Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2306
HOMEBREW Digest #2306 Fri 10 January 1997
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: janitor@brew.oeonline.com
Many thanks to the Observer & Eccentric Newspapers of
Livonia, Michigan for sponsoring the Homebrew Digest.
URL: http://www.oeonline.com
Contents:
Re:mead/beer on an aircraft
Pale Ale recipes
[No Subject Provided By Sender]
Re: labels
Re: labels
Decoction Mashing, re: to Chas P. post (George De Piro)
Re: Racking to Secondary
Re: Getting clear wort/pH probe storage/water testing
"Technical" agar questions (Paul Henning)
removable labeling stock
Sparge Temperature - Why not lower
Re: agar agar
Filtering wort- Sipnonstarter
yeast recommendation (Jerry Cunningham)
Extract to All-Grain & Back
First Brew Troubles
Brewing Equipment: Strainer and Funnel (fwd)
Peroxidase ... not a hydrolytic enzyme
Planispiral Chiller
Sanitizing mini-kegs
Tannins and husk
Re: Homebrewed pH meters, clarifying cloudiness
Re: Need Info on Opening a Homebrew Shop
"Decoction" or "No Sparge" Mashing for Ales? (A. McGregor)
Re: Welding Things
Beer Bread
labels
Labels
Re: Rust on welds
the sucking thing
RIMS pump?
Have Questions
NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS: brew.oeonline.com
Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew@brew.oeonline.com
(Articles are published in the order they are received.)
Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc.,
to homebrew-request@brew.oeonline.com BUT PLEASE NOTE that if
you subscribed via the BITNET listserver (BEER-L@UA1VM.UA.EDU),
you must unsubscribe by sending a one line e-mail to listserv@ua1vm.ua.edu
that says: UNSUB BEER-L
Thanks to Pete Soper, Rob Gardner and all others for making the Homebrew
Digest what it is. Visit the HBD Hall of Fame at:
http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/hbd/hallofame.html
If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first.
Please don't send me requests for back issues - you will be silently ignored.
For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to lutzen@alpha.rollanet.org
ARCHIVES:
An archive of previous issues of this digest, as well as other beer
related information can be accessed via anonymous ftp at
ftp.stanford.edu. Use ftp to log in as anonymous and give your full
e-mail address as the password, look under the directory
/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer directory. AFS users can find it under
/afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer. If you do not have
ftp capability you may access the files via e-mail using the ftpmail
service at gatekeeper.dec.com. For information about this service,
send an e-mail message to ftpmail@gatekeeper.dec.com with the word
"help" (without the quotes) in the body of the message.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 21:32:40 -0500 (EST)
From: WattsBrew@aol.com
Subject: Re:mead/beer on an aircraft
Dan,
I have taken 2 six packs on a commercial flight with no difficulty.
I passed it through x-ray for carry-on and when asked what was in the
bottles, I told the security guy it was homebrew, he said "Oh, somebody's
going to have a great flight".
I just stuffed the gym bag in the overhead compartment. Of course, this
stirred up the yeast sediment, but we let them settle for a few days
afterward.
I have never (kiss of death?) had a bottle explode here at home, so I never
considered that one might blow at 25000 ft. The cabin pressure is pretty
stable, I don't think that will be a problem.
Enjoy the ride and the brew.
Bill Watt - Brewing beer in Lancaster, NY
wattsbrew@aol.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 20:59:32 +1100 (EST)
From: Mark Preston <prestonm@labyrinth.net.au>
Subject: Pale Ale recipes
G'day fellow Brewers,
I am in need of pale ale recipes, so if you have a good recipe please send..
prestonm@labyrinth.net.au
Thanks
CHEERS
Mark Preston
Mark Preston
Brewing Beer in Melbourne, Australia..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 97 06:06 CST
From: postmaster@swpe06.sw.lucent.com
Subject: [No Subject Provided By Sender]
>From postmaster Fri Jan 10 06:06:49 1997
Subject: smtp mail failed
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 2455
Your mail to swen01.lucent.com is undeliverable.
- ---------- diagnosis ----------
<<< 554 Transaction failed -- I/O error
- ---------- unsent mail ----------
>From uucp Fri Jan 10 06:06 CST 1997 remote from swpe06
>From homebrew Thu Jan 9 19:58:56 0700 1997 remote from dionysus.aob.org
Received: from dionysus.aob.org by swpe06.sw.lucent.com; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 06:06 CST
Received: by ihgp0.ih.lucent.com (SMI-8.6/EMS-L sol2)
id GAA04439; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 06:14:16 -0600
Received: from ihig1.firewall.lucent.com by ihgp0.ih.lucent.com (SMI-8.6/EMS-L sol2)
id GAA04433; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 06:14:12 -0600
Received: by ihig1.firewall.lucent.com (SMI-8.6/EMS-L sol2)
id GAA13704; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 06:18:23 -0600
Received: by ihgw1.lucent.com; Fri Jan 10 06:07 CST 1997
Received: (from dionysus@localhost) by dionysus.aob.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id TAA03664 for homebrew-digest-outgoing; Thu, 9 Jan 1997 19:58:56 -0700 (MST)
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 19:58:56 -0700 (MST)
Message-Id: <199701100258.TAA03664@dionysus.aob.org>
X-Authentication-Warning: dionysus.aob.org: dionysus set sender to owner-homebrew-digest@dionysus.aob.org using -f
From: owner-homebrew-digest@dionysus.aob.org (Homebrew Digest)
To: homebrew-digest@dionysus.aob.org
Subject: Homebrew Digest V2 #25
Reply-To: homebrew@dionysus.aob.org
Sender: owner-homebrew-digest@dionysus.aob.org
Errors-To: owner-homebrew-digest@dionysus.aob.org
Precedence: bulk
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 41989
Homebrew Digest Thursday, January 9 1997 Volume 02 : Number 025
Procedures:
To send a message to the digest, send it to <homebrew@aob.org>
To subscribe to the digest, send a message to <majordomo@aob.org>
with the text "subscribe homebrew-digest" in the body.
To unsubscribe from the digest, send a message to <majordomo@aob.org>
with the text "unsubscribe homebrew-digest <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 New product announcements
2 Re: big heads; widmer
3 Need address of inventive Aussie
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 07:58:00 -0500
From: Michael Switzer <switzer8@pilot.msu.edu>
Subject: Re: labels
Bert H. Chew writes:
>I am about ready to bottle my first batch. I would like
to make labels
>with my PC. I was wondering if anyone knew of some good
label stock to
>use with an inkjet printer that would be EASY to remove
after the bottles
>were empty?
I use just a regular 20# bond paper in my Epson Color
InkJet. I then attach the labels using Elmer's Spray
Adhesive, which can be found anywhere that they sell school
supplies. The adhesive is water resistant and soaks into
the paper to make it resistant too. I have no trouble
removing these labels once you get a corner up they come
off like a Post-It Note, leaving no gunk behind.
Michael Switzer
- -----------------------------------
switzer@cpp.msu.edu
switzer8@pilot.msu.edu
http://pilot.msu.edu/user/switzer8
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 97 08:44:45 -0500
From: David Winfield <ddw@ptdprolog.net>
Subject: Re: labels
>I use just a regular 20# bond paper in my Epson Color
>InkJet. I then attach the labels using Elmer's Spray
>Adhesive, which can be found anywhere that they sell school
>supplies. The adhesive is water resistant and soaks into
>the paper to make it resistant too. I have no trouble
>removing these labels once you get a corner up they come
>off like a Post-It Note, leaving no gunk behind.
Michael:
Do you have a problem with the ink running if they get wet?
Dave Winfield
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 08:44:45 -0800
From: George De Piro <George_De_Piro@berlex.com>
Subject: Decoction Mashing, re: to Chas P. post (George De Piro)
Howdy!
Yeah, yeah, I know you're all probably sick of my writings on
decoctions, but I would like to discuss Chas's post.
Chas describes how he decocts by mashing 1/3 of the grain overnight,
at a starting temperature of 125F, allowing the temp to fall to ~100F.
He says in this way he takes care of his protein and acid rests. In
the morning he heats it to saccharification, then boils it, then adds
it to the "main" mash (the remaining 2/3 of the grain).
He does this to avoid leaving the main mash in the protein rest range
for too long.
One problem I see with this is that he's leaving 1/3 of his mash in
the lower protein rest range for several hours, while 2/3 of the mash
never gets a protein rest. Depending on the malts you're using, this
could leave a lot of higher molecular weight proteins and lots of very
degraded proteins (free amino acids), with not a large amount of the
more desirable mid-weight proteins (that provide body and mouthfeel
without as much haze potential as the larger proteins).
Also, the bacterial action that occurs in a pot of wet grain at ~110F
over 8 hours will be noticeable. The mash may taste a bit sour,
which is not usually desirable.
I usually avoid over long protein rests when decocting by heating the
main mash to saccharification and then pulling the decoction (after a
good deal of conversion has occured). I then boil the decoction mash
and add it back very slowly to avoid raising the main mash to too high
a temperature.
I'm not really using the decoction to achieve temperature steps, just
to form melanoidins. This won't work in some people's systems, but
it's definitely less work than splitting your brew session over two
days.
Have fun!
George De Piro (Nyack, NY)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 09:51:24 -0600
From: lheavner@tcmail.frco.com
Subject: Re: Racking to Secondary
This is a Mime message, which your current mail reader
may not understand. Parts of the message will appear as
text. To process the rest, you will have to use a Mime
compatible mail reader. Contact your vendor for details.
- --IMA.Boundary.852905146
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: cc:Mail note part
From: "Douglas M. Yost" <dyost@txdirect.net>
>>When is it recommended to rack an ESB to the secondary fermenter?
I have heard the following:
2 to 3 days
bubbles at 90-second intervals
Presently I am at day 3, and the bubbles are at 5-second intervals.<<
At the risk of restarting a flame war on the use of secondaries, Why rack
at all? If it is to get the beer off of the trub as in "I dumped my kettle
with hot break and all into the fermentor, then I would transfer as soon as
most of the solids have settled out and while fermentation was active to
minimize the risk of airborne infection.
IMHO, racking to a 2ndary is just extra work and another opportunity to
infect the beer. In an ale which has a short period before bottling, there
does not appear to be any advantage.
Regards,
Lou Heavner
<lheavner@frmail.frco.com>
- --IMA.Boundary.852905146--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 10:05:08 -0500
From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer@engin.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Getting clear wort/pH probe storage/water testing
>>>>> "David" == David C Harsh <dharsh@alpha.che.uc.edu> writes:
David> If you are on a municipal system, call your water company.
Caveat: what you will probably get is an average over a long period,
usually a year. And it's generally not the most recent year, which
doesn't matter much unless they've changed water sources and/or
treatments since they last printed up the analysis.
If your water varies significantly throughout the year, as it will if
much of it comes from surface sources (river, e.g.), then the report
is useful, but should not be taken as gospel.
=Spencer Thomas in Ann Arbor, MI (spencer@umich.edu)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 09:46:55 -0600
From: Paul Henning <phenning@cs.uiowa.edu>
Subject: "Technical" agar questions (Paul Henning)
I've seen a variety of posts in the last few digests about obtaining
"agar-agar" at Asian groceries. My problem is sort of opposite of
that. I have access to a wonderful biochemistry supply store, but I
don't know how to specify exactly what type of agar to get. On the
Yeast Culture Kits homepage, they mention "YM" agar and "YMA" agar.
Are these appropriate? Do I need to specify anything else? USP?
As a side note, what does the designation "USP" stand for? It seems
to imply that the product receiving that designation is safe for food
use. Is that correct?
Cheers,
Paul Henning | The truth is
http://www.cs.uiowa.edu/~phenning | out there.
phenning@cs.uiowa.edu (finger for PGP public key) | Linux.
"Make good money, $5 a day; Made any more, I might move away..."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 11:10:53 -0500 (EST)
From: Charles Puffe <cpuffe@mail1.nai.net>
Subject: removable labeling stock
>I am about ready to bottle my first batch. I would like to make labels
>with my PC. I was wondering if anyone knew of some good label stock to
>use with an inkjet printer that would be EASY to remove after the bottles
>were empty?
<lurk mode off>
Avery makes a removable label stock, part number 6464, that is perfect. The
labels are 6 to a page, 4" x 3.33". Although spec'd for laser printers, I
have friends that have used these labels successfully in color inkjet
printers. YMMV. Surf to http://www.avery.com (no affiliation, blah, blah,
blah) for specs/info.
Chuck
<lurk on>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 10:22:33 -0600
From: Tom Galley <tgalley@flash.net>
Subject: Sparge Temperature - Why not lower
I'm going to try this again using a different system. Sorry for the
garbled post; hope this one appears normally.
A series of niggling problems, poor planning, and interruptions
resulted in my wasting enough time prior to sparging that my sparge
water temperature dropped to the high 150's. I raised it to the low
160's by adding boiling water, but I ran out of preboiled brewing
water, and headroom. Since I use gravity feed, I didn't want to
screw around lowering 10.5 gallons of hot water and heating it back
up, so I didn't worry and sparged away. I had already mashed out to
168=B0F. Over the course of a 2 hour sparge (22# grain bill in 10
gallon Gott), the temperature of the sparge water dropped from about
162=B0 to about 156=B0. Granted, I need to better insulate my reservoir.
=20
Extraction was a whopping 80% efficient compared to my expected 75%
or so. I guess this was the result of continuing enzyme activity
during the sparge, although I ended up mashing for 2.5 hours, which
was an hour longer than planned. The wort tasted great and fermented
out quickly in primary. The beer is drier than I hoped when
transferred to secondary (1.010 SG), but still tastes great. It
shouldn't have been more fermentable, though, since the temperature
during sparge was higher than my 153=B0F mash temperature. =20
So the question is: Why not sparge at these lower temperatures?=20
Seems less attention to ph would be necessary to prevent tannin
extraction. What difference does it make if the enzymes keep working
a bit? Why was the wort apparently more fermentable than planned?
Thanks,
Tom
galley@sperry-sun.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 08:23:05 -0800 (PST)
From: Jeff Frane <jfrane@teleport.com>
Subject: Re: agar agar
Al Korzonas offers:
>Michael writes:
>>Does anyone know a realitively inexpensive place to get Agar?
>
>Yes. Chineese grocery stores. Ask for "agar agar."
>
But pay attention! For some completely bizarre reason, you
will occasionally find "agar agar" that is actually white
tree fungus. The actual agar is sold in long lumpy-looking
strips. The Chinese use agar for various treats (many dim
sum dishes), and the fungus in dishes like hot & sour soup.
- --Jeff Frane
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 08:35:51 -0800
From: Jim Martin <fermntap@concentric.net>
Subject: Filtering wort- Sipnonstarter
There is a new product out that will start the siphon flow, strain the
hops ( pellet or whole ) and leave just enough wort in the thing to
pour off into a hydrometer jar for a reading. It's called the
"Siphontap" It's easy to use and cheap ! ($ 9.95) Available through
your local homebrew supply store.
Jim Martin Fermntap@concentric.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 11:31:19 -0500
From: Jerry Cunningham <gcunning@Census.GOV>
Subject: yeast recommendation (Jerry Cunningham)
First of all, thanks for all the great stuff you all have been posting
lately - lots of interesting articles (I especially liked Don Van
Valkenburg's dry hopping observations) and even a plaid joke!
I'm going to try my first true lager soon, and I need a recommendation on
yeast. I'm planning on a German pils following closely by a doppelbock,
using the same yeast. The old Wyeast spec sheet recommends these strains:
- ---
German Pilsner: Light to medium body. Dry. Bitter. Medium to high hop
flavor and aroma. Very low diacetyl OK. Nofruitiness/esters. Wyeast 2007,
2124, 2308.
Bock/Doppelbock: Full body. Malty. Low bitterness. Low diacetyl OK. No
fruitiness/esters. Medium to high alcohol. Wyeast 2124, 2278, 2007.
- ---
So, I was thinking of using one of these strains:
2007 Pilsen lager yeast A classic American pilsner strain, sturdy and
simple to use. Ferments dry and crisp. Flocculation -medium; apparent
attenuation - 71-75%. (48-56F)
2308 Munich lager yeast A demanding strain, but capable of producing some
of the finest lagers made. Very smooth, well-rounded and full-bodied.
Flocculation - medium; apparent attenuation - 73-77%. (48-56F)
2124 Bohemian lager yeast A pilsner yeast from the Czech Republic. Ferments
clean and malty, with rich residual sugarin full gravity pilsners.
Flocculation
- - medium; apparent attenuation - 69-73%. (46-54F)
I'm leaning towards 2007 or 2124, the "demanding strain" clause from the
2308 description kinda scared me off from that one. I also have some yeast I
scavanged from a growler of DeGroens Pils (from Baltimore Brewing Company, I
believe it's viable) that I was thinking about using - does anybody know
what strain this is?
Thanks for any help!
- - Jerry Cunningham
Annapolis, MD
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 11:46:52 -0500 (EST)
From: KennyEddy@aol.com
Subject: Extract to All-Grain & Back
Vince Mitchell asked about All-Grain --> Extract --> All-Grain conversion.
See my web page (URL below) for my article on all-grain to extract
conversion. The basic idea is to take each grain individually and decide
whether an extract substitute is available, whether a simple specialty-grain
steep is adequate, or whether a mini-mash is necessary. Then combine these
steps into your recipe and fire away.
As far as going from extract to all-grain, this is where it gets tricky. For
conversion of only pale extract, substitute pale malt (pale ale malt in
english ale recipes, lager malt in lagers, etc). The converision rate would
be about 1.5 lb grain per lb of dry extract, or 1.3 lb grain per lb of liquid
extract, assuming about 75% efficiency (typical).
For "dark" and "amber" extracts, you have several options, none of which will
be right all the time. The reason is that "colored" extracts may or may not
contain anything in addition to pale malt other than coloring. And even if
it did contain dark malt, how much and what kind is never revealed. So you
have to guess. My suggestion is to substitute pale malt as described above,
then add appropriate (for the style) specialty grains to bring the color up
to the same as the extract.
Converting all-grain to extract is useful for the extract brewer, but
converting extract to all-grain is unnecessary IMHO since there are many fine
recipes and style guidelines available. Extract beers are often (but not
always) "simplified" versions of the beer style they represent, and for
reasons already mentioned, a lot of guesswork and augmentation would have to
go into a conversion. Start form scratch with all-grain.
*****
Ken Schwartz
El Paso, TX
KennyEddy@aol.com
http://members.aol.com/kennyeddy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 13:11:32 -0300
From: Suzanne Chaput <alacarte@nfld.com>
Subject: First Brew Troubles
Being the pioneer brewpub in this province is exciting but not without
frustration. We lack sources for discussion locally, and therefore the
learning process can at times be hindered. We kegged our first brew two
weeks ago (a top fermented amber ale using extracts). We poured yesterday
and two problems ensued. First, the brew is extremely cloudy and has
excessive sediment, despite having been filtered. Second, the brew is flat
(we use a CO2/Nitrogen, 70/30 carbonation system which has been effective
for all imported kegged beer). We didn't clarify the beer. Could this be
what has caused the cloudiness, and if yes, will it help if we clarify now?
And then the problem of carbonation remains. We'd like to salvage this
first brew because ... well it's our "maiden brew" ... and because despite
these two unfavorable characteristics, the brew imparts a rather pleasant
flavor. What can we do about it now, or what should we look to change in
future brews? Suggestions/advice would be greatly appreciated.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 10:58:53 -0600 (CST)
From: Frosty <frosty@cstar.ac.com>
Subject: Brewing Equipment: Strainer and Funnel (fwd)
Hello fellow brewers!
I have been looking everywhere for a large (~12inches diameter) strainer
and an accompaning funnel for straining my wort before going into the
primary. I can find a strainer at Walmart, but it is not fine enough to
get out the pellet hop remains.
Anyway, I figure that I can get something from a commercial kitchen supply
place but 1) I don't know where any are and 2) they probably won't sell
just one to me.
What is everyone out in homebrewland using? My brewpot is large and does
not pour very easy so I am trying to be neat.
Any comments would be appreciated.
Frosty
frosty@tp.ac.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 12:37:17 -0500
From: Steve Alexander <stevea@clv.mcd.mot.com>
Subject: Peroxidase ... not a hydrolytic enzyme
Steve Alexander wrote ...
>of peroxidase enzymes that should reduce phenols. They require
>hydrogen peroxide for the hydrolisation. Add hydrogen peroxide to
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Everybody knows peroxidase is an oxidizing enzyme not a hydrolyzing
enzyme. Peroxidase and H2O2 together oxidize phenols RELEASING H2O
instead of using H2O. Phenols aren't eliminated, instead the oxidized
phenols readily polymerize, hopefully to such an extent that they
either become insoluable or combine with proteins. Where did this bozo
learn his enzymatics ?
thought I'd beat you all to the punch,
Steve Alexander
p.s. 0.1% hydrogen peroxide is suggested in M&BS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 14:28:16 +0000
From: John Robinson <robinson@novalis.ca>
Subject: Planispiral Chiller
Hi there,
In HBD Volume 02 : Number 025 Dave Hinkle posted his experiences with
planispiral chillers. To my knowledge Ed is the one who came up with
this idea, but I wouldn't be surprised to discover that it occurred
to others independently.
I built mine after looking at the one Ed built and it has served me
well. I made mine out of 1/4" copper tubing, and would recomend
3/8's I think for somewhat increased rigidity. Mine works quite
well, but I am in the process of changing my brewing setup in many
fundamental ways, and rather that build another immersion chiller for
my new 15 gallon boiling vessel, I'm going to do a counterflow
chiller this time. Ed to my knowledge is currently in Ontario and last
I heard he was no longer subscribed to HBD. I do not know his
current email address.
Ed did also write a letter to BT describing his chiller, I have that
issue at home but do not remember which one it is. If there is
sufficient interest I'll dig it up and post the year and version.
- -John Robinson
Software Developer
NovaLIS Technologies
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 13:35:36 -0500
From: Kevin Sinn <skinner@MNSi.Net>
Subject: Sanitizing mini-kegs
I've just purhased a mini-keg system and I'm urious as to the best way to
sanitize them. I'm aware that chlorine bleach will pit the aluminum over
time. What are some other alternatives?
Thanks
Kevin Sinn
Windsor, Ontario, Canada
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 97 12:49:45 CST
From: John Wilkinson <jwilkins@imtn.tpd.dsccc.com>
Subject: Tannins and husk
Bill writes:
>A continuing thread over the past couple of years and something that you
>are warned about in all grain brewing is the husk portion of the malt.
>The husks have been blamed as being the major source of tannins in beer,
>yet when beer is brewed with the husks being sieved off, the tannin is
>about 91% of the tannin found in beer that is brewed with husks. Where
>is all this tannin coming from? At least some of it is coming from the
>hops.
and AlK reponds:
>33% according to Moll in Brewing Science (Vol. 3, I believe, "Collodal
>Stability in Beer" is the name of the chapter).
My question is, if the non-husk beer has 91% of the tannins of the husk beer
and hops contribute only 33%, where does the rest come from? Am I
misinterpreting Bill's statement? Are the husks sieved off after they have
already contributed most of their tannins or is there another source?
John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins@imtn.dsccc.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 10 Jan 97 14:09:29 EST
From: "David R. Burley" <103164.3202@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Re: Homebrewed pH meters, clarifying cloudiness
Brewsters:
Our Walloon (based on his accent), Ronnie Baert says:
> Is there any chemist or scientific specialist who can tell us which metal=
> s that can be used for
> making elektrodes for a ph-meter? Electronics & measuring =3D no problem.=
> For our purpose
> (homebrewing) we measure only a few times per month. For a short measure=
> ment, and, if
> you clean after each measure the electrodes, it should be possible to mea=
> sure acurate the ph
> using a meter with naked elektrodes.
Sorry, Ronnie, but the glass envelope around the pH meter electrodes is critical
to the measurement and the type of glass and thickness is important and the
manufacture is still somewhat of an art. There is a reference electrode ( which
can be calomel - mercuric chloride ) in there also. In the old, old days pH was
first measured electrically with a bare platinized platinum electrode in a
hydrogen gas atmosphere versus a calomel electrode connected by an agar-agar or
gelatin containing potassium chloride bridge. Very clumsy and both the hydrogen
and calomel are dangerous, especially around sparks and a foodstuff like beer.
My recommendation - don't waste your time or money. Buy whatever you want -
temperature compensated or not - it will be a lot cheaper and certainly it will
work. Personally, I wouldn't bother with temperature compensation, since, as
pointed out the other day here, pH itself also varies with temperature. Use a
metal cup ( I use a thick walled metal shot measure or a SS measuring cup) which
can be cooled quickly to the desired reference temperature with ice and water on
the outside.
My advice -don't re-invent the wheel. Why not spend your time on a RIMS or
something else where your creativity can be useful?
- -----------------------------------------
Mark Bayer clarifies his question about cloudier wort resulting from putting it
through a sieve versus just drawing it off the brew ketle.
Answer. Part of the purpose of the rolling boil, particularly after the Irish
Moss is added, is to collect the trub into larger flocs which settle rapidly.
By putting them through a sieve you broke them up and these smaller particles
settle slower. The solution - siphon the wort off through a choreboy scrubber
which can use the hops as a filter bed and not break up the flocs.
- -----------------------------------------
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
103164.3202@compuserve.com
Voice e-mail OK
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 13:10:41 -0500 (EST)
From: AJN <neitzkea@frc.com>
Subject: Re: Need Info on Opening a Homebrew Shop
Marty
Did you ever get any responses? If so could you pass them on to me?
On Mon, 30 Dec 1996, Marty Tippin wrote:
> I've got this strange urge to open a homebrew supply store here in town -
> seems to me like a good opportunity to fill a void in the community and do
> something I've always wanted to do (own a small business)...
>
> Problem is, I haven't the foggiest idea how much it costs to start a shop,
> where to look for suppliers, how to go about procuring startup capital, what
> kind of profits to expect, etc.
>
> If any of you kind shop owners out there would care to offer some advice,
> I'd be grateful... Reply by direct e-mail if you please...
>
> -Marty
>
_________________________________________________________________________
Arnold J. Neitzke Internet Mail: neitzkea@frc.com
Brighton, Michigan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 13:57:17 -0500 (EST)
From: Art McGregor <mcgregap@acq.osd.mil>
Subject: "Decoction" or "No Sparge" Mashing for Ales? (A. McGregor)
Greetings Beerlings!
Having read a little about decoction mashing (single, double, triple)=
, I=92ve
been interested in trying it to get the benefits of the improved malt=
y flavor.=20
The question is whether decoction mashes will add any noticeable flav=
or to
ales, or is it mainly useful only with lagers? I guess a similar que=
stion
would apply to "No Sparge" mashing.
Currently, I brew extract beers. Would any of these two techniques p=
rovide
improved maltiness if used with a partial mash (again, only talking a=
bout ales,
not lagers)? Would it require full volume wort boils (6 gallon), or =
could the
sweet liquor from the partial mash (~3 gallons) be used for the wort =
boils that
I would add my malt extract and hops on the stovetop?
TIA!
Hoppy Brewing,
Art McGregor (Northern Virgina)
day: mcgregap@acq.osd night: apmcgregor@nmaa.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 10 Jan 1997 12:33:15 -0800
From: Dion Hollenbeck <hollen@axel.vigra.com>
Subject: Re: Welding Things
>> Kelly C Heflin writes:
KCH> Someone just wrote about stainless steel rusting after welding.
KCH> As a welder and having just welded 3 stainless pots for myself,
KCH> let me give my opinion.
[...snip...]
KCH> Take a wire brush or some steel wool and scrub the area
KCH> around the nipple.
This is not a good recommendation to make. Any metal finishing with
steel on a stainless piece will embed small particles of steel in the
stainless which *may* eventually rust. One should never recommend
using steel wool on stainless. Stainless steel scrubbers are not even
a good recommendation because being the same hardness as the other SS,
they will tend to scratch it and those scratches can be sites for
corrosion to begin at. This is one of the reasons that in commercial
production of stainless steel things that after all fabrication is
done (usually the machining) that the pieces are passivated in nitric
acid to eat the steel away. The best way to clean SS is the
recommendation made by John Palmer, and that is an oxalic acid based
cleanser and a ScotchBrite pad, or if you are actually trying to
remove welding oxidation, UTP, a highly corrosive acid paste made
specifically for that job.
dion
- --
Dion Hollenbeck (619)597-7080x164 Email: hollen@vigra.com
http://www.vigra.com/~hollen
Sr. Software Engineer - Vigra Div. of Visicom Labs San Diego, California
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 16:29:23 EST
From: John C Peterson <petersonj1@juno.com>
Subject: Beer Bread
I'm just a Freshman here and don't want to give you my opinion about
brewing beer yet, but the best use I have found for the leftover beer in
the bottom of the first fermenter is giving to my wife for making bread.
It's excellent and tastes better than sourdough bread. Email me for the
recipe.
Have your loved one make up a batch, some stew, get a homebrew and you
are set for the winter.
John Peterson
petersonj1@juno.com
Freshman Brewers visit me at:
http://www.geocities.com/Yosemite/6841
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 10 Jan 97 16:47:38 EST
From: "Kenneth D. Joseph" <74651.305@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: labels
Bert,
I've had great luck using plain old paper with my color bubble jet. I format
the page for Avery 5164 labels (6 to a sheet), then use an exacto blade or a
paper cutter to cut. For "special occasions" like Christmas/Hannukah Sparkling
Cider gifts, I used a fancy recycled stock purchased from Wal-Mart, with equal
success. I attach them to the bottles with one of those paste sticks. The
labels come right off when soaked in water. I have also started a collection of
one empty bottle of each batch. My wife sprayed some kind of lacquer on the
"permanent bottles" to protect the labels from discoloration. Welcome to
brewing -- enjoy!!!
kj
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 17:02:06 -0500
From: Andrew Quinzani <quinzani@mdc.net>
Subject: Labels
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 13:41:46 CST
From: "Bert H. Chew" <bchew@juno.com>
Subject: Labels
Hi everyone,
I am about ready to bottle my first batch. I would like to make labels
with my PC. I was wondering if anyone knew of some good label stock to
use with an inkjet printer that would be EASY to remove after the bottles
were empty?
Thanks
Bert H. Chew
bchew@juno.com
I use just good old white or colored paper...thing is with Inkjet is that
the colors or even the black and white ink will run...but I got around that
one, Get to an art supply store and get a can of clear acrylic sealer. Spray
you labels with this after they are printed out. Let dry and they will never
run!
As for the glue..... I use good old MILK, yes, I said milk.
Pour some milk in a small dish and run the BACK of the label over it, no
sence in getting the top wet. Lay it on the bottle and hold one conner with
your thumb and with a dish towel dry the label off,....gently rub untill all
the air is gone from under it. This will stay on untill you soak it and it
floats right off.
-=Q=-
"Q" Brew Brewery...Home of Hairy Chest Ale
- ------------------------------------------------------------
quinzani@mdc.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 14:33:08 PST
From: Joseph Kral <kral@hpljlk.hpl.hp.com>
Subject: Re: Rust on welds
> Date: Wed, 08 Jan 1997 07:28:24 -0600
> From: Jim Nasiatka-Wylde <Jwylde@interaccess.com>
> Subject: Re: Metallurgy Question
>
> >
> >Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 13:57:01 -0800
> >From: George De Piro <George_De_Piro@berlex.com>
> >Subject: Metallurgy question (George De Piro)
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Yet another metallurgy question; perhaps we should change this to an
> > engineering forum...
> >
> > I had some free welding done to put nipples on my stainless steel
> > kettles (get your mind out of the gutter). The guy must have
> > overheated the metal on one of them because the area around the weld
> > rusted after just a few hours in contact with water!
> >
> > Is there a way to make it stainless again, or am I now the proud owner
> > of a 15.5 gallon sort-of-stainless conversation piece?
>
> Hey George -
>
> What you have run into is typical with most SS Welding. What happened is
> that the oxide layer that prohibits stainless from rusting got wiped out
> by the welding process, and you need to give it some time to 'recondition'
> itself and reform the layer.
>
> Lightly sand the areas down to clean bare metal again, and let it sit for
> several days (maybe a week or so if you have the patience) and then it
> should be ok. This is assuming that it is stainless, and the welder did
> use SS welding rod with a decent MIG/TIG torch.
>
> Good luck!
>
Actually what has happened here is a change in the crystalline structure of
the metal. Most pots and utensiles are a 300 series stailess which is an
Austenitic stainless. Welding causes the formation of ferrites. The
material around the welds is now a Ferritic stainless (like some 400
series). You will also find that the material around the welds has lost its
non-magnetic properties. Sanding or otherwise cleaning the surface will not
fix it. It is permanent. This problem is common and well known.
- --
Joseph Kral
Hewlett-Packard Laboratories
kral@hpljlk.hpl.hp.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 17:28 -0600
From: BAYEROSPACE <M257876@sl1001.mdc.com>
Subject: the sucking thing
collective homebrew conscience:
i saw a review in an issue of zymurgy a few years ago for a siphon starting
device called "the sucking thing". does anyone know if it's still being
made/sold?
brew hard,
mark bayer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 17:03:23 -0700 (MST)
From: Agnor Craig <Craig.Agnor@Colorado.EDU>
Subject: RIMS pump?
Santa has brought me a pump. Is it suitable to use in a RIMS?
Actually a friend of mine won this pump in the HOPS/BOPS homebrew contest
about a month ago and wasn't sure what to do with it and gave it to me.
The pump is a
Hartell Leakprook Magnetic Drive Pump
Model CP-3B-1A
The pump is cylindrical with about a 4 inch diameter and the following
specs are printed on its side
1500 rpm 115 Volts 60 Hertz .48 Amps
The two-page brochure that came with the pump is a general bulletin
which describes the basic function of the line of pumps produced by
Hartell and their uses (hot and cold water circulation up to 200F and
150 psig,...etc).
Has anyone used this pump, or a very similar one, in a RIMS system?
Can anyone direct me to a design or set of plans for using this pump in a
RIMS (I already mash in a 10 gallon Gott cooler with a Phils Phalse
Bottom in case there is a design for a Gott RIMS )? If this pump isn't
going to be used in
a RIMS, what other homebrewing applications could this pump be used for?
Any help would be appreciated.
Cheers,
Craig Agnor
agnor@colorado.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 11:29:37 +1100 (EST)
From: Mark Preston <prestonm@labyrinth.net.au>
Subject: Have Questions
Hi Fello Homebrewers,
Could somone help me out with the following questions..
I have done some reading on aeration of wort with a fish tank pump, how does
one go about keeping the air that is pumped into wort contamination free??
I have heard people in this arena refere to a chemical called Iodophor, used
for sterilization/Sanertation. I live in Australia and have been unable to
find this product. Does anyone out there in brew land know what the chemical
ingrediants are of Iodophor?
This may help with a substutite product or maybe Iodophor is sold under a
diferant name here in Aus..
Thanx in advance
Cheers
Mark Preston
prestonm@labyrinth.net.au
Brewing Beer in Melbourne, Australia..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2306, 01/10/97
*************************************
-------
