Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2175
This file received at Hops.Stanford.EDU 1996/09/05 PDT
Homebrew Digest Thursday, 5 September 1996 Number 2175
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Shawn Steele, Digest Janitor
Thanks to Rob Gardner for making the digest happen!
Contents:
Motorize MaltMills/Keg Burner Support/Cheap DIGITAL Thermometer (DAVE BRADLEY IC742 6-7932)
re:Orval Culture (Jim Liddil)
Re: Old yeast ((patricia hust))
Storing Starters/ American ("Craig Rode")
Matt in Montreal ("Mark C. Bellefeuille")
Re: Channeling (Kelly Jones)
Bob Mrzen (RUst1d?)
mashing mistakes ((Jeff Sturman))
Re: Duffy's extraction efficiency (Gregory King)
Blow-Off and Crap advice ( ("Aaron Herrick")
Help with WA State Laws ((Ray Ownby))
knifing/extraction (M257876@sl1001.mdc.com (bayerospace@mac))
Screw-off tops ((Kevin E Buttrum))
Flame Sanitizing (John Wilkinson)
RE: Extraction rate (John Wilkinson)
Livermore Ca. (djfitzg@VNET.IBM.COM)
Blowoff tube ((LaBorde, Ronald))
priming/under cabonation and posting receipes (AJUNDE@ccmail.monsanto.com)
A source for 7-8oz bottles ((DON CHASE))
Re: Late harvest hops ((Rick Larson))
Polyclar, ("David R. Burley")
Very fine mesh for a false bottom (( Douglas A Cook 230-4715 8894))
Re: Cleaning Kegs (Dave Beedle)
For SUBMISSIONS to be published, send mail to:
homebrew@aob.org
For (UN)SUBSCRIBE requests, send mail to:
homebrew-digest-request@aob.org
and include ONLY subscribe or unsubscribe in the BODY of the message.
Please note that if subscribed via BEER-L, you must unsubscribe by sending
a one line e-mail to listserv@ua1vm.ua.edu that says: UNSUB BEER-L
If your address is changing, please unsubscribe from the old address and
then subscribe from the new address.
If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first.
For technical problems send e-mail to the Digest Janitor, shawn@aob.org.
OTHER HOMEBREW INFORMATION
http://www.aob.org/aob - The AHA's web site.
http://alpha.rollanet.org - "The Brewery" and the Cat's Meow Archives.
info@aob.org - automated e-mail homebrewing information.
ARCHIVES:
At ftp.stanford.edu in /pub/clubs/homebrew/beer via anonymous ftp. Also
http://alpha.rollanet.org on the web and at majordomo@aob.org by e-mail.
COPYRIGHT:
As with all forums such as this one, copyrights are retained by the
original authors. In accordance with the wishes of the members of the
Homebrew Digest, posts to the HBD may NOT be sold or used as part of a
collection that is sold without the original authors' consent. Copies
may ONLY be made available at no charge and should include the current
posting and subscription addresses for the HBD.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: DAVE BRADLEY IC742 6-7932 <BRADLEY_DAVID_A@LILLY.COM>
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 14:54:03 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Motorize MaltMills/Keg Burner Support/Cheap DIGITAL Thermometer
Some info pertaining to recent HBD queries...
**Motorizing MaltMills:
A local Industrial Tools and Machine dealer had the necessary pulleys
(sheaves technically) which I bought to connect a 1/3hp motor
(former furnace motor) to my mill. Including the bushing for
the MM 3/8" shaft, this cost me <$40. The arrangement gives me ca. 400 RPM
at the mill, and it mills red wheat without any slippage. The parts, etc...
Local Dealer: Kenneth J. Galm Co., Inc. (317) 634-3467
Parts are made by Browning (their part numbers)
Description "part #" - price
H Bushing "H 3/8" - $ 4.08
A Belt "A36" - $ 3.82
F H P Sheave "AK 89 H" (ca. 12" diameter) - $23.53
F H P Sheave "AK20 x 1/2" (ca. 0.5" diam) - $ 5.23
**Support for converted keg boilers:
Taking a hint from a mail order catalog, I found that a pair of cinder blocks
topped with some square steel tubing (Lowe's stocks it) works well. I mounted
the actual burner on some 1.25" flat steel bar, the bar supporting the burner
by passing through the holes in the cinder blocks. Works well and is cheap.
**Digital Thermometer that's CHEAP!
As I began to brew Sunday, a horror: my expensive thermometer was dead.
I found a terrific replacement at William Sonoma...$15.00! Its a digital
version of the standard 5" cooking thermometer, made by Taylor.
Model 9840, range -58 to 302F, reads quickly (few seconds). I've checked
the calibration (non-adjustable) versus lab thermometers, and it
reads within 0.3 degrees F both at ambient and at 60C/140F.
Dave in Indy
------------------------------
From: Jim Liddil <JLIDDIL@AZCC.Arizona.EDU>
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 8:15:48 -0700 (MST)
Subject: re:Orval Culture
Maltdog wrote:
> However, there was something odd about all three batches. The attenuation on
> the beer was insane! The starting gravity was 1.054, pretty much true to
> style, and the finishing gravity, on all three batches was 0.099! I've never
> had a finishing gravity that low. Sounds more like a mead!
This is because Orval is bottled with brettanomyces. This yeast is able to
utilize dextrins via various dextrinases. Not mead but lambic. :-)
Jim
www.u.arizona.edu/~jliddil
------------------------------
From: phust@unlinfo.unl.edu (patricia hust)
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 10:36:15 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: Old yeast
I have not brewed since spring, too busy, kind of warm for fermenting,
etc. I saved some yeast then by washing the dregs from the bottom and
putting in sterile mason jars. The "yeast" has been in the
refrigerator since March or April. How do I know if it is good? I
assume I shold make a starter and if it begins action I am O.K.? Is
there a way to know? Smell, taste? Thanx for any help.
Jim Hust
------------------------------
From: "Craig Rode" <craig.rode@sdrc.com>
Date: 5 Sep 1996 10:51:32 -0600
Subject: Storing Starters/ American
While pondering whether to use the American II from Wyeast, I decided that
while I was doing a yeast starter I would, at the same time, create a starter
from the dregs of my last bottle of APA using 1056. I figured that I would
have 2 starters going in 22 oz bottles, and if I got bad reports from you on
American II, I would use the 1056. Well, the news was mixed, but in the
spirit of experimentation I went ahead and used the new yeast. Now I have a
22 oz bottle of 1056 starter, fermented out. Can I cap this and refrigerate,
and use it for the next brew session in a couple of weeks? I figure if I
decant the 'beer' and add new food, it should work. Comments?
The feedback on the American II consisted of 2 posts, one negative and one
positive. Interestingly, at the same time MANY posts were occuring about
copyrights and the correct way to calculate resistance. Did I somehow end up
in something other than HOMEBREWERS DIGEST?
Regarding bottles: Here in Wisconsin, in the rural areas, we used to have
cases of "shorties" which are 8 oz bottles. They contained basic megaswill
and came 36, I think, to a case. Anyone in a rural part of the state aware of
the availability of these? Also, this may be something EVERYBODY knows, but
just in case, I discovered that 16 of the 22 0z bottles fit perfectly into
those plastic milk containers that nobody but the dairys are supposed to have
but we all did, and used for storing records in college. Makes for nice
stacking of bottles, full or empty.
Craig Rode
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
I don't care if anyone copies this.
------------------------------
From: "Mark C. Bellefeuille" <mcb@abrams.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 09:17:00 -0700 (MST)
Subject: Matt in Montreal
Appologies to all others.
Matt, Email to your address bounced. Please send email directly to me.
I'll resend my email about Phoenix area breweries.
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
Mark C. Bellefeuille BEER! Because Barley makes lousy bread!
mcb@abrams.com Brewing in Phoenix AZ (602) 759-9273
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
From: Kelly Jones <kejones@ptdcs2.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 09:19:23 -0700
Subject: Re: Channeling
Al K. Wrote:
> I believe that the HBD came to an concensus that knifing the grain bed a
> few times during the *laeuter* increased channelling.
Nope, no concensus. If you have channeling, knifing is a form of gentle
stirring (gentle so as not to disturb the grain bed to the point of
getting cloudy runnings) which will tend to redistribute the grain,
eliminating whatever channels exist. True, more may eventually form.
Also true that simply
>Poking a knife or skewer into the grain bed
would only create more problems, but then, that's not how knifing is done.
Kelly
Hillsboro, OR
------------------------------
From: RUst1d? <rust1d@li.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 12:15:19 -0700
Subject: Bob Mrzen
Name: Bob M=E4rzen O.G.: 1.047
Style: M=E4rzen I.B.U.: 26.9
Volume: 10.0 gallons A.B.V.: ?%
Grains/Fermentables Lbs Hops AAU Oz Min
Pale, American 2 Row 13.00 Saaz 4.0 3.00 90
Munich, Belgian 2.50
Crystal 120, American 1.50
Anyone wish to comment on this M=E4rzen recipe? I am planning on using
Wyeast 2112 (We are the preists of the temple of Sprinx!) California
Lager.
- --=20
John Varady
Boneyard Brewing Co.
"Ale today, Gone tomorrow"
------------------------------
From: brewshop@coffey.com (Jeff Sturman)
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 10:26:42 -0600
Subject: mashing mistakes
mark bayer said:
<<
make sure the pale malt you're using for the base of the recipe is enzymatic,
and not carapils or some other specialty type that has little or no enzymes.
this seems kind of obvious to a lot of us, but i remember trying to mash
crystal malt in my "extract to partial mash" transition period.
>>
My third batch of all-grain brew failed miserably. I designed the recipe
myself. :) Here it is (don't laugh):
7# Victory malt
1# 40L Crystal malt
1# Wheat malt
1# Roasted barley
1# Chocolate malt
hops, yeast, etc...
I mail ordered this stuff and the guy I talked to on the phone didn't even
blink an eye. One would think he would have stopped me and helped me a
little, but not this guy. 'I'll ship that immediately, have a nice day
sir!' I mashed, and mashed, and mashed, and mashed, but the iodine test
remained black as night. I finally sparged, boiled, chilled and pitched my
yeast. I dumped the batch about a week later. I called the shop where I
ordered the stuff to complain that the yeast hadn't worked. This time I
talked to a different person who immediately pointed out to me that 1# of
wheat malt doesn't contain enough enzymes to convert the whole mash. I
*thought* victory malt had enzymes... Moral of the story: new mashers
should run their recipes by more experienced mashers before brew day!
Any other newbie-mashing stories out there?
jeff
casper, wy
------------------------------
From: Gregory King <GKING@ARSERRC.Gov>
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 12:36:19 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Duffy's extraction efficiency
Ian Smith <rela!isrs@netcom.com> wrote about Duffy's extraction
efficiency:
>The efficiency for 10# grain at 1.035 into 6.5 gall is (35/10)*6.5=23
>approx. this isn't as bad.
True for 6.5 gallons with SG 1.035, but my impression was that Duffy
measured the SG after boiling the wort down to ~5 gallons, in which
case the 18 ppg figure that he calculated is correct.
Greg King
gking@arserrc.gov
Philadelphia, PA
------------------------------
From: "Aaron Herrick" <chemstat@phoenix.net>
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 10:58:04 -0500
Subject: Blow-Off and Crap advice (
Al K writes:
>Buy yourself some 1 1/4" OD tubing for blowoff and 5/16" ID FOOD-GRADE
>tubing for siphoning and don't use one for the other
Bill Griffin responds:
>Why bother to use a blowoff tube in the first place. Use a bigger carboy
>or a crock or a bigger pail. Al I would hope that we are all smart
>enough to use food grade, but why 5/16" I think that is a bit small. Why
>not 3/8" or 1/2"? Far better in my most humble and unknowing opinion.
Point 1: The original poster *wants* to use a blow-off method. As to
their reasons, perhaps you should read the article in Brewing Techniques
from a month or so ago.
Point 2: I have used different size tubing for siponing, from 5/16 up,
and I find that the larger tubing does give faster flow (Gee, that Fluid
Mechanics stuff does come in handy!), however it was harder for me as a
beginner to produce consistent siphons without air bubbles, etc.
>Folks remember when you ask for advice on this digest you had better be
>prepared for the advice you get being wrong at least half the time. Some
>of the information is exceptional the rest is crap.
True, we should all be aware of this. I think most people are.
Aaron Herrick
Houston, TX
------------------------------
From: rownby@televar.com (Ray Ownby)
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 09:41:40 -0700
Subject: Help with WA State Laws
Anyone have any specifics on the Homebrew laws in Washington state? Went to
get a liquor permit for my wedding reception and was told that it was
illegal to serve homebrew at such a function. I have 25 gallons already
made up; am I going to have to sneak it in so we can have our special
wedding brews? I can't believe the laws are that restrictive. Apparently
we have been breaking them for some time now and just didn't know it.
Anybody have any facts on this for me? TIA,
- -Ray-
rownby@televar.com
Homepage:
http://www.televar.com/~rownby
- -Ray Ownby-
Moses Lake, WA
------------------------------
From: M257876@sl1001.mdc.com (bayerospace@mac)
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 12:02 -0600
Subject: knifing/extraction
collective homebrew conscience:
lou wrote:
> He already has a starter going and timed to be ready to pitch tonite.
if by a starter you mean he has it actively fermenting in a quart or so of
wort, i don't think there is a problem waiting until this weekend. i've let
starters go a few days in an erlenmeyer flask. just keep it relatively cool
(basement temp) and it should be fine.
if by a starter you mean he popped the envelope, and that's it, i don't know.
i would recommend that he step it up into a quart of wort in a large bottle/
flask to get the cell count up before using it. as far as preserving a
swollen envelope, i've never done that. it seems like they should be okay for
a few days, though, at a not-too-hot temperature. make sure he doesn't get
it too cold and then shock it thermally at pitching.
don wrote:
>I'm still wondering which commercially available yeast available in the
>U.S. of A. would be best for recreating PU. At first guess, 2124,
>2007, 2278, or 2206.
i can speak from experience only on #2124 and #2278. i brewed a czech pils
with the #2278 and a number of beers with #2124 (my favorite) last year.
In My Humble Opinion, i think the #2278 was a bit more sulfury than #2124,
which is very clean, and i believe the #2278 in that regard is closer to
the pilsner urquell yeast. however, i had no diacetyl and my czech pils
really wasn't very close to pu. pretty good, but not close. you should make
an effort to run the primary ferment pretty cool (mid 40's, maybe?), and do
a long cold lagering, from what i understand about the way pu is brewed. this
is fairly time consuming.
Al K wrote:
>I believe that the HBD came to an concensus that knifing the grain bed a
>few times during the *laeuter* increased channelling. Channelling is
>where the sparge water establishes a sort of "river" in the grain bed and
>continues to flow down that path of least resistance forgoing the
>extraction of sugars from surrounding grain. Poking a knife or skewer
>into the grain bed would only *create* a path, not prevent its creation.
maybe i should have said "raking". the way i do it is this: take a regular
table knife, and a couple of separate times during the sparge (@ say, 20
minutes from starting and 40 minutes from starting), cut a cross hatch
pattern into the bed using 10 or 12 "slices" in one direction and then
10 or 12 "slices" in the perpendicular direction, while not disturbing the
bottom 4-6 inches or so of the bed.
now, when i do this, the sparge water level is still above the bed surface,
and the entire bed is well liquefied, not dry, so what happens is quite a bit
of mixing, and the effect is that by the end of the raking process, it looks
like i've stirred up the entire top portion of the bed. the reason i don't
just "stir it up" quickly is i'm concerned about the bottom part of the bed
getting disturbed. so i take my time and do this slowly.
i agree that "poking" a knife vertically into the bed would probably cause
chanelling. i should have explained a bit more, i guess.
ian wrote:
>The efficiency for 10# grain at 1.035 into 6.5 gall is (35/10)*6.5=23
>approx. this isn't as bad. Did you perhaps take the hydrometer reading of
>the hot wort ? You should take the reading at 59 or 60 F or measure the
>temperature and adjust the hydometer reading.
i think duffy took the gravity reading at the end of the boil, not the
beginning. at that point, he had less than 6.5 gallons. it's a good
idea for a brewer having extraction problems to take it at the beginning,
though, in case he/she/it wants to boost the gravity with extract.
a bit long-winded today, i'm afraid, but hopefully this helps.
brew hard,
mark bayer
------------------------------
From: kbuttrum@juno.com (Kevin E Buttrum)
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 13:01:44 EDT
Subject: Screw-off tops
Many of the beer companies have been packaging in screw-off cap bottles.
So seeing the trend towards the screw-off top bottles, I am wondering
why hasn't anyone put out a screw-off bottle capper for use by
hombrewers. It can't be that hard to make the capper.
I would try to come up with something if I knew how the breweries got
those caps on in the first place. Do they screw them on or clamp them on
like standard caps? May-be I should just ask JAKE.
Later,
Kevin Buttrum
Doodle boy Brewing
kbuttrum@juno.com
------------------------------
From: John Wilkinson <jwilkins@imtn.tpd.dsccc.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 12:07:35 -0500
Subject: Flame Sanitizing
I have seen a number of recommendations to flame openings of carboys,
starter flasks, etc. to sanitize them. However, it would seem to me that
just passing a flame over the glass would not be sufficient to sanitize
and leaving it long enough to sanitize would likely heat the glass enough
to break it. Is this true? If there is a point between passing a flame
across the mouth and heating to breaking that will sanitize glass, how do we
know when it is reached?
I would not think wiping with alcohol and flaming it off would be much better
either. Is there any point in flaming anything but Pyrex which can be
safely heated to a point that would kill bacteria and yeast?
Surely some of you microbiologists out there should be able to answer these
questions.
John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas
------------------------------
From: John Wilkinson <jwilkins@imtn.tpd.dsccc.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 12:18:11 -0500
Subject: RE: Extraction rate
Bill Giffin said of Al K's suggestion to double sparge time and mash out close
to 176F:
>>Mostly hogwash! You will also have a poorer beer.
Why would a slower sparge and mashing out produce a poorer beer? Is Bill's
problem with the mash out temp of 176F? That is the only thing I see that is
questionable and at that not but a few degrees beyond what I thought was
generally advised.
Perhaps Bill can further enlighten us as to the error in Al's advice.
John Wilkinson
------------------------------
From: djfitzg@VNET.IBM.COM
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 96 13:20:30 EDT
Subject: Livermore Ca.
Some friends of mine will be traveling to Livermore Ca. in the next couple
weeks. If anyone can recommend interesting brew-pubs or other drinking
establishments in the area, I would appreciate it.
Thanks in advance,
Dan Fitzgerald
djfitzg@vnet.ibm.com
Poughkeepsie, N.Y.
------------------------------
From: rlabor@lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald)
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 12:21:58 -0500
Subject: Blowoff tube
>From: bill-giffin@juno.com (Bill Giffin)
>>I bow as I acknowledge the presence of the Great Beer God, Al K:
Buy yourself some 1 1/4" OD tubing for blowoff and 5/16" ID FOOD-GRADE
tubing for siphoning and don't use one for the other
>>
>Why bother to use a blowoff tube in the first place. Use a bigger carboy
>or a crock or a bigger pail. Al I would hope that we are all smart
>enough to use food grade, but why 5/16" I think that is a bit small. Why
>not 3/8" or 1/2"? Far better in my most humble and unknowing opinion.
>Folks remember when you ask for advice on this digest you had better be
>prepared for the advice you get being wrong at least half the time. Some
>of the information is exceptional the rest is crap.
I'll tell you why bother to use a blowoff tube. Last nite I fermented a 60%
wheat 40% barley brew in a 6 gal. fermenter. The wort was about 4.5 gallons
with a nice eight inch space for the foam to expand into. So I did it at
room temperature 75-80F. When I went to bed it was going smoothly with a
three inch foam head. When I looked at it the next morning it was
overflowing onto the floor, etc..
So the lesson I have learned is to always use a blowoff tube especially when
I ferment in the foyer close to the carpet. Lucky for me the foam did not
reach the carpet and stayed on the tile.
Now Bill, as far as complaining when someone asks for and then gets advice,
all I can tell you is to shorten your internet cable by cuting it and see if
you are happier.
Ron
------------------------------
From: AJUNDE@ccmail.monsanto.com
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 12:44:28 -0500
Subject: priming/under cabonation and posting receipes
Greetings brewnerds!
Two things today!
I have seem to have been having problems with carbonation. All of my
batches seem to be, well, not quite carbonated enought. It's there,
but won't seem to hold a head very long, nor is there a lot of bubbles
in the glass after only a couple of minutes.
I'm doing ale extracts and partial mashes, and priming with .75 cup
dextrose.
I realize that some ale's are typically not as strongly carbonated as
others, but I think that mine are still a little weak. As far as I
can read, my options are:
1. areate a little when priming with .75c dextrose to help
re-establish the yeast more. (bad, bacteria problems)
2. add more dextrose (bad, bottles may explode, or too much
carbonation)
3. start priming with malt extract (never done it, no expectations)
Any suggestions/tips?
The second item I have today is in reguards to posting receipes. Is
there a policy of not posting receipes to HBD? I see a lot of
requests, and I have made requests and 90% of replys are by e-mail
(thanks all that replied). Unfortunatly, if I'm not the requester, I
don't get to see the e-mailed replies, and therefore can't review
them, or "cut" them out to save and try later! I realize that this
may cause the Digest to take up more bandwidth, but it's current'y
already 30-40kb now.
Comments? Policies? Would somebody set me straight! Please spam and
flame me by direct e-mail, nobody want's that on the list!!!
Thanks!
| Allen Underdown - ajunde@ccmail.monsanto.com |
| ITSS WAN Group - Monsanto Chemical Co. |
| Amateur Radio Operator, computer geek, homebrewer and outdoor enthusiast! |
| Try My BBS at 314.939.9445! |
------------------------------
From: wchase@alpha.utampa.edu (DON CHASE)
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 12:35:49 -0400
Subject: A source for 7-8oz bottles
Charles Epp asks about little bottles:
> Anybody know of a source (preferably inexpensive)for small, cappable
> bottles in the 7-8 oz. size?
There is a very popular drink in some Latin American countries called "Malta"
(notice the root word "malt") that comes in 8oz bottles. I have a friend who
is from Puerto Rico who drinks it, but her brand uses "twist-off" caps.
I have a friend (and fellow brewer) whose wife is from Columbia and, by no
coincidence, drinks a brand that uses ordinary caps. I think the brand is
"Bohio", but I may be wrong.
Malta is available in most grocery stores here in Tampa, Florida, but we also
have a large Latin American population. In short, check with your Latin
American friends and see if any of them drink malta, or try it yourself.
Personally, it just makes my thirsty, but if I didn't already have a source
I might be willing to drink it regularly for the bottles.
I hope this helps.
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don Chase | Hombrewing : the only sport open exclusively
Objectivist...Businessman... | to anal-retentive alcoholics.
Homebrewer. | Relax...have a homebrew.
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
From: rick@adc.com (Rick Larson)
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 12:43:00 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: Late harvest hops
emccormi,
> Miguel,
> I would expect snipping the flowers before they develop would
> encourage the hops to grow a stronger rootstock. Works that way for mums
[snip]
If your (or Miguel's) hops are like mine, you wont need to worry
about developing stronger rootstock. I have some roots 2" in diameter!
Every spring, I have to dig a circle around my hops to limit grown and
extra runners.
rick
- --
Rick Larson rick@adc.com
Minneapolis
------------------------------
From: "David R. Burley" <103164.3202@CompuServe.COM>
Date: 05 Sep 96 13:48:51 EDT
Subject: Polyclar,
Brewsters:
Keith Busby asks about using Polyclar for his Belgian Trippel. I thought I sent
in a brief description of various clarifiers a week or so ago, but it may have
been during another screw-up with my mailer. I don't remember it appearing ( I
don't re-read my own submissions and I may have downpaged) I include it here
again in case it didn't make it, along with parts of a private communication in
which I extended the discussion.
Polyclar reacts with the catechins (a type of polyphenol or tannin) which
removes it from the playing field and it can't hydogen bond to the proteins.
This hydrogen binded complex between tannins and protein makes them less
soluble
and appear as chill haze. Dave Miller( H'Book of HB, p 193) uses tremendous
amounts of polyclar (up to 1/4 cup per 5 gallons) - but see below. I propose
that this quantity is so large because he suggests using Polyclar and Bentonite
together. I suggest you use both but not together. Add the polyclar and after
it has had its effect, say 24 hours, add the bentonite. Test the various levels
for your beer in small quantities, say 7 oz in several bottles in the fridge
and
use the minimum of each to get what you want. Miller comments that the Polyclar
releases CO2 dissolved in the beer, so watch out! Since Bentonite removes
protein and protein is bad in wine ( use all the Bentonite you want, no bad
effects) and protein is good in beer you will have to add the minimum amount.
In
agreement with Milller, I suggest you start with 0.5ppm and go down to get the
right level.
My quotes from my communication to HBD:
"Further on this subject, I just received the 96 catalog from Fall Bright, The
Winemakers Shoppe, Dundee, NY
( no affil. etc.) and they had a nice short summary on the subject of
clarifying aids (with an emphasis on use
in wines) which I hope is interesting to HBDers for its general content as well
as those making fruit beers
and wines as well as beer: Following is a re-typed (by me) version of their P.
15:
"GELATIN has a *positive charge* and precipitates negative charged tannin. It
is
excellent to reduce tannin. Sprinkle (2 grams or approx. 1 tsp per 5 gallons
onto cold wine. soak 5 minutes, warm until dissolved, but avoid excessive
heating. If using in combination with tannin, add tannin first ( dissolved in
wine) by racking
the wine onto the tannin solution. Let rest for 24 hours and add dissolved
gelatin. Allow 2-3 weeks to settle. There might be a slight color loss. Gelatin
is not usually recommended for white wine.
SPARKOLLOID is a polysaccharide in a diatomaceous (earth)* carrier with a
*positive charge*. It does not strip color. For 5 gallons, dissolve 2.3 grams
(1-3/4 tsp) in 1/2 cup of boiling water. Simmer about 15 minuntes until mixture
is smooth and creamy, may agitate in a blender. Add some wine to thin and add
to wine. Agitate well. Wait 1-2 weeks after use for settling.
BENTONITE has a *negative charge* Wines with a higher pH will require more
bentonite (to)* obtain the
same results of less at a lower pH. Use 2.4 to 4.5 grams per 5 gallons. (2.6
grams of granular Bentonite = 1/2 plus 1/8 tsp). Mix Bentonite with 5 oz. of
water. let stand overnight or for at least 2 hours. Mix some wine back into the
slurry and add to wine. This is fast acting. You can probably rack in 24
hours.
EGG WHITE is used only on red wines. Separate the yolk ( discard), add a pinch
of salt and whip to a froth.
1 egg per 5 gallons. Mix beaten egg in 10 times the volume of wine and add to
the main volume.
PVPP OR POLYVINYL-POLYPYRROLIDONE, alias Polyclar Reacts with tannins and
reduces browning due
to a strong affinity for catechins. Use .28 to .95 grams per gallon ( .28
gms. = 1/2 tsp.) for wine and beer. Filtration recommended after use.
PECTIC ENZYME added at crushing helps release juice form ( sic) pulp increasing
juice yields and improving rates of settling, clarification, fining and
filtration. Normal use at crushing is 4-8 drops per gallon on hybrids and
viniferas; 10-14 drops per gallon on American grape varieties and double that
on fruits like peaches, plums,apples,strawberries. Let set on enzyme for 4-8
hours before pressing. Cover fruit with plastic to prevent oxidation.
References: Winemaking Basics(Ough), Technology of Wine Making (Amerine) and
instruction labels from
Fall Bright."
N.B. ( word)* is my inclusion to clarify the text - DRB"
And from a private e-mail:
"Julianne, after our discussion, I decided to amplify and simplify this even
further:
Surface charge Positive Negative
Clarifier Gelatin Bentonite
Polyclar, PVPP Irish Moss,
Carageenan
Sparkolloid
Egg white
Isinglass,collagen
Use to remove Tannins Protein
Catechins
Polyphenols
Yeasts
Anthocyanogens
Many of the proteinaceous products have both positive and negative sites on
them, but at beer pH, generally they are positive. Isinglass and soluble
collagen type finings work best at pH of 4.4, but 4.0 is almost as good. M&BS
p545 ed 1. Chill-haze largely is a reaction between tannins and protein.
Polyclar reacts with the tannins reducing the concentration of the chill-haze/
tannin protein complex. It is interesting that hop bitter principles are a
special class of polyphenols.
Other factors which should be taken into account is the role metals can play in
haze formation. Copper, iron and aluminum, are concentrated by 4000-80,000
times in hazes as compared with residual beer. lead,nickel,tin vanadium and
molybdenum are concentrated 1000-4000 times and manganese, calcium and calcium
are concentrated only about 100 times. (Malting & Brewing Science p 633, 1st
ed.) A well water supply to a house with copper pipes can easily have copper
and iron. If an aluminum kettle is used, then you could easily get all three.
Time to buy a Brita water filter which will remove all of these."
I see I left out nylon in my discussion. Nylon is used for removal of
anthocyanogens and belongs in the positive class.
M&BS says (p 636 ed 1) "Much of the protein in the wort is therefore present as
a complex with polyphenols." And "There is, however, no correlation between
anthocyanogens and haze potential of the beer." And ".....it is believed that
all of the polyphenolic constituents of beer take part in haze formation."
I guess that means too many hops lead to hazy beer! Maybe one of the reasons
Belgians use old hops in which the polyphenols are oxidized and polymerized (
low bitterness) and insoluble in wort is because they don't cause a haze
problem. Anyone have any experience in this area?
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
USA
------------------------------
From: czsqdt@agt.gmeds.com ( Douglas A Cook 230-4715 8894)
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 12:54:46 -0500
Subject: Very fine mesh for a false bottom
Hello,
A couple of weeks ago while at a flea-market a guy who goes around to companies
and buys random surplus "junk" had something that really caught my eye. He had
some stainless wire mesh that had come out a huge centrifuge. He had gotten
a sheet of this mesh which proabably measured 4' by 15'(the 15' is a guess
since
he had it cut up into thirds). It is 84 mesh(84 wires to the inch) and the
wires have a diameter of 0.0035". This is a VERY FINE mesh. He said that
this stuff runs about $100 a square foot, but take that with a grain of salt.
I got my sheet, 4' X 6' for $5:)
The original sheet has reinforcement ribs of cloth that run lengthwise down
the edges and once down the center and are on both sides of the mesh. They are
probably epoxied down and if they had to come off the only way I can think of
would be with a torch and just burn the cloth and epoxy off. There was a place
on my section where someone had taken a oxy-acet torch to it and it was a
little
discolored, but it disapated the heat so well that there is no noticable loss
in strength. Now I don't feel that the cloth would contribute anything first
because people have been using grain and hop bags for years, secondly because
this centrifudge was from Eli Lilly Parmesuticals(supposedly). So maybe I might
be able to make a Prozac Porter. (It was used for drying or something so no
drug
reside exists, otherwise it would have never gotten to the public.)
Anyway, I am wondering two things:
Is this mesh too fine for a false bottom?
I don't think the slightest bit of draff would make it's way past.
The percent open area is a tick over 50%! Water flows through it
with no problems. There is a little beading due to surface tension, but
nothing significant.
What kind of false bottom to design?
Currently I am using a 10 gal gott with a circular copper manifold. I
am looking to eventually move towards the use of a RIMS system. which
kinda goes back to the question of is this mesh too fine. Ideas that I
have had are to construct a frame that would allow for a similar shape
to the Phil's Phalse Bottom, but that would take up a lot of material.
Another idea was a copper manifold that had many mesh fingers emminating
from a central line down the middle:
######I######
I
######I######
I
######I######
I
If it seems feasible and I go for it there should still be LOTS of this mesh
leftover, and last week he still had more of this stuff. So, anyone wanting
some just let me know. The shop I frequent is talking to people for ideas
about what to do as well, and it is somewhat puzzling. As a side note this is
my first post after about a year and half and 15 all-grain batches later. This
digest is a weath of knowledge. The points and counterpoints allow many lurkers
like myself to learn a great deal. To all posters and especiallly the regulars
I thank you for all the indirect help/hints/knowlege..
Thanks,
Doug Cook
------------------------------
From: Dave Beedle <dbeedle@bacchus.net.ilstu.edu>
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 13:17:09 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: Cleaning Kegs
In a recent message David Root wrote:
>
> Is it OK to clean my converted brewing kegs with a steel wool pad?
Related to this, I've been using B-Brite to clean kegs and to sanitise.
This with the beleif that B-Brite is indeed a sanitizer though I have not
seen that it is. So, is it? B-Brite a sanitizer that is! I've not had an
infection problem (well ok, one batch that I attributed to the yeast and
techniques with it...) but I though I'd double check.
> IMHO = ????
In My Humble Opinoin
> YMMV = ????
Your Milage May Vary
> BTW = ???
By THe Way
TTFN 8-)
- --
Dave Beedle - Unix Support Manager - dbeedle@ilstu.edu - Network Services
| http://www.ilstu.edu/~dbeedle/ | Illinois State University
"Ignorance is bliss. Then you get run over by a bus 136A Julian Hall
because you never bothered to learn how to cross the road" Normal, IL 61761
------------------------------
End of Homebrew Digest #2175
****************************
