Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1652
This file received at Hops.Stanford.EDU 1995/02/08 PST
HOMEBREW Digest #1652 Wed 08 February 1995
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor
Contents:
casking / chlorine&SS / vinyl hose (RONALD DWELLE)
Water Analysis (Jeff Stampes)
6 row confusion/TSP (usfmchql)
Cloudy Beer Problem (Ken Schroeder)
MATLAB ibu functions (John Glaser)
Re: Real Ale Conditioning (Tel +44 784 443167)
RE:Halogens vs Stainless Steel... (usfmchql)
Water bath mash tun (Jeremy Ballard Bergsman)
Re: Easy Mashers and Irish Moss/Rubber Removal (Doug Mewhort)
Hops Growers? (Blake Meyers)
Taste Test... (Bob Bessette)
sealing a Corny keg (Chris Lovelace)
Kegging questions (Elizabeth M Clouthier )
Lagglander dry malts and low S.G. (Mel Martinez) (by way of mem@pha.jhu.edu (Mel Martinez)) (by
Estimating IBUs (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
Keg Sanitation (Mark Roberson)
Re: Isinglass & other finings (Sean C. Cox)
Leaky Wort Chillers (berkun@decwet.enet.dec.com)
Brewsters who run- part 2 (kit.anderson)
Re: Loss of Carbonation with Mini-Keg (Chris Strickland)
******************************************************************
* 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: Mon, 06 Feb 95 10:52:47 EST
From: dweller@GVSU.EDU (RONALD DWELLE)
Subject: casking / chlorine&SS / vinyl hose
Can I "cask condition" in the small soda-type kegs? I'd like to try
kegging, but don't want to screw with the C02 tanks (I also think I
like natural carbonation better). Is there a faq on cask-ing (as
opposed to "kegging") somewhere? Refer me to a book? What's the reason
to add CO2 in the first place? Why not let the yeasties do it?
I think I have learned the evils of chlorine and SS tanks. My brewpot
just developed a pin-hole leak and has all sorts of other "rusty"
looking spots that may turn into pin-holes. Anyone know if I can
repair this pin-hole easily, or should I trash the pot? Epoxy? Is
Epoxy food-safe? (I usta sanitize with chlorine!)
I too have had trouble with the vinyl hose when taking near-boil wort
out of the kettle. The problem I usually have is that air starts
leaking into the hose from the spot where the hose clamp tightens down
on the vinyl. I just got some different kind of hose (from Handy Andy,
a big home-improvement/lumber type store) which is a vinyl with some
sort of red and blue re-inforcing molded into it. The salesperson said
it was for hotter water (and he had been active in the hose business
for at least 12 minutes). After one pot, I'd say it seems to be better
than standard see-through vinyl. We'll see after a couple more boils.
The hose wasn't that much more expensive (don't remember exactly, but
it wasn't a big-ticket item).
How do I get this Koch/Boston calendar?
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 95 09:01:55 MST
From: jeff@neocad.com (Jeff Stampes)
Subject: Water Analysis
Jim Robinson muses in HBD#1649:
>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?
Given the data, I would imagine this could even be done via a good
spreadsheet program (ie Excel 5.0). A region to plug in data, a few
lookup tables and 'if' statements, and a close proximity to what you're
lookinmg for could be achieved. A real program could of course do it
better.
I have not followed the water analysis and Chemistry thread, so I am
not qualified for this task. However, I'm reasonably sure that given
the proper data, it can be achieved. Maybe for starters, our resident
chemistry/zymurgy experst could work together to compile a faq listing
exactly what the appropriate water chemistry for various styles of beer
would be? Just a simple chart, nothing fancy y'know. If that data was
compiled somewhere, the ambitious among us could move on with a
"pocket Calculator" for water chemistry adjustments.
Question: I posted a while back that I had compiled the data from
Zymurgy's article on calculating mash temps. into a spreadsheet to
ease the mashing process. I have used it for a few recipes and have had
great success. I e-mailed it to countless people, but never received
any feedback on it. If any of you have used it to calculate your
infusions of hot H2O, let me know how it turned out.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Feb 1995 11:44:37 EST
From: usfmchql@ibmmail.com
Subject: 6 row confusion/TSP
In HBD #1650...
-=> TomF775202 comments on using a percentage of 6 row barley to aid in stuck
lautering with oatmeal...
I can understand how the grain size differences may aid in preventing the oats
from settling so deep in the bed that they stick the sparge (due to the
smaller-than-2-row inner kernels forming a more compact filter bed, I
presume?). I am confused by his comment on reduced extraction, however. Being
that six-row barley is enzymatically more powerful than two-row, wouldn't it
follow that it would yield a higher rate of extraction? Am I missing
something? (I am assuming the grind is adjusted for the smaller kernels.
Perhaps this is the source of my confusion?) Any comments welcome...
-=> Robert W. Mech shares his method for washing bottles, specifically:
> Q: Do I have to use Chempro, TSP, etc?
> A: No, you can... ....You can use any "Clean Rinsing" sanitizing agent...
I don't believe TSP is a sanitizing agent, as this implies. And, if Chempro is
similar to TSP (I'm not familiar with it), it follows that it isn't either.
All your sanitizing is being performed by your dishwasher's heat drying cycle
per your procedure.
"Grain, water, yeast... ...Brew it! Don't chew it!"
P.G. Babcock
President, Chief Taste-Tester, and Consumer Numero Uno
Drinkur Purdee pico (ie. micro-micro) Brewery
(My apologies to John Keane, but nano isjust too close to nanny for my
liking...)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 95 09:16:45 PST
From: kens@lan.nsc.com (Ken Schroeder)
Subject: Cloudy Beer Problem
For the past three or four months my beers have been coming out cloudy. Even
several weeks of cold conditioning does not clear the beer. I have made
some changes in my mashing proceedure, and I was wondering if the collective
wisdom could help shed light on my problem. The beer taste just fine and the
"numbers" are exactly on target for my process. My changes are : 1. little or
no protien rest (50C). 2. Dropped Lactic Acid water treatment. 3. 3 tbs of
gypsum (an increase of 1 tbs. ; 10 gal batches).
A few more specifics. I get water from the Sierra Nevada (Hetch Hetchy water
system). The water has virtually nothing in it. My mash usually sits at about
5.4 or 5.3 pH during the mash and dropps to 4.8 to 5.0 during sparge. I have
used a couple of crushes (Carona and Malt Mill) without any change in the
cloudyness. I use a Great Western 2 row base for all of my beers. I use a
thick mash technique with a doe in at 40c (acid rest) for about 30 min
before I raise to 60C with a direct fire and boiling water infusion. I spend
less than 5 minutes at the 50c range. Saccrification temp varies with the
style but is always between 60C and 68C. I recirculate the wort as I raise
the mash to strike, allow the grain bed to set and start a long sparge (1 to
1.5 hrs.) once the wort runs clear (subjective term).
Short of using finnings or filtering, does anybody have any sujestions to
help "clear" my problem. Private email is great : kens@lan.nsc.com.
TIA
Ken Schroeder
Sequoia Brewing
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 95 11:03:57 -0700
From: John Glaser <glaser@widlar.ece.arizona.edu>
Subject: MATLAB ibu functions
If you don't have or use MATLAB, ignore this post.
I figured there may be a few scientist/engineer types here that use
MATLAB. If you are interested, I've written a few MATLAB functions
that compute utilization and IBUs. If anyone wants them, I'll be glad
to email them to you.
They use the formulae given in Ed Hitchcock's post in HBD #1648, and
from the hops FAQ. They include help and syntax in MATLAB format, are
reasonably well commented, and can be easily modified if you don't
like the formulae used.
Hope this helps someone,
John Glaser (glaser@widlar.ece.arizona.edu)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 14:52:10 +0000
From: Brian Gowland <B.Gowland@rhbnc.ac.uk> (Tel +44 784 443167)
Subject: Re: Real Ale Conditioning
In HBD 1650, "Fleming, Kirk R., Capt" <FLEMINGKR@afmcfafb.fafb.af.mil>
wrote:
> Please excuse me for needing so much hand-holding--but let
> me verify I understand. Are you saying that a 3 week
> secondary fermentation/conditioning in your pressure
> vessels is sufficient to both clarify and carbonate to
> your taste? Is your 3 week minimum condxing period
> at ~room temperature?
Yes to both parts. Firstly, my pressure barrels sit on a bench in my
spare bedroom. Temperature varies in a natural way as we don't have any central
heating. In winter, the room will be pretty cool at night (maybe 10 deg. C) and
warmer by day (15 deg. C). In summer, the room will be warmish by night and
quite warm during the day (20-25 deg. C). I don't interfere with the temp. nor
worry about it - I can't say I've noticed any bad effects from brewing all year
round and cask conditioning under these conditions. The daytime temp. in summer
is probably a little high but a 5 Imp. gallon barrel of beer seems to have quite
good thermal inertia and they don't get exposed to direct sunlight.
As far as the three week period is concerned, this seems to be quite
ample for the beer to clear (some of my beers are pretty clear within a few days
to a week of barrelling). This may be largely due to a couple of extra steps
that I take during the primary fermentation as follows. Firstly I will state
that these aren't my own ideas (credit where credit due) but come from my
brewing text written by Graham Wheeler. After pitching my yeast, I normally
expect to see a good working yeast head after 12-24 hours. At 48-72 hours, I
"drop" the beer. Dropping is a traditional British method still practiced by
some commercial breweries and simply involves transferring the fermenting wort
into a clean fermenter WITH aeration. In transferring the wort, I leave the
dirty yeast head and a great deal of trub behind. The re-aeration allows quick
build up of a new, clean yeast head. Fermentation is allowed to continue until
the beer is at, or very close to, final gravity. At this point I rack once more
(this time WITHOUT aeration) and leave for another 24 hours before racking to
the pressure barrel (again without aeration). The barrel is then sealed and left
for the maturation period. The pre-barreling racking stage allows for a certain
amount of further settling of yeast and other solids that otherwise would need
to clear in the barrel. At this stage, the beer is often quite clear as it is
going into the barrel hence the occasional total clearance within a few days or
a week. I will hasten to add that I do not drink it just because it has cleared
- I take a small sample shortly after barreling and then after a week just for
quality assurance - what a chore. :)
Although the beer may clear quite quickly, the minimum period of three
weeks is as much for the maturation of flavour and developing of condition. The
key issue here is that, as I understand it, common US practice is to allow the
secondary fermentation to take place in a vessel with an airlock. This allows
the CO2 produced in the conditioning period to escape to the atmosphere and
means that if the beer was transferred to a pressure barrel or keg when
secondary fermentation is completed that there is no further residual sugars to
produce natural carbonation - hence the need for priming. By transferring to a
sealed pressure barrel at or near to FG, then any CO2 produced over the three
week period is trapped and gives CO2 pressure for dispensing and carbonation.
British Ales are traditionally lightly carbonated so it is easy to achieve the
level required this way - in saying that, however, one of my recipes will
consistently produce sufficient CO2 during conditioning to produce a pint of
foam if I open the tap too much and it can take several minutes to dispense a
pint without it doing this - not something that is necessarily desirable but it
illustrates the possibilities. One slight problem, however, is that as beer is
dispensed and the volume of beer to headspace ratio gets smaller, it becomes
difficult for the smaller volume of beer to produce sufficient CO2 to pressurise
the headspace and to carbonate the beer itself. In many cases, by the time the
last gallon or two is being dispensed, the carbonation can be very light and it
is often necessary to allow a small amount of air into the barrel as the beer
is dispensed. This is not normally a great problem as long as the last gallon
is consumed fairly quickly. The brew I mentioned above though produces enough
CO2 throughout to last virtually until the last few pints. I will add at this
point that three weeks is Graham Wheelers minimum period for a medium strong
ale - his (very rough) rule of thumb is take the OG, divide by two and to
mature/condition for that number of days - e.g., OG 1040, 40/2 = 20 days (or
near enough three weeks). Stronger ales should be matured/conditioned for 4,
5 or 6 weeks according to OG.
> BTW, when we used isinglass for the first and only time
> I added it incrementally as we pumped our chilled wort
> from the fermenter into the keg, then tried as best we
> could to agitate without sloshing too much. I noticed
> absolutely no indication of clarification--the beer
> is still fairly opaque (it's a brown ale) after three
> weeks in the cooler, and is definitely not "bright". I
> have no point, I'm just relaying results and trolling
> for comments.
Hmmm... there could be a number of issues that may have caused this
problem. I have only ever used Isinglass for winemaking (don't bother any
more) and know that it is very sensitive to temperature. Isinglass should
always be kept cool and should be pretty viscous. If exposed to the heat,
it will become very runny and its effect is reduced to the point that it
will be useless. Assuming that the Isinglass is in good condition, the way
that I have used it with wine is to put several teaspons of it into a jug
and add some wine in stages, mixing thouroughly at each stage. The first
stage involved adding 1 teaspon of wine to the Isinglass and blending until
well mixed. Then a couple more teaspoons and then a couple of tablespoons
etc. until a pint or more had been thoroughly mixed. This was then added
to the wine and thoroughly mixed in. It worked, but frankly I get just as
good results by leaving my wines to clear of their own accord and I don't
have to worry about it. My main point is that most things will clear of their
own accord if left for sufficient time - racking a few times helps. The only
time that I'd bother with Isinglass would be if I intended to transport a
large quantity and wanted it clear enough to drink shortly afterwards.
Apologies for the bandwidth on this message but it appears that cask
conditioning seems to be of reasonable interest. Hope its of some interest
and/or help.
Cheers,
Brian Gowland
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Feb 1995 12:34:22 EST
From: usfmchql@ibmmail.com
Subject: RE:Halogens vs Stainless Steel...
*** Resending note of 02/01/95 13:21
*** Resending note of 02/01/95 12:50
* Man's mind, stretched by a new idea, never goes back to its *
* original dimension. - Oliver Wendell Holmes *
Subject: RE:Halogens vs Stainless Steel/Cu in my beer...
-=> In a previous (recent) HBD I said the following:
> Your point is valid regarding halogens; however, per my sources (and,
> again, I'm not an expert), chlorine is particularly reactive with
> stainless steel. I don't know exactly where Iodine falls on 'the scale',
> but it is my understanding that it is substantially less reactive than
> chlorine; and somewhat more reactive than bromine.
I have done a little research of my own on this since. This research has
yielded the following nuggets (From a college chemistry book):
o All halogens react with metals to form halides (ites?- I'm away from the
book I found this information in. Not a chemist, so please excuse my
memory lapse).
o Iodine is LESS reactive than bromine. Reactivity of hologens is inversely
proportional to their atomic size. Iodine is a larger atom than bromine.
>From this information, I surmise that using iodine-based sanitizers may result
in damage (the formation of hal-whatevers) over the lifetime of the stainless
steel product. Due to the low reactivity of iodine in the formation of them,
this basically means you'll wear your pot, keg, etc. out before the iodophur
does.
In summary: Relax. Iodophur is safe for stainless. (I thought that was clear
from my last post on the subject, but apparently not!)
-=> In another issue, someone commenting on my jockey-box post asks if it is
safe to use copper with finished beer...
I believe it is in Papazian's 'Companion' book where he states that washing Cu
in a weak acid (such as beer) causes a layer to form which prevents Cu from
leeching into beer. Apparently, this will take place as the leading edge of
your beer stream passing through (all but instantaneous); it is evidenced by
the bright gold color resulting from this contact.
Hope it helps....
P.G. Babcock
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 10:39:53 -0800 (PST)
From: Jeremy Ballard Bergsman <jeremybb@leland.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Water bath mash tun
> From: Matthew Howell <howell@ll.mit.edu>
> Subject: mash tun/boiler question
> We were discussing ways to reduce the risk of a scorched
> mash when direct heating is used. ( I mash in a converted
> keg, BTW) My father suggested employing a double-boiler
> type setup to eliminate direct contact with the flame, and
> still allow the use of a Cajun cooker as a heat source.
One of the biggest problems I foresaw when designing my 1/2 BBL
brewery was that of applying the heat without scorching, especially
under the false bottom. As the batch size increases the square-cube
law makes it harder and harder to apply heat in the conventional
manner. I came up with this double-boiler idea and am in the process
of implementing it. The inside "pot" is a 1/2 BBL keg and the outside
"pot" is just over 1/2 of a 55 gal steel drum.
I have not actually used this but before starting I did two test
batches with 5 gallon batches being mashed in a 5 gallon pot that was
inside an 8 gallon pot, double-boiler style. This worked quite well,
gave me excellent yields (probably less local enzyme denaturing at the
point of heat application) and I was even able to bring up the temp
pretty well on my ordinary gas stove. My new setup will require a
very large heat source however since the amount of water in the outer
pot is going to be fairly large due to limited cheap choices for said
pot. For those worrying about the rate of heat application, remember
that you now get to add heat to every surface but the top, whereas before
heat was added to the bottom while being lost from every other part.
I am putting together my web page at the same time as this brewing setup
and I hope to have pictures when I am done. The address is:
http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~jeremybb/
Jeremy Bergsman jeremybb@leland.stanford.edu
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 07 Feb 1995 00:02:19 -0700
From: lmewhort@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca (Doug Mewhort)
Subject: Re: Easy Mashers and Irish Moss/Rubber Removal
Kirk Harralson Wrote:
>
>Andrew J Donohue writes:
>
>>I posted this to RCB with no response so I'll try here. I
>>tried Irish moss for the first time on my last batch. I use
>>an easy masher in a 1/2 keg for a kettle. When I tried to
>>drain the wort into my fermenter the EM clogged presumably
>>with break material an irish moss. I always use whole hops
>>and have never had this problem without the IM. Is there
>>a trick to this or should I just avoid IM with my system?
>
>Nothing will clog an EM faster than using IM. I even tried propping my kettle
>at an angle while chilling to try to get all the break material on one
side, but
>that didn't do it either. I have also tried attaching a piece of siphon
hose to
>the spigot and blowing air through the EM to clear it, but it quickly clogged
>back up. I ended up picking up the kettle and pouring it through a clean but
>unsanitized funnel to get it into the carboy. Of course, it ended up
infected.
>My only solution, so far, is to either not use IM, or remove the screen
part of
>the EM between the sparge and the boil, drain everything from the kettle into
>the carboy, and rack to a second carboy as soon as possible.
>
<<Snip a pretty good suggestion about slotted rings>>
I have absolutely no problem using Irish moss with my EasyMasher(tm). I am
certain this is because I use whole hops in the boil. They make a very nice
filter bed in combination with the screen of the EM. There is usually about
3 inches of hops and hot break on the bottom of my converted keg when the
keg has been drained in the chiller. This may be due to the somewhat
excessive amounts of Irish moss (1tbs/5gal 2tbs/10gal). A little hot break
(1/4 oz) made it into the chiller on this weekends Dopplebock, but that I
think that was due to the low amount of hops in the boil (1oz).
Also if the people looking for a recipie for Big Rock Traditional Ale are
still out there, send me a message and I'll post the All-grain recipie we
are using as our house brew. It is awfully close to the original.
On a completely different note. One of my cornelius kegs came with a red
rubber gasket rather than the usuall black rubber O-ring in the top. When
the keg was filled with boiling water, left for 1/2 hour, sealed, purged and
filled it would no longer hold pressure. When the top was removed to inspect
why, the gasket had ripped in many pieces and was stuck soilidly in place on
both the lid and the inside of the top of the keg.
Which finally brings me to my question, is there any way to remove rubber
without affecting the stainless steel? I would hate to lose such a nice keg.
Doug.
Skilled Brewer, Twisted Chef...Maybe I should open a brewpub?
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 11:10:21 -0800 (PST)
From: Blake Meyers <bcmeyers@ucdavis.edu>
Subject: Hops Growers?
I am wondering if anyone out there grows their own hops, and can provide
some information about where to purchase or acquire some clippings to
grow my own. I'm also curious about what sort of growing conditions are
best and if the flowering is light-sensitive.
I also tried an interesting experiment last night, and would like to know
if anyone has any related experiences:
I recently tried brewing an Oatmeal Stout recipe that I got
somewhere, and being the novice brewer that I am, I became impatient
after a week for the fermentation to stop. When it finally got down to
about one to two bubbles per minute, added the corn sugar and bottled it
up. Two weeks later, there was so much carbonation that half the beer
turned to foam - the neverending head! Anyway, it was not very
satisfying. SO last night, I opened all my bottles and captured the foam
and beer in a carboy. I figure let it settle again, finish the
fermentation and then rebottle it. Will this be a problem?
Blake Meyers
University of California - Davis
bcmeyers@ucdavis.edu
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Feb 1995 13:07:47 EST
From: Bob Bessette <bessette@hawk.uicc.com>
Subject: Taste Test...
Fellow HBDers,
I thought I would post this and try to specifically target the extract brewers
out there. This past weekend my wife and I decided to do a taste test. I made
it a point to save one of my extract brews that I made probably 4 months back
and decided to compare this brew with my first all-grain batch that I made
probably 2 months ago. My wife and I, among many others, were always very
impressed with my extract brews. At the time I was making them, I was very
satisfied. But still I always wanted to have the flexibility and creativity
that all-grain beer making allowed you. Well, the comparison of the two brews
was rather amazing. My wife made comments like the extract brew was "light and
bubbly' while the all-grain batch was 'full-bodied'. Strange thing is that
this morning when I walked into work one of my co-workers mentioned that the
all-grain was by far better than any of the extract brews I had let him try
previously. Another co-worker had already told me this.
So I guess what I'm trying to say is that the move to all-grain is VERY
DEFINITELY worth it. Not to mention that I am saving approximately $10 per 5
gallon batch with the all-grain process and I'm not even culturing my own
yeast yet. This past weekend I made another batch and it took me from start to
finish 5 hours. And, it should be noted, that 1.5 hours of this was waiting
for conversion. I was eating dinner at the time. So if you feel the urge to go
to all-grain DO IT. I would recommend that you watch someone else do it first
and take notes. After your first time you will be constantly striving to
perfect your process. If any of you extract brewers out there would like any
information from me please send me mail. Since I have only done 3 all-grain
batches (13 overall) I think I can relate to what concerns you might have as
far as moving to the all-grain process. I don't claim to be an expert or even
close to it. All I know is that the quality of my beer has increased
tremendously since I have moved to the all-grain process and I would be
welcome to share with you my experience from moving to the all-grain process.
Better beer for cheaper money. Can you beat that?
Bob Bessette (all-grainer and proud of it...)
bessette@uicc.com
Systems Analyst
Unitrode Integrated Circuits
Merrimack, NH 03087
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 16:32:31 -0500
From: lovelace@pop.nih.gov (Chris Lovelace)
Subject: sealing a Corny keg
Hello, all.
I've just gotten a kegging setup and I'm trying to figure out how to get a
good seal on my pin-lock keg. The gasket on the bung is flexible and
appears to be in good shape, but whenever I try to pressurize the keg, it
leaks. The keg was pressureized when I got it, so there must be a way...I
just can't find it.
When I called the store where I got the keg, they suggested wiggling the
bung around with the CO2 turned on to find the exact spot where I can get a
good seal. I found it once and I got the keg pressurized up to about 30
psi and it seemed to hold. Now I want to pressurize it to 5 psi and I
can't get the bung to where it won't leak.
Is there some secret to this? Is it this difficult to get a good seal on
all kegs or is it just mine? (If its just mine, I may take the keg back
and exchange it for another.)
TIA,
Chris Lovelace LOVELACE@POP.NIH.GOV
------------------------------
Date: Mon Feb 6 16:33:01 1995
From: <eclouthi@tmac.com> (Elizabeth M Clouthier )
Subject: Kegging questions
To the collected wisdom I have a couple of keg questions:
I have come into possesion of a Sankey Type QTR barrel 7.5 Gal.
What is this thing good for? Can I use this for a kegging system
or is it only good for a brew pot?
On a separate issue I tried my hand at my first all-grain last
week. It was a spirtual experience... lots 'o' fun but God what a
mess. TIA
Tom Clouthier
President and brewmaster
PIG DOG PICO BREWERY
PHIPPSBURG MAINE
eclouthi@tmac.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 16:37:41 -0500
From: mem@rowland.pha.jhu.edu (Mel Martinez) (by way of mem@pha.jhu.edu (Mel Martinez)) (by
Subject: Lagglander dry malts and low S.G.
The last two batches I have made I have used Lagglander dry malts from JD
Carlson.
The first had 2 lbs of Lagg. dry plus 4 lbs syrup plus ~3/4 lb steeping
grains. The target gravity was ~1.050 in 5 gal. However, I hit this
while adding (sterile) water to the fermenter at only about 4 gal total
volume. By the time I bottled, after, of course, racking to secondary,
racking to
bottling bucket, sampling the gravity a few times, etc., I only managed
38 X 12 oz bottles - 3.6 gal.
The last batch, which I made this weekend, used 3 lbs of Lagg. dry malt
extract, 3.3 lb syrup and about 1.3 lb steeping grains. The target was
~1.060-65 in 5 gal, however, again, I came up way short. I was able to
meet the target by quickly boiling a scrounged up 1 lb jar of honey and a
1/2 cup water and adding it to the mix. After that, every thing was
perfect, s.g.-wise. I extracted a quart of 1.06+ grav. wort to freeze for
krausening and added water and a quart of low-gravity(by now) yeast
starter to get 1.048 in 5.75 gal, which is about correct for the recipe.
Question - is there something about about Lagglander dry malts that is
keeping me from hitting my s.g targets? I.E. - 1 lb should equal ~10
points in 5 gal, correct? I'm falling way short. I have double checked
my hydrometer with tap water and it seems dead on correct.
Also, the final gravity of the first batch, while it was supposed to be
heavy (a dark brown), I was expecting it to get to ~1.018 or so and it
pretty much stopped at 1.021. Does the Lagglander have a lot of other,
non-fermentables in it?
The shops here lately seem to be carrying more Lagg than M&F dry malts so
that is why I used it. If I use it again, I am definitely going to make
sure I keep a lb or two of honey at hand, but that really defeats one's
attempts at 'all malt' brewing... Should I just expect to use more Lagg.
dry in my recipes?
Any info/comments/suggestions are much welcome.
Cheers,
- --
Mel Martinez
The Johns Hopkins University
Dept. of Physics
mem@pha.jhu.edu
------------------------------
Date: 6 Feb 95 15:06:00 -0600
From: korz@iepubj.att.com (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
Subject: Estimating IBUs
Bryan writes:
>Garetz does present a good method of estimating IBUs in
>your homebrew.
<snip>
>Let's say you make a pale ale with (according to Garetz
>formula) 40IBUs of bitterness. Get a reference beer with
>a known amount of IBUs, like Budweiser. Jackson's and
>Eckhardt's books give actual IBUs of various commercial
>beers. Garetz describes the process in detail, but you
>add a known amount of hop oil to your reference beer until
>the bitterness tastes the same as the bitterness in your
>pale ale. You can then calculate the bitterness of your
>reference by adding the IBUs that Bud started with to
>the number of IBUs that you added.
I'll bet a lot of you (especially Bill Cook) expected to
hear from me after this post, no? This method that Garetz
has in his book, and Bryan posts here, has one major
problem: the perception of bitterness is dependent on not
*just* the IBUs in the beer(maltiness, water chemistry, etc.).
In other words, if you were adding a calibrated hop extract
(not hop oil -- hop oil is not bitter -- it adds aroma)
to Budweiser for a homebrewed American Premium Lager which
had the exact same protein, melanoidin, dextrin, water and
residual sugar profile as Bud, then the test would be valid,
but if you don't then you can't use the values.
Here's a test for you: compare Liberty Ale and bottled
Guinness. Which has more bitterness? Now, which has
more IBUs? Liberty is more bitter to the taste, but bottled
Guinness has more IBUs.
It gets even more complex when you figure-in sulphates
into the formula. A high-suphate beer will taste much
more bitter than a low-sulphate beer with the same IBUs.
Bottom line: the method is virtually useless.
********
Robert writes:
>TSP, Chempro, or other sanatizing agent.
Tri-sodium Phosphate (TSP), unless it is chlorinated, is not a sanitizer.
Also, not all dishwashers are created equal. If indeed someone is compling
a "bottle sanitation using a dishwasher" FAQ, please add the following:
If you are not using a "heat sanitation" cycle on your dishwasher and are
relying on a sanitizing solution to disinfect your bottles, first make
sure that your dishwasher gets solution onto all internal surfaces of
your bottles. Put a little water into ten bottles or so and shake them
so that all inside surfaces of the bottles are wet. Next, pour some
flour into the bottles and shake that to coat the inside of the bottles.
Put these bottles into the dishwasher - in various places in the racks -
and run a cycle. Check the bottles. Is there any flour left in them?
If so, then your dishwasher is not reaching every corner of every bottle
and therefore cannot be relied upon for sanitizing in this way.
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 14:59:45 -0700
From: roberson@hydroxide.chem.utah.edu (Mark Roberson)
Subject: Keg Sanitation
I would like to rationalise John Palmers' review of the metallurgical
literature with some first-principles chemistry.
Stainless steel is iron (Fe) alloyed with carbon and doped with a small
amount of chromium (Cr). The Cr:O bond is very much stronger than the Fe:O
bond, so Cr atoms displace Fe atoms on the surface to form an unreactive oxide
covering. In order for something to attack the bulk metal it must enter
through a defect in the covering, and there must be an electrochemical driving
force of sufficient strength to make the reaction go.
Elemental Iodine (I2) is fairly large as diatomic molecules go, and is not
a powerful redox reagent.
"Chlorine" bleach as used by brewers is not elemental Chlorine but sodium
hypochlorite (NaClO). The active agent, singlet Oxygen, is extremely reactive
and quite tiny. Thus I am hardly surprised that bleach corrodes stainless
steel while iodine is safe.
Hoppy brewing, Steve,
Mark
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 95 17:45:12 EST
From: scox@factset.com (Sean C. Cox)
Subject: Re: Isinglass & other finings
Greetings all,
I've seen a lot lately about the use of various fining agents for
clearing beers, and I am a litle confused about it. I don't use any finings
in my beer (too cheap/lazy) however, I alway get brilliantly clear beers
anyway. I'm an all-extract brewer (have been for years) and I use a variety
of extracts (usually whatever is cheapest, see above. :)
My most recent example was a cranberry-wheat beer (Alexander's wheat
extract) which became perfectly clear (beautiful red color too!) in about 2
weeks in the bottle (primary 4 days, secondary 1 week). I added the
cranberries to the cran-wheat right after the boil to help chill the wort,
I don't have a wort-chiller, but no haze!) A recent dark honey ale did the
same ("generic" dark malt extract, 2 lbs clover honey). The cranberry-wheat
was fermented with Wyeast Bavarian Weizen (my first liquid) and the honey-ale
was fermented with Edme dried. Both were beautiful in a couple weeks.
The only funky part of my brewing is that the water I use is *REALLY*
soft (you can make soap lather by thinking about the water). I don't have
the numbers here at the office, but the carbonates were in the low double
digits (25-40 I think) and the sulphates were similarly low (terrible hop
utilization). I remember getting my water survey and comparing to the numbers
Charlie P. has in TCJOHB and thinking "Gee, Pilsen has hard water compared to
me!" Could this impact the "clearing rate"?
Is there any data about the relationship between softness and clarity?
(Other than "Pilsen brews pilseners" "Burton-on-Trent sure doesn't". :-)
--Sean, confused in Connecticut.
=-=-= Sean Cox =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= FactSet Data Systems =-=-=
=-=-= scox@factset.com =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= 1 Greenwich Plaza =-=-=
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Greenwich, CT 06830 =-=-=
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 95 14:50:42 PST
From: berkun@decwet.enet.dec.com <berkun@decwet.enet.dec.com>
Subject: Leaky Wort Chillers
There's been some discussion recently on leaky wort chiller connections and I
can't resist my 2 cents. The writer of the original article sounds like he
may be slighly "hardware store impaired". This is alright, I'm "football
impaired" myself. :-)
Here's what I did (after experiencing jets of water shooting across my
kitchen). Go to your local hardware store. Tell them you want to connect a
male garden hose end to a copper pipe with a compression fitting. They will
sell you (at very low cost) a collection of little odds and ends and will
show you how they all line up on the copper pipe and just twist into place.
No soldering, no welding, no brazing, no problem.
Do this on both ends of the copper pipe.
Then tell them that you want to put a new female end on a garden hose. They
will sell you a cheap doo hickey. Buy two. Take you garden hose and cut it
in half. Cut the male end off of the one half and attach a new female end
where the old male was and another female to the other (cut) end.
Now you can screw one end of the garden hose into you kitchen faucet, the
other end onto your wort chiller (and since both ends of the hose are female,
it doesn't matter which end goes where) and you can attach the other piece of
garden hose to the output of the wort chiller and hang it out the window and
water your lawn, or run it into the sink and wash your dishes while you cool
your wort.
Point is: it's very easy, very cheap no more hose clamps and at the end of
the day you simply unscrew the hoses and store them separately from the wort
chiller making the whole darn thing easier to clean and store.
One last thing. Before you attach the compression fittings to the copper
tube, cut off about a foot of the tube. Drill a half dozen small holes about
half way down (the cut off section). You now have a very sophisticated high
tech wort aerating device, a venturi tube. Simply stick it on the end of the
racking hose as you siphon your cooled wort from the pot into your carboy.
Forget the shake and dance routine, you'll have more foam than you know what
to do with (actually, you can deal with the foam just by tipping the carboy
around a little).
I know others have mentioned this device, but it is the single greatest tool
I've added to my inventory and I feel compelled to spread the word.
Well, I guess this is more than 2 cents. Hose clamps just aren't nearly as
elegant as hose fittings.
Ken B.
Seattle
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Feb 95 14:19:25 -0500
From: kit.anderson@acornbbs.com
Subject: Brewsters who run- part 2
Part 2
Whether it's at the point of the first or second fermenter,
there isn't much to do at this point but wait until all action has
settled down in preparation for bottling. This whole time period
between brewing and bottling is not unlike pregnancy. It's sitting
around, thinking of names for the new brew and wondering if it will be
a blonde, red, or brunette and inherit bad hair days too. There is a
major difference though- the whole bulk of the baby isn't worn under
our rib cage. We probably won't make the cover of national magazines
posing nude with our hands lovingly caressing our fermentation tanks
but come to think of it, our newsletter could use a centerfold or two.
Our cravings at this point don't turn to pickles and ice cream, but
they do begin to develop for the new brew. Some of us brewsters even
begin to clean house long before bottling day arrives in anticipation
of the blessed event. Some of us have showers- you brewers might call
them "drinking up the old stuff to have room in the fridge for the new
brew" parties. The showers, though, aren't always for brewsters only.
If we waited for all the local brewsters to gather, we'd never get the
shelves cleaned out. No, I figure the best audience for a brewsky is
usually male, so I invite all those guys with coy invitations for a
football game, several brews and some eats- and as a result, spend the
next few months trying to figure out the elusive aroma in my new ale
that is fermenting quietly by the upstairs toilet the day of the
party. See? I told you these "use up the old brews" parties are
showers.
I can see that the nice lady in white is waving that syringe
at me again- so I had best send this installment off to the newsletter
audience in hopes that you brewers have gained yet another level of
empathy with your distaff partners-in-brewing. If last month's
installment did send you guys to the woods to bond, maybe this month's
will necessitate another meeting under the forest canopy to pass
talking sticks around. As you meet, do consider the fact that J.E.
thinks I don't have a big enough wortpot to deal with the results of
irate brewster upon his physical self. I'll just have to go shopping.
Oh, darn- I think I hear that mall calling now.
*********************************************************************
Disclaimer- This was written by Marie Mains, not me. It originally
appeared in the Inland Empire Brewers' (San Bernadino, CA)newsletter.
Permission is granted to redistribute. Flames to alt.shut.up.pc.jerk.
*********************************************************************
Kit "Travels With Chiles" Anderson
Bath, Maine
<kit.anderson@acornbbs.com>
*
- ---
* CMPQwk #1.4 * UNREGISTERED EVALUATION COPY
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 18:31:07 -0500
From: cstrick@iu.net (Chris Strickland)
Subject: Re: Loss of Carbonation with Mini-Keg
Well, I've isolated the leak in my mini-kegs. It turns out that it's the
seal inside of the pump.
----------
||
| || |
|--------|
| ^-|-- Rubber seal
Leak in Here somewhere ->| |
+--------+
||
||
||<--Beer Tube
||
I cleaned this area one day, there was a greasy substance inside. It
probably helped hold the seal. I had a buddy recommend I go to a scuba shop
and buy some silicone used on diving masks. That it should help plug the
seal. Any other ideas out there?
- --------------
Chris Strickland
cstrick@iu.net
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1652, 02/08/95
*************************************
-------
