HOMEBREW Digest #3285 Wed 29 March 2000

[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

  Rice And Nasty Names ("Phil & Jill Yates")
  A burner & keg balancing act.. ("John Stegenga")
  Mail order Phil's Philler? ("Brian Dixon.")
  mashout ("Nathaniel P. Lansing")
  FWH ? ("Nathaniel P. Lansing")
  Using Brinkman burner (John Varady)
  Great new product ("Steven Lichtenberg")
  tabs ("Paul Niebergall")
  FWH definition (Brian Lundeen)
  Re: FWH (Jeff Renner)
  Isinglass, how to get low pH? ("Paul Kensler")
  May/June Zymurgy Deadline ("Paul Gatza")
  Re: Brass bulkhead fittings (jafjmw)
  Carbonation (Gravel Stephen E NPRI)
  Seattle Area Brewers (Brad Miller)
  yeast and alcohol (cbuckley)
  copper tubing for a jockey box chiller (J Daoust)
  Cell Counts ("St. Patrick's")
  Counterflow chiller ("Steve")
  burner (ALABREW)
  Georgia Coast beerhunting (kathy/jim)

* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! * Entries for the 18th Annual HOPS competition are due 3/24-4/2/00 * See http://www.netaxs.com/~shady/hops/ for more information * 18th Annual Oregon Homebrew Festival - entry deadline May 15th * More info at: http://www.hotv.org/fest2000 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 FROM THE E-MAIL ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!** IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, you cannot subscribe to the digest as we canoot reach you. We will not correct your address for the automation - that's your job. The HBD is a copyrighted document. The compilation is copyright HBD.ORG. Individual postings are copyright by their authors. ASK before reproducing and you'll rarely have trouble. Digest content cannot be reproduced by any means for sale or profit. More information is available by sending the word "info" to req at hbd.org. JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 21:23:23 +1000 From: "Phil & Jill Yates" <yates at acenet.com.au> Subject: Rice And Nasty Names I am a little bit behind trying to respond to Jeff Renner on the matter of rice mashing. Every so often I am unceremoniously plucked from home and sent off for several arduous days work. I find it most disruptive! All I wanted to say on the matter of rice mashing was that Jeff's last post completed the picture for me. I asked how can you mash ungelatinised rice? Jeff explained he grinds it first. Now I realise he is doing with rice just as he does with corn. I have followed Jeff's corn procedure in the production of Mudgee Mud and found the whole process to work very well. And I think during the consumption of that beer, the six scantily dressed ladies brought along their younger sisters and cousins as well! It was not around for long and even the sample I had saved for Jeff was consumed (though I recall I was the culprit responsible). This discussion started because I mentioned that I had switched to using flaked rice to avoid the cooking process. Jeff has enlightened me yet again. On the recent spat of nasty name calling, I must apologise. Doc Pivo is not usually allowed anywhere near the keyboard unless under constant supervision and heavy sedation, but every so often he sneaks out on his own. To all nerds, whimps, dolts and narcissistically inclined personalities, I am truly sorry for your being named. We hope this outrage will not happen again. We also hope that you will not be asked to read the same HBD ten times over as I did with HBD #3282. I kept asking myself "Just what point in here is Pat desperately trying to drive home?" Apparently there was no point at all. Cheers Phil. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 07:02:20 -0500 From: "John Stegenga" <bigjohns at mindspring.com> Subject: A burner & keg balancing act.. IN HBD 3284 Dan Senne writes: >Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 18:05:07 -0600 >From: "Dan Senne" <dsenne at intertek.net> >Subject: burners and kegs > >Just wanted to pass on a bit of information... > I recently bought a Brinkman general purpose propane cooker at Walmart >for $49.95. It's a ring-type burner that is advertised to put out 160,000 >btu's. I was delighted at how much more quickly I could bring liquid to >boil on it as opposed to my kitchen gas range. >However, since then I obtained a Sankey keg which I cut the top out of, and >found that the bottom lip of the keg fits right on the metal support ring of >the burner. Ideally, I would have liked the burner to either fit inside the >keg or outside. I'm a bit worried about this much boiling liquid perched so >precariously. I plan on some sort of modification to the burner to remedy >this. Dan - They sell rectangular and square pieces of iron 'grill' grate at 'that home store with the orange logo' that will suit your purpose just fine. Hope this helps! John Stegenga Covert Hops Society Atlanta GA PS - Don't forget to enter the Peach State Brew-off 2000! May 6, 2000.... http://www.coverthops.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 04:59:34 -0800 From: "Brian Dixon." <briandixon at home.com> Subject: Mail order Phil's Philler? I asked this once before, but the post didn't go through or something (?), so it didn't get answered. In any case, my wonderful brass Phil's Philler broke ... something about a 1/3rd full carboy coming down off a counter and bouncing around the kitchen while trying to bottle my latest creation ... and now I need a new Philler. Local brew shops do NOT carry it anymore and don't seem to be very successful at getting them ... who knows why? Listermann Mfg's web site gives the impression that they don't do mail order directly. Does anyone know of an online store, or have the phone number of a shop that does mail order, that DOES carry the Phil's Philler? My initial searches have turned up zilch ... Also, it seems I remember that the Phil's Philler was offered for a time with either nickel or chrome plating ... is my imagination going wild, or does anyone know anything about this? If it's true, then is the plated version or the plain brass version better? Why? Thx MUCHO Amigo! Brian Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 08:40:16 -0500 From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew at compuserve.com> Subject: mashout Steve said >>Tables show that 1 pound of stuff in a gallon of solution at 20C gives: dextrose(glucose) SG = 1.0435 Fructose SG=1.0465 sucrose SG=1.0461 (see AJ's 1.04622 note in HBD 3205). maltose SG=1.0461 dextran (avg weight 420 glucose units) SG=1.0438<< >>You seem to be confusing 1gal of solution containing 1# of stuff (typical brewing measure) vs 1# of stuff added to 1gal of water.<< The references I looked don't specify If it is 1lb in 1 gallon of solution or 1 lb into 1 gallon of water. Looking at your numbers and the variation from the 1044 for sucrose I mentioned would seem to point to that my references were 1# into 1 gallon of water. This is also indicated by the extreme difference between our numbers for the gravity of glucose; if adding 1 lb of glucose to 1 gallon the water of hydration would depress the specific gravity. >>No literature or experiment anywhere suggests that lowering temps can increase BA activity again. The thermal denaturing of malt BA is irreversible and the specific activity is monotonically increasing with temperature.<< At least as legitimate as you 11 trails sans mashout; I have tried at least that many in a Phils lauter tun, I found that if I wrapped 1 towel around the tun my RDFs stabilized and foam stand improved. Wrapping a second towel around the mash tun maintained the temperature nicely. Keeping my mash temperature "up there" indicated to me that there was significant effect on RDF. A particular session comes to mind where it was -10 degrees out and the wind blowing in the window was coolling the mash tun significantly, no,_a_lot_. I mashed in at 160 and every 10 minutes had to add boiling water to raise the temperature back up from 154 or 155. This beer finished off about as dry as any I've tasted. Do consider that if any B amylase survives (even 10%) as temperature slips downward the BA now enters a range of its' most aggressive activity. Causing an even more rapid reduction of the starch. >>>Secondly: mash out, for some as yet undefined reason, >enhances head retention. >Suggested by whom ? Hydrophobic glycosylates >of oligopeptides are implicated in foam. I have >*never* seen a source claiming these result from >mashout, but would love to hear about this source. Personal communication with Dr. G. Fix . He didn't mention his source. I used to skip my mash out also, believing the texts that the enzymes were denatured by the end of my 162 rest. It wasn't until I started doing a mashout that RDFs became what they were intended and foam stand became superlative. I don't know maybe it's just coincidence. >>after finishing a mash I'd like to save time and get up >to a boil as quick as possible, it is much quicker getting to a boil from >.170 than 140, and it saves gas, about 40%. >> It cannot "save" energy since you expend even more energy when you boosted the mash + grist. It also can't save you TIME unless you ignore the mashout boost and rest time.<< Read what I said carefully. I was refering to getting things up to boil. I guess you haven't been at the computer for a week or so, business happens, Dave asked me this but since I use hot water from the water heater little time is spent heating mash and sparge water, and I do realize a savings in propane this way. As to the Tuborg experiment. >>Proctor malt, mash-in 30' at 126F, boost to 145.4F for 60' then boost to mashout 172.4F for 10 minutes. All boosts at 2C/min rate. Wort sampled at 10' intervals and enzymatic action was prevented in the samples.<< With such a long rest at 145, no rest at 158 why would there be significant change in extract with the mashout? >>Detailed carbo assays were performed and the pre-mashout wort was evaluated as 70.5% attenuable vs 70.3% after mashout. At the 2C/min pass through Alpha range I would expect only a slight drop in attenuability. The experiment doesn't show what lautering at 145 would do to brewhouse efficiency. I have purged my in basket and can't quote back positively but your original "skip the mashout" post seemed to infer that a low temperature lauter was OK and wouldn't hurt mash tun efficiency; you had cited an experiment of a lauter approaching 1 degree C (wasn't that to avoid tannin extraction?). The Tuborg experiment proves nothing to this issue. If I understood correctly, and you quoted exactly, all samples were pre-lauter. >>"Del sez so", just isn't the basis for an interesting or productive discussion.<< Well, it has become that, so maybe it was! To counter, your "skip the mash out" post didn't offer more than some test batches in your brewery and the blanket statement that we shouldn't be recommend a mash- out in the HBD. Isn't that just a "Steve says so"? In fact, that's what got me fired up. You can call me Nat, just don't call me late for dinner, N.P.(Del) Lansing Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 08:40:17 -0500 From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew at compuserve.com> Subject: FWH ? Bob McDonald asks >>Everything I've read about hops says that the delicate aromatic compounds that provide hop aroma and flavor are driven off in the boil. If this is so, how can hops added before the boil add flavor and aroma? << I think _perhaps_the key here is the "driven off in the boil" aspect. Since in FWH the hops steep in wort below boiling, it is possible that the aroma compounds have time to bind to the wort in a way yet to be described; so that when the boil is reached they can't be driven off. Purely conjecture though, but it seems to work. And Lynn says,>>The use of the term FWH is creating some confusion because it has been too narrowly defined based on the Brauwelt article. I would like to see it used to mean simply adding hops to the first wort. One could also have middle wort or late wort hopping. FWH should not carry any implied meaning of omitting the last addition IMHO.<< I agree, (see I wasn't ripping on you before), though I wish there was some more indication of the time needed in the not yet boiling wort to produce the desired effect. In the article I read they mentioned that in late hopping some undesirable character was added to the wort, so a late addition may undo the purpose/benefit of FWH, the beer would still in essence be FWHed. This is America, brew your beer the way _you_ like! N.P.(Del) Lansing Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 09:19:49 -0500 (EST) From: John Varady <rust1d at usa.net> Subject: Using Brinkman burner dan writes: >Ideally, I would have liked the burner to either fit inside the keg >or outside. I'm a bit worried about this much boiling liquid perched so >precariously. I plan on some sort of modification to the burner to >remedy this. I use a brinkman burner. To fix this problem I went to the hardware store and bought 3 small C clamps. Clamp them on the top outside ring of the burner at equal spacing and let the keg sit on the clamps. This simple modification allows you to remove the clamps when it comes time to actually use the burner with the intended grill. John - -- John Varady http://www.netaxs.com/~vectorsys/varady Glenside, PA rust1d at usa.net Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 10:01:03 -0500 From: "Steven Lichtenberg" <slichten at mnsinc.com> Subject: Great new product just stopped by my local homebrew store and saw what I though to be one of the greatest new products available on the market. This is a product called MicroWorts. What they have done is contract with some of the local microbreweries to aseptically package their wort right off the same line used at the brewery (there is a tap right before the chiller for packaging). This wort is vacuum packed full volume wort. Simply open the container, add yeast and let it ferment. Of course, you can transfer to a carboy or add anything you want to make it special. The product is about $18.00 and contains 2.5 gallons of wort. This is great for the "Mr. Beer" guys just trying brewing out for a lark and for the experienced brewer that occasionally runs out of beer and can't schedule a days brewing session. Since these guys will deliver anywhere in the country, this also gives people the opportunity to have readily available beers that they ordinarily can not get locally (Think Doninion Ale in California). Currently available are beers from Dominion Brewing in Ashburn, VA with other local DC area breweries coming on-line soon. This is really cool. Not just for beginners, but for everyone wither as a fill in or to try new beers quickly and fairly inexpensively. Check it out at http://www.haveahomebrew.com/microworts As always, no affiliation just a satisfied customer. **** ---- "There's always time for a Homebrew!" ---- **** O| | ---------------- Steven Lichtenberg ---------------- | |O \__/ ------------ slichten at mnsinc.com ------------- \__/ ----------- Programmer at Large ------------ --------- Lichtenberg Consulting --------- ---------- Gaithersburg, MD ------------ ---------------------------------------- ENJOY LIFE -- THIS IS NOT A REHEARSAL Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 10:05:54 -0500 From: "SCHNEIDER,BRETT" <SCHNEIDERB at morganco.com> Subject: RE: Rye Beer Guy asks about using rye, and I like this especially in my 'lawn mower beer'. I know this will bring up many other notes, but for me lawn mower does not imply american style pilsner. I want something smooth, interesting, with hop and malt in nice balance, and with a low OG for quenching my thirst in volume. I like to drink it cold too so the typical ale is not what I am after. I use pils as the base malt and ferment with an english ale yeast and then cold condition, keg, force carbonate, and have a nice hot summer. Basic profile is as follows: Modified pils base 52% Biscuit 15% Munich 15% Flaked Rye 18% Single temp infusion 152/53F OG 1.037 FG 1.010 ABV ~3.3% West coast hops equal parts by weight 60/30/15 mins for 20IBU >From the keg to the growler (into the kitchen fridge) to my glass. Nothing better after mowing the yard, then putting your feet in the wading pool while your naked 2 year old splashes about keeping us all cool.... Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 09:19:04 -0600 From: "Paul Niebergall" <pnieb at burnsmcd.com> Subject: tabs Dan Senne writes: >I recently bought a Brinkman general purpose propane cooker at >Walmart for $49.95. It's a ring-type burner that is advertised to put >out 160,000 btu's. However, since then I obtained a Sankey keg >which I cut the top out of, and found that the bottom lip of the keg >fits right on the metal support ring of the burner. Ideally, I would >have liked the burner to either fit inside the keg or outside. I'm a >bit worried about this much boiling liquid perched so >precariously. I plan on some sort of modification to the burner >to remedy this. Dan describes exactly what I have with his Brinkman burner and modified sankey keg set up. The lip of the keg fits precisely on the outer ring of the burner. You probably wouldnt get a closer fit if it was designed to do so. The only problem is that the keg WILL fall off the burner with the slightest bump. Dont even think about firing it up without modification. At first I tried clamping the keg to the burner with four C-clamps positioned at 90-degree intervals clamping the inside lip of the keg to the burner ring. This didnt work so well. At first the calmps were tight, but after turning red-hot from the flames, I wasnt so sure they would stay tight. Once they cooled, it was almost impossible to remove the clamps. Anyway, It worked, I didnt get burned, but I dont recommend it. You need to permanantly weld support tabs to the burner ring. I used pieces of 1/8th-inch thick by 1-inch wide steel stock for tabs. You can get a 4-foot length (about 3 feet more than you really need) of the stuff from any hardware store for a few bucks. Cut (hack saw) the stock into 4 pieces; each piece with a 2-inch length. Put about 1/2 of the length of each 2-inch long piece (about 1 inch, duh.) in a vice and hammer away so that you get a nice 90-degree bend in it. Get a welder, or find someone who knows how to weld (I finally found a use for my un-employed brother-in-law who speciallized in welding technology at vo-tech school) and weld the support tabs around the outer ring of the burner. Position the tabs so that they are located just ouside of the outside wall of the keg. Make sure you have your modified keg handy so you can place it on top of the burner and position the tabs correctly. I used four tabs and they work extremely well. | I | I | I = Tab _________I I ----------------------I ++++++++++ ++++++++++ = Outer Ring of burner Hope this helps Paul Niebergall Burns & McDonnell pnieb at burnsmcd.com "Illegitimis non carborundum" Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 09:35:56 -0600 From: Brian Lundeen <blundeen at post.rrc.mb.ca> Subject: FWH definition To my way of thinking, FWH should be defined by the objectives we are trying to achieve, namely improved hop flavor and aroma. The procedures would then flow logically out of that. A broad definition as you propose MAY not result in the desired effects. Factors such as wort temperature and steeping time could be an important part of this, and I think it is important that we not lose sight of that. As for the final addition of hops for aroma, only experimentation will tell us whether it is necessary or detrimental, and whether FWH improves the quality of late additions. Although I am not familiar with the research in question, I am told that George Fix feels that late hop additions contribute negatively to overall beer quality, and I would certainly like to know more about this. Brian > Finally a comment on FWH. The use of the term FWH is creating some > confusion because it has been too narrowly defined based on > the Brauwelt > article. I would like to see it used to mean simply adding > hops to the > first wort. One could also have middle wort or late wort > hopping. FWH > should not carry any implied meaning of omitting the last > addition IMHO. > Lynne O'Connor Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 10:32:32 -0500 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: FWH Thanks to Lynne O'Connor for her clarification on the hops additions at PU. She also wrote: >Finally a comment on FWH. The use of the term FWH is creating some >confusion because it has been too narrowly defined based on the Brauwelt >article. I would like to see it used to mean simply adding hops to the >first wort. One could also have middle wort or late wort hopping. FWH >should not carry any implied meaning of omitting the last addition IMHO. I agree with this and it is my practice to still use some late addition hops when I FWH. I think the brewers reported on in Brauwelt were trying to test FWH agains late additions and so would have left late additions out for testing purposes so as not to confound the results. Bob McDonald <rcmcdonald at yahoo.com> asked: >how can hops added before >the boil add flavor and aroma? Help me out here. That's the big question that no one on HBD has found the answer to yet, either in the literature or otherwise, but it really works. There is a summary of FWH by Dave Draper at hbd.org, I think. Jeff -=-=-=-=- Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, c/o nerenner at umich.edu "One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 12:47:46 -0500 From: "Paul Kensler" <paul.kensler at attglobal.net> Subject: Isinglass, how to get low pH? At last weekend's Real Ale Festival in Chicago, it was discussed that Isinglass will not dissolve unless it is in a low pH (<3) solution. Any suggestions as to the best way to achieve this? Phosphoric, lactic, tartaric... ? Any "rule of thumb" amounts to use? I do not have a pH meter, and my papers don't read that low. I am using RO water (pH about 6) for the solution. Thanks, Paul Kensler Lansing, MI Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 11:31:35 -0700 From: "Paul Gatza" <paulg at aob.org> Subject: May/June Zymurgy Deadline Hi everyone. MCAB sure was a pleasure. I was most impressed by the quality of the hospitality beers brewed up by the members of the St. Louis Brews. Here is a toast to Bob, John, Terry, LuAnne, Mark, Louis, Pat and everyone else involved in this fine event. Several of you in St.Louis mentioned that you were interested in joining the AHA so that you could vote on the slate of AHA Board of Advisor candidates in the upcoming election. Each AHA member gets four votes (one for each open slot). The candidates are Scott Abene, Pat Babcock, Louis Bonham, John Carlson, Jr., Steven Mallery, Dave Miller, Randy Mosher, Lynne O'Connor and Martin Stokes. To receive the May/June Zymurgy, which includes the candidate statements and ballot, we need your membership by this Friday, March 31. Friday is the day we run the report of mailing labels to send to the printer. The Zymurgy mails April 13, with ballots due by a May 15 postmark. This issue of Zymurgy is the first since Ray Daniels has taken the helm of Zymurgy, and is the highest quality issue in my opinion since I came on board in 1998. The focus is on honey and brewing, both from a beermaking and meadmaking context. Ray has diversified our author pool to include Ken Schramm and Dan McConnell, Byron Burch and Brad Kraus for this issue. I urge you to take another look at Zymurgy and vote for the new AHA Board candidates. You may join the AHA at http://www.beertown.org. Paul Gatza (mailto:/paulg at aob.org) Director, American Homebrewers Association 736 Pearl St., Boulder, CO 80302 voice(303)447-0816 x 122 fax (303) 447-2825 Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 20:54:08 +0100 From: jafjmw at wlsfn.force9.co.uk Subject: Re: Brass bulkhead fittings > Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 09:04:27 -0600 > From: Rick Lassabe <bayrat at worldnet.att.net> > Subject: Brass Bulkhead Fittings [snip] > You will also need to > de-lead the surface, (one part white distilled vinegar and two parts > hydrogen peroxide, until buttery color). [snip] What's this (I've seen it mentioned before) about de-leading brass plumbing fittings? Surely fittings supplied for potable water are "unleaded"? - -- Adam Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 16:22:15 -0500 From: Gravel Stephen E NPRI <GravelSE at csd.npt.nuwc.navy.mil> Subject: Carbonation Hi All, Does anyone know if there are BJCP or AHA guidelines for carbonating the different styles? Is carbonation supposed to be the same across the board? I have a PSI to Temperature conversion chart that states that British beers should be from 2.0 - 2.4 PSI, most other beers 2.4 - 2.85 and high-carbonation beers 2.85 - 2.95. Does anyone know? Thanks, Steve Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 13:35:43 -0800 From: Brad Miller <millerb at targen.com> Subject: Seattle Area Brewers For all of the Seattle area brewers, I am having to move soon and it looks like I'll have to be in an apartment for a while. I'm looking for a brewer who has some extra room in their garage for some brew items, all of which they can use. I have a PID controlled RIMS with 2 propane tanks, fridge, 4 cornies, 6 carboys, 4 primaries and various other items. I really don't want to just put them in a storage locker, I hope that somebody could put them to use while I wait for a place. If you're interested drop me an email. Also I have a whole bunch of soda despensing line that I am just going to toss if no one wants it. Thanks for your help. Brad "Yeast, The Un-Coli" Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 17:03:44 -0500 From: cbuckley at newsoft.com Subject: yeast and alcohol I have two related but separate questions. I have been looking at some different recipes for high gravity beer. My questions are about yeasts ability to live in high alcohol, and attenuation of high gravity worts. First question is how much alcohol can a "average" ale yeast tolerate? secondly is the attenuation needed to produce a high alcohol beer from a high gravity wort. I'm assuming that I am using the word "attenuation" correctly. To me it is the amount or percentage of the available 'food' that a yeast strain can ferment. I have made one lager that had an apparent attenuation of 83%. I have had ales as low as 60%. Back to the recipes. I have seen some recipes that show a OG of 1.090+ and a FG of 1.014. To me that is close to 85% attenuation from an ale yeast and an alcohol of 9%+. If that's true than why don't my lower gravity worts finish with a lower FG, or 85+/-% attenuation. I have made six ales and one lager all from extract. All have tasted good (the lager is still conditioning). Two have been stouts that started at 1.048 - 1.050 and finished at about 1.014. That's about 72% attenuation. I have not seen a connection between a higher OG and higher attenuation. I would like to try a beer with a OG around 1.080 and I want to know where the FG should be. Is it dependent on the extract or malt? Do I need to use yeast nutrients or enzyme? Can I get high alcohol and attenuation with extract? Am I way off in my thinking or am I missing a big piece of the puzzle? I hope that doesn't sound too much like the ramblings of a pure novice (I am one though) and I thank you for any advice or clarification. On another note ---- a couple of weeks ago I asked a question about yeast starters and why I should use them. Well I did use one in the stout that I brewed last week and the lag time was less than 12 hours!! I was able to rack it after only four days in the primary. While that may not sound impressive to some of you I'm very excited. Previously I had lag times averaging a few days. Thanks to all who responded and helped me decide to use starters.!! I'm glad there are experienced people out there that are willing to help us newbies understand how everything works. Happily brewing in NH Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 14:40:26 -0800 From: J Daoust <thedaousts at ixpres.com> Subject: copper tubing for a jockey box chiller Ok, it is becoming clear that the Stainless tubing is painfully expensive. Is it acceptable to use copper refrigeration line instead?? Thanks, in advance, Jerry Daoust e-mails are ok Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 17:11:15 -0500 From: "St. Patrick's" <stpats at realtime.net> Subject: Cell Counts Sorry for the delay in getting back to this. I spoke yesterday with the gentleman at Analytical Food Labs (AFL) who did the tests. 1. Only viable cells were counted. Cells were not counted by microscope--this is typically done only in the dairy industry. Several plate dilutions were counted (log 2,4,6,8,9 dilutions for each sample). 2. Contamination testing was done. No contamination was found, only product. 3. Regarding 1" thick: This issue, i.e., when is the optimal time to pitch Wyeast, was the main focus of these tests for me. In my original post I understated how many Wyeast packs were checked and at what thickness. AFL checked numerous packs ranging from immediately smacked to fully risen at a number of thicknesses to answer this question. This was an iterative process that funneled down to the 1" thick pouch. AFL states that Wyeast is at its optimal when its 1" thick because this is the point at which there is maximum cellular budding of the yeast. After this point there is a little more growth of yeast, but the wort (food source) is being used up and the yeast are starting to give off their waste products and saturate their system leading to a falling off of viable yeast until they reach a stationary phase. Also, alcohol is being given off and the activity of the yeast starts to decrease. What is interesting is that the optimum time to pitch does not coincide with maximum cell counts, which occurs a little later. 4. Jim Liddil wonders why Analytical Food Labs data is more or less valid than that included in the Zymurgy 1998 special issue. I will repeat that the tests that I reported were done by a professional lab, that the yeast suppliers had no knowledge whatsoever that the tests were going to be done, the products got to the lab in about as good a condition as possible. Here are the facts of which I am certain regarding the Zymurgy article. The cell counts, for both White Labs and Wyeast, in the table of the Zymurgy special issue were provided to the author by White Labs. This is not stated in the article. The White Labs data sheet containing these cell counts clearly states the tests on Wyeast were done on 2 week old packs obtained secondhand. This information is not provided in the article. The Zymurgy table contains information that disagrees with what is printed on the Wyeast package although there is no explanation as to why or on what basis the author chose to disagree with this information. The Zymurgy article contains the recommendation that brewers should pitch 3 vials of White Labs for a 5 gallon batch (if the vials are over 1 week old). That's ~$20/batch. The author offered the following insight "It may seem like you are spending a small fortune on yeast by doing this," There was a Zymurgy letter in a following issue from White Labs that disputed some of the information in the article, viz, it wasn't really necessary to spend $20/batch on yeast, that the White Labs retail price in the table was off by 50% or more, and that White Labs shelf life was much longer than stated in the table and text. Lynne O'Connor St. Patrick's of Texas Brewers Supply 1828 Fleischer Drive Austin, Texas 78728 USA 512-989-9727 www.stpats.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 18:23:43 -0500 From: "Steve" <stjones1 at chartertn.net> Subject: Counterflow chiller Greetings, all. I'm planning on making a counterflow wort chiller using 3/4" ID copper tubing with 3/8" OD copper tubing inside. I'll use refrigeration tubing for the 3/8" because it has half the wall thickness, and I figured it would transfer the heat quicker. Hopefully this will save another 30-60 minutes on brew day. My plans are this: Solder a 3/4 X 3/4 X 3/4 tee on each end of the outer tubing, then solder 3/4 x 3/8 reducers to them. I'll have to drill out the 3/8" end of the reducers to remove the small stop tabs, and then run the 3/8" tubing thru the whole thing, soldering those connections. I'd leave an inch or two extending out to clamp my 3/8" id vinyl tubing on to. Then, solder reducers on the tees and clamp on my water supply tubing (also 3/8"). Actually, I'll assembly it dry and then solder the whole thing. I was wondering what the minimum overall length of the tubing should be to be effective at chilling to within 5 degrees of the water. A 25' coil would cost me about $50 to build, so I'd like to make it smaller if possible. I noticed St Pats now has such an animal but they use stainless for the inner coil, and theirs is 11 ft. long. I have to wonder about its effectiveness since stainless is not near as good a conductor of heat. Does anyone have any ideas on how long I should make it? Thanks Steve 5.58S, 1.24E rennerian State of Franklin Homebrewers http://users.intermediatn.net/franklinbrew Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 18:17:02 -0600 From: ALABREW <alabrew at mindspring.com> Subject: burner Dan Senne wrote about the Brinkman burner and the fit of a Sankey keg on it. I have one of these burners too and a keg and agree that it is not a good idea to have boiling liquid with such a close fit. I put a metal grate on the burner and the keg on it, works great. Kim - -- Kim and Sun Ae Thomson ALABREW Homebrewing Supplies http://www.mindspring.com/~alabrew mailto:alabrew at mindspring.com Birmingham, AL Home Beer and Wine Making Specialists Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 00:06:24 -0400 From: kathy/jim <kbooth at scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us> Subject: Georgia Coast beerhunting My wife and I are flying to Jacksonville, Fla, then heading north to Savannah, GA, and back to St. Augestine. Any tips on good beerhunting or great seafood eats or general tourist info....would be welcome. email me at kbooth at waverly.k12.mi.us and TIA. cheers, jim booth, lansing, mi Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 03/29/00, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96