Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2876
HOMEBREW Digest #2876 Mon 16 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:
too low flow (Paul Niebergall)
flat beer, caramel, oat,metabisulfite ("David R. Burley")
Sight Glass Info (WayneM38)
Re: Fermentability of crystal/dextrin malts ("Dave Humes")
cooking ("Bryan L. Gros")
spruce maple mead??? freezer ("Bryan L. Gros")
Old Bay Beer (Mikey Beck)
Re: Linguistic history of 'wort' (Tidmarsh Major)
Hogshead Tapper ("Timmy Runnette")
pump/damp rid (William Frazier)
Home Malting ("J.Kish")
re: pepper experiment, low density foam for lautering ("Ludwig's")
Wyeast ("J.Kish")
Flip top vs. cap top ("Sandy Macmillan")
Roggenbier / controlling diacetyl ("George De Piro")
Re. flip top vs. cap top (Malcolm Purves)
Roggenbier (ThomasM923)
oxidation during bottling (ThomasM923)
RE: Site glass (John_E_Schnupp)
Stokes flow/law & fluid mechanics (David C. Harsh)
Alt recipe (Mike Marshburn)
Pronunciation (Ken Schwartz)
Who am I? (Jeff Renner)
Hops Toxiciy in Dogs ("Fred L. Johnson")
Chlorine dioxide (ThomasM923)
Change of Address ("Edmund J. Busch")
Yet another newbie question ("Jan Brown southern U.S.A.")
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: Fri, 13 Nov 1998 13:49:09 -0600
From: Paul Niebergall <pnieb@burnsmcd.com>
Subject: too low flow
In Friday's HBD Scott Murmen writes:
>Assuming you draw 6 gal. in 60 minutes, and using a cross sectional
>area of your lauter tun as 1 sq. ft., the downward velocity is about
>200x10-6 ft/sec. The kinematic viscosity of water is about 0.5X10-5
>sq. ft/sec at 140F, which gives an *upper bound* on the Reynolds
>number of about 10. Very low Reynolds number flow indeed. As I
>suggested, this is definitely in the range of what's called Stokes' flow.
Whoa, that is a awfully low velocity you are quoting there.
If you draw 6 gal. in 60 minutes, then your flow rate (Q) is 6 gallons/60
minutes or 0.10 gpm. Divide this number by 7.48 (the number of gallons
in a cubic foot) and you get 0.013 cubic feet per minute (cfm). So,
Q = 0.013 cfm
>From pipe flow theory, we know that Q = AV (volumetric flow rate Q =
cross-sectional Area x Velocity). Re-arranging this equation to get
velocity (V=Q/A), we can calculate the fluid velocity:
V = 0.013 cfm/1.0 square foot = 0.013 feet per minute (fpm)
BUT, this is not the velocity we want because this is not pipe flow. It is
flow through porous media. The Darcy velocity (little v) is what we
want. To get that we divide the specific discharge (big V) by the porosity
of the media (n), because only the pore space is open to flow.
v=V/n
Note that in this equation, little v will always be larger that big V because
porosity is expressed as a fraction, and the same amount of water is
now forced to flow through a smaller area, thus increasing the velocity.
I do not know what the porosity of a grain bed is, but for example I will
assume it is somewhere between 25 and 75 percent (0.25 to 0.75).
Using this assumed range of porosity values, we can calculate velocities
of:
v = 0.013 fpm/0.25 = 0.052 fpm
and,
v = 0.013 fpm/0.75 = 0.017 fpm
Anyway, using the numbers given by Scott above there is no way we
can get a value of 200x10-6 ft/sec for either big V or little v. Which leads
me to conclude that, if we cannot calculate fluid velocity correctly, we
should not even begin to discuss things like Reynolds numbers or Stokes
law.
Brew on,
Paul Niebergall
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1998 14:51:55 -0500
From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: flat beer, caramel, oat,metabisulfite
Brewsters:
Pete Gottfield has experienced a common problem with beer that has
been racked and stored too long before bottling. The yeast goes dormant
and cannot satisfactorily ferment the added priming sugar. The result?
Flat beer. This is especially a problem with high alcohol beers. His wife
accepts this flatness as a common occurrence for male brewers from
time to time. Paul disclaims any personal knowledge of this until now.
I suggest you review my method in the archives for bottling with a
"kraeusen starter" which uses a boiled and cooled starter consisting of a
tablespoon of malt extract, the priming sugar and to which is added
some of the yeast and beer from the bottom of the secondary
.
In 12 hours you will see activity and can bottle. Your beer will
reliably
come
to condition quickly and to the same amount every time. AlK has
repeatedly
criticized this technique ( never having tried it, to my knowledge)
because
he
believes it to be unreliable since the priming sugar can be fermented.
I do not doubt that at all if it is left too long. In my experience I
have
been
quite successful with waiting 12 hours and then bottling. Frankly, the
way
you are doing it now, and as Al suggests, produces the most unreliable
level of carbonation of all doesn't it?
I started this method when sucrose was the only sugar available
( way back in the dark days of home brewing) and I wanted the yeast's
external enzyme invertase to invert the sugar before using it to prime.
Having it concentrated improved the chance that it would work on the
sugar. It really works very well and gives reliable carbonation.
If you prime with corn sugar, then this combination of the suagr and
starter
is not needed and you could undoubtedly re-energize the yeast in a small
sample from the bottom of the secondary with the tablespoon of malt
extract
boiled and cooled in a small amount of water by itself providing the FAN
necessary to get some growth of this yeast in the beer. You should then
boil the priming sugar separately in water and let it cool. Although I do
not think it is necessary and have never tried it, this latter method
should
remove AlK's objection to this technique.
To produce the equivalent of Viagra for your current brew I would start
some
yeast in a little boiled and cooled malt extract solution and add it to
each bottle.
4 ounces of water with a tablespoon of malt extract boiled and cooled.
Pitch the yeast and allow it to become active. 1/2 teaspoon of this in
each
of 50 bottles will do the trick I'll bet.
- --------------------------------------
Dave Hume asks if a written suggestion based on the method of preparation
in which pale malt is toasted versus converting the endosperm by wet
kilning is used to distinguish between caramel amd crystal malt in the
brewing industry..
In my experience Crystal Malt is a British usage in origin and Caramel
Malt
is
the US usage for a very similar product. I had originally thought that
the
use
of the trademark Cara(mel)-Pils(ner) originated in the the Germanic
speaking
and Germanic brewing style countries. This theory fell down when
I realized that the Germans spell it Karamel. How about the Belgians?
( the origin of Cara-Pils) I suspect they spell it Caramel like the
French.
In any event, Carapils is clearly headed toward the pilsner industry and
it
is a converted endosperm and is undoubtedly a malt style called caramel
by
the users. I do not think Briggs' suggestion holds water based on usage
since
he would classify cara-pils a crystal malt.
- ----------------------------------------------
Phil Wilcox suggests using Campden tablets or metabisulfite in beer to
kill
off
yeasts. Don't try it. First place, the pH of beer is too high for the
bisulfite to
be active. Metabisulfite needs a pH of 3.3 or below to be active.
Second place, any sulfur dioxide in the beer will be swept out by the
Carbon
Dioxide bubbles and you will likely detect it more than you would with a
wine.
If you did use Red Star Champagne yeast, it is a variety of S. Cerevisiae
just like beer yeast. If you used a finishing yeast ( aka Prisse de
Mousse
and the
like) it is S. Bayanus and it definitely will ferment all the sugars out
and you
will have a non-sweet beer like most beers, and it will probably
carbonate
well.
Don't do anything unusual, just bottle away.
- --------------------------------------------
In the middle of another of his learmed discourses, Jeff Renner ponders
the
question of why is "oats" always plural.
Kind of reminds me of Ogre in the Revenge of the Nerds II. In the midst
of
a highly philosophical discussion by the nerds, Ogre says "suppose C-A-T
really spelled dog" and all the nerds, who are high on mariajuana, say
in
unison "yeaaah".
Actually oats isn't always used in the plural in the Germanic Anglo-Saxon
Language where it originated. It is a holdover word from before the
Norman
conquest when these Saxons were defeated and were slaves to the Normans.
These Saxon slaves did the cooking and farm work and were the wenches
these
Normans visited at night. So many of these words ( many four letter ones
like
oats) were useful and carried over into the modern English language,
despite
the onslaught of the French based words.
We don't always use it in the plural either. We say Oatbread
or Oatmeal. We do always say "groats" as the plural to describe some
crushed
or processed grain ( usually oats) and do not say "groat" without the "s"
unless we are talking about an obscure British coin.
- --------------------------------------------
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
103164.3202@compuserve.com
Dave_Burley@compuserve.com
Voice e-mail OK
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1998 15:51:30 EST
From: WayneM38@aol.com
Subject: Sight Glass Info
<< Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1998 00:58:42 EST
From: BrwrOfBeer@aol.com
Subject: Site glass
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.
Prost,
Scott
>>
Scott I have two converted kegs that have 1/2 in welded couplings.
I added a sight glass in one of the by using a 2 in long 1/2 in. brass
threaded nipple and drilling in a hole to accept a threaded hose barb fitting.
I soldered it in. This nipple was then threaded into the lower coupling and my
ball valve attached to the nipple. The 3/16 hose barb points up and has a
section of poly hose running up the keg. I made a protective sleve/volume
marker by slicing a window in a 5/8 copper pipe and secured the pipe at the
top of the keg through an eye bolt to the top keg chine. It slides right over
the hose barb fitting and rests on the brass nipple on the bottom.
Good points of this design:
Did not require additional welded keg fitting.
Will not clog because sight glass is on filtered side of supply. Screen/filter
on inside of keg prevents any junk from getting into sight glass.
At lowest level of keg possible.
Protected from bottom burner heat my nipple and ball valve.
Sits right in front of you for easy viewing and volume measurment.
Easy to clean.
Bad points of this design:
I use this on both my HLT and brew kettle on my RIMS system.
Because the poly plastic tube is open on top, in order to pump or draw off
any liquid and get an accurate reading of liquid volume, the tube must be
closed off in some manner. Scared the hell out of myself the first time I
started my pump with the tube open. Installed a small needle valve on the top
of each one an can now pump without the sucking air problem.. Must still
close ball valve on pump to get accurate liquid reading but that is no big
deal.
Just my experience.
Hope this helps.
One other data point. I wanted to hit my target volumes and OG's as close as
possible after sparging, boiling etc. but kept comming up a bit short on the
final cooled volume of wort in my fermentors. I have a cooling coil installed
in my brewkettle and pump directly into the carboy.
Someone pointed out here that there is about a 4% expansion of water from 60
degrees to 212 degrees. So if I stopped boiling at 6 gal, and cooled the wort,
the volume would drop by about .3 gal. in a 6 gal batch.
Missing wort found!!!
Make sure you calibrate the sight glass accordingly.
Wayne
Big Fun Brewing
Milwaukee
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1998 16:28:23 -0500
From: "Dave Humes" <humesdg1@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Fermentability of crystal/dextrin malts
Mort O'Sullivan's explanation is very interesting. It seems to be on
the very edge of understanding. I suspected that the simple
explanation of "mashing" in the kernel creating non-fermentable
dextrins was either incomplete for faulty. Like many areas of
investigation, the answer to one question is the basis for many new
questions. Such is the case here.
Mort's explanation accounts for how amylose is converted during the
production of crystal malts into non-fermentable extract. Now, if
amylose survives stewing relatively intact, but is subsequently
changed in the kiln into something which is enzyme-resistant, I'd be
worried about such large molecules surviving into the final product.
Sounds like a formula for starch haze and instability. But, then who
knows what it is really converted into.
According to Mort's explanation, amylopectin is preferentially
hydrolyzed during the production of crystal malts. This presumably
results in fermentable extract in the case of crystal malts. For
dextrin malts, which are stewed at a higher temperature, the balance
is more towards non-fermentable dextrins. But, these should be
subject to enzymatic activity in the mash and hence still lead to
fermentable extract. I suspect that it is fairly well established
through empirical results that dextrin malts do indeed contribute
minimal fermentable extract. So, why aren't the dextrins resulting
from hydrolyzed amylopectin degraded in the mash to simpler sugars?
I suspect the answer lies in Mort's final paragraph. The eventual
kilning of the stewed grain must convert the dextrins into something
else which is enzyme resistant. I don't know how much cross linking
there is in dextrins, but maybe the drying and kilning processes
change the cross linking such that the accessibility of the molecules
to the mash enzymes is reduced.
This analysis does bring up an interesting point. There is a
diffence between converting at a higher temperature in the mash
versus adding dextrin malts to effect an improvement in the body of a
beer. In the former case, the high temperature mash results in
non-fermentable dextrins passing into the final beer. In the latter,
it's something else (to be determined) which is contributing to the
body, since dextrins from the malt would be degraded in the mash.
I'd like to hear some opinions on which is preferable.
- --Dave
Dave Humes >>humesdg1@earthlink.net<<
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1998 13:30:38 -0800
From: "Bryan L. Gros" <gros@bigfoot.com>
Subject: cooking
Jim Booth writes:
>1) I assume almost any recipe that uses wine or vinegar to deglaze a
>pan surface could use beer as a substitute? Opinions or guidelines?
Sure. use beer. Just think about the flavors you want. And remember,
in sauces you usually reduce the liquid, which concentrates the flavors.
So a mildly bitter beer may add a significant bitterness to the dish.
>2) Recipes as stews, soups or braizes could use beer?
Yep. And you probably don't concentrate the flavors as with a
sauce.
>4) Does baking with beer have any advantages over other liquids?
Not that I can think of, except the carbonation may cause things
to rise a bit more than if you used a non-cabonated liquid. I would
imagine something like dinner rolls would be good with doppelbock
added to the dough.
I think in general, a balanced beer would go well with most food.
Bryan Gros gros@bigfoot.com
Oakland, CA
Organizer, 1999 National Bay Area Brew Off
http://www.dnai.com/~thor/dboard/babo99.htm
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1998 13:37:42 -0800
From: "Bryan L. Gros" <gros@bigfoot.com>
Subject: spruce maple mead??? freezer
Rick Olivo <ashpress@win.bright.net> writes:
>...A BIT OF BACKGROUND... The
>Wisconsin lead rush saw communities of lead miners springing up overnight.
>So eager were these men to dig up the richs of lead (used for many
>purposes, especially lead bullets, soft castings etc.) that they lived in
>their diggings, had stores and homes in holes in the ground. ...
> the beer consisted of maple syrup
>(sugar?) and honey obtained in trade with friendly indians, and spruce
>needles as a bittering agent instead of hops. I understand that the
>beverage was quick to ferment being ready to drink in a month...
> I must admit I am puzzled by the rapidity at which it was ready
>to drink. I know honey meads can take over a year to properly mature. How
>could this brew be ready to drink so soon?
Well, if I lived in a hole in the ground and dug up lead seven days
a week, I'd have a much different opinion on "ready to drink" than I
do now!
Sounds nasty to me.
******
I've been using the crystals that others have mentioned
(Damp-Rid?) in my chest freezer to absorb moisture.
It works pretty well, but I still get condensation. If I lager, and run
the freezer around 50 to 60F, I get a lot of condensation and often,
mold.
When I have the freezer down to 40 or less, I get much less
condensation. Makes sense I guess.
Also, my cup of dessicant has a very hard layer on top, as other
people have reported. I don't get any puddles in the lid, but I get
puddles in the cup on the hard layer. I pour this off when I think
about it, but I wonder if there is a better way. I may look out for
the "dirty" crystals that others have mentioned.
Bryan Gros gros@bigfoot.com
Oakland, CA
Organizer, 1999 National Bay Area Brew Off
http://www.dnai.com/~thor/dboard/babo99.htm
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1998 13:43:49 -0800 (PST)
From: Mikey Beck <stilts121@yahoo.com>
Subject: Old Bay Beer
My girlfriend asked me today if it was possible to make a beer
seasoned with Old Bay (that rancid stuff Marylanders go nuts over). I
told her it was *possible* but I sure as hell wouldn't drink it. But
I told her I'd pitch the idea to the homebrew collective and see what
you all thought about it. Personally, I can't see any reason to use
Old Bay in a beer or how it would complement any given beer's flavors.
Any thoughts?
cheers,
mikey.
BSSC/121
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1998 17:56:41 -0600
From: Tidmarsh Major <tidmarsh@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Linguistic history of 'wort'
On the pronunciation of wort, Marc Fries suggests a Modern High German
approach.
<historical linguistics>
One thing to remember is that by and large, English did not borrow
basic brewing terms such as 'mash,' 'malt,' and 'wort' from German.
Both languages are members of the Germanic branch of Indo-European,
and most of our brewing terms trace their roots back to Common
Germanic, before the Angles and Saxons settled (or invaded, depending
on your perspective) Britain, so that most German and English cognate
brewing terms derive from a common source, Germanic *wurtjo-, rather
than a borrowing from one to the other. The difference in
pronunciationi of "w" in High German dialects is a result of the
second sound shift, described by the famed linguist and fairy-tale
scholar, Jakob Grimm. 'Wort' derives from Old English 'wyrt' meaning
root or herb, hence 'wort' an infusion of herbs and malt.
</historical linguistics>
Whew, sometimes I can't stop myself.
Tidmarsh Major
Birmingham, Alabama
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1998 17:23:25 -0800
From: "Timmy Runnette" <parothed@napanet.net>
Subject: Hogshead Tapper
Anyone have any experience with the Hogshead Tapper for lagering/dispensing
homebrew? Saw it featured in Zymurgy this month and checked out the
Website. Does anyone have any other recommendations on customizing a
refrigerator for lagering and brewing?
Thanks in advance!
Cheers
Timmy
parothed@napanet.net
par8head@usa.net
ICQ#645265
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1998 02:15:04 +0000
From: William Frazier <billfrazier@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: pump/damp rid
Dave Schaff asks about a pump to use when racking beer. I use a peristaltic
pump that will empty 5 gallon carboys in 3 or 4 minutes. The nice thing
about this pump is the only part that contacts the beer is the internal
surface of the tubing so sterilization and clean-up are quite simple. You
can get some info on these pumps from;
Barnant Company
1-800-637-3739
fax 1-708-381-7053
Ask for Masterflex Pump info
Concerning damp freezer chests or refrigerators, try Oasis which is a
product used by florists. Oasis comes in brick size blocks and will absorb
a lot of water. When it becomes saturated just remove and let air dry for
later use. You can buy Oasis at craft stores or perhaps at your local
florist shop.
Bill Frazier
Briarpatch Brewing
Johnson County, Kansas
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 18:18:16 -0800
From: "J.Kish" <jjkish@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Home Malting
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?
Joe Kish
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1998 01:05:18 -0500
From: "Ludwig's" <dludwig@us.hsanet.net>
Subject: re: pepper experiment, low density foam for lautering
Scott M. said,
> ...the lauter tun. Obviously the experiment was a failure, because it
> didn't seem to convince David of anything, other than possibly I'm a
> buffoon.
Not at all.
> The comment that I made earlier was "the only energy potential of any
> importance to this flow is gravity, and hence, the only possible
> direction for the gradient of the potential is down." I don't know
> why that statement would cause so much arm waving and concern.
Because your statement sounds like it considers other dynamics in the
mash
as trivial, which is not the case, IMHO.
> As for John's experimental photos. The way I interpreted those (and I
> really just glanced), was a uniform downward flow with boundary layers
> on both walls. The dye within the boundary layers will move slower..
I don't see this as a boundary layer phenomenom in a macro sense. For
example: why didn't noticable boundary layers form in the multi-manifold
experiment. There is a grain bed that is totally impeding any boundary
layer formation (in a classical sense, I guess). There is, of course
boundary layers forming around every particle in the mash. Whoah! Model
that. I still stand behind the simple stream tube model which is enough
to understand the basics of what's going on in the mash.
As an additional thought, though, and since many of us think about this
stuff for fun. There is a product that is called low density foam, and
it's used in some military fuel tanks. It is highly porous, as the name
might suggest. This foam might make a good medium for further
experiments into lauter efficiency. I think that this stuff might also
be useable for lautering. Perhaps a 1 inch thick piece or maybe 1/2
inch, might work pretty good over your false bottom or manifold and
would be easy to clean, maybe. I don't know what the toxicity of this
stuff is and whether it is heat resistant or not. If anyone has a line
on this stuff or if there is a commercial equivalent, let us know.
Dave Ludwig
Flat Iron Brewery
SO MD
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 18:31:21 -0800
From: "J.Kish" <jjkish@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Wyeast
>problems. In short, with the new packs you and I pay more but get no
>real benefits. Can we convince Wyeast to continue producing the
smaller
>packs? Or is my information wrong regarding Wyeast's plans to phase
out
>the smaller packs? --Chuck in Lawrence, KS
.
What we need to do is convince Wyeast to put out even smaller packs
than the small ones--Half size---and charge half the price!
The only way you could avoid making starters, is when Wyeast puts out
smack-packs with one cup of culture---They'll never do that!
Joe Kish
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1998 09:53:00 +0300
From: "Sandy Macmillan" <scotsman@ncc.moc.kw>
Subject: Flip top vs. cap top
I have kept beer in flip top for over one year, in fact lost a few bottles
and only found then when I moved.
The rubber ring was OK but after opening the bottle I had to replace them,
they had taken a set and were no longer flexible. Carbonation was retained.
I now use new rubber rings and bend the wire clip slightly to get a better
seal.
Sandy Macmillan
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 98 08:00:04 PST
From: "George De Piro" <gdepiro@fcc.net>
Subject: Roggenbier / controlling diacetyl
Hi all,
Schierlinger Roggenbier, made by a small brewery that was bought out by
Thurn
und Taxis, has not been produced in about 2 years. If you see it at the
store
berate the shop manager for selling such obviously stale garbage to the
unsuspecting public.
Thurn und Taxis Roggenbier replaced Schierlinger. If you can find a
fresh
bottle, you will enjoy a beer that is very Weizen (pronounced VI-tsuhn)
like,
with banana and clove notes and a dry, spicy finish.
I have made a 60% rye beer with good results, except that the production
was a disaster. The lauter set up like a bucket of cement. I stirred
constantly
to keep the flow going, collected the cloudy runoff and allowed it to
settle
for 4 days in the fridge (I couldn't get to it before 4 days).
I siphoned the clear wort off the draff, discovered it was quite sour,
and
finished the batch anyway. I used the typical Weihenstephan 68
Weizen yeast. The beer was outstanding, if I do say so myself. The
sourness
added a depth that is missing in the commercial examples (Schielinger,
at that
time). The sourness was much milder in the finshed beer than the
refrigerated
wort.
Brewing a Roggenbier with less than 50% rye malt will make a beer that
is not
like the German examples, but it will still be tasty.
- ------------------------------------------------------
Dean talks about Wyeast 2308 (Munich lager) and its need for a diacetyl
rest.
He also mentions some beer he made that, to him, was diacetyl-free, but
got
comments to the contrary from a homebrew contest.
I have posted quite a bit about testing your young beer for its diacetyl
potential, and Louis Bonham wrote the test up in a recent Brewing
Techniques.
I'll summarize here again:
Yeast make alpha acetolactate (AAL), not diacetyl. AAL is relatively
tasteless.
AAL oxides to diacetyl (oxidative decarboxylation) over time in beer.
Heat and
oxygen speed this up. Yeast that have NOT been exposed to oxygen
post-pitching
can and will metabolize diacetyl.
If your beer has a lot of AAL it won't taste like diacetyl, but over time
it will become
diacetyl-ridden. How can you tell if your beer has a lot of AAL?
Simple:
Take two aliquots (samples) of the young beer. Put one in a loosley
covered
jar and heat to about 150F (60C) for 20-30 minutes while keeping the
other
sample cool. Smell and taste both samples. If the heated sample tastes
buttery
and the cool sample does not, the beer has a lot of AAL and requires a
diacetyl
rest.
If both samples are not buttery, you have no AAL to deal with (note: if
this
beer becomes buttery later on you will have a good idea that the source
of
diacetyl is a pediococcus infection).
If both samples are buttery, try a diacetyl rest.
A diacetyl rest works because at the higher temperature the AAL gets
converted
to diacetyl and then gets metabolized by the yeast. If you lager the
beer at low
temperatures diacetyl reduction will occur, but at a much slower rate.
Have fun!
George de Piro (Nyack, NY) "Nyack" rhymes with "kayack" (you know, the
boat)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1998 14:58:51 +0000
From: Malcolm Purves <malcolm.purves@which.net>
Subject: Re. flip top vs. cap top
Hello, I am new to this list and this is my first go at a post to it,
so please forgive any mistakes.
Victor Farren asked :-
> Has anyone kept beer in these flip top bottles for a long
> time (around 1yr or more)?
Yes, I have.
> Do the grommets do an appreciable job of
> keeping carbonation
Yes, to my surprise, they did !
That was the short, quick answer, the longer one is :---
I cannot speak for caps, I have never used them.
My beers dont usually get a chance to remain in bottle very long,
I seem to have a continuous beer flow crisis :-( !
Let me tell you about it :-
In October 1997 I made two smoked beers, one using German smoked malt
and the other using Scottish peat smoked malt.
They were both og. 1035 approx. They both gave a lower extract than
I usually obtain.
Bottled in 450ml fliptop "Grolsch" bottles.( most of my brews go into 2
pint flaggons, but I suspected that these smoked beers would need to be
drunk in small quantities until my taste buds had done some getting
used to it. )
Well, to cut a long story short, most of them got put away in a cool
dark corner and were forgoten.
Just a couple of weeks ago I gave them a try, expecting that such a low
gravity beer after 1year+1month would now be ready to throw down the
drain. NO ! Surprise!
They both had retained pressure, both still poured with a head ( the
Scottish had a better head ) and both were still drinkable.
Well, as drinkable as they ever were :-(
Sadly the overpowering smoked flavour had not abated or mellowed at all.
> I was thinking of giving some away as gifts.
That sounds like a nice idea,
but I am probably a bit of a long from you, sadly !!! <G>
Best wishes from SW England,
happy brewing,
Malcolm.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1998 10:16:35 EST
From: ThomasM923@aol.com
Subject: Roggenbier
"Timmons, Frank" <Frank.Timmons@alliedsignal.com writes asking about
Roggenbier.
Frank,
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.
Rye can really gum things up. I would keep the level of rye down to about 25%
or less and a beta-glucan rest between 104-113 degrees F to break down the
gums.
I brew a rye pilsner with ~10% flaked rye and at that level the taste of the
rye comes through quite well, and with a beta-glucan rest there is no
noticable increase in sparging time.
Thomas Murray
Maplewood, NJ
PS-
I've had an German import Roggenbier, unfortunately I can't remember the name
of it. It seemed like a dark german ale with some banana and clove type
flavors. Oddly enough, I couldn't find any obvious rye flavor in it.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1998 10:27:44 EST
From: ThomasM923@aol.com
Subject: oxidation during bottling
In the Homebrew Digest #2870 Sat 07 November 1998 Eric Fouch said this about
an oxidation problem:
"The only thing I can think of is the bottling step. I don't try to minimize
the little bit of gurgling that takes place when I use my bottling wand.
Anyway, I wonder how important that little gurgle gurgle is."
Eric---
That little gurgle-gurgle could be the cause of your oxidation problem. In
the past, I have noticed oxidation byproducts in some of the bottles of a
certain batch but not in others. While I used to try to be careful when I
started filling, occasionally I would be daydreaming instead of paying
attention and let the beer splash off the bottom. After a few batches with
some bottles tasting rough and others tasting fine, I decided that this was
the source of the oxidation and I started to be lot more careful.
If you are using a plastic filler with a valve on the bottom, be very careful.
If you watch closely, you can see the beer actually jet out of the openings if
the valve is not open fully. This is definitely not a nice thing to do to your
beer. I came up with a nice beer friendly gadget to fill bottles with last
year and I have had good results so far. It is also very simple. I took a
piece of brass tubing (the hobby store type) that was 3/16" in diameter,
rigged up a fitting so it would fit on 3/8" vinyl tubing and used it to fill
like this:
First, I hold the top of the filler and the end of the hose in my hand and
bend the tubing over on itself to form a kink. The brass tube is narrow enough
so the beer stays inside it by surface tension when the tubing is kinked. Then
I slowly let the kink open to allow the beer to begin flowing ( a very gentle
flow can be produced this way). Once there is about an inch in the bottom, I
allow the tubing to open fully.
I intentionally chose a narrow tube for the filler so that the beer would stay
put while the hose was kinked. I would recommend trying a piece of brass
tubing with a larger inside diameter (I haven't yet) because the flow is a
little slow. The adapter fitting is easy to make. If anyone is interested,
I'll gladly provide the details.
Thomas Murray
Maplewood, NJ
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1998 07:17:40 -0800
From: John_E_Schnupp@amat.com
Subject: RE: Site glass
>I installed site glass in both of my converted kegs. I used a 3/8ths inch
>brass 90 degree angle. On one end it's 3/8ths pipe thread, the other end
is
>3/8ths inch compression. Drill and tap a hole in the keg for the threaded
>end of the adapter, wrap the threads with Teflon tape and install into the
I did it that way also.
>POLYCARBONATE tubing for the sight glass/tube. The upper end of the tube
can
>be anchored with an eye bolt fitted with a rubber grommet.
>Mine have been in place for a couple years with no problems.
Be careful here. You may want to do a test run be heating water. The
first
time I used mine (hot water tank) the plastic got soft and started to droop
(I didn't have the top fastened) and it started to leak at the compression
nut. It was only water. I drained the water and installed a piece of
copper
tubing as a temporary fix. My next brew session, I used a small piece of
aluminium under the fitting as a heat shield, haven't had a problem since
John Schnupp, N3CNL
Colchester, VT
95 XLH 1200
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1998 12:16:20 -0500
From: David.Harsh@uc.edu (David C. Harsh)
Subject: Stokes flow/law & fluid mechanics
Paul Niebergall <pnieb@burnsmcd.com> quoted the CRC Handbook
>"Stokes Law: Gives the rate of fall of a small sphere in a viscous fluid.
>When a small sphere falls under the action of gravity through a viscous
><medium, it ultimately aquires a constant velocity."
>
>Clearly, this has nothing to do with the flow of a liquid (such as wort)
>through a porous medium (such as a grain bed). ...
>Stokes has nothing to do with the Reynolds number. Stokes is applied to
>a fluid that is at rest (not moving). Reynolds numbers only apply to fluids
>that are flowing. I beleive what Scott is trying to define is called "laminar"
>flow (Reynolds number less than 2000).
This is not correct in many cases.
1. Stokes flow applies to very slow (sometimes called "creeping") flow.
The velocity can either be a moving fluid with a stationary object or a
moving object. The only important thing is that the motion is RELATIVE.
(Remember those bad PSSC physics movies or am I dating myself here?) In
the case of a sphere, the characteristic dimension is the diameter and the
Stokes flow assumption requires Re<<1, typically .1 or less. This Re has a
subscript "p" and is called the Particle Reynolds number
Stokes law is derived based on the assumptions of stokes flow, but the
creeping flow assumption is not restricted to being applied to falling
objects in a fluid, you can use creeping flow to calculate velocity
profiles in highly viscous flows if they are assigned by a particularly
sadistic fluid mechanics instructor ;)
2. Laminar flow being below 2000 (or 2100, 2300 +/-) is restricted to flow
in circular pipes. For spheres, it must be less than 1; over a flat plate
less than 10,000.
3. Just to confuse things, the CRC definition of Stokes law neglects that
all objects falling through a fluid (viscous or not) acquire a terminal
velocity and depending on the value of Rep, different methods can be used
to calculate the terminal velocity.
{fluid mechanics lecture mode off}
FWIW, I thought Scott was comparing the flow regime on a qualitative basis
and not claiming strict applicability of Stoke's flow for this case. I
think his argument was valid.
Dave
Dave Harsh
Bloatarian Brewing League, Cincinnati, OH
O-
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1998 13:27:48 -0500
From: Mike Marshburn <mike48@erols.com>
Subject: Alt recipe
Hello neighbors
After reading all the posts about Alt, without ever tasting one, I've
decided to brew one.
Here is the recipe I've settled on:
5lbs DWC Munich dark (only one available)
4lbs Canadien two row
Yeast Labs A06 Dusseldorf Ale 1/2 gal starter
2oz Liberty 3.4AA (1.5oz 60 min .5oz 5 min) I also have Ultra at 2.3AA,
but no German hops
90min mash 153-150F. Boil 90 mins. Seperate 1 gal of first runnings and
boil down to 1qt and add to main boil at knock out for malty flavor. I
should end up at 1.045-48, 33IBU's and 17SRM for 5.5gal into the
fermenter. Any comments or suggestions welcomed.
Mike M, Virginia Beach, Va
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1998 15:12:05 -0700
From: Ken Schwartz <kenbob@elp.rr.com>
Subject: Pronunciation
The definitive pronunciation guide:
Trub - "gunk"
Wort - "stik-ee brown yeest fud"
Vorlauf - "run-awf"
Sparge - "rins"
Spargate - "rinsd stuf"
Diacetyl - "but-tree flay-ver"
Decoction - "big mes"
*****
Ken Schwartz
El Paso, TX
kenbob@elp.rr.com
http://home.elp.rr.com/brewbeer
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1998 21:20:13 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Who am I?
Shane <scook@infoserve.net> asked
>Who is Jeff Renner and how did he get selected to be the milepost from
>which distances are measured? Also, what happens when he travels, does
>the space time continuum get shifted?
I am the all powerful OZ! (pay no attention to the man behind the curtain).
I guess since you've asked twice and no one else answered, we'll have to
let you on the secret. I'm a long time brewer (first brew 1973) and HBD
resident. Every six months or so I post a note asking folks to include
there location in their posts. It might help answer questions (like,
what's wrong with my water, or where can I get ingredient X), you might
find out you have a neighbor who brews, and it just helps foster community.
One time after such a request a couple of years ago, my good friend Dan
McConnell (of YeastLab and Yeast Culture Kit Co) posted an answer to
someone's question with the signature, "Dan McConnell, about three miles
southeast of Jeff Renner." Then Spencer Thomas (Spencer's Beer Page)
posted with a signature "about five miles southeast of Jeff Renner and two
miles from Dan." Then we were off to the races. We've had folks post as
far away as Tasmania, Austria, South Africa and points between include
distances to me. Some have specified mileage, KM, altitude, latitude and
longitude, etc. Some have plugged in locations in GPS software and have
come up what they thought was precise distances, but did they know where I
was?
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
-=-=-=-=-
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan c/o nerenner@umich.edu
"One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1998 08:01:52 -0500
From: "Fred L. Johnson" <FLJohnson@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Hops Toxiciy in Dogs
Fred Nolke asked about the toxicity of hops in dogs.
Lots of good info can be found at the URL below. (Pretty scary stuff!)
www.shopthenet.net/greyhound/nl/june1996vol2iss2/hops.html
- --
Fred L. Johnson
Apex, North Carolina
USA
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1998 08:05:31 EST
From: ThomasM923@aol.com
Subject: Chlorine dioxide
Does anyone know where I can get Oxine (trade name) or chlorine dioxide for
sanitizing? I'm looking for a quantity of under a gallon. Five Star has it but
they will not sell it to homebrewers.
Thomas Murray
Maplewood, NJ
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1998 19:01:43 -0500
From: "Edmund J. Busch" <Brewmaster@compuserve.com>
Subject: Change of Address
Ed Busch is changing his e-mail address. Effective immediately, please
send
e-mail to:
Brewmaster@netscape.net.
The old address will be good until 11/19. After that, please contact me
at
the new address.
Thanks,
Ed
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1998 18:32:44 -0600
From: "Jan Brown southern U.S.A." <jbrown58@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Yet another newbie question
I have had tons of help from you guys but now I'm stumped. When we
discussed my messed up ale that ended up being a barley wine or strong
ale( I used champage yeast, my stupid) I was told that it could take a
long time for this stuff to finish. So why are we at 1 bubble every
18-20 seconds after only 6 days????? What IS finished???? I took a
sample and the s.g. is 1.022. Its even beginning to clear. Should I rack
it to a secondary or let it sit or what.
jan
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2876, 11/16/98
*************************************
-------
