---

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

Contents:
  RIMS discussion ("Bridges, Scott")
  Re: RIMS - Disadvantages.. (Steve Alexander)
  Errors-To: bacchus at aob.org (Keith Busby)
  Renfaire results (Bob Wilcox)
  Overnight mashing w/ adjuncts? (Charles Capwell)
  Lager temp/SpG (BREW4YOU at aol.com)
  Crushed Roasted Barley (orion at mdc.net)
  RIMS mash thickness (hollen at vigra.com)
  No Sparg ("Don Van Valkenburg")
  Scorching (Scott Murman)
  Tiny Bubbles -> Foaming problems (Daryl K Kalenchuk)
  USA vs. British 2-row for partial mash (Alex Santic)
  Hop removal/No sparging/Table Sugar/Conversions (Charles Capwell)
  Copper, the BATF, and the FDA (Charles Ewen)
  Softened Water (David Sprague)
  Honey Fermentability ("Kirk R Fleming")
  PPBT?/IBU calculations/Sorry ((Algis R Korzonas))
  MALTMILL Gears (Jack Schmidling)
  Letting it settle (Derek Lyons)
  See you at The Store/Stainless Soldering?/Sankey 1/2 BBL's/Blow-Off/Cleaning Stainless (Rob Moline)
  Perceptions/N2 Draft/Check Valves/Homebrewing Pro's/Kit's Contest/Carboys/GABF! (Rob Moline)

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: "Bridges, Scott" <bridgess at mmsmtp.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 96 16:57:00 PDT
Subject: RIMS discussion

 
 
I just want to say that I *really* like the current RIMS discussion for 2 
reasons.  First, I am currently in the planning stages for my RIMS. 
 Actually, I already have everything except the heating element and 
controller (2 key pieces, one might add).  So, my ears are perking up at any 
RIMS-type threads.  I'd like to encourage continued RIMS 
debate/discussion/etc.  Strangely enough, I'm actually understanding the 
technical stuff. 
 
Secondly, this discussion has a distinctly civil tone about it.  This is 
encouraging.  After some of the recent threads, it does serve to demonstrate 
that a discourse can occur, even to the point of disagreement, without 
losing the people who are interested in the actual content of the 
discussion. 
 
Thanks, Dion, Steve, Kurt, Keith, etc.  Keep it up! 
 
Scott Bridges 
 

Return to table of contents


From: Steve Alexander <stevea at clv.mcd.mot.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 19:12:13 -0400
Subject: Re: RIMS - Disadvantages..

 
Luke Dion says ... 
 
>...Most of us RIMSers are doing it much from 
>the practical standpoint and may not have access to "related" 
>information that is not accessed through any "homebrew" keyword. 
>Multi-disciplinary viewpoints are very valuable. 
 
Hey - I'm just a a homebrew geek with a library card and some subset 
of my original brain cells. 
 
>SA> Another point is that alpha-glucosidase places a significant role in 
... 
>If the RIMS is doing damage to it, how could I tell?  What would be 
 
If you perform a low temp mash (below gelatinization temp) of pale 
malt and get poor extraction, loss of AG may be the culprit. 
 
Shear forces & enzyme loss ... 
>While I don't doubt that it may be happening, what you are talking 
>about is industrial enzymology.  It may be very important to an 
>industrial concern that they are losing 5% of their product to shear 
>forces destroying the enzymes.  But to a homebrewer all that matters 
>is that a *sufficient* amount make it into the relevant parts of the 
>process TO PRODUCE GOOD BEER. 
 
The amount of shear force applied to the wort over time is probably 
pretty extreme in a RIMS.  See Kirk Fleming's excellent post.  But 
you're right, I have no way to quantify this. The symptoms might show 
up as a problem RIMS brewing with high adjunct loads, or long mashes 
that just don't seem to complete conversion in a reasonable time. 
GREAT BEER is the goal, and to get there we need to understand the 
differences that this mashing harddware introduces. 
 
>How's this for a high adjunct load: 
Higher still - I mean 60% to 75% unmalted grain. 
 
>Well, your calculations are sort of skewed.  The 2 qts should not be 
>figured in because it is always in the hose 
 
The extra 2 quarts dilutes the enzymes and enzyme inhibitors and 
soluable carbs - so they are precisely relevent to mashing.  Dion is 
right about excluding the 2 qts from dough-in and balling 
considerations tho'.  This makes water calculations for a RIMS 
different from other mashing techniques. 
 
>If there is *any* other reason for using a thick mash, please pass it 
>on. 
 
M&B Sci chapter 9 discusses the effects on proteolytic enzymes.  If 
your looking for proteolysis (which is much less of a concern w/ most 
modern malts, but consider numalted adjuncts) then go thick.  You 
could also use mash thickness to modulate alpha and beta amylase 
activity, but that is streching the point.  Thicker mashs generally 
afford lower inactivation rates of enzymes, which might be a factor in 
high adjunct, high temp mashes as used by the mega-breweries. 
 
>Again, I agree.  If the brewers technique is marginal with regarding 
>to pitching sufficient healthy yeast ... 
 
Again - yeast growth may be a problem only at the extreme margins - 
but even in a 'normal' beer this might afford a slight difference in 
flavor.  It's something to look for tho'. 
 
>And I would postulate that the proof is in the 
>tasting.  If I can produce beer that can win ribbons in competitions 
... 
Taste is the criteria - I agree.  And some great beers can be made 
with a RIMS - there is no doubt.  The question is what are the 
differences due to mashing method ?  What are the limitations ?  How 
can RIMS methodology best be used to make the various different 
styles?  Even if every difference is an advantage for RIMS, we still 
need a better understanding of how this affects flavor. 
 
I'm proposing *plausible* differences and problems area.  And 
suggesting some areas that could seemingly be improved.  Just as it's 
possible to make a 'good' pilsner with an infusion mash, or a 'good' 
IPA with a decoction mash there will be differences atributable to the 
mashing method.  It is also possible to copy infusion and decoction 
styles with a RIMS mash.  What do we gain? what do we lose?  Are the 
results identical - I don't think so.  Can anyone characterize the 
differences due to RIMS mashing for me ? 
 
Again I have to thank Dion (and Louis Binham and Kirk Fleming) for his 
insightful post.  It has certainly helped my understanding of RIMS 
brewing issue.  The possible 'shortcomings' that I have suggested 
aren't likely be be the source of lousy beer, unless brewing at the 
extremes.  They will undoubtedly cause subtle differences in flavor 
tho' - differences that we should try to understand. 
 
Steve Alexander 
(sorry about my post bandwidth today) 
 

Return to table of contents


From: Keith Busby <kbusby at uoknor.edu>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 19:38:51 -0500
Subject: Errors-To: bacchus at aob.org

Bryan Gros asks about the best fermentation temperature for the Wyeast 
Belgian White. I just brewed a batch of wit and fermented it at our ambient 
temp which was about 73/74. The beer, if I say it myself, beats the Hades 
out of Celis (spijt mij, Pierre). 
 
Keith Busby 
Keith Busby 
George Lynn Cross Research Professor 
Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies 
University of Oklahoma 
780 Van Vleet Oval, Room 202 
Norman, OK 73019 
Tel.: (405) 325-5088 
Fax: (405) 325-0103 
 

Return to table of contents


From: Bob Wilcox <bobw at sirius.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 17:59:47 -0700
Subject: Renfaire results

Has anyone gotten results from the Renaissance Faire competion held 
9/15/96 in Navato Ca. It rained that day and the Boss ,who was going with 
me, is not to fond of stomping in the mud and getting wet, so we didn't 
make it. email would be fine 
 
TIA 
- -- 
Bob Wilcox 
Long Barn Brewing 
bobw at sirius.com 

Return to table of contents


From: Charles Capwell <chas at A119021.sat1.as.crl.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 21:11:27 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Overnight mashing w/ adjuncts?

Since I am now busy w/ school I don't have all that much time to brew. 
However, I was looking at the article on pp. 66-67 of the 1995 Zymurgy 
Special Issue, "Mashing and Saving Time." It looks like a good idea to 
me(but then again the next all-grain batch I do will only be my second), 
but it left me wondering about letting adjuncts sitting all night in 
the mash. Does anyone know if this could cause a problem? I don't want 
to wake up the next morning to a mush insted of a mash. If it will 
turn the mash all mushy, I am right in assuming I could just add the 
adjunct(flaked barley) when I get up and let it sit for about an hour 
while I heat up the sparge water(providing the mash is still at ~155F)? 
 
To provide more information than is probably necessary, here's the 
grain bill for this recipe, which is a 2.5 gal batch: 
 
4 lbs English Pale Ale 
2 lbs English CaraPils 
1.25 lbs Black Patent 
1.25 lbs Roasted Barley 
1 lb Flaked Barley 
 
- -Chas (chas at crl.com) 
 

Return to table of contents


From: BREW4YOU at aol.com
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1996 08:54:15 -0400
Subject: Lager temp/SpG

   I am fermenting a batch of Munich Helles and need some input. 
The starting gravity was 1.049 and after 5 days at a temp of 46 dF 
the SpG was 1.026.  It was racked to my scondary and the new 
temp, day 6-21, was 36-38 dF.  The SpG on day 21 was 1.024. 
   How am I doing?  Is the temp OK?  Will the gravity drop to the 
correct value for this style (1.008-1.012) ? 
    I used a starter with Wyeast 2124 (Bohemian)  and aerated well. 
 
                                                                  Thanks, 
                                                                   Scott 

Return to table of contents


From: orion at mdc.net
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1996 09:53:42 -0400
Subject: Crushed Roasted Barley

Michael David Bateman said: 
 
>        I read that when using roasted barley it should be brought to a 
>boil, then removed from the water.  I also read that the barley should not 
>be crushed.  I was wondering if anyone had ever crushed barley or black 
>patent malt and used it. 
> 
>        My last batch turned out terrible (it tasted like sour milk.)  I've 
>tried to find out why it soured but haven't had any luck so far.  I can 
>only think of two things that may have caused this.  1) My roasted barley 
>seemed to be slightly crushed as did my black patent malt. 
 
I have developed (with my trusty brewing buddy, Andy Q) an excellant Oatmeal 
Stout recipe Hopeless Conditon Oatmeal Stout), and it calls for some Roasted 
Barley. Not knowing any better, or different, we crushed it, along with the 
chocolate malt, dextrine, and two row. The only ill effect was adding *too 
much* roasted barley. The smoky flavor was too overpowering, even for a 13 
gallon batch (1/2 pound of roasted barley). So, on the last batch, I cut the 
roasted to 1/4 pound, and it came through just fine! I plan on continuing to 
crush the roasted, to extract the flavor. Just be sure to limit the amount, 
since it is such a strong flavoring agent. Also, I have witnessed the 
loading of ingredients in a commercial brewery. They put the roasted barley 
and chocolate malt through the same mill as all the other ingredients. In 
fact, their mill was set to grind the grain into very small powder grains. 
 
OD 
            Orville Deutchman 
 
      Brewer of Down Under Ale! 
     Hobby Brewing at its Finest! 
I'm relaxing, and having a homebrew! 
            orion at mdc.net 
 

Return to table of contents


From: hollen at vigra.com
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 96 08:05:24 PDT
Subject: RIMS mash thickness

 
UNCLE!!!  I concede that I had not taken into account enyzme dilution 
when not adding the "fixed" 2 quarts of system volume, but merely mash 
thickness.  I now concede that the 2 quarts matters when considering 
enzyme dilution. 
 
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: "Don Van Valkenburg" <DONVANV at msn.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 96 16:25:13 UT
Subject: No Sparg

As a brewer with many years experience and an owner of a homebrew shop,  I 
will have to cast my vote on the side of no sparge for certain reasons and 
situations: 
 
First for a home brewer trying to make the transition to all grain  or at 
least partial grain from all extract.  I recommend going to more than 50% 
fermentables from grain and no, or minimal sparge.  Poor extraction rates are 
certainly less expensive and produce a better brew than brewing with extract. 
 
 
Also, one can get by with much less equipment; hot liquor tank, large boil pot 
etc. by not sparging, and the difference between a 5 gal and 10 gal pot will 
buy a lot of grain.  By not sparging and just using the concentrated first 
runnings one can get by with only a 5 gal pot. 
 
I recently tried out the EASYMASHER  (no affiliation, usual disclaimers) as a 
method for brewing almost all grain in the kitchen with only a 5 gal boil pot. 
 I installed the Easymasher in a 4 gal pot, added 8 lbs of domestic 2 row, 
with  165 F water, then stabilized the temp to 155 F.  After about an hour 
drained the liquid and minimally sparged to achieve 4 gal in the brew pot.  I 
then added a couple LBS of extract to kick up the gravity a little and boiled. 
 Of course when I finished boiling I only had about 3 gallons, but a very 
concentrated wort.  I then poured this into my fermenter with 2 gal of cold 
water (this also helps cool down).  After complete cool down, pitched yeast. 
The result was a great brew. 
 
Don Van Valkenburg 
donvanv at msn.com 
 
.. 
 

Return to table of contents


From: Scott Murman <smurman at best.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1996 09:25:56 -0700
Subject: Scorching

 
One of the more important factors that contributes to scorching or 
carmalizing is the material you are heating.  Stainless steel is 
desirable from a non-reactive point of view, but its thermal 
properties for cooking leave much to be desired.  One of the reasons 
that heavy gauge aluminum cookware is popular is that it will evenly 
distribute the heat through the entire cooking pot, rather than 
letting it pass through easily and concentrate above the heating 
element.  Unfortunately, heavy gauge aluminum would be far too 
expensive for a 10 or 15 gallon pot.  Many of the dutch-oven type 
cookers will have an aluminum disc sandwiched between two SS discs in 
the base of the pot to overcome the problems of steel.  If you are 
having problems with scorching, try widening your flame to heat a 
greater surface area, or setting your pot on/in another material. 
Then let us know how it works :) 
 
SM 

Return to table of contents


From: Daryl K Kalenchuk <dkk886 at mail.usask.ca>
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1996 11:42 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Tiny Bubbles -> Foaming problems

In HBD 2196 Al Korzonas writes: 
"If you don't believe that this is a factor, take two 50F bottles of beer. 
Shake them. Open one immediately and the other after another hour at 50F. 
If you can explain the difference in the results without the "eddy current" 
solution, then I'd be interested in reading it." 
 
Boy did I get wet when I opened the first one, I just never learn.  Well 
here's your explination.  This explination does nothing to discredit your 
solid advice to wait an hour to serve a shaken keg and your suggestion that 
the cause is the same in the keg and bottle. 
 
Shaking the keg, can, bottle or what ever causes micro bubbles to become 
temporarily suspended in the liquid.  These bubbles provide the nucleation 
site once the CO2 concentration is no longer in equilibrium.  The eddies may 
help in suspending these bubbles but they themselves wouldn't have 
sufficient pressure gradients to create significantly many such sites 
especially at CO2 equilibruim. 
 
I thought of an experiment to show this but it the following illustrates the 
point well. (the hose to the bottom minimizes the amount of air being 
introduced into the beer which would act as nucleation sites) 
 
In HBD 2198 Dave Hinkle with many other good points states: 
", putting a 4" length of 3/8" hose over the 
end of the spout helps less experienced pourers get a good fill. Pouring below 
the surface dramatically reduces foaming, even more so than pouring down the 
side of the mug. " 
 
Incidentally applying this concept can help explain why tapping an shaken 
beverage can can prevent gushing and why knocking an open bottle creates a 
gusher. 
 
HBD's been quite crowed lately so I decided to keep this explanation as 
short as possible,  if you require a more complete explanation please 
contact me privately. 
 
Daryl, 
Saskatoon, (too soon to be great white north)Canada 
 

Return to table of contents


From: Alex Santic <alex at brainlink.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1996 16:40:20 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: USA vs. British 2-row for partial mash

I'm planning on brewing a British-style IPA tomorrow and the timing of my 
starter is right on. At the last moment I've decided to do a partial mash 
recipe instead of just extract and specialty grains, so I went out in 
search of British 2-row pale malt. There was none to be found today at the 
NYC homebrew supply places and it's too late to mail-order. 
 
What I bought instead is American 2-row (I think the maltster was 
Briess). Assuming this is less well-modified malt than the British and I 
do a protein rest rather than just a single-step infusion mash, is there 
anything objectionable to using 2 or 3 pounds of this in a partial mash 
recipe for an IPA? 
 
I note that Terry Foster is somewhat discouraging about this in his Pale 
Ale book, although he seems less concerned in the Porter book because the 
relative flavor contribution of the pale malt is less. 
 
Any pertinent comments within the next 36 hours would be well 
appreciated. Thanks! 
 
Alex Santic 
alex at salley.com 
Silicon Alley Connections, LLC 
New York City 

Return to table of contents


From: Charles Capwell <chas at A119011.sat1.as.crl.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1996 16:27:16 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Hop removal/No sparging/Table Sugar/Conversions

> >From: stevek at propwash.co.symbios.com (Steve kemp) 
> Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 08:14:14 -0600 
> Subject: survey - how do YOU remove hops after the boil??? 
> 
> So to the question: 
> 
> How do YOU remove whole leaf hops from YOUR kettle? 
> 
 
Personally, I use bags. 
 
Well, you could try using your lauter tun as a "hop back" as I 
think Papazian suggests in TNCJOHB. Never tried it myself. 
 
Also the EasyMasher folks have introduced a "cylinder" of SS screen 
that is made to fit racking canes(the metal ones, of course) for this 
purpose. I imagine that if you do put it on a racking cane that keeping 
those troubling leaves from plugging it *might* be aleveated(sp?). Since 
you can move the cane about and dislodge the offending materials. 
 
> >From: KennyEddy at aol.com 
> Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 11:45:22 -0400 
> Subject: RIMS:  Flames versus Electrons / No-Sparge Sparging 
> 
> Louis Bonham talks about "No Sparge" sparging: 
> 
>  If you have room in your mash tun to add the extra grain, it's a worthwhile 
> experiment. 
> 
 
Well, I know I do, and I was going to do a simple pale ale the next time 
I brew(after the current batch that is), so I could splurge for the extra 
grains and post the results. The question that jumps to mind is the effects 
on more complex recipes. Maybe I'll do a couple of batches for comparision 
tests. 
 
Also, this would make my life soooooo much easier when brewing. One of 
the reasons I don't do it that much is because of the time it takes to 
do an all-grain brew. With this I could mash overnight, get up, draw off 
the wort, etc, etc, in a hell of a lot less time. I'd *love* to have the 
time to spend all day brewing(actually I'd *love* to have the time 
to spend all week brewing, but that's another story :) and pay attention 
to every little detail of the process, but circumstances prevent it. 
 
 
> >From: Jeff Frane <jfrane at teleport.com> 
> Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 08:50:37 -0700 (PDT) 
> Subject: Re:Table Sugar 
> 
> Rich Hampo wrote: 
> 
> I can't quite sort out the attributions, and get find the original posting, 
> but the notion that most or all American sugar comes from cane is 
> WRONG.  A simple check on the supermarket shelf will tell you that 
> a signiicant portion of the table sugar, particularly the less expensive 
> packages, is beet sugar.  Cane sugar gets whooped up a lot, 
 
I actually was checking this before I even read this response. At the 
local supermarket I couldn't find anything but cane sugar. I think that 
it all depends on the part of the country you live in. Of course you're 
more likely to find beet sugar in places where cane sugar has to shipped 
in, due to it probably costing less. Now whether or not the consumer 
actually sees this saving is another matter altogether. :> 
 
 
> >From: Mil <milp at cuug.ab.ca> 
> Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 11:50:46 -0600 (MDT) 
> Subject: conversion guidelines 
> 
> I'm looking for some guidelines on the following: 
> 
>  converting all-grain recipes to all-extract recipes 
>  converting all-grain recipes to mash-extract recipes 
>  converting DME requirements to LME requirements. 
> 
 
The 1995 Special Issue of Zymurgy has the first, and that you can turn 
their equation around for the poundage to figure out(roughly) how many 
pounds of grain you'd need. 
 
As for the third, I think the trick would be to bear in mind that the 
DME is about 3% water, while LME is about 20% water. A rule of thumb I 
use is 1.25 lbs LME for ever pound of DME called for in a recipe. 
 
- -Chas (chas at crl.com) 

Return to table of contents


From: Charles Ewen <C.D.Ewen at worldnet.att.net>
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 18:43:53 -0400
Subject: Copper, the BATF, and the FDA

I received a call at the brewery last week from the Regional (New York) BATF 
office.   The Inspector said she was conducting a survey of local breweries 
at the behest of the FDA.   She asked if I used a copper mashtun or copper 
kettle, or has any copper or brass pipes, fittings or valves "anywhere between 
the backflow preventer and the aeration stone". 
 
The Inspector explained that the FDA did not wish food below a pH of 6.0 to 
come into contact with copper or similar soft metals.   She said that any 
brewery using copper equipment would be visited by the BATF, and a sample of 
beer would be taken for analysis. 
 
I found it an amusing coincidence that F. X. Matt has just started an ad 
campaign for their Saranac line of beers, and one of the points that the ads 
make is that Saranac is still brewed "in traditional copper kettles".  I guess 
their analysis was acceptable. 
 
 
Charley Ewen, President                            C.D.Ewen at worldnet.att.net 
The Saw Mill River Brewery, Inc. 
 
 

Return to table of contents


From: David Sprague <dsprague at bga.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1996 19:34:00 -0500
Subject: Softened Water

Hello all.  I am brand new to brewing and have seen a couple of 
conflicting reports on the use of softened water for use in brewing. 
The area in which my wife and I live has an extremely high level of 
chlorine as well as water hardness.  To counteract this we installed a 
system to give our whole house softened water.  The ion exchange resin 
bed, simply put, trades calcium for sodium.  The two viewpoints that I 
have seen is 1) Don't use softened water (from postings on net) and 2) 
pg. 79 of Papazian which states that, "The sodium ion (Na) will 
contribute to the perceived flavor of beer by enhancing other flavors. 
In excess, it will contribute to a harsh, sour or metallic flavor. 
Chlorides (Cl) will tend to lend a soft, round, full, sweet flavor to 
beer."  To me the key word here is "excess" sodium ions.  The hardness 
of the water in this area is about 13 degrees of harness.  I am not sure 
of what scale they use and I will find out, but does anyone out there 
use softened water?  Thank you for your time. 

Return to table of contents


From: "Kirk R Fleming" <flemingk at usa.net>
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1996 19:25:11 -0600
Subject: Honey Fermentability

In #2198 and earlier, folks are talking about honey fermentability and I 
only wanted to provide a data point: og = 1.128, fg = 0.998.  This was my 
first mead ever, and I was absolutely astounded at the attenuation.  This 
was using Wyeast's Dry Mead. 
 

Return to table of contents


From: korzonas at lucent.com (Algis R Korzonas)
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 96 14:19:46 CDT
Subject: PPBT?/IBU calculations/Sorry

Shawn writes: 
>Several professional brewers as well as Charlie Papazian (You Know 
>Who), Jim Dorsch (Beer Writer) and James Spence (PPBT Judge) will also 
 
What's a PPBT Judge? 
 
*** 
Paul writes: 
>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 ? 
 
Well, first I'd like to note that the Belgian Biscuit malt has starch in 
it and neither the Biscuit nor the Crystal have any enzymes to convert it. 
The Biscuit is therefore adding very little other than a starch haze to 
your beer. 
 
To calculate your boil gravity, you figure that you have 6 pounds of 
malt syrup (6 * 35 points) and 1/2 pound of DME (1/2 * 45 points), 
1/2# of crystal (1/2 * 22 points) and 1.5# of honey (1.5 * ~35). 
Total these up and you get 210+22.5+11+52.5 which is 296 points. 
Divide that by 3 gallons and you get about 99 points, or 1.099 for the 
boil gravity.  Punch that into the online calculator or get a copy of 
the Hops & Beer Special Issue of Zymurgy and check out Jackie Rager's 
article on IBU estimation.  I'm not 100% sure regarding the honey.  I 
don't use honey in my beer and so I don't have its pts/lb/gal value 
memorized.  It's somewhere between 30 and 35. 
 
*** 
Sorry about my gateway... well it's not my gateway, it's AT&Ts.  AT&T 
is splitting up into AT&T, NCR and Lucent Technologies -- Bell Labs. 
In the transition there are a lot of funky things going on with our 
mailers.  Complaints fall on deaf ears, so it's compleatly out of 
my control. 
 
Al. 
 
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL 
korzonas at lucent.com 

Return to table of contents


From: Jack Schmidling <arf at mc.net>
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1996 21:38:37 -0700
Subject: MALTMILL Gears

From: Ian Smith <rela!isrs at netcom.com> 
 
>Does anyone have a geared Maltmill (tm) ? I believe the gears are not the same
diameter/number of teeth. Can anyone tell me the number of teeth
and/or diameters ? 
 
The two gears are 32 teeth and 30 teeth.  This causes a slight 
differntial in speed but it is trivial and incidental to the 
reason they differ.  Using 1.5" diameter rollers and a nominal 
spacing of .045", custom made gears would have to be used to reach 
across the space and in the minuscual quantities we use, they would 
be priced out of reach.  So, we use two standard gears of appropriate 
pitch diameter to make the reach.  The above combination happens to 
work. 
 
This, BTW, is another advantage of only adjusting one end of the rollers. 
If both ends were adjustable, gearing would be next to impossible on 
small diameter rollers.  This was one of the downfalls of the Glatt 
and using plastic only aggrivated the problem. 
 
js 
 
- -- 
Visit our WEB pages: 
Beer Stuff:  http://dezines.com/ at your.service/jsp/ 
Astronomy:   http://user.mc.net/arf/ 
 

Return to table of contents


From: Derek Lyons <elde at hurricane.net>
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 00:41:46 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Letting it settle

At 06:51 PM 9/20/96 +10, you wrote: 
>Dear Friends, 
> 
>In #2195, Mark "Brew Hard" Bayer writes: 
> 
>"here's an idea:  use a 7 gallon carboy to put the chilled wort+trub 
>in. you can aerate/pitch your yeast at this point, depending on 
>temperature, then wait for the trub to settle." 
> 
> But unless one has done a very good job with having a 
>large starter at the peak of pitchability (I do NOT mean to reopen 
>that old bashfest about when that is) and has aerated the bejeeezus 
>out of the wort, I think it is fair to say that many of us do not see 
>dramatic activity in the first 2-3 hours (and please, no posts saying 
>"I get ten feet of foam in the first 5 seconds" -- I know some of us 
>here have outstanding lag performance. I am talking about the rest of 
>us poor bastards.).  In such a case most of the yeast are sitting 
>there in the junk at the bottom of the settling tank and are left 
>behind when the liquid is transferred to the primary. 
> 
 
Not really (YMMV).  It seems that if the starter we well mixed up (thus 
suspending the yeast) that most of the yeast is in suspension in the wort. 
 
Any yeast that has settled in the short (2-3 hour for me though I've only 
observed, not tried this method) time it takes for the trub to settle would 
seem to be from the high-floc end of the scale. 
 
Unless you are using a know high-floc yeast, most of the viable cells should 
be in suspension at this point. 
 
Derek L. 
 

Return to table of contents


From: Rob Moline <brewer at kansas.net>
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 12:45:36 -0500
Subject: See you at The Store/Stainless Soldering?/Sankey 1/2 BBL's/Blow-Off/Cleaning Stainless

                       The Jethro Gump Report 
        Been busy! Just catching up! Assistant brewers require training! 
Have'nt posted in a while, forgive the length. 
 
>Does anyone wanna try to meet up at the members only tasting?  Ya know- we 
>could get together "face to face" and....have a beer or something! 
>(hahaha) 
>        3pm at the "store" might be a place/time to try.  Any takers? 
>//John-    The Cosmic Coyote  -Wyllie\\\ ccoyote at sunrem.com 
> 
        See you there! Any who wish to prod the specimen, may! 
 
>From: Scott Abene <sabene at fcg.net> 
>Has anyone been brave enough to do their own stainless soldering when 
>converting 1/2 barrels? 
 
        I don't know about stainless soldering, but, for sure, mate, the 
best friend of a brewer is his welder...welding stainless is an art, and 
only the best need apply...must be done in an argon environment, with an 
argon jet around the rod....BTW, did you know that argon being heavier than 
air, when you get a lung full, the cure is to hang yourself upside down to 
let the argon flow down and out of your lungs? Burt Lovegren, my amazing 
welder, can even weld sintered steel! (Try pouring petrol into a styrofoam 
cup for an equivalent trick!) But the best trick is that Burt thinks that a 
welder's best friend is his brewer! SYMBIOSIS! 
 
>From: Tim.Watkins at analog.com 
> Does anyone have any experience using the readily available 15.5 
>gallon kegs (or for that matter, the 7.75 gallon ones).  I have a cousin 
>who works a Miller distributor (no Miller jokes, please...), and I can get 
>a CO2 system really cheap.  Has anyone ever used these, and/or is it 
>do-able?  Specifically, I guess the important question is how to remove the 
>valve so they can be filled. 
 
        Depressurize and then tinker to your hearts content. The trick is 
how to clean and fill, and for that you don't need to remove the valve. 
Sabco or Tosca (can't recall which) offers a valve for the sankey which has 
a larger bore than usual, which allows one to turn the keg upside down and 
blast caustic and rinses up the beer down tube and thence to the bottom of 
the keg, which serves as a CIP (Clean in Place) to flow the solution back 
down the interior sidewalls...it also cleans the CO2 valve at the same time, 
as it is the vent for the solutions. Then fill, via counter pressure thru 
the down tube, venting via the CO2 side. You could also gravity fill the 
beast for keg cleaning, rinsing, and filling. But you don't need to remove 
the valve. 
 
>Subject: Blow-Off and Crap advice ( 
> 
        Boy, lots of banch on this one!  Here's a thought....try "Ferm-Cap" 
and forget the whole bloody thing! Manufactured by Siebel, distributed by 
Crosby and Baker, this stuff is an emulsion of various stuff, that 'caps' 
the fermentation, and prevents blow-off from ever being an issue. You think 
its a PITA to find a half pint of blow off on your floor, try thinking about 
gallons from a high gravity batch! I use about an ounce per 7 BBL batch and 
love it, I use it on even low grav brews. They say it enhances head 
retention, but I just use it to save a bunch of cleaning. Makes the inside 
of the ferms easier to clean too. 
 
Subject-Stainless Cleaning 
 
        Lots of chat here too. Jethro doesn't use ANY FERROUS ANYTHING near 
his stainless, but he uses plenty of green scotch pads. They work great, and 
haven't led to global warming yet. I look forward to trying the yeast slurry 
polishing trick, though. BUT, the BEST clean and shine EVER seen in the LAB 
was with the recently developed "Brewer-Ez" product. Fan-bloody-tastic! But, 
I won't be deserting caustic for it though, just plan to switch back and 
forth. The stuff is only active for just over an hour and I re-use my 
caustic, something that can't be done with Brewer-Ez. But, it is great 
stuff! You've never seen such a shine !!!!! 
 
Jethro 
 
Cheers! 
Rob 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: Rob Moline <brewer at kansas.net>
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 12:45:42 -0500
Subject: Perceptions/N2 Draft/Check Valves/Homebrewing Pro's/Kit's Contest/Carboys/GABF!

                        The Jethro Gump Report 
 
>From: "Dave Draper" <ddraper at laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au> 
>Subject: Moods and perceptions of intoxication 
 
        Sidebar, your honor...lets talk about moods and perceptions of 
intoxicants....Wall Street Journal reported some years ago about a 
sommellier (sp?) judging where the fella who won said the best way to win 
the wine tasting portion of the contest was to get well and truly hammered 
the night before. He said that the increased irritability and nervous 
agitation of a hangover was just the thing to increase his perceptions of 
the individual subtleties of the wines. 
 
>From: wchase at alpha.utampa.edu (DON CHASE) 
>This information is second-hand, so feel free to flame me if it's wrong 
>and I'll be glad to pass it along. To the best of my knowledge, if you've ever
>had Guiness on draft, it has been nitrogen-injected. 
 
        Flame free, the Guinness round here is pushed with a 27/73 percent 
blend of CO2/N2. The set up for Guinness cannot accidentally be switched 
with a CO2 only blend, cos the regulator for any N2 or N2 blend uses a 
reverse thread for hooking the regulator to the tank. Not having served 
Guinness at the LAB, but serving my own stout in a similar fashion, I 
believe the Guinness pressure is 55-60 psi. I, having received good info 
from the HBD, have switched from my previous blend (as Guinness) to a 37/63 
blend with better CO2 characteristics, but less spectacular cascade effect. 
I run 30 psi. 
 
>From: George_De_Piro at berlex.com (George De Piro) 
      This is to keep beer out of your gas line and regulator.  Once the 
>     beer is carbonated there will be no pressure difference between the 
>     keg and the line, and beer can flow freely into it.  Quite messy. 
 
        Get some check valves. They let the gas flow one way only and 
prevent messy regulators. Avoid ones with steel balls and springs, IMHO, but 
seek out the ones with a rubber or silicone valve. The ferrous stuff rusts, 
after contact with liquids, and become unreliable. And I've gone 
through quite a few and had to rebuild many a regulator as a result. 
 
>From: Andy Walsh <awalsh at crl.com.au> 
>Subject: professionals in amateur homebrew competitions 
 
        My 2 cents.....Most brew comps I see notice for state "any home 
brewed beer,"...and as such I would feel free to enter, should I desire, any 
beer I brewed at home...but since I have been working at the LAB, I have 
only brewed 2 batches, in over 2 1/2 years, both extract for the purpose of 
teaching....(matter of fact, just sold my entire rig, fridges, cornys, 
carboys, regs, tanks.....sob...sob......and the miles of hoses!!..sob..sob) 
        The point of having too much too lose seems insignificant to me, 
'cos where I sit, the contest is won every day by keeping your customers 
happy with a consistent rendition of their favorites... 
        Sort of like M.Jackson said, (paraphrased) "Never hire (?) a brewer 
with a sun tan...they have too much time on their hands...and aren't 
spending it in the brewery." 
        I just don't have the time (nor the tan), but I would stand by the 
stated regulations of a comp....if you want only home-brewers, and not 
pro's, then state "Open only to home brewed beers brewed by non-pro brewers" 
and then define pro brewers. 
        Now, here you also get into trouble.....'cos many industry folk 
wouldn't define me as a pro brewer, not having any formal training and only 
brewing 500 BBL per year. So, what it comes down to are the intentions of 
the hosting organization of the comp and their clearly stated definitions 
and qualifications for that comp. 
        FWIW, I refuse to participate in my home clubs comps. It ain't fair, 
IMHO. 
 
>>kit anderson wrote: 
>> 
>>> I submitted a wit that Greg Noonan gave a 40 
>>>to. The two non-ranked judges gave it a 22. Chill haze, estery, acidic were 
>>>the only comments. 
 
        I have seen the whole deal on this one and Kit is correct. But a 
comp is like a crap shoot. It all depends on soooo much, even with the best 
beers. But one always assumes that comps have qualified judges and in this 
case they clearly were not. 
 
>>From: "Bernard D Hummel" <hummelbe at pilot.msu.edu> 
>My thoughts on carboys:  I currently don't use a carboy much because I 
>        think that they are APITA. 
 
        Personally, I loved my carboys, all four of them. They never were a 
PITA to me. Once emptied and rinsed, filled with H2O to the shoulder and 
carried to the fermenting room, (the unused second bathroom) and then filled 
to the top with clorox, they were self cleaning and sanitizing until the 
next rinse and fill with wort. Oh, well, different strokes for different folks!
 
GABF! 
        For those wishing us luck, thanks! We will need it...when you're in 
competition with the best around, you can always wish to be lucky. I do. 
        I just can't wait till next year when I can split the Jethro Gump 
Brewery off from the Little Apple and compete for "Most Entries From a 
Single Company" category with Sam Adams, which in contrast to the rest of us 
with the maximum 5 entries, has 10. (Or with Longshots, how many?) Now, do 
you think that anybody who knows their malt from their hops is fooled by 
entries from Sam Adams, and entries from Boston Beer Company? 
        Now, lets see, there's the J. Gump Brewery, and the LABCO brewery, 
how bout the "Son of Jethro" Brewery, and the "Jethro Scratches His Ear" 
brewery....lets see...there's 20 entries!! Now, how 'bout the "4 Motorcycles 
in the Shed Brewery" and the "Reserve Parachute Unpacked Since 1992 
Brewery".....WOW, now I have 30 entries!!! The mind boggles!..or 
biggles....hey, the "BIGGLES BREWERY!"   WOW, there's 35 entries!! Just let 
me at 'em! 
 
Cheers! 
Jethro (Hophead) (Humorless Bastard) (Hope to See You at GABF) Gump 
 
 
C 
 
Cheers! 
Rob 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