HOMEBREW Digest #1375 Fri 18 March 1994

Digest #1374 Digest #1376

		Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor

  The Continuing Debate on Hopssssssssssss (Jeff Frane)
  Hops utilization research (708) 938-3184" <HANSEN.MICHAEL at igate.abbott.com>
  Treatment of Specialty Grains (Michael Inglis)
  Starting a brewpub help (John Oberpriller) (John Oberpriller)
  Eisbock History (John Oberpriller) (John Oberpriller)
  Food grade sealant (J. Fingerle)
  speed growing yeast (William Nichols)
  Hops and Deer (Art Steinmetz)
  Re: Starter Culture (John DeCarlo              x7116          )
  Hop rhizomes & rooting hormone (John Fix)
  Growing Hops (John DeCarlo              x7116          )
  De-lidding SS Kegs (Bob_McIlvaine)
  Animal products??? ("Pete Brauer 312/915-6157"                 )
  False Bottom Museum (Jack Schmidling)
  PID Controllers (Louis K. Bonham)
  Filtering (William Nichols)
  Keg carbonating and bottling (William Nichols)
  A few points (Jeremy Ballard Bergsman)
  Party Kegs are for me... (603)429-8553 - BESSETTE at UICC.COM"
  Re: Recirculating Pumps (Dion Hollenbeck)
  Homebrew competition question (BUKOFSKY)
  joining ("Keith W. Kulpa")
  query (Tobey A Nelson)
  source of beta amylase (Chuck Wettergreen)
  Glass airlocks - Where? (Mike Dix)
  Priming with dried malt extract (erict)
  post-boil isoalpha acid solubility/boil volume vs. hop utilitzation (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
  Wort Gravity and Utilization of Alpha Acids: Data!! (Glen Tinseth)
  Rinsing sanitizers (Allen Ford)
  IBU, UBMe, WeBUs (Glen Tinseth)
  GCHC 1994 (Carlo Fusco)

Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew at hpfcmi.fc.hp.com (Articles are published in the order they are received.) Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc., to homebrew-request@ hpfcmi.fc.hp.com, BUT PLEASE NOTE that if you subscribed via the BITNET listserver (BEER-L at UA1VM.UA.EDU), then you MUST unsubscribe the same way! If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first. FAQs, archives and other files are available via anonymous ftp from sierra.stanford.edu. (Those without ftp access may retrieve files via mail from listserv at sierra.stanford.edu. Send HELP as the body of a message to that address to receive listserver instructions.) Please don't send me requests for back issues - you will be silently ignored. For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to lutzen at novell.physics.umr.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 16 Mar 1994 14:38:56 -0800 (PST) From: gummitch at teleport.com (Jeff Frane) Subject: The Continuing Debate on Hopssssssssssss Some interesting -- if inconclusive -- discussion on hop utilization and specific gravity. > From: "Anderso_A" (quoting Mark Garetz) > > >Wort gravity *does* have an effect. A big one. But the gravity > >during the boil is not what matters, it is the gravity during > >fermentation. > > As I see it, your statement means little or no change to an > all-grain brewer but significant change for an extract brewer. If > I'm brewing an extract Pale Ale with an OG around 1.044, then the > gravity of my wort would be about 1.090. I then double the volume > with pre-boiled/chilled tap water to lower the OG down to the > desired gravity. My all-grain beers start at 6 to 7 gallons & boil > down to 5 gallons. When calculating my IBU's I would add hops > based upon a gravity of 1.090 for the extract beer while the all- > grain beer would get hops based on a 1.040 OG. The net result > being the extract beer uses more hops than the all-grain beer. If > I understand correctly what you posted, then my extract beers are > being too heavily hopped. > Is this correct? Does anyone else have empirical evidence to > support or counter this? > My own evidence, over about 10 years of brewing, is that you are absolutely correct -- the concentrated wort customary in extract brewing necessitates a much higher addition of bittering hops (but see Steve Daniel below) -- and this is *clearly* not a product of fermentation gravities. Jim Busch wrote: > > I think it is intuitively obvious that the higher OG of a ferment will tend > "scrub" more hop character out of a beer. Hop constituants also tend to > adhere to yeast, so yeast quantity and removal (filtering) effect hop > character. Im still on the fence as to the actual boil gravity effects, > but I agree with Norm that the super concentrated extract brewer tends to > have more problems developing the same hop character. > I don't know how "intuitive" it is, Jim. What is there about a high-gravity ferment that would "scrub" hop character? It seems to me that if there's anything "obvious" about the question, it's the relative sweetness of a high-gravity wort and the necessary increase in bittering hops necessary to balance that sweetness. Frankly, I've never seen any significant difference in fermentation between a 1.040 and a 1.070 beer that would account for differences in hop utilization. ((And while I'm thinking of it, would the hop formula afficionados remind me whether or not these formulae factor in the water?)) Al Korzonas (always the diplomat) wrote: > > My experience mirrors Norm's. I too believe that increased boil gravity > reduces utilization. The reason I think there is no data out there from > the brewing researchers is because the big breweries don't really care > about this information. They formulate recipes and adjust hop usage based > upon IBU tests on the finished product. I know that Anheuser-Busch buys > hops in incredibly large amounts and then they store them sometimes for > two or more years before use. I'm sure they test the hops for %AA > periodically (especially when going to a new lot), but the final adjustments > probably come from bitterness measurements in the final product. > I'm under the distinct impression (reached during a conversation with the Blitz-Weinhard brewmaster) that most large commercial breweries utilize high-gravity brewing -- something that would account for the research into hop utilization during fermentation. The brewery process calls for watering the beer down *after* fermentation -- unlike the homebrewer who more likely waters the wort down *before* fermentation. As such, there isn't much difference between the wort in the kettle and the wort in the fermenter. I would hope that homebrewers, not just A-B, would "formulate recipes and adjust hop usage based upon IBU tests on the finished product" -- I know I do, although my IBU tests are all done by the in-house tongues. So what? > > I too am trying to keep an open mind on the kettle utilization issue, but > my experience leads me to believe otherwise. [clip, snip & rip] > Brewing is both an art and a science. Science can sometimes help explain > why the art works, but it can't replace it. The final proof is in the > quality of the beer you make and if you are happy with it. You can't > learn to be a great brewer from a book... you have to roll up your sleeves. > And here's a real sleeve-roller: Steve Daniel writes: > > Just my two cents worth on the hop utilization thing. What some folks fail > to take into account when they use the argument, "My beers got more bitter > when I went to a full-wort boil, so the lower gravity must increase hop > utilization" is that two variables changed in the process. Along with a > decreased gravity, the total liquid volume went up too. Since hop acid > isomerization is an equilibrium reaction, volume (dilution) will definitely > have a positive effect on utilization, and wort gravity may therefore play > little or no part in the process. Has anybody done two same-volume boils, > one at a low gravity and one at a high gravity, and then had the iso-alpha > acid assayed? That would be the only way to tell. > It's probably not the same thing, but: I have doubled batches from 5 gallons to 10 without doing anything but doubling the bittering hops -- and dilution didn't seem to be a factor. For many extract homebrewers, I'd suspect the ratio isn't any higher: 3 gallons concentrated wort up to 6 gallons or so of all-grain wort. As I said above, my experience has been that it's very difficult to replicate the hopping quality I get in all-grain beers in extract beers -- a real problem in configuring beers for my Beginning Brewing classes. Perhaps Al Korzonas is close to the truth when he suggests that the documentation doesn't exist because for most commercial breweries, the problem doesn't exist: they simply don't produce 1.090-1.100 worts the way homebrewers do and in the relative ranges they are concerned with, hop utilization simply *isn't* significantly affected by changes in wort gravity. As I said, they *are* concerned with hop utilization in concentrated fermentation because they more concentrated they can make their ferments, the more beer they can pump out with the same volume of equipment. - --Jeff Return to table of contents
Date: 16 Mar 1994 16:01:00 -0600 (CST) From: "Michael D. Hansen (708) 938-3184" <HANSEN.MICHAEL at igate.abbott.com> Subject: Hops utilization research Hey homebrewers! I am also interested in this hops utilization problem. Everywhere I look it seems that there are different opinions, equations, etc. on hops utilization and IBU's that could potentially affect the outcome of a beer to a significant degree. I also agree that (more) controlled research needs to be done to address this problem. I would like to help with this research problem. I am a clinical statistician at a large pharmaceutical company in the Chicago area who can lend a hand in the design and analysis of these experiments. I am unfamiliar with most of the hard scientific research that has already been done in the area due to lack of accessibility of the research materials. (The Siebel Institute here in Chicago claims they have most, if not all, materials published on the subject of brewing but unfortunately you must be a student or an alum to use it and it is not open to the public). Nevertheless, the offer stands so drop me an E-mail. Brew on my friends! Mike (HANSENMD at RANDB.ABBOTT.COM) Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 94 11:54:23 PST From: mri10 at mfg.amdahl.com (Michael Inglis) Subject: Treatment of Specialty Grains Hello folks, in discussions of when and how to utilize specialty grains in all-grain brewing on r.c.b., several different opinions were expressed. Frankly some of them confused me. I am going to give my opinions on this topic and the reasoning and logic behind the opinions and hopefully it will generate some discussion. Assumptions: Specialty grains are added to beer for three primary effects: the addition of color to the finished product, the addition of certain flavor profiles to the finished product, and the addition of body to the finished product. I would like to break down the flavor profiles into two groups: sweetness, and any other flavors. I have read in discussions that the primary times in the all-grain brewing process that people add the specialty grains are 1) as a part of the main mash before any rests or conversion, 2) at the mashout stage, 3) while the final runnings are heating up and then removing when they come to a boil. For my purposes I will treat scenario 2) and 3) as being the same since in both instances, all enzyme activity has ceased. My Take on When to Add Specialty Grains: In almost every case, the specialty grains should be added at the mashout stage. The only case specialty grains should be added to the primary mash and mashed is when a certain specialty grain is added only for the color factor and the specialty grain in question has both a dextrine and color character associated with it. My Reasoning: Body and sweetness associated with specialty grains comes from the fact that a "mini-mash" has already occured within the husk of the grain during the malting process, leaving dextrines as a large part of the malt composition. Dextrines add both sweetness and body to the beer as they are unfermentable to yeast. To add a specialty grain to the main mash for mashing defeats the purpose of using the grain in the first place. The dextrines that are freed up in the mash from the grain get converted to fermentables during the main mash by the enzymes that are present and you lose both the body and the sweetness. On the other hand, if you add the specialty grain to the mash at the mashout process, the increased temperature will cause all enzyme activity to cease and for all practical purposes all of the dextrines in the grain will remain intact and manifest themselves in the final product. The sparging process will ensure that an acceptable extraction occurs. If the grains used will only impart color, then adding them at the beginning of the mash is acceptable. If the grains used are used with the intent to only impart color and to eliminate any dextrine quality from the grain manifesting itself in the final product, then adding the grain at the beginning of the mash is required. But I think that the majority of the time this is not the case. This is my understanding of the issues with specialty grains. For the majority of scenarios, it just doesn't make sense to add the grains at the beginning of the mash. If someone has any other inputs to this discussion, I am looking forward to reading them. Mike Inglis mri10 at mfg.amdahl.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 94 08:59:16 MET From: John Oberpriller <s12int::l375bbk at god.bel.alcatel.be> Subject: Starting a brewpub help (John Oberpriller) There has been a lot of questions concerning starting a brewpub. I'm not an expert, nor do I play one on TV. But you might be able to get some tips on starting up for less than the 500K to 1M normally required by contacting the following: Sprecher Brewery, Milwaukee, WI - This is a microbrewery, not a brewpub. It was started with approx. $10,000 using mostly converted dairy equipment. Lakefront Brewery, Milwaukee, WI - This is a low budget brewpub. The owner is trying to qualify for a BIG BUCKS loan by developing a track record first. ( I've never been to this one. A friend told me about it.) Cherryland Brewery, Sturgeon Bay, WI - This place is also a spartan setup. Not to much glitz here. They use a UniKettle procedure, I think?? Some of they're equipment was custom manufactured by out of work ship welders. I hope this helps the brewpub wannabe's. I appologize for no addresses or if the info is a bit dated. I don't live in Milwaukee anymore. zum Wohl! John Oberpriller l375bbk%s12int.dnet at alcbel.be Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 94 09:36:13 MET From: John Oberpriller <s12int::l375bbk at alcatel.be> Subject: Eisbock History (John Oberpriller) The village of Kulmbach, Germany near Bayreuth, *claims* to be the inventors or discoverers of ice beer or more correctly Eisbock. The Reichelbaeu brewery *claims* that in 1890, they mistakenly left some barrels of bock beer out in the winter weather. The result, concentrated bock beer around 9%. Apparently, the Eisbock is still produced by Reichelbraeu and EKU. I haven't tasted it yet, but I'll write in if I do. Disclaimer: The above tid bit of history was not intended to validated the MEGA Breweries Ice Beers, nor is it presented as fact. In the case of the MEGA brews, they're just removing water they shouldn't have added in the first place. Let's face it, Big Bud and the Lite King are the reason most of us started brewing. John Oberpriller Bierevergnuegen!!! If VW can do it, so can I. email: l375bbk%s12int.dnet at alcbel.be Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 94 07:39:30 EST From: fingerle at NADC.NADC.NAVY.MIL (J. Fingerle) Subject: Food grade sealant Hello all! A quick question, I tried to add a plastic valve to my primary, and although the hole I cut seemed to be cut cleanly, the valve leaks. The leak is very slow, perhaps a drop per minute, but it makes the fermenter unacceptable for any use other than as a bottling bucket. Can anyone recommend a food grade sealer I could use (in addition to the gasket that came with the valve)? Thanks. P.S. Oh, not to take anything for granted, the both the valve and the fermenter are food grade plastic. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 1994 18:24:40 From: bnichols at mlab.win.net (William Nichols) Subject: speed growing yeast On saturday morning I got motivated to make a batch of homebrew (a Bass-alike from 'The Cats Meow') but I didnt start the yeast yet. It was Wyeast London Ale, I popped it about 7:00 am and slipped it under the waterbed sheets quietly while my wife was asleep. She is not real happy about sleeping with yeast, but I assured her that it is sealed. By 7:00 pm it was pretty well puffed so I pitched it into a starter (which I canned last month) in a wine bottle with a trap on it. I kept the temperature at 85 deg with a temperature controller and an electric heater cartridge. Basically I made a hot plate that I sat the bottle on, and I used a thermocouple wire taped to the bottle for the controller to read and display the temp.. Before I went to bed ( about 16 hours after I started) it was bubbling pretty well, but not much through the trap. At 10:00 am on sunday I pitched the activated starter into my Bass-alike. By 10:00 pm I had a steady stream of bubbles out of my blowoff tube, and its been going full stream since, 48 hrs later It seemed to work. Is this procedure bad in any way? thanks for feedback Bill Nichols <bnichols at mlab.win.net> Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 1994 08:31:27 -0500 From: Art Steinmetz <asteinm at pipeline.com> Subject: Hops and Deer All this talk about homegrown hops has got me interested. Biggest problem for me is deer. I got 'em in NJ the way NYC has rats. Do deer like hop vines? Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 94 08:38:39 EST From: John DeCarlo x7116 <jdecarlo at homebrew.mitre.org> Subject: Re: Starter Culture I regularly take a sample from my cooled wort and put it into a tall cylindrical container for measuring S.G. This container has been cleaned and sanitized. After a day or so, it usually has a krauesen on it and tastes fairly clean. I used to joke that I made so much beer in the kitchen that ale yeast lived in the air. Now, after my first contaminated beer (with wild yeast--my sweet and raisiny porter with lots of Special B became dry and overcarbonated), probably because I didn't boil my bottle caps for the first time, I suspect that my kitchen is more likely a haven for wild yeast. It's actually an interesting experiment you can try several places (like where you mash, where you boil the wort, where you crush the grains, where you ferment, where you cool the hot wort for pitching, where you bottle, etc.). And you can try it at different times of year--the warmer it is and the higher the humidity, the more stuff living in the air. If you always get *nothing*, you may not need to be as careful with sanitation as the rest of us. John DeCarlo, MITRE Corporation, McLean, VA--My views are my own Fidonet: 1:109/131 Internet: jdecarlo at mitre.org Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 94 08:55:00 -0500 From: john.fix%hardgood.com at philabs.Philips.COM (John Fix) Subject: Hop rhizomes & rooting hormone Has anyone used any rooting hormones (i.e. Rootone) when planting hop rhizomes? It seems that dipping the shoots in the hormone might make the rhizomes start quicker.... Thanks! -= John =- - ---- * Hardgoods East PCBoard BBS - hardgood.com - (914)961-8749 Metro NY * Retailers Conference - Home Brewing Specific Files and Conferences & More! Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 94 08:56:43 EST From: John DeCarlo x7116 <jdecarlo at homebrew.mitre.org> Subject: Growing Hops One minor note for people concerned about growing hops near the house. As an owner of a brick home who has to fight ivy and such because it will damage the brick, I was concerned about hops. However, never fear! Hops won't act like ivy at all. I now have twine coming down from the chimney and hops growing up the side of my house--they provide some attractiveness and insulation in the summer and hops of course. John DeCarlo, MITRE Corporation, McLean, VA--My views are my own Fidonet: 1:109/131 Internet: jdecarlo at mitre.org Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 94 09:22:08 EST From: Bob_McIlvaine at keyfile.com Subject: De-lidding SS Kegs While I won't argue that a air powered grinder is a good way to cut the top out of SS kegs, I can assure you that a sabre saw with a bi-metal blade wil NOT take 4 hours. It takes about 10 minutes and does a very nice job. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 94 08:43 CST From: "Pete Brauer 312/915-6157" <$W$PR42%LUCCPUA.BITNET at UICVM.UIC.EDU> Subject: Animal products??? I need some help here. I belong to a veggie list and they are now sayin that beers like Guiness contain animal products. Could someone please explain this to me? I have said that as a homebrewer I don't know why they would be added, I tend to think that this is an urban myth but I defer to the expertise of this group for enlightenment. Please respond as quickly as possible as I need ammunition to press my argument, or I need to shut up before I make a total fool of myself. TIA Pete - $W$pr42 at luccpua.it.luc.edu or pbrauer at orion.it.luc.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 94 09:36 CST From: arf at mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) Subject: False Bottom Museum >From: Jim_Merrill at vos.stratus.com >What is the best way to implement a mashing vessel using a 15.5 SS keg. The three options I am considering are: 1) False Stainless Steel bottom 2) A copper ring that sits in the bottom and has small slits in it. 3) An "Easy Masher" type installation with a screen. >When using a false bottom, should you try to minimize the area under the SS plate by using a plate that rests in the bottom curved portion of the keg? (I have found some 10" SS dinner plates in a camping store for $4 each) I hate to sound pompous but, the easy masher has relegated the false bottom to a location next to the dinasaurs in the museum. I can't think of a single advantage other than potentially faster lautering with a false bottom and that has questionable value in homebrewing. The em is utterly simple, works like a charm and is cheap and easy to build or buy. The false bottom, unless carefully made and fitted will cause no end of grief with scorching and junk getting stuck in the line. Even then, you have to live with the dead space under it and recycle wort till it clears out. Actually, I do not know of any way to deal with the scorching problem with a false bottom. It almost precludes mashing in the same kettle. The copper pipe manifold is an alternative but is grossly complicated and difficult to build compared to the em and I don't know of any commercially available nor why one would want one. js Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 1994 20:02:15 From: lkbonham at beerlaw.win.net (Louis K. Bonham) Subject: PID Controllers For those of you using a RIMS or other electrically-heated mash system, from recent experience I can *strongly* recommend scrounging around and acquiring a commercial PID (proportional integral derivative) temperature controller. About 2 weeks ago I happened upon two such units in a junk bin in an electronics surplus shop, and feeling lucky, bought them both. Tested both on my bench and they worked fine, so I installed one on my BrewMagic RIMS system. Brewed a pale ale today, and all I can say is WOW. LED readout of set point and present values, electronic calibration, autotuning of PID values, etc., etc., etc. Bottom line -- after calibrating, just set the desired temp and watch. Mash temp's automatically held to within 0.3F (and could be even better with an RTD rather than a thermocouple sensor), with no overshoots. Makes step mashing truly "push button.". These units are certainly not cheap if you purchase them retail ($190 and up), but they can be found in the surplus electronic, industrial, and scientific supply channels if you're patient and persistent. [If anyone is interested, I still have the second unit (Fuji Electronic PYZ4 -- 1/16 DIN size) and a copy of its users manual.] Louis K. Bonham lkbonham at beerlaw.win.net Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 1994 17:08:15 From: bnichols at mlab.win.net (William Nichols) Subject: Filtering I was my local HB and wine making store and I saw a filter for wine making and started wondering if I could use it for beer. It was pancake style and took 9" flat round filters. A separate pump could be purchased to get it thru. I think I could use CO2 instead. The filter housing and 10 filters cost $80. Does anybody have any idea if this would work? Thanks, Bill <bnichols at mlab.win.net> Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 1994 16:53:57 From: bnichols at mlab.win.net (William Nichols) Subject: Keg carbonating and bottling Since I wasnt impressed with my first attampts at natural carbonation, I proceeded into kegging and artifical carbonation early on. I just cant seem to get the ammount right(not enough). I carbonate at 30 PSI and store tapped (for easy sampling) at 15 PSI and 50- 55 deg. It pours well at this pressure but if I go any higher it is real foamy. I also tried lower pressures but it seemed that it didnt pour as well and since I wanted more carbonation It didnt make sense to leave it low. What do others do ? Suggestions will greatly be appreciated. Since I now have 2 batches in corbouys, i figureed that I should make some room in a keg. I had about 3/4 gal left in the keg so I figured that I would bottle it. I sanitized and chilled the bottles and boiled the caps. To chill the keg, (it was already at50 deg F) I put it in a 5 gal bucket with ice and rock salt. I prepared the wash tubs for filling. As a dispensing valve I tried to use a filling stick ( I dont know the correct name) that came with a starter kit. This must have been designed for gravity filling because it filled the bottles up with foam. First I tried at 15 PSI then 10 then 5 and I gave up. I attached the standard dispensing tap and tried just tapping into the bottle. The problem was that the foam coming up prevented the beer from flowing down. For this, I put a 6" piece of tubing on the tap outlet so I could dip into the bottle and fill from the bottom. The pressure that seemed to work the best was 10 PSI. This worked OK but I still lost some foam down the drain. Is this usual? Is there a better way? Thanks, Bill Nichols <bnichols at mlab.win.net> Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 1994 09:53:08 -0800 (PST) From: Jeremy Ballard Bergsman <jeremybb at leland.Stanford.EDU> Subject: A few points > Date: Wed, 16 Mar 94 08:51 > From: DRA.SMTMHS%smtmhs at sharpwa.com (Darren Aaberge) > Subject: I can't believe they're not IBUs > Hopping (something like 5%). Burch states in his book that he bases his > utilization numbers > on the method used by the American Society of Brewing Chemists. If I > remember right, at the > time it was thought that the ASBC measures IBUs and does not calculate them. > Anyway, in the Right, Burch is wrong. From Malting and Brewing Science Vol 2. (pg 491-2): IBU=50 X Abs at 275 nm of an isooctane extraction of acidified beer ASBC BU's=(96.15 X Abs at 255 nm) + 0.4 of an acid washed, diluted, slightly different isooctane extraction of acidified beer. "This method [ASBC] gave a better correlation with the iso-alpha-acid content . . . ." Note that both methods make a number of assumptions, e.g. that the iso-alpha- acids are bitter in proportion to their absorbance at a certain wavelength. > > So, I believe that Burch must be accounting for some amount of oxidized beta > acids in the > hops used for dry hopping (are oxidized beta acids soluable without being > boiled?). Of > course, this may be totally useless to homebrewers if we cannot measure the > amount of > oxidized beta acids in our hops. Any comments? > > Darren Aaberge I doubt that Burch knows what he is correcting for. What he tries to provide, and what we all need, is a utilization curve that applies to how we, as homebrewers, boil wort. There have been several guesses. Garetz' curve is the closest to the one that I have worked out for my own system, but that is no guarantee that it will work for yours. > > Date: 16 Mar 94 20:58:00 GMT > From: korz at iepubj.att.com (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583) > Subject: extract recipes/beginner Q's/Stuck ferment? > > >Doppelbock > > > >1 can Ireks Amber > >2 cans Unhopped Amber Extract > >1 lb Crystal Malt > >2 cups Chocolate Malt > >1 cup Roasted Barley > >4 1/2 oz Hallertau hops > >lager yeast > > > <snip> > > I'm afraid I must strongly disagree that this will make anything resembling > a Doppelbock. The Roasted Barley is completely out of place for this > style. I don't think any German breweries would put unmalted barley, roasted > or not, in a beer. I agree that this will not make a Dopplebock. They have no roasted character. German breweries were not allowed to use unmalted barley, under their purity law, but they do have "chit malt" which is basically barley that has just barely been malted. This gives them the characteristics of unmalted barley but lets them get around the law. _________________________ About the bottle breakage by cappers: I have capped about 3000 times and I have never broken a bottle. I use every type of brown pry-off bottle I can lay my hands on, usually they are non-refillable. I use a bench capper. (I even bake my bottles to sterilize them!) Maybe too many homebrews going down during those bottling sessions :). Jeremy Bergsman jeremybb at leland.stanford.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 1994 12:54:25 EST From: "Systems Analyst (603)429-8553 - BESSETTE at UICC.COM" Subject: Party Kegs are for me... I too have to agree with "rprice" who loves the party keg system. After having accumulated mucho bottles I have found a much easier and quicker way to store my home brew. I enjoy using these party kegs so much that I bought two sets of 4 containers each including the taps and CO2 cartridges. The 4 containers which will hold a 5-gallon batch, the tap, and two boxes of CO2 cartridges cost me $49.95. I can't explain to you how much easier this has made my life as far as home-brewing is concerned. The big "PAIN" for me was cleaning and capping my bottles. The process of bottling took me at least 2 hours which includes cleaning and disinfecting. Now it runs me an hour tops when using the minikegs. The reason I bought 2 sets was so I could have to different brews on tap at the same time. Right now in my frig I have a pale ale and an English ale at my disposal. I have a separate frig in my basement that I keep these in but you could easily fit a keg in with your foodstuffs in your kitchen frig. I also think that the brew tastes better out of the kegs in comparison to the bottles. Another major advantage is that after the first 2 glasses you have no yeast sediment in your beer. With the bottles you have to at least be aware of the yeast at the bottom of the bottle (although it never bothered me). As you can imagine these "party kegs" have made my brewing life a whole lot easier and I certainly think the expense is worth it. I bought my keg system at the Brew Ha Ha in Pottstown, PA (the usual disclaimer). Their 800 number is 800 243 2620 or their local number is (215) 326-2620. This system was $39.95 not too long ago so it looks like they are becoming more popular... Happy St Pat's Bob Bessette Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 94 09:41:23 PST From: hollen at megatek.com (Dion Hollenbeck) Subject: Re: Recirculating Pumps >>>>> "Joe" == Joe Stone <JSTONE at SJEVM5.VNET.IBM.COM> writes: Joe> I need some information on recirculating pumps. What type of pump Joe> should I use? Where can I buy one? How much should it cost? Please Joe> email me directly. I don't want to waste bandwidth. Joe> Joe Joe, before I can answer these questions, I would need to know some more information about your setup. Are you planning to build a RIMS? what size mash tun? What kind of false bottom? Any other intended uses? Just off the cuff, you will pay anywhere from $80 to $250 for new pumps, and about $60 to $90 for those same pumps used or surplus. You need to use a magnetically coupled pump. I will go into details when I get more info from you. Have you read the article in the last (a couple of years ago) Aymurgy gadgets issue on RIMS? A lot of info is given there. dion Dion Hollenbeck (619)675-4000x2814 Email: hollen at megatek.com Staff Software Engineer Megatek Corporation, San Diego, California Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 1994 13:24:14 -0400 (EST) From: BUKOFSKY <sjb8052 at minerva.cis.yale.edu> Subject: Homebrew competition question All, I am planning on entering a porter of mine in this years national homebrew competition. My question is this: The recipe had a cup of blackstrap molasses in it, which is a major aroma/taste factor. Do I have to enter it under "Specialty beer" or "Robust porter"? After all, the definition of "specialty beer" in the guidelines says "...using fermentables other than malted barley as a major taste/aroma contributor...." or something like that. Any help? Thanks, Scott No cute comment. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 1994 13:29:18 -0500 (EST) From: "Keith W. Kulpa" <ukwk1 at sunyit.edu> Subject: joining Could you send me info? Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 1994 11:59:23 -0500 (EST) From: Tobey A Nelson <nelsonto at student.msu.edu> Subject: query Hello brewers! I am a novice... Last week a friend and I cooked up our first batches of beer (from kits), an IPA and a Porter. We are presently having a debate about a point which I think someone might be able to help me with. My brewmate is crazy over the damn hydrometer readings and is taking them everyday; he is opening the carbouy every day to take them. I think that fermentation is (supposed to be) anaerobic and that this may well have messed us up... What are the thoughts of you all wizened brewmeisters? Is our first brew doomed? If the fermentation, which was very active (roiling) on the second day, has been interrupted by opening the carbouys, is there something we can do at this point to save these batches? I look forward to a response at: [Nelsonto at student.msu.edu]. Thank you! Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 94 10:42:00 -0600 From: chuck.wettergreen at aquila.com (Chuck Wettergreen) Subject: source of beta amylase HBDers, Does anyone know a source of refined beta amylase. My local supplier has alpha in approx. 2 oz vials, but I want to mash something for a high alcohol content without using barley and without any or few non-fermentable bi-products. TIA, E-mail replies encouraged Chuck Chuck.Wettergreen at Aquila.com * RM 1.3 00946 * Complex problems have simple, wrong answers. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 94 11:10:23 "PST From: Mike Dix <mdix at dcssc.sj.hp.com> Subject: Glass airlocks - Where? Wanting to make yeast starters per the HBD stove-top method (JS-method?), I got a flask and drilled stopper at "The Science Shop" in San Jose. But neither Beer Makers ("Finally sold the last one. Didn't fit the drilled stoppers anyway.") nor the Brew Club ("Who makes them?") carry glass airlocks. They're not in the Beverage People catalog either. Please let me know who carries them (No. Cal. or mail order). By the way, the hole in the black lab-type stopper is much narrower than brew store versions, so I can be flexible on tube diameter. Thanks, Mike Dix Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 94 14:39:27 EST From: erict at vnet.IBM.COM Subject: Priming with dried malt extract Peter Williams asked about using dried malt extract for priming ... Peter, I too have had disappointing carbonation using dried malt extract, so I'm glad to hear it's not just me! My guess (and it's only a guess) is that the sugars in malt extract aren't as readily usable by the yeast as the nearly pure glucose in corn sugar is, especially under the relatively adverse conditions in the bottle (high alcohol content, ever-increasing pressure, etc.). I have found that letting the malt-primed brews condition a little longer (6 weeks to 2 months; a lot longer, actually) helps a bit. I don't think that the small amount of corn sugar added at priming adversely affects the taste of the beer, so I've pretty much switched to using that (or sometimes honey, which also works well) on a permanent basis. Anybody else have a more learned opinion to offer? I'm curious to know how wild my guesses are ... - -- Eric Tilbrook Return to table of contents
Date: 17 Mar 94 20:17:00 GMT From: korz at iepubj.att.com (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583) Subject: post-boil isoalpha acid solubility/boil volume vs. hop utilitzation Andy writes: >The important thing to remember is that wort gravity does not affect >the formation of iso-alpha-acids, the amount of heat does. The only >thing that wort gravity will affect is the iso-alpha-acids going into >solution, which can be modified by leaving the stuff sit for a while >before turning on the wort chiller. This may be well and good (I'm discussing this further with Andy offline), but I would like to warn against "leaving the stuff sit for a while before turning on the wort chiller." Doing this will increase the production of Dimethyl Sulfide in the wort which, in the case of lagers, could be significant (Woodstock Lager, contract brewed by Point Brewery, is a recent example I've tasted with too much DMS -- Old Style, by Heilemann, is a perennial favorite example). ********** Mark writes: >The reason lies in the fact that hops are utilized less >efficiently at higher hopping rates. When you do a partial >boil, your effective hopping rate during the boil is much >higher than it would be if you were doing a full boil. > >An example will make this clearer: If I put 50 grams of 5% >alpha hops in 20 liters of wort, I have added 2.5 grams of >alpha acids or 2500 milligrams, total. In milligrams per >liter (mg/l) that is 125 mg/l of alpha acids (2500/20=125). >If I put in the same amount of hops but cut the boil volume >in half, I have now doubled my hopping rate to 250 mg/l. >And the hops will be utilized less efficiently at 250 mg/l >than at 125 mg/l. Well, despite the fact that I still don't consider Mark Garetz an expert, I must admit that the correlation between hop utilization and isoalpha acid concentrations *could* explain the fact that, in my experience, Rager's formulas have worked. I still feel that not enough research has been done in this area yet to discount any other factors, *including* boil gravity. Mark has reported that he has found no record of research in this factor, so why are we so quick to discount it? There are a great many factors that must be considered and should be investigated before we finalize the formula that contains the factors that make a significant difference and excludes the factors that don't. BTW, I appreciate your posting of your references Mark... Thanks! Al. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 1994 12:32:00 -0800 From: glent at falstaff.cache.tek.com (Glen Tinseth) Subject: Wort Gravity and Utilization of Alpha Acids: Data!! Lots of opinions on this subject recently. I love to pick up the digest and see "hoppy" subject lines! I did a little experiment a week ago and ran the samples yesterday in Gail Nickerson's lab at OSU. For those of you who don't want the details here is the jist. Two worts, 1.086 and 1.043 (all grain) each boiled with the same amount of hops, in the same size pot over the same burner. The initial volumes were identical. The HPLC showed that the utilization in the kettle for the high gravity wort was 20%, for the low gravity wort it was 42%. This method is specific to iso-alpha acids and was done by a pro (Gail). I won't make any sweeping generalizations based on this, admittedly, tiny sample. More to come. Something to chew on... Glenn Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 1994 14:50:52 -0600 (CST) From: Allen Ford <allen at darwin.sfbr.org> Subject: Rinsing sanitizers I have seen numerous posts questioning the need to rinse various sanitizing agents from fermenters, kegs, etc. prior to contact with beer. If the instructions indicate that the agent does not need rinsing, as with iodophore, it should be allowed to air dry. It seems that during this air-drying stage, other nasties could come in contact with the recently sanitized surface. In reality, the biggest problem with air-drying is the time and advanced planning required to do so. My solution to this problem is to pressure can or autoclave several 500ml bottles of water at the time I make starter solutions. This way, I have plenty of sterile rinse water and I don't have to buy cheap beer for the purpose. Purchasing their wimpy products only encourages them to brew more. This sterile water also comes in very handy when I want to de-brew a beer a small amount. I have even used it to sparge the hops in my hopback. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Allen Ford <allen at darwin.sfbr.org> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-= Southwest Foundation for Biomedical Research San Antonio, Texas =-=-= Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 1994 14:10:46 -0800 From: glent at falstaff.cache.tek.com (Glen Tinseth) Subject: IBU, UBMe, WeBUs Darren Aaberge, in HBD 1374, writes about bittering units and the confusion surrounding them. Here's what I know about the situation. BUs (Bittering Units) and IBUs (International Bittering Units) are one and the same - an internationally agreed upon unit for describing the bitterness of wort and beer. The method uses an isooctane extract of the sample, which is run on a UV spectrophotometer. The absorbance data is run through an equation, and voila, you have IBUs (or BUs). This method is *not* specific to iso-alpha acids, anything that absorbs at the wavelengths in question contributes to BUs. Even unhopped beer has 3-4 BUs. The number of BUs is therefore slightly higher then the mg/L of iso-alpha acids. Hope this helps, Glenn Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 1994 14:53:00 -0500 From: carlo.fusco at CANREM.COM (Carlo Fusco) Subject: GCHC 1994 _____________________________________________________________________ Canadian Amateur Brewers Association Presents the 10th Annual Great Canadian Homebrew Competition and Conference June 3 and 4, 1994 Royal Canadian Legion, Branch 101 3850 Lakeshore Blvd. West Etobicoke, Ontario _____________________________________________________________________ The 1994 Great Canadian Homebrew Conference will be the tenth time that homebrewers from across our nation will gather to celebrate homebrewing as an art and a science, the Canadian way. Over the last decade we have seen this annual event grow into a first class conference with informative seminars, the Great Canadian Homebrew Competition awards presentation, demonstrations, exhibits, excellent beers from across the country, superb gourmet food, entertainment, and lots of fun. This year will be no exception. Conference registration and itinerary will be posted in April. The 1994 Great Canadian Homebrew Competition promises to be the best yet. This year's competition will feature expanded categories and sub categories as well as the challenging 'Look-Alike' beer. The styles for the competition are as follows: Canadian Lager Canadian Ale Continental Pilsner British Ale Vienna/Oktoberfest/Marzen Pale Ale Munich Dunkel India Pale Ale Bock English Bitter Traditional Bock Brown Ale Helles Bock English Brown Wheat Beer English Mild Berliner Weisse Porter Weizenbier Stout Dunkelweizen Dry Stout Belgian Witbier Sweet Stout Extra Strength Fruit Beer Barley Wine Specialty Imperial Stout Herb Beer Doppelbock Unique Fermentables Weizenbock Belgian Special Ales Scotch Ale Trappist Belgian Strong Ale Lambic Look-Alike Flanders Brown Ale Hart Amber Ale Saison The deadline for entries is May 14, 1994. For more information write or phone CABA at: CABA 19 Cheshire Dr. Islington, Ontario M9B 2N7 Phone/Fax: 416-237-9130 Compuserve: 71601,3357 InterNet: carlo.fusco at canrem.com ligas at mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca Fidonet: Carlo Fusco at 1:229/15 - --- * Freddie 1.2.5 * email: carlo.fusco at canrem.com Sharon,Ontario,Canada Return to table of contents
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1375, 03/18/94