Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2156
This file received at Hops.Stanford.EDU 1996/08/22 PDT
Homebrew Digest Thursday, 22 August 1996 Number 2156
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Shawn Steele, Digest Janitor
Thanks to Rob Gardner for making the digest happen!
Contents:
Victory Sunrise wheat ((Mike Spinelli))
Lager ("Clifford A. Hicks")
Adding Fruit ((Billy Cole))
Addendum to Aeration made easy ((Ed J. Basgall))
Water types and Recipes (John Girard)
Puffy Northwestern Malt bags ((Ed J. Basgall))
Phenolic aromas (korz@pubs.ih.lucent.com)
Re: Splitting kegged beer? (Alan Stevens)
Enzymes in grains (Nina and Mike)
infected grain (Steve Alexander)
Finings ... (Steve Alexander)
Jackson, Mississippi ("Richard L. Walker")
Jet Burners, etc. (Kirk R Fleming)
autolysis (Paul Cantalupo)
RE: Guinness Mash schedule/protein rests/No airstone ((George De Piro))
All Grain to Extract ("John Penn")
Filtering Water (Michael Caprara)
A Dry Hopping Primer (Michael Caprara)
Guinness/Flaked Barley (Jim Busch)
Tap & Beer Lines (Bill Rust)
Re: RIMS heaters - NonoNOnononono (hollen@vigra.com)
Munich malt production (korz@pubs.ih.lucent.com)
dry hop with fresh hops (John McCauley)
Re: what is dry hopping? (Cory Wright)
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paa3983@dpsc.dla.mil (Mike Spinelli)
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 96 16:05:36 edt
Subject: Victory Sunrise wheat
Just had a draft pint of Victory Brewing's Sunrise Wheat and boy oh boy it's
good.
I was expecting a bland Americanized wheat but this is far from it. Classic
German all the way! Great job for fellow HBDer Jim Busch.
Mike
------------------------------
From: "Clifford A. Hicks" <74631.2471@CompuServe.COM>
Date: 21 Aug 96 16:12:54 EDT
Subject: Lager
I am fairly new to the world of lagering having only just purchased a chest
style freezer with external temperature regulator. I know that some (most) of
the recipes I have seen recommend lagering for as much as two months. My
question is this: If I let a batch sit there at 50 or so degrees for two months
or so, what will happen when I prime and bottle? Will there be enough suspended
yeast to use the priming sugar and therefore carbonate my beer? How long before
it carbonates in the bottle? Should the bottles also be kept cool? The beer I
am
getting ready to bottle looks to have dropped out everything...there is no haze
- - it is perfectly clear beer. If I have to repitch yeast, what is the
procedure?
Okay all you lager experts, give me some help on this. Answers best sent to me
at 74631.2471@compuserve.com Thanks!
------------------------------
From: Billy_Cole@dgii.com (Billy Cole)
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 14:44:11 +0100
Subject: Adding Fruit
I have a partial grain Pale Ale recipe that I've brewed twice, and
like alot. I'd really like to add some strawberries to this the next
time I brew it. I've never added fruit and I'm wondering which is the
best method in doing so. I was planning on freezing them, then
during the boil, I would heat up another pot with the 5lbs. of
strawberries with about 1/2 gallon of water. When both my wort
and the now strawberry water are cooled, add them together in the
primary and pitch my yeast. I would really appreciate some input
on this. Thanks.
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Billy Cole / Senior Engineer / Digi International
ph: 206-867-3893x628 / pager: 206-663-0229
billyc@dgii.com
------------------------------
From: edb@chem.psu.edu (Ed J. Basgall)
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 18:02:42 -0400
Subject: Addendum to Aeration made easy
Well, wouldn't ya know it. I guess I was misled by a commercial
brewing magazine no less. My thanks to Al for pointing out my error.
In my future aerations I will add a sterile cotton plug or .2 - .3 um
disposable syringe filter (1" diam)
into the air line as it comes out of my pump. I know that works
for cell culture and microbiology applications. I wonder how many
contaminating organisms can float around and for how long in a small bubble
without hitting the sides? Sounds like a thesis project.
My appologies for misleading the collective. Thanks again Al.
Ed Basgall
SCUM
(State College Underground Maltsters)
------------------------------
From: John Girard <jungle@hollywood.cinenet.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 15:23:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Water types and Recipes
With the growing numbers of recipes being posted, an old subject has come
to my attention. Every 30th recipe or so, someone else brings it up
again, and then it is swallowed by the HBD to be regurgitated again (in
its same form) some time later. Well, here it is again, but this time I
hope a little discussion can be generated to help solve it.
Here's the problem: with all-grain beers especially, but with extracts
too, the type of water that you brew with has (in my estimation) an
enormous impact on the final product. And yet, in most recipes (posted
on the net and found in your favorite brew mag alike) water types are not
indicated, even when water adjustments are reccommended. This is no one's
fault, but leads to problems, most notably that it becomes very difficult
to duplicate with any accuracy the great brews that our fellow brewers
have concocted.
Cries to indicate water types in recipes have fallen largely on deaf
ears, and probably for good reason: who wants even a simple water
analysis tacked on to every recipe they read, or worse, to have to figure
out how to match the recipe's water by adjusting their own?
A simple solution I might propose is the following. Although there
are thousands of different water types, brewers tend generally to group
them in some major categories (often by the region where styles were
first popularized using regional water supplies). What I might propose
is to devise a grouping system of 10 or so of most common water types
(Burton, Dortmund, Plzen, etc.) with ion concentrataion ranges for each
type.
A conversion list could be generated that offers recommendations for
converting one water type to any of the others through salt additions
and/or dilutions with distilled H2O. (This isn't particularly new -- I
know I've seen such conversion charts before. Rather what would be new
would be to standardize it somehow so that we have greater understanding
when sharing ideas -- we need to define our terms more specifically).
Finally, when someone posts a recipe, they can indicate which (general)
water type was used for making the brew, and anyone seeking to duplicate
it can make the necessary adjustments to their water.
My (limited) understanding of water chemistry leads me to believe that
while there are a large range of possibilites for the concentrations of
various ions, some generalizations can be readily made, and by defining
10-15 general water types, we might be able to encompass *most* types
used by homebrewers.
Thoughts and gentle criticism appreciated.
- -John
____________________________________________________________________
John Girard in L.A. jungle@hollywood.cinenet.net
"I don't have any solutions, but I sure admire the problem."
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
From: edb@chem.psu.edu (Ed J. Basgall)
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 18:24:05 -0400
Subject: Puffy Northwestern Malt bags
What's with these guys? I too have experienced this bloated bag syndrome.
I purchased a case of dark Northwestern malt extract last fall and used
most of it up over the winter. Two days ago I open the last box and
the bag was as tight as a drum.... Needless to say I opened it, tasted
like malt, no off flavors. Used it. I'm not dead yet and my wort is still
frementing merrily away. Time will tell....
Just another 2 cents....
Ed Basgall
SCUM
(State College Underground Maltsters)
------------------------------
From: korz@pubs.ih.lucent.com
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 96 17:41:33 CDT
Subject: Phenolic aromas
Ken writes:
>Ian Smith has phenolic beer (bummer dude). Sounds like you took care of your
>water, so I'll guess that your fermentation temperature was fairly high?
>Above 75F? That will do it.
I agree that higher fermentation temperatures tend to cause yeast to create
more higher alcohols and some yeasts are predisposed to making phenolic
aromas at higher temperatures. However, in my experience, the bulk of the
yeast strains that we have available to us don't have this predisposition
to phenolic character. I think that Ian's problem is a wild yeast that
got into the fermenter during aeration or got into his starter.
Recall that I was quite adamant about having problems brewing in the summer?
Well, the reason was that I simply could not aerate my wort with room air
witout picking up a wild yeast that produced that dreaded phenolic aroma.
It smelled just like Band-Aids(tm). For me, the solution was switching to
filtered air and an airstone and now, most recently, the Oxynater(tm).
I know it's in my air for one clear reasons:
an unpitched starter, left out for a day starts to ferment spontaneously
and has an intense phenolic aroma.
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korzonas@lucent.com
Copyright 1996 Al Korzonas
------------------------------
From: Alan Stevens <stevensa@ctt.bellcore.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 19:16:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Splitting kegged beer?
>
> This may sound like sacrilege to avid home brewers, but a friend and I have
> convinced a local distributor to order us a 1/2 barrel of an excellent
> German specialty beer. We would like to divide this into 4 - 5gal Corny
> Kegs (2 for each). We have both been kegging our own beer for about 2
> years but have never tried to transfer beer from a commercial keg to our own
> Cornies. The 1/2 barrel won't fit in either of our frig's and we live too
> far apart to run to the others house for a pint. Is there a "good?" way to
> do this and will it ultimately effect the beer? Thanks in advance!
>
Good beer is good beer! You don't have to apologize. I have done this
many times
with good results. (although I do get comments when I take the keg back
for the deposit
the next day!). You need a Sanke tap, some corny keg fittings and hose
(possibly some adapters as the line sizes my be different).
Prepare your keg(s), and charge with about 10-15 lbs of CO2.
Connect CO2 to the Sanke tap with the same pressure as the pre charged
corny kegs.
connect a line from the "out" side of the corny keg to the "out" side of
the Sanke tap.
install the Sanke tap on the commercial keg and push the lever down.
At this point, the two kegs are in equalibrium. As you slowly release
pressure on the target keg, the beer will flow from the bottom of the
commercial keg to the bottom of your keg. If the beer is cold, it will
be easy to follow the progress of the beer by the condensation on the
target keg.
If you do this slowly enough, there will be very little foaming, and
foaming will be a problem as you get near the top. Since you are going
into two kegs, you can start on the second while you wait for the foam
to subside.
With the right connectors, this works well, the beer is never exposed to
oxygen, and is not even agitated much.
While we are on this subject, is there anyone in the Ottawa area that
would like to split a 60L keg of Niagara Saaz Pilsner with me. (Damn
good beer, but hard to get in the small kegs).
Al Stevens
------------------------------
From: Nina and Mike <nina-mik@metalhead.azaccess.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 18:39:25 -0700
Subject: Enzymes in grains
Greetings!
I just recently joined this list so I hope the question that I am about to
pose is not dredging up a thread only recently put to rest!
I was wondering if anyone out there has run across some type of listing,
article, etc. or has personal knowledge of enzyme potentials for
grains/seeds other than barley and wheat? It stands to reason that all
seeds, to some degree, need to be able to convert starch into sugars as they
begin growing; hence the malting process. Being in the mood to experiment, I
was curious to what degree other grains could be malted, mashed, and made
into "beer" without either using barley malt or the chew and spit process as
an enzyme source.
Thanks for your thoughts. My initial library research has turned up nothing
(though the library wasn't very well stocked with brewing science entries!).
Mike Yeatts
nina-mik@mail.azaccess.com
------------------------------
From: Steve Alexander <stevea@clv.mcd.mot.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 22:18:56 -0400
Subject: infected grain
Craig A Mayr writes that I wrote ...
>Steve Alexander writes:
>>There is also
>>one grain fungus which seems to produce a carcinogenic by-product,
>>which causes pancreatic cancer - usually quite deadly.(snip)
>
>I think what Steve is talking about is Aflatoxin B. Actually this is a
>group of toxins produced by Aspergillus flavus fungus. I wouldn't worry
>too much about them on your grain and getting into your beer and giving
>you pancreatic cancer. These compounds have been reported to naturally
>occur in peanuts, peanut meal, cottonseed meal, corn, dried chili peppers
>etc. Ergo, if you've eaten peanut butter sandwiches, you've probably gotten
>these in your diet already. Furthermore, the growth of these molds on
>your grain does not always indicate the presence of toxins since the yield
>of toxins depends on growing conditions (moisture, pH, temp, substrates
Another good reason why I dislike peanuts ...
I apologise for not being able to recall the name of the fungus
(embarassing for an amatuer mycologist) tho I pretty certain that
aflatoxin b. is the ticket. An article appeared in the Wall Street
Journal about 2.8 years ago - during fall harvest time in any case,
which indicated that the late wet midwest growing conditions were
causing substantial outbreaks of fungal infestation and that aflatoxin
b. was being found in grain shipments. Purchasers such as the cereal
companies were not performing the necessary tests on a per shipment
basis - just random tests. As I recall the fungus in question glows
under 'black light', which was supposed to be an initial screening
method.
I guess that fact that this fungus occurs on many food stuffs doesn't
imply that there are no checks on the human food supply. It's 'sposed
to be tested and rejected. The system is undoubtly 'leaky' tho'.
>and aeration) as well as genetic components. I can't comment on whether
>or not these compounds are destroyed by boiling or not. Their melting
>temp is typically between 286 and 289 C. I would *guess* that these are
>stable through a boil. There is no doubt, though, that these compounds
>are carcinogens (cancer causing),
OK - punting the infected grain gets my vote - I didn't realize the MP
was so high.
> ... but IMHO if you are going to drink beer,
>you're getting exposed to a much more dangerous compound at far higher
>levels than the aflatoxins. Let's face it, to live is to be at risk of
>getting cancer, drink beer.
I personally prefer to limit the number and quantity of carcinogens I
ingest. Nasty tasting beer from infected malt is a good place to cut
back IMO. BTW - substantially high moisture content is necessary to
get a fungal infection. Properly dried and stored malt should be
immune.
Thanks for the extra info Craig,
Steve Alexander
------------------------------
From: Steve Alexander <stevea@clv.mcd.mot.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 22:26:40 -0400
Subject: Finings ...
David Burley writes ..
>The comment the other day ( or was that in a private e-mail?) that
>because Irish Moss doesn't work at below 5.2 or whatever and does at
>a higher pH, somehow disproves that the IM electrostatic model for
>clarification is incorrect.
Article in the "Journal of the Institiute of Brewing", 1995 I believe,
all about carageenan. I didn't copy the article just scanned it.
Two point stuck out - one is that irish moss is pretty useless at low
pH values is taken from a table in the article. The second that the
simple electrostatic model doesn't explain the activity of carageenen
is explicitly stated in the article conculsion. I didn't mean to say
that the low pH activity implied the models failure - tho' it probably
came out that way.
Steve Alexander
------------------------------
From: "Richard L. Walker" <mail.cheney.net@cheney.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 22:05:05 -6
Subject: Jackson, Mississippi
Does anyone know of a restaurant or pub in Jackson, Mississippi that
serves their own beer? I like to visit places that brew their own
while I travel. Please send private e-mail.
Richard L. Walker
Pensacola FL (City of Five Flags) USA
rlwalker@cheney.net <-- play
richard.l.walker@gulf.com <-- work
------------------------------
From: Kirk R Fleming <flemingk@usa.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 23:02:19 +0100
Subject: Jet Burners, etc.
In 2155 Keith asks:
> Uh.. Kirk, aren't you contradicting yourself here. In the first
> paragraph you say that "this may be a momism" but then you conclude
> in the second paragraph that when you turn them (jets) down "it's
> pretty clear they aren't burning too efficiently."
If not contradicting, then at least waffling. What I tried to say is
that I don't know for a fact, from a BTU/ft^3 standpoint, if one
burner is more efficient than the other in normal operation. But, it
certainly seems that jet burners are inefficient at low throttle. I
have no reason to think one is more efficient than the other when used
wide open or nearly wide open--nice white and blue flame in each case.
I'm practicing to run for political office, okay?
KRF Colorado Springs
------------------------------
From: Paul Cantalupo <LUPEY@vms.cis.pitt.edu>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 1996 08:50:19 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: autolysis
I am quite new to this forum and also to home brewing. I started
home brewing this summer and I am having a ton of fun. I have produced three
all grain batches: 2 porter and 1 wheat (still fermenting) and also one
"Barkshack Ginger Mead" fermenting under the kitchen table as I post this. :)
In some of the recent digests, there has been talk of autolysis in the
primary fermenter due to the long fermentations and not racking the beer to
the secondary. My specific question is why doesn't autolysis occur in the
bottle? A layer of yeast (albeit a small one) is always present in the bottle
unless you have access to a filtering system. Also, Papazian states in "The
Joy of Home Brewing" that the yeast imparts stability to the beer. I have
never tasted autolysis and from what I have read, I don't want to.
If anybody has an answer, please send private email since I hardly get
a chance to read the digest on a regular basis. The boss at work is always
watching me!! Thanks for all your advice and info.
Later
The Mad Italian
Paul Cantalupo
------------------------------
From: George_De_Piro@berlex.com (George De Piro)
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 1996 08:22:31 -0700
Subject: RE: Guinness Mash schedule/protein rests/No airstone
Hi all!
Chuck asks about Guinness's mash schedule.
According to Lewis in his wonderful book, "Stout," Guinness uses a
starch conversion rest of 148F, which makes much more sense than the
158F rest reported here, considering the flavor of the final product.
I just happen to have the book with me today, so I can provide an
exact reference. All who are interested can look on pp. 52-54 for a
fairly detailed accounting of the Guinness mash.
If you like brewing, drinking, or dreaming about stouts, GET THIS
BOOK! I'm not even that into the style (relatively) and it inspired
me to brew a 12 gallon batch (unfortunately, the "foamless" batch
described in an earlier post, no fault of the book though)!
--------------------------
Chuck also asks about the necessity of a protein rest. If you are
going to filter your beer the beta glucans and proteins from unmalted
adjuncts (like barley, wheat, or oats) will clog the filter,
necessitating a low temp (120F) rest.(I'm getting a lot of mileage
from that Lewis book today, see p.129).
If your grain bill is mostly well-modified malted barley, a protein
rest is unnecessary. I know of some pros who say it's unnecessary
with ALL modern barley malts (any other opinions on this?).
If you're using more than 10% unmalted grain or a large proportion of
malted wheat, you should probably do a protein rest. High quantities
of high molecular weight proteins can actually hurt head retention,
and help make lautering a nightmare.
--------------------------
Ron talks about his positive experiences of aerating without an
airstone. I've been doing this for a year now, and it works great for
me, too. I was afraid of using the airstone because it seemed like it
would be too difficult to clean, so I put it aside! I hook the hose
from my small aquarium pump up to a copper cane and let the pump run
for 30-90 minutes (depending on what else I'm doing, or if I fall
asleep...). Works great, foaming isn't severe so I can just walk
away.
Have Fun!
George De Piro (Nyack, NY)
------------------------------
From: "John Penn" <john_penn@spacemail.jhuapl.edu>
Date: 22 Aug 1996 09:39:18 -0400
Subject: All Grain to Extract
Subject: Time:9:20 AM
OFFICE MEMO All Grain to Extract Date:8/22/96
Thanks Ken Schwartz for that all grain to extract conversion post in
HBD#2155. I have converted a few partial mash or all grain recipes to
extract/specialty grain concentrating on getting the gravities and hop
amounts due to a concentrated boil right. But, I didn't take into account
the grain types as fully as you describe such as using British Pale extracts
for British 2-row. It was very informative and inspires me to be more
exacting in my extract brewing. Even though I don't have the time required
for a partial mash/all grain I hope to try a partial someday so I'll save
your posts. Thanks again.
As for David's comments on dry hopping. Maybe in adding the hops you
stirred up the yeasts a little generating some activity, much like racking to
a secondary which increase activity a little. A bubble every 15-20 secs is
not very active so my vote goes for not worrying about it.
John Penn
------------------------------
From: Michael Caprara <mcaprara@awwarf.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 14:33:14 -0600
Subject: Filtering Water
Hello fellow brewers and purveyors of flatulence!
I know there has been some sporadic talk of filtering water, but I didn't
really think that I wanted to filter.....until now.
I want a portable filter system since I brew outside on the deck. My
water supply is chloraminated (Denver Water) and is really good water
(it comes from snowmelt destined for the pacific, but diverted through a
big tunnel under the continental divide).
Here are my questions:
1. What type of setup should I use? GAC? membrane?
2. If using a GAC, what are the problems with microbial regrowth? I am
only going to filter the water I brew with.
3. Please pass along any tidbits of info or lessons learned the hard way.
Please email privately if you feel this is redundant info. TIA
Brewfully Deadicated
Michael Caprara
mcaprara@awwarf.com
http://www.dimensional.com/~godbey/louthan.html
------------------------------
From: Michael Caprara <mcaprara@awwarf.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 1996 08:14:11 -0600
Subject: A Dry Hopping Primer
Tom wrote:
I see the term "dry-hopping" but don't know what it means. Can
some-one give me a quick synopsis of what it is and how it is done?
Tom
Dry hopping is basically adding dry hops to your beer to impart that
wonderful hop nose and aroma. If you like beers such as Sierra
Nevada, then you should dry hop. How you do it depends on if you
bottle or keg.
Bottling: Add the hops to the secondary fermenter. You can put them in
a hop bag if you wish. If you add them to the primary, a lot of the aroma
will be "scrubbed" off due to vigorous fermentation. Let the hops sit in
the beer for about 3 or 4 weeks, and bottle as usual.
Kegging: This is easy! Throw the hops in a hop bag, add some sanitized
marbles if you like, and throw in the bottom of the keg as you fill it with
beer.
That is all there is to it! I personally don't worry about sanitizing the hops,
just the hop bag and marbles.
Brewfully Deadicated
MC :{P} Hopus headus maximosus
------------------------------
From: Jim Busch <busch@eosdev2.gsfc.nasa.gov>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 1996 10:22:12 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Guinness/Flaked Barley
Chuck asks:
<Several days ago, Pete Finlay of England posted an interesting note
<about a brewery tour at Guinness. He said that the knowledgeable former
<Guinness employee leading the tour reported that Guinness mashes at 158.
Sounds reasonable but only after 30-60 minutes at 140F.
<This surprised me, given the dryness of Guinness stout.
Yup, not possible with only a 158F rest.
<While I'm on the subject, one of Dave Miller's books argues that
<dry stout recipes containing large percentages of flaked barley should
<be given a protein rest before being brought to saccharification
<temperatures. Is Miller incorrect on this?
I wouldnt say incorrect but not required. If you have a good lauter
tun, you can mash 25% flaked barley using a two step mash, 140F/158F.
Ive done both, an intense 105/122/140/158/170 and found almost no
difference in attenuation over a 140/158.
Re: standard Cajun Cookers. The more I use one of these the more it
seems to me they are fantastic for steaming Maryland bluecrabs or
Maine lobsters. If only grains were more like shellfish.....
Jim Busch
Colesville, Md (where good bluecrabs are finally coming in!)
------------------------------
From: Bill Rust <wrust@csc.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 96 10:49 EDT
Subject: Tap & Beer Lines
Here's a question for the Keg Gurus:
I'm getting ready to put my homebrew on tap. I plan to use an existing tap
that's built into the bar. It's the type that has a vertical, cylindrical
steel column with the tap on the side:
____
\ / (Unlike the typical
|| ___ home setup that is
||= | drilled into a ref-
| | rigerator, it's a
| | bar-type tap.)
| |
----|___|----
I'm not familiar with this type of tap. It looks difficult (if not
impossible) to take apart and clean. What's the best way to clean it and
the beer lines out? Do I need to use caustic soda? If so, what's the
recommended procedure? Is there a better alternative?
Skol.
----------------------------------------------------
Bill Rust, Master Brewer | To Do Is to Be - SOCRATES
Jack Pine Savage Brewery | To Be Is to Do - PLATO
http://www.i1.net/~wrust | Do Be Do Be Do - SINATRA
----------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
From: hollen@vigra.com
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 96 09:01:13 PDT
Subject: Re: RIMS heaters - NonoNOnononono
>>>>> "John" == Palmer John <palmer@ssdgwy.mdc.com> writes:
John> EHRRH! Wrong. I hadnt heard of Nikalloy, I assumed it to be a
John> trade name of a nickel-containing alloy, but if its Inconel,
John> then its NOT Stainless Steel. But its one step better. Inconel
John> is a Nickel based, as opposed to Iron based alloy that has
John> superior corrosion resistance to 300 series stainless. Just a
John> nit, but I live for this sort of thing. :)
Sorry folks, but John picked my nits correctly. I wrote from work and
off the top of my head and the info from a couple of different
manufacturers got intermingled and scrambled. What is still true is
that the Chromalox or Accutherm elements are the ones to buy. The
Accutherm elements, however, are in the $130 range for SS.
Now from the reference material at home:
Regular home store elements which I directed you all away from are
copper based and tinned, not galvanized.
Chromalox which makes the heater elements sold by Grainger and they
are "Constructed with a nickel based alloy". Never says what nickel
based alloy
Accutherm makes heater elements which are made with "334 Stainless
Steel which is equivalent to Incoloy 840".
Sorry for my brain farts, gang. Thanks for catching it, John.
dion
- --
Dion Hollenbeck (619)597-7080x164 Email: hollen@vigra.com
Sr. Software Engineer - Vigra Div. of Visicom Labs San Diego, California
------------------------------
From: korz@pubs.ih.lucent.com
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 96 11:26:07 CDT
Subject: Munich malt production
Sorry that it has taken a few days to get around to replying, but I wanted
to check my facts before posting (the new and improved Al!)...
Dave writes:
>Al, so you've never had burnt toast? But seriously, I generally agree with
>your analogies. If you consider that in culinary terminology, 'roasting' is
>using dry high heat for a long time to cook &/or dry something generally that
>has a high moisture content to start with such as meat, potatoes, green coffee
>beans, etc.
This may be true in the kitchen, but not in malt production. There is some
disagreement between malsters whether damp or dry malt should be used in the
roasting drum [DeClerck, p.244], but most maltsters use dry malt similar to
Pilsner or Pale Ale malt. In the barrel roaster they make Biscuit,
Victory(tm), Chocolate, Carafa(R), Black Patent and Roasted Malt. They also
start with dry barley and make Roasted Barley and Black Barley in the roaster.
>'Toasting', on the other hand, is using dry high heat for a short
>period of time to dry and crisp something that is already generally low in
>moisture (like bread crumbs, etc.). But since either can be done to various
>degrees of "doneness", I don't automatically associate 'roasted' with a burnt
>component.
Yes, but in malt production the barrel roaster is the device used for both
toasted malts such as Biscuit and Victory and roasted malts such as the others
I've mentioned above. The difference is time and (primarily) temperature.
>Toasted malt has been kiln dried, then heated in a hot, dry oven. Roasted
>barley or malt went in the oven still wet (green). My analogy would be to
>think of coffee beans or peanuts when you think of roasted, and think of ...er
>...whatsit ...um toast when you think of toasted (but not BURNT toast :). But
>it's hard to describe something based on taste/smell alone that is a
reflection
>of the processing.
As I said before, green malt (wet) is not put into the barrel roaster. All
malt is dried in the kiln and then can optionally go into the roaster. It's
not quite an oven -- it's a rotating drum that's heated from below. It also
has water sprayers installed which are used to douse the malt (to cool it
quickly) when it is done (although I suppose it may be used to put out fires
too, which I'm told are more common than the maltsters would like!).
>Here's one for you to think about: If black patent is a
>roasted malt, is Munich malt high-kilned, or light-roasted?
In response to this, Jim writes:
>Its high-kilned but not until an extensive drying process is complete
>at relatively low temperatures. The drying is important to create
>amino acids and sugars that will undergo Maillard reactions to
>produce melanoidins and Strecker aldehydes.
Absolutely. I'd like to add a little more detail, if I may.
There are two parts to kilning: the "drying phase" and the "curing phase."
The temperature of the curing phase is what distinguishes Aromatic
(25 Lovibond) and Munich (usually about 8 Lovibond), but it's the drying
phase that distinguishes pale malts from "high-kilned" malts like Vienna,
Munich and Aromatic [DeClerk, p.182].
Drying Phase
In the kiln, there are three factors: time, temperature and ventilation.
For the production of pale malts like Pale Ale and Pilsner malt, the
temperature is relatively low (40-45C) and ventilation is very high.
The malts are therefore dried quite quickly. Once the moisture is below
10%, the temperature can be raised. Raising the temperature earlier
would result in significant enzyme loss. The low moisture protects the
malt enzymes from denaturing [DeClerck, p196].
For the production of high-kilned malts like Vienna, Munich and Aromatic,
the initial temperature during the drying phase is higher (about 50C).
Furthermore, the ventilation is considerably lower. As a result, the
moisture content of the malt only drops to about 20% in the first 24 hours
[DeClerck, p.197]. Typically, high-kilned malts take about twice as
long to make as pale malts [Malting and Brewing Science, p.177]. Clearly
there is a significant amount of enzyme loss in the production of high-
kilned malts, but this higher temperature drying is important for the
production of high levels of soluble sugars and amino acids which are
later utilized in the production of melanoidins via Maillard reactions
and Amadori rearrangements [Malting and Brewing Science, p.105].
Interestingly, the temperature profile of Vienna malt kilning looks more
like Pilsner rather than Munich malt (from fig.79 on page 198 of DeClerck).
Curing Phase
Pale malts typically are cured at 80 to 95C for 5 hours. Temperatures
above 80C, however, are only used if the malt is not over-modified and
was dried at low temperatures. Munich malt is typically cured at 105C
for 5 hours [DeClerck, p.197]. Aromatic malt is typically cured at 115F
[Busch, personal communication].
So, as we can see, there is more to Munich malt production than just
higher temperatures in the kiln -- at the expense of some diastatic
and proteolytic power, high-kilned malts are dried in a hotter, *higher-
moisture* kiln for the first 24 hours and only *then* raised to a high
temperature.
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korzonas@lucent.com
Copyright 1996 Al Korzonas
------------------------------
From: John McCauley <jmccauley@ctgusa.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 1996 13:24:07 -0400
Subject: dry hop with fresh hops
I'm now harvesting a bumper crop of cascade hops and would like to ask about
a couple things.
First, what's a good method of drying these short of getting a food dehydrator?
Second, what about the danger of infection if I dry-hopped with these. Is
there any processing beyond drying that ought to be done to minimize
unwanted beasties I'm sure are present on the flowers? Would I be safer
making a "hop extract" with vodka instead?
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| John McCauley | CTGi 703-352-0590 |
| jmccauley@ctgusa.com | Oakton, VA |
| If I could walk that way I wouldn't need the talcum powder... |
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
------------------------------
From: Cory Wright <cwright@midcom.anza.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 1996 12:50:47 -0500
Subject: Re: what is dry hopping?
Tom Lochtefeld wrote:
>
I see the term "dry-hopping" but don't know what it means. Can some-one
give me a quick synopsis of what it is and how it is done?
>
Dry hopping refers to adding hops to the wort/beer (please, let's not get
off on the "when is it beer" tangent again!) after the boil. As with most
brewing procedures, there are diverse opinions about when and how to add
them. Typically, hops are added to the secondary. Pellets, whole hops, and
plugs can be used--your preference. I personally like adding whole hops to
the secondary. Put them in a hop bag and (if it doesn't have a long enough
one) tie a string to the bag to retrieve it at bottling. Dry hopping has a
greater effect on aroma and taste than adding hops to the boil. It does not
affect bitterness.
Of course, YMMV. Hope this helps.
Cheers,
Cory
cwright@midcom.anza.com
------------------------------
End of Homebrew Digest #2156
****************************
