Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2425
HOMEBREW Digest #2425 Fri 23 May 1997
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org
Many thanks to the Observer & Eccentric Newspapers of
Livonia, Michigan for sponsoring the Homebrew Digest.
URL: http://www.oeonline.com
Contents:
Reusing Yeast (Tumarkin)
Keg Priming plus (PAUL W HAAF JR)
partial boil extract brews too dark ("Charles L. Ehlers")
Tinseth hop curve (Jeremy Bergsman)
Stuck Fermentation (Aaron Kelley)
headspace (smurman)
Homebrew shops in Cleveland ("Braam Greyling")
Headspace & carbonation ("Dave Draper")
Re: Carbonator Attachments (guym)
RE: Carbonator problems ("Bridges, Scott")
RE: Bottle Headspace ("Jeff Hailey")
Shiner Bock (KennyEddy)
beer bottle pressure (James R. Layton 972.952.3718 JLAY)
Force Carbonating at Room Temp/ S=Eric Fouch? (RANDY ERICKSON)
Re: Spam, spam, spam, spam ("Mark A. Baur")
AHA NHC 1st Round Chicago - RESULTS ("Roger Deschner ")
Draft Systems Kegs/Grolsch Hops-New Homebrewing Books/ Little Apple Brewing ("Rob Moline")
first all grain low O.G. (Thomas Kramer)
Need source for propane burner (Ken Johnson)
HBD Moderation Guidelines (Some guy)
Bottle Headspace (Aaron Kelley)
Re:Inverted Carboy Fermenter (Kelly Jones)
NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS: hbd.org
Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew@hbd.org
(Articles are published in the order they are received.)
If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!!
To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to homebrew-request@hbd.org.
**SUBSCRIBE AND UNSUBSCRIBE REQUESTS MUST BE SENT FROM THE E-MAIL
**ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!
PLEASE NOTE that if you subscribed via the BEER-L redistribution
list (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
IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, the autoresponder and
the SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE commands will fail!
For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to lutzen@alpha.rollanet.org
Homebrew Digest Information on the Web: http://hbd.org
Requests for back issues will be ignored. Back issues are available via:
Anonymous ftp from...
hbd.org /pub/hbd
ftp.stanford.edu /pub/clubs/homebrew/beer
E-mail...
ftpmail@gatekeeper.dec.com (send a one-line e-mail message with
the word help for instructions.)
AFS users can find it under...
/afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer
JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 19:39:35 -0400
From: Tumarkin@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Reusing Yeast
Tim Dugan writes:
>I am fortunate enough to be able to brew on two consecutive weekends.
>I would like to reuse my yeast from last weekend, this weekend. Can I
>simply rack off my first batch to the secondary, and put the second
>batch right onto the trub and yeast from the first batch? Or should I
>go through the process and was the yeast with sterile water as
>described in the Yeast FAQ?
I have been doing exactly that on a fairly regular basis. I don't think
it is necessary to wash the yeast - that is more important if you plan
on storing it rather than reusing it at once.
Aerate the second batch as well as you can. It absolutely assures a
great starter. Usually I brew a similar style for the second batch. This
is also a goodmeans for preparing the yeast to brew a high gravity beer
such as anImperial Stout or Barleywine. I have never done it for more
than two batches in a row, but I'm sure that this could be extended
safely for a larger number of batches - as long as you are careful with
sanitation.
Eric Tepe asks about the yeast in the Rogue Shakespeare Stout being the
brewing yeast or a conditioning yeast. Sorry, I don't have an answer to
that but it brings to mind a couple of related yeast questions. First,
is there a commercial equivalent of Rogue's PacMan yeast? And second,
what commercial yeasts are good choices for conditioning yeasts? And
lastly, what general conditions or beer styles call for conditioning
yeasts?
Mark Tumarkin
The Brewery in the Jungle
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 22:30:21 EDT
From: haafbrau1@juno.com (PAUL W HAAF JR)
Subject: Keg Priming plus
I'm about to keg a Weisse-Peche, and I think I may have made a tad more
than 5 gal. Since I will probably have to bottle a Qt. or two, has
anybody tried adding priming sugar to the fermenter and then transfering
to keg? This way I can just move to bottles when the keg is full. I
plan on doing this friday night, so an RSVP would be helpful. Private
e-mail is also OK. Thanks in advance.
A man's got to believe in something, I believe I'll have another beer!
Paul Haaf
haafbrau1@juno.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 21:45:32 -0500
From: "Charles L. Ehlers" <clehlers@flinthills.com>
Subject: partial boil extract brews too dark
Dana Brigham, dbrigham@nsf.gov , on Mon, 19 May 97 11:40:01 EST writes:
"I currently boil my extract/partial mash batches in 3 gallon volumes (5
gallon final recipe volume) due to limited overhead space on the stove. I
use a 'generic' stainless stock pot, and I have fitted one of those cast
iron 'hot plates' to the front 8" burner on my electric range. The hot
plate thing does a real good job at evenly distributing the heat (and it
stays hot for a *LONG* time after the burner is off). But I am
consistently getting darker batches than I plan on. There is some
caramelization of the sugars on the bottom of the pot - but not too much,
at least to my untrained eye. I do try to stir often (but not constantly)
and I do full 60 minute boils. I assume (since most don't say) that the
recipes I find in the Internet, homebrew mags and my books are generally
for a full 5 gallon boil. So - without cutting back on body/flavor adding
ingredients, how can I 'lighten up' the color of my homebrew given my
current constraints of not enough room for a pot big enough to do a full 5
gallon boil?"
>From my experience (five years--not that much but not insignificant) it's
not easy to get a light colored extract brews unless you're using nothing
but extra light dried malt extract. Even then, adding grains will darken
it. I don't think your "problem" is carmelization or the length of the
boil. Any batch I've brewed using malt extract syrup has always been gold
colored at the lightest. Extra light DME and nothing else except honey or
rice syrup can get you a light, straw colored brew. However, I've learned,
and am teaching my friends, that you shouldn't necessarily judge a beer by
its color.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 20:16:57 -0700
From: Jeremy Bergsman <jeremybb@leland.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Tinseth hop curve
I wrote:
> As far as I can
> tell, the shape of Tinseth's curve is assumed, not measured, which
> suggests to me that he has done his measurements with early additions.
In private email Glenn informed me that his curves are based on
both literature (which is what I figured) and experiment (which
I didn't figure). (I hope that isn't a nettequitte violation!)
One point that came up was that he makes sure to stir in his hops.
Failure to do this might be responsible for some lag in utilization.
I think I stirred them in (I usually do). Anyway, time for more
data!
- --
Jeremy Bergsman
jeremybb@leland.stanford.edu
http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~jeremybb
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 23:16:59 -0500 (CDT)
From: Aaron Kelley <akelley@cems.umn.edu>
Subject: Stuck Fermentation
Well, I have run into my first stuck fermentation. I brewed a Smoked
Porter with the Wyeast Swedish Porter Ale yeast (#?). OG was 1.060.
After a week and a half ferment at 60F the bubbling was down to about
every two minutes so I racked to secondary. I realize now that gas
evolution is not a sure sign of the completion of fermentation, but it
has worked fine for my previous 20 or so batches. Anyway, I dropped the
secondary temperature down to 46 for a week ( the beer actually got down
to about 37F on the cooldown before I adjusted the refrigerator). I was
all prepared to bottle tonight when I took a specific gravity reading.
1.030 is still way too high. I expect it to finish in the 1.015 range.
After about one gallon was transferred to the bottling bucket I caught
the gravity problem. I promptly transferred back to the secondary. A
yeast sediment had formed on the bottom of the carboy. I shook up the
carboy as best I could and plan to finish the fermentation upstairs at
around 68-70F.
Is this adequate to reinitiate fermentation? Will I have to repitch
yeast? I guess I will have to wait a day or so to see if fermentation
resumes. Has anyone else had problems with this yeast? Did I ferment it
too cold.
Aaron Kelley
Chemical Engineer and Graduate Student
Biological Process Technology Institute
Department of Chemical Engineering and Material Science
University of Minnesota
akelley@cems.umn.edu
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 00:14:44 -0700
From: smurman@best.com
Subject: headspace
David R. Burley wrote:
>
> Now, I also believe the observations made by responsible observers, so how
> do I square these above physical truths with the apparently contradictory
> belief that partially filled bottles can be over carbonated?
As I read Dave's post I had some thoughts. I agree that it doesn't
make sense that a partially filled bottle will create more CO2, but
that's the effect I saw, and that's what prompted me to post in the
first place; I couldn't square the result with the theory. I have a
feeling what we're seeing is not a difference in CO2 saturation, but
rather a difference in pressure in the bottle. The higher pressure
must equilibriate instantly with the atmospheric pressure. As I
mentioned in my original post, this can in some cases even lead to
weak shock waves in the bottle neck. This pressure equalization could
be causing the severe CO2 expulsion we're seeing. Think of it as
similar to pouring a beer quietly and simply dumping a beer into a
glass. Which beer would you observe to have more CO2? The violently
poured beer would create more foam even though we know both beers are
primed at the same rate, and both would have the same amount of CO2 in
solution.
Aaron Kelley wrote:
> The difference may be the oxygen in the headspace. The underfilled
> bottle has much more oxygen available than a regular or overfilled
> bottle. If the yeast are able to use this oxygen they will degrade
> the sugar oxidatively, producing 6 molecules of CO2 per sugar
> molecule. When oxygen is not present, yeast must use the fermentative
> pathway and produce only 2 CO2 molecules per sugar molecule.
This is not really the case. Yeast *much* prefer the fermentative
pathway, so if there is any sugar available they will ferment whether
or not there is oxygen present or not. Since the primed bottle
contains sugar the yeast will not undergo any respiration. The idea
that adding oxygen at pitching aids the yeast in their respiration
phase is an oft-repeated fallacy. There was an article on this by
Tracy Aquila in one of the recent brewing rags.
I'm beginning to wish I hadn't been so quick to relieve the pressure
on my batch of bottle bombs so that I could do some experiments.
SM (that's smurman to you)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 14:21:34 +200
From: "Braam Greyling" <braam.greyling@azona.co.za>
Subject: Homebrew shops in Cleveland
Hi
Can somebody send me the adress of a homebrew shop in Cleveland that
supply Wyeast ?
Another friend of mine is going to Cleveland only and he said he will
bring me back some Wyeast to South Africa.
TIA
Braam Greyling I.C. Design Engineer
Azona(Pty)Ltd
tel +27 12 6641910 fax +27 12 6641393
You can taste a good beer with one sip,
but it is better to make thoroughly sure.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 08:43:20 -6
From: "Dave Draper" <ddraper@utdallas.edu>
Subject: Headspace & carbonation
Dear Friends,
In all these posts discussing the apparent observation of
overcarbonation in underfilled bottles, I cannot help but wonder:
are people *sure* that it is the *beer* that has a perceived excess
of CO2 in it, or are they mistaking the much greater "hiss" when the
cap is pried off a low-fill bottle for carbonation? Do these
underfilled bottles show greater "fizz" of exsolving CO2 from the
beer? In my experience, which I will admit right out was not gained
through any systematic exploration of this question, the answer is
No. Beers appear to me to have very similar CO2 contents, but the
hiss is much louder when the bottle is, say, half filled compared to
the normal level (like many, I package every drop I can get out of
the batch, regardless of how low the fill is in my last bottle).
Perhaps there is something more complicated going on, but Occam's
Razor compels me to ask this anyway.
In other news, I have received exactly one response to my earlier
call for data on fill levels in kegs, and one suggested explanation
without any data, so nothing to report on that yet.
Cheers,
Dave in Dallas
- ---
*****************************************************************************
Dave Draper, Dept Geosciences, U. Texas at Dallas, Richardson TX 75083
ddraper@utdallas.edu Home page: http://hbd.org/~ddraper
Beer page: http://hbd.org/~ddraper/beer.html
...yeast contain the mechanism of their own destruction.
---Charlie Scandrett
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 May 97 09:05:44 MDT
From: guym@Exabyte.COM
Subject: Re: Carbonator Attachments
Chas Peterson <CNS_PETERSON@msn.com> writes,
> I'm a little frustrated with my "Carbonator" cap (made by Liquid
> Bread <snip>
> I bought two of these things and both have a nasty habit of the
> poppet valve breaking loose from the inside of the carbonator.<snip>
> I'm considering using some marine goop or super-glue on the thing.
> But is anyone else out there having similar troubles? If not I may
> simply return the
> product and request a replacement.
Chas,
I have a Carbonator Cap and it has always worked flawlessly. I have
used it to carbonate thousands (well O.K., maybe hundreds) of bottles
of beer, water, Kool Aid, flat soda, home made soda, etc. and it has
never failed me yet. It sounds like you may have a couple of
defective units (I seem to recall hearing some rumblings of a
defective run of these things a while back). I'd recommend returning
them to the store you purchased them from for replacement (they should
be glad to replace them) or directly to Liquid Bread if the store
won't do it.
--
Guy McConnell /// Huntersville, NC /// guym@exabyte.com
/// CoralReefer@compuserve.com ///
"Give me oysters and beer, for dinner every day of the year
and I'll feel fine..."
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 May 97 09:43:00 EDT
From: "Bridges, Scott" <bridgess@mmsmtp.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM>
Subject: RE: Carbonator problems
Chas wrote:
>I'm a little frustrated with my "Carbonator" cap (made by Liquid Bread, it
>allows you to inject CO2 into a PET bottle or attach a mini-tap to your
>regulator). I bought two of these things and both have a nasty habit of
the
>poppet valve breaking loose from the inside of the carbonator. That is,
there
>is a small plastic ring that supports the poppet valve against the force of
>the CO2 ball-lock attachment from the regulator. This ring appears to
simply
>"snap" in place, but breaks free when I connect it to the CO2 source (this
is
>a real PIA -- poppet valve falls into filled PET bottle, beer gets flat,
>etc....)
>
>I'm considering using some marine goop or super-glue on the thing. But is
>anyone else out there having similar troubles? If not I may simply return
the
>product and request a replacement.
Chas,
I'm posting this instead of emailing it, since others may have this same
problem. I encountered this exact same problem last summer. After fuming
about it for a while, and trying to figger out how to fix it, I just decided
to contact the supplier who sold it to me and return it. He put me in touch
with Liquid Bread, the manufacturer. Apparently, they had some quality
control problem with a particular batch of these. It is defective, and I
don't believe that it's fixable. They gave me a return address to send it
back. They replaced it free of charge, and also threw in a second one for
my trouble. I consider that to be a good response to the problem.
Scott
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 May 97 09:00:34 EDT
From: "Jeff Hailey" <jeff_hailey@ccmail.eo.ray.com>
Subject: RE: Bottle Headspace
Aaron Kelley states:
>>First, let me try and dispel a myth. For all practical purposes,
>>water is an incompressible fluid. This makes it impossible to
>>kill yeast by overpressurizing a bottle. The yeast will only
>>"feel" atmospheric pressure no matter what the pressure is in
>>the headspace of the bottle. To prove to yourself that water
>>is incompressible, try taking a syringe filled with water and
>>no air. Plug the end and try to press the plunger. It is
>>impossible to compress the liquid.
This is ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE! Yes, water is basically incompressable.
However, compressability only deals with the change in volume versus
the change in pressure. By pressing on the syringe's plunger, you
are changeing the pressure of the water in the syringe, but not the
volume -- hence the incompressablity of water.
Ask anyone who has ever been diving about water pressure. Your ears
start to feel the pressure in as little as a couple of feet. Divers
get the bends from the solubility of nitrogen at increased pressures.
Yeast under pressure will surely feel something -- and I guarantee
that it won't be atmospheric pressure.
Cheers!
Jeff Hailey
Brewing in Tulsa, OK
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 10:02:45 -0400 (EDT)
From: KennyEddy@aol.com
Subject: Shiner Bock
Lou Heavner asks about the "bock" from that lil' ol' brewery in Shiner.
St Patrick's of Texas (512-832-9045, no affiliation, blah blah blah) sells a
partial-mash kit for "Texas Bock" which is described this way in their
catalog:
1.5 lb crushed munich 10L
1 lb maize
1/8 lb crushed black patent
4 lb pale syrup extract
1 oz Cluster (bittering)
1/2 oz Hallertau (finishing)
2178 Lager Blend yeast
I have not made this recipe so I can't comment on its accuracy, but it
certainly looks reasonable.
One would of course mash the first three ingredients before adding the
extract. Substitute 5 lb American 2-row malt for the extract if
all-graining.
This recipe yields about a 1.041 SG (assuming 75% efficiency; typical
kitchen-kludge partial-mashing might yield lower results).
*****
Ken Schwartz
El Paso, TX
KennyEddy@aol.com
http://members.aol.com/kennyeddy
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 10:09:06 -0500
From: layton@sc45.dseg.ti.com (James R. Layton 972.952.3718 JLAY)
Subject: beer bottle pressure
Aaron Kelly posted:
>First, let me try and dispel a myth. For all practical purposes, water
>is an incompressible fluid.
Agreed.
>This makes it impossible to kill yeast by overpressurizing a bottle.
Maybe so. I don't know.
>The yeast will only "feel" atmospheric pressure no matter what the
>pressure is in the headspace of the bottle.
This is not correct. Yeast in a sealed bottle of beer will "feel" a
pressure equal to the headspace pressure plus a hydraulic pressure
which is proportional to the depth at which any particular yeast cell
happens to be at. Atmospheric pressure has no effect, it is on the outside
of the bottle. Ever swim to the bottom of a 12 ft deep pool? Zero
compressibility does not mean zero pressure gradient.
Just for fun I calculated the pressure at a depth of 7 inches in a
carbonated bottle of beer. I assumed a temperature of 40F, a
carbonation level of 2.5 volumes, and an SG of 1.010.
>From a chart on force carbonating kegged beer, 2.5 volumes at 40F
will mean there is about 12.3 psi pressure in the headspace of the
beer.
Using an equation which relates fluid pressure to specific gravity
and depth I calculated an additional pressure of 0.255 psi.
Therefore, a yeast cell near the bottom of a 12 oz longneck bottle full
of beer will see approximatly 12.3 + 0.3 = 12.6 psi (gauge pressure).
OK, so what? I don't know, I just can't help myself sometimes. I figure
that while we are following these advanced academic topics we should
challenge posts containing wrong or misleading information. No flame
intended. I found the oxidative reduction vs. fermentation question very
interesting. Thanks Aaron, I look forward to reading responses to this
theory.
Jim Layton (Howe, TX)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 09:35:15 -0700
From: RANDY ERICKSON <RANDYE@mid.org>
Subject: Force Carbonating at Room Temp/ S=Eric Fouch?
Badger Roullett asks about force carbonating at different temperatures:
>>>
my questions are...
1) if you carbonate at room temp, what shoudl the co2 settings be?
2) if you carbonate at lower temps (ie. sticking my 3 gallon kegs in the
frig) and then take it out. what happens? will i lose the carbonation?
3) if i carbonate at room temp, and then chill to serve what happens? do
i lose the carb?
<<<
For starters, get a hold of the CO2 carbonation table at the Brewery:
http://alpha.rollanet.org:80/library/CO2charts.html
Basically the pressure you need to apply is a function (second order?,
quadratic?) of the temperature and the desired carbonation level,
expressed in volumes of CO2.
So for a typical carbonation level of 2.5 Volumes of CO2, you would
apply 10 psi at 36 degrees F, but you would need 30 psi at 72 degrees
for the same degree of carbonation.
You don't _lose_ carbonation at any temperature, unless you have a leak
in your system. Much more CO2 will dissolve in your beer at a lower
temperature so I guess there is some economy (of gas) involved in
carbonating at lower temperatures. (Never mind the cost of
refrigeration, those of us who rely on the revenues of power companies
for our livelihood thank you, trust me).
Recall that there are two commonly used definitions of "force
carbonation" used in the HBD as well. One camp considers anything
other than natural priming to be force carbonation, while the other uses
the term to reflect the process of hooking up the CO2 and forcing it to
carbonate by shaking the keg until no more gas will dissolve. The "hook
it up and leave it alone" process takes days, the "shake like hell" method
takes minutes. When I'm not it a great hurry, I favor the leave it alone
method. Just be sure to consult the chart to make sure you're in the right
pressure range for the temperature the beer is at.
**********
Eric Fouch:
What the hell is your e-mail address? That junk in your header is
undecipherable, at least to me. I found some info on the Lucy event if
you're still looking.
Cheers,
Randy in Modesto
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 08:59:16 -0700
From: "Mark A. Baur" <baur@hpcvlx.cv.hp.com>
Subject: Re: Spam, spam, spam, spam
The answer to your question lies here, haafbrau1:
http://spam.abuse.net/spam/others/simplespam.html
Mark A. Baur baur@cv.hp.com
TCC-CVL
Software Integration T/N: 541-715-7579
Hewlett Packard, Corvallis Visualization Lab Desk: 5UP8
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 11:43:40 CDT
From: "Roger Deschner " <U52983@UICVM.UIC.EDU>
Subject: AHA NHC 1st Round Chicago - RESULTS
We have (finally) tabulated the results of judging 824 entries last
weekend here in Chicago. Congratulations to the winners, listed below.
A big thank-you to the legions of judges who came to Chicago, despite the
total lack of hotel rooms, to help us out. Also, special thanks to our
capable corps of stewards, without whose skills, confusion would have
reigned with so many entries. And it couldn't have been done without
Assistant Organizers Tom Fitzpatrick and Brad Reeg, or the tireless
efforts of numerous other Chicago Beer Society members who stepped
forward for unpacking, data entry, and housing out-of-town judges in
their homes. This event was the largest single homebrew competition ever
held in the Midwest, and perhaps anywhere in the world outside of the
State of Texas. (Judges: Your points have already been sent to the BJCP.)
We've also got to recognize our gracious host site - Goose Island Beer
Company's microbrewery. (not the brewpub). The brightly-lit bottling room
turned out to be perfect for judging, and the machinery was a good
backdrop for some unusual photos. Thank them by going out and buying more
Goose Island beer!
Good luck to these winners in the Second Round in Cleveland!
Roger Deschner University of Illinois at Chicago rogerd@uic.edu
Aliases: u52983@uicvm.uic.edu R.Deschner@uic.edu
=============== "Civilization was CAUSED by beer." =====================
====Chicago Region Director, 1997 AHA National Homebrew Competitiion====
PLACE BREWER(S) CLUB
Barley Wine
1 Brian St. Clair Bloatarian
2 John Kleczewski Headhunters
3 Chuck Boyce Bloatarian
Belgian & French Ale
1 Larry D. Gray Bloatarian
2 Chris De Podesta, Karen De Podesta
3 Thomas Peroulas, Daniel Juliano Boneyard UZZ
Belgian-Style Lambic
1 Bert Zelten Green Bay
2 Larry D. Gray Bloatarian
3 Al Korzonas Chi Beer Soc
Mild & Brown Ale
1 Michael P. Seachrist
2 Bill Pfeiffer Ann Arbor
3 David M. Johnson First Draft
English-Style Pale Ale
1 David Allaben Foam Blowers
2 Joseph Styke, Tom Stawarz
3 Kevin Kutskill
American-Style Ale
1 Greg Grosklos
2 Paul Kerchefske Sin City
3 Mike Rivard Chi Beer Soc
English Bitter
1 Douglas Bloss
2 Valdymar Kopec
3 Philip Venzke
Scottish Ale
1 Nick Schroeder
2 Carl Regenfelder Beer Barons
3 Scott Taxman
Porter
1 Stephen Klump Ann Arbor
2 Philip Gravel Urban Knaves
3 Todd Grantham
English & Scottish Strong Ale
1 Chuck Wettergreen Headhunters
2 Stephen Klump Ann Arbor
3 Michael Brage, Andres Brage, Yonina Tova
Stout
1 Robert Hyndman, Debbie Hyndman Duneland
2 Al Korzonas Chi Beer Soc
3 John Warakomski, Ian Tomlinson
Bock
1 Art Steinhoff K. Gambrinus
2 Phil Kaszuba Green Mtn
3 Jim Hodge Chi Beer Soc
German Dark Lager
1 Thomas Plunkard Ann Arbor
2 John Stevenson
3 Bill Rogers
German Light Lager
1 Stephen Klump Ann Arbor
2 Mike Lelivelt Madison HTG
3 Thomas Plunkard Ann Arbor
Classic Pilsener
1 Eric Stockinger
2 Terry Richardson Silverado
3 Mark Knoebl Headhunters
American Lager
1 Gerald M. Poss, Jr.
2 Thomas Plunkard Ann Arbor
3 John Stevenson
Vienna/Marzen/Oktoberfest
1 Scott Whitaker Foam Blowers
2 Paul Martinez Beer Barons
3 Paul Shick
German-Style Ale
1 Valdymar Kopec
2 Eric Stockinger
3 Marc Kullberg Chi Beer Soc
German-Style Wheat Beer
1 Mike Rivard Chi Beer Soc
2 Dennis Davison Chi Beer Soc
3 Joseph Styke, Tom Stawarz
Smoked Beer
1 Paul Hale, Phil Kaszuba, Rich Evans Green Mtn
2 Mike Bardallis Down River
3 Mark Ratliff Commission
Fruit & Vegetable Beer
1 Mike Lelivelt Madison HTG
2 Matthew Werner
3 Tom Schlak
Herb & Spice Beer
1 Carl Regenfelder, Robert Kustra Beer Barons
2 Robert Pinkerton Bloatarian
3 Chuck Wettergreen Headhunters
Specialty & Experimental Beer
1 Hal Buttermore Ann Arbor
2 Bert Zelten Green Bay
3 Paul Hale, Phil Kaszura, Rich Evans Green Mtn
California Common Beer
1 Paul Martinez Beer Barons
2 Philip Gravel Urban Knaves
3 Chuck Bagi
Traditional Mead & Braggot
1 Marc Kullberg Chi Beer Soc
2 Al Korzonas Chi Beer Soc
3 Randy Johnson
Fruit & Vegetable Mead
1 Hal Buttermore Ann Arbor
2 Marc Kullberg Chi Beer Soc
3 Robb Harris First Draft
Herb & Spice Mead
1 Robb Harris First Draft
2 Daria Labinsky, Stan Hieronymus Abnormal
3 Eric Drake, J. Woody Drake Scioto ...
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 May 97 10:24:21 PDT
From: "Rob Moline" <brewer@kansas.net>
Subject: Draft Systems Kegs/Grolsch Hops-New Homebrewing Books/ Little Apple Brewing
The Jethro Gump Report
>From: "Trollhattan Motors, Inc." <direct@cybertroll.com>
>Subject: Help- Kegs & fitting what do I have???
>I have 8 old stainless kegs, they are rounded made by Firestone
>for Schaefer Beer Company. It has a wooden bong in the side
>and a screw type fitting in the top. Similar to the Hoff-Stevens (SP)
>except it has only one hole for the probe. The screw in adapter is
>also marked Schaefer / Draft Systems (DS), and has a 3 lug nut to
>screw onto the keg. It has a single stainless probe with two o-rings.
>The co2 line connects to the of the PLASTIC body of the connector,
>via a hose barb. What do I have?
With a wooden 'bong' in the side, these must have been made in the 1960's!
(Sorry, couldn't help myself!) ;-)
This sounds similar to the 4 Draft Systemns kegs given to me by a Miller
distributor, except that the valve in the top of my kegs did have a dual
probe capability, just like a Hoff Stevens. The problem with this type is
that instead of a spring loaded valve for the CO2 side, as in an H-S valve,
there was what is called a "Gator Bag", made of a brown rubber material
that is similar to some types of back flow prevention devices. These perish
with age, and to my knowledge are no longer produced. I called Sabco and
ordered 4 new H-S valves and replaced them, so now I am able to use them
with the rest of my H-S kegs. 2 of them were particularly difficult to get
apart and I had to resort to the trusty Dremel Moto-Tool to cut the
retaining rings off.
My suggestion, minimally, is to do the same with yours, that is to convert
to H-S valves. Optimally, send them to Sabco or Tosca for conversion to a
Sankey valve. More expensive, yes, but Sankeys are much easier to work
with. They can also restore any damage to the kegs internally, like dents,
rust, or leaks.
For your bungs, I would approach your nearby friendly brewer at a brewery
that uses them. I'm sure they would sell you some, as I'm sure you won't
want to buy them in 500 bung packages, nor do you want to pay the prices
charged for small orders. Note that there are several sizes of bung, ask if
you can borrow one to size it. These cost under 25 cents, depending on the
quantity ordered, and the seller.
Grolsch Hops. New Homebrewing Books
I just yesterday acquired fellow HBD contributor Graham Wheeler and Roger
Protz's books, "Brew Classic European Beers At Home," "Brew Your Own Real
Ale At Home," and Graham's book "The Camra Guide to Home Brewing." In
"BCEBAH," the recipe for Grolsch Premium Lager lists for a 5 US gallon
batch 7.45 lbs pilsen malt, 1.3 lb Flaked maize .9 oz Saaz and .6 oz
Hallertau at commencement of boil for 90 minutes. Step Infuse or
double-decoct . Step at 122 for 20 minute, 144 for 45 minutes and 158 for
45 minutes. OG 1048, FG 1011. 5 % ABV, 4 % ABW, 27 IBU. Irish Moss in
kettle for last 15 minutes of boil. No mention of finishing hops.
I have not had time to read them yet, but they appear to be probably the
most comprehensive books on homebrewing I have yet seen! Nice work, Graham!
From: "Fred Mitchell" <ALFRED.W.MITCHELL@cpmx.saic.com>
Subject: Little Apple Brewing Company
Thank you Fred, you are very kind. I hope to see some more HBD'ers as the
'travel to GABF season' approaches. I will give a free sampler tray to
anyone who identifies themselves, to me, as HBD'ers, and give you a tour of
the brewery. This offer, of course, can only be honored if I am in the
brewery at the time you arrive. Should any of you wish to avail yourselves
of this, and call in advance to let me know when you plan to drop in, I
will arrange my schedule to accommodate you. Maybe we could talk about
beer! Or maybe brewing? Or Beer?
Rob Moline
Little Apple Brewing Company
Manhattan, Kansas
(913)-539-5500
"The More I Know About Beer, The More I Realize I Need To Know More About
Beer!"
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 13:24:03 -0400
From: Thomas Kramer <tkramer@monad.net>
Subject: first all grain low O.G.
>Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 13:21:27 -0400
>To: homerbrew@hbd.org
>From: Thomas Kramer <tkramer@monad.net>
>Subject: first all grain low O.G.
>
>I finally got my new cajun cooker, and my 1/2 keg converted, and my 5gal
rubber maid cooler with a Phil's phalse bottom. I brewed a I.P.A. that
called for 10lb Inglish pale mast and 1lb crystal, using a single step
infusion at 152F for 90 min. I poured 2.5 gal of 170f water into my cooler
and added the grain's but the cover on, and 90 min's latter I did a iodine
test, which did not chance color. Them I lautered within 5gal of 170F
water through my Phils sparger, and then boiled it for 60 min. Then I but
it all back in my cooler to sparge it, added about a 1/2 gal of water to
get up to 5gal. The reepie called for a O.G. of 1.054 all I got was 1.030
what could I have done wrong? Is it possible that after I added the water
at the end allthough I did shack the carboyed, the water did not mix all
the way and when I got my samplt to check O.G. it was part water?
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 12:22:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ken Johnson <kenjo@pogo.WV.TEK.COM>
Subject: Need source for propane burner
I need a mail order source for a ring type propane burner. I've seen the
100,000 btu 8" tall King Kooker, and it looks like it would do nicely.
Please send me email if you know of a good source.
Thanks,
kj
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 15:37:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: Some guy <pbabcock@mail.oeonline.com>
Subject: HBD Moderation Guidelines
Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager...
As alluded to in a previous post, these are the guidelines to which the
Janitors shall adhere in administering the moderation feature recently
added to the digest.
This set of guidelines was painstakingly discussed and honed to the
document you see here. The Steering Committee is to be commended for
deciding this policy in order to protect the free nature of the Digest,
while protecting its bandwidth from undesirable abuses.
See ya!
-p
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
A policy statement of the Home Brew Digest
Deliberated upon by the Home Brew Digest Steering Committee
Unanimously agreed upon and concurred by the Janitors
Effective 21 May 1997 as follows:
In response to increased efforts by spam merchants to post chain
letters, X-rated web site advertisements, and similar items to
the HBD, the HBD Steering Committee has recently reviewed and
discussed the Digest policies.
We remain committed to an open forum for the discussion of brewing
and beer related matters; however, to keep the HBD from being
misused, we have adopted the following Guidelines for the HBD:
1. Our guiding principle is that the HBD should not censor or
delete *any* message that deals with beer or brewing. The
only exception is where the message *itself* is *clearly*
against the law; for example, a post containing an illegal
solicitation of investors for a microbrewery would be
deleted, but posts discussing marijuana beer or home
distilling -- while not encouraged -- would not.
2. The Digest Janitor will try to delete messages that are
obvious, indisputable detrius (misplaced unsubscribe
requests, chain letters, etc.) and commercial spam with
no arguable connection to beer or brewing.
3. Posting blatant commercials to the HBD is *strongly*
discouraged. While such messages will not be deleted if they
have *any* connection with beer and brewing, the HBD Steering
Committee will encourage the HBD readership not to patronize
businesses who clearly are abusing the HBD.
4. Brief product or sale announcements, comments about or reviews
of products or publications, and query responses that suggest
a particular product or merchant (e.g., "In response to XXX's
inquiry, my shop has a supply of corny kegs for $15 each")
are appropriate HBD messages and *are* encouraged.
5. HBD readers *are* the HBD. They and the marketplace of
ideas -- not any person or committee -- are the ultimate
arbitrators of what beer and brewing related posts are
worthwhile and appropriate for the HBD.
However, the Steering Committee requests that HBD
contributors remember that this Digest, unlike a
USENET newsgroup, has limited bandwidth; i.e., the
digest is limited to a certain size each day. For
this reason, the Steering Committee gently asks
contributors to think carefully before posting
messages that most readers consider inappropriate
or of marginal utility, such as:
A. Personal diatribes or insults;
B. Complaints about a message being inappropriate
for the HBD (if it really bothers you, send the
"offending" party e-mail);
C. Complete results of a local competition (preferred:
put them on a web site and post a short message
identifying and pointing to its URL);
D. Lengthy competition announcements (you don't need
to list every category);
E. Lengthy quotes of earlier messages that add only
a "me too" comment.
It is the hope that, through the mutual cooperation of the readership and
Steering Committee of the HBD, no further actions need be taken to
moderate the homebrew digest.
Signed,
The Home Brew Digest Steering Committee
Scott Abene
Louis Bonham
Greg Day
Kelly Jones
Spencer Thomas
Concurred,
The Home Brew Digest Janitors
Pat Babcock
Karl Lutzen
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 14:51:00 -0500 (CDT)
From: Aaron Kelley <akelley@cems.umn.edu>
Subject: Bottle Headspace
Greg Pickles writes,
This does not seem right to me. True, water is essentially incompressible
but it can still transfer force. Pressure = force per unit area (if I
remember my freshman ME class correctly). Hence anything in the water and
the container will be subjected to the same pressure present in the
headspace above the liquid. If this were not true, hydrostatic testing of
compressed gas bottles would not work and SCUBA divers would not need
pressurized air to breath.
- -----------------------
I think I need to rephrase my previous statement. Greg is correct that
water can transfer pressure. However, yeast are also filled with water.
If a balloon filled with air is suspended in water and pressure is
applied to the water the balloon will srink. However, if a balloon
filled with water is subjected to the same treatment it will not srink,
because the water within the balloon is incompressible.
The cell membrane of a yeast cell is not like a balloon, because water
can flow essentially freely through the membrane. However, an increase
in pressure above the liquid does not increase the driving force for
water diffusion into the cell and the yeast are fine.
- ------------------------------------------------------
Steve Waite writes,
What was earlier theorized on the HBD (although so far unverified as far
as I remember), is that as HCO3- builds up in solution it changes the
osmotic pressure differential across the cell wall and prevents waste
products from escaping the cell. It is this pressure difference which
kills the yeast. I don't understand the details myself but, that's my
take on what's been posted to date.
- -------------------------
I don't believe this theory. With all of the protein and other
components dissolved in the cytoplasm of the yeast ( the liquid inside
the yeast cell) the osmotic pressure is always going to be higher inside
the yeast. The other problem with this hypothesis is that osmotic
pressure favors the exact opposite reaction. Osmotic pressure forces
water toward an area of higher salt concentration. If anything,
disolving HCO3 in the beer would cause water to flow toward it, not
prevent it from flowing.
However, all of this is nil if you believe my first arguement that the
higher concentration of dissolved chemicals will always be within the
yeast cell. Cells are able to control their osmotic pressure
differential.
- ------------------------------------------
This problem of differing carbonation is certainly an interesting one.
Hopefully with all of the wisdom of the HBD we can come up with a
satisfactory one. As for now I still support the increased availability
of oxygen in the underfilled bottle.
Aaron Kelley
Chemical Engineer and Graduate Student
Biological Process Technology Institute
Department of Chemical Engineering and Material Science
University of Minnesota
akelley@cems.umn.edu
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 15:42:20 -0700
From: Kelly Jones <kejones@ptdcs2.intel.com>
Subject: Re:Inverted Carboy Fermenter
Kim Lux described his work to create an inverted carboy fermenter by
drilling a hole in the bottom, and affixing a valve to the top (which
now becomes the bottom). Sounds like a great setup, but I would like to
offer a warning:
The work you have done in drilling the hole has created a great many
'microcracks'. These are small cracks in the glass, perhaps invisible
to the naked eye, which will serve as initiation sites for stress
fractures. Have you ever cut a sheet of glass by scratching a line into
it, then stressing it at the line? The same effect at work.
Normally, when glass is machined in such a way, the microcracks are
healed by 'firepolishing', that is, heating up the edges of the hole
with a gas flame, to the point that the glass melts slightly and the
cracks flow shut. (If you wanted to do this, you would have to be
EXTREMELY careful not to thermally stress the glass to the point of
breakage!). Alternately, the glass can be strengthened by etching in HF
(a very dangerous acid) which increases the radius of the cracks, thus
reducing the stress-rising effect.
I would suggest that you be aware of the weakened state of your carboy,
and treat it with extreme care: Never set it down on its bottom without
some sort of foam cushion for protection, never fill it with hot
liquids, and be careful inserting any type of bung.
And let us know how it works out for you!
Kelly
Hillsboro, OR
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2425, 05/23/97
*************************************
-------
