HOMEBREW Digest #2609 Wed 14 January 1998

[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]

		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

  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
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 01/14/98, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96