HOMEBREW Digest #3097 Sat 31 July 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

  Replacement for AHA or an alternative ("Peter J. Calinski")
  bt and japanese beetles (JPullum127)
  No-Sparge, One-penny Beer &c. (Brad McMahon)
  Brian and NHC 2000 ("Tom  and Deb Plunkard")
  Bugs on your Hops ("Arthur McGregor")
  Assumptions ("Houseman, David L")
  Rubbermaid Coolers ("Mark Vernon")
  re: pressure drop in hoses, or, who is eddy viscosity, anyway? (Jeff)
  Charlie Bamforth goes HSA crazy! ("Eric Panther")
  new role for mash enzyme ("Eric Panther")
  The Doctor is IN. (Rod Prather)
  Dr. Pivo ("Eric Panther")
  Orange in Belgian Ale (Robert Johnson)
  Indoor burners (Harlan Bauer)
  Advice needed re: yeast <= (darrell.leavitt)
  Permanent Disfigurement?? ("glyn crossno")
  Q: adding kettle sugars at END of the boil? (darrell.leavitt)
  Nottingham and long lags ("Nathaniel P. Lansing")
  re: false bottoms for mash tuns (John_E_Schnupp)
  re: Brian Brew Ha Ha (Joel Plutchak)
  Small grist mills ("Steve Ashton")
  Re: Orange Peel (Spencer W Thomas)
  The CABA Brew Your Own Seminar (Jeff Pursley)
  re: false bottoms for mash tuns ("Kensler, Paul")
  Re: pressure drop in hoses, or, who is eddy viscosity, anyway? ("Bayer, Mark A")
  Nitpicking about respitration (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
  Pressure Canning Wort Starters (Matt Birchfield)

* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! * Subscribe to the Distilled Beverage Digest * Send "subscribe" in body of note to dbd-request@hbd.org * Subscribe to the Home Vintners' Digest * Send "subscribe" in body of note to hvd-request@hbd.org 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, 28 Jul 1999 09:18:06 -0400 From: "Peter J. Calinski" <PCalinski at iname.com> Subject: Replacement for AHA or an alternative I have watched the traffic criticizing the AHA and its practices. I'll come clean and say that I am not a member/subscriber. It seems every time I get ready to sign up, a controversy like this comes up and makes me rethink my decision. Rick Theiner asks some interesting questions (reproduced below). They finally prompted me to toss in my $0.02. In my experience, quite often when a problem arise, the first instinct is to toss out the problem and start anew. My experience has also shown me that such an action is seldom as easy as it seems. It is usually better to fix the problem than start over. Starting over usually uncovers more unanticipated problems than the original situation. Again, speaking as an outsider to the organization, why can't the problems be fixed? Does the current leadership feel that the problems are not a priority? If a large proportion of the community feels they are a priority, can't the leadership be "turned on" to the problems. If not, can the leadership be changed? I know of one example of a national organization that didn't meet the perceived needs of the members and as a result the leadership was overthrown. The organization was the National Rifle Association. If I recall right, about 20 years ago the leaders were losing focus (as perceived by the members). One example sited was the plan to move the NRA headquarters from Washington DC. to Colorado. Since a large portion of the NRA activities include lobbying Washington politicians, such a move was largely considered a lack of focus or worse. As I recall, most of the leadership was replaced. Please don't let opinions about the NRA's motives cloud the issue. The similarities to the AHA are there. One important factor associated with the NRA is the heavy involvement by the industry (I don't know this for a fact, I have heard it stated and have not heard it refuted). Perhaps the AHA could benefit from more involvement my the home-brew shops and suppliers. Well, that's my $0.02. Consider fixing rather than starting over. Rick's questions from HBD#3094 for reference are below. Allow me to play Devil's Advocate and ask some simple questions: -What would such an organization do? -Why would anyone want to be part of said organization? -What would the benefits be? -What would differentiate this organization from the AHA? -How would such an organization be governed? -How would this organization be established? -How would this organization recruit new members? This is just the tip of the iceberg, but a good place to start. Does anyone have the answers? Rick Theiner Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 12:33:17 EDT From: JPullum127 at aol.com Subject: bt and japanese beetles now that we have thouroughly covered japanese beetles, what do i do about the nutsedge that is taking over my front lawn? Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 02:23:52 +0930 From: Brad McMahon <brad at sa.apana.org.au> Subject: No-Sparge, One-penny Beer &c. IN HBD # 3094 Bob Uhl wrote: >I have seen in several sources that in the old days a brewer >would make three batches from one grain bill. > The first would be a no-sparge batch, very thick and strong, called >three-penny beer. The grain would be remashed, then a second batch >would be sparged out, called two-penny beer. > The grain would be mashed a third time and one-penny beer would > result. I haven't heard those terms before but they sound about right for the time of Dickens. The technique is not quite right. No-one sparged, you just re-infused and drained. "Sparging was not introduced until the early part of the nineteenth century. They mashed much larger quantities of malt per batch, twice or three times as much, and they mashed the same batch up to three times; or at least, they thought they were mashing three times. The first mashing made the strong old nectars of perhaps O.G. 1100, the second mashing made common ale of perhaps 1075, and the third made table beer (T beer) or small beer of about 1050. Sometimes the first and second mashes were combined to brew a strong ale of about O.G. 1090. However, the second and third mashes were not real mashes at all, merely rinses." Wheeler,G.,"Home Brewing:The CAMRA Guide",CAMRA Books,St. Albans, 1993, p81. >If oversparging can result in too many tannins, this could only >exacerbate the problem, unless there is some other component >wh. I am overlooking. >Granted, the remashing would not be at boiling temps, but still... Well, if the last run off is at 1050 then there wouldn't be a problem! Quick little spot quiz. Q.How did house brewers know what temp. to mash at before the invention of thermometers? A. If the water was just too hot to stick your hand in, you've reached strike temperature! Some times you just have to look at brewing without the science hat on.... I digress.. The three beers from one mash system carried over to the continent where the monks would brew three beers from the same batch. The first run was served to special guests. The second run sold to the layman. The third drunk by the monks as an everyday drink. Triples, Doubles, and Singles! The Scots, being the, umm, thrifty sorts, used to make more: Out of one peck {quarter of a bushel} you would get: Twenty Pints o Strong Ale Twenty Pints o Sma' [small] Twenty Pints o Hinky Pinky Twenty Pints o Plooman's Drinkie Twenty Pints o Splitter Splatter and Twenty Pints was waur nor watter. [no better than water] Going by that description, small beer would be strong ale by our modern standards! Plowman's Drink, and Splitter Splatter live on thanks to the power of American macrobreweries! I, myself have never tried this method, but I too, would be interested in hearing of results. Brad McMahon 1000 miles from nowhere{and Dwight Yoakam}, but very near Adelaide, Sth. Australia. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 14:06:19 -0400 From: "Tom and Deb Plunkard" <tommagic at ix.netcom.com> Subject: Brian and NHC 2000 Hello, I'm a long time reader, first time poster. I'd like to say it's nice to see everyone cooling down about Brian. I've talked to Brian and met him personally and I have to agree he is a nice guy. At the same time Paul is a nice guy. I've never met him but I have talked with him several times. I would bet letting Brian go was the hardest decision Paul has made in his career. I'm assuming Paul and Brian were Friends and had a lot in common, same work, same hobby. A friend wouldn't can a friend without a very good reason. I'm assuming Brian was doing or not doing something and Paul had asked him to change. I would bet he allowed Brian to get away with it far longer then he should have because of there friendship. I would bet, on the day Brian was let go, Paul felt cornered and finally did what he should have done long ago, knowing that it would or could destroy their friendship. What I'm trying to say is, a great guy may not be a great employee. Until Brian says different, we can only hope that his removal was a proper decision. The point of all this is, us brewers up here in "Renner Land" don't want you to boycott us at the NHC 2000. Many people have worked too hard already to get it here in Michigan. Now that its coming, many more of us are joining in to make it the best conference yet. I know many of you are upset and some of you are down right mad over this thing but please don't take it out on us Detroiters/Michiganders. In fact the conference would be a great place to voice your opinions, concerns and complaints. We are very concerned and would hope you would reconsider coming. If you said that you were going to boycott the event and have since changed your mind it would be great if you would post it. Just talking about a boycott can take the wind out of our sails. Please support the NHC 2000. Thank you. Regards, Tom Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 14:43:56 -0400 From: "Arthur McGregor" <MCGREGAP at acq.osd.mil> Subject: Bugs on your Hops Hi Everyone! I'm still catching up on the HBD after being out for awhile, but this topic has stayed active for the past week or so. Below is what I posted in July of 1997 on Hops, bugs and insecticides. Hops Insects: I grew hops for three years and decided it was too much trouble for the amount of hops harvested when compared to the cost of buying a pound of hops in bulk. But while I did grow them, I had a lot of problems with bugs, and I thought I should pass on some info on bug control. I live in Northern Virginia, near DC, and we have lots of Japanese Beetles, and they _LOVE_ hops. The last year that I tried to farm hops I sprayed the hops with "Liquid Sevin," and it helped to keep the beetles off, but caused an even bigger problem -- the hops were then attacked by lots of small SPIDER MITES. After searching the web I found the following at the Department of Entomology, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University under the "Spider Mites Factsheet PUBLICATION 444-221 x 1991: > Most insecticides are not effective on mites and some, especially carbaryl > (Sevin), result in increased mite damage by killing their natural enemies. ^^^^^^^ > Use a miticide as suggested in Virginia Pest Management Guides, available > through your local Extension Agent. Always read the label before applying > any pesticide. Additional WEB searchers on hops found this at the University of Florida (IFAS) Cooperative Extension Service: > Oct 1993 INSECT CONTROL IN MINOR VEGETABLE CROPS MINO-023 > Dr. Freddie A. Johnson, Extension Entomologist > Hops > Cythion (malathion) > *Diazinon (diazinon) > Dipel (B.t.) > Javelin (B.t.) > Kelthane (dicofol) > Omite (propargite) > *Telone II (1,3-dichloropropene) > *Telone C-17 (1,3-dichloropropene + chloropicrin) > Vapam (metam-sodium) > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > An asterisk (*) denotes a restricted use material (requires State of > Florida permit to purchase and use insecticide). > > Trade names are followed by the generic or common chemical name indicated > by parentheses ( ). There may be one to numerous trade names for each > generic name. Some generic names may also be used as trade name, i.e., > Ethion (ethion). So it appears that Malathion, which is readily available at home centers, is approved for use on hops, at least in the State of Florida, so hopefully would be ok in Virginia, and elsewhere. Hope this is of some help to the HBD. I eventually just mowed the hops over with the lawn mower, but 3 of the original 9 plants are still hanging in there and have been coming back every year since 1994. Hoppy Brewing :^) Art McGregor(mcgregap at acq.osd.mil) Lorton, Virginia (near Washington, DC) Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 15:06:36 -0400 From: "Houseman, David L" <David.Houseman at unisys.com> Subject: Assumptions Bob Uhl said: "Mr. Gatza said that it was a personnel matter, not a personal matter.... I really don't know enough firsthand to make an informed decision." Excellent point that others would do well to heed. Tim Green writes: "AHA is going to stand in the position that they are the main organization that has accepted sponsorship of an event like the NHC Boston then they are the ones who should take the heat when something goes wrong" Agree 100%. That was my point. And Paul has taken corrective action. Tim goes on: "As was pointed out in at leas one other post, probationary periods are normally 30-90 days, not 6-12 months. It seems that if there were organizational problems, then the manager in charge, (Paul), should have taken an earily proactive action, not let the problem drag on and on. (which is poor management practice by the way)" I don't recall Paul ever stating any duration of a probationary period; I believe all that's been quoted is whisper down the valley and supposition. I don't believe industry has any standards for probationary periods. Some new hires into probationary positions may spend a year before they are no longer considered probates (nah, that's not a word meaning one who is on probationary status, is it). When the term probationary is used in the sense of a notice to perform to corrective action or termination or other action is possible, then it can range from 30 days to again much longer. Depends on the job requirements and what needs to be corrected. Dave Houseman Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 15:41:17 -0500 From: "Mark Vernon" <vernonm at goportable.com> Subject: Rubbermaid Coolers Does anyone know of a supplier for Rubbermaid 10gal coolers. Their web site lists them but they are not available for online order. I have not been able to find them here locally (wal-mart, target, k-mart...). If anyone can help thanks. Mark Vernon, MCSE,MCP+I, MCT Integrated Software Solutions VernonM at goportable.com http://www.goportable.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 17:37:33 -0400 (EDT) From: mcnallyg at gam83.npt.nuwc.navy.mil (Jeff) Subject: re: pressure drop in hoses, or, who is eddy viscosity, anyway? Hi All, WARNING: Technical brewing related info follows! Page down now if not interested in technical discussions! Mark Bayer, responding to Dave Burley, recently wrote about the effects of serving line lengths and diameters. >what is mechanically important is how fast the beer is flowing from the end >of the hose As far as agitation is concerned, yes, the velocity of the beer flowing into the glass is important. Also important is the rate of change of pressure (dp/dt) that the beer experiences. I don't have a lot of experience related to dissolved gasses and bubble formation, so I'm not sure of the relative importance of these two items. Maybe someone with this type of experience could jump into the discussion. What I do have quite a bit of experience in is the relationship between pressure, hydraulic resistance, and flow rate of fluids. >not the static pressure of the exit flow, which dave accurately >points out will always be the same value regardless of hose length. As Dave Burley alluded to, the pressure drop from keg to glass will *always* be the difference between the pressure in the keg and atmospheric pressure. How the beer gets from the keg to the glass has no effect on the magnitude of this overall pressure drop. However, the flow rate of the beer and the pressure gradients that it experiences along it's trip *are* a function of how the beer gets from the keg into the glass. >the mean velocity of a developed laminar flow in a straight pipe ... >can be given by: > >um = (R^^2/8u)(-dp/dx) > >where R is the radius of the pipe, u is absolute viscosity, and dp/dx is the >static pressure drop per length of pipe from the keg to the atmosphere (the >gage reading on the regulator divided by the length of pipe). I'm not sure where Mark got this equation, but it's not really applicable to characterizing the flow found in a kegging system. The problem with it is that dp/dx is not constant in this application (it is in a long pipeline, but not in a kegging system), and the flow is probably (QDA!) not laminar. For predicting flow rate (and mean velocity) in a fluid system such as a kegging system, you would want to use Darcy's head loss formula (head is another term for pressure, but it is in units of distance like "feet of water" or "inches of mercury"). Darcy's formula in its simplest form is: head loss = f * (L / D) * ( V**2 / (2*g)) where: f is the friction factor (from a Moody chart for pipe flow) L is length D is diameter V is velocity g is the gravitational constant Since the cross sectional flow area usually varies along the flow path the velocity term (V) is not constant and Darcy's formula is usually re-written in terms of the flow rate (which is constant throughout the system): flow rate = q = V * a_flow therefore: V = q / a_flow and: head loss = f * (L / D) * (1/a_flow**2) * ( q**2 / (2*g)) the head loss coefficient is defined as: head loss coefficient = K' = f * (L / D) * (1/a_flow**2) therefore: head loss = K' * ( q**2 / (2*g)) These K' terms are tabulated in many, many text books for components such as pipes, elbows, T's, valves, orifices, diffusers, etc. etc.. By summing up all of the K' terms for individual components of a system, the total system loss coefficient can be found. Once you know the total system loss coefficient, you can easily calculate the pressure drop needed to achieve a desired flow rate, or the flow rate that would result from a given pressure drop. Experimentally you can easily determine the total system loss coefficient by measuring the flow rate and and pressure differential. Also, by knowing how the losses are distributed throughout the system you can determine the pressure at any given point in the flow path (by combining Darcy's formula with the Bernoulli equation). So, now you're probably asking yourself how all of this stuff relates to the beer lines in your kegging system! Well, the head loss coefficient equation says that the loss coefficient is proportional to length and inversely proportional diameter (given everything else is constant). You can also see that it is possible to evenly distribute the losses along the flow path and produce a gradual pressure drop, or you can have most of the loss right at the tap and produce a sudden pressure drop right before the beer hits your glass. You can also see that the head loss is a function of flow rate squared, so the idea of a *fixed* pressure drop per foot of beer line is not true. Darcy's formula and the Bernoulli equation would be quite useful for designing a RIMS system, if you were so inclined. And, believe it or not, you can actually apply Darcy's formula to the flow within a grainbed in your mashtun too (but you have to apply it to a bunch of small uniform volumes and solve them all simultaneously). Better brewing via technology! Jeff ========================================================================== Geoffrey A. McNally Phone: (401) 832-1390 Mechanical Engineer Fax: (401) 832-7250 Naval Undersea Warfare Center email: Systems Development Branch mcnallyg at gam83.npt.nuwc.navy.mil Code 8321; Bldg. 1246/2 WWW: Newport, RI 02841-1708 http://www.nuwc.navy.mil/ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 11:41:12 +1000 From: "Eric Panther" <epanther at somelab.com> Subject: Charlie Bamforth goes HSA crazy! Since Charlie Bamforth moved to UC Davis, he has gone beserk about hot side aeration (HSA). He has extensive articles in both the latest Brauwelt and Journal of the Institute of Brewing on the topic. He suggests the risks are higher for "small scale" (ie. homebrew) than for large commercial operations, due to the far higher surface/mash (or wort) ratio in the former, so the opportunity for oxygen ingress into the wort is considerably greater. He also says that HSA does not just cause decreased shelflife, but can have a negative effect on the flavour profile of fresh beer. So it is something all serious homebrewers should be concerned about (that's you isn't it?). The amount of oxygen consumed during brewing is startling: between 50 and 200ppm. One would expect that small scale brewing would be at the upper end of this range. When one considers that the maximum amount of oxygen dissolved in a mash at 60C is about 4ppm, a considerable amount of gas exchange must be taking place during brewing at the air - mash/wort interface. The reactions are both enzymic (lipoxygenase activity on unsaturated fatty acids and oxygen) and non-enzymic (autoxidation of unsaturated fatty acids, by activated forms of oxygen). Both are rapid (within a few minutes) and generally limited by the amount of oxygen present. Ways to minimize HSA include: - mash in at the highest temperature possible (ie. no protein rest!), to reduce oxygen solubility in wort and accelerate denaturing of lipoxygenase - use deaerated or preboiled water for all operations (store with lid on to prevent O2 pickup) - prefill mash/lauter/boiler with N2 or CO2 to minimize oxygen pickup during mash-in and transfers - avoid copper or iron brewing vessels or elements (to minimize the formation of activated forms of oxygen) - use an inert gas blanket on top of mash and wort - ensure the clearest possible lauter runoff, to minimize wort unsaturated fatty acid composition I would say that unless a homebrewer followed these procedures, one could no t really claim to have climbed the Everest of the art. Any Sir Edmunds out there, or just a bunch of weekend bushwalkers? Eric Panther. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 12:18:06 +1000 From: "Eric Panther" <epanther at somelab.com> Subject: new role for mash enzyme Another interesting article in the latest JIB is on a new role in mashing for limit dextrinase. As we all know, alpha and beta amylase are the main enzymes of interest to us, which act to degrade unbranched amylose to glucose, maltose and maltotriose. The hydrolysis of amylopectin yields a mixture of branched amylopectin and fermentable sugars. A debranching enzyme is required to convert the branched dextrins to fermentable sugars. One such debranching enzyme is limit dextrinase. In the past, it has not been considered relevant to brewing due to the low amounts found in malt and an assumed heat lability. However, the recent study by Stenholm and Home (JIB, v105/4, 1999) questions earlier assumptions on the role of limit dextrinase in brewing. A quick summary: - At 62.5C and below, limit dextrinase is heat stable in wort. - At 65C, limit dextrinase loses 40% of activity after 1 hour. - In acetate buffer, limit dextrinase begins to lose activity at 50C. ie. the mash acts to protect limit dextrinase. - Mash conversion temperatures of 60-65C and pH of 5.3 - 5.5 (measured at mash temp) are optimum conditions for limit dextrinase and produce the most fermentable wort. These last conditions are traditionally used in brewing to produce a more fermentable wort, but the mechanism is thought to have been due to an optimization of conditions for beta amylase. The latest study shows no correlation between beta amylase activity and fermentability (correlation coefficient = 0.37), but a high correlation coefficient between free limit dextrinase activity and fermentability (correlation coefficient = 0.84). So if you want the most fermentable wort, mash at 60-65C and pH of 5.3 - 5.5, as usual, but the reasons for this are probably not what you have been led to believe. Eric Panther. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 21:25:44 -0500 From: Rod Prather <rodpr at iquest.net> Subject: The Doctor is IN. Alan Meeker so worthily noted: > Also, I don't believe that Sanders ever gave out > military advice or Severinson medical advice! > It should be noted that one can obtain a doctorate in the discipline of music, which I believe is Severinson's credentials. Colonel Sanders title was awarded via an organization known as the Kentucky Colonels, (not the basketball team) a post civil war benevolent organization centered, I believe, around Louisville. Still, the casual use of the title Doc, Doctor, Dr. is common in our society for people recognized to be outstanding in their field. (Dr. Soybean Farmer? :-) Dr. Piva is about as tongue in cheek as one can get. (peeva, beeva, pivo, bivo is beer in slavic languages whether Czech, Russian or Hungarian). It amounted to no more than the title Dr. of Homebrewology. Call the AMA and see if they care (not the Academy of Model Aeronautics). This is a knowledgeable and intellectual discussion, get over it. Drink a home-brew, talk about brewing and I'll send you a great picture of a fruit fly, if you ask real nice. I have a bunch of 'em. I am sure that Doc Pivo would be pleased that his name produced such a totally distracted departure from our focused discussion. - -- So you wanna make beer, Visit me at http://fast.to/beer Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 14:44:30 +1000 From: "Eric Panther" <epanther at somelab.com> Subject: Dr. Pivo For those who care, Jeff Irvine (Dr. Pivo), really is a doctor (of medicine). Note he has never mentioned this on HBD, preferring to stick to the whimsical pseudonym. I notice certain other regular posters often pompously announce "I'm a Ph.D. in Chemistry, but I never mention it on this forum". Yeah, right.... Eric Panther. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 22:44:00 -0700 From: robert at bobbrews.com (Robert Johnson) Subject: Orange in Belgian Ale I brew Belgian Style Ales all the time and have used many kinds of peels.. Nothing really I have found replaces the real thing (Curacao bitter orange peel) even though the beers do come out very good.(different tastes in each beer) In fact I just brewed last week a christmas ale using the peel from 6 navel oranges... I have also made orange ale using the complete orange in the batch. Robert (bobbrews) Johnson P.S. I have also a Belgian Triple sage beer in secondary right now, can't wait to taste it. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 02:00:06 -0500 From: Harlan Bauer <blacksab at midwest.net> Subject: Indoor burners Donovan asked about indoor burners. Yes you can use a burner in the basement, and yes, you can use a propane burner in the basement; BUT, if it's propane, it must be the low pressure type; or else natural gas. Remember, restaurant kitchens are indoors. First question: Is your house equipped with gas? Propane or Natural gas? The type of gas will determine the size of the oriface in the burner. If propane, the house is already set up with a low pressure system and your Cajun Cooker will not work properly--pawn it off on someone else. If your house is NOT equipped with gas, contact your local LP dealer and get a medium sized tank set up for low pressure (the kind you'd have if your house was a trailer) and install it outside. REPEAT, install it outside! Then pipe the gas indoors. If you don't know how to do it, find someone who does, or give me a call and I'll walk you thru it. IMHO, the best types of burners are commercial Wok rings and commercial stove burners--the wok ring is great for developing a lot of heat, but the stove element has finer simmering control. I'd suggest a wok ring for your HL tank and boiling kettle and a stove element for your mash tun. Low pressure burners are considerably more efficient than the HP ones and create a whole lot less CO. Next, since you only have one window (same as I had when I brewed at home), build an exhaust hood directly over your burner and vent it out the window. A CO alarm is an excellent idea. The only real disadvantage of brewing indoors is the lack of a trough drain. You can slop SOME water onto the floor, but you can't just dump a lot of stuff onto the floor and then hose it down. This is the biggest advantage of using the garage--it's the best of both worlds. Hope this helps, Harlan Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 06:46:00 -0500 (EST) From: darrell.leavitt at plattsburgh.edu Subject: Advice needed re: yeast <= Date sent: 29-JUL-1999 06:39:42 Here's the thing: I know that I should step-up smack packs,...but I really need to brew this afternoon. I have a Wyeast#1742 bursting at the seams, and I plan on making a Brown Ale (10 lb Halcyon, 1 lb Crystal, 1/4 lb Chocolate, perhaps some brown sugar, and I may substitute some Special B for some of the Crystal), and I was thinking: What would the result be if I were to supplement the smack pack with one rehydrated Munton's Gold, or a Coopers dry yeast? Would it make more sense to just run the risk of under- pitching....or should I use dry yeast with the Swedish #1742 WYeast? Thankyou in advance for any advice you can render. ...Darrell <terminally intermediate all-grain brewer> _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ _/ _/Darrell Leavitt _/ _/INternet: leavitdg at splava.cc.plattsburgh.edu _/ _/AMpr.net: n2ixl at amgate.net.plattsburgh.edu _/ _/AX25 : n2ixl at kd2aj.#nny.ny.usa _/ _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 06:41:36 -0500 From: "glyn crossno" <crossno at tnns.net> Subject: Permanent Disfigurement?? Phil Yates The Loving Caring One. wrote: "You cannot possibly know that I always, ALWAYS replace removed limbs!!" Does this include tails? No lets not restart the 'are tails limbs?' debate. Glyn Crossno Estill Springs, TN - -- Have you hugged your bines today? Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 08:30:14 -0500 (EST) From: darrell.leavitt at plattsburgh.edu Subject: Q: adding kettle sugars at END of the boil? Date sent: 29-JUL-1999 08:26:22 I am attempting a brown ale, and read (Daniels and Parker ,BROWN ALE) that 'some English brewers' add sugars at the end of the boil . .....If one wanted to add molasses of brown sugar at the end (to retain more of the flavor, apparently ?) should one just drop in a couple cups or so and stir? How about impurities? Is the few minutes at boil temps ok? ...Darrell _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ _/ _/Darrell Leavitt _/ _/INternet: leavitdg at splava.cc.plattsburgh.edu _/ _/AMpr.net: n2ixl at amgate.net.plattsburgh.edu _/ _/AX25 : n2ixl at kd2aj.#nny.ny.usa _/ _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 08:40:13 -0400 From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew at compuserve.com> Subject: Nottingham and long lags Only now rebuilding my library after a roof collapse and subsequent loss of about 1/3 of my reference material; I can explain the long lag times some experience with Nottingham yeast. After reviewing Danstar's own technical sheets I see that their recommended pitching rates are deficient. Assuming a 10 degree Plato wort, the pitching of one 5 gram packet of yeast in 5 gallons is about 1/2 what it should be to give a pitching rate of 1 million cells/degree Plato/mililiter wort. At that rate it would take 8 generations to reach fermentation cell counts. This would require, after adaptation delays, 16 hours at least, lots of oxygen and added nutrients to provide a healthy fermentation population. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 06:02:08 -0700 From: John_E_Schnupp at amat.com Subject: re: false bottoms for mash tuns >I'm building a new 10 gal mash tun based on a Gott water cooler. Does >anyone have any tricks for sealing the false bottom to the sides and >still being able to remove it? Thanks. Joe, Cut the false bottom a little loose. Take enough tubing to wrap around the edge of the false bottom. Slit it on one side and wrap it around the false bottom. You'll have a great seal. I used some scrap teflon tubing I got at work. My false bottom slides in and out fairly easily and seals well. John Schnupp, N3CNL Dirty Laundry Brewery Colchester, VT 95 XLH 1200 Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 08:15:27 -0500 (CDT) From: Joel Plutchak <plutchak at ncsa.uiuc.edu> Subject: re: Brian Brew Ha Ha In HBD #3095, Dan Cole wrote: >Finally (for me on this topic), the AHA has been "couped" by BT in the >promotion of homebrewing. Where was the AHA when BT was working on the >Hombrew Publicity Campaign (creating affordable, high quality commercials >for use by local homebrew shops)? Where is the AHA now on the HPC? Last weekend I was just wondering where *BT* was on the HPC issue. I like to think I keep abreast of goings-on in the beer world, but I haven't heard anything since the idea was originally floated. - -- Rev. Joel Plutchak, B.S. It's too foggy this morning to know where I am Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 09:22:41 -0400 From: "Steve Ashton" <sashton at metlife.com> Subject: Small grist mills Mark writes..... Fellow Brewers, I seek opinions, of which I'm sure there is no shortage here, as to which small grain mill gives the best grist, and is adjustable for a variety of grain types. I have a reputable commercial mill, but because I am dealing with such a great variety of grains in relatively small amounts, I find that constantly adjusting my mill becomes impractical. I need approx. 20 pounds of grain to get the settings where I want them, and since I'm pilot brewing with a grist charge of about 20#, I end up throwing too much malt away. I'm looking for suggestions as to the best brands, suppliers, etc. Thanks in advance for your help. - -------- Mark, I use the Schmidling adjustable malt mill (there is a non adjustable version). It's very easy to motorize and adjusting the rollers is even easier. The hopper holds about 3 lbs. so you should waste a lot less malt getting the adjustments right. The only issue I have had with it is it tends to tear the husks a little. This has not been detrimental on a half barrel scale (no astringency or problems sparging). Jack Schmidling may be able to comment on that and what the range of the mill is. Steven Ashton A little west of NYC Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 09:54:50 -0400 From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer at engin.umich.edu> Subject: Re: Orange Peel Fred, "Brewers Garden" aka F. H. Steinbart sells dried Curacao orange peel. American grown oranges do not impart the same flavor, although I have used them in a wit beer with good success (add some lemon and lime peels to bend the profile a little closer to Curacao.) When I used dried peels, I used the whole thing, not ground. When I used fresh peels, I used just the zest. =S Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 09:00:16 -0500 From: Jeff Pursley <JPursley at Tulsa.E2M.net> Subject: The CABA Brew Your Own Seminar In the July 29 HBD, Rob Jones writes about the upcoming Canadian Amateur Brewers Association (CABA) Brew Your Own Beer Seminar. This sounds like an excellent idea. It is a perfect example of the type of service the AHA could provide to member clubs. They could provide materials and help us to coordinate local events like this one. They could serve as a clearing house for information, passing along the good and bad experiences of other clubs and homebrewers. Good luck Rob, let us know how it works out. Jeff Pursley Fellowship of Oklahoma Ale Makers Tulsa, Oklahoma Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 09:28:58 -0500 From: "Kensler, Paul" <paul.kensler at wilcom.com> Subject: re: false bottoms for mash tuns Joe, I use a 10 gallon Gott with a Phil's Phalse bottom - this might not be an answer to your question, but I have never found a need to seal it to the bottom. My procedure goes like this: Install Phalse bottom and close ball valve on cooler Put about .5-1 gallon foundation water in cooler (just enough to cover the top of the Phalse bottom) "Poke" the Phalse bottom with my mash paddle to knock out any air bubbles trapped under it. This takes care of the floating some folks seem to have a problem with. If it still seems to ride up a little bit, I just set my mash paddle on top of the Phalse bottom until I get some mash on top of it. Depending on what sort of mash I'm doing, I either dough in at this point (when I am doing a single infusion mash), alternating between adding grist and water, or I transfer the completed mash from my mash tun (when I am doing direct-fire step mashes) to the cooler for lautering. Once I get a couple pounds of wet grain on top of the Phalse bottom, it stays put and I don't get any loose grains sneaking around the edges. A couple of tips - make sure you attach the runoff tubing to the Phalse bottom real well - I have accidentally knocked the tubing off the barbed tip when I got a little overzealous with my stirring. Also, if you still need to "seal" the false bottom to your cooler, try a search of the HBD archives - several folks have posted about their success using a length of flexible tubing filled with BB's and sealed at each end with silicone. Hope this helps - Paul Kensler Plano, TX Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 07:34:43 -0700 From: "Bayer, Mark A" <Mark.Bayer at JSF.Boeing.com> Subject: Re: pressure drop in hoses, or, who is eddy viscosity, anyway? collective homebrew conscience_ science alert (you know what to do). jeff mcnally wrote a few things that i'd like to respond to: (laminar pipe flow equation here) >I'm not sure where Mark got this equation, but it's not really applicable >to characterizing the flow found in a kegging system. The problem with it is >that dp/dx is not constant in this application (it is in a long pipeline, >but not in a kegging system), and the flow is probably (QDA!) not laminar. the equation i posted comes from _boundary layer theory_, dr. hermann schlichting, 1987 reissue from mcgraw-hill, page 86. the reason i pulled this out was because alan m and dave b were discussing the effect of hose length and diameter on pressure drop. i was only intending to help explain why longer hoses and hoses of smaller diameter impose more restriction on the flow. i was not trying to model the entire flow path from keg to glass. i also tried to make it clear that the flows we experience are universally turbulent (except for those of you who are very patient), and the turbulent form of the theoretical equation involves reynold's number, and is therefore not as easy to understand how hose length and diameter affect the flow (it's easier to just plug some numbers in and see the result). the laminar equation does display clearly the relationship between resistance, momentum, and the physical characteristics of the pipe, which is also generally valid for turbulent flow. both the turbulent (not posted) and the laminar equation have been rigorously proven to be quite accurate for pipe flow, by many fluid dynamicists (hey, *real* science). >For predicting flow rate (and mean velocity) in a fluid system such as a >kegging system, you would want to use Darcy's head loss formula (head is >another term for pressure, but it is in units of distance like "feet of >water" or "inches of mercury"). Darcy's formula in its simplest form is: >head loss = f * (L / D) * ( V**2 / (2*g)) >where: f is the friction factor (from a Moody chart for pipe flow) > L is length > D is diameter > V is velocity > g is the gravitational constant first, let me say that everything jeff wrote is accurate. we are just coming at this problem from two different angles. back in the mid-to-late 1800's, during the industrial revolution, hydraulics engineers found that the inviscid theoretical models for fluid flow (developed by euler, et.al.) were not accurately predicting the actual engineering applications they were interested in. pipe flow was one of the most important ones. so they set about running experiments to *empirically* figure out how to predict pressure drops, momentum changes, et cetera, for all the situations they cared about. they compiled massive quantities of data and then empirically figured out the equations. this is where d'arcy's equation comes from. everybody knew that the theoretical equations didn't model viscosity, but not many realized how important it was. then, in the early 1900's, a german scientist named ludwig prandtl figured out how to incorporate viscosity into the theoretical models and solve them for particular flows. he came up with boundary layer theory, and, voila!, suddenly the predictions of fluid flow with friction (like pipe flow) became very accurate and they were rigorously demonstrated in laboratories. this is where the laminar equation for pipe flow that i posted comes from. both equations are accurate. jeff's is an older equation based on empirical data. mine is a little newer and comes from first principles (navier stokes equations and boundary layer theory). this is probably going to get a few flames, but i felt like an explanation was in order. sorry to those of you who feel it is a waste (hope you paged down). brew hard, mark bayer stl mo Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 10:54:37 -0400 (EDT) From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker at welch.jhu.edu> Subject: Nitpicking about respitration >strains< of S. cerevesiae do not "respire" in the presence of glucose >above a rather modest level but given oxygen (and suitable nutrients) >they will consume it to produce biomass, in particular, cell membrane >material. Respiration, OTOH, produces only water, CO2 and ATP (energy). ... And metabolic intermediates which are the carbon skeleton building blocks for anabolic reactions, therefore BIOMASS (Not every carbon from every glucose molecule makes it to CO2). I respire all the time but, as my wife is quick to point out, I'm increasing my biomass! -Alan Meeker Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 11:11:45 -0400 From: Matt Birchfield <peridot at usit.net> Subject: Pressure Canning Wort Starters Hi All, Can anybody out there provide specifics about canning wort in Mason jars to store and use as starters? I think what I'm looking for are facts like: 1- What should the S.G. of the canned wort be, or does it matter in relation to my second question? 2- What temperature, pressure and time should be used for safe canning, and how full should the jars be? 3- How long will the canned wort last? 4- Are there any special steps (boiling again, etc.) that should be taken to use the canned wort, or just flame the jar, pour it into the starter fermentation jug and pitch yeast? 5- When canning wort do you need to pressure can, or can you "steam can"? How 'bout immersion in boiling water? 6- What are the chances, circumstances, risks, etc., or doing it wrong? I hate the hassle of making starters (or forgetting to), as I'm sure most people do, and would really like some good advice on the matter. I know this issue has been raised in previous digests, but I haven't been able to find specifics on the process. Thanks in advance! Matt New River Valley, VA Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 07/31/99, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96