Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2429
HOMEBREW Digest #2429 Thu 29 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:
valve stems/diacetyl rest/banana & bubble gum/Phalse/carbonation & fill/invert candi sugar (korz)
RE: Dry yeast / Weizen & starch haze (George De Piro)
Various (John W. Braue, III)
Cranberry Lambic (William H Plotner)
NHC Results, Californi & Nevada (HARRY HOUCK)
Way to regulate air temperature?? ("Robert Marshall")
marijuana in beer ("Grant W. Knechtel")
Using Gelatine Finings (John Sullivan)
Hops Medicine (Aesoph, Michael)
Ruined? continued. ("John Penn")
Chi Pwi Gees (David Johnson)
calculating strike water temp (Wes Clement)
CO2 cylinders\; Safety (dcstanza)
IBU estimates in high-grav worts ("Dave Draper")
burners and BTU (Eric Palmer)
Cherry Stout ("David W. Schoemaker")
Summer Brewing (DGofus)
tart berries in beer (Eugene Sonn)
Must I prime again ? ("Braam Greyling")
Corny/ss question ("Braam Greyling")
Clear Weizen??? ("Paul A. Hausman")
Fermentation temps (John Wilkinson)
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: Tue, 27 May 1997 17:27:04 -0500 (CDT)
From: korz@xnet.com
Subject: valve stems/diacetyl rest/banana & bubble gum/Phalse/carbonation & fill/invert candi sugar
John writes:
>I'd like to suggest a humble solution: Sacrifice a lid and drill a hole in
>the center large enough
<snip>
>bottle lids as a carbonation cap. An off-shoot of this idea was to install
>valve stems on my kegs. I often have more kegs filled with beer awaiting
>consumption than I have room in my fridge. In order to obtain the
>"correct", or should I say desired, carbonation level I need to apply a
>different CO2 pressure to the kegs that are not in the fridge that those
>that are. A valve stem on the keg and an air chuck on the end of a CO2
>line make this task so much easier.
With all due respect John, I must be missing something here... don't your
kegs already have CO2-in fittings? Why does a valve stem and air chuck
make this easier?
Personally, I have never liked the idea of valve stems and beer containers
because the rubber is guaranteed to *not* be food grade.
***
Alex writes:
>That is why many
>commercially produced lagers go through one or more "diacetyl rests"
>where they are allowed to warm up for a period of several hours at a
>time to stimulate diacetyl reduction.
Although I agree that diaceyl re-absorption is slower at colder temperatures
(which was the main point of Alex's post), I'd like to point out that
a diacetyl rest is not done more than once and is not for a few hours.
The beer is gently warmed up to the high-50's or low-60's F, kept there
for a day or two, and then gently cooled (over the course of a few days)
to lagering temperatures. You can't cool the beer suddenly or the yeast
will drop like a stone and you will have damaged yeast which won't lager
your beer properly. Although I don't know of any brewers doing it, I
suppose you could crash the yeast and the pitch more fresh yeast for the
lagering.
***
John writes:
>3068 to often be too banana or bubblegum like. Banana and bubblegum are
>desireable phenolics in a weizen but I do not think they should overwhelm
>you.
Whoops... sounds like a slip-up here... I can't believe that John meant
to write that. He probably meant to say that "banana and bubblegum are
desireable *esters*" not "phenolics." Of course we all know that
aromas with phenolic sources are ones like "smoky," "clovey," "plastic,"
"medicinal," etc.
***
Chas writes about his defective Carbonater(TM):
>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.
Return it. I've got a dozen or so (and have sold a few hundred) and none
have this problem. Liquid Bread is a great company and really stands
behind their products (no affiliation).
>On the subject of HB products, how do folks who have Phil's Phase bottom like
>the product? Any clogging/floating concerns? I am considering getting both
>the sparge arm and bottom and wanted to hear some objective opinions from
>those who have used these things.
They work very well. One word of advice: use a rigid (copper, PE, or stainless
steel) tube to go from the device to the cooler wall. It will solve both
floating and "hose squishing" problems you get with flexible tubing.
***
Scott writes:
>I had my first batch of bottle bombs a couple of weeks ago. There
>were many contributing factors, but I think the most critical were my
>own sloppy and lazy procedures, and the fill level of the bottles. I
>went back to the archives and looked at what's been discussed about
>headspace in the past. Both Steve Alexander and AlK did experiments
>that showed that an underfilled bottle would develop more carbonation,
>while an overfilled bottle would develop less carbonation (both
>compared to a "standard" fill). I agree with both of these
>statements. It was theorized that the yeast would die off under
>pressure, and that was the cause of the over-filled bottles being less
>carbonated. I'm not sure I agree with this theory.
Not exactly. What my expriments showed was that overfilled bottles had
significantly less carbonation after a few weeks and also after a few months.
"Standard" fill and several underfilled bottles (some severely underfilled)
had the *SAME* level of carbonation. I don't have a plausable explanation
for the physics (or biology) of what is happening, but the observed
results are clear:
a high fill in a bottle interferes with the carbonation process.
My theory about why some brewers experience overcarbonation with
underfilling, is that they are over-priming. If you prime too much
AND overfill, I theorise that the two may be cancelling each other
out. When you underfill, the carbonation is not inhibited and the
beer overcarbonates. Note... this is just a theory... as yet untested.
***
Eric writes:
>I got no comments about my attempt at creating a Belgian Invert Candi Sugar-
>boiling sucrose with honey and phosphoric acid to 150 C. Dave? Al? Alex?
>Scott? Any observations?
I've discussed this with a chemist (sorry, his name escapes me) and he
said that unless you boil an incredibly long time, only a very small
part of the sucrose gets inverted. The purpose of inverting the sugar
was because pure sucrose syrup crystalises almost immediately. If you
convert even a small portion of the sucrose into it's component glucose
and fructose (that's the invert sugar part -- fructose defracts light
the opposite (inverted) way relative to sucrose or glucose), the syrup
does not crystalise. Inverting the sucrose was simly a way to store
the sugar as a syrup.
By the way... candi sugar is not invert sugar... it's simply sucrose.
You're thinking of "Golden Syrup." They yeast will make invertase
which will completely invert the sucrose (yeast can't eat sucrose
without breaking it down into glucose and fructose), so you really gain
little by inverting the sugar *partially* for the yeast.
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz@xnet.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 15:06:52 -0700
From: George_De_Piro@berlex.com (George De Piro)
Subject: RE: Dry yeast / Weizen & starch haze
Hi all,
Tim Plummer asks why his fermentation has apparently stopped after
just two days. He pitched dried yeast, and it took off right away.
Well, without being there to take a hydrometer reading, I couldn't say
for sure that your fermentation isn't stuck, but I'd bet a lot on it.
When an adequate amount of yeast is pitched, fermentation of a
"normal" gravity ale is quite fast. It could be done within 2 days.
Take a hydrometer reading to know for sure.
---------------------------
Dave Johnson asks about bottling his murky wheat beer, and wonders if
it is murky because of starch or yeast.
It's not really possible to know just by looking. My guess would be
that the haze is from the yeast and proteins (wheat is very high in
haze causing proteins). If you know that your procedures were likely
to put starch in the final beer, then it could be a starch haze, too.
Aside from being ugly, starch is bad to have in beer because of the
microbiological instability it causes. Brewers yeast does not
metabolize starch. Some other microbes can. No matter how careful
you are, there will be some other bugs in your homebrew. The idea is
to not give them an easy food source (i.e., starch). With no starch
present, and a healthy pitching of yeast, the unwanted microbes won't
fair very well. If they have access to food with no competition, they
will flourish.
Starchy beer will only get worse with age, because of the likelihood
of a progressing infection. Drink it quickly!
Have fun!
George De Piro (Nyack, NY)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 10:22:41
From: braue@ratsnest.win.net (John W. Braue, III)
Subject: Various
This being one of the few days when I actually have time to respond
to (as distinct from merely read) my mail, I have a couple of
comments:
"John Vaughn" <j_vaughn@ix.netcom.com> writes:
>George De Piro mused about ascorbic acid's effect on aerated wort when
>pitching. The question posed was, "Will the ascorbic acid use up all the
>oxygen?"
>
>Now I'm certainly no expert on ascorbic acid, but I believe that it
>protects whatever it is on (or in) from the effects of oxidation rather
>than using up the oxygen.
Close enough for government work. It should be noted that
oxidation, although historically associated with the effects of
free oxygen (hence the name), does not in fact require oxygen.
Ascorbic acid does not affect oxygen metabolism in any case.
Oxygen is poisonous to all higher organisms (what about that stuff
you've been breathing, you ask? Well, we higher organisms have
these cellular symbionts called "mitochondria", that actually make
use of it...), but the actual harm done via oxidation is done by
"free radicals". These are (over-simplifying somewhat) bits and
pieces of molecules formed in the process of oxygen metabolism.
Being only pieces of molecules, they are extremely aggressive in
their attempts to become Compleat Molecules, and will react with
anything in their paths, destroying DNA, producing all sorts of
interesting (and harmful) compounds, cross-linking protein chains
in the skin and arteries, etc. Ascrobic acid (and several other
substances) appear to preferentially scavenge free radicals,
preventing them from doing the deed.
Bruce Baker <Bruce.E.Baker@tsy.treasury.govt.nz> asks:
>Subject: HBD policies
>
>G'day y'all,
>
>In HBD 2425, the following policy was set forth:
>
>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
>
>Why is a message soliciting investors for a microbrewery illegal? It sounds
>like
>free speech to me. It might contravene some other HBD rule against commercial
> solicitation, but it seems far less odious than a lot of stuff on the net.
>
Without launching on a tirade against the guvmint's peculiar
interpretation of "free speech", let me note that it is held to be
good U.S. law that solicitation of direct investment from the
public can be done only through a MEGO-level document known as a
"prospectus" (what the law is like in New Zealand, I have no
idea). If you read the U.S. edition of the _Wall Street Journal_,
you'll notice that the "tombstone" adverts invariably include the
disclaimer like: "This advertisement is not an offer to sell or a
solicitation of an offer to buy. That offer is made only through
the prospectus." (The "tombstone", you see, is merely an
advertisement that the prospectus is *available*; a subtle but
legally efficacious distinction). No one is (I sincerely hope)
going to dump a prospectus into the HBD, nor may prospectuses
(prospecti?) be sent unsolicited, as to a mailing list.
- --
John W. Braue, III braue@ratsnest.win.net
akatsukami@aol.com
I've decided that I must be the Messiah; people expect me to work
miracles, and when I don't, I get crucified.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 21:18:40 EDT
From: billp4@juno.com (William H Plotner)
Subject: Cranberry Lambic
Fellow Brewers,
Any body out there have an extract recipe for a close approximation of
Sam Adams Cranberry Lambic?
Thanks.
Bill Plotner
Colorado Springs, Co
BillP4@Juno.com
In Search of the Eternal Brew
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 20:39:54 -0700
From: HARRY HOUCK <hhouck@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: NHC Results, Californi & Nevada
Finally, results from the NHC '97 judging in Fresno, CA. 536 entries.
Sorry about the formatting!
Barley Wine American-style Barley Wine Cam Ireland 38.00 First
Barley Wine English-style Barley Wine Fred Waltman 32.50 Second
Barley Wine English-style Barley Wine Joel Rosen 35.50 Third
Belgian & French Ale Dubbel Ron Kline 36.00 First
Belgian & French Ale Belgian Strong Ale Kelly Robinson 38.50 Second
Belgian & French Ale White (Wit) Mike Smith 37.33 Third
Belgian-style Lambic Fruit Lambic David Welch 38.00 First
Belgian-style Lambic Belgian-style Lambic Bill Krouss 34.50 Second
Mild & Brown Ale English Dark Mild Randy Norman 37.00 First
Mild & Brown Ale American Brown Ale Rod Parsons 36.00 Second
Mild & Brown Ale English Brown Ale Mike Riddle 36.50 Third
English-style Pale Ale India Pale Ale David Welch 40.50 First
English-style Pale Ale Classic English Pale Ale David Welch 41.50 Second
English-style Pale Ale Classic English Pale Ale Ken Brown 41.00 Third
American-style Ale American Pale Ale Ken Armstrong 39.00 First
American-style Ale American-style Amber Ale Al Lemke 38.00 Second
American-style Ale American Pale Ale Rod Parsons 40.00 Third
English Bitter English Best Bitter Robert Drake 42.50 First
English Bitter English Strong Bitter Jim Hilbing 42.50 Second
English Bitter English Strong Bitter Ken Brown 42.50 Third
Scottish Ale Scottish Export Ale David Parker 41.50 First
Scottish Ale Scottish Heavy Ale Daniel Darnell 39.00 Second
Scottish Ale Scottish Light Ale Kevin Knox 34.00 Third
Porter Brown Porter Mike Riddle 32.00 First
Porter Robust Porter Patrick Mc Kee 39.33 Second
Porter Robust Porter James Weiner 36.67 Third
English & Scottish Strong Strong Scotch Ale Daniel Darnell 37.50 First
English & Scottish Strong Old Ale/english Strong Peter Zien 36.50 Second
English & Scottish Strong Strong Scotch Ale Richard Wenzlik 35.00 Third
Stout Classic Irish-style Dry Stout Mike Fitzgerald 41.00 First
Stout Oatmeal Stout Wayne Baker 36.00 Second
Stout Foreign-style Stout Charles Hessom 42.00 Third
Bock Eisbock Mike Brenner 44.50 First
Bock Doppelbock Tom Estudillo 39.00 Second
Bock Traditional Bock Tom Gaworski 39.50 Third
German Dark Lager Munich Dunkel Peter Johnson 39.00 First
German Dark Lager Schwarzbier Tom Estudillo 39.50 Second
German Dark Lager Munich Dunkel Robert Ethington 34.00 Third
German Light Lager Munich Helles Harrison Gibbs 32.50 First
German Light Lager Munich Helles Dan Taylor 31.50 Second
Classic Pilsener German-style Pilsener Daniel Darnell 36.50 First
Classic Pilsener German-style Pilsener Ken Armstrong 35.00 Third
American Lager American-style Premium Chad Thistle 41.00 First
American Lager American-style Light Lager George Proper 34.50 Second
American Lager Lager/ale or Cream Ale Byron Burch 34.50 Third
Vienna/marzen/oktober Marzen/oktoberfest Tom Gaworski 42.50 First
Vienna/marzen/oktober Vienna David Streeter 40.00 Second
Vienna/marzen/oktober Marzen/oktoberfest Wayne Burgstahler 38.50 Third
German-style Ale Dusseldorf-style Altbier Mike Riddle 39.25 First
German-style Ale Kolsch Jim Hilbing 37.75 Second
German-style Ale Dusseldorf-style Altbier Jon Appleton 36.00 Third
German-style Wheat Beer Weizen/weissbier Rod Parsons 42.00 First
German-style Wheat Beer Weizenbock Mark Stuart 37.50 Second
German-style Wheat Beer Weizenbock David Teesdale 42.00 Third
Smoked Beer Bamberg-style Rauchbier Ron Kline 36.17 First
Smoked Beer Bamberg-style Rauchbier Jeffrey Sternfeld 35.33 Second
Smoked Beer Bamberg-style Rauchbier Tom Spaulding 31.00 Third
Fruit & Vegetable Beer Fruit & Vegetable Beer Kevin Johnson 39.33 First
Fruit & Vegetable Beer Classic-style Mike Riddle 36.50 Second
Fruit & Vegetable Beer Fruit & Vegetable Beer J. Helmich 34.00 Third
Herb & Spice Beer Classic-style Patrick Mc Kee 41.00 First
Herb & Spice Beer Classic-style Ron Kline 34.50 Second
Herb & Spice Beer Herb & Spice Beer Tim Johnston 40.50 Third
Specialty Beer Specialty Beer Craig Azevedo 38.33 First
Specialty Beer Specialty Beer Tim Dozier 36.83 Second
Specialty Beer Specialty Beer Wayne Burgstahler 36.00 Third
California Common Beer California Common Beer Carl Weyl 42.00 First
California Common Beer California Common Beer Craig Toms 39.00 Second
California Common Beer California Common Beer Bob Thompson 37.50 Third
Fruit & Vegetable Mead Still Melomel Gunther Jensen 41.00 First
Fruit & Vegetable Mead Still Melomel Byron Burch 41.50 Second
Fruit & Vegetable Mead Sparkling Pyment Dan Taylor 41.33 Third
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 22:08:08 +0000
From: "Robert Marshall" <robertjm@hooked.net>
Subject: Way to regulate air temperature??
Well, I got my scoring sheets back from yet another brewing contest.
Yet again a judge, several infact, write, "...watch fermentation
temperature."
I ferment in a basement which fluctuates between 65-74 degrees
generally. Can anyone make any suggestions on how I might be able to
control this better and keep it in the low to mid 60s at most?
Obviously I could buy a fridge, but I'm looking for a cheaper
alternative.
Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated.
Later,
Robert Marshall
robertjm@hooked.net
http://www.hooked.net/users/robertjm/beerbook.htm
- ------
"They who drink beer will think beer."
Washington Irving - (1783-1859)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 21:04:24 -0700
From: "Grant W. Knechtel" <GWK@hartcrowser.com>
Subject: marijuana in beer
Forgive me as a newbie if this subject has been flogged to death, but I glanced
at a small book in the bookstore by some "outlaw" brewers about using marijuana
in beer. It was several months ago, and I can't remember the title or author.
It was fairly comprehensive about such a limited subject. Scanned the recipes
- basically they were for standard beers with 1 or 2 ounces dry-hopped (dry
potted?) in the secondary. The point was, as was stated earlier, that THC is
only slightly soluble in water and somewhat more so in alcohol. Normally I'm a
sucker for any new brew book which comes out, but couldn't see much point in
adding hundreds of dollars worth of adjunct for so little effect, especially
since I never liked the stuff much even when it was cheaper and more socially
acceptable. I guess one could make an extract with vodka, maybe even pressure
cook in Everclear, but why bother? If someone wanted to pursue it further, the
bookstore was Borders in Tacoma, WA. The book was about a hundred pages,
paperback with (I think) a green cover. I have no affiliation with the store,
etc., etc.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 06:03:02 -0700
From: John Sullivan <sullvan@anet-stl.com>
Subject: Using Gelatine Finings
Andy:
Here is how I use gelatin to help drop the non-flocculant yeast in my
beer.
Take 1 or 2 of the packets of gelatin and mix with approximately a pint
of clean tap water. Apply heat and stir. I stir with a dairy thermometer
so I know exactly what the temperature is. When the temp hits 160F, I
kill the heat and cover the pan with plastic wrap (or the lid will do
also). Wait 5-10 minutes. The 160F temperatures will help to ensure
that everything is sanitized and for all practical purposes pasteurized.
Some will argue the time and temp is not sufficient, yada yada yada but I
will stand by the procedure. There is probably nothing wild growing on
the gelatin or in your water that will withstand 160F for any amount of
time. Mind your temperatures because you do not want the gelatin to set
on you. Add to your secondary and rack the yeasty beer directly into the
gelatin solution. There should be enough mixing from the flow of the
siphon but you can also stir gently with a sanitized tool when racking is
complete to ensure that the gelatin solution is evenly dispersed. You
should see dramatic results in 2 to 3 days.
I would not recommend using this procedure unless I am sure that the haze
is from yeast. If I am unsure, I would use the same procedure described
above but also add two tablespoons of polyclar to the gelatin solution.
Polyclar dissolves as well as the gelatin. This method works well for
me.
John Sullivan
St. Louis, MO
------------------------------
Date: 28 May 97 07:53:56 EDT
From: aesoph@ncemt1.ctc.com (Aesoph, Michael)
Subject: Hops Medicine
Collective:
Does anyone out there have the HBD from 2-3 days back? I am looking for
the little article on the medicinal aspect of hops. Please send via
private EMail.
===============================================
Michael D. Aesoph, Mechanical Engineer
Concurrent Technologies Corp. Phone: (814) 269-2758
211 Industrial Park Road FAX: (814) 269-4458
Johnstown, PA 15904 EMail: aesoph@ctc.com
------------------------------
Date: 28 May 1997 09:10:56 -0400
From: "John Penn" <john_penn@spacemail.jhuapl.edu>
Subject: Ruined? continued.
Subject: Time:8:52 AM
OFFICE MEMO Ruined? continued. Date:5/28/97
Well I bottled that stout with the high FG, it was based on AlK's Spread It
On Toast Imperial Stout but with M&F in place of the Laaglander. I had
aerated it when I racked to the secondary, possibly to the beers detriment,
and repitched some more yeast. Anyway I was glad to see that it had dropped
another 5 or 6 pts and was about 1.034-1.035 from a starting gravity of 1.085,
about a 60% attenuation. I got mixed messages about whether I had ruined the
beer or not so I'll wait and see. The batch sat in primary for a week with
three extremely active fermentation days, then slowed dramatically. The SG
was 1.040 after a week and after another two weeks in the secondary it was
down to a more reasonable 1.034-1.035, there was virtually no bubbles the last
few days. It tasted fairly sweet-about 60 IBUs (Rager)-but was very good so
far. I only added 3oz of priming sugar, a little light on the carbonation.
I got mixed reviews on wether it was ruined or not so I'll post a follow up in
a couple of months when it has aged a little.
John Penn
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 07:09:55 -0700
From: David Johnson <dmjalj@inwave.com>
Subject: Chi Pwi Gees
When looking over your friends recipe, I would suggest that this is
probably the current incarnation of the recipe. I live in Wisconsin and
we don't grow any of the grapefruit here. It must be substituting for
something else. Also, what converts the starch in the potatoes? Can
grapefruit do that? this might be one starchy brew(part of its charm?). I
think it might be important to preserve this part of brewing heritage and
ask your friend to find some older folk who might know how this was
brewed long ago. Back to the grapefruit example, there is probably some
kind of native fruit with a similar of flavor profile or just plain sour
or bitter. If I was a guessing man, I would guess that the older recipe
might use honey or maple sap or syrup as part of the recipe and might
have been a form of mead. I would agree that using a more refined yeast
might help the product, but would want to capture what it is that makes
your friend prefer it before we change it too much (and make it too much
like what we already are doing). I think that there is an opportunity
here. Do you feel like Pierre Celis?
Dave
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 08:49:45 -0600
From: wesc@mails.imed.com (Wes Clement)
Subject: calculating strike water temp
I need to know how to calculate the temperature of strike water (and
the amount) for single step infusions. Example: Given I have a 12 lbs
of grain at 75F. How much and at what temperature should the strike
water be in order to establish a mash temperature of 154F?
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 11:26:22 -0500
From: dcstanza@OCC.PASEN.GOV
Subject: CO2 cylinders\; Safety
I have only been a subscriber (lurker) to the HBD for two months now,
and am amazed at the collective thoughts, experiences and good advice
from those who post here. Your input is much appreciated.
I am a very newbie (only two extract batches, so far) and am in the
process of setting up a corny system. I have been able to pick up great
advice from those who have posted on this issue in particular.
In HBD #2428, Mr. Charlie Scandrett posted the following:
"I have posted in the past about keg bombs and the dangers of working
with pressurised gas. Some have suggested that I lighten up?"
I would agree that there is no such thing as "lighten up" when the issue
is safety (and lives) as far as pressurized gas is concerned. The keg
bomb would be instantaneous should someone be foolish enough to
connect up a Co2 bottle WITHOUT the regulator! In no way should we
assume that everyone is aware of these facts.
He also added an interesting post from another forum pointing out
first-hand experience with Co2 cylinders:
">One of the #20 bottles had a loss of structural integrity at a weld
>near the bottom of the bottle."
I am somewhat surprised by this sentence; a few years ago, my father
had a fire extinguisher sales and service business that I helped with. I
was trained and licensed to run the federally required hydro-testing
procedure that these (co2) cylinders must go through (correctly stated in
the post) at a maximum of 5 year intervals. What this means is that,
legally, a cylinder with an expired hydro-test date cannot (and should
not) be refilled - not that it cannot be used. Always check the date
yourself before going to get your cylinder refilled and take it where it wi=
ll
be hydro-tested if it has been 5 years since undergoing its last test. If a
cylinder has significant rust or evidence of possible damage, it may be
tested PRIOR to the expiration of the hydro-test date. It may be an old and
worn-out addage, but it's never been more true; "better safe than sorry".
I am under the impression that under no circumstances were "repairs"
or "welded seams" allowed to these cylinders. These are usually spun
steel or aluminum cylinders with NO seams. It is quite possible that I am
either mistaken by my recollection, or that the regulations have been
changed, but I don't think so.
One other point - the weakest part of the cylinder, and therefore the
most dangerous, is the end of the neck - or more technically correct, the
part where the valve assembly meets ( and sticks out of) the cylinder.
Should the cylinder fall over, it's own weight could be enough to snap
the valve assembly off - with exposive results - instantaneous Co2
rocket! Be sure to take steps that protect from this happening.
Just wanted to add my $.02 worth on what is such an important safety
issue.
Thanks again for such a great brewing resource!
Dave Costanza (Dcostanza@occ.pasen.gov)
Harrisburg, PA
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 10:54:54 -6
From: "Dave Draper" <ddraper@utdallas.edu>
Subject: IBU estimates in high-grav worts
Dear Friends,
I had a private email from a fellow HBDer named Brad Manbeck asking
about estimating IBUs when one is constrained to use a small-volume,
and hence high-gravity, boil. This is the case for many homebrewers
who dominantly use extracts and do "partial" boils in smaller
kettles. I thought I would summarize my reply to him here and
solicit input-- is this approach reasonable? I will be using the
utilization data of Tinseth in this discussion, but it should be
general to any formulation.
Here's the situation. We all know that most of the well-known IBU
formulations incorporate some kind of factor that accounts for the
loss of utilization in high-gravity worts, and these are thought to
have varying degrees of accuracy. One way in which this uncertainty
could be greatest is in a highly concentrated wort. Now, because
IBUs are defined in terms of weight of isomerized alpha-acids per
unit volume of wort, the final wort volume is a crucial parameter.
The larger the volume, the more diluted the dissolved weight of
iso-alphas will be, and hence the less bitter will be the final
beer.
It could be that a low-volume, high-gravity boil topped up with water
to the final volume is close to worst-case as far as getting the most
reliable IBU estimate is concerned. Trouble is, most of the data
available on utilization come from experiments that worked the other
way: the initial volume of wort was a lot *greater* than the final
volume, so that the final gravity was the most concentrated it ever
gets, and gravities earlier in the boil are lower; more importantly,
these earlier gravities are typically sufficiently low (in the 1040s
or so, or lower) that there will be little effect on utilization from
higher gravity.
So here's my idea about estimating how big the effect might be.
Calculate the IBUs twice: first using the smaller volume and whatever
gravity you actually have *of that smaller volume*, and the second
time with the final volume and gravity. In principle there will be a
difference, and this difference should give you some idea how much
utilization you are losing by boiling at the low volume.
Here's an example. Consider a beer that will ultimately consist of 5
gal of 1.050 but for which the boil volume will be only 3 gal. Let's
keep it simple and model a single hop addition of 1 oz of 8% AA hops
boiling for 60 minutes, assuming the volume of wort stays constant
(not realistic but an endmember case). Using the Tinseth data (and
Pat Anderson's TINIBUW program to calculate with them), and putting
in these values, the result is 27.2 IBU. Now let's calculate what the
gravity of that very same liquid would be if it were concentrated
down to 3 gallons. 5/3 * 50 grav points= 83, or 1.083. Now, put in 3
gal of 1.083 in TINIBUW with the same 1 oz of 8%AA hops for 60 min,
with the same assumption of unchanging volume, and the result is 33.7
IBU. But hey wait, shouldn't it be *lower*, since the gravity is
higher? Yes, but the effect of lower volume (greater concentration
of iso-alphas) outperforms that of higher gravity, at least as
reckoned in the Tinseth formulation. When you add that last 2 gal of
water (which has zero IBUs) to that 3 gal of 1.083-gravity, 33.7-IBU
wort, you have diluted both gravity and IBUs. The gravity we already
know will end up at 1.050, and with a similar calculation we can get
at the final IBUs. 3/5 * 33.7 =20.2 is the answer-- we have diluted
the 33.7 IBUs down to about 20 by adding the 2 gal of water at the
end.
So, what we have done is reach the endpoint, 5 gallons of 1.050
beer, by two paths, one in which the wort was never concentrated,
and one in which it was. You can see by comparing the value for the
concentrated version, 20.2, with the 27.2 we got for the
un-concentrated version that utilization will suffer to the extent
that the IBU estimate will be about 25% to 30% too high, from having
a higher gravity boil. That is, with no attempt to account for the
decreased utilization due to high gravity, we'd estimate about 27
IBUs, but when this kind of approach is used, the new estimate comes
out appreciably lower.
I make no claim that this kind of back-of-the-envelope calculation
is highly accurate, but it should at least serve as some kind of
guide. As with everything else, one will have to experiment some to
see what works best. I also intentionally ignore other complicating
factors, such as whether one uses a hop bag, or whether one waits for
hot break to form before adding hops, etc. etc, in order to isolate
this one factor. I'd love to hear from anyone who is still awake
about whether this approach seems sensible as a way for "partial
boilers" to get more accurate IBU estimates.
Cheers and sorry for being so long winded,
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
That's all very well in practice; but will it work in *theory*?
---Ken Willing
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 09:01:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: palmer@San-Jose.ate.slb.com (Eric Palmer)
Subject: burners and BTU
If I were to look for a propane burner that can handle a 5 gal
boil with ease, what kind of BTUs should I look for and what
price should I expect to pay?
TIA,
Eric
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 11:05:35 -0500
From: "David W. Schoemaker" <dschoemaker@ameritech.net>
Subject: Cherry Stout
>Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 11:44:12 EDT
>From: billp4@juno.com (William H Plotner)
>Subject: Cherries in my Stout
>HBD'ers,
>I've been reading the HBD for a while and finally have a question to
>post.
>I am fermenting a cherry stout. The question is, how long do I want to
>keep the cherries in the primary? Normally, I wait until the vigorous
>fermentation is done then rack into my secondary.Usually jest a few days.
> Would I want to leave it in the primary longer? How much longer?
>Thanks for any help.
>Bill Plotner
>Colorado Springs
>Billp4@Juno.com
>In Search of the Eternal Brew
Make sure you use sour cherries. I add mine to the secondary, and leave
them there around a month. Freezing them or crushing them prior to
adding them will make the process go smoother. You may want to have a
slightly sweeter beer than normal, as they will add some
sourness/acidity to your beer that needs to be balanced.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 13:36:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: DGofus@aol.com
Subject: Summer Brewing
Since summer is right around the bend, what effects does this have on my
brewing. I am a newbie and this is my first summer. I realize that temp. has
a big effect on taste. My brewhouse (Basement) is about 64-66 degrees now. I
have a batch on the stove today and one more in waiting...a Canadian ale.
Should this be my last? Should I hope my reserve get me through the summer,
or stock up on...... { : ^ ( egads, store bought refreshment? I could
handle that, nut the cost of drinking good brew is outrageous. ( Why ? lower
the price sell more volume to the average joe six pack.)
Thanks for any help
Bob Fesmire
Madman Brewery
Pottstown, PA
Dgofus@aol.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 14:25:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: Eugene Sonn <eugene@dreamscape.com>
Subject: tart berries in beer
Hello HBDers,
A friend of mine wants to make a fruit beer with a tart berry (I
forget which kind of berry). I've already checked the archives and don't
see recipes for fruit beers which don't use sweet berries. How should my
friend balance the tart flavor, with honey? If so, how much for a 5
gallon batch?
Please e-mail privately and I'll post results to the HBD.
Eugene
eugene@nova.dreamscape.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 09:32:35 +200
From: "Braam Greyling" <braam.greyling@azona.co.za>
Subject: Must I prime again ?
Hello,
I recently made a lager using a double decoction mashing and using
wyeast munich lager yeast. My start gravity was 1050 and my end
gravity was 1010. The beer fermented at the correct temperature
specified for the yeast and I transferred it to a secondary and
lagered it for two weeks just above freezing point. The result was a
VERY clear beer. After the two weeks I bottled it and used my normal
priming procedure ( adding sugar solution to each bottle before
filling). I capped the bottles and left it to carbonate. On day
three after bottling I tried the first one. I knew it would be flat
but hell I couldnt wait no more. Well it was flat. On day seven it
was still flat. On day 10 it was still flat. I am getting worried
that it would be flat on day infinity. There were no bleach left in
the bottles to kill the yeast. So this cant be the problem.
I decided to wait 14 days and see if the carbonation is still
a problem. Can it be that after the lagering procedure that almost no
yeast ended up in the bottle ? It is difficult to believe this
although this beer is the clearest I have ever made.
What else could have gone wrong ? What should I do ?
Thanks!
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: Wed, 28 May 1997 13:14:10 +200
From: "Braam Greyling" <braam.greyling@azona.co.za>
Subject: Corny/ss question
Yello,
During July I am going on a hunting trip in Namibia. I hope I am not
offending anyone. Anyway, I want to take few kegs of beer with me as
we will live in the bush for a few days and will have no place to buy
beer from. We have limited space in the vehicles so I will have to
store some of the meat in the empty cornies when we are coming back.
Traditionally we use vinegar and salt and spices to preserve the
meat.
What I want to know is will it be safe when a mix of vinegar and
salt comes into contact with the corney`s stainless steel or rubber
parts. What will the best method be to clean the cornies afterwards.
Probably caustic soda ?
Thanks very much in advance.
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: Wed, 28 May 1997 18:07:29 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Paul A. Hausman" <paul@lion>
Subject: Clear Weizen???
On Tue, 27 May 1997 08:23:17 -0400, MARK WOOD wrote:
>
> David Johnson <dmjalj@inwave.com> wrote . . .
> > << I just made a bavarian style weizen. I used wyeast 3068 and it has
> > finished fermenting and is now sitting there looking murkily at me. I
> > know that this yeast doesn't floc well and that the style can be
> > cloudy but should I go ahead and bottle "Big Muddy". >>
> >
> I'm currently brewing my second batch of Weizen, using Wyeast 3068.
> The first batch is just 10 days in the bottle, but it's already
> delicious !! I hate to rub it in, but my Weizen finished very clean
> and clear. It can almost pass for a Pilsner
<<<SNIP>>>
> It's true the 3068 doesn't floculate particularly well. My bottles
> aren't horribly yeasty, but it's much harder to pour without getting
> some yeast in your glass. Still, this is style appropriate. If
> you're in doubt, I suggest giving it plenty of time in the secondary.
> This beer is great with minimal bottle conditioning and is a very
> refreshing hot weather beer.
>
> Woody
I'm going to be sampling my ninth or tenth weizen batch tonight.
It's one of my favorites to brew or drink. Particularly in the summer.
I just couldn't resist commenting on a few details here:
1. It's supposed to be cloudy. (Pick up a bottle of Hacker-Pshorr in the
local booze supply.) I usually leave it in the secondary for
about 2 weeks (after a 5-7 day primary). If it's not clear,
bottle anyhow. Then gloat 'cause you've got the style right.
A clear weizen may taste great, but it's not to style. (Sorry
Woody, If you offer me a bottle, I won't turn it down.) ;-)
2. Bavarian Weisse is often called "Hefe Weisse". Hefe is german for
yeast. The idea is that you drink that too. If you haven't tried,
be bold, turn the bottle up hard and let all the yeast mix in.
If you don't like it, go back to decanting; but you probably will.
Then you can act the connoissuer at parties and tell everyone else
how "it's supposed to be drunk", making a royal bore of yourself.
3. It's a great summer beer. It likes to ferment at 68-70 oF; It's
quite refreshing on a summer day; and it can go from malt to
perfect for drinking in only 5-6 weeks (I figure 1 week primary,
2 weeks secondary and 2-3 weeks in the bottle).
- --
Paul A. Hausman <Paul@Lion.com>
Lafayette, NJ, USA
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 May 97 18:39:16 CDT
From: jwilkins@imtn.tpd.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson)
Subject: Fermentation temps
I have been having a little trouble keeping fermentation temps as low as
I would like. I have a refrigerator I ferment in and set the controller
to 62F for ales. I usually ferment in a 10 gallon SS soft drink keg with
a thermometer strip stuck on it. I was fermenting a 9 gallon batch last
weekend which I had chilled from the kettle to sanitized buckets which
were placed in the fridge for about an hour before pouring to the fermenter,
oxygenating, and pitching. The fridge was below 50F but I didn't check the
temp of the wort as I did not have a sanitized thermometer handy. It should
have been well below 70F, though. I pitched a healthy yeast slurry after
oxygenating thoroughly and the airlock was bubbling steadily a few hours
later. The next day foam was pushing out of the airlock and the strip
thermometer on the side of the fermenter read 75F. The fridge was still set
at 62F and had been since pitching. Could the ferment be generating that
much heat or could the strip thermometer be that far off? I realize that
the air in the fridge is not the most efficient way to remove heat but the
fermenter is too large to set in a bucket of water and ultimately the
problem of transfer of heat from liquid to air remains. I don't think I can
afford a glycol jacket for my fermenter. Any ideas?
Thanks,
John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins@imtn.dsccc.com
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2429, 05/29/97
*************************************
-------
