Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1375
This file received at Sierra.Stanford.EDU 94/03/18 00:34:46
HOMEBREW Digest #1375 Fri 18 March 1994
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor
Contents:
The Continuing Debate on Hopssssssssssss (Jeff Frane)
Hops utilization research (708) 938-3184" <HANSEN.MICHAEL@igate.abbott.com>
Treatment of Specialty Grains (Michael Inglis)
Starting a brewpub help (John Oberpriller) (John Oberpriller)
Eisbock History (John Oberpriller) (John Oberpriller)
Food grade sealant (J. Fingerle)
speed growing yeast (William Nichols)
Hops and Deer (Art Steinmetz)
Re: Starter Culture (John DeCarlo x7116 )
Hop rhizomes & rooting hormone (John Fix)
Growing Hops (John DeCarlo x7116 )
De-lidding SS Kegs (Bob_McIlvaine)
Animal products??? ("Pete Brauer 312/915-6157" )
False Bottom Museum (Jack Schmidling)
PID Controllers (Louis K. Bonham)
Filtering (William Nichols)
Keg carbonating and bottling (William Nichols)
A few points (Jeremy Ballard Bergsman)
Party Kegs are for me... (603)429-8553 - BESSETTE@UICC.COM"
Re: Recirculating Pumps (Dion Hollenbeck)
Homebrew competition question (BUKOFSKY)
joining ("Keith W. Kulpa")
query (Tobey A Nelson)
source of beta amylase (Chuck Wettergreen)
Glass airlocks - Where? (Mike Dix)
Priming with dried malt extract (erict)
post-boil isoalpha acid solubility/boil volume vs. hop utilitzation (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
Wort Gravity and Utilization of Alpha Acids: Data!! (Glen Tinseth)
Rinsing sanitizers (Allen Ford)
IBU, UBMe, WeBUs (Glen Tinseth)
GCHC 1994 (Carlo Fusco)
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.
FAQs, archives and other files 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: Wed, 16 Mar 1994 14:38:56 -0800 (PST)
From: gummitch@teleport.com (Jeff Frane)
Subject: The Continuing Debate on Hopssssssssssss
Some interesting -- if inconclusive -- discussion on hop utilization and
specific gravity.
> From: "Anderso_A" (quoting Mark Garetz)
>
> >Wort gravity *does* have an effect. A big one. But the gravity
> >during the boil is not what matters, it is the gravity during
> >fermentation.
>
> As I see it, your statement means little or no change to an
> all-grain brewer but significant change for an extract brewer. If
> I'm brewing an extract Pale Ale with an OG around 1.044, then the
> gravity of my wort would be about 1.090. I then double the volume
> with pre-boiled/chilled tap water to lower the OG down to the
> desired gravity. My all-grain beers start at 6 to 7 gallons & boil
> down to 5 gallons. When calculating my IBU's I would add hops
> based upon a gravity of 1.090 for the extract beer while the all-
> grain beer would get hops based on a 1.040 OG. The net result
> being the extract beer uses more hops than the all-grain beer. If
> I understand correctly what you posted, then my extract beers are
> being too heavily hopped.
> Is this correct? Does anyone else have empirical evidence to
> support or counter this?
>
My own evidence, over about 10 years of brewing, is that you are
absolutely correct -- the concentrated wort customary in extract brewing
necessitates a much higher addition of bittering hops (but see Steve
Daniel below) -- and this is *clearly* not a product of fermentation
gravities.
Jim Busch wrote:
>
> I think it is intuitively obvious that the higher OG of a ferment will tend
> "scrub" more hop character out of a beer. Hop constituants also tend to
> adhere to yeast, so yeast quantity and removal (filtering) effect hop
> character. Im still on the fence as to the actual boil gravity effects,
> but I agree with Norm that the super concentrated extract brewer tends to
> have more problems developing the same hop character.
>
I don't know how "intuitive" it is, Jim. What is there about a
high-gravity ferment that would "scrub" hop character? It seems to me
that if there's anything "obvious" about the question, it's the relative
sweetness of a high-gravity wort and the necessary increase in bittering
hops necessary to balance that sweetness. Frankly, I've never seen any
significant difference in fermentation between a 1.040 and a 1.070 beer
that would account for differences in hop utilization.
((And while I'm thinking of it, would the hop formula afficionados
remind me whether or not these formulae factor in the water?))
Al Korzonas (always the diplomat) wrote:
>
> My experience mirrors Norm's. I too believe that increased boil gravity
> reduces utilization. The reason I think there is no data out there from
> the brewing researchers is because the big breweries don't really care
> about this information. They formulate recipes and adjust hop usage based
> upon IBU tests on the finished product. I know that Anheuser-Busch buys
> hops in incredibly large amounts and then they store them sometimes for
> two or more years before use. I'm sure they test the hops for %AA
> periodically (especially when going to a new lot), but the final adjustments
> probably come from bitterness measurements in the final product.
>
I'm under the distinct impression (reached during a conversation with
the Blitz-Weinhard brewmaster) that most large commercial breweries
utilize high-gravity brewing -- something that would account for the
research into hop utilization during fermentation. The brewery process
calls for watering the beer down *after* fermentation -- unlike the
homebrewer who more likely waters the wort down *before* fermentation.
As such, there isn't much difference between the wort in the kettle and
the wort in the fermenter.
I would hope that homebrewers, not just A-B, would "formulate recipes
and adjust hop usage based upon IBU tests on the finished product" -- I
know I do, although my IBU tests are all done by the in-house tongues.
So what?
>
> I too am trying to keep an open mind on the kettle utilization issue, but
> my experience leads me to believe otherwise. [clip, snip & rip]
> Brewing is both an art and a science. Science can sometimes help explain
> why the art works, but it can't replace it. The final proof is in the
> quality of the beer you make and if you are happy with it. You can't
> learn to be a great brewer from a book... you have to roll up your sleeves.
>
And here's a real sleeve-roller:
Steve Daniel writes:
>
> Just my two cents worth on the hop utilization thing. What some folks fail
> to take into account when they use the argument, "My beers got more bitter
> when I went to a full-wort boil, so the lower gravity must increase hop
> utilization" is that two variables changed in the process. Along with a
> decreased gravity, the total liquid volume went up too. Since hop acid
> isomerization is an equilibrium reaction, volume (dilution) will definitely
> have a positive effect on utilization, and wort gravity may therefore play
> little or no part in the process. Has anybody done two same-volume boils,
> one at a low gravity and one at a high gravity, and then had the iso-alpha
> acid assayed? That would be the only way to tell.
>
It's probably not the same thing, but: I have doubled batches from 5
gallons to 10 without doing anything but doubling the bittering hops --
and dilution didn't seem to be a factor. For many extract homebrewers,
I'd suspect the ratio isn't any higher: 3 gallons concentrated wort up
to 6 gallons or so of all-grain wort. As I said above, my experience
has been that it's very difficult to replicate the hopping quality I get
in all-grain beers in extract beers -- a real problem in configuring
beers for my Beginning Brewing classes.
Perhaps Al Korzonas is close to the truth when he suggests that the
documentation doesn't exist because for most commercial breweries, the
problem doesn't exist: they simply don't produce 1.090-1.100 worts the
way homebrewers do and in the relative ranges they are concerned with,
hop utilization simply *isn't* significantly affected by changes in wort
gravity.
As I said, they *are* concerned with hop utilization in concentrated
fermentation because they more concentrated they can make their
ferments, the more beer they can pump out with the same volume of
equipment.
- --Jeff
------------------------------
Date: 16 Mar 1994 16:01:00 -0600 (CST)
From: "Michael D. Hansen (708) 938-3184" <HANSEN.MICHAEL@igate.abbott.com>
Subject: Hops utilization research
Hey homebrewers!
I am also interested in this hops utilization problem. Everywhere I look it
seems that there are different opinions, equations, etc. on hops utilization
and IBU's that could potentially affect the outcome of a beer to a significant
degree. I also agree that (more) controlled research needs to be done to
address this problem. I would like to help with this research problem. I am a
clinical statistician at a large pharmaceutical company in the Chicago area who
can lend a hand in the design and analysis of these experiments. I am
unfamiliar with most of the hard scientific research that has already been done
in the area due to lack of accessibility of the research materials. (The Siebel
Institute here in Chicago claims they have most, if not all, materials
published on the subject of brewing but unfortunately you must be a student or
an alum to use it and it is not open to the public). Nevertheless, the offer
stands so drop me an E-mail.
Brew on my friends!
Mike (HANSENMD@RANDB.ABBOTT.COM)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 94 11:54:23 PST
From: mri10@mfg.amdahl.com (Michael Inglis)
Subject: Treatment of Specialty Grains
Hello folks,
in discussions of when and how to utilize specialty grains
in all-grain brewing on r.c.b., several different opinions were expressed.
Frankly some of them confused me. I am going to give my opinions on this
topic and the reasoning and logic behind the opinions and hopefully it will
generate some discussion.
Assumptions:
Specialty grains are added to beer for three primary effects: the
addition of color to the finished product, the addition of certain flavor
profiles to the finished product, and the addition of body to the finished
product. I would like to break down the flavor profiles into two groups:
sweetness, and any other flavors.
I have read in discussions that the primary times in the all-grain
brewing process that people add the specialty grains are 1) as a part of
the main mash before any rests or conversion, 2) at the mashout stage, 3)
while the final runnings are heating up and then removing when they come
to a boil. For my purposes I will treat scenario 2) and 3) as being the
same since in both instances, all enzyme activity has ceased.
My Take on When to Add Specialty Grains:
In almost every case, the specialty grains should be added at the
mashout stage. The only case specialty grains should be added to the
primary mash and mashed is when a certain specialty grain is added only for
the color factor and the specialty grain in question has both a dextrine and
color character associated with it.
My Reasoning:
Body and sweetness associated with specialty grains comes from the
fact that a "mini-mash" has already occured within the husk of the grain
during the malting process, leaving dextrines as a large part of the malt
composition. Dextrines add both sweetness and body to the beer as they are
unfermentable to yeast. To add a specialty grain to the main mash for
mashing defeats the purpose of using the grain in the first place. The
dextrines that are freed up in the mash from the grain get converted to
fermentables during the main mash by the enzymes that are present and you
lose both the body and the sweetness. On the other hand, if you add the
specialty grain to the mash at the mashout process, the increased temperature
will cause all enzyme activity to cease and for all practical purposes all of
the dextrines in the grain will remain intact and manifest themselves in the
final product. The sparging process will ensure that an acceptable extraction
occurs.
If the grains used will only impart color, then adding them at the
beginning of the mash is acceptable. If the grains used are used with the
intent to only impart color and to eliminate any dextrine quality from
the grain manifesting itself in the final product, then adding the grain
at the beginning of the mash is required. But I think that the majority
of the time this is not the case.
This is my understanding of the issues with specialty grains. For the
majority of scenarios, it just doesn't make sense to add the grains at
the beginning of the mash. If someone has any other inputs to this
discussion, I am looking forward to reading them.
Mike Inglis
mri10@mfg.amdahl.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 94 08:59:16 MET
From: John Oberpriller <s12int::l375bbk@god.bel.alcatel.be>
Subject: Starting a brewpub help (John Oberpriller)
There has been a lot of questions concerning starting a brewpub. I'm not an
expert, nor do I play one on TV. But you might be able to get some tips on
starting up for less than the 500K to 1M normally required by contacting the
following:
Sprecher Brewery, Milwaukee, WI - This is a microbrewery, not a brewpub. It
was started with approx. $10,000 using mostly converted dairy equipment.
Lakefront Brewery, Milwaukee, WI - This is a low budget brewpub. The owner is
trying to qualify for a BIG BUCKS loan by developing a track record first.
( I've never been to this one. A friend told me about it.)
Cherryland Brewery, Sturgeon Bay, WI - This place is also a spartan setup. Not
to much glitz here. They use a UniKettle procedure, I think?? Some of they're
equipment was custom manufactured by out of work ship welders.
I hope this helps the brewpub wannabe's. I appologize for no addresses or if
the info is a bit dated. I don't live in Milwaukee anymore.
zum Wohl!
John Oberpriller
l375bbk%s12int.dnet@alcbel.be
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 94 09:36:13 MET
From: John Oberpriller <s12int::l375bbk@alcatel.be>
Subject: Eisbock History (John Oberpriller)
The village of Kulmbach, Germany near Bayreuth, *claims* to be the inventors or
discoverers of ice beer or more correctly Eisbock. The Reichelbaeu brewery
*claims* that in 1890, they mistakenly left some barrels of bock beer out in
the winter weather. The result, concentrated bock beer around 9%. Apparently,
the Eisbock is still produced by Reichelbraeu and EKU. I haven't tasted it
yet, but I'll write in if I do.
Disclaimer:
The above tid bit of history was not intended to validated the MEGA Breweries
Ice Beers, nor is it presented as fact. In the case of the MEGA brews, they're
just removing water they shouldn't have added in the first place. Let's face
it, Big Bud and the Lite King are the reason most of us started brewing.
John Oberpriller Bierevergnuegen!!! If VW can do it, so can I.
email: l375bbk%s12int.dnet@alcbel.be
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 94 07:39:30 EST
From: fingerle@NADC.NADC.NAVY.MIL (J. Fingerle)
Subject: Food grade sealant
Hello all!
A quick question, I tried to add a plastic valve to
my primary, and although the hole I cut seemed to be
cut cleanly, the valve leaks. The leak is very slow, perhaps
a drop per minute, but it makes the fermenter unacceptable
for any use other than as a bottling bucket.
Can anyone recommend a food grade sealer I could use (in
addition to the gasket that came with the valve)?
Thanks.
P.S. Oh, not to take anything for granted, the both the
valve and the fermenter are food grade plastic.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 1994 18:24:40
From: bnichols@mlab.win.net (William Nichols)
Subject: speed growing yeast
On saturday morning I got motivated to make a batch of homebrew (a
Bass-alike from 'The Cats Meow') but I didnt start the yeast yet. It
was Wyeast London Ale, I popped it about 7:00 am and slipped it under
the waterbed sheets quietly while my wife was asleep. She is not real
happy about sleeping with yeast, but I assured her that it is
sealed.
By 7:00 pm it was pretty well puffed so I pitched it into a
starter (which I canned last month) in a wine bottle with a trap on
it. I kept the temperature at 85 deg with a temperature controller
and an electric heater cartridge. Basically I made a hot plate
that I sat the bottle on, and I used a thermocouple wire taped to
the bottle for the controller to read and display the temp.. Before
I went to bed ( about 16 hours after I started) it was bubbling
pretty well, but not much through the trap.
At 10:00 am on sunday I pitched the activated starter into my
Bass-alike.
By 10:00 pm I had a steady stream of bubbles out of my blowoff
tube, and its been going full stream since, 48 hrs later
It seemed to work. Is this procedure bad in any way?
thanks for feedback
Bill Nichols <bnichols@mlab.win.net>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 1994 08:31:27 -0500
From: Art Steinmetz <asteinm@pipeline.com>
Subject: Hops and Deer
All this talk about homegrown hops has got me interested.
Biggest problem for me is deer. I got 'em in NJ the way NYC
has rats. Do deer like hop vines?
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 94 08:38:39 EST
From: John DeCarlo x7116 <jdecarlo@homebrew.mitre.org>
Subject: Re: Starter Culture
I regularly take a sample from my cooled wort and put it into a tall
cylindrical container for measuring S.G. This container has been
cleaned and sanitized.
After a day or so, it usually has a krauesen on it and tastes fairly
clean. I used to joke that I made so much beer in the kitchen that ale
yeast lived in the air.
Now, after my first contaminated beer (with wild yeast--my sweet and
raisiny porter with lots of Special B became dry and overcarbonated),
probably because I didn't boil my bottle caps for the first time, I
suspect that my kitchen is more likely a haven for wild yeast.
It's actually an interesting experiment you can try several places (like
where you mash, where you boil the wort, where you crush the grains,
where you ferment, where you cool the hot wort for pitching, where you
bottle, etc.). And you can try it at different times of year--the
warmer it is and the higher the humidity, the more stuff living in the
air. If you always get *nothing*, you may not need to be as careful
with sanitation as the rest of us.
John DeCarlo, MITRE Corporation, McLean, VA--My views are my own
Fidonet: 1:109/131 Internet: jdecarlo@mitre.org
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 94 08:55:00 -0500
From: john.fix%hardgood.com@philabs.Philips.COM (John Fix)
Subject: Hop rhizomes & rooting hormone
Has anyone used any rooting hormones (i.e. Rootone) when planting hop
rhizomes? It seems that dipping the shoots in the hormone might make
the rhizomes start quicker.... Thanks!
-= John =-
- ----
* Hardgoods East PCBoard BBS - hardgood.com - (914)961-8749 Metro NY
* Retailers Conference - Home Brewing Specific Files and Conferences & More!
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 94 08:56:43 EST
From: John DeCarlo x7116 <jdecarlo@homebrew.mitre.org>
Subject: Growing Hops
One minor note for people concerned about growing hops near the house.
As an owner of a brick home who has to fight ivy and such because it
will damage the brick, I was concerned about hops.
However, never fear! Hops won't act like ivy at all. I now have twine
coming down from the chimney and hops growing up the side of my
house--they provide some attractiveness and insulation in the summer and
hops of course.
John DeCarlo, MITRE Corporation, McLean, VA--My views are my own
Fidonet: 1:109/131 Internet: jdecarlo@mitre.org
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 94 09:22:08 EST
From: Bob_McIlvaine@keyfile.com
Subject: De-lidding SS Kegs
While I won't argue that a air powered grinder is a good
way to cut the top out of SS kegs, I can assure you
that a sabre saw with a bi-metal blade wil NOT take
4 hours. It takes about 10 minutes and does a very
nice job.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 94 08:43 CST
From: "Pete Brauer 312/915-6157" <$W$PR42%LUCCPUA.BITNET@UICVM.UIC.EDU>
Subject: Animal products???
I need some help here. I belong to a veggie list and they are now sayin
that beers like Guiness contain animal products. Could someone please
explain this to me? I have said that as a homebrewer I don't know why
they would be added, I tend to think that this is an urban myth but I
defer to the expertise of this group for enlightenment. Please respond
as quickly as possible as I need ammunition to press my argument, or I
need to shut up before I make a total fool of myself.
TIA
Pete - $W$pr42@luccpua.it.luc.edu or pbrauer@orion.it.luc.edu
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 94 09:36 CST
From: arf@mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: False Bottom Museum
>From: Jim_Merrill@vos.stratus.com
>What is the best way to implement a mashing vessel using a 15.5 SS
keg. The three options I am considering are:
1) False Stainless Steel bottom
2) A copper ring that sits in the bottom and has small slits in it.
3) An "Easy Masher" type installation with a screen.
>When using a false bottom, should you try to minimize the area under
the SS plate by using a plate that rests in the bottom curved portion
of the keg? (I have found some 10" SS dinner plates in a camping store
for $4 each)
I hate to sound pompous but, the easy masher has relegated the false bottom
to a location next to the dinasaurs in the museum. I can't think of a single
advantage other than potentially faster lautering with a false bottom and
that has questionable value in homebrewing.
The em is utterly simple, works like a charm and is cheap and easy to build
or buy.
The false bottom, unless carefully made and fitted will cause no end of grief
with scorching and junk getting stuck in the line. Even then, you have to
live with the dead space under it and recycle wort till it clears out.
Actually, I do not know of any way to deal with the scorching problem with a
false bottom. It almost precludes mashing in the same kettle.
The copper pipe manifold is an alternative but is grossly complicated and
difficult to build compared to the em and I don't know of any commercially
available nor why one would want one.
js
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 1994 20:02:15
From: lkbonham@beerlaw.win.net (Louis K. Bonham)
Subject: PID Controllers
For those of you using a RIMS or other electrically-heated mash
system, from recent experience I can *strongly* recommend
scrounging around and acquiring a commercial PID (proportional
integral derivative) temperature controller.
About 2 weeks ago I happened upon two such units in a
junk bin in an electronics surplus shop, and feeling lucky, bought
them both. Tested both on my bench and they worked fine, so I
installed one on my BrewMagic RIMS system. Brewed a pale ale
today, and all I can say is WOW. LED readout of set point and
present values, electronic calibration, autotuning of PID values,
etc., etc., etc. Bottom line -- after calibrating, just set the
desired temp and watch. Mash temp's automatically held to within
0.3F (and could be even better with an RTD rather than a
thermocouple sensor), with no overshoots. Makes step mashing
truly "push button.".
These units are certainly not cheap if you purchase them retail
($190 and up), but they can be found in the surplus
electronic, industrial, and scientific supply channels if you're
patient and persistent. [If anyone is interested, I still have the
second unit (Fuji Electronic PYZ4 -- 1/16 DIN size) and a copy of
its users manual.]
Louis K. Bonham lkbonham@beerlaw.win.net
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 1994 17:08:15
From: bnichols@mlab.win.net (William Nichols)
Subject: Filtering
I was my local HB and wine making store and I saw a filter for wine
making and started wondering if I could use it for beer. It was
pancake style and took 9" flat round filters. A separate pump could
be purchased to get it thru. I think I could use CO2 instead. The
filter housing and 10 filters cost $80.
Does anybody have any idea if this would work?
Thanks, Bill <bnichols@mlab.win.net>
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 1994 16:53:57
From: bnichols@mlab.win.net (William Nichols)
Subject: Keg carbonating and bottling
Since I wasnt impressed with my first attampts at natural
carbonation, I proceeded into kegging and artifical carbonation
early on. I just cant seem to get the ammount right(not enough). I
carbonate at 30 PSI and store tapped (for easy sampling) at 15 PSI
and 50- 55 deg. It pours well at this pressure but if I go any
higher it is real foamy. I also tried lower pressures but it seemed
that it didnt pour as well and since I wanted more carbonation It
didnt make sense to leave it low. What do others do ? Suggestions
will greatly be appreciated.
Since I now have 2 batches in corbouys, i figureed that I should
make some room in a keg. I had about 3/4 gal left in the keg so I
figured that I would bottle it. I sanitized and chilled the
bottles and boiled the caps. To chill the keg, (it was already at50
deg F) I put it in a 5 gal bucket with ice and rock salt. I
prepared the wash tubs for filling.
As a dispensing valve I tried to use a filling stick ( I dont know
the correct name) that came with a starter kit. This must have
been designed for gravity filling because it filled the bottles up
with foam. First I tried at 15 PSI then 10 then 5 and I gave up. I
attached the standard dispensing tap and tried just tapping into
the bottle. The problem was that the foam coming up prevented the
beer from flowing down. For this, I put a 6" piece of tubing on
the tap outlet so I could dip into the bottle and fill from the
bottom. The pressure that seemed to work the best was 10 PSI. This
worked OK but I still lost some foam down the drain. Is this usual?
Is there a better way?
Thanks, Bill Nichols <bnichols@mlab.win.net>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 1994 09:53:08 -0800 (PST)
From: Jeremy Ballard Bergsman <jeremybb@leland.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: A few points
> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 94 08:51
> From: DRA.SMTMHS%smtmhs@sharpwa.com (Darren Aaberge)
> Subject: I can't believe they're not IBUs
> Hopping (something like 5%). Burch states in his book that he bases his
> utilization numbers
> on the method used by the American Society of Brewing Chemists. If I
> remember right, at the
> time it was thought that the ASBC measures IBUs and does not calculate them.
> Anyway, in the
Right, Burch is wrong. From Malting and Brewing Science Vol 2. (pg 491-2):
IBU=50 X Abs at 275 nm of an isooctane extraction of acidified beer
ASBC BU's=(96.15 X Abs at 255 nm) + 0.4 of an acid washed, diluted, slightly
different isooctane extraction of acidified beer.
"This method [ASBC] gave a better correlation with the iso-alpha-acid content
. . . ."
Note that both methods make a number of assumptions, e.g. that the iso-alpha-
acids are bitter in proportion to their absorbance at a certain wavelength.
>
> So, I believe that Burch must be accounting for some amount of oxidized beta
> acids in the
> hops used for dry hopping (are oxidized beta acids soluable without being
> boiled?). Of
> course, this may be totally useless to homebrewers if we cannot measure the
> amount of
> oxidized beta acids in our hops. Any comments?
>
> Darren Aaberge
I doubt that Burch knows what he is correcting for. What he tries to provide,
and what we all need, is a utilization curve that applies to how we, as
homebrewers, boil wort. There have been several guesses. Garetz' curve is
the closest to the one that I have worked out for my own system, but that
is no guarantee that it will work for yours.
>
> Date: 16 Mar 94 20:58:00 GMT
> From: korz@iepubj.att.com (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
> Subject: extract recipes/beginner Q's/Stuck ferment?
>
> >Doppelbock
> >
> >1 can Ireks Amber
> >2 cans Unhopped Amber Extract
> >1 lb Crystal Malt
> >2 cups Chocolate Malt
> >1 cup Roasted Barley
> >4 1/2 oz Hallertau hops
> >lager yeast
> >
> <snip>
>
> I'm afraid I must strongly disagree that this will make anything resembling
> a Doppelbock. The Roasted Barley is completely out of place for this
> style. I don't think any German breweries would put unmalted barley, roasted
> or not, in a beer.
I agree that this will not make a Dopplebock. They have no roasted character.
German breweries were not allowed to use unmalted barley, under their purity
law, but they do have "chit malt" which is basically barley that has just
barely been malted. This gives them the characteristics of unmalted barley
but lets them get around the law.
_________________________
About the bottle breakage by cappers: I have capped about 3000 times and I
have never broken a bottle. I use every type of brown pry-off bottle I can
lay my hands on, usually they are non-refillable. I use a bench capper.
(I even bake my bottles to sterilize them!) Maybe too many homebrews going
down during those bottling sessions :).
Jeremy Bergsman jeremybb@leland.stanford.edu
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 1994 12:54:25 EST
From: "Systems Analyst (603)429-8553 - BESSETTE@UICC.COM"
Subject: Party Kegs are for me...
I too have to agree with "rprice" who loves the party keg system. After having
accumulated mucho bottles I have found a much easier and quicker way to store
my home brew. I enjoy using these party kegs so much that I bought two sets of
4 containers each including the taps and CO2 cartridges. The 4 containers
which will hold a 5-gallon batch, the tap, and two boxes of CO2 cartridges
cost me $49.95. I can't explain to you how much easier this has made my life
as far as home-brewing is concerned. The big "PAIN" for me was cleaning and
capping my bottles. The process of bottling took me at least 2 hours which
includes cleaning and disinfecting. Now it runs me an hour tops when using the
minikegs.
The reason I bought 2 sets was so I could have to different brews on tap at
the same time. Right now in my frig I have a pale ale and an English ale at my
disposal. I have a separate frig in my basement that I keep these in but you
could easily fit a keg in with your foodstuffs in your kitchen frig. I also
think that the brew tastes better out of the kegs in comparison to the
bottles. Another major advantage is that after the first 2 glasses you have no
yeast sediment in your beer. With the bottles you have to at least be aware of
the yeast at the bottom of the bottle (although it never bothered me). As you
can imagine these "party kegs" have made my brewing life a whole lot easier and
I certainly think the expense is worth it. I bought my keg system at the Brew
Ha Ha in Pottstown, PA (the usual disclaimer). Their 800 number is 800 243
2620 or their local number is (215) 326-2620. This system was $39.95 not too
long ago so it looks like they are becoming more popular...
Happy St Pat's
Bob Bessette
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 94 09:41:23 PST
From: hollen@megatek.com (Dion Hollenbeck)
Subject: Re: Recirculating Pumps
>>>>> "Joe" == Joe Stone <JSTONE@SJEVM5.VNET.IBM.COM> writes:
Joe> I need some information on recirculating pumps. What type of pump
Joe> should I use? Where can I buy one? How much should it cost? Please
Joe> email me directly. I don't want to waste bandwidth.
Joe> Joe
Joe, before I can answer these questions, I would need to know some
more information about your setup. Are you planning to build a RIMS?
what size mash tun? What kind of false bottom? Any other intended
uses? Just off the cuff, you will pay anywhere from $80 to $250 for
new pumps, and about $60 to $90 for those same pumps used or surplus.
You need to use a magnetically coupled pump. I will go into details
when I get more info from you. Have you read the article in the last
(a couple of years ago) Aymurgy gadgets issue on RIMS? A lot of info
is given there.
dion
Dion Hollenbeck (619)675-4000x2814 Email: hollen@megatek.com
Staff Software Engineer Megatek Corporation, San Diego, California
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 1994 13:24:14 -0400 (EST)
From: BUKOFSKY <sjb8052@minerva.cis.yale.edu>
Subject: Homebrew competition question
All,
I am planning on entering a porter of mine in this years national
homebrew competition. My question is this: The recipe had a cup of
blackstrap molasses in it, which is a major aroma/taste factor. Do I have
to enter it under "Specialty beer" or "Robust porter"? After all, the
definition of "specialty beer" in the guidelines says "...using
fermentables other than malted barley as a major taste/aroma
contributor...." or something like that. Any help?
Thanks,
Scott
No cute comment.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 1994 13:29:18 -0500 (EST)
From: "Keith W. Kulpa" <ukwk1@sunyit.edu>
Subject: joining
Could you send me info?
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 1994 11:59:23 -0500 (EST)
From: Tobey A Nelson <nelsonto@student.msu.edu>
Subject: query
Hello brewers!
I am a novice... Last week a friend and I cooked up our first batches of beer
(from kits), an IPA and a Porter. We are presently having a debate about a
point which I think someone might be able to help me with. My brewmate is crazy
over the damn hydrometer readings and is taking them everyday; he is opening
the carbouy every day to take them. I think that fermentation is (supposed to
be) anaerobic and that this may well have messed us up... What are the
thoughts of you all wizened brewmeisters? Is our first brew doomed? If the
fermentation, which was very active (roiling) on the second day, has been
interrupted by opening the carbouys, is there something we can do at this point
to save these batches? I look forward to a response at:
[Nelsonto@student.msu.edu].
Thank you!
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 94 10:42:00 -0600
From: chuck.wettergreen@aquila.com (Chuck Wettergreen)
Subject: source of beta amylase
HBDers,
Does anyone know a source of refined beta amylase. My local supplier
has alpha in approx. 2 oz vials, but I want to mash something for a
high alcohol content without using barley and without any or few
non-fermentable bi-products.
TIA,
E-mail replies encouraged
Chuck
Chuck.Wettergreen@Aquila.com
* RM 1.3 00946 * Complex problems have simple, wrong answers.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 94 11:10:23 "PST
From: Mike Dix <mdix@dcssc.sj.hp.com>
Subject: Glass airlocks - Where?
Wanting to make yeast starters per the HBD stove-top method (JS-method?),
I got a flask and drilled stopper at "The Science Shop" in San Jose. But
neither Beer Makers ("Finally sold the last one. Didn't fit the drilled
stoppers anyway.") nor the Brew Club ("Who makes them?") carry glass
airlocks. They're not in the Beverage People catalog either.
Please let me know who carries them (No. Cal. or mail order). By the way,
the hole in the black lab-type stopper is much narrower than brew store
versions, so I can be flexible on tube diameter.
Thanks,
Mike Dix
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 94 14:39:27 EST
From: erict@vnet.IBM.COM
Subject: Priming with dried malt extract
Peter Williams asked about using dried malt extract for priming ...
Peter, I too have had disappointing carbonation using dried malt extract, so
I'm glad to hear it's not just me! My guess (and it's only a guess) is that
the sugars in malt extract aren't as readily usable by the yeast as the
nearly pure glucose in corn sugar is, especially under the relatively adverse
conditions in the bottle (high alcohol content, ever-increasing pressure,
etc.). I have found that letting the malt-primed brews condition a little
longer (6 weeks to 2 months; a lot longer, actually) helps a bit.
I don't think that the small amount of corn sugar added at priming adversely
affects the taste of the beer, so I've pretty much switched to using that
(or sometimes honey, which also works well) on a permanent basis.
Anybody else have a more learned opinion to offer? I'm curious to know how
wild my guesses are ...
- -- Eric Tilbrook
------------------------------
Date: 17 Mar 94 20:17:00 GMT
From: korz@iepubj.att.com (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
Subject: post-boil isoalpha acid solubility/boil volume vs. hop utilitzation
Andy writes:
>The important thing to remember is that wort gravity does not affect
>the formation of iso-alpha-acids, the amount of heat does. The only
>thing that wort gravity will affect is the iso-alpha-acids going into
>solution, which can be modified by leaving the stuff sit for a while
>before turning on the wort chiller.
This may be well and good (I'm discussing this further with Andy offline),
but I would like to warn against "leaving the stuff sit for a while
before turning on the wort chiller." Doing this will increase the
production of Dimethyl Sulfide in the wort which, in the case of lagers,
could be significant (Woodstock Lager, contract brewed by Point Brewery,
is a recent example I've tasted with too much DMS -- Old Style, by Heilemann,
is a perennial favorite example).
**********
Mark writes:
>The reason lies in the fact that hops are utilized less
>efficiently at higher hopping rates. When you do a partial
>boil, your effective hopping rate during the boil is much
>higher than it would be if you were doing a full boil.
>
>An example will make this clearer: If I put 50 grams of 5%
>alpha hops in 20 liters of wort, I have added 2.5 grams of
>alpha acids or 2500 milligrams, total. In milligrams per
>liter (mg/l) that is 125 mg/l of alpha acids (2500/20=125).
>If I put in the same amount of hops but cut the boil volume
>in half, I have now doubled my hopping rate to 250 mg/l.
>And the hops will be utilized less efficiently at 250 mg/l
>than at 125 mg/l.
Well, despite the fact that I still don't consider Mark Garetz
an expert, I must admit that the correlation between hop utilization
and isoalpha acid concentrations *could* explain the fact that,
in my experience, Rager's formulas have worked. I still feel that
not enough research has been done in this area yet to discount
any other factors, *including* boil gravity. Mark has reported
that he has found no record of research in this factor, so why
are we so quick to discount it? There are a great many factors
that must be considered and should be investigated before we
finalize the formula that contains the factors that make a
significant difference and excludes the factors that don't.
BTW, I appreciate your posting of your references Mark... Thanks!
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 1994 12:32:00 -0800
From: glent@falstaff.cache.tek.com (Glen Tinseth)
Subject: Wort Gravity and Utilization of Alpha Acids: Data!!
Lots of opinions on this subject recently. I love to pick
up the digest and see "hoppy" subject lines!
I did a little experiment a week ago and ran the samples
yesterday in Gail Nickerson's lab at OSU. For those of you
who don't want the details here is the jist. Two worts, 1.086
and 1.043 (all grain) each boiled with the same amount of hops,
in the same size pot over the same burner. The initial volumes
were identical.
The HPLC showed that the utilization in the kettle for the high
gravity wort was 20%, for the low gravity wort it was 42%. This
method is specific to iso-alpha acids and was done by a pro (Gail).
I won't make any sweeping generalizations based on this, admittedly,
tiny sample. More to come.
Something to chew on...
Glenn
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 1994 14:50:52 -0600 (CST)
From: Allen Ford <allen@darwin.sfbr.org>
Subject: Rinsing sanitizers
I have seen numerous posts questioning the need to rinse various
sanitizing agents from fermenters, kegs, etc. prior to contact with
beer. If the instructions indicate that the agent does not need
rinsing, as with iodophore, it should be allowed to air dry. It seems
that during this air-drying stage, other nasties could come in contact
with the recently sanitized surface. In reality, the biggest problem
with air-drying is the time and advanced planning required to do so.
My solution to this problem is to pressure can or autoclave several 500ml
bottles of water at the time I make starter solutions. This way, I have
plenty of sterile rinse water and I don't have to buy cheap beer for the
purpose. Purchasing their wimpy products only encourages them to brew
more. This sterile water also comes in very handy when I want to
de-brew a beer a small amount. I have even used it to sparge the hops
in my hopback.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Allen Ford <allen@darwin.sfbr.org> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
=-=-= Southwest Foundation for Biomedical Research San Antonio, Texas =-=-=
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 1994 14:10:46 -0800
From: glent@falstaff.cache.tek.com (Glen Tinseth)
Subject: IBU, UBMe, WeBUs
Darren Aaberge, in HBD 1374, writes about bittering units and the
confusion surrounding them. Here's what I know about the situation.
BUs (Bittering Units) and IBUs (International Bittering Units) are
one and the same - an internationally agreed upon unit for
describing the bitterness of wort and beer. The method uses an
isooctane extract of the sample, which is run on a UV spectrophotometer.
The absorbance data is run through an equation, and voila, you have IBUs
(or BUs).
This method is *not* specific to iso-alpha acids, anything that absorbs at
the wavelengths in question contributes to BUs. Even unhopped beer has
3-4 BUs. The number of BUs is therefore slightly higher then the mg/L of
iso-alpha acids.
Hope this helps,
Glenn
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 1994 14:53:00 -0500
From: carlo.fusco@CANREM.COM (Carlo Fusco)
Subject: GCHC 1994
_____________________________________________________________________
Canadian Amateur Brewers Association
Presents the
10th Annual Great Canadian Homebrew Competition and Conference
June 3 and 4, 1994
Royal Canadian Legion, Branch 101
3850 Lakeshore Blvd. West
Etobicoke, Ontario
_____________________________________________________________________
The 1994 Great Canadian Homebrew Conference will be the tenth time
that homebrewers from across our nation will gather to celebrate
homebrewing as an art and a science, the Canadian way. Over the last
decade we have seen this annual event grow into a first class
conference with informative seminars, the Great Canadian Homebrew
Competition awards presentation, demonstrations, exhibits, excellent
beers from across the country, superb gourmet food, entertainment, and
lots of fun. This year will be no exception. Conference registration
and itinerary will be posted in April.
The 1994 Great Canadian Homebrew Competition promises to be the best
yet. This year's competition will feature expanded categories and sub
categories as well as the challenging 'Look-Alike' beer. The styles
for the competition are as follows:
Canadian Lager Canadian Ale
Continental Pilsner British Ale
Vienna/Oktoberfest/Marzen Pale Ale
Munich Dunkel India Pale Ale
Bock English Bitter
Traditional Bock Brown Ale
Helles Bock English Brown
Wheat Beer English Mild
Berliner Weisse Porter
Weizenbier Stout
Dunkelweizen Dry Stout
Belgian Witbier Sweet Stout
Extra Strength Fruit Beer
Barley Wine Specialty
Imperial Stout Herb Beer
Doppelbock Unique Fermentables
Weizenbock Belgian Special Ales
Scotch Ale Trappist
Belgian Strong Ale Lambic
Look-Alike Flanders Brown Ale
Hart Amber Ale Saison
The deadline for entries is May 14, 1994.
For more information write or phone CABA at:
CABA
19 Cheshire Dr.
Islington, Ontario
M9B 2N7
Phone/Fax: 416-237-9130
Compuserve: 71601,3357
InterNet: carlo.fusco@canrem.com
ligas@mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca
Fidonet: Carlo Fusco at 1:229/15
- ---
* Freddie 1.2.5 * email: carlo.fusco@canrem.com Sharon,Ontario,Canada
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1375, 03/18/94
*************************************
-------
