## 3 Results and Discussion
### Influence of Process Parameters on the Finished Beer
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{
\begin{tabular}{c} **Addition of** \\ **Sugar Cane** \\ **Syrup** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Physical and Chemical Indicators Related to Sugar Cane Beer**} \\ \cline{2-7}  & **Alcoholic** & **Total Acidity** & **Residual** & **Color (EBC)** & **Bittemess** & **Senior Alcohol** \\  & **Strength (\%)** & **(mL/100 mL)** & **pH** & **Sugar (g/L)** & **Value (BD)** & **(mg/L)** \\ \hline OWBL (10\({}^{\circ}\)P) & \(5.6\pm 0.3\) & \(1.96\pm 0.10\) & \(4.77\pm 0.02\) & \(9.41\pm 0.02\) & \(13.35\pm 0.32\) & \(19.8\pm 1.0\) & \(116.67\pm 22.53\) \\ 5\% & \(6.0\pm 0.1\) & \(1.53\pm 0.11\) & \(4.78\pm 0.01\) & \(9.55\pm 0.04\) & \(12.88\pm 0.36\) & \(18.0\pm 0.5\) & \(94.39\pm 18.64\) \\ 10\% & \(6.5\pm 0.1\) & \(1.53\pm 0.11\) & \(4.77\pm 0.00\) & \(9.19\pm 0.13\) & \(13.61\pm 0.16\) & \(17.4\pm 1.4\) & \(97.00\pm 20.01\) \\ 15\% & \(6.1\pm 0.2\) & \(1.57\pm 0.03\) & \(4.78\pm 0.01\) & \(9.40\pm 0.21\) & \(12.78\pm 0.20\) & \(16.6\pm 0.9\) & \(100.94\pm 19.05\) \\ 20\% & \(6.2\pm 0.1\) & \(1.63\pm 0.01\) & \(4.80\pm 0.01\) & \(7.65\pm 1.23\) & \(13.05\pm 0.67\) & \(16.3\pm 0.5\) & \(108.03\pm 24.56\) \\ 25\% & \(7.2\pm 0.1\) & \(1.67\pm 0.03\) & \(4.61\pm 0.00\) & \(8.72\pm 0.04\) & \(13.24\pm 0.24\) & \(16.6^{\circ}\pm 1.2\) & \(119.72\pm 16.88\) \\ 30\% & \(6.6\pm 0.1\) & \(2.30\pm 0.01\) & \(4.63\pm 0.01\) & \(9.25\pm 0.51\) & \(13.04\pm 0.21\) & \(15.4\pm 0.6\) & \(108.45\pm 24.23\) \\ 50\% & \(6.7\pm 0.1\) & \(2.20\pm 0.00\) & \(4.83\pm 0.01\) & \(12.50\pm 0.51\) & \(17.6\pm 0.20\) & \(13.6\pm 0.9\) & \(105.88\pm 19.65\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} (Note: The data in this table are expressed as the mean (\(n=3\)) \(\pm\) standard deviation, using Duncan’s test, and the difference is significant if the superscript letters are different (\(p<0.05\)).  
\end{table} 
Table 1: Effect of different sugarcane juice additions on fermentation of sugarcane beer (original word of the beer is 12\({}^{\circ}\)P, fermentation at 12 \({}^{\circ}\)C). increase the acidity of the beer. From the table, it seems that the amount of juice addition was not linearly related to the bitterness value and color of the beer, which were related to the fermentation metabolic state of the brewer's yeast. After the sensory panel tasting, the fruit aroma of the added sugar cane juice increased with the addition ratio; as the fruit aroma increased, the sweetness of the beer became stronger, and the corresponding hop flavor became lighter. Sugarcane syrup addition and advanced alcohol content were nonlinearly correlated. We were unable to determine the relationship between the amount of syrup added and the content of higher alcohols. When 20% sugar cane juice was added, the fruit aroma and hop aroma were more harmonious, and the taste was suitable. Comparing the different concentrations of LSs in the table, the raw word concentration had a significant effect on the alcoholic strength, total acid, residual sugar, color value, and bitterness value of the beers. The bitterness value decreased with increasing concentration because the word concentration affected the leaching of bitter substances from hops during boiling. As the word concentration increased, the ethanol content of the brew increased, and the higher alcohol content also increased. Measuring the sensory data and the advanced alcohol content, the preference was higher for 10\({}^{\circ}\)P pale lager. The fermentation cycle of pale lagers fermented at different temperatures varied, As expressed in Table 3. With the shortest fermentation time at 14 \({}^{\circ}\)C requiring only 6 d for primary fermentation (high-foam phase), while 8 \({}^{\circ}\)C and 12 \({}^{\circ}\)C required 8-12 d for primary fermentation.