Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #3116
HOMEBREW Digest #3116 Sat 21 August 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:
over pressure boiling ("Micah Millspaw")
Isoelectric Focusing/FG from OG (AJ)
Professor Panther's Perfidious and Preposterous Proclamations. ("Dr. Pivo")
Re: Inexpensive Vacuum sealers (MrMike656)
Brewing Relevance/Licorice (AJ)
Brewpubs in Montreal (Julio Canseco)
Trials , Tribulations and Finnings and the group brew ("Sieben, Richard")
Dagzy the Newbie Brewer! ("Thomas D. Hamann")
Free Equipment (John Varady)
licorice (Jeff Renner)
re: overpressure boiling ("Nathaniel P. Lansing")
"ice brewing" (Steven Sanders)
Re: Lagering schedule (Jeff Renner)
Spec Racing Breweries (Rod Prather)
Heating Elements ("Scott Church")
Is hops our obsession? (Rod Prather)
yeast pumps (jliddil)
White Labs Yeast Questions ("Christopher Farley")
RE: Formula for Calculating Expected FG from OG ("Nigel Porter")
Glucose, Ketone Bodies, Ammonia, Urea, Alcohol, and Diets (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
Reynolds ... peristatlic pumps etc./shear calc needed ("Stephen Alexander")
wierd science .../yeast question ... ("Stephen Alexander")
Re: Keg carbonation/immersion chilled fermenter/chrome and brass ("Hubert W. Schreier")
SMM to DMS formula ("Rich, Charles")
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
* The HBD now hosts eight digests related to this and a few other hobbies.
* Send an email note to majordomo@hbd.org with the word "lists" on one
* line, and "help" on another (don't need the quotes) for a listing and
* instructions for use.
*
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: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 06:56:31 -0500
From: "Micah Millspaw" <MMillspa@SILGANMFG.COM>
Subject: over pressure boiling
writes in HBD 3114:
>
>Subject: over pressure boiling? The talk of pressure cooking wort and
>over-pressure boiling made me wonder...If a large beer factory has a 30
foot
>deep kettle, then wouldn't the beer at the bottom be at 2 atmospheres?
Maybe
>the wort at the bottom isn't actually boiling but the convecting heat
would
>boil the top layer of wort as it reaches closer to 1 atmosphere. Is this
>over-pressure/over-temperature boil why they get such high hop
>utilization's? In a really tall kettle they could be boiling at 3
>atmospheres without a pressure system.
The effect in the boiling kettle is not so much what is happening to the
wort at the bottom of the kettle, but what is happening at the top. First
of all the wort should be constantly in motion throughout the kettle (due
to convection) if a boil is in progress. Second, the chemical reactions
occuring in the boil (there are many) take place at the liquid/gas
inferace, at or near the surface of the wort in the kettle. THis is due
largely to the asmetrical cavitational collapse of the steam bubbles in
the wort itself. The collapsing bubbles creat micro pockets with super
temperatures that impact of chemical reaction in a boil, ie. increased hop
utilization. It is possible and desireable for brewing kettles to be force
vented to enhance the effect. BTW there was an article in BT 3 or 4 years
back on this topic.
Micah Millspaw - brewer at large
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 12:09:52 +0000
From: AJ <ajdel@mindspring.com>
Subject: Isoelectric Focusing/FG from OG
Kirk asks about immobilizing proteins. As we all know proteins are made
up of chains of amino acids. Amino acids form "zwitterions" whose net
electric charge depends on the pH. Of more importance in proteins are
those amino acids which have ionizable side groups. The charge on these
can also be varied by controlling the pH. The isoelectric point for a
protein is the pH at which the protein has no net charge. The key to
Kirk's idea is, thus, to establish a zone within the system at which the
pH is equal to the isoelectric pH of the proteins. Strong electric
fields of proper direction and matching pH gradients adjacent to the
isoelectric zone should do the job. I imagine a good relativity
condenser would be of immense help in implementing this system. This is
called "isoelectric focusing".
Note: At the moment the proteins in my tongue are being electrically
attracted to the proteins on the inner surface of my cheek.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Mike Hanson asked about estimating FG from OG. The FG is simply (1 -
Apparent Attenuation/100)*OG. Thus if the apparent attenuation is 80%
the FG is 0.2 times the OG. Apparent attenuation realized depends on
lots of factors but if everything is done right the yeast are the main
determinant. The yeast supplier will usually give a range of
attenuations which can reasonably be expected to seen with the
particular strains he sells. Here are some Apparent Attenuation numbers
from a couple of beers I've looked at recently.
Commercial Ale (Regional Brewery): 76%
Commercial Lager (Same brewery): 80%
Commercial Ale (Same brewery) 73%
Commercial Pils (Same brewery) 77%
Commercial Pils (Different brewery) 79%
Homebrewed Weizenbeer 80%
Note that the apparent attenuation is not the same as the real
attenuation which is a measure of the sugar eaten and alcohol produced.
Whereas apparent attenuation is easily measured by reading the specific
gravity of the beer and comparing it to the specific gravity of the
wort, real attenuation requires that the alcohol be evaporated from the
beer, the beer to be made up to original weight with water and the
specific gravity then determined. Alcohol content can be estimated from
original gravity and apparent gravity, original gravity and real final
gravity or apparent final gravity and real final gravity. Formulas and
tables based on Balling's work are found in Vol II of DeClerk.
- --
A. J. deLange
Numquam in dubio, saepe in errore.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 14:25:19 +0200
From: "Dr. Pivo" <dp@pivo.w.se>
Subject: Professor Panther's Perfidious and Preposterous Proclamations.
There has been some suggestions raised about in which direction
information is traveling (from HBD to space, or from space to HBD).
The latter is undeniably the correct direction of flow....
unfortunately, the supposition that it comes from an alien culture
beamed TO the HBD is entirely wrong.
It comes from God.
And verily it is written in the Holy books upon which we have placed our
faith... the Old Testament (the Book of DeClarke), and the collective
passages of the New Testament (The Book of Fix, the Book of Miller, and
The Book of Noonan... though some have dismissed these last writings as
being interpretations from the disciples and not actually the words of
God).
There is as well Protestental, more popularistic passages (The Book of
Papazian), which we each vernal equinox burn as the heretical writings
that they are, and with white costumes and pointy hats in place, take
turns wiping our backsides with the "Pagan Picture of the Devil's
Disciple Pouring Hot Wort Through a Strainer"... this is called "the
ritual of the Pap. Smear".
So truly must the foundations of our lithurgy be understood and not
questioned, for there lies the opening through which Satan will come
creeping in .
As to Docent Panthers's use of a Nitrogen flush in his storage shed, I
find this an admirable practice.... I only hope that he is using "food
grade" Nitrogen.
If this gas is not Micro-filtered it can be literred with bacteria.
Sure you may believe that the fact that these grainy materials will be
later boiled is some sort of protection.
Let me just say this.... there are thermophyllic bacteria that would
love to dive (doing a "double inverted triple twisting brown-out"...
10.0 difficulty) with a wry smile right on their cell membranes, into
Charles Rich's pressure cooker, without being phased a bit.
Of course these same would go belly up in some low pH wort, but that is
not what is important here. released from the inner structure of the
matrix between the bilipids, are "exotoxins".
These have been isolated as 3,4 diketo, 15,18,27 tripheno, 47, 12', 16..
HIKE!.....and it's phosphorylated isomere, which have been showed to
have the tastes of "braised asparagus tips" and "a "Twinkee floating in
Sheep dip" , repectively.
One thing we can be absolutely CERTAIN of, is that these tastes will be
exacerbated by using incorrect pitching rates, and I'll be saying a lot
more about this, whether or not anyone cares at all.
These were recently added 50/50 to a can of Miller Lite at the "dePorgie
School of Tasting" (Graduate Division, Dan Quayle College), where one of
the students was heard to remark: "Have you seen my booger? It was on
my finger a minute ago."
So, while Herr Doktor Panther is certainly heading in the right
direction, more attention to detail must be payed! Quit being so
sloppy, or where a belt and braces next vernal equinox.
As to his conversion to "virtual brewing", I think that this is a very
wise course indeed.....
.... and in fact perhaps the only thing that can be done with "virtual
information",.
Dr. Pivo
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 08:24:38 EDT
From: MrMike656@aol.com
Subject: Re: Inexpensive Vacuum sealers
Hi y'all -
Arthur McGregor mentioned the Freshlock II Vacuum Sealer shown in a
recent DAMARK catalog at the unheard-of 'low price' of 22.99. I picked up the
same one at a local Target for about the same price, and you really do get
what you pay for.
I found that it didn't really seal all that well, the bags leaked more
often than not, and the few that didn't leak really weren't the best in the
world. I wound up double and triple bagging my hops and then sealing them in
a zip-loc just so they wouldn't stink up the freezer. The machine doesn't
create enough of a vacuum to really pull all the air out (you could say it
doesn't suck enough, but that would be a contradiction...), making the
machine only good enough to seal things that don't require a vacuum seal.
After a year, I broke down and bought a reconditioned Foodsaver for a
hundred bucks from Sportsman's Guide (if you get the DAMARK catalog, you
probably get that one too - ). They don't always have them, but this sucker
really works. Bags are real heavy duty and reusable. Worth every penny -
especially at the reconditioned price.
Just my two cents....
Mike Maimone
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 12:37:50 +0000
From: AJ <ajdel@mindspring.com>
Subject: Brewing Relevance/Licorice
Matt Smiley posted
>(EtOH + NAD+ ---> acetaldhyde +NADH).
>The second step uses the enzyme aldehyde dehydrogenase (acetaldehyde +
>NAD+ ----> acetate + NADH).....
and then implied that it was not brewing related. Well, no need. Of
course it is brewing related especially if we add the first part of the
path in thus:
pyruvate-----> acetaldehyde -----> EtOH -------> acetaldehyde --->
acetate
The reactions left of EtOH take place in your yeast and the ones on the
right in your liver.
Further to brewing relevance the two reactions Matt posted are the basis
for a very sensitive test for alcohol. The ASBC method for low alcohol
beers uses it. The sample is diluted (yes, it's that sensitive),
buffered and dosed with alcohol dehydrogenase, aldehyde dehydrogenase
(the enzymes which catalyze the reactions) and NAD+. The NADH produced
absorbs ultraviolet light at 340 nm and by measuring this absorbtion the
amount of alcohol can be determined quickly, accurately and without
offending BATF (i.e. no distillation is required). Of course there is a
downside. The test kit for this method is quite expensive.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
There has been some discussion of licorice in beer. Certainly Old
Peculiar tastes of licorice and according to the Good Beer Guide
licorice is used in the recipe. So there is at least one commericial
example that I am aware of.
- --
A. J. deLange
Numquam in dubio, saepe in errore.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 08:30:43 -0400
From: Julio Canseco <jcanseco@arches.uga.edu>
Subject: Brewpubs in Montreal
Greetings, I'll be traveling to Montreal next month. Any recommended
watering holes? Private e-mail is fine. TIA
julio in athens, georgia
... athens is a drinking town with a football problem...
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 07:53:31 -0500
From: "Sieben, Richard" <SIER1@AERIAL1.COM>
Subject: Trials , Tribulations and Finnings and the group brew
Darrly Downie expressed problems with his first all grain experience,
It sounds like your beer was oxidized, but I am not really sure where it
happened, but my experience has been at bottling time. There should have
been nothing but CO2 in the fermentor when you added finings, so that is why
I don't think it happened there. (unless the lid on your fermentor does not
fit very tight and let air in after the primary ferment had settled down, or
you just can't resist taking a peak?) How were your extract beers? maybe
you had some papery/cardboard taste with them too? If so I would look at
your bottling procedures and try not to induce air. Another thing you may
want to try for at least one batch, lets dispense with the finings, use a
kettle coagulant like Irish Moss instead. This way you are not screwing
around with finished beer and risking a post ferment infection. I am only
suggesting this as an experiment to try to isolate the cause of your
apparent oxidation and possible infection, who cares if your great tasting
beer isn't crystal clear anyway? I have to admit ignorance on finings as I
never saw the need for them anyway, given enough time my beer drops bright
by itself. (I do use Irish Moss and sometimes I use beechwood in my
secondary fermentor to make a beer drop bright more quickly and I guess that
is technically a 'fining' agent.)
Final word from me, don't be afraid to all grain brew, I don't find it
harder than brewing out of the can, it's just a longer hobby/brew day and
the benefits outweigh the extra effort.
Rich Sieben
Island Lake, IL
ps I like Jim Kingsberg's idea of a group brew experiment
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 22:48:46 +0930
From: "Thomas D. Hamann" <tdhamann@senet.com.au>
Subject: Dagzy the Newbie Brewer!
Hi Darryl, the Adelaide Hills Amateur Brewers
(or something like that!) is meeting next
in Crafers on 26th Sept. 1999. We have a good
cross-section of brewers and wine makers, with
the 2 HBD `lurkers and dwellers' being Brad and
Thomas who are mashers.
We have "made" most of our mashing equipment
ourselves e.g. CFW chiller, kettle, lauter tun,
and we (2) are brewing a scotch ale this Sunday.
Send me a private eMail if you want to know
more about the club, checking out Brad + Tom's
next brew session or just some brewers chit-chat.
Zum Wohl, Thomas.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 09:16:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Varady <rust1d@usa.net>
Subject: Free Equipment
Ocean Optics is DONATING FREE spectrophotometers from their trade-in program.
http://www.labx.com/v2/adsearch/Detail3.CFM?adnumb=27850
They have hundreds of antique instruments such as the Bausch and Lomb,
Spectronic 20 UV/VIS Spectrophotometer.
You can email them from the web page, or directly to info@oceanoptics.com
Looking forward to brewing season,
John
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: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 09:42:09 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: licorice
Dave Burley <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com> writes
>I believe the hobby books took the easy way
>out or assumed the brewers used licorice
>flavouring ( anyone have any evidence they
>did?) If professionals used the flavouring, perhaps
>it was when the brewers lightened up on the
>OG they used licorice to give the impression
>of a higher OG beer??
Wahl and Henius (1902) http://hubris.engin.umich.edu:8080/Wahl/ make no
mention of licorice in their discussion of porter, but A.L.Nugey (1948)
does in his _Brewers Manual (Practically Considered)_. Nugey was an
engineer and salesman for brewers additives, so his information must be
viewed with some caution, but it probably generally reflected brewing
practices and recipes of his time, except for his strong advocacy of
proprietary additives. His three 100 bbl. formulas (p.55) for porter use
6.5 lbs. of licorice (form not specified) for the 12P recipe, 6 lbs. for
13P, and 6.75 lbs. for 15P. (The 12P is all malt, the stronger ones use
flaked maize.) He also writes cryptically (p.53), "Color malt gives the
Porter a more desireable character. If very dark Porter is desired
increase the amount of licorice."
Brewers interested in recreating historical American brews might like to
try one of these recipes.
Jeff
-=-=-=-=-
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, c/o nerenner@umich.edu
"One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 09:50:19 -0400
From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew@compuserve.com>
Subject: re: overpressure boiling
Mr. Scholz said
" At ~8 ft deep the wort wasn't under multi-atmospheres of pressure and
as far as I know of other commercial plants, the geometry is about the
same."
That would make the wort at the bottom of the kettle at 1.25 atmospheres.
The 2 commercial kettles I've seen have had square aspect ratios.
How many similar to the Rheingold kettles he has actually seen?
Then, " And the hops utilization increase over homebrewing is due to
hooded venting of the kettles and more even heat distribution of large
steam
fired kettles."
The hooded kettles help keep the evaporation to 10% but do not affect the
temperature or convection currents which are the 2 main properties
affecting utilization. Hoods may save energy thus money but a open boil
and a boil under a hood will still be at a temperature the altitude
dictates.
Hoods may help retain hop aroma from late additions but help utilization,
hardly.
Swept kettles and calandria are used to help utilization because of the
_uneven_ "rolling" boil they create. Mixing the hops throughout the wort
is
more important than an even heat.
"The place that the big boys use pressure cookers is for cereal cooking.
??Never said they used pressure cooking for the boil kettle.
" ( I'll leave reference sighting as an exercise for the
student)"
George Fix, "Analysis of Brewing Techniques."
And I wonder, was it a quality problem that caused Rheingolds closure?
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 09:33:33 -0500
From: Steven Sanders <ssanders@microlink.net>
Subject: "ice brewing"
This is something that has been kinda bothering me since I have started
learning about brewing..
What in the world does "ice brewed" mean? I see ads by the megabrewers
for beers made this way, and I have never run across any brewing method
that would involve ice. (short of dumping sterile ice into hot wort to
cool it down) Is "ice brewed" just some marketing bs term for lagering?
Regards,
Steven Sanders
Narnia, WD
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 10:39:24 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Lagering schedule
Chris Cooper <ccooper@a2607cc.msr.hp.com> writes
>I started the ferment at room
>temperature for about 12 hours then moved the carboy to the fridge when I was
>sure fermentationhad started. I initially set the temperature to 56^F and the
>carboy showed around 60-62^F, after a couple of days I started dropping the
>controller a degree each day, now the fridge is at 50^F and the carboy
>is setting at 56^F, fermentation is slowing down (I need to take a gravity
>reading) and once it is complete what cooling schedule should I use?
>My initial thought was to wait for 10-12 days after pitching and then drop the
>temperature to 32^F for a couple of weeks, filter into my keg force pressure
>and serve.
I cool my wort to 48-50F immediately. Fermentation takes longer, but
that's the traditional way. Most of your fermentation was done at warmer
temperatures. There was some discussion some years back as to whether
esters etc are formed with warm starts. I don't think it was ever
resolved. Modern lager fermentations are done at 56-58F in many US and
German breweries, but it's not for me. I then drop 3F/day after
fermentation is nearly over until I get to 33F, where I keep it for 4-6
weeks.
Having said all that, though, I have a CAP/CACA that I fermented with
Nottingham ale yeast at 62-64F and lagered at 40F for three weeks and it is
still lagering, I guess, on service at that temp, and it is not very
ale-ish.
BTW, I never filter and get virtually crystal clear beer. Maybe you could
filter half and report on the difference.
Hope you'll try a CAP for your next lager!
Jeff
-=-=-=-=-
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, c/o nerenner@umich.edu
"One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 10:43:08 -0500
From: Rod Prather <rodpr@iquest.net>
Subject: Spec Racing Breweries
IN Homebrew Digest #3115 Jim Kingsberg wrote about
BrewingArtV.Science/Papazian/An idea
First off Jim, I like it. I like your analogy of architecture VS brewing.
The only problem is that in brewing the function of the design IS the
aesthetics (and the anesthetics). The functionality, (the anesthetic one)
is easily attained by the yeast without a great deal of manipulation. The
aesthetics of beer is what all the work and fuss is about.
What I really like was your idea for everyone to prepare a single recipe and
to compare it. Kind of like spec racing in a brewery mode. It would be
interresting if you could actually have a competition in that mode, but it
would be impossible to certify ingredients. A beer spec race, might be a
good competition for brew clubs or groups trying to identify the best home
brewery process/equipment. It would be fun, anyway.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 12:11:45 -0700
From: "Scott Church" <schurch@gte.net>
Subject: Heating Elements
Howdy all;
I like the concept of using the Hot Liquor Tank as a heat exchanger for the
mash temp. I need to find a heating element. If any of you guys know where
I might find one for a good price I'd be most graciously in debt!
Scott
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 11:17:15 -0500
From: Rod Prather <rodpr@iquest.net>
Subject: Is hops our obsession?
A few friends and I were talking about hops and it's relationship to
cannabis. With the recent news that the actual addictive site of THC is in
the short term memory, we were wondering if there might be an addictive
compound in hops. Has anyone read anything about this. Any off hand
comments or non scientific observations would also be entertained.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 09:50:59 -0700 (MST)
From: jliddil@VMS.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: yeast pumps
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 23:06:36 +1000
> From: David Lamotte <lamotted@ozemail.com.au>
> Subject: Re: Yeast lifespans
>
> Throwing caution to the wind, I have enjoyed some high quality, scientific
> replies to my recent question on yeast aging and lifespans - thank you all.
>
> However, while the discussions on the budding and scaring were appreciated,
> I still couldn't see how long it all took. I mean if I had 40 kids I think
> I would welcome an early grave at the bottom of the fermenter.
>
> As chance would have it, I stumbled on some info that I had downloaded from
> the Wyeast site (http://www.wyeastlab.com/education/edtempch.htm). This
> shows that the average time to bud varies with temperature (insert sound of
> you slapping my head while saying 'Well Duh') - something that I had
> totally overlooked.
>
> Thanks to Dave Logsdon of Wyeast, the answer is (drum roll please) ....
>
> At 75 F it takes approx. 2 hours for an Ale yeast cell to bud. At 65F it
> takes 3.2 hours and at a chilly 60F is slows right down to a bud every 7.5
> hrs. The equivalent times for a lager yeast are 2.2 (75F) 3.7 (65F) 5.0
> (60F) There is also a table which shows how this translates into cell
> counts.
>
> Now, assuming ALAN's 40 bud limit, this gives a life of at least 80 hrs at
> 75F, with a clean living 65F ale yeast entering the record books at more
> than 5 days.
>
I really doubt Mr Logsdon actually did the experiment. I suggest you find
a real reference from a peer reviewed journal or text to get the answer.
I'll try to look this up if I get a chance.
The discussion of pumps is humurous. I would not worry too much about
sheer and reynolds #'s. Personally I've seen lots of bioreactors that use
peristaltic pumps. And of course I am luck to have a cole aprmer pump
with pharmed tubing. So if you have the money buy a perstaltic pum and
some high quality tubing either something from Norton or paltinum cured
silicone if you want really smooth tubing. And get as big a haed as you
can afford.
Bottling plambics is tricky at best. I ahve ahd various good and bad
results. I have stuff I primed and added fresh yeast to that still is
uncarbonated 2 years later. Other stuff that is old has carbonated just
fine.
I got a recent paper about brett in wine and acetic acid prodcution under
various conditions. I'll post a summary when I get time.
Jim Liddil North Haven, CT
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 12:40:04 -0500
From: "Christopher Farley" <chris@northernbrewer.com>
Subject: White Labs Yeast Questions
Has anybody noticed that White Labs Pilsen yeast *appears* as if it were a top
fermenting yeast? Every time I have used this yeast, a thick yeasty carpet
appears on the top of the fermenter which does not readily drop out. This
behavior is consistent, and has been commented on by numerous customers and
employees as well. The beers I have made with it seem to exhibit a pretty
clean lager character, but I have discontinued using this yeast because of the
odd behavior.
Wyeast's David Logsdon has been trying to convince me to stop carrying Wlabs
yeast vials and become an exclusive Wyeast supplier. As a retailer, I value
having a diversity of cultures, but according to Logsdon, "the products Wlabs
sell, are in most if not all cases sourced from us." I have used every Wyeast
lager culture, and have never seen a yeast ferment like Wlabs Pilsen yeast.
Is Logson correct in stating that Wlabs has sourced "most if not all" their
cultures from Wyeast? Logson also claims that Wlabs production and management
of the strains has been questioned by many brewers, but I have found Wlabs
yeast to be completely consistent. Additionally, I've followed the HBD for a
while and can only recall hearing positive things about Wlabs.
Christopher Farley
Northern Brewer, Ltd.
Saint Paul, Minnesota
www.northernbrewer.com
(800) 681-2739
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 18:47:01 +0100
From: "Nigel Porter" <nigel@sparger.freeserve.co.uk>
Subject: RE: Formula for Calculating Expected FG from OG
I wrote
>Nice simple one that I use to give ABV.
OOPS - really should read what I'm replying to before I get carried
away:-)
(queue comments on the stupid English...)
Nigel
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 14:55:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker@welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: Glucose, Ketone Bodies, Ammonia, Urea, Alcohol, and Diets
Matt and Todd have been having an interesting conversation on diet and
ethanol. Here's some info and some questions of my own.
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ketone bodies, nitrogen balance, and protein diets:
Here in the U.S., the average person eats more than enough protein to meet
his/her amino acid needs for protein maintenance of the body. The extra amino
acids (digestive breakdown products of dietary protein) will simply be treated
as an energy source. Depending on the particular amino acid it will either be
converted to glucose ("glucogenic" amino acids) or converted to fatty acids
and ketone bodies ("ketogenic" amino acids). Either way, if the total
caloric intake from all sources (fat, carbohydrates, and proteins combined)
is greater than the calories expended they won't get "burned" for energy but
will eventually be converted to triacylglycerols (aka "fat") and stored in the
adipose tissues.
There are some currently fashionable diets that stipulate that a high
proportion of total calories from protein. A caution often heard from critics
is that this can lead to unhealthy levels of ketone bodies in the blood which
may lead to ketosis or even ketoacidosis. Does anyone have any actual data on
this? I'm wondering how much of a problem this is with these protein diets.
Of all the blood-borne energy sources the ketone bodies seem to have the
largest variations in concentration normally. So, while blood glucose levels
are kept within fairly tight limits (maybe a two-fold variation in
concentration) and fatty acids fluctuate about ten-fold, the ketone bodies can
range some 100 - 200 fold. Normal levels are < 1mM which increases to about
5mM during fasting ("normal" physiological ketosis) but can increase to about
20mM in the ketoacidosis of diabetes. Where exactly do these protein diets
place a person and where along this continuum does one start running into
trouble? This is what I haven't seen addressed.
Also, ketosis is supposedly dangerous for the developing fetus
(specifically the brain). It seems therefore that protein diets wouldn't be a
good idea for pregnant women aside from the lob-sided nutritional aspects
clashing witht the nutritional needs of the developing fetus.
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nitrogen Balance and amino acid metabolism:
Another aspect of amino acid metabolism I haven't seen discussed in relation
to these diets is that of nitrogen balance. Amino acid metabolism by the liver
generates ammonia which usually gets converted to urea for excretion by the
kidneys. It seems than that a diet relying heavilly on protein would place
extra stress on the liver and kidneys. In fact, protein-restricted diets are
used in cases of renal disease. Is there any info on the effect of the added
nitrogen load due to protein diets? Ammonia is pretty toxic and some
apparently can escape the liver into the blood. Also, since blood urea levels
increase some of this urea becomes available to the intestinal flora which
can metabolize it producing more ammonia which has to then also be detoxified
in the liver.
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ethanol and blood glucose:
Apparently in well-fed normal individuals blood glucose actually /increases/
following ethanol ingestion. However, if glycogen stores have been depleted
there will be a drop in blood glucose due to inhibition of gluconeogenesis.
Why does liver gluconeogenesis become inhibited? An increased NADH/NAD+ ratio
tends block the conversion of lactate to glucose. Specifically, the high NADH
levels force the oxaloacetate/malate and pyruvat/lactate equilibriums in the
direction away from glucose synthesis. This also means that, in addition to
the accumulation of acetate and acetaldehyde in the blood that was previously
pointed out, lactate will also accumulate leading to hyperlactacidemia.
Eating fructose used to be touted as a way to defeat the breathalyzer because
it can help restore NAD+ levels. While this is true, it really wont help you
beat a breathalyzer so don't bother switching completely over to fruit beers!
Hope this was useful
-Alan Meeker
Baltimore, MD
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 17:05:07 -0400
From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Reynolds ... peristatlic pumps etc./shear calc needed
First to correct an error of my own - I should have written (1/0.069) in the
force eqn example a couple days back.
- --
Someone kindly pointed out that Paul Niebergall was having an argument with
me (of which I was completely unaware).
After proving snidely and in a nasty tone that RN must equal 4.64 using his
"easier" calculation, he then revised his calculation to my method
demonstrating it was 13000+. Thus in his second try Paul demonstrated that
I was correct in suggesting turbulent flow conditions do obtain. He further
writes
>Once again Steve Alexander tries to cover up his own errors by lashing out
>in an attempt to find fault with others calculations.
I never even *responded* to any of your calculation before this Paul, much
less tried to cover any up.. Get a grip or some prozac.
I completely agree with Paul's second derivation of a figure around 13650.
I apparently used radius instead of diameter when doing a quick calc in my
head and also pulled a wrong figure from a table of viscosity (interpolated
to 20C from a Fahrenheit 10F table in error) water viscosity. Paul's more
fanciful explanations aside. We both agree that turbulent flow should be
the case.
As for MU vs NU - Paul many references use different terminology. Silly
consistancy is the hobgoblin of little minds. The CRC table you quote uses
ETA rather than MU to designate non-kinetic viscosity - why did you
inconsistently fail to mention that ?
>Here is another clue in case you still dont get it. The RN values of
>13,500 and 5500 differ by a factor of 2.455. This factor is awfully close
>to the mass density of water (2.094 lbs s^2 / ft^4). As I indicated in my
>previous post, rho/mu = nu. Is it starting to sink in yet?
Oh yes Paul, 2.455 is so "awfully" close to 2.09 how could I have missed it
? What I do get Paul is that we both made an initial calc error of RN.
Mine
was off by a factor of 2.5, yours by 3000. The only thing 'sinking in' is
that
you have a fanciful imagination about finding the sources of errors, and
apparently accuse others of problems which you have at 1000 times
greater instance.
>Whats the problem Steve? Dont you
>accept science? Why do you continue with the false belief that the RN of
>5500 that you calculated is correct?
When did I ever "continue" it Paul. Was there any post from me at all that
I persisted in this? No. You apparently handle the language about as well
as you original algebra - off by 3000X. Perhaps if you included me in the
email you'd get a response to your rants.
>Maybe thats why we (you) should be
>discussing the art of brewing and leave the science alone.
I'm not happy to have introduced the 2X error plus the interpolation error,
the latter I could live with). I used the original beverage calcs and tried
to throw in the correction factors in my head. A wrong number resulted, but
the right conclusion re turbulence. I expected a margin of error - but this
was too much.
What would have been a true embarrassment is to have crowed so loudly about
someone else's error while showing RN=4.64 in detailed calculation as Paul
did. I've never taken a mechE or any other course in fluid flow Paul, but
I and even some of the brighter chimps at the zoo have enough physical
intuition to spot your error without calculation. Why don't you talk to the
mirror Paul about who shouldn't be posting about calculation [none of
this is Science Paul]
=== back to the real stuff ===
Paul's assumption (and mine) about wort viscosity are still significantly in
error.
Paul assumed 1.02 cP, I used erroneously used the equiv. of 1.27 (erroneous
interpolation). The problem is that water at 60C has a viscosity of only
0.4665, and of course the density (RHO) drops a few percent as well at this
temp. In all we would expect water at 60C to have an RN around 26000+ (low
viscosity - higher RN - more potential turbulence).
For wort the matter is significantly more complex. Early in the mash that
starches and complex carbs have viscosity many times higher than does
solution of simpler sugars and dextrins in finished wort. For high maltose
corn syrup, at 1.080 SG (very comparable to wort before mashout), the
viscosity (mu) is 0.83 cP, but earlier in the mash the figure may be 2X or
possibly even 3X higher! Perhaps a viscometer could replace an iodine test
(joke).
The upshot is this - high viscosity may prevent turbulent flow but only
very very early in the mash. Seems unlikely to provide much help for 1/4"
diam or even 1/2" diam in mid and later mash.
Mashout - the viscosity v temp might only decline by 10% or so in 1.080
wort-like corn-syrup as the temp rises from 150F to 170F. But oddly for
higher gravity syrups the percentage change in viscosity over this same temp
range is much greater. Perhaps a 50% decline in viscosity for 1.200 syrup.
Back to the original (and somewhat interesting) point. Would such turbulent
flow cause shear forces capable of damaging enzymes ?
I have tables that show the decline of various enzymes over a period of 90
minutes at about 1200/sec shear. Tho' few mashing enzymes appear in the
table it seams that shear around that level would be sufficient to cause
significant impact on many different enzymes over the period of a mash. I
haven't the resources to calculate the shear with me for this example
(1gal/min, 1/4" ID, ~0.83cP, tubing length ...).. Anyone up for it ?
Steve
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 17:20:49 -0400
From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: wierd science .../yeast question ...
Kirk writes ...
>In the mean time, however, I'm thinking the whole issue can be resolved for
>RIMS systems by ensuring protein molecules (but not enzymes) are largely
>contained in the main vessel through the use of some sort of electrostatic
>filter.
Actually electrostatic precipitation has been used in experiments on wort
proteins, but it's not too specific ! You are not too far off Kirk. (well
maybe you are a bit off).
>Lately I've also become concerned about the local magnetic field and the
>effects it might be having on product. I know normally this wouldn't be a
>concern, but I have a stack of worn out golf shoes ...
Better yet Kirk. I can get us access to some 1.5 Tesla MRI coils (and the
L.Nitrogen outer casing makes a nice beer chiller too). Maybe we can brew
inside of one and adjust the pH to allow for magnetic break separation. Of
course you'd need a good flow rate ... Other fun tricks involve shaking
your head inside one until you taste electrolytes dissociate in your mouth
and see those 1000 points of light Geo.Bush was always talking about.
Yeah really, but don't try it !!
Another cool trick would be magnetostricive (instantaneous) wort chilling.
Release/remove the field - the polar molecules go all random,
T*dS = dU (constant); entropy change (dS) increases so T decreases,
bam - cold wort..
Anyone know where to pick up an MRI cheap - great brewing and
analytical tool.
===
Paul (a good Paul) Kensler writes of slants .... and kits and mentions
YCKCo: http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/yckco/yckcotbl.html
I should probably keep it a secret, but Dan McConnell at YCKC sells a slant
of Unibroue yeast as "A144 Unibroue yeast " and I think it is just one
amazing yeast. Dan apparently has a lot of secret fungi that don't appear
in the catalog (like the above). TNX to Spencer Thomas for the original
suggestion.
-S
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 16:04:32 -0400
From: "Hubert W. Schreier" <schreier@sc.edu>
Subject: Re: Keg carbonation/immersion chilled fermenter/chrome and brass
Erik Farrell writes:
"I recently made the change from bottles to a corni-keg system. I am having
problems with the carbonation level in a stout I made (damm good thing the
foam tastes good because that's mostly what I get)"
I also switched to kegging recently, and initially got mostly foam. The problem
was discussed in great detail in the recent "hose length" thread. To summarize,
foaming is caused by a sudden drop in pressure when the beer comes out of the
tap. To avoid this, the dispense tubing needs to impose enough flow restriction
to drop the pressure to approximately atmospheric levels at the tap. I now use
6 ft of 3/16" tubing and can pour without foam at 15 psi keg pressure.
Erik continues:
"I have my valve set for14 pounds of pressure. Is this too much? What is an
appropriate pressure level by style? (I mostly make stouts and apa's) Any help
would be appreciated."
This cannot be answered without knowing the temperature of the beer. Usually,
carbonation levels are given in volumes of CO2. I don't know what is
appropriate for stouts, but I think English ales are carbonated to anywhere
between 2 and 2.5 volumes. Knowing the temperature of the beer and the volumes
of CO2 desired you can then figure out what pressure you need from a carbonation
chart. You can find a carbonation chart, the equation used to calculate it and
a nice shell script in HBD#1179 in a post from Alan Edwards:
http://hbd.org/hbd/archive/1179.html#1179-2. Hope that helps.
C.D. Pritchard writes about his chilled fermenter. I've been thinking about
building something similar from a 1/2 bbl. As I brew in SC with 90 F tap water,
I think this would cool the 90 F wort to fermentation temperatures a lot more
quickly than a fermentation chamber or a fridge. The only thing that has kept
me from building it is the following question: Is a copper coil safe to use in a
fermenter or do I need stainless?
On a related note, I can't find anything on the safety of chrome plated
materials in brewing. Is it because they pose a health risk and nobody is
using chrome, or because chrome is safe to use? I guess since there's 13+%
chrome in SS and SS is safe to use, chrome should be safe also? If not, where
can I get ball valves with an SS ball rather than a chrome plated brass ball?
Another materials question I can't figure out is how to remove surface lead
from brass/bronze. I have read about peroxide/vinegar solutions. I assume
peroxide refers to hydrogen peroxide H2O2??? If I recall correctly, this stuff
is pretty aggressive if concentrated. What concentration should I use, how much
vinegar should I use, should I boil the solution and where do I buy peroxide?
And how long do I need to treat the brass with the peroxide/vinegar solution?
Any help is greatly appreciated.
Hubert.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 15:55:22 -0700
From: "Rich, Charles" <CRich@filenet.com>
Subject: SMM to DMS formula
SCREEECH!!! (brakes), backup. My last numbers for SMM attenuation were not
right. Sorry. I couldn't find the formula yesterday when I wanted it, so
here it is for future HBD searchers.
I take these from both of George Fix's books. Principles of Brewing Science
gives the formula on page 143, and Analysis of Brewing Techniques gives it
in the caption of fig.1.6 (note: couple of typos in the caption formula)
Since the half-life of SMM in wort at 100C (212F) is 40 minutes, the
fraction of SMM remaining can be found by:
-ln F = (t/40) * (T/100) * ln 2
or alternately:
F = exp( (-t * T * ln 2) / 4000)
where:
F is the fraction of SMM remaining. (1.0 being all of it)
t is time in minutes
T is temperature Centigrade
SMM attenuation at boiling temps and 15-lb p-cooking temps are:
At 100C (212F) At 121C (250F)
Mins SMM Mins SMM
15 0.771 15 0.730
30 0.595 30 0.533
45 0.459 45 0.389
60 0.354 60 0.284
75 0.273 75 0.208
90 0.210 90 0.152
105 0.162 105 0.111
120 0.125 120 0.081
Definitely not the dramatic difference I'd eyeballed in my last post. Sorry
again for any inconvenience.
Chagrined,
Charles Rich
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #3116, 08/21/99
*************************************
-------
