Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1115
This file received at Sierra.Stanford.EDU 93/04/08 00:14:54
HOMEBREW Digest #1115 Thu 08 April 1993
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator
Contents:
Warp-speed Fermentation (?) (XLPSJGN)
Yeast, Kegging (Jack Schmidling)
Is anyone else interested in meeting this guy (Geoff Reeves)
contamination (ADCMR)
OOPS (Geoff Reeves)
Yeast Starters (Tom Leith MIR/ERL 362-6965)
Roller Mill, Rev. 1 (Norm Pyle)
Favorite Brew Pub or Tavern (S_TUTTLE)
Dry Hopping (Peter Maxwell)
Re: silly question on kegging (Paul Jasper)
Re: why blowoff?/Goose deliveries/Length of chiller/dryhopping (korz)
Thanks ...and more... (YC06000)
Rehydrating dry yeast? (Richard Kasperowski)
Immersion Chiller Length (Tom Leith MIR/ERL 362-6965)
dry hopping/fermentation in secondary ("Knight,Jonathan G")
Re:immersion cooler length (Sherman Gregory)
How to begin brewing? (U033000)
Immersion cooler design (Paul dArmond)
Grain during fermentation? (LYONS)
Corrections on Samichlaus (Richard Akerboom)
historical, part 1. (THOMASR)
Dry Hop Sediment (Peter Bartscherer)
vortex drain strength, and coriolis acceleration (Karl A. Sweitzer)
decoction (Ed Hitchcock)
Decoction Mashing (Jack Schmidling)
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: Tue, 06 Apr 93 11:28 CDT
From: XLPSJGN%LUCCPUA.BITNET@UICVM.UIC.EDU
Subject: Warp-speed Fermentation (?)
Dear Brewers,
Last Friday night, I brewed up a 5-gal. batch of ale with the following
ingrediants:
6.6 # M&F Light Malt extract syrup (unhopped)
1# crystal malt
1 oz. cascade for boil
1/2 oz Northern Brewer for finish
1/2 oz Northern Brewer for aroma
Wyeast liquid British Ale yeast, made with a starter last Wed.
I followed a typical Papezian-type method of steeping the specialty
grains before boiling the hops and extract for an hour and cooling. No
sparging, as I used pellets. Unfortunately, I neglected to get an
original gravity reading (it was quite late). However, I racked last
night to the 5-gal. carboy (I didn't use the blow-off method that
Papezian advocates), took a hydrometer reading and tasted the brew.
So here's my question: the reading was at 1.010, and the flavor and
aroma then was quite good, but it needed clarification. Is it
possible that all of the fermentables could have been fermented out
within that short of time? I'm estimating, given the ingrediants
and amount of water, that the original gravity was somewhere around
1.040 or slightly higher (?). If indeed the fermentation's finished -
rather than stuck (drag!) - is it better to let it clarify in the
carboy or the bottles?
Thanx in advance for any responses and directions. And thanks in
response to all who answered my querry about brew clubs in the Atlanta
area; my brother's brewin' just fine!
Cheers!
John
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 93 11:42 CDT
From: arf@genesis.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: Yeast, Kegging
>From: Jim Busch <busch@daacdev1.stx.com>
>There is an increased risk associated with "dipping" a loop into a slant
repeatedly. I would advise restreaking to a single cell at least
once a year. In theory it can last for years, but why risk it?
If you are already culturing yeasts, then what is the extra plate and
slant once a year to ensure clean yeast?....
I guess I am more concerned about the risk of making it sound so complicated
that people are intimidated. For the person who has never done any of this
before, the simpler the better and if he has to buy a new slant every year is
still way ahead of buying new yeast for every batch.
Turning that liquid yeast packet into ten or so slants directly would be my
choice as the way to get one's feet wet. I think I tried to get to much into
that "beginner's" article on yeast culture. The petri dish streaking can be
ignored till the easy part becomes routine.
>From: C05705DA@WUVMD.Wustl.Edu
>Subject: silly question on kegging
>Could anybody give me any insight on why NOT to carbonate a keg naturally,
like in bottling, instead of using carbonated water and all the works
needed to do kegging.
Not sure what you mean by carbonated water but the two basic reasons most of
us force carbonate are:
1. Although it improves with time, you can drink the beer
within an hour of kegging.
2. It creates no additional sediment as natural carbonadion does.
>From: "John L. Isenhour" <isenhour@lambic.fnal.gov>
>Subject: Dry Ice carbonating in keg
>I have to agree with Jim on this. You really should try this yourself and
gather some empirical data before suggesting it to people who might not know
better.
All my kegs were full at the time and I just had to lay out the idea. I got
the answer I was looking for and presume anyone who tried it would have sense
enough to use a pressure gage and keep an eye on things. However, that is
not what makes lawyer's rich and your point is well taken.
...........DISCLAIMER.............
IF YOU PUT DRY ICE IN A CLOSED KEG, SUE GOD IF IT BLOWS UP.
> I have a lot of experience with forced carbonation of water, wine,
beer and soft drinks, and if you've ever tried gassing beer up to 50psi, you'll
find that its difficult to even vent the pressure down to dispensing level
without it blowing out your venting tube.
Here we are going to disagree. You may be interested to know that I
carbonate all my beer at 50 psi.
Why?
1. My beer is always at basement temp.
2. I have found that some kegs don't seal properly at low pressure
and must be raised high enough to seal. This is actually why I quit
naturally carbonating them. It seemed to take forever till I
found out what was going on.
3. It's a lot faster.
Having said all that, the important issue is the volume of CO2 absorbed not
the pressure it is done at. One could use 500 psi if the keg would take it
and get it done real quickly. The key is knowing when to quit.
Here is the way I do it: I purge the keg several times to get all the air
out then crank the pressure up to 50 psi and start shaking. The pressure
drops in 10 lb leaps for several minutes. When it starts slowing down
significantly, I turn off the CO2 and shake it down to about 30 psi and turn
the gas back on. If it continues to flow while shaking, I continue to shake.
If not, I turn off the gas and let it sit for awhile. If it has not dropped
or I can not shake it down to dispensing pressure after an hour or so, I
bleed of the pressure to 20 psi and call it done.
For the record, I dispense through a cold plate with ice on it so my pressure
is a little higher than normal but the bottom line is, I have no problem
dispensing my beer (in fact I recently bought a Pilsner tap to create foam)
and the one thing no one has yet complained about is the carbonation level of
my beer.
>From: gummitch@techbook.com (Jeff Frane)
>Subject: That Damned Maltmill
>One real problem: the bolt holding the wooden handle on the crank seems
to be threaded in such a way that it inevitably comes unscrewed while
cranking.
All MMs are shipped with one defect just to generate hateful commentary on
the Digest to keep me humble.
Seriously, this could be done my email but as there are 700 of them out
there, you may not be the only one with this problem.
The thread on the inside of the crank is bunged up with a special tool so
that when the knob/handle is screwed in, it can only go so far before
tightening in the thread. I may have been sipping when I did yours but you
can mush up the end of the treaded hole a bit with a screwdriver and a
hammer. Just be sure to do the right/correct end (inside).
>It also looks as though I'll need to put rubber feet on my bucket, so
it doesn't slide and hop around while I'm cranking the mill.
Doing it on the bucket looks a lot easier than it is and depending on the
floor surface, it can be like wrestling with an aligator. I think most
people eventually conclude that it works best clamped to a table with the
business end hanging over the edge so the grain can fall into a bucket.
Thanks for your humor.
js
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 10:56:03 -0700
From: reeves@lanl.gov (Geoff Reeves)
Subject: Is anyone else interested in meeting this guy
>Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 17:07 EST
>From: "JOSEPH V. GERMANI" <GERMANI%NSLVAX@Venus.YCC.Yale.Edu>
>Subject: Re: Homebrewing in Los Alamos
>To: reeves@lanl.GOV
>
>Geoff,
> Well, as I warned you before, I am coming to Los Alamos for a job
>interview. You mentioned that you might like to get together for a few beers.
>
>I will be in Los Alamos on Tuesday (the 6th). My potential employers will be
>taking me to dinner at around 6:30, and I'm not sure when I would be free. I
>am
>guessing that sometime around 8 or 9 pm they will get sick of talking to me.
>If
>you, or any other Atom Mashers, would be interested in meeting up with me, let
>me know. I figure that the best thing might be to give me your home number if
>you're interested and I could give you a call when I am free. Otherwise, I
>will
>be in town for half of Wednesday, so if Tuesday night falls through we might
>be
>able to meet for lunch. Just let me know what is most convenient.
>
>
> Joe
>
>
Hi Folks,
I got e-mail from a homebrewer coming here for an interview. I said
that if things worked out I'd get together with him tonight. Is anyone else
interested in joining us? If so give me a call (5-3877) or e-mail and I'll
let you know when I know more. All I know now is what is above.
Geoff
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Geoff Reeves: Space Science Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory |
| reeves@lanl.gov (internet) or essdp2::reeves (span) |
| Phone (505) 665-3877 |
| Fax (505) 665-4414 |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| A brewery is like a toothbrush. Everyone should have their own. |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
------------------------------
Date: Tuesday, 6 April 93 12:02:53 CST
From: ADCMR@utxdp.dp.utexas.edu
Subject: contamination
hello,
I am a relatively novice homebrewer (about a year) and I have just recently
noticed some trouble with an extract/speciatly grain beer. I used crystal
malt (1/2 lb) biscuit malt (1/2 lb) and Alexander's pale ale (6? lbs.). The
problem: the beer sat fermented in the primary until the fermentation was
nearly done (i.e. more than 90 seconds between bubbles). I racked(?) to the
secondary and everything looked fine for about a day. Yesterday I noticed
that the secondary was bubbling about once every 45 seconds. There is also
a light foam forming on top of the beer -- basically a thin airy head. The
gas escaping from the lock doesn't smell like the usual gas so I am suspicious.
Does it sound like I have a contaminant yeast. If so is there anything I
can do? I thank everyone in advance. My address is ADCMR@UTXDP.DP.UTEXAS.EDU
Caleb
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 11:08:50 -0700
From: reeves@lanl.gov (Geoff Reeves)
Subject: OOPS
Sorry for the last message which was supposed to go to our homebrew club,
not to the homebrew digest.
Geoff
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 12:10:53 -0500
From: trl@photos.wustl.edu (Tom Leith MIR/ERL 362-6965)
Subject: Yeast Starters
Since I was out of DME, and I wanted to can a few pints of yeast-starter wort,
I decided to try the following...
After I had collected enough wort for my boil, I started collecting some into a
seperate pan for making starter. I got around 6 quarts, at 1010. To this I
added two cups of my "main" wort, which brought it up to 1013 or so. Then I
boiled it down (with a bit `o hop and 1 tsp of Fermax) to 1020. Then I canned
it as normal. No DME required. It looks a bit darker than I'd hoped, but hey,
its only a pint...
t
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 93 09:33:00 MDT
From: pyle@intellistor.com (Norm Pyle)
Subject: Roller Mill, Rev. 1
Well, I've done it. OK, OK, my father-in-law has done it, but he's done it
to my specifications. My roller mill, rev. 1 is complete and working. This
thing is a dandy. It is motorized, with a 1/3 horse washing machine motor,
and uses four pulleys to gear down the speed. The rollers are reworked iron
pipe (3.5 inch diameter, I believe). It is sort of a scaled-down version of
the one presented by RW and (??) in the latest Zymurgy gadgets special issue.
He is a tinkerer from way back, but the only special tools used were a welder
and a table-mounted belt sander. The total cost of supplies was around $75.
I will give more info if there is interest, but I'm very busy right now and
if I have to choose between brewing a batch of beer and writing a legible
report on this mill, well, you can guess what'll happen. I can say without a
doubt that the price of Jack's mill is very reasonable, considering the labor
put into this one. I expect the two mills to produce roughly similar
crushes, BTW, although I probably will never have the chance to do a direct
comparison.
Cheers,
Norm
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 13:50:46 -0400 (EDT)
From: S_TUTTLE@UNHH.UNH.EDU
Subject: Favorite Brew Pub or Tavern
I am compiling a list of favorite watering holes. I travel in the summer and
want to make a list of places to visit. If the list gets long enough I may
distribute it among the contributors.
What is your favorite brew pub, beer bar, watering hole, tavern, biker bar,
blue collar bar or just plain bar? Send me a the name, location, phone
number and a brief description of any place you think is worthy of a beer
lover. Brew pubs and establishments with a good selection of beers are a
must but bars with some other kind of quality ambiance will do also.
No fern bars please (bars with guys in white shirts and ties who drive
beemers).
If you include your name and address, I will send you a copy of the list
when I deem it to be of good length and quality.
Also, how long should I age a cherry Kriek beer made from the malt extract
that is available in the stores now? Any recipe ideas for the cherry Kriek
malt extract?
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 11:03:00 -0800 (PDT)
From: Peter Maxwell <peterm@aoraki.dtc.hp.com>
Subject: Dry Hopping
>From HBD 1113 Sherman Gregory comments on dry hopping. I dry hopped for the
first time a week ago and both observed and expected this behavior. I threw
hop pellets into the secondary before siphoning from the primary. Sure
enough a "krauesen" developed and even though I didn't fill it right up, I
still ended up with this green, hoppy froth bubbling out the neck. Next
time I'm going to fill it even less and put the remainder into another
container, to transfer into the secondary after the action subsides. I
think I'll put the hops into a hop bag also to keep them in one place. Does
this work as well as putting them in loose?
The cause seems obvious enough. There is lots of dissolved CO2 in the beer
after fermentation and the hops act as nucleation sites causing loads of gas
to be released. This gas continues to escape slowly (even without dry
hopping) and looks like fermentation but isn't.
Peter
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 11:02:51 -0700
From: paul@melody.rational.com (Paul Jasper)
Subject: Re: silly question on kegging
On 5 Apr, 11:43, C05705DA@WUVMD.Wustl.Edu wrote:
> Subject: silly question on kegging
Not a silly question at all... this is what distinguishes British Real
Ales from processed "keg" beers. The cask conditioning is what adds the
subtleties to the flavor of the beer. If you pump your beer full of
gas, you are "killing" it because this will prevent any further
fermentation taking place.
> Could anybody give me any insight on why NOT to carbonate a keg naturally,
> like in bottling, instead of using carbonated water and all the works
> needed to do kegging.
Well, it's quicker and requires less skill...
> My reasoning is simple; kegging didn't used to be
> done the way it is today. So, what are the pros and cons to throwing in
> priming sugars in a keg and cork it?
It's a bit more complicated, because you don't want the pressure to build up
too much or it will have the same effect as artificially carbonating it.
> I would appreciate any HELPFUL suggestions.
Hopefully, I am being partially HELPFUL, if a little provocative... ;^)
Interestingly, the April edition of What's Brewing, the monthly newspaper
of Britain's Campaign for Real Ale, has a two page feature on the
preliminary results of some research they have been doing into whether
brewers are cheating by minimizing the cask conditioning of their beers.
They have been measuring the drop in gravity of beer delivered to beer
festivals (and in some cases to "friendly" pubs) and also the quantity
of yeast present. They have been able to confirm that many beers are
sufficiently cask conditioned, but they can't prove when this isn't so
(due to factors such as the beer having completed its secondary
fermentation before they got their hands on it). Reading between the
lines, they are particularly suspicious of Courage (Foster's) Directors'
Bitter. However, they do conclude that the Campaign is right to place
so much emphasis on the benefits of cask conditioning in its definition
of the term "Real Ale".
>-- End of excerpt from C05705DA@WUVMD.Wustl.Edu
P.S. The same issue of What's Brewing has an article by Michael Jackson
on the topic of German double bocks, including Paulaner's Salvator,
recently the subject of some discussion on HBD.
- --
- -- Paul Jasper
- -- RATIONAL
- -- Object-Oriented Products
- --
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 93 13:17 CDT
From: korz@iepubj.att.com
Subject: Re: why blowoff?/Goose deliveries/Length of chiller/dryhopping
Gerald asks, why use the blowoff method?
It's merits have been argued in the HBD, but I believe it makes the
beer taste better, so I continue to use it. Papazian says that
the kraeusen contains fusel oils (I've seen fusel alcohols elsewhere)
which some say contribute to hangovers. The most graphic proof I have
for using the blowoff method is to challenge anyone to drink a glass
of blowoff. YUK! Just sniffing it is enough to guarantee my continued
support of this procedure.
The arguments against using the blowoff method (just to be fair) are that
you lose beer and that you lose some of the bittering you just but in
with the hops. One of the test batches that I made was severely underhopped.
It turns out in this case that the non-blowoff half tasted better than
the blowoff half albeit the bitterness was a bit harsh.
If you are going to use the blowoff method, I suggest you go and get some
1.25" tubing and just stuff it into the top of the carboy. Stick the
other end in a bucket or jug with a little water in it. Don't use
a thin tube and a one-hole stopper as it will eventually clog and really
make a mess (especially likely when fermenting with fruit -- I know
firsthand).
**************************
Kevin asks:
>Does anyone know if the AHA will accept hand delivered entries at the Goose
>Island Brewery in Chicago for the annual competition? I will be visiting my
>brother this weekend in Chicago, and he said that he would deliver my entries
>for me. This would save me the hassled of having to deal with UPS.
The AHA won't know and won't care, the only people who might would be the
organizers of the Midwestern 1st-round judging and Goose Island itself.
Last year they accepted my entries hand-delivered, so I assume they will
accept them this year too.
*************************
John writes:
>>The longer the better. Many of then are 20', some are 25', mine is a 50'
>>double helix (homemade). It all depends how fast you want to cool and how
>>cool your tap water is, and how much water you want to use.
>
>Aha! A personal pet peeve, that I know nothing about. Spout-off warning!
>
>My own personal theory is that the shorter the better, until you get to a
>reasonable minimum length.
>
>Why?
>
>Let me interject personal observation from my 15 ft. copper coil. Probably
>more than a foot is outside the wort, say one foot on each end, making 13
>ft. in the wort. I think that is too long. Why? Because the water comes
>out boiling hot at the other end. [I placed my quick-reading thermometer
>in a cup which got the outflow from the wort-chiller, and it quickly jumped
>to 210 or so.]
>
>OK, what good does boiling-hot water do in your wort chiller? I submit it
>does no good at all. So if I had another ten feet of copper in there, it
>would be another ten feet carrying boiling hot water, doing no good.
John then goes on to theorize that length may be important when the wort
approaches the temperature of the water.
I think you're wrong in the first assertion and right about the second
one -- as the wort cools, the length of the chiller becomes more and more
of an issue... you need a longer chiller. My chiller is 50' of 1/4" copper
tubing (immersion) and it chills the wort from boiling to 70F in about 15
minutes during Chicago winters when my tapwater is about 45F.
*******************
William writes:
Questions:
What are pros & cons of pelletized vs whole hops when dry hopping?
I've found that when I use whole hops, they simply float and I siphon out
from under them -- no hops in the bottling vessel or bottles.
Any advice on removing hops when preparing to bottle?
If you use pellets, you can put a copper scrubbing pad over the end of
the siphon hose followed by a mesh bag (this idea was originally introduced
by Al Taylor (I think it was Taylor...) and then independently by Kinney
Baughman).
Alternatives to dry hopping that will give good hop nose?
See Kinney Baughman's article on a sort of hop-back in the Gadgets and
Equipment special issue of Zymurgy.
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 93 15:30:19 EST
From: YC06000 <YC06%FERRIS.bitnet@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>
Subject: Thanks ...and more...
I would like to thank everyone who responded to my recent
inquiries about getting started. I have purchased a couple
of the recommended books and I have located a homebrew shop
in the area. They offer a class plus a discount on supplies
to those who take the class. Now all I need are the supplies
to get started and the nerve to begin....
Next, what is the best source for bottles? Are bottles bottles, or
are some better than others? Should I stay away from bottles all
together?
Also, does anyone know if the Frankenmeuth (sp?) brewery gives
tours and if they do, do you know the hours of the brewery?
One more...I will be in Atlanta, GA in May. Are there any
brewpubs or microbreweries to worth going to?
Thanks for everyones help. I wish I had something to contribute.
Dan deRegnier yc06@ferris.bitnet
Ferris State University
Clinical Lab Sciences
Big Rapids, MI 49307
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 93 12:51:57 EDT
From: richk@icad.COM (Richard Kasperowski)
Subject: Rehydrating dry yeast?
The recent thread about rehydrating dry yeast before pitching drove me
to make my first submission to HBD. (Loud clapping and cheering can
be heard from audience.)
As a relatively new brewer, this is the first I've heard of
rehydrating dry yeast before pitching. For the few batches that I've
made, I pitched the dry yeast directly into the primary, with no
noticable bad effects (i.e., it fermented just fine, and the beer
tasted the way it was supposed to taste).
Is there any advantage to rehydrating the dry yeast? Is there any
disadvantage to tossing the dry stuff directly into the primary?
- --
Rich Kasperowski richk@icad.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 16:23:58 -0500
From: trl@photos.wustl.edu (Tom Leith MIR/ERL 362-6965)
Subject: Immersion Chiller Length
John Decarlo <jad@pegasus.mitre.org> suggests that a shorter cooling coil
might be better than a longer one, down to some minimum. What he has noticed
is that there may be an inflection point in the time vs. temperature curve
on this heat exchanger. He's right. There's no point in making a coil so
long that no additional heat is picked-up by the cooling water during some
portion of its travel. Not that I could reproduce the work today, but this
was a problem on a physics assignment I did maybe 12 years ago. It has to
do with the modulus of heat transfer in materials. Essentially, heat takes
time to "travel" in a material, and the speed with which it "flows" depends
on the temperature difference. A bigger difference in temperature causes
faster heat-flow.
So when you get to the point that a new, incoming volume of water is picking
up heat faster than some number of volumes of water already inside the tube,
your exchanger is too long. What does this mean in practical terms?
Gee, any physics students out there who'd like to take a shot at finding
the optimal heat exchanger length vs diameter vs flow vs tap-water temp
for cooling wort? Could be fun... Or maybe we can do a net-wide emperical
data collection experiment. If anyone's interested in the latter approach,
send me e-mail.
Oh -- mine's 50 feet of 3/8" copper, fwiw.
t
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 93 15:06:38 cdt
From: "Knight,Jonathan G" <KNIGHTJ@AC.GRIN.EDU>
Subject: dry hopping/fermentation in secondary
I'd like to hear more from people who have dry-hopped and had their
fermentation re-start in secondary. I have dru hopped with pellets 3 or 4
times, and with whole hops once, and this is the first time I've had my beer
jump-start on me.
Specifically: when do I know when to bottle? I've still got a krausen
sitting on top, although the bubbling is very slow now. I hate musking
around in the beer to get gravity readings, but I suppose that's the obvious
answer.
Also: I had thought that next time I dry-hop I might try whole hops in a
muslin bag, weighted down with a couple sanitized marbles. Will this be more
or less likely to cause the same renewed fermentation?
And finally: should one perhaps not rack until the beer is within a point or
two of final gravity if one is going to dry-hop? My gravity was still in the
high teens when I racked this time, and I'm thinking this may have
contributed to the jump-starting effect.
Thanks in advance.
Jonathan Knight
Grinnell, Iowa
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 14:51:20 -0700
From: sherman@qualcomm.com (Sherman Gregory)
Subject: Re:immersion cooler length
Oh, this is so much fun! This is the first time I have been flamed on HBD!
Anyway...
In HBD #1113 "John DeCarlo" <jad@pegasus.mitre.org> writes:
>Aha! A personal pet peeve, that I know nothing about. Spout-off warning!
>
>My own personal theory is that the shorter the better, until you get to a
>reasonable minimum length.
>
>Why?
>
>Let me interject personal observation from my 15 ft. copper coil. Probably
>more than a foot is outside the wort, say one foot on each end, making 13
>ft. in the wort. I think that is too long. Why? Because the water comes
>out boiling hot at the other end. [I placed my quick-reading thermometer
>in a cup which got the outflow from the wort-chiller, and it quickly jumped
>to 210 or so.]
>
>OK, what good does boiling-hot water do in your wort chiller? I submit it
>does no good at all. So if I had another ten feet of copper in there, it
>would be another ten feet carrying boiling hot water, doing no good.
It is true that for the first minute or so that the output is nearly at
boiling temp, but after that it is far less. After that, hotter the water
comming out indicates more efficent cooling. The idea here is to remove as
much heat from the wort as fast as possible. The temperature delta times
the cooling water volume is purportional to the heat removed. With a
longer tube, the output temp will be closer to the wort temp meaning more
heat removed. I see two measures of efficency here. One is cooling rate.
The other is temp change/water volume (important in waterless So. CA).
Both of these will be improved with a longer chiller. I know that this is
not linear with chiller length, but more length always helps.
So much for flaming and counter flaming! It is so much fun!
Sherman
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 93 18:06:58 EST
From: U033000 <U033%SETONMUS.BITNET@PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU>
Subject: How to begin brewing?
Hello all, I am new this forum and am completely clueless as to
how to begin brewing my own beer. One of my MAJOR considerations
is money (I am a college student; therefore, I am poor). Could anyone
recommend to me a simple, good tasting recipe? Where can I get
supplies? How much will it cost? How long does it take to brew the
average beer? Etc. I live in the New York/North New Jersey area if you
wish to recommend any homebrew stores.
Thanks,
Bob
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 17:07:19 -0700 (PDT)
From: Paul dArmond <paulf@henson.cc.wwu.edu>
Subject: Immersion cooler design
Sherman has asked about immersion cooler design, what length and diameter
is appropriate, etc. John DeCarlo sez short is good enough.
I'm sorry, John, but you are right and wrong. It is correct that short
coolers put out very hot water initially, but longer is better. Here's why--
Heat flow is proportional to temperature differential. The rate of
temperature drop is fast at first, but slows down as the wort cools. If
your cooler is smaller, it will take a lot longer to cool down below 90
degrees. My water temperature varies from 45F (winter) to 55F summer.
The final 10 degrees of temperature drop takes a lot longer in the summer
than in the winter, due to the smaller differential.
All other things being equal (now there's a simplifying assumption!), the
greater the mass of copper tubing, the faster your cooler will chill that
brew. I'm talking about using 1/4" - 1/2" i.d. soft copper tubing in the
longest length you, your brewpot and wallet feel comfortable with. I have
been using 20 ft of 1/4" i.d. and just got 50' of 3/8" i.d. cause bending
over the pot for so long makes my back hurt.
BTW, there was a long (3 month) thread last summer on immersion and
counterflow coolers. I have extracted the messages into one BIG file, and
will gladly send it to anyone who wants one. If the demand is too much
for me to easily accomodate, I'll see about posting it to the
sierra.stanford.edu FTP site.
see ya in Portland,
Paul.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 93 08:23 EST
From: LYONS@adc3.adc.ray.com
Subject: Grain during fermentation?
Following up on the recent thread of adding grain during
fermentation ... In Dave Line's book (BBLTYB) he gives an extract
recipe for a brown ale (Brown Jack Best Brown Ale) in which he
uses crushed roasted barley in both the pre-boil and in the primary
fermentation (pitched with yeast) stages. I haven't considered this
before, but wonder if anyone has any comments on it. Also, since
many have found that an ideal time to add hops, fruit, peppers,
spices, or any miscellaneous flavorings is during the secondary, it
seems that this would be a better time to add the roasted barley.
Has anyone experimented with the addition of speciality grains
during secondary fermentation? Thoughts?
Chris,
LYONS@ADC3.ADC.RAY.COM
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 93 09:10:36 EST
From: boomer@sylsoft.com (Richard Akerboom)
Subject: Corrections on Samichlaus
Well, I spoke from memory which is always a mistake.
Samichlaus (note spelling) beer from Huerlimann in Zuerich, Switzerland
is, according to Jackson's Pocket Guide, Third Edition, brewed with
a original gravity of 27.6 Plato (about 1.110) and ferments out to
11.1-11.2 % alcohol by weight, which is 13.7-14 by volume.
OK, now that we have that correct, I am still interested if anyone
knows the real story on Sam Adams Triple Bock.
Rich
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Akerboom Domain: boomer@sylsoft.com or akerboom@dartmouth.edu
Sylvan Software uucp: dartvax!sylsoft!boomer
Mechanic St. Phone: 802-649-2231
P. O. Box 566 FAX: 802-649-2238
Norwich, VT 05055 USA
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 93 09:25:33 MET DST
From: THOMASR@EZRZ1.vmsmail.ethz.ch
Subject: historical, part 1.
Historical Recipes by F Accum 1821
translated by Rob Thomas.
All recipes are adjusted to give 4 UK gallons
of beer at fermentation (i.e. 5 US gallons).
All measurements are UK units (same as US, except
gallon US = 0.8 gallon UK)
PART 1
Brown Stout Porter.
- ------------------
Ingredients.
13.99 lb malt, 1/5 pale, 1/5 amber, 3/5 brown
5.3 oz. hops.
Mashing.
Mash 1: 2.375 gall of water at 165 F, 1.5 hours.
Mash 2: 1.875 gall of water at 160 F, 1.5 hours.
Mash 3: 1.938 gall of water at 186 F, 3/4 hours.
Boiling.
mash 1 boiled with the hops for 1.5 hours.
mash 2 boiled with the used hops for 1.75 hours.
mash 3 boiled with the used hops for 2.5 hours.
Produces 4 gall at 1071.
fg. 1024.
- ------------------------------------------------
London Ale.
- -----------
Ingredients.
25.45 lb pale malt
9.29 oz. hops.
Mashing.
Mash 1: 1.820 gall of water at 175 F, 0.5 hours,
then add a further 0.91 gall at 175 F, 2 hours.
Mash 2: 2.180 gall of water at 180 F, 1.75 hours.
Mash 3: 1.270 gall of water at 150 F, 1.25 hours.
Mash 4: 1.270 gall of water at 150 F, 1.25 hours.
Boiling.
mash 1 boiled with the hops for 1.5 hours.
mash 2+3+4 boiled with the used hops for 3 hours.
Produces 4 gall at 1068.
fg. 1026.
- -------------------------------------------------
Table Beer.
- -----------
Ingredients.
10.1 lb pale malt
1.92 oz. hops.
Mashing.
Mash 1: 2.880 gall of water at 160 F, 0.75 hours,
then add a further 1.71 gall at 160 F, 1.5 hours.
Mash 2: 2.700 gall of water at 180 F, 1.25 hours.
Mash 3: 1.980 gall of water at 185 F, 1.25 hours.
Boiling.
mash 1 + 1/2 mash 2 boiled with the hops for 1 hour.
rest of mash 2 + mash 3 boiled with the used hops for 2 hours.
Produces 4 gall at 1035.
fg. 1012.5.
- -------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 93 08:43:01 EDT
From: Peter Bartscherer <BARTSCHP%DUVM.BITNET@PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU>
Subject: Dry Hop Sediment
In response to William Kitch's dry hopping questions, (his _slightly
edited_ text below):
>I tried dry hopping for the first time. I used hop pellets.
>When I started racking the beer into my bottling bucket the
>hop head got broken up and started sedimenting--a fair amount
>got siphoned into the bottling bucket.
FWIW, I had a similar experience with my first dry hop.
However, I found that GENTLY swirling, NOT SPLASHING, the beer in the
fermenter a day or two before bottling caused the hop head to break up
and settle out. I haven't had a sediment-in-the-bottling-bucket problem,
and I did get good hoppy results.
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Bartscherer 215.895.1636 Design & Imaging Studio
BARTSCHP@DUVM.OCS.DREXEL.EDU Drexel U / Philadelphia, PA
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 93 09:09:54 EDT
From: envkas@sn370.utica.ge.com (Karl A. Sweitzer)
Subject: vortex drain strength, and coriolis acceleration
I have found that the best vortex drains are formed when you swirl the bottle
or carboy in a counterclockwise direction (when viewed from above, in the
northern hemisphere of our spaceship earth). The reason is the coriolis
acceleration vector caused by the counterclockwise rotation of the earth.
When you rotate the bottle in the same direction as the earth rotation
the coriolis acceleration vectors constructively add, forming a greater
force on the liquid molecules. The coriolis acceleration vector tends
to force the liquid to the outside of the rotation circle leaving room
in the middle of the bottle for air to enter and replace the exiting liquid.
This air path is more efficient than "gurgleing" air entering the bottle as
periodic bubbles. (note, for those of you in the southern hemisphere, rotate
the bottle in the clockwise direction. For those at the equator, rotate in
either direction.) Some say that the coriolis accel. vector makes pigs tails
curl (no kidding!). I have seen pictures of pigs from Equador with straight
tails!
I have also found that you can drain a full carboy quickly by inserting an
air tube into the neck and extending to the bottom. The air tube allows
air to enter while the liquid exits. Another trick is to cut an air hole in
the top corner of the handle of plastic gallon jugs. I have several jugs like
this that I have marked in quart divisions that are handy for measuring and
pouring large quantities of liquid.
Karl Sweitzer
------------------------------
Date: 07 Apr 1993 10:59:19 -0300
From: Ed Hitchcock <ECH@ac.dal.ca>
Subject: decoction
I had heard from a reasonably reliable source (at least, he *claims* to be
reliable :) that decoction was classically performed by thrusting a bucket
into the top of the mash to make a well, and collecting any liquid that
colected there. The decocted material then contained mostly liquid, with a
small quantity of grain (maybe 5-10% by weight). When I mentioned the line
about taking a quantity of grain and leaving the liquid behind he thought I
was looney. Anyway, his suggestion was to use a picnic cooler/lauter tun
and drain liquid only off the bottom, boil it, and dump it in on top. So I
set up my slotted manifold and tried just that. I did a protein rest, and
then a rest at 149-145 F, and another at 159-155 F. I had to decoct and
boil several times to accomplish this. All I can say is whoever claimed
that drawing off the liquid and boiling it would seriously reduce the
enzyme content should have watched the mash clear during the last rest.
You could literally watch it clear it happened so fast; from cloudy starchy
muddy water to crystal clear wort in about 15 min. I don't know, maybe
this is a decoction-infusion hybrid if I don't boil any grain, but it sure
worked well.
ed
------------
Ed Hitchcock *-----------------------*
Dept of Anatomy and Neurobiology | |
Dalhousie University | JUST BREW IT |
Halifax, Nova Scotia | |
ech@ac.dal.ca *-----------------------*
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 93 09:10 CDT
From: arf@genesis.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: Decoction Mashing
>From: Darryl Richman <darrylri@microsoft.com>
>I did spend all day with my first decoction. Part of that was due to
it going from a planned two decoction mash to a four decoction, because
I was far short of my temperature marks. But having got beyond that,
decoction requires less equipment than a step infusion, and I believe,
produces a different spectrum of flavors and aromas.
There is a simple alternative method I use that makes the first step a lot
easier and totally predicatble along with cutting the time down to about the
same as a "normal" kettle mash.
I use the stove to bring the mash to the low end of the saccharification
range and just use decoctions to maintain the temperture. I scoop out
several quarts of mash and bring this to a boil in a separate kettle. By the
time this is boiling the main mash has cooled enough to need the decoc to
maintian the proper temp. Several gallons are boiled (during a one hour
mash) in this manner and although far from a "real" decoction, it is a
compromise that is easy and probably provides some measure of "a different
spectrum of flavors and aromas" as noted above.
js
--Darryl Richman
------------------------------
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1115, 04/08/93
*************************************
-------
