Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1843
This file received at Hops.Stanford.EDU 1995/09/28 PDT
HOMEBREW Digest #1843 Thu 28 September 1995
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor
Contents:
Acid wit (kit.anderson)
Just Ribbing RIMS (CHARLIE SCANDRETT)
Exploding minis (BF3B8RL)
Boinked Kegs ("David Wright")
Sparge acidification summary ("Dave Bradley::IC742::6-2556")
sanitation/warmed beer (Carl Etnier)
PID temp control (CHARLIE SCANDRETT)
Racist Letter/ US Plastics spigots ("Dave Bradley::IC742::6-2556")
Re-pitching at bottling time (John DeCarlo )
RE siphoning Hot break (Tim_Fields_at_Relay__Tech__Vienna)
Drinking age (CGEDEN)
9" False Bottom (Mark Kirby)
Candling your beers. (Russell Mast)
Brewing/Drinking age ("Colgan, Brian P.")
Virtual Great American Beer Festival (Shawn Steele)
Re: more RIMS questions (hollen)
Re: Periodicals (hollen)
brew pubs in Utah ("Mark J. Wilk")
request@hpfcmi.fc.hp.com ( ROBERT G SCHILLINGER)
request@hpfcmi.fc.hp.com ( ROBERT G SCHILLINGER)
Apples or Cider in your Home brew (Art_Ward)
Re: RIMS (hollen)
Re: Hot on RIMS (hollen)
RIMS Heating ("Fleming, Kirk R., Capt")
Temp distribution in mashing (Ken Schroeder)
Hop Util/Grain Conversion/Force Carbonating/Fermentation Temp Control (KennyEddy)
Heat Source ("Herb B. Tuten")
******************************************************************
* 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.
#
#################################################################
NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS hpfcmgw!
Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew@hpfcmgw.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@hpfcmgw.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@alpha.rollanet.org
ARCHIVES:
An archive of previous issues of this digest, as well as other beer
related information can be accessed via anonymous ftp at
ftp.stanford.edu. Use ftp to log in as anonymous and give your full
e-mail address as the password, look under the directory
/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer directory. AFS users can find it under
/afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer. If you do not have
ftp capability you may access the files via e-mail using the ftpmail
service at gatekeeper.dec.com. For information about this service,
send an e-mail message to ftpmail@gatekeeper.dec.com with the word
"help" (without the quotes) in the body of the message.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 95 07:00:37 -0500
From: kit.anderson@acornbbs.com
Subject: Acid wit
Thanks to all who responded with suggestions on acidifying wit beer.
The consensus is that Crosby & Baker acid blend has a distinctive
flavor because it also contains malic, citric, and tartaric acids. The
88% lactic acid available in homebrew shops is better. Also, it takes
about a month before the "added-in" flavor dissipates.
The only problem is that this beer doesn't get a chance to hang around
for a month. This is the only homebrew that my wife will fill a 18 oz
mug with. Even my Coors Light friends will polish off a keg in no
time.
Some of the judges from the contest were at my house last night and we
sampled it again. The acid blend flavor was reduced noticeably in just
two days.
Kit "Travels With Chiles" Anderson
Bath, Maine
<kit.anderson@acornbbs.com>
*
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 95 22:12:18 +1000
From: CHARLIE SCANDRETT <merino@ozemail.com.au>
Subject: Just Ribbing RIMS
Kirk Fleming writes,
>I think flow rate is hard way to go to get turbulence. Another
>solution may be to use as large a heat exchanger as is practical
>and drive the flow turbulent through vortex generation--force the
>flow to turn as often as possible or use fins. Keep the pump speed
>as low as possible to just maintain turbulence.
The 0.1m/sec pump speed *will* create the turbulence in a smooth bore, but this
approaches the "oversparging" problem. Not really a sparge, but the effect is
the same if there is too much circulating through the grain. Machine stirring
is the same as pumping, but with a larger area of exchange in any system, less
circulation is possible.
I like Kirk's suggestion of a pump and element running in parallel speed, that
addresses the problem.
The turns and fins suggestion is also commercially used in ribbed exchangers
and dimpled jackets of tanks.
The ribs are quite small (as is the boundary layer) like sharkskin ribbing.
If you have not been intimate with a shark lately, then it is ......
more like the ribs on a ribbed condom.
If you haven't been intimate with one those lately.........
then I've run out of similes!
Charlie (Brisbane, Australia)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 08:49:12 -0400
From: BF3B8RL@TPLANCH.BELL-ATL.COM
Subject: Exploding minis
"WHOLLY FERMENTATION BEERMAN, THAT MINIKEG'S ABOUT TO BOINK!"
"RIGHT ON, CARBOY, LETS BLOWOFF OUT OF HERE BEFORE THAT BOINKING KEG GETS A
CHANCE TO BOFF US!"
Thanks to Charlie Scandrett for providing the info on exploding kegs. Sounds
like the failure testing done on these kegs would have been fun to watch!
I just wanted to double check Charlie -- these were the 5L mini kegs that were
tested. You refered simply to "kegs" and I'm not sure that you were talking
about minis. You mentioned that these kegs were not designed for carbonation by
fermentation -- but clearly distributors of the minis intend you to prime the
keg for carbonation. I am truly suprised that those rubber bungs can hold such
pressures (up to 265 psi!).
In any case you refered to putting in safety valves on these kegs:
I STRONGLY ADVISE putting 3 ATM pressure relief valves on all natural
carbonation kegs. Your local hot water system repair man should have a bag full
of them. Have them welded/threaded securely into your system.
The thickness of the metal of these kegs seems too thin for threading or
welding. Further, welds would likely ruin the thin enamel coating on the keg's
interior. Do you know of anyone who has successfully performed the addition of
a safety valve to a mini-keg?
TIA,
Chas Peterson
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 08:54:22 EST5EDT
From: "David Wright" <LSMAIL@osp.emory.edu>
Subject: Boinked Kegs
Charlie Scandrett said that he went to a keg manufacturer (sp?) and
asked about the strength testing of kegs. I have been under the
impression that the boinked kegs that we have been talking about are
the 5 liter mini-kegs. If not the please pardon this post. Are these
the kegs that you are talking about Charlie? If so, this is very eye
opening. I have boinked (I think this is a great technical term!) a
couple of kegs in my time and would be interested to know how much
CO2 is created during a normal secondary ferment. I would not have
thought that it could reach those types of pressures.
Any ideas?
David Wright
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 08:04:31 -0500 (EST)
From: "Dave Bradley::IC742::6-2556" <BRADLEY_DAVID_A@Lilly.com>
Subject: Sparge acidification summary
Hi all. Several weeks ago I asked about sources of acid to
bring down the pH of my sparge water. I received a half dozen
direct Email responses, all of which suggest using tartaric
acid instead of hydrochloric. One mentioned that indeed,
the malic acid I had used will impart unwanted bitterness
to the beer. Several mentioned their water has high Cl
levels anyway, so adding HCl is out of the question. One
said not to worry, the grain bed will buffer the pH to an
acceptable level (for some of the sparge, yes, pending
your grain bill and qty dark malts). I'll just use the
tartaric myself. THANKS TO ALL WHO RESPONDED!!! Oh,
and this acid is available in most brew shops.
Dave in Indy
From: BRADLEY DAVID A (MCVAX0::RC65036)
To: VMS MAIL ADDRESSEE (IN::"homebrew@hpfcmgw.fc.hp.com")
cc: BRADLEY DAVID A (MCVAX0::RC65036)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 14:09:19 +0100 (MET)
From: Carl Etnier <Carl.Etnier@abc.se>
Subject: sanitation/warmed beer
Brian Pickerill has been bottling his 12-14 oz of beer from the
hydrometer flask in unsanitized bottles with unsanitized caps and
unsanitized sugar, even tasting it before putting on the cap, and
not had any problems with spoilage or infection.
The last several batches, I've tried a similar experiment. You
know that half-full (not half-empty!) bottle that you always get
at the end of bottling, when the siphon makes the sad sucking
noise indicating the termination of that batch? I've been spitting
in that bottle before capping it. 'Course, the bottle, cap, etc.
is all per usual procedure, but I'm counting on some difference in
taste, carbonation, etc. from my filthy spit.
When it has come round to beer drinking time each day, I somehow
have never yet felt inspired to open one of these bottles. Brian's
report has made me curious. I'll let you know in November, when
I've returned home to my aging beer.
- -------------------
I asked a while ago about the custom of heating beer before
serving, which I had read about in a novel about Vikings. The
feedback I got, some of it posted on this august forum, was that
heating ales by plunging a hot poker into them was customary
earlier, with one respondent even saying his father had done it in
Germany, sometime around 1950. Only one person reported tasting
warmed beer, which he thought might have been called Grant's
Holiday Ale. It had cloves, cinnamon, etc and did not impress him.
It was also remarked that beer in the middle ages no doubt tasted
very different from any modern product. Jeff Renner, ne'e *Jeff*
Renner, said it best, about the beer drunk at the time of Henry
VIII:
>English ale back then was typically much stronger in OG than now
>(>1.080), probably cloudy with yeast and suspended starch and
>protein from poor mashing and sparging techniques, sweeter
>(higher FG), and unhopped.
To that I would only add, "and flat." I don't know when pressure
vessels and thereby the possibility for carbonation were
introduced for beer, but I suspect they didn't exist then.
Thanks for your info, everyone!
Carl Etnier
A Yank temporarily transplanted from Sweden to Switzerland
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 95 23:20:23 +1000
From: CHARLIE SCANDRETT <merino@ozemail.com.au>
Subject: PID temp control
Harry Bush asks the unavoidable question,
>What is PID (other than something really bad that happens only to
>women), and is it something I should get?
Here goes?...
A thermostal is simply an on/off switch governed by a target temperature.The
temperature fluctuates within a range of sensitivity, called the "Hysteresis".
Proportional, Integral, Derivative control is just that.
*Proportional* control provides added temperature stability by eliminating
fluctuations in temperature by setting the proportion of heating power supplied
to the process depending on the difference between the current and target
temperatures. Unfortunately, the process temperature only settles at the
setpoint if the load of the process exactly matches the heater. Otherwise it
usually produces a stable error, offset from the target temperature.
To compensate for this offset, a second control action is used. *Integral*
action eliminates the offset caused by mismatch of heater and load, by
responding to the duration of the error signal (through integration- remember
Calculus?) when the actual temperature overshoots the target temperature. By
small adjustments in the proportional output, it forces the actual product
temperature to settle exactly at the target temperature.
In many small capacity processes, the PID controller must respond to large and
rapid changes in the target or actual process temperature. (Say, a 20C mash
step). *Derivative* controlling action provides additional temperature
stability by responding to the *rate* of temperature change. This is achieved
by setting the controller output to oppose any temperature deviation from the
target setpoint. This also reduces initial temperature overshoots when the
process approaches the target setpoint for the first time.
In summary,
Proportional control varies the heating power in proportion to the
actual-target temperature differences, like a car's accelerator.
Integral moderates these variations to account for heating to load power
mismatches, a sort of shock absorber that eliminates the offset error.
Derivative is aware of the speed of temperature change, it is a sort of brake
on the thermal momentum of a large rapid change.
Combined = PID temperature control = a little black box!
Charlie (Brisbane, Australia)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 08:46:32 -0500 (EST)
From: "Dave Bradley::IC742::6-2556" <BRADLEY_DAVID_A@Lilly.com>
Subject: Racist Letter/ US Plastics spigots
In Tuesday's HBD, someone asked about a racist Email. I also
received what could be termed a racist Email from the "National Alliance",
based in WV, PO Box 90 in Hillsboro 24946. The note gives a homepage too.
I disagree with what the letter implies/states, but more importantly,
I also wonder how they get my address. I subscribe to one and only one
BB style Email....the HBD. How has someone tapped into this list?
And who else COULD tap into this list...now I don't want to hide
the fact that I'm a homebrewer (nay, promote it!), but I would hope this
list is a bit more guarded.
Dave in Indy
From: BRADLEY DAVID A (MCVAX0::RC65036)
To: VMS MAIL ADDRESSEE (IN::"homebrew@hpfcmgw.fc.hp.com")
cc: BRADLEY DAVID A (MCVAX0::RC65036)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 95 09:58:02 EST
From: John DeCarlo <jdecarlo@mitre.org>
Subject: Re-pitching at bottling time
Kris Thomas Messenger <kmesseng@slonet.org> writes:
>I have seen several mentions in the literature about re-pitching yeast when
>bottling after long secondary fermentations. The rationale seems to be
>that the yeast will have gone dormant, died off, or settled out. Thus to
>assure carbonation in the bottle, it is suggested to add more yeast.
[...]
>If anyone has any first hand experience here, I would be interested in
>hearing it. Another area this applies to is meads which I sometimes leave
>for one or two years.
Well, my overall impression is that this is yeast and environment/system
dependent.
As for first hand experience, I have not had any problems with bottle
carbonation with:
1) An ale that was in the secondary for 6 months.
2) Lots of ales that were in secondary 3-4 months.
3) A mead that fermented/aged 14 months before bottling.
Note that this does not include any lagers. Or fancy Belgian high gravity
styles. All were fermented with various Wyeast ale yeasts except the mead
fermented with Wyeast champagne yeast. All were carbonated within 2 weeks
of bottling, and the mead was wonderfully clear in the carboy before
bottling.
John DeCarlo, MITRE Corporation, McLean, VA--My views are my own
Fidonet: 1:109/131 Internet: jdecarlo@mitre.org
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 95 10:06:48 EST
From: Tim_Fields_at_Relay__Tech__Vienna@relay.com
Subject: RE siphoning Hot break
We had a post within the past few days that mentioned the difficulty
of siphoning hot wort off the hot break. As I recall, the poster
noted that whirlpooling doesn't work with hot break/wort. My own
experience is that whirlpooling _may_ work for the trub, but that it
doesn't phase whole hops at all.
Unless I am mistaken, it is a very good thing to siphon hot wort off
the hot break (being careful to avoid HSA). I _think_ I've read that
removing hot break is much more beneficial than removing cold break.
I'd really like to know what the collective experience has to say
about this. Which is more beneficial? Removing the hot break? the
cold break? both? neither???? For me, the hotbreak removal process
is a royal PITA, so I'd love to avoid it if the benefit is nil.
-Tim
timf@relay.com
"How 'bout them Terps!"
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 95 09:51:54 EDT
From: CGEDEN@NERVM.NERDC.UFL.EDU
Subject: Drinking age
WHen I was 18 the US government was busy sending lots of 18-yr-olds to
fight and die in Southeast Asia. As Barry McGuire sang in "The Eve of
Destruction": "You're old enough to kill, but not for votin'". We also
weren't allowed to drink in most states, although 18 was considered
adulthood for most other things. In some cases this resulted in such
absurdities as 20-yr-old combat-veteran-homeowning-husband-fathers
who were not considered mature enough to enjoy a beer. Then they lowered
the voting age and in most cases the drinking age to 18 in about 1972.
Since then its crept back up to 21 in the interests of highway safety.
Lets face it, 18-yr-olds are adults and deserve the right to drink if they
care to. Some of them will make unwise choices, but so do all of us from
time to time. It makes no more sense to deny them this freedom based on
highway statistics than it would to deny drivers licenses to people over
70 years old.
Now, should 16-yr-olds be allowed to drive? That's another question...
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 10:15:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mark Kirby <mkirby@isnet.is.wfu.edu>
Subject: 9" False Bottom
After reading Kirk Fleming's post regarding false bottoms, I should probably
clarify my posting regarding the use of smaller diameter false bottoms:
My mash\lauter tun also serves as my boiling vessel. I use a King Kooker
(tm) (170K BTU) burner to heat the mash to appropriate temperatures when
needed, and having the smaller diameter plate in the bottom allows DIRECT
access to the bottom of the keg where hot spots can form and scorch the
wort. If the perforated SS plate covered the entire bottom of the keg, I
could not prevent scorching since I would be unable to mix contents above
and below the plate (i.e. no recirculation).
During boiling, I'm able to keep the wort recirculating until boiling
commences, which helps avoid the same problem of hot spot scorching (HSS?)
As for its use with RIMS, I have no experience with such a setup, but
Kirk's reasoning for utilization of larger false bottoms seems clear.
Hope this helps some of you designing your own systems.
Todd Kirby
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 09:37:56 -0500
From: Russell Mast <rmast@fnbc.com>
Subject: Candling your beers.
> From: Kris Thomas Messenger <kmesseng@slonet.org>
> Subject: Re-pitching at bottling time
> Not wanting to have cloudy beer, I am wondering how much yeast I should add
> at bottling time to accomplish this. I have had some beers go for around 3
> months in the secondary and become quite brilliant. A flashlight can be
> seen shining through the carboy even with some fairly dark brews. Thus, it
> would appear as if all the yeast has settled out.
First, there are still many, many yeast cells in suspension, just not enough
to make a noticable difference in the light shining through it. There are,
probably, enough to fully condition your beer in about the normal time.
Second, I really don't have any idea how much yeast to re-pitch. I guess if
you did too much, you might have haze problems or, later, a big ol' hunk of
sediment. I've found that using gelatin finings at bottling not only clears
the yeast out better, it also helps the slurry to stay at the bottom during
pouring, so it doesn't cloud up in the glass as much.
Finally, and most important - I've been "candling" my beers for as long as
I've been using glass carboys. You shine a flashlight through and see how
clear it is, what color it is, how active the fermentation is, etc. My buddy
Jake was over one time I was doing this, and he was aghast. He said that that
will make my beers go lightstruck (skunked!) much faster than simply letting
a light shine in from a room. (I was always aghast that he left his stuff
in an open-door pantry, it was free from direct sunlight, but that's about
it.) I've never had a problem with skunked homebrew, but, to be safe, I
have tried to limit the amount of time I'm "candling" my beers.
So, does anyone know - how much candling is safe? How much will light-strike
my beer? A few seconds, a few days, what?
Thanks,
-R
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 95 11:13:39 EST
From: "Colgan, Brian P." <bcolgan@sungard.com>
Subject: Brewing/Drinking age
>From: acostell@moose.uvm.edu (andrew costello)
>Subject: Brewing/Drinking Age
>Does anyone out there know if there is a legal age attached to hombrewing?
>Does it vary from state to state ? I am also interested to find out your
>thoughts on the 21 year old drinking age. There is a bill being introduced
>in the House of Representatives that would remove the requirement on states
>that they must have a 21 year old drinking age to get federal highway money.
>This requirement forced many states into adopting their legal age as 21,
>even though they may not have wanted to. This is sure to touch off a debate,
>and I'd like to know what the brewers think. Thanks.
Wow, legal brewing age? I shudder to think that my 2 (cellarman) and 5 (asst.
brewster) year olds are a couple of criminals.... Not to mention the fact that
my two year old son screams 'BEER!' at the dinner table until he gets his one
sip. These are the same two in-utero beer swillers from the beer/pregnant thread
btw, both big as trees and smarter that anything IMHO.
So where do I surrender them?
Brian Colgan "Every one has to believe in something."
bcolgan@sungard.com "I believe I'll have another homebrew."
h:(610) 527-8896 / w: (215) 627-3800
Radnor, PA.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 08:45:13 -0600
From: Shawn Steele <shawn@aob.org>
Subject: Virtual Great American Beer Festival
Our access provider mixed up our mail, so I don't know if this made it
out the first time or not. My apologies if this is a duplicate.
- ----------------
Spread the news!
Virtual Great American Beer Festival
October 5-7, 1995
There will be a virtual gathering on the World Wide Web for the 1995
Great American Beer Festival from 6:00 p.m, Thursday, Oct. 5, through
midnight, Saturday, Oct. 7, Mountain time. This virtual GABF will
coincide with the 14th annual Great American Beer Festival in Denver,
Colorado. This event promises to be the largest, most exciting,
domestic beer celebration to date, with more than 1,345 different beers
from over 335 breweries.
Visit the Virtual GABF on the World Wide Web at:
http://www.aob.org/aob/gabf/virtual.html
Our on-line events will include discussions with people at the Great
American Beer Festival through our beer pages, as well as other beer
enthusiasts around the world. Visit our web site to find out which
beers and breweries will be featured during the Virtual GABF. On
Saturday the 7th, the Professional Panel Blind Tasting results will be
posted!
Enjoy the Festival,
Shawn
Shawn Steele
Webmaster
Great American Beer Festival (303) 447-0816 x 118 (voice)
736 Pearl Street (303) 447-2825 (fax)
PO Box 1679 shawn@aob.org (e-mail)
Boulder, CO 80306-1679 info@aob.org (aob info)
U.S.A. http://www.aob.org/aob (web)
This information is subject to change. Great American Beer Festival is
a registered trademark and GABF is a registered service mark of Brewing
Matters.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 09:07:08 -0700
From: hollen@vigra.com
Subject: Re: more RIMS questions
>>>>> "Keith" == Keith Royster <N1EA471@mro.ehnr.state.nc.us> writes:
Keith> I plan on building a system that simply heats the wort with my
Keith> propane cooker under the kettle and recirculates it to the top
Keith> with a pump. No heating element, no computer chips. But it
Keith> does (R)ecirculate, and it is an (I)nfusion (M)ashing (S)ystem,
Keith> but is it a RIMS?
It is my contention that the system that you describe *is* a RIMS
system. While you may provide heat in many different ways, I feel
that the *only essential* component of a system to make it a RIMS is
constant recirculation during conversion. You do not even need the
capability of raising the temperature to achieve the advantages of
even heat throughout the mash and the grain bed acting as its own
filter. Of course, without any heat being added to the system, you
must have excellent insulation in the whole system including the
pumping circuit. There are many ways to provide the heat and a
temperature controller and a low density element are just one. Your
hand controlled propane cooker is another. It is just that some ways
of heating have more propensity for scorching and overshooting than
others. You walk away from your propane setup during the boost and
get distracted and you could come back to a mash at 180F, dead enzymes
and a ruined mash. Unless my temp controller malfunctions, I set the
dial to 150F, walk away and come back 2 hours later and it would still
be at 150F plus or minus 1 degree.
I am sure that I will once again be blasted because some people deem
recirculation to be a *bad thing* and to be avoided like the plague.
However, I am not attempting to debate that point. I do not have a
body of scientific evidence to support or put down that point. I only
find that my beer made with my RIMS is excellent.
Keith> Also, what is the best way to control the speed of the
Keith> recirculating pump? A motor speed controller (dimmer switch?)?
Keith> or a ball-valve upstream of the pump outlet? I would like to
Keith> use the same pump to transfer the wort from the mash tun to the
Keith> brew kettle during the sparge, but I'm worried that trying to
Keith> slow the pump down to a normal sparging speed might be too slow
Keith> and damage/burn the pump.
After talking with tech support engineers at several pump
manufacturers, the preferred way of throttling a pump is to use a
valve on the output side. Personally, I use an industrial fan motor
speed controller (basically a dimmer switch). I have not yet had any
apparent damage to my pump. I felt that running the pump at full
capacity and throttling it with a valve might cause the wort to be
"whipped" in the impeller chamber and therefore cause HSA. I opted
for slowing down the pump.
dion
- --
Dion Hollenbeck (619)597-7080x119 Email: hollen@vigra.com
Senior Software Engineer Vigra, Inc. San Diego, California
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 09:16:19 -0700
From: hollen@vigra.com
Subject: Re: Periodicals
>>>>> "Kris" == Kris Thomas Messenger <kmesseng@slonet.org> writes:
Kris> Presently, I subscribe to Zymurgy as published by AHA. I have
Kris> seen a magazine called "Brewing Techniques" and wonder if anyone
Kris> has some comments on how the two publications compare. Thanks.
As I just posted to rec.crafts.brewing, Zymurgy is geared more towards
the beginning and intermediate brewer, while BT is geared to the
intermediate to advanced brewer and craft brewers (micros and
brewpubs). Also, it is more geared to high tech equipment than
Zymurgy. There is certainly an overlap and I subscribe to both, even
though I have published an article in BT, I do not consider myself
"above" Zymurgy and learn from it as well.
If you can only subscribe to one, I would determine which one based on
your level of skill and love of gadgets. However, if at all possible,
I suggest that you subscribe to them BOTH. From what I have seen of
"Beer", if you are beyond the absolute beginner, you can forget that
one.
dion
- --
Dion Hollenbeck (619)597-7080x119 Email: hollen@vigra.com
Senior Software Engineer Vigra, Inc. San Diego, California
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 12:19:26 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Mark J. Wilk" <mw5w+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: brew pubs in Utah
Can anyone tell me of any brew pubs in the Moab area. I will be there
on a five day bike trip, and I hope to be able to load up on carbos at a
local brewery. Thanks in advance.
Mark
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 12:16:04 EDT
From: ZYHM49A@prodigy.com ( ROBERT G SCHILLINGER)
Subject: request@hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
zyhm49a
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 12:16:30 EDT
From: ZYHM49A@prodigy.com ( ROBERT G SCHILLINGER)
Subject: request@hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
zyhm49a
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 09:34:29 PDT
From: Art_Ward@mc.xerox.com
Subject: Apples or Cider in your Home brew
Has anyone made any beer using Apples and/or Cider. I am looking for
any receipts. I am mainly interested in how you added the apples
(form, example: chucks peeled, sauced ect) to the brew. Private e-mail
only. Thanks
Art Ward
Art_Ward@mc.xerox.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 09:37:18 -0700
From: hollen@vigra.com
Subject: Re: RIMS
>>>>> "Kirk" == Fleming, Kirk R , Capt <FLEMINGKR@afmcfafb.fafb.af.mil> writes:
Kirk> Due to a gut feeling only, I'd prefer to recirculate my wort only
Kirk> to the extent needed to maintain uniform temperature in the grain
Kirk> bed, and foremost only enough to ensure no scorching in the heat
Kirk> exchange area (be it a chamber or a direct-fired tun). Still, I
Kirk> don't see how machine stirring of the mash is any less likely to
Kirk> extract phenols (or anything else) than is constant recirculation.
I agree with your gut feeling and I too, keep recirc rates to a
minimum.
Kirk> Also, I don't follow Charlie's "over sparging" concern...I don't
Kirk> see a connection between RIMS and how much you sparge.
I think what Charlie was alluding to is that any *bad* things which
would happen because of oversparging would happen during
recirculation. However, what Charlie may be overlooking is that
during sparging, you are constantly changing the relationship of the
water to the grain. The pH is changing, the grain is getting less
sugars in it.... I believe that those things which might happen
during oversparging do not occur during mash recirculation because the
*same* wort is going round and round. It is not "washing" the grain
like sparging is.
How about it Charlie, like to re-evaluate your comments in light of
this? Were you maybe extending characteristics of over-sparging to
recirculation which are not there because of the very different
chemical makeup of the wort during recirc from that during sparging?
I am not baiting you, I actually would like to know about specifics
that you feel are a down side of the recirc. I just feel that the
chemical environment is very different in the two cases; different
enough for me to not believe in the problems you seem to think exist.
If you have hard evidence, I am open to it. And in fact, would
welcome it and want to test it out. Since I am writing a book on RIMS
design and fabrication, I want to be able to put in as much proven
information as possible and if you have found a vulnerability to RIMS
systems that can be identified and corrected, I want to do that.
dion
- --
Dion Hollenbeck (619)597-7080x119 Email: hollen@vigra.com
Senior Software Engineer Vigra, Inc. San Diego, California
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 09:39:53 -0700
From: hollen@vigra.com
Subject: Re: Hot on RIMS
>>>>> "Bob" == Bob Sutton
>>>>> <BSutton_+a_fdgv-03_+lBob_Sutton+r%Fluor_Daniel@mcimail.com>
>>>>> writes:
Bob> As an engineer, I find RIMS to be an elegant approach,
Bob> conceptually. However, I would expect RIMS to overheat the mash
Bob> passing through the exchanger/heating element, caramelizing
Bob> sugars and degrading enzymes. On the other hand, a fired system
Bob> still has heat localization concerns at the wall film.
Bob> It would seem, to this innocent eye, that the damage at the wall
Bob> film (assuming decent agitation) would be less than RIMS. What
Bob> exit temperature do you RIMS advocates experience at each
Bob> rest. Based on the pump rates and heat exchange capacity I have
Bob> seen in recent posts, I'd predict that exit temperatures are well
Bob> above enzyme tolerances.
I agree with your concerns and one could construct a RIMS in such a
fashion as to present you with the localized heating you are afraid
of. My heater chamber has the thermistor probe for the temperature
controller on the input side of the heater. The temperature readout
is on the output side. In that manner, I set the dial to give the
desired output temperature. When I am shooting for 150F, the exit
temperature is always lower than that until it reaches 150F and then
it never exceeds that because the duty cycle of the heater is lowered.
I, too, am concerned by the temp differential and as soon as I have my
BruProbe and BruTemp completely working, I plan on replacing my temp
controller probe with a second digital temp readout and running the
system flat out and seeing the actual temperature differential between
input and ouput. I am pretty sure it will be only a few degrees. My
normal boost rate while the heater is going full bore with a grain
bill of abouit 15 lbs. is only 1.5 degrees per minute. The 1125 watts
of the heater are spread out over a surface area of 72 square inches
which means about 15 watts per square inch. This is an extremely low
density of heat.
When I get results from the heater differential test, I will surely
post them here.
dion
- --
Dion Hollenbeck (619)597-7080x119 Email: hollen@vigra.com
Senior Software Engineer Vigra, Inc. San Diego, California
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 95 10:49:00 MST
From: "Fleming, Kirk R., Capt" <FLEMINGKR@afmcfafb.fafb.af.mil>
Subject: RIMS Heating
Bob Sutton expressed concern about RIMS wort heating...
RIMS design (as I know it) generally shoots for continuous flow over a
low energy density heating element, using a temperature controller
setpoint equal to the desired infusion temperature. With the temperature
pickup in the immediate vicinity of the heating element, no part of the
wort ever exceeds that setpoint. The 'exit' temp he asked about is
always exactly the setpoint temperature, or below.
In my direct-fired, human brain-controlled system, the temperature pickup
is in the plumbing immediately outside the bottom of the mash tank. Wort
coming directly off the heating pan flows over the temp probe first, then
goes into the pump and back into the grain bed. Even without the benefit
of an electronic controller I have no temperature overshoot, except that
occuring in the boundary layer at the heating pan (wall film).
Unless you have infinite surface area, of course, the boundary layer temp
*has* to be higher than the setpoint or you can't heat anything up. I
have a large heated surface area, but it is certainly less than infinite.
Since the circulation is continuous, and especially continuous during any
heat inputs, I'm confident there is no significant difference between this
arrangement and a manually stirred system with false bottom.
KRF Colorado Springs
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 95 10:54:25 PDT
From: kens@lan.nsc.com (Ken Schroeder)
Subject: Temp distribution in mashing
Jim Bush and Dion Hollen argue about which systems are better for even
temp distibution in the mash tun. Dion hypes the push button, no
worry rims system, while Jim advocates the hands free stirring,
traditional fired system. Our two respected brewers seem to agree that
even heat distribution is very important. I question this philosphy,
or at least ask, how even is even?
I have extensively measured heat distribution in my traditional, direct
fired, cut keg system. I use a large wood paddle for stirring. With an
expensive thermal couple themometer, I measured virutally every quadrant if
the mash tun and found, after stirring, no more than a 2 degree delta. That
is to say, if one section was 68C the other sections would be no less than
67C and no section would be more than 68C. During the heating process, the
bottom of the mash tun would raise beyond this delta. The delta was (is)
dependant on the amount of heat applied and the amount of time between
stirrings. Once heat was removed, the 2 degree gradiant is established with
stirring. So, how even is even? Also does "even" include the heating process
and if so, how even is even?
Further, when the beer style has high malt characteristics, both my wife I
tend to use direct fire to bring the mash from mash in (25C) to sac temps.
We strive for a 1 degree C per minute raise. We tend to raise the temp to 68C
and then let the mash cool to about 65C before raising again to strike temp.
I find very good results with this method (at least judges seem to think so).
My wife (the scientist/bio-chemist) jumps up and down how all the emzymes and
stuff are all active with this method. Does reflect an "even" heating
proceedure? Comments Dion, Jim?
My wife and I both believe that the uneveness (especically when heating)of
our system and proceedures actually help create beers full of different
characters. It hard to describe in words, but dry and sweet, full bodied but
not thick and other apparent contridictions. I question the need for
"eveness" in the brewing process. This is an opinion, others will have
different opinions. Let's hear them. This is why brewing is an art AND a
science!
Deion, Jim?
Ken Schroeder
Sequoia Brewing (a direct fire, hand stirred, fully manual nano-brewery)
kens@lan.nsc.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 14:03:56 -0400
From: KennyEddy@aol.com
Subject: Hop Util/Grain Conversion/Force Carbonating/Fermentation Temp Control
Hi one and all. I've been a peeping tom long enough so I thought I'd join
the fray. I have a few questions which I have not been able to get answered
satisfactorily elsewhere. This looks like the place!
(1) Hop Utilization: Everybody seems to have different formulae for hop
utilization. Considering how we homebrewers concern ourselves with getting
just the right color numbers and gravities and worrying about extraction
efficiency, it's odd that hop utilization is such an inexact science. I have
read Glen Tinseth's paper on utilization and find it convincing but if I
compare his curves with say Mosher versus Papazian versus Gareth versus
Rager...you get the picture. Using these various gurus' approaches sometimes
leads to IBUs off by dozens of percent from one to another! Who's right (or
at least in current favor)? Or is it so hopelessly complicated and dependent
on the phase of the moon that we can never hope to nail that IBU rating on
the money?
(2) Grain Conversion: Being relatively new to the art of all-grain brewing
(and being the nerdy engineer that I am), I'm wondering about some details
concerning conversion of starch to sugar. I understand that each malt has
its own theoretical extraction potential; multiply this by your system's
efficiency and the amount of grain and water and all that, and you have the
OG contribution. Fine. But: how much of that OG is actually fermentable?
A program like SUDS lists a variety of grains and their OG potential, but
assumes that the resulting OG is fully fermentable (and also assumes that 75%
is converted to alcohol [75% apparent attenuation]). What is needed is a
chart that shows not only potential extract but also *percent
fermentablilty*. For example, 40L crystal might have an extract potential of
31 points, of which say 65% is fermentable. Any such info available?
On sorta the same topic, I would think that roasting grains would destroy
some to all of the starch's conversion capability, yet I see malts like
chocolate or even black patent listed with extractions not much different
that pale malts. The stock answer I get for these questions is "well, we
don't use a high percentage of these grains so we just ignore those effects".
But I would like to know anyway.
(3) Force Carbonation: Now that I'm kegging, I'm enjoying the convenience of
sediment-free beer-on-demand. I'm also enjoying variable and unpredicatable
carbonation levels. My current approach is to add pressure immediately after
racking, according to temperature/volumes tables, then tossing the
unconnected keg into the fridge. This buys a little time by pushing CO2 into
the beer as it cools. Now I suspect two things should be happening here.
One, the free CO2 will reduce in pressure due to the cooling temperatures.
Two, the cooling beer would allow more CO2 to dissolve in (or would it...?).
But I should end up with a pressure at final temperature euqla to that in
the chart for the same CO2 volume I was originally after. Right?
Next question: So assume I have my beer wonderfully carbonated at 2.5
volumes and 38 degrees. Now, I don't have the tables in front of me but I
think this means about 12 psi. Whatever. But my serving pressure is
necessarily 8 psi (to prevent beer-face). So-o-o-o, wouldn't the beer try to
reach equilibrium by "flattening" out to the equivalent 8psi/38 degree volume
level? If so, how does one maintain these carbonation levels without spewing
beer all the way to the neighbor's house?
Controlling Fermentation Temperature: In anticipation of good answers to the
above questions, and in return for your indulgence, I have a suggestion for
controlling fermentation temperatures without investing in a fridge. The key
word here is CONTROL. Many brewers use an insulated box with a jug or two of
ice, but must fudge with this to get just the "right" temperature. I have
been using a box of my own design which is small and lightweight, can control
temperature within a couple degrees, and costs around $50 to build from all
new parts (less if you're a good scrounge). Those of you on America OnLine
will find complete plans in the beer forum uploads board under "Fermentation
Chiller for Summer Brewing" (dig back to like May). Unfortuantely, AOL does
not support file attach over the net, so the rest of you can follow along
here.
The box is built from 2" styrofoam (the pink or blue extruded polystyrene is
sturdiest & recommended, although a bit pricier). My original dimensions
were a compromise between fitting a 5 or 6-1.2 gal carboy (not bucket) with
airlock, versus fitting the pieces on a single 4x8 sheet of foam (or two 2x8
sheets). So if you have access to Foam Unlimited, size it to your liking.
The box is 24"x16" at the base and 34" high. An interior wall divides the
box into a "fermentation chamber" which holds the carboy, and another area
which I will address shortly. If you add up the wall thicknesses to the
dimensions given, you find the inside of the fermentation chamber is 12x12.
Now, in each of the two top corners of the divider, I have cut a 3x3 notch
(before assembly). In one notch I have mounted a 3" 12VDC fan, so it will
blow into the fermentation chamber. The other notch is an "intake" which
provides a circulation path for the air when the box is closed. The fan is
controlled by a standard household COOLING thermostat, set to say 65 degrees
(some will go below 50F, which might make it usable for lagers). I put two
gallon jugs of ice in the chamber behind the fermentation chamber. But since
I want to "corral" the cold air from the ice until needed, I have to put the
fan and intake at the TOP of the divider (cold air sinks). So to get the
intake air diverted DOWN so it will pick up the cold air and flow UP across
the ice before exiting (cold) theough the fan, I added another divider which
splits the "ice chamber". But the divider does not reach the bottom, so air
flows down from the intake notch, UNDER the divider, UP across the ice, and
finally OUT through the fan into the fermentation chamber. The ice chamber
is larger than the intake chamber to allow the jugs to fit (8x8).
The top panel and front panel (at the carboy end of the box) are removable.
The top panel allows access to the ice and the front panel of course allows
access to the beer. The box is assembled with Liquid Nails (except the top
and front panels) and the whole thing is sealed with silicone caulk.
Weatherstripping is applied strategically around the top edges of the
dividers to seal them against the top panel. Additional weatherstripping
seals the perimeter of the top and front panels. I used wooden dowels to
"pin" the top and front in place; a good "press fit" and a heavy book on top
would probably suffice. Everything is powered by a 12V 200mA wall adapter.
In the hottest weather (90 degrees in my garage) I can go two days between
ice changes. If you can park it in your home, three or even four days would
not be unrealistic.
Sorry for such a long-winded introduction but I hope (a) I get my questions
answered and (b) you find the Fermentation Chiller useful.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 13:57:53 EDT
From: "Herb B. Tuten" <HERB@zeus.co.forsyth.nc.us>
Subject: Heat Source
I'd like to expand my home-brew operation and move it to the basement.
I could use a propane type heat source, but then I'd need to vent it and
there are safety concerns. What about adapting a used stove? Or
perhaps there's a way to attach an element directly to a keg with the top
cut off. I'm in the process of obtaining the keg, so this would be the time
to work out the details of how I'll heat it so I can make larger batches
and/or move on to grain brewing. Does anyone have experience
with a basement set-up?
Also, I've always used a siphon for bottling and now I've seen the
priming buckets with faucets everywhere. Any opinions on the faucet
method of bottling?
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1843, 09/28/95
*************************************
-------
