HOMEBREW Digest #2790 Fri 07 August 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

  Dry hopping (Craig & Denise Jensen)
  Stuff (Jim Liddil)
  Acidifying Sparge Water (Tony Barnsley)
  re Yeast Concentration Prior to Fermentation Stage ("Steve Alexander")
  Pitching rates ("Steve Alexander")
  Patron Saint of Brewing/Beer??? (John Baxter Biggins)
  Keg Line Pressure Drop (Bob.Sutton)
  Holes in yer fridge (Nathan Kanous)
  Re: pH data (Rod Schaffter)
  Re: sparge water acidification (Herbert Bresler)
  Pharr Out Acidity, Stuck wine, reducung sugars ("David R. Burley")
  Gypsum & pH Adjustment (Ken Schwartz)
  RE: Clinit*st (LaBorde, Ronald)
  Commercial Starters (Charley Burns)
  RE: coiled hose (John Wilkinson)
  Re:Patron Saint of Brewing/Beer??? (Some Guy)
  re: Holes in the fridge ("Ludwig's")
  Harvesting Homegrown Hops ("Joel Plutchak")
  Microwave / Yeast Harvest ?/ Clubs ? (cdknotts)
  Saturday's Brew ("Kris Jacobs")
  Boiler Sight Gauge Question/Manifold vs. False Bottom (bob_poirier)
  Peter on repitching; underpitching; recipe conversion; Infected Primary (Samuel Mize)
  Refractometer (William Graham)

There will be a Sunday Digest this week... 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 hbd.org 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: Tue, 04 Aug 1998 21:38:54 -0700 From: Craig & Denise Jensen <fourtrax at gte.net> Subject: Dry hopping As a first time poster, I'll see how this works... I wanted to send a quick note for those who are looking at different methods of dry-hopping, specifically in a corny keg. I am enjoying good success using the following method: I drilled a small hole about 1/4" from the end of the dip tube. After inserting the dip tube, I used nylon fishing line to thread through the hole, then tied it tightly around my hop bag filled with whole leaf hops (the bag being boiled for 15 minutes). I left only about 3" of 4" of line between the tube and the hop bag, to ensure that the hops remained under the surface of the beer and in as much contact as possible. It is now 2 weeks since kegging, and the hop flavor is increasing by the day. I have only had one or two specks of hop material make it to my glass so far, although results at the end of the keg remain to be seen. Hope this helps someone! Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1998 21:26:50 -0700 From: Jim Liddil <jliddil at azcc.arizona.edu> Subject: Stuff Dave burley wrote: >Forced fermentations may offer a clue to when the fermentation will be >furnished, but are subject to indeterminate errors. Remember that >this same forced fermentation method is also used to determine the >stability of the beer, as a check for unwanted bacterial fermentation. >Bacteria function better at elevated temperatures, so likely any even >slightly infected beer will give an FG dependent on the bacterial content >as contrasted to a fermentation that was carried out at cooler >temperatures. I have to disagree with this and wonder if by chance you did not read the followup post I wrote after George DePiro's on force fermentation. Geroge worte that ne can use a package of yeast to ferment out 100 ml of wort or so in a day or two to get a true final gravity. I followed up wiht description of the way Siebels does the test. By overpitching one is producing an evironemtn that is inhospitable to fast grwoing organisms. Any organism that will grow and cause super attenuation are very slow growers. So if one does the 4-5 hour technique the chances of other microorganism affecting the gravity are essentially nil. Have you every tried growing wild yeast or lactic acid bacteria on purpose and seen how slow they grow? I have. >The whole point of this hobby for most >homebrewers is to make all kinds of beers with various >( intentional or accidental) mash temperature profiles and yeast that >behave differently. As a result, we almost never know what the final >FG will be, since we have no experience. Given this, how do we know >what the expected FG is supposed to be? > >Actually you don't care what the FG is supposed to be, but as AlK >points out to know "Is the beer done?" This is another way of saying >"Are there any more fermentable sugars in the beer?" > No Dave YOU don't care what the final gravity is. Don't go telling us all what we care about! By doing a forced ferment test, in the proper manner, one can find out what the final gravity is going to be. >However, I believe >they are a cumbersome, 1800s, time consuming and full >of error method of determining a fermentation endpoint. Worst of all >these errors are indeterminate and vary from batch to batch. That's why Miller and AB still do them even though the have Scaba and Paar beer analyzers. All you''re blowing smoke about how inaccurate and imprecise a hydrometer is, is baloney. One can learn to use one correctly and degas the beer etc. In the forced test the beer is essentially degassed from the vigorous agitation or stirring used. So all chemist should abandone grad. cylinders and pipets because there is no way in hell one can learn to read a meniscus properly? Oh please. Mort wrote: Technically, Steve is correct in saying that fermentation rate is ^^^^^^^^^^^^ >dependent on viable biomass, and not growth. I have some recent data >from my own experiments that illustrates this point perfectly: > > Massive overpitching data deleted >This data shows clearly that fermentation rate is governed by biomass, not >yeast growth. > > Yea, clearly. But this is purely an acedemic experiment. It would make no sense to grow and pitch this much yeast on a commercial scale and most homebrewers don't have the resources to do this kind of scale up for 5 gallons. It's easy to do with a 300 ml at Hariot Watt. and we have to ask can this make good beer on a repeated basis? Granted you made your point but few are going to make beer using this method. The satement Lord Peter made is correct for the majority of commercial and homebrewers Lord Peter wrote: >So, my thinking here is: >1) Oxygen is the primary limiting factor in yeast growth. In a fermentation where the yeast have come from a previous fermentation and ahve low sterol levels to start with. And oxygen is only a limiting factor in normal fermentations where it is introduced once at the beginning of the ferment. >2) The yeast will not begin the logarithmic growth phase until they have >proper amounts of aforementioned ergosterol. And the have had a chance to adjust all their other metabloic acitivities etc. >3) The lag time is the period between pitching and the logarithmic growth >phase. >4) Therefore, O2 in sufficient quantities will remove this limiting factor >of growth. The yeast did not have to wait around to get the proper >components they need to begin the growth phase. NO. thsi only applies to yeast that are 95+% viable and are already adapted. the lag phase is a period of adaption. Oxygen will only aid in membrane formation. it does not help the cells adapt to temperature, nor does it help them get their metabolic acitivities going. >5) Does this not mean that not only will the fermentation proceed at a >faster rate because of increase growth, but also that it will begin the >fermentation sooner because it had the proper tools to begin with? > Lag phase is governed by the temperature of the wort, the state of the yeast, the flocullating ability of they yeast (have they been acid washed) and what kind of wort are they being put into (chemcial make up). The yeast will suck up all the oxygen and make sterols, but this will not cahnge the time spend in lag phase. they still have to adpat to the new environment regardless of oxygen level. Jim Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 1998 10:24:58 +0100 From: Tony Barnsley <Tony.Barnsley at riva-group.com> Subject: Acidifying Sparge Water Jeff Wrote, about problems using Gypsum to Acidify his sparge water. Adding gypsum to the water will RAISE the pH of the water. It LOWERS the pH of the mash because it binds with other minerals releasing free phosphate into the mash and thus lowers the pH. For those people that feel they MUST lower the pH of their sparge water. then a few drops of Phosphoric / Lactic Acid will do the job very effectively (In my water, as always YMMV). Of course you can also use Citric, Malic or Tartaric acids at a pinch. Be aware however that over acidification of the wort may result in poor or no Hot break formation (Thanks to AlK for that one. By the way Al Around what pH does this start to become apparent?) Wassail ! Tony, M.i.B (Mashing in Blackpool, Lancashire, UK) Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 1998 05:58:04 -0400 From: "Steve Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net> Subject: re Yeast Concentration Prior to Fermentation Stage Peter Gilbreath writes ... >Lyn Kruger, in notes from Siebel Short Course, 1997: >"Governing principal in fermentation: >The rate of fermentation will depend on the rate and extent of yeast >growth." I'm somehow starting to associate this name with unsupportable nonsense. Mort answered this issue tho'. >>[...]that bears repeating. Lipids are any material that can be >>dissolved in non-polar solvents, [...] a pretty generic term and[...] >Again, Siebel Course 97: >"Lipid is a generic term given to a group of alcohol, ether, and fat >solvents." McMurry, 'Organic Chemistry', Brooks Cole Publ. 4th edition, pp 1099, "Lipids are the naturally occurring organic molecules isolated from cells by extraction with non-polar organic solvents". Mathews&van Holde, 'Biochemistry', Benjamin/Cummins Publ. 2nd edition,pp 12, "Lipids are a chemically diverse group of compounds that are classified together because of their apolar structure which gives them very low solubility in the aqueous environment of the cell". These would not be alcohol or ether solvents, Fats are lipids, but the Seibel definition doesn't really say that does it ? Please cross out the Seibel definition and replace it with something correct. [...] >"Once sufficient oxygen has been adsorbed from the wort to build up the >ergosterol concentration, and the sugars and amino acids are utilized by the >yeast, the cells begin to multiply. Multiplication continues in geometric >progression, called the logarithmic phase of growth, until the material in >shortest supply is used up, growth then slows down and finally the number of >yeast cells remains constant." This growth phase seems to be called the "EXPONENTIAL" not "LOGARITHMIC" phase by everyone else. It should also have been noted that the "material" used up must be a critical not a supportive(synthesizable) nutrient in order to limit growth. >"Under normal brewery conditions the factor that usually limits yeast growth >is the amount of oxygen available in the wort." Well sterols and UFAs really, which are dependent for synthesis on oxygen, but can also be absorbed from wort.. >"When the rate , on a per cell or per gram basis, at which yeast uses the >sugar in wort when growth has ceased is measured, it is found to be very >slow. In contrast, sugar is utilized relatively rapidly when growth is >occurring." There are several reasons for a rate change - not the least of which is that the simple mono-sugars are used up and so a typical beer is dependent on metabolizing bigger (slower to catabolize?) sugars during the stationary phase. It is true that growth requires a pretty fair amount of carbs for energy. The few graphs I have do not show this major rate decline in CO2 (a proxy for fermentation) during the early & mid stationary phase. I have a very nice paper by Gee and Ramirez from JIB from the 1980's which shows a near linear consumption of the individual sugars once they started to be consumed until their individual levels drop too low. I would assert that under 'normal' brewing conditions that the fermentation rate starts to drop sometime after, and not coincident with, the end of exponential growth. >So, my thinking here is: >1) Oxygen is the primary limiting factor in yeast growth. Sterol and (maybe) UFAs ar the limiting factor, whether synthesized of absorbed from wort lipids. Also remember that the pitched yeast ideally have enough sterol to divide ~3 times w/o other sterol synthesis or absorption - so in a sense the pitched yeast state is a limiting factor to growth too. >2) The yeast will not begin the logarithmic growth phase until they have >proper amounts of aforementioned ergosterol. I strongly suspect this is nearly correct, *but* what you are stating above is a critical fact of yeast metabolism if true - and so I will need a reference to really swallow the story that yeast actually WAIT, delaying division until a "proper" lipid level is developed. My guess based on competition and so evolutionary pressure is that yeast *may* delay reproduction in the presence of sufficient O2, and even more doubtful, that yeast *may* delay reproduction until wort sterols are consumed. Either/both of these are different from what you state - and different consequences accrue. I feel that this theory of a delay is highly speculative. It is fully possible that yeast split as soon as they can grab enough sterol(and many other necessities). Perhaps you have a source for this delayed division metabolism - I haven't seen one - but would love to. >3) The lag time is the period between pitching and the logarithmic growth >phase. Many books, several books on bioreactors, M&BS too, include a transitional phases too. This is just a matter of definition - so OK. >4) Therefore, O2 in sufficient quantities will remove this limiting factor >of growth That's easy - YES, I agree. >The yeast did not have to wait around to get the proper >components they need to begin the growth phase. Doesn't follow, because of crabtree effect in fresh wort (~1% glucose) I'm not entirely convinced that yeast even *CAN* absorb O2 initially. I have doubts about whether they really "wait", tho I think it's possible >5) Does this not mean that not only will the fermentation proceed at a >faster rate because of increase growth, but also that it will begin the >fermentation sooner because it had the proper tools to begin with? Not at all - you are ignoring the fermentation that would be occurring due to the original pitched yeast mass regardless of growth. Perhaps the problem is this - There are two things that you might mean my "fermentation". 1/The amount of fermentation that takes place in a given wort. 2/ the amount of fermentation accomplished by a given group of yeast and their progeny. Your Seibel definition seems to mean 2/. While I and M&BS, pp 645 or G.Fix AoBT pp 79-81 clearly mean 1/. Many texts state that pitching additional yeast leads to shorter(faster) fermentations. This has no meaning relative to 2/. >I have not seen any reports or studies that directly rule out O2 sat as a >factor in lag phase length, nor have I seen any that directly support this. >What I do see is a lot of evidence that points me to believe that O2 sats do >indeed influence the length of lag. Please, someone quote a reliable source >to dispel my thoughts, and / or point to the holes in my logic. Timo? What I see are a lot of references that relate lag to delays in producing permeability enzymes, accounting for shock excretion, osmotic pressure changes and metabolic changes to undergo the crabtree effect due to the high (~1%) glucose levels in AG-Wort. There are a lot of references in M&BS, vol2 - but frankly any decent book that covers saccharomyces metabolism should have this. I'd check, 'The Yeasts', by Cambridge press from memory). Steve Alexander Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 1998 05:46:39 -0400 From: "Steve Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net> Subject: Pitching rates Jim Liddel writes about my comments on pitching ... >> The recommended yeast growth rates are that ale yeast should grow by ~8-10X >> and Lager yeast by 4-5X. This would argue in favor starters for 5gal (20L) >According to Lyn Kruger during class and over a few glasses of Guiness the >most >growth you want for ales and lager, regardless of scale (5 gallons or 900 >barrels) is a ~3X. A yeast cell in ideal condition hits the fermenter with 1% Are you sure this isn't 3 divisions (8X) Jim ? 3X may make sense in terms of desired sterol levels, but is clearly out of whack with commercial practice as I read about it the Tech Journals from either side of the Atlantic. As I read more of these extreme statements from Seibel it makes me doubt that they know what they are talking about. Can Lyn Kruger point to a Journal article to support this weird point of view ? >Is autolysis rare in homebrewing? Without doing viability staining this >is purely conjecture in my view. Yes, based on my experience. Steve Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 05 Sep 1998 08:12:01 -0700 From: John Baxter Biggins <jbbiggin at mail.med.cornell.edu> Subject: Patron Saint of Brewing/Beer??? Anyone out there know who the patron saint of Brewing or Beer is (if there is one)??? John Biggins Cornell University Grad School of Medical Sciences Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 1998 08:28:15 -0400 From: Bob.Sutton at fluordaniel.com Subject: Keg Line Pressure Drop Al, you wrote.... |Laurel writes: |>In answer to Mark Swenson's question about dispensing from a keg at |>relatively high pressure - you're right to use a longer dispense line, |>but you might also try coiling it up several times (say, a 5-6" diameter |>coil or as small as you can make it without kinking the tubing) to give |>more back pressure. |Are you sure about this? I don't see how coiling would increase back |pressure... the fact is that flow is what causes the pressure drop. |Is there an "inductor-like" effect (like coiling a wire)? No... there |can't be... can there? An inductor works because a magnetic field is |generated. You need a geeky engineer to answer this one... In non-laminar flow regimes, fittings such as elbows (including long radius turns) generate more frictional resistance than simply the linear path length of the fitting (if the Reynold's Number is less than 2100, the effect decreases.). In fact a simplified means to predict pressure drop in systems applies an "equivalent length" factor to each fitting to represent the linear equivalent of resistance. So by coiling the tubing, Laurel is creating a series of long radius ells, which will offer frictional resistance greater than leaving the tubing in a linear configuration. Here's an oversimplified illustration... Let's assume we have a long radius ell with an inner diameter of 0.25 inch (D=0.25), and let's set the bend radius (to the tubing centerline) at five inches (R=5; no ASCII art - use your mind). The linear length of a 360 degree loop can be computed by calculating the centerline circumference as 2*5*pi, or ~34.2 inches. Cameron's hydraulic data states that the length/diameter (L/D) value for a long radius ell (R/D=20) is 50. Since we have a single loop, the equivalent length of our example is: 50*4*0.25 = 50 inches, where 4 = the number of 90 degree ells to form a loop 0.25 = the ID of our example system. So in fact we've added nearly sixty percent to the linear hydraulic resistance (not backpressure) by forming a loop with a 10 inch diameter. Bob Fruit Fly Brewhaus Yesterdays' Technology Today Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 1998 08:01:46 -0500 From: Nathan Kanous <nlkanous at pharmacy.wisc.edu> Subject: Holes in yer fridge Robert Johnson asks about holes in his fridge. I've done two fridges so far (one died of old age). For both, I made holes in the front of the door for taps. I also ran my CO2 line in through the edge of the door, on the hinged side. It can get a little tight if you need to open the door all the way, but works very well. No problems. The only modification that I included was to put a rubber o-ring (just like the one in a "fermentation bucket" where the airlock goes) around the CO2 line to protect it from the metal. The o-ring may not provide a lot of protection, but it makes me feel like I did something to protect it. YMMV nathan Nathan L. Kanous II, Pharm.D., BCPS Clinical Assistant Professor School of Pharmacy University of Wisconsin - Madison Office Phone (608) 263-1779 Pager (608) 265-7000 #2246 (digital) Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 1998 09:13:16 -0400 From: Rod Schaffter <schaffte at delanet.com> Subject: Re: pH data Fred Johnson inquires: > What is the convention among the biochemists of the temperature at which > one specifies the pH of the enzyme reaction being measure? And is this > the convention used by whomever determined the pH optima of the enzymes we > are dealing with? I really don't care what Miller or anybody else's standard > practice is. I want to know what the biochemist did when he studied the enzyme! > > It seems that unless one has the answer to this last question, we're only > guessing as to the appropriate temperature at which pH should be measured > in the brewhouse. I can't speak for Biochemists, but Analytical Chemists measure pH (and most other electrochemical measurements) at 25 C. The reason for this is that a pH meter actually measures a voltage that is dependent the hydrogen ion concentration. (yeah, I know that it it is really related to hydrogen ion _activity_, but I can brew a batch in the time it would take me to explain pH in terms of activities well!) Hydrogen ion concentration is dependent on the dissociation constants (tendency to break up into separate ions) of all of the acids and bases in the solution. Dissociation reactions of weak acids and bases are temperature dependent, and also dependent on the concentrations of all of the other ions in solution. In addition, the dissociation constant of pure water is highly temperature dependent. According to my trusty CRC Handbook, The (Calculated) pH of pure water would be 7.47 at 0 C, 7.00 at 25 C (actually 6.99825), and 6.51 at 60 C. Also any measurement is dependent on the standards used, which are the buffers used to calibrate the meter. These are calibrated at 25 C, and their actual pH will usually exhibit a lesser degree of temperature dependence, due to the added twist of the temperature dependence of the dissociation constants of the buffer acid and base pairs, but the pH may go up or down with temperature, depending on the specific buffer. This behavior is relevant not only from a calibration standpoint, but because wort contains both weak acids and bases (e.g. polyphenols and proteins) and thus is also a buffer, and will exhibit similar temperature dependence, that is, unpredictable. (I'm sure that someone has done some experiments in this area, so speak up!). The indicators used in pH papers also exhibit temperature dependent behavior, as the color change is due to changes in ionization of the indicator dye molecule. ATC on a pH meter can compensate for small differences in temperature, but in my career, I have had the luxury of taking my samples to the lab and measuring them at 25 C. In Situ measurements of pH must account for differences in temperature, or all be run at a stated temperature. The question to be asked is, "is all of this jargon relevant to brewing?" From my limited experience in mashing, I must give an unqualified "Maybe" ;-). I would say that cooling the sample to room temperature should give quite satisfactory results, and investing in a 25 C temperature controlled bath would probably not improve your brew. (although if anyone has done this, please add your $ 0.02!) Keep in mind that folks brewed at least drinkable beer for thousands of years, and good beer for hundreds of years, before the discovery of ionization chemistry (or thermometers!). The product of controlling these parameters is a more consistent brew. What we need to keep in mind as brewers (and as citizens) is that physical and chemical measurements are usually dependent on the measurement conditions, and unless there is a convention as to those conditions (such as electrochemical measurements being done at 25 C, or boiling points given at 1 atm. pressure) data taken out of the context of the measurement conditions may be at best irrelevant, and at worst, very misleading. Cheers! Rod Schaffter Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 1998 09:38:34 -0400 From: Herbert Bresler <bresler.7 at osu.edu> Subject: Re: sparge water acidification Jeff Pharr asked "A question or two on the process of acidifying the sparge water" in HBD #2788, Mon, 3 Aug 1998. The first one was: What is everyone else doing to bring down the pH? One simple answer is to use lactic acid. I get 88% lactic acid from my local homebrew shop. It comes in a 4 ounce jar and lasts a long time since you only need a small amount per brew (Columbus, OH city water usually requires only about 1 teaspoon per 3 gallons of sparge water to acidify to pH around 5.6). The other nice thing about lactic acid is that yeast will consume it during the fermentation, so it has virtually no effect on the finished product. (If you use a ton of gypsum, it will definitely affect the finished beer, perhaps adversely.) A word of caution: Handle 88% lactic acid carefully; after all, it is concentrated acid and will burn skin, clothing, etc. Good luck and good brewing, Herb Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 1998 10:22:02 -0400 From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Pharr Out Acidity, Stuck wine, reducung sugars Brewsters: Jeff Pharr is unsuccessfully trying to adjust the acidity of his sparge water with Gypsum. Gypsum is a poorly soluble, neutral salt of calcium and sulfate ions and by itself in water won't do much to change the pH. The reason gypsum works in increasing the acidity ( reducing the pH) of a wort is that the calcium ion from the gypsum reacts with various phosphate salts in the malt which are partially protonated. The even less soluble calcium phosphate is precipitated and the proton released. Ergo the pH drops. To adjust your sparge water I recommend food grade lactic acid, although other acids like food grade phosphoric will also work. One problem with phosphoric acid is that it may upset the calcium balance in the wort, so that's why I stick with the lactic acid available from your HB shoppe. Sparge water around 7.5 may cause the extraction of phenols from the husk and parts of the endosperm toward the end of the sparge as the buffers in the wort no longer are concentrated enough to control the pH of the sparge. - ---------------------------- Matt garret has a wine fermentation that is stuck. Add yeast nutrient ( HB store) and pitch another pack of yeast if the addition of the nutrient doesn't do it. - ---------------------------- A.J DeLAnge says: "Dave Burley should be pleased to note that the ASBC Methods of analysis has not 1 but 2 methods for determing reducing sugars." I am , but I'm not surprised. Thanks for pointing this out. For those who don't make the connection Clinitest measures reducing sugars. - ---------------------------- 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, 05 Aug 1998 08:25:49 -0600 From: Ken Schwartz <kenbob at elp.rr.com> Subject: Gypsum & pH Adjustment Jeff Pharr has messed with gypsum to try to adjust the mash and sparge pH and asks: > What is everyone else doing to bring down the pH? > Should I just start buying gypsum in 50lb sacks? > What are the problems associated with excessive gypsum usage in the > mash? > What are the problems with using sparge water with a pH up around 7.5? The reason gypsum (calcium sulfate) works to lower mash pH is because of a *chemical reaction* in the mash which liberates H+ ions (protons), which is what makes acid, acid. In plain water no such reaction takes place, and you might as well be adding sand or Kool-Aid. Excessive gypsum will overload your beer with sulfate ions, which harshens and dries bitterness. There are a very few styles (most notably Burton Pale Ales) that can benefit from such an effect but in most cases this is undesirable. Calcium Chloride is now more commonly available than before, and is a better choice in beers that are sulfate-sensitive. Sparge pH should be lowered to create a chemical environment less prone to leaching susbtances from the grain husks which can lend astringency to the final product. A pH of 5.7 is a commonly-quoted target. To lower sparge water pH, you can use food-grade acid. Your HB supply store should have 10% phosphoric or 88% lactic acid available. The amount of acid required depends on the composition of your water, so use trial-and-error along with good pH strips or a meter to guide you. Another suggestion is to prepare enough *distilled* or *RO* water for sparging, then add malt extract at the rate of about 1 tablespoon per gallon. Distilled/RO water is very "pure" water and its pH is easily influenced from even small additions of acids or bases. Malt extract is concentrated wort, which we know is an acid (acids have pH < 7.0, wort is usually around 5 or so). I have found that this ratio of extract in distilled water lowers the pH sufficently to safely sparge without adding a lot of sugar (something like 2 points of gravity, probably less than your starter is adding ;-). - -- ***** Ken Schwartz El Paso, TX kenbob at elp.rr.com http://home.elp.rr.com/brewbeer Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 1998 10:07:46 -0500 From: rlabor at lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald) Subject: RE: Clinit*st From: Mark Riley <mriley at netcom.com> >The horse is now very, very dead. ;-0 Yeah, you can test it's blood sugar with Clinitest and see if maybe that killed it. Ron Ronald La Borde - Metairie, Louisiana - rlabor at lsumc.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 98 08:34 PDT From: caburns at egusd.k12.ca.us (Charley Burns) Subject: Commercial Starters Peter Gilbreth comments in hbd#2788: In the case that a commercial brewery needs to start anew with their yeast, they are not likely to build up from a smack pack, but rather they will purchase a large amount of centrifuged cells. And when they do need to propogate, they will likely have off flavors in the first few batches that may need to be blended with subsequent brews. [me] The commercial brewers that I have spoken with regarding this buy very large smakpaks from Wyeast and propagate their yeast with small yeast propagation batches prior to pitching the slurry into a **production** batch of beer meant for public consumption. Thus avoiding the off-flavors in the first place. Do you specifically know of a commerical brewer that blends their beer to "hide" off flavors due to low pitching rates? Or was this conjecture? Charley Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 98 10:13:56 CDT From: jwilkins at wss.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson) Subject: RE: coiled hose Al wrote: > Laurel writes: > >In answer to Mark Swenson's question about dispensing from a keg at > >relatively high pressure - you're right to use a longer dispense line, > >but you might also try coiling it up several times (say, a 5-6" diameter > >coil or as small as you can make it without kinking the tubing) to give > >more back pressure. > > Are you sure about this? I don't see how coiling would increase back > pressure... Sam wrote: >It seems to me that a tight-enough coil would bend the profile of the >tubing out of round, effectively reducing the diameter of the hose. An >oval of a given circumference has a smaller area than a circle of that >circumference. So this may work. Maybe I am just dense but I thought what Laurel meant was to use a long enough hose to drop the pressure and that coiling it was a way to fit it into the space available. John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins at wss.dsccc.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 1998 11:26:30 -0400 (EDT) From: Some Guy <pbabcock at oeonline.com> Subject: Re:Patron Saint of Brewing/Beer??? Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager... John Baxter Biggins <jbbiggin at mail.med.cornell.edu> asks: > Anyone out there know who the patron saint of Brewing or Beer is (if > there is one)??? Those would be Saints Dunlop and Flatulence, if I'm not mistaken. No, but seriously: It's Karl Lutzen. See ya! Pat Babcock in SE Michigan pbabcock at oeonline.com Home Brew Digest Janitor janitor@hbd.org HBD Web Site http://hbd.org The Home Brew Page http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/brew.html "Just a cyber-shadow of his former brewing self..." Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 1998 11:45:14 -0400 From: "Ludwig's" <dludwig at us.hsanet.net> Subject: re: Holes in the fridge If your not absolutely sure what lurks behind the sheet metal your about to drill through. Drill a small hole using a drill depth collar to limit the protrusion depth to minimum. Then probe around to make sure nothings in the way. Dave Ludwig Flat Iron Brewery SO MD Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 1998 11:02:14 -0500 From: "Joel Plutchak" <joel at bolt.atmos.uiuc.edu> Subject: Harvesting Homegrown Hops Oh gods of brewing, I approach ye on bended knee. (Was that OK?) I'm in my first productive year of growing hops. The Chinook are just now getting great cones-- long and large-- while the Cascades cones have been around for awhile (smaller and rounder). This past weekend I picked about an ounce of the first Cascades because they seemed dryish. They smelled really nice, too. However, after 5 days of air drying they just smell grassy. What's up? Did I harvest too early? Too late? Dry too much? Not enough? Not fast enough? Could growing conditions have been suboptimal? FWIW, they were papery and springy when I picked them, and they lost *very* roughly (my digital scale measures in 1/4-oz increments) 75% of their weight after drying. The strigs are brittle. The cones were of various sizes, ranging from about 1/2" to 1" long. I can see the golden-yellow lupulin glands, and when crushed they smell like Cascades. Thanks in advance for any conjecture. - -- Joel Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 1998 12:14:51 -0400 From: cdknotts at m3.sprynet.com Subject: Microwave / Yeast Harvest ?/ Clubs ? Microwave Fred Wills wrote: <For actual conventional starters, I usually mix the appropriate amount of DME and water in a mason jar and nuke it in the microwave for about 20-25 minutes. Wicked easy and everything that touches the wort is well sanitized (maybe even sterilized for a short while). Microwave starters are so easy it makes me woinder why anyone would bother canning wort.> I too have great success with using a microwave for starter solutions. I use a 1000ml Erlemeyer (sp?) flask, place it off-center on the microwave carrousel, plug-in 5 to 8 minutes on high and let it go (a true fire-and-forget process). I also use the microwave to prepare my corn sugar priming solution when bottling. I follow the same procedure however, a 3 cup Pyrex measuring cup is used for the solution vessel. No problems thus far with either. Comments? - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Yeast Harvest Does anyone out there use the inverted carboy fermentation technique to harvest yeast? If so, please share your experiences. - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Clubs Does anyone know of a Brew club registry other than the Brewery website or Zymurgy magazine? Or, are aware of clubs in the Northern Virginia area (South-Eastern Fairfax County / North-Eastern Prince William County)? I am at the point (finally living in the USA for at least the next 2 years) where I would like to associate with other brewers in a Home-brew club. The problem is that there seems to be a lack of interest in the area that I live. I have contacted clubs (via email) that are located near by, but I get no response or a "clubs disbanded due to lack of interest" message. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 1998 12:18:14 -0400 From: "Kris Jacobs" <jtsnake at net-link.net> Subject: Saturday's Brew Thanks to all who speculated to me via email about my infected batch. I live in the Kalamazoo, MI area, and 95% of the time I pitch a six- pack worth of bottle dregs yeast from Bell's Amber Ale. I love Bell's yeast -- it works great. I have just recently got a great contact -- now I can get quart jars FULL of Bell's yeast straight off their fermenters. Whoohoo! This should solve any sort of underpitching problems... ;) As for sanitation, I use BTF at about 25ppm, contact time of anywhere from 3 minutes to 30. I suspect my first-ever try at chilling with my CF chiller that I just built had something to do with ruining that IPA. It was a train wreck to say the least -- I had major flow problems, etc. plus I was well into "yeast harvesting" a sixer and then some. Heh! I am back to immersion chilling until I can get a pump, IOTW, until I get my RIMS set up. Kris Jacobs Galesburg, MI Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 1998 12:28:50 -0500 From: bob_poirier at adc.com Subject: Boiler Sight Gauge Question/Manifold vs. False Bottom Greetings! ** Boiler Sight Gauge Question ** Just got done reading HBD #2786 (OK, so I'm two days behind - at least I'm not two MONTHS behind like I was two or three weeks ago!!). I've got a question about the sight gauge Guy Gregory installed on his converted 1/2 bbl. SS keg: Will the wort the fills the sight tube cause any problems with infections, since it isn't boiled along with the rest of the wort?? This has been bothering me for a while, and I haven't installed a sight gauge on my boiler because I couldn't decided if I was being too paranoid or not! ** Manifold vs. False Bottom ** I've got another hang-up regarding the difference in performance between a lauter tun fitted with a manifold (constructed of 1/2 in Cu pipe/fittings), and a tun fitted with a false bottom. I'm in the process of converting a 1/2 bbl. SS keg into a mash/lauter tun, and I can't decided which to use - the manifold is a LOT cheaper, but, something in the back of my head keeps saying that a good false bottom beats hell out of a manifold. Any thoughts?? TIA! Brew On & Prosit!! Bob P. East Haven, CT Home of Bubba's Bodaceous Basement Brewery PS - Keep up the good work, people!! I've learned more about home brewing since I subscribed to the HBD in April '98 than I EVER learned since I started home brewing in '91. THANKS!!! Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 1998 11:42:48 -0500 (CDT) From: Samuel Mize <smize at mail.imagin.net> Subject: Peter on repitching; underpitching; recipe conversion; Infected Primary Greetings to all. Peter Gilbreth <barleywine at prodigy.net> wrote a paragraph I found confusing. Was Lyn saying that using sediment from either fermenter (primary or secondary) would select over time for non-flocculent yeast? I'm not arguing yea or nay, I just didn't quite follow your meaning. - - - - - - - - - - "Brian Wurst" <brian at mail.netwave.net> says: > I would wager that most homebrewers underpitch almost every time they > brew...Could this be the origins of THT (That Homebrew Taste)? You mean the one we like? :-) It's probably a secondary factor, at least, in some less-satisfactory tastes. On the other hand, there are a couple of comments in That Same Issue of HBD about "adequate" pitching providing a "clean," non-estery beer. I personally like lots of fruity, flavorful esters. On the other other hand, this would hurt me in competitions. - - - - - - - - - - "Dave Russell" <drussel3 at ford.com> asks about using his own hops to match a hopped extract. Wow, best of luck, this will probably take you several experiments. Then you'll have to drink them up, darn. Your hop utilization (how much of the available bitterness you actually extract from the hops) will vary based on how much you boil, for how long and how vigorously, how much malt is in the boil, and a lot of other factors. Also, John Bull extracts don't ferment out as completely as some other brands (although some others leave even more sweetness). You'll want to use John Bull unhopped extract to match perfectly. I'll let those who know more about hops give you specific advice. I'm just pointing out that you may have a tough time matching it perfectly. On the other hand, you can easily come up with an excellent beer you will enjoy, if you don't worry about matching it all that precisely. - - - - - - - - - - "Kris Jacobs" <jtsnake at net-link.net> has an infected primary, and says: > I intend to throw the whole batch out, I just have to bring myself to > do it sometime. Probably Saturday morning, when I will whip up a > quick and dirty low-gravity pale ale. I'll grant up front that I'm paranoid, but I personally would dump it and sanitize the primary (and the drain) the day before. I don't really want a 5 gallon infection culture hanging around the house the day I brew. You may also want to spray-disinfect the area you put your fermenters in. - - - - - - - - - - From: randy.pressley at SLKP.COM: > I brewed a batch of India Pale Ale and added a handful of oak chips ... > I tossed them directly into the secondary for about 10 days wearing only > their birthday suit. You should have worn plaid. - - - - - - - - - - To Mark Riley: it's Dracula's horse. It never stays dead for long. On the other hand, if it's a diabetic Clydesdale, we can test with perfect accuracy whether our Budweiser clone is ready. Best, Sam Mize - -- Samuel Mize -- smize at imagin.net (home email) -- Team Ada Fight Spam: see http://www.cauce.org/ \\\ Smert Spamonam Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 1998 10:53:58 -0600 (MDT) From: William Graham <weg at rmi.net> Subject: Refractometer Hello- In this month's BT, there is a small ad from a California company called "Grain Robbbers" which is trying to sell a refractometer for the purposes of measuring sg. Does anyone know anything about this device like how is it used?, is it accurate enough?, and would this be a useful thing for a gadget-tolerant home brewer such as myself? TIA Bill "...the only way to deal with bureaucrats is with stealth and sudden violence." - Butros Butros-Ghali Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 08/07/98, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96