---

	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:
  Help with a water analysis (Eddie Kent)
  Can mash efficiency be over 90%? ("J.W. Schnaidt")
  corny serilizing ("Thomas, Andrew R")
  Pasteurising cornie kegs (Randy Ricchi)
  RE: Newbie Questions, Vol 2 (Mark Weaver)
  December 97 Brewing Techniques (Alan McKay)
  infusion vs. step mashing (Troy Hager)
  Pasteurizing a cornie ("Pat Babcock")
  RECIPES NEEDED (Mark Weaver)
   (Mark Pfortmiller)
  Yeast Behavior ("David Johnson")
  Water Chemistry & 3/4 ton full floating axle (William Graham)
  RE yeast question (Clifton Moore)
  Re: MIXMASHER vs RIMS (Scott Murman)
  re:overcarbed cornie (haafbrau1)
  HSA during mashing/lautering ("Dave Draper")
  Beer and Spam and MCAB (Dean_Goulding)
  RIMS temperature gradient (Dion Hollenbeck)
  Weyermann,runoff,Temp differential, ("David R. Burley")
  Re: Over-carbonated Cornie (Margie and Dave Ludwig)
  dough in (Al Korzonas)
  roasted malt help (michael rose)
  RE: Trademarks, HSA (LaBorde, Ronald)
  re: mix sham  -- ANAGRAM(R) ("Rich, Charles")
  Infusion Mash in GOTT 10 Gallon ("Lee, Ken")


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: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 15:54:28 -0600
From: Eddie Kent <ebk1 at earthlink.net>
Subject: Help with a water analysis

I recently got a water analysis from my local water company (Houston, TX
M.U.D.#163) and they gave me the following:

arsenic      .0025 mg/l    sodium                             35 mg/l
barium       .2110 mg/l   sulfate                                 9 mg/l

iron           .0259 mg/l    total hardness / CACO3  147 mg/l
zinc           .0082 mg/l    PH                                   6.6
calcium           52 mg/l    dil. conduct (unhos/cm)     474
chloride          44 mg/l    tot. Alka. as CACO3        156 mg/l
fluoride          0.2 mg/l    bicarbonate                       190 mg/l

magnesium        4 mg/l    carbonate                             0 mg/l
nitrate(as N) 0.16 mg/l    dissolved solids                 240 mg/l
                                      p. alkalinity / CACO3           0
mg/l

I need some help as to water treatment when brewing a pale ale ( I brew
mainly IPA's and PA's).  Currently I use 1 T gypsum and 1/4 t salt per 5
gallons of tap water after boiling and letting sit overnight.  Any help
would be appreciated by posting or private e-mail.

Also, I currently have a batch of honey ale ( not enough time for an all
grain, I was lazy- its an extract batch with 10 lbs of Light LME, 2lbs
of unfiltered honey, 1/2 lb. 60 degree crystal , and 2 lbs Carapils, 1oz
fuggles 15 min., 1oz hallertau 30 min. 1 oz. hallertau 45 min, 1 hr
boil) in the secondary.  The OG was 1.068 and at transfer after 7 days
the SG was 1.030.  I aerated the wort with 2 one minute blasts of O2
with an oxygenator before pitching the yeast (wyeast 1056 ale) in the
primary and the ferment has been at 68 to 70 degrees.  There seems to be
no activity in the secondary and there is still a strong honey flavor-
should I repitch some more yeast or just wait a week or two in the
secondary?

Again any help would be appreciated by post or private e-mail.
- --
Eddie Kent
ebk1 at earthlink.com

Listening to someone who brews their own beer is like listening
to a religious fanatic talk about the day he saw the light.
    -Ross Murray, Montreal Gazette-



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 16:33:38 -0600
From: "J.W. Schnaidt" <tuba at gwtc.net>
Subject: Can mash efficiency be over 90%?

This past Sunday, I completed my very first all grain batch. Everything
went very well. I was suprised at the simplicity of it all. After reading
about it, thinking, studying and buying the proper equipment, it all seemed
to be much simpler than I had imagined. The question I have concerns mash
efficiency. I'm not concerned with the lack thereof, but rather, what seems
to be too much.

First a bit of background on the equipment and procedure. I used a
Rubbermaid 5 gallon cooler for a hot liquor tank. I also used a Rubbermaid
cooler with a Phils phalse bottom and a Phils sparger installed in the lid
of the cooler.

Here is the grain bill:

10 pounds Belgian 2 row pale
 .5 pound English crystal
 .25 pound US Special Roast
 .125 pound DWC Biscuit
 .125 pound chocolate malt

I mashed in the 11 lbs of grain with 170 deg water (2 deg high to
compensate for heat loss to the mash tun) and nailed my mash temperature of
156 deg right on the money. It held rock solid at 156 deg for the entire
mash. Mash pH was 5.2. After 45 minutes, I checked for conversion using
iodine and found that it was indeed complete. During the mash, I acidified
5 gal. of water to pH 5.2 with lactic acid. I then heated it to 170 deg and
transferred it to the hot liquor tank. I had trouble with some grain under
the phalse bottom. The phalse bottom had floated up and some grain got
trapped under it when I first mashed in. I took a few minutes to get the
grain flushed out before I could begin the recirculation in earnest. Upon
completion of the mash, I recirculated about a gallon of sweet wort. It
cleared somewhat, but I'm not sure how clear it should actually get. It
wasn't as clear as later, during the sparge. I proceeded to runoff into the
kettle and with about an inch of sweet wort left on top of the grain bed, I
proceeded to sparge. The sparge took about 1 hour. I sparged until I had 7
gallons of wort in the kettle.

I did a 90 minute boil, adding 1 oz of Target hops 15 minutes into the boil
and 1 oz of East Kent Goldings 80 minutes into the boil. I also added 1 tsp
of rehydrated Irish Moss 15 minutes before the end of the boil. I force
cooled to 60 degrees and my calibrated kettle showed 5.5 gal of wort. I
measured the specific gravity with a triple scale hydrometer and a
certified saccharometer. The hydrometer showed 1.065 and the saccharometer
showed 16 deg Brix (adjusted for 68 deg calibration temp). These numbers
fairly well agree with each other. This seems like a lot of extract to me,
considering I was shooting for 75% efficiency with a OG of about 1.052 or
so.

My calculations run this way:

10 lbs Belgian pale X 35 pt*lbs/gal      = 350 GU
 .5 lbs English crystal X 24 pt*lbs/gal   =  12 GU
 .25 lbs US Special roast X 24 pt*lbs/gal =   6 GU
 .125 lbs DWC Biscuit X 37 pt*lbs/gal     = 4.6 GU
 .125 lbs chocolate X 25 pt*lbs/gal       = 3.1 GU

Total = 375.7 or 376 GU. I understand this may not be exact, depending on
the maximum extraction rates used. This varies somewhat, depending on the
source of the numbers for maximum extraction. At any rate, 376 GU is about
the maximum extract that could be achieved.

376 GU / 5.5 gal = 68, or a maximum gravity of around 1.068.

As I mentioned above, I measured 1.065, using two different instruments.
Therefore,

1.065/1.068 = >95% efficiency. This would vary somewhat again, depending on
the numbers used above and the accuracy of measuring the final volume. It
certainly seems that my efficiency is well over 90%, no matter how you
figure it.

There's the crux of this post. Is this possible? I've always read and
understood that most brewhouse efficiency figures range 75% to 85%. There
must be a flaw in my calculations somewhere, either in the way I understand
gravity units and the calculation of specific gravity using GU's or in the
numbers I'm using for maximum extraction rates. I'm reasonably certain my
measurements of volume and specific gravity of the bitter wort are correct.
That leaves my calculations subject to question.

I oxygenated the wort with 60 seconds of pure oxygen and pitched .4 gal of
Wyeast 1084 Irish Ale, stepped up 3 times. I had active fermentation within
12 hours and it's currently chugging away.

Can anyone help? I'm not concerned with the good extraction I got; I'm just
trying to understand the numbers and the process a little better. Private
email is OK. I'd sure like to understand what's happening. Sorry for the
long post. Thanks.

Jim Schnaidt
tuba at gwtc.net



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 17:00:29 -0600
From: "Thomas, Andrew R" <thomaar at texaco.com>
Subject: corny serilizing


************************************************
Richard Byrnes says:  
A thought comes to mind, has anyone ever pasteurized a cornie keg before?
It would seem simple enough to drop it in a half barrel, fill the half
barrel with water, take the cornie out, bring th water up to pasteurizing
temps (155?) and drop the cornie back in for a half hour or so.


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

Andy's reply:

I have seen the rubber bottom come off of a corny before when a friend tried
putting boiling water inside one to sterilize.  The keg was not immersed in
water
the way he tried it.     Dont know what the temperature 
limitations are for the glue holding those on, but they are not
indestructible.  



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 17:24:03 -0500
From: Randy Ricchi <rricchi at ccisd.k12.mi.us>
Subject: Pasteurising cornie kegs

Rich Byrnes asked about pasteurising  cornie kegs.  I had a cornie that
kept infecting the beer I put into it.  I had run beer line cleaner through
it and then sanitized all parts with an iodophor solution to no avail.

I finally boiled five gallons of water and ran it out into the cornie. I
put all the cornie parts (disassembled), including the picnic faucet, into
the cornie before filling.  I then let everything sit, covered, until cool.

When I was ready to use the keg, I treated it with iodophor again, and so
far, knock on wood, no infection. It's been about 5 or 6 weeks since I
filled the keg.


Randy Ricchi

Fed. Witness Protection Program Relocatee
Hancock, Michigan

 .....Doh!

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 18:41:25 -0500
From: Mark Weaver <HeadBrewer at eci.com>
Subject: RE: Newbie Questions, Vol 2

Rich,

>1.  I used a cash Christmas gift to make a wort cooler, and the thing
>works great, 212 to 75F in 16 minutes vice a few hours. Doesn't the
>copper react with the wort though?  I know that copper easily gives
>off ions and readily reacts with so many other compounds and
>substances, how does it react here?

Yes copper does react with Wort, however, according to the FDA, it isn't

harmful. What little does go into the beer isn't enough to harm you.
However, if the copper is oxidized, it is highly recommended that you
wash it with some vinegar first. This will remove the oxidation
(green/grey stuff). The copper will become somewhat shinny, but not
gleaming. I use an immersion chiller, a very long tube of copper that is
bent
into the shape of a coil, it is placed in the hot wort 15 minutes before

EOB (End Of Boil). I clean it once a month to prevent oxidation.
According
to some brewers, copper is supposed to be beneficial to the yeast in
some way or another, however, I take that with a grain of salt...

>2.  I switched early to the 5 litre kegging system vice bottles, and
>absolutely love it.  The one problem I had was having enough to fill
>4 kegs and a couple bottles.  When I bought my 8 gal pot to do full
>boils, I started making bigger batches (5 1/2 - 6 gal instead of 5
>gal) and voila! the problem was solved.  At the same time, upon
>recommendation of another homebrewer whom I don't remember, started
>straining my wort as I transfered it to the primary, removing most of
>the hop residue.  I cracked the first keg using these two changes the
>other night and was very disappointed.  I had brewed 'sea bass ale'
>from a recipe I have used frequently with nary a problem, but this
>batch turned out kinda, well, watery.  Not as much body as it should
>have.  Opinions?

Maybe you forgot to add something? maybe you were a pound short on
extract?? I had this problem too when I was using extract oh so long
ago. Have you increased the amount of extract and hops you use to
reflect the fact that you are adding extra water? That may be the
problem... (er,
please don't take that last bit the wrong way....) I have some extra 5
liter kegs that are sitting around. They are all clean, if you pay
shipping you can have them for free.. (I also have the fancy version of
the tap, but that I can't give away for free ;-)

>3. One of the other lists I'm on is in a raging debate about fluid to
>use in air locks.  One side says always use something like vodka and
>the other side says water.  Opinions?

Vodka. Suckback (when the wort cools further in your fermenter and sucks

the fluid out of the airlock and into the fermenter) is not a good thing

if you are using water, or even worse, water with iodine added! Use
Vodka or grain alcohol. The cheap stuff works well, No Stoli Cristal
needed! ;-) What other list are you on?

>4.  My brews typically ferment vigorously enough during the first few
>days to bubble up right through the airlock and make a mess.  One
>brewer suggested I stop using the airlock at first and use a blowoff
>tube to another container.  Sorta makes sense.

Sounds like a good idea. Although, to prevent this problem, I purchased
some 7.5 gallon glass carboys. They have enough headspace so as not to
have that problem. Carboys are easier to clean, but also easier to
break. The 7.5 gallon ones are hard to come by too.

>He additionally said
>that when rapid fermentation has ceased and I'm no longer getting
>effluent from the blow off tube, I have reached "high krausen" and
>should immediately rack of to a secondary for better flavor.

Ah yes. Well, a lot of your hop resins/oils/compounds and some flavour
profiles are taken up into the Krausen. When the Krausen falls back down

into the beer, it takes those flavours and hop compounds etc. back into
the
beer with it... If you do follow his directions, you will have
to alter your hopping profile so that you get the same amount of IBUs in

your beer... Personally I wouldn't bother. There isn't much in the way
of an advantage to racking off during high Krausen.

>Up to now, I wait until the airlock stops bubbling, usually a week -ten

>days, then rack to secondary for about another week, prime and keg,
>age for at least a month and enjoy.  I'm so confuzzled!

Sounds like a good process to me! Do you rack to a glass carboy or to
another plastic fermenter? (if you haven't guessed, I dont like plastic
ferms. To easy to scratch them and get an infection)

I have a brewing website if you would like to check it out, with recipes

and some tips on brewing, calculating IBUs... We are also looking for
more
recipes <hint hint> Here's the address:

http://markweaver.com2tom.com/home.html

Hope that helps a little!

Sante!
Mark
- --
Mark Weaver - Brewer on the Loose
HeadBrewer at eci.com
75'02 / 72tii
"No, I don't brew heads....."
Resume http://markweaver.com2tom.com
Web Site: http://markweaver.com2tom.com/home.html



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 18:35:27 -0500 (EST)
From: Alan McKay <amckay at magma.ca>
Subject: December 97 Brewing Techniques


Dear BT Editor,

I just now received my Dec 1997 BT, and I have to say that I'm very
displeased to see that it is no longer shipped in an envelope.  Given
the choice between this, and paying an extra 50 cents per issue, I'll
gladly pay the 50 cents.  Afterall, this isn't Time magazine that gets
thrown out in 2 weeks (or less).  As it is, my issue arrived completely
dog-eared in one corner.  The last 30 pages are so are bent right
down about 3 inches, and are completely ratty.  Homebrewers hold on 
to these things for years to come.  

Of course, I'm sure I won't be the only one you'll hear from on this.

cheers,
 -Alan McKay
 Ottawa, ON
 K2C 2C7

cc: homebrew at hbd.org

- -- 
                 "Brewers make wort.  Yeast Makes Beer."
                       - Dave Miller's Homebrewing Guide
http://www.magma.ca/~amckay/
http://www.magma.ca/~bodnsatz/brew/tips/

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 17:14:40 -0700
From: Troy Hager <thager at bsd.k12.ca.us>
Subject: infusion vs. step mashing

Hello brewers!

Olin J. Schultz asked about mashing the same recipe using infusion vs. step
methods and I would like to relay my experiences. I have used the single
infusion method quite a few times in the past couple years and have
produced some tasty beers with it, but through reading the HBD and the
latest Fix book, I decided to use some steps for a couple batches of my
IPA.

I mash in a 7 gal Gott so have to use infusions for all rests. I
(foolishly) decided to try the 40-60-70C program for the first brew and
figured the temps. and water to grain ratios per Palmer's formulas in his
article in BT about cooler mash/lauter tuns. I started with a thick mash at
about .75 quart water to 1 lb grain with a 1/2 hr. at 40C. Then moved up to
60C with boiling water. It was  hard to get the temp. up but finally got
close (about 59) and left for another 30 mins. For the final rest we
couldn't get it up to 70C and were well over what I had figured volume-wise
with the formulas, so stopped at about 68C or so at over 2:1 ratio. So I
found that raising the temp at the higher end is very difficult and really
a pain in the butt with this system. After the boil I was at an OG of 1.055.

This batch I split the batch into two fermentors and used Brewtec Amer. Ale
II and Cal. Brewpub yeasts I started from slants. Both fermentations
started fairly quickly and both dropped like a rock to 1.010! I had been
shooting for about 1.015 or so for less alcohol and more body so was a bit
disappointed. The beers both tasted good although a little alcoholic and
thin for my preference.

My second batch used the same recipe. I decided that the three-rest program
was not for my system so decided to go to two rests at 60 & 70C. I also
wanted to try to get the FG up so cut down the 60C rest to 15 minutes and
the 70C for one hour. This beer came out a bit heavier with an OG of 1.064.
This time I used one yeast -Brewtec Amer. Ale II harvested from previous
batch. Fermentation started within a few hours and again dropped like a
rock to 1.011 in only two days!!! Again alcoholic and thin!

Conclusions: The rests were very hard and stressful to do with infusions.
It seems that when the temp. gets up around 60-70C it takes a lot of
boiling water to raise it to the next step and the result is a soupy mash
and impercise temp. control. It also seems like even a short rest at 60C
produces so many fermentable sugars that the FG drops way too low. Am I the
only one having this problem? I know that most of you using RIMS or the
MASHMIXER don't have temp control problems,  but what about using rests in
the 60C range that gets beta-amylase enzymes creating too many fermentables
and the beer dropping too low???

So, needless to say, it is back to the old reliable single-infusion method
for me; less work, better beer... what more do I need to say?

Any comments would be appreciated. I can see why there has been some talk
lately in the HBD about predicting FG numbers. So far, I haven't come up
with the answers.

Troy A. Hager
Franklin Elementary School
2385 Trousdale Drive.
Burlingame,  CA  94010
259-3850



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 20:54:48 -0500
From: "Pat Babcock" <pbabcock at oeonline.com>
Subject: Pasteurizing a cornie

Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager...

Rich Byrnes asks about pasteurizing the BEER WITHIN a cornie keg...

Rich: sounds reasonable to me. Don't know how to assure the beer has
reached and maintained pasteurization temperatures though. I'd
imagine that trials could be performed with kegs of water to
determine at roughly what point the kegged beverage reaches the
desired temperature (noting that starting temp will have a affect on
the time required). I feel an experiment coming on...

 

See ya!

Pat Babcock in SE Michigan          pbabcock at oeonline.com
Home Brew Digest Janitor            janitor@hbd.org
AOL FDN Beer & Brewing Maven        BrewBeerd at aol.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 21:56:09 -0500
From: Mark Weaver <HeadBrewer at eci.com>
Subject: RECIPES NEEDED

Hello all,

I am in the process of developing a new website for homebrew recipes.

If any of you would care to contribute any of your wonderful recipes we
will gladly post them (free of charge!) and give the credit to you
(we'll even make a link to your e-mail if you so desire).

Now, I don't intend to ever be the same size as those wonderful people
at The Cat's Meow, but I am looking to provide a site with a decent
amount of recipes, besides, I have the server space!

If you would like to contribute, please send the recipe via e-mail to:

HeadBrewer at eci.com

Or visit the site at:

http://markweaver.com2tom.com/home.html

Cheers!
MDW.
- --
Mark Weaver - Brewer on the Loose
HeadBrewer at eci.com
75'02 / 72tii
"No, I don't brew heads....."
Web Site: http://markweaver.com2tom.com/home.html


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 20:56:02 -0500
From: Mark Pfortmiller <MPFORTMILLER at PRINTPACK.COM>
Subject:  

I brewed an extract wheat beer last week. I had a nice kruesen in 8
hours time, i check it for 3 straight days and everything seemed alright.
Well the foam came up and out of my air lock on either the 4 or 5 day and
of coarse i didn't check it those days. When i racked it it tasted fine but
I'm worried about an infection. I've been brewing for 2 years and this is
the first time this has happen to me. I use a 6 1/2 ga carboy for the
primary and cornie kegs for the secondary. I've made this same beer
before with no problem.   gggrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr  i hate to feed the sewer
rats my beer. Any chance it will turn out OK???


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 21:51:16 -0600
From: "David Johnson" <dmjalj at inwave.com>
Subject: Yeast Behavior

Brewers,
    I just wanted to submit a few observations I had on yeast behavior. The
first is an observation on BrewTek'sScottish ale yeast. First of all after
using it on only two batches, I am not an expert on it. It does have a
wonderful flavor profile. I have made a strong scotch ale (OG 1.090) and an
export (OG 1.056) and was impressed by how similar they tasted in spite of
having a very different malt profile. Another thing I noticed was that it
was low attenuating on both recipes. I also noticed that it takes forever to
bottle-condition even with the lower gravity beer.
    I also recently made an alt bier with BrewTek Kolsch yeast. After a few
days in the bottle I saw an oily film on the top of all the bottles.
Concerned that I might have an infection I opened a bottle and tasted it. It
was fine. Good Even. I also noticed the beer was not carbonated and there
was no yeast sediment. So I shook up one of the bottles to disperse the film
which vanished and did not return. A few days later, I noticed that the film
had dissappeared in all the other bottles. There is now a layer of yeast on
the bottom. The beer is fine so far. My guess is, this was yeast activity
during conditioning. My question is: is this behavior related to this strain
of yeast or am I not very observant since I haven't noticed this with any
other yeasts (including other ales).

Dave (No matter where I go or how far I travel from Jeff Renner, there I
am.)


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 21:55:24 -0700
From: William Graham <bill.graham at bigfoot.com>
Subject: Water Chemistry & 3/4 ton full floating axle

Help!!!
	This newbie all-grain type is getting wrapped around the axle about
water chemistry.
	My first all-grain batch I completely ignored chemistry and pH.
The second batch, I decided to try to measure pH with my super-whamodyne
, temperature-corrected digital pH meter (pHep 3). The first sparge
samples had a pH of, gasp, 4.70!!! Ack! I didn't measure any more. BTW,
I tested the meter on solutions of 4.0 and 7.0 and it passed with flying
colors. 
	Today I decided to measure the pH of the tap water here in beautiful
Golden, CO. pH of 8.4. I then boiled it, cooled it, and the pH is now
8.9!!! Ack! I though the pH was supposed to go DOWN cuz the carbonates
precipitate out!
	Here's the salient features of the water chemistry from the local water
department:
	
	Cl-free      	1.35
	Cl-Total	1.45
	pAlkalinity	1.0
	pH		8.98	
	tAlkalinity	60.0
	tHardness	132.0

	Sulfate		27.5

all units in mg/L

I'm sure this means that the water is pretty soft, however, when reading
Miller's "Handbook of Home Brewing" and Noonan's "New Brewing Lager
Beer", I just get confused (some engineer, huh?) about temporary
hardness, permanent alkalinity, hardness by CaCO3, etc.
	Could someone please give my some kind of overall, big picture analysis
of my water and maybe how I should treat it for both light and dark
beers?

Kneeling humbly in front of the collective,
	Bill - 4 blocks from the Coors megabrewery

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 23:50:03 -0800
From: Clifton Moore <cmoore at gi.alaska.edu>
Subject: RE yeast question

David wrote:
    I obtained a quart of yeast slurry from a local lager brewery. I was
given a quart of slurry the brewer said that it had 85% yeast and that was
90% viable as he had checked it that morning. He also made a comment about
the maximum pitching rate and said when he does a maximum fermentation he
uses 32 gm. of dry yeast in 200 ml. wort.

Dave:
It looks to me like you may have missed something by a few orders of magnitude.
If you intend to pitch a full quart of slurry into a five gallon batch I
would hold off till
you get some authoritative reply from your post, or clarification from the
source.

I just finished calculating the yeast population I captured from a lager
primary.
I washed it several times and lost cells at every step, but I still came
away with only 100 ml. of slurry.  How is it that you will be pitching
several times the yeast that my batch yielded?

Anybody care to offer up any numbers on this pitching rate question?

Clif



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 00:54:20 -0800
From: Scott Murman <smurman at best.com>
Subject: Re: MIXMASHER vs RIMS 

On Fri, 9 Jan 98 16:55:16 CST  John Wilkinson wrote:
> 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.

I can only say that it is possible.  It's not only possible, but with
a typical batch I've never even come close to overflowing my 10
gal. Gott cooler.  From reading the HBD, I do find that most people
use what I would consider a very thin mash.  I shoot for 1 qt/lb
during my sacc. rests.  I've read others using up to 3.0 qt/lb, which
I can't really undertand.

1 lb. of grain will approximately occupy 1 qt. of volume.  So 10 lb. of
grain will be 10 qts, or 2-1/2 gallons.  Add in 2-1/2 gal. of water,
and you still will have 5 gal. of volume left over.  Even a 1.5 qt/lb
mash ratio would leave 3.75 gal. of empty volume.  If you are having
trouble step mashing with this much extra space, I think you must be
mashing in at far too thin of a mash ratio.

SM

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 08:44:11 -0500
From: haafbrau1 at juno.com
Subject: re:overcarbed cornie

If you have a spare cornie, keg to keg sounds like the least messy& least
wasteful way to go.
Paul Haaf
haafbrau1 at juno.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 08:48:45 -6
From: "Dave Draper" <ddraper at utdallas.edu>
Subject: HSA during mashing/lautering

Dear Friends,

In #2609, Brian Dixon wrote about hot-side aeration:

>      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. 

I'm one of those who had definite signs of oxidation when the mash
was dumped into a lauter tun.  In my case, I was absolutely
stringent about gently handling the wort while still hot, so I'm
confident there were no other opportunities for HSA to occur.  After
beginning to take much greater care in transferring the mash to the
lauter tun, things improved noticeably; and switching to a system in
which mashing and lautering were done in a single vessel eliminated 
the oxidative symptoms entirely.  Any oxidation problems I still have 
are unnoticeable so far because their gestation period is longer than 
the time it takes me to drink the batch.  Just a datapoint.

Cheers, Dave in Dallas
- ---
*****************************************************************************
   Dave Draper, Dept Geosciences, U. Texas at Dallas, Richardson TX 75083
   ddraper at utdallas.edu (commercial email unwelcome) WWW: hbd.org/~ddraper
                 Beer page: http://hbd.org/~ddraper/beer.html
That's all very well in practice; but will it work in *theory*?
    ---Ken Willing


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 10:28:14 -0500
From: Dean_Goulding at tufts-health.com
Subject: Beer and Spam and MCAB




>>"Fight Spam - see http://www.cauce.org/

>I find the best way to fight spam is to EAT it.

Those who are interested in beer and Spam might want to
point their browsers to the home of the Mighty Boston Wort Processors
and note the past 4 years of "Beer and Spam" tastings!

http://www.wort.org/events.html

This page also contains pertinent information for the 1998 Boston
Homebrew Competition where
winners in 18 subcategories will qualify to enter in the MCAB national
 championship round.


Return to table of contents


Date: 14 Jan 1998 07:33:57 -0800
From: Dion Hollenbeck <hollen at vigra.com>
Subject: RIMS temperature gradient

The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to rec.crafts.brewing as well.


The following was passed on to me by Kyle Druey, but I have not
personally read what he has attributed to Jack S.  However, no matter
who said it, it is worth commenting on:

Kyle> Dion, didn't you do some measurements on the temp gradient in a RIMS
Kyle> mash?  Jack S seems to think there is:

Jack> Frankly, I do not see how pumping liquid through a fixed grain
Jack> bed can even come close to the near zero temperature gradient of
Jack> a continuous mix.  There has got to be a measureable difference
Jack> between the liquid at the bottom and that coming out of the
Jack> heater.  If not, there would be no need for a heater.  When my
Jack> mixer is running I can NOT measure any difference between the
Jack> wort near the top and that on the bottom.

Kyle> Do you have any data you could post?


Well, I never did any "formal" or "controlled" temperature
measurements of this.  However, I actually did measure it one day as I
had my BruProbe out to measure the lag time between the heater chamber
output reaching setpoint and the the mash reaching settpoint.

Jack is completely correct that there is a temp gradient between the
return manifold and the wort coming out of the bottom of the mash tun,
but only during boosts.  Once the setpoint is reached by the heater,
the temp in the mash tun gradually rises until after about 10 minutes,
it stabilizes at the setpoint as well.  I probed all over and up and
down and there was only about a .5F difference and this was most
notable right near the walls of the mash tun.

dion

- -- 
Dion Hollenbeck (619)597-7080x164                 Email: hollen at vigra.com
                                             http://www.vigra.com/~hollen
Sr. Software Engineer - Vigra Div. of Visicom Labs  San Diego, California

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 10:50:56 -0500
From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com>
Subject: Weyermann,runoff,Temp differential,

Brewsters:

John Wilkinson asks if Weyermann Pilsner malt needs a protein rest.  I
would say yes, even though Braam Greyling of South Africa purchased a lar=
ge
quantity and was told this malt was capable of being used in an infusion
mash, as I recall from a private communication.  From the German
perspective, I interpret this to mean a decoction is not necessary.  I
would however not use the it in a single step infusion unless the grain w=
as
very soft, like a Pale Ale,  when you bite it.
- -------------------------------------------------
John Wilkinson and Jeff Renner concur on runoff rates, believing that 5
gal/hr is too slow for their 10 gallon systems.  Suppose you were at Bud,=

you'd take a long time at 5 gal/hr!  Since many systems are 5 gallons , I=

suspect that is the source of confusion.  I think the operative number he=
re
is take an hour to sparge regardless of the size of the HB  mash.  The bi=
g
guys do take a few hours sometimes.
- -------------------------------------------------
Kyle Drury correctly asserts that there must be a temperature differentia=
l
from top to bottom if he has to use a heater in his RIMS system, but can'=
t
measure the difference. Why not approximate it with a power calculation? =

The amount of power into the heater is the amount lost at equilibrium.  I=
f
you assume the specific heat of water is 1 and the specific heat of malt =
is
0.4 and other losses ( pump, tubing, etc.) are small, you can calculate t=
he
temperature differential, given your grain bill and mash water content.
- ------------------------------------------------- =

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


Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 11:15:23 -0500
From: Margie and Dave Ludwig <dludwig at eagle1.eaglenet.com>
Subject: Re: Over-carbonated Cornie

>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?  
Dave,
You didn't mention it but I assume you don't have a pressure relief valve
in the lid. I force carbonate my kegs at ~28 psi in the fridge for 3 days
or so then bleed off the pressure with the pressure relief valve to about 3
psi for dispensing. I would let the keg sit awhile (no doubt it's been
sitting awhile by the time this gets posted), then bleed off pressure from
the IN fitting by depressing the poppet. Because the IN tube is usually an
inch or so long, if your beer level is high, you'll probably get something
out of the fitting. You could tilt the keg to get more distance between the
beer and the IN tube. That might be the way to go.
Hope this helps.

Dave Ludwig
Southern MD Brew


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 11:22:17 -0600 (CST)
From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com>
Subject: dough in

Both Jack and Dion have recently posted on their methods for doughing in
(the initial mixing of the brewing liquor (water) and grist (crushed grains)).
They both do it by circulating the liquor (two different ways) and then slowly
adding the grist.  Dion even compares the way his system works with the way
big commercial brewers dough in.  Although I've never seen one in operation,
my understanding is that in the US, the larger brewers use a system where the
malt is dropped into the mash tun and the stream of malt is run through a
spray of water.

On the other hand, most of the commercial brewers in the UK use what's called
a Steel's Masher.  This is a cylindrical device that is (for brewers the size
of say, Samuel Smith's) about 24" in diameter and contains a series of mixing
paddles/blades and an auger-like device.  The input-end of this device
connects to the grist case (which holds the grist and connects to the bottom
of the mill) and to a water supply.  The output end swings over the doors of
the mash/laeuter tun.  The paddles/blades/auger are motorized.  It's operation
is quite obvious...  malt and water go in, are mixed by the paddles and are
pushed via the auger into the tun.

The key in both these systems is to prevent clumps of malt from forming
in which there are dry pockets of malt (this is called "balling"). [Our
friends from Oz should have some fun with that, eh?].  I've read in several
cookbooks that when you mix liquid and dry ingredients, you should add the
liquid to the dry and first work the dry ingredients into a paste (working
out all the lumps) and then add the balance of the liquid ingredients.
I know from personal experience, it's a lot easier to get the lumps out of
pudding (US, not UK meaning) mix when you're not chasing a little floating
clump around the saucepan, trying to pin it against the wall.

So, what does this all mean to the homebrewer?  Well, the gadgeteer who
has not chosen to go the RIMS route will immediately start building a
Steel's Masher (see Malting and Brewing Science, The Biotechnology of
Malting and Brewing, A Textbook of Brewing and Practical Brewing for
pictures... I know at least two have diagrams).

For the non-gadgeteers, if you are making a rather stiff (thick) mash
(say, 1.5 quarts per pound or less), then it probably really doesn't make
a difference whether you add liquid to dry or vice versa.  On the other
hand, if you are making a rather thin mash, I suggest holding back a third
or so of the water and and adding it in only after the mash is well mixed.
I think this will reduce the likelyhood of balled starch.

Oh... there are photos of the *outsides* of a few Steel's Mashers on
my website.


Al.

Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz at xnet.com

My new website (still under construction, but up-and-running):
     http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 10:21:10 -0800
From: michael rose <mrose at ucr.campus.mci.net>
Subject: roasted malt help

I've been trying to brew a robust porter but I can't get the flavor
profile I want. Does anybody have any tricks to get the roasted flavor
form roasted malt without the off flavors(astringency?)
Should I mash it or should I steep it? I was thinking of steeping at low
temp(120f) for a short time period (10 min). Would this method
accomplish anything? 
	On this same topic; I have several books on all the aspects of brewing
but I have not been able to find a book on the different types and uses
of malts. Does anybody have any suggustions?
	Any robust porter advice will be appreciated.
- -- 
Michael Rose  Riverside, CA   mrose at ucr.campus.mci.net

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 12:24:50 -0600
From: rlabor at lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald)
Subject: RE: Trademarks, HSA

>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.

This may explain why the results have been satisfactory with my
stoneless areation stone.  I just stick the racking cane with the little
plastic end piece into the wort and areate.   The foam head is about 2
inches thick, and I let 'er go for about four hours steady.

Ron

Ronald La Borde - Metairie, Louisiana - rlabor at lsumc.edu


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 11:36:22 -0800
From: "Rich, Charles" <CRich at saros.com>
Subject: re: mix sham  -- ANAGRAM(R)

Some other anagrams of MIXMASHER

mixes harm
he rams mix
re: mix sham

Actually pretty darned busy, Cheers,
Charles Rich (Seattle, USA)


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 13:10:40 -0700
From: "Lee, Ken" <KLee at resdata.com>
Subject: Infusion Mash in GOTT 10 Gallon

I would like to get some feedback on how those of you that use a single
temperature infusion mash actually perform the operation.  I get okay
results, but am ready to try and improve my process.

I have a 10 gallon GOTT cooler with a phils phalse bottom and a plastic
ball lock to control the out flow.  I boil in a converted 15.5 gallon
key on a camp chef propane stove, the big 100,000+ btu model.  I also
use a wort chiller and get my wort to pitching temp in about 20 minutes.
For the mashing process I generally combine my grains.  An example would
be 7 lbs of pale two row (whatever is cheapest at the homebrew store),
and one pound of either Crystal or another lite colored malt.  With the
eight pounds of grain I will add 1.3 * 8 quarts of water at 170 F.  I
have PH strips from Precision labs, but never got instructions on how to
use them do I don't.  I just add one tablespoon of lactic acid to the
mash water as it is heating up.  I combine the water and grains and stir
them up in the cooler.  I generally get a temp between 150 and 154.
Seems pretty close to me anyways.  I let the cooler sit in the garage
for about three hours...  I then open the balllock and let the cloudy
stuff flow into the container I boiled the water in (A four gallon SS
pot).  I never seem to be able to tell when it clears enough.  I just
let it flow until I don't see any more chunks of grain coming through.
I then ladle this back into the cooler and start draining into my
keg/boiler.  When it drains completely, I turn off the flow, get about 8
gallons of water to 170 degrees, then pour it into the cooler.  I don't
have a sparge arm so I have been using this process.  I never pour in
boiling water in an attempt at mashout.  For some reason I thought you
get to many of the phenols (sp?) when you do.  I don't add any chemicals
to this water.  I then drain into the pot until no grains come through,
pour this back in, and drain until my keg fills up to the 6 1/2 gallon
mark.  I then stop sparging and boil the kegs contents for an hour or
so, adding hops at diferent intervals in the boil.  I also add about two
teaspoons of Irish moss when I fire up the burner for the boil.

I have never seen a step by step process for infusion mashing in a
cooler that explains precisely what chemicals to add and why.  Am I
doing this right, and what can I do to make this process better and how
do you use PH strips.  I enjoy the process and the end result, but think
I can get a 'Better Beer' with a few pointers.

Thanks,

Ken Lee
klee at resdata.com

Return to table of contents

---