HOMEBREW Digest #1901 Tue 05 December 1995

Digest #1900 Digest #1902

		Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor

  Review: Phil's Psyphon Starter - the sucking thing ("Pat Babcock")
  Split decoction mashing ("Mark A. Melton")
  (no subject) (Mark Tuttle)
  infusion mashing ("Sharon A. Ritter")
  Re: wild yeasts/cloviness(?) of wheat beers (Sean Cox)
  .z files/keg conv./dishwasher/partial mash (mmoss)
  Cider priming (MrMike656)
  STEAM Injection (Part 1) (Merino Lithographics)
  STEAM Injection (part 2) (Merino Lithographics)
  1996 Bay Area Brewoff (Bob Jones)
  partial decoction mash: Is it possible? (Alejandro Midence)
  Wyeast 1056 ("Richard J. Smith")
  Bubbles o0Oo0Oo (Todd W. Roat)
  Propane Indoors (YOUNGBRUCE)
  mead question (Leif Rustvold)
  Hot Air Gun Heat Source Tho'ts (KennyEddy)
  re: Gas Burners ("Gregg A. Howard")
  Stopper stuck in carboy (C.D. Pritchard)
  Beer and lawsuits (C.D. Pritchard)
  a newsgroup for winemakers (Alejandro Midence)
  Wyeast 1214 And YeastLab A08 ("Mark E. Hogenmiller")

****************************************************************** * 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: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 09:58:37 +0500 From: "Pat Babcock" <pbabcock at oeonline.com> Subject: Review: Phil's Psyphon Starter - the sucking thing Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager! Anyone else tried this thing? It's a neat idea, but poorly executed, in my opinion. It consists of a piece of vinyl tubing with two plastic tubes and a ball inside; one tube on either end, ball in the middle. The ball rolls back and forth between the tubes. One tube, the bottom one, is bevelled so that little or no liquid will move past it if the ball is against the tube. The other is 'Tee'-slotted so that it will always pass fluid. The premise is that you trap an additional small quantity of fluid in the space each time you shake the cane. Eventually, you gain enough that the column of fluid rolls over the top of the cane, and the siphons starts. When done successfully, this is a fairly quick process. The instructions stated that you simply cut the end off of a standard racking cane, install the starter, then intall the short piece of cane you sawed off earlier. You then put the end in the liquid to be siphoned, and shake vigorously to start the siphon. This is what I found with the unit I purchased: o You must be very careful sliding the thing on the racking tube. The tubes slide easily within the vinyl, and you can close off the gap that the ball is in quite easily. If this happens, you have to take the starter off, force the tubes out, reassemble and try again. I have had to do this a few times already. o I wonder what Listermann's idea of a 'standard' racking cane is? When I bought the thing from a local distributor, I read the instructions there, and purchased a racking cane from the shelf adjacent. Fair test as this is what Joe Consumer would most likely do. Well, the siphon starter more times than not ends up in the bottom of the container from which I am siphoning - it falls off while shaking! I use mine with plastic clamps to hold it on. This has rendered it useless for transferring of beer as these clamps are not easily sanitized, and won't fit through the neck of a carboy. It has been relegated to my 'neat, but not very useful' shelf of toys. o The tube in which the starter lives is flexible and tends to collapse under the weight of the racking cane if allowed to set on the bottom of the container. This has only stopped siphon once (in a warmish liquid) but it has allowed more trub from the primary into the secondary as the dome cap is now laying on its side rather than on its point. This, of course, can only occur when the starter has not fallen off of the cane. I still use it as is to transfer iodophur solution between the bottling bucket and carboys, but that's about all the use I can find for it since it falls apart so easily. I don't have many qualms about putting my arm in a bucket of sanitizer to retrieve the thing (it's clamped in this case, anyway!), but I sure as hell won't waste a batch of beer to the same! I may heat the ends of the racking cane slightly and mushroom them to provide a better interference fit. This would prevent it from falling off and make it useful for siphoning beer again. Since the perception of what a 'standard' racking tubes is varies, Dan would be better off selling it _with_ the required cane. Your assumption that they are all the same may well be the Psyphon Starter's undoing. Sorry, Dan! Loved the sparge arm, CF chiller fittings are great, your mill is cool, and I like your Phalse Bottom; but... My opinion, again, is that the Psyphon Starter is a neat toy. If you buy one, be sure it fits your cane snuggly. Otherwise, it'll prove as useless to you as it has to me. See ya! Pat Babcock in Canton, Michigan (Western Suburb of Detroit) pbabcock at oeonline.com URL: http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/ President, Brew-Master and Chief Taste-Tester Drinkur Purdee pico Brewery Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 08:55:09 -0800 From: "Mark A. Melton" <melton at aurora.nscee.edu> Subject: Split decoction mashing I have used an Igloo(tm) cooler with a copper manifold and vinyl tube for a drain for decoction mashing. When I make a 7-7.5 gal batch I use 9-10 lbs of grain and 3 gal or so of mash liquor. Two decoctions are about the limit as when I remove 1-1.5 gal and bring to a boil, the enzymes are rapidly denatured. Even if I add more amylase enzyme to the last rest (at or around 158 dF) my conversion rate is poor and the last time I did this I got an E.R. of 17 --not good! So-o-o, it occurred to me to split the grain into 3 equal portions and add each after the rest was completed for the previous portion. In other words, I first added 3 lbs of grain and 1 gal. of water at about 146 dF, and the resulting temperature was 136 dF. I allowed this to rest for 30 min. then added the second 3-lb portion. This began mashing at around 124 dF while I heated another gal. of water to 158 dF. When this was added in and mixed the resulting temp. was 132 dF which was too low; I drained out 1 gal and raised it to 161 dF and added it back in which brought the mash up to 136 dF. I repeated the last step and finally got the temperatue up to 142 dF where it rested 30 minutes. For the (almost) final step I added the last 3 lb portion of grain which rested at 131 dF while I heated the last gal. of water to 186 dF (about 10 minutes) and when this was added in the resultant temperature was 146 dF, which was too low. Finally I drained out a gallon of mash liquor and heated it 191 dF and returned it to the mash tun which brought up the temperature to 157-58 dF. I added 1 tsp. of amylase and let this rest for 90 minutes. I also added 1 qt. of hot reverse osmosis water to thin the mash down a little in case I had to drain out another gallon. Anyway, the conversion was pretty good after the last rest and a starch test was decidedly negative. When I began sparging the initial runnings had a sp. gr. of 1.081 which over the 3.25 gal. of mash liquor used would give an e.r. of nearly 30. I am happy with that for now. Question is, has anyone tried this before (split decoction mashing) and if so, do you have any comments, hints, warnings? even verbal abuse if it is positive would be welcome. (Please cc to me at above address as I am temporarily not subscribing to HBD due to local access problems). Mark A. Melton melton at aurora.nscee.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 02 Dec 95 17:40:47 0800 From: Mark Tuttle <tuttle at bendnet.com> Subject: (no subject) if this is a listserver for homebrew receipes, please add my name to the list. Return to table of contents
Date: 02 Dec 95 12:53:50 EST From: "Sharon A. Ritter" <102446.3717 at compuserve.com> Subject: infusion mashing I recently changed my all-grain procedure from mashing on the stove-top to using a 10 gal. Gott cooler with a Phil's Phalse Bottom. My first batch using the Gott resulted in a set mash. I believe the cause was too much water in the Gott compacting the grain bed. I was attempting a step mash for a 5 gallon batch - 10 lbs. of grain - with a rest at 120 degrees, mash at 153, and mash-out at 170. Infusing the requisite amount of water to reach these temps resulted in a final water to grist ratio of over 2 quarts per pound. That's alot more water per pound of grist than I used during my pre-Gott days! For those that want to check my math, the water infusions looked like this: (ambient temp. 55 degrees) To reach 120 degrees, I added 1.75 gal. water at 143 degrees to the Gott and added grains; To reach 153, I added 1.5 gal. boiling water (203 degrees); To reach 170 degrees, I added 2 gal. boiling water (203 degrees). My questions for fellow Gott-geeks are these: Do you typically end up with about 2 quarts water per pound of grist (after mash-out)? At what ratio of water to grist does one want to start worrying about the resulting water pressure on the grain bed? Was my set mash due to some other variable (full moon?) and should I relax and infuse as planned? Since my set-mash experience (first one ever!), I've been skipping the 120 degree rest which keeps the water to grist ratio in the 1:7 range. Dan Ritter in Grangeville, Idaho 102446.3717 at compuserve.com Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 95 12:58:10 EST From: scox at factset.com (Sean Cox) Subject: Re: wild yeasts/cloviness(?) of wheat beers >From: "Tracy Aquilla" <aquilla at salus.med.uvm.edu> > >Many wild yeasts are able to ferment relatively complex carbohydrates (eg. >dextrins) which brewers yeasts can't. That's why wild yeast infections can >produce gushers and glass grenades. Spontaneously fermented cider is >generally very dry, just like most other ciders, unless a relatively large >amount of sugar is added or the fermentation gets stuck. Last night I racked >a 5 gallon batch of "Real" Vermont Apple Cider to the secondary. It started >at 1.058 and went down to 1.002 in less than a month. It tastes quite like >brut champagne. It's fruity and tart. Excellent stuff, if you go for that >sort of thing. I've used wild yeast from honey to make an excellent mead (it's now fermenting a pale ale in my kitchen as well). The mead came out extremely dry and complex in about 6 weeks (instead of my usual several months with "domesticated" yeasts) and got rave reviews from the guys in the Homebrew Club (Club 33 in Norwalk, CT). I hope I'm attributing this right, I misfired the editing of this section :-( >From: Russell Mast <rmast at fnbc.com> >On a similar topic, am I the only one that thinks that the phenolic flavors >in high-phenol wheat beers tastes almost nothing like cloves do? I mean, I >see the comparison, and I can't think of a better name, but it's nowhere near >as similar to cloves as isoamyl ester is to banana. Maybe I'm extra-sensitive >to another flavor in cloves, or less sensitive to any number of things. I've always found wheat beers to taste more like nutmeg/allspice than cloves, although my wife tends to sense cloves more than nutmeg. Especially since I like the smell/taste of nutmeg better than cloves anyhow, I don't mind too much. :) Although I guess if I were judging beers and remarked "Not nutmeggy(?) enough" I could confuse the brewer a bit. :) --Sean === Sean Cox, Systems Engineer ==================== FactSet Data Systems === === scox at factset.com ==================== Greenwich, CT === Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 02 Dec 95 14:40:37 -0500 From: mmoss at PO-Box.McGill.CA Subject: .z files/keg conv./dishwasher/partial mash Many thanks to all who responded to my original request re ".z" extension and converting kegs to kettles. Initially I thought I would thank the few responses that I got on the first day individually by private mail but so many responded that I that I would post publically. This is obviously a very active and knowledgeable group. Some private mail asked me to forward any info I got on decompressing ".z" and I forwarded what I received from the kind responders who included a program along with their mail. Two programs were sent to me; "uncompress" and "GZIP". It was also suggested (which I knew) that I could request the file without the .Z extension. However as I use a graphic aim and click (Spry) mail program I didn't know how to do that. Another program that I found out through the mail that I received is WINZIP if you use Windows (Windoze as some suggested). This was the first time that I saw that play on Windows and now it seems to take even longer than it did before the few who wrote to me using Windoze. Thanks a lot. GZIP (dos) and WINZIP (Windows) are available from SIMTEL archives at oak.oakland.edu by anonymous ftp (thank you Jim Overstreet). An another subject. Does anybody have experience using the dishwasher (as suggested by Dave Miller) to sterilize bottles? Do you use the full cycle or just the heat cycle? If full cycle do you use detergent as if you were washing dishes? Also, I would like to do a partial mash (yes, I admit it, I"m an extract brewer). Miller says that you must boil the entire wort. Papazian seems to suggest that you add a concentrated boil to cold water that is already in the carboy. As I don't yet have a 5 gallon boiler I hope Papazian's instructions (at least the way I've read them) works. Again thanks to all. I'm a recent subscriber to this group and fully enjoy reading HBD. Also nice to get mail on the weekends. Mike Moss Montreal Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 18:03:58 -0500 From: MrMike656 at aol.com Subject: Cider priming Greetings to the collective: After years of brewing beer, I'm taking a shot at cider. I have three gallons waiting to be racked to the secondary for clearing. My spouse has expressed a desire for a small amount of carbonation (I was going to go for a non-carbonated version this time out). My question: Do the same rules and quantities for priming for beer apply to cider (ie, 3/4 cup corn sugar per 5 gal.)? My cider specifics - OG 1.050, used champagne yeast. E-mail or post replies! TIA! Mike Maimone mrmike656 at aol.com "Son - it's in the water - that's why it's yellow!" Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 1995 09:18:08 +1000 From: merino at cynergy.com.au (Merino Lithographics) Subject: STEAM Injection (Part 1) Rob Wallace proposes a hot air heater for his mash and refers to some steam posts I missed. I'll post an analysis of his hot air circulation next after the steam queries. First, I'm a steam injection geek, I even boil (yes it can be done) with the stuff and I've ordered an electronically controlled "parabolic plug valve" to PID control it. Steam has its problems, it can be dangerous and needs to be understood very well. Steam is a great carrier of heat and because it is at 100C to 200C in non contained systems, it can heat quickly without scorching. When superheated, it penetrates the fluid well beyond the boundary layer, and when a central manifold is used, it gives great convection and gelatinisation. (You still need to stir a grain mash for even temp, not to prevent scorching) It isolates the very high temperatures of the burners from your wort, while injecting heat without the usual boundary layer problems. BASICS. 1 litre of water raised to 100C contains 419 kilo Joules of energy (sensible heat)and weighs 1 kg. Specific heat of water = 4.19 kJ/1C/litre, specific heat of steam = 2.16 kJ/1C/kg. 1 kg of steam at 1 atmosphere and 100C contains 419kJ (sensible) + 2257 kJ of heat of vapourisation (latent heat) and occupies 1,673 litres! So, it gives off lots of heat when it condenses and expands *very* rapidly when vaporised. eg 100 litres of water at 40C, to be raised to 60C quickly,(G.Fix's mash) needs (20C x 4.19 x 100) 8,380 kJ of energy. This means 3.4 kg of steam, or 3.4 litres of water vaporised and injected into the 100 litres.(makes 103.4 litres) If you needed to do it in 15 minutes, the steam generator would need to absorb (8,380kJ/900secs) 9.3 kiloWatts (32,000 BTU/hr) At a home setup efficiency of about 40%, you would need a 24 kW (82,000 BTU/hr) burner. I use a 22 litre pressure cooker as my primary steam boiler and a 40 kW burner for 85 litres. Now there is WET steam and DRY steam, and SATURATED steam and SUPERHEATED steam. Wet and dry is easy, dry is 100% water *vapour*,a colourless gas, wet steam contains water droplets. (the stuff clouds are made of) Saturated steam is steam at the boiling point of water at that pressure. i.e. If the temp drops a tiny bit or the pressure goes up a tiny bit, it condenses. Saturated steam is just steam, it is at the point of condensation. All boiling chambers usually produce steam that is 98% saturated vapour and 2% water droplets, i.e. it is "wet" and "saturated". This is important to remember. The % dry is called the steam "quality". Superheated steam is steam above the temperature of saturated steam for a given pressure. The STEAM TABLES will give the temperature of saturated steam for any given pressure, or vica versa. Thus 1 kilogram of superheated steam at 1 atmosphere and 150C has total heat = 419kJ (sensible) + 2257kJ (latent) + 105kJ (superheat)= "specific enthalpy" of the steam. eg of Steam Tables Pressure Temp Sensible Latent Enthalpy Volume Atmos oC kJ/Kg kJ/Kg kJ/Kg m3/kg 1 100 419.04 2257 2676 1.673 2 120.42 505.6 2201.1 2706.7 0.881 3 133.69 562.2 2163.3 2725.5 0.623 4 143.7 605.3 2133.4 2738.7 0.461 When we produce steam in a domestic pressure cooker (with the weighted safety relief valve operating normally please, don't touch it!) it is wet and saturated. Our mash tun and the piping's resistence to flow provide some back pressure, but essentially it is not a contained PRESSURE system and generally doesn't fall under the STEAM REGULATIONS. (These are very heavy, rightly so) However our system does cool the steam in the piping and manifold, so some condenses. This can lead to a dangerous condition called "water hammer" where condensation collects and blocks the fast flow of steam and builds up dangerous back pressure, causing further condensation. This can easly rupture equipment if you have tampered with your safety relief valve. Remember 3 kg of steam in 15 minutes is 4,800 litres of steam, that is 5 litres/second, don't stand in the way! However superheated steam is well above condensation temperature for the low pessure of an open, uncontained system and ensures that high quality dry steam reaches your mash or kettle. Heat losses to piping are absorbed by the superheat. eg To "rolling boil" 100 litres of wort for 1.5 hours. In a normal vigorous boil you would expect to loose 15% of volume. Gee, this is exactly how much steam you need to generate to supply the necessary heat. Boil 15 litres of water to 15 kg of steam and inject. Because it condenses and then heats the water to boil the same ammount, in a perfect system there is no loss of volume. But because there are other heat losses, saturated 100C steam can't effectivly boil water at 100C. However 150C superheated steam would boil it and add a further 1620 kJ of energy, boiling off 2/3 a litre of wort in a perfectly insulated system. Conclusion, you can boil without scorching and get a good rolling boil with steam injection, but you can't reduce volume much. Result, smoother paler beers and a need to sparge to exact volume. How to build this infernal steam generator is in Steam Injection (part two.) Charlie (Brisbane, Australia) Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 1995 09:18:37 +1000 From: merino at cynergy.com.au (Merino Lithographics) Subject: STEAM Injection (part 2) This part 2, the FAQ of superheated steam generation. The Home Steam Generator I strongly recommend a pressure cooker as the base chamber, even though this is not a pressure system. If you do something silly, you are left heating a standards approved pressure vessel, with a working safety relief valve. The SS tubing will take pressures way beyond your capacity to generate. Your plumbing skills will suffer some loss of face, not much else! How to superheat it? First make a little pentagon out of firebricks to support your pressure cooker and contain your burner, leaving ample vents at the bottom. Instal a SS outlet in the side of the vessel and lead a SS tube (no copper, preferably hard SS) under the vessel and make a flat spiral of it across the bottom, exiting down at the center. This is a bit like a hypnotic spiral or lolipop. The idea is to lead the steam back through the flame and superheat it and exit down through the flame to your tun manifold inlet. The wort/mash level should be below the spiral. The temperature of the flame is typically 1200C so superheating the steam is not very difficult.( The high temperature of the flame is why we are remote heating in the first place) Monitor the exit temperature and reduce windings if too hot. Remember steam behaves like a gas and expands when superheated, you cannot put a valve on this system without becoming a pressure boiler. How do I control it? Remember I said the system has a little back pressure from the tun fliud depth and the resistance to rapid flow of steam? Use this. Install another outlet on your cooker and put a valve and a larger pipe exiting into a open drum with water in the bottom, this is a heat sink.(outlet NOT under water) This valve releases the back pressure and lets your saturated steam out before the superheater, thus providing a path of less resistance away from your wort/mash. This is not a contained system because the other outlet is still unvalved, thus open. Of course the gas controls give further adjustment, but not as quick a response. Remember to becareful about constriction of steam flow. If the back pressure is too high and you open the control valve suddenly, you drop the pressure in the vessel instantly, superheating the steam inside. This superheat will vaporise more steam, causing some tendency to boilover out your control valve. Start at 1/2 inch basic, and scale up with bigger volumes. What sort of manifold? Your sparge manifold would do, or a spiral at the centre of your kettle. Lots of holes equal to 150% of the cross sectional area of your supply line. This can be copper as it is not direct heated and never dry. What about scale and "crud"? Commercial boilers produce this because they *continously* inject water and increase the concentration of minerals by evaporation. They try to control it by "blowing down" some of the concentrated water before adding more fresh. As you *batch* boil, you can flush the system in between uses. If your water is too hard it will foam and cause "priming", basicllly water in your steam lines. You will still normally produce some slight "carry over" as you are producing initially 98% steam, 2% water droplets. However this can be negligible if you use softened or distilled water. Scale is basically a back to nature movement. Water contains minerals dissolved from rocks in its catchment area. When you boil the water off and add heat, you essentially metamorphise....rocks! Scale encrustations can be removed by freezing the metal to break the bond or chemically. An important startup step, boil your water with the relief valve open for a few minutes to expell O2 (and Cl). This will otherwise corrode your system and HSA your wort. How big a pressure cooker do I need? If boiling, to boil 100 litres for 90 minutes needs about 15% wort volume in kg's steam. A pressure cooker of 20% of wort volume would do even this demanding job. For mashing only, an even smaller one would do. How big a burner? The example in the first part gives you a tool for calculating your scale. Remember the hottest part of the flame is the tip of it. What if my plumbing leaks? Don't look for leaks with anything but a rolled up newspaper.(this is the professional method since Stevenson) If they are high pressure they will shred the headlines and not your hand! If they are low pressure they will condense and cook the paper and not your hand! The connections in this system should be all threaded gas fittings or metal compression seals. No household type plastic ones of threadseal(unless teflon). What are the effects of steam? Many of the harsher flavours of beer come from overheating of the boundary layer between a hot metal wall and your wort. Steam injection doesn't have a heating boundary at all. This problem could be in your RIMS unit, mash tun or kettle. Such flavours and colouring are often desirable, some people throw white hot rocks in their wort to get these reactions! However, these Maillard (browning) and Caramel reactions not easy to control at this interface (scorching) and I think are best controlled is seperate decoctions. Steam injected into another pressure cooker of decoction is my preferred method. A RIMS unit of a steam injection manifold inside the recirculating pipe is an idea of mine. If the pump was below the injection point (to avoid cavitation), the pump speed would be irrelevant to scorching, allowing very light recirculation. Just a recirculating pump with a normal mash injection manifold would give exactly the same result. If steam is injected into a unstirred settled mash from beneath the grain bed, it temporarily heats the bed to 80c -> 90C before dissapating into the thinner parts. This gelatinises the starch globules well without a decoction of the colour increase of a decoction. Rapid and complete conversion is enhanced. In conclusion, steam is powerful and precise, a gentle heating method but dangerous without proper understanding. I urge you to get a competent engineer to check your constructions if you harness it's power. Charlie (Brisbane, Australia) Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 02 Dec 1995 16:53:19 +0800 From: Bob Jones <bjones at bdt.com> Subject: 1996 Bay Area Brewoff Hello fellow homebrewers... It's that time of year again. Time for the 1996 Bay Area Brewoff held at Lyon's Brewery Depot in Dublin California. The competition is on Jan. 20, 1996. This is the 10th annual running of this competition. For more information, please send me an email and I will forward you more competition details. Thanks, Bob Jones in Alamo, Calif. bjones at bdt.com http://www.bdt.com:80/home/bjones/ Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 19:10:52 -0600 From: Alejandro Midence <alex at conline.com> Subject: partial decoction mash: Is it possible? Hi ya, folks, how's it going? Good? I'm glad. Well, here's a litle something that's been rolling around in my mind for a bit. I just got finished reading the AHA Style Series book on bock. In it, I noticed that some of the recipes were partial mash. In fact, none were truly what you could call *extract* beers since a bit of munich malt is necessary to give it that malty flavor and aroma any good Bock drinker knows and loves. Well, I got to thinking. If a decoction mash gives a maltier flavor due to production of melanoidens (hope I spelled it right), then, what's to say that you can't use a similar process in a partial mash. Here's what one of the *extract* recipes from the book looks like, ok? I'll give you the process I intend using and you tell me, promising only to laugh a little, mind you, if what I've outlined is brilliant, possible, or whether I've gone stark-staring bonkers. :-) Ok, here goes: 6.6 lbs pale malt extract syrup (3 kg) 0.5 lb light dry malt extract (0.23 kg) 1 lb pale lager malt (0.45 kg) 1.5 lb munich malt (0.7 kg) 1 lb light crystal malt 0.45 kg 1 lb dark crystal malt 0.45 kg 13.75 aaus noble hops bittering 3 aaus noble hops flavor 3 aaus noble hops aroma 3/4 c dextros priming wyeast bavarian lager yeast og: 1.064 fg: 1.016-1.020 Get the malt with the enzymes, (the pale lager and munich), and take it through a regular step infusion mash. Protein rest at 122 degrees, raising temperature to about 150 and then to 158, and finally to 170 to mash out. Now, here's the twist, after mashout temperature has been reached, raise temperature of mash to a boil and add it to the crystal malts which have been steeping in water at about 150 all this time. This should rais the whole thing to about 165 degrees. Then, pour some water at an equivalent temperature through the grains in the grain bag thereby conducting some sort of a sparge. Now, remove grains, bring water to boil and add extracts and hops and brew as normal as any other extract brew. Have I gone mad or is there *some* feasibility in what I've just written. Perhaps I'd just better do it as a regular step infusion partial mash after all? Just wondering. Alex ps The recipe makes five gallons of a dunkel bock. Took it straight from the book. <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> If I were to tell you that everything I say is a lie, and then if I were to turn around and say that what I just told you is the truth, would you believe me? <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> Return to table of contents
Date: 03 Dec 95 11:27:40 EST From: "Richard J. Smith" <72154.516 at compuserve.com> Subject: Wyeast 1056 Greetings HBDers, Back in October I started a thread on wyeast 1056 concerning the possibility of a bad lot in September (at least I think it was I, although once these threads come alive it's hard to remember). I won't rehash the conclusions reached by the collective or try to summarize any of the side-threads concerning business integrity that grew from one homebrewers dissatisfaction with having to dump 10 gallons of beer. However, after I thought this was all history, last week the express mail man delivered 6 packages of wyeast 1056 to my door courtesy of the folks at Wyeast Laboratories (thanks David Logsdon). I had written them about my problem not expecting such a response. I want to make it public and for the record on the HBD. For those few who regard this as a greedy capitalist scheme to buy out a disaffected member of the masses, consider me bought out. I like the positive way this company resolved the issue with me, and yes, I will be a wyeast consumer in the future. (I never stopped, really; I was just avoiding the 1056 strain for a while). Now, 6 paks of wyeast, hmmm.... how many beers would that be...? Hey, gotta go formulate some recipes. By for now. Jack from West Point Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 1995 10:35:45 -0500 From: troat at one.net (Todd W. Roat) Subject: Bubbles o0Oo0Oo Took a sample of my ale from my primary (OG 1.052) and the gravity was 1.014 after 8 days. Not bad. However, in the sampling flask the beer was releasing a high degree of CO2 bubbles out of solution: it looked carbonated - minor agitation resulted in a head; millions of tiny bubbles racing for freedom! QUESTION: If the beer has that much CO2 in solution at 1.014 in primary, does that mean its still fermenting? In addition, atypical of any other batch of ale Ive brewed, there is still alot of yeast clumps (looks like brains) still afloat on top of beer after 8 days. Is this also a sign that she's still fermenting? Coincidently, the last couple of batches I bottled (both higher OG beers than this one) demonstrated this same high CO2 in solution coming out of secondary going into the bottles. Input by email or digest much appreciated. Forever curious, Todd in Cincinnati ____________________________________ | | | "Too much of everything is just enough!" | | ____________________________________| Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 1995 13:06:58 -0500 From: YOUNGBRUCE at aol.com Subject: Propane Indoors Using propane indoors is not dangerous. People without access to natural gas use it all the time without risk. Bringing a freshly filled propane tank IS dangerous. Propane tanks have a relief valve on them so when the fluid expands in a completely full tank, the exces is vented and the tank does not explode. I have personally seen a tank vent for about a half hour after I brought it back from the refill station (it was outdoors). It was a slow leak, but I could smell it 6 feet from the gas grill. There is not much chance of a partially filled tank venting, only if if is completely filled. If you bring your tank indoors, use it right away, and get it back outdoors right after you're done, just to be on the safe side. Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 00:51:18 -0800 (PST) From: Leif Rustvold <leif at agora.rdrop.com> Subject: mead question Hello homebrewers - I've been subscribed to the homebrew digest for about a year now, but this is my first post. I'm on my sixth batch, and have been going by Papazian's NCJHB. I'm posting in regards to the batch I started last night, my first mead. I took the OG today before I pitched, and it was significantly lower than I had expected. Rather than 1.120 - 1.130 as the recipe stated it would be, it turned up around 1.086. I was wondering if this could be attributed to settlement by the honey overnight, as I took the reading from near the top, or if I had done something else to give me a mead less concentrate than I had intended. Leif Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 1995 15:04:53 -0500 From: KennyEddy at aol.com Subject: Hot Air Gun Heat Source Tho'ts In HBD #1899 Rob Wallace writes: > I WOULD LIKE TO ASK any of you > who are "thermodynamically competent" to tell me if this concept is so far > away from working (practically speaking) given the heat exchange > characteristics of the media involved, or any other considerations I'm missing. I'm not necessarily "t'dynamically competent" but I had a couple of thoughts (not necessarily concerns): 1) Copper actually IS a pretty good heat conductor, so you would get at least the benefit of minimal thermal resistance between the air & the mash. Whether the heat capacity ratio would support adequate heat input to the mash, I will leave to those more well-versed. 2) Would the temperature gradient from "inlet" to "exhaust" cause problems with "hot spots"? Continuous stirring might be necessary. 3) Perhaps you could *partially* fill the coil with water, and "bubble" the hot air through it. Depends on the force of the air from the gun. Ken Schwartz Return to table of contents
Date: 03 Dec 95 15:16:35 EST From: "Gregg A. Howard" <102012.3350 at compuserve.com> Subject: re: Gas Burners Thanks to all who responded to my question on NG water heater burners. A brief digest of opinions: Most salvaged burners seem to work just fine, even at lower flame levels. NG is cheaper than propane and you don't have to worry about running out in the middle of a session. Plumbing contractors usually have dumpsters full of old water heaters. Ask nice and they'll probably let you have one. Or ten. Don't flex a "flexible" gas line. They were designed to flex a little for installation, but can leak if subjected to more movement. Lines that are designed for more rigorous flexing are available from outdoor grill dealers. Use a ball valve to throttle the gas; ball valves work fast and you can physically see by the direction of the handle if it's open or closed. CO production is not a big issue as long as the flame is blue thoughout. Yellow flame &/or soot = incomplete combustion = unacceptable CO production. In any case, CO detectors are a good idea and are reveiwed in July '95 Consumer Reports. A bigger issue is CO2 production and O2 depletion; some ventilation is a must. Possible leaks are an issue that MUST be addressed. Check your connections regularly with soapy water or your kid's bubble-blowing solution. This is not optional; if you don't do it you run the risk of scattering yourself and your house all over the neighborhood. Not to mention the possibilty of losing a batch of beer. And in response to Ronald J. La Bord's <<The flash I had was to use the heating apparatus from a gas clothes dryer!!!!>>: From repairing my ancient Maytag, I believe the big flame requires the draft provided by the blower and the burner wouldn't function well on its own. Thanks again, Gregg Gregg A. Howard Denver, Co. 102012.3350 at compuserve.com Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 95 15:28 EST From: cdp at chattanooga.net (C.D. Pritchard) Subject: Stopper stuck in carboy Someone posted: >does anyone know how to remove the $0.79 stopper without >breaking the $20.00 carboy?...Is My Carboy Ruined ? (IMCR?) It's total ruined, send it to me for recycling! I had the same thing happen when I stoppered a carboy of hot water (duh!). I used the same technique implemented in the best wine uncorker. It's two parallel and slightly outward curved pieces of springy steel ("legs") set about the diameter of a wine cork apart. Cobble together something similiar but larger. Steel isn't needed- I used some 1/32" x 1/4" brass stock (a good hobby store will have some) bent into kinda a U shape with a piece of wood wired between at the legs at the base of the U: - -->\ /<--- major diameter of cork + a bit | | | | -->| |<--- ID of carboy neck +---+ |///|<--- wood wired to brass +---+ NOTE! The outward bend of legs is NOT accurately depicted- the bend should be more gradual. To use: Start with a dry carboy and stopper. Invert the carboy, and play about with with stopper 'til it's oriented with it's minor diameter downward and in the neck of the carboy. Insert the "unstopper" gently around the stopper then lube the inside of the carboy neck- liquid soap is good but spit is awful handy 8->. Pull the stopper out with a twisting motion. Don't lube the stopper before you've grabbed pretty good with the legs or the legs may slip from the stopper. OTHO, >I have considered just sanitizing the carboy, stopper and all, >and using it for my secondary... That'd be a lot easier than my method but, the stopper lying at the bottom of the carboy would, to me anyway, be a constant reminder of 1)my stupidity and 2)the inadvisability of stoppering hot fluids! C.D. Pritchard cdp at chattanooga.net Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 95 15:28 EST From: cdp at chattanooga.net (C.D. Pritchard) Subject: Beer and lawsuits WALZENBREW at aol.com posted: >Wow! Love to start (or continue) a spirited discussion! Especially if it's >about something I feel strongly about - like Sam Adams and making >quality beer ubiquitous. Me 2, but, supporting homebreweries and microbrewries are best ways to make quality beer more ubiquitous. Ads not withstanding, BBC's reason for brewing is $$$. Decent brew just happens to be in the business plan (and rightly so). BBC ain't into brewing for the love of the art or enjoyment as are most home and more than a few microbrewers. >Most definitely he should sue... Terms like "Boston" and "Sam" (most >of us call Sam Adams simply as "Sam") are the means that the public >uses to identify Boston Beer Company's products... they have every >right in the world to take all legal measures possible to... Come on Greg, fess up, you're a lawyer aren't ya? Perhaps one of the many who get rich from suits like these? Just kiddin; however, kidding aside, the repeated suits against the Boston brewpubs and threaten (?) suit against the Texas one are, at best, frivilious. IMHO, only someone that's partaken of way too much brew or is otherwise brain dramaged would confuse a Sam Houston Austin whatever with a Samuel Adams whatever. I don't buy BBC's brews just because of their suit-happiness. What's next, a suit against Heinz over their "Boston" Baked Beans? Probably not, they're too big for BBC to pick on... C.D. Pritchard cdp at chattanooga.net Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 1995 14:18:20 -0600 From: Alejandro Midence <alex at conline.com> Subject: a newsgroup for winemakers I don't recall in which hbd issue it was, but about a week ago, a gentleman asked about a forum for winemakers. I don't know of a mailing list like the hbd but there *is* a newsgroup similar to rec.crafts.brewing. It is, strangely enough, called rec.crafts.winemaking. Check it out. I asked the collective of this newsgroup after the existence of a forum like the hbd and should be getting responses soon. I'l post them here, of course for the edification of the hbd collective. Y'all take care now Alex <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> If I were to tell you that everything I say is a lie, and then if I were to turn around and say that what I just told you is the truth, would you believe me? <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> Return to table of contents
Date: 03 Dec 95 17:15:01 EST From: "Mark E. Hogenmiller" <71203.135 at compuserve.com> Subject: Wyeast 1214 And YeastLab A08 In HB 1899 Steve Comella writes: >> Also I used the Wyeast >>Belgian Abbey Ale yeast and boy what a strong Clove smell and banana >>taste. Is this common with this strain. I will admit my fermentation >>temperatures are around 78 degrees. Is this contributing to the strong >>aroma and taste. Private E-Mail or Post is fine. >Prior to brewing this type of beer for the first time, I had the same >questions. After reading almost everything relating to this yeast, >and calling Wyeast for additional info, I found that the smell and taste > is hit or miss (see HBD 10/20/92 post by A. Korzonis (?)). >My own experience is that even fermenting at 57 F, there is still *some* >banana, but I like this when it's subtle. >Wyeast suggests a fermentation temp. of 58F to 68F, but you might >do best to keep it under 60F for your next batch if you find the smell >and taste objectionable. Recently I brewed a Belgian Style Ale based on CP's Belgian Tickle (Honey Ale) with Yeastlab A08 "Trappist Ale" and experienced similiar results. The fermentation temperature was around 68F. It is has been bottle conditioned only about two weeks and has a strong Clovelike flavor. 1. Has anyone else encountered a similiar condition of clovelike flavor with Yeastlab A08? 2. With prolonged bottle conditioning will this flavor mellow out? TIA, Mark 71203.135 at compuserve.com "There is only one ultimate truth in Homebrewing, there are no ultimate truths in Homebrewing" Return to table of contents
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1901, 12/05/95