HOMEBREW Digest #2645 Tue 24 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

  Re: Mash water calculations (Spencer W Thomas)
  Haze Gray And Underway... (jamorris)
  Re: Long Secondaries (Michael Satterwhite)
  15 vs 30 amps (Tom Lombardo)
  Hop Plant Identification (Denis Barsalo)
  Halves and Halve-Nots / I'll take 15A over 30A any day? (KennyEddy)
  Recap of PET bottle - Label removal ("David Russell")
  Re: Heater Elements (Steve Scott)
  Aussie Hops (not kangaroo either) (Brad McMahon)
  Hazy Beer ("Little, Wayne")
  Pickles and Botulism / Power and Voltage (Kyle Druey)
  African or European swallow? (David Kerr)
  Winners of the 1998 Boston Homebrew Competition and MCAB qualifiers (Ken Jucks, ph # 617-496-7580)
  Palate Fatigue (Nathan_L_Kanous_Ii)
  Comics / Sparging model: membrane or diffusion or what? (David C. Harsh)
  Carbon Filters (Andrew Quinzani)
  Carbon Filters with Well Water (MAB)
  Re: Water Chemistry Question (Stephen J. Van der Hoven)
  Re: Long Secondaries ("Paul Hockings")
  Pantyhose/nylon hops bags (tlrkirk)
  Heater Elements ("RANDY ERICKSON")
  Water Chemistry (MAB)
  Spent Grain Dog Bones / Dry ("Andrew Avis")
  Iodophor Sanitizing Effect: How Long Does It Last? (Lynn & Mike Key)
  Mummies; long secondaries (Samuel Mize)
  my protein rest test (Al Korzonas)
  Re: Wheelchair Brewing (Kirk Lund)
  Roaster Oven Mashing (feldman)

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: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 00:30:53 -0500 From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer at engin.umich.edu> Subject: Re: Mash water calculations In response to a question by Lars Bjornstad, >>>>> "Hubert" == Hubert Hanghofer <hhanghof at netbeer.co.at> writes: Hubert> [Notes that we have to factor in the thermal mass of the tun.] Hubert> That all seems logical so far but why do you hit mashing Hubert> in temp but not further infusions? When water is added to dry malt, heat (of "slaking" in English) is generated. It is possible that in Lars's system, the slaking heat is close to the heat absorbed in heating the mashtun. =Spencer Thomas in Ann Arbor, MI (spencer at umich.edu) Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 11:43:22 +0300 From: jamorris at washington.navy.mil Subject: Haze Gray And Underway... Good to see a shipmate on this list. I'm on the George Washington eagerly waiting to get home to NC and brew that first batch! This list is a little advanced for me, but I'm picking up things here and there. Enjoy your 'beer on the pier' in Jebel Ali. Ron Morris CVN 73 - -------------- From: Subject: Mail Order Supplier Wanted or Help in Japan Fellow Brewers, I am fairly new to the list and a first time poster. I enjoy the list and am learning lots. I have brewed a few batches of extract pale ales and wheat beers which turned out well but was recently transferred to Yokosuka, Japan. I am presently underway on the USS Independence in the Persian Gulf and want to brew some more when I return to Japan. My question is can someone supply me with a list of email addresses for mail order sources on the west coast of the U.S. and/or any source of supplies in the Tokyo/Yokohama area of Japan. Thanks, Paul Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 05:51:41 -0600 From: Michael Satterwhite <satterwh at weblore.com> Subject: Re: Long Secondaries >Date: Sun, 22 Feb 1998 20:43:03 -0800 >From: Paul n Shelley <pracko at earthlink.net> >Subject: Long Secondaries > >I don't get it. A LOT of recipies call for an initial 5-10 primary >fermentation and then for a lengthier fermentation in a secondary. >Following this, the recipes usually call for packaging and priming with >corn sugar. What I don't understand, and have NEVER been able to >achieve, is successful natural carbonation of a beer after it has been >in a primary and/or secondary for longer than about two weeks. Usually >the yeast has completely autolysed by this point and can no longer >reproduce due to the alcohol content. Has anyone been successful at >bottle conditioning their beers after a long (14-20 day) fermentation >without use of additional yeast? Why do recipes call for such a lengthy >secondary fermentation when corn sugar is being used as a primer? I can >see the benefits of conditioning a beer in the secondary for a long >time, but that's only if you have a CO2 tank to force carbonate it with. I routinely leave my beer in the secondary for 14 - 21 days, sometimes longer. I've never had any problem with bottle conditioning. I add the corn sugar (or DME) solution, gently stir, bottle and cap. The yeast takes it from there. "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech" http://www.weblore.com/soapbox Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 05:57:39 -0600 From: TomL at ednet.rvc.cc.il.us (Tom Lombardo) Subject: 15 vs 30 amps Joe Chang writes: I would rather get zapped by 15 amps than 30 amps any day.. Well, you wouldn't know the difference, since it only takes about 20 *milliamps* (that's 0.020 Amps) to kill you. 15 Amps would fry you just as easily as 30. (Although it might be the difference between open and closed casket.) Tom (in Rockford IL) Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 07:27:38 -0500 From: Denis Barsalo <denisb at CAM.ORG> Subject: Hop Plant Identification Hop growers, I have 4 different plants in my yard. I know that one of them is a Cascade, another a Perle. I seem to remember someone giving me an American Hallertaur (Liberty?) and the last one is maybe a Tettanang or a Nugget, I don't quite remember. I need someone to suggest a good book, or text or something that will help me identify these plants so that I can label them properly on a site plan. I noticed *some* differences in grown pattern, leaf pattern, hop size and color; so there must be a way to identify these for sure. Even the two most prolific plants, the Cascade and the Perle, I'm now uncertain as to which is which. (I think the Perle produced larger flowers and leaves?) Thanks for the help Denis Barsalo Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 08:23:26 EST From: KennyEddy at aol.com Subject: Halves and Halve-Nots / I'll take 15A over 30A any day? Drunkenbastard Sulley asks: This goes back a few years, but I always thought that Watts = Volts x Amps Which leads me to think that if you cut voltage in half, and feed the same amperage, you'll cut the wattage in half. Am I missing something here? I hereby disclaim any knowledge of the workings of electricity; the stuff causes me shocking experiences. I'm just hoping that everything I know isn't wrong. True, Watts = Volts x Amps. And it's also therefore true that if you force the same current through a load at half the voltage you get half, not a quarter, of the power. However, this forcing of a fixed current is not what happens electrically. We end up with a fixed *voltage*, and we have a fixed *resistance* (that of the element), so the current changes accordingly. Follow along: Start with the Ohm's Law equation I = V/R (resistance is fixed) At 240V: Current at 240V = 240V / Resistance At 120V: Current at 120V = 120V / Resistance = 1/2 x Current at 240V (eqn. 1) Your Equation: Watts at 240V = Current at 240V x 240V So at 120V: Watts at 120V = Current at 120V x 120V which (substituting eqn. 1) can be written as Watts at 120V = 1/2 x Current at 240V x 1/2 x 240V which (rearranging collectingthe "1/2"s) can be written as Watts at 120V = 1/4 x Current at 240V x 240V So for a fixed resistance, halving the voltage also halves the current, half time half is a quarter, and there you have it. ***** Joe Chang adds: The major difference/advantage between using 240V over 120V is the amount of amps. A 120V motor drawing 30 amps will only pull 15 amps on a 240V circut. I would rather get zapped by 15 amps than 30 amps any day... If you want to run a 240V GFI circut, you can pick up a GFI circut breaker at a spa shop for about 100 bucks..... Yikes! It only takes a few MILLIAMPS (thousandths of an amp) to stop your heart. The reason we don't die when we test a 9V battery on our tongues is that the skin resistance of our bodies is quite high, and the low voltage generates only a very low current through the skin. Were you to attach a battery to an open cut on your left hand and an open cut on your right hand (DO NOT DO THIS!), you might actually feel the result similarly to the tongue effect, or, you might die as the miniscule milliamps travel through your heart on the way from one hand to the other. If you've ever accidentally felt the jolting effects of a 120V line, consider yourself lucky that your dry skin was only allowing a few MILLIONTHS of an amp through your body. 15A versus 30A is totally moot. ***** Ken Schwartz El Paso, TX KennyEddy at aol.com http://members.aol.com/kennyeddy Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 08:22:30 -0500 From: "David Russell" <drussel3 at ford.com> Subject: Recap of PET bottle - Label removal Thanks to all that responded. Here is a recap of my attempts. Soaking in dishwashing soap (Cascade) overnight was unsuccesful. Soaking overnight in ammonia solution did not work either (1/2 c. to 4 gallon water). I did not try TSP as was another suggestion. Goo-Gone, although a Citrus based cleaner, did contain petroleum products, of which I wanted to stay clear, same with WD-40. I did though use De-Solv-It. This is also a Citrus based cleaner, but contained only organic ingredients, as per the label. I filled each bottle with hot tap water, peeled as much of the label off as I could. I then sprayed a little De-Solv-It on a rag, and removed the remaining label and adhesive. I then placed the bottle in a dishwashing soap (Cascade) solution and then cleaned and rinsed the outsides of the bottles. On to orange pop making with the kids. - -- David Russell drussel3 at ford.com Plymouth, MI Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 08:47:12 -0500 From: sscott at lightlink.com (Steve Scott) Subject: Re: Heater Elements >After Ken Sullivan contemplated cutting the voltage in half on his >4500W/240VAC and 1500W/240VAC heaters to get 2250/120 and 750/120, Ken >Schwartz said that "Running a load on half the voltage QUARTERS the >power." and offered Power = Voltage-Squared/Resistance as the proof. > >This goes back a few years, but I always thought that > >Watts = Volts x Amps > >Which leads me to think that if you cut voltage in half, and feed the >same amperage, you'll cut the wattage in half. Am I missing something >here? I hereby disclaim any knowledge of the workings of electricity; >the stuff causes me shocking experiences. I'm just hoping that >everything I know isn't wrong. Nope, but you're not going all the way. The resistance stays the same so if the voltage changes so does the amperage. The formula that you also need is: I equals V/R I equals amps V equals volts R equals resistance So, for easy figuring, if a 240V W/H element draws 20 amps the resistance is 12 (20A equals 240V/12R). Now that the resistance is known you can figure that in the 120V example I equals 120V/12R or I equals 10A. So with your formula 240V X 20A equals 4800W and 120V X 10A equals 1200W. If the resistance stays the same and the volts (or amps for that matter) change then the amps (or volts) have to change as well. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 1998 00:11:06 +1000 From: Brad McMahon <brad at sa.apana.org.au> Subject: Aussie Hops (not kangaroo either) >Home hop growers in Australia and New Zealand, I'm searching for >a source of Hop cuttings. I've tried just about every avenue and can >only get wild or ornamental hops (with no idea of breeding). Any help >appreciated, as is any variety of brewing hop. Ausbeer #15 (Sept/Oct 97) has a classified ad for hops: Pride of Ringwood and American Cluster plants available with full growing instructions and climbing strings. $19.50 includes packaging and posting Tasmanian Hop Growers Pty Ltd PO Box 124 Scottsdale TAS 7260 fax 03 63522304 Cheques and common credit cards accepted. No affiliation nor contact with aforesaid company. - -- Brad McMahon Adelaide, South Australia brad at sa.apana.org.au PGP Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 08:41:41 -0500 From: "Little, Wayne" <LittleW at od31.nidr.nih.gov> Subject: Hazy Beer Amen to Carl Shipman's comments on hazy beer. The best microbrew I've had to date comes out of Theo DeGroen's Baltimore Brewing Company--all unfiltered! Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 1998 22:04:50 -0800 From: Kyle Druey <druey at ibm.net> Subject: Pickles and Botulism / Power and Voltage Fellow HBDers, Looks like the pickle bucket fermenter thread is gaining momentum just like the dreaded botulism thread of last year. You might try soaking the bucket in baking soda and water. The baking soda is supposed to have some odor absorbing/(adsorbing?) properties. I dumped a small box of this stuff in a used keg that reaked of root beer, seemed to work just fine. Perhaps if the pickle juice is not adequately removed from the plastic it may lead to botulism in the finished beer? (Just kidding, please don't respond to this!) ************************** How is it that when you take a 240V electric heating element and run 120V through it you only get 1/4 of the power, when all you have done is cut the voltage in half? As it turns out, Power is proportional to the voltage squared divided by the resistance: P = (V)^2/R If the power is then halved going from 240V to 120V you now get: P = (1/2 V)^2/R = 1/4(V)^2/R So you can see that now the original power is 1/4 what it was when you ran 240V through it. Not too bad for a nonpracticing ME. Kyle Druey Bakersfield, CA Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 08:59:43 -0500 From: David Kerr <dkerr at semc.org> Subject: African or European swallow? Kevin TenBrink wrote: > Secondly, I think the last English Unit of measure that home brewers and > beer drinkers the world over will be the most reluctant to relinquish is > the pint. British Imperial (20 oz.) or U.S. (16 oz.) pint? Dave Kerr, Needham, MA Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 10:02:38 -0500 From: jucks at cfaft4.harvard.edu (Ken Jucks, ph # 617-496-7580) Subject: Winners of the 1998 Boston Homebrew Competition and MCAB qualifiers Results from the 1998 Boston Homebrew Competition 21 Febrewary 1998, Somerville MA Organized by the Boston Wort Processors An MCAB Qualifying Event * denotes the MCAB Qualifier (note that the MCAB qualifier is not necessarily the beer that is ranked the highest of that sub-style for the category. For categories that had more than one flight in the preliminary round, the MCAB sub-style was placed in a separate flight if possible, and the MCAB qualifier was determined there. The second round determined the final placement for the category. Other categories required multiple flights of MCAB entries and the MCAB qualifiers were determined in the second round.) American Light Lager 1) Michael Branigan, Coventry RI, American Light 2) Thomas Plunkard, Warren MI (Ann Arbor Brewers), Pre-Prohibition * 3) Ann Whyte, Essex Jct. VT (Green Mountain), Pre-Prohibition European Light Lager 1) Ken Weber, Winchester MA (Boston Wort Processors), Helles * 2) Dean Goulding, Mansfield MA (Boston Wort Processors), Bohemian Pils 3) George Fix, Arlington TX, Helles Light Ale 1) Alan Baublis, Belchertown MA (Barley Hoppers), Kolsch 2) Thomas Miklinevich, Monroe CT (Underground), Kolsch 3) John Seckler, Portsmouth NH (Seacoast), Kolsch other) Adam Contos, Boston MA, American Wheat * Bitters 1) David Parr, Winchester MA (Boston Wort Processors), Ordinary * 2) Dan Marshall, Burlington VT (Green Mountain), strong 3) Roger Sleigh, Worcester MA, ordinary Scottish Ale 1) John McCafferty, Winchester MA (Merrimack Valley), Export 80 * 2) John Zelazny, Webster NY (Upstate NY), Export 80 3) Thomas J O'Connor III MD and Satan, Rockport ME (MALT), Export 80 Pale Ale 1) Chris Lavoie, Glenmont NY, American * 2) Scott Snider, Arlington MA, British 3) John Murphy, Medford MA, American IPA 1) Brad Johnson, Lennox MA (Berkshire) * 2) Chris Lavoie, Glenmont NY 3) Clifford Timpson, Milton VT (Green Mountain) Altbier 1) Ann Whyte, Essex Jct VT (Green Mountain), Dusseldorf * 2) Geoff McNalley, Tivertown RI, Dusseldorf 3) Tom Miklinevich, Monroe CT (Underground) Dusseldorf Amber Lager 1) Michael Nagel, Holden MA, O'fest * 2) Thomas J. O'Connor III MD and Satan, Rockport ME (MALT), O'fest 3) Tom Plunkard, Warren MI, O'Fest Brown Ale 1) Chris Lavoie, Glenmont NY, American * 2) Bill Nevits, Hudson MA (Wizards), Mild 3) Alan Baublis, Belchertown MA (Barley Hoppers), Mild Strong Ale 1) Dan Marshall and Cliff Timpson, Milton VT (Green Mountain), Old Ale 2) Christopher Tkach, Newmarket MA, Old Ale 3) Steven Lefebure, Colchester VT (Green Mountain), Barleywine other) Stu Talman, Rochester MA, (Boston Wort Processors), Barleywine * European Dark Lager 1) John McCafferty, Chelmsford MA (Merrimack Valley), Scharzbier 2) Tom Miklinevich, Monroe CT (Underground), Dunkel * 3) Markus Brache, Dedham MA (Boston Wort Processors), Schwarzbier Bock 1) Brian Myers, Norman OK (High Plains Draughters), Eisbock 2) Jeff Flood, Boston MA (Boston Wort Processors), Traditional 3) Randy Reed, Stoughton MA (South Shore and Boston Wort Processors), Traditional other) Steve Lefebure and Joe Connolly, Colchester VT (Green Mountain), Dubelbock * Porter 1) Ben Janowski, Oyster Bay NY (Bonwit), Robust * 2) Cliff Timpson, Milton VT (Green Mountain), Brown 3) John Zelazny, Webster NY (Upstate NY), Robust Stout 1) John Murphy, Medford MA, Dry 2) Thomas Miklinevich and John Watson, Monroe CT (Underground), Oatmeal 3) Rod Bender, Elizabeth PA (Brew Masters), Dry * Wheat 1) Steve Stroud, Medford MA (Boston Wort Processors), Bavarian * 2) Cliff Timpson, Milton VT (Green Mountain), Bavarian 3) Tom Miklinevich, Monroe CT (Underground), Weisbock Strong Belgian and French Ale 1) Dave McCart, Somerville MA (Boston Wort Processors), Tripel * 2) Thomas J. O'Connor III MD and Satan, Rockport ME (MALT), Tripel 3) Thomas Miklinevich, Monroe CT (Underground), Dubbel Other Belgian Ale 1) Francois Espourtoille, Lakeville MA (South Shore), Lambic * 2) Gary Harstead, Mahwah NJ, Lambic 3) Brian Myers, Norman OK (High Plains Draughters), Wit Fruit Beers 1) Charlie Grahm, Everett MA (Boston Wort Processors), Choc. Rasp. 2) Chekar Nimkar, Lynn MA (Boston Wort Processors), Cherry Strong Ale 3) Stu Tallman, Rochester MA (Boston Wort Processors), Rasp. Imp. Stout Spice/Herb/Vegetable 1) Jim Wagner and another Wagner, Pasadena MD, Spice Ale 2) Ben Jankowsky, Oyster Bay NY, Clove, ginger, other spices 3) Mike Hahn, Salt Lake UT (ZZ Hops), Coffee Stout Cider 1) Fred Sterner, E. Freetown MA (Boston Wort Processors), New England style 2) Brett Schneider, Framingham MA (Boston Wort Processors), Cranberry cider 3) Adam Contos, Boston MA, Sparkling Best of Show 1) Francois Espourteille, Lakeville MA (South Shore), Lambic 2) Steve Stroud, Medford MA (Boston Wort Processors), Bavarian Weizen 3) John Murphy, Medford MA, Dry Stout Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 10:17:24 -0400 From: Nathan_L_Kanous_Ii at ferris.edu Subject: Palate Fatigue This it probably best suited for the Judge's group, but I don't know how to submit to their list server. Anyhow, I'm curious about palate fatigue and personal experiences. As I read about beer tasting and evaluation, one thing that is reported to occur is palate fatigue. The more bitter beers you drink, the less able you are to detect bitterness in a beer. Let's get down to the nitty gritty. I feel that I begin to detect subtleties of flavor best after I've "had a few". I don't mean at 3:00 am on a Saturday after imbibing since noon on Friday, just that after I've had a couple of glasses of beer, I feel that my senses begin to detect more of the subtle flavors in beer. They seem more identifiable to me. Am I nuts? Maybe I shouldn't ask it like that, what experiences have others had? Private e-mail is fine to avoid slowing down the digest. TIA Nathan in Frankenmuth, MI Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 10:28:34 -0500 From: David.Harsh at uc.edu (David C. Harsh) Subject: Comics / Sparging model: membrane or diffusion or what? Dave Burley took the opportunity to trash Chemical Engineers and their abilities with respect to chemists. The truth of his opinion is no doubt supported by the myriad of job opportunities for chemists and the lack of same for chemical engineers. ;) - --------------------- For modelling sparge, Lou Heavner and Dave Burley have been writing: LH> I suspect that the whole sparging process is more like baffled LH> convective flow than any other model proposed.... LH> The husks surely act like baffles more than mebranes... DB>Convective flow is concentration/thermal gradient driven. DB>I think of it as a plug flow model driven by gravity with a DB>diffusion from capillaries. Well, as a PhD comical engineer, here's my take on it.. First, definitions: convective flow is due to an imposed flow, whether due to a pressure gradient (in our case gravity) for forced convection or a density gradient for free convection. Concentration and thermal gradients result in mass and heat transfer, respectively, either by molecular (diffusion/conduction) or convective processes. We have two processes occuring in the sparge, diffusion out of the grain particle through the stagnant fluid in and near the husk (this would be a Fickian process). Then once the sugar has diffused through the stagnant fluid into the mobile fluid, it is tranferred through the pores of the grain bed by the bulk flow. I don't know of any evidence to support this, but I would also suspect that there is some adsorption of sugars on the grain surface, which would mean an adsorption equilibrium would also be involved and the amount of sugar remaining on the surface decreases with local concentration in the liquid phase. The sparging starts with uniform concentration everywhere and pure (relatively) water being introduced at one end of the bed. The difference in concentration between the inside and outside of the grain causes diffusion out of the particle, and a zone of "depleted" grain starts to form from the top down through the bed during the sparge process. This unsteady state feature is probably what makes this difficult to model (a steady state process between two phases in a packed bed is a relatively basic problem in our undergrad coursework). Of course, I'm still wondering what the goal of all this is - particle size is a big variable (or capillary length if you look at it that way); there will be a distribution of sizes/lengths that would have to be accounted for or assumed to be uniform. (Remember the engineer joke, "well assuming a spherical horse.." ?) When we're done, we'll have a complicated model with parameters that are unmeasurable. "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing" comes to mind. Seems like what we really have here is an elution chromatography process (i.e. see Helfferich's Multicomponent Chromatography), but I'll admit that I haven't really thought that through. Any takers? Dave Dave Harsh Bloatarian Brewing League, Cincinnati, OH Everyone has a photographic memory. Not everyone has film. O- Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 10:41:22 -0500 From: Andrew Quinzani <quinzani at mdc.net> Subject: Carbon Filters >Louis Gordon asks: >"If I use an activated carbon filter to remove chloramines, will it also >remove minerals that I need to be adding back with brewing salts." Do not use carbon filters, While it may filter out undesired taste it harbors some things that will kill the yeast. I talked to a water filter company severl months ago as I work in a bakery and asked about carbon filters. I forgot exactly what it was that was in the carbon but I was told that it would effectively kill any yeast. -=Q=- - -- "Q" Brew Brewery...Home of Hairy Chest Ale - ------------------------------------------------------------ quinzani at mdc.net Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 10:41:53 -0500 From: MAB <mabrooks at erols.com> Subject: Carbon Filters with Well Water The use of a carbon fliter on well water, IMO, is not necessary. Surely in any water supply system bacterial populations will form on just about any type of growth medium, even the insides of your pipes to some extent (when growth gets too heavy it just breaks away) - this is not an area to be concerned about. People with chlorinated water dont have this problem in their water supply system per se, but anyone who has a carbon filter (which removes chlorine) will always have a bacterial population on the carbon media and in any piping that follows. This "Bacterial Film" will die off as the media becomes exhautsted from chlorine contact. As carbon removes the chlorine from the water "clears the way" for bacterial film growth - ie. the front end of the carbon filter will not contain bacteria but the back end, over time, will develop a bacterial film. Some filters have an "antibacterial media" spread throughout the carbon to prevent this buildup, however these types of filters much more expensive. Instead of using carbon I would recommend using food grade tubing if you "must" have a hose type setup, better yet - just fill some 5 gallon cubitainers (avail. at the camping/outdoors store). Good Luck, Also you may want to take a sample of your well water to a County Agricultural Extension Office for metals/inorganics analysis, this service used to be free in the past, but you may want to check first. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 10:52:38 -0500 From: vhs at ornl.gov (Stephen J. Van der Hoven) Subject: Re: Water Chemistry Question Gregg Soh had a question about water chemistry and as a geochemist and someone who researches the chemistry of ground water, I felt obligated to answer. I suspect that the term "ppm" is being substituted for "mg/kg" (milligrams per kilogram) in the texts that you are looking at. The two terms are often interchanged, but shouldn't be. As Gregg pointed out, ppm is a measure of the number of molecules while mg/kg is a measure of mass. By the way, chemistists always use mg/kg or another measure of mass to avoid the confusion that ppm seems to be causing. If you are bored by math and chemistry, then you may not want to read further. Taking Greggs example of 1 gram of CaSO4 dissolved in 1 gallon of distilled H2O, I will first calculate the concentration Ca based on units of mass. 1 gal = 4.546 liters = 4546 ml (milliters) H2O assuming 1 ml H2O = 1 gram then, the mass of 1 gal of H2O is 4546 g (4.546 kg). The molecular weight of CaSO4 is 136 g/mole (40 g for Ca and 96 g for the SO4 molecule). Therefore the mass of Ca in one gram of CaSO4 is: 1 g CaSO4 X (40 g Ca/ 136 g CaSO4) = 0.294 g Ca (or 294 mg). 294 mg Ca dissolved in 4.546 kg H2O = 64.7 mg/kg, close to the 61 "ppm" value quoted in texts. Following same logic for SO4, the concentration is 1 g CaSO4 X (96 g SO4/ 136 g CaSO4) = .706 g SO4 706 mg SO4/ 4.546 kg H2O = 155.3 mg/kg, also close to the reported 147 ppm value. If the concentration of Ca is calculated based on the number of molecules, the number is different. The number of molecules in 1 gal of water is: 4546 g H2O / 18 g/mole H2O = 252.56 mole H2O The number of moles of CaSO4 in 1 g CaSO4 is: 1 g CaSO4/ 136 g/mole CaSO4 = 0.0074 moles CaSO4. Since CaSO4 dissolved in water into the Ca ion and the SO4 molecule, there are an equal number of moles Ca and SO4 dissolved the water. Also since there are an equal number of molecules in a mole of water as in a mole of CaSO4, you can leave Avagadros Number out of any calculation. So, 0.0074 moles Ca / 252.56 moles H2O = 0.00002911 moles Ca per 1 mole H2O. Multiply 0.00002911 by 1,000,000 and you get 29 ppm Ca. If you followed this lengthy explanation, I hope it illustrates the difference between ppm and mg/kg and explains why they are not interchangeable. As I said earlier, chemists always use mg/kg, but when I see ppm outside of scientific literature, I usually assume that what is really meant if mg/kg. This says nothing about what happens to the chemistry in the mash where all kinds of reactions take place. But that is probably irrelevant because I think the point is that the water added at the beginning of the boil should be of a certain chemistry to obtain the desired results. Having said all that, I personally brew with whatever comes out of the tap and enjoy the finished product regardless of hte initial water chemistry. - ---------------------------------------------------------- Stephen J. Van der Hoven Environmental Sciences Division Oak Ridge National Laboratory P.O. Box 2008, Mail Stop 6400 Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831-6400 Phone: 423-241-5178 FAX: 423-574-7420 e-mail:vhs at ornl.gov - ---------------------------------------------------------- Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 08:05:41 -0800 From: "Paul Hockings" <phocking at pacifier.com> Subject: Re: Long Secondaries Date: Sun, 22 Feb 1998 20:43:03 -0800 From: Paul n Shelley <pracko at earthlink.net> Subject: Long Secondaries >Has anyone been successful at >bottle conditioning their beers after a long (14-20 day) fermentation >without use of additional yeast? Why do recipes call for such a lengthy >secondary fermentation when corn sugar is being used as a primer? Hi All, I recently have had this same question and dilema, I created an all-Grain Vienna Bock on December 1rst::. OG 1.065 Primary took 18 days including about 2 for D rest, I racked into my secondary and dropped it down to about 34 deg. for 14 to 17 days, about 3 days before bottling I added 2 tsp of PolyClar. Bottled and let it set at 70 deg. for about 6 days. Then put into the garage which is about 40 to 50 deg. Just like the books say. 14 days later my beer is completely flat, briliantly clear but flat. So I wait another 2 weeks, still flat. I get discouraged about mid February and decide to dump the whole lot and fill the bottles with Ale. I get my dumping bucket and bottle opener and head to the garage. Low and Behold each bottle I open has a Beautiful head. Needless to say none of my Bock went into the Bucket. So I guess the moral of the story is to be patient. I shall Dump No beer younger than a year... Paul Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 11:31:17 -0800 From: tlrkirk <tlrkirk at wam.umd.edu> Subject: Pantyhose/nylon hops bags Just a suggestion -- why don't you use cheesecloth? At <$1.00 (US) a yard it is much more economical than using nylons (if bought new at at least $2 a pair, usually more). A better reason, I think, for using cheesecloth is that it is intended for use with food so you don't have to try to get all the dye (gross) out of it or worry about where it's been (grosser) before you put it in your brew. You can get little packets of cheesecloth at most kitchen stores and grocery stores, but the most economical way to buy it is at your local fabric store. It's cheap, it's easy, and it's meant for food. TLR Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 09:00:45 -0800 From: "RANDY ERICKSON" <RANDYE at mid.org> Subject: Heater Elements Don't you just love it when a topic you actually know something about comes up? Sully acknowledges Kenny Schwartz' assertion that Power equals Voltage-squared/Resistance (P=V*V/R) but recalls that Power in fact equals Volts X Amps (P=V*I). You are correct Sir! And given the fact that Current also equals V/R, you can substitute V/R into Sully's equation to get Kenny's. Sully then theorizes that if you cut the voltage in half, and supply the same current, power will only reduce by half as well, instead of by 1/4 as Kenny says. The math part is right, but not the electricity part. The constant here is the resistance of the element, not the current. Given that the element is 4500 W at 240 V, and given the equation P=V*V/R, we can rearrange to get R=V*V/P or 12.8 Ohms. That resistance will be essentially the same, regardless of the applied voltage, so it's the current that'll have to adjust itself. When we change to 120V, we get Power equals V*V/R equals (120)*(120)/12.8 equals 1125 W. So, for today at least, Ohm's law is upheld by this court ;-) Randy in Modesto Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 12:05:08 -0500 From: MAB <mabrooks at erols.com> Subject: Water Chemistry From: "Gregg Soh" Subject: Water Chemistry Greg, ppm or mg/L is used extensively in the "water treatment field". This unit of expression is equal to the "Weight" of the solute in a solution (soln.). Some comments of interest for determining this: 1 mg/L = 1ppm (this applies to solns. not dry/dry measures). Weight (in grams) of 1 mole of an element is called its Gram Molecular Weight (GMW). When you look at a Periodic Table of the Elements the number underneath the abreviation is the amount (in grams) needed to equal 1 mole of that substance. Hence a 1 molar solution of Ca (GMW = 40) is equal to 40 grams of pure Ca dissolved into 1 liter of pure water. Formula Weight (FW) is the weight of the dry compound in grams. This can be different then just adding up the GMW's of all the elements in the compound because sometimes water is used in the makeup of the compound ie. Anhydrous vs. heptahydrated forms of the same "apparent" compound will have different FW. The compound MgSO4 (anhydrous version) weighs 120.37 = GMW, ie. 120.37 grams into 1 liter = 1 molar solution. However, if you buy MgSO4 heptahydrate you will need 246.48 grams to make the same 1 molar solution, with the extra weight being added by 7 waters (126 grams). Bottom line is knowing what form of a chemical you are buying and take into account any water in the FW. Also, for calculating purposes: To find out the weight of a compound you need to add to get a desired level in your brew water just subtract the amount already in your water from the desired level and this will be your makeup amount. Knowing this you can determine the weight in grams needed to add to your water. This is calculated by the following equation: Lets use MgSO4 for an example, Mg = 24.305 GMW - (from the periodic table) S = 32.066 GMW " " O = ~16 GMW " " H = 1 GMW " " Total for MgSO4 = ~120.4 GMW Total for H2O = ~18 GMW So for the heptahydrated form of MgSO4 the FW = ~246.4 Mg weighs 24.305 (we can use this to get a ratio): 1 gram of MgSO4 x 24.305/246.4 x 1000mg/1g x 1gal/3.784 liters = 26 ppm (mg/l) is achieved when you add 1 gram of MgSO4 to 1 gallon of pure water. Since the above calculation uses alot of conversions to get the result you could easily back calculate to find out how much you need to get to a desired end amount in the water. ie. you want 260 ppm(mg/l) of Mg in your water and have 100 ppm already, then you need to add 160 ppm: 160 x 3.785 x 246.4/(24.305 x 1000) = 6.14 grams (= 6,140 mg) Hence you would need to add 6 grams MgSO4 per gallon to get the extra 160 mg/l MgSO4 you want. Hope this helps, as water chemistry is much more complicated then measuring and mixing, what you add isnt necessarily what you get. Matt B. Return to table of contents
Date: 23 Feb 1998 09:49:04 -0700 From: "Andrew Avis" <Andrew.Avis.0519423 at nt.com> Subject: Spent Grain Dog Bones / Dry Hello, I don't want to resurrect the dogs eating hops thread, which I understand was a problem a while back. In the spirit of the perpetual "what to do with spent grain" question, I offer the following solution: I dump my spent grains in a makeshift compost pile in my back yard. I've noticed that my dog, Finnigan, and his friends like to munch occasionally on the grains (I'm building a real composter to stop this practice). So on Sunday, after brewing, I saved a bit of grain from the mashtun, and came up with this recipe: Pizza & Beer dog bones: 2 cups wet spent grain 1/2 cup pizza/pasta sauce 4 cloves garlic, crushed (I added 6, but Finn is a garlic lover) 1 egg 2 cups of any combination of whole wheat flour, corn flour, barley flour, soy flour, or regular flour Mix into a firm dough (I had to add a bit more flour to get it firm). Roll out on a greased cookie sheet to about 1/4 - 1/8" thick. Cut into wedges, or strips, or (if you're really creative) bones. Bake at 350F for 30 minutes. Turn off heat, and leave in the oven over night to get hard. I imagine you could make peanut butter bones by substituting PB for pizza sauce & eliminating the garlic. A question: I met a guy yesterday who makes fantastic lagers using Morgans Dry Lager Yeast. Does anyone know anything about this yeast? Is it a true lager, or is it a neutral ale? The temp range was listed as 15C to 30C. Any speculation on the source (brewery) of this yeast? I was really impressed with the flavour that it produced. Drew Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 12:47:03 -0500 From: Lynn & Mike Key <flakeys at ibm.net> Subject: Iodophor Sanitizing Effect: How Long Does It Last? After brewing I sanitize my CF wort chiller with a 12.5ppm iodphor solution. I let it drain and then stuff sterilized gauze into each tube end. This is how I store it. My question: how long will the sanitizing effect of the iodophor last? Must I resanitize the wort chiller when I brew again? Thanks. - -- Cordially, Michael Key "Extremism in the pursuit of prudence is no vice"-- Greasy Fingers, Chicago Gangsters Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 11:58:45 -0600 (CST) From: Samuel Mize <smize at prime.imagin.net> Subject: Mummies; long secondaries Greetings to all, and especially to: > HOMEBREW Digest #2644 Mon 23 February 1998 > From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> > Subject: Enzyme Mortality > How were dem dry bones preserved? Sodium carbonate > ( natron) and wood tar ( which is loaded with phenolics and > is antiseptic). How much of each should we put into a 5 gallon batch? > From: Paul n Shelley <pracko at earthlink.net> > Subject: Long Secondaries >... Has anyone been successful at > bottle conditioning their beers after a long (14-20 day) fermentation > without use of additional yeast? Yep. I don't know why you're having trouble, unless you're always brewing very strong beer. >Why do recipes call for such a lengthy > secondary fermentation when corn sugar is being used as a primer? I can > see the benefits of conditioning a beer in the secondary for a long > time, but that's only if you have a CO2 tank to force carbonate it with. Yeast create waste products during heavy fermentation. When sugar gets sparse, they turn to these for food. These waste products (like diacetyl and higher alcohols) are not wanted in beer. A long secondary fermentation lets the yeast clean up the taste for you. You prime with very little sugar, compared to the original supply, so very little of these waste products are created, and they are rapidly re-consumed by the yeast in the bottle. Best, Sam Mize Multi-part MIME message follows: " ", " ", " " -- Marcel Marceau - -- 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: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 13:23:56 -0600 (CST) From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com> Subject: my protein rest test George writes: Al says that if he gets a lot of break material without a protein rest, the next time he mashes this malt he will use a protein rest to minimize the break material. Kunze seems to disagree with this. Break material is a good thing, because it means that you have removed the larger proteins without breaking them down into haze-forming middle weight proteins. Of course, you should remove the break material... Ahh, but I said that I use a protein rest if I get "excessive break" with a particular malt. One person's "excessive" may be another's "not too bad." To give you an idea of what I feel is excessive (something I should have done in the first place!), I'll tell you what I got with DeWolf-Cosyns Pale Ale malt when used with a single-step infusion at 155F... nearly 20% of the batch was clouded with thick, white globs of break. The bottom gallon of the fermenter was filled with this fluffy stuff that looked like wet cotton. Even if all that was to settle, I doubt there would have been a way that I could have gotten more than 4.5 gallons out of the 5 in the fermenter. I thought that was excessive. A subsequent batch, in which I used a 15 min protein rest at 140F followed by a boiling water infusion up to 155F, resulted in about a quart of break in stead. One additional point regarding your quoting of Kunze... he seems to equate polyphenol (tannin) extraction with husks. That's not what I've read both here (Charlie Scandrett, I believe) and in Malting and Brewing Science. While most of the silicates are indeed in the husks, most of the polyphenols are elsewhere (aleurone layer, I want to say, but don't quote me). Overcrushing does increase both silicate and polyphenol extraction as does sloppy laeutering, but just to be technically correct, it's not the husks at fault regarding the polyphenols. MBS has a table in which they show the difference between worts made from regular and dehusked malt. The polyphenol levels in the dehusked malt wort were very similar to those from the wort made from regular malt. 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: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 13:27:48 -0600 From: Kirk Lund <klund at technologist.com> Subject: Re: Wheelchair Brewing >3. Watching the boil. Whatever set up you have, you must be able to look >into the pot to avoid a boil-over. Boil-over can happen quite quickly There is a small, specially-shaped pyrex plate which keeps the wort from boiling over. At first I had my doubts, but it actually works! >13. Use dishwasher to sanitize bottles. The lower rack will pull out to >you, >simplifying the operation and is an effective method. Avoid having to >bend over a water-filled 30+ gal container to clean bottles. The dishwasher works great for this, but don't use dishwasher detergent, esp. the "spot-free rinse" kind. It leaves a thin film on the glass that will destroy beer head. Good Cheer, Home: kirklund at home.com Work: klund at technologist.com http://members.home.net/kirklund/ Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 15:25:03 -0500 From: feldman at lexmark.com Subject: Roaster Oven Mashing In short, my space in the apartment in which I live is limited. I recently acquired (free of charge) a roaster oven. The temperature dial on the roaster goes from 150 F on up. The roaster holds about 4 to 5 gallons of water. Given my limited space, and the little amount of space that a roaster oven occupies, it appears that this could be a feasible set up for all-grain brewing in my apartment. I have several questions: 1. Has anyone ever converted a roaster oven into a mashing vessel? It seems like it could be a great minimashing set up. If so how did you do it? 2. Even if you haven't done this, do you have any ideas on how I could achieve a decent setup for mashing grains? 3. How many pounds of grain can one mash per gallon of volume of the mashing vessel? I have a few ideas, but I am inexperienced in "all-grain gadgetry". Any help wolud be appreciated. Beers, Bobby B.O.C.K. (Brewers Of Central Kentcky) Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 02/24/98, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96