Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2195
This file received at Hops.Stanford.EDU 1996/09/19 PDT
Homebrew Digest Thursday, 19 September 1996 Number 2195
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Shawn Steele, Digest Janitor
Thanks to Rob Gardner for making the digest happen!
Contents:
sparging ideas (James Murphy)
Scrubbies ((Neal Christensen))
Homebrewing in Italy ("MASSIMO FARAGGI")
Location, Location, Location (John DeCarlo)
Re: table sugar ((Rich Hampo))
RIMS issues ("Louis K. Bonham")
racking losses ((BAYEROSPACE))
Iodine-based sanitizers (Rscholz@aol.com)
"They moved whilst you were at school, son..." ("Pat Babcock")
Newbies and sanitizing (Steve)
Flour, Hops and Crass Commercialism (Jack Schmidling)
extended RIMS discussion questions (Daryl K Kalenchuk)
IBU calculation (Alex Santic)
The Pressures of Hosing (KennyEddy@aol.com)
Specialty Beer Category (DENNIS WALTMAN)
Spec Beer Cat and N.O. (RUSt1d?)
Seminar Correction (Special Events)
Re: RIMS with other grains (Kelly Jones)
Just Hops changed hands (Jeff Frane)
Hop and grain storage; Seasonal Ale Recipe Request; Carboyss ("Bernard D Hummel")
JSP Maltmill, retail beer prices (John Chang)
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: James Murphy <murphy@gordy.ucdavis.edu>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 10:00:24 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: sparging ideas
Hi,
Thanks to all who replied to my question about sparging techniques.
In case there are others who are interested, the suggestions I got were:
1. Buy or build a sparge arm like the one from Listermann and let gravity
do the work.
2. Run a hose from the bucket to the boiler and let it flow slowly.
3. Drill a bunch of holes in a tupperware bowl and suspend over the grain
bed (I think Ken also posted this idea directly to HBD).
Jim Murphy
jjmurphy@ucdavis.edu
------------------------------
From: nealc@selway.umt.edu (Neal Christensen)
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 11:04:52 -0600 (MDT)
Subject: Scrubbies
In 2187 W. D. Knudson wrote that 'The best combination for cleaning
Stainless Steel is the Scotch brand green
cleaning pads and the yeast dregs from the carboy.'
I have been told that yeast slurry is/was often used to clean and shine the
copper kettles in the brew house. My experience is that it works great on
copper - quickly removing any discoloring and bringing it to a shine. I bet
it would also work well on stainless. I have also been told that the green
cleaning pads commonly found at the grocery store are not the preferred
choice in the brewery. The red or maroon pads (also made by Scotch) found
at the paint store are the preferred choice. Can anyone support this and
explain the difference between the pads?
Neal Christensen
Missoula
------------------------------
From: "MASSIMO FARAGGI" <maxfarag@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 07:53:24 -0700
Subject: Homebrewing in Italy
Hi All,
I am new to this group; I would like to introduce myself with a few
words about Homebrewing in Italy. I hope this can be useful to:
1. Italian homebrewers (or just beerlovers) reading HBD
2. USA & rest-of-the-world brewers going to Italy, or just interested
for a "cultural" point of view.
I started homebrewing in 1984, with some beer kits bought in London
by some relatives. Then during a travel to Scotland I could find a
HB shop in Edimborough, so I could buy some ingredients and books;
I switched since then to extract+hop brewing (with grains adjuncts).
The major improvement happened when I could find some of the heaviest
ingredients in Italy (see below); the shop in Scotland agreed to
mail me the other ingredients (yeast, hops, some grains). I brewed
about (only) 25 beers since then - usually a stout and an IPA and some
experiments.
I think I've been a sort of "pioneer" al least in my area (Genoa).
Only in recent years I could meet some people (other than the friends
that I introduced to this Art) who were homebrewing, usually from beer
kits.
However, the possibility of home brewing has always sounded quite
interesting to a lot of people I met; at my present workplace we were
at one time 5 people making beer and we organized at times
"beer festivals" at lunch time!
The main problem in Italy has been and still is the availability of
the ingredients. There are no specialized shops.
This is the present situation as far as I know:
MALT EXTRACT is available as pale DMS in 25 Kg. cans. It is used by
bakers and sold by bakers' wholesale suppliers. It seems to be of a
good quality compared to the UK homebrewing extract I could try and
is produced from the same malteries and breweries producing italian
beer. NO AMBER or DARK MALT EXTRACT seems available.
UNMALTED GRAINS and FLAKES are available in herbs & special food shops.
TORRIFIED and ROASTED UNMALTED GRAINS I make at home from the raw
grains (this will be a question I will post to HBD - grain roasting
techniques - unless I can find some FAQ or so in the WEB)
MALTED GRAINS for adjuncts - crystal malt etc. - these are not available and I
mail order them to UK shops.
HOPS are available in herbs & special food shops, but of unknow type and
quality and badly kept in open air. I tried them and they just work to bitter
your brew; I prefer to mail order them in UK. Maybe one can find wild hops
somewhere or of course grow them.
YEAST Baker yeast is available and works (other question to submit
to HBD - suitability of baker yeast to make beer). As they are
lightweight I prefer to mail order in UK the specific yeast I need.
BEER KITS are now available in some hobby shops; the same can also sell the
basic EQUIPMENT; anyway equipment is not a problem as winemaking is widespread.
So in our group of Hbrewers we found that the best thing is: mail ordering
hops, yeasts and crystal and other malt grains from shops in UK (or ask friends
going to England to buy them) and buying here malt extract, flakes and raw
barley grains. Mail ordering oflarge quantities of malt extraxt, or pale malt
for all-grain brews is very expensive as post rates go by weight
LAWS: it's a controversial point; in the land of winemaking it seems that none
of our hundreds of thousands of laws handles the subject of
homebrewing, neither to forbid it nor to allow it. (Home winemaking is
allowed). I personally have a relative which is a judge specialized in
health and food but she could give me no precise answer. I think you
should at least pay some tax on your beer even for personal consumption (we
also have here in Italy hundreds of thousands of different taxations..).
Anyway if you don't hear from me for too much time please call Amnesty
International...
Ok, sorry if wasted some of HBD space and time, but I feel that there could be
quite a few people in Italy or somewhere in the world (I remember a man from
South America that recently posted to HBD) that is maybe reading beer
newsgroups or digests in the Net and need just that little "push" to jump in
and join us Hbrewers...
I have dozens of technical questions (including the two I mentioned before)
that I will NOT post for the moment... only, if some has any general advice to
a brewer with my limitation, that is warmly welcome.
Any Italian needing more info don't hesitate to email me.
My positive contribution to HBD could be quite small for the moment,
unless someone needs some info about European beers and Ales (I tasted
over 600 and recorded data in my database).
Cheers,
Massimo Faraggi
GENOVA - ITALY
maxfarag@hotmail.com
- ---------------------------------------------------------
Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
- ---------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
From: John DeCarlo <jdecarlo@juno.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 13:08:45 -0400
Subject: Location, Location, Location
Could each person who posts about an event of any kind please *begin*
the post with a geographical location (at least the country, state,
city, and probably general location (Northern California, for example)
for larger states and lesser-known cities). Please!
Even those of us who pretend to know something about world and US
geography may not know where "Big Rock" is. And for a particularly
enjoyable event, it helps us to know ahead of time that it is too far
away to even consider. Otherwise we get our hopes up, only to see them
dashed by a location at the end of the message, or by ending in
confusion when no location is even mentioned.
Thanks.
John "I like to complain" DeCarlo, Arlington, VA (Northern VA, near
Washington, DC).
------------------------------
From: rhampo@ford.com (Rich Hampo)
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 13:08:20 -0400
Subject: Re: table sugar
Howdy all,
Al K. writes
>>I've searched the archives and they do indicate that sucrose
>>(tablet sugar) is derived from sugar beets.
>In europe. In the US it's virtually (if not all) from cane sugar. Both
>cane and beet sugar are almost 100% sucrose (table sugar).
Actually, here in Michigan, a lot of sugar is indeed beet sugar.
The Pioneer brand of sugar is made from sugar beets grown in
mid-Michigan (somehow sugar cane just won't live through the
snowy winters ;=)
Cheers!
Richard Hampo
H&H Brewing Ltd.
------------------------------
From: "Louis K. Bonham" <lkbonham@i-link.net>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 12:09:37 +0000
Subject: RIMS issues
I have to quibble with Steve Alexander's recent critiques of RIMS mashing:
> * The small high capacity heating elements used in typical RIMS means
> that a large amount of thermal energy is transferred over the rather
> small surface area of the heating element. This leads to very high
> thermal gradient, and so high temperatures in the immediate vicinity
> of the heating element. This would suggest thermal loss of enzymes,
> coagulation of proteins and caramelization of sugars.
Good RIMS design relies on the in-line heater *only* to handle temperature
maintenance and the last 2 degrees or so of a boost. My system (a modified
prototype of the unit now marketed by SABCO) has a jet burner and a baffle
plate under the mash/lauter tun, and I use the burner to handle the bulk of
the temp boosts (i.e., I turn the gas off when I get within two degrees of my
target). With this kind of setup, I've never had any problems of the type
you suggest, even when brewing extremely pale beers.
>
> * The pumps typical of RIMS design cause substantial shear force
> which can, and undoubtedly does denature proteins and enzymes to
> some extent. Throttling flow rates with a valve exacerbates this
> problem. This issue is addressed in commercial enzymatic processes
> by specialized pump design.
Theoretically, this may take place. Practically, however, does this
denaturing occur enough to make any material difference in the mash? Again,
I've done dozens of batches and have never encountered any problem of this
nature, even though my system uses the typical pump (March magnetic drive
pump) and controls the flow with a valve. Do you have any hard data that
documents that enzymes are denatured in a RIMS system to any material degree?
> * Very thick mashes are probably not possible with a RIMS apparatus,
> as the amount of fluid available for recirculation and the amount of
> time requires for the liquid to sump would undoubtedly cause
> cavitation and/or loss of priming wort in the up-tube and subsequent
> heating problems.
Again, is this critique based on experience? I routinely do mashes that use
1.2 quarts per pound, and could easily do thicker mashes by just increasing
the batch size (the amount of "foundation" water that fills the plumbing is
constant). More to the point, what's the big deal about doing super-thick
mashes? As documented in Dr. Fix's book, mash thickness has very little
practical effect on the mash, as long as you're not doing an extremely thin
mash. (I know that Noonan and others claim certain benefits from thick
mashes, but I've never seen them advance any hard data to support such
claims.)
> * RIMS recirculation is probably not possible with very sticky mashes,
> for example those that include a high proportion of wheat, rye and
> perhaps rice.
A valid point, but one that appears to have a solution. Conrad Keyes, who
designed the SABCO RIMS system, tells me that he solved the sticky mash
problem of a high-proportion wheat mash by adding a few lbs of rice hulls to
the grist. I have no personal experience with this technique, but it appears
conceptually sound.
> * I really think that the liquid/electrical danger issue should be
> added to the disadvantages list - Just as the advantage of no open
> propane flames and no resulting fumes certainly should be added to
> the advantages.
The electrical danger is, of course, present, but it can be dealt with
cheaply and easily. Anyone designing or implementing a RIMS system **MUST**
include a ground fault interruption circuit in their design, just as any
electrical outlets installed in bathrooms or kitchens should have this
feature. OTOH, as indicated above, a good RIMS system still uses a flame
source, so no advantage from its elimination.
> It has been suggested on HBD that the extremely clear
> highly recirculated runnings from a RIMS setup may lack sufficient
> lipids for optimal yeast growth.
Suggested, yes. Documented, no. I've never heard of anyone actually
encountering this problem.
> The initial dough-in stage owes little to the RIMS apparatus except
> convenience of pumping. After some initial mixing it's possible to
> recirc wort with the RIMS to thoroughly mix the mash. The shear
> forces in the pump at this early stage may be objectionable. Also a
> RIMS probably can't take mashes as thick a those that I usually use at
> dough-in and during the protein rest. A paddle undoubtedly generates
> less shear force than a pump at this stage. Does the RIMS add to
> control or repeatability at this stage ? Hard to answer, but it seems
> unlikely. The major objective of getting grist in contact with water
> and preventing balling still requires substantial human intervention
> and observation I think.
I still question whether the issue of shear forces causing problems isn't
more academic than actual, at least in the small scale batches produced by
homebrewers (>1 bbl) . As to the need for human intervention at dough in,
you're right: ain't no substitute for hand mixing if you don't want balls of
malt.
> The RIMS pumps' shear force loss of enzymes and
> proteins continues to be a negative and the high temperatures produced
> at the very small surface if the waterheater element is an even
> greater threat to the wort.
See above. Again, I've never encountered any problems from any "loss of
enzymes" (indeed, the increased circulation from the RIMS process appears to
accellerate the starch degradation process -- I typically have complete
conversion much sooner than a conventional mash) or insufficient protein.
Regards --------Louis Bonham
------------------------------
From: M257876@sl1001.mdc.com (BAYEROSPACE)
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 12:12 -0600
Subject: racking losses
collective homebrew conscience:
chuck in nashville wrote:
>anyone
>have any suggestions on how to eliminate the trub gunk from getting into the
>primary. I already use an immersion chiller to rapidly cool the wort and
>whirlpool the brewpot and let it sit for about ten minutes before
>transferring into the primary. However there usually isn't much trub left in
>the center of the pot after racking, it all seems to be in the fermenter.
here's an idea: use a 7 gallon carboy to put the chilled wort+trub in.
you can aerate/pitch your yeast at this point, depending on temperature, then
wait for the trub to settle. usually within a few hours the trub will settle
to the bottom and you can then siphon the wort off the trub. i use this
method and it seems to work okay. it assumes, however, that you know about
how much trub a recipe will generate. i usually try to hit the 5.5 to 5.8
gallon mark on the 7 gallon carboy for a typical all barley malt average
gravity (1.048) recipe, and i'm usually in the ballpark. bigger barley
malt recipes give more trub, and wheat malt seems to not contribute much,
in my experience.
by the way, i measure my extraction by using both the pre-racking volume and
the post racking volume. the numbers i come up with are usually about
28 or 29 for post racking volume, and 31-33 for pre-racking volume. which
volume do most of the rest of you use?
i have a question about this method, though. if the yeast is pitched before
racking off the trub, does some of it sediment with the trub and therefore
get left behind when the wort is racked to the real primary? i've often
wondered if i'm losing yeast this way. the alternative is to wait and not
pitch the yeast until after racking (ooh, scary). i've done this for beers
that i have chilled to below 50 degrees and never had a problem, but my
preference is to pitch asap.
so, am i losing yeast by pitching before racking? and if so, is this still
preferable to pitching after waiting for the trub to settle and racking?
brew hard,
mark bayer
------------------------------
From: Rscholz@aol.com
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 13:30:13 -0400
Subject: Iodine-based sanitizers
brewsters,
Steve Johnson writes:
>found an item listed as "Iosan" and
>included some vague descriptors as to what it was used for...as a detergent/
>sanitizer and could be used as a final rinse. Added that it was good for
>cleaning out drink dispensers. No info as to how much of the percentage was
>titratable iodine like they put on the side of those little bottles of
Iodophor
>or such at the homebrew stores. But, at $23.05 bottle for a gallon, it may
be a
>worthwhile investment for me and my other homebrewing comrades. Anybody
>know anything about this stuff?
I use a similar commercial product I get from the resturant supply in NY,NY
I was suprised how little the store reps knew about what they carry. I asked
for a no-rinse sanitizer and they said " we don't carry anything like that"
so I walk
over to the shelf and read the label on their "Beer glass cleaner" and it's
iodine based with instructions for dilutions to air-dry/ no-rinse large food
handling equip. For beer glasses: one dips and rinses in clean water.
that's all the store guys knew about it, but it's great for sanitizing and at
$16.50 / gal per case of six gals. ( yes I know I've got enough for the next
5 yrs)
it beats Iodofor at ~ $1/oz. So look for it as beer glass cleaner and the
resturant
suppliers might know what you want. Hope this helps.
richard l scholz
bklyn ny
------------------------------
From: "Pat Babcock" <pbabcock@ford.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 13:33:27 -0400
Subject: "They moved whilst you were at school, son..."
Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your psychologist...
I was recently ruminating on the underlying feeling of hostility I now pick
up from the digest - a feeling that started a few months before the digest
transferred and has been growing ever since. The feeling of "family", or at
least of "community" seems to be waning.
Perhaps its the impression of a few "experts" apparently trying to dominate
the pages of this august forum whilst trying to make the other look to be a
ninny. Or maybe it's the inevitable degradation of such things. Or, maybe its
the content-control freaks exerting their influence - I can't answer. I can
only hope that calling attention to it will bring back the digest I used to
know.
Where are Tracy Aquilla? Spencer Thomas? AJ DeLange? Dave Draper? Others?
These folks used to be CONSTANT contibutors? Now it's a rare occassion that
we hear from them; and then, only for brief. Have they noticed, too? Am I
insane? Will Batman and Robin get free from the evil clutches of the
Kochster?
It's a lot like coming home to the sudden realization that your family has
moved out while you were at work.
Is it just me?
My intent is not to discount the contributions that some new "faces" have
made to the digest. Just that it seems more like a a fire-fight than a
community any more.
Pat Babcock
pbabcock@oeonline.com (Please, oh please use this address for replies)
Pondering my navel in Canton, MI
------------------------------
From: Steve <JOHNSONS@UANSV5.VANDERBILT.EDU>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 12:38:31 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Newbies and sanitizing
Don Chase in HBD #2193 talks about helping a "newbie" brew his first batch,
and that his friend "...got so worked up over doing everything right that he
oversanitized, and his beer wasswill."
Well, I don't mean to be picky, but I also don't want new brewers to get the
wrong idea about sanitation. I don't think that a brewer can ever get too
careful about sanitation, to the point of "oversanitizing" any equipment.
Perhaps Don means that his friend was a bit sloppy or haphazzard about
carefullyrinsing or drying any equipment that had been sanitized.
As a relatively new brewer myself, early on (batch 4, maybe) I had the mis-
fortune of getting some lactic flavors in some of my bottles, and took the
advice from some of my fellow brewers in our club, the Music City Brewers in
Nashville, TN, to tighten up my sanitizing procedures and separate my yogurt
making from my beer making! I'm now getting to ready to brew my 15th batch,
and haven't had any problems with infections or iodophor and/or bleach
flavors in my beers, either. The bottom line is that all brewers should make
careful sanitation and cleanliness a habit with their brewing, and let those
yeast cells do what they do best! With good sanitation procedures as a
foundation to brewing, I think any newbrewer will have an exceptional chance
of making good beer.
Steve Johnson
Music City Brewers
Nashville, TN
------------------------------
From: Jack Schmidling <arf@mc.net>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 07:57:47 -0700
Subject: Flour, Hops and Crass Commercialism
Al K...
>The whole point of this and my initial post, which Dave seems to havechanged,
is that flour content should not be the primary measure of the
quality of a crush... the integrity of the husks is far more important!
A breath of fresh air. There is little that has created more paranoia
in home brewing than all the ghuru advice about flour, not to mention
the phone calls from people thinking there is something wrong with
their brand new MM's because they see a lot of "flour". When I ask if
they made beer with it yet, the answer is always no.
The home brew books of the 60's were mostly bad info and the more recent
ones are mostly good info but there is still a significant
amount of bad that just will not go away.
>From: Mike Demers <mdemers@ctron.com>
>I also tried eliminating the use of hop bags byinstalling my EASYMASHER (tm)
in my 15 gal. pot
so I could strain the wort through the hops.
This did not work as well as I thought it would.
The wort would flow out pretty good for a while
but then the EM would get clogged up pretty good
and I had to get in there with a spoon and push
the hops away from the screen so the flow would speed
up. It basically was a nightmare and I don't know
if I'll try this again.
It really works quite well but there are a few tricks
to avoid the nightmares.
First of all, you must allow the wort to settle and NEVER
under any circumstances, stir it. Forget the whirlpool for
this critter. It belongs elsewhere.
If hops do get sucked in, the worst thing you can
do is to stir. That produces the nightmare. A gentle
blow on the end of the hose (you figure out how to do
it in a sanitary way) will usually clear it up and get
you through the drain.
I and many others have been using EM's in the kettle for
years. It works.
>From: Ian Smith <rela!isrs@netcom.com>
>Can someone give me the specifications on the MaltMill (TM) - what length and
diameter are the rollers ? What is the material of
construction....
More than you will ever want to know is on our web page.
However, we have just added something that seems newsworthy.
We are now offering hardened steel rollers for the high volume user
as an option at a modest additional cost.
Seems as how some really heavy users are actually wearing out the
diamond knurl and having to return them for re-knurling. Hardening
them in the first place costs little more than reworking and saves
downtime.
js
- --
Visit our WEB pages:
Beer Stuff: http://dezines.com/@your.service/jsp/
Astronomy: http://user.mc.net/arf/
------------------------------
From: Daryl K Kalenchuk <dkk886@mail.usask.ca>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 11:49 -0600 (CST)
Subject: extended RIMS discussion questions
This message began as a private reply to Steve Alexander and others for
their great responses to my question posted in HBD on RIMS disadvantages
this is the type of info I was looking for, but it seems that this issue has
gained some interest now and maybe rekindled some old flames (pun optional).
I'm not going to summarize or argue anyone since I don't have any data on
the subject but would appreciate a little input.
Let me begin by clarifying my question about RIMS benefit to sparging. I
thought that partial recirculation of the sparge water would decrease sparge
time but from gaining further understanding of the sparge process that this
would dramatically decrease my yields. The only advantage would be the ease
of recirculating initial and runnings if raking the bed was required.
I had the same concerns regarding heat transfer rates and pump turbulence(as
Steve) ,not entirely for the same reasons though. I have thought of two
modifications and thought I might get your opinion on them. First heat the
bottom of the mash tun (assuming it's SS) by a burner or large electrical
element thus using the entire area of the false bottom to heat that volume
and recirculating it. If flow is sufficient and heat flux is not too high
then scorching wouldn't be a problem but I'm not sure at what levels this
would be the case. Secondly instead using an external pump immerse an
impeller in a vertical column which runs from the an opening in the false
bottom to an open diffuser at the top of the grain bed. The impeller would
only need to produce a small amount of head(lift of liquid) thus shear would
be minimal as it could run at a very low speed. Two possible problems with
this the very advantages of RIMS. I'm not sure what my temperature control
capabilities will be (this is still just an idea) and the ability of this
low flow pump to move suspended particles back to the top of the grain bed
for filtering. Also no pump to double for other tasks.
As an added question are there limitations as to the styles that can be
produced by a RIMS and do any RIMS people combine the procedure with
decoctation mashes or can you follow a mash schedule which eliminates the
need for decoctaions(sorry I had to ask it).
Daryl K. Kalenchuk
Saskatoon, Canada
Daryl K. Kalenchuk
****************************************************************************
Advanced Engineering Design Lab. * (home)
University of Saskatchewan * 403 Egbert Avenue
Saskatoon, Canada * Saskatoon, Canada S7N 2S8
ph.(306) 966-5498 * ph. (306) 477-5003
http://www.aed06.usask.ca/ * http://www.engr.usask.ca/~dkk886
****************************************************************************
------------------------------
From: Alex Santic <alex@salley.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 13:51:25 -0400
Subject: IBU calculation
Paul Bryan would like to calculate the number of IBUs the recipe below =
might result in, using a 3 gallon concentrated boil. I believe that Paul =
wanted to try the Tinseth formulas which seems like a good idea to me.
Honey Ale=20
6 lb Light LME=20
.5 lb Light DME=20
.5 lb Belgium Biscuit Malt=20
.5 lb Crystal Malt=20
1 oz Columbus Hops (12.4%) 60 min=20
1 oz Cascade Hops (5.5%) 20 min=20
1.5 lb Orange Blossum Honey 20 min=20
1 oz cascade Hops (5.5%) steep=20
O.G. 1.045=20
F.G. 1.013=20
IBU's ?=20
=20
It's easy to calculate the SG of the boil by multiplying the extract =
potential of each ingredient by the number of lbs, then taking the sum =
of all these and dividing by the number of gallons. The LME would be =
contributing about 1.035 points per lb/gal, the DME about 1.045 and the =
specialty grains I dunno but 1.020 seems to work in my calculations. =
Doesn't make a big difference in such quantities.
(6 * 35 + .5 * 45 + 1 * 20) / 3 =3D 84.17
So the SG of the boil is about 1.084. Using this figure for the =
utilization calculation gives you about 40 IBUs, not taking the honey =
into account. You could do a calculation for the SG after adding honey, =
but it only affects the 20-minute hop addition which contributed 8 IBUs =
in the original calculation. I'd just estimate 36 IBUs or so...it's all =
pretty approximate anyway.
Honey ferments pretty completely I hear, so that should contribute =
mostly flavor and alcohol. The remaining ingredients should add up to a =
fairly light but tasty brew. In terms of balance, I'd predict this beer =
would have a distinct (probably nice) bitter edge.
Those who'd like to investigate the utilization formula used above can =
check out Glenn Tinseth's article at =
http://realbeer.com/hops/research.html. The online IBU calculator that =
Paul referred to in his original message is at =
http://realbeer.com/hops/IBU.html. Note that there's an error on some of =
the forms where it says "Boil Volume" whereas you actually need to enter =
the final volume of the batch.
- --
Alex Santic - alex@salley.com
Silicon Alley Connections, LLC
527 Third Avenue #419 - NYC 10016 - 212-213-2666 - Fax 212-447-9107
http://www.salley.com
------------------------------
From: KennyEddy@aol.com
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 13:59:15 -0400
Subject: The Pressures of Hosing
Daryl K Kalenchuk posed a good point on the hose pressure thread:
"Assuming turbulent flow in the beer lines occurs I have to question Al's
comment that shaking the keg creates eddies which harbour nucleation sites
for CO2. Turbulent flow would create the same opportunity for nucleation.
Do you believe it's because of the short time (about 5 sec) that the beer
will flow through the lines if so the first third of the second pouring
should be foamy also, no?"
I once fell for the psi per foot theory, happily adding a mile or so of 3/16"
tubing onto my keg. What I got was slow, foamy beer. I then went back to
the short length of 1/4" tubing and tried a small C-clamp to see if I could
tweak in just the right drop. Foam city again. The turbulence created in
these scenarios, I believe, is causing the very problem we're trying to
solve. I now use the shortest practical length of 1/4" tubing, with my
regulator set to 10 - 12 psi and using door-mount beer faucets. I open the
tap full-blast to serve. My first pour usually runs 1/2 foam + 1/2 beer;
after that I get a pretty decent serve. Based on comparison with beer styles
& carbonation charts, I'd estimate my beers have somewhere slightly under 2
volumes of carbonation, which works fine for my ales.
*****
Ken Schwartz
El Paso, TX
KennyEddy@aol.com
http://members.aol.com/kennyeddy
------------------------------
From: DENNIS WALTMAN <PDWALTMAN@sablaw.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 14:46:47 -0400
Subject: Specialty Beer Category
I have a question for the digest collective:
Would a beer that used First Wort Hopping count as a Specialty Beer by
the AHA style guidelines?
It uses a non-standard technique, but how non-standard is it, and is
it enough for the style?
Thanks in Advance,
Dennis Waltman
Sutherland, Asbill, & Brennan
pdwaltman@sablaw.com
------------------------------
From: RUSt1d? <rust1d@li.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 15:31:41 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Spec Beer Cat and N.O.
>Would a beer that used First Wort Hopping count as a Specialty Beer by
>the AHA style guidelines?
No more then dry-hopping. When you add the hops to your brew does not
make it a Specialty beer. However, from what I understand, you can
enter your beer into whatever catagory you like. It just won't score
well if it didn't belong.
NEW ORLEANS
If you were recently in 'Nawlins or happen to live there I would like
information about the city. I will be honeymooning there in mid-october
and am wondering whats cool. I'm not just looking for brewpubs, but
rather anything else that's cool to do. TIA.
John Varady
Boneyard Brewing Co.
"Ale today, Gone tomorrow"
------------------------------
From: Special Events <spevents@postoffice.ptd.net>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 15:45:51 +0000
Subject: Seminar Correction
Just a note:
In the information about the Great Brews of America Homebrew Seminar
Day, it stated that judging would be done by AHA certifies judges. It
was meant to read BJCP judges. Sorry about the error.
Cheers!
Melissa Simock
- -Thanks Mark!
------------------------------
From: Kelly Jones <kejones@ptdcs2.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 13:05:35 -0700
Subject: Re: RIMS with other grains
SA> RIMS recirculation is probably not possible with very sticky
SA> mashes, for example those that include a high proportion of wheat,
SA> rye and perhaps rice.
The last Wit I made in my RIMS included about 45% wheat, most of which was
raw white wheat, a little bit was wheat malt. Absolutely no problems with
recirculation, but you can bet I did extensive multi-step protein resting.
Fortunately, multi-step mashes are a cinch with RIMS.
Kelly
Hillsboro, OR
------------------------------
From: Jeff Frane <jfrane@teleport.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 13:06:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Just Hops changed hands
Speaking of Just Hops: I contacted them to check on availability of British
hop pellets,
and got this response from Mark:
>Just Hops has switched hands. I've decided to spend more time with the
>family and less time packing hops and more time actually brewing beer. Call
>1800 934 BREW and they will be able to help you out. Ask for Duane. Thanks
>for your support and good luck to you!
I called Duane yesterday, and was told that he had not yet received the
shipment of hops from Just Hops but it was on the way. WIth luck, Duane
won't be raising prices from what JH was charging. I did find out that there
were some British hops (Challenger, Target, etc.) available in pellets. Hooray.
- --Jeff Frane
------------------------------
From: "Bernard D Hummel" <hummelbe@pilot.msu.edu>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 16:51:30 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Hop and grain storage; Seasonal Ale Recipe Request; Carboyss
I have been lurking for a while and saving up some questions for the 'experts'.
Please bear with my beginner questions. I apologize if these questions came
up recently, I can't keep up with this HBD two-a-day stuff.
Question 1: Can hops be stored in the freezer? This seems logical but I
commercial suppliers do not. They just refrigerate. Am I missing
something? I only use commercial (dried) hops but use pellets, plugs
and whole. BYW, anyone know where you can get oxygen impermeable
plastic bags (do Ziplock freezer bags work)?
Question 2: Whats the best way to store malted grains (crushed and whole).
Is it OK if I store crushed grain in a plastic bag at basement temp
(65F)? How long will it keep?
Recipes: I love to collect recipes for homebrew. Anyone have a good
recipe for a Pumkin/Spiced Ale? 'Tis the season to be thinking of
these. I'm not up for all grain so I need extract-specialty grain or
partial mash recipes. Your comments on how the recipe turned out would
be greatly appreciated. (for my private use only)
My thoughts on carboys: I currently don't use a carboy much because I
think that they are APITA. Anyone know of a manufacturer of carboys
with wide-mouth openings (big enough to get your arm down in it for
cleaning)? My idea of the perfect carboy is one with a wide mouth and
some sort of spigot near the bottom. I would certainly buy one if I
could find it.
Thanks for all those who take time to respond. BTW, I think some people
underestimate the usefullness of public posts to begginner questions. I for
one get a lot out of them (Just my 2 pennys worth). That being said, public or
private responses to my questions are greatly appreciated.
-- Ben Hummel
hummelbe@pilot.msu.edu
------------------------------
From: John Chang <75411.142@CompuServe.COM>
Date: 19 Sep 96 17:00:11 EDT
Subject: JSP Maltmill, retail beer prices
Hey Guys!
Having digested all of the malt mill discussions submitted over the last few
months, I have talked myself into acquiring a JSP Maltmill. How much should I
expect to pay for one, and are there different models available? I would like
to aquire a mill prior to my next brewing session as all of my prior batches
were made with precrushed malt. Private email welcomed, and by all means, if
you have any other words of advice/warning/praise, by all means please include
them.
*******************************************************************************
On another note, I have seen the import and microbrew sections of local
supermarkets ( Southern California) expand tremendously over the last year.
Several of them now regularly stock over 150 brands (too bad!). As they all
regularly put selected sixers and individual beers on *sale*, the question
occurred to me: what does the rest of the country pay for these?
If it provides enough general interest, I will accept, compile, and post retail
prices for all of the beers that folks wish to report from their part of the
country.
John Chang
75411.142@compuserve.com
------------------------------
End of Homebrew Digest #2195
****************************
