Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #4628
HOMEBREW Digest #4628 Thu 14 October 2004
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: pbabcock at 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:
Re: Kinetics and Thermodynamics ("Fredrik")
Re: Electric Brewery ("Pete Calinski")
vertical or horizontal ("Dave Burley")
RE: March pumps ("Ben Rodman")
PH adjustments ("Peed, John")
Sugars are utilized sequentially. (ALAN K MEEKER)
Stainless Steel Pump Fittings (Benjy Edwards)
re. Electric Kettle and Re-pitching ("zuvaruvi")
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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! *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* A Fortnight Of Yeast *
* Presented by the HBD in cooperation with Lallemand *
* Questions submission: 10/11 - 10/22/2004 *
* include Fortnight Of Yeast, 2004 in your subject line *
* More info http://hbd.org/hbd/archive/4620.html#4620-3 *
*********************************************************
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.
JANITORs on duty: Pat Babcock (pbabcock at hbd dot org), Jason Henning,
and Spencer Thomas
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 07:54:38 +0200
From: "Fredrik" <carlsbergerensis at hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Kinetics and Thermodynamics
Thanks for your follow up comments Dave. We seem to
always have hard to understand each other. I don't know
if it's terminology or just me which could be. In any case
I appreciate the feedback.
> Think of yeast as a catalyst promoting a chemical reaction
> ( which energetically is possible, but not kinetically rapid)
> via their enzyme and transport mechanisms. The yeast
> do not wait or make energy decisions or look for the
> weakest "prey".
I am definitely attempting modelling the most relevant enzymes,
were called for. But the core is how their activity is *regulated*
as they obviously aren't constants, I refuse to belive that. I
doubt a llist of enzymes alone will help me regulate them which
seem to be the issue here.
I continute to prefer treating yeas as a living *organism* that
responds and acts to any situation in a way that is favourable
for it's survival and reproduction as trained throughout
evolution. The enzymes are there of course, but I think the fact
that there is a living organism here is the key to understand
how the enzymes are *regulated*. By considering the yeast
an organism that does things for a reason, I think it's easier
to understand and may allow simplifications.
Why would a simple organism keep eating if it wasn't for the
benefit of survival or reproduction? If you turn the question
around, why not? Possibly(??) because it takes more efforts
to stay awake and starve than to sleep and starve and hope
for better times.
I am just trying to find some logic here, so may you biologists
forgive me if I am abusing the subject. Yeast continues to
be an organism in my mind, and not reduced to a set of
enzymes.
I suggest consider the energy state of the organism as a whole.
Then perhaps it's easier to understand regulations?
Are you suggesting you do not belive in this idea Dave? This
was the thing I wanted input on but I am not sure if the
message went out.
> If you were to start with all the same concentrations of
> carbohydrates and look at the fermentation as it proceeds
> you will find some carbohydrates are disappearing more
> quickly and the final result may be there are certain
> carbohydrates left depending on many different conditons
> of the fermentation as well as the yeasts' genetic makeup.
I agree with this but the question I want answered is how the
genetic makeup + conditions govern the exact dynamics.
> Point is, all of these carbohydrate reactions are proceeding
> at the same time>, <NOT serially>, as you suggest in your
> comments. Some are just slower than others.
I think you misunderstood me? I never suggested a
*litteral serial uptake* as a *mechanism*. The mechanism can
be thought of a parallell uptake if you prefer to think of it that
way, but the problem is to understand why it's regulated the
way it is. If one sugar depresses another one it will appear
like a "kind of serial uptake", but the mechanism isn't
litteraly strictly serial. And the I doubt depressions are a
logic switch, there are bound to be a smooth transition
on closeup.
Perhaps you are refering to the RDF = RDFW + (1-MTD)
*MTW formula I posted?? that was meant to serve as a
*ballpark estimate*. The model will be far better and more
complex and not a formula. Please don't mix that formula
with the model and my last posts. If it's this formula we
are discussing then, yes it's just an rough estimate that I
figure is alot better than nothing.
There may also be tiny residuals of all sugars even within my
suggestions.
Once the sugar get as far as into the glycolysis chain there
can't be any difference between sugars. The difference as
I understand should be the uptake into the cell +
preparation into g-6-p/f-6-p?
In the model I am condiering the rate from external sugars
to g-6-p/f-6-p. This step is regulated individually for each
sugar. Each sugar having it's own regulation function. This
regulation will not only depend on the strains genetic
information, it will also depend on alot of other things. This
is done in parallell of course, but in reality if one sugar
depresses another there may be serial like effects.
Here is a limited simplfied mind map showing some of the
carbon flow.(only some pathways included, don't take it
too litteral! it's not complete, forget the notes along
the arrows, that's just "notes")
http://hem.bredband.net/frerad/beer/modelling/pictures/pathways.jpg
It will cause more confusion that clarity but here is one
picture showing *some* pathways I am considering.
In short Each arrow is a reaction mechanism. Each
arrow has it's own regulation function. At each arrow
all variables are accounted for. Each arrow represents
and change of energy, redox, carbon, nitrogen, yeast.
There is supposed to be a similar nitrogen flow map.
> Change your concept and model and it will more
> closely fit reality.
What concept? I think you jumped into conclusions or
what do you suggest I change? I don't understand what
your main suggestion is? Serial/parallel isn't an issue, I
think that is toying with words. I never suggested a
litteral serial uptake, though the effect of depression is
that simples sugars are given priority to more
comples ones. I think this effect is *major* and I can't
delegate to a second order issue. It's a first priority
issue to account for.
/Fredrik
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 09:32:36 -0400
From: "Pete Calinski" <pjcalinski at adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: Electric Brewery
I have been using heatsticks for three or four years.
http://hbd.org/pcalinsk/HeatStk3.htm
As for buckets, I use the 7 gallon buckets from swimming pool bromine.
http://hbd.org/pcalinsk/Faucet.htm
But I am getting concerned that the sealant, DAP 8641 is no longer
available. I can't find it in any stores and DAP hasn't responded to my
email queries.
Pete Calinski
East Amherst NY
Near Buffalo NY
http://hbd.org/pcalinsk
***********************************************************
*My goal:
* Go through life and never drink the same beer twice.
* (As long as it doesn't mean I have to skip a beer.)
***********************************************************
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 10:37:33 -0400
From: "Dave Burley" <Dave_Burley at charter.net>
Subject: vertical or horizontal
Brewsters:
Martin Brugard makes a good point about how to mount a centrifugal pump with
regards to the bearing position and such.
Jay Spies says:
- -----------
"Yikes! I know that many people here on the HBD, as well as B3 (sponsor of
the HBD) use these pumps vertically mounted."
- -----------
I suspect there may be some confusion about what is a horizontal and what is a
vertical mounting.
As I interpret his comments, the axis of the pump ( that is the shaft to which
the blades are fixed) is to be mounted horizontally. This would make the
blades rotate in the vertical plane.
Is this correct Martin?
Keep on Brewin'
Dave Burley
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 09:35:53 -0600
From: "Ben Rodman" <brodman at carmelclc.com>
Subject: RE: March pumps
Hi all,
The orientation of a pump issue is interesting! I'd like to protect
my investment... I've used the pump in both configurations, but here's what
I need to ask: when we discuss vertical vs. horizontal, do we mean the body
of the pump or the flow (perpendicular to the body)?
Ben Rodman in Lyons, CO
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 11:30:47 -0400
From: "Peed, John" <jpeed at elotouch.com>
Subject: PH adjustments
I have tried adjusting strike and sparge water PH by adding 88% lactic acid.
The PH of my filtered tap water has been around 8.0 lately, so I added acid
to bring it down to 7.0 for strike and 6.2 for sparge. What I have found is
that the resulting beer has a sour edge to the flavor and a very off
sensation that's hard to describe. Call it a slickness in the texture and
an overly satiating aspect to the flavor and general perception. In short,
the beers that I made with these PH adjustments were ruined. The very worst
examples resulted from acidifying the mash with 88% lactic acid. I have
since switched to gypsum for acidifying the mash, but I have stopped adding
any acid to the water(s). Am I using the wrong acid? And what really is
the point of fiddling with water PH? I get 80% efficiency and excellent
flavor without acidifying my PH 8.0 water, so I see no point in doing so.
Fix mentioned that improperly PH-balanced beers aren't as stable as properly
balanced ones. Comments?
John Peed
Oak Ridge, TN
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 12:03:38 -0400
From: ALAN K MEEKER <ameeker at mail.jhmi.edu>
Subject: Sugars are utilized sequentially.
Dave Burley stated:
"If you were to start with all the same concentrations of carbohydrates and
look at the fermentation as it proceeds you will find some carbohydrates are
disappearing more quickly and the final result may be there are certain
carbohydrates left depending on many different conditons of the fermentation
as well as the yeasts' genetic makeup.
Point is, all of these carbohydrate reactions are proceeding at the <same
time>, <NOT serially>, as you suggest in your comments. Some are just
slower than others.
As you commented, there are some secondary interactions due to the
"interference" of certain sugars, but the point is all of these reactions are
going on simultaneously"
- -----------------------
Dave, this is simply incorrect. As you may recall, I spent a lot of time in
the past trying to explain this to you through off-line e-mails. You still
haven't gotten the core concept here, namely that you are dealing with a
biological organism that is /responsive/ to its surroundings.
The protein catalysts you are referring to are protein molecules that have
to be manufactured by the yeast cell before they can be put into use.
The key point is that the yeast cell does not continuously and simultaneously
manufacture every kind of protein that is coded for in its genome.
As was pointed out by myself and others, to do so would be incredibly
wasteful! Rather, many enzymes are only manufactured when their substrates
are present, which, of course, makes perfect sense.
If you don't like the predator analogy then how about a thermostat analogy.
The yeast cells are constantly sensing their environment and responding
appropriately. Much of the molecular details of these regulatory systems
have been worked out over the past several decades, especially those
relating to the detection and response to specific nutrient molecules,
particularly glucose. You need to stop looking at the yeast cell as simply
a bag of enzymes and see that it for the dynamic and responsive system that
it is. If glucose is present the yeast will use that first and will not
process the other sugars. This is not simply a kinetic phenomenon due to
differing rate constants for the different sugar uptake and utilization
systems, it is because the components of the other systems /are not made/
until the glucose has been used up. At that point the cell is forced to switch
over to the other, less efficient energy/carbon sources.
Pretty simple concept really.
-Alan Meeker
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 16:54:00 -0400
From: Benjy Edwards <rdbedwards at gmail.com>
Subject: Stainless Steel Pump Fittings
Has anyone found stainless steel fittings to attach to the
input/output threads of a March pump? I have been using brass
fittings from the hardware store, but would like to upgrade to
stainless steel. All web searches have yielded nothing.
Thanks very much for a great forum!
Ben Edwards
Boathouse Brewery
www.boathousebrewery.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 17:07:29 -0700
From: "zuvaruvi" <zuvaruvi at cox.net>
Subject: re. Electric Kettle and Re-pitching
Richard,
I've used an electric kettle for five years. I changed to a shiny new 220v
element about six months ago and I'm not happy with it. Metallic brew taste
for the first five batches and it boils like crazy; I mean REALLY BOILS LIKE
CRAZY. And if I step it down to 120v the watt denity is too low; just
simmers. I did a Belgian Dark Strong two days ago and at 1.085 started to
smell nice caramel notes. At 1.088 and 75 minutes into the boil, stronger
darker melanoiden type odors wafted my way. I thought, "that's ok, Belgian
Dark, this is going to be a groovy brew." Went into the kitchen to weigh
out the final Simcoe, Hersbrucker, and Fennel Seed additions, and went back
into the garage to find smoke scented steam billowing from the kettle. At
around 1.090-091, despite being immersed in eight gallons of wort, this
thing was pumping out enough heat to burn sugar. So now I have a Smoked
Belgian Very-Dark Strong (Dion, didn't you have a similar experience a few
years ago with wonderfully surprising results?) and a 220v element that
looks a little limp of late (speaking of posts from down-under, don't I
remember a recent post from another pilot/brewer with a similar problem?)
and intend to put a spigot and a bazooka screen where the heater element is.
And to address another recent post, I laid this stuff down on the yeast cake
from my previous batch, which was racked off the cake as the wort cooled,
and the new brew blew the airlock off the top within an hour; seriously, a
new record, one hour. I use yeast cakes three and four times and have never
had a problem (other than showering the shower with gookey green stuff).
So, long story short, save yourself some trouble, skip the heater element,
and go straight to gas.
My .02 cents worth (or .03 or .04).
Good luck,
Chad Stevens
QUAFF
San Diego
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #4628, 10/14/04
*************************************
-------
