Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1838
This file received at Hops.Stanford.EDU 1995/09/22 PDT
HOMEBREW Digest #1838 Fri 22 September 1995
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor
Contents:
1995 CABA All About Ales (Michael Ligas)
Vitamin C in Beer (John DeCarlo )
yeast starters summary (Alex Sessions)
Oak Chips / Bottle Transfer ("David Wright")
Aged beer & Mace (Jay Reeves)
Brewing & water chemistry question (Michael Genito)
RE: Gott conversion with Bung (Tim_Fields_at_Relay__Tech__Vienna)
Canadian suppliers of hop rhizomes (Derrick Pohl)
Review of BrewTek Mill ("Palmer.John")
fresh hops ("Wallinger, W. A.")
More pubs/yeasts (Jim Busch)
Open Fermentation: Risk & Fermenter Materials ("Fleming, Kirk R., Capt")
Gearmotor Mill Confession ("Manning Martin MP")
SELECTHomebrew Digest #1837 (September 21, 1995) (SWEENERB)
Cooling Beer Line (Ronald J. La Borde)
CO2 regulator zero adjustment... (Brian Pickerill)
Buckled kegs... ("Bessette, Bob")
Beer drinking in Denmark ("Antonio S. Reher")
Steam heat, cooling beer line (Neal Christensen)
RE: Extract Efficiency (Chris Barnhart)
Extract/Grain (krkoupa)
Re:Long distance dispensing (djt2)
REPITCH! (dflagg)
Oak chips (Philip Gravel)
Knave Brew World. (Russell Mast)
The HomeBrew Flea Market ("Pat Babcock")
PUMPS, PUMPS, PUMPS! (blacksab)
******************************************************************
* 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: Thu, 21 Sep 1995 08:31:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Ligas <g8006142@mcmail.CIS.McMaster.CA>
Subject: 1995 CABA All About Ales
CABA's 1995 ALL ABOUT ALES COMPETITION
The Canadian Amateur Brewers Association presents the 1995 All About Ales
(AAA) Competition. Entries must be received before 4:00pm, Saturday,
October 21, 1995.
First, second and Best of Show (BOS) rounds of judging will be done by
recognized beer judges between October 28th and November 11, 1995. The
decisions of the judges will be final. All entrants will receive the
judging sheets used to evaluate their entries.
H. BREWED AT HOME (BAH) BEER CLASSES
Class 1: WHEAT BEER
1a: Weizenbier
1b: Dunkelweizen
1c: Witbier
Class 2: CANADIAN ALE
Class 3: PALE ALE
3a: Classic Pale Ale
3b: India Pale Ale (IPA)
3c: North American Pale Ale
Class 4: ENGLISH BITTER
Class 5: BROWN ALE
5a: English Brown
5b: English Mild
Class 6: PORTER
Class 7: STOUT
7a: Dry Stout
7b: Sweet Stout
Class 8: U.K. STRONG ALES
8a: Barley Wine
8b: Imperial Stout
8c: Scotch Ale
Class 9: CONTINENTAL STRONG BEER
9a: Weizenbock
9b: Belgian Strong Ale
Class 10: BELGIAN SPECIALTY BEER
10a: Trappist
10b: Saison
BREW ON PREMISE (BOP) BEER CLASS
Class 11: ENGLISH BITTER
For further information concerning entry forms/rules/regulations, fees,
dropoff location and judging, contact Craig Pinhey at (905) 529-4388 or
cpinhey@dhc.dofasco.ca
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 95 08:35:25 EST
From: John DeCarlo <jdecarlo@mitre.org>
Subject: Vitamin C in Beer
I have been hearing Archer-Daniels-Midland (ADM) ads and stories in the
news recently. One of their Public Radio "ads" says something like, "ADM,
major suppliers of Vitamin C, a primary by-product of the corn-based
fermentation process."
So, is this unique to corn? If I use some corn adjuncts in my beer, will
the resulting beer have more Vitamin C in it?
Enquiring minds want to know.
John DeCarlo, MITRE Corporation, McLean, VA--My views are my own
Fidonet: 1:109/131 Internet: jdecarlo@mitre.org
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 1995 09:36:14 -0500
From: Alex Sessions <ALEXS@RIZZO.COM>
Subject: yeast starters summary
Greetings to the HBD:
I'm afraid I must take some of the blame for starting the most recent
bout of yeast-starter-threaditis when I asked "why doesn't making a
yeast starter culture the bad microbes as well as the good yeast?".
I've seen many responses in private and on the HBD (thanks to all!).
To summarize the major points (at least that I've seen) for everyone:
1. yes, sterility is more important in making starters than in the
final beer; OTOH, you probably have a better chance at maintaining
sterile conditions when working with 1 liter of wort in a jar or
flask, than when working with 5 or more gallons.
2. microbes tend to grow exponentially. so, if you start with more
yeast than bad bugs, let them both grow for a while, the actual
yeast:bad bug ratio will increase because of the exponential growth
(I would point out that there are an awful lot of assumptions here -
sorry Chris)
3. yeast produce different metabolic byproducts when they are
reproducing (oxygen-rich conditions) versus when they are fermenting
(oxygen-poor conditions); the growth byproducts seem to be generally
undesirable in beer; by making a starter and pitching right after the
yeast has settled (which someone pointed out is the ideal time to
pitch yeast), you can decant the fermented starter, thus keeping many
of the growth products out of your beer
4. (this seemed to be the most popular reason) the activity of yeast
will create conditions which inhibit the growth of many/most bad bugs
(low pH, low dissolved O2, high alcohol); the important factor is the
length of time it takes to reach those conditions; by stepping up
yeast sizes through a series of ever-larger starters, you can insure
that the bacteria-inhibiting conditions are reached as quickly as
possible in each successive starter, and in the final beer
___________________________________________
all this leads me to a new question: if you are repitching yeast from
a previous batch, you presumably already have enough active yeast
cells to ferment the new batch; this would seem to imply that you
could pitch the yeast with zero aeration of the new wort, and hence
would get zero of the yeast growth byproducts in your beer. Comments?
Experimental results?
-Alex
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 1995 09:39:07 EST5EDT
From: "David Wright" <LSMAIL@osp.emory.edu>
Subject: Oak Chips / Bottle Transfer
Ray Ownby asked about oak chips in an IPA. I am in the process of
drinking a batch of oaked IPA now. (Not right this minute) And I
think it is great. The oak flavor was pretty strong at first but
mellowed with a couple of more weeks of aging. I can't see myself
doing an IPA w/o oak chips again.
Now for my problem/question. I recently entered my first competition
and thought that I might do fairly well. Before I filled out my paper
work I went to the brew store and had 3 of the people there guide me
as to which specific categories that I should put my brews into.( ie.
I gave them samples) 2 of the 3 are judges and when I asked how
beers were actually judges they brought out score sheets and judged
them for me right there. One beer scored 42 and 43, and the other
scored 43 and 46. To enter the contest thought I had to transfer the
beer into regular bottles(they were in Grolsch bottles). To do this I
brought the temp near freezing and slow poured the beer from one
bottle to the other and recapped. When I got the results back from
the contest the beers scored 23 and 29. There two good possiblilties
that I have come up with. The first is that the bottles that I used
were contaminated. These bottles were sterilized and then when dry I
put aluminum foil over the tops for storage. These particular bottles
were probably in storage for 3-5 months. The second things that I can
think of that went wrong is that the bottles got mixed up with
someone elses beer. I think that this may be a possiblity because the
only thing that I got were the scoring sheets and a sheet with the
entry numbers of my beers.
Any thoughts? I am leaning towards the contaminated bottle theory
because the coments on the scoring sheets were consistant in stating
that head retention was bad(I know that this is not the case with the
beer that I still have) and that phenolics (sp?) were plentiful.
Thanks for any advice.
David Wright
------------------------------
Date: 21 Sep 95 09:55:51 EDT
From: Jay Reeves <73362.600@compuserve.com>
Subject: Aged beer & Mace
With all this talk about forgotten or aged beer, I thought I'd
relate my experience this past weekend.
I saved a 6 pack of every batch I've made since I started
brewing about a year and a half ago - 32 batches (it was really
tough - beleive me! My wife kept the key to the closet - many
fights.).
Anyway, I had a Beer Tasting party this last weekend where
we all got to try a 3 oz serving of each beer. The pale ales
did not keep well at all @ 18, 17, 16, 12, 10 & 9 months, the
IPA's were better after 10, 8 & 7 months, the brown & mild ales
were ok @ 8, 7 & 6 months, the fruit weizen beers finally came
thru with the fruit flavor after 6 & 7 months (realized after
brewing that you shouldn't try a fruit weizen with the
Wheinstephan yeast), the american fruit wheats were ok
@ 4 months, the altbier sucked @ 4 months, the witbiers
were great @ 6 and 3 months, the porters were better than
before (12 & 11 months), the stouts were great @ 9 & 10
months, CP's Goat Scrotum Ale was a lot better @ 12
months (had spruce essence & licorice in it - whew!).
Some of the beers that didn't keep to good were oxidized
(I think - what the hell does wet carboard taste like anyway?).
Most of the "bad" beers were my first attempts so there's no
telling what kinda stupid stuff I was doing then. The altbier
just didn't have the flavor it did at first - is that due to oxidation?
All the beers were kept at room temp which is 70-75F year
round - not the best but I don't have a beer fridge - or a garage
for the beer fridge...yet.
Now, can someone please help me find something? I'm
looking for blades of mace. This is nothing more than whole
mace before it is ground. Does anyone know where I can
mail-order some?
-Jay Reeves
Huntsville, Alabama, USA
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 1995 10:20:21 -0400
From: genitom@nyslgti.gen.ny.us (Michael Genito)
Subject: Brewing & water chemistry question
In a recent HBD, Jeff Semroc stated that he has moved to a new home where
the water supply is a well and wondered if he should be concerned about the
water content. BTW, I tried sending this msg back to Jeff
(jsemroc@hpatc2.desk.hp.com) but it returned undeliverable.
Ive brewed extract with well water, city water and filtered city water
(Brita filter). With the exception of an Ironmaster American Light head
retention problem (previously posted to HBD), Ive never had a problem in the
final product. I thought the Ironmaster may have had a problem due to
filtered water but Ive as much ruled that out - the extract itself may not
lend to good head.
If the well water is safe to drink by Dept of Health standards (it should be
tested once a yr by the owner) and does not have a foul odor or color (which
it may even though it is safe to drink) then I dont see a problem with any
extract brew. However, when brewing all grain (and I am no expert at this)
you may want the water analyzed as to ph, mineral content, etc.
Papazian's Joy of Home Brewing has a section on water in which he talks of
the above, and it appears that the main concern with well water would come
up when doing all grain. As he explains, the extracts typically contain all
the necessary minerals to make a good batch of beer.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 95 12:20:06 EST
From: Tim_Fields_at_Relay__Tech__Vienna@relay.com
Subject: RE: Gott conversion with Bung
In #1837, LT Alan D Czeszynski <czesz@nadn.navy.mil> writes re his
impressive GOTT conversion technique,
>I was reminded by fellow HBD reader Joe Passante that the
>flexible tube I was originally
>going to run from the elbow to the bung gets very pliable
>when hot, and chances are it would collapse under the weight
>of the mash.
I use a phalse bottom in a plastic bucket WITH the flex tube. this
never occurred to me, and I've experienced some sparge problems that
just might be related. Thanks to both Alan and Joe! I'll have to
look into this one some more...
-Tim
Tim Fields ... Vienna, VA, USA ... timf@relay.com
"reeb!"
"beers me" ... me
"Go beer yourself" ... Kurt Crake
-Tim
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 1995 10:08:19 -0700
From: pohl@unixg.ubc.ca (Derrick Pohl)
Subject: Canadian suppliers of hop rhizomes
In HBD #1837, SIMJONES@upei.ca asked:
>Does anyone out there know of a Canadian supplier of hop rhizomes. I would
>like to have a go at some varietal hopping, as well as the no-name-but-OK
>stuff I'm doing now.
Here's a couple sources posted to HBD by Eric Urquhart a couple years ago.
Hopefully the contact info has not changed:
mail: Hop Stop, 1661 Montreal Road, Ottawa, Ontario K1J 9B7
FAX: 613-748-3052
Tel: 613-748-1374
Hop Stop offer the rhizomes only at a certain time of year, I think - you
put your order in and they ship all the orders out at once. I ordered from
them and the rhizomes arrived just fine. Only one (out of two) survived
the first year, though. It's doing quite well now (its third summer).
mail: Richters, Goodwood, Ontario, L0C 1A0 Canada
FAX: 1-416-640-6641
Phone: 1-416-640-6677
Richters is amazing - they sell a huge selection of herbs and plants,
including obscure herbs from Indian and Chinese medical traditions, and
many legal psychoactive plants. Their fascinating and informative
catalogue is well worth whatever they charge to ship it (it might be free -
can't remember). Anyway, they also sell a few varietals of hop rhizomes.
- -----
Derrick Pohl <pohl@unixg.ubc.ca>
Vancouver, B.C., Canada
------------------------------
Date: 21 Sep 1995 10:19:19 U
From: "Palmer.John" <palmer@ssdgwy.mdc.com>
Subject: Review of BrewTek Mill
Hi Group,
At the last meeting of the Crown of the Valley Brewing Club, Jeff M. (CEO) of
Brewer's Resource visited our club with a demonstration of yeast culturing and
their new Grain Mill. Yeast Ranching looks a lot easier than I had imagined, I
really need to give it a try soon.
The BrewTek Mill (BTM) was compared to my fixed spacing Schmidling MaltMill
(MM) and to the ol standby, the Corona.
The current version of the Brewtek Mill has 2 inch diameter nickel plated
rollers that are 1.5 inches long set in an aluminum housing with stainless
steel bearing mounted to a particle board base. The BTM comes factory set at
.045 gap but the gap is adjustable by loosening two set screws. For the record
the MM has 1.25 dia rollers, 8? inches long and is similarly constructed with
the exception of bronze bushings in place of the stainless steel bearings.
(Speaking as an engineer, I see no difference in performance between the two
bearing systems. -JP) The MM is designed to fit over a bucket to catch the
grist and has a masonite hopper that holds about 2 lbs of malt. The BTM has a
threaded fitting that accepts a common Clorox bottle with the bottom cut out as
the hopper and is designed to be clamped to a table. Very similar to the
Philmill scheme.
The mills were compared for Grist and Thru-put.
1 lb of base malt was cranked thru each mill, counting the number of rotations
it took to process. The Corona took 75 rotations to process one pound. The MM
took 43 to process the pound and the BTM took 62 rotations. The cranking force
of the BTM with an 8 inch handle was easier than the MM with the 5 inch handle,
but swapping handles showed the difference to be mainly a function of handle
length. It was noted though that in spite of the higher cranking force, the
shorter handle resulted in less cranking distance for the operators arm which
was cited as a significant factor in reducing overall cranking fatique. So, its
a tradeoff.
The grists between the three mills were compared. As expected the Corona showed
some shredded husks and a wide range of particle sizes. The grists of the BTM
and the MM looked to be identical. Husks were crushed but intact and the grain
particle sizes range looked to be approximently the same. Jeff has recently
acquired the Sizing Screens for measuring particle size distribution from
Siebel and plans to evaluate the grist distribution to the industry standard 6
roller mill used at the large commmercial brewerys.
Brewers Resource will be marketing a new version of the mill sometime this
winter with longer rollers (2 inches) and a deeper knurl that will increase its
thruput to 1 lb per 42 turns of the handle. The cost of the new mill is still
TBD, but was estimated at $96 compared to the current price of $89. A roller
upgrade will be available to past customers at a nominal fee (TBD).
IN MY OPINION:
The Brewers Resource Mill is a high quality mill at a very good price. The
performance of the mill is very similar to the Glatt Malt Mill which I reviewed
in the HBD last spring. The BTM delivers a good crush and has a one year parts
and labor warrenty.
John J. Palmer - Metallurgist for MDA-SSD M&P
johnj@primenet.com Huntington Beach, California
Palmer House Brewery and Smithy - www.primenet.com/~johnj/
------------------------------
Date: 21 Sep 1995 10:16:10 PDT
From: "Wallinger, W. A." <WAWA@chevron.com>
Subject: fresh hops
From: Wallinger, W. A. (Wade)
To: OPEN ADDRESSING SERVI-OPENADDR
Subject: fresh hops
Date: 1995-09-21 12:03
Priority:
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
it has been my practice with several batches to simply throw the freshly
picked hops into the batch so i don't have to mess with drying. these are
cascade hops. i compensate for the weight by using twice the amount of
pellets or dried hops. since the alpha of homegrown hops are unknown it's a
crapshoot anyway. this has been sufficient to meet my hoppiness
expectations. and i do not taste any vegginess at all.
correct me if i'm wrong, but dry hops are still green - i don't see what
drying does to affect the chlorophyll content of the hops. i thought that
the drying was intended to prevent spoilage if the hops were to be stored
unfrozen.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 1995 13:32:50 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jim Busch <busch@eosdev2.gsfc.nasa.gov>
Subject: More pubs/yeasts
My friend Steve writes some good points:
<While I agree with you that a wider variety of
<beers should be presented and yes there is a dearth of lager styles
<represented in the brewpub industry, it is not without reason. It is a
<simple matter of economics. If I can take my investment (in inventory
<and raw materials) and in one week have a product that will be
<generating revenue, that would be preferable to having to keep all this
<money sitting on the shelf for a month or longer.
Certainly true, I but I have to think that the public is starting
to demand and look deeper than the same old ales. Ill point out that
some of the most successful brewpubs/micros are very well capitalized
and do make lagers. Operations like: Alleghaney, Stoudts, Baltimore Brewing,
Old Dominion, Sudwerks and Gordon Biersch, all make predominantly lagers and
all are very well financed and extremely successful. YMMV.
Dion gets radical:
<In fact, a RIMS system is
< *the* most reliable way to produce consistently excellent beer.
I find this statement very hard to stomach. In my mind, there is nothing
about a RIMS that allows it to make more reliable beer than a traditional
fired and well designed system. In fact, I venture to suggest that in
my 1 BBl pilot system, it is more reliable and consistent than any RIMS
one BBL system could ever be. The key to any system is good even heating,
good mixing of the goods and good brewers practices, non of which is
exclusive to a RIMS system. In fact, I get the additional benefit of
some hard sweat and excercise using my old fashioned one ;^) Plus, with
the DC weather, a little sweat gets those salt concentrations up in the
mash tun!
Thomas writes about mega marketing:
<This study clearly proved that people buy what they are
<told to buy, only the names and market segments change. The beer doesn't
<matter.
I wouldnt want to make any investment decisions based on this market
study! The fact of the matter in the micro/craft segment is that beer
*does* matter. And its going to matter even more as the inevitable
shakedown in the industry hits. Consumers are going to get more educated
and have more choices and this will be good news to the best craft brewers
and the not so good will fall by the wayside. Sierra Nevada is enormously
successful for many reasons, but consistent high quality beers are the
first reason.
<but it is simply naive to think that the best quality beer will
<really sell more than the best marketed beer.
It depends on what you are trying to accomplish. For example:
Old Dominion began in 1989. In 1995 they make ~22,000 BBls per year and
are still expanding quite fast. They have saturated a small geogreaphic
market, Northern Va and DC and are only present in a few counties of Md.
They have *never* advertised or marketed in the traditional sense. They
do tours, and have a little info sheet in the six pack, thats it. Now,
they dont want to be Bud, so the key is to grow into your size and
distribution area. The idea is that in this market segment you dont need
to be a Sam Adams marketer, he needs to be cause hes truly national and
competing at the national level.
Al writes about multiple yeast strains in one brewery:
<So, I personally think that all those cross-contamination stories are bull.
I agree 100%. Good breweries who use multiple strains are everywhere.
German style breweries who use weizen yeasts, alt yeasts and lager yeasts.
Sierra who used to use a lager yeast and the ale yeasts. Anchor who
uses a steam yeast and an ale yeast.....Etc, etc....
Good brewing,
Jim Busch
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 95 11:54:00 MST
From: "Fleming, Kirk R., Capt" <FLEMINGKR@afmcfafb.fafb.af.mil>
Subject: Open Fermentation: Risk & Fermenter Materials
Richard (#1837) cited a comment D Kerfoot made ("if you're willing to risk
open fermentation why spend money on stainless?") and said ss doesn't
have to be expensive. First, the 'risk' issue, then a newfound fermenter...
First, I've only done about 20 batches with open fermentation--but so far
I've had no fermentation problems. I had 1 [possibly] infected batch, and
think I know what happened--not a fermenter issue. Based on this limited
experience, on the results of others who've written to me, and on the
History of Brewing As I Know It, open fermentation doesn't have to be risky.
Some household environments not too conducive to open fermenting, of course,
requiring care/isolation not needed for airlocked fermenters. But on the
whole, I think brewers have an unwarranted fear of open fermenting. I
understand one big reason commercial brewerys went closed was to collect the
CO2. In fact, deClerk describes a great fear among the brewgeeks of the
time about going *closed*. Imagine!
On to plastic vs stainless: I've found a food storage container with all the
stickers ("FDA, USDA, NSF", etc., etc.) and which is taste and odor-free.
With careful handling I see no reason to prefer stainless over this plastic,
other than aesthetics and the longhaul durability Richard is concerned with.
The trade name is Prolon, and if anyone knows anything about it please let
me know. It does not stain even after long exposure to iodophor, indicating
it's at the very least better than vinyl tubing (at the very least) as a
brewing material.
KRF Colorado Springs
flemingk@usa.net
Days since last snowfall: 0 (porter/stout season has officially begun!)
------------------------------
Date: 21 Sep 1995 13:49:51 U
From: "Manning Martin MP" <manning_martin_mp@mcst.ae.ge.com>
Subject: Gearmotor Mill Confession
I posted some time ago about my motorized Glatt mill, which is powered by a
surplus gear motor whose output shaft turns at 156 RPM, with 30 in-lb of
torque (that's about 1/14 hp). The motor cost $20, with another $20-or-so
worth of stuff required to get it running and connected to the mill. I think
I recall Schmidling saying that a 60 in-lb gearmotor would not start a
MaltMill (TM) with the hopper loaded, but it's rollers are more than twice as
long. I too wanted to avoid a belt and pulleys which would extend below the
base of the mill, pose a hazzard, or require sheilding. Its bad enough
having the rollers exposed! A simple solution is to use direct-drive through
a split coupling (bought at a local HVAC supply store). The motor output
shaft and mill drive shaft are positioned end-to-end, and the split coupling
insures that slight miss-alignments are tolerated, and that there is no
bending moment applied to either shaft. The driven side of the coupling is
only clamped (not keyed) to the mill's drive shaft by means of a
longitudinally split bushing. The driven half of the coupling was purchased
with an oversized bore, which the split bushing reduces to the diameter of
the mill's drive shaft. The setscrew in the coupling-half is used to clamp
the bushing to the mill's shaft. If a foreign object enters the rollers,
this arrangement will allow slippage and prevent damage to the mill or motor.
This set-up has now been working flawlessly for more than a year, starting
easily from full stop, loaded or not. Throughput is about 1 lb/min,
depending upon the roller gap setting.
Martin Manning
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 1995 13:28:22 -0500 (CDT)
From: SWEENERB@MSUVX1.MEMPHIS.EDU
Subject: SELECTHomebrew Digest #1837 (September 21, 1995)
Well, I have decided to move the brewery outside and I was hoping to
get some advice about setting up my stuff in order to make the process
an easy one. My current mashing/boiling setup consists of:
8 gal. enamel pot with easymasher
5 gal. enamel pot
4 gal. stainless pot
5 gal. Gott cooler
King Kooker - bought it last night at Sams, its still in the box
I was thinking of heating my sparge water to around 180, then pouring it into
the Gott, which drops the temp around 15 degress or so, and then storing
it until needed. Then start the mash and after emptying the initial
runnings, position the Gott above the 8 gal. kettle and begin the sparge
by opening a hose connection between them. Both the initial runnings and
the remaining sparge are drained into the 5 gal. enamel and then the 4
gal. stainless pot. [Is there a good way to get this wort back into the 8
gal. boiler other than dipping it out and pouring? This was a weak link
in my process even before moving outside.] Then wort is then transferred
back to the 8 gal. boiler and the boil commences. The only other issue
I had was what to do with the hot water coming out of my immersion cooler--
will it kill the grass in the back yard if poured directly on it?
I would really appreciate hearing from any or you who have done this in
the past or just have some helpful advice. Anything directed at me
through email which looks promising will of course be summarized and
forwarded to the HBD. Thanks in advance.
Bob Sweeney
sweenerb@msuvx1.memst.edu
The University of Memphis
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 95 14:06:26 -0500
From: rlabor@lsumc.edu (Ronald J. La Borde)
Subject: Cooling Beer Line
In HBD# 1837 P. Millner says:
>I'd like to run a beer tube into my den and set up a bar with my tap there.
>This distance is going to be about 30-40 feet....
Life is wonderfull with a keg setup!
My keg freezer was in the utility room across the patio and my wife felt
so sorry for me watching as I got the keys and walked into the outside heat
that SHE nagged me to get the freezer moved into the house!!!!! Wow, what
a dilemma. Finally I gave in.
But in your case PM, I don't know if you even have a wife so you can go
ahead with plan A.
I suggest that you may use a wort chiller clone. I mean get something
just like the copper tube within a hose setup. Get or make one long enough
to reach from inside the fridge to the beer outlet. Now fill a container
with glycol and put a pump into it and connect the glycol output to the hose
inlet. On the other end, connect a regular hose for glycol return back to
the container. Insulate both hoses.
I can't think of any reason why you can't put the glycol container in the
fridge along with the kegs. You will need to pass pump power and the hoses
into the fridge somehow - but hey, if you are willing to string the lines
inside your house then I guess you would be willing to run them into the
fridge also. Oh yes, pass the beer through the copper line to the beer
outlet in your den.
I hope this would meet the inexpensive requirement. I am not sure if it
can be called simple. Anyhow, good luck.
Ron
**************************************************************
Ronald J. La Borde |
Work (504)568-4842 | "If the only tool you have is a hammer,
Home (504)837-0672 | you tend to see every problem as a nail."
Metairie, LA |
**************************************************************
------------------------------
Date-Warning: Date header was inserted by BSUVC.bsu.edu
From: 00bkpickeril@bsuvc.bsu.edu (Brian Pickerill)
Subject: CO2 regulator zero adjustment...
Hi,
I have a nagging question (problem) my regulator. It always reads 10lbs
higher than it should. That's right, zero pressure is 10lbs on the scale.
A friend told me that there is a zero adjustment on the back of the
regulator, but wasn't sure, and I have not checked it. (The way it's
mounted, it takes awhile to get it loose and check it out.)
Anyway, I thought I would ask you brew gurus about this, see if it rang any
bells. The regulator is still under warranty, but I don't want to send it
back if I don't have to. I didn't see anything about it in the papers that
shipped with it. BTW, it's a Tap Rite (tm) regulator from Rapids. Now
that I am completely OUT of homebrew (cold turkey) it would be a good time
to send it back if necessary.
Thanks,
- --Brian
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 95 13:42:00 PDT
From: "Bessette, Bob" <bob.bessette@lamrc.com>
Subject: Buckled kegs...
Fellow Brewers,
I have for the first time experienced buckled kegs due to expanding
pressure. This is my 16th batch and it is the first time I have noticed
this. I use the small (12-pack) stainless steel drum kegs that you use the
CO2 cartridges with. Anyway, I noticed this abnormality about 1 week after I
kegged and I know I used the same amount of priming sugar as I usually do.
It was about 5/8 cup of priming sugar. Could this batch be infected? The
beer tastes great, is very clear, but the FOAM is unbelievable. I
immediately put the kegs in the frig when I noticed this problem. Anyone out
there happen to know how this could've happened so I can avoid it in the
future? Please email me at bob.bessette@lamrc.com. TIA..
Bob Bessette
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 95 23:01:12 HOE
From: "Antonio S. Reher" <CUANTICA@vm1.sdi.uam.es>
Subject: Beer drinking in Denmark
Hi,
I will be spending all of next year in Copenhagen and I was wondering if
anyone would help a beer lover find his way around the country. Any informa-
tion about good pubs in Denmark (specilly in the Copenhagen area) -homebrew
or other? Any good brands to taste?
Anto. cuantica@vm1.sdi.uam.es
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 1995 15:17:40 -0600
From: nealc@selway.umt.edu (Neal Christensen)
Subject: Steam heat, cooling beer line
Howdy!
I've been working on my 1/2 barrel brewery design and wanted to get some
feedback on steam. Since I am combining the mash/lauter tun, I think there
is a greater chance of scorching the mash using open flame, so I want to go
to an alternative heat source. I was thinking of having a low pressure
boiler built for heating my mash/lauter tun. The thought came up that it
may be possible to heat with steam using a copper heat exchange coil
(similar to an immersion chiller) rather than steam injection. I don't
think this has been discussed on the HBD yet.
There would seem to be a few advantages to this approach. First, no
dilution of the mash. Second, heating throughout the mash column, rather
than at the point of injection - hopefully eliminating the need to stir the
mash. Third, no possibility of blowing built up scale and other crud from
the boiler into the mash. I know that some commercial breweries use steam
jacket heat - a similar idea to this immersion coil setup. If it works I
may eventually heat the sweet wort this way too.
I am not sure yet what would be required for this setup. I do know a
craftsman who is very familiar with building boilers and old fashioned steam
engines - but he doesn't know much about brewing. It would seem that I
would need to be able to generate a lot more steam than with an injection
system (I have read the steam injection article in Brewing Techniques). It
also may be that some of the benefits described recently about steam
injection (sorry, I don't remember the author) such as simulating decoction
of the thickest mash would be lost with this system.
What do you folks think? What are the important considerations? I
understand safety is a concern and I'll consult knowledgeable people on that
as I go. If any of you have any comments it would be greatly appreciated!
>Date: Wed, 20 Sep 1995 19:38:48 -0400
>From: Millnerp@aol.com
>Subject: Cooling Beer Line
>
>I have a keg set up in my garage in which I usually keep one commercial and
>one homebrew keg. I'd like to run a beer tube into my den and set up a bar
>with my tap there. This distance is going to be about 30-40 feet and
snip....
>anyone have an inexpensive, simple solution?
>
>PM
In general, bars run their beer lines inside of the cooler up to the faucet.
At home, when I extend my lines out-of-doors for parties, I run the lines
through water line foam insulation (used indoors to cut down on condensation
that forms on the outside of cold water lines). This insulation helps keep
the beer cool while it travels from keg to tap, but would not help much for
storage. One solution would be to build a jockey box at the tap end. This
consists of a coil of tubing (copper is more effective, but plastic works)
inside of a bucket or cooler that holds ice. As the beer passes through the
ice bucket it is chilled. Foaming will be a problem on a long beer line
because the beer warms up - even in an insulated line - so use tubing with a
small inside diameter, use plenty of line pressure and you may still need
that tap-end jockey box cooler to keep the CO2 in solution.
Neal Christensen
Missoula - A Place Sort Of
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 95 15:49:44 CDT
From: Chris Barnhart <cbarnhar@ria-emh2.army.mil>
Subject: RE: Extract Efficiency
Hi All,
Brian Yankee asked:
>Does anyone have data/info on the effect of mash temperature on
>extract efficiency? My own experience seems to indicate that
>lower mash temps produce higher extract efficiency, but I can't
>find anything in the standard brewing literature to confirm or
>refute this. Thanks for your help.
This got me to thinking (Good thing :')). Isn't extract efficiency
a measure of how completely you convert the mash from starchs to
sugars (both complex and simple)? Within limits the temperature is
irrelevant to EE. Wouldn't temperature's primary effect be the
speed at which the converson takes place (as long as you don't
denature the amylases stopping conversion completely). I would
assume that temperature primarily influences the fermentability
of the wort. Thoughts?
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 95 15:57:26 PST
From: krkoupa@ccmail2.srv.PacBell.COM
Subject: Extract/Grain
Does anyone have a handy dandy per-pound conversion table between
typical extracts and the all-grain equivalencies? I want to convert
extract recipes to all-grain (and vice versa). For every pound of XYZ
extract, I instead use A.B pounds of pale malt, C.D pounds of munich
malt, and E.F pounds of chocolate malt. You get the idea. I'm just
looking for a rough guide. Or can someone suggest an existing
software tool?
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 1995 19:15:55 -0500
From: djt2@po.cwru.edu
Subject: Re:Long distance dispensing
From: Millnerp@aol.com writes>
Subject: Cooling Beer Line
>I have a keg set up in my garage in which I usually keep one commercial and
>one homebrew keg. I'd like to run a beer tube into my den and set up a bar
>with my tap there. This distance is going to be about 30-40 feet and
>according to my caluculations at any time several ounces of beer will be in
>the line (Clearly to much to waste) so I'm wondering how to keep the beer in
>the line cool. I assume bars either pour beer fast enough that it does not
>get warm or have some type of devise to keep the beer in the line cool. Does
>anyone have an inexpensive, simple solution?
My solution to this is to keep a cold plate in a fridge at the dispensing
point, and keep the pressurized kegs in the basement. You have to keep the
pressure up pretty high (ca 25 to 30 pounds) to get good flow; the pressure
of course drops through the line (mine is about 30 feet of 1/4 in i.d.).
Keeping the pressure high on the kegs at room temp allows for pretty close
to normal levels of carbonation of the chilled beer at the dispensing end.
Of course, you need a fridge at your bar... but it can be small, and the
cold plate takes up less space than three bottles.
Dennis
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 1995 21:56:23 -0400
From: dflagg@agate.net
Subject: REPITCH!
Recently I wrote...
>Doug Flagg replies:
>Very good advise, BUT......
>I'm finishing up on a Pale Ale and I want to brew a Pilsner next.
>What do I do?? Use my Ale yeast dregs to brew the Pilsner. Not!
Looking back, I realize this sounds like a flame, but it was not
intended as one. What I was trying to point out was that various
people, over time, have preached the doctrine of recycling yeast.
I agree...this sounds like a very good idea. But when I went to put
it into practice, I found it didn't work well for me.
I don't brew every week. The time between brews ranges from 2 weeks
to a month and a half. Maybe my capture and storage procedures were
a little sloppy, but I could never keep a large amount of dregs that
long without them going bad. I might try it again, so I can perfect
my technique, but I don't think yeast recycling will be big with me.
For those who recommend brewing the same or similar beers back to back,
I say: Good for You! If it works, do it. For me, the yeast is a big
part of the flavor profile I am looking for, and I usually look for
a different flavor with each brew.
************************************************************
Doug Flagg | "A Homebrew a day...
dflagg@orono.sdi.agate.net | Keeps the Worries away!"
************************************************************
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 95 21:38 CDT
From: pgravel@mcs.com (Philip Gravel)
Subject: Oak chips
===> Ray Ownby asks about using oak chips:
>What's the consensus on using oak chips in an IPA? My last one turned out
>great, but just curious what the opinions of people who've made more than
>one IPA are. TIA,
Use chips of white oak not red oak. Red oak is too strong. I recommend
steaming the chips for a short period of time to kill any bacteria.
- --
Phil
_____________________________________________________________
Philip Gravel Lisle, Illinois pgravel@mcs.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 1995 16:51:28 -0500
From: Russell Mast <rmast@fnbc.com>
Subject: Knave Brew World.
> From: "Penn, Thomas" <penn#m#_thomas@msgw.vf.mmc.com>
> Subject: Beer Marketing
> What does this say for Homebrewing? The same thing that Top 40 music says for
> experimental jazz.
That's beautiful. It's lines like that which make me look forward to HBD.
> I guess my message is to make
> really good beer AND market it well so maybe some bit of the appreciation for
> quality will infect the consumer.
Maybe. I don't know, the emphasis of style over substance so deeply pervades
every aspect of American life, and is probably a problem in other countries,
too. Look at Top 40, at Prime Time sitcoms, at the Bestseller list. Perhaps
beer is the way to break this viscious cycle of selling people their tastes
in life. Maybe. Until then, all we can do is hope the craft beer trend lasts
a bit longer, and hope that our favorite beers also have formidable marketing,
and we can do our part, as beer geeks, to make beer-geekism popular and look
desirable. Of course, we risk blowing it by being too big and too faddish.
(Look what happened to Dungeons and Dragons. Remember that? You used to play,
I can tell.)
> Thanks for reading, and can someone dredge up the original study to which I
> make (loose) reference???
A high school teacher of mine made a refernce to this study also, but I don't
know if I could get in touch with her. I've got some friends who might be
able to scrape up the ref.
-R
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 1995 23:24:46 +0500
From: "Pat Babcock" <pbabcock@oeonline.com>
Subject: The HomeBrew Flea Market
Had a little time on my hands yesterday (9/21), so I spent it on my homepage
(much to my SO's chagrin). The page can now be hit simply with the
URL http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock
Of particular interest are http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/brew.html
http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/800list.html (reformatted for ease of
viewing and use!) and http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/4sale.html All
links are available from the homebrewer pick on my main page
(http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/howdy.html)
Have at it! And be sure to leave comments, suggestions, and critiques
as you go. This is NOT a test!
See ya!
Pat Babcock | "Beer is my obsession, and I'm late for
President, Brew-Master | therapy..." -PGB
and Chief Taste-Tester | "Let a good beer be the exclamation point
Drinkur Purdee pico Brewery | at the end of your day as every sentence
pbabcock@oeonline.com | requires proper punctuation." -PGB
SYSOP on The HomeBrew University - Motor City Campus BBS (313)397-9758
Check out my home page! http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/howdy.html
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 1995 23:32:13 -0500
From: blacksab@siu.edu
Subject: PUMPS, PUMPS, PUMPS!
Well, I got rather a lot of requests from people looking for pumps, so I
thought I should post the results thus far. I'd also like to ask those of
you with first hand experience using any of these pumps to pick up this
thread since there is very little data out there on this subject and a
goodly amount of interest. That said, may it be known that I have no
financial interest with any of these companies...
United States Plastics Corp.
1-800-537-9724
1995/1 CAT#5
p. 156:
Little Giant(tm) Magnetic Drive (MD) Pumps
MD-series are non-submersible, NSA approved and rated at 150F-deg.
Motors range from 1/70-HP to 1/8-HP; Max. Flow(GPM):3.0-21.4; COST:$80-$320
MD-HC-series are similar to above but can handle more corrosive
chemicals,and are rated at 200F-deg. Motors range from 1/30-HP to 1/8-HP;
max. flow(GPM): 7.0-21.4; COST:$138-$361.
MARCH(tm) Pumps
Similar to pumps above, "designed for mildly corrosive applications such as
mildly acidic, alkaline...and sanitary liquid food applications". Housing
cover is attached with wing-nuts for easy cleaning. No MAX. TEMP. rating
cited--anyone got a data point here?
2 basic models: 1/50 & 1/25-HP; max. flow(GPM):5.5 & 6.7; COST: $93 & $98.
W.W. Grainger
1-800-722-3291
1995 General Catalog no.386
pp. 2460-1
TEEL(tm) Magnetic-Drive Chemical Solutions Pumps
Similar to MARCH pumps above. Max Temp. is 180F-deg. Also easily dismantled.
1/50 & 1/25-HP; max.flow: 5.5 & 7.6GPM; COST $80 & $85.
Little Giant(tm) Pumps
Some of the same pumps as above and then some--two shine out:
Little Giant Model #3-MD-MT-HC (Grainger #2P039) & #TE-3-MD-HC (2P040)
Same pump, different bodies, the second has a Totally Enclosed Fan Cooled
motor, the first is open.
1/25-HP; 8.3 GPM; $125 & $177.
Hope this is of some help.
--Harlan Bauer
--Harlan Bauer <blacksab@siu.edu>
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1838, 09/22/95
*************************************
-------
