Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2621
HOMEBREW Digest #2621 Wed 28 January 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:
Decoction mashing (michael w bardallis)
homebrew cooking - bottom-dweller pasta (smurman)
re: recapping twistoffs ("David Blaine")
maple beer update ("David Blaine")
underletting (Keith Menefy)
oxidized starter wort (Alex Santic)
runoff rate (Al Korzonas)
Step Mashing (Jack Schmidling)
Pellet&Whole Hop Utilisation/Lauter Rates (Charlie Scandrett)
Re: Upping Heating Efficiency (Jim Wallace)
re: cleaning copper manifold (Lou Heavner)
JSP Maltmill (non-adjustable) (Mark Arneson)
The Jethro Gump Report ("Rob Moline")
step mashing/no whirlpool/mashout (smurman)
Re: Propane and propane accesories (Jim Graham)
BrewMagic in Dallas Area (aquinn)
Brewing opportunities in South America ("Pagliere, Alan")
Re: Brewtek Saison (Jim Wallace)
Dry Hopping (JGORMAN)
Amsterdam visit ("David R. Burley")
HSA; When? (THaby)
Easy fix for Sabco false bottoms (216) 397-4352" <SHICK@JCVAXA.jcu.edu>
Competition posts (Jeff Renner)
Re: Storing beer yeasts and sourdough starters in same refrigerator ("Tim Wauters")
Be sure to enter the...
The Best of Brooklyn Homebrew Competition
Brooklyn Brewery, Brooklyn, NY
Entries due by 1/31/98, competition 2/7/98
Contact Bob Weyersberg at triage@wfmu.org for more info.
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@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.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: Sat, 24 Jan 1998 11:31:36 -0500
From: dbgrowler@juno.com (michael w bardallis)
Subject: Decoction mashing
Mike,
I do a fair amount of decoction mashing this time of year (tis the
season), and for what it's worth, the guidelines, calculations, and
formulas only go so far. There are a lot of variables to the process:
basic ones such as mash thickness, and harder-to-estimate/calculate ones
like R-value of your vessels and heat loss during transfer (these being
particular to your process/setup). Calculations go in the toilet as soon
as you make an unscheduled infusion to adjust temp (and you will). For
example, not only has total volume increased, but also mash thickness,
and subsequently specific heat of your decoct, susequently AARGH!
Hopefully, you have some decent notes from your first attempt. Using
these as the basis for planning your next batch, make adjustments to your
decoction volumes. Mashing in thick is a good idea, since you _will_ be
diluting it with infusions over the course of the mash. Keeping a
cauldron of boiling water on hand for quick temp corrections is
definitely recommended, but practice, practice, practice is the most
important advice I can give. Another important thing to keep in mind is
that no matter how things go on brew day, you always get beer. It may not
turn out exactly as intended, but it'll probably be pretty good, just the
same.
BTW, they mean 1/3 by volume, and it's not a bad starting point.
Mike Bardallis
Allen Park, MI
That's all very well in practice; but will it work in theory?
---Ken Willing
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 1998 10:44:00 -0800
From: smurman@best.com
Subject: homebrew cooking - bottom-dweller pasta
This is another recipe using the deglazing technique, and it also uses
relatively cheap ingredients to encourage experimentation. This
recipe also has a higher "foo-foo factor" than previous ones I've
posted. It could easily be served in any $15/plate restaurant.
Start with
1/4-1/2 lb. medium prawns
1/4-1/2 lb. sea scallops (bay scallops are ok, but the larger sea
scallops are preferred)
Peal, de-vein, and wash the prawns. Heat (medium, to medium-high) in
a pan some olive oil, salt, and pepper. Add the prawns and scallops,
and cook them thoroughly, about 5-10 minutes. You may see a lot of
liquid form, especially if you've gotten previously frozen scallops.
Just carefully drain the water and continue cooking. We're going to
make our own sauce and don't want to include a lot of old
scallop-water. Remove the prawns and scallops from the pan, and set
aside. This is a good time to add your pasta to the boiling water
(you did remember to start some boiling water, didn't you?).
Add to the pan,
1 clove garlic - diced
1 small shallot - diced
1-2 small, hot chile peppers - diced (Thai or Serrano would be good
choices)
Cook the garlic, etc. until it caramelizes. Add about 4 oz. of beer,
and scrape the bottom of the pan to loosen any crusties. I used an
overcarbonated steam beer (again), and that's about as dark a beer as
I'd use. Hoppy beers would probably work best; IPA's, APA's, and the
like.
Cook this down until it's reduced by at least half, then add 1-2
tbsp. of butter. Do not use margarine!! Margarine is the devil's
tool. Add the butter in small chunks, so that it melts easier, and
stir it into the sauce. Add the prawns and scallops back into the
pan, and heat them back up, coating them with the sauce. You're done.
Mix the sauce with the pasta. Linguini or fettucini or any
medium-noodle pasta works well. Serve in a pasta bowl with bread for
mopping up any extra sauce (or mopping your brow if you added too many
chile peppers). Serves two.
Buon appetito.
SM
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 1998 14:53:07 -0500
From: "David Blaine" <i.brew2@usa.net>
Subject: re: recapping twistoffs
I received almost a dozen responses and several wanted me to reply with =
the results. Rather than answer each individual I wanted to post back =
here that many people do use twist off bottles. They are not as heavy =
duty as flip tops, but if you are giving the brew as gifts, going on a =
trip, or have some other reason that precludes getting the bottles back, =
it is a good alternative. There are special caps made for twist offs, =
they are thinner and fit to the neck easier. You cannot twist these off =
when opening, you need an opener. Some bottles break, so there is a =
degree of risk and/or waste. Apparently these caps are common in =
Canada. I contacted my usual mail order source in Indiana, The Gourmet =
Brewer, and Dave Bartz said he has them in 5 gross lots for $1.50 a =
gross. Thats a ton of caps, but I guess you could use them on your =
regular bottles too. One other consideration is that the seals are =
possibly not as tight as your used to, so I wouldn't suggest doing this =
with a Russian Imperial Stout or something you want to keep arround a =
long time. Last point to make is that a bench capper is almost =
required. All respondants reported crappy results with wing type =
cappers. Owning two different bench cappers, I'm all set! Ciao! and =
Great Brewing
Dave Blaine in Deckerville Michigan
"I deny having any sexual relationship with Bill Clinton, and I have not =
been asked to lie about it"
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 1998 15:00:25 -0500
From: "David Blaine" <i.brew2@usa.net>
Subject: maple beer update
I am overdue in this post, but I am just now experiencing something =
worth reporting at the same time that I have read an explanation. I =
reported back in November that I had brewed a batch of porter from a kit =
and added one quart of maple syrup. I bottled this at an appaling FG of =
1.030. I was warned about bottle bombs etc. That was early to mid =
November. I am just now starting to get some slow gushers when I open =
the brew. The kind where when you pop the bottle and go get a glass =
when you come back it is just starting to foam over the mouth of the =
bottle. Brew Your Own has an article in the current issue =
(http://byo.com) about brewing with sugar and they report that Maple =
ferments out so slowly that you may need to add more yeast in the =
secondary and condition before botteling. NOW they tell me!!!
Brew is good but sweet, I cut it 50/50 with PBR (skip the flames) and it =
is quite drinkable, albeit a tad overcarbonated for a porter. Overall =
the cut beer tastes like the Michelob Maple Ale on the market this =
winter. I guess that the bottles could eventualy explode if left long =
term, but I expect they will be empty by the end of February, so I will =
never get to know ,:-)
Good Brewing,
Dave Blaine in Deckerville Michigan
I.brew2@usa.net=20
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 1998 09:29:16 +1300
From: Keith Menefy <kmenefy@ihug.co.nz>
Subject: underletting
G'day
I am suprised/curious as to why there has been no comment on Dave Hopf's
post on kettle mashing. In it he has a very reasonable piece on boiling
grain. I had got the impression from the HBD that this was a BIG no-no.
Yet the response has been a deafening silence. Curious
Now the real reason for this post.
I recently completed my first all grain brew. With all the hassle of
temp control, carrying containers of hot liquid, starting siphons, and
having them stop, probably as much HSA (hot side aeration) as one can
possibly get, and other little problems there seemed to be an
unreasonable amount of swearing going on.
I have decided that a pump is the cure for it all.
The question - Is underletting (feeding the liquid into the bottom of
the grain bed.) the grain with the hot liquid a better system than
inletting from the top? I have done a search on the subject and got
what I feel is an odd result. The general consensus from just a few
responses is that it is a better system and yet all the systems I have
checked on the net are the opposite. I think that with underletting
there would be no need to stir the grain, the water moving upward should
keep it moving. There would be no need to restrict the flow of the pump
at all. It should be easier to control the temperature with the water
moving faster and there should very little variation of temp in the
grain itself. A deeper grain bed should be ok. It would be very easy to
finish it with boiling water through the mash.
All replies welcome.
Cheers
Keith Menefy Hukerenui New
Zealand
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 1998 15:33:58 -0500
From: Alex Santic <alex@brainlink.com>
Subject: oxidized starter wort
Let's say I prepare one liter of starter wort. Rather than pitching at the
moment of high krausen, say I let the starter yeast ferment a little while
longer and build up glycogen reserves. I then pitch the starter, which is
well along to becoming beer, into oxygenated wort and voila! I now
effectively have a proportion of completely oxidized beer in my wort.
Perhaps it's not a *major* factor in the flavor of the beer, but HBD is the
place to split hairs and this hair seems good as any for dissection.
Obviously, even the most accepted homebrewing techniques can be
sub-optimal, and unless I'm missing something this seems to be an example.
If we want to get to the heart of the problem, it's that (unlike in
commercial practice) homebrewers like to use a wide variety of yeast
strains. It's inconvenient to arrange for 2 or 3 contiguous batches to be
fermented with the same strain. If there were a way to treat the primary
yeast cake from a fermentation such that it could be stored frozen for 3 to
6 months at a high level of viability, it would be one of the great
advances in the quality, ease and economy of homebrewing.
Alex Santic
NYC
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 1998 17:08:44 -0600 (CST)
From: Al Korzonas <korz@xnet.com>
Subject: runoff rate
Darryl Richman send me private email regarding the runoff rate issue.
He says it's documented in his book, "Bock" on pages 92-94. He told me
the Germans recommend a flow rate of about 0.2-0.33 gal./min, per square
foot of surface area in a traditional mash tun.
So, calculate the square footage of your surface area (don't forget
that it's *radius* not diameter, like I've done in the past):
PI * r^2 (i.e. about 3.14 times the radius squared)
I'd like to reiterate that I feel better tun designs allow for faster
runoff with little loss whereas tuns in which the runnings are taken
from a small area need you to run off at a relatively slow rate to
give the sugars a chance to diffuse from the areas of stagnant wort
into the runnings.
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: Sat, 24 Jan 1998 21:16:30 -0800
From: Jack Schmidling <arf@mc.net>
Subject: Step Mashing
From: GuyG4 <GuyG4@aol.com>
Subject: In Defense of Step Mashing
"Commercial breweries don't do this we are told. I don't know, but
Noonan, in Appendix C (I think) of Brewing Lager Beer, disputes this.
He claims most micros step mash....
Keep in mind that Noonan's book is now 12 years old and if it
was representative than, it means little now.
I suspect that is most untrue now for all the reasons that we
have had this thread going. It is simply easier and cheaper to
make beer and tool up for infusion mashing than step mashing.
One can argue about the merits of step mashing but the micros
chose the other approach for cost reasons, not because it makes
better beer.
Insulated coolers are popular because they are easier to deal with,
not because they make better beer.
js
- --
Visit our WEB pages:
Beer Stuff......... http://ays.net/jsp
Astronomy....... http://user.mc.net/arf
ASTROPHOTO OF THE WEEK..... New Every Monday
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 1998 23:19:58 +1000
From: Charlie Scandrett <merino@squirrel.com.au>
Subject: Pellet&Whole Hop Utilisation/Lauter Rates
Hop pellets (Type 90) have their lupulin glands crushed thus losing the
limited protection of that membrane, making them more prone to oxidation
than whole hops. However if the processor keeps the processing temp below
55C and packs O2 free as soon as possible after processing, they are a
superior natural product. Their higher utilisation is due to the more rapid
solubility of Alpha Acids from the crushed hop, allowing these acids more
time to be isomerised in the boil. Isomerised Alpha Acid is the bitterness
from hops.
There is a brewer's convention that Type 90 hop pellets have about 10%
higher utilization than whole hops. It is a bit more complex than that.
At 10P the pellets are slightly less than 10% higher in yield.
At 12.5P pellets are about 33% higher utilisation than whole hops.
At 15P pellets are about 57% higher in utilisation.
>From 10 to 15P, whole hop utilisation will fall from typically 31% to 17%.
>From 10 to 15P Type 90 pellet utilisation will fall from about 33% to 27%
This is one good reason commercial brewers use pellets, less roulette.
But just when you thought it was safe to get back into the wort, these
factors also affect utilisation.
a) decoction mashing and extended mashout reduces hot break in the kettle,
increasing utilisation.
b) wort gravity. (see above)
c) time ( anything under an hour is harder to predict, continues slowly up
to 2.5 hours)
d) turbulence of the boil, more means more utilisation (up to 5% difference).
e) pH: high pH favours solubility of alpha acids, reducing pH from 5.8 to
5.4 can knock about 12% of your utilisation.
f)A higher ratio of Cohumulone to Humulone/Adhumulone in your hop species
gives higher utilisation.
f) Isomerised Alpha acids are surface active compounds, i.e they like
bubbles and colloids. As Al K's "Brewing Techniques" experiment proves, and
the European Brewery Convention confirms, fermenter blowoff of foam reduces
bitterness.
g) Lagering causes precipitation of haze forming colloidal material, and
with it Isomerised Alpha Acids, reducing bitterness.
The more I learn about hops, the more I realise that shooting for a
particular IBU number has less chance than a teenager feeling around in the
dark. Good luck and be careful.
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- ---------
Al Korzonas posted
>In The Biotechnology of Malting and Brewing, Hough says that due to
>entrained air, infusion mashes are more bouyant than decoction mashes.
>He says it's why decoction mashes require rakes to be run during runoff.
>Perhaps that's why infusion mashes can support much deeper grain
>bed depths? I'm just speculating in this paragraph... comments?
You are not speculating, you are remembering your de Clerk!. (Brewer's
collective unconscious, any Jungians out there?) Also an infusion mash
produces a lot more hot break in the kettle than a decoction mash. This is
because there is a lot of hot break already formed in a decoction mash grain
bed and less turns up in the kettle. Trooob gooos things up and thus
decocters have to use a shallower bed.
The ideal flow rate is in the order of 9 to 15mm per minute for *sparge
flow*. This is necessary because a) The water needs time to penetrate and
leach extract from *within* particles. This is obviously going to be slower
than the rate of washing extract from *between* particles. b) The less dense
sparge water gives less bouyancy to the bed and it tends to compact more
easily - sticking problems.
You can collect the first runnings somewhat faster (up to 25mm/min) if you
have a tube manometer to warn you of high bed suction that might lead to
sticking of the lauter.
Charlie (Brisbane, Australia)
A Textbook of Brewing-Jean de Klerk Vol 1
Brewing- Lewis and Young
Hops and Hop Products (A Manual of Good Practice)-European Brewery Convention
Manual of Malting und Brewing-Kunze
Malting and Brewing Science- Briggs etc
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 1998 17:52:02 -0500
From: Jim Wallace <jwallace@crocker.com>
Subject: Re: Upping Heating Efficiency
...........From: "Tkach, Christopher" <tkach@ctron.com>..............
w/ achieving a nice rolling boil because I'm now trying
to boil 6-7 gallons instead of the 4-4.5 gallons that I
resulted in lower OGs and more wort than I know what to
do with. This was quite evident Saturday when I tried to
make an Imperial Stout, but ended up w/ 7gal of wort (after
a 90min boil), about 10 pts lower than expected. My mash
efficiency wasn't off, which means that the lower OG is due
to the fact that I had more wort than expected (7gal vs
5.5gal).
............................................................................
...............................
I see no problem here... next time just reduce the Wort to Boil from 7 down
to 5.5-6.25 and your OG to ferment will be accordingly higher... I collect
7 Gal max but use a STRONG rolling boil for the full 90 min. OR use more grain
___________________________________________
JIM WALLACE ... jwallace@crocker.com
http://www.crocker.com/~jwallace
___________________________________________
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 1998 14:34:42 -0600
From: lheavner@tcmail.frco.com (Lou Heavner)
Subject: re: cleaning copper manifold
From: "Bryan L. Gros" <gros@bigfoot.com>
>I've got a circular copper manifold in the bottom of my boiling
>kettle (1/2 barrel keg). I've got slits cut in the manifold every
>inch or so on the bottom, and the thing rests nearly on the
>bottom of the kettle.
>It's been working great for several years, but the last six
>months or so, I've been having trouble getting the wort
>to drain. Espeically when I've got a lot of hops, it seems
>the manifold gets plugged up.
>Looking in the slits, it seems like there's a fair amount of
>hop/beer crud in the tubing. Is there anyway I can clean
>this out? Acid? Base? Any suggestions?
Hi Bryan,
Could you cut the manifold into a few pieces and mechanically clean
them with a bottle brush or a scotch brite "patch" like cleaning a gun
barrel? Afterwards, reconnect the pieces with some copper joints. No
need to solder. As long as they don't come apart during use, any
leakage will be no different than your slits allow.
Cheers!
Lou
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 1998 23:56:28 -0500
From: Mark Arneson <marnes@hom.net>
Subject: JSP Maltmill (non-adjustable)
Hi all,
I got a JSP non-adjustable maltmill for X-mas and I just broke it in this
weekend.
(non-adjustable because it was recommended)
I used 2-row pale malt grain and found that I had quite a bit of "flour".
What is the JSP pre-adjusted for?
I assumed it was 2-row. Unfortunately, I don't have any experience with
crushing
grain so....maybe this is normal.
I use to use pre-crushed Bries grain and the kernels seemed to be a little
larger
then when I crush my own.
Thanks for any advice.
Mark Arneson
Macon, GA
marnes@bigfoot.com
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 1998 23:30:20 -0600
From: "Rob Moline" <brewer@ames.net>
Subject: The Jethro Gump Report
The Jethro Gump Report
>From: Jim Wallace <jwallace@crocker.com>
>Subject: Re: Can mash efficiency be over 90%?
Yes, and quite often are in commercial settings that employ mash filter
presses. But, this apparent measure must be qualified by the
values given for efficiency by the maltster. These are often quantified by
such methods as the "Congress Mash," and other 'defined' measures. The
term
that best defines any efficiency is described by the same measure of
efficiency for "Brewing Materials Efficiency,"
BME % = What you got/ What You Could Have Had x 100
It was also stressed @ Siebel that, even in terms of packaging house
efficiency, numbers often don't tell the whole truth. Indeed, when
certain
folks are told, "You will hit this number, in this time, with this number
of personnel," that 'fudging occurs, allowing that individual to
report, "Yes, we hit those targets," when in fact they did, but huge
wastes
were otherwise occurring.
>From: stealth <stealth@swlink.net>
>Subject: brewing & Submarines
> The simple answer is yes you can brew on a submarine. :)
>the largest problem to overcome is that all the air is recirculated and
the
>"Brewery Aroma" quickly premeates the entire boat. :(
Now, here is a diversion I would love to hear more about!! This post from
<stealth> would seem to imply that there have been some attempts, perhaps
illicit, to brew @ some depth? Please tell us more! Even just as stories
that "may have occurred."
>From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
>Subject: Licorice.
>Eric Fouch notices a licorice/anise flavor in his new brew. =
>I suspect this is due to the amount/type of hops you used. =
I suspect this is an ester.
>From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
>Subject: New Wort Boiling Method
>He described a "greener" wort boiling
>method.
>2) In stage two, the volatile compounds are eliminated in a wort
>stripping column.
Nothing new here, except perhaps the new readers.
> From: Kelly Jones <kejones@ptdcs2.intel.com>
> Subject: Re: Optimum Mash Grain Depth
> George Danz in HBD #2613 asks:
>>What is a
>>good guideline for ratio of grain depth to tun diameter?
> Why does anyone suppose that the RATIO of depth to diameter has any
>bearing on the mechanics of sparging? The important parameter is
>DEPTH. .
Paul Smith, Instructor @ Siebel, in his notes, states, "Maximum bed
thickness-15.8 inches. Ideal -13.8 inches. Use of adjuncts will affect
this, (SNIP) .....Dry milling-35 lb/sq.ft.. Conditioned dry milling-43
lb/sq/ft. Steep conditioned milling- 53 lb/sq/ft. Reduce by 15% -25% to
achieve 10 brews/day."
Of course, this is for commercial large scale practice. I know of a fella
that has done well in a BP with thicknesses of up to 3 feet!
>From: Dan Cole <dcole@roanoke.infi.net>
>Subject: Lower efficiency for high-gravity beers?
>Has anyone (besides me) experienced significantly lower extract
>efficiencies for "big beers".
I have, but equated it with the generally low efficiencies encountered on
the brewhouse I previously worked in. Now that you mention it, my
Barleywines were notoriously low in efficiency. But, them's the breaks, I
said, it still produced a decent beer. Maybe others would like to quantify
it?
>From: "PARKER,Myles" <myles.parker@deetya.gov.au>
>Subject: RE: more about labels
>I second Mark's comment about the UHU glue stick. I have always used them
and
>found the glue to be easy to apply and to remove.
And I will 'third' it. For the homebrewer, this is the simplest way, if
not only way to go. Cheap and efficient.
>From: GuyG4 <GuyG4@aol.com>
>Subject: In Defense of Step Mashing
>Much has been written of late, by many whose posts are met with respect
and
>awe by those of us general hobbyists, about the uselessness of step
mashing,
>and the clear superiority of the infusion mash technique.
My .02.......and this will remain my viewpoint, despite any attempts to
prove what is already known, that I am neither a chemist, nor a diploma'd
brewmaster.........
Decoction is dead....it's usefullness is purely inherent in 'historical'
and 'tradition for tradition's sakes' brewing.. It's use as a means to
utilize unmalted cereals, AND to raise the main mash temps is no longer
necessary, due to "modern" barley characteristics, "modern" methods of
malting, and "modern" materials that allow raises in temp without burning
the vessel.
Infusion mashing is suitable and the preferred method, in the absence of
'cereals', and/or malted/flaked rye/wheat/oats.
Step infusion is the method of choice for those that have the capability
to do so. Not everybody does.
This does not mean that one cannot achieve great brews with decoction,
merely that IMHO, there is no need to do so.
Just my .02.
> From: "John Robinson" <robinson@novalistech.com>
> Subject: Covering the boil
>What is the general consensus on a partially
> covered boil? I know that the compounds that form DMS come together
> as that in the boil and get driven off by the steam. My question is,
> if the boiler is partially covered and condensation forms on the lid
> (it always does) does that condensate contain high levels of DMS?
> High enough to cross the flavour threshold?
> I suspose I could always taste it. :)
This was also covered @ school, and in practice I have seen this prob in
brewpubs that employ a condensing unit on the steam stack from the boiler,
as an alternative to having to pierce the roof of the pub.
One should try to achieve an 8% reduction in kettle volume to allow for
volatile reductions. And something that was mentioned there that John
mentioned, and of course, being far from the brightest lad on the block,
never occurred to me, but makes a bunch of sense, "Taste" the condensate.
Mr. Smiith stated that once you have tasted these condensates and thier
contained volatiles, you will take all possible steps to ensure their
removal.
> From: "Bryan L. Gros" <gros@bigfoot.com>
> Subject: cleaning copper manifold
> I've got a circular copper manifold in the bottom of my boiling
> kettle (1/2 barrel keg).
> Looking in the slits, it seems like there's a fair amount of
> hop/beer crud in the tubing. Is there anyway I can clean
> this out? Acid? Base? Any suggestions?
P.B.W.
> From: Kyle Druey <druey@ibm.net>
> Subject: 3 rad/s? / Carbonating Bavarian Weissbier
> Brew Dudes:
> John Wilkinson:
>>to exceed 188 rpm to reach 3 meters/second tip speed. That sounds
>>pretty fast and I don't think I exceeded that.
I do hope that all realize that the 3m/sec speed was for a commercial
setting, where the width of vessels can be up to 60 feet. The point is that
for any system there are limits to what one can achieve with mixing without
creating undesired negative effects. Including vortexing oxygen in, there
are other considerations....
"Excessive mash mix speed can dis-associate beta glucans, leading to
lautering problems. It can also lead to "curling' of proteins around,
containing starches and preventing good extraction,".......... Paul Smith
Jethro (Commencing as an Assistant Brewer @ a Local BP) Gump
P.S. Congratulations to all my friends in Colorado, celebrating a fine win
by the Bronco's, in a great game!
Rob Moline
Brewer At Large
brewer@ames.net
Ames, Iowa.
"The More I Know About Beer, The More I Realize I Need To Know More About
Beer!"
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 1998 22:29:16 -0800
From: smurman@best.com
Subject: step mashing/no whirlpool/mashout
Regarding the step mashing vs. infusion thread. I've been reading
that some don't consider adding boiling water to reach the next
rest temperature step mashing, but rather a form of infusion
mashing. Huh? Maybe I just never learned the correct terminology,
but I'm pretty sure the enzymes don't discriminate based upon the
source of the thermal energy addition. To my mind step mashing is
going from temperature to temperature, whether you use steam, boiling
water, fire, or superheated rocks to get there.
//
Whirlpooling is often touted as the best method to remove the most
hops and break material from wort. With my system, this would
actually be the worst method. I use a ring siphon around the outside
bottom of my brew kettle. In this case what I would really desire is
an anti-whirlpool. The hops that lie on the ring siphon form the
filter bed for removing the break material. If I were to whirlpool,
all of my hops would end up in the center of my kettle, and all of the
break material still in suspension with the Irish moss would end up in
my fermenter.
I'm not trying to be a pain, but I wanted to point out that you need
to use techniques that work for *your* brew set-up. Everybody's
system is different in some way. What's really important is to
understand the purpose of each step, then you can understand how best
to work it into your brew regimen. <dismount soapbox>
//
I've read many times on this forum that a mashout step (raising the
mash temp to around 165F before sparging) will improve the efficiency.
I do use a mashout step, but I don't do it for reasons of efficiency,
and I'm having a hard time understanding how a mashout step can affect
efficiency in any way, provided you've done everything else correctly.
My understanding is that a mashout to 165F is primarily to denature
the beta-amylase enzyme so that it won't continue chewing up your
beers body while you perform an hour long sparge. How does it effect
efficiency? If anything it should reduce the efficiency.
SM
(somewhere, over the rainbow...)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 04:36:18 -0600
From: Jim Graham <jim@n5ial.gnt.com>
Subject: Re: Propane and propane accesories
In HBD #2619, From: "Roger Grow" <grow@sumatra.mcae.stortek.com> writes:
> Randy in Modesto is (rightfully so) concerned about the new propane
> regulations that take effect this year. He is right, a new valve costs
> more than a new tank
[....]
> New valves are downward compatible with old
> regulators (left hand female threaded regulators - wrench tightened ) but
> new regulators (male threaded that are hand tightened) will not work on
> old tanks. One of the big reasons for the change is the fact that the new
> valves won't let propane out unless a regulator (or hose, etc) has been
> connected.
Sorry for the long quote, but that description is important....
I bought a second propane tank around 17 Jan from the local Lowes, and
paid $20 for the tank (followed by $10 for propane down the street).
It mentioned having a new-style valve, and the description of the valve
exactly fits the one above, including the bit about not letting propane
flow w/o a positive seal. So either Lowes just hasn't bothered to raise
the prices yet, or the new tanks aren't going to be so painful after all.
Now, to make things more interesting, we just got a Home Depot store.
I see some big price wars coming.....
Btw, while I'm here and mentioning Lowes, I built a counterflow wort
chiller for less than $20. I originally used copper tubing that was
too small (oops!), so had to yank it out and re-do it with 3/8" copper
tubing (20' for $8.50). 5.5 gallons from boiling to around 65 deg. F
to 70 deg. F (current tap water temperature) in 15 minutes or less....
Later,
--jim
- --
73 DE N5IAL (/4) MiSTie #49997 < Running Linux 2.0.21 >
jim@n5ial.gnt.net || j.graham@ieee.org ICBM / Hurricane: 30.39735N 86.60439W
=== Do not look into waveguide with remaining eye ===
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 06:35:02 +0000
From: aquinn@postoffice.worldnet.att.net
Subject: BrewMagic in Dallas Area
Hi all
Is there anyone in the Dallas/ Forth Worth area using SABCO's
BrewMagic System that would be willing to let me take a peek at it?
Thanks in advance. Private e-mail fine.
Tony
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 07:50:56 -0500
From: "Pagliere, Alan" <apagliere@umi.com>
Subject: Brewing opportunities in South America
Dated Material **************** Act quickly
I have been in contact with Jesse Morrison, my good friend and
ex-fellow-brewer. He is currently a "Maestro Cervecero", a Head Brewer,
in fact the head brewer in the first brew pub in Colombia. What a gig,
eh? The place is called Palos de Moguer and is located in Cali,
Colombia.
Anyway, the owner of the place is planning, very seriously planning, to
expand; opening brewpubs (I don't know if micros are in the plan) in
other South American countries. Brazil has been mentioned and I hear
tell of Argentina and there are no doubt other places, as yet unknown to
me, in the works.
Jesse has a request from his boss, the owner, to get 20 resumes of
potential brewers asap. I therefore am requesting anyone among you that
might have a hankering to practice their Spanish (or Portuguese if in
Brazil) while brewing professionally, to get a resume together and fax
it down to Colombia.
If you yourself are not interested, perhaps someone you know may be.
The vital info:
Brewpub: Palos de Moguer
Owner: Berny Silberwasser
Head Brewer:Jesse Morrison (my friend and ex-fellow-brewer)
Address: Avenida 6A / Norte
No. 22-26
Cali, Colombia
South America
Mailing Address:
Jesse Morrison
CD 5015
P.O. Box 02-5242
Miami, FL 33102-5242
Tel (from US):
011-572-660-2840
Fax: 011-572-661-3366
e-mail: colon@colombianet.net
The address:
- ------------------------------------------------------
Alan Pagliere
pagliere@umich.edu
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~pagliere/
- ------------------------------------------------------
Give a man a beer and he will waste an hour;
teach a man to brew and he will waste a lifetime.
--- unknown
- ------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 1998 09:54:37 -0500
From: Jim Wallace <jwallace@crocker.com>
Subject: Re: Brewtek Saison
- -------From: Keith Busby <kbusby@ou.edu>-------------
Does anyone have recent experience with Brewtek CL-380 Saison yeast? After
mighty flocculation and a decent impersonation of a maelstrom, the head on
my Saturday Grand Cru batch rose so much that I have to put a blow-off tube
on a 6.5 gal. carboy. Grain bill was the usual pilsner, small amounts of
biscuit, aromatic, carapils, and amber candi sugar. Pitched 1 liter starter
into 5.5 gal of OG 1.074. Temp. about 68F. Is this yeast notorious for such
behavior? Do we know its origin? Dupont? Regal?
- --------------------------------------------------------
I have used the 380 and yes it is very active and you need to leave a lot
of headspace and even then be prepared with a blowoff tube. My last batch
with 380 was a comparison to the Dupont yeast I captured and saved to
slant... The 380 was a much richer/fuller flavor than the dupont yeast.
Brewers Resource is very secretive about their sources.
___________________________________________
JIM WALLACE ... jwallace@crocker.com
http://www.crocker.com/~jwallace
___________________________________________
------------------------------
Date: 26 Jan 1998 08:56:35 -0500
From: JGORMAN@steelcase.com
Subject: Dry Hopping
I am interested in trying to dry hop some beer. I have heard 2 stories on
this. (1)It is OK to dry hop in the secondary and in individual bottles and
(2)dry hopping should never be done in bottles, only in the fermenter. If
there is someone out there that has done either or both, please shed some
light.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 10:11:33 -0500
From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: Amsterdam visit
Brewsters:
Fred Waltman is taking a trip to Amsterdam with a non-drinking
SO and wants some advice on what to do. I zapped his address
before I could send him this privately, so here it is in time for your =
trip, I hope:
Fred,
Don't miss the Rijksmuseum. Take a canal trip. Cook's can arrange
bus and train tours if you don't want to do it yourself. Lots of very
good restaurants, in some cases the price doesn't match the food,
so ask around. Have coffee and pastry sweets for breakfast or
mid-morning coffee. If you like chocolate you've come to the right place.=
Chocolate sprinkles on everything. Or if you are staying in a Dutch
hotel in which breakfast is part of the deal, eat cold lunchmeats,
hardboiled eggs, runny yoghurt for breakfast to get the real
Dutch experience.
Be sure to try Indonesian food while you are
there. That little dish about the size of a silver dollar that contains
that dark red sauce ( sambal) can be brutally hot/spicy.
Downtown there are lots of excellent international restaurants.
Don't miss the Argentinian restaurant where you will get your fill
of excellent grilled meat. French restaurants and what I would
call Continental restaurants abound. Generally very good. Don't
miss the opportunity to try Genever ( pronouced yuh nay' ver) =
- especially Junge Genever ( yoong yuh nay' ver) This is a =
Dutch Style gin drunk straight. Of course, drink the Dutch beers.
You will be pleasantly surprised by the great taste and body.
Have fun and nearly everyone speaks English, so you'll do great.
Near the train station is a flower market as I recall,so go have a look
early in the AM.
Amsterdam is pretty safe as far as I know, but there is a significant
drug problem as they allow marijuana and this has drawn a class of
people to the main drag in Amsterdam near the train station that
aren't the best. I have never seen any problem with violence or
robbery, however. If you care to, you can pop into certain coffee
houses and smoke a joint. It's pretty surprising to me.
If you have time go outside Amsterdam to see the tulips in April
( even now is OK for the views and museums, etc.) and for sure
the famous blue and white pottery museum in ??
Name escapes me at the moment
Take a raincoat and clothing to keep warm as the wind off
the north sea this time of year is cold and wet.
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
103164.3202@compuserve.com
Dave_Burley@compuserve.com =
Voice e-mail OK =
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 98 9:22:24 CST
From: <THaby@swri.edu> "THaby"
Subject: HSA; When?
Hello Brewers,
I have a simple question. When does HSA start? When setting up my sparge
water I take hot tap water from the kitchen faucet, put that into a gallon
pitcher and transfer that into a plastic courboy, and from there it goes
outside and gets dumped into the keg for further heating. I know there is
a lot of splashing during all of this but it is pre-boil splashing. Could
this cause HSA? Thanks.
Tim Haby/N5YEB
29.497N 98.869W
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 11:20:38 -0500 (EST)
From: "PAUL SHICK (216) 397-4352" <SHICK@JCVAXA.jcu.edu>
Subject: Easy fix for Sabco false bottoms
Hello all,
A few months back I posted about my problems with a Sabco false
bottom that kept collapsing during recirculation. Keeping the mash
moderately thick and pump flow rates low has avoided full collapses, but
the false bottom still seems to flex a bit, allowing grain to come through.
Because of this, I've had to clear the post-pump gate valve frequently during
recirculation, to avoid clogging. After my initial post, a number of people
suggested support systems for the center of the false bottom. I've finally
gotten around to fabricating a simple piece that seems to fix the problem
entirely.
The problem is that the Sabco FB is a 12" diameter circle of
perforated stainless that's hinged in the middle, to make it easy to
install/remove. There's a 1/2" hole in the middle where a drain tube runs
through to the bottom of a converted keg. The FB seems to flex in the
middle, under the weight of grain and suction from the pump, because it's
supported only aroung the edges. The easiest support for the middle section
that I've been able to come up with is to take a short length of 1 1/2" OD
copper pipe, cut to the distance from the bottom of the keg to the bottom
of the FB (1 3/8" in my case.) I then cut four large "slots" in the bottom
end of the pipe, with a hacksaw, to allow the wort to flow to the drain tube.
The pipe fits "around" the drain tube, under the FB, supporting it from below.
To put the mash tun together, just put in the copper support pipe (slotted
end down, otherwise you'll prevent wort from reaching the drain tube,) drop
in the false bottom, with the center hole over the top of the copper pipe,
then install the drain tube down the middle.
Bad ASCII art follows:
________
/ ________
/ /
| | <----- Drain tube
Side view | |
| |
False Bottom ---------------- | | ------------------
___________________ A
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
1.5" copper | | | | | 1 3/8"
pipe ------> | __ ____ | |
| / | | \ | |
| / | | \ | |
| / | | \ | |
____ ---- | | ---- V _______
Keg bottom \__________________________________/
So far, the device has worked quite well. The FB has shown
no evidence of flexing after a typical 20+ lb grain bill. With such batches
before adding the support, the FB was coming out pretty warped. It seems to
be a very simple fix to the problem.
Paul Shick
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 11:20:27 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Competition posts
Brewers
Over the past few weeks we have had several competition announcements and
results that took up a good deal of bandwidth (one even included "(long)"
in the subject line). It seems to me that we've had an informal agreement
around here that full detail posts of competitions with all of the rules,
etc., was inappropriate, and that a short announcement with web site, phone
number or email contact for details was more appropriate and, indeed,
welcome. Ralph Colaizzi <rwc@pair.com> of T.R.A.S.H. recently made an
exemplary announcement of the latter type.
Similarly, long posts of all of the winners of competitions can be replaced
by an announcement of Best of Show winner and other interesting details
(like the winner will be brewing a 1500 bbl batch of his Pumpernickel Stout
for Anheuser-Busch) with a contact for full winners lists.
I don't think this is a matter of "PgDn, Renner, if it doesn't interest
you!" but rather one of saving bandwidth for other discussions
(botulism?;-)), especially in these days of 3-4 day queues. I'm not
presuming to appoint myself arbiter of bandwidth use, however, and am glad
to hear dissenting opinions. HBD is, after all, run by the concensus of
the members.
A related bandwidth saving suggestion, rather than wholesale copying of a
previous post to which you are replying, consider some judicious snipping
or a paraphrase. This again will save more space for botulism.
Jeff
-=-=-=-=-
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan c/o nerenner@umich.edu
"One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 10:26:31 -0600
From: "Tim Wauters" <tim.wauters@msichicago.org>
Subject: Re: Storing beer yeasts and sourdough starters in same refrigerator
Greetings and a question for the collective. Has anyone had success
storing sourdough starter and beer yeasts in the same refrigerator? No, I
haven't tried it yet but my wife (and brewing partner) is interested in
keeping an active sourdough starter in our only refrigerator and we both
share some concerns about cross contamination (especially in the case of
beer yeasts) We currently store the beer yeast in canning jars covered
with lids and foil. Reports of success and horror stories would be
appreciated. Private email is fine.
TIA
Tim Wauters
Chicago
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2621, 01/28/98
*************************************
-------
