Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1916
This file received at Hops.Stanford.EDU 1995/12/22 PST
HOMEBREW Digest #1916 Fri 22 December 1995
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor
Contents:
Last of the Carbonation stuff/Crabtree Effect (Steve Alexander)
Re: Chilling my wort (bush)
Re: "diacetyl rest" - Noonan vs. Miller (Jack Baty)
Re: Heater/Fridge Temp Controller Plans (Bill Rust)
The new yeast strains from wyeast: anyone tried 'em? (Alejandro Midence)
RE: Gear motors and Malt Mills (Larry Johnson)
Laminar flow air cleaners (TPuskar)
Tap locks (Steven Lichtenberg)
Looking for Celebration Ale (Mike_Horning_at_NPD)
Sake / Formaldehyde (KennyEddy)
Sam Adams<tm> contest results (Robert Paolino)
Formaldehyde in Singha beer, etc. (Tom Messenger)
RE: Inlaws and Homebrew ("John W. Taylor")
Re: Gear Motors (hollen)
Singha (RANDY ERICKSON)
Adding yeast the next day (Jim Cave)
Hydrometer Correction (Domenick Venezia)
Re: split boils / malt extract FAQ? / berries in fermenter (Mike Uchima)
Calling all Apartment-Dwellers, and Dorm-Room Guerilla Brewers! (Stefan Smagula)
Re: Belgian White Ale (Robert Bush)
Diacetyl rests (Maribeth_Raines)
Re: Hop Toxicity in Dogs (Paul Sovcik)
Formaldehyde in Beer (Stephen_W._Snyder)
In-laws won't drink your homebrew (Alejandro Midence)
The sucking thing, revisited ("Pat Babcock")
******************************************************************
* 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, 20 Dec 1995 15:33:44 -0500
From: Steve Alexander <stevea@clv.mcd.mot.com>
Subject: Last of the Carbonation stuff/Crabtree Effect
Several private email responses to my post indicating contrary
experience along the line of one from John Girard....
>Anyway...At one point in your post, you suggest that you believe Miller
>may be right in suggesting that fermentation of priming sugar (in the
...
> I'm,
>curious, though, how my observations can be explained: with virtually
>every bottled beer I've made, there is *no* hiss even after several
>days. I would think that if bottle fermentaion occurred so rapidly,
>there would be a hiss in only two or three days, but little real
>carbonation for several days more (as the CO2 is reabsorbed). Any thoughts?
Given the several responses I've recieved, I'm pretty convinced that
the bottle fermentation DOES takes longer than a couple of days. My
experiences have been a second fermentation due to added fermentables
in around 3 days at atmospheric pressure. I've also samples a fair
number of bottles at 2 weeks noting adaquate dissolved CO2, tho'
sometimes a bit of yeast turbidity. I'll experiment next bottling and
post the results.
>People seem to throw around the conjecture that the increased pressure
>has an dampening effect on the metabolic cycle of the yeast. Do you see
>any value in this as a possible (perhaps only partial) explanation?
G.Fix claims that saturation of CO2 in fermenting wort tends to retard
yeast metabolism ('Principles of Brewing Science' pp 169) and
references a paper (Arcay-Ledezma & Slaughter, 'The Response of S.
Cervisiae to Fermentation under CO2 Pressure', JIB VOl 90, 1984 - I
believe JIB is the Journal of the Institute of Brewing). I don't have
access to this Journal unfortunately. Fix also indicates that high
temps and high starting OGs can create osmotic pressure effects on the
yeast cell walls, causing the yeast to reject essential nutrients and
resulting in inhibited yeast growth and legthy and disordered
fermentation. Here G.Fix references several papers, one in the MBAA
Tech Qr vol 18, 1981 called 'The Role of Osmotic Pressure," and
another in JIB vol 86, 1980 on the effects of osmotic pressure seem
relevent. Unfortunalely I haven't access to either journal.
Is bottle pressure sufficient to induce these effects ? I don't know.
Re: a previous post -
Correction: Tracy Aquilla correctly points out that the Crabtree
effect really refers to the tendency of yeast to ferment rather than
respire in the the presence of glucose and doesn't necessarily mean no
growth or reproduction, tho' several brewing sources suggest it. I
think the important point is that with organisms like yeast with
multiple metabolic pathways, that rates for a particular metabolic
pathway have many dependencies.
Stevea
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 1995 21:35:44 +0100
From: bush@shbf.se
Subject: Re: Chilling my wort
In HBD #1914 Jim Hust wrote:
>on an ice/water mixture in my split sink. When the ice has all
>melted, I pour the cooled wort into my primary and either pour the
>near freezing water in , or I cut open the jugs and throw in the ice.
>I get my mixture down to 70F in less than 15 min. Am I doing
>something harmful, or is low tech really just a good?
I read somwhere (can't remember where) that adding cold water encourages
the protein trub to remain in solution, thus giving you a cloudier wort and
(probably) eventually a cloudier beer.
Robert
====================================
= WASSAIL! =
= Robert Bush, Eskilstuna, SWEDEN =
= E-mail: bush@shbf.se =
====================================
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 1995 14:50:22 -0600 (CST)
From: Jack Baty <jack@wubios.wustl.edu>
Subject: Re: "diacetyl rest" - Noonan vs. Miller
>
> >I've been reading Greg Noonan's "Brewing Lager Beer" and noticed that his
> >description of "diacetyl rest" is completely different than Dave Miller's in
> >"The Complete Handbook of Home Brewing".
>
> >Will the real Diacetyl Rest please stand up!
Miller discusses two different kinds of diacetyl rest. They are used
with different types of yeast. One type of yeast is a poor reducer of
diacetyl and needs the temperature to be raised, whilethe other is a
strong reducer and for which the temperature is dropped to reduce
autolysis.
Jack Baty jack@wubios.wustl.edu http://www.biostat.wustl.edu/~jack
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 1995 16:28:41 -0500
From: Bill Rust <wrust@csc.com>
Subject: Re: Heater/Fridge Temp Controller Plans
Howdy Brewsters,
Just thought I'd interrupt the lively 'Bandwidth' discussion for a brief
question about brewing gadgets.
Doug Kerfoot writes...
>regardless of the ambient temp. Right now it is keeping my beer from
>freezing in my garage refrigerator. (I'm in Michigan, the fridg is unplugged
>while a light bulb provides the heat)
I agree that a light bulb would work well as a heat source, but I would
think that the light it produces would be considerably more detriment than
the benefit of the heat. Would painting the lightbulb some color (black???)
still allow heat to be produced? Would that create some other problem, like
fumes or a possible fire hazard?
Just another frigin' question...
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Rust, Master Brewer |
Jack Pine Savage Brewery | Blessings of your heart, you brew good ale.
Shiloh, IL (NACE) | --Two Gentlemen of Verona, Shakespeare
-------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 1995 17:18:22 -0600
From: Alejandro Midence <alex@conline.com>
Subject: The new yeast strains from wyeast: anyone tried 'em?
I guess the subject line of this message is self-explanatory. Has anyone
brewed with the new strains from wyeast? I recall an hbder posting a
query regarding the brewing yeast used by the Young's Brewery in the
U.K. Another replied that wyeast was gonna come out with a strain that
was the same or similar to this one. Has anyone used it?
thanks and y'all take care
Alex
btw, I'm glad y'all liked the beer songs I posted. I may post a really
good one on the man who invented beer in the future. I don't think I'm
up to it right now. Thanks for all the positive feedback on "A Pub With
No Beer" and "It's Long After Ten". I got them from a cd put out some
time ago by an Irish record company. Most of the songs on it are by the
Clancy Brothers. I did not make them up. I don't think I'd do such a
good job. :-)
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Some folk o'er the water think bitter is fine,
And otheres, they swear by the juice of the vine.
But there's nothin' that's squeezed from the grape or the hop
Like the black liquidation with the froth on the top!!!
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 1995 21:03:16 -0800
From: Larry Johnson <Maltster@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: RE: Gear motors and Malt Mills
I just wanted to comment on Jack Schmidling's post about gear motors and
mills. (This is *not* a flame)
For a given load, there shouldn't be any difference in the torque produced
at the mill, whether it is delivered by pulleys and belts or by gears. If
the ratio between the input (the motor) and the output (the mill) of the
power transmission is the same
in a pulley system as in a gear motor system, then there are no differences
in torque.
Put it this way: If I have a pulley system with a ratio of 10:1, and the
motor turns
at 1000 rpm, then the input shaft of the mill will turn at 100 rpm. If
there is a force of 10 lb/ft developed at the shaft of the motor, then I
will develop 100 lb/ft at the shaft of the mill. (You multiply the torque as
you divide the speed). If I have a geared transmission of the same
input/output ratio, then I will have the same torque situation. So; as far
as the motor and mill are concerned, there's no difference in torque between
the two systems.
What I would suspect (speculation mode: enabled) is that the action of grain
grinding puts a lot of torque transients back into the system. You can feel
this when grinding by hand. It is not a perfectly smooth ride (although the
MaltMill is a true joy to hand-crank). These transients are like thousands
of little "shock loads" that would transmit back into the mechanical linkage.
In a gear motor, there is nothing but metal against metal; no shock
absorption. Every transient that occurs at the rollers of the mill would
appear at the shaft of the motor. If you jammed the mill, the motor would
have to stop (suddenly!).
In a belt and pulley system, the belt can stretch a little (even slip if the
transient is large enough) so that the "shock loads" of the grains jamming
into the rollers are not transmitted all the way back through the mechanical
system. I have seen this in industrial applications. It is one of those
little "givens": pulleys and belts accept shock loading a lot better than gears.
So in conclusion: I agree with Jack - if you're going to motorize a malt
mill of any brand, use pulleys and a belt. The parts will last longer if
you do.
P.S. Thanks to Alejandro Midence for a real joy of a post! Season's
greetings to you, Alejandro. You added greatly to my feeling of Christmas
spirit.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The researches of many commentators have already thrown much
darkness on this subject and it is probable that,if they continue,we
shall soon know nothing at all about it. - Mark Twain
Larry Johnson / Athens, GA / Maltster@ix.netcom.com
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 1995 08:00:56 -0500
From: TPuskar@aol.com
Subject: Laminar flow air cleaners
Here's a question for all you yeast ranchers out in HBD-land. While I was
doing my holiday shopping I noticed several home air cleaners which claimed
to be laminar flow devices. One even claimed it met Class II medical device
standards. One of the units is about 18 inches by 12 inches by 9 inches
high. The air intake is on what would be the front (12 by 9 side) and the
output is on what would be the top (12 by 18 side). I was wondering if a box
(plywood lined with formica???) could be constructed so the output would be
mounted on the back and a plexiglass "sneezeguard" with a hinged door as the
front. Would this make a suitable "hood" for working with yeast? I'm sure
that with a little thought, a mount could be made so the cleaner could be
easily removed and used in the house when not in duty for yeast work. The
air cleaner was about $50 and I'd estimate lumber and stuff to be less than
$50 for a box about 2 ft wide by 2 ft high by 18 inches deep which should be
a decent footprint for most of us and roomy enough to work in.
Anybody out there tried anything like this? Is it worth it? Its a little
late, but the aircleaner could make a nice Christmas gift! Email comments
would be appreciated. I'll post any significant replies.
Happy holidays to everyone out there.
Tom Puskar
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 1995 07:58:58 -0500 (EST)
From: Steven Lichtenberg <steve@inet.ttgva.com>
Subject: Tap locks
Greetings all--
I posted this query a couple of years ago and through inertia and a
change of jobs etc I lost the responses. I am looking for a source for
tap locks for my keg box. It has come to the point that I am concerned
about the actions of my inquisitive two year old. She is now tall
enough to reach the taps on the beer fridge and my wife is worried that
we will have five gallons of fine homebrew all over the carpet. I would
like to put something pyhsical on the taps do discourage this type of
activity. Of course, I could take the low tech approach and remove the
beer out line from the keg after each use but I prefer something that
will demonstrate to the baby that this is something you should not do.
TIA for any assistance.
**** ---- "There's always time for a Homebrew!" ---- ****
O|~~| ------------ Steven Lichtenberg --------------- |~~|0
`--' ---------- steve@inet.ttgva.com ------------- `--'
-------- Programmer/Analyst - TTG ---------
---------- Alexandria, VA ------------
-----------------------------------
ENJOY LIFE--THIS IS NOT A REHEARSAL
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 95 08:42:09 CST
From: Mike_Horning_at_NPD@pcmail.tellabs.com
Subject: Looking for Celebration Ale
I was greatly disappointed to find out that Sierra Nevada Celebration Ale
is not being shipped east of the Rockies. Does anyone know of a mail
order source that would sell me two or three cases to get me through
the year? I'm having a hard time getting in the holiday spirit without
my favorite brew!
Private email responses are fine.
Thanks,
Mike Horning
msh@tellabs.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 1995 10:28:34 -0500
From: KennyEddy@aol.com
Subject: Sake / Formaldehyde
I remember making sake in high school but it was long enough ago that I've
forgotten the routine (my "chemical-dependency poster child" status in
college contributes to the fog I'm sure). I do however remember enjoying it
immensely (the sake, that is) and am enjoying the current thread on the
topic. In HBD 1915 it was pointed out that saccharification is carried out
by "koji" fungi. Not being able to find any koji in my brewery, I was
wondering if perhaps one could toss in some amylase powder somewhere in the
process to accomplish the deed. I'm told that this powder (available in
homebrew shops and mail-order) contains no beta amylase; this might be an
issue as alpha-amylase favors production of larger sugars which tend to be
unfermentable. What about it, chemist-types?
Which leads me to a related topic concerning amylase powder. While I haven't
had a chance to try it yet, I got the notion that one could improve one's
extract/specialty-grain brew by tossing a pinch of amylase into the brewpot
while steeping, holding for a while at 155F or so (remember, supposedly this
powder is predominantly of the alpha persuasion), thereby achieving a "mash"
of normally-unmashable grains like chocolate malt or flaked maize. Again,
the type of enzyme might make for a less-fermentable result than say a true
partial mash, but considering the comparitively small amount of grain
involved it shouldn't matter much, and I would think it would still be vastly
superior to simple steeping and simpler than even partial-mashing. Any
thoughts?
I plan to test this concept as follows. A friend of mine and I were recently
arguing over our respective approaches to brewing, and decided to do a "same
thing only different" brew-off over the holiday break next week, brewing the
same recipe (we weighed the hops to the third decimal place on the digital
scale, if that gives you any idea of our A-R approach to this project!) but
using our own individual techniques and equipment. It's a fairly uninspired
light ale, which we chose in order to allow any flavor differences to be more
perceptible. Anyhow, I intend to "sneak in" a pinch of this magic dust into
my steeping grains, figuring this is a great opportunity to look for
differences due to the enzyme. I'll report on it in a few weeks if there's
any noticable difference.
On the topic of formaldehyde in beer, the same seems to be true of Mexican
beer obtained in Mexico (I live in El Paso TX which borders Cd. Juarez in
Mexico, and make occasional trips over). I get the worst damned headache if
I drink more than two or three Bohemias over there, but I can drink a bunch
more if I purchase it in the good ol' USA (which I generally do only in a
restaraunt). I'm told the domestic version (domestic from the
south-of-the-border perspective -- remember, in Mexico, Budweiser is a
"premium import") is made with formalin as a preservative, while (I would
guess) the US-export version is not, due to US regulations.
Y'all have a nice Christmas, y'hear?
Ken Schwartz
KennyEddy@aol.com
"If we can find it, it must be there."
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 1995 09:54:47 -0600 (CST)
From: Robert Paolino <rpaolino@execpc.com>
Subject: Sam Adams<tm> contest results
Well, the results are back from the Sam Adams<tm> homebrew contest.
Since I was the one who reported in this forum the item in the rules
saying that only finalists' scoresheets would be returned, I am pleased
(and it's only fair) to report that I received my 7 ounces of 1994 Kent
Goldings, T-shirt, _and_ scoresheets. I'm glad that they reconsidered. (I
think that this was even the first time I've had an entry judged by a
Master judge.)
I'm certain that judging all those entries was a huge task, and the
organisers they recruited deserve credit for pulling it off. Perhaps next
year they'll consider doing it at more than one site (oh, let's see,
Rochester, Lehigh Valley, and Portland (OR)...) to make it more
manageable.
Now go have a beer,
Bob Paolino uswlsrap@ibmmail.com
Madison rpaolino@earth.execpc.com
"I wrote a song about dental floss, but did anyone's teeth get cleaner?"
-Frank's response to Tipper Gore's Parents Music Resource Center's
assertion that music is responsible for deviant behaviour
HAPPY BIRTHDAY, FRANK! We miss you.
Francis Vincent Zappa, Jr.
American Composer and Musician
21 December 1940 - 4 December 1993
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 1995 08:00:21 -0800
From: Tom Messenger <kmesseng@slonet.org>
Subject: Formaldehyde in Singha beer, etc.
Jeff Smith wrote:
>>Methvin Dave (Dave Methvin?) asked about Singha beer:
>There are some subtle flavors I can't identify, and I'm wondering if anyone
>has tasted this brand and knows what they might have used.
>My father spent about two years at Korat, Thailand and at
>that time the AirForce medics clamed that Singha contained
>formaldehyde. He was told that it
>was used as a sanitation technique. Oddly
>enough my brother and his girl friend who have
>both been stationed in Asia since than claim
>that most beersbrewed in that area
>have a "formaldehyde" taste, especially Heineken Red
>Star made in Thailand.
>Jeff Smith, Barnes, WI
I drink Singha often - it is one of my favortite commercial beers. It is
served at a local excellent Thai restaruant. And no, it has absolutely no
formaldehyde flavor whatsoever. Nor do any other beers I have had throughout
south east asia.
During the Viet Nam war, it was a popular idea among service personnel that
the beer had formaldehyde in it. ALL BEER. Bud, Coors, Miller, Hawaiian
Primo, you name it. "It had to. It would spoil, don't you see?" I, for one,
don't see and believe this sort of "urban legend" to be nonsense.
As for the taste of Singha, the taste I get out of it that I relish is the
hop profile. Not being good at guessing hop styles, I can't help you
formulate a recipe. But whatever you try putting in yours, you can rest
assured that you won't need any embalming fluid.
Wassail!
- ----------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Messenger, Los Osos, California, USA *** kmesseng@slonet.org
- ----------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 1995 09:02:25 -0700
From: "John W. Taylor" <taylor12@llnl.gov>
Subject: RE: Inlaws and Homebrew
My father will drink my home brew, my mother has never liked beer of any
kind. I have my biggest problem with my wife. She will not even taste my
brew, she says its not sanitary enough for her. I have never had a
contaminated batch. So she drinks commercial swill and sometimes micro
brewery beer. I get to have something good from the tap that I made, so if
there is more for me fine.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 95 08:05:35 PST
From: hollen@vigra.com
Subject: Re: Gear Motors
>>>>> "Jack" == Jack Schmidling <arf@mcs.com> writes:
<<Secondly, if Santa gets me s JS mill I'll want to motorize it.>>
> Rather than trying belts & pulleys, it might be simpler for you to find an
> appropriately sized "gear motor" (motor w/integral reduction gears)...
Jack> Belts and pulleys are forgiving but gears, chains, sprockets and
Jack> direct couplings are not.
To expand on this, my approach is to put the motor lower than the mill
and on a hinged platform (harder with a MM, but possible) and let the
weight of the motor be the only "clutch". As soon as the mill gets
jammed, the small pulley on the motor just slips on the V-belt.
dion
- --
Dion Hollenbeck (619)597-7080x119 Email: hollen@vigra.com
Senior Software Engineer Vigra, Inc. San Diego, California
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 1995 08:16:46 -0800
From: RANDY ERICKSON <RANDYE@mid.org>
Subject: Singha
Methvin Dave Methvin asks about making a Singha clone.
I've never made this, but I've sure enjoyed a few with hot & sour coconut
milk soup. This recipe should get you in the ballpark, though.
Take your favorite american light lager recipe.
If it's all-grain, use the same number of cups of pale malt and mash an
additional cup of pre-boiled rice. If it's an extract recipe, use as many
tablespoons of malt extract as the recipe calls for plus either a half-cup
of rice extract or you could steep a cup of minute rice like a specialty
grain.
For bittering you should double the hop rate. With pellets that means two
whole pellets. If you use whole hops, one-and-one half hop cones
should be plenty. Unless you're a hophead, you may be happier with
only one cone.
If this sounds like too much work, you could achieve a similar flavor
profile by munching a piece of ginger and a peanut while drinking a Bud
;-)
Randy Erickson
Modesto Irrigation District
Modesto, California
********************************************************************
And there I go jumping before the gunshot has gone off .....
Slap me with a splintered ruler .... -- Alanis Morissette
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 1995 8:26:56 -0800 (PST)
From: Jim Cave <CAVE@PSC.ORG>
Subject: Adding yeast the next day
I don't have a problem with delaying pitching up to 8 hours, providing
the beer is cooled immediately. The problem I have is the slow cooling. 1st,
you increase the opportunity for contamination, no matter how careful you are
with your sanitation. Remember, sanitation is NOT sterilization, and wort at
100 F is mighty tasty stuff and bacteria replicate at incredible rates at that
temp. Air attemperation is just too slow a cooling process. 2nd, DMS
production will be excessive, particularly with the standard North American
malts which are of the low-kiln temperature variety (i.e. lager malts).
Geeze Gary! You've got serious equipement there, surely building a
$30 chiller won't tax your pocket book or your technical prowess!!!!
Jim Cave
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 1995 08:37:55 -0800 (PST)
From: Domenick Venezia <venezia@zgi.com>
Subject: Hydrometer Correction
I don't think anyone else has posted this during the latest hydrometer
correction thread, so here it is. I consider it the definitive
answer to the question. :-) Thanks to Christopher Lyons.
Domenick Venezia
Computer Resources
ZymoGenetics, Inc.
Seattle, WA
venezia@zgi.com
================
HOMEBREW Digest #963 Mon 07 September 1992
From: Christopher Lyons
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 92 11:25 EDT
From: "C. Lyons" <LYONS@adc1.adc.ray.com>
Subject: Follow-up on SG vs Temp.
Following up on the specific gravity of water as a
function of temperature.... The earlier equation was
based on data for 50F-to-105F. Since the equation
was from a polynomial fit, it should not be trusted
for predicting SG outside this temperature range.
The data below was obtained using the "Handbook of
Chemistry and Physics (CRC)", and is valid for a
temperature range between 0 and 212F.
Temp (C) Temp (F) Density Correction relative to 59F
------- -------- ------- --------------------------
0 32 0.99987 -0.74
3.98 39.16 1.00000 -0.87
5 41 0.99999 -0.86
10 50 0.99973 -0.6
15 59 0.99913 0
18 64.4 0.99862 0.51
20 68 0.99823 0.9
25 77 0.99707 2.06
30 86 0.99567 3.46
35 95 0.99406 5.07
38 100.4 0.99299 6.14
40 104 0.99224 6.89
45 113 0.99025 8.88
50 122 0.98807 11.06
55 131 0.98573 13.4
60 140 0.98324 15.89
65 149 0.98059 18.54
70 158 0.97781 21.32
75 167 0.97489 24.24
80 176 0.97183 27.3
85 185 0.96865 30.48
90 194 0.96534 33.79
95 203 0.96192 37.21
100 212 0.95838 40.75
The correction term was computed relative to
15C (59F). It may be easily calculated relative
to any temperature. A third order polynomial fit
to this data was also very good (R**2 = 0.999969):
Correction(@59F) =
1.313454 - 0.132674*T + 2.057793e-3*T**2 - 2.627634e-6*T**3
where T is in degrees F.
This equation should be good for the entire temperature range
of interest :-)!
... hope this helps,
Christopher Lyons
lyons@adc1.adc.ray.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 1995 10:39:42 -0600
From: uchima@fncrd8.fnal.gov (Mike Uchima)
Subject: Re: split boils / malt extract FAQ? / berries in fermenter
Larry Merkel responds to my question about splitting boils:
> I have been splitting my boils since I started...not into two parallel boils
> but into two sequential boils (one pot big enough for about 3-3 1/2
> gallons). I do five gallon batches by preboiling 2 gallons of water,
> transferring the 2 gallons to the fermenter, and boiling 3 gallons of water
> with the ingredients. I have had no problems so far.
Actually, I've already been doing this for my extract batches. My original
question related to whether splitting the boil for an *all grain* batch would
cause any problems. I've received several other replies by direct e-mail; the
general consensus seems to be "no problem". Thanks to all who responded.
And another question:
Does anyone know of a listing (preferably on-line) which gives the general
characteristics of the widely available dry and liquid malt extracts? It seems
like this would be a great resource for beginner to intermediate brewers who
want a little more control over their brew, but aren't quite ready for
all-grain. For example: I now know that Laaglander DME is much higher in
unfermentables than most of the other brands -- I wish I'd known that before I
used it (actually, the beer came out great; just would've saved me a little
bit of worrying about the high FG). A malt extract FAQ listing this type of
information for *all* of the various extracts would be very useful.
And finally:
I recently tried to brew a cranberry ale, by adding a couple of pounds of
chopped fresh cranberries at the end of the boil, steeping for 30 minutes,
then dumping the whole mess into the primary. The big problem came several
days later, when I was racking the beer to my secondary. The berry bits were
about the same density as the beer, and so some of them kept swirling around
and getting caught in the racking cane, causing the siphon to stop. After
messing around for quite a while trying to siphon around the berry bits (and
spilling beer all over the place), I finally gave up and simply poured the
entire contents of my primary through a strainer. This seems to be a poor
solution, because of the risk of oxidation. I thought of straining out the
berries *before* putting the beer in the primary, but I think a lot of the
berry flavor was extracted during primary fermentation, so I'd rather not do
this. Any suggestions?
- -- Mike Uchima
- -- uchima@fnal.gov
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 1995 13:04:26 -0600
From: smag@mail.utexas.edu (Stefan Smagula)
Subject: Calling all Apartment-Dwellers, and Dorm-Room Guerilla Brewers!
Calling all apartment-dwellers, and dorm-room guerilla brewers!
I was wondering if any of you who brew in tight spaces would be interested
in sharing your apartment-brewing techniques, innovations, tricks, and
tribulations with me. I am writing an article on apartment/minimalist
brewing for a new homebrewing magazine.
I learned to brew in a wee Brooklyn apartment. Like a salmon born in a tea
cup, my fermenter never knew the open sea. My brewing techniques had to
evolve to fit the micro-environment, or perish. I use the same pot as
storage for grain, mash vessel, boiling pot, bottle sanitizer ...and
occasionally as a massive paella-cooker and ice holder for chilling the
homebrew.
* How do YOU brew in tight spaces?
* What mistakes have you made (bottles exploding, the significant other's
favorite peasant shirt besmeared with Imperial Stout...)?
* What gear is absolutely necessary to your apartment-brewing?
* How has your brewing technique evolved to fit your micro-environment?
I appreciate any and all comments, and will post the completed article to
the Homebrew Digest moments AFTER it is published (are you reading Craig?),
unless that would go against the contract (which I haven't seen yet). At
the very least, I will post the useful information in the article...that
should be legal, right?
As Chairman Mao says: It's right to ferment!
Respectfully,
- --New Address
Stefan Smagula
1504 Ridgemont Street
Austin, TX 78723
home: 512.458.3733
fax: 512.471.8857
work: 512.471.1044
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 1995 18:24:58 +0100
From: bush@shbf.se (Robert Bush)
Subject: Re: Belgian White Ale
Mike Morgan wrote:
>I recently picked up a 6-pack of BLUE MOON Belgian White Ale.
>It has a great creamy taste with a hint of orange peel and some
>sort of spice.
>Can anyone shed some light on the style of beer. I have frequently heard
>about Belgian White style but this is the first time I have tried it.
>Also if anyone has a recipe for a similar taste please sent it on over. I
>am really interested in any Wyeast products that may be used.
Surely you must be able to find Hoegaarden in the States? Too me that's the
original Wit (which is the real (Flemish) name of the style) even though
it's not. If I remember correctly it was revived by Pierre Celis before he
moved to Texas from Belgium and started brewing Celis White and Grand Cru.
It is now brewed by brewery De Kluis in Belgium and contains a live yeast
strain that successfully can be used in your own batch. No need to hand out
a lot of money, plus you get to drink a beer!
Here's a recipe I made a couple of years ago, I remember liking the end
product then (sorry I only made 10 litres to try it, so it's a small
batch):
"White Sox Wit" by Robert Bush (10 litre batch)
OG 1052, FG 1011
1000 grams Pilsner malt
900 grams Wheat malt
120 grams Flaked oats
13 grams Saaz @ 3.6% (90 min)
5 grams Saaz @ 3.6% (15 min)
8 grams dried Curacao orange peel (15 min)
12 grams ground Coriander
Step-infusion mash with rests at 52 degrees C (20 min), 63 degrees C (50
min) and 72 degrees C (30 min). Run-off att 78 degrees C.
Boil for 90 minutes. Cool and pitch with a culture of Hoegaarden White.
Ferment at 18 degrees C. Drop to secondary at SG 1026 and bottle at SG 1015.
Mature for a month. Drink.
Good luck!
Robert
====================================
= WASSAIL! =
= Robert Bush, Eskilstuna, SWEDEN =
= E-mail: bush@shbf.se =
====================================
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 95 10:27:10 PST
From: raines@radonc.ucla.edu (Maribeth_Raines)
Subject: Diacetyl rests
A German-trained brewer told me that contrary to the American practice of
raising the temperature for reducing diacetyl, German brewers lower the
temperature. I was quite surprised to hear this but can't remember off the
top of my head the rationale behind it. So the difference in Noonan's versus
Miller appears to be German versus American brewing practices.
Happy Holidays!
MB Raines-Casselman
raines@radonc.ucla.edu
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 95 12:35:35 CST
From: Paul Sovcik <U18183@UICVM.CC.UIC.EDU>
Subject: Re: Hop Toxicity in Dogs
In regards to the recent reports of malignant hyperthermia in dogs after
ingestion of large quantities of hops:
I would think that the antidote would be malt, which would tend to
balance the large dosage of hops. :)
Now someone out there has to have a MSDS for hop toxicity to humans,
right?
-Paul in Chicago
...just another waste of bandwidth...
------------------------------
Date: 21 Dec 95 14:25:13 EST
From: <Stephen_W._Snyder@metcapw1.ccmail.compuserve.com>
Subject: Formaldehyde in Beer
Jeff Smith wrote:
>My father spent about two years at Korat, Thailand and at that time the Air
>Force medics clamed that Singha contained formaldehyde. He was told that it
>was used as a sanitation technique. Oddly enough my brother and his girl
>friend who have both been stationed in Asia since than claim that most beers
>brewed in that area have a "formaldehyde" taste, especially Heineken Red
>Star made in Thailand.
>
>Is this possible? (If it is this may be the best reason to stick to those
>German purity laws)
My father was station in Udorn, Thailand in the late 60's. I've asked him if he
remembers this also. He said that there was a persistent rumor that they used
"Formaldehyde" in the beer. I still here this from time to time. This has got to
be one of those "urban legends" that never dies. What brewer in their right mind
would put this chemical in their beer? Wouldn't it cause some serious problems?
Death? Preservation at least? While I'm not an expert on Singha, I don't think
it's possible. There are other reasons for chemical/solvent flavors in a beer.
Steve Snyder
Seattle, WA
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 1995 13:34:37 -0600
From: Alejandro Midence <alex@conline.com>
Subject: In-laws won't drink your homebrew
You write that your in-laws won't even consider drinking your homebrewed
ales and stouts in spite of the fact that they prefer them to american
beers. They even prefer to drink Bud instead of your beer. (That *is*
an insult) Here's a rather sneaky, underhanded way of showing them the
error of their ways. *malicious grin*
First, treat yourself to a pint or two of their favorite beer from across
the atlantic. Now, rinse and brush the bottles clean. LEAVE THE LABELS
ON! (can you see where this is leading?) Yes, you guessed it! Sanitize
these bottles along with the rest. The labels should stay on. I've
done it before, trust me. Ok, do the usual. Offer them a glass of
homebrew which they willk summarily decline to drink. Behave as usual.
Make some small talk, and then, say: "Hey, I just remembered! I have
two pints left from when I bought some <list their favorite beer>. How
'bout I get 'em and you can drink them while I enjoy my homebrew?" It
*should* work. If not, then here's the creed I adopted from a favorite
Scotish song of mine:
If'n ye're bent wi' Arthuritis,
Yer bones've got carritis,
Ye've galloppin' garlopitis and you're thinkin' 'tis time ye died.
If ye seem a man a'watchin'
While you lie there a'tratchin'
Ye will gain some satisfaction,
Thinkin' JESUS, AT LEAST I TRIED!
Hope it helps. :-)
Alex
ps Oh, I do hate to be so beastly tricky and underhanded but I SOOOOO
enjoy it! :-)
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Some folk o'er the water think bitter is fine,
And otheres, they swear by the juice of the vine.
But there's nothin' that's squeezed from the grape or the hop
Like the black liquidation with the froth on the top!!!
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 95 14:40:59 -0600
From: gjfix@utamat.uta.edu (George J Fix)
Subject: Hops
I hope everyone is having a great holiday season!
I just concluded a series of test brews using relatively new varieties
(at least new to me). I found the results to be interesting, and I have
posted this note in case a few others were interested as well.
The first hop is Ultra, a US low alpha aroma hop. Its predecessors
include Mt. Hood, Crystal, Liberty, as well as the North American
versions of Hallertau, Tettnang, and Saaz, all of which are respectable
hops. However, IMHO Ultra is something quite special. In particular, it has
a uniquely elegant and sophisticated flavor (taste and smell) that really
rings my bell.
There has been a growing interest in Germany in bringing back the old practice
of "first wort hopping". Recent studies have shown that if noble European
varieties are used, this procedure can lead to an improved bitter and
(counter intuitively!) an improved aroma over what could be obtained by
late hopping. My own test brews show that there is definitely some merit in
these claims, and I have been struck by how well Ultras do with this
procedure. Based on this and other considerations, I personally feel Ultras can
be put on the same level as the noble Europeans without apology nor
explanation.
The other hop is Columbus, a US high alpha variety. When this hop was first
introduced last year I was (quite embarrassingly!) in the throws of low alpha
bigotry, and consequently ignored it. My first contact with it came at the
Portland conference sponsored by Brewing Techniques in July. In one of the
sessions Martin Lodahl lead a seminar devoted to Northwest beers having a
high hop profile. Two of the beers selected by Martin were an experimental
IPA brewed by Rogue which was dry hopped with Columbus, and another IPA from
Star Brewing which used Columbus both as a dry and finishing hop. To make a
long story short, once the presentations ended and tasting began the kegs
containing the IPAs emptied in very short order. It was not that the other
ales present were not not excellent, but rather the fact that the IPAs were
"... sinfully drinkable... ", to quote one participant. What I found in both
ales was a huge flowery/floral aroma that was quintessentially Pacific Nothwest.
However, the big surprise was the hop bitter. I was expecting to be assaulted
by astringency with an unpleasant "high alpha aftertaste". However, what came
through was a remarkably rounded bitter, some achievement since the IBUs in
both ales were in the high double digits. Further investigation of its resin
and oil profiles has indicated that Columbus is indeed a new breed of high
alpha hop with highly favorable quality indices (such as % cohumulone,
humelene/myrcene ratios, etc). I have found in my own brewing that it can be
used in all American ale styles either as a bittering, finish, or dry hop.
For reasons that may be entirely my fault I do not seem to be getting the
same quality of flavor from Cascades that I recall from years past. In
any case, the arrival of an alternative like Columbus is very welcome news.
George Fix
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 1995 18:58:36 +0500
From: "Pat Babcock" <pbabcock@oeonline.com>
Subject: The sucking thing, revisited
Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager!
As promised, a review of the new, improved Phil's Psyphon Starter.
The some of the improvements are immediately obvious: There is a
balled-off flange at the ends of the platic inserts. This better
holds the position of the inserts within the tubing while still
allowing them to be disassembled with relative ease for cleaning.
The attachment fit snugly on the end of the racking cane, and did not
shake off no matter how hard I tried - even in hot, slippery Iodophur
solution!
The section of hose on this unit was a bit shorter than the previous
one, and less liquid was added to the column per shake, but this was
a minor detriment to the process.
Worked like a charm!
I found that putting a tubing clamp on the outlet from the racking
cane and restricting (not closing!) the tube aided in getting a good
column of liquid with which to start the siphon. Once a good size
column was gained, the clamp could be open while still shaking the
thing and - Whoosh! Siphon City!
Recommended as a Christmas toy for your favorite brewer. However,
look at what you're buying to ensure it is one of the improved
units. A visit to the shop at which I bought mine yielded up a
passel (about 15) of the same ones I had bought mine from. (and a
large-diameter racking cane, and this really cool beer-thief thing
from FermenTech. Didn't buy them. Yet.)
Marzen, er, um - Merry Christmas and a Hoppy - no, that's Happy New
Beer, sheesh, er, um Year! (Phew!)
See ya!
Pat Babcock in Canton, Michigan (Western Suburb of Detroit)
pbabcock@oeonline.com URL: http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1916, 12/22/95
*************************************
-------
