Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #0674
This file received at Mthvax.CS.Miami.EDU 91/07/08 03:05:25
HOMEBREW Digest #674 Mon 08 July 1991
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator
Contents:
Peristaltic pumps (msharp)
Fast Ferment -- Conclusion and More Wheat Beer (David J. Sylvester)
re: hydrometer readings (Darryl Richman)
RE: Wort Aeration Notes... (MIKE LIGAS)
Re- REAL fruit juice (Bob Hettmansperger)
Re: REAL fruit juice
Oregon Micro-breweries beer fest (Greg Kushmerek)
Mackison's after taste. ("DRCV06::GRAHAM")
Brewing by the seat of your pants (Kevin L. McBride)
Subscription Request (Bits_of_Magic)
hydrometer readings (Brian Bliss)
Send submissions to homebrew%hpfcmi@hplabs.hp.com
Send requests to homebrew-request%hpfcmi@hplabs.hp.com
[Please do not send me requests for back issues]
Archives are available from netlib@mthvax.cs.miami.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 91 7:28:01 EDT
From: msharp@gull.ulowell.edu
Subject: Peristaltic pumps
In the last issue, Bruce Hill mentioned he uses a peristaltic pump
to move his wort about. Unfortunately, he didn't say where he got it.
So, where do you get these things? (without ripping one out of your
hospital's heart-lung machine)
- --Mike Sharp
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 91 08:47:38 AST
From: counselling_centre@admin.cc.acadiau.ca
please add me to this list
Terry lane
bitnet: counsel@acadia.ca
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 91 10:33:03 -0400
From: David J. Sylvester <sylveste@wsfasb.crd.ge.com>
Subject: Fast Ferment -- Conclusion and More Wheat Beer
Hi
First, I would like to thank everyone who responded to my last post
about a fast ferment on an attempt at a wheat beer. Sad tosay, I think the
batch may have to go. Its been in the bottle for almost three weeks. I opened
one after about two weeks. The carbonation was good, nice head but nasty smell
and aftertaste. I'm going to wait and see what the effect of longer ageing
will be before dumping.
Now for my next question. I have 6lbs of Williams Weizenmalt extract
and 2lbs of wheat malt. I would like to try a wheat beer with this. What I would
like are some suggestions for hops and yeast. I plan on making a five-gallon
batch. Is the entire 6lbs of extract too much for a wheat beer? My understanding
is that wheat beers should be somewhat light-bodied. Since I plan on using some
of the wheat malt (2-4 cups) I'm wondering if 6lbs of extract would make the
beer to rich.
As a related question, concerning yeast, does anyone care to comment
on Whitbread's yeasts, ale and lager.
Thanx in advance
Dave Sylvester
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 91 07:57:06 -0700
From: darryl@ism.isc.com (Darryl Richman)
Subject: re: hydrometer readings
> >From: bliss@csrd.uiuc.edu (Brian Bliss)
> from this I deduce that pure alcohol has a S.G of 4.2/5.0 = .84
> anybody with a bottle of everclear (and hydrometer) care to verify this?
Pure ethanol has a specific gravity of 0.79... which is close enough to
say .8 or 4/5. Therefore, it is true, that the Canadian 5% v/v beers
have just the same amount of alcohol as the American 4% w/w beers.
(Sorry to shatter that myth).
> hypothetically, assume that you have 1.040 S.G unfermented wort,
> with 5% potential alcohol (an approximation to the best of my memory),
> and anything non-water is 100% fermentable. It ferments
> completely - nothing left but alcohol and water (very hypothetical).
> It should now have a S.G. of .95 * 1.000 + .05 * .840 = .992, not 1.000
> A hydrometer calculation would indicate that that you have lost
> .048 S.G, and have an alcohol content of 6%, not 5%!
Another way to look at this is that the *Plato scale measures % sugar
in solution. (This is a table that was originally cooked up by Dr.
Balling, and then improved by Dr. Plato.) As a reasonable
approximation, each 4 specific gravity points represent one *Plato, or
1% sugar in solution by weight. Of course, with a beer wort, not all
of that is sugar; 10% or so is going to be protein. And even of the
sugars, some are still too complex to ferment (dextrins). This is why
beer fermentations don't get down to (or below) 1.000, while mead and
wine do.
A rough approximation is that the yeast will ferment each 2 sugar
molecules into 1 CO2 and 1 Ethanol. So each 2* (8 points of specific
gravity) drop--with the alcohol removed--results in a 1% w/w alcohol
addition.
Consider now, that we have
d = x + y
where d is the drop in gravity noted
x is the drop resulting from loss of sugar
y is the drop resulting from the increase in alcohol
For y, each drop of 1* in the x column results in the increase of
alcohol by 0.5%. But that 0.5% registers as only 80% on the hydrometer
because the alcohol is lighter than water. So, when we gain 0.5%
alcohol, we lose 1 - 4/5 or 1/5 of a degreee. Therefore,
y = (x/2)*1/5 = x/10
Now we have
d = x + x/10 = 11/10 x
which can be turned around to
x = 10/11 d
But we aren't really interested in the drop from loss of sugar,
we want to know the drop from the increase in alcohol. Substituting
from above
y = 1/10 x = 1/10 * 10/11 d = 1/11 d
Finally, the drop from the increase in alcohol is 1/5 the actual quantity
of alcohol present.
% alcohol w/w = 5 * y = 5/11 d
Remember that this is all back of the envelope figuring, based on some
approximations. In particular, this assumes an "ideal" fermentation.
Yeast are not ideal fermenters, as they go through a respiratory phase
(while oxygen is present) that doesn't produce ethanol, and also some
of the carbohydrates are used to make more yeast and to keep as energy
reserves. And some of the ethanol is transformed into esters.
For backup, however, I see that Fred Eckhardt, in his _The Essentials
of Beer Style_, cites that each *Plato drop results in the increase of
% alcohol w/w by 0.4167. Greg Noonan in _Brewing Lager Beer_ also
cites 0.42 *Plato as an approximation. 5/11 (0.45) is a 4% difference
from above.
> If the hydrometer manufacturers compensate for this,
> the label on the scale "potential % alcohol" is erroneous.
>
> What they can adjust for is "% by weight" or "% by volume".
> I would assume that hydrometer readings are calibrated for weight,
> means you are weighing the stuff, but they could calibrate the
> potential alcohol scale for volume. It's calibrated for weight,
> is it not? If not, the rest of my argument is in err.
> [...]
> i.e. if the "potential % alcohol" scale on your hydrometer is
> adjusted for weight, it is really giving you % alcohol by volume
> after you subtract.
Because hydrometers have been sold to winemakers in the past, they are
calibrated for % alcohol v/v. Since, as you point out, there is a
linear relationship between % v/v and % w/w, they could easily do it
either way.
--Darryl Richman
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 91 13:35:02 CDT
From: bradley@dehn.math.nwu.edu (R. Bradley)
Please remove me from your excellent Homebrew Digest mailing list.
I'll be back in September!!!
Rob (bradley@math.nwu.edu)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 5 Jul 1991 02:49:00 -0400
From: MIKE LIGAS <LIGAS@SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA>
Subject: RE: Wort Aeration Notes...
In HBD 672 Kurt Swanson <kswanson@casbah.acns.nwu.edu> posted a most inters
interesting suggestion. He described a tap system (remembered from High School
Chemistry class) in which an extra vent hole on a faucet provided a means of
perfusing the running water with air. He reasoned that this may be the basis
for an effective wort aeration system.
Well Kurt...you got me to thinkin' again! I am an all-grain brewer most of the
time and that calls for a full 5 gallon boil followed by wort cooling via a
counterflow wort chiller. It seems reasonable to suggest that a T-fitting
could be placed at the end of the copper coil where the cooled wort is exiting.
As the wort passes by the open side of the T-fitting it would be aerated in the
same manner as water in the forementioned faucet. One could add an added level
of security by placing a filter disc on air intake part of the T-fitting to
provide sterile air. The filter disc would be the same as the one used in the
'Happy Yeast Infusion System' advertised in Zymurgy Magazine. These discs are
available from lab supply companies and can provide filtration down to
2 microns.
The one potential problem I can see with this hypothtical design is that the
flow rate of the cooling wort may not be sufficient to pull air through the
microscopic pores of the filter disc but it should work without the disc in
place. I'll give it a shot next time I brew and report my findings to the
forum.
Mike Ligas
ligas@sscvax.cis.mcmaster.ca
PS. I hope my verbal description is clear...I was considering an attempt at
ASCII graphics but chickened out. Let me know if you have any problems
envisaging my suggestions.
------------------------------
Date: 5 Jul 91 09:25:52
From: Bob Hettmansperger <Bob_Hettmansperger@klondike.bellcore.com>
Subject: Re- REAL fruit juice
Time: 09:15 AM Date: 7/5/91
Subject: Re: REAL fruit juice
>From: Mark Sandrock <sandrock@aries.scs.uiuc.edu>:
>
>It's true. Many of the prepared fruit juices say "100% natural", and,
>if you read the fine print, "10% fruit juice".
Not to feed a thread that has nothing to do with homebrewing, but...
I always assumed that 10% fruit juice meant that it has been cut down with
water, not that it is 90% artificial.
Now, back to homebrewing. Can anyone tell me if there is a homebrewing club
on the Northern New Jersey shore (in the Red Bank or Asbury Park area)?
Thanks,
Bob Hettmansperger (also receiving mail at bobh@twinkie.bellcore.com)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 5 Jul 1991 09:21 EDT
From: Greg Kushmerek <GKUSHMER@RUBY.TUFTS.EDU>
Subject: Oregon Micro-breweries beer fest
A friend of mine just sent me a message from Boulder. He just got back
from a trip in Oregon and noticed that there is some kind of micro-brewery
beer festival coming up in a few weeks.
Does anyone know if this is an annual event? I've already got my vacation
plans booked for England and Germany in September. But this would be a great
thing to plan for next year if it's an annual event.
BTW -- Anyone know of a special XB recipie? I love Theakston XB for its
smoothness, but I can't seem to reproduce it's texture or the head retention
for that matter. I suppose I should exercise less and drink more so that
I may brew more!
Thanks
- --gk
------------------------------
Date: 5 Jul 91 10:07:00 EDT
From: "DRCV06::GRAHAM" <graham%drcv06.decnet@drcvax.af.mil>
Subject: Mackison's after taste.
My experience with imported beers is very limited.A friend gave me a bottle
of Mackison triple x stout yesterday. I tried it and was, well, not happy
with the result.
I thought Mackison was supposed to be a "sweet" stout. It was sort of
sweet, and that was just fine. My problem was with the aftertaste, one
that was reminiscent of fermented raisins ... or was it prunes ...
Needless to say, I found the aftertaste unpleasant. Did I get a bad
bottle, or is that a correct taste. What contributes to that strong after
taste? How do I keep from duplicating it?
More importantly, is Mackison considered a fine beer and my palate just
uneducated?
Dan Graham
"Beer made with the Derry air."
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 91 1:24:04 EDT
From: gozer!klm@uunet.UU.NET (Kevin L. McBride)
Subject: Brewing by the seat of your pants
Just some random notes from my kitchen...
My latest batch is ready to rack into secondary. I brewed it last
Saturday almost entirely on a whim. I had almost no homebrew left in
the house and needed to do something. I'm going to call it:
"Clean out the closet Porter"
Well, I *think* it's going to be a Porter. :-)
Due to a combination of being overwhelmed with technical information
at the conference, and discovering some supplies I didn't know I had
languishing in the back of my pantry, I took a "screw it!" attitude,
relaxed, didn't worry, and tossed it into the brewpot.
Ingredients that I found lying around:
1 can Ironmaster Scottish Mild Ale extract
1 can Bierkeller light lager extract
1 lb. crushed crystal malt
1 lb. Munton & Fison Light DME
1/2 cup Lactose
Ingredients that I bought for the occasion at the last minute:
1 oz. Brewer's Gold hop pellets
1 oz. Cascade hop pellets
1 pkg. Whitbread dry ale yeast
Standard procedure - put crystal malt in cold water, heat to just shy
of boil and sparge into brewpot, add malt extracts and water, bring to
boil, add Brewer's Gold hops, boil a little over 1 hr., stop boil, add
Cascade hops and chill on the way into fermenter. I tossed the dry
yeast directly into the fermenter atop the cooled wort at about 10:00
pm.
Original Gravity: Beats me, I didn't even check.
The yeast started flocculating within an hour and by the next morning
the air lock was burping continuously. Today, 4 days later, it is
completely fermented out and I'm going to transfer it into secondary
probably before I go to bed.
While I still do mostly extract brews with some adjunct grains, I
haven't brewed with canned extracts in quite some time. I was at a
homebrew shop a while back and they had a great deal where if you
bought 6 cans you got an extra discount and I said, "Yeah, sure, why
not?" Actually made a couple or three pretty good brews from them
too. I do prefer to use DME now though because you do get more bang
for the buck or fermentables per pound.
I can't wait to taste it and see if it's anywhere near decent or even
what style it's close to (I think my original intent was to do a pale
ale, but this is much too dark for that. :-) If it's good it will
reaffirm my position that you don't need to get so scientific to brew
good beer. You only need to get scientific to brew good beer
consistently. I rather enjoy my own creations and have only tried on
a couple of occasions to get really methodical about recreating some
commercial brew.
Some commercial brews are fairly easy to approximate if you're willing
to overlook some of the minor rough edges. Others are difficult. Sam
Adams Lager, for example, is pretty easy to approximate; start with
enough light malt to make a moderately full bodied golden lager, add
some crystal malt to give it that amber reddish color and more body,
and go nuts with the Hallertau hops. A couple of my beer illiterate
friends could hardly tell the difference. Of course, they also
probably couldn't tell the difference between Bud and Pilsener
Urquell. Why do we keep these people around? :-) I guess we need
somebody who's willing to keep A-B in business. :-)
I wish that this new beer was going to be ready in time to take to the
next Brew Free or Die meeting. (Hmmm, maybe if I siphon a couple of
bottles full while I'm racking and slightly overprime them they'll be
ready in a week. They certainly wouldn't last much beyond that, but
then again, I don't intend to let them stay around that long.)
BTW, for any of you New Hampshire net.lurkers who don't already know,
the next meeting of BFD is on Sat. July 13 at 3:00 p.m. Dan Hall can
give you details. You listening Dan? :-)
- --
Kevin McBride
Brew Free or Die!
uunet!wang!gozer!klm
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 5 Jul 91 13:01:39 PDT
From: Bits_of_Magic@cup.portal.com
Subject: Subscription Request
I'm sorry for sending this to the list, but repeated requests sent to
homebrew-request have provided no response.
I would like to subscribe to HBD.
thanks,
Evan Robinson
bits_of_magic@cup.portal.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 6 Jul 91 18:40:09 CDT
From: bliss@csrd.uiuc.edu (Brian Bliss)
Subject: hydrometer readings
> original potential alcohol: 5 %
> final potential alcohol: -1 %
> - -----------------------------------
> unadjusted alcohol content: 6 % by weight
> adjusted for error in F.G: 5 % by weight
> 6 % by volume
>
> You should always be able to multiply by 5/6 to get the
> % alcohol by wieght, adjusted for the error in taking the
> final gravity. all equations are linear.
>
> i.e. if the "potential % alcohol" scale on your hydrometer is
> adjusted for weight, it is really giving you % alcohol by volume
> after you subtract.
After thinking about it, I see that this is not coincedence.
I be ready to defend myself from mathmatically-substantiated blows.
I also checked to make sure that 1.040 SG => ~ 5% potential alcohol
on my hydrometer, and it does...
> to their Southern cousins is the belief (promulgated as much by American
> tourists as our own kin) that our [Canadian] beer is stronger. Cruel man!
> Are you going to shatter one of my cherished adolescent myths?
I don't know, but I sure get drunker off of (most) Canadian beers
than (most) American beers, In my limited experience north of the border.
bb
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #674, 07/08/91
*************************************
-------
