Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1673
This file received at Hops.Stanford.EDU 1995/03/07 PST
HOMEBREW Digest #1673 Tue 07 March 1995
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor
Contents:
Hop Family Tree (dhvanvalkenburg)
Water treatment question/phenol precursors/mash exp's (David Draper)
Sodium percarbonate (MR ALAN F RICHTER)
DMS in California Lager Yeast (Mario Robaina)
motorizing Coronas revisted (DONBREW)
sanitizing (DONBREW)
steam generators/wort chillers ("Charles S. Jackson")
Yeast and my septic system? (Charles E. Deaton)
Flat beer (Larry Merkel)
Wort Chillers and Pumps (Pulsifer)
Cel out in Austin... (usfmchql)
Wort Pumps (Diane S. Put)
water treatments ("KEVIN A. KUTSKILL")
How much wheat in a weizen? / Help with Water (Rich Lenihan)
"Jurassic Beer" (Jeff Hewit)
RE: Fermenters again/Beer with a water finish (Kirk R Fleming)
Tubing (Philip Gravel)
Priming, sugar vs. malt? (Joseph_Fleming_at_GSA-2P__2)
Hop Utilization Mathematics (Mike Lemons)
LIST (RENEE)
Re: Anacortes Brewing CO./San Jaun Brewing (Michael Collins)
Heat and chlorine bleach (Philip Gravel)
__publication_only__ (RalphSaaz)
yeast reculturing, and acid washing (PGILLMAN)
Re: A-B and HSA (Timothy J. Dalton)
Carbonation problem (msmith)
sugar weight ("Bummer, Paul")
Re: FAT TIRE / FLAT TIRE (LeRoy S. Strohl)
Got Them "Nylon" Blues (TJWILLIA)
Extract Yield (Rob Reed)
******************************************************************
* 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: Fri, 03 Mar 95 14:59:24 PST
From: dhvanvalkenburg@CCGATE.HAC.COM
Subject: Hop Family Tree
In my use of hops I never paid much attention to the relationships
(genetic) of different varieties of hops until I started buying
them for a brew supply store. I started gathering information on a
chart to create sort of a family tree for hops (no I'm not Mormon).
I found it fascinating, and I think it graphically demonstrates
similarities between the varieties
As far as I can tell all hops originated from one of two lines; either
Fuggles or Hallertauer-Mittelfrueh. The following is a first draft
showing those two families of hops. Any inaccuracy is something that
I would like to know about. I would invite any input, additions etc.
___B.C. Goldings
___E. Kent Goldings_____/
/ \___Chinook*
/
_Golding__/_____Styrian Goldings
/
Fuggles__/_______Willamette*
______Tettanger
/ __Liberty*
/ /
Noble__Hallertauer___/____________(USA)__/___Crystal*
Mittelfrueh \ \
\ \ \
\ \___Hershbrucker \__Mt. Hood*
\
\__Saaz____
\ \__Lubelski (Lubin)
\
\American Saaz
* Developed under the USDA Breeding program.
USDA BREEDING PROGRAM:
Variety Year introduced
----------------------------------
Cascade 1972 (breeding stock not known)
Willamette 1976
Chinook 1985
Liberty 1989
Mt. Hood 1989
Nugget ?
Centennial ?
One last question. Is there anyone out there that worked on the USDA
Breeding Program who might be able to give me additional information?
Don Van Valkenburg EMail: dhvanvalkenburg@ccgate.hac.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 1995 10:57:30 +1100 (EST)
From: David Draper <ddraper@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au>
Subject: Water treatment question/phenol precursors/mash exp's
Dear Friends, I'm looking for a little input on water treatment. My only
source of treatment info is Line's Big Book of Brewing, which covers only
English Ales, with a category for "lager". Sydney is blessed with very
soft water it turns out (total dissolved solids 85-90 ppm, total
alkalinity as CaCO3 21-27 ppm, Total hardness as CaCO3 37-43 ppm) so
making pils beers is no trouble. I would like to know what brewing water
for some other styles should be like, in particular US-style brown ales
(hoppier than their UK counterparts), Vienna-style lagers -- Oktoberfest
- -- Maerzens, and German ales in general (alts, mostly; less fruity than
their UK counterparts). Recommendations of the form "water for X should
be like water for pale ales" are fine, I can take it from there. Post or
email, whatever you prefer.
I noted with interest Jim B's comments about a low-temp rest increasing
the content of precursors of 4-vinyl-guaicol. Jim, does this mean that
these precursors are there, but can only be made into bona fide phenols
provided the proper yeast is working on them (e.g. a Bavarian weizen
yeast)? I ask because I really dislike phenolic flavors (yup, denying me
the bliss of Bavarian wheat beers) and want to be able to make US-style
wheats that do not have phenolics, but wish to make use of low-T rests as
part of my mash program.
Hats off to Rob Reed for an outstanding post on his mashing experiments.
Huge signal to noise as a result! I have been doing some similar
experiments, but not nearly so systematic as Rob's, but enough to support
his conclusion that fermentability is likely to increase if the 60C step
is 45-50 min rather than 30. I reckon his reported 67% attenuation would
reach 70-71% under those conditions. Again, great job, Rob.
Nice to see Kinney back in force too. Cheers, Dave in Sydney
- --
"Life's a bitch, but at least there's homebrew" ---Norm Pyle
******************************************************************************
David S. Draper, School of Earth Sciences, Macquarie University, NSW 2109
Sydney, Australia. email: david.draper@mq.edu.au fax: +61-2-850-8428
....I'm not from here, I just live here....
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 1995 20:25:01 EST
From: YXPE55A@prodigy.com (MR ALAN F RICHTER)
Subject: Sodium percarbonate
In answer to BrewBeerd's questions about the chemical
composition of sodium percarbonate: It is NOT really a
percarbonate in the true sence. Normally when sodium
carbonate (Na2CO3) crystallizes, some water molecules are
included in the crystal. In sodium percarbonate, some of
the water in the Na2CO3 crystal is replaced by
hydrogen peroxide (H2O2). This co-crystallized H2O2 is
released when thecrystal is dissolved and it is that H2O2
that is the active
bleaching/sanitizing agent.
By the way, H2O2 is not all that great a disinfectant at
room temperature. It requires relatively high concentration
or high temperature to work effectively. Peracetic acid (if
you can find it) is a much better "oxygen" disinfectant than
H2O2.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 17:35:52 -0800 (PST)
From: sprmario@netcom.com (Mario Robaina)
Subject: DMS in California Lager Yeast
Has anyone had trouble with Wyeast California Lager producing
DMS? Two batches I recently made have been plagued with a cooked
vegetable/corn aroma and flavor -- not too pleasant. Both tasted
very nice after primary and at bottling, only to go to DMS in the
bottles.
Specifics:
two batches, one extract, one partial mash. Fermented with Cal.
Lager @ 62ish. Both tasted great out of the primary, and fine at
bottling. Bottle conditioned @ 62. Both developed DMS profile
in direct relation to carbonation ( > carbonation = > DMS).
My only theory is that Cal. Lager, as a lager yeast, releases
some sulfur compounds when fermenting. In the carboys, these
compuonds were allowed to escape through the airlocks. In the
bottle, nowhere to go.
As for solutions, all I can think is to try and "bottle lager."
Would this work? Isn't lager yeast supposed to reabsorb sulfur
compounds at low temps.?
Anyone have any ideas? Thanks.
-John
(through sprmario@netcom.com)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 1995 00:27:01 -0500
From: DONBREW@aol.com
Subject: motorizing Coronas revisted
FLATTER%MHS@mhs.rose-hulman.edu
sez,
>and my wife didn't complain about me getting a
>new tool set.
Can we trade wives????? I thought that it was a genetic thing to complain
about new tools.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 1995 00:27:11 -0500
From: DONBREW@aol.com
Subject: sanitizing
Kinney sez;
>Bringing 4 bbls. of water to a boil on brew day in the brewing kettle is
>a big pain so we are in the process of changing our sterilization program.
>I intend on using perasetic acid once a month to ensure absolute
>sterilization of our barrels. Then I plan on following that with a routine
>iodophor soak the rest of the month to maintain sterility. Both of these
>solutions rinse well with smaller amounts of boiling water.
>
Kinney, have you considered the LAC (low foaming acid) that is used on
dairy farms for disinfecting the stainless pipes etc. in the milking parlor.
It comes in HDPE barrels full strength and is used diluted. May also be a
source for new 55 or 15 gal. drums! I have absolutely no idea if this is a
feasible suggestion, I just know that the product exists, and that it comes
in either 15 gal. or 55 gal.drums at least. It seems to me at your
quantities and location a sales guy or gal should be available.
I have been boiling and heating sparge water in a couple of these 15 gal.
size barrels with water heater elements stuck in the side and appropriate
controllers for a about a year now. I only lightly rinsed before the first
time and I have never experienced an off flavor (from the water) .
Well anyway, just a thought, and all representations are anecdotal.
Don
donbrew@aol.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 95 4:03:12 CST
From: "Charles S. Jackson" <sjackson@ftmcclln-amedd.army.mil>
Subject: steam generators/wort chillers
Well...
I sent a query last week but it seems to have been lost in the Thursday,
Friday, Saturday - "Oh my gosh - NO HBD TODAY, AGAIN!" fiasco, Anyway, the
Outlaw picobrewery has done its last batch in AL and will be relocating to
Seneca/Clemson SC, (where brewing is legal) and is seeking brewing
companionship.
Next item, I have about 32K of text on steam generators that I have
collected and will send to any who want it. Much of it is private discussion
and the S/N ratio may be pretty lopsided. You will have to separate the wheat
from the chaff yourself.
My question. Not sure if I may have read this idea back before I ever
thought about mashing and just recently recalled it from the bowels of my
memory or if it is truely an original idea but... In the interest of reducing
water consumption in wort chilling operations I intend to build a recirculating
immersion chilling thingy, RICT(tm).
Prechilled water, obtained by passing water through a coil placed in the
salty ice water bath is directed to the immersion chiller and the effluent
collected in a 5 or 10 gal vessel. Using some cheap pump device the hot
effluent is recirculated. So much for the simple hand-waving gadget part, now
the rocket science part. How will I estimate the systems ability to re-cool
the hot effluent: how many feet of copper for the pre-chiller? optimal fluid
speeds? optimal volume for the saline bath? should I ditch the whole idea,
increase my prozac dose, and just reduce water waste by redirecting my hot
effluent into the washing machine for a load of undies?
Steve
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brewing beer is far more exciting when it is both a hobby AND a felony!
The Alabama Outlaw
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 1995 08:48:01 -0500
From: ae846@detroit.freenet.org (Charles E. Deaton)
Subject: Yeast and my septic system?
This may seem a little off beat but never the less a major concern.
Living in a rural area I do not have a "city waste system" but a
septic system. After bottling my first (of many more) batches, I
starting thinking about the yeast I sent down the sink. OH NO,
I've just created the monster that ate Southeaster Michigan. I
think. Will the yeast reactivate in my septic system and start
an unstoppable batch of something in my yard. 1000 gallons of
starter (yukkkkk).
TIA, Charles E. Deaton.
- --
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 1995 09:59:22 -0600
From: larrymerkel@i-link.net (Larry Merkel)
Subject: Flat beer
I don't think I've seen this particular question posted yet, so I'll
ask. I made my first batch of beer, and it turned out fabulous (although a
little cloudy). The second batch I made was clear as could be, and tasted
great. I'm 1/2 way through the second batch (24 bottles are now empty).
But, about 6 of them were flat when I opened them. The others were VERY
well carbonated. I mixed the priming sugar (1 cup corn) into the carboy (5
gals) and bottled from there. I swirled the carboy around for a couple of
minutes (gently, so as not to disturb the trub at the bottom) and bottled
about 15 mins later. This was a recipe called dutch lager, using brewer's
yeast 2178. Fermented two weeks, then bottle conditioned 2 weeks (3 weeks
now). Any ideas? Some possibilities:
The caps didn't seal well on the flat ones. (I don't know how to
tell if this is the case. I use the double handled capper that a lot of
people seem to dislike).
The priming sugar didn't distribute well in the carboy.
The bottles that were flat had some infection that killed the yeast
and kept those from carbonating. The bottles were sanitized for 4 hours in
15 gallons of water and 3/4 cup bleach. They were all clean to the naked
eye before being sanitized.
TIA.
Larry
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 1995 11:34:39 -0500
From: Pulsifer@aol.com
Subject: Wort Chillers and Pumps
I finally got around to building myself a wort chiller. It had been a
fairly inexpensive project so far. I spent $10 on 25' or 3/8" copper tubing
and a little more for miscellaneous stuff (hose adapters, etc) for a grand
total of around $18 and about 20 minutes of time.
My wife decided to come over and see what this contraption was. She
wanted to know it worked. I told here you put it in the pot and ran water
through it for 15 to 20 minutes. She thought it would use "too much" water.
I told here that I could get a pump and recicrulate ice water from the other
section of the sink (sounds like approval to spend more money).
I found what could be a very good solution. I was going to get an
aquarium power head. They are completely submersible, have suction cups for
attaching to side of sink and some have a plastic filter over the intake
(keeps ice chunks out of the pump). I was looking at the Maxi-Jet 1000. It
will pump 260 gph with no back pressure and pumps to a height of 6 feet. I
am assuming that at a back pressure equivalent to 6 feet of water it would
pump 0 gph.
My question is will this pump achieve the 60 to 180 gph that is typical
of a faucet attached immersion chiller (from wortchiller.faq).
Is it over kill? The next size down is 195 gph and a height of 4 feet, but
is only $2 cheaper. I would stick with the larger size since I don't think
you can pump too much water through the chiller. What kind of back pressure
is provided by 25' of 3/8 in your typical immersion chiller shape? TIA! (gph
= gallons per hour)
Dean A. Pulsifer -- Pulsifer@aol.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 04 Mar 1995 12:33:08 EST
From: usfmchql@ibmmail.com
Subject: Cel out in Austin...
In HBD 1671, Alan P VanDyke provides us with the article from The Austin
American-Statesman. Specifically:
>Miller also could provide marketing research to help Celis "understand what
>the customer wants," said Michael Barnum, general manager of American
>Specialty/Craft Beer Co., a Miller subsidiary.
Ah, yes! The same marketing research that brought such innovative products as
Lite and Red Dog (The dog is red. The beer is insipid.). I find it ironic that
the gentleman making this quote carries the last name of Barnum. Another
Barnum, as we may recall, also made a famous quote: 'A sucker is born every
minute.'
Now, Pierre, about that control you think you'll be exerting...
My flag is at half mast today to bemoan the passing of a worthy brewery :-(
Mourning in Detroit,
Patrick (Pat) G. Babcock
usfmchql@ibmmail.com
(313)33-73657 (V)
(313)59-42328 (F)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 95 10:06:43 PST
From: diput@eis.calstate.edu (Diane S. Put)
Subject: Wort Pumps
>From *Don* Put:
I bought a used stainless steel 20 gallon fermenter with a sanitary stainless
valve in the bottom yesterday, and I am looking forward to using it in place
of the Sankey keg that I normally use for a primary. Because I plan on
having it at a height that will enable me to fill my C kegs right from the
valve on the bottom, I will now have to use some sort of pump to move the
chilled wort from the kettle to the fermenter. I know quite a few of you
use pumps in your systems, so I'd like some feedback on which ones you use,
where you got them, and how you like them.
There are a couple magnetic drive pumps listed in the Grainger catalog--one
made by Little Giant and one by TEEL--but both of these have "glass-filled
polypropylene parts" that contact the liquid. In the back of the catalog,
there's a list of materials and their reactions to various liquids. One
of the liquids is beer and it states that polypropylene is "satisfactory
to 72F" in contact with beer. Now, I know that the wort's pH is higher
than that of the beer, the wort will be chilled to about this temp, and that
the contact time while I'm transferring the wort will be fairly short, so I
don't think the contact with the polyporpylene parts will really be an
issue. Will it? I'd appreciate any feedback from those of you who are
more chemically advanced than I. Also, they describe these pumps as being
able to be used in sanitary and food applications.
TIA,
don (dput@cello.gina.calstate.edu)
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: 04 Mar 95 14:01:45 EST
From: "KEVIN A. KUTSKILL" <75233.500@compuserve.com>
Subject: water treatments
There has been some recent mention of spreadsheets
to determine the necessary additions of salts for
various types of beers. Does anyone have the
information from the Brewing Techniques article
from last year about water treatment spreadsheets?
(the issue the article is in is not available as a reprint)
TIA
Kevin A. Kutskill ("Dr. Rottguts")
Clinton Township, MI
"A beer a day keeps the doctor happy"
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 1995 17:22:36 -0500
From: rich@lenihan.iii.net (Rich Lenihan)
Subject: How much wheat in a weizen? / Help with Water
>From: dipalma@sky.com (Jim Dipalma)
>
>Weizens are supposed to be at least 50% malted wheat, commercial examples
>typically run 50-70% malted wheat.
>
Eric Warner states in his "Wheat Beer" book that German consumers expect a
Wheat Beer to have *at least* 50% malted wheat. I don't know, however, that
there is any written or unwritten rule that states Weizens should be at
least 50% malted wheat. I recently had a bottle of Dunkleweizen from one of
the major Munich breweries (I'm 95% sure it was Paulaner) that stated
clearly on the label that the beer was 60% malted barley and 40% malted
wheat, a ratio of almost two to one. Maybe this is similar to the
Rheinheitsgebot loop-holes that allows beer made for "auslanders" to be held
to a lower standard than beer made for the local market, I don't know. I do
know that it was a pretty credible weizen with plenty of clove and phenols
for the dunkles style of weizen.
Well, that's my 2 cents on Weizens. Now I've got a question on water
analysis. I've finally received a report from the town water department.
It's 3 years old but I'm gonna go with it anyway (I'm told water varies more
from season to season than year to year, especially in the Northeast).
Here's the data:
Alkalinity 49 mg/l Manganese 0.03 mg/l
Calcium 30.3 mg/l Nitrate 0.92 mg/l
Chloride 80 mg/l Nitrite <0.02 mg/l
Conductivity 350 umhos pH 6.6
Copper 0.06 mg/l Potassium 2 mg/l
Hardness 96 mg/l Silica 15 mg/l
Iron 0.01 mg/l Sodium 27 mg/l
Lead <0.001 Sulfate 20 mg/l
Magnesium 4.9 mg/l
I've got some questions but, unfortunately, the water guy only works on
Thursdays. So here goes: There's no mention of carbonate or bicarbonate,
can I guess at those knowing the readings for hardness and alkalinity? From
what I can tell, my water is pretty clean and slightly soft with some
permanent hardness. I figure I should use my water "as-is" for most styles
and that I could probably benefit from a small addition of gypsum for highly
hopped ales.
Am I on the right track, here? I've read Miller's TCHoHB and Noonan's
"Brewing Lager Beer", but I'm still unclear on some things. For instance,
it says that silica can lead to haze, but at what levels?
As for my beers, they've been a mixed bag of late but I've been working on
new styles and equipment and I'd like to know that at least my water was OK.
Thanks in advance...
-Rich
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 1995 18:15:34 -0500
From: jhewit@freenet.vcu.edu (Jeff Hewit)
Subject: "Jurassic Beer"
I recently heard about two brews made from old strains of
yeast. One is called FLAG PORTER, which, according to the
label, is "fermented with original 1825 yeast salvaged from a
sunken vessel in the English Channel." This sounds like a neat
story, but I just finished a bottle, and I'm not real
impressed. It was OK, but at $4.99 for a 1/2 liter bottle, I
don't think I'll try it again. The other brew is called NORVIG
ALE. This is brewed with "yeast obtained from an old farm
brewery near the village of Bergen, Norway." The label goes on
to say "Using ancient 'Totem' sticks to preserve the yeast from
brew to brew, the ale yeast in NORVIG ALE has been passed down
from generation to generation resulting in a rare tatse of the
ancient Scandinavian ales of legend." Supposedly, Michael
Jackson played a role in acquiring the "Totem" stick, but I
don't know if this is true. I haven't tried it yet, but at
$4.99 per 1/2 liter, it better be good to try again.
Does anyone know more about these beers? How much is true, and
how much is pure marketing BS? BTW, neither appears to have
any yeast sediment to use as a starter for "Jurassic" Homebrew.
- --
Jeff Hewit
******************************************************************************
Eat a live toad first thing in the morning and nothing worse
will happen to you the rest of the day.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 1995 17:35:19 -0700
From: flemingk@usa.net (Kirk R Fleming)
Subject: RE: Fermenters again/Beer with a water finish
RE: HBD #1671
I guess there was a mis-understanding somewhere (me or Jim B) regarding
the fermenter concepts. First on the cylindro-conical unit fabrication
from an existing keg: Jim Busch writes:
>If you're going to this amount of effort, ditch the keg idea and go all
>out and have a ... SS sheet rolled to make the top
By "top" do you mean the cylinder portion of the tank (vice the lid)?
If so it sounds like you're suggesting an advantage to custom building
an entire cc fermenter. The idea was to have a cone added to an
existing unit (for maybe $100) as opposed to buying a complete unit
off-the-shelf (a minimum of over $400). I already have the cylinder,
why buy another one (and custom fab it, at that)? In fact, the beer
keg cylinder design is better than one I could have built (at any
reasonable cost, because it already has a chine and partial keg-end at
the top for strength, and the sides already have strengthening ribs in
then for shape retention. These features would easily double the cost
of a simple rolled cylinder, eh? What did I miss?
The second issue was the idea of a bottle under the fermenter to collect
the yeast. Again, Jim says:
>It doesn't need to be fully closed. What you will need to do is bleed
>off some trub and yeast several times, once or twice won't cut it.
I interpreted Will's suggestion (HBD #1667) to mean he wanted to have a
bottle in place into which the yeast/trub would collect on a *continuous*
basis--not just something to drain the fermenter into on a batch basis.
IOW, I perceived something like a glass/metal jar that actually screwed
up into the bottom of the fermenter, just below a shutoff valve. The
shut-off valve would be *open* at all times, with the yeast collecting
into the jar. When the jar appeared to be packed with the stuff, the
shut-off would be closed, the jar unscrewed and "processed", then
replaced, and the valve opened again. This vision was the reason I said
the jar would have to form a closed system--of course it was a silly
thing for me to say, given the design I was thinking Will was alluding to.
If it weren't sealed, it would just drain the fermenter onto the floor.
On another topic:
We brewed a 10 gal batch of "Caroline's Mild" from the Victory Beer
Recipes book (AOB). All the gravities looked good, ferementation went
beautifully and at the recommended temperature (rock steady) and for
the recommended length of time. This beer got rave reviews, but our
product basically sucks. Absolutely no flavor, no body, and I can only
describe the finish as "water". And I mean, WATER. Oh, it's supposed
to be an English Ordinary, so no, I didn't expect much ooommph. But
if anything we mashed at too high a temperature--closer to 158F than
154F during some of the mash period, so I'd expect some serious maltiness
and maybe a higher finish gravity than we got. OG = 37 FG = 10, approx.
It's basically taste-free--nice color, nice head, nice retention.
Any ideas? Has anyone brewed beer that leaves nothing in your mouth,
except when you wanted an Am Lager?
Kirk R Fleming
-flemingkr@afmcfafb.fafb.af.mil
-BEER: It's not just for breakfast anymore.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 95 21:14 CST
From: pgravel@mcs.com (Philip Gravel)
Subject: Tubing
===> Kirk L. Oseid asks about tubing:
>I am currently assembling a system to store hot water for sparging.
> Once the sparge begins, I will let the hot water
>drain slowly onto the mash.
>
>I am concerned about the choice of hose material between the cooler
>and the mash tun. Should this hose be PVC? Vinyl? Reinforced?
>Any other options? The temperature will be as high as 180^F during
>initial cooler-filling stage. The hydrostatic head on the hose
>will be less than 1.0 psi.
Vinyl tubing (eg Tygon) gets awfully soft when hot. You might want
to consider polyethylene tubing. It's the stiff, milky white tubing
that is sold in hardware and home improvement stores where the clear
vinyl tubing is sold. I think it would stand up to the heat better
though it might be difficult to work with when cold.
- --
Phil
_____________________________________________________________
Philip Gravel pgravel@mcs.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 95 13:02:45 EST
From: Joseph_Fleming_at_GSA-2P__2@ccgate1.gsa.gov
Subject: Priming, sugar vs. malt?
I've seen several recipes listing high-quality ingredients but then
use sugar to prime. My natural inclination is to stick with
Reinheitsgebot, at least when not brewing a "specialty" or "flavored"
beer. Can someone quantify the advantages and disadvantages of using
sugar over malt?
Joe JOSEPH.FLEMING@GSA.GOV
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 5 Mar 1995 11:52:15 -0800 (PST)
From: Mike Lemons <mikel@cts.com>
Subject: Hop Utilization Mathematics
Background: I wrote a program a couple of years ago that tells me how
much hops to add to hit a target IBU. I've been satisfied with the
results. Then I bought Mark Garetz's book last week and changed the
program all around to match what's in his book. The next day, I helped
my uncle brew an SNPA clone. (For the first time, I knew how to
calculate utilization for partial boils.) The amount of hops that we
added seemed really high, so I FTP'ed a month's worth of HBD's to see if
anyone had a comment about this. Did they ever! Now I'm thinking,
"Boy, am I stupid."
I found some hard figures in HBD #1657 from "George A. Dietrich"
<74543.310@compuserve.com>. Here's what happened when I ran his figures
through my equations:
25.6 IBU Pilsner:
Garetz: 19.25 IBU Rager: 28.73 IBU
35.3 IBU Steam:
Garetz: 20.90 IBU Rager: 35.30 IBU
The Rager equation was so close on that second beer it's scary! I can
explain the error on the first beer as being a result of using a low
alpha-acid hop for bittering. If we assume that the hops were 3.5%
instead of 3.6%, the Rager equation predicts 19.48 IBU.
Technical Details
=================
I left all of Mark Garetz's modifiers in the program and switched back
and forth between the two utilization equations that follow. However,
the only Garetz modifier that isn't at unity for this batch is the
"Hopping Rate Factor":
utilization /= 1.0 + (ibu / 260.0);
(I put in the lab results for ibu.) This appears to be the reason why
my results differ from other people's results. The HF factor decreases
predicted hop utilization by 13.6% for the steam beer. Does anyone know
where Mark got this equation? Is it made up or does it come from sound
research? It sure makes the numbers come out right. We need more data,
though.
Here are my other equations:
total_ibu += 2.835 * alpha_acid *
calc_util(minutes, gravity) *
ounces / (gallons * 3.7854);
The Garetz equation:
if(minutes < 11.0) return(0.0);
utilization = 7.2994 + 15.0746 * tanh((minutes - 21.86) / 24.71);
The Rager equation:
utilization = 18.109069 + 13.862039 * tanh((minutes - 31.322749) / 18.267743);
(tanh is the hyperbolic tangent)
Someone else figured out the coefficients of the Rager equation a long
time ago. I think that he used some technique that actually requires
thought, while I just plugged the Garetz equation into a computer, told
it to minimize the total error, and let it run for a couple of days.
Here are the results of the equations plotted against the authors' tables:
Garetz Rager
Time Equation Table Time Equation Table
13.0 2.08 2.00 4.0 5.57 5.00
18.0 4.94 5.00 8.0 6.25 6.00
23.0 8.00 8.00 13.0 7.53 8.00
28.0 11.00 11.00 18.0 9.48 10.10
33.0 13.72 14.00 23.0 12.20 12.10
38.0 16.00 16.00 28.0 15.62 15.30
43.0 17.81 18.00 33.0 19.38 18.80
48.0 19.18 19.00 38.0 22.96 22.80
55.5 20.55 20.00 43.0 25.93 26.90
65.5 21.54 21.00 48.0 28.12 28.10
75.5 22.00 22.00 55.5 30.14 30.00
85.5 22.21 23.00 Total Error = 4.19
Total Error = 2.67
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 05 Mar 95 21:28:39 EST
From: RENEE <R3RMJ1@VM1.CC.UAKRON.EDU>
Subject: LIST
MAY I PLEASE BE ADDED TO YOUR MAILING LIST?
THANKS,
RENEE
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 5 Mar 1995 18:33:26 -0800
From: mcollins@mail.wsdot.wa.gov (Michael Collins)
Subject: Re: Anacortes Brewing CO./San Jaun Brewing
In response to:
Jeff Wade reported:
>The Anacortes Brew house, located in Anacortes, WA gets my thumbs up most
>definitely!
The Anacortes Brew House sounds very promising, since I make several trips
to the San Juans each year. There is no doubt I'll be stopping in for a
sample.
Though I was somewhat puzzled by his remarks:
>**San Jaun Brewing Co** Friday Harbor, WA/I feel would be to my advantage,
>to not say anything at all... mabey it was just the weather ??
Maybe it *was* the weather (great), and the fact that I arrived very
parched having bicycled around San Juan Island (approx 32 miles), but I
found the brews at San Juan Brewing to be wonderful and satisfying.
Especially their very memorable malty, tangy, and spicy 'Eichenberger
Hefe-Weizen' .
We had only stopped for one, thinking that we still had another 5 miles to
the campsite; but didn't actually get around to leaving until I had tried a
pint of their Oatmeal Stout, Red Ale, and Schwarzbier and I can't remember
what all else. The ride back was fun, despite the fact that by then it had
gotten pitch black and had started to rain...
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 5 Mar 95 22:15 CST
From: pgravel@mcs.com (Philip Gravel)
Subject: Heat and chlorine bleach
===> Kinney Baughman wonders about boiliing clorox
>This reminds me of a question I've been wanting to ask. I'm almost
>positive that boiling clorox ruins its sterilization properties. I've
>heard that this causes it to degenerate into some kind of harmless salt.
>
>I'm no chemist so my question goes out to those who are. I mentioned this
>to a friend in the past and he asked why, then, do people use clorox in hot
>water in their washing machines?
Chlorine bleach is made by dissolving chlorine gas in a dilute caustic
solution:
Cl2 (g) + 2 NaOH <===> NaOCl + NaCl + H2O
Heat will reverse this reaction, ie drive off the chlorine.
In the case of cleaning or sanitization, heat increases the rate of
these chemcial reactions. Therefore, a hot bleach solution will work
faster than a cold one.
Using a hot bleach solution requires balancing the increased rate of
cleaning vs. the increased rate of chlorine losss. I think part of
this is whether the system is open or closed. The above chemical
equation indicates that there is an equilibrium. As long as the
system is closed, some chlorine gas will accumulate, but once an
equilibrium amount has been reached, no more will leave the solution.
This is probably approximates a washing machine with the lid closed.
In a open system such as an uncovered pan on a stove top, the chlorine
gas is lost to a volume of air so large that an equilibrium
concentration is never reached and chlorine is continually lost.
- --
Phil
_____________________________________________________________
Philip Gravel pgravel@mcs.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 00:38:03 -0500
From: RalphSaaz@aol.com
Subject: __publication_only__
This is my first post and to start, I would like to THANK all of the
contributors to HBD for some of the best information on this subject I have
seen. Your tenacity is to be congratulated.
Now, the hook: Has anyone out there seen a FAQ or the like citing OG for
specific brands of extracts? The prospect of contacting all of the
manufacturers is not appealing to me, and hey... why re-invent the wheel?
I ask because the information I have seems to be contradictory. Using CP's
numbers in App 11 of NCJOH, there seems to be a (small) margin of error
introduced by the table on page 380 and the 1st paragraph on page 381. There
is also no indication of what the numbers are based on (although they will
work for a rough idea). And if I use SUDS 3.1, The results are VERY
different.
Example 1: Page 380: 1# of DME in 1 gal = 1.038 - 1.042. Page 381: If my
wort is water (OG = 1) 5# in 5 gal = 1.020 - 1.030. I think I did the math.
Adding 10# of DME in a 5 gal batch in SUDS gives OG = 1.080. Huh?!?!?!?!
Example 2: I have a wort based on 5 lbs of DME (5# in 5gal = 1.038 -1.042).
If I add 2# more to the wort, my OG will rise .008 - .012. If I add a total
of 10#, my OG should be 1.058 - 1.072. Now, I go to the Guidelines Table and
look up Old Ale and find 10# of extract, 1# Crystal (I assumed 40L) and 1/4#
Chocolate. The OG is is stated as 1.060 - 1.070. I can live with that error.
Next, I go to my (registered) copy of SUDS 3.1, enter the same ingredients,
select EXTRACT and the AHA Style "English Old Ale". Lo and behold: OG =
1.086! That's a bit of a jump!
My assumption is that the errors are based on an ever-expanding selection
of ingredients, but the problem exists; without the correct values for a
given brand, recipe calculation could be off quite a bit in a recipe with
8-10 lbs. of extracts and specialty grains!
This may seem nit-pickish, considering the fact that the brew will be fit
for consumption no matter what the calculations are. But there are somethings
ya just gotta know!
Anyway, flame me if you must! I thank in advance any and all who respond to
this request. Private e-mail is always welcome, but posts here are just as
good.
I now defer to the Gods of Homebrewing and humbly await your attention...
Tempus Pro Brewski,
RalphSaaz@aol.com (Ralph Musco)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 1995 02:25:19 -0800 (PST)
From: PGILLMAN@POMONA.EDU
Subject: yeast reculturing, and acid washing
does anyone know the ph levels that commercial breweries use when they
wash yeast with tartaric acid to remove the trub and contaminants?
i tend to brew batches back to back, and would like to attempt this
procedure in order to extend the number i can do using a single yeast.
if not, does anyone know what textbooks (ie professional brewery texts)
would contain this info, and where i could obtain such texts
thanks much,
phil
pgillman@pomona.edu
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 95 07:37:59 EST
From: Timothy J. Dalton <dalton@subpac.enet.dec.com>
Subject: Re: A-B and HSA
George Fix's description of the removal of DMS and other volatiles
by A-B clearly identifies the technology used.
The process they use is one of the standard chemical engineering unit
operations, referred to as countercurrent stripping. In this case, N2 gas is
used to strip volatiles out of wort. The details are too long to explain here,
but suffice it to say that this is a very well know process and is used
extensively in the chemical and petroleum industries and has been for years. It
can be found in any good ChemE unit-op or mass transfer text book if you really
want to know more (see Treybal - _Mass Transfer Operations_ for example).
Tim
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 95 07:50:05 EST
From: msmith@mail2.lmi.org
Subject: Carbonation problem
Brewed a batch of relatively simple brown ale a little before
Christmas and bottled around January 1 1995. Then waited the
obligatory couple weeks for settling and carbonation to occur. I have
brewed this recipe several times in the past and have had excellent
results, with the beer being fully drinkable in about 2-3 weeks. Two
to three weeks after bottling I was happy to know that this batch also
turned out fine.
Well, I reached into the fridge this weekend to pull out a nice cold
one and with great anticipation poured it into my favorite glass. I
was shocked to learn that all carbonation had disappeared. This had
never happened before. So I tried another, thinking it was just a
fluke. Nope. After three tries, all were flat.
My question is this: Is this problem common? Is it traceable
primarily to a bad seal from the caps? Is there anything other than
perhaps bad caps that can cause a brew to loose carbonation? Most
importantly, can I fix it??? Is it possible to open the bottles,
reprime and recap the bottles? I hate to waste a little over a case
of good brew.
All help greatly appreciated!!!
Thanks,
mark smith
msmith@lmi.org
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 95 08:27:22 EST
From: "Bummer, Paul" <bummerp@uklans.uky.edu>
Subject: sugar weight
Paul Sovcik asked about the weight of 1 cup of corn sugar.
I just ran down to my lab and did a quick weighing, the
results being approximately 148 grams/cup of corn sugar
(a.k.a. dextrose, D-glucose). Note that the exact weight
will be somewhat dependent upon the particle size of the
sugar powder. I use a fairly fine granule size, but if
other sizes are available, expect to see a lower mass per
unit volume (what we refer to as "tap density"). I would
not expect to see values outside of +/- 10% of the above
value.
On another note on metrology..... It was suggested recently
to employ a firearms reloading balance to weigh out hopps,
etc. FYI, for avoirdupois system (most everything in
business) there are 438 grains to the ounce. Only in
apothecary system is there 480 grains to the ounce.
Paul M. Bummer, Ph.D.
College of Pharmacy
University of Kentucky
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 1995 9:12:24 EST
From: LeRoy S. Strohl <lstrohl@s850.mwc.edu>
Subject: Re: FAT TIRE / FLAT TIRE
Would the person who posted the recipe for a Fat Tire clone which he
called Flat Tire post to me directly. Information about the original is
requested. Thanks in advance. lstrohl@s850.mwc.edu
- --
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 95 09:13:07 EST
From: <TJWILLIA@vm.occ.cc.mi.us>
Subject: Got Them "Nylon" Blues
First, I'd like to thank all those who responded to my iron problem. In summary
purchasing some kind of iron removal system is desirable, whether it be a water
softener, iron removal canister and/or RO filter. Some recommended all three,
others said at least one. Water softeners add the disadvantage of increasing
sodium, a factor that leads to brewing problems. Until I get around to purchas-
ing or constructing (ala, Will Self in HBD 1671) a water treatment system, it
looks like it's bottled for a while.
Now my second problem. I just brewed a stout this past weekend. I have always
had problems with excessive trub in the primary. For this batch, I thought I
would try using nylons as both a grain bag and as a filter into the primary.
The nylons were _new_ "No-Nonsense(TM)" brand. I cut off one leg, right out
of the package, for the grains. No apparent problem. Then, I thought I'd boil
the second leg before using it to filter the wort. After I boiled away, I
noticed a strange "greenish" tint to the water. Thinking nothing of this, I
went ahead a filtered. Now I wonder if some kind of dye or _what_ made it
into the fermenter. Should I be concerned? There is no apparent effect on the
yeast (quick starter, rehydrated EDME) and no off smells that I can detect.
BTW, I still ended up with a lot of trub even after using this method. Now I
need to come up with a better solution: perhaps whirlpool? Before or after
cool down?
Any input will be most appreciated.
I better not get any "nonsense" from them "No-Nonsense(TM)" hose.
Tom Williams- Milford, MI
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 10:26:59 -0500 (EST)
From: Rob Reed <rhreed@icdc.delcoelect.com>
Subject: Extract Yield
Kirks asks:
> Rob writes:
>
> >From: Rob Reed <rhreed@icdc.delcoelect.com>
> >Subject: Mash Yield/Fermentability Experiments
>
> >Conclusions:
> > o In this experiment, a 30 min. rest at 105F was more effective in
> > increasing yield than a 15 min. 165-170F mashout rest.
> > o In this experiment, when a 30 min. rest at 105F was employed, only
> > a minor increase in yield was obtained with a 15 min. 165-170F
> > mashout rest.
>
> Why would a mash-out have any effect on yield at all?
I have several theories (no data) why mash-out would increase
yield:
o Several sources have suggested that alpha-amylase is active at
temperatures into the low to mid 160s F. If this is true, then a
mashout would provide additional saccharification. Even if
the enzymes were denatured after say 15-20 min., this still adds up to
additional starch conversion time beyond the original 155F starch rest.
If total starch conversion had not been accomplished, and there is
still finite enzyme activity at mashout temperatures in the malt one
is using, then additional saccharification should occur.
o Another potential explanation is that the mashout increased extract yield
of the lautering process, i.e., more sugar was extracted from the grain
bed due to the higher temperatures involved.
Rob Reed
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1673, 03/07/95
*************************************
-------
