Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2248
This file received at Hops.Stanford.EDU 1996/10/25 PDT
Homebrew Digest Friday, 25 October 1996 Number 2248
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Mike Donald, Digest Janitor-in-training
Thanks to Rob Gardner for making the digest happen!
Contents:
[none] ()
[none] ()
[none] ()
[none] ()
[none] ()
BT Magazine (Derek Lyons)
re: Killer Chiller Question (Derek Lyons)
Re: Cold Side Down (Derek Lyons)
Re: zen of homebrew (Derek Lyons)
wort chillers (Edward J. Steinkamp)
[none] ()
[none] ()
AOB/HBD let's get a grip (Alex Santic)
[none] ()
head retention ("korz")
Vitaminize your Barley wines ("David R. Burley")
Vitamize Part II - The formulae, etc. ("David R. Burley")
[none] ()
[none] ()
re: Killer Chiller Question (Rick Dante)
1996 Capitol District Open (Fred Hardy)
An international forum? (Graham Stone)
Krausening (Priming) ("Genito, Michael A.")
Red beer ("Kevin R. Sinn")
Re: Carbonator problems ("Bridges, Scott")
Thanks/New ???/Aussi Anuran Lager (TheTHP@aol.com)
zen rebuttal (TMCASTLE@am.pnu.com)
Dual Temperature Controller ("Karl Patzer")
Think Positive/Thanks HBD (John Penn)
Help: boiling, cooling, transfering! (Brendan Oldham)
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,
homebrew-digest-owner@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:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From: Derek Lyons <elde@hurricane.net>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 19:39:13 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: BT Magazine
At 10:18 AM 10/24/96 -0500, you wrote:
>Somebody wrote:
>>BT is nice. *IF* you are an all grain brewer, or a LARGE scale homebrewer,
>>or a REALLY anal-scientific brewer, or a brewpub brewer, or a small
>>microbrewery brewer...... But that leaves out about 90% of the brewing
>>community. More importantly BT totally ignores the newbie brewer.
>
>I disagree. I think they have done a good job in the last year or two at
>addressing issues that newer brewers have as they try to improve each
>batch. They do, however, ignore the "newbie brewer" who is making
>his next batch the same way he makes all his batches and isn't interested
>in things like hydrometers, IBUs and liquid yeast. These brewers are
>probably not on this digest and are not who the magazine is aimed at.
>*******
>
As a 'newbie brewer' of sorts, (just over two years and 12 batches), who
*is* interested in 'hydrometers, IBUs and liquid yeast', and who *is*
reasonable well educated and read... I find BT utterly useless. Hence the
initial paragraph quoted above. (Which is mine).
An unscientific poll of 'newbie' brewers that I know shows the same feeling.
------------------------------
From: Derek Lyons <elde@hurricane.net>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 19:39:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: re: Killer Chiller Question
At 12:40 PM 10/24/96 -0400, you wrote:
>On Thu, 24 Oct 1996, Derek Lyons wrote:
>
>> If the water exiting your chiller is cold, then your chiller is not
>> functioning. The water should be *warm*, indicating that it has indeed
>> picked up heat while flowing thru the chiller.
>>
>
>It must be working, since the temperature is is down to 70 degrees in
>about 20 minutes.
>
Then you are using far far too much water if your outlet temp hardly rises.
>> >
>> >So, what do you gain from running the inlet to the bottom of the coil?
>> >water conservation, you can slow the water flow down and still chill.
>> >(say that three times fast:)
>> >
>>
>> Nope, you lose overall, because the coldest part of the chiller remains in
>> contact with the coldest part of the wort. Any water savings is illusory.
>
>I guess I have to disagree, look at the way a counter-flow chiller
>works. The cold water in from the fawcet, contacts the coldest part
>of the wort first and migrates to the hot wort in.
>
You have it exactly backwards. It encounters the coldest wort first
*because the wort it first encounters has already traveled the whole length
of the chiller*. The reason a counterflow chiller is *called* a counterflow
chiller is because the chilling fluid flows *COUNTER* (I.E. against the flow
of) to the chilled fluid.
>
>It is the fact that the coldest part of the coil is in the coldest part
>of the wort that allows for efficient chilling, as the wort cools from
>the bottom up it allow more cool water to take heat out of the top.
>
>If you do it the other way around, your sending hot water to the bottom
>of the coil. This will still work, but your recurulating heat and since
>heat rises, why not let it do the natural thing?
>
Thats what happens by flowing water into the top of the chiller. The cooled
wort sinks, allowing the heated wort to rise and come into contact with the
coldest part of the chiller.
>
>>
>> The most efficient method is to flow from the top. Check your outlet
>> temprature and modulate water flow for maximum outlet temprature.
>>
>
>As I said before:
>
>>water conservation, you can slow the water flow down and still chill.
>
Except that you are *not conserving water*. By letting the cold water into
the bottom, no convection currents form in the wort. These convection
currents help stir the wort and speed cooling. Modulating the water flow
the ensure maximum outlet temps ensures maximum heat pickup, and cooling.
Not modulating and flowing the water in from the bottom increases the amount
of water required.
------------------------------
From: Derek Lyons <elde@hurricane.net>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 19:39:26 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Cold Side Down
At 03:00 PM 10/24/96 -0600, you wrote:
>
>I guess I have to chime in on the chiller thread. I believe the question is
>whether the inlet water of an immersion chiller should go to the top of the
>cooling coil or the bottom of the cooling coil.
>
>Answer: The inlet should go to the lower coil.
>
>With heat exchangers, when the working (cooling) fluid runs in the opposite
>direction as the flow of the cooled fluid it is called a counterflow heat
>exchanger. When the working fluid runs in the same direction as the cooled
>fluid it is called a parallel flow heat exchanger. The counter flow heat
>exchanger has an effectiveness of 0.8 compared to 0.5 for a parallel flow
>heat exchanger (the higher number is better heat transfer). In this case the
>supply water going to the bottom coil is analogous to a counterflow heat
>exchanger since the cooling water is flowing up and the cooling wort is
>flowing down.
>
>These effects may be small, especially in instances where the wort is
>stirred with the chiller or the chiller is flowing fast enough that the
>inlet and outlet temperatures are only a few degrees different.
>
Nice intuitive analogy, but it does not hold up under analysis. When cold
water is introduced at the bottom the cold wort also 'puddles' at the
bottom. The temp difference (hence heat xfer) between the upper reaches of
the coil and the wort is less. Hence the convection currents do not form as
strongly. This results in slower cooling. (and greater water consumption.)
This was (I believe) proved experimentally here on the HBD some time ago.
Derek L.
------------------------------
From: Derek Lyons <elde@hurricane.net>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 19:39:07 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: zen of homebrew
At 10:58 AM 10/24/96 -0600, you wrote:
>
>Are you saying that extract brewers can't get the same results as all-grain
>brewers? FROGWASH! If you are, that isn't very ZEN of you at all.
>
Agreed! Agreed!
<And a perusal of the National winners almost always shows at least one or
two who are extract brewers>
Derek L.
Bremerton WA
Proud Extract Brewer
------------------------------
From: Edward J. Steinkamp <ejs0742@dop.fse.ca.boeing.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 14:25:18 PDT
Subject: wort chillers
An immersion wort chiller is basically a single pass, crossflow
heat exchanger. An in-line chiller (copper tube in garden hose)
is a single pass counterflow or parallel flow heat exchanger
depending on which way the wort flows relative to the water.
A counterflow heat exchange is more efficient than parallel since
the temperature gradient is essentially constant. Based on this,
one might assume that with an immersion chiller the cold water
should enter at the bottom of the pot where the cooler wort tends
to settle and exit at the top by the hot wort, similar to the
in-line chiller where the cold water enters at the point the cold
wort exits. This would help maintain a constant temperature
gradient.
Unfortunately, this is a simplified model and ignores the
question of whether this is forced or natural convection. We
have natural convection when the immersion chiller just sits in
the wort, and forced convection when you agitate the chiller to
create flow over the coils. When the wort is hot you don't want
to be mixing the wort to avoid HSA, thus you are relying on
natural convection.
Natural convection is a function of natural currents set up by
the cooling wort. Cooling wort will fall from one coil to the
next. The faster the current, the faster the cooling, therefore,
the cold water should enter at the top of the pot to create the
maximum current of wort over the cooling coils. A vertical stack
of coils is better for this because each coils is in the stream
of cool wort dropping from the top of the pot. If you are mixing
the wort (after it has cooled a bit - check out the HSA thread)
it doesn't matter which end the cold water comes in, because the
wort is at a somewhat uniform temperature.
I calculated that 33 feet of 3/8 o.d. copper tubing was required
to cool 10 gal of wort to 72 F in 15 minutes with 50 F ground
water flowing at 3.75 gal/min. In addition, I found it easier to
clamp 8 or 10 feet of vinyl tube to the copper pipe and attach
plastic garden hose fittings to the vinyl tube. This way, if
you hose attachments leak, it doesn't squirt water into your
cooled wort.
This is how I calculated the required length:
The mass flow rates are
5 gal
Mwater = --------- x 7.48 lbs/gal x 60 min/hr
1.333 min
Mwater = 1683 lbs/hr
10 gal
Mwort = ------ x 7.48 lbs/gal x 60 min/hr
15 min
Mwort = 300 lbs/hr
Heat Transfer, q
q = 300 lbs/hr x 1.00 btu/lbs-F x [212 F - 72 F]
q = 42000 BTU/hr
The final temp of the water is
42000 BTU/hr
Tfinal,water = -------------- + 50 F
1680 BTU/hr-F
Tfinal,water = 72 F
The logarithmic mean temperature difference is
(212 F - 75 F) - (72 F - 50 F)
LMTD = ----------------------------------
ln[(212 F - 75 F) / (72 F - 50 F)]
LMTD = 61.4 F
Determine the overall Conductance, U
I assumed U = 212 BTU/hr-sqft-F for force convection in a
cooling application using water to cool a watery solution
and assuming clean surfaces.
The heat transfer surface area, A is
42000 BTU/hr
A = --------------------------
212 BTU/hr-sqft-F x 61.4 F
A = 3.23 sqft
Length of tube, L is
3.23 sqft
L = ------------------------------
3.14159 x 3/8 in x 1/12 in/ft
L = 33 ft
I made my chiller with 22 feet of 3/8 copper tubing and it takes
about 20 minutes to cool a 10 gal batch if I have the water
wide open. Typically I let the wort chill to about 100 F without
moving the chiller. I collect the hot water in a big bucket for
cleaning etc. When the wort gets down to 100 F, I vigorously
agitate the chiller to speed the cooling and aerate the wort. So
far this system has worked out pretty good. I have an in-line
chiller as well, but don't like it as much. It would get plugged
and in the summer it would not cool the wort below 85 degrees.
Anyway, just my $.02 (more like $.04) on chillers.
Ed Steinkamp
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From: Alex Santic <alex@salley.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 00:31:21 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: AOB/HBD let's get a grip
Here's the reality:
What many of you are really saying that we need a moderated list. There
are mailing lists just as active (if not more so) that operate smoothly
and productively. Unfortunately there are precious few people with the
time, expertise, and talent to accomplish that. It requires a thorough
knowledge of the list server software and a good instinct for how to work
in the foreground and the background to keep the discussions
well-directed, newbies pointed to relevant information without cluttering
the list, persistent spammers banned, etc., etc. It is *a lot* of work.
If you have that, it doesn't matter who's system is hosting the list. The
people who advocate migrating the digest again are not proposing a
solution to anything. Now if anybody knows a candidate for the moderator
job, that might be getting us somewhere.
Now, should I understand that when you become an advanced enough brewer,
you earn the right to grandstand in an international forum to bash
prominent figures in the homebrew industry in front of thousands of people
while they're not around? In recent days I have heard Charlie Papazian
called everything from an exploiter to a drunkard and he was not the only
victim. Or is it possible that one can be advanced in homebrewing, yet
lose perspective about what sort of talk is appropriate for the local
homebrew meeting after you've had a few, and what sort of discussion is
worthy of this list?
My proposal is that all people who feel they're getting something out of
their AOB membership remain members, and that others resign. If my
calculations are correct, that should result in the AOB living or dying on
the merits. (Note to the revolutionaries: nobody needs your help with this
decision.) Furthermore, I suggest that anyone who wants to create a new
organization, or thinks of any other way great way to promote the
interests of homebrewers, please go off and do it. And don't forget to
post information here so that we can all check it out.
Now, I place people in jobs for a living so maybe it's more obvious to me
than to some, but anybody who thinks that the AOB will, or can, or should
answer any questions as to why they fired one of their employees is
operating in a very clueless manner. If you were fired, would you expect
your employer to explain it to anybody who happened to come along and ask?
They won't explain it because it's none of your business. Any implications
posted should be understood by all for what they are -- either innuendo or
one side of the story.
- --
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:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From: "korz" <korz@xnet.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 23:31:55 +0000
Subject: head retention
I sure hope I don't double-post this...
George writes:
>I don't think that Al addressed the "head retention" issue, though.
>Any input, Al?
Also, Rob wrote (a few weeks ago, but nobody else responded):
> I believe that the theory on head retention is based on the blow-off
>losing the very stuff that engenders head retention...and that by losing it
>to the floor, you lose retention....
Part of my BT experiment was to see if proteins were lost during blowoff.
In the finished beer, the head retention was the same regardless of whether
the blowoff method was used or whether the dirty head was allowed to fall
back into the fermenting beer. The tests done by Siebel showed that there
was very little difference in total protein levels between the two methods.
I believe I only had one or two sentences on head retention in the summary
section. This is partly because the tests done by Siebel were not definitive
-- they grouped all the proteins together although the head-retaining
proteins could have made up most of the protein lost. It may be just that
there simply were enough proteins and a small loss did not affect head
retention. My personal gut feeling is that head retention is not
significantly affected by the blowoff method.
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korzonas@lucent.com
korz.pubs.ih.lucent.com
korz@xnet.com
------------------------------
From: "David R. Burley" <103164.3202@CompuServe.COM>
Date: 25 Oct 96 00:36:20 EDT
Subject: Vitaminize your Barley wines
Brewsters:
Part I
My phone has been out since Sunday and is just now fixed - whatever day this is
being sent. Sorry if this is a little out of sequence.
Robert Waddell, Spencer Thomas and I have been having discussions about a paper
published by Morse, et al on speeding up mead fermentations using buffers or
sequential daily additions of CaCO3 to keep the pH of mead in the range of 3.7
to 4.0. Morse, et al claim that, in the case of mead ( known to take months to
ferment in some cases), a fermentation can be completed in 2 weeks. Robert's
point was that this may work for barley wines and for high gravity stouts as
well and wondered how the addition of CaCO3 would taste. I responded to that
question, but didn't have a copy of the paper to refer to.
Robert sent me a paper frustrated by the unavailability of the chemicals used
in
the paper. When I looked at it, I realized that one shouldn't look in a
chemical supply catalog nor at your HB shop but in your medicine cabinet. The
Table 3 containing these formulae from Morse, et al is published below.
I'm not sure the buffer Formula 1 is necessary in imperial stouts and barley
wine uses. I measured the pH of my Imperial Stout ( OG =1.077) and it was 4.3
near the end of the fermentation. Try just adding the B vitamin preparation
first. Formula 1 will likely be necessary in meads ( as Morse says) which have
little buffering capacity and the pH falls too low for the yeast to metabolize
the sugars.
Formula 1 appears to be pretty much a standard phosphate/citrate buffer except
for the NH4 Sulfate and NH4 Bisulfate and the MgCl2. These inclusions could be
there to feed the yeasts nitrogen and magnesium, but it makes me suspicious
that
this is a preparation available over the counter for stomach or intestinal
problems. I don't know if this is sold as antacid preparations or not.
Phosphate/citrate buffers like these are used in pH meter calibration, I
believe. Just be careful that the preparation you get does not have
preservatives in it as many such calibration buffers do. That's why I suggest
to
look in your pharmacy, at least you will be using something intended to be
ingested. Talk to your pharmacist, he may know of something like this. Some of
the citrate buffers are used as fast acting laxatives, I believe. What their pH
is, I don't know. Test the preparation by measuring its pH in water to be sure
it is doing what you want. If you have some solid info on various preparations
let us know. .
In the last column of the table below, I have put in the common definition for
the contents of Formula 2. If you look at a B vitamin bottle you will see these
things in just about these quantities. I am guessing that the sodium bisulfate
is the pill base, but if someone has solid info on this, let's hear it.
Realizing that this is an untested thing, some of you may wish to try to speed
up your barley wine and stouts by applying this technology. So here goes the
suggestion of what to try. Be sure to report back to the HBD on both positive
and negative results.
The paper by Morse recommends to use 6.75 g/l (1oz/US gal) of formula 1 and
0.25 g/l (0.035 Oz/US gal) of formula 2
The formula 2 weighs 1 gram, so the authors probably used a vitamin pill
weighing a gram. Use one pill per 4 liters or one gallon or 5 of these for a 20
l or five gallon batch. The label on the bottle will tell you how much of each
is in the pill. I suggest you purchase the most concentrated B vitamin pill so
as to reduce the pill base contents in the wine/mead. Basically the authors are
recommending one quarter of formula 2 per liter or all of formula 2 per gallon.
I suspect getting every vitamin in exactly this concentration is not important.
If you are really concerned about this, buy the separate B vitamin pills and
make up your own mixture.
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
103164.3202@compuserve.com
------------------------------
From: "David R. Burley" <103164.3202@CompuServe.COM>
Date: 25 Oct 96 00:36:17 EDT
Subject: Vitamize Part II - The formulae, etc.
Brewsters:
Here are the formulae etc. discussed in part I
Table 3. Nutrient Mixtures for Mead Fermentations (from Morse, et ,al, last
column "Vitamin" is my addition)
Formula 1
Component Weight/gr
ammonium sulfate 1.0
PO4** 0.5
MgCl 20.2
NaHSO4 0.05
citric acid 2.53
sodium citrate 2.47
Formula 2
Component Weight/mg Vitamin
biotin 0.05 B -complex
pyridoxine 1.0 B-6
(meso)inositol 7.5 B-complex
Calcium pantothenate 10.0 B-complex
thiamine 20.00 B-1
peptone* 100.0 Amino acid source
ammonium sulfate 861.45 Pill Base?
Total*** 1000.00
NB "weight/mg "in the table headings should be read as" weight given in mg".
Also on some pill bottles it will read mcg which is an abbreviation for
micrograms ( 1/1000 mg). In the formula 2, "biotin" could have been listed as
50 mcg
*peptone is a preparation of proteins that has been treated with proteases to
form amino acids and LMW proteins and likely not necessary in malted barley
products. So don't worry if you can't find a pill with this in it.
** The table when I received it was skewed up Based on some later information
this was listed as K3PO4
*** My addition to table 3
I found the following table in Malting and Brewing Science p478 1st ed
Nutrile Active Form in cell Function
Biotin Biotin Coenzyme in carboxylation and transcarboxylation
(meso)Inositol Phospholipids Numerous effects upon carbohydrate and lipid
metabolism
Pantothenic Acid Coenzyme A As above
Thiamin Thiamin Coenzyme in oxoacid decardoxylation and
oxidation
Pyrophosphate
Pyroxidine Pyridoxal phosphate Coenzyme for transamination,
decarboxylation & racemization
Nicotinic Acid NAD and NADP Coenzymes for dehydrogenases
(Niacin)
p-Amino Foilc acid and Coenzymes for transfer of one carbon
units
Benzoic acid tetra hydrofolate e.g. glycine to serine
compounds
Meads and light wines are particularly susceptible to this problem since they
do
not have an adequate buffer system to handle the acids formed during
fermentation. For normal beers it seems that the system is OK, but for the
higher alcohol beers and barleywine, fermentation can slow to a ridiculously
frustrating speed. To my knowledge, this has always been blamed on the high
alcohol content "poisoning" the yeast and slowing it down.
This pH effect may be caused by removing the B vitamins from the playing field
by protonation ( a speculation) or slowing down autolysis ( also a speculation)
to prevent the re-introduction of B vitamins inside dead yeast cells may be an
explanation. As you likely know, brewers yeast is an excellent source of B
vitamins, which means that even if the yeast generate these vitamins, they keep
them. With all of it lying on the bottom as a yeast floc, there may be none in
the fermenting beverage. A skewed up synthesis via starved metabolic pathways
in
the yeast may explain the funky taste often found in barley wine and high
gravity stouts and beers which had a slow secondary fermentation. A taste
comparison may be in order between high OG barley wines with and without B
vitamins.
M&BS says P91
"....barley and malt are rich sources of other vitamins and generally these are
concentrated in the living tissues, the embryo and aleurone........
Meso-inositol an ultimate product of hydrolysis of phytic acid (( acid rest or
calcium ions anyone??)) is a growth factor for yeast..........the B complex
have
been studied ....... riboflavin,pantothenic acid,the pyroxidin, pyroxidal, and
pyridoxiamine group .........The vitamins of the B group are highly important
as
growth factors for yeast during fermentation, particularly biotin, inositol and
pantothenic acid.
Other vitamins include folic acid or related substances, nicotinic acid and
thiamin. "
My suggestion:
Measure the pH of your stout or barleywine and if it is below 3.5 or so, adjust
it with CaCO3 repeatedly on a daily basis or with a buffer system. Add the
vitamins if you don't get any positive result from the pH adjustment ( the low
pH may be tying up certain of these vitamins as the protonated form, so
adjusting the pH may free them up - just a speculation). After doing this and
the fermentation finishes, you may have to adjust the acidity of the finished
product ( especially the mead) with tartaric or some other food acid to get the
crispness you may desire.
Comments?
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
103164.3202@compuserve.com
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From: Rick Dante <rdante@pnet.net>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 02:16:54 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: re: Killer Chiller Question
Arnold -
When comparing a counterflow chiller to an immersion chiller you are
comparing two different kinds of heat systems. An immersion chiller
operates in a closed system. All that matters is that the maximum heat is
transfered into the cooling water before the cooling water
makes it's exit. As time progresses the temperature of the entire heat
system drops lower and lower. Length of the cooling coils matters. If
you wait until the end of the loop to begin cooling the hottest part
of the wort you've essentially reduced the cooling length of your
coils. With a counterflow chiller a heat differential is maintained
throughout the path of the flowing liquids. What's important is that
the maximum heat be transfered out of the wort before it makes an exit.
Obviously, pumping the hot exit water next to the exiting wort won't work,
you'd be heating the wort!
>It is the fact that the coldest part of the coil is in the coldest part
>of the wort that allows for efficient chilling, as the wort cools from
>the bottom up it allow more cool water to take heat out of the top.
>
>If you do it the other way around, your sending hot water to the bottom
>of the coil. This will still work, but your recurulating heat and since
>heat rises, why not let it do the natural thing?
Forget about convection, you're cooling the entire heat vessel over time.
Hottest wort with coldest water = more efficient heat transfer. With the
counterflow chiller you're not cooling the entire heat vessel. You're
cooling the cross section of wort that leaves the chiller. You do that
with *cold* water.
Sorry to blabber so long, I just wanted to point out some differences
between counterflow and immersion chillers.
Rick
------------------------------
From: Fred Hardy <fcmbh@access.digex.net>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 07:38:12 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: 1996 Capitol District Open
Last chance to enter! Just a reminder that the most important event to
occur this fall in the Nation's capital is the Capitol District Open
Homebrew Competition. Life is beer; all else is details!
Entry deadline is Tuesday, October 29, 1996. The competition is
Saturday, November 2nd, at the Hyatt Regency Washington hotel on Capitol
Hill. Results will be posted to the Homebrew Digest, Judgenet Digest,
rec.crafts.brewing and alt.beer.
Good Luck to all entrants!
Fred
===========================================================================
We must invent the future, else it will | Fred Hardy
happen to us and we will not like it. | Fairfax, Virginia
[Stafford Beer, "Platform for Change"] | email: fcmbh@access.digex.net
------------------------------
From: Graham Stone <gstone@dtuk.demon.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 12:27:24 +-100
Subject: An international forum?
I would like to raise the community's awareness of the fact that this forum
is being read but brewers all over the world. Ought we not acknowledge the
fact the besides the USA and UK not too many other countries use units like
quarts, gallons, pounds and degrees F (any even then USA and UK can't agree
on how much a gallons is!). Is it not time for us to start converting our
recipes and equipment designs to Kilograms, Litres, Metres and degrees C?
With a metric system of measurement and internationally recognised units
for colour and bitterness, we'd all find it easier to interpret each others
recipes etc.
Graham Stone
Portsmouth, England
------------------------------
From: "Genito, Michael A." <mgenito@ci.rye.ny.us>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 08:15:54 -0400
Subject: Krausening (Priming)
Charlie P. in TCJOHB speaks of krausening, or priming the beer for
bottling with unfermented wort rather than corn sugar or dry malt. He
gives a "simple" calculation as to how much to use based on specific
gravity.
Has anyone tried this? And is there an even easier rule of thumb? I
understand the concept Charlie is promoting, but it would appear that if
there is a standard amount of corn sugar (3/4 c) or dried malt (1 1/4 c)
that he offers, and these amounts do not depend on specific gravity, why
should wort?
BTW, my first "no-sparge" batch is sitting in the bottles for the first
time this week. My idea in the above question is that if I like the
no-sparge results, I might sparge and boil down enough wort to try
krausening.
------------------------------
From: "Kevin R. Sinn" <skinner@netcore.ca>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 12:24:26 GMT
Subject: Red beer
I'm a homebrew rookie, and I have a few questions.
1. My favorite commercial beers are Rickards Red and Killians Irish Red.
Does anyone have a recipe that comes close to either of these beers?
2. What ingredient(s) give a beer it's red colour? I've read about various
kinds of malts in Millers Homebrewing Guide, but I've not read about any
specific malts that will impart a red colour to the beer. I'm assuming it's
malts that will do this, but please correct me if I'm wrong.
3. Regarding immersion wort chillers - are these home made items? It seems
to me that it would be fairly easy to make one with a coil of copper tubing
and the proper connectors.
Thanks!
Kevin Sinn
Windsor, Ontario
Oh ho! So he's in the stove, eh?
------------------------------
From: "Bridges, Scott" <bridgess@mmsmtp.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 96 14:17:00 PDT
Subject: Re: Carbonator problems
David Burley writes about Carbonators:
>So did I and on its second use it came apart and the parts fell into the
beer I
>was going to take to a party. I had to drink an unplanned half liter of my
>Porter to get it back ( what's that about making lemonade out of lemons?).
I
>don't know if there was a snap ring and it fell into another bottle or not
but
>I'm going to use super glue on it to keep it together.
I had the same problem. Actually, it was on my second one, so I knew that
it wasn't supposed to do that. I called Jess at Alternative Beverage (where
I purchased it) about this. He contacted the manufacturer, Liquid Bread.
Apparently, they had some production problem with a certain batch of these.
I guess that we both got one of the defective Carbonators. I was given an
address for Liquid Bread to return the defective part. In return, they sent
me a replacement PLUS a free one for my trouble. While I wasn't
particularly happy to spend good money on something that didn't work, I am
satisfied with the resolution. My advise, contact your supplier (if you
didn't get it from Liquid Bread). In any case, I would expect whoever you
bought it from to stand behind the merchandise.
Scott
------------------------------
From: TheTHP@aol.com
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 08:33:20 -0400
Subject: Thanks/New ???/Aussi Anuran Lager
Special Thanks to dave burley again. Your public email address still comes
back undeliverable!?? So once again...
Im brewing again today (Friday)--Aussi lager. I've never tried
anything this pale before, any secreats? (Still extract/ partial mash) Also
while reading another of your threads (Chuck's) You or chuck were refering to
doing a "mash-in" and a Mash-out. I thought i was pretty ready to go all
grain, but these terms confuse me. would you mind obliging me with a little
enlightenment? Much would be appreciated.
Phil.
Posion Frog Home Brewery
Future home of the Aussi Anuran Lager
------------------------------
From: TMCASTLE@am.pnu.com
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 09:04:16 -0400
Subject: zen rebuttal
Hey,
I don't want to make this a long drawn-out thread, but I feel the
urge to respond to Scott's scathing retort to my post about
all-grain brewing.
Of course you can make good beer with extract. You can make
wonderful beer with extract. You can make beers true to style
(although I'm an iconoclast when it comes to totalitarian style
adherence, I say style be damned, make what you like, but that's
another argument).
And... you may be right, someone who wanted to enjoy the
completeness of brewing art may want to grow their own hops and
grain (and some of you do that just for that reason, don't you?)
My point (ok, it was obscure) was that we're in this for the
enjoyment of the experience to craft beer. Many people get the
"longing/call/urge" to go all-grain. My guess is that happens
because of a desire to make a better product, but maybe more
importantly to be able to better experience the production. So....
if you get the urge, go all-grain, it's a brave new world. BUT...
if you don't get the urge, who cares? Brew good beer, but above
all..enjoy the experience, make it fun. Reduce stress. Be nice to
each other.. (yadda yadda yadda).
P.S. What are all these posts with no subject and no text? Is this
the Silent Majority finally speaking up?
Brew happy,
Tom Castle
The Zen of Homebrew
http://www.netcom.com/~tmcastle
------------------------------
From: "Karl Patzer" <karl@PROF.SLH.WISC.EDU>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 08:11:21 CDT
Subject: Dual Temperature Controller
Does anybody know who sells a Dual Control Thermostat for a
refrigerator. I saw them for sale at one time. One with a plug for a
cooling source and a plug for a heating source. Here in Wisconsin
we can't brew in a refrigerator in a refrigerator in the garage in
the winter without a heat source. I have tried a controller with
only a cooling source and a blacklight always on inside the
refrigerator, but that isn't very reliable. A while back someone
else asked this same question and I found no responses.
Karl Patzer 608-262-3458
State Lab of Hygiene karl@prof.slh.wisc.edu
465 Henry Mall kspatzer@facstaff.wisc.edu
Madison, WI 53706
This has only been a test. If this was a real emergency, you would
have been notified by inter-department mail which you would receive in
3-4 weeks. >;o
------------------------------
From: John Penn <john_penn@jhuapl.edu>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 96 09:16:28 0000
Subject: Think Positive/Thanks HBD
I appreciate Tom Penn's comments about the AHA and the HBD. There
seem to be too many negative posts about AHA, HBD, Papazian, personal
attacks, etc. Poor AlK recently took a lot of slams about his copyright,
etc. Probably new people who hadn't noticed that AlK makes a regular
infomative contribution to the HBD. So does Dave Burley and fortunately
they took their disagreement offline which is a great practice that I've
noticed many other contributors do to hash out a consensus before
posting the results to the HBD.
Many of the posts are ideas or opinions that work for some people
but not for others. Fine! Before you argue with someone stop and
realize there are many styles, opinions, etc. out there and they are ALL
CORRECT. Some people are out to get the most effeciency, match a
particular style, etc. while others are just trying to make good beer
and enjoy homebrew as a hobby. Everyone wants to learn more and I
sincerely appreciate the information in the HBD even if many posts are
repetitive. Maybe that could be improved with the cancel feature. By
the way what are all the empty "none" submissions about?
Bill Giffin mentions reading books and I agree that books are a good
thing but I'd like to add that there are outdated techniques and errors
in some books. The HBD makes a nice compliment because you get so many
diverse opinions as well as getting up to date information.
Lastly thanks to all for comments on my recent Irish Chocolate Stout
(with Java). It's fermenting now with Wyeast 1084 and it smelled/tasted
good at pitching time. When it turns out I'll repost that recipe and
the procedure I used.
John Penn
------------------------------
From: Brendan Oldham <brendan@star.net>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 09:34:30 -0400
Subject: Help: boiling, cooling, transfering!
I recently got my hands on a large boiling pot with a spichot at the
bottom. After boiling, I am planning on creating a 'closed' system by
connecting my wort chiller to this pot and transferring the beer directly
to a carboy equipped with a carboy stopper that has two holes (one for
incoming liquid and one for outgoing air via airlock). I then plan on
letting the trub settle for an hour and transferring beer to a second
carboy, leaving the trub behind.
Now, my questions: First, how does this sound overall? Second, considering
the spichot is at the very bottom of the pot, is there a way I can filter
out the hot break (I use hop pellets) so that the spichot or wort chiller do
not clog? Third, will the hour of settling in the carboy be enough?
Thanks in advance and cheers!
------------------------------
End of Homebrew Digest #2248
****************************
