2002
DOI: 10.1016/s0376-7388(01)00553-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Filtration of lager beer with microsieves: flux, permeate haze and in-line microscope observations

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
23
0
1

Year Published

2005
2005
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 51 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
1
23
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…All the experimental beers produced were relatively turbid compared to the control. The extremely good clarity found in the control beer may be attributed to additional processing steps, such as centrifugation and microfiltration, that are used in the production of commercial beers (such as the control) to increase clarity (Seaton and Cantrell, 1993;Kuiper et al 2002;Shotipruk et al 2005). The beers produced in this experiment were bottle conditioned and were not subjected to further processing as the control beer.…”
Section: Beer Colour Clarity and Foam Head Stabilitymentioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…All the experimental beers produced were relatively turbid compared to the control. The extremely good clarity found in the control beer may be attributed to additional processing steps, such as centrifugation and microfiltration, that are used in the production of commercial beers (such as the control) to increase clarity (Seaton and Cantrell, 1993;Kuiper et al 2002;Shotipruk et al 2005). The beers produced in this experiment were bottle conditioned and were not subjected to further processing as the control beer.…”
Section: Beer Colour Clarity and Foam Head Stabilitymentioning
confidence: 97%
“…The beers produced in this experiment were bottle conditioned and were not subjected to further processing as the control beer. Also, it has been generally observed that bottle conditioned beers are more turbid than their commercial counterparts due to the presence of the residual yeast used for conditioning (Kuiper et al 2002). It was also noted that yeast strain A produced beer with higher turbidity than strain B and this could be that yeast strain A produced and released higher concentrations of haze active proteins since the presence of these proteins has been shown to increase turbidity in beer (Seaton and Cantrell, 1993).…”
Section: Beer Colour Clarity and Foam Head Stabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to Fillaudeau and Carrère (2001), the chemical diversity and large size range of the particles responsible for the beer haze make achieving clarification with the membrane process difficult, but the reduction of chill haze in beer clarification with a polysulfone membrane was good in all the tests, and the most significant result were obtained at 0.50 bar. Kuiper et al (2002), using ceramic membranes at 5 ºC, reported a percentile of rejection for chill haze equal to 97.2% for a membrane of 0.8-µm circle pores and 95.9% for a membrane of 1.5-µm circle pores.…”
Section: Analysis Comparisonmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…This large improvement in achievable flux suggested that the mechanism of filtration using filters with circular pores is very different to that using slotted pores whilst the rejection of the deformable drops can be maintained. Slotted pore microfiltration has become a topic of great interest in fields other than oil recovery, with papers published relating to the filtration of yeast and other particles that may deform, and designs employing slot widths down to 1 micron in diameter (Kuiper et al, 2002).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%