Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #4899
HOMEBREW Digest #4899 Tue 29 November 2005
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: pbabcock at hbd.org
***************************************************************
THIS YEAR'S HOME BREW DIGEST BROUGHT TO YOU BY:
Northern Brewer, Ltd. Home Brew Supplies
Visit http://www.northernbrewer.com to show your appreciation!
Or call them at 1-800-681-2739
Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********
Contents:
Exactness of 98.6F (Jeffrey Byers)
Aged grain (Randy Ricchi)
Pycnometry ("A.J deLange")
Tenacious Phenolic Issue (Rick) Theiner <rickdude@tds.net>
Reference Temperature (Dennis Lewis)
Re: Dilution during fermentation ("Mike Sharp")
re: aged grain, and another question. ("Mike Sharp")
Use of Roasted Wheat ("Lewis, Timothy M HS")
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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.
JANITORs on duty: Pat Babcock (pbabcock at hbd dot org), Jason Henning,
and Spencer Thomas
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 07:13:36 -0600
From: Jeffrey Byers <jbyers at yakfarm.net>
Subject: Exactness of 98.6F
John Stewart is correct when he says that there
are large error bars on this value.
but...
Fahrenheit scale was invented long before
Celsius scale was around.
98.6F exactly equaling 37C is a coincidence.
Why Fahrenheit set up his scale the way
he did is not exactly known.
But either he used someone with an elevated
body temperature to set "100F" or he multiplied
Romer's older temperature scale by a factor to
avoid having to log negative temperatures
outside his home.
Besides I think the average body temperature
has dropped over the years and is now closer to 98.2F.
jefe
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 08:45:50 -0500
From: Randy Ricchi <rricchi at houghton.k12.mi.us>
Subject: Aged grain
Craig asked about the flavor consequences of using old (1 to 2 years)
grain.
Now, I'm sure I don't have as discerning a palate as some, but here is
my opinion, based on my own experience:
With darker malts such as munich malt and darker, I think there is a
noticeable loss in maltiness as the grain ages. I couldn't tell you at
what point the flavor starts to decline, but at 1 year or more, I think
it will have a less malty character than when it was fresh.
That's not to say the resultant wort or beer will taste bad; it just
won't be as malty as it would have if the grain were fresh.
Only once, I tried reviving darker malt by toasting it lightly in the
oven. The malt smelled heavenly afterward, but I didn't perceive that it
carried through to the finished product. Again, I only tried it once,
and maybe I just didn't use enough of the toasted malt to make a
difference.
With lighter malts such as pils or pale ale malt, as long as the grain
has been kept dry you probably won't notice any deterioration in flavor.
Randy Ricchi
way up here in da UP of Michigan, where the weather currently sucks.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 13:55:03 +0000
From: "A.J deLange" <ajdel at cox.net>
Subject: Pycnometry
Steven Parfitt describes the fine art of pycnometry which is carried out
pretty much as he describes with a couple of differences. First go to
http://www.kimble-kontes.com/html/pg-15123R.html and have a look at the
flask used. There are other forms of pycnometers (see Vol II of
DeClerck) but this one seems best for brewing applications. It is
essentially a small Erlenmeyer flask with a side capilary tube and a
ground mouth fitted with a ground glass plug with attached thermometer.
To use the thing the first step is to clean it thoroughly and dry it
thoroughly (alcohol and ether washes are often used). Then tare it on
the balance fully assembled. Now fill with cool distilled water and
insert the thermometer/plug. As the plug is inserted water will exit
through the side capillary. Wipe the bottle dry and repeat the alcohol
wash though you shouldn't really need to do this as the next step is to
wait for the cool water to warm to the reference temperature (15C) and
while this is taking place any water on the outside should evaporate. As
the water warms it expands and some is pushed out the capillary. Soak
this up with a bit of paper towel using a quick swipe so you don't draw
any water out of the capillary but rather only get that which has pushed
up above its tip. When the reference temperature is reached cap the
capillary and weigh. Record the weight. Now dump the water and
thoroughly dry the flask (alcohol and ether) or rinse it thoroughly with
the beer to be measured. Fill with beer cooled to below the reference
temperature. Needless to say it must be completely degassed. Wash the
outside thoroughly and dry (or allow drying to occur while waiting for
the temperature reference to be reached). Proceded as with the water.
The ratio (weight_with_beer - tare)/(weight_with_water - tare) is the
apparent specific gravity of the beer and can be easily adjusted to give
the true specific gravity but it's not worth the trouble to do this as
the difference should be beyond the fourth decimal place.
I guess I missed the bellyaching about hydrometers. With a good set and
proper technique you should be able to easily measure to within about
0.2P (0.001 SG). You have to keep them clean and insert them dry, wait
for the effects of surface tension and deal with bubbles but all this
art you will aquire with a little practice.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 9:39:03 -0600
From: Eric (Rick) Theiner <rickdude at tds.net>
Subject: Tenacious Phenolic Issue
Hail Collective,
Bear with me... I want to make sure that I provide all clues
for you brew-slueths out there.
Some folks may remember that a few years ago I mentioned a
horrible infection in my brewhouse... or what I thought was a
horrible infection. In order to keep the temperature steady,
I constantly ran either an AC unit or a heater in the
brewhouse (really, a seperate structure in my backyard, and
boy do I miss it!). After 4 phenolic batches in a row
(medicinal-phenolic), I decided that something must be living
and breeding in the wood of the structure, or under the
linoleum, or something and the constant air movement ensured
that it contacted my wort/beer. I had a couple more bad
batches before I finally moved all open operations
(transferring, kegging, etc.) outside of the structure.
Then the problem went away.
I thought I left all of this behind when I moved to the
beer-friendly state of Wisconsin. Indeed, my first batch had
no phenolic character at all. My second batch, however,
produced 10 gallons of, again, heavy medicinal draught. I
did not discover this until it went from the secondary to the
keg, so prior to the discovery I brewed a third batch and
there is no phenolic character other than what a Belgian
Strong should exhibit.
Everyone still with me?
I am heavy on cleaning and sanitizing (although not as anal
as some I know...). I am willing to admit that I might have
picked something up as I was packing up the brewhouse, but
all equipment is in common with the batches. On the water--
it is charcoal filtered or RO and treated, so no
chlorophenols due to water quality in either location.
But here is something that the batches DO have in common:
the source of ingredients. The first and third batches were
made with locally obtained ingredients (maybe a bit of hops
from home, but that's it), but the second was made with
oldish grain and hops that I brought from NC. Furthermore,
much of it was aged at better than a year at room temp or
higher. The hops I went through and tossed the stuff that
was clearly degraded, but I held on to the grain and flaked
maize and barley-- pretty much did a kitchen sink brew. What
are the chances that my phenolic issues have been an
ingredient issue all along? I would find it hard to believe,
but I'm stumped.
Thanks for any thoughts,
Rick
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 08:41:12 -0800 (PST)
From: Dennis Lewis <dblewis at dblewis.com>
Subject: Reference Temperature
"Stewart, John" <johns at artesyncp.com> writes:
>>"David Houseman" <david.houseman at verizon.net>
wrote:
>> 98.6 is another reference point.
>Be careful with the 98.6 body temperature. We've
grown >to accept this as normal body temperature, and
expect >some exactness due to the level of precision
(out to >three significant digits).
I believe that David's point about this is that most
of us have a reasonably accurate, narrow range
thermometer at home--like the old mercury one your mom
stuck under your tongue after she kissed your forehead
to determine you were hot. I'll leave the jokes about
the other variety as an exercise for the reader.
I don't think the ear thermometers would work as well,
since getting a steady-state reading is not practical.
I've calibrated all of my thermometers at once--2
instant reads, 2 Polder remote probes, a screw-in dial
thermometer, and a calibrated lab thermometer as a
reference. Of course, the instant read ones are the
only ones with adjusting nuts for calibrating one
point.....
Dennis Lewis
Warren, OH
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 11:14:59 -0800
From: "Mike Sharp" <rdcpro at hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Dilution during fermentation
John from Citronelle asks about dilution during fermentation
"I like to brew a 5 gal batch (DME's mainly) in my 5 gal glass carboy."
This was one of the three main reasons I stopped using my 5 gallon carboys
for primary fermentation. A winemaker I know liked this technique, though,
because it purged a lot of trub out of the fermenter. But the beer loss
means there's no way to completely fill a 5 gallon keg. A bucket fermenter
is so cheap, it just doesn't make sense to me to go through the cleaning
hassle, the difficulty moving and handling the carboy, and the resulting
beer (and yeast) loss by using a carboy for a primary. Of course, you can
get a larger carboy, but IMHO, the bucket is better. They seal so tight
that you could in fact ferment upside down in them, if it weren't for the
airlock hole. You can always transfer to the carboy for secondary, and if
you start with a little over 5 gallons, then you'll end up with a full 5
gallons in the carboy.
Regards,
Mike Sharp
Kent, WA
[1891.3, 294deg] AR
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 12:38:25 -0800
From: "Mike Sharp" <rdcpro at hotmail.com>
Subject: re: aged grain, and another question.
To Craig Agnor's excellent question, I'd like to add:
Suppose...uh...a friend of mine had some grain that was not only old (at
least several years), but had been milled as well, and had been stored in
sealed poly buckets? ;^)
A separate question I've been meaning to ask is this: When you look at
brewing equipment (usually for brewpubs), you often see that the bright beer
serving tanks are much larger than the capacity of the brewhouse, and
sometimes even larger than the fermenters. Or you'll see a setup that has
several large unitanks (say 14 bbls) for fermenting and serving, but a
brewhouse capacity of 7 bbls. I've wondered how they work the brewing
schedule--do you brew two batches, and ferment twice your brewhouse volume
as a single batch, or do you "top up" the serving tanks with freshly
fermented beer (which seems weird to me)? Is this configuration more
efficient than, say, 7 bbl brewhouse and 7 bbl unitank fermenters?
Regards,
Mike Sharp
Kent, WA
[1891.3, 294deg] AR
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 16:29:51 -0500
From: "Lewis, Timothy M HS" <tim.lewis at hs.utc.com>
Subject: Use of Roasted Wheat
I am making a 5 gal. extract Weizenbock this weekend and for the specialty
grains I chose Munich, Dark Wheat, and Roasted Wheat (I figured I'd let the
grains contribute all the darker color, and wanted to try something
different and maybe more authentic than Chocolate). My question is how much
should I limit the Roasted Wheat to, I have never used it before, all I know
it is pretty dark (~400L) so I assume I should treat it similar to Black
Patent and use no more than 1/2#? Or is that even too much too cause too
much bite or burnt flavor? Thanks.
Tim Lewis
Enfield, CT
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #4899, 11/29/05
*************************************
-------
