---

	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:
  Infusion Mashing (Dave Burley)
  Joke (Dave Burley)
  Summary - where to find teflon washers (Bill Graham)
  RE:Teflon Washers ("Timmons, Frank")
  Alcohol Estimation - Easiest way (AJ)
  The Jethro Gump Report ("Rob Moline")
  fermentors (jim williams)
  recipe imitation (JohanNico)" <JohanNico.Aikema at akzonobel.com>
  Why an aspirator. ("S. Wesley")
  Acid Wit (AJ)
  Oatmeal stout recipes ("Ratkiewich, Peter")
  Mash Paddle ("Jeff Beinhaur")
  1999 AHA National Homebrew Competition (Paul Gatza)
  Alcohol calculations (Ed Iaciofano)
  re:Yeast microphotographs (contaminated?) (Michael A. Owings)
  RE:Teflon washers ("Phillips, Jack")
  re: alcohol & pregnancy (Lou.Heavner)
  re:Yeast microphotographs (contaminated?), Duvel yeast...Mblue (Joe Rolfe)
  Sam Adams Spring Ale (Tidmarsh Major)
  MCAB recipes (Alan Folsom)
  Comments on Comments (AJ)
  kegging (Jason.Gorman)
  Probable Typo, Acidic Wit, (Dave Burley)
  Barley wine (John Wilkinson)
  A cool new toy - Burton Union (Alan Monaghan)
  Re. Alcohol Measurement (Jeffry D Luck)
  Home Brew Clubs (Mark Tumarkin)
  the real deal (Clark)


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

This space free to a good competition...

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: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 17:55:56 -0500
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com>
Subject: Infusion Mashing

Brewsters:

Although I didn't want to discuss this any further, since I was
intending to give a rough outline for a first brew, I will spend
a little of my currently precious time ( getting ready to move)
to expand it a little.

Jim Busch comments on my suggestion to use 180F water
to infuse to 155F.  I know that C. Papazian and Jim Busch
suggest the use of 165-168F liquor as the strike heat in
a single  infusion. I could never get to the desired
temperature by starting at this low strike heat.

 A few years ago I  published a formula here which I had
derived from M&BS(1971) table p259 on the specific heat
of malt. From this I determined that 1 # of grain was
equivalent to 0.22 US quarts of water in terms of heat
capacity. (See the HBD Archives)

Based on that I derived the dimensionless equation
 V(H2O added) = {(0.22W(grist) + V (water present in mash))
 X  delT of mash}/(delT  water added) .

This is useful for step infusions, since it will let you calculate
the amount of water to add at whatever temperatures you  have.

Thus at the beginning when there has been no water
added, the grist is at 65F and the desired beginning
Mash temperature is 155F and strike liquors of 180F,
165F and 170F are compared on a pound of malt, 

the equation is simpler and produces:

V(H2O) ={ 0.22 * (155-65)}/(180 -155)  =  0.8 quarts/lb
V(H2O) = {0.22 * (155-65)/(165 - 155)   = 1.98 quarts/lb
V(H2O) = {0.22 * (155-65)/ ( 170 - 155)  = 1.32 quart/lbs

The heat sink of many mash tuns have a heat capacity
equivalent to a pound or more of grain.

Thus for a mash of 9 pounds of malt plus a one pound
equivalent tun this will look like 0.22*10(155-65)/ (165 - 155) = 19.8
or 2.2 quarts per pound. 


Thus:

Mash Tun equiv to 1 pound of malt (0.22  quarts)                


Strike heat     Quarts per pound        


165             2.2
170             1.47
180             0.88

Mash Tun equivalent to 2 pounds of malt (0.44 quarts)

165             2.42
170             1.63
175             1.21
180             0.986

Mash Tun Equivalent to 3 pounds of malt ( 0.66 quarts)

165             2.64
170             1.76            

175             1.32
180             1.056


To determine the heat capacity of your mash tun, add a
 volume of water equivalent to a mash volume
 ( and don't forget that heat absorbong spoon or paddle)
 at a known temperature, stir for 5 minutes and check
the temperature.  The loss in temperature times the
volume in quarts will tell you will tell you how
much heat the tun absorbs.  


SO if your water
temperature goes down 5 degrees when you
put it into the tun and you used 15 quarts of water, then
you can back calculate.  15 = Z (175-65)/(5)

or Z = 75/90 = 0.83qt ( approx 4 lbs of malt) equivalent
for the tun and paddle 


So the final Step Mash equation to calculate water
to be added is:

V ( infused water) = {(Lbs grist ) * 0.22 + Tun Vol Equivalent
+ V H2O in mash}  delT Mash / delT infused water

The point of all this is: 165F water to infuse to 155F is too cool
to get you 1.3 quarts per pound as Jim suggests. somewhere
around 175F is more like it.  I suggested 180F, since on the
first run there is a lot of fiddly farting around and I did
not know what kind of mash tun was being used and using
this 180F temperature will give the beginner a good margin.

Enough said on this subject.

Keep on Brewin'

Dave Burley
  


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 18:08:01 -0500
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com>
Subject: Joke

Brewsters:

I thought I'd pass this one along:

A mother was reading a book about animals to her 3 year old daughter:

Mother:   "What does the cow say?"
Child:    "Moooo!"
Mother:   "Great!  What does the cat say?"
Child:    "Meow."
Mother:   "Oh, you're so smart!  What does the frog say?"

The wide-eyed little three-year-old looked up at her mother and replied,

"Bud."


Keep on Brewin'


Dave Burley

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 18:55:51 -0500 (EST)
From: Bill Graham <weg at micro-net.net>
Subject: Summary - where to find teflon washers

All -
	I asked( in desperation ) for a source of teflon washers. I was
(gratefully) overwhelmed with responses, and thought a summary would be in
order to perhaps help the next poor hapless soul who is teflon-less.

B. Kruse recommended any plumbing supply or commercial boiler suppliers
you may find in the phonebook.

T. Murray recommends a company on the web http://www.smallpartsinc.com/.
While they do not have an online catalog, I kept the bookmark for future
projects.

John Schnupp N3CNL XLH1200 recommends several things - The blue plastic
thingy (my words) inside the bottle cap of 3L PET soda bottles can be
extracted and cut to size, if your hole is small enough. He also suggests
"food grade cut-your-own gasket material" (his words). I guess just call
around and ask for it. Sounds reasonable. Mr. XLH1200 also has a nice
trick for cutting washers out of gasket material - drop him or me a line
for further explication.

Gregg Howard recommends gasket or seal supply houses, who can cut custom
gaskets while you wait. More specifically, Great Western Seal here in the
Denver area is a recommendation.

Luke Van Santen (how could you possibly move from Golden to Minnesota??)
says that Challenge Equipment in Wheatridge CO could have the goods, along
with Dairy Engineering in the Denver area. (I promise I won't mention your
name to them, Luke).

And, yes, despite my pitiful wailings, McMaster-Carr had exactly what I
wanted. No less than 4 people gave me the exact part number (or page
number) from the catalog, which I had diligently searced for hours. 
Remember to search by keyword if the search by index gives you no results. 
Thank you Messrs. Hodge, Phillips, Jahnke, and Kerr; I am humbled by your
superior searching skills. 

Teflon-fulfilled,
	Bill

"...the only way to deal with bureaucrats is with stealth and sudden
violence."  -  Butros Butros-Ghali




Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 16:04:00 -0700 
From: "Timmons, Frank" <Frank.Timmons at alliedsignal.com>
Subject: RE:Teflon Washers

Bill Graham asked yesterday about Teflon washers. I have some I would be
willing to part with. I tried to E-mail privately, but it bounced. So, Bill,
E-mail me and we'll talk. You don't even have to kiss me.

Frank Timmons
Richmond, Va.


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 03 Mar 1999 00:59:44 +0000
From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com>
Subject: Alcohol Estimation - Easiest way

I had private e-mail from a reader who was puzzled about my formulas for
ABV and ABW because he thought they were related to differences in
specific gravity before and after fermentation. Indeed they are and this
reminded me that I had left out the home brewer's most common and easiest
method of
estimating alcohol content in my summary of methods. There are
lots of places to get the basic data necessary to do this. Probably the
easiest is the scale on many hydrometers which include "potential
alcohol" calibrations. One reads the potential alcohol in the wort and
subtracts the potential alcohol reading in the finished beer.

For those who don't have a hydrometer with potential alcohol scales the
following procedure, based on tables attributed to Balling, as given  in
DeClerk (Vol II p 428) can be used. To illustrate the procedure consider
as an example a 1.050 OG beer that finishes at 1.012 (75% attenuation).
Calculated values for this example appear in brackets [..] after each
step.

1. Convert the specific gravity of the unfermented wort to degrees Plato
using   P = 0.01589 + 0.25687*y  - 0.00019224*y^2
where y = 1000(specific gravity - 1). y^2 means y squared i.e y*y
[12.34]

2. Convert the specific gravity of the fermented beer to degrees plato
using the same formula. [3.07]

3. Subtract the two Plato values [ 9.27]

4. Calculate a conversion factor from
    f = .39661 + 0.0017091*Po + (1.0788E-5)*Po^2
where Po is the Plato value for the wort [0.4193]

5. Multiply the difference in Plato values by the factor from Step 4.
This is the percent alcohol by weight (ABW)  [3.88%]

6. Multiply by 1.25 to obtain percent alcohol by volume [4.85%]
- --
A. J. deLange
Numquam in dubio, saepe in errore.


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 20:42:10 -0600
From: "Rob Moline" <brewer at isunet.net>
Subject: The Jethro Gump Report

			The Jethro Gump Report
Rice Hulls
	I add them into the mash, as the grain is doughing in....and feel that they
are worth their weight in gold......

Cheers!
Jethro Gump

Rob Moline
brewer at isunet.net
Lallemand Web Site
jethro at isunet.net

"The More I Know About Beer, The More I Realize I Need To Know More About
Beer!"



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999 22:31:45 -0800
From: jim williams <jim&amy at macol.net>
Subject: fermentors

Hi,
I'm interested in heaing what others use for fermentors. Sorry, I'm not
interested in hearing "carboy". I'm trying to find another vessel.
Currently, I'm using a sspot. Open fermenting. Very happy with the
results. I kinda need something a little more permanent. I'm having to
really do  a lot of riggin' and swappin' to do this. Thinking of going
with an enamel coated pot as my fermentor. Does anyone use the plastic
conical fermentors available? They sound interesting...

Thanks, Jim







Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 07:58:41 +0100 
From: "Aikema, J.N. (JohanNico)" <JohanNico.Aikema at akzonobel.com>
Subject: recipe imitation

Brewers,

George De Piro published his winning recipe of a Weizen.
I also give my recipes to anyone who wants them. But I know some brewers are
very mysterious about their recipes. A few don't even participate in
contests if the recipe must be included. Others hand over a not correct
recipe.
My question: are there any ideas about this? Would it be possible to clone a
recipe and win a competition? I myself am skeptical about this, because:
 -different mineral content of water
 -different supplier of malt or a different batch
 -different supplier of hops or a different batch or different storage of the
hops
 -different age (storage) of yeast
 -and (IMO) most inportant: differences in equipment and operating procedure
(accuracy in weighing, temperature, time).

Any ideas?
my recipe collection: http://www.cybercomm.nl/~aikema/index.html
Greetings from Holland, Hans Aikema



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 06:57:14 -0500
From: "S. Wesley" <WESLEY at MAINE.MAINE.EDU>
Subject: Why an aspirator.

Jeremy Bergsman asks why I am trying to use an aspirator in 
conjunction with a water pump to generate the vacuum in my N.A. beer 
project.  The answer is that it appears to me to be the least 
expensive way to generate the necessary vacuum.  The nominal ultimate 
vacuum of the aspirator is -28.5" Hg or about 36 mm of absolute 
pressure. I  have found that it takes about 90 min to evaporate 
100 ml at 32C by boiling with the aspirator running on a municipal 
water supply. Since most of this is water vapor pressure I'd say I'm 
getting down to about 37 or 38 mm Hg absolute.  If you don't boil 
evaporation is much much slower than this.  I tried out a 
recirculation pump and I was only able to boil at 38C, and the 
evaporation rate looks lower.  This would indicate an ultimate 
pressure of roughly 51 mm Hg absolute. I have looked around for other 
types of vacuum pumps which will do the trick, but even looking at used 
reconditioned pumps I haven't found any thing that will work for less 
than about $450.  Since I do research work in surface phyiscs I have 
access to a lot of pumps that can do this job just fine for me, but 
it doesn't help anyone else If I come up with a technique that 
requires the use of a $1200 vacuum pump!  If anyone has any 
suggestions for an inexpensive way to generate vaccuum in the range 
of 20-40 mm Hg please let me know.  Also If anyone has any 
suggestions for an inexpensive recirculating pump that can deliver 
2gpm  at 40psig, again please let me know.   


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 03 Mar 1999 12:14:16 +0000
From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com>
Subject: Acid Wit

Fooled ya with the title, didn't I? Nathan Kanous wants to know how much
acid is in wit beer. In this case as the organoleptic response of the
drinker depends on the pH that parameter is (IMO) the most important
one. I recommend experimental incremental addition of lactic acid (where
that is the approach to acidification) with tasting and pH measurement.
Note the pH level which gives the desired result (and the amount of acid
required to get it) and dose the bulk of the beer to that pH. The catch
here is that the lactic is supposed to take weeks to months to meld with
the beer. Be your own judge of this and tweak the results as necessary.

Measurement of the actual acid level will require a titration. This can
be done in several ways. To make the math simple, put 100 mL of beer
(degassed or you will be measuring the carbonic acid as well as the
organic acids) in a beaker, put a pH electrode or a few drops of
phenolpthalein indicator in there and add 0.1 N sodium hydroxide from a
buret or syringe or whatever you have. The acidity, in milliequivalents
per liter, is the number of mL of sodium hydroxide required to bring the
pH to 8.3 or cause the phenolpthalein to turn pink. The mEq/L can be
converted to "as acetic" or "as lactic" if you want. If anyone wants the
conversion factors drop me a line.

Test kits for doing this titration are available (for wine) at homebrew
shops. I believe they supply some sodium hydroxide solution, indicator
and a eyedropper or some such. I think the result is "as acetate" as
that's the way the wine industry does it.
- --
A. J. deLange
Numquam in dubio, saepe in errore.




Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 07:32:43 -0500 
From: "Ratkiewich, Peter" <PRATKIEWICH at ci.westport.ct.us>
Subject: Oatmeal stout recipes

We're planning on brewing an all-grain Oatmeal Stout in about two weeks.
I have one recipe and have seen one or two in past digests.  I humbly
request a few more from the collective.  We're shooting for two fifteen
gallon batches, hopefully having an OG of somewhere around 1058 -> 1064.
We'd like to use the 1056 yeast that we have cultured, but realize that
the available recipes may not agree with that concept.  Any ideas??


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 09:20:36 -0500
From: "Jeff Beinhaur" <beinhaur at email.msn.com>
Subject: Mash Paddle

Thanks to everyone for the overwhelming response to my question about mash
paddles. To quickly summarize for those who care the suggestions ranged from
fairly simple slabs of unfinished wood, to wooden spoons from restaurant
supply stores, to stainless steel paddles and spoons. One response was to
use a pizza paddle (don't know what the actually name is but it's that thing
that pizza joints use to slide pies in and out of the oven) with some holes
cut through it. There were some suggestions about canoe paddles. Also, Lynne
from St. Pats sent me some info. on the products they carry including what
seems to be a relatively inexpensive stainless steel paddle (it's not on the
web site but she says it's in the catalog). Thanks again to all respondees.

Today's question: Any suggestions for replacing the washers on the faucets
for the Gott coolers. My coolers are fairly new and they always seem to leak
around the faucet. I've tried to tighten them but this seems to only make it
worse. I guess I could try to just replace with like washers but I wonder if
anyone has a better idea. Thanks in advance.
Jeff Beinhaur, Camp Hill, PA
Home of the Yellow Breeches Brewery





Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 03 Mar 1999 08:16:37 -0700
From: Paul Gatza <paulg at aob.org>
Subject: 1999 AHA National Homebrew Competition

Hi there brewfolk. Here's a link to the webpage for the 1999 National
Homebrew Competition. The main rules and regs packet was sent to AHA
members in December, with the Site Locator Guide sent in February. All
the info can be downloaded from here, or I can send you a hard copy if
you request one from me. I'd like to encourage brewers who enter the NHC
to also consider entering one of the many local club competitions that
are held in the spring. A brewer does not need to be an AHA member to
enter, although the entry fee is reduced for AHA members. If you would
like to join the AHA, please call (888) UCANBREW. For volunteer, steward
or judging information, please contact Brian Rezac at brian at aob.org.
Last year's NHC had 3480 entries. The entry deadline is April 9th.     

http://beertown.org/AHA/nhc99frameset.htm

- -- 
Paul Gatza
Director
American Homebrewers Association	(303) 447-0816 x 122
736 Pearl Street			(303) 447-2825 -- FAX
PO Box 1679				paulg at aob.org -- E-MAIL
Boulder, CO 80306-1679			info at aob.org -- AOB INFO
U.S.A.					http://www.beertown.org -- WEB


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 07:21:32 -0800 
From: Ed Iaciofano <Ed.Iaciofano at quantum.com>
Subject: Alcohol calculations


Hello,
     Here are alcohol calculation equations that I saved
from the Mead Lovers Digest #429 (7 Sept. 1995), as posted
by Michael Hall.  I've used these equations and they've worked
quite well for me.

Regards,

/Ed_I

- --Beginning of MLD post--

Subject: Alcohol percentages
From: hall at galt.c3.lanl.gov (Michael L. Hall)
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 95 10:06:59 MDT

I did some research on the determination of various parameters of
fermented beverages a little while back for a Zymurgy article (see the
summer 95 issue for a more complete version of this). Succinctly, the
*most accurate* way to determine alcohol content in any fermented
beverage is by the following set of equations (nomenclature at end):

   OE = -668.962 + 1262.45*OG  - 776.43*OG**2   + 182.94*OG**3

   AE = -668.962 + 1262.45*FG  - 776.43*FG**2   + 182.94*FG**3

    q = 0.22 + 0.001*OE

   RE =  ( q*OE + AE ) / ( 1 + q )

  A%w = (OE - RE) / (2.0665 - 0.010665*OE)

  A%v = A%w (FG / 0.794)

The first two equations are very accurate fits (by me) to empirical data
(from Plato), the next three equations are empirical equations developed
by Balling, and the last equation is an analytical equation. If that is
too much trouble, then a good estimate (better than many in the common
homebrew books) based on these equations is:

              76.08 (OG - FG)
  A%w = --------------
              1.775 - OG

  A%v = A%w (FG / 0.794)

This estimate is based on the equation "E = 1000 (SG - 1) / 4", which is
only really valid for low SG. For high OGs (like the meads in question),
you really need to use the full-blown equations at the beginning of this
post.

Again, I direct you to the Zymurgy article for a full explanation.

Nomenclature:

  A%w    - Alcohol percent by weight.
  A%v     - Alcohol percent by volume.
  AE       - Apparent extract (degrees Plato), the apparent weight percent
of	
	    dissolved solids in the beer, before correcting for the lower
	    density of the alcohol.
  E         - Extract (degrees Plato), the weight percent of dissolved
materials	
                in the wort.	
  FG       - Final specific gravity.	
  OE      - Original extract (degrees Plato).	
  OG      - Original specific gravity.	
  RE       - Real extract (degrees Plato), the real weight percent of
dissolved	
	    solids in the beer, after correcting for the lower density of
the
	    alcohol.
  SG      - Specific gravity (density relative to water). Specific gravity
in	
                points is equal to 1000*(SG - 1).	

- ---End of MLD post------	



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 03 Mar 1999 15:37:54 GMT
From: mikey at swampgas.com (Michael A. Owings)
Subject: re:Yeast microphotographs (contaminated?)

Charley Burns Writes:
> I took a look and saw some thing that are NOT round. Was this sample
> contaminated? I have some yeast that IS contaminated. Can I send you some to
> take a photograph of? Its contaminated (I'm nearly 100% certain) with
> Pediococcus Damnosus.

Most of the wierd stuff you see are artifacts of the camera (not there
when you look at the picture with the naked eye). Also, the flask I
used to dilute the sample was not terribly clean. 

However, the starter sample was fermented cleanly (normal taste and
smell considering it was fermented on a stir plate). Also the yeast
cell count in the original sample was very high, coming in at
1.24x10E8 cells/ml -- I doubt much else could get a foothold in the
sample.

Sorry -- I can't generally do photos on demand (time doesn't permit).
I would be happy, though, to offer the camera and scope for future or
current collective experiments in yeast management.

More photos soon -- at 1000X if my illuminator turns out to be up to
the job.
***********************
Lord grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change.
The courage to change the things I can. *** And the wisdom to 
hide the bodies of the people I had to kill because they pissed 
me off ***


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 07:40:55 -0800 
From: "Phillips, Jack" <jack_phillips at uscs.com>
Subject: RE:Teflon washers

I sent private email to Bill regarding these, but after reading the digest
today I thought I should post it to the forum.

	McMaster-Carr (insert the usual denial of any association) does in
fact stock Teflon washers. They just don't identify them separately in the
catalog. They can be found in the washer section of both the 103rd and the
104th editions of the catalog pg. 2146 in the 103rd and near the same
location in the 104th. These are bolt sized rather that pipe washers i.e.: 1
/ 2 inch nominal ID .780 rather that .840 but either buying the next size up
or  enlarging the ID will work. These washer have OD's in the range 1.50
 -1.75, cost is around $3.40 - $3.80 per copy. As you usually don't need
many, this is cheaper than buying a sheet of Teflon and making your own


				Prost
				Jack Phillips
Timberline Brewing, Placerville Ca.
A few miles uphill and East of Charley (congrats on a fine beer) and
approximately 2K miles west of Jeff


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 09:32:24 -0600
From: Lou.Heavner at frco.com
Subject: re: alcohol & pregnancy


     Jim Wagner of Pasadena, Maryland concludes with:

     WARNING: Consumption of alcohol may actually CAUSE pregnancy!

     One thing experimenters usually learn and politicians never learn is
     to not confuse correlation with causality.  In my experience, alcohol
     may LEAD to pregnancy rather than CAUSE pregnancy.  There is even some
     contrary evidence that alcohol in excessive quantities can inhibit
     pregnancy.

     Lou - Austin, TX enjoying the wide lattitude allowed in the HBD


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 03 Mar 1999 11:02:32 -0500
From: Joe Rolfe <rolfe at sky.sky.com>
Subject: re:Yeast microphotographs (contaminated?), Duvel yeast...Mblue

Charley Burns asked about un-round 'targets' in the online photo..

It is tough to tell what those were. Typically under a normal brewers
wort your going to see all kinds of things that to an untrained
eyeball are going to look like unwanted visitors.  Your going to see
small pieces of junk (hops, break material, beer stones, skins,
airborne micrococci and if you use irish moss little 'sunglasses'). 
Some of these targets may look just like the book says (pedios look
bunches of grapes - if memory serves me) but in most cases it is not. 
There are a few stains available (spelling is going to be way off here
and a ***good QDA*** (spelling??) Eosin Y and Alcian Blue would give a
good indicator as to what it is. If anyone wants the real spelling
email me and I will break out the book.  If you could isolate the
target and then grow it up so as to determine catalyse/gram polarity
then you get a little closer.  Differential medias also can help
determine what they might be, but this can be time consuming and
expensive.

One thing for sure if the unwanteds are easily visable in any
particular frame of the slide - you should be able to taste the off
flavors in the beer without a great amount of difficulty. Some of the
targets look like paper/cloth strands maybe used to clean off the
slide.  The one thing I would like to look at is the 'amoebae' in the
lower left of the 430x pic. This caught my eye.  A few of the
standalone targets look like beer stones but that is a long shot.
There are a couple of other specs (l shape in the upper left would be
the next in line) in there that would get a closer look, but all in
all not too bad a shot. Not to bash the photographer - but it was too
out of focus for a good determination.  Siebels has a pretty good
little book on beer deposits available (just a satisfied customer) but
this is mostly from packaged beer samples.  The book is great for
those just starting with a scope and little or no formal training.  


Leo Barendse asked about Devel bottle yeast...
In most cases the bottles we get here are older and the yeast is not
viable.  In some cases you can get lucky and find a fresh bottle (if
you do get me some too).  The best thing to do is to proof them in a
few small fermentation before going to a large one.  I never had much
luck pulling a bottle off the warm shelf of a package store and
getting a viable cell out of the bunch. Maybe I am doing something
wrong also...THe best case - go to Belgium and get a fresh one.  One
question would be - Did the starter ferment out and taste reasonably
good??

ALAN KEITH MEEKER had questions about Mblue
***QDA***
As you found in the text you mentioned - Mblue works great (most of
the time) with a good fresh slurry. This has been sort of common
knowledge in the commercial brewing world. I will see if I can find
some refs for you but this may take a few days. Like you mention the
recipe for the Mblue 'appears' to be important - one recipe I had
called for a small addition of acid, I'll see if I can did the recipe
up but it may be in the ASBC (which I dont have anymore). One this the
blue does do if you are looking at them under the scope - - gives some
contrast of the 'yeast guts'.  Two indicators (under the scope) I
usually looked for was size of the vaculole (large was not good) and
the condition of the cell wall (thick was not good).  It is tough to
explain (large and thick but experience is the best teacher) as I
generally took a quick look and could just tell what was going on with
them to some extent. The color, odor and taste of the yeast were also
used.  Again very tough to explain. These were enough to determine
pitch it or get another.

There is a Rhodimine B Red stain the has been reported to give better
results, never tried it tho. One true way to check viability is an
agar slide and a well diluted slurry added. You want to get a good
distribution of cells isolated by several dozen cell diameters.  Count
them under a scope (100x should be fine), incubate for a period (upto
two days or more if you love adventure). Then recount the cells that
have started to grow. A camera might be helpful here as a side
thought. There is no second guessing with this method, the cell either
grew or it did not. Do the math and your viability is know.  Problems
with this - the dilutions must be very accurate, the slurry must be
homogenous when sampled and it is tedious.  You could probably adapt
it to a plate method also but may not be as accurate. Never did this
with a plate.

Well I have used up my bandwidth
Good Luck And Great Brewing
Joe Rolfe


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 03 Mar 1999 10:28:23 -0600
From: Tidmarsh Major <ctmajor at samford.edu>
Subject: Sam Adams Spring Ale

Last December, Jim Booth asked for opinions about Sam Adams Apring Ale
as an example of Koelsch.  I recently found some on a trip through
Atlanta and offer the following observations for comment:

I wouldn't consider myself an arbiter of the style, having tasted
"echt Koelsch" only once, but I think the Sam Adams may be a bit off
the mark. It lacks the gentle maltines and slight fruitiness that I
recall, and may be slightly over-bittered.  Aspen Brewing's
"Tire-Biter" ale is another American Koelsch-style ale that I think
hits much closer to the mark.

What do others think (of Sam Adams Spring Ale or other American
Koelsch-style beers)?

Regards,
Tidmarsh Major
Birmingham, Alabama


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 11:35:14 -0600 (CST)
From: folsom at ix.netcom.com (Alan Folsom)
Subject: MCAB recipes

Since others are posting MCAB recipes, here is mine for the 1st
place Tripel.  Tripel recipes are not that difficult to come up 
with, the trick (as far as I know) is to keep fermentation temps
down, and use a great yeast.  I am very found of the yeasts from
Brewer's Resource, and this used their excellent CL-320 belgian
strain.

Grain:
	12.5 lbs  DeWolf-Cosyns Pils Malt
	 1   lb   DeWolf-Cosyns Wheat Malt
	 1   lb   Light Candi Sugar
	 1   lb   Corn Sugar (I was too cheap to buy more candi)
Hops:
	  .5 oz   Hallertauer Plug (3.3%a)   90 min
	  .5 oz   EK Goldings Plug (6.4%a)   60 min
	  .5 oz   Hallertauer Plug (3.3%a)   30 min
	  .5 oz   Hallertauer Plug (3.3%a)   15 min
Yeast:
	Slurry from a 2 liter starter of BrewTek CL-320
	(Heartily recommended)
Process:
	Since my water is very carbonate, I used bottled so 
       called "spring" water.

	Protein rest at 131F for 35 min
	Conversion at 152F for 105 min
	OG: 1.076  FG 1.010

	1 tsp Irish Moss Flakes for last 15 min of boil.

	Aerated 1 minute with pure O2 through a stainless steel stone.

	Primary ferment 14 days at basement ambient, about 58F.
	Secondary ferment 14 days also at basement ambient.

	The beer was bottled 28 Mar 1998.  I think it peaked late 
       last fall, and is slowly going down hill now (though still 
       quite good.)

Al Folsom


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 03 Mar 1999 13:27:39 -0500
From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com>
Subject: Comments on Comments 

Louis Bonham had several comments on my alcohol determination summary. I
left out lots of details on all the methods and encourage anyone
considering using any of them to go to the referenced sources (in
earlier posts) or the MOA's themselves for details. Naturally, I'll
answer any questions anyone has.

What I'm really about in this post is Louis's comment that the  beer be
degassed before the distillation/gravimetry  procedure I cited. The ASBC
procedure does call for this to be done but as alcohol is very volatile
and the ASBC degassing procedure (sloshing in a flask) results in
sparging with CO2  some EtOH is going to be swept out of solution. I had
always regarded this as unappreciable until I read the insert that comes
with the Boehringer-Manheim (Enzymatic oxidation) kit which goes on at
length about the necessity to pipette samples beneath the surface of the
diluting water, cover cuvets with Parafilm and so on.  "Ethanol is sehr
flu:chtig". So the question is "Why degass?". Anyone who has tried to
measure beer without degassing it knows part of the answer. The bubbles
and foam make this hard to do. Serological pipets are good because you
just keep sucking it in as fast as the escaping gas pushes it out and
you can still see the meniscus. It's lots tougher in a volumetric flask
but it can be done by "vacuuming" up the foam with a pipet as it forms.
There is another problem with bubbles that form on the inward sloping
part of the flask near the neck. You can sort of jar them loose so they
go up into the neck and form foam which you vacuum away. So the question
is whether degassing is to simplify volume measurement (and thus give
more accurate results) or whether there is some other reason (e.g. drive
off other volatiles which might  effect the
gravity reading). Any thoughts?

Louis also posted:
>(take the gravity of exactly 100mls of
>degassed beer, boil it until it was reduced by half, make up to 100mls
with
>water, take the gravity of the dealcoholized beer, and calculate the
percentage
>alcohol), and he simply told me "that doesn't work.  You have to
measure the
>distillate."  I don't understand why these methods wouldn't work

DeClerk gives a very similar procedure except that the first measurement
is that of the wort, not the beer. Before this post appears, you will
have seen another of mine which reviews our  (homebrewers') favorite
method of estimating alcohol content i.e. using the apparent
attenuation. That post took Balling's numbers (as reported by DeClerk)
for apparent attenuation and showed how to use them to estimate alcohol.
Balling also obtained data for doing this with real attenuation. The
procedure is the same as what I posted except that true extract is
determined by boiling away enough of the beer to drive off all the
alcohol, then making back up to the original volume and measuring the
s.g. of the dealcoholized, reconstituted beer. The two gravities are
differenced and multiplied by a factor which, like the apparent gravity
factor, depends on the original gravity, but has a different numerical
value from the apparent attenuation multiplier. This, and the apparent
method) are based on the assumption that 2 g of extract produce fixed
amounts of ethanol (about a gram), CO2(about a gram) and yeast (about
0.11 gram - this is the only one I rember). As this is not always the
case (lager strains produce less than yeast strains) the method is not
super accurate. Other volatiles throw it off as well.

On to the legal. Louis touched on one of those things I've always wanted
to know about brewing but was afraid to ask. I reasoned (what's that
have to do with the law, you're asking) that in this procedure the
alcohol is not concentrated - the intent is, after all, to prepare a
water solution in which the alcohol concentration is exactly the same as
that in the beer. My admittedly very sketchy knowledge of the rules led
me to believe that it was processes, of whatever nature, that
concentrate alcohol which are regulated. Nevertheless, I'd like that
name and address (plus an idea as to what to tell them).



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 13:11:00 -0500
From: Jason.Gorman at steelcase.com
Subject: kegging

I force carbonated my keg and let it sit a few days to carbonate the beer.  I
then released the excess pressure and run a couple of psi through the keg to
dispense.  Do I need to re-pressurize the keg to keep the beer carbonated
while in cold storage?


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 13:46:53 -0500
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com>
Subject: Probable Typo, Acidic Wit,

Brewsters,

To all those Brewers in CGS ( or is it MKS?) land, please
note a probable typo In George de Piro's sharing of his
winning Weizen recipe.  He equates 14 US gallons with
25.2 liters.  It's actually  3.785 X 14 = 52.99 liters.
I suppose there's nothing wrong with a Weizen Wine
but it won't match George's recipe.  Hmmm, could
this be the next envelope that gets pushed?
Weizen Wein - Vy not?
- -----------------------------------------------------------
Nathan Kanour asks for quantitative information on
the Lactic Acid content of Wit biers. Nathan,  if you do
not have access to a method of doing a direct titration
( with a burette, for example) why not find out yourself
by using an acid testing kit, normally used by
winemakers, available from your homebrew store?.
This will also allow you quality control of your own wits
after you brew them.
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Keep on Brewin'


Dave Burley

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 13:58:57 -0600
From: John.Wilkinson at aud.alcatel.com (John Wilkinson)
Subject: Barley wine

I am thinking about making my first barley wine.  I have only had Big Foot
and Old Foghorn and much prefer the Big Foot.  I have seen various barley
wine recipes but am not sure what they may be like, since there seems to
be a wide range of difference in them, at least judging from the two kinds I
have tried.  I prefer the relative dryness of the Big Foot rather than the
sweetness of the Foghorn.  I wonder what OG is necessary to get the maltiness
of Big Foot and what IBU rate to offset the sweetness?  I have looked in the
HBD archives and have found no recipes purporting to be similar to Big Foot.
I have thought of using Rob M.'s recipe for 10/20 as its low FG would seem to
promise not too much sweetness.  I tried Phil Wilcox's version of that at the
MCAB and found it quite good.  Maybe I have answered my own question but I
wonder if anyone has an opinion on what it would take to come up with something
similar to Big Foot?  Also, I have a sizeable yeast cake of 1056 under a
fermenting beer and thought of using that but I notice that Rob called for an
English ale yeast and used Nottingham.  Would the 1056 be good for the type
barley wine I am looking for or should I go ahead and use Nottingham?

John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas


Return to table of contents


Date: 	Wed, 3 Mar 1999 15:41:27 -0500 
From: Alan Monaghan <AlanM at gardnerweb.com>
Subject: A cool new toy - Burton Union


My brewing buddy and I just received an evaluation unit of Dan Listermann's
newest piece of equipment. A Burton Union for carboys. You can see it here
at: http://bullwinkle.gardnerweb.com/Beer/burtonunion.html
<http://bullwinkle.gardnerweb.com/Beer/burtonunion.html> .  A very nice tool
that should be included in a home brewers equipment list. 

Note: I do know Dan as he is my local supplier for Home Brewing but I am
posting this link here as an idea to others who have had blow overs and
wondered how to fix it. This is a wonderful unit and we are looking to
procure another one in the future. All other disclaimers do apply. 

"There's only two things that excite a man, expensive toys and real
expensive toys." 
 - Red Green 
Alan G. Monaghan
Gardner Publications, Inc.
AlanM at Gardnerweb.com <mailto:AlanM at Gardnerweb.com> 



Return to table of contents


Date: 03 Mar 1999 15:41:29 -0700
From: Jeffry D Luck <Jeffry.D.Luck at aexp.com>
Subject: Re. Alcohol Measurement

To the question of trying to find the alcohol content in 
beer, I have a little dingus from my winemaking supplies
called a vinometer....

It's a glass funnel looking thing, the reservoir portion
would hold the volume of maybe a teaspoon.  The down
side of the funnel is a graduated tube about the size of 
a mechanical pencil lead on the inside.  (Imagine a basic 
medical thermometer with a marble-sized reservoir on top 
and you get the proportions.)

Anyway, you put 6 or 8 drops of wine in the thing, turn it
over and watch where the liquid pours out to.  It works by
capillary action -- the force which draws water _up_ into 
a sponge.  Water and alcohol are drawn up into the tiny 
tube at different heights, and the percentage of a mixture 
is calibrated on the outside of the tube.

I've haven't used it on beer yet.   Would it work?  You would
have to measure the beer before it's primed/carbonated,
of course.  Could you clean the thing well?  I'm sure any
slight deposit on the inside of the tube would mess up the
reading.

Any comments?

Jeff Luck
Salt Lake City, UT - USA



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 03 Mar 1999 19:00:23 -0500
From: Mark Tumarkin <mark_t at ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Home Brew Clubs

This is not directly brewing specific, but it is related and hopefully
will be thought provoking for others and helpful to me. I was recently
elected president of my local brew club (although since Billy has
recently brought such infamy to the presidency I would prefer to use
another honorific  - Primary Fermenter). At any rate, our club, the
Hogtown Brewers, has been in existence a long time and has gone through
many changes. For the last several years there have been no regular
meetings, only frequent parties and informal gatherings for dinner and
beer almost every Sat evening at our local brew pub.

I was elected on the platform of free beer, regular monthly meetings and
moving the club towards more educational, brewing improvement type
activities. I also threw out the idea of invading Belgium, attacking a
few monastaries and breweries, and then surrendering and demanding
reparations. Since the club's treasury isn't up to even buying the
necessary tickets I'll have to put that idea on hold for a while. And
since I can only make good on the free beer promise once in a while, I
felt I better deliver on the other promises to improve the club.

So, I was wondering what kinds of activities make your club special or
worthwhile. Do you hold monthly style comps? with a homebrewer of the
year - and if so how do you structure the points, etc? What sort of
events do you put on? In short, any suggestions you have to offer that I
can use to improve our club (and maybe the responses will help other
clubs as well).

TIA,

Mark Tumarkin
Hogtown Brewers
Gainesville, FL



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 03 Mar 1999 19:57:08 -0500
From: Clark <clark at capital.net>
Subject: the real deal

Brewguys,

I have been a hbd reader for a short time and I have my second batch of
brew going now.  Like many, I got started 20 years ago with a can of malt
(I don't know if it even had a label on it) some water, sugar and bread
yeast.  My kids were small at the time and they had a ball spraying each
other with that beer.  It was awful.  I had not done any other brewing
until this year after my brother gave me a kit for Christmas.  It was for a
continental pilsner.  It has been in the bottles four weeks now and it is
starting to get pretty darn good.  My second effort is for a pale ale from
John J. Palmers directions on brewing your first beer.  It has been in a
carboy for a week and is looking good.  

Now I have a few questions for anyone interested.  I have been on the web
reviewing sites and collecting recipes.  At this point I am all extract
brewing until I get enough equipment collected and have a little more
confidence in what I am doing.  1)  After boiling a wort, should it always
be cooled before adding to your primary fermenter or can hot wort be poured
into cold water to cool it?  I have seen instructions for both methods.  2)
 For all-grain brewing, can the malt be put through a food grinder to
"crush" it?  It sounds like some folks have "rolled"  the crap out of their
malt from some of the discussions regarding particle size.  3)  The water
from my well is measured at 23 grains of hardness.  There is a lot of
calcium (limestone bedrock) in it.  It tastes fine but it is very hard.
What should I do about the hardness or is it not a big concern with most
beers?  4)  I am bottling in brown bottles and storing my beer in the
basement.  The temperature runs at 70 degrees plus or minus a few and there
is no direct sunlight through the windows.  Is this a good bet for long
term storage ( I am so optimistic about having beer to store) or should it
be darker or cooler?  5)  Has anyone ever used sunflower seed or soybeans
in any of their brewing or are they too oily?

This is a fascinating hobby and I am having a great time researching .  My
plans are to do a brew a month if time allows and keep a notebook to keep
track of what works and what doesn't.  Any answers or discussion of the
above would be appreciated.  Thank you for your time.

Dave Clark
Eagle Bridge, NY
   


Return to table of contents

---