HOMEBREW Digest #2959 Sat 20 February 1999

[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

  Brown malt/historic porter (Jeremy Bergsman)
  Temperature Controller (Joe Kish)
  Star San (Joy Hansen)
  Reality Check-ing some "facts" (ThomasM923)
  a tangential question... (LEAVITDG)
  scottish ale (Rick Georgette)
  RIMs & Grain Bed (RobertJ)
  Chill Haze / Steve do you filter? ("Crossno, Glyn")
  denaturing enzymes (David Whitman)
  re Mash Question / Coriander for Wits (Ken Schwartz)
  Jacketed thermometers (Bill_Rehm)
  Walk-in cooler (fridge)
  Re:MCAB + Cold Room (DakBrew)
  Fruit & Herb Beers (randy.pressley)
  Quick yeast Question (Eric.Fouch)
  Re: Hops History (Tidmarsh Major)
  yeast autolysis in primary (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
  Diacetyl Problem (Thomas S Barnett)
  sparge temps - protein denaturation (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
  Why RIMS with modified malts? ("Taber, Bruce")
  RE: Stuck sparges ("Mercer, David")
  jockey box ("Bryan L. Gros")
  Cherry and Plum Bounce (Liquors) (Spencer Tomb)
  Houston/Galveston Brewpubs (Spencer Tomb)
  Cinq Cents clone followup / NHC / Y2K (Matthew Arnold)
  Non-alcoholic beer by vacuum evaporation. ("S. Wesley")
  Computer Controlled brewing ("Shane Brauner")
  RE: Larson: Mash Question ("NFGS")
  sanitizing bottles (Jeremy B. Pugh)
  Cartoon (John Wilkinson)
  Wort Chillers (AJ)

Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! Enter The Mazer Cup! _THE_ mead competition. Details available at http://hbd.org/mazercup Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!! To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to request@hbd.org. **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! Contact brewery at hbd.org for information regarding the "Cat's Meow" Back issues are available via: HTML from... http://hbd.org 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 COPYRIGHT for the Digest as a collection is currently held by hbd.org (Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen). Digests in their entirity CANNOT be reprinted/reproduced without this entire header section unless EXPRESS written permission has been obtained from hbd.org. Digests CANNOT be reprinted or reproduced in any format for redistribution unless said redistribution is at absolutely NO COST to the consumer. COPYRIGHT for individual posts within each Digest is held by the author. Articles cannot be extracted from the Digest and reprinted/reproduced without the EXPRESS written permission of the author. The author and HBD must be attributed as author and source in any such reprint/reproduction. (Note: QUOTING of items originally appearing in the Digest in a subsequent Digest is exempt from the above. Home brew clubs NOT associated with organizations having a commercial interest in beer or brewing may republish articles in their newsletters and/or websites provided that the author and HBD are attributed. ASKING first is still a great courtesy...) JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 22:46:41 -0800 From: Jeremy Bergsman <jeremybb at leland.Stanford.EDU> Subject: Brown malt/historic porter I asked for advice on my historic porter recipe. Unfortunately, the only responses I received concerned the brown malt. While useful, I'm still interested in other things such as the diastatic power of the Weyermann smoked malt and whether people think that beechwood smoke is appropriate in a c. 1700 porter, etc. As for the brown malt, I received 3 responses that HB is not the only maltster making it, Beestons does too. One respondant disliked the effects of both brown malts when used at high rates due to a smokey/phenolic character, but suggested the Beestons might be better. The most interesting reply was from Stephen Cavan who has made several historic porters from different periods using homemade malt. See his web page: http://duke.usask.ca/~cavanst/18cbeer.htm - -- Jeremy Bergsman jeremybb at leland.stanford.edu http://www.stanford.edu/~jeremybb Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 18:39:43 -0800 From: Joe Kish <jjkish at worldnet.att.net> Subject: Temperature Controller "Tom & Dee McConnell" There was a follow-up article in Zymurgy about a year ago, that hinted at discrepancies, such as a 'slight' error in the diagram, but not much was said. The best place is the data sheet for the RCA 3059 & 3079. Also, there was an Application Note ICAN-6182, "Features and Applications of RCA Integrated-Circuit Zero-Voltage Switches(CA3059 and CA3079)" Joe Kish jjkish at worldnet.att.net Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 22:58:53 -0500 From: joytbrew at halifax.com (Joy Hansen) Subject: Star San I've abandoned using Idophor or percarbonate for most sanitation chores. Since the peracetic sanitizer is not available to home brewers, I've settled on Star San, a foaming sanitizer. It always leaves a lot of bubbles which on the surface of the container. 1. What is the contact time for this sanitizer and if low levels? 2. Can Star San be used as a NO-RINSE sanitizer; or, is the residual lethal to beer yeast? 3. I use hot PBW to clean, hot water rinse, followed by Star San to sanitize. I think these are working OK for me? This old dog can learn new tricks! The Fix's book, An analysis of Brewing Techniques details the use and efficacy of several sanitizers. Star San wasn't among them. I sure wish they had included this one. Joy"T"Brew Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 06:56:49 EST From: ThomasM923 at aol.com Subject: Reality Check-ing some "facts" Alan McKay wrote: I'm currently having an argument with a fellow in the on-line German forum...We both agree that going over 78C/168F in your sparge is a bad thing. But he says it's because over this temperature, you denature your enzymes, and since they are made out of protein (which they are), you therefore get hazy beer. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ - --------------------------- Allen, have you asked your German colleague how he preserves his enzymes during the boil? Thomas Murray Maplewood, NJ Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 07:23:24 -0500 (EST) From: LEAVITDG at SPLAVA.CC.PLATTSBURGH.EDU Subject: a tangential question... Do we as brewers need to be concerned with "genetically manipulated" seeds? I have heard that there is quite a fuss taking place over this in Britain, and wonder if any of you know whether we need to worry... ..Darrell <Plattsburgh, NY> Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 07:41:38 -0500 (EST) From: rickge at webtv.net (Rick Georgette) Subject: scottish ale Can someone suggest the correct temperature to use for secondary coditioning of a scottish ale. In Noonans book he suggest 40 - 50, is the purpose of this to drop out the yeast because I can't see the yeast working at these temps. I am using both 1728 and 1084. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 07:44:16 -0500 From: RobertJ <pbsys at pbsbeer.com> Subject: RIMs & Grain Bed Phil Wilcox wrote: My pump is a march pump rated at 220F. Great little thing. I also use 2 different ball valves to decrease the flow speed. One of them has the 3/8 restricted ball in it. but this is after the pump not before it. (Jpegs avail upon request) Everything before the pump has to be 1/2 or bigger, including the inside of the ball part of the valve. - ----- I use a similar pump (March 1/25th HP) and have a 3/8" ball valve (not full port) out of my mash tun. I have had no problem with recirculating. A larger mash drain valve would be better in terms of total volume moved (which is not needed) but I have no problems with either clogging or air with this set up. Flow rate is controlled on the down stream side with a similar valve. If I used all 1/2" tubing on downstream side with no restriction I expect I would have a problem Bob Precision Brewing Systems URL http://www.pbsbeer.com Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 06:51:25 -0600 From: "Crossno, Glyn" <Glyn.Crossno at cubic.com> Subject: Chill Haze / Steve do you filter? While enjoying my latest CAP I was thinking, (always a mistake), "If I could get rid of the chill haze this would be perfect." This one was corn meal, cereal mash, single infusion. Great Head, last for quite a while. So do I need a SHORT protein rest. At 130? 135? 10 minutes? ThE GrEaT BrEwHoLiO <skotrat at mediaone.net> wrote >Mark Riley Writes: >>I've made several ales and lagers >>without using a protein rest and have found that these very >>same beers have a stubborn chill haze that won't go away >>with "lagering". >I say: >Hmmm funny you should mention this topic. I have been eliminating >my protein rest lately to see if it made a difference. Well, I am >experiencing the same said chill haze problems for the first time >ever in my brewing. Lagering seems to get rid of it most of the time >but not completely. >>Mark Riley Writes: >>Now, supposedly the pros say that a >>protein rest is "unnecessary with todays malts" but do >>these same pros not care about chill haze because they're >>all filtering their beers and this is a non-issue for them? >I say: >I have talked to several pros about it and they filter... Therefore >they have no problem. >I am also experiencing better head (lord knows we all need that ;) ) >on my beers but it isn't as lasting as when I do a 134 rest. >I am using many of the same malts that Mark has mentioned as well >as Briess Pale Ale 2 row. >Anybody else getting some of the same results? >PH Problems?? >Hmmmm... Then Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net> wrote >You may want to consider a mash-in at 90-104F/35-40C instead of 130F/54C. >Unless you have particularly poorly malted grain (like homemade hard as >stone) you don't get any advantage from a 54C rest and *may* be killing your >foam head. Nothing important happens at 100F except that the malt gets wet >and the enzymes&starch go off into solution. This allows the enzymes to act >faster at 145F/63C. Kunze and others suggest avoiding or at least carefully >controlling the 50C temp range as a head/body killer. Glyn Crossno Estill Springs, TN Rural HBD land. - --------------- > "...I was to learn later in life that we tend to meet any new > situation by reorganizing: and a wonderful method it can be for creating > the illusion of progress, while producing confusion, inefficiency and > demoralization." > Petronius Arbiter, 210 B.C. > > Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 07:56:45 -0500 From: David Whitman <dwhitman at rohmhaas.com> Subject: denaturing enzymes Alan McKay asks for support in a debate about the benefits/problems of allowing the sparge to drift above 168F. The key point is whether enzymes denature, and the consequences of this if they do. There is no single magic temperature at which enzymes denature. Different proteins are more or less stable, but for any given protein, the rate of denaturing goes up with temperature. Long periods at lower temp can denature as can short times at high temp. The ideal temperatures for the various conversion rests we do are compromises between enzyme activity (goes up with temperature) and enzyme stability (goes down with temperature). The kinetics of denaturing are also affected by pH (you can denature egg albumen by boiling at pH 7, or with low pH at room temperature). Assuming you've already got conversion, it's not obvious to me what the problem with denaturing the enzymes during sparge would be. Denaturing generally involves just randomizing the secondary structure of the enzyme (the way it folds up), with no change in molcular weight. This can affect solubility, but if solubility goes down, you'd just leave more protein behind in the grain bed. Remember that you're going to boil the wort in the next brewing step, so it's not as if those enzymes aren't going to see high temperature eventually. Like Alan, I've observed increased extraction when using a 168F mashout. I've always attributed this (QDA - opinion, not supported by experiment!) to 1. lower viscosity for better flow and 2. a burst of conversion due to enhanced enzyme catalysis at high temp (which isn't sustainable for long because the enzymes will denature). Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 06:03:00 -0700 From: Ken Schwartz <kenbob at elp.rr.com> Subject: re Mash Question / Coriander for Wits Todd Larson writes that he is having trouble sparging, that it takes a long time and he has to clear the spigot and stir to get the liquid to move. Sounds like a classic case of Phil's Phalse Bottom Phloating and Philling with Phluff. The Phalse has a tendency to Phloat and allow grain to bypass the false bottom. They would then get directly into the spigot and slow or even stop the flow. Many solutions ahve been posted here in the past, and I encourage you to search the HBD archives at http://hbd.org . One is to use a stiff length of cooper pipe to connect the elbow to the drain, rather than flexible tubing. This tends to hold the Phil's against the bottom of the mash/lauter vessel. Other people have slit a length of vinyl tubing, slipped it around the edge of the Phil's forming a "gasket" around the perimeter, and stuffing it down inside the bucket. This supposedly forms a good seal and hold the Phil's in place. ===== Nathan Kanous asks about ground coriander in witbier. My one and only witbier used 1 oz Curacao orange peel and about 1 tblsp crushed seeds late in the boil for a subtle but noticible effect. The book "Clonebrews" (Tess & Mark Szamatulski) has a recipe for Blanche de Bruges calling for 1 tsp ground coriander, along with 1/2 oz Curacao peel, 1/4 tsp crushed cumin seeds, and 1 tsp crushed grains of paradise, for the last 45 minutes of the boil, with an additional 1/4 oz orange peel and 1/2 tsp coriander in the last 3 minutes. - -- ***** Ken Schwartz El Paso, TX Brewing Web Page: http://home.elp.rr.com/brewbeer E-mail: kenbob at elp.rr.com Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 07:23:08 -0600 From: Bill_Rehm at DeluxeData.com Subject: Jacketed thermometers Does any out there know of anyone that sells jacketed thermometers for mash tuns and boil kettles? What do I mean you may ask, it's a thermometer that has a sleave that it fits into thus the thermometer can be removed at high temps. without the liquid draining out the hole. I'd like to add one to my boil kettle so I can easily check the temp while cooling, but I don't want to put regular mashing thermometer on my converted keg boil kettle and expose it to the extreme temps of boiling. TIA Bill Rehm The Weil Street Backyard Brewery, Oostburg Wisconsin Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 08:26:39 -0500 From: fridge at kalamazoo.net Subject: Walk-in cooler Greeting folks, In HBD#2958, Eric Schoville expressed an interest in installing a 5'x8' cold room in his garage. I have heard from many people who have added extensions and such to upright fridges and freezers. This approach seems to be pretty viable for those who can live with a modest increase in space. However, in my opinion a 5'x8' room with a 7' ceiling in a garage that gets above 100 degF will require more cooling capacity than a domestic refrigerator can provide. I'll describe a couple of possibilities I think will work. The first, and I believe to be the best choice in this case is to look around for business liquidation sales or auctions. Cold rooms of this size are very common and are often cheap to buy. I've been offered several over the years, free for the taking. These rooms are generally made up of foam-filled sheet metal panels that have been zip-screwed together. The refrigeration system is made up of several components. There will be a separate condensing unit that may be located outdoors to prevent heat rejection into the garage space. The evaporator and fans are usually mounted high on one wall and are designed to remove moisture from the air at the desired temperatures (low 30'sF). There will be a drain pan and line to carry away any condensate to a remote location. Be aware that an EPA certified technician will be required to reclaim any refrigerant in the system before you can disassemble the cooling components. When the room is reassembled, the tech will need to leak-check, evacuate and charge the system. There may be local laws requiring licensed technicians to perform *any* refrigeration-related work. Another possibility is to construct a well insulated room and install a small window air conditioner as the cooling unit. I would recommend 4" of rigid foam for insulation on the *inside* of a 2x4 framework. The foam would be two layers of 2" rigid board, installed with joints butted and sealed tight, and staggered between inner and outer layers. I'd also highly recommend a layer of 5/8" water-resistant drywall inside the foam to provide some fire resistance. Interior finish could be a vapor-barrier paint or something similar. The window air conditioner should be mounted in a side wall so that waste heat is ducted to the outdoors, and not into the garage. An external temperature contoller may be needed to allow the lower- than-normal-for-air-conditioner temperatures desired. Condensate will collect in the window ai r contioner's drain pan and may be directed outdoors or into a floor drain. The fan must run continuously to minimize the possibility coil icing and the air conditioner should be set to recirculate the air in the cold room. Of the two options I described, I believe the first will be cheaper to do and will provide better results if a commercial cold room can be obtained at auction/liquidation. Good luck on the project! Hope this helps! Forrest Duddles - FridgeGuy in Kalamazoo fridge at kalamazoo.net Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 08:47:05 EST From: DakBrew at aol.com Subject: Re:MCAB + Cold Room Eric Schoville wrote" "On another note, I am thinking about putting a cold room "in my garage. I am thinking about a 8'x5' room with a 7' "ceiling. Ideally I would like to keep it in the low 30's. ''One problem is that my garage routinely stays at 115 in ''the summer. Has anyone tried anything like this who can ''comment on my different options. Right now I have two ''chest freezers, but they are space limiting. Do I need to ''go with a commercial unit for this? Can anyone relate ''some experience with commercial cooling units? I have no ''idea what they are like." Hey Eric why not build your room around one or both of the chest freezers. Such that the openings were in the room and the compressors were not. then remove the lids and you could probably have 2 different cold zones really cold in the freezers and not so cold in the surrounding room. They run really big chest freezers in supermarkets with no tops all day long. Just a thought :-) If you like that Idea you could try a window ac unit and lots of rigid foam insulation. That's how I plan to make mine when the garage/ brewery gets built. Good luck and let us know how you do it and how well it works. Dan Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 8:42:19 -0500 From: randy.pressley at SLKP.COM Subject: Fruit & Herb Beers I'm getting ready to brew another batch of brew and am planning to try for a different taste than my usual IPA. My plan is to brew the IPA as usual but then split the batches 3 ways, 5 gal each. I would like to add fresh mint to one batch, I assume dry hopping would be the best procedure here, but how much mint should I use to leave just a hint of mint in the beer when tasted. The next batch I would like to add fresh ginger root. I assume here that I would add that to the last 15 minutes of the boil. Again how much for just a hint of ginger taste. Lastly I read an article in BYO this month about orange beer. The brewer takes 2 lbs of oranges, roughly 20% of the total grain bill, puts them in a blender then seeps them during the boil. Anyone ever done this? Am I better off just using the orange zest and dry hopping this as well. Any input appreciated. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 09:18:00 -0500 From: Eric.Fouch at steelcase.com Subject: Quick yeast Question HBD- Here's a quick yeast question, and the chance for somebody to just impress the hell out of me.... Doe's anybody know what yeast would be isolated from a bottle of "Hogerspaten Poorter*"? And answering saccharomyces cerevisiae doesn't count! *A Belgian porter, the spelling is from memory Thanks Eric Fouch Bent Dick YoctoBrewery Kentwood, MI Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 08:46:41 -0600 From: Tidmarsh Major <ctmajor at samford.edu> Subject: Re: Hops History Badger asks about books on early hops. Look for Ann Hagen's books on Anglo-Saxon food and drink (there are two). As I recall, the second book covers the production of beverages, and it contains a number of good references to primary sources that mention hops in England and on the continent from about the 8th C. or so. My memory is a bit hazy on the details, and I no longer have access to the books, having switched universities, but I do recall that her scholarship was excellent and that the volumes were treasure troves of information about early medieval brewing. Waes hael, Tidmarsh Major Birmingham, Alabama "We must drink as we brew" --The Wakefield Master Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 10:42:22 -0500 (EST) From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker at welchlink.welch.jhu.edu> Subject: yeast autolysis in primary George De Piro wrote: Storage of beer on the primary yeast is vastly different to storing the beer on secondary or bottled yeast. The major difference, and the one that most concerns us, is that there are orders of magnitude less yeast in the secondary or bottle than in the primary. First, are there any references available on the extent of autolysis/loss of viability as a function of time post-ferment? Surely someone has looked at this in detail. I've read a few studies examining viability decreases related to other variables such as pitch size, ethanol concentration, nutrient deficiencies, fermentattion temp, etc.. but none that simply measure the settled yeast over time. I'm beginning to conduct such experiments myself but have only just got started. Am still researching/debating the merits of using Methylene blue staining as a surrogate marker of viability. Second, another major difference in the primary is the presence of variable amounts of break materials with their potential negative flavor impacts. Can you confidently differentiate between trub-derived off flavors and those coming from yeast autolysis? It seems to me that this factor could go a long way in explaining the different opinions different brewers seem to have on this issue as there is certainly going to be a wide range of break carrying over into the primary depending upon one's brewing techniques. -Alan Meeker Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 09:46:03 -0600 (CST) From: Thomas S Barnett <barnets at mail.auburn.edu> Subject: Diacetyl Problem Hello all, I made a wheat beer using Wyeast #3068. I pitched a large starter and fermented at 65-70F. I was therefore surprised to find a noticeable butterscotch flavor,(i.e. diacetyl), in the finished product, as i was under the impression that diacetyl is generally a result of underpitching and/or high fermentation temperatures. This leads me to beleive that the problem is a result of bacterial contamination rather than problems associated with intense yeast growth. If this is indeed the case, is there any way to reduce the diacetyl concentration after the beer has been bottled? Will raising the temp. activate the yeast to uptake the diacetyl or just worsen the problem if it's bacterial? Will storing the bottles cold for a while help? Could this particular yeast simply produce a lot of diacetyl? Thanks. Tom Barnett. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 10:53:02 -0500 (EST) From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker at welchlink.welch.jhu.edu> Subject: sparge temps - protein denaturation Alan McKay asks about high sparge temps leading to later haze problems due to denaturation of proteins.. _______________________________________________________________ I'm currently having an argument with a fellow in the on-line German forum at http://www.bier-selbstgebraut.de/wwwforum/index.html We both agree that going over 78C/168F in your sparge is a bad thing. But he says it's because over this temperature, you denature your enzymes, and since they are made out of protein (which they are), you therefore get hazey beer. He says that by no means do you want to have denatured enzymes for your sparge. And it gets _________________________________________________________________ Alan, I think you win this argument hands down. The primary reason usually given for not sparging too hot is that a hot sparge will extract tannins/polyphenolic compounds from the grain husks which can contribute to what is called "husk astringency" and would also contribute to later hazes, especially chill hazes as the phenolics interact with proteinacious material in the final beer so, from the standpoint of haze formation I suppose he is right, but for the wrong reason. We are talking about sparging here so the enzymes have already done their work and we don't care whether they denature. In fact, raising temps for mashout is meant to denature the enzymes and halt any further saccrification. Besides, what does your friend think is going to happen after the sparge when you actually BOIL the wort? Now that's denaturation! Alan Meeker Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 10:49:40 -0500 From: "Taber, Bruce" <Bruce.Taber at nrc.ca> Subject: Why RIMS with modified malts? Please help a confused brewer. A while back there was a long debate about the need of a protein rest with today's highly modified malts. The consensus was ( in my opinion) that protein rests were unnecessary with regards to extraction efficiency, though some argued that it affected other characteristics such as chill haze. Then we have the never-ending discussions on RIMS systems. Aren't these fancy systems built specifically to provide easy and accurate temperature stepping during the mash? If I believe in single temperature mashing, is there any reason to consider a RIMS? I must be missing something here. Bruce Taber Almonte, Ont. Canada Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 08:13:40 -0800 From: "Mercer, David" <dmercer at path.org> Subject: RE: Stuck sparges Todd, I've been mashing for years, and never had a stuck sparge, even with grain bills that were 70% wheat. So that makes me uniquely unqualified to offer advice to someone who has the problem. Nevertheless, here are some things I'd look at (in rough order of probable cause): Check how your false bottom fits on the bottom. If the seal isn't tight, or the bottom floats up (I've heard that this is a problem with most plastic false bottoms and seen it myself with a friend's Listermann) then grain is going to get under the false bottom and into your outlet tube and clog up things every time. Blowing on the outlet tube will only push the grain back into the area under the false bottom where it will flow right back into the tube and clog things up when you've stopped blowing. Measure your strike water. What's the big deal about measuring out 5 quarts of water for 5 lb. of grain? Try to keep about 2"" of sparge water above the surface of your grain (I break this rule every now and then, and it doesn't really seem to have much effect, but with small mash sizes it might.) Don't start the sparge fast. Begin at a moderate trickle. A quart every 8-10 minutes is about right. Another rule I've broken occasionally, but I've read that too fast an initial drain can set the mash and get you stuck. Monitor mash and sparge temperatures. Sparge water should be hot (I typically sparge with 185F water). This is a rule I never break. Those are my suggestions. My strong suspicion is it's the fit of the false bottom in your bucket. If you can't get it to seal correctly, consider making a slotted copper manifold. That's what I use, and it has worked flawless every time. Happy brewing. Dave in Seattle Todd Larson wrote: Mash question I am trying really hard to make that jump to all-grain brewing. In preparation, I have been doing partial mashes of about 5 lbs. My lautering / sparging seems to take forever (1.5-2 hours). I try not to grind too finely. I put some water in the bottom of my bucket. I am using a small bucket with a plastic Listermann false bottom. I try to lauter very slowly and keep a little fresh sparge water on top at all times. I end up stirring it and blowing through the drain tube to get stuff moving. I mean it moves at less than a trickle. I have done about 4 of these batches, and every one is the same. If lautering is this hard, I am not sure I want to try to lauter 7-10 lbs. Can anyone describe for me how thick the mash should be? I have heard "like runny oatmeal". Any other terms out there that leave less open for interpretation? I prefer to go by feel rather than having to pre-measure my mash water. Any help is appreciated. Todd Larson larson.jt at pg.com Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 08:19:02 -0800 From: "Bryan L. Gros" <gros at bigfoot.com> Subject: jockey box Our club is discussing building a club jockey box to serve beer at club or personal events. Anyone else done this and want to offer suggestions/advice? We figure we'd like at least four taps, preferably six. We need fittings for both pin and ball cornies. CO2 connector. And we'd prefer to use a keg or something rather than the "standard" cooler. Copper coils are easiest and cheapest and are best for heat transfer. Stainless are easiest to keep clean. What about a plate kind of heat transfer? Other ideas? thanks. Bryan Gros gros at bigfoot.com Oakland, CA Draught Board Homebrew Club http://www.dnai.com/~thor/dboard/ Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 10:43:00 -0600 From: Spencer Tomb <astomb at ksu.edu> Subject: Cherry and Plum Bounce (Liquors) Matt: I did not see the ad, but I have some experience in making liquors that have turned out very well. We make cherry or plum bounce using a recipe that was in an old Joy of Cooking cookbook (Circa 1950). We put vodka, fresh, ripe, unpitted fruit and sugar 1:1:1, v:v:v in a quart canning jar cover it with the lid and ring and shake it daily till the sugar disolves. It is ready to consume in about 5 weeks and gets better to about 10 months. I guess that the resulting liquid is about 30% alcohol. It is an extraction process. I especially like wild plum bounce and my wife prefers cherry bounce made with pie cherries. They both are fantastic cough medicine and excellent on vanilla ice cream. I have tried "bouncing" other fruits and found that it works well with other roseaceous fruits with pits and blueberries are good too. There are some very nice aromatic flavors in plums and cherries that would be interesting to try to get in a beer. These are probably the cyanide producing compounds from the pits. Spencer Tomb "Matthew Hahn" <mchahn at earthlink.net> Wrote: >A few months ago I saw an ad in one of the beerzines (BREWING TECHNIQUES?) >about liquors (non-distilled) that you could make at home. These were not >the flavorings that one adds to vodka or brandy but actual kits to make a >beverage that ferments to 20% or so. Anybody else see this ad and remember >where it was or anybody know the name and contact info of the company? Any >help would be appreciated. Thanks. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 11:02:09 -0600 From: Spencer Tomb <astomb at ksu.edu> Subject: Houston/Galveston Brewpubs I will be making a trip to Houston in March for a meeting in the Green's Point/Conroe area and I would like to know if there is a good brewpub on that side of Houston. I am familiar with the ones in the Village area, but that is quite a trek from where I will be. After the meeting, I will head to the beach for some R&R and I would like to have some recommendations for Galveston too. Will I be able to find the Celis beers on tap in the Green's Point area or in Galveston? TIA Spencer Tomb Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 17:49:36 GMT From: marnold at ez-net.com (Matthew Arnold) Subject: Cinq Cents clone followup / NHC / Y2K Last night, my wife and I compared my Chimay Cinq Cents (White Cap) clone with the real McCoy. All told, I came VERY close. Color: The Chimay was slightly darker, though not by much. It was also cloudier (not sure why, I've never had any this cloudy before). Body: Very similar Bitterness: Very similar Carbonation: Very similar Aroma/Flavor: My version was much more bananay than the Chimay. I used Wyeast 1214 which reportedly is the Chimay strain. I fermented it at 58F (a BJCP judge from my homebrew club guessed that I used the Weihenstephan Wheat yeast fermented at about 70F). I know Chimay is fermented at a much higher temperature. I may try fermenting warmer next time. The banana ester overwhelmed the aroma and flavor of my beer. The Chimay had a much nicer melody of various fruits in both flavor and aroma. All told it was a pretty good shot. For the recipe, check the archives or visit my homepage http://users.ez-net.com/~marnold (shameless plug). Disclaimer: I am not a BJCP judge, nor do I play one on T.V. Maybe someday? - ----- This same BJCP judge I mentioned said that I should enter my barleywine in the AHA NHC this year. I'm really wondering if it's worth it for the $12 entry fee, not to mention the loss of at least one precious bottle of beer. I'm definitely going to enter it in my club's competition. Hopefully Paul Kerchefske (who posts occasionally to the HBD) won't run away with all our awards again this year! Awesome job last year, Paul! In that same vein, thanks to our faithful HBD janitors for correcting the format on the HBD calendar when I entered the Rackers' competition information improperly. Mea culpa. - ----- I don't understand why everyone is brewing Y2K beers. As every good nerd knows, Y2K is actually the year 2048. That's a long time to wait! Sorry, I couldn't resist . . . Later, Matt - ----- Webmaster, Green Bay Rackers Homebrewers' Club http://www.rackers.org info at rackers.org Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 13:23:29 -0500 From: "S. Wesley" <WESLEY at MAINE.MAINE.EDU> Subject: Non-alcoholic beer by vacuum evaporation. Anyone who has searched the HBD archives or read RCB or HBD for a while knows that the subject of producing alcohol free beers shows up with some regularity. A number of solutions have been suggested including brewing weak beers, dilution of stronger beers and removal of alcohol by heating. While some of these techniques may achive results which are satisfactory, I find it hard to believe that the results are as flavorful as regular homebrewed beer. As I get older and find that it takes less and less beer to give me a rather nasty hangover the prospect of being able to remove most of the alcohol from one of my regular beers becomes more and more appealing. Two techniques which have been suggested over the years that have caught my eye are dialysis and vacuum evaporation. I have seen both of these ideas dismissed as too difficult and too expensive for hombrewers to attempt. It seems that with people building PC controlled RIMS systems homebrewing technology has evolved to a point where these perceptions need to be reconsidered. By the way, although I am not a lawyer, I have read through the entire text of the federal alclohol laws (I believe it is Title 27) and I see nothing to indicate that this process is illegal as long as you don't collect the distilate. Some time over the next few months I plan to give vacuum evaporation a go. It seems to me that you only need two pieces of equipment to do this. A chamber which can be evacuated to a reasonable degree without imploding and an appropriate vacuum pump. I plan to use a quarter barrel sanke keg as the chamber. If this doesn't work I have access to a number of disused UHV chambers of adequate size and a smorgasbord of vacuum pumps through my research work. As far as I can tell I should be able to seal the beer out line on the tap and pump on the gas in line. (Obviously the check valve will have to be removed.) The question is: when do you stop pumping? My educated guess is that If I start with a beer which is about 4-5% ABV I will need to evaporate 30-50 % of the volume of beer to get the alcohol content down to less than .50 %. This is after replacing the lost volume with water which has been boiled and cooled. I realize that this may take some time and use quite a bit of electricity, but I am prepared to deal with that. I would like to get a more accurate sense the fraction of the volume I need to remove. I based my guess on some simple calculations I did and some information I extracted from Howard & Gibat's "The Lore of Still Building (1994, Noguska Press, Fostoria, Ohio). These authors describe a technique for determining the alcohol content of a liquid in which a small sample is distilled until half of the volume has evaporated (p28). They claim that at this point most of the alcohol will have evaporated and that measuring the distillate with a proof hydrometer will yeild a value which is twice the alcohol contentof the original sample. They also state that the typical out put of a pot still distilling a wash which is 10% ABV is 20-30% (p55). My caluclations were done with a spreadsheet. I set up two columns for water and alcohol and start with 96.1 (W0) parts water by weight 3.9 (A0) parts alcohol by weight . On the line below I write an equation for the volume of water and alcohol at some interval of time (t) later. This was done using the following equations: W1 = W0 - [(Rw)*W0/(W0+A0)]*dt and A1 = A1- [(Ra)*A0/(W0+A0)]dt, and copy it down the columns The basic assumption is that the evaporation rate of one component of a mixture will be proportional to the fraction of the mixture comprised by that component. It is not important to know the actual evaporation rates here, just the ratio since we can use any units and intervals of time we like. As long as (Ra*dt)/(Rw*dt) = the ratio of the evaporation rate of pure alcohol the to the evaporation rate of pure water we are o.k.. So the quesiton is what is the ratio? I have tried to look through CRC to find this information, but if it is there I guess I don't how it is identified. The only possibly useful information I could find was that the vapor pressure of ethanol is 2.5 times the vapor pressure of water at 20C Now since alcohol is about 2.5 times the molecuar weight of water, I guessed that the mass evaporation rate must be 6.25 times as higher for alcohol than it is for water. Using a value of Rw*dt = .1 I find that I get down to .5%ABV after evaporating 33% of the original volume. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 13:09:56 -0600 From: "Shane Brauner" <GossamerDP at pdq.net> Subject: Computer Controlled brewing Has anyone created an interface to actually control boil/mash temps with a computer? Or even logging your brew session or fermentation with your computer (having it automatically record the temp at certain intervals). I've had some experience talking through serial ports with Perl, and have programmed in Java, C, C++... as well. Unfortunately, I don't have the $$ for digital thermometers - can anyone point me to a cheap one? In any case, I'm interested! Shane Brauner Shane at Uh.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 14:18:35 -0800 From: "NFGS" <fjrusso at coastalnet.com> Subject: RE: Larson: Mash Question >From Todd Larson: >I am trying really hard to make that jump to all-grain brewing....sparging seems to take forever (1.5-2 hours). ....... Well Todd, I am not a long time brewer or a brewmaster. So take my input for what it is worth. Like you I wanted to jump to all grain and found the sparge times long and tedious. As a materials and process engineer I knew there had to be another way. So here is what I have done myself. I have a product known as peel ply. It is a polyester or nylon woven fabric and comes in a number of different weaves. I used this as a bag in my sparge bucket. The only thing that comes out of my sparge bucket is liquid and no solids. My time is reduced to 20-30 minutes depending how often I recirculate some of the wort. Once all of the liquid has run off I am able to squeeze strain the bag and get out the very last of the wort. It works for me. The bag allows me to stir and get the liquid moving. My OG's are right where I want them to be. By the way this same product is also used in water filtration applications so I know it is safe to use. I would like to hear from the others in this group on their experiences using a filter bag in the sparge bucket. What do they see as drawbacks or negative impacts on the beer. Frank fjrusso at coastalnet.com Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 15:00:56 -0700 From: jpugh at hjnews.com (Jeremy B. Pugh) Subject: sanitizing bottles On the topic of sanitizing bottles ken Schwartz writes: My favorite technique is to run them through the dishwasher (WITH NO DETERGENT OR SPOTTING AGENT), with heated dry cycle enabled. I also fill the detergent cup with some Clorox though I recognize that water spray doesn't always actually get inside the bottles. I can load the DW the night before bottling and run it overnight or the next morning. One-cent worth: This is the same method I use with two exceptions. I soak the bottles in a sanitizing solution (2 tsp household bleach to 5 gallons cold water) rinse them well and then run a hot water and hot dry cycle in the diswasher. I skip the bleach in the diswasher. Good suggestion to work over the diswasher Ken. My wife will be especially pleased after the stout vs. carpet debacle of last month. If it was a snake it woulda... Lately I have had so many batches going that I've had to buy new bottles from our local watering hole which sells them to homebrewers for their deposit ($1.50). Many of them are nasty so I am a bear on cleaning (with these I use a full ounze of bleach to five gallons of cold water). I am sure that a skoal bandit chaw is just chock full of bacterial goodness. Yuck. Also, belated thanks to all of the HBD wizards who took the time to help me through my first lager attempt. It turned out great. But this porter that's in secondary is going to be out of sight. .. It's a hobby and a habit all in one. Jeremy B. Pugh Logan, Utah Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 16:08:56 -0600 From: John.Wilkinson at aud.alcatel.com (John Wilkinson) Subject: Cartoon The Dallas Morning News ran a cartoon yesterday that was about home brewing. It was a single panel cartoon called Close To Home. I looked at the guy's web page (www.closetohome.com) but it wasn't there. Maybe it will come up later or it is probably carried in several other papers. The cartoon hit pretty close to home for me. Look for it in recent papers on the funny pages. It was pretty good. At least to a brewer. John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - john.wilkinson at aud.alcatel.com Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 02:24:23 +0000 From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com> Subject: Wort Chillers Simon writes in "defense" of his chiller design. I don't believe any defense is necessary. I'll admit I didn't "work the sums" but based on a quick look at the math everything seemed OK. Later I'll show that it is not difficult to include the effects of variation in "k" in computing chiller performance. Nevertheless the point about one man's "unappreciable" being another's "appreciable" is taken and thus I'd better indicate why I personally think the variation is signifcant and let anyone who is interested make his own decision. In my brewing I use a 50' length of half inch refrigeration tubing inside a 1" garden hose (coiled). What Simon calls "k" varies by a factor of about 8 between 10 gph and 100 gph flows. For a desired 2.5 F rise using 45F cooling water (i.e. wort temp 47.5 exiting) I compute (from a measurement based model of k dependence on flow) 70 gph coolant flow and 13.9 gph wort flow. Were I to increase thewort flow 50% and ignore the change in k I would conclude that I would have a 12.5 F rise (exiting wort temperature of 57.5 F). If I allow for the change in k I would conclude that the rise would be only 5 F. I consider a 7 F difference in wort output temperature significant. Note that the Heart's chiller (I put numbers in my last post) is much less sensitive (about a third as much) to wort flow rate than the chiller I just talked about and errors from ignoring flow rate are thus smaller. Considering turbulence isn't difficult. The efficiency of the chiller depends on the normalized coolant and wort flow rates. The normalizing constant, Q, contains k. Determine the desired efficiency. Then use the curves in the article I referenced (which also tells how to measure Q for your chiller) to determine normalized flows. Looking a the curves it's pretty easy to see aout where the operating point should be. If the wort flow at the operating point is fw = r*Q then solve Q = fw/r and Q = fn(fw) for fw and Q. Here fn represents the functional relationship between Q and fw. In my experiments with the three chillers Q was linear with flow in each case i.e. Q = m*fw + b in which case the solution is Q = b/(1 - r*m); fw = r*Q. Where fn isn't linear a root finder can be used. All this is a fascinating intellectual excercise but in actual operation the coolant temperature is the temperature of the water in my well and the coolant flow is as fast as the pump will pump it. I can control wort flow with a needle valve but usually just open it up all the way and run 20 gph. The wort enters the fermenter at whatever this combination of parameters gives and I use the cooling jacket to get it to pitching temp. The 50' chiller is more than I need and the little, inexpensive Heart's outperforms it at up to 34 gph wort flow. Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 02/20/99, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96