---

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

Contents:
  "ginjo" beer ("Harold R. Wood")
  WBC/Iodophor (Rob Moline)
  Re: Potassium Sorbate (Aaron Sepanski)
  Re: Potassium Sorbate (Aaron Sepanski)
  Re: Questions of trub (Aaron Sepanski)
  Re: Recipe? (Aaron Sepanski)
  Re: Krausen (Aaron Sepanski)
  Dogs+ Hops= Malignant Hyperthermia (BOBKATPOND at aol.com)
  Re: Beer correspondance courses ("Robert Marshall")
  Ice Beers (David Dow)
  iced tea beer (DONBREW at aol.com)
  Web Plumbing Supplies (DAVE BRADLEY IC742 6-7932)
  Non-Cascade Pale Ales ("Decker, Robin E.")
  Enzymes/Maltiness (Jim Busch)
  Re: Flavorful low-gravity beer (dipalma at sky.com (Jim Dipalma))
  Carbon Filters / Beefy Birthday Brew / Gott'um Questions (KennyEddy at aol.com)
  127-164-146-148-150-152-170 mash schedule (Jerry Cunningham)
  Oops (shawn at aob.org (Shawn Steele))
  Is my beer ruined?? (Bill Giffin)
  Uncl: US Budweiser and Reinheitsgebot ("Calvin Perilloux")
  Dividing Wort (PMMH86A at prodigy.com (MR THOMAS   WETHERN))
  IBU calculations (dwhitman at rohmhaas.com (Dave Whitman))
  Re: Gott Cooler Setup ("Sutton, Bob")
  Gott coolers, insulation, heat capacity (Ian Smith)
  Oxygenation ("David R. Burley")

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, 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: "Harold R. Wood" <hrwood at uog9.uog.edu>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 11:00:41 +0000 (WET)
Subject: "ginjo" beer

Does anyone out there know anything about "ginjo" beer.  This is apparently
a barley malt based beer fermented with sake yeast.  Has anyone made this or
tasted it?  Is there a commercial example?  I know nothing of sake, what
characteristics would a sake yeast impart?

Return to table of contents


From: Rob Moline <brewer at kansas.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 19:08:13 -0500
Subject: WBC/Iodophor

>From: "Bryan L. Gros" <grosbl at ctrvax.Vanderbilt.Edu>
>Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 09:59:38 -0500 (CDT)
>Subject: world beer cup
>
 seems like a lot of beers that we consider "defining the style"
>weren't listed.  No mention of Pilsner Urquell, Sierra Nevada Pale Ale,
>Anchor Steam, Pete's Wicked Ale, and even Salvator.  Either they
>didn't win, or they didn't enter.  What does it mean to make a better
>bohemian pilsner than PU?  Can PU be out of style?  Also, no german
>beers won for Kolsh, Alt, or any of the four wheat styles.

        I'm told that by Friday, there should be a list of all participating
breweries, products, and judges.

>Third, some funny names.  Augsburger Doppelbock won a bronze
>for bock, not doppelbock.  And Stovepipe Porter won a bronze for
>European dark lager.  Lager?  I guess these are marketing names and
>the beers were entered in the appropriate category.
>
        This is something that has more than a few folks wondering as well.
Last years GABF had a "*.* Ale" that won in a lager category, as well. Now
I'm sure that without a test for the presence and/or absence of certain
sugars, there are many products that would be capable of emulating a
different style, or yeast, and how would the judges know? Seems to me
though, that an obvious name like "ale" in a lager competition would be
certain to draw the attention of someone, if not the judges, then certainly
the person who has to assemble the beers for tasting, or the person who has
to ascribe a name to a number at the conclusion of judging. Maybe this is
one of those "Great Cosmic Unknowns." I do agree that there are names used
by marketers that do not reflect the true nature of the product. But, it
does make you reconsider when deciding which category to enter. "Maybe my
*.* beer would be more competitive in this other category,"  where maybe
there weren't so many entries last year or any other reason!

>American beers certainly dominated, which indicates that there are
>a lot of diverse and quality beers being brewed here.  Great Britain was
>almost shut out, as was Germany.  I'm sure this has to do with shipping
>problems.  They should do next year's competition in Europe and
>see how the brews stack up.

        Frankly, I was amazed at the small number of participating
breweries. With 3000 invitations sent out, for only 250 or so breweries to
be interested seems like it could be just a 1st year situation, where the
breweries wanted to see how the whole deal played out before making the
go-ahead decision to participate. One of my customers said that he could
easily understand why small fish like me would be eager to get in, while he
doubted that any of the better established track records of some major
European breweries would be enhanced by an "American up-start competition."
The event will be 2 years from now in Barcelona. They plan to run it in
conjunction with the international beer marketers conventions, which
apparently meet just every other year.

>Well, just my comments.  I like this idea better than the GABF, which
>has boiled down to winning ribbons for marketing purposes.  But if
>the best beers aren't entered, then the results don't mean as much.
>
        I like it also, but for different reasons. Unlike the GABF, every
brewery that wants to get in, can get in. There is no cut off point. I know
that this is due to the physical size of the Currigan Hall, but the limit
exists...last year I would have been able to enter if I had bottled or
canned my beer, as there was a cancellation for a slot upstairs, but they
wouldn't allow kegs up there.
        I don't like being limited to only 3 entries either, but like the
limit of 5 at GABF, it's probably for the best, so that judging doesn't take
3 weeks! And frankly, I'd go broke..my general manager doesn't believe in
this kind of thing and all entries to competition have been paid for by me.
I did manage to get him to shell out for GABF this year, though!

        And while I am aware of the current attacks on the marketing
angle/ribbons won position, you can bet your butt that I plan to advertise
this (once the guidelines for use of the award in adverts are issued) and
any other award that the Little Apple should ever be fortunate enough to lay
it's hands on. But I doubt that too many folks will get p.o.'d at us, 'cos
we really are just small fry, don't distribute and can't afford to trademark
"Second Best Barleywine in America! (or World, or anything else) TM"

        As far as the statement regarding results not meaning as much if the
best aren't there, I totally agree. It will certainly make me feel better if
every other entry in my category was a centuries old European powerhouse!

>------------------------------
>
>From: korz at pubs.ih.att.com

>At what concentration was he using the iodophor?  While I never use my
>mouth to start siphoning beer, I often use it to start siphoning 12.5
>ppm (even 25 ppm) iodophor and have gotten a mouthfull several times.
>I rinced with water immediately just in case,

        Interesting to note that while working in Operating Rooms, it was
not uncommon for certain surgeons to rinse out an open abdomen with an
Iodophor/saline solution, suction it out and repeat. Particularly in the
presence of abdominal infection, or when spilled bowel contents were
present. One surgeon noted that the patient would be able to taste it for a
few days post-op, but that was a small price to pay for an opportunity to
offset any further infection.

Cheers!
Rob (Jethro Gump) Moline
Little Apple Brewing Company
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: Aaron Sepanski <sepanska at it.uwp.edu>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 21:03:39 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: Potassium Sorbate

For the person that wanted to control the alcohol level in their beer...
I thought that maybe you could give potassium sorbate (or campton
tablets) a try.  I was just in the homebrew shop today and inquired on
your behalf.  Apparantely the way the stuff works is by killing the
yeast, not by making it dormant.  So when it comes time to prime your
beer, you are going to have a major problem.  Unless of course you force
carbonate your beer, then you will be ok.  Sorry about the mix up.

Return to table of contents


From: Aaron Sepanski <sepanska at it.uwp.edu>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 21:11:57 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: Potassium Sorbate

For the person interested in controlling their alcohol levels... I
suggested trying pottassium sorbate.  I went to the homebrew store to
pick up ingredients and inquired on your behalf.  The action of potassium
sorbate (an campton tablets) is killing the yeast.  That's why the
alcohol level doesn't get any higher.  Therefor this method will only be
acceptable if you force carbonate.  Sorry about the mix up.

Return to table of contents


From: Aaron Sepanski <sepanska at it.uwp.edu>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 21:18:39 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: Questions of trub

Due to the sound advice advice I got from numerous people who were
generous enough to sacrifice their time to make me a better homebrewer,
and save me from unnesserray equipment costs...  I chilled my most recent
batch with ice in the sink surrounding my boiler.  Does anyone have a
simple way to rack off the trub directly from the boiler?  By the way,
doing it this way saved me about 2 and a half hours.  Thanks a lot!!!!!!

Return to table of contents


From: Aaron Sepanski <sepanska at it.uwp.edu>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 21:22:46 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: Recipe?

Does anyone have a recipe for a refreshing fruit flavored summer brew?
Partial mash please.

One other question, i recently thought about flavor a beer with lemons.
Since lemons are considering more acidic than the typicall fruit, is it
necessary to adjust the pH off your wort?  Any experience, anyone?

Return to table of contents


From: Aaron Sepanski <sepanska at it.uwp.edu>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 21:24:58 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: Krausen

What is the safest way to pull of the krausen of your fermenting beer?  I
never had the problem until I swithed my primary to a 6.7 gallon carboy.

Return to table of contents


From: BOBKATPOND at aol.com
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 23:13:28 -0400
Subject: Dogs+ Hops= Malignant Hyperthermia

From: Rob Moline <brewer at kansas.net>

>Dantrolene is a VERY expensive drug and has a limited shelf life, and will
>not be found in quantities greater than that necessary to treat 1 or 2 cases
>at any one time. But it will be found in EVERY operating room in the
>developed world and further supplies are air ambulanced in, when necessary.

I would agree that Dantrolene is expensive but the rest of this statement is
wrong. Dantrolene comes as a powder and is stable until it is mixed.  Most
hospitals carry
A LOT of it. The cost is cheap relative to its benefit. You have to give lots
and you only have a few minutes in which to give it.  If you had to wait for
Lifeflight to bring more you would have a dead patient.

Bob Morris

Return to table of contents


From: "Robert Marshall" <robertjm at hooked.net>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 20:17:44 +0000
Subject: Re: Beer correspondance courses

The American Brewer's Guild offers a correspondance course in their
catalog.

Do a Yahoo Internet search and check out their webpage for more
details.

Good luck,


Later,

Robert Marshall
robertjm at hooked.net

homepage: http://www.hooked.net/users/robertjm
- ----------------------------------------------
"In Belgium, the magistrate has the dignity
of a prince, but by Bacchus, it is true
that the brewer is king."

          Emile Verhaeren (1855-1916)
          Flemish writer
- ------------------------------------------------

Return to table of contents


From: David Dow <dl4kd at acadia.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 23:43:16 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Ice Beers

Hiya,
I am checking out the ins and outs of brewing ice beers
like an eisbock or one of the commercial ices on the market.
Now, I understand that the brew is frozen until the water crystalizes and
then the crystals are removed leaving a stronger brew.  My question is:
when do you freeze it? After it ferments awhile or right after you boil?
Also, what do you do with the mixture then? Do you bottle what's left
or do you reconstitute it? If you reconstitute it, wouldn't you have
what you started with? And if you don't, won't you have a big, thick,
gooey mess?
And what about cold filtering? How does this figure into play?

So long and thanks for the fish!!

dinky dave

"AYUH! It's Beer" Brewery
Home of:
"Yessuh! That Theyah is a Weezen"
          and
"Jailhouse Bock"


Return to table of contents


From: DONBREW at aol.com
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 08:19:10 -0400
Subject: iced tea beer

Matt A. sez:
The problem: it tastes like iced tea! What happened? Did I use too much
crystal malt? or not enough extract? or the wrong kind of extract? Argh! My
b-day is ruined!

   Let it age for a few more weeks.  I had a all grain brownish taste that
way after a month in bottle, but after 2 months it got much better.

Don McArthur
Falls Church, Va.




Return to table of contents


From: DAVE BRADLEY IC742 6-7932 <BRADLEY_DAVID_A at LILLY.COM>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 12:43:38 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Web Plumbing Supplies

There is a great resource on the WWW for plumbing supplies.
I'm not affiliated with the company, I just see lots of
parts of interest to homebrewers.  They offer most every
type of fitting in brass/copper, and after Emailing the
proprietor (Vic) with a request for some SS fittings,
they have some of these listed too.  Prices look reasonable,
especially to those who don't already have a convenient
local source for such plumbing needs.  They do business
solely over the WWW, taking orders via Email and Fax.
*****************************************************
http://PlumbingSupply.Com/index.html
*****************************************************
And now back to your (ir)regularly scheduled brewing info...

Dave in Indy


Return to table of contents


From: "Decker, Robin E." <robind at rmtgvl.rmtinc.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 96 8:47:00 -0500
Subject: Non-Cascade Pale Ales

In #2072, Rick asks for suggestions for alternative hop combinations...

We recently brewed an "IPA" named Independence Pale Ale that used Columbus
hops all the way through.  This is not for the faint of heart tho, as it
yielded 59.4 IBUs!!  The interesting thing is you get a hint of flavor from
all the hops that went into the creation of the Columbus (including
Cascades), so you don't really need to combine them with anything else.

On a commercial note, The Caesar's Head Pale Ale that I've been raving about
lately, is brewed with Saaz all the way through.  Dave is adamant about
Noble hops in his beers, and he has a point.  His Pale is very nearly
addicting, being flavorful, but still light enough for "sessions" (I drank
at least 4 pints last nite <blush>).

If you want to go for an English Pale, use Goldings for bittering; Fuggles
for flavor & aroma; an English Bitters would use only Goldings.  With that
10 gal system, you're gonna have alot of fun trying these out (she said
jealously).  Let us know what you're up to ...!

Goldings
"don't even think of asking for a disclaimer"


Return to table of contents


From: Jim Busch <busch at eosdev2.gsfc.nasa.gov>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 09:48:15 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Enzymes/Maltiness

David writes:

<Remember that the higher the temperature, the faster the enzymes degrade. The

Depends on which enzymes you are talking about. Alpha Amylase will survive
quite a long time at 156-158F.

<lower the concentration of enzymes,ergo,the slower the conversion of starch
<to
<sugar. SO, at the high end ( 155-158) of the saccarification region( 145-160
<F), even though the rate of saccrification (at a constant enzyme
<concentration),
<is higher, the  stability of the enzyme is lower and is disappearing faster.

What is being reduced is the activity of Beta Amylase which controls
fermentability (more rest at 145F increases maltose production).

<This leads to a lower enzyme concentration, and depending on the ratio of
<water
<to grist in the mash, could lead to a high level of unfermentables. The
<solution? Extend the saccharification time to get complete conversion. This
<will

Only if you increase the time spent in the 140-148F range.

<lower the unfermentables and increase the fermentables. You could also try
<using a lower ratio of water to grist. This will increase the concentration 
of
<the enzymes and speed up the conversion.

No.  Thicker mases favor enzymes that work on proteins.  More dilute
mashes promote the activity of amylases.

<Personally,I like malty brews with FGs in the upper teens and lower twenties.
<This allows me to put in plenty of hops to counterbalance- the result- a very
<flavorful brew.

I have found that attenuation is not necessarily linked to maltiness.
Some of the more malty beers such as Paulaner Oktoberfest are very
highly attenuated.  Sweetness and maltiness are different flavors.

Good brewing,

Jim Busch


Return to table of contents


From: dipalma at sky.com (Jim Dipalma)
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 96 10:21:18 EDT
Subject: Re: Flavorful low-gravity beer

Hi All,

In HBD #2073, George DePiro writes:

>	In HBD 2072 Martin Wilde suggests making a high gravity beer and
>    diluting it to the desired low gravity after the boil in order to
>    achieve a relatively flavorful low gravity beer.
>
>    I think that the correct process is to dilute the wort after
>    fermentation, not before.  The reason this works is that yeast tend to
>    produce more fruity flavors in a high-gravity environment, thus you
>    will create a beer with some interesting character.  Even though you
>    are diluting it after fermentation, some of that character will come
>    through.

   True, the high gravity fermentation will provide more esters, and this is
exactly why I wouldn't recommend it. I've brewed a lot of bitters and milds
by diluting high-gravity wort, and have found pre-fermentation dilution
much more effective than diluting post-fermentation.

   The key to brewing these low gravity styles successfully are obtaining body
and malt character in beers with an OG that's only in the mid-1.030s. In this
regard, rounded, sweet flavors are Good Things(tm), since they help give the
impression that the beer is more full-bodied than it actually is. Conversely,
sharp flavors such as hop bitterness and dark roasted malts are Bad 
Things(tm),
since they will contribute to the impression that the beer is thin and watery.

   With the exception of iso-amyl acetate (banana flavor in weizens), most
esters tend to be sharp flavors. By diluting pre-fermentation, the wort has a
much lower gravity, which helps minimizes ester production.
   Yeast selection, always important, is critical with this type of brewing.
Highly attenuative strains or strains that produce a lot of esters should be
avoided like the plague. Ideally, a yeast that is relatively non-attenuative,
leaves some diacetyl (see above, rounded, sweet flavors are Good Things(tm)),
and does not throw a lot of esters should be used for these types of beers.

>
>    Remember to boil and cool your diluting water to sterilize and
>    deoxygenate it.  Avoid the introduction of air when diluting by
>    siphoning carefully and/or purging the headspace over the liquid with
>    CO2.

  Yes, if you do decide to dilute after fermentation, the dilution water must
be handled just like beer, i.e., siphoned quietly with no splashing, to avoid
re-aerating the water. If this is not done, the ethanol that's present in
fermented beer will be oxidized to acetaldehyde, a very sharp flavor (green
apples), and a very Bad Thing(tm) indeed. By comparison, diluting the wort
before the yeast is pitched means that I am able to simply pour the water into
the fermenter through a sanitized funnel, splashing it with a wild, reckless
abandon.

>
>    Also, your hop utilization won't be as efficient in the high-gravity
>    boil, so you may have to adjust your hop rates a bit.

  A slight adjustment due to high wort gravity is of the least concern with
regard to hopping levels. When calculating IBUs, it is important to use the
final, *post-dilution* volume in the calculations. If you calculate IBUs based
on pre-dilution volume, then dilute 20%-25%, you will end up with grossly
underhopped beer.

            Cheers,
              Jim              dipalma at sky.com

Return to table of contents


From: KennyEddy at aol.com
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 10:23:54 -0400
Subject: Carbon Filters / Beefy Birthday Brew / Gott'um Questions

Nate Apkon writes:

> Activated carbon filter sounds like the way to go.  However,  what eles
> does it remove from the water?

This question has been dealt with here before, although I don't know that
anyone has any solid test results.  The consensus is that charcoal removes
chlorINE (NOT chlorIDE -- Cl-) but not much else.  You can probably also
expect some sediment reduction as well.  If you do have a before-and-after
test performed, we'd like to see the results!

**********************

Matt Apple laments:

> I made a 5-gal batch for my b-day, trying to make a Newcastle-ish kind of
> brown ale.
>
> 6.6 lbs. M&F light extract
> 1/4 lb black patent malt
> 1/2 lb crystal malt
> 1.5 oz Fuggles (boiling - 30 min.)
> Wyeast London Ale (forgot the #, 1968 or something)
>
> I let it stay in the primary for one week and in the secondary for about 4
> weeks, then put some in a 5L keg and the rest in bottles. The FG was about
> 1.033, but I forgot to take an OG.
>
> The problem: it tastes like iced tea! What happened? Did I use too much
> crystal malt? or not enough extract? or the wrong kind of extract? Argh! My
> b-day is ruined!

1.033!  YIKES!  Something didn't "take" here.  Did you pitch your yeast with
the wort temperature too high, killing the yeast (although it appears that
*some* fermentation took place)?  Ferment at very low temperature (below
60F), putting them to sleep?  Left any "yeasticidal" sanitizer behind?  Also,
unless your extract is already hopped (bittered); a 30 min boil will not
extract nearly all of the potential bitterness of the hops -- 60 minutes
minimum is (strongly) recommended.  And addition for 30 min is appropriate
for emphasizing hop *flavor* over *bitterness*.

**************

Matthew A McKinstry wnats to know:

>      1.  Should I hold out for a 10 gallon cooler?   What kind of grain
>      capacity can I expect with the 5?  (I brew Pale Ales, Browns, Porters,
>      and Wheats almost exclusively.  I'm not much into BIG beers.)

A five-gal container will hold about 12 lb of grain + water, although it'll
be pretty full at this point.  I routinely mash up to 11 pounds of grain in
my 5 gal cooler without difficulty.

>      2.  How difficult would it be to do multi-step mashes in the 5 gallon?
>      I probably will do mostly single step but I want the option to do
>      more.  Is it as simple as starting with a thick mash and adding more
>      hot water or drawing off some liquid and heating?

Drawing off liquid & heating will risk destroying enzymes since you'll have
to heat the liquid higher than your next mash temperature.  This is because
the grain you left behind and didn't heat needs to be heated too when you add
the liquid back.  If you remove a portion of the "thick" mash (mostly grain)
and boil it, you are essentially doing a decoction mash, which is "the" way
to make many German and other malty brews such as Oktoberfests and Weissens.
 But that's another story.

If you want to mash in at 140F and want to raise to 158, for example, you
start with ~1 qt/lb of strike water (thick mash) at about 157F, and later
boost to 158F with another 1/2 qt/lb (thinnish mash) at boiling.  More steps
than this (e.g., 122F protein rest) often make for a too-thick starting mash
and/or too-thin ending mash.  However, for simpler brews or those using
highly-modified malts, two or even one step is usually adequate.  I've been
making fine brews with a single mash temperature (usually around 152 - 154)
using British two-row.  Mnay (most?) brewpubs also use single-temperature
mash schedules.

>      3.  For the first temperature rest do you overshoot by a little to
>      account for the energy absorbed by the cooler?  If so, by how much?

Yup.  Typically about 3 degrees.  You can measure this by adding 3 - 4 gal
plain tap water heated to your strike temperature to an empty cooler; let it
settle a couple minutes, then measure the drop.  Also, don't forget to
account for the energy absorbed by the *GRAIN* when figuring strike water
temperatures!  Grain's heat capacity is about 0.32 relative to water, if I
remember right.

Ken Schwartz
KennyEddy at aol.com
http://users.aol.com/kennyeddy



Return to table of contents


From: Jerry Cunningham <gcunning at census.gov>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 10:26:51 -0400
Subject: 127-164-146-148-150-152-170 mash schedule

Hey there,

I was brewing a wit the other day and I tried out my new and innovative
127-164-146-148-150-152-170 infusion mash schedule (I don't do Celsius). I
thought I'd run it by you guys for comment/input/ridicule. My grain bill was
48% unmalted wheat, 48% pilsen malt, 2% flaked oats. I decided against the
typical 122-152-170 schedule as it was just not challenging enough for me. I
guess my basic question is "What the hell have I done?". I mash in a cooler
(in case you haven't guessed) and spent 30 minutes  at 127, 2-3 minutes  at 164,
about an hour going through the 146-148-150-152 "rests", and a 20 minute
mash-out at 170-ish.

On a serious note, what exactly is going on with the unmalted wheat? Do the
starches get converted? The fermentation really smells like s&%#! (the ~1/2
gallon of left over wort fermenting in my boiler out on my deck smells
better!) Is this typical with the Wyeast Wit strain?

Thanks,

- - Jerry Cunningham
  Annapolis, MD

ps Those plaid jokes never get old...  (extreme sacasm intended)


Return to table of contents


From: shawn at aob.org (Shawn Steele)
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 12:36:45 -0600
Subject: Oops

While trying to improve the posting to let posters know that their
messages have been received, I accidently deleted someone's post.  My
apologies to whoever it was and please try again.

- - shawn
Digest Janitor

Return to table of contents


From: Bill Giffin <billg at maine.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 11:05:30 -0500
Subject: Is my beer ruined??

Good morning,

I have DMS in my beer is the beer ruined?

Bill


Return to table of contents


From: "Calvin Perilloux" <dehtpkn9 at ibmmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 11:09:17 EDT
Subject: Uncl: US Budweiser and Reinheitsgebot

There was a question way back in HBD 2064 (I'm way behind on these)
regarding American Budweiser sold in Germany.  It was specifically
about the label contents "Malt, hops, RICE, and yeast" and wondering
how it could be sold in Germany, given the Reinheitsgebot here.

That was a bone of contention back in the days when the EU (back then
still called the EC, I think) was spreading its wings and putting
through the open market reforms a few years ago.  Theoretically,
a country cannot set "arbitrary" rules to prevent foreign products
from being sold, and that's where this came in.

There were claims by come in the German brewing industry that the
Reinheitsgebot was in fact a health rule!  Beer brewed by that method
would be healthier, and thus the restriction should be allowed.
However you may view the advantages of all malt beer, it's a plain
fact that you can make healthful beer with many other ingredients,
and the folks in Brussels agreed.  So non-Reinheitsgebot beer can
indeed be sold here in Germany, but the Germans still have the right
to exercise  control over the manufacture of the product, and so they
can enforce Reinheitsgebot in brewing!  I have no direct knowledge
of it, but I suspect that there can be exceptions to the rule for
export beer.

All that said, the market for non-Reinheitsgebot beer is very small
in Germany.  Germans tend to avoid foreign beer like the plague,
from my experience, and most foreigners here seem to head straight
for the German stuff.  I personally like having foreign, "adulterated"
beer in the very few stores that carry small amounts of it at high
prices, but I actually drink it only for a rare change of pace or
palate adjustment to remember what a British or Belgian Ale is like.

Regarding the ingredients being actually onthe label, I sure do
like THAT rule!  Instead of a brewery getting by with the statement
"Selected Cereal Grains" (selected for low price and low flavor,
perhaps), the actual ingredients have to be on the product.  Now
THAT's customer protection.  And yes, they even have to print the
alcohol content on the package.  And a "Good at least until" date.
What a concept!

Calvin Perilloux                                  "Bayerisches Bier,
Erding, Germany                                    Staerker als Heimweh"
Home: 100627.2777 at compuserve.com
Hell: dehtpkn9 at ibmmail.com


Return to table of contents


From: PMMH86A at prodigy.com (MR THOMAS WETHERN)
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 12:22:15, -0500
Subject: Dividing Wort

How do I(or can I for that matter)separate a batch of wort in to
multiple primary fermenters (carboys)?  I am an extract brewer
and have about 10 batches of experience.  I recently began
brewing 2 batches at once using separate brew pots.  I.E. the
basic 5 gallon recipe 2 at one time thing.  If I obtain a larger
kettle, I would like to do a full 10 gallon boil and then
separate the wort in to 2 carboys to pitch yeast into. Can I do
this?  Secondly, what if I was to use three primary fermentation
containers for the 10 boil and "top off" each carboy to 5 gallons
with chilled water?  Is there any reason I can not do this?

Any and all help appreciated, E-Mail is fine(PMMH86A at prodigy.com)
Basically, I want to increase my yield but make sure I do so in a
correct way.

Tom Wethern,
Atlanta GA
Only 30 Something days and counting!
Any international homebrewers coming to town??

Return to table of contents


From: dwhitman at rohmhaas.com (Dave Whitman)
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 12:33:18 -0400
Subject: IBU calculations

In HBD#2073, Howard Smith asks:

>when calculating IBU's, how do you weigh the different alpha acid
>percentages versus the time in boil and amount added? For example, if I
>add a 7% hop for 60 min., a 4.5% for 30 min., and a 4% finish, what would my
>AA
>% be that I use for the IBU calculation? Do you simply average the 3
>percentages if you use 1 oz. of each?

Averaging the %AA doesn't work if the hops are boiled for different time
periods.

In the example cited, high acid hops were boiled 60 minutes, and a low acid
hop for 30 minutes.  Compare this to a beer where you boil the low acid hop
for 60 minutes and the high acid for 30.  I'd expect the first beer to be
much more bitter, but averaging the %AA values would predict identical
bitterness.

I think the proper way to do this is to perform a separate IBU calculation
for each hop/time/amount combination, then add up the resulting IBU's.



Return to table of contents


From: "Sutton, Bob" <bob.sutton at fluordaniel.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 12:48:00 -0800
Subject: Re: Gott Cooler Setup

From: "DAVID T. PETERS
<d_peters at e-mail.com>

>Did I buy the wrong Phil's Phalse Bottom?  I put it in the cooler
and it
>is smaller than the inside diameter of the cooler.  How do I make up
the
>difference?

There are two PPBs for the GOTT. One fits snugly in the 5 gallon
unit, the
other in the 10 gallon. Depending on the gap that you have, one
approach is
to split a length of Tygon tubing longitudinally, and wrap it around
the
perimeter of the PPB. This will help if the fit is loose, but not by
a wide
margin; say 0.25 inches. If you have the PPB for the 5 gallon, it's
probably best to go to your favorite local shop and bargain for a
swap.
I've found that if you're willing to promise a six-pack of your next
batch,
that you should have no trouble getting setup.

Bob
Fruit Fly Brewhaus
Yesterday's Technology Today


Return to table of contents


From: Ian Smith <rela!isrs at netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 08:47:45 -0600 (MDT)
Subject: Gott coolers, insulation, heat capacity

Matt,

I use a 5 gallon Igloo cooler and can get 12-13 lbs of grain
in it - sufficient for 6.5 gall of 1.060 IPA's. It can be close to the
top and a PITA sometimes. The cooler is insulated on all sides but not
the top (lid) since it was not intended for hot liquids - a lot of heat
escapes through the lid. I started putting towels on the lid to
insulate it and then finally broke down and purchased a can of foam
insulation from the hardware store. You drill a hole in the side of the
lid (there were already 1 or 2 on the Igloo anyway) and squirt the
stuff in). During my recent mashes the lid is not even warm to the
touch and I only lose 1 degree F per hour !!

In order to eliminate the heat capacity of the cooler in mash-in calcs I
usually pour in 170 F water, close the lid, shake gently and wait 5
minutes. Since the cooler settles down at 150 F it effectively
eliminates the heat capacity !

If I had my druthers I probably have purchased the 10 gall Gott/Igloo
if I could find one. Does anyone out there know of a source and if so
how much are they ?

Cheers
Ian Smith
isrs at rela.uucp.netcom.com

Return to table of contents


From: "David R. Burley" <103164.3202 at CompuServe.COM>
Date: 19 Jun 96 14:53:08 EDT
Subject: Oxygenation

Brewsters,

I apologize for tjhis GIGANTIC epistle, but I felt it was important to put all
my ideas and questions in one spot so they can all be chewed on at the same
time.

Many bytes have been spent in discussion of oxygenation, esters etc.  I enjoyed
reading them and it sounds like Tracy has a good source for some of  this
information relating to yeast growth, etc.  I believe this public forum is one
of the best ways to learn something about which we all enjoy studying. I would
like to see, where possible, more documentation of these ideas, since I see
brewsters carrying ideas espoused here to extremes, much to the detriment of
their beer.

I will admit that even though I have been brewing for many years, modern (i.e.
1990's) professional brewing and biotexts have not passed in front of my eyes
as yet (soon to be corrected) However, I have also heard, what, to me, sounds
a bit excesssive in the attempts to get oxygenation-based on my experience.
I know we are all A/R on most subjects concerning our beer, but let's not
overdo things so that we end up making bad beer as a result.

Let's consider some hard facts from physical chemistry- Solubility of gases
in water.

I believe water is a useful model for wort for oxygen and nitrogen, but not
carbon dioxide because its compressibility and reactivity make its solubility
strongly pressure and pH dependent. I include it here as an order of magnitude
figure, since everyone is familiar with the solubility ( at the wrong pH and
pressure for direct comparison) through personal experience.

>From "Handbook of Chemistry and Physics" 73rd edition ( 1993)

Solubility is in partial pressure of the gas of 101.325 kPa ( one atmosphere)
and is the mole fraction solubility. If this is troubling you, don't worry,
but hold off on the homebrew for a minute.  The molecular weights for oxygen
and nitrogen are very close (32 and 28) so a direct comparison of the
solubilities without all the troubling conversion to grams per gallon ( or
whatever)  will give you a feel for the relative solubility.


T deg C	T deg F		Oxygen		Nitrogen		Carbon
Dioxide

15	59		2.8X10E-5	1.4X10E-5	8.2X10E-4
20	68		2.5X10E-5	1.3X10E-5	7.1X10E-4
25	77		2.3X10E-5	1.2X10E-5	6.1X10E-4
30	86		2.1X10E-5	1.1X10E-5	5.4X10E-4
35	95		2.0X10E-5	1.0X10E-5	4.8X10E-4

Carbon dioxide ( at 1 atmosphere of pressure) is about 40 - 50  times more
soluble in water ( taking into account the MW difference) than oxygen.

What does this mean?  Frankly, I was surprised by these numbers. I would have
guessed that carbon dioxiode would have been several orders of magnitude more
soluble. ( and it is at the correct pHs and pressures)

But what it means to at least one HBD inquiry on the efficiency of various
methods is that the AMOUNT of gas dissolved is extremely small.  Think of it
this way. A five gallon carboy open to the air will contain about 1 gallon of
oxygen. This amount is about  0.2/(2XE-5) or 10,000 times more than you will
need to saturate the beer in that 5 gallon carboy!.

So the amount of oxygen available is not an issue, since there will be plenty
available whether you are using air or oxygen.  The problem is the rate of
absorption. Using pure oxygen will speed up the rate of absorption by a factor
of five, since its concentration in air is about 20% of the pure stuff.I
don't know of a good model for this, but it obviously depends on the surface
area of the gas exposed to the liquid. It is safe to assume in the absence of
a better model that the rate of absorption is bubble size dependent.  The
smaller the bubbles, the more surface area, the faster we get to saturation.
Also,the more agitation, the faster we get to equilibrium.

If we assume that we have a liter of gas and the bubble size is 2 mm in diameter
then the total surface is arrived at by the following:

V = 4/3 pi rE3  so the volume ( rounding off pi to 3)  is 4 cubic millimeters.
Since a liter is 1000 cucm and a cucm is 1000 cumm there are 1 million 2 mm
dia bubbles (1XE6) in a liter. Now, A=2pirE2. So: the area of a single bubble
is 6 sq mm. And the area of a liter of them is 6XE6 sq mm or 6 sq m of surface
area. Compare that with a plastic waste basket of 20 cm diameter (and a liter 
of oxygen above the wort) which has a surface area of 600 sq cm or .06 sq 
meters.

SO: a difference of at least 6/0.06=100 times faster rate. This does not take
into account surface saturation effects, rates of diffusion, etc., so the
difference could be even greater. You conclude Aha! the proper way to saturate
your wort with gas is through a bubbler.

AND you might even conclude that this is the best way to get oxygen into the
wort.  You would be right in the case of the closed fermentation, but what of
the open fermentation method? Given that you bubble oxygen into the cold wort
for five minutes, let's compare that to a wastebasket sitting under a blanket
of air in which there is (as noted above) plenty of oxygen available for
saturation. Five minutes is one twelth of an hour and a twenty four hour period
has 288 of these five minute periods. Therefore, with the open fermenter you
have approximately three times the opportunity  ( 288/100)  for the saturation
to take place as you do with the closed fermenter, using bubbled air. Assuming
that agitation is irrelevant. With bubbled oxygen you are better off by a factor
of 5/3 versus air.

My point is, these numbers for a short time bubbling versus a long time sitting
exposed to the air are the same order of magnitude for an open fermenter. Open
fermentations are probably not oxygen starved, even if not a lot of splashing
etc. is carried out.

Furthermore, those of you having done carbonation of a keg know it takes some
time, in many cases hours to achieve saturation of carbon dioxide, even with a
bubbler (although the bubbler is faster). This may give you a clue as to the
rate of saturation of a gas in water.  I have no other data on that subject.
Does anyone else?
- -----------------------------------
SO, what does this mean?  It looks to me like bubbling in oxygen is necessary
for a closed fermentation, but not necessary in an open fermentation in which
the wort is only a foot or two deep.  Maybe those guys who designed the
Yorkshire Squares and the coolships knew what they were doing.
- -----------------------------------
On the subject of hot side absorption, HSA., and presumably oxidation.  I have
seen a lot of fuss being made about HSA and the need to cool quickly before
bringing the wort in contact with oxygen.( and I do it by the book)
Remember, professional brewers exclusively use closed boiling which we don't
have the opportunity to practice in most cases due to boil-over potential.  To
me an hour at a rolling boil in a small kettle ( high surface to volume ratio)
in the presence of air will do plenty of HSA, oxidation and browning.  Giving
lots of by products and beer darkening. What am I missing? Steam distillation
and evaporation of the bad guys?  What about the good guys? Shouldn't we look
for a way to do closed kettle boiling?

What is the big deal about HSA versus CSA? From a rate of reaction standpoint,
100 deg C versus 20 deg C will mean a rate of reaction difference of
2X2X2x2x2X2X2X2 = 256. Based on the reaction rate declining by a factor of two
for every 10 deg C decline in temperature.  So cooling down will slow down the
reaction, but with our penchant for bubbling in oxygen and long term exposure
before the carbon dioxide sweeps out the oxygen, we will still have ( within a
factor of 5 or so) the same effect from hot or cold side absorption. In fact,
oxygen is substantially less soluble in hot wort than in cold, so with HSA and a
closed fermentation with no oxygen added as CSA, the damage could be less.  What
am I missing?
- ----------------------------------
Finally, on the question of ester formation. There seems to be two diametrically
opposed opinions, sometimes put forth by the same person. More oxygen will give
more, or sometimes, less esters?  I'm confused.  Is there a problem here in
confusing esters (a product of reaction between alcohol and a carboxylic acid)
and aldehydes and ketones ( an oxidation product of alcohols and related
products).  Is any odoriferous substance( whether or not it is chemically an
ester) called an ester by some people?  What am I missing?

I understand that oxygen can (and is necesssary to) oxidize ( directly or
through an enzyme catalysed reaction)  an alcohol to an acid so that with a
higher acid concentration we will get more ester formation.  I also understand
that aldehydes and ketones are partial oxidation products of alcohols on the way
to formation of acids.  More oxidation would give more of them, but continued
oxidation would carry these products to acids and more ester formation. Relative
rates of the various reactions will determine the ratios of the various
products.  Since these products are require oxygen, how could increasing the
oxygenation reduce the formation of ester and related intemediates? What am I
missing?

Thanks for your patience in reading this.  Let's hope discussion which ensues
from this will help clear up some of these very important issues.

Keep on brewin'

Dave Burley
103164.3202 at compuserve.com


Return to table of contents