Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2061
This file received at Hops.Stanford.EDU 1996/06/06 PDT
Homebrew Digest Thursday, 6 June 1996 Number 2061
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Shawn Steele, Digest Janitor
Thanks to Rob Gardner for making the digest happen!
Contents:
immersion chiller summary (Dan)
leaky corny kegs (BOBKATPOND@aol.com)
False bottom question (diagen@netvision.net.il (Nir Navot))
Re: Inline heating ("Kevin McEnhill")
Kosher Beer (KJBREW@aol.com)
Yeast/Water (ajdel@interramp.com (A. J. deLange))
A Wrench in the cogs of the Rumor Mill... ("Patrick G. Babcock")
Re: leaky corny kegs ("Patrick G. Babcock")
Hammermilling and whirlpooling (Kathy Booth)
Predicting Beer Color (George_De_Piro@berlex.com (George De Piro))
Jethro Gump and Big Words ("David R. Burley")
Results of an Apple Ale Attempt: Suggest (COLLICR1@MAIL.STATE.WI.US)
Kosher for Passover? ("Allan Rubinoff")
Cold-conditioning ales leads to O2 staling? (Brian Bliss)
Scottish Ale / Grain Bag Mashing / SUDS Malt & Hops Database Files (KennyEddy@aol.com)
Airlock activity and wheat (Dan Morley)
Am I the only one? (Marty Tippin)
The Home Brew Rat/copyrights/Russell Mast/Mills/ (skotrat)
Grassy tasting beer (gravels@TRISMTP.Npt.nuwc.navy.mil)
When is a beer, not a beer? (rmast@fnbc.com)
Re: transition to all grain, muddy brew (dipalma@sky.com (Jim Dipalma))
Re: oxidation, yeast growth, RIMS reproducibility ("Tracy Aquilla")
Re: When does your beer become beer? (Bill Rust)
yeast packets ("Dave Higdon")
Re: Irish What? (jfrane@teleport.com (Jeff Frane))
Indoor use of burners (Steve Potter)
Public Health Officials to shut down all homebrew supply outfits ("Keith Royster")
Wort Chiller (matthew.t.apple.1@nd.edu (Matt Apple))
Re: RIMS Definition (jstone@stratacom.com (Joseph Stone))
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: Dan <DJTIM@delphi.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 1996 22:36:34 -0500 (EST)
Subject: immersion chiller summary
In HBD #2044 Greg King Posted on immersion chillers
..snip, snip...
h>To get the same volume of water flowing through chillers with
h>different tubing diameters, the chiller with the narrower tubing must
h>be longer. The relationship is inversely proportional to the square of
h>the tubing diameters. For example, 3/8" tubing is 1.5 times wider
h>than 1/4" tubing, so the length of the 1/4" tubing chiller must be
h>1.5*1.5 = 2.25 times longer than the 3/8" tubing chiller to hold the
h>same volume of water.
Sorry Greg but whoever told you that the smaller diameter chiller should
be longer is incorrect and doesn't understand heat exchanger design. The
underlying assumption of getting the same volume of water through the
chiller is the right idea, but this should be accomplished by increasing
the flow rate not length of tubing.
If you lengthen the tubing and maintain the same flow rate all that will
happen is that the extra length of tubing will become less effective at
removing the heat from the wort. One of the critical factors in good
heat exchanger design is maintaining a high temperature differential
between the hot working fluid and the cold working fluid. As this
temperature difference becomes smaller less heat transfer will occur. So
what will happen is that with 1/4" tubing the water in that extra length
of tubing will be getting very hot (approaching wort temperatures) and
therefore its effectiveness at cooling becomes nil.
Net result....the 1/4" diameter chiller should be SHORTER and not
longer, IF you maintain the same flow rate.
***********************
In HBD #2043 Jeremy E. Mirsky writes:
>>My second question pertains to my hydrometer readings, which are >>
>>usually discrepant with the recipe or the calculated gravity. This
>>time I boiled about 3.5 gals of wort and tried to mix as well as I
>>could with the water in the fermenter. Suds4.0 gave me a O.G. of
>>1.046, yet my reading was about 1.038 (after cooling below 80 deg.)
>>This has happened with most of my batches. Has anyone had similar
>>experiences?
and James Williams replies...
>This may seem like a dumb question, but have you calibrated your
>hydrometer? Test your hydometer by taking a reading using distilled
>water. It should read 1.000. If not, the difference is the correction
>factor you need to add or substract to your measurements in the future.
This is a very good point. I was getting readings WAY off and found that
when I calibrated my hydrometer it was off by 0.010!!!!!
However, this didn't totally account for my differences between
predicted and actual SG. I think that another factor is how strict you
are on volumes. I usually add 1/2 gallon more water to account for
racking losses. I believe this also contributes to the difference but I
also believe that the predicted yield from the grains or and even
extracts is very good guess but like everything else in life predictions
and reality are two different things.
Caution: I am a newbie with only 4 batches under my belt, so my
responses are based on only a little experience and a lot of intuition.
***********************
Cheers. This brew's for you.
Dan Timmons
djtim@delphi.com
'[1;32m== IntJet: QWK, UK & US, Windows, GUI, OLR !!
'[1;35;40m-=> Delphi Internet Jet SST v3.012 - (C) PBE
------------------------------
From: BOBKATPOND@aol.com
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 22:09:36 -0400
Subject: leaky corny kegs
I've been having problems with leaking around the lid on some of my kegs, I
replaced the rubber seal without any improvement. Has anyone else had this
problem or have a suggestion as to what to try next? TIA
Bob Morris
------------------------------
From: diagen@netvision.net.il (Nir Navot)
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 10:01:55 +0300 (IDT)
Subject: False bottom question
Can someone sort out for me the issue of percent open area in mash/lauter
tun false bottom? Specifically, what is an acceptable/normal area for a
non-RIMS system for tuns with capacity of 1 bbl (US 31 gal) and up?
Cheers,
Nir
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nir's Brewery
Rosh Haayin, 40800 Israel
Fax 972.3.9012398
------------------------------
From: "Kevin McEnhill" <kevinm@kci.wayne.edu>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 05:58:19 -0500
Subject: Re: Inline heating
In HBD#xxxx, "Michael T. Bell" <mikeb@flash.net> asked about in-line
heating elements for a RIMS setup. I don't have a system yet but I
did try my idea out in just plain water and it seemed to work fine.
After reading Morris's articel on RIMS using a hotwater heating
element, I thought about the carmalizing question alot. My solution
(so far not tried on real wort), was to heat a water bath and run a
copper tube with the wort inside through the boiling water.
Actually, now that I think about it, what I had was an immersion
chiller running backwards. Instead of the coils sitting in a pan of
ice water, they were in boiling water. This arangment is what I am
currently building (at an incredably slow pace) for Dragon's Inn
Brewery (my wife still calls it the garage).
I think this system has quite a few advantages to direct heating.
First, the maximum temperature that touches the wort is 212F, surger
doesn't carmalize at that temp. Second, the mass of the water bath
will provide a more constant heating source than trying to control an
electric element. Third, if you have an immersion chiller, you only
need to ad a pump. Forth, if the pump quits while you are switching
laundry, you don't have to worry about the heater burning the wort.
The system seems elegant to me, and as soon as I can find a seven
gallon boiling pot, I'll let everyone know how it worked.
< Insert witty phrase here > kevinm@kci.wayne.edu <Kevin McEnhill>
------------------------------
From: KJBREW@aol.com
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 08:13:13 -0400
Subject: Kosher Beer
Although grains are kosher for passover by themselves, it is the action of
yeast on the grains which makes them chometz or not for passover. Grains used
in making matzoh are guarded from harvest to grinding to ensure that no
moisture comes into contact with them. I think this guarantees that any MALT
product is NOT kosher for passover.
As far as wine goes, the wine is considered kosher if it was made by a jew.
Concentrate must be certified kosher for the wine to be kosher, but wines
from fresh fruit are automatically kosher if a jewish person makes them. Mead
is also fine.
I asked my brother, an ordained rabbi, about all of this and he explained it
in great detail. There is alot more to kashruth than this, but, if your
kitchen is kosher anything you make there will be kosher as long as the
ingredients themselves are kosher. Malt, hops, yeast and water are parve,
neither milk or meat, and are therefore kosher.
------------------------------
From: ajdel@interramp.com (A. J. deLange)
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 08:27:18 -0500
Subject: Yeast/Water
Jonh Wilkinson had several questions in #2060:
1. From my understanding, what has been said before in hbd, the yeast will
not respire in the presence of fermentable sugars in the wort. Is this not
correct?
Yes. Yeast, though equipped with the mechanisms for it (mitochondria) do
very little respiration but understand that respiration has a very narrow
meaning here: transfer of electrons to oxygen in the presence of hydrogen
ions to form water. They do use oxygen mostly for other purposes.
2. If this is the case, will they [yeast] enter their reproductive stage
again if oxygen is introduced later while there are still fermentable
sugars present?
Yes, provided the other nutrients they need for growth (FAN, essential
amino acids) are also present. This is why oxygenation is avoided later in
the fermentation. The yeast will revert to reproduction and produce the
metabolites associated with that phase which are not usually desireable.
Some brewers do purposefully aerate later in the fermentation because they
want these
fermentation products.
3.Also, if the reproductive or growth stage produces undesirable byproducts
then most of us must get them in our brews as we usually underpitch and
aerate the wort.
In my opinion, this is true although in my own brewing I find that the
consequences of oxygenation to or above saturation are less than the evils
of not oxygenating. It depends on the style of beer and the yeast strain.
4. If reusing yeast from a previous batch where there is probably an
adequate amount, should we avoid aerating the wort to avoid yeast entering
a growth phase and producing these undesirable byproducts?
I think everyone agrees that you should oxygenate to air saturation levels
(20%, 8mg/L). Some will say don't go above this. I'll say do. In truth I
think it depends on the strain of yeast, the beer being brewed, the gravity
of the wort, the pitching level and so on. The best thing to do is
experiment and see what level of aeration gives the best results in the
finished beer. I consistently get better results with higher levels and
suspect it is because I never have an adequate cell count (even though I
typically reach about 8E6/mL) but it may also be the particular strains I
use.
5. I am thinking of buying an oxygen bottle so I can be sure I have
enough O2 in solution. I understand the yeast clear the O2 from the wort
in short order but how long should it take for them to complete what growth
they are going to have and settle out?
In my experience, once the starter gets past the first couple of feedings
the rate of oxygen and sugar consumption soars. As a practical matter I
oxygenate once in the morning and once in the evening when the culture is
at the liter level. I usually do the last feedings and aerations on a
weekend day and oxygenate several times about half an hour apart. About
half an hour after the last oxygenation fermentation starts and that is
usually over in a couple of hours. One can then decant, replenish the wort
and resume oxygenation. Don't worry about the few cells that go down the
drain with the spent wort. You are selecting for those with better
flocculation properties.
6. ...my brewing water is very soft and low ph. I don't
see that I would need added calcium for acidification since the water is
already acidic but do I need it for break formation and for the yeast? If so,
won't the mash be acidified even more?
pH is a measure of the imbalance between alkalinity and acidity, not the
amount of either. The amount of calcium needed for pH adjustment depends
very much upon the grain you are using. You don't say anything about the
alkalinity of your water but soft water is usually low in alkalinity so
that not much calcium is needed for acid adjustment, even with the palest
Pilsner malts. A little extra calcium for the sake of break formation,
yeast metabolism, etc, can't hurt. If added as the sulfate (gypsum) harsh
hops bitterness will result. If added as the carbonate the pH will increase
but this may be desired if high kilned malts have pulled the pH too low.
Calcium chloride is more or less neutral but does, of course, lead to salty
tastes if sodium is high which it shouldn't be if the water is soft. Soft
water is usually OK as is for Pilsners. If you don't like the pH try
calcium chloride as a calcium source or add a little lactic acid to the
mash.
A.J. deLange Numquam in dubio, saepe in errore!
ajdel@interramp.com
------------------------------
From: "Patrick G. Babcock" <pbabcock@ford.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 09:16:07 -0400
Subject: A Wrench in the cogs of the Rumor Mill...
Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager...
The rumor that Russell Mast, Scott Abene and I are one in the same is false,
groundless, and totally untrue. I have it under good authority that, in the
wee hours of the afternoon yesterday, right-wing extremists of the Humorless
Bastard Brigade joined with the Post Content Vigilantes and snuck into the AOL
server, subdued Majordomo, and planted a message to create the effect! Hell! I
don't even CARE that Irish brewpubs proudly display their toilets behind glass
windows for all their patrons to see! I don't even CARE about some ridiculous
1-800 number that you call to hear some Moronic Dork [TM - the Boston Brewing
Company] try to sound like a Trappist Monk in Kokomo Indiana, only to find its
a toll-free answering machine (someone OBVIOUSLY has far too much time and
money on their hands...). Nor due I claim familiarity with Heather and her
exploits! Of course, I must admit to having seen Ginger in her Gilligan's
Island days. I hear she didn't age well...
Heck! I don't even have the shirt! ('Course John & John do. Well done,
Commando
Russ!)
Let's put this issue to rest now! The perpetrators *WILL* be discovered! They
*WILL* be punished (as if this isn't punishement enough)! I have already place
my order for the case of Bud Red Light Ice which they will have to drink in
retribution! Beware the Frozen Crimson Illuminated Acetaldehyde Avenger!
Um, er, coffee's a little strong this morning...
See ya!
Pat Babcock in SE Michigan pbabcock@oeonline.com
http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/brew.html
Copyright 1996 Juan Valdez. Doctor sez only half the rights are reserved
'cause
caffeine makes me nervous.
------------------------------
From: "Patrick G. Babcock" <pbabcock@ford.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 09:19:51 -0400
Subject: Re: leaky corny kegs
Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager...
On Jun 4, 10:09pm, Bob Morris wrote:
> Subject: leaky corny kegs
> I've been having problems with leaking around the lid on some of my kegs, I
> replaced the rubber seal without any improvement. Has anyone else had this
> problem or have a suggestion as to what to try next? TIA
Try some Keg Lube [tm] or Lubrifilm [tm] on the large o-ring. Or any other
"sterile" vegetable-based lubricant. Avoid vaseline - it attacks the rubber of
the seal. Avoid K-Y - it is water (hence, beer) soluble.
See ya!
Pat Babcock in SE Michigan pbabcock@ oeonline.com
http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/brew.html
Copyright 1996 Johnson & Johnson. All rights friction-free.
------------------------------
From: Kathy Booth <kbooth@isd.ingham.k12.mi.us>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 09:25:33 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Hammermilling and whirlpooling
In a commercial brewery tour in Portland, (Widmer?) they used
hammermills for grinding. I was under the impression that the
whirlpooling process removed the particles of husk that would be
probematic to the homebrewer without industrial equipment. Its been
acouple of years so the exact placement of the whirlpool in the flow
chart is unclear to me. Also unclear is how you sparge the mash with
hammermilled grist. I used a hammermill in feed grain situations, and the
grain is thrown against a strike plate and then the reduced particles
escape thru a sieve as I remember from a distant childhood.
Cheers, jim booth, lansing, mi
------------------------------
From: George_De_Piro@berlex.com (George De Piro)
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 10:29:26 -0700
Subject: Predicting Beer Color
I've noticed that when trying to predict beer color using the data in
the Zymurgy Great Grain Special Issue, the beers are usually a tad
lighter than I calculate. Should the "potential color" number also be
multiplied by your efficiency, or am I just experiencing variation
amongst different lots/brands of malt?
George De Piro (Nyack, NY)
------------------------------
From: "David R. Burley" <103164.3202@CompuServe.COM>
Date: 05 Jun 96 10:21:49 EDT
Subject: Jethro Gump and Big Words
Rob Moline of Little Apple Brewing, Manhattan, Kansas, and now of Jethro Gump
Brewing continues to insist that his methods do not support theory. He adds
sugar solution to his secondary without stirring and waits long enough for
diffusion to completely disperse the sugar. I guess you Kansassians are really
patient.
All I have to say about using big words like Brownian is, if you can't walk
the
walk, don't talk the talk {;-)
Keep on brewing,
Dave Burley
103164.3202@compuserve.com
------------------------------
From: COLLICR1@MAIL.STATE.WI.US
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 09:29:44 -0500
Subject: Results of an Apple Ale Attempt: Suggest
I've been homebrewing on and off for the last 9 months and finally had a
beer turn out. I had a little problem with bleach in the first couple of
attempts. Anyway, I tried to make an all extract Apple Ale. Here's ther
recipe:
5 lbs Light Malt Extract
4.5 gallons of Preservative Free Apple Cider
1.5 oz Cascade Hops
1 package dry Edme Ale Yeast
I boiled the Extract with 1.5 gallons of water for 40 minutes Adding the 1
oz of hops at the beginning and .5 oz of hops with 3 minutes left. After
cooling the wort, I added it to the 4.5 gallons of Apple Cider and pitched
the yeast. Admittedly, I didn't take a hydrometer reading.
I fermented this mixture for 2 weeks and then kegged it in the 5 liter
mini-kegs using 1/3 cup of corn sugar as priming for the batch. After ten
days, I decided it was time to give this brew a try. I was delighted that
it actually tasted like beer, unlike my other attempts, but I was surprised
that the Cider did not impart a stronger apple flavor or sweetness. It
actually tastes more like a peach beer to me than an apple beer. The body
of the beer is real good though.
Does anyone have any suggestions as to how I could adjust my recipe to get
more Apple flavor and sweetness. I've read that for the sweetness I could
add lactose or other unfermentables and would appreciate any comments about
this method that you'd be willing to share.
Thanks in advance,
Craig
------------------------------
From: "Allan Rubinoff" <allan_rubinoff@mathworks.com>
Date: 5 Jun 1996 10:28:18 -0400
Subject: Kosher for Passover?
In HBD #2060, Mark Garetz <mgaretz@hoptech.com> writes:
> What is not kosher for passover is any bread or cake that has been leavened
> or in other words allowed to rise. This is usually caused by yeast, but
> leavening by baking powder is out too.
>
> One might assume, therefore, that NO beer can be kosher for passover because
> it contains yeast. Can't say for sure, but my opinion would be that yeast
> itself is not a problem because WINE is an integral part of the passover
> seder (meal) and we know that is fermented by the actions of yeast the same
> as beer. Using this reasoning, I would assume that beer could be construed
> to be kosher for passover. When the dietary laws were written, they didn't
> know yeast existed, and various rabbinical bodies over the years have
> interpreted and reinterpreted the laws (dietary and otherwise) to fit the
> times.
This is self-contradictory. Wine is OK because there is no grain
involved. Beer is not OK precisely because it does fit the category of
"bread or cake that has been leavened." The combination of grain and
leavening makes beer strictly forbidden for Passover.
The leavening doesn't even need to be added by the brewer (or baker),
either. It can be present in the air or in the ingredients. To make
matzoh kosher for Passover, it must be baked within a few minutes (18?)
of mixing the flour with water. This is to prevent any leavening from
taking place, through the activation of wild yeast in the flour or air.
Given this constraint, it's obviously impossible to make beer kosher for
Passover.
Allan Rubinoff
rubinoff@mathworks.com
------------------------------
From: Brian Bliss <brianb@microware.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 96 09:39:38 CDT
Subject: Cold-conditioning ales leads to O2 staling?
Ken Willing <kwilling@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au> writes:
> So I'm back to my original question: Is headspace O2 a legitimate concern,
> or is it unlikely as a source of O2 leading to staling? (I'm referring to
> high-melanoidin ales whose staling problem I initially thought was
> melanoidin mediated; but hot-side aeration has been radically eliminated, so
> it seems doubtful that early melanoidin oxidation is the cause.)
>
> For some time, I've been fining my ales with gelatin and then
> cold-conditioning them in the secondary vessel at around 4C. for a couple of
> weeks, before bottling. I have a persistent problem of these beers going
> cardboardy, muddy, with loss of distinctiveness of flavor, etc., as early as
> 6 weeks in the bottle. Given this kind of cold-conditioning, full
> carbonation after priming/bottling can take up to a month; so the beer is
> sometimes good to drink for only about two weeks...
>
> My question is: After cold-conditioning that drops nearly all the yeast out
> of suspension, is it conceivable that the remaining low yeast contingent in
> the bottle is simply insufficient to absorb oxygen quickly enough to prevent
> reactions with dissolved and headspace O2 to form staling compounds?
Use polyclar to drop the yeast out, instead of gelatin. It reduces
oxidation in the beer & removes excess tannins, both to a point.
Free O2 may not be your problem, however. When you drop the yeast out
as you are doing (ala english bitters), rather than letting the beer sit
on the yeast for a few weeks after fermentation appears to mostly be over,
you are not giving the yeast a chance to reduce the acetaldehyde in the
beer (which it produced earlier). Acetaldehyde is responsibe for a fresh
"green apple" flavor, quite to my liking. It is, however, inherently
unstable, and will lead to the staling you describe in a matter of a few
weeks.
If it is long-term stability you are after, then don't drop the yeast out
as early, and introdue fresh yeast at bottling time. This will help
carbonation develop more quickly, absorb free O2 left in the beer, so the
beer will be better earlier and last longer. If someone knows a way to
prevent acetaldehyde from decomposing (or slow the process down - while
keeping the beer at the proper serving temperature), please let us know.
bb
- ------------------------------
------------------------------
From: KennyEddy@aol.com
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 10:50:23 -0400
Subject: Scottish Ale / Grain Bag Mashing / SUDS Malt & Hops Database Files
Clark D. Ritchie asks for a Scottish Ale recipe. I whipped up a Heavy last
winter that has gotten great reviews, so I'll pass it on here:
8 lb Light DME (or 10 - 11 lb pale malt for all-grain)
2-4 oz chocolate malt (for color)
1 lb 40L crystal
1/2 lb Peated
1/2 oz Perle (7.5%) 30 min
1/2 oz Chinnok (11.3%) 20 min
1 oz Fuggle (4.5%) 10 min
(about 20 IBU)
Wyeast European Ale (had a bad experience once
with the Scottish yeast!)
Ferment @ 65F 1 week (need plenty of headspace!!)
secondary 2 weeks @ 65F
OG 1.070
FG 1.020
Ages well! I'd perhaps kick up the hopping just a bit but it's pretty decent
as-is. BTW I've tasted similar recipes with 2 lb and 3 lb of the peated malt
- -- I think 1/2 lb is perfect to prevent this form becoming a Rauchbier!
Those other brews were simply overpoweringly peaty. This is a pretty big
beer but the dry smokiness takes the edge off the alcohol. As I said, a bit
more IBU's (maybe 25 or so) would perfect the balance.
**************
Chris Cooper's method of all-grain brewing may have its flaws for that kind
of process, but it leads to a somewhat simpler way to partial-mash than
trying to rig up a lauter tun / sparge apparatus in the kitchen. Mash your
grains in a grain bag that is tied such that the grains are quite loose (not
compacted). Meanwhile, prepare some clear water (maybe a gallon or so) in
another vessel by heating to ~170F. After conversion, "steep" the bag up and
down several times in the mash water. Now lift the bag, allow the grain to
drain into the mash water, then do the same dippity-doo rinse a few times in
the clear water. Again, lift and drain over the rinse water pot. Combine
the contents of the two vessels, heat to boil, add extract, and proceed. If
you're patient or have another vessel handy, you can get better extraction
using a second rinse vessel, but this probably is just getting that "last
10%". Note that you need to be sure that the volume of mash water plus the
volume of rinse water will still fit into one vessel or the other!
**************
I updated my copy of SUDS with the grain data form the Zymurgy Great Grain
Issue, and hop info from a variety of sources. I've posted the SUDSMALT.DBF
and SUDSHOP.DBF files at
ftp://users.aol.com/kennyeddy/files/sudsmh.zip
if anyone wants to expand their SUDS databases. You can get at it through my
web page as well (URL below). **FAIR WARNING** -- these files will overwrite
your current files, and saved recipes using now-non-existent "old names" will
come up with goofy color/gravity figures. Hops data will be unaffected. You
might want to add the stock SUDS grains back in, along with any you've added,
or rewrite your recipes with the new database in place.
**************
Ken Schwartz
KennyEddy@aol.com
http://users.aol.com/kennyeddy
------------------------------
From: Dan Morley <morleyd@cadvision.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 09:16:42 -0600
Subject: Airlock activity and wheat
Hello,
I have a question that has been puzzling me since I started brewing with
wheat.
I have done numerous beers (extract and all-grain) using anywhere from 5% to
50% wheat.
Whenever I use any amount of wheat, I find that there is always bubbles
passing through the air-lock of the secondary, no matter how long I let it
sit in the secondary for. And I always have a rim of fine white foam around
the top of the secondary. When I brew without wheat, I find that eventually
the bubbles stop (or get very slow).
The first wheat beer I made I left it in the secondary for six weeks, thinking
that it was still fermenting!!, thankfully I have learned how to determine
when fermentation is complete other that counting bubbles!
Does anyone know what it is with wheat that will cause the foam and the
continuous activity in the air-lock??
Thanks
Dan Morley
------------------------------
From: Marty Tippin <martyt@sky.net>
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 1996 10:51:49 -0500
Subject: Am I the only one?
(I know everyone is tired of this sort of post, so I'll keep it brief.
Don't bother flaming me either; we both have better things to do...)
Am I the only one who is consistently getting a slow feed on homebrew digest
mailings?? The digest consistently shows up around 10:00pm CDT - a good 22
hours or so after it was supposedly "sent" - putting me well behind the
curve on information dissemination. Used to always be waiting in my inbox
by 6:00AM CDT before "the big change." I find this delay more than a little
distressing.
I can manually request the digest from majordomo and get response in a
matter of seconds, so it's obviously not a problem at my end nor anwyhere in
between. Shawn tells me the delay si because I'm at sky.net, and the mail
is sent alphabetically by domain; if that's true, I sure feel sorry for the
folks at yellow.submarine.com and zulu.net...
Anyway, if you're in the same boat I am, PLEASE be sure to fire off a letter
to Shawn telling him about it - maybe something will be done if enough
people voice their complaints.
- -Marty
------------------------------
From: skotrat <skotrat@wwa.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 1996 11:09:16 -0500
Subject: The Home Brew Rat/copyrights/Russell Mast/Mills/
From: pbabcock@ford.com
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 16:40:41 -0500
Subject: The Home Brew Rat/copyrights/Russell Mast/Mills/
Pssssssst Buddy,
Wanna buy a Grain Mill?
It's adjustable.
copyright but not sold by Scott Abene (1996)
################################################################
# ThE-HoMe-BrEw-RaT #
# Scott Abene <skotrat@wwa.com> #
# http://miso.wwa.com/~skotrat (the Homebrew "Beer Slut" page) #
# OR #
# http://miso.wwa.com/~skotrat/Brew-Rat-Chat/ (Brew-Rat-Chat) #
# "Get off your dead ass and brew" #
# "If beer is liquid bread, maybe bread is solid beer" #
################################################################
------------------------------
From: gravels@TRISMTP.Npt.nuwc.navy.mil
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 96 12:20:44 EST
Subject: Grassy tasting beer
Hi All,
I kegged a brown ale on Sunday and dry hopped in the keg with 3/4 oz.
of Tettenanger hops in a nylon hop bag, I weighted the bag down with
sanitized marbles and attached it to the liquid in tube with a
sanitized binder clip. This is the first time I've dry hopped in the
keg. I usually dry hop in the secondary.
Here's the problem; My beer tastes grassy! Now, don't get me wrong, I
like grass, I walk on it all the time, but I don't like drinking it!
What is the problem? Is it the hops? I can still taste the true hops
flavor behind the grassyness. I've used these hops before, but not
for dry hopping, and have never tasted anything like this. Could it
be that I just need to let the hops age a little? If so, will they
age properly under 30 psi. of CO2?
I guess I'll just have to drink pour a pint from the other keg for
awhile and try not to worry while I'm waiting for replies.....
Thanx,
Steve Gravel Newport, Rhode Island
"Homebrew, It's not just a hobby, It's an adventure!"
------------------------------
From: rmast@fnbc.com
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 11:35:17 -0500
Subject: When is a beer, not a beer?
> From: Mary Towle <MTOWLE@mhz.com>
> Subject: When does your beer become beer?
> In determining the age of your beer, when is ground zero?
It really depends on what you're talking about. If you mean for
telling people how old your beer is, like if they ask the age, I
usually try to give both numbers. Like "I started this batch 6
weeks ago, but it's only been in the bottle for one week" or something.
> Or, when does your beer become beer?
I like to go with a Gibsonian definition, using the concept of
affordances - a beer becomes beer when it says "drink me", often
only moments before quaffing, but sometimes that's still while
it's boiling. (If you know what a Gibsonian is, raise your hand,
and then go soak your head.)
> - - - - One of us says it is beer as soon as you pitch the yeast.
That sounds more like religious bias than gender bias. Doesn't the
book of Isiah say "God knew you before you were in the carboy" or
something like that?
> What does the homebrewing public have to say about it?
As the official spokesperson for no one in particular, I'd like to
say "who cares?" Thank you.
The one thing I can safely say is that as long as your equipment is
kosher, the beer is kosher, whether or not it's beer yet.
Russell Mast
copyright 1996, Stuart Cheshire.
------------------------------
From: dipalma@sky.com (Jim Dipalma)
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 96 12:51:45 EDT
Subject: Re: transition to all grain, muddy brew
Hi All,
In HBD #2060, Bill Kowalski writes:
>A saccharification rest at 155-160F is (at best) at the upper limit of the
>saccharification temperature range, and will produce a very high ratio of
>unfermentables to fermentables. Additionally, conversion at these
>temperatures requires a much longer period than at cooler temps (say 150F),
Sorry, I have to disagree. At the cooler temps, you'll get mostly beta
amylase activity. This is something of an over-simplification, but essentially
beta amylase breaks a single glucose molecule of the end of a starch chain -
significant starch reduction does not occur with beta amylase alone. A mash
held at 150F will convert of course, but that's because alpha amylase is
also active at that temperature.
To illustrate this point, there was a tangentially related thread that
appeared on this forum recently regarding the use of well-modified malts in
a decoction mashing schedule. Specifically, the discussion focused on the
effect of leaving the rest mash at protein rest temperatures for an extended
period of time when the malt was already highly modified. It was felt that too
much protein reduction was taking place, and the body and head retention of
the finished product was suffering. I adapted my decoction schedule
accordingly, and shortly thereafter brewed a pils where the rest mash was left
at 130-135F for over an hour while the decoction was processed. Just before
adding the decoction back, I tasted the mash. It was noticeably sweet, but an
iodine test showed it had not converted. This was exactly what I expected -
beta amylase alone would produce some sweetness, due to the production of
glucose and the subsequent formation of maltose, but not full conversion.
OTOH, I have found 155F to be an ideal temperature for rapid conversion,
as there is significant activity by both alpha and beta amylase at that
temperature. I routinely hold the first saccharification rest at 155F when
doing decoction mashes, as it makes no sense to manipulate the sacc. rest
temperature of thick decoctions. The wort sugar profile is altered when the
decoction is boiled anyway (some caramelization, more unfermentables),
regardless of which conversion temperature was used, so it makes sense to
select a temperature that leads to fast conversion. Over the past 4 years
and 50-60 decoction mashed batches, I've had only 3 or 4 occasions where
the decoction failed to convert fully in 30 minutes and required a longer
rest.
>so I don't think a 30 minute rest is going to do the job.
See above.
>Chris' post got me thinking about a question that has been on my mind for a
>while now: When we make high gravity beers, we usually take the first
>runnings from the mash for the high gravity beer, and then either use
>subsequent runnings for a "small" beer or just discard the remaining sugars
>with the grain. My question is why don't we just keep recirculating the
>first runnings until all the soluble sugars are "rinsed" from the grain? The
>first runnings are obviously not saturated with sugars (or else we wouldn't
>be able to perform concentrated boils with malt extract) so we should still
>be able to dissolve additional sugars into these runnings. I guess the
>easiest way to answer this question would be just to try it and see what
>happens, but if anyone has any ideas or insights, I'd love to hear them.
Well, I think you certainly *can* improve extraction by increased
recirculation of the first runnings. From what I've read of Dave Miller's
writings, I believe this is exactly how he obtains the rather gaudy extraction
numbers he reports. However, I think there's a tradeoff here.
Recirculation, unless done in a tightly insulated closed system like a RIMS,
will result in heat loss and an increased risk of HSA. If you're like most of
us and collect the initial runoff in a small pan and manually return it to
the top of the tun, this can be a problem. There is also the time factor.
Grain is cheap and time is precious, so IMHO it's easier to just toss another
pound or two of base malt on the grain bill rather than go to great lengths
to squeeze every last bit of sugar out of a mash. One man's opinion.
*****************************************************************
Also in HBD #2060, Tom Puskar writes:
>I made an all grain batch to use as my first kegged batch.
>Now, here's the problem. The batch looks like muddy water!
>1. When I chilled the batch, I adjusted the flow of both cooling water and
>wort so the wort cooled to about 70F. It ran into the chiller quite clear
>but came out cloudy. I think maybe I din't precipitate the cold break enough
>and instead of dropping out in the fermenter it just stayed as a sort of
>emulsion.
I've never used a CF chiller, but 10 minutes cooling time sounds very fast
to me. Is this normal for a CF chiller??
>2. The yeast is a really lousy flocculator and is just staying in
>suspension.
Could be, some strains I've used stubbornly refuse to drop out of suspension.
If it is yeast, gelatin will take it out, but since you've already kegged the
batch gelatin is not really an alternative.
>4. The beer gods were angry with me on brewing day.
Why, were you wearing plaid? :-)
>Oh yeah, I did a single infusion with the strike water at about 170 and
>setlling in to about 155 for an hour. No protein rest.
What malt did you use?? Was it a domestic malt by any chance??
Tom, I'm inclined to agree that the cloudiness is cold break material. The
fact that it went into the chiller clear and came out cloudy is kind of a big
clue that's what it is. If you used a domestic or undermodified malt, and
skipped a protein rest, the wort likely had a somewhat higher protein content
than normal. The rapid chilling time would have coagulated a great deal of
this protein, and given you a large quantity of cold break material. I have
this happen when I brew in the winter and my tap water is only about 45F. I
can chill 11-12 gallons of wort in 15-20 minutes, but the cold break looks
like huge wads of cotton candy floating around in the fermenter.
Unfortunately, I'm at a loss to suggest a remedy. I've got a couple of batches
at home that were unknowingly brewed with a very poor quality malt, horribly
undermodified, that have the same problem. Large amounts of cold break that
stubbornly refuses to settle out, the beer looks like mud. I've tried
extensive cold conditioning, fining with polyclar, then with gelatin, no
luck. If anyone has a solution, I'd appreciate hearing about it.
Cheers,
Jim dipalma@sky.com
------------------------------
From: "Tracy Aquilla" <aquilla@salus.med.uvm.edu>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 96 13:03:28 CDT
Subject: Re: oxidation, yeast growth, RIMS reproducibility
In Digest #2060:
Ken Willing <kwilling@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au> wrote:
>So I'm back to my original question: Is headspace O2 a legitimate concern,
>or is it unlikely as a source of O2 leading to staling?
IMO, yes, it's a legitimate concern and it is possibly the main source of O2
leading to the staling of bottled beer.
>My question is: After cold-conditioning that drops nearly all the yeast out
>of suspension, is it conceivable that the remaining low yeast contingent in
>the bottle is simply insufficient to absorb oxygen quickly enough to prevent
>reactions with dissolved and headspace O2 to form staling compounds?
Yes, it's conceivable. Even if the beer isn't cold-conditioned for a long
time and there remains a 'normal' amount of yeast in suspension, it probably
won't be able to absorb all of the O2 from the headspace. The key is to
minimize the O2 in the bottle. There was a decent article on minimizing O2
in bottled beers in Brewing Techniques recently (March/April '96).
John Wilkinson <jwilkins@imtn.tpd.dsccc.com> wrote:
>I have been recently reading the CAMRA Homebrewing book and a very nice
>read it is, too. The author stated that oxygen in the wort caused the
>yeast to respire and multiply. From my understanding, what has been said
>before in hbd, the yeast will not respire in the presence of fermentable
>sugars in the wort. Is this not correct?
It is true, S. cerevisiae cannot respire (i.e. oxidative phosphorylation) in
wort. The reason for the misnomer is that many people equate respiration
with the uptake of oxygen, while biochemically-speaking, it's much more than
that.
>The gist of what the books author
>said was fine in that he was pointing out that oxygen was necessary for
>yeast growth and should not be present later.
Oxygen is not necessary/required for the growth of S. cerevisiae, but it is
required by most other species of yeast (eg. Brettanomyces. sp.).
>A part I am still not sure of, though,
>is what causes the yeast to go into a reproductive phase. Is it the
>presence of oxygen and fermentable sugars? If this is the case, will they
>enter their reproductive stage again if oxygen is introduced later while
>there are still fermentable sugars present? I think A.J. deLange said that
>in hbd #2059. It would seem to make sense.
There's really no such thing as a 'reproductive phase'. Any suitable carbon
substrate (eg. sugar) will allow yeast to bud. The rate of budding is very
slow during the lag phase and fastest during the log phase, but the cells
continue to bud throughout the entire fermentation, until the level of
fermentable sugar is depleted. However, when a fermenting culture is
provided with O2 (i.e. aerobic fermentation), it will both ferment and bud
even faster, but will not respire. Aerobic fermentation will also produce
certain compounds (particularly acids) in higher quantities than will
anaerobic fermentation. This can taint the beer. Oxygen doesn't really make
the yeast grow, it just makes it grow faster.
> Also, if the reproductive or
>growth stage produces undesirable byproducts then most of us must get them
>in our brews as we usually underpitch and aerate the wort. If reusing
>yeast from a previous batch where there is probably an adequate amount,
>should we avoid aerating the wort to avoid yeast entering a growth phase and
>producing these undesirable byproducts? I suppose for brews done from
>starters we have to aerate our wort and just accept the byproducts as an
>adequate amount of yeast from a starter seems unlikely.
Wort DO levels have a most significant impact on esters, although wort
composition, fermentation temperature, and the yeast strain used also have a
significant impact. It is true, by underpitching and aerating the wort, one
is providing conditions conducive to ester production, but whether or not
this is desirable depends on the style being brewed. With most ales, esters
are desirable, while with some ales and most lagers, they are not. One way
to minimize ester production is to use a higher pitching rate and minimize
or even completely avoid wort aeration (and keep the temp down). Repitching
the yeast from one batch to the next usually amounts to overpitching
slightly. In such a case, one can expect less esters, even if the wort is
aerated, but there will still be a significant amount of budding going on.
>I understand the yeast clear the O2 from the wort
>in short order but how long should it take for them to complete what growth
>they are going to have and settle out? How long should I wait after each
>step to be safe in decanting the liquid. Or should I even worry until
>time to pitch?
I wait 2-3 days. It's usually just about done in 2, and most of the yeast
has dropped to the bottom by 3. The only time to worry is when the yeast is
old and has been sitting more than a week. In that case, feed it once before
pitching.
"Keith Royster" <keith.royster@ponyexpress.com> wrote:
>Perhaps. But I'll have had the enjoyment of building my RIMS, I'll be
>done sooner and with much less effort, especially if you're brewing
>a style that calls for a stepped infusion mash or a decoction mash.
>And I'll also be able to reproduce it much more accurately.
First, I'd like to address the last statement. I don't do RIMS and I'm
skeptical of this comment. Can someone who does RIMS please provide some
comparative variance numbers to support this claim? When referring to
accurate reproduction, are we talking basically about the OG and
fermentability of the wort, or something more? Secondly, I'd like to hear
from RIMS users who do decoction mashes. Do you think RIMS and decoctions go
well together? Maybe I'll try...
Tracy
------------------------------
From: Bill Rust <wrust@csc.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 96 13:19 EDT
Subject: Re: When does your beer become beer?
Good day Brewsters,
Robert A. Uhl writes...
>> - - - One of us says it is beer as soon as you pitch the yeast.
>
>Wrongo. At the moment of pitching, one has a 5 gallon drum of really
>nasty sweet stuff. This is known as wort...
Actually, that's incorrect. The pro brewers I've talked to claim that it's
beer when you add the yeast.
BTW, good luck to all the finalists in the NHC today!
-----------------------------------------------------------
Bill Rust, Master Brewer | for (beer=99; beer>0; beer--) {
Jack Pine Savage Brewery | take_one_down();
Shiloh, IL (NACE) | pass_it_around(); }
-----------------------------------------------------------
- ------------------------------
------------------------------
From: "Dave Higdon" <DAVEH@qesrv1.bwi.wec.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 13:32:17 EST
Subject: yeast packets
when is it best to pitch liquid yeast, when the pack expands to 1
inch, on the day when the incubation period = months old, or what
ever comes first.
------------------------------
From: jfrane@teleport.com (Jeff Frane)
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 1996 11:28:25 -0700
Subject: Re: Irish What?
>From: "FINLEY, BARRY CURTIS" <BFINLEY@MUSIC.CC.UGA.EDU>
>Date: Tue, 04 Jun 1996 13:48:50 EDT
>Subject: Irish brown ale
>
>
>I would like to get some ideas for brewing an Irish brown ale.
No offense intended, but what the hell is an Irish brown ale?
Other than another bogus marketing scheme from Coors, I don't
see that it's a real beerstyle. The Irish do drink a couple
of beers that aren't stout (although not much) but, historically,
they brew porter. Period. Some of it is stout porter, true,
but still: porter.
If you want to brew an Irish brown ale, it sounds like you can
do anything you want and call it Irish brown ale. That's
probably what Coors did.
- --Jeff Frane
(x) non-copyright material included
------------------------------
From: Steve Potter <spotter@Meriter.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 1996 13:38:36 -0500
Subject: Indoor use of burners
I am interested in setting up a natural gas burner in my basement. All the
information tha I have come across so far relates to LP burners, not NG
burners.
My specific questions are as follows:
1. With a 30,000 BTU NG burner, what is the realistic risk of using it in a
basement?
------------------------------
From: "Keith Royster" <keith.royster@ponyexpress.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 15:42:36 -0500
Subject: Public Health Officials to shut down all homebrew supply outfits
OK, now that I have your attention, I would like to bring a serious
story to your attention.
A friend of mine who runs a mail-order homebrew supply store out of
his home had a surprise visit very recently by a women from the
county health dept. Apparently someone complained that he was
packing hops without a permit! No, I'm not joking, this really
happened! Apparently you need a permit from the county health dept.
to repackage and sell consumables(?).
He has been most generously (what's the emoticon for sarcasm?)
granted 30 days to either pack it up and close, or make the necessary
modifications to his outfit and apply for a permit. Since he doesn't
have the $20,000 necessary for the latter option, it looks like he
may have to close down.
This could have far reaching implications, so in the interest of
helping a fellow homebrewer out, and to protect our own interests in
homebrewing, I'm hoping that somebody out in the HBD collective knows
something about this and how to get out of it. It seems to me that
he should not be subject to the health officials since he is not
producing or processing the hops. He's only repackaging them.
Besides, do hops fall under the definition of consumables? I don't
know about you but after using them I throw mine out, except for the
rare occasion when I feed them to my golden retriever (sorry, bad
joke).
Please, oh grand HBD wisdom, don't fail me now!
Keith Royster - Keith.Royster@ponyexpress.com
@your.service - http://dezines.com/@your.service
Mooresville, North Carolina
------------------------------
From: matthew.t.apple.1@nd.edu (Matt Apple)
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 17:50:05 -0500
Subject: Wort Chiller
Quick question from an ignorant newbie...
I just got a wort immersion chiller, courtesy of UPS. What the heck am
I supposed to do with it? Do I dunk it into the brew pot or what? Also,
I got a faucet adapter for my carboy/bottler jetspray cleaner, but it
only fits the bathroom sink, not the kitchen sink (since I live in an
apartment, there's no outside faucet or basement). Maybe I need a
plumber...
Matt A.
matthew.t.apple.1@nd.edu
http://www.nd.edu/~mapple
- --- End of forwarded mail from Homebrew
------------------------------
From: jstone@stratacom.com (Joseph Stone)
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 96 18:51:26 PDT
Subject: Re: RIMS Definition
I've decided to leave the RIMS acronym well enough alone, however, I
did like the terminology of Kirk Fleming, Ken Koupal and others.
Continuous Recirculation of the Wort (i.e. Pump)
Heat (Gas/Electric) Applied in the Recirculation Path (Inline/Direct)
Feedback-Based Temperature Control (Manual/Automated/Programmable)
I've attempted to enumerate a few variations,
Manual Gas Inline RIMS
Example. The Rodney Morris' prototype, a "spiral of 3/8-inch
copper tubing which he placed over a (gas) burner...". The heat
delivered by the gas burner is manually adjusted based on the
observed response of a temperature sensing device.
Manual Gas Direct RIMS
Example. Identical to the Manual Gas Inline RIMS only the heat
from the gas burner is applied directly to the mash vessel.
Manual Electric Inline RIMS
Example. An electric heater element in a tube. The power applied
to the heater element is manually adjusted based on the observed
response of a temperature sensing device.
Manual Electric Direct RIMS
Example. Identical to the Manual Electric Inline RIMS only the
electric heater element would be located within the mash vessel.
Automated Electric Inline RIMS
Example. Identical to the Manual Electric Inline RIMS only a
controller adjusts the power applied to the heater element based on
the feedback of a temperature sensing device. The controller is
capable of maintaining a single temperature without human
intervention. This is the original Morris' RIMS.
Programmable Electric Inline RIMS
Example. Identical to the Automated Electric Inline RIMS except
that the controller is capable of maintaining a multiple step
temperature profile without human intervention.
- ------------------------------
------------------------------
End of Homebrew Digest #2061
****************************
