Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2963
HOMEBREW Digest #2963 Thu 25 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:
Ball Valves != Sanitary, Thermowell/Probes, more yeast results from 10% sucrose (Joe Rolfe)
Two questions... (Jeffry D Luck)
Fix extraction (Matthew Arnold)
Re: EASYEAST (bob mccowan)
Mashing, Sparging, Extraction Efficiency (Drewmeister)
Hops promote body (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
MCAB Recipes (John Varady)
Propane tank manifold or "t" (Alan Dowdy)
Racking too soon/keg sanitation (Rob.Green1)
Yeast Inhibition by CO2? ("Stanley E. Prevost")
an idea ("Gradh O'Dunadaig")
Ball valves (Doug Moyer)
Re: Why RIMS with modified malts? (Jim Snow)
Alcohol Measurement (AJ)
valves (Rod Prather)
Heart of Dixie Brew-Off: Entries due 3/6 ("John W. Rhymes")
homebrew cooking - lager yeast bread (Scott Murman)
valves (Rod Prather)
rowan (Jon Macleod)
Wood as an Structural Material (Mark_Ohrstrom/Humphrey_Products)
re : Milling Grains ("Alan McKay")
My first cider (Mike Isaacs)
sake stuff (Jim Liddil)
Phil's Phalse Bottom (Dan Listermann)
Milling Grain (Dan Listermann)
RE: Yeast from bottles (LaBorde, Ronald)
Wort pH (BioCoat)
Water analysis and Swedish Ale ("Foster Jason")
Bottled O2 Adapters (Bob.Sutton)
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: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 11:37:35 -0500
From: Joe Rolfe <rolfe@sky.sky.com>
Subject: Ball Valves != Sanitary, Thermowell/Probes, more yeast results from 10% sucrose
fridge@kalamazoo.net mentioned
<snip>
>I believe ball valves to be the best overall choice for most
>home brewing uses. Ball valves are inexpensive, throttle
>liquid flow reasonably well, are easy to clean and sanitize,
>and unlike a globe valve, easy to clear obstructions
>(like hops) from.
<snip>
I will agree on all but the sanitation part, no way, no how is a ball
valve easy to sanitize. I brewer I know of takes extreme measures to
sanitize the ones on his fermenters. To the extent of heating the
entire valve up with boiling water in effort to pasturize the hidden
recesses, for many, many minutes. Do not use heavy duty flame on them
as the seal can be ruined. Alc squirted and flamed in to the opening
is a good bet. Dissassembly (if possible might be better - never
tried it tho). I dont know how you would even try to sanitize the
plastic ball valves I have seen on some of the homebrew gear in
magazines. But then I hate plastic like the plague also....I'd rather
get the plague.
In larger commercial operations - I have only seen ball valves on
fermentation gear in A. Pugsley breweries and this friend of mine
(above). I do take back the cheaper than butterfly type, I have a
1.5inch ball all 316SS on my brewkettle, used $275(ouch)...1.5inch
butterfly can be had for $150 or so.
Themowells/Probes
If you do purchase the themowell - check the sizes carefully as was
mentioned and there is the metalized paste that goes in the well tip
to allow contact of the themometer probe to the well. Check a
plumbing supply house for this stuff. Triclamp fittings make it
easier to move around but raise the cost quite a bit. Good, Cheap,
Fast - pick two again....
****BIG QDA****
All of the yeast(7 so far) I have pull from 10% sucrose storage have
come back to life, some more slowly than others, some with some blips
during reanimation, but after a few cycles at lab level fermentation
all appear to be functional to the levels I remember them and
brewnotes remind me. I have since pulled two others and they are
starting to make the return from the dead. Time to brew Budwieser and
check for defects, this will happen this Saturday. Just another QDA
related to 10% sucrose storage...Most of these had been stored for 6-8
years, in cool cellar temps under 10% sucrose (per Rajotte), in about
2.5 ml or a 10ml tube tightly capped. Reanimation by taking loop
fulls did not pan out, the entire tube had to be dumped into 5ml.
Another reason to make several tubes in the beginning.
The 5ml samples were examined under scope, morphology noted, plated
and reisolated and built up from there in 2.5ml to 10ml, to 50ml to
250ml to liter at normal room temps with "occasional" daily
agitation. The beer was decanted and tasted (one by me) flavor
noted. At the liter stage, sterile wort reintroduced and sample
repeated. Before use micrcope exam will be done again. I did not have
time to do full fermentation performance test/viable cell counts but
the all seem to start and finish around the same time frames, and
final gravity (from taste only) appears to be close to each other.
The gravity will be check more when resonable volumes of beer are
available. Good time for clinitest - sorry I did not say that:. -
good enuff for me.
One thing I have yet to be able to complete is the giant colony. All
kinds of GD trouble, I had been doing this with fairly good success on
just plain ole agar/wort. Cant seem to get the plates to pour well,
eventual mold spores form (after about three to four weeks) and the
colonies just never get bigger than 1/4inch diameter. The mold scares
me more than the size, right now....
Good Luck and Great Brewing
Joe Rolfe
------------------------------
Date: 23 Feb 1999 09:38:35 -0700
From: Jeffry D Luck <Jeffry.D.Luck@aexp.com>
Subject: Two questions...
Greetings guru's.
I'm new at brewing and so far I'm only doing extract and partial
mash batches. In my first try at tweaking a standard recipe, I
upped the LME from 6 to 9 lbs (for a 5 gallon batch). I now know
what 'fusal taste' is all about. Will this flavor go away over time?
It's been in the bottles now for a month. And more importantly,
what other adjustments do I need to make in the future if I'm
increasing the LME?
Also, I am headed out of town soon and I'm wondering how to
best transport homebrew on an airplane. Can you check it with
your luggage, or is there a risk of freezing it in the cargo hold?
Or, can you get it past the carry-on gate without too many stupid
questions from the pseudo-cops? Is there a worry about changing
altitude & air pressure?
Thanks in advance for your help.
Jeff Luck
Salt Lake City, UT - USA
(...where it's NOT currently legal to homebrew. 'Sort of adds to
the experience.)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 17:14:06 GMT
From: marnold@ez-net.com (Matthew Arnold)
Subject: Fix extraction
Steve Alexander commented about George Fix's 104F (40C) rest in the last HBD. I
myself decided to test it with a recent batch I made. I mashed in with at 1
qt/lb, rested for 30 minutes, then added enough boiling water to get up to my
saccrification temperature at 158F (70C). Everything went well enough, but I
only noticed a nominal increase in efficiency, well within the noise. I think
the problem was that I had to add so much boiling water to get the mash up to
158F that my mash ended up well over 2 qt/lb. My guess is that any efficiency
increase was counteracted by the fact that the enzymes were so diluted. Does
that sound like a decent assumption? Steve? George? George? Al?
Fix uses enough boiling water to get up to 140F (60C) then uses direct heat to
get up to 158F. This would give a better mash thickness of about 1.6 qt/lb. I
mash in a Gott cooler so direct fire is out for me (I don't like the molten
plastic taste in my beer. Call me a perfectionist :) )
FWIW, I used mostly Weyermann Dark Munich with some Melanoidin to make an AlK
altbier. I don't know how much longer I can let it "lager" before I lose all
control and tap the keg.
The Fix HBD blurbs may be found at
http://realbeer.com/spencer/FAQ/Fix-mash.html
Steve adds regarding mashouts, but it certainly applies to the above
discussion:
>Pay the maltster the 50 cents and go home early.
When I first started all-grain brewing Scott Kaczorowski (sp? You still out
there, Scott? Long time, no type!) gave me the sage advice: "Grain is cheap,
your time is expensive." If I were a megabrewer, every point of extract would
be precious. As a homebrewer, working on a much smaller scale, getting every
last point isn't that critical.
That's my .02 (.0308 Cdn, probably overpriced),
Matt
- -----
Webmaster, Green Bay Rackers Homebrewers' Club
http://www.rackers.org info@rackers.org
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 12:34:24 -0500
From: bob.mccowan@bmd.cpii.com (bob mccowan)
Subject: Re: EASYEAST
>Anyone in the area of Hampton, NH using EASYEAST?
Joe: According to Don at Stout Billy's in Portsmouth, EASYEAST is produced
by a microbiologist from UNH. It started out as a custom product for Stout
Billy's, and I guess it has branched out from there. Last time I looked,
they had quit a variety of yeast available. I have brewed with it and had
no problems. However, even though Don assured me that there is enough yeast
to pitch 5 gallons of wort, I think the lag time is too long; I prefer to
step the yeast up once before pitching.
Bob McCowan
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 13:28:31 -0500
From: Drewmeister <drewmstr@erols.com>
Subject: Mashing, Sparging, Extraction Efficiency
Once again, I'm joining in late on a discussion on HBD and askiong a fairly
remedial question. As of the last 2 years, I have been brewing 25%/75%
All-Grain/Extract. This year, my New Year's resolution was to brew more
and better beer, as well as to brew at least 50% all-grain. I use a Gott
cooler to mash, transfer to a 2 bucket lauter tun, and use a gravity feed
Phil's "sparge arm" to sparge. My questions are as follows:
1. Conversion test: never seems to work the way the say. The iodine does
not turn color right away, but eventually, little black streaks appear.
2. Recirculation ("vorloff" (sp?)): When taking the first runnings from
the lauter tun and recircing, what is the best and easiest way to add the
wort back on the top of the grain bed without splashing/channeling the
grains. I tried to pour these runnings back into the sparge water tank,
but the particles of grains kept making my sparge arm get clogged, so I
will not do this again.
3. How is extraction efficiency measured. I remember reading about this,
but can't remember where. What are the rules of thumb for gravity/gal/lb
of grain??? I used 12 lbs of Crisp British Pale malt, 1 lb crystal and 1
lb Carapils and wound up with only 4 1/2 - 4 3/4 gals after boiling. The
S.G was 1.070.
4. Along the lines of the efficiency, should I have added some cold water
to get to 5 gals??? I followed the strike water/sparge water/make-up water
guidelines in NCJHB and came up a little short. Now if I was at my target
1.060 with 4 1/2 - 4 3/4 gals, I would not worry, but adding a little cold
water may have gotten me to my target S.G. of 1.062 (according to the
recipe). If measuring S.G. when cool, do you just chill the wort, take
S.G. then add water if S.G. is high???
Drewmeister
drewmstr@erols.com
http://www.erols.com/drewmstr/flyfish.html
"Fishing is the part of life that's filled with more or less regular
successes, and failures that don't really matter because there'll always be
a next time." - J. Gierach
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 14:08:04 -0500 (EST)
From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: Hops promote body
Last night my wife came home from the store and presented me with a bottle
of hair conditioner. The brand is Willow Lake "Hops, Apricot, and Almond
Conditioner." The label says it contains natural hop extract for
"increased body." Too bad it doesn't have any hop aroma to it. Maybe I'll
add some to the secondary the next time I do a protein rest with today's
highly modified malts..
-Alan
- ------------------------------------------------------------------
"Graduate school is the snooze button on the alarm clock of life."
-Jim Squire
-Alan Meeker
Johns Hopkins Hospital
Dept. of Urology
(410) 614-4974
__________________________________________________________________
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 15:08:17 -0500 (EST)
From: John Varady <rust1d@usa.net>
Subject: MCAB Recipes
Howdy folks. I know a few of the MCAB winners are on this list and I was
hoping to start a thread of MCAB winning recipes. Following is my porter
recipe which took 2nd in Robust Porter. It's an interesting recipe in that
it has a vienna malt base, uses a low % of dark malts (6% total) and is
fermented with Bavarian Lager yeast. I should have waited for my comment
sheets to come back so I could post some tasting notes as well, but I'll
post a follow up when they get to me. One thing I can say is that using
Bavarian lager yeast gave this beer a much better aroma then I had ever
achieved using ale yeast. Without the ale yeast esters, the toasty, bready,
malty, coffee, toffee aromas predominate, giving the beer a righteous nose
(we'll see what the judges smelled in my follow up post). This recipe has
been well relieved in contests and I am happy to say the beer that placed in
the MCAB was a different batch from the beer that qualified me.
As an aside, I was fortunate enough to taste the first place Tripel brewed
by Al Folsom at our home brew club meeting last Thursday. It was exquisite
and my glass was way too small. Great beer Al, let's see the recipe! (I'm
particularly interested in see Georges Weizen).
Without further ado:
HBRCP 2.2 Recipe:
Name: Pine Box O.G.: 1.053
Style: Robust Porter I.B.U.: 43.5
Volume: 13.0 Gallons A.B.V.: 5.1
Grains/Fermentables Lbs % Hops AAU Grams Min
- ---------------------- ----- --- --------- ---- ------ ----
Vienna, German 13.50 54 Galena 10.5 60.00 120
Pale, American 2 Row 5.00 20 Cascade 5.0 56.00 15
Aromatic, Belgian 2.00 8 Spalt 4.7 50.00 0
Biscuit, Belgian 1.00 4
Melanoidin, German 1.00 4
Chocolate, English 1.00 4
Special "B", Belgian 1.00 4
Black Roast, English 0.50 2
Yeast: Bavarian Lager
Mash 25 lbs of grain in 10 gallons of water to rest @ 151F for 20 mins.
Boost slowly to 158F over 30 mins and rest for 40 mins. Drain to collect 7.5
gallons first runnings. Batch sparge with 7 gallons water to collect 14.5
gallons total. Boil down to 13 gallons. Pitch yeast at 58F. Ferment at
50-54F for 2 weeks. Lager in SS at 32F for 4 weeks.
- --
John Varady The HomeBrew Recipe Calculating Program
Boneyard Brewing Custom Neon Beer Signs For Home Brewers
Glenside, PA Get More Information At:
rust1d@usa.net http://www.netaxs.com/~vectorsys/varady
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 14:20:43 -0800
From: Alan Dowdy <Alan@Auroracorp.com>
Subject: Propane tank manifold or "t"
I haven't any experience using propane tanks and burners so forgive me if I
am complicating a simple project but.... I am in the final stages of
building a 3 tier brew system loosely based on a number of similar systems
that I have found on the web. I have two propane tanks and three burners,
as all the other systems I've seen seem to have, and this is where I have
run into a small hitch. Where does one purchase, or how does one build, a
manifold or "t" for connecting both the burners for the liquor tank and
mash/lauter tun to one propane tank? I made the mistake of going to a BBQ
specialty store where I was told by the young sales assistant that "it can't
be done" even though I have seen it done, just not close enough to see how.
Is it just a simple fitting that I can pick up as Home Depot. I hesitate to
thinks so because the connection between the regulator and tank doesn't look
that simple. I am sure that more than a few of you have already crossed
this bridge and I would appreciate any guidance you might offer. Thanks
again.
Alan Dowdy
Torrance, CA
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 17:53:20 -0500
From: Rob.Green1@firstunion.com
Subject: Racking too soon/keg sanitation
Coupla questions about the above topics.
1) Is it possible to rack to the secondary too soon. I had an Alt in primary
for
6 days @ 65-70 F and racked before the yeast had all settled out. Was this
a mistake? if so can I fix it now? or should I just try to enjoy the possible
high
gravity finish and possible diacetyl (sp?) flavors that may result from my
fermentus interruptus? (too many road runner cartoons as a child).
2) What is the general consensus on sanitizing corny kegs? I am new to
kegging (1st batch). I had four corny's donated to my cause by my local
Coke guy and did the following prep steps. Rinsed with cold water followed
by a hot water rinse followed by a strong bleach solution which was allowed
to remain in the keg for 30-45 mins (pressed poppets after the keg was full to
make sure sanitizer was in contact with all surfaces) . I then drained the
bleach solution and did not rinse yet. The kegs are waiting patiently for the
batch mentioned in item #1 at which time I will re-sanitize and rinse one out.
I read on an earlier post that bleach solution can harm metal if left to sit
too
long, should this rule apply to ss kegs also? There's a little pool of the
bleach
solution at the bottom of the kegs, should I get that out ASAP?
Rob Green
Live to Brew.....Brew to Live (forgive me Mr. Harley)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 18:13:38 -0600
From: "Stanley E. Prevost" <sprevost@phase4.com>
Subject: Yeast Inhibition by CO2?
There was a presentation at the National Craft Brewers Conference "Practical
Yeast Management in the Brewpub", by
David Sohigian, American Brewers Guild. Some supplemental material on yeast
used in that presentation can be found at
http://realbeer.com/abg/pdf/ibssupplement.pdf
There is a section in that material dealing with Inhibitory Effects of CO2
on yeast health and performance. In a nutshell, it says that saturation
levels of CO2 cause many changes in the metabolism of the yeast during
fermentation, including a decrease in or prevention of cell division. Many
other negative effects are described.
Assuming these effects are real, there are implications for brewing
practice. I will illustrate with a current situation I have.
I have two 5-gallon meads in primary fermentation, one using Wyeast dry mead
yeast 3632 and one using Wyeast sweet mead yeast 3184. They have been going
for about three weeks and both still have about a three second bubble. The
3184 mead is very "fizzy". Any agitation of the carboy results in
considerable evolution of CO2. The 3632 mead is mostly flat, showing little
of the fizzy character of the other one. There are many differences between
the two meads, but one that might have some bearing is that the 3632 mead
had about 1/4 tsp of Foam Control used to help suppress foaming during
aeration (recommended usage is 1 tsp). Is it possible that this affects the
CO2 retention? Although the bubble rate of the sweet mead indicates a
healthy fermentation, I wonder if there is any negative effect from the high
CO2 level.
If this effect of CO2 is real, then one should attempt to maintain maximum
yeast health and vigor during fermentation by adopting a practice of
degassing during fermentation by some means such as agitation or by using an
additive to reduce CO2 retention.
Do any of you Wise Ones know anything about this effect?
Stan Prevost
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 16:50:02 PST
From: "Gradh O'Dunadaig" <odunadaig@hotmail.com>
Subject: an idea
Hey, Dan Listermann and other engineer-types...
so, i live at sea-level and when i am skimming the fecch from my
boiling wort, it gets mildly uncomfortable with my paw in my brewpot.
your task, should you decide to accept it, is to come up with a gizmo so
i don't burn my precious fingers. email me for the street address to
send the royalty checks.
or, if there is an already existing gizmo, could i please be
informed of the location where i might make the purchase?
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 20:36:20 -0500
From: Doug Moyer <shyzaboy@geocities.com>
Subject: Ball valves
In HBD#2960 Rod Prather mentions the non-linearity of ball valves. Since
most people I know control ball valves by hand, their non-linear nature
is not relevant. But the fact that when you open them up they are truly
open is important. It keeps husks and other bits from catching like they
_could_ whilst going around the bends in a gate valve.
Open the ball valve as far or as little as you need. Does it matter what
the angular position is in relation to the flow?
Brew on!
Doug Moyer
Salem, VA
Star City Brewers Guild: http://hbd.org/starcity
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 21:48:35 -0600
From: Jim Snow <homebrewer@home.com>
Subject: Re: Why RIMS with modified malts?
To answer Bruce's question below:
If I believe in single temperature mashing, is there any reason to
consider a RIMS?
I am in the process of upgrading my three-tiered system to RIMS. I am
also generally a single infusion mash person. Two benefits I see in
switching to RIMS is (1) providing a constant temperature _throughout_
the bed during the mash and (2) easily raising the temp for mash out. I
have noticed with my digital thermomether that the temp of my mash bed
can vary greatly during my 153F infusion mashes. I hope to improve my
extraction efficiency, wort clarity and process repeatability through
RIMS.
-Jim
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 04:05:27 +0000
From: AJ <ajdel@mindspring.com>
Subject: Alcohol Measurement
I sent the following to Simon Wesley in response to his request for info
about alcohol measurement. Then I thought that there might be a reader
or two (besides Simon) who might be interested in how alcohol in beer is
measured. The following is the ASBC Beer-3 method:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Briefly, Boehinger Manheim, now part of Roche, sells a kit for alcohol
determination. It costs about $80 and, as the enzymes must be kept
cold, must be Fedexed overnight adding about $20 to your bill. Then
there is some handling fee so it's a little over $100 when the smoke
clears. I think the kit does 30 tests but half of these are blanks i.e.
you can really only do 15 tests with a kit unless you run a bunch at
one time against 1 blank.
A sample at about 0.5% abv is diluted about 100:1 (working from memory
here) and 3 mL placed in a cuvet and three mL of DI water in another
(the blank). Each of the 2 cuvets has 0.3 mL buffer and an NAD plus AlDH
(aldehyde dehydrogenase) tablet added to it. The cuvets must have a
closure or be sealed with parafilm to prevent evaporation. The
absorbance is measured at 340 nm. Now 0.05 mL of ADH (alcohol
dehydrogenase) slurry is added to each and, after a reaction period, the
absorbances are measured again. The EtOH content is proportional to the
difference of the differences in the absorbance meaurements. The test is
extremely
sensitive, hence the 100:1 dilution. There is no reason it could not be
used for normal alcoholic strength beer as well (in fact there is a
simplified procedure for beer, wine, etc.) except for the expense.
I saw your post in today's HBD and I can do this testing if you want
but I'd have to charge quite a bit and I can't immagine why someone who
is obviously enjoying his experiments with LA beer so much would want
someone else to do the analysis! [Simon has access to a
spectrophotometer]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The following is a little amplification on the method. The chemistry
mimics what goes on in your liver. First, ethanol is oxidized to
acetaldehyde by the electron transfer coenzyme NAD+ in the presence of
the enzyme alcohol dehydrogenase. In this process, NAD+ is reduced to
NADH
ADH
CH3CH2OH + NAD+ ----> CH3CHO + NADH + H+
Next, acetaldehyde is oxidized to acetic acid by NAD+ in the presence of
aldehyde dehydrogenase:
AlDH
CH3CHO + NAD+ H2O ----> CH3COOH + NADH + H+
The presence of the hydrogen ion on the right shows that the reaction is
pH dependent and in the test it is forced to the right by the use of a
strong alkaline (potassium hydroxide) buffer. Thus each mole of alcohol
oxidized results in 2 moles of NADH. NADH absorbs light at 340 nm (near
UV ) and thus the amount of NADH in the cuvet can be estimated from the
spectral absorbtion at that wavelength using Beer's law. This is
directly proportional to the amount of ethanol in the sample.
ASBC method Beer-1 for full strength beers adds 50 mL of DI water to 100
mL of beer and distills the mixture until nearly 100 mL of distillate
has been collected. The distillate is presumed to contain all the
alcohol from the beer. It is made up to 100 mL with DI water, mixed, and
its specific gravity measured with an electronic densitometer of
pycnometer. Tables give the % alcohol by weight and volume of the
distillate and hence the beer. The residue in the flask is made up to
100 mL and its specific gravity measured. Comparison to the OG of the
beer gives the true attenuation.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 06:41:21 -0500
From: Rod Prather <rodpr@iquest.net>
Subject: valves
I'll go with you on the glove valve being a better control mechanish but
ball valves are terribly non linear when it comes to controlling flow and
have poor resolution due to the 1/4 turn characteristic. What you are
saying is that ball valve, though non-linear with a tendency to control flow
only near the closed position are desirable because they are easy to
clean? So what If I want something that has some resolution and range. My
needs for control are a bit more precise than I can get from a globe
valve. Globe valves don't seem to be a good answer for brewery
applications, too many hiding places.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 22:38:20 +0000
From: "John W. Rhymes" <jwrhymes@mindspring.com>
Subject: Heart of Dixie Brew-Off: Entries due 3/6
It's time!
Entries are due on March 6, 1999, for the 1999 Heart of Dixie
Brew-Off. Judging will be based on the 1998 BJCP guidelines, and
we are accepting all styles except Cider. Our special category is
Potato Beers, made with at least 20% potato (in any variety or form).
Entries in this category should be designated as category 'P'.
See http://www.bham.net/brew/brew-off-1999.html for details and entry
forms. Entries are $6 and require three bottles. Recipes are
required only for the Potato Beer category.
We are putting together another excellent judging panel (more judges
are certainly welcome!). Last year, we had 37 judges evaluate 155
entries, with 3 judges for each flight. We've got good prizes and we
will return your scoresheets promptly. Please include your email
address on your registration form to expedite communication.
John W. Rhymes -- Birmingham, Alabama
jwrhymes@mindspring.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 23:27:02 -0800 (PST)
From: Scott Murman <smurman@best.com>
Subject: homebrew cooking - lager yeast bread
I know there are others out there who have tried this, so please,
don't be shy. I've gotten back into sourdough baking, which prompted
this experiment. I took the yeast slurry from the primary of a lager,
poured it into a quart mason jar, and stuck it into the fridge (aka
beer holder) to settle. No sanitation efforts were undertaken, or
desired. For some reason, I felt a lager yeast would work better than
an ale strain for bread. <shrug>
Anyway... I took 1 tablespoon of yeast slurry, and combined it with 1
cup of bread flour and 1/4 cup of water. I kneaded this in my bread
machine, and then let it sit for about 4 hours. After 1 hour there
was definite action. At 4 hours I added 1/2 cup of wheat flour (I
only wanted to make a small loaf to experiment), and again used the
bread machine to give the dough a long knead. After the knead, I
formed the dough into a round loaf, and let it rise overnight. I
intentionally did not add any salt or sugar.
In the morning, the dough had at least doubled in size. I slashed the
tops of the loaf, glazed it with egg white and water, and baked it for
40 min. at 350F. My oven is small, and I suspect that it bakes to a
higher temperature, so you might want to try 400F as a start.
It resulted in a decent bread. It isn't the greatest bread in the
world, but it certainly is as good as many bread yeast recipes I've
seen. By playing with the rise times and H2O amounts you could
probably make an interesting loaf.
-SM-
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 07:11:36 -0500
From: Rod Prather <rodpr@iquest.net>
Subject: valves
I'll go with you on the glove valve being a better control mechanish but
ball valves are terribly non linear when it comes to controlling flow and
havX-Mozilla-Status: 0009to the 1/4 turn characteristic. What you are
saying is that ball valve, though non-linear with a tendency to control flow
only near the closed position are desirable because they are easy to
clean? So what If I want something that has some resolution and range. My
needs for control are a bit more precise than I can get from a globe
valve. Globe valves don't seem to be a good answer for brewery
applications, too many hiding places.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 07:28:16 -0500
From: marli@bbs2.rmrc.net (Jon Macleod)
Subject: rowan
Has anyone on the list ever used rowan berries (from the European
Mountain Ash) in brewing; either beer or mead. I've seen it mentioned
in quite a few historical texts, but never a recipe. Haven't been able
to try any either. The berries themselves are certainly awful (VERY
tart), but I've really been curious to try something.
Mike
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 22:19:48 -0500
From: Mark_Ohrstrom/Humphrey_Products@humphreypc.com
Subject: Wood as an Structural Material
Mitchell "Smooth" Surface (sorry, couldn't resist #;-]) asks:
> My other question is about stands. I've looked at some of the systems
> on the web and noticed that most of them are using metal frames. I
> don't weld and don't know anyone who does. I'd like to use a wooden
> stand, with perhaps a sheet metal top, but have the obvious concern
> about putting a 170,000 BTU gas burner on a piece of wood. Has anyone
> done this?
I invite anyone with questions about the safety of wood in the vicinity of
the open flame/heat of a gas burner to use a handy, yet accurate instrument
to predict the relative safety of their application -- the human hand.
It's surprising how close that you can hold your hand to the kettle and
burner while they are running full tilt.
In still air, use either corrugated cardboard or plywood as a
shield/reflector/receiver of the radiant heat from the burner. Now, place
your hand between the surface and the roaring burner to gauge the heat
exposure. Note that wood surfaces would best be smooth and painted a light
color -- this to prevent sparks or soot (or spilled wort) to settle on the
surface, and to reflect radiant heat.
Along with the conducted heat (assuming that you're using the typical
burner/stand configuration) you should be nowhere close to the
scorch/ignition point of wood. Unlike say, a woodstove installation
(perhaps ignored for years), the brew - and the surrounding area - tends
to receive close attention during the time that the fire is on.
Note: do not use wood directly ABOVE the heat source! (Try placing your
hand OVER the flame to confirm why this is so!)
Mark in Kalamazoo
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 08:48:52 -0500
From: "Alan McKay" <amckay@nortelnetworks.com>
Subject: re : Milling Grains
Jack Schmidling wrote :
> Just to keep the record straight, I posted no such thing. It was
> the sales manager for that Canadian company who always seems to be
> trying to pick a fight. He got nowhere on r.c.b so he lifted that
> from my web page and came trolling here in the HBD and now seems
> to have gotten a bite.
First of all, I have no affiliation whatsoever with Valley Mill.
I live in Ottawa where it's made, and I met the guy once when I
went to pick up my mill at his house. Just so you know, Jack,
I'm considering a law suit to get you to cease and decist this
sort of slander against my name. It's outright lies, and I won't
put up with it any longer.
As for where I lifted the quoted material, I got it from your
post to r.c.b, Jack, not from your web page. If you like I can
very easily dig up the exact date and time you posted the message,
and can give yo all the appropriate article numbers and so on.
-Alan
- --
Alan McKay Nortel Networks
Norstar WinNT 613-765-6843 (ESN 395)
amckay@nortelnetworks.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 06:20:23 -0800
From: Mike Isaacs <misaacs@bigfoot.com>
Subject: My first cider
I usually brew on back-to-back weekends, taking advantage of the previous
week's yeast. Last week, instead of brewing, I decided to throw in some
apple juice. I racked yesterday and both batches were very acidic.
Batch#1 was 5 gallons 100% Gravenstein juice, pasteurized.
Batch#2 was 5 gallons Tree Top, pasteurized.
Both were added, as is, to the fermenters with 1056 American Ale.
Visible signs of fermentation appeared in 3 hours at 65F.
Racked to secondary 7 days later.
Batch#1 Some apple taste, very, very acidic, little apple aroma. - nice
yellow color, cloudy.
Batch#2 Less apple aroma and taste than #1, less acidic, too. - clear and
pale yellow.
I plan to keg one batch for a party in three weeks and bottle the other.
Will the taste mellow or does it need some work. I have had thoughts of
blending both, after tasting again. I have also thought about lactose, a
product I have not used before; or maybe some fruit flavorings. What
about adding a can of apple juice concentrate to the kegged batch and
force carbonating?
Any comments or suggestions? Thanks,
Mike
Son of a Son of a Aler, misaacs@bigfoot.com
Dancing when we go, "Apocalypso IPA"
Jolly Mon Brewery, San Ramon, CA
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 07:57:36 +0000
From: Jim Liddil <jliddil@azcc.arizona.edu>
Subject: sake stuff
Rod Prather Asks
<SNIP>
>Did the paper give any insight as to why sake ferments to 20%. I have been
>told of a phenomena called accomodation where the alcohol tolerance
>increases if sugars are added slowly as fermentation progresses. Sake
>emmulates this because the koji, or aspergillus fungus, that produces the
>sugars continues working after the yeast is added to the rice liquor so
>conversion and fermetation takes place simultaneously. I have wondered if
>the principle could be applied to high alcohol beers.
Again I suggest For starters (grin) read CRC Critical Reviews
in mIcrobiology "Ethanol tolerance in Yeasts" Vol 13, Issue 3. This review
article covers all this stuff and more. and if you get all the cited
references you end up with quite a collection of cool articles.:-) The
bottom line is that there really is not much difference in brewing (beer,
wine, sake distilling) yeasts and their ability to ferment to a given
alcohol level. I am only refering to s. cerevesiae. And the bottom line
is is the final prodcut drinkable? All of this stuff about FAN, oxygen
etc. is mentla masturbation if the final result is undrinkable swill. Keep
in mind that for the majority of the worlds brewers the beer the brew has
to SELL! If it does not then they go out of business. We as homebrewers
can do all the funny stuff we want only being limited by our budgets. And
if all I want is high alcohol beer I'll make some barleywine and fortify it
with the 200 proof ethanol. Now there's an idea.
Jim Liddil
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 10:14:11 -0500
From: Dan Listermann <72723.1707@compuserve.com>
Subject: Phil's Phalse Bottom
Rick Georgette writes:
<By itself Phils false promise bottom is difficult to use. Grain easily
slips past it and it floats in water making it difficult to mash in. I
have used a simple solution to make this work in a round cooler. Simply
slit a piece of tubing and slide it around the circumference of the
screen. This not only holds it in place, but it prevents grain from
flowing aroung the screen causing a stuck sparge.>
As I have explained here before, if you use the strike method where you
put
all the water in the mash tun before adding the grist this sort of
problem
can happen. For a number of reasons it is better to add the grist and
water effectivly at the same time by adding a pan of water followed by a
pan of stirring between additions. I don't have problems with stuck
mashes
when I do this.
Lately I have found an even better way to strike. I connect the output
of
my hot liquor tank to the output of the mash tun and underlet the strike
water while I stir in the grist
No more switching pans and I get a very controled mix without balling or
exposure of enzymes to excessive temperatures.
Rick's gasket is very effective and harmless, but I haven't found it to
be
necessary.
Dan Listermann dan@listermann.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 10:43:26 -0500
From: Dan Listermann <72723.1707@compuserve.com>
Subject: Milling Grain
Jack Schmidling writes:
<BTW, Sieble uses a motorized and timed shaker so I would not be
surprised if someone got different results hand shaking the sieves.>
The second public testing of the Maltmill's grist distrubution was
performed at the Oldenburg Brewery. It was performed with their
mechanical
shaker. The results bore no resemblance to the distribution that is in
Jack's promotional material.
To my knowlege Jack has never released the actual numbers he got from the
tests at the Seible Institute. If I am incorrect in this, I would
appreciate a copy.
Oldenburg let me borrow their shaker long enough to develope a method of
producing the same distribution manually.
My offer stands. I will lend my seives to anyone willing to give it a go
and report their results.
Dan Listermann dan@listermann.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 09:42:10 -0600
From: rlabor@lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald)
Subject: RE: Yeast from bottles
>>>>
From: Petr Otahal <potahal@postoffice.utas.edu.au>
Why doesn't everyone just restart their yeast from their own home brew
bottles by building up from the sediment in the bottle? Isn't this a lot
less complicated than having to use agar and stuff? Surely you could do
this at least a few times without getting many mutations and the like.
<<<<
I did this once, and it worked well, just as you might imagine.
I guess it is not done more often because of some sort of paranoia/AR fears
about unseen bacteria.
Ron
Ronald La Borde - Metairie, Louisiana - rlabor@lsumc.edu
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 12:30:40 EST
From: BioCoat@aol.com
Subject: Wort pH
Can anyone tell me the significance of proper wort pH. What should the
correct pH be before and after the boil?
Thanks
Rick Georgette
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 11:49:00 PST
From: "Foster Jason" <jasfoster@hotmail.com>
Subject: Water analysis and Swedish Ale
Greetings Fellow Brewers,
I am a moderate, intermediate all-grain brewer of 5 years. In a quest to
improve my beers, I am on a search.
I find my dark beers (stout, porter, brown ale, dunkel) turn out
excellent and I am very pleased with their taste. However, I am usually
disappointed with my lighter-coloured beers. There is usually a sour
off-taste, sometimes more, sometimes less. In particular, my efforts to
brew kolsch and pale ales have left me underwhelmed.
So, I am searching for a cause. There are a number of possibilities my
set-up is crude by many standards), but my latest theory is my water
composition. I use our municipal tap water and add 1 to 2 tsp of gypsum.
I wonder if this is adequate. Our water analysis looks like this:
chlorine=2.5 mg/L
chloride=2.8 mg/L
flouride=.8mg/L
calcium=80 mg/L
total hardness (as CaC03)=150 mg/L
sulphate=60mg/L
sodium=4 mg/L
pH=8.2
Other elements such as mercury, lead, iron and manganese are at
negligible levels.
Is there something else I should be doing?
My second question: I notice on my packs of Wyeast liquid yeast that
they have a yeast strain for "Swedish Ale". I am a self-described
Swedeophile and would love to brew one. Does anyone have a recipe and/or
a description of Swedish Ale?
Thank you to all.
Jason Foster
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 14:45:34 -0500
From: Bob.Sutton@fluordaniel.com
Subject: Bottled O2 Adapters
I thought I'd set up an aeration rig using bottled oxygen, instead of the old
aquarium pump. Off to Home Depot and I found O2 can (BenzOMatic) for about $7.
Fine so far... huh ? Well not quite. The O2 cylinder needs to be fitted with a
valve that actuates an internal release valve inside the O2 cylinder - much like
a Schraeder valve on a bicycle. AND it takes a left-handed thread (good-bye
Home Depot).
I really don't want to by a whole cutting rig just to get to the O2 shut-off
valve.
Has anyone adapted a BenzOMatic O2 cylinder. I'd appreciate some hints.
If one doesn't have ready access to medical O2, or is welding-impaired, what
solutions remain. Am I left with the aquarium pump.
>From the foothills of Sawth Cariliner,
Bob
Fruit Fly Brewhaus
Yesterdays' Technology Today
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2963, 02/25/99
*************************************
-------
