Patent No. 2248153A: Method For Emulsifying The Essential Principles Of Hops

Today in 1941, US Patent 2842293 A was issued, an invention of Lyndon D. Wood, assigned to the Nat Hops Lab Inc., for their “Method for Emulsifying the Essential Principles of Hops.” There’s no Abstract, although in the description it includes this:

In order to make an emulsion, it is generally necessary that the insoluble mat-erialheld in suspension be very finely divided, otherwise the materials will separate in the container. When that occurs, it is necessary .to shake the mixture each time before it is used.

In the making of emulsions it has been found necessary heretofore to employ what is known as an emulsifying agent in the form of a tasteless, odorless gum such as tragacanth or gum acacia. Small amounts of these gums, which are readily soluble in water are mixed with the insoluble material, and the mass is beaten in machines designed for the purpose. The beating or pounding has the effect of finely dividing the material which it is desired to emulsify and hold in suspension.

In medicine many remedies which it is desired to administer are thus emulsified. It is claimed for the use of emulsions that in emulsified form the odor and taste is blanketed, and they are unobjectionable to the patient. Also, because of the fine division, they are much more readily assimilated and more quickly and easily digested. The same claim is made for those which are use-d industrially, that is, that this small division of the essential material makes it possible for it to be more readily mixed and dissolved in whatever it is planned to use it, and that the time of mixing and assimilating is very much shortened.

No emulsion of the essential principles of hops has heretofore been made, so far as I am able to find.

I have made many experiments and attempts to emulsify hops, and was unable to make a satisfactory emulsion until the present process was developed by me. The difficulty in making an emulsion of hops is probably due to the fact that it has been extremely difficult to effect a satisfactory division of the resins chiefly found in the lupulin of the hops. In my experiments, I have tried combining them with purified mineral oils, which are a very common component of emulsions. I have tried many vegetable oils such as cotton seed oil, soy bean oil, corn oil, flax seed oil, sesame oil, etc. I have also tried animal fats and oils such as butter, lard, fish oil, etc.

The process I have designed is entirely new, and seems to work perfectly. Emulsions made by this process have been kept for weeks and months, and I find no separation by precipitation or otherwise into their component parts. The process I have designed for making this emulsion is as follows:

I take one part or :portion of any hops extract or concentrate, made by any suitable process, but preferably by the process herein described, in which my first procedure is to suitably prepare the hops by pulverizing them to a degree of fineness by which they will pass a 20 mesh screen or sieve. This may be done in any one of several types of mills which can be adapted for the Work. The mill should be enclosed in such a way that no air currents are present in which the aroma of the hops can be dispersed From the mill the prepared or pulverized hops should be conveyed to a closed tank or receptacle where a suitable solvent is applied. The solvent which I have found most “efficient is acetone, although it may be not-ed that the essential principles of hops, namely, hop oil, lupulin, tannin, and hop seed oil are partly soluble in either petrolic ether, alcohol, methanol, high grade gasoline, ethyl acetate, etc., and in certain hot fatty oils.

I then mix with the powdered hops a highly efficient solvent, acetone. The amount of acetone applied will depend somewhat on the amount of moisture in the dried hops, and also on their age, which affects the percentage of gamma or hardened resins they contain. In general, however, it will be found that one pound of acetone should be applied to one pound of pulverized hops. This application of solvent should be made in a closed container, as the solvent is volatile and in an open container evaporates rapidly, carrying off by evaporation a small fraction of the desirable hops aroma.

The length of time which the pulverized hops should be submitted to: the action of the acetone in the closed container will depend upon the a e of the hops and the extent to which the resins in the lupulin have hardened. If the hops are fresh and have been dehydrated at low temperatures the percentage of hardened or gamma resins will be less than those in hops which were subjected to a higher degree of heat in dehydrating, and particularly those of older growth and those which have been stored in uncooled warehouses. For fresh hops, dehydrated at low temperatures and kept in cooled storerooms, an hour will be sufficient time for the action of the solvent to soften and make soluble the lupulin. For hops of older growth and those which were subjected to greater heat in drying and storing, the period of time which they would be subjected to the action of the solvent might be extended to twenty-four hours, or even longer.

After the hops have been submitted to the action of the acetone for the required period of time, they should be moved in a closed conveyor to a percolator, also closed, for the extraction of a considerable portion of the solvent and extract. This process of percolation can be expedited by the use of a vacuum pump, if desired.

When old hops are used in which the lupulin has hardened and particularly those in which a rancid odor has occurred from the oxidation of hop oil, I employ activated carbon, which may be made from the vegetable fibrous material of the hops residue after extraction has been made by percolation and pressure. This activated carbon may be used in two ways;

(a) By mixing it in finely powdered form with the pulverized hops while they are in a dry state. When this method is employed one-fourth ounce of activated carbon will be used to each pound of pulverized hops. The prepared hops should be stirred and shaken until the activated carbon has been thoroughly mixed with them, then be permitted to stand in a closed container for a period of time not less than two hours. The activated carbon absorbs the excess oxygen of oxidized material which has produced the rancidity and thus restores the odor of fresh hops.

(1)) Or, the activated carbon may be applied to the liquid extract, in which one-fourth ounce of activated carbon is used to each pound of the extract; permitting it to slowly settle; and after a period of from two to four hours the carbon may be removed from the extract by filtration will not contain as large a percentage or fraction of the resinous lupulin as it will carry. The extract obtained by this percolation may then be reemployed on another similar portion of pulverized hops, and the process repeated until the extract has reached the point of saturation, which will be indicated by its specific gravity as well as by the degree of its liquidity.

After the pulverized hops have been submitted in this way’ to the action of the acetone in the tank and in the percolators, the hops are then conveyed in a closed container to a press, preferably’ of the hydraulic type to avoid heat, in which sufficient pressure is applied to express from the hops residue all of the extract obtainable, after which the residue of hops will be found upon inspection or analysis to contain nothing but vegetable fibrous materials and no tannin, oils, or lupulin. This shows that all of the essential principles of the hops have been entirely extracted.

The liquid extract obtained from these several percolations and from the pressing of the hops is then put into an evaporating pan or preferably a jacketed vacuum still, and a degree of heat (60 C.) is applied sufficient only to evaporate all the acetone.

After finding by analysis the amount of tannin and lupulin which the extract contains, I carefully measure, weigh, observe its degree of liquidity, and by an observation of its specific gravity, etc., and by applying the same tests to subsequent lots manufactured, I secure uniformity by the addition of an amount of alcohol, glyceryl laurate, and tannin sufficient to secure such uniformity. The amount of glyceryl laurate used will vary but in any event would not be more than one ounce to each pound of emulsion produced. The function of the addition of this glyceryl laurate is two fold; first, to continue the resinous material in a soft solvent condition, and to make it soluble in the hop wort; second, it assists in the emulsification of the resinous material.

To the hops extract obtained as above described, or in any other suitable manner, I add an equal amount of malt syrup, preferably made from barley malt. The mixture is put into a hoinogenizer, or into what is known as a colloidal machine, which is commonly employed in making other emulsions, and in which the mixture is beaten until the small particles of resinous lupulin contained in the hops extract are finely divided.- No emulsifying agent such as gum tragacanth or other gums usually employed in the making of emulsions is used in this process. The result is a very perfect emulsion which will retain its form without separation indefinitely.

Due to the fact that by my process of making the hops extract I have made available and retained all of the hop seed oil found in the seeds in the hops blossoms, I assume that this oil has a beneficial effect in the making of this emulsion. To some extent, it produces the same effect as the oils used in the making of other emulsions. Among the advantages in the use of this emulsion in the place of bulk hops in brewing are the following:

First, by effecting a much finer division of the resinous lupulin, the resins which give a bitter flavor to all beer and ale are much more quickly dissolved in and assimilated by the hot water used in brewing.

Second, a better distribution. of the lupulin in the beer is obtained than by the use of boiling bulk hops in the wort.

Third, its use in this finely divided form greatly shortens the time required to hop the beer by the methods now employed.

Fourth, this emulsion has the same advantages as follows the use of hop extract in the creation and maintenance of foam on the beer when it is served. This is produced by the small fraction of hop seed oil found in the extract.

Fifth, another advantage is that due to the finer subdivision of the flavoring principles, the emulsion is more quickly and evenly dispersed in the wort or unfinished beer and the time required for cooking the bulk hops in the beer therefore, the time of making each brew is considerably shortened. To illustrate: Most brewers cook the hops in the wort for from one to two hours after the cooking of the grain has been completed. In brewing tests which we have made, we secure the same result by stopping the brewing or cooking as soon as we have introduced the emulsion.

of brewing is con- In further explanation, We have found that four ounces of emulsion containing only about one ounce of hop extract will flavor as much beer as four ounces of extract or as one pound of bulk hops. This can only be explained by the fact that in emulsifying the resinous lupulin contents of the hops or hops extract, we subdivide each particle of these flavoring constituents into many thousands of finer particles. That is the principal reason for putting it into the form of an emulsion rather than in the form of an extract. It greatly increases the flavoring power or ability as compared with the extract or bulk hops from which it is made.

The method or process above described for the making of hops emulsion is entirely a cold one. The advantage of a cold process over the prior art is that it retains all of the aromatic principles of the hops, which are easily volatilized and driven off by the application of heat.

The only stage of the process in which any heat is used is to vaporize the acetone, and only a slight degree of heat-not over 60 degrees C.- is required for that purpose.


Patent No. 4276738A: Hop Picking Machine

Today in 1981, US Patent 4276738 A was issued, an invention of Dominick Ferraro, for his “Hop Picking Machine.” Here’s the Abstract:

A picking machine is described for harvesting hops from vines that have been trained over a low profile trellis. The machine includes two sets of vertical picking conveyors that straddle the vines. The conveyor sets are transversely adjustable toward or away from the vine. A forward picking conveyor set includes picking fingers that move continuously downwardly, stripping hops down from opposite sides of the vine downwardly onto horizontal receiving conveyors. A rearward set of picking conveyors follow the forward set with picking fingers moving upwardly. The upwardly moving picking fingers lift the vine, “stringing” the vine vertically and stripping the remaining hops so they will fall downwardly onto receiving conveyors below.

US4276738-1 (1)
US4276738-2 (1)

Patent No. 2559107A: Drying Hops

Today in 1951, US Patent 2559107 A was issued, an invention of Verlin A. Bloxham, for his “Drying Hops.” There’s no Abstract, although in the description it includes this summary:

This invention relates to an improved process for the drying of hops.

The common process employed, in lowering the moisture content of hops from 75% to 80% to 7 to 11%, involves the use of apparatus including a house-like structure having a reticulated floor upon which the hops are loaded. Beneath the floor there is disposed a heater, commonly direct fired, and the products of combustion from which usually pass through a zigzag or like arrangement of large pipes, located beneath the hop floor, on the way to the stack. Forced draft of air through the hops is not provided, the house being tall compared to its section so as to provide a stack effect, the hop-floor being some twenty feet above ground level. There are a great number of objections to this manner of drying, the major one probably .being the variable quality of the dried product. This variable quality is clue to several factors inherent in the process employed, one of the main ones of which is that the drying is more efficient in the lower portion of the bed, with the result that if the bed is not turned one or more times during the drying process, the drying will not -be uni,- form and hops in one portion of the bed will be of a different moisture content from those in another portion.

The turning of the hops, to ensure uniformity in drying, has its own drawbacks. After the hops dry, they become very fragile and brittle and easily broken, and when the bed is turned to reverse the position of the upper and lower layers, many of the cones which have reached the brittle state will be broken, and the product taken from the dryer will have an excessively high proportion of fines. The labor involved in this operation is, of course, objectionable in addition.

As will be apparent from the above description of the apparatus, the hops are subjected not only to heat by convection from the pipes, but also to radiant heat. For this reason, though ordinary dry bulb thermometers are customarily used in order to control the temperature Within the bed, the lower layers of hops to which heat is radiated will be at temperatures higher than that indicated by the thermometer. This consideration, of course, renders the control by thermometer inadequate and misleading and constitutes one of the reasons for lack of uniformity in the product, since the hop is extremely sensitive to excessive temperature. Further, action of this radiant heat is to raise the temperature to excessive levels of those portions of the enclosure which are seen by the pipes. This results in the successive drying, charring and perhaps final combustion of the combustible material, generally wood, employed in construction of the driers; the loss of the driers by fire is a common occurrence.

A still further serious objection is encountered due to the fact that fines fall from hops through the floor and onto the hot pipes where they become charred and give rise to vapors which in turn pass through the hops and may be condensed on or absorbed by them.

The driers are tall, as referred to above, which increases the difficulty and labor involved in loading, turning and unloading. Floor loading is limited to a depth of about twenty-four inches. The heating system is inefficient, wasting as much as 50% of the heat.

The present invention contemplates the continuous drying of hops, thus avoiding any delay between the harvesting of the hops and the drying operation. This facilitates the harvesting operation inasmuch as it is not necessary to assemble a kiln charge prior to the drying operation for loading into the kiln. Thus, the drying operation and the harvesting operation can be coordinated and carried on simultaneously and continuously.


Patent No. 2005770A: Hop Extractor

Today in 1935, US Patent 2005770 A was issued, an invention of Daniel C. Bleser, for his “Hop Extractor.” There’s no Abstract, although in the description it includes this summary:

This invention relates to improvements in hop extracting and has for its main object the provision of a method and apparatus whereby the desirable flavoring and other elements of hops may be extracted: therefrom without also extracting certain rank, bitter principals which are undesirable and objectionable, It is also an object of this invention to provide an improved means for extracting hops which will require less time than the conventional practices now used.


Patent No. 2988820A: Apparatus For Treating Hops

Today in 1961, US Patent 2988820 A was issued, an invention of Albert Edward Brookes, for his “Apparatus For Treating Hops and the Like.” There’s no Abstract, though it’s described this way in the application:

The object of this invention is to provide in a convenient form apparatus for treating hops or the like.

Apparatus according to the invention comprises in combination a chamber, a perforated endless conveyor extending across the upper part of the chamber, means for supplying hot air under pressure to the chamber, adjustable means for determining the proportion of the conveyor through which the hot air can escape from the chamber, and means responsive to the temperature of the air above the conveyor for determining the setting of said adjustable means.


Patent No. 857461A: Hop Picker

Today in 1907, US Patent 857461 A was issued, an invention of Emil Clemens Horst and John Ehrhorn, for their “Hop Picker.” There’s no Abstract, though it’s described this way in the application:

Our invention relates to a machine by which hops may be picked or separated from the vines upon which they grow. It consists of an endless traveling screen upon which the hop vines are thrown, and through which the hops upon their stems are caused to depend; a means for severing the hops from the stem.


Patent No. RE22889E: Stationary Type Hop Picking Machine

Today in 1947, US Patent RE22889 E was issued, an invention of Florian F. Dauenhauer, for his “Stationary Type Hop Picking Machine.” There’s no Abstract, although in the description it includes this summary:

Hops are raised on a trellis sixteen to eighteen feet in height. When ripe, the vines are out about four feet from the ground, the strings supporting their upper ends to the wire or trellis overhead being either broken by pulling on the vines or cut. Hand picking of hops, owing to the conditions surrounding the growing of hops, the shortness of the season, scarcity of labor and the like, is very expensive and the best hand picking leaves a large percentage of foreign material in the hops and the necessary sacking, boxing and delay in getting hand picked hops to the dry house often results in the discoloring, bruising and flattening of the hops themselves and entails many objectionable incidents.

My invention is an improvement over Patents Nos. 1,054,119 and 1,054,551 covering an apparatus and method for picking hops. In the patents, the picker drums are arranged in two horizontal rows with the drums in the upper row being disposed vertically above the drums in the lower row. The passage between the two rows of drums in the patented devices is therefore restricted in depth between each pair of drums and is of greater depth between adjacent sets of drums. This results in a passage having varying depths and the vines will be unnecessarily compressed each time they are moved through the restricted portions of the passage. The breakage of parts of the vines takes place more readily because of this. Moreover, the arrangement of the drums in vertical pairs leads to another disadvantageous feature of the machine. The hops are picked only where the vertical pairs of drums occur and no picking takes place between adjacent pairs of drums. The picking operation is therefore not continuous throughout the length of the passage.

One of the objects of my invention is to provide a hop picker in which the picking of the hops is continuous throughout the length of the passage through which the vines are moved. A further object of my invention is to provide a passage of uniform depth throughout. A more complete picking of the hops results and there is less breakage of the vines since the vines are carried through a passage of uniform depth rather than through one where the depth varies between each pair of successive drums.

A further object of my invention is to provide a novel vine carrier made of endless cables and carrying vine grasper bars, the bars in turn having vine gripping jaws that are automatically closed on the vines at the feeding end of the machine and are automatically opened so as to free the vines at the exit end of the machine.


Patent No. 2116006A: Hop And Stem Separator

Today in 1938, US Patent 2116006 A was issued, an invention of Edouard Thys, for his “Hop and Stem Separator.” There’s no Abstract, although in the description it includes this summary:

The object of the present invention is generally to improve and simplify the construction and operation of separators; to provide a separator which is particularly intended for separating stems from hops; and more specifically stated, to provide an inclined endless conveyor having trough-shaped members extending crosswise thereof, said troughs being divided into small pockets and said pockets being so shaped that the hops when deposited on the conveyor will settle in the bottom portion of the pockets while the stems will stand endwise and project upwardly from the pockets or lie on the surface thereof in a position where they can be readily removed by a revolving brush under which the vation of the hop and stem separating machine.


Patent No. 2440276A: Brewing Method Using Albedo In Wort

Today in 1948, US Patent 2440276 A was issued, an invention of Abraham Arnold Klein, for his “Brewing Method Using Albedo In Wort.” There’s no Abstract, although in the description it includes this summary:

According to the present invention albedo from fruit of the genus Citrus, particularly from grapefruit or citron, is used instead of, or in addition to, hops in the manufactured beer. I have found that the lupulin of hops has in many cases undesirable effects on the human organism. Furthermore hops deteriorate easily. Albedo from citrus fruit can be used instead of hops and the bitter flavour imparted by it to the wort is of a mild and agreeable character.

So this is essentially using grapefruit or other citrus almost 70 years before Ballast Point Grapefruit Sculpin. But not the whole fruit, or even the rind, the albedo is the white, fleshy inner later in between the thinner, top rind layer and the inside fruit. That spongy material is, according to this patent, used in place of or with hops in the brewing process. I wonder if anybody used this method to produce commercial beer?