HOMEBREW Digest #1569 Thu 03 November 1994

Digest #1568 Digest #1570

		Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor

  Kinney Baugham (Dean Miller/BOSTON/PART/CSC)
  Copyright (Ed Hitchcock)
  HBD and copyright ("Mark A. Melton")
  acronyms, IMHO (Jeff Frane)
  HBD contributors should implicitly surrender copyright (LBRISTOL)
  Malting Process (WSPEIGHTS)
  Decoction Mash (Gunther H. Trageser)
  Subject: Wort Chillers (Mark Gugel)
  Worthless Posts (WSPEIGHTS)
  Copyrights, royalties....and Jim<tm> Loch<tm>? (uswlsrap)
  Bob's Wit ("DEV::SJK")
  making a fridge into a keg cooler (01-Nov-1994 1612 -0500)
  Esslinger Beer in Philly (Eugene Sonn)
  SMM/Wyeast Bavarian Weizen/Gypsum, Lactic Acid and pH (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
  High gravity/ utilization (MR_SPOCK)
  All grain observations (Chad Kirby)
  Re: hop utilization (Aidan "Krazy Krausen Kropping Kiwi" Heerdegen)
  Re: Hop utilization/Hot side aeration (Philip Gravel)
  Frugal Brewers Guide To Brewing Aids ("Robert W. Mech")
  Big Beady Stouts (David Draper)
  Software ("Robert W. Mech")
  Tom Hardy's Ale (J. Fingerle)
  Grain storage (Jeff Stampes)
  Twits & beer (BrewerLee)
  Sprayers (Mike Zentner)
  re:  Barley Wine yeast (Keith Frank)
  Re: Superior manifold design (Spencer.W.Thomas)
  Re: Worthless Posts (Paul Ganci)
  how low can you go? (SPEAKER.CURTIS)
  Belgium Here I Come! (Aaron Shaw)
  PVC as manifold material (Stephen Nesbitt)
  HBD's are being sold !!! (Hmbrewbob)

****************************************************************** * NEW POLICY NOTE: Due to the incredible volume of bouncing mail, * I am going to have to start removing addresses from the list * that cause ongoing problems. In particular, if your mailbox * is full or your account over quota, and this results in bounced * mail, your address will be removed from the list after a few days. * * If you use a 'vacation' program, please be sure that it only * sends a automated reply to homebrew-request *once*. If I get * more than one, then I'll delete your address from the list. ****************************************************************** Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew at hpfcmi.fc.hp.com (Articles are published in the order they are received.) Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc., to homebrew-request@ hpfcmi.fc.hp.com, BUT PLEASE NOTE that if you subscribed via the BITNET listserver (BEER-L at UA1VM.UA.EDU), then you MUST unsubscribe the same way! If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first. FAQs, archives and other files are available via anonymous ftp from sierra.stanford.edu. (Those without ftp access may retrieve files via mail from listserv at sierra.stanford.edu. Send HELP as the body of a message to that address to receive listserver instructions.) Please don't send me requests for back issues - you will be silently ignored. For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to lutzen at novell.physics.umr.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 1 Nov 94 10:56:31 EDT From: Dean Miller/BOSTON/PART/CSC Subject: Kinney Baugham Is Kinney Baugham, I hope I spelled that right, still on the Internet? If so, does anyone have his e-mail address? If not, does anyone have his snail mail address? TIA dean Dean_Miller at cscmail.csc.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 1994 14:14:35 -0400 (AST) From: Ed Hitchcock <ehitchcock at sparc.uccb.ns.ca> Subject: Copyright If we publish a comment through HBD, it is with the intent to have our thoughts, our intellectual property propagated through this medium. If I print up a hard copy of HBD, is that breech of copyright? If I have to pay the department for the 10 cents worth of paper to do so, is that breech of copyright? If I photocopy this to pass around to friends who love HBD but just recently lost net access, is that breech of copyright? If they cover my $2 photocopy costs, is that breech of copyright? If the material being distributed is clearly labelled as the Homebrew Digest, and all headers and footers and names and .sigs are intact I see no breech of copyright so long as no profit is made. It is merely wider propogation of the HBD to an access-deprived audience at cost. ---------------- Ed Hitchcock, now on the right side of the student/staff division ehitchcock at sparc.uccb.ns.ca Return to table of contents
Date: 01 Nov 94 12:26:20 EST From: "Mark A. Melton" <75452.277 at compuserve.com> Subject: HBD and copyright You cannot copyright something that is already in the public domain. I seriously doubt whether anything that is put on Internet is automatically copyright because if there ever was "public domain," this must be it. I further suspect that it may be against the law to put the copyright symbol (c) on your little bit of intellectual property because to claim copyright when none exists is illegal. Check with your legal authority. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 1994 11:06:39 -0800 (PST) From: Jeff Frane <gummitch at teleport.com> Subject: acronyms, IMHO Gary Bell wrote: > 1. Algis R Korzonas wrote about DMS and SMM. For the un-initiated, what > are you talking about? Acronyms are great, but only if you know what > they stand for! Here's another acronym: RTFM. If we have to define every acronym used in brewing literature, whenever we use it, we'll be here all day. Get a good homebrewing text and look in the index or glossary; I think Dave Miller's book is a good option. ==== Since Clay Glenn has decided *not* to sell hard copies of the HBD, perhaps we can drop the subject, neh? also, the name-calling that grew out of it. - --Jeff Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 94 12:49:23 CST From: LBRISTOL at SYSUBMC.BMC.COM Subject: HBD contributors should implicitly surrender copyright "Ulick Stafford" <ulick at ulix.rad.nd.edu> wrote: > I think that there should be language in hbd that a post made to HBD > implies an implicit surrender of copyright. <text deleted> > I personally thought the hardcopy development was a good idea. It is > just such a shame that the spirit of Jim Koch has spread to so many. I want to go on record as fully supportting this notion. Personally, I feel honored that someone might actually want to take anything I have written or will submit to this forum into a hardcopy format. And if anyone is subsequently willing to actually pay for the privilege of reading it, I am even more honored. I fail to see the difference between this and those services that make money by providing electronic access to the Internet and thereby the HBD. I expect compensation from neither. It's really simple to me. I often write things for commercial purposes (both personally and professionally) for which the copyright will be vigorously defended. But the HBD is *NOT* one of them! If I should someday decide to write a book on homebrewing (and expect to make any money from it), you can rest assured that I will not submit it to this medium for publication. Anything I submit here is strictly for my own personal enjoyment and for the promotion of what I consider to be the finest hobby available out here in the unfashionable western spiral arm of the galaxy. The last time I checked, this was still called "The *HOME*brew Digest", and not the "Daily Professional Publication for Brewing". It is reasonable to expect that proper "credit" be given to anything quoted out of this source; this is really just a matter of common courtesy, something with which many people seem to have lost touch these days. I personally think anyone who expects more compensation for their writings than this should find themselves another outlet for their creativity. - -------------------------------------------------------- | Larry Bristol | DON'T PANIC! | | SYSUBMC.BMC.COM | A true Hitchhiker always knows | | (713)918-7802 | where his towel is. | - -------------------------------------------------------- Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 1994 09:19:54 -0500 From: WSPEIGHTS at ntia.doc.gov Subject: Malting Process Will someone explain the malting process to me, please. AND..Is it possible or practical to do it myself? Thanks. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 1994 12:40:26 MDT From: gtrageser at maugham.atc.edmonton.ab.ca (Gunther H. Trageser) Subject: Decoction Mash I recently bought Eric Warner's "German Wheat Beer" of the "Classic Beer Styles Series". He describes various decoction regimens and what puzzles me is that he seems to include grain with the decoctions. For all I know one is only to remove wort from the mash and bring it to the boil and then return it to the mash in order to increase the temperature and never to boil the grain. But here one is told to take 'a stiff decoction, bring it up to conversion temperature, give it a conversion rest and then boil for up to 45 minutes' (the boiling time may be slightly different - I'm working from memory here). This implies that grain is included in the decoction. Any experts out there who can help me out? Private e-mail fine but this may be of general interest. Gunther H. Trageser, gtrageser at atc.edmonton.ab.ca Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 94 15:30:27 EST From: Mark Gugel <mdgugel at mtu.edu> Subject: Subject: Wort Chillers On Tuesday Mark mentioned that everyone seems to be using 1/2 inch chillers and he wonders whether a 1/4 inch chiller wold work. I personally use a counter flow chiller which consists of a 25 foot coil of 3/8 inch copper in a 5 gallon bucket. My wort throughput is rather modest (ca. 1 gallon/min). I personally wouldn't use 1/4 inch tube because I don't want to wait very long. I'm sure many people who use 1/2 inch tubeing would have similar reservations about using 3/8 inch tubeing. The design of my wort chiller is simple - hot wort stirrels DOWN the coil then out a tube running up the center of the coil. Cooling water is introduced in the bottom of the bucket and forced to swirrel in the opposite direction of the wort in the decending coil; an overflow hose is attached to the cover. I am confident that surface area is not a problem. A friend copied my design but used 50 feet of coil. The wort exiting his chiller isn't noticably cooler than mine, but it does take more to get the siphon started. Prosit! Mark D. Gugel (mdgugel at mtu.edu) Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 1994 15:43:03 -0500 From: WSPEIGHTS at ntia.doc.gov Subject: Worthless Posts In response to Dennis Forester in HBD 1565. Every post has some value, no matter how localized..... no matter how petty (if you know what I mean). I find them interesting and I don't mind reading or skimming through them. After all, I read yours, didn't I? Lighten up....have a beer....don't be so serious. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 94 15:49:23 EST From: uswlsrap at ibmmail.com Subject: Copyrights, royalties....and Jim<tm> Loch<tm>? - -------------------- Mail Item Text Follows ------------------ To: I1010141--IBMMAIL From: Bob Paolino Research Analyst Subject: Copyrights, royalties....and Jim<tm> Loch<tm>? I think it's quite a stretch to compare Mr.Koch's less-than-admirable profit-driven manoeuvres with the hbders' objections to the idea that someone was going to sell the digest. I doubt that the people who made the suggestion of collecting royalties literally expect to receive compensation for posting to hbd. What they were saying, quite properly, is that they objected to the idea that someone was proposing to make money by distributing the product of an explicitly non-commercial forum. Flaming people for reminding a would-be entrepreneur that you need permission to use other people's work for profit by comparing that reminder to Jim Koch's assertion of property rights in the names of various historical figures is absurd. Jim Koch seeks to appropriate the names of dead people (probably spinning in their graves) for profit. If anything, it might be more accurate to say that our "publisher" is being more Koch-like than are the people reminding him that there are rules to follow if you want to appropriates other peoples' work for commercial gain. Pomposity?? Sure, sometimes people's hbd posts display an undue sense of self-importance. The hbd has its share of "brewing chemists" (Hi, Mitch :-) ) and "picobreweries" and whatever else. So what? But our "publisher" brought it on himself with his own little bit of pomposity. If this guy really just intended to take a few copies down to Kinko's to make copies for people in his club, why didn't he just say so rather than by giving himself a corporate name? Sharing brewing information is a wonderful thing. Lots of club brewsletters include information from hbd, but they acknowledge the source/author and they don't do it to make money. Bob Paolino Disoriented in Badgerspace Return to table of contents
Date: 1 Nov 94 14:54:00 CST From: "DEV::SJK" <SJK%DEV.decnet at mdcgwy.mdc.com> Subject: Bob's Wit Bobdabrewer asks about Wit in HBD 1567: > Because I am using 4 lbs. of Belgian pale malt to 5 lbs. of flaked adjunct > (4 wheat & 1 oats) I'm concerned, not worried, about 1.Conversion & 2.Set > mash. I agree w/ Lee that a decoction schedule is needed here but,once was > enough for me ....this is suppose to be fun. I am puzzled by this assertion that a decoction is appropriate in a Wit. A Wit is very light in body, big maltiness being inappropriate (now, a Grand Cru is a different thing entirely...) Maybe we're talking about a Competition Wit? I think a decoction would get you a better lauter, but I think the effect on the body would be detrimental. Anyways, I'd up the pale malt by a pound and cut the oats by half. A pound of oats will give you a noticable (but not unpleasant) oily/slippery character that might be too much, unless, of course, you really like oats. But a Wit is so light that I really think a pound is too much. This is my recipe for 5 gal: 5 lbs Belgian Pils 4 lbs wheat flakes 1/2 lb rolled oats Styrian or East Kent Goldings for 60 min for about 18 IBUs No finishing hops 2 oz dried lemon or orange peel (!) first 30 min (You don't want citrus aroma or flavors. Use the real stuff if you can.) 3.5 tsp finely ground corriander last 15 min (Pitch into fermenter.) 4 tsp 85% lactic acid at bottling/kegging/secondary/whatever (This is to taste and I'm not sure of the resulting pH.) I use the yeast cultured from a Hoegaarden Wit Protein rest at ~125F for 30 min. Apply heat only to slowly bring up to sacc rest at ~153F for 60-90 min. Mashout at 172F for 10 min. OG 1.048. > ...but I'm going to use 1/2 teaspoon amylase enzyme at the beginning > to help in the conversion of starch to simple sugar. NO! Bad Bob! Bad! > Yes, I understand that complete and total coversion is undesirable but > I don't think the 4lbs. of pale malt has near enough enzymes to convert > >50% adjunct. You'll be fine. You're right, a clear Wit is not what you're after and trust me, a 60-90 min sugar rest (longer if you want) will work fine. As I said above, this is my procedure. My Wit is cloudy even before it gets cold, has a death-defying head, and there is little residual sweetness. > I'll mash-out at 175F. to thin out the mash and prevent a stuck mash...I > hope. I hope so too. A perfect crush is essential here. At the start of your protein rest, the mash will look as if it consists of oatmeal in thin Elmer's Glue. This will become more or less clear sometime during the sugar rest. Use a handful of rice hulls if you're really nervous. Scott Kaczorowski sjk at rc3a.mdc.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 94 16:16:04 EST From: 01-Nov-1994 1612 -0500 <ferguson at zendia.enet.dec.com> Subject: making a fridge into a keg cooler someone (2-3 HBDs back) asked about making a fridge into a keg cooler. i have my 10# CO2 tank on the outside of my fridge, tap coming out the front. on the side of the fridge, i punch 2 holes thru, oh, about 1/2" in diam, which is equal the the OD of the hose i use for C02. one hose is for pinlock kegs, the other for ball-lock. i didn't bother putting any insulation around the holes 'cuz the fit was tight (always a good thing) and it didn't seem to leak any coolness from the fridge. then, i punched a much larger hole in the front for the tap. everything works excellent and has been for 1+ years... i eventually will put in a 2nd tap for the pin-lock keg. currently, if i have a pin-lock in the fridge, you'll have to open the fridge to get the brew... jc Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 1994 16:33:23 -0500 (EST) From: Eugene Sonn <eugene at sccs.swarthmore.edu> Subject: Esslinger Beer in Philly I went to my local beer distributer last week in search of some Esslinger beer. I like the heavy duty brown 16 oz bottles the beer comes in and despite its very light color, tastes pretty darn good. But my distributer no longer carries it. Any other PA area HBDer's who know where I can get some Esslinger? I have forgotten where in PA it's brewed and don't have any labels on the bottles anymore. Thanks in advance, Eugene eugene at sccs.swarthmore.edu Return to table of contents
Date: 1 Nov 94 21:51:00 GMT From: korz at iepubj.att.com (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583) Subject: SMM/Wyeast Bavarian Weizen/Gypsum, Lactic Acid and pH SMM is S-methyl methionine, which is enzymatically created in grain during germination. It is a precursor of Dimethyl Sulfide (DMS). Various maltsters' malt varies in the amounts of SMM it has, but more highly-kilned malt has less SMM than less highly-kilned malt. ******** Jim writes: >...Wyeast Bavarian Weizen yeast... >Is Bavarian Weizen known for a >slow but steady fermentation? I believe it is supposed to add a bit of a >sour flavor to the beer. How does it do this...lactic acid producing >bacteria perhaps? This yeast is a blend of two yeasts, one of which is supposed to give a clovey aroma/flavor which is characteristic of Bavarian Weizens. It is not supposed to add any sour flavor. It does not contain any bacteria. You may be confusing Bavarian Weizen with Berliner Weiss, the latter which does traditionally involve an intentional lactic "fermentation." Please also, note that I'm talking about Wyeast #3056, NOT about the Wyeast Weihenstephan Weizen yeast (#3068), which is a single strain that produces a beeer with both a nice clove character and a pleasantly light banana ester. Jim continues: >The water here is very >high in ph (7.8 and rumoured to be above 8 at times) and has a very low >carbonate level. I've added gypsum to increase the carbonate and lower >the ph. I also added a bit of lactic acid to help lower the ph to a more >appropriate level for the mash. Does anyone have experience with lactic >acid? I could do some testing to determine how much lactic acid to add >to lower the ph but have been unable to find any recomendations on how >much various amounts of lactic acid will lower the ph of a given volume >of water. Gypsum is Calcium Sulfate and, as such, does not add any carbonate. It does, however, lower your pH. The testing that you want to do is not on your water, but rather on your mash and your runnings. The level of carbonate you have in your water and the type of grain you use (darker malts lower mash pH) will determine how much Gypsum or Lactic Acid you will need to use to get your mash/runnings pH into the 5.1-5.5 range. The more carbonate you have in your water, the harder it will be to lower your water's pH. *Some* carbonate will come out of solution as Calcium Carbonate if you boil your water before use. Without treatment, the "Chicago" water I use has a pH of about 7.5-8.0. There is about 100-110 ppm of carbonate in our water. I believe that my water department mixes Lake Michigan water with some local well water, since it seems to vary from month-to-month. When I mash in with the relatively pale DeWolf-Cosyns Pale Ale malt, at a rate of 1.33 quarts per pound, I get a pH of about 5.1-5.2. Even after adding another infusion of 2 gallons of water, my pH is still about 5.4-5.5. I then make up some treated sparge water with 1 gram of Gypsum per gallon for Pale Ales/Bitters and my runnings stay between 5.5 and 5.0 pH. I have not tried to make any beer styles that would require less sulphate, and thus I have not tried to use any acids or Calcium Chloride to acidify the sparge water in place of the Gypsum. Generally speaking, if you are making a beer that can have higher sulphate levels (like Pale Ales, IPAs, Bitters or Dortmunders) use Gypsum to acidify the sparge water and/or adjust the pH of the mash. If you are making a beer that requires very low sulphate levels (like Bohemian Pils or Munich Helles) then use some kind of acid or Calcium Chloride (or an acid rest or zuur maltz (sp?)) to acidify the sparge water. In addition to Lactic acid, I've heard of people successfully using Phosphoric acid, Hydrochloric acid and even acid blend (a winemaker's blend of malic, citric and tartaric acids) to acidify sparge water. Whatever you use, make sure it's food grade and DON'T try to change the pH of the SPARGE WATER to 5.1-5.5, but rather try to get the right amount of treatment into your sparge water so your RUNNINGS stay between 5.1 and 5.5 pH. Since the amount that your would use depends widely on your carbonates and your grain bill, all I can suggest is trying a batch with 1 gram per gallon of Gypsum as a starting point and then monitoring your runnings' pH to see if you need more or less next time. If your water has a lot of carbonates, you will want to first boil your water and then decant off the white sediment. This will definitely reduce the amount of chemical treatment that you will have to add to lower the pH. So, I'd like to paraphrase Jim's question and ask in stead: Could brewers who have used various acids or Calcium Chloride post a suggested starting point (and include the carbonate level of your water)? Al. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 1994 17:29:21 -0500 (EST) From: "NAME SEAN O'KEEFE, IFAS FOOD SCIENCE" <SFO at gnv.ifas.ufl.edu> Subject: Hop utilization, SMM & DMS Jeff wonders about temperature as affecting hop utilization. Since higher solute concentration (higher wort gravity) would increase bp, not decrease it, temperature is not decreasing hop utilization in high gravity wort. Solubility og hop flavoring compounds, including bittering compounds such as iso acids, will be negatively affected by high gravity. The flavor compunds are salted out of solution by the sugars in a high sg wort (lower solubility). SMM is S-methylmethionine which is the precursor to DMS (in malt). During the boil, SMM is converted to DMS but the DMS being volatile is lost. But when the wort is cooled, any SMM converted to DMS in a slow cool is not lost. Thats why high DMS is often blaimed on a slow cooling and perhaps one reason why rapid cooling may result in better beer. But some DMS is also formed in the fermentation, mainly from DMSO, dimethylsulfoxide. infections can also lead to higher DMM. My question was whether I can get rid of the SMM completely by having an extra long boil (like 2hrs). By the way, lower fermentation temps are apparently related to higher DMS from DMSO. info from Hough & Al malting & brewing Sci Vol 2. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 1994 17:34:27 -0400 (EDT) From: MR_SPOCK at delphi.com Subject: High gravity/ utilization - -- ON 11/1/94 "Jeff Dudley, S29711 at 22681.utrcgw.utc.com" writes: >Subject: Re: hop utilization] >I was under the impression that the reason utilization is higher is because >high gravity worts boil at a lower temp due to the increase in dissolved >solids. It affects boiling (and freezing) point similar to salt. I wonder >what level of impact our brewing friends at high altitude experience. Going back to my college physics days (10 years already??) I seem to remember that increasing the specific gravity of a liquid will raise the temperature at which it boils, not lower it. The reason why you get less utilization from high gravity worts is simply because the liquid already has alot of stuff (sugars) dissolved in it and it becomes increasingly harder to dissolve even more stuff in it. Then what about the water thing you ask? I'm not sure about the details of it but I believe it has something to do with the fact that water is the only substance that expands when it is cooled down. Are there any physical science heads out there that know more, or is this completly off topic. --------------- RM ------------ Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 1994 14:56:19 -0800 (PST) From: Chad Kirby <ckirby at u.washington.edu> Subject: All grain observations This weekend I brewed up my first batch of all-grain beer. I used the Cream Ale recipe from Dave Miller's Great Beers book. The process went very well overall (only two boilovers--good thing it was outdoors at that point 8-), but I had a couple of questions and observations. The OG came out low, about 1033. The book said that it should be 1042 or something like that. I used the tables from Papazian's new book for the extract potential of the various grains and adjuncts that I used and came up with 1038 as a theoretical maximum OG for the brew. Are my calculations off, or is the OG from Miller's book not achievable by mere mortal brewers? In retrospect, I suppose I should have wondered that there were only 6.5 pounds of grain (as I recall 5 lbs of pale 6-row, 1 lb of flaked maize and a quarter ounce each of crystal and dextrin malts) going into this beer--all of my previous brews have used at least 6 pounds of *extract*. Not thinking, I just added up the pounds, got six and a half and thought good enough. Is 6.5 pounds of grain as low as it seems to me? The brew has been happily fermenting for a few days now, I am hopeful that it will turn out ok despite such a low OG. If my gravity prediction was accurate, does that mean that the efficiency of my system is around 87%. This seems too high for a first attempt. I was using a Zapap setup with a rotating sparging arm. Thanks for the insights. ck ckirby at u.washington.edu *** Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 94 15:51:48 EDT From: Aidan "Krazy Krausen Kropping Kiwi" Heerdegen <aidan at rschp2.anu.edu.au> Subject: Re: hop utilization Full-Name: Aidan "Krazy Krausen Kropping Kiwi" Heerdegen Jeff <S29711 at 22681.utrcgw.utc.com> wrote: | I was under the impression that the reason utilization is higher is because | high gravity worts boil at a lower temp due to the increase in dissolved | solids. It affects boiling (and freezing) point similar to salt. I wonder | what level of impact our brewing friends at high altitude experience. I think you'll find that the boiling pt *increases* with the amount of dissolved solids (as long as they are not inclined to enter the vapour phase). Pretty much puts the kibosh on that idea huh! I think the relationship between wort gravity and utilisation is a little more complicated than that .. Cheers Aidan - -- Aidan Heerdegen e-mail: aidan at rschp2.anu.edu.au Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 94 23:54 CST From: pgravel at mcs.com (Philip Gravel) Subject: Re: Hop utilization/Hot side aeration ===> Jeff Dudley writes about hop utilization >I was under the impression that the reason utilization is higher is because >high gravity worts boil at a lower temp due to the increase in dissolved >solids. It affects boiling (and freezing) point similar to salt. I wonder >what level of impact our brewing friends at high altitude experience. Just a small, but significant nit to pick here. Dissolved solids raise the boiling point of a liquid. They depress the freezing point. === > Terry Terfinko writes about hot side aeration >Aeration (HSA). If I understand correctly, it is caused by allowing >to much air to be injected into the mash or sparged wort. Things >to avoid would be splashing or excessive stirring. Basically you're correct. It's the splashing or excessive stirring of the wort which exposes it to air at temperatures greater then 160 ^F. > What are the affects of HSA? How can I determine if my beer >has an HSA problem? I checked two of my brewing books and >neither have any information on HSA. Hopefully the HBD can fill >in the knowledge gap here. I don't know if it's possible to measure HSA, but effect it to impart a wet carboard like flavor to the beer. - -- Phil _____________________________________________________________ Philip Gravel pgravel at mcs.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 1994 01:01:41 -0600 (CST) From: "Robert W. Mech" <rwmech at eagle.ais.net> Subject: Frugal Brewers Guide To Brewing Aids I have been talking with a great many people on how to save money by making alot of brewing aids (fermentors, tun's, etc.) at home with some help from local hardware stores. I have compiled this information into a text file which I will post to the HBD when it is completed. What I am looking for is people with shortcut/frugal ideas on how to make brewing items. I currently have information on how to save money on the following. Fermentors Carboys Lauter Tun Wort Cooler Bottles Most of these are do it yourself (cooler into lauter tun) etc. More or less the do it yourself cheaper than you can buy it, Recipes. If anyone has other information on how to make any other brewing aids or how to obtain them cheaply (frugaly), please email them to me. Your work will be noted throught the text. Im putting this together for the simple fact that I have appreciated what I have found out and how to save money, im sure others out there will want it as well. Thank you fellow brewers. P.S. If somone has a WWW or FTP site that would like to carry current copies of it when it is finished, It would be appreciated. - -- Robert W. Mech - rwmech at eagle.ais.net Freelance IS Support / Administration / Programming "If you want to get it done right, pay somone else to do it for you." Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 1994 20:12:15 +1100 (EST) From: David Draper <David.Draper at mq.edu.au> Subject: Big Beady Stouts Dear Friends, I could use some troubleshooting. Since I started mashing I have made two batches of stout in amongst my other endeavors. In both of them, the bead has been huge--most bubbles were >1 mm in diameter. So of course the head does not last at all. No troubles with carbonation levels--they're just what I want. In all my other beers, the heading is fine, fairly creamy with good lacing. I am quite sure I am not getting any soap residues in either my bottling bucket, fermenters, or bottles, because I don't use detergents of any kind. The flavors are fine as well. I have used Wyeast 1084 in both the Big Beady Stouts; but I've used 1084 in a couple of brown ales in amongst all these with no trouble. I did single-step infusions for both batches: the first had a strike T of 67C and the second of 66, and both held there for 90 mins. I sparge with 77C water. I have not treated my water, and in fact don't know in detail its mineral content. Grain bills go like this: for the first, 2.3 kg pale malt, 580 gr Munich, 500 gr 80L crystal, 250 gr chocolate malt, 100 gr roasted barley, 50 gr flaked barley, 100 gr wheat malt. For the second, 2.5 kg pale, 250 gr 80L crystal, 100 gr choc, 150 gr black malt, 300 gr roasted barley. Both were hopped just once at the start of the boil, the first with Willamette pellets, the second with Chinook, for IBUs in the low 40s. The first batch gave only 24 pts/lb/gal (one of my first mashes) and the second gave a little over 28. Both batches had about the same OG, 1045 and 1046 (BTW the first was a small-volume, allgrain batch, the second a full-size, partial-mash w/1 kg of extract syrup), and both spent 12-14 days fermenting (primary + secondary). Both were primed with dextrose, at 6.25 and 6.5 gr/litre respectively--levels at which I get the good heading in the other beers as mentioned above. So what's up with my mashed stouts? My results were much better when made with all extracts--nice creamy heads that lasted the whole glass. Sorry to go on at such length, but I wanted to provide as much info as possible. Many thanks for any advice. Cheers, Dave in Sydney - -- "Never trust a brewer who has only one chin" ---Aidan Heerdegen ****************************************************************************** David S. Draper, School of Earth Sciences, Macquarie University, NSW 2109 Sydney, Australia. email: david.draper at mq.edu.au fax: +61-2-850-8428 ....I'm not from here, I just live here.... Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 1994 04:56:55 -0600 (CST) From: "Robert W. Mech" <rwmech at eagle.ais.net> Subject: Software Ive been considering creating a windows based "Beer Software", inside would include a section to store youre recipes, a logging section, and perhaps even a trouble shooting section. I need Ideas for this however, and people who know more about brewing than I do (somone who is all grain, goes to competetions, etc.) to help with specifics. If you would be intrested in helping on the project, email me. Robert - -- Robert W. Mech - rwmech at eagle.ais.net Freelance IS Support / Administration / Programming "If you want to get it done right, pay somone else to do it for you." Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 94 07:35:48 -0500 From: fingerle at nadc.nadc.navy.mil (J. Fingerle) Subject: Tom Hardy's Ale Quick question, when you intend to save a barleywine for several years, how do you store it? If you have a collection of Thomas Hardy's Ale over the years, are they kept in the fridge, or in a wine celler, or just left in a back closet? Personally, if I had the $$, I'd have a wine celler, a heat and humidity chamber for my musclecar Buick, and a stabilized walk-in refridgerator for lagering, another for fermenting, another for serving British ales, another for...well, you get the picture. But I don't, and over the course of a year, my "excess" beer is stored between 60F and 90F, depending on Mother Nature. My guess is that this is not optimal for a decade of barleywine storage. Any comments? - -- /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ name: Jimmy Fingerle phone: 215-441-7209 email (internet): fingerle at nadc.navy.mil fax: 215-441-1407 (tecnet): fingerle at tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 94 17:04:59 MST From: jeff at neocad.com (Jeff Stampes) Subject: Grain storage How about storing large quantities of grain? Is temperature a consideration? I have only a quite cool cellar (well-ventilated to the mountain air to keep the temps VERY low) to store it in. I was going to purchase a couple of large Rubbermaid tubs to keep 50lb. bags in to keep the rats out of it and keep it down there . . . any problems I may not be considering? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Jeff Stampes | "And on the Eighth Day God jeff at neocad.com | created Homebrew . . . and Boulder, Co | hasn't been heard from since" -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- "God wrote this book, and It sez here in this book God made us in his image, so if we're dumb, then God is Dumb, and a little ugly on the side!" - Frank Zappa -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 1994 08:40:01 -0500 From: BrewerLee at aol.com Subject: Twits & beer After posting on the response I received from the gentleman who was going to publish the HBD hardcopy, I had hoped (and so did he) that things would go back to normal. Nah, that would be too easy. I responded to an offensive post yesterday in e-mail where some of the contributors here were called pompous on top of everything else and what they post called drivel. All I got back was more flame so I'm glad I have a twit filter now. No problem there. The funny thing was after all that he signed his next post as Dr. somebody. Hmm. Guess he missed the day in human relations where they actually had to talk to someone. Oops, did I flame? Sorry. Back to the original intent of this post. Here's a challenge: Let's drop it. The original poster didn't think it was important enough to pursue. The people that thought their thoughts were being violated are now safe and those who were clamoring "free speech" and wearing tie-dyed t-shirts once again are already reading this digest so let's drop it. Remember beer? It's why we're here. If those who read here and post on rec.crafts.brewing don't like us, fine. Doesn't change the way my beer tastes. Those on alt.beer can go back to what they were doing and we can all get back to normal. Just a quick note to those of you who think someone else's hard work is drivel: Just be glad the people that read your thesis didn't think so. If it's drivel, then unsubscribe. The directions are at the top. Now on to lighter things: I brewed a parallel Wit this weekend. Both were infusion mashes but one was pre-cooked and the other just went into a protein rest. The pre-cooked had a 5% better extraction but that's not necessarily a good thing for the style so I'll post tasting results in a couple of months. -Lee C. Bussy BrewerLee at aol.com November 2, 1994 8:36 am Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 1994 08:43:39 -0500 From: Mike Zentner <zentner at ecn.purdue.edu> Subject: Sprayers Aidan Heerdegen writes: >Jack S. (about whom there are many strongly held opinions) >reckons the sprayer is unecessary .. and I am inclined to >believe him. Just keep the level of your sparge water above your >grain bed and trickle the water in gently, should be fine (but >one of those gizmo's sounds like FUN! ... but we are trying to >be frugal here after all ..). I have had experience with this. The problem with small scale brewers, especially those who do it in the garage in winter (like me), is that this is a major source of heat loss. The small droplets in the spray are rapidly cooled in air unless you have the whole thing insulated from the outside. Larger scale brewers probably do not have to worry about this since only the droplets at the edge of the spray pattern really get exposed to cold air (the larger scale makes it easier to keep the overall temperature in the spray area higher). Mike Zentner Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 1994 08:40:59 -0600 From: keithfrank at dow.com (Keith Frank) Subject: re: Barley Wine yeast ***** From Bruce DeBolt ***** Someone posted yesterday (deleted original message) about not using champagne yeast for barley wine. In the SWBN article on barley wines I mentioned yesterday (from R. McNeill) he also said not to use champagne yeast and instead recommended a healthy starter of an ale yeast like Wyeast 1056. Bruce DeBolt c/o keithfrank at dow.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 94 10:19:26 EST From: Spencer.W.Thomas at med.umich.edu Subject: Re: Superior manifold design My manifold has a vent pipe. At first, I liked it, because it kept me (I thought) from drawing wort from the grain bed too fast -- it starts entraining ("sucking") air into the sweet wort. Now I don't like it because of the same reason. It's essentially impossible to run the sparge from a 20lb mash (in a 10 gallon cooler) slowly enough so that it doesn't entrain some air through the vent. So I plug the end of the vent with a clamped bit of plastic tubing. Why not get rid of the vent all together? Because I use it to underlet my mash infusions. I think I get better mixing this way, by putting the hot stuff in at the bottom instead of the top. =S Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 94 10:40:42 EST From: Paul Ganci <Paul.Ganci at analog.com> Subject: Re: Worthless Posts Dear HBDers, Recently Dennis Forester posted his opinions of local NJ homebrew shops to which Mike Demers responded that such posts are a waste of HBD BW. Frankly, I do NOT understand this attitude. There are many of us homebrewers out there from across the world with a diverse range of backgrounds. The HBD is about the dissemination of information having to do with all aspects of homebrew making. IMHO, such knowledge may consist of anything relating to homebrew production including where to purchase supplies. I am sure that those people who do extract homebrews can give "two hoots" about the latest mashing gadgetry or techniques. Personally I don't believe "fruit" belongs in beer, but just as the extract brewers don't complain about all the mash posts I don't complain about the number of pumpkin ale recipe posts! I would like to ask the HBD community "What ever happened to tolerance?" When I see a post which doesn't interest me I just skip to the next one (it really isn't that hard). It seems to me that more BW is wasted fighting about what should be in the HBD. Poor Clay Glen I think is a real case in point (and I admit I flamed him privately). Here is a person attempting to make the HBD available to a wider audience and what do we do ... we burn him at the stake! There have been more posts on Copyright law recently and I ask how does that relate to homebrewing? At least Clay was attempting to disseminate the wealth of knowledge contained in the HBD. Perhaps we should all step back and contemplate the purpose of the HBD. I believe it to be a PUBLIC forum for active discussion of homebrewing. To that end ANYTHING having to do with homebrewing is a valid topic of discussion. Moreover, if Clay wants to make a hardcopy edition of the HBD available so that more people can access the valuable information contained within then so be it. The HBD is already public and such an endeavor seems to be in the spirit of the original HBD conception. And we should all remember that there are many of us out there with many different interests. This diversity assures that no single post will ever interest every HBDer, but on the same token that does not render the post worthless. Let the flames roar I just put on my abestos suit. Paul Ganci Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 1994 09:34 EST From: CSS2 at OAS.PSU.EDU (SPEAKER.CURTIS) Subject: how low can you go? A question: What is the minimum amount of fermentables necessary to make a beer that will have SOME taste, normal head retention, etc? I am not interested in making a watery beer, but I am curious how low you can go. Extract recipes only... I made a pale ale (5 gal) w/ one 3.3# can of light syrup and 1 lb. of DME; the beer fermented fine (it only took 6 days) and tasted great - a little more like mass-produced Budmilloors, but extremely drinkable. This would seem to be close to the lower limit; anybody ever try making 5 gallons of beer with one 3.3# can of syrup??? Some of my non-beer-connoiseur-type friends think that most of my homebrew tastes too strong, but loved this pale ale. Private email is fine; if anyone is interested in what I find out, I'll post a summary to the HBD. Thanks and Hoppy Brewing Curt Speaker css2 at oas.psu.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 1994 11:40:13 -0500 From: ar568 at freenet.carleton.ca (Aaron Shaw) Subject: Belgium Here I Come! Dear Fellow Beer Lovers, I am going to be in the Mecca of all brewing nations (Belgium) from the 21st of November to the 21st of December and I want to take in as much as possible (ie: Brewery tours, unique pubs, etc...). So, I would be very interested in hearing from anyone who has had interesting brewery experiences or found the perfect atmosphere in some quaint rural tavern. Any information will be greatly appreciated. - -- "Come my lad, and drink some beer!" Aaron Shaw Ottawa, Canada Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 1994 09:43:34 -0600 From: snesbitt at terra.oscs.montana.edu (Stephen Nesbitt) Subject: PVC as manifold material Al K. states: >remember someone just recently posted how they got >a plastic-flavored beer from a PVC manifold in their lauter tun? Just another data point: prior to this year's brewing season, I set up a Coleman cooler with a PVC manifold. All PVC components are CVPVC (I think that's the right acronym) which means they are food grade and capable of handling temps up to about 180^ - in essence PVC used for potable water lines. I've mashed 3 beers using this setup, one of which I'm drinking now. At least to this point, I have experienced no plastic off flavors - something I was afraid of. I'll want to get through an entire season before making a final call, but tentatively I think PVC could be used as long as it is the right type. One other data point, my initial plan was to drain the coolor using a "fiberized" food grade shower/sink hose. The hose has a very definite plastic smell, and I decided not to use it. In its place I'm using a simple food grade plastic tubing attached with a ring-type clamp. YMMV, -steve oapsn at terra.oscs.montana.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 1994 12:53:08 -0500 From: Hmbrewbob at aol.com Subject: HBD's are being sold !!! I found out from a friend the other day that he had *PURCHASED* back issues of HBD (1989-8/94) on a CD-ROM titled Beer Homebrew Guide put out by Walnut Creek. This means all the people sending hate mail to Clay G. can get off his back. I dont know why but I would like to give my opinion on this subject. This forum as it is, unedited, is public domain. Your contributions to it, keep the art of brewing alive and growing. If you want to make money by giving advice, my advice to you is write a book and go on tour. (no charge) Thanks Hoppy Brewing, Bobdabrewer Return to table of contents
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1569, 11/03/94