Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1118
This file received at Sierra.Stanford.EDU 93/04/13 00:17:14
HOMEBREW Digest #1118 Tue 13 April 1993
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator
Contents:
cooling (Ulick Stafford)
Wyeast reuse/stretching (Troy Howard)
camra (BadAssAstronomer)
Re: Tabs and the such (David C Mackensen)
RE: Request for decoction mashing help.... (""Robert C. Santore"")
RE: Help, I boiled away the hops. (""Robert C. Santore"")
Help, I boiled away the hops (Troy Howard)
Bucket Sealer (/O=vmspfhou/S=dblewis/DD.SITE=JSCPROFS/)
Re: I boiled away my hops (korz)
Favorites (Darren Hanson)
CO2 (Jack Schmidling)
hops growing (Kirk Anderson)
mailing list (Martin McMenamin)
HOP ALPHA ACID (Jack Schmidling)
Boulevard Brewing Co. (John Fitzgerald)
Change of e-mail address (Randy Smith)
Dry Hopping (Carl Eidbo)
My Belgian rock collection (chris campanelli)
proposed beer tax increase ("PAUL EDWARDS")
alternative forum (Michael D. Galloway)
Fermenting Apple Cider & Filtering Cold Break ("Anderso_A")
more comments on bottles / European system (brew it 12-Apr-1993 0923 -0400)
Coriolis force/Givin' carboys a swirly (John Adams)
Re: Chiller Study (Kelly Jones)
Yeast pitching rates (/O=vmspfhou/S=dblewis/DD.SITE=JSCPROFS/)
Immersion Chiller Efficiency (Carl West)
Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew@hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
(Articles are published in the order they are received.)
Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc.,
to homebrew-request@hpfcmi.fc.hp.com, BUT PLEASE NOTE that if
you subscribed via the BITNET listserver (BEER-L@UA1VM.UA.EDU),
then you MUST unsubscribe the same way!
If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first.
Archives are available via anonymous ftp from sierra.stanford.edu.
(Those without ftp access may retrieve files via mail from
listserv@sierra.stanford.edu. Send HELP as the body of a
message to that address to receive listserver instructions.)
Please don't send me requests for back issues - you will be silently ignored.
For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to lutzen@novell.physics.umr.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 93 11:29:01 EST
From: Ulick Stafford <ulick@bernini.helios.nd.edu>
Subject: cooling
Tim Anderson posted an adjustment he made to his chiller to improve
cooling. I have been considering a simple change - reversing the flow.
At present cold water enters at the bottom of the coil and exits at the
top. That combined with water's tendency to stratify in layers causes the
wort to be still, stratified and hot near the top. A reverse in flow
would chill the top stuff first and it would then sink setting up
convection currents that may aid coagulation and heat transfer. The
reason I haven't until now is worry about air pockets being trapped in the
coil, but given high flow rates that is probably a foolish concern, and
an actual desire not disturb the hop pellets so much so I could rack off
them quicker. However I usually have to rack wort twice anyway before
pitching so this is of less concern. Comments?
Also related peripherally to cooling, Al's post interested me. I have
roused yeast since the first batch I did when I was a whelp, thought
everybody did it, and thought it was essential for beers brewed with
bottom fermenting yeast (not Al's beer of course). But the temperature
thread intrigued me. 72 or 68 is much too warm for a house I have to heat,
but then 60 is what I am used to. In Ireland I usually had to put the
ferments in a warm place. But 60 is too cool for my
SO's guinea pigs and bird. So their room is heated to 68-70. This mean that
for nice temperature steps I can start at 68 in the rodent room, rack to
secondary and move to the kitchen (60) and then put it in the basement
50-55 to clarify prior to bottleing. If only lager temperature steps were
so easy.
Another ale comment is that I have gone back to my plastic bucket
for ale primaries. I never used to skim, but now I have decided after
reading Warner that I should collect yeast from the top. I did so on my
last ale. The yeast is quite the foulest stuff I have ever tasted due to
the hop resins and other lovely scum. It doesn't seem to be contaminated
in that I can't taste anything off but that could be due to masking by
the hop resin. I have decided that I should rinse and, to be sure, acid wash
the yeast prior to reuse. Comments?
__________________________________________________________________________
'Heineken!?! ... F#$% that s@&* ... | Ulick Stafford, Dept of Chem. Eng.
Pabst Blue Ribbon!' | Notre Dame IN 46556
| ulick@bach.helios.nd.edu
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 93 09:14:33 PDT
From: troy@scubed.scubed.com (Troy Howard)
Subject: Wyeast reuse/stretching
Howdy all,
Well, after all this talk about dry yeast contamination (notwithstanding
the recent posts concerning the improvements at Whitbred) I have finally
decided to take the liquid yeast plunge.
!*SPLASH*!
Ok, so I shelled out $4 for Wyeast Belgian Ale yeast. FOUR BUCKS! For
microscopic fungus! It boggles the mind. In HBD #1103, Philip J Difalco
<sxupjd@fnma.COM> reposted an article by Rick Cavasin on stretching Wyeast
by making a 1/2 gallon starter, fermenting to completion, bottling the
results in 5-6 bottles, and using the bottles to make starters for pitching
into your wort. In the post, Philip asks for comments from the yeast-gurus
out there.
I have not seen any replies posted, so I thought I would ask again; with a
slightly different slant (no pun intended).
I have followed Rick's instructions and I now have a 1/2 gallon starter
fermenting away. This should yield ~6 bottles of yeast. However, for my
next brew, Belgian may not be appropriate. So I'll go out, get another
packet of Wyeast (say, London Ale), and do the same thing for it.
Then, I'll have 5 bottles of Belgian and 5 bottles of London in the fridge.
So now I forsee obtaining my own collection of Wyeast, all bottled in 12 oz.
beer bottles and stored in the fridge. I might only have to buy yeast
once a year (once my collection is established).
This seems like a very cheap, very easy form of yeast management.
Is it?
Are there draw backs (like problems with autolysis, or the yeast just dying)?
Am I wasting my time?
Rick mentions he has had bottled yeast last 6 months. Will they last longer?
Are those 6 mo. old yeast just as good as those from a new Wyeast packet?
Please, please, please, send me guidance.
Lost in the terrifying world of expensive microscopic organisms,
Troy
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1993 11:56:42 -0500 (CDT)
From: STOREY@fender.msfc.nasa.gov (BadAssAstronomer)
Subject: camra
Hi everyone
Just back from England with a bunch of real ale under and around
my belt :) Man it was great, but I'll bore you with the details
in some other post.
However, the CAMRA Guide to Good Beer impressed me so much, I was
thinking of joining CAMRA. Anybody out there a member or
ex-member? Any and all comments will be appreciated.
thanks
scott
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1993 13:24:15 -0400 (EDT)
From: David C Mackensen <cygnus@unh.edu>
Subject: Re: Tabs and the such
try using emacs and the M-x untabify... this will replace tabs with
spaces and preserve columns.. what a bargain!
- --
- -- Chris Mackensen (dcm2@kepler.unh.edu or puck@unh.edu)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 09 Apr 93 14:46:39 -0400
From: ""Robert C. Santore"" <rsantore@mailbox.syr.edu>
Subject: RE: Request for decoction mashing help....
In HBD 1116 Stuart Galt asks:
> Sorry about posting this to the whole world, but... with all the recent talk
> about decoction mashing, I am a bit interested in giving it a try.
> a) What books/article/whatever should I read to figure out how it is done?
> b) Is there anyone in the Seattle area that is willing to come over and
> help/show/whatever brew a batch. I seem to be entering my busy season
> with an up coming wedding and the picnic season aproaching :-)
I like Noonan's book - Brewing Lager Beer. I re-read it all the time.
Also, FWIW, decoction mashing is easy! Easier, I think, than a temp.
controlled mash. Much less to worry about. It is my favorite mash.
Enjoy!
Bob Santore
rsantore@mailbox.syr.edu
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 09 Apr 93 15:05:26 -0400
From: ""Robert C. Santore"" <rsantore@mailbox.syr.edu>
Subject: RE: Help, I boiled away the hops.
In HBD 1116 Markham R. Elliot writes:
> My beers have dramatically improved since that first fateful batch. Reduced,
> then eliminated the use of sugar. Then came the use of a secondary fermente
> Then the use of DME, and finally the failed attempt at using DME as a primin
> agent. Longer boils...longer boils...longer boils. No one reminded me that
> when using a hopped extract, the longer you boil, the more you remove what t
> hops were put in there for. No one to blame but myself, should have seen it
> coming. Knew better. Dealt with essential oils in Organic Chemistry those
> many years ago. Faithfully read the HBD daily, and see cautions about not
> boiling away the "hop nose", etc, etc.
> Now the plea for help.
> Should have guessed why everyone said "not bad, but not bitter enough". Now
> that I've screwed up another batch (now 3 days in the primary), is there a w
> to salvage what I'm sure will be another "bland", hop-lacking brew? The fla
> of the past few batches has been ok; rich, sort of sweet, but kinda watery a
> again, missing a lot of what the hops were there for to begin with.
Mark, In my opinion most hopped extracts are way underhopped. You didn't
give us a recipe to work with but I suspect that if you are relying on the
extract to give you your hops, that could be your problem.
I would recommend using unhopped extract and adding your own hops.
There are many advantages: it is more fun, you become more familiar with
recipe formulation (after all, you may want to brew all grain some day),
and your flavor will drastically improve. You also have much more freedom
to brew what you want.
If you use your own hops, remember - you cannot boil away bitterness!
A vigorous 1-hour boil is just what you need to extract bitterness from hops.
You will lose some of the more volatile flavor components but thats ok
because you can add hops near the end of the boil to give you flavor and
aroma. The amount to add and when to add it really depends on the style
you're after. Find a homebrewer with a beer you like and get the recipe!
Then stick to it (just once anyway).
As far as the batch you have in the carboy, I know that hop extracts
are available. Some are for bitterness, some for aroma. I've never used
them. Ask your supplier and make sure you get the right kind (or both?).
Good luck!
Bob Santore
rsantore@mailbox.syr.edu
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 93 12:33:10 PDT
From: troy@scubed.scubed.com (Troy Howard)
Subject: Help, I boiled away the hops
Markham R. Elliott writes:
>My beers have dramatically improved since that first fateful batch. Reduced,
>then eliminated the use of sugar. Then came the use of a secondary fermenter.
>Then the use of DME, and finally the failed attempt at using DME as a priming
>agent. Longer boils...longer boils...longer boils. No one reminded me that
>when using a hopped extract, the longer you boil, the more you remove what the
>hops were put in there for. No one to blame but myself, should have seen it
>coming. Knew better. Dealt with essential oils in Organic Chemistry those
>many years ago. Faithfully read the HBD daily, and see cautions about not
>boiling away the "hop nose", etc, etc.
>
>Now the plea for help.
>
>Should have guessed why everyone said "not bad, but not bitter enough". Now
>that I've screwed up another batch (now 3 days in the primary), is there a way
>to salvage what I'm sure will be another "bland", hop-lacking brew? The flavor
>of the past few batches has been ok; rich, sort of sweet, but kinda watery and
>again, missing a lot of what the hops were there for to begin with.
>
>I have read with increasing interest over the past couple of weeks about "dry
>hopping" in the secondary. Would me adding some high alpha hop pellets to the
>secondary be worth the try to put back in what I boiled away ? Any other
>suggestions (other than throwing it out) will be welcome. BTW, no more hopped
>kits for this kid, gonna take another step toward what many seem to feel is the
>only way to brew.
OK, I'll give this one a try. I am not sure I am right, so if any of you
out there know better, please feel free to gently correct me.
Hop essence and hop bittering are two very different things.
You are certainly right that boiling for any significant period will almost
completly elimate hop aroma. However, my understanding is (and this is the
part I am not really sure about) that the alpha and beta acids which are
responsible for hop bitterness are not really all that volatile. So they
should not easily boil away.
Also, as I understand it, hopped extracts don't really have that much
hop aroma to begin with.
If I understand you correctly, you did not add any hops to the boil, and just
relied on the hopped extract.
So my suggestions depend on what you want:
1. If you want more bitterness, try boiling some hop pellets for 30 minutes
in a ~pint of watter, and add this to your secondary. [I have never tried this.
It seems like it should work. Any one know any better?]
2. If you want more hop aroma, try dry hopping in the secondary.
3. If you want both, try 1 AND 2.
In the future, add your own hops. It's as easy as falling down, and it opens
up a whole new dimension to your brews.
Troy
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 93 12:45 PDT
From: /O=vmspfhou/S=dblewis/DD.SITE=JSCPROFS/@NASAmail.nasa.gov
Subject: Bucket Sealer
***************************** PROFS Note *****************************
From: DBLEWIS --VMSPFHOU Date and time 04/09/93 14:45:54
To: POSTMAN --NASAMAIL
FROM: Dennis B. Lewis <InterNet:dblewis@jscprofs.nasa.gov>
SUBJECT: Bucket Sealer
I recently acquired a couple of 20 liter plastic buckets. The bucket and the
lid are both made from HDPE (which is food grade). The bucket is white and the
lid is deep red. They used to contain laundry detergent. So far I've only used
the buckets to soak-sterilize bottles. I would like to use them to ferment
because if I put 19 liters (5 gal) in them the kraeusen will push the goop to
the top of the bucket and stick it to the lid (Budweiser does this with their
fermenters; it eliminates the need for a blow off hose, although I'll have to
change the airlock a couple times.) I have a couple of questions regarding
these buckets:
1.) Is there any hazard associated with detergent that may have seeped into
the bucket walls? They have been cleaned, soaked in bleach water and in hot
tap water (160F). The buckets no longer have any perfumy smell whatsoever.
2.) The lid does not seal well. Is there any food grade cheap sealant that I
could use to caulk up the lid? How about some sort of gasket? Regular lids
from other buckets don't fit.
Dennis B. Lewis (713) 483-9145 ** NASA/JSC/DH65 Payload Ops
Homebrew, The Final Frontier.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 93 15:12 CDT
From: korz@iepubj.att.com
Subject: Re: I boiled away my hops
Mark writes:
>My beers have dramatically improved since that first fateful batch. Reduced,
>then eliminated the use of sugar. Then came the use of a secondary fermenter.
>Then the use of DME, and finally the failed attempt at using DME as a priming
>agent. Longer boils...longer boils...longer boils. No one reminded me that
>when using a hopped extract, the longer you boil, the more you remove what the
>hops were put in there for.
It's true that boiling boils-away hop aromatics, thereby removing hop
bouquet and flavor, but boiling does not boil-away hop bitterness. What
I think your problem may be is that you added some DME to an already
underhopped kit but did not add some hops to make up for the increased
malt. The Extract Special Issue of Zymurgy has a useful, albeit somewhat
outdated, table of commercial malt extracts which gives, among other things,
Homebrew Bittering Units (HBU) per can and HBU per pound for the hopped
extracts. I've switched over to IBUs long ago since they are much more
universal, especially given that not everyone does full boils (using IBUs
and Jackie Rager's formulas from the Hops Special Issue of Zymurgy, you
can compensate for partial boils and get consistent bittering).
>Should have guessed why everyone said "not bad, but not bitter enough". Now
>that I've screwed up another batch (now 3 days in the primary), is there a way
>to salvage what I'm sure will be another "bland", hop-lacking brew? The flavor
>of the past few batches has been ok; rich, sort of sweet, but kinda watery and
>again, missing a lot of what the hops were there for to begin with.
>
>I have read with increasing interest over the past couple of weeks about "dry
>hopping" in the secondary. Would me adding some high alpha hop pellets to the
>secondary be worth the try to put back in what I boiled away ? Any other
>suggestions (other than throwing it out) will be welcome. BTW, no more hopped
>kits for this kid, gonna take another step toward what many seem to feel is the
>only way to brew.
It's okay to use hopped extracts, as long as you use quality brands and know
how many IBUs have been added (in converting from HBUs to IBUs, 25% utilization
is often what's used). To save this batch, what you can do is to buy some
isomerized hop oil and add that at bottling time. Another alternative, is
to make a hop "tea" by boiling some hops in water for an hour (and while
you're at it, you can add flavor hops 15 minutes before the end of the boil
and finishing hops 5 minutes before the end of the boil), strain out the
hops and add this "tea" to your batch at bottling. Try to minimize splashing
so you don't oxidize the hop oils. Get the Hops Special Issue of Zymurgy
to figure out how much hops to boil up in the "tea" for whatever IBU level
you want your "tea" to have -- use 5 gallons for volume, since that's what
it's going into, even though it's not what your "tea" boil volume was.
***********************
Subject: Re: decoction mashing
Stuart writes:
>with all the recent talk
>about decoction mashing, I am a bit interested in giving it a try.
>
>a) What books/article/whatever should I read to figure out how it is done?
Greg Noonan's book, Brewing Lager Beer, is probably the best modern
discussion of the decoction mashing method that I know of. Greg also
has an article in the All-grain Special Issue of Zymurgy, which has a
condensed version of the decoction process -- I don't recall if it was
enough info to actually do a mash.
DON'T PANIC!
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 93 13:37:20 PDT
From: Darren Hanson <Darren.Hanson@f271.n103.z1.fidonet.org>
Subject: Favorites
Reply-To: darren@ofa123.fidonet.org
A couple questions for everyone. Reply in e-mail (note the Reply-To
address please!) and I'll post the results in a couple of weeks.
1) What is your favorite type of fermented beverage?
a) Ale
b) Bock
c) Lagger
d) Weissen
e) Steam Beer
f) Mead (including melomels, et al)
g) Hard Cider
h) Wine (grape based)
i) Wine (non-grape based, Strawberry Wine for example)
j) Other (please specify)
2) What are your three favorite draft beverages? (alcoholic)
3) What are your three favorite beverages in bottles or cans? (alcoholic)
4) What question did I leave out that I should have included?
5) May I use your name in relation to this questionaire?
6) Would you be willing to respond to a more in depth questionaire
to be sent in e-mail in about a month?
__ __
\/ Darren Hanson \/
Prefered Return Path: darren@ofa123.fidonet.org
@ofa123.fidonet.org
- --
Darren Hanson
Internet: Darren.Hanson@f271.n103.z1.Fidonet.org
Compuserve: >internet:Darren.Hanson@f271.n103.z1.Fidonet.org
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 93 22:42 CDT
From: arf@genesis.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: CO2
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 93 13:54 CDT
From: korz@iepubj.att.com
> Regarding the high-pressure side gauge, I'll stick my neck out and
say I think it's useless. It won't begin to drop till all the liquid
CO2 has run out and has turned to gas. Then it will drop to zero in one
or two days. That's not my idea of warning you that it's about to run out!
That confirms my suspicions. I inherited an antique single gage regulator
from my father who used CO2 for his airbrush in his art studio. He's long
gone and it has a lot of sentimental value but I always wondered what I was
missing. When I moved into this house, strangely enough, there was another
one in a drawer in the basement just like my father's. I put that on my 2.5
lb cylinder for traveling.
>I plan to weigh my tank the next time it runs out and use it's weight
as an approximation for when I should go get it refilled. It should weigh,
well... 20# more when full (for a "20#" tank).
I did that for the last two tanks and it leaves little doubt. If you look
carefully, you will find the tare (empty) weight of the cylinder stamped on
it somewhere. So if you forget to weigh it empty, all is not lost. This is
important for those of us who just swap tanks instead of waiting around for
refilling.
It is also a good idea just to be able to keep the gas man honest.
The last time I swapped tanks, it seemed a bit light and when I got home it
weighed in at 39 lbs. The tank weighs 31 lbs so I got 8 lbs of gas instead
of 20. He cheerfully gave me a different one but it was a pain never the
less.
The final count on the previous tank was 40, 5 gal kegs carbonated and
dispensed along with a lot of miscelaneous squiriting around.
js
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 1993 10:03:07 -1100
From: Kirk_Anderson@wheatonma.edu (Kirk Anderson)
Subject: hops growing
I received my rhizomes and my Zymurgy special hops issue yesterday.
Mr. Rajotte's article on growing is fine but does not give me enough
information. Like first of all, I understand about needing a trellis and
so on, but what do I do with these things to start?
Do they go in the ground vertically? What kind of ground? How deep? etc.
I've seen various postings on specific aspects of hop
growing in the HBD over the past couple months, but could some one
point me toward a more step-by-step treatment of the subject?
Thanks for helping.
********************************
Kirk Anderson, Dept. of French
Wheaton College, Norton MA 02766 <Kirk_Anderson@Wheatonma.edu>
*************************
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 93 8:25:50 PDT
From: Martin McMenamin <mcm@orac.holonet.net>
Subject: mailing list
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 93 13:52 CDT
From: arf@genesis.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: HOP ALPHA ACID
A Proposed Method for Determining Hop Alpha Acid Content
The following methodology is based on empirical measurement
and experiments. It may be seriously flawed but as the end
results seem to achieve the goal desired, it is worth
further experiments by anyone who cares to replicate the
results.
My pH meter arrived late last week and I must confess that I
spent most of the time since then playing with it. Although
I suspect it will not have much impact on my beer, I bought
it mainly to learn whether pH could be used to determine
Alpha Acid content of hops.
The instrument I purchased is made by Oakton and is the pH
Tester 2. Claimed accuracy and resolution is .1 pH unit.
After calibrating the unit with pH 7 and pH 4 buffer
solutions, I proceeded to test just about everything in the
house. The biggest surprise was to learn that tea, as we
drink it, has a pH of 6.9. I always thought that the
astringency of tea was a result of tanic acid. I also found
that to test tap water accurately takes about 9 minutes to
reach a stable value. Boiled tap water reaches stability
within a few seconds. I presume it has something to do with
dissolved gas.
My hypothesis on hops Alpha Acid was that a high AA hop
should produce a tea with a lower pH than a low AA hop under
controlled conditions.
To test the hypothesis I proceeded as follows:
Tea #1 3 grs Chinook (AA 12%) in 250 ml water.
Tea #2 3 grs Saaz (AA 2.9%) in 250 ml water.
The teas were brought to a boil for 5 minutes and poured
through coffee filters.
The quantity of 3 grs was selected because that is 1/10 the
amount of Chinook I normally use to hop a 7 gallon batch and
it would make the math easier later on.
After cooling the teas to room temperature, the following pH
measurements were obtained:
Tea #1 Chinook pH 6.2
Tea #2 Saaz pH 6.6
The delta is .4 pH which I believe works out to a factor of
4 in the real world and nicely matches the delta of the AA
in the hops.
Although, measuring at different times sometimes provided
different numbers, the spread was always the same and I
attributed the problem to lack of understanding of how to
use the instrument.
The only significant anomaly was that on the third day, the
pH of both teas dropped to 5.7. They had been left
uncovered throughout the period but something significant
happened overnight of the third day.
In conclusion, if the results are the product of Alpha Acid
in the hops then it should be possible to work out formulae
to determine the approximate AA of hops or at least
determine how much of an unknown hop is required to achieve
the same pH of a known hop.
js
------------------------------
Date: 9 Apr 93 24:31:00 PST
From: John Fitzgerald <johnf@ccgate.SanDiegoCA.NCR.COM>
Subject: Boulevard Brewing Co.
While on a recent trip through the mid-west, I picked up some micro
brews (I assume) made by the Boulevard Brewing Co. in Kansas City,MO.
I carried back some Bully Porter, and some Irish Red ale. Both of
these beers seem to have a metallic after-taste, very noticeable in
the Irish, less so in the Bully, because of the extra malt/hops flavor.
What I am wondering is if any locals, or anybody else who has tried
these beers has tasted something similar. Rather than criticizing their
beers, I am trying to educate my taste buds. Is this taste from high
metal ion concentrations as Miller suggests? Or is this what phenolic
tastes like, perhaps from high chlorine content of the water? Or maybe
the beer was stale - the label suggested drinking by April, so maybe
I was catching the beer at the end of it's preferred life cycle. The
two were tasted at room temp (Probably in the mid 60's F). If anybody
has any input, I'd love to hear it.
John.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 93 9:19:59 EDT
From: rjsmith@iron.afsac.wpafb.af.mil (Randy Smith)
Subject: Change of e-mail address
My e-mail address has changed to:
rjsmith@iron.afsac.wpafb.af.mil
The old address will continue to be recognized for another 6 months or so.
- --Randy--
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Randy J. Smith DoD #2022 '93 CBR900RR
C.E.T.A. Corporation rjsmith@iron.afsac.wpafb.af.mil
"Most of our so-called reasoning consists in finding arguments
for going on believing as we already do."
- James Harvey Robinson
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 93 13:33:42 CDT
From: Carl Eidbo <milo!eidbo@plains.NoDak.edu>
Subject: Dry Hopping
I have seen a lot of converstion about dry hopping lately. I have tried
dry hopping a number of times, with limited results. I have tried
enough that I do feel qualified to shoot my mouth off a bit. (I have
only worked with pellets).
1. Several people have reported "gushing" upon the first addition
of pellets. I have reduced and reduced the amount of pellets
I add, to try and reduce the amount of gushing. The last
amount I tried was one pellet about 1/8" long. The beer still
gushed, although not quite as violently. I added the rest of
the hops about a day later, with no gushing.
The beer was at about 68F, and virtually done fermenting.
Apparently, there are several factors involved:
A. The slow release of CO2 by the yeast has caused the cool
beer to become super-saturated with CO2.
B. The hops particles are nucleation sites for CO2 release.
C. The hop oils support head (foam) retention.
D. The "shock" of the initial CO2 release triggers a much
larger release from the super-saturated fluid.
2. I have frequently seen a re-start in fermentation a few days
after the addition of the dry-hops. Several others have also
reported this effect to me. It is easily observable by
charting the "seconds per bubble" count of the airlock.
Usually, a nice foamy head rises for a couple of days.
Normally, there are no off-flavors associated with this renewed
fermentation, but I have detected contamination flavors if
the dry hopping was performed when the gravity is too high.
I also pitched from a dry hopped batch, and the resulting
beer was badly contaminated.
Why? I don't know.
3. I have occasionally tasted a very bitter component after dry
hopping. My feeling is that these are hop particles that have
not settled out yet. Usually this "rough" flavor disappears
in time.
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl Eidbo Prairie Homebrewing Companions Fargo, ND
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 93 15:26 CDT
From: akcs.chrisc@vpnet.chi.il.us (chris campanelli)
Subject: My Belgian rock collection
I have taken up rock collecting. And not just any rocks either.
I collect only the finest. I collect Belgian rocks.
Oh sure. I know what you're thinking. The answer is no. I'm
not on drugs. And yes, I still think that rock collecting in
general is still up there with bird watching, golfing and other
ectomorphic endeavors.
It's all come about innocently enough. I'm an avid user of
Belgian malts. On top of that I don't buy it in no stinkin'
five-pound bags neither. Only bulk flips my skirt up. If
there's no risk of a hernia, why bother?
Mixed in with the malt is a strange collection of unidentified
malted objects. Most are easy to figure out. A tangled clump of
barley rootlets, an odd twig or a mangled piece of wire. But
every now and then I'll find a rock. And while all of the
objects warrant inspection, to me the rocks are keepers.
To date my collection numbers four. They all appear to be
similar in appearance. All are bluish-grey, flat and layered.
It's hard to tell whether they've been malted. I'd like to think
that they have as I don't know of anyone who collects malted
rocks. At least the authoritative source on the achievements of
western civilization, The Guiness World Book of Records, doesn't
seem to have a category for it.
I look at the rock and try to imagine it's voyage. I try to
picture where the rock came from and how it got mixed in with the
malt. Where was the farm located? The malting company? What
does the local terrain look like and how close is it to the
coast? Considering the region's history, has this rock ever been
tread on by a Roman sandal or the track of an armored vehicle?
Only the imagination can provide such answers.
When I go under I'll probably donate my collection to the
Smithsonian. After all, when you consider what the Hursts,
Rockefellers, and Carnegies of the world have donated, a Belgian
Malted Rock Collection is far more interesting than a bunch of
stupid paintings any old day. At least I think so.
chris campanelli
------------------------------
Date: 12 Apr 93 06:58:00 EST
From: "PAUL EDWARDS" <8260PE@indy.navy.mil>
Subject: proposed beer tax increase
I've just seen a memo from the Small Brewers Coalition which contained
the following information:
Senator Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) has introduced Senate Bill 684, titled
"National Health Care Act of 1993", which proposes to raise the excise
tax on beer a whopping 450 percent, as follows:
Large brewers: currently $18.00/barrel, proposed $81.00/barrel
small brewers: currently $ 7.00/barrel, proposed $31.50/barrel
Increases in taxes for distilled spirits and wine are 215 percent and
20-30 percent, respectively.
Apparently, Sen. Inouye has it in his mind that beer is the root of
all health problems in the US!
Based on what I've seen of production figures for the last year or two,
A-B's taxes alone will go from about $1.5 billion to $6.5 billion.
Micro's would have to raise their prices to the point that some may not
survive.
If you feel as I do, write or call your senators and representatives and
let them know. Taxes are one thing, highway robbery is an entirely
different matter.
-- Paul Edwards
PS - If the bill passes, be *real* glad you know how to brew your own.
It may be the only way to afford a beer.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1993 08:10:26 -0400
From: Michael D. Galloway <mgx@ornl.gov>
Subject: alternative forum
> First of all, whatever happened to Kinney? I still see his ads but he has
> not posted here for months. I am sure it is just a coincidence but it seems
> that he vanished about the time Jay Hirsh started his censored, politically
> cleansed, alternative forum.
I musta been asleep or brain dead, what alternative forum are we talking
about here?
Michael D. Galloway
mgx@ornl.gov
Living in the WasteLand
------------------------------
Date: 12 Apr 93 03:23:37 EST
From: "Anderso_A" <Anderso_A%55W3.CCBRIDGE.SEAE.mrouter@seaa.navsea.navy.mil>
Subject: Fermenting Apple Cider & Filtering Cold Break
The following attachments were included with this message:
__________________________________________________________________
TYPE : FILE
NAME : ANDY
__________________________________________________________________
Greetings,
I had a friend over last night to help me with a Steam
beer I was making. He had with him a gallon bottle of apple
juice he had picked up for his son. He decided to
experiment with the apple juice by re-hydrating an extra
packet of dry yeast I gave him, pitching it into the apple
juice bottle, and putting a cork with an airlock on top.
This morning I got up and it's bubbling vigorously (I wish
my beers fermented that quickly!).
My questions:
1. Does anyone know how this "cider" will turn out?
2. I never measured OG, so does anyone know how much alcohol
should be created?
3. It may be too late, but is there anything that can be
done now to make this concoction more palatable?
With regard to the beer I made last night, I have a
question. After the boil was over, I chilled the wort down to
about 70 degrees and strained it into my carboy. I let it sit
for about a half hour and watched as the cold break gently
settled down to the bottom 1/4 of the carboy. I then poured
the carboy's contents through 2 separate funnels with
strainers into another carboy. I was attempting to filter
out the cold-break. Apparently, it is too fine to be
trapped by the normal stainers which come with a brew shop's
funnel. Almost all the cold-break passed through both
filters into my second carboy. My question is, aside from
siphoning off the clear wort from the cold-break sediment,
is there any practical way to filter out the cold-break? If
a finer filter is the answer, then how fine should it be and
where do I procure one? (And yes, I realize that by all
this filtering between carboys I am increasing my risk of
contaminating my newborn beer!)
Thanks,
Andy A
Bitch's Brewery
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 93 06:23:36 PDT
From: brew it 12-Apr-1993 0923 -0400 <ferguson@zendia.enet.dec.com>
Subject: more comments on bottles / European system
I also agree that genuine bar bottles are the best for bottling. I've heard
horror stories of Sam Adams (tm) bottles breaking during the capping phase
after so many uses, although, I personally have not had this problem yet!
Has anyone seen this yet?
Bar bottles are noticibly heavier then standard returnable bottles, such as
Sad Adams(tm); the glass is much thicker, and hence, more durable.
Another bottle type I like is the 16oz standard european bottle. these are
pretty heavy, and, then have 4oz more capacity then the bar bottle types
widely used in the states.
When I was in Austria this past fall, we went on
a tour of the Zipfer Brewery. It was completely in german, hence, I did not
understand much, but I could guide myself through the tour with my nose! At
any rate, they've really got their s%t down in Europe. Most of the brew
sold in bottles there comes in a standard 16oz bottle (I think it is 16oz?!).
So, on the bottle input side of the bottling room at the Zipfer brewery,
you'll see returned bottles in standard returnable crates (much like milk
crates) from all sorts of breweries. They all use the _same_ standard bottle,
they make it easy to return them to just about anyone, and just about any
brewery can fill the bottles. Green ones, brown ones, etc. Being an
environmentally concious person, I _really_ liked what I saw. The US of A
is so caught up in making $$$ as quickly as possible that we'll probably
never see anything like that...
JC Ferguson
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 93 08:38:30 -0600
From: John Adams <j_adams@hpfcjca.sde.hp.com>
Subject: Coriolis force/Givin' carboys a swirly
Ed Hitchcock writes:
> To this I can but say: Horse poop. The coriolois force on the
> liquid in a carboy 30cm or so in diameter is virtually nil. Swirl it any
> way you please, there will be no difference. The friction of the side of
> the jug is far greater than any coriolis effects on the water. As for the
> pigs, they can poop too.
Interesting hypothesis but I doubt you've have ACTUALLY testing it (the
coriolis effects on the water that is). I have and I can say that getting
the water swirling in EITHER a 5 gallon glass carboy or a 12 oz. bottle will
indeed get the liquid to drain faster. I have been using this trick for quite
some time but I'm sorry I didn't try to prove it on paper first.
While I will not comment on the actual forces involved (we all really known
there is not true coriolis 'force') or their magnitudes, the technique does
indeed work.
Dennis B. Lewis writes:
> OK, I haven't tried this but, I assume that when you start swirling the water
> in the carboy, that the carboy is already inverted (and over the sink/lawn).
> If you get up a good swirl and then try to invert the carboy, you would really
> goof up your swirl when the carboy gets horizontal. Plus the rotational
> inertia of 3+ gallons of water spinning fast enough to hug the sides would be
> impressive when you tried to flip it around.I think it just needed to be said.
Yes, start dumping the water and then begin to swirl it about. As soon as
the water starts to clear out of the mouth (and air can be drawn up) the
carboy will quickly drain. You do not need to continue to swirl the carboy
after the water starts draining quickly.
Believe me the inertia is NOTHING to be concerned about in comparision to a
gripping a wet, glass carboy containing somewhere between 16 and 32 pounds
of water.
John Adams
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 93 09:31:10 -0600
From: Kelly Jones <k-jones@ee.utah.edu>
Subject: Re: Chiller Study
I'd love to see someone perform this study, although one could
probably get equally valid results by running a simulation, with less
time/material expended. However, as I indicated in my last post on
this subject, there are _two_ important heat transfer coefficients at
work here: one inside the tube, and one outside the tube. It would
make little sense to accurately quantify conditions inside the tube in
terms of ID, flow rate, etc. and then simply characterize conditions
outside the tube as "stirred" or "unstirred". One should include
parameters such as chiller diameter, spacing between coils, diameter
of pot, height of coil, velocity of stirring, etc., etc. A compounding
problem is that the inside convective heat transfer coefficient is
highly dependent upon the "scale factor": a new, shiny tube will
conduct much better than an old, crusty one... Not a simple problem
at all, unfortunately.
PS: gak writes:
>Got this from the sci.physics FAQ...
>Summary: the Coriolis force is real, but irrelevant at the bathtub
(or carboy) scale.
(followed by technical explanation of fluid dynamics involved in the
coriolis effect)
Hey gak, could you get the guys at sci.physics to tell us how long to
make our chiller coils?
Kelly
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 93 08:12 PDT
From: /O=vmspfhou/S=dblewis/DD.SITE=JSCPROFS/@NASAmail.nasa.gov
Subject: Yeast pitching rates
***************************** PROFS Note *****************************
From: DBLEWIS --VMSPFHOU Date and time 04/12/93 10:12:54
To: POSTMAN --NASAMAIL
FROM: Dennis B. Lewis <InterNet:dblewis@jscprofs.nasa.gov>
SUBJECT: Yeast pitching rates
I have a question about how the yeast pitching rates affect the flavor/quality
of the finished beer. I have been guilty of dumping in a puffed up pack of
yeast directly into the fermenter. But lately, I've been brewing by racking
cooled wort onto sediment from the primary of a previous batch. The results
are like night and day. The resulting explosive fermentation is very
satisfying to watch and commences withing a few hours :-).
Anyway, here's to point: when I pitch the small packet of yeast into the wort,
it makes copies of itself until it hits the terminal concentration (50 M
cells/ml(?)), THEN it goes into the fermentation cycle. If you pitch about the
teminal concentration, then there is very little reproduction and all
fermentation. It seems to me that this method would leave a lot of proteins in
the beer because they weren't used to make other yeast and more alcohol for
the same reason. Is the taste noticable? Do the extra proteins increase head
retention/taste? I haven't had enough experience doing this to tell the
difference.
One other point: one common thread I've noticed regarding yeast culturing is
how many generations the yeast are good for. Since I'm only using one
generation(?!?) for a couple batches... (N.B. I remove most of the trub so I
don't think there is much of a problem with accumulated crud on the bottom of
the fermenter.)
I may be nuts. If so the phaser me directly and save the bandwidth for more
important things like Coriolis force physics lessons.
Dennis B. Lewis (713) 483-9145 ** NASA/JSC/DH65 Payload Ops
Homebrew, The Final Frontier.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 93 12:01:31 EDT
From: eisen@kopf.HQ.Ileaf.COM (Carl West)
Subject: Immersion Chiller Efficiency
There seems to be a confusion in this discussion of IC efficiency
between time, water, copper, and dollar efficiency.
To Improve Time Efficiency:
A larger, colder surface will cool the wort faster than a smaller,
warmer one. Use as long a chiller as you can manage, and run lots of
really cold water through it. The cooler the water exiting the chiller
the faster the wort will be cooled. When cool water is exiting it
indicates that there is an appreciable temperature differential between
the cooling water and the wort for the entire length of the chiller
tubing, therefor more heat energy is being extracted from the wort than
if the exit water were warm or hot. Simply put: The more cold water you
run through the chiller the cooler your wort will get, the faster you
do it, the faster it will get cool. Especially if you stir the wort.
Use the chiller to stir with.
To Improve Water Efficiency:
This is a whole other question, one best answered by a
thermodynamacist, which I'm not, but I'll take a shot at a simple answer
anyway. Regulate the flow so that the output of the chiller is at the
temperature you want the wort to be. This will take longer.
Theoretically, I guess it would take forever because you would always
be _approaching_ the target temperature, but the flow would become
infinitesimal in an hour or two and you could get on with your brewing.
I don't think the length of the chiller matters in this case.
To Improve Copper Efficiency:
Make the chiller very short. It will take a _long _ time to cool the wort
by either method but you won't be using much copper to do it.
To Improve Dollar Efficiency:
Borrow someone else's chiller.
The Real Question:
What's important to you?
Carl
"In practice the difference between Theory and Practice
is greater than it is in theory."
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1118, 04/13/93
*************************************
-------
