---

	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:
  Need head (Lance Levsen)
  Propane burners (Lance Levsen)
  Carboys? NOT! (Louis Bonham)
  Imploding Pyrex Carboys - an apology and a retraction ("S. Wesley")
  Re: Brewing w/o hops ("Charles T. Major")
  Removing Hops/Trub, and Plumbing a Gott Cooler (RCAYOT)
  Mill Gap Settings (BioCoat)
  Hop Allergies and Gott Conversions (Dan Listermann)
  Re: Beginners Guide to Mashing - Mash pH (Jeff Renner)
  re:Mash/Lauter Tun (Michael A. Owings)
  Strike temp - heat the malt (Domenick Venezia)
  Lauter Time, Wort aeration, Debate (Jack Schmidling)
  Re: Beginners Guide to Mashing - Mash pH (Jim Cave)
  kegging pressure (Bryan Gros)
  Lager Pitching Temp (Troy Hager)
  RE: Malt Mills, ho-hum? (LaBorde, Ronald)
  Addition of calcium salts to the mash (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
  Re: Implosive carboys. (Ross Reid)
  Mashing Formulas Again (John Varady)
  ACID MALT ("Jeff Carlson")
  phloaters! (Brent Dowell)
  BT Palexperiment (Greg Remake)
  BeerTrader Corrections (PanheadMan)


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: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 00:31:09 -0600
From: Lance Levsen <lance.l at home.com>
Subject: Need head

From: JPullum127 at aol.com
Subject: i need more head


> 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

I have only brewed ales, but the CAMRA book, "Brew British Real Ale" 
by Wheeler and Protz really helped me. Not to mention my local 
supplier and HBDer Steve Cavan. He suggested at least 5% torrified 
wheat. The book backed his statements (where I suspect he got the 
info :-) and my head is great. I also bumped up my DME for priming a 
touch, going from C.P's 1 1/4 cup to about 1 3/8's. Good and long 
lasting with age.

In regards to affecting style, I am finding that the addition of the 
torrified wheat has actually made my bitters and pales much better, 
go figure.

 -Lance



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 00:34:17 -0600
From: Lance Levsen <lance.l at home.com>
Subject: Propane burners

Robert C. McDonald asked about Propane Burners.

I just picked up a 170k BTU Morrone burner. Having come from the 
stove top
this is absolutely wonderful.  I've done 32 liter boils in 20 minutes 
and 8
liter boils in 20 minutes. It uses a lot of propane (and the mother 
of all
boil overs for the unwary)  but I like it.  I can adjust the output 
down to a
blue flame, large blue flame, mind you.

Using it for initial boil, sparge heating, and boiling wort for 60 
minutes I figure I can  get 4 batches out of a 20 lb propane tank.

The propane dealer we talked to said , "100K BTU = 5 lbs propane/hr." 
 I don't
know if that is accurate so I don't put much faith in it. I have 
never gone much more
then 3/4 of the valve and then only to bring to boil.

I mash in a Gott so am not a good indicator in regards to  
maintaining mash
temperatures.

On my boil pot (32 liter canner) I have a large diameter pot, so I 
like it,
the sparge though is much smaller and tends to lose heat from the 
flame
blowing around the base and up the wall of the pot.

On the whole my brew session has been cut from 8 hours to 4, not 
including
cleaning up.

Hope this helps.

 -Lance



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 04:15:20 -0600
From: Louis Bonham <lkbonham at hypercon.com>
Subject: Carboys? NOT!

Hi folks:

Gotta agree with Dave Burley's warning about putting any kind of serious
pressure -- positive or negative -- on carboys.  When I wrote Simon with a
number of comments regarding his vacuum dealcoholization experiment, what I
actually wrote was:

> (2)    What do you envision using as the vessel for vacuum boiling 3 gallons
> (or more) of NA homebrew?  I can't imagine a carboy -- even the hyperexpensive
> Pyrex ones -- being able to handle the pressure without imploding.

Somehow Simon transmorgified this into me suggesting that pyrex carboys (yes,
they do exist, but cost many times as much as regular ones) might be used.
IMHO, Dave is correct -- pulling enough of a vacuum to boil liquid in even a
thick walled, $200 pyrex carboy is probably a recipe for an implosive disaster.
Please don't do it.  And don't even *think* about doing it with a regular carboy
 . . . .

On other fronts . . . .

Many folks have written me in the past to ask where they can get a copies of
various ASBC methods of analysis, because the ASBC book is not commonly found in
libraries, even major university libraries.  In doing little research the other
day, however, I discovered that many of the ASBC MoA's (as well as many more
MoA's and useful tables not found in the ASBC publication) are reprinted in the
"Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International" -- a reference work that
*is* commonly found in most university and big city libraries.  You can browse
the table of contents of this work at:

http://www.aoac.org/pubs/pubcat16.htm

Worth leafing through if you're into the analytical side of things.

LKB



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 07:13:17 -0500
From: "S. Wesley" <WESLEY at MAINE.MAINE.EDU>
Subject: Imploding Pyrex Carboys - an apology and a retraction

Dave Burley expresses a concern which I share regarding using Pyrex 
carboys as vacuum vessels in the production of NA beer.  Clearly this 
is has the potential to be dangerous and it would be prudent to err 
on the side of safety and not try it.  I would like to apologise to Louis 
Bonham and Bill Frazier for dragging them into this.  I was simply 
trying to give alternative suggestions for a vacuum vessel.  What 
really happened was that they asked me what I thought of the idea of 
using a pyrex carboy.  I was the one who said that it would probably 
be o.k..  I said this based on my experience working with some rather 
large pyrex vessels that are used under vacuum.  These containers are 
probably thicker in the wall than the Pyrex carboys and are 
specifically designed for vacuum use.  The reason I mentioned Louis 
and Bill was that I generally make a habit of trying to not trying to 
take credit ideas which are not my own.


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 08:11:11 -0600 (Central Standard Time)
From: "Charles T. Major" <ctmajor at samford.edu>
Subject: Re: Brewing w/o hops

I've never brewed without any hops, but I did make a 
rosemary IPA once where I replaced the flavor and aroma hop 
additions with 2 oz of fresh rosemary, and the flavor was 
quite good.  I've also heard that rosemary has many of the 
same preservative qualities of hops, so perhaps rosemary is 
at least a partial solution to your problem.

Regards,
Tidmarsh Major
Birmingham, Alabama



Return to table of contents


Date: 10 Mar 1999 08:44:35 -0500
From: RCAYOT at solutia.com
Subject: Removing Hops/Trub, and Plumbing a Gott Cooler

     HBD'ers
     
     I want to thank all of the people who responded to my request for 
     information regarding methods for removing pelletized hops and trub 
     from hot wort.  The consensus was that "you can't do that!"  I guess 
     most people use a mixture of whole, plug, and pelletized hops as 
     pelletized hops are very difficult to remove from hot wort with a 
     slotted drain, screen, or "chore boy-dip tube" methods.  I guess I 
     will probably stick with plug/pellet mixtures and try things myself.  
     If I come up with anything, I'll let you all know.
     
     Second subject: Plumbing Gott coolers, and Phils Phalse bottoms:
     
     I use both 5 and 10g round coolers with Phils Phalse bottoms, and 
     plumb them through the wall of the cooler using a bung from a minikeg, 
     available at any homebrew shop for about $0.75!  I then pull a length 
     of tubing (1/2" ?) through the hole in the bung- it seals very nicely! 
      I also use a small bit of silicone sealant around the inner lip of 
     the sealing surface of the bung, never leaks!  And I can easily remove 
     the tubing and bottom for cleaning.  As for using the Phils Phalse 
     bottoms and floating, I usually mash in using alternate measures of 
     water and grain.  I also use my mash paddle (the lower end of a 
     plastic two piece rubber raft paddle) to hold down the false bottom 
     while mashing in, some leakage, but easily removed during 
     recirculations.  My biggest problem with the Phils bottom is the 
     relatively low open area, large holes.  I wish to thank Phil Listerman 
     for developing these items and promoting the ease of all grain 
     brewing, it certainly was a big step up form my Zapap!
     
     Regarding open fermenters:
     I have fermented in open fermenters for a very long time, mostly 
     because I am stingy and can't abide by throwing away all that beeer 
     from the blow-off when fermenting in a carbouy.  Oh sure I could not 
     fill up the carboy all the way, what a waste of space!!!  Open 
     fermenters in the form of plastic pails aare a great way to ferment, 
     there are many 7g pails available, and some even have bottom drains.  
     Yes sanitation is a very real problem but can be handled by taking 
     cleaning up before and after brewing serioulsy.  In addition, there 
     are several strains of ale yeast that are truly top cropping, that is 
     they rise to the surface when fermenting in hte foam.  Now when you 
     have an open fermenter, you can scrape off the early brown head that 
     contains a lot of dead yeast and hop resins, but the next crop of head 
     will be loaded with teh most viable and CLEAN yeast you have ever 
     used.  This technique is my prefered way to collect enough yeast for 
     high gravity brewing.  Having said that, open fermenters are also a 
     good way to contaminate yeast, so the number of generations you can 
     repitch are greatly reduced when using open fermenters.  I use a new 
     starter almost every time, but you would not believe the quantity and 
     quality of yeas tthat can be obtained in this manner, all of you high 
     gravity brewers out there should realy consider this the next time you 
     plan a big beer.
     
     Regards,
     Roger Ayotte
     
     P.S. YES, enough on the mills!!!!!XX#%%&*!


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 09:48:10 EST
From: BioCoat at aol.com
Subject: Mill Gap Settings

Can someone tell me what the correct gap for milling my grain should be.  I
understand that this may change with different types of malts, can you also
give me help with this issue.

Thanks
Rick Georgette


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 10:05:02 -0500
From: Dan Listermann <72723.1707 at compuserve.com>
Subject: Hop Allergies and Gott Conversions

Curt Woodson asks about brewing without hops.  I have brewed beers using
dandelions as bittering agents.  The last batch used a pound of undried
pedals.  I was a little disapointed in the brew because it had a
"Budweiser" taste to it.  I was looking for something really interesting.


Last spring I went to pick for another batch.  Apparently I have 
developed
an allergy to them.  I got about half way through when the nose and eyes
went.  It took about two days to clear up - or at least it seemed that 
way.
  I have to figure out a way to get the kids to do it for me this spring.


A flavor developer gave me a bottle of dandelion extract a few years ago.
 

That may be something to try on a small scale.

I have an heather extract  from Royal Piper that I have been meaning to
try.


Andrew Nix asks about Gott cooler conversions.  I recommend just using a 
#4
drilled stopper ( # 3 will work as well ) with a piece of 3/8"  tubing (
copper or racking cane ).  Connect the tube to the Phalse Bottom with a
short piece of vinyl hose.

To control the output flow, use an inverted Psyphon ( I can't help 
myself).
 Make a hook from the "J" portion of a racking cane, attach it to the
output hose and hook it over the side of a small pot.  The flow rate can 
be
finely regulated by raising and lowering the pot and there are no
constrictions to get clogged.

Dan Listermann            dan at listermann.com  or 
72723.1707 at compuserve.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 10:12:05 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Beginners Guide to Mashing - Mash pH

"John Palmer" <jjpalmer at gte.net> wrote
>The whole purpose of adding gypsum or any other salt to the mash is
>to manipulate the mash pH.

Of course, the other thing that happens with gypsum addition is an increase
of sulfate, which is desireable for pale ales, especially English, but
undesireable with many other styles, especially pale lagers with noble
hops, where it results in a harsh bitterness.  If you need to increase Ca++
in a pilsner, try CaCl2*2H2O.  I've wondered if other Ca salts might be
preferable, such as calcium lactate or calcium phosphate (is this
soluble?), where the anions are normal components of a mash.  'Course,
it's hard enough to get calcium chloride.

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: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 15:20:38 GMT
From: mikey at swampgas.com (Michael A. Owings)
Subject: re:Mash/Lauter Tun

> Has anyone converted a Gott cooler using the EZ Masher???  

I recently switched from using a kettle w/ an EasyMasher to a 10 Gal
Gott w/ an EasyMasher. The Gott spigot just unscrews from the cooler.
You then just stick the easy masher in where the spigot was. Should
take all of 15 seconds. My efficency ranges from 88-90% with a nice
long sparge (which I usually don't do) down to about 70% with a no or
fast minimum sparge (more usual -- grain's cheap). I've been pretty
happy with the whole arrangement. Usual EasyMasher benefit of short
recirc times.

You'll need to either order the Gott easymasher directly from JSP or
build one yourself, as it's almost impossible to find the Gott version
retail. Building one is a simple affair:

A bored rubber cork is used to replace the Gott spigot. Through a hole
in the center of the cork goes a bit of bent copper tubing to which is
attached the SS screen on the part inside the cooler. You will need to
provide your own spigot - I attach a short piece of vinyl tubing to
the outlet side of the copper pipe. To this I attach a cheap plastic
spigot (available from your local HW or HB store). You could also use
a pinch clamp. The SS screen (sold as the Sure Screen) is available
from a number of sources, including Brewers Resource
(http://www.brewtek.com) and a number of other vendors.

Good luck -- mikey
***********************
Lord grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change.
The courage to change the things I can. *** And the wisdom to 
hide the bodies of the people I had to kill because they pissed 
me off ***


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 07:23:08 -0800
From: Domenick Venezia <demonick at zgi.com>
Subject: Strike temp - heat the malt


Someone once suggested that if you are having trouble hitting your
mash temperature using strike temperature calculations just heat your
malt in the oven to the mash temperature and use water at the mash 
temperature too.

BTW - I have never tried this myself since I always hit my mash temp
within 1 C using a preheated (with hot tap water) 10 gallon Gott and
formulas from Kelly Jones' Aug 1993 HBD post.

Cheers!

Domenick Venezia
Venezia & Company, LLC
Maker of PrimeTab
(206) 782-1152  phone
(206) 782-6766  fax orders
demonick at zgi dot com



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 09:22:09 -0800
From: Jack Schmidling <arf at mc.net>
Subject: Lauter Time, Wort aeration, Debate

"Curt Speaker" <SPEAKER at SAFETY-1.SAFETY.PSU.EDU>

" Dan mentioned last week that if your lauter/sparging process 
is taking 30 minutes or less, you are leaving something behind...

Simply proves why this forum generates so much high quality debate. 

I used to throttle back the EM to force about 60 minutes sparge
time.  Since I installed the EMII in my mash tun several years
ago, I have been draining the kettle as fast as it will drain 
and have not noticed the slightest change in extraction. Not 
only is this less than 30 minutes but I make 10 gallon batches.

It is my humble opinion that if that is the best advice you have
ever received, perhaps it is time to take another look at your
lautering system.

Keith Busby <kbusby at ou.edu>

"I used to aerate my wort by splashing and sloshing but for
the last two batches have used  the aquarium pump/aeration 
stone method.....

For those who were not around during another "great debate", the
results of my controlled experiment on aeration are posted on my
web page in the Application Notes section.

Bottom line is, I chucked the pump and went back to sloshing.

"Larry Maxwell" <Larry at bmhm.com>

"I have been pleasantly surprised by the quality of their debate and
commend them for their effort....

Thank you for the kind words and keep in mind that other folks with
equally strong views were also heard from.  In fact, I thought I 
was debating him not Dan.

"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.

Funny, I was thinking the same thing.  Seems more like a valuable
service than an evil to be bemoaned.  After all, one can always 
skip what one is not interested in.

js

- -- 

Visit our WEB pages:     http://user.mc.net/arf

ASTROPHOTO OF THE WEEK..... New Every Monday



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 08:21:09 -0800
From: Jim Cave <cave at psc.org>
Subject: Re: Beginners Guide to Mashing - Mash pH


	...John Palmer is of course right, again, in the technical sense.  Perhaps 
I am lucky with my water: hardness 2-4 ppm and pH 6.8.  However, in the 
days when I actually worried about such things, if my pH paper could be 
relied on, the indicated mash pH was under 5, and supposedly suboptimal.  I 
never bother taking pH's any more.

	One of the topics that had me worried forever when I first started mashing 
was the subject of water chemistry and mash pH.  However, the local that I 
knew who were doing it, never bothered about it and consequently neither do 
I.  I just would like the beginner out there to give mashing a go, 
regardless of their water chemistry.  Then discuss your result with a more 
experienced brewer and judge and twick the recipe from there.

	Historical Pale ales supposedly are high in gypsum and since my water has 
very low amounts of anything in it, I routinely add it.

	GET OUT THERE AND MASH, DAMN IT!!  IT'S SIGNIFICANTY CHEAPER AND THE 
RESULTS ARE WORTH IT!!

				Jim Cave



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 08:43:05 -0800
From: Bryan Gros <bryang at xeaglex.com>
Subject: kegging pressure


Fritz had some questions about keging.

First, kegging has two g's

As for keg pressures and getting proper carbonation, it isn't 
straightforward. In my experience, there is a lot of trial and error. 
But changes are easy.

It is easiest to carbonate the colder the keg is. Ideally, you chill the 
keg to near freezing, then crank up the pressure (22 or 28psi maybe) 
and shake the keg for several minutes. You can hear the CO2 flowing 
as more is dissolved in the beer. Then put the keg back in the cooler 
to rest. You may need to repeat this process, depending on how full 
your keg is. Before serving, raise the temperature to your preferred 
serving temp and release some of the pressure.  Serve and check 
the carbonation. I generally dispense at about 15psi, which is  higher 
than most people say. My regulator is not ideal, since it has the most 
precision between 10 and 40 psi. So it is hard for me to go below 10.

And with my setup, I don't leave the keg hooked up all the time. I just
recharge at the end of the night, or when the dispensing pressure 
drops. If the beer starts to become over carbonated, I back off on the 
pressure. This sometimes happens as the beer volume decreases 
and the gas volume increases. If I prefer more carbonation, I crank up 
the pressure that  I store the keg with.

Also, contrary to popular belief, I haven't found much of a difference 
between four feet of 3/8" tubing (to a cobra tap) and 1 foot. Maybe 
because I don't keep a constant pressure in the kegs...


*******
by the way, when people get bored with a topic (like mills), why do 
they feel the need to tell everyone they are bored? Just let those 
still interested keep the discussion going and you can skip over it.

*******
>Curt Speaker <SPEAKER at SAFETY-1.SAFETY.PSU.EDU> writes:
>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. ... I took Dan's recommendation to heart and slowed down 
>my lautering process....My extraction rate jumped by about 3-5 points 
>per gallon.

I agree. Good advice. That was the biggest question I had when going all
grain, and I didn't see it addressed in any of the standard texts (at least
not in '92). From the HBD, I learned to sparge longer and it makes 
a big difference. Sparging time and the crush are probably the most
important aspects in getting respectable efficiency from your malt.

  - Bryan

Bryan Gros
Oakland CA
gros at bigfoot.com
Draught Board Homebrew Club




Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 08:52:59 -0800
From: Troy Hager <thager at bsd.k12.ca.us>
Subject: Lager Pitching Temp

Fellow HBDers,

After an Alt and a Kolsch, I plan on doing a full lager. I have read Noonan
(NBLB) and the posts here but still have a couple nagging confusions. First
of all, Noonan suggests, "Where practical, it is advisable to separate the
chilled wort from the cold break in a settling tank." p.170

Q: How many of you find this "practical" and do it?

He also states, "For lager beers, yeast is generally pitched into wort that
is at or near the lower end of the intended fermentation temperature range.
Although yeast will generally reproduce more quickly if pitched into
relatively warmer wort, it will also produce more diacetyl, fusel alcohols,
and esters.  p.169  The wort temperature is generally allowed to rise to 39
to 43 degrees F before it is racked off the cold break into the fermenter
along with the yeast starter... Where a settling tank is not employed, the
wort is generally pitched at 42 to 47 degrees F."p. 170

With my immersion chiller I usually get it chilled down to about 65F maybe
60F if I let the chiller run for another ten mins or so.

Q: Do I pitch the yeast at 60F and then throw it in the fridge to drop the
temp? (Noonan warns of danger: "Controling the temperature at the beginning
of fermentation is more important than controlling the temperature near the
end of fermentation, because esters and fusel alcohols are largely produced
when the yeast is respiring, during the lag and reproductive phases of
fermentation." p173)

Q: Or do I drop the temp in the fridge first and then pitch the yeast. (The
danger here is obviously longer lag times - as we all know, one of the
major causes of bad beer.)

So, as you see, this is a confusion. What has worked for you? Private email
is fine!

Thanks!


 -Troy 




Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 10:46:07 -0600
From: rlabor at lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald)
Subject: RE: Malt Mills, ho-hum?

>>>>
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 stumbled upon a way to make the live critters show themselves.  I had
placed about a ten pound paper grocery bag containing crushed malt into a 5
gal. plastic bucket and sealed the bucket with it's cover (beating it down
with a rubber mallet), two days later, upon opening the bucket, about a
dozen or so critters were all over the white bucket walls.  They must have
come up for air?, or moisture?

Ron

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



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 12:38:03 -0500 (EST)
From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker at welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: Addition of calcium salts to the mash

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

Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 10:41:46 -0800
From: "John Palmer" <jjpalmer at gte.net>
Subject: Re: Beginners Guide to Mashing - Mash pH

John Palmer responded to the suggestion of adding gypsum to mash water of
unknown composition>
_______________________________________________________________________
"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."
_______________________________________________________________________

I totally agree that you should have some idea of what the composition of
your water is before making salt additions, this will allow you to make
rationally designed modifications of the water. However, it should be 
pointed out that pH adjustment is not the sole purpose of adding calcium
salts such as gypsum (calcium sulphate) or calcium chloride to the mash
water - these are also supplying calcium ions which have very important
stabilizing effects on the amylase proteins. These effects can be quite
large. For instance, if you plot the enzyme activity of alpha amylase /in
the absence of calcium/ versus pH you do indeed see maximal activity just
above pH = 5 with fairly steep decreases to either side of this pH value.
But, if you add calcium to the enzyme you now retain 100% activity even
with increases of several pH units! (note however that there is still a
steep drop off if the pH is decreased). Calcium also stabilizes amylases
against heat denaturation/inactivation. Such effects can be beneficial,
giving more robust enzyme activity in the mash. 

Cheers!

 -Alan Meeker
Baltimore, MD
 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Curiouser and curiouser..."
		-Lewis Carol
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>




Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 18:06:36 GMT
From: mrreid at golden.net (Ross Reid)
Subject: Re: Implosive carboys.

Greetings,
I read with interest Dave Burley's post on implosive carboys in HBD
#2974 and now have several questions for him and/or the collective.
Because of a bad back I wanted to devise a system for racking both my
beer and wine without the necessity of constantly lifting the "from"
carboy to a position higher than the receiving carboy. Or in some cases,
carrying them up a narrow flight of stairs.
In short, I use one of those two holed carboy caps on the receiving
carboy. The larger center hole has a standard racking cane inserted,
almost to the bottom of the carboy. This in turn is connected to another
racking cane in the "from" carboy. Then, connecting my vacuum pump to
the smaller connection on the carboy cap, I pull a vacuum on the
receiving carboy, thus transferring the contents with no lifting.
I gave some thought to the danger of implosion but, when I operated the
BOP, one of my suppliers sold a vacuum pump and caps with the express
purpose of degassing wine in glass carboys prior to bottling and
therefore assumed that pulling a vacuum on my carboys would be safe.
I have also accomplished the same type of transfer by applying CO2
pressure to the "from" carboy for same level transfers.
In your opinion, is there any safe vacuum (or CO2 pressure for that
matter) which could be applied to a standard glass carboy for same level
racking?
My vacuum pump has a high quality vacuum gauge plus a micrometer adjust
needle valve assembly to control the amount of vacuum. For same level
transfers, I use vacuum as little as 5" Hg. However, I have on occasion
used the system for moving liquid from my basement to the first floor
which, to accomplish in a reasonable time, requires a vacuum of approx.
15" Hg.
My only concession to the possibility of implosion has been the use of
safety glasses during such transfers. 
I've been using this system for about 2 years. Have I just been lucky?
Thanks for any input.
Cheers,
Ross Reid,
Branchton, ON, Canada.

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 15:13:09 -0500 (EST)
From: John Varady <rust1d at usa.net>
Subject: Mashing Formulas Again

David Burley writes in HBD 2971:
>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.

Really? I don't see that value on the M&BS chart you posted...


Then He posts in HBD 2974:
>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.
>
<<snip>>
>
>        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

Extrapolating the table you posted, .44 equates to a moisture content of
about 10%!! If you had this malt stored for a few years, I would imagine
that it would have begun to rot at those moisture levels.

Why do you say that you should be using .20 (or 8.33/4*.2 = .417), which
according to the M&BS chart posted indicates a moisture content of about 8%.
What kind of malt are you using that has a moisture content of 8%? A quick
check of Briess' web site shows that all malts they produce have a moisture
content of 4% which is right in line with my suggestion in HBD 2970 to use
 .4 as the malt heap capacity.

This all comes back to your suggestion to mash in at a rate of 1.5 quarts
per pound using 180F water added to 65F grist to achieve an initial mash
temp of 155F. If I use the formula you provide from M&BS and an 8% moisture
content, I still calculate the initial mash temp to be 168F (the formula I
provided in HBD 2970 calculates this to be 166.3F, close) using these numbers.

(.42*65+3.1*180)/(.42+3.1)+(12.4/2)/(.42+3.1) = 168F

The same old assumptions you accuse me of making are supported by your
cherished M&BS. Your calculations are not (and please don't tell me that I
don't take into account the heat absorbed by the mash tun and paddle. This
would have to be 13F for your numbers to work!).


Later,

John

PS> Has there been enough said on this subject yet? We'll see.

- -- 
John Varady                     The HomeBrew Recipe Calculating Program
Boneyard Brewing                Custom Neon Beer Signs For Home Brewers
Glenside, PA                            Get More Information At:
rust1d at usa.net                  http://www.netaxs.com/~vectorsys/varady 



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 99 15:29:58 -0500
From: "Jeff Carlson"<carlsonj at gvsu.edu>
Subject: ACID MALT


     
     Yesterday in the local homebrew supply shop I saw a malt called acid 
     malt. What is acid malt? Could it be used in a stout to give it that
     special tang? What amount would you use? Any help appreciated.  




Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 20:33:44 GMT
From: bdowell at crl.com (Brent Dowell)
Subject: phloaters!

I Thought I would toss in my experience with a phils phloating phalse
bottom.  I had been using a 10 inch diameter in my 10 gallon Gott
cooler for mashing.  Although I handn't every really had problems with
it, I bought the 12 inch diameter one.  The first time I used it it
was the mash from hell.  It appears that while the 10inch one would
maintain it's slightly domed shape when there was a cooler load of
grain sitting on it, the 12 incher deformed and the bottom hole on the
pickup tube was sucking the plastic bottom of the mash tun.

I've gone back to using my 10 inch phloater and all is well.  BTW, I
really don't have much of a problem with it phloating, probably
because I load part of the grist in first, then some water, then some
grist, then some water, .........

Also, I use a fairly thick mash, so there isn't much of an opportunity
for it to phloat once the mash tun is loaded.  As usual, YMMV.  

Brent Dowell
Lone Unknown Brewing
Antioch CA


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 14:36:28 -0600
From: Greg Remake <gremake at gsbalum.uchicago.edu>
Subject: BT Palexperiment

Greetings all,

I found a couple of items to be very interesting in the BT article about
the Palexperiment results (it's on-line).  

One thing that struck me was the large proportion of infected brews.  I
think that result emphasizes the importance of sanitation and large
starters (and the fallacy of "pitchable" Wyeast packs).  I have to wonder
how "clean" my brews really are.  

Another interesting result was how far off predictive formulae were for
actual IBU levels.  One thing I noticed was the wide range of the
predictions.  Another observation was that most of the formulae's predicted
IBUs were low, which makes me suspicious.  The article points out that the
hops AA% was provided by the supplier and not independently determined, so
it could be that the hops were actually stronger than advertised.  Due to
this error, I don't think any of the formulae were proven or disproven.
Any thoughts?

Greg


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 15:57:23 EST
From: PanheadMan at aol.com
Subject: BeerTrader Corrections

Welcome to everyone who has subscribed to beertrader today.  I've been 
informed by a hbd reader that I made an error in the subscription 
instructions.  You actually need to put

   subscribe digest beertrader

in the body of your message (to request@ brewcam.com).

Also, due to a minor error on my part posting was not allowed this 
morning, but that has been fixed as well.  Sorry for any confusion.

Thanks for everyone's interest.

 -Alan Gilbert
brewmaster at brewcam.com


Return to table of contents

---