Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #4522
HOMEBREW Digest #4522 Sun 18 April 2004
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org
***************************************************************
THIS YEAR'S HOME BREW DIGEST BROUGHT TO YOU BY:
Beer, Beer, and More Beer
Visit http://morebeer.com to show your appreciation!
Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********
Contents:
competitions: BJCP, AHA ("Peter A. Ensminger")
mash schedule questions ("-S")
Kurz/ Hoch mash schedule ("Dave Burley")
Re: mash schedule questions (Jeff Renner)
Re:DCL American Ale #56 (CONN Denny G)
RE: Bad temp readings.. (Bill Tobler)
DCL yeast (Marc Sedam)
12th Annual Spirit of Free Beer - Call for Entries, Judges, and Sponsors ("Mark E. Hogenmiller")
re: Mash Thickness (Bill Gornicki) ("-S")
Re: Brewoff Scoresheets... ("Al Quickel")
Ping Jeff Renner: Ballantine IPA Clone recipe (Bob Girolamo)
link of the week - viscosity (Bob Devine)
First Lager Fermentation ("Pat and Debbie Reddy")
Re: starch chemistry (contains new response from Marc Sedam) (part1/2) ("Fredrik")
Re: starch chemistry (contains new response from Marc Sedam) (part2/2) ("Fredrik")
Brewing and Buses ("Graham L Sanders")
New Draft Style Guidelines (at last) (Ed Westemeier)
What is the best way to clean an Immersion Wort Chiller? ("William and Karen LaCross")
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* The HBD Logo Store is now open! *
* http://www.hbd.org/store.html *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Suppport this service: http://hbd.org/donate.shtml *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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.
LOOKING TO BUY OR SELL USED EQUIPMENT? Please do not post about it here. Go
instead to http://homebrewfleamarket.com and post a free ad there.
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 and Spencer Thomas (janitor@hbd.org)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 00:55:09 -0400
From: "Peter A. Ensminger" <ensmingr at twcny.rr.com>
Subject: competitions: BJCP, AHA
Many BJCP higher-ups (Garofalo, Houseman, etc) and AHA higher-ups
(DePiro, Renner, Moline, etc) read the HBD.
I suggest that these organizations should have an official policy of
not recognizing any competition whose sponsors did not submit judging
forms or score sheets for their previous competition.
Cheerio!
Peter A. Ensminger
Syracuse, NY
http://hbd.org/ensmingr
- -------------------------
I entered a competition over a year ago (Coconut Cup in South Florida) and
never heard anything from the judges. (my bank said they cashed the check,
so I'm pretty sure they received the entry). Now I know that, like you, I
must have had a Gold medal beer. Thanks for shedding some light on that.
- -----
(shameless plug)
Sunshine Challenge '04 in Orlando FL
Check out www.cfhb.org for details
They will give your judging sheets back on the last day of the competition
(if you're there.)
(end shameless plug)
Al Q
Longtime Lurker, First time Poster
Groveland, FL
[954.6, 172.6] Apparent Rennerian
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 06:17:29 -0400
From: "-S" <-s at adelphia.net>
Subject: mash schedule questions
Joseph Gerteis asks ...
>I am specifically interested in lagers
>here, since I have worked out my ale mash schedules and
>since the malts are typically easier to work with.
That's the rumor, but the specs in recent years show little difference
besides the slightly greater Lovibond of the PA malt. The idea that lager
malts have a bit greater beta-glucans level is believable, but you do NOT
have to revise your mashing technique to use lager malts. They aren't any
more difficult.
> I am still wondering about the two-stage
> high-temp rest (60/70c or similar).[...]
> Is this an
> extraction/conversion issue or is there a flavor impact?
Neither ! Fix adapted his 60/70 steps (for both lagers and ales) from
similar methods in the German sources. The idea is that you get as much
fermentability as you want by choosing the rest *time* at 60C (beta-amylase)
and then finish the mash w/ a good alpha-amylase rest at 70C. The main
issue in saccharification is always getting the *right* amount of
beta-amylase activity and therefore the right fermentability. On a
relative basis malt has lots of alpha-amylase but just barely enough
beta-amylase to do the job. A masher must be careful w/ the BA, but any oaf
can complete the starch conversion given the excessive levels of AA in malt.
Step mashers can time the low (60C) rest to control this variable but
single-infusion mashers MUST control the temp. Both work well and produce
very comparable worts - properly done.
>(Side question: Steve Alexander mentioned yesterday
>that Fix himself noted that a single step rest was not
>clearly different from a multi-step mash in the taste
>of the finished beer. Steve -- does that correspond
>with your own experience with lagers?)
I don't think many of the highly ornate and complex mashing schemes do much
to change flavor so long as they don't kill body, haze & foam and result in
the same fermentability. The one method which has a clear claim to a flavor
impact is decoction. Decoction does create certain Maillard and caramel
flavor products, but it's very inefficient at this. Many HBers have some
fantasy image of immense malty flavors emanating from a decoction, but the
reality is that decoction imparts only a subtle flavor difference. This is
another case where a single side-by-side comparison says a lot more than all
the "expert" opinions. IMO no-sparge will out-do a decoction every time,
and a little additional munich, vienna or melanoidin malt will usually do
the same.
>Second, what kinds of schedules are most common at the
>commercial and homebrew levels?
I don't know. Kunze's book is a textbook of commercial German brewing.
It's safe to say that Kunze's sort of abbreviated mashes which begin at 58C
or above and step upward are common there. Decoction is still practiced in
the continent, but less widely than in previous decades. M&BS describes
1980-ish British practice which I assume hasn't changed so much. Micro
breweries use all sorts methods, but most often single infusion.
> How many out there use
>a 60/70c rest schedule or equivalent?
I used 60/70c for many years and finally adapted this to 62C/72C. Later I
found out that my schedule is closer to Kunze's recommendations. If my
malt is likely to throw a haze I'll mash-in at 58C for a touch of
proteolysis, then slowly step the temp to 62C.
-S
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 09:35:56 -0400
From: "Dave Burley" <Dave_Burley at charter.net>
Subject: Kurz/ Hoch mash schedule
Brewsters:
Joe Gerteis mentions he would like a little more information on the kurz/hoch
German brewing regimen.
For starters, the German expression "kurz/ hoch" means "short/high" as a
description of a new ( relatively) regimen in the German brewing industry in
which they gave up the older brewing methods using the older malts. The fact
that it has a name tells you it is different from the old practice.
Like Budweiser, the Germans are also in the business to maximize their
profits, so now minimize their occupancy time in the mash tun by shortening
the mash time. One of the techniques is to eliminate the low T hold. To Hell
with tradition.
As Kunze says p224 about German breweries
"In a small brewery the time it takes to mash is not important........In
large, modern breweries often eight brews or more per day are cast.......This
demands not only the use of short mash processses but also an exact time plan
which tolerates no delays..."
This is made possible by the changes in the malting activities schedule, made
from warm weather malts ( like US, etc) and the types of barley grown in
Europe. Agricultural activites in Germany ( they even appointed a commission
to select the types of barley and discard most of the traditional varieties )
have dramatically changed the barley coming to the maltster. Before WII they
had 300 or more varieties of barley, now I think the number is down to about 6
and trending lower.
These lower nitrogen and higher yield barleys can be malted to allow the
kurz/hoch brewing schedule. Thus, the low hold T and decoction of German
beers in a commercial setting, with the accountants dictating every brewer's
move, means a real change in the taste and quality of German beers.
You will find the brewing industry saying no changes in the taste have
changed, but I know better and so do older Germans. But, like in the USA,
the younger crowd buys most of the beer and they don't know any better, so the
German beers ( even the famous Octoberfest beers) trend to the lighter side
and lower flavor so more can be consumed
P 218 of Kunze under
"Three mash processes",
"In the three mash methods the temperature increases between the main mash
temperatures
35 C ( 95F) mashing in temperature
50C ( 122F) protein rest/gummy material degradation
64C ( 147F) maltose formation rest
75C ( 167F) saccharification rest is produced by the removal of the cooker
mashes, boiling and second mashing
.........These mashes produce very aromatic beers."
But as I said in my earlier comments, I fool all these attempts at controlling
my brewing by using Moravian malts and adding cooked raw barley to emulate the
old malts and thus I use the older low T hold methods of brewing.
When I gave some of my German style lager to a German staying with us, he said
on his first taste "You MADE this? Tastes like the German beer I remember."
Keep on Brewin'
Dave Burley
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 10:50:59 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <jeffrenner at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: mash schedule questions
"Joseph Gerteis" <joseph540 at elvis.com> writes:
> I am still wondering about the two-stage high-temp rest (60/70c or
>similar). ... what kinds of schedules are most common at the
>commercial and homebrew levels? How many out there use a 60/70c
>rest schedule or equivalent?
I have adopted a 145/158F (63/70C) schedule for my Classic American
Pilsner, with the first rest being for the main mash and the second
for after I add the boiling hot cereal mash. This is the schedule
that A/B uses for Budweiser, as we MCAB attendees discovered when
touring the pilot brewery in St. Louis for MCAB-2 four years ago.
This results in a crisp, well attenuated pilsner. When things go
right. ;-)
For an modern American cereal mash beer with a typical 40% or more
adjuncts, the cereal mash will easily supply enough heat to make the
boost. For my more historic level of 22% corn, I need to use some
propane and recirculation.
Jeff
- --
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, JeffRenner at comcast.net
"One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 10:05:31 -0700
From: CONN Denny G <denny.g.conn at ci.eugene.or.us>
Subject: Re:DCL American Ale #56
Bob, that post piqued my interest, also. I had my LHBS order some for me
yesterday. I'll certainly post my results.
--------->Denny
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 12:41:22 -0500
From: Bill Tobler <wctobler at sbcglobal.net>
Subject: RE: Bad temp readings..
Mike said he's getting different readings from his dial gauge thermometer
and a handheld stick thermometer. You can get pretty wild temperature
differences in the mash tun, especially a SS one without insulation at the
beginning of a temperature change, but you said you were getting a big delta
T with just water and no grains. Put the handheld thermometer next to the
gauge probe and read the temperatures. If both thermometers are accurate,
they will read the same. (Within a degree or so)
But, if one of them is off, you need to determine which one. You could test
all three thermometers in boiling water and record the readings, but that is
pretty far outside the range you use the thermometers, but will work. You
could also just heat some water up in the 160 degree range and put all three
in there and record the readings. If you have a problem, two will read the
same or very close, and one will be off. More than likely, the one
different from the other two is wrong.
I have a lab grade Mercury thermometer I calibrate with every once in a
while. (But not in the mash) I'll heat up some water and check all my
digital thermometers against it. I'll test at different temps, from room
temp up to boiling. One of my Omega temperature controllers tends to be off
at low temps, but gets in line with the others above 120 degrees.
BTW, just to encourage others to let everyone know where they are, last week
I posted on the AHA techtalk and signed my name and location. The next day
I received an e-mail from a new brewer right in town here looking for some
advice, company and a club. We fixed him right up.
Bill Tobler
Lake Jackson, TX
(1129.7, 219.9) Apparent Rennerian
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 15:23:55 -0400
From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam at unc.edu>
Subject: DCL yeast
Word is that this yeast is the old EDME strain. Whether that's the same
as 1056 is beyond me.
- --
Marc Sedam
Chapel Hill, NC 27599-4105
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 18:45:37 -0400
From: "Mark E. Hogenmiller" <mehogenmiller at cox.net>
Subject: 12th Annual Spirit of Free Beer - Call for Entries, Judges, and Sponsors
Competition Announcement
- --------------------------------
Brewers United for Real Potables (BURP) is proud to announce that the
2004 Spirit of Free Beer homebrew competition will be held on
Saturday, June 12th at Old Dominion Brewing Company in Ashburn, VA.
For another year we will be a qualifying event for the prestigious
Masters Championship of Amateur Brewing (MCAB). All BJCP recognized
styles including meads and ciders are eligible for entry. First entry
is $6.00, subsequent entries are $5.00 each.
We have years of experience at organizing and judging homebrew
competitions, so we take pride in doing it right. Experience and
quality judging is the cornerstone of our competition. BURP educates
and encourages the enhancement of judging skills and judges within the
club.
Over the past 12 years BURP has earned a reputation for the, um,
*loot* that can be won at all levels of the Spirit of Free Beer
competition. Each year, Spirit of Free Beer sponsors generously donate
great prizes, including: ingredients, equipment (from small items to
big stuff), breweriana, clothing, books, and, well, FREE BEER!
Thanks to all of our sponsors past and present! A partial list of
confirmed sponsors for this year's competition follows at the end of
the message.
For complete details and forms, please visit the BURP web site at
www.burp.org/events/sofb/2004/
Call for Judges
- -----------------
We welcome out of town judges from the Midwest, New England and the
Mid-Atlantic regions.
Feel free to email Judge coordinator Bill Newman at <Newman at
burp.org>.
If you need a place to stay, please contact Bill or competition
organizer Dave Pyle.
Entries will be accepted between May 21st and June 4th. For drop off
and mail in locations please refer to the BURP web site.
Call for Sponsors
- -------------------
Some of the best homebrew suppliers, manufacturers, and retail shops
read sponsor, and participate in the Homebrew Digest. If you would
like to become a sponsor of this year's Spirit of Free Beer, please
e-mail Rob Hanson at <kate.rob at verizon.net>.
Good luck and cheers!
Rob Hanson
Sponsor Coordinator
<kate.rob at verizon.net>
on behalf of
Competition Organizers
Dave and Becky Pyle
events at burp.org
www.burp.org
Mark Hogenmiller
Burke, VA
BURP - 2004 Spirit of Free Beer Registrar
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 19:29:32 -0400
From: "-S" <-s at adelphia.net>
Subject: re: Mash Thickness (Bill Gornicki)
Bill G writes,
>I did a short excerpt for my club's education corner about mash viscosity
>based on Dornbusch's model and it may be useful to some.
>
>Different mash viscosities favor different mash enzymes.
Oh dear - You're propagating a lot of erroneous ideas Bill. "Viscosity" is
*NOT* mash thickness. You cannot interchange these terms. They mean
entirely different things.
>Check out how I applied this model at the link below...
>http://www.feathercraft.net/CRAFT/Documents/Mash%20Technique2.doc
There is a lot of baloney in that sandwich, Bill.
<<<
Mash is discussed in many texts as, simply paraphrased, ".the thicker the
mash the more full-bodied your beer will be. Likewise, the thinner [...]
>>>
Any book that suggests that should be ... recycled immediately.
<<<
Thick mashes encourage proteolytic enzymes (protein degrading) to degrade
proteins and other gums into more usable components for both yeast health
and clearer beer.
>>>
More baloney ! Mash thickness stabilized AND SLOWS these hydrolytic
enzymes. The quote above is accurate only for mash rests far above the
"optimal" protein&glucan degrading temp. That's a crazy method of mashing.
A very thick 72C rest encourages more beta-amylase activity too (as compared
to thin), but only a moron would try to make a highly fermentable wort in a
very thick 72C rest.
==
I'm not picking on you Bill, but there are several misleading poorly
researched books around and reciting their content just increases the
thought pollution.
-Steve
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 10:38:51 -0400
From: "Al Quickel" <alquickel at hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Brewoff Scoresheets...
I just received an e-mail from MASH (Coconut Cup) regarding my last post. As
I had suspected, my scoresheets were evidently lost in the mail. I still do
not have judges comments, but MASH did provide a record of my score. NOT a
gold medal winner prematurely disposed of. There goes that theory. The new
postal carrier seems to have it together, though. Maybe next year. Thanks
Scott & Denise.
Al Q
Groveland, FL
[954.6, 172.6] Apparent Rennerian
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 09:32:57 -0700
From: Bob Girolamo <bob-girolamo at sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Ping Jeff Renner: Ballantine IPA Clone recipe
Jeff,
I've been researching this for a while and have noted your 1998 HBD
archive of the recipe but, have had no luck finding it. I was wondering
if you still had it somewhere and could post it.
TIA
Brewer Bob
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 20:18:41 -0600
From: Bob Devine <bob.devine at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: link of the week - viscosity
Viscosity can be a tough concept to grasp. I've seen reports
that viscosity is "mouth coating" (no, that is a different effect)
or that it is a density (no, highly viscous liquids can be light)
or that viscosity is determined by the original gravity (nope).
So, viscosity is a characteristic of your beers but what is it?
What causes it? and What is good?
And just how does one make a "black and tan" (or if you don't
want to re-open a political battle, a "half and half")?
BTW, did you know that a lot of research in viscosity came from
trying to make a good chocolate milk?
http://www.foodproductdesign.com/archive/2002/0102AP.html
Viscosity is the resistance of a fluid to flow.
A fun introduction to viscosity of common fluids:
http://www.cockeyed.com/science/viscosity/viscosity1.html
The viscosity of water establishes the standard of 1.00 centipoise
(also measured at 0.000891 Newton seconds per meter squared)
where CentiPoises = CentiStokes x Density.
The viscosity of beer depends on the type of beer. For example,
the viscosity of larger is about 50% higher than water and stout
is about twice as viscous. Many wheat beers are much higher.
An often repeated note is that a beer's viscosity is caused
only by "caused by the presence of polysaccharides (dextrins)
in the beer that are not fermentable by the yeast."
Yes, but that is only part of the answer but the whole anwser
is a bit more complicated. See the following links:
http://www.regional.org.au/au/abts/1999/stewart.htm
http://www.asbcnet.org/Journal/abstracts/search/1995/bc1995a29.htm
http://www.asbcnet.org/Journal/abstracts/search/2002/0919-01a.htm
http://www.asbcnet.org/Meetings/2001/Abstracts/P-17.htm
www.dal.ca/~foodsci/Jin.ppt
Bob Devine
not illegally brewing in Utah, nope, not me
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 22:48:35 -0500
From: "Pat and Debbie Reddy" <reddydp at charter.net>
Subject: First Lager Fermentation
I brewed my first lager this morning and pitched the yeast about 7 hours
ago. I've never conducted a primary fermentation in glass, so maybe what
I'm seeing here is normal, but it's ugly and, yes, I'm worried. Here's a
link to a picture I took minutes ago - what is that crud in my beer? Is a
lager fermentation supposed to throw a funky head like that? Calm me down,
please!
PMR
http://webpages.charter.net/rede/First%20Lager
- ---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.659 / Virus Database: 423 - Release Date: 4/15/2004
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 09:32:22 +0200
From: "Fredrik" <carlsbergerensis at hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: starch chemistry (contains new response from Marc Sedam) (part1/2)
Marc Sedam seem to have some technical server problems that seem to prevent
him to
post to the hbd list, so he asked me to post his response on this topic.
While at it I've inserted some follow up comments/questions to his original
response.
It was too big for one post and I certainly can't cut Marc's response to
I'll just split it in two.
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: starch chemistry
> Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004 14:44:47 -0400
> From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam at unc.edu>
> To: post at hbd.org
>
>
>
> Wow, I haven't seen this much heavy science on the HBD in a while. Makes
>
> for an early a.m. brain massage.
>
> Just to pick a nit.in the industry, it's called starch "liquefaction"
> not liquification. Why? No idea. But in an effort to help your search
> you'd probably get more hits if you use liquefaction in the terms. Sorry
> 'bout that.
Thanks, I had no idea. The fact that I'm swedish doesn't make it easier :)
This will help.
>
> I'll speak, as Steve suggested, a little more to the starch since that's
> where my background lies. If you search the HBD archives for "Sedam and
> gelatinization" you'll probably get a few additional bits of information.
I just did and found some these excellent old posts from you.
http://hbd.org/hbd/archive/3284.html#3284-8
http://hbd.org/hbd/archive/3982.html#3982-2
This gave me some more great information to process! Thanks for these great
posts. In the first post above you wrote this in the end :)
"P.S. If you think the rest of the HBD would benefit, I'll post this. I
didn't want to clog bandwith."
These kind of posts are the best. Good stuff. It doesn't get anywhere near
waste of bandwidth IMO. If you have more let it out if you get a chance. I
for one will read it all with great interest.
/Fredrik
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 09:32:27 +0200
From: "Fredrik" <carlsbergerensis at hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: starch chemistry (contains new response from Marc Sedam) (part2/2)
(part2/2)
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: starch chemistry
> Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004 14:44:47 -0400
> From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam at unc.edu>
> To: post at hbd.org
[jump]
>
> The gelatinization of starch is critical to your model, although without
> a DSC (differential scanning calorimeter) you're going to be a little
> handicapped. The gist of it is this: starch granules first begin to take
> up water and swell, then they "crack", and eventually completely
> solubilize. You are going to get different percentages of amylose
> available during each part. During the swelling, some short-chain
> amylose is able to migrate out of the starch granule and into solution.
> The granule is still intact. Further, even the intact granule is
> susceptible to degradation by beta amylase. This creates small
> "pinholes" in the granule through which further short-chain amylose can
> leave. It is this swelling of the granule and uptake of water that Steve
> A. talks about in the cereal mash. Note that amylose or amylopectin
> don't gelatinize.the starch granule gelatinizes. That being said, the
> relative composition of the grain (% amylose vs. % amylopectin) will
> have an effect on the overall gelatinization temperature. Waxy starches
> (high amylose) have lower gelatinization temps.
>
> Eventually, the "birefringence" of the granule (telltale "X" pattern you
> see in a granule under a dark-field microscope) will disappear. The
> granule cracks open and releases the remaining amylose and amylopectin
> into the solution, as well as the trapped water. At the same time, the
> amylopectin (and some short-chain amylose) can bind water. During a
> cereal mash, this is when you see the viscosity dramatically drop. It's
> a combination of the disruption of starch granules and the component
> compounds in starch being rapidly digested by BA and AA. I should point
> out that this entire process can be made MUCH more rapidly through shear
> forces. In other words, regular stirring of the mash (or constant
> stirring, in the case of the pro brewer) will get you through the
> swelling stages much faster.
>
> Once everything is in solution, you still have two substrates being
> attacked by the same enzymes. Amylose will generally get digested much
> quicker than amylopectin as the entire starch chain (recall that amylose
> is nothing more than a linear bunch of glucose molecules) is available
> for BA and AA to attack. The AA is randomly cleaving the chain, while BA
> is chewing it from the ends. The result is going to be a ton of glucose
> and maltose from the combined AA/BA activity-as it relates to
> amylose.some maltotriose is left here too. Amylopectin is a different
> beast. Since neither BA or AA can digest the alpha 1-6 bonds in
> amylopectin, you're left with less fermentable extract per weight of
> amylopectin. Once all of the degradation of the amylopectin molecule
> happens you're left with the "beta-limit dextrins"-most of the remaining
> indigestible starch fraction. So I'll agree and disagree with Steve.
> Amylose is available for digestion first, when the granule swells. Once
> the granule gelatinizes both are available equally, although the amylose
> fractions will still be digested to completion first.
Thanks alot Marc for the great response. I will try to revise things and add
something to the equations to mimic some of the new things you mention here.
I will need to make some more actual tests too. You describe thing from the
granule perspective but it seems I also need to somehow account for the
grain perspective as it would be significant. Unless your mashing flour,
from some "glass of water on the desk experiments" the hydration seems to
work from the outside to the center and at least at room temp it's quite
significant. Very quickly the surface softens, while the core is solid and
apparently fairly dry. I figure the prehydration or 40C has some connection
to this. I haven't accounted for this yet but I think I have to try and come
up with something. I'd like to know the effect on resulst rehydrating the
*grains* to a certain extent onto the core before entering the actual mash.
Lack of other devices I've rehydrated whole grains, and after some time I
take a grain and cut it in half with a razor to roughly inspect the process
of rehydration visually via the cross section.
I think I've got the enzyme stuff ok so far. Based on the probability for
attacks at certain bonds I've come up with quite simplified model (maybe
oversimplified? I won't know until I've tested it later). Anyway I count on
accounting for the denaturation dynamics as well as the limit dextrins. I
should get the polymer distribution with time and the 1-6 skeleton will be
left as the residual regarldess of how much enzymes there is. Hopefully
there will be some fun resulting gif animations of the polymerdistribution
when it's all done. I assume that any point the enzymes attack amylose and
amylopectin at valid bracnhes at a fixed probability distribution. For
amylopectin the probability reach zero at and near the 1-6 branches. We'll
see how this turns out together :-|
I'm not done with putting the actual simulation (VBA/excel) together yet but
it's on it's way, because lots of things come in the way all the time, it
tend to be occasional jumps. I spend several hours yesterday calibrating a
new temperature setup.
I'll digest the new input and update the model. I hope to get some more
comments from you guys later on.
/Fredrik
>
> If you want to try and find these numbers, you may consider looking at
> Novozymes website. http://tinyurl.com/37aqr
>
> They provide industrial starches to the brewing industry. It may not be
> EXACTLY what's happening in the mash tun but it may provide a start for
> your model. You also may want to look up a book called "The Handbook of
> Water Soluble Gums and Resins" which has a chapter on starch that is
> still THE bible in food science circles. I have a copy I could scan and
> email you. Steve.you too!
>
> --
> Marc Sedam
> Chapel Hill, NC
>
> --
> Marc Sedam
> Life Sciences Consultant
> Office of Technology Development
> The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
> 308 Bynum Hall; CB# 4105
> Chapel Hill, NC 27599-4105
>
> 919.966.3929 (phone)
> 919.962.0646 (fax)
> OTD site : http://www.research.unc.edu/otd
> Monthly Seminar Info: http://www.research.unc.edu/otd/seminar/
>
>
>
>
> --
> Marc Sedam
> Life Sciences Consultant
> Office of Technology Development
> The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
> 308 Bynum Hall; CB# 4105
> Chapel Hill, NC 27599-4105
>
> 919.966.3929 (phone)
> 919.962.0646 (fax)
> OTD site : http://www.research.unc.edu/otd
> Monthly Seminar Info: http://www.research.unc.edu/otd/seminar/
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 17:28:24 +1000
From: "Graham L Sanders" <craftbrewer at bigpond.com>
Subject: Brewing and Buses
G'day all
Now being a North Queenslander, one takes pride of our "rough and tough"
nature. Even in ones death throws, we like to think we will go out in a
typical bushies style, something like "he was taken by a saltie but he still
tried to get one last beer down before he went under." Never in my wildest
dreams did I think I would instead almost go out being the hood
ornament not only for a bus, but a car as well.
So it was on that faithful day, when I started making my Vienna lager well
before sunrise. All went well, beer finished by lunchtime, and shoved into
the fridge to finish cooling it down to lager temperatures. With the
starters also on the go, I should be able to pitch the yeast by sunset. At
that stage life was good, and one was looking forward to some of my Belgian
Beauties as a reward that night. Never quite got that far.
At 4.00pm, one decides to go on his daily constitutional on the "deadly
treadly", sole aim to keep ones beer belly in check. Well it seems some bus
decided that I would make a great addition to the look of the vehicle. This
is nothing new up this way, as plenty of trucks commonly motor around with
roos all over the bull-bars, from the nights drive, to be hosed off at the
next fuel stop. Never thought buses would take up the fashion with me. So
there I was, suddenly lifted off my bike and wearing a bus. And to show we
up here have a fashion sense, the driver decided I didn't look that good, so
threw me onto a car for good measure to see if I look any good there. Didn't
look good on the car, so they dumped me on the road.
End result of this little skirmish, I rattled like an old wooden bridge,
chest all out of shape, broken bones, lung going down faster than Bill
Clinton, skin greyer than a bush roo, well, one was a touch close to meeting
his maker, or as a brewer would hope, finally working out that ultimate
question "who is the real patron saint of brewing."
Now what do dedicated brewers think off at this time. SWMBO - no way!,
children or family - nope!, what about life flashing before your eyes -
sorry that doesn't happen!!!!!. This little brewer was muttering one thing
only, to paramedics, doctors, nurses in and out of reality, " THE
YEAST, ---- SOME-ONE NEEDS TO PITCH THE YEAST ". I'm told rather off putting
when they are trying to get your name, and where it hurts.
Another thing we brewers must do is constantly think about brewing. So as I
was drifting between worlds, talking to god, etc, they needed to do an
urgent chest drain. To do this they use a pointed stainless steel rod, about
1/4 inch diameter. Now it seems when I saw this, I somehow wanted to abscond
with said piece of metal for my brewing equipment, and tried to take it as
they trust it into my chest, without any pain relief. Now I can tell you,
being bayoneted by emergency staff certainly brings you back to reality and
cuts shorts your conversation with the all mighty. And I certainly forgot
about using that SS rod for brewing, instead suggesting in very colourful
language that they stick it up the doctors PHD.
But the end result of all this
1. Yes most important the yeast was pitched and That Bloody Bastard Bus
Vienna is now kegged.
2. Never did get to keep that SS rod
3. Being bayoneted is not nice
4. And yes, I'm on the mend.
Now one thing I am going to have to do is post more regularly on the HBD. It
was very touching the goodwill I received from the brewing community. Might
aim for once a week "posting from the tropics".
Shout
Graham Sanders
Oh
While I was having a chat to God, found out the only reason he sent me back
was yes "God is a homebrewer". But he wouldn't let me up there yet. Seems he
thought he knew all about brewing, til as he put it, that bastard Fix turned
up and kept correct him. His last words to me before I was rudely send back
to reality - " I'm not ready yet for another brewer telling me what wrong
with my brews til I get a few more under my belt and get George off my
back."
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 16:21:22 -0400
From: Ed Westemeier <hopfen at malz.com>
Subject: New Draft Style Guidelines (at last)
On behalf of our very hard working Style Guidelines Committee, I want to
pass on the message below. As everyone knows, our style guidelines are
due for revision, and this is the year. Here's your chance to see the
draft guidelines the committee came up with, and put in your own two
cents.
This message and the links can also be found at the BJCP website
(www.bjcp.org).
Ed Westemeier
BJCP Communication Director
communication_director at bjcp.org
- -------------------------------
The BJCP Style Committee has completed its preliminary review and update
of the 1999 Style Guidelines. These draft guidelines are now posted for
public review and comment. All BJCP judges and interested individuals
are welcomed to participate in the review. The Style Committee will
monitor the discussion and incorporate good suggestions. We intend to
have an open comment period for at least one month, with the final
guidelines being rolled out at the AHA National Homebrew Conference in
Las Vegas, June 17-19.
The guidelines can be viewed and commented upon in a web-based forum
system found at http://www.hopmadness.com/bjcp/ They have been
extensively revised, reorganized, and contain new style parameters and
commercial examples. Eight new sub-categories have been added.
Comments are welcome on the individual guidelines and on the overall
organization. Identification of errors, omissions and misinterpretations
are especially welcome.
Note that these guidelines have not yet been approved for use by the
BJCP. The 1999 guidelines remain in effect for BJCP- and AHA-sanctioned
competitions.
Gordon Strong
BJCP Grand Master Judge
Chairman, BJCP Style Committee
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 18:14:06 -0400
From: "William and Karen LaCross" <lacross at chartermi.net>
Subject: What is the best way to clean an Immersion Wort Chiller?
I'm interested in any tips I can get on cleaning my copper wort chiller. I
have gotten a nasty metalic taste in a couple of batches before I realized
it was from the wort chiller. The last batch was cooled the old fashion
way; in the snow bank on the back deck, and didn't show a hint of the bitter
metal flavor. I typically slosh the chiller in a 5 gallon bucket of PBW
after every brew session, and again with PBW before using it again, but
obviously I'm doing something wrong. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Bill LaCross
Petoskey, Michigan
(218.8, 345.7) Apparent Rennerian
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #4522, 04/18/04
*************************************
-------
