Optimization of beer filtration capacity

Inês Sofia Nunes Eugénio

ines.eugenio@tecnico.ulisboa.pt

Instituto Superior Técnico, Lisboa, Portugal

October 2019

Abstract
The present thesis developed in the filtration area of Sociedade Central de Cervejas e Bebidas S.A
from February to August 2019, had two goals: increasing the filtration flow rate of high gravity beer (from
250 to 350 hL/h) and reducing by 10 % the consumption of kieselguhr adjuvant per hL of diluted beer.
This optimization was crucial for the company as it permitted to reduce the power consumption and to
guarantee a higher filling capacity.
To achieve these goals, all the equipment in the filtration area was characterized and possible limi-
tations that could affect the filtration optimization were identified. With this purpose, the performance of
all filtration cycles from three filtration lines were monitored and analysed within the previous 7 months
of operation. To confirm maintenance of beer quality, while studying the effects of beer filtration capacity
increase, recipe alteration and maturation time, the beer turbidity, viscosity and density were monitored
through laboratory analysis.
Four filtration studies were done in this work: increasing the initial filtration flow rate to 300 and 350
hL/h and modifying the normal filtration procedure by changing the feed flow direction within the frame
and plate filter when setting the second adjuvant pre-coat of the filter to 100 % diagonal and changing its
composition.
By comparing the filtration cycles performance observed in the project time window with the verified
last year (2018), one can notice that the volume of commercial beer produced increased 3 % while the
number of cycles reduced by 91. On the other hand, the kieselguhr usage decreased 16 % corresponding
to 18 % decrease of its consumption per hL diluted beer and to half-yearly savings of 17.8 kC in the
company budget.
Keywords: High gravity beer; Kieselguhr; Frame and plate filter; adjuvant pre-coat

1. Introduction yeast or proteins to pass through the filter. [2] The

Matured beer have visible hazes which have
been reported as being due to residual starch, pen-
tosans from adjunct, oxalate from calcium-deficient
worts, β-glucan from inadequately modified malt,
carbohydrate and protein from yeast and interac-
tions between protein and polyphenol. [1] For that
reason, traditionally, the beer is filtered using filter
aids such as kieselguhr (KG). [2] After this proce-
dure, the beer is defined as optically bright when
it reaches a haze of < 0.2 EBC (on a 25° scatter)
and < 1.0 EBC (on a 90° scatter). [3]
The kieselguhr or diatomaceous earth is made
from the skeletons of minute sea plants which have
been kilned and milled to various grades of fine-
ness. This is the most porous, rigid and effective
filter aid. [2]
The cake filtration uses the principles of absorp-
tion and depth. For that, the supporting medium
is pre-coat with filter aid which forms a depth filter.
This procedure is important to bridge the gaps in
the support medium and to prevent the filter aid,
pre-coat medium has two layers of filter aid but only
the second layer defines the degree of beer clar-
ity. [4] The finer the filter aid, the higher its porosity
which induces an increased separation and a lower
filtration flow rate. [1]
After the pre-coating is complete, the beer is
brought into the filter. In order to prevent the filter
clogging, KG is continuously dosed into the beer
during the filtration cycle. This suspension of KG is
known as body feed. It adsorbs the beer particles
building up a layer of powder, yeast and protein un-
til the filtration end. [2] The interactions described
previously are demonstrated in figure 1.
The cake filtration is achieved by inducing a
pressure gradient across the medium, causing the
separation between the particulate material and
the fluid. [5] As a result a clear beer is produced
and the cake thickness is continuously increased.
[3]
During the filtration cycle, the haze particles
seemed to mask the pores of the filter cake which

1
causes the increasing of the pressure drop [3] and
the cake resistance. [5] The pressure drop in-
crease is an indirect indication of the filter cycle
life time, as the fast increase implicates a short fil-
ter cycle. [3] When the pressure drop reached 1.2
bar the flow rate has to be reduced. Because of
this, the pressure drop and the filtrate turbidity de-
creases as well. [3]
2. Materials & Methodology
As the enormous variety of commercial products,
the filtration area have 3 filtration lines, which work
similarly and in parallel. The flow sheet of the fil-
tration line is demonstrated in figure 2. In order
to identify possible limitations that could affect the
filtration optimization all the equipment were char-
acterized.

Figure 2: General flowsheet.

This work focused on the frame and plate filter so

Figure 1: Cake filtration.
it was important to understand how it works. In this
filter, the beer feed is into the base of the frames
The modelling of cake filtration assumes that in which the cake build-up occurs. The cake is de-
Darcy’s Law (equation 1) can be applied to both the posited onto filter clothes which are held in place
filter medium and the filter cake. Assuming that: q by the plates. The filtered beer passes out through
corresponds to the filtration flow rate, K is the per- channels in the top of each plate. [7]
meability coefficient, A is the surface area, P is the The brewery is operating three Orion 100/250
pressure, µ is the beer viscosity and L is the sur- kieselguhr filters, which one have a different filter
face thickness. This assumption results in two re- surface area: 127.3; 133.0 and 131.1 m2 . Cur-
sistances to fluid flow (R) and two pressure drops rently the filters are operated in the way that 70 %
(∆P ) which gives the equation 2. [6] In this equa- of the flow leave the filter at diagonal flow (the in-
tion, the index’s b and m corresponds to a cake and let and outlet are diagonally) and 30 % at “normal”
a filter medium, respectively. flow (inlet and outlet on one side). The difference
kA ∆P is described in figure 3.
q=− (1)
µ L
µ Lb dV µ Lm dV
∆P = + (2)
A kb dt A km dt
Considering the resistance term is defined by the
ratio between the medium thickness and its perme-
ability, the equation 2 can be defined by the equa-
tion 3. [6]
dt µ Figure 3: The feed within the frame and plate filter is marked
= (Rb + Rm ) (3) at yellow and the exits at blue: normal flux at dark blue and
dV A∆P
diagonal flow at light blue.
As the cake resistance increases with the cake
mass (w) and with the volume of filtered beer, For the filter pre-coat and the body feed, three
these parameters (by the solid concentration - c) types of kieselguhr dimensions are used: the
have to be considered in equation 3. The propor- coarsest type is called DIC, the medium CBR and
tionality between the cake resistance and the cake the thinnest CBL. The first pre-coat contains 75 kg
mass is characterized by the specific resistance of of DIC; the second pre-coat 60 kg and 20 kg of
filtration (α), which gives the general filtration equa- CBR and CBL respectively and the third the body
tion (equation 4). [6] feed 35 kg of CBR and 35 kg of CBL. The pre-coat
dt µαc µRm additions are done by a centrifugal and a peristaltic
= 2 V + (4) pumps while the body feed requires only the peri-
dV A ∆P A∆P

2
staltic pump.
In the end of the filtration line, there is a cartridge
filter with the purpose of catching any small amount
of filter aid leaking through. This equipment con-
tains 48 filter cartridges.
In the other hand, in order to implement the opti-
mization in this system, the characteristics and per-
formance of filtration cycle and the formation of the
filter cake were studied. Besides that, four filtration
studies were done in this work: increasing the fil-
tration flow rate and changing the normal filtration
procedure.
The analysis of filtration cycle was possible by
gathering data from three different sources: the op-
erators’ records sheet, where several parameters
are monitored per hour by the operators such as
the filtration flow rate, the pressure drop, the kiesel-
guhr consumption and volume of beer filtered; the
brewmaxx software that records some beer quality
parameters and equipment status and finally using
laboratory analysis to gather the beer turbidity, vis-
cosity and density.
Beer viscosity
In order to know the beer viscosity through time,
several beer samples were taken following this sim-
ple procedure. A beer sample is set to 20 ◦ C by
using a water bath for 10 minutes. Secondly, the
sample is uncarbonated by a magnetic stirrer for
10 minutes. Finally the sample is transferred to a
10 ml flask to be analysed by a viscometer.
Beer turbidity
To measure the beer turbidity, a beer sample is
put onto a 150 ml flask and analysed by a neph-
elometer at 0 ◦ C. This equipment measures the
suspended particles by employing a light beam
(630 ± 30nm) and measuring its reflection at 90 ◦ ,
which is caused by the presence of small particles
(< 1µm) such as proteins.
Yeast viability
The beer’s yeast viability is analysed using a Nu-
cleoconter. This equipment, which uses fluores-
cence microscopy, is able to count dead cells using
a fluorescent dye (DAPI).
As we are interested in also counting the total
number of cells, a lysis buffer is used which turns
all the cells permeable to DAPI.
The determination of the yeast viability is then
computed by taking the ratio between the number
of viable cells and the total number of cells.
3. Results & discussion
In order to understand the performance of the
filters and the variations between the three lines,
229 filtration cycles, from 1 July 2018 until 31
January 2019, were analysed. This has demon-
3
strated that the three filtration lines have identical
behaviours and similar filtration parameters, for in-
stance, the filtration time, the volume of beer fil-
tered, the kieselguhr consumption and the pres-
sure drop at the end of the filtration.
Another observation from the filtration cycles is
that both the amount of added kieselguhr and the
volume of filtered beer increase during the filtration.
Despite of these increases the ration between the
mass of kieselguhr and the volume of filtered beer
decreases, due to the reduction of the impact of
the added kisselghur in the pre-coat.
3.1. Filtered beer vs unfiltered beer
During this study, several beer samples were
analysed in the laboratory to measure its viscosity,
density and turbidity as well as to distinguish the
differences in the beer when it crosses the frame
and plate filter, by measuring it before (Nathan
tank) and after (filter exit).
For that, 9 samples were taken which their aver-
ages and standard deviation can be seen in table
1. At the same time, yeast viability was tried to be
studied in the lab but the available equipment didn’t
have enough sensitivity.
Table 1: Mean values respective errors of 9 analysis of unfil-
tered and filtered beer for turbidity, density and viscosity.
Unfiltered beer Filtered beer
Turbidity (EBC) 76.8 ± 17.3 0.60 ± 0.14
Density 1.00832 ± 0.00070 1.00825 ± 0.00059
Viscosity (mPa.s) 1.625 ± 0.057 1.665 ± 0.026
From table 1 it can be noticed that the filtered
beer’s density is lower due to the addition of kiesel-
guhr suspension which dilutes the beer. Moreover,
by looking to the unfiltered beer’s turbidity, a high
standard deviation can be noticed, of around 23
%, which can be explain due to the beer matura-
tion phase length, change in the procedure or that
the beer turbidity can change through the filtration
cycle.
In order to test this last hypothesis, several beer
samples were taken during the filtration cycle with
the aim of compute the percentage of turbidity re-
duction. For that, samples of beer unfiltered and fil-
tered were taken at the same time and analysed in
the lab. In the 5 cycles examined, the percentage
of turbidity reduction was higher than 97, a value
that has a possible association with the frame and
plate filter’s efficiency. Moreover the percentage of
reduction in turbidity increases during the filtration
cycle which can be related to the increase of cake’s
thickness.
3.2. Characterization of filtration cycle
As the feed of the frame and plate filter is dosed
by a centrifugal pump, this causes variations in the
flow rate and the pressure during the filtration cy-
cle. This behaviour has to be considered in the
equation 4 as well as the volume filtered during
the time corresponds to the flow rate, which to-
gether gives the linear equation 5 from which the
filter medium and specific cake resistance can be
determined.
∆P µαc µRm
= 2 V + (5)
q A A
As the used filter medium is always the same,
it’s resistance can be assumed constant for all fil-
tration cycles. By knowing the medium permeabil-
ity and unfiltered beer viscosity, the medium resis-
tance can be computed by equation 6 which gives
the value of 8.5 × 10−2 m−1 .
∆P
K= (6)
µ × Rm
In this way, the y-intercept in the equation 5 is
constant with a value of 1.1×10−6 kg/(m4 s). By do-
ing a linear regression in each. filtration cycle using
the equation 5, specific cake resistance can be de-
termined as it’s directly proportional to the slope of
the line as can be seen in figure 4.
Figure 4: An example of a linear regression using equation 5 in
a filtration cycle.
After that the cake resistance can be calculated
by equation 7.
V During the daily monitoring in the filtration sec-
Rb = αc
A tor, some problems that could limit this optimiza-
During this work 184 filtration cycles were anal-
ysed and the average of the specific cake resis-
tance and the cake resistance were (8.1 ± 5.4) ×
1011 m/kg and (3.9 ± 1.4) × 1012 m−1 respectively.
In order to compare the cake resistance with the lit-
erature [8], Rb has to be divided by the cake thick-
ness. In this way, the computed value is very sim-
ilar to the literature [8] as the orders of magnitude
are the same (1014 ).
Considering that the cake has an uniform distri-
bution in the filter, it is possible to calculate the cake
thickness using the equation 8, where µKG is the
specific mass of KG. The average of this parameter
was 1.3 ± 0.4 cm for the 184 cycles.
w
l= (8)
µKG A
The cake permeability is calculated by the ratio
between the beer flux and the pressure drop mea-
sure in the same time stamp. Thus in figure 5, an
example of this parameter’s variation during the fil-
tration cycle can be observed.
Figure 5: An example of the variation of the cake permeability
during the filtration cycle.
3.3. Identifying possible limitations
First of all, a summary about all the proposals
from the last audit and modifications that the SCC
had done was created. With this, it was possible to
verify that the frame and plate filter didn’t need any
modification in order to increase its capacity. Be-
sides that, by the end of 2018 the filtration system
became more controlled with the implementation of
the Brewmaxx software and with the modification
of the two pumps operation procedures in each fil-
tration line.
In April 2019, an audit was performed by Pall
Corporation aiming to help the SCC to increase
the filtration capacity, which discovered some prob-
lems. For instance, the composition of the second
pre-coat was coarser than the body feed; the first
pre-coat wasn’t well distributed through the filter
and it’s washing should have been more efficient.
(7)
tion were detected such as the procedure of chang-
ing the maturation tank, the maximum capacity of
some equipment and the beer quality.
In the SCC, there are four maturation rooms,
having 24 tanks each one being their discharge
done only by gravity force. However, in the mat-
uration rooms 1 and 2, the tanks have discharge
problems due the low height difference between
the maturation tank and the Nathan tank.
The end of the tank discharge in the maturation
rooms 1 and 2 take on average 4:00h while in the
maturation rooms 3 and 4 take only on average
1:25 h. When this procedure takes too long, it can
cause air inflow to the frame and plate filter which
4
can damage the beer quality. Therefore, to avoid kieselguhr, the turbidity of the beer filtered at the
this problem, when the beer comes from the mat- first 4 hours of filtration was above the values of
uration room 1 and 2, the filtration flow rate has specification.
to be decreased to values below 250 hL/h. This
is an operation limitation to the filtration capacity’s 3.5. Testing changes in the normal filtration
increase. procedures
The aim of this work is to increase the flow rates As said early, during the audit some problems
from the high gravity beer to 350 hL/h and of di- were found related with the distribution of the pre-
luted beer up to 500 hL/h. By looking for the max- coat through the frame and plate filter. As a follow-
imum capacity in all equipment, it can be noticed up 2 tests were performed: changing the feed flow
that the cartridge filter could limit this optimization direction of the filter when setting the second ad-
due its maximum flow rate (of diluted beer) of 450 juvant pre-coat of the filter to 100 % diagonal and
hL/h. However it didn’t show sudden pressure vari- changing the composition of the second pre-coat.
ations or an unnatural clogging when this limit was The first test provided negative effects on the
surpassed. performance of the filtration cycle. For the second
The last limitation identified was the effect of one, the composition of the second pre-coat was
short beer maturation times. More precisely, changed to 40 kg CBR + 40 kg de CBL. In these
this reduces the filtration efficiency due to the filtration cycles, the average of the filtration param-
higher presence of suspended particles, causing eters were computed and compared by the table
a shorter filtration cycle by 15 %, whereas the vol- 3.
ume of beer filtered was reduced by 13 % and an
Table 3: Filtration parameters determinate for the normal com-
increase in the pressure drop and in the kieselguhr position (60 kg CBR + 20 kg CBL) and for the tested composi-
consumption. tion (40 kg CBR + 40 kg CBL) of the second pre-coat.
Although the shorter filtration cycle, the turnover 60 kg CBR + 40 kg CBR +
time (washing and sterilization of the filtration line) 20 kg CBL 40 kg CBL
is constant, causing a reduction in the filter produc- Filtration cycle
13 ± 4 12 ± 4
tivity and an increase in the operation costs. time (h)
Volume beer (3.8 ± 1.2) (2.9 ± 1.4)
3.4. Testing the increase of filtration flow filtered (hL) ×103 ×103
rates Average filtration
293 ± 28 242 ± 32
Two studies for increasing the initial flow rate, to flow rate (hL/h)
300 and 350 hL/h, were done in this work. For Volumetric consum-
143 ± 20 191 ± 34
each test, the average filtration parameters were ption of KG (g/hL)
computed and can been seen in table 2. For that, Cake resistance (3.2 ± 1.5) (6.3 ± 2.1)
(m−1 ) ×1012 ×1012
20 filtration cycles with a ”normal” operation were
analysed, 18 filtration cycles with a initial flow rate
of 300 hL/h and 10 cycles of 350 hL/h. From table 3, the alteration in the composition
of the second pre-coat affected negatively the per-
Table 2: Filtration parameters determinate for the normal oper- formance of the filtration cycle. However, the beer
ation and for trials of 300 and 350 hL/h.
”Normal” operation 300 hL/h 350 hL/h
filtered in this period had lower filterability due a
Filtration cycle
23 ± 6 19 ± 5 19 ± 4
valve problem so this trial should be repeated.
time (h)
Volume beer (5.44 ± 1.44) (5.52 ± 1.29) (6.09 ± 1.42) In this study, some beer filtered samples were
filtered (hL) ×103 ×103 ×103 taken during the filtration cycle in order to analyse
Average filtration
flow rate (hL/h)
234 ± 14 294 ± 14 313 ± 26 the turbidity variation. As it was expected, the new
Volumetric consum-
140 ± 15 141 ± 12 134 ± 14 composition of the second pre-coat caused a lower
ption of KG (g/hL)
Cake resistance (2.9 ± 1.1) (3.6 ± 1.1) (3.1 ± 0.5) turbidity in the beginning of the cycle and a reduc-
(m−1 ) ×1012 ×1012 ×1012 tion of turbidity between unfiltered beer and filtered
beer was 98.3 % higher.
From the table 2, it can be observed that when
the average filtration flow rate increased during 3.6. Beer recipe changing
the tests, the cycles’ length decreased and simul- Usually the beer is made of malted barley, barley
taneously the volume of filtered beer increased. and corn. However, it was tested a beer recipe with
These behaviour is associated with the increase of only malt and corn. The filtration parameters were
the filtration capacity and causes the reduction of computed for the period before this alteration (13
power consumption due to the reduction of operat- filtration cycles) and during this modification (16 fil-
ing hours. tration cycles) as shown table 4.
Despite the good results in the trials of 350 In table 4, it is possible to verify that the alter-
hL/h such as the lowest volumetric consumption of ation of the recipe caused a negative impact in the

5
performance of the filtration, as it decreased the
filtration rate.
Table 4: Average filtration parameters determinate for the fil-
tered beer with a normal and a different recipe.
Normal recipe Different recipe
Filtration cycle
16 ± 3 13 ± 3
time (h)
Volume beer (4.5 ± 0.8) (3.3 ± 0.6)
filtered (hL) ×103 ×103
Average filtration
279 ± 29 271 ± 32
flow rate (hL/h)
Volumetric consum-
149 ± 14 164 ± 30
ption of KG (g/hL)
Cake resistance (4.3 ± 1.0) (4.7 ± 1.5)
(m−1 ) ×1012 ×1012
This recipe modification caused a reduction of
the beer filterability which can be associated with
4 reasons: the use of inadequately modified malt;
the incorrect addition of exogenous enzymes; a dif-
ferent malt distribution in the mashing and the pres-
ence of insoluble proteins from the corn in the beer.
The first three hypothesis were refuted by the lab
result on the malt and beer analysis so the only
reason that could be considered is the presence of
insoluble proteins.
Last but not least, this recipe change also
caused some loses in the company budget and a
labour increase. The raw material cost increased
due to an extra addition of malt in this recipe, the
consumption of kieselguhr was 0.7 ton higher than
usually causing a extra cost of 480C and 4 more
cycles than expected which required more man-
power and an increase of the operational costs
(water cost for washing and sterilizing of the filtra-
tion line).
4. Conclusions
During this internship, 184 filtration cycles were
conducted in the three filtration lines being each
one analysed for its duration, the volume of beer
filtered, the filtration flow rate, the consumption of
kieselguhr and the variation of the drop pressure.
From these analyses it was concluded that the per-
formance of the three lines were similar and the
volumetric consumption of KG decreased during
the filtration cycle because the reduction of the im-
pact of the kieselguhr used for the pre-coat.
Two successfully studies of increasing the initial
filtration flow rate, to 300 and 350 hL/h, were done
in this work. They evidence that for the same time
of filtration, the volume of beer filtered increased
which is related with the increase of the filtration
capacity.
The performance of the filtration cycles before
(231 cycles) and during this internship can be ob-
served in table 5. This results show a good im-
plementation of increasing the filtration capacity, by
allowing more 27 % volume of beer filtered, and in-
6
crease the flow rate by 54 hL/h while decreasing
the volumetric consumption of KG by 19 %.
Table 5: Average filtration parameters determinate for the filtra-
tion cycle before and during the internship.
Before the internship During the internship
Filtration cycle
18 ± 6 18 ± 6
time (h)
Volume beer (3.9 ± 1.3) (4.9 ± 1.6)
filtered (hL) ×103 ×103
Average filtration
222 ± 18 276 ± 31
flow rate (hL/h)
Volumetric consum-
180 ± 33 145 ± 25
ption of KG (g/hL)
Cake resistance
-
(3.9 ± 1.4)
(m−1 ) ×1012
By comparing the filtration cycles performance
observed in the project time window with the veri-
fied last year (2018), it can be noticed that the vol-
ume of commercial beer produced increased 3 %
while the number of cycles reduced by 91. On the
other hand, the kieselguhr consumption decreased
16 % by mass, corresponding to decreasing 18 %
per hL of diluted beer resulting in half-yearly sav-
ings of 17.8 kC in the company budget.
To end with, the main goals of this project were
a success, as the filtration capacity was increased
and simultaneously the volumetric consumption of
KG reduced.
5. Future studies
Two more studies can been done in order to
increase the filtration capacity and reducing the
kieselguhr consumption.
In order to perform the first test, the initial filtra-
tion rate should be put at 300 hL/h and analyse the
turbidity of the filtered beer. From these analysis
it can be detected the moment where the flow rate
can be increaced to 350 hL/h (figure 6). This pro-
cedure avoid values of beer turbidity above specifi-
cations.
Figure 6: Identification of the instance of time to increase the
filtration flow rate from 300 to 350 hl/h.
In the second test, the goal is to reduce the
amount of kieselguhr consumption. As the parti-
cle removal efficiency increases throughout the fil-
tration cycle, it should be possible to decrease the
body feed dosage without harming the beer quality.
Therefore, to test this hypothesis, laboratory analy-
sis should be performed to guess when is possible
to reduce the kieselguhr by evaluating the reduc-
tion in the turbidity aiming to turn it constant. The
actual and the expected variation of the beer tur-
bidity and body feed dosage is shown in figure 7.
[6] A. Rushton, A. S. Ward, and R. Holdich. Solid-
Liquid Filtration and Separation Technology.
VCH, 2 edition, 1996.
[7] G. J. Freeman and M. T. Mckechnie. Filtra-
tion and Stabilization of Beers, pages 365–392.
Springer US, Boston, 2003.
[8] Coulson and Richardsons. Chemical Engineer-
ing. Elsevier India, 2006.

Figure 7: Effect of the reduction of the body feed dosage in the

filtered beer turbidity during the filtration cycle. The top figure
shows the actual behaviour whereas the bottom the expected
scenario.

References
[1] C. W. Bamforth. Beer haze. Journal of
the American Society of Brewing Chemists,
57(3):81–90, 1999.
[2] Institute of Brewing & Distilling. IBD Qualifi-
cations - The General Certificate in Brewing
(GCB), 2016.
[3] F. Braun, N. Hildebrand, S. Wilkinson, W. Back,
M. Krottenthaler, and T. Becker. Large-scale
study on beer filtration with combined filter aid
additions to cellulose fibres. Journal of the In-
stitute of Brewing, 117(3):314–328, 2011.
[4] N. Shala, I. Hoxha, and G. Xhabiri. Influence of
filtration in the final product stability and qual-
ity of clarity beer. International Journal of In-
novative Studies in Sciences and Engineering
Technology, 3:20–23, 2017.
[5] E.S. Tarleton and S.A. Willmer. The effects of
scale and process parameters in cake filtration.
Chemical Engineering Research and Design,
75(5):497–507, 1997.