Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2618
HOMEBREW Digest #2618 Sat 24 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:
calculating mash volume (Andrew Stavrolakis)
Recipe (something we haven't seen for a while) (Mark T A Nesdoly)
Altbier all-grain (Al Korzonas)
Dunkelweizen/HB Munich Malt/Wheat Decocting ("Eric Schoville")
Basic Brew Water Ammendments (Chris Cooper)
Toronto and area beer & events? (Dan Morley)
Hoegaarden Wit (was: Oh, no! Not the Blue Moon thread again.) (Matthew Arnold)
Whole versus pellets - utilization (Al Korzonas)
Covering the boil ("John Robinson")
Typos/Chillers/Bad Brewpubs (EFOUCH)
chest type freezer for storing finished beer ("J.W. Schnaidt")
ruined beer? (John Wilkinson)
optimal grain bed depth and runoff rate (Al Korzonas)
Re: Oven Mashing/Lower Extraction? (Mark Riley)
cleaning copper manifold ("Bryan L. Gros")
oxygenating starters (Andy Walsh)
About the bulk raspberries: more info (Vicky)
3 rad/s? / Carbonating Bavarian Weissbier (Kyle Druey)
7th. N.Y. CITY SPRING REG. HOMEBREW (PBSys)
War of the Worts 98 Results (folsom)
Counter flow wort chiller, pumping, RIMS questions (AllDey)
Powdery mildew ("P. Edwards")
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: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 09:44:33 -0500
From: Andrew Stavrolakis <andrew_stavrolakis@harvard.edu>
Subject: calculating mash volume
Scott Murman writes:
>1 lb. of grain will approximately occupy 1 qt. of volume. So 10 lb. of
>grain will be 10 qts, or 2-1/2 gallons. Add in 2-1/2 gal. of water,
>and you still will have 5 gal. of volume left over. Even a 1.5 qt/lb
>mash ratio would leave 3.75 gal. of empty volume.
I always used the figure that 1 lb grain =.08 qts of volume, for example 10
lbs of grain mashed in at 1.5 qts/lb would occupy a total volume 15.8 qts,
or approx 4 gallons. This figure has never led me wrong, even when I mashed
5.5 lbs of grain in a 6 quart cooler, where there was, shall we say, a slim
margin of error.
Cheers,
Andrew.
************************************************************
Andrew J. Stavrolakis
Controller
LASPAU: Academic and Professional Programs for the Americas
25 Mount Auburn Street
Cambridge, MA 02138
phone:617-495-0543
fax: 617-495-8990
email:Andrew_Stavrolakis@harvard.edu
http://www.laspau.harvard.edu
------------------------------
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by mail.usask.ca
From: Mark T A Nesdoly <mtn290@mail.usask.ca>
Subject: Recipe (something we haven't seen for a while)
Hello,
Last October I brewed something that I called a
"Dunkelweizenbock"--basically a very strong, dark wheat beer. The basic
recipe had been formulated using Ray Daniels' _Designing Great Beers_, and I
got a little creative with a couple of the ingredients. I should also say
that there is no commercial examples within about 400 miles of where I live;
I guess I was "shooting from the hip" on this one. Anyway, the beer turned
out great; both the wife and I loved it. The keg only lasted about 5 or 6
weeks. During the holidays, we were visiting the in-laws in Edmonton, and I
managed to find a great beer store with dozens of imports. One of them was
Schneider's Aventinus Wheat Doppelbock. A few days after we got back, we
had a taste of Aventinus. I don't mean to toot my own horn, but it tasted
_exactly_ like Aventinus. Even the wife said it tasted like "the one you
did before". Mine was perhaps a little darker in colour, but otherwise they
were the same.
Here's the recipe:
Dunkelweizenbock: All-grain, triple decoction mash (this was my 2nd-ever
decoction), 19 litre yield (about 5 US gal)
2.40 kg Maris Otter 2-row pale malt
400 g DWC Caravienne Malt 20L
325 g DWC Chocolate Malt
163 g DWC Caramunich Malt
475 g (pre-cooked weight) home-made Caramel Wheat Malt (see end how to make)
475 g (pre-cooked weight) home-made Roasted Wheat Malt (see end how to make)
3.15 kg DWC Wheat Malt
Mash/lauter tun: 48 qt Coleman Cooler fitted with a slotted copper manifold
Mash Start: 22 litres tap water added to mash; hit acid rest at 98F, held
for 20 min before next step; 3 ml 21% Phosphoric acid also added to mash at
this point
1st decoction: 11 litres (thickest part of mash) pulled, brought to 158F,
rested for 20 min, then heated to a boil and boiled for 10 min *remember to
stir the decoction like mad!!!
This was added back to the mash (I was shooting for 135F protein rest), and
I hit 145F, so I added 2 litres of cold tap water and hit 135F, held for 20
min before next step
2nd decoction: 12 litres (thickest part of mash) pulled, brought to 158F,
rested for 15 min, then heated to a boil and boiled for 5 min *again, stir
like mad!!!
This was added back to the mash, and I hit 154F; I also added 1 oz (two hop
plugs) of Hal. Hersbrucker (aa = 3.2%) to the mash itself; it's a little
trick I came up with when brewing wheat beers to help prevent a stuck runoff
(there are _no_ rice hulls available anywhere around here, so they're out of
the question); this temperature was maintained for 20 min before last step
3rd decoction: 6 litres (thinnest part of the mash) were drained from the
mash/lauter tun before it stuck like glue; 7 litres tap water were added to
this last decoction, and it was brought to a boil for 5 min; no need to
stir this last decoction, since there are no grains in it
This was added back to the mash, and I hit 167F (mashout); held 10 min
before sparge began; it was sparged with 10 litres of 170F water, with 2 ml
of 21% Phosphoric acid added to it; 25 litres of runoff were collected in
50 min
The runoff was First Wort Hopped with 1.5 oz of Hal. Hersbrucker hop plugs
(aa = 3.2%) [about 17 IBU]
The wort was boiled for 90 min; 15 min before the end of the boil, 1/4 tsp
of Irish Moss and 1 tsp yeast nutrient were added
Wort was chilled with an immersion chiller and the trub and hops were
separated using my "syphon tube" arrangement [see HBD #2514 for description]
Wyeast 3068 (Weihenstephan Wheat) 750 ml starter was pitched at 67F
OG 1.068
FG 1.015
Sun Oct. 5/97 - Day #1; ferment temperature maintained at 62F - 68F
Tues Oct. 14/97 - Temperature bumped to 70F - 72F
Sun Oct. 19/97 - Kegged
Mon Oct. 20/97 - Force Carbonated (at 40F) at 12 psi (2.47 Vol of CO2)
How I made the Caramel Wheat Malt: I stewed the wheat malt at 155F for 90
min (I didn't crush the malt beforehand, either), then I spread it on a
cookie sheet and put it in the oven which had been set at 300F; I stirred
it often until it was dry, but not burned
How I made the Roasted Wheat Malt: I just spread the wheat malt on a cookie
sheet, then baked it at 230F for 45 min, then 300F for another 45 min
Let me know if you have any questions.
- -- Mark, brewing in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 09:41:37 -0600 (CST)
From: Al Korzonas <korz@xnet.com>
Subject: Altbier all-grain
Sorry for the personal response, but the direct email to Matt bounced.
Matt had asked me about using Victory in place of Biscuit in an Altbier.
Matt--
Briess Victory and DWC Biscuit are similar, but I recommend DWC Aromatic
or Weyermann Melanoidinmalt for Altbiers, not Biscuit or Victory. Aromatic
and Melanoidinmalt are high-kilned (super Munich!) whereas Biscuit and
Victory are toasted pale malts. Big difference. If I did a decoction,
I would not even add the Aromatic... I would make the grist 100% dark Munich.
Since I usually do infusion mashes, I add either Aromatic or Melanoidinmalt
for that extra maltiness.
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: 20 Jan 98 10:54:21 -0800
From: "Eric Schoville" <ESCHOVIL@us.oracle.com>
Subject: Dunkelweizen/HB Munich Malt/Wheat Decocting
Collective:
I tried unsuccessfully to brew a Dunkelweizen on Sunday. I was
extremely disappointed in the color. The grain bill was as follows:
50% Great Western Malted Wheat
50% Hugh Baird Munich Malt
I did not include any chocolate malt, because previous posts to the hbd
have said that it is not appropriate for this style. I was hoping that
double decocting and a long boil would produce a dark color, but alas,
it ended up pretty light. Can someone give me a definitive recipe for
this style?
Having used the Hugh Baird Munich Malt in the past (on an alt and a
dunkelbock), I have continually been disappointed at the color of this
malt. Any comments? Next time I think I am going to buy a bag of
Weyermans Dark Munich, not some English imitation.
Also, I noticed a tremendous amount of break material during the boil.
I thought that decoction mashing is supposed to _lower_ the amount of
break material. I boiled the decoction for a good twenty-five
minutes. Was this perhaps due to the wheat malt?
As always, all comments appreciated...
Eric Schoville in Flower Mound, TX with 45 gallons of beer fermenting.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 11:08:37 -0500
From: Chris Cooper <ccooper@a2607cc.msr.hp.com>
Subject: Basic Brew Water Ammendments
Greetings all!
Over the past several months (indeed years) an often visited subject
has been that of amemding the brew water. As my own brewing experience
has progressed over the past three years I would like to take a look
at my brewing water and amendment practices. I don't want to re-start
a thread based on in depth analysis but would instead like to come up
with a list of general "rules of thumb" for extract and all-grain
homebrewers for when to use the adjunct chemicals sold by most homebrew
shops (ie. Burton Salts, Chalk, Gypsum, etc.). I would like to see
the discussion kept to a level where the only testing equipment needed
would be pH papers. If you have guide lines that you use for
when-to-add, how-much-to-add, and why-you-add for common adjuncts please
reply to this thread. If you would like reply to this via private
E-mail I will include your suggestions in a summary post.
If there is enough response I may be able to create a "Basic Brew
Water Ammendment FAQ".
Chris Cooper , Commerce Michigan --> Pine Haven Brewery <--
Chris_Cooper@hp.com --> aka. Deb's Kitchen <--
(about 20 miles ENE of Jeff Renner)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 09:32:08 -0700
From: Dan Morley <morleyd@cadvision.com>
Subject: Toronto and area beer & events?
Hiya all,
I will be in Toronto (specifically Mississauga) from Jan 26 to Feb 6. I have
checked out the list of brewpubs and micro's on the net, but I was wondering
if anyone had any personal recommendations? Also, is anyone aware of any
beer events happening on the Jan 31/Feb 1 weekend?
Private e-mail is fine.
Thanks
Dan Morley
President of the Marquis de Suds Homebrewers
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 16:33:56 GMT
From: mra@skyfry.com (Matthew Arnold)
Subject: Hoegaarden Wit (was: Oh, no! Not the Blue Moon thread again.)
>Another point...wits are supposed to be drunk fresh. They do not age or
>travel well. 3-4 weeks is about all. After that the spices and esters
>decrease. I think that if you were to taste side by side fresh draught
>versions, the difference would be more than evident.
My inlaws brought a couple of bottles of Hoegaarden Wit (I give specific
instructions ;) ) with them the last time they came to visit. It tasted like a
very dry German wheat beer. The predominate flavor was cloves also with the
usual Belgian dryness. Should cloviness dominate that much? I liked the Wit
that a local brewpub made a while back, but I have no idea how "authentic" it
was.
Is it possible to get Hoegaarden fresh in the US? For some reason or another,
the local distributor (in Northern Wisconsin, Green Bay area--no, I'm not a
Packers' fan) isn't carrying Celis anymore. Pity. Hopefully the situation will
change, although I do have friends in Austin . . .
Matt
P.S. I brewed my first all-grain batch a week ago Sunday. If the hydrometer
sampling I took at racking time is any indication, I've got a winner on my
hands! It is an Ordinary Bitter, FWIW. Only problem, I set the sparge rate too
low and it took 2.5 hours to sparge. Blech.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 10:57:00 -0600 (CST)
From: Al Korzonas <korz@xnet.com>
Subject: Whole versus pellets - utilization
Charley writes:
>So, an ounce of pellets is not equal to an ounce of cones due to moisture
>content? I always thought we got higher utilization due to the busted up
>lupulin glands on pellet hops. Can we get confirmation from a hop processor
>on this?
I'm no hop processor, but the %moisture is immaterial... the % alpha acid
rating on the package accounts for this. They measure the %AA of the
finished pellets, regardless of the %AA of the original whole hops.
Now, if packaging is not oxygen-barrier (or if air has not been purged
from the packages) whole hops will lose %AA faster than pellets, but with
modern packaging, this shouldn't be a factor (although I'm sure there are
still some store owners that continue to use plain old sandwich bags).
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: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 13:39:31 +0000
From: "John Robinson" <robinson@novalistech.com>
Subject: Covering the boil
Hi all,
I've got a question. 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. :) I probably will next time. Is
anyone aware of any chemical analysis which indicates if there is DMS
in the condensate and if so how much?
- ---
John Robinson "When I am working on a problem I never think about beauty.
Software Developer I only think about how to solve the problem. But when I
NovaLIS Technologies have finished, if the solution is not beautiful, I know
robinson@novalis.ca it is wrong." - Buckminster Fuller (1895-1983)
------------------------------
Date: 20 Jan 1998 12:59:04 -0500
From: EFOUCH@steelcase.com
Subject: Typos/Chillers/Bad Brewpubs
HBD-
From: "David L. Thomson" <dlt@ici.net>
Subject: Re: Newbe step mashing
Hi, I am thinking of doning a hefe Weissen all grain batch next.
David- I realize you misspelled "donning", but you'd better bring a raincoat.
Regarding planispiral chillers, I "built" one last year and love it! First, I
tried to use a tubing bender to make nice concentric spirals and wire them
flat, but soon gave up on the approach. I couldn't get it to not kink.
Finally, I just took a new 25 foot section of 3/8 tubing, which comes wound in
a box (about 12 inches in diameter) and worked it into as tight a spiral in
the center as possible (about 3 inches), and ended up with the ID of my pot.
So, the water goes into the first spiral around the sides of the pot, down to
the smallest spiral in the center, then spirals back out to the edge, out and
into the sink. It cools 5 gallons from 200F to 90F in about 20 minutes with no
stirring. WFM (Works For Me).
About bad brewpubs: Some of my friends and I visited the Harper Brewing
Company in East Lansing last Friday night. The first thing that struck me was
that the mash and lauter tuns were in the front window. The fermenters were
pretty much on the other side of the pub- at least 20 yards away. It made an
interesting visual impact. The four of us got four different beers: An
American Wheat, a Cream Ale, a porter, and a stout. When I tasted my American
Wheat, my first reaction was to tell my homebrewing buddy to *not* get it.
Upon tasting all the brews, they varied in flavor very little. The colors
were appropriate for style, and the stout did have some roastiness to it, but
the predominant flavor in all three beers was that of OXIDATION! They all had
heavy wet cardboard flavors to them. Very little hop character, no malty
flavors, and my "wheat" beer was totally bland.
My suspicion (not knowing how brewpubs operate) is that they transfer from the
mash tun to the fermenters hot, and chill in the fermenters. They are
probably getting oxidation in the transfer lines given that they transfer so
far, probably hot, and probably don't flush the transfer lines with CO2.
Seems that would be a good source for the oxidation problems. If I could have
found the brewmaster that night, I would have straightened him out, that's for
sure!
Anyone else been there? Mr. Booth?
Anybody reading this affiliated?
Need some recipe consultant work/brewery redesign?
Eric Fouch- Things would different if *I* was in charge!
Bent Dick YoctoBrewery
Kentwood, MI
efouch@steel
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 12:48:02 -0600
From: "J.W. Schnaidt" <tuba@gwtc.net>
Subject: chest type freezer for storing finished beer
I just recently acquired a chest type freezer that I am going to use for
fermenting and lagering beer and possibly storing beer. A question occurred
to me that I haven't ever seen addressed.
I would like to store my finished and bottled beer in this freezer along
with the beer that is fermenting or lagering. Let's say I have a beer
finished and bottled and stored in this freezer and I have the temperature
set at 50 degrees. Now let's say I introduce a carboy of newly brewed lager
that I'm going to ferment at 50 degrees. Fine. Three weeks later, I'm going
to gradually lower the temperature of this lagering beer to 34 degrees and
leave it there for 4 weeks. I then bottle this beer. Now, I want to ferment
an ale. I warm the temperature up to 64 degrees to ferment the ale. All the
while, I've got bottled beer stored in this same freezer.
You perhaps see what I'm getting at. The temperature of this freezer is
going to be changing, sometimes by as much as 30 degrees or better. This
will in turn, obviously, raise and lower the temperature of the finished,
bottled beer that is also stored there.
Will this affect the beer that is already bottled and carbonated? In other
words, does it adversely affect the beer to raise and lower the temperature
through a range of say 20-30 degrees like this any number of times? Note
that the beer won't get over 65 degrees or so or less than 32 degrees. I
was wondering what affect raising and lowering the temperature would have
on beer that was already bottled, carbonated and just waiting to be
consumed.
Jim Schnaidt
tuba@gwtc.net
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 98 12:48:01 CST
From: jwilkins@wss.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson)
Subject: ruined beer?
Mark Pfortmiller wrote:
>I brewed an extract wheat beer last week. I had a nice kruesen in 8
>hours time, i check it for 3 straight days and everything seemed alright.
>Well the foam came up and out of my air lock on either the 4 or 5 day and
>of coarse i didn't check it those days. When i racked it it tasted fine but
>I'm worried about an infection. I've been brewing for 2 years and this is
>the first time this has happen to me. I use a 6 1/2 ga carboy for the
>primary and cornie kegs for the secondary. I've made this same beer
>before with no problem. gggrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr i hate to feed the sewer
>rats my beer. Any chance it will turn out OK???
I have this happen several times without a problem.
I recently made a beer where everything went wrong. After the boil I could
not get the wort to flow out of the spigot in the kettle. I finally cleaned
and sanitized my immersion chiller and chilled the hot wort. This took a
couple of hours. I then siphoned to my fermenter but the siphon clogged with
3-4 gallons left in the kettle (of 10 gal.). It was getting late so I
sanitized a quart jar with iodophor and dipped the wort along with hops and
break into a carboy that I think was sanitized a few weeks earlier. I had no
yeast for this part so I left it with an airlock until I could get back with
some yeast. That was two weeks later. Nothing was growing on the wort so I
siphoned it to the dregs in a secondary from which I had just filled a keg.
Apparently the secondary didn't have much yeast in it because two weeks later
the SG was still 1.030. I then siphoned to the dregs in my primary after
transferring that beer to kegs. Two weeks later the SG was 1.013 and the beer
tasted fine. It is in a glass carboy now (I did not have a keg available) and
looks good and tasted good. If this beer turns out I will call it my Cerveza
Milagro (Miracle Beer).
So I wouldn't worry about foaming through the airlock. I have done worse.
John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins@wss.dsccc.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 13:31:36 -0600 (CST)
From: Al Korzonas <korz@xnet.com>
Subject: optimal grain bed depth and runoff rate
George writes:
>But here's the rub... we believe that our lauter and sparge times will
>increase significantly if we add 50% to the grain quantity or possibly
>even 75% if we do a very HEAVY recipe. We worry that there may even be
>the distinct liklihood that we'll get a stuck sparge with so much grain.
>It might reach a depth of 18 to 20" in a particularly heavy mash. This
>depth is higher than the screen is in diameter!!
>
>Does anyone on the HBD have any experience with this problem? What is a
>good guideline for ratio of grain depth to tun diameter? We've noticed that
>some commercial tuns have depts of 2 to 3 feet with diameters up to 8 feet
>or more! If this is optimal, then we might be flirting disaster?
and Dave writes:
>John Wilkinson and Jeff Renner concur on runoff rates, believing that 5
>gal/hr is too slow for their 10 gallon systems. Suppose you were at Bud,=
>you'd take a long time at 5 gal/hr! Since many systems are 5 gallons , I=
>suspect that is the source of confusion. I think the operative number he=
>re
>is take an hour to sparge regardless of the size of the HB mash. The bi=
>g
>guys do take a few hours sometimes.
These two issues are related. I've just searched all my local files
and can't seem to find the formula for calculating the recommended
runoff rate (but it is a function of the cross-sectional *area* of the
grain bed). I believe that either Darryl Richman or maybe Jim Busch
posted about this four or five years ago. If you would repost, or if
someone has the formulas, please send them to me and I'll repost (rather
than have 40 people repost them to the HBD!).
Anyway, I'm best at explaining stuff without resorting to math, so I'll
do my best here and I'm sure it will all come together for you when
the formulas actually get posted.
I've read in several places that the ideal grain bed depth is 18". This
is supposed to be true for both commercial-sized and homebrew-sized
mashes. In my files, I found that Jared had posted that Siebel's
pilot brewing system's mashtun is set up for an 18" bed depth -- it was
(still is? Rob? George?) 20" high and 10" by 5" wide. Theory aside,
I also found in my notes that I got 32 points/lb/gal from a 6" grain
bed depth. In a followup post (to Jared's) by Rob Lauriston, he notes
that by running rakes, the industrial brewers could get away with a
lot more than an 18" grain bed depth. Certainly, the mash/laeuter tuns
in the UK that I saw (see my website for some photos) were far deeper
than what would be needed for an 18" (or even 36" (about a meter))
grain bed depth. (Incidentally, Coors uses a mash filter in stead of
a laeuter tun... I'd be curious to find out their yield!)
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?
Anyway, back to George's question... it's not the ratio of area to bed
depth that is the problem. Think of it this way: your 5-gallon batch is
as if you took a 10" diameter section out of a commercial brewer's mash
(as if cut out with a cookie cutter). Depth is the of primary importance.
As for Dave's runoff rate... again, this should be constant for a given
laeutering design and grain bed depth. Making 100 barrels or 1/6 of a
barrel shouldn't make that big of a difference in runoff rate per square
foot of grain bed cross-sectional area. Consider this: would it matter
if you were making 100 bbl of beer and taking the runnings from one laeuter
tun with a 24" grain bed depth or taking the runnings from 600 small
lauter tuns, each with a 24" grain bed depth? Wouldn't the runnings from
each of the 600 small laeuter tuns be 600 times slower than that from
the one huge laeuter tun? The total "optimal" time to take the runnings
would be constant, no?
That said, I quickly mentioned laeuter tun design above... I feel that this
is important because for designs in which the runnings are taken from a
relatively small area (like the one I have designed... see my website) when
compared to one in which the entire bottom of the tun is perforated and
collects runnings, a slightly slower runoff is beneficial. Since there
are larger areas of "stagnant" runnings (i.e. in the corners of the tun),
you need more time for the sugars to diffuse into the sparge water. I'd
like to point out that I was the first to point this out in a series of
posts (HBD #853, #855, #999, #1003 and #1252). Then, later, in the
1995 Great Grains Special Issue of Zymurgy, I authored an article based
upon an "experiment" that Steve Hamburg and I did, which showed that for
a runoff rate of 7 gallons per hour, the various lauter tun designs are
very, very similar in extract efficiency.
So, what does this all mean? Well, it means that if you have a grain bed
cross-sectional area of between 1.5 and 3 square feet and take runnings at
a rate of 7 gallons per hour, I believe you can use virtually any laeuter
tun design from an EasyMasher(tm) to a Zapap to a slotted pipe to a
perforated bottom. Furthermore, I believe that some designs will allow
for faster runoff rates with little loss in extract efficiency, but with
the 7gal/hour rate, you are safe with any design.
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: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 09:50:59 -0800
From: Mark Riley <mriley@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Oven Mashing/Lower Extraction?
In HBD #2614, Lorne P. Franklin writes:
>I've done three extended oven batches with success, but have encountered a
>lower extraction rate than I normally have. Has anyone else noticed this?
I haven't noticed this, but I do take the mash out of the oven every
15 minutes or so and stir it. I get about 85% efficiency most of the
time. I always mash out by heating the kettle on the stove - so that
helps the efficiency.
Mark Riley
The Beer Recipator - http://realbeer.com/brewery/recipator
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 13:21:16 -0800
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). 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?
Thanks.
- Bryan
Bryan Gros gros@bigfoot.com
Oakland, CA
Visit the Draught Board club website:
http://www.dnai.com/~thor/dboard/index.htm
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 11:37:01 -0800
From: Andy Walsh <awalsh@crl.com.au>
Subject: oxygenating starters
The technique of aerating cropped yeast in water just prior to pitching
into unaerated wort has been patented in the UK. I haven't seen the
patent (I shall try and get hold of it), but have read of the method in
several texts. I think the holders may be from Bass. (don't quote me!).
Oxygenating a starter a short time before pitching improves yeast
physiology or vitality.
Yeast *vitality* (health of viable cells) is often ignored when
discussing pitching rate, as opposed to *viability* (proportion of
living cells). Vitality is a difficult one to measure (especially for
homebrewers), but yeast high in vitality is generally high in membrane
sterols and/or intracellular glycogen (but especially the former). Vital
yeast can be pitched at a lower rate than non-vital yeast.
The initial energy required by yeast to generate sterols and unsaturated
fatty acids from oxygen is said not to derive from wort sugars but from
glycogen stored by the yeast acquired from a previous fermentation.
Typical levels are (data from various sources):
glycogen (%) sterols (%)
A)aerobically propagated 30 0.8 (at
peak)
B)fresh anaerobic (normal) 30 0.1 (at end)
C)aged (B) 3 days at 15C 5 0.1
You can see that it doesn't take long for yeast to lose glycogen
reserves. Storage at colder temperature drastically decreases the
degradation rate.
Aerobically propagated yeast can lead to flavour differences when
pitched directly into wort. Large breweries often save and blend the
first batch produced in this way. Homebrewers do not generally have this
option.
In any case, type B yeast is what we generally have close to the end of
a fermentation. Aerating such yeast for about 2 hours prior to pitching
will reduce the glycogen to about 5% and increase sterols to about 1%.
Such yeast is in optimum form for immediate fermentation.
The technique as described by Quain and Boulton (UK patent 2,197,341
1988) is to crop yeast from the fermenter, suspend in water and aerate
until maximal oxygen uptake is reached (about 2 hrs), then pitch
immediately into unaerated wort. They claim that during fermentation
there will be a better consistency in yeast growth, a better attenuation
profile and a better volatile spectrum. This is not the same thing at
all as pitching aerobically propagated yeast.
One of the main aims is to reduce the effect of oxygen requirement
variations for different strains. It is well known that different
strains require different amounts of O2, as does a single strain of
varying vitality. By measuring the point of maximal oxygen uptake in the
above method, a given yeast sample is basically using up the amount of
oxygen it requires for optimum vitality: no more oxygen is required
after this peak is reached. Lag times will also obviously be reduced,
and fermentations should be more consistent by standardising yeast
vitality.
The technique as applied to homebrewing could be (based on ref 2):
- obtain about 1% by volume of yeast slurry from primary fermenter eg.
collect
200ml *thick* slurry from 20l batch. Assuming dry weight of yeast/slurry
is
about 60%, gives a pitching rate of 6g/l, or ~10 million
cells/ml. (Alternatively collect about 1/4 of slurry present.)
- dilute with water by 10:1 (eg. 2l in example)
(They specifically mention water rather than wort)
- keep aerated for 2 hours (by shaking often, whilst open to atmosphere
(cotton wool plug), or with aquarium pump) - not with pure O2!
- pitch into unaerated wort.
(You'd also have to reduce wort volume by 10% to compensate. )
I haven't tried this, so don't know how well it works.
It is claimed to be superior for commercial use,
and looks easy for homebrewers too (no more O2 cylinders and guesswork,
shaking carboys etc.), so I plan on giving it a shot at some stage. A DO
meter would ideally be required to test this, but 2 hours was a general
kind of time. Someone with a DO meter care to try this too?
Looney Andy from Sydney.
PS. If there is any interest I can follow up on this once I obtain the
exact patent.
refs.
(1) C. Boulton et al "Yeast physiological condition and fermentation
performance" Proc. Cong. Eur. Brew. Conv. 23:385-392, 1991
(2) G. Callaerts et al "Relationship between trehalose and sterol
accumulation during oxygenation of cropped yeast" 1993 J. Am. Brew.
Chem. v51 pp75-77.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 19:47:40 -0500
From: Vicky <rcci@mindspring.com>
Subject: About the bulk raspberries: more info
OK folx!
Many of you hit me up about the raspberries, and boy, what enthusiasm!
Anyway, here's the scoop: The raspberries come only in 42 lb mylar bags
with spouts. The bags are in boxes, but shipping them would be risky at
best. I proposed to the brewery which has the stuff that they put the
bags in milk crates, then box *that*. I'm waiting for a reply, and will
update the group when I find out. It'll up the shipping cost a bit, but
it should protect the berries from the UPS monster.
Meanwhile, I'm also finding out exactly how much of this stuff they've
got, since I got so many requests. I'll have an update before the end of
the week, and let everyone know.
Finally: How about a collection of raspberry recipies? Since this stuff
is going to be all over, what do you have? I'll get my new ones together
and start the ball rolling, shall I?
Wassail!
vicky rowe ---paging through my archaic hand written brew log for the
raspberry recipes..
meadster at large
- --
- ---------------------------
The Home page: www.mindspring.com/~rcci/vicky
The Biz page: www.rcci.com/ (my company, that is)
The Scottish Country Dance Page: www.mindspring.com/~rcci/scd
=====================================================
The thing to do with a silly remark is to fail to hear it. --Zebadiah J.
Carter
Where I come from, anyone who says "Excuse me" is a human being. --Joe
The return address has been despammed.
Remove spammersdie from my address to reply.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 09:00:27 -0800
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.
Like John and Kenny Eddy, I estimated the maximum safe rpm at about
180 rpm which seemed high to me also. Seems that listing the angular
velocity would be more appropriate, and perhaps the Siebel number of 3
m/s is really 3 rad/s? 3 m/s on a ferris wheel would be alot different
than 3 m/s on an ice cream mixer. Maybe the Siebel brothers Jethro and
George could check this again. If the number is 3 rad/s then that
translates to about 29 rpm, which is in line with Jack S' 30 rpm
estimate. But at 30 rpm, it was reported that a vortex was created, so a
slower speed is still needed. Interestingly enough, in Eric Warner's
book "German Wheat Beer", the maximum safe mixing speed is listed as 40
rpm (p. 77)...
Charlie Scandrett:
>But if there remains a static or laminar layer on the heated surface,
>it overheats, causing enzyme, head protein damage and possible
>scorching. The point of RIMS and mashmixing is to keep all heated
>surfaces turbulent AND to promote mechanically assisted convection.
This was exactly my point, much better stated by Charlie. For a typical
RIMS temperature boost the flow is about 2 gpm through the 1.5" copper
pipe. Using the viscosity of water this equates to a Reynolds number of
about 3750, which is borderline turbulent flow. Obviously wort has a
higher viscosity than water, and I will let the HBD engineers figure out
how it decreases the Reynolds #. But practically speaking, the flow
through the RIMS heating chamber during temperature boosts is probably
at the very least transitional, meaning there is probably not a problem
with heat distribution. Now the real question becomes how does one
determine if you have turbulent flow when mixing? And again, how slow
does the mixing rpm have to be to avoid HSA/enzymatic degradation/blade
shear of the grist, and still achieve adequate temperature distribution?
**********************************************************************
Bavarian Weissbier Carbonation
It is almost wheat beer weather here in sunny California and I am
craving a weissbier. Any tips on how to adquately carbonate Bavarian
Weissbier in a corny keg? I guess the carbonation guideline is
something like 3 to 5 volumes. Do I need to crank up the pressure and
use a 10' or 15' of 3/16" diameter beer line to keep adequate
carbonation in the keg? Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Kyle Druey
Bakersfield, CA
"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy."
-Ben Franklin
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 20:21:55 -0500
From: PBSys@softhome.net
Subject: 7th. N.Y. CITY SPRING REG. HOMEBREW
7th. Ann. NEW YORK CITY SPRING REG. HOMEBREW COMPETITION=A9=20
Sunday, March 22, 1998 - 10:00 a.m.
SNUG HARBOR CULTURAL CENTER
Rm G-201 Visitor's Center
1000 Richmond Ter.
Staten Island, New York 10301
The seventh annual New York City Spring Regional Competition will take
place on Sunday, March 22nd., at Staten Island's historic Snug Harbor
Cultural Center. The competition is both BJCP and AHA sanctioned and
sponsored by the Homebrewers of Staten Island.
All judging will take place at Snug Harbor. Judging will begin promptly at
10:00 am. The first round judging will be a closed session. Best of show
judging will take place, after a lunch break, at 3:00 p.m. and will be open
to the public.
Sal Pennachio, award winning brewer of New York Harbor Ale will be on BOS
panel. First Prize is a Stainless steel brew kettle with bottom drain and
thermometer from PBS $295.00 value). Over $1,000.00 in other prizes will be
given away
Last years competition brought 228 entries. This year we are expecting a
minimum of 275. As we are in the middle of brewing season most brewers
should have a number of entries.
Snug Harbor Cultural Center is located 1 mile west of the Staten Island
Ferry Terminal. If you need directions please contact Ken Johnsen at
(718)-987-7202 or leave a message at (718)-667-4459
Complete information; prizes, categories, rules and deadlines can be found
at URL hhtp://www.wp.com/hosi/companno.html
The following locations will accept entries between 3/1/98 and 3/18/98
The Brew Brothers at KEDCO, Farmingdale L.I., NY 11735-1168
Hop, Skip & A Brew' Ridgewood N.Y. 11385
New York Homebrew, Carle Place NY 11514
Arbor Wine & Beermaking Supplies, East Islip, NY 11730
Hop & Vine, Morristown, N.J., 07960
U-Brew, Milburn, N.J., 07041
The Barnegat Bay Brewing Co., Toms River, N.J., 08755
Brew Crafters Inc., Turnersville, NJ 08012
Brunswick Brewing Supply, Highland Park, NJ 08904
Keg & Barrel, Forked River, NJ 08731
The Home Brewery, Bogota, N. 07603
The Princeton Homebrew Depot, Princeton N.J., 08542
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 19:46:16 -0600 (CST)
From: folsom@ix.netcom.com
Subject: War of the Worts 98 Results
I figured I'd better et this post out, but my wife was answering phone
requests for the results of the competition before I was even
home from it. I'd like to make some thank-yous, also. First
to the 36 judges who came and helped make this event run so
smoothly. Second, our prize coordinator, who didn't even blink
when I told him I needed prizes for 22 categories! I believe
strongly in keeping categories at a reasonable size, to allow fair
comparisons of beers, and give the best feedback to brewers. That's
a great theory, but it puts a lot of pressure on those soliciting
prizes! Third, the members of the Keystone Hops who pitched in to
help, finding work that needed to be done and doing it, without
waiting for requests. Fourth to Barry DeLapp for his software
(and support of it). I can't imagine running a contest without
this package. Next, to our host, EdMcGowan, of Buckinham Mountain
Brewery. He treats us well, and provides an excellent site. Please
stop by, drink his beers, and thank him in person. Finally,
to the 140+ brewers who submitted 360 entries!! We just keep growing,
a tribute to all who help, and to all who participate.
Two sites have agreed to post the winner's lists. They are:
http://burp.org/competitions/wotw98.htm
http://www.the-gourmet-brewer.com/competitions/WofW98.htm
If someone truly needs individual scores, they can email me, but
we anticipate having score sheets out no later than next monday.
Thanks again to all who helped, and all who participated!
Cheers,
Al Folsom
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 22:31:44 EST
From: AllDey <AllDey@aol.com>
Subject: Counter flow wort chiller, pumping, RIMS questions
As I ponder improvements to my p-RIMS, I've assempled a few questions:
1) Getting primed: I want to can the old immersion chiller and build a counter
flow. I need to use my Teel 180F-rated pump so will need to pass the hot wort
through the chiller first (and some recommend this approach anyway). What's a
good way to start the siphon through the chiller and to the pump? My pump is
mounted low on a rack straight beneath the mash/lauter tun. - I turn it off
and on a few times with hot water in the system to burp the air out of the
lines prior to dough in (I could put a relief valve in the tee-high point-
coming out of the keg but would rather keep my thermometer there :{). This
works ok but I don't expect similar results with a long coil somewhere
upstream. And I sure don't want HSA.
2) Speaking of mounting your pump - I've seen web pages showing pumps mounted
every which way. Granted, some of these may be self-priming but others I know
are not. Shouldn't the pump be mounted with the intake the highest point to
avoid cavitation?
3) I'm fishing for handy solutions for drawing samples from the spargate for
pH and gravity testing. Any thoughts RE a sample port design?...winning
entries get a sincere thank you and a standing invite to sample beer next time
you're in Cheyenne.
4) I can't sleep knowing there may be critters watching me from my watch
glass. The wort level indicator on my kettle has small hose (1/4") which
means it doesn't work that great and seems a safe harbor for nasties because
its hard to clean. For these and other reasons, I'm gonna drill a new hole
(the old one rose from the exit pipe at the 5.0 gal mark) and make a new level
indicator. I'd like to use glass as I subscribe to that reckless school of
the plastic polymer dis-enchanted: the question - how to create something
that can be easily disassembled and cleaned? Responders resulting in a
chuckle, a new level indicator, or a germ of an idea may get a beer named in
their honor. Flames can't hurt me. I'm outta here before the RIMS police
arrive....
ps. I'll post a summary to the digest.
Paul, Cheyenne WY - Home of the 4th Annual 8 Seconds of Froth - coming June
20th.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 98 06:46:27 -0500
From: "P. Edwards" <pedwards@iquest.net>
Subject: Powdery mildew
Jethro wrote:
>Hops.
>Also, we learned that my prediction of hop shortages and price increases
>secondary to the powdery mildew infestation in the US are unfounded.
I have some additional info on this: The organism that causes powdery
mildew in hops came into the US on some imported rhizomes (from Germany,
I think) and quickly spread. One of our club members happens to be an
entymologist (did I spell that right??) for DowElanco. He was involved
in getting an emergency certification from the US Dept of Ag for a
DowElanco pesticide that is effective against the particular critter that
causes powdery mildew in hops. Seems this pesticide has been used abroad
and in other applications domestically, but was never certified for use
on hops grown in the US, as hops are a "minor crop" to our gov't & don't
garner a lot of attention from the regulatory folks.
Bottom line was that the certification was granted, pesticide was applied
and the hop crop was saved. But now the US growers have a new problem
that will continue to need attention.
Oh, and by the time the hops are harvested and dried, the pesticide has
dissapated, not to worry.
- --Paul E.
Indianapolis, IN
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2618, 01/24/98
*************************************
-------
