HOMEBREW Digest #3034 Wed 19 May 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

  re: Hardware question (John_E_Schnupp)
  Stirring ("Nathaniel P. Lansing")
  all grain brewing (ROATTW)" <ROATTW at UCMAIL.UC.EDU>
  Screen in boiling kettle (Manbeck, Brad J.)" <BJM at roisysinc.com>
  counter pressure bottle fillers (Tom.E.George)
  an alternative to magnetic stirrers ("Marc Sedam")
  Slick mouthfeel ("David Kerr")
  Re: Primetab (Steve Jackson)
  Re: Anybody have a recipe that clones Corona? (Jeff Renner)
  Idiotic State/Provincial Liquor Laws ("Alan McKay")
  Schaarbeek cherries (dolmans)
  water, water, everywhere. stirring = aeration? (fwd) (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
  BJCP Exam ("Houseman, David L")
  Oxygen in stirred worts (MICHAEL WILLIAM MACEYKA)
  Jethro Gump == Pat Babcock??? (HAHAHA) ("Jeffrey M. Kenton")
  Re: SS/Cu/Al Dielectric Corrosion ("Timmons, Frank")
  Multi-tier questions ("J. Doug Brown")
  Extract Barleywine ("Evans, Timothy")
  pw false bottom/cilantro/chiller agitation ("Bayer, Mark A")
  Water (AJ)
  Rye beer (Greg Remake)
  Re: Galvanic Corrosion between Al, Cu, SS ("John Palmer")
  babcock impersonations (JPullum127)
  The Jethro Gump "Reports" ("Rob Moline")
  Recirculation tribulations (ThomasM923)
  RE: Bottled beer tastes different than beer from the keg (Dave Humes)
  Mephitis sweet mephitis (ThomasM923)

Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! 2000 MCAB Qualifiers: Spirit of Free Beer! Competition 5/22/99 (http://burp.org/SoFB99); Oregon Homebrew Festival 5/22/99 (http://www.mtsw.com/hotv/fest.html); Buzz-Off! Competition 6/26/99 (http://www.voicenet.com/~rpmattie/buzzoff) 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: Mon, 17 May 1999 23:01:18 -0700 From: John_E_Schnupp at amat.com Subject: re: Hardware question >Does anybody have any suggestion on the best way to hook up the >burners. The jets are 3/8" flare. <snip> >I reluctant to use compression fittings, because I am >concerned about propane leaks. What is the best material for the tubing? >What types of fittings should I use? Any suggestions would be appreciated. Flare fittings, copper tubing. Compression fittings are NOT for gasses. Use a t-fittings to branch off the main line to each burner. You should need one less t-fitting than burners. If you are using high pressure burners, you may have a problem with the pressure if you have all the burners going at once. The burner should have a valve on it so you really don't need any additional valves. John Schnupp, N3CNL Dirty Laundry Brewery Colchester, VT 95 XLH 1200 Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 08:58:58 -0400 From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew at compuserve.com> Subject: Stirring Scott Murman says..." Just how much O2 diffusion occurs when stirring? My intuition tells me it's negligible compared with forcing O2 into solution. Stirring rouses the yeast and forces excess CO2 out of solution, both of which cause foaming, but I think you still need to perform oxygenation with some other means." I'll address the three assumptions in order: A)enough B)Mis-intuition, see A, C)yes, yes, and no The major points of a stirplate: A)It doesn't need refilled or certified periodicly. B)If you leave it running for 48 hours the room won't ignite the next time you turn on a light. C)No chance of over oxygenation and killing the yeast. D)The _constant_ stirring keeps exposing the entire solution to atmosphere allowing maximum absorbtion of O2. If you aerated to 8 ppm with an injection system the O2 levels begin immediately to fall, lost to metabolism and outgassing by CO2; it is not long before it is nil. The stirrer maintains the O2 levels_continuously_though at a lower level, but the yeast just need to have some available, not the 8 ppm needed in a "one-shot" aeration system. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 09:04:34 -0400 From: "Roat, Todd (ROATTW)" <ROATTW at UCMAIL.UC.EDU> Subject: all grain brewing I believe the general rule of thumb is approx. 1 quart of 172 degree water per pound of grain, all totaled, will bring the mash down to 152 degrees or so. Its not much different than the stovetop method. In general we are looking to hold the mash between 148-152 degrees for about an hour or until starch conversion is complete (as indicated by iodine test or,as I used to do it, never check but feel confident - if its been held at 152 for an hour it was always converted, so I quit checking). For an excellent article on getting started in all grain see an article by Dan Listermann called "Wanna Mash" at http://listermann.com/mash.html. <http://listermann.com/mash.html> What makes this article nice for a beginner is its emphasis on simplicity that in turn eliminates the intimidation factor. I am/was the type to keep brewing as simple as possible and the "chemistry of it all" bores me (sorry chem guys ;^). start with this simple approach mentality and,if you are of the mindset that enjoys all the complexities of brewing delve into all that later. Hope that helps. Todd Todd W. Roat Clinical Trials Coordinator EMCREG Coordinator Department of Emergency Medicine 231 Bethesda Avenue Cincinnati, Ohio 45267-0769 (P)513-558-5216 (F)513-558-5791 <mailto:emcreg at uc.edu> emcreg at uc.edu todd.roat at uc.edu <mailto:todd.roat at uc.edu> Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 8:27 -0600 From: "BJM (Manbeck, Brad J.)" <BJM at roisysinc.com> Subject: Screen in boiling kettle I have a ten gallon Polarware kettle that I use as my boiling vessel. I really enjoy the easy of use of opening the ball valve at the bottom and draining the cooled wort into my carboy. My only complaint is the amount of trub and hop particles that make it out of the kettle. I would like to rig some sort of screen / filter on the inside of the kettle so the trub and hop particles get filtered out before being drained into the carboy. Currently, I use the whirlpool technique on the cooled wort, and I use a screen inside a funnel on top of the carboy. I've heard of people using chore boys (stainless or copper pot scrubbies), an Easy Masher screen, and the Sure Screen for their screen / filter. What I am looking for is specific ways in which a screen / filter was attached to the inside of the kettle. Thanks in advance for any information! Private emails are OK Brad Manbeck bjm at roisysinc.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 08:28:51 -0500 From: Tom.E.George at email.heartland-health.com Subject: counter pressure bottle fillers On Mon, 17 May 1999 Bill Frazier wrote: > I would appreciate input on the various types/brands of >counterpressure filling equipment and any tips on filling by this method. Bill Check out Benjamin Machine Products at web site http://members.aol.com/bmpbfd3/index.html . I am very impresed with the CPBF I have. Works great and is extremely well made. (no affiliation and all that stuff) See ya at the AHA Convention in Kansas City!!! Tom George St. Joseph, Mo Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 09:36:40 -0400 From: "Marc Sedam" <marc_sedam at unc.edu> Subject: an alternative to magnetic stirrers Although the recent thread on magnetic stirrers had me longing for the days when I worked in a lab and could borrow equipment at will, there is a cheaper and more available method of yeast rousing for the non-tinkerers. I use a 2L Erlenmeyer flask for all starters. Instead of keeping the yeast roused with a stirrer, I use an aquarium pump, HEPA filter, and cap the flask with a foam stopper. All are available from Williams Brewing (std. disclaimer). The key is the foam stopper. The aquarium tubing can be inserted in the neck of the flask and "sealed" up with the stopper. Because the stopper is soft, it molds around the thin diameter tubing very well (pushing it against the side of the neck) and provides a good method for diffusion of air without worrying about dust or associated bugs from getting in the starter. Total cost of equipment= <$25. If you want to be real fancy you could add an aerating stone to the end of the line for better diffusion of the air, but I haven't found it necessary. Besides, it can double the cost of the set-up and I am, above all else, "frugal". Anyhoo, the action of the pump keeps the yeast roused and provides a constant O2 source for growth. Conceivably this could be done in any sized container as long as the diameter of the neck was reasonably similar to that of an Erlenmeyer flask. I'll be testing this theory out tonight on a 3-gallon carboy. Marc Sedam Huisbrouwerij Zuytdam Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 09:32:48 -0400 From: "David Kerr" <dkerr at semc.org> Subject: Slick mouthfeel Jeremy reports a "slick" mouthfeel in a doctored high diacetyl beer, AJ reports that slickness has been attributed to high diacetyl levels. Thank you both for the responses. Slick is a more accurate descriptor than the term "oily" that I employed. One other datapoint - upon reviewing my log book I found a similar notation after tasting one of my rare lager attempts - pilsner brewed at 52-55F using 2 sachets Superior (dry) lager yeast in a 5 gallon batch. Dave Kerr - Needham, MA - hoping that the new Fenway will serve REAL beer Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 06:50:48 -0700 (PDT) From: Steve Jackson <stvjackson at yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Primetab In HBD #3032 (May 17, 1999), Bobpreed at aol.com wrote: >>>> I've been thinking about using the Primetab corn sugar tablets for bottle conditioning, has anyone had any experience with Primetab, either good or bad? <<<< I used them once about a year ago after I was given a sample. The directions provided with them are very accurate, and the number of tablets I used provided me with exactly the amount of carbonation I was looking for. Since the PITA part of bottling for me is sanitizing all the bottles, it didn't save a whole lot of time or effort (although I was spared an extra step of racking into my bottling vessel -- Alan McKay's concerns about excess sediment were unfounded in my case, but others may vary of course). There were a couple minor gripes (one of which the instructions warn about). Because of the surface area of the tablets providing nucleation sites for CO2 evolvement, there was some foaming during bottling. Nothing excessive, but enough to leave a little ring of foam at the top of the fill line. Because of this, I needed to be a little more dilligent about cleaning bottles after use. The other gripe isn't addressed: The instructions say the tabs are sanitary as packaged. But what about the leftover ones I had? Will they remain reasonably sanitary, or am I screwed. I haven't tried to test which possibility is the more likely. The low-down on these buggers: Convenient, well-made, easy-to-use, but I don't know if it's enough of a time or effort saver to warrant the extra expense (two packs would cost me about as much as 3 pounds of dextrose). I would bet the best use would be for people who keg who want to bottle a small portion of the batch. -Steve in Indianapolis _____________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 09:35:59 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: Anybody have a recipe that clones Corona? "J. Doug Brown" <jbrown at labyrinth.net> writes: >I bottle with Corona bottles and now that I am brewing would like to >try and make a Corona like beer. It's been some years ince I've had a Corona, and I don't remember it being anything special, But I think that if you'd make a Pilsner-type with 6-row, lots of corn (30%) and perhaps some sugar (10%) and hop it to ~20 IBU, you'd be in the ballpark. Leaving the bottles in the sun for a little while will give it that familiar skunk smell, or mayber you'd like to improve on the real thing and not do this. Jeff -=-=-=-=- Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, c/o nerenner at umich.edu "One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 08:25:37 -0400 From: "Alan McKay" <amckay at nortelnetworks.com> Subject: Idiotic State/Provincial Liquor Laws Until about 5 years ago when the liquor laws were completely reformed, there were a lot of really stupid ones back in Nova Scotia. For example, establishments could either be a "Bar" or a "Tavern". The former was allowed to sell bottled beer and hard liquor, but nothing on tap. The latter was allowed to sell bottled beer and draught, but no hard liquor. (Not sure where wine fit in, as I never drank it). The list went on and on, but finally someone woke up and reformed the laws. Still no booze in corner stores like Quebec, though ;-) cheers, -Alan - -- Alan McKay OS Support amckay at nortelnetworks.com Small Site Integration 613-765-6843 (ESN 395) Nortel Networks Internal : http://zftzb00d/alanmckay/ External : http://www.magma.ca/~bodnsatz/brew/tips/ All opinions expressed are my own. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 08:32:47 +0000 From: dolmans at mail.tss.net Subject: Schaarbeek cherries Hi! Would the person interested in getting and propogating Schaarbeek cherries please get a hold of me. I was intrigued by your post so I put my Father (a retired farmer who lives in the Netherlands) and my Uncle (a landscape architect in Holland) on the case, both beer lovers which helps. I have some leads that may be interesting to you. TIA. Gerard Dolmans Dolmans at mail.tss.net Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 11:51:30 -0400 (EDT) From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker at welch.jhu.edu> Subject: water, water, everywhere. stirring = aeration? (fwd) WATER PRECIPITATES >>Jeff wrote: >>Can anyone tell me what I've been so conciensously >>avoiding in my brew? Am I doing right to avoid the sludge >>or am I missing some critical element? My beer tastes >>great, so I'm not too concerned about this, just curious. >>Jeff Luck >>Salt Lake City, UT - USA Jeff, I believe what you are seeing are precipitated carbonates, especially given that you mentioned that your water is somewhat hard (read high in Mg and/or Ca). The problem, as I mentioned in a recent post, is that simply boiling your brewing water may actually be raising the pH and hurting you when it comes time to sparge (assuming you are doing an all grain batch). This may be less of a problem if you have let the water sit all night assuming it can re-equilibrate with the CO2 in the air but this may not be happening due to the water temp, low surface to volume ratio, and you're probably leaving the lid on the pot to keep down evaporation. At any rate, if you are sparging it is probably a good idea to check the pH of your sparge water and make adjustments as necessary... - ------------------------------ STIRRING AND AERATION Scott Murman wrote: >>Several recent posts have commented about stir plates. Just how much >>O2 diffusion occurs when stirring? My intuition tells me it's >>negligible compared with forcing O2 into solution. Stirring rouses >>the yeast and forces excess CO2 out of solution, both of which cause >>foaming, but I think you still need to perform oxygenation with some >>other means. You are almost certainly right that stirring will not get as much O2 into solution as would applying gas (either air or O2) directly but my intuition tells me that the contribution from stirring need not be "negligible." You are also right in pointing out the added effects of keeping the yeast in suspension and CO2 elimination - both of which will encourage faster yeast growth independent of the oxygen content. >>The idea is to have 100% saturation when the yeast want to bud. We >>start with 0% since our wort has been pre-boiled by some means. I >>don't think stirring can quickly raise from 0% to 100%, and I doubt it >>could make an appreciable dent even over time. Hmmmmmm depends. First, on when the yeast are synthesizing their sterols and UFAs. The individual cells are most likely performing this throughout their growth - before, during, and after they actually "bud." Indeed, each cell will go through the cell cycle more than once (depending on innoculum size and culture volume) during the approach to stationary phase. Second, how is the sterter media treated? as you say, dissolved O2 will be zero for all practical purposes immediately after boiling - but if one then cools and stirs vigorously for a good period of time in a large enough container with good access to air prior to innoculation it seems to me you'd have a fair amount of oxygen in solution at that point. I wish I had a dissolved O2 sensor then I could check this out for myself - anyone have one along with some time to kill?? One thing I do wonder about is how much oxygen the yeast uptake after they have "spent" the media and are in stationary phase? I wonder if they can build up their sterols/UFAs at this point if kept strirring? Here, there would be little positive pressure in the vessel due to CO2 generation and I assume you could get good aeration. Would the energy required come at the expense of glycogen reserves? Lastly, a while back I read several scientific papers (AHHHH science rears it's ugly head again!) on yeast sterol/fatty acid metabolism and there were clear cases of increased levels of these compounds in actively growing cultures that were merely "open" to air (cotton plug in flask neck) so it does seem that significant amounts of oxygen can dissolve in the growth media even when the culture is "purging" the airspace by CO2 evolution... -Alan Meeker Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 11:54:34 -0400 From: "Houseman, David L" <David.Houseman at unisys.com> Subject: BJCP Exam The BJCP exam will be held at 7:00pm on Friday, June 25th, at Beer Unlimited in Malvern, PA as a kickoff to the BUZZ OFF Homebrew Competition. For those interested in taking the test the first time or retaking the exam for a higher score, please contact Chuck Hanning at 610.889.0396 or by email at hanning at voicenet.com. Additionally there will be a single prep session on Wednesday, June 2nd, at Beer Unlimited at 7:00pm. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 12:01:55 -0400 (EDT) From: MICHAEL WILLIAM MACEYKA <mmaceyka at welch.jhu.edu> Subject: Oxygen in stirred worts Howdy all, I am a budding molecular biologist who spent some time working in a lab that studies yeast mitochondria. Yeast grown in media that contain fermentable sugars, such as wort, would invariably have shrunken mitochondria because they did not respire. In order to get big bulging mitochondria we could purify, we would grow the yeast in medium that had carbon sources which required respiration for growth, i.e. glycerol, ethanol, lactate, etc. Anyway, we grew yeast in these media in a shaking water bath in erlenmeyer flasks with aluminum foil covers. The only way they could grow was if there was significant oxygen around for them to respire. Now, I am the first to admit that we did not measure the oxygen tensions over time in these media, but I am satisfied with the assumption that when continually shaking or stirring the wort, significant amounts of oxygen do get into the medium. Further, I have noticed that when I shake my starters I get more yeast than if I just let them grow on the bench top, particularily if I start them from a few colonies. Which reminds me that I can get a single colony from a fresh plate to 250 mL saturated culture in a day and a half with shaking, so they are probably making sterols and unsaturated fatty acids using oxygen that dissolves in the medium as it is shaking. Key word is "probably." Just my observations. Hope it helps. Mike Maceyka Brewing in Baltimore, MD Birth place of Felonius Monk Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 11:47:26 -0500 From: "Jeffrey M. Kenton" <jkenton at iastate.edu> Subject: Jethro Gump == Pat Babcock??? (HAHAHA) I just wanted to chime in about two items. As far as the readability of Jethro's posts go: If you can't read 'em, try harder or give up. I find them to be filled to the brim with valuable information. Often Jethro's posts are the only place I can learn about the topics he discusses. I have found his posts to pass on information about our fellow brewers, as well as people important to the brewing community. That alongside the generally excellent quality information he has about yeasts, BWs, and so forth. On the other hand, if you aren't interested in the information he has to offer, give up. There's no shame in it. I have also seen Mr. Gump type, so I am thankful for ANY output.(just kidding, Rob) Pat Babcock exists. Otherwise who wrote that cool quote on the backs of those MCAB shirts? If a cyber entity can prove that IT is indeed Pat Babcock, I'll give it some extra RAM (computers don't care about money). Entries to jkenton at iastate.edu The more I know about computers, the more I wish they produced beer... Jeff Kenton Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 09:56:00 -0700 From: "Timmons, Frank" <Frank.Timmons at AlliedSignal.com> Subject: Re: SS/Cu/Al Dielectric Corrosion Alan Mc Kay asked in the HBD yesterday about using a stainless steel and/or copper fitting on an aluminum pot, and the possibility of dielectric corrosion. The corrosion engineers call it galvanic corrosion, and it is the result of dissimilar metals being immersed in an electrolyte. This forms a very small electric potential across the metals, essentially a battery, which can corrode the metal. All metals are arranged on a galvanic series from least noble (more likely to corrode) to most noble, and the farther apart on the series, the worse the corrosion will be. Of the three metals mentioned, stainless steel is the most noble, then copper (I assume you will have a copper alloy, like brass, not pure copper, although there isn't much difference between them electochemically speaking), then aluminum. However, the relative surface areas of the three metals will help you somewhat. If the more active metal part (the aluminum pot in this case) is much larger than the more noble metal part (stainless steel), the predominant polarization of the smaller part tends to inhibit the corrosion. You can do two things: 1) isolate the parts from each other the best you can. I used PTFE (Teflon) washers to make up a bulkhead fitting for a converted sanke keg, you could do the same thing. If the metals don't touch each other, or at least if you minimize the touching areas, galvanic corrosion is not going to be as much of a concern. Or 2) don't worry about it, because galvanic corrosion is a pretty slow process, and you will keep the pot dry for 99% of its life and the corrosion will not take place without the electrolyte present. I would do both. Good Luck and Happy Brewing. Frank Timmons Richmond, Va. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 17:40:17 +0000 From: "J. Doug Brown" <jbrown at labyrinth.net> Subject: Multi-tier questions Hello, I am in the process of designing a two tier all grain brewing system and was wondering what methods do you use to clean the system after brewing. Do you all grain brewers using multi tier systems disassemble you systems to clean them, fill them with water and run it through all your vessles and lines, etc. I have a design that I like, however the sanitization and cleaning worries me a little. Is sanitization really a problem in your systems because you are working with very hot water at some point in all the vessles in your system except the fermenter. I have a drawing of the system at http://www.labs.net/jbrown/Doug/Brew/two_tier.htm If anyone with RIMS experience and all grain brewing would like to comment on the design and provide suggestions, or identify problems I would like that very much. I really appreciate all the help and information that I have received on this digest and from all members the provided information directly. Thanks Doug Brown - -- -------------------------------------------------------- / J. Doug Brown Sr. Software Engineer \ < jbrown at labyrinth.net jbrown at ewa.com > \ http://www.labs.net/jbrown http://www.ewa.com / -------------------------------------------------------- Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 10:48:00 -0700 From: "Evans, Timothy" <TbEvans at OMM.com> Subject: Extract Barleywine I've recently discovered the pleasures of Barleywine and would like to brew a batch before it gets too hot. Does any one have a proven recipe for an extract Barleywine? Thanks in advance for any recipes or other suggestions in this regard. Private email is fine. Tim Evans Los Angeles, California tbevans at omm.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 11:30:54 -0700 From: "Bayer, Mark A" <Mark.Bayer at JSF.Boeing.com> Subject: pw false bottom/cilantro/chiller agitation collective homebrew conscience_ Tom B wrote: <snip>My current brewing system employs a 15 gallon polarware pot with a <snip>10 gallon Gott cooler.<snip>i've been considering a SS false bottom >that fits directly in the pot. <snip>Any problems with stuck sparges? >Can step mashes still be done by adding heat, (via a propane source), >directly to the kettle, or is this false bottom intended for infusion >mashing? i imagine there might be a few problems to think about. first, with regard to applying heat to the pot with a false bottom in place: since the bottom is stainless, has no aluminum or copper "sandwich", and recirculation is not mentioned, there is definitely a scorching potential. you can't get to the bottom of the pot with a false bottom installed, so there's a risk you won't be able to easily stir up the bottom liquid fraction to distribute heat throughout the mash evenly. secondly, you should consider grain depth in the polarware pot. i've got one, and it's a fairly big diameter. the depth of the grain bed is going to be shallower by quite a bit versus a smaller diameter cooler. how much shallower? hmmmm. if, for example, you have a grain bed depth of 6 inches in the gott (diameter ~13 in.), putting the same volume into a 15 gallon polarware kettle (diameter ~18 in.) would reduce your grain bed depth down to about 3.1 inches. this can introduce difficulty with achieving good clarity in the vorlauf process. if you move up to 10 gallon batches, you're probably ok. al k wrote: >the cilantro can be used for making salsa, which goes well >with beer, and understatement of the month. homegrown tomatoes and cilantro in a homemade salsa is an unbelievably good combination. throw in a little habanero pepper (careful!), and it's a religious experience. ron l wrote: >I have noticed that if I rock the coil, the heat exchange goes much faster, >same effect as when one rocks the immersion chiller. this brings up something i've been thinking about. the weak sanitation link in my process is the chilling process, which, as ron states, goes much faster if i agitate the immersion coil while chilling. this means my kettle is uncovered during the 20 - 30 minutes it takes me to get the wort down to lager or ale pitching temps. in the summer, i have concerns about airborne contaminants getting into the brew. has anybody figured out a way to combat this? my best idea so far is to leave the chiller stationary, cover the whole thing with saran wrap, and agitate the kettle. this is a big pain in the rear, though. i was thinking how much easier this would be if i had a little mechanized "lifter" that i could prop under one edge of the kettle. the lifter would be able to push the kettle up about an inch and then let it back down, and continue cycling this way to keep the wort moving in contact with the chiller. jack s, is there a market??????? brew hard, mark bayer stlmo Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 13:38:21 -0500 From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com> Subject: Water Alan Meeker and Jeff Luck posted on very similar issues. Let's look at Alan's comments first: When he boiled his nominal (east coast surface) water the pH increased by 1 unit which he ascribes to loss of CO2. This is indeed the cause. Most waters of this type as delivered by the water works are about saturated with or slightly super saturated with CO2. The solubility of CO2 decreases dramatically with increased temperature so that heating causes loss of the gas upsetting the equilibrium between carbonic acid, bicarbonate ions and carbonate ions. The pH shifts upwards in order to establish a new equilibrium with a lower carbonic fraction (and increased bicarbonate and carbonate). Upon cooling, the water is undersaturated with CO2 and some dissolves from the air. If the water was originally just saturated it will eventually return to its initial pH. When Alan added gypsum to the water there was no pH change. Gypsum is the salt of calcium hydroxide, a strong base, and sulfuric acid, a strong acid so the salt is approximately neutral. Upon heating, CO2 is driven off causing the pH shift towards the high end and concomitant conversion of bicarbonate to carbonate. Now, however, calcium ion is present which coalesces to form calcium carbonate which precipitates. This results in the release of H+ ions which is why the pH shift is not as dramatic in this case. Chalk is white. The fact that this ppt. is brown suggests that the water contains some iron and/or manganese. Upon standing and cooling, CO2 from the air again dissolves lowering the pH. Wait long enough and the precipitate will redissolve. This can be accelerated for demonstration purposes by bubbling CO2 through the sample. Alan comments on the mysteries surrounding the phosphate reaction. In simplified form it is: H+ H+ Ca++ ^ ^ \ phytase / / \-> phytin -----------> H2PO4- ----> HPO4-- ----> PO4--- - ------>Ca3(PO4)2 i.e. the enzyme phytase frees inorganic phosphate from organic phytin. (Thanks to Al K for suggesting this way of diagramming). Some of this sheds protons to become phosphate (PO4---). In the presence of calcium a precipitate is formed and this results in conversion of more H2PO4- and HPO4-- to phosphate throwing off protons along the way. These protons overcome the alkalinity (buffering capacity) of the water and are responsible for the reduction in pH. It's not really a buffering action. The more calcium the more phosphate will. Alan comments that he was sparging with alkaline water based on the pH of 8.5 -9. Note that alkalinity and pH are not the same thing. In fact the alkalinity of Alan's tap watrer is probably about 80 ppm as CaCO3 which is not very alkaline at all. Adding gypsum to this water will not reduce the alkalinity nor increase it. It is probably not necessary to acidify this water for sparge. As it isn't very alkaline the acid released by the phytin reaction will probably keep the pH below 6 to the point where the runoff is down to 2 - 4 P. Try it. In the same regard it is probably not necessary to acidify this water for mash. There's a good chance of hitting pH 5.5 - 5.6 without it. If not, add a little crystal malt to the grist. Note: I don't personally like adding acid for mash pH control. Water hardness and higher kilned malts will generally do the job. This is just my personal preference in this matter. I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with pH adjustment by the use of acid - mineral or organic. Comment on "THE SKINNY": You can effectively lower mash pH by boiling and calcium addition if you do it right. In Alan's case, if he had decanted the water off the precipitate quickly and mashed with that water he would find the mash pH lower than with the untreated tap water, even if the decanted water had been allowed to stand. This is because the precipitate (calcium carbonate) is formed from bicarbonate ion in the water and since this is the source of alkalinity when this is removed the alkalinity goes down. Hardness is removed at the same time so it is beneficial to supplement with calcium (chloride or sulfate depending on the taste effects you want). Now on to Jeff Luck's question about what's the white stuff that forms when he boils his water. In terms of the previous discussion, it should be clear that the white stuff is calcium carbonate with perhaps some magnesium carbonate. Jeff tells us that his water is quite hard. We already know this when he tells us that the precipitate forms without addition of any additional calcium (as opposed to Alan's softer water which requires calcium supplementation for precipitate formation). - --------->Ca3(PO4)2 Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 13:33:18 -0600 From: Greg Remake <gremake at gsbalum.uchicago.edu> Subject: Rye beer Hello all, I've seen rye beers (roggenbier) discussed here occasionally, and I'm curious as to whether I'd like the taste enough to try brewing one. Can anyone suggest favorite commercial varieties to try? Redhook makes an ale called Ryehook; are rye brews primarily ales or lagers? What are some of the characteristics that distinguish a rye beer? The archives don't offer a clear consensus (surprise!) as to whether rye malt or rye flakes are preferable. Some brewers claim flakes promote stuck sparges, while others blame malt. Most do agree, however, that over 20% rye can clog up the sparge. What's the difference (if any) in the final product using malt vs. flakes? Not many places carry rye malt, but most have the flakes - maybe that's an indication. Assuming I'll decide to brew a rye beer, does anyone have a favorite recipe? Are there yeast strains that are particularly well suited for the style? Any other pointers? Brew more, Greg Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 15:20:40 -0700 From: "John Palmer" <jjpalmer at gte.net> Subject: Re: Galvanic Corrosion between Al, Cu, SS Alan asks whether attaching a copper (brass??) ball valve with stainless steel washers to an aluminum pot would be a dielectric (sic) corrosion problem. Survey says: Maybe. The long answer is yes, there will galvanic corrosion, but the question is - how much? Is this going to be your brewpot, hot water tank, or what? Aluminum will corrode when coupled to stainless steel or copper/brass. Stainless steel is the most inert here. If your usage is intermittant, then your corrosion should be minimal. The fact that you have a large aluminum surface and a relatively small cathode (steel, copper) decreases your corrosion rate. Also, if you electrically insulate the ball valve and tubing from the aluminum via teflon or rubber or something then your corrosion will be insignificant. My recommendation is to go ahead and just watch the area near the contact of the metals for pitting. Btw, you can't weld other metals to aluminum and soldering to aluminum (especially this much aluminum) is difficult for both heat required and fluxing. Best bet is to make a bulkhead fitting out of brass. John Palmer Palmer House Brewery and Smithy www.realbeer.com/jjpalmer Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 20:09:39 EDT From: JPullum127 at aol.com Subject: babcock impersonations scott abene writes: just a side note... I was contacted today by the law office of Rookum, Steelem and Robbum. They said that they were hired by someone Named Apache Unix from the HBD.ORG group. They offered me a large cash amount to play the role of a Mister Pat Babcock at the 2000 AHA Home Brewers' Conference. as counsel for the firm of dewey,cheatem and howe, we must insist that you immediatly cease and desist from impersonating mr babcock.we feel so strongly this sort of outrageous behavior must stop that we intend to represent mr babcock if it costs him every cent he has. by the way our client, fred garvin would like us to remind you that there is still a large unpaid bill for professional services rendered while you were impersonating "charlie's harem" at the last function. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 22:42:49 -0500 From: "Rob Moline" <brewer at isunet.net> Subject: The Jethro Gump "Reports" The Jethro Gump "Reports" >From: Joe Rolfe <onbc at shore.net> >Subject: Is it just me....or > >is Jethros "reports" always unreadibly formatted....? Sorry for the inconvenience....not only to you, Sir...but to others in a similar position....Apparently, it is a problem, endemic.....bubonic? (Can I see a reference for that?) My only excuse is firmly placed elsewhere....I guess I could say that I just use the settings that arrived in my software...... But I will be more honest,...and say that out of the goodness of my heart, I had employed a couple of out of work brewers to handle my correspondence.... One was just so filled with angst toward anyone that didn't agree with his viewpoint...and the other got arrested for cruelty to animals for centrifuging a Shetland Sheepdog, and using the tail for a pipebrush to clean the last possession he deemed worthy, an 1.5 inch tri-clamp..... Then they got into a fight, arguing over who was going to take Fouch's mate Fred to the Prom! Well, I had enough!! So, I hired 2 professionals!! And I must say I got them quite cheap, I think.....It seems that BOTH James Carville and Mary Matalin were in a wee slump...seeing that the next major US election is not yet in the primary stages....and from the fees I get from answering yeast questions from amateur brewers, I was able to get them BOTH for 6.7 million USD (per month) combined!!! (WHAT A DEAL!!) Ah, yes, I thought, I am now set! No wuckin' furries, eh? Not to be.........While they don't seem to argue as much as brewers that just can't believe that there is any other way possible, but their own...... they still can't seem to get my "Reports" formatted correctly! Well, I had warned them!! And by God, should this "Reports" fail to meet specifications, well, they are done...HISTORY!!! They can go work for Hillary, or Joh Bjelke-Peterson as far as I am concerned!! Gee, I don't know, Joe, I guess if that happens you are just back to me, and my crappy formatting.....maybe one day I can get it right....... (This section edited by Jethro.) Like using no tabs, eh? And gee, Joe, I just thought you hated me 'cos I work for a DRY yeast Company, and, believe in my product. Now, I realize it's just my format! Thanks, mate! And may God Bless! Cheers! Rob Moline brewer at isunet.net Lallemand jethro at isunet.net "The More I Know About Beer, The More I Realize I Need To Know More About Beer!" Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 00:15:57 EDT From: ThomasM923 at aol.com Subject: Recirculation tribulations I've been meaning to ask this question for a while--- I would like to use a centrifugal pump for recirculating wort through the grain bed prior to sparging. I'm tired of hovering over the lauter tun to perform this mundane brewing task and would like to automate this step. I would like to have the output of the lauter tun go into a grant with a liquid level switch in it to regulate the operation of the pump. At the end of the recirculation loop I would have some kind of manifold to gently return the wort under the surface of the standing liquid. Between the pump output and the manifold would be a valve to control the flow rate. OK, so far so good; the thing that I can't seem to figure out is how to keep the wort from flowing backwards through the pump once it has turned off, which it would do once the liquid level in the grant reached a certain level. The only thing I can think of to avoid this is a check valve. Is this the way to go? It seems that check valves require a bit of pressure to open (5 lbs per sq. in. or so) and may do away with the gentle approach altogether. I am interested in hearing about how others approach this type of recirculation setup. Thomas Murray Maplewood, NJ Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 May 99 23:45:06 -0400 From: Dave Humes <humesdg1 at earthlink.net> Subject: RE: Bottled beer tastes different than beer from the keg >The beer from the keg is always better than the bottled version of the >same recipe, even from the same batch. Must be something about the >secondary fermentation products that build up during conditioning. So, >since I like to have some bottled beer on hand I'm going to start >filling by the counterpressure method. Hopefully, the bottled beer will >taste as good as the keg version. I would appreciate input on the >various types/brands of counterpressure filling equipment and any tips >on filling by this method. TIA. I assume you are force carbonating your kegs. Otherwise, there should not be much difference since the keg is just a big bottle that would also trap secondary fermentation products. I have made a similar observation to yours, but in my case the difference was noted between kegged beer and CP filled bottles of the same beer. I thought it was great out of the keg and ordinary out of the bottle. I think there's a lot going on when dispensing out of a keg that is not simply duplicated when dispensing from a bottle. I recently CP filled a strong bitter, something like a Fuller's. To be true to style, it was minimally carbonated in the keg. But, because the beer is under continuous pressure when dispensing from the keg, it is simple to put a nice head on the glass that laces all the way down. The CP filled bottles seemed to have the right carbonation level, but were lacking aroma and flavor and poured with very little foam. I believe that the bursting bubbles in the head are responsible for delivering a large portion of the aroma and flavor of the beer. Remember, you can only taste sweet, sour, bitter, and salty, so most of what you taste depends on your nose. So, I would advise you to adjust your carbonation level in the keg before CP filling to be appropriate for the style. Terry Foster recommends in Classic Style Series Pale Ale volume to carbonate draught pale ales to 0.75 to 1.0 volumes and bottled beers to 1.5 to 2.0 volumes. This process is likely to be style dependent and require lots of tuning. Concerning equipment and procedure, I use the Hoptech filler that has a single 3-way valve. It's pretty simple and I highly recommend it. I would not touch one that has 3 valves. I know people that are happy with the Counter Phil CP filler, but as I understand it, it relies on siphon to draw beer from the keg and therefore requires the bottle to be below the keg. I prefer to have my keg on the floor and the bottles on the countertop. Any who has one care to comment? It is imperative that you have your beer and bottles very cold before filling, as close to freezing as possible, as this helps keep the CO2 in solution. Early attempts at CP filling can be quite messy and frustrating. Persist. The process is also much more efficient if you have a helper cap while you fill. - --Dave - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------- Dave Humes <humesdg1 at earthlink.net> Dave Humes - ----------------------------------------------------------- Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 00:45:38 EDT From: ThomasM923 at aol.com Subject: Mephitis sweet mephitis Phil Yates wrote concerning skunks: The closest we ever got to one was watching Pepe La Pooh (does anyone remember the proper spelling?) Yes: Pepe Le Pew (one of the better Looney Tune offerings...Le Pew!) Also: Oh yes, and Don McLean once sang about one he saw in the middle of the road... Not Don "American Pie" McLean, but Loudon Wainwright III. Oh, uh...gonna open up a beer. Right now. (required beer related reference) Thomas Murray Maplewood, NJ Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 05/19/99, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96