Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2631
HOMEBREW Digest #2631 Sat 07 February 1998
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:
keg lube (AlannnnT)
Doggerel.... ("Rob Moline")
Wyeast 3056 ("John Lifer, jr")
Randy's Oldie Fridge (Forrest Duddles)
Viscosity / Extraction (Kyle Druey)
alterno keg lube (Dave Sapsis)
peculiar yeast starter behavior "Kevin TenBrink" 2/6/98 (Vachom)
Chlorphenolics (AJ)
Fining Agents - what they are good for (Charles Burns)
some questions (michael rose)
mashtime in the mashtun (Domenick Venezia)
Bentonite first? (John Wilkinson)
Efficiency Evaluation ("Paul Hockings")
YARCMTD ("Randy Erickson")
Re: peculiar yeast starter behavior (Mike Uchima)
Bottle oxidation vs. HSA (James Tomlinson)
re: peculiar yeast starter behavior ("phil sides")
Two Tubs, 4 Kettles and a Baby (part 1) (Charles Burns)
Two Tubs, 4 Kettles and a Baby (part 2) (Charles Burns)
PRP Part 3 / Late Night HBD / Phenols in BT (Kyle Druey)
RE: Keg Lube alternative (Richard Gardner)
help stamp out quoted-printable! (Dick Dunn)
Iceland, anyone? / AB ads for freshness (Richard Gardner)
NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS: hbd.org
Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@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 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@hbd.org
Homebrew Digest Information on the Web: http://hbd.org
Requests for back issues will be ignored. Back issues are available via:
Anonymous ftp from...
ftp://hbd.org/pub/hbd/digests
ftp://ftp.stanford.edu/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, 6 Feb 1998 00:41:05 EST
From: AlannnnT@aol.com
Subject: keg lube
Hi all. I try not to post commercial info on the page but all this discussion
of the high cost of keg lube type products makes me cringe. A high quality,
food grade lube suitable for pumps, kegs parts and couplings, from freezer to
hot room temperatures cost $3.50 for a FOUR ounce squeeze tube. I challenge
any homebrewer to use up a four ounce tube in this century, and I'm sure my
tiny shop is not the only one selling it. Don't buy the small tin [one ounce]
package sold by mailorder places if your are a heavy lube user, but $3.50
[retail] for four ounces shouldn't be excessive. Check with your local HB
shop.
>From the eastern tip of the J. Rennerian Hemisphere,[Long Island NY]
Alan T
Karps Homebrew
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 23:52:00 -0600
From: "Rob Moline" <brewer@ames.net>
Subject: Doggerel....
Doggerel...
The Digest seems to be cooking along at what I see as one of the best
paces I have observed in some time. Thanks to all for continuing my
education. Dave, give it a rest.......
Mashout for denaturing enzymes seems redundant to me. Don't we denature
them in the boil? I just consider a mashout, read sparge at 176 F for me,
to be chasing good flow at runoff.
Mark Tumarkin wonders about growing hops in Gainesville. Don't he know
that the best thing that grows in Gatorville is a Seminole Victory?
Courtesy of George De Piro, I had an opportunity to taste the HopDevil
brew made by the Victory Brewing Company. Good God, I wish I could brew
like that!!! Gentlemen and women, my credentials don't count for much, and
anyone who knows me will attest to my absence of brewing knowledge and
taste...but count on it...this beer screams Gold Medal....my prediction.
Well done!
I wish to announce that I am now employed as an assistant brewer
(technical terminology.... I feel I have earned the title of Brewer, even
if I am working for a Head Brewer) at the Court Avenue Brewing Company of
Des Moines, and in a curious twist, am now working for Steve Zimmerman, who
was my assistant brewer (when the LABCO re-opened in '95. Ain't life
strange? The good thing is that I am back in the biz on a daily hands on
basis, and the company is basically well balanced, great food and beer, and
a GM that is not only a homebrewer, but also has "Beernut" on his
personalized license plates!
Thanks to those of you who helped when I was down.....
"Remembering Who My Mates Are.."
Jethro Gump
Rob Moline
Brewer
Court Avenue Brewing Company
Des Moines, Iowa
brewer@ames.net
Ames, Iowa.
"The More I Know About Beer, The More I Realize I Need To Know More About
Beer!"
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 1998 05:50:40 -0600
From: "John Lifer, jr" <jliferjr@misnet.com>
Subject: Wyeast 3056
I have been wanting to do a lager for quite some time now. I got a pack
of Wyeast 3056
Bavarian yeast a while back, oops, Oct 97 date. Has been two days and
no activity in pack
at all. I know it should take 4 days or so, but my question is what is
the viability of this yeast?
Should I wait or start an ale yeast I have on hand? It was stored in
refrig, at 70f or so now.
Thanks, John Lifer, Jr. Still illegal in Mississippi (but maybe a
brewpub or two?)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 1998 07:38:09 -0500
From: Forrest Duddles <fridge@Imbecile.kzoo.edu>
Subject: Randy's Oldie Fridge
Greetings folks,
Randy posted:
>To add to the refrigerator thread: I have an old (25-30 years, judging
> by the "Harvest Gold" color) refrigerator, approx. 16 cf, with a
> single door (freezer and refrig. in same compartment). I've been using
> this to lager, but I noticed that by turning the control to a point
> between defrost and "1" (the warmest setting), I can maintain a temp
> of 50 degrees. Will this setting hurt the unit? If it won't, I could
> ferment lagers without buying an external controller.
> Thanks- Randy in San Diego
This will probably work fine. Refrigerators of that era were built pretty
tough - but not very efficient. I must say, however, that at this advanced
age "She could blow at any moment!"
Hope this helps!
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
Forrest Duddles - FridgeGuy in Kalamazoo
fridge@Imbecile.kzoo.edu
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 1998 23:15:03 -0800
From: Kyle Druey <druey@ibm.net>
Subject: Viscosity / Extraction
viscosity and lautering...
>If lower viscosity yielded greater extraction then it would happen at
>the lower viscosities that naturally occur during the sparge. Viscosity
>is not an issue.
I think I mentioned that the only reason I bring the mash to mashout
temps is to reduce the viscocity. I do not do this to increase
extraction, but rather to reduce the possibility of a stuck mash.
On extraction...
Homebrewers seem to be obsessed with high extraction rates, e.g. "I
obtained 34 pts from my last mash". Can you always get 34 pts from your
mash? I think the more important issue is consistency. So what if you
can only get 25 to 26 pts from your mash setup. If you can do this
almost every time then you can achieve repeatability in your brewing,
and you will be way ahead of your extraction crazed friends. "...IT IS
RARE IN BREWING FOR EFFICIENCY AND BEER QUALITY TO GO HAND IN HAND."
(Fix, PoBS, p. 98) If you want high extraction rates just use a Corona,
grind up the malt to flour, and you will beat your neighbors extraction
rate every time (if you don't get a set mash).
viscosity and the RIMSer...
Burley mentioned to us that viscosity increases rapidly with respect to
concentration. I have noticed this when the mash really starts to
convert at the 158 F rest. The viscosity increases and the pump begins
to feel it. What I have been doing lately is to add 1 or 2 qts of the
heated sparge water during the 158 F rest to make recirculation easier.
This has eliminated any high temp stuck mash problems I may have had in
the past.
Kyle Druey
Bakersfield, CA
Al K where are you? I have been looking forward to your comments on the
protein rest/modification issue...
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 07:40:44 -0800
From: Dave Sapsis <DAVE_SAPSIS@fire.ca.gov>
Subject: alterno keg lube
For a long time I suffered with attaching/extracting fixtures to
kegs...then it dawned on me.
My lovely sister, being a health care professional working in the AIDS
division of CDC, and a long proponent of safe sex and other current
issues, had provided me with a big ol bottle of ASTRO-Glide. Hey, I
didn't ask for it, but the stuff is great (nudge, nudge, wink, wink, say
no more). I beleive it is 'specially formulated to be, er, ingestible.
Works like magic. On kegs too. I bet y'all know where to look for it
if the mood strikes you.
- --dave in Sacramento, just a few keystrokes away from allayou.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 09:44:14 -0600
From: Vachom <MVachow@newman.k12.la.us>
Subject: peculiar yeast starter behavior "Kevin TenBrink" 2/6/98
Kevin:
Your yeast starters haven't really reached high krausen. The great
shortcoming of using yeast starters is the unpredictable nature of the
yeast; that is, you can't necessarily brew when it's convenient for you,
because it may not be a convenient time for the yeast starter. My guess
is that if you'd left any of your starters alone for another day, you'd
have had visible bubbling.
A couple of suggestions. Check the age of the liquid yeast you buy.
Wyeast that's been hanging around the supply shops fridge for three
months may be less efficient than fresher yeast. Secondly, make sure
you aerate your starter well at first, but remember that fermentation is
an anaerobic process. The yeast needs oxygen to get started, but once
started, it will be harmed by additional oxygen.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 1998 10:57:05 -0500
From: AJ <ajdel@mindspring.com>
Subject: Chlorphenolics
>
In #2630 George DePiro wrote:
> Chlorine can react with phenols in the beer to form chlorophenols, but
> these are usually perceived as a strong swimming pool odor, not
> medicine.
I can't say that chlorphenolics never manifest themselves this way but
I believe
they are usually perceived as having "plastic", "electric" or "band aid"
odors. In
my experience it has always been the former. When first confronted with
a
chlorphenolic beer I usually think "Damn, this cup is cracked" because
they smell
(to me) exactly what a cheap plastic drink cup smells like when it is
disrupted.
And so I advise anyone who wants to learn what chlorphenolics smell like
to get a
cheap clear plastic drink cup and crumble or cut or file or somehow
otherwize
abuse it. Note that the cups used in contests are special odor free cups
(or at
least they should be) so that they will not work for this experiment. I
typically
pick this up once or twice each time I judge. I have personally never
run into a
beer that smelled like a band aid, free chlorine or anything "electric".
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 98 08:14 PST
From: cburns@egusd.k12.ca.us (Charles Burns)
Subject: Fining Agents - what they are good for
There has been some discussion about fining agents lately (gelatin,
polyclar, bentonite) and people attempting to use them to remove starch haze
and protein hazes. As far as I know (of course I could go home, reread my
books and make an intelligent post, but why not just go ahead and make a
fool of myself right now), these fining agents are good at clearing
suspended yeast, and not good at all for clearing starch or protein haze.
The basic idea is that the fining particles have an opposite electrical
charge than yeast so that they tend to glom on to each other (glom is a
technical term), making them too heavy to remain in suspension and thereby
settle out.
Starch is bad and can probably be removed only by filtering.
Protein haze can be cleared by lagering. Why it works I don't know, but
everytime I have a beer that's hazy when its initially kegged, will clear in
2-3 weeks of storage at 34F. I also notice that flavors seem to intensify
during this lagering time. I recently made a Sweet Stout that when kegged
was full of body and mouthfeel (yummy) but very light in perceived
roastiness. After 3 weeks in the keg at 34F, it now has dried out a bit and
the roasty flavors are really beginning to come alive. I don't know what the
science is, but I really like the result. By the way, I fine every beer I
make with 1 teaspoon of gelatin in a pint of boiling water at the time I
transfer from primary to secondary.
Charley (working on 2 tub stout brewing report) in N. Cal
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 1998 08:05:38 -0800
From: michael rose <mrose@ucr.campus.mci.net>
Subject: some questions
Some help from the collective in settling some brewclub debates.
1)Does Special Roast Malt need to be mashed, or can it be steeped?
2)The BT Market Guide states that the conversion time for 2-row is
about 5 minutes. Why do we need to do a 60 minute mash?
3)Which Wyeast, both lager and ale, is most neutral? (imparting the
least amount of flavor)
4) What is Monica Lewinskys favorite game?
"Sallow the leader"
thanks, mike rose mrose@ucr.campus.mci.net riverside, ca
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 08:40:29 -0800 (PST)
From: Domenick Venezia <demonick@zgi.com>
Subject: mashtime in the mashtun
In 2630 "Spies, James" <Jams@mlis.state.md.us> said,
> While diffusivity is secondary during the sparge, during the mash it is
> not.
> ... <snip> ...B
> The problem is that we usually stop mashing after 60 min. or so, and as I
> said above diffusion is slow, so there will always be sugar trapped
> within the grains
> ... <snip> ...
> how much increase in efficiency occurs if we are to simply let the whole
> shebang sit for another 30 - 45 minutes? Would the slow diffusion of
> sugars *out* of the middle of the grains and *into* the spaces between
> them help increase efficiency more than simply doing a painfully slow
> sparge after 60 min?
My guess is very little, to none. For diffusion to work there must be a
concentration gradient. In the above case there must be a higher
concentration of sugar in the grains than outside the grains. If the
"whole shebang" has been fully converted and is at osmotic equilibrium
then the only way to get sugar to diffuse out of the grains is to reduce
the concentration of sugar outside the grains, that is, sparge. The issue
boils down to the question of whether the mash is at osmotic equilibrium
at the start of the sparge.
I think that this might be easy to calculate. First, one must employ a
mashout in this case to inactivate any remaining enzymes, because we do
not want the mash to continue to convert during the sparge. Since we know
exactly how much water we have added to the grist, then the SG of the
first runnings (after appropriate recirculation) can be taken to be the SG
of the mash. Using the volume and initial SG one can calculate the total
amount of sugar contained in the tun under the assumption of osmotic
equilibrium. Then, run your sparge, and at the end of the sparge
calculate the total amount of sugar extracted from the mash. If the
"after sparge" number is higher than the "before sparge" number then there
must exist some reservoir of higher concentration in the mash, and our
original assumption of osmotic equilibrium is false. Because of the
margins of error in this process, only a gross difference will be
detected.
Domenick Venezia demonick@zgi.antispam.com (remove .antispam)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 98 12:28:25 CST
From: jwilkins@wss.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson)
Subject: Bentonite first?
Kirk Harralson quoted a winemaking faq about adding bentonite at the beginning:
> It helps to get rid of a lot of stuff (including millions of dead yeast
> cells) during the primary fermentation by having it all fall out before
> clearing ever starts. Doing so optimizes the actual clearing process
> by taking care of a lot of it before you even try. It also helps avoid
> foul smells from decomposing yeast -- a potential problem when your
> wine is in the carboy for several weeks or even months -- when you
> transfer the wine into the secondary by having them all fall out to the
> bottom in the primary, therefore avoiding their transfer.
If the bentonite is added at the beginning it would seem any yeast it removed
would be freshly pitched. I wouldn't think the bentonite would continue to
remove things from the must (or wort, in our case) after it had precipitated
and I would expect that precipitation to be well before the yeast was finished
and dying off. What could it be removing at the beginning that needed to be
removed?
I hope this has not strayed too far from beer brewing but I find it
interesting.
John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins@wss.dsccc.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 11:08:48 -0800
From: "Paul Hockings" <phocking@pacifier.com>
Subject: Efficiency Evaluation
HI all,
My first submission to the digest. Anyway my dilema of the week..
Targeting a 13.75 p ESB, I figured 1.206 lbs/ext/gal. Aiming for an 8
gallon batch and using Golden Promise Scottish Malt as my base ( with only 6%
chrystal for color) I used the following formula to determine the amount of
grain I would need : 1.206 * 8gal = 9.68 lbs, (80% course grind
extract for Golden Promise from malt anaylisis sheet) and my
rounded up system efficiency to 70%, I got : 9.68 / (.8 *.7) = 17. 2 lbs
of grain. So 17 lbs of grain and 9 gallons of water later I ended up
with a density of 16. 25 P in just over 7.5 gallons after a 90 minute boil !
Redoing the formula for a 7.5 gallon batch would = 16.1 lbs of grain
needed. 1 lb less.
My Question, Does this mean my efficiency for this batch has risen to
~80% ?? 7.5 gals at 16.25 p = 10.8lbs/ext , 10.8 / 17 = .63 , .63 / .8
= .79
If this is correct I have increased my efficiency 10% with this batch
(wow!) , mostly due to my increased attention to the lauter tun
(converted half barrel) temperature during sparge . I would be interested
in any comments the group might have.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 11:23:02 -0800
From: "Randy Erickson" <RANDYE@mid.org>
Subject: YARCMTD
Yet Another Rubbermaid Cooler Mash Tun Design:
Drew (Emily's husband) asks about what type of false bottom to use in his =
Rubbermaid cooler mash tun. There are a number of links to various =
designs at The Brewery website, I would start there.
I will also tell you what I did when I built mine about a month ago. The =
slick part, not suprisingly, is based on a KennyEddy design.
I had a wild hair to build this thing, I'd decided to use the Easymasher =
concept, but was too impatient to order one from Jack. My local shop had =
a rolled up screen, _identical_ to the one on my real Easymasher (also =
from a company in Illinois) for about 8 bucks. You could probably make =
something just as good with about two-bits worth of screen, but hey, it's =
a hobby. =20
I clamped the screen onto a short (six-inch) piece of 3/8" OD copper =
tubing with a small stainless hose clamp (just like EM). The other end of =
the tubing fits snugly inside a piece of 3/8" ID plastic racking hose. =
The hose fits snugly inside a rubber mini-keg bung. The bung fits very =
snugly into the hole of the interior lining of the Rubbermaid cooler, from =
the inside. No cutting, melting, bolting, gluing, etc., just quick and =
easy.
I left about two inches of hose sticking out of the side of the cooler =
and attached a $2 plastic valve (3/8" hose barb on both ends. Another =
three feet of hose lets me sparge without splashing. I imaging you could =
use a long piece of hose and one of those pinch type racking hose clamps =
and avoid the valve altogether.
Good luck,
Randy in Modesto (who's really excited about getting to go to the =
California HB Club of the Year banquet at Anchor tomorrow night)=20
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 1998 13:45:11 -0600
From: Mike Uchima <uchima@mcs.net>
Subject: Re: peculiar yeast starter behavior
Kevin TenBrink asks about lack of activity in starters, and the fact
that the airlock bubbles when the starter is shaken.
This is normal. A 1 pint starter has about 1/40th the volume of wort,
compared to a full size batch of beer. So the bubbling rate in the
airlock will be only about 1/40th what you'd see on a carboy full of
beer. When you shake it, you are causing a bunch of dissolved CO2 to
come out of solution all at once, which causes the fast bubbling.
If you want to determine when the starter has fermented out (i.e. you
want to decant most of the liquid so you can re-feed the starter, or you
want to pitch just the slurry), wait until it starts to clear.
- --
== Mike Uchima == uchima@mcs.net ==
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 1998 15:58:06 -0500
From: James Tomlinson <red_beards@no.spam.compuserve.com>
Subject: Bottle oxidation vs. HSA
I brewed my first successful partial grain just after Christmas (First
one was a carboy gyser from a blocked air lock...nuther story). It
started out as what appeared to be one of my best beers (A Sam Adams Ale
Clone). Unfortunately, I seem to be getting the "cardboard" taste.
I didn't notice it in the first 1/2 of the bottles. It appears to be
getting stronger. At first, I thought it was a little HSA from my
ineptatude with moving the mash from the mash tun to the lauter tun (no
longer an issue since I fully converted my 30 qt cooler with my easy
masher).
I now fear that it is bottle oxidation. This brew sat in secondary for a
long time (3 weeks). There was not a lot of CO2 left in the beer at
priming. I bottled with standard airspace. I primed with saved gyle.
So, Whadda ya think ? HSA or Bottle Oxidation ?
- --
James Tomlinson
remove the "no.spam" to reply
Give a man a beer, and he wastes an hour.
But teach a man how to brew, and he wastes a lifetime!
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 1998 14:27:07 PST
From: "phil sides" <hopsock@hotmail.com>
Subject: re: peculiar yeast starter behavior
In HBD #2630 Kevin TenBrink <tenbrink@jps.net> wrote:
>I make a starter and add the yeast. The next morning there does not
>appear to be any activity, ie fermentation, in the gallon jug that I
>am using, that is, until I give it a shake or a swirl. Then a huge
>out gassing of CO2 occurs and it returns to its apparently docile
>state. I wait a few minutes and give it another shake and yet >another
large burst of CO2 is emitted from the wort/starter. This >has happened
on every occasion I have made a yeast starter, even >though I have used
different yeast, different amounts of starter >wort, and different temps
to store these starters.
Sorry to ask such an obvious question, but are you sure you are getting
a good seal at the base of your airlock and the stopper's contact with
the bottle? CO2 could be seeping out slowly, and every time I pick up my
gallon jug to look at it, I give the stopper a good push just to make
sure. I use the same stopper I use for 5 gallon carboys and the jug
opening is not exactly the same size as the carboy openings although I
have never had a leak.
>How am I to know when the starter is done, when it stops
>spewing CO2 upon agitation?
I always pitch mine 48 hours into the starter fermentation. I have
violent fermentation in the starter jug on the second day. My method is
probably a little different than most of the collective, but I follow it
precisely each time and it always works.
I use 2 cups (yes that says cups, a LOT more than I see others using) of
DME in 2/3 gallon of water and boil for 15 minutes. This yields just
over 1/2 gallon of wort. Cool it then pitch either a 12 oz. bottle of
slurry harvested from a primary or a smack pack. Pitch the starter 48
hours later. I see signs of fermentation almost immediately.
Phil
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 98 16:19 PST
From: cburns@egusd.k12.ca.us (Charles Burns)
Subject: Two Tubs, 4 Kettles and a Baby (part 1)
Two Tub Russian Imperial Stout
It all began with what I thought was a fairly innocent remark. Something
like, "Hey Dave, you know, after making a barrel of Dunkel, it seems like
that wine barrel mash tub would be more suited for making a really BIG beer
on a homebrew scale. A barleywine or Russian Imperial...". Next thing I
know, we're collaborating on a recipe for a monster brew. What follows is
the story of Two Tubs, Four Kettles and a Baby.
In late December, we had used Dave's half wine barrel mash tub to double
decoct a barrel of Dunkel (which we appropriately scorched and now consider
a rauchdunkel but tastes like a steinbier). This time, Dave got his buddy
Peter (a professional brewer) who had the other half of the wine barrel to
join us and make it into a two tub extravaganza. The first amazing fact that
surfaced is that Peter lives down south (about 100 miles away) and owns a
very small car (I think a little toyota). He managed to get the half wine
barrel, kettle, burner, propane, fiance and 3 sacks of grain all packed into
this little sardine can of a car. Nearly had to use the "jaws of life" to
extract them when they showed up!
The best way to tell this story is to list what went wrong step by step
throughout the brew day, so here it goes...
Peter, where's the chocolate malt? Uh-oh. The grain bill we came up with
called for chocolate and nobody brought any. So off go Peter and Dave to buy
some while Vic and I proceed to mill 130 lbs of pale ale malt. Beautiful
Crisp Maris Otter malt. Its floor malted and therefore little handled by
machines that trash the malt. Not a broken kernel in the bag and beautifully
plump.
Dave has this 500 year old (approx) Corona Mill that he motorized by
hammering a socket wrench onto the shaft which then has an adapter for a
variable speed, hand held drill. I just had to have a picture of this so I
ran to get my camera. Second problem of the day - camera batteries are dead.
This day is beginning to look like one of those brew days when everything
goes south.
Giving up on the pictures Vic (my buddy Victor who got me started in this
hobby) and I proceed to mill. We got through the first bag and about 20 lbs
into the second when the socket came loose. We tried and tried hammering it
back on but to no avail - no way to mill. Looking through Dave's tools, we
tried to file some new edges on the shaft. Didn't work. So what the heck, we
went to the drug store and picked up new batteries for the camera.
Dave and Peter came back and found us helpless. Tried the hand crank on the
Corona and after 2 lbs gave up, we'd have been cranking all day to finish
up. Dave found a little smaller socket and with some more filing and
hammering, we finally got the mill running again. Total milling was about
150lbs (see recipe at end). After the first batch was milled, we went ahead
and mashed in.
Alternately adding hot water from Dave's hose which is hooked up to his hot
water heater in the garage and boiling water from the 3 kettles we had
already set up, Dave and Peter eyeball the thing and got a fairly stiff
looking mash going. Peter says "add water until it stirs like jelly". Who
knows what the ratio of water to grist was, no telling, but it looked about
1.25 quarts per pound of grist, my guess only. We hit 152F, not bad for no
calculator, just eyeballing it. Mashtub one was filled to within about 1
inch of the rim. We immediately began boiling more water for the next mash.
Milling completed and we mashed in the next one very similarly, only this
time we hit 154F. We're boiling more water now for hot liquor and a sparge.
About this time we look around and say, how many fermenters do we have.
Well, not enough. So Vic tears off down the street in my car to go get his
6.5 gallon glass. And doesn't come back for almost 2 hours - after we had
lunch. Seems the fermenter had been UNCLEANDED for a LONG time.
Uneventful mash, we sampled a few homebrews and eventually killed a keg of
Vienna that Dave had made. Excellent beer that day, all day long (except for
maybe a sweet stout that Dave felt never should have been made). No sparge
drain of mashtun one produced about 12 gallons of about 1.100 wort (at
140F), after we ran a few pints onto the concrete becuase we left the drain
open on the kettle, which we proceeded to boil. Sparge began for the gyle
wort which eventually yielded about 12 gallons of 1.055 wort (at 140F). We
got concerned about the volume of grain and water in the tubs and so the
second tub was about 10 lbs short of grain. It yielded 12 gallons of approx
1.090 wort first runnings and 12 gallons of 1.048 wort gyle (straining to
remember these details).
... to be continued ...
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 98 16:20 PST
From: cburns@egusd.k12.ca.us (Charles Burns)
Subject: Two Tubs, 4 Kettles and a Baby (part 2)
...continued...
So there we were with 4 kettles going and two of them decide to boil over
about the same time, much to Dangerous Dave's delight. Dave's ever present
hose cooled things down. Unfortunately, one of the burners cooled down a bit
too much and the flame went out. With 3 other burners going, there was so
much noise, nobody noticed the lack of flame on one of them. Luckily, a few
minutes later I smelled the propane and noticed the lack of boil in one of
the kettles. Just needed a little spark and we were back in business. Good
thing we were outside and well ventilated.
About now you're probably wondering about the baby. Dave's patio brew haus
is covered by a low hanging metal patio cover. This thing THUNDERS when it
rains hard. And rain it did. The "baby" was El Nino dumping about 3 inches
of rain on us during our 9 hour brew extravaganza.
Dave has these copper screens he uses at the bottom of the kettle to strain
hops out at the end of boiling. And Peter has this incredible cylinder (one
end closed) of stainless mesh he built that is the same shape as the half
keg kettle. This in-kettle hopback/hop bag ends up as a liner to the inside
of the kettle. But it only works if you actually put it IN the kettle before
you put hops in. Duh. We forgot. Actually we had two kettles with no screen
and two with.
Never fear, Dangerous Dave's got a hop bag for one kettle, but one we just
plain forgot and dumped hops in the other. The one we fogot about we simply
took a kettle (after it was emptied) put some water in it, fired up a
burner, dropped in the big stainless hopback, boiled it for a few minutes
and them dumped the entire 10 gallons of cooled (full of whole hops) right
into it. Turned on the spout and instantly came out super clean wort. We
ended up doing it twice because we forgot to pull the hop bag out of the one
kettle before cooling and the bag fell into the kettle and got lost.
I guess to wrap this little story up, the other stuff that went wrong 1)
broke Peter's manifold while cleaning the mash tub, 2) dropped several
hundred pounds of wet grain into Dave's very large trash can (imagine
automated trash collection truck tilting over when attempting to lift it),
3) forgot to take gravity readings after the boil so all OG's are estimates,
4) got a little tipsy and forgot to write down what hops were used in gyle
beers, 5) scraped protein off ceiling of basement Sunday morning when
fermenter suddenly became a volcano (erupted for 24 hours). Dave had 6
inches of freeboard in his open fermenter in the garage which also
overflowed that night.
Grain Bill for Two Tub Russian Imperial Stout
65# Crisp pale
10# Carastan 30 L
4# HB roast (575L)
2# chocolate (~300L)
200 gms whole Centennial (~70 minutes) half 8%AA half 10%AA
224 gms whole East Kent Goldings (knockout) 5%AA
OG: 1.102 (est)
Wyeast Scottish Ale (mine only)
That was mashtub and batch number 1. The second tub was about 10 lbs lighter
in total grain, same boil hops but I think it got finished with some
Williamette or Fuggles. Things were getting hard to keep track of at that
point. We mixed the two worts so everyone got some of everything.
There is no way we will ever, ever repeat this beer, no matter how much we
want to. It smells fantastic by the way. I don't have a clue what we hopped
the porter with but I'm fermenting it with Cal Common Wyeast 2112. All
fermenting taking place at 62F for my batches.
I have pictures to prove all of this is really true.
Charley (still cleaning the ceilings) in Rescue, California.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 1998 08:46:26 -0800
From: Kyle Druey <druey@ibm.net>
Subject: PRP Part 3 / Late Night HBD / Phenols in BT
Protein Rest Primer Part 3
From: Tim Martin <TimMartin@southwest.cc.nc.us>
>I certainly have enjoyed the discussion on "modern malts" please keep
>it up.
OK. Although now I am beginning to feel that my pursuit in finding
practical answers is akin to chasing the wind.
>if I use Marris Otter this time and I don't use a rest but order more
>at a latter date it may be different and will require a rest.
This is my supposition. I was surprised that nobody challenged this and
mentioned that quality maltsters will be consistent in their malting,
and one can expect consistent modification from lot to lot. This is
probably true to a certain extent, but why then does the maltster always
perform a laboratory analysis on each lot? Because one never knows for
sure...
>You lose me on measuring the acrospire not sure I would recognize
>one if I held it in my finger any way.
Boil some grain in a small pot for 60 minutes. At the end of the boil
the acrospire will be a white/green color, and will stick out of the
husk (while it is still boiling in the pot). It is very noticeable,
give it a try.
>quite frankly a malt analysis sheet, if you can find one is difficult
>to interpret.
I should have mentioned how to interpret laboratory numbers in my
original post. The HBD xpurtz know better than to do this, but since I
don't know any better,and don't have the
education/experience/recognition as an xpurt I can offer some guidelines
:>) (again, this is based on my research, and the object is to reduce
haze causing proteins):
*Highly/Well Modified Malt: Kolbach Index (%SNR) >= 40, Fine Grind
Coarse Grind Difference (%FG/CG) < 1.8. No protein rest needed.
*Moderately Modified Malt: 36 <= Kolbach Index < 40,
1.8 <= %FG/CG < 2.2. 20' protein rest at 135 F.
*Poorly/Under Modified Malt: Kolbach Index <36, %FG/CG >= 2.2.
20' protein rest at 122 F.
I am sure the certainty of my recommendations above is a good indicator
of how little I understand this issue. If you have 'tweeners', where a
malt is well modified by the Kolbach index and moderately modified by
the %FG/CG (or vice versa), add a 20' protein rest at 135 F, this will
not hurt the beer, and could very well help. I am not sure if the same
logic would apply if a malt is moderately modified by the Kolbach index,
and undermodified by the %FG/CG. Perhaps you could then mix and match by
resting 15' @ 122 F, then rest for 15' @ 135 F. My hope is that the
homebrew shops will begin to list the Kolbach index and the %FG/CG, as
they list the color now. Kudos to St. Pats of Texas who is going to list
the lot analysis for one of their malts. Perhaps if we all start asking
for the lot analysis it will become readily available. Anyone, please
feel free to offer changes on the laboratory number guidelines I listed
above. I failed to mention % protein of the malt as a factor to
consider, but I am not yet sure what to do with this.
I thought it was interesting that when I used my home-made testing
methods I came up with the same protein rest conclusions on my 6 base
malt samples as Steve Alexander did using the laboratory numbers.
(somebody figure out the chi-squared probability of that happening at
random, I am sure it is less than 5%)
**************************
David's predicament:
>Thanks for the hbd. I am now hooked and I am having a hard time
>justifying this with my wife.
David, I ditto your sentiments. Here on the west coast we can read
tomorrows HBD at 10:00 pm the night before at the HBD website. Somehow
my dear wife does not share the same sence of urgency that I have to
read the HBD the night before....
I forgot to mention to Steve Alexander how much I enjoyed reading his BT
article on phenols, very good stuff, and why I like BT mag!
Kyle Druey
Bakersfield, CA
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 20:56:51 -0600 (CST)
From: Richard Gardner <rgardner@papillion.ne.us>
Subject: RE: Keg Lube alternative
tim wrote:
>A mail order brew shop recommended I use Vaseline as a substitute for
Keg lube. I personally never tried this, since I believe it's a petroleum
based product, any brave souls care to try it and report back.
Petroleum isn't the problem- I'd say the issue is how soluable the lubricant
is. I've used "Sanitary Petro-Gel Lubricant" for a couple of years now with
no problems - from the McGlaughlin OIL Co! It is a "technical white grease"
for "machinery parts where food contact is only incidental" which it is for
my kegs--all the places I put the gel are not in the main flow of beer.
I'd guess (no, I haven't tried this) that vasoline (TM), lightly applied,
would work well. It really isn't very soluable. I would not recommend any
water soluable lubricant though (since this is a family forum I won't give
names :).
------------------------------
Date: 6 Feb 98 18:48:15 MST (Fri)
From: rcd@raven.talisman.com (Dick Dunn)
Subject: help stamp out quoted-printable!
Dave Burley's affliction with equal-signs, double-spaced text, broken
equations, and the like in his submissions is not peculiar to Dave.
It's a consequence of the fact that he's using compuserve.com as his ISP.
The same problems afflict other Compuserve users sending articles to this
and other digests. And, of course, they afflict the readers and the digest
janitors as well. It's an ongoing problem, and from what I've seen of
people's interactions with them, Compuserve is entirely unable to under-
stand the problem they're creating, let alone admit it or fix it.
The source of the problem is Compuserve's use of an email format (actually
a "Content-Transfer-Encoding") of "quoted-printable" rather than "7 bit".
Quoted-printable is marginally useful in any case, but definitely unsuit-
able for general interchange, and apparently Compuserve provides no way for
its users to turn off the q-p translation. Short of harrassing Compuserve,
which according to the folks who have tried it seems to have been unsuccess-
ful so far, the problem is likely to remain.
- ---
Dick Dunn rcd, domain talisman.com Boulder County, Colorado USA
...I'm not cynical - just experienced.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 22:40:34 -0600 (CST)
From: Richard Gardner <rgardner@papillion.ne.us>
Subject: Iceland, anyone? / AB ads for freshness
OK, I don't want to abuse the space, but this one isn't in the normal
archives of "hey, I'm going to X, where are the brewpubs, etc" (plus my
newserver just died). I'm considering a job offer as an expat in Iceland
(Reykjavik). Friends who have been there loved it, but could not answer any
of my beer questions. My MJ pocket guide discusses the one brewery in this
Nordic land (what do you expect with a population of less than 300,000 in an
area the size of Kentucky? I live in a town of 400K today, with 2 brewpub,
but over 100 beers availble). I have found out that until 10 years ago beer
was illegal (but hard booze OK, huh?). My general questions are:
- Is homebrewing legal - or would I have to bootleg? (not that I am
proposing breaking the law, and realizing that I may have to go back to
extract due to cost/availabliity, but by this point I figure I can probably
go back to making a real decent brew from extract, bringing my extract in
from Glasgow . . . . ). I figure that finding propane will be problematic,
so we'll have to depend on electric burners (220V!), and I'll put the rest
of my gear in storage.
- Are there decent beers available other than the local brew and American
imports (ugh) like Bud, Miller, and Coors. Sorry, we're not into Hard Rock
Cafe. Are decent British Ales available? Or will I have to take cheap trips
to Belgium (throw me in that ther (sic) briar patch).
Private responses requested. Should I get enough info, I'll repost a
summary. (BTW, after 6 years here, I don't remember a single .is posting).
==
Something different - I just heard the latest AB ad for their fresh local
beer. Give me a break. While I greatly respect their brewmasters (no spams
please, their brewmasters DO know what they are doing [what the general
market wants], and they did have the best displays at the GABF), their
market-iers have warped reality with the discussion of how their "local"
breweries make "fresher" beer.
- --- The facts, although interesting, are irrelevant ----
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2631, 02/07/98
*************************************
-------
