HOMEBREW Digest #1871 Tue 31 October 1995

Digest #1870 Digest #1872


	FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
		Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor


Contents:
  Pete's Wicked Bottles (David Pike)
  Toasted Malt, Bitterness ("William D. Knudson")
  Comments on Oct 26th HBD (w.r.) crick" <crick at bnr.ca>
  Comments on Oct 26th HBD (w.r.) crick" <crick at bnr.ca>
  Secondary Fermentation (Mitch Hogg)
  Re: False Bottoms (hollen)
  Re: Pump Sale (hollen)
  Re:  PH/airlocks/yeast washing (Tim Fields)
  Mail Order Scientific Outlets? ("Michael A. Owings")
  Wort Storage -- Summary ("Michael A. Owings")
  UNSUSCRIBE (Scott Mayhew)
  Carmelized Mashes and Propane Scare (Don Put)
  Bulging cans of extract (bean)
  new poster, info please (Steve Comella)
  re: Mason Jars 101 (Dick Dunn)
  propane burners indoors (Rob Lauriston)
  False Bottom Performance (Kirk R Fleming)
  propane indoors (blacksab)
  Using a Blowoff Hose (John W. Braue, III)
  Schneider Weisse (Rolland Everitt)
  EASYSPARGER (Jack Schmidling)
  SABCO Kettle as a Boiler (Phil Brushaber)
  ftp stanford.edu (Richard Buckberg)
  silicone and latex (David Hill)
  Re: mead (Sean Cox)
  Airlock Fluid (dludwig)

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!! October 3 thru October 13: The digest !!! will be unmanned! Please be patient if !!! you make any requests during this time !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ****************************************************************** * 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. ****************************************************************** ################################################################# # # YET ANOTHER NEW FEDERAL REGULATION: if you are UNSUBSCRIBING from the # digest, please make sure you send your request to the same service # provider that you sent your subscription request!!! I am now receiving # many unsubscribe requests that do not match any address on my mailing # list, and effective immediately I will be silently deleting such # requests. # ################################################################# NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS hpfcmgw! Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew at hpfcmgw.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@ hpfcmgw.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. Please don't send me requests for back issues - you will be silently ignored. For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to lutzen at alpha.rollanet.org ARCHIVES: An archive of previous issues of this digest, as well as other beer related information can be accessed via anonymous ftp at ftp.stanford.edu. Use ftp to log in as anonymous and give your full e-mail address as the password, look under the directory /pub/clubs/homebrew/beer directory. AFS users can find it under /afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer. If you do not have ftp capability you may access the files via e-mail using the ftpmail service at gatekeeper.dec.com. For information about this service, send an e-mail message to ftpmail at gatekeeper.dec.com with the word "help" (without the quotes) in the body of the message.
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 14:39:39 -0700 From: David Pike <davep at cirrus.com> Subject: Pete's Wicked Bottles I thought I read somewhere that Pete's is selling 22oz. bottles through their (T-shirt) catalog. Has anybody else heard of this and what is the price, contact number, etc? Dave Pike davep at cirrus.com Return to table of contents
Date: 27 Oct 95 18:43:34 EDT From: "William D. Knudson" <71764.203 at compuserve.com> Subject: Toasted Malt, Bitterness In HDB 1865 Eric Miller discusses the bitterness related to home toasted malt. Maybe you've hit a green version of the elusive historically accurate version of Porter. One thing we do know about the 'Porter Craze' of the late 18th and and early 19th Century in Europe is that this stuff was aged for months, sometimes a year, prior to dispening. Wasn't this to round out the malt bitterness? Michael Jackson's book on beers of the world has a picture of a Coors label from the 1870's that indicates the Porter was aged for 8 months. (It was't a big three yet - No Flames) So, don't give up on this beer! Let it sit around till next Spring and let us know how the bitterness progressed! In any case, input from the maltster world would be interesting: What is the effect on beer bitterness by aging roasted malt prior to brewing? Was malt aging a practice for this purpose in the porter brewing days of the 18th Century? Tschuss! Bill Ich kann besser Deutsch, wenn ich etwas Bier getrunken habe! Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 15:54:00 -0400 From: "bill (w.r.) crick" <crick at bnr.ca> Subject: Comments on Oct 26th HBD Just a few comments on the Oct 26th digest. Jerry Cunningham: The recipe you have presented has a greater than 99% chance of producing beer. The Style of this beer is a little known style called "Bottom of the Box Ale". There are not commercial examples of this beer;-) Gene Rafter on Chlorox use. I've used it for over a decade, with no problems. Note that plastics can absorb it if the concentrations, and/or contact time are too long, and this can leach out later into your beer. If you use concentrated hot solutions on glass, apparently it can etch the glass. I noticed this when I started soaking hard to clean bottles with a strong solution of Chlorox and hot water. The bottles I did this seemed to need this treatment every time I used them after this. The dishwasher lady at our cafeteria told me not to clean a teacup with Chlorox, because it gets harder to clean because it affects the glaze, which seem to support this theory. Regarding cleaning, and or boiling caps. I've used about 10,000 of them right out of the box, with never a problem. The few gushers I've ever had are ussually poorly cleaned bottles. Diaphrams in regulators: They can be removed, but I don't know where you would get a replcement. It could be the little pressure relief valve is dirty. You can disassemble a regulator by screwing the body apart. Most have a hex shaped portion in the middle of the body. Remember how it came apart, clean and dry the parts, and reassemble. I learned how to do this after plugging my regulator set at 20PSI onto a overfull 30PSI keg. The regulator vented the pressure back to 20PSI, forcing about a cup of beer through the regulator and out of a little vent hole on the back of it. Don't do this. It makes a mess! Make sure you screw the main pressure adjusting screw out so the initial pressure when you turn it on is low. There is no calibration required if you don't change any parts. Be cautious of substituting parts like the spring, or diaphram, or you could end up with a regulator with a dramatically different output pressure range.(can you say 800PSI stainless steel beer rocket;-) ) Someone mentioned a sight glass on a kettle? Why? I supose if it was large enough to allow free circulation through it, you could judge the hot break? Bill Crick Brewius, Ergo Sum! Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 15:54:00 -0400 From: "bill (w.r.) crick" <crick at bnr.ca> Subject: Comments on Oct 26th HBD Just a few comments on the Oct 26th digest. Jerry Cunningham: The recipe you have presented has a greater than 99% chance of producing beer. The Style of this beer is a little known style called "Bottom of the Box Ale". There are not commercial examples of this beer;-) Gene Rafter on Chlorox use. I've used it for over a decade, with no problems. Note that plastics can absorb it if the concentrations, and/or contact time are too long, and this can leach out later into your beer. If you use concentrated hot solutions on glass, apparently it can etch the glass. I noticed this when I started soaking hard to clean bottles with a strong solution of Chlorox and hot water. The bottles I did this seemed to need this treatment every time I used them after this. The dishwasher lady at our cafeteria told me not to clean a teacup with Chlorox, because it gets harder to clean because it affects the glaze, which seem to support this theory. Regarding cleaning, and or boiling caps. I've used about 10,000 of them right out of the box, with never a problem. The few gushers I've ever had are ussually poorly cleaned bottles. Diaphrams in regulators: They can be removed, but I don't know where you would get a replcement. It could be the little pressure relief valve is dirty. You can disassemble a regulator by screwing the body apart. Most have a hex shaped portion in the middle of the body. Remember how it came apart, clean and dry the parts, and reassemble. I learned how to do this after plugging my regulator set at 20PSI onto a overfull 30PSI keg. The regulator vented the pressure back to 20PSI, forcing about a cup of beer through the regulator and out of a little vent hole on the back of it. Don't do this. It makes a mess! Make sure you screw the main pressure adjusting screw out so the initial pressure when you turn it on is low. There is no calibration required if you don't change any parts. Be cautious of substituting parts like the spring, or diaphram, or you could end up with a regulator with a dramatically different output pressure range.(can you say 800PSI stainless steel beer rocket;-) ) Someone mentioned a sight glass on a kettle? Why? I supose if it was large enough to allow free circulation through it, you could judge the hot break? Bill Crick Brewius, Ergo Sum! Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 1995 08:49:01 -0400 (EDT) From: Mitch Hogg <bu182 at freenet.toronto.on.ca> Subject: Secondary Fermentation I thought I'd de-lurk to post my thoughts on secondary fermentation, largely because it's a subject on which I actually *have* some thoughts (sheesh, you guys and your "how much oxygen can one safely dissolve in the double-axel beta amylase rest of a mason jar full of dog-show judges" threads). At any rate, as far as I can tell, the cons of secondary fermentation are as follows: 1) Infection 2) Spilling beer on the floor whilst the pros are: 1) Keeping the beer from sitting on the bottom-dwelling crud (is that a technical term?) for too long 2) Freeing up the primary for another batch (or to use as a priming vessel) 3) Ease of dry hopping 4) Glass carboy allows one to see the beer (and check for clarity, etc) 5) Aeration As far as the cons are concerned, I don't think either one is a serious potential problem. Regarding 1), I think everyone here knows that you can't even *glance* at a batch of beer without risking infection, so be sure to keep your racking as clean as possible. And as for 2), just be careful where you point that hose. As for the pros, 1) is (like everything else here) a matter of personal taste, but I find that racking to the secondary reduces the element of sediment surprise in the final bottles. 2) I find is very helpful in keeping track of the progress of each batch. It's like an assembly line: primary; secondary; bottle. As for 3), this is what I've been told. Maybe I'll even try it someday. 4) is probably my strongest incentive. In my early days doing this, using only an opaque plastic pail, I bottled (and worse yet, offered to unsuspecting friends) some pretty cloudy beer. With a glass secondary, you can actually see what's happening and know when the beer is clear enough to bottle. In fact, my secondary fermentation is a fermentation in name only; I usually leave it in the primary for about a week and it's just about done all it's going to do before I transfer it to the secondary. I know this is unorthodox, so correct me if I'm doing something horribly wrong (yeah, like I had to ask:)). Ditto for 5). Works for me, but if others want to open up the to-splash-or-not-to-splash debate again, I'll be happy to listen to reason (or, as is most likely, reasons. A lot of 'em; mostly contradictory). And that's my half hour at 60C about secondaries. YM, as usual, MV. I will resume my ever-vigilant lurk. Mitch. Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 1995 07:34:07 -0700 From: hollen at vigra.com Subject: Re: False Bottoms >>>>> "Kirk" == Kirk R Fleming <flemingk at usa.net> writes: Kirk> Jay Reeves <73362.600 at compuserve.com> asked about: False Bottoms >> Has anyone used the size of perf-plate that Martin specifies? Does >> the grist get through the holes and do you have any scorching? Kirk> Hole size: Yes. Hole spacing: No. You don't need that much Kirk> open area (1/3 that much will work fine, even at 5 gpm recirc Kirk> rates) altho I don't say it hurts. I am beginning to suspect that this is not true. I am using a Phil's Phalse bottom which, as close as I can determine, is 7/64" holes on 11/32" centers. When I do a mash of 14# grain in a 10 gal. Gott cooler, everything is fine. When I get up to 18# like for my last Belgian Strong Ale, then the 1/8hp pump I have at full bore has a very hard time keeping a decent recirculation rate. I don't know what the open area of this is, but I think I need to go to a much larger open area. I am thinking of drilling some massive holes in the PPB and use it as a framework only and put some 70% open SS mesh on to actually be the false bottom. Anybody have any thoughts? I am going to begin experimentation, and will post any results back. This is a little daunting because I need to brew such big beers to test out the performance. I am open to other false bottom suggestions anyone may have for the Gott. dion - -- Dion Hollenbeck (619)597-7080x119 Email: hollen at vigra.com Senior Software Engineer Vigra, Inc. San Diego, California Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 08:30:28 -0700 From: hollen at vigra.com Subject: Re: Pump Sale >>>>> "GRMarkel" == GRMarkel <GRMarkel at aol.com> writes: GRMarkel> I just received a sale paper from MSC (Manhatten Supply Co.) GRMarkel> featuring pumps. What caught my eye was the price of a GRMarkel> Little Giant magnetic coupled pump model 3X-MDX. This model GRMarkel> has been mentioned several times in the HBD and seems to be GRMarkel> generally accepted as a good pump for brewing systems. The GRMarkel> description is as follows: GRMarkel> "Model 3X-MDX [...] 1/50 HP. While this is a great price and yes this is a great little pump for transferring brewery liquids, it will be inadequate for a RIMS system. The minimum for a RIMS is at the 1/20hp range and that will only do for grain bills under about 15 lbs. While false bottom geometry also comes into play, a pump this small has a hard time pulling through a false bottom and large grain bed and trying to pump it back up any significant distance. While this pump may work fine in some instances even in RIMS, I would be very cautious in buying it for a RIMS because you may find it is not enough. Better to look for used surplus pumps with excess capacity. I use a 1/8hp version that I got for $15 at a garage sale, an MD-SC. Used mag pumps are available from time to time in the surplus catalogs for about $50 or so. dion - -- Dion Hollenbeck (619)597-7080x119 Email: hollen at vigra.com Senior Software Engineer Vigra, Inc. San Diego, California Return to table of contents
Date: 28 Oct 95 11:56:43 EDT From: Tim Fields <74247.551 at compuserve.com> Subject: Re: PH/airlocks/yeast washing In #1869, Paul Sovcik's <U18183 at UICVM.CC.UIC.EDU> question leads me to another: >Subject: pH testing for all grain brewing > > Miller states that testing the pH of the sparge water is critical >because of increased tannins with a high pH. Of course, everything Miller >does is " critical", so Im not sure I believe him completely. Seems to me >that testing the runnings for sweetness and astringency would be all that >is necessary, and checking pH is an optional step, much like checking SG.. >If you taste astringency, you add a bit of Ca to the sparge water. > > So whats the deal? Does everyone who brews all-grain check pH? I began testing the PH of my mash because of low extraction rates. I use the low cost PH test strips but have found it difficult to effectively read them. Also, they are not what I would call "real accurate". For the same reasons, I also tried to test the PH of sparge water with absolutely no luck - the strip didn't react well at all to plain water. My question (given the premise that assessing and adjusting PH is important): is there any more accurate testing method out there between the $3 test strips and the $80+ electronic Rolls Royce models? - ------- Ken (krkoupa at ccmail2.srv.PacBell.COM) writes: > What do you use in your bubbling-type air lock? Water? Vodka? > Something else? I've been using water and a couple of times I've grown algae-like > stuff in the air lock. Preboiled, cooled water poured into a sanitized airlock. I use whatever happen to be in the tea kettle. Never had problems, and it's fair to say I've had suck back airlock water drawn back into the carboy) in every batch. >Besides, I'd hate to have a shot of vodka go undrunk. > I doubt algae would grow in vodka :-) - ---------- rbarnes at sdccd.cc.ca.us follows up on the yeast washing thread: > I have also done this successfully, but I have a question about > the agitation of the yeast in order to promote settling of the > layers into a "crud" layer on the bottom and a "clean" layer in > the middle. It seems to take a while (over an hour) for a moderate > amount of separation to occur. I found that agitating several times, not just once, helped to achieve disctict separation. I The yeast FAQ does mention several agitations, but doesn't really state directly that it is helpful. I also placed the jars into a cold water bath on the guess it would speed settling. "Reeb!" Tim Fields ... Fairfax, VA timf at relay.com (non-brewing time) timfields at aol.com (weekends) 74247.551 at compuserve.com (weekends) Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 1995 09:38:07 -0700 (CDT) From: "Michael A. Owings" <mikey at waste.com> Subject: Mail Order Scientific Outlets? Does anyone know of a good mail order scientific equipment outlet that sells to the public? I'm looking for petri dishes, flasks, culture tubes, etc. Thanx a bajillion in advance ... -- mikey Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 1995 09:44:26 -0700 (CDT) From: "Michael A. Owings" <mikey at waste.com> Subject: Wort Storage -- Summary The general HBD consensus on long-term storage of (large amounts) of wort seems to be that it shouldn't be done, even at temps of around freezing, for more than a day. Other suggestions included: - Use nitrogen to take up excess carboy head space, CO2 might react w/ the wort. - Do a mash-out to deactivate any enzymes that might have a chance to work over the storage period - Cool the wort prior to storage to minimize DMS production. Thanx to all who responded. -- mikey Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 1995 10:35:37 -0600 From: bv977 at Freenet.UCHSC.EDU (Scott Mayhew) Subject: UNSUSCRIBE UNSUBCRIBE - -- Scott Mayhew bv977 at freenet.uchsc.edu University of Colorado Health Sciences Center Denver, CO Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 1995 10:36:05 -0700 (PDT) From: Don Put <dput at cello.gina.calstate.edu> Subject: Carmelized Mashes and Propane Scare John Palmer wrote (Hey, John, how's the baby doing?): >I dont think we touched on scorching of the mash, and in all fairness I >will let Martin field that question. Again, my concern would be loss of >heat transfer and scorching of grain that got beneath it; maybe its not a >problem with the right hole diameters and size plate. I can comment on this based on experience. I've always wanted to use my mash tun as a combination mash/lauter tun, but, since I use a burner (a nice, very controllable three-ring type) to do my temperature controlled programs, I was worried about scorching and/or carmelizing the liquid under the false bottom, especially once the mash converted and a heavy sugar concentration would be found there. So, I constructed a lauter tun with a 1/2" SS drain directly in the center of the bottom, designed and built a false bottom out of a piece of copper plate I found at a scrap yard, and conformed the false bottom to the contour of the tun (Sankey keg) until there was about 3/8" of dead space underneath. After mounting my motorized mash mixer, I gave it a try. What do you think happened? Yeah, you got it. Even with the mash mixer going the whole time, the sugars under the the false bottom carmelized, then scorched into a solid, black mess. I went ahead and finished the batch, but ended up tossing it (gee, is that a painful experience or what?) because it tasted like burnt beer, and it's a flavor that doesn't go away no matter how long it ages. Even though I thought this might happen when I started the test, I did think that by minimizing the dead space under the false bottom and stirring constantly I could avoid the problem. Not so in my case. The only way to avoid this with my setup would be to have a steam-heated mash tun, which I don't think I'll construct at this point as it only takes a few minutes to transfer the mash to the separate lauter tun. >From: joep at informix.com (Earl the Pearl) >Subject: gas burners indoors >Don't do it! Propane is extremely dangerous. It's heavier than air and >will seek out the lowest part of the room (house) and hang out. If >there's a spark anywhere near it, say goodbye to your family, house, and >everything inside it. >Please use propane only ina *well* ventilated area (read this as >*outdoors*)! This is more than just a tad bit reactionary. While I agree that propane can act in this manner, there are quite a few houses--mine being one of them--up where I live that use propane-fired gas furnaces and they are installed under the house, inside the house in closets, and in many other tight, cramped places, and the installations conform to the UBC. Yes, propane will "seek out the lowest" area of anywhere it's confined, but there has to be a _leak_ first. So, folks, the sky really isn't falling just yet. If the system has been carefully checked for leaks, by using either the soap solution or manometer leak-down methods, then I don't think propane is any more dangerous than using natural gas under similar circumstances. ANY gas buildup in a confined area is trouble waiting to happen, although I agree that propane concentrations can build up faster because of it's heavier-than-air properties. BTW, we have numerous propane suppliers up here and every time a person switches from one to another, the new supplier has to do a leak-down test; it is required by law and their insurance carriers. Now, I personally would be more worried about carbon monoxide concentrations building up from a burner in a small area. In fact, the last time I had my heater checked, which I did at the start of the current heating season two weeks ago, the technician was very careful to pull the burner out and make sure that the heat exchanger wasn't cracked. Once the heat exchanger cracks, it can allow less-then-healthy concentrations of CO into the house along with the heat. This can be as deadly, in a much more insidious way, as any explosion from gas buildup. When was the last time you had your heat exchanger checked? According to the guy who checked mine, he finds quite a few of them each year. With some brands of gas-fired furnaces, this can happen over a few heating seasons. Sorry about the off-topic info on the heat exchangers, but after talking to this heating guy I have a whole new interest in one of those things we tend to take for granted like our house's heating system. I always thought just changing the intake filters was all the maintanence that was required. Cheers, don (dput at cello.gina.calstate.edu) "A long time ago, being crazy meant something." -Charles Manson Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 1995 12:04:33 PDT From: bean at seattle.email.net Subject: Bulging cans of extract I don't necessarily think htat I am enough of a brewer for you too heed my advice, I do however think the old woman who livd next door to me as a child was enough of a baker. I remember one year we we making pumpkin pies and came across a bulging can of that mystery pumpkin pie filling. I being the innocent child that I was, opened it with the can opener. The pie filling sprayed all over the kitchen. At this point all pie making stopped and we had to clean ourselves and the kitchen from top to bottom. Apparently, a bulging can is a warning sign of botchilism (sp?). I don't know much about botchilism, except that it can make you EXTREMELY sick. I would throw out the bulging can......you can always buy more extract :) Sabine bean at seattle.relay.ucm.org Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 1995 17:33:54 -0700 From: brew2u at azstarnet.com (Steve Comella) Subject: new poster, info please Hello from the Tucson desert! Inititially, I would like to thank the HBD collective for the enormous amount of good (and occasionally not so good : - ) ) information previously and currently posted to the digest. I look forward to the additional wisdom to come. That said, I need some assistance. I am currently generating a "program" in Excel, utilizing data from the hop faq, Zymurgy's current grain issue, and other sources. The "program" will use drop-down menus to select which style you plan to brew, and which grains, adjuncts, hops and yeast you would like to use. What it will do is allow you to match your recipe to your specified target (so far it has worked ok on published recipes) by calculating the expected OG and color using your grain/adjunct bill, print a shopping list, print/save your recipe including procedures, et al. No, I haven't figured out how to get it to make my b'fast ;-).Yet. Anyhow, what I need is data regarding the average color (L) and points per pound of the malt extracts available to homebrewers. I realize that it would be a rather large amount of data, but I don't care (are most CPA's like this?). I think I have exhausted nearly all of the Net resources available, hence this post. I will also be generating a program based upon the water analysis' of world famous brewing areas using the info previously posted; this will (hopefully) generate the deficiencies/overabundances in comparing your water to the chosen target. Of course, when all of this has been tested in practice and passed, I will make it available to whomever wants it. Feel free to e-mail me directly. If there is any other interest re: this info, I will be happy to post. TIA +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Didn't your mother ever tell you not to play with your balls by the road?, I asked the juggler. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Steve Comella brew2u at azstarnet.com Return to table of contents
Date: 28 Oct 95 18:29:57 MDT (Sat) From: rcd at raven.eklektix.com (Dick Dunn) Subject: re: Mason Jars 101 Pat Babcock (pbabcock at e-mail.com) wrote: > > In HBD 1866 Dick Dunn comments on the design of Mason Jars to vent excess > > pressure... > > Unfortunately this isn't quite right. When packing jars to go into the canner, > the rings are tightened only 'finger-tight'; ie. they are tightened just > enough to prevent the contents from spilling out of their own volition. It is > this loose fit that gives the pressure relief to which you refer,... "Screw the band down firmly..." (Ball _Blue_Book_) is not a "loose fit". What Pat calls "finger tight" really amounts to "Do not use jar wrench or other device to tighten the screw band." It's expected to be tight, just not enough to damage the seal or prevent normal pressure release during the processing. I figured that if you tried to put homebrew in it, you'd tighten the lid the same as a home canner would, and so the jar would start to vent at about the same pressure as it does in canning. I'm not claiming this makes them useful for homebrew! Pat and I agree completely that canning jars are no good for this. As I said before, "it's using the design backwards" because the seals are intended to hold by partial vacuum, not pressure. I only meant to point out that the jars ARE designed for some amount of pressure during processing--as much as the lid allows before it starts to vent--and that there is a pressure- release mechanism designed in. That's another reason not to use them for brewing--who wants a container that automatically lets the carbonation out?!? - --- Dick Dunn rcd at talisman.com -or- raven!rcd Boulder, Colorado USA ...Simpler is better. Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 95 17:56 PDT From: robtrish at mindlink.bc.ca (Rob Lauriston) Subject: propane burners indoors Bruce Taber <BRUCE.TABER at NRC.CA> asked about using propane indoors. Joe Pearl <joep at informix.com> gave a good warning of the potential dangers, but I think he went a bit too far: >Don't do it! Propane is extremely dangerous.... >Please use propane only in a *well* ventilated area (read this as *outdoors*)! You must have ventilation, but lots of indoor situations allow this. You just have to keep in mind that you and the flames need enough air to breathe, you don't want to breathe much of the 'exhaust', and you don't want unburned gas to accumulate. I think the biggest danger is that someone might leave their boil unattended, have a boil-over that extinguished the flame, and then have a gas build-up and explosion. To the warning that there must be good ventilation, I'd add that it needs to be supervised. I store the tanks outside too, and only bring them in when I'm using them. (They also get used for 'canning' pickles, jams, relishes and such. "You see dear, they're not just for brewing!" I think the religion thread got started in order to avoid what Ken G. started asking about in that post -- brewing and the significant other ;-) Since my brewing buddy Don Moore has some of his equipment in my basement, I end up having two 35,000 BTU burners going under a 1.5' x 2.5' window with fan in the window blowing outwards, or blowing across the top of the pots towards the window. There's also a level-entry door open about fifteen feet away. There might be some problems in the depths of winter if one is reluctant to let the winter winds inside. Compared to other parts of this country, winters aren't too severe here, but as a former Ottawa Valley boy, I know you have to coddle your brass monkey in the old country. I was hesitant to use propane inside, but I love the effectiveness of the gas burners. My question is, would I be any better off with natural gas (like the hot water heater and furnace which are also in the basement)? Rob Lauriston <robtrish at mindlink.bc.ca> The Low Overhead Brewery Vernon, B. C. Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 1995 18:47:38 -0600 From: flemingk at usa.net (Kirk R Fleming) Subject: False Bottom Performance In #1867 Reeves said: > Martin calls for a 20 gauge 3/32" holes on 5/32" centers (33% open.. and I responded "You don't need that much open area (1/3 that much will work fine, even at 5 gpm recirc rates) altho I don't say it hurts." Dion, in #1869 responds: > I am beginning to suspect that this is not true. I am using a Phil's > Phalse bottom which <snip> is 7/64" holes on 11/32" centers. When I > do a mash of 14# grain in a 10 gal. Gott cooler, everything is fine. > When I get up to 18# <snip> then the 1/8hp pump <snip> has a very hard > time keeping a decent recirculation rate. I don't know what the > open area of this is, but I think I need to go to a much larger open > area. I compute you have about 8% open area, assuming this hole pattern is across the entire plate. By my calculation Martin's is about 28%, and Rodney Morris (in The RIMS Article) is a 70% open system. Here's my data, although I don't draw too many conclusions from it. Grain bill weights are given for batches done with three different false bottom designs described in the notes to the right of the table: Grain (lbs) - ----------- 1. 5.5 -Grain bills 1-6 were mashed using a false bottom that was 2. 11.5 15 3/8" in diameter, having 900 holes 3/32" on 3/8" centers 3. 22.0 for an approx. 3.3% open area. Depth of the grain bed was 4. 18.25 about 12-14" on the larger bills. 5. 21.5 -Grain bill 7 was done with a 14 5/8" diameter bottom with 6. 20.5 2120 5/64" holes on 1/4" centers, for a percentage open area 7. 20.5 of about 6.2%. Depth about 12-14", from memory :-) 31. 6.5 -Grain bill #31 was the largest run so far with a small stovetop system, the false bottom for which is a 11 3/4" diameter plate having 1350 holes 5/64" dia on 1/4" centers and a percentage open area of 6.0%. Depth of grain bed was approx 6", +/- 1/2". You have my approx grain bed depths and can see how they compare to yours. Without knowing the dimensions of a 10 gal Gott, all I can say is this: Since I could easily recirc with just 3.3% open, and certainly had no problems with 22lb bills using 6% open, your 8% should be more than adequate for any recirc rate you want. That leaves the unknown data: your grain bed depth. If it's 50-100% deeper than mine, then that may be the significant difference in our setups. As a sanity check on how deep I'm claiming by beds are, runs 1-7 above are in a Sanke (15 5/8" ID), and run 31 above is in an 11 3/4" dia vessel. If flow is okay with 14 lbs of grain, but jams up with 18 lbs, I might conclude grain bed compaction is the problem. But that increase in grain weight still isn't up to the nearly 22 lbs of Run 5 above, PLUS you have 30% more 'openess' in your plate, AND larger holes. IOW, not only is percentage of open plate greater, each individual hole is also larger than mine. Doesn't make sense. I can't reason out how plate design couples with bed compaction. To me it doesn't follow that a more open bottom will improve the situation. I'm not saying it won't or I wouldn't try it. It just isn't *obvious* to me why it would help. Was this a single data point, and if so is it possible flow was restricted elsewhere in the system? Two more points: 1) I'm able to allow the grain bed to drain quite a bit (as in run dry) and still maintain *at least* sparging rates of circulation. I would expect this dramatic reduction in buoyant force on the bed would mimic a much deeper bed. 2) Pump power is probably not a factor with centrifugal (not positive displacement) pumps. Mine is a 1/25 hp unit and NOT a factor in pulling wort thru the bed. Finally, Dion also asked: > Anybody have any thoughts? I am going to begin experimentation, and > will post any results back. This is a little daunting because I need > to brew such big beers to test out the performance. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Yeah yeah yeah. That's the same line I use with my wife when she asks why I have so many bags of grain when I walk out of the supply shop. "I need to do a few experiments." Don't think she always buys it, but I just insist I need more *data*, heh heh heh. :-) KRF Colorado Springs - ------------------------------------------------------ "We can help the cause of pale ale both by drinking it and brewing it as much as possible." Terry Foster - ------------------------------------------------------ Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 1995 01:15:02 -0600 From: blacksab at siu.edu Subject: propane indoors I have been using a Cajun Cooker clone in my basement for a while now with absolutely no problems. I'm also extremely careful. Here's what I see to be the potential dangers: 1. Carbon monoxide 2. Lack of oxygen 3. Leaking tanks, hoses and fittings, and the ensuing fire 4. Explosion I see Carbon Monoxide as the greatest danger to safety. Colorless, odorless, and extremely deadly. However, an adequate ventilation hood and a CO detector solve that problem. I think it is insructive to note that the fires under the Woks in Chinese restaurants are considerably larger than the burners that most of us use. There are usually more of them and they burn for considerably longer periods of time than the 4-hours or so that it takes to mash and boil a batch of beer. A CO detector sure doesn't hurt, and eases the concerns of most skeptics. Lack of oxygen is less of a problem in most houses since most houses leak like sieves anyway. I'm a remodeling contractor and I see it all the time. HOWEVER, lack of oxygen is a real concern in tightly constructed, superinsulated houses; in fact, indoor air pollution in general is a problem in such homes. The oxygen problem can be solved by feeding the fire with outside air--a small fan and some flexible clothes-dryer hose works fine. Leaking gas joints are ALWAYS a problem, be it propane or naural gas. But not necessarily because an explosion might occur (although it might). The more likely problem is starting something else on fire, and then freaking out. Most leaks are very small, and if they ignite at all, can usually be blown out and corrected. BUT ALL JOINTS SHOULD BE TIGHT IN THE FIRST PLACE and tested before a match gets anywhere near them. Finally, although it is true that propane is heavier than air and thus sinks, so too does natural gas. This is really only a problem if a leaking pipe is neglected for a goodly length of time. Gas stinks, and it becomes nauseating long before it becomes explosive. Gas explosions are usually hot water tanks because we keep them in out of the way, confined spaces where no one can smell them, and kablooey! Portable Propane tanks should NEVER be stored in the basement or the garage! Keep them outside away from the house and away from children. With proper care and consideraion, brewing in the basement is IMHO, a safe and pleasant place to brew. A little caution goes a long way. Whether you brew or not, every house should have adequate fire extinguishers, smoke detectors, and Carbon Monoxide detectors that are KNOWN to function. Check everything regularly. Hope this helps, and please, no flames... --Harlan Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 1995 09:48:45 From: braue at ratsnest.win.net (John W. Braue, III) Subject: Using a Blowoff Hose Gene Rafter <grafter at creighton.edu> asks: > My ? is have many of you who have used the blowoff method >described in The Complete Homebrew Guide found any benefit from this >besides reducing the risk of contamination? I made an Octoberfest 2 >weeks ago and yea it was kind of fun watching the carboy blowoff the >Kreausen and all but when I transfered to a secondary carboy I noticed >how much I lost. I'm not going to notice anything till I try my beer but >I thought I would ask a more experienced brewmeister what he/she thinks >of this method. > Being a homebrewer when I have time (somebody find me a contract that doesn't involve so much overtime!), I have fermented both with and without a blowoff hose. I don't know about protection from contamination, but I find a blowoff hose helps with reducing the risk of overflowing fermenters. I basically brew two types of beer: a sort of stout/porter hybrid with an OG of 1.07, and a red ale with an OG of about 1.045. The red ale ("Rotbrau") is a well-behaved brew that ferments vigorously but decorously in a 6.5 gallon plastic bucket with a standard fermentation lock attached. The stout/porter hybrid ("Grossbrau") is a wild, out-of-control thing that typically threatens to blow the top off of the fermenter, makes whining noises that scare my wife, and would probably eat the parakeet if I didn't keep an eye on it. A blowoff hose is a practical necessity to prevent a world-class mess from developing every time I brew it (not that my household is any stranger to world-class messes...) Recommendation: ferment any given recipe with a fermentation lock on the fermenter the first time. If you awaken to find two gallons of spilled beer/kraeusen oozing out of the crevices, ferment it with a blowoff hose in the future. - -- John W. Braue, III braue at ratsnest.win.net I prefer both my beer and my coffee to be dark and bitter; that way, they fit in so well with the rest of my life. I've decided that I must be the Messiah; people expect me to work miracles, and when I don't, I get crucified. Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 1995 09:59:57 -0500 From: af509 at osfn.rhilinet.gov (Rolland Everitt) Subject: Schneider Weisse A few days ago I enjoyed a bottle of Schneider Weisse at a local restaurant. Noticing the yeast in the bottle, I decided to take the bottle home and try to culture the dregs. I seem to have something going - but what is it? Anyone ever use this yeast, or have any idea what they use? Rolland Everitt af509 at osfn.rhilinet.gov Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 95 10:47 CST From: arf at mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) Subject: EASYSPARGER Michael Wood ponders the virtues of developing a continuous sparger and suggests that he may be re-inventing the wheel. Well, it is (was) called the EASYSPARGER (TM) and after three years of trying to convince the hb community that it was as good an idea as the EASYMASHER and the MALTMILL, I sold about a dozen and removed it from the product line. It did more to simplify my brewing process than any other gadget I have come up with but I guess I did not try hard enough to convince the hide-bound-gotta-do-it-the traditional-way crowd. Basically, it is a one gallon kettle with a hose that hooks onto the kitchen fawcet and another short hose an inch lower on the front where the hot water dribbles out into the mash tun. It sits on the stove and makes as much sparge water as needed and about as fast as required. When all done it stows away in the EM kettle and and totally eliminates all the hassle of batch sparging. I still have a few dozen kettle and some parts but no interest in making them. MM's and EM's keep my busy enough. If anyone wants to give it a whirl and is willing to pick them up, they are here for the taking. js Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 95 08:57:00 -0600 From: phil.brushaber at lunatic.com (Phil Brushaber) Subject: SABCO Kettle as a Boiler I finally came up with the bucks to buy a SABCO kettle (reconditioned 15.5 gallon keg). I was quite please with the clean, professional restoration. And it's nice to have legal stuff. I am not using this as a mash/lauter tun, just a boiler, so I got the basic kettle plus a stainless steel drain and a brass spigot. SABCO installs the drain hole as low as feasible on the bottom outside edge of the keg. However this still has about 1 - 1.5 gallons of wort remaining in the keg after it is drained. Before I start experimenting with brass elbows inside the keg. I thought someone might pass along their good solution to lowering the drain on the SABCO. BTW after four years of homebrewing and now not having to use a pan to "bail" my hot wort out of my standard Volrath kettle, I now know of the pleasure of whirlpooling the hotbreak and hops to the bottom center of the kettle and gently draining wort from the side of the kettle. Now I just need to know how to effectively get at more of the "goodies" without desturbing the hop/break "pyramid" in the center. - ---- The Lunatic Fringe * Richardson, TX * 214-235-5288 * Home Of FringeNet Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 1995 14:04:22 -0800 From: Richard Buckberg <buck at well.com> Subject: ftp stanford.edu I have been trying to ftp from the Stanford archives for most of the past week. Every time, at all hours, the connection is closed by the host without allowing login. Is something wrong with the site? Or is it just so busy that I can't get an anonymous ftp slot? What I'm after is a file of the 1995 GABF winners. If someone could mail me that file, or direct me to another source, I'd be much obliged. Thanks! Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 09:18:03 +1100 From: davidh at melbpc.org.au (David Hill) Subject: silicone and latex Could anyone who knows please advise any adverse effects of using either latex or silicone in beer dispensing system. Latex in uni directional valves & silicone to seal leaks I cannot find "food grade" silicone only the plumbers/ glazers variety. many thanks David Hill Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 95 18:01:40 EST From: scox at factset.com (Sean Cox) Subject: Re: mead >From: "James Giacalone" <JGiacalone at vines.ColoState.EDU> >Subject: Mead > >I have a 5 gallon carboy of mead that I made in June. >I used sterile techniques handling the mead from the start. >It has benn racked twice and the problem is that I am begininng to see >white spots arond the top edge of the mead. >Is this yeast ( I hope) or is it contaminated? It smells fine. >Please help! TIA I've had this happen when I use "raw" or "unprocessed" honeys. The stuff floating on top of the mead looks like little odd-shaped "colonies" of something (probably evil) but turn out to be coagulated beeswax that was in the honey. If you take one of the specks out and try to crush it in your fingers, it should smear like wax, not like "evil creatures". This has happened particularly in honey beers that I've made, so if you boiled or heated your must I would almost expect it. The wax itself is harmless, but I try to remove the big pieces by skimming so they don't gum up the bottling equipment. --Sean === Sean Cox, Systems Engineer ==================== FactSet Data Systems === === scox at factset.com ==================== Greenwich, CT === Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 00:07:31 -0500 From: dludwig at ameritel.net Subject: Airlock Fluid Ken Koupal asked about what to put in your airlock. Use clorox at around 1/4 cup to 5 gal (ala papazian). If you sanitize with this, you should have plenty around. If you have an algae problem, you're probably getting too much sunlight.Keep it dark around your fermenter. dludwig at atc.ameritel.net dave ludwig Return to table of contents
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1871, 10/31/95