Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1649
This file received at Hops.Stanford.EDU 1995/02/04 PST
HOMEBREW Digest #1649 Sat 04 February 1995
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor
Contents:
Re: Dishwasher sanitation (Bill Vaughan)
Sour mashing procedures (Bill Vaughan)
steam generators and phils phalse bottom ("Charles S. Jackson")
AHA pulls out of BJCP (Louis K. Bonham)
Iodophors ("Lee Bussy")
RE: Fermenting first homebrew/Chloramine Removal (usfmchql)
Bottling a lager... (Robert_Ser)
Vail Co. (djfitzg)
Re: Phila shops. (David Arnold)
Plastic labels (Mark A. Stevens)
More isinglass (Jim Busch)
Way to go, Al ("William F. Cook")
Archive of Beer Recipes? (Franklin Fuller)
Re: Flames (real ones) / bottles breaking ("Christopher V. Sack")
Mead questions (map)
Re: r.e. Iodine Test Strips - Where? (Dion Hollenbeck)
Barley Gelatinization (Randy M. Davis)
Roller mill speed (Jack Schmidling)
Water Analysis ("jim robinson")
Siebel Operations course (Kelly Jones)
Re: Ultraviolet light (Spencer.W.Thomas)
Breaking bottles while capping ("Dutcher, Pier")
Fort Meyers (Matt_K)
Decoction (Steve Robinson)
Counterflow Wortchiller questions (Chris Barnhart)
AHA and the BJCP (Shawn Steele)
RE: Iodine Test Papers (Arthur McGregor 614-0205)
Gravity? (Douglas R. Jones)
******************************************************************
* NEW POLICY NOTE: Due to the incredible volume of bouncing mail,
* I am going to have to start removing addresses from the list
* that cause ongoing problems. In particular, if your mailbox
* is full or your account over quota, and this results in bounced
* mail, your address will be removed from the list after a few days.
*
* If you use a 'vacation' program, please be sure that it only
* sends a automated reply to homebrew-request *once*. If I get
* more than one, then I'll delete your address from the list.
******************************************************************
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.
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
ARCHIVES:
An archive of previous issues of this digest, as well as other beer
related information can be accessed via anonymous ftp at
ftp.stanford.edu. Use ftp to log in as anonymous and give your full
e-mail address as the password, look under the directory
/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer directory. AFS users can find it under
/afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer. If you do not have
ftp capability you may access the files via e-mail using the ftpmail
service at gatekeeper.dec.com. For information about this service,
send an e-mail message to ftpmail@gatekeeper.dec.com with the word
"help" (without the quotes) in the body of the message.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 1995 20:42:38 -0800
From: bill@oilsystems.com (Bill Vaughan)
Subject: Re: Dishwasher sanitation
Jonas writes:
>I recently spoke to my homebrew supplier about cleaning bottles in a
>dishwasher. He claimed that there was some soap that was ideal for that
>kind of thing. I was under the impression that soap residue will be left
>in the bottles. Can someone tell me the best conditions for using a
>dishwasher to clean/sanitize bottles?
I use my dishwasher to sanitize, but I clean the old-fashioned way, in a
sink with lots of TSP. Procedure:
1. Clean all the food guck out of the dishwasher.
2. Run it once, empty, with no soap or rinse agents, to get rid of any
leftover soap crud.
3. Set it on "heat dry," NOT "air dry." If your dishwasher won't do this,
then you can't use it to sanitize bottles. But that's OK, you probably
needed to clean it out anyway.
4. Wash the bottles by hand and rinse _all_ the TSP solution out of them.
5. Put them in the dishwasher -- no soap, no rinse agent, just water --
and run it. You don't need to use a heavy-duty wash cycle, a short wash
will do as long as it has a full dry cycle.
I do it this way because I don't trust the dishwasher to do a good job
cleaning, or even rinsing, inside a long-neck. So far (4 years) I have not
had a bad batch of beer that I could attribute to lack of bottle
sanitation. (Yeast culture went south on me once, but it affected every
bottle uniformly. Note that you can tell bottle-sanitation problems from
other sources of nasties because with bottle-sanitation problems, there
will be some bad bottles and some good ones.) As always, YMMV.
BTW, I keg most of my beer these days. Eliminates the bottle problem
completely. Of course, it raises the issue of how to sanitize your kegs...
For which I use iodophor. I always rinse with boiling water, twice or
three times if necessary, until I can't smell iodine in the keg anymore. I
figure if I can still smell it, it will get into the beer. Two guiding
principles here:
-- Boiling water is good for everything, and
-- Trust your nose.
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Bill Vaughan Software Engineer |
| bill@oilsystems.com Oil Systems, Inc. |
| (510) 297-5834 San Leandro, CA |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| "Things should be as simple as possible, but no simpler" --Einstein |
| "Simple is as simple does" --F. Gump |
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 1995 20:44:04 -0800
From: bill@oilsystems.com (Bill Vaughan)
Subject: Sour mashing procedures
Here's the sour mashing procedure I use.
If you're doing a part-mash, part-extract recipe, this applies to your
whole mash. If all-grain, you should probably only do this with part of
your mash unless you like really sour beer.
Mash as usual. Do NOT try to sour the mash before mashing -- it will
get sour but will not convert. Amylase seems not to work at low pH.
Take the mash to 170F for mash-out. At this point it contains no
lactobacillus, so we will have to introduce some. There are four obvious
sources: yogurt, sourdough, and "wild" lacto from grain hulls or the air.
You need to cool the mash to the correct temperature for your lacto source.
a) Yogurt: I use commercial packaged yogurt culture, from your local
health food store. I suppose you could use grocery-store yogurt, but I've
never tried it. Cool the mash to 90 degF, sprinkle the culture on the
surface of the mash and mix it in.
b) Sourdough: Use a commercial packaged sourdough starter, but don't
just sprinkle it on your mash -- it will take too long. Instead, a week or
so early (about when you do your yeast starter -- you DO do a yeast
starter, don't you?) make a 1-pound mash of plain pale malt and start the
sourdough starter in that. By mashing day it should be nice and stinky.
Stir the whole mess into your mash. Starting and fermentation temp is
about 105 degF.
c) Wild lacto, from grain hulls: This is the traditional method. Just
stir a quarter pound of grain, right from the sack, into your mash. I
don't know the traditional temp, but I suspect 90-100 degF will work.
d) Wild lacto, from the air. Cool your mash to about 90 degF, take it
outside, and leave it open to the air for about twenty minutes. Shoo away
the birds. In principle, this can give you a particularly local
lactobacillus strain. I don't do it -- I figure my local strain is just
_lactobacillus sanfrancisco_ anyhow.
In all cases, keep the mash at your fermentation temp until it is ready.
That will take one to two days for yogurt culture, maybe three days for
sourdough. The only time I tried wild lacto, it was like lightning -- five
or six hours.
When the stuff is done, it will look and smell spoiled. There is
nothing uglier than a lactic fermentation, and your marriage may be in
jeopardy from the stench. The mash will look soupy, with husks floating on
top and a lot of bubbles. If you can get it past your nose, you will find
that the liquid tastes good. Sour, but good.
I suppose you can let the mash ferment to completion, but I don't. It
would be terribly sour. I go for my target pH, and then raise the mash
back to 170 degF for sparging.
Before re-heating your mash, you should pull some out -- say a half
pound to a pound -- and keep it. That way, if you like your sourmash beer,
you have a ce ready-made for your next batch. It will keep for a
surprisingly long time in the refrigerator, with a lid on it. Feed it
every month or so. You can _even_ make sourdough bread out of it.
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Bill Vaughan Software Engineer |
| bill@oilsystems.com Oil Systems, Inc. |
| (510) 297-5834 San Leandro, CA |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| "Things should be as simple as possible, but no simpler" --Einstein |
| "Simple is as simple does" --F. Gump |
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 95 22:56:31 CST
From: "Charles S. Jackson" <sjackson@ftmcclln-amedd.army.mil>
Subject: steam generators and phils phalse bottom
Mike Brannigan's query on steam caused me some concern. I thought
I had found the answer to my problem of raiseing temperatures in my
beautiful Gott tower-of-power mash tun but then realized that I may have a
problem trying to pump steam in. I use the phalse bottom (TM) and it seems
to me that I will need to use a copper manifold. I can't envision having a
manifold AND a phalse bottom in the same tun, but then I'm orthopaedics so
I'm not very smart. Do I need to hang up my beloved (and expensive) phalse
bottom to use steam injection?
Steve
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brewing beer is far more exciting when it is both a hobby AND a felony!
The Alabama Outlaw
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 1995 01:23:45
From: lkbonham@beerlaw.win.net (Louis K. Bonham)
Subject: AHA pulls out of BJCP
The following is a press release From Patrick N. Baker, who is one
of the Home Beer and Wine Trade Association (HBWTA)'s co-directors
of the Beer Judge Certification Program (BJCP):
==================================================================
*AHA Announcement of cancellation of their sponsorship of the BJCP*
The AHA has announced that they are cancelling the June 1989
agreement between Scott Birdwell, former president of the
HWBTA and Charlie Papazian, then President of the AHA, which
inaugurated the Beer Judge Certification Program. Desmond Lundy,
current HWBTA President, will make an official response upon his
return from vacation. As HBWTA Co-Director of the BJCP, I am making
an interim statement on behalf of the HBWTA.
It is the right of either sponsoring party to resolve to go no
further with the BJCP at any time. The decision of the AHA to
withdraw support must be seen as regrettable, particularly given
the obvious desirability of keeping a program such as the BJCP
independent of any single sponsoring entity, thereby preserving
its integrity. Such a program under single sponsorship is at risk
of becoming a propaganda machine, or worse, a marketing tool. It
has long been the position of the HWBTA that we would like to see
the BJCP function as an independent entity, free from control of
any organization, including our own. We continue to support the
development of an independent BJCP.
We urge that the involvement of the AHA in the remaining short
time of the joint sponsorship of the BJCP to be constructive, not
obstructive. We wish the AHA well luck in developing a judge
accreditation program that is both respected and cost effective.
Under the terms of the sponsoring agreement, AHA involvement in
the BJCP will cease on April 18, 1995.
We urge brewers and judges to continue their support of the BJCP.
Both the HWBTA and BJCP are working to achieve judge
representation and judge control of the Beer Judge Certification
Porgram.
Patrick N. Baker
BJCP Co-Director
=================================================================
In addition to this press release, I have learned that the AHA has
notified the HWBTA that not only is the AHA quitting the BJCP (in
favor of starting and running a judge program that is 100% AHA
controlled [read: by Charlie P. and his designees], but the AHA
also intends to insist that the BJCP cease any use of the BJCP
name. While the AHA may be within its legal rights to do so, this
smacks of the type of tactics employed by that other paragon of
fairness and truth, Jim Koch [TM].
Having watched the AHA's antics over the last few years, this ought
to be the last straw. IMHO, this is a shameless power play by the
AHA bureaucracy -- those same folks that bring you that "AHA product
catalog of the month" known as Zymurgy.
Whn somebody finally offerred an alternative to Zymurgy, the result
was Brewing Techniques -- a product vastly superior to what was
then available. It's time for a similar, democratic alternative to
the AHA to emerge, possibly along the lines of the old Homebrewers's
Alliance of brew clubs.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 1995 06:33:49 +0000
From: "Lee Bussy" <leeb@southwind.net>
Subject: Iodophors
I saw two more posts about Iodine based sanitizers today.
Okay, I've had enough. I use an Iodine based sanitizer. It works.
It does not attack SS (think about all the SS in resteraunts). I do
not rinse and make good beers (come look at my ribbon collection).
It does not loose its effectiveness in it's storage container. It
does sanitize (albeit to a lesser degree) as long as it's still
orange.
Where do I get my info? Test results performed by third party firms
for Ecolab, Trade literature and field people who use it on a daily
basis.
There. Enough already. If you want to belive some minimum wage
earner answering a phone somewhere about iodine based sanitizers...
great. Maybe you ought to call Bud and tell them not to use it.
==================================
Rich Lenihan asks about boiling temps and food grade tubing:
Rich, I use the same vinyl that everyone else does for running my
wort out of the kettle and into my counterflow chiller. It does get
very soft but still intact and secure. Many batches done this way.
What specifically were you going to do with it?
==================================
- --
-Lee Bussy | The 4 Basic Foodgroups.... |
leeb@southwind.net | Salt, Fat, Beer & Women! |
Wichita, Kansas | http://www.southwind.net/~leeb |
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 1995 08:22:59 EST
From: usfmchql@ibmmail.com
Subject: RE: Fermenting first homebrew/Chloramine Removal
In HBD #1647:
-=> Joseph R Tristano asks about (apparent) lack of fermentation...
Try a hydrometer check. Snap-top fermentation buckets are notorious for
letting CO2 leak out of the lid/bucket interface. If you followed typical
(prohibition beer) instructions on a hop extract can, you have more than
enough fermentables. This is the only thing that comes to mind due to the
brevity of your post.
-=> Joseph R Tristano also writes that he fills his airlock with a B-Brite
solution.
It is good to fill the airlock with something incapable of infection; however,
might I recommend that next time you try vodka or ever-clear (both are
flavorless grain alcohols)?
Why? You may notice that when you remove your fermentor from that 80F bath to
a cooler temperature that the airlock fill moves toward the beer side
(assuming your lid isn't leaking...) If the temp differentials are great
enough, some of that B-Brite may be drawn into your brew.
Also, when you move that plastic bucket, the sides may collapse slightly and
expel air through the lock. When you set it down again, it will return to its
original shape - again potentially drawing that B-Brite into your beer. If
vodka or ever-clear is drawn in, they add no chemicals that wouldn't end up
there naturally.
I believe B-Brite solutions lose their efficacy over time as well.
Once again, just my (humble) opinion...
-=> Dean A. Pulsifier asks about removing chloramine from his tap water...
I believe filtration through activated charcoal will remove it (not an
expert).
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
"So many beers; so little time!" - beer-o-phile's lament
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Pat Babcock
President, Chief Taste-Tester, and Consumer Numero Uno
Drinkur Purdee pico Brewery
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 95 08:26:32 est
From: Robert_Ser@ceo.sts-systems.ca
Subject: Bottling a lager...
CEO file contents:
Dear fellow Home Brewers...
I have a question regarding the bottling of a lager. I brewed
a batch of pilsner on December 30th (OG: 1045) and used Wyeast's
Pilsen Lager yeast (#2007). The primary fermentation was done at
55F for 7 days, then racked to secondary and moved to a cold room
(42-45F) where it has been sitting for four weeks. It was very
clear and showed no visible signs of fermentation.
I was getting ready to bottle it on Monday night, so I moved
the carboy onto a work table and started preparing my bottles.
After a few minutes, I happened to noticed that the airlock was
bubbling again (about one bubble every 5 seconds). Worried about
incomplete fermentation (read: exploding bottles), I placed the
carboy back in cold storage to let it ferment some more.
I checked it yesterday (two days later), and the airlock was
once again silent. I gave the carboy a slight swirl, and noticed
airlock activity again.... I have not checked the SG (something
about worrying about infections stops me), but I get the feeling
that the fermentation is complete.
So please tell me, what is happening? Is this simply a case
of releasing dissolved CO2 when I shake it (like splashing around
a glass of Coke after it goes flat)?
Can I bottle it, or must I really take the SG, and check
again in a few weeks to make sure the fermentation is complete?
While I'm on the subject of bottling lagers, here is a
related question: should I keep the bottles at a warmer temp (say
55F, or even warmer) for a week after bottling in order to kick
off the fermentation, or should I keep them cold (45F)? Also, is
there any need to re-introduce some yeast at bottling time, or is
there enough dormant yeast in suspension in the beer as it is?
Finally, is the standard 3/4 dextrose good for a pilsner, or
should that be slightly increased?
Any advice/answer would be more than welcome...
And now, a public 'Thank You' to Matt K. (of the kitchen
yeast painting, foam city kegging and brewba diving 'fame') who
kindly introduced me to all-grain brewing last week. I was
surprised to see how easy, worry free and *fun* this was. We used
a single step infusion mash, and had absolutely no problems
(except for one minor boil-over which kept me scrubbing the stove
till midnight or so)... I am definitely considering the conversion
to all-grain soon, and encourage all extract brewers to give it a
try (preferable with a knowledgeable friend). Thanks again,
Matt...
TIA,
Rob in Montreal
robert_ser@ceo.sts_systems.ca
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 95 08:38:31 EST
From: djfitzg@VNET.IBM.COM
Subject: Vail Co.
greetings colorado, a friend of mine is planning a trip out to Vail, and would
like your help. He is interested in any of the finer micro bre establishments
out your way. please respond via e-mail to djfitzg@vnet.ibm.com
as always thanks,
dan fitzgerald.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 95 08:55:38 -0500
From: David Arnold <davida@syrinx.umd.edu>
Subject: Re: Phila shops.
folsom@ix.netcom.com (Alan Folsom) wrote:
>There are several shops in the city, "Home Sweet Homebrew" is one I've
>heard about. For those of us who don't go into the city limits very
>often, I recommend Keystone Homebrew in Montgomeryville. Their number
>is 641-4677, they do a lot of business so stock turns over fairly
>quickly, have good prices, and nice people. Usual disclaimer, I don't
>work for them, etc., although they do get a lot of my money.
Yes, I've been to this one too. It's nestled in a stall in the Montgomery-
ville Farmers Market; not exactly where you'd look for a homebrew shop, but
why not? I wasn't looking seriously, but they did seem to have a decent
supply of fixins
They had a complete kit to turn a fridge into a keg fridge for $200, with
everything but the drill bit and keg. How is this for a price on average?
I'm not really interested in the rock-bottom mail-order price, as I've been
burned this way before. Of course, I am swayable by intelligent arguments!
:-)
David Arnold (301)405-7636 Inet: davida@syrinx.umd.edu
UUCP: uunet!syrinx.umd.edu!davida
University of Maryland NeXTmail: davida@anagram.umd.edu
College Park, MD 20742 URL: http://syrinx.umd.edu/~davida/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 1995 09:11:52 -0500
From: stevens@stsci.edu (Mark A. Stevens)
Subject: Plastic labels
In HBD 1647, Steven Lichtenberg (steve@Pentagon-EMH6.army.mil)
recommended bottles from Blue Ridge beers (Frederick Brewing)
because they had plastic labels that were easy to remove.
I've been using the Blue Ridge bottles quite a bit lately, but
I've found that while, yes, the labels are VERY easy to remove,
they often leave a sticky residue on the bottle that is very
difficult to remove. I let the last batch of bottles soak in
a chlorine bleach solution for an hour or so, then ran them
through the dishwasher. A few of the bottles came out perfectly
clean, but quite a few had a gummy sticky mess on the side.
After I finish drinking up what I've got, I'll let it soak
for a week or two in a tub of chlorine solution and see if
that helps.
Cheers!
- ---Mark Stevens
stevens@stsci.edu
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 1995 09:47:58 -0500 (EST)
From: Jim Busch <busch@eosdev2.gsfc.nasa.gov>
Subject: More isinglass
Capt Kirk asks:
<The question is: can one do both of these and expect
<it all to work? Specifically, does the isinglass precipitate
<the yeast as well as the proteins, and if so, is there any
<reasonable way to clarify with isinglass and yet not
<have to force carbonate?
Add the priming fermentables and the isinglass at kegging time.
The yeast will ferment and the isinglass will drop the yeast.
Be sure to cut the dip tube short or you will have a lot of
isinglass in your glass. Isinglass is meant to be used in this
fashion. If you want to force carb, use the isinglass in the
fermenter, then force prime the keg.
Dennis suggests:
<4) Pitch with 2 quarts starter *directly into the boiling keg*.
Leave lid in place.
Ferment on *all* of the hot trub??! Thats a radical idea! Check out
Ron Barchet's article on hot trub in an early 94 issue of Brewing Techniques.
Seriously, you would be much better served if you had a second 1/2 BBl
keg that is sanitized and ready to take the chilled wort. By using an
immersion chiller, you already have all the hot and cold trub in the
kettle, and it can be quickly separated from the bright wort. No waiting
required, just one more transfer to the fermenter.
BTW, I think you are asking for stability problems in a beer fermented
on hot and cold trub.
- --
Jim Busch
busch@mews.gsfc.nasa.gov
"DE HOPPEDUIVEL DRINKT MET ZWIER 'T GEZONDE BLOND HOPPEBIER!"
------------------------------
Date: 02 Feb 95 09:58:14 EST
From: "William F. Cook" <71533.2750@compuserve.com>
Subject: Way to go, Al
In HB1647, Algis writes:
>Mark Garetz knows far less about brewing than he thinks he does...[snip]...
>To call Mark Garetz's work with hops "research" is a grave mistake.
>It may sound as if I have a personal vendetta against Mark and perhaps
>I do.
Way to go, Al. Up until now, this was an excellent discussion of hop
utilization. I'm sure it will deteriorate into worthlessness immediately.
I take it that, whatever professional organizations you may belong to,
you aren't invited to be a discusser of technical papers very often.
Bill Cook
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 1995 07:54:25 -0800
From: dfuller@ix.netcom.com (Franklin Fuller)
Subject: Archive of Beer Recipes?
Does anyone out there know of locations of beer recipes on the Net? I
am still an extract brewer and am looking particularly for extract
recipes...although I hope to be brewing all grain sometime soon!
:fdf:
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 1995 11:02:07 -0500 (EST)
From: "Christopher V. Sack" <cvsack@mailbox.syr.edu>
Subject: Re: Flames (real ones) / bottles breaking
On Tue, Jan. 31, Ron Dwelle asked about Charlie P's method of pouring
boiling wort into empty beer bottles in preparation for yeast
propogation. Ron experienced two "breakers" and three "crackers". This
is not unexpected because the bottles are neither tempered nor heat
resistant glass such as Pyrex (tm) or Kimex (tm). If the bottles are
heated before filling (I personally use oven sanitation), then pouring
hot liquid into the hot bottle and letting the entire bottle cool down
slowly will result in no breakage. I have used this very method for
bottling a batch of hot tea. Two cases of bottled iced tea and no breakage.
As for flaming the neck of the bottle. If the bottle was just sanitized,
flaming is not necessary, but it is still a good idea for yeast
propogation purposes. The contact time of the flame is under a second,
but it is important to flame all parts of the neck that may contact the
sterile wort. Flaming is very important just before pouring, because
the lip of the bottle has been in contact with the unsanitized air for ???
days/months.
I personally use a butane torch set on a small flame for two reasons.
First of all, the flame is much hotter than a lighter so that contact time
can be much shorter. Secondly, the torch will stand up by itself. This
frees up both of my hands. One hand for the bottle, the other for the
cap.
Chris
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 95 10:59:27 EST
From: map@summit.novell.com
Subject: Mead questions
I have several questions about mead that I hope someone who
is more experienced can answer.
I started my first trial batch of mead back in late Sept 94.
I used 4lb generic honey to 1 gallon water.
Boiled honey with water (30 mins) and then added tannin/tea, acetic
acid/lemon juice, yeast nutient and dry champagne yeast when cooled.
Starting SG 1.120.
Fermentation ceased after 15 weeks (FG 1.050) and was still cloudy.
I didn't like this FG so I added more yeast nutient and a little more
dry champagne yeast - What I got wasn't any more fermentation but the
added yeast mixture did clear the must and also dumped a load of sediment
in the secondary.
My questions are:
1) Why did the fermentation stop? tried to keep temp. atleast 60F - I know
it takes time for mead to ferment, but I got no further activity
after 15 weeks. I hear stories about mead going down to FG 0.998.
2) Was it a smart move to add more yeast? - I guess not - but it did clear.
What else can I do to get it going again if it happens next time?
The resulting mead is drinkable but a little to sweet for me (1.050),
but the strength is ok. It's in the sweet sherry range as far as I can tell.
The only other question I have - Is it possible to darken the resulting mead?
The light yellow color is a little off-putting when I "pass" it around to
guests :-). Can I darken it in future with something while I'm preparing the
must. Do different types of honey impart different colors to the resulting
mead? Would a rasberry melomel have color and/or be darker?
Thanks.
Mike -- map@summit.novell.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 95 08:14:46 PST
From: hollen@megatek.com (Dion Hollenbeck)
Subject: Re: r.e. Iodine Test Strips - Where?
>>>>> "Stan" == Stan Fisher <stanf@indirect.com> writes:
>> of the solution. Bet most of you, too, were under the false
>> assumption that if it was still orange, it would sanitize, well I have
>> learned that is false information and I want to find out what is
>> accurate information.
Stan> Woah!!! Does anyone have an idea of the shelf life of a jug of
Stan> Iodophor?
I was talking about diluted Iodophor. I believe that there is no
problem with the product bottle when kept closed, but this is not
based on any facts. If there was a shelf life, wouldn't the
manufacturer have some sort of expiration date on it?
dion
- --
Dion Hollenbeck (619)675-4000x2814 Email: hollen@megatek.com
Staff Software Engineer Megatek Corporation, San Diego, California
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 95 9:51:50 MST
From: Randy M. Davis <rmdavis@mocan.mobil.com>
Subject: Barley Gelatinization
On the subject of rests at temperatures below the gelatinization temp. of
barley. The other day Jim Larsen mentioned that malted grains do not require
gelatinization. In support of his statement I offer a quote from Malting and
Brewing Science that I thinks explains the issue fairly well. This is from
volume 1 page 282.
"It has long been known that extended mashing at 55 C.(130F.) eventually
produces about 90% of the possible extract, although this is well below the
recognized gelatinization temperature of barley starch, and even at lower
temperature extensive starch degradation occurs. The enzymes are therefore
slowly able to degrade malt starch granules and not merely a paste or
gelatinized starch as is present in precooked adjuncts."
So, let's hear it for the enzymes. The next section describes some of the
effects of mash temperature on protein degredation. By the way, I am currently
reading Malting and Brewing Science for the second time. I find that it
satisfies the burning desire I have for more and more technical info related
to brewing. I recommend it highly to anyone who suffers from the same
affliction.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Randy M. Davis rmdavis@mocan.mobil.com Calgary Canada (403)260-4184 |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 95 10:56 CST
From: arf@genesis.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: Roller mill speed
<From: "Manning Martin MP"
>My Glatt mill is now powered by a 30 in-lb gear motor that turns at 156 RPM.
Power transfer from the gear motor PTO to the mill is through a split
coupling. A direct drive arrangement such as this is very compact, and
avoids the hazard of a belt and pulleys.
That's why I put in the engineering effort to try the approach. I was
coupling with the gears used in the gear drive and it required on a small
plastic to completely cover all moving parts. I conlcuded that the motor
required to do the job was far to expensive to make a vialble product.
>It will start from zero-speed with no hesitation, even if the hopper is full
of malted barley or the slightly-more-taxing malted wheat.
Not sure what is going on here but Yankee Brew News reported that the Glatt
is harder to turn than the MM and should therefore require more torque. I
don't know why this should be given the much small rollers and consequent
lower throughput.
> I have not tried un-malted wheat, but my ol' KitchenAid Flour mill is just
made for that.
If you don't want to destroy the gears, it's best you stick with the KA.
> I also know of a Listermann Philmill which has been motorized
using the same gear motor and direct drive.
This is even harder to believe as I KNOW this one is harder to crank than the
MM. Guess I would like the brand and model of that motor as it clearly is
not performing like the ones that I bought.
> The through-put of my Glatt depends somewhat on the gap setting, and is
typically 1.2 to 1.5 pounds per minute. Interestingly, measurements taken at
slow speeds, cranked by hand, would have predicted as much as 1.8 lb/min at
156 RPM, so there is a noticable reduction of through-put with increased
cranking speed.
That is a direct result of the efficiency of the texturing of the rollers.
They obviously are feeding grain as fast as they can at the lower speed and
increasing it just rolls them around in the mill. This situation existed to
a lesser degree in the MM with the earlier linear groves on the rollers. The
current design is far more efficient and the throughput rises linearly to
about 400 RPM at which point, it starts falling off again.
js
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 95 09:23:22 pst
From: "jim robinson" <jim_robinson@ccmailsmtp.ast.com>
Subject: Water Analysis
This message is to the gee-whiz propeller head programmers out
there ( I say that with the greatest respect). I even remember
seeing a post from a programmer who is looking for work.
Weeeellll, if you can do what I'm proposing, you'll impress more
than a few brewers.
I'm sure that more than a few of you are getting tired of seeing
the "now standard" graph for water analysis. The standard phrase
at the end of the post is something like this "should I add
_____?". Obviously the answer to their question depends on a
number of variable, not the least of which is "what are you
trying to brew?"
OK, so heres the catch. Is it possible to come up with a program
that the average Joe Brewer can "plug" in his local water numbers
and come up with the proper adjustment to make a specific brew?
I know that it would probably take a bunch of research, but the
programming would probably be easy. Eh? I'm sure if someone did
a beta version, the local beer experts would be happy to tweak it
into reality. This would be the brewers equal to the pocket
calculator. It doesn't matter to many brewer why something
works, or what the theory behind it is, only that it works.
With that said, are there any takers out there?
I know what your going to say... but I only work for a computer
company, I don't actually know anything about programming ;-)
Jim Robinson
P.S. My Coleman "Commercial" 10 gallon water cooler ($22.00)is
now doing very successful 10 gallon batches. SO THERE GOTT!!
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 1995 10:37:02 -0700
From: k-jones@ee.utah.edu (Kelly Jones)
Subject: Siebel Operations course
Has anyone out there attended the Siebel "Microbrewery and Pub Brewery
Operations" course? Can you offer any input as to the course content, what
you gained from the course, whether it was worth the money, etc.? (I have
the Siebel catalog, I'm looking for feedback from actual course attendees.)
Thanks,
Kelly
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 95 12:39:50 EST
From: Spencer.W.Thomas@med.umich.edu
Subject: Re: Ultraviolet light
I found the following on "the web" yesterday. It seemed relevant to
this discussion.
>From http://hamjudo.com/hottub_notes.html (see also
http://hamjudo.com/cgi-bin/hottub)
What is the ozone generator?
An ozone molecule is three oxygen atoms instead of the normal two. My
dictionary (American Heritage Dictionary, Second College Edition) says
that ozone is an unstable, powerfully bleaching, poisonous, oxidizing
agent with a pungent irritating odor. I use ozone instead of chlorine
or bromine to keep the water clear. Ozone breaks down into normal
oxygen after a few minutes in the water.
The ozone generator is a tube with an ultraviolet light. Air gets
sucked through the ozone generator and is pulled into the water. When
the UV light hits the air, it turns some of the oxygen into ozone. The
ozone in the water kills any single celled creatures in the tub. It
also has bleached my rubber ducky.
------------------------------
Date: 02 Feb 95 09:43:55 PST
From: "Dutcher, Pier" <PEDU@chevron.com>
Subject: Breaking bottles while capping
From: Dutcher, Pier -PEDU
To: OPEN ADDRESSING SERVI-OPENADDR
Subject: Breaking bottles while capping
Date: 1995-02-02 09:31
Priority:
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After reading the thread about people breaking "cheap" bottles, I thought
I'd enter the fray -
I started using Miller Genuine Draft (yeah, right...) bottles several years
ago because they were the only clear, recappable bottles that contained an
affordable beer that I could kind of enjoy. I also broke several of those
while recapping, along with other brands of thin bottles. My solution: stop
using the neck-grip double-lever type capper (you could break a champaigne
bottle with one of those if you tried hard enough) and switch to a
single-lever capper. It was a bit more expensive (~$40, as I recall), but
worth every cent. I've been unable to break ANYTHING with it, and I put
plenty of force on the lever to assure a tight cap seal. Those of you who
have used only a double-lever capper, try to borrow a single-lever one for
your next bottling session. I doubt if you'll want to return it]
Pier Dutcher (PEDU@CHEVRON.COM)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 95 12:53:40 est
From: Matt_K@ceo.sts-systems.ca
Subject: Fort Meyers
Message:
I will be heading to Fort Meyers in sunny Florida in the near future.
Any advice re. good brewpubs will be greatly appreciated.
Matt
Montreal
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 95 09:49:34 EST
From: Steve Robinson <Steve.Robinson@analog.com>
Subject: Decoction
Tom Ausfeld writes:
> Secondly: I keep hearing that bringing grains to higher than 170F, I
> risk an increase leeching out tannins from the husks. I have done 6
> all-grain beers and I'm very happy with the results. I'm planning a
> lager and would like to do it with a decoction mash. I have not
> performed a decoction mash as of yet, but have been doing alot of reading.
> My understanding is that you remove some of the mash (including grains)
> and boil it. Am I missing something here or am I worrying to damn
> much about tannins?
Tannin extraction is a function of both temperature and pH. In your thick
decoctions, the pH should be low enough as to minimize tannin extraction.
The concern arises during sparging because, as you remove the sweet wort
from the grain, the pH of the mash rises.
Steve Robinson in North Andover, Mass.
steve.robinson@analog.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 95 14:06:49 EST
From: Chris Barnhart <clbarnha@letterkenn-emh1.army.mil>
Subject: Counterflow Wortchiller questions
I currently use a "garden hose and tube" style wortchiller built
from ideas in the chiller FAQ. To save space and bulk I would like
to switch to the "coil in a PVC tube" style. Has anyone built
this type of chiller? How does it compare in efficiency with the
other style. Is it somewher between an immersion and the "garden
hose" style? Would this style use more cooling water? I've seen
several examples at store and in ads but don't know anyone who
actually uses one.
Chris Barnhart
clbarnha@letterkenn-emh1.army.mil
+
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 1995 13:51:01 -0700
From: Shawn Steele <shawn@aob.org>
Subject: AHA and the BJCP
I have forwarded the following announcement from Karen Barela, president
of the American Homebrewers Association. Before panicing, please pay
attention to the following paragraph of this release:
"We have long desired the BJCP to be educational, accessible, responsive and
international in scope. Because of this philosophy, we have decided to
develop a new beer evaluation program, one that represents the wide diversity
of competitions and judging in this country and the international community."
ANNOUNCEMENT FOLLOWS
- --------------------
January 31, 1995
It is with regret that the American Homebrewers Association has found it
necessary to cancel joint sponsorship of the Beer Judge Certification
Program. The joint sponsorship of the program, formed in 1985 under an
agreement with the Home Wine and Beer Trade Association will no longer
be in effect as of April 19, 1995.
We are not yet certain about the changes that will take place as we are
still discussing the situation with HWBTA and Beer Judge Certification
Committee (BJCC) representatives. Under the terms of the original
agreement, either program sponsor can cancel the joint sponsorship with
90 days written notice to the other sponsor. I notified HWBTA President
Desmond Lundy in writing on January 18, 1995 that the agreement has been
canceled.
We sincerely hope that the cancellation of the BJCP will go smoothly
during this 90 day period. It is our intention to work carefully and
conscientiously with the HWBTA and BJCC, both former sponsoring
organizations, and BJCP judges. We regret that we were unable to resolve
the differences in philosophy and style that have held back the current
BJCP.
The AHA is committed to making this transition a positive one. We have
long desired the BJCP to be educational, accessible, responsive and
international in scope. Because of this philosophy, we have decided to
develop a new beer evaluation program, one that represents the wide
diversity of competitions and judging in this country and the international
community. Current BJCP judges will be welcome to participate in the new
program with equivalent judging status. We also plan to form a new
committee structure, elected from the existing pool of BJCP judges. Our
goal is to build the best program possible.
A formal announcement with details about the transition will be mailed to
all judges at a later date. In the meantime, the program will continue
unchanged through April 19, 1995.
Sincerely,
Karen Barela
President, American Homebrewers Association
Please direct all inquiries regarding this announcement to Karen Barela,
AHA President, PO Box 1679, Boulder, CO 80306-1679, (303) 447-0816,
FAX (303) 447-2825, E-mail: aha@aob.org
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 1995 16:22:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: Arthur McGregor 614-0205 <mcgregap@acq.osd.mil>
Subject: RE: Iodine Test Papers
You can buy iodine test papers from many homebrew stores and mail order.
They are similar to pH test papers, and the color change depends on the
strength of the iodine in p.p.m. (parts per million). The papers can be used
to determine if your batch of iodine cleaning solution (1-2 oz in 5 gallons of
water) is still strong enough to for sanitizing. The price is around $3-$4
for the vial of 100 test papers.
A word of caution on the brands that are available - some brands have
color changes that are so small that the papers are worthless. I bought one
type through the mail (BLUE RIDGE iodine test papers) and they stink! The
color change is a very small blue tint, and the only concentration that has a
dark enough color to read is 50 ppm :>o) which is 4 times the strength needed.
I recently went to a local homebrew store and bought a different brand of
iodine test papers that IS VERY READABLE. It's labeled "Precision Iodine Test
Papers," and is made by: Precision Laboratories, Cincinnati, Ohio 45215
(513)777-3034. The small bottle consists of 100 white strips, comes with a 3
grey scales that indicate 12.5 ppm/25 ppm/50 ppm. The difference in the grey
to black scale are dark enough to determine if the iodine concentration is
strong enough to sanitize :>). I can not verified whether the test strips are
accurate, so will have to believe the folks at Precision Labs. I would
recommend that if your homebrew store does not carry any iodine test papers,
that they _not_ stock a brand that is hard to read (such as BLUE RIDGE). So
ask questions before buying if by mail order. Standard disclaimer, just
hoppy! I've found that a 5 gal batch at 12.5 ppm of iodine cleaning solution
will last for about 2 weeks before it needs replacing. Hope this helps :) .
BTW according to Thomas' Register the address for Precision Labs is:
Precision Labs
8989-T Crescent Park Dr.
West Chester, OH 45069
(513)777-3034
Good Brews!
Art McGregor (mcgregap@acq.osd.mil) Lorton, Virginia
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 1995 08:53:19 -0600
From: djones@iex.com (Douglas R. Jones)
Subject: Gravity?
I have been given the basic recipe for a commercial
beer that I love. But the folks gave me the gravity
in numbers I do not comprehend. I am assuming that
they are in Plato (?).
They are:
O.G. 11.5 - 12
F.G. 2.5 - 3
Can anyone translate this for me?
Also if the recipe calls for Belgian 2 Row is this
equivalent to either Belgian Pilsner or Belgian Pale Malt>
TIA,
Doug
- --------------------------------------------------
'I am a traveler of | Douglas R. Jones
both Time and Space' | IEX Corporation
Led Zepplin | (214)301-1307
| djones@iex.com
- --------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1649, 02/04/95
*************************************
-------
