HOMEBREW Digest #3165 Tue 09 November 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

  1999 Happy Holidays Homebrew Competition (Brian Dreckshage)
  Heat exchange systems ("scott")
  RE: Aeration (Demonick)
  winemaking ("Vinbrew Supply")
  Beer News from Ascension/Misc. (AJ)
  Exploding Bottles, Bonafied!, (Dave Burley)
  Bonafied Styles Page ("Houseman, David L")
  a bit off-subject (Marc Sedam)
  Thanks for the RIMS input ("J. Doug Brown")
  Cyser ("Werrbach, Maria")
  Soda Pop (Dan Listermann)
  Re: malta starters ("Penn, John")
  RIMS systems (Robert Johnson)
  re: Exploding Bottles? ("John Watts")
  system queries! (DAN ELGART)
  Anchor code (Susan Walsh)
  yeast growth/fermentation ("Alan Meeker")
  malt mod (jliddil)
  Fermenters again? (Rod Prather)
  Aquarium Heaters ("Jeffry D Luck")
  Lead in Brass (Jack Straw)
  Kurt's continued clog (Kurt Kiewel)
  Sterling hops? (Paul Shick)
  Re: Bonafied Styles Page (phil sides jr)

* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! * The HBD now hosts eight digests related to this and a few other hobbies. * Send an email note to majordomo at hbd.org with the word "lists" on one * line, and "help" on another (don't need the quotes) for a listing and * instructions for use. 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: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 23:18:12 -0600 From: Brian Dreckshage <dreck at concentric.net> Subject: 1999 Happy Holidays Homebrew Competition Falling leaves, football and the smell of malt and hops in the air. That can only mean that it is time again for the St. Louis Brews Happy Holidays Homebrew Competition. The competition is Dec. 10 and 11, and we hope that you will enter again this year. Registration is at: www.stlbrews.org Please pass the word on to your fellow club members. Also, if you are interested in judging or stewarding, please sign up on the web site as well. Thanks, Brian Dreckshage Competition Organizer Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 01:09:47 -0800 From: "scott" <Cuckold at cornerpub.com> Subject: Heat exchange systems I just now saw your post on HBD regarding Heat exchange brewing systems. I have a website with pictures of my trials and tribulations with my system. It works great for me. Any questions, just e-mail me. Let me know what you think. Scott http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Salon/3768/Brewery.html "Jeff Hewit" <aleman_ at excite.com> wrote: I have seen some discussion on HERMS systems. (I forget exactly what "HERMS" stands for, except that "RM" means "recirculating mash.") My understanding is that wort is pumped through a heat exchanger in the hot liquor tank as an alternative to using an electric heating element in the traditional RIMS set up. ... I'm sure someone has posted details on these set ups. Does anyone know of any Web sites that include HERMS plans? Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 04:16:39 -0800 From: Demonick <demonick at zgi.com> Subject: RE: Aeration From: "Frank J. Russo" <FJRusso at coastalnet.com> >What if for a set time X HOURS after pitching, you continued to >aerate the wort? Yes I know about oxidation etc... But, is there a >time period after pitching, when continued aeration will be of >benefit to the yeast culture without causing damage to the wort, 4 >hours, 8 hours, 12 hours, 24 hours???? Anyone have any answers or >ideas here. If not I guest I have to create an experiment on my own >and report back. There was an extensive discussion of this question back in Nov94. At that time Maribeth_Raines <raines at radonc.ucla.edu> said: >Sorry but I disagree with the recent wisdom on aeration. I believe >it is the Practical Brewer which states that some breweries aerate >12-24 hours (I don't recall off the top of my head) and this is post >pitching. There is an old English technique called "dropping", in which the actively fermenting wort (24-48 hours post pitch) is literally dropped from one fermentation vessel to another with aeration during the drop. See the HBD archives around mid-Feb95 for an extensive discussion. Morland's of Abingdon and Marston's of Burton and many other commercial breweries used to practice dropping - the main reason for them stopping, being that it is expensive on space and equipment. Maribeth also said: >There are several things which suggest at least to me, to aerate >after pitching. First is that the *maximum* amount of oxygen that >can be dissolved in cooled wort is 8 ppm. George Fix was the first >to bring this point up and has very convincing data. I have done my >own experiments with similar results. If you look at the textbooks, >most yeast require 8-12 ppm and some lager yeast require 20 ppm of >oxygen. This raises an interesting question. How do you supply more >oxygen than you can dissolve? Well I personally believe the answer >is to continue to aerate after pitching. If you follow the dissolved >oxygen levels after pitching most of the oxygen is rapidly absorbed >(most within 30 minutes). I have measured oxygen levels while >continuing to aerate and they still went down by 30-40% within 30 >minutes of adding the yeast. My idea is that you can make up the >deficit in oxygen by allowing the yeast to absorb some oxygen while >continuing to add more. I have brewed over 20 batches this way with >at least 30 minutes aeration prior to fermentation and at least 30 >minutes post pitching. I have gone up to seven hours aeration post >pitching and have never had a problem. All of these experiments were >done using the BrewTek aeration system which I developed; it is an >aquarium pump based system. In general the fermentations are always >rapid and complete and I would recommend at least trying aeration >post pitching since I believe it helps. Although I do agree that >prolonged aeration for 8-12 hours is probably excessive." One thing that I can personally attest to, is using aeration to attempt to restart a stuck fermenation - DON'T! This was the only batch I ever tossed. Within days it was undrinkable, and the fermentation never restarted. Domenick Venezia Venezia & Company, LLC Maker of PrimeTab (206) 782-1152 phone (206) 782-6766 fax orders demonick at zgi dot com Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 07:41:09 -0500 From: "Vinbrew Supply" <devans at greenapple.com> Subject: winemaking Just my opinion, I've sold customers a bunch of wine kits and surprisingly I've had good results. Alexander's concentrate has made the best so far, with selection kits coming in close Second. However, was the quality of the wine affected because I told the customers to throw away the directions and make it like you were from scratch? You can produce a good bottle of wine,producing a 20 dollar bottle is a little exaggerated I think.. Maybe 7-10 dollar is not out of reach. But there is nothing wrong with that either... Doug Vinbrew Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 13:31:01 +0000 From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com> Subject: Beer News from Ascension/Misc. Just got back from almost 2 weeks on Ascension Island and while there really isn't any beer news from that rock I do have one tidbit that you all might find interesting. "Beer" on Ascension largely means yellow, fizzy American stuff purveyed for a buck a pop in the "Volcano Club". This situation quickly leads one to the store in Georgetown which carries salvation in the form of Guiness draught (at $2 a can). Consumption of Guiness in a can naturally leads to discussion of widgets and an examination of same (after the can is drained). This reveals that Guiness has a new design for this device. After spending millions of pounds to come up with various esoteric looking plastic devices they have now settled on a simple 1.2 inch sphere with one tiny hole. This rolls about freely in the can (as opposed to the older flat widgets which hugged the bottom) and seems to work just as well as the much more convoluted designs. A real example of the KISS principal! Apparantly some of the guys out there brew from kits but I didn't encounter any. The water on the US base is vacuum distilled and thus very soft. Great potential for Pilsners. In town, the water is derived from wells near the summit of Green mountain and, thus, presumably also soft. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Here are a couple of old posts that got returned just before I left. Possibly no longer of current interest but since I typed them I going to post them: The following caught my eye in Paul Campbells post WRT D.D. Williamson Caramel Coloring CARAMEL COLOR NO. 300: COLOR SRM 9,400 - 10,500 (2) (2) ASBC METHOD. The ASBC method calls for measurement of the absorbtion in a half inch cell at 430 nm and multiplying the value by 10. For SRM 10000, A would be 1000 so it's obvious that the ASBC method isn't followed exactly. Even if a half mm cell were used the absorbtion would be 39.4 - way beyond the reach of the best instruments. Then there's the issue of the SRM definition which requires the sample to have the "average" spectral characteristics of a set of beers the darkest of which was 7.5 SRM. Clearly there is more to it than this - probably dilution with all the shortcomings this brings. Any details? For Sean Richens: a) Variacs "Variac" was the brand name for an adjustable auto-transformer. These are still sold but not by the original Variac manufacturer (General Radio?). Anyway, there are no limitations on the power factor of the load which an auto-transformer can handle i.e. the load can be as capacitive or inductive as you like as long as the total current drawn (resistive and reactive) does not excede the KVA rating of the Variac. I suspect what is really being discussed here is some sort of solid state controller which does indeed require that special considerations be given in the design to handle inductive loads (whose collapsing mangetic fields create voltages high enough to damage semiconductors if they are not protected properly). b) John Schnupp's bicarb. I can't get to the archives to retrieve John's numbers but for pH less than 8.5 (the EPA limit in the US): bicarbonate(mg/L) = alkalinity(ppm as CaCO3)*61/50 to very good agreement. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Alan writes: >A while ago I started up a page called "Bonafied Styles" and mentions that there has been little response. Perhaps it's because people are having trouble searching for the site as the word is spelled "bonafide". - -- A. J. deLange Numquam in dubio, saepe in errore. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 08:53:42 -0500 From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Exploding Bottles, Bonafied!, Brewsters: Ross Reid has a homemade soda pop recipe which encourages adding yeast to a 1lb of sugar per gallon of water and bottling it. He wonders if this recipe is safe. Ross, the recipe says to store the capped bottles warm for five days, then move to a cool place. Maybe the recipe means for you to move to Boulder or Greentree, Colorado or Jackson Hole, Wyo. or someplace cool like that. It certainly would be safer! I have seen this kind of recipe for years and believe it is one of those "wishful thinking" recipes for people who do not understand the chemistry or physics involved, but still want a sweet homemade carbonated drink without the equipment to carbonate it. We sometimes find this kind of information in craft and recipe information. I have tried many times to rationalize why such a recipe has been around for so long and if there is something I am missing ( like the yeast can't operate well at high sugar concentration or whatever). Nothing fits my experience to believe that one could possibly make soda pop safely this way. Bakers know that bread yeast continue to operate at even refrigerator temperatures and what might be cool in Australia, besides sheep fondling, would be scorching in Wisconsin. In my early days of brewing, I had a few bottle bombs, luckily confined to a box. I had a friend who ultimately had to wear very heavy clothing, thick gloves and a face shield to uncap cases of exploding bottles. The uncapped bottles shot foam as high as his house. Do not fool around with overcarbonation. I would not try this recipe and I would post to the website or wherever you got it that it is extremely dangerous even if the bottles are plastic. - -------------------------------------------------------- Alan's appeal for contributions to his Bonafied Styles site is likely necessary because he really means "Bonafide" (Latin = good fidelity) Styles. Now we know what he means! Try changing your site name to a bonafide spelling of the word! Injuneres! Huh!! But thanks for the website. - -------------------------------------------------------- Keep on Brewin' Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 09:09:12 -0500 From: "Houseman, David L" <David.Houseman at unisys.com> Subject: Bonafied Styles Page Alan McKay provides a web site of Bonafied Styles. As a reminder, the Beer Judge Certification Program (BJCP) maintains on their web site a full set of detailed style descriptions used in BJCP, and for 2000 the AHA as well, competitions. This recently updated style guide can be found at http://www.mv.com/ipusers/slack/bjcp/style-index.html . Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 09:22:19 -0500 From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam at unc.edu> Subject: a bit off-subject I read both Steve A's and Dave B's posts with much interest. Being 6'5" and under 30, I never realized all I had to do to buy my three-tier, turn-key SS brewery and Porsche was echo everything my boss says. Hmmm. Call me in a year (if my new executive secretary won't screen you out) and I'll tell you if it works. ;-) Oh, and Dave makes mention of technology transfer. Being that it's what I do for a living, I can assure you that it only works when those big, faceless companies have an R&D infrastructure in place (and likely a patent portfolio) which can support the invention being transferred. Otherwise you should just start your own company. The biggest misconception is that a company gives a patootie about your small idea (no matter how good) if they don't see it fit within their core business. Just my $0.03--I gave an extra penny because it's my job. Oh yeah...beer. I will post my post-keg thoughts on a very successful batch of Berliner-weiss shortly. A beer worth brewing. Cheers! Marc - -- Marc Sedam Technology Development Associate Office of Technology Development The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill 308 Bynum Hall; CB# 4105 Chapel Hill, NC 27599-4105 http://www.research.unc.edu/otd Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 14:28:47 +0000 From: "J. Doug Brown" <jbrown at labyrinth.net> Subject: Thanks for the RIMS input Thanks for ideas and thoughts you shared on my RIMS idea. Most of the responses were emailed directly to me, however some of the questions were duplicates. I thought if I answered these here I could get even more group feedback. These answers are in reference to questions generated by my new RIMS design idea at: http://www.labs.net/jbrown/Doug/Brew/new_deal/index.html Questions about the air removal chamber in my RIMS setup: In a normal RIMS operation any air bubbles that make it through the heater are pumped back on top of the grain bed and float on top of the mash. These air bubbles would be effectively filtered out due to their ability to float on top of the mash and the pump only draws liquid from beneath the grain bed. In my design, during normal RIMS operation the same would happen, however during stages where the water is recirculated external to the mash any air bubbles would be recirculated through the pump causing further mixxing of air and wort. During external to the mash recirculations the heated mixture is pumped into the chamber near the top, and liquid is drawn off near the bottom. Since bubbles rise, the fluid in the air removal near the bottom will have fewer bubbles than that pumped out of the heating chamber. Any fluid additions by partially opening valve V4 would force the air out of the external recirculating system and on top of the grain bed where it would be filtered out like a normal RIMS system. Questions about bacterial concerns: There was a question about bacteria growth in this system during RIMS operation since the water used to fill the system was not boiled first. It never really crossed my mind that this might happen, but thinking about it, is it really a problem. After the water was brought up to mashing temperatures hopefully within 15 minutes, a normal step mashing program would be followed. After the sparge, the entire volume of wort would be boiled for a normal hour boil. Wouldn't this boil kill any bad beer bacteria? With this system I could also fill the RIMS with hot water via the heated water fill secquence shown on the before mentioned page. Questions about the sparge and heated water fill: The sparge operation is the same as the heated water fill, except that the drain valve is also paritally opened so that the wort draining out is replaced by the heated water flowing in. The heated water fill could probabaly use more of an explanation. I will be assuming that the system is switching from a RIMS operation to the sparge operation. In "Mashout" mode, the pump is recirculating fluid through the heating chamber, through the air removal chamber, then back to the pump. The rate of fluid going to the RIMS vessel will be exactly the same as the rate fluid is entering this loop via freshwater addition at valve V4. As long as the fresh water addition is not too fast the recirculating fluid should pass through the heating chamber sufficiently often to be at the desired sparge temperature. I do not worry as much about the water being too cold entering the RIMS unit as I do about it being too hot. There will be very little volume of fluid in the recirculation loop in this phase, and once the heating element is turned off via the temperature controller, the recirculating fluid will still pick up more heat due to the thermal capacitance of the heating coil. If what I have said does not make sense, or in you opinion would not happen, please let me know, or ask questions about it. This weekend I just bought the low density heating element and an electronics book that will help me design my microcontroller based heating controller. Thanks again for all the input Doug Brown jbrown at labyrinth.net - -- -------------------------------------------------------- / J. Doug Brown Sr. Software Engineer \ < jbrown at labyrinth.net jbrown at ewa.com > \ http://www.labs.net/jbrown http://www.ewa.com / Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 08:51:16 -0600 From: "Werrbach, Maria" <mwerrbach at mail.elgin.cc.il.us> Subject: Cyser Fellow Fermenters, I've been brewing now for just over 5 months and I'm really enjoying my product. I decided to try and make some, what I call, applejack with honey and brown sugar (1 C of each) using Nottingham yeast for a total of 5 gallons. My S.G. was .066, and now, two weeks later I'm at .018 with a fairly active airlock. I don't want this to be dry, and I'm certain that my gravity reading will continue to drop. My question is, can I introduce some non-fermentable sugar when I bottle this to sweeten it up alittle? Oh, and one more question. I've never toasted grain before and I wanted to know the oven temperature and time approximations to do it. I'm assuming that I crush my grain prior to toasting. Thanks all. Maria Werrbach werby at interaccess.com <mailto:werby at interaccess.com> Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 09:52:45 -0500 From: Dan Listermann <72723.1707 at compuserve.com> Subject: Soda Pop Ross Reid ( mrreid at golden.net ) asks about making soda pop. I do quite a bit of this and, although I now usually use corny kegs, I haven't had problems with exploding bottles when I bottled. The thing about pop is that the carbonation is controlled in the opposite way carbonation is controlled in beer. In beer it is the amount of sugar added at bottling that determines the carbonation level. With pop it is the amount of yeast added that controls carbonation. The sucrose ( table sugar ) used in making pop has no nutrients in it that would allow the yeast to reproduce. The yeast you add is all you get. It lives its little life out making CO2 and dies. First do not use baking yeast. Baking yeast is frequently contaminated with bacteria for flavor reasons. Use brewing or wine making yeast. Carefully measure the yeast per the instructions. This usually means that you will not use the whole package. Be sure to dissolve the yeast in water before mixing it in with the sugar water to assure even distribution. It usually takes a number of weeks before the pop is ready to drink. My increasingly lovely spouse volunteered my services to demonstrate pop making for our youngest's Cub Pack. I made a batch to serve at the demo a number of weeks ago and will make two batches at the demo so all the kids can take a 2l home. I use the "Homebrew" brand. The birch root beer is my favorite although the regular is very good as well. The sarsaparilla is very good if you like the taste of sassafras. The cola is very "RC" like. The cherry is very wild black cherry. The orange is excellent. I don't care for the cream soda. The ginger beer and ginger ale are both good although I don't have the presence of mind to say what the difference between the two is. I haven't tried the strawberry or the raspberry yet. Interestingly an employee once made a cherry stout using the cherry extract. It produced a very distinctive chocolate covered cherry flavor in the stout. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 10:01:25 -0500 From: "Penn, John" <John.Penn at jhuapl.edu> Subject: Re: malta starters RE: malta starter.... Never Mind. Actually I got a nice reply about the origins of malta and a warning that it may be nutrient deficient compared to a regular starter. It seems my starter did take off but probably it was the yeast from a 10 month old bottle of homebrew using yeast from a bottle of "Duvel" last year. Nothing happened for 4 days with the new "Duvel" yeast ,then I added the yeast from one of my year old belgian homebrews and the starter took off a couple of days later. Tasted OK and it seems to have the slow steady fermentation I see with the Duvel yeast. I think the belgian beers do have a distinct yeast flavor but of course that depends on the recipe and the belgian beer. I have had recipes where the yeast flavor dominates but I can see that it is a subtle taste which some could miss. My current "dubbel" recipe uses light malt extract, glucose sugar, and I think I'll use a little orange blossom honey (1#) for a dubbel style. Next time, I plan on repeating a "white" style which uses coriander. Makes a nice dry finish on the tongue due to the coriander. I had tried a couple of brewferm kits which were decent but after making my own dubbel last year I realized the yeast in the brewferm kits seems like a sweeter tasting basic ale yeast without the subtle taste of the duvel yeast which I prefer and to me tastes more authentic in belgian beers. Since this is my first attempt using malta as a starter I think I'll try it a couple more times and see how the lack of nutrients affects my starters. Maybe I'll switch back to regular starters. Thanks to Hector for his description and history of malta, hopefully his reply went to the homebrew list and not just to me as a private reply. I also got a reply that BYO has an article on using malta for starters but haven't seen the article. John Penn Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 07:03:42 -0800 From: robert at bobbrews.com (Robert Johnson) Subject: RIMS systems Noticed some increased activity on RIMS systems. One of our club members Ken Dodd built a beuatiful and fully functional RIMs that takes very little spave and no climbing or heavy lifting. If you want to see a pic follow this link to our club photo gallery. http://www.bobbrews.com/ferm_photo_gallery.htm Robert (bobbrews) Johnson Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 09:29:27 -0600 From: "John Watts" <watts at radiks.net> Subject: re: Exploding Bottles? KABOOM!!!!!!!!!!!!!! followed by Where the at &#^$ is the mop? Rgds Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 09:47:23 -0600 From: DAN ELGART <cogneeeto at earthlink.net> Subject: system queries! Re: Brewing systems ease of use and repeatability of results. .Please, Sirs/ madams, could you address a few questions that I have regarding feasibility of a few systems?? I am currently using a three-barrel/three-burner type cooker made of wood and primarily brew single step mash ales. K.I.S.S.! We have three pub brewery firms in our town-- all use the single step method, using highly mod. malts (mostly Briess). I uasually super pitch the yeast (gallons are free and available at any one of the brew pubs in town). I am looking for a (yet) simpler setup, easier to clean, fewer stuck sparges, with predictable results. Please advise!! FIRST... the RIMS SYSTEM http://www.advancedbrew.com/compubrew.html ) 1) With the wort constantly re-circulating, why would one assume temperature stratification- do commercial units paddle( this unit uses considerably less grain than a commercial operation!- **is it necessary at the 5 to 10 gal level of production?) 2)Commonly- the initial rest temp.( for home brewers) is achieved by starting with a known water Vol.+ a known grain Vol. (usually at a pound of grain per liter of water) producing an expected temp. drop when the grain is introduced- that is to say... grain is dumped into hot water to achieve a predicted rest temp, then holding that Temp. is the only concern (in single step mashes). Are they telling me that this kills most of the available enzymes, not leaving enough enzyme content to do what little there is to do- with today's highly modified malts? Please expand on this, I try for perfection also- but now, mostly by achieving simplicity. i.e.: When using a single step mash- is a slow and predictable heat ramp necessary? 3) It seems to me that the paddle would grind the grist like being in a pepper mill- only to sift more particles into the re-circulating pump?? Is this necessary to not starve the re-circulating pump? Is the paddle necessary for reasons other than un-stratifying the mat of grist?? 4) Wall mounted -- this unit seems as if it would be a nightmare to clean, any comments, please?? 5) Sparging- hot water source: is this achieved by way of another external unit (not incl.)? If sparging is done in a gravity fed way- does this system require to be mounted up high? Further complicating the cleaning. ABT seems like the bread machine of beer, requiring several more components, immobile, and awkward for a mash only unit. Please comment. Please understand that my inquiries are of a "Devil's advocate" nature and I mean not to berate anybody... I have considered a unit of this type for some time (or) a type like seen here : http://www.morebeer.com/b31000.html (or) look here : http://www.homebrewheaven.com/ , now look on the left index half way down for the "Peak Brewing System" -- click on there..., - -- my system (made of wood) is clunky and hard to use and store --and I am truely interested in clearing the "smoke of marketing" of course I"d fabricate my own version. Please... do you have any other suggestions?? THANK YOU! Dan Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 10:17:21 -0600 From: Susan Walsh <swalsh at icva.gov> Subject: Anchor code Maybe, the code 9YD stands for: 1999 batch Y April This is a code similar to a code a manufacturing plant I once worked in used. The first number is the year, the next letter is the batch, and the next letter is the month. The month is A for January, B for February etc. Just a thought. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 11:22:04 -0500 From: "Alan Meeker" <ameeker at welch.jhu.edu> Subject: yeast growth/fermentation Hi Dave, >I was surprised when Alan commented > that the majority of the fermentation took > place during the growth phase of the yeast > ( I assume you mean the population of > yeast or do you mean the individual cell?) Perhaps I haven't phrased this quite precisely enough, sorry. What I am talking about is that apparently the /rate/ of sugar utilization is greatest while the yeast population is in exponential growth phase; ie- actively dividing. This makes sense, as the yeasts' metabolism will be peaking during this active growth phase and will apply equally well to the whole yeast population as well as an individual yeast cell within this population. That is, on a per cell basis, the yeast will assimilate more of the wort sugar per unit time while it is actively growing and dividing versus other phases such as the lag phase (pre-exponential) or the plateau phase (post-exponential). > since I had assumed that all yeast which > are still alive are processing sugar. As > a percentage, the new yeast is far > outnumbered by the fully grown yeast at > equilibrium. Yes, but as I mentioned above the "new yeast" (presumably actively dividing) are processing sugar at a faster rate than the equilibrium population, some 20-30X faster (in effect the early population is acting like a population 20 - 30 times it's size, at least in terms of its sugar utilization) Put another way, it's like comparing a teenagers and octagenarians - the teenagers will eat a helluva lot more/eat faster than the oldsters. I have never seen a plot of > % sugar consumption versus % of > equilibrium population. Do you have > some kind of numbers to support this? Yes, I'll have to dig the reference(s) out. > Alan, do you agree that yeast come to > an equilibrium population value > ( regardless of how complex a control > process you believe it is) during and > before the end of a fermentation? Certainly. Ideally, they follow a "classical" growth curve - a lag phase followed by "exponential" or "log" growth followed in turn by a plateau phase due to some limiting growth factor. But, I think the important thing to focus on is /why/ they are doing this... It /is/ a complex process. For instance, your question as to whether they will plateau before the end of fermentation - in part this will depend on what the cause of the plateau is. Why is the population plateauing in the first place? In the simplest case some essential yeast nutrient in the wort will run out ("become growth-limiting") because the yeast have eaten it all up. What it is exactly that gets used up first will be dependent, by-and-large, on the make up of the wort. Any nutrient could, in theory, be growth-limiting but let's suppose it is wort sugar as is likely to be the typical situation. In this case, in the early part of the fermentation the yeast will grow and reproduce as fast as they can because growth conditions are optimal - there is plenty of all the nutrients they need. But soon they have eaten up almost all the sugars which, of course, means that fermentation is rapidly coming to an end. The lack of sugars now means that continued growth is impossible and the yeast stop growing (plateau, come to equilibrium, whatever you wish to call it). Here the cessation of yeast growth exactly parallels the cessation of fermentation, so very little of the actual fermentation would be done by yeast in this plateau phase of growth. The reason I'm stressing the "complexity" line is that I think it is important for people to understand what is going on with their yeast and what the various relevant variables are so they can exert some control over them to improve their beers. > And that this is relatively standard > population value for normal fermentations? > Both lager and ale yeasts? Well, no I don't think so, at least not if I am reading your meaning of "standard population value" correctly. You seem to be referring to some population size which the yeast will tend to reach given enough time regardless of starter size. Are you talking about what would be analogous to the ecologist's term "carrying capacity" - the maximum population size the environment can support? If so, then yes there will be such a maximum attainable yeast population size but, (complexity again!) whether or not you reach this size will depend on a whole host of factors, not least of which will be the size and condition of the starter. For example, in the lab I can take a SINGLE yeast cell and grow it in culture, in the presence of oxygen to saturation where there will be many many millions of cells per mililiter. At this saturation point, something became limiting for growth. The yeast could have run out of some nutrient or perhaps some metabolic byproduct built up to toxic levels in the media. Alternatively, I could have started with a single cell and grown it up under /oxygen-free/ conditions. Here, the final yeast population size would be limited by lack of oxygen (lack of vital cell membrane synthesis) rather than lack of say sugar or nitrogen and instead of getting millions of cells at the end, I'd only have maybe 10 cells because the initial starting cell could only divide a couple of times. If I'd started with thousands of cells in the oxygen-free case then maybe I'd end up with tens or hundreds of thousands, but still not millions as in the first case. What I'm trying to illustrate here is that, /minimally/, the final yeast population size will be dependent upon the starter size, the state of the starter, and the amount of oxygen present in the media (wort in our case). This is ignoring a whole bunch of other factors involved in determining the final yeast population density. In the lab I can control all the relevant variables so I can, if I want to, I use defined media. My yeast are virtually 100% viable and pure. I can add exactly the same number of cells at the start of growth every time. My growth media volume is accurate and reproducible. The growth conditions are exactly the same run to run w/regards to temperature to the 0.1 deg C, aerations and agitation during growth, pH etc. etc.. BUT, at home the situation is very different! I've lost much of the control over these variables, especially the "growth media" aka - the wort. I'm sure the number of yeast in my starter varies by quite a bit - did I grow it for four days? five? What was the temperature? How well were they aerated? I KNOW my wort is not the same from batch to batch, the S.G differs somewhat, the malts in the grain bill may be different, hell the /style/ is probably different! The amount of aeration isn't the same, etc, etc, etc... Could I exert more control over these parameters? - you bet! But, as I'm sure Mike Maceyka will attest, I am already quite anal in my attention to the details of my brewing, any more and it'd start getting too much like work which, for me anyway, wouldn't be as much fun! In summary, I think it is important to get to know what the relevant variables are in yeast growth and fermentation, how they are inter-related and how to exert /reasonable/ control over them in the homebrew setting. Alan Meeker Baltimore, MD Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 10:25:57 -0700 (MST) From: jliddil at VMS.ARIZONA.EDU Subject: malt mod As Lynn pointed out there are other important parameters to the analysis of malt. And rather than rehash things those interested may wnat to review the disucssion in the hbd archives. It would be great if a malt analysis had beta-glucan listed as well as other parameters. And one can still not be sure about a malt until they actually brew with it. Also visual inspection is important. I had a conversation with a brewer who got malt that had a great analysis sheet. But when it was dilvered the truck driver has the pneumatic blower set to high and the malt was shattered to pieces. I've been looking into disinfectants and cleaning for various reasons. In the best of all worlds you really want to be able to physically scrub the object you are cleaning prior to any disinfection. It's scary the probelms that occur from improper cleaning of things like endoscopes. So for the guy with the green carboy, I agree that you should let it soak in bleach or autodishwasher detergent. But then use a brush and scrub it. You could also try to make a CIP head/setup. Another alternative is chromic acid or alcoholic KOH. But these are very dangerous and should only be saued by trained professionals. :-) And finally I'll apologize for going off the deep end on the AHA. It always helps to sit on a post for a while prior to sending it. Jim Liddil Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 07:11:49 -0500 From: Rod Prather <rodpr at iquest.net> Subject: Fermenters again? Well Dave, I must say you are particularly curmudgeny (sp?) today. Some of us successfully ferment in carboys using a top trap that drains back into the carboy. This can be sanitized and it can be designed to leave that undesirable top foam behind. I do agree that it can get out of control with high alcohol beers and barley wines. Open fermentation is great if you have a clean dedicated area for beer making. If, as in my case, you brew in a dungeon the availability of mold spores and creatures of the dank may be excessive and closed fermentation might be desirable. In any case, DON'T use a plastic trash can. The plasticizers used are great for garbage but not for human consumption. Say what you may about this but if they were food grade, the USDA would mark them as such. Go buy a white, food grade 15 or 20 gallon food storage container from Gordon's or another supplier. Seems like deja vu, huh. > Secondly, I'd lose the bad idea of doing a primary > fermentation in a carboy. ---------------I ferment in a > 6 gallon plastic garbage can covered > with a plastic sheet held down by a chain of rubber > bands. I have never had a foam over. > - -- Rod Prather Indianapolis, Indiana Return to table of contents
Date: 08 Nov 1999 11:18:55 -0700 From: "Jeffry D Luck" <Jeffry.D.Luck at aexp.com> Subject: Aquarium Heaters We had a aquarium heater that broke, or to be precise, the heater's thermostat broke. We got back after two weeks vacation to a house temp of 60F and an aquarium temp of about 110F. Fish dead. Aquarium plants dead. Algae doing just fine. It was quite, um ...fragrant -- took 3 days to air the place out. If you use a cheap aquarium heater, check it daily. Just 1 data point. Jeff Luck Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 10:47:32 -0800 From: Jack Straw <jstraw79 at pacbell.net> Subject: Lead in Brass Ive been a lurker for a while on this list, and I wanted to throw my $0.02 in here. My understanding of the whole lead in brass issue is that there are extremely minimal ammounts of it present in the alloy. That combined with the ammount of surface area of the valves that actually touch the beer, leads me to believe that there is no reason to worry about de-leading your brass. Please correct me if I am way off base here, for I have done no batch analysis concerning my statment above. It just seems to me that there is a negligable ammount of lead there. Cheers, Peter - -- "Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." -Ben Franklin Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 13:22:28 -0600 From: Kurt Kiewel <kiewel at mail.chem.tamu.edu> Subject: Kurt's continued clog Thanks to all for your responses to my drain clog problem. Unfortunately my problem persists. I brewed a pumpkin ale this weekend and used hop plugs instead of pellets hoping this would solve the problem. Again after cooling, whirlpooling and allowing to settle for ten min. I got a clogged drain after about a cup of wort drained out. Not following scientific method and changing two variables at the same time (does that make my brewing art and not science?) it could be the pumpkin that caused the clog this time and not the hops. I don't know. Next time there will be no pumpkin. My question to the collective regarding this problem is... Is it advisable to put the hops inside some kind of loose bag? It seems that from my reading that hops ought to roll and tumble during the boil and that this physical action helps extract and isomerize the alpha acids in the hops. Do I need the hop leaves to act as some kind of filter bed for the trub? More specs on my set up: I have a 1/2 inch brass ball valve fitted about 2 inches from the bottom and the fitting extend about an 1/2 inch inside the keg. My stainless scrubbie is fastened with solid copper wire to the fitting. Looks like a 2 inch diameter stainless pom-pom stuck to the side near the bottom at about the 1.5 to 2 gallon mark. Thanks for aiding my quest for clear runoff... or any runoff at all for that matter. Kurt Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 14:36:35 -0500 (EST) From: Paul Shick <SHICK at JCVAXA.jcu.edu> Subject: Sterling hops? Hello all, I'm just beginning my usual winter run of German lagers, and I'm planning to try the new breed, Sterling, for my bittering hops. The various hop suppliers list this as a Saaz/Hallertauer hybrid, with very good aroma/flavor properties and fairly high alpha (mine are 7+%.) Does anyone have any experiences (pleasant or otherwise) with Sterling hops? Thanks in advance. Paul Shick Basement brewing in Cleveland Hts OH Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 15:35:23 -0500 From: phil sides jr <psides at carl.net> Subject: Re: Bonafied Styles Page >As I mentioned last time, if you've never been in Cologne, then >I won't consider your opinions on a Bonafied Koelsch. Similar >goes for any other style. No offense, but if you haven't had the >real thing, then you can't know the real thing. Are you saying Michael Jackson should quit writing about beer and whiskey and open a travel agency? ;-) That was supposed to be funny, but seriously though I couldn't disagree more with your logic here. Are you saying that an accomplished homebrewer or professional brewer who is educated in brewing history, beer styles, techniques, ingredients and troubleshooting is not qualified to comment as to whether a beer fits a particular style? How about someone who is educated in sensory perception, flavor/aroma descriptors and has had their beer evaluation skills tested and certified (such as a BJCP judge)? I say that anyone meeting the above criteria should be able to refer to published style guidelines or text authored by an expert without the benefit of experiencing 'the real thing' and render an valid opinion of a beer's fit to style. I will conceed that in the process of garnering the above credentials, an individual will most likely have sampled classic examples of most if not all recognized beer styles but I do not believe this is requisite to be able to identify what the beer should taste like. A person who lacks this training but was stationed in Germany for three years as part of military service is not necessarily qualified to classify beers just because they have had it from the source. Just my $.02... Phil Sides, Jr. Concord, NH - -- Macht nicht o'zapft ist, Prost! Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 11/09/99, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96