Homebrew Digest Thursday, 19 September 1996 Number 2193
![[Prev HBD]](/img/previous.gif)
![[Index]](/img/index_button.gif)
![[Next HBD]](/img/next.gif)
![[Back]](/img/up_level_button.gif)
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Shawn Steele, Digest Janitor
Thanks to Rob Gardner for making the digest happen!
Contents:
NEWS FLASH! ((Shawn Steele))
Mashing Pumpkin and Other Stuff (RUSt1d?)
RIMS - Disadvantages and some thoughts. (Steve Alexander)
Just Hops is No Hops ((Jay Reeves))
Just Hops ("Toler, Duffy L.")
Re: Just Hops (RUSt1d?)
Oops to Vienna and Victory malts (Tim Martin)
Re: 1st time brewing ((DON CHASE))
Color malts (Jim Larsen)
RE: Decoction mashing / Munich malt / Lag times ((George De Piro))
Found!! Stopper-to-hole size table! (Ken Sullivan)
Computer Controlled Brewing / Rubber Stopper Hole Sizes (KennyEddy at aol.com)
Re: Newbie probability? (hollen at vigra.com)
pressure drop in hose ((BAYEROSPACE))
All Vienna, All Munich (korz at pubs.ih.lucent.com)
Wyeast Thames (DAVE BRADLEY IC742 6-7932)
Pressure Drop ((A. J. deLange))
first beer good? ("Bryan L. Gros")
Losses During Primary to Secondary Racking (BernardCh at aol.com)
IBU calculation (Paul Brian)
Iodine-based sanitizers (Steve)
Stainless Passivating (Kyle R Roberson)
mail warning (uucp at ihgw2.lucent.com)
For SUBMISSIONS to be published, send mail to:
homebrew at aob.org
For (UN)SUBSCRIBE requests, send mail to:
homebrew-digest-request@ aob.org
and include ONLY subscribe or unsubscribe in the BODY of the message.
Please note that if 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
If your address is changing, please unsubscribe from the old address and
then subscribe from the new address.
If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first.
For technical problems send e-mail to the Digest Janitor, shawn at aob.org.
OTHER HOMEBREW INFORMATION
http://www.aob.org/aob - The AHA's web site.
http://alpha.rollanet.org - "The Brewery" and the Cat's Meow Archives.
info at aob.org - automated e-mail homebrewing information.
ARCHIVES:
At ftp.stanford.edu in /pub/clubs/homebrew/beer via anonymous ftp. Also
http://alpha.rollanet.org on the web and at majordomo at aob.org by e-mail.
COPYRIGHT:
As with all forums such as this one, copyrights are retained by the
original authors. In accordance with the wishes of the members of the
Homebrew Digest, posts to the HBD may NOT be sold or used as part of a
collection that is sold without the original authors' consent. Copies
may ONLY be made available at no charge and should include the current
posting and subscription addresses for the HBD.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: shawn at aob.org (Shawn Steele)
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 15:44:06 -0600
Subject: NEWS FLASH!
With all of the discussion about the LongShot beers, I thought I'd let
everyone know that the LongShot brewers will be at the GABF... and also
they will be "talking" at the Virtual GABF on the World Wide Web next
Thursday, Friday and Saturday (September 26-28) from 8:00 to 8:30
mountain time, so if you have any questions for them, ask them then.
Several professional brewers as well as Charlie Papazian (You Know
Who), Jim Dorsch (Beer Writer) and James Spence (PPBT Judge) will also
be attending. If you have a homebrew club, you may want to arrange a
special club meeting somewhere with Internet access. For more
information look at the schedule at:
http://beertown.org/gabf/virtual.html
- -shawn
Shawn Steele
Webmaster
Association of Brewers (303) 447-0816 x 118 (voice)
736 Pearl Street (303) 447-2825 (fax)
PO Box 1679 shawn at aob.org (e-mail)
Boulder, CO 80306-1679 info at aob.org (aob info)
U.S.A. http://beertown.org (web)
Return to table of contents
From: RUSt1d? <rust1d at li.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 96 13:04:34 -0700
Subject: Mashing Pumpkin and Other Stuff
timtroyr at ionet.net__read sig before replying (Tim Robinson) wrote:
>Frankly, I'm ready to skip mashing the pumpkin and adding it straight to the
>boil, and then siphoning after primary in a manner that will leave the
>pumpkin sludge behind.
How about this. Mash grains without the pumpkin. When conversion is
complete, run the first runnings from the tun (do not mash out!)
into the kettle and then add the pumpkin. There should be sufficient
enzymes left in the first runnings to convert the starch in the
pumpkin while it's in the kettle (this will eliminate any sparging
nightmares). After converting the pumpkin, finish sparging the
grains into the kettle and boil the pumpkin with the wort.
I have also thought of doing this when mashing pure corn starch.
Which makes me wonder (WMMW), is mashing corn starch basically the
same as adding corn sugar to the copper? Is it worth the trouble to
mash corn starch or should I just add corn sugar?
In an unrelated thread, someone mentioned that in a case of beer
they had conditioning, all the yeast was clinging to one side of
the bottle. Someone suggested something about magnetic influences
on the yeast that attracted it to one side. WMMW, could yeast be
influenced by a large magnet placed under the fermenter? Would
this cause the yeast to settle quicker? AS&S sell strong magnets
cheap. Maybe it's time to experiment (read: brew more beer).
- --
John Varady
Boneyard Brewing Co.
"Ale today, Gone tomorrow"
Return to table of contents
From: Steve Alexander <stevea at clv.mcd.mot.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 13:08:43 -0400
Subject: RIMS - Disadvantages and some thoughts.
Daryl K Kalenchuk asks about RIMS disadvantages ...
Before I list disadvantages, note that I am in favor of any technique
or apparatus that allows greater parameter control and/or
repeatability, and RIMS certainly does this. I've also recently
tasted some very good HB beers brewed on a RIMS, so don't suppose that
I am opposed to the RIMS methodology on pragmatic grounds. I do
believe that it is a limited first generation design and has
substantial room for improvement.
* The small high capacity heating elements used in typical RIMS means
that a large amount of thermal energy is transferred over the rather
small surface area of the heating element. This leads to very high
thermal gradient, and so high temperatures in the immediate vicinity
of the heating element. This would suggest thermal loss of enzymes,
coagulation of proteins and caramelization of sugars.
* The pumps typical of RIMS design cause substantial shear force
which can, and undoubtedly does denature proteins and enzymes to
some extent. Throttling flow rates with a valve exacerbates this
problem. This issue is addressed in commercial enzymatic processes
by specialized pump design.
* Very thick mashes are probably not possible with a RIMS apparatus,
as the amount of fluid available for recirculation and the amount of
time requires for the liquid to sump would undoubtedly cause
cavitation and/or loss of priming wort in the up-tube and subsequent
heating problems.
* RIMS recirculation is probably not possible with very sticky mashes,
for example those that include a high proportion of wheat, rye and
perhaps rice.
(For example I brewed a Roggen clone a few weeks ago that used 63%
rye malt in a double decoction mash schedule. The two decoctions
made the rye grist much more amenable to sparging. But in the
interim the mash consistency was something like elmers glue and
thick oatmeal Not RIMSable I think.)
- -- Advantage/Disadvantage --
* I really think that the liquid/electrical danger issue should be
added to the disadvantages list - Just as the advantage of no open
propane flames and no resulting fumes certainly should be added to
the advantages.
===
It is useful to consider the mashing/sparging process which involves
mixing strike water and grist, adding heat and evenly distributing it
throughout the mash, setting up a grainbed thru recirculation and then
draining sweet wort throughout a sparge period.
All these functions combine synergistically into a nicely practical
single bit of hardware called a RIMS. And there are many
*conveniences* in the use of a RIMS, but I am going to consider issues
of control and quality. If I wanted convenience I'd buy beer.
Taking the last stage first, the setup of the grainbed and extraction
of sweet wort probably is no better with a RIMS than with conventional
HB hardware. It has been suggested on HBD that the extremely clear
highly recirculated runnings from a RIMS setup may lack sufficient
lipids for optimal yeast growth. It's hard to argue that a RIMS
sparge isn't slightly more repeatable than a conventional sparge, but
it isn't clear that repeatability has much value at this late stage.
The initial dough-in stage owes little to the RIMS apparatus except
convenience of pumping. After some initial mixing it's possible to
recirc wort with the RIMS to thoroughly mix the mash. The shear
forces in the pump at this early stage may be objectionable. Also a
RIMS probably can't take mashes as thick a those that I usually use at
dough-in and during the protein rest. A paddle undoubtedly generates
less shear force than a pump at this stage. Does the RIMS add to
control or repeatability at this stage ? Hard to answer, but it seems
unlikely. The major objective of getting grist in contact with water
and preventing balling still requires substantial human intervention
and observation I think.
Mash schedule w/ temp stepping - This is where RIMS has it's most
obvious advantages - and this is after all the most critical stage of
the process. A program controlled RIMS can undoubtedly accurately
repeat very complex mash schedules. If adequate temperature sensing
is done, then there is the possibility for excellent mash time & temp
accuracy too. The RIMS pumps' shear force loss of enzymes and
proteins continues to be a negative and the high temperatures produced
at the very small surface if the waterheater element is an even
greater threat to the wort. In theory a burner and a human stirrer
with a thermometer can do an excellent job, but in practice we all
know that a moments inattention causes the dreaded scorched pot
syndrome or at least temperature drift with remarkable frequency. The
RIMS pretty clearly wins this stage - BUT ...
A more gentle stirring mechanism and a larger surface area lower
temperature heating element would be unmitigated improvements to a
RIMS IMO. Also notice that a RIMS is taking the sugar and enzyme rich
wort and subjecting it to heat and shear forces. Ideally we'd like to
heat perfectly evenly - or selectively heat the grist. It seems
nearly impossible to heat evenly. Heating the grist rather than the
wort might achieve some of the many advantages of decoction.
Steve Alexander
Return to table of contents
From: jay at ro.com (Jay Reeves)
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 12:27:57 -0500
Subject: Just Hops is No Hops
In HBD 2191 Al Korzonas sez:
>When it comes to hop varieties, nobody has a wider selection (and in
>whole hop form) than Mark Kellums at Just Hops. The number is 217-864-4216.
Sorry, but Just Hops now has absolutly the smallest selection of hops as
in no hops at all. Mark sold out to Highlander Homebrew in Colorado
Springs (800-934-2739). Mark said he was tired of doing it and it seemed
he never have time for anything like brewing and family. He said that
Just Hops is supposed to continue as Just Hops but it will be run by,
and from, Highlander Homebrew. Highlander is not yet setup as all of
the equipment is not in their possesion. Mark didn't know when
Just Hops would reappear.
I hope Highlander does as good a job as Mark -- I liked the vaccum packing
job he did.
-Jay Reeves
Huntsville, Alabama, USA
Return to table of contents
From: "Toler, Duffy L." <TOLERD at cdnet.cod.edu>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 96 12:26:00 PDT
Subject: Just Hops
Al writes:
>When it comes to hop varieties, nobody has a wider selection (and in
>whole hop form) than Mark Kellums at Just Hops. The number is
217-864-4216.
Unfortunately, I just found out about Just Hops and got excited that we had
a hop dealer in Illinois. I did send an E-mail to Mark and he replied:
Just Hops has switched hands. It's now in Colorado. Call 1 800 934 BREW and
they will be happy to help you out.
Oh well!
Duffy
Return to table of contents
From: RUSt1d? <rust1d at li.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 13:54:49 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Just Hops
>Unfortunately, I just found out about Just Hops and got excited that we had
>a hop dealer in Illinois. I did send an E-mail to Mark and he replied:
>
>Just Hops has switched hands. It's now in Colorado. Call 1 800 934 BREW and
>they will be happy to help you out.
For comparable prices to Just Hops, try the Malt and Hop Stop, also in
Illinois. I placed an order yesterday. Free shipping and at prices
cheaper then most. blah blah blah (<-standard disclaimer).
http://www.mcs.net/%7Emaltnhop/home.html
John Varady
Boneyard Brewing Co.
"Ale today, Gone tomorrow"
Return to table of contents
From: Tim Martin <TimM at southwest.cc.nc.us>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 14:28:13 -0300
Subject: Oops to Vienna and Victory malts
Hey Neighbors,
Will the idiot who confused Vienna with Victory malt please
take one giant step forward.........me. I apologized if I
confused anyone else. See, I was relying on memory when I
posted and as any of you that are over 40 know this can be
dangerous and those of you that aren't, just wait. Thanks to
all for setting me straight. However, the discussion did help
me understand grains and enzymes a little better.
Tim Martin
Buzzard's Roost Homebrewery
"with that strong predatory taste"
Cullowhee, NC.
Return to table of contents
From: wchase at alpha.utampa.edu (DON CHASE)
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 13:23:57 -0400
Subject: Re: 1st time brewing
Timothy J Kniveton asks:
>What is the probability that a beginning homebrewer will turn out a
>decent first batch of beer? second? third?
I can only speak from personal experience here, but my 1st batch was decent.
By decent, I mean better than drinkable, but not what I was truly aiming for.
My dad loved it, the guy up the street loved it, I drank it.
By my 4th batch, I was gaining confidence, and brewed a mostly extract
"Guiness" clone that was quite good. Good enough in fact to take 2nd place
at our monthly club meeting, with an average score of 34.
>Is it a random variable, or more of a random question?
I say it's a product of how well you embrace the homebrewer's philosophy:
Relax, Have a Homebrew.
My beer got (and gets) progressively better as I learned that no matter how
much you worry about your beer, it's still going to turn out or not. I don't
get all worked up over the details, I just brew. I helped a friend brew his
1st batch. He got so worked up over doing everything exactly right that he
oversanitized, and his beer was swill. On his 2nd attempt, with the memory
of his 1st try still on his taste buds, he was so careful not to oversanitize
and undersanitized somewhere along the line. When he asked if I would help
with his 3rd batch, I stipulated that he relax and drink at least 3 homebrews
before we even got started. This was the best beer either of us have ever
brewed.
This is my $0.02, FWIW. I'm not the most experienced brewer, and if you find
a different system that works for you, by all means use it! This is just my
advice to any 1st time or less experienced brewers:
Relax, Have a Homebrew. Learn it. Live it. Love it.
PS - My tagline doesn't refer to the _truly_ anal-retentive beer drinker, just
the ones anal-retentive enough to drink a commercial beer and say, "I could
do better than that!"
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don Chase | Hombrewing : the only sport open exclusively
Objectivist...Businessman... | to anal-retentive alcoholics.
Homebrewer. | Relax...have a homebrew.
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Return to table of contents
From: Jim Larsen <jal at oasis.novia.net>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 13:44:11 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Color malts
George De Piro in HBD 2192 notes:
I used 2 ounces of chocolate malt in a 5.5 US gal. batch of Dunkle
that was pretty good. The flavor contribution of 2 ounces of
chocolate malt was just about nil, and the color was right on.
While I have not made a Dunkel, I do brew Bocks using 2-4 ounces
of chocolate malt in 10 gallons. The chocolate not only adds color, but a
touch of dryness to balance the malty sweetness. It certainly does not
impart the sharp bitterness associated with the chocolate in a porter.
Jim
Return to table of contents
From: George_De_Piro at berlex.com (George De Piro)
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 15:11:30 -0700
Subject: RE: Decoction mashing / Munich malt / Lag times
Hi!
Rick expressed a desire to decoction mash, in part to achieve caramel
flavor and deep garnet color. Decoction mashing isn't necessary for
these, and in fact, I try to minimize caramelization of the sugars by
stirring the mash constantly.
The biggest reason to decoct at home is to allow sugars and amino
acids to form malty-tasting compounds (melanoidins). A by-product of
this process is deepening of wort color, but you can achieve the same
colors by adjusting the mash bill of an infusion mashed recipe.
I won't get into my strong belief that Maerzen shouldn't taste like
caramel again...
----------------------
In reply to my own post on Munich malt, I forgot about the darker
grades because I can't find them! The stuff I use (from Ireks) is too
light to make a 100% Munich Malt Dunkles, but if the darker ones are
diastatic enough to convert themselves, it could be done.
Anybody know a good source of the other grades?
----------------------
Tom Castle asks if long lag times are a Good Thing or Bad Thing. The
answer is Bad Thing! (quite emphatically)
Long lag times are usually indicative of under-aeration or
under-pitching, or both. They give other, unwelcome microbes a chance
to do their bit and contribute off-qualities to the beer (especially a
cooked vegetable smell).
The yeast are going to be making CO2 in all phases off growth; foam is
not just indicative of anaerobic fermentation.
15-20 hours is a long time, but the beer won't necessarily suffer.
Have fun!
George De Piro (Nyack, NY)
Return to table of contents
From: Ken Sullivan <kj at nts.gssc.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 13:47:58 -0600
Subject: Found!! Stopper-to-hole size table!
Well, I called our local homebrew store.. What's Brewin' in Boulder,CO
and they faxed me a table which I converted into electronic format.
For anyone else who might be curious...
This is a table of Hole sizes and the Rubber stopper sizes
Hole Size Stopper# Dimensions (bottom - top)
- -----------------------------------------------------
3/4" A #2 5/8 - 13/16
1" B #5 15/16 - 1 1/16"
1 1/16" C #5.5 31/32 - 1 1/8"
1 1/8" D #6 1 1/16 - 1 1/4"
1 3/16" E #6.5 1 3/32 - 1 5/16"
1 1/4" F #7 1 3/16 - 1 7/16"
1 6/16" G #7.5 1 7/32 - 1 17/32"
1 1/2" H #8 1 5/16 - 1 5/8"
1 5/8" I #8.5 1 13/32 - 1 11/16"
1 11/16" J #9 1 1/2 - 1 3/4"
1 3/4" K #9.5 1 15/32 - 1 25/32"
1 7/8" L #10 1 21/32 - 1 31/32"
1 15/16" M #10.5 1 3/4 - 2 1/32"
2" N #11 1 7/8 - 2 3/16"
2 1/8" O #11.5 1 7/8 - 2 7/16"
2 1/4" P #12 2 1/8 - 2 1/2"
2 1/2" Q #13 2 9/32 - 2 11/16"
3 1/4" R #14 2 15/16 - 3 9/16"
3 3/4" S #15 3 1/4 - 4 1/16"
enjoy!
Return to table of contents
From: KennyEddy at aol.com
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 15:58:24 -0400
Subject: Computer Controlled Brewing / Rubber Stopper Hole Sizes
Ian Smith asks about controlling a RIMS with a computer:
"I would like to automate my mash and sparge with a computer. Is it
possible to buy a card that will convert a thermocouple (or other temp
sensor) to an input that can be read by a computer ? I would also like to
turn an electric heater on and off as well as some valves and a pump. Has
anyone tried this ? "
I've thought about it but decided that for me the logistics of locating my PC
near my brewery were not worth the effort. But while I was thinking about
it, I came across a PC card that looks almost custom-made for the job.
ComputerBoards, Inc (125 High Street, Mansfield, MA 02048, 508-261-1123)
sells a card called the "CIO-DAS08/Jr" for ** $99 **. It has 8 12-bit
analog-input channels (+/- 5 volt range), 8 digital outputs, and 8 digital
inputs. It's entirely I/O mapped (including the start-conversion command) so
you can talk to it with simple input and output commands like "peek" and
"poke" in BASIC or IN and OUT in assembly language. For another $50, you can
add a two-channel analog-output chip, though I don't think it's necessary for
a home brewery.
Attaching an LM34 temperature sensor to an analog input gives you better than
0.3-degree F (or deg C if using LM35) resolution, and you can use the
cheap-grade $1.50 LM34D by doing a two-point calibration and storing the
correction factors in the software. This should put your accuracy well
withing one degree. The digital outputs sink 24 mA so they can directly
drive LED's, solid-state relays, and some sensitive-coil mechanical relays.
I would recommend adding an external relay- or optically-isolated interface
for any digital I/O that are driving or sensing large voltages, to protect
the PC.
With this many digital lines available, you could add electric solenoid
valves to your system and control more than just the mash. An entire home
brewery can be built using seven valves (see any of the excellent RIMS pages
out there) so you could conceivably automate the whole process.
I've bought lots of cards from ComputerBoards here at work, and their prices
are much lower than anyone else's while quality-wise I've never had a problem
with any card nor with the order. If you can write the required control
software, and rig a couple of cables and relays, you're in business for about
$100.
*****
Ken Sullivan asks
"Hi all, does anyone out there have a table which correlates
rubber stopper sizes with hole sizes for the purpose of
selecting the proper drill bit??"
From a recent McMaster-Carr catalog (all dimensions inches):
Size Large Small Hole
End Dia End Dia Dia
00 9/16 3/8 1/8
0 11/16 1/2 1/8
1 3/4 9/16 5/32
2 13/16 5/8 13/64
3 15/16 11/16 "
4 1 25/32 "
5 1-1/16 7/8 "
6 1-1/4 1 "
7 1-7/16 1-3/16 "
8 1-5/8 1-5/16 "
9 1-3/4 1-7/16 "
10 1-15/16 1-5/8 "
Please note that this table applies to rubber stoppers and that cork stoppers
of the same "number" are of different size. I have no idea whether this
table is "standard".
*****
Ken Schwartz
El Paso, TX
KennyEddy at aol.com
http://members.aol.com/kennyeddy
Return to table of contents
From: hollen at vigra.com
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 96 14:06:03 PDT
Subject: Re: Newbie probability?
>> Timothy J Kniveton writes:
TJK> What is the probability that a beginning homebrewer will turn out a
TJK> decent first batch of beer? second? third?
TJK> Is it a random variable, or more of a random question?
If you do a good bit of research, both book learning and talking to
your local supply store person (if they know what they are doing),
rehearse the brew procedures the day before and stick to what you have
read and been told, the probability is high of making a good batch of
beer the first time.
If you grab a kit, don't follow the directions and are disorganized
and do foolish things like dip an unsanitary spoon in your primary
fermenter, the chances of making a load of doodoo are high.
Brewing good drinkable beer ain't rocket science, or even very
difficult at all.
Brewing excellent beer takes a while, but at least you can be working
on it while drinking good drinkable beer.
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: M257876 at sl1001.mdc.com (BAYEROSPACE)
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 17:06 -0600
Subject: pressure drop in hose
collective homebrew conscience:
kelly jones wrote:
>So, if I use 10 feet of hose, I should get about 30 psi drop, right? Now,
>if I hook this up to my keg, which is carbonated/pressurized at only 10 psi,
>I should have (10 - 30) = negative 20 psi at the tap. Will this negative
>presssure cause my keg to suck air back through the line into the keg, or
>will the negative pressure cause the hose to collapse, thus preventing any
>flow at all?
this is an entertaining question. firstly, the assumption that you will have
"negative twenty" psi at the tap is not entirely correct. the beer has to
move through the hose before the hose can take its toll on the head pressure
you're pushing with. so what would happen? i believe that the beer would
eventually, slowly, get to the tap and come out. i say this because
i believe the restriction value of 3 psi per foot is based on some nominal
rate of flow in an equilibrium condition. i don't believe the restriction
is 3 psi per foot if the beer moves significantly slower than the rate of
flow used to generate the tables for hose restriction.
i think the 10 psi (above atmospheric) is enough to overcome the smaller
amount of friction the beer generates at a very slow rate of flow. the
equilibrium condition would be the beer flowing (at slower than the rate of
flow used to generate the restriction value of 3 psi/ft) out the tap. the
pressure differential on the fluid mass is great enough to ensure that some
motion occurs (i believe).
but the underlying point is that you don't NEED 10 feet of hose. the values
of restriction for different sized hoses are to enable you to buy the minimum
amount you need FOR A DESIRABLE RATE OF FLOW and carbonation level at
temperature.
boy, i'm going to feel really stupid if this isn't the right answer.
brew hard,
mark bayer
Return to table of contents
From: korz at pubs.ih.lucent.com
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 96 17:10:53 CDT
Subject: All Vienna, All Munich
Don writes:
>Only two varieties of Vienna malt are listed in the
>article, US and German and are only 3-4 L. When used
>as 100% of the total grain bill will result in the proper
>color.
I think that modern Vienna malts are quite a bit lighter than
the ones of Anton Dreher's time. I think you're right about
an all-Vienna malt beer being too light for the current
AHA guidelines for Vienna (8 to 12 SRM).
On the other hand:
>There are several varieties of Munich malt listed and range in
>color from 7.8 L to 30 L. Using 100% Munich to produce a Munich
>Dunkel with 10 L Munich malt will result in a beer that is 22.5
>SRM, which is over the range of 17-20 SRM, according to the
>1995 AHA style guidelines.
Whoa! Beer colour is quite a bit more complicated than multiplying
degrees Lovibond times pounds and dividing by gallons. An Appendix
in George & Laurie Fix's Vienna/O'fest/Maerzen explains this
(although someone recently pointed out (in Brewing Techniques) a
possible error in one of the datapoints). Another source is the
series of articles on beer colour by Ray Daniels in Brewing Techniques.
[Let me take this opportunity to suggest to those of you that don't
yet subscribe to Brewing Techniques: subscribe! If you are serious
about brewing, you will learn something about brewing in every issue!
Just a satisfied subscriber, blah, blah, blah...]
My practical experience has indicated that an all-Munich (DeWolf-
Cosyns or Ireks) will give you a really nice Duesseldorf Alt or
Munich Dunkel and within the AHA guidelines. They would be at
the light end, but would not be out of style. As for extraction,
I got something like 28 pts/lb/gal from both, which is within my
usual range. Seriously, 30 degrees Lintner is enough for malt to
convert itself unless one was sloppy with hitting the saccharification
rest and overshot terribly. DWC Munich is about 50 deg Lintner and
DWC Aromatic is about 30. I've gotten Aromatic to convert itself
with no other malts present (that's not to say a beer made from
100% Aromatic would taste very good -- hmmm... naa, I don't think
it would... too sharp, my guess).
Having tasted the wide variety of Munich Dunkels in Bavaria last
summer, I will agree with George that 100% Munich malt used in
an infusion mash will not give that super-malty, almost chocolaty
flavour of an Ayinger Altbayerisch Dunkel, but it will give one
similar to the Dunkels from a number of other Bavarian brewers.
Decoction mashing makes a big difference here, I feel.
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korzonas at lucent.com
Return to table of contents
From: DAVE BRADLEY IC742 6-7932 <BRADLEY_DAVID_A at LILLY.COM>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 22:31:50 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Wyeast Thames
I've used this Thames Valley yeast for two batches thus far.
With no attenuation numbers at hand, I can only say it has
behaved comparably to the Irish, Chico and London ale strains
in terms of lag times. With an appropriate starter, I get
1-2" krausen in my open fermenter within 8-10hrs. My aeration
has been via aquarium pump, and starters for these 10-12gal
batches have been stepped to 3qts, when settled giving a 1 inch
yeast cake in the starter vessel's 6 inch diameter bottom.
Taste profile thus far is a bit more fruity than the London Ale
yeast, with better attenuation than the Irish yeast. Didn't seem
to give as dry a beer as the London ale yeast has for me. YMMV.
Dave in Indy
Home of the 3-D B.B.B.
Return to table of contents
From: ajdel at interramp.com (A. J. deLange)
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 00:18:22 -0500
Subject: Pressure Drop
Kelley Jones should have put one of those cute little ASCII faces with its
tongue in its cheek at the end of his post on pressure drops through
dispensing hoses. Just in case anyone took it seriously, the pressure drop
across a dispensing hose is always the guage pressure of the tank. The drop
of x psi per y feet (or meters or whatever) is the pressure drop at nominal
flow rate and viscosity for the specified hose bore. The object is to
select a hose bore and length which drops most of the tank pressure (set to
maintain the desired carbonation level) when the beer is flowing at a
reasonable rate. This insures a gentle flow into the glass.
A.J. deLange Numquam in dubio, saepe in errore!
ajdel at interramp.com
Return to table of contents
From: "Bryan L. Gros" <grosbl at ctrvax.Vanderbilt.Edu>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 16:16:18 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: first beer good?
Tim asks:
>What is the probability that a beginning homebrewer will turn out a
>decent first batch of beer? second? third?
Tim, the probability is very high. Much higher than what the brewer
thinks.
It seems like such an involved process the first time and so many
variables to watch, but it really is quite forgiving and after all that
waiting, the first bottle always tastes great.
- Bryan
grosbl at ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu
Nashville, TN
Return to table of contents
From: BernardCh at aol.com
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 21:23:19 -0400
Subject: Losses During Primary to Secondary Racking
I'm fairly new to this homebrewing stuff. I apologize in advance if this is
a stupid question.
When I rack from my primary to secondary fermenter (both 5 gallon glass
carboys) I seem to lose anywhere between 3 quarts to 1 gallon of beer. I
know that I've started with 5 gallons (calibrated the carboy) and I know that
I lose about 12 or so ounces when starting the siphon; where does the rest
go?
There is a fair amount of trub "gunk" in the bottom of the primary fermenter.
However when I go to clean the primary after racking, the "solids" seem to
disappear. Where did they go?
Am I right in thinking that the trub "solids" are displacing the wort, and
that I really haven't started with five gallons. If this is the case, anyone
have any suggestions on how to eliminate the trub gunk from getting into the
primary. I already use an immersion chiller to rapidly cool the wort and
whirlpool the brewpot and let it sit for about ten minutes before
transferring into the primary. However there usually isn't much trub left in
the center of the pot after racking, it all seems to be in the fermenter.
I'm tired of having 20% of my beer go "somewhere!"
Thanx in advance for any help.
Chuck in Nashville, TN
"Music City USA"
Return to table of contents
From: Paul Brian <pbrian at Tudor.Com>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 96 13:08:34 -0400
Subject: IBU calculation
Can someone please give me a lesson calculating IBU's? I tried using someone's
calculator on the Net but don't know the boil gravity of 6.5 lbs of liquid malt
extract in a 3 gal boil. Do a pound of grains add to the gravity? Also, I
added 1.5 pounds of honey with the flavor hops, how do you compensate for that?
Here's the exact recipe:
Honey Ale
6 lb Light LME
.5 lb Light DME
.5 lb Belgium Biscuit Malt
.5 lb Crystal Malt
1 oz Columbus Hops (12.4%) 60 min
1 oz Cascade Hops (5.5%) 20 min
1.5 lb Orange Blossum Honey 20 min
1 oz cascade Hops (5.5%) steep
O.G. 1.045
F.G. 1.013
IBU's ?
I did a 3 gal boil and added it to 2.5 gal cold water in carboy. It tasted
great last night at bottling no matter what the IBU level is, I was just
curious how to calculate them. Thanks in advance for any help.
Cheers,
Paul Brian
Stamford, CT
Return to table of contents
From: Steve <JOHNSONS at UANSV5.VANDERBILT.EDU>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 16:38:23 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Iodine-based sanitizers
In line with the never ending quest to find things in bulk so that you can
save yourself and/or your friends some bucks, I stopped in to visit one of
our local food and restaurant supply companies that is open to retail sales to
the public to look for some Iodophor or something along those same lines.
Nothing was available on the shelves, but I spoke with the customer service
rep who looked through her stock book and found an item listed as "Iosan" and
included some vague descriptors as to what it was used for...as a detergent/
sanitizer and could be used as a final rinse. Added that it was good for
cleaning out drink dispensers. No info as to how much of the percentage was
titratable iodine like they put on the side of those little bottles of Iodophor
or such
at the homebrew stores. But, at $23.05 bottle for a gallon, it may be a
worthwhile investment for me and my other homebrewing comrades. Anybody know
anything about this stuff? The store in question is Robert Orr / Sysco in
Nashville, TN.
Steve Johnson
Music City Brewers
Return to table of contents
From: Kyle R Roberson <roberson at beta.tricity.wsu.edu>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 20:59:36 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Stainless Passivating
Can the metalurgists amongst us please email me with
recommendations for acid strength and composition for
passivating stainless steel (both inside and out)? For
the inside, I expect to circulate it through a pump and
CIP. I also want the acid (or other) to remove flux, oils
and whatever else might be hanging around. These are newly
manufactured tanks.
TIA,
Kyle
roberson at beta.tricity.wsu.edu
Return to table of contents
From: uucp at ihgw2.lucent.com
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 96 00:45 CDT
Subject: mail warning
We have been unable to contact machine 'igc' to deliver mail you sent.
Our attempts to deliver your mail will continue for 2 more day(s).
No further action is required by you.
The following mail has not been delivered:
igc!mail pubs.ih.lucent.com!korz (Date 09/17)
If you wish to kill the job, contact our administrator at
postmaster at att.com (att!postmaster) and ask to kill UUCP job igcJ3467.
Sincerely,
postmaster at att.com
#################### Data File: ####################
From aob.org!Homebrew Tue Sep 17 20:15:32 GMT 1996 remote from lucent
Received: by ihgw2.lucent.com; Tue Sep 17 15:17 CDT 1996
To: korz at pubs.ih.lucent.com
From: Homebrew at aob.org
Subject: Your Message has been received
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 96 20:15:32 GMT
Sender: Homebrew at aob.org
Message-ID: <9609172015.aa17209 at bacchus.aob.org>
Source-Info: From (or Sender) name not authenticated.
Your message, which follows, has been received and will be posted to the list.
The following Subjects are currently scheduled for the next digest:
001 -- RE: Pro's homebrewing
002 -- Longshot
003 -- dextrins/lager yeast?/Brewer's Gold/bad beer/sucking air/copper
004 -- Some new stuff
005 -- HBD buyers co-operative
After processing, your message to be posted is:
Received: from algw1.lucent.com by bacchus.aob.org id aa17192;
17 Sep 96 14:15 MDT
Originally-From: korz at pubs.ih.lucent.com
From: Homebrew Digest REQUEST Address Only <homebrew-request@ aob.org>
Received: from pubs.ih.lucent.com by alig1.att.att.com (SMI-8.6/EMS-1.2 sol2)
id QAA01092; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 16:19:18 -0400
Received: by pubs.ih.lucent.com (4.1/EMS-L SunOS)
id AA22516; Tue, 17 Sep 96 15:14:23 CDT
Original-From: korzonas at lucent.com (Algis R Korzonas)
Received: by pubs.ih.lucent.com (4.1/EMS-L SunOS)
id AA22509; Tue, 17 Sep 96 15:14:16 CDT
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 96 15:14:16 CDT
Message-Id: <9609172014.AA22509 at pubs.ih.lucent.com>
Original-From: korz at pubs.ih.lucent.com (Algis R Korzonas)
To: homebrew at aob.org
Subject: Northdown hops/dispensing pressure/sucrose/late oxygen additions
Errors-To: bacchus at aob.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: korz at pubs.ih.lucent.com, Homebrew Digest POSTING Address Only
<homebrew at aob.org>
Paul writes:
>Northdown is
>one of the newer general purpose British hops, working well for bittering
>or later additions, with moderately high acid content (8.6% for my package.)
>The closest alternatives are Target or Challenger (although they might be just
>as hard to get.)
When it comes to hop varieties, nobody has a wider selection (and in
whole hop form) than Mark Kellums at Just Hops. The number is 217-864-4216.
(No affiliation, just a satisfied customer and respectful competetor).
***
Chris writes:
>Alan Edwards posted a most useful CO2
>saturation table relating temperature and keg carbonating pressure to obtain
>a desired carbonation level. How does this relate to dispensing pressure? A
>few months back Ken Schwartz discussed the expected pressure drop from keg to
>mug through the various fittings, length of tubing, etc. If the carbonating
>pressure and dispensing pressure are different, how do you keep the
>carbonation level constant?
If you set up your system right (proper length of proper diameter hose
for a given pressure) you should be able to dispense at the same pressure
as that with which you carbonated. This way, the beer is always ready
to be served and always properly carbonated. The key is setting the
pressure right (from Alan's great tables) and then having long-enough and
small-enough hoses to drop all that pressure. If you still have foam,
try a narrower or longer hose. I use a 6- to 8-foot length of 3/16" ID
beer line for my beers served at 50F.
***
>I've searched the archives and they do indicate that sucrose
>(tablet sugar) is derived from sugar beets.
In europe. In the US it's virtually (if not all) from cane sugar. Both
cane and beet sugar are almost 100% sucrose (table sugar).
***
Duff writes:
>I know it's possible (I hear) for yeast to run out of oxygen before running
>out of fermentable sugars in high gravity brews (barleywine, scotch
>heavies, tripplebocks, meads, etc.) even if the wort is saturated with O2
>at the time of pitching (at fermentation temps). What would happen if one
>waited until "primary" fermentation had slowed down to a crawl or apparent
>end and then siphoned into a corney for further fermentation, then force
>"oxygenated" the keg with an O2 tank instead of a CO2 tank?
You would get oxidized beer. Yeast don't "run out" of oxygen. They
absorb the oxygen from the wort within a few hours of pitching. They use
this oxygen to build cell membranes. If there is insufficient oxygen
at pitching time, the yeast will have weak cell membranes and therefore
poor alcohol tolerance. There is a relationship between oxygen needs and
high-gravity worts/musts, but the oxygen needs to be added before any
alcohol is created. Adding oxygen during the violent fermentation will
increase diacetyl production (try Samuel Smith's Nut Brown Ale). Adding
oxygen when the fermentation is over or almost over will only oxidize the
alcohols into aldehydes (yuk!) and wipe out any aroma you may have gotten
from late kettle hops.
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korzonas at lucent.com
Return to table of contents