Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2294
Homebrew Digest Monday, December 23 1996 Volume 02 : Number 014
Procedures:
To send a message to the digest, send it to <homebrew@aob.org>
To unsubscribe from the digest, send a message to <majordomo@aob.org>
with the text "unsubscribe <your email address>" in the body.
If you are having difficulty unsubscribing, send a message to
<majordomo@aob.org> with the text "who homebrew-digest" in the
body. This will return a list of all subscribers. Search this
list for your email address, and include it, exactly as it appears
(including any other text) in your unsubscribe message.
If you are still having difficulty, send a message to <admin@softsolut.com>
with a description of your message, and we shall attempt to resolve
the problem.
1 HB Newbie Seeks Help
2 Re:Lambic Blend
3 re: Brown Sugar Priming (Denis Barsalo)
4 2nd Annual South Shore Brewoff
5 First Partial Mash
6 Tis a puzzlement
7 HBD complaints
8 Re: p/p/g and Best WIshes!
9 mills
10 Re: Question fo Metallugists
11 How to make Megaswill
12 Steeping Hops with grain?
13 Two hole stoppers
14 Homebrew Digest
15 Shelf life of beer
16 spargeless connection
17 Trappist Recipie
18 band-aid (tm) flavor
19 Christoffel robertus and BrewWorks in Cincinatti
20 Perforated Stainless Steel Plate Sources
21 No sparge, s.g. readings with solids
22 BACK ISSUES ZYMURGY, BREWING TIMES
23 Intern'l mail order?
24 Rye Beers
25 Efficiency Question
26 Medicine Rock Keg system
27 Dry Hops in Primary,
28 Here's another one for the chemists...
29 Misusing the HBD for comedy
30 Small beers
31 Re: Expansive pots ( not those, the ones we brew in)HSA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 22:56:03 -0500
From: Aeoleus <osiris@net-link.net>
Subject: HB Newbie Seeks Help
G'day,
I just recieved my first issue of the digest list, and most of you all
seem to be pretty knowledgeable. Allow me to explain my situation: My
first attempt at a homebrew is currently sitting in a glass carbuoy, 23
days out of conception. It appears to be, at this point, free from
infection, and the bubbling has slowed to a snail's pace.
I began with ten pounds of honey from a local Apiary and added the
obligatory yeast energizer, acids, salts, and champagne yeast, along
with some cloves, allspice, and ground mace. The mixture was allowed to
rest for 13 days, then transferred to a second carbuoy and allowed to
rest for ten more. (If anyone has a comment at this point, please do
not hesitate to add).
It's getting down the wire here and it's almost time for bottling. My
question is about specific gravity. I don't envision the final reading
to be equivilent to exactly 1.08 or whatever the recommendation is. I
heard that you can take a reading three days in a row, and if you come
up with the same reading, it's okay to sugar and bottle. Is this
entirely accurate? I don't want any of those damned grenades. :)
If you could also offer some general advice, I'd appreciate a mail or
two. In my experience, nothing ever goes according to books, and
there's no substitute for anecdotal evidence.
Thanks in advance for any advice you can offer.
- -- Brian Ream Kalamazoo Michigan
- -- mailto:osiris@net-link.net http://www.net-link.net/~osiris
- -- China - Free Your Future!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 21:13:57 -0700
From: Jim Liddil <jliddilk@azcc.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re:Lambic Blend
>From: "Alexander S. MacGillivray RN" <alex@wooddimensions.com>
>Subject: Lambic yeash blend
>I'm going to be brewing by first batch of lambic and I picked
>up some Wyeast 3278 Belgian lambic blend. My question is, should I use
>the Wyeast in the primary fermentation or should I be using it in the
>secondary using some dry yeast in the primary.
*****
I wouldn't use it at all.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 1996 08:13:50 -0500
From: Denis Barsalo <denisb@cam.org>
Subject: re: Brown Sugar Priming (Denis Barsalo)
>Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 13:11:05 -0500 (EST)
>From: Paul Ward <paulw@doc.state.vt.us>
>Subject: Brown Sugar Priming
>Just a quick question...
>Say someone wanted to try priming with light brown sugar instead of
>his normal corn sugar (for a 5 US gal batch), what would be a good
>amount to add for 'normal' carbonation?
Try 2/3 cup if doing bottles, and 1/3 cup if you're kegging. I recently did
a ESB in bottles. The carbonation is perfect!
Denis
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 1996 09:08:37 -0500
From: Esbitter@aol.com
Subject: 2nd Annual South Shore Brewoff
The South Shore Brew Club proudly announces:
A call for homebrew entries and judges for the
****************************************************************
SECOND ANNUAL SOUTH SHORE BREWOFF
Boston South's Best Homebrew Competition!
- BJCP sanctioned -
****************************************************************
Deadline for entries March 15th, 1997.
Pickup entry forms and style guidelines at the dropoff locations listed
below.
Any questions about the competition regulation, procedures, awards, etc.,
should be directed to:
Glenn Markel 508-226-3249 (grmarkel@aol.com)
or
Randy Reed 617-341-8170 (esbitter@aol.com)
Interested in Judging/Stewarding Sunday, March 23rd? Please contact Stephen
Rose at 508-821-4152 for a judge/apprentice entry form.
First come, first served. BJCP points and food will be provided.
Drop off points:
Witches Brew, 25 Baker St. Foxboro, MA (508)-543-0433
Barleycorn Enterprises, 149 Union St. Rockland, MA 02370 (617)-871-9399
Hoppy Brewer, 493 Central Ave. Seekonk, MA 02771 (508)-761-6615
Barley Malt & Vine, 26 Elliot St. Newton, MA 02161 (617)-630-1015
Brew Horizons, 884 Tiogue Ave., Coventry, RI 02816 (401)-589-2739
Good Luck!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 1996 09:19:24 -0500
From: Scott Dexter & Kristen Brainard <SCOTTDER@ids.net>
Subject: First Partial Mash
Greetings Fellow Brewers,
I am yet another first time poster to HBD. With so much great advice
flying around
(I have learned alot just reading HBD), i figured I toss in a question
of my own, actually more a plea for friendly advice.
I like most brewers started out with extracts, then added specialty
grains to
improve my brew and was very pleased with the results. Now I'd like to
take the
next step and do a partial mash.
here are my questions:
a) What would be a relatively easy partial mash recipe to start off my
journey into all grain? ( I really like Porters and Stouts)
b) What would be a good lauter tun for small mashes like this? Would a
simple
strainer of some sort be ok?
c) Will partial mashing improve head retention on my beers, while the
ones in the
past have tasted great, the head retention has been lacking (my
glasses are clean
I don't have any problems with an commercial brews I buy)?
Thanks in advance,
Scott
PS- If you are a homebrewer from Rhode Island I'd love to hear from you.
PPS- Here is my homepage, http://users.ids.net/~scottder/beer.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 1996 22:10:41 +0000
From: "Christopher V. Sack" <cvsack@mail.ican.net>
Subject: Tis a puzzlement
Perhaps someone can expain this little puzzlement to me. When I
checked my mail this morning, I noticed that there was a reply to the
latest homebrew-digest posted to the net at about 9:30am. I did not
get my copy of the digest until after 9:00pm and I had been checking
my mail several times during the day. The digest suggests that it
was posted at 1:30am based on the time stamp. Any ideas what might
be happening?
Chirstopher V. Sack <cvsack@ican.net>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 96 12:42:13 -0500
From: Adam Rich <ar@crocus.medicine.rochester.edu>
Subject: HBD complaints
Hello,
This message is to publicly thank Adrian (and his coworkers) for his
services. To criticize him for the policy of the AOB is wrong.
Furthermore, to criticize him for not taking insults in an understanding and
gracious manner is outrageuos! There is just no excuse for this
inappropriate behaviour by a few people.
Please remember that the majority of the subscribers are happy for
this service and we applaud the efforts of the digest manager.
thank you,
=========================================
Adam Rich, PhD
Hoempage: http://www.millcomm.com/~arich/index.html
Department of Dental Research
University of Rochester Medical Center
601 Elmwood Ave, Box 611
Rochester, NY 14642
716-275-8751
=========================================
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 21 Dec 96 18:54:25 EST
From: "David R. Burley" <103164.3202@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Re: p/p/g and Best WIshes!
Brewsters:
Rick Walton says:
> Would someone please explain what 'points per pound per gallon'
> actually is? I know it has something to do with how much extract
> you can get from different malts, but how is it related to specific gravity
> and where do you get these numbers from?
Rick,
Couldn't be simpler. It's name is its explanation.
Thus, as a numerical example, if 10 pounds of malt were to give an SG of 1.060
in 5 gallons of wort. or 2# of malt per gallon of wort gives an OG of 1.060 (
i.e. 60 points). This is 60/2 or 30 points per pound per gallon - a good
number. 100% efficiciency for pale malt should be about 36 p/p/g. So in our
case above we have 30/36 = 83% efficiency based on the theoretical maximum
expected extract.
People sometimes appear to use this p/p/g number as a measure of efficiency,
which it is not. It can be used to calculate the efficiency of extraction once
the theoretically expected extract has been calculated. To give you an extreme
example of why it is not a measure of efficiency, suppose you had made up a mash
of 100% Belgian Chocolate malt ( Just the name would send my wife crying for
some) and got a p/p/g of 30 you might be tempted to say this was an OK
efficiency when it is actually exrtaordinary at 100% of theoretical for this
malt. Bigger differences can be had with high roasts and adjuncts. So use
p/p/g carefully in your conversation., please.
To give you an idea of the theoretical p/p/g for a complex grain bill see
Charlie Pap's "Home Brewer's Companion" for a series of tables of expected
extract from malts and various adjuncts. This willl let you calculate the
expected extract from any possible mixture of malts and extracts. Using this
number and your p/p/g obtained you can calculate your efficiency.
- ----------------------------------------------------
To all HBDers, during this holiday period please overindulge safely in honor of
yourself and those close to you. For the New Year, remember your enemies as
well as your friends and wish them all peace and happiness.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
103164.3202@compuserve.com
Voice e-mail OK
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 1996 16:08:51 -0800
From: "Olin J. Schultz" <beerx3@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: mills
>
> With all the talk about no-sparge brewing to creat malt charactor, one
> thing comes to mind. If you want a really malty beer back off on the
> hops. You can have either a very malty beer or a very hoppy beer but it
> is very difficult to have both in the same beer
It is called balance and it certainly is achievable. A beer that can be
transferred to different parts of the mouth and seems both malty and and
bitter depending on where it rests. I love to achieve this in a brown
ale by using a high proportions of munich, vienna, and D.W.C. aromatic
malts without having to increase the starting gravity past 1.055.
>
> >>Al K says:
> I personally, have used the Corona, PhilMill
> and both the adjustable and non-adjustable MaltMills and feel that the
> rollermills are far, far superior to the Corona. I prefer the adjustable
> MaltMill over the PhilMill primarily because of throughput, less
> cranking,
> and much less airborne dust.
> >>
>
> I am not sure how the available roller mills are far, far superior to the
> Corona. I have conducted screen tests on all of the mills; PhilMil,
> MaltMills,Corona; and the Corona when properly adjusted provided the best
> crush. I have heard complains of the husk being broken up with the
> Corona and this is true if the mill is not set up properly. When the
> mill is set up properly the husks for the most part are whole and
> provide a good filter bed in the lauter tun.
As with anything if you have the spare time to sit there and mess with
it, yes you can get a good mill. It is a pain in the ass though and
you have to readjust alot. I got rid of mine and moved to a
phillmill. If this comparison takes price into comparison, then you
have to make do with what you can afford.
After dealing with the philmill I moved to a maltmill, which is what I
currently use. Yes you can motorize a philmill and listen to it wheeze
while it throws dust all over your brew room if you want to. Hook that
same drill up to the maltmill and you will be mashed in before somone
using the philmill is ever done milling. It is 3-4 times as fast, no
exageration. The corona and phillmill are ok for extract and 5 gallon
all grainers but when moving to 10 gallons at a time the maltmill is the
only way to go. I would like to mention however that the customer
service and general friendliness provided by Jack Schmidling Inc. is
deplorable.
>
> Al complains about the cranking of the Phil's Mill. When you use an 1/2"
> electric drill cranking is a breeze.
That is not an equal comparison.
>
> Many of the faults that have been attributed to the Corona mill are not
> the mills fault but rather the lack of skill to process the crushed malt.
You must be the master adjuster ;)
>
> Al how did you evaluate the mills by here say and lack of good procedure?
Please Bill, I think Al has probably had more exposure to mills than
yourself, and his opinions probably represent what any shop owner will
tell you. Selling all three mill myself, I know I feel the same way.
Olin Schultz
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 1996 20:06:14 -0500
From: Jim Bentson <jbentson@htp.net>
Subject: Re: Question fo Metallugists
At 08:01 PM 12/19/96 -0700, you wrote:
>Subject: Re: Question for Metallurgists
>
>John Palmer wrote:
>> The linear coefficient of thermal expansion of 304 stainless steel is 9.6
>> microinches per inch per 'F. Since I didnt know the exact dimensions of
>> your pot other than it holds 50L, I took the cube root of 50 to give me a
>> vessel of 36 cm on a side. This converts to 14.5 inches per side and when
>> you multiply 9.6 x10^(-6) x 150F, you get a change in length of .0209
>> inches, which when cubed results in a change in volume of less than a drop
>> in the bucket.
>
>John, you're a fine metallurgist, but not much of a geometrician! 8-)
>Actually, the formula for volume change, given a length of l and a length
>change of dl, is approximately dV = 3*l^2 *dl, or 3*14.5^2*.0209 = 13.2 in^3.
>Much more than a few drops, but still not large enough to worry about in
>doing mash efficiency calculations.
>
>Kelly
>Hillsboro, OR
>
Hi All
I have been lurking in the background for about one year and have learned
a lot
from the group. I teach Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering at Polytechnic
University ( AKA Brooklyn Poly) and have have been an extract brewer for
about three
years. After spending the last summer as an apprentice at a local brew-pub I
have just
switched to all-grain. The reason for my 'surfacing' into the group is that
I have noticed some misinformation at times relative to fluid and heat flow
questions.
With regard to the pot expansion question both responses have errors in
them. John Palmer approximated the cylindrical pot as a cube and assumed
expansion in all directions.
In addition he used the actual pot temperature of 150 deg F rather than the
change in temperature (150 - room temp). Kelly also calculated the expansion
incorrectly.
When a pot is heated it is free to expand only in the vertical direction.
The material
in the circumferential direction is not free and does not expand any
appreciable amount.
To see this, consider a bar wedged between two immovable ends. What happens
is that
as you increase the temperature, the material tries to expand but can't.
This creates
a thermally induced force in the bar. The magnitude of the force created in
the bar is simply equal to the force it takes to compress the bar from the
length it would have attained if heated without constraints back to the
original length before the heat was applied.
Assuming a height of 16 inches, a 50 liter pot would have a diameter 15.6
inches. Thus the
assuming a mash temp. of 155 and a room temp. of 60 the change in temp is 95
deg F and
the change in height (using John Palmer's value for the expansion coeff.
which seems reasonable) is given by 16 x 9.6x10^(-6) x 95 = .0146 inches
increase in height at the top. If we now multply
this by the pot area we get a change of volume of 2.78 cu. in which is
equivalent to 1.5 fluid oz.
This is obviously not significant. Also remember that this is only if the
pot is full to the top. If
half full this value is one half or about one oz. in 25 liters!!!
I also have some comments regarding the thread on immersion heaters and
line pressure drop.
If anyone is interested drop me an e-mail at jbentson@htp.net or
jbentson@rabbit.poly.edu.
By the way, since i have done a fair amount of work on pebble bed heat
exchange I recently
got interested in developing a computer model of a grain bed during
sparging. This will take some
effort and I will keep you posted
Since this is my first post please excuse if I inadvertantly make a mistake
and send extraneous
material.
Regards
Jim Bentson
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 1996 20:53:49 -0600
From: Ben Pollard <classicferm@fia.net>
Subject: How to make Megaswill
With the recent threads on both FWH and NSB, I have tried them both and
will continue to compare them with other brews.
But, on to the point, if you sparge your mash after you do a NSB, the
grist still has a small amount of fermentables in it, but very little
flavor, (IMO from tasting it) and you take the hops you used for the
FWH. You boil for about 10 minutes, ferment, add an excessive amount of
priming sugar. Would you end up with Megaswill?
It would be dirt cheap, (free) beer you could let the non-friends you
have that don't like good beer drink! Just haven't figured out how to
get the corn and rice in it.
Merry Christmas and Hoppy New Year to All.
Ben C. Pollard
classferm@fia.net
Brewed 66 Wort Hogs Brewers Guild
Classic Fermentations Homebrew Shop
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 1996 21:07:50 -0600
From: Ben Pollard <classicferm@fia.net>
Subject: Steeping Hops with grain?
I have done FWH and seem to get an added hop flavor and aroma. I try to
make a comparable beer to the good ones using extracts, and was
wondering if you could steep your aroma hops with the specialty grains
and get a similar effect to FWH. Has anyone tried?
I plan on brewing an extract version of an all grain ESB and will try
steeping and will let everyone know the results.
Merry Christmas
Ben C. Pollard
classferm@fia.net
Brewed 66 Wort Hogs Brewers Guild
Amarillo TX
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 1996 23:56:16 -0500
From: behar@theporch.com (Ted Behar)
Subject: Two hole stoppers
>>question : do rubber stoppers exist with 2 holes? i checked my hb store
>last
>>weekend but they didn't have any 2-hole stoppers. i'd like to put the gas
>>in one hole and keep an airlock in the other so i could see the bubbling and
>>have some sort of idea of the volume of gas i'm putting in.
>
>I haven't seen any rubber stoppers with 2 holes (although it seems like a
>logical item - so they probably do exist) -
I recommend you try a Chemistry/Scientific supply company - The two hole
stoppers are often used in chemical laboratory use.
Brew on,
Ted Behar, Nashville, TN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 1996 06:36:04 -0500
From: JohnT6020@aol.com
Subject: Homebrew Digest
I get HBD through rec.craft.brew and seem to have missed HBD V2 #10 and HBD
V2 #12. I may have missed them as I hurried through the other postings and
unintentionally deleted them. How can I get copies?
Please add my name to the regular subscriber list.
73,
JET
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 1996 07:42:09 -0500 (EST)
From: "Gerald J. Ginty" <ginty@salve5.salve.edu>
Subject: Shelf life of beer
I was wondering what the shelf life of beer is. I realize that much is
dependent on the quality of the yeast and the gravity of the beer.
I had a pleasant surprise at a party last night. I friend of mine pulled
out a bottle which I had given him last Christmas. I seem to recall that
it was a pale ale with a SG of about 1.042. The beer was lovely and
clear, had a nice hope noise and malty taste, though a bit dry on the
palette.
Any thoughts..
Cheers....
*******************************************************************
* Gerry Ginty ginty@salve5.salve.edu *
* (401)847-6650 ext 2177 (W) *
* (401)847-7912 (H) **** *
* St. Columba's CC Homepage: * GB * *
* http://www.salve.edu/~ginty/cricket/sccc.html **** *
*******************************************************************
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 1996 19:20:36 +0100
From: Jeff Irvine <irv@wireworks.se>
Subject: spargeless connection
To whom it may concern:
I am new to this media. I can receive mail, news (occasionally), but
am uncertain that any thing I write comes out. As I understand it,
there is a discussion of "spargeless mashing". As I can understand your
description, it is what I have been going for about 12-13 years. I've
thought a lot about it and am willing to share my experience on the
matter, but would like to see that this missive ends up in the right
place before expending the energy. Should this actually end up in the
HBD, please let me know and I'll be happy to share the historical
background, theoretical rational, and the method I've been using to
avoid sparging (which is a bloody bore!).
As I mentioned I am quite new to this manner of communicating, but
quite "old" to brewing. Please send up a flare if I've ended up in the
right place, and tell me how to formally get connected (I bumped into
this on RCB).
With thanks in advance,
Dr. Pivo
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 1996 18:21:07 -0600
From: "N.A. Campiglia III" <spitdrvr@camalott.com>
Subject: Trappist Recipie
Does anyone have a good Trappist Ale recipie??
If you do, please send it to me. Thanks in advance..
- -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
N. Campiglia
spitdrvr@camalott.com
Abilene, Texas
'74 Spitfire
Home Brew GuRu Wanna Be!!
"To Beer or Not To Beer, What was the Question?"
" If you're gonna be dumb...... You better be tough "
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 1996 01:12:55 -0500
From: bob rogers <bob@carol.net>
Subject: band-aid (tm) flavor
nice to see the HBD back.
i have a keg full of beer which tastes strongly of wet bandaids (phenols).
i think i know why, but does anyone know anything i can do about it? Since
the beer is lightly hopped, i have considered hop extracts and/or dry
hopping to cover the taste. since it's in a keg, if there is anything that
will neutralize the phenols i can add it.
yrnmbsr (yes, right now my beer seems ruined)
bob: brewing in the heart of the bible belt
bob rogers bob@carol.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 1996 01:22:52 -0500
From: bob rogers <bob@carol.net>
Subject: Christoffel robertus and BrewWorks in Cincinatti
i was recently in cincinatti and visited BrewWorks. i think it is as cool
as bardo rodeo (in d.c., but an entirely different sort place). go there if
you can.
i bought some Christoffel Robertus, mainly becuase it was in a cool 1/2
gallon growler with an aluminum handle. the style claims to be
"dubbelgemout bier". the card on the bottle neck explains it comes from
holland (st. christopher brewery), and the brewer calls it a "dubble malt
beer" brewed in the "munich tradition". the freshness date claims sept97
(go figgure). it is dark amber, with no esters present. it is very malty
and dry, and maybe a little sour. Does anyone know how to brew something
like it, or what flavor components are in it that i haven't identified?
bob: brewing in the heart of the bible belt
bob rogers bob@carol.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 1996 07:14:04 -0500
From: "Steve McKeeby (Phone 616-342-3102 - Fax 616-342-3718)" <mckeeby@tcpcs3.dnet.etn.com>
Subject: Perforated Stainless Steel Plate Sources
I am building a 3 tier brew system with 30 gallon stainless kettles and am just
about ready to brew except I need a false bottom. The diameter of the kettle
is approximately 18" and I am having a hard time finding stainless perforated
plate. I am also looking at stainless wire cloth but then I need to fabricate
quite a bit more and I am getting anxious to start brewing. Can anyone offer
any suggestions as to sources for stainless perf. plate? Are there any
suggestions pertaining to options that I have for false bottoms?
TIA,
Steve
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 1996 08:34:04 -0500
From: "Debolt, Bruce" <bdebolt@dow.com>
Subject: No sparge, s.g. readings with solids
1. No sparge data
Over the weekend I did a no-sparge mash with 12 lb of grain. This was
for a 3-3.5 gallon batch:
- - 9 lb pale malt
- - 1 lb Munich
- - 1/2 lb wheat
- - 1/2 lb carapils
- - 1 lb crystal
Crush - two roller mill at homebrew store.
Using 1.33 qt/lb grain = 16 qts of mash water. Single temp infusion,
in a 10 gallon Gott cooler, no mash out. Mashed at 154F for 100
minutes, temp. at end was 150F (it was cold in Houston). I recirculated
the first gallon, then let it drain with the valve wide open. It took
longer than normal, about 20-30 minutes.
I collected 2.5 gallons of 1.075 wort, then diluted to 1.048 at just
under 4 gallons and proceeded as normal.
This message is a datapoint only for those who use Gott coolers with
single temp mashes. I don't have accurate scales or volumetric flasks,
so don't get too anal analyzing the results. I left 6 quarts of liquid
in the mash tun, or about 0.5 qt. per lb of grain. YMMV.
2. Measuring gravity with stuff in the liquid
Same batch as above. Measured 1.060 final gravity in the trub and hop
pellet saturated liquid from the bottom of the pot. Drained this
through a coffee filter and measured 1.055. Temperature of liquid in
both cases was the same.
Bruce DeBolt
Houston, TX
bdebolt@dow.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 22 Dec 96 12:18 PDT
From: ROTH.TER@SEATTLE.VA.GOV
Subject: BACK ISSUES ZYMURGY, BREWING TIMES
Seattle area brewers---I have 10 back issues of Brewing Times and 25
back issues of ZYMURGY, including some Special Issues (YEAST,EXTRACT, etc)
for sale or trade for homebrew in the Puget Sound area. Would like to get
rid of all at once. Will throw in "PALE ALE" from the Classic Beer Style
series --$25 for all.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 1996 09:39:15 -0500
From: Ken Overton <kov@jhu.edu>
Subject: Intern'l mail order?
I just got my brother a simple brewing kit and he absolutely loves it -- all
his friends do too. The only problem is that he can't find any place to get
supplies in his hometown, Nairobi, Kenya. Yep, KENYA. So my questions are:
(1) Does anyone know of good African mail order outfits for ingredients?
(2) If not, are there good, dependable bulk places anyone could recommend for
him to order from every month or so?
thanks much,
- -- kov
- --
Ken Overton kov@jhu.edu Internet Sysadmin JHU Press
You have received this message because you are subscribed to the homebrew
mailing list. For information on how to unsubscribe and other commands
which are available to you, send a message to <majordomo@aob.org> with the
text "help" in the body. If you need assistance, send mail to
<owner-homebrew@aob.org>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 1996 08:57:44 -0600
From: Michael McGuire <mcguire@hvsun40.mdc.com>
Subject: Rye Beers
Well Guys,
I finally tried to make a rye beer as suggested in HBD. I've notice that it
hasn't cleared after two weeks in the secondary. Any suggestions??
6# 2-row
4# rye-malted?
1056 yeast
2 oz perle (1/3 PWH) 4.2%
I added 2.5 gallons of water @ 170 F. The cooler was quite cold and the
temperature equalized at 130 F. I added about 1 gallon of boiling water and the
temp moved to 140F. I pulled a thick decoctation of bring to 160 then boil for
15 minutes and back in the mash. Stired in and didn't check the temp until an
hour later(153 F). Recirulated until it cleared mostly, then obtained 6
gallons. Boiled, chilled, areated, added yeast and had fermentation in about 4
hours. Primary fermentation appeared to end in three days, transfered to
secondary at one week. Added geletine at transfer.
Got any suggestions?? Maybe I didn't get full conversion and have a starch
haze?? Is rye beer normally hazy like wheat beirs??
Ciao,
Miguel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 23 Dec 1996 10:11:30 -0600
From: Craig Rode <craig.rode@sdrc.com>
Subject: Efficiency Question
Greetings.
Some of you may remember me as the guy who can't get better than 25 p/p/g.
Here's a question. This weekend, I brewed twice. Once with HB English Pale
Malt and once with Schrier 2 Row. Plus some specialty grains, but I don't
think that matters. Both with about 10 lbs pale malt. Identical procedures:
25 min protein rest at 122F
90 min rest at 152F
10 min mashout at 168F
Maltmill to crush, EZmasher to mash/sparge. Collected 8 gallons for each.
About 90 minutes to sparge. Calculated yield approx 25 p/p/g. Now here's the
question. After collecting the 8 gallons, I took a SG reading on the
runnings. They were still, in both cases, at 1.020! I always thought you
should stop sparging when SG hit 1.010. So clearly, I am leaving sugar
behind. WHY? Too slow a sparge? Too coarse a crush?
Oh yeah, I also, during the second session, stopped sparging in the middle,
mixed the mash like crazy just in case any channeling was occuring, then
recirulated until clear again and resumed. My sparge water has a pH of 7.8,
but I have in the past tried acidifying it with lactic acid and it has made no
difference.
What would lead to runnings, after 8 gallons, to still be at 1.020?
TIA
Craig Rode, Milwaukee, WI (Where I should have been Christmas shopping instead
of brewing, my wife reminds me....)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 1996 08:34:20 +0800
From: Peter Farrow <pfarrow@unix.sri.com>
Subject: Medicine Rock Keg system
Am considering purchasing the Medicine Rock Keg system. Would
appreciate feed back on this equipment.
Tks
Pete Farrow
pfarrow@unix.sri.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 23 Dec 1996 12:07:33 -0500
From: John Penn <john_penn@spacemail.jhuapl.edu>
Subject: Dry Hops in Primary,
Subject: Time:12:56 PM
OFFICE MEMO Dry Hops in Primary, Date:12/23/96
Yes, I tried Al's dry hopping in the primary for an ale and was quite happy
with my first dry hop attempt. I waited until the bubbling had slowed--after
a few days, dry hopped with 1oz. of Cascade, then bottled before two weeks
total time in the primary to avoid autolysis problems. Next time I'll do the
same but I might try 2oz of Cascade. Certainly if you dry hop in the primary,
you want to wait until fermentation slows to avoid bubbling away your hop
aroma.
John Penn
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 1996 11:40:51 -0600
From: Algis R Korzonas <korzonas@lucent.com>
Subject: Here's another one for the chemists...
I've got another question for the chemists, although any
person who has taken any classes that require analytical
lab work would probably know.
Okay...
Percent by weight (% w/w) is easy: grams/100 grams or pounds/100 pounds
(okay, pounds are technically a force, not a weight, but on earth...)
Percent by volume (% v/v) is also easy: ml/100ml or gal/100 gal, etc.
Now, what's with % w/v? What the heck is this? Is this some sort of
agreed-upon convention (like w is always in grams and v always in liters)
or is it just a mistake? How can something be a percent weight of a
volume?
Is this really a measurement convention or are a lot of people using
the wrong symbols when they mean w/w and v/v?
Thanks.
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korzonas@lucent.com
korz@pubs.ih.lucent.com
korz@xnet.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 96 13:12 EST
From: eric fouch <S=eric_fouch%S=fouch%G=eric%DDA=ID=STC021+pefouch%Steelcase-Inc@mcimail.com>
Subject: Misusing the HBD for comedy
Date: Monday, 23 December 1996 12:57pm ET
To: STC012.HOMEBRE1@STC010.SNADS
From: Eric.Fouch@STC001
Subject: Misusing the HBD for comedy
In-Reply-To: .....OK].....
LETTERMAN'S TOP TEN THINGS THAT SOUND DIRTY AT THE OFFICE, BUT AREN'T:
10. I need to whip it out by 5]
9. Mind if I use your laptop?
8. Put it in my box before I leave.
7. If I have to lick one more, I'll gag]
6. I want it on my desk, NOW]
5. HMMMMMMMMMMMM........ I think it's out of fluid.
4. My equipment is so old it takes forever to finish.
3. It's an entry-level position.
2. When do you think you'll be getting off today?
AND THE NUMBER 1 THING THAT SOUNDS DIRTY AT THE OFFICE BUT
ISN'T:
1. It's not fair... I do all the work while he just sits
there.
TOP TEN THINGS THAT SOUND DIRTY AT THE HOMEBREWERY, BUT AREN'T:
10. After kegging, I like to roll it around on the ground.
9. Want to help aerate my wort?
8. Do you think I should rack off my trub?
7. I want to split your secondaries.
6. Have you seen my racking cane?
5. I like to pitch at least a quart at a time.
4. I can't say as I've ever experienced yeast bite.
3. I like it with a creamy, rocky head.
2. What do you think about using a blow-off tube?
AND THE NUMBER 1 THING THAT SOUNDS DIRTY AT THE HOMEBREWERY BUT
ISN'T:
1. Would you like to try a double decoction?
Eric Fouch
Head of Head Retention
Bent Dick YactoBrewery
Kentwood, MI
- -----------( end of letter )--------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 1996 10:32:04 -0800
From: DAVE SAPSIS <DAVE_SAPSIS@fire.ca.gov>
Subject: Small beers
Mark Bayer inquires about small, second-runnings beers, which in the
brewer's parlance are often referred to as "gyle" beers.
I have been making these types of beers ever since I started making
really big beers -- just seemed like the proper thing to do. And
within the context of the no-sparge discussion, the results of these
efforts are somewhat surprising: I have made some quite memorable gyle
beers, noticeable for their *malt* character, and have often thought
about how unique they are. That is, the methods of making them are
unique and quite different from normal mashing routines, and that you
probably cant recreate their character in any simpler manner. That
is, the malt flavors are a distinct function of the mash regime. Now
I warn the reader that the following only relates to my experience,
and in no way confers any particular understanding of the mechanisms
by which things come about.
When making barleywines and imperial stouts, my grain bill usually is
on the order of 75-85 pounds. I used to use two 60 qt coolers for
this, but have since built a larger single tun (obtained a used 120
gallon oak barrel, cut in half, natch). This is a lot of product for
a target of 12 or so gallons of cast out strong wort. The gyle beers
that result from this kind of bill have often been in the 1060-1065
range. Consequently they are only "small" in a relative sense. On
one occasion, the gyle beer from a russian stout turned out to be
quite amazing -- easily the best beer I thought I had made all year.
What made it stand out was a beautiful malt flavor that complimented
the acidic sharpness of the roast. I have had similar sorts of
impressions of amber gyle beers from barleywine grists: a noticeable
maltiness that seems to be what those advocating no-sparge techniques
are describing.
Now it could be that my techniques of using lots of malt really doesnt
result in a traditional thin second beer, where most of the
carbohydrate went into the big beer, and you are getting the very last
of the sugars out of the grain, hence possibly some kinds of compounds
that tend to counteract maltiness derrived from early runnings. In
any event, I have had very good results with the gyle beers I have
made using my techniques, and in no instances that I can recall did
these beers ever seem to be lacking in malt character. Another nice
thing about these beers is that while you are waiting the six months
for the monsters to approach drinkable, you can enjoy one of these and
remember how fun it was looking at that tun full to the gills!
Just one person's experiences. Use or loose at your discretion.
--dave Dave_Sapsis@fire.ca.gov
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 20 Dec 96 10:22:02 EST
From: "David R. Burley" <103164.3202@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Re: Expansive pots ( not those, the ones we brew in)HSA
Brewsters:
Kent says:
> According to my calculations, that comes to a whopping 36 pts/lb/gal. I
> don't believe that I am a mashing God, so I suspect some errors
> somewhere.
Kent,
The volume errors from expansion of the pot are an order of magnitude smaller
than more common sources of error. Don't forget wort also expands with an
increase in temperature which will reduce the error from the pot expansion when
using this dipstick method.
Why don't you weigh the pot full (Pf) and empty (Pe) on your bathroom scale.
You know the density of the solution from your SG measurement. (Pf-Pe) /(8.6X
SG) = V Voila! the volume in gallons (8.6 lbs/gal). Although there are
extensive tables, I generally correct for temperature changes over small delta
T's by using 0.00023/deg F. You could try a nice clean plastic rod or several
coats of sealer on your stick.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
Neil Kirk says:
>I do not aerate my wort except during run-off after the boil (ie whilst the
wort is still hot). When the wort is >down to pitching temperature I
(carefully) stir in my yeast starter culture (about 1:40, starter:wort) and
we're >away. Fermentation is well established in 12 hours, and the beer
(almost) invariably ferments down to the >desired FG (sometimes faster than I
would like).
>Someone please re-educate me!
Well, I guess you missed the whole point of the discussion. Of all the steps in
brewing beer, aeration of the wort whilst it is hot is just about the worst
thing you can do. When I discovered this myself a few decades ago I felt like
Aristotle and screamed "Eureka!" The difference in beer produced by cold and
hot aeration is remarkable. Next time, try immersing your covered boiler with
your hot wort in a cold bath or immerse a cooler made of copper tubing through
which you pass cooling water to get it down to about 70F or so. At this
temperature, oxidation of melandoins and other compounds to form staling
aldehydes are substantially reduced and the yeast will benefit from the
additional incorporated oxygen during startup.
Try it. I garontee you will like the result.
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
103164.3202@compuserve.com
Voice e-mail OK
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Homebrew Digest V2 #14
*****************************
