---

	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:
  Simple Yeast Culturing ("Mark Nelson")
  Step vs. Infusion (nathan_l_kanous_ii)
  Yeast Aeration, ("David R. Burley")
  entering competitions (Stephen Ross)
  RE: MixMasher Motor? (John Wilkinson)
  Whirlpool of Doom (Samuel Mize)
  re: step mashing disadvantages (Charles Burns)
  7 gallons per hour, NOT! (Al Korzonas)
  Oxygen passing through Plastic ("Tomlinson, James")
  Flat Beer ("William Warren")
  Propane and propane accesories ("Roger Grow")
  Re: if I don't filter (mcveyp)
  Bass O2 patent (Andy Walsh)
  Brass Beer Engine (rbarnes)
  Coopers Sparkling Ale (John D Elsworth)
  Fridge temp controler ("Michael Maag")
  Partial Mashing ("Gregg Soh")
  Commercial False Bottoms (aquinn)
  Open, Closed, Plastic, Glass (Glyn Crossno)
  lager temps/propane tank longevity ("Kevin TenBrink")
  I did it again (John Varady)
  Further clarification Jim Liddlil's post on sanitizing plastic (FivestarAE)
  "Killian's" Recipe, Secondary question (Alpinessj)
  aeration (Spencer W Thomas)
  pH test ("Bryan L. Gros")
  beer blending ("Bryan L. Gros")
  Protein rests (Al Korzonas)
  Minneapolis ("Little, Wayne")
  Request for Amsterdam beer spots (Fred Waltman)


Be sure to enter the...
The Best of Brooklyn Homebrew Competition
Brooklyn Brewery, Brooklyn, NY
Entries due by 1/31/98, competition 2/7/98
Contact Bob Weyersberg at triage at wfmu.org for more info.


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: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 08:38:12 -0500
From: "Mark Nelson" <menelson at mindspring.com>
Subject: Simple Yeast Culturing

Michael Dingas asked about how to re-use/extend the life of a smackpack of
liquid yeast.

Personally I haven't tried this one, but I like the idea.  Check Alan and
Melissa's brew page (specifically link to
http://www.magma.ca/~bodnsatz/brew/tips/yeast/culture.html  Then See
"Culturing for the Rest of Us" near the bottom of the page.

In short the idea is to brew a mini-batch of unhopped beer, then bottle it
with all the yeast in suspension.  In other words swirl the carboy to get
all the yeast suspended, then bottle and cap as normal.  Each bottle becomes
the equivalent of a smackpack (or better) and can be used in a starter for
an upcoming batch, or probably to pitch directly into an upcoming batch.
There's more detail to the procedure on their page.

- --
Mark Nelson
Windhund Brauerei
Atlanta GA



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 09:08:10 -0400
From: nathan_l_kanous_ii at ferris.edu
Subject: Step vs. Infusion


Hey, since I posted my non-scientific support of step mashing, something
came to mind that I didn't mention.

I infuse my first step with a water:malt ratio of 1 qt water to 1 pound of
malt.  Sorry to those that use "real" units of measure, I've just not made
that transition yet.

Anyhow, I start with 1 qt/pound for an initial temp rest of 135 deg F.
After my protease rest (20 to 30 minutes), I then infuse 0.25 quarts /
pound of boiling water.  Then, I add heat (converted kegs) to get to my
saccharification temp.

This turns out to be kind of a combination of step mashing (40-60-70, ala
Fix) and infusion mashing.  I hold my saccharification rest at 150 to 158,
depending on what I wanted in a final product.

I use the "infusion" temp for saccharification, because I could more easily
predict final gravities and dextrin content than I could by using the 60
and 70 deg C rests for various intervals.  I didn't have the time to do
multiple trials with various times at 60 and 70 deg C to learn what degree
of fermentability I could achieve with various times.  It just was easier
at the time, and works well for me.

Unfortunately, a lot of things get done for the wrong reasons (read that as
a guilty plea) but accomplish the right outcome.  They become a means to an
end.

Anyhow, could the ratio of water to grain in the various steps influence
whether a brewer favors or disfavors step mashing?  Hmm....

Nathan in Frankenmuth, MI



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 10:20:07 -0500
From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com>
Subject: Yeast Aeration,

Brewsters:

Sam Mize puzzles over when to oxygenate a fermentation and
suggests considering repeated oxygenation during the early
stages of fermentation.

I suppose as long as the yeast were in a growth phase, =

oxygenation wouldn't hurt, but the risk is of course oxidation
of the wort.  As I and others have already commented, the main
reason for oxygenation is to have a yeast colony which
can be re-used and finish out a fermentation reliably with =

no unwanted aldehydes. Although the Brits successfully do
this by oxygenation of the wort in the main fermentation
( aldehydes are not a major problem for most British style beers,
but can be a problem for most lagers) and others have reported
success with growing starters in the constant presence of air by
stirring, the risk of aldehydes and beer staling is present.

Other than AJ DeLAnge's comment that some British brewers
oxygenate the yeast just before pitching, to my knowledge, no one
here has reported the oxygenation of a full pitching size of  yeast,
ale or especially lager.  Without the presence of wort, I don't know =

how successful this oxygenation would be, but this may be a partial
solution to preventing oxidation of the wort while giving a healthy
yeast colony.

If a small quantity of wort or malt extract were fermented using =

the entire pitching quantity of yeast with continuous stirring in
air or oxygen before pitching, followed by settling or centrifuging
and pouring off the spent starter beer to get rid of the aldehydes =

in the solution, this would seem to be ideal and practical. =


Anyone tried this?
- ----------------------------------------------------
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, 21 Jan 1998 09:38:55 -0600
From: rossst at duke.usask.ca (Stephen Ross)
Subject: entering competitions

**de-lurk**

First, a hearty thank you for the in-depth discussions and posts here on
hbd.  I've just recently switched to all-grain, and the more I learn, the
more I value the hbd.  I'll turn into a
chemi-techno-thermo-fluid-dynamic-geek yet, as long as it brews better
beer!

QUESTION: Do competitions accept entries in PET bottles?

I've been bottling in PET for about 5 years.  I'm getting kegs soon, but
I'd like to enter some brew into competitions.  I suppose after I start
kegging I'll have to get gadgety and build a counter pressure filler, but I
don't want to have to get bottling equipment after getting kegs.

Any advice would be appreciated! Email also welcome.

Stephen Ross
(in Saskatoon, SK, a long ways from Jeff Renner.)



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 21 Jan 98 10:39:50 CST
From: jwilkins at wss.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson)
Subject: RE: MixMasher Motor?

Todd Kirby posted:

>I've been reading with great interest the recent thread on the mixmasher. 
>Has anyone tried adapting a motor from an ice cream maker? Lots of people 
>in the south have these things just lying around during the prime 
>cold weather brewing season. Should have plenty of torque but may be a 
>bit slow, I'm not sure. Just thought I'd throw it out.

I bought an ice cream freezer for this very thing.  I found it a little more
difficult to adapt than I expected.  The drive is an octagonal recess (female)
which I managed to fit by finding a square nut large enough, drilling through
it, and pinning it to my mixer shaft.  Before I actually tried it on a mas I
made ice cream using the motor and noticed it ran pretty fast.  I decided
it was too fast and abandoned that tack.  I ended up using a gear motor I
bought.  As I mentioned in a post last week, I have decided that that stirrer
was causing stuck sparges for me, and that motor turns at only 28 rpm.
perhaps the problem is not the speed but my crude mixer blades.
Whatever the reason, I have abandoned my auto mixer.  I would be afraid
that even with better mixer blades an ice cream freezer motor would be too
fast, though.  I now use mine just to make ice cream.  That is not bad, though.

John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins at wss.dsccc.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 11:41:29 -0600 (CST)
From: Samuel Mize <smize at prime.imagin.net>
Subject: Whirlpool of Doom

Greetings to all, and especially to:

> HOMEBREW Digest #2615               Wed 21 January 1998

> From: "Bret A. Schuhmacher" <bas at healthcare.com>
> Subject: What happens if I don't filter before fermentation?

> It's such a PITA to get the break out of my wort before fermentation I
> was wondering what happens if I don't bother?

Apocalypse, world famine and loss of rainforest habitat.  However, your
beer will still be good.  It just won't be Great Beer.

Some of the unwanted proteins will redissolve out of the hot break, and
you'll get some kind of flavors from steeping the cooked hops.


> I've tried the centrifugal method, but I really don't want to mess
> with siphons. I prefer to dump the whole pot into the fermenter.

Whirlpool, THEN strain.  So why whirlpool?  To settle the trub to the
bottom, so you can leave it in the pot.

I did this Monday.  I dipped out the top 2/3 of the wort and ran it all
through the strainer without it clogging.  I wound up with almost-dry trub
in the trash, and ALL my wort in the fermenter.

Siphoning, you'll get more trub in the fermenter, and leave a pint of wort
in the pot (with a partial boil, that pint is concentrated money).

I did a full boil.  However, I've whirlpooled partial boils, which
experience suggests that you, too, can leave a LOT of trub in the pot if
you pour gently (without stirring up the trub layer).  You may find it
easier to dip out the top half with a tumbler, to lighten the pot before
pouring out the rest.  (I dipped from my full boil with a gallon pitcher.)

> I've got a 2 stage strainer on my funnel and the nylon sack just gets
> filled with break.  I wind up emptying it several times before I get
> all the wort into my fermenter.  It's just very messy, time consuming,
> and I'm tempted to stick my hand into the wort sitting in the funnel
> to move the break out of the way so the wort will drain into the
> fermenter.

Been there, done that, re-pasteurized a batch after mucking it through
with my hand (heavy wort, pellet hops and chocolate -- two ounces clogged
the strainer).

> Any tips?

Chill below 100F, whirlpool and settle.  (I don't know if the whirlpool
really matters with this method, but I suspect it helps compact the trub.)

Use a kitchen strainer as a pre-strainer, so your funnel will clog less.
Or just use the kitchen strainer.  It's got a big filtering surface, and
it's easy to dump.  You only need to get most of the hops and hot break,
not every last solid particle.  In fact, a little cold break may provide
yeast nutrition.

When the strainer or filter clogs, don't wait for it to drain, or try to
shake through "just a little more."  Pour out the liquid so you can dump
the trub.

But don't pour the liquid back into the brew pot.  The strainer is full of
suspended trub.  You'll just re-strain the same trub several times.

Pour the liquid from the strainer into a sanitized bowl.  Knock the trub
out of the strainer, then pour the bowl of trub-heavy wort back into the
strainer.  Repeat if it re-clogs.  Dump the strainer again and you're
ready for more from the pot.  Since you're not re-straining the same trub,
you'll only do this three or four times (unless you use 7 pounds of
extract, 4 oz of hops, 8 oz of molasses and an 8 oz chocolate bar).

 - - - - -

By the way, I chill by floating a foil roasting pan on my wort and putting
ice in it.  Heat-sanitize for a minute with the hot trub (AFTER the boil),
dump out the water as the ice melts.  I cool five gallons in less than an
hour, it takes one 88-cent bag of ice, no siphon or other equipment.

I heat the pan AFTER the boil for fear that a big flat pan will catch and
combine several boil bubbles, making one big uberbubble that could spray
hot wort all over the kitchen (and me).

Best,
Sam Mize

- -- 
Samuel Mize -- smize at imagin.net -- Team Ada
Fight Spam - see http://www.cauce.org/
Personal net account - die gedanken sind frei

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 21 Jan 98 10:34 PST
From: cburns at egusd.k12.ca.us (Charles Burns)
Subject: re: step mashing disadvantages

Olin Schultz writes:
>
>> The disadvantages of step mashing.  The biggest is less head
>> retention. This is more noticeable on lighter beers.  On high 
>> gravity beers you get good head as a default of the higher 
>> percentages of head stability constituents.  The other factor is 
>> that step mashing provides for more exposure to the beta amylase set 
>> of enzymes, which results in thinner beers.  This may or may not be 
>> desired, but most homebrewers are

Bram Greyling disagrees:
>I tend to disagree. You cant say that step mashing causes all this. 
>My step mash beers has got good head retention and I regularly brews 
>a real thick beer when I want. 

I take exception with both statements.

You cannot have a meaningful discussion regarding mashing regimens (single, 
multi, decoct, whatever) without including the grain bill. Step mashing 
fully modified Pale Ale malt cannot be compared with step mashing 
undermodified pale malts such as pils or lager malts. Please include what 
types of malts you are using when conversing about mashing processes.

See Kyle Druey discussion (the quiz) in HBD 2614.

Charley (with no more headless beer) in N. Cal


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 12:57:48 -0600 (CST)
From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com>
Subject: 7 gallons per hour, NOT!

Clearly I messed up when I said that if your laeuter tun is between
1.5 and 3 square feet you should run off at a rate of 7 gallons per
hour.  We had better wait for the formulas to be posted.

In my system, my tun is about 14 or 15" in diameter and I have had
good results with taking 17 gallons of runnings in 1.5 hours.  That's
quite a bit more than my previous post.

Thanks to George for pointing out my error (luckily, I Cc'd him with
my post).

Al.

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 15:43:01 -0500
From: "Tomlinson, James" <red_beards at compuserve.com>
Subject: Oxygen passing through Plastic

Carl Shipmam Wrote:

>>      There have been some comments recently about oxygen passing thru
the walls of plastic fermenters with resulting off-taste.  I am using an
S-type air lock, which is a form of manometer. While fermenting, the
pressure in the vessel supports a 2-inch approx column of water so the
pressure inside is greater than atmospheric.
        =3D

It seems to me that this may prevent oxygen (or any other gas) from
entering the container. I have a vague recollection of partial pressures =
=3D
in
a vessel, which suggests that the oxygen partial pressure could be very l=
=3D
ow
and the CO2 pressure high
<<

The partial pressure issue is real. The differential pressure for a
specific gas would be the difference in partial pressure across the
boundary. This doesn't mean that Air will push a water lock in thw wrong
direction, but it is possible for air to enter a fermenter across the
fermenter boundary.

However, this is just a guess here, I expect the permeability of 1/8 inch=
=3D

of PVC with differential oxygen partial pressure of about 3 psid would be=
=3D

almost nil. For a PET Soda bottle, based on the thin walled nature, you
could expect more diffusion, but I expect it again is almost nil. Maybe,
long term storage could allow some oxygen to enter, and I don't know how
little is needed for oxidation which is noticable.

If someone wants to run an experiment, fill a PET bottle with air and pla=
=3D
ce
it in a tank of CO2 and measure the internal pressure of the PET Bottle
every couple of months, to check the N2 and O2 leakage rate.

James Tomlinson
Give a man a beer, and he wastes an hour,
Teach a man to brew, and he wastes a lifetime!


Return to table of contents


Date: 21 Jan 1998 13:23:02 -0800
From: "William Warren" <wwarren at geron.com>
Subject: Flat Beer

              I'm confused!                Flat Beer

Hey there fellow homebrewers! 

I have a problem that I can not solve, I need your expertise. Actually I =
have two problems. My last three batches were good beers, but there was =
something off about each batch.  

The main problem was the beer was flat each time. My question is why? I =
followed the directions very closely. Could the yeast be dying in my =
primary? 

The other problem has to do with the taste...  The finished product =
seems to have a "funny" taste to it. I'm thinking that it could have =
something to do with either my bittering hops or the water. In two of =
the batches, I had to substitute the bittering hops. I was unable to =
find the hops in my local homebrew shop. Now if I switched the hops, =
would there be a funny taste to the end product( the substituted hops =
were close in Alpha Acids).

If anybody out has any to say on this topic, I would greatly appreciate =
it.

Will


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 14:36:01 -0700
From: "Roger Grow" <grow at sumatra.mcae.stortek.com>
Subject: Propane and propane accesories

Randy in Modesto is (rightfully so) concerned about the new propane regulations
that take effect this year. He is right, a new valve costs more than a new
tank, but the new tanks (in consumer sizes) should all have the new style
valve. New valves are downward compatible with old regulators (left hand female
threaded regulators - wrench tightened ) but new regulators (male threaded that
are hand tightened) will not work on old tanks. One of the big reasons for the
change is the fact that the new valves won't let propane out unless a regulator
(or hose, etc) has been connected. There's a valve inside (like a bike tube)
that must be depresed first.
	A co-worker sucesfully exchanged his (empty) old type for a (full) new
type at the local grocery store. The exchange price is $14, a few dollars more
than a refill, but you're guaranteed an in-spec tank each time and they're open
24/7 so that panic run at 9:30 on a Sunday night is possible.

Roger Grow
Homebrewer, Tribe Member, Hypoxia Commando.

Remember, you don't have to drink homebrew to have a good time,
You can freeze the stuff and eat it on a stick!!

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 15:38:14 -0700
From: mcveyp at kingman.com
Subject: Re: if I don't filter

I filter somewhat through a wide screen/collander. I do rack after three
days and most of the big chunks get left behind. I can't detect any
off-flavors or infections. The more particles in the wort, the more spoogier
the krausen tends to be. I have fermented with all that stuff you listed and
produced normal beer. It saved me lots of time and messing around too. okbye
Patrick in Arizona


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 11:01:22 -0800
From: Andy Walsh <awalsh at crl.com.au>
Subject: Bass O2 patent

What a productive lunchtime!
I nipped down to the patent office and printed UK patent 2 197 341
(1988), which details the Bass technique for yeast oxygenation. It only
cost a couple of dollars and is quite detailed. I urge anybody
interested in this topic to do the same. Alternatively ring your local
patent office and they will send it to you for a small fee.

The idea is pretty much as I suggested earlier. Traditional wort
oxygenation techniques do not take into account a particular sample's
oxygen requirement, so there is generally either too little or too much
oxygen supplied. (Fortunately for us it is not overly critical!) The
authors claim their technique supplies the correct amount of oxygen to
yeast
allowing predictable fermentations, controlled just by the pitching rate
and temperature. Test comparisons show their technique to give faster,
more predictable fermentations than with traditional wort aeration.

Unfortunately the exact method is difficult for homebrewers to reproduce
exactly..

"an aqueous suspension of brewers' yeast is oxygenated at a rate which
is progressively increased in such a manner that the concentration of
oxygen in the suspension remains substantially constant. Oxygenation is
preferably continued only until no further increase in the rate of
oxygenation is required to maintain the concentration substantially
constant".

ie. ideally some type of computer controlled oxygen monitor/dispenser is
required - generally out of our league. However, I think we can still
try and simulate it...

One of the experiments uses yeast quantities just about right for
homebrew pitching! Read on..

"In one experiment a 200g (wet weight) sample of an ale yeast derived
from a previous brewery fermentation was suspended in 2l of distilled
water in a stirred glass vessel. Air was the delivered into the
suspension by means of a sterile filter and glass sinter at a rate of 1
l/min for a period of 6 h. During this time the temperature was
maintained at 20C. At intervals the air supply was discontinued and the
rate at which dissolved oxygen was consumed by the yeast (DOT) measured
by means of a polarographic dissolved oxygen meter connected to a chart
recorder."

The results are illustrated in the following table:
(I read this by eye off a graph)
glycogen in % dry weight
DOT in %satn./min
sterol in ug/ml

time    DOT     sterol  glycogen
0       12      50      22
1       16      110     12
2       21      140     8
3       18      155     5
4       11      155     5
5       9       155     5
6       8       155     5

ie. maximum sterol levels occur between 2 and 3 hours after aeration
starts. This corresponds approximately with minimum glycogen and maximum
rate at which the suspension absorbs dissolved O2.

It appears that it is difficult to oversupply the suspension with O2, as
the yeast stops using it as it runs out of glycogen, it's ATP (energy)
source. This is why water should be used. Both wort and beer provide
food sources for yeast (yeast will respire ethanol etc. in beer under
such oxygenation). So for us, as long as we run with about 1l air per
min with the given starter volume say 3-4 hours we should be OK (err on
the side of too high since it shouldn't matter that much).

Elsewhere in the patent they pitch such oxygenated yeast at the rate of
3.75g/l wet weight into an ale of OG 1.060. Thus the starter in this
example is sufficient for a 50l batch of beer. Scaling down to 20l, use
about 100g of yeast in 1 litre of water with 500 ml/min of air for 3-4
hours. The air flow rate required is questionable. I calibrated my O2
cylinder/diffusion stone last night by placing an inverted water filled
measuring jug over the bubble stream inside a larger, water filled pot.
1l/min is a very high aeration rate! I think that as long as
*sufficient* air is supplied to maintain a constant partial pressure
(0.2 ATM for air), that the air flow rate is irrelevant. I originally
thought that 1l/min of air was equivalent to 200ml/min O2, but now think
this is flawed logic. Pure O2 is also covered by the patent, but there
are no examples given on how long such oxygenation would take.

Ideally a DO meter is required. I looked around and it seems Hanna make
one of the cheapest at ~A$1000. Other brands around the same price
(probably ~US$500) were TPS and Corning, although Hach seemed to have
the best reputation (and 60% pricier!). Can anybody recommend one?
Another option is to use DO chemical test kits (much cheaper!). These
are colour based, changing from yellow to clear. If we were measuring
wort DO these would be unacceptable (yellow -> amber ??), but for yeast
suspended in water they might be OK. Comments please?

The inventors also say you can store the yeast with no problems
(preferably cool) without further addition of oxygen, although they do
not say for how long. This means you do not need to prepare the yeast on
brew day. In
the other paper I referenced in my previous post, they discover that
treatment similar to this increases trehalose levels. Trehalose is
regarded as a general stress protectant, and oxygenated yeast actually
keeps *better* than non-oxygenated yeast! I would hazard you could keep
it (refrigerated) for *at least* a week, then pitch on brew day straight
into unoxygenated wort and achieve quick lag times, although obviously
the shorter the storage time the better.

So go get the patent or other references by all means, but I think I
have reproduced enough here for anyone to use the technique if they
wished to. I have never tried it, but the authors (highly respected
brewing scientists) recommend it, and Bass cared enough about it to
patent it, so that's good enough for me to at least give it a shot.

Andy in Sydney.

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 21 Jan 98 16:16:47 -0800
From: rbarnes at sdccd.cc.ca.us
Subject: Brass Beer Engine


     Brew Your Own magazine had an article about a "$50 Beer 
     Engine" last year. I went to the local boat store today to 
     buy the pump they specified (Fynspray plastic galley pump), 
     and found that Fynspray also sells an all-brass version of 
     the same pump. If you saw the plastic and brass pumps 
     side-by-side you'd know why I HAD to buy the brass pump! 
     (Cost=$54). 
     
     Since the pump tube (and virtually everything else on the 
     pump) is brass, will this be detrimental to beer? Should I 
     treat the brass with a mixture of vinegar and hydrogen 
     peroxide to minimize the possibility of lead contamination? 
     Or does this process cause pitting of the brass surface that 
     would cause the pump to malfunction? I can return it and buy 
     the plastic pump if necessary.
     
     Also, does anyone have a source for sparkler heads for beer 
     engines? I could probably adapt one to the spout on the pump.
     
     Thanks-
     Randy in San Diego



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 21:54:39 -0500 (EST)
From: elsworth at connix.com (John D Elsworth)
Subject: Coopers Sparkling Ale

When on a recent wonderful trip from the US to visit relatives near Sydney,
Australia, I of course sought out some good beers.  My nephew recommended
Coopers Sparkling Ale (from South Australia).  I didn't try that one while
I was there, but brought a bottle back with me and am looking forward to
tasting it.  However, it has pronounced yeast sediment in the bottle, and
while I am used to carefully decanting bottled beer from yeast, my nephew
said that it is usually drunk after mixing the contents of the bottle!  So,
I am looking for advice from HBDers from Down-under regarding the best way
to enjoy this beer.

John Elsworth
elsworth at connix.com



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 17:11:35 -0500
From: "Michael Maag" <maagm at rica.net>
Subject: Fridge temp controler

Greetings, now that the cold weather is here, I need to keep the kegs in =
my garage beer fridge from freezing.  (So far only the lines have iced). =
 I plan on using a ceramic  type reptile cage heater.  (Looks like a =
ceramic light bulb).  I need advice on the type, brand, and possible =
source for a controler to use with it.  From what I have read, there are =
units which plug into the wall, the fridge power cord plugs into the =
unit, a sensor goes from the unit to the fridge interior, and =
connections are there to hook up the heat source.  The thermostat =
supplies power as needed to maintain the desired temperature.  Right ?  =
So, what is a cost effective brand of unit, and where is the best place =
to order one ?
TIA, Mike 8*)



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 22:20:42 PST
From: "Gregg Soh" <greggos at hotmail.com>
Subject: Partial Mashing

If I partial mash, it would be sort of an infusion mash, only smaller, I 
figure. If this is the case, can I use more water than the usual 1-1.3 
quarts/pound of grain? Would it be beneficial or detrimental? (diluting 
enzyme concentration perhaps?) One thing I have always wondered, can 
you/should you/should you not stir an infusion mash?

Thanks,
Greg

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 06:04:04 +0000
From: aquinn at postoffice.worldnet.att.net
Subject: Commercial False Bottoms

Is there a consensus among the collective as to the best commercially 
available false bottom.  I've reviewed past issues and have a wealth 
of information, but a recommendation from someone who has already 
done the experimenting with different models would be appreciated.
E-mail replies welcome.

Tony
  

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 08:52:02 -0600
From: Glyn Crossno <Glyn.Crossno at cubic.com>
Subject: Open, Closed, Plastic, Glass

Heiner Lieth <lieth at telis.org> wrote:
>I know that some of you do open fermentation.  Does anyone do "partial"
open
>(i.e. open part of the time)?  Any experiences to share?

When I first went to 9 gallon batches, I split the wort between a 6.5
gallon carboy and a 5 gallon plastic pail.  I use the "holes in the
racking cane" aeration.  The carboy is always under an airlock.  The
pail started with the lid on, but of course I pull it off to check out
the activity.  The FG is always lower from the pail on the order of
0.02.

Is this due to the semi open ferment?  Geometry?  Oxygen permeability of
plastic?

Glyn Crossno
Estill Springs, TN
- --
"Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car
keys
 to teenage boys." P.J. O'Rourke



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 07:45:30 PST
From: "Kevin TenBrink" <nine_inch_ales at hotmail.com>
Subject: lager temps/propane tank longevity

Perhaps someone in the collective can answer one of these questions for 
me:
1)I am going to rack over a lager to secondary today.  I used wyeast 
Danish II (2247?) and would like to know how long, and at what temp 
should this be stored in the secondary?  The colder the better or is the 
low 40's better?  Is 4 weeks long enough? What is a diacetyl rest and 
when/how do you do one? Should the rest be done with this yeast?

2) I just bought a king cooker outdoor propane burner and a 5 gallom 
propane tank.  If I am doing 3.5-4 gallon boils for 60-70 minutes, how 
long can I expect the gas in the tank to last before I need to refill 
it, I would hate to be half way through a boil and have the burner 
sputter out on me.

Thank you for all of the help.
Kevin TenBrink
Salt Lake City
Nine Inch Ales Homebrewery and Club
http://www.geocities.com/NapaValley/8222

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 10:52:53 -0800
From: John Varady <rust1d at usa.net>
Subject: I did it again

Recently I asked about a Porter I made with Bavarian lager yeast and
wondered what I should call it. Most responses said Porter, with the rest
calling it a Swartzbier.

Well, I've done it again. This time I made a beer with a Maerzen grain bill
and an IPA hop bill. I fermented it with an ale yeast and Bavarian lager
yeast. Well, the ale yeast turned out a great tasting IPA. The lager yeast
is still fermenting ( at  42F) and is too yeasty to get a good profile of the
final flavor.

So, what would you call this beer? IPL? Specialty? Tasty?

BTW, the Porter done with the lager yeast took second place in a recent
contest as a Brown Porter. I didn't enter it as a Swartzbier, so no clue
how it would have fared.

Thanks

John Varady                     http://www.netaxs.com/~vectorsys/varady
Boneyard Brewing                The HomeBrew Recipe Calculating Program
Glenside, PA                    rust1d at usa.net
   


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 11:42:33 EST
From: FivestarAE <FivestarAE at aol.com>
Subject: Further clarification Jim Liddlil's post on sanitizing plastic

Hello, my name is Jim O'Shea, from Five Star Products and Services. I would
like to thank you for this opportunity to post a reply to the past two
postings by Jim Liddil. 

We take seriously every comment a customer or potential customer has to say
about our products. Customer input is very important to us in servicing this
new market. In Mr. Liddil's case we were even more concerned as he is a
professional making a public statement on the Internet, which is highly read
by homebrewers. Our biggest concern is that he stated, "I am not trying to
promote there (sic) stuff and some of my results might make you think about
using them anyway."(emphasis added)

Mr. Liddil was a beta tester for us. We sent him some of the products we were
looking at to sell to homebrewers. We had asked him to respond to us
privately, in the spring of 1997, so we could offer the best products to
homebrewers. Those who have seen our ads or contacted us know we released Star
San, not Saniclean. The information we gathered from our beta testers, showed
us that Saniclean was not the best sanitizer for this market. 

Some points I had hoped Mr. Liddil would have made in his postings is that any
product that has only been sanitized will grow bacteria as sanitizing only
kills 99.999% of bacteria. Brewers sanitize; they do not sterilize.
Sterilizing is a 100% kill of all bacteria. I had also hoped he would have
pointed out that long rod bacteria usually takes about two days to grow and is
not a beer spoiler. This additional information shows that Mr. Liddel's test
is a strong indicator that plastic, even old scratched plastic, can be
sanitized and used with confidence when brewing beer.

This is the information I would have liked to have provided to Mr. Liddil
before he went public, on the Internet, with his information. By
collaborating, Mr. Liddil could have presented all of his research on
sanitizing plastic in a manner that would have been more beneficial to
homebrewers.

We welcome any independent test results others may have obtained. We ask to
review the data before publication so we may contribute additional information
that could be important in educating homebrewers in their art.

Thank You 
James M. O'Shea III
Advertising and Marketing Coordinator
Five Star Products and Services, LLC

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 11:59:40 EST
From: Alpinessj <Alpinessj at aol.com>
Subject: "Killian's" Recipe, Secondary question

Mike Cukrow asks about a "Killian's" Recipe

Making a duplicate of Killian's Red would be hard to do without an all-grain
batch. You would have to mash adjuncts such as corn and rice. I have been
making a Griffin Irish Red for St. Patrick's Day over the last couple of years
which I refer to as a "pumped up" Killian's. Here is my all-grain recipe (I'll
try to convert it for you as well). Recipe for 5 gallons.

4 oz flaked barley
2 oz roasted barley
2 oz chocolate
6 oz crystal 40
9 lbs 2 row
2 oz Fuggles - 60 min
1 tsp Irish moss - 20 min
1 oz Cascade - at k.o.
Lager yeast (I've had good success w/ Wyeast #2007 Pilsen lager, this year I
used #2112 California lager) It is important to use a lager yeast and ferment
at the proper temps to get the clean flavor profile.
Expected O.G. - 1.052
Expected F.G - 1.012

Do a single step infusion (or whatever you want) for a rest at 154 F for 60
minutes. Raise to 165 F for 10 minutes. Then sparge as normal. Boil for 75
minutes, adding hops and moss as described. Cool and pitch yeast at 70 F. Cool
to ferment temps for yeast within 12 hours.

For an extract recipe leave out the flaked barley, subsitute 5 lbs light DME
for the 9 lbs of 2-row and steep the other grains. If you brew now you might
still make it by St Patrick's Day!

Secondary Fermentation Question

I've noticed that a lot of you like to transfer to the secondary while there
is still some active fermentation in the primary. I understand your reasons
for doing this but I have noticed a problem for me. I usually get no further
drop in gravity after I transfer. For instance, if I expect the gravity to
drop to 1.010 (from previous batches of the same recipe) and rack at 1.015
(with bubbles still coming out of the airlock) it will stay there, or
sometimes drop to 1.014, but will not get to where it should be. What is the
reason for this? I would expect that the active yeast cells are still in
solution, not down in the yeast/trub cake that does not get transfered. And,
if anything, I would expect the transfer to "rouse" some of the inactive cells
and get them fermenting again. But this does not happen. I have noticed this
with both ale and lager yeasts. What gives?

Scott Jackson
The Jackson Backyard Brewery
"Scratching my head in Denver, CO"

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 12:53:24 -0500
From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer at engin.umich.edu>
Subject: aeration

Question: what happens when you aerate during fermentation?  Is it
good or bad?

Has anyone done the experiment?  

We've had months of back and forth speculation...

"Well, it seems to me that ..."
"I don't know, why not ...."
"This authority sez ..."
"But I can't see why ..."

SHEESH!  SHUT UP OR PUT UP!

Make a batch of beer.  Split it into two (or more) fermenters.  Aerate
one during fermentation and don't aerate the other.

Take notes.

Taste blind after bottling.

Are there differences?

Wait a month.  Taste.  Repeat until bored or out of beer.

Does one "last" longer than the other?  How do the flavors change as
they age?

After you've done that, THEN report back.  Otherwise it's like
Monday-morning quarterbacking.  Fun for the participants and totally
boring for everyone else.  Not to mention repetitive and redundant and
repetitive.


Gee, I must be a bit techy today.

=Spencer Thomas in Ann Arbor, MI        (spencer at umich.edu)

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 10:40:07 -0800
From: "Bryan L. Gros" <gros at bigfoot.com>
Subject: pH test

Dave Burley wrote in HBD#2616:
>>I have PH strips from Precision labs, but never got instructions
>>on how to use them so I don't.
>
>They are really difficult to use {8^).  Just dip them in a sample
>of wort which you spooned out of the mash tun and compare
>colors on the side of the strip container. When you match the
>color of the strip and the color sample on the container,
>that is the pH of the liquid. Some of the strips  want the
>sampled liquid to be at room temperature, so cool it in the
>spoon. Remember the pH of the *hot* wort is 0.35 units lower,
>approximately than the cooled wort.

So if I take my strip and dip it in the hot wort, wait a couple 
seconds, and then compare the color with the container, will
I be reading the correct wort pH?  I mean, will the number
I read by the pH of the hot wort (since I dipped the strip
in the hot wort) or will it be too high (since the strip is
cool when I make the comparison)?

The color comparison is harder than it looks.

Thanks for the clarification.

          - Bryan

            gros at bigfoot.com
            Oakland, CA

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 11:08:53 -0800
From: "Bryan L. Gros" <gros at bigfoot.com>
Subject: beer blending

in HBD#2616, Robert Ray wrote:
>Quick question:  I have a keg o' ale that is just bland, to the point of
>possibly tossing.  It tastes ok, but there really is no hop bite.  My
>question is:  Can I still dry hop this batch, even though it has been
>kegged for over two months and has been force carbonated?  I hate to
>give up on it.

I don't see any problem with dry hopping the beer now, but I'm
not sure it will help you much.  dry hopping doesn't impart
much in the way of flavor, and gives almost no bitterness.

Sounds like your best bet is to blend the batch with another
batch that is very flavorful.  You could quickly brew an IPA
or something and blend the two.

I think blending offers a great opportunity to incrase the 
varieties of beers we have that many of us don't take
advantage of.  I've got four kegs in the fridge and 
have been mixing the beers in the glass.  I'm thinking of
mixing two beers in my three gallon keg to have an
additional beer in the fridge.

  - Bryan

Bryan Gros	gros at bigfoot.com
Oakland, CA
Visit the Draught Board club website:
http://www.dnai.com/~thor/dboard/index.htm

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 13:22:37 -0600 (CST)
From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com>
Subject: Protein rests

Kyle writes:
>1) Hugh Baird Pale Ale, 41-44 %SNR: There is no question that this malt
>is highly/well modified and suitable for a single infusion mash without a
>protein rest.  I think a good homebrewing definition of highly/well
>modified is any malt that does not need a protein rest.
> 
>2) Durst Pils, 1.0-2.0 %FG/CG:  From what I can tell this malt is
>in-between Noonan's guidelines and is probably moderately modified.  I
>would use a protein rest of 20'  at  131F.
> 
>3) De Wolf Pilsen, 2.0 %FG/CG:  This malt is borderline undermodified
>and could use a 20' rest at 122F.
> 
>4) Baird Premium Pilsen, 38-42 %SNR:  Using Noonans guideline indicates
>this malt is highly/well modified and does not need a protein rest.  But
>how many pilsners are made without a protein rest?  Would you use this
>malt to make a pilsner with a single infusion temp rest and no protein
>rest?  I am not so sure so I would rest this malt at 135 F for 20'.

I agree that "1" doesn't need a protein rest and that "2" and "3" would
benefit from one (I've never used Durst, but the DeWolf-Cosyns Pils
needs one, in my opinion).  As for doing a protein rest on "4" just because
you associate Pilsners woth protein rests, I don't agree.  That's
not a good reason.  While it shouldn't hurt to do a rest at 135F, it would
be pretty much a waste of time better spend elsewhere.  Modification
determines whether you need a protein rest, not the style.

Going back to "3" for a second, why would you do the rest at 122F and
not 131F (or 135F or 140F)?  Because it is *even less modified*?  Again,
I think you are somehow associating modification and rest temperature.
All modern malts will have more than enough amino acids in all-malt
worts.  A rest at 122F simply increases wort amino acid levels at the
expense of body and head retention.  With our modern malts, I contend
that NO recipe needs a 122F rest!  If you are using an undermodified
malt and need a protein rest, then do it at around 135F and break those
big (haze- and break-forming) proteins into medium-sized (body- and
head-forming) proteins.

I've posted about this before and I'll say it again.  Here's how I
determine whether I need to use a protein rest for a particular malt:

1. brew a batch using this malt and *don't* use a protein rest,

2. if more than 1/5 of the carboy is filled with break material
the next morning, then next time I use this malt, add 15 minutes at
135F, and

3. if there's only a small amount of break material in the carboy
the next morning, then *don't* add a protein rest next time.

Simple, no?

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: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 15:38:31 -0500
From: "Little, Wayne" <LittleW at od31.nidr.nih.gov>
Subject: Minneapolis

Any decent brewpubs/beer bars in Minneapolis? Going for a business trip
in March.  Brrrr! 
Private e-mail is fine.

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 12:42:38 -0800 (PST)
From: Fred Waltman <waltman at netcom.com>
Subject: Request for Amsterdam beer spots



I am going to have a few days in Amsterdam and was wondering if anybody 
had any suggestions for beer places to visit. I will be using public 
transportation (i.e. no car) and am traveling with a non beer-drinking 
S.O. so places in or near cultural or historical sites will be especially 
appreciated.

Fred Waltman
waltman at netcom.com
Marina del Rey, CA

Return to table of contents

---