Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #3648
HOMEBREW Digest #3648 Fri 01 June 2001
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org
***************************************************************
THIS YEAR'S HOME BREW DIGEST BROUGHT TO YOU BY:
Northern Brewer, Ltd. Home Brew Supplies
http://www.northernbrewer.com 1-800-681-2739
Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********
Contents:
Cooling wort with ice (TOLLEY Matthew)
Kegged the mega-swill (craftbrewer)
RE: intermediate mashing instructions? ("Mike Pensinger")
Florida Bottle Bill Signed ("Mark Tumarkin")
Pressure fermenting (AJ)
AHA Elections ("Jeff Beinhaur")
RE: ice vs chiller (LaBorde, Ronald)
kegging system options ("murls")
Beer Glasses (Brad Miller)
re: H:W Huh ? (Tom M)
CAP exp(yeast)&Aussie glasses (Frank Tutzauer)
runoff clarity and harshness (Troy Hager)
Re: ice vs chiller (Steven)
RE: mash runoff clarity ("Houseman, David L")
re: H:W Huh ? (steve-alexander)
cold flocculation ("Paddock Wood Brewing Supplies")
Big (CAP?) Spurments ("Dr. Pivo")
Bottle Color, Cider Site ("Hedglin, Nils A")
Re: Pressure Fermenting & H:W ("Robert J. Waddell")
goin' to Red Lake ("elvira toews")
Beer in Bath ("elvira toews")
Re: H:W Huh ? (steve-alexander)
Australian Serving Sizes ("Brad McMahon")
Re: great beers in Southern England (alastair)
*
* 2001 AHA NHC - 2001: A Beer Odyssey, Los Angeles, CA
* June 20th-23rd See http://www.beerodyssey.com for more
* information. Wear an HBD ID Badge to wear to the gig!
* http://hbd.org/cgi-bin/shopping
*
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
*
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.
JANITOR on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 15:47:57 +1000
From: TOLLEY Matthew <matthew.tolley@atsic.gov.au>
Subject: Cooling wort with ice
From: "Tammy Duriavich" <murph@xsite.net>
>John, & all that have given input re: force cooling w/ice, now I understand
>that even tho the water is "clean" going into the freezer, it's not
>necessarily so coming out of the freezer & going into my brew.
>Therefore, I guess I'll just have to get a chiller, won't I??
Why? Here in Oz we get our milk in 2-litre or 3-litre plastic bottles.
Wash, rinse, fill with water, freeze. On brew day, spray the bottle(s) with
cold sanitising solution and let sit for the necessary period of time -
melting will be minimal, especially if you sit the bottle in a sanitised
esky. Gently sit the bottle full of ice in the hot wort. When you're done,
clean the bottle and pop it back in the freezer for next time.
Cheers!
...Matt...
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 19:56:45 +1000
From: craftbrewer@telstra.easymail.com.au
Subject: Kegged the mega-swill
G'Day All
/
Well the last of my sins have been completed. Jeff keeps yelling
at me "Satan, I expell you to the never regions". Come to think
of it, I can't remember how i ended up in this part of the world.
/
But yes people, I have kegged the "commercial Brew" for the
young soon to be 18 year old SWMBO. Must admit I'm
impressed. No not with the taste, nor my brewing skills, but the
fact that I have got it so close to a commercial its frightening.
I would recon if I hadn't used fresh Pride of Ringwood hops,
and used isohops instead, I would have a VB/Fosters. But with
the fresh hops, its more like a CUB premium beer. Still crap but
gee its close. I am thinking for the party telling "the now it all"
18 year olds its a keg of commercial premium and seeing the
reaction.
/
And how do we get away with that. Well up here its quite a
common practice to take a corny keg to a pub and tell the
publican to fill her up. Then take it home and you serve a
megaswill on tap at home. Neat idea. And speaking of up here
/
Scott (wishing he was a North Queenslander) wrote
/
Graham in the nyuide is not easy on the eye we have heard,
nor when he is charmingly dressed in Khaki <<<<<<<<<<<
/
And whats wrong with Khaki!!!!!!!. I have a suite made of the
stuff. I get strange looks thou when I wear it down south. I
can't work out why. Everyone tells me I have wonderful looking
knee-caps, and great looking legs.
/
Still he has let one secret out of the bag.
Unfortunately designs after this time were not "manly" enough
and did not allow the flow of body odour to those withing a 5
meter radius easily.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
/
Yeh guys SWMBO's are strange creatures. "Boy does that
guy stink" they will say. Then later its "I have a good mind to tell
him that". Soon its "hey you you smell a bit mate" to your face.
But you have the last word. Next morning you roll over to her
and say oh so softly
"will you have a shower you smell".
/
Shout
Graham Sanders
/
Oh speaking of errant Females. Seems Bushes young SWMBO
to be, cant sneek in and out of bar now. Keeps getting caught.
Should talk to my 17 year old. Not only can see do it properly,
She also drinks responsibly. Now if old Bush could learn from that,
you lot might have responsible drinking laws.
/
What am I saying!!!!!!! I have an 18th coming up. There is going
to be some serious drinking going on, reminds me of my youth.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 07:47:57 -0400
From: "Mike Pensinger" <beermkr@bellatlantic.net>
Subject: RE: intermediate mashing instructions?
I highly recommend The Seven Barrel Brewery Brewers Handbook ((ISBN
1-887167-00-5) I got mine from Amazon and have loved it. It covers all
phases of the brewing procees and was easy to use and read.
Mike Pensinger
beermkr@bellatlantic.net
http://members.bellatlantic.net/~beermkr
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 08:23:05 -0400
From: "Mark Tumarkin" <mark_t@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Florida Bottle Bill Signed
Hey everyone,
It's time to Celebrate! The Florida bottle bill was finally signed by Governor
Bush yesterday. The changes will take place Oct. 1st. This is the first time
in over 35 years, since the law was passed limiting container size, that
retailers can sell beer in container sizes other than 8, 12, 16, and 32 oz
sizes.
It has been a long, hard fight. Lawmakers had tried to change the legislation
as early as 1973, but the current effort was led by Senator Tom Lee of
Brandon. We really owe him a lot of thanks for continuing to sponsor this
legislation,despite the fact that the bills have been defeated the last
several years, in large part because of opposition from the lobbyists of the
big beer manufacturers and distributors. This year however, the lobbyists
decided not to oppose the legislation as vigorously. There has been a
concentrated effort by homebrewers and beer lovers to write letters and make
calls to all the state legislators to convince them the time had come to do
away with the repressive restrictions. Thanks again to Pat, Karl, and the HBD
for hosting the Florida Brewers List - the communication method we used for
coordinating this effort. Thanks also to John Larsen, past president of the
North Florida Brewers League, the Tallahassee homebrew club. John was our man
on the spot in the state capitol. He not only closely watched the legislation,
alerting the rest of us as events took place, but he spent a lot of time
talking with lobbyists and legislators. He also testified very effectively at
several of the committee hearings. The campaign to change the law was a group
effort (a major effort!), but John was certainly at the forefront of that
effort.
So now that the bill was passed and now signed, beer lovers in Florida can now
look forward to the opportunity to buy imports in metric sizes, and
micro-brews in sizes like 22oz bombers or 7oz nips. That is, assuming that
distributors can be found to carry the 'odd sizes' in the face of continued
pressure from the big boys. I'm sure that there will be some enterprising
distributors who will want to develop this niche market.
So break out those American micro-brew bombers or those treasured Belgians and
drink a toast to free choice. Chalk up one for the good guys!
Mark Tumarkin
Gainesville, FL
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 10:20:23 -0400
From: AJ <ajdel@mindspring.com>
Subject: Pressure fermenting
RE:
>While I was in Split Croatia a few years back I got a tour of the local
>brewpub and discovered that he fermented under pressure. He stated
that it
>sped the process up and allowed fermentation at higher temperatures
without
>off flavors being produced. I cant remember how much pressure was on
the
>vessel and it was in Bars which i didnt understand anyway.
Apparently this is done fairly frequently. The idea is that if CO2 molar
concentration can be kept close to what it would be in the more
traditional cold lager fermentation the yeast will behave more or less
as they do in the traditional fermentation but they will do their work
faster because of the higher temperaure. You say the vessel was in the
Bar? (sorry, I can't help it sometimes).
A.J.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 10:22:29 -0400
From: "Jeff Beinhaur" <beinhaur@email.msn.com>
Subject: AHA Elections
Congrats Mark.....
I have one comment concerning the number of votes based on total membership.
Mark states that only 180 out of 10,000 members voted. Low yes but I wonder
how many of those members are actually brewers. I ask this because I know of
a few people that joined only to be able to attend members only events at
GABF. I'm sure these guys could give a crap about voting they just want to
drink. So are there any stats that might take this into consideration?
Jeff Beinhaur, Camp Hill, PA
Home of the Yellow Breeches Brewery
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 09:31:32 -0500
From: rlabor@lsuhsc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald)
Subject: RE: ice vs chiller
>From: "Tammy Duriavich" <murph@xsite.net>
>
>John, & all that have given input re: force cooling w/ice, now I understand
>that even tho the water is "clean" going into the freezer, it's not
>necessarily so coming out of the freezer & going into my brew. I've just
>been lucky thus far. Therefore, I guess I'll just have to get a chiller,
>
Well, maybe you can hold off on that chiller for a while. The problem with
ice is that it may have picked up some contamination from the fridge. If you
start with clean water (boiled, then cooled), then put it into a Ziplock bag
(supposed to be sanitized, it's for food after all), then place this into
the freezer.
Now you have some clean, sanitized ice which you can use by opening the
Ziplock and placing the ice into the wort. You can first submerge the pack
into some sanitizer much as you would the yeast pack to sanitize the pack's
surface just before handling and opening it.
Ron La Borde
Ronald La Borde - Metairie, Louisiana - rlabor@lsuhsc.edu
http://hbd.org/rlaborde
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 09:30:28 -0600
From: "murls" <murls@gateway.net>
Subject: kegging system options
Hello all,
I'm in the planning process of putting a bar in my basement. I want to have
a keg system and am looking at a couple options. The first is to have a
full size fridge with the faucets mounted on the front door. The second is
to use a chest freezer with an external thermostat to control temperature.
I would put a tower on top of the freezer or bar for the faucets. For
either system I would probably put the CO2 cylinder in with the kegs,
however I would be open to having the CO2 external. I would appreciate
anyone's input on both installations, pros and cons of systems, where to
drill the fridge/freezer, pitfalls, don't do this or there could be
problems, etc.
Thanks,
Todd
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 08:50:09 -0700
From: Brad Miller <millerb@targen.com>
Subject: Beer Glasses
If it were up to me, the Darwin stubbie (2 Liters) sounds the
best. Now do they call it "Darwin" in honor of him or because after
you have a few you might eliminate yourself from the gene pool?
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 09:41:56 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tom M <tomomeier@excite.com>
Subject: re: H:W Huh ?
>H:W and Surf:Vol are NOT directly related ratios Del. They can be >varied
INDEPENDENTLY. Take a fixed fermenter shape like a cylinder,.
>choose any arbitrary H:W ratio and any arbitrary Surf:Vol ratio and
>you can create a cylinder which has both ratios. The two are
>unrelated
D=diameter H=height VOL=volume (clever huh) SURF=surface area
And incidentally W=D, and H:W will now be designated as H:D
SURF=(pi/4)*D*D
VOL=(pi/4)*D*D*H
Therefore,
SURF:VOL = 1/H
H:D = H/D
Testing your assertion, I choose a H:D ratio=1 and a surf:vol ratio based on
H=3 ft
For this cylinder, surf:vol=1/3..
Now if we inrease to 4ft, surf:vol=1/4
Thus for a given H:W, there is an infite amount of surf:vol ratios
that can be chosen by varing the overall dimensions.
A simple example will show that the same can be said for holding
the surf:vol constant.
Choosing surf:vol=1/3, therefore H=3 and H:D=3/D
so H:D is also independent of surf:vol
Unfortunately, in this case, Steve appears to be correct.
Hate it when that happens. I mean that in the nicest possible
way Steve.
Now I need a beer!!
Tom Meier
Huntsville, AL
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 13:28:19 -0400 (EDT)
From: Frank Tutzauer <comfrank@acsu.buffalo.edu>
Subject: CAP exp(yeast)&Aussie glasses
Paul's worried about "yeast problems" in the CAP experiment:
> By the way, the CAP experiment sounds like a wonderful idea,
>but I'm firmly on the side of the "split-batch" experimental
>design as a way to remove as much noise as possible. This still
>leaves the problem of worrying about each individual's yeast
>propagation habits, though, since any problems there would
>certainly negate any later claims about fermentation differences.
Not if the yeast problems are random (and I see no reason why they
shouldn't be). Now, if there is enough variation in yeast, then it might
*obscure* differences of interest (we can't find the signal in all the
noise), but if we do find a signal (a fermenter difference), random yeast
problems won't "negate" claims of fermenter differences.
I do believe that we should try to standardize yeast handling, though (to
lessen the noise).
***************
Then Matt teaches us about Australian beer glasses:
>schooner...middy...pony...pint...half-pint... a pot... a glass...
>a lady's waist...kite...butcher...ten...eight...seven...
>a Darwin stubbie... a handle... a Shetland pony ... a bobby...
>Now, which did you want? :)
So do you folks in Oz just use random words for everyday items? In the
US it's a glass or a pint. Occasionally you can get a wheat beer in a
22-ounce glass, in which case it's called "a 22-ounce glass." Geez.
I'm not sure I'd want to drink whatever comes out of a Shetland pony...
--frank
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 10:31:58 -0700
From: Troy Hager <thager@hcsd.k12.ca.us>
Subject: runoff clarity and harshness
Brian,
I have been brewing for about 5-6 years now, have a three tiered brewing
system and a conical fermenter (BBMB) which I ferment in a temperature
controled lagering fridge... I even oxygenate my pitched wort with a O2
tank, pitch tons of yeast, have lag times of 2-4 hours, and have my beers
consistently finish at 1.008-1.010 ... and my beers still are rough around
the edges! I am trying to get to the bottom of this, as it seems you are,
and have been reading and looking over my brew notes and procedures to find
the problem. I am very anal about sanitization. I use PBW or TSP with lots
of rinsing and sanitize with StarSan.
I have thought about the fact that my recirculated wort is not very clear
and have wondered if that is a problem. I have also wondered about using
pots to recirculate and add back to the top of the mash - does this
agitation add a lot of HSA? So, recently I have started using my pump to
recirculate but have only brewed once doing this so the results are not in
yet.
After going back and doing some reading, especially in Noonan's 'New Brewing
Lager Beer', I have realized that I have not been boiling very vigorously.
In fact, to try to get my evaporation rates down to 10-15% or so I have been
partially covering my kettle and boiling at just over a simmer... Noonan
states (I don't have my book with me but will paraphrase as best as I
remember) that it is essential to *violently* boil the wort and that this
agitation is what helps the harsh hop tannins/polyphenols and other nasties
adhere to the proteins and fall out in the hot break. He also states that a
full violent open boil helps in stabalizing the wort and many of the nasties
are also blown off in the evaporation. I don't know what this
"stabalization" means exactly but it sounds like something that you would
want to achieve and it seems that I am doing just the opposite with my low
covered boil.
Also, Noonan states that in worts with lower pH values (my water is very
soft and very low in pH - my pale ale mashes run at 5.0) it is even more
important to get that boil rolling wildly because in a boil with a low pH
value, proteins have a more difficult time sticking together and falling out
as break material. I have noticed that my hot break is very small particles.
So, I am going to start boiling at full tilt to see if I can get better hot
break and a cleaner tasting beer.
Questions about your brewing process:
- How are you crushing your grains - lots of shredding?
- What temp are you mashing at? Single infusion? Step?
- What is the pH of your mash? Your boil?
- How long are you boiling and how hard?
- What hops are you using, how much, when?
- Are you religious about cleaning and sanitization?
- Type of yeast, starter volume, lag times?
One thing I have started to do to figure out what is wrong with my process
is to brainstorm a bunch of experiments -eg. Pivo- to test some of my
techineques. What I have found in my beer is that it tastes great after
conditioning - it is when I keg that it becomes unstable and develops the
harsh off flavors. I don't know if the problem lies in my packaging methods
or in other steps. I will first rule out the carbonation methods:
Some examples of exp. I am going to try are:
- split into two kegs - prime one keg and force carbonate other
- split batch to keg and bottle - prime both
- split batch to keg and bottle - force carbonate keg and prime bottles
- split batch to two kegs - one of yours and one of your brewing friends -
carbonate and serve through different tanks and taps
You might want to run some experiments as well on your beers. Another test
you might do is to run the wort stability tests right out of the kettle
after chilling: Sanitize 3 small glass containers (I use pint size canning
jars) and carefully fill each with chilled wort and place them in a warm
area about 80F (I use the oven). At 24 hours you open the first one and
smell and taste. If you smell or taste nasty sour/nasty aromas/flavors you
need to buck up on your sanitization procedures. Also test at 48hrs and
72hrs. If you make it to 72 without off flavors/aromas give yourself a pat
on the back. This is written up in a back issue in BT by Louis Bonham I
believe.
Hope this helps. Any ideas keep me posted.
Troy
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 14:18:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: Steven <stevensl@mindspring.net>
Subject: Re: ice vs chiller
I'll weigh in on this debate, having tried both of course!
Rubbermaid or Sterilite makes ice cube trays build in little water jug
like containers. For you guys wanting to locate them they look like their
quart liquid containers with screw off lids but inside are little cube
"makers". They can be easily sanitized and will hold hot water. I would
not attempt boiling water though. Just boil up some water, cool it down a
little and dump it in these, then freese it.
If you are feeling "frugal" grab a few dozen regular ice trays, boil
water, fill them and cover with plastic wrap. nice and clean ice.
Before i got the counterflow i would dump a tray or two worth in the wort
to help get me to pitching temps.
Steven St.Laurent ::: stevensl@mindspring.net ::: 403forbidden.net
Democrats - Give a man a fish, feed him for a day
Republicans - Teach a man to fish, feed him for life
Libertarians - Screw him, I'm full from eating fish
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 14:54:37 -0400
From: "Houseman, David L" <David.Houseman@unisys.com>
Subject: RE: mash runoff clarity
> Brian Lundeen complains of "runoff envy", which might be
> better described as
> "haze halitosis" or even "pernicious protein precipitate
> pouting".
My own recirculation was with a 2 quart pot and I did maybe 8 or so of
these. While I ceased getting particles by the end of this time, the wort
was not as clear as it was after about 1/2 hour of running the wort into my
kettle. I put a pump/heater (RIMS-lite) in the recirculation path to
maintain the temperature while recirculating and used this to go from my
mash temperature to 168-170oF final mashout temperature. After about 20
minutes of recirculation the wort is as clear as filtered beer when viewed
through the 3/8" vinyl tubing. I did find that the reduced tannin content
of the finished beer was reflected in reduced astringency when other
parameters of my process were held essentially constant.
Dave Houseman
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 19:25:24 +0000
From: steve-alexander@att.net
Subject: re: H:W Huh ?
Tom Meier wrote,
> Steve appears to be correct.
> Hate it when that happens.
You've got company Tom. Most people hate me when I'm
correct and only enjoy it when I'm wrong and I have the
flame marks to prove it.
It's easier, and more general than you describe, Tom.
For any fermenter w/ vertical walls and a flat bottom
(the top wort surface is always flat(almost))
where V=volume, S=surface area, H, W the obvious ...
V = S * H so S/V = 1/H
The S:V ratio determines the height uniquely, and you
are still free to vary the width to create any H:W
desired. True for cylinders, rectangals etc given any
fixed definition for W for the particular shape.
If you modify H to mean the 'average' height averaged
across the entire surface area then it applies to any
vertical walled fermenter with arbitrary bottom shape -
like a CC.
H' = Integral H(S) dS/S)
V = H' * S
...
Given H:W=x, and S:V=y then
H=1/y and W = 1/(x*y)
I thought it was obvious that V/S was just the wort
height, and S:V it's inverse. I was wrong, so enjoy.
-S
thanks to Jerry Barkley for prodding me on the matter.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 13:32:22 -0600
From: "Paddock Wood Brewing Supplies" <orders@paddockwood.com>
Subject: cold flocculation
As Dominick noted, "flocculation" is not simply "falling to the bottom of
the fermentor". But for clear beer, then enhancing sedimentation through
finings or other methods is the goal.
My question to the beer chemists out there is: Does cold enhance
sedimentation of yeast and/or other suspended particulate?
My experience has lead me to believe that rapid chilling will help to speed
up the clarification process. Perhaps I have misinterpreted my unscientific
results and something else is taking place?
Clarification of this matter would be greatly appreciated...
cheers,
Stephen Ross -- "Vitae sine cerevisiae sugant."
Paddock Wood Brewing Supplies, Saskatoon, SK, Canada
orders@paddockwood.com www.paddockwood.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 21:28:46 +0200
From: "Dr. Pivo" <dp@pivo.w.se>
Subject: Big (CAP?) Spurments
This is certainly a North American topic, and has gendered all the ire
that usually makes the rest of us just sit back and wait until the dust
settles... so I hesitate to suggest.... but will anyway.
The whole idea of a "Mass Experiment" is so intriguing, that I have read
a bit of what is being suggested, among which a few lines that parallel
my thoughts.
Scott Murman writes: (Whose name, BTW, is really Scott Murphy, it's just
that he had it officially changed so that he could tease me about my old
age, and inclement eye sight).
> if the
> experiment accomplished nothing else but got a number of homebrewers
> to try some new techniques that just might help them make better beer,
> or they had some fun trying them, then i'd certainly say it would be
> judged a success
>
And Petr Otahal (whose real name escapes me) writes:
> The starting wort may vary from brewer to brewer depending on the process,
> water, and even yeast type and pitching rate, BUT as long as we are only
> focused on the DIFFERENCE between the two beers brewed by each brewer,
> these process, water and yeast variations are not important.
>
My advice on really creating some mass brewing spurmenting hysteria
would be to include the following criteria.
1) It should be fun.
2) The question asked should be straight forward enough that everyone
understands what it is.
3) Everyone should be allowed to participate.
4) There is NEVER going to be much valid statistics gained from this, so
make it so everyone can do their own analysis at home.
5) It should inspire people to doing more of the same.
There has been suggestions of narrowing the question down to exactly two
geometries, that require two different size cornelius kegs.
In the first part.... "who cares?" This really seems to be a bit of
trying to get the upper hand on "line 34 of paragraph 7 from two and a
half years ago" or some such..... Argueing, in other words.
This is self serving.... why not make it "selfless"?
As to the need for having two different size cornies..... I am a known
keg fetishist, and would qualify for participation (my 11 litre is named
"Junior"), but why can't everyone else play? People who haven't hugged
and demanded to own every strange and new keg that they come across?
The suggested "two cornie size" experiment is an excellent one.... but
why stop there?
Why a CAP? Why indeed this American insistance on brtewing beers of
which there is no longer any examples to compare it to?
Does this stem from lack of ability, or confidence? Might, if one brewed
something of which the original model is still tastable, run the risk of
being judged inferior?
It does seem a bit to me like having a competition about who can do the
best vocal impersonation of George Washington.
Should yee really like to go this route, might I suggest a creation of
mine that represents how beer was brewed locally at the end of the 19th
century. I call it the "Swedish Traditional Draught "(STD), and I am
the absolute world master at making it.... because... because... em...
er.... who can refute me?
Should anyone else like to acquire an STD, or to share one with friends
and loved ones, feel free to contact me.
My brazen suggestions for a "Mass Spurment" would be the following:
The question could be: (and I will avoid the use of the word "geometry",
as there are certainly people out there who were scorched by this term
at the age of about 14, and still flinch when they hear it.... doesn't
mean they can't make beer, or do controlled experiments)
"Does the size and shape of my fermenter affect how the beer turns out?"
...and I think the beer style of choice should be ....
"Whatever you bloody feel comfortable brewing".
Imagine that. Everyone who brews beer in a manner they understand,
subjecting it to two different fermenting conditions based solely on the
size and shape of the fermenter.
Even the "goat bladder" fermenters would be allowed to take part......
though I strongly suggest that they thoroughly empty their vessels of
its previous contents before adding the wort, less they not only
introduce a "confounder" to their experiment, but should they come up
with something really interesting, might have difficulty in re-inlisting
their tasting panel.
Then it turns out that the only thing you need, is one vessel to mix up
your wort and yeast, that's as big as two different vessels (your
choice!) that you want to ferment in.
Oh yeah. Owning things like thermometers and hydrometers would be nice,
and writing a few things down (though certainly not an absolute
recquisite).
If you have a Dissolved Oxygen meter, can count cells (I won't mention
any dyes for fear of opening another debate), a spectrometer, a gas
chromatograph, a Mass "Spec", and can do spin resonance.... by all means
use them..... and by the way.... can I play at your house next weekend?
And how to evaluate the results of these "two different kind of
fermentation vessel" beers?
Easy pie. Do a "triangle test".
I formed a lot of my opinions about beer making by doing "blind
tastings". They were a lot of fun, and people indulged me rather
because they liked drinking my beer, than they had a great interest in
the results, I think.
But a normal "blind tasting" can really be subject to dominant
personalities, and the wrong smacking of lips, grimace, or raised
eyebrows, can really wreck your results. Plus, a lot of people are
really worried about "getting it wrong"..... in other words... the "ego"
can destroy both the results and the fun, and it's really no good
playing "tasting police", and seeing people search your face for the
"right answer".
A guy named Louis Bonham introduced me first to the concept of "triangle
testing" some years back, and I am forever grateful.
I am, however, a bit "cheesed" that I hadn't thought it up first.
It is SO simple, SO clean, and SO ego-free.
All you need is some paper, some plastic cups, a marking pen, a die
(which is half of "a pair of dice", or one fifth of a "Yahtzee" game),
and 7 or 8 friends who want to drink your beer.
There is no right answer, and nobody the hell knows what's going on
(including yourself) until you tally up the papers, so there's no
cheating.
All you get is: "Is there a difference?", and if there turns out to be
one, a good idea about what it could be.
Just think. A bunch of brewers, trying to answer a single question,
passing on their results, learning a bunch along the way, and learning a
very honest tool for finding out even more things!
Like all good science, we "may" answer the question. We will most
certainly raise 50 more that might not of otherwise come up.
We could probably try and answer those too.
I think that people starting to make their own beer, because the stuff
at the corner made by professionals seemed to have gotten less and less
interesting, is a "kind of" revolution.
Wouldn't it be fine if the people who already made one of the finest
things you can ingest, also developed a culture of objectivity, and
selfless discussion, and 'spurmentation, that perpetuated us finding
out, what an industry whose main interests are expediency, economy, and
long shelf life, can understandably not do for us?
Now THAT'S what I call a revolution.
Dr. Pivo
PS Believing in the theory that "simple minds can make simple
explanations", I do believe I can explain not only "how" to do a
triangle test, but how to understand what you are "statistically" trying
to achieve, to anyone who has enough stuff inside their skull, that they
can make beer..... if this is wanted.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 15:42:49 -0700
From: "Hedglin, Nils A" <nils.a.hedglin@intel.com>
Subject: Bottle Color, Cider Site
Hi all,
I know that clear bottles are bad because the beer can get sunstruck, but
what about green bottles? I think I heard that green wasn't too good
either, but I've got a friend with a couple a cases of empty Heineken
bottles. Also, are there any good Hard Cider sites around? I've looked
through both recipe collections at hbd.org, but I like like to find
something that includes more of a beginner's guide too.
Thanks,
Nils Hedglin
Sacramento, CA
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 18:45:32 -0600
From: "Robert J. Waddell" <rjw@dimensional.com>
Subject: Re: Pressure Fermenting & H:W
"Mike Pensinger" <beermkr@bellatlantic.net> sez:
>Subject: Re: Pressure Fermenting
>While I was in Split Croatia a few years back I got a tour of the local
>brewpub and discovered that he fermented under pressure. He stated that it
>sped the process up and allowed fermentation at higher temperatures without
>off flavors being produced. I cant remember how much pressure was on the
>vessel and it was in Bars which i didnt understand anyway.
So... what I'm wondering is if the "Pressure Fermenting" thread and the
Height/Width threads are related. It seems that there would be some
optimum depth that the pressure would increase the fury of the
fermentation. It also seems that it would be very difficult to observe
with all of the turbulence of the ferment, so multiple sessions at
different pressures would seem to be the way to determine this. Would
there also be a difference in an open fermentation at sea level compared to
one at altitude? I don't have the resources or the knowledge to chase this
line of thought very far, so I'll turn it over to the collective.
RJW
I *L*O*V*E* my [Pico] system. 'Cept for that
gonging noise it makes when my wife throws it
off the bed at night.
Women...
--Pat Babcock
*** It's never too late to have a happy childhood! ***
****************************************************************************
RJW@dimensional.com / Opinions expressed are usually my own but
Robert J. Waddell / perhaps shared.
Owner & Brewmaster: Barchenspeider Brew-Haus Longmont, Colorado
****************************************************************************
(4,592 feet higher than Jeff Renner)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 20:00:09 -0500
From: "elvira toews" <etoews1@home.com>
Subject: goin' to Red Lake
Dave Persenaire wants to know where to stock up in Red Lake. I don't know
Tinley Park, but if your route takes you through or near Thunder Bay or
Kenora, you might consider a stop in the Big City while you have the chance.
Worst case, settle for Rickard's Red. It's Molson's concession to those who
want to taste their beer, or Moosehead, which is generic NA beer with some
Saaz thrown in. The Moosehead at least comes in cans, which is considered
politically correct when drinking above granite.
If you get lucky, Kenora might have Ft. Garry from Winnipeg. Otherwise,
look for Wellington's, Upper Canada, Brick, Sleeman's, Connor's, etc. for
the evening brews at the cabin.
Maybe Robin Griller can update us on what's good in Ontariariario these
days.
Oh, and would you email me on your return and let me know how high the water
levels are?
Good fishin'!
Sean Richens
srichens@sprint.ca
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 20:03:34 -0500
From: "elvira toews" <etoews1@home.com>
Subject: Beer in Bath
No, I'm not talking Prohibition brewing practices. I'm answering Herb's
question. Mole is the name of one brewery whose real ales are available in
Bath.
As well as pretty buildings and Roman ruins, Bath is the better sort of
university town and some decent beers are to be had. Just ask for "local
ale" and the bartender will steer you right.
Sean
srichens@sprint.ca
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2001 01:10:24 +0000
From: steve-alexander@att.net
Subject: Re: H:W Huh ?
Del writes ...
>Show me the dimensions for a 5 gallon fermenter with a
>0.8 H:W and a surface:volume of 1 cm-e2/16.66 cm-e3.
I see our communication difficulty. I never said you
could choose VOLUME and H:W and S:V - all three
independently. That's not possible.
I did say you can choose H:W and S:V independently and
design a fermenter. Take away the 5gal Vol requirement
(never part of the H:W argument) and it's easy.
Travis Dahl writes ...
>Quite obviously, then, height:width and surface:volume
are related!
I'd like to use the words independent and orthogonal,
but these have different meaning in areas like
experimental design and statistics than in algebra and
another tower of Babel discussion(TBD) would ensue.
The two ratios H:W and S:V can be chosen arbitratily,
and a fermenter designed which has both. You cannot
derive a general function like
S:V = f(H:W)
since for any H:W there are infinitely many S:V
possible. The best you can achieve is
S:V = f(H:W, and other things)
That is what I meant by unrelated, tho' my choice of
terms isn't intuitive. It's true that H:W and H are
unrelated by this definition too.
Let's just say - H:W does not determine or constrain S:V
or vice-versa. They are independent variables in
fermenter design - but PLEASE that's not the same
independent var that experimenters or statisticians are
referring to.
>3) I think the comparison should be between a (5
gallon?) glass carboy and
>a similar size Cornelius keg
This might help answer the question - are cornies
significantly different to carboys in HB fermentation
performance - and I too think that's an interesting
question, but it doesn't really control enough to
provide much of a clue about whether H:W is the critical
factor or something else. You've changed H:W, material,
fermenter smoothness, S:V, H, W, S, headspace, the shape
of the bottom, heat transfer characteristics and more
other things than you can shake a stick at.
Do compare these two - it would be very interesting, but
don't imagine for a minute you're testing H:W as an
isolated performance factor. This gets back to the
question - just what hypothesis *IS* the experiment
about ?
Dave Harsh writes ...
>Personally, I haven't found even the implication in
>deClerk to this effect. If anybody can give me the
>specific citation, I'd like to know.
>(I have the 1994 reprinting from Seibel)
The implication and maybe a citation appear in Fix'
AoBT. I thought it was in a journal from the 1950s, not
his book. If anyone could send me a copy I'd certainly
appreciate it.
>Your comparison of the cornie to the test
>tube, while a valid argument, is absurd on the face of
>it. I thought we were restricting our arguments to
>homebrewing.
The result was presented as brewing related, not just
HB, so i'd think anything from a post-slant starter to
megabrewers tanks would be subject to the law.
>The return of the absurd argument. But if the volume
>is the same, a 3:1 container has less cross section
>than a 2:1 container.
Who ever said volume had to be the same ? You've missed
the point if need to add more constraints to make your
argument fly.
>, my use of dimensional analysis techniques to describe
>the fermenter geometry is not "handwaving
You may have facts, but until you present the
assumption, analysis method and results - you've just
posted the handwaving argument. For such detail email
would be best tho' Dave.
>On the contrary, I have been paying attention. You
>feel aspect ratio isn't the cause, something else is.
No. You are stating this as if I agreed there was an
effect related to H:W - I don't. I don't believe that
high aspect ratio fermenters (separating out all the
unrelated factors, vol, S:V, cross sectional area, etc)
create any such effect.
Based on the impression given in AoBT HBers seem to
think H:W *defines* an independent performance
parameter. That a 3:1 culture bottle is inferior to a
1:1 100HL tank. I do NOT believe this.
I do expect different shaped, sized, 'materialed'
fermenters to give different results for various
reasons. I don't expect those results to consistantly
show that high H:W give poor performance.
>[..] I disagree with [...] your
>interpretation of the literature on shear
>induced flocculation.
Then please email me your reference literature citations
of shear induced flocculation of yeast and we can
compare our interpretations.
-S
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2001 12:21:15 +0930
From: "Brad McMahon" <brad@sa.apana.org.au>
Subject: Australian Serving Sizes
Matt Tolley wrote:
>In South Australia, you get
>a schooner, a kite (a pint) or a butcher (200ml).
In SA, the schooner is 285ml and the pint is
either 425ml, or 570ml. You have to ask what size pints they are serving.
Generally, those selling British or Irish beers will give you an English pint
and those selling Australian beers will give you a South Australian pint.
It has never been called a kite.
The butcher is right (200ml) but very rarely used.
Yep there is always great confusion between the states where different sizes
mean different things. New South Welshmen get confused when visiting South
Australia. They order a schooner thinking 425ml and receive 285ml.
Of course, the opposite happens going the other way.
>But, pints are still offered in many places, whilst still not at the 650ml
>pint standard.
Huh? A real pint is 568.261 ml.
A US pint is 473.1765 ml.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 20:06:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: alastair <alastair@odin.he.net>
Subject: Re: great beers in Southern England
Herb,
Sounds like you'll be in Wadworth country. Salisbury is close to the
Wadworth brewery in Devizes, I'm not sure if they have tours, but
you can checkout http://www.wadworth.co.uk/ for more info.
Their best known beer is 6X. It's a fairly good Best Bitter, if you
can find a good pub with it on cask, it's worth trying. They have
other beers like Henry's IPA (not like USA IPA, more of a hoppier
Ordinary) and some seasonal brews.
You should be able to find Fuller's and some Burton brews like
Pedigree if you look around. Just steer clear of things like
Boddingtons, Caffrey's etc. They're not bad drinking, but they are
nitro British mega swill... stick to hand pulled cask beer and
you can't go wrong!
See if you can find a copy of the "Good Pub Guide". It should fill
in any blanks.
Have fun!
Alastair
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #3648, 06/01/01
*************************************
-------
