Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2057
This file received at Hops.Stanford.EDU 1996/06/02 PDT
Homebrew Digest Sunday, 2 June 1996 Number 2057
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Shawn Steele, Digest Janitor
Thanks to Rob Gardner for making the digest happen!
Contents:
Mini-Keg Questions ("Steven J. Bortnick")
Re: lager vaseline? (Jeff Renner)
re: RIMS (and more) (cdp@chattanooga.net (C.D. Pritchard))
Hunter Airstat Relay Update ("brew")
All Grain Weizen -Reply (Brad Anesi)
Methanol/ Sparge-Mash Temp/ Forrest Gump Bottling (Rob Moline)
mash-extract recipies (Val Martinez)
Re: RIMS Pump Power (jstone@stratacom.com (Joseph Stone))
RIMS Definition (jstone@stratacom.com (Joseph Stone))
Weight of honey (Terry)
wort chillers (RBoland@aol.com)
Boiling NaOH Sankey keg cleaning (Dave)
NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESSES
homebrew@aob.org (SUBMISSIONS only)
homebrew-digest-request@aob.org (for REQUESTS only)
Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew@aob.org
(Articles are published in the order they are received.)
Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc.,
to homebrew-digest-request@aob.org, BUT PLEASE NOTE that if
you subscribed via BEER-L NET, you must unsubscribe by sending a
one line e-mail to listserv@ua1vm.ua.edu that says: UNSUB BEER-L
This list service is now being provided by majordomo@aob.org, so some
of the commands may have changed. For technical problems send
e-mail to the Digest Janitor, shawn@aob.org.
If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first.
ARCHIVES & OTHER INFORMATION
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 or visit
http://alpha.rollanet.org on the Web. Othere information is available by
e-mail from info@aob.org and on the AHA's web site at http://www.aob.org/aob.
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 at /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. Some
archives are available via majordomo@aob.org.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Steven J. Bortnick" <automan@ici.net>
Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 10:29:10 -0400
Subject: Mini-Keg Questions
I am interested in buying a mini-keg system. I am sick of washing and
bottling. Can anyone recommend a particular brand or type? I was
looking at the Williams Brewing Mini-Keg. Any input is welcome!
Thanx
Steven
- --
"I Am The Lizard King, I Can Do Anything"
"You Are All Just Plastic Soldiers In A Miniature Dirt War"
"Break On Thru To The Otherside"
automan@ici.net
------------------------------
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Date: Sat, 1 Jun 96 11:24:06 -0400
Subject: Re: lager vaseline?
In HBD 2055, jsturman@coffey.com asked:
> I just brewed a lager using 6# DWC pilsener and 1.5#
> flaked corn.<snip> The problem is
> there is a LOT of vaseline-looking stuff floating on top
> of the wort in the carboy. I have brewed lots of beer,
> but not many lagers, and I have never used flaked corn.
> The wort is already fairly clear <snip> but
> this floating gunk is absolutely amazing! LOTS of
> vaseline-like stuff, sort of formed in ribbons, fibers
> and clumps that
> (honestly) resemble brains. Has anybody experienced
> this? I have never heard of it, please help...
This is almost certainly coagulated insoluble protein - hot and/or cold
break. (it isn't really greasy like vaseline, is it?) I generally get
pretty big hot break when brewing in this style (see my article on
recreating the Classic American Pilsner in Brewing Techniques last
Sept/Oct issue) and it is stringy - like egg drop soup. It probably
means you will have good, clear stable beer. Now it's floating up on
the evolved CO2 in your fermenter. If you can carefully rack this over
*without aerating it* to a clean fermenter, leaving all the crud behind,
it would probably be advantageous. Otherwise, relax etc.
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan c/o nerenner@umich.edu
------------------------------
From: cdp@chattanooga.net (C.D. Pritchard)
Date: Sat, 1 Jun 96 11:34 EDT
Subject: re: RIMS (and more)
Long post follows. If this RIMS doesn't interest ya, I apologize- please
hit your PgDn key several times.
Kirk R Fleming <flemingk@usa.net> posted:
>First, with anywhere from 12-25 lbs of grain sitting on a 6% open false
>bottom, the wort drains out *under gravity alone* at a rate greater than
>I would want to pump it with my system.
What exactly is your recirc flow? I've found that if a decent flow (>3/4
GPM) isn't maintained and I control the heater (1500kW) based only on the
temp of the of the wort on the suction side of the heater, the dT across the
heater is too great and, IMHO, you risk denaturing the enzymes.
>I'd greatly appreciate any pertinent RIMS Reality
>Reports (from either viewpoint), but please include false bottom *total
>area* and percentage open areas.
First, recirc flow is also a BIG variable as is the "texture" of the grain
bed. Here's my data:
False bottom is a 10.5" dia. plastic pail lid with lots of 5/8" diameter
holes (atleast 60% open area over 9.5" dia. area). Above that is a grid of
#12 gauge copper wire spaced 1/2 to 3/4" on center and then some screen
removed from a kitchen strainer. Quoting an open area is problematical due
to the construction but, I'd guess 60% or better. Suction line is 3/4 and
1/2" copper pipe. Pump is 1.5' below the he bottom of the 6 gallon pail
plastic tun. Pump is rated 4 GPM at 3', 2 GPM at 8' and 11' shutoff. I've
measured recirc at 1.5 gpm max without the discharge manifold above the
grain bed attached (eyeballed reduction of no more than 0.1 GPM) with a
grain bed only 8" deep. Normal grain bills (8 lbs or so) can get 1/2 to 1
GPM. With a Phil's Phloating Phalse bottom, I could only manage a mere
trickle without the pump cavitating and the bed compacting to a useless
state. I think Dion uses a Phils but I don't know what his recirc flow is.
The best I can describle my malt crush is "good"- I use a home made concrete
roller mill with 4 and 7" rollers, eyeballed data: <10% flour, >60% whole
husks and < 5% uncrushed. I typically add the grain to the full volume of
water, stir very well and let settle for 5 minutes max.
A previous post on this thread seemed to allude to the pump somehow sucking
the liquid through the grain bed. I don't think so. If one "sucks" the
wort through the bed, it'll cause compaction and *greatly* reduce the
flowrate! Other than the grain bed, the other flow limiting factor is the
NPSHR (net positive suction head required) spec. for the pump. This is the
total pressure required at the pump inlet and it varies with the flow rate
and the temp of the fluid (primairly 'cause the vapor pressure of water
fiqures in and it varies with temperature). I've not seen any specs. for
the small centrifugal type pumps used in RIMSs, but for large (>100 GPM)
centrifugal pumps, not not much "sucking" power is available. If you go
below the NPSHR, you'll get caviation and will notice a significant
reduction in the flow, hence the condition is somewhat self-regulating:
when the variables are just right, you'll notice oscillations in the flow
and the sound of the pump (caviation). Caviation will also errode the pump
impeller over time.
Here's what I've done to help establish the maximum flowrate w/o too much
grain bed compaction or causing too much caviation:
Use a speed controller on the pump, not valves for adjusting the flow since
control is easier and more precise IMHO. Put a valve/sight gauge on a tee in
the pump suction line. A length of clear vinyl tubing works for me. This
allows you to actually see the pressure available. I also use this as a
sparge-outlet line. Add water to RIMS and ensure all air is out of the
suction path (test by running pump wide open), do mash in, let rest a bit to
form a bed, then start the pump up at a low speed. Increase the speed until
you hear caviation then back off a bit. If your are lucky, you won't have
compacted the grain bed too much. Now, slowly open up the sight gauge valve
and note the liquid in the gauge. The level relative to the level of liquid
in the tun is the friction loss in the suction line and grain bed at that
flow, for that particuliar grain bed and can be used to set the flow in
future similiar mashes without risking a stuck mash. Now, if you want to
live dangerously and learn a bit, slowly increase the pump speed and you'll
notice that once a certian point is reached, the level will drop rather
suddenly and dramatically, the caviation will be grow very loud and, if you
aren't quick, air will be sucked into the pump. At this point, refloating
the bed by just stopping the pump doesn't work for me and I restir. A
hassle, but one's learned a good lesson!
Happy RIMSing and, as always, YMMV!
C.D. Pritchard cdp@chattanooga.net
------------------------------
From: "brew" <brew@devine.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM>
Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 11:57:49 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Hunter Airstat Relay Update
My Hunter Airstat's relay stuck, resulting in five frozen kegs of
beer. When the Airstat was opened for failure analysis, melted relay
contacts were discovered. It appears that the one of the contacts is held
in place with solder. When the contact heated, then later released, a bead
of solder prevented the contacts from opening.
The original relay in my Airstat was a Potter & Brumfield T90N1D12-24, rated
at 30A, 240VAC with a 24 volt coil. Newark Electronics carries this in their
catalog at around $5. However, they also have a $25 minimum order.
I found a similar relay at All Electronics (800-826-5432) for $2.50. It is
catalog #RLY-180, an Aromat JT1aE-DC24V. This relay is sealed, unlike the
P & B. Fits the circuit board perfectly. So far it is working great.
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __
|\/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/|
|Jim Griggers brew@devine.columbiasc.ncr.com Columbia, SC|
|Palmetto State Brewers http://www.scsn.net/~psbrewer |
|______________________________________________________________|
------------------------------
From: Brad Anesi <BANESI@novell.com>
Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 10:00:06 -0600
Subject: All Grain Weizen -Reply
On 31 May, WalkerMik@aol.com wrote...
>I plan to brew an all grain recipe from Eric Warner's German Wheat
>Beer book, and have a few questions. I'm trying to decide if the
>decoction mash (my first) would be worth the extra time and effort, or if
>I should just go with an infusion mash due to the rising temp here in AZ
Mike, I'm also just about to do an all-grain Weizen and would be
interested in seeing any worthwhile comments not posted to the list. In
the mean time, here's my 2 cents...
Although a German purist will tell you that an authentic German Weizen
needs to be made via a decoction mash, I don't think there's enough to be
gained (if anything) vs. a step-infusion mash. The finest Weizen I've
ever had (Tabernash Wheat), is made using a step-infusion. BTW, I'm
using their yeast to ferment half of my upcoming Weizen - the other half
of the batch is being fermented with Hoegarden yeast.
Good luck,
Brad
------------------------------
From: Rob Moline <brewer@kansas.net>
Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 11:50:43 -0500
Subject: Methanol/ Sparge-Mash Temp/ Forrest Gump Bottling
>From: aesoph@ncemt1.ctc.com (Aesoph, Michael)
>Subject: Methanol (NOT AGAIN)
However, I have had some of my beverages turned down by the uninitiated
because of the methanol myth.
Forget them. "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it think!"
If they observe you enjoying your brew and not succumbing to a horrible
fate, and they still are unconvinced, let them drink BUD! And there will be
more for you!
>>From: George_De_Piro@berlex.com (George De Piro)
>>Subject: RE:Sparge water temp
I'll do some sequential temp checks on tomorrows batch, but
>I'm quite sure that the mash temp, as indicated by grant temp, doesnt get
>into the 165 range until quite a bit into the sparge.
Yesterday's batch, 7 BBL, 4 BBL strike h20 at 152.1 F, 1st Runnings 142.3 F,
temp checks every 15/60 post initiation of sparge. Sparge water temp a wee
bit low at 171.5 F. Sparge time 1:05. Temp of outflow at commencement of
sparge 141.2, at end of sparge 156.5.
Bottling Bucket Thread;
Being a simple fellow, I always added a boiled/cooled dextrose solution to
the secondary carboy and waited 15/60 for a diffusion/brownian out effect to
occur. Never stirred or did anything to risk re-suspending any flocc'ed out
yeast. And being a simple fellow, I never had any of those nightmares occur
like some carb'd, some not, etc. A Forrest Gump approach to beer.
Rob Moline
Little Apple Brewing Company
Manhattan, Kansas
"I am a humourless bastard."
"I am a humourless bastard."
"I am a humourless bastard."
------------------------------
From: Val Martinez <valhhm@trib.com>
Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 15:58:13 -0600
Subject: mash-extract recipies
I have recently (one batch ago) begun brewing with mash-extract recipes. I
enjoy the additional understanding of the process of brewing great beer. As
I learn more about the process, I also want to know more about how things
work. I need help with two aspects:
1. Is there a good rule(s) of thumb for predicting the O.G. of a recipe
that I have either altered or developed - either extract or mash-extract
recipies? I want to know what effect the addition of certain amount of
ingredients have on the O.G. of a batch of beer. I have read the appendix
in the "Complete Joy of Homebrewing", but need more. I tried using these
guidelines with some beers that I had made and with some of the recipies in
the book and consistently came up with O.G.s exceeding the actuals by 25%.
In these guidelines, it gave the approximate gravity for 1# of ingredient in
1 gal of water. What I did: for each grain/ingredient, I took the amount
and divided it by 5 (I brew in five gallon batches) then multiplied it by
the approximate gravity given, then I added the gravities for each
ingredient together.
2. Is there a good rule(s) of thumb for converting an extract recipe to a
mash-extract recipe? What grains will approximate amber malt extract for
example? How much grain should I mash to substitute for 1, 2, 3, 4, pounds
of malt extract?
Thanks. Responses can be sent to valhhm@trib.com or to HBD.
------------------------------
From: jstone@stratacom.com (Joseph Stone)
Date: Sat, 1 Jun 96 16:20:56 PDT
Subject: Re: RIMS Pump Power
> In #2053 Dion said:
>> With anything other than a 70% open area false bottom, even
>> 1/20hp is severely underpowered.
I too respect Dion's opinion. We have had several valuable
exchanges in the past (coincidentally, the last time that I
spoke with Dion, April 96, he was in search of "... a grid of
some sort holding up a 70% open screen.").
The referenced append dealt primarily with pump power, however,
the closing statement raised a question regarding how RIMS was
able to get wort through the grain bed so quickly.
I didn't have much to contribute to the pump discussion. I use
a pair of March MDXT-3s. But the comment regarding "RIMS"
getting wort through the grain bed set off warning bells. I
responded to the post through private E-mail.
Clearly, the mash "screen" within a RIMS setup must allow for a
high flow rate. If you are relying on the pump to "suck" wort
through the grain bed you are going to have problems.
I have used a perforated mash screen within a 10 G Vollrath pot
in a RIMS-like setup for over a year. The screen is 13.75" in
diameter with 3/32 holes on 5/32 inch centers. At 34% open
area that works out to a total open area of 50.49 square inches.
The flow rate of this mash screen was more than adequate to
support the needed RIMS recirculation rate. As with Kirk, I am
forced to throttle back the flow.
My biggest complaint with the 3/32 hole pattern was that it
allowed too much grain to pass at dough-in. As has been
mentioned on this forum in the past, the grain gets caught up
in the pump and the impeller eventually decouples from the
motor.
To solve this problem, I am in the process of integrating a
mash screen which is comprised of triangular bars,
______________
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
The bar spacing is approximately .030" and there are
approximately 8.5 bars per inch. Based on my calculations,
this represents 24% open area. I will replace the 10 G Vollrath
with a 15 G Vollrath. The screen is 16.00" in diameter. At 24%
open area that works out to a total open area of 48.25 square
inches.
So Kirk's point regarding "different false bottom total areas"
is well taken. In this example, I've gone from 34% open area
to 24% open area and have only lost 2.25 square inches of total
open area.
I have very little experience in the theory surrounding flow. I
would be interested in a comparison of the flow rate for, say, a
50% open area (window-like) screen versus a 50% open area
perforated disk. Even given equal false bottom total areas, I
can't imagine that the resulting flow rates are the same.
I thought that I'd include open area percentages for a few other
hole patterns courtesy of Stainless in Seattle,
3/32 on 5/32 inch centers 34%
1/8 on 3/16 inch centers 42%
.050 on .066 inch centers 45%
3/16 on 1/4 inch centers 53%
Joe
- ------------------------------
------------------------------
From: jstone@stratacom.com (Joseph Stone)
Date: Sat, 1 Jun 96 16:55:25 PDT
Subject: RIMS Definition
RIMS is probably one of the most loved/hated topics on the
digest. And I don't mean to stir up an endless thread, but
I would be interested in the "official" definition of RIMS.
The acronym taken literally is far too generic, or is it?
I have reduced the definition of RIMS to a recirculating
pump and a heat source within the recirculating path.
I would tend to include the "heating-element-within-a-tube",
but Rodney Morris' prototype (Zymurgy 11.4) used a "spiral
of 3/8-inch copper tubing which he placed over a burner...".
If we exclude the heating-element-within-a-tube, we certainly
don't need to mention automatic electronic temperature
controllers, or do we? Manual electronic temperature
controllers?
I use a heating-element-within-a-tube which is controlled by
a PC via an ADIO board/SSR (Solid State Relay). Is this
considered a RIMS?
Is RIMS intended to describe the entire system? Or only the
mash component (i.e. the Morris' Igloo cooler)? My
definition would describe RIMS as an accessory to the mash
component (like a temperature sensing device or mash screen).
Yeah, I know. Who cares?
Joe
- ------------------------------
------------------------------
From: Terry <brew@buffnet.net>
Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 19:04:07 GMT
Subject: Weight of honey
A gallon of honey weighs 12 lbs, 3 lbs per quart, I have no monetary
interest in honey just trying to help out.
www.dnci.com/brewfellow
------------------------------
From: RBoland@aol.com
Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 22:21:22 -0400
Subject: wort chillers
See attached file.
------------------------------
From: Dave <woodstok@rupert.oscs.montana.edu>
Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 00:16:19 -0600 (MDT)
Subject: Boiling NaOH Sankey keg cleaning
Just my two bits on safety for this cleaning tip.
IMHO do NOT use a boiling NaOH solution!! Sodium hydroxide (lye) is nasty
enough as it is. If you want real cleaning power, simply use 95% alcohol
as your solvent, not water. You do NOT need to boil anything, and it's a
whole lot easier to deal with (though the same safety precautions must be
taken as NaOH in any situation is not to be taken lightly).
I've used this method to clean my carboys when NOTHING else will work. I
only have a pint of this solution and it WORKS! The best part about it is
that i can REUSE it (it turns brown, but that has no effect on cleaning
power).
To make the stuff I just mixed about an ounce of NaOH in a pint of 95%
alcohol. To clean the carboy I let the solution sit in the carboy such
that the solution covers the dirty part overnight (with the carboy
stoppered shut). If the NaOH/alcohol doesn't get rid of the dirty
deposit, you might as well recycle the carboy because it just ain't coming
off.
Sorry for the waste of bandwidth, i've posted this before and now you all
get to see it again. But the thought of boiling an NaOH solution anywhere
else but in a chemical lab gives me the willies!
Dave
Life's a beer,
Brew it up...
------------------------------
End of Homebrew Digest #2057
****************************
