Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2877
HOMEBREW Digest #2877 Tue 17 November 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:
Wyeast Has a Great Product ("Rick Wood")
Re: Who am I? (Barry Watson)
Oats as a plural (Raymond Kruse)
Re: Roggen flub ("George De Piro")
Freezer drain (Forrest Duddles)
Koelsch book by E. Warner (Markus Berndt)
Old Bay beer / flat beer ("Spies, Jay")
RE: Setting the gap on a Corona mill (Gary H Nazelrod)
Singular oat, eh? (David Kerr)
Re: Home Malting (Jeff Renner)
Nottingham Yeast (Andrew Stavrolakis)
Rennerangulation... (pbabcock)
Regulators (Andrew Stavrolakis)
perceived sweetness and SG (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
Preserving Homebrew Labels (Manbeck, Brad J.)" <BJM@roisysinc.com>
Freezer Dehumidifier ("RANDY ERICKSON")
RIMS False Bottom for GOTT ("RANDY ERICKSON")
Dry Yeast / Caramelization (Paul Ward)
Pressure sparging (PRS) - CPC" <peter_santerre@hjco.com>
Aluminum questions (William Graham)
Brass/Lead (William Graham)
*wyrtjo = worth, not Wurz? (Donald Beistle)
easy thermometer calibration ("Frederick L. Pauly")
Sparging temperature ("Gregory M. Remec")
Home Malting (Clifton Moore)
Frementation end and diacetyl rest (Troy Hager)
yeast tests (Christopher Peterson)
Fresh Yeast (DSchaff135)
Thermometer in sankee (Michael Rose)
Weinacht Weisse ("Steve")
Chill haze and RIMS ("charles beaver")
Sight glasses, Reynolds numbers, Zapap lauters, and yeast (GuyG4)
Debunking the Wyeast-Files (Jon Bovard)
Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
Send your entries in for Hoppiest Event On Earth yet?
Details: http://members.tripod.com/~BrewMiester_2/Home.html
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: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 17:23:31 +1100
From: "Rick Wood" <thewoods@netpci.com>
Subject: Wyeast Has a Great Product
Hello HBD,
Well I must disagree with the Jim Liddil and others. Wyeast does not, IMHO,
"suck" but produces a product that many of us use and think is an excellent
product. I think that the Wyeast Smack Packs are a great evolution from dry
yeast to slants.
I have made good beer by both making starters and pitching directly from the
smack pack. I prefer to do starters, but I have never had a problem with
the perhaps 10 smack pack direct pitchings that I have made. Wyeast
produces a product that performs as advertised. Is it the perfect, end all
to yeast management - certainly not. Does it consistently produce good beer
in a convenient package for a wide variety of homebrewers - it certainly
does.
I maintain my favorite yeast on a slant. I even keep this strain as a smack
pack as well. However, for strains that I do not use often, I prefer to use
the Wyeast smack packs. They work well, they are not labor intensive, they
produce good beer, they store easily and they are reasonably priced. Would
I like them to be cheaper? Sure, I would like everything that _I_ don't
sell to be cheaper!
(I have no association with Wyeast, Just a Very Satisfied customer.)
Lastly, I would just like to comment that it is sad that some of our posters
seek out the negative and the mean and seem to have a personal ax to grind.
Rick Wood
"Brewing on Guam"
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 10:43:54 +0100
From: Barry Watson <Barry.Watson@uab.ericsson.se>
Subject: Re: Who am I?
Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu> wrote:
> but did they know where I
> was?
Triangulation mate!
> So, keep posting your location, everyone. Distance from the center of the
> hombrewing universe is optional. As for me, I'm having an out of body
> experience, so I'm presently some distance from myself.
>
> Jeff
My position relative to you as a polar coordinate
[4147 miles (6674 km) (3604 nautical miles), northeast (35.2 degrees) ]
Obviously you all know that as 59:23:00N 18:00:00E Stockholm, Sweden.
Shalom and peace
Barry
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 07:05:14 -0500
From: Raymond Kruse <kruse2@flash.net>
Subject: Oats as a plural
> In the middle of another of his learmed discourses, Jeff Renner ponders
> the
> question of why is "oats" always plural.
>
This was covered in the South with the "grit" which is never used in
the singular when refering to the food item. Much too small a thing
to think of singly. Who would want just one oat?
Ray Kruse
Glen Burnie, PRMd
rkruse@bigfoot.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 8:04 -0800
From: "George De Piro" <George_De_Piro@berlex.com>
Subject: Re: Roggen flub
Hi all,
Steve Alexander pointed to a slight error in my post about Roggenbier.
He notes that Thurn und Taxis has owned Schierlinger for much more
than two years.
To be completely accurate I should have said that T & T stopped
producing Roggenbier at the Schierlinger brewery about 2 years ago and
now produce the Roggenbier under a different label (Thurn und Taxis)
at a different brewery. The beer is very similar to the old
Schierlinger.
If you see a bottle of Schierlinger it is most definitely quite old.
Look for Thurn und Taxis, instead. At least then you have a small
chance of it being in drinkable condition.
Have fun!
George de Piro
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 13:07:44 GMT
From: Forrest Duddles <fridge@kalamazoo.net>
Subject: Freezer drain
Greetings folks,
In HBD#2874, Ray Steinhart asked if it is possible to add a drain
hole to his new chest freezer to help remove the condensate that
collects in the bottom of the cabinet.
Most chest freezers have evaporator tubing in the side walls of the
cabinet, but not the bottom. However,it is common for the tubing to
pass under the cabinet (inside the insulation) and back to the
compressor. A careful look at the external tubing layout should help
spot a good drain location. On my freezers the drains are located near
the front edge of the cabinet bottom and near the right side. If you
add a drain hole, be sure to seal the surface of the foam insulation
with silicone caulk or something similar to prevent moisture from
saturating it over time. Be aware that an open drain hole will allow
air exchange to the outside and may make the condensation problem
worse. A drain should only be opened periodically to remove any
accumulated condensate.
I don't use the drains in either of my freezers. I prefer to dry the
interior with dessicant instead. Recent discussion on this list has
brought up several different brands to try. I've had good luck with
Damp-Rid but I'll try some of the others for comparison. De-Moist
sounds like a good one to try.
Be aware that adding a drain hole to a new chest freezer will likely
void its factory warranty. I considered the length of the warranty
when I purchased my freezer and wish to keep it valid. My collar and
temperature controller additions were done without altering the
freezer itself in order to maintain warranty.
Hope this helps!
Forrest Duddles - FridgeGuy in Kalamazoo
fridge@kalamazoo.net The FridgeGuy is now on line!
Check out http://www.hbd.org/fridgeguy
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 07:28:31 -0700 (MST)
From: Markus Berndt <Markus.Berndt@Colorado.EDU>
Subject: Koelsch book by E. Warner
Hi all,
a couple of days ago the new book on Koelsch arrived in the mail. Since
I grew up in a small town just north of Cologne, I had to read it in one
sitting. It is very entertaining and informative, although I found a
problem with the recipes Eric Warner includes. He gives the amount of hops
in g alpha acid. If one calculates the amount of hops being used for
example for the classic Koelsch (assume 5 gallon recipe, and a 4% alpha
acid hop) one arrives at 23.25 g, or 0.82 oz (this includes about 15%
aroma hops). Now, assuming 30% utilization during the boil I get an
estimated IBU level of 15 (this is probably an upper bound since I am
assuming that all the hops contributes equally to the bitterness,
including the aroma hops). The recipe, however, gives a target of 22 IBUs.
Am I missing something?
- Markus
- -- Zwischen Leber und Milz passt immer ein Pils (or Koelsch :) --
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 09:44:56 -0500
From: "Spies, Jay" <Spies@dhcd.state.md.us>
Subject: Old Bay beer / flat beer
All -
Mikey Beck has the unmitigated temerity to call Old Bay (seasoning of
the Gods) **RANCID** !!! You shall be immediately drawn and quartered
if you are caught setting foot in Maryland . . .
:-)
Hmmm . . . Old Bay Beer. Being a lifelong Marylander, and a devotee of
steamed crabs coated in the stuff, I'd have to say I'd probably have to
take a pass on a beer *made* with it. Remember that it's about 95%
salt. We don't go adding salt to our beers in any appreciable quantity,
and I'd be hard pressed to find a way to separate the "Old Bay flavor"
from the salt. (if anyone has a way, let's hear it . . .) However, I
usually like to drink a light-bodied pilsner with steamed crabs. If
you're feeling adventurous, you could try dumping some Old Bay into a
few bottles (or cans) of Budmillors crap and see what you think. Hell,
it couldn't get any worse, and at least you might be able to actually
*taste* something. OTOH, my personal favorite addition for non-crab Old
Bay is in tuna salad. Easy as hell, and tastes great. Just substitute
it for your normal spices.
On another note, Pete Gottfield complains about flat beer, and Dave B.
advises using a kraeusening starter. While this will probably work
fine, I do the following: I usually have a batch in primary and another
in secondary which used the same yeast. When I bottle the batch from
secondary, I try to "steal" some of the yeast from the primary by
siphoning off some of the primary cake. I swirl the racking cane around
in the primary to suck up a lot of the yeast, and usually don't end up
taking more than a cup or so. This gives the bottled beer some healthy,
active yeast to work with. Just make sure you use the same strain, or
one with *very* similar attenuation characteristics. If you don't, the
new yeast may eat some stuff that the original yeast left behind and
leave you with overcarbonated beer, or a basement full of glass shards.
I've found that I can even use the (same) yeast from a different style
of beer. The flavor contribution from a cup or so in 5 gallons is not
noticeable in most of my ales (probably not so for a lighter beer), and
the reliability of carbonation is, I think, worth it.
Hope this helps,
Jay Spies
Wishful Thinking Basement Brewery
BALMER MARYLAND HON !!
go O's!! -- er . . . never mind.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 09:39:47 -0500
From: Gary_H_Nazelrod@tst.tracor.com (Gary H Nazelrod)
Subject: RE: Setting the gap on a Corona mill
In HBD#2857 "Bill G. Riel" <briel@ibm.net> asks:
>First time poster (and relatively new brewer here). I've acquired a
>Corona mill, and I was wondering if any owners of this mill could tell
>me how to set the gap correctly for the best crush? I searched the hbd
>archives and found one suggestion to use a dime between the plates,
>then turn an extra 1/4 to 1/2 times, but that seems like it would be a
>pretty narrow gap. Any ideas (or is trial and error my best bet?)
I have never tried the dime method; it is not clear from your post whether
the extra 1/4 to 1/2 times is in or out. I used the trial and error
method. I started with the gap wide enough that some grains would pass
through uncrushed. I then gradually decreased the gap until no grains
passed through uncrushed. With this setting I do get quite a bit a flour.
You need to crank the handle a few times between adjustments to ensure that
the grains you are inspecting were really crushed at this setting.
Depending on your lauter method you may find this setting too fine. I use
an easymasher and do not have a problem with a stuck sparge.
Good Luck
Gary Nazelrod
Silver Spring MD
(too lazy to calculate my JR coordinates)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 10:09:27 -0500
From: David Kerr <dkerr@semc.org>
Subject: Singular oat, eh?
I've heard noted beer enthusiasts Bob and Doug Makenzie say "Get oat
of here, you hoser!"
Dave Kerr - Needham, MA, a 4 hour drive from the Great White North
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 10:14:55 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Home Malting
>From: "J.Kish" <jjkish@worldnet.att.net> challenges me:
>
>Jeff Renner,
> That article about home malting by R.C. Dale sure turned me on.
>The only problem is; It's so difficult to obtain good brewer's barley!
>The market should open up so that home brewers can buy bags of
>Harrington or Klages barley, or even six-row barley for experimenting!
>Why don't you lead the way?
I think I'll continue to champion the cause of Classic American Pilsner and
let others tackle this one. I believe that Dan Listermann has grown
Klages. You could check with your local feed mill for untreated seed malt.
Farmers may be another local source. I got 6-row feed barley from a
farmer who had cleaned it for planting with a small cabinet fan mill.
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, 16 Nov 1998 10:24:02 -0500
From: Andrew Stavrolakis <andrew_stavrolakis@harvard.edu>
Subject: Nottingham Yeast
Well, with Danstar Nottingham yeast mentioned in 3+ posts in HBD #2875, I
feel compelled to add my $.02.
I haven't read the Zymurgy article rapping dry yeasts, but I have used
Nottingham extensively to brew *many* different types of beer and have found
it to be very predictable in its performance. I have never had it produce a
bad beer. That said, it has certain characteristics that should be
considered when using it in a recipe. First, it is highly attenuative, on
the order of >80%. It tolerates cool temperatures, down to 55F. It is very
alcohol tolerant - I've fermented out a 13.5% ABV mead with it, and *still*
had enough juice to carbonate it. And lastly, it is very neutral in its
flavor, and is highly flocculant.
That said, if used in a normal gravity (say 1.050) ale, you run the risk of
ending up with a very dry, alcoholic brew. To get a full bodied, but fully
attentuated brew, I recommend mashing at 155F or higher, with no more than
1.25 quarts/lb of liquor.
Where this yeast shines, though, is in barleywines. You can pitch as many
packs as you need to get the yeast count up, it will *not* poop out, even
for bottle conditioning. The neutral flavor allows an aggressive
fermentation without worrying about overpowering esters. The barleywines
I've brewed with this yeast ferment quickly and are ready to drink in as
soon as 6-10 weeks, but still improve with further aging. You could brew a
winter warmer with this yeast today and have it be ready in time for Christmas.
So, as with anything else, be careful of the tool you select for the job.
Nottingham is not my first choice for pale ales or bitters. But I wouldn't
use anything else for big time barleywines.
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: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 11:29:31 -0500 (EST)
From: pbabcock <pbabcock@mail.oeonline.com>
Subject: Rennerangulation...
Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager...
Barry writes:
> My position relative to you as a polar coordinate
> [4147 miles (6674 km) (3604 nautical miles), northeast (35.2 degrees) ]
>
> Obviously you all know that as 59:23:00N 18:00:00E Stockholm, Sweden.
Obviously.
See ya!
Pat Babcock in SE Michigan pbabcock@oeonline.com
Home Brew Digest Janitor janitor@hbd.org
HBD Web Site http://hbd.org
The Home Brew Page http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/brew.html
"Just a cyber-shadow of his former brewing self..."
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 10:39:00 -0500
From: Andrew Stavrolakis <andrew_stavrolakis@harvard.edu>
Subject: Regulators
Hi all,
Let me preface this question by saying I don't currently keg my beer and my
knowledge of compressed gas is limited to an appreciation of it making my
beer fizzy;-)
This weekend I purchased a regulator at a flea market for 10$. It looks to
be in good condition. It appears to be brass; it has (I think) a 7/8" female
tapered thread flare fitting on one side, and a 1/2" tapered thread male
nipple on the other. It says "Listed compressed gas regulator" "2 stage
oxygen" "Craftsmen model #313.54302" on the face. It has two intact guages,
one to 3000lb the other to 150lb.
Could I use this for C02? This may be the kick in the a$$ I needed to get me
out of bottles.
Thanks for the help.
andrew_stavrolakis@harvard.edu
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 10:53:24 -0500 (EST)
From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: perceived sweetness and SG
Recently, Dean Fikar wrote about his stuck fermentation:
"...........It did take the SG down to about
1.020. I still thought that the beer tasted a little sweet. I was
pretty discouraged at this point and seriously considered dumping the
batch. As a last resort, I pitched packets of champagne yeast and
Nottingham dry yeast, both properly hydrated. The beer fermented down
to 1.016 and tasted very good with little residual sweetness."
My question is, can a change in SG from 1.020 to 1.016 really knock down
the perceived sweetness that much? Was Dean on some threshold between too
sweet and just right? Of course, I suppose this could be a significant
change in the amount of sugar left - 20% assuming the entire SG above
1.000 is coming from sweet sugars... Any thoughts?
-Alan
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 10:37 -0600
From: "BJM (Manbeck, Brad J.)" <BJM@roisysinc.com>
Subject: Preserving Homebrew Labels
I am creating labels for homebrew that I brewed for Christmas presents. I
am looking for suggestions on ways to seal / preserve the ink on the
labels. I'd like them not to run if they find a little condensation.
Private emails are fine.
Thanks - Brad
Burlap Shack Brewery
bjm@roisysinc.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 09:16:17 -0800
From: "RANDY ERICKSON" <RANDYE@mid.org>
Subject: Freezer Dehumidifier
Overton's (the waterski catalog) has the Dri-Out brand dehumidifier
with the plastic basket and white crystals if anyone is having trouble
finding these in the hardware stores. www.overtons.com
The basket and 2# of crystals go for $8 --- p/n 21908
The 2# refill is $5 --- p/n 21909
Randy in Modesto
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 10:29:15 -0800
From: "RANDY ERICKSON" <RANDYE@mid.org>
Subject: RIMS False Bottom for GOTT
Hi all:
I've got about $100 invested in my RIMS so far (just getting started
in other words) and I'm buying parts as I decide on various design
options.
Kyle in Bakersfield has been extraordinarily patient in trying to
describe for me his annular ring (two pizza screens sandwiching
a fine stainless mesh and raised about an inch off of the tun floor)
false bottom that he uses in his GOTT mash tun.
I know that some folks use Phloating false bottoms, and C.D.
Pritchard's spirally stainless braided hose design looks promising,
but I'm curious to hear about some of the other false bottom options.
Do any of you GOTT RIMSers have a false bottom design that's
particulary elegant, easy, cheap, etc? An enquiring (though
somewhat thick) mind wants to know.
Randy in Modesto
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 13:33:44 -0500 (EST)
From: Paul Ward <paulw@doc.state.vt.us>
Subject: Dry Yeast / Caramelization
Paul Shick is throwing together a 'spur of the moment ale', and is
wondering about using Nottingham dry yeast and what the results will
be. I need the convenience of dry yeast (literally no time to tend
to starters), and have tried just about all of them. Nottingham was
my favorite because of its' clean flavor profile and reliability
(sort of like a dry 1056). However, a few months ago I ran across a
new dry yeast called 'Safale' - which I reported on here. I have used
Safale in about 7 batches since then including my only back-to-back
exact same recipe with the only variable being the yeast. In batch #1
I used Nottingham and in batch #2 I used Safale. I kept the recipe
as easy as I could to compare these two yeasts:
3.3 lbs Munton's Light liquid malt extract
3.3 lbs Munton's Dark liquid malt extract
1 oz. Northern Brewer pellets for 60 minutes
1 oz. East Kent Golding pellets for 15 minutes
I don't remember what the SG/FG was offhand, but there was only .001
or .002 difference between them.
Granted, the Nottingham batch is 10 days older than the Safale batch,
but they are both over 60 days old now, so are about as close
together in drinkabilitiness as they are ever going to be. My
uneducated and totally predjudiced palet is able to pick up quite a
taste difference between them. The Nottingham batch is quite dry and
has a strong hop presence. The Safale batch is much maltier in
taste, better balancing the hops. Although I've never done back to
back comparisons with my all grain batches, my recollection is that the
Nottingham is a clean and dry fermenter there also, but I mash high
(temperatures) and get a lot of unfermentables, so it works better there
than in extract batches.
I would recommend to Mr. Shick that he pump up the crystal a little
to account for the attenuation of the Nottingham, it really seems to
eat a lot of sugars.
******************
George De Piro quoted Mort O'Sullivan (talking about making crystal
malt) thusly, "Once caramelized, these sugars are no longer sugars,
and so are not fermentable by yeast." Does anybody know at what
point (temperature) caramelization/Maillard reactions start to occur?
I've long felt that caramelization of my priming sugar solution is
part of the inconsistency I experience in carbonation levels. I
usually boil my priming sugar in a cup or so of water while preparing
my bottling bucket. Sometimes it boils quite a while, sometimes
less. One batch I boiled so long it ended up a deep amber color by
the time I added it to the bucket, and that batch never did
carbonate. If I just bring my sugar/water solution up to a boil and
then cover and remove from heat, can I assume that it is sufficiently
sanitized for priming since it will be brought to 100C and then
gradually cool until I'm ready for it? Everything I've read says
that it has to be boiled to sanitize properly.
Paul in Vermont
paulw@doc.state.vt.us
- --
According to government height/weight charts,
I'm seven and a half feet tall.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 10:51:00 -0800
From: "Santerre, Peter (PRS) - CPC" <peter_santerre@hjco.com>
Subject: Pressure sparging
Thomas Murray Writes:
"I read somewhere that a German brewer of Roggenbier uses some kind of
pressure
sparging technique to force the sparge water through the grain bed. The
grist
had a high percentage of rye in it, something like what you suggested
(65%) as
I recall."
This got me to thinking - (Uh oh)
Would it be possible to put in an 'easy masher' type pickup on the end
of
the 'Out' line in a corney keg and use this to do a pressurized mash?
The trouble I thought would be getting both sparge water and pressure
into the keg at the same time - but this could be done by using a second
corny filled with 170'F water and pushing it out of that with the co2
into the
corney lauter tun. You could simply collect the wort (vert vort wyrt
w0rt)
from the out side of the lauter tun with a cobra head tap (or whatever.)
My thoughts on this -
1: This would eliminate HSA during this procedure since you would be
using c02 to move
the sweet wort and not gravity.
2: Corney Kegs probably wouldn't hold heat very well for mashing
in/holding sparge water but
there are ways to insulate i guess.
3: You could regulate the out flow to a pretty steady rate, or at least
better than the damn plastic
inline ball valve I have on my sparge arm/out line.
4: Stuck grainbed? Never! Just crank up the co2 baby! (Just kidding, I
could see 12 pounds
of 170'F grain blowing up. Or cabonated grain? hmmm)
Has anyone ever tried this?
What do you guys think would be the benefits/problems with this idea?
I think that if I do not have any responses with critical problems
suggested, I am going to try this.
-ShoCKValue
(AKA Pete Santerre)
.Both personal and public responses are welcome, but keep it on the HBD
if you think it has any value
and don't bother replying if you don't. ;)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 12:05:19 -0700 (MST)
From: William Graham <weg@rmi.net>
Subject: Aluminum questions
Distributed Collective-
I'm NOT asking if aluminum is safe for brewing - I'm (pretty)
convinced.
Because of the superior heat conductivity of aluminum vs.
stainless steel, I've decided to move from my kegs to big, heavy duty
Vollrath aluminum stock pots for my brewing pleasure.
So, does anyone have any experiences using aluminum that they
would like to share?
How do you clean your pots?
How did you get your fittings installed? Did you weld in a
coupling? Did you use bulkhead fittings? Any specifics would be greatly
appreciated.
BTW, I'm getting a 60 qt for the mash/lauter tun, and an 80 qt for the
boiler. The aluminum is 1 gauge (.281")
Thanks,
Bill
"...the only way to deal with bureaucrats is with stealth and sudden
violence." - Butros Butros-Ghali
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 12:22:00 -0700 (MST)
From: William Graham <weg@rmi.net>
Subject: Brass/Lead
Brewers-
I've seen references to an experiment that was done that disproved
the notion that brewing in aluminum pots was unsafe. The gist of the
experiment was that aluminum levels were measured in wort before and after
a boil in aluminum. The aluminum levels were identical.
My question is: has this been done for "deleaded" brass? (By
"deleaded", I mean soaked in a solution of vinegar and H2O2.) Does anyone
know for sure that "deleaded" brass will stay "deleaded" in the face of
tens or hundreds of batches at boiling temperatures in a fairly acidic
environments?
Frankly, I'm not convinced at all - I need more convincing that
lead won't end up in my beer than aluminum. I think we can all agree that
lead is much more dangerous than aluminum... So why haven't we tested it
even to the same level we tested for aluminum?
My fittings are stainless steel.
Bill
"...the only way to deal with bureaucrats is with stealth and sudden
violence." - Butros Butros-Ghali
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 14:21:34 -0500 (EST)
From: Donald Beistle <dbeistle@arches.uga.edu>
Subject: *wyrtjo = worth, not Wurz?
Ted Major's recent postings regarding the origins and morphology of the
word "wort" prompt me to wonder if the familiar etymology for this
brew-snob shibboleth might be wrong. That is, English "wort" and its
German cognate "Wurz" are supposed to be descendants of the same
Proto-Germanic word that gives Modern German the other "Wurz", meaning
root. The logic here is obvious to homebrewers: wort is the "root" of the
beer. However, the concept of "Stammwurz" (O.G., lit. "stem/original
strength") argues against such an interpretation because of the
semantic redundancy evident in linking "Stamm" (meaning source) with
"Wurz" (also meaning source).
So, might it be that the common Germanic word behind all the modern
cognates of "wort" did not mean "root" but rather "worth"? The logic
behind such an interpretation would be that we brewers mash grains in
order to extract their hidden "worth."
What do you think, Ted? We can chew the Anglo-Saxon fat privately if this
linguistic discussion seems to be straying too far afield for the HBD.
Waes hael!
Donald Beistle
Athens, Georgia
Way south of Jeff Renner
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 14:33:51 -0500
From: "Frederick L. Pauly" <flp2m@avery.med.virginia.edu>
Subject: easy thermometer calibration
I was worried about the accuracy of my thermometers and came up
with what I think is a good solution. We have a people
thermometer that I assume has got to be prettiy accurate around
98.6F So I got a sink full of water at about 98F and tested all
my thermometers against it.
Can I stop worrying now????
Rick Pauly
Charlottesville, Va
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 13:37:56 -0600
From: "Gregory M. Remec" <gremec@gsbalum.uchicago.edu>
Subject: Sparging temperature
Greetings,
I've found some contradictory information regarding proper sparging
temperature. I understand that to avoid tannin extraction (assuming an
appropriate pH), I don't want the grains to reach a temperature much above
170F. Many sources state this as the reason to heat sparge water no higher
than 170F. However, other sources maintain that due to thermal losses, one
may use sparge water near boiling temperatures and never raise the grain
bed above 170F (assuming a properly slow flow rate). Therefore my question
is, what is the optimal grain bed temperature (if there is one) and why?
Is it simply less than 170F? Or is it a range, like 165F to 170F? I seem
to be able to control my grain bed temperature fairly well, but I just
don't know what to shoot for.
Gregory M. Remec
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 11:32:24 -0900
From: Clifton Moore <cmoore@gi.alaska.edu>
Subject: Home Malting
I am another of those who has spent much of the past few
years working through questions relating to home malting.
I am still accumulating questions at a much greater rate than
answering them, but in the process I am starting to pick up
a "big picture" view.
First: Why is it so hard to buy raw malting barley? The
farmers are going out on a limb hoping to gain a premium
price for their effort of growing malting barley. Unfortunately,
it is not easy to do, as the requirements of the malters are
very stringent, and depending on market demand, most of
their source product is likely to be purchased from contract
growers where the product is monitored from seed to harvest.
Imagine you have grown a few hundred tones of malting
barley only to discover that for some reason unrelated to
the quality of your product, your barley is rejected. The
farmer will be looking to the feed market to purchase his
product. Now he is faced with an inferior product for the
feed market due to the low protein content designed into
the malting product. To sell off a few bags to home malters
would only more firmly stigmatize his product as
"failed malting barley".
By trying to capture a slight premium, the grower ends up
with a reduced value product. Selling a few bags to home
brewers is not going to turn this around.
The reason malting is a segregated specialty is that it is
harder than brewing. I culture yeast, mash 10 gallon
batches, and keg in cornies. None of this comes close
to the complexity inherent in the growing and curing of the
raw barley. It is exquisitely complex. Much like brewing,
it can be done with a little effort and a few simple steps.
But when it comes to dealing with the nuances of steeping,
germinating, and kilning, the complexity is stunning.
I hope that this group can have a hand in making source
barley available to home brewers. From this is sure to
follow advancements in the malting field. This is not to
say that the malting labs are not filled with skilled practitioners,
but the entire process is deeply set in traditions and might
well benefit from contributions by "the collective".
Much in the same way ammeter radio enthusiasts have
pioneered modern communications, I believe home
brewers are having an impact on commercial brewing.
Clifton Moore
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 12:38:21 -0800
From: Troy Hager <thager@bsd.k12.ca.us>
Subject: Frementation end and diacetyl rest
Fellow Brewers:
I have been wondering about how others tell when a fermentation is over and
when to rack to the secondary.
I have heard some say when your airlock is bubbling only once a minute it
should be racked. I have also heard others say to take a gravity reading
and when it is down to your target FG then it is over. I have heard brewpub
brewers say that they crash-cool ales after three days or so (I suppose
they take a SG reading to see if it is low enough and then chill it down).
I have had many ales bubble away furiously for a couple days and then
quickly slow down - I have also had many keep bubbling away for days
sometimes up to a week...
I suppose this all doesn't matter much if you just throw it into another
carboy or keg and leave it at cellar temps. but, I have been puting my beer
into the fridge for some cold storage during the secondary to facilitate
settling and dropping out some of the yeast and bread materials in a timely
manner. Is this a good idea?
What about a diacetyl rest? I have been told that for a diacetayl rest you
should let the beer stand at ferm. temps for a couple days after the end of
the fermentation, but if you don't know when the fermentation officially
ends, this is a tough call.
Thanks for the help!!!
-Troy
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 15:52:42 -0500
From: Christopher Peterson <peterscc@email.uc.edu>
Subject: yeast tests
Collective,
Some comments and questions to you all regarding the yeast taste tests in
the lastest issue of zymurgy. First, this is exactly the type of
information I am looking for when selecting yeast strains, the little
blurbs given in the catalogues can be vague at times. In my opinion, we are
all better served when we have more useful information regarding the
ingredients we use in brewing. While the information provided was useful, I
found the strains selected to be somewhat random. And perhaps they were.
To those of you in the hbd collective who are actually involved with some
of these magazines, I propose similar, yet smaller experiments, that
involve the analysis of categories of yeast. For example, a couple of
brewing friends and I performed an experiment using 4 belgian ale strains
to ferment the exact same wort. We learned about some of the common
characteristics as well as unique charateristics for each strain. Without
going into any detail, we all concluded that we prefered wyeast trappist to
wyeast belgian ale II, and to a strain obtained from a bottle of La Fin Du
Monde (Note however that the beers were actually fairly young-3 months-for
belgian yeasts so perhaps we should repeat this experiment with longer
conditioning thrown in). The fourth strain was wyeast belgian wit. Since
the grist was probably inappropriate for this yeast, I didnt include it in
my final considerations.
To me it would be great if there was an english ale experiment which
described the characteristics these yeast. Ditto lager yeasts. This may be
a bit much for every issue, but seems reasonable for a yearly feature. This
type of article could be done with hops as well as malts. Any comments?
Christopher Peterson
peterson@molgen.uc.edu
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 16:25:46 EST
From: DSchaff135@aol.com
Subject: Fresh Yeast
This is a newbie question. Everytime I go and get yeast from the brew shop
they tell me it is really fresh. I was told by one person who works there that
if the liquid is somewhat clear and the sediment is a beige color it is fresh.
I am using liquid yeast cultures that have supposedly come from Wyeast packs
and the store has cultured. I just had a bad experience with the last batch.
The sediment was brown and the starter never took off. I pitched the yeast
anyways and have had very little signs of fermentation. I don't believe I did
anything to shock/kill the yeast. I don't really know what to do besides
pitch another batch of yeast. Any suggestions?
Hoppy Brewing
Dave
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 13:56:27 -0800
From: Michael Rose <mrose@ucr.campuscw.net>
Subject: Thermometer in sankee
I'm using a converted sankee keg with 1/2 inch NPT fitting in the side
for my mash tun. I want to install a dail (bimetal) thermometer. How far
into the mash tun should the probe extend to get accuate readings?
Thanks, Mike Rose Riverside, CA mrose@ucr.campuscw.net
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 19:50:35 -0500
From: "Steve" <stjones1@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Weinacht Weisse
Greetings, all.
A friend has asked me if I could brew a beer like one he had
in Germany several years ago. He called it Weinacht Weisse,
and said it was a winter beer, or Christmas beer. I've never
heard of it - has anyone else out there in HBDland any
knowledge of it? Is it a Southern style weisse or Berliner
Weisse? Any hints on a recipe?
TIA for any help.
Steve
State of Franklin Homebrewers
Johnson City, Tennessee
http://home.att.net/~stjones1
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 19:33:11 -0600
From: "charles beaver" <cbeav@netnitco.net>
Subject: Chill haze and RIMS
I recently added a RIMS setup to my 15 gallon three-tier brewing system. The
mash circulates by pump to the top of the grain bed and is distributed by
means of a drilled copper helix just under the top of the grain bed. I use
Nylo-braid hose so I can see that the mash clears in about 20 minutes, but I
mash for a full 60 minutes ending with a mash out to 170 F. My extraction
efficiency has improved to 70% from 65% with this system.
But there's trouble in Paradise. I now have a significant problem with
chill-haze I never had before. The beer is clear at room temp, but upon
cooling a severe chill-haze forms. I plan to treat it with Polyclar, but I
would rather avoid the problem altogether.
Am I mashing too long causing leaching of tannins? I don't think there is
any aeration problem. The beer tastes great and there are no off flavors.
Any comments will be appreciated.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 20:29:54 EST
From: GuyG4@aol.com
Subject: Sight glasses, Reynolds numbers, Zapap lauters, and yeast
Scott asks:
> Can a site glass be put on the side of a converted Keg with out welding?
> If
> so, what is the best way of doing so? Any advice welcome. E-mail ok.
>
Yes. I used two 1/4 inch male NPT by 1/8 inch compression male elbows. I
drilled one appropriate sized hole in my keg just above the bottom weld,
and one appropriate sized hole in my keg just below the top weld, but on a
line above the bottom hole. These I tapped with 1/4 inch tap, and
threaded the fittings into the holes. I first connected the two elbows
with 1/8 inch diameter poly tubing, but testing made it melt and leak I
used Teflon tubing, and have'nt had a problem since. At boiling, the
liquid in the sight glass jumps around a bit, and this design allows those
goodies to go back into the boiler, not spray all over and waste beer.
Total investment, about 5 bucks, 3 bucks for the two elbows, a buck fifty
for the teflon. I had the drill and borrowed the tap. Works for me.
> RE: recent discusssion from Scott Murman and Paul Niebergall re: lautering
flow rates and Reynold's numbers
The Reynolds number is a dimensionless number expressing the ratio of
inertial to viscous forces during flow. It is generally used to
distinguish between laminar flow at low velocities and turbulent flow at
high velocities. As discussed in a textbook I have, the Reynolds number
for flow through porous media is defined as R=(pvd)/u, where R is the
Reynolds number, p is the fluid density, u is the viscosity, v is the
specific discharge (the darcy velocity or small v Paul talked about in HBD
2876), and d is a "representative length dimension for the porus medium,
variously taken as a mean pore dimension, a mean particle diameter, or
some function of the square root of the permeability k" (Freeze and
Cherry, Groundwater, 1979, pg. 72) F and C further cite Bear (in Dynamics
of Fluids in Porous Media, 1972) stating that "Darcys law is valid as long
as the Reynolds number based upon the average grain diameter does not
exceed some value between one and 10. For this range of Reynolds numbers,
all flow through granular media is laminar." If you want to try this
approach, note that v is defined as discharge per unit area. You may want
to go from there, and be sure to be clear about what you use for the
variable d. I think you'll find Darcy's law applicable to the problem.
I think Reynolds numbers might be most applicable to this problem in terms
of flow within individual pore spaces, not within the volume of
interconnected pores. Darcy's law is an empirical law which describes
flow through a volume which is occupied in part by irregularly shaped
solid material. There are several mathematical problems with a Darcian
approach to lautering, largely dealing with viscosity of wort,
compressibility of grain, and other complicating issues, and we must
remember that such an approach only explains the physical parameters of
flow, not the chemical parameters of displacement and dissolution which
are so important to us in lautering. This does not discount the
importance of understanding the physical forces on lautering.
I suggest we reexamine John Palmer's work. He essentially used empirical
models to illustrate the flowpaths taken by water/wort through grain comparing
different drainage configurations. (using compressible media, by the way). A
Darcian model approximates what he demonstrated (which I've forwarded to John)
but in general, the empirical model stands on its own, in the tradition of
Darcy himself. I believe any attempt at modeling must explain the empirical
observation. I think approaching it from a Reynolds number angle is the wrong
tree under which to bark, though the analysis is interesting to read. And,
ulitimately, it may actually get there if flow is effectively laminar in the
lautertun over a reasonable distance.
My guess is that Scott's Stokes Law citation probably refers to the Navier-
Stokes equations, which Bear used to try to derive Darcy's law. How well does
it work? Well, I don't begin to comprehend Bear, so I guess I don't know.
As to Zapap style false bottoms, I believe drains are superior for
homebrewing. Megabreweries may be a different story. There are 3 elements to
a zapap: the saturated grain; the volume under the false bottom, and the
valve. If you remove the volume under the false bottom faster than the
saturated grain can provide it, you will stick your lauter until you can
establish hydraulic continuity between all three elements. The drain cannot
remove liquid faster than it can be yielded by the grain,
and as John's experiments indicate, simple drains are very effective at
draining the entire grain area of a homebrew sized lautertun. The best use
I've had for my zapap was soaking barley during home malting.
Paul Schick asks about Nottingham Yeast in HBD 2875..
> My imagination leapt immediately to visions of a very clean Scotch ale.
> On the other hand, the Nottingham apparently attenuates quite highly (80+
> %) so it's probably not quite right for a very malty Scotch. Is it fruity
> enough for a nice bitter? Is it better suited for American styles? I'm
> really dreaming of a nice Goldings/Willamette hopped pale ale with a
> fruity palate. Any hope?
In my view, London yeast is my dry yeast of choice for the kind of flavors
you're looking for. Nottingham has worked best for me with lighter ales
for spring/summer consumption; London is pretty terrific for fuller bodied
beers. I for one have found these Danstar products to perform remarkably
well, especially when brewdays cannot be planned three days in advance. I
always pitch two packs of yeast. No, I don't work for Danstar, etc.
Say, I'm really enjoying all the threads recently. Can't we resurrect
botulism?
Guy Gregory
Lightning Creek Home Brewery
Spokane, WA
At my age, flowing well is its own reward.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 00:52:59 +1000
From: Jon Bovard <jonbovard@geocities.com>
Subject: Debunking the Wyeast-Files
What follows is what I received from David Lodgson At Wyeast. Great
customer
service as always!
Cheers
Jon
Jon,
There are no plans to phase out small packs. We will continue to produce
them at the same cost, and make them available to all.
Thanks for the note.
Cheers!
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2877, 11/17/98
*************************************
-------
