Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1947
This file received at Hops.Stanford.EDU 1996/01/29 PST
HOMEBREW Digest #1947 Mon 29 January 1996
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor
Contents:
hot sparge/skimming & blowoff/wild yeast?/get a second Dr.'s opinion (Algis R Korzonas)
Blow-off Technique Redeemed (sorta) (John W. Braue, III)
green o ring on keg (why?) (Robert Rogers)
that bitter, trubish stuff sure is 'bitters' (Dan McConnell)
Blowoff tubes and open fermentation (dludwig)
Munich Mistake (Lance Skidmore)
SG calc and measurement (Domenick Venezia)
Yeast metabolism thread, Gott coolers (Al Stevens)
Cornstarch Recipe (Gary S. Kuyat)
Problem With Green Bottles (William Moulis)
CO2 Corney Keg Leak (Greg Holton)
microbrewery or brewpub systems (Dan_Imperato)
Brewday from hell award (Mark Redman)
SHC (Eric W. Miller)
Cleaning Solder Flux ("Palmer.John")
Methanol in Homebrew (Gary S. Kuyat)
Amer. Amber Ale (Bryan Gros)
Pils malt flavor/mini-keg pressure (BF3B8RL)
O2-absorbing caps (Jeremy Ballard Bergsman)
Access to FAQs / Aeration (Lynn Ashley)
Bottle Carbonation/Charlie's Hot Lager (Steve Alexander)
Phil's Philler (Denis Barsalo)
Sparge Temp, Blowoff (Jack Schmidling)
re: heating bands for wort (Robert Rogers)
******************************************************************
* 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, 25 Jan 96 17:29:09 CST
From: korz@pubs.ih.att.com (Algis R Korzonas)
Subject: hot sparge/skimming & blowoff/wild yeast?/get a second Dr.'s opinion
Aidan writes (regarding using a >170F sparge water):
>I have no idea if this is a significant enough volume to throw a
>chill haze in your beer.
Not chill haze -- starch haze (hazy at all tempertures).
***
Tim writes:
>the flavor of the open-fermented beer was more mature for its
>young age (6 days vs. 3 weeks), less rough, and smoother. The skimming of
>krauesen material seems to have eliminated much of the sharpness associated
>with young beer. Perhaps the intangible flavor improvement imparted by open
>fermentation is actually the *absence* of certain undesirable flavors.
>Anyone more experienced care to speculate further?
Rather than speculate, I did an experiment and had the resulting beer tested
at Siebel. I'm afraid that I can't go into details until after publication
(in Zymurgy), but one important thing I found was that a significant amount
of IBUs were lost when the kraeusen was removed from the fermenting beer.
***
Adam writes about a possible wild yeast problem that causes overcarbonation:
>I bake bread every weekend in the same kitchen that I make beer in.
>However, I quit doing it on the same day! Now I try to clean the countertop
>with bleach, and I shower before brewing! I also sweep the floor and mop
>before brewing. All of this is an attempt to reduce opportunity for wild
>yeast contamination.
It could be the sweeping of the floor. This will kick a lot of dust into
the air and that's probably the air you are using to aerate the beer, right?
You can try aerating in another room or perhaps you might want to buy one
of those filtered air aeration systems (the kind with the aquarium pump,
filter and airstone).
***
Chris says:
>...this doctor of internal medicine said
>this to her. He asked my wife if I drank my beer before a month old. She
>said yes. I do. I try it at different stages to see how it is doing. I think
>everyone does this. He said that it can be poisonous. I can't believe it!
>Something about the yeast and alcohol at early stages...
>Peterborough, Ont.Can.
Sounds like the doctors in our company's new medical plan. The doctor
is wrong. Period. Even if you were making moonshine, either it's poisonous
or it's not. Sure, yeast converts some alcohol to esters via a process called
esterification, but it is not in quantities that would change the beer from
poisonous to non-poisonous. See what socialized medicine can do?
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz@pubs.att.com
Copyright 1996 Al Korzonas
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 08:01:13
From: braue@ratsnest.win.net (John W. Braue, III)
Subject: Blow-off Technique Redeemed (sorta)
>Mark Riley <mriley@netcom.com> writes:
>>*Blowoff is probably the silliest procedure
>>*that has ever been developed for making beer. I am hard pressed to think
>>*of even a single redeeming feature. The advantages of "open" fermentation
>>*are as myriad as those for blowoff are lacking.
>
>>I have to agree with Jack here. I think that blow-off is a step back.
>>About the only advantage is that it is good for those that can not check or
>>manage their fermentations frequently.
>
>With all due respect, it seems silly to slam the blowoff technique without
>providing any reasons why it is inferior. I'd be interested in hearing
>just a few (out of the "myriad").
(I believe that thq quotees are arf@mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) and
korz@pubs.ih.att.com (Algis R Korzonas), but I won't guarantee it.
If I'm misattributing here, sorry).
I don't use truly open fermentation (as opposed to covered open
fermentation) because one of the components of my household is a
free-flighted budgerigar. A truly open fermentation would risk
ending up full of avian by-products, including a whole bird if it
took it into what passes for its mind to dive into the fermenter
(this behavior is documented amongst other small hookbills...some
of them *late* small hookbills). I concede that this reason, or
its logical equivalent, is not one that will apply to every
homebrewer, or perhaps even a majority.
Using closed fermentation, then, for reasons of sanitation ("Aack!
There are *feathers* in my beer!"), I generally use a standard
airlock on a 6.5 gallon plastic carboy. I use a blowoff hose
*only* when I expect the ferment to produce so much kraeusen that it
will push the airlock out of the lid (and yes, *that* has
happened). Blowoff, for me, is a purely pragmatic process to
minimize the mess produced by fermentation.
Why do I do things in this exact manner? Well, largely because
it's the way that I've always done them. Domenick Venezia (I have
forgotten his e-mail address) has suggested that I just get a
larger fermenter. This, along with covered open fermentation and
brewing pseudo-lamic fruit beers, is one of those things that I'll
probablly get around to trying someday (say, before the end of the
next millenium).
- --
John W. Braue, III braue@ratsnest.win.net
I prefer both my beer and my coffee to be dark and bitter; that way,
they fit in so well with the rest of my life.
I've decided that I must be the Messiah; people expect me to work
miracles, and when I don't, I get crucified.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 21:30:55 -0500
From: bob@harvey.carol.net (Robert Rogers)
Subject: green o ring on keg (why?)
the o ring on the co2 side of my keg is green. does anyone know why and can
i replace it with a black one?
bob rogers
bob@carol.net
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 22:20:23 -0500
From: danmcc@umich.edu (Dan McConnell)
Subject: that bitter, trubish stuff sure is 'bitters'
>From Jeff Frane:
<On a sideline, I notice a number of people referring to the
<scum on top of the krausen as "trub"; this is, I think, a
<form of confusion and the term should not be mis-used.
<Tim Laatsch has it right:
<
<>Ref: De Clerck, A Textbook of Brewing, 1957, Vol 1, pp 401 (The text is
<>his, any typos are mine):
<>
<>The eliminted bitter material is found partly in the head which should be
<>skimmed off carefully to avoid adding sharpness to the beer. In top
<>fermentations, the resins are found mixed with the yeast which has risen to
<>the surface, and are removed along with the yeast at skimming. So as not
<>to include too much bitter material in the yeast, the first heads formed on
<>the surface before purging of the yeast are skimmed off.
<>sometimes called 'bitters'".
<>
<
<So let's be precise, folks.
<
<- --Jeff Frane
Hey Jeff! Let's also be accurate while we are being precise. It was I,
not Tim who quoted DeClerck.
OK, your point sounds reasonable to me. For the sake of clarity, I shall
refer to the trub-containing, non-yeast, bitter material that comes out of
a carboy or first rises to the surface in an open fermenter 'bitters' as
indicated by Jean DeClerck. In the past, I called it bitter material,
trub-laden foam, trub-containing material, truby-stuff and (unfortunalely)
trub, because I really didn't know what to call it. You will get no
argument from me-it will be a handy term AND easy to spell!
So, who invented blow-off (or blow-by)?
And if "These are sometimes called 'bitters'", what are they called the
rest of the time?
DanMcC
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 22:14:37 -0500
From: dludwig@atc.ameritel.net
Subject: Blowoff tubes and open fermentation
>less than meek and equivocal. Blowoff is probably the silliest procedure
>that has ever been developed for making beer. I am hard pressed to think
>of even a single redeeming feature. The advantages of "open" fermentation
>are as myriad as those for blowoff are lacking.
>
>Try simplicity and ease of use as the basic cover all.
Actually, I think that the blowoff tube method is a pretty clever and simple
way of getting rid of the "bitters" that supposedly inhabit the krausen. I
say "supposedly" because I'm going on what I've read here in recent posts.
I don't have first hand knowledge, as I've never used blowoff and instead
use a 6.5 gal carboy(w/airlock) for 5 gal batches and led all of the krausen
fall back into the fermenting beer. The presence of bitters got me thinking
though since my beers seem to have a certain harshness to them which may be
partially the result of my leaving everything in the beer. As far as open
fermentation, I wouldn't expose anyone's beer to my basement brewery
environment considering my workshop, garbage storage, beercan recycling
operation, cat litterbox, etc, all contribute to a pretty nasty air quality.
But I want to come up with a way of getting the bitters off my beer while
still using my closed fermentation technique. Aside from ease in getting the
skum off the beer without blowoff tubes, what advantage is there to open
fermentation?
-Dave Ludwig in Southern MD
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 20:13:10 -0800 (PST)
From: Lance Skidmore <lskidmor@linknet.kitsap.lib.wa.us>
Subject: Munich Mistake
>Jim Dunlap writes:
>2) I really enjoy the flavor of Munich malt and have heard mixed reviews of
>using excessive amounts as the final brew will have an extremely high
>terminal gravity and be too sweet. If this is true why are there so many
>recipes available which use 50 - 100% munich malt? I would like to brew a
>Dunkel, Bock or, Maerzen using a high percentage of Munich Malt if I can
>acheive a reasonably low, say 1.016 - 1.020 terminal gravity. If someone in
>the collective has any suggestions as to a recipe and in particular a mash
>procedure, I would be most grateful.
Jim, some friends and I recently brewed a very nice brew using a -BUNCH- of
Munich...by mistake! When I measured the grain out for a brown ale I
mistakenly grabbed the light Munich bin instead of the Klages. After
adding the darker grains and grinding them all together I realized my
error. Fearing that we would have a difficult conversion because of the
relatively low diastatic power of the Munich, we upped the grain bill
with about 25% Klages. While it certainly doesn't fit any particular
style very closely, it's a very rich brown ale with an incredible head.
It's not sweet at all and has a very malty profile. The recipe is for 20
gal, so figure accordingly:
New Year's Eve Munich-Brown-Goof
39# - Light Munich
10# - Klages
1 # - Chocolate
2 # - 60 lov. Crystal
4oz - Centennial (boil)
6oz - Cascade
Wyeast German Ale # 1007
Protein rest @ 122 deg F, stepped to 145 F (oops too low), then up to
153F for 45 min. OG = 1.058, FG = 1.013. Had an extremely active
fermentation from a third generation of German #1007 harvested from the
bottom of a Bock the same day that we brewed. Anyway, it's one of the
best batches we've made and I plan on repeating my mistake!
Lance Skidmore
Port Orchard, WA
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 23:27:25 -0800 (PST)
From: Domenick Venezia <venezia@zgi.com>
Subject: SG calc and measurement
In an attempt to create more consistent yeast starters I wanted to
better quantify the amount of DME needed to meet target specific
gravities. I have encountered a discrepancy between calculated
values and observed values that I can not explain.
My understanding of specific gravity is that it is the ratio of the
weight of a given volume of wort (or any liquid) to the weight
of the same volume of water. My examples will all be metric
since the system is so easy to work with. Just remember that
for water 1 cc (cubic centimeter) = 1 ml (milliliter) and 1 ml
weighs 1 g (gram).
100 ml of 1.050 wort should weigh 105 g, arrived at by 105/100.
Basically the specific gravity is the ratio of the weight of the
volume (in grams) divided by the volume (in ml). Various authors
state that 1 lb of DME in 1 gallon of water yields an SG about 1.040.
This didn't sound right to me because:
1 lb = 454 g
1 gal = 3785 ml
If we assume that the DME has a volume of 363 ml we calculate
4239/4148 = 1.022. Way low compared to 1.040. The magic number of
363 comes from 0.8*454. See below results.
So I did a test. 10 g DME in 100 ml water yielded 108 ml of wort.
That is, 10 g of DME increased the volume by 8 ml. Calculating we
get: 110/108 = 1.0185
Then I measured it with my hydrometer: 1.034 !
To give 1.034 I would have needed 106.4 ml of volume instead of the 108 or
11.7 g of DME instead of the 10. Neither measurement can be off by that
much. Equipment included a 3-beam balance (calibrated with analytical lab
equipment) and 100 ml graduated cylinders. All measurements were made at
a temperature of 20 C which coincidentally is the temperature for which
the graduated cylinders are calculated.
What gives? Is my brain damaged? Too much lead leached from my brass
fittings? Too many cups of styrofoam coffee? Mercury poisoning from that
broken thermometer? Too many fusels from not using blowoff? Carbon
monoxide poisoning from burning propane indoors? Or simply too damn many
homebrews?
Domenick Venezia
Computer Resources
ZymoGenetics, Inc.
Seattle, WA
venezia@zgi.com
------------------------------
Date: 26 Jan 96 05:04:21 EST
From: Al Stevens <72704.743@compuserve.com>
Subject: Yeast metabolism thread, Gott coolers
A couple of digest back Tracy said
"Since many people have complained about too much
biochemistry lately, I'm not going to get into that here."
Please no ! don't stop. I have really enjoyed the technical discussions, It has
increased my understanding considerably.
Here is a question that just might be right down the yeast metabolism alley. I
make some strong beers that can give me a good buzz, but every batch of cider
that I have made I don't dare drinking more than one "small" glass at at time
because of the awful "cider" head the next morning. Just what are these little
beasties making in cider that they don't make in beer ?
*********************************
Lots of you seem to be using Gott coolers for mashtuns, I looked for a "Gott" at
my local hardware store an they showed me a cylindrical cooler labeled "drinking
water" . The capacity was 10 US gallons (gallons shrink when they go north).
Is this the thing that I want, is it safe for high temperatures ?
Thanks
Al Stevens
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 96 7:39:32 EST
From: Gary S. Kuyat <gkuyat@clark.att.com>
Subject: Cornstarch Recipe
Since a few folks have asked about my cornstarch beer... Here it is.
For 15 Gallons @ 1.042 OG
(this stuff is well suited to parties of industrial beer drinkers)
12.0 lbs Schrier 6 row malt
7.5 lbs Corn Starch
.4 lbs Special B
4.0 oz. 5%(approx AA) Piscataway NJ Homegrown Hops
In a 5gal pot, with a STRONG spoon mix 6.5 lbs Corn starch with 3 gal cold
water. Stir well until all clumps are gone (cold water makes this easier).
Heat this stirring occasionally until it begins to thicken (about the
consistancy of heavy cream) then stir constantly being careful to scrape
the bottom of the pot with the spoon. This stuff will get REALLY THICK as it
boils, and will burn if you don't keep stirring it. At this point it will be
more like shoveling it than just stirring. When you really can't stir it
anymore (no liquid left, mixture is well gelled, won't pour out of the pot
must be scooped out) it's done.
Add this mixture and the 6 row and Special B in alternating layers to your
10 gal mash tun (a.k.a. Gott Cooler). You want to get this well mixed, with no
"hot spots" Add as much water as you need to get this to a thick mash.
Remember, no hot spots! Boiling cornstarch will eat you 6 row enzymes for
lunch! So, be sure to stir well! We're going for a temp of 140F - 145F.
This is a good point to go out and do something else. Clean your 5gal pot,
go fishing, get some sleep... I usually let this sit for at LEAST 2 hours.
If I am around, I will stir it every 15 minutes, the 1st stirs seem to be the
most important. I don't worry if I'm not there at exactly 2 hours.
You should notice at the end of this, that the mash is CONSIDERABLY thinner.
It should also be very sweet. Strain off about 40% of the mash (some liquid
here is okay, but you want mostly solids). Put this your pot and slowly (about
1 degF / minute) bring it to 155F. Let it sit for 10 min at this temp, and
then bring to a boil, stirring constantly. Boil for 5 minutes. Stir this into
the main mash to bring the temp to 150F-155F. Let this sit for at least 30min.
But longer is okay too. I might eat dinner here, or shovel some snow.
Strain out liquid from your mash (no solids) to about 30% of the volume of the
mash. Bring it to a boil, and re-add it to the mash for a mash out. Give this
a good stir, adding sparge water to fill the tun, and let it sit to settle for
15 min. Sparge can become easily stuck since you will have lots of particulate
matter and a pretty small grain bed. I usually let it run til it gets stuck,
then stir it up, and recycle until clear. Sparge to 17 gal (or as much as your
boiler can hold!)
Skim the boil until no more skum forms, then hops are added:
2.5oz at 60 minutes
1.5oz at 10 minutes.
I prefer Wyeast California for this beer, fermenting at 60-65F for the 1st
week, then rack, then 58-62F for 2 more weeks, then rack and finally lager for
about a month at 45F.
This beer is a nice lawnmower beer, and folks who have been worried about
homebrew have really liked it. The main reason I origanally brewed this was
as a tester for different kinds of hops. You can split the unhopped wort into
samples, each with a different kind of hops or hopping schedule. It shows the
hops in a very neutral environment, but doesn't just taste like "hop juice".
Gary Kuyat
gkuyat@ix.netcom.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 06:50:10 -0600
From: William Moulis <wjmoulis@facstaff.wisc.edu>
Subject: Problem With Green Bottles
Previous batches of my beer were done in brown and clear bottles, with no
problems encountered, but my last batch was bottled in green bottles along
with the brown and clear, problems were encountered ONLY in the green
bottles (small white balls, with an almost skin like feel) floating on top
of the beer. The bottles were cleaned in the same manner that I cleaned the
brown and clear (using a bleach solution) filling and capping of all of the
bottles were done in the same manner. All the bottles were put in cases with
the open handles covered to keep out sunlight . I would appreciate any input
on what the balls are or why this was caused.
Thanks in advance
Bill
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 08:14:06 -0500 (EST)
From: greg@kgn.ibm.com (Greg Holton)
Subject: CO2 Corney Keg Leak
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 15:26:43 -0500
> From: knetlb@smtp-gw.spawar.navy.mil (Bob Knetl)
> Subject: CO2 Corney Keg Leak
>
> I have kegged beer for the last 4 yrs. and a just started
> experiencing a problem with CO2 leakage. I use previously
> driven Coke kegs. I have a 3 keg manifold setup and have
> experienced a leak (you can hear a hiss after the connector is
> locked in place) between the gas fitting and the keg. It
> matters not which of the 3 connectors or the keg (I have about
> 7 kegs) I have never changed the o-rings on the keg connector.
> Could that be it or the maybe the gas side manifold
> connectors are the problem. Anyone experience this problem?
>
> Bob
>
I usually replace the o-rings when I pick up a new keg. The
small ones on the inlet and outlet fittings are readily available
at hardware stores. Even then, you may get some leakage -- try
a thin coating of vaseline on all o-rings, including the big one
on the top hatch.
Greg
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 96 8:21 est
From: Dan_Imperato@vos.stratus.com
Subject: microbrewery or brewpub systems
Hi all,
I am posting this for a friend of mine who wants to open a brewpub.
He would like to know the sources of 6-10bbl systems. I know of Eliot
Bay Metal Fabricating in Washington but can anyone offer other suggestions?
Thanks in advance.
Dan
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 08:39:28 -0500
From: Mark Redman <brewman@vivid.net>
Subject: Brewday from hell award
Greetings fellow brewmen (and women)!
Although I don't want to hog too much bandwidth with this thread, I HAVE to
tell my personal brewday from hell story since the previous stories pale in
comparison.
I had brewed 5 gal. of porter which was sitting in our spare office. My fiance
and I share an office, which has all my homebrew equipment (including a
freezer chest), my desk and computer, her desk and copying maching, fax, etc.,
as well as all her shoe samples (she is in sales). This was before I
oxygenated using 100% O2, so late in the evening I decided to go for one last
shake of the ol' carboy. You guessed it: 5 gal of unfermented wort slipped out
of my hand, cut the hell out of my finger and went crashing onto the new,
light grey carpet. I called a bud (you know your true friends at this point)
and we spent the next 6 hours pulling EVERYTHING out of the office, pulling
up carpet, pulling up carpet padding, etc. Went and rented a steam cleaner, and
while sucking up the mess the cleaner foamed up and spilled another gallon of
dark porter in one of the few unstained areas in the room. MORE carpet to pull
up, padding to throw away, etc. Had to cancel my flight the next day (the
misses was away on business, thank God) and spend another 6 to 8 hours trying
to steam clean the mess from every nook and cranny, lay down new padding,
clean everything in the room that was splashed, etc.etc.
Final results:
1) one missed flight and a pissed-off regional manager
2) one pissed-off fiance threatening to leave me if I didn't quit this hobby
(I'm still brewing and she's still here)
3) one pissed-off apartment manager having to replace new carpet.
4) A cut finger
5) more than $50 in rental fees for soaps, cleaners, etc.
6) a smell that still hasn't quite gone away (this happened 4 months ago)
7) a perfectly good porter: Gone.
8) about 24 total man hours used. But I'm still brewing away! Cheers!
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 09:31:22 -0500
From: ac051@osfn.rhilinet.gov (Eric W. Miller)
Subject: SHC
>I for one have seen somebody set fire to a fart, and believe me, it was
>impressive! I guess there is a fair bit of methane there.
WARNING: this is extremely dangerous! It's well known that "fart-sparking"
is one of the top three causes of "spontaneous" human combustion.
Countless high school gym students fall victim to this "funny" trick
anually. Let's not add homebrewers to the list!
Eric Miller
Brewing Safely and Seriously ;-) in Newport, RI
------------------------------
Date: 26 Jan 1996 07:58:42 U
From: "Palmer.John" <palmer@ssdgwy.mdc.com>
Subject: Cleaning Solder Flux
How to clean off solder flux: Good question.
If you do it right, only using a small amount, most all of it will be consumed
during soldering with a propane torch. If you used a paste flux, the remainder
should be cleaned using a solvent, and for most people that will be Paint Brush
Cleaner or gasoline. Then you have to remove the the solvent. A good
dishwashing detergent should take care of that followed by a boiling water
rinse to thoroughly remove the detergent. By the way, lighting the soldered
manifold to get rid of the solvent is not recommended because you tend to bake
on any heavy organics that you just dissolved.
Liquid acid fluxes usually dont need the solvent treatment and respond to
detergent cleaning alone.
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: Fri, 26 Jan 96 11:02:22 EST
From: Gary S. Kuyat <gkuyat@clark.att.com>
Subject: Methanol in Homebrew
Going out on a limb here, but don't you think it IS POSSIBLE that fermentation
carried on with spent grains in the wort could produce some methanol?
I realize that we of the HBD would never actually do this, but I seem to
remember something in a "build your own still" manual strongly encouraging
would be distillers to strain the wort from grains for this reason. No real
science here, just deductive reasoning. Methanol is wood alcohol, spent grains
taste like wood...
Gary "dry graining" Kuyat
gkuyat@ix.netcom.com
------------------------------
Date-Warning: Date header was inserted by ctrvax.Vanderbilt.Edu
From: grosbl@ctrvax.Vanderbilt.Edu (Bryan Gros)
Subject: Amer. Amber Ale
Don Rudolph started a discussion on Dave Brockington's call for the creation of
American Amber as a distinct style from Pale Ale.
It is an interesting question as to when a style should be recognized as
distinct. While
the line between amber ale and pale ale is a bit of a fine one, so it the
line between
porter and stout. I would agree with the separation of the two styles,
mostly based
on the presence of the caramel sweetness that helps to balance the
hoppiness. You
just don't find that in Sierra Nevada PA, for example.
Don quoted the 95 and 96 AHA style guidelines. It seems that the
differences between
the two reflect Dave's arguments. The color description changed from deep
amber to
light copper. The maltiness description dropped from medium to light. While
these are vague words, they leave a big hole open for an Amber Ale style.
Also, one of the big examples of the differences in the style can be found
in the
SF Bay Area. Try a Drake's Ale and a Drake's Pale Ale. The main
difference is the
amount of crystal malt.
- Bryan
grosbl@ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 08:23:44 -0500
From: BF3B8RL@TPLANCH.BELL-ATL.COM
Subject: Pils malt flavor/mini-keg pressure
I have two questions for the collective:
1. I recently finished up bottling and conditioning two ten gallon batches of
beer -- one a Kolsch, and one an amber lager. I'm hoping the collective can help
me locate a "off flavor" in these two beers. The aftertaste on both have a high
unpleasant, almost phonolic sweet taste. I want to call this flavor "earthy" or
"sandy" -- I can't simply put my finger on it! I just don't like it.
Both used a "small" amount of Belgian Pils malt in the mash (5# for the Kolsch,
3# for the lager), both used a single decoction method, both used Boston Beer Co
(TM) Mittlefreu (sic) hops for flavor and aroma. The Kolsch used the Wyeast
Kolsch yeast, and the lager use the Bohemian Wyeast strain. Both used cold
fermentation about 58F for the Kolsch, and 44F for the lager.
This flavor has in the past appeared twice when I used pils malt. With these
two early batches my first inclination was that some low level infection had
occured. But now I'm thinking this can't be true since I would have seen this
sweet phonlic flavor appear in some of the 12 other batches of beer I've brewed.
So I'm inclined to think that I simply don't like the flavor of pils malt -- I
know of some folks who don't like the flavor of Munich malt for example -- but
perhaps there's simply a problem with my sparge, grind, etc. Any thoughts?
2. I have recently purchased two CARBONATORS (TM) for my two mini-keg taps. Now
I can use my CO2 regulator to drive the mini taps. Any suggestions on how high
I should set the regualtor?
Just as a final note to the mini-keg carbonation thread, I have a few years
expericence with both the plastic and metal mini taps. A few weeks ago, I was
loading a new charge into the plastic tap, and the damn thing sheared off right
in my hand!. The CO2 cartridge (16g) had already been pierced, so there was an
ear shattering hiss and tiny valve parts bounced off the walls of my basement
(fortunately none were driven into my hand). Be careful with those plastic mini
taps.
FWIW, my plastic mini tap appeared to hold a higher level of carbonation in the
keg than my metal tap, but both seemed to keep only a light amount of C0 in the
keg. The beer clearly flows better out of the metal tap. I'm using my minis
mostly for British beer where low carbonation is welcomed. I'm hoping to
attached (very securly) a CARBONATOR (TM) to whats left of the sheared mini and
use my CO2 system to drive it hereafter.
Private or Public responses welcomed.
Chas Peterson
charles.b.peterson@bell-atl.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 10:45:42 -0800 (PST)
From: Jeremy Ballard Bergsman <jeremybb@leland.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: O2-absorbing caps
Just a data point:
Last night I tasted a "red" ale that I brewed in June. It has now been in
the bottle almost 6 months. When bottling I randomly assigned regular
and O2-absorbing caps to the bottles. Last night I picked one of each
and compared them (as I have been doing for the last 6 months). Both
were somewhat oxidized, neither terribly so, and I have yet to find
a difference between them.
My biggest complaint with my own beer for a while has been oxidation.
I am only now starting to make more stable beers. I find that I am
rather sensitive to oxidation and it bothers me, so a solution would
be most welcome. I don't think these caps are it.
Jeremy Bergsman
jeremybb@leland.stanford.edu
http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~jeremybb/beerstuff/beerpage.html
------------------------------
Date: 26 Jan 96 14:37:19 EST
From: Lynn Ashley <73744.3234@compuserve.com>
Subject: Access to FAQs / Aeration
To: INTERNET:homebrew@hpfcmgw.fc.hp.com
I've seen several references to brewing FAQs here in the Digest.
Where can I access them? If possible, via ftp, since my web access
has been buggy lately.
Also I understand from someone who attempted to get HB Digests from
the archive that they are in some binary (compressed?) format with .Z
filename extensions. Are decoders available for PCs to read these .Z
files? Are the files available somewhere as ASCII text or PKZIP files.
__________________
A note on aeration: I use a hand-held blender to aerate. It is a
readily available kitchen tool with a motor in the handle and a set of
blender blades at the end of a wand. Its intended purpose is to blend
or emulsify sauces in their own cooking or storage container. When held
at an angle partly below the surface of the wort it will beat air into
the wort with such violence that foaming can be a problem. Proper
selection of angle and depth causes strong circulating currents which
look as though they probably go to the bottom of the fermenter.
Unfortunately I have no way to know how effective this method is compared
to others, but due to its violence, my guess is that it is at least
comparable.
And you can even disguise it a kitchen gadget (possible gift for the SO?).
__________________
Lynn.
|-------------------------------------------------------------|
| Lynn Ashley (lajiao ren) Arlington, Virginia, USA |
| 73744.3234@compuserve.com 38.904N 77.120W 105mAMSL |
|-------------------------------------------------------------|
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 18:18:38 -0500
From: Steve Alexander <stevea@clv.mcd.mot.com>
Subject: Bottle Carbonation/Charlie's Hot Lager
Sorry for the delayed response - I've been on business travel for the
past 9 days.
Kelly E. Jones is concerned about several issues of this experiment -
>2) As for the observation that the air-locked bottle completed in 6
>days, I would be hesitant to conclude this. We're used to considering
>a carboy as still fermenting when we see a bubble every few minutes.
>Consider that a carboy contains 20l of fermenting wort, a bottle
>only 300ml, so we would expect a bubbling rate from the bottle
>which is less than 1/60th that of a carboy. At this rate, the
>bottle's airlock bubbling could easily go unobserved, or washed out by
>the effect of varying atmospheric pressure. So I am guessing that
>your airlocked bottle also took over 20 days to fully finish
>fermenting, and did so at such a slow rate that airlock bubbling was
>not observable after 6 days.
The 'reference' airlocked bottle was an afterthought on my part, but
instead of counting bubbles, I observed the liquid level/position in
the an 'S' type airlock vs a marked position over a period of 30 to
60 minutes as fermentation slowed. Given this I'd be willing to
state that more than 90% (very conservative estimate) of the gas
vented thru the airlock during the first 6 days of fermentation. If
the same were true in the normal-fill capped bottles we would need
an explanation of why the CO2 presure & carbonation didn't build up
till around 9 days later!!
I freely admit subjectivity of the measurements, clearly with better
instrumentation we could obtain pressure, O2 and CO2 in solution and
in the headspace, SG, and perhaps a turbidity measurement - all vs
time; maybe larger samples, better controlled conditions as well.
It would be nice but it's not in my budget.
>experiments. While I have no reason to disbelieve Steve's
>observations, it would be hasty to take these results as the final
>truth, whether they support our theorys or not.
I totally agree here - it is necessary for someone to try to
reproduce these results independently. Verification under other HB
conditions is important. Note that my Beer under test contained
S.uvarum (Wyeast 2308). It would be nice to see additional
experimentation using ale yeasts. I've got lagers on my schedule
till the weather warms. I'd suggest just normal and underfilled
bottles as test points. The effort required to reproduce the
experiment is minimal for anyone who is planning to bottle anyway.
I still must say that regardless of the subjective measurement
method, that the carbonation level clearly was greater at an earlier
date as bottles were successively less filled. This result was
quite repeatable from bottle to bottle. The measurement was
subjective, but the result was about as incontrovertable as that
other subjective effect - dry-hopping imparting aroma and flavor.
What isn't at all clear is the mechanism and necessary conditions
for the early carbonation of underfilled bottles.
Also, with a bit more uncertainty, the result that fermentation at
~1ATM head pressure (the reference airlock bottle) completed well
ahead of the normal fill bottles. Certainly this needs a few more
data points as well.
Charlie Scandrett, whose posts are always fascinating and even
tantalizing as exemplified by his comment on the experiment which
reads ...
>Actually Steve's results have broad agreement with other research on this
>subject. G. Fix says that increasing CO2 pressure "tends to retard yeast
>metabolism", while quoting a paper,
>The Response of S. Cerevisiae to Fermentation under CO2 pressure",
>Arcay-Ledezma, J.C. Slaughter, "JIB", Vol 90, 1984.
>If anyone can find this article, please let me know!
>Commercially, increased CO2 pressure is used to retard diacytel and ester
>production in high temp lager fermentation. (18C)
The possibility of fermenting lagers at the higher temperature
indicated (18C=64F!) should excite homebrew lager fans like me who
are limited by the weather. Perhaps fermentation in a corny keg
with a pressure relief valve .... Charlie can you supply more
information on the method, pressures, the results, the biochemistry?
Stevea
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 20:44:36 -0500
From: denisb@CAM.ORG (Denis Barsalo)
Subject: Phil's Philler
Hello fellow brewers,
I got a Phil's Philler for Xmas and tried it out this week, here
are my comments and questions.
I used to use one of those plastic bottle fillers with the little
nipple on the end, I never had any problems with it and found that filling
bottles was quite easy. Now that I have Phil's Philler, I'm having to learn
how to fill bottles all over again. I have to learn when to stop the flow
so that when I remove the Philler from the bottle, I have the "right" head
space. I think I finally got it figured out by the 20th bottle or so! :-/
The *biggest* disadvantage I found is that Phil's is a hands on
situation, seeing how the filler is "spring loaded", you have to hold on to
it while filling the bottle! With the little plastic ones, I used to stick
it in the bottle, and do other stuff in the meantime while the bottle was
filling. (I use grolsch bottles, so usually I was busy putting the gasket
on the bottle I had just filled while the next one was filling, or taking
out another couple of bottles from the dishwasher.)
Can anyone tell me if I can reach into the top of Phil's Philler
and rip out the spring? Will it still work with only gravity (like the
cheap plastic ones)? If it won't work without the spring, can I put in a
weaker spring that will give under the weight of the Philler?
Seeing how this was a gift, I feel like I should use it and not
abuse it! :-) Any advice or comments are welcome.
BTW, I bought myself, as a one year brewing anniversary present,
Phil's Phittings so I can build *my own* CF chiller. I've been borrowing
one from a buddy for the last couple of batches and now I feel like I can't
brew without it! Maybe for my birthday, I'll get Phil's Spraging Arm!
Don't worry, brew happy!
Denis Barsalo
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 96 22:27 CST
From: arf@mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: Sparge Temp, Blowoff
>From: Mark Riley <mriley@netcom.com>
Subject: *Why* is Blow Off Silly?
>With all due respect, it seems silly to slam the blowoff technique without
providing any reasons why it is inferior. I'd be interested in hearing
just a few (out of the "myriad").
Let me begin by suggesting that there are no real advantages to the
blowoff procedure. So considering that, probably 90% of new brewers
use the method, is just seems sort of silly, doesn't it.
Not sure how you define "myriad" but lets see where this gets us...
Cleaning out a carboy that was used for primary fermentation has got
to be number one on the list. Compare that to cleaning out a classic
7 gallon fermenter.
If the fermenter is steel, i.e., a brew kettle, sanitizing it requires no more
than boiling a bit of water in it for a few minutes.
In spite of the yucky taste, blowoff is beer. Worse yet, it is lost beer
that the blowoffer went to a lot of trouble and expense to produce.
After cleaning the carboy, you gotta clean the hose and the bucket.
Most folks put some sort of sterile solution in the bucket and probably
sanitize the bucket and tube in case of backup.
Skimming an open ferment is fun and zero beer is lost.
Skimming is also optional as I have yet to see anyone prove that leaving
in on the beer has any effect on the taste of the final beer. It tastes pretty
gross but when you drain the beer, it stays behind if you do it properly.
So if skimming is not really essential, what is the point in blow off in the
first place?
If you have an EASYMASHER on your kettle, you can sample the
beer as often as you wish during the fermentation.
If above, you do not need to mess with a syphon.
This may not ber myriad but it is rather silly and I quit.
js
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 1996 00:41:06 -0500
From: bob@harvey.carol.net (Robert Rogers)
Subject: re: heating bands for wort
i got a heating band and used it on my plastic fermenter.
it reached temperatures of 80 degrees F. maybe it has to do with the "handle
indents" , where it seems to get even hotter? Maybe it's defective
alcohol abuse: spilling it
bob rogers
bob@carol.net
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1947, 01/29/96
*************************************
-------
