HOMEBREW Digest #2642 Fri 20 February 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

  Hot Plate Details / Aluminum (Kyle Druey)
  metric can't be standard (AlannnnT)
  Mash water calculations (Lars Bjornstad)
  metric system (jim english)
  Dick Dunne & MLD (John A. Carlson, Jr.)
  My metric comments! (Brad McMahon)
  MIni Kegs ("Mike Piersimoni")
  Cold ferment/warm maturation ("Dave Draper")
  Enzyme kinetics ("David R. Burley")
  Beer Primary "William Warren"  2/19/98 (Vachom)
  Mini-kegs (Ahenckler)
  Homebrewing & Individuals with physical limitations (Steve)
  Pickled Primary ("Bruce Jackson")
  strange ferment questions (Andrew Patti)
  RE: floating sediment (John Wilkinson)
  Are enzymes consumed? (Domenick Venezia)
  re: membranes (Lou Heavner)
  Erratic Wyeast yeast performance (George_De_Piro)
  Modified RIMS heater / Expanding foam around LT (Kenneth Sullivan)
  First Timer Question ("Milo")
  Problem adding Polyclar (Pvrozanski)
  Lacto d.  / lager ferm temps (James R. Layton 972.952.3718 JLAY)
  SRM colors in your computer? ("Carl Shipman")
  Re: Metric IS standard ("Michel J. Brown")
  Homebrew and Flatulance (Wayne_Kozun)
  Re: Experiment ("Michel J. Brown")

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 hbd.org 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, 18 Feb 1998 11:23:36 -0800 From: Kyle Druey <druey at ibm.net> Subject: Hot Plate Details / Aluminum Fellow Brew Dudes: Several HBDers sent private email to me for more info on the Hot Plate R)(tm) :). Here is what I did. I purchased 2 table top electric ranges from Walmart. Each unit has 2 burners on it with controls, one burner is 1000W and the other is 650W, both run on 120V. The units cost $28 a piece and after adding in Pete Wilson's share it came to just over $60 for both. This seemed like a good deal to me. What you get for $60 is 4 120V burners (which are hard to find, I could not find them anywhere), 4 power controls that give you infinite settings for each burner (1000W dimmers are $20 each at Home Depot), and 4 SS drip pans (the pans are flat, again hard to find, which makes it easy to mount on the hot plate base). Of course, if you have access to a supplier the parts are much cheaper. I was able to salvage a few parts from my homebrew gadget junk-pile, which saved me a few dollars. 240V Option - Before I go on, I should mention the 240 V option, which was my first choice. After consulting with the El Paso Kid (KennyEddy), I was convinced that using 120V was the best choice for me. For starters, you would be nuts to use 240V for brewing without a GFI, which will run you about $60-$100 depending on what amperage you need. It would have to be installed in the breaker box of your house. I would have needed an electrician to do this costing me probably another $40. The 240V burners cost about $25 each, and the controls are another $25. So you can see that the cost adds up quickly if you go with 240V, not to mention the safety concerns I have working with 240V. But the power output is obviously much better with 240V, and you could probably get away with using only 2 burners. If you have the skills and resources using 240V is the way to go. Maybe you could get a hold of an old stove and strip the parts off of it. Fabrication - You need to strip the Walmart stoves of the elements, drip pans, and controls. Pretty easy to do, the hardest part was drilling out a few rivets to disassemble the drip pans from the stove top frame. I mounted each element on a 4" steel 2 gang box, no cover plate is needed because the 6" diameter drip pan covers the gang box. The 4 burners were then mounted on a 12" X 18" X 1" piece of pine, and the boxes secured with wood screws. You must square the edges of the drip pans to obtain the smallest burner footprint possible. I did this using a hammer to flatten 2 sides of the circular drip pan, with the sides at right angles to each other. The squared edges from the 4 drip pans then butt up together. Two burners are wired for each circuit. To use the hot plate you need two 20 amp outlets that are wired to different breakers, make sure you check this out! Fortunately, most kitchen outlets are 20 amps, so this shouldn't be a problem, but it limits you to kitchen brewing. This is OK with me because then I can stay in the kitchen and watch my football games while I brew, and I am not exiled to the garage when it is 110 F in the summer. Each circuit has an on/off switch for one burner, and the variable power control for the other, plus a GFCI. I was a little concerned that the stove would not be able to support 6 gallons of water, about 50 lbs. It turned out not to be a problem since the load is distributed and each burner only supports about 13 lbs. The total cost for the hot plate is about $80, which is comparable or possibly cheaper than the propane option, not to mention you never have to fill a propane tank. Performance - When I brought out the hot plate for the initial boil my wife took one look at it and started laughing. The only thing she actually said was "where's the fire extinguisher". I have to admit, starting this puppy up just about scared the pee pee out of me. The four elements combined provide a theoretical total power of 3300W. From calcs this should heat 6 gallons of water from 150 F sparge temps to boiling in about 15-20 minutes. In reality, this was not the case. It took 45 minutes to boil 6 gallons from 135 F. I estimated the power applied to the wort to be 1600 W, about half of theoretical. This is why I start the burners during the sparge as the wort collects in the boiler. By the end of the sparge I am almost boiling. I called the stove manufacturer and had them send me two more 1000 W burners to replace the 650 W burners. Each element costs an additional $3. This will now give me 4000 W of power, and hopefully more than 2000 W of applied power. HELP! - I need some help from the HBD community. The 50% heat losses from the theoretical is disappointing. How can I control heat losses from the three primary heat transfer modes: Conduction - I think there are probably significant conductive losses from the burners to the gang boxes. The gang boxes are too hot to touch during the full boil. Is there a way to reduce this by sitting the drip pans on some insulation? What type of insulation can be used? Common household fiberglass insulation, or is there something better? Convection - I don't think this is much of a problem. Perhaps I will install some type of metal skirt around the sides of the burner footprint to minimize losses here. Radiation - The drip pans provide decent control to limit radiation losses. Maybe lining them with foil will help, and the metal skirt should also help. Any suggestions would be appreciated, private email or post. ************************************************************ I never got to elaborate on my aluminum versus stainless tirade. Aluminim is better! I never got to throw in my $0.02 cents on brewing with aluminum pots. As it turns out, aluminum conducts heat something like 5 times better than stainless steel, and is about 1/2 the cost. It has not been proven that Al causes alzheimers (sp?) disease, and if the pot is allowed to oxidize it will not leach Al taste to your finished beer. SS beats Al only that it is more scratch ristant, retains heat better, and one can make more money by selling SS pots. My 10 gallon aluminum Vollrath was $63 with the lid, plus another $5 for a ball valve and internal drain piping which I installed. I saw the same stainless steel setup for $160. Kyle Druey Palexperimenting in Bakersfield, CA Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 23:16:49 EST From: AlannnnT at aol.com Subject: metric can't be standard Brad in Australia writes ........ ARGH! Metric IS standard. It would be too much to ask Americans to come out of the 18th century before the 21st century arrives, wouldn't it :-) - -- Brad, I have traveled a bit and I find the two standard things in the world are Levis and Marlboros. Levis are measured in inches. Marlboros come twenty per pack. Neither is metric. And inches is an American only thing. Therefore, the two world standards are not metric and one is our way, so we Must be right! It's the rest of the world that has it wrong! :) Alan Talman USA Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 09:34:48 +0100 From: Lars Bjornstad <siv95043 at vm.bi.no> Subject: Mash water calculations As an a propos to the Java script calculator posted the other day, When using the calculations in brewing software and found around on the web, I find that they work perfectly (on our system) for the first infusion. E.g. 1.6 liters/kg water/grain ratio, 5 kg malt at 20C needs a mash water temp of about 60C to reach the protein rest at around 50C. The same with a single infusion rest. For the second infusion, adding boiling water, all the calculations suggest around 5 liters boiling water to reach conversion rest at 66-67 C. (in the above example). We have found that we need almost 8 liters to reach 66C. Does anyone have similar experiences? Isn't it a bit strange that the calculations are correct for adding water to dry grains, but way off when adding to the mash? I'm aware of the YMMV clause that comes with these formulas, but still? The formula is basically the same. We use a cooler w/copper manifold mash/lauter tun. Hope someone can help, Lars Bjornstad ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The Golden Droplet (brewing): http://www.ifi.uio.no/~ketilf/draapen.cgi Gartnerlosjen: http://www.uio.no/~ahaavard/lars/gartner.htm ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 07:39:58 -0500 From: jim english <jim.english at mindspring.com> Subject: metric system While I agree with Brad's point in general his use of the 18th century as a reference point, with derogarory implications, disregards the fact that the origins of the metric system (i.e. Napoleon Bonaparte....) date from the very end of the 18th century themselves. Latron JRE in Hotlanta Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 05:44:06 -0700 (MST) From: jac at iex.net (John A. Carlson, Jr.) Subject: Dick Dunne & MLD Has anyone else had problems posting to the Mead Digest recently? - --John Carlson Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 1998 00:12:39 +1000 From: Brad McMahon <brad at sa.apana.org.au> Subject: My metric comments! It's good to see we still all have a sense of humo(u)r! >May a Butt of Hogsheads land on you exerting several > poundals of force. >PS- You're absolutely right. >Eric Fouch Actually,Eric, I wouldn't mind as long as the brew was good! >I think we Americans are making great strides towards > the acceptance of the metric system. > For example, in recent years we've seen a >tremendous increase of interest in the 9mm bullet! Ahh, there are still all those .45 fanatics! And then you cut down the 10mm, and called it .40 cal! Ah well... >See you latre, (note: metric spelling) I burst out laughing when I read that! I love it! Keep on adding your 6.6lbs of extract, and never add 3kg of it, cos you would have a metric beer, that wouldn't fit in the glass properly. Just a thought, if you were doing a German beer recipe, would you have to use metric units, so that you wouldn't breach the Reinheitsgebot? - -- Brad McMahon Adelaide, South Australia brad at sa.apana.org.au PGP Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 08:44:32 -0800 From: "Mike Piersimoni" <msp at dplus.net> Subject: MIni Kegs I recently purchased a mini keg system. On the batches I placed in the mini kegs I have waited the precribed = time (and weeks longer) but have not had the same carbonation that I get = from bottles. The shop I purchased the system from told me that the carbonation would = be at least as much as the bottles. I have not found that to be. The precribed amount is 1/3 cup corn sugar in a 5 gal batch. I have even tried putting more (about an once )still no luck. Does anyone have any experience with these kegs. Your help would be appreciated. Mike Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 08:40:44 -6 From: "Dave Draper" <ddraper at utdallas.edu> Subject: Cold ferment/warm maturation Dear Friends, In #2641 George de Piro wrote about four approaches to brewing lager in his usual clear and informative way, and asked for input from people who have used any of the variants to the traditional cold ferment, cold maturation. Wholly by accident, I recently made a lager using his variant #4, cold fermentation and warm maturation, and the beer has come out quite well. Here's what happened. Some of you may recall my difficulties with my brewing fridge sporadically tripping its GFI plug. I brewed up a batch of what I had intended to be be a Czech style Pils, with lager malt, a bit of light caramel, Czech Saaz hops, and Wyeast Bohemian using RO water + salts to mimic a good soft water. Most of the primary fermentation took place at the desired temp, about 8 or 9 C (46-48F), and then the GFI problem reared its ugly head once more, and the fridge was without power for more than ten days. During that time, temp inside the fridge rose slowly to about 14 C (57F) while I wrung my hands and prayed to the twin gods of beer and electricity. At length, the problem corrected itself (I have a very good idea what is going on, at last) and I could turn the fridge on again, and so lowered the T down to near freezing over a couple of days, and left it there for another ten or so, and then bottled. The beer has turned out very well indeed, albeit with a hint of fruitiness no doubt caused by the beer's time at higher temps at the end of primary fermentation, but otherwise is clean and stable. It is, in fact, one of my best efforts in terms of overall drinkability. It will be judged in the upcoming Bluebonnet, so I will be able to provide some objective feedback in due course. 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 It helps to have someone else evaluate your beer. ---Bruce deBolt Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 09:46:09 -0500 From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Enzyme kinetics Brewsters: Larry Mc Closkey asks if enzymes are immortal or consumed by their reaction. Enzymes are essentially a biological catalyst in that they are available after each molecular reaction to do it again. However, they do depend on geometry and hydration to be effective and selective. Such a complex structure of atoms eventually comes apart. Its temperature dependence is perhaps the most well known response in which the denaturization ( a combination of loss of solvation and structural integrity) proceeds exponentially faster at higher temperatures. This curve is so steep that early workers even chose a "denaturization" temperature which is a useful guideline above which activity of the enzyme is curtailed quickly. Other things like Calcium ion content, mash thickness, and sugars produced can affect the speed of reaction and even the lifetime of the enzyme. There are competing factors here. As the temperature goes up, the speed with which the second order reaction - substrate plus enzyme increases. Also the speed with which the enzyme disappears (basically a first order reaction) is also increasing. The difference in the temperature sensitivities of the various enzymes is the primary manner in which the wort composition is controlled by the brewer. So is the enzyme immortal? No. Is it essentially immortal for the lifetime of the mash or at least its role in the mash? That is the job of the brewer to see that it sticks around long enough to do its job and goes away when he wants it to. - --------------------------------------------- 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: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 09:00:11 -0600 From: Vachom <MVachow at newman.k12.la.us> Subject: Beer Primary "William Warren" 2/19/98 William: Don't use it, lessn' of course you want pickle tastin' beer. Get a new clean one and even then you should probably retire plastic fermenters every 5-10 batches--use 'em to soak bottle labels off, store grains, gear, etc. Some people (strong correlation to those who have access to free buckets--i.e. know the guy at the pickle factory who will GIVE him buckets BEFORE the pickles go in) use a new bucket with every batch. The other option is to use carboys exclusively. If you brew in 5 gallon batches, buy a six gallon carboy to use as a primary fermenter (I'm assuming you have a 5 gallon carboy for a secondary fermenter). The extra gallon volume will provide enough room for high krausen with most beers without causing blow-off problems. You'll come out ahead financially in the long run by ponying up for the carboy now. If you keep it clean and treat it kindly, you won't ever have to buy another. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 10:00:54 -0500 (EST) From: Ahenckler at aol.com Subject: Mini-kegs To those interested in/frustated with mini-kegs: Not having the space for an extra fridge solely devoted to beer (wow... wouldn't that be great!), I needed an alternative to corny kegs. About 4 and a half years ago, I ended up with a couple of Party Pigs. At the time, they were roughly price competitive with mini-kegs (they probably still are) and they offered (and still offer) lots of advantages: * You don't need to mess around with CO2 pressures, worrying about empty cylinders, etc. Dispense pressure is provided by a plastic bag that expands due to a controlled vinegar/baking soda type reaction that is sealed away from the beer. * You can prime at the same rate as you use for bottling. I usually put half a 5 gal. batch in a Party Pig and half in bottles so I have some on tap (Scotchtoberfest!) and some to give away, enter in contests, etc. * These things are really durable. In the years I have had them, the only things I have had to replace have been a few machine screws that I stripped. They were about ten cents at the hadware store. * They still fit in my fridge and are pretty handy for parties. * When (if) I retire them, they are recyclable. The major downsides to these things are the plastic pouches which have to be replaced every time you refill a Party Pig (about $3.50 to $4) and the fact that other homebrewers kid you about not having a *real* kegging system. i have been so happy with these things that when I eventually upgrade to a corny system (sediment free beer and instant carbonation are nice) I will continue to keep them around. Insert standard disclaimer here. - Andrew Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 09:05:55 -0600 (CST) From: Steve <JOHNSONS at uansv5.Vanderbilt.Edu> Subject: Homebrewing & Individuals with physical limitations In addition to the excellent post on Wheelchair brewing in recent HBD, there was also a feature on 2 homebrewers who refuse to let physical limitations prohibit their brewing in Zymurgy 1996 special issue Vol. 19 #4 titled "Why We Brew". Nice feature, with some pictures; detail about the ins and outs may not be there, but might give someone a contact for some additional information from experience. Steve Johnson, President Music City Brewers Nashville, TN about 1 mile from Dave Miller's office Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 09:33:26 -0600 From: "Bruce Jackson" <bruce at candid.com> Subject: Pickled Primary William Warren writes: I have acquired a 5 gallon bucket that was used to keep pickles. I have=20 washed it out a couple of times and the smell is still there(only=20 slightly). My question is would you use this bucket as a fermentation=20 device. And if so how would you clean it so the smell is not noticeable=20 and I brew good beer. Any information would be helpful.=20 - ----- I acquired exactly the same thing, and found it too "pickley" to trust = for anything but soaking bottles in bleach solution to sanitize and/or = soak off lables. After several months of on and off soakings in a cold = bleach solution, there's no longer any trace of pickle, and I've started = using it for a bottling bucket with no more off-flavors than I get with = the rest of my equipment :). I would use it for a primary in a = heartbeat if it were bigger. Bruce Jackson Edmond, OK Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 08:22:44 -0800 From: Andrew Patti <patti at hpl.hp.com> Subject: strange ferment questions I've had 4 pretty strange ferments lately attempting to use WYEAST 1056 in a SNPA type recipe. I'm looking for help determining what's going on. Here's a description of the last one. The recipe looks like: o 9 lbs American Klages 2-Row Pale Malt o 0.5 lb Carapils Malt o 0.5 lb Crystal Malt o 1.25 oz Perle Hops (6.5 alpha) o 1 oz Cascade Hops (6.3 alpha) o WYEAST 1056 American Ale I use an infusion mash at around 151 F for an hour and 20 min, and after sparging/boiling/cooling get a SG reading of 1.052. My mash and sparge water is RO treated with 1 tsp gypsum per 5 gallons. I use those pH strips so I'm wildly guesing at what the pH really is, but it looked about right. I use an immersion chiller to go down to room temp. When I rack to the glass fermenter I try and splash around the wort exiting the hose (there are no special holes drilled for aeration or anything like that though). I then pitch a 1 qt starter created 48 hours in advance (one day too long probably). The fermenter is placed in a room that averages about 63-65 F. Now the fun begins... There was a lag time of 28-36 hours before the lock began bubbling away. 48 hours after pitching the bubbler was going at 1 chig every 2 seconds or so. During the next few days it slowed to about 1 chig per 3-4 seconds then locked at that rate for 5 days. The ferment looked a little funny in that for the first 2-3 days of fermenting there was a beautiful white foam 1-2 inches thick on the surface. After that, the surface of the foam became covered in shiny tan colored matter (same color as settled yeast it turns out). Also, there was a noticable flow upward from the break/settled yeast during the ferment. Everything smelled fine for the first 5 days or so, then started to smell a little off (classifying smells is tough, but I was thinking rotten egg smell), so on the 8'th day I racked to a secondary. The SG was at 1.024 and there were no off flavors other than some yeast bite and a noticeable sweetness. Now after 2 1/2 days in the secondary there is a 1/4 inch layer of white foam, it's bubbling at 1 chig per 5 seconds or so, and there are no off smells. Sorry for the amount of BW I chewed up, but I'm REALLY curious to hear what everyone thinks - especially about the: 1) off smell, then no off smell after racking 2) upward flow in the ferment (was some down too of course) 3) tan colored "shone" on the surface after a few days, then insignificant coloring on the foam after a few days in the secondary. 4) long lag after pitching (plenty of break transferred, but I've got a good idea what's coming here :) 5) long ferment (63-65F doesn't seem THAT cold) One last note is that in a previous attempt a similar thing happened and when I caught the off smell I figured the batch was infected and stuck. I let it sit in the primary for a month and didn't pay much attention just to see what would eventually happen. Well, it fermented down to 1.007, cleared very nicely and had a faintly detectable medicanal smell/taste. Any thoughts? Andy Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 98 10:41:52 CST From: jwilkins at wss.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson) Subject: RE: floating sediment Bob McDonald asked how to get rid of floating sediment in a keg. What I have done is to slowly release the pressure, remove the lid, withdraw the out dip tube until the end is almost to the top of the keg, place an SS scrubber on the end with a hop bag over it, push the dip tube back home, and transfer to another keg. I transfer through a hose with liquid out fittings on each end. It would be best to fill the receiving keg with boiled water and force it out with CO2 to purge the keg before filling. This a tip from Dave Burley that I use now. In my experience, the hop bag and scrubber filter out most of the crud. At least it has worked with hops. The scrubber actually just keeps the hop bag from becoming a dip tube size filter but it might work on its own. The only tricky part is getting the scrubber and bag to stay on until the dip tube is home. I haven't had too much problem with that, though. Oh yeah, boil your hands first so you don't contaminate the beer. John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins at wss.dsccc.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 08:43:29 -0800 (PST) From: Domenick Venezia <demonick at zgi.com> Subject: Are enzymes consumed? SouthBayHB at aol.com asked: > > Are amylase enzymes "consumed" or changed by the reaction they > facilitate? The simple answer is no, enzymes are catalysts and are not consumed by the reactions they facilitate. Theoretically a single molecule of alpha-amylase and a single molecule of beta-amylase could convert your entire mash. Do not try this at home - it could take a LONG time. Unfortunately, the real world intervenes in these theoretical situations, and the real answer is, no, but ... Although these enzymes are not consumed during the reactions they catalyze they can and are destroyed by other factors in the mash. Amylase enzymes are proteins. Proteins are long polymers of amino acids, like beads on a chain. Some proteins consist of a single chain, others consist of multiple chains. These chains are precisely folded into a specific 3D shape that lend the protein its function. Anything that can disrupt protein chains can affect amylase enzymes, heat, pH, salt concentration, and proteases are among the things that can destroy an enzyme. Enzymes are destroyed in two ways, fold disruption and chemical degradation. The 3D fold can be disrupted by heat, pH, and salt concentration. Chemical degradation can occur by other enzymes (proteases) literally chewing up the amylase chains, or through acidic chemical digestion like that which occurs in your stomach. The mash is a nasty place. It's hot. It's slightly acidic. It contains protease enzymes. If starch gelatinized at room temperature the amylase enzymes would last a long, long time, but would do their work much, much slower. We must use high tempertures in the mash to make the starch quickly available for conversion, but at the same time the hot acidic solution is slowly digesting the amylase. The mash is an attempt to balance these effects and get all the starch converted before the total distruction of the amylase. The mash also contains protease enzymes, and the protein rest is an opportunity for these enzymes to chew up the protein present in the grain. My guess is that some of the amylase is destroyed during a protein rest, but not enough to adversely affect conversion. Why is all this stuff in the grain in the first place? A kernel of grain is literally a plant egg. It contains an embryo and food reserves for germination. Starch is a very efficient means for storing sugar. There are also protein and other nutrient stores. The seed also contains all the enzymes it needs to convert the starch to sugar (amylases) and convert the protein to amino acids (proteases). During germination all the starch is converted to sugar and consumed. If I were designing a seed I'd put the enzymes close to where they are needed. Amylase is needed in the starch granules so that is where I'd put them. Some of the longevity of amylase in the mash may be due to sequestering. If the amylases are separated from the proteases, then during the protein rest, which occurs below gelatinization temperature, the amylases may be protected from the proteolytic activity of the proteases. Perhaps someone else can speak to the issue of enzyme locality within the seed. Perhaps I'll look it up. Cheers! Domenick Venezia demonick at zgi.antispam.com (remove .antispam) Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 09:47:10 -0600 From: lheavner at tcmail.frco.com (Lou Heavner) Subject: re: membranes From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> >When I was tromping around a chemical plant in a hard hat >and boots, I had a wonderful boss and fellow PhD chemist >who referred to chemical engineers as "comical engineers" >in a kind hearted way. I was remembering him when I make >that remark, but maybe he was right. Oh Dave, just stab me in the heart! If you had seen some of the scale-up work done by chemists that I have seen, you might think chemists were comics... in a kind hearted way, of course! ;) I suspect that the whole sparging process is more like baffled convective flow than any other model proposed. I had once thought that there might be some degree of pore diffusion, but based on Jethro's review of the movie "MASH", it sounds like the goods inside the husks are pitted rather than characterized with gazillions of micropores. The husks surely act like baffles more than mebranes and to the extent that they inhibit rinsing, create "bulk" concentration gradients driving bulk diffusion. It becomes more like solving a boundary layer problem where much if not most of the liquor is in a boundary layer. That is why slower sparges up to a limit will improve sugar recovery. It also explains why channeling is bad. Lou Heavner - Austin, TX BSChE (some would say with emphasis on the BS) and proud of it! Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 12:59:33 -0800 From: George_De_Piro at berlex.com Subject: Erratic Wyeast yeast performance Hi all, In the past I have written about getting some very sulphury fermentations using Wyeast 1338. This is a strain I use a lot, and usually don't get a lot of sulphur from it. A call to Wyeast was useless in helping to determine the cause of this, but I may have serendipitously found an answer: A homebrew shop near me (which shall remain nameless) has decided to cut overhead by turning up the thermostat on their ridiculously large cold room. They now store yeast and hops at 55-60F (~14C). I bought a package of Wyeast 1338 from them last week. It was dated Nov. 7. Unhappy with both the storage temp and the age of the package, I went to a different store. Much to my chagrin, all they had was 1338 from Nov. 7, but it was stored in a proper refrigerator. What the heck, I though, I'll grow both separately and see what happens... The one that was stored cold is fermenting the starter in a very normal and pleasant manner. The one that was kept warmer is cranking out the sulphur. Both rotten eggs ("sufidic") and struck match ("sulfitic") aromas! EUREKA thought I! Being a very small experiment doesn't make this definitive, but it is pretty compelling. The only variable in this experiment other than the yeast storage was the shape of the starter flask: the sulphury yeast is in a 1 qt. jar (high height:width ratio) while the "normal" yeast is in a gallon jug. Both had the same amount and batch of wort added to them, though. They were both provided with oxygen. Any micro-types have any ideas about this? It seems reasonable that high-temp storage would damage the yeast in some way. Is increased sulfur production a known indicator of yeast damage? Have fun! George De Piro (Nyack, NY) Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 11:02:30 -0700 (MST) From: Kenneth Sullivan <kenneth.sullivan at Central.Sun.COM> Subject: Modified RIMS heater / Expanding foam around LT S.H.I.T. So Happy It's Thursday I found some water heater elements at Home Depot for $10.50 each so I bought a long one at 4500W/240VAC and a short one at 1500W/240VAC. I have a 24" x 2" copper pipe and am thinking about putting 'Tees' on both ends and inserting both heater elements on opposite ends. That way I can turn on one, the other or both. Questions: Should I run these at 120VAC to cut the wattage in half? What other problems can you experienced RIMSers forsee? Second item: I have a converted keg for sparge water and plan to insulate the bejesus out of it. My carpenter friend suggested that I build a box around it and fill the box with the expanding foam-in-a-can and carve it into a nice package. I plan to use the RIMs heater or a different keg to bring the sparge water to temp and then pump it into the Sparge keg. Again, I would like to learn from others mishaps than rediscover the obvious ;-) thnx, KJ Ken Sullivan, Kernel Support Engineer Sun MicroSystems Customer Call Center Broomfield, Colorado 80020 (303) 464-4633 kjsulli at central.sun.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 13:15:22 -0500 From: "Milo" <pigsnzen at ntr.net> Subject: First Timer Question I'm brewing my first beer (a Edme extract Red Ale w/honey added, top fermenting yeast). I've been lazy & let it sit in the secondary for ~6 weeks. Now small white dots are floating on the surface... Has my beer gone bad? (The dots have not gotten bigger over the last week or so...) Thanx! Milo P.S. Does anyone know if brewing beer in a "DRY" county is illegal, even if the state does not make HB illegal? - not that I am doing such a thing... ;} Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 12:44:38 -0600 From: Pvrozanski at ra.rockwell.com Subject: Problem adding Polyclar I dry hopped a batch of American Pale Ale in the secondary using whole Cascade hops. As you can probably guess, they're floating on top of the beer. My problem is that I usually add Polyclar and with the hops floating the way they are I have no idea as to how to get the Polyclar in the carboy. One idea I had for solving my problem was to perform a tertiary rack where I could add the Polyclar prior to kegging. Another idea was to add a piece of tubing to my funnel that would project through the hop bed and into the beer. I could then add a Polyclar/water mixture to the beer. Which idea sounds better or does someone out there have a better idea? Thanks in advance. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 13:22:10 -0600 From: layton at sc45.dseg.ti.com (James R. Layton 972.952.3718 JLAY) Subject: Lacto d. / lager ferm temps George De Piro asked: > 2. Warm fermentation/cold maturation: pitching at ~8C (47F) and the > temp of the ferment is then allowed to rise to 12-14C (54-57F). > The beer is only cooled to near freezing once the diacetyl test is > negative. This has the advantage of taking only 17-20 days. Final > attenuation is quickly reached and diacetyl reduction is fast and > reliable. <snip> > Anybody out there doing this? How's the beer? I used a similar schedule for a munich helles recently. Pitched at 50F, fermented to endpoint at 56F, racked to secondary and dosed with polyclar, primed and bottled. Conditioned at 63F for three weeks, then moved beer into a fridge at about 35F. It is still there, "lagering". OG 1.051, FG 1.010 (I would have preferred a bit higher FG). Yeast was Wyeast 2124, the Bohemian lager strain. Timing: brewed 11-28-97 racked 12-24-97 bottled 1-5-98 The beer is deadly clean. Maybe too clean. Not much flavor of any kind. Easy to drink, but not much to get excited about. BTW, its an all-grain, single decoction recipe. I made a similar munich helles last year, and the year before that as well. These beers had a sulphery flavor that I thought to be a bit high, and so did a few judges (still got 2nd place in Ger. Light Lager at last year's Sunshine Challenge). This year's brew has almost none of that flavor. Now all that was changed was the mash method (was step infusion), hop bill (tweaked it down this time, and used a different variety), and the primary fermentation temp, so this can't be a strict A to B comparison. Still, I _think_ the higher fermentation temperature led to a reduced level of the sulphery flavor. I think I liked last year's beer better. Maybe next year I'll ferment at 54F. - ---------------------------- Nathan Kanous asked about Lacto. delbrukii (sp?). I made a good wit beer last year using lacto. d. culture from Yeast Culture Kit Company. I cultured it using info from a Brewing Techniques article by Dr. Brian Nummer in Vol. 4, No.3. Dan McConnell of YCKC also answered a few of my questions. I split a 5 gal. batch at bottling time, souring half of it with lactic acid and adding the lacto culture to the other half. Both turned out very well. Anyway, between the BT article and Mr. McConnell, I was quite successful in my first effort with bacterial culture. Sorry, I can't recall all the details right now but it did require a special media and elevated temperature to speed the bacteria culture along. Jim Layton (Howe, TX) Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 13:59:40 -0700 From: "Carl Shipman" <cshipman at dakotacom.net> Subject: SRM colors in your computer? Hello Brewers, It may be practical to create on a spreadsheet a range of colors that approximate the SRM scale, although I haven't done it. What I have done is paint one cell in each of my (Excel) brewing record sheets with a color that resembles the beer I brewed. An achievement that ascends to the level of "Gee Whiz" or maybe even "Golly". Some of us like to play with our toys. One photo is worth a thousand words, etc. Judging beer color without scientific instruments is done, as I understand it, using a visual comparator adjacent to the sample, both transilluminated by a standard light source such as photographic daylight. I simulate that by painting one large spreadsheet cell with color and the adjacent cell white. Put the sample in front of the white cell. Use standard monitor brightness and contrast settings, such as midway. If anyone wants to try this, the following may save a few minutes of poking around. On an Excel spreadsheet, select a cell and size it as desired. Click Tools, Options, Color, and you see the color palette for that workbook. Click a color panel on the palette, such as R1 C1. Click Modify, Custom, and you see a color map along with a swatch of the selected color and six numbers that specify that color. The What's This gizmo defines them. There are a couple of pointers on the color map that you can drag with the mouse or you can change the six numbers directly. The color swatch will split to show the result. For beer colors, use mostly red and green. In an additive color system, yellow is red + green. Brown is dark yellow. Reddish brown uses more red. R + G + B makes white, so blue combines with some of the R and G to make white, which dilutes the color. Beer colors use larger values of R and G, smaller values of B. The customized palette color changes in rather large steps because on my computer there are only 56 colors available whereas we can see thousands. When you like the custom color, click OKs back to the spreadsheet. Then click Format, Cells, Patterns, and you will see the palette with the modified color. Click the modified color and return to the spreadsheet. The selected cell should be that color. If you are using that color anywhere else in the workbook, it will change to the customized value. If anyone makes a color scale and likes it, the next question may be transporting it between computers. Major variables will be monitor brightness and contrast settings. I think this can be controlled with the exposure meter of an SLR camera and will be glad to respond to e-mail on that topic. Golly, Carl Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1987 14:11:41 -0800 From: "Michel J. Brown" <homemade at spiritone.com> Subject: Re: Metric IS standard > > Um, early 1970's (decimal currency) actually, from memory, around 1971. > Australia converted in 1966. > My mistake, I was there when it happened, and I just learned how many shillings were in a pound so I could buy a pint of cask conditioned bitter. Guess it affected my memory more than I thought! > > Ooh, didn't know about the 30 year window.. any idea whether > they are sticking to it? Do you know if kids are learning > both systems in schools? > Well, so far they UG BoS has kept with the program. Both my children are learning both the American English system, and the SI system. When my son asked me how much an inch was I told him "three barley corns", to his consternation. > > Does Australia > > use the cgs or the MKS system of weights and measures? TTYL, God Bless! > > > We are purely SI metric. > Yes, I know, but which *scale*? There is Centimeter-Gram-Seconds, and then there is the Meter-Kilogram-Seconds scale. Both are different, and both are SI. So which does Australia use? > > Cheers! > -- > Brad McMahon Adelaide, South Australia > brad at sa.apana.org.au > PGP > Dr. Michel J. Brown, D.C. {Portland, OR} 2222 miles due west of Jeff Renner homemade at spiritone.com http://www.spiritone.com/~homemade/index.html "Big Man don't drink no stinking light beer!" "Big Man drink beer what got BIG TASTE!" Big Man Brewing (R) 1996 Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 17:41:57 -0500 From: Wayne_Kozun at otpp.com Subject: Homebrew and Flatulance Has anybody else noticed the correlation between drinking homebrew and flatulance, or is this something that only affects me. I notice that after drinking two or three homebrews some very noxious gasses start vacating my body causing my wife to threaten to not allow me to drink my own homebrew. Do other people have this problem? Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1987 14:42:39 -0800 From: "Michel J. Brown" <homemade at spiritone.com> Subject: Re: Experiment > > Michel-- > I suggest that it would be even more interesting if we all used the > same water... i.e. distilled + brewing salts. Two variables (the > equipment and technique) are plenty. > Well, fwiw, my water here in Portland is about as clean as distilled water - -- even Pilsner Urquell water is 10X harder than my water is! I have to add CaCl2 to my mash water when making a Bohemian Pils to harden it to PU standards 8-O Problem is that there are micronutrients, like selenium, copper, zinc, manganese, magnesium, and phosphorus which aid in yeast nutrition that would be missing in distilled water plus brewing salts imho. I agree with you about the variables, but what else can be done? TTYL, God Bless, and ILBCNU! > > Al. > Dr. Michel J. Brown, D.C. {Portland, OR} 2222 miles due west of Jeff Renner homemade at spiritone.com http://www.spiritone.com/~homemade/index.html "Big Man don't drink no stinking light beer!" "Big Man drink beer what got BIG TASTE!" Big Man Brewing (R) 1996 Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 02/20/98, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96