HOMEBREW Digest #2564 Sat 22 November 1997

[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]

		Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org
		Many thanks to the Observer & Eccentric Newspapers of 
		Livonia, Michigan for sponsoring the Homebrew Digest.
				URL: http://www.oeonline.com

  Press Release: MCAB Qualifying Events Announced ("Louis K. Bonham")
  Re: Justifying Beer Making (Don Ogaard)
  cleaning blowoff hoses ("Bob Spiers")
  RE: Solarflow Burners (Art Steinmetz)
  Spousal unit approval of HBD  hobby (kathy)
  Homemade Beer Engines (Mike Spinelli)
  Homebrew Humor ("Ellery.Samuels")
  Blonde Ale (Bob Tisdale)
  Beer Engine ("David R. Burley")
  Re: CO2  /  Brewtek vs Valley Mill (Richard Abato)
  RE: siphon diameter ("Kensler, Paul")
  O2 requirement? ("Little, Wayne")
  Hopless Beer (CHUCK HUDSON 1209 MGC LABORATORY 272-1522)
  RE: Beer engines ("Kensler, Paul")
  boiled grains and corn sugar (where's the still!?!!?) (Samuel Mize)
  Happy  Holiday Homebrew Competition--Call for Entries ("Paul Demmert")
  Rolling mills ("Sornborger, Nathan")
  Re: Justifing makeing beer (Dan Morley)
  re: Cleaning Blowoff hoses (John_E_Schnupp)
  Chimay (Al Korzonas)
  Dare I say....corn sugar ("Taber, Bruce")
  Rousing the wee beasties ("Steven W. Smith")
  Timmerman's (Al Korzonas)
  parti-gyle (Al Korzonas)
  microscopes (smurman)
  Re: Malt vinegar (Jacques Bourdouxhe)
  rakes (Al Korzonas)
  yeast volcanos (Mark Weaver)

NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS: hbd.org Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew at hbd.org (Articles are published in the order they are received.) 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 homebrew-request@hbd.org. **SUBSCRIBE AND UNSUBSCRIBE REQUESTS MUST BE SENT FROM THE E-MAIL **ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!! IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, the autoresponder and the SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE commands will fail! For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to brewery at realbeer.com Homebrew Digest Information on the Web: http://hbd.org Requests for back issues will be ignored. Back issues are available via: Anonymous ftp from... hbd.org /pub/hbd ftp.stanford.edu /pub/clubs/homebrew/beer E-mail... ftpmail at gatekeeper.dec.com (send a one-line e-mail message with the word help for instructions.) AFS users can find it under... /afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 13:55:34 -0600 From: "Louis K. Bonham" <lkbonham at phoenix.net> Subject: Press Release: MCAB Qualifying Events Announced November 20, 1997 For immediate release: MCAB Qualifying Events Announced The Steering Committee of the Masters Championship of Amateur Brewing ("MCAB") is pleased to announce that it has invited ten premier North American amateur brewing competitions to serve as Qualifying Events for the first MCAB, which will be held in Houston, Texas in early 1999. The MCAB is a new, grass-roots national amateur brewing competition sponsored by Brewing Techniques Magazine, the Home Beer and Wine Trade Association, the Home Brew Digest, and the Foam Rangers Homebrew Club of Houston. The aim of the MCAB is have a national championship of the highest possible quality, thereby promoting the development of the craft of amateur brewing. The MCAB will therefore be a small, invitation-only, "champions' championship," where large panels of highly-qualified judges will evaluate small numbers of the very best beers that amateur brewing can offer. To select the participants for the MCAB, the MCAB Steering Committee has chosen a number of amateur brewing competitions to serve as MCAB Qualifying Events. First place winners at Qualifying Events in 15-20 Qualifying Styles (BJCP substyles selected by the MCAB Steering Committee) will receive an invitation to enter the MCAB in that style, and will be free to brew a fresh batch in their Qualifying Style for the MCAB. There are many, many excellent competitions throughout North America that could function as Qualifying Events, and the Steering Committee (which includes some of the most respected and recognized names in the world of amateur brewing) has the difficult task of choosing among them. The initial MCAB will have 10-11 Qualifying Events; in the future, it is hoped that there can be more *if* a larger pool of entries does not reduce the MCAB's ability to deliver the highest possible judging and fairest possible evaluation for the competitors. To be a Qualifying Events, a competition must be open to all amateur brewers (i.e., the event cannot be limited to residents of a certain area or members of certain clubs or organizations), must agree to offer categories for the 15-20 MCAB Qualifying Styles, must agree to use the BJCP Style Guide for those Qualifying Styles, and must agree to use certain flight size and judge panel specifications. In selecting a local competition as a Qualifying Event, the Steering Committee considered the following factors: 1. Size and reputation of the competition. 2. Reputation of the sponsoring club or clubs. 3. Geographic distribution of Qualifying Events. 4. Local or regional availability of adequate numbers of qualified judges. The selection of a competition as a Qualifying Event does not annoint it as superior, nor is such selection permanent. Indeed, while some major competitions may become perennial Qualifying Events, the Steering Committee envisions that Qualifying Events will probably rotate between area competitions. Based on these criteria, the following 1998 competitions have been invited to be Qualifying Events for the first MCAB: Dixie Cup Houston Bluebonnet Brew Off Dallas Sunshine State Challenge Orlando BUZZ-Off Philadelphia BURP Spirit of Free Beer Washington, DC Boston Homebrew Competition Boston Bidal Society Competition Kenosha, WI Kansas City Brew Meister's Competition Kansas City Novembeerfest Seattle CABA March in Montreal* Montreal * If the CABA decides to participate and wishes to designate a different CABA competition as a Qualifying Event, it may do so. The Steering Committee has also sought to identify a suitable competition in California to invite to be a qualifying event. At present, however, it has been unable to identify one that meets the necessary criteria for Qualifying Events, particularly the requirement that such competitions be open to all amateur brewers. If the Steering Committee can identify and approve a suitable California competition by the end of 1997, then it will add a California-based Qualifying Event. The Steering Committee also has promulgated the following Mission Statement for the MCAB: The Masters Championship of Amateur Brewing exists to advance the art and science of amateur brewing, by: 1. Identifying and recognizing excellence and achievement among amateur brewers; 2. Promoting and encouraging high-quality, locally-run amateur brewing competitons and events in all regions of North America; 3. Providing opportunities for all amateur brewers to advance their skills, be it through competition, judging, or education; 4. Encouraging communication and cooperation between local amateur brewing clubs; 5. Fostering understanding and advancement of the beer evaluation process; and 6. Promoting public awareness and recognition of the craft of amateur brewing. The MCAB Steering Committee consists of representatives from four sponsoring organizations: Brewing Techniques Magazine (Steven Mallery), the Home Beer & Wine Trade Association (Dee Roberson), the Home Brew Digest (Pat Babcock), and the Foam Rangers Homebrew Club of Houston (Louis Bonham). It also includes seven "at large" members: Dr. George Fix, Byron Burch, Jim Liddil, Scott Birdwell, Scott Bickham, David Houseman, and Chuck Cox. For further information about the MCAB, contact Louis K. Bonham at lkbonham at phoenix.net, or at 713.222.9944. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 22:09:56 -0700 From: Don Ogaard <dogaard at trib.com> Subject: Re: Justifying Beer Making Delurking ... (after about 6 months or so). Since this is my first post, a word of introduction: I've been brewing = for a little over 10 years, all-grain for the last six. I average about = 40-50 batches per year (just put batches #36 and #37 for 1997 in the = fermenters last Saturday.) Yeah, I know I need to step up to a bigger = system ... not in the budget right now :^( I also culture yeast and = have a nice library of home-adapted strains on slants. Now that the = howdys are over, I wanted to put in my $0.02 on Ken Lee's post on Justifying Homebrewing. = My wife doesn't like beer (go figure), so I've been there, Bud. It's = pretty easy to justify the ingredient costs compared to buying micros or = imports, particularly if you buy your grain in 50-pound sacks, and I see = you already got lots of good advice on that. (My favorite was the one = about spending more time in bars - still giggling.) The bigger problem = for me was the time involved for all-grain. Spending all day Saturday = on one batch and then Sunday on another won't win you any husband/father = of the year awards. So here's what I do: I brew most of my routine beers using a simple infusion mash (obviously, = this won't work for styles which demand step-infusion or decoction). = Friday night, I start the mash, protein rest, bring to saccharification = strike temp, then stick it in a 150 degree oven and go to bed. Get up = at 0500 Saturday, throw it in the sparger, sparge, boil. Just before = batch 1 starts to boil, start mash 2 (which is already ground and = waiting), stick it in the oven. By the time mash 1 is cooled and in the = fermenter, mash 2 is ready to go in the sparger. Voila, two batches = and you're done by noon. Do only one batch, and you're out of the = kitchen before the Better Half even wakes up. Unless, of course, you = insist on doing those two and one-half hour boils. And I agree with Scott Kaczorowski: don't waste time trying to squeeze = out that last mash efficiency percentage point or two by being anal = about your sparging. Add some extra to your grain bill, and sparge = quick. Grain is cheap, your time is valuable. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 23:49:54 PST From: "Bob Spiers" <gotcha500 at hotmail.com> Subject: cleaning blowoff hoses I used 3/8" blow off tubing and a carboy cap in the past and now I use 1" blow off tubing. I have always cleaned with brushes? 4' lenghts in either 3/8" diameter or 1" diameter. Works great and I don't have to worry about chemicals. I get the brushes through Beer, Beer & More Beer. Check out http://www.morebeer.com no affiliation etc... Bob Spiers ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 19:12:10 -0500 From: Art Steinmetz <asteinm at pipeline.com> Subject: RE: Solarflow Burners Solarflo Corporation 22901 Aurora Rd. Bedford, OH 44146-1701 (216)439-1680 They wouldn't sell me one. Industrial applications only they said. I tried to hook them up with the folks at SABCO in the hopes of SABCO offering a IJ burner option on their RIMS but SABCO said it would boost the cost to much. I would like to get my hands on these to do a refit of the crummy single-orifice jet burners on my RIMS unit. - -- Art asteinm at pipeline.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 21:06:23 -0500 From: kathy <kbooth at scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us> Subject: Spousal unit approval of HBD hobby Five reasons to get approval of homebrewing: Take your SO to eat at brewpubs and notable taverns. Especially if she doesn't like beer, tell her you'll order the beer and she can order her two favorite entrees and you'll share. Insist on dessert. Let her drive home. Take a job she's been wanting done (by you) and promise you'll do it before you homebrew. Promise that after you homebrew, you'll let her control the TV remote the rest of the week. Promise that after you homebrew, she can choose a couple of romantic comedies for the two of you to watch. Go out to a bar where the waitress is saucy and puts her hand on your shoulder, etc. and remark with enthusiam about how much more fun it is to be at the bar them home brewing. Five reasons to get disapproval of homebrewing: Damage her stove top while cooking wort. Have her find the kitchen floor sticky the morning after. Get a vigorous boil going with the windows shut and have condensate run down the walls. Fill her freezer with bags of homegrown hops. Have her find big black fly maggotts in the composted spent mash and have the maggots develop and get in the house. cheers, jim booth, lansing, mi Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 97 09:01:04 est From: paa3983 at dpsc.dla.mil (Mike Spinelli) Subject: Homemade Beer Engines HBDers, Gabrielle Palmer in #2562 asked about the Brew Your Own article on making a beer engine out of a galley pump from a boat. I got mine from John Fogarty who is featured in the article. He runs What's Brewing near Atlantic City NJ. He did all the modifications that needed to be done at a very reasonable price. I basically wanted a "turn key" beer engine with all the fittings and hoses. Total cost was around 60 bucks I think. I've used it once with great results. Although I used it for the wrong beer (a weizenbock) it still worked great. Started by dextrose priming a 3 gallon cornie and making SURE you seal the lid by pushing in some CO2. I made the mistake of not adding the CO2 and 2 weeks after adding the dextrose, had zero carbonation. Had to then force carb' the weizenbock. Anyway, I'm using a 20 gallon American oak cask to house the engine. The cask acts as a facade which slips over the SS cornie keg. The bottom of the cask is removed to allow the cornie ti fit. The top of the cask has a 1" fule that allows the pump to be attached. All you see is the cask and the pump ontop. John Fogarty can build you the clamp-on housing that's featured in the article if you want a more portable pump. In 3 weeks I'll be using it again for a party featuring a PA, ESB and Oatmeal stout. You can buy the galley pumps direct from the distributer whose name I have at home. They're made in New Zealand under the name Fyne-Spray (sp?). The distributer is in Connecticut I think. E mail me if you want the the name and #. I had the fantastic luck of getting the oak cask for 45 bucks! Gibbs Bros. in Hot Springs Arkansas had a used cask that had been returned for some reason. I was so grateful I sent the prez. 3 bottles of my monster brew. Mike Spinelli Mikey's Monster Brew Cherry Hill NJ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 97 09:43:41 EDT From: "Ellery.Samuels" <esamuel at mvsb.nycenet.edu> Subject: Homebrew Humor This is an example of Homebrewers humor. Limited intelligence of course! - ---------- Two guys of limited intelligence were on a ship that sank in the middle of the ocean. They managed to inflate a rubber life raft and grab a box of provisions before their ship slipped below the surface. After floating under blazing heat for 6 days they ran out of food and water. On the 10th day, bleary eyed and half dead from heat, thirst and starvation, they spotted a small object floating toward them in the water. As it drew near, they were ecstatic to find that it was an oil lamp (the kind the genies come in). They grabbed the lamp and rubbed it. "POOF" out popped a tired old genie who said, "OK, so you freed me from this stupid lamp, yadda, yadda, yadda. But hey, I've been doing this 3 wishes stuff for a long time now and quite frankly, I'm burned out. You guys get only ONE wish and then I'm OUTTA here. Make it a good one". The first guy, without hesitation or thought blurted out, "Give us all the beer we can drink for the rest of our lives!!!" "Fine," said the genie, and he instantly turned the entire ocean into beer. "Great move Einstein!" said the second guy, slapping the first guy in the head. "NOW we're gonna have to pee in the BOAT!" _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ Did Aladdin really find a GEnie in a lamp? Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 09:11:50 -0500 From: rtisdale at entomology.msstate.edu (Bob Tisdale) Subject: Blonde Ale I have seen this style mentioned in HBD and on the Brewery's bulliten board but I have not seen a description in any books or in the Brewery's library. Also, I have not seen any recipes in the Cat's Meow of Gambrinus Mug. What's the deal? Cheers, Bob Tisdale Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 10:31:14 -0500 From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Beer Engine Brewsters: I note that Gabrielle Palmer, a Ford Employee asks for help in designing = a beer engine. Hmmmmmm! Maybe Pat Babcock has been influencing Ford R&D? I= s this a new type of engine that Budmilloors is ready to sponsor research o= n? Gabrielle, all kidding aside, I suspect that you will find what you want= if you look under RIMS in the abstracts to this digest, as I assume you mean an automated home brewery or do you really mean a "beer engine" for drawing kegs ala the British use of the term?. A little explanation is in= order and may explain the RCB silence. Keep on brewin' Dave Burley Kinnelon, NJ 07405 103164.3202 at compuserve.com Dave_Burley at compuserve.com = Voice e-mail OK = Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 10:38:54 -0500 From: Richard Abato <> Subject: Re: CO2 / Brewtek vs Valley Mill On Wed, 19 Nov 1997 10:18:37 -0500 Oliver Weatherbee oliver at triton.cms.udel.edu wrote: >> If you do a primary in your bucket, you can still purge your secondary >> by making a simple CO2 generator. Just take a 2-liter soda bottle, and >> drill a small hole in the cap. Use some DAP silicon sealant (or something >> similar) to secure a small diameter tubing of maybe 3 or 4 feet >> through the cap. You can use cheap aquarium tubing for this. Just add >> a sugar solution (table sugar is fine) and yeast (bread yeast is fine) >> and run the tubing to your sanitized carboy. I would think the risk of contamination from the bread yeast would be much greater than the risk from a little oxidation! Has any one done a comparison between the BrewTek and Valley Mills? I am considering purchasing one of them but I have not seen either in person. I will be motorizing (not with a drill). Any suggestions? Thanks Rich rpa at intrinsix.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 08:39:04 -0700 From: "Kensler, Paul" <PKensler at itcmedia.com> Subject: RE: siphon diameter Eugene, I ordered a 1/2" racking cane and siphon tube from Brewer's Resource a year or so ago, and use it for all my wort / beer transfers - it really moves much more quickly than the 3/8" standard tubes do. Here's the URL for the web page that has the item: (http://www.brewtek.com/siphon-funnel.html) Standard non-affiliation disclaimer applies ;-) Eugene said: "HBDers, Has anyone out there seen racking canes which are wider and therefore would move more beer per second?" Paul Kensler Special Events Project Manager, Global Access (972) 633-6227 direct (972) 881-1300 fax Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 10:39:14 -0500 From: "Little, Wayne" <LittleW at od31.nidr.nih.gov> Subject: O2 requirement? Maybe some of the mycologists could explain the oxygen requirement of yeast in lay terms. I keep hearing O2 is needed to form cell walls, but isn't most of the cell division occurring during fermentation, when O2 is not required? Do the cells only divide during the time O2 is present in "high" levels in wort? How much oxygen is really necessary and when does the shift from respiration to fermentation occur? It is my understanding that O2 actually represses the generation of ETOH and CO2 in brewers yeast. I would really like to see some peer-reviewed references on this confusing (to me) subject Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 9:20:04 -0700 From: CHUCK HUDSON 1209 MGC LABORATORY 272-1522 <CHUDSON at mozart.unm.edu> Subject: Hopless Beer John, You might try another list called Hist-brewing. You stand a good chance to gather a hopless recipe from that group. The address is Hist-brewing at pbm.com Or to subscribe send e-mail to majordomo at pbm.com and in your message type subscribe hist-brewing I been brewing both professional and at home for 15 years and these people taught me a lot about the history and art and even the science. Good look in your search. Chuck Hudson Head bottle washer,floor sweeper,Journeyman brewer and what ever else my wife can think of for me to do at Vista Weyr Homebrewery and Meadery. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 09:23:07 -0700 From: "Kensler, Paul" <PKensler at itcmedia.com> Subject: RE: Beer engines Gabrielle wrote: "I have been considering the idea of making my own beer engine. I found an article in the May 1996 issue of Brew Your Own that describes a way to build your own beer engine for under $50. Has anyone here ever tried this? How did it turn out? Can you recommend any other articles or web sites that would have any additional information?" Gabrielle, I did try this, with mixed success (I think it was the May 1997 issue). I built a nice-looking solid red oak cabinet and base for the pump (pretty easy, even though I have no woodworking skills). The most important thing is, you really MUST get the exact pump shown in the article - it has a plastic plunger, and plastic housing on top. The same manufacturer makes other pumps that are almost identical, except one is brass, the other chrome. They look nicer, but they use a soluble lubricant that dissolves in beer - NASTY! The plastic unit uses a different plunger mechanism that does not require the lubricant, and is therefore more suitable for food-grade applications. Fortunately, I live near a boat store that carries the full line, and has a generous return policy. The author of the article, John Fogarty, is very helpful and helped me figure out the problem with those other pumps. He is also a good source if you can't find a local retailer that carries the pumps. You can reach him at wbrewing at aol.com or at 609-485-2021 (work). Hope this helps - good luck! And let me know how your engine turns out. Paul Kensler Special Events Project Manager, Global Access (972) 633-6227 direct (972) 881-1300 fax Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 10:41:35 -0600 (CST) From: Samuel Mize <smize at prime.imagin.net> Subject: boiled grains and corn sugar (where's the still!?!!?) Greetings to all, and especially to: > From: Mike York <myork at asheboro.com> > Subject: boiled grains and corn sugar > Thanks for all of the suggestions. I still don't get it. Please be more > specific. What is so terrible about corn sugar and bringing my "roller pin > cracked" specialty grains to a boil before sparging--then using the liquid > to mix with a can of malt extract and extra hops? I'm not Charley, but I'll give you an answer. Nothing is "terrible" about it. If you're happy with your beer, keep doing what you're doing. However, if you want to improve your quality (taste and shelf life), there are things you can change. Perhaps you've heard of the 80/20 rule -- 80% of the value comes from 20% of the resource. As a rough estimate, this is true in an amazing range of contexts. In this case, 80% of the quality of the best beer comes from 20% of the labor and expense. The discussions on HBD often center around getting that last 20% of quality, which requires 80% of the effort. This is an attempt to get the very best quality possible, often for competitions using judges with trained critical palates. If you just want a tasty brew, you can use simpler processes. Note that your original post was about not needing to cool wort: > A good homebrew can be made without > perfectly chilling the batch. Yet you described your process as: > My brew pot of hot steaming wort is then floated in a sink full of the cold > deep-well water. When the wort has cooled down some--about thirty minutes > after changing the water three times--the wort is poured in a five gallon > capacity carboy filled with three gallons of cold water. The cold bath and the dilution with cold water provide plenty of cooling. They prevent Hot-Side Aeration (HSA), and let you pitch your yeast soon enough to overwhelm any wild infections. Mechanical chillers are convenient, but not really needed until you're doing full-volume boils. Note that HSA mostly affects shelf life. Charley's specific suggestions were shorthand for subjects that have been discussed on HBD before. I recommend reading the last couple of years in the archive -- that's what I'm doing, it's like getting another MS degree but more fun. Anyway, his suggestions would flesh out as: CORN SUGAR If corn or table sugar is more than 15-20 percent of your sugar, it can create a "winey" or "cidery" taste. Basically, this adds no desireable flavor, just alcohol. If you replace the refined sugar with dry malt extract, you will get a maltier-tasting beer with more body. OTOH, some people prefer a stronger, lighter-bodied beer, and add corn sugar to get it. BOILING GRAINS You can get an astringent taste if you use too much water (depending on its acidity/alkalinity), if you heat the grains gradually in the water, or if you boil them. Basically, you want to put them in hot-enough water, dissolve out the sugar, and get them out before tannins and other strong tastes go into the solution. The easiest way to do this is to get or make a nylon mesh or muslin bag to put the grains into. I use a paint strainer -- a nylon mesh bag sold at some building supply or paint stores. Boil it in a little water to sanitize it, then put your grains into the bag. Bring the water up to 170F, toss in the grains, hold it at 170F for 20-30 minutes, then take out the bag. You may not get as much of the sugar, since the grain is not floating freely in the water, so you may need to increase your grain purchase by half a pound or so. Best, Sam Mize - -- Samuel Mize -- smize at imagin.net -- Team Ada (personal net account) Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 11:37:32 +0000 From: "Paul Demmert" <demmertp at thunder.safb.af.mil> Subject: Happy Holiday Homebrew Competition--Call for Entries The St. Louis Brews are holding their seventh annual Happy Holiday Homebrew Competition (HHHC) on Friday, December 12 and Saturday, December 13, 1997. The competition is sanctioned by the AHA, registered with the BJCP, and part of the Midwest Homebrewer of the Year program. Starting today, November 20, entries will be accepted by mail through December 6. Please visit our web site, www.stlbrews.org, for competition information, HHHC style guidelines, and on-line registration or contact me at the address below. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 12:42:16 -0500 From: "Sornborger, Nathan" <nsornborger at email.mc.ti.com> Subject: Rolling mills I have seen quite a few postings about homemade rolling mills, motorizing rolling mills, etc.. Frequently I respond to these via private e-mail but I thought that this time I'd spit out a bunch of info for those who search the archives first. I have made several mills and helped to build others. All of them have worked well. I have made some observations along the way and here they are. Knurling; This seems like a popular thing when trying to build a cheap mill and when roller diameter must be kept small. No knurling is best, if you can make the rollers big enough, a nice smooth surface will give the best results. After that, fine, shallow knurling is better than deep coarse knurling. What's the difference you ask. Well those bumps do three things: they break up the husks with their sharp edges, they provide pockets for the grain to 'hide' in and avoid a good crush, and they provide bumps to over crush other grains as they go through. Do I need knurling? Well this one's tougher. When an individual grain reaches the nip point of the two rollers there are a couple of forces on it. Going into the mill there is friction and gravity, pushing the grain back up there is the vertical component of the normal force on the rollers. Calculations can be done here using nip angle (the angle above horizontal at which the grain is nipped), and coefficient of kinetic friction for grain on whatever roller material you choose. Generally assumptions must be made for both of these. What I have seen is 4" rollers, both driven, are the smallest to guarantee you can use smooth rollers. Smaller than that and sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't. Similarly, if only one roller is driven they must be larger. What to use for rollers? This is size dependent and there are some good low cost options available. The best option is usually a plain bore cast iron wheel for industrial carts. They are available in 4" dia and 1-1/2" wide and cost about $6 a piece from McMaster-Carr. Width can be increased by using multiple wheels. Have more money and want a better roller? Get a leather belt flat pulley from Browning, these are available in all sizes up to oh-my-god that's big. Sometimes the crown needs to be turned down for a flat surface though. How big should the motor be? This varies with roller dia, roller width, speed of grain supply, roller speed, roller mass, and probably a few other things I'm forgetting. To play it safe, plan on 4-6 lbs of downforce at the nip per linear inch of roller. To get horsepower from this, multiply by the total roller width to get total downforce at nip. Then.... (total downforce at nip (lbs) * roller radius(inches) / 12") = torque at roller in ft-lbs torque at motor / motor to roller ratio = torque needed and then hp = torque * motor rpm / 5252. There are obviously a lot more things to think about than just these but they are frequently covered in other articles, books etc. I hope this is helpful. Nate Sornborger Barrington, RI Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 11:24:22 -0700 From: Dan Morley <morleyd at cadvision.com> Subject: Re: Justifing makeing beer Ken Lee wrote about justifying his brewing expenses to his wife. When I first started making beer it was with the idea of saving money. My wife gave me the starter kit for Christmas 4 years ago. And at first, it did save me money! But then, as I progressed through kits, extracts, partial mashes and onto full mashes the savings became secondary. I am one of the lucky ones because I have never had to "justify" the expense or the time to my wife. Over the last 4 years I have acquired much equipment, books and gadgets. Heck, I even have my own room in the basement for all my brewing equipment and beer! Here is what I have done that I feel has helped avoid arguments over homebrewing. 1) I have always tried to spread out the spending and I believe that this has helped avoid making the money an issue. I try to be as thrifty and resourceful as possible and to me this is just part of my hobby......why pay allot of money for something if you can design and build it yourself??? If I were to tell my wife that I wanted to spend a couple of grand on a complete ready to go RIMS system that would be a different story.... 2)As far as the time, I plan my brew days far in advance....making sure that it does not interfere with anything else that it going on in our lives. Quite often I brew in the evenings (from 6 to 12)and when I am brewing, I still try to be helpful, often cooking and cleaning up dinner, cause I am in (over taking??) the kitchen anyway. Sometimes I double batch on the weekends and often my wife will take the kids and go out for the day, either to friends or to her moms. I have never asked her to do this, rather, she willing gives me the house for the day and enjoys doing her own thing. 3) I make sure that my wife has ample time for her hobby. My wife has a fair bit of money tied up in a sewing machine and a serger and lots of sewing gadgets too! I never complain when she wants to purchase things for her hobby. 4) I show an interest in her hobby and will help her with it any time that she asks, and in turn she will help me if I need it. 5) Try to keep all the other aspects of your relationship in good shape. If you are fighting or just not getting along well lately, changes are that she will lash out at your brewing too! If she is happy, chances are that brewing will not be an issue. My wife and I have been married almost 11 years, I guess the bottom line is RESPECT for each other and what we want to pursue.... ( and I think the 10 th Anniversary diamond ring helped too :-) ...).there are allot worse things that we could be spending our time, money and energy on. Cheers Dan Morley President, Marquis de Suds Homebrewers Calgary, Alberta, Canada Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 10:48:34 -0800 From: John_E_Schnupp at amat.com Subject: re: Cleaning Blowoff hoses >I clean my blowoff hose(s) by wading up a piece of bathroom >tissue or kleenex (but make sure it doesn't have anything in >it like creams), wetting it so its a soggy mess, stuff it into the >blowoff hose, making sure that it fits in there real snug-like. >I then attach the hose to my water hose (but I suppose a >bottle washer would work as well, maybe even the facet itself) >and blast the soggy tissue through the hose. Repeat as >necessary until all the gunk has been cleaned out. That seems like a great wat to get soaked! Try this instead. Feed a length of string thru the blow-off hose. This a wad of cloth on the end and PULL it thru the hose. I'll bet it works as well (if not better because you can actually make a tighter fit and still pull it thru) and you'll still be dry when you're all done. John Schnupp, N3CNL Colchester, VT 95 XLH 1200 Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 12:57:07 -0600 (CST) From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com> Subject: Chimay Kit writes: >Chimay uses a single strain bottling yeast that is different from the >fermentation yeast mix. That's why culturing from a bottle will give you >a totally different flavor than Chimay. Chimay is quite proud of the fact that they use one yeast and mention it all the time in their ad literature. They used to use a big mess of yeasts, but Jean DeClerck helped them isolate a single yeast back in the 1950's and they still make a big deal about it. I've read in at least three sources that the yeast in the bottles is the fermentation strain. If you get bad results from the yeast, it may just be because it is pretty beat-up. Rarely do you see Chimay here that's less than a year old and I've seen five-year-old bottles (check the cork for the bottling month/year) in the stores. Furthermore, even the capsule rouge/Premier is over 1.060 and alcohol has a way of mucking up yeast. Try reusing the yeast several times with some throwaway (old extract perhaps) worts and see if subsequent generations don't perform better. The capsule blanche/ Cinq Cents and capsule bleu/Grand Reserve are even stronger... I recommend trying to culture from the red cap/Premier if you have the option because of the lower alcohol level. Al. Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL korz at xnet.com My new website (still under construction, but up-and-running): http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 14:35:00 -0500 From: "Taber, Bruce" <Bruce.Taber at nrc.ca> Subject: Dare I say....corn sugar I've been brewing for about 10 years, the last few have been all-grain. I've made lots of great beer since I went to all-grain, stouts, browns, fruit-ales, wheats, oktoberfest, even a great smoked ale. The only type I have had trouble with is making a tasty LIGHT ale. I know this sounds like an oxymoron, but I have had homebrew that falls into this category. I've tried using rice as an adjunct but I don't like it's flavor contribution (even though the literature says it has none). I was thinking of trying corn, but then why not skip the corn and just add a couple of pounds of corn sugar like I did years ago when I first started brewing with kits. It should thin out the flavor without changing it, right? Does anyone want to admit that they have done this? I need this beer for my beer-taste-deprived friends (OK, OK, I'll be drinking it too). Any comments would be appreciated. If you could send your response to the digest and me so I would be sure not to miss it. Bruce Taber Almonte, Ontario, Canada bruce.taber at nrc.ca Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 12:52:00 -0700 (MST) From: "Steven W. Smith" <SYSSWS at gc.maricopa.edu> Subject: Rousing the wee beasties Is there a reason *not* to use a magnetic stirrer or similar during secondary fermentation? Would it generate some "cascading dihydro-oxy- acetate of bananas reaction" or otherwise Ruin My Beer? I used an ESB-type yeast for the first time and have become rather ticked at having to coax the wee buggers to swim around in my wort. It seems they just wanna lie on the bottom and snooze their lives away until I swirl the damned carboy again. I'm desperately fighting back the urge to repitch and get on with my life... The recent discussion of stirrers for starters got me wondering. EIEIO, Captain! ( _Chariots_of_the_Globs_, F.F.C.). Steve Steven W. Smith, Systems Programmer. Glendale Community College. Glendale Az. syssws at gc.maricopa.edu "Sometimes I think I'd be better off dead. No, wait, not me, you." Jack Handy Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 13:54:51 -0600 (CST) From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com> Subject: Timmerman's Paul asks if he can ranch yeast from Timmerman's. Unless the label literally says "Timmerman's Lambic" (which I do not believe is currently imported into the US) no. MOST Timmerman's beers are filtered. Certainly all the fruit beers from them are NOT traditional Lambics. They are overly sweet, lacking in horseyness, not nearly sour enough and basically just a very sweet fruit beer. If you are trying to make a Timmerman's fruit beer clone, any non-phenolic yeast will do... don't bother with finding a Brett or Pedio. What you want is a fruit ale not a Lambic-style. If, however, you have tried Cantillon, Boon Marriage Parfait, Lindeman's Cuvee Rene (*only*... all the rest of the Lindeman's are soda pop like the Timmerman's) or Hanssens and *loved* them, then you do indeed want to make a pseudoLambic (pLambic) and you do need to get some Brettanomyces yeast and lactic acid bacteria to get something similar. The Cantillon and Marriage Parfait do have live cultures in them, but not *all* the cultures involved in the fermentation. Many of them have died during the fermentation and rarely do any of the Saccharomyces survive into the bottle. Get yourself a nice clean Saccharomyces like Wyeast #1056 and keep dumping the dregs from any Cantillon or Marriage Parfait bottles that you drink into the fermenter. You may be able to get some live cultures from Hanssens, Cuvee Rene, and some other traditional Lambics (Oud Beersel, Girardin, St. Louis Fond Tradition (*ONLY* THE FOND TRADITION), etc.) but I know that Cantillon and MP work relatively reliably. You can improve your chances a little by getting the yeast and bacteria from The Yeast Culture Kit Company or Head Start brewing cultures (if they have production again -- anyone know?). Al. Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL korz at xnet.com My new website (still under construction, but up-and-running): http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 15:14:26 -0600 (CST) From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com> Subject: parti-gyle Loren takes a stab at the meaning of parti-gyle, based upon some incomplete information in the Encyclopedia of Beer. Parti-gyle brewing is an "old" method of brewing in which you take the first runnings from the laeuter tun, and make one beer. Then you refill the laeuter tun with sparge water, stir, let it sit a bit and finally drain it to make a second beer. Finally, you refill, stir, rest and drain to make a third beer. Some brewers used to take the three beers, ferment them separately and then blend them back together (this may be unique to Belgian brewers, which is the context in which I read it, but maybe not). In case it's not obvious, the first wort will be very strong, the second wort will be weaker and the third will be weeker still. When fly sparging (where you draw wort from the bottom and add sparge water on top, continuously) was developed, many brewers abandoned the parti-gyle method. There was a great article by Randy Mosher in Brewing Techniques on parti-gyle brewing about three or four years ago. You have dozens of options if you do brew this way: * boil, ferment and bottle all three beers separately, * mix the 1st and 2nd worts and make a strongish beer and a weak beer, * mix the 2nd and 3rd worts and make a strong beer and a weaker beer, * mix part of the 3rd wort into the 1st wort and put the rest into the 2nd wort, * etc. Since I built my 1/2 bbl system, I brew this way all the time. In fact, I often make one beer from the first runnings and a little of the third runnings and another from the second runnnings. It takes a little planning and math (which I can't simply type-in on the fly). I actually sparge continuously, but take SG and volume measurements... first running off into my old 10-gallon kettle and then diverting the "second" runnings into the 18.75-gallon kettle at the appropriate time. Finally, I'll divert the "third" runnings back into the 10-gallon. Once the sparge is all done, I put the 10-gallon kettle onto the mash/laeuter tun burner and I can do two boils simultaneously. Two different beers, a total of about 15 gallons, one cleanup and the whole lot takes about 8 hours. The most common use for parti-gyle brewing (and what I do most often) is simply to make one strong beer and let the rest of the wort make a smaller beer of whatever gravity it turns out to be. One recent session yielded 4 gallons of 1.125 Barleywine and 10 gallons of 1.045 Special Bitter. I boosted the Special Bitter a bit by adding 3 pounds of crushed crystal malt along with the sparge water. Had I not made the Bitter, I would have wasted all the sugar trapped in the grains after draining the first runnings for the Barleywine. The options are endless. Al. Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL korz at xnet.com My new website (still under construction, but up-and-running): http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 13:14:25 -0800 From: smurman at best.com Subject: microscopes What type of microscope setup would be required to be able to identify different strains of yeast? SM Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 16:30:03 -0400 From: bourdouj at EOA.UMontreal.CA (Jacques Bourdouxhe) Subject: Re: Malt vinegar >From: Bob and Susie Stovall <urbanart at netropolis.net> Hi brauwmeisters Bob and Susie asks: >How does one make malt vinegar? Is there a homebrew digest for vinegar? > >thanks > For sure there is a homebrew digest for vinegar, it is called the Lambic digest. I hope this helps Jacques in Montreal ************************************************* * Oh beer! O Hodgson, Guinness, Allsop, Bass! * * Names that should be on every infant's tongue * * ( Charles Stuart Calverley ) * ************************************************* Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 15:40:35 -0600 (CST) From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com> Subject: rakes Scott writes: >I remember Al K. caught a little bit of grief (?) when he mentioned he >had been to England and seen some brewers using rakes. I recently toured >Miller Brewing Co. in Irwindale, CA and Miller not only runs rakes >continuously through their sparge (1140bbl lauter tun!) but lowers them >continuously as well. They end up 2.5 inches from the false bottom when >they're done. So I guess I feel somewhat validated in my practice. Give >it a, er, whirl... I don't recall the discussion, but I don't think it was me or England. I did ask every brewer whose brewery I toured (8 or 10) if they ran the rakes during the sparge and they all said, *no*. They all said that they use the rakes only to remove spent grain from the mash/laeuter tuns. Brewers who use decoction mashes (according to The Biotechnology of Malting and Brewing, by Hough) need to run their rakes because the boiling of the decoctions removes all the entrained air from the mash which makes the grain bed lose its bouyancy. I'm pretty sure that Miller Brewing doesn't use decoction mashes, but they do use cereal-cookers which boil the adjuncts and *part* of the barley malt. I presume that this boils enough of the entrained air out of the mash to require rakes. To me, the bottom line is this: if you can get by without rakes, do. Al. Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL korz at xnet.com My new website (still under construction, but up-and-running): http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 12:09:56 -0500 From: headbrewer at juno.com (Mark Weaver) Subject: yeast volcanos To the gentleman who posted regarding his yeast volcanos; According to K. Kunz at the Brewing Science Institute, this is her explanation of what is happening: What is occurring is the entrapment of CO2 bubbles in a highly-flocculent yeast (such as Wy1968), which, when a large enough number of them form, are buoyant enough to carry the attached aggregate of yeast up with them to the surface. It is quite normal. Regards, Mark Brewer on the Loose 75'02 & 72tii headbrewer at juno.com or AwfulQuiet at aol.com Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 11/22/97, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96