or technological age of the brewery b)
 ThetrueThird level
cost of water is more than sum of the water price and sewer service costs c)
 Specific water
 Fourth
level on average in European breweries in 2010 was 4,2hl/hl beer, of which
2,7hl/hl beer was discharged as wastewater a)
 Fifth level
 Technological solutions for more sustainable brewing industry are constantly being
developed in R&D projects. These solutions target also energy and water efficiency
 A systematic approach at conceptual level was seen needed to quantify the key indicators
for new developments and technological solutions. Between 2012-2016 a tool/platform was
developed with emphasis first on brewery and later on malting process

a) C. Donoghue et al., The Environmental Performance of the European Brewing Sector, Report number 3101010DR02, May 2012
b) Galitsky, Energy Efficiency Improvement and Cost Saving Opportunities for Breweries - An ENERGY STAR® Guide for Energy and Plant
Managers, LBNL-50934, September 2003, based on data from Sorrell, 2000, McDonald, 1996, Anheuser-Busch, 2001
c) Chastain et al., Brewers Association Water and Wastewater: Treatment/Volume Reduction Manual, Brewers Association
Hytönen E., et al., 20.9.2016, EBC Symposium
Click to edit Master title style
Examples of simulation tools used in brewery/malthouse design/analyses
Scope (plant Type (code,
Purpose of wide, commercial
Tool Tool’s provider, focus, www Example references of use
 Click to edit Master text styles simulation department,
SuperPro M&E, Commercial Jones A., et al., Team iBrew design report, Calvin
Designer  Second level
plant wide
simulator College, 2013 M&E, Commercial
 Third level
ungen/brauerei-loesung.html dynamics
plant wide
simulator Paulaner-cs-Z11.pdf
Mignon D. and Hermia J., Using batches for modeling
Batches  Fourth levelEnergy, department
Commercial and optimizing the brewhouses of an industrial
dynamics simulator brewery, Computers & Chemical Engineering, 1993,
 Fifth level Vol 17 (supplement 1), S51-S56 Warnasooriya, Modeling and simulation of the beer
MatLab – process
mulink/?requestedDomain=www.mat deparment code fermentation process and temperature control, 2011,
simulink control Master's Thesis
MatLab – Bleier B., et al. Craft Beer Production, Design report,
mulink/?requestedDomain=www.mat M&E plant wide code
simulink Unviersity of Pennsylvania, 2013
using Muster-Slawitsch B. et al., Process modelling and
Excel Energy plant wide Engineering technology evaluation in brewing, Chemical
Equation solver Engineering and Processing 84 (2014) 98–108
Spreadsheet for Krogerus K., Gibson B. and Hytönen E., "An improved
dynamic model for prediction of wort fermentation progress and
Excel Dynamics components
component total diacetyl profile", the Journal of the American
balances Society of Brewing Chemists, 2015 (1): 90-99
Fei Yu, Process modeling of very-high-gravity
Aspen M&E, steady- Commercial fermentation system under redox potential-controlled plant wide
Plus state simulator conditions, Master's Thesis, University of
Saskatchewan, 2011
Hytönen E., et al., 20.9.2016, EBC Symposium
Click to edit Master title style

 Investigate impacts of technological choices and implementation

 Click to edit Master text styles
of novel technologies on malting and brewing processes
 Second level
 Impacts of interest: energy and water consumption
 Third level
 Develop a holistic and flexible platform for R&D projects’ impact
Fourth level
analysis that is based
 Fifth level on plantwide modelling of malting,

brewing and linked processes

Hytönen E., et al., 20.9.2016, EBC Symposium
The to edit Master title style

 Superstructure-type steady state simulation model

 Click to edit Master text styles
The key performance measures evaluated using the platform are plant wide
and departmental
Second levelenergy and water consumption and equipment utilisation
degree. Third level
 Platform uses
 Fourth
two interlinked
level software
 Fifth model
 Process simulation level for mass and energy balance using Balas® process
simulator *
 Microsoft Excel -based spreadsheet system for electricity consumption and unit
operation utilisation degree calculations
 User interface in Excel for parameterization and result manipulations
 Additional automation build to handle systematically data: the setting-up a model
run, conversion of M&E balances (process demands) to water and energy
consumptions and unit utilisation, storing results

Hytönen E., et al., 20.9.2016, EBC Symposium
The platform
Flexibilityto edit Master title style

 Click to edit Master text styles Unit operation level flexibility

 Second
process model + linked
level  Brewhouse
 Third and
level  mash filtering: lauter tun or filter
management = Flexibility  mash milling: wet or dry
 Fourth level
 weak wort recycling optional
 Platform level flexibility:
 Fifth level
 Trub recycling optional
 heat source: hot water or
 Beer processing
 pasteurization optional
 cooling: EtOH/water,
ammonia  Malting:
 Steeping: amount of steeps,
 Case comparisons water recycling rate, optional
 setting-up scenarios water purification
 Optional barley drying

Hytönen E., et al., 20.9.2016, EBC Symposium
The platform
Process to edit Master
simulation model title style Departments
 Malting
 Thermodynamic properties  Brewhouse
 VLE calculated using thermodynamic model RKS – Redlich-  Fermentation
 Click to edit Master text styles
Kwong-Soave  Beer processing
 Boiler
 Model component data mainly from Reid et al. *
 Second level
 Liquid phase assumed to be ideal  Water preparation
 Model compounds:  Utilities
 Third level  Waste management
 Water, Ethanol, Carbon dioxide, Oxygen, Nitrogen and
Ammonia  Fourth level MAIN FLOWSHEET

 Fifth level
 Malt and adjuncts (brewhouse): Water and solid Starch LP_condensate
0.517 kg/s 142 C 500 kPa

 Malt (malting): Starch, Protein, Beta-glucan, Barley-other and Clean_water

33.9 kg/s 10 C 101 kPa
0.19 kg/s -26.6 C 1600 kPa


Water Cold_water_in
2.68 kg/s 65.6 C 101 kPa

 Syrup: a binary mixture of Water and liquid Glucose.


25.2 kg/s 19.5 C 101 kPa

 Hops and yeast: a binary mixture of Water and solid Hops and
0.517 kg/s 0.517 MW Waste_yeast
LP_steam_in Boiler 0.036 kg/s 9.13 C 150 kPa
Water_prep Utilities Waste_mgt
0.241 kg/s 84.2 C 101 kPa

solid Yeast (thermodynamic properties the same as for

 Cans: Aluminium
 Trub: Lipofilics Feedstock
0.745 kg/s 15 C 101 kPa

 Reactions:
Feedstock_in 5.56 kg/s 10 C 200 kPa

Malting Brewhouse Fermentation Beer_processing

 Yield –based (kinetics not considered in the reactors) Hops_in

0.006 kg/s 15 C 101 kPa


 Reaction heat either based on literature or actual reaction heat Adjuncts_in



based on the thermodynamic properties Oxygen_in



* Reid, Prausnitz, and Sherwood: The Properties of Gases and Liquids - Third Edition, McGraw-Hill, 1977. CO2_in

Hytönen E., et al., 20.9.2016, EBC Symposium
The platform
Process to editmodel
Master titleof style
– screenshot brewhouse flowsheet

90 C 0 kg/s
LP_Brewhouse 2.68 kg/s 65.6 C 101 kPa

 Click to edit Master text styles

Split=0; weak wort to filtering
Split=1; weak wort to mashing Brewhouse_warm_Water_out


 Second level

10 C 0 kg/s
155 C 0.289 kg/s
10 C 0.621 kg/s

10 C 0.184 kg/s
79.4 C 1.59 kg/s

 Third level


79.4 C 6.63 kg/s

 Fourth level

94.5 C 3.95 kg/s

94.5 C 6.63 kg/s

Mashing Mash filtering Wort_boiler

85 C 3.95 kg/s
Mashing_sp Mashing_liquor Mashing_vessel_1 Mashing_vessel_2 Mashing_vessel_3 Mashing_vessel_4

55 C
 Fifth level
50.8 C 62 C 70 C 75 C

Prerun_vessel GA-201
GA-101 GA-604
Main_wort Sweet_wort Wort_boiling_condenser Wort_cond_cooler
Miller 87.5 C
76.5 C GA-206
Split=1; mash filter 87.5 C
Mashing_loss Split=0; lauter tun 99 C
Pre_masher GA-102

Mashing_heater_1 Mashing_heater_2 Mashing_heater_3 Mash_filter_press

Trub_formation Boiling_loss 0.186 kg/s 25 C 101 kPa
Milling Mash_drain_wtr Wort boiling


FC_Adjuncts SpentGrain

FC_hops GA-207
Hops_in Syrap_to_boiling 85 C

GA-205 Wort_boiler_sp
FC_Syrap Additions_sp Wort_to_fermentation
3.41 kg/s 10 C 101 kPa
Chilled_w_wort_cooling Wort_out
99.7 C

Split=0; trub to mashing
Split=1; trub to filtering
Split=0; no trub recycled
Split=1; trub recycled Hop_trub

Wort filtering and cooling Hops_trub

Hytönen E., et al., 20.9.2016, EBC Symposium
The platform
Process to edit Master
simulation model title style
 Approach for making a steady-state process model from batch processes
 #1 – If constant conditions (T, p, moisture) average flow through a batch unit in unit of time equals the flow rate
 Click to edit Master text styles
in corresponding continuous model unit
 #2 – If conditions change (e.g. heat profile, gas venting) the batch unit is divided into representative ”phases”
 Second level
for which #1 can be assumed to apply. In the model, consecutive phases are modelled using a series of units
 #3 – All batch equipment have specific volume and number of vessels defined for utilisation degree evaluation
 Third level
 Examples  Fourth level
 Mashing  Fifth level Fermentation
1 batch unit  4 phases 1 batch unit  2 phases

Hytönen E., et al., 20.9.2016, EBC Symposium
The platform
Click to edit Master
Linked spreadsheet model title style

 Electricity (Brewing)
 Click to edit Master
 consumption text
Share styles
of total consumption  Equipment utilisation
 Second level
Machine drive and process cooling 55%
 Effect of process changes on
Other equipment 25%
 Third level
Process HVAC and lighting 15%
needed equipment volume per
Other  Fourth level 5%
time unit
 Fifth level  maximum theoretical
 Consumption in pumps (~30
pumps dimensioned) & process utilisation degree used as
cooling is calculated using M&E baseline
balances  Both continuous (e.g. mash
filtering, wort filtering, beer
 Electricity (Malting) filtration) and batch (mashing,
Summer Winter
boiling, fermentation)
Kilning and Germination, including
possible cooling
80 % 69 % equipment assessed
Product and barley handling, steeping 15 % 24 %
Other (laboratory, office) 5% 7%

Hytönen E., et al., 20.9.2016, EBC Symposium
Click to edit
Case study Master title style

 Objectives of the case study: CASE Basecase VHG High moisture

 assessment of the impacts
 Click tohigh
of very edit Master
gravity brewing textBeer
production (ML/a) 150 220 a) 150
on a brewing process Malting capacity (kt dry/a) 20 20 22.2 a)
 Second level
 evaluation Gravity after wort boiling (Plato 15 22 15
 Third
of the level
impacts of
malt moisture on a malt
 Fourth
house and brewery level
integrate Malt moisture (%) 4.8 4.8 12
balances  Fifth level
Syrup dose (g/kg malt) 0,01 100 0,01
 Basecase and two other
cases used; main parameters Fermentation
• Temperature (°C) 10 17 10
in the table • Duration (h) 144 168 144
 VHG – very high gravity; • Cycle duration (h) 290 338 290
design capacity basis is • O2 to aeration (mgO2/kg wort) 10 15 10
constant wort boiling
capacity Milling specific energy (kWh/t malt) 5.6 5.6 8.1 b)
 high moisture malt case Wort boiling time (min) 60 60 74 b)
design capacity to fulfill
Brewhouse yield (%) 75 75 70 b)
basecase beer production
rate a) Simulation result; b) Experimental result, note: atmospheric wort boiling

Hytönen E., et al., 20.9.2016, EBC Symposium
Click to edit Master title style
Basecase – M&E balance and example of platform validation

 Inputs to and outputs from

 Click
the breweryto edit Master text styles
 Second
 All inputs level
and outputs back-
calculated based onlevel
 Third the
setpoint of 150ML/a beer
 Fourth level
with gravity 15 after wort
 Fifth level
 Energy consumption values
only for brewery
 Validation of the simulated
electricity demand using
 Simulated value (7.2kWh/hl
beer) a bit lower than
published values
(>7.5kWh/hl beer in
Europe) *

*Scheller, L., Michel, R. and Funk, U. Efficient Use of Energy in the Brewhouse, MBAA TQ vol.45, no.3, 2008 , pp. 263-267
Hytönen E., et al., 20.9.2016, EBC Symposium
Click to edit Master title style
VHG-case compared to Basecase

 Click to edit Master text styles

 Energy  Second
values onlyforThird level
brewery  Fourth level
 When gravity is  Fifth level
increased from 15 to
22, 47% increase in
beer production, 36%
increase in malt or
grain demand and
significantly increased
by-product production

Hytönen E., et al., 20.9.2016, EBC Symposium
Click to edit Master title style
VHG-case compared to Basecase

 Click to edit
With the caseMaster
study text styles
assumptions, moving to VHG
 Second level
brewing can significantly
 Third
decrease level
energy demand and
Fourth level
 Fifth level

 When gravity is increased to

22 considering same wort
boiling capacity, processing
after fermentation requires Table. Brewery utilisation degree

more capacity upto 47% in Basecase VHG

MASHING 100 % 65 %
high gravity beer (HGB) MASH FILTERING 100 % 65 %
adjustment and pasteurization WORT BOILING 100 % 100 %
WORT FILTERING 100 % 100 %
FERMENTATION 100 % 117 %
HGB ADJUSTMENT 100 % 147 %
Hytönen E., et al., 20.9.2016, EBC Symposium
Click to edit Master title style
High moisture malt case compared to basecase

 Click
 When maltto edit Master text
moisture styles
 Second
is increased from level
4.8% to 12%, only
 Third level
small impacts on
overall balances isFourth level
expected based on  Fifth level
the assumptions
made in this study
 Energy consumption
values include both
malting and brewing
 Due to lower yield
however, more grains
are needed to
produce the same
amount of beer as in
Hytönen E., et al., 20.9.2016, EBC Symposium
Click to edit
High moisture malt Master titleto style
case compared

 Increasing the malt moisture seems to

 Click to edit Master text styles
lower the energy needs of malting but
due Second levelyield loss in mashing
to assumed
 energy
the total Third level
consumption is about
the same as Fourth level
in basecase
 Fifth level
 In order to be able to accommodate
higher moisture malt in brewery, for
same production rate more capacity is
needed mainly in fermentation
Table. Brewery utilisation degree
Basecase High moisture malt Table. Malt house key process utilisation degree
MASHING 100 % 103 % Basecase High moisture malt
MASH FILTERING 100 % 102 % STEEPING 100 % 111 %
WORT BOILING 100 % 101 %
GERMINATION 100 % 111 %
WORT FILTERING 100 % 100 %
FERMENTATION 100 % 100 % GERMINATION AIR 100 % 100 %
BEER FILTRATION 100 % 100 % KILNING 100 % 72 %
HGB ADJUSTMENT 100 % 100 % KILNING AIR 100 % 72 %
Hytönen E., et al., 20.9.2016, EBC Symposium
Click to edit
High moisture Master
malt titlevalidation
-case result style (malting process)
 Malting-process heat consumption: model compared to values derived
 from
Clickprocess data in different
to edit Master conditions
text styles
 Second level
 Third level
 Fourth level
 Fifth level

 Energy consumption values for malting vs. literature

Heat (kWh/t malt) Electricity (kWh/t malt)

Literature 614 – 1066 a), 713-1105 b) 77.4 – 156 a),113 – 171 b)

Platfrom (basecase) 700 100

a) Electricity consumption matches actual demand at Danish Malting Group, Danish energy agency; b) Stewart, D., Emissions, energy, water and
malt, Brewer & Distiller International, May 2010. 38-41.

Hytönen E., et al., 20.9.2016, EBC Symposium
Click to edit Master title style

 A generic modelling and simulation platform has been developed for

 Click to editimpacts
investigating Master text styles choices and implementation of novel
of technological
 Secondon
technologies level
malting and brewing processes
 The main Third
features of the linked modelling platform and specifically the
simulation model have
 Fourth been presented.
 The example case  Fifth
level presented were:
 assessment of the impacts of very high gravity brewing on a brewing process
 evaluation of the impacts of malt moisture on a malt house and brewery integrate
 Case study results show positive impacts on both energy and water demands
in the VHG case
 The platform has shown its targeted features:
 flexible – detailed malting department model added and linked to overall simulation
model with less model compounds; easy set-up and comparison of new cases
 holistic – plant-wide somewhat non-intuitive balances quantified for high moisture
malt case show even slightly higher energy demand

Hytönen E., et al., 20.9.2016, EBC Symposium
Click to edit Master title style

 The authors would like to acknowledge

 Click to edit Master text styles
 PBL Brewing Laboratory, Ecomalt project and Tekes for funding
 Second level
the modelling and platform development work
 Third level
 All project and company experts involved for their valuable inputs
 Fourth level
to the contents
 Fifthand
level structure of the platform

Hytönen E., et al., 20.9.2016, EBC Symposium
Click to edit Master title style

Mr. Eemeli Hytönen, PhD

Click to edit Master text
Scientist styles
VTT  Second level
P.O.Box 1000
 Third level
FIN 02044 VTT, Finland
 Fourth level
 Fifth level
Tel. +35820 722 2729
Mobile +35840 533 6759

Hytönen E., et al., 20.9.2016, EBC Symposium