---

   FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
        Shawn Steele, Digest Janitor
        Thanks to Rob Gardner for making the digest happen!

Contents:
  Pressure Reduction on Keg Lines ("Kieran O'Connor")
  kosher brewing (f.harding at genie.com)
  Re: RIMS Pump Power (hollen at vigra.com)
  aeration of stuck wort (Kathy Booth)
  Weight of honey (skotrat)
  Caustic Soda Temps (Rob Moline)
  Yeast Culturing ("Michael T. Bell")
  Lye,Methanol, Brownian Motion and RIMS ("David R. Burley")
  A Belgian beer laugh (PivoPrince at aol.com)
  RIMS definition (DONBREW at aol.com)
  RIMS Definition (Kirk R Fleming)

NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESSES
  homebrew at aob.org                (SUBMISSIONS only)
  homebrew-digest-request@ aob.org (for REQUESTS only)

Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew at aob.org
  (Articles are published in the order they are received.)
Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc.,
  to homebrew-digest-request@ aob.org, BUT PLEASE NOTE that if
  you subscribed via BEER-L NET, you must unsubscribe by sending a
  one line e-mail to listserv at ua1vm.ua.edu that says: UNSUB BEER-L
This list service is now being provided by majordomo at aob.org, so some
  of the commands may have changed.  For technical problems send
  e-mail to the Digest Janitor, shawn at aob.org.
If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first.

ARCHIVES & OTHER INFORMATION

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 or visit
http://alpha.rollanet.org on the Web.  Othere information is available by
e-mail from info at aob.org and on the AHA's web site at http://www.aob.org/aob.
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 at /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.  Some
  archives are available via majordomo at aob.org.


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

From: "Kieran O'Connor" <koconnor at syr.edu>
Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 08:17:08 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Pressure Reduction on Keg Lines

For an informative article on dropping the pressure of the keg from xx
pounds to dispensing pressure, check out the AHA's COnference
Proceedings, "Brew Free or Die." Not sure of the year. Dave Miller has an
article on exactly how much a foot of hose reduces the pressure. it is,
in fact, 2-3 lbs per foot, depending on the ID of the hose.

Kieran

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Kieran O'Connor

koconnor at syr.edu
Syracuse, N.Y. USA

                  In vino veritas; in cervesio felicitas.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



Return to table of contents


From: f.harding at genie.com
Date: Sun,  2 Jun 96 12:53:00 UTC 0000
Subject: kosher brewing

I deleted the original post but recall questions on kosher ingredients and
rabinical supervision required to make a true kosher batch of homebrew.

A couple of points:

1.  Since malting and extract preparation involve a degree of "cooking"  I
would guess that that you should try to find materails made from a plant
that has been kosher certified.  Look for "K" or a U with a circle around it
on the label.  I do not know if one exists.  Chances are that malt and
extract are coincidently prepared "kosher" but how to really be sure?

2. Kosher certification is expensive.  Where I work, we hire a company to
consult with and provide certification  ( the circle U one).  They have a
fermentation specialist and the issues are quite complext.  However if you
were not brewing for profit a local rabbi, trained in certification,  might
come by your house and help you out for free.

3. I am not sure what the carrier is for dry yeast (gelitin?) so would use
liquid.

4. Pre boil all pots and pans and utensils spoons in contact with the beer
or wort.  This is standard practice in kosherizing equipment.

5. Use whole flower hops to get around any processing issues that might
arise with pellets (like trace additives).

6.  Most corn sugar is kosher (or at least our rabbi is not too concerned
about which supplier we buy from).  Same with sucrose.

7. To be safe, I would not uses clarifing aids.   Especially the one that
originates from fish gills.   I think some fish are kosher and some are not.

8. Any beer will not be "kosher for passover" because of the barley and/or
wheat.  I'm sure your friend will know this.

Well, good luck.  I hope this helps.

Flint
 Florence SC

Return to table of contents


From: hollen at vigra.com
Date: Sun, 2 Jun 96 07:25:37 PDT
Subject: Re: RIMS Pump Power

>>>>> "Kirk" == Kirk R Fleming <flemingk at usa.net> writes:

Kirk> In #2053 Dion said:
>> With anything other than a 70% open area false bottom, even
>> 1/20hp is severely underpowered.

Kirk> First, I respect Dion very much, and since he has on several occassions
Kirk> helped me with my stupid questions, I owe him a great deal.  But, (and
Kirk> you knew this was coming), the assertion regarding pump power doesn't
Kirk> make sense nor does it agree even remotely with my experience.  Again,
Kirk> I ASSUME BECAUSE DION SAID IT THAT IT AGREES PERFECTLY WITH HIS!

Kirk> First, with anywhere from 12-25 lbs of grain sitting on a 6% open false
Kirk> bottom, the wort drains out *under gravity alone* at a rate greater than
Kirk> I would want to pump it with my system.

Given that I know I am not lying and having corresponded a *lot* with
Kirk, I respect him and know he is not lying, then I think the best
thing is for him and I to take this offline, see what the differences
are and try to come to some explanation of why we are seeing such
different behaviors.  When we have a theory we can bring it back on
line for general discussion.  Hopefully, there will also be some
experimental data to back it up.  I think these two very different
experiences can help me solve the problem I have been having with slow
flow rates.

dion

- -- 
Dion Hollenbeck (619)597-7080x164                 Email: hollen at vigra.com
Sr. Software Engineer - Vigra Div. of Visicom Labs  San Diego, California

Return to table of contents


From: Kathy Booth <kbooth at isd.ingham.k12.mi.us>
Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 11:29:07 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: aeration of stuck wort

I posted recently asking about aerating a stuck wort.

Domenick Venezia responded that aeration  was advisable but several others 
recommended against oxygen introduction. Domenick advised me to split my 
stuck worts and aerate one and not the other as an experiment.  At that 
point I'd added a 3# dme in 3g water with a new yeast with aeration, and 
when at krausen added to the stuck wort with aeration  and the
 fermentation completed at 1.012. 

Has anyone ever experimented with splitting a stuck wort, aerating one 
part and not aerating the other?  Did the stuck wort ferment with aeration?
Did the aerated beer suffer from oxyidation?  My bottled pale ale was a 
hit at a friend's retirement party, but the wages of oxyidation may pay 
with shelf life.  I'll get the opinion of the homebrew club in a couple 
of weeks.

I realize there are many causes of stuck fermentations with inadequate 
aeration as the most frequent cause. Extract brews may lack FAN and need 
nutients, Ambient temps may be too low, and yeasties may be weak as I 
remember that the most obvious measure of a "drifted yeast" was lack of 
attenuation.; and of course "Plaid".

Cheers    jim booth, lansing, mi

P.S.  On the water thread;  what does "RO"  as in RO water mean?

Return to table of contents


From: skotrat <skotrat at wwa.com>
Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 10:35:44 -0500
Subject: Weight of honey

>From: Terry <brew at buffnet.net>
>Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 19:04:07 GMT
>Subject: Weight of honey
>
>A gallon of honey weighs 12 lbs, 3 lbs per quart, I have no monetary
>interest in honey just trying to help out.
>www.dnci.com/brewfellow
>
Terry, 

I noticed that you did not include your last name on this thread. Isn't it
true Terry that your middle name is Clover??? and your last name is Honey?????

Hmmmmmmm???? Come one answer me.....

- -Scott


################################################################ 
#                     ThE-HoMe-BrEw-RaT	  	               #
#                Scott Abene <skotrat at wwa.com>                 #	
# http://miso.wwa.com/~skotrat (the Homebrew "Beer Slut" page) #
#                           OR                                 #
#  http://miso.wwa.com/~skotrat/Brew-Rat-Chat/ (Brew-Rat-Chat) #
#              "Get off your dead ass and brew"                #
#     "If beer is liquid bread, maybe bread is solid beer"     #
################################################################


Return to table of contents


From: Rob Moline <brewer at kansas.net>
Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 10:58:18 -0500
Subject: Caustic Soda Temps

>>From: Dave <woodstok at rupert.oscs.montana.edu>
>>Subject: Boiling NaOH Sankey keg cleaning
>>
>>Just my two bits on safety for this cleaning tip.
>>
>>IMHO do NOT use a boiling NaOH solution!! 

Agreed. The optimum is a 2.5 % solution at 170 F. ("Practical Brewer," MBAA,
page 273, 10th printing.)

Rob Moline
Little Apple Brewing Comapny
Manhattan, Kansas

"The more I know about beer, the more I realize I need to know more about 
beer!"


Return to table of contents


From: "Michael T. Bell" <mikeb at flash.net>
Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 12:29:59 -0500
Subject: Yeast Culturing

Howdy!

I'm going to be doing a little yeast culturing soon for the first time. I've   

read the paper in the Brewery InfoBase and still have a few questions.

1. I'm using plastic petri dishes instead of glass test tubes. Can you still   

use the double boiler method to sterilize with steam, or will they just   
wilt?

2.  I'm using agar instead of gelatin.  Do I still need to add dme?  How much?

3.  Any suggestions?

TIA
- -- 
- -mtb
beer is good food


 Michael T. Bell                          
 E- mail:  mikeb at flash.net                     
 Home:  817.468.8849                                 
 Fax:  817.468.7121

Return to table of contents


From: "David R. Burley" <103164.3202 at CompuServe.COM>
Date: 02 Jun 96 14:39:36 EDT
Subject: Lye,Methanol, Brownian Motion and RIMS

Dave Woodstock's caution about handling sodium hydroxide - lye - is seconded
here.  Remember that lye solution dissolves animal fat to make soap, it also
dissolves or softens various other animal tissue and makes the skin slough 
off.
It is worse  to get in your eye than acid - not that either is a desirable
alternative. Dave's solution of lye in alcohol is more effective in removing
residue but it is at least  as dangerous as lye in water and I believe moreso
because the alcohol dissolves oil from the skin and dehydrates the skin by
displacing skin moisture, helping the lye do its damage. ALWAYS wear safety
glasses and rubber gloves and a long sleeved shirt and long pants when 
handling
lye at any temperature. Cold lye solution is just as effective in the long run
as warm lye solution in removing carbonaceous crud, it just takes longer.  If
you have to have it warm, put it in the vessel cold and warm the vessel.  The
hotter the lye solution is the faster it works, but is is also true that it
works faster you. Also, don't forget chlorine bleach is a solution of lye with 

chlorine in it, so be double careful.  Familiarity breeds sloppiness, so train
yourself early on to be careful and remind yourself and any assistants of the
dangers of these chemical helpers whenever you use them. I have yet to drink a 

beer I would give up my sight for.  
- ----------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Aesop has friends who turn down his home brew because they fear 
methanol
poisoning.  Assuming they are not being polite, having tasted homebrew that
wasn't at it best (not yours of course, Michael), you owe them a clear
explanation that the methanol content is largely beyond your control, as it is
for all brewers who have a clean wort, fermented with yeast intended for 
brewing
beer.

Methanol is a by product of all fermentations using S. Cervesiae, whether it 
is
used for wine or beer, it is just that occurs as a low concentration 
by-product
and in low concentrations it is apparently not harmful. When methanol, as well 

as ketones and aldehydes, are harmful is whenthey are concentrated during
distillation to give a high concentration in an alcoholic beverage.  This can
occur if the early part of the distillate is not removed, a poor separation
column ( or perhaps none at all) is used and distillate outside a certain
temperature range is collected. I have had a distilled "beverage" in China ( 
the
name escapes me for the moment) which would have been more at home in a
fingernail polish remover bottle. It smelled of ketones and I did not doubt it
had been roughly distilled once, was a grain product and probably had a high
level of methanol.  Campai or not I played W.C. Fields and spilled more than I
drank.  Thank goodness it came in thimble size cups. 

Michael, your friends have no more worry with your home brewed beverages than
with commercial brews. If they really are your friends, you have the 
obligation
to convert them to a really good drink.  
- -----------------------------------------------------
Rob Moline says he when he was home brewing, he didn't bother to stir in the
sugar solution into his secondary, just added cool, boiled dextrose solution,
waited 15/60 minutes and bottled. He characterized this approach as a Forrest
Gump approach. Maybe Forrest Gump wouldn't have noticed variations in the
bottles, I don't know. But lots of other people who use this method end up 
with
bottles broken and some flat. Brownian motion is not a dependable way to mix
sugar and brew together, in the first place the mean free path of the 
molecules
in a condensed phase is extremely short ( like angstroms) and we're talking 
tens
of centimeters in five or ten gallons here.  In the second place we're talking
major density differences in the sugar solution and the brew, so the syrup 
will
immediately fall to the bottom and stay there. I have in the past added sugar
crystals to rapidly fermenting wine and been surprized when at the end of the
fermentation the sugar crysytals were still in the bottom of the tun even 
after
some weeks, despite the agitation of the wine by the carbon dioxide bubbles.
Thirdly, diffusion is a process which is logarithmic in nature and you will
never have a uniform concentration if you waited for diffusion.  Physical
agitation whether in the secondary, a bottling bucket, or my recommendation,
each bottle, is a necessary part of uniformity of carbonation over the whole
batch of beer.

I had some inquiries by e-mail about the volume of sugar solution I add to 
each
bottle.  So here's my formula for a 5 gallon batch: for 12 oz botles I add 2
tsp; for quarts I add 2 Tlbs. of a solution of 10 oz sugar to 14 oz water,
boiled and cooled. Papazian's recommendation would be half that much sugar. 
- --------------------------------------------------------

I echo a fellow reader's question. What does RIMS stand for anyway?
 
 
Keep on brewin'

Dave Burley
INTERNET:103164.3202 at compuserve.com

  



Return to table of contents


From: PivoPrince at aol.com
Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 19:07:04 -0400
Subject: A Belgian beer laugh

I'm not quite sure how to describe this, but for a laugh about Belgian
Abbey-style beers brewed in Kokamo, Indiana (!) call, toll-free
1-800-954-0064. It's an automated message and they're not selling anything,
but boy is it strange..........

PivoPrince

Return to table of contents


From: DONBREW at aol.com
Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 19:35:30 -0400
Subject: RIMS definition

>
>RIMS is probably one of the most loved/hated topics on the
>digest.  And I don't mean to stir up an endless thread, but
>I would be interested in the "official" definition of RIMS.
>The acronym taken literally is far too generic, or is it?
>
>I have reduced the definition of RIMS to a recirculating
>pump and a heat source within the recirculating path.

  Assuming you RECIRCULATE your INFUSION thru your MASH in a fairly constant
manner and use your "heater in a tube" to maintain/increase temp you have a
RIMS.

  Don


Return to table of contents


From: Kirk R Fleming <flemingk at usa.net>
Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 20:09:19 +0100
Subject: RIMS Definition

In #2057 jstone at stratacom.com (Joseph Stone) asked about what the "official" 
defintion of RIMS is.  Naturally, there isn't one, and each of us probably
has an opinion.  I think the salient features of a RIMS system, based on the
original article, are: continuous recirculation of the wort to ensure a
uniform temperature distribution throughout the wort, and some means of
feedback-based temperature control.

I like to leave the feeback loop issue open and simply say that heat energy
is applied somehwere in the system, and system response is monitored and used
to control heat input in order to maintain desired mash temperature.  I think
it's reasonable for others to say, "Well, the use of an automated feedback
control loop was pretty significant in the Morris design--that's what made it
unique."  I like to be able to include my system, which uses manual feedback
control, in the RIMS definition, since the objective is met using the same
fundamental tech: namely, recirculation to ensure uniform temp distribution.

Automated vs manual feedback control aside, note that some time back Al K.
suggested the whole thing was a misnomer: it can't be "infusion mashing" since
there are no infusions of hot liquor.  We all argued about this for a while
and Al even chastised me for selective use of the dictionary.  Since there are
already several precedents for the term "temperature control mashing" to
denote steam jacket, direct fire, or heat exchanger control of the mash, it
might be useful to call RIMS technology "control loop mashing", or
"automated feedback control (AFC) mashing" where the use of a feedback control
loop with recirculation was the essential feature.

I suggest Recirculating Automated Temperature Control mashing, or RATC, as the
most descriptive of systems using temperature controllers and recirculation.
Unfortunately, it's not an acronym, so it's doomed from the start!

KRF Colorado Springs

Return to table of contents