---

	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:
  MALTOSE FALCONS' 1999 MAYFAIRE HOME BREWING CONTEST-JUDGES WANTED (Tom Wolf)
  Cream Ale/DMS ("Tim Morgan")
  Re: The Burton Union ("Arnold J. Neitzke")
  Bottle Yeast ("Steve")
  Aircraft Pressures Correction (Jim Bentson)
  Alcohol Determination ("Swintosky, Michael D.")
  Trub and hop removal from wort? (Joy Hansen)
  Brewpot drains (Paul Shick)
  Leaks (Mark_Ohrstrom/Humphrey_Products)
  portable water filters ("rrscott")
  Re: Acid levels in wit...let's make this easy (Jeff Renner)
  Burton Union device ??? (Lee Menegoni)
  Pseudo Burton Union System (Dan Listermann)
  I've got this wit stuff in my beer... (Jim Layton)
  Strike temperature ("Mercer, David")
  RE: pH meters and SINK Holes (LaBorde, Ronald)
  My .02cents on obtaining mash temps / SLIDE CULTURE misprint??/Milling with JSPs MM (Joe Rolfe)
  re: Fermentor Geometry and Attenuation (John_E_Schnupp)
  hop separation (John_E_Schnupp)
  Fred Garvin's Craft Corner (Eric.Fouch)
  The  HD Burton Union (wkolb)
  Open Fermenters, Beginner's Questions (Dave Burley)
  Koelsch (Ted McIrvine)
  Flocculation, (Dave Burley)
  North Coast Red Seal Ale (Troy Hager)
  Mills, again.... ("David C. Harsh")
  MCAB 3rd place Doppelbock Recipe ("Jim & Shelly Wagner")
  Near complete 2-tier ("C and K")


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

Madison Homebrewers and Tasters Guild's 13th annual Big and Huge - 28
March 1999:  Rules and forms at www.globaldialog.com/madbrewers
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: Thu, 04 Mar 1999 19:35:30 -0700
From: Tom Wolf <wolfhrt at ibm.net>
Subject: MALTOSE FALCONS' 1999 MAYFAIRE HOME BREWING CONTEST-JUDGES WANTED

Greetings and thanks for past judging support of the Maltose Falcons
home brewing contests! All judges are welcome. As you know there are
never too many.

If you are a judge or an experienced taster and are interested in
judging our Mayfaire contest it will be held at 9:00 AM on Saturday,
April 10th at the St. Luke Church in Woodland Hills CA. The address is
5312 Comercio Way, 1blk east of Canoga and 2 blocks south of Ventura.

If you would like to register or just have other questions, please
contact me, Tom Wolf (wolf1 at ibm.net) 805-296-0872 home, 805-253-5487
work.


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 20:12:47 -0800
From: "Tim Morgan" <blkcloud at ncal.verio.com>
Subject: Cream Ale/DMS

Cream Ale Question

This January I brewed a recipe from the Brewery "Creamy Cream Ale"

This extract recipe caught my eye from some time ago and I just wanted to
try it.
Although I changed a few things (used brew store light LME versus John Bull
extract, and I did a partial mash of the
grains versus steeping them) the boil and the rest when fine in fact I
really like the stuff.
Very pale, very light, tastes creamy and sweet but...(there always is one)
had it judged recently.  Now the problems start.

The Judge dinged me for high DMS and vegetable aroma.  This guy is a
certified BJCP so he must be right.
I'm still very new at the competition thing (been brewing for three year
though).  Ok says I what did I do wrong.
Millers book indicates that pale lager malt is the problem and that I should
be using British pale malt instead
(i.e., low DMS) but I have used this malt on other styles and never had this
so what to do?  Note that the creamed corn flavor
was present when the wort was put into the fermentor to the best of my
memory.

My questions are 1) should this style taste like the creamed corn DMS
flavor?
                               2) anyone had this problem with either the
recipe or the style?
                               3) I have searched TCM and HBD and found
little info on cream ale?
                               4) ideas on overcomming DMS?
                               5) any good extract Cream Ale

TIA
Tim Morgan
Black Cloud Brewery
Petaluma, CA

As quotes go my favorite is, "If it's less than a million, do it by hand"



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 06:16:00 -0500 (EST)
From: "Arnold J. Neitzke" <neitzkea at frc.com>
Subject: Re: The Burton Union

I had the same problem.  To correct it, just hit the reload button, after
you are on the page.

On Thu, 4 Mar 1999, Rod Prather wrote:

> The burton union seem like it might be a great product.  The pictures were
> non existant and leaves me wondering just what the Burton Union acutally
> is.  Except perhaps the first night after Richard and Liz's wedding.   Don't
> think you'd want to publish that either.

_________________________________________________________
Arnold J. Neitzke     Internet Mail: neitzkea at frc.com
Brighton, Mi          CEO of the NightSky brewing Company
- ---------------------------------------------------------



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 06:59:24 -0500
From: "Steve" <stjones1 at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Bottle Yeast


Greetings, all.

I am planning to brew a dubbel in a few weeks, and don't have any
belgian yeasts in my bank, but I do have a bottle of Chimay I've been
saving. Can anyone tell me if the Chimay yeast is a bottling yeast or
the fermentation yeast?



Steve
State of Franklin Homebrewers
Johnson City, Tennessee
http://home.att.net/~stjones1



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 07:51:28 -0500
From: Jim Bentson <jbentson at longisland.com>
Subject: Aircraft Pressures Correction

Hi All

Yesterday, I posted a statement about aircraft pressurization.
Unfortunately it ended with the following paragraph which should be ignored
as it confuses the issue.:

"The usual design load for aircraft floors is 100 to 200 psf. At 35,000 ft
the pressure differential between the cabin and the outside of the fuselage
is around 0.5 atmospheres or 72 psf."

Apparently, the arithmetic part of my brain was turned off  when I wrote
that. In  converting from atmospheres to psi to psf, I left a step out. 72
psf is 1/2 psi not 1/2 atmosphere (which is 7.2 psi or 1037 psf). While
this is large compared to the uniform floor design load of 100-200 psf, the
failure load of the floor is considerably higher as the floor must be
designed not to fail during any decompression incident

Jim Bentson




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 08:15:49 -0500 
From: "Swintosky, Michael D." <Swintosk at timken.com>
Subject: Alcohol Determination

Peter Ensminger compiled a listing of various formulae for estimation of
alcohol content in beer.  A small brewer like myself finds this both
interesting and useful.  But does anyone know the accuracy of these methods?
That is, how do their results compare to known accurate methods?  Can anyone
provide the +/- error for each method?
Mike


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 08:38:45 -0500
From: joytbrew at halifax.com (Joy Hansen)
Subject: Trub and hop removal from wort?


Roger wrote:

>I  am trying to decide on a Brew-pot design.  .  .  .I also use a
>copper "cane" with a copper cap and a "chore boy" as a way
>of removing hops and trub.  .  .How hops and trub are best removed
> from hot wort (I use a counter flow  wort chiller)


Hi Roger,

I've used a keg brew pot for as long as I can remember and it 
works just fine at removing trub and pelletized hops from the wort. 
However, I must use whole hops as a portion of the hop additions.

I have a fitting welded to the flat wall of sanke keg and a brass 
pipe elbow pickup inside the keg adjusted to leave about 1/2 gallon.  
Beyond the elbow inside the keg, I've attached a stainless steel screen
formed into a tube of about 1 inch in diameter and about 6 inches long. 


Are you using a fine nylon mesh bag over your pot scrubber?  Using a 
portion of  whole hops should remove most of the break material 
and pelletized hops.  The nylon mesh bag should be equivalent to the
stainless steel screen.

The whole hops form a filter over the screen, much like the husk material 
does in the lauter.  Any hop fines that make it through before the filter
sets seem to be of little consequence and are scrubbed out by the 
Kraeusen or remain in the yeast cake.  

It's not a whirl pool, but It works for me!  


     






Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 08:59:38 -0500 (EST)
From: Paul Shick <SHICK at JCVAXA.jcu.edu>
Subject: Brewpot drains


Hello All,

	Roger Ayotte asks about brewpot drains and what systems
work well for straining out hops and trub.  Roger, the easiest
set up that I can think of is to use Jack's EasyMasher in one of
your existing kettles.  If you use whole hops for flavor or FWH, 
these form a good enough filter bed around the screen to strain out
the pellet hops and hot break nicely.  It's also easy to install,
and a real bargain.  For my half barrel brewpot, it works well
even when I use Irish Moss (in reasonable quantities,) and an
immersion chiller.  There's not much gunk carried over to the 
fermentor.  It's nice to have something so simple work so well!


			Paul Shick
			Baement Brewing in Cleveland Hts, OH




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 09:10:05 -0500
From: Mark_Ohrstrom/Humphrey_Products at humphreypc.com
Subject: Leaks

Jeff Beinhauris is troubled by leaks from his Gott(R)(TM) faucets:
> 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 ...

Overtightening the faucet nuts *may* distort the washers enough to provide
a leak path.  If the seal material is permanently distorted, or hardened by
heat, UV exposure, or time, the washers will need to be replaced to get a
good seal.

Another thought is that you may have a spiral leak path around the threads
themselves (you don't mention whether you've got a seep or a gusher).  A
remedy may be to wrap several layers of Teflon(TM) tape over the faucet
threads before slipping the washers on.  Be careful not to force the nut
over the tape - go easy and allow the tape to conform, or run the risk of
splitting the nut.


Mark in Kalamazoo




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 06:27:23 -0800
From: "rrscott" <rrscott at jps.net>
Subject: portable water filters

Brad Manbeck said:
>I am looking for an inexpensive water filter for brewing. Something that
>wouldn't be permanent since I am renting.

I use a kitchen counter semi-portable filter that has a screw in attachment
to replace the faucet's diffuser and 2 hoses that go back to the filter
unit, which sits on the counter behind the faucets.  There is a spring
loaded pull switch at the faucet attachment that lets you select filtered
water or plain old tap water.  It uses the standard filters (about 10" long)
so you can use the grade of filter appropriate for your water quality and
needs.  I got it at Orchard Supply (now part of Sears) but most any home
center has them.  Cost about $45 and filters are about from $5 to $20,
depending on capability.  When you move, just unscrew the hose
attachment and put the original diffuser back on.

Bob Scott



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 09:40:53 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Acid levels in wit...let's make this easy

Nathan Kanous <nlkanous at pharmacy.wisc.edu> wants to sour his wit with
Lactobacillus but

>Head Start is not currently selling cultures.

Yeast Culture Kit Co. is http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/yckco/yckcotbl.html
(yada, yada).

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: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 10:13:14 -0500
From: Lee Menegoni <Lee.Menegoni at digital.com>
Subject: Burton Union device ???

Why is that device called a Burton Union?  It looks more like a wort
recovery device,  for the cost of it and a carboy one could get a larger
carboy.

Since the recovered wort would be blanketed by CO2 it isn't doesn't work
like a Burton Union.  As I understand it, some of the effects of a
Burton Union are to expel solids that rise to the top of the wort early
in fermentation and to introduce additional oxygen into the fermentation
via wort that flows back into the fermenter which  leads to elevated
diacetyl levels, try a Samuel Smith Pale Ale for example.   This device
seems to fail to do either.

Lee Menegoni
email: Lee.Menegoni at Compaq.Com



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 10:18:31 -0500
From: Dan Listermann <72723.1707 at compuserve.com>
Subject: Pseudo Burton Union System

Rod Prather writes:

<The burton union seem like it might be a great product.  The pictures 
were
non existant and leaves me wondering just what the Burton Union acutally
is.  Except perhaps the first night after Richard and Liz's wedding.  

Don't
think you'd want to publish that either.>

The Pseuto Burton Union system is a device that recirculates blow off.  
As
you probably know the Real Burton Union system blows off foam from
fermentation casks to a trough that allows the excessive yeast to settle
out and retain some bitter hop resins or so they say.  The beer is then
returned to the casks through a coupling called a "union." It is an
alternative to skimming.

 I concieved the Pseudo system while trying to ferment 15 gallons in a 
half
barrel.  I lost 3 gallons and was not just a little offended. This system

consists of a large jar that is connected, upside down, to the mouth of 
the
fermenter by way of a large diameter tube which protrudes a few inches 
into
the jar.The tube is drilled with a hole near the top.  The jar's bottom 
is
drilled to allow a blowoff tube to be inserted into it.  The idea is that

the blow off goes up into the jar and collapses in the height of the jar.
 

The beer returns down the tube while some yeast settles in the space 
under
the tube.  The bitter hop resins attach themselves to the sides of the 
jar
instead of falling back into the beer.  The blowoff tube at the top of 
the
jar is needed in case the fermentation is too vigorous.

Beer loss is minimal with this system.  Usually about a cup of mostly 
yeast
which is a nice source for harvest for the next batch.  Does it taste
better?  I don't know, but I am running a test comparing the same wort
fermented in a 6.5 gal fermenter, a traditional blow off tube in a 5 gal.

and the Pseudo Burton System.  We will see.

This product is not on the market just yet, so ask your local supplier 
for
one so I will get off my ass.

Dan Listermann                dan at listermann.com 


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 09:33:57 -0600
From: Jim Layton <a0456830 at rlemail.dseg.ti.com>
Subject: I've got this wit stuff in my beer...

Nathan Kanous asked about souring a wit with lactobacillus:

>So, you folks out there in HBD land...anybody know how much
>lactose should be added to 5 gallons of wit beer to achieve
>a "desireable" level of acidity after fermentation and 
>innoculation with lactobacilli?

I've made several wits, one of them was soured by adding a lactobacillus
culture at bottling time. The results were very good, won a couple of
ribbons. I bought the culture from YCKC and followed the procedure used
by Scott Bickham for one of his award winning wits. See HBD #1581 or
search Cat's Meow for "wit and bickham". You don't need to add lactose.
The lactobacilli find enough to eat without it. I halted the process by
refrigerating the bottles when the sourness reached the level I liked. 

Brad Manbeck asked about a slow fermentation with Wyeast 3944 at around
64F. In my experience, 64F is pushing the low end for this yeast.
It performs much better at 68F-70F.

Jim Layton (Howe, TX)


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 07:35:20 -0800 
From: "Mercer, David" <dmercer at path.org>
Subject: Strike temperature

I remember a few years ago Dave B. and Al K. engaged in one of their
entertaining wars over mash temperatures. Let's hope this thread doesn't
resurrect that unpleasant exchange. 

It appears that Dave likes to mash at what some of us think is too high a
temperature, but if he likes the beer this produces and if dough-ins with
strike water at 180F produce that mash temperature on his system, then who
are we to argue? That said, I shoot for 151F in single infusion mashes, and,
if I rinse out my 10 gallon Gott with hot tap water, add strike water at
167F, then add grain at 1lb to 1qt, I consistently *every time* hit that
151F temp right on the nose. (Yes, I know that the temperature is uneven in
the mash, but I stir well and take measurements in four or five different
places in the tun, and they always average out to 151F.) It usually takes
about 15 minutes for the temperature to stabilize to that level. The unusual
thing is that the temperature of the grain can range from 65F (brought up
from the basement and milled right before mashing) to 70F (milled the night
before and kept overnight in the kitchen) and it has no apparent effect on
this final rest temperature. For me, 167F strike water will produce a 151F
(1lb/1qt) mash every time, and it sounds as if this is roughly consistent
with most of the HBD posts on this subject.

I have not had as good precision hitting lower temperatures for protein
rests with wheat malt, but that is another story...


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 09:53:45 -0600 
From: rlabor at lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald)
Subject: RE: pH meters and SINK Holes

>>>>
 ...But to the problem of why the short life of pH meters.  A $35 pH meter is
a
throw a way meter.  It is not design for long life.  A top quality meter
will cost upwards of $100 and much much more.  If you want accuracy (ph .01)
start at $150.  Also look for one with a replaceable probe....
<<<<

And therein lies the problem.  For $150 and 2 year lifetime, if I brew twice
a month, ($150/(24 * 2)), would be $3.12 per brew.  This is if you get the 2
year lifetime for the probe.  My experience with probe life has been more
like 6 months, so ($150/(24 * 0.5)) would be $12.50 per brew.  This is why I
view PH meters for homebrewing as SINK HOLES.

>>>>
 ...If you want to extend the life of the pH probe use it at ambient
temperature
only.  Never stick it into the hot mash.  Remove a sample of wort let it
cool then measure the pH.  Use the manufactures rinse solution and storage
solution when finished.  The probe tip must stay wet while stored....
<<<<

Yes, this is exactly what I have done with the second PH meter I owned.
Guess what, it made nadder tadder difference, still 6 months life.  I mean,
talk about a letdown - measure some distilled water, get PH 9.2, huh, check
again, PH 3.8. Hmm, Just hold the PH meter into anything and you can get any
reading you like. in fact you will get ALL the readings you can imagine.

>>>>
Ron,  Does pH meter use really improve the beer?  And does it improve
consistency? Maybe these questions need to be answered first....
<<<<

Under ideal conditions, like in a professional brewery lab, yes, I would say
that the PH meter is essential.

My personal experience with homebrewing is that the PH meter use has the
potential to screw up your beer more than to improve it.  How can this be
so?  By getting false readings, by not being able to know if you are
acidifying too much.

I am not saying that no one should use a PH meter,  what I am saying is that
for the expense to keep your PH meter accurate and dependable, you will
spend so much $$$$ that it is not cost effective for homebrewing.  Now, if a
club owns a meter, and the members all use it, then you are approaching a
sensible plan.

Ron

Ronald La Borde - Metairie, Louisiana - rlabor at lsumc.edu



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 11:26:00 -0500
From: Joe Rolfe <rolfe at sky.sky.com>
Subject: My .02cents on obtaining mash temps / SLIDE CULTURE misprint??/Milling with JSPs MM

Use the formulas once and get a ball park. Everyone is not going to be
able to use one formula.  Determine your heat losses in your set up,
the ambient temps where you brew and keep good records.  Far too many
formulas (no offense intented to those techie types), use your
experience and the art of brewing here. One item for larger
homebrewers - is the temp of the water uniform in temp and not
stratified?? I use an electric element and a pump to recirc the water
from the bottom of the tank thru the element tube (RIMs like) and to
the top of the HLT (try not to splash/aerate it). This pretty much
assures me of a reasonably close temp thruout the HLT. For most of the
mash schedules, I heat the water 25F-30F higher than the desired mash
temp. Yea a big difference you might say, but hell it is only beer and
I am not Bud/Miller altho the tun is prtty large (90gal) and not
insulated. This temp does vary (- 10F) during the warmer months. I
have never been able to detect any difference in the beer with a shift
of 2-3 degrees in the mash anyway. If anyone can without send the beer
to the lab, my hat is off to you.  The initial mash is thicker and not
alot of fun to stir.  But without all the added volume it is easier to
adjust. With the thicker mash comes another issue - you will use more
sparge water and you may want to adjust the ph/content as a result.For
all brewers is the thermometer accurate??  I have seen alot of crappy
thermometers that are the bottom line reason of missed mash temps.
works for me.

On the post of SLIDE CULTURE yesterday - I read it and something does
not look right - the dilution. But that is what it said in the doc and
that is what I wrote.  Use your judgement in obtaining the proper
dilution for the volume you toss on the agar. The separation number
are accurate.  Again try it, keep good records, modify, try
again...not rocket science. 

On the MM discussions.
<I do not own stock in JSP or have any other financial interests in
the company, just a repeat satisified customer.>
I just recent repurchased on of the gear driven, adjustable MMs. Works
as good as one I bought quite some time ago. Could not be happier
(unless I had one of the German made wet mills). I dont know what
"holy grail" milled grain people are looking for but my guess if you
are still looking for the grail - you may never find it.  At smaller
volumes like most of us homebrewers it does not really matter beyond a
few points:
	1) are the husks all ripped to shreads?? (not desirable)
	2) are the grains crush nearly 100% (very desirable)- no/very few
uncrushed grains
	3) is the output 100% flour??  (not desirable)
	4) does it take all day to do 20 pounds (not desirable)
Skip the sieves, and what Practical Brewer says, this is aimed at the
big guys. This may be the grail. Look at the results after milling,
again this is not rocket science either. Many have read and seen what
it should look like - correct. What does yours look like?  Is it
reasonably close to what you have read/seen in the past. If so and
something is still not right with the wort coming out, something else
is wrong.

js said in response to David C. Harsh" <David.Harsh at uc.edu
>This is simply untrue and all you need do is look at the rollers
>after milling a batch.  The dust and fines cover the entire roller
>although concentrated in the center.  The faster the rollers turn
>the more roller length gets used.

This I can vouch for - I used to spin my rollers at about 600rpm,
grain did 'walk' to the enitre length. The only thing I saw the hopper
guides doing was slowing down the amount of grain let in.  In the
original mill I had - I removed these and thruput climbed to 500 to
600 pounds per hour.

js said..
>Best way to achieve that is to get people to stop buying our
>wonderful product.

Nahh - you got a great little product there. The one addition I do
make to the mill is to close off the gap between the movable hopper
and the front/back plates.  I have seen some grain coming out the gap.

Good Luck and Great Brewing
(if anyone emails me in the next week - no I did not trash can it, I
am on vacation skiing in NH if there is anything left up there - what
a crappy winter for snow lovers here in the NE.)
Joe Rolfe


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 08:22:20 -0800
From: John_E_Schnupp at amat.com
Subject: re: Fermentor Geometry and Attenuation

Ed sez'

>I have noticed an interesting phenomenon with my last
<snip>
>The smaller carboy always seems to finish at an SG of
>1.012 while the larger finishes at an SG of 1.006.
<snip>
>Is the result simply the effect of the surface area that the
>fermentor presents?  Is there any published data on optimal
>sizes?

Curious, a few weeks ago a neighbor and I split a 10 gallon
batch.  I believe he said his SO was 1.012ish when he bottled
it.  Mine was 1.022.  We split the yeast from my previous
batch.  We both had the same volume, the only difference
(in light of Ed's comments) was that his fermentor has a
larger diameter than mine.  It would be interesting to split
another batch with him and see if the same thing happens.

Are you up for it Stephen?

John Schnupp, N3CNL
Dirty Laundry Brewery
Colchester, VT
95 XLH 1200




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 08:54:28 -0800
From: John_E_Schnupp at amat.com
Subject: hop separation

>Anyway, I hope this can begin with several comments on the "standard"
>set-ups I mentioned, and also would like to hear any "inventive" ideas
>that may help me decide to convert my Sankey keg, or purchase a
>"Brew-pot".  I think I can afford the SS pot, but I don't like the
>false bottom approach as advertised, as I think they may let too much
>of pelletized hops through.

I use a 15 gallon brewpot.  I use an immersion chiller.  I drain the pot
with a ball valve attached thru the side, near the bottom.  The pickup
on the inside of the pot is 3/8" copper tubing (yeah 1/2" would be
faster).  The copper tubing is circular and is on the bottom of the pot
and goes around the outside edge.  I drilled a lot of holes in it and
then covered it with some SS mesh that I removed from a SS reinforced
washing machine hose.

I got this idea from a web site of one of the regulars on HBD, I just
can't remember who.  I've been using this for a couple of years now with
good results.  If you whirlpool the hops will pile up in the center and
you'll get damn near all the wort.  I typically have 1-2 quarts trapped
in the hops (I've measured this by had pressing the wort out of the
hops after brewing) and use a loss of 2 quarts in my calculations so
I'm not caught short of wort in the end.

John Schnupp, N3CNL
Dirty Laundry Brewery
Colchester, VT
95 XLH 1200




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 11:27:00 -0500
From: Eric.Fouch at steelcase.com
Subject: Fred Garvin's Craft Corner

HBD-
If you stop by the Bent Dick YoctoBrewery, make sure to go down the hall past
 the brewery, through the second door past the Male Escort Staging area, and
 you'll find Fred Garvin's Craft Corner.  Today, we got out the Bent Dick Tool
 Box, and set ourselves to working on the "new" RIMs system; functional, but
 still under construction.  Today Fred had a good idea:  Take the top that was
 cut out of the Sanke keg, and make a false bottom (Phred HATES Phloaters).
 Phirst..I mean first, we sanded the edges
 down and made sure we rounded them out nice and even.  Then we took a 9/64"
 drill bit (Fred dulled the 1/8" bit doing some adjustments to his elaborate
 array of trusses), and drilled out about 400 holes.  We deburred the backside
 of the holes using a 9/16" drill bit.  Now what used to be the top of the keg
 now sits in the bottom.  Fred was enamored with the elegance of this solution.
  We sealed off the bung hole with some 0.010" brass shim stock- we pressed it
 around the bung hole, then crimped it in place with a pair of pliers.  After
 drilling a 1/2" hole through the shim, the 3/8" copper dip tube fits down
 through the false bottom, and the other end goes out through the side of the
 keg, where it is adapted up to garden hose threads for the RIMs pump.  This
 new setup is destined for it's maiden voyage when The Brown Eye Gang comes out
 to take over the YoctoBrewery, churning out 15 gallons of house brew slated
 for dispensation at this years pike opener, the last weekend of April.

We'll report back on any operational ceveats we encounter.

Gotta go- Fred's got his club foot stuck in the K-Y wall dispenser again.

Eric Fouch
Bent Dick YoctoBrewery
Kentwood MI


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 17:40:01 GMT
From: wkolb at home.com
Subject: The  HD Burton Union

I have been using something very similar and now I have a name for it!
It consists of a small 3 in. piece of blow off tube, a 2 liter soda
bottle, a No#2 stopper with a hole in it and an airlock
Cost about 2 to 3 bucks and works well for small to mod. amounts of
blow off.
Here are some pictures if you would like to see it.
http://catalog.com/happydog/burt.html
Warning. The pics are a little large so if you have a slow connection
or pay by the min. you may not want to look at them!
This is also part of my Brewing Supply web site.
Fair warning

I also stuck in a picture of my "Happy Dog brewing tree" that I will
be using this saturday at our home brew meeting.

Wil
Happy Dog Brewing Supplies
In Mt Pleasant SC and loving it :)




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 12:43:54 -0500
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com>
Subject: Open Fermenters, Beginner's Questions

Brewsters:

Jim Williams asks for suggestions on what to use for fermenters.
 Although my first few brews were done in a carboy
( pre homebrewing books and the like - we made up
our own rules), I quickly gave up with cleaning up the splooge
and contamination to go  to an "open" fermentation style
which I learned while living in Britain from books where it
WAS legal ( unlike the US in those days) to do homebrewing.

I use a 6+ gallon plastic wastebasket. covered with
a plastic sheet held down tightly with a daisy chain of rubber
bands.Cover this to prevent light entering.  I "drop" this into a
carboy, along with some of the yeast from the bottom after the
major fermentation is over ( 3-5 days).  I have been doing it this
way since 1969 and never had a bad batch.

If you can, get a white or grey polyethylene waste basket.
This will minimize the unlikely chance that the pigments will
somehow affect the beer or be unhealthy to you. The light
color will make visual inspection for cleanliness easier. 

I suggest that you get a heavy walled basket wash it with
dish detergent and fill it with boiling water a few times and
allow it to stand to remove any potential surface contaminants.

There are several possible advantages to this method.

1) ease in cleaning the ring off the side of the vessel, 

since you can use a cloth or paper towel and wipe it
directly on the ring.  I often use straight bleach while
wearing rubber gloves and glasses to wipe down
the entire interior.

2) it has been suggested without proof that oxygen
can continue to be disssolved in the wort until
anaerobic fermentation takes place, since oxygen
can diffuse through the thin polyethylene sheet.

3)Racking over when the fermentation quiets down will
serve to deflocculate yeast and allow it to finish out
reliably to dryness. The temptation with a carboy
is to leave the beer in the primary until it is comletely
finished. With the higher gravity beers this can lead to 

incomplete fermentations if yeast flocculation occurs
before the fermentation is finished.

4) Others disagree, but I see the carboy/overflow hose
as a most likely source of contamination, since it is so
difficult to clean reliably.

5) The plastic vessel is light and easy to handle,
doesn't break if you drop it or thermally stress it.

6)  The old unproven bugaboo about plastic scratching
and being a source of contamination just has not been
proven and I think it is unlikely.  Certainly less likely than
the overflow hose being a cource of contamination. I 

have been using the same plastic vessels for decades
with no adverse effects.
- ------------------------------------------------
Clark asks if it OK to pour hot wort through the air - NO!
always cool you wort first. Many beginners screw up 

their beer by pouring the hot wort through a strainer to
remove the hops.  This single act will ruin your beer.
Cool the beer as quickly as you can by allowing 

the boiler to stand covered in a sink with cold water
constantly being changed and stir the wort periodically.
Get a heat exchanger as soon as you can. The 

cold wort should be aerated to encourage yeast growth.

Correct your water by reading AJ DeLange's  excellent
contributions in the archives.  You can boil and cool to
remove temporary hardness. Dilute with distilled water.
Use a deionizing cartridge or reverse osmosis.

Proper crushing of malt is of utmost importance if you
want to get good extractions. Read about my double
milling procedure in the HBD Archives, Others like
Jack Schmidling, Dan Listerman have also made
contributions.  I do not think a food mill will be the best
but it will work. It may overheat if you run it too long.
If you are going out to spend money, spend it
on a variable nip roller mill.

Keep your beer cooler than 70F if you can, but more
importantly keep it in the dark. I use boxes or paper
bags from the grocery store.

Keep on Brewin'

Dave Burley

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 13:28:18 -0800
From: Ted McIrvine <McIrvine at ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Koelsch

My favorite Koelsch is Goose Island Koelsch.  I've never had an
authentic Koelsch from Cologne, but the Goose Island is a very good
match for the descriptions that I've read.  It has a delicate malty
flavor with a slight trace of noble hops.

> From: Tidmarsh Major <ctmajor at samford.edu>
> 
> What do others think (of Sam Adams Spring Ale or other American
> Koelsch-style beers)?
> 
> Regards,
> Tidmarsh Major
> Birmingham, Alabama
- -- 
McIrvine at Ix.Netcom.Com
College of Staten Island/CUNY
http://www.csi.cuny.edu/academia/programs/mus.html
http://www.csi.cuny.edu/arts/calendar.html


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 13:35:47 -0500
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com>
Subject: Flocculation,

Brewsters:

Ed Sieja has discovered that a larger carboy finishes at a
lower SG than a smaller one.

I can explain it, but I am surprised that such a small difference
in volume will produce it.

The explanation is this, presuming you had identical worts
in each one and didn't transfer a higher concentrated wort in
one and not the other, taller vessels allow yeast a longer
contact time with the beer, since even though they are
flocculated, they have to fall a longer path and, therefore,
chew up more sugar.

One test you can make is to be sure the wort is well stirred
before you transfer it to the vessels. Check the OG in each
vessel.

Also, it does not surprise me that the "open" fermentation
gave you a consistently lower FG, since it probably
absorbed more oxygen from the air before fermentation
and possibly you transferred the still fermenting batch to
carboys and deflocculated the yeast somewhat or at least
stirred it up.  Both of of these factors will allow you to go
nearer to the true End of Fermentation (EOF).

One suggestion - perform the transfer to another carboy
when the wild and crazy fermentation slows and see if
your FG doesn't fall.

The reason you like the higher OG one is that it has a little
bit of sugar in it and gives it a fuller mouth. Commercial
beers often use this trick, or at least filter it off the yeast
early so that there is little sugar left over and they can
get more fermentations per year..

If you like the higher FG beer try mashing at a higher
temperature than you normally do ( go to 158F). 

- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
John Varady makes the same old assumptions and
comes out with the old answer.  John, my value of the
heat capacity for malt comes from M&BS (1971) P.259
and the heat capacity is R = 0.439.  About 10% or
more higher than your assumptions.  You also did
not bother to take into account the mash tun and stirrer
heat capacity.

More importantly perhaps, you did not take into account my 

description of how the new brewer should go about this 

process by  adding water a little at a time to get to the
correct tempertature. Later additions of hot water will be
needed as he maintains the temperature over the mashing
time. It is my opinion that 152F is too low to make a full-mouth
beer, so that's why I suggested 155F
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
Keep on Brewin'


Dave Burley

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 11:37:47 -0800
From: Troy Hager <thager at bsd.k12.ca.us>
Subject: North Coast Red Seal Ale

Fellow Brewers,

Rick asks about California's North Coast Brewing Co's Imperial Stout - it
*is* a fine stout and I have found that most of their beers are top quality
(IMHO). I have visited this brewery (in Fort Bragg) a few times and since
it's name has come up, I might as well ask a question that I have been
wondering about for a long time.

I have long been a fan of their Amber Ale called "Red Seal." It has a
distinct hop aroma and flavor that I cannot pin down. I do taste Cascade or
Chinook or Centenials but there is something more in there. It also has a
distinct round caramel/toasty flavor for the malt. Although the bottles can
be inconsistent (I have had many bottles that have gone off) when you get a
good Red Seal, in my opinion, it is one of the best West Coast Ambers
around.

Does anyone have an idea what they use to make this great beer?







 -Troy 




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 17:01:32 -0500
From: "David C. Harsh" <David.Harsh at uc.edu>
Subject: Mills, again....

Jack responded......
>In case you missed it, Zymurgy's "Roll out the Mills" article
>concluded that the best crush of all mills was by running through
>a fixed mill twice.  They also use an older mill but not the
>same vintage as Fix.

Yes, I saw the article.  When my students come up with results that are so
close to published data, I am suspicious.  As I recall, the article never
states that the data presented is from a twice-ground sample.  (that's why
I asked how the data was collected in the first place)  Once again, the
question that arises is whether the twice crushed grain makes better beer
or simply matches the distribution better!  I just love that peer reviewed
science of Zymurgy!

>>"Remember the start of this discussion was the QDA claim that using the
>>distribution listed in the Practical Brewer will result in better
>>homebrew.....

>Not sure what a QDA is but I believe this discussion started by
>someone asking the absurd question "is the Schmidling mill as good
>as good as 6 roller commercial mill?"

>>"This so-called IDEAL DISTRIBUTION is irrelevant to homebrewing
>>except as a very general guidline.....

>I couldn't agree more and have said so many times.

So we can agree on something.  But YOU are the one who always mentions that
your mill reproduces the mythical distribution.  But only if you run it
through twice using an old mill, right?  Bottom line - if it really is
irrelevant, why do YOU bring it up in your sales literature?

For the record, QDA= Questionable Data Alert     Someone coined it recently
to indicate beliefs that aren't supported by solid science.

>>...Jack's ad... claims that grain is actually milled across the entire
>>length of the roller.  ... prevents more than the center 50% from being
>>used if you motorize, the effective roller length is reduced even more....
>
>This is simply untrue and all you need do is look at the rollers
>after milling a batch.  The dust and fines cover the entire roller
>although concentrated in the center.  The faster the rollers turn
>the more roller length gets used.

If that's how you interpret data, maybe you should work for the Tobacco
Institute.  The fact that dust and fines cover the roller does not mean the
entire roller is used.  It means:
	a)that dust is generated and
	b)there is sufficient diffusion or convection for it to distribute
		over the entire system  and
	c)that attractive forces between the dust particles and the rollers
		are enough for the particles to adhere to them.
Dust collects underneath the table that I place my mill on - does that mean
the table is grinding grain also?

As far as increased speed using more roller, how do you explain that?
Faster roller turning means less time for the grain to spread out.  At the
slowest speeds, the grain will spread out at its natural angle of repose,
which I have measured in the lab to be approximately 25 degrees.  Since you
are grinding it an increased rate, the angle will by necessity be steeper
and less of the roller will be used.  Just to be fair, I'll ask the
collective - any solids handling engineers want to address this and
convince me otherwise?  It makes zero physical sense, but I'm listening.

Dave
Still in Cincinnati...


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 17:43:51 -0500
From: "Jim & Shelly Wagner" <wagner at toad.net>
Subject: MCAB 3rd place Doppelbock Recipe

Hi all....
	I finally have the time to post the recipe, so here it is....

42.1% German 2 row                         1oz. Hallertau N. Brewer 7.5a 
60min
31.6% Munich                                  .5oz.Hallertau N. Brewer 7.5a
 30min
10.5% Crystal 60L                             1oz. Hallertau Hersbrucker 4a
5min
10.5% Caramunich                             WYeast #2308 Munich Lager
5.3%   Carapils

I run Promash, and by the formulas I choose to utilize and the efficiency
of my system, that gives me an OG. of 1.086 and an approximation of 33 IBU,
24SRM.

I've used WYeast #2206 in the past with good results, but prefer the
smoothness of 2308.

I used a multi-step infusion with a 1:1.25 quart of water per # of grain..

122'F for 20"
144'F for 40"
156'F for 60"
Mash out  at 165"H and sparge with 168-170'F acidified(Ph-5.8) water

I also have the luxury of having a small RO(being a Bio Med Tech has it's
advantages when you are a homebrewer!!!) and I did utilize it for the batch
I made for the comp. Here is the profile that I used....

Ca  75ppm
Mg  12ppm
Na  30ppm
SO4 120ppm
Cl    90ppm
CO3  50ppm

Like always, pitch enough yeast or your attenuation will suffer(among other
things!)

Primary fermentation  20 days  at  49-51'F in glass
Secondary                 60 days  at  52-55'F in glass

That's pretty much it...if I left anything out that you would like to
know...drop me an email.

Finally, it's been said a few times already, but many thanks again to Louis
and everyone else who made the MCAB a reality..it was an awesome time in
Texas and winning a 3rd was just icing on the cake!!!

Cheers!!....Jim Wagner
	    Pasadena, Maryland

WARNING: Consumption of alcohol may make you think you are whispering when
you're NOT!!!



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 15:13:10 -0800
From: "C and K" <Cuckold at cornerpub.com>
Subject: Near complete 2-tier

I see the light at the end of the tunnel.  Two tier frame (square steel
tubing) complete.  3 propane burners and black steel piping installed, and
tested last nite.  Success!  3 keg    completely finished, with 9 total
couplings, and level indicators on two of them.  GFCI wiring just
completed.  Pump arrived last week, still need to install (awaiting mail
order nipples).  HERM's type setup, plumbed 25' of 1/2" copper tubing in
the hot licquor tank.

Even the wife is getting into our winter project.  She can't wait to begin.
 Unfortunately, we are also closing on a house this month, so anticipate
our first all grain experiment for April.  

I knew absolutely nothing about gas plumbing, and was very nervous
beforehand.  Special thanks to the folks at :

http://www.morebeer.com/sculptures.html

Although I could have obtained everything I needed for less elsewhere, one
guy there, Regan was extremely helpful, and encouraging.  He talked me
through the process, and made the whole thing a breeze.

Moving brews.com was also a big help, and the guy there is always helpful,
and a great supplier of pumps and plumbing.

Not trying to advertise, just pass on where I got some great help.  Also to
the folks on this board, of course.

I'd also like to especially thank someone who particularly motivated me. 
The guy at Jim's Homebrew, Spokane, Wa.  When he said...."Don't you think
you are going a little overboard".  He lost my business after that day.

Scott and Elke

Seldom correct...but never without doubt


Return to table of contents

---