Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #4983
HOMEBREW Digest #4983 Wed 29 March 2006
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:
RE:Water Test ("A.J deLange")
IBU Calculations ("David Houseman")
NHC East Regionals ("Dave Wohlfeil")
Hi grav stuff ("steve.alexander")
EKU28 (ddarity)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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, 28 Mar 2006 12:45:50 +0000
From: "A.J deLange" <ajdel at cox.net>
Subject: RE:Water Test
There are a couple of things you can estimate from this limited data
(alkalinity, hardness and chlorine) but most of the estimates will be
very crude. The best is with respect to the alkalinity. Given that the
water is potable the only appreciably source of alkalinity is the carbo
system and given the pH all of that which contributes to an alkalinity
reading will be bicarbonate. An alkalinity of 60 means bicarbonate in
the amount of 61*60/50 = 73 mg/L bicarbonate. But this is not a useful
number. That's why alkalinity is reported. With respect to the hardness
you have 50/50 = 1 milliequivalent per liter and you can guess than 60%
of that comes from calcium and 40% from magnesium which would give you
.6*20 = 12 mg/L calcium and .4*12 = 4.8 mg/L magnesium but the
proportion is just a guess though it's based on typical ratios. From
this you can calculate a rough residual alkalinity RA = 60/50 - (.6 +
.4/.2)/3.5 = 0..46 mEq/L. Multiply by 50 to get RA of 23 ppm as CaCO3.
This is an RA which is low enough that you shouldn't have to worry about
the water being a problem with any beer style and this is really the
most important conclusion
This is really about as much as you can tell. You have measured 60/50 =
1.2 mEq/L alkalinity which is from negatively charged ions (bicarbonate)
and 50/50 mEq/L hardness which is from positively charged ions (Ca++ and
Mg++) so according to what you know about your water at this point it is
shy 0.1 mEq/L positive ions. These could be sodium or potassium ions or
a combination but it is impossible to guess how much are present because
the water most probably also contains some sulfate and chloride which
would require more sodium and or potassium to balance. What is more
likely is that there is error in the readings from the test kit which is
probably at best readable to 10 ppm. The pH reading is definitely
suspect. A pH as low as 5.5 would imply a well in an area with very
active soil bacteria.
If you are really interested in this go to Hach or Lamotte and buy more
accurate test kits. Unfortunately a complete picture is hard to get
because sulfate and sodium are hard to measure but if you can get good
alkalinity, chloride and separate calcium and magnesium hardness
readings educated guessing is possible. (Note: I just checked Hach and
they seem to have a new sulfate test but it isn't very sensitive, 50
mg/L, though you can improve this by evaoprating the test water to, say,
1/10th of its original volume to get 5 mg/L sensitivity).
A.J.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 18:34:06 -0500
From: "David Houseman" <david.houseman at verizon.net>
Subject: IBU Calculations
There are several commonly used formulas for calculating IBUs. ProMash has
the choice of Garetz, Rager, Tinseth and Generic. In one example of a
recipe, the same amount of hops results in widely varing IBU calculations
using these different formulas. I have been use Garetz but recognized that
my beers were on the bitter side of my expectations. I'm considering moving
to Rager, which would use less hops for the same calculated IBUs. My
questions are: "Are any of the formulas generally recognized as being more
accurate to measured IBU rates? Is there any recognition that one of these
results in beers closer to style from a sensory perspective?"
David Houseman
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 21:21:24 -0500
From: "Dave Wohlfeil" <wohlfeil at apk.net>
Subject: NHC East Regionals
Attention Judges - We are looking for judges for the 1st round of the AHA's
National Homebrew Competition - Eastern Region. Judging will be held on
Friday April 28(evening), and Saturday April 29, 2006(morning and
afternoon). They will be held at J.W. Dover in Westlake, Ohio. Lunch and
Dinner with our big raffle will be provided on Saturday for all judges.
Discounted hotel rooms will be available. If you are available to judge,
please contact Dave Wohlfeil, Judge Coordinator via email at
wohlfeil at apk.net. Thank you
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 00:01:51 -0500
From: "steve.alexander" <steve-alexander at adelphia.net>
Subject: Hi grav stuff
ALAN K MEEKER writes ...
>A while back I had made an insanely strong barleywine that failed to
>carbonate despite a fresh addition of champagne yeast at bottling.
I'm more of a session beer guy myself, but I do excel at insanity
and curiosity, so a questions to Alan ...
How strong is 'insane' when the BJCP says a BW is SG1.080-1.120
(roughly 20-30P?). Also I'd be very interested to hear how
a yeast-master like Alan handled such a hi-grav fermentation.
==
Michael Eyre asks ...
>There's a nasty rumor going around that the bigger beer you try to make
>(all grain, btw!) in a given mashtun, the less efficiency you *tend* to
>get. I seem to be seeing this in my brewery when I make a barley wine...
>any truth to this?
Of course it's true - and for an obvious reason. To raise the SG of
the sweet wort you necessarily must use less water, cut off the lauter
earlier and therefore leave more goods in the grist - so it's less
efficient.
Lauter run-off will always be lower gravity than first runnings so
the highest SG possible from any reasonable mash is that that of the
first runnings. If you make a "normal" mash with 1.25qt/lb (~2.5L/kg)
then at the end of mash, the mash liquor will hit abt 1.088 or 22P.
Now if you decrease the water:grist ratio much below this you are
compromising the mash conversion ((not the place for it but the enzyme
reactions require more water and so operate more slowly)). Yes you can
mash with 2qt/lb and increase the first running gravity to abt 26P.
You can even drop the water down to 0.7qt/lb and get insanely high SG
but most of the water and goods will remain in the grist and the
efficiency will be very very low.
Of course the extraction efficiency isn't the issue - you could lauter
with more water to make a "small beer" from the later runnings and get
just the same extract out of the grist. The problem is that you can't
apply all that extract to the hi-grav wort, as you might like. Unless
you concentrate the wort somehow, excessive boiling or low pressure
evaporation of water, there is no way around the problem.
Commercial brewers prefer to add extract to make hi-grav beers, and it's
probably a reasonable approach for those insane gravity HB worts.
==
Such trouble some go to for hi-grav, and to what end - often a fusel-y
unbalanced mess of a beer. Another approach is to mash and ferment at
reasonable gravity and then 'eisbock' your way to glory. That is to
*slowly* allow ice to form post fermentation, and remove the ice which is
nearly pure water if you freeze slowly enough. It's possible to achieve
whiskey-type levels of ethanol concentration in this way, if that's your
goal, but there are bigger advantages IMO.
The mash extraction has completely normal efficiency, the fermentation has
normal gravity, the fermentation normal conditions so no tricks are required
and no funky flavors accrue. You get complete attenuation without playing
games. Best of all you can use your normal brewing skills to balance the
sweet/bitter aspects rather than guessing on a once every couple years
barley-wine hopping level and betting on the attenuation.
One drawback - I believe that the eisbock process is considered a form
of distillation in the US legal code, and therefore violates federal
law when performed without license. Funny world where moving water
from here to there without harming a souls is a licensed taxable
event. Perhaps they should require a license & tax of hurricanes
instead.
-S
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 10:41:31 -0600
From: ddarity at direcway.com
Subject: EKU28
Does anyone out there have a good recipe for an EKU 28?
Schedules for the decoction mash would be great!
Many Thank,
Dave
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #4983, 03/29/06
*************************************
-------
