HOMEBREW Digest #3421 Mon 04 September 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

  I'm yours Lynne ("Bob Sutton")
  Those Mini-Kegs Again (Bill.X.Wible)
  RE: Star San foaming ("Brian Lundeen")
  Re: Identifying Hops plants, Step mashing ("Douglas Gould")
  Two Hydrometers (Mea & Marvin)
  newbie question ("Tammy Duriavich")
  Re: Kits and bollox (Lance Levsen)
  st. pat's clarified (Mea & Marvin)
  Re: Lautering: Wort Does Not Flow Uphill (Steve Lacey)
  Thankyou's,Morality/mortality in yeast, Head in fish ("Graham Sanders")
  Spent-grain Bread (nap_aca_bh)
  RE:counter-flow cooling (Rick Pauly)
  Homebrewers Do Odd Things ("Phil & Jill Yates")
  RE: European Ale Yeast ("Steve")
  label removal (DeVeaux Gauger)
  acetone revisited and fixing foul flavours. ("Dr. Pivo")
  10 Gal Fermenters ("Steve  Bireley")
  Octyl Alcohol/OP ("A. J.")
  Re; Counter-Flow Cooling Efficiency (RobertJ)
  Warm Water Counterflow Chilling (Dan Listermann)
  RE: kettle fitting (Eli Daniel)
  re: Lautering: Wort Does Not Flow Uphill (John_E_Schnupp)
  OK, water gurus... (Project One)
  St Pats ("Nigel Porter")
  Chloramine removal (MAB)
  Chris Cooper's $.02 (Beaverplt)
  CP Philling (Aaron Perry)

* * Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! 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. JANITOR on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 13:14:25 EDT From: "Bob Sutton" <anerobe at hotmail.com> Subject: I'm yours Lynne Lynne bemoaned: >>>I offered 1 ton to the AHA conference of 1999 and it was refused. My offer of 1500 lbs to the Dixie Cup this year was also refused.<<< Lynn - I understand your feelings of rejection - been there myself. Let me try to help. As a favor, I'll accept the 1500 lb grain donation (I assume shipping is included). I hope this helps. Bob Fruit Fly Brewhaus Yesterdays' Technology Today DISCLAIMER: I never, ever bought anything from Lynne - nor did I complain about the service I didn't request - however I did spend time browsing her website - nice goods! _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 13:43:23 -0400 From: Bill.X.Wible at QuestDiagnostics.com Subject: Those Mini-Kegs Again Hey brewers, There was something posted real recently about modifying the taps or bungs on mini-kegs to allow pressure release so they don't deform. I was searching through, but couldn't find it. Can anybody point me to it? Much appreciated. I have a couple of these I want to try. Thanks. Bill Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 13:39:52 -0500 From: "Brian Lundeen" <blundeen at rrc.mb.ca> Subject: RE: Star San foaming Jeffrey Calton comments on Star San's spectacular ability to foam: > Upon trying out > Star-San however, I was dismayed at all the foaming > encountered. Sanitizing a > carboy left the container nearly completely full of foam. Am > I to assume that > this foam is harmless to yeast, people, or the taste of beer? According to Five Star, the manufacturers of Star San, the foam left behind is harmless to yeast, people and the taste of beer. Assuming proper dilution directions are followed. I have no reason to doubt their word on this. However, you do want to minimize the foam left behind, and having a carboy completely full of the stuff is excessive, although I expect as you racked into it, the vast majority of the foam would simply ride up on the rising surface and come out the neck. There is no need to get that much foam to start with, though. First, you don't need to fill the carboy with solution, but if you do, the only way to prevent foaming is to rack it in, and rack it out, a waste of time IMO. Pour in a couple of liters gently. You will get some foam but we'll deal with that later. Gently rotate the carboy for a couple of minutes so that the solution washes over the entire inside surface. Now comes the tricky part. You want to get as much foam as possible riding on the surface of the liquid. A final very slow even rotation will accomplish this. Pour the solution out very slowly into a bucket, with a gentle rocking motion that keeps the solution moving side to side relative to its direction of flow. This will help keep the foam riding on the surface so it can be carried out. The trickiest part is when you just have a small amount of liquid left in the shoulder area, but a little finesse will get all the liquid and foam out. If a bit's left behind, don't even worry about it. You will also experience this with bottles, if you use them. Don't try using what we winemakers call an "avinitore", the Italian name for those plunger-driven bottle sanitizers. Soak your bottles in a bucket full of solution, then pour out gently with a minimum of glug-glugging. Leave on a bottle tree and what little foam is left will drain out. I love the stuff and highly recommend it. NAJASCYYY. Cheers, Brian Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 15:48:26 EDT From: "Douglas Gould" <maestro_d at hotmail.com> Subject: Re: Identifying Hops plants, Step mashing >I have noticed that my most recent light coloured ales have a chill >haze in them. I have read a bit about getting rid of it. I think >that the best way for me is to conduct a protein rest during the >mash. If I have read and listened to the advice of others I should >attempt a rest at ~ 122'f. I am contemplating a thick infusion mash >with a rest at 122'f then raising the temp to ~ 154'f for the main >mash rest. My difficulty comes when I try to raise the temperature >up to my main mash rest. I have a simple infusion mash system in a >rectangular ice chest cooler. I have had messy troubles in the past >while attempting a decoction type mash. Lets just say my shop floor >was real clean once I finally got finished my brew day. So my >question is: given that a typical brew is mashed in with >approximately 5kg of grain + adjuncts how much water should I >mash-in with to get a 122'f protein rest. Then how much boiling >water should I add to get to the desired 154'f main rest yet still >retain the needed mash thickness for a balanced conversion. Any >comments or help will be greatly appreciated. I'm not a super-duper brewing wizard, but I do have some experience with stepping up infusions with boiling water. (I brewed 4 beers doing it this way.) I've since moved to stovetop temperature increases and an insulated box which I prefer. I find using a cooler to be a little nerve-wracking. Missing a target temperature leads to a little too much stress for me to be able to relax and enjoy the brewing experience but hopefully my pain and suffering will be helpful for you. >From my vague memories of high school chemistry, I recall that mass temperature systems can be calculated by using the following formula (which is basically conservation of heat). Sum of all ( Mass * Temperature ) = a constant So for our infusion: Mass of mash * Initial temperature of mash + Mass of added water * Temperature of the added hot water + Mass of vessel * Initial temperature of vessel Equals Mass of everything * final temp everything The balance equation for the addition of water to the mash tun is then: Mi*Ti + Mt*Ti + Ma*Ta = (Mm + Mt + Ma) Tf Where: Ma = Mass of water to add Mi = Mass of the mash (before addition) Mt = Thermal mass of you vessel Ti = Initial temperature Tf = Desired final temperature Ta = Temperature of added water Solving for the amount of boiling water to add: Mw = (Mi + Mt)*( Tf - Ti )/( Ta - Tf ) Or you could calculate the temperature of water to add by the following: Ta = (Tf - Ti)*(Mi + Mt)/(Ma) + Tf Now, given that, but without knowing the Mt, it'll be difficult to hit the temperatures you want, but you should be able to come close. Also, unless you want a really thin mash for starch conversion, you have to start with a very thick mash for your protein rest and limit the temperature rise. This actually works out OK, 'cause a thick mash works well for a protein rest. I'm going to show my example in metric because of the convenience of 1 litre of water = 1 kg. The formulas above are valid for any measurement system, but remember to work in consistent units. (lbs of water) You can calculate the thermal mass of your vessel by experimenting with boiling water and an empty cooler. Typically, insulated vessels have very low thermal mass. A heavy steel vessel could be several kilos. Here's what I'll work with. I'll estimate the thermal mass of my cooler at 0 kg, and use 25C for initial room/grain/vessel temperature. I'll aim for a protein rest at 50C (131F). It's on the high end of the scale, but it should work fine for reducing chill haze. And if we still be in protein conversion range. The initial grist of 5kg will be infused with 10 litres of water at the following strike temperature: Ta = ( Tf - Ti )*( Mi + Mt )/( Ma ) + Tf Ta = ( 50C - 25C )*( 5kg + 0 )/( 10kg ) + 50C Ta = 62.5C = Strike temp (Also, when using a non-zero thermal mass make sure you mix in the grain after stabilizing your vessel's temperature. Otherwise you may overheat your grain before the mash vessel has enough time to absorb some of the excess heat.) This should yield a really thick (less than 1 quart per pound) 15kg of mash at 50C, depending on the thermal mass (Mt) of your vessel and the temperature of your your dry grain. Let's assume we're spot on for the sake of our example (but make sure you measure with a thermometer and adjust the calculation for starch conversion step-up). Before you have experience with the temperature dynamics of your vessel, I recommend that you do one of the following: either aim for the top end of the starch conversion range and rely on the thermal mass not absorbing enough heat to lower you mash below starch conversion range, or aim for the middle and estimate the thermal mass. In fact the first time through, I'm going to neglect my thermal mass *and* aim for the middle of starch conversion range. I'll undoubtedly end up below my desired range, but it's safer to add a little more boiling water to ease it up into the desired range than to desperately try to lower the temp before the amylase gets denatured. I'm going to aim for 66C. So, after the protein rest I'll add the following amount of boiling water: Mw = (Mi + Mt)*( Tf - Ti )/( Ta - Tf ) Mw = ( 15kg + 0 ) ( 66C - 50C ) / ( 100C - 66C ) Mw = 7.3 kg of 100C water. ...and if I need to raise the temperature some more I'll need about 500ml of boiling water per degree C. The mash is significantly thinner at this point. (3.46 l/kg or 1.65 qts per lb) If you are way outside your target temperature you should quickly add more boiling or ice cold water to correct. Missing high is much more serious. Especially with a thin mash, amylase will degrade rather quickly. Again, we aimed low, so it shouldn't be a problem. As an aside, I've seen at least a couple of bits of software that will do these calculations for you. I like filling up my brewing notebooks with chicken scratch algebra. I'm also more comfortable doing it by hand because I know how and where shortcuts are being taken, and I know what all the fields mean and what units they're in. On the other hand, I'm known to make the occasional error so you may want to verify with a tool anyway. Also be aware of the volume of your cooler. A five gallon cooler isn't going to cut it, with the amount of water we'd have to add to 5kg of grain. You should be able to squeak by with an 8 gallon cooler. Otherwise, you'll have to reduce the amount of grist. Good luck, Doug - -- Douglas Gould - maestro_d at hotmail.com "Wise men make proverbs, but fools repeat them." - Samuel Palmer (1805-80) _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 15:25:08 -0700 From: Mea & Marvin <mcmc at loop.com> Subject: Two Hydrometers Hey Y'all: Been brewing for a couple of years. Started out helping a friend bottle- you can imagine the rest. Started extract; ended three tier kegs; multi-frig capacity; done about a dozen twelve gal batches. Haven't tried "designing" any recipes, relying ins- stead on recipes gleaned from award winning people who know a lot more than me. All I do is keep it clean, and follow basic brewing protocol with single-infusion mashes. Except for one batch which was allowed to get too warm in the primary, everything I have made has been excellent- beyond any of my expectations. Head retention, clarity, flavor. Oh man, the flavor! Reading hbd and rec.crafts.brewing I notice all these discussions regarding the esoteric minutia and the scientific aspects (are all you guys chemists and/or engineers?), and I realize: I own two hydrometers that I've never used. Is this wrong? Will I ever develop the urge to use them? Is it OK that I stumble along in my silly little world, blissfully ignorant? Or is it sheer folly I choose not to worry about all these details which, admittedly, I know little about anyway? Just wondering, Marv Lost Angeles "It's just too easy, Dano" Steve McGarrett/HAWAII 5-0 Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 17:41:18 -0500 From: "Tammy Duriavich" <murph at xsite.net> Subject: newbie question Coming out of lurkdom to ask a very newbie question. Background: I've made 2 batches of wine (the 2nd, a peach wine from scratch, is in the secondary as I type) & 1 batch of beer (drink-able on 9/14, from a kit (don't grimmace, it was a good learning experience), that I think will be pretty good). Reason to try beermaking: I wanted a unique gift for my husband's birthday. Question: Since kits aren't my idea of making it myself, I want to try something but don't want the bottles to explode in my basement. I want to make a beverage similar to "Hootch" (for me, I'll use a regular beer recipe for his birthday). Can I use a sour mash recipe & add lemonade concentrate to it a) when I pour into my primary carboy or b) instead of priming sugar when I go to bottle? TIA!! Tammy Duriavich Clean Hands, Warm Heart Handmade Soaps & Bath Products W.Chicago, IL - email murph at xsite.net http://www.CleanHands-WarmHeart.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 17:06:34 -0600 From: Lance Levsen <l.levsen at printwest.com> Subject: Re: Kits and bollox > Lance Levsen thought that he had a good point when he wrote this: > | My point being that in my circumstances given an equal regard to process, > the > | beer is dictated by quality of ingredients, not type of ingredients. > > Bollox mate, one day sit down and get two coffee's, one made from fresh > ground beans, the other made from instant coffee. Essentially, the same crap > but with VERY different results. This is just what malt extract is, the real Bollocks he says, I don't think so. :-) I wholeheartedly agree with your example of the coffee, but the metaphor isn't complete. You don't have the aroma's in malts as you would with coffee's. Nor are the process the same to create the coffee. One is brewed or boiled, the other is added to hot water. In my mind that's the same as your average set of kit instructions, which is not what I meant. If there was some way to duplicate the methodology of creating the coffee using the two different ingredients then maybe you might be right, I don't know, not having done that experiment. > is 'close enough is good enough' then they're okay, I'm just saying that 99 > times oout of 100, a well made mash beer is going to be better than a well > made kit beer. I know when I started brewing this was correct. I also know that as an all-grainer the methodology that I now use with kits is much more intensive. If you don't believe a well made extract beer can compete with an all grain, try it. Just use the same processes you would an all grain starting post sparge. Notice I used "extract", not "kit". Hops and adjunct's are your responsibility. > Oh yeah, kits are for wankers ; ) Kit's. . .maybe, extract beers. . .no. > (Luv ya college boy) Are you a mind reader? I just got the confirmation of registration for my first course today. :-) After working in the trade for four years a bachelour's probably wouln't hurt. > Cheers, > Dave. p.s. I am off prospecting (minerals not jobs :-) for the next couple of weeks, CC me if you reply please. Cheers, - -- Lance Levsen, Programmer Product Innovation PWGroup - S'toon. 477-3166 Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 16:42:10 -0700 From: Mea & Marvin <mcmc at loop.com> Subject: st. pat's clarified The valve was cheap and it happened to be from Korea. My desire for quality in manufactured items is my primary concern. Price and point of origin are totally secondary. To the three wackos who e-mailed me directly concerning this: All caps and physical threats do not a compelling argument make; if you truly become this upset over your misperceptions and imaginary threats to your accepted personal paradigms, I have this to offer: A. Get a life. B. Develop a sense of humor. C. Have a homebrew (in hard to reach areas repeated application may be necessary) Humor is the most important aspect, so please humor me here. There is nothing in this world worth getting this angry over (except maybe a stuck sparge). I have no agenda. Please see: http://groovehandle.com/gh2/political.html There are no black helicopters. I repeat, there are no black helicopters. Marv Lost Angeles "Ah, Mr. McGarrett...you think you are very smart...you make me laugh" Wo Fat- HAWAII 5-0 Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 15:56:29 +1100 From: Steve Lacey <stevel at sf.nsw.gov.au> Subject: Re: Lautering: Wort Does Not Flow Uphill John Palmer, you are a legend! No, let me emphasise that, you are a f***ing legend! That is one hella cool experiment you did with the dye spots. And I am so pissed off with you for thinking of that. Not that I should pretend that given enough time I would have. But I have occasionally wondered (and suspected what you confirmed) about that aspect of manifolds, and now I know. Cheers to you, John! Steve Lacey PS I've been off-line for a while because our server had a brain explosion and I somehow got uns*bscribed from HBD (probably something to do with bouncing emails?). Graham Sanders has been kind enough to send me the back issues and I'll get back to posters that responded to my posts eventually, inc. Warren (that's REVerand, Boooar, I said, Reverand) White and Graham "The SHED" Sanders himself. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 19:11:30 +1000 From: "Graham Sanders" <craftbrewer at cisnet.COM.AU> Subject: Thankyou's,Morality/mortality in yeast, Head in fish G'day All I'm sure there is a conpiracy going on out there. You lot just dont want me to finish my brew room. I can understand that. When i perfect my Lychie lambic, and longan Lambic, and flood the world with it, and send all other beers into extinction, you lot will have nothing to do. Better to keep me on this square box instead. Ah well, be it on your shoulders if you want me to occupy bandwidth - but I dont want to here any sour pusses rabbitting on about "he shouldn't say this or that" Oh speaking of complaints, one bright spark had to write ______ >>>>>"Even freezing it doesn't guarantee a high morality rate." Has anyone else had problems with immoral or amoral yeasts? Could it be that for proper reproduction oxygen isn't enough, we should also be sure to induce the proper moral atmosphere? Perhaps after oxygenating the wort, the yeast could benefit from a stern lecture... Did you mean "low mortality rate" Graham, or am I missing something here? tongue firmly in cheek,<<<<<<<<< ________ And keep that tongue firmly there. If I hear its been anywhere else i'll let SWMBO have her way (one way or another). Either that, or the morality police will become your mortality enforcers. Here in the north we are even more red-necked than any of you in the deep south over there. Hey over here 'Men are men, and women are just bloody pleased (and satisfied)'. The strict code of whats right goes for all species, and yeast is no exception. Even Phils drug induced yeast was almost shot at first site. And speaking of being shot, I was asked wasn't a 303 up the bum (for ferals) a bit of an overkill. Not really, if I can spray them out a bit its good fertilizer for the yard (better than grain and hops - and the dog wont get sick if it eats it.) Now a big THANKYOU to all those who have wrote to me, thanking myself about my little series on yeast storage. I think a lot of people forget what forums like this are about. The obvious lack of mateship that surfaces on occasion would put off many a newie. Offering an alternative opinion, go for it, character assasination, well I have that 303 to sort out you fellas, or should I offer you to our lastest killer, the head hunting cod. Shout Graham Sanders Oh- hows this for long odds. It turns out the head in the fish was from a guy who fell off a trawler 3 days ago. He was never found. But get this, it was the same boat 3 days later that caught the fish, at a totally different area on the Barrier Reef. Work that odds on that one. Perhaps the guy was trying to get back to his workmates, would have be owed a few days pay (ok enough bad jokes) Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 06:08:42 -0400 From: nap_aca_bh <nap_aca_bh at nwoca.org> Subject: Spent-grain Bread My wife (a fantastic cook) has used spent grain in her bread recipies for some time. Her recommendations: 1) Run the grain through a food processor to break up the larger kernals. 2) Measure out 1 cup portions and store in the freezer. 3) Substitute 1 cup of grain for 1 cup of flour in a standard 2 loaf batch. 4) Best with darker bread recipes ... wheat, rye, etc. Swedish Rye is her flagship .... an original passed down from an old Swedish lady (rest her soul) from church. If interested in recipes or tips contact LeAnn at phe_aca_lh at nwoca.org. Bob Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 06:20:22 -0400 From: Rick Pauly <flp2m at unix.mail.virginia.edu> Subject: RE:counter-flow cooling I used to use a pre-chiller like Pete describes when I used an immersion chiller. I would hold on to the copper tube that fed the coil to the kettle so I could stir the kettle coil. What I found out was this coil that should have been ice cold was not, unless I also stirred the pre-chiller coil in the ice bucket. The water moving through the prechiller is creating a local warmer zone right next to the copper pipe and so it does not get as cold as ice. The water in the ice bucket most be stirred constantly for ice cold water to stay in contact with the pre-chiller coil. Rick Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 20:40:38 +1000 From: "Phil & Jill Yates" <yates at acenet.com.au> Subject: Homebrewers Do Odd Things I was relating this story recently to Jeff Renner and it occurred to me that someone else might get a laugh out of it. Being generally considered to be on the "odd side", I saw nothing unusual in what I did. A year or so ago I was overnighting in Perth and had with me a couple of Wyeast packs I had bought in Adelaide. Trying to keep them cool, I put them in the bar fridge in my room. This now presented the real probability that I would forget to collect them when I checked out early the next morning. So I stuck one of my flying boots in the fridge so I could not leave without them (unless of course, I checked out with only one boot on!) When "Room Service" came to check on things and top up the fridge if necessary, I was on the phone and forgot I had my boot in the fridge. The stunned look on the chap's face (when he found my boot in the fridge) was classic. The only explanation I could offer him was : "Hey, I'm a homebrewer"!! "We do this sort of thing"! At that particular hotel, they have looked at me oddly ever since! Cheers Phil Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 06:57:46 -0400 From: "Steve" <stjones1 at chartertn.net> Subject: RE: European Ale Yeast Pete wrote "... has anyone else seen particularly fast ferments with 1338 European ale yeast at pretty normal ale temps? Or did it drop prematurely from cold or something else?" I just used this yeast for the first time a month or so ago. I had a smak-pak that was about 20 months old, but I thought I'd give it a try anyway. I popped it, and it swelled up to maximum in 4 days. I made a 1 gallon starter and pitched the slurry into 10 gallons of 1.043 dunkelweiss. I fermented in my cold box at about 64F and in 3 days the gravity was 1.012. It never did have more than about 2 inches of krausen on top. In 3 more days it was at 1.010 and I considered it finished. I racked to secondary and it is now in the 2nd week of 'lagering' at 45F. Steve Jones State of Franklin Homebrewers Johnson City, TN http://users.chartertn.net/franklinbrew Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 07:34:41 -0400 From: DeVeaux Gauger <dvx at mich.com> Subject: label removal Thanks to everyone who responded to my inquiry as to removing labels from beer bottles. Here is the final tally: Ammonia: 7 Bleach: 7 TSP: 4 Caustic Soda: 1 Dishwasher detergent/B-Brite: 8 Straight A: 1 Laundry detergent: 1 I'll try them all, but not at the same time!! Thanks again! Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 13:53:30 +0200 From: "Dr. Pivo" <dp at pivo.w.se> Subject: acetone revisited and fixing foul flavours. Thought I'd avoid that fine HBD tradition of "Yes, it is.", "No, it isn't.", and broach an entirely new subject. I recently wrote about shifting from brewing complacency to chaos, as I moved into temporary quarters, and a resultant brew that reeked and tasted of acetone. I also mentioned that "krauzening" this turned it into an at least acceptable beer. Taking a bold step here, and saying that I have spent the last many years of whatever cellar acumen I have, in "fine tuning" flavours, I had really quite forgotten what one does with a "bomb". Having for the first time in quite a while produced a real "loo-loo", it reminded me that this is not an entirely unimportant issue, particularly for the beginner. Most home brewing books have a "trouble shooting" section, where there are off flavours, aromas, and appearances described, what the likely cause is, and how to avoid it next time. This is all well and good, and the most important aspect of the art (not repeating the same mistake), but does nothing to assuage the fact that you are now sitting there with an entire batch that would "scare buzzards off a gut wagon". I bounced my head back and forth between the palms of my hands to see if I could pass on some of the tricks I've picked up over the years, and it came out kind of organized thus: 1) Scrubbing 2) Clearing 3) Krauzening 4) Hop Filtering, and 5) Stewing 1) Scrubbing: Ah yes, I can see you shying away from the very word, and images of pots and pans running through your head, and truly one does sometimes think one spends more time "cleaning things" than messing with the actual beer components. Fortunately this has nothing to do with steel wool, but simply means that the CO2 that bubbles out of your beer will carry "volatile" things with it. If there is any part of your beer that you can smell, you can say that it is "volatile", and if it doesn't smell nice, it can probably be "scrubbed". One way of doing this is with the faithful "corny" and a CO2 source. Simply switch the connect on your gas, so you can bubble into the "out" line, and fire away. You can continually hold the safety valve open or open it at intervals. I kind of prefer the latter so I can "whiff check" what's coming out, and not get my snout so satiated that I can't detect any longer. Some odours will be intimately associated with the yeast themselves, and the above method doesn't work very effectively, as you are blowing them around creating more. With these, you can do a surprisingly effective scrub by just pulling the pressure off the keg. The larger the head space in the keg the more effective it will be. Let it sit a day and then draw a glass again. It is continually surprising how this little thing will change the aromatic character of your beer. Pull off whatever pressure has built up, and then charge the head space with enough CO2 to take you back to your original carbonation, and you will have quite a different beer. I might mention that you will lose even volatile things that you might want to keep. Hop aromatics and diacetyls are two things that come to mind that will also be reduced by scrubbing. 2) Clearing: If the yeast themselves are the culprits of foulness, simply racking from them can do a lot. "Chill Shocking" (dropping the temp rapidly and greatly) will do a lot towards putting them on the bottom before racking. Sometimes both clearing and scrubbing work well together, and I would think "autolysis" would be a good object to try this on. 3) Krauzening: A truly lovely technique in many situations. It never ceases to amaze me, how the relatively small portion of beer (10 percent is fine) dominates the flavour of the combination. This is a two way street, so if you have a beer you are quite happy with, you can easily turn it into crud by krauzening it with a "bomb". 4) Hop Filtering: This is a pretty cute trick, and essentially a "hop back", just done with finished beer. I go on rather pointlessly about this at length at http://www.bodensatz.com/homebrew/columns/jirvine/salvage.html so don't think I need to say any more here. 5) Stewing: Some beers are just beyond repair, and then if you are a miserly bugger like myself, that hates throwing things away, you might want to learn some foods to cook with them... I kind of prefer "musty" flavours in stews based on beer... wild game, Norwegian goat cheese... that kind of stuff. Sometimes you just have to give up. I just KNOW what some of you are thinking: "Why not distill the stuff?". If you are planning on using the result for anything other than shoe polish remover, I'd advise against it.... it tastes just horrible.... ..... Now, if you forget to put the hops in the beer, distill the finished fermented product, dilute it back to about 45 percent alcohol, and store it in oak, THAT'S quite another story. Dr. Pivo Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 08:18:01 -0400 From: "Steve Bireley" <sbireley at renex.com> Subject: 10 Gal Fermenters We use Sankey kegs for fermenters with great success. You can sterilize them with heat, they are easy to clean, you can ferment 12 Gallons in them, and they are cheap. Go to your local brewery and buy damaged kegs that won't go through keg cleaner any more. Steve Bireley Northern VA Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 12:25:28 +0000 From: "A. J." <ajdel at mindspring.com> Subject: Octyl Alcohol/OP For Louis: To paraphrase Agatha Christie: You have seen, but you have not observed! The octyl alcohol is there to collapse the foam so you can measure up the 10 mL accurately. As soon as that stuff hits the beer, the foam is collapsed utterly and completely so that while you still have to deal with bubbles in the pipet at least you don't have foam obscuring the meniscus. The octyl alcohol also prevents foam from forming when the tube is shaken though I don't think this is as big a deal. Alcohol is great for collapsing beer foam. I'm sure in alcohol determination Louis has prayed for the reflux of alcohol to start in time to keep foam from climbing into his Kjeldahl adapter. Hexyl alcohol is used to collapse foam in SO2 determination. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mention of Agatha reminds me: I was in her stomping grounds last week and found the Old Peculier well, peculiar. It seems to be a shadow of the beer of as little as a year ago. Not as richly flavorful nor as smooth and robust on the tongue. I'd score it 38 ibut remember it as a 48 from a year ago. Consultation with one of the locals says the bean counters have beaten down the brewers yet again. Has anyone else gotten this impression or is it my imagination? The whole experience was colored by the fact that the first pint I was given was turned and I had to go to another pub. By this time the gain was turned all the way up. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 08:57:22 -0400 From: RobertJ <pbsys at pbsbeer.com> Subject: Re; Counter-Flow Cooling Efficiency From: "Peter Zien" <PZ.JDZINC at worldnet.att.net> asks My counter-flow wort chiller has a 1/2" inner diameter wort inflow/outflow and usually cools 5 gallons of wort in 10 minutes to within 4 degrees F of the source water. With the summer source water temperature in the mid-80F's, I employ an immersion chiller in an ice- bucket to pre-cool the source water prior to its flowing through the counter-flow chiller. The source water is run at high through the system, and the wort out-flow is restricted some by clamp to increase the time the wort spends within the cooling coils. Although the temperature of the source water is in the mid-50F's, the wort is only cooled to 76F. Why is my wort cooling efficiency so poor when employing an ice-bucket and immersion chiller to pre-cool the source water? As the cooling water gets colder, if you want your wort to approach the cooling water temperature you will have to "exchange" more BTUS than with when you have a higher cooling water temp. There is a limit to the amount of heat that can be exchanged by a given design. With your chiller, to get to a lower wort temperature you will have to; further lower cooling water temp, slow wort flow and increase cooling water flow. or increase the length (surface area of your chiller) Bob Precision Brewing Systems URL http://pbsbeer.com Manufacturer of 3 Vessel Brew Systems, HERMS(tm), SS Brew Kettles, SS hopback and the MAXIchiller Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 09:40:19 -0400 From: Dan Listermann <72723.1707 at compuserve.com> Subject: Warm Water Counterflow Chilling <Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 10:11:04 -0700 From: "Peter Zien" <PZ.JDZINC at worldnet.att.net> Subject: Counter-Flow Cooling Efficiency My counter-flow wort chiller has a 1/2" inner diameter wort inflow/outflow and usually cools 5 gallons of wort in 10 minutes to within 4 degrees F of the source water. With the summer source water temperature in the mid-80F's, I employ an immersion chiller in an ice- bucket to pre-cool the source water prior to its flowing through the counter-flow chiller. The source water is run at high through the system, and the wort out-flow is restricted some by clamp to increase the time the wort spends within the cooling coils. Although the temperature of the source water is in the mid-50F's, the wort is only cooled to 76F. Why is my wort cooling efficiency so poor when employing an ice-bucket and immersion chiller to pre-cool the source water?> It is far more efficient to directly cool the wort with the ice rather than first cool water that will be used to cool the wort. Take you immersion chiller and attanch it to the out flow of your counter flow chiller. Put the immersion chiller in the ice bath and use it as a post chiller or secondary chiller. This is how commercial breweries cool wort. They don't waste refrigerated water removing the bulk of the BTUs. They save the cooled water to get the last and hardest BTUs out. Dan Listermann dan at listermann.com Check out our new E-tail site at listermann.com! Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 10:17:51 -0400 From: Eli Daniel <edaniel at epesi.com> Subject: RE: kettle fitting Bjorn asks about using a copper tupe with a stainless steel scrubby thing (SSST) as a filter for hops on the end. That's what I originally had in by brewpot, and it got clogged up when I tried to use pellet hops. I found that using an aluminum mesh sock (originally designed as a lint trap for a washing machine outtake hose) instead of the SSST made a huge difference, I guess just because the holes are bigger and there's more surface area. HTH. Eli Daniel Somerville, MA Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 08:09:12 -0700 From: John_E_Schnupp at amat.com Subject: re: Lautering: Wort Does Not Flow Uphill <snip> a bunch of good stuff From: John Palmer <jjpalmer at gte.net> I saw the photos from your previous experiment. This one sounds interesting too. I might have asked this back at your other test but can't remember. Have you investigated flow thru a false bottom. I use a 10 gal Gott with a false bottom. I have a single pick-up in the center of the false bottom with the opening as close to the bottom as possible (about 1/8"). This most recent test almost makes me think that a manifold might be the best pick-up, even under a false bottom. John Schnupp, N3CNL Dirty Laundry Homebrewery Georgia, VT 95 XLH 1200 Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 08:46:30 -0800 From: Project One <project1 at pond.net> Subject: OK, water gurus... I finally got around to having my western Oregon well water analyzed, and I'd really appreciate any help in figuring out what it means. Following is the info the water test co. gave me: Arsenic - ND Nitrate - ND Conductivity - 234 uhmos/cm Hardness - 101 mg/l Iron - .25 mg/l pH - 7.3 Total Dissolved Solids - 164 mg/l Turbidity - .84 NTU That's all the relevant (?) stuff. Can someone help me figure out what kind of mineral concentrations are in here? Thanks a lot, ---------->Denny Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 17:40:14 +0100 From: "Nigel Porter" <nigel at sparger.co.uk> Subject: St Pats Only ever ordered once from St Pats (an aeration stone that you can't seem to buy in UK) via the web site. I had exactly what I wanted, with less shipping cost than I expected waiting on my doorstep about a week later. Not bad for a trip across most of the US & the Atlantic - quicker than I can usually get things from mainland Europe. Only a one off order, but I was impressed. Nigel Guildford, UK Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 15:37:30 -0400 From: MAB <mabrooks at erols.com> Subject: Chloramine removal Some recent speculation on removal of chloramine by Jeff R. and A.J. : >dichloramine and trichloramine are indeed very volatile Actually dichloramine is not very volatile at all. >and that is to add more chlorine! This will convert the monochloroamines >to di- and tri-, which will gas off. I don't know how much you'd need to >add, but it wouldn't be much, as we're talking about a few ppms of the >amines. I also don't know how practical this would be compared to AJ's >other suggested methods. A.J. >I tried this in doing the research for the BT article and found that it worked >quite well for water I chloraminated myself but did not seem to work so well >for the chloramine in Fairfax County water. I believe A.J is experiencing the effect of organochloramines vs. a pure nitrogen ammonia source. The differences he is seeing are likely related to the organochloramine concentration in the Fairfax County water suply. Organochloramines are very persistent and can not be differentiated from dichloramines made with a pure ammonia source (lab grade ammonium chloride). I have to say that this proposed method (adding more chlorine to a chloraminated water) is futile as far as trying to remove chloramines. First off, it is extremely difficult to form NCl3 (Nitrogen Trichloride). Conditions which favor its formation are low pH (<6.0, store bought bleach has a very high pH), hence adding Chlorox would prevent the pH from dropping, in fact it raises the pH. NCl3 is formed only sparingly (at pH's above 7.0) by overchlorinating,(i.e. very high chlorine to ammonia dose ratios - 12:1 - 14:1). At these high dose ratios one would just form more free chlorine. There is a point (its called "Breakpoint" chlorination) at which the dose ratio of chlorine to ammonia will cause any ammonia present to convert to nitrogen gas (hence, removing most all of the ammonia from the water), almost all of the chlorine used to reach this "Breakpoint" is also removed, as it is converted to HCl. Breakpoint occurs at a ratio of 7.6:1 chlorine to ammonia (in practice the ratio could be in upwards of 8-9:1 Cl2 : NH4). After you reach the "Breakpoint" any additional chlorine you add to the water becomes free chlorine as there is no ammonia left to combine with. Breakpoint chlorination is not as simple as it may sound, it requires very accurate analytical equipment to determine levels of both ammonia and chlorine. Trichloramine/Nitrogen Trichloride/NCL3 is very volatile, Dichloramine is not. In water, dichloramine is persistent only in the presence of free chlorine, otherwise, it reverts to monochloramine (depending on the pH). As I stated a few days ago, it is my opinion that GAC is the most effective and easiest way to remove chlorine/chloramines from brew water. A GAC system can be made with a piece of 3-4" PVC, some end caps, some filter floss and bulkhead fittings (be sure to use the correct flow rate). A camden tablet will work as well! Matt B. Northern VA. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 12:51:34 -0700 (PDT) From: Beaverplt <beaverplt at yahoo.com> Subject: Chris Cooper's $.02 AMEN to everything you said Mr. Cooper. In particular I applaud your statements on Mr Papazian and personal attacks. I cut my brewing teeth using "Joy" and feel I learned a ton of info from him. And that is why I receive this post, TO LEARN. I fail to understand why, after we've learned something from someone and improved on it, we have to tear down that person. Regarding newbies. I consider myself a newbie in that there is so much I don't understand yet. At times some of the posts intimidate me, but I have to applaud all the members of this group. I have never seen a "newbie" picked on for lack of knowledge. I hope any people like myself aren't afraid to post for fear of looking stupid. A wise man once asked the question "What would you do if you didn't fear?" I think the answer is learn. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere! http://mail.yahoo.com/ Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 16:10:38 -0400 From: Aaron Perry <vspbcb at earthlink.net> Subject: CP Philling Something to ponder, I Counter Pressure Philed (No aphiliation, GREAT gadget though!) my last batch. I racked straight from the primary to a keg, attached a special lid with an airlock affixed, and carried out the secondary there. After the secondary period I put on a sealing lid and force carbonated by shake method. I Waited a day, It was still a bit cloudy, so I thougt....If I get a little yeast in the bottom, won't that help the beer's stability and shelf life, just like bottle conditioning? Away I wenta philling. After a day in the fridge, the bottles were nice and clear. There is just a bit of yeast sediment, not unlike that of an SNPA. So, what do you think? Will the yeast help stability? Is it just a decoration? It's much more elegant than the slurry at the bottom of a bottle conditioned beer! I realize it kind of defeats the idea of CP filling to get bright bottled beer but.... As far as serious yeast culturing is concerned, I'm ready to make the leap. My onl concern is "lab" space. What is the checklist to make sure a room in a normal house is clean enough to play with yeast in a more advanced manner? TIA AP Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 09/04/00, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96