Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1474
This file received at Sierra.Stanford.EDU 94/07/13 00:53:50
HOMEBREW Digest #1474 Wed 13 July 1994
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor
Contents:
secret bud strategy (Al Vaughn)
Re: club bylaws (John DeCarlo x7116 )
Oxygen in wort (Chuck E. Mryglot)
Oak Chips Summary (Guy Mason)
All Grain Equipment, Hops (Arthur McGregor 614-0205)
Re: CSTR vs. Recirculating Reactor (cush)
Brewing at Work (Conan-the-Librarian)
Dunk Cooling (Steve Scampini)
I need some immediate help, PLEASE!!!! (Ben Piela)
Homebrew software (Ed Hitchcock)
Newbie asks "is this infected?" (Kevin Michael Savage)
HELP! 1st all grain mash disashter!! (skemp),
HELP! 1st all grain mash disashter!! (skemp),
Manifolds / Yeast Experiment (npyle)
chill (Ulick Stafford)
Re: Heineken and skunkiness (Rick Myers)
The effect of cold break on hydrometer readings. (Erik Speckman)
skunks (Pierre Jelenc)
Trub & specific gravity (Art Steinmetz)
Blowoff blowup, old siphon tubes, milk glue, liquid dry yeast? (Nancy.Renner)
Re: Equipment Questions (Bill Szymczak)
Aluminum, overprimed, Schlitz, beer bread (Nancy.Renner)
HELP! 1st all grain mash disashter!! (skemp) <skemp@hp7013.ecae.stortek.com>
re: water chemistry (TODD CARLSON)
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: Tue, 12 Jul 1994 00:48:00 GMT
From: al.vaughn@castles.com (Al Vaughn)
Subject: secret bud strategy
"Steve Peters remarked on the Secret Bud Strategy" that they would let
the others (Coors and Millers) brew their own renditions and just buy
out Red Hook. As far as I know, Bud has already brewed their own
version of a "handcrafted" (liberal on the quotes O.K.) brew called Elk
Mountain Amber Ale. The name is after their hop fields in Idaho. They
have begun to introduce it to the West and Northeast in kegs only at
this time. From some of the posts I've seen, they began brewing it in
Fairfield, CA and some say it is pretty good for a beer by the biggies.
Don't know if this adds anything to the flame war adverstisements, but
the news sounded interesting.
As far as the flame war ads, I just figure they're kinda funny. They
way I see it, if you go to the time to make your own, you're not going
to run out and buy theirs. And if that's the case, who cares what they
call or refer to my beer. They haven't tasted mine and I've surely
tasted theirs. So you can either get all worked up about it, or you can
just ignore it. I choose to ignore them and laugh at them. By the way,
the ads about Iggy on the island and the "Yes I am" I find very funny.
* OLX 2.1 TD * For Sale: Iraqui rifle, never used, dropped once.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 94 08:23:26 EST
From: John DeCarlo x7116 <jdecarlo@homebrew.mitre.org>
Subject: Re: club bylaws
>I am reposting this because all I got were requests from other people
>who wanted the information. So any club members or officers have
>by-laws for their club they could pass along? TIA, Andy Kligerman
Can anyone explain why a homebrew club would *want* to have by-laws?
Our club has been around for years, has hundreds of members, and has no
need for by-laws. It's not like homebrew clubs need to be debate
societies.
John DeCarlo, MITRE Corporation, McLean, VA--My views are my own
Fidonet: 1:109/131 Internet: jdecarlo@mitre.org
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 94 08:27:39 EDT
From: cem@cadre.com (Chuck E. Mryglot)
Subject: Oxygen in wort
I have a question about oxygen in wort, and wort transfer method.
After chilling I splash my wort into the fermenter in order to get
some oxygen into the wort.... good for fermenting, the yeast need
this.
Now my question is, when I rack this to secondary and then later
to a keg, should I take careful steps to make sure I do not splash
the wort around? Will adding more oxygen at these points adversely
affect the beer? If yes, what is the affect?
Perhaps I should use a syphon long enough to reach the bottom of
the target container so as to underlet the wort.
Any comments?
Thanks
Chuckm
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 1994 09:04:08 +22305931 (EDT)
From: gam@beluga.must.com (Guy Mason)
Subject: Oak Chips Summary
Here is a summary of replies to Oak Chips in Pale Ale posting :
>From Steven W. Schultz :
Boil the oak chips before adding to the secondary.
>From Lance Shipman :
I've made at ten batch's of India Pale Ale adding oak chips to the
secondary, and never had a problem. The oak chips add a nice flavor
to the brew.
>From Marc Provencher :
Boil the oak chips before adding to the secondary.
Go easy on the amount 60 grams was way to much.
>From TFirey :
Steam the oakchips about 20 minutes, then bake @350F for 10 minutes.
Use British Oak for British brews, American Oak is stronger in flavor.
>From Thomas Fotovich :
Oak Chips are out of style for IPA's.
Boil chips for 15 minutes.
Use a yeast that imparts a woody flavor.
>From BToddL69 :
Steam for 20-30 minutes.
>From SNNC49A :
Steam for 20 minutes.
Don't use to much or it can be overpowering...
General opinion agrees that I'm to paranoid about dry-hopping, it's not
a problem.
Thanks to all for the info, now if I could just email you a bottle of
the final results...mmmmmm maybe ftp...
_ _
O O
/---------------------------uuu--U--uuu---------------------------\
| Guy Mason When Brewing is |
| MUST Software International Outlawed only |
| E-mail : gam@must.com Outlaws will |
| Brew. |
\-----------------------------------------------------------------/
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 1994 09:06:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: Arthur McGregor 614-0205 <mcgregap@acq.osd.mil>
Subject: All Grain Equipment, Hops
Hi All
All Grain Equipment Questions:
My wife just bought me a Gott Cooler for my B.D., so I shall be
transitioning to all grain soon. I was wondering about brew pots. I=
have seen
adds in brew supply catalogs and seen canning pots in department stor=
es for
8-8=BD gal ceramic on steel pots, but they are listed as medium duty.=
I have
also read in the HBD of some brewers whose ceramic on steel brew pots=
had the
handle break off. How sturdy/reliable are these brew pots, and how w=
ould I
know short of buying one? I know that kegs can be modified, but do=
n't have
one, yet, nor time to mess with one. Inititally I would brew a 3-4 g=
al batch
on my electric stove before investing in a Cajun/King cooker and wori=
ng up to
larger batches.
Now as for the Gott cooler, I am thinking about getting a Phils =
Phalse
Bottom (tm?) versus a nylon grain sparge bag. Now my understanding i=
s the
sparging process is faily long, so I would want to replace the Gott s=
pigot with
a open drain plug or such, and controll the flow of water with a
valve/restictor of sorts. Does this sound reasonable? Does anyone k=
now of a
Gott manufactured spigot replacement part, and where to get one?
Growing Hops Replies
In June I posted a quetion on why one of my hops plants was growing l=
ike crazy,
and the other ones weren't, and what fertilizer would be good for the=
plants.=20
Below are portions of the replies:
R.P. Mattie wrote:
>=09Composted cow manure is a very good choice. The only other thing=
you
>=09might have wanted to have added is sand, which allows some air sp=
ace and
>=09the growth of roots as well as beneficial soil organisms. The th=
ing to
>=09find out is what kind of soil Ph hops prefer. the clay is quite =
acidic,
>=09the compost mildly so. You might want to add lime for its alkali=
nity, and
>=09perhaps some kind of calcium/mineral source. Go easy on these th=
ings, and
>=09miracle grow kind of stuff. Because they are so easily and quick=
ly taken
>=09up, they seem to lead to a kind of soil burn out, which is bad fo=
r the
>=09living things in your soil, so bad for your plants in the long ru=
n, unless
>=09you like hydroponic gardening. You CAN add a high-nitrogen ferti=
lizer,
>=09and the hops WILL grow MUCH faster, but it will be really leggy a=
nd flabby
>=09and not at all hardy. =B7 =B7 =B7
L.S. Strohl wrote:
>=09=B7 =B7 =B7 hops grow very well here, and I think the red clay i=
s the key because
it
>=09seems to hold moisture when it is built up with compost. I grew h=
ops for two
>=09years and finally gave up in frustration because of the ravages o=
f the
>=09damn Japanese beetles. I am not sure how bad they get up your way=
, but
>=09down here in Fredericksburg they frequently reach epidemic propor=
tions.
>=09Oh, Cascades were my most successful hops followed by a Pride of
>=09Ringwood hizome =B7 =B7 =B7
J. Brawley wrote:
>=09=B7 =B7 =B7 have found that the Cascades are doing much
>=09better than the others. I put in two Cascade roots, one Pearl an=
d one
>=09Nugget....the Pearl grew for about a month and stopped but the Nu=
gget is
>=09just beginning to flower. Anyway, I have been using a little mi=
racle
>=09grow every 2 weeks and otherwise add compost on a regular basis. =
I also
>=09found this semi-organic budding fertilizer made from ground up fi=
sh called
>=09"Alaska Mor Bloom" which is 0-10-10. It seems as though it has b=
oosted
>=09the plants a bit...it also helped along some herbs that have been
>=09struggling this year.
By the way, my other Cascade, a Northern Brewers, and a Hallerta=
uer are
now up at 5-8 feet. My one _Giant_ Cascade is up to 18 feet with lot=
s of nice
flowere buds. Just hope the Japanese Beetles don't eat them! In the=
May/Jume
issue of Brewing Techniques has an article on growing hops, and says =
that
sprays like Diazinon and Malathion are availble, but have 14 day wait=
ing times
to harvest if you use them. The gardening salesperson at the local h=
ardware
store recommended Liquid Sevin for controling bugs, and from reading =
the back
of the bottle, most waiting periods are 0-2 days before harvest. Any=
one know
about this stuff and if direct spraying on the flowers will damage th=
em? As
far as harvesting, I was thinking of puting the floweres in mason jar=
s. I've
seen that some of the vacuum/sealer machines have attachemnts for suc=
king air
out of canning jars. As an alternative, I was wondering if the CO=
=B2 carttidges
for soda water, etc, might be used to flush the air out of a canning =
jar before
sealing. There was also a previous mention on the HBD about oxygen b=
arrier
bags from Cole-Parmer scientific catalog. Could those be used with o=
ne of
those vacuum/sealer machines, and are they expensive? Email or post.=
I'll
post if intersting responses. TIA
Good Brewing,
Art McGregor (mcgregap@acq.osd.mil)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 1994 08:55:14 -0500 (CDT)
From: cush@msc.edu
Subject: Re: CSTR vs. Recirculating Reactor
Lance Stronk writes:
>process control at Yale. The professor, Bela Liptak, and author of the text,
>Optimization of Unit Operations, is very knowledgable in the field of process
>control. I could be misinterpreting the information but, his book says that
>the recirculating type of chemical reactor is more efficient than the constant
>stirred tank reactor. I don't know if this applies to all chemical reactions
>including the enzymatic reaction of starch - sugar conversion. I think that
>the recirculating method that is talked about is not just recirculation of the
>liquid wort (in the case of brewing). It might be the recirculation of a
>'slurry' (wort + grain). One thing is certain from the text; CSTR does NOT
>give the highest % yield. Any CE out there like to elaborate further?
A Chemical Engineer speaks :-)
Depends on how you want to define 'efficient'. The basis of a CSTR (continuous
stirred tank reactor) is that you have a fixed volume in the reactor, you keep
a constant temperature, and stirr the daylights out of it (to keep the
concentrations of reactants/products constant throughout the volume). At the
same time you add the reactants in a constant stream, and take liquid OUT
of the tank (that liquid having the same concentrations as the well mixed
liquid in the tank). You control the flow rates of the 'in' and 'out'
stream so that a constant volume of liquid is maintained in the reactor.
This is a continuous process, i.e. you do NOT have to stop the reactor to
empty/refill it to process another batch.
OK, that said, on to 'efficiency': the goal of a chemical plant, which
includes CSTRs is to maximize dollar revenue. You do this my maximizing
the amount of product produced per unit time and minimizing the cost of
production. Note: this is NOT the same as getting the highest yield from
a reaction! In the CSTR you pull liquid out of the reactor, and that
liquid contains product AND un-reacted raw materials. In a 'batch'
reactor (like we have with mashing...even for a RIMS) you throw all
reactants into the reactor, and let them react until the reaction
completes (i.e. maximizing % conversion) In a CSTR the liquid you pull
out is composed of molecules that have a distribution of time in the CSTR,
with the average being well below the time needed for 'complete' conversion,
the outcome being that the reaction has NOT proceeded to completion.
In that sense the batch reactor is more 'efficient' because it allows
more complete conversion of the reactants to products.
The CSTR is more 'efficient' economically though: you do not have the
costs/time lost of emptying/refilling/cleaning, etc. And in the end
you do have complete reaction because typically the mixed products
coming out of the CSTR are separated (to purify the product), and the
unreacted raw materials are fed back in to the CSTR. In doing this
the entire plant operates continuously, without having to wait (i.e. be
idle) while the reactor is re-filled.
Long answer to a short question. Any questions? There will be
a quiz on this tomorrow..... :-)
Yes, I really am a Chem. E.: I just WORK on computers.....
- --
> Cushing Hamlen, Client Services | cush@msc.edu
> Minnesota Supercomputer Center, Inc. | 612/337-3505
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 1994 06:58:54 -0700
From: pascal@netcom.com (Conan-the-Librarian)
Subject: Brewing at Work
I think there's a simpler way to arrange all this.
Person A is a homebrewer. However, for educational purposes s/he may find
it expedient, while preparing at home, to keep the filled carboy at work.
Why not ? It's fun to watch. Work environments are probably more stable,
from a thermal point of view. Is it any different from an aquarium ... or
a houseplant ? I think not. It is a personal hobby. It is educational, as
well.
How could anyone claim to be surprised, if this gradually attracted enough
attention that, when bottling time arrived, coworkers volunteered to help ?
And whom would be surprised if this evolved into an after-hours "club", as
is common at some of the larger corporations ? Perhaps it might even prove
a tax writeoff for the company, to donate materials or facilities to this
group.
That this group might choose to have "tastings" every month or so, well, this,
too, is no surprise, and makes perfect sense. That they occur just after the
company closes for the business week, well, that makes sense, too ... as does
inviting other employees to attend.
All of this is inherently legal, perfectly ethical, and tax-free.
Ask a lawyer if you want to ... but, remember, s/he's being paid to keep you
out of trouble ... not to challenge the boundaries of the law, but to keep
you well away from those boundaries.
And - caveat to the braindead - don't abuse it, or you'll lose it. Laugh at
how stupid the government is, and how smart you are, and you'll be sorry ...
Note : this will not work if you work at a corporation run by advocates of the
Women's Christian Temperance Union. (-:
- -- richard
Law : The science of assigning responsibility.
Politics : The art of _distributing_ responsibility.
richard childers san francisco, california pascal@netcom.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 94 10:02:25 EDT
From: Steve Scampini <scampini@hp-and.an.hp.com>
Subject: Dunk Cooling
I must say, John Dodson's post about putting the brewpot in a garbage
can to cool it was really interesting. At least as good was the idea of
the grommet in the top and the stirring spoon. This idea could also be
used with an immersion chiller to speed the cooling, rather than jiggling
the coil of tubing like I usually do. Also, with no cooling apparatus
in the pot, it should be possible to try an idea I have been toying with
which is to make a big screen plunger which exits through a hole in the
lid. At the end of the cooling, the plunger (equal diameter to the
inner diameter of the pot) is pushed down to the bottom of the pot
thus trapping all the slud...I mean solids at the bottom of the pot.
One could also add a bag of ice cubes to the cooling tub to really goose
the cooling.
Steve Scampini
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 94 08:51:10 EDT
From: ben@fcmc.com (Ben Piela)
Subject: I need some immediate help, PLEASE!!!!
Hello fellow homebrewers,
First off, I would like to say thank you to all that replied to my newbie
questions last week regarding hop pellets, the resulting sludge, and geyser
like explosions I witnessed coming out of the bottles of my first batch.
I will post a summary shortly......
Now to my problem....
I am am idiot. My second batch was going along pretty well. I was new to
the extra amount of sediment caused by using hop pellets (w/o the addition
of a hop bag) but that was really no big deal. I decided that I would use
a special honey, that I purchased in Hawaii, as my primer. I heard pros
and cons about using honey, but I decided, what the hell, Charlie Papazian
says you could do it. Well......... Charlie recommends when using honey
as a primer, use 1/2 cup. Being the mathematical genius that I am, I quickly
deduced that 8oz was 1/2 cup. A week after bottling, I tested my beer, and
of course, it is over carbonated!!! My embarrassment extends beyond words.
I don't know what I was thinking.
Can someone offer some advice as to what I should do? Should I trash the
whole batch? Should I instantly refridgerate and hope for the best??
Please help. All replys will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Ben Piela
Homebrewing Beginner
ben@blues.fcmc.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 1994 11:15:09 -0300
From: Ed Hitchcock <ECH@ac.dal.ca>
Subject: Homebrew software
The version of the beer recipe editor I posted to r.c.b last week is now
on sierra.stanford.edu in the /pub/homebrew/programs directory under the
name (I think) recipe_editor.zip. It is for DOS, needs CGA or better video
card. This version is free, but I would like some feedback on it, both
positive and negative.
Happy brewing.
*-Ed Hitchcock---ech@ac.dal.ca---* Mares drink Grolsch and does drink
*-Anat.&Neurobio.---Dalhousie-U.-* Koelsch and little lambs drink Lambic.
*-Halifax--NS--Can---------------* Ed'll drink Lambic too, wouldn't you?
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 1994 11:05:03 -0400
From: ksavage@uceng.uc.EDU (Kevin Michael Savage)
Subject: Newbie asks "is this infected?"
I'm a rookie brewer (six brews so far), and I fear that I am
experiencing my first infection. A Sam Adams Ale clone which
was nicely carbonated 3 months after bottling has become very
overcarbonated (though no gushers or bottle bombs yet 8*)) 6
months after bottling.
3.5 # M&F amber malt extract syrup
2.0 # Laaglander amber DME
1 oz Hallertau hop pellets (2.6 AAU; boiling)
1 oz Tettnanger hop pellets (3.8 AAU; finishing)
2 pkg M&F dried ale yeast
Extracts added to cold water & brought to a boil; boiling hops
added and boiled for 20 minutes, finishing hops added and
boiled for an additional 10 minutes. The hot wort was chilled
to 78F and placed in a sanitized (?) plastic primary. Tap
water was added to make 5 gallons.
Yeast was prepared one day prior to brewing by adding the
dried yeast to 1 quart of cooled concentrated wort in a
sanitized glass jug with an air lock. After brewing, the
actively-fermenting starter was then pitched into the primary
with the cooled wort.
After four days, fermentation had slowed to about 3 bubbles
per minute, and the beer was racked to a sanitized glass
secondary. After two weeks in the secondary, fermentation had
seemingly stopped. The beer was racked to the bottling bucket,
primed with 1.25 cups Laaglander amber DME boiled for 5
minutes in 2 cups of water, and bottled.
Two weeks after bottling, mildly carbonated; three months
after bottling, very nicely carbonated; six months after
bottling, more foam than liquid! To my novice palatte/nose,
there are no unusual off-flavors or odors, and no visible
signs of infection (mold ring in neck, etc.)
I sanitize with Clorox (1-2 ounces in 5 gallons), with all
equipment in the sanitizing solution for at least an hour
prior to use. My bottles get the clorox soak, and are rinsed
in the dishwasher (no detergent, full wash-rinse-heat dry
cycle).
I apologize for the excessive bandwidth. Any thoughts or
ideas (or flames, for that matter) would be greatly
appreciated in my quest for better beer.
TIA,
Kevin in Cincinnati
ksavage@uceng.uc.edu
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 94 13:52:09 MDT
From: Steve@hp7013.ecae.stortek.com, Kemp@hp7013.ecae.stortek.com, (skemp),
Subject: HELP! 1st all grain mash disashter!!
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 94 13:52:09 MDT
From: Steve@hp7013.ecae.stortek.com, Kemp@hp7013.ecae.stortek.com, (skemp),
Subject: HELP! 1st all grain mash disashter!!
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 94 10:05:02 MDT
From: npyle@hp7013.ecae.stortek.com
Subject: Manifolds / Yeast Experiment
ChuckM writes:
> 2. I mash in a picnic cooler with a slotted pipe manifold. My yields
> are always just shy of 25 pts/lb/gal. I was thinking of changing
> from a manifold to an Easymasher type of drain in order to improve
> on yield.
>
> - Does anyone get better yields than I do using this sort
> manifold of arrangement?
> - Will switching to an Easymasher type of device help?
Chuck, there is no reason in the world an easymasher manifold would give you
better yield than a slotted pipe manifold. What are you doing, but
collecting the liquid at the bottom of the grain bed? The manifold type,
properly designed and built will have very little effect on yield. In
theory, the em style should be less efficient since it is collecting liquid
in a smaller area than a slotted pipe manifold. In practice, this doesn't
seem to be the case, i.e. yields with it are fine, but so are yields with a
slotted pipe. I recommend you look elsewhere for your low yield "problem".
Try increasing the temperature of the mash by using hotter sparge water
and/or finding a way to close the lid of the lauter tun during sparging. Try
sparging longer (you can get away with more than you think). Try a better
crush on your grain (this may by the single biggest factor in yield).
FWIW, I got around 32 ppg in my last batch with a slotted pipe manifold.
Why? I think it is because I sparged a bit longer but there are several
variables. I usually get around 28-29 ppg. The manifold probably isn't the
issue, and rebuilding it is wasted effort.
**
Mark Peacock, please post your approximate fermentation temperatures for your
yeast experiment. I suspect it is in the low 60s based on your LESB results.
That yeast drops out in a hurry, more so at low temps.
Cheers,
Norm npyle@hp7013.ecae.stortek.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 1994 11:12:34 -0500 (EST)
From: ulick@ulix.rad.nd.edu (Ulick Stafford)
Subject: chill
John Dodson suggests chilling by immersing a pot in circulated waiter
container - a variation on the bath tub approach.
Interesting thought, but I see 3 problems. Firstly, lifting the full pot.
Mine never moves till the wort is pitched - I just dump the chiller in.
Secondly the need to stir. While any immersion chiller needs some agitation,
not as much as this, because much of the chilling takes place at the
bottom so convection won't help. An interesting experiment is to put an
ice cube in the bottom of a test tube (weighted down) and then boil
the water at the top with a burner. The same lack of convection
currents will occur here. Thirdly, heat transfer will be much less with
steel than copper, and also the fact that the outside will be much less
turbulent than the fast flow inside a copper tube will also reduce
heat transfer. I recommend an immersion chiller.
__________________________________________________________________________
'Heineken!?! ... F#$% that s@&* ... | Ulick Stafford, Dept of Chem. Eng.
Pabst Blue Ribbon!' | Notre Dame IN 46556
| ulick@darwin.cc.nd.edu
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 94 10:23:03 MDT
From: Rick Myers <rcm@col.hp.com>
Subject: Re: Heineken and skunkiness
Full-Name: Rick Myers
> I still believe that the source of Heinekin's skunkiness MUST be from the
> water they use, somehow. In the low lands like that, the water must have to
> pass through, and be treated by many different things.
It sure sounds like you've never had Heineken from a keg! ABSOLUTELY NO
skunkiness. Great stuff. I've only found the bottled version to be
skunky. I don't see how the water could cause it, anyway. The culprit
is the green bottles.
- --
Rick Myers (rcm@col.hp.com)
Information Technology Specialist
Hewlett-Packard Test & Measurement Organization Information Technology
Colorado Springs, CO
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 1994 09:40:15 -0800
From: especkma@reed.edu (Erik Speckman)
Subject: The effect of cold break on hydrometer readings.
>From: pittock@rsbs2.anu.edu.au
Asks what he should do to prevent floating cold break from effecting his SG
readings.
Nothing.
Take a toy boat and put it in a bathtub full of water. Mark the water
line. Now float a bunch of rubber duckies in the tub. The waterline will
be at the same level on your boat. Fill the ruberduckies part way with
water so they sit below the surface. No difference.
[hint, the boat is your hydrometer]
This doesn't preclude some effect from break material sticking to the
hydrometer.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 94 13:02:56 EDT
From: Pierre Jelenc <pcj1@columbia.edu>
Subject: skunks
In Homebrew Digest #1473 (July 12, 1994), Paul Murray
<pmurray@lingua.cltr.uq.oz.au> asks:
<< The orthodox explanation is that beer becomes light struck and the
isohumulone (from the hop oils) breaks down into mercaptans & fusel
alcohol causing the skunk flavour. Somebody out there should be able to
correct this as I'm sure it's only half right. >>
Only half right: No fusel alcohols, just 3-methyl-2-butene-1-thiol, the
very same stuff that skunks make. It is not a figure of speech, it *is*
the same chemical.
<< What puzzles me is that my regular beer shop keeps it's imports in a
display fridge which they insist contains special fluros which do not emit
u/v and therefore do not affect the isohumulone and ought not therefore
affect the beer. >>
They are wrong. While isohumulones themselves absorb directly only UV
radiation to cause skunking, the same reaction is achieved when any light
of wavelength in the green and below is absorbed by other molecules and
transferred to the isohumulones by a process known as non-radiative energy
transfer. The primary absorber is known as a sensitizer; in beer,
riboflavin is thought to be the sensitizer. This explains why green glass
is ineffective in protecting the beer, since it lets green, blue, and
violet through, in addition to a small amount of UV.
<< Yet the first couple of Urquell's I bought from them were superb, but
the more recent ones were beginning to taste like nasty imports (I don't
know what skunks smell like!). So given that they are right about the
fluros, given that the later bottles are from the same case, why does this
happen? >>
P.U. is in green glass. This is a Bad Thing.
Pierre
Pierre Jelenc pcj1@columbia.edu
Columbia University, New York
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 1994 13:34:26 -0400
From: Art Steinmetz <asteinm@pipeline.com>
Subject: Trub & specific gravity
Chris Pittock writes:
> When I did the last partial there
> was a large amount of cold break material, so much so that
when I took the
> sample for spec grav. I was CERTAIN that this will give a
false reading due
> to all that crap floating around.
Trub has no effect on SG readings. Precipitate solids do not
effect the density of a liquid. Counter-intuitive if you look
at cloudy sample but think about it. Throw some rocks and logs
into a swimming pool. Do they effect the density of water? Do
you float higher or lower in such water?
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 94 13:51:42 EDT
From: Nancy.Renner@um.cc.umich.edu
Subject: Blowoff blowup, old siphon tubes, milk glue, liquid dry yeast?
>From *Jeff* Renner - I do not, as Dan McConnell suggests, think I am my
wife!;o)
Brian Klimowski, whose small diameter blowoff tube clogged and blew out the
stopper in an explosive manner, probably knows the solution to this
potentially problem, since he specified "small diameter," but he didn't
mention it, so I will. Always use a one inch PVC tube. Your hardware
probably has this. Sterilize it and stick one end in the carboy mouth and
the other end in bleach water. If you get a lot of cooling or O2 take-up,
the bleach water may creep up the tube. If it does, relieve this by taking
the end out of carboy mouth, not the bleach water, as I did. A bubble rose
up through the tube, pushing a few cc's of bleach water ahead of it right
into the carboy! This resulted in a few ppb chlorophenols in the beer,
which was undrinkable.
- -------
On the thread of how long you can use siphon tubes, I have used mine for
many years. I boil them while I set up, maybe 20 - 30 minutes to sterilize
them. They are yellow and nearly opaque, but still flexible and usable.
- -------
Corey W. Janecky mentions using whole milk to glue labels on bottles. I've
seen this too, but skim milk makes better sense, and is what I use on those
occasions I label a bottle. The butterfat is useless at best, and may make
the paper translucent or turn rancid at best. The milk protein casein is
the "glue, and is present in skim milk as well.
- -------
Bob Stovall says he recognizes the superiority of liquid yeast, but asks if
he made up a good culture from dry yeast and used the "sludge," would that
be any less good than liquid yeast? The superiority of liquid yeast is
primarily based on two things. First, they are purer than dry yeast, due to
the inevitable contamination inherent in the drying process, although this
has improved markedly in recent years. Secondly, not all good brewing
strains dry well, so the dried strains have been selected for there ability
to withstand drying rather than necessarily their brewing characteristics.
This too has improved recently, but since small scale production runs are
more practical with liquid yeasts (they cost more), more varieties can be
made available. This means we can brew with the same yeasts as the famous
breweries (Guinness, Pilsner Urquell, Bass, etc.), giving us much more
flexibility. If you newer brewers haven't yet used liquid yeast, maybe that
should be your next step in improving your beers, before all grain. It
could make a bigger difference. But make a starter! If you can't, you are
probably better off using one of the newer and purer dry yeasts - they are
superior to liquids in that you will pitch lots more cells.
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 94 13:53:40 EDT
From: bszymcz%ulysses@relay.nswc.navy.mil (Bill Szymczak)
Subject: Re: Equipment Questions
Chuck M asks:
> 2. I mash in a picnic cooler with a slotted pipe manifold. My yields
> are always just shy of 25 pts/lb/gal. I was thinking of changing
> from a manifold to an Easymasher type of drain in order to improve
> on yield.
>
> - Does anyone get better yields than I do using this sort
> manifold of arrangement?
> - Will switching to an Easymasher type of device help?
I doubt that switching to an easymasher type will help your yield.
I haven't been using a picnic cooler but have mash-lautered in a kettle
using both a manifold as well as the Easymasher (tm). With either
device my yields were nearly identical at about 25 pts/lb/gal. In
my opinion, crushing your grain finer (but risking grain
astringency) and/or more stirring (I only stir when changing
temperatures) are much more likely ways of improvng your yield.
By the way, I've found both methods to work equally well, and have
used each with a 70% wheat grain bill for weitzens (single
decoctions) with no stuck sparges. Of course, it may be that my
crush is a little on the coarse side.
Bill Szymczak Gaithersburg, MD
bszymcz@ulysses.nswc.navy.mil
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 94 13:55:34 EDT
From: Nancy.Renner@um.cc.umich.edu
Subject: Aluminum, overprimed, Schlitz, beer bread
>From *Jeff* Renner
braddw@rounder.rounder.com is worried about the effects of the aluminum in
his surplus coffee urn if he uses it for brewing. The bad rap aluminum got
regarding Alzheimer's disease has been refuted by many researchers,
including the original one. As I understand, he is somewhat embarrassed by
having the reputation of having linked the two, and he can't shake the rep.
It also won't make your beer taste metallic. I brew with a 40 qt., 5mm
thick alum. stock pot ($65 with lid from restaurant supply) that I wouldn't
trade. Great thermal conductivity, durable, heavy duty but light weight. I
can't remember the rest. Also, I can't find my brewing spoon, and I'm
having trouble doing IBU calculations, and I don't remember your name,
either. ;o)
- -------
Ben Piela says his first batch was "lame" - it geysered! What went wrong,
he asks. Ben, you probably bottled before it was finished working out.
Some complex sugars take longer to ferment - they do during the secondary
fermentation. It's hard to wait for your first batch, but try to for the
next one. Also, some posts here have implied that carrying too much yeast
over to the bottle will result in overpriming. Not true. It takes very
little yeast for priming - more will just make it happen a little sooner.
The amount of fermentables is what's important. With care, you can have a
perfectly conditioned bottle with a yeast layer no thicker than a coat of
paint.
- ----------
Rich Webb says <I prefer Miller Psudo-Draft among the mega breweries. But
my homebrew is still the best!> For those times when you have to drink
mega, try Schlitz. You can taste the hops bitterness! Since it's a budget
brew, it probably has extra adjuncts and short lagering, but it won a medal
a few years back at the GABF, and I agree.
- ----------
Dan suggested that, as a professional bake (for this I went to college for
seven years?), I might have comments on the bread thread. Actually I don't
have much to add. I don't like spent grain bread, because I don't like
picking the husks from my teeth. The thread has been about baking from
"trub." I wonder if the authors meant sedimented yeast. Trub, the settled
hot and/or cold break, tastes nasty. The yeast, especially if washed to
remove bitterness, can make nice, if slowly rising, bread (unless you use
lots, which will probably adversely affect the taste). I once recreated an
old bread from vague historical references, for an Elizabethan feast for a
local culinary society. It was barley and wheat, "raised of an ale barm."
I can't remember the recipe, but it was mild and nutty tasting, and was very
well received.
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, I think.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 94 13:52:09 MDT
From: Steve Kemp (skemp) <skemp@hp7013.ecae.stortek.com>
Subject: HELP! 1st all grain mash disashter!!
Well my 1st all grain brew did not go as planned! Just a couple of problems
that I need some help with. I'm using a 10 gallon Gott cooler for a mash/lauter
tun. Placed 12 lbs of grain into the Gott and added about 3 gallons of water
at 175 F, mash temp was about 155 F and all was well UNTIL the iodine test
said it was done. Then I opened the valve to the copper manifold in the bottom
of the Gott and nothing came out NOTHING! My copper manifold was plugged! I had
to scoop out the grain a panful at a time and hand sparge ( a real pain, but a
homebrew helped! ). Anyway, what happenned to the manifold? It's a "U" shaped
1/2" copper pipe with hacksawed slots that lays in the bottom of the cooler and
is just pushed through the rubber grommet in the side, and then goes to a valve.
I'd appreciate hearing from other brewers that use similar manifolds, and
especially Gott cooler users, as to what went wrong with mine, and how you
built yours.
On to the 2nd question(s):
I ended up with 4.5 gallons of wort OG 1.060 ( added tap water to bring up to
5.5 gal and thought that all would be well! However, about 12 hours into a
vigorous fermentation there is absolutely no foamy froth on top of the brew.
All of the other ( extract ) brews I have done developed 1.5 to 3 inches of
foam on them.
What happened here? plenty of C02 but no head?
What have I done? and will it be drinkable?
Here is what took place on brew day:
1. heated 7.5 gallons of water to 175 F in a sankey keg.
2. place 12 lbs of cracked English 2 row in the Gott cooler.
3. add 3 gallons of 175 F water to grain and stir.
initial mash temp 155 F.
ph near 5.2
a drop of iodine in a spoonful of water from the cooler turned black.
4. 1 hour later added 1 lb of crystal and a quart of 175 F water
mash temp 153 F.
5. at 1 1/2 hours iodine test color was a light tan color.
open valve to bottom of the Gott (nothing came out!!!!!)
6. use a hand strainer to hand sparge the grain.
now have about 6 gallons of wort in another sankey keg.
7. add 1 oz cascades and boil 40 mins
8. add 1/2 oz cascades, 1/2 tsp irish moss and boil 20 mins
9. add 1/2 oz cascades and steep 5 mins
10. use imersion chiller to cool to 174 F
11. strain into 6.5 gal carboy using hand strainer with a bed of hops in it.
12. pitch a quart of starter made from Wyeast American ( 1056 I think )
Incidently, the grains were not milled in a Corona, a Glatt, or a MM, but
in Norm Pyles' "washermatic millerama" an excellent homemade mill made with
an old washing machine motor. ( Ask Norm for details )
I'd appreciate any insight that any of you might have, TIA.
Cheers, Steve Kemp < skemp@hp7013.ecae.stortek.com>
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 94 14:11:54 EST
From: carlsont@GVSU.EDU (TODD CARLSON)
Subject: re: water chemistry
There were a couple of questions on yesterday's HBD that
dealt with water question (see postings of Aidan H. and
John I.). This topic seems to be a perennial source of
questions and confusion. After it came up a few months ago,
I got some books from the library and read up on the
subject. I sent a response dircectly to John I. on the
subject. Sorry, I seem to have erased Aidan's address.
Just email me for a copy. If anyone else is interested,
please email me directly. The response was rather lenghty
so I am heasitant to post on the HBD. If there is enough
interest, I will send it out for everyone.
Todd
carlsont@gvsu.edu
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1474, 07/13/94
*************************************
-------
