---

	FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
		Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org
		Many thanks to the Observer & Eccentric Newspapers of 
		Livonia, Michigan for sponsoring the Homebrew Digest.
				URL: http://www.oeonline.com


Contents:
  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

---