Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2382
HOMEBREW Digest #2382 Tue 25 March 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:
Square Vs. Round Tuns (John Sullivan)
RE: RIMS recirulation and dough-in ("Keith Royster")
Re: need good head (Scott Abene)
Re: constant RIMS pumping + RIMS dough-in? (Dion Hollenbeck)
Big Apple Homebrew Competition, beds for volunteers (George De Piro)
Conversion times in decoction mashes (Bob McCowan)
cold beer (John_E_Schnupp)
RE: 0xygen Tanks (John Wilkinson)
The most important ingredient... (korz)
Re: dogs & hops / guinness setup (Brian Bliss)
New Member ("Gary Yerkes")
Protein rests (korz)
First all-grain batch... incomplete conversion? (Dave Riedel)
Pet Safety and Homebrewing (Mark Nelson)
cold beer (John_E_Schnupp)
re: Decoction consensus, Krauzening ("Dr. Pivo")
RIMSters RIMS Questions (JJBrewer)
gravity bottle filler (smurman)
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://brew.oeonline.com/
If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first.
Please don't send 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 from:
brew.oeonline.com /pub/hbd
ftp.stanford.edu /pub/clubs/homebrew/beer
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: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 06:47:57 -0800
From: John Sullivan <sullvan@anet-stl.com>
Subject: Square Vs. Round Tuns
Robert Marshall wrote about tips for using square coolers.
I have found that square coolers work quite well. I used a 48 quart
cooler for years with little problem. I would think that size of choice
would depend upon the brew length and gravity that you wish to achieve.
I used a CPVC false bottom with six manifold arms as depicted below.
Forgive my ASCII art.
O = CPVC caps - = CPVC pipe
+ = CPVC tees X = CPVC elbows
V = CPVC ball valve
_______________________________________________________
| |
| O-----------------------------------------------X |
| | |
| O-----------------------------------------------+ |
| | |
| O-----------------------------------------------+ |
| +----|---V
| O-----------------------------------------------+ |
| | |
| O-----------------------------------------------+ |
| | |
| O-----------------------------------------------X |
|_______________________________________________________|
The tee leading to the valve points in the direction of the valve and the
straight pipe leading from that tee is not cemented. This facilitates
the removal of the entire manifold assembly for cleaning. You will have
to find a way to provide a good seal for the CPVC pipe that extends
through the wall of your cooler. I found that using vinyl tubing (i.e.,
same thing as racking hose)works well. You will want tubing that is a
bit larger than the hole in the wall and that allows for a tight fit of
the CPVC pipe inside the tubing. I found that I had to heat the tubing
and then jam the pipe into it. Whatever method you choose, just ensure
that you have a tight seal.
I chose six manifold arms because I felt that it was important to be
pulling evenly across the entire bottom of the tun. You can choose to
use fewer manifold arms if you wish. I would just suggest that you space
them accordingly across the bottom of the tun.
I cut the pipes with a hacksaw using diagonal cuts approximately 40% of
the diameter of the pipe spaced at 3/4" intervals. If you use a hacksaw
to do this, you can expect to expend a lot of time. I would suggest that
you use a jigsaw instead. You will have to find a way to remove the CPVC
burrs both inside and outside of the pipe. I found that course steel
wool worked well. When finished adding the cuts to the pipe, clean the
entire assembly using CPVC cleaner. When finished with this, cement the
entire assembly together with the exception of the straight pipe leading
to the valve at the tee. Use your cement sparingly. Use just enough
inside the tees, elbows and caps to seal it. Next, you will want to clean
the entire assembly again using hot water and TSP or a substitute and
rinse well.
When you get ready to use this, you will need to ensure that foundation
water is laid above the top of the false bottom, prior to adding your
mash. Lay the foundation water, open your valve and let some flow out
ensuring that the tops of the pipe do not become exposed. Generally,
this will ensure that you have no air pockets within the pipe. Then you
can add your mash and for all practical purposes are ready to go.
The advantages to this system are:
A) It is inexpensive
B) The ball valve allows for precise outflow rates
C) There is more surface area and less vertical development, minimizing
the effect of excess weight on your false bottom
I'm sure there are some who have counterpoint positions on all this
but I hope this helps. It has worked extremely well for me for years.
John Sullivan
St. Louis, MO
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 08:29:59 +0500
From: "Keith Royster" <keith.royster@pex.net>
Subject: RE: RIMS recirulation and dough-in
Scott Bridges asks:
> Do you RIMSers let the pump run the whole time? Or just to do
> temperature raises and now and then to maintain a rest
> temperature?
I run mine continuously throughout the mash like C.D.Prichard does. I
think it helps maintain the clarity of the wort and keeps the
temperatures even in the mash tun. Plus the mechanical agitation can
only help the rate of reactions. The one time I didn't keep it
continuously running I was doing a tow temp protein rest. Quite a
bit of the grain dust slowly settled down under my false bottom and
stuck to the bottom of my mash tun. When I tried to start the pump
back up it began cavitating because it had a 1" layer of "plaster of
paris" plugging the inlet!
C.D.Prichard adds:
> How do you other RIMS users dough-in? I typically fill my RIMS with
> water, recirc and heat it, kill the pump and heater, stir in the
> grain well, let settle for 5 mins. or so then start recirculating
> and heating.
I heat my water in a gravity fed tank using propane. I have a ball
valve under my mash tun that I close for mash in. After underletting
the false bottom with hot water from the tank, I begin mixing grain
and water to the right "feel" and consistency. Then I open the ball
valve under the mash tun to fill the pump head with liquid and i turn
it on and let it recirculate. I can then add more water if necessary.
I use a ball valve upstream of the pump to control flow rate.
> know it's recommended that water be added to the malt instead of the
> back-assward way I do it
I've never heard of this before. Perhaps it is to keep the dust
levels down. Or is this to prevent dough-balls? Either way, I've
never had problems with my dough-in method.
Keith Royster - Keith.Royster@pex.net
@your.service - http://dezines.com/@your.service
Web Services - Mooresville, NC
Voice & Fax - (704) 662-9125
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 09:37:36 -0600
From: Scott Abene <skotrat@wwa.com>
Subject: Re: need good head
Gavin Scarman <scarman@satech.net.au>
Wrote:
>Subject: need good head
>
>I've had good head before so I will recognise it when I get it.
One does never forget good head. You will know it when you find it for sure.
>The thing is I'm not sure what gave me good head.
Was it dark? Did you get this head in some kind of "glory Hole"?
>Also what is it that causes the good head I get to last longer?
Try thinking about Baseball...
>Seriously I think I read somewhere that it's the protein that causes the
>head to form.
Some people produce more protien than others. Try taking some ZYNC.
>Who can tell me more about this visual aspect?
Films will sometimes help. You might also try the use of cleverly placed
mirrors. It also helps to be able to see the Great head that you are getting.
-Scott "You don't think I could have possibly left this post alone now do
you???" Abene
################################################################
# ThE-HoMe-BrEw-RaT #
# Scott Abene <skotrat@wwa.com> #
# http://miso.wwa.com/~skotrat (the Homebrew "Beer Slut" page) #
# OR #
# http://miso.wwa.com/~skotrat/Brew-Rat-Chat/ (Brew-Rat-Chat) #
# "Get off your dead ass and brew" #
# "If beer is liquid bread, maybe bread is solid beer" #
################################################################
------------------------------
Date: 24 Mar 1997 07:53:21 -0800
From: Dion Hollenbeck <hollen@axel.vigra.com>
Subject: Re: constant RIMS pumping + RIMS dough-in?
>>>>> "CD" == C D Pritchard <cdp@mail.chattanooga.net> writes:
CD> If you do stop the pump, make real sure you kill the power to the
CD> heater!
Excellent advice, CD!!
CD> Don't start the pump initially at a high flow, start at a low or
CD> no flow and work up to avoid a stuck mash.
Or, if you do, stop the pump and stir the grainbed up from the bottom
thoroughly and then turn the pump back on at low flow. It will take a
while to re-establish the filter bed, but better that than a stuck
mash.
CD> How do you other RIMS users dough-in? I typically fill my RIMS
CD> with water, recirc and heat it, kill the pump and heater, stir in
CD> the grain well, let settle for 5 mins. or so then start
CD> recirculating and heating. I know it's recommended that water be
CD> added to the malt instead of the back-assward way I do it. Anyone
CD> see any problems with this?
I use a J shaped water return on the end of my hose and recirculate
while pouring the grain into the returning water stream. Mixes it all
and I do not have to stir. However, this has to be done at a high
flow rate, and I have found that if that is done, it tends to compact
the grainbed. And in fact, this is where my stuck mashes were coming
from. When all grain is mixed in, I have to turn off the pump to swap
out the J return for my normal return manifold and at this time, I
stir the grain bed up from the bottom to loosen it up. Since I
started doing this, I have not had the problems I used to have with
slow recirc due to compacted grain bed. When I turn on the pump once
again, it is at a low flow rate and I leave it there for the whole
mash.
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: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 11:05:29 -0800
From: George_De_Piro@berlex.com (George De Piro)
Subject: Big Apple Homebrew Competition, beds for volunteers
Hi all,
Sorry to bother you all again with our competition announcement, but I
thought I should mention that we do have a few people willing to house
out-of-town judges and stewards. Having a place to sleep (indoors)
may make it feasible for some of you to judge/steward on April 12.
If anyone is interested, please let me know as soon as possible so
that arrangements can be made. Thanks.
****BIG APPLE HOMEBREW COMPETITION****
sponsored by New York City's finest homebrew clubs:
The Malted Barley Appreciation Society and
The New York City Homebrewers Guild.
This year's contest will feature *GARRETT OLIVER*, head brewer of
Brooklyn Brewing Company as a special guest best-of-show judge!!!
The event will be held on April 12 at Milan, 1 East 36th Street in
Manhattan. Entries are due by April 10th. Call for a list of
drop-off/mail-in locations.
The Best of Show prize is a day of brewing with Keith Symonds at The
Westchester Brewing Co., White Plains, NY, and a $100 gift certificate to
the Home Brewery (they mail order).
Interested contestants should call Joanne Sagala @ 212-583-4863 (day)
or Donna Bersani @ 201-935-2067 (evening), or E-mail me @
George_De_Piro@Berlex.com.
We also need judges!!! Contact me (George) at the above E-mail
address or at (201)305-5074 if you are interested in judging.
Have fun!
George De Piro (President, Malted Barley Appreciation Society)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 13:51:56 -0500
From: Bob McCowan <bob.mccowan@bmd.cpii.com>
Subject: Conversion times in decoction mashes
I've done a number of decoction mashes, and with the exception of one where
I scorched the mash I have been extremely pleased with the results (and the
scorched one isn't all that bad). However, the time spent is sometimes a
problem.
I understand that the additional time spent doing the decoctions, with a 155
rest on the way to a boil and the boil itself, is part of the game.
However, once I get to the saccharification rest it seems like I need a
*long* rest (2 hrs or more) to get a negative iodine reaction. My pH
measures OK, low 5's I think, and I'm quite careful to take only thick mash
when I pull a decoction.
I have noticed that I get a stronger iodine reaction from mash taken from
the top of the tun than I do from the runoff that I am recirculating. Maybe
some starch is getting trapped in the top of the mash tun.
Why does conversion take so long and how can I shorten it?
Bob
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob McCowan
ATG/Receiver-Protector voice: (508)-922-6000 x208
CPI BMD fax: (508)-922-8914
Beverly, MA 01915 e-mail: bob.mccowan@bmd.cpii.com
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 1997 20:12:28 -0700
From: John_E_Schnupp@amat.com
Subject: cold beer
Greetings fellow brewers,
I usually lurk on the sidelines. In recent posts I have noticed several
questions about ways to serve cold beer. I thought I'd post the way I
handled
my situation, YMMV.
I had my kegs and CO2 bottle before having a fridge and taps. I knew that
I
would eventually have a fridge (new or used). I made the decision to use
3 gal corny kegs for two reasons. 1) I would be able to bottle some of
the
brew for easy transportation of small volumes. 2) I measured various
sized
fridges and determined that with the shorter 3 gal kegs I would be able to
keep
the topmost shelf for storage of bottled beer and other beverages. This
did
not however solve my immediate problem of serving cold beer. I found that
a 10 gal Gott drink cooler was large (diameter) enough to hold a 3 or 5 gal
keg
and allow enough room for plenty of crushed ice. The 3 gal keg was
actually
short enough to allow me to put the lid on the cooler. I was able to pick
up 2
bags of ice on my way home from work on Wed morning and I would still be
drinking cold beer on Sat. I used a thumb tap and my CO2 bottle. In order
to make this set-up transportable a CO2 bulb of the air gun variety could
be
used. There are several options on the market for the CO2 bulbs. A larger
rectangular cooler may be able to hold more than 1 kegs. This was the most
cost effective method for me. I also got a Gott cooler that I will be able
to use
for mashing when I step up to all grain.
As for being able to hook multiple kegs to one CO2 source there are may way
to attack this problem. There are several mail order sources for multiple
outlet
manifolds. There are Y adapters that can be ganged together. I used 4
mini
regulators, 1/4" tubing and compression fittings to fashion a CO2
distribution
system whereby I can control the pressure individually This may have been
overkill but as a field service engineer and self professed gadget guy I
never
seem to settle for that's good enough. I adjust the regulator at the
bottle so
that the pressure is higher than the highest pressure I expect to use on
any one
output. I make seltzer water and various other carbonated beverages so one
of my mini regulators is typically set at 30-35 psi, therefore I keep the
pressure
from my bottle regulator at 45-50 psi. For dispensing several kegs of the
same
beer (weddings, family reunions, etc...) they can be connected in series.
Out
of one keg to the In of another.
I find that one of the beauties of this home-brew hobby, besides being able
to brew great beer, is the endless tinkering with equipment. It seems that
I
always have at least one project underway. My current project is a RIMS
system. I have completed the heat chamber and am looking for a heater
controller and a pump. Any input or advice on either would be greatly
appreciated. Private e-mail please. TIA.
Brewing in the Green Mountain State,
John Schnupp, N3CNL
Colchester, VT
john_e_schnupp@amat.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 97 12:58:30 CST
From: jwilkins@imtn.tpd.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson)
Subject: RE: 0xygen Tanks
Richard Klug asked about Bernz-O-Matic (tm) oxygen tanks with a wort aeration
system.
My kit came from Gulfstream and uses the Bernz-O-Matic (tm) tanks so I replaced
with same from the hardware store.
Incidentally, I had wondered if the recommended dose was sufficient and this
weekend tested a batch I had brewed the weekend before. I used Wyeast 1968
that had been stepped to 1/2 pint, pint, quart, then quart with oxygen before
pitching. The starter was actively fermenting at pitch time. I Pitched into
~8 gallons which had two shots of ~30 seconds of oxygen separated by twenty
minutes as recommended. After a week in the fermenter I found the gravity to be
1.020. O.G. was 1.060. Wyeast 1968 has been known to finish high for me with
underaerated wort but not with properly aerated ones. This last batch indicates
to me that the recommended two 15-20 second shots of O2 may be insufficient. I
will use more next time.
John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins@imtn.dsccc.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 13:22:11 -0600 (CST)
From: korz@xnet.com
Subject: The most important ingredient...
Phil writes that his beers improved when he switched to liquid yeast.
Mine did too. And they improved again when I switched to full boils.
And they improved again when I switched to all-grain.
But guess, what... since then, I've brewed a couple of extract, partial-
boil, dry yeast batches and they were par with my all-grain, liquid yeast
batches.
Granted, you can't get a super-pale American Pilsner from extract, nor
can you make a Wit with unmalted wheat without at least partial mashing,
and you can't make an all-Munich malt Altbier or Munich Dunkel (no, sorry
both William's and Marie's Munich extracts are only 50% Munich malt)...
...but, for many styles, you can make absolutely commerical-quality
beer from dry yeast, extract, and partial boils.
What's important? Sanitation, high-quality dry yeast (like Danstar,
for example) that has been stored cold and rehydrated properly, fresh
extract, hops, yeast, de-chloronated, sanitized water in the fermenter
(I pre-boil and cool my top-up water), and experience in recipe formulation.
Just a little post to reassure beginners that you don't need a Siebel
Institute degree to brew prize-winning beer...
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz@xnet.com
P.S. Note that liquid yeast DOES buy you a much wider range of beer
flavours simply because you have a much wider range of yeasts to choose
from. Also, I've found that I get better clarity from full-boils than
I do with partial boils. Finally, brewing all-grain gives you more
control over your fermentability and the opportunity to add things like
rye, torrified wheat, flaked oats, etc., to your recipes. I don't
suggest any extract brewers *avoid* trying these things, I just want
to say that, in my experience, you can make great beer without them.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 97 14:17:34 CST
From: Brian Bliss <brianb@microware.com>
Subject: Re: dogs & hops / guinness setup
The "dogs get sick when they eat hops thread" appeared here a year or two
ago. The problem is that people were disposing of their spent hops by
throwing them on the compost pile. Spent hops still contain a lot of
sweet wort, which dogs (and others) apparrently find tasty. I don't recall
any problem with dogs being attracted to growing hop vines.
- ---------------
>I have been brewing for a year or so and I have my homebrew on tap.
>Lately I have been brewing stouts and would like to be able to draw a
>stout with the same creamy head as guiness. I tried using nitrogen but
>it wasn't the same. A bartender friend said I need a guiness tap and a
>mix of CO2 and nitrogen in one tank. Anyone know how I can get a pint of
>stout that is just like guiness draught?
I've got one at home. The Guinnes tap has a little screen in it which
causes the release of most of the dissolved N2 & CO2 in the beer, creating
the head. You can probably get by with putting some fine mesh screen
over a regular tap and pouring violently. As for the gas, you need the
"beer gas" 70% N2 / 30% CO2 mix, or a higer concentration of N2. Some
people have reported that put N2 (which is used for dispensing still wines)
works great. N2 is less soluble in solution than CO2, so your beer won't
get overcarbonated and harsh, and when what's in there comes out of solution
it forms much finer bubbles, i.e. the classic draught Guinness head. The
the 70/30 N2/CO2 mix requires a tank which contains dip tube going below
the level of liquid. The people at the gas company said that if a normal
tank is filled with beer gas, it will shoot dry ice crystals out when
dispensed.
bb
------------------------------
Date: 24 Mar 1997 12:33:00 -0700
From: "Gary Yerkes" <Gary_Yerkes@sd.littondsd.com>
Subject: New Member
12:21 PM
OFFICE MEMO Time:
Subject:
New Member 3/24/97
Date:
Hello.
I am new to BHD and also new to brewing. I look foreword to reading all the
great information at this forum seems to have to offer.
To date I have brewed a Nut Brown Ale and a Stout. Both were extract brews
and both came out better than most store bought beers I have tried. My third
batch is fermenting and is a Wheat beer. I plan on adding some Raspberry
extract to about 1/2 the batch at bottling so I can see what each tastes like.
One guestion. I have read about whirlpooling to help make a brew clearer but
have not found the term described. Can anyone explain the tenique?
Again, I am happy to be on board.
Gary Yerkes
San Diego
Gary_yerkes@sd.littondsd.com
The Grizzly Brewery (my house for now)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 14:39:34 -0600 (CST)
From: korz@xnet.com
Subject: Protein rests
Charley writes:
>Resting at lower temps like 112-122F (45-50C) develops simpler proteins
>(good for yeast growth but unlikely to be necessary) in a way similar to
>beta-amylase and still leaves abundant large molecular weight proteins.
>Too long at this temp however will degrade your medium weight proteins
>costing you mouthfeel and body in your finished beer. If you really
>want to reduce those qualities this is the place to do it. Personally I
>rarely perform this rest although I did recently in a 6-row + corn
>recipe. This rest is called for though, if you should have a glucanate
>problem in your finished beer -- never seen it.
>
>Resting at temps around 125-140F (51-60C) will develop medium weight
>proteins by degrading large molecular weight proteins. Again, the
>medium weight proteins are the ones you really want for your beer, the
>largest proteins are otherwise a wasted protein source since they'll
>largely coagulate in the boil and drop out as hot break and as cold
>break.
This is partly right. There are two groups of proteolytic enzymes at
work in the "protein rest" range which is about 112 or 113F to about
140F (45-60C). 122F (50C) is sort-of the "middle" of the range and
is said to be the temperature that maximizes the contibutions of both
groups of proteolytic enzymes. I've read various names for these
two groups, but most commonly, they are refered to as peptidases and
proteases. The peptidases are more heat labile (they denature ("die")
faster at higher temperatures) than the proteases. This is just like
the relationship between beta-amylase and alpha-amylase.
Peptidases create amino acids from proteins of all sizes and the
proteases create medium-sized (body-building and head-retaining)
proteins from large (haze-producing and break-producing) proteins.
The higher the temperature, the quicker the peptidases denature and
the less amino acids are produced. The lower the temperature, the
more amino acids you get and the less medium-sized proteins you
have in your beer (resulting in thinner-bodied beer with lower
head retention).
So, if you rest at 122F or 125F or 127F, you will be producing more
amino acids (which there are more than enough of in an all-malt
mash and excesses can result in other problems like higher alcohols)
and getting thinner beer. If you rest at 135F or 137F or 140F, you
will be breaking down more of the large proteins (which, as Charley
correctly pointed out, will end up as break or, even worse, as haze)
into medium-sized proteins which will give you fuller-body and better
head retention.
This really should be put into a FAQ somewhere... it's a commonly
misunderstood relationship regarding protein rest temperatures.
Most recipes I've seen that mention a protein rest have 122F listed
and as you can see, for most recipes, a higher protein rest temp
would be a much better choice.
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz@xnet.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 12:50:21 -0800 (PST)
From: Dave Riedel <RIEDEL@ios.bc.ca>
Subject: First all-grain batch... incomplete conversion?
I did my first all-grain beer on Saturday. Good news: my converted keg system
works great! Bad news: possible incomplete conversion :(
Procedure:
Mashed in 8.25 lbs Canadian Malting 2-row and 0.5 lbs of Baird Crystal
60L with 1.33 qts/lb water; strike temp 152 deg F. Wrapped keg with 'blue
camping foam', placed bath towel over lid and folded 'foamy' over top. 30 mins
later I stirred and read same temperature: 152F. 60 mins later (total mash
time 1.5 hrs) the temperature read 147F. From many sources, I was led to
believe that conversion was almost impossible to mess up, so I brought the mash
to 165F for mash-out. After recirc, sparge and runnoff, I had 6 gallons of
1.036 wort - seemed about right for a final 5 gal gravity of 1.048-9. However,
during the recirc and the raise-to-boiling period, the wort seemed to smell and
taste quite starchy. I have done 5 partial mash batches with concentrated
boils. So, I have *some* grain/conversion experience but, I'm not used to
tasting a full-volume wort (I've only tasted the 2-2.5 gallon concentrated
stuff). The all-grain wort although generally sweet, had another taste and
smell which I *think* is starch. True, I could be paranoid... At the time
(almost at the boil), I was thinking: if it's half starch, why bother boiling
and wasting hops on a beer that will taste like a raw potato and invite
bacteria to explode my bottles? So, I went out and bought a drugstore bottle
of iodine to test for conversion. I added about a 1/2 tsp of wort from the
kettle to a dish and put a drop or two of iodine near it and allowed the two
liquids to run together - no colour change. Tried the test again with some
mash liquid that I managed to suck out of the grain bed - no change. Tried
it again with some of the grain bed - some change, but I understand that the
husks will generally always have a little starch on them. So, having generally
passed the iodine test, I proceeded to boil, chill, pitch and aerate by 'wand'.
I placed the ~65F wort in a 68F room and waited. Lag time was long, but that's
likely because I had added wort to my Wyeast London Ale starter on Thurs night
instead of my usual night before. Today, Monday, it is bubbling through the
airlock at 48/minute. Added note: the grains were crushed with a JSP
MaltMill (TM).
Questions:
I plan to let the wort ferment out, then I'll taste it and see if the
starch flavour persists. Is there anything else I can do to check the wort?
(I suppose a high final gravity will indicate starch). Did I mistake some
other wort component for starch? If the fermented wort tastes reasonable,
should I bottle anyway and just drink it quickly?
too much starch in beer or underwear chafes my behind...
Dave Riedel
Victoria BC, Canada
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 15:57:41 -0500
From: Mark Nelson <menelson@mindspring.com>
Subject: Pet Safety and Homebrewing
I thought I'd send in the following two cents, before this thread =
terminates...
As a homebrewer and Greyhound owner I've watched the posts and read the =
articles talking about the hops vs. dogs issue and I'm not worried. As =
I understand it, hops aren't really all that poisonous, unless big =
quantities are ingested. I unfortunately can't shed any light on the =
substance involved or the quantities which are dangerous, but I seem to =
remember from the article that (1) it's rare and (2) involved Greyhounds =
primarily and (3) involved the dogs getting into and eating a whole =
batch's worth of hops. The moral is to keep spent hops away from your =
pets, but don't worry about hop plants growing out in the yard. IMHO, =
no dog will eat enough fresh hops to get sick but might just eat enough =
wort-sweetened used hops to do just that.
FYI on point (2). Greyhounds are in the sighthound family. Sighthounds =
include a family of dogs which hunt by sight more so than scent. They =
include greyhounds, whippets, Italian greyhounds, pharaoh hounds, =
Ibizans, Scottish deer hounds, Irish wolf hounds, afghans and borzois. =
As a family, they all have very low body fat percentages and react very =
quickly to different chemicals, whereas the body fat of other breeds may =
act as a buffer against chemicals. Sighthounds even have to be =
sedated/anesthetized more carefully than other breeds. =20
=00
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 1997 20:12:28 -0700
From: John_E_Schnupp@amat.com
Subject: cold beer
Greetings fellow brewers,
I usually lurk on the sidelines. In recent posts I have noticed several
questions about ways to serve cold beer. I thought I'd post the way I
handled
my situation, YMMV.
I had my kegs and CO2 bottle before having a fridge and taps. I knew that
I
would eventually have a fridge (new or used). I made the decision to use
3 gal corny kegs for two reasons. 1) I would be able to bottle some of
the
brew for easy transportation of small volumes. 2) I measured various
sized
fridges and determined that with the shorter 3 gal kegs I would be able to
keep
the topmost shelf for storage of bottled beer and other beverages. This
did
not however solve my immediate problem of serving cold beer. I found that
a 10 gal Gott drink cooler was large (diameter) enough to hold a 3 or 5 gal
keg
and allow enough room for plenty of crushed ice. The 3 gal keg was
actually
short enough to allow me to put the lid on the cooler. I was able to pick
up 2
bags of ice on my way home from work on Wed morning and I would still be
drinking cold beer on Sat. I used a thumb tap and my CO2 bottle. In order
to make this set-up transportable a CO2 bulb of the air gun variety could
be
used. There are several options on the market for the CO2 bulbs. A larger
rectangular cooler may be able to hold more than 1 kegs. This was the most
cost effective method for me. I also got a Gott cooler that I will be able
to use
for mashing when I step up to all grain.
As for being able to hook multiple kegs to one CO2 source there are may way
to attack this problem. There are several mail order sources for multiple
outlet
manifolds. There are Y adapters that can be ganged together. I used 4
mini
regulators, 1/4" tubing and compression fittings to fashion a CO2
distribution
system whereby I can control the pressure individually This may have been
overkill but as a field service engineer and self professed gadget guy I
never
seem to settle for that's good enough. I adjust the regulator at the
bottle so
that the pressure is higher than the highest pressure I expect to use on
any one
output. I make seltzer water and various other carbonated beverages so one
of my mini regulators is typically set at 30-35 psi, therefore I keep the
pressure
from my bottle regulator at 45-50 psi. For dispensing several kegs of the
same
beer (weddings, family reunions, etc...) they can be connected in series.
Out
of one keg to the In of another.
I find that one of the beauties of this home-brew hobby, besides being able
to brew great beer, is the endless tinkering with equipment. It seems that
I
always have at least one project underway. My current project is a RIMS
system. I have completed the heat chamber and am looking for a heater
controller and a pump. Any input or advice on either would be greatly
appreciated. Private e-mail please. TIA.
Brewing in the Green Mountain State,
John Schnupp, N3CNL
Colchester, VT
john_e_schnupp@amat.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 23:08:47 +0100
From: "Dr. Pivo" <irv@wireworks.se>
Subject: re: Decoction consensus, Krauzening
Charles Burns had a collection of consensus opinions regarding a single
decoction. I thought I would add some specific and more general
comments regarding temp and volume, and hope it does not add to the
confusion.
> At least 5 different commentors have stated 135F to 140F is a good temp=
=2E
> Checking the New Brewing Lager Beers (Greg Noonan 1996, page 138), he
> recommends a temperature between 122 and 131.
snip
>Noonan assumes undermodifed
> malts. He later asserts that for more modern malts (why does he write a=
bout
> old stuff in the first place) a temp of 126-149F for the first rest but=
> recommends 131F (kinda low according to all of us)
Decoction is a method of hitting selected "target" temperatures. The
list of temperatures are as long as the individual aims are. One can
rest for acid, proteiolysis, beta-glukon, the amylases, etc. If you
have already defined your process as a single decoction, then you are
doing two rests. The question is what you want to achieve at those two
rests. I think the numbers presented by Greg Noonan are not at all
unreasonable, despite the fact that they are lower than other
suggestions you have received. His numbers lie within traditional
proteolytic ranges, where the numbers you have presented, seem to be a
bit of a compromise between protein digestion, and amylase
activity--perhaps a good compromise with only one decoction, especially
if you shoot high at your second temperature.
> I've had recommendations that say pull from 1/3 to 1/2 for the decoctio=
n on
> one end to pull 90% (virtually all) the grain for the decoction. Now, I=
've
> been doing the 80-90% trick and not having very good luck
As regards the proportion to take away for decoction, the answer is
theoretically deceptively simple--Whatever ammount which upon boiling
and readdition gets you to your next target temperature.
I think it is a bit of a mistake to consider decoction a complicated
process, rather it is quite a primative one. If one was firing with
wood, and had no method of measuring the temperature right through the
mash, it is a pretty logical solution, to take a decided portion away,
bring it to boiling and re-add it--It will always give you the same
temperature change. I'm sure you have at your fingertips a large
variety of ways to reach the same target temperatures, even if not
decocting. =
It is repeatedly presented in the homebrew literature, that the
decoction gives you a "maltier" taste that you just can't get any other
way. I guess if you say something often enough it must be true! You'll
have to decide for yourself if you think that that is true. One sort of
general "clue" is that ALL the major lager breweries, no matter how
unmalty tasting their product, decoct...On the other hand, the British
as a general rule don't--I've always considered the hallmark of a good
bitter, its malty taste--The truth seems to be wandering about somewhere
out there, but is very difficult to get hold of. At any rate, there are
other ways of reaching these temps. without decocting, and I certainly
wouldn't shy away from using them. =
I would suggest to you, Charles, that you simply find out the ammount
of boiling liquid that will take you to your next target. Since you are
starting pretty high, I would think 1/3 would be plenty, if not too much
(you haven't given much chance for maltose production, and are "burning"
way past denaturing in a hurry- getting some high final gravs?).
Decoction is based on having an enzyme excess, that will allow
conversion despite the fact that you are adding back "dead" material. =
It never ceases to amaze me, the over capacity of this enzyme system,
but I think removing 80-90% of your viable enzymes is really "pushing
it", plus I cannot understand how you could possibly maintain your mash
under the point of denaturing EVERYTHING with a 90% proportion of
boiling liquid, and 10% at 140=B0F--or have I missunderstood your
description?
I'm sure you'll get lots of suggestions about "THE way to do it". I
don't belong to that particular school. If you find out why each target
temperature is chosen, I'm sure you can create your own "best beer",
even if it isn't the way someone else does it. It's just good to
understand the traditional rational, if you want to adjust your flavour
profile.
There's lots of good literature on the subject (which you've obviously
already gotten a hold of), if you want help interpreting the
particulars, I'd be happy to oblige. I think it would be a good idea to
communicate directly by Email however, as I've found that this
particular group is represented (at least by volume of contribution) by
some pretty traditionalist (read modern breweries) views. =
Don't happen to be one of 'em. Seems to be their group, don't want to
rile'em.
As long as I'm sticking my neck out (sorry for the long post, as
mentioned, I'd prefer to communicate privately, I know I have a problem
with this language, and have been GREVIOUSLY misunderstood before), some
response to Luc Dore:
> I'd like to get into Krausening a batch instead of the proverbial cor=
n
> sugar. Now I know that the quantity of beer to remove from the batch
> before pitching the yeast is dependent on the gravity and on batch size=
;
> except that I don't know the formula to apply.
If you want to most closely approximate what you have been doing, you
might try using some frozen wort, instead of corn sugar (it's cheaper
and perhaps more brewing friendly). If you want to start krausening,
you're into a whole new ball of wax.
Traditionally one adds about 10-15% volume of krauzen to a "finished"
secondary. If you are kegging, I wouldn't worry about the gravity (less
number of times you poke at it, the less chances for introduction of
infection or O2). Bottleing is something else. Krauzen is defined as a
visable "high foam"--it could be best just to learn to recognize it, and
snatch it. My own VERY PERSONAL OPINION, is that with a krauzen, you
open up a "fountain of youth". The beer behaves after 3 months the way
it should after 2 weeks. It gives you incredible leeway in adjusting
what is going to happen, on an expanded time scale.
I'd suggest doing some krauzens and see what happens with them. It's
good stuff! I've been punching them out for more than a decade and
still don't understand them--I just know that they always give me that
fresh taste of youth, and a completely different reaction to time and
temperature than I can achieve any other way.
I have some guesses, that the whole thing is dependent on a metabolic
phase of simple sugar metabolism (where they were when you introduced
them),and the fact that the yeast are real oxygen (and oxidative
metabolite) scavengers then, AND pressure sensative at this stage (the
only explanation I have for why they behave so retardedly). Whatever it
is, a krauzened beer, is the true "royal house" of brewing, and I
certainly don't do enough of them.
Do a LOT of them,and let us know what happens. I think there is
entirely too little attention payed to this very fine art.
Dr. Pivo
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 18:43:24 -0500 (EST)
From: JJBrewer@aol.com
Subject: RIMSters RIMS Questions
A couple of current and future RIMSters ask about rims techniques
............
>The only thing is I'm not sure how to operate it! Do you RIMSers let the
>pump run the whole time? Or just to do temperature raises and now and then
>to maintain a rest temperature? Ant other tips are welcome as well. I can
>hardly wait to crank this baby up.
>Jason
>I claim in no way to be a RIMS expert, but I'll be glad to share my
>experience as a data point. I've been using my home made RIMS for about 4
>months and maybe 5 batchs (I've been too busy to brew as much as I would
>like).
I
>Good questions, Jason. We seem to spend a lot of time talking about RIMS
>construction, but not as much on the actual use. I'd also like to hear
>about some other RIMS'ers actual routines. Also, I'd appreciate any
>constructive criticism of my process.
>Scott
and
>How do you other RIMS users dough-in? I typically fill my RIMS with water,
>recirc and heat it, kill the pump and heater, stir in the grain well, let
>settle for 5 mins. or so then start recirculating and heating. I know it's
>recommended that water be added to the malt instead of the back-assward way
>I do it. Anyone see any problems with this?
>c.d. pritchard cdp@chattanooga.net
>http://caladan.chattanooga.net/~cdp/index.html
Well, I have only been using my completed system since November and only had
time for five batches, but I see some similarities to others already. I
normally heat up my mash water in the propane-fired sparge tun since its so
much faster than the RIMS heater and then pump it over to the mash tun.
Typically I heat this water to about 15 degrees higher than my desired
initial mash temp. since the grist and tun will absorb this much or more if
the mash tun is really cold. I also then dough in the "back assward" way,
stir the malt well and make sure there is about an inch of water above the
top of the mash bed. I then begin recirculating to even out any temperature
differences in the mash tun. Normally, I also leave the pump running the
whole time as well.
Sparging has become more challenging. The best way I've found so far is to
turn off the pump and let gravity do most of the work. I can also partially
close the ball valve to further restrict flow with out damaging the pump.
SInce using this method I've increased my extract effieciency 5 points.
Hope this helps some. Comments/questions/criticisms welcome.
Jamey Johns
San Ramon, CA
jjbrewer@aol.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 15:45:17 -0800
From: smurman@best.com
Subject: gravity bottle filler
I've just about had it with the cheap plastic spring-loaded bottle
filler that I've always used. It leaks, it foams, it's basically a
pain in the ass. I'm sure with all of the inventive people on this
forum, someone has come up with an improvement. Care to share? (and
please don't suggest kegging, I simply can't at the moment).
The homebrew acronyms are still located at
http://www.best.com/~smurman/zymurgy. From the hit counts, I'm not
the only one who forgets what FAN stands for:)
SM
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2382, 03/25/97
*************************************
-------
