---

	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: Iodophor (phil sides jr)
  RE: Strike Temps (phil sides jr)
  Newer Brewer builds Cooler Cooler (John Roe)
  Fw: Chicken Feed ("Rick Dobler")
  Decoction info for Robert Jones ("Sieben, Richard")
  Rims, Herms mash thickness (Rick & Ruth Duyck)
  re: Chiller turned flusher ("Dan Schultz")
  Bottles ("West, Robert M. SFC")
  packing peanuts (Marc Sedam)
  Re: Strike water temp calculation (Demonick)
  yeast question for Dr. Cone (Marc Sedam)
  mash-out ad nauseam ("Nathaniel P. Lansing")
  TNB Online Articles (Marc Sedam)
  "Scratcg feed" trivia (JohnT6020)
  Sticky in Colorado (geeks)
  Decoction , iodophore, Clayton Cone Cuestion, Partially (Dave Burley)
  Chicken Feed Update (William Frazier)
  Belgian Trippel recipe. ("Pannicke, Glen A.")
  re: Munich Lager Yeast (The Artist Formerly Known As Kap'n Salty)
  DECOCT VOLUMES (RCAYOT)
  picnic tap/faucet as inline valve (Jeff Renner)
  Not the same old science vs. art ("Doug Moyer")
  Australian Brewers and other life forms ("Jim B Verlinde")
  Mashing Formulas (John Varady)


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

* 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: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 01:52:15 -0400
From: phil sides jr <psides at technologist.com>
Subject: Re: Iodophor

Dennis Templeton <djt2 at po.cwru.edu> writes:

>This is certainly a good writeup, and Robert's conclusion that
>rinsing after using proper concentrations of iodophor is well
>justified. He notes that tasters can detect the iodine diluted in
>water, but not in beer.

You mean NOT rinsing after using proper concentrations of iodophor is
well justified, right?

Phil Sides, Jr.
Concord, NH
- --
Macht nicht o'zapft ist, Prost!




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 02:31:12 -0400
From: phil sides jr <psides at technologist.com>
Subject: RE: Strike Temps

Brad Miller <millerb at targen.com> asks:

>just past my HSA manifold.  All of this labor made me wonder, what is
>the equation for strike temps?  I've seen java programs on the net
>but I actually want the equation, like 25lb of grains  at  65 F and 9
>gal water at 170 F will give a temp of X.  I'll let you think about

(1.0 X weight of water X temperature) + (0.4 X weight of malt X
temperature)
- -------------------------------------------
(weight of water) + (0.4 X weight of malt)

= temperature of mixture.

I found this in Michael J. Lewis & Tom W. Young's book, Brewing (pg.
102) and have used it with good success to predict proper strike temp.
I like this formula because it does not require any unit conversions.
Just rearrange the formula to yield your unknown.

Phil Sides, Jr.
Concord, NH

- --
Macht nicht o'zapft ist, Prost!




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 05:01:41 -0400
From: John Roe <Sensei_John_Roe at compuserve.com>
Subject: Newer Brewer builds Cooler Cooler


I'm a newer brewer, and have enjoyed this forum
on several levels, thanks!

I had a desire after pitching the yeast in my first batch,
a William's IPA kit , to control fermentation temperature.

So I brought home my little mini office refrigerature
and bought a 4'x8' sheet of 1.5" double foil and plastic
moisture barrier backed foam.  I took the door off and with
a kitchen knife and a big roll of duct tape made a top-lidded
refrigerated chest which can easily hold two 5 gallon fermentors
with bubble-locks.  Took about an hour.
I attached a williams original temp controller and stuck a digital
thermometer probe through the side and was all set.

 ...Except I want to be able to lager and/or chill beer down in
secondary to help drop the yeast before bottling, so I am going
to build a "side box" onto the side, with it's own lid and room for
two more carboys/fermentors.  I will put a "muffin" fan in a circular
cut out on the bottom of the shared wall with a foam "flapper"
and another flapper "return" at the top.

This fan will be controlled by my williams controller, while the main
compartment will revert back to the original stock temperature
control.  Now I will have a refrigerature with room for a couple
of six packs ready to drink, plus two carboys, or room for several
cases at drinking / lagering temperature. AND I will have room for
two more carboys/plastic fermentors at Ale temperatures, or whatever,
on my separate williams controller.  All this for a few bucks of foam
and duct tape plus a fifty dollar controllor and an old mini-fridge I
hardly used anyway.

Sorry for the long post, but I'm thrilled to be brewing, already have done
two batches in 10 days, the second my own recipe barley-wine using
 pro-mash for guidance. Now I am getting set to brew a stout.


John Roe
Laguna Hills, Ca
www.martialartsacademy.org
roe-sensei at martialartsacademy.org

"have the good manners not to hit
the man until he's your husband,
and until he can hit you back"

 ... From the movie "The Quietman"






Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 08:13:22 -0400
From: "Rick Dobler" <dobler at madbbs.com>
Subject: Fw: Chicken Feed


- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick Dobler" <dobler at madbbs.com>
To: <post@hbd.org>
Sent: Friday, April 14, 2000 8:09 AM
Subject: Chicken Feed


Greetings,
I live in Western NY. I work for a large animal feed manufacturer.

I hope you realize that the 50 lb sack of cracked corn was not meant for
human consumption. Feed grade products are not handled as cleanly as human
grade. There can be bug infestations, pestisides, chewing tobacco spit.

I worked at a smaller company at one time. I saw the mill workers taking a
wizz in the corn bunk. They were too lazy to walk to the bathroom.

Procede at yor own risk!!
The Lone Brewer




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 08:12:44 -0500
From: "Sieben, Richard" <SIER1 at Aerial1.com>
Subject: Decoction info for Robert Jones

I used to guestimate the percentage of mash to remove by using my stiring
spoon to determine the total depth of the mash and then decide how deep the
mash should be after removal of the desired percentage.  I also had gallon
marks on my spoon that were calibrated to my boiling pot, this same marks
helped out in measuring the mash depth with some consistency.  Simple and it
worked for me.

Rich Sieben
Island Lake, IL 


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 09:39:46 -0400
From: Rick & Ruth Duyck <rnrduyck at mnsi.net>
Subject: Rims, Herms mash thickness

Hi all
I'm about half finished building my H.E.R.M.S. system and am wondering
about the mash thickness in a step mash. I've read somewhere (here?)
that it is important to reach the next temperature quickly. I've also
read in Charlie P.'s book that "a thicker mash favors proteolytic
activity and thinner mashes favor diastatic activity". Is it ok to just
add boiling water as he does in his book and use the heat exchanger ( or
heater element in a R.I.M.S.) to maintain the temperature and for
mashout? I figure you would have to mix the boiling water in the set
grain bed ,but wouldn't the grain bed reset again? Of course this is not
a completely automated system, its more of a hands on system. Thanks
alot for any help.                  Rick Duyck,

Windsor, Ontario, Canada eh!



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 06:48:55 -0700
From: "Dan Schultz" <dschultz at primenet.com>
Subject: re: Chiller turned flusher

>steve lane noted his lack of good results with his built in immersion
chiller and success >with it as a heater for his clean up water:

Sorry to hear your built in chiller wasn't working to your needs. I just ran
my first run on my HE-Man RIMS that incorporates a similar built-in
immersion chiller. I, however, did enjoy great success with mine (the
chiller part anyway) and wonder what our differences could be.

I used about 45 feet of 1/2" copper tubing that connects to 1/2" SS welded
ports at about the 2 gallon and 7 gallon level marks. On the outside, I have
garden hose quick connects.  My first run was only a 5 gallon batch and even
with about 25% of my coil above the wort, I was able to chill faster than
when I used my 1/2" x 50' immersion chiller (which is now my HE-Man RIMS
manifold in the liquor tank). I must admit that I am blessed with 42F tap
water this time of year (goes up to 50F in the summer). There is no real
rationale for the improvement other than pure subjective opinion.

You can see a picture at http://www.primenet.com/~dschultz/boiler.html

In my research on RIMS systems on the web, I have yet to note anyone else
using a built-in immersion cooler. I suspect that for all the trouble, most
go to C/F chiller. By my method, I eliminate any sanitation concerns and now
I can put a nicely fit lid on my boiler as soon as I turn the heat off to
minimize airborne contamination.

Building this thing was a win-win situation becuase any failure as a
immersion chiller meant that I could still use it as the liquor tank/HE
Manifold. My major concern was for cleaning since I do not want to have to
remove the coil each time to get all the hops out of the boiler. After my
initial run, a good hosing did the job. I used hop pellets as a result of a
gift kit and will test full leaf on my next batch.

Burp,
 -Dan











Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 09:54:43 -0400
From: "West, Robert M. SFC" <westr2 at ftknox5-emh3.army.mil>
Subject: Bottles

I have a very simple question.  Can you or is it recommended to bottle our
fine nectar in twist off bottles?


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 10:10:45 -0400
From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam at unc.edu>
Subject: packing peanuts

Someone finally figured out the packing peanuts trick.
Huzzah!

I do know what's in the packing peanuts and there's nothing
in there to prevent mold.  Eco-Foam (tm) was created a few
lab doors down from me at a former employer and it's super
cool.  Much of the process is a trade secret, but I can tell
you that it's made of food-grade starch and mineral salts.
The stuff won't mold because if it gets moist it simply
disintegrates.  Cool stuff and great for the environment to
boot.

Cheers!
Marc



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 07:27:37 -0700
From: Demonick <demonick at zgi.com>
Subject: Re: Strike water temp calculation

Brad Miller <millerb at targen.com>
>... I've seen java programs on the net but I actually want the equation,

Here's a post from about 7 years ago.  I use this equation and 
with pre-heating my 10 gallon Gott I routinely hit my strike temp
target within 1 C.

Cheers,

Domenick Venezia
Venezia & Company, LLC
Maker of PrimeTab
(206) 782-1152  phone
(206) 782-6766  fax orders
demonick at zgi dot com

FREE PrimeTab SAMPLES! Enough for three 5 gallon batches. Fax, phone, or 
email: name, shipping address (no P.O.B.) and phone number. (I won't 
call. It's for UPS in case of delivery problems). Sorry, lower 48 only.

/******************************************
** Date: Wed, 18 Aug 93 10:34:38 -0600
** From: Kelly Jones <k-jones at ee.utah.edu>
** Subject: Heat Capacity of Malt / Infusion Calculations
**
** In HBD #1206, Andy Phillips asks about the heat capacity of crushed
** malt, to be used for calculations of infusion mashes.  I have found
** that the number 1350 (where water is about 4200) to work well for me.
** I believe the units are J/Kg/K, but this is not important.
** Alternately, one could use the dimensionless number 0.32 for the malt,
** where water is equal to one.  Of course, this will vary somewhat
** depending on the type of malt used, the moisture content of the malt,
** etc. but this should be a good starting point.
**
** For those not familiar with these calculations, I will present them
** here:
**
** First, let
** Cpm= heat capacity of your malt, about 0.4
** Cpw= heat capacity of water, 1.0
** Mw = mass of water used
** Mm = mass of malt used
** Tw = temperature of strike water
** Tm = beginning temperature of malt (usually room temperature)
** Tf = final temperature of mixture (rest temp)
**
** Masses and temperatures can be in any units, as long as you are consistent.
**
** The basic formula, then, is
**
** (1)  Tf = (Cpm*Mm*Tm + Cpw*Mw*Tw)/(Cpm*Mm+Cpw*Mw)
**
** This can be rearranged in many ways to solve for the desired unknown.
** For example, if we want to know the quantity of water to add to result
** in a desired protein rest temperature, we can write
**
** (2) Mw = Cpm*Mm*(Tf-Tm)/(Cpw*(Tw-Tf)) or, using the numbers for Cpm&Cpw,
**
** (3) Mw = .32*Mm*(Tf-Tm)/(Tw-Tf)
**
** SO, suppose you have 4Kg of malt at 25C, and you want to add some
** quantity of water at 54C to achieve a protein rest temperature of 50C:
**
** Mw = .32*4*(50-25)/(54-50) = 8Kg of water
**
** These formulas can also be used to calculate additional water
** quantities to raise the mash temp further. However, different
** variables must be used: Instead of Mm, we will substitute Mmash, the
** mass of the mash, equal to the total mass of malt and water used so
** far; for Tm, we will substitute Tmash; and for Cpm, we must use
** Cpmash, calculated as
**
** Cpmash = (Cpm*Mm +Cpw*Mw)/(Mm+Mw)
**
** Thus, the revised formula (2) is
**
** Mw = Cpmash*Mmash*(Tf-Tmash)/(Tw-Tf)
**
** continuing our example, we have Mmash = 4Kg +8Kg = 12Kg, Cpmash =
** (.32*4+1*8)/(4+8)= .773.  Suppose our mash temp is still at 50C, and
** we want to raise it to 66C for a sacharification rest using some
** quantity of water at 100C. Then
**
** Mw = .773*12*(66-50)/(100-50)  = 3Kg of additional (boiling) water.

** Some simplifying assumptions have been made here, but they seem to work
** out just fine. (So please don't get on my case about enthalpies of
** mixing, non-additive Cp's, etc.) You may need to play around with the
** value of Cpm to get these eaquations to work out better for you. Also
** remember that your mash tun will absorb some heat, resulting in a rest
** temperature slightly lower than that predicted here.  You may want to
** shoot for a degree or so higher to compensate.  Note that your boiling
** water temp may not be 100C.
** Equation (1) may be rearranged, if instead it is desired to know, for
** example, what water temperature should be used to obtain a given
** temperature rest for a given volume of water ( if one is shooting for
** some specific mash thickness).




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 10:32:47 -0400
From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam at unc.edu>
Subject: yeast question for Dr. Cone

Is there a succinct reason why there are not many good dry
lager yeasts out there?  I've heard, anecdotally, that even
the dry lager yeasts aren't true bottom fermenters.  Is it a
question of genetics or that there's really no big demand
for dry lager yeast to make it worthwhile to investigate the
problem?

 -Marc Sedam



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 10:38:15 -0400
From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew at compuserve.com>
Subject: mash-out ad nauseam

SA  >>BA does NOT act more aggressively at the lower temperature.
Just the opposite is true.<<

    As the temperature slips down from alpha rest temps the BA certainly
still
is active and at the point of it's more aggressive activity.

>>. If you don't like your heat source then mashing conditions aren't
the issue.<<

  Never said I didn't like my heat source; in fact the portablity is a
benefit!

>>I don't find your arguments compelling or even based on a good
grasp of the issues.<<

That's nice, you work for the Clinton spin-meisters?
The issue is; does a mash out benefit someones' beer?
  1)improves foam stand.(your 'pro lit' supports this)
  2)improves lauter efficiency.( you stated up to 12%)
  3)denatures beta amylase to set the RDF at the desired point. (you'll try
to refute)
  4)promotes greatest alpha amylase activity to avoid unconverted
      starch from entering the finished beer. (show me it ain't so)

>>What seems to be missing is
support for the claim the mashout temps (76+C) are NECESSARY for adequate
foam.<<

I specified 72 C to 74 C as a mash-out temperature. You pulled 76 out of
the air or
are confusing mashout with sparge temps.

>>Kunze at least as early as 1996
suggests (pg 569) that malting conditions and mashing temps.  Avoiding
50C-60C as foam negative, and encouraging 62-65C [and 70-72C long high pH
*5.5 to 5.6 !!!] rests as foam positive.   <<

Now you support what I was saying about mash-out (72-74 C) and foam, so
what's the point?
  >>missing is
support for the claim the mashout temps (76+C) are NECESSARY for adequate
foam.<<

This point is a disagreement based on semantics. What you say may be
'adequate'
foam without mash-out your pro-lit says will see foam positive effects at
72C
mash-out temps; supporting my allegations.

  Consider also the problem of HSA. Quoting back from a prior digest ( lost
the #)
>>I tend to agree with the latter view as lipoxygenase enzymes
are very heat labile<< (not your quote)
 Would a high temperature mash out, 72 to 74 C, ensure degradation of
lipoxygenase to help minimize HSA effects during the run-off to the grant
and pumping
to the kettle?

   N.P (Del) Lansing

   


   


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 10:46:13 -0400
From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam at unc.edu>
Subject: TNB Online Articles

Interesting blurbs about the Siebel Institute here.  I'm
surprised the topic hasn't surfaced on the HBD yet...is Rob
Moline able to comment at all?

http://www.beertown.org/IBS/Newbrewer/tnbonline.htm

Cheers!
Marc



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 10:50:35 EDT
From: JohnT6020 at aol.com
Subject: "Scratcg feed" trivia

Flossmoor  IL  000414  at  0744 CDT    

Fellow brewers:
In HBD 3299 Glen Panicke comments about chicken scratch feed.  I only reply 
because scratch feed is a product of a vintage similar to mine.  In effect I 
have been an "eye witness" to making, and using scratch feed.

Scratch feed refers to the time when chickens ran free in the back yard.  
They were constantly scratching the ground to turn up something to eat.  
Scratch feed was a cracked grain mixture that the owner threw out on the 
ground for the chickens to scratch for.  Not quite floor sweepings, but the 
formula was highly variable, depending on what was in surplus supply at the 
"elevator" where such stuff usually originated.  It nourished the chickens 
and was believed to be healthy for the chickens to work a little for their 
meal.

There is a left-handed relation to brewing here.  Adjunct grains in brewing 
can be almost any starchy grain that happens to be handy.

73
JET
<johnt6020 at aol.com>


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 14:53:36 +0000
From: geeks at att.net
Subject: Sticky in Colorado

Greetz -
   Well, two months after my fermenter sprayed my guest 
bathroom with hops, malt, and yeast, I finally got around 
to cleaning it up. ( the spousal-unit was happy with that 
snap decision ). Anyway, after appealing for help here on 
the HBD, few suggestions came in, and distilling down the 
answers, painting was in order.
   Hmmmm. Sounds like too much work. Then, the answer 
popped into the cranium, the stuff tough enough to soak 
labels off of Anchor Steam bottles, the wonder chemical 
 ...
TSP!!!

   Mix this stuff 1/4 cup to 1 gallon of water, use a 
dishwashing rag, and gently wipe, and it all comes off! 
Unbelievable! The bathroom looks like new!!! ( as a 
bonus, much spousal appreciation was also noted later in 
the evening )

   Just make sure you don't rub too hard ...( I'm talking 
about the tsp solution now ). Also, the box says it may 
remove some gloss from paint, but my catbox was already 
semi-gloss.

Bill in malty-smelling Golden, CO


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 10:56:54 -0400
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com>
Subject: Decoction , iodophore, Clayton Cone Cuestion, Partially

Brewsters:

Time for a little engineeering.  Robert Jones (hmmm, living in SC, where
have I heard that name before?) asks a question that has often bothered me
when doing decoction mashes. How do we know when too much is not enough and
such when pulling a thick mash.

I have always chosen the dip and look method, but it is not good enough. I
always have to adjust the re-combined mash temperature.

Have any of you developed a device to improve this to the point where we
can pull the correct amount of mash and get the correct temperature hold
points without heating or holding back when we recombine mashes?

I can imagine a sort of strainer which is pushed into the mash to a certain
depth and this is pulled out without mixing in too much air and put in the
boiler, some measured amount of thin mash added to correct the consistency
and brought up to the boil in desired stages.

The trick would be to have some way to move this "strainer" back into the
mash for the next decoction
( a movable flap, a bottom that folds up and then recloses or such?) to the
desired depth and then lift it out.  Proabaly not too tricky, but needs
some engineering minds to make it simple and practical, which is my
definition of engineering excellence. Best of all would be to be able to
use an existing cooking? device.

Thoughts and comments?
- -----------------------------
Jason Foster's thoughts about iodophor and his concern of using it as a
non-rinse sanitizer are common.
  
Given the word "dry" which is what you are supposed to do after you use
iodophor and what some people interpret as "non-rinse" which is to apply
iodophor, drain it  and immediately use the device are two different
things. The latter is not necessarily dangerous as the iodophor will react
with beer components, but it can affect the taste.

If you allow the device to dry, you should have no concern. OTOH, if I am
using a sanitizer with a difficult to dry carboy, for example, after
sanitizing, I usually rinse all such containers with boiled and usually hot
water, just to be sure there is no taste impact. It is cheap insurance and
one more potential problem eliminated.
- -----------------------------
Question for Clayton Cone:

Would you please discuss % attenuation, laboratory conditions of the
fermentation and method of measuring it?  Will all brewing yeasts with
similar bio-chemistries ( i.e. all those who can digest the same sets of
sugars) attentuate to the same percentage  under lab conditions  if stirred
during the fermentation and for a long enough period?

What are other practical factors in a fermentation that can affect
attenuation?

How do you account for the various attentuation limits given for similar
yeasts and how can we homebrewers use these numbers?
- -----------------------------
Hmmm.  Phil those "caramelly flavors" as you call them and darkening with
the lid off during what you term a "high boil" is what I was talking about.
I doubt you would see much of a difference if it were not that oxygen
weren't having an effect. The flavors produced are not appropriate at all
for most light, rice based lagers ( which I also enjoy)  but maybe not too
bad in beers with lots of other flavors.  I suspect we have observed the
same thing, just interpreted it differently with a different set of
conditions. It is true, I guess, that you have never tried it my way, so
you don't really know what I am talking about.

It is possible that you are getting more water boiled off ( and a
consequent higher boil temperature) during a "high boil" than a "low boil"
and, as a result, you are <also> getting additional caramelly flavors in
the high boil because of the higher temperature and higher concentration of
reactive components .   I suggest you try that next rice lager partially
covered 2/3 during the long boil after the foamup and see for yourself. And
for those ales, boil off the same amount of water but 2/3 covered and
compare these results. If you have two identical kettles, try it side by
side with each brew.

I don't recommend the lid being on at all during the initial foamy boilup (
although being an experienced daredevil, I do keep the kettles covered
during the heatup and listen for boiling sounds) and then uncover. When the
foam clears I replace the lid, but only 2/3 closed. This jet of steam will
keep oxygen away from the wort during the 1 hour or so rolling boil. It is
easy to do and I don't know why anyone would resist it.  Maybe you've never
heard of oxidation during the boil  because professionals do all of their
boils in closed kettles and have a much smaller surface to volume ratio
than homebrewers.

I don't think those are caramel flavors induced by oxidation, more likely
they're oxidized phenols. I can taste the difference and see the color
difference between two different boilups of the same batch in two identical
kettles, one covered 2/3 and one not.  The amount of boiloff was not
substantially different as the rate of boiloff is pretty much determined by
the rate of heat applied - as you indicate, minus a little condensation on
the lid at first. A towel on the lid reduces this condensation
substantially.

Same brew, same yeast, etc.  Even Dr. Pivo could tell the difference.
- -------------------------------
Keep on Brewin'

Dave Burley


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 14:57:42 +0000
From: William Frazier <billfrazier at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Chicken Feed Update

I bought 50 pounds of Farmland Cracked Corn a couple of days ago at the
COOP.  My idea was to replace the corn meal I usually use in a CAP with the
cracked corn.  A couple of problems.

First the corn, while cracked, seemed to be in pieces too large to permit a
good extraction.  I passed it through a Corona Mill a couple of times and
got the particle size down to that of a BB plus corn flour.  I proceded with
a cereal mash the night before brew day.  Watch out!  Big time scorch.  I
had enough time to prepare a second cereal mash with Aunt Jemima Corn Meal.
This one worked out fine, like others in the past.  I used the AJCM mash in
the CAP brewed yesterday.

Then I received a warning from Rick Dobler from Western NY, who works for an
animal feed manufacturer.  Without going into the details of Rick's warning
I would suggest not using animal feed grade cracked corn.  Thanks Rick!

Presently the resident flock of grackles are enjoying the cracked corn.
There are hundreds of them at my place this time of year building nests and
laying eggs.  Lots of expectant mothers out there and I figured they needed
the corn a lot more than me.

So, while using 9 cents per pound cracked corn in home brew sounded great
it's back to human grade corn meal for me.

Regards,

        Bill Frazier
        Olathe, Kansas



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 11:31:51 -0400
From: "Pannicke, Glen A." <glen_pannicke at merck.com>
Subject: Belgian Trippel recipe.

> P.S. Anyone have a favorite all-grain Belgian Trippel recipe?

I have one for a 5 gal batch which I've finally settled on.  Technically I
guess it's a Special, but it's of Trippel proportions.  It winds up light,
crisp and VERY alcoholic.  I usually only drink this stuff under heavy
moderation, otherwise I'll wake up the next morning under the coffee table
wrapped up in the throw rug hugging the dog.  Look...  I'm not proud of it.
The dog thing, not the beer ;-)

Grains:
10# 	Pilsner Malt
2#	Vienna Carapils

Mash:
I do this now with that always special, backwards-ass Belgian decoction
mashing regime (boiling portions of the wort, not the mash to raise the
temp).  It works, but I'm not sure if the end result tastes much better than
a simple step-infusion mash.

Mash in  at  130F
30 min  at  130 F
45 min  at  150 F
15 min  at  170 F
Mash out at 170 F
Sparge until final gravity reaches 1.010 or 6.5 gallons have been collected

Hops:
1/2 oz.	Hallertauer (3.0 - 3.5 AA) in the first wort (removed prior to
starting the boil)
1/2 oz.	Styrian Goldings(3.0 - 3.2 AA) in the first wort (removed prior to
starting the boil)
1 oz.	Hallertauer in the boil (add after the hot break starts to form)
1 oz.	Styrian Goldings (3.0 - 3.2 AA) (add at halfway through the boil)

Boil:
Raise to a vigorous boil for about an hour (partially covered) to drop the
volume to about 5.5 gallons.
Add 2# honey (wildflower, clover or orange blossom have worked equally
well), 1/2 oz. crushed coriander, 1/2 oz. Bitter Orange peel and 5 whole
cloves.
Allow to steep for 10 minutes and force chill to room temp.
Rack off trub to collect 5 gallons.

Fermentation:
Ferment to completion at room temp (68 - 72 F) with White Labs WLP550 or
Wyeast #1214, #1762 or #1338 (I prefer Wyeast #1762)
Rack to a secondary for 5 days at room temp.
Dry hop with 1/2 oz. Styrian Goldings (3.0 - 3.2 AA) for 2-3 days.
Drop temp into the 40 - 50 F range for 24 hours prior to bottling/kegging.
Cold condition after cabonation is completed for a 2 week minimum.

There it is.  My recipe, the way I like it, with the major process
parameters included.  Hopefully you can get something close to what I do.
Belgian beers are supposed to be... weird?... no...  ummmmm.... UNIQUE!  The
hops and spices mellow out some of the heavy phenolics which I have found to
always dominate over the esters produced by most Belgian yeast strains
available on the market.  You may also can the spices, flavor hops and dry
hops to attain a brew that adheres more to the style guidelines of a
trippel.  I prefer to use honey in place of candi sugar up to 4# total and I
have found the best results with the Wyeast #1762 strain.

Knock yourself out.  It ain't hard to do with this brew!

Glen Pannicke
Merck & Co.
Computer Validation Quality Assurance  
email:  glen_pannicke at merck.com 


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 16:32:25 GMT
From: mikey at swampgas.com (The Artist Formerly Known As Kap'n Salty)
Subject: re: Munich Lager Yeast

AKGOURMET at aol.com wrote:

> Got a question about Wyeast Munich Lager 2308.  I brewed a 
> 10 gallon all grain batch of premium lager a month ago 
> and it's only down to 1.023. 
[snip]
> Pitched a 3 quart starter (decanted) of yeast (I know, 
> underpitched for a lager, but not that bad).

This looks like a classic underpitching problem. You probably should
have pitched at least the sediment from a 2 gallon starter.
Personally, I would have pitched at minimum 3-4 gallon starter at the
smallest (decanted, of course) for 10 gallons. Sometimes you can get
away with underpitching (some folks say they do it all the time),
sometimes not. With lagers fermented cold from the beginning,
underpitching can cause real problems. In my own case, the ferment
usually stopped early. 

Another possibility is that you temp-shocked the yeast. Say by
pitching a room-temp starter into very cold wort. Or maybe a
combination of the two. In any case, the ferment is not likely to
continue much lower.

This is actually pretty easy to remedy -- just pitch some more yeast.
I'd grow up another starter at room temp and just repitch. At this
point, you could probably get away with repitching less yeast at room
temp -- since the bulk of the extract is already gone, finishing at
room temp is not likely to introduce much in the way of off flavors.
Think of it as a diacetyl rest. Try growing up another 3 qt starter of
munich (or maybe find something cleaner) and let it finish at room
temp or just a little "cool". It should only take a couple of days to
be done. I'll bet you could even use a clean ale yeast, but I haven't
tried this personally.

Also, consider verifying the accuracy of your hydrometer.

Note: I speak only from my OWN experience. I do not claim  to be an
authority (although Biergiek and Fouch look up to me like a father).
Some of you may not even use yeast at all or ferment your lagers at
350F in cardboard-- more power to you. Those of you who regularly
complain about other postings (and you know who you are) should remain
in your seats and take a few deep breaths. And finally: NOVICE BREWERS
SHOULD NOT BECOME ALARMED BY THIS POST. I REPEAT: NOVICE BREWERS
SHOULD NOT BECOME UNDULY ENTURBULATED BY THE CONTENTS OF THIS POSTING.

Cheers -- TAFKAKS



**************************************
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.
**************************************
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.


Return to table of contents


Date: 14 Apr 2000 11:28:43 -0400
From: RCAYOT at solutia.com
Subject: DECOCT VOLUMES

     Regarding Robert Jones recent query on Decoction volumes:
     
     From: "Robert S. Jones" <bigskygyd at mcn.net>
     Subject: Decoction info needed
     
     "I am an all grain homebrewer and often use decoction programs in my
     brewing.  I have always struggled with determining how much mash to 
     remove for the decoction. Most of the decoction programs I use call 
     for removal of 30% to 45% of the mash. I usually rely on the "That 
     seems about like 40%" method and the beers turn out pretty good but I 
     would like to have more consistency in doing this......."
     
     Robert, I would suggest that you read or reread Noonan's Brewing Lager 
     Beer.  Second, keep good notes!  Remember that Decoction was developed 
     by people who did not even have the benefit of a thermometer!  The 
     temperatures they used were fixed, "blood temperature" about 100F and 
     Boiling about 212F.  With these fixed temperatures, they could mix 
     boiling mash with the rest mash and hit the correct temperatures only 
     if the proportions were exactly correct.  They determined these 
     amounts by trial and error, and by keeping good records, determined 
     for their brewery what worked best.  We now know what temperatures we 
     want, and with good estimates of the heat capacity of the mash 
     components could calculate the appropriate volumes.  I would suggest 
     you do what I do however, and that is use the old "I know that three 
     strainers full of mash, when decocted and returned to the rest mash 
     did not have enough heat to raise the temp where I wanted it, maybe 
     I'll try three and a half strainers full this time"  This has worked 
     well for me, I also keep some boiling water on hand to help with the 
     temp boosts in case I undershoot, and if I overshoot I add cold 
     brewing water.  There are some great articles from Zymurgy and Brewing 
     techniques that discussed the various heat capacities of wort and mash 
     components, but I would use these as a guide unless you are really 
     inclined to do the math, and measuring necessary.  These articles will 
     help you understand the thermodynamics involved.  I hope you continue 
     to do decoction brews as I believe that there is something to be 
     gained from them.  Good luck.
     
     Roger Ayotte 



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 13:11:11 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu>
Subject: picnic tap/faucet as inline valve

A few days ago I mentioned the trick I learned from watching Mike O'Brien
of pico-Brewing Systems rack some beer.  I used the term "picnic tap,"
which is perhaps an unfortunate and confusing term.  I received an email
from a confused HBDer from Oz (I'll preserve his anonymity so as not to
embarass this poor party-throwing unfortunate who couldn't figure it out).
I should better have called it a picnic beer faucet - you know, the black
plastic gizmo on the end of a hose that has a thumb lever that you press to
dispense beer.

To recapitulate now that you have the proper image in mind, you can use
this as an in-line valve by stuffing a hose in the spout and running this
to the keg or whatever your transferring to.  You can either press the
lever for intermittent flow or flip it up into the lock open position for
continual flow.

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, 14 Apr 2000 13:23:05 -0400
From: "Doug Moyer" <shyzaboy at yahoo.com>
Subject: Not the same old science vs. art

Brewers,

Every so often, the list gets its collective panties in a bunch regarding
some variation of, "Is brewing science or art?" This time, the variant seems
to be along the lines of, "everybody else should keep it simple because I
don't use science and I make beer my buddies love!"

Give me a break. The hobby is what you make of it. Some like to make it as
complex as possible, whilst some still prefer the can of Blue Ribbon malt
and copious quantities of table sugar. But, don't chew people out for not
sharing your personal approach to brewing!

Someday, I plan to own a microscope and other paraphernalia for a complete
homebrewing lab. (But, today, I don't even have room for the stuff I do
have.) Someday, I hope to understand and participate in these seemingly
esoteric discussions about yeast's biochemical pathways. Can I brew great
beer without it? No question. But it would amuse me to take it to that
level. Isn't that what hobbies are all about--personal amusement?

At its best, the hbd bandies about quotes from literature, combined with
well designed experiments, and, after much discussion and critical
evaluation, puts together practical recommendations for the "lay"
homebrewer. Wow!

At its worst, you have boobs like me slicing off peoples' heads for making
statements based on incomplete or inaccurate assumptions--attacking instead
of leading the lost sheep gently back to the fold.

In other words, while bad attitudes may occasionally seem disenchanting, the
heart of the hbd is exploring the hobby to whatever level makes each of us
quiver with excitement. Just don't get bent out of shape over someone else's
level of interest. There's room for all of us.


Brew on!
Doug Moyer
Salem, VA

Star City Brewers Guild: http://hbd.org/starcity

"There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness.'"
     ~ Dave Barry

(There. I've mentioned "panties" and "quiver with excitement" in the same
post. If that doesn't get a rise out of Garvin or the Yates assemblage, I
don't know what will.)


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 13:58:11 -0400
From: "Jim B Verlinde" <beans at voyager.net>
Subject: Australian Brewers and other life forms

I have attempted to decipher Phil/Jill Yates' sometimes-beer-related musings
for a period of time now but to no avail until I received the following
email from The Learning Kingdom. While still not crystal clear, a
perspective is coming into focus. Maybe one more homebrew will help!


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

           Why does Australia have such unusual life forms?

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


The continent of Australia has one of the most unusual collections of
native life forms on the planet.  Why are there so many strange forms
there?

50 million years ago, Australia was part of a land mass near the
South Pole.  It was connected with what are now Antarctica and South
America.  As the continents slowly shifted, Australia split off and
began a long journey northwards.  During that time it was isolated by
wide stretches of ocean.

In Australia, evolution continued for about twenty million years
without interference from new forms emerging on other continents.
The climate changed radically several times, and whole families of
life forms became extinct while new ones evolved.  As a result,
Australia developed ecosystems quite different from those on other
continents.

More about the prehistory of Australia:
http://www.austmus.gov.au/lostkingdoms/


Jim Verlinde
Grand Rapids, MI
(Not far from Eric and Fred)



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 14:53:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Varady <rust1d at usa.net>
Subject: Mashing Formulas

There were a couple of questions in HBD 3299 about decoction/infusion
amounts/temperatures. At the risk of trading in my library card for
employment at the local branch, here are all the formulas you need to
infusion/decoction mash. They can 
be found on my web site and are the formulas used in my software. The only
credit I can take is for rearranging the basic formula to figure the others.

Basic Formula

The following formula will compute the final temperature of a mixture of 
two masses at different temperatures. 

Tf = (Hc1*M1*T1 + Hc2*M2*T2)/(Hc1*M1+Hc2*M2) 

Where:

     Tf = final temperature 

     Hc1 = heat capacity of first mass 
     M1 = wieght of first mass 
     T1 = current temperature of first mass 
     Hc2 = heat capacity of second mass 
     M2 = weight of second mass 
     T2 = current temperature of second mass 

Rearranging this formula, and using a value of 1 for the heat capacity of 
water, we come up with the following: 

Infusion Formula - Amount of Initial Strike Water

The following formula will compute the mass of initial strike water 
required to hit a certain mash temperature based on the temperature of 
the initial strike water. 

Ma = Hcm*Mm*(Tf-Tm)/(Tw-Tf) 

Where:

     Ma = required mass of initial strike water 

     Hcm = heat capacity of malt (about .4) 
     Mm = mass of malt used 
     Tm = current temperature of the malt 
     Tf = final temperature desired 
     Tw = temperature of initial strike water 

Infusion Formula - Temperature of Initial Strike Water

The following formula will compute the temperature of the initial strike 
water required to hit a certain mash temperature based on the mass of the 
initial strike water. 

Tw = (Ma*Tf-(Hcm*Mm)*(Tm-Tf))/Ma 

Where:

     Tw = required temperature of initial strike water 

     Ma = mass of initial strike water added 
     Tf = final temperature desired 
     Hcm = heat capacity of malt (about .4) 
     Mm = mass of malt 
     Tm = current temperature of the malt 

Infusion Formula - Amount of Step Infusion Water Required

The following formula will compute the mass of the water required to 
boost a mash from one temp to the next. 

Ma = (Hcm*Mm+Mw)*(Tf-Tmash)/(Tw-Tf) 

Where:

     Ma = required mass of water to infuse 

     Hcm = heat capacity of malt (about .4) 
     Mm = mass of malt 
     Mw = mass of water already in mash 
     Tf = final temperature desired 
     Tmash = current temperature of the mash 
     Tw = temperature of infusion water added 

Infusion Formula - Temperature of Step Infusion Water Required

The following formula will compute the temperature of the water required 
to boost a mash from one temp to the next. 

Tw = (Ma*Tf-(Hcm*Mm+Mw)*(Tmash-Tf))/Ma 

Where:

     Tw = required temperature of infusion water 

     Ma = mass of water infused 
     Hcm = heat capacity of malt (about .4) 
     Mm = mass of malt 
     Mw = mass of water already in mash 
     Tf = final temperature desired 
     Tmash = current temperature of the mash 

Decoction Formula - Decoction Mass of Mash Required

The following formula will compute the mass of the mash that must be 
decocted, heated and returned to the mash to boost it from one temp to 
the next.

Md = (Hcm*Mm+Mw)/(1+((Tf-Td)/(Tmash-Tf))) 

Where:

     Md = required mass of decoction 

     Hcm = heat capacity of malt (about .4) 
     Mm = mass of malt 
     Mw = mass of water already in mash 
     Tf = final temperature desired 
     Td = temperature of decoction when added back to mash 
     Tmash = current temperature of the mash 

Decoction Formula - Temperature of Decoction Required

The following formula will compute the temperature the decoction must be 
when returned to the mash boost it from one temp to the next.

Td = Tmash-(Hcm*Mm+Mw)/Md*(Tmash-Tf) 

Where:

     Td = required temperature of decoction when added back to mash 

     Tmash = current temperature of the mash 
     Hcm = heat capacity of malt (about .4) 
     Mm = mass of malt 
     Mw = mass of water already in mash 
     Md = mass of decoction 
     Tf = final temperature desired 

Fudge Factor

When adding either hot water or decoctions to boost your mash temp, you 
must always take into account the amount of heat your mash tun will 
absorb. Typically, this will only be 1 or 2
degrees fahrenheit, but will vary from system to system. After a little 
trial and error, you will become familar with the temperature drop 
realized by your system and will be able to adjust
for it. 
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

---