HOMEBREW Digest #3652 Wed 06 June 2001

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

		Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org


          Northern  Brewer, Ltd. Home Brew Supplies
        http://www.northernbrewer.com  1-800-681-2739

    Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********

  Re: Aussie beer glasses ("Darren Robey")
  H:W Tower of Babel ("Stephen Alexander")
  re: H:W huh?  More tower of babel ("Stephen Alexander")
  Re: Oxygenation Methods (David Lamotte)
  pH of Sparge Liquor (Ant Hayes)
  Re: Strawberry Wheat (Steven)
  Re  Re. 101 Glass Carboy Questions (Steven)
  Why yeast matters for the CAP experiment (Paul Shick)
  metrification (Joe Yoder)
  Lemon Grass Usage (Martin_Brungard)
  Rims Pumps *Help* (Jonathan Peakall)
  Fruit Beers (Phil Wilcox)
  Plastic bucket fermenters (Jesse Stricker)
  Yokohama or Tokyo ("H Stearns Laseur")
  How To Brew website (John Palmer)
  Good HB books and resources... (Troy Hager)
  Stubbies/CF chillers/Benzene (AJ)
  RE: Converting All-Grain Stout to Extract (LaBorde, Ronald)
  Airstone sanitation ("Neil K")
  wort chiller and brew flag ("David Craft")
  Hot side aeration / how to best transfer with a 15 gal keg ("Gary Smith")

* * 2001 AHA NHC - 2001: A Beer Odyssey, Los Angeles, CA * June 20th-23rd See http://www.beerodyssey.com for more * information. Wear an HBD ID Badge to wear to the gig! * http://hbd.org/cgi-bin/shopping * * Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! * 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 FROM THE E-MAIL ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!** IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, you cannot subscribe to the digest as we canoot reach you. We will not correct your address for the automation - that's your job. The HBD is a copyrighted document. The compilation is copyright HBD.ORG. Individual postings are copyright by their authors. ASK before reproducing and you'll rarely have trouble. Digest content cannot be reproduced by any means for sale or profit. More information is available by sending the word "info" to req at hbd.org. JANITOR on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 17:01:07 +1100 From: "Darren Robey" <drobey at awb.com.au> Subject: Re: Aussie beer glasses Ohh the good old Aussie beerglass terminology. Of course in New South Wales a Schooner is a 425 ml glass not a 285ml glass. Being a Victorian who's done a bit of travel in NSW, I was in South Australia one day a few years back and saw a sing on the door of a pub "$2.00 Schooners" You bloody beauty I thought. You cant even get a pot in Victoria for that outside happy hour these days. So I wondered in side and said, "I'll have a schooner of coopers pale, thanks mate". To my horror he pulled a pot. I said, "Sorry mate, I asked for a schooner, not a pot or a middy." He just said, "It is a schooner you idiot, now just sit down and drink your beer." So all disappointed I went to a table and sat down to drink my schooner of pale. Dam confusing place that South Australia, but at least the beers OK. Darren Barney Wrightson wrote: I dont know about larger ones, but Cooper's Brewery (Home of the famous Sparkling ale) has, In addition to various other merchandise, a 285ml glass available on their web site (www.coopers.com.au) for A$5.50 - "Coopers 285ml Brasserie Glass (#CC58)" which we refer to as a schooner in South Australia as opposed to a pot in Victoria (It is always a nice surprise when I go to Vic and ask for a schooner :) ). HTH, Barney Wrightson * I am not affiliated with Coopers in any way except as a loyal consum ____________________________________________________________________________ This email is confidential and if you are not the intended recipient you must not disclose or use the information in this mail. If you have received this email in error, please notify us immediately and delete the e-mail and any copies. It is your responsibility to virus scan this email. The AWB Group does not guarantee that this email is virus or error free and is not responsible for any non-AWB changes made to this email and any attachments. The content and opinions in this email are not necessarily those of the AWB Group. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 02:29:08 -0400 From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net> Subject: H:W Tower of Babel Del writes ... >>> Take away the 5gal Vol requirement >>>(never part of the H:W argument) and it's easy. > >It very much was the start of the debate; George's published >findings that a batch split into 2 fermenters, each 3/4 full, one >with aspect of 2.5:1 and one with 1:1, have different fermentation >characteristics. But you said DeClerk's finding apply from liters on up to commercial tanks, and Fix cites Unterstein in commercial tanks yet claims application for small HB tanks. Size isn't part of it w/in brewing range fermenters. >Also, the megabrewers' tank, by your own admission, do comply with the effect. No and stop making up things I supposedly said (that's Dave Harsh's job ;^) ). If you think I said H:W causes poor performance in a megabrewers' tank you are very mistaken. Great height no longer appear in commercial fermenter designs because it impacts pressure so CO2 solubility and fermentation performance. This is well known. Height is NOT H:W and they cannot be related. Lake Erie is a poorly designed fermenter because of it's 60ft depth despite it's highly favorable aspect ratio of 1:10000. I'd be perfectly happy to limit the discussion to tanks under 2 meters in height. It's excessive to limit it to 5gal fermenters only.. >What we have yet to see is some publication where you've read that small >fermenters don't comply with the effect. The folks making the positive assertion must presenting the evidence. Mr. Harsh tells us his copy of DeClerk is silent on the matter of H:W. What we have yet to see is that there is any "effect " associated correctly with H:W. I see no evidence Del, and unless YOU can point to a paper in a peer reviewed journal testing aspect ratio I refuse to plan library trips to disprove guesswork and conjecture. So where are the papers that H:W *does* cause a performance deficit ? >LaMarck wants me to point out yeast probably evolved as >thin-film creatures. The shallow depth of grapes and >other fruits fed their lust for oxygen and help release the CO2 >that so impedes their growth. Anything deeper than a inch or so may >be too deep for natural yeast activity. But unlike most yeasts our brewing S.cerevisiae ferment sugars never found in fruit, have no lust for oxygen and even as a strategic advantage can accomplish most of their life cycle without any O2 !! This last is a very rare talent. This along with the crabtree effect it implies a competitive strategy of first clearing all the glucose then the O2 in solution. Later when the competition is thin they can enjoy the ethanol, and surface O2. Yeast may not have developed with modern fermenters in mind, but the surface of fruit was certainly not the environment either. -S Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 02:43:51 -0400 From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net> Subject: re: H:W huh? More tower of babel Frank T writes ... >No way would I use the term "surface" or "surface area" to describe >Tom's SURF or Steve's S. Instead, this is the "cross-sectional area," >i.e., the area that results from cutting the cylinder parallel to it's >base. Tom this definition results from Nathaniel Lansings reasonable contention that O2 from the headspace diffuses into beer impacting yeast performance. The area of interest is the area of the wort in contact with air - not the area definition you've suggested. Obviously this thread is so long not even sensible readers follow it anymore. -S Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 19:37:10 +1000 From: David Lamotte <lamotted at ozemail.com.au> Subject: Re: Oxygenation Methods Current scuttlebutt includes Wort Oxygenation amoungst the topics. Like others, I use a stainless diffusion 'stone', but differ in that I use it in a closed keg. My fermenter is a 22 (US) gal corny keg and I have an additional gas port welded in the lid. This dangles down inside the keg. After assembly I insert it in the keg and half fill it with Idophor solution. I turn it on its head for half the soak time before flipping it over again to finish. The idophor is pushed out under gas pressure leaving the keg and diffuser sanitised and untouched by human hands. After filling with wort I gas it up with oxygen, but leave the pressure release valve closed. I leave it under his oxygen blanket for at least 4 hours after which the fermentation is really starting to get under way. I then remove the diffuser and tube from the lid and clip on a gas fitting and short length of tube to bubble away in a jar of water. There are photos to be seen at http://oz.craftbrewer.org/gear/DLgear.html Hope this helps. David Visit the home of Australian Craft Brewing at http://oz.craftbrewer.org Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 13:26:39 +0200 From: Ant Hayes <Ant.Hayes at FifthQuadrant.co.za> Subject: pH of Sparge Liquor I have a hot liquor tank which has its outlet above heating element depth. It is a permanent installation - and thus difficult to drain. For this reason, I do not drop the pH of my hot liquor - but adjust in the mash tun. Further, I sparge with water at an average pH of 8. On page 80 of Volume 1 of de Clerk's "A Textbook of Brewing", he recommends "(using) untreated liquor for sparging" for similar reasons of not wanting to corrode the hot liquor tank. I have read elsewhere that sparge liquor should have a pH of less than 6 - to reduce tannin extraction. What is the standard practice? Ant Hayes Gauteng Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 08:08:20 -0400 (EDT) From: Steven <stevensl at mindspring.net> Subject: Re: Strawberry Wheat I made a raspberry wheat and a blueberry wheat awhile back with mixed results. Overall I liked the style but here are some notes of mine. - I used a mix of fresh and frozen fruit. This gets expensive and i could not tell the difference so decide which gives the best bang for the buck - I placed fruit in the secondary, which the raspberry gave a very nice flavor and aroma, blueberry less so (but the blueberry's i had where not great). I would probably do this again rather than boil since its even more crap to strain out of the boil I would think. - boil the fruit before putting it in the secondary. This is probably the best reason to boil the fruit with the wort. I had mixed results with some infection occuring, probably something wild on the fruit. - rack to a third (clearing) vessel. I was surprised how much pulp/skins/cruft occured in my beer. I tried to get strain it through a filter into my bottling bucket but still had debris. - try adding oatmeal! I used it and i was quite pleased compared to my other (control) batch. I use oatmeal in almost everything now. My raspberry came out tasting somewhat lambic in nature, i'll definatly try it again using frozen raspberrys, fresh is just too expensive and using more wheat. Try to do a lambic maybe? Steven St.Laurent ::: stevensl at mindspring.net ::: 403forbidden.net Democrats - Give a man a fish, feed him for a day Republicans - Teach a man to fish, feed him for life Libertarians - Screw him, I'm full from eating fish Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 08:12:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Steven <stevensl at mindspring.net> Subject: Re Re. 101 Glass Carboy Questions "Jeffry D Luck" <Jeffry.D.Luck at aexp.com> said: > Don't do it! Those plastic fermenting buckets > are the best improvement to homebrewing since > Charlie's much alligned book. The hassle of > working with 40lb (full) slippery-when-wet glass > is not worth the nominal, if any, improvement > you will notice. You know i find it very hard to disagree with this. Personally i've been doing all glass for my last couple of batches and frankly a full 6.5-7 gallon carboy IS A PITA (pain in the arse). I'm going back to a bucket primary until i can get the scratch for a conical! Steven St.Laurent ::: stevensl at mindspring.net ::: 403forbidden.net Democrats - Give a man a fish, feed him for a day Republicans - Teach a man to fish, feed him for life Libertarians - Screw him, I'm full from eating fish Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 08:49:42 -0400 From: Paul Shick <shick at jcu.edu> Subject: Why yeast matters for the CAP experiment Hello all, I've been kind of surprised by the direction that the Great CAP Experiment has been taking, and I thought I'd make a pitch for building in a bit more control and structure to the proceedings. If you don't mind too much, I want to remind people about the history here. I feel somewhat responsible for the expenditure of bandwidth and energy, since the whole issue arose from an off hand comment Steve Alexander made about my use of a conical fermentor on a homebrew scale, in the midst of his very thoughtful post on Zinc requirements for proper fermentation. George Fix then posted some interesting data from his work, comparing fermentations in (cooled) conicals with other fermentor geometries. George noted three areas of difference: 1. Much faster fermentation in conicals; 2. More complete attenuation in conicals; and 3. Lower diacetyl levels in conicals. Steve objected that these differences were likely due to other factors than geometry, and the grand debate ensued. (These are my impressions of the these posts, by the way, so please don't flame George or Steve about them.) Note that George was posting about fermentation behaviors with _his_ yeast propogation methods, which no doubt involve adequate pitching rates of very healthy yeast populations (judging from George's writings about yeast, especially in AoBT.) My concern about the currently proposed structure of the CAPExp is that it looks like a lot of work to produce "data" which probably won't address the three claimed differences very clearly. If the CAPExp design doesn't carefully control the method of yeast propogation/pitching, most of the data are likely to be collected from fermentations involving underpitching and/or less-than-healthy yeast populations. Also, none of the current suggested procedures really looks at the speed of the fermentation, let alone diacetyl levels. (Yes, AJ, I'm aware of the time/expense involved in measuring diacetyl, and I'm not suggesting we include it in the experiment.) The question, as it was originally posed, is basically "Does fermentor geometry affect fermentations (involving adequate pitchings of healthy yeast) at homebrew levels, in terms of speed, attenuation and diacetyl?" My main concern here is that underpitched fermentations, or those involving stressed yeast populations, behave quite differently than those involving large populations of healthy yeast. It's quite possible that the effect of fermentor geometry will be quite different in underpitched fermentations than it is in "ideal" fermentations. If we don't build into the experiment a way to guarantee that all participants are starting with good yeast populations, any conclusions we draw will be pretty shaky. My suggestion is that we should do everything possible to set a level "playing field" for the CAPExp, especially where the yeast are concerned. We're all aware of the likelihood of underpitching if we use smack packs, "pitchable" tubes, etc. without starters. Even if we all use starters of the same size, we'll still be likely to have very different pitching rates and yeast states, just because of (unavoidable) variation in conditions. The only real solution I can see is that 1. We should all use dry lager yeast, preferably from the same manufacturer's lot, following agreed upon rehydration and aeration procedures. 2. We should take careful gravity readings at agreed upon intervals to monitor the progress of the fermentation in each vessel. 3. We should forget about diacetyl, so that AJ can sleep at night. I'm aware of the scarcity of good dry lager yeast. I've heard pretty good reports about Saflager, although I haven't used it myself. I'm hoping we'll hear from Jethro about some great Lallemand strain. Sorry about the length here. Pat, could you forward this to the CAPExp list, if you think it's appropriate? Paul Shick Cleveland Hts, OH Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 08:06:11 -0500 From: Joe Yoder <headduck at swbell.net> Subject: metrification Bret Morrow wrote: Matt was talking about about Australian beer "sizes", including a Darwin stubbie (2 L). Lets see, 1 L equals 2.2 miles--God, that's a lot of beer! Once again showing our American (U.S.) stupidity when it comes to the metric system. I am pretty sure that there are 2.2 L to the mile, so a Darwin really isn't that much beer!! I am pretty sure our Australian, Europeon and S. African Brewers (and other metrificated brewers) will back me up on this!! LOL, Joe Yoder Lawrence, KS Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 09:19:44 -0400 From: Martin_Brungard at urscorp.com Subject: Lemon Grass Usage I just finished researching the HBD archives for info on lemon grass usage. There were several mentions of lemon grass, its effect, and pitfalls of using too much. But no where did I find any advice on how much to use in a specific volume of beer. I just planted a tuft of lemon grass and would like to start incorporating it into some of my recipes. I just need to get the amount and usage "in the ballpark" so I don't ruin a batch. I plan to use a little lemon grass in a wit and I could use some advice on its usage. Thanks for your help! Martin Brungard Tallahassee, FL Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 06:44:19 -0700 From: Jonathan Peakall <jpeakall at mcn.org> Subject: Rims Pumps *Help* Howdy All, I have ruined another impeller/housing on my RIMS pump. This is the second one that died, so I have to assume that the pump just isn't up to the rigors of hot wort and sparge water. It is a Teel 180 deg. pump from Moving Brews. When the last one blew, moving brews was kind enough to send me a new one. I was supposed to send the dead one back, and never did, as I went on a 2 month trip, and when I got back my brew buddy had lost it. Anyway, I need a pump that can take it. Since it is going to be a pain in the a$$ to re-plumb the RIMS, I want to get a pump that will last. Suggestions/sources for a tough as nails pump? TIA, Jonathan Peakall Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 10:04:27 -0400 From: Phil Wilcox <pjwilcox at cmsenergy.com> Subject: Fruit Beers Jeff-- For Starters 42 IBU is double to many IBUs for a wheat beer. and tripple what you would want for Fruit wheat. Secondly, 40/60 Wheat with no rice hulls makes you a very brave man. Rinse with warm water a lb of rice hulls and you'll thank me for it later... Next. Willamette at 15min? Why? Do you want a hoppy smell strawberry beer? yuck. The best fruit beers i've had are all belgian. They often don't use any hops. You might want some for balance, but not more than 15-20 IBU for sure. 32 oz? Strawberries and watermellon are both real subtle flavors after fermentation. If you plan on fermenting them better go with more than a pound per gallon Cleaned and Diced are good. No stems please. Q1 Definitely don't boil them, you'll set the pectins, which in a wheat beer, haze is a good thing--no? You'll also boil off all the aromatics. If you ferment them, I would use the secondary, a big seconday, like a bucket. But who says you have to ferment them? The best Sissy froo froo fruit beer/Chick magnet beers I have made used a Mead technique. I would mash my wheat beer with a 122 protien rest and then a high sacrification rest to get the absolute lowest gravity I could squeeze out of the beer. Pitch a big starter or commercial brewpub slurry and O2 like crazy. Ferment in 4-5 days hopefully. I would then rack into a secondary (NOT A KEG) add some Potassium Sulfate (1/4 tsp/gal if I am remembering this right) this will not kill the yeast, but will prevent further fermentaion. If you have the time I would wait 24 hrs to add the fruit. Last time I left the 2.5 gal of beer on 3 lbs of raspberries for 5 days. Then rack to a keg and force carbonated. I had Fuchia beer, that was VERY BERRY and very PINK, and the chicks loved it at the party I served it at the next day. It was a bit of overkill on the raspberries, you couldnt taste the beer really. A little bit of wheat character came out, but the gals around the billiard table would be pouring thier CAP for this one! ;<) For a balanced Raspberry I would try 3.5 lbs in 5 gal. For Strawberries I would stick with a lb per gallon. The sugar from the berries makes up for the dryness of the beer. And hopefully the wheat character is there to balance the remaining sweetness. Q2 No. See above Q3 So long as cleaning includes removeing the stems, Yes. You could put them in the freezer over night in order to burst open all their cells, I usually use frozen fruit anyway... Q4 Adequate? More like overkill. see above. Fruit Beers are best fresh. The Rasp Wheat still placed for a 3rd at the state fair 2 months after It was completed, and it had lost alot of freshness by then. I Don't like most commerdcial fruit beers, We used sam adams cherry wheat as a calibrator one year at the state fair. It got a 22. The best I have had came from Seattle. it was Jet City 777 Apricot Rye Nectar. And it was sublime!! It was a big beer, with the alcohol, rye and apricot all in perfect harmony. Too bad that one doesn't exist anymore. New Glarus Belgian red is a great cherry beer, with more cherry's than beer. and while in NYC I had a bottle of Pinconing County Belg Red. that was also fabulous. Phil Wilcox Poison Frog Home Brewery and Bumblefrog Meadery Jackson, Mi Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 10:06:18 -0400 (EDT) From: Jesse Stricker <jds19 at duke.edu> Subject: Plastic bucket fermenters In Digest #3651, Jeffry Luck writes: > > I'm getting ready to make the jump from my Basic > > Starter setup (two plastic fermenters...) to > > fermenting in one or more glass carboys. > > Don't do it! Those plastic fermenting buckets > are the best improvement to homebrewing since > Charlie's much alligned book. The hassle of > working with 40lb (full) slippery-when-wet glass > is not worth the nominal, if any, improvement > you will notice. I brewed in a big seven-gallon bucket for a while, and then I used a 6.5 gallon carboy as a primary for a while. A few months ago, I went to brew some beer, but the primary carboy was in use. A friend of mine rode in to the rescue with a big seven-gallon bucket and, well, I haven't let him have it back since. It's got a handle you can trust, it's easier to move, it protects from the light, if I drop it it doesn't break, and it's about 4000 times easier to clean. I still use a five-gallon carboy for secondary when cleaning is easier and oxygen permeability might (or might not) be a problem, but the difference between reaching into my fermenter and gently scrubbing away yeasty crud or trying to hit that little speck of stuff with a jet washer and a carboy brush is so great that I'm a (re)convert to the joys of buckets. Jesse - -- Jesse Stricker jds19 at acpub.duke.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 09:43:39 -0500 From: "H Stearns Laseur" <h_stearns_laseur at email.mobil.com> Subject: Yokohama or Tokyo Ohio gozai mas, Any brew stores in Yokohama or Tokyo? I'll be there two years and want to get a hold of some grain, hops and extract. I can bring in my own extract and hops if it comes to that, however, you can't beat freshly crushed grains. Heeeellllppppp. Stearns (for Glenn) Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 09:20:21 -0700 From: John Palmer <jjpalmer at gte.net> Subject: How To Brew website Hi Group, With the discussion of helpful books for all-grain brewing, I am pleased to see people cite my book. Glad I could be of service. But don't waste your time trying to download and print the whole thing. The second edition of How To Brew will be available in July as a 6" x 9" softcover. The second edition is much better, and will hopefully be available from most brewshops as well as online. I will post a short note in July when it is available. It is currently at the Printers and I expect to review the blueline next week. So, save your shareware fees (only ever received about 2 dozen), and wait for the hardcopy. The online first edition will continue to be available, and I haven't decided whether to update it or not. It would be another 6 months work, and we are expecting our third child in August, so it may be a year before I get time to do that. Looking forward to seeing everyone on the 22nd, John John Palmer Monrovia, CA homepage http://www.realbeer.com/jjpalmer How To Brew - the online book http://www.howtobrew.com/sitemap.html Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 09:17:01 -0700 From: Troy Hager <thager at hcsd.k12.ca.us> Subject: Good HB books and resources... Along with the current thread on people's favorite HB books... now that Brewing Techniques is gone, what HB periodicals do you guys subscribe to and read? I really miss Brewing Techiques. The two other HB mags out there seem to be Brew Your Own and Zymurgy. I used to subscribe to Zymurgy but found that it was a little less technically oriented that what I needed (articles about bottle openers and tap handles are of little interest to me) but that was a few years ago. Has it changed in any way? The other mag BYO seems really aimed at novice extract brewers from what I have seen. I have heard mention of the New Brewer mag. aimed at micro and pub brewers but at $85 for a subscription that is over my head. Is there anything else out there for the experienced all grain brewer along the lines of what BT used to be? Thanks for your feedback! Troy Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 14:27:13 -0400 From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com> Subject: Stubbies/CF chillers/Benzene "Stubbies" refers to bottles as compared to "tinnies". A tinnie is a measure of distance as in "It's 6 tinnies from Erldunda to Aileron". A Darwin Stubby was a 2L bottle of NT Lager or NT Draught - can't remember which and they are now defunct. I think they were bought up by one of the larger breweries. They used to sell a kit for the tourists consisting of the stubby, 2 glasses and a bar towel. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * There is no "best" speed for the wort to flow through the chiller. Intuition should tell you that the faster the cooling water flows and the slower the wort flows the closer to the cooling water inlet temperature the ouput wort will be. Chillers have a sort of intrinsic cooling capacity (in gallons per hour) which, other things being constant, depends on the length of the chiller. If the wort flow is set to this capacity and the cooling flow is 10 times this capacity or more the exiting wort temperature will be within 3 degrees F of the coolant temperature. This choice gives "efficient" cooling but uses lots of cooling water. Other combinations of wort and coolant give less efficiency but are more conserving. Experiment with boiling water to find out what rates will give you what you want. * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * Benzene has been replaced by toluene in the current alpha/beta acid MOA because of concerns over toxicity. Here's a summary of the new procedure (from a post 26 AUg 2000). The wavelengths should be the same as for benzene buy I don't have a copy of the old procedure to check against. 5 grams of freshly ground hops are extracted into 100 mL of toluene on a wrist action shaker for 30 minutes. An aliquot from the extraction bottle is centrifuged for 5 minutes and 5 mL of clarified extract diluted to 100 mL with methanol. An aliquot of this dilution is then diluted further with alkaline (0.2 mL 6N NaOH per 100 mL MeOH) methanol to the extent that the absorbances at 325 and 355 nm fall within the dynamic range of the instrument. Absorbances are then read at 325, 355 and 275 nm against a blank prepared by applying the same two dilutions to 5 mL toluene. The three absorbtions are weighted by a set of coefficients, summed, and scaled by the dilution factor. One set of weights gives the alpha acid content and another the beta: % = d(w1*A355 + w2*A325 + w3*A275) for alpha, w1 = -51.56, w2 = 73.79, w3 = -19.07 for beta w1 = 55.57, w2 = -47.59, w3 = 5.10) d = (mL first dilution)(mL second dil.)/[(500)(extract mL used to make first dilution)(mL from first dilution used to make 2d dilution)] There is a standard isohumulone mix sold by the ASBC for checking on this and other methods. It is very expensive - I don't recall the price but over $100 for the minimum quantity. You can get the details on how to buy this stuff from ASBC (they have a web site). - -- A.J. deLange CT Project Manager Zeta Associates 10302 Eaton Place Fairfax, VA 22030 (703) 359 8696 855 0905 ajdel at mindspring.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 13:40:35 -0500 From: rlabor at lsuhsc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald) Subject: RE: Converting All-Grain Stout to Extract >From: "Peter Fantasia" <fantasiapeter at hotmail.com> >Subject: RE: Converting All-Grain Stout to Extract > >>On May 21 Nils A. Hedglin asked about converting >an >>all-grain stout recipe to an extract recipe >A good rule of thumb is that a lb. of grain is eqivalent to .82 lb. of >extract No don't try it. I used some extract and man oh' man did it ever screw up my maltmill. It musta took me 2 hours to clean it up! Just could'nt resist - sorry to interrupt the H/W digest. Ron La Borde Ronald La Borde - Metairie, Louisiana - rlabor at lsuhsc.edu http://hbd.org/rlaborde Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 18:55:35 -0400 From: "Neil K" <neilk27 at hotmail.com> Subject: Airstone sanitation Troy Hager writes: I too use O2 to oxygenate my chilled wort. My procedure used to be with a stainless difussion stone as well. I attached it to an old piece of racking cane and some tubing to create a kind of aeration wand and after wort was pumped to fermenter, I carefully take the stone out of the sanitizer, place it on the wand, open the fermenter top (BBMB CC) and give it a couple blasts with the O2. The procedure always bothered me somewhat - first of all I had to grab the stone and place it on the wand careful not to touch anything with it and I am sure my hands are not perfectly sanitized.... Why not attach the stone to the wand first and dump the entire assembly in some no-rinse sanitizer? Grab the wand at the opposite end, the part that doesn't touch any wort, and there's very little to worry about. I recently bought a 36" window box (usually used for plants) for a couple of dollars at a home depot place. It's long enough for my Fermtech siphon starter, racking cases, tubing, etc. and it's shallow and narrow enough that you don't need a lot of liquid to submerge items. Small items like airlocks and bungs don't get lost, and some even come with bottom drains to make it easy to reuse sanitizers. My real question is about the airstones themselves: several posts have recently mentioned problems with them clogging and I was wondering what the general consensus is about them and their ease of use. I'd be hooking up an aquarium pump, not an O2 cylinder. Also, are the cheap disposible pet shop airstones considered food grade? Several people have said they used them instead of stainless. Private e-mails are fine. Thanks! Neil K Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 20:12:17 -0400 From: "David Craft" <David-Craft at craftinsurance.com> Subject: wort chiller and brew flag Hello, I am making an immersion wort chiller and cannot get the 90 degree bends I am looking for in the ends. I am thinking about soldering (non lead) copper couplings on to the coil. Is there downside to this, metallic contamination to my wort, leaking caused by the temperature differential? Second, my wife wants to buy me "brewing flag" that can be hung when I am brewing. This would be similar to the many other seasonal and sporting flags you see at people's houses. Any suggestions on who might carry these? David B. Craft Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 22:49:21 -0500 From: "Gary Smith" <mandolinist at interlync.com> Subject: Hot side aeration / how to best transfer with a 15 gal keg How-d, My first post here so hi to all. I brewed this weekend and ran into several problems I need ideas to help resolve these problems the next time I brew. I have three 15 gal stainless kegs; two are fit with Easy Mashers with a 3/8" stainless ball valve tap and the other has a copper pipe at the bottom of the keg with no screen and the same ball valve heli- arced to the side of the keg. When I made them I thought to use one for sparge, one for mashing & the other for boil. With the easy masher I've since found it's no problem to mash/lauter in one kettle but the problem comes in how to best get the mixture into the boil kettle which needs to be high enough to drain through the chiller into the carboys. If I were to have the 3 kegs on a ironwork step frame, each high enough to allow complete draining of their contents, it'd be too tall for my brew space. Besides, the ladder would be prohibitively expensive for me. I kept the mash tun on the Cajun Cooker which I had elevated on blocks. After sparging I was able to jockey it onto a platform and slide the now full boil kettle onto the cooker from the same table. (The boil kettle was still high enough to drain into the carboy) and I completed the brewing. Since I make 10 gallons at a time & I'm no body builder, the boil kettle is too heavy for me to lift once I've completed the sparging & the same with the mash tun for they're too high to get a good grip on. Someday soon I'm going to have an accident if I keep doing it the way I just did. So, I was brain storming with a friend about this trying to come up with a better way to brew with these barrels. We were trying to come up with a way to have the mash tun & boil kettle on the same level (I have a wrought iron stand for a huge aquarium which is just the right height) The idea of draining the mash into a container on the ground & then using a peristaltic pump to fill the boil kettle came up but finding such a pump isn't going to be easy or cheap. The idea of draining into a container & then scooping it up and pouring into the boil kettle came up but with the run-off at 170 degrees, we weren't sure if that might be a problem with hot side aeration. If the Garage were heated I could put a winch from a boat trailer or a pulley system in there to lift the kettles which would solve everything but in the cold weather I can't use this garage so I have to come up with a more realistic solution. If I bought another Cajun Cooker so I'd have one under the mash tun elevated 4 feet on cinder blocks & another cooker under the boil pot yet elevated enough to drain through a cooler to a waiting carboy, it would work fine but I don't want to buy a second cooker. So, the three main questions: At what temperature does hot side aeration become a factor and would scooping the collected mash from say, a Coleman cooler & then pouring it into the boil kettle be problematic in any way? If it's not a problem, that's my easiest solution that I can figure. But... I suspect the 170 degrees brings me into the HSA arena. What do others with these converted kettles from kegs do to drain from the mash tun to the boil kettle & still be high enough to drain into the carboy after boiling? Feel free to post to me directly if you'd prefer, I'd sure like some sage advice. >From beautiful downtown Highland, IN Cheers, Gary Gary Smith http://www.geocities.com/dawgmando/ If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and a man. - Mark Twain - Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 06/06/01, by HBD2HTML v1.2 by KFL
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96
Convert This Page to Pilot DOC Format