Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2662
HOMEBREW Digest #2662 Mon 16 March 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:
mash water calculations (Sherry Heflin)
Converting a beer keg to a boiling pot (Stephen Rockey)
No moving parts sparge control thought (Mark Berman)
Too many hops? ("Michel J. Brown")
Re: shape of fermenter & effect on yeast (Sean Mick)
Help for my first lager! (Rosalba e Massimo Faraggi)
Yeast sludge and FWH ("Tomusiak, Mark")
Help for my first lager! (2) (Rosalba e Massimo Faraggi)
Re: autolysis (dfikar)
CO2 Tank Position / 6-row (Denis Barsalo)
Refractometer, Temp Compensated pH meter ("Raymond C. Steinhart")
Hop homegower Warning. (Darren Gamache)
re: bleach and kegs (Jon Macleod)
re: chlorine data (Jon Macleod)
Slant Vials / Transfer Box / El Nino Spores (Kyle Druey)
Berliner weiss ("David R. Burley")
Mash pH ("David R. Burley")
Benzene, mass (Paul Niebergall)
home made roller mill (Jeff Sturman)
Stainless Steel Brew Kettle (kbjohns)
Dubbel yeast? (Gordon Strong)
For cooks and other potential mead makers. (Fred Johnson)
microscopes ("Ray Estrella")
Newbie Question - grains w/extract (Mike Beatty)
All-grain to extract conversions ("Clifford A. Hicks")
Re: yeast storage / priming and FAN ("Hubert Hanghofer")
Stout faucet / Guiness faucet ("Steve Hill")
AG to Extract: Whatta way to go.../Overhopping Cancer (Some Guy)
Rolling Rock (Jason)
Be sure to enter the 7th NYC Spring Regional Competition
3/22/98. Surf to http://www.wp.com/hosi/companno.html for more
information...
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, 13 Mar 1998 13:24:50 -0600
From: Sherry Heflin <sheflin@shreve.net>
Subject: mash water calculations
Hi all,
I've got a question about mash water and temperature. I'm presently
using a converted Sanke keg for my mash tun and am using a false bottom
setup. My problem lies in the fact that my valve at the bottom is set
about two inches off the bottom and my false bottom sits on top of the
lip of the valve. This means it takes almost 2-gallons to reach the
level of the false bottom. I'm making ten gallon batches and having to
use about eight+ gallons of water to cover the grain. Needless to say I
seem to have a thin mash and was just wondering what effects that may
have. I've figured how to hit correct mash temps, and making good brew
but was wondering if a different setup may be better.
Someone had a question about putting airlock on sanke kegs. Two
suggestions. I have one I cut a hole in the top big enough to fit my arm
in to clean it that when fermenting I cover with a big o-ring and a
piece of plexi-glass that I bolt down over the o-ring with stainless
bolts and hold down with wingnuts. A hole the size of the stopper for
the airlock is cut into the middle of the plexi-glass. Works good and
you can kind of see in it to see when krausen begins to fall. Another
thing that works is boiling the orange cap for the top of a carboy and
it will fit over the plug at the top of a sanke keg while its still real
hot and pliable. Then just plug the one hole and put your airlock in the
other.
Finally, a plea to anyone who is thinking of opening a brewpub. I live
in Shreveport La. and there isnt a brewpub within a 150 mile radius of
here. We've got a great riverfront here with 4 gambling riverboats.
Somebody bring one here. Ah alas, if I could only afford to build one.
Nothing like a good hoppy I.P.A. and spicy- assed mudbugs.
Later. Bodie down in Dillabrew country
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 1998 13:22:16 -0600
From: Stephen Rockey <srockey@egyptian.net>
Subject: Converting a beer keg to a boiling pot
Hello all,
I recently acquired a used 15 gallon beer keg. I want to convert it to
use as a boiling pot, but want to make sure I do it correctly. Is there
an FAQ somewhere that has directions, and maybe some diagrams, on how
to, and how big to cut the hole in the top, etc.
Those that have done this; What do you use for a lid? I also want to
put a valve on the bottom so I don't have to pour the wort. Is there
something from the local hardware store that can be used and can stand
the heat? Or is there a retail valve which would work better? Any and
all help will be greatly appreciated.
Steve Rockey
Jacob, IL
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 1998 14:59:20 -0500
From: Mark Berman <mberman@bbn.com>
Subject: No moving parts sparge control thought
In HBD 2658, Dana Edgell asks about controlling sparge levels:
>3) I am looking at using the float valve from a swamp cooler as to maintain
>a constant sparge level (with proper ani-HSA manifold addition).
Dana's question reminds me of a technique that I've wanted to
use, but never quite got around to trying out. The basic idea
is to control sparge water level using a device built for keeping
a cat's water bowl filled when the owner is away. The device
is basically a plastic bowl with a tapered ridged spike sticking up
from the center. You fill a two liter PET (couldn't help it) bottle
with water and invert it onto the spike. As kitty's water level falls
below the rim of the bottle, additional water fills the bowl. I think
one of these things costs about $2 at a pet store.
So, I wondered, why not cut the base off of a two liter bottle, feed
in a hose from my HLT, poke a few holes in kitty's bowl, and drop the
whole contraption on top of my grain bed? Can anyone tell me why this
is a dumb idea? Better yet, has anyone tried it? My likely next brew
time is next weekend (March 21-22). If I don't get any feedback, maybe
I'll give it a try and report back.
Mark Berman
Somerville, MA
berman@banet.net
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 1998 12:15:12 -0800
From: "Michel J. Brown" <homemade@spiritone.com>
Subject: Too many hops?
This just in from the local University extension office:
"A worldwide glut of hops has driven prices so low that soome Northwest
growers say they might not string up their vines this year. "We've got a
poor market, and acxres are going to come out this year, that is for sure'"
said Pat Leavy, a member of the Oregon Hop Commission who raises hops near
Aurora. Hop industry officials in Oregon, Washington and Idaho -- where
most of the nation's hops are grown -- are all affected by low prices
caused by three consecutive years of record production worldwide. With the
annual production costs running between $1 and $1.25 a pound,
Leavy said, farmers cannot afford to raise a crop at the 60 to 80 cents
a pound being offered for uncontracted acres. Last year, growers were
raising hops on contracts paying $1.40 to $1.50 a pound for the Nugget
variety, which is planted on about half of the 44,000 acres of hops in the
Northwest, Leavy said. Prices plummeted after the U.S. Breweries
Association reported that U.S. stockpiles of hops topped 59 million pounds
last fall."
So much for chicken little talking about the prices going up due to adverse
weather, and the rhizome virus on the New Zealand organic Hallertau last
year. Too bad we can't help out these poor farmers!
Dr. Michel J. Brown, D.C.
homemade@spiritone.com
http://www.spiritone.com/~homemade/index.shtml
"In the field of observation, chance favors only the prepared mind"
L. Pasteur
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 1998 12:33:48 -0800 (PST)
From: homebrew@dcn.davis.ca.us (Sean Mick)
Subject: Re: shape of fermenter & effect on yeast
AlK writes:
>Some yeasts simply don't ferment well when the aspect ratio of the
>fermenter is much taller than it is wide (like 3:1). There have been
>many theories as to why this may be (pressure, eddy currents, etc.)
>although none have been without some holes (i.e. DeClerck's initial
>experiments were done on 1-liter batches... so much for pressure).
>Two common yeasts that exhibit this behaviour are the Whitbread Ale
>strain and Wissenschaftliche 34/70 (reportedly Wyeast #2124 in an old
>article by Dave Logsdon, other association in other texts).
>I have not read of any such effect during *conditioning*, but that is
>not to say that there isn't an effect.
Just as a datapoint, I recently fermented a 10 gallon batch of rauchbier
with the W 34/70 yeast (from White Labs, called Chris White to confirm its
origin). It was fermented in a tall cylindroconical stainless fermenter
(2.5:1 ratio). The yeast was very active. I fermented it rather hot,
between 55-60 F. This is because I did not compensate for the reduction in
heat transfer through stainless (versus glass carboys). Oh well, live &
learn. It did create alot of diacetyl during fermentation, but a prolonged
(1 week) rest at 60F post fermentation eliminated the excess. The beer is
actually very nice going into its cold conditioning. OG was 1.058, FG
1.008. Single decoction. Hope this helps, John, as you were originally
inquiring about fermenter geometry & how it affects yeast. Using this yeast
before in a carboy, I did not notice much difference in activity level.
(I'm assuming that the increased diacetyl this time is only because of the
increased temp, as I fermented at 50F in glass). I spoke to a gentleman at
the American Brewer's Guild (David, can't remember his last name) and he
felt that pressure caused by the weight of the wort was insignificant on
such a small scale (under a barrel) with respect to fermenter geometry. I
asked him if this meant that we could theoretically ferment 5 gallons in a
long vertical tube without pressure problems, and he said "I don't see why
not" Not that I plan to do this, happy with my current setup, but it's just
another view to put it all in perspective. We homebrewers can't always
scale down the same rules that apply to breweries. In this case it may be
to our advantage, as we could be more flexible in our fermenter
designs/choices. I'm not denying the problems with Whitbread yeast, BTW,
just expressing my datapoint. Perhaps Whitbread's problems aren't related
to pressure... (unless it exceeds 4 volumes, in which case most yeast begin
having problems).
Sean Mick
Mick's Homebrew Supplies
http://www.dcn.davis.ca.us/~homebrew
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Mar 1998 00:18:43 -0800
From: Rosalba e Massimo Faraggi <rosamax@split.it>
Subject: Help for my first lager!
Hi!
My first lager is having quite a slow fermentation. I kept it in the
fridge between 12 C and (lately) 10 C, it started furiously the first
day then slowed down... now it's almost 4 weeks, gravity dropped just a
few points in the last 10 days or so, and in the last 4 days the gravity
just did not change any more. Looks like fermentation has really stopped
at about 1020 - 1022. OG was no more then 1070, so the attenuation
seeems not too much! Yeast is Whitelab Czech Pils.
So my question is, do you think it is finished? Should I just start
lagering at colder temperatures or try to start fermentation again?
And, I was planning to bottle condition the beer, since I am not
equipped for filtering and force carbonate; but if I bottle at such a
gravity, do I risk some bottle explosion if fermentation wakes up again
in the bottle?
TIA and cheers!
Massimo - Genova Italy
http://www.split.it/users/rosamax/
Max Italian Beer Page!
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 1998 15:18:28 -0800
From: "Tomusiak, Mark" <tomusiak@amgen.com>
Subject: Yeast sludge and FWH
Greetings brewers...I have a few procedural questions regarding my next
batch.
Firstly, I am currently fermenting a beer with Wyeast Munich Lager
yeast, and I would like to start my next batch by simply siphoning the
fresh wort onto the primary yeast sludge from the first batch - the
sludge would be about two weeks old at the time that I do this. My
question is, is it advisable to "restart" the sludge in the primary by
adding a small amount of starter wort first, or am I likely to get a
strong start by just siphoning the fresh batch directly onto the sludge?
I plan to aerate with an aquarium pump, and I definitely want a quick
start (lag times longer than 8 hours make me cranky...).
Secondly, I would like to try first-wort hopping the new batch with some
swell new Tettnanger Tettnang hops that I just received. References to
first-wort hopping usually say something like "first-wort hopped with
35% of the total hop bill". Does this mean that you total up all the
hop additions that you would add as part of a more standard schedule
(boil, aroma and flavor hops), add the appropriate amount as first wort
hops, and then omit the flavor/aroma hops? Do you specifically need to
hop and boil just the first runnings from the lauter to get this
benefit, or can
you wait until you collect the entire wort volume and then boil?
Any advice would be appreciated - Mark Tomusiak, Boulder Colorado.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Mar 1998 00:47:09 -0800
From: Rosalba e Massimo Faraggi <rosamax@split.it>
Subject: Help for my first lager! (2)
I forgot to add some data to ... help you help me.
The beer is a Bock, extract+ grains, I just added about 100 gr for 10
liters of Carapils to the malt extract.
The beers tastes good enough now, clean, not infected, just a bit too
sweet. It is fermenting in a SS pot.
Cheers and sorry for the double message
Massimo
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 1998 19:54:32 -0600 (CST)
From: dfikar@flash.net
Subject: Re: autolysis
>autolysis/priming/tank geometry/headspace air/mashout/10%
>sucrose/diacetyl/same ingredients/soapy (Al
>Korzonas)
.
.
.
>Just because the yeast are dead doesn't mean their enzymes are denatured.
>Consider how long alpha amylase survives at 140F and I believe that
>10 minutes at 140F is one pasteurisation unit, no?
>I think this speculation may be a little bit extreme.
Digging back into the cobwebs of my (largely unused) double science major
(chemistry\biology) 20 yrs. ago to further speculate...
I seem to recall that the enzymes that are active *within* an
organism (e.g. yeast) are quite dependent on the biochemical milleu within
the cell wall to function properly. When an organism dies the cell membrane
becomes inactive. The living membrane is an incredibly dynamic
regulator of what enters & exits the cell, in no small part to make sure
that the finicky cell enzymes can function properly. Therefore, it does not
seem like a stretch to me that all or most of the yeast's enzymes would be
renderended inactive when the cell dies - from whatever cause.
Thus, while the temperature
elevation during pasteurization might not itself render the enzymes inactive
the biochemical changes concomitant with cell death might. Any practicing
biochemists/microbiologists out there?
- ---------------------------------------------
Dean Fikar - Ft. Worth, TX (dfikar@flash.net)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 1998 21:24:50 -0500
From: Denis Barsalo <denisb@CAM.ORG>
Subject: CO2 Tank Position / 6-row
Hey Gang,
I'm in the process of moving my beer fridge and I was wondering if
there's a reason why I couldn't lay my 10 lbs CO2 tank on its side? (I want
to put the tank on top of the fridge, horizontaly.) Will the gas enter the
regulator in liquid form and cause problems?
As far as 6-row is concerned, I've been using Canadian 6-row as my
main malt in Lagers and Pilsners for quite a while, and often use it half
and half with Canadian 2-row in American and Canadian Ales. I like the
taste it imparts, especially on light lagers, and it's often cheaper to
purchase than 2-row. I find it very unfortunate to see posts knocking the
use of 6-row, by brewers that have never tried brewing with it!
Denis Barsalo
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 1998 21:11:59 -0600
From: "Raymond C. Steinhart" <rnr@popmail.mcs.net>
Subject: Refractometer, Temp Compensated pH meter
1) I am not sure if I have read this here or not. How effective is a
Refractometer for calculating both Specific Gravity (OG) as well as
Terminal Gravity. This would surely push the range of the meter, yes?
What about the color of the wort from grains, what about proteins, etc.
2) Does any one know of a Temp. Compensated pH meter capable of 100C for
under $300.00.
Thanks,
Ray Steinhart
Brewers of South Suburbia
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 1998 21:41:24 -0800
From: Darren Gamache <bgf@televar.com>
Subject: Hop homegower Warning.
Hello,
Currently the Washington Hop Industry is fighting a new disease in the
pacific northwest. It is called Powdery Mildew. This disease is
terrible and it spreads like wildfire. The Washington Hop Commission has
produced a "Best Management Practices" list that all of the commercial
growers are following in the coming season.
Every hop grower from the largest 3000 acre commercial operation to the
ornamental backyard gardener needs to know how to combat and prevent
this disease. For unckecked plants will only spread the inoculum
further and make combating the disease that much more difficult.
I encourage all hop growers to read and digest carefully the
information contained within the memo. The memo has been posted at
<www.andinator.com/brewrats/hopmildew.html>
On another note, powdery mildew overwinters in the arial buds of hop
rizomes. For those of you that are buying rizomes from the Northwest,
make sure that they are PM free.
I am not an authority, but if their are any questions I can field some
of them and the others I will refer to our industry scientists.
Thanks
--Darren
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 1998 22:54:53 -0500
From: marli@bbs2.rmrc.net (Jon Macleod)
Subject: re: bleach and kegs
I used to work for Clorox and had to deal with this question on a more
industrial basis. Whenever one is asking about material capability, the
next question should be "what effect on which material?"
Nickel and iron are big time catalysts in the degradation of sodium
hypochlorite. Therfore, stainless steel will make bleach break down
relatively quickly. Stainless steel, however, doesn't really take part
in the reaction, in the time to which we are referring. (I wouldn't
store bleach solution in it, but for sanitizing it doesn't really
matter.) At a bleach plant, where a batch may sit overnight, the
concern is rapid degradation of product, not corrosion of fittings.
(and so, no SS is used)
Ok what about this degradation? We're talking degradation, not simply
reaction. When bleach reacts, like with organics, it makes salt water.
When it degrades, with a catalyst present as opposed to simply time,
while it eventually makes salt water, first it is really freeing up the
chlorine to react more readily with whatever is present. That's why
dilution is actually more effective than "straight" 5.25%. (by lowering
pH, water is also destabilizing) So bottom line; you could argue that
the nickel in your keg actually catalyzes the sanitizing effect of your
bleach.
Me? I use iodifor for my kegs and diluted bleach for all the glass and
plastic. Any good reason? No. The bleach does a bigger number on the
plasics than the stainless.
Mike
PS. I work in medical devices now and just can't bring myself to say
sterilize or decontaminate with this stuff. Those terms have definite
meanings that we can't substantiate.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 1998 23:08:06 -0500
From: marli@bbs2.rmrc.net (Jon Macleod)
Subject: re: chlorine data
Absolutely true, some people are more sensitive to some
elements/molecules than others. I too have noticed that if you soak a
plastic container in bleach solution for several days, it will smell
so. If, however, you clean the container and rinse, in a timely manner
(oh, let's say something less than a couple of days) the plastic won't
have reacted and created surface chloro- molecules.
Periodically, you see allegations regarding sodium hypochlorite's
contribution to all sorts of pollutants (e.g. dioxin). That's really
guilt by association (Cl2). Dioxins and most other non-salts are only
created at high temperatures, like in a paper mill. At "room"
temperature, about the only thing you can make are various salts.
There isn't enough chlorine, or enough energy available, in city water
to be making much of anything (except dead bacteria).
Mike
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 1998 23:16:24 -0800
From: Kyle Druey <druey@ibm.net>
Subject: Slant Vials / Transfer Box / El Nino Spores
Need a recommendation from my fellow HBDers. I am going to purchase
some yeast culturing vials for making slants, but I am not sure what
size to get. The three sizes I am considering are all borosilicate
glass with screw thread rubber lined caps and are autoclavable. Which
one is the best size/type for slants:
1) 20 mm OD X 150 mm height, test tube type with rounded bottom
2) 17 mm OD X 60 mm height (8 ml), flat bottomed
3) 1 dram (3.7 ml) don't know the dimensions, flat bottomed (this is my
first choice because I can get 49 of them for $19 and they appear easy
to clean and handle)
What say ye plant doctors and yeast ranchers?
****************************************************
Also, Fix has a picture of a transfer box in his latest book. Looks
fairly simple to procure. Is the transfer box worthwhile to add to the
arsenal?
I heard on the radio last week that due to El Nino the spore count here
in CA is 200 or 300 times the normal amount. I don't know if this is
the cause or it is my sloppy sterile technique, but I did get my first
moldy yeast starter ever (25+ batches) a few weeks ago. Had to toss it
and start over.
I inquired a few weeks about a sanitary fitting for a fermenter. I
received some good feedback and am in the process of fabricating and
testing a prototype. I will report back the results if the fitting
appears useful. Thanks again to the HBD for the valuable input.
Thought my beers were getting pretty good 'til I cracked open a bottle
of Hacker-Pschorr Marzen last night. Now I know what you get to drink
in Paradise, my beers have a long long way to go...
Kyle Druey
Bakersfield, CA
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Mar 1998 09:32:43 -0500
From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: Berliner weiss
Brewsters:
AlK says:
>Dave writes:
>>OTOH, the
>>advantage of adding the lactic acid after fermentation is that
>>you can have both Berliner Weiss and the southern Weisse
>>from a single batch. Berliners sweeten this acidic brew
>>sometimes by adding sweet simple syrup, Kir or other fruit
>>flavored syrup. Using an actual Berliner Weisse culture has
>>the disadvantage of potentially contaminating your equipment.
>Southern Weisse (Bavarian Weizen) is supposed to have a
clovey/banana
>character which comes from the yeast. In a Berliner Weiss,
this would
>be inappropriate and you should use a more "normal" yeast
(i.e. one that
>is not so fruity and does not create so much 4-vinyl guiaicol).
Therefore,
>you cannot make a good Berliner and a good Bavarian Weissbier
from
>the same fermenter. You could if you split the wort and used
two
>different yeasts, however...
Yep, but talk to George De Piro, he says Beliner Weiss HAS a
clovey/banana taste and delbruckii and lots of other stuff which
I sincerely doubt. So he discourages using lactic acid compared
with a lactic mash. And believes my caution to avoid equipment
contamination to be nonsense. I guess he hasn't had much
experience or read much about making Belgian beers where
the same cautions apply.
It is true that Beliner Weiss does not have a "phenolic" profile as
Eric Warner confirms. I stand by my earlier comment that the
simpler and more reliable way to make a Berliner Weiss is to
acidify the beer with lactic acid the first time through. Next time
use a lactic acid addition to the mash.
If the brewer still feels compelled to use a "natural" source of
lactic acid it can be done safely. One way to avoid
contamination, once the appropriate level of lactic acid is
determined is to make up a small sour mash and sterilize it
by boiling briefly or holding it at near boiling for a few minutes.
Check the achives for a method I published a year or so ago.
This method produced 0.1N lactic acid. Using the amount
determined by addition of lactic in the earlier experiment you
can calculate the size of the sour mash needed.
Using a clovey yeast without lactic acid addition is appropriate
for the southern style.
- -----------------------------------------------
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
103164.3202@compuserve.com
Dave_Burley@compuserve.com
Voice e-mail OK
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Mar 1998 09:32:46 -0500
From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: Mash pH
Brewsters:
AlK Says:
>I really would like some clarification from the "brewing researchers"
amidst
>us (AJ, Andy, Dave, Dave, George, George, Jim, Mort, Rob, etc.)
I've read
>in one professional text (on two nearly consecutive pages),
where in one place
>the book says that the pH of the mash should be in the
low 5's when measured
>at *MASH* temperatures and in the other place it says it
should be in the
>low 5's measured at *ROOM* temperature. Since there
is a 0.2 to 0.5
>(depending on your water chem, I presume) difference
between the pH at mash
>temps and at room temp, I would *really* like to know
which is correct.
Well, remember the pH you strive for is the "optimal" pH.
The big question is what are you optimizing?
Like you, I have been very frustrated by this non-specification,
but have to presume they mean pH at the mash temperature,
otherwise things do not make much sense. Personally,I
always take the pH at room temperature since pH papers
and pH meters work better there and subtract 0.3 to estimate
the mash pH.
Here is some data from Malting and Brewing Science (M&BS):
p213 in 1st edition
"At 150F (65.5C) the pH of the mash will be about 0.35 units
less than at 65F (18C) due to the greater dissociation of the
buffer substances present. Therefore enzyme systems whose
pH optima are known from determinations at 20C appear to
have higher pH optima in the mash if it is cooled before the
pH is determined. An infusion mash is best carried out at
pH 5.2-5.4. Consequently the pH of the cooled mash will be
5.5-5.7. Alteration of the mash pH towards the acid side of
pH 5.8 will i) allow the amylases to degrade the starch more
rapidly ii) alter the solubility and coaguability of the proteins
and iii) minimize the extraction of tannins. With increasing
acidity more soluble protein appears in the wort but the proteins
are more degraded by the proteolytic proteins, and so the wort
gives beer less prone to non-biological haze.
Mashes made with distilled water have a pH of about 5.8 and the
buffers in the grist always tend to hold this pH...."
Ken Schwartz reports that his mash pH fell to 5.3 with only a
tablespoon of malt in a large quantity of distilled water. I use
RO water and mashing in with a lager malt, I come to a pH of
5.6 at room temperature. My mashes go very well.
M&BS Table 8.8 page 214
pH Characteristics of a "standard" infusion mash of "usual"
thickness made at 150F with a pale ale malt.
Smallest Saccharification time 5.3-5.6 (
wort)
Greatest Extract in an infusion mash 5.2-5.4 (mash)
Greatest Extract in a decoction mash 5.3-5.9
Mash pH giving most fermentable wort 5.3-5.4
(approx 0.2 units above pH for max extract)
Mash impossible to filter <4.7
alpha amylase max activity ( Ca++ present) 5.3-5.7
beta amylase max activity 5.3
Perm. Sol. NItrogen maximal abt. 4.6
(mash)
4.9-5.1 (wort)
Formol Nitrogen Maximal abt
4.6
(mash)
4.9-5.1 (wort)
Proteinase Activity Maximal
4.6-5.0
(mash)
Phytase Activity maximal abt
5.2 (mash)
Peptidase Activity maximal
7.8;8.6
I presume all these pH values are at 150F to make sense with
the above comments in M&BS. IN the future lets try to report
temperature as well as pH.
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
103164.3202@compuserve.com
Dave_Burley@compuserve.com
Voice e-mail OK
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Mar 1998 09:07:43 -0600
From: Paul Niebergall <pnieb@burnsmcd.com>
Subject: Benzene, mass
Evan writes about benzene contaminated stainless steel:
Benzene is extremely volatile and will quickly evaporate from any
surface (especially a non-porous SS surface). After a good washing in
hot water and thorough drying, there should be no benzene left.
However, benzene is extremely toxic and carcinogenic. Inhaling a
concentration of 500 ppm is considered immediately dangerous to life or
health. Exposure limits as low as 0.1 ppm have been set by the National
Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. The national drinking water
standard for benzene is 5 micrograms per liter. So even though I know it
isn't a problem because all of the benzene will evaporate, I would not
use stainless that held benzene just because, knowing how dangerous
of a chemical it is, I wouldn't be able to sleep at night thinking about it.
After being blessed once again with a reminder of how educated some
of our most prolific posters are (of which the pomposity of the
discussion is exceeding only by egos of the participants), Dave B. goes
on to write:
>>Actually she was incorrect as "mass" refers to an inertial
>>characteristic. She should have said...{Snip}"
Well, in the case presented, "mass" is exactly the right word. As in
"supporting a 2 kg mass". Yeah, I know that a mass in zero gravity (or
no acceleration) exerts no force, but that tidbit of information is irrelevant
unless some of our subscribers are reading the HBD in the space
shuttle. It is still a 2 kg mass that the record is (or is not) supporting.
A better way of putting it is "supporting the force exerted by 2 kg mass
under the prevailing conditions of acceleration".
And even better yet, one should say "supporting a force of 2 Newtons"
But, the phrase "supporting a kilogram weight" is wrong. It's a good thing
your thesis advisor didn't hear you say that.
>>don't argue with me.
Why not, you are wrong?
BTW, my reference indicates that there are 0.06852 slugs in a kg.
Brew on,
Paul Niebergall
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Mar 1998 10:21:17 -0700
From: brewshop@coffey.com (Jeff Sturman)
Subject: home made roller mill
A recent post dealt with making a roller mill and specifically what to use
for the rollers. A customer of mine recently made an adjustable, motorized
roller mill. After some initial problems it appears to be running just
fine. He used 5.75" diameter stainless steel pipe for his rollers. No
knurling required, since the angle between the rollers is so steep. Each
roller is about 14 inches in width. It is quite an impressive machine.
Those interested can email Mike at mbraun@coffey.com. He has pictures
which we could scan and post online if there is any interest.
Helpful hint: For anyone interested in super fine mesh for steeping
grains, boiling hops, making wine, etc., go to your local paint supply
store and pick up some paint strainer bags. These are large, fine nylon
mesh bags that can be altered for different applications. The cost is
rediculously low when compared to the purpose-made home brewing bags on the
market. I got this tip from a customer, Jim Shipley, who is very skilled
at pinching pennies in the brewery.
Finally, a blatant ad, but I hope it is okay since this is a great deal for
home brewers looking for large stainless steel tanks. Check out:
www.coffey.com/~brewshop/BBHome.html
and go to the Stainless Steel Vessels link. These are 10 to 30 gallon ss
tanks for $15 to $25 each!!! Pictures included. Sorry for the ad.
Jeff
casper, wy
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Mar 1998 13:39:38 -0500
From: kbjohns@peakaccess.net
Subject: Stainless Steel Brew Kettle
BOS Prize in the 3/22/98 NY city spring Reg. HB Competition is a 10 gal
Stainless Steel Brew Kettle with bottom drain and SS themometer from PBS,
Precision Brewing Systems. Credit will be given for a larger kettle if
desired.
Why not try to win it? We are also giving away $1,800 in other prizes.
Complete information can be found at URL http://www.wp.com/hosi/companno.html
Ken Johnsen
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Mar 1998 14:47:52 -0500
From: Gordon Strong <strongg@earthlink.net>
Subject: Dubbel yeast?
I am interested in determining what variety of Wyeast is best used for a
Belgian Dubbel. In looking over their list, it appears there are at
least four which might work well. I am interesting in hearing about
results, experiences and problems from actual use of these strains.
I don't have easy access to other yeast suppliers, nor do I wish to
culture my yeast from a commercial product, so I request comments be
limited to fermenting a classic Trappist-style Dubbel using Wyeast.
Thanks,
Gordon Strong
Beavercreek, OH
strongg@earthlink.net
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Mar 1998 06:11:24 -0500
From: Fred Johnson <FLJohnson@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: For cooks and other potential mead makers.
Fellow brewers:
I found the following recipe for mead in a recently published general
cookbook containing recipes for breads, soups, main dishes, appetizers,
desserts, and everything else. (The contributor of the recipe, the
cookbook, and its publisher shall remain nameless in order to protect
the innocent.) The well-intentioned author of the recipe did his best
to outline the procedure and describe the needed equipment for the
person who had never tried homebrewing -- bless his heart, God. But
when I read this, I laughed out loud and wondered, "What cook in his
right mind would venture into the world of homebrewing after reading
this recipe?"
I hope you enjoy it as much as I did.
- --
MEAD
1 qt. honey
3 qt. water
Nutmeg
Pieces of ginger
1 piece dried orange peel
1 tsp. hops
1 tsp. juniper berries
1 1/2 oz. fresh yeast
Cook honey with the water for 1 hour. Place nutmeg, ginger, orange
peel, hops and juniper berries in a piece of cheesecloth, tie it closed,
secure a weight on the end, and place in honey mixture; boil another
hour. Cool honey and place in carboy (an airtight container that will
allow gasses to escape, but will not allow air to enter; these can be
found at wine and beer making shops). Dissolve the yeast in a little of
the honey mixture, then add the mead. Seal carboy. Mead will ferment
at room temperature for 6 months. When the mead is fermented, the
carboy will stop bubbling. Place the carboy in cool, dry place. After
a year the mead will definitely be through fermenting and you can
transfer it to bottles and seal the tops. Watch for delayed
fermentation, and if observed, open the bottle to allow the fermentation
to finish, then close again. If fermentation occurs in a sealed bottle,
the container will most likely blow up. The longer the mead sits, the
better it gets.
- --
Fred L. Johnson
Apex, North Carolina
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Mar 1998 13:05:01 -0600
From: "Ray Estrella" <ray-estrella@email.msn.com>
Subject: microscopes
Hello to all,
I want to continue with my education on yeast, and think it is time to
get a microscope. Would those in the collective that use them, mind
giving me a recommendation on what to look for, with yeast cell counts
and viability studies in mind? TIA
Ray Estrella Cottage Grove MN
ray-estrella@msn.com
****** Never Relax, Constantly Worry....have a better Homebrew ******
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Mar 1998 19:57:12 +0000
From: Mike Beatty <mbeatty@ols.net>
Subject: Newbie Question - grains w/extract
Hello all-
I am familiar w/brewing w/extracts, but have come across a recipe I
would like to try that calls for extract along with grains. The recipe
says, "steep the grains in water as it boils. Remove grains." Now, my
question is, should I do anything to the grain, such as cracking or
grinding? Will steeping the whole grain release the flavor?
Thanks!
- --
Mike
______________________________________________
Do you believe in Macintosh? Please check out:
<http://www.evangelist.macaddict.com/>
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 1998 10:18:22 -0500
From: "Clifford A. Hicks" <simtech@ka.net>
Subject: All-grain to extract conversions
This has probably been discussed before but how about one more time for me .
. . .
What is the conversion ratio so I can figure out how to adapt an all-grain
recipe to an extract recipe? All responses much appreciated!
Cliff Hicks
simtech@ka.net
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 1998 18:39:01 +0100
From: "Hubert Hanghofer" <hhanghof@netbeer.co.at>
Subject: Re: yeast storage / priming and FAN
Hello all,
Duane Hale posted in HBD#2638:
> In reference to the "yeast storage in distilled water" thread, an
> alternative method is to store the yeast in a 10% sucrose and water
> solution (1.040 OG) that has been sterilized beforehand in a pressure
> cooker as advocated in Pierre Rajotte's "First Steps in Yeast Culture...
and Al Korzonas commented in HBD#2660:
> Yeast stored this way must be kept very cold (the exact temperature
> has been posted in HBD a few years ago). Above this magic temperature,
> the sucrose is *fermented*!
In the early days of yeast culturing, backup cultures stored in 10%
sucrose
were kept in a dark place at / or below 15C - far above any temp that
would inhibit yeast growth or fermentation! I've a copy of an old book on
yeast culturing, "Die Hefereinzucht" by Prof. Dr. Hans Schnegg,
Weihenstephan, 1947.
He wrote that it's of great importance to inoculate the sucrose solution
only with small amounts of yeast slurry so that only little cloudiness of
the sucrose solution is obtained. This way the amount of nitrogen
compounds [FAN] - essential for yeast growth - can only be provided by
yeast itself [autolysis]. This level is so low, that hardly any yeast
growth and certainly no fermentation (and accumulation of by products)
does occur.
He further underlines - as has also been addressed by Duane Hale -
that evaporation has to be avoided because increasing osmotic pressure
would kill the yeast sometimes. But on the other hand he notes that total
sealing of the storage flasks has shown to lower yeast viability. So
called
"Freudenreich flasks" with long, tall necks, sealed with cotton wool, were
used.
I think I'll give it a try and report back in 15 years or so ;-)
I've started preparing backup cultures in Dec 1996. Along with distilled
water I used isotonic buffer solution made of 9 grams NaCl per litre
water.
So far there is no big difference between the two types of backup media
but
some strains have only very little residual viability. - I need a whole
drop to get some colonies on a slant while other backup cultures only
require one stroke with an inoculation loop.
I analyzed my records and can only find 2 possible conclusions so far:
1/ Ale strains are more sensitive than lager yeasts.
2/ In preparing backup cultures, yeast is harvested from a slant with
an inoculation loop and suspended in the backup media (pick up and
transfer
of any nutrient is avoided). It seems to be essential to harvest the yeast
from the agar within the growth phase.
~~~~~
The inhibition of fermentation by low FAN brings up another point:
Sometimes we read about problems when priming with sucrose, like sweet
taste and / or lower carbonation as expected. I wonder if low residual FAN
levels could cause this and I'm sure that this may indeed be a problem
when
brewing (not priming) with low FAN extracts.
Dave Burley commented on his priming method in HBD#2661
> ...This will produce an active yeast acclimated to the sugar and
> the beer and have sufficient FANs ( from the malt extract) to allow
> the yeast to carry on and carbonate quickly and reliably, unlike
> "less-controversial" methods of adding sugar alone which work poorly,
> slowly or at least unreliably.
IMHO Dave's "controversial" priming method should be discussed in a
serious
and constructive way and not being pilloried on web pages. With no doubt
it
requires much experience and the right feeling to hit the exact point of
attenuation. Dave has this experience but the question is what could be
done do make it reliable to less experienced brewers?
CHEERS &
sehr zum Wohle!
Hubert in Salzburg, Austria
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 1998 11:35:13 -0700
From: "Steve Hill" <hills@inficad.com>
Subject: Stout faucet / Guiness faucet
I'm shopping for a stout faucet and have a couple of questions:
1) Some places sell "stout faucets" and some sell "Guiness faucets". The
Guiness faucet costs about twice as much - what's the difference?
2) Is there any value to "vari-flow" which allows flow rate to be adjusted
at the faucet?
Thanks,
Steve
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 1998 13:52:33 -0500 (EST)
From: Some Guy <pbabcock@oeonline.com>
Subject: AG to Extract: Whatta way to go.../Overhopping Cancer
Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager converted from all-grain to
extract...
Cliff asks...
"What is the conversion ratio so I can figure out how to adapt an all-grain
recipe to an extract recipe? All responses much appreciated!"
and, since it's been so long since I made any kind of real contribution
to the Digest, I write...
Answers vary on experience, extracts used, phase of the moon, conjunction
of the planets and whether your dog is touching a RIMS heating element
while eating hops smothered in tomatoes, but, in general, DME yields about
45 pgp and LME yields around 36. Take the all-grain recipe's expected SG,
subtract one, multiply by 1000, then multiply by the brew length (the
volume of the resulting brew). Take this number and divide by the factor
for the type of extract you want to use.
For example, say a stout has an SG (or OG) of 1.040, and the recipe is for
ten gallons. First you have (1.040-1)x1000=40 points in ten gallons. SO
you need to add 40x10=400 "points worth" of extract to make their SG.
Just to make it confusing, let's say that, due to their flavor and color
profiles, you want to use 3/4 DME and 1/4 LME. Here we go! You need
(400x3/4)/45=300/45=6.66lbs DME (six-and-two-thirds lb) and
(400x1/4)/36=100/36=2.75lbs LME (rounded down a tad...) to yield the same
gravity in ten gallons (or durned close, anyway!).
Yielding the desired flavor and coloration to any such converted brews is
usually where the mathematics go out the window, and the artistry of
brewing comes in. Just remember: never, NEVER boil dem grains! (unless
doing a decoction, of course, but that's different.) And never, NEVER
wear plaid whilst brewing. Unless brewing ales indiginous to Scotland, of
course. But then it must be a kilt, and yawl not be wearin' the skivvies,
lad!
Did any one else read of the preliminary Oregon State U study showing
that a component of hops in beer may prevent cancer? YES! There _IS_ a
God! And he _IS_ a brewer!
See ya!
Pat Babcock dislocated in Norfolk, VA pbabcock@oeonline.com
Home Brew Digest Janitor janitor@hbd.org
HBD Web Site http://hbd.org
The Home Brewing Page http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/brew.html
"A beer a day is, well, is a necessity."
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 1998 20:13:32 -0600
From: Jason <jmckee@siue.edu>
Subject: Rolling Rock
I was wondering if anyone had a recipe for a Rolling Rock-like brew or
suggestions for an approximation. I enjoy it on hot summer days (not
far off!) and would like to make my own version. Extract or all-grain
is fine. Reply via e-mail or this list is fine also.
Thanks for any suggestions!
Jason.
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2662, 03/16/98
*************************************
-------
