Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2959
HOMEBREW Digest #2959 Sat 20 February 1999
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:
Brown malt/historic porter (Jeremy Bergsman)
Temperature Controller (Joe Kish)
Star San (Joy Hansen)
Reality Check-ing some "facts" (ThomasM923)
a tangential question... (LEAVITDG)
scottish ale (Rick Georgette)
RIMs & Grain Bed (RobertJ)
Chill Haze / Steve do you filter? ("Crossno, Glyn")
denaturing enzymes (David Whitman)
re Mash Question / Coriander for Wits (Ken Schwartz)
Jacketed thermometers (Bill_Rehm)
Walk-in cooler (fridge)
Re:MCAB + Cold Room (DakBrew)
Fruit & Herb Beers (randy.pressley)
Quick yeast Question (Eric.Fouch)
Re: Hops History (Tidmarsh Major)
yeast autolysis in primary (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
Diacetyl Problem (Thomas S Barnett)
sparge temps - protein denaturation (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
Why RIMS with modified malts? ("Taber, Bruce")
RE: Stuck sparges ("Mercer, David")
jockey box ("Bryan L. Gros")
Cherry and Plum Bounce (Liquors) (Spencer Tomb)
Houston/Galveston Brewpubs (Spencer Tomb)
Cinq Cents clone followup / NHC / Y2K (Matthew Arnold)
Non-alcoholic beer by vacuum evaporation. ("S. Wesley")
Computer Controlled brewing ("Shane Brauner")
RE: Larson: Mash Question ("NFGS")
sanitizing bottles (Jeremy B. Pugh)
Cartoon (John Wilkinson)
Wort Chillers (AJ)
Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
Enter The Mazer Cup! _THE_ mead competition.
Details available at http://hbd.org/mazercup
Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org
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!
Contact brewery@hbd.org for information regarding the "Cat's Meow"
Back issues are available via:
HTML from...
http://hbd.org
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
COPYRIGHT for the Digest as a collection is currently held by hbd.org
(Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen). Digests in their entirity CANNOT be
reprinted/reproduced without this entire header section unless
EXPRESS written permission has been obtained from hbd.org. Digests
CANNOT be reprinted or reproduced in any format for redistribution
unless said redistribution is at absolutely NO COST to the consumer.
COPYRIGHT for individual posts within each Digest is held by the
author. Articles cannot be extracted from the Digest and
reprinted/reproduced without the EXPRESS written permission of the
author. The author and HBD must be attributed as author and source in
any such reprint/reproduction. (Note: QUOTING of items originally
appearing in the Digest in a subsequent Digest is exempt from the
above. Home brew clubs NOT associated with organizations having a
commercial interest in beer or brewing may republish articles in their
newsletters and/or websites provided that the author and HBD are
attributed. ASKING first is still a great courtesy...)
JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 22:46:41 -0800
From: Jeremy Bergsman <jeremybb@leland.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Brown malt/historic porter
I asked for advice on my historic porter recipe. Unfortunately, the only
responses I received concerned the brown malt. While useful, I'm still
interested in other things such as the diastatic power of the Weyermann
smoked malt and whether people think that beechwood smoke is appropriate in
a c. 1700 porter, etc.
As for the brown malt, I received 3 responses that HB is not the only
maltster making it, Beestons does too. One respondant disliked the effects
of both brown malts when used at high rates due to a smokey/phenolic
character, but suggested the Beestons might be better. The most interesting
reply was from Stephen Cavan who has made several historic porters from
different periods using homemade malt. See his web page:
http://duke.usask.ca/~cavanst/18cbeer.htm
- --
Jeremy Bergsman
jeremybb@leland.stanford.edu
http://www.stanford.edu/~jeremybb
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 18:39:43 -0800
From: Joe Kish <jjkish@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Temperature Controller
"Tom & Dee McConnell"
There was a follow-up article in Zymurgy about a year ago, that
hinted at discrepancies, such as a 'slight' error in the diagram,
but not much was said.
The best place is the data sheet for the RCA 3059 & 3079. Also,
there was an Application Note ICAN-6182, "Features and Applications
of RCA Integrated-Circuit Zero-Voltage Switches(CA3059 and CA3079)"
Joe Kish jjkish@worldnet.att.net
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 22:58:53 -0500
From: joytbrew@halifax.com (Joy Hansen)
Subject: Star San
I've abandoned using Idophor or percarbonate for most sanitation chores.
Since the peracetic sanitizer is not available to home brewers, I've
settled on Star San, a foaming sanitizer. It always leaves a lot of bubbles
which on the surface of the container.
1. What is the contact time for this sanitizer and if low levels?
2. Can Star San be used as a NO-RINSE sanitizer; or, is the residual lethal
to beer yeast?
3. I use hot PBW to clean, hot water rinse, followed by Star San to
sanitize. I think these are working OK for me? This old dog can learn new
tricks!
The Fix's book, An analysis of Brewing Techniques details the use and
efficacy of several sanitizers. Star San wasn't among them. I sure wish
they had included this one.
Joy"T"Brew
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 06:56:49 EST
From: ThomasM923@aol.com
Subject: Reality Check-ing some "facts"
Alan McKay wrote:
I'm currently having an argument with a fellow in the on-line German
forum...We both agree that going over 78C/168F in your sparge is a bad
thing. But he says it's because over this temperature, you denature
your enzymes, and since they are made out of protein (which they are),
you therefore get hazy beer.
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- ---------------------------
Allen, have you asked your German colleague how he preserves his
enzymes during the boil?
Thomas Murray
Maplewood, NJ
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 07:23:24 -0500 (EST)
From: LEAVITDG@SPLAVA.CC.PLATTSBURGH.EDU
Subject: a tangential question...
Do we as brewers need to be concerned with "genetically manipulated" seeds?
I have heard that there is quite a fuss taking place over this in Britain,
and wonder if any of you know whether we need to worry...
..Darrell
<Plattsburgh, NY>
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 07:41:38 -0500 (EST)
From: rickge@webtv.net (Rick Georgette)
Subject: scottish ale
Can someone suggest the correct temperature to use for secondary
coditioning of a scottish ale. In Noonans book he suggest 40 - 50, is
the purpose of this to drop out the yeast because I can't see the yeast
working at these temps. I am using both 1728 and 1084.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 07:44:16 -0500
From: RobertJ <pbsys@pbsbeer.com>
Subject: RIMs & Grain Bed
Phil Wilcox wrote:
My pump is a march
pump rated at 220F. Great little thing. I
also use 2 different ball valves to decrease the flow speed. One of them
has the 3/8 restricted ball in it. but this is after the pump not before
it. (Jpegs avail upon request) Everything before the pump has to be 1/2 or
bigger, including the inside of the ball part of the valve.
- -----
I use a similar pump (March 1/25th HP) and have a 3/8" ball valve (not full
port) out of my mash tun. I have had no problem with recirculating.
A larger mash drain valve would be better in terms of total volume moved
(which is not needed) but I have no problems with either clogging or air
with this set up. Flow rate is controlled on the down stream side with a
similar valve. If I used all 1/2" tubing on downstream side with no
restriction I expect I would have a problem
Bob
Precision Brewing Systems URL http://www.pbsbeer.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 06:51:25 -0600
From: "Crossno, Glyn" <Glyn.Crossno@cubic.com>
Subject: Chill Haze / Steve do you filter?
While enjoying my latest CAP I was thinking, (always a mistake), "If I could
get rid of the chill haze this would be perfect." This one was corn meal,
cereal mash, single infusion. Great Head, last for quite a while.
So do I need a SHORT protein rest. At 130? 135? 10 minutes?
ThE GrEaT BrEwHoLiO <skotrat@mediaone.net> wrote
>Mark Riley Writes:
>>I've made several ales and lagers
>>without using a protein rest and have found that these very
>>same beers have a stubborn chill haze that won't go away
>>with "lagering".
>I say:
>Hmmm funny you should mention this topic. I have been eliminating
>my protein rest lately to see if it made a difference. Well, I am
>experiencing the same said chill haze problems for the first time
>ever in my brewing. Lagering seems to get rid of it most of the time
>but not completely.
>>Mark Riley Writes:
>>Now, supposedly the pros say that a
>>protein rest is "unnecessary with todays malts" but do
>>these same pros not care about chill haze because they're
>>all filtering their beers and this is a non-issue for them?
>I say:
>I have talked to several pros about it and they filter... Therefore
>they have no problem.
>I am also experiencing better head (lord knows we all need that ;) )
>on my beers but it isn't as lasting as when I do a 134 rest.
>I am using many of the same malts that Mark has mentioned as well
>as Briess Pale Ale 2 row.
>Anybody else getting some of the same results?
>PH Problems??
>Hmmmm...
Then
Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net> wrote
>You may want to consider a mash-in at 90-104F/35-40C instead of 130F/54C.
>Unless you have particularly poorly malted grain (like homemade hard as
>stone) you don't get any advantage from a 54C rest and *may* be killing
your
>foam head. Nothing important happens at 100F except that the malt gets wet
>and the enzymes&starch go off into solution. This allows the enzymes to
act
>faster at 145F/63C. Kunze and others suggest avoiding or at least
carefully
>controlling the 50C temp range as a head/body killer.
Glyn Crossno
Estill Springs, TN
Rural HBD land.
- ---------------
> "...I was to learn later in life that we tend to meet any new
> situation by reorganizing: and a wonderful method it can be for creating
> the illusion of progress, while producing confusion, inefficiency and
> demoralization."
> Petronius Arbiter, 210 B.C.
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 07:56:45 -0500
From: David Whitman <dwhitman@rohmhaas.com>
Subject: denaturing enzymes
Alan McKay asks for support in a debate about the benefits/problems of
allowing the sparge to drift above 168F. The key point is whether enzymes
denature, and the consequences of this if they do.
There is no single magic temperature at which enzymes denature. Different
proteins are more or less stable, but for any given protein, the rate of
denaturing goes up with temperature. Long periods at lower temp can
denature as can short times at high temp. The ideal temperatures for the
various conversion rests we do are compromises between enzyme activity
(goes up with temperature) and enzyme stability (goes down with
temperature). The kinetics of denaturing are also affected by pH (you can
denature egg albumen by boiling at pH 7, or with low pH at room
temperature).
Assuming you've already got conversion, it's not obvious to me what the
problem with denaturing the enzymes during sparge would be. Denaturing
generally involves just randomizing the secondary structure of the enzyme
(the way it folds up), with no change in molcular weight. This can affect
solubility, but if solubility goes down, you'd just leave more protein
behind in the grain bed. Remember that you're going to boil the wort in
the next brewing step, so it's not as if those enzymes aren't going to see
high temperature eventually.
Like Alan, I've observed increased extraction when using a 168F mashout.
I've always attributed this (QDA - opinion, not supported by experiment!)
to 1. lower viscosity for better flow and 2. a burst of conversion due to
enhanced enzyme catalysis at high temp (which isn't sustainable for long
because the enzymes will denature).
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 06:03:00 -0700
From: Ken Schwartz <kenbob@elp.rr.com>
Subject: re Mash Question / Coriander for Wits
Todd Larson writes that he is having trouble sparging, that it takes a
long time and he has to clear the spigot and stir to get the liquid to
move.
Sounds like a classic case of Phil's Phalse Bottom Phloating and
Philling with Phluff. The Phalse has a tendency to Phloat and allow
grain to bypass the false bottom. They would then get directly into the
spigot and slow or even stop the flow.
Many solutions ahve been posted here in the past, and I encourage you to
search the HBD archives at http://hbd.org . One is to use a stiff
length of cooper pipe to connect the elbow to the drain, rather than
flexible tubing. This tends to hold the Phil's against the bottom of
the mash/lauter vessel. Other people have slit a length of vinyl
tubing, slipped it around the edge of the Phil's forming a "gasket"
around the perimeter, and stuffing it down inside the bucket. This
supposedly forms a good seal and hold the Phil's in place.
=====
Nathan Kanous asks about ground coriander in witbier. My one and only
witbier used 1 oz Curacao orange peel and about 1 tblsp crushed seeds
late in the boil for a subtle but noticible effect. The book
"Clonebrews" (Tess & Mark Szamatulski) has a recipe for Blanche de
Bruges calling for 1 tsp ground coriander, along with 1/2 oz Curacao
peel, 1/4 tsp crushed cumin seeds, and 1 tsp crushed grains of paradise,
for the last 45 minutes of the boil, with an additional 1/4 oz orange
peel and 1/2 tsp coriander in the last 3 minutes.
- --
*****
Ken Schwartz
El Paso, TX
Brewing Web Page: http://home.elp.rr.com/brewbeer
E-mail: kenbob@elp.rr.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 07:23:08 -0600
From: Bill_Rehm@DeluxeData.com
Subject: Jacketed thermometers
Does any out there know of anyone that sells jacketed thermometers for mash
tuns and boil kettles? What do I mean you may ask, it's a thermometer that
has a sleave that it fits into thus the thermometer can be removed at high
temps. without the liquid draining out the hole. I'd like to add one to my
boil kettle so I can easily check the temp while cooling, but I don't want
to put regular mashing thermometer on my converted keg boil kettle and
expose it to the extreme temps of boiling.
TIA
Bill Rehm
The Weil Street Backyard Brewery, Oostburg Wisconsin
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 08:26:39 -0500
From: fridge@kalamazoo.net
Subject: Walk-in cooler
Greeting folks,
In HBD#2958, Eric Schoville expressed an interest in installing a
5'x8' cold room in his garage.
I have heard from many people who have added extensions and
such to upright fridges and freezers. This approach seems to be
pretty viable for those who can live with a modest increase in space.
However, in my opinion a 5'x8' room with a 7' ceiling in a garage
that gets above 100 degF will require more cooling capacity than a
domestic refrigerator can provide. I'll describe a couple of
possibilities I think will work.
The first, and I believe to be the best choice in this case is to look
around for business liquidation sales or auctions. Cold rooms of this
size are very common and are often cheap to buy. I've been offered
several over the years, free for the taking. These rooms are
generally made up of foam-filled sheet metal panels that have been
zip-screwed together. The refrigeration system is made up of
several components. There will be a separate condensing unit that
may be located outdoors to prevent heat rejection into the garage
space. The evaporator and fans are usually mounted high on one
wall and are designed to remove moisture from the air at the desired
temperatures (low 30'sF). There will be a drain pan and line to carry
away any condensate to a remote location. Be aware that an EPA
certified technician will be required to reclaim any refrigerant in the
system before you can disassemble the cooling components. When
the room is reassembled, the tech will need to leak-check, evacuate
and charge the system. There may be local laws requiring licensed
technicians to perform *any* refrigeration-related work.
Another possibility is to construct a well insulated room and install a
small window air conditioner as the cooling unit. I would recommend
4" of rigid foam for insulation on the *inside* of a 2x4 framework.
The foam would be two layers of 2" rigid board, installed with joints
butted and sealed tight, and staggered between inner and outer
layers. I'd also highly recommend a layer of 5/8" water-resistant
drywall inside the foam to provide some fire resistance. Interior
finish could be a vapor-barrier paint or something similar.
The window air conditioner should be mounted in a side wall so that
waste heat is ducted to the outdoors, and not into the garage. An
external temperature contoller may be needed to allow the lower-
than-normal-for-air-conditioner temperatures desired. Condensate
will collect in the window ai r contioner's drain pan and may be
directed outdoors or into a floor drain. The fan must run
continuously to minimize the possibility coil icing and the air
conditioner should be set to recirculate the air in the cold room.
Of the two options I described, I believe the first will be cheaper to
do and will provide better results if a commercial cold room can be
obtained at auction/liquidation. Good luck on the project!
Hope this helps!
Forrest Duddles - FridgeGuy in Kalamazoo
fridge@kalamazoo.net
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 08:47:05 EST
From: DakBrew@aol.com
Subject: Re:MCAB + Cold Room
Eric Schoville wrote"
"On another note, I am thinking about putting a cold room
"in my garage. I am thinking about a 8'x5' room with a 7'
"ceiling. Ideally I would like to keep it in the low 30's.
''One problem is that my garage routinely stays at 115 in
''the summer. Has anyone tried anything like this who can
''comment on my different options. Right now I have two
''chest freezers, but they are space limiting. Do I need to
''go with a commercial unit for this? Can anyone relate
''some experience with commercial cooling units? I have no
''idea what they are like."
Hey Eric why not build your room around one or both of the chest freezers.
Such that the openings were in the room and the compressors were not. then
remove the lids and you could probably have 2 different cold zones really cold
in the freezers and not so cold in the surrounding room.
They run really big chest freezers in supermarkets with no tops all day long.
Just a thought :-)
If you like that Idea you could try a window ac unit and lots of rigid foam
insulation. That's how I plan to make mine when the garage/ brewery gets
built.
Good luck and let us know how you do it and how well it works.
Dan
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 8:42:19 -0500
From: randy.pressley@SLKP.COM
Subject: Fruit & Herb Beers
I'm getting ready to brew another batch of brew and
am planning to try for a different taste than my
usual IPA. My plan is to brew the IPA as usual but then
split the batches 3 ways, 5 gal each. I would like to add
fresh mint to one batch, I assume dry hopping would be
the best procedure here, but how much mint should I use
to leave just a hint of mint in the beer when tasted. The next
batch I would like to add fresh ginger root. I assume
here that I would add that to the last 15 minutes
of the boil. Again how much for just a hint of ginger
taste. Lastly I read an article in BYO this month about
orange beer. The brewer takes 2 lbs of oranges,
roughly 20% of the total grain bill, puts them in a blender
then seeps them during the boil. Anyone ever done this?
Am I better off just using the orange zest and dry
hopping this as well.
Any input appreciated.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 09:18:00 -0500
From: Eric.Fouch@steelcase.com
Subject: Quick yeast Question
HBD-
Here's a quick yeast question, and the chance for somebody to just impress the
hell out of me....
Doe's anybody know what yeast would be isolated from a bottle of "Hogerspaten
Poorter*"? And answering saccharomyces cerevisiae doesn't count!
*A Belgian porter, the spelling is from memory
Thanks
Eric Fouch
Bent Dick YoctoBrewery
Kentwood, MI
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 08:46:41 -0600
From: Tidmarsh Major <ctmajor@samford.edu>
Subject: Re: Hops History
Badger asks about books on early hops.
Look for Ann Hagen's books on Anglo-Saxon food and drink (there are
two). As I recall, the second book covers the production of
beverages, and it contains a number of good references to primary
sources that mention hops in England and on the continent from about
the 8th C. or so. My memory is a bit hazy on the details, and I no
longer have access to the books, having switched universities, but I
do recall that her scholarship was excellent and that the volumes were
treasure troves of information about early medieval brewing.
Waes hael,
Tidmarsh Major
Birmingham, Alabama "We must drink as we brew" --The Wakefield Master
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 10:42:22 -0500 (EST)
From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: yeast autolysis in primary
George De Piro wrote:
Storage of beer on the primary yeast is vastly different to storing the
beer on secondary or bottled yeast. The major difference, and the one
that most concerns us, is that there are orders of magnitude less yeast
in the secondary or bottle than in the primary.
First, are there any references available on the extent of autolysis/loss
of viability as a function of time post-ferment? Surely someone has looked
at this in detail. I've read a few studies examining viability decreases
related to other variables such as pitch size, ethanol concentration,
nutrient deficiencies, fermentattion temp, etc.. but none that simply
measure the settled yeast over time. I'm beginning to conduct such
experiments myself but have only just got started. Am still
researching/debating the merits of using Methylene blue staining as a
surrogate marker of viability.
Second, another major difference in the primary is the presence of
variable amounts of break materials with their potential negative flavor
impacts. Can you confidently differentiate between trub-derived off
flavors and those coming from yeast autolysis? It seems to me that this
factor could go a long way in explaining the different opinions different
brewers seem to have on this issue as there is certainly going to be a
wide range of break carrying over into the primary depending upon one's
brewing techniques.
-Alan Meeker
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 09:46:03 -0600 (CST)
From: Thomas S Barnett <barnets@mail.auburn.edu>
Subject: Diacetyl Problem
Hello all,
I made a wheat beer using Wyeast #3068. I pitched a large starter
and fermented at 65-70F. I was therefore surprised to find a noticeable
butterscotch flavor,(i.e. diacetyl), in the finished product, as i was
under the impression that diacetyl is generally a result of underpitching
and/or high fermentation temperatures. This leads me to beleive that the
problem is a result of bacterial contamination rather than problems
associated with intense yeast growth. If this is indeed the case, is there
any way to reduce the diacetyl concentration after the beer has been
bottled? Will raising the temp. activate the yeast to uptake the diacetyl
or just worsen the problem if it's bacterial? Will storing the
bottles cold for a while help? Could this particular yeast simply produce
a lot of diacetyl? Thanks. Tom Barnett.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 10:53:02 -0500 (EST)
From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: sparge temps - protein denaturation
Alan McKay asks about high sparge temps leading to later haze problems due
to denaturation of proteins..
_______________________________________________________________
I'm currently having an argument with a fellow in the on-line
German forum at http://www.bier-selbstgebraut.de/wwwforum/index.html
We both agree that going over 78C/168F in your sparge is a bad
thing. But he says it's because over this temperature, you denature
your enzymes, and since they are made out of protein (which they
are), you therefore get hazey beer. He says that by no means do
you want to have denatured enzymes for your sparge. And it gets
_________________________________________________________________
Alan, I think you win this argument hands down. The primary reason usually
given for not sparging too hot is that a hot sparge will extract
tannins/polyphenolic compounds from the grain husks which can contribute
to what is called "husk astringency" and would also contribute to later
hazes, especially chill hazes as the phenolics interact with proteinacious
material in the final beer so, from the standpoint of haze formation I
suppose he is right, but for the wrong reason. We are talking about
sparging here so the enzymes have already done their work and we don't
care whether they denature. In fact, raising temps for mashout is meant to
denature the enzymes and halt any further saccrification. Besides, what
does your friend think is going to happen after the sparge when you
actually BOIL the wort? Now that's denaturation!
Alan Meeker
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 10:49:40 -0500
From: "Taber, Bruce" <Bruce.Taber@nrc.ca>
Subject: Why RIMS with modified malts?
Please help a confused brewer.
A while back there was a long debate about the need of a protein rest with
today's highly modified malts. The consensus was ( in my opinion) that
protein rests were unnecessary with regards to extraction efficiency, though
some argued that it affected other characteristics such as chill haze.
Then we have the never-ending discussions on RIMS systems. Aren't
these fancy systems built specifically to provide easy and accurate
temperature stepping during the mash?
If I believe in single temperature mashing, is there any reason to
consider a RIMS?
I must be missing something here.
Bruce Taber
Almonte, Ont. Canada
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 08:13:40 -0800
From: "Mercer, David" <dmercer@path.org>
Subject: RE: Stuck sparges
Todd,
I've been mashing for years, and never had a stuck sparge, even with grain
bills that were 70% wheat. So that makes me uniquely unqualified to offer
advice to someone who has the problem. Nevertheless, here are some things
I'd look at (in rough order of probable cause):
Check how your false bottom fits on the bottom. If the seal isn't tight, or
the bottom floats up (I've heard that this is a problem with most plastic
false bottoms and seen it myself with a friend's Listermann) then grain is
going to get under the false bottom and into your outlet tube and clog up
things every time. Blowing on the outlet tube will only push the grain back
into the area under the false bottom where it will flow right back into the
tube and clog things up when you've stopped blowing.
Measure your strike water. What's the big deal about measuring out 5 quarts
of water for 5 lb. of grain?
Try to keep about 2"" of sparge water above the surface of your grain (I
break this rule every now and then, and it doesn't really seem to have much
effect, but with small mash sizes it might.)
Don't start the sparge fast. Begin at a moderate trickle. A quart every 8-10
minutes is about right. Another rule I've broken occasionally, but I've read
that too fast an initial drain can set the mash and get you stuck.
Monitor mash and sparge temperatures. Sparge water should be hot (I
typically sparge with 185F water). This is a rule I never break.
Those are my suggestions. My strong suspicion is it's the fit of the false
bottom in your bucket. If you can't get it to seal correctly, consider
making a slotted copper manifold. That's what I use, and it has worked
flawless every time.
Happy brewing.
Dave in Seattle
Todd Larson wrote: Mash question
I am trying really hard to make that jump to all-grain brewing. In
preparation, I have been doing partial mashes of about 5 lbs. My
lautering
/ sparging seems to take forever (1.5-2 hours). I try not to grind
too
finely. I put some water in the bottom of my bucket. I am using a
small
bucket with a plastic Listermann false bottom. I try to lauter very
slowly
and keep a little fresh sparge water on top at all times. I end up
stirring it and blowing through the drain tube to get stuff moving.
I mean
it moves at less than a trickle. I have done about 4 of these
batches, and
every one is the same. If lautering is this hard, I am not sure I
want to
try to lauter 7-10 lbs. Can anyone describe for me how thick the
mash
should be? I have heard "like runny oatmeal". Any other terms out
there
that leave less open for interpretation? I prefer to go by feel
rather
than having to pre-measure my mash water. Any help is appreciated.
Todd Larson
larson.jt@pg.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 08:19:02 -0800
From: "Bryan L. Gros" <gros@bigfoot.com>
Subject: jockey box
Our club is discussing building a club jockey box to serve beer
at club or personal events. Anyone else done this and want to
offer suggestions/advice?
We figure we'd like at least four taps, preferably six. We need
fittings for both pin and ball cornies. CO2 connector. And we'd
prefer to use a keg or something rather than the "standard"
cooler.
Copper coils are easiest and cheapest and are best for heat
transfer. Stainless are easiest to keep clean. What about a
plate kind of heat transfer? Other ideas?
thanks.
Bryan Gros gros@bigfoot.com
Oakland, CA
Draught Board Homebrew Club
http://www.dnai.com/~thor/dboard/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 10:43:00 -0600
From: Spencer Tomb <astomb@ksu.edu>
Subject: Cherry and Plum Bounce (Liquors)
Matt:
I did not see the ad, but I have some experience in making liquors that
have turned out very well. We make cherry or plum bounce using a recipe
that was in an old Joy of Cooking cookbook (Circa 1950). We put vodka,
fresh, ripe, unpitted fruit and sugar 1:1:1, v:v:v in a quart canning jar
cover it with the lid and ring and shake it daily till the sugar disolves.
It is ready to consume in about 5 weeks and gets better to about 10 months.
I guess that the resulting liquid is about 30% alcohol. It is an
extraction process.
I especially like wild plum bounce and my wife prefers cherry bounce made
with pie cherries. They both are fantastic cough medicine and excellent on
vanilla ice cream. I have tried "bouncing" other fruits and found that it
works well with other roseaceous fruits with pits and blueberries are good
too.
There are some very nice aromatic flavors in plums and cherries that would
be interesting to try to get in a beer. These are probably the cyanide
producing compounds from the pits.
Spencer Tomb
"Matthew Hahn" <mchahn@earthlink.net> Wrote:
>A few months ago I saw an ad in one of the beerzines (BREWING TECHNIQUES?)
>about liquors (non-distilled) that you could make at home. These were not
>the flavorings that one adds to vodka or brandy but actual kits to make a
>beverage that ferments to 20% or so. Anybody else see this ad and remember
>where it was or anybody know the name and contact info of the company? Any
>help would be appreciated. Thanks.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 11:02:09 -0600
From: Spencer Tomb <astomb@ksu.edu>
Subject: Houston/Galveston Brewpubs
I will be making a trip to Houston in March for a meeting in the Green's
Point/Conroe area and I would like to know if there is a good brewpub on
that side of Houston. I am familiar with the ones in the Village area,
but that is quite a trek from where I will be.
After the meeting, I will head to the beach for some R&R and I would like
to have some recommendations for Galveston too.
Will I be able to find the Celis beers on tap in the Green's Point area or
in Galveston?
TIA
Spencer Tomb
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 17:49:36 GMT
From: marnold@ez-net.com (Matthew Arnold)
Subject: Cinq Cents clone followup / NHC / Y2K
Last night, my wife and I compared my Chimay Cinq Cents (White Cap) clone with
the real McCoy. All told, I came VERY close.
Color: The Chimay was slightly darker, though not by much. It was also cloudier
(not sure why, I've never had any this cloudy before).
Body: Very similar
Bitterness: Very similar
Carbonation: Very similar
Aroma/Flavor: My version was much more bananay than the Chimay. I used Wyeast
1214 which reportedly is the Chimay strain. I fermented it at 58F (a BJCP judge
from my homebrew club guessed that I used the Weihenstephan Wheat yeast
fermented at about 70F). I know Chimay is fermented at a much higher
temperature. I may try fermenting warmer next time. The banana ester
overwhelmed the aroma and flavor of my beer. The Chimay had a much nicer melody
of various fruits in both flavor and aroma.
All told it was a pretty good shot. For the recipe, check the archives or visit
my homepage http://users.ez-net.com/~marnold (shameless plug).
Disclaimer: I am not a BJCP judge, nor do I play one on T.V. Maybe someday?
- -----
This same BJCP judge I mentioned said that I should enter my barleywine in the
AHA NHC this year. I'm really wondering if it's worth it for the $12 entry fee,
not to mention the loss of at least one precious bottle of beer. I'm definitely
going to enter it in my club's competition. Hopefully Paul Kerchefske (who
posts occasionally to the HBD) won't run away with all our awards again this
year! Awesome job last year, Paul!
In that same vein, thanks to our faithful HBD janitors for correcting the
format on the HBD calendar when I entered the Rackers' competition information
improperly. Mea culpa.
- -----
I don't understand why everyone is brewing Y2K beers. As every good nerd knows,
Y2K is actually the year 2048. That's a long time to wait! Sorry, I couldn't
resist . . .
Later,
Matt
- -----
Webmaster, Green Bay Rackers Homebrewers' Club
http://www.rackers.org info@rackers.org
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 13:23:29 -0500
From: "S. Wesley" <WESLEY@MAINE.MAINE.EDU>
Subject: Non-alcoholic beer by vacuum evaporation.
Anyone who has searched the HBD archives or read RCB or HBD for a
while knows that the subject of producing alcohol free beers shows up
with some regularity. A number of solutions have been suggested
including brewing weak beers, dilution of stronger beers and removal
of alcohol by heating. While some of these techniques may achive
results which are satisfactory, I find it hard to believe that the
results are as flavorful as regular homebrewed beer. As I get older
and find that it takes less and less beer to give me a rather nasty
hangover the prospect of being able to remove most of the alcohol
from one of my regular beers becomes more and more appealing.
Two techniques which have been suggested over the years that have
caught my eye are dialysis and vacuum evaporation. I have seen both
of these ideas dismissed as too difficult and too expensive for
hombrewers to attempt. It seems that with people building PC
controlled RIMS systems homebrewing technology has evolved to a point
where these perceptions need to be reconsidered. By the way,
although I am not a lawyer, I have read through the entire text of
the federal alclohol laws (I believe it is Title 27) and I see
nothing to indicate that this process is illegal as long as you don't
collect the distilate.
Some time over the next few months I plan to give vacuum evaporation
a go. It seems to me that you only need two pieces of equipment to
do this. A chamber which can be evacuated to a reasonable degree
without imploding and an appropriate vacuum pump. I plan to use a
quarter barrel sanke keg as the chamber. If this doesn't work I have
access to a number of disused UHV chambers of adequate size and a
smorgasbord of vacuum pumps through my research work.
As far as I can tell I should be able to seal the beer out line on
the tap and pump on the gas in line. (Obviously the check valve will
have to be removed.) The question is: when do you stop pumping? My
educated guess is that If I start with a beer which is about 4-5% ABV
I will need to evaporate 30-50 % of the volume of beer to get
the alcohol content down to less than .50 %. This is after replacing
the lost volume with water which has been boiled and cooled. I
realize that this may take some time and use quite a bit of
electricity, but I am prepared to deal with that.
I would like to get a more accurate sense the fraction of the volume
I need to remove. I based my guess on some simple calculations I did
and some information I extracted from Howard & Gibat's "The Lore of
Still Building (1994, Noguska Press, Fostoria, Ohio). These authors
describe a technique for determining the alcohol content of a liquid in
which a small sample is distilled until half of the volume has
evaporated (p28). They claim that at this point most of the alcohol
will have evaporated and that measuring the distillate with a proof
hydrometer will yeild a value which is twice the alcohol contentof
the original sample. They also state that the typical out put of a pot
still distilling a wash which is 10% ABV is 20-30% (p55).
My caluclations were done with a spreadsheet. I set up two columns
for water and alcohol and start with 96.1 (W0) parts water by weight
3.9 (A0) parts alcohol by weight . On the line below I write an
equation for the volume of water and alcohol at some interval of time
(t) later. This was done using the following equations: W1 = W0 -
[(Rw)*W0/(W0+A0)]*dt and A1 = A1- [(Ra)*A0/(W0+A0)]dt, and copy it
down the columns The basic assumption is that the evaporation rate of
one component of a mixture will be proportional to the fraction of the
mixture comprised by that component. It is not important to know the
actual evaporation rates here, just the ratio since we can use any
units and intervals of time we like. As long as (Ra*dt)/(Rw*dt) = the
ratio of the evaporation rate of pure alcohol the to the evaporation
rate of pure water we are o.k.. So the quesiton is what is the ratio?
I have tried to look through CRC to find this information, but if it
is there I guess I don't how it is identified. The only possibly
useful information I could find was that the vapor pressure of ethanol
is 2.5 times the vapor pressure of water at 20C Now since alcohol is
about 2.5 times the molecuar weight of water, I guessed that the mass
evaporation rate must be 6.25 times as higher for alcohol than it is
for water. Using a value of Rw*dt = .1 I find that I get down to
.5%ABV after evaporating 33% of the original volume.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 13:09:56 -0600
From: "Shane Brauner" <GossamerDP@pdq.net>
Subject: Computer Controlled brewing
Has anyone created an interface to actually control boil/mash temps with a
computer? Or even logging your brew session or fermentation with your
computer (having it automatically record the temp at certain intervals).
I've had some experience talking through serial ports with Perl, and have
programmed in Java, C, C++... as well. Unfortunately, I don't have the $$
for digital thermometers - can anyone point me to a cheap one? In any case,
I'm interested!
Shane Brauner
Shane@Uh.edu
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 14:18:35 -0800
From: "NFGS" <fjrusso@coastalnet.com>
Subject: RE: Larson: Mash Question
>From Todd Larson:
>I am trying really hard to make that jump to all-grain brewing....sparging
seems to take forever (1.5-2 hours). .......
Well Todd, I am not a long time brewer or a brewmaster. So take my input
for what it is worth. Like you I wanted to jump to all grain and found the
sparge times long and tedious. As a materials and process engineer I knew
there had to be another way. So here is what I have done myself.
I have a product known as peel ply. It is a polyester or nylon woven fabric
and comes in a number of different weaves. I used this as a bag in my
sparge bucket. The only thing that comes out of my sparge bucket is liquid
and no solids. My time is reduced to 20-30 minutes depending how often I
recirculate some of the wort. Once all of the liquid has run off I am able
to squeeze strain the bag and get out the very last of the wort.
It works for me. The bag allows me to stir and get the liquid moving. My
OG's are right where I want them to be. By the way this same product is
also used in water filtration applications so I know it is safe to use.
I would like to hear from the others in this group on their experiences
using a filter bag in the sparge bucket. What do they see as drawbacks or
negative impacts on the beer.
Frank
fjrusso@coastalnet.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 15:00:56 -0700
From: jpugh@hjnews.com (Jeremy B. Pugh)
Subject: sanitizing bottles
On the topic of sanitizing bottles ken Schwartz writes:
My favorite technique
is to run them through the dishwasher (WITH NO DETERGENT OR SPOTTING
AGENT), with heated dry cycle enabled. I also fill the detergent cup
with some Clorox though I recognize that water spray doesn't always
actually get inside the bottles. I can load the DW the night before
bottling and run it overnight or the next morning.
One-cent worth:
This is the same method I use with two exceptions. I soak the bottles in a
sanitizing solution (2 tsp household bleach to 5 gallons cold water) rinse
them well and then run a hot water and hot dry cycle in the diswasher. I
skip the bleach in the diswasher.
Good suggestion to work over the diswasher Ken. My wife will be
especially pleased after the stout vs. carpet debacle of last month. If it
was a snake it woulda...
Lately I have had so many batches going that I've had to buy new
bottles from our local watering hole which sells them to homebrewers for
their deposit ($1.50). Many of them are nasty so I am a bear on cleaning
(with these I use a full ounze of bleach to five gallons of cold water). I
am sure that a skoal bandit chaw is just chock full of bacterial goodness.
Yuck.
Also, belated thanks to all of the HBD wizards who took the time to
help me through my first lager attempt. It turned out great.
But this porter that's in secondary is going to be out of sight. ..
It's a hobby and a habit all in one.
Jeremy B. Pugh
Logan, Utah
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 16:08:56 -0600
From: John.Wilkinson@aud.alcatel.com (John Wilkinson)
Subject: Cartoon
The Dallas Morning News ran a cartoon yesterday that was about home brewing.
It was a single panel cartoon called Close To Home. I looked at the guy's
web page (www.closetohome.com) but it wasn't there. Maybe it will come up
later or it is probably carried in several other papers. The cartoon hit
pretty close to home for me. Look for it in recent papers on the funny pages.
It was pretty good. At least to a brewer.
John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - john.wilkinson@aud.alcatel.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 02:24:23 +0000
From: AJ <ajdel@mindspring.com>
Subject: Wort Chillers
Simon writes in "defense" of his chiller design. I don't believe any
defense is necessary. I'll admit I didn't "work the sums" but based on a
quick look at the math everything seemed OK. Later I'll show that it is
not difficult to include the effects of variation in "k" in computing
chiller performance. Nevertheless the point about one man's
"unappreciable" being another's "appreciable" is taken and thus I'd
better indicate why I personally think the variation is signifcant and
let anyone who is interested make his own decision.
In my brewing I use a 50' length of half inch refrigeration tubing
inside a 1" garden hose (coiled). What Simon calls "k" varies by a
factor of about 8 between 10 gph and 100 gph flows. For a desired 2.5 F
rise using 45F cooling water (i.e. wort temp 47.5 exiting) I compute
(from a measurement based model of k dependence on flow) 70 gph coolant
flow and 13.9 gph wort flow. Were I to increase thewort flow 50% and
ignore the change in k I would conclude that I would have a 12.5 F rise
(exiting wort temperature of 57.5 F). If I allow for the change in k I
would conclude that the rise would be only 5 F. I consider a 7 F
difference in wort output temperature significant.
Note that the Heart's chiller (I put numbers in my last post) is much
less sensitive (about a third as much) to wort flow rate than the
chiller I just talked about and errors from ignoring flow rate are thus
smaller.
Considering turbulence isn't difficult. The efficiency of the chiller
depends on the normalized coolant and wort flow rates. The normalizing
constant, Q, contains k. Determine the desired efficiency. Then use the
curves in the article I referenced (which also tells how to measure Q
for your chiller) to determine normalized flows. Looking a the curves
it's pretty easy to see aout where the operating point should be. If the
wort flow at the operating point is fw = r*Q then solve Q = fw/r and
Q = fn(fw) for fw and Q. Here fn represents the functional relationship
between Q and fw. In my experiments with the three chillers Q was linear
with flow in each case i.e. Q = m*fw + b in which case the solution is Q
= b/(1 - r*m); fw = r*Q. Where fn isn't linear a root finder can be
used.
All this is a fascinating intellectual excercise but in actual operation
the coolant temperature is the temperature of the water in my well and
the coolant flow is as fast as the pump will pump it. I can control wort
flow with a needle valve but usually just open it up all the way and run
20 gph. The wort enters the fermenter at whatever this combination of
parameters gives and I use the cooling jacket to get it to pitching
temp. The 50' chiller is more than I need and the little, inexpensive
Heart's outperforms it at up to 34 gph wort flow.
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2959, 02/20/99
*************************************
-------
