Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2484
HOMEBREW Digest #2484 Thu 14 August 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:
AB beer school (AJN)
licorice; liquor tank ("Myers, John")
Homebrew Favorites (RUSt1d?)
Flaked Barley ("John Penn")
Mint Question ("John Penn")
Carbonation Problems (Tim Steffens)
Bucket Chiller (RUSt1d?)
GABF? Worth The Trip? (Jim Thomas)
hop varieties - enough! ("Andy Walsh")
survey 97 correction ("John Watts")
Hoppy PNW Ales and Pike Place Brewery ("Michael K. Cinibulk")
Plato conversions ("Graham Wheeler")
Removing Goo/Cleaning Keg Parts/ See Ya? (RANDY ERICKSON)
Re: Hydrometer Scale Conversions & Removing Goo (Spencer W Thomas)
Extraction Efficiencies ("Alan McKay")
poppet valve re-seating (Randy Ricchi)
Extraction Efficiency (Alpinessj)
US Tettnanger conspiracy! (Andy Walsh)
Can I save my brew?? (Mark Arneson)
malta bottles (Mark Tumarkin)
Cornie Questions... (Some Guy)
IPAs and hop heaven (Mark Tumarkin)
Flying homebrew (Calvin Perilloux)
pounds to volume conversion rate (Eugene Sonn)
Licorice, Specific Gravity,Iodine test, ("David R. Burley")
What to do with a leaking corny keg? (Chris Ragaisis)
Rogue Ales (DGofus)
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!!!
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 brewery@realbeer.com
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, 12 Aug 1997 08:07:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: AJN <neitzkea@frc.com>
Subject: AB beer school
This past weekend I went to Sea World in Ohio. At the parking gate one
of the papers I was handed said: Budweiser beer school.
Well I just had to go.
Their agenda:
Learn how we use the finest natural ingredients to brew Bud
Learn why fresh beer tastes better
Receive a certified beermaster certificate.
I was surprised at the amount of information they gave out, such as the
ratio of rice to malt.
Michalob is brewed with a 80% 20% ratio, and bud a 70% 30% ratio, bud lite
is 65% 35%. They didn't say and I didn't ask, but a mich lite is a bud!
Bud is 5% alcohol and bud lite is 4.2%. The "teascher" said that they
have 23 varities of hops and use 17 for the bud line alone.
Bush and O'Douls (sp) used a percentage of corn grits (I didn't ask how
much).
The reason for using beechwood aging, is that the yeast clings to the
curled wood chips, exposing more beer to the yeast, allowing for a faster
aging process of 24 days. It was amusing watching (on the video) of a guy
standing in the lagering tanks, moving the beechwood chips around with a
rake, this was before the lagering! Hopefully it is steamed first to
sanitize!
All bottles and cans are pastureized, kegs are not.
When it came time for the "fresh beer" sampling, they poured a bud in one
cup and a "old" bud in another cup, I guess I wouldn't make a very good
beer judge, because I didn't taste any difference. The guy also admited
that the "old" bud was abused (held at warm temps for a long time).
The guy indicated that after the 110 "expiration" date, the beer was
returned to AB, of course one joker made the comment it was relabled as
bush and sent out again :)
They also gave a sample of a amber and a mich, again I wouldn't make a
good judge, since they all tasted the same. Please note that before I
started making my own, you would have found me with a michalob and I
still take it with me when I need cans.
Of course he had to slam the micro's because they do ales which are
easierto do , even though he had a pale ALE sitting on the table, from a
micro!
So if your on the east side of Ohio and want to see some rather large
fish :), take the 30 minutes for some mild amusement, and get a certified
beermaster certificate, I got mine :)
_________________________________________________________
Arnold J. Neitzke Internet Mail: neitzkea@frc.com
Brighton, Mi CEO of the NightSky brewing Company
- ---------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 08:29:50 -0400
From: "Myers, John" <JMyers@polkaudio.com>
Subject: licorice; liquor tank
Gentlepeople,
A couple of questions for the collective.
* I was reading an article about a Reading, PA brewpub that was adopting
an old rediscovered recipe for a porter. The recipe called for
licorice, but the publication (I believe it was the Chesapeake Bay
Schooner) noted that anise would have to be substituted since the FDA
prohibits licorice. HUH???? Does this mean I can blame all my
indiscretions on being a "Licorice Baby"? If yes, is there some
gullible but filthy rich group or person I can sue? ;^) Seriously,
what's the deal, and no, I didn't just crawl out from under a rock.
* Has anybody ever used one of those commercial coffee urns (Westbend, I
think) as a hot liquor tank or mash tun? They look like stainless steel
with a glass sight gage and electric heat. I reckon they hold 3 or more
gallons, and I assume the heating element capable of bringing that
volume to at least 170F in a reasonable amount of time. I think a good
cleaning and a little modification would make this worthwhile if a used
urn could be acquired at a reasonable price. I think I can get one, but
don't want to haul home more junk if it's not suitable.
Thanks in advance.
cheers,
j
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 09:11:38 -0700
From: RUSt1d? <rust1d@usa.net>
Subject: Homebrew Favorites
Has anyone else received their copy of Lutzen and Stevens lastest book
"More Homebrew Favorites" free in the mail? It surprised me when I got
it and I wondered why until I saw I had a couple of recipes of mine
printed. I just wonder how you guys found the addresses of each of the
contributors??
Soon to be brewin' again...my spring stash is on its last keg! Eeep.
- --
John Varady http://www.netaxs.com/~vectorsys/varady
Boneyard Brewing The HomeBrew Recipe Calculating Program
Lafayette Hill, PA * New email address ***> rust1d@usa.net
------------------------------
Date: 12 Aug 1997 09:16:50 -0400
From: "John Penn" <john_penn@spacemail.jhuapl.edu>
Subject: Flaked Barley
Subject: Time:9:03 AM
OFFICE MEMO Flaked Barley Date:8/12/97
Doug Moyer--I tried to send this as a private email but it went to the
previous HBD poster rather than you so I'll put in on the HBD. Don't mean to
waste too much BW...
>I agree, probably no diastatic enzymes in M&F extract. Mash using about
>1.5 qts/# of malt in a small cooler. A bag to hold the malt is
>convenient or you can just strain the malt through a wire mesh
>strainer. Equal parts of barley malt and flaked barley sounds OK or you
>can always use more barley malt too. You don't want to overdilute the
>mash which is different than steeping where it doesn't generally matter
>how thick the mash is. Hold 150-158F for about an hour then pour into
>your pot. You can rinse the grains with hot water to get a little more
>sugar out of them. A single step infusion is just about as easy as
>steeping except you have to be a little more careful about temperature,
>you let it sit a little longer, and you have to mash between 1-2qts/# of
>malt. Good luck.
> John Penn
------------------------------
Date: 12 Aug 1997 09:26:17 -0400
From: "John Penn" <john_penn@spacemail.jhuapl.edu>
Subject: Mint Question
Subject: Time:9:10 AM
OFFICE MEMO Mint Question Date:8/12/97
I was contemplating a chocolate mint stout recipe that called for 4oz of mint
leaves in the secondary. Based on all the posts about hops and drying them, I
became concerned about how to best use the mint. The recipe called for raw
mint leaves, not "dried", in the secondary.
1) Now presumably hops are OK in the secondary but is there anything I can do
to "clean" the mint leaves that I pick so that I reduce the infection chance?
2) Should I use raw leaves, or should I dry them first? I don't want that
grassy flavor similar to undried hops.
3) Should I add mint leaves to the secondary? Or has anyone tried them added
at the end of the boil like aroma hops?
4) Is 4oz of undried mint leaves too much?
Thanks for any advice or help.
John Penn
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 08:37:40 -0500 (EST)
From: Tim Steffens <tsteffen@indyvax.iupui.edu>
Subject: Carbonation Problems
Hi gang,
I've been listening for some time known and what a great format. Kudos to
list master(s).
I've been having a problem with carbonation. I've started brewing again
after 6 years and my last 2 batches have had little to NO carbonation.
The first batch was a basic American Wheat all extract brew. 2 stage
fermenter. When I racked it to the 2nd fermenter the bubbles in the air
lock were about 6 minutes apart. I think I left it go to long? When I
racked it to the bottling bucket I added the sugar directly to the brew and
stirred it very gently as not to add any air. In the end some were more
carbonated than others but none were carbonated like they should be.
The second batch I just opened yesterday and NONE of it carbonated this
time. This was a Brown Ale part grain and extract. I kept the yeast in the
starter to long and killed it. Put I rehydrated some more and it was
churning like mad with in 24 hours. And again I think I waited to long to
rack it to the second fermenter. The bubbles were 6-8 minutes apart. This
time I made a sugar starter, boiled some water, let it cool, and pitched
the sugar to that. Added the started to the bottling bucket and racked the
brew. Waited 2 weeks and NO carbonation.
What am I doing wrong? Am I waiting to long to rack it to the 2nd fermenter
or is it something when I bottle it?
HELP!!!
Tim Steffens, CRA
Indiana University Medical Center
tsteffen@indyvax.iupui.edu
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 10:20:29 -0700
From: RUSt1d? <rust1d@usa.net>
Subject: Bucket Chiller
>A question that arose during a discussion about building a CF chiller.
>Rather than have the copper tubing run thru a hose, why not just set
>the coil into a bucket of water? Or, if the space is available,
>freeze the water first. Cleaning out the tubing would still be an
>issue, but construction would be much simplier. Has this been tried?
Yes. It don't work so good. I made a chiller with a 5 gallon bucket and
30' of 3/8 copper coil. The coil went in one side of the lid and out the
other side. Into the bottom side of the bucket I had a garden hose in
and outta the top side I had a hose comming out. The lid snapped on and
the water flowed into the bottom and out of the hose at the top. I had
many problems with the lid popping off under the pressure generated by
the water. This flooded the brewery (which sucks when using electric)
and made a mess. And to top it off, the flow had to be maintained very
slowly to achieve the desired temp. I threw this thing out two weeks
ago.
- --
John Varady http://www.netaxs.com/~vectorsys/varady
Boneyard Brewing The HomeBrew Recipe Calculating Program
Lafayette Hill, PA * New email address ***> rust1d@usa.net
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 10:31:39 -0500
From: Jim Thomas <jim.thomas@telops.gte.com>
Subject: GABF? Worth The Trip?
To All Past Attendees of the Great American Beer Festival:
I'm considering a trip to Denver in October and I'm wondering what to
expect if I go to the Festival.
I'll likely go to the AHA Members-Only Tasting so, if you've been to
that, you're feedback would be appreciated.
Questions...
1. Is it a mob scene?
2. Remembering the brew-haha last year over the policy change regarding
backpacks...is there that much stuff to bring back? If so, what kind of
stuff is there for the taking?
3. What are prices like for food and GABF merchandise?
4. Are brewery booths "manned" by folks from the brewery, or by festival
volunteers?
Thanks for the feedback. (Private replies are fine)
Jim
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 02:00:58 +1000
From: "Andy Walsh" <awalsh@crl.com.au>
Subject: hop varieties - enough!
From: Christopher W Kafer <ckafer@iastate.edu>
>I am wondering if any other methods have been used to
>differentiate varieties/cultivars such as RFLP or RAPD markers etc.
>Anybody know? My literature search didn't bring up much. Hmmmm... maybe
>we could get a grant from somewhere...
At last an open mind out there in HBDland has prompted me to post again on
this topic, in hope of reaching similar souls...
I can find only one reference on DNA fingerprinting methods of hop
identification in the technical literature (1). This article describes an
RAPD method of DNA fingerprinting. They mention the accepted accuracy of
GLC techniques when cones are available, but how RAPD methods are very
useful when new yards are being established and varietal authentication is
required at an early stage of growth (before cones develop). They compare
several varieties of hop, including Fuggle, but not US Tettnanger
(unfortunately). They comment on the DNA similarity of many hop varieties.
You can be sure that AB have done much more research on RAPD than is
discussed in this article, but that is all they are publishing right now.
All varieties tested were differentiated by this technique, including
Fuggle and Wil-LAM-ette, a triploid Fuggle derivative. DNA fingerprinting
techniques were originally developed to analyse human DNA in forensic and
medical applications, BTW.
I have also researched the GLC chromatogram technique, of which I shall
attempt to give an overview of here, although I make no pretences about
being an expert!
Chemical methods of hop identification have really only developed since
1990. Earlier methods, such as lead conductance value (% alpha acids),
provide only an indication of variety. The GLC chromatogram technique
measures the proportions of hydrocarbons in the sesquiterpene region, which
are comparatively non-volatile. Ratios of essential oils in this region to
beta-caryophyllene remain comparatively independent for a particular
variety, despite growing conditions (climate, year, maturity, location).
The *amount* of oils will vary substantially, particularly myrcene, and the
volatile oils, but not the ratio of some oils to caryophllene. The
hydrocarbon fraction may represent 85% of the essential oils, but only 70%
of the aroma. A particular variety may have substantailly different brewing
categoristics, but may be identified by its chromatogram signature. This
has been substantiated throughout the world. (2,3,4).
Colin Green of Wye has stated the following (of samples he has tested)-
- 16 different samples of US Tettnanger appear to be Fuggle
- one sample of German Tettnanger appears to be Saaz
- one sample of Australian Tettnanger appears to be Fuggle
- one sample of Australian Hallertauer appears to be Fuggle
Another study appeared at the same time in TQMBAA (4). They give details of
the GLC results of several hop types. US Tettnanger and US Fuggle show
remarkably similar chromatograms in the sesquiterpene region and are
virtually indistinguishable, supporting Colin's (US tettnanger = Fuggle)
hypothesis. US Hallertauer was substantially different from Fuggle, which
suggests that the Australian clone of US Hallertauer (looked like Fuggle)
was not representative of US Hallertauer (looks like Hallertauer!)
Look, this gets bloody complicated. It has only been over the last decade
that chemical means have been developed to test hop variety. Before this,
we relied on appearance. Since many hops are virtually indistinguishable
(even from a DNA perspective), what chance do we have of being sure of a
particular plant's origins? It's hardly surprising that two noble European
hops might really be the same thing.
There will be much more written on this in future. At the moment I would
say that the majority of evidence suggests that US Tettnanger is really
Fuggle. The number of samples of the other results are possibly too small
to be representative. The same variety grown under different conditions
will also brew differently, so forget about the anecdotal evidence.
Have I said enough on this yet? I think so. Just keep an open mind.
Andy.
References:
(1) MS Abbott, MJ Fedele, "A DNA-based varietal identification procedure
for hop leaf tissue" Anheuser-Busch Companies. JIB 1994. v100 pp283-285.
(2) J Freundorfer, J Maier, L Reiner, "Computer-aided method for
identification of the cultivar of hops and hop products on the basis of
essential oils. II. Effects of environment and processing on properties of
hop oils" 1991. Monatsschrift-fuer-Brauwissenschaft. v44 (6) pp221-238.
(3) ST Kenny. "Identification of US-grown hop cultivars by hop acid and
essential oil analyses". 1990. JASBC. p 3.
(4) GJ Stucky, MR McDaniel. "Raw hop aroma qualities by trained panel
free-choice profiling" JASBC. 1997. p65.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 06:02:06 -0500
From: "John Watts" <watts@top.net>
Subject: survey 97 correction
I goofed when I gave the URL for the survey. It should have been
www.top.net/watts/beer97.htm.
I guess I shouldn't have a couple of homebrews before typing.
John Watts
watts@top.net
www.top.net/watts
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 97 13:15:46 -0400
From: "Michael K. Cinibulk" <cinibumk@ml.wpafb.af.mil>
Subject: Hoppy PNW Ales and Pike Place Brewery
George De Piro wrote:
>It seems that in the quest to replace bland, light lagers, the area (Pacific
>NW) brewers have become monotonous on the hoppy end of the spectrum! What
>ever happened to malt? Where is balance? I found this to be true at many of
>the area bars and brewpubs, too. Pike Place Brewery was particularly
>one-dimensional. If >you only like hoppy beers, you'll like what their
>doing.
At first I found myself in complete agreement; then I read the comment about
Pike Place. Granted, I haven't tried any of their products in over 2 years,
but the reason I liked their Pale Ale and Stout so much is that (I thought)
they actually were different from most other highly hopped Pacific NW ales.
Has something changed in the past two years? I seem to remember a well
balanced PA with something other than the usual overdose of Cascades.
Mike Cinibulk
Bellbrook, Ohio
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 18:12:21 +0100
From: "Graham Wheeler" <Graham.Wheeler@btinternet.com>
Subject: Plato conversions
Troy Hojel asks:
> Can anyone help me with an *accurate* formula for Specific gravity-
> Plato conversions?
Troy is unlikely to find a precisely *accurate* formula for this without
doing lots of first-principle calculation in his spreadsheet for each beer
he designs, because the two systems are not directly comparable. Degrees
Plato is simply %w/w sugar concentration (weight of sugar / total weight of
solution), but this is a non-linear function, so simply dividing by a
single constant is not particularly accurate.
The closest Troy is likely to get without getting into heavy maths is:
(SG-1) * 258.85
- ---------------
SG
Where SG is in the form of 1.xxx
This is still an approximation, but it follows the table published in
"Malting and Brewing Science", 1971 edition, to about two decimal places.
This is perfectly adequate for home brewing purposes. I have my doubts
about the accuracy of the Plato table anyway, because when I try to work it
out from first principles, I come up with different figures to Plato. Mind
you, the tables in different references give different SG / Plato figures
anyway.
Graham Wheeler
High Wycombe
England
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 11:23:36 -0700
From: RANDY ERICKSON <RANDYE@mid.org>
Subject: Removing Goo/Cleaning Keg Parts/ See Ya?
Rick Raver mentions a product called "Goo Gone".
FWIW, there is something very similar called "Goof Off" which cleans
about anything. I'm not affiliated with Goof Off, but I do have half a bottle
in my garage.
******************
Art McGregor asks about cleaning keg poppet valves and pressure relief
valves and includes some amazing ASCII art:
I don't remember where I read it, but some keggers theorize that frequent
disassembly of the valve bodies does more harm than good to the
threads, o-rings, and poppets.
I do a thorough cleaning and rebuild when I first get a keg and make sure
I get all of the crud out of every crevice. After that, I make sure that I
keep it clean so that it never needs disassembly. Like most things it life,
it'll last longer if you clean it when you're done with it and put it away
ready to use next time. (How come I never believed that when my Dad
said it ;-)
I fill my recently emptied kegs with a soaking solution of PBW or B-brite
and let it soak right-side-up and upside-down so that all interior surfaces
come in contact with the solution. I then drain some of the cleaning
solution through the gas-in valve (I use a spare QD) and through the
pressure release valve. I then hook up the CO2 tank and beer line and
force the solution out to clean the liquid-out valve and the beer line and
faucet. Rinse well with lots of water.
It's probably overkill, but I use boiling water to sanitize when filling a
(clean) keg. I put the keg lid in a small bucket and cover with boiling
water to soak for a few minutes (This softens up the lid gasket nicely
too). I then pour a couple of gallons of boiling water into the keg and
close the lid. I then shake the hell out of the keg for a few minutes.
Wearing gloves, I jam the spare gas-in QD onto the valve (point away
from myself), and let it vent steam. I then open the pressure relief and
run out some hot water out through it. Finally I connect the gas and a
liquid out QD and force out the remainder of the water.
It seems to work for me, what do some of the rest of you do?
*****************
Jethro then says, somewhat cryptically, "See Ya!":
Is that some sort of inside joke that passes over the head of us who
don't exactly have our fingers on the pulse of the beer scene? Say it
ain't so Rob!!! What gives?
Cheers -- Randy in Modesto
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 16:17:13 -0400
From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer@engin.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Hydrometer Scale Conversions & Removing Goo
Steve Johnson (johnson@uansv5.vanderbilt.edu) quotes Charlie P:
"The numbers that represent this measurement and expressed in degrees
Plato are equal to one-fourth the value of the last three numbers that
indicate specific gravity."
Well, not exactly.
A curve fit (due to deClerck) gives:
E = 0.258*(1-0.0008*Pts)*Pts + 0.003
where E is extract in degrees Plato, and Pts is (SG - 1) * 1000
Two important things to note:
1. The conversion is not quite linear.
2. The factor is not exactly 1/4.
And a third, probably irrelvant thing:
3. The 0 points are not identical (I think this may be an artifact of
the curve fit.)
In a table:
Plato Points Plato Points Plato Points
0 0 10 40 20 83
1 4 11 44 21 87
2 8 12 48 22 92
3 12 13 53 23 96
4 16 14 57 24 101
5 20 15 61 25 105
6 24 16 65 26 110
7 28 17 70 27 115
8 32 18 74 28 119
9 36 19 78 29 124
10 40 20 83 30 129
>From this we see that the "times 4" conversion works up to 12P, at
which point the non-linear factor becomes apparent.
=Spencer Thomas in Ann Arbor, MI (spencer@umich.edu)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 16:05:59 -0500
From: "Alan McKay" <Alan.McKay.amckay@nt.com>
Subject: Extraction Efficiencies
Rob Keinle writes :
MHO I believe that the extraction *deficiencies* many of us see are
directly related to our sparging techniques. For 5 years, I too mashed
on the stovetop, transferred the mash to a bucket, and sparged using
Phil's setup. My efficiencies were *always* around 5 pts off projection
and *consistently* about 70% overall. I am certain the problem was due
to temperature loss in transferring the grain and an inability to make
up for that loss with 170 degree sparge water.
My proof for this assumption is the fact that, at the beginning of this
year, I switched to a dedicated 3-vessel system in which the grain is
*not* moved to another vessel for sparging and heat may continue to be
applied to it (as well as to the sparge water itself) throughout the
sparge procedure.
Alan McKay responds :
Rob, you can't change your entire brewing system and then say that
you attribute your higher extraction to one simple variable like the
water
temperature, or whether or not you have to transfer the mash. This
is so far from a controlled experiment that it isn't funny. You've
basically
changed every single variable, yet want to believe that your better
extraction is a result of only one of them.
I agree with what you are trying to say to some extent, but please be
careful about how you draw your conclusions. I've also seen evidence
that simply brewing larger batches can increase efficiency, too.
Sometimes dramatically. You may think that everything is the same
as it was, but it most certainly cannot be if you've changed your
entire system.
For what it's worth, though, in my own controlled experiments (i.e.
only one variable changed), I get at least 5% better extraction if I
include
a mashout (~170F) than when I don't (~155F).
cheers,
-Alan
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 17:22:01 -0400
From: Randy Ricchi <rricchi@ccisd.k12.mi.us>
Subject: poppet valve re-seating
Art McGregor asked how to get the poppet valve re-seated on a pin-lock keg.
Place the valve body upside down on the table/counter. Place the valve
(also upside down, of course) inside the body.
Now take the short gas-side dip tube out of your keg. Put the bottom of
the dip tube over the stem of the valve. It fits beautifully inside the
curves of the three legs. Now push until you see or feel (you should be
able to do both) the three legs seat in the groove inside the body.
Sorry, I don't have any advice about the pressure relief valve.
Randy Ricchi
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 18:48:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: Alpinessj@aol.com
Subject: Extraction Efficiency
I am looking for suggestions to increase my extraction efficiency. I have
never gotten over 70%. I think my problems lie in temperature control at the
end of the mash and sparging.
I'll describe my system briefly. I use a 10 gallon picnic type cooler to mash
in which I have fitted with a slotted copper tubing system and a ball-lock
release valve. I have also attached a sparge arm that connects to my hot
liquor tank (a 5 gallon coller) through a hole in the top. This way I can
keep the lid shut for the sparge.
I normally use single infusion mashing from the 150 F to 156 F range
depending on style. I don't have a problem maintaining the temp during the
mash(usually 1 to 1.5 hours). I then sparge with 180 F water form the hot
liquor tank. I use 180 F to allow for a temperature drop during transfer.
Should I raise the temerature of the mash (do a mash-out) before I begin
recirculating the mash to get a clear run-off?
Should my sparge water temperature be different?
How long should the sparge last for a typical 5 gallon batch? (i.e. 10 lbs of
grain and an initial boil volume of 6 to 6.5 gallons).
What should the temperature be of my run-off from the mash-tun to the brew
pot?
I recently moved to Denver from South Carolina, do I need to use any special
procedures during brewing to account for the altitude change? (approx. 4000
ft)
Thank you in advance for your answers and suggestions.
Scott Jackson
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 13:01:20 -0700
From: Andy Walsh <awalsh@crl.com.au>
Subject: US Tettnanger conspiracy!
I'm sorry, but I can't stop myself from posting on this topic!
The following comes from the Haas hop web-site. Haas are *major* growers
in the US and also own the entire Australian hop fields (hmmm...).
http://www.john-i-haas.com/tett.htm
"Tettnanger is an old aroma variety originating in the Tettnang area
around Lake Constance in Southern Germany. Selection of Tettnanger
rootstocks in Germany resulted in two different rootstocks now available
to U.S. growers. Each produces hops with distinct analytical data. One
is more like the German grown Tettnanger than the other. Analytical data
in this brochure are for the rootstock most widely grown in the U.S.A."
OK. One of Colin Green's (from Wye College) major points is that the
ratio of farnesene to caryophyllene is too low in US Tettnanger (around
0.6, similar to Fuggle, rather than the 2.7 of German Tettnanger). The
Haas site presents similar data for the common US Tettnanger, and admits
there are now two different rootstocks for the variety, and that one
gives more true to type cultivars. The data shown (for the most common
one) does not show true to type farnesene ratios.
So how's this for a conspiracy theory? The US hop growers realised (too
late!) they stuffed up when importing Tettnanger, which has been on sale
since 1986. (this one is the most common today, was exported by Haas to
their Australian fields, and are also the samples tested by Colin Green
and found to be Fuggle). So they tried again (after the first was
already established), got a second rootstock, which is the real thing,
which they are now steadily introducing to eventually take over from the
original botch up. But do you think they are going to let all the
brewers know they've been misled for several years? NO WAY JOSE! They
don't want to look stupid!
Their conspiracy has been unmasked on the HBD!
Even if this theory is all BS, and that no US Tettnanger is really
Fuggle (remember Wye College says it is!), readers should be aware that
there are two completely different hops grown in the US being sold as US
Tettnanger. A major hop grower has admitted this. So make sure you get
the right one!
Andy "Sherlock" Walsh.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 01:47:02 -0400
From: Mark Arneson <marnes@hom.net>
Subject: Can I save my brew??
Hi all,
I got a pale ale brewing.
(all grain 10 Lbs of pale malt)
I pitched the yeast (dry M & F ale yeast)
on saturday, with an OG of 1.045. It pretty much stopped
fermenting on monday with a gravity of about 1.022
I arieated (spell) the wort with O2 while it was being
X-ferred off of the trub. My other 2 batched turned out great
but I used Wyeast for them.
Will a pack of Wyeast help me here??
Thanks for any help!
Mark
marnes@hom.net
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 06:35:16 -0400
From: Mark Tumarkin <tumarkin@mindspring.com>
Subject: malta bottles
Hi all,
Here's some more on the ongoing Malta theme (which seems to rival the
botulism thread - although come to think of it they sometimes seem to be
the same thread) - Delano DuGarm's experiment seems to put to rest the idea
of using Malta as a yeast starter medium. Then Al Petrukhin's questions
using small bottles:
>Lady G wrote in #2471:
> We found that the 22 oz bottles had a lot more fizz
> than the 12 ozers.
> Whether really it and the quality of carbonation (by priming
>sugar) depends on a size of bottles?! Whether someone can explain
>this effect (or to refute it)?
> I have 2 boxes of small bottles (on 300 grams) and I planned
>to use them in near future. Is it bad idea for the reason of
>problems with carbonation (by priming sugar) and better to me use
>bottles of a greater size?
My son-in-law loves Malta Goya which they sell here in Miami in 7 oz
bottles. Personally, I don't care for Malta, it's way too sweet and talk
about out of balance, it could use some major hopping! But I have found a
good use for the Malta bottles. I fill one or two bottles with each batch
of beer. Being sometimes impatient, I can then open up a small bottle to
check carbonation far earlier than I might with a 12 oz. without feeling
guilty if it hasn't had enough time. I haven't seen any problem with
developing good carbonation in the small bottles, it seems like a function
of enough time - just like with bigger bottles.
Another good use for these little bottles would be in bottling a
Barleywine. I just don't have enough of them - maybe later.
Mark Tumarkin
The Brewery in the Jungle
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 20:26:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: Some Guy <pbabcock@oeonline.com>
Subject: Cornie Questions...
Greetings Beerlings! Get me out of New Jersey...
With all the talk of kegging parts and shtuff, another
better-than-a-year-old-not-quite-finished-work-in-progress comes to mind.
Take a peek at http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/kegging
This is another part of that "online book" I've been struggling with over
the past year (moreso now, since I have no time). Not sure where I left
it (and too dagnabbid tired to look at the moment), but it may help some.
See ya!
Pat Babcock in SE Michigan pbabcock@oeonline.com
Home Brew Digest Janitor janitor@hbd.org
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 07:12:34 -0400
From: Mark Tumarkin <tumarkin@mindspring.com>
Subject: IPAs and hop heaven
Matthew Arnold and Matt Gadow both wrote about hoppy IPA's in this past
HBD, Matt even invites > Anyone want to start a "worship of the
IPA style" thread?
=20
I'll bite. This month, IPA is the style for the competition at my homebrew
club - M.A.S.H. (Miami Area Society of Homebrewers). The following two
paragraphs are the opening of an article I wrote for our newsletter: =20
So, did you hear Clint Eastwood now has a brewpub with a beer called Pale
Rider? Stop laughing, it's not a joke=85 it's true. Maybe unbelievable, but
true none the less. One thought leads to another as I sit here drinking one
of my really hoppy homebrewed pale ales, I got to wondering if he'll start
thinking of his early Sphagetti Western days and come up with an "Indian"
Pale Ale? It could happen=85 It's kind of sad; is that where marketing is
taking microbrews these days? Every micro and brew pub seems to have
settled on an IPA as one of the requisite brews they must have in their
line-up. And yet, how many of those brews are really to style; a decent
pale ale, let alone a good IPA??? Too few, too damn precious few.=20
Of course, I'm prejudiced. It's hard to choose one favorite beer with so
many wonderful choices; porters, wits, stouts, Trappist ales, IPAs (of
course), barleywines, bitters, IPAs (oh, did, I already mention them?) =85
yeah it's hard to choose, but not that hard. If I could only drink one
style, I wouldn't hesitate for a minute.. assertively bittered India Pale
Ale comes up the winner!! Even the name sounds wonderful, the aroma is
heavenly, and the flavor incredible, down to that lingering dry hop finish!
What kind of beer do they serve in Heaven? It's gotta be India Pale Ale.
=20
I'm sure you get the drift - I like hoppy IPAs, and most aren't. Both of
the Matts talk about recipes that a hophead can love. Dave Brockington
certainly qualifies as a hophead. I have been playing with high alpha hops
in large amounts in my recent batches. In my last 5 gal batch, I used 4 oz
Columbus for bittering, this was followed by 2 oz of Cascades, and then
dryhopped with another 2 oz of Cascades. It is still dryhopping,so I don't
know what it's like yet. I'll bottle it this weekend. It will still be a
little young at the end of the month for the competition (especially with
this high hopping rate it could use more ageing time). I also like using
Chinook, another high alpha hop. =20
Dave Burley recently commented about Northwestern brews being too hoppy, or
rather too one-dimensionally hoppy - I would agree that we should try for
balance. But on the other hand, it's fun to push the envelope. I personally
think it's hard to go over the top with hopping. With my recent batches, I
have been trying to achieve sort of an essay on hops. I want assertive
bittering, good hop flavor, and great aroma. Hops all the way through to a
lingering finish. Is that too much too want?=20
Yes Matt, I quess I do sort of worship IPAs. As I said above, I think
that's what kind of beer they serve in Heaven. Sorry for the waste of
bandwith, I quess I get easily carried away on this subject.=20
Hoppy brewing,=20
Mark Tumarkin
The Brewery in the Jungle
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 07:32:40 -0400
From: Calvin Perilloux <peril@compuserve.com>
Subject: Flying homebrew
Regarding the question about bringing your homebrew with
you on commercial flights, it can be done, with caveats:
Carry-on is the safest for the beer if you have only a
few bottles, especially if you plan on drinking them =
within a few days of arrival, since you can avoid the =
shaking that checked baggage gets. However, the X-ray =
monkeys will sometimes ask to see it and might even =
confiscate it.
I have had it confiscated only once, in North Carolina. =
They asked to see the bag, and when they saw the scratched =
Beck's labels and Sunkist caps, they said "No Way!". =
I argued with those minimum wage flunkies a while because =
they couldn't quote me any specific rule about homebrew or
other carbonated, bottled beverages being prohibited (and =
I wored for an airline and new of none regarding it!), but =
it was a matter of keeping the homebrew but missing my flight =
at that point, and I finally gave up and left it. I hope it =
was infected and exploded in their locker.
I have not since had any problems, mostly because after that
when I brought homebrew in carry-on bags I used commercial =
bottles with the labels intact and plain crown caps.
Checked-Luggage: This works fine, too. But pack that stuff =
like it's going to be dropped from four feet high. It might =
even be, as I saw US Air (gee, I love that airline) do with =
my hard shell suitcase in Pittsburgh, teetering it awkwardly
four feet up before it smashed to the ground on the top handle
as I watched from the window, horrified. However, not a single
bottle was broken, more than I could say for the suitcase.
Wrap EACH bottle in a half-section of newspaper, then tape =
around it. I then put each in a plaastic bag (I re-use them =
later) tied up in case the bottle does break. It is essential =
make sure the padding is well stuck to each bottle. Stuffing =
bottles randomly amongst old underwear won't do it, never mind =
the psychological flavor/aroma effects later. Never, ever,
have any part of the bottle peeking out from the paper, even
the cap, since a whack there will shatter the neck. Use hard
shell luggage if you can. Doing this I have never lost a bottle
out of hundreds, save for the dumb time I packed beer AND an
IBM XT PC in the same case which went for a smashup on a =
Frankfurt escalator, and even then only one bottle was lost,
and the liquid was absorbed quite well.
Finally, I have no relation to the above mentioned airline other
than being a sati... er, well, er, just a previous customer.
Calvin Perilloux
Bondi Junction, Australia
peril@compuserve.com
p.s. Let's hope I cracked the =3D20 junk problem. Apologies if not.=
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 07:58:08 -0400 (EDT)
From: Eugene Sonn <eugene@dreamscape.com>
Subject: pounds to volume conversion rate
Hello HBD,
Since I've received such a large response to my question, I'm
posting the results. I wanted to know how I could use volume measurements
to figure out how much malt to use in a batch. This is important to me
and anyone who buys extract in bulk and who doesn't have access to an
accurat scale.
The suggestions:
1) several people gave approximations such as
1 cup = .75 lbs
1 cup = .63 lbs
1 cup = .70 lbs
1 liter = 3.15 lbs
2) I also had several people suggest using empty cans of
extract since they have the weight marked on the label. Since the
above approximations don't agree exacctly, this suggestion would be best
used if the can had contained the same type of extract (light, dark etc)
as the bulk extract you're measuring.
Thanks to everyone who responded. I made one batch without the
benefit of this help and ended up using entirely too much malt. I ended
up making a california common beer with quite a kick and too much
sweetness. It's not to style, but it tastes pretty good nonethless.
Now back to brewing.
Eugene
eugene@nova.dreamscape.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 08:35:30 -0400
From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: Licorice, Specific Gravity,Iodine test,
Brewsters:
Tom Moench comments on the licorice taste he gets with RO water and I
occasionally get the same. I think it is related to the hops and goes aw=
ay
in a week or so in my experience as the hops taste mellows. Often I get
this taste when brewers use high alpha hops as bittering hops.
- ---------------------------------------
Brian Kuhl asks for some rough numbers of SG for fruit juices. My best
suggestion is to measure it by crushing some fruit and strain off the jui=
ce
and use you hydrometer.
Grapes typically have an SG in the region of 1.1. They are the highest
sugar content fruit so expect other fruits to be less than this and more
like half of this.
- --------------------------------------
Keith Royster ponders if his conversion was complete in 15 minutes based =
on
an iodine test in his crystal clear wort from RIMS.
I doubt it. Likely you filtered out all the starchy particles by
recirculating them through the bed. Frankly, Charlie Papazian must have
had the same problem, as you can be easily mislead by his comments on thi=
s
test and recommended short length of conversion and his comments that the=
husks give a black reaction to iodine. They do if there is still
unconverted starch there.
The iodine test is poorly understood and really only works for situation=
s
where you have finely divided particles or *preferably* starch released
into the test solution. Decoction mashers can use the iodine test easily,=
but for all of us infusion mashers it takes a little more effort to get
consistent results.
To really find the end of the conversion step, take a sample of the *bed=
*
including the wort and grain particles and heat it to boiling in the
microwave to free any starch. Do the iodine test on this liquid sample. =
You will be surprised to find that it takes sometimes 11/2 hours to get a=
complete conversion depending on the milling, malts and temperature/time =
history. Just like the big boys (do you think they would spend so long in=
the saccharification step if it wasn't necessary?) You will also be very=
pleasantly surprised to find a much improved yield and most importantly a=
consistency in your brews. =
- --------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 08:05:56 -0600
From: chris@megsinet.net (Chris Ragaisis)
Subject: What to do with a leaking corny keg?
I have a 5 gallon corny keg that just won't seal. It's been like this
since I got it (St. Patrick's, if you must know) a couple of years ago, but
since I have 3 others, I just put up with it. Well, no longer! Is there
something I can do about this, or should I just pitch the thing and mark it
up to experience?
Thanks,
Chris Ragaisis
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 09:02:54 -0400 (EDT)
From: DGofus@aol.com
Subject: Rogue Ales
I have recently tried a few of Rogue ales. Can anybody tell me more about
this brewery and its offerings? I tried Rogues Dead Guy Ale, Their Red Ale? ,
and their Ale. All were VERY TASTY. I then checked out my local distributer (
I almost forgot where it was since starting to hombrew) and was very unhappy
with the price. Damn good beer always cost a mint! Why?.... Bastards, I feel
like I am getting raped with my pants on everytime I buy a good beer. Well
enough of that. Does anybody have extract recipes that would duplicate some
of Rogues fine products? I enjoy the taste, but cannot afford the real deal.
Thanks plenty in advance.
Bob Fesmire
Pottstown, PA
Dgofus@aol.com
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2484, 08/14/97
*************************************
-------
