---

	FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
		Digest Janitor: pbabcock at hbd.org


***************************************************************
       THIS YEAR'S HOME BREW DIGEST BROUGHT TO YOU BY: 

                     Your Business Name Here
    Visit http://hbd.org "Sponsor the HBD"  to find out how!
			 
    Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********

DONATE to the Home Brew Digest. Home Brew Digest, Inc. is a 
501(c)3 not-for-profit organization under IRS rules (see the
FAQ at http://hbd.org for details of this status). Donations
can be made by check to Home Brew Digest mailed to:

HBD Server Fund
PO Box 871309
Canton Township, MI 48187-6309

or by paypal to address serverfund@hbd.org. DONATIONS of $250 
or more will be provided with receipts. SPOSORSHIPS of any 
amount are considered paid advertisement, and may be deductible
under IRS rules as a bsuiness expense. Please consult with your 
tax professional, then see http://hbd.org for available 
sponsorship opportunities.
***************************************************************


Contents:
  Re: Olive Oil (steve alexander)
  Re: Olive Oil (Fred L Johnson)
  Heaters, etc. ("A.J deLange")
  BJCP Elections -- Voting is now open (Ed Westemeier)
  RE: Electric Boiling Kettle Heating Element (Nathan Hirneisen)
  gravity fed brewery / diacetyl and overpitching (Matt)
  Re: Heaters, etc. (Harlan Bauer)
  Does anyone know Dana Johnson? (Harlan Bauer)
  Re: Electric Boiling Kettle Heat Element (Calvin Perilloux)
  Re: Olive Oil ("steve.alexander")


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*           The HBD Logo Store is now open!             *
*            http://www.hbd.org/store.html              *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*  Suppport this service: http://hbd.org/donate.shtml   *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*   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 cannot reach you. We will not correct your address
  for the automation - that's your job.

HAVING TROUBLE posting, subscribing or unsusubscribing? See the HBD FAQ at
http://hbd.org.

LOOKING TO BUY OR SELL USED EQUIPMENT? Please do not post about it here. Go
instead to http://homebrewfleamarket.com and post a free ad there.

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@hbd.org or read the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org.

JANITORs on duty: Pat Babcock (pbabcock at hbd dot org), Jason Henning,
                  and Spencer Thomas



----------------------------------------------------------------------


Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 01:06:20 -0400
From: steve alexander <steve-alexander at roadrunner.com>
Subject: Re: Olive Oil

The lovely and talented Fred suggests ...
> I can only speculate on alternative explanations of Hull's results  
> until I see the control data that says otherwise. I do admit to some  
> bias, and I'm sure my skepticism is showing.  :0)
>   

The bit that makes me most skeptical is that the amount of olive oil added
in other reports (I don't have the Hull figures) is so small that it 
could not possibly
replace conventional wort oxygenation as the source of UFAs and sterols. 
It's too
low by an order of magnitude or more.  This suggests another source of 
O2 or lipids
to the yeast either pre- or post- pitching ... speculation as you say.

They need to assay the yeast lipids pre- & post fermentation.   
Something sounds
wrong with their result.

 -S



Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 07:24:01 -0400
From: Fred L Johnson <FLJohnson52 at nc.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Olive Oil

Steve Alexander points out the most compelling reason to be skeptical  
of the olive oil study, i.e., that the numbers just don't add up.

I fear that the olive oil method as described Hull will become yet  
another one of those unsubstantiated methods passed along in  
homebrewing circles that wastes time, money, and beer. If you wander  
around the discussion forums, you'll now see folks wondering about  
yeasts' need for sterols and wondering if adding egg yolk to the  
fermentation might help. These folks seem to think that yeast contain  
cholesterol. (Do you see how the errors begin to multiply?)

Someone needs to do the well-controlled experiment(s) in the lab.  
(I'll bet it's already been done.)

Fred L Johnson
Apex, North Carolina, USA



Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 08:38:51 -0400
From: "A.J deLange" <ajdel at cox.net>
Subject: Heaters, etc.

Harlan,

The basic pieces of information you need are that one BTU is the amount 
of heat required to raise 1 pound of water 1 degree fahrenheit and that 
1 BTU is delivered  when 0.293 watts flows for 1 hour or 60*0.293 = 17.6 
watts flows for 1 minute. Assuming that you want to change the 
temperature of 375 pounds (45 gal) of water by 1 degree per minute you 
would require 375*17.6 = 6600 or 6.6 kw. The implications of 1 degree 
per minute are that it would take 212 - 167 = 45 minutes to bring 45 
gallons of water to the boil from mashout temperature and probably 
somewhat longer given that you will lose some heat in the lauter tun. 
Also, it would take 85 minutes to raise 45 gal of 55 degree well water 
to 140 strike temperature. Thus while you can probably get by with 6.6 
kw it's very marginal and twice or more than that is probably  more 
reasonable considering that you will be wanting to do more than 45 
gallons (3 x 15.5 + 5 = 50.5 which is enough to fill three kegs and have 
some over for hangup in the wort chiller, in the hops ....) and you will 
certainly need to heat more than 45 gallons of water to do even a 45 gal 
brew. So lets look at 13.2 kw in the kettle and a like amount in the 
HLT. That's 26.6 kw or 111 amps at 240 volts (222 Amps at 120). Thats a 
lot of electricity and probably why not many people use this approach 
with volumes as large as 45 - 50 gal.

The good news is that 3 phase heaters are just three separate heaters in 
one package so no, you definitely do not need inverters or an MG set. 
The bad news is that all 6 wires may not be available to you. If the 3 
are wired in "wye" configuration then you have one wire for each element 
and a common neutral. Just hook all three element wires to 240 and the 
common to service neutral and you are off and running. If they are 
connected "delta"all is not lost. You can connect 240 across 2 (of the 
3) terminals and have one heater produce its rated load while the other 
two produce 1/4 for a total of 1.5 times the rated load (half what the 
heater would produce under 3 phase excitation) or short two of the 
terminals and apply 240 between the shorted pair and the 3rd terminal in 
which case two of the heaters would produce their rated loads and the 
other nothing (for 2/3 of the load available under 3 phase).

You still need to think about where you are going to get 110 amps. Thats 
as much as many houses have for their entire service. Hefty wire is 
required.

A couple of other thoughts: Mount the drums on some sort of a stand that 
will allow them to be tipped. This makes cleaning much easier (how are 
you going to get spent grain out of the lauter tun, how will you get 
spent hops out of the kettle?). You will definitely need to install 
large nipples more for cleaning than for moving wort and water around 
(wash stuff out with a high pressure hose). If these are Triclover valve 
assemblies life will be much more pleasant for you.

Cheers, A.J.


Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 09:14:09 -0400
From: Ed Westemeier <hopfen at malz.com>
Subject: BJCP Elections -- Voting is now open

BJCP judges in the Mid-Atlantic, Midwest, South, and West regions can  
cast their vote for regional representative at any time during the  
month of April. Just go to www.bjcp.org/electioncenter.html and select  
your region.

All four regions have at least two very good candidates each, so there  
is a real choice this year, unlike many past elections. It would be  
great to see a large voter turnout. Since the term of office is now  
three years, your choice will have far-reaching effects.

Ed Westemeier
BJCP Communication Director
communication_director at bjcp.org



Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 09:40:33 -0400
From: Nathan Hirneisen <cave_nate at hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: Electric Boiling Kettle Heating Element


RE:

Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 08:10:58 -0400
From: Harlan Bauer 
Subject: Electric Boiling Kettle Heating Element


try a band heater around the drum for a low watt density 
heater for your kettles. 
This has been on my project list to get away from LP gas

http://www.fastheat.com/products/elements/better.htm

sizes up to 6" wide by 36" dia

a issue could be if your drums are beat up and 
the surface is not smooth to make a good heat transfer 
from the band heater to the drum. 

as for the rotary phase converter. actually you loose power 
in the phase converter. The only reason you want one if 
(as you said) 
to be able to use 3 phase motors in your shop. 
And if you had a real 3 phase system, 
you now got to worry about balancing loads 
on the phases and many other things that 
one dont got to worry about in a 1 phase system

Also, with the high power requirements of your brewing system. 
make sure to read up on the codes or get a licensed electrician.
12 Gage romex will not cut it with the power 
requirements (15KW +)  you are looking at. 

thanks

 -Nate

Hatfield, PA


Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 09:41:44 -0700 (PDT)
From: Matt <baumssl27 at yahoo.com>
Subject: gravity fed brewery / diacetyl and overpitching

Harlan seems to have an appreciation for brewery designs that take
elegant advantage of gravity.  If you are ever in Brugge, definitely
check out an amazing historical example of this principle by touring
the ~6 floor De Halve Maan brewery.  The floors flow down from grain
(not malt) storage on the top floor, to a maltings (no longer used) a
floor below, and so on through a brewhouse, coolship, the open
glass-covered-steel primary vats cooled by water pipes, closed lagering
tanks (complete with small manways for the small child laborers to
enter and clean them in the old days), etc.  A really cool brewery
tour.

- ---

Is overpitching (say, 3M cells/ml/P) likely to lead to higher final
diacetyl levels in average gravity all-malt beer?  I would expect more
cells at the start to take up more valine at the start, leaving all
cells a little more starved for valine for more of the fermentation. 
On the other hand, more cells are available to mop things up at the
end--but only if they are in good enough shape.

More generally, it seems to me there should be a correlation between
overpitching and the fermentation problems that tend to arise from
amino acid deficiency (such as diacetyl).  Anyone know if there
actually is one?

(The studies showing increased fusel production with higher pitch rate
might be one example... depending on what mechanism is actually
producing the extra fusels.)

Matt




Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:55:28 -0400
From: Harlan Bauer <harlan.bauer at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Heaters, etc.

A.J., thank you for your response. Let me address the parts that I
currently understand. The rest is a bit over my head, but if I sit down
with paper and pencil, I can learn it and understand it. Math and this
type of conversions are definitely not my strong suit, but you've given
me enough information that with some effort, I can figure it out...

On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 08:38:51 -0400
"A.J deLange" <ajdel at cox.net> wrote:

> per minute you would require 375*17.6 = 6600 or 6.6 kw. The
> implications of 1 degree per minute are that it would take 212 - 167
> = 45 minutes to bring 45 gallons of water to the boil from mashout
> temperature and probably somewhat longer given that you will lose

I'm not sure how long lautering will take, but if I begin heating the
boiling kettle as soon as the heating element is covered, this
shouldn't be a problem, no? 

> some heat in the lauter tun. Also, it would take 85 minutes to raise
> 45 gal of 55 degree well water to 140 strike temperature. Thus while

Since I will have a dedicated HLT, heating time should not be a
problem: I simply set a temperature controller to 208*F and have it
turn on at say 4am for a 7am mash-in. Further, there's nothing stopping
me from using the day before brew day to run the HLT water thru a
passive solar hot water heater using a thermal-syphon. Note also that I
intend to insulate all these tanks with *at least* 2-in rigid
fiberglass or rockwool duct insulation. Further, in all likelihood, the
HLT is going to double as the solar hot water heater for my entire
house (note: I'm single and my wants are very simple...)

Since boilover is not a concern in the HLT, I should be able to heat
just under 55-gal to 208*F and hold it--mash-in and sparge
temperatures will be tempered with a simple "mixing valve": 

- ----HOT-x----|
                      |---x---mash tun-->
- ---COLD-x---|

x = ball valves

> you can probably get by with 6.6 kw it's very marginal and twice or
> more than that is probably  more reasonable considering that you will
> be wanting to do more than 45 gallons (3 x 15.5 + 5 = 50.5 which is
> enough to fill three kegs and have some over for hangup in the wort
> chiller, in the hops ....) and you will certainly need to heat more
> than 45 gallons of water to do even a 45 gal brew. So lets look at

True, but I *do* have a pump. The boiling kettle could be used to heat
the mash water and the full HLT can be used for sparging. I intend to
only do single-temperature infusions...

Some of the line and heat exchange losses can be recovered by pushing
the last wort thru with cold water or CO2 or even air--A "T" fitting,
post kettle, w/ S/O valves would do the trick--that's how we did it
at Pipkin Brewing in Louisville--just watch the sightglass at the
fermenter and kill it when the entering wort gets clear-ish. 

Until I do an actual brew, I have no idea what these drums will
actually hold, nor do I know what the evaporation rate will be on a
1.25-1.5-hour boil. I'll probably do a test run with extract to
determine whether an onion-dome lid would be worthwhile--it would
certainly help concentrate the initial boil-over and reduce evaporation
with a smaller opening...just knock the boil-over down with a garden
hose for the first few minutes until it settles down...

> 13.2 kw in the kettle and a like amount in the HLT. That's 26.6 kw or
> 111 amps at 240 volts (222 Amps at 120). Thats a lot of electricity
> and probably why not many people use this approach with volumes as
> large as 45 - 50 gal.

Yes, but that's presupposing that both are running at full output. The
HLT will only be cycling occasionally at mash-in because it will
already be up to temperature--it only has to hold that
temperature(208*F) until mash-out. Further, by your calculations
above, the HLT should only *need* one heating element if everything is
automated to turn on at ~4AM...

While it *is* a lot of electricity, it would also be a lot of propane
as well. Do you know, off hand, what the equation would be for BTU's/lb
of propane (if so, just give me the equation and let me figure it
out--I really *do* want to understand this stuff, not just know the
answer)? I'm actually more comfortable with a gas fired kettle, but
that's only because that's what I'm used to. I have a feeling, though,
that electricity might turn out to be cheaper. 

The thing is, I have a 200amp service and the only thing really drawing
any energy are my power tools; and the only thing that is currently
running constantly is an energy efficient chest freezer. The brewery
will NEVER be used at the same time as my shop, so why should a ~100amp
draw be a problem with a 200amp service? The run from the transformer
to the service panel is less than 75-feet... 

> 
> The good news is that 3 phase heaters are just three separate heaters
> in one package so no, you definitely do not need inverters or an MG
> set. The bad news is that all 6 wires may not be available to you. If
> the 3 are wired in "wye" configuration then you have one wire for
> each element and a common neutral. Just hook all three element wires
> to 240 and the common to service neutral and you are off and running.
> If they are connected "delta"all is not lost. You can connect 240

OK! This is the part that I do not understand. Perhaps you or
someone else could look at the installation guide and translate the
hieroglyphics for me. Here is the URL to the pdf installation manual
for the Chromalox model EMTS-3:
http://www.chromalox.com/catalog/resources/PD407.pdf

and to their catalog page:
http://www.chromalox.com/catalog/resources/EMTS-3%20Severe.pdf

> You still need to think about where you are going to get 110 amps.
> Thats as much as many houses have for their entire service. Hefty
> wire is required.
> 

Remember, this is new construction. I'll be doing the work myself, it
is all to go in conduit and I have every intention of asking you when
I'm ready to install what guage wire I should use with the length of
run... I'm doing the feasability study at the moment, and you have no
idea how much I appreciate your warnings! I'm smart enough to know when
I *don't* know something...

> A couple of other thoughts: Mount the drums on some sort of a stand
> that will allow them to be tipped. This makes cleaning much easier
> (how are you going to get spent grain out of the lauter tun, how will
> you get spent hops out of the kettle?). You will definitely need to

Ah, that's easy. I've got some 4-in SS pipe in my scrap pile with 4"
T/C flanges. The drain on the boiling kettle will be a short length of
this with a 1.5-in T/C tee'd off the pipe facing down--the 1.5-in T/C =
bitter wort out; the 4-in T/C w/cap = trub cleanout. It's exactly the
setup that DME used on a 7-bbl kettle I used to brew on.

I'm not going to use the SS drums for a mash tun--I want a more squat
geomery with a 1.5-in T/C outlet centered on a slightly dished bottom.  

> Triclover valve assemblies life will be much more pleasant for you.

T/C adds a lot of flexability--if you thread the center of the fairly
cheap blank caps you can add all kinds of copper gizmos--like injecting
O2 (or air) and yeast post heat exchange....

A.J., thanks again for taking the time to respond. This is a long-term
project and I still have lots of questions, I just don't know what they
are just yet (like how I'm going to integrate a touch-screen control
center running on Linux, hee hee). This is just the preliminary
planning stage where I'm gathering all the stuff I need as I find it...

harlan.


Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 15:09:09 -0400
From: Harlan Bauer <harlan.bauer at gmail.com>
Subject: Does anyone know Dana Johnson?

Does anyone know if Dana Johnson still works for Birko? There's no
contact info for him on their web site. 

I have a question that he might be able to answer concerning how to
deal with CIP chemicals responsibly without access to sewer or septic.

harlan.


Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 12:24:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: Calvin Perilloux <calvinperilloux at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Electric Boiling Kettle Heat Element

Harlan Bauer asks about three phase power:

I don't have any of my copies of the NEC and other docs 
at hand, so this is all off the top of my head, but here
goes:

> Would I gain any efficiency by having a converter, 
> or would the efficiency of the 3-phase be lost in 
> the converter?

In general, you can expect a loss in conversion; that's
the nature of electrical conversion in general, though 
if you are faced with the alternative of the same device 
running well on converted 3-phase versus very poorly on 
2-phase, then you'll need to convert.  But you're using 
this for heating right?  I'm not sure I see the requirement 
for resistive heating elements (as opposed to motors) being
better with three-phase over two-phase.  Perhaps that's just 
Chromalox's default design for some items where they assume
their customers have 3-phase, high-current power available.  
But the phase itself ought not to be a big deal for 
resistive heating.

However, there is the issue for you of the design voltages 
and configurations, which are different with a 3-phase and 
a 2-phase device, so yeah, that can be a problem.

> 3.) How many watts am I going to need to bring 45 gallons 
> of high gravity wort to a rolling boil? Should I divide 
> the wattage between 2 or 3 heating elements or should/can 
> I use just one? 

I'm too lazy to do the math/estimation right now, but I'm
guessing you might want several elements for that large 
amount of heat instead of a large, compact one.  That 
depends on the element geometry, though; if you have 
a good way to distribute the heat from a very high-power 
but low-wattage-density element, then it could be OK.

> 4.) Is an immersion element my only option? [versus "rice cooker"]

No, but it is indeed a more efficient option.  Whenever the
heating element is outside of the wort, you increase losses.
The giant rice cooker idea does seem workable, but on a
scale like that, most people would probably go to direct
gas-fired or (if you are zealous and meticulous but also 
half-mad) even gas-fired steam.  The rice cooker option
also has the advantage of being easier for CIP compatibility,
as you are no doubt aware.

By the way, if you insist on 3-phase, a converter is surely
a better option, even with efficiency losses, than paying 
your utility for three phase power installation in a rural 
area where you might be a long ways from full three-phase 
access.

Anyway, I see that quite a few of the Chromalox products do 
seem to use single phase 240V, just perhaps not the specific
product you are eyeing.  Have you talked directly to one of 
their engineers about it?  Perhaps they do have something 
that can be easily reconfigured for what you want.

Calvin Perilloux
Middletown, Maryland, USA


Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 19:45:09 -0400
From: "steve.alexander" <-s at roadrunner.com>
Subject: Re: Olive Oil

Fred L Johnson wrote:


>> > > If you wander around the discussion forums, you'll now see folks 
>> > > wondering about yeasts' need for sterols and wondering if adding egg 
>> > > yolk to the fermentation might help. These folks seem to think that 
>> > > yeast contain cholesterol. (Do you see how the errors begin to multiply?)
>> > >
>> > > Someone needs to do the well-controlled experiment(s) in the lab. 
>> > > (I'll bet it's already been done.)
>>     
> >   
>   
Right - I meant to say it but the OO provides almost no sterol (two+ 
orders of magnitude too little) so attempt to grow yeast anaerobically 
with this tiny OO addition must certainly fail. Almost certainly oxygen 
was introduced at some level.

Modestly off-topic, but volume is low.

This morning on the financial channel the talking heads were in a tizzie 
because a recent study showed two expensive proprietary anti-cholesterol 
drugs did NOT reduce the rate of arterial plaque accumulation better 
than inexpensive off-patent ones. The drug companies would take a $10B 
tumble at market-open. So the funny part; the taking heads were 
extremely skeptical of this paper based on a previous study showing the 
expensive stuff reduced chol'ol more. One head commented that it 
"seems like voodoo" to measure arterial thickening by ultrasound rather 
than measure choleseterol level. I had to laugh out loud.

The nonsense is that cholesterol (specific fraction) is a proxy for 
atherosclerosis and no one should care about their cholesterol level if 
they they aren't building plaque. The sad part is that cholesterol 
fractions are not a very good proxy, but the medical industry has 
conflated the two to an extent that the public apparently fears the 
proxy more than than the actual plaque. As a result you get this 
ridiculous backward reasoning.

Similar conflation and illogic begins around 2:25 here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yp_l5ntikaU

Of course fallacious reasoning is on prominent display; in political 
speech, CAGW climate debate, "Sanjay Gupta"-style TV-medical 
pronouncements, discussion of energy+environment, discussions of 
evolution. When it impacts brewing though that's serious. Heres a little 
toolkit for the upcoming US political season, tho' it's good anytime;
http://users.tpg.com.au/users/tps-seti/baloney.html
http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/arguments_topics.html
http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html

So we shouldn't take the Hull-OO claim too seriously. I trust the 
sincerity and truthfulness of the Hull test, but they are (as AJ points 
out) a commercial venture and not a funded research project. If they 
intended to publish a result they would need to consider experimental 
design and they should anticipate the major criticisms in review. It's 
an interesting side-note but not worthy of using as a foundation for 
reasoning about how to manage yeast. It's time for a search of the 
brewing lit.

 -S











Return to table of contents

---