HOMEBREW Digest #2667 Sat 21 March 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

  Home Brewer's Beer Walk-In Cooler Ideas  -  approx 5' by 6' area ("Reed,Randy")
  Re: Overmodified (crap) malts (David Elm)
  Re: Motorised Valley mill (David Elm)
  re:  What are spicy-assed mudbugs? (MADwand)
  hazy beer & high temp rests/proteins/chlorophenols/malt rant (George_De_Piro)
  RIMS Construction/Mash Stirrer (bob_poirier)
  plastic beer/Clinitest/batch vs. fly/Kriek kits/oxygen/partial mash (Al Korzonas)
  Makkoli ("Dr. Dwight A Erickson")
  RE: Can beer fight cancer? (Mark Weaver)
  Hops Prevent Cancer (Kelly S Underwood)
  Iodophor (ricjohnson)
  Williams Mash System (Steve Krause)
  Yeast Skimming/Cropping ("Capt. Marc Battreall")
  Malt extracts/Installing ball valve in aluminum (Steelbrew)
  sobbing over fobbing? (Charles Hudak)
  more on bugs | priming (John Bowerman)
  Wyeast XL and Starters (Paul Edwards)
  Crayfish ("David R. Burley")
  Re: Porter (Steve Jackson)
  Repositionable labels/Jim's filtering comments (Chas Peterson)
  Party Pigs (Randy Lee)
  Specialty Malts (jamorris)
  Excellent Explanation (Mike York)
  Re: Diacetyl/Mash Efficiency (Bill Goodman)

Be sure to enter the 7th NYC Spring Regional Competition 3/22/98. Surf to http://www.wp.com/hosi/companno.html for more information... 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: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 12:43:08 -0500 From: "Reed,Randy" <rreed at foxboro.com> Subject: Home Brewer's Beer Walk-In Cooler Ideas - approx 5' by 6' area Dear Amateur Brewers, Can anyone out there shed light on building and cooling a small walk-in area in a basement? I live in the Northeast United States and my basement does not stay cold enough in the summer to keep my beer "happy." Here are my initial thoughts: Instead of buying another refrigerator and temperature controller for my cases of homebrew, kegs and commercial beers obtained from near and far, I would like to build a small area in my basement about the size of a walk in closet. The temperature would be maintained at about 50 to 55 degrees F. Having this space would keep my homebrew away from warm summer basement temperatures, would protect my special imported beers from the heat, and allow me to serve kegs of ale using a shank and tap installed through the wall, and over a sink. Lagers would still be served from my serving fridge at 45 degrees. Question: If I build a well insulated space of about 5 feet by 6 feet (floor to ceiling height), what are the considerations regarding cooling it to 50 --55 degrees year-round? For example, can I just use a "window unit" air conditioner for this? Do they go down that low? Can I easily modify the thermostat or should I use my temperature controller that I use on my fermentation fridge? Can I vent it in the basement or does it need to be vented outside? Should I try to vent to the basement in winter (to help heat the house) and vent to outside in summer (to contribute to the global warming situation :^) I have heard of the wine cellar cooling units that control air temperature and humidity, but they are quite expensive. If I rarely open the door to this area, could I use one of my existing refrigerators to cool the entire area or is this asking too much? Anyone have any experience building and using a home beer walk-in cooler? Thanks in advance for the help! Randy ===================================================== "Homebrewers are like dogs teaching each other how to chase cars."----------------------- Ann Reed ===================================================== +-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- +Local*Brewing*Company++++++++++++++++++++++++ +RREED at FOXBORO.COM+++++++++++++++Surfing*the++ +Randy*Reed++++++++++++++++++++++Information++ +BJCP*Recognized++++++++++++++++SuperBikePath+ +Beer*Judge/Potscrubber++++++++++++++++&++++++ +South*Shore*Brew*Club+++++++++++++Web*Wired++ +(Boston,*MA*Area*-*South)++++++++++++World+++ Visit SSBC at http://members.aol.com/brewclub/ +-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 11:26:30 -0700 From: David Elm <delm at cadvision.com> Subject: Re: Overmodified (crap) malts >George de Piro says: >... >Well I cant speak from Marris Otter experience but I can speak at great >length about the poor service and quality that we receive from the big >maltsters here in Australia. I don't know how far your club wants to go for malt but Westcan Malting in Alix, Alberta, Canada sells to home brewers, micros, and large breweries in Canada, USA, South America, and Japan. Locally we can buy a 50Kg bag. Export may be a minimum of a container. Check http://www.westcanmalt.com They have a single product, a pale malt (1.7) Harrington 2-row, protein 10.5% - --------------------------------------------------------------------------- David Elm delm at cadvision.com (403)932-1626 888-660-6035 fax:(403)932-7405 Box 7, Site 16, RR 2, Glendale Rd., Cochrane, Alberta, T0L 0W0, Canada Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 11:26:31 -0700 From: David Elm <delm at cadvision.com> Subject: Re: Motorised Valley mill >I have a Valley mill with which I crush my grains. I want to motorise it. >How strong must the electrical motor be and what is the optimum rpm >speed to which I can let the rollers run ? >With optimum I dont mean necessarily the fastest, I still want to >obtain a good consistent crush. Valley Brewing Equipment, in a brochure, write about using the mill at 300 RPM connected to a power drill. My setup and two others that I have seen use a GE gear moter (170RPM) direct connected via a rubber coupling to the shaft. I got the gear motor from SURPLUS CENTER at 800-488-3407. The part number is 5-1098 and it was $25US+shipping. - --------------------------------------------------------------------------- David Elm delm at cadvision.com (403)932-1626 888-660-6035 fax:(403)932-7405 Box 7, Site 16, RR 2, Glendale Rd., Cochrane, Alberta, T0L 0W0, Canada Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 20:30:02 GMT From: MADwand at earthling.net (MADwand) Subject: re: What are spicy-assed mudbugs? On Wed, 18 Mar 1998 00:16:29 -0500, in rec.crafts.brewing you wrote: ::Date: Mon, 16 Mar 98 16:52:16 est ::From: paa3983 at dscp.dla.mil (Mike Spinelli) ::Subject: What are spicy-assed mudbugs? :: ::JBDers, ::Bodie in #2662 mentions how IPAs and spicy-assed ::mudbugs go so well together. :: ::Can you south'nas enlighten me as to what this creature is? Crawfish from Louisiana. You don't know what you are missing. But if you didn't know what they were, how'd you know they are a "south'nas" product? Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 13:48:59 -0800 From: George_De_Piro at berlex.com Subject: hazy beer & high temp rests/proteins/chlorophenols/malt rant Hi all, Kirk asked why his all-grain beers have been suffering from chill haze while his extract ones did not. He mentions that his thermometer was reading 10F too low. He also wonders why he achieved starch conversion if he was mashing so much hotter than recommended. First, he achieved conversion because alpha-amylase is good up to 168F (75C) or so. Mash out doesn't denature it, contrary to what most (all?) homebrew texts state. Of course, because beta-amylase only has a 10 min. life span at 158F (70C), worts made at this temp will be highly unfermentable. A good mash schedule for a lactose-free sweet stout! Why are the beers hazy? Well, my guess is that it isn't chill haze, but starch haze. Since Kirk's thermometer was off by 10F, he was mashing out at 178-180F (81C) instead of 168-170 (75C). That could cause unconverted starch trapped in the steely tips to be released, with not enough amylase around to convert it. Beer with a permanent starch haze would be the result. As a test you could do an iodine test to the mash after a 180F mash out (or you could just not do a 180F mash out...). Are you sure the haze is only present in cold beer, or is it just worse when it is cold? -------------------------------- Sam Mize talks about all sorts of stuff. He asks about my post in which I mention that, according to Kunze, it is protein degradation products that cause chill haze. Sam postulates that these would also be broken up by a protein rest, and therefore help reduce haze. If a protein rest is done at a low enough temperature, and for enough time, than yes, you can achieve a significant amount of large and small protein degradation. You will also end up with thin, headless beer! That is one danger of doing a protein rest at all with modern malts; they are already well-modified enough to not need a rest between 113-135F (45-57C). Of course, if you use Munton's malt, like I did, you'll want to ADD protein to the wort...perhaps a good time to try that old "cock ale" recipe... Sam also asks about the taste of chlorophenols. Within the past month AJ and I posted a discussion about the flavors of different phenolic compounds. Search the archives for details. In summary, everybody has the potential to taste chemicals in a different way from the person next to them. At Siebel we were doing a fair amount of "spiked beer" tastings. The chlorophenol I tasted (ortho-chloro-phenol) smelled like a swimming pool at 8 ppb. AJ has smelled other chlorinated phenols that are medicinal (to him). ------------------------------- Norm responds to my post about Munton's Marris Otter malt. I think some people may be a bit confused, so I'll clarify myself: Marris Otter is a strain of barley. My post in NO way meant that all Marris Otter malt is bad. It is, in fact, a fine barley that can produce exceptional malt. I have used Crisp malting's Marris Otter with nothing but wonderful results. Malt modification is much more a function of how the maltster treated it. Different varieties need to be treated differently, but many barleys are capable of becoming fine malt when handled correctly. My complaint is with the maltster, MUNTON. They are the one's who are at fault here for producing crap and sending it here rather than feeding it to some mad cow off in an English field somewhere... By the way, I called the Northeast sales rep for Munton, and he said that Marris Otter will soon disappear from English farms. That is quite sad... Have fun! George De Piro (Nyack, NY) Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 98 08:33:39 -0600 From: bob_poirier at adc.com Subject: RIMS Construction/Mash Stirrer Good Morning, HBD! I've brewed a few all-grain, and many partial mash batches, and I've been happy with the results. However, I still have problems with mashing: Mashing-in & reaching the correct initial temp; Maintaining & changing the mash temp. For partial mashes, I follow the suggestions of the boys at the Seven Barrel Brewery, and use my oven to maintain the desired mash temp. This works out pretty well, but your ordinary, run-of-the-mill oven isn't designed or intended to maintain such low temps (100-170 deg F). So, I'm looking for new & exciting ways to brew all-grain batches! The Jan/Feb '98 issue of Brewing Techniques Magazine explores the debate between infusion & decoction mashing. They go on to give detailed explanations of each technique. The idea of constructing my own RIMS intrigues me immensely! The article lists a bunch of RIMS related web sites and possible sources for RIMS related hardware/components. To say the least, I've been doing a lot of surfing and research the past few weeks! Fascinating!! And I'd like to thank all of those individuals who were kind enough to provide info about their own RIMS on the web. So, my first question is, about how much cash are we talking about for setting up just the one vessel, converted to the actual RIMS? The rest of the system can be added on piece by piece, correct? Secondly, are there any discernible advantages to incorporating a mash stirring paddle into the RIMS? I can remember encountering only one such system, and it was offered for sale by a professional outfit. I don't remember seeing a paddle on any homegrown RIMS. Well, any tips/tricks/advice/info would be greatly appreciated! Bob Poirier, Jr. - East Haven, CT bob_poirier at adc.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 14:28:55 -0600 (CST) From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com> Subject: plastic beer/Clinitest/batch vs. fly/Kriek kits/oxygen/partial mash Dave writes: >Tim Burkhardt has a plastic taste in his bottled beer = >that wasn't there before bottling. This taste is often = >associated with phenols and such. Possibly what = >you taste is due to the beer oxidation during bottling. = >If you are using a bottling bucket - don't. Add the = >priming sugar solution to each bottle ( 48 teaspoons = >in 8 ounces) and siphon from the secondary directly = >into the bottle. You avoid beer oxidation and don't have = >to sterilize the bucket, your stirrer, etc. Using a priming = >starter will also reduce the effects of oxidation as the = >yeast are active from the beginning. While it's true that oxidation of polyphenols can lead to phenolic/plastic taste, a much more likely culprit is a mild wild yeast infection. Many wild yeasts are producers of plastic/clovey aromas and flavours. As for this priming method, it is far less precise than bulk priming. The old method of priming was to put granular sugar (undissolved) into each bottle. This technique is pretty much no longer used among mainstream US homebrewers (although I've seen some ads for granular sugar-measurers in Australia). Gentle racking is not much more likely to cause oxidation than pouring primings into the bottles. And since I really can't recall the last time I had any oxidation comments from judges on any of my beers (even year-old normal-gravity beers and multi-year Barleywines), I tend to believe that my methodology (see two or three HBDs ago) is sound. *** Dave writes: >value for the batch. I suggest you also try Clinitest as it = >will tell you with an equal or greater degree of precision = > - compared to a hydrometer - if your main fermentation is = >finished - faster and a smaller sample. Combining = >these two techniques, Clinitest and the forced = >fermentation ( while you also do a wort stability test = >as George suggests) will tell you as close as you care = >to know if it's bottling time. = How quickly we forget. Please see Andy Walsh's magnificent post in HBD #2584 for the methodology and other background information, but here's the bottom line on Clinitest: Clinitest reads low for the major sugars left after fermentation. Maltotriose typically forms 10% of wort gravity in an all malt wort. eg. 1.050 wort has ~5 SG points of maltotriose.The lowest measure on Clinitest is 0.25%, corresponding to about 4SG points of maltotriose as being the minimum resolution for this sugar. One of the most common fermentation disorders is an inability to ferment this sugar. Clinitest will not normally detect this. In addition, as one does not know the final sugar composition, a reading on Clinitest of 0.25% could mean very different things since it does not measure the different sugars to the same degree of accuracy. Conclusion - Clinitest does not give an accurate portrayal of final sugar concentrations. It may be useful as a general fermentation indicator, but I won't rush out to buy one. However, if you want a glucose monitor, Diastix are great! Anybody know how to measure maltotriose? *** Jim writes (in an excellent post where he corrects my post on sparge rates): >If this were not the case , we would be able to dump all the sparge water in >the tank at once, stir and collect all the sugar in one drain. The very fact >that we must drain the sparge and replace it with fresh water makes me think >that there is some solubilty limiting factor at play. Again I stress that >this is postulation, as I don't know the actual solubility limits. Comments >anyone? I believe that the benefit of a continuous sparge (aka fly sparging) over a batch sparge (where the grain bed is drained, then refilled, then drained, etc.) is that there will always be some trapped wort in the grain bed. If you batch sparge, the gravity of the wort trapped will be equal to the gravity of the last draining. In a fly sparge, you (theoretically) have lower gravity runnings remaining trapped in the grain bed when you stop. Frankly, it's all theoretical and if you have a system in which there is a lot of chaneling, batch sparging will be *more* efficient than fly sparging. *** Jon writes: >Has anyone ever used one of the Kriek kits that are available? Or, does >anyone have any suggestions on how to make these kits taste more authentic, >yeasts,etc? I once made a batch from *two* Brewferm Kriek kits. I followed the directions except that I used two cans of extract rather than the one plus corn sugar recommended in the instructions. The resulting beer was faintly a cherry beer with nothing near the sourness of a true Kriek Lambic. To make these kits taste more authentic... I recommend that you buy much less expensive domestic wheat extract (yes, I know that true Lambics are made with raw wheat, but we're talking extract here) get some Brettanomyces yeast and Lactobacillus bacteria from either Yeast Lab, The Yeast Culture Kit Company, Head Start Brewing Cultures or (as a last resort) Wyeast and add your own cherries after a year in the primary. It will also help join the Lambic Digest and to read its back issues. *** Someone who didn't post their name writes: >Secondly, make sure >you aerate your starter well at first, but remember that fermentation is >an anaerobic process. The yeast needs oxygen to get started, but once >started, it will be harmed by additional oxygen. Not exactly. Once the alcohol level begins to get substantial, oxygen will oxidise the alcohols to aldehydes, but early in the fermentation, oxygen will primarily increase the diacetyl in the finished beer. See the photo tour of The Old Brewery - Tadcaster on my website for a pretty graphic example of fermenting wort oxidation! *** Gregg writes: >If I have a partial mash, I would use much less grain than a full mash >and make up for this in extract. In most cases, just a little over >enough diastatic grain is included in the bill to convert whatever >adjuncts there may be(cara-pils, flaked barley, oats, etc.). Given this >scenario, if the recipe calls for a large percentage of specialty grains >that have no enzymes and don't need enzymes, does one still include this >in the mash with the mash water ratio of 1-1.5qts/lb? It really wouldn't >be a problem with a full all-grain mash, but given the now-low >percentage of diastatic constituents, wouldn't this be detrimental to >the mash? My gut feeling is that it is *theoretically* detrimental (because the products of saccharification actually impede the action of the enzymes and crystal malts will simply add more of these products), HOWEVER, in practice, I don't think that the difference would be tasteable. Note also, that if you have very high-bicarbonate (i.e. high alkalinity) water and you are making a dark beer, the dark grains will lower the pH into a more reasonable range (one that favours the enzymes and also reduces polyphenol extraction). On the other hand, if you have very low alkalinity water, adding dark grains could lower the pH too much and interfere with the action of the enzymes. In other words... it depends on your water and your recipe. *** I'm sure you'll all be glad to hear that I'm all caught up now... 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, 19 Mar 1998 12:44:10 -0700 From: "Dr. Dwight A Erickson" <colvillechiro at plix.com> Subject: Makkoli Greetings to all, Does anyone out there have a receipe for a Korean brew called Makkoli ? (pronounced Mah Koh Lee) If so, I'd be most appreciative if ya could send it to me (private e-mail OK) http://colvillechiro at plix.com THANKS ! Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 16:38:13 -0500 From: Mark Weaver <HeadBrewer at eci.com> Subject: RE: Can beer fight cancer? Another interesting point regarding cancer and alcohol: Now, this does not pertain to beer but: A recent 30 year study of 35,000 French men who drank three glasses of wine a day, had no cancer what-so-ever, even if they smoked... Anything over three glasses and they had problems with their livers, anything under three glasses and the effects were greatly diminished. Prost! Mark Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 17:40:06 -0500 From: underdog63 at juno.com (Kelly S Underwood) Subject: Hops Prevent Cancer For those who were looking for more info on Hops and cancer: *** Scientists Say Hops May Help Prevent Cancer *** Corvallis, OR - According to Oregon State University researchers, *xanthohumol,* a compound commonly found in hop plants, is toxic to cancer cells and may actually help protect humans from the deadly disease. The University*s studies indicate that the compound, known as a *flavonoid,* inhibits an enzyme called *cytochrome P450,* which is known to activate the cancer process in cells. Researchers also reported that some flavonoids enhance the effectiveness of enzymes called *quinone reductase,* that can block active cancer-causing substances already at work in the body. Lead researcher Donald Buhler, an agricultural chemist, cautioned reporters at the press conference where his team*s research was announced, that these findings should not be used to endorse more beer consumption. He said if the results of the study pan out, scientists may be able to make the compound available in pills or other concentrated forms. Make mine a Sierra Nevada Bigfoot and forget those pills! HappyHours.com BrewsGram #4 - March 18, 1998 - Terry Soloman, Editor America's #1 On-Line Beer Newsletter! Kelly Underwood Gales Ferry, CT _____________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 17:28:43 -0500 From: ricjohnson at SURRY.NET Subject: Iodophor Al K. writes I've seen everything from 1 minute to 15 minutes for iodophor, so I usually use 15 minutes for fermenters, hoses, airlocks, etc. I usually put about a gallon in my carboy shake it around for about a minute and then let it drain for approx 10 min. Am I the only one that does this? I have had no infections lately. BTW what dilution is best for no rinse? I was told by my shop to use a cap-full per gallon. I have moved up to big bottles. The caps on the big bottles are bigger than the small bottles, but I still use a cap full. Richard Johnson Mt. Airy, NC Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 17:39:36 -0500 From: Steve Krause <skrause at new-vista1.com> Subject: Williams Mash System I have reading HBD for several months and just received the Williams Mashing System as a birthday gift. As a result I am about to brew my first all grain batch,after brewing with kits and extract recipies for about on and off for about 15 years. What I would like to know if anyone has had any experiance using that system,and what the results were thanks Steve Krause Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 21:55:43 -0500 From: "Capt. Marc Battreall" <batman at terranova.net> Subject: Yeast Skimming/Cropping Got a batch of Munich Dunkel that just started fermenting today usingt a healthy 1.8L Wyeast #2206 Bavarian Lager yeast starter. I want to crop or skim the krausen off the top because of what I have read in alot of texts (mainly Noonan's Brewing Lager Beer). First off, is this really necessary to aid in diacetyl reduction and to improve the smoothness of the finished product? And secondly, should I salvage the skimmings for either a secondary re-pitch or further usage? I have heardand read of reviving/cleaning the skimmings and using them to augment the secondary. Anyone have any ideas or comments in this subject? Please hurry, a good krausen head is building as of this posting. Cheers, Marc - -- Captain Marc Battreall Islamorada, Florida Future site of "The BackCountry Brewhouse" Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 21:59:14 EST From: Steelbrew <Steelbrew at aol.com> Subject: Malt extracts/Installing ball valve in aluminum Hans E. Hansen writes: >Does anyone have any information on the comparitive attenuation >characteristics of the different brands of extract? i.e. - which will >make a thinner or richer brew? I know Laaglanders tends to finish >with a higher gravity, but what about M&F, Telefords, Edme, John Bull, >etc.? Any info on Breiss bulk (barrel) malt? Does dry extract finish higher >or lower than liquid - or does it matter? > >I have seen people reference some ancient issues of Zymurgy, but I >don't have access to these. Also, the info could be obsolete. Try this site: http://triton.cms.udel.edu/~oliver/firststate/tips/maltextract.html. Lots of good info including what you're after. BTW, I just have to get in a lick for my favorite extract, Alexander's pale. I use this as my "base malt" in several different styles, from pales to porters, and it works great. Not to mention my supplier sells it in bulk for $1.85/pound! It finishes at a low gravity. If a higher TG is needed, I steep dextrinous (is that a word?) specialty malts or do a 155-158 degree partial mash. ****************************************************************************** ********** I recently purchased a 15 gallon 3004 aluminum Vollrath pot. I understand that 3004 is some kind of aluminum alloy, and I was wondering if it could be welded. If so, does anyone know of a capable welder in the Olympia/Tacoma area? Has anyone successfully installed a drain valve with compression fittings into one of these pots? Thanks, Dan Fox Olympia, Wa. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 22:08:55 -0800 From: Charles Hudak <cwhudak at gemini.adnc.com> Subject: sobbing over fobbing? George writes about foaming probs with his tap system: >Have put three beers through my new system that is mounted >through the door of an old reefer: Corny kegsx2. Rapids brand >double faucet, one hooked to 5.5 ft, the other to 6.5 ft of 3/16" >vinyl Rapids brand beer tubing. CO2 is run w/ 5/16" tubing from a >double pressure gauge Tap-Rite regulator through the reefer wall to >a double ganged modular plastic CO2 distributor which runs to two >Corny kegs. I have run a fairly standard OG 1.063 pale ale, a Munich >Dunkel, and a honey ale through the system. I have used various >methods to carbonate, but the last was carbonated at 12psi at 40F. In >a standard English pint 'bitter-style' pub glass (that is clean) I >get about 1/2" of beer and the rest foam. I open the faucet >completely and run the beer down the side of the glass. I have tried >pumping at > the smallest pressure I can manage and still get flow, 2 lbs, 4lbs, >6lbs, 8lbs, 10lbs, 12lbs, and 14lbs (this last was what the Rapids >guy suggested) Each and every time, almost all foam!! The beer is >great once the foam goes down, but what a pain. I've tried pulling a >second glass behind the first, without shutting the faucet, but no >difference. > A couple of things to look into. How clean are your faucets? Beer faucets need to be cleaned regularly. It is amazing at how much crap accumulates in your faucets in a short amount of time. If your faucets are clean, look at every inch of your draft system for burrs or other edges that could be providing nucleation sites and causing foaming. Specifically, I'd look at your dip tube (especially the top, near the poppet), the poppet, the tank plug, and all of your tubing to fitting connections. Assuming that overcarbonated beer is not the problem, it is usually dirty draft equipment or damaged draft equipment which causes foaming problems. You might consult the back of the rapids catalog (assuming that you haven't already) for tubing specifics to set up your system. I think that you are supposed to shoot for a pressure at the tap of only 2-3 psi. Based on the fact that the length and diameter of the tubing cause the pressure to drop from the keg to tap (longer and narrower tubing cause more drag on the liquid flow and cause more of a pressure drop; some types of plastics cause more drag than others) you should calculate your tubing length based on your normal keg pressure in order to get down to the required pressure at the tap. Most draft systems use 5/8" lines until the last couple of feet and then drop down to 3/16" to the tap shank. Good luck; been there done that ;( C-- Charles Hudak in San Diego, California (Living large in Ocean Beach!!) cwhudak at adnc.com ICQ# 4253902 "If God had intended for us to drink beer, he would have given us stomachs." - --David Daye Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 16:58:30 -0800 From: John Bowerman <jbowerma at kfalls.net> Subject: more on bugs | priming Oooh!! The light's bright ... In HBD #2665 Kirk Lund wrote: > ... poured the hot sugar water in the bottom of > my bottling bucket. I then racked the beer from secondary onto it and > bottled without stirring. ... That particular batch resulted in half > the bottles overcarbonated and half that are flat, so I've gone back > to stirring. Any opinions, personal experiences, etc. regarding > stirring vs not stirring when priming? As I see it, not stirring would would lead to statification in the priming bucket, and therefore different levels of priming sugar in bottled beer. Although I've only been brewing for a little over 3 years now, the technique I use has never given me any problems. I start to transfer beer to my priming bucket (gently to prevent aeration) with the tubing at an angle to impart a swirling current (whirlpool?). About the time 1/2 to 1 gal of beer is in the bucket, I add my priming solution (plus any finings) by gently pouring down/along my brewing paddle (it may be the only thing I remember from high school chemistry). After the rest of the beer has been transfered I give a gentle stir or 2, wait a couple of minutes, then start bottling. Works every time. In HBD # 2666 David Burley wrote: > In Sydney, Australia I have had Botany Bay Bugs which > look like some kind of really prehistoric (I'm sure they are) > shellfish that has been stepped on by an elephant. They > are oblong and flattish with segmented tails. Sounds like "Slipper Lobsters", if so I'm envious. They've been on my shopping list of things to eat for some time. However, if this was at "Doyles on the Quay" then you have my condolences (highly overrated -- they overcook shellfish something horrible). I highly reccomend "Hawks" just outside Lafayette, LA for some of the best crawfish (concievably even the best) I've ever eaten. Go for the 5 lb platter. The extra seasoning has lots of character, but it ain't for sissies. The beer was merely wet. ... back to the shadows. John Bowerman Bad Dog Brewing Klamath Falls, OR I must be God. Every time I pray, I find I'm just talking to myself. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 06:58:46 -0500 (EST) From: Paul Edwards <pedwards at iquest.net> Subject: Wyeast XL and Starters John (& the collective); I read with interest your post to HBD about the Palexperiment. Kudo's to Dave Logsdon for providing the yeast. However, I would caution you that the XL packs, while containing significantly more yeast than the 50 ml smack packs, do not seem to contain sufficient yeast to meet the 1x10^6 cells per ml per deg plato pitching rate many of us try to acheive. When the XL packs first appeared in a our local HB shop, a few of us tried side-by-side comparisions of XL pitched directly versus using a starter. In all cases the XL packs pitched directly had 12-16 hour lags versus 2-6 hour lags using 2 to 3 liter starters. (When using the starters, we decanted the spent wort first and only pitched the slurry). Certainly 12-16 hours is better than 24-36 hours, but I feel 2-6 hours is even better and easily acheivable. All yeast was about 1 month old, based on the embossed date on the smack pack. Now, the XL packs do offer the advantage that one may skip the 50 ml to 500 ml step-up (10:1 increase) and pitch the XL pack directly into a larger volume of starter wort. That to me makes the XL worth the extra buck. Not all Wyeast varieties are available in the XL size. My friend Jim Liddil may disagree with me about Wyeast, but I still prefer their products over others on the market. I don't have the time, space or inclination to to be much of a yeast rancher, starting at the slant level. With Wyeast when the pack swells, I know I'm good to go. With the "vial yeasts", I don't have any idea. Just my $.02 worth. Good luck with the Palexperiment. I'm looking forward to reading the results. - --Paul Edwards pedwards at iquest.net Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 08:18:15 -0500 From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Crayfish Brewsters: Donald Smith says that being from the Old South he says "crawfish" not "crayfish" for dem good eatin' spice bugs. I have always found this surprising, since the word "crayfish" comes from the French equivalent "ecrevisse". I would have thought with all that Arcadian (Cajun) influence it would be pronounced as "crayfish" in Louisiana and surrounds. In SE Ohio where I grew up we said both. Then we also said "snake feeder" and "dragonfly" for the same bug. Guess we were transitional, linguistically speaking. - --------------------------------------------- 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: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 05:27:20 -0800 (PST) From: Steve Jackson <stevejackson at rocketmail.com> Subject: Re: Porter In HBD #2666 (March 20, 1998) Wayne Kozun wrote: >>I really doubt that porter was developed as a hybrid of light and dark >>beers. Porter came before stout as stout was originally called stout >>porter, and the porter was eventually dropped (see the Guinness >>article in >>the Spring 98 issue of Zymurgy). Actually, this is exactly how porter was developed. In the days before its creation, many pub patrons would order an "entire." This was a beer comprised of a mix of the house beers, typically something lighter (relatively speaking -- pale malts and therefore pale beers hadn't been developed yet) and somthing darker, and often with the addition of some old or stock ale. Needless to say, publicans found it a bit of a hassle to mix up pint after pint of entire. That is why a London brewer whose name escapes me (my references are at home and I'm not) at the moment set out to create a beer that would replicate the appearance and flavor of porter, allowing publicans to serve from one cask instead of several. This beer came to be known as porter, possibly due to the fondness among men of that occupation for the beer. Porter was made at varying strengths, the strongest of which was sometimes called "stout porter." As time went by, the strong version of porter came to be more popular and, as Wayne mentioned, the "porter" part of the name was dropped. Eventually, porter was pretty much dropped as well (Guiness, which started out as a porter brewery, kept making one until the 1970s). The style was revived by the microbrewery movement and has since become a very popular style again. For more information on this wonderful style, you can check out Michael Jackson's Beer Companion, Ray Daniels' "Designing Great Beers" or the Classic Styles Series book on porter. _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free at yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 08:38:54 -0500 From: Chas Peterson <chasp at digex.net> Subject: Repositionable labels/Jim's filtering comments HBDers - I wanted to thank Jim for seeking out what appears to be a decent alternative to labeling beer. I've always found it a PIA to put a coded sticker on the top of each bottle. I know what it means, but my guests don't. "Say Chas, whats a SZB? Or a APA, or..." you know what I mean. One question though, how did the ink-jet perform. I attempted to make labels with this kind of printer before, but found them to bleed ALOT. Is the label made for injets, like the toothed tranparancies? Also, just one comment on Jim's filtering observation. I too found that filtering will *clean* up the flavor of lighter beers quickly, but I also found that this effect is temporary. Given sufficient time (talking many weeks here), I found my unfiltered beers to be as clear as the filtered ones. The only difference was a slight reduction in bitterness in the filtered product. I do admit to using polyclar for unfiltered homebrew. I might be interesting if AJ had keep a bottle or two unfiltered and compared the filtered/unfiltered beers for clarity and flavor. I just want to warn those those embarking on the filtering journey -- its relatively expensive for both your pocketbook and more importantly time. Of course this kind of thinking does not apply well in the commercial environment where speed is of the essence. Enjoy, Chas Peterson Laytonsville, Md =========================================================== Chas Peterson chasp at digex.net Director - Product Development 301-847-4936 Custom Enterprise Networks Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 08:19:45 -0600 From: Randy Lee <rjlee at imation.com> Subject: Party Pigs Bob the BOCK member sez: >If you know anything about these >Tommy Knocker Party Pig To Go packages please do tell. Sounds like a >bargain for the homebrewer interested in Party Pigging. The base part of these are probably the same thing (the major plastic piece). The party pigs come in two flavors: ones set up for refill and the other not. the ones set up for refill have a bolted down head piece whereas the ones not mean for refill have a head piece that is held together with a crimped part. Much cheaper. Without the right equipment, you can't get these to work at home. I'm sure that if these things were not meant to come back to the brewery for refill that they would be putting them out in the crimp style since the cost differential is significant. Randy Lee Viking Brewing Company Dallas, WI http://www.win.bright.net/~results Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 16:51:30 -0500 From: jamorris at washington.navy.mil Subject: Specialty Malts I sent this question to the digest a few days ago, but our server here on the ship crashed at the same time I was ready to receive the replies. Darn ships! If you responded, please retransmit. Your time is appreciated... - ---------- Thanks to all of you that helped me before. Your responses were awesome and gave me a wealth of knowledge. Since then my better half sent a copy of TNCJHB. My order will be waiting when I get home. My order included 1 lb of cara-pils dextrin malt. I wanted the benefits of crystal malt without the added color. I thought it should be treated as the other crystal malts and then I read that dextrin malt required mashing. Now I'm concerned that I won't be able to use it without going too in depth. Should I scratch the cara-pils and go with a light crystal malt or will I in fact be able to use it a a 'regular' crystal malt? Thanks in advance Ron Morris USS George Washington Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 08:09:55 +0000 From: Mike York <myork at mail.asheboro.com> Subject: Excellent Explanation Jim, Just wanted to thank you for an outstanding explanation titled "Subject: HopDevil credit/filtering" in you latest post. Mike >Doug; Try using a small nylon screen like the material used for hop bags or >a fish tank strainer. This is what was used ( on a larger scale) in the >brew-pub I worked in. A much simpler way, and the way I use at home, is >simply use a large spoon to skim the foam and a little of the liquid wort. > Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 15:03:24 +0000 From: Bill Goodman <goodman at APWK01G1.nws.noaa.gov> Subject: Re: Diacetyl/Mash Efficiency Capt. Marc Battreall <batman at terranova.net> wrote: > remember a while back when I was in search of the origin of the > "Ringwood/Norwich Ale Yeast"? Well, I received alot of posts about the > characteristics of said yeast and what I can expect. Lots of consensus > regarding the diacetyl levels of this yeast and now that my batch is > finished and in the keg, I can definately confirm that this yeast does > indeed throw ALOT of diacetyl. Funny thing, all the brews at the brewpub > where I acquired this yeast at did not have any detectable > diacetyl...hmmmm.... go figure! I assume that it is a slight difference > in the fermentation processes for sure. Anyway, I attempted a short, 2 > day diacetyl rest which obviously did little or nothing to reduce the > level. The brew is still good, just not what I expected. So if you get > ahold of some of this yeast [Wyeast #1187] considered yourself warned!! I had wondered where one could find Ringwood yeast for homebrewing, as I'd love to attempt brewing something a la Maryland's Wild Goose brewery's Amber or Golden Ale, in which the Ringwood yeast delivers a nice buttery (er, diacetyl) flavor. But is Wyeast 1187 really Ringwood? A search for "1187" in the Wyeast Brewing Yeast Product List Web page (http://www.wyeastlab.com/beprlist.htm) yielded: > 1742 Swedish Ale yeast > Stark beer Nordic-style yeast of Scandinavian origin, floral nose malty > finish. Flocculation medium; apparent attenuation 68-72%. (64-74o F) A.K.A. > 1187. - -- Bill Goodman Olney, MD Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 03/21/98, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96