Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2585
HOMEBREW Digest #2585 Wed 17 December 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:
Nitrogen and stout taps (JC Ferguson)
Truth in labeling (Terry White)
New Web Page ("ESCHOVIL.US.ORACLE.COM")
RE: A Few Questions ("Liquid Man")
Bottle Carbonation (Overfilling) (Todd Goodman)
Sweeteners (Tom Clark)
cask conditioned ale dispensing help (Bob Bullard)
A-B attack ("Raymond Estrella")
A Matter of Punctuation (Malty Dog)
4bbl in the woods. (Randy Kinsman)
Bohemian yeast, Laaglander and long ferment ("Kevin W. Aylor")
Request advice on gas burners (Stankau)
SABCO fermentor (Bob Bullard)
Swedish Porter (JFarrar101)
Poor mash efficiency! (Rick Paavola)
War of the Worts Homebrew Contest is Coming! (folsom)
$20 centrifuge ("Keith Royster")
Mash efficiency, what is it ?/ pt1 (Steve Alexander)
Mash efficiency, what is it ?/ pt2 (Steve Alexander)
Rusted weld on Cornelius keg (bob mccowan)
Orval and bad grain info (Headduck)
RIMS pump speed control (MED)" <Frederick.Wills@amermsx.med.ge.com>
RE: torrefied wheat ("Kensler, Paul")
Probably Taking the Plunge to All-Grain ("Schultz, Steven W.")
Re: Zymurgy problems? (Jim Parker)
Bottle Lagering vs Bulk Lagering (Lorne P. Franklin)
RE: Denature temperature of Pectin Enzyme (LaBorde, Ronald)
Grain Mill (Nick Bonfilio)
Results of Grain Mill Inquiry ("Capt. Marc Battreall")
Negra Modelo (John Wilkinson)
=====================================================================
Beer is our obsession, and we're late for therapy!
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...
ftp://hbd.org /pub/hbd/digests
ftp://ftp.stanford.edui /pub/clubs/homebrew/beer
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: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 14:31:47 -0500
From: JC Ferguson <jc.ferguson@digital.com>
Subject: Nitrogen and stout taps
I have a "stout" fawcet that I use to serve homebrew with the N2/CO2
gas mix, ala guinness. I serve the beer out of cornelius kegs in a fridge
that has a temp at about 40F or so. The N2/CO2 tank sits outside the
fridge at room temperature.
My problem is I can never get the beer to dispense ala guinness!
When I keg, I do not prime at all, since that would generate CO2.
I tap the keg, turn on the guinness gas, and pour a pint, but it comes
out with NO head! i have tried force carbonating with the guinness
gas on at 28 PSI and shaking the keg without a whole lot of luck.
what I have observed is as the keg gets lower, the head starts to get
better.
What I'm looking for is a sure-fire, step-by-step method of getting
this to work just like force carbonating using C02 and having good results.
any ideas?
thanks,
jc
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 19:10:33 -0500
From: terry@brewfellows.com (Terry White)
Subject: Truth in labeling
Marshall George laments AB's stance on truth in labeling in HBD 2581. I
would love to see truth in labeling, but I don't really care where they
make my beer, I am more concerned with what is in it. Why is beer
exempt from labeling all ingredients in their product. Every other
product has to list all the ingredient in descending order, why not
beer. It would be very interesting to see a listing of all the adjuncts
and chemicals in some of the commercial beers out there.
What do you think ?
Terry
------------------------------
Date: 12 Dec 97 14:14:53 -0800
From: "ESCHOVIL.US.ORACLE.COM" <ESCHOVIL@us.oracle.com>
Subject: New Web Page
After many, many hours of work, I have finally
finished (is it ever finished?) my 3 tier system.
I have put together a web page with some pictures
and a lot of text. I owe a big round of thanks to
all of you have knowingly and unknowingly helped
me in this quest. Please take a look at my page
and tell me what you think:
http://home1.gte.net/rschovil/beer/3tier.html
If anyone has a RIMS, 3 tier, or 2 tier and isn't
mentioned in my links section, please let me know!
The web page, like most projects in my life, is
ongoing. I'm sure there will be
additions/corrections to come!
Eric Schoville in Dallas with 10 pounds of hops
in my freezer! (Dave, come get em!)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 1997 11:10:14 -0500
From: "Liquid Man" <luv2jeep@redrose.net>
Subject: RE: A Few Questions
As to your question of NA brews:
1. Pre-heat the oven to 180 degrees F.
2. Place fermented beer in SS or enameled-pot in oven.
3. Leave in oven for 20-30 minutes, stirring occasionally.
4. Remove beer from oven and give final stir.
5. Cool beer using similar methods as when cooling wort.
6. Use force carbonation method to carbonate, or use priming sugar and
pitch yeast (baking killed all active yeast).
7. Bottle when beer is cool.
8. Wait normal couple of weeks as with alcoholic beers.
Viola! Non-alcoholic Homebrew!
-Liquid Man
a.k.a. Craig Myers
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 1997 17:33:27 -0500
From: Todd Goodman <tsg@eng1.netlink.com>
Subject: Bottle Carbonation (Overfilling)
I know this was brought up before (maybe even beaten to death) but I
still have some questions.
I've experienced exploding bottled homebrew once and that was with a batch
that I attempted to fill to the top in an attempt to reduce the oxygen in
the bottle.
The batch had been fully fermented (left for weeks in secondary and
FG right where it should have been, sorry no Clinitest results) and I
used the same amount of priming sugar as usual (it *was* by volume at that
time, 3/4 cup).
A number of bottles exploded in that batch. The other bottles had no
hiss when opened but were fully carbonated and had a good head when poured.
I know others have reported exploding bottles when underfilled, but this
seems counterintuitive to me (and counter to my experiences since I usually
bottle a partially filled bottle each batch).
My untrained mind figured that overfilled bottles were under greater pressure
since there was less head space for the undissolved CO2 which resulted in
it being under greater pressure. Is my thinking all wet (like the table I
had the bottles on)?
Can anybody give a reason?
Thanks,
Todd Goodman
Brewing in Westford, MA ((North?)east of Jeff)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 1997 13:21:57 -0500
From: Tom Clark <rtclark@eurekanet.com>
Subject: Sweeteners
Dear folks...
Has anybody ever tried using artificial sweeteners in Beer for those who
have an intollerance for milk products?
Tom Clark
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 1997 19:18:48 -0000
From: Bob Bullard <bob@rbullard.demon.co.uk>
Subject: cask conditioned ale dispensing help
I recently moved to England and have grown quite fond of the cask
conditioned ales available here. I have a chest freezer and up till now
have dispensed my beer from corny kegs using CO2. Now that I am a card
carrying CAMRA member, I am interested in altering my setup to dispense beer
naturally carbonated in the keg using a hand pump. Can anyone offer any
advice on how to set this up. Thanks in advance.
Bob Bullard
Entire Butt Brewery
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 97 02:57:54 UT
From: "Raymond Estrella" <ray-estrella@classic.msn.com>
Subject: A-B attack
Hello to all,
Marshall talk of our mega-nemesis Bud,
>Well, it appears that the Anheuser-Busch family is on the warpath again.
>Once again, they are pushing in the state of Missouri to have all beers
>go with 'Truth In Labeling'. <snip>
>since people like Sam Adams, Pete's, etc. contract their brews
>out, then they would have to (oh I shudder - the beer has to travel a
>day or two on a truck!) put on their labels where they are made (just in
>Missouri), and it may not necessarily mean Boston or whatever.
I am not a fan of A-B but I would not mind seeing the true birth (brew)
place
of the beers that I buy. Earlier this year I was back to my birth place of
California, helping my Brother-in-law on a huge job. Two blocks from their
house is a big Liquor Depot that carries a ton of "micros". Most evenings
after we got in, I would go down and buy one or two bombers (22 oz) of a
brand that I had never seen in our part of the woods. About half of them
were contract brews made within 60 miles of my house.
Your buddy Sam Adams, (J.K.) makes his Oregon Originals, that are not
made in Oregon, nor are original. It is called misleading marketing, and it
works. Boy, are we gullible.
>In addition, I think that it's high time for August A. Busch III to yank
>his hypocritical 'Skunky Beer' ads. Lets take a look at the A-B product
> that is currently in bottles. Bud, Bud Light, Natural Light,
>Michelob...so far so good, brown bottles. Bud Ice, Bud Ice Light - NOT!
>These very beers are packaged in CLEAR GLASS BOTTLES, and isn't clear
>glass one of the causes of 'Skunky' beer? I guess when you make stuff
>that is so full of rice and no hops to speak of, you don't have to worry
>about your beer skunking.
Hypocritical, no, misleading, you bet'cha. Ever since this Born-on-date/
skunky beer ad campaign has been running, I have fielded a lot of queries
about it. (Being the local beer-guy) These ads work for them because of the
lack of knowledge by the general public about the issue at hand. Yourself
included it looks like. Skunking is caused by the reaction of light (of a
certain
wavelength) changing the molecular structure of isohumulone. A-B's main
stream products don't have many IBUs, and do not sit on the shelves as long
as the green bottled brands that they pick on in the ads. Rice has nothing to
do with it. The clear bottled products use a specially treated hop extract
that
wont skunk. It was popularized by Miller Genuine Draft.
>You don't hear ads from Pete's,
>Rogue, whatever saying A-B beer isn't any good because they use lots of
>adjuncts. They have too much class to do so, and are too busy pushing
>their own product.
They would not say that because a lot of the worlds great beers use
adjuncts. Belgian, Scotch and English Ales come to mind.
Ray Estrella
Cottage Grove, MN
ray-estrella@msn.com
******** Never relax, constantly worry, have a better homebrew. ********
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 1997 22:55:38 EST
From: Malty Dog <MaltyDog@aol.com>
Subject: A Matter of Punctuation
>From Homebrew Digest #2582:
>Let a good beer be the exclamation point at the end of your day as
>every sentence requires proper punctuation!
I tend to think of a good beer as more of an ellipsis...
Bill Coleman
MaltyDog@aol.com
Brooklyn, NY
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 12:58:23 -0500
From: Randy Kinsman <kinsman@glinx.com>
Subject: 4bbl in the woods.
I am in the process of building a 4bbl system to brew small batch
specialty beers. This has to be done on a shoe string because in
Canada, taxation on alcohol is very high. Therefore, the profiit
margins are small. I need to propagate my own yeast, design my own
equipment and have is made. My questions for the enlightened masses
of HBD are as follows:
1) I have had two different oppinions expressed on how much yeast I
need to pitch for my first batch. Both have said that 10gal of beer
should be sufficient but one says to pitch the resulting slurry and
the other says to pitch at high Krausen. Any opinions?
2)I am using used dairy tanks for fermenters. They have dish bottoms
and are open to the top but fitted with tight fitting hinged lids. So,
technically, I have open fementers. Does anyone have any suggestions
as to any particular strains of yeast which are best suited to this
style of brewing?
3)I am having some trouble finding anyone able to guarantee a sanitary
weld with conical vessils so, I want to have a rectangular mash/lauter
tun built. Are there any inherant problems with this design? What
should I be shooting for for optimum grain bed depth is designing the
tun?
4) Until now I had not considered a rectangular kettle but since I
have your collective ears, is this a bad idea?
Thanks for you help,
Randy Kinsman.
kinsman@glinx.com
Cambridge,Nova Scotia
Candna
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 12:21:27 -0500
From: "Kevin W. Aylor" <kwa2r@removeavery.med.virginia.edu>
Subject: Bohemian yeast, Laaglander and long ferment
I am having some problems with a lager. I used 5.5lbs of Laaglander DME
(Light) in a 5-gal batch. I am using Wyeast Bohemian Lager (2124). The
O.G was 1.044 and after fermenting 2 weeks in the primary the gravity is
1.022. I have never used this yeast before and I have read the profile
and it states it has an apparent attenuation of 69-73%. I also know
that Laaglander has one of the lowest attenuation factors of any
extracts on the market. The beer was fermented at about 48-50 degrees
F. My question is this F.G reading of 1.022 about what I should expect
with this extract and yeast combination or should I just wait it out for
a few more weeks. The S.G has not changed in about 5 days and is now in
the secondary.
Thanks,
Kevin
- --
Remove "remove" from address to reply.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 13:22:49 EST
From: Stankau <Stankau@aol.com>
Subject: Request advice on gas burners
I started brewing about 5 years ago when I was single. The kitchen was my
kitchen. On brew day there was no one to complain about the time, mess, or
smell, and things stayed where I put them until I moved them or put them away.
Since then I've married and now have a 1 1/2 year old daughter. We still have
the same kitchen, but it is no longer all mine. Money spent on brew toys,
within reason, has never been a problem. Time on the other hand is a precious
commodity. The family demands their time of me on weekends, and I have to
clear in advance the intended brew day. Fortunately she enjoyed my beer and so
the end justified the means. (Notice the past tense) In October we learned
she/we are pregnant. Not only will she probably not have another beer until
after the baby is borne, but the smell of boiling wort now makes her nauseous.
I have not brewed since October. Fortunately as a compromise I am getting a
gas burner for Christmas. Unfortunately I don't know anything about them. One
of the mail order supplies I use offers a 170,000 BTU King Kooker for $50.00,
the other mail order supply offers a 30,000 BTU and a 100,000 BTU Cache Cooker
both by Camp Chef for $80.00 and 90.00 respectively. I would appreciate some
advice on my up coming purchase. I will be brewing full wort boils with a 10
gallon stainless kettle.
Stan Kauchak
Albuquerque, NM
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 20:35:25 -0000
From: Bob Bullard <bob@rbullard.demon.co.uk>
Subject: SABCO fermentor
I noticed that SABCO is selling a 15 gal fermentor manufactured from a
reconditioned keg. ANyone have any experiences with this. I have three
SABCO kettles for my brewery and have been quite pleased.
Thanks,
Bob Bullard
Entire Butt Brewery
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 19:05:22 EST
From: JFarrar101 <JFarrar101@aol.com>
Subject: Swedish Porter
Lurker alert!!
Greetings to the collective. I have a recipe question I need some help with.
Every once in a while, I see a reference to "Swedish Porter". As my wife's
family is of Swedish distraction, and seeing how I love porter anyway, I
thought it would be way cool to do a Swedish Porter. My only problem is that
I can't find a recipe for one anywhere. Question: What makes a Swedish
porter a Swedish porter? Wyeast does make a specialty yeast for Swedish
porter, so is Swedish porter simply a regular British porter using a different
yeast strain, or is there also a difference in the grain bill? Any and all
help would be greatly appreciated;
private e-mail is O.K.
Jeff Farrar, Farfyl Homebrewing
Buffalo, N.Y.- Queen city of the great lakes, quietly returning to lurkdom.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 21:54:09 EST
From: rlpaav@juno.com (Rick Paavola)
Subject: Poor mash efficiency!
O wise and great brewing collective,
Today I brewed up a "winter warmer", to prepare for the infamous
Minnesota January's. I was shooting for a OG of 1.062 or better. A
little back ground. This is my third all-grain batch in a Coleman picnic
cooler with a CPVC manifold. My mash schedule was a single-step
infusion, resting at 156 degrees until conversion. I had very little if
any temperature loss in the tun. The sparge was begun after a room temp.
iodine test that was negative. I also used the "batch sparge" technique
to collect 4.5 gallons of wort. After boiling, I'm guessing that I had
3 to 3.5 gallons of wort. I took a gravity reading in the cooled (65
degrees) wort and got 1.070. Not looking good at this point. I slowly
added water, trying not to overshoot 1.060 (I'd take less beer at the
"perfect" gravity than a full batch that is lacking), but not carefully
enough. I ended up with a gravity of 1.052, and still under 5 gallons.
In the past I have used the batch sparge with success, but I am at a loss
why this one wasn't successful. Here's the recipe if it will help.
11 lb. 2-row pale malt
1 lb. victory malt
.75 lb. crystal malt (40L)
.3 lb chocolate malt
1 oz. Kent Golding hops (7.6%) - 60 min. boil
1 oz. Fuggle hops (4.4%) - 25 min. boil
1 tsp Irish moss
WYeast Scotch Ale #1728
Now assuming 75% efficiency, I calculate an OG = 1.062, IBU = 35.
And that's for a full five gallons. So here's my plug to the collective
- -- What happened to my warmer? My crush looked good, my mash temp held,
I sparged slowly, and I'm on the weak end. I'm certain that the beer
will taste fine, but it may not have the _UMPH_ I was hoping for, and
that may not help with subzero temps. Any help would greatly
appreciated.
Sincerely,
Rick Paavola
rlpaav@juno.com
Rochester, MN
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 21:03:23 -0600 (CST)
From: folsom@ix.netcom.com
Subject: War of the Worts Homebrew Contest is Coming!
Hello Folks-
This is a reminder of the upcoming War of the Worts
contest, to be held January 17th in Lahaska, Bucks County,
Pennsylvania. Flyers are available, and I believe I have
mailed them to everyone who has previously requested them.
Last year we had 333 entries, and have every reason to expect to
top that this year. We need judges! (as well as entries).
For general information on the contest, or to request enty info,
email me at: folsom@ix.netcom.com
To register to judge or steward, please email our judge coordinator,
Nate Brese, at rahneb@rohmhass.com.
The contest will again be held at the Buckingham Mountain Brewery
and Restaurant, as it was the previous two years. As you may know,
the brewpub suffered a major fire shortly after last year's contest,
and was not able to reopen until this past September. The facilities
have been renovated and enlarged, better than ever. The owners
have been very supportive of the homebrew community, and I urge
everyone to patronize them, buy a few brews, and thank them for their
support.
Al Folsom
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 22:24:57 +0500
From: "Keith Royster" <keith@ays.net>
Subject: $20 centrifuge
I'm not sure, but I thought maybe this might be of interest to some
of you yeast ranchers out there. In this month's issue of Scientific
American magazine there is an "Amateur Scientist" article describing
a method to build your own centrifuge for about $20 using an old
kitchen blender. The complete article can be found online at:
http://www.sciam.com/0198issue/0198amsci.html
Keith Royster - Mooresville/Charlotte, North Carolina
email: keith@ays.net
http://www.ays.net/brewmasters -Carolina BrewMasters club page
http://www.ays.net/RIMS -My RIMS (rated COOL! by the Brewery)
http://www.ays.net/movingbrews -pumps and accessories for advanced homebrewers
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 01:10:18 -0500
From: Steve Alexander <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Mash efficiency, what is it ?/ pt1
Over the past weeks there have been some rather good postings regarding
methods to improve mash and sparge efficiency and some confusion
regarding definition and measurement of extraction efficiency.
[Note that 1lb of sucrose dissolved in enough water to create one gallon
of total volume at 68F(20C) creates a solution of SG 1.04615. Pure
extract thus provides 46.15 pt-gallons/lb or 386 pt-liters/kg.]
What is extract ?
Most diastatic malts have their extraction rate measured under
consistent lab conditions for their data sheets. The common figures are
the 'dry basis coarse grind percent', (DBCG%), the 'dry basis fine grind
percent' (DBFG%), and for british malts the 'hot water extract' (HWE).
Lab Extraction rates ---
For DBCG% and DBFG%, the US (ASBC) and Continental(EBC) methods are
similar. After accounting for malt moisture, 50 grams of dry malt mass
are milled with a lab mill, added to 200ml of 45C water for 30 minutes.
This mix is stirred throughout a 1C/min(25min) rise to 70C then an
additional 100ml of water are added for a 60min rest at 70C. The mix is
then chilled separated and measured. A calculation is made of the mass
of the matter extracted in the wort versus the original dry mass of the
malt.
Hot Water Extract -
HWE is a British test in which malt is 'mashed' for 1 hour at 65C(149F),
then chilled and measured. The results are expressed in
Liter-degree/kg, but are otherwise similar to the DB% figures above.
Dividing the result by 3.86 will give a roughly comparable figure to
DBCG%.
Criticism of Lab Extraction methods --
These lab mashes differ from conventional mashes in several ways. The
water:malt ratio is much higher (6:1 to 10:1 versus 2.5:1) and the
ASBC&EBC mash rest time periods (115 minutes) are longer than commercial
practice. There is no pH adjustment or addition of brewing salts and
distilled water is used. The extraction rates are correspondingly
high. The EBC&ASCB methods correspond roughly to a step mash, the HWE
methodology to a single infusion. None represent a decoction mash.
Roast and crystal malts are infrequently tested by these procedure since
that result would be hard to interpret. Mashing crystal or roast malt
without pale malt to add enzymes may give different results than when
mashing the two together.
Typical pale malts have a DBCG% of 77% to 81.6% and DBFG% is usually
0.5% to 2% higher, a range of 78.5% to 82.5%. Conventional commercial
breweries are said to be able to just achieve the DBCG% extraction
figures, tho I have also read that some modern high efficiency breweries
can achieve the DBFG% figures. This translates to commercial extractions
rates of 34 to 37 pt-gal/lb from pale malts for example.
Note that all of the lab extract rates above measure the sweet
(unboiled) wort. We leave extract behind in the kettle in the form of
break and wort lost in the hops. So accurate measures of mass
extraction efficiency should be made in the kettle and not in the
fermenter. The actual loss in the kettle is small, and an accurate
measure at this stage is difficult for homebrewers, so we'll acknowledge
the inaccuracy, and ignore this issue for now.
Steve Alexander
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 01:12:50 -0500
From: Steve Alexander <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Mash efficiency, what is it ?/ pt2
In order to give some practical results let's consider a real world
example. In the v20#4 issue of Zymurgy's 'Winner's Circle' we find
George Fix's Gold medal winning Kolsch recipe.
17 lb pilsner malt, 3 lb wheat malt, 1 lb crystal malt
resulting in 13.5 gal wort at OG 1.048.
Lets assume the following data for the malts:
Pilsner malt, 4.5% moisture, 79.5% DBCG%, 81% DBFG%
Wheat malt, 4.5% moisture, 80.5% DBCG%, 83% DBFG%
Crystal malt, 6.0% moisture, 73.5% DBCG%, 77.5% BDFG%
These figures are representative of certain continental malts of the
sort that might be used, and are taken from the malt selection data in
the Brewing Techniques 1997 Market Guide, which has a nearly
encyclopedic listing.
=== METHOD A, absolute mass extraction ==
How might a brewery evaluate the extraction rate ?
17lb pils @ 4.5% moisture = 16.235lb dry mass
3lb wheat@ 4.5% " = 2.865lb dry mass
1lb cryst@ 6.0% " = 0.940lb dry mass
total dry mass = 20.04 lb dry mass of malt.
Extract in brew = 13.5gal*48 pts / (46.15 pt-gal/lb) = 14.04lbs of total
extract in the wort.
14.04 lbs / 20.04 lbs = 70.1% extraction of dry malt mass.
=== METHOD B, absolute mass vs DBCG% ===
How would a brewery compare this result against the DBCG% lab results ?
Using the DBCG% figures from the assumptions above:
16.235lb*0.795 + 2.865*0.805 + 0.949*0.735 = 15.90lbs
of extract that we would expect from a DBCG% lab mash. So George got
14.04lb/15.90 or 88.3% of the DBCG% extraction rate.
[if we repeat this calculation with the fine grind lab figures, we get
86.4% of the DBFG%]
=== METHOD C, pt-gal/lb vs 36 pt-g/lb ==
How does this look from a homebrew perspective ?
13.5 gal * 48 pts = 648 pt-gal
21 lbs of (moist) grain
=> 30.857 pt-gal/lb, (respectable).
Comparing 30.857 to 36pg/lb => 85.7% extraction ref. to 36pt-g/lb.
=== METHOD D, pt-gal/lb vs homebrew bogeys ===
How about when using a more detailed analysis following homebrew malt
bogey values like the table in the Zymurgy 'Great Grain' issue ?
The tables indicate typical extraction bounds of:
German Pils malt 1.038 or 38 pt-gal/lb
German wheat malt 1.039 or 39 pt-gal/lb
German dark cryst 1.037 or 37 pt-gal/lb
So 17*38 + 3*39 + 1*37 = 800 pts.
648/800 = 81.0% efficiency.
====
So George's mash was either 70.1%, 88.3%, 85.7% or 81.0% efficient,
depending on how you calculate it. What does this all mean ? Which
method is 'correct' ? Which measure is useful?
Why are we interested in brewing efficiency ?
1/ Improving efficiency reduces materials costs.
2/ Efficiency measures allow us to monitor changes in malts.
3/ Measuring process efficiency allows us to compare different brewing
processes and hardware.
Reason 1/ is only of interest in commercial operations. Reason 2/ can
be monitored much more accurately simply by picking up a data sheet on
any commercial malt - tho' it has some limited value for those self
reliant home maltsters. Reason 3/, the monitoring and comparison of our
mashing and sparging methods and hardware is the most valid reason for
homebrew and commercial operations.
Method A, 70.1%, tells us what percentage of the dry grist mass we are
extracting. If we were repeatedly brewing the same beer, or beers from
the same malt bill this method would tell us both how our mashing and
sparging processes are workings, AND whether something has changed in
our malts. 'A' measures process and materials together.
Method B, 88.3%, compares the results of method A with the lab
extraction rates for the mixed grist. Method B measures our process,
and differences between the lab extraction and our brewing, but to a
great extent it factors out changes due to the malts used. 'B' most
directly measures our process.
Method C has similar utility as Method A, but compares extraction
against an artificial value of 36 pt-gal/lb. This method is meaningless
and a direct statement of extract (30.87 pt-gal/lb) is more useful.
Method D - this method like method B compares extract against values for
the specific malts, which allows us to measure our brewing process and
to factor out the malt differences. The major objection to method D is
that there is no recognized method of arriving at the bogey figures for
the extraction rate of the specific malts. The tables that are available
are highly variable and the numerical resolution of published figures is
inadequate. One reason why the figure calculated above (81%) is so low
is that the limiting 'bogey' extraction from the 'Zymurgy' table for
german pilsner malt of 1.038 is ridiculously high. Accounting for the
moisture level, this extraction would require an 86% mass extraction
rate - well beyond any reasonable value. The tables also lump all malts
of a given category from a particular county together, perpetuating a
somewhat outdated 'national malt character' notion.
Conclusions --
Method A or a raw measure of pt-gal/lb measure process AND materials
together - inseparably.
Since DBCG%, DBFG% and HWE are the the only reliable figures available
to evaluate and compare specific malts. Method B is undoubtedly the best
measure of process separate from materials.
Method C should be abandoned since it is inherently meaningless.
Method D has the advantage of being simple and accessible to
homebrewers, but the tables on which it is based are significantly
flawed. It is possible to construct better tables for method D and to
get identical results to method B. Without such improved tables, method
D is only useful for comparing brews made with identical malt
composition.
- --
Because the primary value of measuring efficiency is to measure our
'process' rather than materials, method B is clearly the winning
choice. With properly defined and developed tables, method D would also
be a good choice.
or so I think,
Steve Alexander
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 08:23:58 +0000
From: bob.mccowan@bmd.cpii.com (bob mccowan)
Subject: Rusted weld on Cornelius keg
A friend of mine was cleaning his keg when he noticed that a section of one
of the welds had some surface rust. How can he clean the rust and treat the
SS so that the rust doesn't reappear?
Bob
Bob in Newbury, MA.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 09:53:26 EST
From: Headduck <Headduck@aol.com>
Subject: Orval and bad grain info
Jeffery Rose writes:
I just tried an Orval Trappist ale and found it to smell like a men's
urinal at a seedy gas station. Was this beer spoiled or do true
connoisseurs like Michael Jackson actually fancy that urinal-fresh
flavor?
I don't know about the urinal fresh flavor, but I also had a bad experience
with an Orval Trappist ale that I recently purchased. It was so carbonated
that I couldn't really tell what it tasted like. It was fizzier than bad
champagne. Is this what this style is supposed to be like??? Pardon my
ignorance, but I don't often shell out 3.50 for a 12 oz. beer. Maybe my
pallet just needs to be educated??
Just a note on bad information. I bought a can of extract recently because my
local brewshop was out of the usual bag in a box extract that I usually use.
It was a 4# can of Alexander's Sun Country, Pale Malt Extract. On the label
under ways to improve your brew it states: "More colorful and flavorful beers
can be made to suit your own taste by adding crushed caramel, crystal and/or
black malt to the boiling wort."
Shouldn't these people know better??? It is no wonder there is so much
confusion amoung novice homebrewers about addition of grain.
returning to lurking status,
Joe Yoder
Lawrence, KS
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 09:13:01 -0600
From: "Wills, Frederick J (MED)" <Frederick.Wills@amermsx.med.ge.com>
Subject: RIMS pump speed control
A question for all you RIMS advocates and users. I have built a RIMS
system (a budget version) from the original Rodney Morris plans. It
came out very nice IMO with only one minor obstacle to fix and I'll be
mashin'. My problem is that when testing my set-up I found that the
pump motor gets very hot if I cut the speed down to what I feel would be
an appropriate recirculation speed of about 2 gal/min. The pump is a
Little Giant model 3-MDX which has 1/2"OD smooth inlet outlet fittings.
My system has very little in the way of flow restriction as I have
plumbed it with 1/2" ID Tygon tubing and the total head is about 2 foot.
I think the problem may be that at lower pump speeds the internal blower
fan doesn't move enough cooling air through the motor. BTW - I ran the
pump for about 2 hours at full speed with no overheating.
I suppose my options at this point are:
1) Add a flow restriction device (ball valve?) downstream of the pump
and forgo the cool hi-tech speed controller.
or
b) Rig up a muffin fan and ducting to draw air through the motor at all
times.
Has anyone else run into this dilemna? I think that I read a similar
problem mentioned on someone's RIMS web page.
How have others addressed this problem? Anyone take the fan approach?
Thanks,
Fred Wills
Fearless Freddie's (soon to be RIMS) Homebrewery
@42.99N - 71.38W - you figure it out...
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 09:54:40 -0600
From: "Kensler, Paul" <PKensler@itcmedia.com>
Subject: RE: torrefied wheat
RE: Torrefied wheat, Maris Otter, and gummy sparges...
I chose the
decoction route in order to enhance extraction and flavor. Using a
single
temp infusion mash @154F I had fine sparge results. Could boiling a
fraction of the grain (twice) have worsened the M-O tendency to stick?
I've never done a decoction mash, so I have no experience there. I
wouldn't think so... The only time I have used M-O pale ale malt, it
was a simple infusion mash also.
>Despite what caused the gummy sparge, you could use a low-temperature
>glucan rest to help break down the gums that seem to be present,
I thought about this, but I did rest at 40C (104F) for about 20 minutes.
Should I rest lower or higher to break down glucans? BTW, the fact that
the
wheat is torrefied doesn't make it any gummier, does it? Isn't all
wheat,
malted or whatever, huskless?
Unfortunately, I am at work and all my brew notes and texts are at home.
I don't usually do beta-glucan rests, so I can't remember the correct
temperature. I think its at about 90 - 100F? But yes, all wheat is
huskless and I wouldn't expect there to be that much performance
difference.
>or use a couple handfuls of rice hulls in the mash tun to help the
>sparge.
I haven't seen these at my brew store.
(snip)
belgian pale malt (Dewolf Cos.?)...how about using that?
If you're interested, I can point you to a couple of URLs for HB stores
that can mail-order rice or oat hulls. I swear by them (Williams, St.
Patrick's, etc). Regarding DWC pale ale malt, I have had really good
results using it (but I have never decocted it and I rarely use a
protein rest).
Paul Kensler
Plano, TX
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 11:40:19 -0500
From: "Schultz, Steven W." <swschult@CBDCOM-EMH1.APGEA.ARMY.MIL>
Subject: Probably Taking the Plunge to All-Grain
My last several batches of beer have been partial-mash, and overall I
believe they are an improvement over my extract-only batches. As I
suspect others before me have decided, given the time and work involved
in a partial-mash it makes sense to go the next step and become an
all-grain brewer. Also, I have been given the green light to get
myself a Valley Mill for Christmas.
I'm writing now to ask for feedback on my proposed all-grain procedures:
a.m. - Heat water (approx. 1.25 quarts of water per 1.0 pound of grain)
to about 170F then pour into 10-gallon round Gott cooler. In the cooler
will be the grain, the Hop Tech cooler bulkhead fitting, and Phil's
Phalse Bottom. I would expect this to produce a mash temp in the
mid-150s. Put cover on cooler, go to work.
p.m. - Return from work. Heat about 4 gallons of water to 180F or
higher, pour into cooler. Let settle a few minutes then sparge. I
would hope that this would give me about 3-4 gallons of water with a
gravity approximately 5/3 of my target OG.
Does that sound about right? I cannot do full boil now or at any time
in the near future, so please tailor your advice to that limitation.
I haven't used one of these coolers before, but with 10 or more pounds
of grain in it, will there be enough room for me to pour in 3-4 gallons
of sparge water?
Without doing "rests" at 122F, etc., will beer produced in this manner
suffer in some way? Will it be hazy? Will there be poor head
retention?
Any comments or suggestions, public or private, are appreciated.
Thanks.
Steve Schultz
Abingdon, MD
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 1997 13:22:35 -0700
From: Jim Parker <jim@aob.org>
Subject: Re: Zymurgy problems?
Sandy writes:
>
> Hi all,
>
> When I got my Zymurgy last week the binding immediately started falling apart!
> I have never had
> one do that (and its a good thing as they get alot of abuse!)
>
> Sorry to waste the space, but if its a bad issue overall, thought you all
> would like to know.
>
> Thanks,
> Sandy in Indianapolis
If anyone else has a similar problem, please e-mail me immediately and I
will ship you out a new magazine, as I have told Sandy I will send her.
I'll be calling our printer today to see what could have caused this and
would like to know the scope of the problem.
Thanks,
Jim
- --
Jim Parker
Director
American Homebrewers Association (303) 447-0816 x 122
736 Pearl Street (303) 447-2825 -- FAX
PO Box 1679 jim@aob.org -- E-MAIL
Boulder, CO 80306-1679 info@aob.org -- AOB INFO
U.S.A. http://www.beertown.org -- WEB
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 12:35:47 -0400
From: lachina@mindspring.com (Lorne P. Franklin)
Subject: Bottle Lagering vs Bulk Lagering
Having onferred with a half dozen or so veteran lager brewers, the
consensus is that there are no discernable differences between lagers aged
in bulk (secondary fermenter or keg) and lagers which have been bottle
primed then cold stored. Of course different procedures are called for for
each method. But one CAN expect true lager quality from beers that have
been fermented within the correct temperature range, botlled, primed at
fermentation temperatures for 1-3 weeks (one person suggested warmer
temps.), then cold-aged for 1-2 months, or longer.
Hoppy Lagering, All!
Lorne
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 11:35:54 -0600
From: rlabor@lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald)
Subject: RE: Denature temperature of Pectin Enzyme
From: Mike Allred <mballred@xmission.com>
>I recently made a fruit mead which I held at 145 deg for 15 min to
>pasteurize it. I do not like using Camden and I didn't want to boil
the
>honey. I added the peptic enzyme at 145 deg and I'm not sure if the
>temperature was too hot for it to work.
The peptic enzyme bottle says to keep refrigerated, so I think that it
would not be too happy at a high temperature. I wonder why you feel the
need to put it in so early in the proccess. I had a mixed fruit wine
that was very cloudy about a month after start of fermentation (one
gallon bottle size), I added 10 drops of pectic enzyme and it cleared
like magic in about a week to very clear.
Ron
Ronald La Borde - Metairie, Louisiana - rlabor@lsumc.edu
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 9:39:03 PST
From: Nick Bonfilio <nicholas@rattler.Remedy.COM>
Subject: Grain Mill
My wife has a Kitchen Aid heavy duty mixer that can interface with many
different attachments, like a can opener or a vegetable slicer.
They also offer a grain mill (all metal). I was wondering if anyone out there
has any data points on using this attachment to crush their brewing grains.
Does it work as well as the grain mills typically available for purchase
in your local homebrew shops?
I couldn't see a demo of it--but I removed it from the box and read the
enclosed literature and noticed that it features a dial to change how fine
the grain can be crushed. It's expensive ($150), but it may be worth it
than having to use some manually operated grain mill.
If anyone knows what features to look for in a grain mill for crushing brewing
grains, this too may enable me to make a good decision.
I appreciate any advice.
Nick
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 13:01:20 -0500
From: "Capt. Marc Battreall" <batman@reefnet.com>
Subject: Results of Grain Mill Inquiry
Hoppy Holidays To All;
Just thought I'd let ya'll know that my inquiry to the collective about
the grain mills brought me 20 individual responses. Thanks to all of you
who responded with your opinions and experiences with the mills. To
recap, I am purchasing (or hopefully getting for Christmas) a grain
mill, and had narrowed the choices down to 2. They are either the Valley
Mill (tm) or The Maltmill (tm). And the survey said......
Maltmill - 10 (including one vote from J. Schmidling, of course!)
Valleymill - 6 (all satisfied users)
Both above - 1 (responder had and liked both)
Other mills - 3 (Corona, Brewtek, and build it yourself)
- -----------------
Total E-mails 20
Being that I have relied so much on the assistance and expertise of the
HBD'ers in the past, I will most probably go with the majority and get
The Maltmill. Just haven't decided whether to go with the adjustable or
not. Most of the respondents stated that the adjustability of any of the
mills was just not that big of a deal.
With this, I hope that it kills this much repeated thread.
Thanks again for all your help.
Merry Christmas To All!
Marc
- --
Capt. Marc D. Battreall
Islamorada, Florida
batman@reefnet.com
The Fabulous Florida Keys
future site of "The BackCountry Brewhouse"
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 97 12:33:05 CST
From: jwilkins@wss.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson)
Subject: Negra Modelo
Negra Modelo (not Negro Modelo) is called a "dark ale" on its label.
I don't know if it is really an ale but it is the best Mexican, or for that
matter the best American, beer I have had. I had a couple last night in
Joe T. Garcia's restaurant in Ft. Worth, as a matter of fact.
John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins@wss.dsccc.com
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2585, 12/17/97
*************************************
-------
