HOMEBREW Digest #2719 Thu 21 May 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: incuctive heating and RIMS (LaBorde, Ronald)
  Re: Dangers of under pitching (Scott Murman)
  RE: Primary Control/Flavor Kits/Sulfur (LaBorde, Ronald)
  Re: Converting grain to extract (brian_dixon)
  Yeast pitching rates (John Wilkinson)
  Rhubarb ("David Johnson")
  Home malting (Jorge Blasig - IQ)
  Re: AHA competition question (Scott Braker-Abene)
  Wort pumps to handle boiling ("Mark S. Johnston")
  RE: SS Cleaner ("Capt. Marc Battreall")
  March Pump (Jeremy Bergsman)
  re:Pin Lock Keg Woes (Phil Tully)
  Pumps; fruit flies; close-out (Samuel Mize)
  Re: Pin Lock Keg Woes (Ted Major)
  Re: BW in kegs, all-grain monsters (Steve Piatz)
  Re: pumps (Joe Rolfe)
  Dangers of contamination: dry vs. liquid yeast (Matthew Arnold)
  Fruit Flies, Temp Control, Label removal ("Peter J. Calinski")
  More yeast pitching (George_De_Piro)
  RE: Wort Pump & boiling temps (LaBorde, Ronald)
  RE: Starting the starter (LaBorde, Ronald)
  RE: electrocution (LaBorde, Ronald)
  SILENCE! or Defending my Honor (EFOUCH)
  Delta-T revisited (stencil)
  steam injection pointers (Mike Spinelli)
  Liquid Decoctions ("Andrew Avis")

BURP's Spirit of Free Beer competition is June 6-7 and entry information is available by contacting Jay Adams (adams at burp.org). 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: Tue, 19 May 1998 15:57:09 -0500 From: rlabor at lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald) Subject: RE: incuctive heating and RIMS >From: "S. Wesley" <Wesley at maine.maine.edu> >Transformers are generally engineered to maximize the mutual >inductance of the primary and secondary coils. This is accomplished by >closely interwinding the primary and secondary coils around a laminated >soft iron core to minimize losses due to eddy currents and hysteresis. Some are, some aren't. Many transformers are made with entirely separate winding coils, the typical transformer will have the primary coil wound first nearest the core, then the secondary winding on top of the primary. On a step down transformer, the primary wire diameter is smaller than the secondary, and it calculates out such that less wire is needed with this arrangement. The esoteric designs you mentioned are generally for high frequencies, not 60 Hz. >Any attempt to rewind the coil of the secondary around a pipe will >dramatically weaken the coupling between the primary and secondary >coils >dramatically reducing the efficiency of the transformer. The coil of the secondary is not wound around the pipe, the pipe IS the secondary. As long as you stay within the core, all is well, if the windings are loose, electrically it still doesn't matter. It will mechanically chatter and vibrate like crazy though. >If anyone really wants to try this you might find it >significantly more effective to use a variac (Variable transformer) to >step the voltage down. The output of the Variac can then be connected to >the an induction coil wound around the pipe. If I understand your design, the variac would replace the transformer, allowing a low voltage - high current feed to the RIMS coil. Can you imagine the size of a high amperage variac? You would need an airplane hanger to house it. >Keep in mind that if you are doing this in a metal pipe the >metal is a much better conductor than wort so you may wind up >transferring more power to the pipe than the wort. This is exactly what we want. We want to power the pipe (RIMS chamber) with an induced magnetic field that will cause the shunted pipe's electrical resistance losses to manifest as heat throughout the pipe! >I rather suspect that >you will find that the losses due to resistive heating in the induction >coil and in the variac (Which is not nearly as efficient as a regular >transformer) will make this a very inefficient process overall. You suggested the variac. >Has anyone here ever heard of the KISS principle? :) Awh, that's no fun! Ron Ronald La Borde - Metairie, Louisiana - rlabor at lsumc.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 14:15:08 -0700 (PDT) From: Scott Murman <smurman at best.com> Subject: Re: Dangers of under pitching > As a really quick note, the easiest way to guess at your pitching rate > is to follow this rule: never step up the volume that the yeast get > pitched into more than 10 fold when making ales, and closer to 5 fold > for lagers. In other words, if you are making 5 gallons (19L) of ale, > pitch at least 1/10 that volume yeast starter (0.5 gallon (1.9 L)). > Aerate well. You will experience short lags, fast fermentations that > don't stick, and you'll have happy yeast to harvest. > > George De Piro (Nyack, NY) Yeah, what he said. Only I'd consider those *minimum* guidelines. (see, George and I do agree on some things). Since I've been reading the HBD, I've always been struck by what I term an inverse attention disorder. Folks seem to spend 90% of their attention worrying about 10% of the process. I'm not saying everyone is guilty of this, but many will worry about predicting their IBUs to 4 significant digits, or keeping their mash temperature within 0.1F of target, or whether they should add another 1% of Munich to their grist, but then they'll pitch a one pint starter that they worked up the night before, and stick it in a closet to ferment at goodness-knows-what temperature. The yeast is responsible for almost everything good (and often everything bad) that comes out of beer, and IMO, it should be the absolute number one priority in brewing. No matter whether you're using kits, partial mashing, or on a 30 bbl. system, you can get the best improvement in your brewing by paying more attention to your yeast. They deserve it. Build them their own little room. Spend $$ buying them neat toys. Make pagan offerings to them. Then when your S.O. and party guests comment on how much they like your latest brew, you can bask in the glow and take all the credit (and then you better get back to brewing, because the ungrateful bastards will drink all of your best beer). Once you've got your yeast consistently happy and healthy, then you can really start to experiment with different parts of your process. I know this sermon is old hat for many, but I don't think it can be repeated enough. </dismount soapbox> SM (working up a barleywine BBQ sauce recipe before I head to Europe) Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 16:24:28 -0500 From: rlabor at lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald) Subject: RE: Primary Control/Flavor Kits/Sulfur >From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com> >Wim wrote about making a RIMS heating tube section the secondary of a >transformer. While this is conceptually a fine and very interesting idea >I'm not sure I'd advocate it...... > >...............Also, the secondary is almost shorted >in this application thus the primary will look like an extremely low >impedance to the mains and there is probability that the primary will be >destroyed. The more I think about this, the more I believe you are right AJ. Upon first hearing about using the chamber itself as the secondary, well, I was charmed. The problem I think, and as you may have already understood is that to get enough heat transfer surface, one would need several turns inside the core, and this would dictate the turns ratio. The ratio would be too small causing enormous power draw from the transformer - much too much for any reasonable size unit. No, I will stick to my original design, to use a single or several turn secondary, connected by large conductors (welding cable) to the RIMS chamber that can be as long as needed for heat transfer to the wort. The chamber need not be a coil at all. It may be simply a length of straight stainless pipe. This way, the transformer design will not be constrained by chamber geometry. I am growing weary thinking about all this, so I will probably go on to the next RIMS design - let's see, hmm, microwave oven, 750 watts, seems good, high temp plastic tubing RIMS chamber, seems good, stuff into oven, seems good, now for those pesky radiation leaks... Ron Ronald La Borde - Metairie, Louisiana - rlabor at lsumc.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 19 May 98 14:43:19 -0700 From: brian_dixon at om.cv.hp.com Subject: Re: Converting grain to extract >Is there a formula for converting the amount of extract necessary to >replace a measurement of grain? For instance, if a recipe calls for 2 >pounds of Laaglander malt, can I replace that w/1 pound of Laaglander >malt extract? > >Thanks! >- -- >Mike Beatty If what you are really trying to do is to convert an all-grain recipe to an extract-based recipe, then I highly recommend (I'm the author) the article on recipe conversion in the latest issue of BrewingTechniques magazine. It'll provide a lot more info than just how to convert the base malt, including converting specialty grain and adjunct amounts, hop amounts, the expectations you should have for such a conversion, and the challenges involved in doing a good job of it. But if you are just looking for a simple conversion of the base malt (grain) to an equivalent amount of extract, then the answer is "Of course!" But you'll need a little more information first: 1. The maximum theoretical yield of the grain you will be using. Sometimes available via the distributor or manufacturer. Typical for 2-row would be 37 points per pound. 2. Your extraction efficiency for your mashing system, e.g. most home brewers have efficiencies from around 65% up to around 93% or so. It varies a lot from brewer to brewer so you really need to know what _yours_ is. 3. The yield of the extract that you are replacing. Also sometimes available from the manufacturer. Also may be available from the BrewingTechniques Market Guide (see http://www.probrewer.com/marketguide.html). Typical for dry malt extract is about 44 pts/lb, and for liquid, 36-37 pts/lb. Now for the formulae (it takes a couple of steps): Step 1) Points provided by malt Pts from malt = (lbs malt)*(max. theor. yld)*(your efficiency) Example: Given 6 lbs American 2-row at 37 pts/lb (max. theoretical yield) and an extraction efficiency of 70%, here's how many points are produced by the malt: Pts from malt = 6 lbs * 37 pts/lb * 0.70 = 155.4 pts Now you need to provide this many points with _extract_ so the contribution will be the same. The formula is simple: Step 2) Pounds of extract required Lbs Extract Req'd = (Pts from malt) / (extract pts per lb) Continuing the example, and assuming dry extract at 44 pts/lb: Lbs Extract Req'd = 155.4 pts / 44 pts per lb = 3.5 lbs of extract Good luck! Brian Dixon Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 19 May 98 16:45:56 CDT From: jwilkins at wss.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson) Subject: Yeast pitching rates If the correct pitching rate for a lager is 400 ml per hectoliter (26.42 gal.) for a 1.048 wort and for an ale is half that, then, by my calculations, the correct rate for 9 gallons of 1.053 wort would be about 150 ml for lager and 75 ml for ale or about 2 1/2 US ounces. I recently brewed 9 gallons of 1.053 OG ale and pitched a yeast slurry that was almost 1 inch thick at the bottom of a 1 gallon jug. The jug was about 6 inches in diameter. By my calculations that should have been about 15 ounces of yeast solids. Even allowing for error of estimation of the thickness of the yeast, walls of the jug, non-flat bottom of the jug, and trub in the yeast, I would think I would have had at least 7 ounces of yeast. I pitched this yeast in an essentially unaerated wort as I had read Tracy Aquilla's article in BT. The only aeration the wort received was in running it from the CF chiller to the fermenter. I fermented at about 63-64F for two weeks and had a final SG of 1.020. The yeast was Wyeast 1968, by the way. I have come to expect at least 75% apparent attenuation with 1968 when the wort is well aerated and with fermentation temps in the low 60's. I would have expected a final SG of about 1.013. I would seem that with 2-3 times the recommended pitching rate I would have had better results. I have had similar results with unaerated worts poured to the yeast cake of previous batches which I am sure exceeded the recommended 2 1/2 ounces of solids. Are my calculations wrong? I realize there can be other things involved but I have not had good luck getting good attenuation without wort aeration no matter how much yeast I have used. I know I have made no controlled experiments and don't intend to claim I have disproved G. Fix's assertions about pitching rates but am curious as to what is going on in my case. Any good ideas? Perhaps I have made some stupid calculation errors (it wouldn't be the first time). If so, I would appreciate having that pointed out to me. Puzzled in Grapevine, John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins at wss.dsccc.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 18:49:33 -0500 From: "David Johnson" <dmjalj at inwave.com> Subject: Rhubarb Brewers, Has anyone here used rhubarb in beer? I have seen recipes for rhubarb mead and wine. It seems that it might be a way to make a pseudo form of one of the sour beer styles. I made a cranberry pwit beer a couple of years ago and it turned out rather well with a good level of sourness but not a lot of cranberry flavor. There was enough orangeness that it couldn't pass as a straight wit beer, But most people who were told it was a cranberry beer said it didn't taste like cranberries. So the redness created expectations that were not met. (people drink with their eyes). Rhubarb is not as red, and has a flavor that blends well with almost anything. So I figure it is worth a try. I propose making my previous pwit recipe except I would use 2 lbs. of rhubarb (Stems Only) Cut the stems in half inch size, freeze, and steam them just before adding them. I would add them shortly after high krausen with some pectic enzyme. What do you think? I was thinking this could also work in other psour styles. Dave Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 20:05:01 -0300 (GMT-0300) From: Jorge Blasig - IQ <gisalb at elmer.fing.edu.uy> Subject: Home malting I have recently read several posts about home malting and crystal malt preparation. In fact, I have prepared crystal malt following the procedures suggested by Ken Schwartz, KennyEddy and Dave Burley, and it worked pretty good. It works just as they say. I have a question though now. I am a little mixed up because sometimes certain malts receive several names. I believe caramel malt is the same as crystal. Am I right? If not, I believe it would be helpful that somebody sends a post indicating the names of different kind of malt (those which have several names). I need to prepare carapils. Is it the same as dextrine? I need the procedure to prepare carapils. Any suggestions? Jorge Blasig Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 21:51:09 -0500 From: Scott Braker-Abene <skotrat at wwa.com> Subject: Re: AHA competition question Christopher Peterson Wote: > I sent a couple of beers to the national AHA competition this year (first >time). I thought it was strange that they request only one beer for the >first round, but three for the finals. Well this is because it is easier to screw up your beer with someone elses and get it into another category in the first round. You see if you send only one bottle of your best stout that you worked your ass off to make wonderful and let's just say it won all the local competitions that you entered it in and even the local Brew Pub Brew Master said it was one of the finest examples of dry stout he has ever tasted. That right there makes it easier for the AHA weazles to take that one bottle of your finest dry stout and say enter it into... Hmmm let's say the American Dark lager Flight of the First Round. >This seems backwards to me since so >few beers make it to the final round. Is one beer enough? How many judges >actually evaluate each entry in the first round? Any other info appreciated. How many Judges evaluate the beer? Well the AHA nationals uses the terms evaluate and judge very loosely. Of all the times I have enterd the nationals (3 times to be exact) they have somehow screwed up my entry in every one in some way er another. When the beer was put into the category it was meant to (and yes I filled out all the labels and entry form right... I even have xeroxs to prove it) it then got to the great judges. These judges are nothing like the judges that I get in regular comps... I don't get Al K. (who is an excellent Judge) or Ed Bronson (Another truly excellent judge), I get a bunch of novices... That don't fill out the score sheet and have no freaking idea of what a style is really to be. Guys that take off points on a weiss beer for have no noticable hop bitterness and hop aroma. Guys that tell me that the clove taste in the same weiss beer is an obvious infection... Why should any of us spend $9 plus on an entry for beer to be judged poorly? As for why they want 3 bottles in the 2nd round... They need the bottles! I haven't vented like this in a while and I now feel great! I need a beer.. C'ya! -Scott "God I love Plaid and P Babcock wears it well.." Abene ################################################################ # ThE-HoMe-BrEw-RaT # # Scott Abene <skotrat at wwa.com> # # http://miso.wwa.com/~skotrat (the Homebrew "Beer Slut" page) # # # # # # "The More I know About Beer, The More I Don't Need The AHA" # ################################################################ Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 23:11:50 -0400 From: "Mark S. Johnston" <msjohnst at talon.net> Subject: Wort pumps to handle boiling Ron posted: >>My intentions are to use this pump for >>recirculation, sparge, whirlpool, as well as knockout, the whole deal. >Let's see: > Recirculation, well, at most mashout 170f, not boiling. > Sparge, about same, 170, or so. > Whirlpool, hmm, maybe, if you hose down the boiling kettle just >after knockout, you can quickly drop 10 degrees off in seconds. >I have heard others mention boiling temps, but I can not find a need, >maybe there is some reason, but I can not reason why. I use the pump for whirlpool and knockout as well. However, I sanitize it and the hoses by recirculating boiling wort through it for the last 10 to 15 minutes of the boil. By inserting the end of the hose beneath the surface, there is no splashing. (Yes, the pump and hoses are clean prior to this recirc.) I could also see someone pumping wort through a counterflow chiller, depending upon their equipment design. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 01:12:10 -0400 From: "Capt. Marc Battreall" <batman at terranova.net> Subject: RE: SS Cleaner Stacy Groene wants to know about "Barkeeper's Friend" in HBD2714: Stacy, I don't know for sure if that particular brand has what you would call a specific cleaner for stainless steel. If they do, I am unaware of it, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist for sure. I have been bartending off and on since I was legal age, and I certainly have done my fair share of cleaning things, but the only product by that name I have ever seen was merely a scouring powder similar to Comet or Ajax. I do remember though, that it rinses alot clearer and I think it doesn't leave a chalky film despite the fact that it is similar in compostion to the above named products. It may not be designed specifically for stainles, but it will work. Maybe there is someone in the collective that knows for sure. Cheers, Marc - -- Captain Marc Battreall Backcountry Brewhouse Islamorada, Florida Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 01:01:30 -0700 From: Jeremy Bergsman <jeremybb at leland.Stanford.EDU> Subject: March Pump Kenneth Sullivan asks about a March pump: I also bought a March pump from C+H. When people say to keep these filled with water, they mean while it's in use. In other words, it must be downhill from its source (these will not self prime), and the inlet and outlet must be opened to allow water to fill the housing before it is turned on. I got 3 years of use out of mine before the (used) gasket needed replacing, but this is obviously chance from pump to pump. I found that when there is no gap between the two parts of the housing is when it would start to leak--the gasket was no longer thick enough that the halves were compressing it when they were brought together. I found a new gasket for ~$1. Have you actually found that it leaks? From what you wrote it sounds OK. If it does leak I think it's the part where there is no gap rather than the part where there isn't. When mine first started to leak I was able to get a couple more brews out of it by wrapping the gasket with teflon tape before assembly. BTW, I would suggest removing the pump head after every brew-- there's no orientation where all the water will drain out and I found algae growing in there after a long brewing hiatus. - -- Jeremy Bergsman jeremybb at leland.stanford.edu http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~jeremybb Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 20 May 98 08:02:17 EDT From: Phil Tully <TXPHIL at VMETH5.OSSD.GIS.ML.COM> Subject: re:Pin Lock Keg Woes I own both pin and ball lock kegs and obtaining parts is generally not a proble m. Any local Homebrew shops should be able to order the parts from a wholesale r. Looking at my wholesale catalog from FOX equipment show pages of parts for both types. regards Phil Tully Owner Tully's Brew N Barrel. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 07:55:53 -0500 (CDT) From: Samuel Mize <smize at prime.imagin.net> Subject: Pumps; fruit flies; close-out Greetings to all, and especially to: - - - - - > From: blacksab at midwest.net (Harlan Bauer) > Subject: High temperature pumps > ... high temperature pumps ... > at least one that can handle boiling liquids made > of polysulphone. Boy, talk about adjuncts... - - - - - > From: "David Johnson" <dmjalj at inwave.com> > Subject: Driving me Buggy > ...fruit flies... > I have gotten the potential food sources and > breeding sites cleared up but they are just hanging around. I have > considered the "no-pest-strips" but they are not to be used around food > storage. The only thing left in that room are capped beer and corked wine. > Can the insecticide permeate the corks? I can't imagine it would. You could also go by a feed store and get some of the yellow fly strips they use in stables. I don't think these have an insecticide on them, they're just paper with a sticky sweet-smelling goo on them. They come rolled up in a little tube. There are several brands. I don't know the proper name for the product, but I never even get a weird look asking for "those yellow fly strips you hang up." - - - - - > From: brewshop at coffey.com (Jeff Sturman) > Subject: calling it quits Sorry to hear it -- I hope you do well in the future. Best, Sam Mize - -- Samuel Mize -- smize at imagin.net (home email) -- Team Ada Fight Spam - see http://www.cauce.org/ Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 08:42:20 From: Ted Major <tidmarsh at mindspring.com> Subject: Re: Pin Lock Keg Woes >Problem: one of the kegs had bad poppets. >Bigger Problem: they were Coca Cola kegs. >I have been unsuccessful in locating replacement poppets for these kegs. >One source told me that these were proprietary parts, and that there was a >legal problem here. > >Can anybody in HBD-land shed any light on this subject??? Should I dump >these kegs and start over? > >Thanks! Much depends on the manufacturer of your kegs. I have pin-lock (Coke) kegs made by both Firestone (black rubber) and Cornelius (red rubber). Look at the engraving on the side of your kegs to see whether they are Cornelius or Firestone. The Cornelius poppet valves are the same for their ball-lock and pin-lock kegs, so I've been able to get parts for those from my local homebrew shop. For the Firestone kegs, I was referred by the local shop to Williams Brewing (http://www.williamsbrewing.com), and from looking at their web page, they seem to have the right poppet vavles for either keg. I've no affiliation with Williams and have never ordered from them, but I've seen them recommended in this forum from time to time. Cheers, Tidmarsh Major, Birmingham, Alabama tidmarsh at mindspring.com "Bot we must drynk as we brew, And that is bot reson." -The Wakefield Master, Second Shepherds' Play Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 08:52:17 -0500 (CDT) From: Steve Piatz <piatz at cray.com> Subject: Re: BW in kegs, all-grain monsters In HBD #2716 Ray Estrella asks about where I came across the comment that some beers are better bottle conditioned. > A friend and brewer of many gold medal winning BWs told me that >he was just reading something about them need true bottle conditioning >for proper flavor development, but I do not know where he saw it. >Are you out there Steve? > While I don't have total recall like some other posters to the HBD, one place I saw comments about bottle conditioning was in "The Analysis of Brewing Techniques" by Fix and Fix. I think it is in the later part of the book and as I recall they do give some references. Eric Warner in his book on Wheat beer also comments on bottle conditioning of that style yielding a smoother product. In the case of Warner, I just read it last night while preparing for an BJCP Exam Prep class I am leading. I have left barley wines in the keg for a very long time (I think I still have a 1995 version in a keg). My kegs are in the basement at 55F to 65F. When (if) I bottle I try to prime at a low level with corn sugar - it will take a while but they do carbonate. - -- Steve Piatz Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 10:15:20 -0400 (EDT) From: Joe Rolfe <onbc at shore.net> Subject: Re: pumps just one word of caution while using any pumps in a brewer (small or large). Be very carefull of the discharge outlet and pressure. I would suggest hard plumbing the outlet of the pump over soft hose in ALL cases. Hot wort/caustic and acid can cause quite a bit of discomfort (putting it mildly). if you do choose to soft plumb insure you have a quick exit from the area in the event of a hose bursting or a coupling coming loose. but you guys/gals knew this anyway - right?? good luck and great brewing joe rolfe Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 14:28:55 GMT From: marnold at netnet.net (Matthew Arnold) Subject: Dangers of contamination: dry vs. liquid yeast Many people say that dry yeast is inherently (or, more likely to be) contaminated than liquid yeast. I wonder if this statement can still be made or if tests have been run on products from Lallemand, et al. My concern with liquid yeast has been that even though I know the smack-pack I buy has a pure culture inside, once I open it, all bets are off. I try to keep everything as clean and sanitized as possible, but my kitchen is hardly a laboratory. My question is: where is the greater danger? Using dry yeast which may be contaminated, but doesn't need a starter due to the large amount of viable yeast, or, using liquid yeast which will need to be stepped up a couple of times (with the chances of contamination that come in with every step)? My main concern would be with the first step-up from smack-pack to starter. Obviously, that's the smallest number of cells and thus the greatest chance for an infection to overrun the starter. It would seem to be that the primary benefit of "pitchable" yeast (whether Wyeast XL or White Labs) would be helping to eliminate the possibility of an infection taking hold in that first starter. Any thoughts? Matt - ----- Webmaster, Green Bay Rackers Homebrewers' Club http://www.rackers.org info at rackers.org Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 10:40:44 -0400 From: "Peter J. Calinski" <PCalinski at iname.com> Subject: Fruit Flies, Temp Control, Label removal > ------------------------------ > > Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 08:24:30 -0500 > From: "David Johnson" <dmjalj at inwave.com> > Subject: Driving me Buggy > > Brewers, > I have acquired a slight problem. I typically store fruit and vegetables > in an area in my basement which is adjacent to the area I brew in. It also > happens to be the area where I cellar my beer and wine. This winter, the > onions, carrots and potatoes have become infested with fruit flies. I have > gotten rid of the fruit and vegetables but the flies have not figured out > where they want to go. I don't really want to brew until I have gotten rid > of them. Any suggestions? I have gotten the potential food sources and Well, I had the same problem but the flies didn't show until I started the fermentation. The air lock made a great fly trap. I had to empty it many times a day. After a while, they stopped getting trapped. Either I caught them all or they left for greener pastures. I'm not sure which but I suspect the former. I don't have a really good solution for you but I will say the batch came out OK; no contamination. > ------------------------------ > > Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 10:26:44 EDT > From: KennyEddy <KennyEddy at aol.com> > Subject: Electric Brewing / Gott Coolers > (Snip) > Finally, you have to deal with controlling the elements. Simple on-off > control is great if you're lucky enough to get the right level of boiling > action without a boilover. Chances are though that you'll need to throttle > one element as a "fine adjust" of the boiling vigor. Hi-power dimmer switches > can be found but are somewhat expensive. Simple switched-diode controllers > can be used with some success but only offer off/half/full power control. Can't one adapt an electric range surface burner control? As I recall, I took one apart quite a few years ago. In those days (which, given the way manufactures stick with success means these days also) the burner was cycled on and off based on the temperature of a little heating coil under the knob of the control (not the temperature of the surface burner). Upping the temperature setting put more pressure on the bimetallic strip next to the coil thus requiring the coil to be energized for a longer time. The surface burner was energized whenever the coil was energized. Thus, the surface burner is running open loop. If you will, the loop is closed by the human. If the pot is heating too slow, the human turns up the knob. Then the coil duty cycle increases. As I recall, the cycle times were on the order of a minute depending on knob setting. You can observe (hear) this by listening carefully to the surface burner control You'll hear it click on and off. Or, turn on the stove and observe your house power watt-hour meter. You'll see the rate of rotation vary as the control cycles on and off. > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 12:31:06 -0400 (EDT) > From: Jeff Poretsky <jeffp at access.digex.net> > Subject: beer label removal (again) > > A question for the list. > > I was collecting bottles of beers that I've had. The collection is getting > too large for my small apartment, so I want to just save the lables. > > How does one remove these hermitically sealed lables? :) Ammonia. I have been saving the labels for years. Have over 150. Here is my system. I saved a large plastic pretzel "jar" with a wide mouth and enough depth (~15") to hold a bottle. Saved the jar lid also. Filled the jar about 3/4 full (need room for the bottle to fit without overflow) with an ammonia solution (don't remember the concentration-- maybe 2 parts H2O to one part ammonia) and replaced the lid. When ever I have a beer I haven't had before, bring home the bottle. I put it in the jar and replace the lid. (The lid pushes the bottle down so the label is submerged.) Maybe in an hour, maybe in four hours, the label is loose. (It is very temperature dependent. I keep it in the garage so in the summer it is fast, in the winter very slow.) I have noticed that the European bottles are very fast (straight H2O would work fine) but the American bottles are as you say "hermetically sealed". I have had a problem with some metallic coated labels such as the Yuengling Black & Tan. The metal comes off the label before the label comes off the bottle. If you keep the lid on tight all the time, the solution will last for months however it gets pretty cruddy. > I've tried boiling water, water with bleach, and a few other variants of > the first two. > > Any help would be appreciated. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 11:08:26 -0700 From: George_De_Piro at berlex.com Subject: More yeast pitching Hi all, Dan M. writes: "Repitching is an easy and economical way to get the best performance out of your yeast. With better beer as a byproduct, why would anyone not practice this procedure?" There is one very simple reason: I don't always brew with the same strain over and over again! Of course, what Dan says is correct, if you want to brew with the same yeast several times and your technique is very sanitary, and you're timely about harvesting, etc. Whenever I make a strong beer I make a normal gravity beer a week in advance using the same yeast (sort of a giant, consumable yeast starter). Pitching a huge amount of yeast really is the only way to make a strong beer well. There are many times that I don't reuse the yeast though. Bavarian Weizen yeasts are so distinctive that they are tough to use on other styles. An ESB just isn't quite right when fermented with a nice Weizen yeast. For those times, you are obligated to make up a large starter. It really isn't hard, and you can get more cells than Dan's #'s simply by providing some extra oxygen to the starter. Agitation is good to. Have fun! George De Piro (Nyack, NY) (George^2??) Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 10:17:52 -0500 From: rlabor at lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald) Subject: RE: Wort Pump & boiling temps >From: "Raymond Johnson" <JOHNSONR2 at state.mi.us> >By using the pump to send boiling hot wort through the CF chiller(before >starting the water), the coils can be sanitized, and the wort returned to >the kettle before starting the whirlpool. Anyone who has plans to >purchase a pump, should do themselves a favor and get one that handles >boiling temps. For the difference in price, it ain't worth the pain of >regret should the need arise for a pump that can. >Just friendly advice from a guy who's been there--cheers. Yup, I am convinced. I too am a believer, you guys did a great job of convincing me! Yes, the pump to get is one that can handle boiling temps. I could not find a need, I asked, and I received -- thanks everyone who responded, and my hat off to the HBD. Ron Ronald La Borde - Metairie, Louisiana - rlabor at lsumc.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 10:28:08 -0500 From: rlabor at lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald) Subject: RE: Starting the starter >From: Jay Spies <spiesjl at mda.state.md.us> >I am having a hell of a time trying to figure out the >correct ratio of DME to water. Am I missing something here, or why don't you just take hydrometer readings and notes? One thing I found is that it takes a while for all the DME to completely dissolve, so allow some time and stir. Ron Ronald La Borde - Metairie, Louisiana - rlabor at lsumc.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 10:41:19 -0500 From: rlabor at lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald) Subject: RE: electrocution >From: Samuel Mize <smize at prime.imagin.net> >> From: rlabor at lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald) >> Subject: RE: Primary Control/Flavor Kits/Sulfur >> Any apparatus can be dangerous, propane can explode, burn your clothes, >> all life is a risk, breathing Mexican fire haze is bad also, but we go >> on and breathe anyhow. We survive. >Well, yeah, we do, until we don't. >I'd just as soon go with proven concepts and commercial components, >myself, in something carrying a strong electrical current. >Anyone AJ can discourage probably SHOULD be discouraged from tinkering >up a home-built heating transformer dingus. We don't want someone >half-taught to fry himself because "it sounded so easy..." Absolutely true, no one should be fooling around with all this unorthodox apparatus unless they know what they are doing, have no doubts about any aspect of it, are somewhat crazy, and are impossibly curious. The Curies played around with radiation, discovered x-rays, became great famous scientists, changed the world as we know it, but killed themselves eventually in the process. Ron Ronald La Borde - Metairie, Louisiana - rlabor at lsumc.edu Return to table of contents
Date: 20 May 1998 12:38:46 -0400 From: EFOUCH at steelcase.com Subject: SILENCE! or Defending my Honor HBD- It seems like this isn't the first time a post was entitled "Eric Fouch and Civility". After the last one, I promised I wouldn't post public defenses to my actions, but I have received two e-mails expressing concerns over my distaste of people of perceived (by me) lesser stature in life, and seeming endorsement of a caste system. Allow me to elucidate: The biggest problem with my communication skills is that I sometimes don't feel the need to explain myself. Here we go.... I never said I have a problem with people who have menial or "lousy" jobs. I implied that I have a problem with people who don't do their "lousy" jobs well. No, my daddy didn't put me through college. I put me through college. I put me through college by doing "lousy" jobs. But I did them well. When I was scraping gum off the floor at Woolworths with a putty knife, and was asked a question by a customer, rather than just make something up like "that's seasonal, so we don't have it now", I got up, and found the manager and got the correct answer. I've slung burgers, mixed mortar, stocked shelves, and wacked weeds with a scythe. Always to the best of my ability. If the guy I insulted because I said he couldn't cut it flippin' burgers, *could* cut it flippin' burgers, he would end up moving up the corporate ladder at the restaurant instead of inflicting his incompetence on the customers at his next place of short term employment. I *DO* think I'm better than this person, because I care enough about whatever job I have (or had) to do it well. Now you see why I don't tend to explain myself. There. That oughta keep the guy who *could* cut it flippin' burgers from spitting in my Big Mac. (oooppps!) Now if you'll excuse me, I have a golf date with the Emperor. (He hates it when I'm late and don't let him win) Sorry for the wasted bandwith. One of the complaintants suggested an apology might be in order. OK. Apology accepted. Eric Fouch Sensitivity Trainee Bent Dick YoctoBrewery Kentwood MI P.S. I don't think I'm an "*ssh*ol*", or that I make the world a "sh*tty pl*ce", just becuase I demand good service. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 17:01:37 GMT From: stencil at bcn.net (stencil) Subject: Delta-T revisited The idea of pumping heavy low-voltage current through a conductive portion of a RIMS's recirc path may not be unrealistic, especially for those who seek kinder, gentler heating. To boost 30 pounds (10# grain, 13 qt water) at around a degree a minute requires 1800 BTU per hour, or about 600 watts. A ten-foot length of 3/8-in copper tubing has an interior area of around 120 square inches (using Arkansas Metric pi = 3.0); a soothing 5 watts per square inch. Such tubing has roughly the same weight per foot (0.2#) as AWG1 wire and so presumably the same resistance, about 0.15 milliohms per foot. That ten-foot length, around 1-1/2 milliohms, would dissipate 600 watts at just under a volt applied. So, how to push 600 amperes down the length? The reasonable paradigm would seem to be the despised soldering gun. Our tubing is represented by the (relatively) high-resistance tip and current is provided by a transformer with a single-turn secondary consisting of a length of heavy-wall brass tubing flattened in the middle and bent into a narrow U. The flattening is important not just for ease of forming but also because a hollow tube makes a poor secondary winding: too many flux lines fail to impinge on a conductor. Note that there is no ferromagnetic core; just a plastic bobbin on the flattened tube and a few hundred turns of magnet wire on it. A fair approximation of this would be to flatten an 8-in length of 3/4 or 1-in OD copper tubing, perhaps even doubling it over, and winding the primary - 150 turns - on it over a suitably insulated bobbin. This would then be attached near the ends of the liquid tube, making the straight bar on a D-shape; the tube could be coiled and given insulating sleeving or spacers so the turns don't short out. The weak part is the attachment between the tube and the "bar" secondary. The connection must be very low-resistance to avoid localized overheating. Stainless steel tubing, while harder to work and connect - you'd want to gas-weld lugs to it - would have the advantage of higher resistance. ======= stencil - hand-mashing with gas in the Berkshires ======= Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 20 May 98 13:44:09 est From: paa3983 at dscp.dla.mil (Mike Spinelli) Subject: steam injection pointers HBDers, Can any of you steam injectors provide some pointers on setting up a steam injection system for my 1 barrel system? I plan on using the steam to increase the temps. in 60 pound mashes. My mash tun is SS and I plan on adding a Trend thermometer and coupling on the side. Will a run-of-the-mill department store pressure cooker be big enough to boost up a 60 pound mash? Reason I ask is one of our club members had the brass ones to make a steam cooker out of a half barrel keg ! : o. When he firef that thing up the noise it created was unlike anything I've heard. I hope I don't need a rig that big. Thanks Mike Spinelli Mikey's Monster Brew Cherry Hill NJ Return to table of contents
Date: 20 May 1998 11:55:38 -0600 From: "Andrew Avis" <Andrew.Avis.0519423 at nt.com> Subject: Liquid Decoctions Brewers, I apologize if this topic has been covered before, but I haven't seen it in the last year. I've just moved up to 38 litre batches from 19 litres, and when doing my first "large" brew last weekend I discovered that 21# of grain & 6 gals of water leave no room for subsequent additions of boiling water in my 10 gal cooler. I resorted to drawing off about 1 gal of runnings, bringing it to ~190F, and then adding it back to the mash to hit my temps & mashout. (First rest was at 145 - I was aiming for 152, but miscalculated heat loss during transfer of the hot water. Next rest was 154F. Mashout was 165F.) I have never seen a discussion of this technique before - everything I've read suggests boiling water additions to raise mash temps (or decocting a thick portion of mash). Does this method present a problem, especially when going from a low temp rest? I don't know much about mash chemistry, but I'm guessing that there is a lot of starch in solution, as well as enzymes and tiny bits of grain - which is why I didn't boil the runnings (plus the fact I did not want excessive carmel flavour). So I'm wondering if this technique has any drawbacks with regards to 1) killing enzymes 2) doing something to the starch and 3) creating off flavours. If not, does anyone have a simple formula for calculating how much runnings should be drawn off, raised to a specific temp, and then added back to hit a target temp? Thanks for any advice. Andrew Avis Calgary, Alberta Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 05/21/98, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96