Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1727
This file received at Hops.Stanford.EDU 1995/05/10 PDT
HOMEBREW Digest #1727 Wed 10 May 1995
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor
Contents:
Homebrew carry-on? ()
Water Chemistry Example (A. J. deLange)
SUDS Alert! User-correctable error (David Draper)
Wyeast 3068 (Anatum)
Oven mashing (Jeff Renner)
Klages malt (ESMPD)" <gcunning@Census.GOV>
RE: Smoking Grains for Brewing (spencer)
Digital Thermometer/Timer Review (dsanderson)
FOOP (Matt_K)
dark wheat beer?/DME (Larry Lowe)
Bottled Yeast/False Bottom (Randy M. Davis)
Make MY wish... (Russell Mast)
RE: Terminal Gravity / SUDS (billj)
Body and Gravity (Russell Mast)
Feed Store Grain / 35K BTU (Norman Pyle)
Malt (aardvark)
Men, Women, and Bottles (Russell Mast)
Aluminum stockpots ("James Giacalone")
Smoking Grains (cisco)
Re: Non-sankey keg ("R. James Ray")
Lautering setups (Jeff Benjamin)
Re: Long stem dial thermometer ("R. James Ray")
Copper Kettle (Christopher R. Vyhnal)
FG and Body/Al Welding/SS Keg Appl/RIMS FAQ Offer/Candi (Kirk R Fleming)
Mercury Spill, O2 caps (Christopher R. Vyhnal)
whoa/mangos (Alan Van Dyke)
Various Beer Things ("Harrington, Stephen J")
Competition (Michael L Montgomery +1 708 979 4132)
Brewcap or Fermentap (JEFFREY.T.ANDERSON)
******************************************************************
* 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.
******************************************************************
#################################################################
#
# YET ANOTHER NEW FEDERAL REGULATION: if you are UNSUBSCRIBING from the
# digest, please make sure you send your request to the same service
# provider that you sent your subscription request!!! I am now receiving
# many unsubscribe requests that do not match any address on my mailing
# list, and effective immediately I will be silently deleting such
# requests.
#
#################################################################
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: Tue, 9 May 1995 06:22:52 +0500
From: generic@be1578.be.ford.com ()
Subject: Homebrew carry-on?
Hi all.
Flying to Houston on thursday to attend a wedding. I wanna bring
12 of my best. Is it allowed? Is it safe? Would I have a better
chance with plastic bottles? TIA for your help.
BTW, I already have Mr. Shirleys "Locations for Fine Beer in the
Houston area." (apr 18 94)
Mike Preston, Secretary .~~~.
The Detroit Carboys | |]
"Habeo Hordea Fermentabo" |___|
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 May 1995 04:34:56 -0500
From: ajdel@interramp.com (A. J. deLange)
Subject: Water Chemistry Example
In #1725 Darren Aaberge had a question about adjusting the pH of his mash
working from Austin, TX water with a pH of 9.8, 17 ppm Calcium, 57 ppm
chloride 16 ppm Magnesium, 28 ppm Sodium 39 ppm Sulfate and a total
alkalinity as CaCO3 of 55.
For starters, I'm amazed by that pH. Do people drink this water? Does it
taste very bitter? That aside the basis for neutralization of alkalinity is
conversion of all (or nearly all) carbonate and bicarbonate to carbonic.
"Neutralization" is a bit of a misnomer since this occurs at a pH near 4
which is hardly neutral. In fact it is about as acidic as this water is
basic. Anyway, the first step is to find out how much of the alkalinity is
due to carbonate and how much to bicarbonate as each mole of carbonate
requires 2 moles of hydronium to "neutralize" it and each bicarbonate
requires one.
The ratio of bicarbonate to carbonic to is r1 = 10^(pH - pK1) i.e. 10
raised to the power of the difference between the pH and the pK. The pK is
minus the log of the dissociation constant for the reaction H3O+ + HCO3-
<--> H2O + CO2 and has the value pK1 = 6.38. For water at pH 9.8 r1 =
10^(9.8 - 6.38) = 2630.2680.
Similarly the ratio of carbonate to bicarbonate is r2 = 10^(pH - pK2) where
pK2 is the pK for the reaction H3O+ + CO3-2 <--> HCO3- + H2O and has value
10.32. Thus r2 = 10^(9.8 - 10.32) = 0.3020.
Now let there be x moles of carbonic in the water. There are then r1*x
moles of bicarbonate and r1*r2*x moles of carbonate. The total moles of
these species are then x( 1 + r1 + r1*r2) = S. This is solvable for x as x
= S/(1 + rt1 + r1*r2)
which is the moles of carbonic, r1*S/(1 + r1 + r1*r2) is the moles of
bicarbonate and r1*r2*S/(1 + r1 + r1*r1) is the moles of carbonate. To get
values S must be determined.
Alkalinity is defined as the sum of the bicarbonate concentration plus
twice the sum of the carbonate concentration (plus the hydroxyl
concentration minus the hydronium concentration but these last two can
usually be ignored). Thus
A = r1*S/D + 2*r1*r2*S/D + 10^(14-pH) where we have simplified by defining
D = (1 + r1 + r1*r1). This is solved for S by S = D*(A - 10^(pH-14))/(r1 +
2*r1*r2)
The water in question has total alkalinity as CaCO3 of 55 mg/l. As the
molecular weight of CaCO3 is 100 this amounts to 55/100 = 0.55 millimoles
per litre. This is the total alkalinity, A. As 10^(pH-14) = 0.06 millimole
it can, as we said, be ignored. At such a high pH the hydronium
concentration is definitely too small to consider. Thus S =
3425.6089*.55/4218.9499 = 0.4466 millimoles. Then x = S/D = 0.13
micromoles/l, bicarbonate is r1 times this or 0.3429 millimoles/l and
carbonic r2 times this or 0.1036 millimoles/l. These values in millimoles/l
can be converted back to ppm as CaCO3 simply by multiplying by 100 to get
34.29 ppm bicarb and 10.36 ppm carbonate.
To "neutralize" these species you will need .3429 millimoles/l hydronium
for the bicarbonate and 2*.1036 = .2072 millimoles/l for the carbonate for
a total of .5501 millimoles per litre. Does that number look familiar?
An alkalinity of 55 ppm as CaCO3 is not that bad. The rule of thumb is to
have less than 50. Also 17 ppm Ca isn't that low. It is 17/40 = .427
millimoles per litre. If each of those calcium ions reacted with phytin to
produce one hydronium ion you would come close to neutralizing your
alkalinity. I would, therefore try gypsum before fooling around with acids
unless you are doing beers in which the sulfate is already high. You might
try testing a quart or two of mash with gypsum to see what happens. If you
do decide to try acid (lactic, phosphoric and hydrochloric are good choices
except that your chloride is already pretty high), be careful as it is
possible to overshoot although the buffering system of the mash itself will
give you some protection.
Seems this ought to be in a FAQ somewhere.
A.J. deLange Numquam in dubio, saepe in errore!
ajdel@interramp.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 May 1995 22:33:12 +1000 (EST)
From: David Draper <ddraper@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au>
Subject: SUDS Alert! User-correctable error
Dear Friends, this post is for users of Mike Taylor's SUDS program for
Windows--if that isn't you, page down now. After all the hoo-hah about
the various ways to do IBU calcs and my post just the other day in which I
favorably commented on the way SUDS incorporated the results of that
hoo-hah, it turns out that there is an error in the data files that the
program uses to do the calcs, which Andy Walsh and I stumbled across
yesterday. That's the bad news--the good news is that because of the way
Mike Taylor redid the way the program calculates IBUs in version 4, we can
all correct the error ourselves, and he has asked me to put the net.word
out on this. What happened is that Mike put the wrong values in the file
containing Glenn Tinseth's utilization data--Mark Garetz's numbers are
there instead. So in order to use the Tinseth data (which are my personal
favorites), we need to edit the files and put the correct numbers in
there.
Now, there are three data files for each of the three authors' data: Rager,
Tinseth, and Garetz. This is because Mike chose to give the option for
using Garetz's 5% fudge factor for the flocculation characteristics of
yeast. So there is a Rager average flocculation, low flocculation, and high
flocculation file; similarly there are three files for Tinseth and three
for Rager. These files have some text at the top, saying "This table is
based on figures of..." then a line of ====, and below that a table of
numbers, in the form minutes and utilization percent, e.g. "10 5%".
Here is what the Tinseth average flocc data, in the file avgtin.ibu,
SHOULD look like:
5 5%
10 6%
15 8%
20 10%
25 12%
30 15%
35 19%
40 23%
45 24%
50 25%
60 26%
If you want to use the Garetz 5% fudge factor for flocculation (I love
alliteration), then edit the hitin.ibu and lotin.ibu files, adding 5% for
high flocculation and subtracting 5% for low flocculation. When editing
the files, be sure you include that percent sign, otherwise you will have
problems.
Mike says he's sorry for any confusion (although no one had tried to
contact him on this so far, so it could be worse), and future releases will
have the right data in the right files. I hope this post is enough to put
anyone who was scratching their head on the right track.
Cheers, Dave in Sydney
- --
"...if you think about it, everything makes sense." ---Ginger Wotring
******************************************************************************
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: Tue, 9 May 1995 09:29:20 -0400
From: Anatum@aol.com
Subject: Wyeast 3068
Hello all,
Just wanted to put my two cents into the Wyeast 3068 discussion. I've brewed
about eight batches of all-grain, and the first to blow the airlock and spew
forth during fermentation was this yeast. The beer was a wheat with 50% wheat
malt, so perhaps this is to be expected.
Unfortunately, the beer didn't finish well - it stopped after three weeks at
1.012, which is a good deal higher than expected. It has quite the malty
taste, too! (Though I intend to drink it!)
Till next time,
Widllife Research Associates
Greg Tatarian
Petaluma, CA
anatum@aol.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 May 95 09:35:46 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Oven mashing
David L. Shea wrote about oven mashing
> This method works great, however, when you put your
> kettle in the oven, turn off the heat. The oven is
> insulated and will keep a steady temperature for the
> entire mash, as long as you don't open up the door
> before the mash is complete. I was warned that leaving
> the heat on might actually raise the temperature or
> scorch the bottom grains.
I've been doing oven mashing since my first all grain batch in 1979 or
so. I was surprised to see it as a new tip in this month's zymurgy. I
thought I read it in Dave Line, who suggests overnight mashing, which I
use to do, but I just checked his "Big Book on Brewing," and there's no
mention. He suggests covering the mash pot with blankets, so maybe I
just figured it out myself to keep an even temperature overnight.
Anyway, I always set the oven temperature to 150^F, and I've never had
any trouble such as David is concerned about - just rock steady mash
temperatures. And I open the oven several times to stir, check
temperature and pH, taste, etc. Then I mashout on a propane cooker
(formerly stovetop), then carefully ladle the mash to my insulated
Zapap. I must confess to thinking about adapting my 10 gallon aluminum
pot to RIMS to avoid all of this, and it is too big to fit in the oven.
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan c/o nerenner@umich.edu
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 May 1995 09:33:59 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Jerry Cunningham (ESMPD)" <gcunning@Census.GOV>
Subject: Klages malt
Is Klages malt fully modified? Do I need to do a protein rest with this malt,
if I'm not really concerned about chill haze? I've heard some people say that
it's not fully modified and you need to do a protein rest, while others just
do a single-step infusion.
Thanks,
Jerry Cunningham
Annapolis, MD
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 May 95 09:51:32 EDT
From: spencer@med.umich.edu
Subject: RE: Smoking Grains for Brewing
A couple of years ago, Ed Westemeier (of this forum) sent me a bottle
of hickory-smoked beer (oktoberfest???). I loved it's bacony aroma
and flavor. But that's just my opinion.
=Spencer Thomas in Ann Arbor, MI (spencer@umich.edu)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 09 May 95 09:51:26 EST
From: dsanderson@msgate.CV.COM
Subject: Digital Thermometer/Timer Review
I just received a Digital Thermometer/Timer from a mail order company
named Improvements 800 642-2112 that I think is perfect for all-grain
brewing.
It is a small LCD unit with a S/S probe at the end of a 4 ft. cable
designed to remotely read the internal temp of a roast in the oven. The
probe is shaped like a candy cane so it'll hang 6 1/2 inched down from
the rim of a kettle but I'll probably mount it to a stirring paddle.
The temp range is 32F to 248F and you can set an alarm to go off when
any temperature in that range is reached. I found it to be fast to
stabilize and reasonably well calibrated. It read a steady 34 in ice
water, 99 under the tongue and fluctuated between 212 and 214 in boiling
water(mostly 212).
It also has a countdown timer/alarm mode with a range of 1 sec to 100
hours.
Cost: $30 with 6 mo. warrantee. It works for me.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 May 95 10:01:02 edt
From: Matt_K@ceo.sts-systems.ca
Subject: FOOP
Message:
Steve Robinson asks:
> Do I hear FOOP, anyone?
FOOP you say? We can do FOOP. FOOP is the sound my neigbours hear
when I use some gasoline and a match to flame sterilize my corny kegs.
Just kidding!!
Matt
in Montreal
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 May 95 9:20:14 CDT
From: Larry Lowe <lnl@apwk01g3.abrfc.noaa.gov>
Subject: dark wheat beer?/DME
Full-Name: Larry Lowe
i just bottled a batch of M&F wheat beer. i am new at this micro/pico brewing
thing, so i have a question. all of the wheat beers (all be it a small number)
i've had, have all been a light/golden color. is the M&F supposed to be a darker
color...not like a stout, but definately not golden in color. i did not stand
over the wort and stir constantly...a collective gasp...so therefore burnt
residue was on the bottom of the pan. i am guessing that this burning
contributed to the color. am i correct?
i want to buy a "kit" which come with DME. i have read a few posts that have
had bad results with this? is this common? if so, is there anything you can do
to minimize/eliminate such results? should i just double the extract syrup?
i also want to try a john bull australian style extract. anyone enjoy this
beer. TIA and privat e-mail is fine.
hi lee.
larry
- --
from: Larry N. Lowe
NOAA, National Weather Service
Arkansas-Red Basin River Forecast Center
10159 East 11th St, Suite 300
Tulsa, Oklahoma 74128-3050
lnl@apwk01g3.abrfc.noaa.gov
Off: (918)832-4109 FAX: (918)832-4101
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 09 May 1995 8:28:54 MDT
From: Randy M. Davis <rmdavis@mocan.mobil.com>
Subject: Bottled Yeast/False Bottom
Rob in Montreal asked about the life span of bottled yeast. I use the same
'parallel propagation' technique that is outlined in the yeast FAQ. The one
and only problem I have encountered so far is that I tend to have too much
yeast on hand. I brewed this past weekend and used a starter prepared
from a bottle of Wyeast #1968 that I bottled approx. 6 months ago. These
bottles have been refrigerated all the while. The starter came to life
quickly and the lag time in the 23 litre batch was less than 12 hours (it
took off sometime during the night). So far I have not found a bottled yeast
that did not take off and I have also not had any infection problems. I
recently picked up a bottle of Blanche de Bruges for the yeast and did not
realize till I was drinking it that the best before date was August 1993!
It was slow to start but it did get going eventually. The behavior was
identical to the Wyeast wit strain. It looks as though bottled yeast can
remain viable for fairly long periods.
As for Jim Powell's question regarding false bottoms. I would strongly
recommend the copper manifold approach. Very easy to construct and quite
efficient. I made one about a year ago and I'm sold.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Randy M. Davis rmdavis@mocan.mobil.com Calgary Canada (403)260-4184 |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 May 1995 09:37:01 -0500
From: Russell Mast <rmast@fnbc.com>
Subject: Make MY wish...
Your article sent to homebrew is being rejected. The reason:
-- No subject line given --
> This Department recently received a letter from the Illinois
> Department of Drunks concerning Russell Mast, a twenty-five year old,
> who has plenty of time to live, but no time to waste.
>
> Craig turned in a wish to the Old-fart's Make a Wish Foundation
> expressing a desire to have an entry in the Guiness Book of World Records
> for the most BEERS received by an individual.
>
> Please take a minute and help make a little boy's wish come true. Send
> your beers to:
>
> Russell Mast
> c/o Old-fart's Make a Wish Foundation
> 3738 N. St. Louis Ave.
> Chicago, IL 60618 USA
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 09 May 95 09:31:57 cst
From: billj@mails.imed.com
Subject: RE: Terminal Gravity / SUDS
Greetings from the swamp lands of Texas,
The question posed by Larry Bristol sparked another idea. I am wondering if
there are any style criteria for FG. I use SUDS for my recipe formulations
which gives me a target OG, color, IBU, and Alcohol range but does not
provide info on proper FG or typical grain bill (specialty grains and %)
for the style. I would hate to make a scotch ale with a FG of 1010 or a
light lager with FG 1025 but I don't have the information to know what is
correct. This is probably the weakest part of my brewing knowlage (except
understanding FOOP, or microbiology, or water chemestry, or ...).
Are there any sources that give typical characteristics (OG, FG, Color,
IBU), content(grain bill/hop/yeast) and process information
(infusion/decoction/???) on all (or most common) styles of beer?
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have a suggestion for a SUDS x.0 that is a turn in a different direction.
"SUDS for idiots"
Give me slide switches that adjust the OG, FG, IBU, and color within a
particular style (or maybe within 150% of the style for the contest
winners) and let the computer figure out the grain bill, hop schedule, mash
schedule, and fermintation schedule. Every time a program designer lets me
put "GARBAGE IN" I get "GARBAGE OUT" (or beer that only I will drink). A
little AI (Artificial Inteligence) would make up for my LI (lack of ...),
and I would gladly give up creativity and imagination for good beer.
Just a Thought
Bill Joy
billj@mails.imed.com
Angleton Texas
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 May 1995 09:47:16 -0500
From: Russell Mast <rmast@fnbc.com>
Subject: Body and Gravity
> From: LBRISTOL@SYSUBMC.BMC.COM
> Subject: Terminal Gravity
>
> A few people have responded to my query about final gravity. Thank you all
> for the time and information.
> So my question is basically this - Assuming that we allow the beer to reach
> full attenuation, does the FG represent such an objective, quantitative
> measure of the amount of protein/dextrine present in the beer, and therefore
> (by extension), its "thickness", "mouth feel"", etc.?
No.
> As a hypothetical, lets assume we have two beers, one with an OG of 1060 and
> another at 1040, and when both of these reach attenuation, the FG is 1010.
> While one of them clearly has produced more alcohol, is it reasonable to
> expect them both to exhibit the same level of "thickness", "mouth feel", etc.?
No.
> If the answer is "yes", then the FG would represent an objective measure; if
> "no", then why not?
I don't know. "They" say it's got something to do with proteins. I really
don't know.
I am thinking of two particular batches, one steam beer the
other a Weizen. The weizen had a FG of 1.007, the steam of 1.006. The weizen
had much less body than the steam. The steam had a higher OG, for what it's
worth. I can't say for sure why these two beers differed in body as much as
they did. I can say I liked them both very much, and I prefer my wheat beers
a little 'lite' tasting.
> Or suppose we have two beers that both start at the same
> OG, but end with FG of 1010 and 1015 respectively. Is it a given that the
> beer ending at 1015 will have more "mouth feel" than the other?
I'd guess not, but can't say for sure. The last four beers my friend Jake has
made all had the same OG, by coincidence. I'll talk to him about it, because
I think they have varied in FG.
> Or maybe I could use the ratio of OG:FG as a little better way to measure.
Maybe, but I doubt it.
> What does the collective wisdom have to say?
I see what you're trying to achieve, that's a way to scale mouthfeel. I don't
believe that it's very accurate to try and capture mouthfeel on a unitary
scale. I could see a stout and a doppelbock which could be rated as equally
'thick' but there's a different quality to the feel. Of course, the same is
true of color, and they have a scale for that, so why not mouthfeel? Still,
I think the best we'd be able to achieve for mouthfeel is a subjective rating
system based on accepted standards. Maybe the sensory epithelia in the mouth
that contribute to mouthfeel operate on a principle as 'simple' as
photoreceptors, so that an objective measure based on chemical composition
could be devised, but I doubt that it's worth the time and effort that would
be required.
-R
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 May 95 8:55:58 MDT
From: Norman Pyle <npyle@hp7013.ecae.StorTek.COM>
Subject: Feed Store Grain / 35K BTU
Kevin Hass wrote:
>Sidenote: Batch 2 was an experimental batch brewed entirely from home
>malted barley that was made from barley I bought from the feed store.
>The malting was simple and easy, and the malt produced is fine.
>In fact, the grain sizes were LARGER than malted barley from the brew
>store. How's that! $0.40 per gallon :-)
This sounds very interesting, but I would make one caution. Much of the seed
sold to farmers is treated for various pests, even the seed sold for cattle
feed. I personally don't want anything extra going into my beer. You can
certainly find non-treated grain, and I hope yours was, but the problem is
that you can't verify it. I'm currently using some wheat from a commercial
feed mill, and was told it is pure clean wheat, no chemicals. I trust these
people and I guess I'm just suggesting you make sure you deal with folks you
can trust. Regarding the home malting, details, give us details!
**
John Palmer wrote:
>The Superb gas burner quotes only 35KBTU compared to the 100+KBTU of the
>Cajun
>Cooker types, but it heats 12 gallons without any problems and I have done 5
I can attest to this. I use two different water heater elements, which are
purported to be about 35K BTU, and they work fine. I have no trouble
reaching any level of boil that I desire, from just bubbling, to a major
rolling boil. The only thing I probably lack compared to the rocket engines
is the ability to hit the boil in under 10 seconds, and I also go many many
batches between propane fills.
Norm
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 May 1995 07:54:59 -0700 (PDT)
From: aardvark <bvaughn@netcom.com>
Subject: Malt
After doing 6 extract and one all grain I have yet been able to get a
good malty flavor in my brews. It was suggested that I bump up the
adjuncts. Maybe 2# crystal malt and 2# cara-pils. What do the
collective wisdom of the HBD think?. Regardless of the lack of malt
flavor my brews have been wonderful.
E-Mail is fine
Brad.
bvaughn@netcom.com
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 May 1995 10:13:53 -0500
From: Russell Mast <rmast@fnbc.com>
Subject: Men, Women, and Bottles
>From the author of women are from venus, men are from bacchus.
> From: Karen.Coffel@ncal.kaiperm.org
> Subject: Male/Female ratio and other sordid (assorted) topics
>
> Greetings Gentlemen !!!
> At MY home, I am the Brewmistress... for us, I enjoy deciding what
> to make next and my husband (and all of his friends) love to drink whatever
> I make.
You, uh, you got any sisters?
-R
> From: jhewit@freenet.vcu.edu (Jeff Hewit)
> Subject: Brewing - A Guy Thing
>
> She dislikes the smell of boiling wort so much...
Wow, I feel lucky. My SO likes the smell, and doesn't usually help
me drink it.
> She also questions my "need" for so much paraphanalia
I would say "laughs at" rather than "questions" but as long as I'm not
spending her money, she doesn't mind.
> From: P.Hannah@cqu.edu.au (Paul Hannah)
> Subject: Bottling beer?
>
> I am about ready to bottle my **second** brew and the method I used last
> time was to add sugar to the bottles individually then fill.
I have done that a few times. The books are right when they say it's going
to result in inconsistent carbonation.
> This time, I have been doing some reading (mainly here and ?complete joy of
> home brewing? by Papazian?) and in the book recommends using dried malt
Pshah. Use corn sugar. 1/2-1 cup, depending on how much bubble you want.
> extract and the bottling method that is suggested is to add 1 cup of boiled
> dried malt extract to a second fermenter, transferring the wort then bottling.
Many people use a 'bottling bucket' which is not quite as nice as a fermenter.
Many people's bottling buckets are their old fermenters. Mine is actually my
boiling kettle. Real easy to heat-sanitize it.
> Finally, my question is how to be sure that the extract is evenly
> distributed, and is it possible to do this within the original carboy (I was
> hoping to put off the purchase of the next till later on.)
Hmm... Pour it in, and stir with your racking cane, and let it settle for an
hour? I don't know. I'd just get another receptacle. Maybe you could do it
in two parts in your boiling kettle. (I'm assuming you have a small kettle,
mine holds a raging 8.5 gallons.)
-R
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 May 95 9:18:02 MDT
From: "James Giacalone" <JGiacalone@vines.ColoState.EDU>
Subject: Aluminum stockpots
I have brewed many a batch of beer
with an aluminum stockpot foryears.
There is no evidence that................
uhhhhhhh.........it uhhhhhhhhh............
hmmmm......what were we talking about..
oh yeah......the goodtimes virus!
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 May 1995 08:36:40 -0500 (CDT)
From: cisco@tabasco.ccit.arizona.edu
Subject: Smoking Grains
> 1. what type of malt to use, pale malt?
>
I use at least two pounds of pale ale malt and all of my
specialty grains for the recipe. This usually is 3 pounds.
>
> 2. what type of wood to smoke? anyone ever try mesquite?
> 3. must the grains remain cool while smoking, or is it ok to
> smoke in a gas grill where they will be exposed to the heat
> as well?
>
Use fruit woods because their flavor is more subtle and not
overpowering like mesquite. I have had great results smoking
grains for two hours while maintaining a temperature between
100 to 120 degrees. I smoke my grains dry and hand stir every
15 minutes. I don't wet my grain because I'm afraid of trans-
forming the pale ale malt into crystal-like malt. (I smoke a lot
of salmon and the fish must be dried after the brining process
before it is smoked. )
John 'Cisco' Francisco
Senior Applications Systems Analyst
CCIT - Decision Support / SIS & Voice Response
University of Arizona
Office: (520) 621-6727
Pager: (520) 218-0925
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 May 1995 09:08:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: "R. James Ray" <ray902@uidaho.edu>
Subject: Re: Non-sankey keg
> I recently acquired a non-Sankey stainless steel keg (15 gal.). I
> don't know the keg type, but it has a bung hole(without bung), and a
> two-holed metal cap with rubber seal that locks into two pins at the
> top of the keg. There is a dip tube within the keg.
What you have is a Hoff-Stevens keg. You can order a tap and some
bungs and then you can serve beer from it.
James Ray
Treaty Grounds Brewpub
Moscow, Idaho
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 May 95 10:07:39 MDT
From: Jeff Benjamin <benji@hpfcbug.fc.hp.com>
Subject: Lautering setups
A number of new all-grainers have asked about lautering setups (false
bottoms, etc). I haven't seen slotted manifolds mentioned in a while,
so I thought I'd present the idea again as an alternative.
In short, you use pieces of 1/2" hard copper tubing with slots cut in
one side, a slot every half inch or so. You connect the pieces using
copper T's, elbows, and endcaps to make a manifold in whatever
configuration fits in your vessel. Put the manifold, slots down, in the
vessel and attach to the drain spigot, and bingo! You have a lauter
tun. If you don't have a spigot, just add an elbow and one more section
of pipe that sticks up out of the mash, and siphon the wort out.
More complete plans are in the all-grain FAQ in the archives at
ftp.stanford.edu. If for some reason you can't access them, send me
email.
In answer to a specific query of jpowell@surgery.bsd.uchicago.edu (James
Powell), I would very much recommend *against* using wood in the
construction of any lautering equipment. Wood is porous, and will
absorb wort and be liable to harbor infections.
On another subject... he's back! Even a Denver newspaper columnist had
a blurb telling people to *stop sending cards to Craig Shergold*. I
don't know how Make-A-Wish got messed up in this, but I feel sorry for
them.
Jeremy Ballard Bergsman <jeremybb@leland.Stanford.EDU> wrote:
> Just a small correction to a previous post: viruses will not be removed
> by a .2 micron filter (or any filter you might reasonably use).
Uh-oh. That means you might get some Good Times in your beer!
- --
Jeff Benjamin benji@fc.hp.com
Hewlett Packard Co. Fort Collins, Colorado
"Think! It ain't illegal yet." -- George Clinton
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 May 1995 09:14:56 -0700 (PDT)
From: "R. James Ray" <ray902@uidaho.edu>
Subject: Re: Long stem dial thermometer
Lee Bollard asked about long stem dial thermometers. I use an 18" long
dial type thermometer I bought at a home and garden store. They are
intended to monitor the tempurature of a compost pile. The adjustment
nut allows for calibration to match your glass thermometer. Cost is
about $15.
James Ray
ray902@uidaho.edu
Treaty Grounds Brewpub
Moscow, Idaho
------------------------------
Date: 09 May 95 13:02:00 EDT
From: Christopher.R.Vyhnal@Dartmouth.EDU (Christopher R. Vyhnal)
Subject: Copper Kettle
In HBD #1720, TPuskar writes:
>> I was in a Corning/Revere factory outlet today and saw a 13 gallon copper
"clothes boiling kettle" on sale for about $75. It reminded me of an old
kettle my grandma used to have back before indoor plumbing and electricity.
It is oblong in shape. I didn't take measurements but I figure it is about
30 inches by 18 inches and maybe 18 inches high. The figures might be off
but the capacity is stated on the label. The bottom seemed to be
welded/brazed/soldered (I don't know the proper term) to the sides. I asked
the clerk (a part time college student) if it was food grade and she looked
at me like I was nuts.
This thing would probably span two burners on a typical stove and would seem
to be a neat and less expensive alternative to a large stainless or enameled p
ot. I'm pretty sure it comes with a top as well.
Does anyone have any insight to this kind of pot? <<
has there been any follow-up to this post? i've been looking for a larger
boiling kettle that's cheaper than stainless and more durable than enamel over
steel. if anyone has a phone number to call, please post it--i'm sure there
are other interested readers...
TIA,
Chris
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 May 1995 11:27:19 -0600
From: flemingk@usa.net (Kirk R Fleming)
Subject: FG and Body/Al Welding/SS Keg Appl/RIMS FAQ Offer/Candi
*Larry Bristol on OG, FG, and mouthfeel issues:
- ----------------------------------------------
<a tremendous emphasis is placed on OG...FG seems to be of little importance>
I think this is because it is much more *easily* controlled, at least by
beginners such as myself. It's trivial to determine the OG from the
onset of the brew session, and with software such as SUDS I think it's
even easier to predict OG to within a few points. Altho SUDS also does a
very good job with FG in my experience, there are more factors that can
change it more dramatically.
<Assuming...full attenuation, does the FG represent [a] measure of...
protein/dextrine...in the beer, and therefore...mouthfeel?>
I argue: Yes and No. "Yes" if you are talking about a "class" of worts built
from similar or identical ingredients. For example, if you have a typical
pale ale bill of pale malt and some 40L crystal. Suppose you make three
different batches having different proportions of these two ingredients,
all with the same OG:
Pale ale malt: 7 lbs This recipe yields OG = 42 and FG = 11
40L crystal: 1 lb according to SUDS 4.0
Pale ale malt: 6 lbs This recipe also yields OG = 42, and
40L crystal:2.2 lbs SUDS says FG = 11 as well
Now, I *think* you'll find in practice these two recipes may indeed
produce the same OG (I have no trouble believing that), BUT I doubt they
will yield the same FG using the same yeast--just my intuition which may
be wrong, of course. My claim is that, in this case, the FG may NOT be
the same and may indeed be an indicator of mouthfeel/body.
OTOH, "no" if you're comparing two beers of completely different classes
having identical OGs. For example, take:
Pale ale malt: 6.2 lbs SUDS says this recipe produces OG = 42
Chocolate malt: 1 lb (and it also says it will have FG = 11)
Black patent: 1 lb
I think I'm on very safe turf speculating this brew *will not* finish at
11 per SUDS--my estimate is it will finish at LEAST as high as 15-18. I
ask some of the rcb posters (who would view this as a perfectly acceptable
stout recipe, BTW) to brew this crap up and see what they get. As a data
point, I have a very nice "transition" stout that finished at 20 and
which has a very light, dry feel (very dry, in fact). This beer gives NO
sense of having swigged from an Aunt Jemima bottle (I reserve such high
praise for only my finest creations).
My point: apples and oranges just can't be compared. Also, "complete
attentuation" was assumed as the baseline for Larry's post, but this term
only has meaning from the perspective of a particular yeast. Again, two
beers which are both "completely fermented" can only be compared (on the
basis of FG) if they were done with yeasts of comparable attenuation.
FINALLY, 'I read somewhere' possibly in Miller's TCOHB where the author
cited DeClerck as having "proven" that dextrins do not contribute to
body/mouthfeel. Anyone else ever see that or have a source?
*Rob Emenecker on aluminum brewpots (but NOT Alzheimer's):
- ---------------------------------------------------------
<my understanding is welding is out of the question with aluminum...>
Aluminum is weldable and welded aluminum is as common as welded steel. A
good welder could do a gorgeous job for you, if you could find a proper
fitting for the pot. However, you *can* simply drill a hole and use a
flange-bulkhead thru fitting, but you may have trouble finding such a
fitting with gaskets that will seal under the tight radius of the pot and
that can take the temperatures well. Teflon gaskets would be the perfect
choice--I have not seen such a fitting that would work on such a curved
surface--but apparently the EasyMasher (TM) in fact does. Don't know.
*Kenneth Whitney askes what to do with an SS keg:
- -------------------------------------------------
Cut the top out and make a fermenter if you need one for 10 gal. The dip
tube can be cut off to make a gorgeous, unbreakable hydrometer jar by
covering one end with a rubber cap or plugging with a solid rubber stopper.
They cool quickly under the faucet, and never break.
*RIMS FAQ Ideas:
- ---------------
Various folks have suggest they'd be interested in [some sort of] a RIMS
FAQ, but many of the suggesters are already RIMS weenies. So far I've
only come up with one Frequently Asked Question, and that's the old "what
does RIMS stand for and what is it?".
In any case, I'll volunteer to collect the questions from the HBD and rcb
communities, and to put together the paper. I would need help from
experienced RIMS builders and users (I've only build and used a manual
RIMS--most folks think automated feedback control ala Morris). I will
also ask M Stevens and K Lutzen if they would put and html RIMS document
on their Brewery site. Send me your questions, ideas, and FAQ *answers*
and I'll try my best to consolidate, etc. Your sources for electronics
and plumbing, with phone number of source, items acquired, etc., would also
be helpful--RIMS folks are just 90's gear- and chip-heads, you know.
*Matthew_Gregory asked for candi sugar source:
- ---------------------------------------------
I know Old West Supply (800-ILV-BREW) has candi sugar on their shelves,
and I know they do mail order--I'd guess they can combine these two
features to your benefit. Very satisfied customer only etc., etc.
Kirk R Fleming / Colorado Springs / flemingk@usa.net
------------------------------
Date: 09 May 95 14:03:49 EDT
From: Christopher.R.Vyhnal@Dartmouth.EDU (Christopher R. Vyhnal)
Subject: Mercury Spill, O2 caps
in HBD#1723 lee asked about mercury contamination...
i suppose this has the potential to be a fairly common problem for homebrewers.
from what you've described, i don't think you need to be overly concerned (but
then i don't have to drink your beer ; ). here's what you should do if you ARE
concerned: call-up one of the major chemical supply houses (Fischer
Scientific, VWR should both have 800 #s) and order some sulfur wipes. you can
use these to swap the inside of your kettle and react the mercury to a more
stable (ie, less volatile) form (HgS). if it was my kettle i probably wouldn't
bother, but it's not. in the future, i wouldn't use a mercury thermometer.
standard disclaimers apply--your beer's probably more toxic than the mercury,
but your brain damage may vary....
in HBD#1725 todd asked about oxygen absorbing caps...
i've heard conflicting opinions on the proper way to activate the caps. is
there a definitive opinion on this?
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 May 1995 14:20:19 -0700
From: alan@mail.utexas.edu (Alan Van Dyke)
Subject: whoa/mangos
This in HBD #1742:
>That note was more blatant than the advertisements that have been being
>screamed about in the current 'commercials' thread. Shame on you! Haven't you
>been listening (reading)?!? Whether a private individual or corporate, that is
>NOT the purpose for the HBD. I have absolutely no qualms with your posting on
>*P* as you pay to maintain your membership there. Any rules they may have
>regarding advertisements is buffered by the price you pay for their service.
>The HBD is a FREE service for discussion of homebrewing topics; not for you to
>peddle your wares.
****
>Best regards,
>Patrick G. Babcock Michigan Truck Plant PVT Office
>usfmchql@ibmmail.com 38303 Michigan Avenue
>(313)46-70842 (V) -70843 (F) Wayne, MI 48184
I hope the Michigan Truck Plant PVT Office is exempt from the above flames.
###############
Now a brewing question. Has anyone ever put mango in their beer? I want
to make something different for the summer, & it sounds good to me. Right
now I'm thinking of a run of the mill basic wheat beer with about a
mango per gallon added in the secondary. If anyone's done this before, let
me know.
Alan Van Dyke Austin, TX
------------------------------
Date: 9 May 1995 12:42:50 -0800
From: "Harrington, Stephen J" <sharrington@msmail4.hac.com>
Subject: Various Beer Things
Greetings,
Just got back from vacation and boy to I have a lot of reading of HBD to do.
The quest for the Samuel Smiths continues. I have learned that the secret is
'dropping' instead of racking. Glad I did not totally ignore that thread. No
specific recipies (just a generic pale ale should do). My question is what
about the yeast? Which liquid one should is best?
Speaking of vacation, while visiting my in-laws near New York City (just
outside of JFK), my mother-in-law asked me what she should do with a left over
15 gallon stainless steel Bud keg. Deciding that I would not be able to get
it back to LA, I told her I would ask the HBD (try explaining that one to
your mother-in-law) if there was anyone local who would be interested in
purchasing it. So, if you are that person, send me an email and I will give
you her number. Standard disclaimers apply, I have no financial interest in
my mother-in-law, blah, blah, blah.
Stephen Harrington
Manhattan Beach, CA
------------------------------
Date: 9 May 95 15:18:00 -0500
From: mlm01@intgp1.att.com (Michael L Montgomery +1 708 979 4132)
Subject: Competition
This is just a reminder of an up and coming event
The Winfield Chamber of Commerce is sponsoring its First Annual
"Rites of Spring Homebrew Competition" on June 10, 1995. This
competition is AHA Sanctioned and is in need of judges and
stewards. If interested in judging or stewarding, please contact
Ron Meyer at "Beer in a Box" 1-708-690-8150 or 1-800-506-BREW.
Beer in a Box homebrew supply store is working out the details to
get the judges free entry into the "Rites of Spring" beer and wine
tasting scheduled for the evening of June 10 which will feature
several beers and wines from numerous distributors.
The entry fees and requirements are as follows:
3 bottles/entry
1-3 entries: $4.00 each
4-7 entries: $3.50 each
8 or more: $3.00 each
Checks should be made payable to Winfield Chamber of Commerce
Send or drop off entries to arrive between June 1 to June 5 to:
Rites of Spring Homebrew Competition
c/o Winfield Liquors - Beer in a Box
27W460 Beecher Ave.
Winfield IL 60190
For entry forms or questions, call Josette Allen at 1-800-506-BREW or
1-708-690-8150
------------------------------
Date: 9 May 95 15:22:08 -0500
From: JEFFREY.T.ANDERSON@x400gw.ameritech.com
Subject: Brewcap or Fermentap
I am trying to find someone who used the Brewcap or the Fermentap to use
a 5 gallon carboy for Primary, Secondary and Bottling.
It sounds like a great idea, but is it any easier? and how do you prime
it? Please respond with private mail to
jeffrey.t.anderson@x400gw.ameritech.com
Thanks :)
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1727, 05/10/95
*************************************
-------
