Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #0811
This file received at Mthvax.CS.Miami.EDU 92/01/28 03:11:43
HOMEBREW Digest #811 Tue 28 January 1992
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator
Contents:
re: autoclaving carboys (The Rider)
wyeast accidents (dave ballard)
sanitizing agents (Jonathan A. Rodin)
eisbock (homer)
red star (Russ Gelinas)
Practicing with poetic license (Dennis J. Templeton)
Eisbock (Bob_Konigsberg)
sparging (sherwood)
RE: Dave Miller's brewpub (jmp)
Iodophor (korz)
Culture equipment (Dennis J. Templeton)
Wyeast Cultures ( George Fix )
Re: To Blow-Off Or Not? (korz)
Yeast and head retention (Conn Copas)
Axbridge Beer Kit (trwagner)
New on hbd, high-gravity brew (Tom Lyons)
Re: trub in the primary (was Interesting Experience) (korz)
Re: PUMPING BEER (korz)
PH readings (Jeff Chambers)
When to add lactose? (Stephen Russell)
Ph Ranges (Mike Fertsch)
Send submissions to homebrew@hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
Send requests to homebrew-request@hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
[Please do not send me requests for back issues!]
Archives are available from netlib@mthvax.cs.miami.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 92 12:41:00 GMT
From: fetzerm@Sdsc.Edu (The Rider)
Subject: re: autoclaving carboys
From: "The Rider" <mfetzer@ucsd.edu>
Date sent: 27-JAN-1992 12:36:40 CUT
>Someone asked if anyone had access to large lab equipment, and if so, have
>they tried autoclaving carboys. He was worried about the glass cracking.
>
> We do, we did, it did. Scratch one carboy.
I wasn't going to comment on this thread, but this response forces me to.
We've autlcaved carboys many times. Never has one cracked. This is
opposed to the experience of some friends, who decided to boil their wort
in the autoclave. That carboy *did* crack, scratch 5 gals of beer. *BUT*
I am certain that it's all a function of the individual carboy (no
imperfections, please) and also, you probably have to use the slow vent
cycle... As I said, 2 carboys of mine have been through the autoclave half
a dozent times (we usually find it's too much of a hassle to take them to
the lab) but they're all quite healty...
Take care,
Mike
................................................................................
Michael Fetzer
Internet: MFETZER@UCSD.EDU UUCP: ...!ucsd!mfetzer
BITnet: MFETZER@UCSD (use FETZERM@SDSC for BITnet SEND)
HEPnet/SPAN: SDSC::FETZERM or 27.1::FETZERM
------------------------------
Date: 27 Jan 1992 8:24 EST
From: dab@pyuxe.cc.bellcore.com (dave ballard)
Subject: wyeast accidents
hey now- a friend of mine (the now-infamous oz) and myself have both
had packages of wyeast #1056 (american ale) pop while we were bursting
the yeast capsule. neither one of us used extreme force or anything,
the seam on the side of the pack just split. is anyone else having
this problem??
later
dab
=========================================================================
dave ballard "Life may not be the party we hoped for,
dab@pyuxe.cc.bellcore.com but while we're here we should dance."
=========================================================================
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 92 09:16:26 -0500
From: rodin@ftp.com (Jonathan A. Rodin)
Subject: sanitizing agents
I recently moved into a house with a septic tank. After reading up a bit
on the way septic tanks work, I became concerned that dumping the chlorinated
water I use to sanitize will disrupt the workings of my septic system. Is
this a real problem or am I worrying overly (I'm getting a homebrew to relax
with right now)?
Are other sanitizing agents (TSP, metabisulphite, etc.) better vis-a-vis my
septic system. Are they better for the environment in general. What are
the trade offs using different chemicals for sanitizing?
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jon Rodin ftp Software, Inc. voice: (617) 224-6261
rodin@ftp.com 26 Princess Street fax: (617) 245-7943
Wakefield, MA 01880
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 92 08:48 MST
From: homer@drutx.att.com
Subject: eisbock
I know a former brewmaster from the EKU-28 brewery.
He said that when he worked there, that freezing was not used in the
process. The high alcohol was reached by rousing the yeast during
fermentation. The beer was racked between fermentation vessels
several times to keep the yeast going.
Jim Homer
att!drutx!homer
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1992 10:53:40 -0500 (EST)
From: R_GELINAS@UNHH.UNH.EDU (Russ Gelinas)
Subject: red star
As a clarification, it's Red Star *ALE* yeast that produces those
not-so-pleasant fruity flavors, especially at high temperatures. I've
had much success with Red Star LAGER yeast; it's hearty, quick to start,
and clean. Not as clean as liquid, but good for a dry lager yeast.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 92 10:55:27 -0500
From: djt2@po.CWRU.Edu (Dennis J. Templeton)
Subject: Practicing with poetic license
I see in the last HBD that ol' Jack S. has advanced from being simply the
world's greatest brewer to being authority on community water supplies and
medicine too.
Nay nay, I say.
Dear Jack; you cannot destroy the botulism toxin with a pressure cooker.
You are out of your league on this one.
dennis (M.D. Ph.D.)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 92 08:43 PST
From: Bob_Konigsberg@3mail.3com.com
Subject: Eisbock
A couple of notes here. I've got a book on Cider making which discusses
both freezing and distillation.
1) Freezing for the purpose of concentrating the alcohol is in fact
illegal, most folks know that.
2) What is more interesting is the books discussion of problems with
freezing. Although their discussion is limited to cider, it will apply
here. One of the things that proper distillation does is to separate
out stuff called heads (substances more volatile than alcohol), and
tails, (substances less volatile than alcohol), both of which are
generally undesireable side products of fermentation. The problem is
that by separating out the water alone by freezing, it concentrates
these substances (fusel alcohols, etc.) in the remaining beer, as well
as the alcohol, and may make it taste worse. By way of example, hard
cider concentrated in this fashion is called "cider oil". Draw your own
conclusion.
3) Another item discussed is that if you are going to do this, don't use
a high gravity brew to start with. Apparently (as an extreme case),
high alcohol cider (substitute beer), is a little too resistant to
freezing to enable good separation. I'll try to remember to look up in
the book any general guidelines that apply for those who wish to try it.
BobK
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 92 08:55:36 -0800
From: sherwood@adobe.com
Subject: sparging
I have been thinking about switching from extract to all-grain. There is a
limit to the number of vessels I would like to purchase, namely one (a fellow
brewer uses a 20-gal SS pot with a SS screen held off of the bottom an inch
with a valve below; this should make both a good mashing/boiling vessel).
I also do not want to buy another burner. How to provide sparge water is
thus my problem. Dave and I got to talking, and he said that his water
heater will get up to 150F -- if it got to 160F he would use that. Nifty
idea -- no sparge vessel needed, no extra burner, and you have pressurized
hot water that can be piped (er, hosed) anywhere. I like it. I know small
hot water heaters (like for mobile homes) are not particularly expensive.
So, has anybody tried this? If the best we can do is 150F, would that still
work reasonably (not ideally, maybe, but reasonably?)?. Alternatively, we
could replace the thermostat if higher-temp ones are available. Anybody
know if they are?
So many questions; so few answers....
Thanks much,
Geoff Sherwood
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1992 11:17:12 -0600
From: jmp@shoe.wustl.edu
Subject: RE: Dave Miller's brewpub
In HBD810, Brian Bliss asks about the location of Dave Miller's brewpub
in St. Louis. It is called, oddly enough, The St. Louis Brewery. It is
at 21st Street and Olive Boulevard (I think that Olive is the correct cross
street). The phone number is 241-2337. The easiest way to get there is
to get to Union Station, which is at 22nd and Market streets, and go north,
that is to say, away from the front of Union Station. Go north for a block,
and look to your right. It is pretty easy to spot.
Jerome Peirick
peirick_j@wums.wustl.edu
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 92 11:30 CST
From: korz@ihlpl.att.com
Subject: Iodophor
Has anyone used Iodophor for sanitizing bottles, carboys, etc.?
I got some from Foxx Equipment, but the instructions only talk
about concentrations for glassware and dishes (apparently, it's
used in the restaurant industry). I need to know what concentration
to use for our homebrewing use. Help? Thanks.
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 92 12:52:05 -0500
From: djt2@po.CWRU.Edu (Dennis J. Templeton)
Subject: Culture equipment
Occasionally the question of where to buy culture equipment comes up on the
net and the recurring problem is that most supply companies will only sell
to "authorized" labs (sheesh!). I've found a company that encourages sales
to individuals, using mastercard or visa payment instead of a university
P.O. The company is Cole/Parmer, and I'm looking at their 1992-1993
Plasticware catalog. Their number is 1-800-323-4340. Their prices are
about the same as the other scientific supply houses. They'll probably be
more willing to send you the catalog if you use some bogus company name
when you call.
This catalog has petri dishes, culture tubes, plastic tanks, tubing, and
valves that might come in handy. They also have a hand-held pH meter for
$43 that's cheaper than my homebrew supplier.
And, no, I do not own stock in this company.
dennis
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 92 11:30:48 CST
From: gjfix@utamat.uta.edu (George J Fix)
Subject: Wyeast Cultures ( George Fix )
Mike Lelivelt in HBD#810 asks about yeast cultures at Wyeast. I have
not had practical experience with all of them, but this is what I do
know.
The Whitbread dried culture is made in England, and distributed in the US
by Siebels of Chicago. This is where Wyeast got their stock culture, although
they now keep it on slants, or at least this was the case as of a few years ago
when I last talked to Fred. Remarkably, slant systems can be effectively used
even for multi-strain cultures, and this is but one of a long list of reasons
why it is such a practical system for yeast maintenance.
The other ale culture which I have had some practical experience is the Chico
or American Ale culture. I believe it is the same as Siebels BRY-96, which
in turn is the production yeast at SN. It is most certainly a pure single
strain. I find it makes excellent ales in the moderate gravity range (say up
to 13.5 deg or 1.054). Whitbread, on the other hand, makes excellent high
gravity ales. No.2 in this three strain culture is an incredible fermenter.
I am familiar with four of their lager yeast. I conjecture that the Bavarian
strain is the same as W34-70. The strain 2308 is the same as W308, better
known to some as Wisenheimer. Both are pure strains. W34-70 is widely used
in Germany today and makes excellent lager beer. It tends to be sensitive to
high trub levels. Also, it tends to be somewhat of a slow starter when first
pitched, however it gets much better in this regard when it is reused.
The Bohemian strain is reported to be from Pilsen. It is dramatically different
(and better) than the "Saaz pitching yeast" available from ATCC in Rockville,
Md. The latter is also from Pilsen, and is a very strong ester producer. Darryl
Richman brought back yeast from Pilsen from which two strains were isolated.
One called strain W is very close to the culture at ATCC, and does not make
good beer. The other, called strain D, produced some of the finest lager beer
that I have ever made. It is less fruity than the Wyeast culture and produces
rounded, soft continental flavors. It is less sulfury than W34-70, but a tad
fruitier. I believe it is different from the strain at Wyeast. Check with
Darryl if interested.
The American Pilsner strain is reported to be AB's production yeast. It
produces apple like flavors found to some degree in all AB products. The
culture from Wyeast, however, can have on occasion very strong apple flavors.
These will diminish to some extent with aging, nevertheless measured
acetaldehyde levels are always well above what is normally thought of as
acceptable. It is my belief (totally without proof) that the Wyeast culture
(unlike AB's production yeast) is a multi-strain culture.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 92 12:11 CST
From: korz@ihlpl.att.com
Subject: Re: To Blow-Off Or Not?
Jim Farley writes:
>John DeCarlo writes:
>
>> If I had to try and say something relatively unbiased in
>> conclusion, I would say that if you don't use a secondary
>> fermenter, you may well benefit from having stuff removed during
>> blow-off. OTOH, if you rack to a secondary fermenter shortly
>> after high kraeusen, you are leaving behind a fair amount of
>> trub in the primary, thereby avoiding any need for blow-off.
>
I disagree. The (alleged) benefits of blowoff are the removal of
higher (fusel) alcohols and (from my own obsevations) some hop oils.
Some brewers swear by the blowoff method, others consider it a waste
of beer -- I used to be in the former camp, but I'm trying to be
objective and plan to do a few experiments to see if I can tell
the difference.
>I agree with John's advice wholeheartedly. However, the major
>reason that I use a blow-off tube is not because I don't use a
>secondary, but because of the fear of gook getting spewed all over
>my kitchen when my airlock gets blown off by CO2 pressure during the
>first few days of fermentation. Is there an alternative method for
>avoiding this that I am unaware of?
The most common way is to use an oversized primary. I know that 6 and
7 gallon glass carboys are available and although I don't recommend
using plastic fermenters, there are 11 gallon plastic food-grade
buckets available.
On a related note, Friday I brewed up a Cherry Stout. I miscalculated
my and brewed up about 5.5 gallons. I put 5 in a glass carboy and
0.5 in a gallon jug. Since there are whole cherries in this batch,
and I could not split them accurately (in the proper proportions)
between the carboy and jug, this will not be a good test for blowoff
versus non-blowoff. Back to my point. I put two 3.3 lb cans of John
Bull dark unhopped extract, 1.5 lbs of DME, 1 lb of Crystal and some
non-fermentable grains in this batch, which is not really a high OG:
not including the cherry solids (no way of knowing how much sugar
they add to the wort) the OG for 5.5 gallons was 1054. Oh yeah, I
also steeped 2 oz of flaked barley while the wort went from 125F to 165F.
Pitched Wyeast #1084 - Irish Ale yeast. The blowoff was incredible!
This morning (monday) the kraeusen has fallen, the total blowoff was about
a half of a gallon. The point I'm trying to make here is that I suspect
that even a 7 gallon carboy would have needed a blowoff hose. I can't
even imagine how much blowoff there would be in a 1112 OG beer like EKU 28
Kulminator! Have any of you really-high-gravity beer brewers successfully
brewed without blowoff? Chuck-- have you? Oops again -- I failed to
mention the ferment is being done at 66F.
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 92 15:46:15 GMT
From: Conn Copas <C.V.Copas@loughborough.ac.uk>
Subject: Yeast and head retention
I've been combing the literature (and the archives) on factors which affect
head retention, and one thing which is conventionally neglected is yeast
strain. On the other hand, I've seen some brands which advertise this as a
plus, and it accords with my experience. So what might be the mechanism ?
Obviously, we need to rule out factors which are only indirectly related to
the strain, such as degree of attenuation, rapidity of bottle conditioning,
preferred working temperature, etc. I'm thinking more in terms of fermentation
or maturation by-products. Any ideas ?
Re dried yeast, I saw a recent claim that top fermenters survive the drying
process less successfully than bottom fermenters. The result being that dried
ale yeast tends to contain a high proportion of spores, as opposed to
dormant cells (presumably), which makes for an inferior ferment in some
fashion which escapes me and for which I would welcome an explanation. Thus,
so-called dried ale yeast may in fact more closely resemble lager yeast. I'm
wondering if this is an alternate explanation for why dried yeasts are so
attenuative; it's not just because they are inherently vigorous, but because
they are biased towards a particular strain. Ideas ?
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1992 16:22:18 -0500
From: trwagner@unixpop.ucs.indiana.edu
Subject: Axbridge Beer Kit
Howdy all brewers.
Last October, I was milling through my local liquor store in search
of George Killian's Red (now THAT's a great beer!!) However, much to my
disappointment, Indiana does not distribute Killians at all! (damn). I
spotted a beer kit called Axbridge Beer Micro Brewery. I thought it was a
cool thing. I gave it a glance a few times when I returned but left
without the kit due to its price. (I still wanted one though, even if it
did cost $39.95)
The kit is basically a sealed plastic bag inside a synthetic woven
bag on the outside. At the bottom of the plasitc bag, sitcking through the
outside one, is a spout. At the top is a plastic cap with a valve. All
you do is add about 60 oz of HOT water to the mix *inside* the bag, add
another 340 oz of cold water, toss on the brewers yeast that is included
with the kit, cap the bag, and wait for about 21 days. (of course, I will
wait about 28 days).
The cap with the valve is supposed to keep the pressure inside the
bag and add co2 throughout the process. It is an English Ale and is
supposed to clear after 20 or so days.
I purchased and finished setting up the kit on Saturday the 25th of
January. When finished, I will release a result for those interested.
My question is this. Has anyone else out there tried a micro
brewery like this (or this exact one), know of a BETTER price, know if
these kits can be purchased mail order, or if they can be re-used?
Thanks
Ted
____________________________________________________________________________
_
Ted Wagner aka "Guardian Angel"
trwagner@ucs.indiana.edu (via Eudora)
o__ o__ o__ o__ Indiana University
_.>/ _>/ _ _.>/ _.>/ _ home of the "WORLD's Greatest College
(_) \(_)\(_) (_) \(_))\(_) weekend.........The Little 500!"
____________________________________________________________________________
_
------------------------------
Date: 27 Jan 92 16:33:23 EST
From: Tom Lyons <76474.2350@compuserve.com>
Subject: New on hbd, high-gravity brew
This is my 1st submission to the digest, though I have received
it for quite a while through Compu$erve's Beer forum.
I brewed a high-gravity bock last weekend, and wonder what I can
do to get as complete a fermentation as possible. My SG reading
was 1.136, part of which I think is attributable to some trub in
my sample, but it still is chock full of fermentables. I pitched
Wyeast London Ale, cause it's what I had.
How well will that yeast do, and should I attempt to rouse it
when fermentation slows/stops? Should I add another strain later
in fermentation? If so, what? In the interest of general
information, here is my recipe:
8 lbs pale malt
1 lb Vienna malt
.5 lb chocolate malt
2.5 lbs dark extract syrup
2.5 lbs light DME
1 oz Chinook 12.5% alpha boil
1 oz Hallertau finish
Grains mashed in a RIMS. Extracts added to boil. Forgot my
Irish Moss <slap>. I'd like to get the gravity as low as
possible, I mean I don't expect 1.009 or anything but I sure
don't want to see it stop at 1.070 or similar. Thank you thank
you thank you.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 92 18:11 CST
From: korz@ihlpl.att.com
Subject: Re: trub in the primary (was Interesting Experience)
Steve writes:
> I brewed up a dopplebok a couple of weeks ago and had an interesting
> experience. I'm working my way up to all-grain (I do partial grain now) and
> had made use of some new equipment. When I was done, I had about 3.5g of
> wort and added that to 1.5g of water. My method todate has been to let this
> settle overnight, and then siphon the beer off the settled trub and then
> pitch the yeast. I've found that this has led to a minimum of sediment in
> the finished product. However, my brews have had some infection problems
> in the past few batches, so I've avoided the plastic pails I was using and
> just pitched directly into the carboy that had the beer, trub and all. I
> had waited until the beer was about 70F before pitching, and there was a
> good 2-3" of trub at the bottom of the carboy.
>
> After three days, nothing. Relaxing, I looked at my logs from the previous
> batch, where I used the same yeast (WYeast, Bavarian Lager). It had taken 3
> days for that to show signs of activity. So I waited. After 5 days, still
> nothing. Now, worried, I reasoned that I had a bottom fermenting yeast that
> was down there in the trub looking for things to eat and not finding
> anything. So I got a siphon tube, sanitized it and stirred the muck up. Two
> days later, it was off and running. It's still (1 week later) going crazy!
> The 2-3" of trub has been blown up into suspension by the activity of the
> yeast. It is absolutely amazing to watch.
I suspect your wort simply needed oxygen.
> So I think I solved the immediate problem; this batch. But the longer term
> problem remains. How to avoid getting the trub in the carboy. How do you
> netbrewers deal with this? I was thinking of a 6g carboy, adjusting the
> recipe to fill it and then after the trub had settled, siphon to a 5g and
I feel that there isn't a problem with leaving the beer on the trub for
a short while, say, a few weeks. You can reduce your trub by cooling in
your kettle (the added advantage of being able to aerate as you pour into
the primary without fear of oxidation (as long as the wort is under 80F))
thus getting your cold break in the kettle rather than the primary. This
implies an immersion chiller. If you use a counterflow chiller, you get
the same benefit but you need to cool as you transfer and then rack off the
cold break. Cooling your wort quickly gives the additional benefit of
reducing DMS in your beer, which is produced while your wort cools from
boiling to 140F. Shortening that period of time will reduce how much DMS
gets created. Since you mentioned Lager yeast, I assume you will be
fermenting for a long while at cooler temperatures. That's when I think
you need to worry about getting the wort off the trub. I suggest that
you get an immersion wort chiller, siphon the cooled wort off the cold
break into a 6 gallon carboy, then after three weeks rack off the trub
into a 5 gallon carboy. I know you mentioned "cheaper and easier" and
I suggested a more expensive, more difficult way. Sorry. Well, on
second thought, if you cooled your wort in the kettle, by say, putting
it in a tub of icewater, that would be cheaper than a chiller. I think
you've described the easiest way, though, so I'm afraid I can't help
you there.
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 92 18:28 CST
From: korz@ihlpl.att.com
Subject: Re: PUMPING BEER
Dan writes:
> I'm doing some mental designing for a medium sized basement brewery. I
> want to use a pump of some sort to move beer or wort from one vessal to
> another. A peristoltic pump is out of the question because of cost. I've
> been looking at the Little Giant SC serive magnitic drive pumps.
[stuff deleted]
>This pump does 470 gallons per hour and costs $119 from "That Fish Place,"
> so would be a pretty good deal if it's useable.
I've been thinking the same for a while -- a pump would make siphoning
obsolete and sanitation easier. However Dan, you mentioned that a peristaltic
pump is out of the question because of cost, but the Coleman-Palmer catalog
has peristaltic pump heads for $80. Drive motors begin (I think) at $125,
but there are a lot of $20 motors out there. If you're willing to spend
$119, I think you should be able to put together a peristaltic pump. I'm
not familiar with the Little Giant SC, but one very important characteristic
of the kind of pump we both are looking for is: SELF-PRIMING! If the pump
you get is not self-priming, then we're back to square one -- siphoning.
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 92 16:01:48 CST
From: motcid!red!chambers@uunet.UU.NET (Jeff Chambers)
Subject: PH readings
Greetings,
Is there a better (and also cheap) way to determine the PH of your grist
than with typical PH papers? I take a reading and for the life of me I can
determine the PH with any kind of accurracy. Do other people has this
problem of should I consult an eye doctor?
Shifting Gears, I tried "Samual Smiths 'Pure Brewed Lager Beer'" over the
weekend since it was the first time I've heard of it. Since the Oatmeal
Stout is one of my favorites, I thought the lager deserved a try. I must
say that it was exceptionally smooth with a nice bitter kick at the end.
Unfortunately, I won't be drinking a lot of them, though, as they are $11 a
six here in Chicago.
Jeff Chambers
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 92 21:51:17 EST
From: srussell@snoopy.msc.cornell.edu (Stephen Russell)
Subject: When to add lactose?
I have read that certain sweet stouts (i.e. Mackeson's) add lactose
(milk sugar) at both boiling and bottling. What I am wondering is,
if lactose is really unfermentable by beer yeast, why should it matter
when it is added? Does it react in some way during fermentation that
I am not aware of, or at least change in flavor profile?
FYI, our club (the Ithaca Brewers' Union of Ithaca, NY) is having a Stout
and Porter competition for St. Patrick's Day. Only 2 bottles and $4 per
entry required. 5 categories, 3 prizes in each category. If anyone is
interested, send me e-mail directly and I'll send you information.
Cheers,
STEVE
Stephen Russell...srussell@snoopy.msc.cornell.edu, srussell@crnlmsc3.bitnet
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 92 13:49 EST
From: Mike Fertsch <FERTSCH@adc1.adc.ray.com>
Subject: Ph Ranges
martin wilde) found a machine for PUMPING BEER:
>I just recently purchased a pump for pumping beer. It was a Teel
>pump. The specifics are as follows:
> - a chemical magnetic drive pump.
good.
> - designed for sanitary conditions.
good.
> - pumps fruit juices (beer should have no problems!!!).
not an issue.
> - ph range of 5-9.
HUH? Mu understanding is that beer has a ph lower than 5.0 Wort is
in the low 5's, and fermented beer is more acidic. My guess is the
dissolved CO2 acidifies the beer.
> - temperature range of 32-180 degrees.
good.
> - gravity feed (will not pull a column unless primed).
I'm not sure what graviry feed means. I can start a siphon, and the
beer moves by gravity feed!
The capacity of the pump seems a little high, but should be useable. Most
pumps I've seen are either much to fast (tens of gallons per minute) of
much too slow (liters per hour). I'd like a pump in the 0.5-1 gallon per
minute range.
I'm not sure what makes these pumps (any pump), but I'd be worries about
oxidatation. If an impeller spins around, pushing the beer, I'd think
it would oxidise the beer. Any comments?
Mike Fertsch
mikef@synchro.com
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #811, 01/28/92
*************************************
-------
