Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #4357
HOMEBREW Digest #4357 Thu 25 September 2003
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:
Water spots in carboy ("Parker Dutro")
Another Brewer in the ranks ("Benton, Terrence")
Re: Head Pressure Clarification (Nate & Brenda Wahl)
sweetness and proteins (Marc Sedam)
re: Splenda ("-S")
Which temprature should I read off stick-on thermometer ("Russell J. Elliott")
Slow bottle carbonation, cold temperatures (Christopher Swingley)
SS Beer Dispense--Update (Richard Foote)
Pressure & Clarification (John Varady)
Newcastle Clone ("Steve Dale-Johnson")
re: Announcement ... pressure & sedimentation rate ("-S")
acid wash / re: sedimentation rate ("Chad Stevens")
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* The HBD Logo Store is now open! *
* http://www.hbd.org/store.html *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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 cannot reach you. We will not correct your address
for the automation - that's your job.
HAVING TROUBLE posting, subscribing or unsusubscribing? See the HBD FAQ at
http://hbd.org.
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 or read the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org.
JANITOR on duty: Pat Babcock (janitor@hbd.org)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 21:40:41 -0700
From: "Parker Dutro" <pacman at edwardwadsworth.com>
Subject: Water spots in carboy
Awhile ago someone posted the question asking how to remove the cloudy
hard-water spots from inside a carboy. I went all through my archives
and can't find it so does anyone know how to do it? No amount of PBW or
Straight-A soaking seems to help.
Thanks.
Parker
"To every man, in his acquaintance with a new art, there comes a moment
when that which before was meaningless first lifts, as it were, one
corner of the curtain that hides its mystery, and reveals, in a burst of
delight which later and fuller understanding can hardly ever equal, one
glimpse of the indefinite possibilities within." C. S. Lewis
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 07:23:54 -0500
From: "Benton, Terrence" <Terrence.Benton at med.va.gov>
Subject: Another Brewer in the ranks
Our esteemed janitor, Pat Babcock announced -
" ...Jillian Marie Babcock! Introduced to great, wide word 12:13
pm today, 9/22/2003. Weighing in at 7.5 lbs and 20 inches long!
Congrats Pat.
Welcome to the largest of Fraternities.
tb
p.s. Does this mean the "Kids and Beer" Thread is going to circulate again?
Haha.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 08:23:06 -0400
From: Nate & Brenda Wahl <cruiser at coastalwave.net>
Subject: Re: Head Pressure Clarification
A very interesting thread. One thing I haven't seen discussed is the
impact of the increased pressure on the liquid itself, as well as CO2
bubble formation. I thought of this after watching some clumps of
yeasties merrily bopping up and down inside a glass carboy like they
were on a rollercoaster. They make bubbles, either by offgassing from
respiration or being nucleation sites for bubble formation, become
bouyant and rise to the top; eventually, the bubbles burst or fall off,
and they then fall back down to the bottom to start over again. Maybe
they even enjoy it, who knows!.
With increased head pressure, for a given quantity of gas produced, it
seems that any bubbles formed would therefor be smaller. It also could
be that with the higher pressure the gas would more likely go into
solution than to form bubbles, too, but I have no facts on that. But
either of these effects would seem to result in particulates settling
quicker, having fewer/smaller bubbles to ride around on..
I'm also suspecting that higher CO2 saturation levels may impact the
viscosity of the liquid or some other influential properties (surface
tension?), but again have no facts to back that up. Thoughts?
Cheers,
Nate Wahl (OWW)
Oak Harbor, Ohio
65.1, 146.4 - Congrats Pat & Family!!!
Pumpkin Lager rev.4 in the primary!
http://users.coastalwave.net/~cruiser/pumpkin3.jpg
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 09:01:45 -0400
From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam at unc.edu>
Subject: sweetness and proteins
My only thought on the protein thread was that by changing the system
from 1-2psi to 15psi puts more kinetic energy in the system, even if it
is equilibrated at 15psi. Since the system has more energy there is a
greater opportunity for the protein "blobs" to interact and bump into
each other. Since sedimentation is size and weight dependent, if the
proteins are bumping into each other more frequently they may eventually
hit a critical density and start to settle. Once the first few protein
blobs start to agglomerate the rest of the sedimentation process kind of
feeds on itself.
Or I could be full of crap.
*********************
In terms of Splenda and sweetness (two separate threads):
1) Someone told me that Splenda was chlorinated sucralose, and was
indigestible/unfermentable because of the chlorine additions on the
sugar backbone. Don't know if it's true or not.
2) If you want to add a sweetness to beer without fermentability, try
stevia powder. Most co-ops/ health food stores/ Whole Foods will have
it. Use VERY sparingly. I think stevia is 100x sweeter than sugar.
You can grow stevia plants in your garden too. Chew on a leaf and it's
a sweet explosion.
Cheers!
M
- --
Marc Sedam
Chapel Hill, NC
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 09:41:12 -0400
From: "-S" <-s at adelphia.net>
Subject: re: Splenda
Fred Johnson asks about the Splenda(Sucralose) 'trick'
labeling which is just short of a scam IMO.
>The list of ingredients on a package of Splenda, [...]
>Dextrose
>Maltodextrin
>Sucralose
>
>So how can this be a "No Calorie Sweetener"? What are the actual
>concentrations of the listed ingredients?
In the US if the amount of carbos in a serving is less than 1 gram
(even 0.99 grams!) they are permitted to label the product as zero
grams and then calculate the carbos as 0 * 4 = 0 calories.
Splenda is packaged with flaked (very low density) dextrose &
maltodextrin as a carrier and labeled so that identical
VOLUMES) of Splenda and granulated table sugar have
comparable sweetness. IOW you can replace granulated table
sugar with Splenda on an equal volume basis and get very
comparable sweetness.
A cup of Splenda weighs only 28 grams, while a cup of granulated table sugar
weighs 200 grams. Since sucralose is some 600 times sweeter than sucrose
(my recollection) a decent estimate is that a cup of sucralose has (27*4)
108 calories while a cup of table sugar has 800. The teaspoon packets of
Splenda then should contain about 0.58gm of product with is almost entirely
carbohydrate by weight and contains some 2.25 Calories. A tsp packet of
granulated sucrose is abt 4 grams and 16 calories.
[Two formulations ..].
>95% dextrose, 4% malto-dextrin, and 1% sucralose
>99% malto-dextrin, 1% sucralose
Right but it's 99% digestible carbohydrate by weight either way.
-Steve
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 23:10:30 +0930
From: "Russell J. Elliott" <relliott at senet.com.au>
Subject: Which temprature should I read off stick-on thermometer
Hi Everyone,
Iv'e been brewing for about 5 years on and off now, and just discovered
this list! Already I have soaked up a lot of new info....Just started
doing partial mashes, and used a liquid yeast for the first time in my
last brew. (A porter) It sure tasted good at bottling time...
Anyway, I have one of those stick on thermometers on the side of my
primary fermenter, and I was wondering what colour is the actual real
measure of the temprature. Mine varied from 22 degrees c to 26 degree c,
22 was a dark blue colour, 24 as a light green and 26 was an amber
colour. Sorry about the metric, I live in Australia! I certainly hope
the beer didn't ferment at 26, but it did taste ok anyway at bottling.
Thanks,
Rusty.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 06:39:26 -0800
From: Christopher Swingley <cswingle at iarc.uaf.edu>
Subject: Slow bottle carbonation, cold temperatures
Greetings!
I have a problem getting my beers carbonated in the bottle within a
reasonable amount of time. I'm fairly certain this is because I keep my
bottles in the garage where the temperatures are around 55 - 60 F for
three seasons of the year. I brew ales, and use a brew belt controlled
with a dimmer switch when the beer is brewed to keep the temperature up
in the 65 - 70 F range. But once they're bottled, the warmth is gone.
So far, all my beers have eventually become carbonated, but it sometimes
takes two frustratingly long months.
It seems as though I have a couple options:
* Get over it. Wait the two months.
* Figure out some way to keep my bottles warmer. Bring them in the
house until they're carbonated, build a little warming chamber,
bite the bullet and heat the garage to a warmer temperature, etc.
* Add a lager yeast to the bottling bucket when bottling.
Any thoughts?
Thanks,
Chris, brewin' a mild brown with all my leftovers this weekend
- --
Christopher S. Swingley email: cswingle at iarc.uaf.edu
IARC -- Frontier Program Please use encryption. GPG key at:
University of Alaska Fairbanks www.frontier.iarc.uaf.edu/~cswingle/
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 12:45:20 -0400
From: Richard Foote <rfoote at mindspring.com>
Subject: SS Beer Dispense--Update
Brewerz,
As a follow up to my post of yesterday, I received the following email
response from Customer Service at Williams Brewing:
Hi Rick,
The shank nipples that we sell are stainless.
Thank you,
Janis Martinez
>Other contact areas to work on include shanks and tail pieces. Williams
>has ss shanks but I don't see any ss shank nipples (tail pieces).
I goin' stainless!
Rick Foote
Whistle Pig Brewing
Murrayville, GA
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 12:40:13 -0400
From: John Varady <John at beerinhand.com>
Subject: Pressure & Clarification
When you apply pressure to the top of a vessel full of uncarbonated beer,
you will set up a current flowing from the top of the tank to the bottom.
Since there is no gas at the bottom, the gas must migrate through the beer
to get there. Perhaps this slight gas flow causes enough of a current to
move particulate with it?
- --
Dusted off the brewery this month and fired it up after 2 years, 2 jobs and
one kid. Feels good, smells better...
John Varady * Old email address ***> rust1d at usa.net
Glenside, PA "Don't quote me on that." - Ben Franklin
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 12:44:07 -0700
From: "Steve Dale-Johnson" <sdalejohnson at hotmail.com>
Subject: Newcastle Clone
Anyone have a good all-grain brown ale recipe they would be willing to
share? More like a low gavity english style than an American Nut brown,
although maybe a double mash combo would work....
I have a special request to help a new brewer do something like his
favourite Newcastle Brown.
Don't recall this beer as being anything to write home about, kind of a low
gravity mild with a sweetish finish.
Private replies welcome at sdalejohnson at royallepage dot com
Steve Dale-Johnson
Brewing at (1918 miles, 298 degrees) Rennerian
Delta (Vancouver), BC, Canada.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 16:11:35 -0400
From: "-S" <-s at adelphia.net>
Subject: re: Announcement ... pressure & sedimentation rate
Congrat to Pat and his S on the birth of Jill Marie. Best wishes.
========
Chad Stevens seems off a small bit time (I know he knows
better) when he writes ...
>So if you have a fifteen
>foot tall bright tank, bringing it to two atmospheres effectively
quadruples
>the height of the column thus increasing pressure on the particulate
>substantially.
Every open fermenter on the planet is running at about 1 atmosphere
of surface pressure. Most pressure meters read in psig or gauge
pressure which is relative to atmospheric. So 2 atm of gauge pressure
means an absolute pressure of 3 atmosphere. The bottom of a 16ft
fermenter experiences another half atm of head pressure than does the
surface. The top is at (3atm/1atm) 3X the pressure of an open ferment,
but the bottom is only (3.5/1.5) 2.33X the pressure of the same vessel
when open .
> I doubt the majority of the particulate in
>beer is compressible.
I'm certain they aren't significantly compressible.
I agree (as usual) with Spencer that the pressure may reduce the rate of
bubble CO2 formation, and the release of bubbles can cause major
disturbances. I have to say that when sealed any carbonated liquid
quickly reaches headspace equilibrium and bubbling quickly stops.
==========
Chad notes ....
>...clarification is a function of...particulate
>size....The smaller the particulate relative to it's specific gravity, the
>faster it will fall out of suspension.
I get the point but the statement above is not accurate. Actually the
sedimentation rate is proportional to the linear size squared times the
density difference. Bigger denser particles fall faster.
V = ... * (r^2)*(Dparticle - Dmedia)
I think Chad meant that if you compress a particle, the r^2 term decreases
less so than the Dp density term increase. A compressed particle will
generally sediment a bit faster than the uncompressed version.
*BUT* Stokes law (above) falls apart for small particles - under
a few microns - where Brownian motion (thermal kinetics) and
colloidal interaction (electrostatic forces) are have a greater
impact than gravity.
Yeast don't act by colloidal suspension rules (it's been shown
repeatedly) but proteins may. A slight shift in pH due to CO2
overpressure *may* cause the interaction of lower vs high pK
proteins which might then sediment more rapidly. I doubt it, but
the possible mechanism is real. I don't see how CO2 pressure
impacts Brownian motion.
Excess pressure can damp out any remaining fermentation and
that may be an issue at a commercial brewery where process
timing means money.
-S
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 20:08:10 -0700
From: "Chad Stevens" <zuvaruvi at cox.net>
Subject: acid wash / re: sedimentation rate
Y'all,
I bought a 30 gallon white food grade plastic barrel that I'm going to use
for lambic fermentation. It originally held lemon juice and the odor was
quite strong. I've gotten most of it out but now that I'm getting close to
brewing the lambic, I want to do an acid wash to get rid of the last bit of
residual funk.
I'm going to use Muriatic Acid. Any ideas on what pH I should shoot for,
lets say, a week long soak? I'll follow with Iodophor.
I also have a virgin American oak barrel. After much soaking (six months)
and a couple of batches, the tannin level is still way up there. pH for a
month long acid soak in wood?
- ---------------------
Regarding my sedimentation post:
Oops: "The smaller the particle relative to it's specific gravity, the
faster it will fall out of suspension."
Thank you Mr. Johnson for correcting me. I meant what I wrote, but what I
wrote isn't what I meant.
What I meant was: If you take sumpin' and make it smaller, it's now more
dense and will fall out of suspension more quickly. That is what I
meant...I think. :o)
So yes "by Stokes' equation:
2. The sedimentation rate is proportional to the density difference between
the particle and the liquid."
So if you make a compressible particle smaller, with the help of a little
co2 let's say, then the density differential is now greater and the particle
ought to fall out of suspension more quickly. (Assuming any of the
particulate is compressible, which is questionable).
And the Spencer Thomas "particle as nucleation site" idea is wonderful.
More pressure = smaller bubble = less floaty. As fermentation progresses,
the liquid becomes supersaturated with co2, bubbles form on nucleation
sites, and are given off as the bubble's bouyancy becomes greater than it's
ability to adhere to the nucleation site. Now fast forward to the end of
fermentation. The liquid is still supersaturated but the little bubbles
aren't growing anymore. Some are too small to break away and will linger.
Transfer to a bright tank will provide some mechanical force stripping small
bubbles from some particles but probably not all bubbles from all particles.
Increase the head pressure, decrease the size of the bubble, decrease
bouyancy, and...voila! Wonderful.
Has anyone observed faster clarification with head pressure? It still seems
questionable the effect would be very robust.
My list of little brewing experiments keeps getting longer. Guess I need to
drink more beer!
Chad Stevens
QUAFF
San Diego
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #4357, 09/25/03
*************************************
-------
