Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #3165
HOMEBREW Digest #3165 Tue 09 November 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:
1999 Happy Holidays Homebrew Competition (Brian Dreckshage)
Heat exchange systems ("scott")
RE: Aeration (Demonick)
winemaking ("Vinbrew Supply")
Beer News from Ascension/Misc. (AJ)
Exploding Bottles, Bonafied!, (Dave Burley)
Bonafied Styles Page ("Houseman, David L")
a bit off-subject (Marc Sedam)
Thanks for the RIMS input ("J. Doug Brown")
Cyser ("Werrbach, Maria")
Soda Pop (Dan Listermann)
Re: malta starters ("Penn, John")
RIMS systems (Robert Johnson)
re: Exploding Bottles? ("John Watts")
system queries! (DAN ELGART)
Anchor code (Susan Walsh)
yeast growth/fermentation ("Alan Meeker")
malt mod (jliddil)
Fermenters again? (Rod Prather)
Aquarium Heaters ("Jeffry D Luck")
Lead in Brass (Jack Straw)
Kurt's continued clog (Kurt Kiewel)
Sterling hops? (Paul Shick)
Re: Bonafied Styles Page (phil sides jr)
* 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: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 23:18:12 -0600
From: Brian Dreckshage <dreck@concentric.net>
Subject: 1999 Happy Holidays Homebrew Competition
Falling leaves, football and the smell of malt and hops in the air.
That can only mean that it is time again for the St. Louis Brews Happy
Holidays Homebrew Competition.
The competition is Dec. 10 and 11, and we hope that you will enter again
this year.
Registration is at:
www.stlbrews.org
Please pass the word on to your fellow club members.
Also, if you are interested in judging or stewarding, please sign up on
the web site as well.
Thanks,
Brian Dreckshage
Competition Organizer
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 01:09:47 -0800
From: "scott" <Cuckold@cornerpub.com>
Subject: Heat exchange systems
I just now saw your post on HBD regarding Heat exchange brewing systems. I
have a website with pictures of my trials and tribulations with my system.
It works great for me. Any questions, just e-mail me. Let me know what you
think.
Scott
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Salon/3768/Brewery.html
"Jeff Hewit" <aleman_@excite.com> wrote:
I have seen some discussion on HERMS systems. (I forget exactly what
"HERMS" stands for, except that "RM" means "recirculating mash.") My
understanding is that wort is pumped through a heat exchanger in the hot
liquor tank as an alternative to using an electric heating element in the
traditional RIMS set up. ... I'm sure someone has posted
details on these set ups. Does anyone know of any Web sites that include
HERMS plans?
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 04:16:39 -0800
From: Demonick <demonick@zgi.com>
Subject: RE: Aeration
From: "Frank J. Russo" <FJRusso@coastalnet.com>
>What if for a set time X HOURS after pitching, you continued to
>aerate the wort? Yes I know about oxidation etc... But, is there a
>time period after pitching, when continued aeration will be of
>benefit to the yeast culture without causing damage to the wort, 4
>hours, 8 hours, 12 hours, 24 hours???? Anyone have any answers or
>ideas here. If not I guest I have to create an experiment on my own
>and report back.
There was an extensive discussion of this question back in Nov94. At
that time Maribeth_Raines <raines@radonc.ucla.edu> said:
>Sorry but I disagree with the recent wisdom on aeration. I believe
>it is the Practical Brewer which states that some breweries aerate
>12-24 hours (I don't recall off the top of my head) and this is post
>pitching.
There is an old English technique called "dropping", in which the
actively fermenting wort (24-48 hours post pitch) is literally dropped
from one fermentation vessel to another with aeration during the drop.
See the HBD archives around mid-Feb95 for an extensive discussion.
Morland's of Abingdon and Marston's of Burton and many other
commercial breweries used to practice dropping - the main reason for
them stopping, being that it is expensive on space and equipment.
Maribeth also said:
>There are several things which suggest at least to me, to aerate
>after pitching. First is that the *maximum* amount of oxygen that
>can be dissolved in cooled wort is 8 ppm. George Fix was the first
>to bring this point up and has very convincing data. I have done my
>own experiments with similar results. If you look at the textbooks,
>most yeast require 8-12 ppm and some lager yeast require 20 ppm of
>oxygen. This raises an interesting question. How do you supply more
>oxygen than you can dissolve? Well I personally believe the answer
>is to continue to aerate after pitching. If you follow the dissolved
>oxygen levels after pitching most of the oxygen is rapidly absorbed
>(most within 30 minutes). I have measured oxygen levels while
>continuing to aerate and they still went down by 30-40% within 30
>minutes of adding the yeast. My idea is that you can make up the
>deficit in oxygen by allowing the yeast to absorb some oxygen while
>continuing to add more. I have brewed over 20 batches this way with
>at least 30 minutes aeration prior to fermentation and at least 30
>minutes post pitching. I have gone up to seven hours aeration post
>pitching and have never had a problem. All of these experiments were
>done using the BrewTek aeration system which I developed; it is an
>aquarium pump based system. In general the fermentations are always
>rapid and complete and I would recommend at least trying aeration
>post pitching since I believe it helps. Although I do agree that
>prolonged aeration for 8-12 hours is probably excessive."
One thing that I can personally attest to, is using aeration to
attempt to restart a stuck fermenation - DON'T! This was the only
batch I ever tossed. Within days it was undrinkable, and the
fermentation never restarted.
Domenick Venezia
Venezia & Company, LLC
Maker of PrimeTab
(206) 782-1152 phone
(206) 782-6766 fax orders
demonick at zgi dot com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 07:41:09 -0500
From: "Vinbrew Supply" <devans@greenapple.com>
Subject: winemaking
Just my opinion,
I've sold customers a bunch of wine kits and surprisingly I've had good
results. Alexander's concentrate has made the best so far, with selection
kits coming in close Second. However, was the quality of the wine affected
because I told the customers to throw away the directions and make it like
you were from scratch?
You can produce a good bottle of wine,producing a 20 dollar bottle is a
little exaggerated I think.. Maybe 7-10 dollar is not out of reach. But
there is nothing wrong with that either...
Doug
Vinbrew
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 13:31:01 +0000
From: AJ <ajdel@mindspring.com>
Subject: Beer News from Ascension/Misc.
Just got back from almost 2 weeks on Ascension Island and while there
really isn't any beer news from that rock I do have one tidbit that you
all might find interesting. "Beer" on Ascension largely means yellow,
fizzy American stuff purveyed for a buck a pop in the "Volcano Club".
This situation quickly leads one to the store in Georgetown which
carries salvation in the form of Guiness draught (at $2 a can).
Consumption of Guiness in a can naturally leads to discussion of widgets
and an examination of same (after the can is drained). This reveals that
Guiness has a new design for this device. After spending millions of
pounds to come up with various esoteric looking plastic devices they
have now settled on a simple 1.2 inch sphere with one tiny hole. This
rolls about freely in the can (as opposed to the older flat widgets
which hugged the bottom) and seems to work just as well as the much more
convoluted designs. A real example of the KISS principal!
Apparantly some of the guys out there brew from kits but I didn't
encounter any. The water on the US base is vacuum distilled and thus
very soft. Great potential for Pilsners. In town, the water is derived
from wells near the summit of Green mountain and, thus, presumably also
soft.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Here are a couple of old posts that got returned just before I left.
Possibly no longer of current interest but since I typed them I going to
post them:
The following caught my eye in Paul Campbells post WRT D.D. Williamson
Caramel Coloring CARAMEL COLOR NO. 300:
COLOR SRM 9,400 - 10,500 (2)
(2) ASBC METHOD.
The ASBC method calls for measurement of the absorbtion in a half inch
cell at 430 nm and multiplying the value by 10. For SRM 10000, A would
be 1000 so it's obvious that the ASBC method isn't followed exactly.
Even if a half mm cell were used the absorbtion would be 39.4 - way
beyond the reach of the best instruments. Then there's the issue of the
SRM definition which requires the sample to have the "average" spectral
characteristics of a set of beers the darkest of which was 7.5 SRM.
Clearly there is more to it than this - probably dilution with all the
shortcomings this brings. Any details?
For Sean Richens:
a) Variacs
"Variac" was the brand name for an adjustable auto-transformer. These
are still sold but not by the original Variac manufacturer (General
Radio?). Anyway, there are no limitations on the power factor of the
load which an auto-transformer can handle i.e. the load can be as
capacitive or inductive as you like as long as the total current drawn
(resistive and reactive) does not excede the KVA rating of the Variac. I
suspect what is really being discussed here is some sort of solid state
controller which does indeed require that special considerations be
given in the design to handle inductive loads (whose collapsing mangetic
fields create voltages high enough to damage semiconductors if they are
not protected properly).
b) John Schnupp's bicarb.
I can't get to the archives to retrieve John's numbers but for pH less
than 8.5 (the EPA limit in the US): bicarbonate(mg/L) = alkalinity(ppm
as CaCO3)*61/50 to very good agreement.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Alan writes:
>A while ago I started up a page called "Bonafied Styles"
and mentions that there has been little response. Perhaps it's because
people are having trouble searching for the site as the word is spelled
"bonafide".
- --
A. J. deLange
Numquam in dubio, saepe in errore.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 08:53:42 -0500
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: Exploding Bottles, Bonafied!,
Brewsters:
Ross Reid has a homemade soda pop recipe
which encourages adding yeast to a 1lb of
sugar per gallon of water and bottling it.
He wonders if this recipe is safe.
Ross, the recipe says to store the capped bottles
warm for five days, then move to a cool place.
Maybe the recipe means for you to move
to Boulder or Greentree, Colorado or
Jackson Hole, Wyo. or someplace cool like that.
It certainly would be safer!
I have seen this kind of recipe for years and
believe it is one of those "wishful thinking"
recipes for people who do not understand
the chemistry or physics involved, but still
want a sweet homemade carbonated drink
without the equipment to carbonate it. We
sometimes find this kind of information in
craft and recipe information.
I have tried many times to rationalize why
such a recipe has been around for so long
and if there is something I am missing
( like the yeast can't operate well at
high sugar concentration or whatever).
Nothing fits my experience to believe that
one could possibly make soda pop safely
this way. Bakers know that bread yeast
continue to operate at even refrigerator
temperatures and what might be cool in
Australia, besides sheep fondling, would
be scorching in Wisconsin.
In my early days of brewing, I had a few
bottle bombs, luckily confined to a box.
I had a friend who ultimately had to wear
very heavy clothing, thick gloves and a face
shield to uncap cases of exploding bottles.
The uncapped bottles shot foam as high
as his house. Do not fool around with
overcarbonation. I would not try this recipe
and I would post to the website or wherever
you got it that it is extremely dangerous
even if the bottles are plastic.
- --------------------------------------------------------
Alan's appeal for contributions to his
Bonafied Styles site is likely necessary
because he really means "Bonafide"
(Latin = good fidelity) Styles. Now we know
what he means!
Try changing your site name to a
bonafide spelling of the word!
Injuneres! Huh!! But thanks for the website.
- --------------------------------------------------------
Keep on Brewin'
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 09:09:12 -0500
From: "Houseman, David L" <David.Houseman@unisys.com>
Subject: Bonafied Styles Page
Alan McKay provides a web site of Bonafied Styles. As a reminder, the Beer
Judge Certification Program (BJCP) maintains on their web site a full set of
detailed style descriptions used in BJCP, and for 2000 the AHA as well,
competitions. This recently updated style guide can be found at
http://www.mv.com/ipusers/slack/bjcp/style-index.html .
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 09:22:19 -0500
From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam@unc.edu>
Subject: a bit off-subject
I read both Steve A's and Dave B's posts with much interest.
Being 6'5" and under 30, I never realized all I had to do to buy
my three-tier, turn-key SS brewery and Porsche was echo
everything my boss says. Hmmm. Call me in a year (if my new
executive secretary won't screen you out) and I'll tell you if it
works. ;-)
Oh, and Dave makes mention of technology transfer. Being that
it's what I do for a living, I can assure you that it only works
when those big, faceless companies have an R&D infrastructure in
place (and likely a patent portfolio) which can support the
invention being transferred. Otherwise you should just start
your own company. The biggest misconception is that a company
gives a patootie about your small idea (no matter how good) if
they don't see it fit within their core business. Just my
$0.03--I gave an extra penny because it's my job.
Oh yeah...beer. I will post my post-keg thoughts on a very
successful batch of Berliner-weiss shortly. A beer worth
brewing.
Cheers!
Marc
- --
Marc Sedam
Technology Development Associate
Office of Technology Development
The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
308 Bynum Hall; CB# 4105
Chapel Hill, NC 27599-4105
http://www.research.unc.edu/otd
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 14:28:47 +0000
From: "J. Doug Brown" <jbrown@labyrinth.net>
Subject: Thanks for the RIMS input
Thanks for ideas and thoughts you shared on my RIMS idea. Most of the
responses were emailed directly to me, however some of the questions
were duplicates. I thought if I answered these here I could get even
more group feedback. These answers are in reference to questions
generated by my new RIMS design idea at:
http://www.labs.net/jbrown/Doug/Brew/new_deal/index.html
Questions about the air removal chamber in my RIMS setup:
In a normal RIMS operation any air bubbles that make it through the
heater are pumped back on top of the grain bed and float on top of the
mash. These air bubbles would be effectively filtered out due to their
ability to float on top of the mash and the pump only draws liquid from
beneath the grain bed. In my design, during normal RIMS operation the
same would happen, however during stages where the water is recirculated
external to the mash any air bubbles would be recirculated through the
pump causing further mixxing of air and wort. During external to the
mash recirculations the heated mixture is pumped into the chamber near
the top, and liquid is drawn off near the bottom. Since bubbles rise,
the fluid in the air removal near the bottom will have fewer bubbles
than that pumped out of the heating chamber. Any fluid additions by
partially opening valve V4 would force the air out of the external
recirculating system and on top of the grain bed where it would be
filtered out like a normal RIMS system.
Questions about bacterial concerns:
There was a question about bacteria growth in this system during RIMS
operation since the water used to fill the system was not boiled first.
It never really crossed my mind that this might happen, but thinking
about it, is it really a problem. After the water was brought up to
mashing temperatures hopefully within 15 minutes, a normal step mashing
program would be followed. After the sparge, the entire volume of wort
would be boiled for a normal hour boil. Wouldn't this boil kill any bad
beer bacteria? With this system I could also fill the RIMS with hot
water via the heated water fill secquence shown on the before mentioned
page.
Questions about the sparge and heated water fill:
The sparge operation is the same as the heated water fill, except that
the drain valve is also paritally opened so that the wort draining out
is replaced by the heated water flowing in. The heated water fill could
probabaly use more of an explanation. I will be assuming that the
system is switching from a RIMS operation to the sparge operation. In
"Mashout" mode, the pump is recirculating fluid through the heating
chamber, through the air removal chamber, then back to the pump. The
rate of fluid going to the RIMS vessel will be exactly the same as the
rate fluid is entering this loop via freshwater addition at valve V4.
As long as the fresh water addition is not too fast the recirculating
fluid should pass through the heating chamber sufficiently often to be
at the desired sparge temperature. I do not worry as much about the
water being too cold entering the RIMS unit as I do about it being too
hot. There will be very little volume of fluid in the recirculation
loop in this phase, and once the heating element is turned off via the
temperature controller, the recirculating fluid will still pick up more
heat due to the thermal capacitance of the heating coil.
If what I have said does not make sense, or in you opinion would not
happen, please let me know, or ask questions about it. This weekend I
just bought the low density heating element and an electronics book that
will help me design my microcontroller based heating controller.
Thanks again for all the input
Doug Brown
jbrown@labyrinth.net
- --
--------------------------------------------------------
/ J. Doug Brown Sr. Software Engineer \
< jbrown@labyrinth.net jbrown@ewa.com >
\ http://www.labs.net/jbrown http://www.ewa.com /
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 08:51:16 -0600
From: "Werrbach, Maria" <mwerrbach@mail.elgin.cc.il.us>
Subject: Cyser
Fellow Fermenters,
I've been brewing now for just over 5 months and I'm really enjoying my
product. I decided to try and make some, what I call, applejack with
honey and brown sugar (1 C of each) using Nottingham yeast for a
total of 5 gallons.
My S.G. was .066, and now, two weeks later I'm at .018 with a fairly
active airlock. I don't want this to be dry, and I'm certain that my
gravity reading will continue to drop. My question is, can I introduce
some non-fermentable sugar when I bottle this to sweeten it up alittle?
Oh, and one more question. I've never toasted grain before and I
wanted to know the oven temperature and time approximations to
do it. I'm assuming that I crush my grain prior to toasting.
Thanks all.
Maria Werrbach
werby@interaccess.com <mailto:werby@interaccess.com>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 09:52:45 -0500
From: Dan Listermann <72723.1707@compuserve.com>
Subject: Soda Pop
Ross Reid ( mrreid@golden.net ) asks about making soda pop. I do quite a
bit of this and, although I now usually use corny kegs, I haven't had
problems with exploding bottles when I bottled. The thing about pop is
that the carbonation is controlled in the opposite way carbonation is
controlled in beer. In beer it is the amount of sugar added at bottling
that determines the carbonation level. With pop it is the amount of
yeast
added that controls carbonation. The sucrose ( table sugar ) used in
making pop has no nutrients in it that would allow the yeast to
reproduce.
The yeast you add is all you get. It lives its little life out making
CO2
and dies.
First do not use baking yeast. Baking yeast is frequently contaminated
with bacteria for flavor reasons. Use brewing or wine making yeast.
Carefully measure the yeast per the instructions. This usually means
that
you will not use the whole package. Be sure to dissolve the yeast in
water
before mixing it in with the sugar water to assure even distribution. It
usually takes a number of weeks before the pop is ready to drink.
My increasingly lovely spouse volunteered my services to demonstrate pop
making for our youngest's Cub Pack. I made a batch to serve at the demo
a
number of weeks ago and will make two batches at the demo so all the kids
can take a 2l home.
I use the "Homebrew" brand. The birch root beer is my favorite although
the regular is very good as well. The sarsaparilla is very good if you
like the taste of sassafras. The cola is very "RC" like. The cherry is
very wild black cherry. The orange is excellent. I don't care for the
cream soda. The ginger beer and ginger ale are both good although I
don't
have the presence of mind to say what the difference between the two is.
I
haven't tried the strawberry or the raspberry yet.
Interestingly an employee once made a cherry stout using the cherry
extract. It produced a very distinctive chocolate covered cherry flavor
in
the stout.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 10:01:25 -0500
From: "Penn, John" <John.Penn@jhuapl.edu>
Subject: Re: malta starters
RE: malta starter.... Never Mind. Actually I got a nice reply about the
origins of malta and a warning that it may be nutrient deficient compared to
a regular starter. It seems my starter did take off but probably it was
the yeast from a 10 month old bottle of homebrew using yeast from a bottle
of "Duvel" last year. Nothing happened for 4 days with the new "Duvel"
yeast ,then I added the yeast from one of my year old belgian homebrews and
the starter took off a couple of days later. Tasted OK and it seems to have
the slow steady fermentation I see with the Duvel yeast.
I think the belgian beers do have a distinct yeast flavor but of course
that depends on the recipe and the belgian beer. I have had recipes where
the yeast flavor dominates but I can see that it is a subtle taste which
some could miss. My current "dubbel" recipe uses light malt extract,
glucose sugar, and I think I'll use a little orange blossom honey (1#) for a
dubbel style. Next time, I plan on repeating a "white" style which uses
coriander. Makes a nice dry finish on the tongue due to the coriander. I
had tried a couple of brewferm kits which were decent but after making my
own dubbel last year I realized the yeast in the brewferm kits seems like a
sweeter tasting basic ale yeast without the subtle taste of the duvel yeast
which I prefer and to me tastes more authentic in belgian beers.
Since this is my first attempt using malta as a starter I think I'll try
it a couple more times and see how the lack of nutrients affects my
starters. Maybe I'll switch back to regular starters. Thanks to Hector for
his description and history of malta, hopefully his reply went to the
homebrew list and not just to me as a private reply. I also got a reply
that BYO has an article on using malta for starters but haven't seen the
article.
John Penn
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 07:03:42 -0800
From: robert@bobbrews.com (Robert Johnson)
Subject: RIMS systems
Noticed some increased activity on RIMS systems. One of our club members
Ken Dodd built a beuatiful and fully functional RIMs that takes very
little spave and no climbing or heavy lifting. If you want to see a pic
follow this link to our club photo gallery.
http://www.bobbrews.com/ferm_photo_gallery.htm
Robert (bobbrews) Johnson
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 09:29:27 -0600
From: "John Watts" <watts@radiks.net>
Subject: re: Exploding Bottles?
KABOOM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
followed by
Where the @&#^$ is the mop?
Rgds
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 09:47:23 -0600
From: DAN ELGART <cogneeeto@earthlink.net>
Subject: system queries!
Re: Brewing systems ease of use and repeatability of results.
.Please, Sirs/ madams, could
you address a few questions that I have regarding
feasibility of a few systems??
I am currently using a three-barrel/three-burner type cooker made of
wood and
primarily brew single step mash ales. K.I.S.S.! We have
three pub brewery firms in our town-- all use the single step
method, using highly mod. malts (mostly Briess). I
uasually super pitch the yeast (gallons are free and available at any
one of the brew pubs in town). I am looking for a (yet)
simpler setup, easier to clean, fewer stuck sparges, with predictable
results. Please
advise!!
FIRST... the RIMS SYSTEM
http://www.advancedbrew.com/compubrew.html )
1) With the wort constantly re-circulating, why would one assume
temperature stratification- do commercial units paddle( this
unit uses considerably less grain than a commercial operation!- **is
it
necessary at the 5 to 10 gal level of production?)
2)Commonly- the initial rest temp.( for home brewers) is achieved by
starting with a known water Vol.+ a known grain Vol.
(usually at a pound of grain per liter of water) producing an expected
temp. drop when the grain is introduced- that is to say...
grain is dumped into hot water to achieve a predicted rest temp, then
holding that Temp. is the only concern (in single step
mashes). Are they telling me that this kills most of the available
enzymes, not leaving enough enzyme content to do what little
there is to do- with today's highly modified malts? Please expand on
this, I try for perfection also- but now, mostly by
achieving simplicity. i.e.: When using a single step mash- is a slow
and
predictable heat ramp necessary? 3) It seems to me that
the paddle would grind the grist like being in a pepper mill- only to
sift more particles into the re-circulating pump??
Is this necessary to not starve the re-circulating pump? Is the
paddle
necessary for reasons other than un-stratifying the mat of
grist?? 4) Wall mounted -- this unit seems as if it would be a
nightmare to clean, any comments, please?? 5) Sparging- hot
water source: is this achieved by way of another external unit (not
incl.)? If sparging is done in a gravity fed way- does this
system require to be mounted up high? Further complicating the
cleaning.
ABT seems like the bread machine of beer, requiring
several more components, immobile, and awkward for a mash only unit.
Please comment.
Please understand that my inquiries are of a "Devil's advocate" nature
and I mean not to berate anybody... I
have considered a unit of this type for some time
(or)
a type like seen here : http://www.morebeer.com/b31000.html
(or) look here :
http://www.homebrewheaven.com/ , now look on the left index half way
down for the "Peak Brewing System" -- click on there...,
- -- my system (made of wood) is clunky and hard to use and store --and
I
am truely interested in clearing the "smoke of marketing" of course
I"d
fabricate my own version. Please... do you have any other
suggestions?? THANK YOU!
Dan
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 10:17:21 -0600
From: Susan Walsh <swalsh@icva.gov>
Subject: Anchor code
Maybe, the code 9YD stands for:
1999 batch Y April
This is a code similar to a code a manufacturing plant I once worked in used.
The first number is the year, the next letter is the batch, and the next
letter is the month. The month is A for January, B for February etc.
Just a thought.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 11:22:04 -0500
From: "Alan Meeker" <ameeker@welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: yeast growth/fermentation
Hi Dave,
>I was surprised when Alan commented
> that the majority of the fermentation took
> place during the growth phase of the yeast
> ( I assume you mean the population of
> yeast or do you mean the individual cell?)
Perhaps I haven't phrased this quite precisely enough, sorry. What I am
talking about is that apparently the /rate/ of sugar utilization is greatest
while the yeast population is in exponential growth phase; ie- actively
dividing. This makes sense, as the yeasts' metabolism will be peaking during
this active growth phase and will apply equally well to the whole yeast
population as well as an individual yeast cell within this population. That
is, on a per cell basis, the yeast will assimilate more of the wort sugar
per unit time while it is actively growing and dividing versus other phases
such as the lag phase (pre-exponential) or the plateau phase
(post-exponential).
> since I had assumed that all yeast which
> are still alive are processing sugar. As
> a percentage, the new yeast is far
> outnumbered by the fully grown yeast at
> equilibrium.
Yes, but as I mentioned above the "new yeast" (presumably actively dividing)
are processing sugar at a faster rate than the equilibrium population, some
20-30X faster (in effect the early population is acting like a population
20 - 30 times it's size, at least in terms of its sugar utilization) Put
another way, it's like comparing a teenagers and octagenarians - the
teenagers will eat a helluva lot more/eat faster than the oldsters.
I have never seen a plot of
> % sugar consumption versus % of
> equilibrium population. Do you have
> some kind of numbers to support this?
Yes, I'll have to dig the reference(s) out.
> Alan, do you agree that yeast come to
> an equilibrium population value
> ( regardless of how complex a control
> process you believe it is) during and
> before the end of a fermentation?
Certainly. Ideally, they follow a "classical" growth curve - a lag phase
followed by "exponential" or "log" growth followed in turn by a plateau
phase due to some limiting growth factor. But, I think the important thing
to focus on is /why/ they are doing this...
It /is/ a complex process. For instance, your question as to whether they
will plateau before the end of fermentation - in part this will depend on
what the cause of the plateau is. Why is the population plateauing in the
first place? In the simplest case some essential yeast nutrient in the wort
will run out ("become growth-limiting") because the yeast have eaten it all
up. What it is exactly that gets used up first will be dependent,
by-and-large, on the make up of the wort. Any nutrient could, in theory, be
growth-limiting but let's suppose it is wort sugar as is likely to be the
typical situation. In this case, in the early part of the fermentation the
yeast will grow and reproduce as fast as they can because growth conditions
are optimal - there is plenty of all the nutrients they need. But soon they
have eaten up almost all the sugars which, of course, means that
fermentation is rapidly coming to an end. The lack of sugars now means that
continued growth is impossible and the yeast stop growing (plateau, come to
equilibrium, whatever you wish to call it). Here the cessation of yeast
growth exactly parallels the cessation of fermentation, so very little of
the actual fermentation would be done by yeast in this plateau phase of
growth.
The reason I'm stressing the "complexity" line is that I think it is
important for people to understand what is going on with their yeast and
what the various relevant variables are so they can exert some control over
them to improve their beers.
> And that this is relatively standard
> population value for normal fermentations?
> Both lager and ale yeasts?
Well, no I don't think so, at least not if I am reading your meaning of
"standard population value" correctly. You seem to be referring to some
population size which the yeast will tend to reach given enough time
regardless of starter size. Are you talking about what would be analogous to
the ecologist's term "carrying capacity" - the maximum population size the
environment can support? If so, then yes there will be such a maximum
attainable yeast population size but, (complexity again!) whether or not you
reach this size will depend on a whole host of factors, not least of which
will be the size and condition of the starter.
For example, in the lab I can take a SINGLE yeast cell and grow it in
culture, in the presence of oxygen to saturation where there will be many
many millions of cells per mililiter. At this saturation point, something
became limiting for growth. The yeast could have run out of some nutrient or
perhaps some metabolic byproduct built up to toxic levels in the media.
Alternatively, I could have started with a single cell and grown it up under
/oxygen-free/ conditions. Here, the final yeast population size would be
limited by lack of oxygen (lack of vital cell membrane synthesis) rather
than lack of say sugar or nitrogen and instead of getting millions of cells
at the end, I'd only have maybe 10 cells because the initial starting cell
could only divide a couple of times. If I'd started with thousands of cells
in the oxygen-free case then maybe I'd end up with tens or hundreds of
thousands, but still not millions as in the first case. What I'm trying to
illustrate here is that, /minimally/, the final yeast population size will
be dependent upon the starter size, the state of the starter, and the amount
of oxygen present in the media (wort in our case). This is ignoring a whole
bunch of other factors involved in determining the final yeast population
density.
In the lab I can control all the relevant variables so I can, if I want to,
I use defined media. My yeast are virtually 100% viable and pure. I can add
exactly the same number of cells at the start of growth every time. My
growth media volume is accurate and reproducible. The growth conditions are
exactly the same run to run w/regards to temperature to the 0.1 deg C,
aerations and agitation during growth, pH etc. etc.. BUT, at home the
situation is very different! I've lost much of the control over these
variables, especially the "growth media" aka - the wort. I'm sure the
number of yeast in my starter varies by quite a bit - did I grow it for
four days? five? What was the temperature? How well were they aerated? I
KNOW my wort is not the same from batch to batch, the S.G differs somewhat,
the malts in the grain bill may be different, hell the /style/ is probably
different! The amount of aeration isn't the same, etc, etc, etc... Could I
exert more control over these parameters? - you bet! But, as I'm sure Mike
Maceyka will attest, I am already quite anal in my attention to the details
of my brewing, any more and it'd start getting too much like work which, for
me anyway, wouldn't be as much fun!
In summary, I think it is important to get to know what the relevant
variables are in yeast growth and fermentation, how they are inter-related
and how to exert /reasonable/ control over them in the homebrew setting.
Alan Meeker
Baltimore, MD
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 10:25:57 -0700 (MST)
From: jliddil@VMS.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: malt mod
As Lynn pointed out there are other important parameters to the analysis
of malt. And rather than rehash things those interested may wnat to
review the disucssion in the hbd archives. It would be great if a malt
analysis had beta-glucan listed as well as other parameters. And one can
still not be sure about a malt until they actually brew with it. Also
visual inspection is important. I had a conversation with a brewer who
got malt that had a great analysis sheet. But when it was dilvered the
truck driver has the pneumatic blower set to high and the malt was
shattered to pieces.
I've been looking into disinfectants and cleaning for various reasons. In
the best of all worlds you really want to be able to physically scrub the
object you are cleaning prior to any disinfection. It's scary the
probelms that occur from improper cleaning of things like endoscopes.
So for the guy with the green carboy, I agree that you should let it soak
in bleach or autodishwasher detergent. But then use a brush and scrub it.
You could also try to make a CIP head/setup. Another alternative is
chromic acid or alcoholic KOH. But these are very dangerous and should
only be saued by trained professionals. :-)
And finally I'll apologize for going off the deep end on the AHA. It
always helps to sit on a post for a while prior to sending it.
Jim Liddil
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 07:11:49 -0500
From: Rod Prather <rodpr@iquest.net>
Subject: Fermenters again?
Well Dave, I must say you are particularly curmudgeny (sp?) today.
Some of us successfully ferment in carboys using a top trap that
drains back into the carboy. This can be sanitized and it can be
designed to leave that undesirable top foam behind. I do agree that
it can get out of control with high alcohol beers and barley wines.
Open fermentation is great if you have a clean dedicated area for beer
making. If, as in my case, you brew in a dungeon the availability of
mold spores and creatures of the dank may be excessive and closed
fermentation might be desirable. In any case, DON'T use a plastic
trash can. The plasticizers used are great for garbage but not for
human consumption. Say what you may about this but if they were food
grade, the USDA would mark them as such. Go buy a white, food grade
15 or 20 gallon food storage container from Gordon's or another
supplier.
Seems like deja vu, huh.
> Secondly, I'd lose the bad idea of doing a primary
> fermentation in a carboy. ---------------I ferment in a
> 6 gallon plastic garbage can covered
> with a plastic sheet held down by a chain of rubber
> bands. I have never had a foam over.
>
- --
Rod Prather
Indianapolis, Indiana
------------------------------
Date: 08 Nov 1999 11:18:55 -0700
From: "Jeffry D Luck" <Jeffry.D.Luck@aexp.com>
Subject: Aquarium Heaters
We had a aquarium heater that broke, or to be precise,
the heater's thermostat broke. We got back after two
weeks vacation to a house temp of 60F and an aquarium
temp of about 110F. Fish dead. Aquarium plants dead.
Algae doing just fine. It was quite, um ...fragrant -- took 3
days to air the place out.
If you use a cheap aquarium heater, check it daily.
Just 1 data point.
Jeff Luck
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 10:47:32 -0800
From: Jack Straw <jstraw79@pacbell.net>
Subject: Lead in Brass
Ive been a lurker for a while on this list, and I wanted to throw my
$0.02 in here. My understanding of the whole lead in brass issue is
that there are extremely minimal ammounts of it present in the alloy.
That combined with the ammount of surface area of the valves that
actually touch the beer, leads me to believe that there is no reason to
worry about de-leading your brass. Please correct me if I am way off
base here, for I have done no batch analysis concerning my statment
above. It just seems to me that there is a negligable ammount of lead
there.
Cheers,
Peter
- --
"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy."
-Ben Franklin
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 13:22:28 -0600
From: Kurt Kiewel <kiewel@mail.chem.tamu.edu>
Subject: Kurt's continued clog
Thanks to all for your responses to my drain clog problem.
Unfortunately my problem persists. I brewed a pumpkin ale this weekend and
used hop plugs instead of pellets hoping this would solve the problem.
Again after cooling, whirlpooling and allowing to settle for ten min. I
got a clogged drain after about a cup of wort drained out.
Not following scientific method and changing two variables at the same time
(does that make my brewing art and not science?) it could be the pumpkin
that caused the clog this time and not the hops. I don't know. Next time
there will be no pumpkin.
My question to the collective regarding this problem is... Is it
advisable to put the hops inside some kind of loose bag? It seems that
from my reading that hops ought to roll and tumble during the boil and that
this physical action helps extract and isomerize the alpha acids in the
hops. Do I need the hop leaves to act as some kind of filter bed for the
trub?
More specs on my set up: I have a 1/2 inch brass ball valve fitted about 2
inches from the bottom and the fitting extend about an 1/2 inch inside the
keg. My stainless scrubbie is fastened with solid copper wire to the
fitting. Looks like a 2 inch diameter stainless pom-pom stuck to the side
near the bottom at about the 1.5 to 2 gallon mark.
Thanks for aiding my quest for clear runoff... or any runoff at all for
that matter.
Kurt
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 14:36:35 -0500 (EST)
From: Paul Shick <SHICK@JCVAXA.jcu.edu>
Subject: Sterling hops?
Hello all,
I'm just beginning my usual winter run of German lagers, and
I'm planning to try the new breed, Sterling, for my bittering hops.
The various hop suppliers list this as a Saaz/Hallertauer hybrid, with
very good aroma/flavor properties and fairly high alpha (mine are 7+%.)
Does anyone have any experiences (pleasant or otherwise) with
Sterling hops? Thanks in advance.
Paul Shick
Basement brewing in Cleveland Hts OH
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 15:35:23 -0500
From: phil sides jr <psides@carl.net>
Subject: Re: Bonafied Styles Page
>As I mentioned last time, if you've never been in Cologne, then
>I won't consider your opinions on a Bonafied Koelsch. Similar
>goes for any other style. No offense, but if you haven't had the
>real thing, then you can't know the real thing.
Are you saying Michael Jackson should quit writing about beer and
whiskey and open a travel agency? ;-) That was supposed to be funny,
but seriously though I couldn't disagree more with your logic here.
Are you saying that an accomplished homebrewer or professional brewer
who is educated in brewing history, beer styles, techniques, ingredients
and troubleshooting is not qualified to comment as to whether a beer
fits a particular style? How about someone who is educated in sensory
perception, flavor/aroma descriptors and has had their beer evaluation
skills tested and certified (such as a BJCP judge)?
I say that anyone meeting the above criteria should be able to refer to
published style guidelines or text authored by an expert without the
benefit of experiencing 'the real thing' and render an valid opinion of
a beer's fit to style. I will conceed that in the process of garnering
the above credentials, an individual will most likely have sampled
classic examples of most if not all recognized beer styles but I do not
believe this is requisite to be able to identify what the beer should
taste like. A person who lacks this training but was stationed in
Germany for three years as part of military service is not necessarily
qualified to classify beers just because they have had it from the
source. Just my $.02...
Phil Sides, Jr.
Concord, NH
- --
Macht nicht o'zapft ist, Prost!
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #3165, 11/09/99
*************************************
-------
