Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #3302
HOMEBREW Digest #3302 Tue 18 April 2000
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: Rims, Herms mash thickness ("C.D. Pritchard")
Questions for Dr. Cone ("maltandhops")
Inevitable wise cracks (Steve Lacey)
AHA First Round May 6/7 in Philadephia (David Houseman)
Getting started. (Kerrigan, Kevin [mailto:kkerrigan)
lagering questions (kysard)
Yeast Q's -Marc Sedam- Dr. Cone ("Rob Moline")
The Rob Moline Report-Siebel ("Rob Moline")
Re: Decoction , iodophore, Clayton Cone Cuestion, Partially (phil sides jr)
(no subject) (Epic8383)
Fruit Beer ? ("Francois Zinserling")
Iodophor Rinsing ("Phil & Jill Yates")
cooling times, cool tips, Aussie insolents ("Dr. Pivo")
Re: Curious Australian Life Forms? (Jeff Renner)
"The Cosmic Kid" ("Marc Gaspard")
flaked out or loosing your liner ("Bob Bratcher")
re: Mashing Formulas (Lou.Heavner)
My 2 cents... ("Pannicke, Glen A.")
re: Flow rate for chlorine removal ("Brian Lundeen")
Carmelly flavors part deux and hot break amount (Dave Burley)
caramelly flavors (Dave Burley)
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
* 18th Annual Oregon Homebrew Festival - entry deadline May 15th
* More info at: http://www.hotv.org/fest2000
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 FROM THE E-MAIL
ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!**
IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, you cannot subscribe to
the digest as we canoot reach you. We will not correct your address
for the automation - that's your job.
The HBD is a copyrighted document. The compilation is copyright
HBD.ORG. Individual postings are copyright by their authors. ASK
before reproducing and you'll rarely have trouble. Digest content
cannot be reproduced by any means for sale or profit.
More information is available by sending the word "info" to
req@hbd.org.
JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 18:44:35
From: "C.D. Pritchard" <cdp@chattanooga.net>
Subject: re: Rims, Herms mash thickness
rnrduyck@mnsi.net is building a HERMS and asked (edited):
>I'm... wondering about the mash thickness in a step mash....
>Is it ok to just add boiling water... and use the heat exchanger
>to maintain the temperature and for mashout?
If you do use the system for those boosts, keep the hot water handy just in
case the boosts between rests are "too slow". 1 to 1.5 degF.min. is often
quoted as good. Where a slow boost is more likely affect the brew is
during the protein rests (or so I've read). For a new system, I'd choose a
brew recipe that doesn't require any boosts other than to mash-out since
the boost time to there isn't nearly as critical as the others. I'd save
the multi-step mashes until after you've gotten some experience with your
system.
Rather than waste electrons on stuff most aren't interested in, I just
posted info on starting up a new RIMS type system at:
http://chattanooga.net/~cdp/rims_com.htm
c.d. pritchard cdp@chattanooga.net
http://hbd.org/cdp/ http://chattanooga.net/~cdp/
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 15:44:05 -0700
From: "maltandhops" <maltandhops@email.msn.com>
Subject: Questions for Dr. Cone
Dr. Cone
They have been previous post in the HBD about the role of
yeast and their influence on mouthfeel. I'm not referring to
attenuation but possible interaction with proteins.
(proteins contributing to mouthfeel, not yeast metabolism).
There have been situations where a person
has split the same wort into two fermenters and pitched
different yeast, and the beer with the lower FG ends up having more
mouthfeel. Can you explain what we are observing?
Second question.
I just rigged up my stir plate to stir my 7 gallon fermenter.
I want to get good attenuation, not yeast growth.
At what gravity (%) should I start the stir plate, and at what
intervals should I run it? ( 1 minute per hour ??)
Thanks, mike rose Crestline, CA maltandhops@msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 09:12:17 +1000
From: Steve Lacey <stevel@sf.nsw.gov.au>
Subject: Inevitable wise cracks
Rick appraised us of the less than hygienic conditions under which
feed-grade corn can be handled:
> I worked at a smaller company at one time. I saw the mill workers taking a
> wizz in the corn bunk. They were too lazy to walk to the bathroom.
In Australia we call alcoholic drinks piss. As in "getting on the piss" or
"getting pissed". I never thought to take these terms literally, but now I'm
not so sure...
If these questionable practices extend to more unsavoury acts, we might also
have to consider renaming Classic American Pilsener to CrAP.
Happy Brewing
Steve Lacey
P.S I shudder to think how Phil & Jill are going to take this news...
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 20:02:56 -0400
From: David Houseman <dhousema@cccbi.org>
Subject: AHA First Round May 6/7 in Philadephia
Final notice of the the Regional First Round AHA NHC for 2000 is being held
May 6 & 7 at Drexel University's Department Of Restaurant & Institutional
Management (HRIM), at 105 N. 33rd Street, Philadelphia, PA. It is an easily
reachable location, about 6 blocks from Philadelphia's 30th Street train
station served by Amtrak and local service. (THE BUILDING IS IDENTIFIED ONLY
AS 'ACADEMIC BUILDING'.) We are inviting you to judge at this excellent
location and enjoy some Philadelphia hospitality for the weekend. We need
judges and stewards for this premier event. Judging will be held both days,
punctuated by lunch and followed by a "happy hour" on Saturday, CATERED BY
THE HRIM STUDENTS, AND INCLUDING BEERS FROM SOME OF OUR LOCAL BREWERIES AND
BREWERS. This location will be warmer than Red Bell was last year!
Judges and stewards are requested to be at the 6th floor of the HRIM at
9:00am on Saturday and 10:00am on Sunday. Judging will begin promptly at
9:30am on Saturday and 10:30am on Sunday. Please contact the Judge
Coordinator, David Houseman, at 372 Harshaw Drive, Chester Springs, PA 19425
or email him with the same information at dhousema@cccbi.org. Remember that
your commitment to judge is a commitment of your time, which we appreciate
and rely upon. So, we will be counting on your attendance if you tell us
you will be here. We still have lots of excellent styles waiting for judge
assignments. We will be using the new common BJCP/AHA style guidelines.
Contact George or Nancy at Home Sweet Homebrew for further details: (215)
569-9469 or
homsweet@voicenet.com
Dave Houseman
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 21:10:20 -0400
From: Kerrigan, Kevin [mailto:kkerrigan@hastings.edu]
Subject: Getting started.
To whom it may concern:
Some friends and I were considering investing in a home brewery. We have no
knowledge of cost or required supplies. If you could send us any
information on getting started off it would be greatly appreciated.
Kevin Kerrigan
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 11:29:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: kysard@excite.com
Subject: lagering questions
Hello,
I am new to HBD and home brewing, although I have had graduate courses
in fermentation / biochemical engineering. I just need help applying
to small scale practical home brewing.
Before I invest any more capital I need to know if it is REALLY
possible to brew CLEAR pilsner lagers like HernBrau on a 5 gallon
scale with homebrew equipment: including soda kegs, CO2, 40 to 50F
temp.
Can anyone point me to a good website on this subject? I have
the New Lagering Book, but find it a little impracticle, w/out
much on expections for the final homebrew.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 21:12:16 -0500
From: "Rob Moline" <brewer@isunet.net>
Subject: Yeast Q's -Marc Sedam- Dr. Cone
From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam@unc.edu>
Subject: yeast question for Dr. Cone
Is there a succinct reason why there are not many good dry
lager yeasts out there? I've heard, anecdotally, that even
the dry lager yeasts aren't true bottom fermenters. Is it a
question of genetics or that there's really no big demand
for dry lager yeast to make it worthwhile to investigate the
problem?
Marc,
There is a large enough market for a true lager yeast Saccharomyces uvarum
(carlsbergensis) and it is high on our list of problems to be solved. The
several hundred strains of yeast that we have actively produce and dried on
a commercial basis all follow a similar growth pattern when grown in the
highly aerobic, zulauf feed fermentation that is required to produce yeast
economically for the commercial market.. Zulauf feed means that the wort
and nutrients are fed to the highly aerobically growing yeast at a rate
that does not allow more than 0.1 % sugar present at any time except for
brief predetermined periods to achieve increased levels of enzymes and to
control other parameters such as protein, phosphate, trehalose, glycogen
and budding cycles. These parameters can only be controlled by the zulauf
method, Batch grown yeast cannot be controlled to the degree that is
required for drying and shelf life stability. The true lager yeast is the
one exception to this growth pattern. We have finally resolved the growth
problem. We are now working on the drying challange. We can now dry it
with excellent viability but are not satisfied with the shelf life, and
stability of the dried yeast. With a little fine tuning, the product
should be on the market in the year 2000. We have a doctor from
Weihenstephan and a doctor from a brewing department of a university in
Scotland working full time on this project.
Wort composition and fermentation temperature play such a significant role
in the production of lager that several ale yeast strains can produce
excellent lager beer.
Clayton Cone
Addendum from Rob
Lallemand/Danstar makes a dry lager yeast that is currently on the
market, Kroner....but due to the problems of stability that Dr. Cone
references...it is only available to the pro-brewing market, from Scott
Labs, in 500 gm bricks.
I used it once, @ LABCO, and tried to follow it's
recommendations...i.e., that the batch be fermented at high..(72F from
memory) temps for a period not to exceed 36 hours, then ramped the temps
down as suggested....BUT, I left the batch at high temps for slightly in
excess of 48 hours...
Following ramp-down...the yeast performed exactly as described in the
literature, following the factory's displayed curve of attenuation...
But, after all was said and done, I found a very slight fruity ester
apparent....which I attributed to the longer times I held it at higher
temps....
I never used it again, but not for the fruity esters, purely for the
economics of running a 7bbl brewhouse with 3 fermenters.....In the 2 weeks I
held the lager brew in fermentation, I could easily have run 2, if not 3
ales through the same tank...and the same is said for secondary lager
times.....
All in all, brewpubs making lagers have planned for them, by capacity
in vessels that I didn't have.....After all, a fella has to age his
barleywine, huh?
Cheers!
Rob
"The More I Know About Beer, The More I Realize I Need To Know More
About Beer!"
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 21:49:44 -0500
From: "Rob Moline" <brewer@isunet.net>
Subject: The Rob Moline Report-Siebel
The Rob Moline Report-Siebel
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 10:46:13 -0400
From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam@unc.edu>
Subject: TNB Online Articles
Interesting blurbs about the Siebel Institute here. I'm
surprised the topic hasn't surfaced on the HBD yet...is Rob
Moline able to comment at all?
http://www.beertown.org/IBS/Newbrewer/tnbonline.htm
Cheers!
Marc
Yes, Rob Moline is able to comment, but hasn't for what should be
obvious reasons.....Attorneys bother me....One of my best friends is one....
;-)
I have loyalties to all involved.....especially Lallemand.....and Bill
Siebel....
I couldn't...nor would I attempt to illustrate here what all the
parties involved have ever done for me.....On both sides of this
fence....Nor the debt I owe them....
But, my bottom line has to be....
Who is to question what Bill Siebel decides is in the best interest of
his family, his Institution, and himself?
Certainly not me.....
Rob Moline
Special Scholarship, Siebel Short Course, 1998
Lallemand
"The More I Know About Beer, The More I Realize I Need To Know More
About Beer!"
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 02:38:48 -0400
From: phil sides jr <psides@technologist.com>
Subject: Re: Decoction , iodophore, Clayton Cone Cuestion, Partially
Dave Burley <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com> opines:
>easy to do and I don't know why anyone would resist it. Maybe you've
never
>heard of oxidation during the boil because professionals do all of
their
>boils in closed kettles and have a much smaller surface to volume ratio
>than homebrewers.
Dave,
You mean those boil kettles with the huge exhaust pipes, uptake fans,
and steam condensers attached? How about the manways they usually leave
open? I'll concede that some homebrewer has not cut the top off of them
with a sawzall, but they are definitely NOT closed kettles my friend. I
know some commercial brewer out there somewhere probably does boil in a
closed kettle so I am not going to say no one does, but in the well over
one hundred brew houses I have been in I have not seen one.
You are definitely right about the surface area to volume ratio. I
think it is safe to consider kettle geometry the principal process
difference between production brewing and homebrewing.
Phil Sides, Jr.
Concord, NH
- --
Macht nicht o'zapft ist, Prost!
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 03:55:10 EDT
From: Epic8383@aol.com
Subject: (no subject)
Folks,
I seem to have ignited an old debate (sci v art). I have no problem with
how analytical anyone gets, hell 3 years ago I never thought I'd be at the
stage I am now. I just think its rather cowardly and in bad taste to flame
someone (although there does seem to be some civility creeping back in).
Water seems to be one of those topics that'll invite discussion, I was
running my tap water through a Brita filter until recently. I read an old BT
that said they use an ion-exchange resin. During that time, I had a few beers
go to competition and the judges all detected some astringencies, along with
a few other out of character flavors. I suspected the yeastie boys weren't
getting their fill of trace minerals and switched to an Omni U25 whole house
filter, which is a carbon filter only. The first batch was pale ale and will
be ready to drink this week. By memorial day a kolsh will be on tap. I'm
hoping to find a local judge who will taste them and confirm my suspicions.
Gus
Just outside JFK Airport (sometimes known as the Blue Ice Brewhouse)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 11:25:57 +0200
From: "Francois Zinserling" <francois@designtech.co.za>
Subject: Fruit Beer ?
We have some "alcoholic beverages" available
locally. Known brand names are HOOCH and
BACARDI BREEZER. (no affilia... bla bla)
I am not sure if you would classify it as a
"fruit flavoured beer" or an "alcoholic soda".
Typical flavours are lemon, lime, raspberry,
orange, apple(not cider) etc.
I would like to attempt a brew of this.
Does anyone know more about this ?
Some recipes would be appreciated.
CHEERS
ZING (ZA)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 22:07:04 +1000
From: "Phil & Jill Yates" <yates@acenet.com.au>
Subject: Iodophor Rinsing
There has been quite a bit of discussion lately on the use of iodophor. I
know when I first got interested in using it, one plus that went with it's
use was the lack of necessity to rinse it off. But I can't think of any
reason why one wouldn't. What I mean to say is I can't see any situation in
sanitising of equipment where you would walk away and let the stuff dry on.
I've used it for a long time and find it most effective. But I would never
not rinse it off.
I know I've painted myself as a beer swilling obnoxious brewer with scant
regard for any anal retentive procedures. But never would I let my sanitiser
dry on the equipment.
Just what slack brewing operations are some of you running?
Can you not afford a bit of rinsing water?
Dave Burley, you and I are going to have to get together.
The HBD is obviously full of heathens.
Phil
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 15:15:26 +0200
From: "Dr. Pivo" <dp@pivo.w.se>
Subject: cooling times, cool tips, Aussie insolents
Jim wrote:
> I have found that the simple act of shaking one's
> immersion chiller gently in the cooling wort decreases the time required to
> cool it dramatically; before I 'discovered' this, my cooling times were on
> the order of 30 minutes, or even longer; since I started moving the chiller
> to and fro my wort cools from near boiling to 70F in 5-10 minutes
...and 'deed it is true, that convection plus conduction is way faster
than conduction alone.
Being the laziest bugger around, the only thing I am going to shake, is
simply to prevent yellow stains in my skivies.
To remedy this, I've made what I call a "jump valve". This is simply an
expansion chamber and a check valve in series... the pressure does not
exceed the check until it fills the chamber, when it does, a whole
whoosh* (*accepted technical term for "whooshing") of water comes
through and jolts the chiller, then the valve closes, and the whole
cycle starts again.... you get sort of an automatic "chiller shaker".
Whooshing rates are based on flow, pressure, volume of chamber (and up
stream volume), and strength of spring in your check valve, according to
Pivological studies on the subject.
If you're like me, you may rather "play with your spring", than "shake
your chiller".
- ------
On another note, thanks for all the "cool tips" regarding England.
A "special thanks" for a particularly detailed report from Gillian Crafton.
...and yes, William, I shall stop at Fuller's et al, and shall "pop
thine question".
- ------
...as regards all those "au." signatures that think they are making good
beer without getting the "Golden Librarian" stamp of approval.... just
remember... I may leave for England tommorrow, but I SHALL be returning
your way, and putting things into order...
... why last time I had to wrestle Dave Edne three time around the
Picton pub floor when he threatened to replace the open fermenters. In
the scuffle, he kicked the bag of cow dooty off the bar, mightily
angering the barmaid for whom's passion fruit they were intended as fertiliser.
She helped me hold him down, and we poured a bottle of Chardonay down
his gullet, which on top of the Bock, sent him reeling out into the gravel.
It did my heart good to see those glassy eyes and green cheeks loading
50 litre barrels into the truck the next day in 35C heat as I was
getting up for my breckie.
As to the closed fermenters?... Scharrer found out they cost money, and
he couldn't find one free at the local rubbish tip, so that danger has passed.
Dr. Pivo iiIii
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 09:26:05 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Curious Australian Life Forms?
Phil promised us a "ding dong party" but when I arrived at the Burradoo
train station, he was nowhere to be seen. His excuse is a lame one. If
Fred hadn't wanted to get back to civilization so badly, we'd have hung
around (he apparently left his travel tube of K-Y in the gents at the
station). As it was, I didn't want to spend a night sharing a room with
Fred at the Burradoo version of the Hilton, so we scurried back home, as
Phil reported.
Back home, I found this report (thanks, Jim Booth) of Australian ding dong
parties and strange life forms (although the main protagonist in the story
no longer qualifies as a life form as he has joined Marilyn and will be
unable to frolic with the ladies at Phil's party, if and when it happens.
This report is a nominee for the 1999 annual Darwin Award. From
http://darwinawards.com/darwin/darwin1999-45.html , "In the spirit of
Charles Darwin, the Darwin Awards commemorate individuals who protect our
gene pool by making the ultimate sacrifice of their own lives. Darwin Award
winners eliminate themselves in an extraordinarily idiotic manner, thereby
improving our species' chances of long-term survival. " Be sure to read
the other nominees' stories. BTW, this makes this a beer related post. :-)
The Winner Gets... a Post Mortem
1999 Darwin Awards Nominee
Confirmed True by Darwin
(August 1999, Australia) Drinking oneself to death need not be a long
lingering process. Allan, a 33-year-old computer technician, showed his
competitive spirit by dying of competitive spirits. A Sydney, Australia
hotel bar held a drinking competition, known as Feral Friday, with a
100-minute time limit and a sliding point scale ranging from 1 point for
beer to 8 points for hard liquor.
Allan stood and cheered his winning total of 236, (winners never quit!)
which had also netted him the literally staggering blood alcohol level of
.353 grams of alcohol per 100 ml of blood, 7 times greater than Australia's
legal driving limit of 0.05%.
After several trips to the usual temple of overindulgence, the bathroom,
Allan was helped back to his workplace to sleep it off, a condition that
became permanent.
A forensic pharmacologist estimated that after downing 34 beers, 4
bourbons, and 17 shots of tequila within 1 hour and 40 minutes, his blood
alcohol level would have been 0.41 to 0.43%, but Allan had vomited several
times after the drinking stopped. The cost paid by Allan was much higher
than that of the hotel, which was fined the equivalent of $13,100 US
dollars for not intervening.
It is not known whether Allan required any further embalming.
www.DarwinAwards.com (c) 1997 - 2000
Reference: Stephen Gibbs of the Sydney Morning Herald, Reuters
-=-=-=-=-
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, c/o nerenner@umich.edu
"One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 08:54:31 -0500
From: "Marc Gaspard" <mgaspard1@kc.rr.com>
Subject: "The Cosmic Kid"
From: "Alan Meeker" <ameeker@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: The Science and Art of Brewing
"I have a friend who's an artist, and he sometimes takes a view which I
don't agree with. He'll hold up a flower and say, "Look how beautiful it
is," and I'll agree. But then he'll say, "I, as an artist, can see how
beautiful a flower is. But you, a scientist, take it apart and it becomes
dull." I think he's kind of nutty.
First of all, the beauty that he sees is available to other people - and
to me, too, I believe. Although I might not be quite as refined
aesthetically as he is, I can appreciate the beauty of a flower. But at the
same time, I see much more in the flower than he sees. I can imagine the
cells inside, which also have a beauty. There's beauty not just at the
dimension of one centimeter; there's also beauty at a smaller dimension.
There are the complicated actions of the cells, and other processes. The
fact that the colors in the flower have evolved in order to attract insects
to pollinate it is interesting; that means insects can see colors. That adds
a question: does this aesthetic sense we have also exist in lower forms of
life? There are all kinds of interesting questions that come from a
knowledge of science, which only adds to the excitement and mystery and awe
of a flower. It only adds. I don't understand how it subtracts.
-R. Feynman from "What Do You Care What Other People Think?"
I have friend who in high school was the science nerd (he now designs IC's
for IBM!) who use to love to rag on this hippy-dippy type we called "The
Cosmic Kid". Once TCK picked a flower and started rhapsodizing on its
beauty. My friend looked at the flower in his hand, looked up at him and
asked,"Do you always kill the things you love?"
"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy."-Ben Franklin
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 09:57:47 -0400
From: "Bob Bratcher" <rbratcher@advanceautoparts.com>
Subject: flaked out or loosing your liner
Brewers,
Just brewed up a willy nilly version of a Ballantine IPA like
CACA Saturday. I say willy nilly because the inspiration for
the recipe originated from notes Jeff Renner was kind enough to
forward to me on CACA's that were Ballantine attempts, but.....
A couple of brews and some tapping of keys later in front of
ProMash we end up with a whole new monster. I did stick to the
hop schedule though, thanks Jeff.
With this batch I experienced a 13% increase in system efficiency
as calculated by ProMash. I know to some of you that that number
means nothing so I submit that I also picked up about an
additional 2.5~3 pts/lbs/gln.
I haven't seen any real deviation in my efficiency since I
started all grain until this batch. Now I get this significant,
to me, jump all of the sudden.
recipe:
7 lbs Pale 2 row (no 6 row available locally)
0.75 lbs Crystal 10L
4 lbs Flaked Maize
1.50 lbs (gasp!) Corn sugar
Single infusion @ 153*F ~60min
Mash out @~170*F ~70min
Sparge water @~170*F ~70min
5.5 gallons OG 1078 ( and I was shooting for something in the
60's )
I know that the amount of maize is significantly higher than many
of you might recommend, but I did it any how. Is the maize the
culprit for the increased efficiency? Does flaked maize
contribute more by weight than grain? Kind of like you may get
70% out of 2 row but you will get 90% from flaked maize? I don't
know I'm asking.
These numbers take into account the use of corn sugar, so that's
not it.
I had one other variable that changed for this batch that I never
have taken seriously as to its effect on system efficiency. I
use a plastic bucket with a PhilsPhloaterPhalsy. Normally I'll
use a mesh mash bag to line the lauter tun, this time I didn't.
So is it the maize or the liner or something else?
FWIW, Pitched two packs of Nottingham without rehydration. About
12 hours later the foam was just about to crawl out the air lock
in a 6.5 gallon carboy. The box of yeast at the store had just
arrived the day before brewing, I imagine that it was pretty
fresh from Danstar.
Brew On!
Bob Bratcher
Advance Auto Parts
rbratcher@advanceautoparts.com
Roanoke, VA
Star City Brewers Guild
http://hbd.org/starcity
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 09:13:22 -0500
From: Lou.Heavner@frco.com
Subject: re: Mashing Formulas
John Varady <rust1d@usa.net> posts:
{snip a bunch of good information on calculating infusion/decoction
temps...}
Fudge Factor
When adding either hot water or decoctions to boost your mash temp,
you must always take into account the amount of heat your mash tun
will absorb. Typically, this will only be 1 or 2 degrees fahrenheit,
but will vary from system to system. After a little trial and error,
you will become familar with the temperature drop realized by your
system and will be able to adjust for it.
Another thing to consider is temperature drop during rests. If you
make your calculations on the fly, no problem. But if you are trying
to predict quantities ahead of time and your mash temp drops a few
degress during a 30 - 45 minute rest, Your calculations will
undershoot.
Regards,
Lou Heavner - Austin, TX
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 11:12:23 -0400
From: "Pannicke, Glen A." <glen_pannicke@merck.com>
Subject: My 2 cents...
Rick Dobler wrote about the nastiness in chicken feed used for cereal
mashes:
>Feed grade products are not handled as cleanly as human
>grade. There can be bug infestations, pesticides, chewing tobacco spit.
>I worked at a smaller company at one time. I saw the mill workers taking a
>wizz in the corn bunk. They were too lazy to walk to the bathroom.
Aside from the spit, this sounds close to human grade. Add rat turds, dirt
and a host of other crud which USDA also considers acceptable under certain
concentrations in some human foods. I think I'm more concerned over the
potential for pesticides, hormones and vitamins than urine. But then it
would be fitting if I were to shoot for a beer like Bud Lite, huh? ;-)
Dave Burley spoke of tempting fate with his partially closed boils:
>I don't recommend the lid being on at all during the initial foamy boilup (
>although being an experienced daredevil, I do keep the kettles covered
>during the heatup and listen for boiling sounds) and then uncover. When the
>foam clears I replace the lid, but only 2/3 closed.
Maybe I'm bordering on the "daredevil" side too because I keep the lid
cracked about an inch on one side from the time I start the flame until I
turn it off. I have noticed a few things though. Since I've been FWH'ing
my beers lately, boilovers seem to be less likely. Could it be due to hop
particulates providing nucleation sites in the boil? Maybe. I still keep
the thermometer in until it reaches about 205 F but now I don't have to
watch it like a hawk until it boils. Since I've been doing this I've had
the boil start with my back turned and no boil over - until I stick that
stupid "charismatic wooden spoon" in the mix. Stainless, stainless,
stainless! Chuck the wood! It also takes me less time to achieve a boil
and I can get a stronger one too (on my stovetop) with the lid partially on.
The stronger boil also makes for a GREAT hot break.
Jeff McNally informed us of his improved bottle santizing techniques:
>After a few batches, I started
>re-using bottles that had previously held homebrew. Even though I had
double
>rinsed these bottles right after emptying them, they had a very noticeable
white
>"film" inside them only up to the fill level.
> I had thought that a soak in dilute bleach followed by a triple rinse
with my
>jet bottle washer would not only sanitize my bottles but clean them as
well.
>As I was getting ready to bottle one day, I noticed that one of my clear
>bottles still had this film on it's inside surface even after being
"cleaned
>and sanitized". From that point on I started using a bottle brush on every
>bottle, every time I cleaned and sanitized them.
I know a few guys who do the same - rinse, soak in bleach and jet rinse
again. Unfortunately without mechanical or detergent action, organic and
inorganic deposits are not removed from the sides of the glass. It looks
smooth, but glass is really pretty porous and will still harbor "crud".
Bacteria and yeast which have formed colonies on the glass can become
entrenched in the pores with the top layers of dead cells (killed by the
sanitizer) forming a layer of plaque over the embedded colony. This plaque
can effectively protect the colony from further action by the sanitizer.
Mechanical cleansing with a good detergent can more effectively remove most
organic deposits and plaques thereby exposing the entrenched colonies to
sanitizer. Don't believe me? Read up on some of the sterilization problems
and techniques in implantable medical devices. It's the same principle.
Bottle brushing sucks. There's no way around it. I've moved to kegging so
I have less to scrub, but I still do bottles on occasion. All of my bottles
get a shake rinse after being emptied. When I get six or so of them
accumulated, I jet wash them and then soak them in a hot TSP solution over
night. They then get jet rinsed and are bleached over night followed by a
final jet rinse. I store them inverted in their case until it's time to
bottle. Then they get jet rinsed again are put in the dishwasher (without
rinse aid or detergent) so they can be sanitized by the heat cycle. Every
now and again, I'll scrub with a brush prior to the TSP soak. It's not
consistent, but I'd say that the scrub happens once every two or three
fills. It's probably enough to scrape off any tough organic deposits before
they become a problem.
It may sound like a lot of work, but actually you wind up breaking up the
task into smaller batches and it's not so much of a chore. The preparation
of 54 bottles for a 5 gallon batch in one shot can ruin your evening to the
point that even imbibing in a homebrew can't rectify ;-)
And Sean Richens gave an informative narration on water quality:
>I'm curious to hear what others think about not bothering to remove
>chloroamines. As I said, I haven't had phenolic off-flavours, and now I
>think I know why.
I haven't had my water checked yet, but I get my brewing water from the tap.
I've been using the Brita water filter for all of my batches since I started
brewing. It's a slow process, but I can collect 2 - 4 gallons per day from
this little bugger. I just collect water over the course of a week - while
I'm growing up by "Big-Ass Starter". Brita suggests 2 gal/day to ensure
maximum efficiency but I push it. With the exception of one batch, which
was noticeably infected with some kind of nasty bugger in the carboy, I have
not had any batches which exhibited a chlorophenic aroma or taste. I'm a
big advocate of filtration.
I'll shut up now....
Glen Pannicke
Merck & Co.
Computer Validation Quality Assurance
email: glen_pannicke@merck.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 10:37:46 -0500
From: "Brian Lundeen" <blundeen@rrc.mb.ca>
Subject: re: Flow rate for chlorine removal
> - if you have chlorinated water, effective removal requires
> a flow of 2-3
> USGPM or less per cubic foot of carbon. With chloramine,
> this has to be
> reduced to 0.5 to 1.5 USGPM or less per cubic foot. Nearly all
> municipalities in the US and Canada using a surface water source are
> switching to chloroamine for microbial control.
So what volume of carbon do your typical screw onto the faucet types of
filters have, and what would be a suitable flow rate for them?
Brian
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 13:21:29 -0400
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: Carmelly flavors part deux and hot break amount
Brewsters:
Part 2 of Carmelly flavors
>>The flavors produced are not appropriate at all
>>for most light, rice based lagers ( which I also enjoy) but maybe not
too
>>bad in beers with lots of other flavors.
>I think a little of the malty flavors that I think are produced in the
>kettle boil (and cereal cooker) are nice in a CAP, including a rice CAP,
>but not if done to excess. I wouldn't want to distress the billiard
ladies.
I am not at all against malty flavors from melandoins, nor even a few
caramelly flavors in my CAP, these can still be produced by restricting the
exit surface area relative to the kettle surface area to make a steam jet
which prevents the air from reaching the wort surface. This reduces the hot
wort oxidation substantially, without impairing the other reactions, if the
lid is simply insulated with a towel or other sophisticated device to keep
the boil off rate nearly the same as the lidless case.
Wort oxidation products are a different thing. Phenols, tannins from the
hops and other anthocyanins, say from the barley husk, and such in wort can
be oxidised and do not produce nice flavors. I don't know the chemical
identity of other oxidation precursors or products but my taster says they
are there.
There are obviously several things going on here during the boil. Loss of
wort by an open kettle versus a partially open kettle will change to some
extent the rate of loss of water and also the temperature/time profile of
the boil. As water boils off and the concentration of sugars and other
substances goes up, it takes a higher and higher temperature to reach the
boiling point. As the concentration goes up, more melandoins are formed as
are more caramels from the higher temperatures and concentrations and more
melandoins decompose due to the higher temperatures. Different heating
rates ( as Phil Yates notes with his "high" and "low" boil rate technique)
will also change the temperature/time profile as this will affect the
temperature/concentration/time profile and thus the product qualities.
Boiling technique thus is shown to become a part of the flavor and color
of the beer.
What to do? Although I have never done it, it would be interesting to
examine a series of final temperatures of the boiling wort as a starting
point. This may be an interesting control and perhaps even better than time
alone. Even more pertinent would be the time/ temperature profile. This
could be a clue to the effects of the boil on the final flavor. Also,
noting the level of loss of the wort at each measurement would be an
interesting measurement to give a clue to the concentration of the sugars
at various points throughout the boil. Instead of doing the obvious
experiment, maybe brewers should start recording these as you brew each
batch and see if you can find a final wort temperature guidline for your
similar beers as a means of controlling flavors.
If you want another angle on this and for those less interested in the
chemistry, try cooking your spaghetti sauce with the lid off and with it on
in identical kettle at the same time and compare the flavors. Now, I happen
to like the oxidised flavors of the lidless spaghetti sauce better, but
notice how it differs from the original fruit flavor of the lidded one.
Also notice the darkening ( browning) of the lidless one. What happened? I
believe the anthocyanins and other plant phenols and perhaps other phenolic
compounds were oxidised and produced the change in flavor and color. If
this can happen to something as strongly flavored as tomatoes and have a
substantial flavor effect, the same thing can happen to the subtle flavors
of a malty solution, aka your wort.
- -----------------------------------------------------
Jeff also says:
>An interesting sidelilght, even though I get decent (not great) hot break
>in the kettle, which is pretty well filtered out by the hop bed, I always
>get a good deal more hot break in the canned wort, especially the pressure
>canned sort. Anyone know why? I'm I not getting enough break in the
>kettle.
I don't know how you determined this, but I suspect it is the hot break
compactness that is different. I don't see how to do the experiment, but it
would be interesting to do an experiment in which the hot break was
measured both ways by actually weighing it. Protein precipitates are
notorious for responding to physical activity, as are many other "fluffy" (
scientific word) precipitates. Depending on that level, the precipitate
can be compacted or be dispersed.
Keep on Brewin'
Dave Burley
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 13:21:41 -0400
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: caramelly flavors
Brewsters:
Jeff Renner (>) says:
Quoting me (>>):
>>Phil those "caramelly flavors" as you call them and darkening with
>>the lid off during what you term a "high boil" is what I was talking
about.
>>I doubt you would see much of a difference if it were not that oxygen
>>weren't having an effect.
Jeff (>) says:
>A pertinent (and not impertinent, which there is an awful lot of around
>here sometimes) observation - I often can a quart or two of leftover wort.
>This is after I've aerated by cracking the outlet fitting so it draws
>bubbles into the pump while I'm recirculating the cool wort as it gets
down
>to low 50's for a CAP. The atmosphere canned wort darkens a bit, and
>pressure canned wort darkens a good bit more.
I suspect this is a result of the higher temperature seen in the pressure
canning giving rise to caramel and melandoin formation as well as,
perhaps, oxidation products. An interesting experiment would be to
compare the oxygenated wort with the just cooled but not oxygenated wort.
Pressure can both and see if there is a color difference. I am only
postulating that the oxidation products are colored ( see below) but I
believe they are, based on my observation, and also cause a taste change.
We also know that if we store an unopened can of malt extract a long time
it darkens considerably. An interesting experiment would be to hold two
unopened cans of malt extract, one in the refrigerator and the other at an
elevated temperature for a long time and compare these. The higher
temperature one should be darker and have a more malty character due to the
formation of melandoins in the high concentration of the extract but with
little to no assistance from the oxygen in the air..
> I don't know how much of
>this is due to the dissolved O2. I thought that melanoidin producing
>Maillard reactions (good things, I think) are between proteins and sugars,
>and do not involve oxygen, so this darkening could be due th this and not
>to any oxidizing reactions.
If I recall corrrectly, a decomposition product of melandoins is caramelly
flavors as contrasted to malty, bready and such flavors which are melandoin
derived. Caramels are the ultimate product of the "browning reaction" which
occurs via melandoin intermediates. Caramel can also be just sugar derived.
I believe I have read that both caramels and melandoins are colored,
although I don't really intuitively understand why pure melandoins should
be colored. These are both identified as being responsible for the color of
beer in addition to the grist composition.
We know that table sugar by itself will produce caramelly flavors and
colors when boiled at high enough temperatures and concentrations and long
enough.
Higher concentrations resulting in higher boiling temperatures both as a
consequence of boiling off more water from the wort and longer boiling
times should produce higher levels of caramelly flavors as well as malty
flavors.
This is temperature dependent and concentration dependent for the
melandoins ( a bi-molecular reaction) and polymolecular for sugars ( you
need more than one for the polymerization and subsequent coloring) but
only temperature dependent for melandoins decomposition ( IMHO
decomposition is likely uni-molecular). In some cases, I recall that the
melandoin intermediates sometimes actually catalyse the formation of
caramel in addition to being a source for these.
So, holding at a constant temperature ( say with the lid on, not too
tightly) will produce all three of these reactions but will cause increased
decomposition of melandoins relative to the case where the lid is off and
concentration and temperature goes up more during, say, a one hour boil. A
side by side test of these worts, I postulate, should show for the "lid-on"
case, caramelly in favor of malty, given all other things are equal, like
the lid off is diluted to be equal to the lid on case. Flavors from
oxidation have to be excluded, perhaps by not having hops around would help
in this experiment, perhaps by a sophisticated palate.
.
Boiling with the lid off, giving a greater loss of water, will favor
increased production of both caramelly and malty flavors. But, also, I
believe with the lid completely off there is a second series of reaction
with oxygen from the air which discolors the wort and produces flavors
which are less desirable and may even lead to a shorter shelf life,
aldehyde and other carbonyl flavors.
I suggest interested brewers try a simple experiment which I have done with
two identical kettles. Do one boil with the lid off and one with the lid
partially on and covered with a towel or other insulator to reduce
condensation on the lid so as to maintain as best as you can the same
volume in the two kettles during the boil and compare the results. Compare
the wort colors at the same OG. Ferment separately diluted to the same OG,
but identically and compare the color and flavor. You will find the open
boil to be darker and the flavor of the beer to be less clean. Do this with
a pale lager to best understand the effect, although I have also noted (
but not experimentally) a similar effect in pales. One would conclude that
higher hopped beers will be more affected.
Part 2 for more comments follows
Keep on Brewin'
Dave Burley
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #3302, 04/18/00
*************************************
-------
