HOMEBREW Digest #3116 Sat 21 August 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

  over pressure boiling ("Micah Millspaw")
  Isoelectric Focusing/FG from OG (AJ)
  Professor Panther's Perfidious and Preposterous Proclamations. ("Dr. Pivo")
  Re: Inexpensive Vacuum sealers (MrMike656)
  Brewing Relevance/Licorice (AJ)
  Brewpubs in Montreal (Julio Canseco)
  Trials , Tribulations and Finnings  and the group brew ("Sieben, Richard")
  Dagzy the Newbie Brewer! ("Thomas D. Hamann")
  Free Equipment (John Varady)
  licorice (Jeff Renner)
  re: overpressure boiling ("Nathaniel P. Lansing")
  "ice brewing" (Steven Sanders)
  Re: Lagering schedule (Jeff Renner)
  Spec Racing Breweries (Rod Prather)
  Heating Elements ("Scott Church")
  Is hops our obsession? (Rod Prather)
  yeast pumps (jliddil)
  White Labs Yeast Questions ("Christopher Farley")
  RE: Formula for Calculating Expected FG from OG ("Nigel Porter")
  Glucose, Ketone Bodies, Ammonia, Urea, Alcohol, and Diets (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
  Reynolds ... peristatlic pumps etc./shear calc needed ("Stephen Alexander")
  wierd science .../yeast question ... ("Stephen Alexander")
  Re: Keg carbonation/immersion chilled fermenter/chrome and brass ("Hubert W. Schreier")
  SMM to DMS formula ("Rich, Charles")

* 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: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 06:56:31 -0500 From: "Micah Millspaw" <MMillspa at SILGANMFG.COM> Subject: over pressure boiling writes in HBD 3114: > >Subject: over pressure boiling? The talk of pressure cooking wort and >over-pressure boiling made me wonder...If a large beer factory has a 30 foot >deep kettle, then wouldn't the beer at the bottom be at 2 atmospheres? Maybe >the wort at the bottom isn't actually boiling but the convecting heat would >boil the top layer of wort as it reaches closer to 1 atmosphere. Is this >over-pressure/over-temperature boil why they get such high hop >utilization's? In a really tall kettle they could be boiling at 3 >atmospheres without a pressure system. The effect in the boiling kettle is not so much what is happening to the wort at the bottom of the kettle, but what is happening at the top. First of all the wort should be constantly in motion throughout the kettle (due to convection) if a boil is in progress. Second, the chemical reactions occuring in the boil (there are many) take place at the liquid/gas inferace, at or near the surface of the wort in the kettle. THis is due largely to the asmetrical cavitational collapse of the steam bubbles in the wort itself. The collapsing bubbles creat micro pockets with super temperatures that impact of chemical reaction in a boil, ie. increased hop utilization. It is possible and desireable for brewing kettles to be force vented to enhance the effect. BTW there was an article in BT 3 or 4 years back on this topic. Micah Millspaw - brewer at large Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 12:09:52 +0000 From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com> Subject: Isoelectric Focusing/FG from OG Kirk asks about immobilizing proteins. As we all know proteins are made up of chains of amino acids. Amino acids form "zwitterions" whose net electric charge depends on the pH. Of more importance in proteins are those amino acids which have ionizable side groups. The charge on these can also be varied by controlling the pH. The isoelectric point for a protein is the pH at which the protein has no net charge. The key to Kirk's idea is, thus, to establish a zone within the system at which the pH is equal to the isoelectric pH of the proteins. Strong electric fields of proper direction and matching pH gradients adjacent to the isoelectric zone should do the job. I imagine a good relativity condenser would be of immense help in implementing this system. This is called "isoelectric focusing". Note: At the moment the proteins in my tongue are being electrically attracted to the proteins on the inner surface of my cheek. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mike Hanson asked about estimating FG from OG. The FG is simply (1 - Apparent Attenuation/100)*OG. Thus if the apparent attenuation is 80% the FG is 0.2 times the OG. Apparent attenuation realized depends on lots of factors but if everything is done right the yeast are the main determinant. The yeast supplier will usually give a range of attenuations which can reasonably be expected to seen with the particular strains he sells. Here are some Apparent Attenuation numbers from a couple of beers I've looked at recently. Commercial Ale (Regional Brewery): 76% Commercial Lager (Same brewery): 80% Commercial Ale (Same brewery) 73% Commercial Pils (Same brewery) 77% Commercial Pils (Different brewery) 79% Homebrewed Weizenbeer 80% Note that the apparent attenuation is not the same as the real attenuation which is a measure of the sugar eaten and alcohol produced. Whereas apparent attenuation is easily measured by reading the specific gravity of the beer and comparing it to the specific gravity of the wort, real attenuation requires that the alcohol be evaporated from the beer, the beer to be made up to original weight with water and the specific gravity then determined. Alcohol content can be estimated from original gravity and apparent gravity, original gravity and real final gravity or apparent final gravity and real final gravity. Formulas and tables based on Balling's work are found in Vol II of DeClerk. - -- A. J. deLange Numquam in dubio, saepe in errore. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 14:25:19 +0200 From: "Dr. Pivo" <dp at pivo.w.se> Subject: Professor Panther's Perfidious and Preposterous Proclamations. There has been some suggestions raised about in which direction information is traveling (from HBD to space, or from space to HBD). The latter is undeniably the correct direction of flow.... unfortunately, the supposition that it comes from an alien culture beamed TO the HBD is entirely wrong. It comes from God. And verily it is written in the Holy books upon which we have placed our faith... the Old Testament (the Book of DeClarke), and the collective passages of the New Testament (The Book of Fix, the Book of Miller, and The Book of Noonan... though some have dismissed these last writings as being interpretations from the disciples and not actually the words of God). There is as well Protestental, more popularistic passages (The Book of Papazian), which we each vernal equinox burn as the heretical writings that they are, and with white costumes and pointy hats in place, take turns wiping our backsides with the "Pagan Picture of the Devil's Disciple Pouring Hot Wort Through a Strainer"... this is called "the ritual of the Pap. Smear". So truly must the foundations of our lithurgy be understood and not questioned, for there lies the opening through which Satan will come creeping in . As to Docent Panthers's use of a Nitrogen flush in his storage shed, I find this an admirable practice.... I only hope that he is using "food grade" Nitrogen. If this gas is not Micro-filtered it can be literred with bacteria. Sure you may believe that the fact that these grainy materials will be later boiled is some sort of protection. Let me just say this.... there are thermophyllic bacteria that would love to dive (doing a "double inverted triple twisting brown-out"... 10.0 difficulty) with a wry smile right on their cell membranes, into Charles Rich's pressure cooker, without being phased a bit. Of course these same would go belly up in some low pH wort, but that is not what is important here. released from the inner structure of the matrix between the bilipids, are "exotoxins". These have been isolated as 3,4 diketo, 15,18,27 tripheno, 47, 12', 16.. HIKE!.....and it's phosphorylated isomere, which have been showed to have the tastes of "braised asparagus tips" and "a "Twinkee floating in Sheep dip" , repectively. One thing we can be absolutely CERTAIN of, is that these tastes will be exacerbated by using incorrect pitching rates, and I'll be saying a lot more about this, whether or not anyone cares at all. These were recently added 50/50 to a can of Miller Lite at the "dePorgie School of Tasting" (Graduate Division, Dan Quayle College), where one of the students was heard to remark: "Have you seen my booger? It was on my finger a minute ago." So, while Herr Doktor Panther is certainly heading in the right direction, more attention to detail must be payed! Quit being so sloppy, or where a belt and braces next vernal equinox. As to his conversion to "virtual brewing", I think that this is a very wise course indeed..... .... and in fact perhaps the only thing that can be done with "virtual information",. Dr. Pivo Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 08:24:38 EDT From: MrMike656 at aol.com Subject: Re: Inexpensive Vacuum sealers Hi y'all - Arthur McGregor mentioned the Freshlock II Vacuum Sealer shown in a recent DAMARK catalog at the unheard-of 'low price' of 22.99. I picked up the same one at a local Target for about the same price, and you really do get what you pay for. I found that it didn't really seal all that well, the bags leaked more often than not, and the few that didn't leak really weren't the best in the world. I wound up double and triple bagging my hops and then sealing them in a zip-loc just so they wouldn't stink up the freezer. The machine doesn't create enough of a vacuum to really pull all the air out (you could say it doesn't suck enough, but that would be a contradiction...), making the machine only good enough to seal things that don't require a vacuum seal. After a year, I broke down and bought a reconditioned Foodsaver for a hundred bucks from Sportsman's Guide (if you get the DAMARK catalog, you probably get that one too - ). They don't always have them, but this sucker really works. Bags are real heavy duty and reusable. Worth every penny - especially at the reconditioned price. Just my two cents.... Mike Maimone Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 12:37:50 +0000 From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com> Subject: Brewing Relevance/Licorice Matt Smiley posted >(EtOH + NAD+ ---> acetaldhyde +NADH). >The second step uses the enzyme aldehyde dehydrogenase (acetaldehyde + >NAD+ ----> acetate + NADH)..... and then implied that it was not brewing related. Well, no need. Of course it is brewing related especially if we add the first part of the path in thus: pyruvate-----> acetaldehyde -----> EtOH -------> acetaldehyde ---> acetate The reactions left of EtOH take place in your yeast and the ones on the right in your liver. Further to brewing relevance the two reactions Matt posted are the basis for a very sensitive test for alcohol. The ASBC method for low alcohol beers uses it. The sample is diluted (yes, it's that sensitive), buffered and dosed with alcohol dehydrogenase, aldehyde dehydrogenase (the enzymes which catalyze the reactions) and NAD+. The NADH produced absorbs ultraviolet light at 340 nm and by measuring this absorbtion the amount of alcohol can be determined quickly, accurately and without offending BATF (i.e. no distillation is required). Of course there is a downside. The test kit for this method is quite expensive. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * There has been some discussion of licorice in beer. Certainly Old Peculiar tastes of licorice and according to the Good Beer Guide licorice is used in the recipe. So there is at least one commericial example that I am aware of. - -- A. J. deLange Numquam in dubio, saepe in errore. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 08:30:43 -0400 From: Julio Canseco <jcanseco at arches.uga.edu> Subject: Brewpubs in Montreal Greetings, I'll be traveling to Montreal next month. Any recommended watering holes? Private e-mail is fine. TIA julio in athens, georgia ... athens is a drinking town with a football problem... Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 07:53:31 -0500 From: "Sieben, Richard" <SIER1 at AERIAL1.COM> Subject: Trials , Tribulations and Finnings and the group brew Darrly Downie expressed problems with his first all grain experience, It sounds like your beer was oxidized, but I am not really sure where it happened, but my experience has been at bottling time. There should have been nothing but CO2 in the fermentor when you added finings, so that is why I don't think it happened there. (unless the lid on your fermentor does not fit very tight and let air in after the primary ferment had settled down, or you just can't resist taking a peak?) How were your extract beers? maybe you had some papery/cardboard taste with them too? If so I would look at your bottling procedures and try not to induce air. Another thing you may want to try for at least one batch, lets dispense with the finings, use a kettle coagulant like Irish Moss instead. This way you are not screwing around with finished beer and risking a post ferment infection. I am only suggesting this as an experiment to try to isolate the cause of your apparent oxidation and possible infection, who cares if your great tasting beer isn't crystal clear anyway? I have to admit ignorance on finings as I never saw the need for them anyway, given enough time my beer drops bright by itself. (I do use Irish Moss and sometimes I use beechwood in my secondary fermentor to make a beer drop bright more quickly and I guess that is technically a 'fining' agent.) Final word from me, don't be afraid to all grain brew, I don't find it harder than brewing out of the can, it's just a longer hobby/brew day and the benefits outweigh the extra effort. Rich Sieben Island Lake, IL ps I like Jim Kingsberg's idea of a group brew experiment Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 22:48:46 +0930 From: "Thomas D. Hamann" <tdhamann at senet.com.au> Subject: Dagzy the Newbie Brewer! Hi Darryl, the Adelaide Hills Amateur Brewers (or something like that!) is meeting next in Crafers on 26th Sept. 1999. We have a good cross-section of brewers and wine makers, with the 2 HBD `lurkers and dwellers' being Brad and Thomas who are mashers. We have "made" most of our mashing equipment ourselves e.g. CFW chiller, kettle, lauter tun, and we (2) are brewing a scotch ale this Sunday. Send me a private eMail if you want to know more about the club, checking out Brad + Tom's next brew session or just some brewers chit-chat. Zum Wohl, Thomas. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 09:16:21 -0400 (EDT) From: John Varady <rust1d at usa.net> Subject: Free Equipment Ocean Optics is DONATING FREE spectrophotometers from their trade-in program. http://www.labx.com/v2/adsearch/Detail3.CFM?adnumb=27850 They have hundreds of antique instruments such as the Bausch and Lomb, Spectronic 20 UV/VIS Spectrophotometer. You can email them from the web page, or directly to info at oceanoptics.com Looking forward to brewing season, John John Varady The HomeBrew Recipe Calculating Program Boneyard Brewing Custom Neon Beer Signs For Home Brewers Glenside, PA Get More Information At: rust1d at usa.net http://www.netaxs.com/~vectorsys/varady Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 09:42:09 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: licorice Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> writes >I believe the hobby books took the easy way >out or assumed the brewers used licorice >flavouring ( anyone have any evidence they >did?) If professionals used the flavouring, perhaps >it was when the brewers lightened up on the >OG they used licorice to give the impression >of a higher OG beer?? Wahl and Henius (1902) http://hubris.engin.umich.edu:8080/Wahl/ make no mention of licorice in their discussion of porter, but A.L.Nugey (1948) does in his _Brewers Manual (Practically Considered)_. Nugey was an engineer and salesman for brewers additives, so his information must be viewed with some caution, but it probably generally reflected brewing practices and recipes of his time, except for his strong advocacy of proprietary additives. His three 100 bbl. formulas (p.55) for porter use 6.5 lbs. of licorice (form not specified) for the 12P recipe, 6 lbs. for 13P, and 6.75 lbs. for 15P. (The 12P is all malt, the stronger ones use flaked maize.) He also writes cryptically (p.53), "Color malt gives the Porter a more desireable character. If very dark Porter is desired increase the amount of licorice." Brewers interested in recreating historical American brews might like to try one of these recipes. 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: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 09:50:19 -0400 From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew at compuserve.com> Subject: re: overpressure boiling Mr. Scholz said " At ~8 ft deep the wort wasn't under multi-atmospheres of pressure and as far as I know of other commercial plants, the geometry is about the same." That would make the wort at the bottom of the kettle at 1.25 atmospheres. The 2 commercial kettles I've seen have had square aspect ratios. How many similar to the Rheingold kettles he has actually seen? Then, " And the hops utilization increase over homebrewing is due to hooded venting of the kettles and more even heat distribution of large steam fired kettles." The hooded kettles help keep the evaporation to 10% but do not affect the temperature or convection currents which are the 2 main properties affecting utilization. Hoods may save energy thus money but a open boil and a boil under a hood will still be at a temperature the altitude dictates. Hoods may help retain hop aroma from late additions but help utilization, hardly. Swept kettles and calandria are used to help utilization because of the _uneven_ "rolling" boil they create. Mixing the hops throughout the wort is more important than an even heat. "The place that the big boys use pressure cookers is for cereal cooking. ??Never said they used pressure cooking for the boil kettle. " ( I'll leave reference sighting as an exercise for the student)" George Fix, "Analysis of Brewing Techniques." And I wonder, was it a quality problem that caused Rheingolds closure? Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 09:33:33 -0500 From: Steven Sanders <ssanders at microlink.net> Subject: "ice brewing" This is something that has been kinda bothering me since I have started learning about brewing.. What in the world does "ice brewed" mean? I see ads by the megabrewers for beers made this way, and I have never run across any brewing method that would involve ice. (short of dumping sterile ice into hot wort to cool it down) Is "ice brewed" just some marketing bs term for lagering? Regards, Steven Sanders Narnia, WD Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 10:39:24 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: Lagering schedule Chris Cooper <ccooper at a2607cc.msr.hp.com> writes >I started the ferment at room >temperature for about 12 hours then moved the carboy to the fridge when I was >sure fermentationhad started. I initially set the temperature to 56^F and the >carboy showed around 60-62^F, after a couple of days I started dropping the >controller a degree each day, now the fridge is at 50^F and the carboy >is setting at 56^F, fermentation is slowing down (I need to take a gravity >reading) and once it is complete what cooling schedule should I use? >My initial thought was to wait for 10-12 days after pitching and then drop the >temperature to 32^F for a couple of weeks, filter into my keg force pressure >and serve. I cool my wort to 48-50F immediately. Fermentation takes longer, but that's the traditional way. Most of your fermentation was done at warmer temperatures. There was some discussion some years back as to whether esters etc are formed with warm starts. I don't think it was ever resolved. Modern lager fermentations are done at 56-58F in many US and German breweries, but it's not for me. I then drop 3F/day after fermentation is nearly over until I get to 33F, where I keep it for 4-6 weeks. Having said all that, though, I have a CAP/CACA that I fermented with Nottingham ale yeast at 62-64F and lagered at 40F for three weeks and it is still lagering, I guess, on service at that temp, and it is not very ale-ish. BTW, I never filter and get virtually crystal clear beer. Maybe you could filter half and report on the difference. Hope you'll try a CAP for your next lager! 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: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 10:43:08 -0500 From: Rod Prather <rodpr at iquest.net> Subject: Spec Racing Breweries IN Homebrew Digest #3115 Jim Kingsberg wrote about BrewingArtV.Science/Papazian/An idea First off Jim, I like it. I like your analogy of architecture VS brewing. The only problem is that in brewing the function of the design IS the aesthetics (and the anesthetics). The functionality, (the anesthetic one) is easily attained by the yeast without a great deal of manipulation. The aesthetics of beer is what all the work and fuss is about. What I really like was your idea for everyone to prepare a single recipe and to compare it. Kind of like spec racing in a brewery mode. It would be interresting if you could actually have a competition in that mode, but it would be impossible to certify ingredients. A beer spec race, might be a good competition for brew clubs or groups trying to identify the best home brewery process/equipment. It would be fun, anyway. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 12:11:45 -0700 From: "Scott Church" <schurch at gte.net> Subject: Heating Elements Howdy all; I like the concept of using the Hot Liquor Tank as a heat exchanger for the mash temp. I need to find a heating element. If any of you guys know where I might find one for a good price I'd be most graciously in debt! Scott Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 11:17:15 -0500 From: Rod Prather <rodpr at iquest.net> Subject: Is hops our obsession? A few friends and I were talking about hops and it's relationship to cannabis. With the recent news that the actual addictive site of THC is in the short term memory, we were wondering if there might be an addictive compound in hops. Has anyone read anything about this. Any off hand comments or non scientific observations would also be entertained. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 09:50:59 -0700 (MST) From: jliddil at VMS.ARIZONA.EDU Subject: yeast pumps > ------------------------------ > > Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 23:06:36 +1000 > From: David Lamotte <lamotted at ozemail.com.au> > Subject: Re: Yeast lifespans > > Throwing caution to the wind, I have enjoyed some high quality, scientific > replies to my recent question on yeast aging and lifespans - thank you all. > > However, while the discussions on the budding and scaring were appreciated, > I still couldn't see how long it all took. I mean if I had 40 kids I think > I would welcome an early grave at the bottom of the fermenter. > > As chance would have it, I stumbled on some info that I had downloaded from > the Wyeast site (http://www.wyeastlab.com/education/edtempch.htm). This > shows that the average time to bud varies with temperature (insert sound of > you slapping my head while saying 'Well Duh') - something that I had > totally overlooked. > > Thanks to Dave Logsdon of Wyeast, the answer is (drum roll please) .... > > At 75 F it takes approx. 2 hours for an Ale yeast cell to bud. At 65F it > takes 3.2 hours and at a chilly 60F is slows right down to a bud every 7.5 > hrs. The equivalent times for a lager yeast are 2.2 (75F) 3.7 (65F) 5.0 > (60F) There is also a table which shows how this translates into cell > counts. > > Now, assuming ALAN's 40 bud limit, this gives a life of at least 80 hrs at > 75F, with a clean living 65F ale yeast entering the record books at more > than 5 days. > I really doubt Mr Logsdon actually did the experiment. I suggest you find a real reference from a peer reviewed journal or text to get the answer. I'll try to look this up if I get a chance. The discussion of pumps is humurous. I would not worry too much about sheer and reynolds #'s. Personally I've seen lots of bioreactors that use peristaltic pumps. And of course I am luck to have a cole aprmer pump with pharmed tubing. So if you have the money buy a perstaltic pum and some high quality tubing either something from Norton or paltinum cured silicone if you want really smooth tubing. And get as big a haed as you can afford. Bottling plambics is tricky at best. I ahve ahd various good and bad results. I have stuff I primed and added fresh yeast to that still is uncarbonated 2 years later. Other stuff that is old has carbonated just fine. I got a recent paper about brett in wine and acetic acid prodcution under various conditions. I'll post a summary when I get time. Jim Liddil North Haven, CT Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 12:40:04 -0500 From: "Christopher Farley" <chris at northernbrewer.com> Subject: White Labs Yeast Questions Has anybody noticed that White Labs Pilsen yeast *appears* as if it were a top fermenting yeast? Every time I have used this yeast, a thick yeasty carpet appears on the top of the fermenter which does not readily drop out. This behavior is consistent, and has been commented on by numerous customers and employees as well. The beers I have made with it seem to exhibit a pretty clean lager character, but I have discontinued using this yeast because of the odd behavior. Wyeast's David Logsdon has been trying to convince me to stop carrying Wlabs yeast vials and become an exclusive Wyeast supplier. As a retailer, I value having a diversity of cultures, but according to Logsdon, "the products Wlabs sell, are in most if not all cases sourced from us." I have used every Wyeast lager culture, and have never seen a yeast ferment like Wlabs Pilsen yeast. Is Logson correct in stating that Wlabs has sourced "most if not all" their cultures from Wyeast? Logson also claims that Wlabs production and management of the strains has been questioned by many brewers, but I have found Wlabs yeast to be completely consistent. Additionally, I've followed the HBD for a while and can only recall hearing positive things about Wlabs. Christopher Farley Northern Brewer, Ltd. Saint Paul, Minnesota www.northernbrewer.com (800) 681-2739 Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 18:47:01 +0100 From: "Nigel Porter" <nigel at sparger.freeserve.co.uk> Subject: RE: Formula for Calculating Expected FG from OG I wrote >Nice simple one that I use to give ABV. OOPS - really should read what I'm replying to before I get carried away:-) (queue comments on the stupid English...) Nigel Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 14:55:18 -0400 (EDT) From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker at welch.jhu.edu> Subject: Glucose, Ketone Bodies, Ammonia, Urea, Alcohol, and Diets Matt and Todd have been having an interesting conversation on diet and ethanol. Here's some info and some questions of my own. - --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ketone bodies, nitrogen balance, and protein diets: Here in the U.S., the average person eats more than enough protein to meet his/her amino acid needs for protein maintenance of the body. The extra amino acids (digestive breakdown products of dietary protein) will simply be treated as an energy source. Depending on the particular amino acid it will either be converted to glucose ("glucogenic" amino acids) or converted to fatty acids and ketone bodies ("ketogenic" amino acids). Either way, if the total caloric intake from all sources (fat, carbohydrates, and proteins combined) is greater than the calories expended they won't get "burned" for energy but will eventually be converted to triacylglycerols (aka "fat") and stored in the adipose tissues. There are some currently fashionable diets that stipulate that a high proportion of total calories from protein. A caution often heard from critics is that this can lead to unhealthy levels of ketone bodies in the blood which may lead to ketosis or even ketoacidosis. Does anyone have any actual data on this? I'm wondering how much of a problem this is with these protein diets. Of all the blood-borne energy sources the ketone bodies seem to have the largest variations in concentration normally. So, while blood glucose levels are kept within fairly tight limits (maybe a two-fold variation in concentration) and fatty acids fluctuate about ten-fold, the ketone bodies can range some 100 - 200 fold. Normal levels are < 1mM which increases to about 5mM during fasting ("normal" physiological ketosis) but can increase to about 20mM in the ketoacidosis of diabetes. Where exactly do these protein diets place a person and where along this continuum does one start running into trouble? This is what I haven't seen addressed. Also, ketosis is supposedly dangerous for the developing fetus (specifically the brain). It seems therefore that protein diets wouldn't be a good idea for pregnant women aside from the lob-sided nutritional aspects clashing witht the nutritional needs of the developing fetus. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Nitrogen Balance and amino acid metabolism: Another aspect of amino acid metabolism I haven't seen discussed in relation to these diets is that of nitrogen balance. Amino acid metabolism by the liver generates ammonia which usually gets converted to urea for excretion by the kidneys. It seems than that a diet relying heavilly on protein would place extra stress on the liver and kidneys. In fact, protein-restricted diets are used in cases of renal disease. Is there any info on the effect of the added nitrogen load due to protein diets? Ammonia is pretty toxic and some apparently can escape the liver into the blood. Also, since blood urea levels increase some of this urea becomes available to the intestinal flora which can metabolize it producing more ammonia which has to then also be detoxified in the liver. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ethanol and blood glucose: Apparently in well-fed normal individuals blood glucose actually /increases/ following ethanol ingestion. However, if glycogen stores have been depleted there will be a drop in blood glucose due to inhibition of gluconeogenesis. Why does liver gluconeogenesis become inhibited? An increased NADH/NAD+ ratio tends block the conversion of lactate to glucose. Specifically, the high NADH levels force the oxaloacetate/malate and pyruvat/lactate equilibriums in the direction away from glucose synthesis. This also means that, in addition to the accumulation of acetate and acetaldehyde in the blood that was previously pointed out, lactate will also accumulate leading to hyperlactacidemia. Eating fructose used to be touted as a way to defeat the breathalyzer because it can help restore NAD+ levels. While this is true, it really wont help you beat a breathalyzer so don't bother switching completely over to fruit beers! Hope this was useful -Alan Meeker Baltimore, MD Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 17:05:07 -0400 From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net> Subject: Reynolds ... peristatlic pumps etc./shear calc needed First to correct an error of my own - I should have written (1/0.069) in the force eqn example a couple days back. - -- Someone kindly pointed out that Paul Niebergall was having an argument with me (of which I was completely unaware). After proving snidely and in a nasty tone that RN must equal 4.64 using his "easier" calculation, he then revised his calculation to my method demonstrating it was 13000+. Thus in his second try Paul demonstrated that I was correct in suggesting turbulent flow conditions do obtain. He further writes >Once again Steve Alexander tries to cover up his own errors by lashing out >in an attempt to find fault with others calculations. I never even *responded* to any of your calculation before this Paul, much less tried to cover any up.. Get a grip or some prozac. I completely agree with Paul's second derivation of a figure around 13650. I apparently used radius instead of diameter when doing a quick calc in my head and also pulled a wrong figure from a table of viscosity (interpolated to 20C from a Fahrenheit 10F table in error) water viscosity. Paul's more fanciful explanations aside. We both agree that turbulent flow should be the case. As for MU vs NU - Paul many references use different terminology. Silly consistancy is the hobgoblin of little minds. The CRC table you quote uses ETA rather than MU to designate non-kinetic viscosity - why did you inconsistently fail to mention that ? >Here is another clue in case you still dont get it. The RN values of >13,500 and 5500 differ by a factor of 2.455. This factor is awfully close >to the mass density of water (2.094 lbs s^2 / ft^4). As I indicated in my >previous post, rho/mu = nu. Is it starting to sink in yet? Oh yes Paul, 2.455 is so "awfully" close to 2.09 how could I have missed it ? What I do get Paul is that we both made an initial calc error of RN. Mine was off by a factor of 2.5, yours by 3000. The only thing 'sinking in' is that you have a fanciful imagination about finding the sources of errors, and apparently accuse others of problems which you have at 1000 times greater instance. >Whats the problem Steve? Dont you >accept science? Why do you continue with the false belief that the RN of >5500 that you calculated is correct? When did I ever "continue" it Paul. Was there any post from me at all that I persisted in this? No. You apparently handle the language about as well as you original algebra - off by 3000X. Perhaps if you included me in the email you'd get a response to your rants. >Maybe thats why we (you) should be >discussing the art of brewing and leave the science alone. I'm not happy to have introduced the 2X error plus the interpolation error, the latter I could live with). I used the original beverage calcs and tried to throw in the correction factors in my head. A wrong number resulted, but the right conclusion re turbulence. I expected a margin of error - but this was too much. What would have been a true embarrassment is to have crowed so loudly about someone else's error while showing RN=4.64 in detailed calculation as Paul did. I've never taken a mechE or any other course in fluid flow Paul, but I and even some of the brighter chimps at the zoo have enough physical intuition to spot your error without calculation. Why don't you talk to the mirror Paul about who shouldn't be posting about calculation [none of this is Science Paul] === back to the real stuff === Paul's assumption (and mine) about wort viscosity are still significantly in error. Paul assumed 1.02 cP, I used erroneously used the equiv. of 1.27 (erroneous interpolation). The problem is that water at 60C has a viscosity of only 0.4665, and of course the density (RHO) drops a few percent as well at this temp. In all we would expect water at 60C to have an RN around 26000+ (low viscosity - higher RN - more potential turbulence). For wort the matter is significantly more complex. Early in the mash that starches and complex carbs have viscosity many times higher than does solution of simpler sugars and dextrins in finished wort. For high maltose corn syrup, at 1.080 SG (very comparable to wort before mashout), the viscosity (mu) is 0.83 cP, but earlier in the mash the figure may be 2X or possibly even 3X higher! Perhaps a viscometer could replace an iodine test (joke). The upshot is this - high viscosity may prevent turbulent flow but only very very early in the mash. Seems unlikely to provide much help for 1/4" diam or even 1/2" diam in mid and later mash. Mashout - the viscosity v temp might only decline by 10% or so in 1.080 wort-like corn-syrup as the temp rises from 150F to 170F. But oddly for higher gravity syrups the percentage change in viscosity over this same temp range is much greater. Perhaps a 50% decline in viscosity for 1.200 syrup. Back to the original (and somewhat interesting) point. Would such turbulent flow cause shear forces capable of damaging enzymes ? I have tables that show the decline of various enzymes over a period of 90 minutes at about 1200/sec shear. Tho' few mashing enzymes appear in the table it seams that shear around that level would be sufficient to cause significant impact on many different enzymes over the period of a mash. I haven't the resources to calculate the shear with me for this example (1gal/min, 1/4" ID, ~0.83cP, tubing length ...).. Anyone up for it ? Steve Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 17:20:49 -0400 From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net> Subject: wierd science .../yeast question ... Kirk writes ... >In the mean time, however, I'm thinking the whole issue can be resolved for >RIMS systems by ensuring protein molecules (but not enzymes) are largely >contained in the main vessel through the use of some sort of electrostatic >filter. Actually electrostatic precipitation has been used in experiments on wort proteins, but it's not too specific ! You are not too far off Kirk. (well maybe you are a bit off). >Lately I've also become concerned about the local magnetic field and the >effects it might be having on product. I know normally this wouldn't be a >concern, but I have a stack of worn out golf shoes ... Better yet Kirk. I can get us access to some 1.5 Tesla MRI coils (and the L.Nitrogen outer casing makes a nice beer chiller too). Maybe we can brew inside of one and adjust the pH to allow for magnetic break separation. Of course you'd need a good flow rate ... Other fun tricks involve shaking your head inside one until you taste electrolytes dissociate in your mouth and see those 1000 points of light Geo.Bush was always talking about. Yeah really, but don't try it !! Another cool trick would be magnetostricive (instantaneous) wort chilling. Release/remove the field - the polar molecules go all random, T*dS = dU (constant); entropy change (dS) increases so T decreases, bam - cold wort.. Anyone know where to pick up an MRI cheap - great brewing and analytical tool. === Paul (a good Paul) Kensler writes of slants .... and kits and mentions YCKCo: http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/yckco/yckcotbl.html I should probably keep it a secret, but Dan McConnell at YCKC sells a slant of Unibroue yeast as "A144 Unibroue yeast " and I think it is just one amazing yeast. Dan apparently has a lot of secret fungi that don't appear in the catalog (like the above). TNX to Spencer Thomas for the original suggestion. -S Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 16:04:32 -0400 From: "Hubert W. Schreier" <schreier at sc.edu> Subject: Re: Keg carbonation/immersion chilled fermenter/chrome and brass Erik Farrell writes: "I recently made the change from bottles to a corni-keg system. I am having problems with the carbonation level in a stout I made (damm good thing the foam tastes good because that's mostly what I get)" I also switched to kegging recently, and initially got mostly foam. The problem was discussed in great detail in the recent "hose length" thread. To summarize, foaming is caused by a sudden drop in pressure when the beer comes out of the tap. To avoid this, the dispense tubing needs to impose enough flow restriction to drop the pressure to approximately atmospheric levels at the tap. I now use 6 ft of 3/16" tubing and can pour without foam at 15 psi keg pressure. Erik continues: "I have my valve set for14 pounds of pressure. Is this too much? What is an appropriate pressure level by style? (I mostly make stouts and apa's) Any help would be appreciated." This cannot be answered without knowing the temperature of the beer. Usually, carbonation levels are given in volumes of CO2. I don't know what is appropriate for stouts, but I think English ales are carbonated to anywhere between 2 and 2.5 volumes. Knowing the temperature of the beer and the volumes of CO2 desired you can then figure out what pressure you need from a carbonation chart. You can find a carbonation chart, the equation used to calculate it and a nice shell script in HBD#1179 in a post from Alan Edwards: http://hbd.org/hbd/archive/1179.html#1179-2. Hope that helps. C.D. Pritchard writes about his chilled fermenter. I've been thinking about building something similar from a 1/2 bbl. As I brew in SC with 90 F tap water, I think this would cool the 90 F wort to fermentation temperatures a lot more quickly than a fermentation chamber or a fridge. The only thing that has kept me from building it is the following question: Is a copper coil safe to use in a fermenter or do I need stainless? On a related note, I can't find anything on the safety of chrome plated materials in brewing. Is it because they pose a health risk and nobody is using chrome, or because chrome is safe to use? I guess since there's 13+% chrome in SS and SS is safe to use, chrome should be safe also? If not, where can I get ball valves with an SS ball rather than a chrome plated brass ball? Another materials question I can't figure out is how to remove surface lead from brass/bronze. I have read about peroxide/vinegar solutions. I assume peroxide refers to hydrogen peroxide H2O2??? If I recall correctly, this stuff is pretty aggressive if concentrated. What concentration should I use, how much vinegar should I use, should I boil the solution and where do I buy peroxide? And how long do I need to treat the brass with the peroxide/vinegar solution? Any help is greatly appreciated. Hubert. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 15:55:22 -0700 From: "Rich, Charles" <CRich at filenet.com> Subject: SMM to DMS formula SCREEECH!!! (brakes), backup. My last numbers for SMM attenuation were not right. Sorry. I couldn't find the formula yesterday when I wanted it, so here it is for future HBD searchers. I take these from both of George Fix's books. Principles of Brewing Science gives the formula on page 143, and Analysis of Brewing Techniques gives it in the caption of fig.1.6 (note: couple of typos in the caption formula) Since the half-life of SMM in wort at 100C (212F) is 40 minutes, the fraction of SMM remaining can be found by: -ln F = (t/40) * (T/100) * ln 2 or alternately: F = exp( (-t * T * ln 2) / 4000) where: F is the fraction of SMM remaining. (1.0 being all of it) t is time in minutes T is temperature Centigrade SMM attenuation at boiling temps and 15-lb p-cooking temps are: At 100C (212F) At 121C (250F) Mins SMM Mins SMM 15 0.771 15 0.730 30 0.595 30 0.533 45 0.459 45 0.389 60 0.354 60 0.284 75 0.273 75 0.208 90 0.210 90 0.152 105 0.162 105 0.111 120 0.125 120 0.081 Definitely not the dramatic difference I'd eyeballed in my last post. Sorry again for any inconvenience. Chagrined, Charles Rich Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 08/21/99, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96