Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1946
This file received at Hops.Stanford.EDU 1996/01/27 PST
HOMEBREW Digest #1946 Sat 27 January 1996
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor
Contents:
Question: Problem with beer attracting insects. ("David W. Boyd")
Competition: World Cup '96 ("Bob Regent")
Uncl: Honey wheat beer is too yeasty ("Calvin Perilloux")
Oxygenator (Guy Mason)
Stainless Paint mixers ("mike spinelli")
aluminum brewing kegs (Julio Canseco)
Summary: Cold Ale Fermentation (Russ Snyder)
Follow up to Q's (Steven Lichtenberg)
Blue Dog Ale recipe and Manzanillo (Rob Emenecker)
Yeast Energizer? (Nutrient?) (Rob Emenecker)
Blowing Off the Blow-off Method?? (Bill Rust)
trub ("Tracy Aquilla")
Re: Blow off fermentation (David Ard)
white beer (Alan P. Van Dyke)
re: Diacetyl (Eric W. Miller)
Mashing Potatoes! (Jim Cave)
Cancel (PEthen)
PET bottles - O2 permeability (Bob Waterfall)
Crashing Carboys / Doin' the carboy shuffle (Greg Hawley)
AC Power Controller Circuits (KennyEddy)
Hot break/Cold break (John Wilkinson)
Very high OG (Maxwell_McDaniel_at_PRISM)
The Valley Mill (919) 405-3632" <danz@edasich.rtp.semi.harris.com>
Plastics & Heat -- More Data (KennyEddy)
Bad Alcohol (Mike White)
******************************************************************
* 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, 24 Jan 1996 11:48:04 -0800
From: "David W. Boyd" <dwboyd@novia.net>
Subject: Question: Problem with beer attracting insects.
Greetings:
First I would like to thank everyone out there who contributes to
the news group and mailing list. This is the most open and informative
group of people I have ever encountered. It refreshing to have
a good signal to noise ratio on the net.
Now for a question:
I recently began having a problem with little flying knats (sic)
being attracted to my beer while fermenting. Heaven forbid I leave
an un-rinsed bottle on the counter. The exterminator said these can
be a problem in our area, and the county extension agent said that
as long as I am brewing I can expect them. If they just stayed
in my fermenting area (shower stall in spare bath) it wouldn't be
so bad but they have migrated to the kitchen and it is creating
problems with the spousal unit. I am real careful about cleaning
up after brewing and wiping up any spills or overflows. They appear
to be attracted to the gas given off through my airlock. I hate
to think what would happen if I used a blow-off tube and bucket.
Does anyone out there in the collective have any suggestions? I tried
hanging fly paper but they don't seem attracted to that.
On another note, thanks for all the good information on starters thats
been posted. I brewed a "Black Strap Ale" last weekend. Pitched a
2 Qt starter into 5 gal of 1.061 wort. Had massive fermentation and
krausen going in just over an hour.
- --
David W. Boyd Buy/Sell/Trade
EMAIL: dwboyd@novia.net New/Used
WEB: http://www.novia.net/~dwboyd Computer Equipment
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 22:53:12 -0800
From: "Bob Regent" <regent@hooked.net>
Subject: Competition: World Cup '96
World Cup of Beer '96
en-dem-ic\en-'dem-ik\adj 1: belonging or native to a particular
people or country 2: restricted or peculiar to a locality or region
Fellow Homebrewers,
In the spirit of recognizing the development of endemic styles of
beer, the Bay Area Mashers are proud to present the 2nd Annual World
Cup of Beer Homebrew Competition. The structure of this competit ion
has been designed to celebrate the complex interacti ons between the
environment, available natural resources, and local culture that
arise to form regionally distinct brewing styles. For instance, who
can argue that Moravian malted barley, Saaz hops, local soft water,
an enormous amount of human energy an d Bohemian spirit has not
fostered something worth emulating: Pilsner. To wit, we have
restricted this competition to a set of eight categories that
represent singular relationships between geograph y and the
development of distinctive beer styles. Those categories are:
American Ale, Bock, Bohemian Pilsner, English Bitter, Vienna Lager,
Dry Stout, Belgian Ales, and Scotch Strong Ale.
The World Cup of Beers is sanctioned by the American Homebrewers
Association, and is being sponsored by numerous West Coast beer
related businesses. Last years inaugural World Cup was a smashing
succ ess with over 150 entries and are expecting even a great er
turnout this time around ! The deadline for receiving entries is
March 9, 1996; final judging will be conducted March 24, at Ti Bacio
Ristorante in Oakland. The entire restaurant will be dedicate d to
providing an excellent environment for beer evaluat ion. All beers
will be refrigerated upon receipt, served at proper temperature and
judged by experienced judges. Ribbons and prizes will be awarded to
1st, 2nd and 3rd place finishers in each categor y. A special award
will be given to the Best of Show.
After final judging, we invite you to a party at the nearby
Barclay's Pub and Restaurant to celebrate all efforts and award the
winners. This will be an excellent opportunity to share homebrew
and i nteract with the professional and amateur brewers who ar e
reviving quality brewing in the Bay Area.
Please visit our world wide web site at
<http://www.hooked.net/users/regent/worldcup.htm> where you can
download complete rules, style guidelines and entry forms.
For those without web access, please email Bob Regent
<regent@hooked.net> and specify whether you want an information
package shipped via snailmail, text email, or email with a MS Word
6.0 attachmen t (specify encoding method if desired).
Experienced judges who are interested in participating should
contact David Klein <Klein@physics.Berkeley.edu> .
We look forward to receiving your entry and hope you'll join us to
celebrate the art and science of fine brewing in the home.
Sincerely,
Ray Francisco
Competition Coordinator
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 06:31:30 EST
From: "Calvin Perilloux" <dehtpkn9@ibmmail.com>
Subject: Uncl: Honey wheat beer is too yeasty
>From HBD 1944 regarding brewing the honey wheat beer...
> Well, I gave it a try and needless to say, I did not get what I
> expected. It has a very pronounced Yeasty flavor, and is over
> carbonated... Cooled and pitched at 78 F, with Wyeast Liquid
> yeast, (Bavarian Wheat Yeast).
You've just brewed a Bavarian Wheat Beer, albeit one with honey in it,
thus running afoul of the Reinheitsgebot police, and with the high temp
ferment *and* Bavarian Wheat Yeast, you have also run afoul of your
wife's (and your) expectation of an American honey wheat. You mentioned
Boulevard Wheat from KS, and I'm trying to remember what that was like,
but it was four years and 3000 beers ago. Most American wheats are
subdued compared to the Bavarian ones, so I'll assume you want the
subdued American profile.
The Bavarian yeast you used probably stays in suspension more than other
yeast (I have no data sheets here in front of me to confirm) because
Bavarian wheat beer is often served cloudy (Naturtru:b, auf Deutsch),
and that suspended yeast will give you more yeasty flavor than you want.
I suspect that you're also finding really high levels of phenols if your
fermentation if up in the 70's where you pitched the yeast, especially
since the Bavarian strain is designed for phenol (clove aroma)
production.
I propose for your next try (never, ever give up!) that you use a more
conventional yeast but the same ingredients and see if that comes out the
way you want it. Back in the States, I brewed wheat beers with both the
Bavarian and other yeasts, and the other-yeast-brews were often preferred
by my friends; the true Weissbier flavor is very distinctive, often too
distinctive for a lot of people.
Calvin Perilloux "Bayerisches Bier,
dehtpkn9@ibmmail.com Staerker als Heimweh"
Erding, Germany
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 07:20:42 -0500
From: Guy Mason <guy@matrixNet.com>
Subject: Oxygenator
Greetings ,
Has anyone tried the Oxygenator from Liquid Bread? It looks like a
great
way to aerate but I'd like to hear from current users before parting
with
any cash.
Thanks
- --
o o
\ / M A T R I X
o--o
/ \ O Guy Mason voice: 203-944-2020x190
o \ / guy@matrixNet.com fax: 203-944-2022
O--O--O
/ \ MATRIX, 2 Trap Falls Road, Shelton, CT 06484
O O
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 07:29:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: "mike spinelli" <paa3983@dpsc.dla.mil>
Subject: Stainless Paint mixers
I just recieved a catalog from Industrial Safeety in Ohio (1-800-537-9721)
on pg 157 they have 304 stainless steel (no paint finish) mixers in various
sizes. Stock # 03443 has a 1/4" shaft for use w/ electric drill and a
30" length for $19.41. Standard disclaimer.
Mike in Cherry Hill NJ
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 96 08:28:21 EST
From: Julio Canseco <JCANSECO@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU>
Subject: aluminum brewing kegs
I am trying to get a beer keg and convert it to a mash/lauter/boil/etc.
kettle. I haven't been successful finding a S.S. keg, however aluminum
kegs are no problem to come by. Has anybody used them? Are the a suitable
alternative to S.S.? Post or e-mail OK. TIA
julio canseco
jcanseco@uga.cc.uga.edu
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 09:19:57 -0500
From: Russ Snyder <rsnyder@LANDO.HNS.COM>
Subject: Summary: Cold Ale Fermentation
Let me first thank everyone who responded to my request for help with my
problem of a stuck ale fermentation due to low tempurature. It is good to
know that there are so many helpful (and clever) folks out there. The
suggestions fell into two catagories as follows:
Catagory 1) How to maintain a higher tempurature (65-75 deg. F)
Putting the fermenter in a warm water bath
Wrapping fermenter in an electric blanket
I have a very small cabinet down there (basement) that is about
3'x3'x5', just the right size to put a carboy in. I got a plastic milk
crate and
suspended a worklight inside it so it faced downward, and put a 40 watt
bulb in it. I sat the crate on the floor and the carboy on top, turned the
light on and shut the cabinet. Leaving the light on 24 hours the cabinet
has stabilized at about 68-70 deg., jsut right for ales. (I especially
liked this one --RS)
Use a "Brew Belt" available at homebrew shops. (Mine had it, but I
didn't buy one)
Use a heating pad set under the fermenter set on low heat, put a towel
between the heating pad and the fermenter if it gets too hot.
Catagory 2) Alternate yeasts that work at lower temps. (I had used Edme dry
ale yeast)
Wyeast's German Ale yeast at 55 degrees
Wyeast #1056 (Chico ale strain) works well at 55-70 deg.F
The Wyeast Calif. lagar strain (?#) might be a good choice if you want
to pitch a lagar yeast and maintain a lower temp.; it is somewhat
fruity, which should complement your ale
The California Common Lager strain will be good up to around 65 deg
Yes, Wyeast Kolsch yeast (#?) is technically an ale yeast I believe, but I
have a batch fermenting now at 56F. This is a highly attenuative strain,
and is said to ferment cleanly with a slightly yeasty flavor. My first
batch with it is in bottles but not ready to drink yet.
Well, the solution I chose was to place a 30 gal. garbage bag over the
fermenter (with a hole cut out for the air lock) and fit the bag over the
heat register. When the heat came on it would blow warm air into the bag,
thus heating the wort to a good temp. As I metioned in my post, we have a
heat pump so the air coming out of the register is only about 70 deg. F, so
it took a while to start bubbling, but it did.
I had to move the fermenter into my bedroom to do this, much to my wife's
delight...NOT. Nothing like being lulled to sleep by the bubbling sound of
active fermentation and the aroma of hops.
Finally, one responder mentioned that he had had problems with Edme dry
yeast being dead and never activating. Mine kicked in once the temp was
raised a bit, but I thought I'd pass that along. Anyone else have a similar
experience?
Sorry this was so long, but I though others may benefit from the info.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 09:19:55 -0500 (EST)
From: Steven Lichtenberg <steve@inet.ttgva.com>
Subject: Follow up to Q's
Greetings all-
a few weeks ago, I posted requesting info on _FAUCET_ locks (thanks Al
for clarifying the terminology). This is a follow up to that request.
Many people responded with the info I asked for (Rapids, Foxx etc). The
prices quoted from these vendors ranged from $30-$45 depending on exactly
what you were looking for. Some people suggested a slightly different
approach; that being a cut off valve on the beer line just behind the
nipple. These run around $20. there were some low tech solutions as
well. One suggestion was to simply remove the beer out line from the keg
and put refrigerator locks on the outside of the reefer.
The solution I
finally came up with is a modification on something suggested by John
DeCarlo (thanks John, and no I didn't make it to the BURP meeting
afterall. Too much shoveling that weekend ;-)). He suggested somehow using
plexiglass to build a cage around
the faucet heads. This got me thinking (I know, don't play with matches).
I finally ended up with an interesting solution. I took a piece of 3"
PVC pipe about 8" long and cut a notch in it to accomodate the shank of
the faucet. This completely covers the faucet. I then drilled a hole
through the pipe near the bottom. Through the hole goes a piece of 3/8"
all thread with holes drilled at either end. I put small key locks
through the holes in the all thread and was done. Total cost $0 as all
the parts were leftovers from other projects. If you had to buy
materials at the hardware store, I can't imagine it would cost more than
$10 tops.
Hope this can be of use to someone out there. It just reinforces my
perception of this forum as one of the best resources available to a
great hobby.
**** ---- "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, 25 Jan 96 09:34:20 PST
From: Rob Emenecker <remenecker@cadmus.com>
Subject: Blue Dog Ale recipe and Manzanillo
Just two quick questions...
#1--Does anyone have a recipe for Blue Dog Ale? I am passing this request
along for a fellow homebrewer that does not have net access.
#2--My SO and I will be travelling to Manzanillo, Mexico in early March.
Does anyone have any info about local breweries to tour, REAL Mexican beer
to try while there, or other fun stuff (food, wine and beer related that
is)?
TIA
- --Rob
****************************************************************************
| (remenecker@cadmus.com) | (RobEmnckr@aol.com) |
| Cadmus Journal Services, Inc. | Brewery Manager, Standing Rock Brewery |
| Linthicum, Maryland 21090 | Proud Purveyors of "Hairy Dog Homebrew"! |
| 410-691-6454 / 684-2793 (fax) | (410) 859-9169 (voice only) |
****************************************************************************
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 96 09:57:57 PST
From: Rob Emenecker <remenecker@cadmus.com>
Subject: Yeast Energizer? (Nutrient?)
Last night I decided to make up a case of one quart starters. I used the
recipe from Dave Miller's Handbook and stumbled over one part of the recipe.
The recipe calls for a teaspoon of Yeast Energizer for a 3.5 gallon batch of
starter solution. My local homebrew store carried Yeast Nutrient which I
assumed to be the same thing. The Yeast Nutrient was labelled as food grade
urea and ammonia phosphate (or maybe ammonium phosphate... I don't have the
bottle in hand). Also, the yeast nutrient was labelled to use 1 teaspoon per
gallon. Are they the same thing?
As I was getting the wort to a boil I realized that neither the bottle of
Yeast Nutrient nor Dave's book indicate WHEN to add the *stuff* (please
excuse the 50 cent techno words). Given that Dave's recipe said 1 teaspoon
for approx. 3 gallons and the jar said 1 teaspoon per gallon, I went with
the average.... 1-1/2 teaspoon for 3 gallons. (Okay, so it is not exactly
the average, by the time I get home from work my brain hurts and does not
always function properly.) I figured that for the purpose of starters it
wouldn't hurt throwing it into to boil, afterwhich I worried about the urea
and/or ammonium phosphate breaking down in the boil.
NEED MORE INPUT! (Number 5 from the movie Short Circuit)
- --Rob
****************************************************************************
| (remenecker@cadmus.com) | (RobEmnckr@aol.com) |
| Cadmus Journal Services, Inc. | Brewery Manager, Standing Rock Brewery |
| Linthicum, Maryland 21090 | Proud Purveyors of "Hairy Dog Homebrew"! |
| 410-691-6454 / 684-2793 (fax) | (410) 859-9169 (voice only) |
****************************************************************************
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 10:14:22 -0500
From: Bill Rust <wrust@csc.com>
Subject: Blowing Off the Blow-off Method??
OK, so what's the beef??
Mark Riley asks in HBD #1944
>*Why* is Blow Off Silly?
>>*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").
Then in HBD #1944 Jack added...
>It is a giant leap backwards.
>
>Carboys make great secondary fermenters for beer or wine but they
>are the wrong tool for primary and using them with blowoff technique
>is like trying to make a silk purse out of a sows ear.
[snip]
>Aside from that, I have no strong feelings one way or the other.
That's interesting that you have no strong feelings, but apparently you felt
compelled to respond at least twice to the same issue. It would perhaps be
more helpful to include a reason or two why, instead of the cute sound byte.
By way of sparking some discussion, I've done the procedure twice and I can
tell you the following...
Pro: you don't have to skim because the trub gets blown out with the excess
foam.
Pro: It lets you have the benefit of skimming without opening your closed
fermenter (for those of you worried about that sort of thing).
Con: It's a major PITA to clean out your hose and carboy when your done.
-------------------------------------------------------
Bill Rust, Master Brewer |
Jack Pine Savage Brewery | Im Himmel es gibt kein bier,
Shiloh, IL (NACE) | War es wir trinken hier!
-------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 96 10:25:39 CST
From: "Tracy Aquilla" <aquilla@salus.med.uvm.edu>
Subject: trub
In Digest #1944:
jfrane@teleport.com (Jeff Frane) wrote:
[snip]
>A few years ago, there was a little fracas on r.c.b. about
>whether "yeast trub" was appropriate; fortunately, the forces
>of Light seem to have won that one and it would be good
>if people were more precise. There is, after all, a real
>vocabulary associated with brewing and it's not up to
>homebrewers to corrupt it.
Would it be OK to call it 'yeast sediment'? Isn't trub German for sediment?
As usual, I'm in the dark.
Tracy
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 09:34:27 -0600 (CST)
From: David Ard <davidard@mmc.mtmercy.edu>
Subject: Re: Blow off fermentation
I recently re-read Noonan's recommendations on primary fermentation in
the carboy with a blow off tube. I know that Papazian also recommends
it. Over the years I have tried almost everything, and I return to using
a 7.5 gal. plastic fermenter with lid and air lock for the primary, and
then rack it to a 5 gal. carboy after the head falls for the last days of
fermentation and settling of yeast. Over 23 years of brewing I have
found this to be the easiest method and I have never had a problem that I
could discern in the beers I have made. I believe that the homebrewer
should use his or her ability to taste something as a criterion for
judging the quality of the brewing techniques. We have different
abilities in this area, but while I brew for quality and variety as well
as cost, I am the primary drinker of my beers.
Noonan recommend having sterile water or wort handy to top up
the fermenter (he recommends a 5 gal. carboy, not the 6.5 gal.).
I have always thought this would dilute the beer (using water) or add
more fermentables (using sterile wort), which would have uncertain
effects of continuing the fermentation. The biggest problem I encountered
using this method was the loss of wort through the blow off tube. I
understand that this method blows off material that could leave undesirable
flavors, but again, I have not been able to taste them.
The other problem I found with the blow off method was cleaning the
tube and the carboy. The plastic primary fermenter cleans very easily,
while the carboy and tube does not.
It is very easy to splash the wort from the boiler into the plastic
fermenter in order to provide sufficient oxygen for the yeast to grow,
but because of the head that forms, this is not very practical in the
carboy.
My only caution in using the plastic primary with the airlock, is to
avoid lifting it and sucking whatever is in the airlock into the wort.
Though I have done this more than once, and I always use a light
chlorine solution, again I have never tasted a problem. I do try to
avoid this however.
There is a CO2 cover over the wort as it ferments since CO2 is
heavier than oxygen, so you can look, but always be minimal about this
do avoid potential infections.
What I am amazed about is how forgiving brewing is for people like
me who just have a hard time being the kind of brewer Noonan writes
about. If I had no experience and had not made hundreds of batches of
beer over the years that were really good, and had read his book first,
I would have been really afraid that I could not do it.
Finally, I have also found that there are many ways to brew and many
systems, processes, and methods with different equipment. Rather than
develop negative attitudes towards other people's ways, it would be far
better to learn, experiment, and find that which we can be most
comfortable with, and always be willing to change.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 09:29:47 -0600
From: alan@mail.utexas.edu (Alan P. Van Dyke)
Subject: white beer
Howdy!
In HBD 1943, Mike Taber queried about white beers. I can let you know that
Celis uses a house yeast that he's very particular about keeping to himself
(even though some have claimed to have pilfered some). However, I
understand that WYeast Bavarian Wheat works satisfactorily. Also, Celis
uses Willamette hops in Celis White. I don't know what other professional
brewers use, but, IMHO, none of them really rate the same as Celis ;-).
Also, Celis uses unmalted winter wheat (from Luckenbach!), which will
definitely make the beer rather pale. If I remember correctly, it's 50-50
wheat/barley. When Celis was brewing Hoegaarden, he also had about 5% oats
in the mash, but has given it up here in the States. Of course, you should
make your beer the way -you- want to make it, & not the way someone else
does, but I hope this helps in pointing you into the right direction.
Alan Van Dyke Austin, TX alan@mail.utexas.edu
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 11:02:01 -0500
From: ac051@osfn.rhilinet.gov (Eric W. Miller)
Subject: re: Diacetyl
Al writes:
|Andy writes:
|>This thread has made me wonder that perhaps the open fermentation has a
|>significant contribution to the high levels of diacetyl in the lager.
|>But why not the bock?
|
|Could they be using different yeasts for the lager and the bock? Some
|yeasts simply make a lot more diacetyl than others.
I seem to remember reading that all yeast *produce* similar levels of
diacetyl at the onset of fermentation. The difference is that as the
ferment subsides, they *reduce* the diacetyl at different rates.
So it's possible that they are using the same lager yeast for both the
generic "lager" and the bock. If the bock is aged much longer than the
lager, the yeast will have much more time to reduce the diacetyl level
in the beer.
Na zdrowie,
Eric in Newport, RI
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 8:25:15 -0800 (PST)
From: Jim Cave <CAVE@PSC.ORG>
Subject: Mashing Potatoes!
Has anyone out there tried mashing potatoes? Sorry! Has anyone
tried adding mashed potatoes to their mash? There! Thats better!
My father related to me that when he was over in England during the
war, the country dabbled with making potato beer. I suspect that they were
adding potatoes to the mash. Dad said it was very tasty stuff, but extremely
potent. He said that they ended up banning it and that he witnessed the
publicans taking several casks of the stuff and breaking them open onto the
lawn. Turned the grass yellow apparently. It might seem like a tall storey
but dad wasn't given to telling tales.
I would imagine that adding potatoes to the mash would result in a
fairly thin beer. A strong beer might taste fairly ordinary and weak.
Jim Cave
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 11:45:27 -0500
From: PEthen@aol.com
Subject: Cancel
HEY! Didn't I cancel this?!!??
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 12:23:04 -0500 (EST)
From: waterr@rpi.edu (Bob Waterfall)
Subject: PET bottles - O2 permeability
Rolland Everitt says in hbd 1944:
>I am going to risk electronic ostracism by reviving the thread on
>PET (polyethylene) bottles.
PET is polyethylene terephthalate, a different substance that is over 100
times less permeable to gases in general than polyethylene (PE).
>The general wisdom seems to be that PET bottles may be OK for
>short-term (a few weeks) storage of beer, but that they are
>unsuitable for long-term storage because they are somewhat
>permeable to oxygen. This explanation leads inevitably to the
>question "if they can't keep O2 out, how do they keep CO2 in?" I
>believe I recall an explanation that involved the comparitive
>partial pressures of the gasses inside and outside the bottle.
CO2 does escape. The question is whether the rate of CO2 escape or the rate
of O2 infiltration affects the beer more.
>This never quite made sense to me, but I accepted it. Recently,
Since I got a C in my Mass Transfer course oh so many years ago, it
apparently didn't make a lot of sense to me either.
>however, I ran across some interesting data in _Food Science_, by
>Norman Potter (AVI, 1978). Potter presents several tables on the
>physical characteristics of packaging films. The data of interest
>were attributed to _Modern Plastics Encyclopedia Issue_ (McGraw-
>Hill, 1976). The permeability of low-density polyethylene to
>various gasses was given as follows.
>
> gas transmission
> cc/100 Sq. In./24 Hr/
> gas mil at 25 C.
>
> O2 500
> N2 180
> CO2 2700
>
>My source did not discuss the test method. It would be nice to
>know the thicknesses of test specimens, and the pressure (or
>partial pressure) differentials across them. All the same, the
>data suggest that polyethylene is much more permeable to CO2 than
>to O2. Also, if my understanding of partial pressures is correct,
>the partial pressure differential for CO2 (in a bottle of
>carbonated beer) is greater than for O2 - so how come O2 can get
>in, but CO2 can't get out?
You're absolutely right about that. If the above data was derived from an
experiment using the same partial pressure differences for all the gases, it
shows that LDPE is about 5.4 times as permeable to CO2 as it is to O2.
(Data quoted by SEAN O'KEEFE in hbd 1632 shows that the CO2/O2 permeability
ratio for PET is 3). Using O'Keefe's permeability ratio of 3 and solubility
data for O2 and CO2 in water (Perry & Chilton Chemical Engineer's Handbook
5th Ed. shows CO2 to be about 40 times as soluble as O2 in water), I figured
out the following:
By the time you lose 10% of your CO2 pressure (and its dissolved CO2), your
dissolved O2 level will reach about 0.3 ppm. I assumed a PET bottle
pressurized to 3 atm. and no dissolved O2 at bottling, Henry's Law applies,
and probably some other things.
I did not figure out how long it will take because of lots of assumptions
I'd need to make about surface area of the bottle, amount of headspace, etc.
For all I know it could take years for that much diffusion to take place. I
figure the 10% CO2 loss might be starting to get noticeable as a loss of
carbonation. Will 0.3 ppm of dissolved O2 ruin my beer?
Bob Waterfall <waterr@rpi.edu>,
Troy, NY, USA
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 12:04:23 -0600 (CST)
From: Greg Hawley <gregh@plexus.com>
Subject: Crashing Carboys / Doin' the carboy shuffle
As "mike spinelli" <paa3983@dpsc.dla.mil> said:
> 1 Fill carboy w/ wort cover top w/ plastic wrap, cover w/ my hand
> and shake the SHIT outta it for about 5 minutes.
BE CAREFUL. I had finished washing my 5 gallon carboy after my last
ferment. I put a plastic bag over the top of the carboy, wrapped a rubber
bad around the sandwich bag covering the top, and carried it down to my
basement for storage. I had my bottling bucket in the other hand. When I
got to the basement, I was using the end of the bottling bucket to push
some stuff out of the way (so I could put the bucket down).
I was paying too much attention to the bucket and not enough attention to
the carboy. A few seconds later I was left holding a sandwich bag. The
carboy fell to the cement floor, made amazing crashing sound, and broke
into thousands of glass shards. Despite not having shoes on, I was
unscathed -- I WAS LUCKY. The good thing of the whole story is now I have
a 6 gallon carboy with a carboy handle. I bought a new one.
BE CAREFUL. You could send yourself to the hospital before you realized
anything wrong had even happened!
Greg.Hawley@plexus.com, (414) 751-3285
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 14:10:31 -0500
From: KennyEddy@aol.com
Subject: AC Power Controller Circuits
Presented here, for demonstration and educational purposes only, are two
approaches to AC power control for such applications as heating elements
and motors.
Reader assumes all risks and damages resulting from constructing and/or
using circuits discussed here!
Now that that's overwith...
Hi/Lo Power Switch
==================
If an AC load merely requires "HI/LO" power control (100% and 50%), a
very simple approach is to use a diode (rectifier) to "block" half of
the current going to the load. Halve the current and you halve the
power. A suitable circuit is shown here using sad and weak ASCII "art"
(best viewed with a fixed-pitch font such as Courier, and perhaps
with glasses):
---SWITCH---
| |
0---------------*--DIODE---*--------------0
120/240 VAC LOAD
0-----------------------------------------0
The diode can be installed without regard to polarity; a heat sink is
recommended as the rectifier will dissipate several watts with a 20A
load (up to 4500W load at 240V). The switch is a simple wall switch. When
closed,
full power is applied to the load. When open, half-power is delivered.
Basic Adjustable AC Power Controller
====================================
Following is a schematic for a "basic" adjustable AC power controller:
---------------------------**================*============
| || | ||
| (Left Terminal) || | ||
/ || / ----
\ 500k Linear Pot ||(MT) \ Outlet
/ ----------- / ---- (to load)
\ <-- (Center /\ \\// Triac \ ||
/ | Terminal) //\\ \/ 600V / 100 ||
\ | ----------- 25A \ ohm ||
| |>| (G)/ ||(MT) | ||
----*------| |---------/ || | ||
| |<| || --- 0.1uF ||
--- SBS or || --- 400V ||
--- Diac || | ========
| 0.1uF / 400V || | 120/240 VAC
---------------------------**================*==================
\___22 AWG OK \__14 AWG or Heavier Required
It's nothing fancy but it is effective. The capacity of the unit is
dictated by the triac; it MUST be a 400V or higher (600V shown) voltage
rated device to be used with 240VAC. The current-rating is dictated by
your maximum load and can be determined by dividing the load power by the
line voltage (add a couple amps to be safe). The triac will dissipate
power (watts) equal to about 1.7 times the current (so at 20A this means
34 watts!!); the triac MUST be mounted to a suitable heat sink and/or
even fan-cooled. Inadequate heat removal would result in destruction of
the triac and possibly a fire!
The resistor and capacitor circuit on the right is a "snubber" to
control the triac when driving inductive loads and will therefore enable
the circuit to be used as a motor (or pump) speed controller. Note that
motor torque may suffer at slow speeds in some cases.
Use of an "isolated" triac affords best safety. Non-isolated triacs
have an electrically-live case which means an electrically-live heat
sink would result when it's mounted. This is a shock hazard. Isolated
triac cases are electrically dead and thus safer for mounting to an
exposed panel or other heat sink. BTW the "gate" terminal (the one at
an angle on the schematic) is on the right as one views the triac with
the leads "down" and the metal tab to the rear. The other two terminals
are "main terminals" and are interchangable. The other components can be
installed without regard to polarity. As for the pot, when viewing from
the shaft, wiring to the center and left terminals results in increasing
power with clockwise rotation, as desired. The right terminal would be
left unconnected. An insulative plastic knob would be a great safety
feature.
Note that the wiring from the wall to the outlet, from the outlet to the
triac, and from the triac back to the wall MUST be heavy-gauge (14 AWG
or heavier) to support high currents. These wires are drawn with "==="
and "||" characters. The rest of the wiring which includes the snubber
and the pot/cap/diac circuits are low-current and can be 22 AWG hookup
wire.
The controller is happy with 120 or 240 volts and either 50 or 60 cycle
current.
If a low-voltage SBS/Diac (<= 10V) is used, the circuit is essentially a
"zero-turn-on" controller which will minimize or eliminate RFI
interference (as is often manifested by "static" on the radio when cheap
dimmers are used). Using a typical 30-40 volt Diac would work but with
increased interference. This won't hurt anything; it's just annoying if
it screws up the radio or TV.
Inexperience experimenters would be well-advised to seek the help of a
trained technician if they desired to build one of these circuits.
Great care in assembly, test, and use is required. Testing the circuit
using 120V and a light bulb for the load would allow observation of the
power control effect by the relative brightness of the bulb, as well as
avoiding operation of a potentially erroneous circuit at the higher
voltage.
If one were inclined to build such circuits they might find the parts
are available from Digi-Key and other sources:
(800)DIGIKEY
http://www.digikey.com
No minimum order but $5 handling
charge is added to orders under $25
Simple Hi/Low Control:
Diode MBR2045CT-ND $3.61
Heat Sink HS114-ND $0.34
Switch (wall switch)
Basic Power Controller:
Triac Q6025L6-ND $6.12
10V SBS HS-10-ND $0.68
500K Pot CT2210-ND $2.60
0.1uF Cap E4104-ND $0.51 (2 req'd)
Heat Sink HS117-ND $6.66 (may require drilling)
I have no affiliation with Digi-Key; I have ordered from them many times
and have been pleased with their service. Prices are from catalog #961
Jan/Feb '96. If one lives in a large community, they could check the
yellow pages for "Electronic Equip & Supls" to see if there's a local parts
seller who caters to the repair industry. These places often deal in
"replacement" lines such as "ECG", so one may be able to get these parts
locally. Radio Shack *might* be able to special-order these parts too.
The triac given above is a Teccor Q6025L6; a more univeral
number for finding a "replacement" part is MAC223A8FP (MAC223A8 without
the "FP" is the "non-isolated" version and should be avoided or at least
used carefully!). The SBS can be a replacement for the Teccor HS-10 or
for Motorola MBS4992 or MBS4993. The Motorola parts have three leads; the
center lead can be left unconnected (and trimmed), or connected to the
other two terminals through two 22K resistors.
Ken Schwartz
El Paso, TX
KennyEddy@aol.com
Yogi Berra - "Always go to other people's funerals, otherwise they won't
come to yours."
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 14:02:03 -0600
From: John Wilkinson <jwilkins@imtn.tpd.dsccc.com>
Subject: Hot break/Cold break
I have read much about the need to get rid of the hot break material and
perhaps the cold break but how do I know what is hot break, what is cold
break, and what is other? How do I get rid of hot break or cold break?
I currently cool my wort, scoop out hop matter if using plugs, let it settle
to clear then siphon off the clear part trying to avoid as much of the
cloudy sediment as possible. I have assumed that the hot and cold break
would be in this cloudy sediment and therefore I would be avoiding most of
both. Is this true?
Also, I strain out as much of the hops and any other sediment as I can but have
been asked if this affects hop flavor in the beer. I don't know that, either.
Is it desirable to leave hop residue in the wort going to the fermenter?
Thanks,
John Wilkinson
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 96 14:37:33 cdt
From: Maxwell_McDaniel_at_PRISM@mail.prisminfo.com
Subject: Very high OG
Hi all, it's my first post to this list so please go easy on me. Last nite
I was rushing to finish a batch of IPA before the little woman got home
because I had promised her dinner would be ready. But that's another
story...
Anyway, I'm brewing the Brew Free or Die IPA from the Cats Meow and my OG
came out at 1.110. What the heck did I do? I can't figure it out... I
assume it's supposed to be a 5 gallon batch... BTW, I checked it this
morning and so far no activity.
Is my yeast gonna convert all this stuff?
TIA
Maxwell
"Insert great beer quote here with obscure musical reference tied in"
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 96 15:43:51 EST
From: "George Danz (919) 405-3632" <danz@edasich.rtp.semi.harris.com>
Subject: The Valley Mill
I saw this mill advertized on p. 24 of Zymergy Winter, '95 issue. It looks
big, it looks good, but looks aren't everything. Has anyone bought one of
these and if so, what's the consensus? I already have a Glatt mill which
works fine, even w/ a 3/8 drill driving it. My only complaint and it aint
a big one is that it could be a bit faster as my friend and I do 2 10gal.
batches on a single brewday.
The Valley Mill looks like it might crank out the grain a bit faster and
w/less fiddling with hopper filling.
Best Regards,
George E. Danz Snail Mail Address:
gdanz@harris.com PO Box 13996
(919)405-3632 Work Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
(919)405-3651 FAX
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 16:01:37 -0500
From: KennyEddy@aol.com
Subject: Plastics & Heat -- More Data
A couple more data points realtive to the "plastic brewery" concept:
According to the "Engineering Manual" and corroborated by "Mark's
Standard Handbook for Mechanical Engineers" (both McGraw-Hill
publications), the following heat-related properties apply to the
plastics listed:
Plastic Max Svc Heat Dist
======= ======= =========
HDPE 250 250
Polypropylene 275-300 130
PVC (rigid) 150-165 140-170
PVC (flexible) 150-220 140-170
Hi-Impact ABS 150 185-215
all figures are degrees F (boiling = 212F at sea level)
"Max SVC" is the "maximum continuous service temperature" or the maximum
recommended temperature that the plastic should be continuouosly exposed
to. "Heat Dist" is the "heat distortion temperature" at which the
plastic becomes soft enough to deform.
I read this to mean that these plastics will increase in *flexibility*
approaching the "Heat Dist" temperature but will retain their strength
and integrity up to that point. This is consistent with E-mail I have
received telling of "soft" buckets which otherwise performed well.
My tentative conclusion after seeing these figures is that HDPE (high-
density polyethylene) should be adequate for use as a boiler; obviously,
thicker material will experience less "flexibility" than thinner
material, but meltdowns and warpage should not be a problem with
anything but the thinnest material. However, as a precaution, a hot
boiler should never be lifted or moved until it has cooled at least to
hot tap water temperature, and boiling should be done in an area where
an accidental meltdown would be containable. This temperature data does
not take into account any high heat conducted through the element base
to the bucket, just the temperature of the water (212F or less). Again,
anecdotal eveidence suggests this is not a problem either.
Ken Schwartz
El Paso, TX
KennyEddy@aol.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 16:53:18 -0600
From: mike@datasync.com (Mike White)
Subject: Bad Alcohol
On 23 Jan 96 Aesoph, Michael wrote:
>Dear Collective:
> A freind of mine mentioned that the addition of certain substances
>to any fermenting beverage could produce Methyl alcohol. If I recall
>correctly, this is the poisonous variety. He specifically mentioned
>potatoes, other vegetables and certain grains. Is this true, or is he
>full of nonsense?
Methyl alcohol (methanol) is made by charring wood in a closed, oxygen free
container. So as long as you don't pressure cook your wort at over 450
degrees with sticks in it, you're safe.
By the way, vodka was originally made from potatoes.
I suppose it is POSSIBLE that some minute amount of methyl alcohol could be
produced by fermentation as a by product...but I can't believe that there
could possibly be enough produced to harm anyone.
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Thought for the day:
If you drink and drive, you might as well smoke also.
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Mike White
mike@datasync.com
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1946, 01/27/96
*************************************
-------
