HOMEBREW Digest #1548 Mon 10 October 1994

Digest #1547 Digest #1549

		Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor

  Mail order beer (EJ McGowan)
  Need HBD# of recent George Fix article (Jay Lonner)
  Fermentap and Carboys (ELQ1)
  Shipping beer (Harralson, Kirk)
  Mash Volumes/Electric Sankey Keg Boilers (CliffR3500)
  Wet Hops Correction ("Glenn Tinseth")
  FWD>Project Activation of 1 ("Dianne Dranginis")
  The big leap to ALL-GRAIN (TIM)
  A modified RIMS system (Stephen Russell Bliss)
  Yeast head reference ("Steve Veillette, WCSU Information Systems")
  Air Filtration - Yet Another Improvement (Richard A Childers)
  specialty malts (Domenick Venezia)
  Chlorine (Domenick Venezia)
  City's ozone water treatment (Domenick Venezia)
  Carboy Handle Summary/ Corrections (COYOTE)
  Madison Homebrewers November Classic UPDATE (uswlsrap)
  Submission (BrewerLee)
  Re: Specialty Malts. (Erik Speckman)
  Something from England? (m.trageser)
  Boots' (U.K) plastic kegs (Gilad Barak)
  Rollermills.... (Jack Schmidling)
  Happy Holidays reminder ("Ginger Wotring, Pharm/Phys")

****************************************************************** * NEW POLICY NOTE: Due to the incredible volume of bouncing mail, * I am going to have to start removing addresses from the list * that cause ongoing problems. In particular, if your mailbox * is full or your account over quota, and this results in bounced * mail, your address will be removed from the list after a few days. * * If you use a 'vacation' program, please be sure that it only * sends a automated reply to homebrew-request *once*. If I get * more than one, then I'll delete your address from the list. ****************************************************************** 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: 7 Oct 94 8:54:43 ES From: EJ McGowan <EJ_McGowan.LOTUS at crd.lotus.com> Subject: Mail order beer Hi Minel, Why do I watch 90210? It only aggravates me!!! I tried to call you Wednesday during a commercial, but there was no answer. That show id getting sooo predictable. You predicted three weeks ago that Andrea would catch Jessie flirting. I predicted two weeks ago that Kelly would catch Dillon and Valerie. We predicted that Brandon's friend was going to die. They need to get some new writers. Maybe we could apply for the job!! I bet we would do a better job. What is up for tonight? Write back and let me know. See ya!!! Kathy Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 1994 12:55:39 -0800 (PST) From: Jay Lonner <8635660 at NESSIE.CC.WWU.EDU> Subject: Need HBD# of recent George Fix article Hi, I deleted the recent (~3 weeks old) HBD article containing George Fix's article on mash schedules for highly modified malt. I can't get thread to work on my local VMS account, so could someone please send me the number of the HBD in which this article appeared? Once I have the number I can retrieve it from sierra myself. TIA, Jay. 8635660 at nessie.cc.wwu.edu <--- email address included to help Coyote maintain his center Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 94 13:05:21 PDT From: ELQ1%Maint%HBPP at bangate.pge.com Subject: Fermentap and Carboys Good Morning all you brewduds, hopheads and ale allies, In this months Celebrator, is an ad for a Fermentap[pat pending] in which an inverted carboy is placed on a stand with what appears a three way gizmo for the bung, the ad calims to be able to; rack with out siphoning, harvest yeast, and less oxidation/wasted beer. The idea is a great one, but here in Quake country of CA., it seems to me to add to the great debate on carboy disasters. the deal includes the stand and and valve assembly for $26.95, No disclaimer, just curious. On my primary fermentation, to avoid water being sucked into the wort during the lag, I attach a Baggie [tm] to the carboy neck with a rubber band until there is good gas pressure and then replace with an airlock. Ed Quier ELQ1 at PGE.COM Please, no comments, Belive you me, I've heard them all. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 94 17:39:52 EST From: kwh at roadnet.ups.com (Harralson, Kirk) Subject: Shipping beer Bill Cook posted information about sending beer via USPS or UPS that he received from Craig Verver in response to an earlier post: >in Canada. It's also technically illegal to mail or ship beer in the >US without a distributor's license, though enforcement seems spotty. > >Finally, USPS doesn't typically require declaring the contents of >the package. Whatever carrier/agent you decide to use, don't mention >beer -- you're shipping yeast samples if anyone asks. >----- > >Craig. > This subject has come up several times in the HBD in the last few years, and I have purposely avoided getting involved. I realize that people are going to ship beer by common carrier, with little regard to what is legal and what is not. There is a big temptation to just mislabel the package, as Craig suggests, and let it go through the system. We handle in excess of 22 million packages/day, so enforcement is next to impossible. Contributors to the HBD have, for the most part, frowned upon other blatant illegal subjects in the past, such as home distillation, using marijuana in brewing, stealing breweries kegs for tun conversions, etc.. However, from the posts I have read over the past few years, the majority of people seem to think that shipping beer is some sort of gray area; that it is "technically illegal, but...". This attitude is similar to people who make illegal copies of software. They know it is illegal, but somehow they justify doing it. I suppose each of us must decide which laws we choose to obey and which laws we choose to break. It is a federal regulation that we (United Parcel Service) cannot accept any alcoholic beverages in our system. This can be confirmed by calling our main information number at (800) 346-0106. Kirk Harralson kwh at roadnet.ups.com Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 94 17:31:29 EDT From: CliffR3500 at aol.com Subject: Mash Volumes/Electric Sankey Keg Boilers Hello All, I have a question concerning mash volumes. Does anyone know how to figure out how much space you are going to need in the mash tun based upon the amount of grain. I am planning on expanding my 5 gallon RIMS system to a 15 gallon set up and I want to know how big to make my mash tun. I am planning on using a maxium of about 35 pounds of grain for sixteen gallons of finished, boiled wort. Below is my reckoning on the matter. The reason that I am posting this is that it will be a significant investment to custom make the mash-tun and I want to be sure that I got the right size. Any comments or suggestions? Displacement of malt (35 lbs * .05) = 1.75 gal. This is from Noonan, Brewing Lager Beer, page 174 1.3 quarts per pound mash-in water (35 lbs * 1.3 = 45.5 qts/4 qts/gal) = 11.4 gal Total volume of mash tun needed = 13.15 gallons I have from time to time seen posts concerning brewers using electric hot water heater elements in a SS pot. I would be extremly grateful if one of these users could send me instructions on how they are made and how well they work. I have a 20 gallon boiler that I would like to convert to an electric boiler. The idea of not having to use a jet engine to boil my wort outside and then move the hot boiler back inside sounds very nice. As long as I am here, I am more or less new on this mailing list and would like to know how to get the FAQ list. I suscribe to AOL and I'm not sure how to go about getting it. Thanks in advance! Cliff CliffR3500 at aol.com Return to table of contents
Date: 6 Oct 1994 12:57:23 U From: "Glenn Tinseth" <glenn_tinseth at terrapacific.com> Subject: Wet Hops Correction Subject: Time: 12:39 PM OFFICE MEMO Wet Hops Correction Date: 10/6/94 In HBD 1535, David Sapsis, dbsapsis at nature.Berkeley.EDU, wrote: <DS> On another note, also relating to the use of wet hops as presented in <DS> hop.faq, hops are *not* 80% water; that is, there is not 4 times the <DS> mass of free water as that mass leftover after drying. Consequently, <DS> the suggestion of using 6 times as much mass of wet hops as dry ones <DS> is way off base. All hops are measured for moisture using a dry <DS> weight basis, so 100% MC indicates that hops at this level of <DS> moisture are one-half water. Thus, assuming all other things equal <DS> between wet and dry cones, one would use twice as much fresh, wet <DS> hops as an equivelent mass of dry ones. I suspect that some of the <DS> reports relating to harshness from use of wet hops may be due to <DS> using about three times the equivelent measure, and then drawing <DS> comparisons! To which, Jim Ancona, Jim_Ancona.DBS at dbsnotes.dbsoftware.com responded in HBD 1537: <JA> I recently harvested half a grocery bag of home grown hops. They <JA> weighed 20 oz. fresh. After drying on a screen in my attic for two <JA> days they weighed 4 oz. So in my case, they really were 80% water! I waited a couple days to see if David would respond, but he didnUt. When hops are grown normally and picked at the right time they do indeed average 80% water wt/wt. 5 pounds of freshly picked hops will dry down to 1 pound of hops at 0% moisture content or about 1.09 lbs at 8% moisture. Sorry to be blunt but DavidUs comment above is just plain wrong. His recommendation not to use 6 times more wet hops is well taken though. Hop oils are decreased during drying (exposure to heat and oxygen). Not only is myrcene content decreased, so is the content of other compounds which are perceived as more RhoppyS than myrcene. Wet hops have a higher oil content (on a dry basis) than dried hops--certainly not 5 times higher--but using double the wet hops vs. dry hops is a good starting point. Other components are reported on a dry weight basis (*and* on an as is basis). For example, the Willamettes I just had analyzed were 5.5% alpha acids as is and 6.0% on a dry weight basis--they were about 8.7% moisture. Because DavidUs post was--on the whole--very interesting and credible, I thought that this glitch should be pointed out. Another thing to remember is that even sitting at room temp in your house, hops dry quickly and what was 80% water decreases rapidly. So weigh your freshly picked hops immediately after harvest and use that number to guide your drying. It might be worth drying the heck out of a small sample and then back calculating the water content after weighing the dried sample. Try to dry hops until the strig is brittle and breaks when you bend it. Then leave the hops out at room temp for an hour or so to equilibrate and cool. Then package in barrier packaging and freeze. Brew beer and send me some 8^) Glenn (email gtinseth at teleport.com) Hop questions (and answers) welcome! Return to table of contents
Date: 7 Oct 1994 16:37:00 U From: "Dianne Dranginis" <ddrangi at denitqm.ecte.uswc.uswest.com> Subject: FWD>Project Activation of 1 Subject: Time:3:59 PM OFFICE MEMO FWD>Project Activation of 10971BD Date:9/28/94 MEMORANDUM DATE: August 28, 1994 TO: Tyrone Larson Holland Wireless FROM: Gina Eckert Project Administrator Program Office 541-6634 RE: Project activation The following project has been assigned a 1994 charging/tracking number and entered on the Enterprise time reporting system as of August 28, 1994. Proj # Project Name Technical Lead 10971BD Holland Wireless Tyrone Larson It is US WEST Technologies' policy to document CECO compliance for all projects. If this project is solely support of internal U S WEST functions or is virtually identical to other work which has previously been approved, then such documentation should be filed at your earliest convenience. If this work is for an external offering or differs dramatically from previously approved work, please contact Cathy Pyrek, USWT's MFJ Compliance Manager, within 5 working days. Her number is (303)541-6527. If you have any questions do not hesitate to contact me. cc: Charles Morgan Dianne Dranginis Karen Meyers Carol Wimert Pat Hilton-Suiter Cheryl Miller Chris Hassler Cathy Pyrek Maggie Barrington Renee MacDonald Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 1994 19:54:57 -0400 (EDT) From: TIM <LAATSCH at kbs.msu.edu> Subject: The big leap to ALL-GRAIN Hello everyone, I have been successfully brewing extract-based beers for about six months now. At the urging of *countless* homebrewing counterparts, who insist that all-grain simply makes for better beer, I have decided to make the big leap into all-grain brewing. Being anal about preparation, I have been exhaustively reading about mashing in Papazian's TNCJOHB. I have a few general questions and one perplexing problem with Papazian's numbers concerning amounts of water to add at certain times. So, please prepare for a barrage of greenhorn questions: 1. Although the monitored-brewpot method is the cheapest way to go for a mash-tun, I am concerned that adequate temp control cannot be achieved. I am considering the "picnic cooler" approach. I assume there is no consensus on the issue, so any helpful hints or experiences by e-mail would be appreciated. 2. I would like to do temperature controlled three-stage mashing. Charlie recommends 122, 150, and 158. What are some other viable alternatives? What's the best way to achieve the temperature changes if using the picnic cooler method?---Papazian suggests adding specific amounts of boiling water....which leads me to my last point. Charlie's numbers do not seem to add up: First, he says that 0.5 quarts of 200 F water per pound of grain will raise the temperature by 18 F. OK. Then, he says "it would be safe to assume that.." the same amount of 212 F water would raise the temp by about 25 F. A simple proportion shows this not to be the case: 200/18 = 212/x x=19 Am I missing something here? Then in all his recipes, the amount of water he suggests adding would not achieve the desired temperature change according to the information above. Look at an example for 8 pounds of grain: He says to combine the grains with 2 gallons of 130F water for a protein rest at 122 F. OK, no problem. THEN, to raise the temperature to 150 F, he says to add 4 quarts of 200 F water (recall 0.5 quarts/pound grain = 18 F increase). I may be wrong, but 122 + 18 = 140, not 150. Am I just a total bonehead or does something not add up here?? If Papazian is wrong, where can I get accurate information on this issue. If he is right, please enlighten me. I apologize for taking up HBD space with such seemingly trivial questions, but to an all-grain toddler with high trepidation these are issues of life and death. ;) TIA for your patience and any info. Tim Laatsch ("Bones") laatsch at kbs.msu.edu PS What price range are the GLATT mill and MALT mill? Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 1994 18:39:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Stephen Russell Bliss <sbliss at flute.aix.calpoly.edu> Subject: A modified RIMS system As a new member of HBD I have been spending *a lot* of time digging through the archives and the docs on various RIMS setups. I think I may have come up with a better (different at least) way to raise the temperature of the mash. My idea is this -- First make an immersion heating coil of copper tubing (just like an immersion cooler). And then use the controls, pump, and electric heating element/enclosure of an existing RIMS setup to recirculate heated *WATER* thru the immersion heating coil placed in the mash tun. If this works properly it would NOT: -- Scorch the wort -- Oxygenate the wort -- Compact the grain bed -- Catch on fire, if the mash stuck and the heater went dry during unattended mashing. it WOULD: -- Give good control over mash temperatures. -- Be easy to adapt to existing mash tuns including picnic coolers. Has anybody tried this? Will it work? What do you think? TIA sbliss at flute.aix.calpoly.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 1994 9:18:41 -0400 (EDT) From: "Steve Veillette, WCSU Information Systems" <VEILLETTE at WCSUB.CTSTATEU.EDU> Subject: Yeast head reference Dear Good People, For what it's worth, I have found the reference that I paraphrased yesterday regarding the benefits of yeast head contact the air. From "Overview for Designing a Brewery" by Eric Warner, Blue River Consulting, as it appears in "Brewery Planner" compiled by The Institute for Brewing Studies, published by Brewers Publications, 1991: "Harvesting ale yeast or removing the post-kraeusen layer on the surface of the green beer is easily done with an open fermenter. In open fermenters ale yeast comes in contact with the air above the fermenter, making the yeast more virile and increasing the number of times it can be pitched." "...Finally, taste tests have shown that beers from open fermentations are often preferred to the control beers from closed fermentations." Perhaps I will try "open" fermentation, i.e. leaving the airlock off of the carboy, on my next batch. Although I do not repitch, I would be curious to see the effects (if any) it has on the kraeusen and overall flavor of the finished beer. HAHB, Steve +-------------------------------+ | Stephen P. Veillette | | Information Systems | Ya know, I can't remember | Western CT State University | *not* knowing how to brew. | VEILLETTE at WCSU.CTSTATEU.EDU | +-------------------------------+ Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 1994 08:22:14 -0700 From: pascal at netcom.com (Richard A Childers) Subject: Air Filtration - Yet Another Improvement "Date: Thu, 06 Oct 94 21:05:01 EDT From: GubGuy at aol.com Subject: Filtration Summary (again) < various methods eliminated in interests of brevity > "3: The "Bubble Jar" method; ..." "4: And the winning entry, submitted by Christopher Sack: "The filter for the aquarium pump is very simply a 1" OD x ~6" long glass or copper tube that is filled with aquarium activated charcoal ..." "I actually ended up doing was something a little different. I took a small jar ... Packed some cotton on top of the tubing, put activated charcoal on top of that, covered with more cotton. The remaining hole ... is 'out'." This gave me an idea. See, when filtering air, I think the basic question is : Is there any possible path by which particle A can enter closed system B by entry point C, exit by exit point D, and never, ever encounter airborne contaminant counter- measure(s) E ( F, G, H, etc ) ? It's a tough question. And when you look at each of the components - water with or without sanitizing agents ... cotton ... activated charcoal - it still seems, to me, that there are possible paths for the contaminating particles. - In the water, many airborne particles could be contained in a bubble, and never touch the liquid sides of the bubble during its entire passage, from bottom, to top, of liquid. - I'm unclear as to the efficacy of wadded, closely-packed natural fibers as a filter of airborne pathogens. On the other hand, maybe I'm just being over-cautious, here. But I'm not convinced there are no possible paths for pathogens through cotton. - The same issues pertain to closely-packed grains of activated charcoal. Aquarium charcoal has never struck me as being very fine ... it is coarse, and rather granular. It is far worse than cotton. And, in any case, the charcoal needs to be wet, to work ... But, there's nothing to stop one from grinding the charcoal finer, and, of course, the wetting agent could also contain hydrogen peroxide ... and it would make sense to use some cotton, on top and on bottom ... and maybe a airstone to generate finer bubbles, to address that first issue. ( Aquariums stores sell bubble tubing, which one could coil up in the bottom of one's filtering jar, so that when bubbles were emitted, they were evenly distributed across the entire filtering medium ... it's like an airstone, but elongated to several inches or feet, and flexible. It can be used to create a 'curtain' of very fine bubbles across the back of an aquarium. ) Also, I suspect wet cotton would expand and become somewhat more filtering. One might wish to use foam pads in place of cotton ... Anyhow, some thoughts which I trust will prove useful. ( By the way, does anyone know what the difference is between 'activated' and 'unactivated' charcoal, besides the price ? I mean, what we're talking about here is nothing more or less than a filter made out of wetted carbon particles ... gardening-grade charcoal works in my aquariums, just fine, and it don't cost $8.00 a box, neither. )-: - -- richard "I gathered I wasn't very well liked. Somehow, the feeling pleased me." _Nine Princes In Amber_, by Roger Zelazny richard childers san francisco, california pascal at netcom.com Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 1994 08:23:23 +48000 From: Domenick Venezia <venezia at zgi.com> Subject: specialty malts I don't remember who asked the original questions but the answers from Willits by way of Flatters are a bit misleading. I will lend my voice to the inevitable cacophony as I haven't participated in a good cacophony in weeks! Ah ... it brings back fond memories of fine cacophonies past, but that's another story ... >From: Willits <willits at camelot.Stanford.EDU> >From: Neil Flatter > >>I have read in different places that munich and vienna malts are >>crystal malts and also that they need to be mashed. It was my >>understanding that crystal malts do not need to be mashed. Is >>this correct? > > Willits/Flatter answer > >No, not from what I have seen. Crystal has a low enzyme level, meaning >it needs to be mashed w/ something else w/ a more enzymes. [I use a >2-row, 6-row, Carapils (Dextrin), etc.] Munich and vienna are high in >enzyme levels and do not need additional grains to supply necessary >enzymes. Crystal has no enzyme level. It is fully modified (converted) in the husk and then kiln dried creating a little crystal of malt sugar. It does NOT need to be mashed. However, some people include it in the mash, others add it just before mashout or sparge, and still others steep it in the sparge water. The issue with mashing crystal is NOT conversion of starch to sugar (there is no starch left) it is ease of process and possible breakdown of dextrins during the mash, and hence loss of some of the crystal character and contribution. >>Does dextrin malt need to be mashed? > > Willits/Flatter answer > >Yes, but it might only be a one-step infusion mash. [Read as: put the >grains in, bring water to boil, remove grains.] This of course is NOT a "one-step infusion mash". It is a steep, a tea if you will, and will NOT convert the dextrin malt. Dextrin malt (carapils) do NOT have the diastatic power to convert themselves and they need to be mashed with something that does. >>I have read that crystal malts can break down at mash >>temperatures. Is it a good idea to put them in just before the mashout? > > Willits/Flatter answer > >Again, I put them in at the start of the mash because they do not >contain the needed enzymes to convert the protein to sugars. Again, crystal malts do NOT need to be mashed (see above). We can only hope that "convert the protein to sugars" is a brain fart. Domenick Venezia ZymoGenetics, Inc. Seattle, WA venezia at zgi.com Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 1994 08:48:50 +48000 From: Domenick Venezia <venezia at zgi.com> Subject: Chlorine - ------------------------------ >Date: Fri, 07 Oct 94 09:20:32 EST >From: dweller at GVSU.EDU (RONALD DWELLE) and taste. This is after it's all done & bottled. I assume there can't be chlorine in the batch, since the yeasties worked fine during ferment and in making a nice carbonation in the bottle. Not true. It takes much more chlorine to kill yeast than to kill bacteria. You can brew with chlorinated tap water with no preboil with no problem. This was a full-mash pale ale, and the only peculiarity I can identify is that I let the mash-out at the end go too high (answering a phone call), and I actually got some (not much--localized I think) boiling during mash out. Tannins (phenols) extraction from the grain husks perhaps. My wife says our soft city water has had more chlorine in it lately (her sniffer is much better than mine), but I called the city water dept and they said the only change recently is something they've been adding to the water to treat lead pipes You believed the City Water Department over your own wife's nose?! Shame on you. Don't you know that government agencies at all levels lie by knee-jerk reaction. I believe your wife's nose. They upped the chlorine levels for the hot summer months. You don't say whether you preboiled your mash and sparge water, but I assume you did not. My guess is that the first batch had a double whammy with boiling extracting phenols (tannins) from the husks and combined with the extra chlorine courtesy of the Water Department you got a yield on the sythesis of chlorophenols that smell a lot like band-aids (tm). The second batch is more muted because you didn't boil the mash. Seattle has VERY soft water too. I turned up my water heater (it also helps keep the basement library warm) very high (no children), and I run 8-9 gallons of this VERY hot water into my brew kettle the night before a brewing session and I let it sit UNCOVERED overnight to outgas chlorine and oxygen. Seems to work. The alternative is a charcoal filtration system. Try running 9 gallons through a Brita water filter! Good luck. Domenick Venezia ZymoGenetics, Inc. Seattle, WA venezia at zgi.com Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 1994 09:04:58 +48000 From: Domenick Venezia <venezia at zgi.com> Subject: City's ozone water treatment When it rains it pours ... In response to recent water problems in the midwest and east coast The Seattle City Water Department has decided to switch to or add ozone treatments to the city water supply starting soon. What is this going to do to my brewing water? I currently let my hot tap brewing water stand uncovered overnight to outgas chlorine and air. Will this be sufficient for the ozone treatments. Any Seattlites out there that know more about the local situation please contact me. Thanks. Domenick Venezia ZymoGenetics, Inc. Ed (Sig-Typo) Hitchcock - Meet mt two dogs? Seattle, WA venezia at zgi.com Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 08 Oct 1994 10:15:41 -0600 (MDT) From: COYOTE <SLK6P at cc.usu.edu> Subject: Carboy Handle Summary/ Corrections I'm not going to name names, cuz everyone knows who they are. And if you don't know who you are, please report to your local alzheimers treatment center and tell them you brew with aluminum :) Here's the unskinny bop on those orange handled carboy handles, use for the 5 galwater jug carboys, and 6.5/7 gal acid bottles (how BIG are they?) For those who don't know: The handles are made of FAT wire in two pieces. They are bent to wrap around the neck of the carboy, and the other is shaped for a handle. THey connect via a bolt and wing nut. Orange plastic covers the wires- for you brewing safety and comfort. >From all I've heard it IS safe to use these for carrying full carboys. BUT...that doesn't mean you can't have problems. Watch for stress lines (those little bags under your eyes from worrying too much aka not enuf HB!) around the neck. DO NOT tighten the nut down real hard. It shouldn't sqeeze the bottle, but should hold it snug. You can still manage to bang the carboy or balance it precariously on a table ledge while racking...etc...etc. But- it seems that they are commonly used for transport. Thing is the neck-ring needs to sit at the point on the neck where the curve of the bottle ends. NOT below the threads of the acid bottle top! MODIFICATION: to make a handle fit a 7g acid bottle. 1. The wire which wraps around the neck needs to be adjusted. What I did (and it worked...so I'll patent it with ACME) is to slightly straighten the loopy part (neck wrap) and also the eye-hole for the bolts. What this leads to is a nice snug fit around the bottle neck, but... 2. The bolt needs to be lengthened by about a 1/2". Since bolts are cheap I opted to buy a new one which was already longer. Stretching bolts is a tiresome project. The original bolt is 2" and the minimum for the new one is 2 1/2" 3" would work ok too. I think it's 1/4" threads. 3. Part of what this does it to all alot more slippage space for the handle part to slide back and forth on the bolt, so you can cut some small pieces of tubing to slide on the bolt and serve as spacers to hold it snug in place. I found this also allows you (with a little fiddling/cutting) to tighten the nut down snug w/o it squeezing on the bottle neck. I'd even suggest adding some for use with a 5 gallons bottle. I used some reinforced gas line tubing- since it's pretty firm and thick. I ended up with three pieces. One inside the two eyelets of the handle (very small, 1/8 in?) and one on either side (about 1/4"). I still am going to make efforts to support the carboy from below while transporting downstairs. But it seems pretty sturdy. You need to try to match the curve of the bottle neck with the curve of the wire. Nice-even support. No pinpoint-stress points! Do not tear up the plastic in the process cuz you don't want metal on metal. FWIW: the handles seem reasonable prices at $4.50, but it is only a couple pieces of wire, and a bolt, and I had to replace the bolt (gee. .10 more!). But- hey, someones got a patent on them. I'm surprised they haven't come out with the 7g model yet- those bottles are pretty popular! *** And I've been requested to state that it was NOT in zymurgy, but in BT that that article on the air bubble gadget appeared, so zymurgy is not publishing faulty info/products. Well at least not in THAT article! So now our resident technical editors should be put to at ease! But really...I don't mean to slam zymurgy. I've been quite entertained looking over my special issue for the last week. Particularly liked the Scotch Heather ale article. The part about discovering whiskey by warming a pot of brew, and drinking from a vessel which collected drops off the ceiling of the cave. Who would'a ever guessed! Warm & cool! *** Neil Flatter didn't flatter himself by saying: I put them in at the start of the mash because they do not contain the needed enzymes to convert the protein to sugars. * Well, uh er....there may be some proteins which are saccharified and have sugar moeities attached, but thats not where we obtain our brewing sugars. Starches are converted to sugars. Some protiens are broken down to amino acids (serve as nutrients) while others serve as body and head retention agents. I think I had a couple other problems with your conclusions, but I wasn't in the editor so I'll leave it to others. Brew on ye' brethren of bee barley and vine- \-/-\ John (The Coyote) Wyllie SLK6P at cc.usu.edu \-/-\ Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 08 Oct 94 18:33:32 EDT From: uswlsrap at ibmmail.COM Subject: Madison Homebrewers November Classic UPDATE - -------------------- Mail Item Text Follows ------------------ To: I1010141--IBMMAIL From: Bob Paolino Research Analyst Subject: Madison Homebrewers November Classic UPDATE To potential entrants and judges who requested rules and entry forms, my apologies for the delay in sending them. There was, however, a good reason: WE NOW HAVE A NEW SITE AND TIME FOR THE COMPETITION! Traditionally, our competitions have been evening events at UW Memorial Union. Madison will have a brewpub opening this fall, and we have arranged to have the competition there during its opening week!!! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 1995. Judging starts at 12 noon at the GREAT DANE BREWING COMPANY, 123 East Doty, downtown Madison. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Judges should arrive by 11am if they want lunch. Day of event entries will not be accepted unless they have been preregistered at least a week in advance, as described in the rules (send the paperwork in advance to allow us to enter data and assign entry numbers and bring the beer to the site by 11am). Separate deadlines for shipped and hand-delivered entries are detailed in the rules. DO NOT SHIP entries to the brewpub. See rules for details. Send your snailmail address for rules and entry forms. Requests to me at uswlsrap at ibmmail.com or to: November Classic, AHA Sanctioned Competition Madison Homebrewers and Tasters Guild P.O. Box 1365 / Madison, WI 53701-1365 This is also a call for judges; many palates make light work. Come judge, meet a friendly bunch of homebrewers, and check out a new brewpub. We'll get judging done in time for Saturday evening festivities at the pub! Bob Paolino Disoriented in Badgerspace Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 08 Oct 94 19:46:34 EDT From: BrewerLee at aol.com Subject: Submission Ken Schroeder wrote about "A Suggestion for AHA Competitions": > How about it AHA: require a self addressed stamped envelope from the > entrants and require that the judging sheets be copied and mailed > back in that envelope by the competition organizers? Simply put.... no way. I used to think this was a good idea until I spoke with Alberta Rager about a competition I'm organizing. The entrants pay their entry fee (I assume there is one for these club competitions) and expect prompt and accurate judging replys. The money goes to something. The AHA should be bound to the same rules as they hold regular contest organizers to. People shouldn't have to their name, address and stamp on yet another sheet of paper. <stepping off my soapbox> :) -Lee Bussy brewerlee at aol.com Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 1994 19:43:48 -0700 From: especkma at halcyon.com (Erik Speckman) Subject: Re: Specialty Malts. Neil Flatter wrote a confusingly formatted reply to someone in #1547 which I think contains some false information about certian specialty grains. I have inserted extra '>'s to try distinguish Mr. Flatter's reply from what I think is the original post. > >> 1. Are caramunich and caravienna the same as munich and vienna >>malts? >I would use them interchangeably. Then again, I probably would use any >one of the four for the other. They are sold by the same vendor as >different, but I haven't seen how they differ. Munich and Vienna are both high kilned malts, with munich being the darker of the two. They are in many ways similar to pale malts. The main difference is that they are kilned at higher temperatures, as a result they are lower in diastic power than most pale malts and should not be used to convert non-malt adjuncts. Caramunich and caravienna are both "crystal malts" they are malted and then raised to conversion temperature for a period of time before drying. They will all add color to beer but using these four grains interchangeably will certianly result in different beers. At the very least the colors will be different, and the flavor profiles are also likely to differ. >> 2. I have read in different places that munich and vienna malts are >>crystal malts and also that they need to be mashed. It was my >>understanding that crystal malts do not need to be mashed. Is this >>correct? > >No, not from what I have seen. Crystal has a low enzyme level, meaning >it needs to be mashed w/ something else w/ a more enzymes. [I use a >2-row, 6-row, Carapils (Dextrin), etc.] Munich and vienna are high in >enzyme levels and do not need additional grains to supply necessary >enzymes. Crystal malt is efectively mashed in the husk before being dried. That means, while it lacks enzymes when it reaches the brewer, it already has undergone conversion and so doesn't need to be mashed, just infused. Munich and vienna are high-kiled malts. They are like pale 2-row or pale 6-row except they have been dried at higher temperatures. As a result they are more carmelized and darker and they have lower enzyme levels, but they still have enough enzymes to convert their own starch unless you are reckless with your mash conditions. Carapils (dextrin) has no appreciable diastic enzyme activity. Some sources suggest that it should be mashed with a enzyme rich malt but it is essentially a crystal malt that has been kilned at low temperatures to avoid browning. >> 3. Does dextrin malt need to be mashed? > >Yes, but it might only be a one-step infusion mash. [Read as: put the >grains in, bring water to boil, remove grains.] I wouldn't call this a mash, I would call this an infusion, like making tea. It only sits at conversion temperature for a brief time. >> 4. I have read that crystal malts can break down at mash >>temperatures. Is it a good idea to put them in just before the mashout? > >Again, I put them in at the start of the mash because they do not contain >the needed enzymes to convert the protein to sugars. As I said before, crystal malts lack active enzymes but they don't need them because they have already been mashed before kilning. ( I assume the comment about converting protein to sugars was just a mental lapse, mashing converts starch,a large sugar polymer, into simpler sugars). ______________________________________________________________________ Erik A. Speckman Seattle, Washington Good Brain Doesn't Suck especkma at reed.edu especkma at halcyon.com Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 94 02:35:00 UTC From: m.trageser at genie.geis.com Subject: Something from England? Howdy Folks, I'm a relatively new brewer, (7 batches). I have enjoyed reading the digest and have certainly learned a great deal. ---Thanks!! I have an aquaintance who is visiting merry old England next week, leaves Wednesday, and thought I might ask him to pick up a thing or two at a British brew shop. Trouble is, I don't know what would be unique, or of special interest. I thought maybe some hops from the region. Any suggestions? Thanks to all. - -----To Brew, or Not to Brew, THERE IS NO QUESTION! Mickey Trageser, Eldersburg, Maryland (m.trageser at genie.geis.com) Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 1994 13:34:07 --300 From: gilad at orbotech.co.il (Gilad Barak) Subject: Boots' (U.K) plastic kegs Hi there, First post on the HBD after about two months of browsing only. I live in Israel and brewing information is hard to come by so thew HBD is a great source for me. I have the same problems concerning availability of brewing equipment and ingredients. A friend is now in the U.K and he sent me a catalog of homebrewing equipment sold by a department store called Boots. They have a plastic pressure keg for storing and dispensing beer. This friend understands nothing in beer and the catalog does not supply much information. >From his description it is about 30-40 Liters and made of plastic. It costs about 25 Sterling Pounds. He could not tell me if any aditional equipment should be bought to make it suitable for dispensing beer. Does anyone know this product? What do I have to buy in addition to the keg? Thank you for any information Gilad Barak gilad at orbotech.co.il Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 94 08:32 CDT From: arf at genesis.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) Subject: Rollermills.... >From: Ed Hitchcock <ehitchcock at sparc.uccb.ns.ca> > For roller mill spacing, George Fix wrote an article in the fall 1994 issue of Zymurgy that covers spacing. George's article provided good technical background on crush analysis and the effects of a "bad" crush but wisely left avoided dogmatic statements on "ideal" spacing. It is my experience on several thousand mills both fixed and adjustable, that .045" provides an excellent crush on every malt out there. It mashes efficiently, flows well and runs clear. It is a fairly course crush but not so course to effect proper wetting in the mash tun. The only direction one might want to go is to a finer crush but I have yet to come up with a good reason to do so on homebrew sized batches. I have never been able to measure any improvement in extract by using a finer crush on 10 gallon batches. After all is said and done, most users weigh all the grains out into one bucket and mill them together. This, of course means that adjusting the mill for different grains is waived in favor of simplicity. > As for knurling, I'm sure Jack would be delighted to give you the history as to why he switched from longitudinal to diamond knurling. The linear knurling was used because it was similar to the groves on the surplus rollers I used for the first 40 mills. When we designed our own roller, it seemed prudent to stick with what worked. We can thank Dan Listerman for the new and far more efficient knurl on the current MALTMILL. The first thing I noted on the Philmill I bought for evaluation was the use of a diamond knurl and pondered whether this could be the cure to the occasional feeding problem reported by customers. The problem only occurred on fixed mills because the adjustable could always be adjusted to find a setting that would feed properly. I made up a few prototypes but opted for a much coarser knurl than the Philmil uses and never looked back. The rollers feed efficiently at much closer spacing and without the need for gears or any active drive to the passive roller. I suspect that the Philmil could be improved by a coarser knurl but I am sure he has the same "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" attitude. I am not sure why Glatt has gone back and forth between the two but having rollers even smaller in diameter (1.25") is a self-inflicted wound that makes feeding far more difficult in the first place and is no doubt one of the reasons for the mandatory but infamout plastic gears. > He will also expalain why it is cheaper to buy one of his, and if you're in the states I think he's right. Well, the fact is I still can't compete with someone who has a machine shop in the basement and considers it a labor of love. One can build a mill for $10 if really pressed but selling it at a profit is a different ball game. >From: npyle at hp7013.ecae.StorTek.COM >Are you saying your options are a "straight knurl" or a "diamond knurl"? I know what diamond knurling is, but I don't understand straight knurling. That is sort of a generic term for rolling a pattern on cylinders. This can be anything from screw threads to straight lines and diamond patterns. It takes massive amounts of pressure and most people run out of gas because they can not do a proper job, on a large roller, in even a large industrial lathe. We send our rollers to a company that does nothing else but roll. Unfortunately, getting them there and back again adds to the cost but that is the price of quality. js Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 09 Oct 1994 20:53:08 -0600 (CST) From: "Ginger Wotring, Pharm/Phys" <WOTRING at SLUVCA.SLU.EDU> Subject: Happy Holidays reminder The St Louis Brews are pleased to announce the return of our Happy Holidays Homebrew Competition! This is an AHA sanctioned event, using the standards and categories provided by the AHA, with the addition of one special beer style, Christmas Brau. This is a winter warmer/kitchen sink type beer, with OG > 1.060, >3 malts, >4 hops, at least one adjunct. The Happy Holidays Homebrew Competition is also part of the Midwest Homebrewer of the Year challenge. Entries are due by 5pm 29 Nov. Judging will be held on the afternoon of 10 December, with a banquet and award ceremony following. We welcome all entries, and urge everyone interested to come judge with us! Please pass this information along to other brewers who may be interested. If you will be visiting us, let me know. We will have some places to stay available. - -- Ginger Wotring, HHHC coordinator internet: wotring at sluvca.slu.edu Return to table of contents
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1548, 10/10/94