HOMEBREW Digest #2974 Wed 10 March 1999

[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]

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

  No more Mills (Rod Prather)
  Dry vs Liquid Extract (Ken Schwartz)
  Brewing w/o Hops...Allergies (cdwood)
  Re: Dry vs. Liquid Malt Extract (David)" <drussel3 at ford.com> (Sandra L Cockerham)
  Re: Phil's Phloating Phalsie in a 10 gallon Gott ("Scott Moore")
  Wort Aeration (Keith Busby)
  What a crock! (Nathan Kanous)
  Proper Phalse Bottom Usage (Dan Listermann)
  Implosive Carboys, topless carboys, plastic fermenters (Dave Burley)
  Re: questions about them yeasties ("Charles T. Major")
  Stones and clips and extract, oh my (PAUL W HAAF JR)
  Straw Creepage (Eric.Fouch)
  Keging Presure (msnet)
  Malt Mills, ho-hum? (Joy Hansen)
  Alan Monaghan's RIMS question (Joy Hansen)
  Thanks to Dan Listermann ("Curt Speaker")
  Open Fermenters (Eric Schoville)
  Strike Heat Part 1 of 2 (Dave Burley)
  Strike Heat part 2 (Dave Burley)
  Re: Beginners Guide to Mashing - Mash pH ("John Palmer")
  i need more head (JPullum127)
  re: Fermentor geometry/characterstics ("Eric McIndoo")
  Pithy Response to Witty Post (AJ)
  Mash/Lauter Tun (Drewmeister)
  DME vs LME (Lou.Heavner)
  Re: Re: Malt Mill Blues ("Larry Maxwell")
  California Common ("Eric R. Tepe")
  BeerTrader Mailing List (NEW!) (Alan Gilbert)
  kegging/bottling questions (SRNagley)
  Gypsum (William Frazier)

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: Tue, 09 Mar 1999 07:01:48 -0500 From: Rod Prather <rodpr at iquest.net> Subject: No more Mills Jeff, I don't think that the subject is tired, it is quite valid. The problem is that no one has presented any controlled studies to determine that a finer, variable, double, coarser, funkier, fluffier, fussier, fuzzier, frumpier crush actually produces a better extraction. I have the feeling that one or the other has a good point. There is just no definitive valuation as to who it is. From appearance, IMHO, the finest crush you can get without plugging up the plumbing is the one you want. Where does that lie. Guess it depends on your system, huh! > Is it just me or is anyone else about tired of the on going mill debate. > Hey > Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 1999 05:49:42 -0700 From: Ken Schwartz <kenbob at elp.rr.com> Subject: Dry vs Liquid Extract Dave Russel asks about dry versus liquid extract. Dave, I think you hit on most of the pro's and con's of the two forms of extract. Your choice of "types" of extract might arguably be greater with liquid -- pale ale, pilsner, blended "kit" syrups, as opposed to basic light/amber/dark/wheat for dry. My suggestion is to use liquid extract in 3.3 lb increments (or other unit sizes) and make up any difference with dry. I also like to keep some dry extract on hand for yeast starters. - -- ***** Ken Schwartz El Paso, TX Brewing Web Page: http://home.elp.rr.com/brewbeer E-mail: kenbob at elp.rr.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 07:50:54 -0500 From: cdwood at lexmark.com Subject: Brewing w/o Hops...Allergies My Dear Brewing Brethren, I have a friend who I work with that has developed an allergy to hops. Over the last year or so he has started having reactions when ever he drinks beer. (No, I'm not talking about getting drunk!) His face starts turning red and he starts to have asthma type problems breathing. He is willing to start homebrewing if he thinks he can brew good tasting beer that he can drink without the reactions. He came to me, knowing I was a Homebrewer, asking if you could brew beer without hops or use something else instead of hops to bitter a brew. We talked some about using Spruce and Ginger as bittering agents, but wondered if there was other things that could be used instead of hops to help him out. He loves a GOOD beer , but as this disorder progressed he found less and less beers he could drink. Now I have made a few pLambic Kierks in the last couple months and noticed that my yeast starter was not too bad using Wyeast Belgian Lambic Blend. In fact the beer I decanted off the top of the yeast cake was sour/bitter tasting and there were no hops in it at all. So my question to ya 'all is: Is it possible to brew a beer without using hops to bitter, that tastes good even if storage time is reduced? Thanks to the Janitors of the digest for all the hard work they put in!!!! Long time lurker, seldom poster, May your next brew be your best, Curt Woodson cdwood at lexmark.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 1999 08:24:26 -0500 From: Sandra L Cockerham <COCKERHAM_SANDRA_L at Lilly.com> Subject: Re: Dry vs. Liquid Malt Extract (David)" <drussel3 at ford.com> Hi, *Regarding Dry Malt Extract (DME) vs. Liquid Malt Extract (LME)* I almost exclusively use DME for my extract batches. The rare times I do use LME, it is bulk Alexander's... I do not like canned LME, often its old, and there is a distinct "tang" that taints the beer. I especially like to use a mixture of M & F brand DME and Laaglander DME. I use the latter, for its propensity to leave a higher terminal gravity. I have made many full bodied beers with this method. I also like the fact that I only weigh out what I need. It does have a tendency to be a mess when spilled, but I have made worse messes with LME !! I also only use the lightest DME and LME. If any color or sweetness is desired I use specialty grains. Cheers, Sandy C. in Indianapolis Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 08:49:50 -0500 From: "Scott Moore" <smoore at koyousa.com> Subject: Re: Phil's Phloating Phalsie in a 10 gallon Gott Alan writes: >I put the syphon hose around the thing, but it's >pretty obvious by looking that it isn't going to do any >good. Tried it and when the hot mash water got to the hose, it got soft and came loose.... >I already have an all-metal bulkhead, and the arm going >from the centre of the Phil's to the ball valve is >ridgid copper, which some pholks suggest should help (it >didn't). I know, the far end of the Phloater still comes up... >HELP! I wanna be lazy again! Well, being somewhat lazy myself I followed the advice of a fellow HBDer (Sorry, I don't remember who but I am forever grateful) and constructed a weighted snake to hold it down. Take 35" of 3/4 ID vinyl hose and jam a #3 stopper in the end after softening up the end with hot water. Fill the hose with BBs and jam a stopper in the other end. I couldn't find a #3 stopper that wasn't drilled so I used 7/8 SS bolts to plug the holes. The snake weighs about 7 pounds and keeps the Phloater tight on the bottom while it also seals the area around the edge. Scott Moore The still unnamed brewery Medina, Ohio Sleeplessly awaiting my next brew session Friday... Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 1999 07:59:03 -0600 From: Keith Busby <kbusby at ou.edu> Subject: Wort Aeration I used to aerate my wort by splashing and sloshing but for the last two batches have used the aquarium pump/aeration stone method. Instructions said to run for about 5 mins for 80% saturation. 3-inch head of foam developed as predicted. I thought fermentation was sluggish on both occasions: the first a Grand Cru using La Chouffe Yeast (this finally fermented out after a month), and the second an ESB (OG 1.056) with Shepherd Neame yeast. Is 5 mins long enough? If not, how to avoid foaming without additives? Ditch the stone? A less powerful pump? Keith Busby Keith Busby George Lynn Cross Research Professor Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies University of Oklahoma 780 Van Vleet Oval, Room 202 Norman, OK 73019 Tel: (405) 325-5088. Fax: (405) 325-0103 Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 1999 08:09:10 -0600 From: Nathan Kanous <nlkanous at pharmacy.wisc.edu> Subject: What a crock! Isn't that open "glass" fermentor just a crock? Ah yes, I bet I stirred up a few memories from some of our more mature posters. :^) nathan in madison, wi Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 09:41:23 -0500 From: Dan Listermann <72723.1707 at compuserve.com> Subject: Proper Phalse Bottom Usage Alan McKay ( amckay at nortelnetworks.com ) Asks about using a Phil's Phalse Bottom in a 10 gallon Gott cooler. First I assume that he is using the 12" diameter bottom as a 10" bottom will always be a problem in such coolers. The key to all this is to NOT POUR THE STRIKE WATER IN BEFORE THE GRIST ! That was exciting. I feel better now, thank you. The water needs to be added at the same time with the grist. Pour a pan of water in the cooler and follow with a pan of grist, stirr, repeat. If the mash gets too thick add a second pan of water. If the mash gets too thin, add a second pan of grist. This method ensures that the mash is thourghly wetted and does not expose the enzymes to harsh temperatures. The weight of the mash keeps the bottom down. Before vorlaufing (recirculating) you should do as the English and underlet a bit of sparge water and stir the mash to break up any compaction. Let it resettle for 5 to 10 minutes before vorlaufing. A neat alternative is to connect the cooler's outlet to the hot liquor tank ( I use my half barrel kettle's tap) and let the strike water underlet while adding and stirring the grist. It saves screwing with the second pan and requires strike water about 5 degrees Fahrenheit cooler. Dan Listermann dan at listermann.com or 72723.1707 at compuserve.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 09:41:59 -0500 From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Implosive Carboys, topless carboys, plastic fermenters Brewsters: I was alarmed to read in Simon Wesley's endeavors to produce low alcohol beer by distillation that Bill Frazier and Loius Bonham had suggested the use of a carboy under vacuum as a vessel. DON'T DO IT! The shape of the carboy with the flat bottom and cylindrical sides are not made for vacuum service. Carboys also vary within the bottle itself in glass thickness so that the suggested heating of the carboy could build up thermal stresses. Lest you think I 'm being too cautious, I saw the hamburger that used to be the face of an experimenter who chose the wrong glass vessel for his work. Luckily he lived. If you must place a vacuum on a huge vessel, at least make it something that will bend and not shatter. - -------------------------------------------------- On a related topic of cutting the top off of a carboy to make an open glass fermenter, remember that the carboy is an integral design with the shoulders being part of the stiffening ( strengthening) of the complete assembly. Removing the top will make the sides much weaker to blows and perhaps even to lifting. This will just amplify the inherent danger in handling such a heavy breakable bottle full of liquid. - -------------------------------------------------- I agree with the HBDer who cautioned against using certain plastics which have plasticizers or dangerous monomers. However, polyethylene is inert and if care is taken to choose a safe pigment system - like titanium dioxide white, no problems should ensue. Polyethylene can be identified by the recycling mark on the bottom of the container. I do not know the number off the top of my head. Anyone? - -------------------------------------------------- Keep on Brewin' Dave Burley Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 08:41:50 -0600 (Central Standard Time) From: "Charles T. Major" <ctmajor at samford.edu> Subject: Re: questions about them yeasties Cory Chadwell asks about reculturing yeast from a bottle of Boulevard Pale Ale. I have no knowledge of the brewery, the yeast(s) it uses, or the temperature ranges for the yeast, so I'll leave those questions for others. For reculturing from the bottle, wipe the lip with alcohol and flame before pouring most of the beer out. Then, as you suggest, pour in about a cup of starter wort and shake. I've used a small stopper with an airlock in the past, and more recently I've plugged the mouth of the bottle with sterile cotton which allows a more aerobic environment as the yeast grows. Then pitch to a regular starter and build up as usual. See Dave Miller's _Brewing the World's Great Beers_ for more details, but you've certainly got the right idea. Good luck--I always enjoy brewing with recultured yeast from a bottle-conditioned beer. Tidmarsh Major Birmingham, Alabama Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 09:55:00 -0500 From: PAUL W HAAF JR <haafbrau1 at juno.com> Subject: Stones and clips and extract, oh my First off, I pulled four driveway stones from my, yes, driveway. I put them in my pot to boil with my wort. They are the best thing I've added to the boil. Talk about saving boil-overs. The second best thing I've added to the boil is a clothes pin or two. When clipped to the lid, they do wonders for relieving boil tension and allowing full use of heat without any DMS problems. I've been waiting to post this until someone had a question about lid use. I just saw one, so here's my post. QDA alert. I'm an extract first brewer for many reasons. Every time I've tried to use DME, I've had clumping problems, plus it seems to be more expensive. My vote is on LME I'm sure others feel differently. I hope this helps. Cheers, Paul Haaf Y2K- A survivalists dream come true. ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 10:04:00 -0500 From: Eric.Fouch at steelcase.com Subject: Straw Creepage But, Mark- "The premised gradients would be quickly lost due to the mixing action in the fermenter. Most likely IMHO, the mechanism at work here is that of buoyancy: The flocs of yeast *may* be carried up to the surface by CO2, there releasing it to sink again, pushed by the next floc in line. This phenomenon (in principle) is observable in a glass of soda/pop with a straw - as the CO2 bubbles form on the straw, it will begin to float until an equilibrium point is reached between the displacement of the bubbles and weight of the straw above the surface (less the differential buoyancy of the rest of the straw)." You forgot to take into account the friction between the straw and the container. Initially, the bubbles must overcome the stiction between the straw and the container to initiate movement. Then, once the straw starts moving, inertia will actually move the straw upwards beyond the point of buoyant equilibrium, and the straw will "hang up" on the side of the container due to the friction between the container and the straw. And don't forget that the friction will vary due to the container material- glass vs. plastic, vs. waxed paper. And container geometry will play a role also- a wide container will provide a steeper angle, increasing the friction. Although I suppose eventually, if the container is wide enough, the vector would change such that the straw would no longer slide up the container, but simply pivot at the point of contact. Maybe we should try Teflon straws. I wonder if the bubbles would be less likely to form on a Teflon straw. Then, of course, the aforementioned stiction and friction would be reduced, also. Perhaps a straw constructed out of a hydrophilic material would increase fluid drag, and decrease bubbly affinity, reducing the amount of buoyant forces imparted to the straws surface. Of course all this can be avoided, by simply using one of those covers that has an "X" shaped cut in the top, allowing for straw insertion, but providing enough friction to impede buoyancy induced straw creepage. The tops with the simple holes in the top, IMHO, are inferior to the "X" slit. And I don't even have a Masters Degree. In Science or otherwise. Eric Fouch Bent Dick YoctoBrewery Kentwood, MI Notice- Fred Garvin is now accepting all competitor's Male Escort Service coupons. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 07:32:04 -0800 From: msnet at pacbell.net Subject: Keging Presure Hi All, I am new to keging. I keged last night for the first time using a 5 gal "Corny" keg and I have a few questions about time at pressure. >From the numerous charts on the web I determined I wanted 1.8 atmospheres of pressure for carbonation. According to the charts I put the beer under 22lbs of pressure at my brewery room temp (65F). My questions are. How long do I keep the CO2 tank valve open and the beer under constant pressure? Do I bring the keg up to pressure and then remove the pressure line from the keg? Does the beer stay at this high pressure? I have been told/read that to dispense you need 3lbs. Is this right for "corny" type kegs? Does the beer absorb the CO2 making the pressure go down? Do I wait X time and then vent the excess pressure? Does anyone have a tried and true method of getting the right pressure/carbonation? I would also like to hear opinions on Priming with sugar verses Force carbonation. Thanks in advance! Fritz Waltjen (msnet at pacbell.net) Los Angeles, California Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 10:40:17 -0500 From: joytbrew at halifax.com (Joy Hansen) Subject: Malt Mills, ho-hum? The discussion on malt mills is as boring as the discussion on distilling. With the exception that the BAT raid, seized properties and equipment might make an interesting story! I think the use commentary of one of the mills under discussion might make the dialog more meaningful and interisting to entry level all grain home brewers. IMHO, based on the appearance of the milled malt, the faster a small diameter roll turns, the more shearing of the husk and production of fines take place. I thought the idea was to crack the kernel and leave as much husk intact as possible. When did speed become an issue? I purchased a Schmidling Malt Mill years ago because it was affordable and filled a void in the home brewing equipment market. At that time, it was the most economical mill available. It was an outstanding performer as compared with the Corona grinder. After many years of satisfied use, the long rollers have many stone scars over much of their surface (This is thanks to the horrendous amount of dockage included in malts destined for Home Brewers. More rocks mean more profits!). Speaking to dockage in malts, I note the small weevil holes in most specialty malts. This means that the source malts were infested with insects and a high kiln temperature was required to salvage the malt! I wonder what the kilned insect flavor/taste contributes to the beer. I run my Schmidling Mill between 100 and 200 RPM with a 1/2 inch 600 RPM electric drill which has variable torque and speed on the trigger. The center gap of the mill is adjusted to .060 inches. The roller speed is adjusted under load. The hopper is lowered from the manufactured setting to prevent malt from exiting over the rollers. I always have starch imbedded over the entire length of the rollers. Uncrushed kernels are always emaciated and probably don't contain mush carbohydrate. I accept the 80 to 88 percent efficiency of extraction from my mash which implies that most of the kernels must be cracked by the milling procedure I use! Turning the rollers at 600 + RPM and creates mostly malt flour and broken husks! Cheers, Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 10:45:58 -0500 From: joytbrew at halifax.com (Joy Hansen) Subject: Alan Monaghan's RIMS question Hi Alan and RIMS home brewers, I use a home built RIMS unit with a 15.5 keg mash tun and a PBS punched SS false bottom. My Promash program calculates gravity based on achieved efficiency within the system. The default value is 75%. For several brews, I found myself about 10% over the target gravity. By calculation, I'm getting a minimum of 80%, with some hitting 88%! I brew batches to provide 8 gallons of wort in the primary fermenter. The grist is typically 18 to 25 pounds for this amount of wort. Your question about doubling the amount of grist and achieving greater efficiency is troubling to me because, IMHO, you may not have optimized the mash parameters for a 5 gallon batch. I hope you will believe me when I tell you that Murphy's Law is applicable and you'll soon find out why he's considered as your brewing assistant! Especially when you start stepping up the volume of the mash. If you consider the open area of R. Morris' original picnic cooler false bottom, I recall that it exceeds 200 square inches. The open area of the PBS punched SS plate, IMHO, is about 75 square inches. Obviously, the depth of the mash changes from less than 5 inches to as much as 8 inches. I believe that these changes result in a substantial decrease in the permeability of the mash. Increasing the grist in the keg exacerbates the problem! IMHO, choosing a keg as a mash tun is a poor choice. It's cheap by comparison to commercial pots; however, I have about 8 years of experience with a keg mash tun to back my claim. Calculate the open area possible in a 19 inch pot compared to a PBS punched SS false bottom! Are you checking the pH of the mash, adjusted for the rest temperature? My description of the iodine starch test is a little different than I read. It's true that I get an blue/black color early in the mash rest. Later, I remove most of the large particulate for the test and I get an immediate red/brown color which changes to black in less than one minute. The particulate also turns black. Later, near the end of the first saccharification, I get a longer lag between addition of the iodine and the color development. Because many posts and texts indicate that a one hour rest in the 145-152 range develops a better malt flavor, I use this schedule. The second saccharification rest is typically at 158. At this temperature, my objective is for the particulate in the starch test NOT to turn black for an extended time after addition of the iodine. Mash out is at 168 to 170. I try to maintain the temperature of the mash during subsequent sparge/runoff by both infusion and RIMS direct heat. This schedule produces a malty, thick mouth feel, and highly fermentable wort. Ending my soap box, the last consideration is the actual final volume of wort in the brew pot after boiling. I might have 10 gallons in the brew pot; however, there is cooling shrinkage, trub and hop displaced volume, and dead space in the brew pot. So, I might get 8 1/2 gallons in the primary. This may be critical, because an error in measurement of 2 gallons of a target 8 gallons converts to a 25 percent or so deviation from the target gravity! A one gallon difference amounts to 12.5 percent deviation, and so on . . . Don't worry about all this stuff, I've worried for you over the past 8 years. Sometimes, I think I should go back to the Herter's Bull Moose Cookbook recipe for home brew. The mail order firm is out of business; however, looking back - their brewing source was a gem, as were the writings! Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 11:44:09 +0500 From: "Curt Speaker" <SPEAKER at SAFETY-1.SAFETY.PSU.EDU> Subject: Thanks to Dan Listermann I just wanted to take a moment to thank Dan Listermann for what may be one of the best pieces of information that I have ever gleaned off of the HBD. Dan mentioned last week that if your lauter/sparging process is taking 30 minutes or less, you are leaving something behind. Now I have been brewing all-grain for about 3.5 years now and have been fairly pleased with my extraction rates --- nothing special, but my beers turn out well. While brewing a Schwarzbier this past weekend, I took Dan's recommendation to heart and slowed down my lautering process. Instead of the usual 20-25 minutes to lauter a five-gallon batch, I took about 45 minutes to collect all ther runnings. My extraction rate jumped by about 3-5 points per gallon. Thanks Dan!!! Curt Curt Speaker Biosafety Officer Penn State University Environmental Health and Safety speaker at ehs.psu.edu http://www.ehs.psu.edu ^...^ (O_O) =(Y)= """ Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 1999 11:13:05 -0600 From: Eric Schoville <eschovil at us.oracle.com> Subject: Open Fermenters The discussion of open fermenters is being raised again, so I thought I would throw my two cents in. For a couple of years, I have used a converted Sankey keg as an open fermenter and have been extremely happy with the results. Converted kegs make excellent fermenters because they are easy to clean, sterlize and readily available. Plus, there are no safety concerns with stainless as there may be with some plastics. Eric Schoville Flower Mound, TX http://home1.gte.net/rschovil/beer/3tier.html Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 12:27:15 -0500 From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Strike Heat Part 1 of 2 Brewsters: Andrew Nix sent me an e-mail asking about what M&BS ( Malting and Brewing Science) meant and a couple of other innocent questions. Since he had a Bechtel e-address, I assumed he was an engineer and likely a mechanical engineer. Anyway , to be sure he was happy I supplied him with a scan of the table on malt heat capacity and the rest of the relevant information and went back into my notebook to understand why I had used 0.22 as the equivalent number of quarts of water for a pound of malt's heat capacity. From the table 10.1 it was obvious that the number should be more like 0.20 or so - if an unslaked malt were being used. My results were empirical and I have to guess that I probably used malt that had been hanging around in a trash bin for a few years and likely had a heat capacity of 0.44 from the extra water absorbed and was thoroughly slaked. Anyway, here is the scanned version of that page with the formulas repaired, since my scanning software tried to reorganize them into something "meaningful" RIMSers will find this of interest, since "underletting" as a way of heating is discussed. I will have to shorten the lines, since the HBD server does not like long line formats (WHY IS THAT?) I hope the table survives: M&BS (1971) P. 259 ,MASHING 259 Initial Heat = (St +RT)/(S+R) + (H/2)/(S + R) where S is the specific heat of the malt and t the temperature of the malt; R is the ratio of weight of liquor to that of grist and T the temperature of the liquor (striking heat); H is the slaking heat of the malt in gram-cals/degree temperature. The expression is applicable to both C and F providing terms are expressed in the appropriate units. TABLE 10.1 Specific heat (water =1) and slaking heat of a malt at various moisture contents Slaking heat (gram % Moisture Specific heat cals) at mashing temp. of 150F 0 0.38 33.5 1 0.38 29.0 2 0.39 25.0 4 0.40 18.8 6 0.41 14.5 8 0.42 12.4 BROWN, H. T. (1910). J. Inst. Brewing 16, 112. HOPKINS, R. H. and CARTER, W. A. (1933). f. Inst. Brewing 39, 59. Part 2 follows: Keep on Brewin' Dave Burley Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 12:27:44 -0500 From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Strike Heat part 2 Brewsters: Part 2 Brewsters: continuation of M&BS (1971) page 259-60 A slack malt has a slightly greater specific heat, but a much reduced slaking heat and requires a striking heat some 2-4F (l.1-2.2C) higher than a malt of normal moisture content. Thus for an initial heat of 150F (65.5C), a grist moisture content of 2 %, a grist temperature of 80F (27C), and a mashing rate of 2.5 brl/Qr, the striking heat would be 156F (69C) assuming the volume of liquor to be measured at 60F (15.5C). Using a grist moisture content of 6 %, the corresponding striking heat would be 159F (70.5C). With the thick mashes (about 2.5 brl/Qr) used in infusion mashing, it is difficult to raise the temperature once the mixing is completed and is usually not attempted. Heat transfer is particularly slow and the use of steam-jacketed vessels with the thick mash can lead to localized baking of the materials. It is, however, possible in some circumstances to pass free steam into the mash and this causes very little dilution of the mash, an important factor in the protection of mash enzymes. On the other hand, the temperature of the mash may be raised by pumping hot liquor underneath the mash (underletting); thus a stand of 145F (63C) may be followed by underletting to raise the temperature to 155F (68C). A further formula has been devised to assist in the calculation of the temperature of liquor underlet. It is approximate because it does not take into account heat losses from the equipment. Final Mash Temperature = (M(S +R) + QT)/(S + R + Q) where S and R are the same as in equation (1), M is the mash temperature before underletting and T the temperature of the introduced underletting liquor; Q is the weight of water in the mash in appropriate units. In order to convert Q into volume of liquor, it must be multiplied by the weight of malt in the mash and divided by the weight of water in one unit volume, expressed in the same units of weight. The infusion-mash tun (Fig. 10.4) is traditionally circular, varies very much in diameter, but is usually 6-8 ft in depth and in some cases even deeper. Although the traditional wooden construction has the advantage of heat insulation, wood soon becomes spongy. - ------------------------------------------ Note that the equation I provided took into account the heat capacity of the tun (important in our case) and allowed one to use it to do a step infusion mash. My equation did not take into account the slaking heat of the malt. In the above example, a quarter is 448 lbs and a barrel is 36 imperial gallons or 36/0.833 = 43.2 US gallons. So the grist/liquor ratio is for 2.5 brl/Qr = 0.96 or ~ 1 quart/lb. Keep on Brewin' Dave Burley Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 10:41:46 -0800 From: "John Palmer" <jjpalmer at gte.net> Subject: Re: Beginners Guide to Mashing - Mash pH In an otherwise good post encouraging brewers who have not have tried all-grain brewing before to Just Go For It, Jim had one instruction that I particularly disagreed with. To wit: >Add about 1 tablespoon of gypsum (to the mash)...The experts will point out the "1 >tablespoon" of gypsum is a pretty crude guess. Probably, but water chemistry isn't a huge >issue for most people for their first beer. Okay, maybe not huge, but it is important. The axiom Don't Play With Matches is appropriate here. There is more to the issue of adding gypsum than it just being a crude guess. The whole purpose of adding gypsum or any other salt to the mash is to manipulate the mash pH. The mash pH depends on 2 main variables: the grainbill and the mineral content of the mash water. The combination of these will produce the mash pH. HOPEFULLY, that pH is around 5.7 If it's not, (you need to measure it to be sure) you can add salts to adjust it. There are several resources, online and otherwise, that can lead you through the calculations. One thing that is not well known is that the concept of Residual Alkalinity is the best way to understand the mash pH and adjust it. (Do a search in the HBD archives for keywords: AJ and Kohlbach; or see the article on Water in last falls? BT. Sorry I cant locate my copy at the moment) The point I want to make is that unless you know that your water is relatively high in carbonates AND you are brewing without any dark malts, adding an unknown amount of gypsum to the mash is folly. In fact, if you know only those two things and add a known quantity, it is still folly. You are still flying blind. IF you are going to mash for the first time and have no clue as to your water's mineral content then you are better off adding nothing, and brewing a neutral recipe that includes only some coloring malt like medium caramel (crystal 60) and base malt. The preferred way to start all-grain brewing is to understand how the malts and residual alkalinity combine to determine mash pH and brew your recipes accordingly. Of Course, I didn't start out that way, and neither did the other 90% of us. When I started, I took a class at a local brew shop (Fun Fermentations) (now, sadly, defunct) and there Don (an experienced all-grainer) told me what styles Los Angeles-area water was good for, (Pale Ales, Brown Ales, and Porters), because of our moderate calcium and magnesium levels and our moderate-to-high carbonate levels. I brewed a porter for my first all-grain and was ecstatic with my success. Sorry to turn a simple cautionary comment into a tirade, but once I started explaining I couldn't stop. Good post Jim. John Palmer Palmer House Brewery and Smithy http://www.realbeer.com/jjpalmer Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 13:31:12 EST From: JPullum127 at aol.com Subject: i need more head my first 3 all grain batches have all come out really well except there isn't much head. carbonation is good with 3/4 cup corn sugar. glassware is properly cleaned. extract batches have never had this problem. mashes have been single infusion with tempof 154-156. i know some folks add a little wheat malt for this,not sure how much to try without affecting the character of the style i'm going for. any recs. or other ideas? thanks marc Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 12:48:14 -0700 From: "Eric McIndoo" <emcindoo at micron.net> Subject: re: Fermentor geometry/characterstics Nathan Kanous wrote "My thoughts are that the plastic was much more effective than the glass at transferring heat from the brew to the atmosphere and the glass held it in. Therefore, higher temps, more vigorous fermentation and other attendant effects. I suppose that it could be the "open" style of fermentation in plastic that allowed this to occur. Essentially the same event, just a different reason." Actually, glass is better at dissipating heat than plastic. This comes from many years of experience of chilling growth media for bacteria in both plastic and glass containers. In my experience, glass sometimes takes half the time that plastic does (to freeze water/growth media from room temp). Just to prove this to yourself, pour hot water into a plastic cup and your pint glass and feel the outside each. If the plastic is the same thickness as the glass, the plastic will take much longer to heat up. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 1999 20:33:48 +0000 From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com> Subject: Pithy Response to Witty Post John Varady proposes to sour a wit by means of some Pilsner beer which he has innoculated with a couple of barley corns. Sour it will probably become but as there is little low molecular weight sugar present to feed lactobacillis it is probably going to be acetobacter, feeding on ethanol, which will predominate and produce acetic acid rather than lactic. In other words, I think it probable that the Pils will turn into malt vinegar rather than the desired lactic acid containing broth. In the Guiness process I believe it is sugar containing wort that is fermented (partially by) lactos thus producing the sour beer used to tart-up the main volume. - -- A. J. deLange Numquam in dubio, saepe in errore. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 1999 15:38:41 -0500 From: Drewmeister <drewmstr at erols.com> Subject: Mash/Lauter Tun I currently am using a 5 Gal Gott cooler for mashing, works great, but I transfer my mash over to a 2-bucket (Zapap type) lauter tun. I want to eliminate the extra equipment, and extra step of transferring by converting my Gott cooler. I thought info would be all over the web. I'm considering two systems (gonna start a debate here). The Phil's Phalse Bottom and the EZ Masher. Regardless of what system I go with, I was wanting info on replacing the faucet that comes on the Gott cooler. Does the Gott EZ Masher come with this attachment, or do I use a simple spigot that is used on bottling buckets??? Has anyone converted a Gott cooler using the EZ Masher??? I use a Phil's Sparge Arm, which I love. Also, for people using sparge arms, what do you use as your hot liquor tank (HLT) to keep the temp up during sparging??? Or do you just insulate the HLT?? I currently use a 7 gallon bottling bucket as my HLT and just keep adding water from the stove as the level drops to insure that my sparge water is up to temperature. If using this method, it is best to avoid aerating the sparge water correct???(hot side aeration). Next week, it's 100 questions!!! Andrew Nix Drewmeister drewmstr at erols.com http://www.erols.com/drewmstr/ Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 15:15:38 -0600 From: Lou.Heavner at frco.com Subject: DME vs LME >>From: "Russell, D. A. (David)" <drussel3 at ford.com> >>Subject: Dry vs. Liquid Malt Extract >>What is the general consensus out there? Hi David, I do mainly all grain now, but when I do an extract batch or when I build starters, I use LME. I get it locally and my supplier gets it in 55 gal drums. They have a reportedly high turnover so it is fresh. They have several flavors (light, dark, wheat, Munich, etc) to choose from and I can buy as much or as little as I want. I can go get a cup or 2 for building a starter or exactly the right amount for whatever I am brewing. No cans to mess with. They claim that their light LME makes a lighter colored wort/beer than their lightest DME. This makes sense because the drying process will probably cause more darkening even if it is relatively low temperature spray drying. Their price for LME is less than for the equivalent DME (or cans of LME, for that matter) as long as you buy it out of the bulk containers. If I were planning to store extract at home for long periods, if I were buying it mail order, or if the cost favored it, I'd lean towards DME. In my situation, I avoid the cans and dry malt extract altogether unless there was a specific reason like using Laaglander for extra dextrins or rice extract for for an American style. Your situation may be different so also YMMV. Cheers! Lou - Austin Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 1999 14:12:13 -0800 From: "Larry Maxwell" <Larry at bmhm.com> Subject: Re: Re: Malt Mill Blues > Subject: Re: Malt Mill Blues > > Hey Folks, > > Although I learn a lot from this digest and I do know how to use my PgDn > key, I am beginning to become tired of the seemingly constant arguing about > whose malt mill is my efficient or more like a commercial mill <snip> I have been pleasantly surprised by the quality of their debate and commend them for their effort to avoid it degenerating into pointless bickering. As long as each one has something new and reasonably informative to add in a post, I would like to hear it. I intend to purchase or build a mill, and having two interested parties debate the merits of their products is useful to me. It is unusual to have two manufacturers go head to head in a debate, and I only wish manufacturers of everyday items I purchase were willing to engage in debates for the benefit of consumers. Larry Maxwell San Diego Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 1999 17:30:47 -0500 From: "Eric R. Tepe" <erictepe at fuse.net> Subject: California Common Collective, I was wondering if there were any other commercial representatives of the Steam beers/California Common style besides Anchor. Thanks in advance to all who reply Eric Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 17:47:09 -0800 From: Alan Gilbert <alan_gilbert at mac.symantec.com> Subject: BeerTrader Mailing List (NEW!) Attention all homebrewers! I'm assuming you all like beer (big assumption right? :) I'm also assuming that you (like me and many other homebrewers I know) buy a significant amount of beer besides what you brew, right? Ever lived in another part of the country where you could get a beer you just can't get where you live now? Ever visited another country where you tasted a heavenly beer that isn't imported where you are? Ever felt like trying another homebrewers perfect beer (an Uerige copy perhaps) after reading his post on HBD? I know I have. Well, I had an idea!!! I started a mailing list called "BeerTrader". It is in digest form so you will only get spammed once a day if you subscribe (and then only if people post), so it should be very low bandwidth. The purpose is thus: post about a beer you've been looking for or one you want to trade, and perhaps somebody, somewhere (this country or another) will let you know if they have or can get what you want. You never know. Here's all you got to do. Email a subscription request to: Requests at BrewCam.com with a body of "subscribe BeerTrader" (subject doesn't matter) Once you are subscribed you can post by sending your message to: BeerTrader at BrewCam.com I'm looking forward to some lively beer trading. -Alan Gilbert BrewMaster at BrewCam.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 20:40:48 EST From: SRNagley at aol.com Subject: kegging/bottling questions Fellow Brewers, As a recent convert to kegging, with a dedicated serving fridge, I find myself being able to have no more than 2 beers on draught at any one time. My supply of previously bottled beers has been dwindling and one of the pleasures I've enjoyed about this hobby has been the variety of beers that I've had on hand to drink. So I've been thinking of purchasing a CP bottle filler. My 2 questions in this regard are: 1) Does anyone have any experience with the Phil's CP bottle filler? I've seen one mail order place recomend it as being the easiest to use. Some directions of other fillers that I've seen have seemingly required three hands to operate. (Dan L need not respond :) unless he wants to privately) 2) Can I bottle fill say, half a 5 gal batch after having consumed the first half from the keg, and then store this at cellar temps? (currently ~ 60F, bound to increase during the summer months). Or conversely, I could bottle 1/2 the batch right off and then proceed to drink the second half from the keg. I'm wondering about having the beer initially cold for the bottling and then having it warm to cellar temps and then keeping it for several months. I would imagine that the shelf life would be shortened but will I be running into any other problems here? While I've stored beers in my basement for a year or more, these have all been bottle conditioned. Many thanks for any help you can provide. Steve Nagley Muskrat Brewing Old Forge, Pa Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 04:01:18 +0000 From: William Frazier <billfrazier at worldnet.att.net> Subject: Gypsum Jim Cave makes a nice presentation for first-time all-grain brewers, as have several others recently. However, there should be some caution about arbitrary addition of brewing salts to brewing liquor without first knowing your local water quality. Jim goes so far as to say... "The experts will point out the "1 tablespoon" of gypsum is a pretty crude guess. Probably, but water chemistry isn't a huge issue for most people for their first beer." My local water (Kansas City area) starts out with 152 ppm sulfate (gypsum = calcium sulfate). If I added one tablespoon gypsum for a 5 gallon brew I would have about 575 ppm sulfate. There aren't many world class brewing waters with anything that approaches that level of sulfate. I would try the first all-grain brew without any gypsum, or better yet ask your local water department for a water quality report. Then consult one of the homebrew books on water-mineral adjustments. You may find your local water is just fine or you might want to dilute with distilled or reverse osmosis water to reduce the concentration of certain minerals. Bill Frazier Johnson County, Kansas Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 03/10/99, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96