---

	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:
  Re: Scotch Ales (KMacneal)
  hbd contribution? / pumps / dehydrated yeast (MaltHound)
  Clinitest eat your heart out (Matthew Comstock)
  pumps ("Eric Panther")
  Re: Pumping, Viscosity, and Newtonian Liquids ("BERNER,ROBERT A.")
  Mint Chocolate Stout ??? (John Baxter Biggins)
  p cooking wort ("Eric Panther")
  Requiem for Phytic Acid (AJ)
  brewing on a scale ("Stephen Alexander")
  yeast/log growth ("Stephen Alexander")
  Dry yeast (tmorgan)
  Septic and brewing (Spencer W Thomas)
  CO2 Measurement (Spencer W Thomas)
  smartass dry yeast answer ("Bayer, Mark A")
  re: To Pump or not to Pump (Ronald Babcock)
  CPVC in mash/lauter tuns ("Jason Birzer")
  When to transplant Hops ? (woodsj)
  mini-kegs (Tom Lombardo)
  Please Remove Me From Mailing List (dzr2)
  pressure cookers ("Eric R. Tepe")
  sour-apple weiss (Scott Murman)
  Dry Yeast ("Rob Moline")


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

* The HBD now hosts eight digests related to this and a few other hobbies.
* Send an email note to majordomo at hbd.org with the word "lists" on one 
* line, and "help" on another (don't need the quotes) for a listing and
* instructions for use.
*


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, 11 Aug 1999 06:47:47 EDT
From: KMacneal at aol.com
Subject: Re: Scotch Ales

In a message dated 8/11/99 1:27:49 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
homebrew-request@hbd.org writes:

<< ThomasM923 at aol.com asks
 >does anyone know of a
 >supplier of the Hugh Baird lightly smoked peat malt mentioned by Ted 
McIrvine
 >in HBD #3103? >>

Williams Brewing also stocks peated malt as well as Scotch malt, a slighty 
darker version of pale malt that is supposed to be similar to what is used to 
produce scotch ales.  I've used them both in some scotch ales (I even put the 
smoked malt into some porter) and have been happy with the results.

Keith MacNeal


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 06:52:21 EDT
From: MaltHound at aol.com
Subject: hbd contribution? / pumps / dehydrated yeast 

In HBD3107 

Matthew Comstock <mccomstock at yahoo.com> said:

"1.  Repitching as the 'best' starter method, like Frederick J. Wills
(Frederick_Wills at compuserve.com)in #2788 (I like that post)"

Wow!  you mean I actually contributed something that someone thought was 
worthwhile.  I am elated.  ...but the Email address is obsolete FWIW.

***************************************

Kirk Fleming said:

"What I've READ (and I can't cite the source) is that these pumps have a
shear effect of the beer, and in particular proteins, and change the
character of the beer for the worse."

While I can't say there is *no* effect on the chemical structure of the 
proteins, I can say that I have noticed *no* change for the worse in the 
character of my beers after having instituted a mag coupled centrifugal 
impeller pump in my RIMS.  In fact, a marked change for the *better* was 
noticed, probably due to the benefits of higher wort clarity.

He continues:
"If true, this would especially be the
case when the outlet flow rate from the pump is reduced through the use of a
shut off valve.  In this case, the impeller is turning at its full speed,
basically churning the wort even more than it would if the flow rate were
unrestricted."

This is an incorrect assumption, and may be why we don't see the degradation 
suggested.  When the flow is restricted by a valve in the outflow, slippage 
takes place at the magnetic coupling to the impeller which reduces the 
tourque applied and impeller speed.  Of course, it is also entirely possible 
to just speed reduce the motor, thereby eliminating the backpressure issue 
entirely.

I have not seen any evidence, either personal experience or related, that 
supports the theory that these pump "shear effect" issues have any detectable 
negative impact on the finished product.  

Alternative pump types each seem to have their negatives.  I have not seen 
any peristaltic pumps that will deliver the flow rates that are required for 
RIMS.  Otherwise, these would seem to be the best choice for the reasons you 
note, cost issues aside.  Diaphragm pumps might be difficult to control flow 
rate on and most are not sealed "food grade" pumps rated for acidic solutions.

**********************************
and Brad Kuhns <bnlkuhns at netzero.net> asked:

"The gal and my brew shop told me that every 
time she and other people have rehydrated at that temp they have gotten the 
same results. Did I kill the yeast? It kinda seems like it. Is there any 
validity to the statement the brew shop owner made?"

No Brad, you most likely did not kill the yeast.  Unless your thermometer is 
off by a lot, the yeast was more likely bad to begin with.  Maybe it was 
subjected to some stress prior to the shop owner receiving it, hence her 
observations about its viability.  REhydrating dry yeast per the instructions 
is the absolutely right thing to do.  Just curious, which brand of dry yeast 
was it?   

Now - Pump on!
Fred Wills
Londonderry, NH


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 05:32:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: Matthew Comstock <mccomstock at yahoo.com>
Subject: Clinitest eat your heart out

Clinitest eat your heart out.

In the July 26, 1999 issue of Chemical and Engineering news, there is a
report (that I paraphrase with absolutely no permission) discussing a
paper from R. M. Strongin in Organic Letters, 1, 331, 1999.  They
describe a macrocyclic receptor molecule (looks a ring incorporating
four phenylboronic acid, C6H5B(OH)2, substituents and linked with four
1,3-benzenediol backbones, C6H4-1,3-(OH)2) that forms
characteristically colored complexes with specific saccharides:  "...on
heating, a colorless solution of the compound undergoes a color change
in the presence of simple sugars...."

"...For example, the solution becomes yellow with fructose, peach with
glucose, and purple with sucrose.... "  Structurally related
saccharides, such as glucose phosphates, amino sugars, and carboxylic
acid sugars also give rise to unique colors, allowing them to be
distinguished easily by visual inspection.  The colors are formed
rapidly and reproducibly and remain stable for up to several days...." 


Beer contains many different sugars, so a complex absorbance spectrum
would result in a test using this receptor molecule. However, with
appropriate standards, it seems like it would be possible to discern
and quantify the sugars in solution, spectrophotometrically.

Is Clinitest able to tell you what sugars are present, or only that
there is some kind of saccharide present?

Maybe it's time to finally set up that organic synthesis lab next to
the brewery. 

Synthesize your own.

Matt Comstock in Cincinnati, OH


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free  at yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 23:43:36 +1000
From: "Eric Panther" <epanther at somelab.com>
Subject: pumps


Captain Kirk sez:

>Again, I'm only repeating what I've read elsewhere, which of course doesn't
>make it so; it seems intuitively plausible, tho.  Blood is another liquid
>that is apparently designed specifically to change properties under shear.

This thing about blood is not true. It is often said, but untrue. I recently
worked for a company developing a centrifugal titanium pump as a replacement
for a heart: not at all haemolytic, despite popular claims. I thought about
using one of their prototypes ($20,000 each, titanium, one moving part) for
a beer pump, but decided against it: who cares about erythrocytes, can't
shear my wort amongst friends!

Eric



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 09:49:17 -0400
From: "BERNER,ROBERT A." <BERNERRA at apci.com>
Subject: Re: Pumping, Viscosity, and Newtonian Liquids

Greetings, 

What follows below is an attempt to explain some fundamental properties of
fluids in a non-technical way. Fellow Rheologists, if there are any, please
don't get to bent out of shape if I make any statements that are not exactly
correct. I am just trying to communicate a concept.  

Kirk Flemming writes below:

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

Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1999 09:16:56 -0500
From: Kirk.Fleming at born.com
Subject: To Pump or not to Pump

The most frequently used pumps are food grade impeller-type pumps.  These
are basically a floating paddlewheel held inside a sealed plastic chamber
and driven magnetically.  The most frequently used means of regulating them
(that I've seen) is through the use of yer basic ball shut-off valve (the
kind used in residential plumbing for water supply).

What I've READ (and I can't cite the source) is that these pumps have a
shear effect of the beer, and in particular proteins, and change the
character of the beer for the worse.  If true, this would especially be the
case when the outlet flow rate from the pump is reduced through the use of a
shut off valve.  In this case, the impeller is turning at its full speed,
basically churning the wort even more than it would if the flow rate were
unrestricted.

    _____________________________________________

Kirk makes some valid assumptions that may be addressed in George Fix's
Analytical Techniques book (the exact title escapes me.) I do recall him
mentioning measuring the viscosity of wort in the book. Viscosity is a
material's resistance to flow, or in other words how thick a liquid is.
Water has very low viscosity and honey has relatively high viscosity. A
fluid who's viscosity remains constant no mater what shear rate it is
subjected to is considered a Newtonian liquid. Water, as are most liquids,
is a Newtonian Liquid. Some fluids are shear thinning; i.e. their viscosity
drops as you increase shear rate. Molten chocolate is an example. Next time
you melt some chocolate in a pan start stirring it slowly and then increase
your speed and see what happens. Conversely some liquids get thicker as you
increase the shear rate. Temperature also has an effect on viscosity,
generally the higher the temp the lower the viscosity. Pumping a fluid, as
does stirring, does impose a stress on the fluid. The shear rate is a
measure of how much you are "perturbing the molecules" of the fluid you are
pumping. Shear rate is a function of how fast you are moving the fluid and
how much space the fluid has to move through (not the distance traveled).
Pumping a fluid at a very high speed through a very small opening would
yield a very high shear rate. There endeth the Rheology lesson.

If you subject your wort to high shear rates you could be physically
breaking down some of the proteins. This could have an effect on the
finished product. Even a high gravity wort is still a fairly dilute solution
of "stuff" in water and the viscosity might only be on the order of 2 or 3
times that of pure water. While honey is about 100000 times as viscous as
water. If you had a very high concentration of protein in your wort you
might notice more of a difference between pumping and not pumping your wort
in your finished product. What kind of difference would you notice, poor
head formation or retention?, mouthfeel? If I had the right equipment here
at work I would gladly come in one weekend and get a viscosity profile of
some wort from one of my brewing sessions. Unfortunately we are set up to
measure high viscosity fluids, like honey, and solids. Anyone out there have
access to a stress controlled rheometer suitable for low viscosities or
perhaps a high shear Haake viscometer?  

Bob Berner  in Alentown PA

Your body is a temple, a temple of Bacchus.
 



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 10:11:17 -0400
From: John Baxter Biggins <jbbiggin at mail.med.cornell.edu>
Subject: Mint Chocolate Stout ???

Has anyone ever tried a Mint Chocolate Stout?  My guess is to "dry-hop"
fresh  mint leaves in the 2ndary.  I saw something in the CM3 using store
bought syrups, but I just wanted a different opinion.  Living in a cramped
closet in Manhattan w/ limited facilities, I'm a still partial-mash guy.

Private email OK.

 -bignz


- -------------------
John B. Biggins
Cornell University Medical College
Weill Graduate School of Medical Sciences
Student -- Program in Pharmacology

Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center
Department of Molecular Pharmacology and Therapeutics
Laboratory for Biosynthetic Chemistry
lab:(212)693-6405   fax:(212)717-3135

	"Science, like Nature, must also be tamed
	   With a view towards its preservation.
	 Given the same state of integrity
	   It will surely serve us well."
	    -- Neil Peart; Natural Science (III) -- Permanent Waves




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 00:19:22 +1000
From: "Eric Panther" <epanther at somelab.com>
Subject: p cooking wort

Amongst the myriad of posts recommending pressure cooking wort for
maltiness, I beg to differ. Gotta be at least one dissenting voice!

I actually went out and purchased a huge pressure cooker several years ago
when I first read this theory. I can't remember the brand, but it was from
India or thereabouts. about 20l capacity...

Well I made several batches which were p-cooked in this monster. The taste
was not so much malty as cooked caramel. Imagine steinbier and the process
which makes it so. Same for pressure cooking. Great for steinbier, not so
great for anything else. Hop utilisation- great! break formation- terrific!
taste- blah!

At least the cooker came with a recipe book. It included a recipe for
"steamed mutton for 100". So I held a big party; steinbier and steamed
mutton. Nobody showed up. I was eating cold mutton and sipping steinbier for
months afterwards (before I stopped drinking beer of course)

I hate steinbier and mutton now..

Eric Panther.

PS. Hey, the beergod Narziss (I am so surprised he does not contribute to
this most excellent forum - the world's best! Maybe nobody has told him
about it?) does not recommend overheating wort either, for you science
geeks. Pressure cooking wort belongs in the depths of hell as a brewing
technique.



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 09:22:01 -0500
From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com>
Subject: Requiem for Phytic Acid

Alan wrote:

>...it is not the release
>of phosphate during the mash itself that lowers the mash pH but the
subsequent
>complexation/precipitation of this phosphate with divalent cations
(most
>likely calcium) that drives the lowering of the mash pH.

If Alan can get comfortable with the idea that this mechanism is
responsible for much of, but not all of*, the acid produced at mash-in I
can declare us in violent agreement and terminate this thread. I do so
with some regret as it has been, for me (but perhaps only for me), one
of the most interesting in a long time.

*M&BS tells us that the most of the remainder of the acid comes from
precipitation of phytic acid directly with calcium with a small amount
possibly coming from similar reactions with unspecified proteins. The
mechanism is the same for phosphoric acid, phytic acid and the proteins
as well:  only the pK's and solubility products differ. Precipitation of
an insoluble salt upsets the equilibrium causing a fraction of the less
basic (more protonated) ions of that same salt to shed protons and
convert to the more basic forms. These protons are responsible for the
drop in pH.



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 09:58:35 -0400
From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: brewing on a scale

Just catching up on some old HBDs - take the dunce cap off Matt.

Matt Comstock writes ...

>During the fermentation, the
>specific gravity is dropping, mass is floating out of the carboy as
>CO2, could we monitor the fermentation by placing the carboy on a
>scale?

Thought I already posted on this - but yes, Hubert Hangofer noted this
method in offline email.

>Probably couldn't tell the difference between 1.012 and 1.014,
>but....

Actually a drop from 1.014 t o1.012 in  20L(5.2gal) is about 38 grams
of CO2 given off difference (1.35 ounces) and quite measurable with a
decent scale !  Putting your fermentor on a balance might be a pretty
'clean' method of observing fermentation.

Lou Heavner says ...
> Not entirely goofy, but I don't think it would work.  The SG is
> density and I imagine the liquid level is changing as much or more
>  than the mass.

No actually it barely budges except for evaporation.  The volume of
the ethanol is almost the same as the volume displaces by the sugar.

>  Plus you have solid biomass forming which is supposed
>  to mostly settle out and not be a part of the liquid density.

Right, yeast in growth will create a yeast mass of about 5% of the sugar
used, which of course drops to 0% after growth ceases.   but the basis of
the method is that the amount of CO2 developed is directly proportional to
the amount of fermentation (ignoring CO2 in solution for a moment) .  If the
amount of yeast grown varies for the same amount of fermentation, then
certainly the beer SG will be slightly different.  But we are interested in
the fermentation progress, not really the SG nor the yeast mass per se - so
it is a good method.

Steve








Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 11:00:57 -0400
From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: yeast/log growth

I didn't get the context of Alessandro's original post from the excerpt.

Yeast in respiration (lots of O2)  have much more energy available and grow
fast without producing alcohol.  Of course the anaerobic fermentative growth
(logarithmic) phase is where most of the beer alcohol is produced.

 -S





Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 08:28:37 -0700
From: tmorgan at esassoc.com
Subject: Dry yeast

I have done many beers with dry yeast, mostly Nottingham Ale but some Edme too. 
Some I have re-hydrated some not.  I have never had a failure to ferment with or
without re-hydration.  My guess would be that you had a) old yeast or b) your
temperature for re-hydration was too high >105F.  If anything from my own
observation, re-hydration seems better to do than not with dry yeast.  However,
YMMV is always the case.  

Interestingly enough, I just had a failure (my first) with a 5 month old package
of Wyeast 1007 which two days after smacking did nothing.  Sounds too me like
what you did (get more yeast) was clearly the right thing in this case.  Hope it
comes out well.

        Tim Morgan
        Black Cloud Home Brewery
        Petaluma CA
    



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 11:39:39 -0400
From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer at engin.umich.edu>
Subject: Septic and brewing

As someone (John Wilkinson?) pointed out, almost all of the effluent
from the brewing process is what is commonly called "gray water".
This stuff may not (depending on local laws, of course) need to go
into the septic system.  You could just run it out onto the driveway
or lawn (watch heat here -- don't want to cook the grass), or build
yourself a "dry well."  This is a hole of appropriate size, filled
with rocks (crushed gravel?), and covered over.  You run a pipe into
the top, and the water flows into the gravel, and then slowly into the
ground.

Me, whenever I've brewed outside, my outflow just goes into the
driveway, and I usually dump the rinse water from cleaning the pots
onto the driveway or lawn.

A friend distributes his spent grain over his lawn by simply scooping
it out of the mash tun and flinging it out across the lawn.  It
presumably helps fertilize the soil and adds organic matter.  I put my
spent grain into my composter.

=Spencer Thomas in Ann Arbor, MI        (spencer at umich.edu)


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 12:20:04 -0400
From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer at engin.umich.edu>
Subject: CO2 Measurement

Let's do a little calculation here, shall we?

A typical beer might drop from a SG of 1.048 to 1.012 during the
course of the fermentation.  Or, to put it another way, the sugar
content drops from 12% to about 4%.  Each glucose (C6-H12-O6) molecule
that is fermented produces 2 Ethanol (C2-H5-OH) molecules and 2 CO2
molecules.  Glucose has a molecular weight of 6*12 + 12*1 + 6*16 =
180, CO2 has a molecular weight of 44.  So .488 of the weight of the
sugar escapes as CO2.  100g of wort has 12g of sugar in it.  After
fermentation, about 8g of the sugar has been fermented, and about 4g
of CO2 produced.  So the mass has dropped to 96g.  This change is
certainly detectable.  

Suppose an empty carboy masses 2kg.  19L of wort masses 19.9kg, so the
original mass of the carboy full of wort is 21.9kg.  After
fermentation, the finished beer masses about 21.1kg.  Again, this
change should be measurable.  Whether you can get the precision you
want from this measurement is a different question entirely.  

Someone proposed measuring the volume of outgassed CO2.  A rough
calculation indicates how much this volume would be.  A mole of ideal
gas has a volume of about 22 liters (a bit more at room temp, but this
is close enough for the precision we're using here.)  One mole of CO2
weighs 44g.  The outgassed CO2 from our hypothetical batch of beer
weighs about 800g, or about 18 moles.  The volume of CO2 that is
outgassed is therefore about 400 liters, or about 105 gallons, or
about 14 cubic feet.  You'd need a pretty big container to capture and
measure this volume!

Things I ignored in the back-of-the-envelope calculations above:

* Yeast mass.  Very little of the sugar goes to yeast (about 1% if I'm
remembering correctly).  Most of it goes to Ethanol and CO2.

* CO2 dissolved in the beer.  About 1 "volume" of CO2 is dissolved in
the beer at room temperature, or about 2g/liter, or about 38g for our
19 liter batch.  This is about 5% of the total weight loss.

=Spencer Thomas in Ann Arbor, MI        (spencer at umich.edu)


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 09:48:05 -0700
From: "Bayer, Mark A" <Mark.Bayer at JSF.Boeing.com>
Subject: smartass dry yeast answer

collective homebrew conscience_

brad wrote:

<snip>I brewed a nice Nut brown this weekend and used dry yeast and
>dehydrated 2 packages per the instructions on the back 105 deg for 15
min's. <snip> Did I kill the yeast? It kinda seems like it.

dehydrating dried yeast is a questionable practice, typically not conducive
to getting good results.  i'd say those instructions for dehydration are
faulty.  just a guess.

brew hard,

mark bayer
stl mo


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 11:09:09 -0600
From: Ronald Babcock <rbabcock at rmii.com>
Subject: re: To Pump or not to Pump

Kirk.Fleming in 3107 talks about shear effect on beer. 

I would be interested to find out what the mass of commercial breweries use
to move the beer. All the ones I have visited have used pumps. Are the
pumps being run wide open to prevent degradation of the final product or
are they being throttled back / speed controlled to control the flow.

I personally have brewed the same beer recirculating consistently through
the mash and only using the pump to move the wort from one vessel to
another. I don't use the pump to transfer the wort from the boiling vessel
to the carboys. I couldn't tell a difference in the taste of the beer only
a higher extraction rate and quicker conversion.

I haven't tried the same beer with only gravity as the means to transfer
from one to an other. This may be something to try and see how much or if
shear effect has on the beer.

I know everyone says not to put a speed controller on a mag pump is this
due to cooling? If so a second fan running at full speed could be used to
cool the pump. I have a router speed control that I have used for years and
haven't had a problem with the router. Wouldn't this work on a mag pump if
in fact shear effect changes the flavor of the beer.

Ron


Ronald Babcock - rbabcock at rmii.com - Denver, CO
Home of the Backyard Brewery at http://shell.rmi.net/~rbabcock/


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 13:14:08 -0400
From: "Jason Birzer" <longshot at pressroom.com>
Subject: CPVC in mash/lauter tuns

I've been thinking about converting a cooler into a mash/lauter tun to 
finally get into all grain.  Most of the instructions I have found for 
doing it use copper for the manifold.  Recently, tho, I have seen 
mention of using CPVC to make the manifold.  Is there any 
pluses/negatives to doing either?  I figure that CPVC would be easier 
to work with....

Jason Birzer
Nowhere near Jeff Renner...



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 13:49:02 -0400
From: woodsj at us.ibm.com
Subject: When to transplant Hops ?



Greetings to all.  Tis the season for lots of hops posts.  Here's one
that I can't find in the archives or on a website.  A recent post to
AHA Tech Talk received no response.

I have 2 sets of first year plants, 1 is growing well at over 20 feet
tall with lots of cones and no bugs.  The other set was planted in a
less-than-desireable location and not doing as well with limited
sunlight and will probably be transplanted.  I fully understand I'm
giving up the first year root growth but I think it will be best in the
long run.  When is the best time to transplant ?  In the fall after the
cones have been harvested and bines withered or in the spring
just like you'd plant a new set ?

Any experience or advice ???

Jeff Woods
Camp Hill, PA
(Proud Syracuse U grad in the heart of Penn State country)




Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 18:39:16 -0500
From: toml at ednet.rvc.cc.il.us (Tom Lombardo)
Subject: mini-kegs

Hi,

I just bought a set of mini-kegs, and I was hoping someone could help me.  

The directions for screwing the cartridge onto the regulator tell me to
turn the cartridge holder until I hear a slight hiss, then turn more to
seal it.  Well, I don't get a faint hiss, it goes from nothing to spraying
CO2 all over.  By the time I get it turned all the way, the CO2 is gone. 
I've done this 3 times, with 8g and 16g cartridges.  No matter how slowly
I twist, it goes "zero-to-full-blast" almost instantly.  

Am I missing something?

Also, Dan Listerman mentioned a newly designed bung and tap for the
system.   Where might I find these items?

Thanks,
Tom (in Rockford IL, where we finally have a brewpub!)



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 21:58:39 -0700
From: dzr2 at earthlink.net
Subject: Please Remove Me From Mailing List





Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 23:23:45 -0400
From: "Eric R. Tepe" <erictepe at fuse.net>
Subject: pressure cookers

Where does one find a 17-22qt pressure cooker/canner? My local Wal-Mart
and Meijer only have 12qt ones.

Eric


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 21:53:44 -0700 (PDT)
From: Scott Murman <smurman at best.com>
Subject: sour-apple weiss


This is a beer inspired by those green sour-apple candies from my
youth.  I'd been meaning to brew this for years, and the recent
attempts of Tidmarsh & Teutonic finally gave me enough motivation.
I made this in a 1 gal. batch, for various reasons.  The total cost
for the batch was less than a pint at the local pub, and it probably
took less time than it takes to drink the same (no boil, no chill, no
worries).

1 lb. pils malt
1 lb. wheat malt

I didn't bother with any hops.  Didn't bother with any gravity, pH, or
pK measurements either, but I was aiming for something around the low
1.030's.  Felt pretty close.

Mash in a small Igloo playmate cooler at 1 qt/lb at 150F for 60 min.
Add cool water to drop temperature below 120F, then add a handful of
malt, cover the mash with saran wrap to keep O2 out, and set in a warm
place.  Occasionally I would add some hot water to raise the
temperature.  I was trying to keep it as close to 113F as possible.  I
left it like this for 24 hrs.

Meanwhile...

1 lb. apples (most assertive tasting you can find)

Core and slice the apples, then freeze them overnight.  Thaw, and then
turn them into apple sauce.  I briefly heated them (screw the pectin,
this was meant to be cloudy) for no real good reason.  Then dump them
in the bottom of a fermenter.

I lautered the mash in a kitchen colander, and didn't boil.
Transfered directly to the fermenter already full of apple sauce.  Do
not let anyone who wants to drink this swill help during this step, in
fact, keep them out of the house.  The mash absolutely smells like
crap.  Forget the horse blanket, this nag has already died.

Pitched a 1 pt. starter of Chico yeast.  I prefer to use neutral
yeasts for these type of brews, since they don't cover any of the
other flavors.  Fermented for "awhile" at "room temp".

Bottled with corn sugar.  Whoo-doggie, it's definately sour as
advertised.  Tastes very much like lemonade.  Thin body,
mouth-puckering sour, and cloudy.  Faint apple flavor.  I have no idea
how it will age, but it's drinkable as-is (if you dare).

If I do it again I will add some "aroma agent", like essence of apple,
or bat dung, or anything, because it still doesn't smell like
something you want to bury your nose in (don't go there Fouch).  I've
never tried an authentic weiss, but my impression is that they really
are this sour.  I can see why you'd add a sweet syrup at serving.  I
might experiment with serving with sliced orange, or similar, just to
be chic.

If you're bored with the usual, give this a try.  Next up Pumpkin Brew
'99!

 -SM-


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 00:02:35 -0500
From: "Rob Moline" <brewer at isunet.net>
Subject: Dry Yeast

Dry Yeasts...
     Recent posts and communications with brewers indicate some are having
probs with dry yeast usage....
     Not presuming to speak for other manufacturers products, I can speak
for Lallemand, and the problems seem to be related to a few areas; transit
and storage, rehydration, and inadequate pitching rates.

1. Transit and storage. When I was ordering dry yeast for brewpubs, I would
always specify overnight for summer shipments, or  at  least 2 day... while in
the winter, the least expensive options were fine. Dry yeast, just like
liquid strains, will suffer high death rates in the presence of elevated
temperatures. This is why one should store dry yeast in the fridge, cooler
or freezer.
     Of course, when one buys from an HB shop, one is unaware of just how
many days this yeast has been sitting in a UPS truck  at  an ambient of 128F in
Tucson. One can be aware if the yeast is stored in  at  least a fridge in the
shop, though, and insist that the yeasts you buy have been stored in a
cooled situation whilst in the shop.

2. Rehydration. Lallemand yeasts should be rehydrated in WATER  at  100F. Use
about a cup and a half for 2 sachets. (My recommendation...I believe
Lallemand's rec is for 104F, but the range officially is 98-107F.) After
10-15/60 of WATER rehydration, irrespective of any foam generated, mix this
slurry with an equal amount of chilled wort, and allow this to rest for
10-15/60, before adding to your batch.
     Many folks are adding the yeast to wort for rehydration. This is in
many cases successful, but actually inhibitive to optimal performance of the
yeast. If one understands that the "Fluid Bed Drying" technique of yeast
drying removes the fluid content of an optimized cell...that is, a cell that
has been prepared with adequate glycogen stores for optimal survival/revival
rates....one should easily recognize the need to rehydrate the cell and ALL
it's components...
     To rehydrate with wort ensures activation of certain cell components
AND activities, like sugar transport, before other parts of the cell are
rehydrated and prepared to function.  Think of an army with an inadequate
supply line.........or conversely, brilliant logistics support without
adequate front line troops...it just isn't the best way to go.

3. Inadequate pitching rates. Lallemand adopted the 5 gm sachet size, when
it first got into the home beer market for one reason...that was what the
competition offered, and what the market expected.
     Many of us in the homebrew world have been for years advocating the use
of rates greater than 5 grams for 5 gallons. My recommendation is for 10
grams/2 sachets for 5 g. The major advantage, in the current state of
development of the dry yeast business, is the fact that one doesn't need to
do a couple of days stepping up to use it.  Just get ready to pitch, and
30/60 later....you are ready. But without the greater rates offered by 2
sachets,  at  a ridiculously low cost, that advantage might be nullified by
longer lag times.....mostly induced by the previously discussed
factors....transit/storage conditions...and rehydration practices.
     I have seen, in my own professional practices, some variation in 'lag'
from time to time....but the fact is that most of the time the yeasts
produced results that bordered on miraculous, (how else do you comprehend a
Gold  at  GABF, for Barleywine, 11.44% ABV, with Nottingham? It certainly
wasn't the brilliance of the brewer!) and in those moments that things were
slower, the yeasts performed as expected.
     Lag time itself is worthy of discussion, but for the moment, I believe
that folks prob's relate to storage, rehydration, and rate.

     Increasingly sophisticated and demanding market forces, i.e.,
homebrewers, has led to several changes in the home brew yeast world. The
first major shift was the response from the liquid yeast marketers who
recognized the lack of range of style and quality in the dry yeast world.
     But the next shift has been the response from Lallemand, unique among
dry yeast producers, in recognition of the fact that they are either in this
market with pride, or not at all. Keep in mind that the domestic AND
international homebrew market is but a fraction of Lallemand's yeast
business. Gasohol production yeasts alone would belittle the homebrew side
of their production. Add to that the commercial wine business (their big
biz, which Lallemand is highly proud of their successes in), the liquor, the
chocolate, the baking, etc......and one might begin to understand that
Lallemand is in the business of homebrewing yeast manufacture to be the
best, not because it is the breadwinner here.
     So, recognizing their own shortcomings, what to do?

     Hire the best minds from the world's premier brewing institutions, and
breweries....and put them to work improving quality and style offerings. To
this end, there are folks currently working on new pitching recommendations
based on style, and gravity....there are new yeasts from the world's best
institutions coming to market in dry form........there is a bloke like me to
focus your comments back to the manufacturer, in an effort to let them know
what you need. (Certainly not the best mind! Oh, well...they can't have it
all, eh?)

    But back to prob's, if one can control the above mentioned
factors....transit/storage, rehydration, and rate...one's experiences with
Lallemand/Danstar yeasts will be wonderful. If any of the above parameters,
along with age of product are not monitored, results will vary...just as
they will with ANY yeasts.

Cheers!
Rob Moline
Lallemand
jethro at isunet.net
brewer at isunet.net

     "Yeast Fact" Many homebrewers complain of a lack of temperature
control. In over 900 gasohol production facilities in Brazil, supplied with
yeast by Lallemand, many have no fermentation temp control. Fermentation
temps often rise up to 30C (86F) higher than pitching temp during that
fermentation. Can you say 'Ester production?'





Return to table of contents

---