Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2993
HOMEBREW Digest #2993 Thu 01 April 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:
Re: Guinness/real ale type taps ("Michael Maag")
Old/Stale Malt or Bad Crush, Water softeners (Joe Rolfe)
Returned mail: User unknown (Stephen Klump)
Publicizing homebrew events (Gail Elber)
Canadian Bud... Acetaldehyde? ("Riedel, Dave")
Re: Big Brew '99 Milk Stout ("Brian Rezac")
Guiness head, Soft water (Dave Burley)
Re: Soapy taste (Nathan Kanous)
Amplifier Chip ("J.Kish")
Re: judging, why? (MicahM1269)
autolysis (Jason.Gorman)
Beer Flavors, Phreds Phirst CAP (Eric.Fouch)
Sugar Substitute ("Trevor Good")
The dreaded topic...Filtering ("Philip J Wilcox")
Correct pH for hop tea? (mike rose)
competitions, Using yeast from one batch for a second batch, 100 (LaBorde, Ronald)
Beer characteristics & commercial examples (jsulli - Jeremy Sullivan)
Venturi stout faucet and judging ("silent bob")
Help with RIMS problems (Paul Shick)
diacetyl, PC control of RIMS, Stuck RIMS mash, mashing/steeping, skunky/sulfur (Dave Burley)
RIMS Stuck? (Joy Hansen)
Re: Spiffy new TI chip for Index of Refraction (Wade Hutchison)
MI Brewpubs (Nathan Kanous)
Braggot (Nathan Kanous)
Re: 100 Gal Limit (Tim Anderson)
Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
This space free to a good competition...
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, 30 Mar 1999 12:50:33 -0500
From: "Michael Maag" <maagm@rica.net>
Subject: Re: Guinness/real ale type taps
I asked:
Is there a Guinness type tap, or a tap for a beer engine, or a sparkler tap
that is designed to draw atmospheric nitrogen into the beer by a venturi
tube or the like? If not, is there a style of tap that might be modified to
do the job? I would like to dispense ale with CO2 and have the tap "suck"
air (mostly nitrogen) into the beer stream. Any ideas?
Steve replies:
Why would you want to do this? The point of these taps is to release CO2
from
solution and create a thick dense head, not to aerate the beer.
I reply:
I want to simulate drawing some of the ale into a syringe along with air and
squirting it under the surface of the ale in the glass.
I want to simulate the action of the "widget" in the Guinness can which
releases nitrogen into the beer.
I have read the CO2/Nitrogen mix in the Guinness on tap or in the Pub Draft
cans is what gives Guinness it's characteristic head. I want the CO2 and
the atmospheric Nitrogen to mix in the tap on the way out. I want to avoid
using compressed nitrogen if I don't have to, seems like a waste since air
is mostly nitrogen. Eh?
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 13:06:56 -0500
From: Joe Rolfe <rolfe@sky.sky.com>
Subject: Old/Stale Malt or Bad Crush, Water softeners
More two cents on the bad crush/mbad malt debate....
Dan Listermann dan@listermann.com 72723.1707@compuserve.com
said:
>"Old and stale" malt is not the cause of poor extraction.
> Poor crushes are the primary cause of poor extraction.
Ok I'll agree for the average novice poor extraction is going to come
from poor process. But once you get by this issue, if you constantly
use the same process (by keeping somewhat reasonable records - I was
pretty anal for a while then backed off a little) and lets say you
brew the same beers (which I did) and even before lautering your first
wort is way off (let us say first wort normally was 1085 to 1090 and
you get a first wort of 1060). Volume of grain(wt), water(liters),
temp and ph are in control (as they were). The runoff/finished/boiled
hopped wort was hazy (more so than normal but iodine looked as tho it
converted). And lets fatten the pot a bit by saying " I just dipped
in to a new metric tonne that arrived last week - this did not happen
in yesterdays brews - same grain vendor/malting house". No date/batch
codes to boot. And fatten it again by calling another 'friendly' local
microbrewer - who got a shipment recently from the same vendor/malting
house who says he has the same problem (crappy extract and hazy
product)... Guess what we both did with the malt - sent it back, three
times in 4 years this happened....Another good reason why blending in
a micro is not a bad thing to do if you can afford it (extra tanks
just for the uhoh...).
My guess old - stale malt...(maybe old and stale is not the proper
term) - crappy malting?? - who knows/who cares ( i wonder if they were
ISO9000 certified ;)...the bottom line is the malt is bad/out of spec.
Call it what ever you want it is S**T malt. And we all know that
whatever (insert any big brewery here) does not want you - the
uncontrolled pico breweries of the world - will get it - eventually.
And you'll all scratch your head, maybe some cussing and what the F***
is going on here...- because most dont keep good records or brew often
enough. But as a good friend has me now saying ' You know what -
you'll still have beer at the end of the day '. Thanx Dan (not you DL
another Dan=), I could not agree more...
George, Marshall E. <MGeorge@bridge.com>
Asked about Water Softeners and Brewing
I got one of those salt based ones too, it is great for ripping out
iron, manganese amoungst a few others like calcium (a bad thing to
have ripped out). It also bumps up the sodium and cloride - a bad
thing for blood pressure and beer in excess. I am due to get a before
and after check test done soon. I'll repost the results when I do. I
have two tests from ages ago, but they were done by different
companies with different 'checmical callouts' and three yrs apart, so
I wont confuse the masses with that data.
*****QDA******
Best thing to do: if your raw water tastes good/smells good, adjust
the pH and us it. If the iron is high (>1-2ppm) you may want to blend
(raw/soft/someone elses supply) to get it below .5ppm or lower, check
your raw water calcium content and determine how much you need to add
back. You'll probably want to avoid CaCl. Cl will be high enough for
most beers after a 50/50 blend. I would not use soft for mashing -
without adding some calcium in. For extract I doubt that it matters
much. Yeast dont like high iron content and you wont like the beer
much (IMHO).
Good Luck and Great Brewing
Joe Rolfe
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 14:05:25 -0500
From: Stephen Klump <StephenKlump@compuserve.com>
Subject: Returned mail: User unknown
Hello All,
There seems to be common organoleptic confusion
between diacetyl and DMS.
The best way to clear the air and your noses would be
to sit down with a bottle of Rolling Rock and one
of Bishops Finger - preferably without the skunk to
confuse the palate. Side by side comparison
of the two will show creamed corn vs microwave popcorn
(respectively).
good luck and happy tasting.
cheers!
Stephen
stephenklump@compuserve.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 11:52:06 -0800
From: Gail Elber <gail@brewtech.com>
Subject: Publicizing homebrew events
If you are organizing a homebrew competition or beer festival and are
hoping to draw participants and judges from a wide area, don't forget to
let the bimonthly brewing magazines (especially BrewingTechniques <g>) know
about it far, far in advance. The event may seem far away to you, but we
work far ahead -- for example, I'm currently working on the May/June issue.
We don't need full details, just the basics. I often see competitions
announced here on HBD that are too late to get into the BT calendar. And I
just discovered by chance that the New England Real Ale Festival will be in
April this year (www.redbonesbbq.com), and we won't have announced it.
Bummer! Eventually the Web will make all this irrelevant, but meanwhile,
remember us.
Gail Elber
Associate Editor
BrewingTechniques
P.O. Box 3222
Eugene, OR 97403
541/687-2993
fax 541/687-8534
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 11:56:48 -0800
From: "Riedel, Dave" <RiedelD@pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca>
Subject: Canadian Bud... Acetaldehyde?
George De Piro writes:
> Acetaldehyde: smells like freshly cut pumpkin or unripe apples.
> Also smells like Budweiser (its easier to smell it if the beer is
> warmer than the typical serving temperature of Budweiser).
So, is this the same for Canadian brewed Budweiser? It's brewed
under license by Labatts. I can't get the US Bud here. (Not that
this is usually a problem).
cheers,
Dave Riedel
Victoria, BC
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 13:15:36 -0700
From: "Brian Rezac" <brian@aob.org>
Subject: Re: Big Brew '99 Milk Stout
In HBD #2991, Matt Arnold wrote:
>I was very disappointed that the official AHA recipe would include
steeping
>grains that are only going to give you starch in your beer. Flaked
barley and
>flaked oats do need to be mashed with 2-row/6-row/pale ale/etc. malt
otherwise
>they are adding nothing but starch. They also say to use Carapils.
That's OK if
>you're using DWC Carapils (which can be steeped) but it's bad if it's
Briess
>(which cannot). I guess I would have hoped that at least the AHA
wouldn't be
>giving out such bad brewing advice.
Matt makes some excellent points. He is correct. Flaked barley and
oats do need to be mashed with equal or greater quantities of
enzymatic malt. I also agree with his comparison of DWC vs. Briess
carapils. When Paul and I worked on stepping down the original 11 Bbl
recipe, these issues were raised.
Our goal, however, was to provide an extract/steeped grains version of
the Collaborator Milk Stout. The dilemma is if we used pale malt and
reduced the pale malt extract in the appropriate quantities, we would
end up with basically an all-grain recipe with a little extract in it.
So, knowing that homebrewers have been using these ingredients this
way for years, we opted for simplicity over efficiency to encourage
participation of homebrewers at all levels. At the time, folks were
chompin' at the bit to get the recipe, so we made a quick decision.
Let me point out, however, that there is nothing "official" about the
recipe. We've provided the original 11 Bbl recipe so that the
advanced brewers can step-down it down themselves to fit their system
if they choose. I often encourage brewers to tweak it anyway they
like to fit their system or the availability of ingredients. The real
purpose of Big Brew is not to brew exact replicas of Collaborator Milk
Stout, but simply brew together.
I will add a note to the Extract version of the recipe annotating the
suggested use of enzymatic malts. (One nice thing about Big Brew is I
can update the site directors via email.) But, I would prefer to
create a good, solid extract/steeped grains version of the recipe with
readily available ingredients. I am open to suggestions. Please take
another look at the recipe at: http://www.beertown.org/bigbrew99
You can post your suggestions here on the HBD, or email me directly at
brian@aob.org
Thanks for your help.
I also invite everyone to participate in the AHA's Big Brew '99!
E Pluribus (Br)Unum! - {From Many, One (Brew)!}
Brian Rezac
Administrator
American Homebrewers Association
736 Pearl Street, Boulder, CO 80302
303 447-0816, ext. 121
brian@aob.org http://beertown.org
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 15:54:53 -0500
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: Guiness head, Soft water
Brewsters:
In responding to an HBDer's question about the potential
existence of a tap that used air at atmospheric pressure
to mix in air to produce a Guiness type head, Steve Ashton
said "why would you want to do this, the purpose of a Guiness
tap is to remove CO2 and produce a head"
Not quite right, Steve, or at least mis-leading to some extent.
To produce a Guiness type head it is necessary to provide
agitation to the beer in the presence of air or nitrogen gas
( via a sparkler plate, e.g.)such that you cause "breakout"
of the CO2 and yield bubbles which contain both CO2 and
nitrogen or air. The latter gases are less soluble in the beer
than CO2 and therefore, as long as the bubble wall is stable,
these gases will stay inside. This gives an extremely long
lasting foam. Things that provide a stable cell wall are
surfactants like water soluble proteins and other long chain
water soluble organic solids. With a pure CO2 bubble, even
with a stable bubble wall, diffusion of the soluble gas through
the wall leads to an early demise of the foam.
- ----------------------------------
Marshall George just moved into a house with a water softener
and ponders the effect on his all grain brewing.
It will have an effect. Largely, the major effect is that you have
switched from a water that basically has alkaline earth ions
( calcium and magnesium ) to one which has alkalai metal
ions ( sodium).
It will have an effect on the mash pH and on the mouth feel
of the finished beer. Perhaps more importantly your whole
family will no longer get any minerals other than sodium from
the water ( bad). Solve both of these problems easily by
installing a Reverse Osmosis (R-O) water purifier under
your kitchen sink, so that everyone including the local brewer
can have de-ionized water. This R-O should cost you about
$200 or less if you install it. Feed your family dolomite pills
or Citrical with magnesium and a little zinc to ensure proper
bone growth and maintenance.
You may want to bring the calcium up to at least 50 ppm,
so that you have the proper enzyme stability ( especially
if you mash at a high temperature) and to assure the
proper flocculation of the yeast to promote beer clarity.
Calcium chloride will produce a smooth, full mouth and
calcium sulfate will produce a bitter, dry finish and
accentuate the hops.
Keep on Brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ
Dave_Burley@Compuserve.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 15:59:51 -0500
From: Nathan Kanous <nlkanous@pharmacy.wisc.edu>
Subject: Re: Soapy taste
There it is....Bickham's Focus on Flavors. Brewing Techniques July /
August 1998:
Soapy, goaty, butyric flavors are due to fatty acids and associated esters
which may be minimized by minimizing contact with trub, selecting different
yeast, or better separation of wort from trub. Question...how do you chill
and transfer from boil to fermenter?
nathan in madison, WI
Nathan L. Kanous II, Pharm.D., BCPS
Clinical Assistant Professor
School of Pharmacy
University of Wisconsin - Madison
425 North Charter Street
Madison, WI 53706-1515
Phone (608) 263-1779
Pager (608) 265-7000 #2246 (digital)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 22:26:37 -0800
From: "J.Kish" <jjkish@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Amplifier Chip
Wade Hutchison,
Can you find out the name of the amplifier chip
from your electronic buddy? We are interested!
Joe Kish jjkish@worldnet.att.net
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 07:56:26 EST
From: MicahM1269@aol.com
Subject: Re: judging, why?
In a message dated 3/28/99 11:13:01 PM Central Standard Time, homebrew-
request@hbd.org writes:
<<
> From: MaltHound@aol.com
> Subject: Homebrew Judging - why?
>
> So I ask the wise and experienced collective:
>
> What would make you enter into competitions fully knowing the limitations
that
> exist?
> What makes those brewers that have multiple ribbons on their brewery walls
> continue to enter?
> Why do so many homebrewers in general feel the need to compete?
>
> Fred Wills
>>
I would say that for many (not all) it has much more to do with competition
rather than the desire/ need for feedback from the judges. I think that many
homebrewers use the need for feedback on their beers to justify what they
really want, to enter and win. Competiveness is very much a part of human
nature, and accounts for a lot of the things we do.
BTW, my wife banned me from competing in brewing competitions several years
ago.
micah millspaw- brewer at large
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 08:29:00 -0500
From: Jason.Gorman@steelcase.com
Subject: autolysis
I did some searching in the archives, but could not find the information I was
looking for. From what I have read, autolysis is basically the spilling of
the yeast guts into the beer. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't this
basically yeast nutrient? If you transfer to a secondary and add some DME,
will you get renewed fermentation and rid yourself of the rubbery autolysis
taste and smell?
RDB
GR, MI
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 09:46:00 -0500
From: Eric.Fouch@steelcase.com
Subject: Beer Flavors, Phreds Phirst CAP
HBD-
A few comments on the flavor profiles (defects) in commercially available
beers. Homebrewing Volume I has a whole section on particular beer flavor
descriptors, and the commercial beers they are found in.
Here is where one would normally put in affiliation disclaimers, but I'm
afraid we can't do that. Fred has found a few typos and sentence fragments in
Al's book, and being the first to bring these to Al's attention, Fred fully
expects to be prominently featured in the credits, sit back and retire when
the royalty checks start rolling in from Homebrewing Volume I, 2nd Edition.
Then AND ONLY THEN will I allow him to retire from his gig in my brewery's
Male Escort Service.
************************SAA****************************
(Serious Announcement Alert)
Also- in conjunction with my homebrew club The Primetime Brewers, a local
microbrewery (Canal Street Brewing) and, I think, The Michigan Brewers Guild,
we are trying to put together a tasting seminar with a commercial kit to dope
up beers and educate brewers on flavor descriptors and their sensitivity to
them. We need to get attendance up to 30 or so, and we keep hovering around
25. Cost of the seminar would be $30 per person. If anybody in the West
Michigan area is interested, drop me a note, and I'll get you more information.
**********************End SAA****************************
Fred and I did our first CAP this week:
2.5 pounds polenta
7.5 pounds Pale Ale Malt (Briess)
.25oz Home Grown Northern Brewer (FWH)
.75 oz HGNB at 60 minutes
Cereal mashed 2.5 pounds malt with the polenta for 30 minutes at 158 (Mashed
in at 130, and brought the temp up to 158 across 30 minutes).
Then boiled the cereal mash for 30 minutes.
Then we mashed the remaining 5# of malt at 153F for 45 minutes, added the
cooled cereal mash to hit 158 for 15 minutes.
We sparged to 6.5 gallons into Fred's False Keg Top Bottomed (non phloating)
Brew Keg, and boiled it in the garage on Fred's modified water heater natural
gas burner.
We cast 5.5 gallons of cooled wort at 1.050 into the fermenter, and put it in
the fridge overnight to cool the last 10 degrees or so down to 47F
Then Fred pitched the 2112 yeast from a one gallon starter the next morning,
and we got activity 24 hours later.
Fred's kinda pissed at me, 'cause he thinks I screwed up the starter: I
pitched a 2112 smack pack (fully expanded) into 1/2 gallon 1.040 starter at
room temp. After it fermented out, I poured off the liquid, and pitched
another gallon of 1.040 starter on the yeast. After it fermented out, I put
the starter jug in the fridge at 47. 24 hours before brewing, I dumped off
the liquid, and poured in another quart of 1.040 starter, and left it in the
fridge. It was at high krausen when I pitched it into the CAP Wort. I
challenged Fred to critique my starter growing technique, and he just muttered
something about lining the reception area with Visqueen for a "bachelor"
party, refilling the KY dispensers and royalty checks.
If any body would like a photo of Fred's False Keg Top Bottomed Brew Keg, or
any of the other modifications we have done in Fred's Craft Corner, let me
know, and Fred'll scan the photo's in after he downloads the hidden camera
footage from the "bachelor" party.
Eric Fouch
Bent Dick YoctoBrewery and Male Escort Service
Kentwood MI
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 09:07:17 -0600
From: "Trevor Good" <t.good@printwest.com>
Subject: Sugar Substitute
I have a friend who has recently bought his starter kit for home brewing. He
is starting the way we all did with kits and corn sugar. The only difference
being he is diabetic. We work in a print shop that printed a cookbook for
diabetics. It called for Splenda to replace sugar in most recipies. As far
as we know Spenda is a sugar derivitive. Is there a sugar substitute for kit
beers? Will DME work well in kit beers? What do other diabetics use to
replace sugars if anything? Will yeast react to Splenda in the same way as
sugar?
Thanks in advance
Trevor Good
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 10:57:15 -0400
From: "Philip J Wilcox" <pjwilcox@cmsenergy.com>
Subject: The dreaded topic...Filtering
From: Philip J Wilcox@CMS on 03/31/99 10:57 AM
About a year ago the photo lab at work purchased a new processor and a new
water filtering system came with it. The old one I got for free. Includeing
the the lovly short range Trend thermometer now installed in my recirc
loop. After brewing for 4 years and never finding a need to filter a beer.
I now have a stubborn Helles which refused to fall bright after using what
is rumored to be Ayinger Lager yeast? Anybody know if this is a known
Non-flocker? Beer was brewed in December with Tom Plunkard we split the
batch, he used his yeast, and I stopped at the local Micro to get mine. His
is brilliantly bright with no chill haze. My beer Tastes just as incredible
and smells awesome but looks more like an American wheat at times.
So I scrounged and got the fittings and tubing I needed. Once again cleaned
the filter, unwrapped the Spun/wound filter cartride I also got from work
and put it in the chamber and screwed the chamber into place. This is one
of the short versions (5"?) not the long 10" ones I see in BT or Zym. To my
surprize it did not fit tight? Shouldn't it? I had a half of keg of Star
san hooked it up so went ahead and ran it through the filter. It went right
through, with little to no noticeable restriction. It flowed at 4 psi and
increased without a lag to 10 psi when applied. Frustrated I stopped and
took apart the filter and from what I guess there is a 3/8 to 1/2 in gap
involved here. What gives?
Am I missing a mechanical part?
What proceedures are you other filter-ers using?
TIA to all who reply, If you want to be annomous, I can repost from private
email...
Phil Wilcox
Poison Frog Home Brewer
Warden-Prison City Brewers
In Jackson, MI 32 Mi. West of Jeff Renner
AABG, AHA, BJCP, HBD, MCAB, ETC., ad nausium...
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 07:32:13 -0800
From: mike rose <mrose@ucr.campuscw.net>
Subject: Correct pH for hop tea?
I'm making a hop tea by boiling a quart of water with hops for one minute
then adding this to the secondary. Does anyone know what the correct pH
for the quart of water should be?
Thanks, Mike Rose Riverside, CA mike@hopheads.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 10:52:10 -0600
From: rlabor@lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald)
Subject: competitions, Using yeast from one batch for a second batch, 100
>Subject: competitions
>What makes those brewers that have multiple ribbons on their brewery
>walls continue to enter?
>Why do so many homebrewers in general feel the need to compete?
The very drive for achievement that makes the ribbons appear on the walls in
the first place.
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- ------------------------------------------------------------
>Subject: Using yeast from one batch for a second batch
>...Then let settle. Transfer
>off the stuff on the top. Repeat this and then pitch the stuff on the
>bottom into the second batch.
The good yeast will be in the middle, and one is supposed to agitate, pour
off the top and collect the middle. Easier said than done! I have never
had any luck pouring off the top without remixing the whole mess again.
I had this idea to use a turkey baster and insert into the middle and suck
up the good stuff, but as soon as I tried the stuff on the bottom seems to
just leap up into the baster. So I would try this next time:
Use some 3/8 OD tubing connected to a baster or large syringe, and
try sucking from the middle with a racking cane cap put on
the end of the 3/8 tubing, hopefully this will work.
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- ---------------------------
>Subject: 100 Gal Limit
>What's the penalty if we exceed this?
>Who's keeping track?
>What's the big deal, here, anyways?
Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil.
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- ---------------
>Subject: RE: One tier system
>The stand is a recycled
>rack that weighs about 150 pounds. I added two casters on one end that
>touch and roll when I pick up on opposite end of stand. This way I can
>move out to an open spot to brew.
A real easy way to get a one tier stand is to order a metal wire two shelf
cart, with casters from a mail order industrial catalog. Will cost you
about $150, and it's perfect for a brewing one tier stand. Water cannot
collect on the wire shelves, and no drilling is needed, just bolt stuff onto
the wire shelves.
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- ---------------------
>Subject: "I Hope Your Chooks Turn Into Emus...
The whole idea of whining about back door purchases misses one important
piece of logic:
What's the difference if one purchases through the back door, or
another competing homebrew shop. Unless there's accounting
incest, what difference can it make to the success or failure of
another shop? I fail to see how either method could or should be
prevented.
Ron
Ronald La Borde - Metairie, Louisiana - rlabor@lsumc.edu
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 11:47:51 -0600
From: jsulli - Jeremy Sullivan <jsulli@acxiom.com>
Subject: Beer characteristics & commercial examples
> How would you describe Sam Adams Boston Lager? I find the "pine tree" flavor
> overpowering. Maybe I'm overly sensitive to whatever flavor that is, but I
> could barely stomach the beer.
>
> I'm a new homebrewer, and relatively new to beer in general. Please pardon my
> newbieness.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 09:50:12 PST
From: "silent bob" <holdenmcneil@hotmail.com>
Subject: Venturi stout faucet and judging
Hello fellow brewers,
The question was raised about using a venturi device in a faucet to
introduce nitrogen into beers to produce a "draught" or "guinness" style
head. The idea is good, but would require a relatively high flow rate
to work. Also, venturi's are engineered to work properly at very
precise flow rates and pressure drops, so gas pressure regulation would
have to be very precise.
As for judging.... We all know that we all have different sensitivities
to all of the relevant flavor compounds. We all also have unique
subjective tastes. Most of us prefer bigger beers. Most of us are
impressed by beers that push the limits of hoppiness, maltiness,
"bigness" etc. for a style. And, we all have varying abilities to
evaluate ou own biases. I have long thought that the BJCP should keep a
database of all score sheets including the judge, score breakdown and
specific flavor characteristics recognized by the judge (yes, this would
require changing the score sheets, scanable ones pehaps?). Every flight
of beers should contain a commercial "reference beer" that is close in
style, but not necessarily exactly the style being judged. Statistics
on how each judge scores in general, what they are sensitive to, and
their biases could be collected and returned to each judge. By using
commercial reference beers, data for one specific consistant example can
be used to compare an individual judge to a large pool of judges judging
the same beer. This diatribe only scratches the surface of this idea,
but I think that you can all see what I am getting at. Judging is
inconsistant, alot of judges misidentify flavors or miss them completely
etc. This is the only way that I see that we can continually evalute
judges and judging. Sorry for the lengthy post, and I just put on my
asbestos underwear in anticipation of the responses, so have at it.
Happy Brewing!!
Adam C. Cesnales (250 miles SE of Jeff Renner) in the armpit of America,
Youngstown, OH
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 13:28:57 -0500 (EST)
From: Paul Shick <SHICK@JCVAXA.jcu.edu>
Subject: Help with RIMS problems
Hello all,
Bill Macher wrote in with a tale of his troubled first
encounter with his RIMS. Bill, don't despair! I'm firmly
convinced that there's a learning period with any new system,
and that you'll grow to love your new set up, eventually. My
initial experiences with my one-tier basement setup were pretty
traumatic, too, but it's now reached the point where I can brew 11+
gallons in about 4 hours, including clean up, without any sweat.
Bill' questions:
>Question: Is it desirable to size the screen/manifold/false-
>bottom hole size such that some fines ARE re-circulated back
>to the filter bed (thereby not plugging the system)? Can the
>screen be too fine? My guess is too fine of screen is bad...even
>if the area of the screen is large.
Remember, the grain bed is supposed to do the filtering,
once it's set up. As long as you can keep your valves
clear, having some grain flow through early on isn't a
problem. Eventually the bed sets up well enough to
prevent further grain from passing through.
>Question: If I have a tight fitting false bottom, does a
>manifold under it offer any positives? I am beginning to
>think not.
Some people feel this is a real plus. My (commercially
made) false bottom lets enough grain through at the beginning
of recirculation to clog my gate valve, unless I clear it
periodically with a quick opening and closing. After a
few minutes of flow, this usually clears up. A recent batch
of bock, though, was screwed up by having grain coming through
during the runoff to the kettle, for no reason that I could
sort out. I had to recirculate the wort until it cleared
again, after I had started adding sparge water, so that I was
diluting out the runoff more than I planned. My scheduled
doppelbock became a plain dunkelbock. At that point, I
would have paid a lot for a manifold under the FB. This
hasn't been a problem in any other recent batch, though.
>Question: Is it desirable to rest the mash, after dough in,
>for a bit before turning on the rims pump?
Yes, this lets the grain bed set up. I usually rest for
about 20 minutes before beginning recirculation, but 10
minutes would almost certainly be enough for my system.
>Question: What kind of flow rates should I expect to get in
>a RIMS? I can get about 3 GPM with water by itself.
This depends on the depth of the grain bed and the grist.
The torrified wheat you mentioned in your grist is awfully
"sticky." My suggestion would be to go for the slowest flow
rate that you can tolerate with your heating system. In my
case, I use a natural gas burner under the converted keg, and
I usually keep the flow at less than one gallon per minute
while I run the burner (on low!) This gives me about 1-2 degrees
rise per minute, which is all I'm really looking for. Those
doing more extreme step mashing might need quicker temperature
rises and faster flow. Your idea of a 5 gallon shakedown run probably
wouldn't have helped, by the way, because the shallower grain
bed might have caused even worse flow-through problems.
>Question: Is my beer ruined? (just joking...)
If my initial batches with my "semi-RIMS" turned out okay,
anyone's will! Search the 1997 archives under my name if
you want to hear about another disastrous maiden run. Hang
in there. It'll get to be great fun.
Paul Shick
Basement brewing in Cleveland Hts OH
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 14:11:03 -0500
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: diacetyl, PC control of RIMS, Stuck RIMS mash, mashing/steeping, skunky/sulfur
Brewsters:
David Harris says:
"oxygen is not required to do the job of oxidizing the
alpha aceto lactate, Ca++, Zn++ and Fe+++ will do the job."
I doubt it, since the reduction of these ions (except Fe+++)
in an aqueous environment is pretty tough and unlikely with
an organic reductant for any of them, IMHO. Fe could be the
exception, but is undesirable in beer, anyway and often low
in concentration.
Perhaps you did not mean this exactly, as you went on to
comment on the need for calcium and zinc in the enzyme train.
Could you further explain this, as now I am left with the
impression that you believe diacetyl formation can take place
in beers which have Ca, Zn or Fe as long as there is some
residual a-acetolactic acid in them and that oxygen is not
important.
- ---------------------------------------
Wade Hutchinson's comments on using a recycle loop with a
centrifugal pump to prevent cavitation reminds me that one
of the faults with a centrifugal pump often is that it beats up
enzymes, malt and the like. Recycling may exacerbate such
a problem. Have any RIMSers found such trouble to be
significant with centrifugal pumps?
As Wade mentioned, the vapor pressure of the fluid is a
controlling factor to the cavitation of the pump. Therefore,
as you get to higher temperatures, cavitation probability
increases. Check out your pumps at operating temperatures.
Wade, I am sure we would all appreciate knowing more details
about how you used a PC as a controller. I have a couple
of 386s that are destined for just such duty. There are cards
available for this application as well as using your PC as an
electronic instrument.
- -----------------------------------------
Bill Macher's description of his trials and tribulations with his
Steam RIMS reminds me of why I have never tried it. But
a couple of comments on your procedures are in common with
all other spargers. 1) always have foundation water covering
your false bottom before you put in the mash.This will help
prevent plugging, 2) screen wire in my experience is too small
and plugs. Use larger holes. Likely your 1/16" slots were also
too small. File them open with a triangular file.
In the early days, I also made the incorrect assumption that
smaller was better and stuck a mash. The holes in my Zapap type
design were just a little under a 1/4 inch as I used my soldering
gun to make the many holes in the plastic tub. Thinking that this
was too big, I covered it with plastic screen wire. To my disbelief,
it stuck. I removed the screen wire and on subsequent mashes,
I have never had a problem. You may also wish to turn the slots
on your manifold down so that you prevent physical plugging
and reduce the dead volume. This will help reduce the recycle
time to a clear wort. 3) a very critical factor with RIMS is the grist
size itself. I recommend you try my double grind procedure ( see
the archives) this will give an active flow rate and excellent
extraction.
The lesson? It is the mash particles themselves which form the
filtration bed and all the manifold or false bottom has to do is to
support the big pieces of malt and not get plugged by the small
ones.
- --------------------------------------------
Charley Burns asks about the difference between steeping and
partial mashing.
The biggest difference is whether or not the malt has active
enzymes and starch.
Too often we see recipes in which starch containing malts and
adjuncts are just steeped or held at high temperatures which
denature the enzymes. This can lead to poor extraction and
often cloudy, starchy brew in danger of ending up like a
bad Lambic in which bacteria thrive on the remaining starch
after it has been bottled.
Steeping for me means using enzymeless and starch free malts
like crystal, chocolate, etc. and can be preferably carried out at
high temperatures, just like making coffee.
Mashing is required for all the other malts and adjuncts. Which
means keeping the extraction and mashing temperature below
160F for at least 1/2 hour and perhaps lower and longer. 1.5 to 2.0
quarts per pound is a good water/grist ratio. Higher amounts
of water prevent enzymes blockage by the products and speed
up the rate, but at too high a ratio the overall rate can be lowered.
- ------------------------------------------
John WIlkinson hits it on the head. Sulfury is not skunky as
Budweiser would have you believe. I have often heard it
said here that green bottles are the contributor to the skunkiness
of beers which come wrapped in light tight boxes. Not so in
most cases. Some European beers, particularly northern
European beers, are sulfury as a result of the yeast. I believe
(notebook not here) it is Wyeast European Lager III which has
this strong character and which I often use when reproducing
this style.
- ------------------------------------------
Keep on Brewin'
Dave Burley
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 19:35:02 GMT
From: happyhansen@scronline.com (<happyhansen@scronline.com>)
Received: from cust22.scronline.com ([207.212.244.87])
by scronline.com (wcSMTP [445])
with SMTP id 665541808; Wed, 31 Mar 1999 19:34:57 GMT
X-Sender: joy.hansen@bbs.scronline.com
Message-Id: <v01540b01b327a6269729@[207.212.244.66]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: homebrew@hbd.org
From: happyhansen@scronline.com (Joy Hansen)
Subject: RIMS Stuck?
Just a quick recommendation for a RIMS pseudo false bottom based on my
experiences.
Use a commercial or home built false bottom similar to the PBS punched
stainless or a Stoelting grate. The high strength of these units is
critical to prevent false bottom collapse when the pump is operated against
a stuck or near stuck mash.
Then, instead of fighting the issue of a stuck mash when clarity isn't an
issue, install motorized mash mixer that has a scraping blade to travel not
more than 1/8 inch above the false bottom. For those converted keg pseudo
R. Morris users, most have experience similiar to mine - flow is adequate
as long as the false bottom can be stirred and scraped. Hours of time for
the ramps and lots of sweat and tears to save the mash. The motorized
stirring will make anyone a convert at first glance!
H & R has a motor that turns at 3.3 RPM, is geared, and has adequate
torque to move a house! I left the handles on the sanke keg (the rest of
the rim cut out) and this serves as the mounting for the bracket to hold
the stirring motor. I mounted a fitting in the center of the bottom of the
keg and use it to: 1) provide a center support for the false bottom, 2)
provide a pathway for the supply liquor to the mash, and 3) provide a
bearing/mount for a stirring shaft which connects to the motor shaft.
Rather than take up a lot of HBD space, if anyone is interested in a
schematic of the setup, I can post an e-mail with this as an JPEG
attachment.
The mash schedule involves a dough in, infusion to a beta glucan rest, RIMS
to saccharification and mash out temperature rests.
When the mashout is complete, I do a manual recirculation for sweet wort
clarity. I let the liquor flow by gravity and return the outflow to the
mash until the liquor is clear. If it's necessary to pump the liquor to
the brew kettle, I would install a grant to collect the gravity out flow
and then pump to the kettle. For the small amount of mashout run off, the
bucket transfer to the kettle isn't a big deal.
The two pseudo sparge are accomplished likewise. Strike water is added to
the mash cake, stirred with recirculation to reach the mash out
temperature, manually recirculated for clarity, and then transferred via
gravity to the kettle.
My batch size for the fermenter is planned to be at least 8 gallons. The
sweet wort from the mash is typically 5 + 3 + 3 gallons. This accomplishes
an 80 percent or better extraction. An additonal 3 gallon pseudo sparge
increases the extraction into the 90s. The temperature of the mash out and
pseudo sparges is up to the conscience of the brewer!
So far, this technique prevents stuck mash and accomplishes what I think is
an attainable and reproducible schedule. I'd appreciate a description of
alternate successful RIMS mash schedules.
I'm out of pocket for several weeks at happyhansen@scronline.com and I
cannot send attachments from this address. If anyone has interest, send
the e-mail responses to joytbrew@halifax.com. It might be some time before
I can return to Scottsburg, VA and reply with the schematic.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 15:22:09 -0500
From: Wade Hutchison <whutchis@bucknell.edu>
Subject: Re: Spiffy new TI chip for Index of Refraction
Well, in theory this should work. The Index of Refraction of
a water ethanol mixture, at 28C should fall between 1.357 (pure
Etoh) and 1.332 (pure water). The resolution should give you
accuracy to within 1 part in 5000. Thanks for the info, I'll
be looking into this for work, actually.
-----wade hutchison
>
>Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 09:05:00 -0500
>From: "Peter J. Calinski" <PCalinski@iname.com>
>Subject: Refractive Index. Can This Measure It?
>
>In HBD #2986 Louis Bonham described the use of refractive index to measure
>alcohol content. By coincidence, Texas instruments just announced a new
>device to measure the refractive index of liquids.
>
> http://www.ti.com/sc/docs/psheets/newdocs/specfunc.htm
<snip>
>The TSPR1A150100 Spreeta liquid sensor has a dynamic range of 1.320 to
>1.368 refractive index units (RIU)
>with a resolution of 5x10-6 RIU. The physical dimensions of the Spreeta
>sensor are shown in Figure 7 on page 8. The output of the Spreeta sensor is
>a series of analog pulses, one per clock cycle, from which the refractive
>index of the liquid is derived when the voltages are digitized and
>processed with the proper algorithm.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 14:46:50 -0600
From: Nathan Kanous <nlkanous@pharmacy.wisc.edu>
Subject: MI Brewpubs
Ken Pendergrass mentions:
But in northern MI I
can think of 2 not yet mentioned. One is on the south edge of Gaylord.
Which is about an hour south of the big mac bridge. This place is huge
and abuts the freeway (US23) you can't miss it. It's on the east side of
Isn't this the Big Buck Brewery? Kind of like the McDonald's or Budweiser
of brewpubs in my opinion. Huge. Appeals to the massess of deer hunters
that only spend a few hours a year in the woods and fewer tastebuds
enjoying good beer. I wasn't real impressed with their beers, but opinions
are cheap.
nathan in madison, wi
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 15:01:17 -0600
From: Nathan Kanous <nlkanous@pharmacy.wisc.edu>
Subject: Braggot
I've never made a braggot before. My father-in-law raises bees (any of you
Michiganders want honey? He prefers to sell bulk when nobody has any...if
you get my drift). I can get as much clover / wildflower (mostly clover)
honey as I'd like. I've been a little intrigued about making a braggot.
I'd like to hear from some people that have made braggots in the past and
have experience. Tried and true recipes preferred, but we all have to
start somewhere. TIA
nathan in madison, wi
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 14:38:56 -0800 (PST)
From: Tim Anderson <timator@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: 100 Gal Limit
Bob Sheck wishes to know:
>>>
Subject: 100 Gal Limit
What's the penalty if we exceed this?
Who's keeping track?
What's the big deal, here, anyways?
<<<
I my case, it's a combinitation of marriage and age. Even if I was
single, I'm much too old to try for 100. I barely have the energy for
one.
tim
===
Please ignore the advertisement below. Thank you.
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2993, 04/01/99
*************************************
-------
