---

	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: Maris Otter (gertchie)
  innoculation loop lifespan (Scott Murman)
  10% sucrose - more info... (Joe Rolfe)
  Mashing efficiency $ pH? (John S Thompson)
  New system questions (Cory Chadwell Page Navigation)
  Bottled O2 Adapter Availability (Bob.Sutton)
  33 Points per Pound per Gallon, Breast Pumps, College Brewing (Dan Listermann)
  Homebrewing presentation (Lou.Heavner)
  Home dispense systems (Gail Elber)
  More on alcohol Measurement (AJ)
  Mash pH questions and answers Part 1 (Dave Burley)
  Mash pH and first All-Grain Part 3 (Dave Burley)
  Mash pH questions and answers part 2 (Dave Burley)
  ASBC Alcohol (AJ)
  Re: Kitchen Strainers ("Tim Green")
  Rowan berries (in wine) (Malcolm Purves)
  Rice Hulls: when to add ? (LEAVITDG)
  Biere de Garde (Rick Georgette)
  Bicarbonate Water (CRHammond)
  Re: fridge fans (Jeff Renner)
  Water Analysis (AJ)
  Enamel Pot repair? ("Donald D. Lake")
  re: Overdid the mashout? (Alan McKay)
  College Brewer/Electric Brewery ("Shane Brauner")
  RE:AIRPLANE BEERS ("Rob Ball")
  RIMS/HERMS survey (MicahM1269)
  one barrel RIMS (Dan Kasen)
  Valves (ThomasM923)


Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!

Enter The Mazer Cup! _THE_ mead competition.
Details available at http://hbd.org/mazercup
Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org

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!

Contact brewery at hbd.org for information regarding the "Cat's Meow"

Back issues are available via:

  HTML from...
        http://hbd.org
  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

COPYRIGHT for the Digest as a collection is currently held by hbd.org 
  (Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen). Digests in their entirity CANNOT be 
  reprinted/reproduced without this entire header section unless 
  EXPRESS written permission has been obtained from hbd.org. Digests
  CANNOT be reprinted or reproduced in any format for redistribution
  unless said redistribution is at absolutely NO COST to the consumer.
COPYRIGHT for individual posts within each Digest is held by the
  author. Articles cannot be extracted from the Digest and
  reprinted/reproduced without the EXPRESS written permission of the 
  author. The author and HBD must be attributed as author and source in
  any such reprint/reproduction. (Note: QUOTING of items originally
  appearing in the Digest in a subsequent Digest is exempt from the
  above. Home brew clubs NOT associated with organizations having a
  commercial interest in beer or brewing may republish articles in their
  newsletters and/or websites provided that the author and HBD are
  attributed. ASKING first is still a great courtesy...)

JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)


----------------------------------------------------------------------


Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 09:22:28 -0700
From: gertchie at earthlink.net
Subject: Re: Maris Otter


Hi, Chief.

I've used Hugh Baird Marris Otter for the last 4 years, and I really
like it. I'll tell you what I know about it. The HB Marris Otter Pale
malt is rated at 3L, and I would describe it's character as rich,
malty, slightly dextrinous. I love it for all my special bitters, ESBs,
& porters. I've never computed the extraction efficiency that I get,
but a typical 10-gallon batch of special bitter (or pale ale) will
have 22# Marris Otter, 2# 17L Hugh Baird crystal, and 2# Hugh Baird
55L crystal. Using a single step infusion  at 152F I usually end up with
an OG of 1.058 and an FG of 1.017.

- --Doug
gertchie at earthlink.net


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 08:49:17 -0800 (PST)
From: Scott Murman <smurman at best.com>
Subject: innoculation loop lifespan


How long does a typical innoculation loop last?  Mine looks like it's
about had it.  The loop is pitted and brittle.  I've had it for a few
years probably, and I use it quite a bit.  It's tungsten I believe.
Is there a better material from the price-performance point of view?
I don't mind replacing it every few years, but I'd rather replace it
every decade or so.

 -SM-



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 12:38:31 -0500
From: Joe Rolfe <rolfe at sky.sky.com>
Subject: 10% sucrose - more info...

To clarify some of the points Alan Meeker asked about:

>I have a couple of questions for you. Do you have any data on the
>percent viability of the long term storage yeasts you were trying to
>"reanimate"?
No, unfortunate as it is, I have not done much with the tubes as to
counting before and after.  One of these days if I get some time I may
check this out. I would venture to guess Mblue would not be the way I
would attempt it.  The stuff is just very unreliable with older cells.
I would have to go with a slide type viability test to get better
numbers. I wonder if Dave Whitman wants to add this media to his
running test.;)

>The fact that you couldn't get a culture going from a loop
>and had to instead use the whole tube seems a bit worrisome, sounds like
>you're getting one helluva lot of cell death.

No doubt most cells were probably in bad shape, a few did come back
from one loop full. Again the counting would really help out here. My
most favorite one did come back quickly, one of the ones that had a
tough time was not stored as long as this one. One that had trouble
was a bottom yeast but so was the one that cam back quickly. I also
had a slow start on a top yeast and a resonably fast start on a
different top yeast. All I know is if one is in good health - I would
consider it a sucess, but yes I was having a fit (I think i need to
relax and have more homebrew) for a few days waiting for them to kick
in.  Most of the ones I have restarted are not easily gotten from
wyeast or breweries.

LAMBADA(bottom yeast) - came right back.
VIT(bottom yeast) - came right back.
CARBONE(bottom yeast) - real slow - still struggling with this one
after 3 weeks.
WY2206 - lots of trouble, gave up on this one - repurchased, have a
half dozen more tubes to try.
LeCheval(top yeast) - came right back.
DeKoninck(top yeast) - real slow, first 3 ferments where slow to
start, but seems to be running fine now.

Visually - in the tube the films of yeast were about the same as was
the volume of sucrose in the tubes.
All are sitting in starters for a brew of Budwieser (no flames pleez)
like beer this Sat.  That will be the acid test for me to see how the
flavors come out.  I sampled the starters the other day and all seemed
well.  Need to look at them under the scope and replate for storage.
Over the next year or so I will pull the remainder (about 50 others)
out and see what is going on with them. Most of the the remainder are
wyeast and maybe a dozen are specials.


>Were these the samples that had been stored away for several years? 

Yes most since around 1991. But the one that was most trouble was only
under since 1994/95. Which leads me to believe that they might have
been in poor health when they went under.   

>Is there any airspace in the tubes you are storing in? In Rose's article
>on yeast handling he recommended filling tubes with sterile paraffin oil,
>perhaps to help exclude oxygen. I wonder if this would help in maintaining
>viability?

The tubes had a little variation in volumes but had quite alot of
headspace. This was something I was wondering about, but from my talks
with Rajotte when he was finding info from Europe about this method
for his book, the yeast basically goes to 'sleep' without much growth
if any. From my notes and a few articles I have there was little
mentioned about headspace.  More was spoken about evaporation.  When I
put these strains back under I will do a normal and low headspace side
by side.


Thanx for the info on the giant colony, I was a tad 'cheap' on the
agar in the plate.

Good Luck and Great Brewing
Joe Rolfe


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 11:40:27 -0600 (CST)
From: John S Thompson <jthomp6 at unix1.sncc.lsu.edu>
Subject: Mashing efficiency $ pH?


Hello all...

The last three batches I've mashed have had alarmingly low efficiency. I
treat my water with gypsum and lactic acid to acidify (both mash and
sparge water). I'm wondering if my pH is too low, and how this could
adversely affect my extraction efficiency. I have these little pH strips,
but they're terribly difficult to read accurately. (The difference between
5.6, 5.3, and 5.0 is almost unnoticable.) Could a mash that is too acidic
lower efficiency significantly? I probably got 40% or 50% efficiency (at
best) last night...

Thanks.
John



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 Feb 99 12:32:59 -0600
From: Cory Chadwell Page Navigation <chadwell at ssd.fsi.com>
Subject: New system questions

Hello collective,

I finally made some much needed mod's to my brewing setup.  I had previously 
tried 2 different setups and they had both driven me pretty much back to the 
ease of extract brewing.  The first was a one tier (and the ground) gravity 
fed setup which required me to lift many gallons of hot water for every stage 
of the mash.  The second was a direct fire single vessel with a perforated 
bucket as a false bottom method.  Both of these were painfully difficult to 
use but they did yield some reasonably good beers.

I now have a two tier platform and a pump from moving brews on order.  And I'm 
ready to get back into the swing.

All the recent talk about Ph forced me to check my brewing notes only to find 
I haven't ever really consided it.  So I want to run a scenario by you that I 
may use next weekend if it seems reasonable.

First I always prep my water by boiling and allowing to cool the prior night.  
Then when I'm ready to brew I'll lower the water ph to 5.7 - 5.8 (this is my 
total water supply for both mash and sparge).  I hope to lower the ph with 
lemon juice as I'll be using lemon zest in the fermentor anyway.

This is the mash schedule I'll be following.
 15 min  at  104 f
 30 min  at  153 f
 45 min  at  157 f
 mashout  at  168 f
 sparge for approx 45 min

I'm hoping the 104 f rest further decreases the ph.  Also you may notice there 
is no rest between 120-140 f I dropped that a year ago and just as one man 
unsuprising data point I've been able to raise a much better head on my beers 
ever since.

This is my planned grainbill
 16 lb 2-row
  1 lb carapils
  1 lb wheat malt
  1 lb 40 l crystal

Any suggestions are welcome so feel free to pick this apart.  :)

Secondly, I've never really cared about the alcohol content of my brews just 
the taste.  I just try to get the og in the neighborhood and ferment away.  
However with the upgrade in my setup I've interested a friend in brewing with 
me and he really wants to know exactly how much alcohol is in the finished 
product (I get the feeling he wants to brew some super strong demon beer).  
How do you determine the finished alc. content.

Public or private email welcome.
THX, Cory
- -- 

- --------------------------------------------------------------------
Cory D. Chadwell          FlightSafety International
Design Engineer           2700 N. Hemlock Circle                     
Navigation / Visual       Broken Arrow, Oklahoma 74012       /|
chadwell at ssd.fsi.com                                        /c|   -
9186919796 at mobile.att.net (text paging 150 characters)     /  |  /|
- ------------------------------------------------------  <-----s---
                                                      FSI  \  |  \|
                                                       SSD  \c|   -
                                                             \|




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 18:39:15 GMT
From: Bob.Sutton at fluordaniel.com
Subject: Bottled O2 Adapter Availability

There's no question  - the HBD community is awe-inspiring when the
need for help arises.  I want to thank everyone who responded to my
dilemma locating a Bernz-O-Matic oxygen cylinder regulating valve.
Since some folks wrote requesting that I post a summary, I'll gladly
oblige.

It turns out that several sources exist.

Brewer's Resource: http://www.brewtek.com./aerator.html
You can buy the oxygen regulator alone for $18.95; for $36.50 a HEPA
filter, stainless steel airstone and tubing comes with the regulator
(domestic orders over $50 ship free, CA sales tax).

Liquid Bread: http://www.liquidbread.com/order.htm
You can buy the oxygen regulator alone for $24.45, or the entire
(Oxynator) system for $44.45. Please note that the Oxynator system
does not include a HEPA filter (shipping/handling included, FL sales
tax)

Hoptech: http://www.hoptech.com/fermequip.html
Hoptech offers a Wort Oxygenating Kit for $29.95 comparable to the
"Oxynator". The regulator is not sold alone.(domestic orders over $50
ship free, CA sales tax).

Benz-O-Matic: http://www.bernzomatic.com/
Online commerce has not come to Bernz-O-Matic, however they do carry
links to their retail partners, if you need to locate a source for
oxygen cannisters. A suggestion was made to call the company and
request a replacement valve.

A few folks suggested checking out local mom and pop hardware stores -
I called a few in my area without success.

Although Liquid Bread sells Oxygen tanks for $16.45, the Bernz-O-Matic
tanks are available at Home Depot, Lowes, and most hardware stores for
under $7.

I opted for the Brewtek regulator as I already have all the other
hardware.

Thanks from the foothills of Sawth Caroliner !!!

Bob
Fruit Fly Brewhaus
Yesterday's Technology Today

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 13:51:22 -0500
From: Dan Listermann <72723.1707 at compuserve.com>
Subject: 33 Points per Pound per Gallon, Breast Pumps, College Brewing

Jeff Renner writes:

< Some homebrewers report 33 p*g/p. They probably lie about their golf
scores, too.>

I think that I would have to issue with Jeff here.  I operate a homebrew
shop here in Cincinnati and I think that I can safely say that, as a 
group,
homebrewers don't play much golf.

This morning a customer introduced me to a new application for Straight-A

Cleaner.  He uses it to clean the family breast pump.  He raved about the

effectivness.

Gail Elber from Brewing Techniques asks about college brewing clubs.  I
brewed my first batches in college back in '73.  They were horrible
prohibition brews and it so scarred me that I didn't brew again for 13
years.  I operate a homebrew shop about two blocks from Cincinnati's 
Xavier
University.  I thought that I would see a lot of student business, but I
get more profs, parents and maintenance men than students in here.  I 
think
they lack the a delayed gratification factor needed to brew.

Dan Listermann      dan at listermann.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 15:07:15 -0600
From: Lou.Heavner at frco.com
Subject: Homebrewing presentation

     I am in the final stage of developing a presentation on homebrewing
     for a technical audience.  I have asked for and received some input
     from the collective already.  As I put the finishing touches on it,
     I'm looking to lighten it up a bit.  I intend to include a top 10 list
     of why to homebrew a la Letterman.  Any contributions to the list
     would be appreciated as well as any nice brewing related clipart/pix
     and humorous quotes.

     Cheers!

     Lou Heavner - Austin, TX


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 13:59:44 -0800
From: Gail Elber <gail at brewtech.com>
Subject: Home dispense systems

In the May/June BrewingTechniques, we'd like to publish a little showcase
of the equipment people have built to dispense beer at home. If you have a
home draft system that involves some interesting device or technique, send
me the details. Vague recollections of other people's systems are welcome,
especially if you have a lead to help me contact them. In addition to
systems at home, I'm interested in systems you've developed for bringing to
parties or to outdoor homebrew festivals. Bring 'em on and get the glory
you deserve.

N.B.: If you want to send digital photos, we need a resolution of 300 dpi
at a reasonable size for reproduction. Analog (I don't know, what would you
call them?) photos are better.


Gail Elber
Associate Editor
BrewingTechniques
P.O. Box 3222
Eugene, OR 97403
541/687-2993
fax 541/687-8534




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 18:14:10 -0500
From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com>
Subject: More on alcohol Measurement

In response to Simon's last post: Measurement of the specific gravity of
water/ethanol solutions is the basis of the ASBC Beer-1 method. In that
case the solution is the distillate. Accordingly, ASBC has tables which
specify alcohol content (given three ways viz. w/w,v/v,grams/Liter) vs
specific gravity out to 4 or 5 decimal places. They are published in the
much less expensive methods for craftbrewers version of the MOA's. Be
interesting to compare Simon's experimental calibration curve to the
ASBC data. I'll post a couple of points as soon as I get home.

In response to Alan's comments: this method is referred to as
"ebulliometry" and is used in the wine idustry. In fact I think I
remember reading somewhere that it is the BATF's approved method for
wine. Special instruments (called "ebulliometers") which consist of two
small flasks, a lamp and a differential thermometer (measures
temperature differences precisely) are (or were) available but they are
a bit expensive. One additional twist to ebulliometric measurement is
that the residual extract in the beer depresses the boiling point as
does the alcohol so that the true extract of the beer must be determined
and a correction applied. As I mentioned in a previous post this is done
by boiling off all the alcohol, making back up to the original volume
and measuring the specific gravity. Since you have to do this anyway you
might as well throw on a head and condenser and use the gravimetric
method. You can buy all the required stuff (distilling flask, Kjeldahl
head, condenser) for less than the cost of the ebuliometer.

As I recall, DeClerk has tables both for % alcohol based on temperature
difference and the corrections for true extract.



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 21:10:23 -0500
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com>
Subject: Mash pH questions and answers Part 1

Brewsters:

Thinking that I had been crystal clear on what the mash pH for
bitter should be and how to determine it, Pete Calinsky sent me a
series of questions which proves otherwise. A couple of other
HBDers had questions also, which led me to the following format

Although this was a private e-mail Pete
suggested I publish his questions and my answers to him here,
based on the principle that if you have a question, so does
someone else, I guess. For those experienced all-grainers
I suggest you page down, as there is nothing new here, just
explained better than I did before, I hope, with surrounding detail.

Pete said:

>Now I am really confused.  I'll never get to all grain brewing.  Too 
much
>confusion.  Well, anyway I gotta try.  Please understand, my chemistry 
is
>limited to two collage courses 30 years ago.  I barely learned how to
spell
>ph, er PH, er pH.

Well I always have trouble when I try to write "Ph.D" after a discussion 
on
pH.

>Your post in HBD #2964 raised more questions in my mind than I knew
>existed. It seems to me that the pH that counts is the pH where the
>conversion is taking place, i.e. in the mash tun.  So if someone 
developed
>a good recipe, they could say: 

        "mash at xF for y minutes at a pH of z."

>It seems this is the ideal information to reproduce the recipe however, 
I
>would be lost.  I would have questions like:

>1) Should I try to set the pH of the strike water before heating it?  If

>so, to what since the pH will change as it heats up then cools when 
mixed
>with the grain?

No as I said in my earlier HBD comments, set the pH AFTER
the dough in (i.e. mixing the grain and water). The pH of the
liquor (brewing water) has no relevance to the pH of the mash.

>2) Should I set the pH at the strike temp?  But this is higher than the
>mash temperature so how do I compensate?

No, the pH is ALWAYS measured at Room Temperature to
be practical. It is true that the pH goes lower as the temperature
goes up, but don't worry about it. Just use the values you find
in the literature, typically 5.5-5.7 for infusion mashes with British
malts. Allowing the pH to be too high - say above 5.8 will prodice
a darker wort after boiling.  Too low a pH, say below 5.0 will 

cripple the saccharification enzymes and you will have an
extract efficiency reduction and perhaps poor yeast growth.

>3) Won't the combination of water and grains alter the pH?  It seems to 
me
>that there has to be an effect.  If I just added grain to neutral water,

>wouldn't the pH change?  It seems it could also depend on the types of
>grains although I don't know to what extent.

Yes the grains have lots of phosphate buffers and the like.
 If you used distilled water, the pH of a mash of pale malts
would come to pH = 5.8 or thereabouts.  Higher kilned ( darker)
 grains/malts in the grist would lower the pH. As an aside
low mineral content waters like in Pilsnen produce a mash
with the pH on the high side, sometimes even 5.8.

end of Part 1

Keep on Brewin'

Dave Burley

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 21:10:58 -0500
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com>
Subject: Mash pH and first All-Grain Part 3

Brewsters:

Part 3

Experienced all-grainers please page down

Pete says:

>Maybe I am making too much of this.  I have no idea what the magnitude 
of
>the effects might be -- not even an inkling.  

>I hope you can take the time to lead me in the right direction.

Well, a journey begins with a single step. To make 5 gallons, 

buy 8 pounds of pale *ale* malt, 1 pound of crystal malt have
it milled. Wet it down in your mash tun with hot water ( 180F)
stirring until you get it to 155F. Try to  add  about 1.5 quarts per
pound. If you see that you are not going to make it, finish the
last additions with boiling water and lots of stirring or heat
separately. Mix in gypsum ( calcium sulfate) 1/2 tsp at a
time with stirring until the pH comes to 5.7 when measured
at RT. The pH may continue to drop as the gypsum dissolves.
Next time add less. Hold the temperature there by keeping
towels or other insulation wrapped around, under and on top
of your mash kettle. Hold it for 60 minutes. Heating if you
have to or adding boiling water with stirring. Heat to 168F
 or thereabouts by applying heat or adding boiling water
with stirring and hold for 10 minutes. Try to keep the amount
of water added to around 2 quarts total per pound, so you
can sparge with about 10 -15  quarts. Not a big deal, if you
have added too much water, just boil it off during the boil.

Drain the wort while sparging with 175-180F water whose
pH is 5.5 - made so with lactic acid. Be careful not to mix
air into this wort while it is hot. Boil it, add your hops
( say 21/2 oz of low alpha hops like Fuggles) after
the foam up. All brewers know that a watched pot does
boil and foam over, but only when you have your hands
full of something breakable or spillable ( maybe a beer?).
 Boil for an hour, add 1/2 oz hops at 50 minutes into the boil.
This will make a simple Bitter.

If you want a pale beer use all pale ale malt. Although
this will not match up to a lager malt, it will
be very satisfying if you use Saaz hops and put in all the
hops at the beginning of the boil. Ajust the pH of the mash
with lactic acid, if needed.

These are not fine tuned directions and I am sure many
brewers could add many comments.  I can too. Please
don't confuse the issue.  These are simple directions
and they will work satisfactorily for the first all-grain mash.

Point is go ahead and
try an all grain mash. It WILL work - I promise. Don't
let worrying keep you from it.

Good Luck! and

Keep on Brewin'

Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ
Dave_Burley at Compuserve.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 21:10:44 -0500
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com>
Subject: Mash pH questions and answers part 2

Brewsters:

Part 2 Likewise all you experienced all-grainers can page down.

Pete says:

>So, I suppose the originator of the recipe could try to help me by 
saying:
>"Mix xx Lb.. of the specific grain mix with yy Gal. of water at a temp. 
of
>zzF and a pH of ww for vv minutes." 

>instead of the first quote above.  I think that would give me a better
>chance of reproducing the recipe but, is there still a possibility of
>error?

Well, the pH adjusts pretty quickly.  By the time you get all the grain
wet out, the pH will be stable.

>  It seems to me that even if we both start with the same grain mix
>and water temperature and pH, the resulting pH of the mash could be
>different because of the other factors such as the mineral content of 
the
>water.

Definitely.  If you have a higher calcium content in your water,
then the precipitation of calcium phosphate will release protons
from the partial salts of the phosphate ( i.e. HPO3 and H2PO3),
raising the pH and lowering the buffering capacity of the mash.

In fact, this is one of the principles used in water treatment* to
drop the pH into the 5.5-5.7 zone (pH = 5.2-5.4  at 150F, e.g.) to
maximize the saccharification enzymes activity. The Brits are
most concerned by this, since they use highly modified malts
with low nitrogen content and only care about the conversion
of starch to sugar.  Nitrogen (protein) conversion enzymes like
it a little cooler and and little less acidic.  Fact is, however,
nearly all the enzymes have such a broad temperature range
and pH activity range, that it is usually only a matter of degree
about how much conversion takes place.

"( Please see AJ DeLAnge's many excellent discussions in
the HBD archives on the subject of water treatment.)

In other words, all these things being discussed should not be a
cause for you to throw up you hands and not go to all grain.
Try all grain, it will work almost no matter what you do,
it's just that you will get closer to your goals the more batches
you make and the closer you stick to the principles being
discussed in the HBD.  


>Also, if the originator used a pH meter and I am using pH paper (which I

>just bought and am dying to experiment with), how do I correlate the
>readings?

Just as I suggested, cool your sample first.

end of part 2
Keep on Brewin'

Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ
Dave_Burley at Compuserve.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 03:38:44 +0000
From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com>
Subject: ASBC Alcohol

As promised, here are  data relating the specific gravity of alcohol
solutions (20/20C) and alcohol content taken from the ASBC tables
("Laboratory Methods for Craft Brewers", ASBC, St. Paul, MN 1997):

ABV = 0.022945 + 0.64271x + 0.0070823x^2
ABW = 0.019825 + 0.50686x + 0.0062838x^2

where x = 1000*(1 - specific gravity). The range of validity is sg
1.00000 to 0.98650, ABV 0 to 10%, ABW 0 to 8.02%.

The peak residual (i.e. the largest error anywhere in the valid range)
occurs where x = 0, i.e. it is the first coefficient: 0.0229% ABV and
0.0198% ABW. RMS residual is 0.0098% for ABV and  0.00819% ABW i.e. the
fits are excellent.

The ASBC tabulated data seem to be the same as are given in DeClerk, Vol
II p 433 - 439 except that the tables in DeClerk go up to 13.6%
ABW/10.95%ABV.

I was wrong about DeClerk having the ebulliometer data. The tables I was
thinking of are in Weissler, Harald E "Brewing Calculations", Chapter 21
of Hardwick (Ed) "Handbook of Brewing", Marcel Dekker, New York 1995
p666 - 670
- --
A. J. deLange
Numquam in dubio, saepe in errore.




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 22:45:00 -0500
From: "Tim Green" <timgreen at ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Kitchen Strainers

Jim DePalma writes:

>There is an existing device, a very complicated one, the culmination of
>years of research and application of the latest available technologies.
>It's called a kitchen strainer. Inexpensive, very effective at removing
>foam while leaving liquid wort behind, and never needs calibration.
>


There is also another fine device which can and should be used with a
kitchen strainer
It is called an Oven-Mitten, used to protect your hand from moderate to
large amounts
of heat...

Tim



Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 04:27:53 +0000
From: Malcolm Purves <malcolm.purves at which.net>
Subject: Rowan berries (in wine)

I am not sure how relevant this might be, but for wine making read on- 

Mike said :- 
*A
Has anyone on the list ever used rowan berries (from the European
Mountain Ash) in brewing; either beer or mead.
*B
I've seen it mentioned
in quite a few historical texts, but never a recipe.
Haven't been able to try any either.
*C
The berries themselves are
certainly awful (VERY tart), but I've really been curious to try
something.
- -----
Replies:-
A) No I have not tried them, but
B) Duncan Gillespie in " The Winemakers Garden" SBN 900841 18 4
October 1971 says about Rowan berries :-
" Use the quantities and method in the Basic Currant wine (but do not
press the berries too thoroughly because of their astringency) "

"Basic Currant:
4lb really ripe currants, black, red, white or a mix.
3 to 3 1/2 lb sugar
yeast nutrient
pectolase
all purpose yeast"

Then he describes the usual procedures
Strip berries,crush, cover boiling water, cool, add yeast
etc. and make to 1 gall ( UK BTW )

So, for beer or mead substitute malt or honey for the sugar ? :-) hic !
Or brew some beer and a handful or three of rowan for a first try
up to a max. of 4lb per gall in subsequent brews !
I think I should disclaim all the usuals at this point :->

C)
He also says
" There is a species of rowan which is grown in parts of Europe for
cooking and eating. It is sorbus Moravica ( sometimes listed as
sorbus edulis ) and here the astringency is much less pronounced.
One for the wine-maker ? " 

His use of caps M suggests that this is a cultivar, not a species ?

Relevant to what Spencer said ? :- 
> I have wondered if there was a
> larger fruited cultivar of Sorbus aucuparia that was being used

Duncan's chapter opens with this :
" The Norse god Thor fell into a mountain torrent (*1) and was being
swept away when he reached up and grasped the branch of a tree. In
gratitude, he blessed the tree, and ever since then the rowan or
mountain ash has been a guard against evil spells, snake-bite and
witchcraft "

1) Hmmmm, a bit incompetent of a god wasn't it ? It don't inspire one
to believe in its efficacy. I suggest you dont drink too much in the
presence of snakes or witches :-)

I think they have also been used in jam/jelly making, but do not have
refs. to hand at the mo. So presumably they are not too poisonous. !!


Malcolm,
SW England.



Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 05:49:37 -0500 (EST)
From: LEAVITDG at SPLAVA.CC.PLATTSBURGH.EDU
Subject: Rice Hulls: when to add ?

Date sent:  27-FEB-1999 05:45:51 

I recently purchased some rice hulls, and as I understand, they may help to 
prevent a stuck sparge when mashing maize or rice.  Well, the fellow who 
sold them to me suggested that I just sprinkle them into the "zapap" when I 
start to recirculate....but I have noticed that Tess and Mark Szamatulski
(Clone Brews) suggest that they go into the mash.  Is this because they are 
thinking we all have combination mash and lauter tuns, or does it really 
matter when the hulls go in?
 ...Darrell
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ _/
_/Darrell Leavitt                              _/
_/INternet: leavitdg at splava.cc.plattsburgh.edu _/
_/AMpr.net: n2ixl at amgate.net.plattsburgh.edu   _/
_/AX25 : n2ixl  at  kd2aj.#nny.ny.usa            _/
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/


Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 06:33:24 -0500 (EST)
From: rickge at webtv.net (Rick Georgette)
Subject: Biere de Garde

I want to brew a Biere de Garde, can anyone suggest a recipie including
mash, temps and a yeast, including fermentation temps.  I have heard
that you can culture from Jenlain, are there any others with viable
yeast? Also, how do I get that cellar/musty character?

Thanks in advance



Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 08:13:04 EST
From: CRHammond at aol.com
Subject: Bicarbonate Water

Joy"T"Brew writes:

>4.  My brewing water is very high in bicarbonates and this makes preparation
>of proper water quite difficult.  I must boil/cool the brewing water to
>decompose the bicarbonate, which precipitates out much of the associated
>calcium I need for proper mashing.  How much bicarbonate varies because the
>municipal water is drawn from 5 wells, each with a different chemistry.  I
>don't know which is today's water, so I've taken the average.  This results
>in variations in the pH and efficiency of the mash.  The last brew required
>an hour and a half at each the 1st and 2nd saccharification temperature.
>The pH paper indicated a pH of 5.4?  I'm always reluctant to add gypsum,
>calcium carbonate, or calcium chloride in excess.  So, I add 85% phosphoric
>acid and try to get the proper pH of 5.3 to 5.8.   Just a small amount of
>bicarbonate residual seems to buffer the mash to 5.8 (marginal for
>conversion).

You might want to check out aquarium supply stores - there are several
alkalinity test kits for aquarium water that you could use to determine what
your water is on any given day.  Some of the kits refer to Carbonate Hardness
as KH hardness.

Reif Hammond


Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 09:41:04 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu>
Subject: Re: fridge fans

fridge at kalamazoo.net writes about:
>Subject: fridge fans

That would include just about anyone who reads his posts on HBD, wouldn't it?

Jeff

 -=-=-=-=-
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan c/o nerenner at umich.edu
"One never knows, do one?"  Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943. 




Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 15:47:54 +0000
From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com>
Subject: Water Analysis

I didn't get a chance to comment on Foster Jason's water analysis
earlier and as I'm in disagreement with what several of the responses
given by others suggest I thought I'd better throw in my opinion. The
reported analysis is chlorine=2.5 mg/L, chloride=2.8 mg/L,
flouride=.8mg/L, calcium=80 mg/L,total hardness (as CaC03)=150 mg/L,
sulphate=60mg/L,sodium=4 mg/L, pH=8.2. My first point of departure from
the general advice is that the calcium number must be a calcium hardness
(as CaC03) number because 80 mg/L Ca as the element corresponds to 200
mg/L calcium hardness which is greater than the reported total
hardness.  80 mg/L Ca hardness is equivalent to 32 mg/L calcium as the
ion. That's not a whole lot of calcium and so calcium supplementation
will be beneficial for some styles. Most people like to see 50 - 100
mg/L though certainly lots of beers are brewed with calcium at and below
30 mg/L.

Straightening out the calcium question lets us estimate the  alkalinity
as about 93 ppm as CaCO3. With total hardness of 150 and calcium
hardness of 80 the magnesium hardness is 70 mg/L corresponding to 17
mg/L as the ion. This is  not enough to cause the sourness which high
levels of magnesium lend.

The residual alkalinity (i.e. the alkalinity not canceled by the calcium
and magnesium) is about 60 mg/L - a little above the maximum desired
level of 50. Mash pH would probably be about 5.85 in a all pale malt
beer unless some dark malt is added or the calcium supplemented. To
reach 0 residual alkalinity about 85 mg/L extra calcium would be needed
but you don't need to get to 0 RA especially if a little caramel malt is
used. The 85 mg Ca would require 365 mg/L gypsum. This would increase
the calcium hardness by 210 ppm as CaCO3 and the sulfate by 201 mg/L.
That's fine for Burton style ales. For other beers it's probably
preferable to use calcium chloride dihydrate. It would take 88 mg/L to
supply enough calcium to reach 0 RA, the calcium hardness would still go
up by 210 mg/L and the chloride would increase by 42 mg/L. This chloride
will lend a full, round, sweetness to the beer. One can, of course, get
some of the calcium from the chloride and some from the sulfate.

It is probably not necessary to supplement this water at all because the
extra RA can be dealt with through specialty malts. If you don't want
high levels of those, then mash pH adjustment with calcium will be
required. The sulfate level is quite high so Bohemian style Pils is
probably out and results with noble hops may be disappointing.

Another concern is the chlorine. At 2.5 mg/L the potential is there for
problems with chlorphenols which can produce a variety of off flavors.
If the chlorine is really chlorine it can be eliminated by letting the
water stand for a couple of days. If it's chloramine then standing will
require weeks. If you can't determine which it is just throw 1 Campden
tablet into each 20 gallons being treated. This will neutralize either
form.

Someone mentioned decarbonation by boiling. This can be done but it's
difficult to get rid of much bicarbonate when the level is this low.
It's much easier to dilute. If boiling is attempted be sure to add some
chalk for the chalk released to crystallize onto. Without it, none will
precipitate when its this low. Adding calcium as gypsum or the chloride
helps in getting bicarb out by the boiling method.

Based on the analysis given there is nothing wrong with this water
except that the chlorine/chloramine must be dealt with. The analysis
given doesn't give a complete picture of the water, however. Are there
chlorphenols already in it? Does it give off any odors or tastes when
warmed? If so, then carbon filtration will remove those substances and
may improve the beer. Obviously, sanitation always deserves a mention.
Spoilage organisms can introduce sour "off" tastes, especially the
stubborn pediococcus. Some hop varieties synergize with other brew
components (including minerals in the water ) to give a sour off taste,
in my opinion. A micro in my area has this and I don't like it but the
public loves the beer so this is just my taste. Foster may have similar
tastes. So try different hop varieties and see if that makes a
difference. Another good idea is to put the beer into a contest where,
if you are lucky, you will get it tasted by a knowledgeable judge who
might have some ideas. Remember that in general the paler the beer the
less masking of off flavors there will be from malt.
- --
A. J. deLange
Numquam in dubio, saepe in errore.




Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 11:46:20 -0500
From: "Donald D. Lake" <dake at gdi.net>
Subject: Enamel Pot repair?

I have a 8.25 gal enamel pot that chipped.  I read somewhere that it
shouldn't be used anymore becasuse of something or other.  Although I
now use a converted keg as kettle, I would still like to use it to heat
up sparge water and such.

What will happen if I use it for this purpose with the exposed steel?
Any ideas on patching it so I don't have it throw it out?

Pot-less in Orlando
Don Lake
www.amuni.com




Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 13:20:42 -0500
From: Alan McKay <amckay at ottawa.com>
Subject: re: Overdid the mashout?

In 2965 Greg Remake wonders if he overdid his mashout.

Coincidentally just this morning we were discussing this in one of
the German on-line forums.  In Kunze's "Technology Brewing and
Malting" on p 225 section 3.3.1 it says :

"This means that lautering would be fastest at 100C. Although
 undissolved residual starch is in every case washed out of the 
 spent grains during sparging (continuation of mashing), late
 saccharification by alpha-amalyse can only occur provided it has 
 not been inactivated by termpartures above 78C(172F). Lautering 
 at 100C (212F) consequently always results in "blue mashes" 
 (iodine test)."

 "Because alpha amalyse is destroyed at 80C (176F) it is necessary 
  to keep below this temperature during lautering"

Did you do an iodine test?  Can you take a sample now and do one?
There could be a good chance that there is indeed starch in your
beer.

Not only that, but you could have extracted tannins, as well, 
which would make for a pretty astringent beer.

cheers,
 -Alan


- --
   "Brewers make wort, yeast makes beer"
    - Dave Miller's Homebrewing Guide
http://www.magma.ca/~bodnsatz/brew/tips/


Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 12:43:27 -0600
From: "Shane Brauner" <GossamerDP at pdq.net>
Subject: College Brewer/Electric Brewery

Hi Gail & those on the HBD who might find this interesting,

I'm a senior computer science major at the University of Houston, and I've
been brewing for about 15 months now.  I started brewing because I liked
good beer (the expensive stuff), I like cooking, and creating things like
that, and I thought it would be interesting and cool.  An easy/cheap way to
get drunk wasn't on my list (which is what most people think when you tell
them you brew).  An $8 1.5L bottle of vodka or a case of Bud will get you
farther if that's your goal.  I wanted to make beer that would impress
myself and others.  This is the challenge.  As I learned more (and still
learn) about the intricacies of brewing, it interested me even more.  I've
been devouring as much knowledge as I can about this fascinating hobby.
Right now, I'm limited by 2 things: 1) My budget and 2) My experience.  I'm
in the process of rectifying both of those.  I try to try a new beer every
couple of weeks or so and am interviewing for jobs following graduation
(hint hint to any programmers hiring in Houston).  The only thing that
really sucks about this is that I look young for my age (22) and have an out
of state drivers license (ND) and so have a big song and dance every time I
order a beer.  Well, enough of the rant.  :-)  If you have any questions
feel free to contact me.

- -------
On another note, thanks to everyone who responded to my inquiries about
using a computer in conjunction with brewing.  I've got a ton of info to
digest, and some time to do it in.  Man, that stuff is expensive. :-)  If I
wasn't getting married this July, I'd spring for it, but first things first.
(And yes, she brews with me, and even likes Guinness!)
So I'll plan and scrounge and see what comes up.

Shane Brauner
Houston, TX (but my driver's license says Jamestown, ND)




Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 20:46:30 -0500
From: "Rob Ball" <robball1 at earthlink.net>
Subject: RE:AIRPLANE BEERS

Hello All,

 Just a quick answer to the posts about cabin pressure in jetliners.
The baggage compartments are the same pressure as the inside cabin,
only the temps are different.If these compartments were not at the 
same pressure as the rest of the plane it would rip apart and our 
worries would switch from bottles to the lack of parachutes!!
Happy flying,drinking,ect.ect. BTW  I LOVE THE HBDG!!

 ..
Take Care
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
              Rob Ball
    robball1 at mail.earthlink.net
    Way to old to grow up now!!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 09:39:55 EST
From: MicahM1269 at aol.com
Subject: RIMS/HERMS survey

I've recently been asked to do a presentation on RIMS/HERMS and so I thought
that it might be a good idea to conduct a little survey. Please respond
privately. I would like to know:

What sort of recirculating system used? (RIMS, HERMS, other)

How long have you been using it?

Did the RIMS replace another mash system?

Is your system manual or LC, PC, or other controlled?

How do you use you system? ( to do single temp mashes, to do multi temp step
mashes, to minimize the amount of water used in the mash,etc..,any others)

After acquiring a RIMS, do you use it exclusively or do you still use your
more traditional mash techniques?

With your RIMS, has your mash efficiency; increased? decreased? no change?

What are you average flow rates in gallons per minute?

What sort of wort collection do you use? (false bottom, tube collection,
etc...)

Thanks in advance for taking the time to respond.

micah millspaw - brewer at large


Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 08:55:38 -0600
From: Dan Kasen <dkasen at flash.net>
Subject: one barrel RIMS

Having made a RIMS system for a ten gallon system, I would like to know
if it is practical to do a one barrel RIMS?

Thanks,
Dan Kasen



Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 11:09:06 EST
From: ThomasM923 at aol.com
Subject: Valves

I've seen some criticism of ball valves lately. One criticism has to do with
nonlinear flow control, which is a limitation I think most of us can live
with. This isn't rocket science, after all. The other has to do with
sanitation, which I must admit, I've never considered before. However, I don't
think that any other commonly available type of valve can be that much less
prone to harboring organisms. Globe valves, needle valves and gate valves all
have a lot of internal surface area with an abundance of tiny nooks and
crannies. As a matter of fact, a ball valve seems to have a lower amount of
surface area than some of the others I mentioned (please note the word "seems"
in this sentence before blasting me for propagating questionable data ;~] ).
Am I missing some species of valve that can be completely, consistently and
reliably sanitized?

Thomas Murray
Maplewood, NJ


Return to table of contents

---