Last time, I mentioned that I had two stages left in my process. The next to last stage was bourbon barreling the beer. I didn’t have a bourbon barrel. I did have bourbon, and I did have oak chips. That was enough for me. I took some of the oak chips and decided to let them soak in some of the bourbon. While that was happening, I did some calculations to figure out what sort of effect I would get by adding bourbon. Through a ratio field test (the lay way of saying that I made some extreme boilermakers to see how the bourbon would come through), I settled on an appropriate level of bourbon.
My beer gravity was 1.092, meaning the the beer was 20.37 (and some)% ABV after the difference from the initial gravity. The bourbon I had was hot. It was 65.05% ABV. So, I took the amount of 20.37 and multiplied it by 84 ounces of beer. Then I took 65.05 bourbon and multiplied it by my ounces of bourbon (14 ounces, in this case). I added the two products of the multiplication and divided by the total ounces. It looked a bit like this:
20.3762%ABV*84 ounces=1711.6008
65.05% ABV*14 ounces=910.7
1711.6008+910.7=2622.3008/98=26.758171.
So, my ABV from the Bourbon addition yielded 26.76% (roughly) ABV. I approached this two ways to make sure that I was getting an accurate reading. First, the simple math from the hydrometer told me my ABV. From there, it was only a matter of figuring volumes. The other check had to do with the relative density in solution. So, the effect of the alcohol was to drop my hydrometer to give me a new reading of 1.075. I figured that for every percent alcohol on the hydrometer reading, I was actually getting 2.8143295% by volume increase.
I know this is getting a little convoluted, but the relative density of a distilled spirit is actually less than water and it affects the gravity reading in the negative even though the ABV goes up. I’m not going to go into the math because it’s tedious, and it took a long time to figure out.
The only reason I bothered was for the next stage in my beer: I still had to eisbock the brew, which involved the removal of water. Fortunately, the decreases viscosity of the beer via the addition of distilled spirit renders the beer more freezable. However, the gravity was still pretty high and reminded me once again that my initial gravity was simply too high. Next time, I’ll get it right.
Since I’m removing water, the thickness has re-increased. All this means is that my gravity is going to go back up. Therefore, I’m still using the formula that says for every 1% of ABV on the hydrometer (still basing the idea on relative density from the Bourbon), I’m actually getting 2.8143295% ABV. Sorry if this has become too much. Let me put it this way: The more moisture loss I see, the more water I know has been removed from solution, thus the more ABV. Yet, because of the effect the bourbon had on the beer, I can’t rely on simply getting a straight reading, hence all the calculating.
I promise that the next section will be more interesting. Let me just say that I had an almost 27% beer that I put in the freezer and wish it would have been less thick. The bourbon did thin it a bit, which meant for a little better freezing. We’ll see. Even as I write this I’m still not done eisbocking. Stay tuned, I only have one more post and will reveal how the thing ended up.
Just did some interesting reading, folks. I knew that some correction needed to be made because of higher gravities on the beer. It seems that I’m actually about 1.3% higher on my original ABV level than what I’ve stated. I’m still in the learning process, too. But the correction is basically meant to account for higher densities and gravities. Here is the link that I hit. https://www.grimmysbeer.com/
This is certainly a learning curve for me, too. I suppose it could make my results seem less reliable but I’d rather be honest. It seems my actual yeast produced ABV is somewhere in the neighborhood of 21.672% instead. What do you know. I think I’ll write a final post correcting some of the stuff a long the way. However, this now means that my bourbon addition actually got me to 27.868857%, which is a nice little jump for the brew.
[Reply]
I also want to note that this also means I’ve got to account for the effect of my bourbon. The new factor for my bourbon’s effect is 2.7319148 instead of the 2.814, etc. Stick with my folks, I get the feeling I’m going to have to add a plus or minus sign at the end of this thing.
[Reply]
This is awesome Mike! Even tho I don’t get all the math, gravity, etc. I just love what you are doing and your enthusiasm really comes through on this post. Once you Eisbock how long will the brew need to condition? Will it be drinkable immediately? It just seems like such an awesome thing you are doing, and the process seems like it is actually a lot of fun, and quite interesting. I don’t even brew, and I’m riveted by these posts!
[Reply]
Oh and by the way it wasn’t lost on me that you used a Beam product for your bourbon. I thought surely you would throw in some Stagg for the Bourbon, but Bookers is very tasty too!
[Reply]
Stagg would have been nice, but $70 a bottle, and only being able to buy it once a year in the fall, I get the use of Bookers.
[Reply]
Don,
The Stagg was so tasty that I’m out. I’ve actually got another bottle nesting at my parents. It is Bookers and it’s not cheap but I figured I needed to do it right. The beer will get better with time but I’ve already worked on the brew for over three months, so it’s really nice and good to go.
I’m glad you get the enthusiasm. I go love doing this stuff and it’s fodder for a future brewery. I’m happiest when I’m brewing. Thanks for the compliment and interest in what I’m doing. I need to see what my yield ends up being but I might bring a bottle to Idaho when I come.
[Reply]
Rich,
Booker’s isn’t cheap either…just more available.
[Reply]
Wow, Mike, this is technical, but I can follow it (mostly). It’s cool to see just how deep one can descend into brew nerditry. I mean that with all sorts of respect.
Maybe I’ll try one of these for my next brew. Does Northern Brewer make an extract kit for this?
[Reply]
I think you could try to find the kit for it . It was a lot of work and I’m going to post the results today. The funny part of the process was how much I realized I need to learn about the process of eisbocking.
[Reply]
[...] enough for me, and I hope you enjoyed the posts (here they are in the original order: 1,2,3,4,5). I’m very proud of this accomplishment. Please tweet, re-tweet it, or re-re-tweet it [...]