HOMEBREW Digest #2619 Mon 26 January 1998

[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

  Simple Yeast Culturing ("Mark Nelson")
  Step vs. Infusion (nathan_l_kanous_ii)
  Yeast Aeration, ("David R. Burley")
  entering competitions (Stephen Ross)
  RE: MixMasher Motor? (John Wilkinson)
  Whirlpool of Doom (Samuel Mize)
  re: step mashing disadvantages (Charles Burns)
  7 gallons per hour, NOT! (Al Korzonas)
  Oxygen passing through Plastic ("Tomlinson, James")
  Flat Beer ("William Warren")
  Propane and propane accesories ("Roger Grow")
  Re: if I don't filter (mcveyp)
  Bass O2 patent (Andy Walsh)
  Brass Beer Engine (rbarnes)
  Coopers Sparkling Ale (John D Elsworth)
  Fridge temp controler ("Michael Maag")
  Partial Mashing ("Gregg Soh")
  Commercial False Bottoms (aquinn)
  Open, Closed, Plastic, Glass (Glyn Crossno)
  lager temps/propane tank longevity ("Kevin TenBrink")
  I did it again (John Varady)
  Further clarification Jim Liddlil's post on sanitizing plastic (FivestarAE)
  "Killian's" Recipe, Secondary question (Alpinessj)
  aeration (Spencer W Thomas)
  pH test ("Bryan L. Gros")
  beer blending ("Bryan L. Gros")
  Protein rests (Al Korzonas)
  Minneapolis ("Little, Wayne")
  Request for Amsterdam beer spots (Fred Waltman)

Be sure to enter the... The Best of Brooklyn Homebrew Competition Brooklyn Brewery, Brooklyn, NY Entries due by 1/31/98, competition 2/7/98 Contact Bob Weyersberg at triage at wfmu.org for more info. NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS: hbd.org Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@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 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... ftp://hbd.org/pub/hbd/digests ftp://ftp.stanford.edu/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer 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: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 08:38:12 -0500 From: "Mark Nelson" <menelson at mindspring.com> Subject: Simple Yeast Culturing Michael Dingas asked about how to re-use/extend the life of a smackpack of liquid yeast. Personally I haven't tried this one, but I like the idea. Check Alan and Melissa's brew page (specifically link to http://www.magma.ca/~bodnsatz/brew/tips/yeast/culture.html Then See "Culturing for the Rest of Us" near the bottom of the page. In short the idea is to brew a mini-batch of unhopped beer, then bottle it with all the yeast in suspension. In other words swirl the carboy to get all the yeast suspended, then bottle and cap as normal. Each bottle becomes the equivalent of a smackpack (or better) and can be used in a starter for an upcoming batch, or probably to pitch directly into an upcoming batch. There's more detail to the procedure on their page. - -- Mark Nelson Windhund Brauerei Atlanta GA Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 09:08:10 -0400 From: nathan_l_kanous_ii at ferris.edu Subject: Step vs. Infusion Hey, since I posted my non-scientific support of step mashing, something came to mind that I didn't mention. I infuse my first step with a water:malt ratio of 1 qt water to 1 pound of malt. Sorry to those that use "real" units of measure, I've just not made that transition yet. Anyhow, I start with 1 qt/pound for an initial temp rest of 135 deg F. After my protease rest (20 to 30 minutes), I then infuse 0.25 quarts / pound of boiling water. Then, I add heat (converted kegs) to get to my saccharification temp. This turns out to be kind of a combination of step mashing (40-60-70, ala Fix) and infusion mashing. I hold my saccharification rest at 150 to 158, depending on what I wanted in a final product. I use the "infusion" temp for saccharification, because I could more easily predict final gravities and dextrin content than I could by using the 60 and 70 deg C rests for various intervals. I didn't have the time to do multiple trials with various times at 60 and 70 deg C to learn what degree of fermentability I could achieve with various times. It just was easier at the time, and works well for me. Unfortunately, a lot of things get done for the wrong reasons (read that as a guilty plea) but accomplish the right outcome. They become a means to an end. Anyhow, could the ratio of water to grain in the various steps influence whether a brewer favors or disfavors step mashing? Hmm.... Nathan in Frankenmuth, MI Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 10:20:07 -0500 From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Yeast Aeration, Brewsters: Sam Mize puzzles over when to oxygenate a fermentation and suggests considering repeated oxygenation during the early stages of fermentation. I suppose as long as the yeast were in a growth phase, = oxygenation wouldn't hurt, but the risk is of course oxidation of the wort. As I and others have already commented, the main reason for oxygenation is to have a yeast colony which can be re-used and finish out a fermentation reliably with = no unwanted aldehydes. Although the Brits successfully do this by oxygenation of the wort in the main fermentation ( aldehydes are not a major problem for most British style beers, but can be a problem for most lagers) and others have reported success with growing starters in the constant presence of air by stirring, the risk of aldehydes and beer staling is present. Other than AJ DeLAnge's comment that some British brewers oxygenate the yeast just before pitching, to my knowledge, no one here has reported the oxygenation of a full pitching size of yeast, ale or especially lager. Without the presence of wort, I don't know = how successful this oxygenation would be, but this may be a partial solution to preventing oxidation of the wort while giving a healthy yeast colony. If a small quantity of wort or malt extract were fermented using = the entire pitching quantity of yeast with continuous stirring in air or oxygen before pitching, followed by settling or centrifuging and pouring off the spent starter beer to get rid of the aldehydes = in the solution, this would seem to be ideal and practical. = Anyone tried this? - ---------------------------------------------------- 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: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 09:38:55 -0600 From: rossst at duke.usask.ca (Stephen Ross) Subject: entering competitions **de-lurk** First, a hearty thank you for the in-depth discussions and posts here on hbd. I've just recently switched to all-grain, and the more I learn, the more I value the hbd. I'll turn into a chemi-techno-thermo-fluid-dynamic-geek yet, as long as it brews better beer! QUESTION: Do competitions accept entries in PET bottles? I've been bottling in PET for about 5 years. I'm getting kegs soon, but I'd like to enter some brew into competitions. I suppose after I start kegging I'll have to get gadgety and build a counter pressure filler, but I don't want to have to get bottling equipment after getting kegs. Any advice would be appreciated! Email also welcome. Stephen Ross (in Saskatoon, SK, a long ways from Jeff Renner.) Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 98 10:39:50 CST From: jwilkins at wss.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson) Subject: RE: MixMasher Motor? Todd Kirby posted: >I've been reading with great interest the recent thread on the mixmasher. >Has anyone tried adapting a motor from an ice cream maker? Lots of people >in the south have these things just lying around during the prime >cold weather brewing season. Should have plenty of torque but may be a >bit slow, I'm not sure. Just thought I'd throw it out. I bought an ice cream freezer for this very thing. I found it a little more difficult to adapt than I expected. The drive is an octagonal recess (female) which I managed to fit by finding a square nut large enough, drilling through it, and pinning it to my mixer shaft. Before I actually tried it on a mas I made ice cream using the motor and noticed it ran pretty fast. I decided it was too fast and abandoned that tack. I ended up using a gear motor I bought. As I mentioned in a post last week, I have decided that that stirrer was causing stuck sparges for me, and that motor turns at only 28 rpm. perhaps the problem is not the speed but my crude mixer blades. Whatever the reason, I have abandoned my auto mixer. I would be afraid that even with better mixer blades an ice cream freezer motor would be too fast, though. I now use mine just to make ice cream. That is not bad, though. John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins at wss.dsccc.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 11:41:29 -0600 (CST) From: Samuel Mize <smize at prime.imagin.net> Subject: Whirlpool of Doom Greetings to all, and especially to: > HOMEBREW Digest #2615 Wed 21 January 1998 > From: "Bret A. Schuhmacher" <bas at healthcare.com> > Subject: What happens if I don't filter before fermentation? > It's such a PITA to get the break out of my wort before fermentation I > was wondering what happens if I don't bother? Apocalypse, world famine and loss of rainforest habitat. However, your beer will still be good. It just won't be Great Beer. Some of the unwanted proteins will redissolve out of the hot break, and you'll get some kind of flavors from steeping the cooked hops. > I've tried the centrifugal method, but I really don't want to mess > with siphons. I prefer to dump the whole pot into the fermenter. Whirlpool, THEN strain. So why whirlpool? To settle the trub to the bottom, so you can leave it in the pot. I did this Monday. I dipped out the top 2/3 of the wort and ran it all through the strainer without it clogging. I wound up with almost-dry trub in the trash, and ALL my wort in the fermenter. Siphoning, you'll get more trub in the fermenter, and leave a pint of wort in the pot (with a partial boil, that pint is concentrated money). I did a full boil. However, I've whirlpooled partial boils, which experience suggests that you, too, can leave a LOT of trub in the pot if you pour gently (without stirring up the trub layer). You may find it easier to dip out the top half with a tumbler, to lighten the pot before pouring out the rest. (I dipped from my full boil with a gallon pitcher.) > I've got a 2 stage strainer on my funnel and the nylon sack just gets > filled with break. I wind up emptying it several times before I get > all the wort into my fermenter. It's just very messy, time consuming, > and I'm tempted to stick my hand into the wort sitting in the funnel > to move the break out of the way so the wort will drain into the > fermenter. Been there, done that, re-pasteurized a batch after mucking it through with my hand (heavy wort, pellet hops and chocolate -- two ounces clogged the strainer). > Any tips? Chill below 100F, whirlpool and settle. (I don't know if the whirlpool really matters with this method, but I suspect it helps compact the trub.) Use a kitchen strainer as a pre-strainer, so your funnel will clog less. Or just use the kitchen strainer. It's got a big filtering surface, and it's easy to dump. You only need to get most of the hops and hot break, not every last solid particle. In fact, a little cold break may provide yeast nutrition. When the strainer or filter clogs, don't wait for it to drain, or try to shake through "just a little more." Pour out the liquid so you can dump the trub. But don't pour the liquid back into the brew pot. The strainer is full of suspended trub. You'll just re-strain the same trub several times. Pour the liquid from the strainer into a sanitized bowl. Knock the trub out of the strainer, then pour the bowl of trub-heavy wort back into the strainer. Repeat if it re-clogs. Dump the strainer again and you're ready for more from the pot. Since you're not re-straining the same trub, you'll only do this three or four times (unless you use 7 pounds of extract, 4 oz of hops, 8 oz of molasses and an 8 oz chocolate bar). - - - - - By the way, I chill by floating a foil roasting pan on my wort and putting ice in it. Heat-sanitize for a minute with the hot trub (AFTER the boil), dump out the water as the ice melts. I cool five gallons in less than an hour, it takes one 88-cent bag of ice, no siphon or other equipment. I heat the pan AFTER the boil for fear that a big flat pan will catch and combine several boil bubbles, making one big uberbubble that could spray hot wort all over the kitchen (and me). Best, Sam Mize - -- Samuel Mize -- smize at imagin.net -- Team Ada Fight Spam - see http://www.cauce.org/ Personal net account - die gedanken sind frei Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 98 10:34 PST From: cburns at egusd.k12.ca.us (Charles Burns) Subject: re: step mashing disadvantages Olin Schultz writes: > >> The disadvantages of step mashing. The biggest is less head >> retention. This is more noticeable on lighter beers. On high >> gravity beers you get good head as a default of the higher >> percentages of head stability constituents. The other factor is >> that step mashing provides for more exposure to the beta amylase set >> of enzymes, which results in thinner beers. This may or may not be >> desired, but most homebrewers are Bram Greyling disagrees: >I tend to disagree. You cant say that step mashing causes all this. >My step mash beers has got good head retention and I regularly brews >a real thick beer when I want. I take exception with both statements. You cannot have a meaningful discussion regarding mashing regimens (single, multi, decoct, whatever) without including the grain bill. Step mashing fully modified Pale Ale malt cannot be compared with step mashing undermodified pale malts such as pils or lager malts. Please include what types of malts you are using when conversing about mashing processes. See Kyle Druey discussion (the quiz) in HBD 2614. Charley (with no more headless beer) in N. Cal Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 12:57:48 -0600 (CST) From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com> Subject: 7 gallons per hour, NOT! Clearly I messed up when I said that if your laeuter tun is between 1.5 and 3 square feet you should run off at a rate of 7 gallons per hour. We had better wait for the formulas to be posted. In my system, my tun is about 14 or 15" in diameter and I have had good results with taking 17 gallons of runnings in 1.5 hours. That's quite a bit more than my previous post. Thanks to George for pointing out my error (luckily, I Cc'd him with my post). Al. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 15:43:01 -0500 From: "Tomlinson, James" <red_beards at compuserve.com> Subject: Oxygen passing through Plastic Carl Shipmam Wrote: >> There have been some comments recently about oxygen passing thru the walls of plastic fermenters with resulting off-taste. I am using an S-type air lock, which is a form of manometer. While fermenting, the pressure in the vessel supports a 2-inch approx column of water so the pressure inside is greater than atmospheric. =3D It seems to me that this may prevent oxygen (or any other gas) from entering the container. I have a vague recollection of partial pressures = =3D in a vessel, which suggests that the oxygen partial pressure could be very l= =3D ow and the CO2 pressure high << The partial pressure issue is real. The differential pressure for a specific gas would be the difference in partial pressure across the boundary. This doesn't mean that Air will push a water lock in thw wrong direction, but it is possible for air to enter a fermenter across the fermenter boundary. However, this is just a guess here, I expect the permeability of 1/8 inch= =3D of PVC with differential oxygen partial pressure of about 3 psid would be= =3D almost nil. For a PET Soda bottle, based on the thin walled nature, you could expect more diffusion, but I expect it again is almost nil. Maybe, long term storage could allow some oxygen to enter, and I don't know how little is needed for oxidation which is noticable. If someone wants to run an experiment, fill a PET bottle with air and pla= =3D ce it in a tank of CO2 and measure the internal pressure of the PET Bottle every couple of months, to check the N2 and O2 leakage rate. James Tomlinson Give a man a beer, and he wastes an hour, Teach a man to brew, and he wastes a lifetime! Return to table of contents
Date: 21 Jan 1998 13:23:02 -0800 From: "William Warren" <wwarren at geron.com> Subject: Flat Beer I'm confused! Flat Beer Hey there fellow homebrewers! I have a problem that I can not solve, I need your expertise. Actually I = have two problems. My last three batches were good beers, but there was = something off about each batch. The main problem was the beer was flat each time. My question is why? I = followed the directions very closely. Could the yeast be dying in my = primary? The other problem has to do with the taste... The finished product = seems to have a "funny" taste to it. I'm thinking that it could have = something to do with either my bittering hops or the water. In two of = the batches, I had to substitute the bittering hops. I was unable to = find the hops in my local homebrew shop. Now if I switched the hops, = would there be a funny taste to the end product( the substituted hops = were close in Alpha Acids). If anybody out has any to say on this topic, I would greatly appreciate = it. Will Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 14:36:01 -0700 From: "Roger Grow" <grow at sumatra.mcae.stortek.com> Subject: Propane and propane accesories Randy in Modesto is (rightfully so) concerned about the new propane regulations that take effect this year. He is right, a new valve costs more than a new tank, but the new tanks (in consumer sizes) should all have the new style valve. New valves are downward compatible with old regulators (left hand female threaded regulators - wrench tightened ) but new regulators (male threaded that are hand tightened) will not work on old tanks. One of the big reasons for the change is the fact that the new valves won't let propane out unless a regulator (or hose, etc) has been connected. There's a valve inside (like a bike tube) that must be depresed first. A co-worker sucesfully exchanged his (empty) old type for a (full) new type at the local grocery store. The exchange price is $14, a few dollars more than a refill, but you're guaranteed an in-spec tank each time and they're open 24/7 so that panic run at 9:30 on a Sunday night is possible. Roger Grow Homebrewer, Tribe Member, Hypoxia Commando. Remember, you don't have to drink homebrew to have a good time, You can freeze the stuff and eat it on a stick!! Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 15:38:14 -0700 From: mcveyp at kingman.com Subject: Re: if I don't filter I filter somewhat through a wide screen/collander. I do rack after three days and most of the big chunks get left behind. I can't detect any off-flavors or infections. The more particles in the wort, the more spoogier the krausen tends to be. I have fermented with all that stuff you listed and produced normal beer. It saved me lots of time and messing around too. okbye Patrick in Arizona Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 11:01:22 -0800 From: Andy Walsh <awalsh at crl.com.au> Subject: Bass O2 patent What a productive lunchtime! I nipped down to the patent office and printed UK patent 2 197 341 (1988), which details the Bass technique for yeast oxygenation. It only cost a couple of dollars and is quite detailed. I urge anybody interested in this topic to do the same. Alternatively ring your local patent office and they will send it to you for a small fee. The idea is pretty much as I suggested earlier. Traditional wort oxygenation techniques do not take into account a particular sample's oxygen requirement, so there is generally either too little or too much oxygen supplied. (Fortunately for us it is not overly critical!) The authors claim their technique supplies the correct amount of oxygen to yeast allowing predictable fermentations, controlled just by the pitching rate and temperature. Test comparisons show their technique to give faster, more predictable fermentations than with traditional wort aeration. Unfortunately the exact method is difficult for homebrewers to reproduce exactly.. "an aqueous suspension of brewers' yeast is oxygenated at a rate which is progressively increased in such a manner that the concentration of oxygen in the suspension remains substantially constant. Oxygenation is preferably continued only until no further increase in the rate of oxygenation is required to maintain the concentration substantially constant". ie. ideally some type of computer controlled oxygen monitor/dispenser is required - generally out of our league. However, I think we can still try and simulate it... One of the experiments uses yeast quantities just about right for homebrew pitching! Read on.. "In one experiment a 200g (wet weight) sample of an ale yeast derived from a previous brewery fermentation was suspended in 2l of distilled water in a stirred glass vessel. Air was the delivered into the suspension by means of a sterile filter and glass sinter at a rate of 1 l/min for a period of 6 h. During this time the temperature was maintained at 20C. At intervals the air supply was discontinued and the rate at which dissolved oxygen was consumed by the yeast (DOT) measured by means of a polarographic dissolved oxygen meter connected to a chart recorder." The results are illustrated in the following table: (I read this by eye off a graph) glycogen in % dry weight DOT in %satn./min sterol in ug/ml time DOT sterol glycogen 0 12 50 22 1 16 110 12 2 21 140 8 3 18 155 5 4 11 155 5 5 9 155 5 6 8 155 5 ie. maximum sterol levels occur between 2 and 3 hours after aeration starts. This corresponds approximately with minimum glycogen and maximum rate at which the suspension absorbs dissolved O2. It appears that it is difficult to oversupply the suspension with O2, as the yeast stops using it as it runs out of glycogen, it's ATP (energy) source. This is why water should be used. Both wort and beer provide food sources for yeast (yeast will respire ethanol etc. in beer under such oxygenation). So for us, as long as we run with about 1l air per min with the given starter volume say 3-4 hours we should be OK (err on the side of too high since it shouldn't matter that much). Elsewhere in the patent they pitch such oxygenated yeast at the rate of 3.75g/l wet weight into an ale of OG 1.060. Thus the starter in this example is sufficient for a 50l batch of beer. Scaling down to 20l, use about 100g of yeast in 1 litre of water with 500 ml/min of air for 3-4 hours. The air flow rate required is questionable. I calibrated my O2 cylinder/diffusion stone last night by placing an inverted water filled measuring jug over the bubble stream inside a larger, water filled pot. 1l/min is a very high aeration rate! I think that as long as *sufficient* air is supplied to maintain a constant partial pressure (0.2 ATM for air), that the air flow rate is irrelevant. I originally thought that 1l/min of air was equivalent to 200ml/min O2, but now think this is flawed logic. Pure O2 is also covered by the patent, but there are no examples given on how long such oxygenation would take. Ideally a DO meter is required. I looked around and it seems Hanna make one of the cheapest at ~A$1000. Other brands around the same price (probably ~US$500) were TPS and Corning, although Hach seemed to have the best reputation (and 60% pricier!). Can anybody recommend one? Another option is to use DO chemical test kits (much cheaper!). These are colour based, changing from yellow to clear. If we were measuring wort DO these would be unacceptable (yellow -> amber ??), but for yeast suspended in water they might be OK. Comments please? The inventors also say you can store the yeast with no problems (preferably cool) without further addition of oxygen, although they do not say for how long. This means you do not need to prepare the yeast on brew day. In the other paper I referenced in my previous post, they discover that treatment similar to this increases trehalose levels. Trehalose is regarded as a general stress protectant, and oxygenated yeast actually keeps *better* than non-oxygenated yeast! I would hazard you could keep it (refrigerated) for *at least* a week, then pitch on brew day straight into unoxygenated wort and achieve quick lag times, although obviously the shorter the storage time the better. So go get the patent or other references by all means, but I think I have reproduced enough here for anyone to use the technique if they wished to. I have never tried it, but the authors (highly respected brewing scientists) recommend it, and Bass cared enough about it to patent it, so that's good enough for me to at least give it a shot. Andy in Sydney. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 98 16:16:47 -0800 From: rbarnes at sdccd.cc.ca.us Subject: Brass Beer Engine Brew Your Own magazine had an article about a "$50 Beer Engine" last year. I went to the local boat store today to buy the pump they specified (Fynspray plastic galley pump), and found that Fynspray also sells an all-brass version of the same pump. If you saw the plastic and brass pumps side-by-side you'd know why I HAD to buy the brass pump! (Cost=$54). Since the pump tube (and virtually everything else on the pump) is brass, will this be detrimental to beer? Should I treat the brass with a mixture of vinegar and hydrogen peroxide to minimize the possibility of lead contamination? Or does this process cause pitting of the brass surface that would cause the pump to malfunction? I can return it and buy the plastic pump if necessary. Also, does anyone have a source for sparkler heads for beer engines? I could probably adapt one to the spout on the pump. Thanks- Randy in San Diego Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 21:54:39 -0500 (EST) From: elsworth at connix.com (John D Elsworth) Subject: Coopers Sparkling Ale When on a recent wonderful trip from the US to visit relatives near Sydney, Australia, I of course sought out some good beers. My nephew recommended Coopers Sparkling Ale (from South Australia). I didn't try that one while I was there, but brought a bottle back with me and am looking forward to tasting it. However, it has pronounced yeast sediment in the bottle, and while I am used to carefully decanting bottled beer from yeast, my nephew said that it is usually drunk after mixing the contents of the bottle! So, I am looking for advice from HBDers from Down-under regarding the best way to enjoy this beer. John Elsworth elsworth at connix.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 17:11:35 -0500 From: "Michael Maag" <maagm at rica.net> Subject: Fridge temp controler Greetings, now that the cold weather is here, I need to keep the kegs in = my garage beer fridge from freezing. (So far only the lines have iced). = I plan on using a ceramic type reptile cage heater. (Looks like a = ceramic light bulb). I need advice on the type, brand, and possible = source for a controler to use with it. From what I have read, there are = units which plug into the wall, the fridge power cord plugs into the = unit, a sensor goes from the unit to the fridge interior, and = connections are there to hook up the heat source. The thermostat = supplies power as needed to maintain the desired temperature. Right ? = So, what is a cost effective brand of unit, and where is the best place = to order one ? TIA, Mike 8*) Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 22:20:42 PST From: "Gregg Soh" <greggos at hotmail.com> Subject: Partial Mashing If I partial mash, it would be sort of an infusion mash, only smaller, I figure. If this is the case, can I use more water than the usual 1-1.3 quarts/pound of grain? Would it be beneficial or detrimental? (diluting enzyme concentration perhaps?) One thing I have always wondered, can you/should you/should you not stir an infusion mash? Thanks, Greg ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 06:04:04 +0000 From: aquinn at postoffice.worldnet.att.net Subject: Commercial False Bottoms Is there a consensus among the collective as to the best commercially available false bottom. I've reviewed past issues and have a wealth of information, but a recommendation from someone who has already done the experimenting with different models would be appreciated. E-mail replies welcome. Tony Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 08:52:02 -0600 From: Glyn Crossno <Glyn.Crossno at cubic.com> Subject: Open, Closed, Plastic, Glass Heiner Lieth <lieth at telis.org> wrote: >I know that some of you do open fermentation. Does anyone do "partial" open >(i.e. open part of the time)? Any experiences to share? When I first went to 9 gallon batches, I split the wort between a 6.5 gallon carboy and a 5 gallon plastic pail. I use the "holes in the racking cane" aeration. The carboy is always under an airlock. The pail started with the lid on, but of course I pull it off to check out the activity. The FG is always lower from the pail on the order of 0.02. Is this due to the semi open ferment? Geometry? Oxygen permeability of plastic? Glyn Crossno Estill Springs, TN - -- "Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys." P.J. O'Rourke Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 07:45:30 PST From: "Kevin TenBrink" <nine_inch_ales at hotmail.com> Subject: lager temps/propane tank longevity Perhaps someone in the collective can answer one of these questions for me: 1)I am going to rack over a lager to secondary today. I used wyeast Danish II (2247?) and would like to know how long, and at what temp should this be stored in the secondary? The colder the better or is the low 40's better? Is 4 weeks long enough? What is a diacetyl rest and when/how do you do one? Should the rest be done with this yeast? 2) I just bought a king cooker outdoor propane burner and a 5 gallom propane tank. If I am doing 3.5-4 gallon boils for 60-70 minutes, how long can I expect the gas in the tank to last before I need to refill it, I would hate to be half way through a boil and have the burner sputter out on me. Thank you for all of the help. Kevin TenBrink Salt Lake City Nine Inch Ales Homebrewery and Club http://www.geocities.com/NapaValley/8222 ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 10:52:53 -0800 From: John Varady <rust1d at usa.net> Subject: I did it again Recently I asked about a Porter I made with Bavarian lager yeast and wondered what I should call it. Most responses said Porter, with the rest calling it a Swartzbier. Well, I've done it again. This time I made a beer with a Maerzen grain bill and an IPA hop bill. I fermented it with an ale yeast and Bavarian lager yeast. Well, the ale yeast turned out a great tasting IPA. The lager yeast is still fermenting ( at 42F) and is too yeasty to get a good profile of the final flavor. So, what would you call this beer? IPL? Specialty? Tasty? BTW, the Porter done with the lager yeast took second place in a recent contest as a Brown Porter. I didn't enter it as a Swartzbier, so no clue how it would have fared. Thanks John Varady http://www.netaxs.com/~vectorsys/varady Boneyard Brewing The HomeBrew Recipe Calculating Program Glenside, PA rust1d at usa.net Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 11:42:33 EST From: FivestarAE <FivestarAE at aol.com> Subject: Further clarification Jim Liddlil's post on sanitizing plastic Hello, my name is Jim O'Shea, from Five Star Products and Services. I would like to thank you for this opportunity to post a reply to the past two postings by Jim Liddil. We take seriously every comment a customer or potential customer has to say about our products. Customer input is very important to us in servicing this new market. In Mr. Liddil's case we were even more concerned as he is a professional making a public statement on the Internet, which is highly read by homebrewers. Our biggest concern is that he stated, "I am not trying to promote there (sic) stuff and some of my results might make you think about using them anyway."(emphasis added) Mr. Liddil was a beta tester for us. We sent him some of the products we were looking at to sell to homebrewers. We had asked him to respond to us privately, in the spring of 1997, so we could offer the best products to homebrewers. Those who have seen our ads or contacted us know we released Star San, not Saniclean. The information we gathered from our beta testers, showed us that Saniclean was not the best sanitizer for this market. Some points I had hoped Mr. Liddil would have made in his postings is that any product that has only been sanitized will grow bacteria as sanitizing only kills 99.999% of bacteria. Brewers sanitize; they do not sterilize. Sterilizing is a 100% kill of all bacteria. I had also hoped he would have pointed out that long rod bacteria usually takes about two days to grow and is not a beer spoiler. This additional information shows that Mr. Liddel's test is a strong indicator that plastic, even old scratched plastic, can be sanitized and used with confidence when brewing beer. This is the information I would have liked to have provided to Mr. Liddil before he went public, on the Internet, with his information. By collaborating, Mr. Liddil could have presented all of his research on sanitizing plastic in a manner that would have been more beneficial to homebrewers. We welcome any independent test results others may have obtained. We ask to review the data before publication so we may contribute additional information that could be important in educating homebrewers in their art. Thank You James M. O'Shea III Advertising and Marketing Coordinator Five Star Products and Services, LLC Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 11:59:40 EST From: Alpinessj <Alpinessj at aol.com> Subject: "Killian's" Recipe, Secondary question Mike Cukrow asks about a "Killian's" Recipe Making a duplicate of Killian's Red would be hard to do without an all-grain batch. You would have to mash adjuncts such as corn and rice. I have been making a Griffin Irish Red for St. Patrick's Day over the last couple of years which I refer to as a "pumped up" Killian's. Here is my all-grain recipe (I'll try to convert it for you as well). Recipe for 5 gallons. 4 oz flaked barley 2 oz roasted barley 2 oz chocolate 6 oz crystal 40 9 lbs 2 row 2 oz Fuggles - 60 min 1 tsp Irish moss - 20 min 1 oz Cascade - at k.o. Lager yeast (I've had good success w/ Wyeast #2007 Pilsen lager, this year I used #2112 California lager) It is important to use a lager yeast and ferment at the proper temps to get the clean flavor profile. Expected O.G. - 1.052 Expected F.G - 1.012 Do a single step infusion (or whatever you want) for a rest at 154 F for 60 minutes. Raise to 165 F for 10 minutes. Then sparge as normal. Boil for 75 minutes, adding hops and moss as described. Cool and pitch yeast at 70 F. Cool to ferment temps for yeast within 12 hours. For an extract recipe leave out the flaked barley, subsitute 5 lbs light DME for the 9 lbs of 2-row and steep the other grains. If you brew now you might still make it by St Patrick's Day! Secondary Fermentation Question I've noticed that a lot of you like to transfer to the secondary while there is still some active fermentation in the primary. I understand your reasons for doing this but I have noticed a problem for me. I usually get no further drop in gravity after I transfer. For instance, if I expect the gravity to drop to 1.010 (from previous batches of the same recipe) and rack at 1.015 (with bubbles still coming out of the airlock) it will stay there, or sometimes drop to 1.014, but will not get to where it should be. What is the reason for this? I would expect that the active yeast cells are still in solution, not down in the yeast/trub cake that does not get transfered. And, if anything, I would expect the transfer to "rouse" some of the inactive cells and get them fermenting again. But this does not happen. I have noticed this with both ale and lager yeasts. What gives? Scott Jackson The Jackson Backyard Brewery "Scratching my head in Denver, CO" Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 12:53:24 -0500 From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer at engin.umich.edu> Subject: aeration Question: what happens when you aerate during fermentation? Is it good or bad? Has anyone done the experiment? We've had months of back and forth speculation... "Well, it seems to me that ..." "I don't know, why not ...." "This authority sez ..." "But I can't see why ..." SHEESH! SHUT UP OR PUT UP! Make a batch of beer. Split it into two (or more) fermenters. Aerate one during fermentation and don't aerate the other. Take notes. Taste blind after bottling. Are there differences? Wait a month. Taste. Repeat until bored or out of beer. Does one "last" longer than the other? How do the flavors change as they age? After you've done that, THEN report back. Otherwise it's like Monday-morning quarterbacking. Fun for the participants and totally boring for everyone else. Not to mention repetitive and redundant and repetitive. Gee, I must be a bit techy today. =Spencer Thomas in Ann Arbor, MI (spencer at umich.edu) Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 10:40:07 -0800 From: "Bryan L. Gros" <gros at bigfoot.com> Subject: pH test Dave Burley wrote in HBD#2616: >>I have PH strips from Precision labs, but never got instructions >>on how to use them so I don't. > >They are really difficult to use {8^). Just dip them in a sample >of wort which you spooned out of the mash tun and compare >colors on the side of the strip container. When you match the >color of the strip and the color sample on the container, >that is the pH of the liquid. Some of the strips want the >sampled liquid to be at room temperature, so cool it in the >spoon. Remember the pH of the *hot* wort is 0.35 units lower, >approximately than the cooled wort. So if I take my strip and dip it in the hot wort, wait a couple seconds, and then compare the color with the container, will I be reading the correct wort pH? I mean, will the number I read by the pH of the hot wort (since I dipped the strip in the hot wort) or will it be too high (since the strip is cool when I make the comparison)? The color comparison is harder than it looks. Thanks for the clarification. - Bryan gros at bigfoot.com Oakland, CA Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 11:08:53 -0800 From: "Bryan L. Gros" <gros at bigfoot.com> Subject: beer blending in HBD#2616, Robert Ray wrote: >Quick question: I have a keg o' ale that is just bland, to the point of >possibly tossing. It tastes ok, but there really is no hop bite. My >question is: Can I still dry hop this batch, even though it has been >kegged for over two months and has been force carbonated? I hate to >give up on it. I don't see any problem with dry hopping the beer now, but I'm not sure it will help you much. dry hopping doesn't impart much in the way of flavor, and gives almost no bitterness. Sounds like your best bet is to blend the batch with another batch that is very flavorful. You could quickly brew an IPA or something and blend the two. I think blending offers a great opportunity to incrase the varieties of beers we have that many of us don't take advantage of. I've got four kegs in the fridge and have been mixing the beers in the glass. I'm thinking of mixing two beers in my three gallon keg to have an additional beer in the fridge. - Bryan Bryan Gros gros at bigfoot.com Oakland, CA Visit the Draught Board club website: http://www.dnai.com/~thor/dboard/index.htm Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 13:22:37 -0600 (CST) From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com> Subject: Protein rests Kyle writes: >1) Hugh Baird Pale Ale, 41-44 %SNR: There is no question that this malt >is highly/well modified and suitable for a single infusion mash without a >protein rest. I think a good homebrewing definition of highly/well >modified is any malt that does not need a protein rest. > >2) Durst Pils, 1.0-2.0 %FG/CG: From what I can tell this malt is >in-between Noonan's guidelines and is probably moderately modified. I >would use a protein rest of 20' at 131F. > >3) De Wolf Pilsen, 2.0 %FG/CG: This malt is borderline undermodified >and could use a 20' rest at 122F. > >4) Baird Premium Pilsen, 38-42 %SNR: Using Noonans guideline indicates >this malt is highly/well modified and does not need a protein rest. But >how many pilsners are made without a protein rest? Would you use this >malt to make a pilsner with a single infusion temp rest and no protein >rest? I am not so sure so I would rest this malt at 135 F for 20'. I agree that "1" doesn't need a protein rest and that "2" and "3" would benefit from one (I've never used Durst, but the DeWolf-Cosyns Pils needs one, in my opinion). As for doing a protein rest on "4" just because you associate Pilsners woth protein rests, I don't agree. That's not a good reason. While it shouldn't hurt to do a rest at 135F, it would be pretty much a waste of time better spend elsewhere. Modification determines whether you need a protein rest, not the style. Going back to "3" for a second, why would you do the rest at 122F and not 131F (or 135F or 140F)? Because it is *even less modified*? Again, I think you are somehow associating modification and rest temperature. All modern malts will have more than enough amino acids in all-malt worts. A rest at 122F simply increases wort amino acid levels at the expense of body and head retention. With our modern malts, I contend that NO recipe needs a 122F rest! If you are using an undermodified malt and need a protein rest, then do it at around 135F and break those big (haze- and break-forming) proteins into medium-sized (body- and head-forming) proteins. I've posted about this before and I'll say it again. Here's how I determine whether I need to use a protein rest for a particular malt: 1. brew a batch using this malt and *don't* use a protein rest, 2. if more than 1/5 of the carboy is filled with break material the next morning, then next time I use this malt, add 15 minutes at 135F, and 3. if there's only a small amount of break material in the carboy the next morning, then *don't* add a protein rest next time. Simple, no? 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, 22 Jan 1998 15:38:31 -0500 From: "Little, Wayne" <LittleW at od31.nidr.nih.gov> Subject: Minneapolis Any decent brewpubs/beer bars in Minneapolis? Going for a business trip in March. Brrrr! Private e-mail is fine. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 12:42:38 -0800 (PST) From: Fred Waltman <waltman at netcom.com> Subject: Request for Amsterdam beer spots I am going to have a few days in Amsterdam and was wondering if anybody had any suggestions for beer places to visit. I will be using public transportation (i.e. no car) and am traveling with a non beer-drinking S.O. so places in or near cultural or historical sites will be especially appreciated. Fred Waltman waltman at netcom.com Marina del Rey, CA Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 01/26/98, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96