Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1973
This file received at Hops.Stanford.EDU 1996/03/01 PST
HOMEBREW Digest #1973 Fri 01 March 1996
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor
Contents:
Don't fudge that data (GREGORY KING)
re: Subject: Mash Questions ("Gregg A. Howard")
Diacetyl - is it really a noun? (Bob McCowan)
chillin' (Dan McConnell)
Porter Recipes (Glenn Raudins)
Hudson Valley Homebrew Competition? (Brad Anesi)
re: Stuck Fermentation (Brian Pickerill)
HB Magazines ("John P. Linton")
Botulinum (Paul.Lambie)
polyphenols (tannins) and silicates (Steve Alexander)
depth of grainbed (Rob Lauriston)
Yeast Information Seeked. ("Roger A. Becker")
The Tao of Mash Temps?? ("Kenneth D. Joseph")
Lactobacilli from malt grain (Steve Alexander)
Stuck Tea Conversion and Break (Russell Mast)
Ready-made RIMS & pump motor controllers? (KennyEddy)
German vs. American Wheat Styles (Mark Peacock)
DWC Special B / Keg Leaks (Rob Reed)
Re: Kegging 101, Lagering--time and S.G. (Jim Dipalma)
isinglass (Jeff Struman)
Going to Oklahoma City ("Nathan L. Kanous II")
removal of name f/ list (Lewis Alexander)
FW: removal of name f/ list (Lewis Alexander)
Kegging 101 - gas leak (Robert Rogers)
jack daniel's oak aged pilsner (Robert Rogers)
Superbrau extract (t.duchesneau)
How to Clean Bottles (and Why Not to) (John W. Braue, III)
Re:European Brewery Tours. (Johan H\dggstr\vm)
Storage of yeast. ("Braam Greyling")
bottling laments (TMCASTLE)
Almond flavor ("Kirk Harralson")
******************************************************************
* 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, 28 Feb 1996 11:34:36 -0500 (EST)
From: GREGORY KING <GKING@ARSERRC.Gov>
Subject: Don't fudge that data
John W. Braue, III (braue@ratsnest.win.net) wraps up his answer to
CASteveB@aol.com's question about the measurement of specific gravities
with:
>Moral: measure carefully, mix thoroughly, and ensure that your
>hydrometer is calibrated correctly. If you still don't get the
>right answer, assume that you did anyway. Brewing is technology
>and art, not science; it's perfectly alright to fudge the data if
>that gives a better result.
John is much too quick in dismissing the role of science in brewing
(especially since he gave such a nice scientific explanation for Steve's
apparent problem!).
Measuring ingredients carefully, taking careful instrument readings,
and recording one's procedures all fall within the category of "The
Scientific Method", and are done with the idea of being able to repro-
duce the results of a particular brew session at a later time (as much
as this is possible in homebrewing) or to do some post-mortem trouble-
shooting if something happens to go wrong along the way.
Moral: Don't fudge the data. If your data doesn't fit your expectations,
try to find the explanation (as John did for Steve's SG anomaly).
Greg King
gking@arserrc.gov
------------------------------
Date: 28 Feb 96 12:13:35 EST
From: "Gregg A. Howard" <102012.3350@compuserve.com>
Subject: re: Subject: Mash Questions
In HBD # 1971 Chuck wrote: <<After the prescribed mash schedule, I did a
starch test and noticed that all the starch was not converted. I let it rest for
another 15 minutes (at 158F) and still all the starch had not converted. Another
15 minutes and still nothing. I ASSuME that this was due to the fact that I was
using a 2-row instead of a 6-row?>>
If the rice was fully gelatinized and you didn't have any problems
maintaining mash temperatures, it's probably just fine. I have been brewing
with rice with lower ratios of both 2- & 6-row American malt than in that recipe
for a while and have not had a problem with conversion. What I have had a
problem with is getting to the point where I could read an iodine test and know
what I was looking at. According to Dave Miller, suspended cellulose will give
the same reaction as unconverted starch. That might have been what you were
seeing. All I know is that I stopped trying to use iodine, and started
depending solely on time and temperature to know when conversion *should* be
complete. It has worked for me.
If anyone is interested, I have a short outline of my rice brewing method
that I wrote for Delano 'Adjunct Boy' DuGarm, who was (purportedly <G>) putting
together an adjunct FAQ last year.
Gregg
Gregg A. Howard Denver, Co. 102012.3350@compuserve.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 12:29:10 -0500
From: Bob McCowan <bob.mccowan@cfrp.varian.com>
Subject: Diacetyl - is it really a noun?
We brewers tend to use the term diacetyl as a noun, but from the structure
of the word it looks like an adjective. Is it really a noun, or are we just
trashing ( turning a noun into a verb) the language? If it's an adjective,
then diacetyl what?
Bob
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob McCowan
voice: (508)-922-6000 x208
ATG/Receiver-Protector fax: (508)-922-8914
CPI BMD
Formerly Varian CF&RPP e-mail: bob.mccowan@cfrp.varian.com
Beverly, MA 01915
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 12:35:49 -0500
From: danmcc@umich.edu (Dan McConnell)
Subject: chillin'
Hi all....late as usual.
>From: "Mark G. Schmitt" <102160.1456@compuserve.com>
>
>Could someone help me understand the test results from Zymurgy's counterflow
>wort chiller evaluation? Perhaps I don't know what the authors mean by
>*Time To
>Cool 5 Gal* of wort. To me this implies the time it takes for 5 gal of wort to
>gravitate through the inside copper tube. If so, then why does it takes
>20+ min
>to go through 25' of 3/8 OD tubing but only 12+ to traverse 50'?
It took 20+ min to drop the temperature to 65 in the 25' and 12+ min to
drop the temperature to 64 in the 50'. This is not a measure of the rate
at which the wort CAN flow. Unrestricted wort flow varied amoung the
chillers, therefore wort flow could be used to (attempt to) nomalize the
final wort temperture. We restricted the flow in the 25' model so that the
output temperature would be in a usable range. This was less of an issue
with the more efficient 50' models and that's why in the 50' chiller we
could let it flow faster.
>Are not the
>Brewers Resource model and the 25' Listermann model identical except for the
>garden hose? Then how come the wort flow is 19.7 gal/hr for the former
>but 14.9
>gal/hr for the latter?
They are the same length and design (the same guts), but apparently not
equal. It must mean that either or both the diameter of the hose or the
diameter of the coil plays an important role in the efficiency. One could
argue that a smaller diameter coil, on the order of 12 inches might produce
more turbulence resulting in a more rapid cooling rate than a larger
diameter coil of 24 inches or a chiller that was linear.
>I was a little suprised to note that the extra 25' of
>tubing in the second Listermann chiller only dropped the wort temp by one
>additional degree to 64F even though the coolent temperature is 52F.
Yes, but it dropped it much faster. We were looking at rates, not how low
could it go.
> Finally,
>is the key to CF design a large diameter inner tube as in the Heart's chiller?
Heart's chiller has internal baffling (not fins, per Heart's) to produce
turbulent flow. That's that key in this instance. I suspect this unit was
originally designed as part of another piece of equipment (oil cooler?).
DanMcC
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 09:58:27 -0800 (PST)
From: raudins@lightscape.com (Glenn Raudins)
Subject: Porter Recipes
As promised, here are a couple porter recipes. ( I chose to send these
because I have both an extract and grain version. I can't say this for any
others.)
Extract Porter: (5/4/92)
- ------------------------
3.3lbs M&F Dark Extract
4.0lbs Alexander's Pale Extract
0.5lb M&F Dark DME
1.0lb Crystal Malt (90L)
0.5lb Black Patent
0.5lb Dark Roast
1 oz. Willamette (Alpha=4.2) 60 min Boil
1 oz. Willamette (Alpha=4.2) 2 min Boil/Steep
Wyeast 1028
O.G: 1.056
F.G: 1.018
Steep specialty grains separately
All Grain Porter: (3/19/95)
- ---------------------------
7lbs 2-Row
3lbs Klages (Old, doing a cupboard cleaning)
1lb Crystal Malt(90L)
.5lb Black Patent
.5lb Chocolate Malt
1 oz. Willamette (Alpha=4.3) 60 min boil
1 oz. Willamette (Alpha=4.3) 10 min boil/steep
Wyeast 1028
O.G: 1.05x
(Sorry, I didn't list a mash schedule for it when I brewed it. Just to
make up for it, I'll list an American Brown Recipe with its mash schedule.)
All Grain American Brown: (1/16/94)
- -----------------------------------
9lbs 2-Row (Old)
.75lb Crystal Malt(40L)
.6lb Belgian Choc Malt
.5tsp Gypsum (Adjusting mash ph)
1 oz Northern Brewer (Alpha=10.0) 60 min boil
.5 oz Cascade 15 min boil
.25 oz Cascade Dryhop (upon transfer to secondary.)
Wyeast 1028
Mash:
Protein Rest: 123F for 30 min
Bump to 154 for 90 min (or what suits you.)
O.G: 1.052
Ferment at 60F and condition at 13psi of CO2 for carbonation.
Enjoy, and hopefully this will stimulate another round o
recipe sharing. (And yes, my record keeping has improved since
these recipes. :-)
Glenn
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 10:41:28 -0800
From: BANESI@novell.com (Brad Anesi)
Subject: Hudson Valley Homebrew Competition?
Does anyone have the details about this?
There was a blank message regarding this a few digests ago.
Thanks,
Brad
(Banesi@Novell.com)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 14:07:00 -0600
From: 00bkpickeril@bsuvc.bsu.edu (Brian Pickerill)
Subject: re: Stuck Fermentation
On Mon, 26 Feb 1996 22:38:06 -0400 (EDT), Kevin <liquori@ACC.FAU.EDU> asks:
>Dear Collective,
> First I want to thank everyone who reassured me that sticking my
>arm in my beer wasn't the worst thing to do. Now I have a new problem.
> I brewed a Harpoon Winter Warmer clone (from Cat's Meow). The OG
>was 1.061. Four days later the gravity was 1.039. Last night I transferred
>from the primary (it was in the primary for a week) to the secondary.
>The gravity was 1.036.
>There has been no activity in the fermentation lock over the last
>twenty-four
>hours. I do not know what the terminal gravity should be, but I know this
>is too high. I am assuming the stuck fermentation is due to the fact that
>I did not aerate the wort (this is only my second batch and I'm still
>catching on). I pitched a liquid Wyeast (British ale #1028). On my first
>batch the fermentation was also stuck so I added some priming sugar to
>the primary. This dropped the gravity very little, but left the beer with
>a very cidery taste.
> Any suggestions for getting the fermentation going again? Is this
>actually no problem and the process is just EXTREMELY slow?
>
>Thanks in advance...Kevin...liquori@acc.fau.edu
>
I think the best you could do is to add a fairly large quantity of settled
yeast that had been very well aerated in the starter, (being sure that the
temperature of the starter and the winter warmer wort were right for the
new yeast.) I'm assuming that you didn't use a starter with the #1028?
Probably you would want to add more of that same yeast, but with a good dry
yeast you could add this within a couple of days. The idea is to add yeast
that had plenty of O2 in their last generation, which should be able to
continue to ferment with less than ideal O2 situation in your wort, and not
to add more oxegenated wort. Just adding some dry yeast would probably
help, since most of it is pretty well oxegenated when it's dried.
- --Brian Pickerill, Muncie, IN
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 96 14:16 EST
From: "John P. Linton" <0003726529@mcimail.com>
Subject: HB Magazines
I am looking for a listing of Home Brewing magazines. I have heard
mention of Zymurgy and some others, but do not have an address or
phone number to call for subscription information. Any info would
be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
jl
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 10:58 -0800 (PST)
From: Paul.Lambie@ncal.kaiperm.org
Subject: Botulinum
Regarding recent posts about botulism: It is true that the Clostridium
botulinum bacteria and the endotoxic it produces are destroyed by boiling.
However, the spores may withstand 100 C for several hours and could therefore
potentially contaminate the wort. Spore germination and toxin production
are both inhibited at low pH and toxin production is also reduced at
temperatures below 6 C, so contamination of wort (especially if refrigerated)
would be unlikely. If one wanted to be absolutely certain that there was no
contamination, the spores can be destroyed by moist heat at 120 C for 30 min.
Paul Lambie
P3 Brewers
Rocklin, CA
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 15:46:57 -0500
From: Steve Alexander <stevea@clv.mcd.mot.com>
Subject: polyphenols (tannins) and silicates
Some thoughts a questions ...
Quite a few weeks ago (last year?) I believe it was Charlie Scandrett
who suggested some radical, challenging and intriguing suggestions for
a small brewery contstruction. Among them the use of dehusked grain
in order to reduce tannin extraction as I recall (sorry if the
attribution and detail isn't quite right). An interesting table in
M&B Sci makes a tabular display of extract, silicate and tannin
extraction of normal and dehusked malt for 1st wort, 1st, 2nd, 3rd and
4th sparging [taken from, 'Grey & Stone, 1948, Wallerstein Labs Comm.
11,301']. The relevent parts of the table produced below:
Normal Malt:
Extract% Silicates Tannins(mg/L)
(SiO2 mg/L)
---------------------------------------------
1st wort 20.5 37 78
1st sparge 16.9 39 49
2nd sparge 8.3 17 25
3nd sparge 6.0 18 24
4nd sparge 5.0 31 18
Dehusked Malt
Extract% Silicates Tannins(mg/L)
(SiO2 mg/L)
---------------------------------------------
1st wort 25.4 nil 66
1st sparge 13.8 nil --
2nd sparge 7.6 nil 24
3nd sparge 6.4 nil 25
4nd sparge -- nil --
The final hopped wort ended up w/ virtually the same extract, 91% less
silicates and 22% less tannins for the dehusked beer. The dehusked
mash also sparged out somewhat faster.
Well without access to this paper (which isn't likely), it's a little
hard to interpret these results, but it's fairly clear that dehusking
will remove a very large portion of the silicates, but only a fraction
of the tannins. The decrease in tannins appears to be mostly in the
first runnings. The tannins from the 'normal malt' decrease in
successive runnings, but not as quickly as the decrease in extract.
It would be very nice to see this sort of table with a more detailed
breakdown into more specific phenolic compounds.
- --
Silicates are mostly in the outer husk, contribute harshness to the
final beer and, like tannins, are more readily extracted from the husk
at higher temperatures and higher pH values.
*Incidentally, rice hulls, which have been suggested as a mechanical
*aid to difficult to sparge wheat and rye beers, are very high in
*silicates.
- --
Polyphenols are concentrated in the pericarp and alleurone layers just
below the outer husk(pallea + lemma). I believe that the pericarp
comes off with the outer husk, but if anyone can clarify this I'd like
to hear about it.
Are the polyphenols in the pericarp and alleurone attached in proteins
tannin complexes ? Why is pH a factor in their release ? Is cold
sparging a practical possibility ?
Steve Alexander
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 96 12:39 PST
From: robtrish@mindlink.bc.ca (Rob Lauriston)
Subject: depth of grainbed
Just to add my $0.02 (Canadian) worth on the subject of the depth of the
grainbed in a lautertun.
My LT is 40.5 cm (16 inches) in diameter, for an area of 0.128 square meters
(1.39 square feet). I normally use 10 kg (22 lb.) of grain because that
gives enough wort to fill my 60 quart kettle. So that's 78 kg/m2 or 15.8
lb/ft2. The depth of the grainbed is about 6-8 inches.
I have used up to 18 kg (40 lb) in this lautertun, but the run-off was a bit
slow. That's 140 kg/m2 or 28 lb/ft2. Then the grain is more like 14 inches
deep. The false bottom is SS wedge-wire.
Rehberger and Luther in the Handbook of Brewing (ed. Hardwick) write,
"Specific loading varies from milling process and lauter tun design. Dry
milling ranges from 33.5 - 61 lb/ft2 ..." p. 282. However, since large
industrial brewers may run the rakes continually during sparging, they can
get away using a lot more grain. So much for the references.
Another way to look at it is according to the factors which determine the
minimum and maximum bed depths. Here's a more verbose version of what Al K.
posted.
The minimum grain depth is the one in which you can establish a filter bed
and get even flow of spargewater through the grainbed. I think it was last
summer that we went all through a discussion of particles moving up and down
in the mash and even whether there was such a thing as a filter bed. To
repeat what I have observed on various brewing systems: the filter bed is
created because the very small particles in the mash are washed away from
the bottom of the mash in the recirculation leaving a filterbed of husks and
other larger particles behind. I think this filterbed is only an inch or so
thick, based upon my experience of being able to run the rakes in a
commercial lauter tun an inch above the bottom without causing the wort to
become cloudy.
So the real factor that affects the minimum grain depth is the ability to
get an even flow through the grain. I'm pretty sure that resistance to flow
is proportional to the square of the grain depth. That is, if the grain
depth varies between three and four inches, sparge will travel through the
four inch areas at only 56% of the rate that it goes through the three inch
areas (3e2/4e2 = 9/16). And especialy since the four inch area contains 33%
more extract (4/3), this is a problem. It could work out to much more than
a few points per gallon. Channeling would have a greater effect in a thin
bed too. In short, it's easier to get an even flow with a thicker bed (to a
point).
I think that the only factor affecting the maximum depth is the length of
time it takes to lauter. Does anyone out there have a grain bed deeper than
a foot?
It seems right to me that the grain depth should be less than the diameter
or width of the lauter tun. The only support I can give for this feeling is
that as the bed contracts during sparging, it can crack but almost *always*
pulls away from the sides of the vessel. The effect of this channelling
would be more severe with a tall narrow LT than with a short wide LT. This
is where proportionality comes in.
I know this doesn't quite jive with what Jared wrote about Siebel's pilot
LT: "ideal grain depth is 18 inches. ... The >mash-tun was a tall
rectagular box about 20 inches high, 10 inches depth and 5 >inches in
width." Perhaps Siebel, oriented to larger scale commercial brewing, made a
mistake when scaling down?
The actual height of the lauter tun is irrelevant -- as long as it's higher
than the grain ;-) Since the extra height of the LT above the grain serves
no purpose, it's silly (tm) to talk about grain depth as a fraction of the
lautertun height.
Conclusion? When designing a LT, you decide what range of batchsizes you
want it to be able to accomodate, what amounts of grain that it will take to
make those batches, and then you try to get the weight of grain per area of
false bottom in the range of 12 to 25 lb/ft2.
I'll compile and post of summary of others experience if people want to send
me their numbers: size of LT, weights of grain used, perhaps with a
description of their false bottom and approximate flow rates.
My grandfather had a newspaper column entitled, "Maybe I'm Wrong". I follow
in his keystrokes.
Rob L.
____
------------------------------
Date: 28 Feb 96 16:01:58 EST
From: "Roger A. Becker" <102425.3003@compuserve.com>
Subject: Yeast Information Seeked.
I am a new member of the Homebrew Digest group and this is my first posting. I
am interested in finding meaningful information about the various strains of
yeast sold by Wyeast. Does anyone know of a compendium of yeast information
that may be available from the HBD that would have the information I am seeking.
Second, does anyone have a recipe for a dried malt extract version of ESB
English Bitter. This is a really great ale and I have not been able to get very
close to the real thing. Could it be that the proper yeast strain is the
missing ingredient? Any ideas would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Rog
------------------------------
Date: 28 Feb 96 16:27:55 EST
From: "Kenneth D. Joseph" <74651.305@compuserve.com>
Subject: The Tao of Mash Temps??
Greetings,
I have a few questions I would love explanations from the learned about:
1. I would love to hear an explanation of the effect of the continuum of mash
temperatures and their respective taste results.
2. What is the proper water to grain ratio -- I have been using 1.33 Quarts/#
per a book I have.
3. I am doing an experiment to produce an authentic medieval ale (I know, not
much for the refined palate) and am wondering what a good source of wild yeast
would be since I live in the desert and its winter. I have been told that bread
would work, and also saw a recipe for a cider where wild yeast from the apples
was used. Would a sliced up apple work?
Private e-mail is fine -- I'll post a summary.
thx,
Ken Joseph
74651.305@compuserve.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 16:40:23 -0500
From: Steve Alexander <stevea@clv.mcd.mot.com>
Subject: Lactobacilli from malt grain
Several times I've read the suggestion on HDB that malted grains can
be used as a source of lactobaccilli for brewing acidification. One
of the Cat's Meow recipes call for this as well.
As an experiment I made a 6 oz sterile wort starter from extract and
'pitched' with a tablespoon of pale malted barley. The airlock
bubbled, tho never vigorously, and after 10 days I took a look. The
wort was somewhat cloudy. The aroma was sort of like (yeast)
fermenting wort but w/o the yeasty toasty smell, tho there was a
substantial DSM odor. The flavor was most definitely lactic acid and
malty wort flavors. I slipped a few drops under a microscope and -
WOW - enough distinct bacteria to make any swamp jealous !
Well I expected contamination but this was a jungle. I did this
ferment at ambient room temps (around 70F) - if I was trying hard to
select thermophilic bacteria like L.Delbreuckii I should have kept the
temperature up - and bumped it up higher on signs of an infection. My
conclusion is beware of those overnight acid rests - you can't tell
*what* is growing in there.
BTW - via private email I've found that The Yeast Kit Company will
sell a pure L.Delbreuckii culture (not a smack pack) for a modest
price. So there is no reason for the bacterial cultural elite to make
inferior Dry stouts and Berliner Weiss.
yeast kit company page
http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/yckco.html
No relationship w/ the YKC, just a soon-to-be customer.
Steve Alexander
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 16:14:39 -0600
From: Russell Mast <rmast@fnbc.com>
Subject: Stuck Tea Conversion and Break
> From: liquori@ACC.FAU.EDU
> Subject: Stuck Fermentation
Have you tried sticking your arm into the beer? That often unsticks mine.
(Sorry, couldn't resist.)
Seriously -
> I am assuming the stuck fermentation is due to the fact that
> I did not aerate the wort
I think you hit the nail right on the head.
> On my first
> batch the fermentation was also stuck so I added some priming sugar to
> the primary. This dropped the gravity very little, but left the beer with
> a very cidery taste.
That's not a good idea. My admittedly limited knowledge of yeast physiology
suggests that this would probably just encourage yeast dormancy.
> Any suggestions for getting the fermentation going again? Is this
> actually no problem and the process is just EXTREMELY slow?
It is a problem. You already have the answer, grasshopper. AERATE IT! It's
not too late, it's never too late. Well, sometimes it is - you might oxidize
the wort. However, active yeast will 'reduce' those oxidized chemicals back
to what you want them.
Shake shake shake, shake shake shake, shake your carboy. (I do this with the
carboy on the ground to minimize risk of breaking.)
> From: Imakebeer@aol.com
> Subject: Hop Tea
Boiling hops in water doesn't do the same as boiling them in wort - different
chemicals come through in different proportions, and different reactions take
place on top of that. The best way to present different hop characteristics
is to brew a bunch of little test batches with an identical recipe but
different hoppings. A pain? Yes, but the only way to get accurate hop
representation.
> From: pittprog@usaor.net (Chuck)
> Subject: Mash Questions
>
>
> ... all the starch was not converted.
> ... I ASSuME that this was due to the
> fact that I was using a 2-row instead of a 6-row?
I'd bet it's something different, maybe poorly crushed grain?
My last batch never fully converted. I got bored with waiting, and just
made beer with it. It took a long time to clear in the carboy, and wasn't
as high a gravity as I wanted, but it tastes great. (It was also a bit
overhopped, but that's waning with age.)
> Additionally, I have noticed that in my all grain batches
> I get little or no hot break compared to my extract batches
> which get plenty. Is there a reason for this?
Weird. I usually get a lot more. Maybe you're not boiling vigorously enough?
Do you do larger boils with all grain than you did with extract? It could
be that you have enough heat to do the smaller batches but not enough for
the larger batches.
-R
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 17:47:20 -0500
From: KennyEddy@aol.com
Subject: Ready-made RIMS & pump motor controllers?
I received a catalog at work today from Solid State Advanced Controls (315)
638-1300. There are at least two items which may be of interest to y'all. I
know nothing about this company; I probably requested the info for reference
some time ago. Not even sure they'll sell to you as an "individual"
(although their price sheet does include single quantity), but it'd be worth
a shot if you're interested.
Item 1 is the TCR series temperature controller. You add an NTC thermistor
and a pot, and wire it to the line and the heater element. The unit switches
when the thermistor resistance equals the pot resistance plus about 1K. You
can select a thermistor and pot for whatever range or sensitivity you're
after. The 100K thermistor Morris recommends in his original RIMS circuit
article has a resistance of about 100K at 25C. about 25K at 55C, and about
7.5K at 85C (to give you an idea). The unit is in a 2" x 2" x 3/4" package
(tiny!) with six 1/4" terminal lugs. The package has a hole in the center
for mounting to a heat sink with a #8 to #12 screw. It's powered entirely
off the AC line. It's available in 120 or 230 VAC models, and 6, 10, or 20
amp operation. Price range is $33.65 (6A, either voltage) to $47.76 (20A)
with discounts for higher volumes. One possible drawback -- it lacks the
anticipator circuit Morris uses, so some overshoot is to be expected (how
much, I don't know -- depends on your system). Accuracy is claimed to within
1 deg C of setpoint.
Item 2 is an AC Phase controller, which basically is a variable power
controller. It'd be a nice RIMS pump speed control, and other available
models will handle much more power than that. It's the PHS series, in a 2 x
2 x 1 package similar to the TCR. You just add a cheapo pot (100K for 120V,
200K for 230V) and connect the unit to the line and the load. It has three
terminal lugs for connection. Again, it's available for 120 or 230 VAC, and
1, 6, 10, and 20A capacity (the 20A capacity is worth 2400W of control at
120VAC and 4800W at 240VAC!). Pricing goes from $9.28 (1A) to $24.13 (20A).
In addition to controlling pump speed, another PHS could be used in
conjunction woth the TCR to control the max power of the element, to serve as
a temperature-rise rate controller.
No affiliation blah blah blah but it might help some of you
soldering-iron-challenged brewers out there.
Please direct all further questions about these products to the phone number
above...
Ken Schwartz
KennyEddy@aol.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 17:54:43 -0500
From: Mark Peacock <mpeacock@oeonline.com>
Subject: German vs. American Wheat Styles
Not wanting to re-start the great Style thread, but...
Can someone summarize the differences between German (more specifically,
Barvarian) wheat and American wheat beers? One obvious difference is yeast
strains. What about others -- hops, wheat:malt ratios, use of specialty malts?
Thanks and regards,
Mark Peacock
mpeacock@oeonline.com
Big Business on the Web -- http://oeonline.com/~mpeacock/bbusiness.html
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 16:36:10 -0500 (EST)
From: Rob Reed <rhreed@icdc.delcoelect.com>
Subject: DWC Special B / Keg Leaks
A.J. wrote in describing DWC Special B malt:
> Caramunich Special-B
> Lab. Wort Color, Lov. 72 221
Hasn't DWC recently changed their Special B from 220L'ish to about
150L or so? I had not used their Special B for awhile, and I noticed
that the last batch I bought was lighter than previous.
////////////////////////////////////
Dan asked about keg sealing problems:
> When force carbonating at pressures of 8-9 psi and greater there is no
> apparent leakage, but at dispensing pressure (about 5 psi) there is
> significant gas leakage around to oval lid. Thinking I had a bad O-ring
> or micro-fissure in the lid itself, I replaced both. Same problem,
> same spot. With both lid & O-ring assemblies, the leak occurs right
> at the point where the long axis of the oval intersects the perimeter.
Assuming there are no leaks in your keg, one solution is to buy an
oversize large o-ring - about $5 US - from Williams in CA. I have several
for older pin-lock kegs: they are fatter (larger cross section) and are more
pliable than stock o-rings. Another option is to serve at your 8-9 psi: if
you choose your beverage line tubing diameter and length properly, you
should be able to serve at 8-9 psi in the 40's (F). Based on HBD info,
I use 4' of 3/16" ID hose and can serve up to about 10 psi reliably.
Cheers,
Rob Reed
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 96 10:32:01 EST
From: dipalma@sky.com (Jim Dipalma)
Subject: Re: Kegging 101, Lagering--time and S.G.
Hi All,
In HBD#1971, Dan Nelson writes:
>I'm having one problem, though,
>which is is getting a perfect seal around the lid of the keg. It's a
>5 gal. ball-lock corney, reconditioned, new gaskets, in very nice shape.
>When force carbonating at pressures of 8-9 psi and greater there is no
>apparent leakage, but at dispensing pressure (about 5 psi) there is
>significant gas leakage around to oval lid.
That's consistent with my experience with corny kegs. It takes 10-12 psi
to "seat" the large Oring and get a good seal. You can dispense at 10-12 psi
with no problem, but you'll need to adjust your tubing length/diameter to
compensate for the higher dispensing pressure.
FWIW, I use just over 3 feet of 3/16" beverage tubing, which drops about
3 psi/ft (by comparison, the 1/4" tubing drops just 1 psi/ft). There's a 1 psi
drop across the hose connect, another 1 psi across the cobra head tap, so
the total pressure drop across the dispensing line is roughly equivalent to
10-12 psi also.
***********************************************************
Also in HBD#1971, Tam Thompson writes about lagering times and SG:
>I'm unclear about how
>long you need to lager things. I'd always used 2 months as a rule
>of thumb, except for bocks (traditional, not American or Texas) and
>Dbocks, which take 3 months. Lately, however, I've been thinking that
>the length of time required for lagering is probably related to the original
>gravity. A Dbock, at OG 1.075+, or bock, at 1.065-1.075, requires 3 months.
>Lagers beers with lighter gravities require 2 months.
IMHO, lagering times are related more to yeast strain and fermentation
schedule rather than OG. Some lager strains produce a lot of hydrogen sulfide
(smells like rotten eggs), diacetyl, etc., during primary, and require 3-4
months of lagering to eliminate. Conversely, other strains such as W 34/70
ferment very cleanly, and produce good results after just 4-6 weeks of
lagering. Use of a diacetyl rest can also shorten lagering times significantly.
With that said, my schedule for lagering is similar to Tam's. I use Wyeast
2206 or 2308 for lagers above 1.060 such as bocks and festbiers, and lager
for 3-4 months. The 2206 is one of the aforementioned strains that produces
copious amounts of hydrogen sulfide during primary. A 1.048 pilsner pitched
with W34/70 is generally in the glass less than 2 months after brewday. So,
while I've also seen a correlation between lagering times and OG, I think it's
due more to the strain of yeast used.
>I'm
>thinking that gravities below 1.045 could be lagered at around 32-34 F for,
>say, 6 weeks.
Try the W34/70, use a diacetyl rest, and this should work.
Cheers,
Jim dipalma@sky.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 16:02:10 -0700
From: brewshop@coffey.com (Jeff Struman)
Subject: isinglass
Hello fellow brewers,
I recently started using isinglass flakes at bottling time to help clear
my beer in the bottles. This isn't a real important question, but I am
curious about something: When I add this isinglass to water it puts off
some real obnoxious odors. The smell makes my eyes water, my nose run and
makes me sneeze. If I take a good whiff of the odor it takes my breath
away (literally.) What's going on here? Is this odor toxic or dangerous?
What causes it? And, while we're on the subject, what is the chemical or
biological reason for isinglass' clearing properties?
TIA for any replies,
Jeff
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 19:55:24 -0600
From: "Nathan L. Kanous II" <nlkanous@facstaff.wisc.edu>
Subject: Going to Oklahoma City
Wife and I are going to Oklahoma City March 7-10. Does anyone know of any
brewpubs / microbreweries in Oklahoma City?
Anybody out there from Oklahoma City?
Private e-mail is fine. Thanks
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 96 18:32:00 PST
From: Lewis Alexander <lalexan@msbassett.kla.com>
Subject: removal of name f/ list
Date: feb 28,96
From: lewis alexander
Sub: Please remove my name from the mailing list.
Thanks for the great beer articles!
E-mail address: lalexan@kla.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 96 18:47:00 PST
From: Lewis Alexander <lalexan@msbassett.kla.com>
Subject: FW: removal of name f/ list
----------
From: Lewis Alexander
To: 'homebrew - articales'
Subject: removal of name f/ list
Date: Wednesday, February 28, 1996 6:30PM
Date: feb 28,96
From: lewis alexander
Sub: Please remove my name from the mailing list.
Thanks for the great beer articles!
E-mail address: l_alexan@kla.com (new address), old address f/ ref:
(l_alexan@kla.bassett.com)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 23:59:04 -0500
From: bob@carol.net (Robert Rogers)
Subject: Kegging 101 - gas leak
>When force carbonating at pressures of 8-9 psi and greater there is no
>apparent leakage, but at dispensing pressure (about 5 psi) there is
just make beer that needs more carbonation:)
from what i have come across so far, 5 psi is about the minimum pressure any
corney keg will hold. the last batch i kegged started @ about 25psi. i
didn't foam too much on dispensing--maybe an inch in a pint mug. i think
this has to do with the length of my tubing, which is over 6 feet.
bob rogers, bob@carol.net
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 23:58:44 -0500
From: bob@carol.net (Robert Rogers)
Subject: jack daniel's oak aged pilsner
i just found jack daniel's 1866 classic oak-aged pilsner. the side of the
bottle claims "our oak-aged pilsner is the best of two worlds. we first
handcrafted a traditional old world pilsner beer, using only select two-row
barley malt, cluster and saaz hops, choice yeast and pure water. we then age
it in a unique new world way-using jack daniel's oak barrel wood. oak-aging
gives our pilsner a more complex character and an extra measure of golden
color, for a pilsner unlike any other." the box goes on to add "the next
time you're in lynchburg, tennessee, visit our small brewery and see the way
beer used to be made". the box also comes with a card to mail to the brewery
to join "the slow brewers of america" and receive "the latest news on old
fashioned beer".
the beer is very light in color and has a very crisp taste. so the question
this brings up is: has anyone ever used wood in aging beer? oak is very high
in tannin. why is tannin bad from grain but good from oak? i will try oak
aging with my next pilsner (RSN). before i just dump some oak in the
fermenter (maybe oak dowels in the secondary), are there any suggestions
about quantity of wood (seems surface area will be the key), and precautions
to take?
bob rogers, bob@carol.net
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 96 04:17:00 UTC 0000
From: t.duchesneau@genie.com
Subject: Superbrau extract
A couple suppliers here in upstate NY have listed Superbrau LME in 4# cans
for under $7. When I went to one of those stores to buy some last weekend,
I was told that they didn't carry it any more because they found out that it
contained rice. I was told that it was only suitable to make a Bud clone.
The other store still carries it and the person working there told me he had
used it with success.
Who out there has experience with Superbrau? Were those experiences good
or bad? Does anyone have first hand knowledge of the contents? Rice?
TIA... ...Tom
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 07:05:00
From: braue@ratsnest.win.net (John W. Braue, III)
Subject: How to Clean Bottles (and Why Not to)
Craig Stewart <foghorn1@darwin.nbnet.nb.ca> writes in HBD #1972
>rSlightly off the topic of *brewing* the beer, but on the topic of
>*bottling* the brew. I've been brewing for a while now, partial mashes
>and the like. Ive got a pain in the arse that takes a lot of the fun out
>of brewing for myself. CLEANING THE DAMN BOTTLES! I wash out the
>bottles after I drink them, but invariably I have to aquire new ones. As
>I don't drink the domestic swill that is offered exclusivly in my small
>part of Canada, I have to get second hand bottles. Some of the stuff
>that comes out of them makes me want to 'recycle' the obligitory
>homebrews that I consume while brewing and bottling. Are there any ideas
>as to how to clean out this mess. Yes, I have a dishwasher, I'm it!
><grin>
Soaking overnight (or longer) in a solution of 500 ml clear ammonia
to 20 l cold water has worked well for me in the past. Judging
from the use of clear bottles (it's always difficult to tell if a
brown bottle is *really* clean, isn't it?), this removes
everything except some label-glue residue.
>
>Next question, to sanitize them, how much household bleach should I put in
>~20 - 25 litres of water. If I put in enough to smell it, I have a devil
>of a time geting the smell out, and if I can't smell it, I don't know if I
>have enough! Otherwise, I'm having fun.
>
Use household bleach in the 250 - 330 ml range per 20 l of water.
Rinse well (i.e., don't just stick the bottle under the tap and
call it done; actually swirl some water about on the inside) in the
hottest possible water (I don't believe in OSHA standards, and
have my water heater set to about 65 deg C).
Prepping bottles *is* a pain in whatever end of the spinal column
you prefer, isn't it? That's why I've moved to kegging.
- --
John W. Braue, III braue@ratsnest.win.net
john.braue@berlinwall.org
"The water of England is not drinkable"
- -- Elizabeth of York in a letter to the Infanta Catalina of Aragon
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, 29 Feb 1996 13:43:28 +0100
From: johan.haggstrom@ped.gu.se dv (Johan H\dggstr\vm)
Subject: Re:European Brewery Tours.
Jim Booth writes
"Sposual unit and I will be touring in England, Scotland, Ireland,
France, Belgium and Holland in July.
Your suggestions about historically interesting places would be appreciated."
I visited the small geuzebrewery CATILLION in Anderlecht, a part of
Bruxelles (don't no the adress), a couple of years ago. It's a fantastic
experience. The brewery is run in a very small scale and in a traditional
way. Don't miss it. It's really worth a visit.
Johan Haggstrom, Goteborg, Sweden
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 14:44:52 +200
From: "Braam Greyling" <ACG@knersus.nanoteq.co.za>
Subject: Storage of yeast.
Hi there
I have a few questions about storage of yeast.
What is the best way to store dry yeast. Can I freeze it ? How long
can I store it ? I ask because it is difficult for me to get the
right yeast for my purposes. I wish to order yeast from U.S. to my
country (South Africa) and would like to store it as long as
possible.
If any beer mail order business read this message, please send me a
catalogue.
Thanks
Bye
Braam
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 08:52:36 -0500
From: TMCASTLE@pwinet.upj.com
Subject: bottling laments
In HBD#1972 Craig Stewart curses the chore of bottle washing and in
several past issues people have mentioned the chore as a major reason
for switching to kegging. Well, to each their own, and maybe I'm so
new to homebrewing; but it seems like this is an attitude issue.
I love to wash and fill bottles. It's part of the Zen of brewing.
It's quiet time to reflect on the art and slow down the pace of life.
Put on some music, enjoy a brew, "Be still and know that I am brewing
(a twisted Biblical paraphrase)".
Ski buffs sharpen their blades, fishers build their lures, homebrewers
bottle (apologies to those of the kegging persuasion).
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 96 10:07:08 EST
From: "Kirk Harralson" <kwh@smtpgwy.roadnet.ups.com>
Subject: Almond flavor
Mike Aesoph writes:
> A while ago, I was helping a friend empty his fridge of imported beers
>(by consumption of course) and I noticed that some of the beers had a
>nice "toasted almond" taste. Does anyone out there know a good beer
>recipe that includes almonds or other unique flavor ingredients?
A guy at my local brewshop swears by his "toasted almond" ale. His method is to
spread a pound or so of grain on a cookie sheet, sprinkle a bottle of almond
extract over it, then toast it in the oven as described in Papazian. This
sounded very suspect to me, but several people claim it is a fantastic beer, and
the almond flavor really comes through. Disclaimer: This is second-hand
information only; I have never tried it. I just thought it was an interesting
idea that I may try in the future. If you try this, I would definitely suggest
grinding the grain before you wet it in any way. Even the slightest amount of
moisture makes quite a mess in a mill. A safer approach may be to add the
extract at bottling. You could bottle half the batch as normal, and then add
some extract to the remainder to do a side-by-side comparison and to adjust
quantities. Just remember to take very good notes. Good Luck!
Kirk Harralson
Bel Air, Maryland
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1973, 03/01/96
*************************************
-------
