Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2564
HOMEBREW Digest #2564 Sat 22 November 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:
Press Release: MCAB Qualifying Events Announced ("Louis K. Bonham")
Re: Justifying Beer Making (Don Ogaard)
cleaning blowoff hoses ("Bob Spiers")
RE: Solarflow Burners (Art Steinmetz)
Spousal unit approval of HBD hobby (kathy)
Homemade Beer Engines (Mike Spinelli)
Homebrew Humor ("Ellery.Samuels")
Blonde Ale (Bob Tisdale)
Beer Engine ("David R. Burley")
Re: CO2 / Brewtek vs Valley Mill (Richard Abato)
RE: siphon diameter ("Kensler, Paul")
O2 requirement? ("Little, Wayne")
Hopless Beer (CHUCK HUDSON 1209 MGC LABORATORY 272-1522)
RE: Beer engines ("Kensler, Paul")
boiled grains and corn sugar (where's the still!?!!?) (Samuel Mize)
Happy Holiday Homebrew Competition--Call for Entries ("Paul Demmert")
Rolling mills ("Sornborger, Nathan")
Re: Justifing makeing beer (Dan Morley)
re: Cleaning Blowoff hoses (John_E_Schnupp)
Chimay (Al Korzonas)
Dare I say....corn sugar ("Taber, Bruce")
Rousing the wee beasties ("Steven W. Smith")
Timmerman's (Al Korzonas)
parti-gyle (Al Korzonas)
microscopes (smurman)
Re: Malt vinegar (Jacques Bourdouxhe)
rakes (Al Korzonas)
yeast volcanos (Mark Weaver)
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: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 13:55:34 -0600
From: "Louis K. Bonham" <lkbonham@phoenix.net>
Subject: Press Release: MCAB Qualifying Events Announced
November 20, 1997
For immediate release:
MCAB Qualifying Events Announced
The Steering Committee of the Masters Championship of Amateur
Brewing ("MCAB") is pleased to announce that it has invited ten
premier North American amateur brewing competitions to serve as
Qualifying Events for the first MCAB, which will be held in
Houston, Texas in early 1999.
The MCAB is a new, grass-roots national amateur brewing
competition sponsored by Brewing Techniques Magazine, the
Home Beer and Wine Trade Association, the Home Brew Digest,
and the Foam Rangers Homebrew Club of Houston. The aim of
the MCAB is have a national championship of the highest
possible quality, thereby promoting the development of
the craft of amateur brewing. The MCAB will therefore
be a small, invitation-only, "champions' championship,"
where large panels of highly-qualified judges will
evaluate small numbers of the very best beers that
amateur brewing can offer.
To select the participants for the MCAB, the MCAB Steering
Committee has chosen a number of amateur brewing
competitions to serve as MCAB Qualifying Events. First
place winners at Qualifying Events in 15-20 Qualifying
Styles (BJCP substyles selected by the MCAB Steering
Committee) will receive an invitation to enter the
MCAB in that style, and will be free to brew a fresh
batch in their Qualifying Style for the MCAB.
There are many, many excellent competitions throughout
North America that could function as Qualifying Events,
and the Steering Committee (which includes some of the most
respected and recognized names in the world of amateur
brewing) has the difficult task of choosing among them.
The initial MCAB will have 10-11 Qualifying Events; in the
future, it is hoped that there can be more *if* a larger
pool of entries does not reduce the MCAB's ability to
deliver the highest possible judging and fairest possible
evaluation for the competitors.
To be a Qualifying Events, a competition must be open to
all amateur brewers (i.e., the event cannot be limited to
residents of a certain area or members of certain clubs or
organizations), must agree to offer categories for the
15-20 MCAB Qualifying Styles, must agree to use the BJCP
Style Guide for those Qualifying Styles, and must agree
to use certain flight size and judge panel specifications.
In selecting a local competition as a Qualifying Event,
the Steering Committee considered the following factors:
1. Size and reputation of the competition.
2. Reputation of the sponsoring club or clubs.
3. Geographic distribution of Qualifying Events.
4. Local or regional availability of adequate numbers of
qualified judges.
The selection of a competition as a Qualifying Event does
not annoint it as superior, nor is such selection permanent.
Indeed, while some major competitions may become perennial
Qualifying Events, the Steering Committee envisions that
Qualifying Events will probably rotate between area
competitions.
Based on these criteria, the following 1998 competitions
have been invited to be Qualifying Events for the first
MCAB:
Dixie Cup Houston
Bluebonnet Brew Off Dallas
Sunshine State Challenge Orlando
BUZZ-Off Philadelphia
BURP Spirit of Free Beer Washington, DC
Boston Homebrew Competition Boston
Bidal Society Competition Kenosha, WI
Kansas City Brew Meister's Competition Kansas City
Novembeerfest Seattle
CABA March in Montreal* Montreal
* If the CABA decides to participate and wishes to
designate a different CABA competition as a Qualifying
Event, it may do so.
The Steering Committee has also sought to identify a suitable
competition in California to invite to be a qualifying event.
At present, however, it has been unable to identify one that
meets the necessary criteria for Qualifying Events, particularly
the requirement that such competitions be open to all amateur
brewers. If the Steering Committee can identify and approve
a suitable California competition by the end of 1997, then it
will add a California-based Qualifying Event.
The Steering Committee also has promulgated the following
Mission Statement for the MCAB:
The Masters Championship of Amateur Brewing exists
to advance the art and science of amateur brewing, by:
1. Identifying and recognizing excellence and achievement
among amateur brewers;
2. Promoting and encouraging high-quality, locally-run
amateur brewing competitons and events in all regions of
North America;
3. Providing opportunities for all amateur brewers to advance
their skills, be it through competition, judging, or education;
4. Encouraging communication and cooperation between
local amateur brewing clubs;
5. Fostering understanding and advancement of the beer
evaluation process; and
6. Promoting public awareness and recognition of the craft of
amateur brewing.
The MCAB Steering Committee consists of representatives from four
sponsoring organizations: Brewing Techniques Magazine (Steven
Mallery), the Home Beer & Wine Trade Association (Dee Roberson),
the Home Brew Digest (Pat Babcock), and the Foam Rangers Homebrew
Club of Houston (Louis Bonham). It also includes seven "at large"
members: Dr. George Fix, Byron Burch, Jim Liddil, Scott Birdwell,
Scott Bickham, David Houseman, and Chuck Cox.
For further information about the MCAB, contact Louis K. Bonham
at lkbonham@phoenix.net, or at 713.222.9944.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 22:09:56 -0700
From: Don Ogaard <dogaard@trib.com>
Subject: Re: Justifying Beer Making
Delurking ... (after about 6 months or so).
Since this is my first post, a word of introduction: I've been brewing =
for a little over 10 years, all-grain for the last six. I average about =
40-50 batches per year (just put batches #36 and #37 for 1997 in the =
fermenters last Saturday.) Yeah, I know I need to step up to a bigger =
system ... not in the budget right now :^( I also culture yeast and =
have a nice library of home-adapted strains on slants. Now that the =
howdys are over,
I wanted to put in my $0.02 on Ken Lee's post on Justifying Homebrewing. =
My wife doesn't like beer (go figure), so I've been there, Bud. It's =
pretty easy to justify the ingredient costs compared to buying micros or =
imports, particularly if you buy your grain in 50-pound sacks, and I see =
you already got lots of good advice on that. (My favorite was the one =
about spending more time in bars - still giggling.) The bigger problem =
for me was the time involved for all-grain. Spending all day Saturday =
on one batch and then Sunday on another won't win you any husband/father =
of the year awards. So here's what I do:
I brew most of my routine beers using a simple infusion mash (obviously, =
this won't work for styles which demand step-infusion or decoction). =
Friday night, I start the mash, protein rest, bring to saccharification =
strike temp, then stick it in a 150 degree oven and go to bed. Get up =
at 0500 Saturday, throw it in the sparger, sparge, boil. Just before =
batch 1 starts to boil, start mash 2 (which is already ground and =
waiting), stick it in the oven. By the time mash 1 is cooled and in the =
fermenter, mash 2 is ready to go in the sparger. Voila, two batches =
and you're done by noon. Do only one batch, and you're out of the =
kitchen before the Better Half even wakes up. Unless, of course, you =
insist on doing those two and one-half hour boils.
And I agree with Scott Kaczorowski: don't waste time trying to squeeze =
out that last mash efficiency percentage point or two by being anal =
about your sparging. Add some extra to your grain bill, and sparge =
quick. Grain is cheap, your time is valuable.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 23:49:54 PST
From: "Bob Spiers" <gotcha500@hotmail.com>
Subject: cleaning blowoff hoses
I used 3/8" blow off tubing and a carboy cap in the past and now I use
1" blow off tubing. I have always cleaned with brushes? 4' lenghts in
either 3/8" diameter or 1" diameter. Works great and I don't have to
worry about chemicals.
I get the brushes through Beer, Beer & More Beer. Check out
http://www.morebeer.com no affiliation etc...
Bob Spiers
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 19:12:10 -0500
From: Art Steinmetz <asteinm@pipeline.com>
Subject: RE: Solarflow Burners
Solarflo Corporation
22901 Aurora Rd.
Bedford, OH 44146-1701
(216)439-1680
They wouldn't sell me one. Industrial applications only they said. I
tried to hook them up with the folks at SABCO in the hopes of SABCO
offering a IJ burner option on their RIMS but SABCO said it would boost the
cost to much.
I would like to get my hands on these to do a refit of the crummy
single-orifice jet burners on my RIMS unit.
- -- Art
asteinm at pipeline.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 21:06:23 -0500
From: kathy <kbooth@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us>
Subject: Spousal unit approval of HBD hobby
Five reasons to get approval of homebrewing:
Take your SO to eat at brewpubs and notable taverns. Especially if she
doesn't like beer, tell her you'll order the beer and she can order her
two favorite entrees and you'll share. Insist on dessert. Let her
drive home.
Take a job she's been wanting done (by you) and promise you'll do it
before you homebrew.
Promise that after you homebrew, you'll let her control the TV remote
the rest of the week.
Promise that after you homebrew, she can choose a couple of romantic
comedies for the two of you to watch.
Go out to a bar where the waitress is saucy and puts her hand on your
shoulder, etc. and remark with enthusiam about how much more fun it is
to be at the bar them home brewing.
Five reasons to get disapproval of homebrewing:
Damage her stove top while cooking wort.
Have her find the kitchen floor sticky the morning after.
Get a vigorous boil going with the windows shut and have condensate run
down the walls.
Fill her freezer with bags of homegrown hops.
Have her find big black fly maggotts in the composted spent mash and
have the maggots develop and get in the house.
cheers, jim booth, lansing, mi
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 97 09:01:04 est
From: paa3983@dpsc.dla.mil (Mike Spinelli)
Subject: Homemade Beer Engines
HBDers,
Gabrielle Palmer in #2562 asked about the Brew Your Own
article on making a beer engine out of a galley pump from
a boat.
I got mine from John Fogarty who is featured in the article.
He runs What's Brewing near Atlantic City NJ.
He did all the modifications that needed to be done at a very
reasonable price. I basically wanted a "turn key" beer engine
with all the fittings and hoses. Total cost was around 60 bucks
I think.
I've used it once with great results. Although I used it for the
wrong beer (a weizenbock) it still worked great. Started by
dextrose priming a 3 gallon cornie and making SURE you
seal the lid by pushing in some CO2. I made the mistake of
not adding the CO2 and 2 weeks after adding the dextrose,
had zero carbonation. Had to then force carb' the weizenbock.
Anyway, I'm using a 20 gallon American oak cask to house the
engine. The cask acts as a facade which slips over the SS cornie
keg. The bottom of the cask is removed to allow the cornie ti fit.
The top of the cask has a 1" fule that allows the pump to be attached.
All you see is the cask and the pump ontop. John Fogarty can build
you the clamp-on housing that's featured in the article if you want
a more portable pump.
In 3 weeks I'll be using it again for a party featuring a PA, ESB and
Oatmeal stout.
You can buy the galley pumps direct from the distributer whose name
I have at home. They're made in New Zealand under the name
Fyne-Spray (sp?). The distributer is in Connecticut I think. E mail
me if you want the the name and #. I had the fantastic luck of getting
the oak cask for 45 bucks! Gibbs Bros. in Hot Springs Arkansas had
a used cask that had been returned for some reason. I was so
grateful I sent the prez. 3 bottles of my monster brew.
Mike Spinelli
Mikey's Monster Brew
Cherry Hill NJ
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 97 09:43:41 EDT
From: "Ellery.Samuels" <esamuel@mvsb.nycenet.edu>
Subject: Homebrew Humor
This is an example of Homebrewers humor. Limited intelligence of course!
- ----------
Two guys of limited intelligence were on a ship that sank in the
middle of the ocean. They managed to inflate a rubber life raft
and grab a box of provisions before their ship slipped below the
surface. After floating under blazing heat for 6 days they ran
out of food and water.
On the 10th day, bleary eyed and half dead from heat, thirst and
starvation, they spotted a small object floating toward them in
the water.
As it drew near, they were ecstatic to find that it was an oil
lamp (the kind the genies come in). They grabbed the lamp and
rubbed it. "POOF" out popped a tired old genie who said,
"OK, so you freed me from this stupid lamp, yadda, yadda, yadda.
But hey, I've been doing this 3 wishes stuff for a long time now
and quite frankly, I'm burned out. You guys get only ONE wish
and then I'm OUTTA here. Make it a good one".
The first guy, without hesitation or thought blurted out, "Give
us all the beer we can drink for the rest of our lives!!!"
"Fine," said the genie, and he instantly turned the entire ocean
into beer.
"Great move Einstein!" said the second guy, slapping the first
guy in the head. "NOW we're gonna have to pee in the BOAT!"
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Did Aladdin really find a GEnie in a lamp?
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 09:11:50 -0500
From: rtisdale@entomology.msstate.edu (Bob Tisdale)
Subject: Blonde Ale
I have seen this style mentioned in HBD and on the Brewery's bulliten
board but I have not seen a description in any books or in the Brewery's
library. Also, I have not seen any recipes in the Cat's Meow of Gambrinus
Mug. What's the deal?
Cheers,
Bob Tisdale
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 10:31:14 -0500
From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: Beer Engine
Brewsters:
I note that Gabrielle Palmer, a Ford Employee asks for help in designing =
a
beer engine. Hmmmmmm! Maybe Pat Babcock has been influencing Ford R&D? I=
s
this a new type of engine that Budmilloors is ready to sponsor research o=
n?
Gabrielle, all kidding aside, I suspect that you will find what you want=
if you look under RIMS in the abstracts to this digest, as I assume you
mean an automated home brewery or do you really mean a "beer engine" for
drawing kegs ala the British use of the term?. A little explanation is in=
order and may explain the RCB silence.
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
103164.3202@compuserve.com
Dave_Burley@compuserve.com =
Voice e-mail OK =
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 10:38:54 -0500
From: Richard Abato <>
Subject: Re: CO2 / Brewtek vs Valley Mill
On Wed, 19 Nov 1997 10:18:37 -0500
Oliver Weatherbee
oliver@triton.cms.udel.edu wrote:
>> If you do a primary in your bucket, you can still purge your secondary
>> by making a simple CO2 generator. Just take a 2-liter soda bottle, and
>> drill a small hole in the cap. Use some DAP silicon sealant (or something
>> similar) to secure a small diameter tubing of maybe 3 or 4 feet
>> through the cap. You can use cheap aquarium tubing for this. Just add
>> a sugar solution (table sugar is fine) and yeast (bread yeast is fine)
>> and run the tubing to your sanitized carboy.
I would think the risk of contamination from the bread yeast would be
much greater than the risk from a little oxidation!
Has any one done a comparison between the BrewTek and Valley Mills? I am
considering purchasing one of them but I have not seen either in person.
I will be motorizing (not with a drill). Any suggestions?
Thanks
Rich rpa@intrinsix.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 08:39:04 -0700
From: "Kensler, Paul" <PKensler@itcmedia.com>
Subject: RE: siphon diameter
Eugene,
I ordered a 1/2" racking cane and siphon tube from Brewer's Resource a
year or so ago, and use it for all my wort / beer transfers - it really
moves much more quickly than the 3/8" standard tubes do. Here's the URL
for the web page that has the item:
(http://www.brewtek.com/siphon-funnel.html)
Standard non-affiliation disclaimer applies ;-)
Eugene said: "HBDers, Has anyone out there seen racking canes which are
wider and therefore would move more beer per second?"
Paul Kensler
Special Events Project Manager, Global Access
(972) 633-6227 direct
(972) 881-1300 fax
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 10:39:14 -0500
From: "Little, Wayne" <LittleW@od31.nidr.nih.gov>
Subject: O2 requirement?
Maybe some of the mycologists could explain the oxygen requirement of
yeast in lay terms. I keep hearing O2 is needed to form cell walls, but
isn't most of the cell division occurring during fermentation, when O2
is not required? Do the cells only divide during the time O2 is present
in "high" levels in wort? How much oxygen is really necessary and when
does the shift from respiration to fermentation occur? It is my
understanding that O2 actually represses the generation of ETOH and CO2
in brewers yeast. I would really like to see some peer-reviewed
references on this confusing (to me) subject
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 9:20:04 -0700
From: CHUCK HUDSON 1209 MGC LABORATORY 272-1522 <CHUDSON@mozart.unm.edu>
Subject: Hopless Beer
John, You might try another list called Hist-brewing. You stand a good chance
to gather a hopless recipe from that group. The address is Hist-brewing@pbm.com
Or to subscribe send e-mail to majordomo@pbm.com and in your message type
subscribe hist-brewing
I been brewing both professional and at home for 15 years and these people
taught me a lot about the history and art and even the science. Good look in
your search.
Chuck Hudson
Head bottle washer,floor sweeper,Journeyman brewer and what ever else my wife
can think of for me to do at Vista Weyr Homebrewery and Meadery.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 09:23:07 -0700
From: "Kensler, Paul" <PKensler@itcmedia.com>
Subject: RE: Beer engines
Gabrielle wrote: "I have been considering the idea of making my own
beer engine. I found an article in the May 1996 issue of Brew Your Own
that describes a way to build your own beer engine for under $50. Has
anyone here ever tried this? How did it turn out? Can you recommend
any other articles or web sites that would have any additional
information?"
Gabrielle,
I did try this, with mixed success (I think it was the May 1997 issue).
I built a nice-looking solid red oak cabinet and base for the pump
(pretty easy, even though I have no woodworking skills).
The most important thing is, you really MUST get the exact pump shown in
the article - it has a plastic plunger, and plastic housing on top. The
same manufacturer makes other pumps that are almost identical, except
one is brass, the other chrome. They look nicer, but they use a soluble
lubricant that dissolves in beer - NASTY! The plastic unit uses a
different plunger mechanism that does not require the lubricant, and is
therefore more suitable for food-grade applications. Fortunately, I
live near a boat store that carries the full line, and has a generous
return policy.
The author of the article, John Fogarty, is very helpful and helped me
figure out the problem with those other pumps. He is also a good source
if you can't find a local retailer that carries the pumps. You can
reach him at wbrewing@aol.com or at 609-485-2021 (work).
Hope this helps - good luck! And let me know how your engine turns out.
Paul Kensler
Special Events Project Manager, Global Access
(972) 633-6227 direct
(972) 881-1300 fax
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 10:41:35 -0600 (CST)
From: Samuel Mize <smize@prime.imagin.net>
Subject: boiled grains and corn sugar (where's the still!?!!?)
Greetings to all, and especially to:
> From: Mike York <myork@asheboro.com>
> Subject: boiled grains and corn sugar
> Thanks for all of the suggestions. I still don't get it. Please be more
> specific. What is so terrible about corn sugar and bringing my "roller pin
> cracked" specialty grains to a boil before sparging--then using the liquid
> to mix with a can of malt extract and extra hops?
I'm not Charley, but I'll give you an answer.
Nothing is "terrible" about it. If you're happy with your beer, keep
doing what you're doing. However, if you want to improve your
quality (taste and shelf life), there are things you can change.
Perhaps you've heard of the 80/20 rule -- 80% of the value comes from
20% of the resource. As a rough estimate, this is true in an amazing
range of contexts. In this case, 80% of the quality of the best beer
comes from 20% of the labor and expense.
The discussions on HBD often center around getting that last 20% of
quality, which requires 80% of the effort. This is an attempt to get
the very best quality possible, often for competitions using judges
with trained critical palates.
If you just want a tasty brew, you can use simpler processes.
Note that your original post was about not needing to cool wort:
> A good homebrew can be made without
> perfectly chilling the batch.
Yet you described your process as:
> My brew pot of hot steaming wort is then floated in a sink full of the cold
> deep-well water. When the wort has cooled down some--about thirty minutes
> after changing the water three times--the wort is poured in a five gallon
> capacity carboy filled with three gallons of cold water.
The cold bath and the dilution with cold water provide plenty of
cooling. They prevent Hot-Side Aeration (HSA), and let you pitch
your yeast soon enough to overwhelm any wild infections. Mechanical
chillers are convenient, but not really needed until you're doing
full-volume boils. Note that HSA mostly affects shelf life.
Charley's specific suggestions were shorthand for subjects that have
been discussed on HBD before. I recommend reading the last couple of
years in the archive -- that's what I'm doing, it's like getting
another MS degree but more fun. Anyway, his suggestions would
flesh out as:
CORN SUGAR
If corn or table sugar is more than 15-20 percent of your sugar, it
can create a "winey" or "cidery" taste. Basically, this adds no
desireable flavor, just alcohol. If you replace the refined sugar
with dry malt extract, you will get a maltier-tasting beer with
more body.
OTOH, some people prefer a stronger, lighter-bodied beer, and add
corn sugar to get it.
BOILING GRAINS
You can get an astringent taste if you use too much water (depending
on its acidity/alkalinity), if you heat the grains gradually in the
water, or if you boil them. Basically, you want to put them in
hot-enough water, dissolve out the sugar, and get them out before
tannins and other strong tastes go into the solution.
The easiest way to do this is to get or make a nylon mesh or muslin
bag to put the grains into. I use a paint strainer -- a nylon mesh
bag sold at some building supply or paint stores. Boil it in a
little water to sanitize it, then put your grains into the bag.
Bring the water up to 170F, toss in the grains, hold it at 170F for
20-30 minutes, then take out the bag. You may not get as much of the
sugar, since the grain is not floating freely in the water, so you
may need to increase your grain purchase by half a pound or so.
Best,
Sam Mize
- --
Samuel Mize -- smize@imagin.net -- Team Ada
(personal net account)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 11:37:32 +0000
From: "Paul Demmert" <demmertp@thunder.safb.af.mil>
Subject: Happy Holiday Homebrew Competition--Call for Entries
The St. Louis Brews are holding their seventh annual Happy Holiday
Homebrew Competition (HHHC) on Friday, December 12 and Saturday,
December 13, 1997. The competition is sanctioned by the AHA,
registered with the BJCP, and part of the Midwest Homebrewer of the
Year program.
Starting today, November 20, entries will be accepted by mail
through December 6. Please visit our web site,
www.stlbrews.org,
for competition information, HHHC style guidelines,
and on-line registration or contact me at the address below.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 12:42:16 -0500
From: "Sornborger, Nathan" <nsornborger@email.mc.ti.com>
Subject: Rolling mills
I have seen quite a few postings about homemade rolling mills, motorizing
rolling mills, etc.. Frequently I respond to these via private e-mail but I
thought that this time I'd spit out a bunch of info for those who search the
archives first. I have made several mills and helped to build others. All of
them have worked well. I have made some observations along the way and here
they are.
Knurling; This seems like a popular thing when trying to build a cheap mill and
when roller diameter must be kept small. No knurling is best, if you can make
the rollers big enough, a nice smooth surface will give the best results. After
that, fine, shallow knurling is better than deep coarse knurling. What's the
difference you ask. Well those bumps do three things: they break up the husks
with their sharp edges, they provide pockets for the grain to 'hide' in and
avoid a good crush, and they provide bumps to over crush other grains as they
go through.
Do I need knurling? Well this one's tougher. When an individual grain reaches
the nip point of the two rollers there are a couple of forces on it. Going into
the mill there is friction and gravity, pushing the grain back up there is the
vertical component of the normal force on the rollers. Calculations can be done
here using nip angle (the angle above horizontal at which the grain is nipped),
and coefficient of kinetic friction for grain on whatever roller material you
choose. Generally assumptions must be made for both of these. What I have seen
is 4" rollers, both driven, are the smallest to guarantee you can use smooth
rollers. Smaller than that and sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't.
Similarly, if only one roller is driven they must be larger.
What to use for rollers? This is size dependent and there are some good low
cost options available. The best option is usually a plain bore cast iron wheel
for industrial carts. They are available in 4" dia and 1-1/2" wide and cost
about $6 a piece from McMaster-Carr. Width can be increased by using multiple
wheels. Have more money and want a better roller? Get a leather belt flat
pulley from Browning, these are available in all sizes up to oh-my-god that's
big. Sometimes the crown needs to be turned down for a flat surface though.
How big should the motor be? This varies with roller dia, roller width, speed
of grain supply, roller speed, roller mass, and probably a few other things I'm
forgetting. To play it safe, plan on 4-6 lbs of downforce at the nip per linear
inch of roller. To get horsepower from this, multiply by the total roller width
to get total downforce at nip.
Then.... (total downforce at nip (lbs) * roller radius(inches) / 12") = torque
at roller in ft-lbs
torque at motor / motor to roller ratio = torque needed
and then hp = torque * motor rpm / 5252.
There are obviously a lot more things to think about than just these but they
are frequently covered in other articles, books etc. I hope this is helpful.
Nate Sornborger
Barrington, RI
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 11:24:22 -0700
From: Dan Morley <morleyd@cadvision.com>
Subject: Re: Justifing makeing beer
Ken Lee wrote about justifying his brewing expenses to his wife.
When I first started making beer it was with the idea of saving money. My
wife gave me the starter kit for Christmas 4 years ago. And at first, it did
save me money!
But then, as I progressed through kits, extracts, partial mashes and onto
full mashes the savings became secondary. I am one of the lucky ones because
I have never had to "justify" the expense or the time to my wife. Over the
last 4 years I have acquired much equipment, books and gadgets. Heck, I even
have my own room in the basement for all my brewing equipment and beer! Here
is what I have done that I feel has helped avoid arguments over homebrewing.
1) I have always tried to spread out the spending and I believe that this
has helped avoid making the money an issue. I try to be as thrifty and
resourceful as possible and to me this is just part of my hobby......why pay
allot of money for something if you can design and build it yourself??? If I
were to tell my wife that I wanted to spend a couple of grand on a complete
ready to go RIMS system that would be a different story....
2)As far as the time, I plan my brew days far in advance....making sure that
it does not interfere with anything else that it going on in our lives.
Quite often I brew in the evenings (from 6 to 12)and when I am brewing, I
still try to be helpful, often cooking and cleaning up dinner, cause I am in
(over taking??) the kitchen anyway. Sometimes I double batch on the weekends
and often my wife will take the kids and go out for the day, either to
friends or to her moms. I have never asked her to do this, rather, she
willing gives me the house for the day and enjoys doing her own thing.
3) I make sure that my wife has ample time for her hobby. My wife has a fair
bit of money tied up in a sewing machine and a serger and lots of sewing
gadgets too! I never complain when she wants to purchase things for her hobby.
4) I show an interest in her hobby and will help her with it any time that
she asks, and in turn she will help me if I need it.
5) Try to keep all the other aspects of your relationship in good shape. If
you are fighting or just not getting along well lately, changes are that
she will lash out at your brewing too! If she is happy, chances are that
brewing will not be an issue.
My wife and I have been married almost 11 years, I guess the bottom line is
RESPECT for each other and what we want to pursue.... ( and I think the 10
th Anniversary diamond ring helped too :-) ...).there are allot worse things
that we could be spending our time, money and energy on.
Cheers
Dan Morley
President, Marquis de Suds Homebrewers
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 10:48:34 -0800
From: John_E_Schnupp@amat.com
Subject: re: Cleaning Blowoff hoses
>I clean my blowoff hose(s) by wading up a piece of bathroom
>tissue or kleenex (but make sure it doesn't have anything in
>it like creams), wetting it so its a soggy mess, stuff it into the
>blowoff hose, making sure that it fits in there real snug-like.
>I then attach the hose to my water hose (but I suppose a
>bottle washer would work as well, maybe even the facet itself)
>and blast the soggy tissue through the hose. Repeat as
>necessary until all the gunk has been cleaned out.
That seems like a great wat to get soaked! Try this instead.
Feed a length of string thru the blow-off hose. This a wad
of cloth on the end and PULL it thru the hose. I'll bet it
works as well (if not better because you can actually make
a tighter fit and still pull it thru) and you'll still be dry
when you're all done.
John Schnupp, N3CNL
Colchester, VT
95 XLH 1200
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 12:57:07 -0600 (CST)
From: Al Korzonas <korz@xnet.com>
Subject: Chimay
Kit writes:
>Chimay uses a single strain bottling yeast that is different from the
>fermentation yeast mix. That's why culturing from a bottle will give you
>a totally different flavor than Chimay.
Chimay is quite proud of the fact that they use one yeast and mention
it all the time in their ad literature. They used to use a big mess of
yeasts, but Jean DeClerck helped them isolate a single yeast back in the
1950's and they still make a big deal about it. I've read in at least
three sources that the yeast in the bottles is the fermentation strain.
If you get bad results from the yeast, it may just be because it is
pretty beat-up. Rarely do you see Chimay here that's less than a year
old and I've seen five-year-old bottles (check the cork for the bottling
month/year) in the stores. Furthermore, even the capsule rouge/Premier
is over 1.060 and alcohol has a way of mucking up yeast. Try reusing the
yeast several times with some throwaway (old extract perhaps) worts and
see if subsequent generations don't perform better. The capsule blanche/
Cinq Cents and capsule bleu/Grand Reserve are even stronger... I recommend
trying to culture from the red cap/Premier if you have the option because
of the lower alcohol level.
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz@xnet.com
My new website (still under construction, but up-and-running):
http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 14:35:00 -0500
From: "Taber, Bruce" <Bruce.Taber@nrc.ca>
Subject: Dare I say....corn sugar
I've been brewing for about 10 years, the last few have been
all-grain. I've made lots of great beer since I went to all-grain,
stouts, browns, fruit-ales, wheats, oktoberfest, even a great smoked
ale. The only type I have had trouble with is making a tasty LIGHT ale.
I know this sounds like an oxymoron, but I have had homebrew that falls
into this category.
I've tried using rice as an adjunct but I don't like it's flavor
contribution (even though the literature says it has none). I was
thinking of trying corn, but then why not skip the corn and just add a
couple of pounds of corn sugar like I did years ago when I first started
brewing with kits. It should thin out the flavor without changing it,
right?
Does anyone want to admit that they have done this? I need this
beer for my beer-taste-deprived friends (OK, OK, I'll be drinking it
too). Any comments would be appreciated. If you could send your
response to the digest and me so I would be sure not to miss it.
Bruce Taber
Almonte, Ontario, Canada
bruce.taber@nrc.ca
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 12:52:00 -0700 (MST)
From: "Steven W. Smith" <SYSSWS@gc.maricopa.edu>
Subject: Rousing the wee beasties
Is there a reason *not* to use a magnetic stirrer or similar during
secondary fermentation? Would it generate some "cascading dihydro-oxy-
acetate of bananas reaction" or otherwise Ruin My Beer? I used an
ESB-type yeast for the first time and have become rather ticked at having
to coax the wee buggers to swim around in my wort. It seems they just wanna
lie on the bottom and snooze their lives away until I swirl the damned carboy
again. I'm desperately fighting back the urge to repitch and get on with my
life... The recent discussion of stirrers for starters got me wondering.
EIEIO, Captain! ( _Chariots_of_the_Globs_, F.F.C.).
Steve
Steven W. Smith, Systems Programmer. Glendale Community College. Glendale Az.
syssws@gc.maricopa.edu
"Sometimes I think I'd be better off dead. No, wait, not me, you." Jack Handy
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 13:54:51 -0600 (CST)
From: Al Korzonas <korz@xnet.com>
Subject: Timmerman's
Paul asks if he can ranch yeast from Timmerman's.
Unless the label literally says "Timmerman's Lambic" (which I do not
believe is currently imported into the US) no. MOST Timmerman's
beers are filtered. Certainly all the fruit beers from them are NOT
traditional Lambics. They are overly sweet, lacking in horseyness, not
nearly sour enough and basically just a very sweet fruit beer. If you are
trying to make a Timmerman's fruit beer clone, any non-phenolic yeast will
do... don't bother with finding a Brett or Pedio. What you want is a fruit
ale not a Lambic-style.
If, however, you have tried Cantillon, Boon Marriage Parfait, Lindeman's
Cuvee Rene (*only*... all the rest of the Lindeman's are soda pop like
the Timmerman's) or Hanssens and *loved* them, then you do indeed
want to make a pseudoLambic (pLambic) and you do need to get some
Brettanomyces yeast and lactic acid bacteria to get something similar.
The Cantillon and Marriage Parfait do have live cultures in them, but
not *all* the cultures involved in the fermentation. Many of them have
died during the fermentation and rarely do any of the Saccharomyces
survive into the bottle. Get yourself a nice clean Saccharomyces like
Wyeast #1056 and keep dumping the dregs from any Cantillon or Marriage
Parfait bottles that you drink into the fermenter.
You may be able to get some live cultures from Hanssens, Cuvee Rene,
and some other traditional Lambics (Oud Beersel, Girardin, St. Louis
Fond Tradition (*ONLY* THE FOND TRADITION), etc.) but I know that
Cantillon and MP work relatively reliably.
You can improve your chances a little by getting the yeast and bacteria
from The Yeast Culture Kit Company or Head Start brewing cultures (if
they have production again -- anyone know?).
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz@xnet.com
My new website (still under construction, but up-and-running):
http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 15:14:26 -0600 (CST)
From: Al Korzonas <korz@xnet.com>
Subject: parti-gyle
Loren takes a stab at the meaning of parti-gyle, based upon some
incomplete information in the Encyclopedia of Beer.
Parti-gyle brewing is an "old" method of brewing in which you
take the first runnings from the laeuter tun, and make one
beer. Then you refill the laeuter tun with sparge water, stir,
let it sit a bit and finally drain it to make a second beer.
Finally, you refill, stir, rest and drain to make a third beer.
Some brewers used to take the three beers, ferment them separately
and then blend them back together (this may be unique to Belgian
brewers, which is the context in which I read it, but maybe not).
In case it's not obvious, the first wort will be very strong, the
second wort will be weaker and the third will be weeker still.
When fly sparging (where you draw wort from the bottom and add
sparge water on top, continuously) was developed, many brewers
abandoned the parti-gyle method.
There was a great article by Randy Mosher in Brewing Techniques
on parti-gyle brewing about three or four years ago. You have
dozens of options if you do brew this way:
* boil, ferment and bottle all three beers separately,
* mix the 1st and 2nd worts and make a strongish beer and a weak beer,
* mix the 2nd and 3rd worts and make a strong beer and a weaker beer,
* mix part of the 3rd wort into the 1st wort and put the rest into the
2nd wort,
* etc.
Since I built my 1/2 bbl system, I brew this way all the time. In fact,
I often make one beer from the first runnings and a little of the
third runnings and another from the second runnnings. It takes a little
planning and math (which I can't simply type-in on the fly). I actually
sparge continuously, but take SG and volume measurements... first running
off into my old 10-gallon kettle and then diverting the "second" runnings
into the 18.75-gallon kettle at the appropriate time. Finally, I'll
divert the "third" runnings back into the 10-gallon. Once the sparge is
all done, I put the 10-gallon kettle onto the mash/laeuter tun burner
and I can do two boils simultaneously. Two different beers, a total of
about 15 gallons, one cleanup and the whole lot takes about 8 hours.
The most common use for parti-gyle brewing (and what I do most often)
is simply to make one strong beer and let the rest of the wort make
a smaller beer of whatever gravity it turns out to be. One recent session
yielded 4 gallons of 1.125 Barleywine and 10 gallons of 1.045 Special
Bitter. I boosted the Special Bitter a bit by adding 3 pounds of crushed
crystal malt along with the sparge water. Had I not made the Bitter,
I would have wasted all the sugar trapped in the grains after draining
the first runnings for the Barleywine.
The options are endless.
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz@xnet.com
My new website (still under construction, but up-and-running):
http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 13:14:25 -0800
From: smurman@best.com
Subject: microscopes
What type of microscope setup would be required to be able to
identify different strains of yeast?
SM
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 16:30:03 -0400
From: bourdouj@EOA.UMontreal.CA (Jacques Bourdouxhe)
Subject: Re: Malt vinegar
>From: Bob and Susie Stovall <urbanart@netropolis.net>
Hi brauwmeisters
Bob and Susie asks:
>How does one make malt vinegar? Is there a homebrew digest for vinegar?
>
>thanks
>
For sure there is a homebrew digest for vinegar, it is called the Lambic digest.
I hope this helps
Jacques in Montreal
*************************************************
* Oh beer! O Hodgson, Guinness, Allsop, Bass! *
* Names that should be on every infant's tongue *
* ( Charles Stuart Calverley ) *
*************************************************
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 15:40:35 -0600 (CST)
From: Al Korzonas <korz@xnet.com>
Subject: rakes
Scott writes:
>I remember Al K. caught a little bit of grief (?) when he mentioned he
>had been to England and seen some brewers using rakes. I recently toured
>Miller Brewing Co. in Irwindale, CA and Miller not only runs rakes
>continuously through their sparge (1140bbl lauter tun!) but lowers them
>continuously as well. They end up 2.5 inches from the false bottom when
>they're done. So I guess I feel somewhat validated in my practice. Give
>it a, er, whirl...
I don't recall the discussion, but I don't think it was me or England.
I did ask every brewer whose brewery I toured (8 or 10) if they ran
the rakes during the sparge and they all said, *no*. They all said
that they use the rakes only to remove spent grain from the mash/laeuter
tuns.
Brewers who use decoction mashes (according to The Biotechnology of
Malting and Brewing, by Hough) need to run their rakes because the boiling
of the decoctions removes all the entrained air from the mash which
makes the grain bed lose its bouyancy. I'm pretty sure that Miller Brewing
doesn't use decoction mashes, but they do use cereal-cookers which boil
the adjuncts and *part* of the barley malt. I presume that this boils
enough of the entrained air out of the mash to require rakes.
To me, the bottom line is this: if you can get by without rakes, do.
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz@xnet.com
My new website (still under construction, but up-and-running):
http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 12:09:56 -0500
From: headbrewer@juno.com (Mark Weaver)
Subject: yeast volcanos
To the gentleman who posted regarding his yeast volcanos;
According to K. Kunz at the Brewing Science Institute, this is her
explanation of what is happening:
What is occurring is the entrapment of CO2 bubbles in a highly-flocculent
yeast (such
as Wy1968), which, when a large enough number of them form, are buoyant
enough
to carry the attached aggregate of yeast up with them to the surface. It
is
quite normal.
Regards,
Mark
Brewer on the Loose
75'02 & 72tii
headbrewer@juno.com or AwfulQuiet@aol.com
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2564, 11/22/97
*************************************
-------
