HOMEBREW Digest #2609 Wed 14 January 1998
![[Prev HBD]](/img/previous.gif)
![[Index]](/img/index_button.gif)
![[Next HBD]](/img/next.gif)
![[Back]](/img/Back.gif)
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org
Many thanks to the Observer & Eccentric Newspapers of
Livonia, Michigan for sponsoring the Homebrew Digest.
URL: http://www.oeonline.com
Contents:
another Zapap improvement ("Curt Speaker")
MIXMASHER vs RIMS (John Wilkinson)
duvel (Kent Townley)
Re: newbie questions (LONG) (brian_dixon)
Re: hot side aeration (brian_dixon)
Surplus Center Correction 1-800-488-3407 (The GasFamily)
BJCP help, Lancaster PA brewers (bers)
Brewing & Submarines (Derek Lyons)
Mash Aeration ("Hubert Hanghofer")
RO/Phosphoric-Lactic/pH (AJ)
New addresses.... (Homebrew Digest)
Dry Ice (John Rezabek)
Yeast Starters (Tim Runnette)
re: Infusion versus step mashing ("C.D. Pritchard")
runoff speed (Jeff Renner)
Time to cool wort in 5 gal bucket. ("Eric Bonney")
step mashing ("Emily Neufeld")
mash efficiency ("Emily Neufeld")
RIMS Temp Control Options / E-Communication / Tin Followup (Kyle Druey)
Trademarks, HSA (Jack Schmidling)
Over-carbonated Cornie,refrac/SG ,MonsterMash-er, pH ("David R. Burley")
NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS: hbd.org
Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org
(Articles are published in the order they are received.)
If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!!
To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to request@hbd.org.
**SUBSCRIBE AND UNSUBSCRIBE REQUESTS MUST BE SENT FROM THE E-MAIL
**ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!
IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, the autoresponder and
the SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE commands will fail!
For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to brewery at realbeer.com
Homebrew Digest Information on the Web: http://hbd.org
Requests for back issues will be ignored. Back issues are available via:
Anonymous ftp from...
ftp://hbd.org/pub/hbd/digests
ftp://ftp.stanford.edu/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer
AFS users can find it under...
/afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer
JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 13:34:26 EST
From: "Curt Speaker" <speaker at safety-1.safety.psu.edu>
Subject: another Zapap improvement
This idea is not my own, but I used it with some success...
One problem with the bucket-in-bucket or piece-of-a-bucket-in-bucket
lautering setup is heat loss during sparging. Many large hardware
chains (Lowes, Home Depot, etc.) now sell insulation that is best
described as aluminized bubble wrap. By wrapping this material
around your bucket, you can stabilize the heat of the grain bed
during sparging.
I used this setup for over a year with good results. I just recently
converted to the perforated pizza pan inside a 7 gallon Rubbermaid
water cooler and love the new setup. It allows me to mash a good bit
more grain and to maintain mash/lautering temps much better...and the
whole thing cost me less than $30.
Hoppy New Year!
Curt
Curt Speaker
Biosafety Officer
Penn State University
Environmental Health and Safety
speaker at ehs.psu.edu
http://www.ehs.psu.edu
^...^
(O_O)
=(Y)=
"""
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 98 16:55:16 CST
From: jwilkins at wss.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson)
Subject: MIXMASHER vs RIMS
Scott Murman challenged Jack Schmidling's assertion that an insulated cooler
mash tun limited the complexity of a step mash program saying that adding
heated water would handle that problem.
In my experience mashing with a10 gallon insulated cooler mash tun, the number
of steps is definitely limited. It gets difficult to raise the mash temp even
with boiling water without running out of room. I like the cooler mash tun
but I don't do more than two steps. Even with one step I cannot always
bring the mash temp to 170 for mash out. I don't find that much of an
impediment, however, but limited number of steps might be a problem with less
modified malts.
Which reminds me, does anyone have opinions about Weyerman pils malt? I just
bought a bag and am wondering if I need protein rests.
John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins at wss.dsccc.com
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 16:49:04 -0700
From: Kent Townley <krt at hpeskrt.fc.hp.com>
Subject: duvel
Does anyone know what the grain bill and/or hop schedule is for
Duvel? Michael Jackson implies that the grain bill is 80% locally
malted barley (from France?), something like a pilsner malt, with
20% dextrose. He claims they do an infusion mash, and they do 3
hop additions of Styrian and Saaz.
I am wondering how Moorgat (sp?) gets such a nice, sweet finishing
creamy flavor/feel out of Jackson's description? Any ideas?
Kent Townley
Richardson, TX
krt at fc.hp.com
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 98 15:58:44 -0800
From: brian_dixon at om.cv.hp.com
Subject: Re: newbie questions (LONG)
1.
[corn sugar priming sweetness versus malt priming sweetness snipped]
>I can buy off the shelf IMHO. A few batches ago, my supplier slipped
>in corn sugar vice my usual malt, and I figured what the hey, I'll
>try it. That batch is a little sweeter than I expected, not
>so bad, but... opinions?
Don't know, but I doubt the corn sugar versus malt is the culprite.
If you think about all the sugars in the world, some of which are
simple and fermentable and don't leave sweetness as a result, others
of which are moderately simple and don't ferment but are nearly
flavorless and hence are not sweet, and others that are more complex
and not fermentable, and also flavorless and wouldn't provide
sweetness, then you start to see why I state my opinion. Corn sugar
should be 100% fermentable, and the only way it could contribute
perceived sweetness would be by increasing the alcohol content a bit,
but priming contributes _very little_, percentage wise, to the alcohol
and shouldn't be the source of any sweetness. Malt extract contains a
variety of sugars in varying proportions. Same thing applies as for
the corn sugar for the 100% fermentable sugars. The nonfermentables
are known for not having any (or very little) flavor and should not be
contributing to the residual sweetness either. Sweetness is a hard
thing to pin down as to what causes it, BUT maltier beers and higher
alcohol (to a point) beers are both perceived by most tasters as being
more sweet. I'd start with that in your analysis, then take a look at
alcohol percentages and final gravities for a key to why some of your
beers have more residual sweetness. Oh yeah, it's possible that some
of the sweet tasting fermentable sugars did not get fermented, e.g. a
stuck ferment. Your final gravities ought to tell you more about
this, e.g. check the typical attenuations for your yeast selection
against the reality of your brewing.
2.
[snip]
>production, BUT. With my setup it is very nearly impossible to
>maintain exactly 155 F. If I look away for even a moment, it jumps
>as high as 175 F. From lurking on the list for quite some time, I
>get the impression this might actually be a good thing. How better
>to control temps, and what temps to use?
Easiest way I have found to maintain the correct temperature for a
steep is to first heat the water to about 5 degrees warmer than you
need, say 165 F or so, then drop the grains in it, and heating if
necessary to get the temperature between 155 F and 160 F. Now for the
secret: prior to doing this, preheat your oven on it's lowest setting
and dink around with it to get a temperature of around 150-160F. This
takes less work than you think, and is nothing more than a casual
endeavor you undertake while getting your other brewing stuff in
order. Once your steep (water and grist) is at the right temp, just
turn off the oven and put your pot in it for the duration of the
steep. The warm environment will hold the temperature to within about
2 degrees of what it was going in. Works like a champ. I also
perform my mashes in this way, using a 33-qt canner to hold the mash
so it'll fit in the oven (lowest rack).
> 3. I use two burners on my gas stove to heat/boil my wort. I get
>some 'burning' (carmelization?) on the bottom of the pot, very
>little, but its there. Is this a bad thing? I realize I can reduce
>the rate of temp increase when going from steep to boil, but should
>I, and that brings up question 4
I don't think of it as a bad thing, because I like the caramelization
flavor in the type of beers that I brew. It's a bad thing if it's
inappropriate to the style, e.g. light lagers, pale ales etc. Easiest
fix is to put a trivet or zig-zag bend coat hanger wire on the burners
to separate the pot from the electric burners a bit. Also try lining
the top of your stove with foil, shiny side up, for shorter heating
times and more consistent heating (and easy boilover cleanup).
> 4. After steeping the grains for 30 min, Most of the recipes I like
>say add extracts etc and boil for 1 hr. Does time used to increase
>temp from 155 to boiling count? Are we talking a full rolling boil,
>gentle boil, what?
Start timing after you reach a full rolling boil. In fact, I believe
in boiling for 20-30 minutes to get a solid hot break prior to adding
the hops, and only start timing at the point where the first hops went
in. The only exception to this is if you are trying to make a very
lightly colored brew. In that case, start timing as soon as it
reaches a rolling boil, but don't hesitate to add the hops right away,
and you can shorten the boil to 30 minutes (total) if you need to,
making sure your hop charge is adjusted up to make up for the lower
extraction rate, e.g. 30 minute boil versus 60 or 90 minutes.
> 5. What I'm looking to brew is an equivalent of Wm Younger's Tartan
>Special with just a wee bit more body. I'm getting close as I try
>various recipes, or more truthfully, understanding more of how
>various ingredients affect final taste, but one of things I love
>about Tartan Special when I was stationed in Scotland was how smooth
>it was. I can't even begin to approach that. Mine has a bit of a
>bite to it when it first hits the palette. Is this aging? What
>other factors affect that?
Aging (conditioning) may help. Hop choice may help. Hop amount (use
less) may help. Extra long (2 to 3 hours) boils may help (protein
that came out of solution at the hot break redissolves during long
boils). Buy the AOB Classic Series book on Scotch and Scottish Ales
and read it for hints on Scottish brewing techniques and recipes.
Brian
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 98 16:07:06 -0800
From: brian_dixon at om.cv.hp.com
Subject: Re: hot side aeration
[snip]
> so I poured the mash in to my 5gal
>cooler, and sparged. The temp of the mash was about 162F at the time
>will
>this cause hot side aeration, and what does that mean, will my beer
>taste
>different, how will I be able to tell?
I have heard of at least one other case where HSA problems were traced
to non-delicate handling of hot mash, e.g. 'plopping' it into a lauter
tun. But others have had no problems. Could be that the people who
did, were also pushing the limits on the hot aeration (or aeration at
an improper time) in other ways too. Darker beers should be more
bullet proof as the melanoidins help to prevent staling and oxidation.
Lighter beers will require more delicate handling.
How to tell? Classic symptoms include wine or sherry-like flavors in
the beer, or wet cardboard 'staleness' in the beer. The flavors may
be absent at first and develop over time. But by the time you had to
transfer your mash, you were pretty well invested in the brew and may
as well continue. If it happens again, transfer the mash gently and
without plopping, into the other vessel and you shouldn't have any
problems. I've never taken the risk of 'plopping' my mash around, so
I can't tell you how much is too much. If the beer has a hint of off
flavor to it, throw a big party and use it up quickly before it stales
further!
Brian
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 1998 20:51:20 -0600
From: The GasFamily <gasman at medlinc.com>
Subject: Surplus Center Correction 1-800-488-3407
The phone nuber I listed for the Surplus Center was incorrect -
1-800-488-3407 is the correct number. I apologize for my poor reading.
Mike Gasman
Lincoln NE
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 98 23:12:48 PST
From: bers at epix.net
Subject: BJCP help, Lancaster PA brewers
Greetings HBD
I'm going to start studing for the BJCP ex. . Are there any judges
in the Lancaster PA area that can give me a hand starting? I'll be in that
area working for the next 6 month staying in a motel and I can't thing of a
better thing to do with my spare time than studing beer since I can't brew.
I've started getting the study material around and have downloaded the guide
from the BJCP web page.
I'll also need a place to study at can any one help me out with the
names of some good beer bars in the Lancaster PA area? Is there still an
active homebrew club in Lancaster? The phone at the AHA club page is old and
he did not know if the club was still working.
Thanks all
Tony
- -------------------------------------
Name: Tony Maurer
E-mail: bers at epix.net
Date: 1/9/98
Time: 11:12:48 PM
Brewing in Benton PA
- -------------------------------------
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 1998 23:14:51
From: Derek Lyons <elde at hurricane.net>
Subject: Brewing & Submarines
>Date: Thu, 08 Jan 1998 10:01:24 -0500
>From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer at engin.umich.edu>
>Subject: Re: High Altitude Brewing Record
>
>And maybe some CA homebrewers can go for the "low altitude" brewing
>record in Death Valley, eh?
>
>Hmm. I wonder if it's possible to brew on a submarine.... :-)
>
Stills work on submarines.... <G>
Derek L.
xFTB2/SS
Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 16:45:21 +0200
From: "Hubert Hanghofer" <hhanghof at netbeer.co.at>
Subject: Mash Aeration
In HBD#2605 John Wilkinson reported on problems he had with his mash
stirrer:
> ...Anyway, I was having a lot of problems with stuck runoffs and
> had a thick layer of teig (sp?) on top of the grain. I fought
> this problem for some time before I decided it might be tied to the
> stirrer. My last two batches were done without the stirrer and I
> had no runoff problems...
I often suspect mash aeration to cause stuck runoffs but in this
case it's obvious! Among other things, mash aeration can cause
excessive formation of teig (doughy precipitate) depending on barley
strain and deg. of modification.
Cysteine, Cystine and gel-proteids can form polypeptides of higher MW
under the conditions of oxygenation. The resulting precipitate adsorbs
glutelines and lipids. Small granules of starch as well as b-glucans
and pentosans participate in complex formation and increase "teig"
even further. This in turn will hinder amylases and thus starch
conversion, lower yield and / or attenuation. [1]
But these are only the visible effects in the early stage of brewing.
Far more complex are the effects of oxygenation on polyphenols. Simply
said: their composition is altered in a negative way.
- Due to activity of peroxidase (T opt.=3D45C, destroyed at about 65C)
and polyphenoloxidase (T opt.=3D65C, destroyed at about 85C!!!)
polyphenols are oxidized and polymerized. Thus the ratio of unwanted,
oxidized HMW polyphenols to desirable, intact Anthocyanogenes and
Tannoides is increased. The resulting beers are darker [4], show off
flavors and have low flavor stability (shelf live). [1] [2]
IMHO intact Tannoids are very desirable in craft brewed beers. - K.F.
Kretschmer underlines the reductive potential of Tannoids and their
importance on both flavor and flavor stability. He even goes so far to
positively correlate Tannoid content and success of various premium
beers. [3]
*****
I had years of experience to study the effects of mash aeration! I
provide primitive brewing methods for wheat beer, intended to support
beginners in regions, where homebrewing supplies are not established
yet and the usual schedule: extract brewing -> all grain doesn't work.
Keeping the equipment as simple as possible lead to some HSA-prone
techniques. But what worked and still works very well for wheat and
some ales doesn't so for lagers! I had a hard way to find this out.
The safest way for me to avoid mash aeration and provide reductive
wort composition is:
* Mashing in an insulated mash- lautertun.
* Adding infusion water and decoctions at once or - better yet - by
underletting it through a valve at the bottom of the mashtun.
* Stirr gently until temp is evenly.
* During rests only stirr every 10 mins to raise the grain.
* Keeping the pre-boil wort in the kettle under a layer of finest
Tettnanger hops - a.k.a. First wort hopping ;-)
To conclude - mash aeration can lead to *very serious* problems,
maybe even bigger problems than with post boil hot wort aeration! We
had to sample many aged lagers and I strongly appeal to everyone in
this collective: When designing mash mixers use all your creative
potential to avoid creating a mash aerator. Mash aerators would be a
big step in the wrong direction!
CHEERS &
sehr zum Wohle!
Hubert in Salzburg, Austria
[1] Ludwig Narziss, "Abriss der Bierbrauerei", 1995,
ISBN 3 432 84136 1, Pages 117, 118, 121.
[2] Karl Friedrich Kretschmer, "Tannoide- und Reduktonkraftwerte
naturgeklaerter Kellerbiere", Brauwelt Nr.28/29 1995
[3] W.Back, C.Forster, M.Krottenthaler, J.Lehmann, B.Sacher,
B.Thum, "Neue Forschungserkenntnisse zur Verbesserung der
Geschmacksstabilitaet", Brauwelt Nr.38 1997
[4] R.Daniels, "Designing Great Beers", 1996
ISBN 0-937381-50-0, Pages 52, 53.
Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 13:56:24 -0400
From: ajdel at mindspring.com (AJ)
Subject: RO/Phosphoric-Lactic/pH
John Bovoard asks whether a reduction in TDS from 260-360 ppm to less than
50 ppm by his RO unit is effective. I'm not sure whether John wants to know
if water at 50 ppm has been effectively deionized in terms of suitability
for brewing or whether I think the RO unit is working properly. Assuming
the former is meant, the answer would be "Yes" in general. Water with a
mineral content of less than 50 ppm is definitely "soft". Pilsen, known for
its very soft water, has a TDS level of about 35 ppm and the water from
this RO unit, at less than 50 ppm, should be soft enough for the brewing of
Pilsner beer. For many other styles augmentation of the mineral content
will be required.
As for whether the unit is performing effectively: RO units of the type
usually installed in homes should reduce ion content by at least 90% for
all common species and by more than that for most species. Thus I'd expect
to see TDS levels at less than 26 - 36 ppm from a properly functioning
unit. The manufacturer should be able to supply you with performance data
showing how much each of several species is reduced. There is, of course,
the issue of maintenance of the equipment. Particulate and activated carbon
pre-filters must be changed fairly frequently or contamination/poisoning of
the RO membrane will result with reduced performance.
As RO units remove a percentage of the dissolved ions, pre-treatment, as
by, for example, boiling to reduce calcium, bicarbonate and magnesium ion
concentrations, would result in lower levels of those ions at the output of
the RO unit if it were fed with pre-treated water rather than water from
the mains. This may not be practical as the unit requires line pressure for
operation and this pressure would have to be supplied by a pump.
Finally, be aware that TDS values are usually approximations based upon
conductivity measurements. It would be best to have individual tests done
for sulfates, hardness, chlorides, alkalinity, etc on both the
pre-treatement and post-treatment water. Values for post treatment ion
levels will, in addition to answering the immediate question, be useful in
calculating the salt additions required for a particular ion profile.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
There has been some discussion of the relative merits of lactic vs
phosphoric acid for sparge water pH adjustment. I'd vote for lactic based
on its availability in small quantities at most of the better stocked
homebrew shops and on its being somewhat safer to handle. You might find
phosphoric more flavor-neutral but flavor shouldn't be an issue since we
would hope that people would not be sparging with water alkaline enough to
require enough acid to have a flavor effect. If the water is that alkaine
it should be treated to reduce the alkalinity (boiling or lime addition
should do the job in the majority of cases).
Phosphoric does pull calcium - this is not a rumor - and I suppose you
could argue that this is a reason to prefer lactic but not very
convincingly. We need calcium mostly so that phosphates from malt can pull
it and thus lower mash pH. This takes place at the pH of the strike water
and, as much less precipitation will occur at the lower pH of kettle wort
and fermenting beer, there should be plently left for other duties provided
that the mash-in precipitation didn't drop it all out. At pH 5, for
example, 10 mg/L calcium is in equilibrium with approximately 70 mMol/L
total phosphate.
The question I always ask is "Do you really need to acidify the sparge
water?". If the sparge water is of low alkalinity (regardless of its pH) it
will have a hard time competing with the buffering capacity of the
mash/wort and pH will rise slowly. If you've decoction mashed you've
already extracted tannins (yes, yes, I know the pH is lower but tannins
still get extracted - getting them to complex and drop out is one of the
reasons for lagering in traditional brewing) and you're not as sensitive to
additional extraction at sparge.
Check runoff pH and gravity as you sparge. If pH stays below 5.5 or 6 to
the point where runoff gravity is, say, 4 P, ask yourself if you really
need the 40 grams of extract that comes with the next liter of runoff. Have
you had score sheets come back with comments about astringecy on them? The
bottom line is that you must experiment, take notes, solicit the opinions
of your "customers" and figure out what works best for you.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Adam Rich asked about when to measure pH. Opinions vary. There are those
who say you never need to measure it (just as there are those who say you
don't need to measure gravity) and there are those who say it should be
measured throughout the brewing process. That said, the most critical
measurement is the one at dough-in. If the pH doesn't fall into that 5.2 -
5.6 range at dough-in it very probably isn't going to be at the desired
levels at other stages unless some remedial action is taken. Some brewers
(especially pro's) take pH readings on the strike water, the mash, each
decoction (if any), the main mash after each decoction is returned, the
sparge water, the runoff at various times towards the end of collection,
the collected wort before and after the boil, the beer at various times
during the fermentation and the finished beer. There are definite expected
behaviors and deviations from them are indications that something is amiss.
Assuming that only one measurement is to be done, do it at dough-in after
the grain is thoroughly hydrated and has had the opportunity to sit for a
few minutes. If a temperature compensated (ATC) meter with a modern (glass
or epoxy which will withstand the mash temperature - no calomel!) electode
with KCl electrolyte is being used, stick the electrode and ATC probe into
the mash and note the reading when the meter is stabilized. The meter must
have been calibrated with standard buffers first. For other meters (won't
withstand mash temperature, no ATC, unknown electrolyte...) or test strips,
calibrate (meters only) at room temperature, cool sample to room
temperature and read. Now subtract 0.1 - 0.2 units from the reading whether
a meter or test strip was used. This is necessary because in brewing pH
values are properly specified at the temperature of the reaction and pH
changes as a function of temperature. Note that this is NOT the same as the
change in reading of a pH meter in response to a change in temperature but
an entirely separate phenomenon.
Numquam in dubio, saepe in errore.
Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 13:06:44 -0500 (EST)
From: Homebrew Digest <hbd at brew.oeonline.com>
Subject: New addresses....
Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager...
Since the HBD has its own domain and server, I thought it would be cool to
make the posting and request addresses a little more "natural". This will
help prevent requests from going to the post queue, and posts going to the
request line. Here they are:
From this day forward, posts can be sent to
post@hbd.org
Any help or subscription-related requests (like subscribe and
unsubscribe request) can be sent to:
request@hbd.org
Fret not, all you old-timers! The time-tested and true addresses of
homebrew at hbd.org and homebrew-request@hbd.org (designed, from what I can
tell, to make the custom Digest scripts more familiar to those used to
Majordomo-type digesters) will still function as always.
Just another public service from your friendly neighborhood Home Brew
Digest Janitorial Staff.
Cheers!
The Home Brew Digest Janitorial Staff
Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 13:23:48 -0500
From: John Rezabek <rezabeks at alpha.wcoil.com>
Subject: Dry Ice
George,
I'm no authority on dry ice. Try looking here, or you may search the HBD
yourself at http://hbd.org
http://hubris.engin.umich.edu:8080/Beer/Threads/Threads/thread.884456003.html#10
The practice of filtering homebrew and force-carbonating in a keg has
become pretty common. My homebrew shop sells maybe a couple set-ups
(pretty much variations on wine filters); probably yours does too. One
of last year's Zymurgy's did an evaluation of filters, and they were far
from equal. I think they were getting down close to sub-micron levels of
filtration. The beer has to be forced through; typically either a
garden-sprayer type mechanisim is used, or a corny keg using CO2 to push
the beer through (and into another corny).
Regards,
- --
John Rezabek
rezabeks at alpha.wcoil.com
http://alpha.wcoil.com/~rezabeks/hawg_creek.html
Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 11:19:05 -0800
From: Tim Runnette <parothed at napanet.net>
Subject: Yeast Starters
I know that my pitching rate is low when I just use the Wyeast package. I
was looking for recommendations and techniques on a yeast starter to
increase my pitching rate. I assume all I need to do is create a small
batch of wort at a comparable specific gravity as the wort I will be
pitching the yeast into. Thanks.
Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 15:14:48
From: "C.D. Pritchard" <cdp at chattanooga.net>
Subject: re: Infusion versus step mashing
Olin J. Schultz posted:
>In the battle of ease of use and simplicity Infusion pretty much waxes
>the mixer and rims and step mashing in general. Does not get much
>simpler than mixing the grist in and coming back 60 minutes(or
>whatever) later.
Don't forget the mashout- the ease and precision of attaining mashout
temperature is one of the many reasons I like a RIMS.
>...I have tried a few batches of the exact same beer with
>both step and infusion mashing schedules. I have liked the infusion
>mashed beers more. The head retention was better and the body was
>greater...My question is if anyone else has done similiar tests.
As a test I did added a 15 minute 140 degF rest to a typical pale ale mash
and had similiar results.
>PS One other benefit of Infusion: You don't lay awake at night
>worrying about HSA ;)
With a decently designed RIMS return manifold, there's no worry about HSA
with a RIMS. Mine is a perforated loop of 1/2" copper tubing. Details on
the web page at the URL below or via hbd.org.
There's been a bit of traffic on the safety of colored polyethylene
containers. FWIW, the red poly containers carried by US Plastics are not
rated as food grade.
c.d. pritchard cdp at chattanooga.net
Web Page: http://chattanooga.net/~cdp/
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 15:22:32 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu>
Subject: runoff speed
John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins at wss.dsccc.com wrote:
>I runoff faster than the oft recommended five gallon per hour rate, too.
>>Probably on the order of five gallons in forty minutes.
Jeez, so do I - 9+ gallons in maybe 50-60 minutes. I think 5 gallons/hr is
way too slow. Recommended by whom? I aim for 1 gallons/6 minutes, which
is what I computed based on my mash tun sq. in. (~175) from what I recall
George Fix recommended.
Jeff
-=-=-=-=-
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan c/o nerenner at umich.edu
"One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943.
Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 15:06:30 -0500
From: "Eric Bonney" <ebonney at fuse.net>
Subject: Time to cool wort in 5 gal bucket.
I was wondering what the effect, if any, time has on cooling wort. I =
made my first 5 gal batch last week and it took me about 12 or 13 hours =
to cool the wort down to 70 degrees to pitch the yeast. This was with =
putting the bucket in a bath tube with cool water. I was wondering if =
this was going to have any effect on my beer or not? =20
Thanks for the help.
-Eric Bonney
ebonney at fuse.net
Check out my home page at:
http://home.fuse.net/ebonney/
Prejudice is a learned trait, SO WHAT are YOU teaching YOUR children?!
Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 98 17:09:05 PST
From: "Emily Neufeld" <eneufeld at michianatoday.com>
Subject: step mashing
Last weekend I brewed my first lager, a Czech pilsener. The recipe
called for a protein rest for 15 minutes between 130-134 degrees and
then a 45 minute rest between 158-160. Reading Fred Eckhardt's account =
of his steam beer in Zymurgy's great grain issue convinced me to give it =
a try. Up until this point I had been doing single infusion mashes using =
an insulated bucket with false bottom that I received as a gift (ordered =
from William's Brewing Company).
My 9 lbs. of grain barely fit into my 19 qt. enamel canning pot. Things =
seemed to go pretty well but there was quite a bit of temperature
variance at different depths and areas of the pot. Note I took the
temperature at 5 minute intervals to chart my progress. At times there =
was as much as a 12 degree difference in different spots of the pot. How =
should I control such temperature variance? Should I pretty much be
constantly stirring in a round and upward motion? Does stirring cause
hot side aeration?
Also, given that I was mashing in an enamel canning pot I had to
transfer the mash into my lauter tun (which doubles as my mash tun for =
single infusion mashes). For the most part, I ladled the mash with a
quart pyrex measuring cup and then near the end a soup ladel. What
effect would pouring the mash from the canning pot to the lauter tun
(insulated bucket with false bottom) have. Would pouring it cause more =
hot side aeration than ladling?
As you can see, I have quite a few questions regarding step mashing.
Overall, I enjoyed the process but the verdict is still out on my
pilsener. I am even thinking about trying a decoction sometime this
winter.
drewbuscareno, at
eneufeld at michianatoday.com
Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 98 17:14:00 PST
From: "Emily Neufeld" <eneufeld at michianatoday.com>
Subject: mash efficiency
I would like some help in computing my mash efficiency. Note I am using =
a simple insulated bucket with false bottom set-up that I received from =
William's Brewing. I have also just tried a stove top step mash. Based =
on experience I have figured that it takes me about 10lbs. of grain to =
get an original gravity in the 1.05-55 range and 9lbs to get in the 1.042=
-46 range. I would like a better way to compute my efficiency so I can =
alter recipes as need be, and hopefully, brew to style. For example, I =
might just need to reclassify my current IPA to a special bitter.
Thanks for your help.
Drew Buscareno, at
eneufeld at michianatoday.com
Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 15:23:12 -0800
From: Kyle Druey <druey at ibm.net>
Subject: RIMS Temp Control Options / E-Communication / Tin Followup
RIMS Temp Control Options
This is nothing new but another option for RIMS temp control besides an
on/off switch or an automated electronic controller is using a dimmer
switch. I have been using the dial type where you turn the knob, not
the slider type. It is not automated, but I can stabilize the temp and
the heat setting in about 5 minutes after I reach my rest temp. It
usually does not vary by more than plus/minus one degree after it has
been adjusted. While not automated, it was a compromise for me between
cost and complexity. Being electronically spastic, I could have never
built the Morris RIMS control circuit, and I could not afford $200 for a
PID. The dimmer switch costs about $20, and the 1000 Watt type *may*
work when using the 4500W/240V element with 120 V. I am not advocating
the use of an undersized dimmer switch, as has been stated before,
working with electricity can be dangerous. I am just telling you what
has worked for me. Would I love to add the PID someday? You betcha!
I hope the RIMS and mix mashing thread has not given the impression that
this is the best or only way to make beer at home. I and many other
HBDers have made great beers mashing with a pot on the stove and
stirring like crazy with a wooden spoon. IMO it is interesting to read
about the creative mashing systems other brewers have built.
************************************************************************
E-Communication
All the comments regarding the Jack S threads have made me realize just
how careful you have to be when you are communicating electronically in
a public forum such as the HBD. If comments are not worded carefully
their intentions can very easily be misunderstood by the recipient and
the audience. As one HBDer implied, you must go out of your way and be
extremely polite and courteous with your comments so that others do not
misconstrue your intentions and become offended. Maybe thats how those
little smiley face thingys came about :)!
************************************************************************
Tin Followup
I received some good responses regarding my tin questions, and was able
to find out some additional info searching the web. Tin is non-toxic in
general, and in safe amounts appears to be required by the body. I
could not find the maximum safe daily limits for tim, maybe one of the
health professionals in the HBD has access to a reference that lists
this. Tin will leach into an acidic solution. Those using tin elements
reported no scorching problems or cleanup problems. The only question I
have now is if tin causes haze in the finished beer. In Miller's first
book he indicates that tin will cause haze. I realize this is probably
page down material but it is good for the archives.
I was not able to purchase a stainless alloy sheath heating element in
my area and was considering using the element that is copper plated with
tin. One of the HBDers read my original tin post and was gracious
enough to offer to purchase a Chromalox stainless sheath element and
mail it to me, with my reimbursement to follow in the mail. Thanks very
much to Mr. R. K. for helping me out!
***********************************************************************
Kyle Druey
Bakersfield, CA
Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 10:50:24 -0800
From: Jack Schmidling <arf at mc.net>
Subject: Trademarks, HSA
Mark Riley
The Beer Recipator - http://realbeer.com/brewery/recipator
"P.S. (USA only) Don't you actually have to *sell* something across
state lines in order to trademark it?
No. In fact you don't even need to register it until or unless you
wish to sue someone for violation as long as you can prove prior use.
In actual practice, a suite would be less complicated if it were
formally registered but it is no necessary at all.
The encircled "R" indicates that the trade mark has actually been
registered and the TM is a warning of a sort of common law claim
that it will be defended if challenged. Both have equal weight in
the courts.
From: Samuel Mize <smize at prime.imagin.net>
Subject: Villainy and crass commercialism
"I keep hearing these wild accusations about Jack Schmidling. So I
reviewed his 1997. For an analysis, email me.
As this could have a profound impact on the very existance of this
august forum, I highly recommend that you post it publicly. It will
save tons of hateful postings castigating the evil wrongdoer and no
doubt assure his total banishment.
"Fight Spam - see http://www.cauce.org/
I find the best way to fight spam is to EAT it.
From: Kyle Druey <druey at ibm.net>
Subject: Blade Shearing / HSA
"Here is a reference on shear degradation (Fix, "An Analysis of Brewing
Techniques", p 25):
I didn't bother quoting all the Fix references but one thing
you should note in all, is the use of words like: avoid, could,
might, may, can, etc. If you do not take note of these words,
his writings take on the auora of dogma that always applies
to ever case.
I doubt that I have (or could have) ever disagreed with anything
George has ever written. However, I keep in mind that he is speaking
to and for a much larger audience than the small batch, homebrew
community.
Even where the theory applies to small batches, there is no reason
to assume that the actual effect could be tasted, seen, smelled or
in any way even detected in the small batch.
"Here is a reference which relates to temperature gradients in the mash
(Fix, same, p. 26):
"In some mashing systems, precise temperature control is problematic,
which creates a situation where two or more temperature regimes may
coexist in the mash at a given rest.
"This may relate to mash mixing, but does it relate to RIMS? Does the
liquid part of the mash that is recirculated create the same shearing
problems as with mixing?
Frankly, I do not see how pumping liquid through a fixed grain
bed can even come close to the near zero temperature gradient of
a continuous mix. There has got to be a measureable difference
between the liquid at the bottom and that coming out of the heater.
If not, there would be no need for a heater. When my mixer is
running I can NOT measure any difference between the wort near the
top and that on the bottom.
"Jack S on HSA during mashing:
""Like so many other buzzwords, HSA makes great raw material for
""articles and books but I am skeptical as to how it applies to the
""relatively slow movement and temperatures we deal with during mash.
"I was able to find one reference on HSA:
"We also can control the amount of oxygen uptake and the amount of
hot-side abuse that takes place during mashing. The evidence
documenting the negative effects of hot-side aeration is extensive."
(Fix, same, p 25)
"This can lead to the following problems:
But you failed to point out what "this" is. He is simply telling
us to "control" it, i.e., don't use the business end of an P51
for a mixer.
"As Jack S pointed out, RIMS is subjected to HSA just as is mix
mashing. With RIMS, the key is to ensure no air is entrained on the
suction side of the pump, and to design the wort return manifold
so that the exit velocity is slow enough to avoid wort foaming.
That is not the end of the story. Contrary to popular opinion an
aquarium aerator does not oxygenate the aquarium by absorbtion
from all those cute little bubbles. Their surface area is
insignificant compared to the top of the water. What the bubbles
or pump do/does is to keep the surface water moving so there is
always new surface for oxygen to be absorbed from the air.
The quietest RIMS in the world simply acts like an aquarium water
pump (not to be confused with the air pump type). It very quitely
and invisibly keeps the surface water moving to absorb as much
oxygen as possible.
Can this cause the notorious HSA? I seriously doubt it.
Could a P51? Probably but that would be the least of the problems.
Then we have to ask, how bout a small submarine? Nuke powered,
of course. A snorkle would cause too much foam.
js
- --
Visit our WEB pages:
Beer Stuff.........http://ays.net/jsp
Astronomy.......http://user.mc.net/arf
ASTROPHOTO OF THE WEEK..... New Every Monday
Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 18:54:49 -0500
From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com>
Subject: Over-carbonated Cornie,refrac/SG ,MonsterMash-er, pH
Brewsters:
Over the Christmas holidays in preparation for a party, I accidentally
over-carbonated a naturally carbonated Cornie of lager
( doing several other beers in a row, after a 5u filtration,
I hit it with 50psi and shook it. OOOPS) I should have
measured it first with my keg pressure gauge, but didn't. At a
keg pressure of 22 psig, can you say foam? You could walk
on this stuff. Can you say Marx Brothers if you try to release the
pressure from the "IN" side, since it foams up and out the
connection?
Any ideas on how to deal with this? I thought about putting an
extra long hose from the keg to my CP bottler to minimize the flow
rate, but that will mean I will have to pressure the bottle to 22psig
to keep it from foaming. And then when I go to cap it???? Once I get
the keg volume part of the way down then it shouldn't be a problem. =
I could also do this with a keg to keg transfer and this may be easier.
I would have dealt with it sooner, but the outdoor temperature went
up from 20F to 60F over the whole season so it was tough to get it =
to near freezing to reduce the pressure. But who's complaining about
Spring in January? Any ideas? Comments? Experience?
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Norm Brewer got a hand held refractometer for Christmas. Try
the Chemical Rubber Handbook for tables of specific gravity
versus refractive index for various sugars.
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin MacRae's MonsterMash-er(TM) story Now that *was* a
knee-slapper, son! {8^)
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Adam Rich asks about pH/temperature of mash and sparge water. =
I use a SS shot glass/jigger to put my sample in and cool it in a bath
of ice water to 20C for my pH meter. A metal measuring cup
would also work fine. For Christmas ( among other things like =
AlK's book), I got a roll of pH paper which is good to the nearest 0.5
pH units (pHydrion 5 to 9, Micro Essential Laboratory, Brooklyn, NY )
and I'm going to try that by sampling into a cold metal spoon.
This should be a big step over the brown pH paper which changes
to a different shade of brown, as is now available in HB stores.
Adam, are you using only pale *ale* malts in your single infusions?
If you are using pale malts this would explain your cloudiness as =
these malts are not so highly modified as the ale malts and are
not intended for single temperature infusions.
Also, I use two 4 gallon SS kettles, they're cheap, easier to handle
and two boil faster than a larger one and you have lots of free-board.
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
103164.3202 at compuserve.com
Dave_Burley at compuserve.com =
Voice e-mail OK =
Return to table of contents
HTML-ized on 01/14/98, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96