---

	FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
		Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org


***************************************************************
       THIS YEAR'S HOME BREW DIGEST BROUGHT TO YOU BY: 

          Northern  Brewer, Ltd. Home Brew Supplies
        http://www.northernbrewer.com  1-800-681-2739

    Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********


Contents:
  Keg cutting (Rscholz)
  brewing resolutions (JPullum127)
  Cooks/Recipes (cmmundt)
  RE: undermodified malt ("Brian Lundeen")
  Subject: danstar london = no more?? ("Houseman, David L")
  Re: CACA comments requested.... (Jeff Renner)
  Stainless v Copper (chillers) (Headduck)
  more Gott bulkhead fitting answers ("Kensler, Paul")
  Malt Liquor Taste Test 2000 ("Kensler, Paul")
  Kraeusening ("Lyga, Daniel M.")
  Re: Ratio of DME to water for yeast starter (Demonick)
  Cutting tops out of Kegs ("Steve")
  Oatmeal stout: no kraeusen (Demonick)
  Cleaning CF chillers (Brad Miller)
  milds and browns--Danstar London (Vachom)
  Re: danstar london = no more?? (Matthew Arnold)
  Re: Low gravity session bitter (Bill Riel)
  Re: Cutting keg Tops (Wkoucky)
  re: CACA question (Chris Campagna)
  Re: Brewing Techniques (BT) And Cash Owed (Ken Miller)
  zymurgy (Jim Liddil)
  Re: (Some Guy)
  Another bulkhead idea (Mark Kempisty)
  term krausening  used in wrong context ("Hubert Hanghofer")
  Volume of a tube ("Spies, Jay")
  Stupid beer tricks ("Steve")
  Re: Kraeusening (Some Guy)
  Re: Ratio of DME to water for starter (Will Fields)


* 
* 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: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 08:18:52 EDT
From: Rscholz at aol.com
Subject: Keg cutting

Steve Hill replying to Mark Ellis about how to cut kegs open and not get a 
rusted and/or jagged edge. 
Writes:
>
I have seen it done several different ways. 
<snip>
I have seen people use hacksaws. 
<snip>
buying a metal sanding disk and attaching it to my drill. ROCK AND ROLL!!!
Just make small round cuts with the edge of the blade, and when the top is 
cut out, 
use the sides of the disk to sand the edges of the keg. 
<snip>
The newly cut edges need time to passivate with the air to create its 
"stainless" protective barrier.
After that period of time, you can party like a rock star!!! 
>


With Sabco http//:www.kegs.com selling Kegs with perfect tops and drains 
professionally welded, 
cleaned and polished for only $121 US. I see no reason to search down clean 
kegs, buy, rent, beg, 
or steal the tools to hack at the stainless steel and try to drill and weld a 
drain coupling. 
I do not know about the rest of you, but even with finding cheap kegs and 
tools, the time factor makes 
the few extra bucks worth the professional job. 
- -----------------------------------
Richard L Scholz
Broklyn, NY


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 08:58:26 EDT
From: JPullum127 at aol.com
Subject: brewing resolutions

well i just brewed the 1st batch of the season wed night,(a  basic moderatly 
hopped amber ale) and while it was brewing decided a new season required some 
new years resolutions. so........1. i will brew a big beer this year.2. i 
will brew a delicate subtle beer this year3. i will try hop varieties i've 
never used before4. i will learn and use a method for yeast storage and 
propagation5. i will try a decoctation mash  and see what all the fuss is 
about.6 and finally i will continue to invite new aquaintences to a brew 
sessionand offer help in learning to brew.  


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 09:06:17 -0400
From: cmmundt at AircraftBraking.com
Subject: Cooks/Recipes

Jeff Rehner wrote in HBD#3463

     I can even sup as I cook dinner (I'll bet that lots of us are cooks -
     it goes with brewing) without worrying about how (if?) dinner will
     turn out.

     I do most of the cooking for me and SWHMBCF (cooked for) and I am
always looking for some new recipes that look interesting.  This brings me
to the question:  What are some of the favorite cooking recipes of the HBD
readers involving their own brew.  There are some obvious choices,
beer&cheese soup and boiling bratwursts in beer, but I would like to see
some unusual recipes.  I have seen the book that details a bunch of cooking
recipes that involve beer, but I think the brewers here have their own
favorites. I think it would be interesting to see what styles of beer are
most frequently used in cooking.  I have used my ESB as base for a light
cream sauce for chicken but I am still trying to find a good idea for my
Imperial Stout.

     I would check the archives, but my company has put up a filter that
does not allow brewing literature, but we are working on it.  There are a
few of us here that brew so we are trying to get it changed.  So, please
forgive me if this has been asked previously.

Chad Mundt
cmmundt at aircraftbraking.com



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 08:16:59 -0500
From: "Brian Lundeen" <blundeen at rrc.mb.ca>
Subject: RE: undermodified malt

Paul Claassen, aka the Teutonic Brewer, writes:

> And beware the Weissheimer Pils malt -- as I
> recently learned
> to my chagrin, Weissheimer has been shipping some
> undermodified Pils malt
> to America,

Paul, you shouldn't have said anything. Now Lynne at St Pat's will snap up
the exclusive distribution rights for North America. ;-)

OK, it's a straight category 5, but hey, now that it's cat-swinging season
down under, and with Graham being kicked off his ISP for on-line luring of
tourists out to his croc-infested billabong (you really didn't think we
would buy that going out of business story, did you?), it's been pretty
quiet around here.

Just no more puns.

Cheers,
Brian



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 09:29:06 -0400
From: "Houseman, David L" <David.Houseman at unisys.com>
Subject: Subject: danstar london = no more??

Pete Czerpak asks about Danstar London yeast's demise.  I've been brewing
ales with the four Danstar yeasts for over a year and find them great.
Clean fermentations (unlike the dry yeasts of several years ago) and most
convenient when you want to brew at the last minute.  I've also been
awaiting the introduction of their dried lager yeasts as Rob had forecast
over a year ago.  What's up with those as well?  

Dave



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 09:43:30 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu>
Subject: Re: CACA comments requested....

"dr smith" <drsmithhm at hotmail.com> writes about his planned classic 
American cream ale (CACA)

>I am planning on the following recipe for this weekend:
>
>	8lbs Breiss 6 row malt(2.2L)
>	2lbs C&B flaked maize
>	0.7oz Cluster at 9.0% - 60min.
>	1.0oz Saaz at 3.7% - knockout.
>	Danstar Nottingham Yeast
>
>For the mash, I am uncertain if I need to attempt a protein
>rest and what it would accomplish.  How might the brew turn out
>differently if I ignore a protein rest?  I understand it would
>have been used for efficiency and clarity with undermodified
>malts, but I'm not certain if it would really benefit the
>flavor.

A protein rest is unnecessary and would have no effect on the flavor 
in any case, only protein levels, which could affect mouth feel, body 
and foam stability, either adversely or positively depending on how 
it was done.  I'd just do a straight infusion mash at 153F or so. 
I'd also suggest you consider a slightly less attenuating yeast than 
Nottingham if you like a creamier result than Nottingham gives. 
Windsor would be a good choice, I think.

>What's the guidelines in this style for aroma hops?  I've always
>just thrown an ounce at knockout for aroma and the beer has been
>good, but I'm not certain if that would be 'to style' for this
>recipe.

I'd suggest using a half ounce as first wort hopping and the balance at T-10.

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, 27 Oct 2000 09:47:01 EDT
From: Headduck at aol.com
Subject: Stainless v Copper (chillers)

Wayne writes:

<< I also have a source of stainless steel tubing (free) and was exploring 
the 
 possibilities of a SS counter flow chiller.
 
 Are you saying that a 50 ft.stainless steel chiller will be 1/26th as 
 efficient as a copper chiller of the same size? How does this relate to real 
 time cooling, from boiling to pitching temps?
  >>
Not exactly.  Most of the heat transfer going on is convection.  It will be 
the same for stainless or copper.  Also (as someone pointed out off list) the 
stainless will likely be much thinner than the copper.  This will affect the 
rate of conduction through the material.

If the stainless steel is free, by all means try it and report your results 
back.  I am sure that it will chill your wort.  Usually, however, stainless 
is much more expensive than copper.  Making copper the better choice because 
of heat transfer properties and cost analysis. <<don't I sound just like an 
engineer>>  I'm working on that!!

good brewing,
Joe Yoder
Brewer / Engineer


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 08:53:23 -0500
From: "Kensler, Paul" <Paul.Kensler at Cyberstar.com>
Subject: more Gott bulkhead fitting answers

Don Lake said:  "The suggestion on using minikeg bungs is excellent if your
appliance is 1/4".  I need something that can accommodate a 1/2"."

That's easy!  I was the one who suggested the minikeg bungs in the first
place; I didn't elaborate in my first post, but my Gott actually has a few
more features too...
1.	I have a standard 1/2" thermometer installed in the side of the
cooler, just a few inches above the ball valve.
2.	I have an inlet bulkhead fitting at the top of the cooler, just
under where the top screws in for incoming sparge water.
Both of these use the same 3"-4" long 1/4" brass pipe nipples - here's how I
did it:

You will notice that where you replaced the original plastic spigot, the
cooler wall is very thin, so you only need one minikeg bung.  Up in the main
part of the cooler wall, the wall is much thicker so you will need two bungs
per hole.  This actually works out better, because the upper two fittings
are rock solid.  The bottom one does wiggle a bit.  
Drill the hole where you want the bulkhead fitting to go, using a hole saw
or forstner bit.  A 7/8" hole will work, but I went with 13/16" because
that's what I had handy that day.  Be sure to drill the hole straight
through, so the holes in your bungpieces will line up.  Insert one bungpiece
on the inside, and one on the outside (discard the inner plastic plugs).  If
you use a 13/16" hole, you will most likely need to push the bungpiece in by
hand as far as it will go, and finish it off with a hammer or mallet.
	Shove the brass pipe nipple through.  It's a tight fit and there is
a lot of friction, so I used a spare block of wood, and put the wood on the
(the cooler was on its side, pipe nipple up).  Make sure the nipple is going
through the hole of the bungpiece on the far side of the cooler wall,
otherwise you'll just shove out the bungpiece.

For the thermometer, just get a simple 1/4" F to 1/2" F adapter.  The 1/4"
side of the adapter screws in to the pipe nipple, and the thermometer screws
in to the 1/2" side of the adapter.  A little Teflon tape, and you can hand
tighten this without leaks.  The pipe nipple rotates in the bung, so you can
tighten the thermometer and then turn it some more so that it is right-side
up.  One thing, you will need a thermometer with a 6" probe - I don't think
a 4" probe will stick out into the mash enough, but I didn't try it so I
could be wrong.  I got my thermometer from Beer, Beer and More Beer (NA,
YYY).  If you need to take your thermometer out, a cheap brass 1/4" pipe cap
on the inside or outside of the pipe nipple will cap off the hole.

For the sparge valve, it works just like the original ball valve replacement
I described. except I added an additional 90 degree elbow on the inside.  So
the description of the hardware, starting from the outside, goes like this
(all parts are 1/4"):  incoming vinyl tubing, hose barb, ball valve, pipe
nipple, 90 degree elbow hose barb, outgoing vinyl tubing - I just coil this
on top of the mash.  This works great, it allows me to finely regulate the
incoming sparge water while still keeping the lid on my cooler to contain
steam and reduce heat loss.

The things I like about all this is that all the parts are relatively cheap
and easily available from a hardware store, no soldering is required, and
all the fittings are completely leak-free.  It all comes apart easily for
cleaning, but the only part I ever take off when cleaning is the thermometer
 - mash gunk gets up inside the pipe nipple and I need to unscrew the
thermometer to run some water through.

I hope this helps, I'd be happy to answer any questions.


Paul Kensler
Gaithersburg, MD


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 09:12:24 -0500
From: "Kensler, Paul" <Paul.Kensler at Cyberstar.com>
Subject: Malt Liquor Taste Test 2000

Thought some of you might get a kick out of this - that's right, it's a Malt
Liquor Taste Test.  Obviously written by a wine snob, this half-serious
attempt at reviewing several popular malt liquors was pretty funny (at least
to me, but then again I think stepping on a rake is funny).

PC alert:  May be slightly offensive to some readers due to...  ah... a few
"stereotypical" depictments.  No affiliation, YYY.

http://www.dailyradar.com/features/directhit_feature_page_1701_1.html
<http://www.dailyradar.com/features/directhit_feature_page_1701_1.html> 


Paul Kensler
Gaithersburg, MD


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 10:15:22 -0400
From: "Lyga, Daniel M." <lygadm at pweh.com>
Subject: Kraeusening


Hello all.

	I've been reading the kraeusening thread with interest.  As most
people are recounting their methods of doing so with apparent ease, I was
wondering of any down-side to using this method to carbonate beer.  Pat
chimes in that he (explicitly) kraeusens his hefeweizens - (why) not other
styles?

	Does the gravity of different wort tend to make the carbonation
level calculation into a 5 gallon batch too difficult?  too unpredictable?
 - or at least more difficult then using corn sugar?


Dan Lyga
Harwinton, CT.


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 07:45:32 -0700
From: Demonick <demonick at zgi.com>
Subject: Re: Ratio of DME to water for yeast starter

From: "Gordon and Sue Ludlow" <ludlow at aa.net>

>I've been making my yeast starters much too thick and never thought to
>take a hydrometer reading. <snip>
>OK, so here's the question.  Which, if any, of these will give me a 
>gravity of 1.025?

I think that most will agree that a starter gravity of 1.025
is much too low.  You would never brew a beer with this low a
gravity, and a starter should be close to your targer gravity.

A volume measurement is not reliable.  Use weight.  I use 200
grams of light or extra-light DME in 1700 ml water.  This yields
a gravity of 1.040-1.045.  28.35 grams/ounce and 946 ml/quart.

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



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 11:03:49 -0400
From: "Steve" <stjones1 at chartertn.net>
Subject: Cutting tops out of Kegs


Mark asked about cutting the tops out of kegs.

I have cut the tops out of about 10 kegs by now. Once other hb'ers saw
my kegs they asked me to help them cut theirs out.

I have a cheap air powered cutoff tool (aka a die grinder). I buy some 2
or 3 inch diameter (1/16" thick) fiber abrasive disks at the flea market
for 50 cents each, and made a little wooden jig that fits into the top
port of a Sanke Keg. I clamp the die grinder to the jig so that the
abrasive disk is at the correct location for the size hole I want to
cut, and it will rotate around the keg in a perfect circle just like a
compass. I made my tops out of 1/4" acrylic with a wooden knob in the
center that is fastened with an SS screw.

I run the disk back and forth over about 4-6 inches of length until it
just breaks thru, then move on to the next 4-6 inches. When I get about
halfway around, I leave a small part connected for support as I cut thru
the second half. I do grind most of the way thru this part, just leaving
a little of the thickness left. Once I get all the way around, I can
then insert a screwdriver or some other flat item into the slot to
support the top while I go back to cut thru the small connector. I can
get halfway thru the second keg before the disk is worn down enough to
replace it. The key is to let the disk just penetrate thru the keg
wall - don't let it get too deep into the cut, because it will bind and
wear out much quicker.

I'm sure you could do the same with a dremel tool, but I think the air
tool would be quicker. It takes about 30-40 minutes for me to cut out
the top, and it only needs a little touchup with some emery cloth to
smooth out the edge.

Hope this helps.

Steve Jones
State of Franklin Homebrewers
Johnson City, TN
http://users.chartertn.net/franklinbrew





Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 08:06:14 -0700
From: Demonick <demonick at zgi.com>
Subject: Oatmeal stout: no kraeusen


I have an Oatmeal Stout bubbling away in the basement.  Here's
the grain bill:

8.5 lbs English pale             2 ounce EKG for 60 minutes
1.5 lbs Quaker quick oats        1 ounce EKG for 30 minutes
1.5 lbs roast barley 500L
0.5 lb  caramunich 135L
0.5 lb  crystal 135L
0.5 lb  chocolate malt

OG: 6 gallons  at  1.059 (A little high - better extraction than I had
    anticipated) 

Yeast: Wyeast 1968 with a 2 quart starter, grown aerobically,
       then refrigerated, and decanted prior to pitching (I am a 
       yeast abuser).  Lag time: 4 hours.

Wort tasted VERY good.  Sparge stuck once, and was easily restarted 
by stirring up the goo that was caked on the false bottom, and 
re-establishing the grain bed a little less aggressively.

There is no kraeusen on the surface of the fermenting wort.  The
contents are swirling and the airlock is chugging - everything looks
entirely normal yet there is only a thin layer 1/4-1/2" of large 
bubbled foam on the surface. 

Has anyone else seen this?  Could it be the lipids from the oats
are inhibiting fine bubble formation?  Also, there was NO hot break.
My procedure is to add irish moss for the last 30 minutes of the 
boil and I always get a great hot break.  This time nothing.  After
chilling there was very little glop left in the kettle.  Usually I
have a pint of more of dirty-scrambled-egg looking coagulated protein
left behind.  This time less than a cup.  

Very little cold break too, though it's hard to see with the dark wort.

How might this bode for the head formation and retention properties of the
final beer?

Thanks,

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



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 08:38:09 -0800
From: Brad Miller <millerb at targen.com>
Subject: Cleaning CF chillers

	I've seen a lot of post recently about cleaning CF chillers 
where people were saying to just flush them with water and then use 
idophor.  What nobody ever mentioned was using a caustic on them.  If 
you just flush you'll get out most of the crap but you will start to 
get protein build up too.  Think about your beer lines or kettle.  If 
you don't believe me, try a caustic on it and see how much faster 
your flow rates are.  Then you can flush with idophor and it will 
work better than with all that other crap in there.

Brad  (Chillin' like Bob Dillon)


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 10:23:30 -0500
From: Vachom <MVachow at newman.k12.la.us>
Subject: milds and browns--Danstar London

Like Jeff Renner, I'm also fired up lately about low gravity British session
beers--for all the reasons Jeff mentions (short mash tun to mug time, less
danger of operating the Cuisinart while imbibing, pleasantly robust flavor
relative to gravity).  I'm also fired up about dry yeasts lately.  Thus, I
mourn the passing of Danstar London, an excellent strain for these low
gravity styles.  I split a recent batch of brown, fermented half on Safale
S-04, half on Danstar Nottingham.  Grain bill was 80% 2-row, 6% each of 40L
crystal, 80L crystal and Belgian cara-pils, and a half handful of chocolate
malt.  OG 1.040, FG 1.008.  25 IBU Fuggles, 50% bittering, 25% flavor, 25%
aroma.  I tapped these kegs a day short of two weeks from the brew session.
The Safale half has a much more appealing fruity character, but the
Nottingham half's tasty too.  The notes to myself for the next batch are to
replace the cara-pils with flaked barley.  The Safale batch, in particular,
could use a little more body.  I'm so fired up about this beer that I may
just brew it again for the Thanksgiving table.

Mike
New Orleans, LA


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 11:04:00 -0500
From: Matthew Arnold <revmra at iname.com>
Subject: Re: danstar london = no more??

On Fri, 27 Oct 2000 00:15:07 -0400, you wrote:

>Heard (saw) that Danstar London may be dropped from the Danstar dry yeast
>line-up.  Its not listed on their website anymore.  Is this the case -
>confirm or deny?  Its certainly not my favorite or house yeast.  Just hate
>to lose more of the good dry yeasts to the wind.

I hope that this is incorrect. Danstar London has been my favorite dry yeast.
What's the word, Jethro?

Matt
- -----
Webmaster, Green Bay Rackers Homebrewers' Club
http://www.rackers.org        info at rackers.org


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 09:31:55 -0700
From: Bill Riel <bill.riel at home.com>
Subject: Re: Low gravity session bitter

Jeff Renner writes about a low gravity session bitter (OG 1.034):

> I just tapped a nine day old bitter that is the lowest gravity I've
> ever made (1.034), and yet it has plenty of flavor, as long as you
> don't think Old Peculier or anything like that.  I wanted to see how
> low I could go without getting something that is watery.  I don't
> think I'll push it past this.  I'm really happy with it.

While this is a bit low, it's not out of line according to Wheeler and
Protz (Brew Your Own British Real Ale). There are quite a number of
bitters with OG's of 1.035 and 1.036. I, too, am a big fan of this type
of ale - and milds for the reason you state below:


> One of the things I like about this style is that I can drink a
> couple of pints without jeopardizing the evening's productivity.  I
> can even sup as I cook dinner (I'll bet that lots of us are cooks -
> it goes with brewing) without worrying about how (if?) dinner will
> turn out.

I find it difficult to cook without a pint at hand! But seriously, I
recently brewed a 1.035 session bitter that turned out wonderfully. Lots
of flavour for such a low gravity, and I can drink as much as I like. My
most recent beer (just brewed two days ago) is a 1.032 OG mild. I've
done a similar beer in the past and seriously considered it one of my
best brewing efforts.

> This batch even included some putative no-no's such as sugar and dry
> yeast (Danstar Windsor).  I used 10% DWC Caravienne, 5% Torrefied
> wheat, 5.5% white cane/beet table sugar, and 1.2% pulverized
> chocolate malt, with Target and EKG for 25 IBU (plenty for this low
> gravity)  and EKG dry hops.  FG was 1.009.  It's a pale copper color
>  - just right.  Nice nutty, malty, hoppy brew.

Sounds yummy! The only ingredient that I haven't used in a bitter is the
Caravienne, but I could see that working nicely. As to the yeast, I used
the same in that mild I just brewed. It's a yeast that performs
wonderfully in a porter that I make from time to time, so I thought I'd
give it a try in this one.

> 
> Hope this inspires some other brewers to brew low alcohol brews.

It's well worth doing - it's amazing how much flavour you can get out of
a low gravity beer.

- --
Bill


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 12:57:47 EDT
From: Wkoucky at aol.com
Subject: Re: Cutting keg Tops


 I cut the tops off of three kegs in a few hours with very smooth edges and 
no rust after four years.  I used an old table saw with a metel cut off blade 
installed.  I placed the keg on the table and clamped two 2 x 4's to the 
table parallel to the keg and the fence at the end of the keg.  I rotated the 
keg between the two  2x 4's and raised the blade to make the cut.  It was 
fast and clean.  I spent about five minutes sanding the edges. 
 
  William Koucky >>


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 13:03:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: Chris Campagna <campagna at umd5.umd.edu>
Subject: re: CACA question

>        8lbs Breiss 6 row malt(2.2L)
>        2lbs C&B flaked maize
>        0.7oz Cluster at 9.0% - 60min.
>        1.0oz Saaz at 3.7% - knockout.
>        Danstar Nottingham Yeast
>
>For the mash, I am uncertain if I need to attempt a protein
>rest and what it would accomplish.  How might the brew turn out
>differently if I ignore a protein rest?  I understand it would
>have been used for efficiency and clarity with undermodified
>malts, but I'm not certain if it would really benefit the
>flavor.

This is VERY close to my Cream Ale recipe.  I use 1 oz. willamette for 45
min. and 1 oz. Cascade for the last 5.  I also use 1056 instead of
nottingham.  Beyond that, it's the same.

I do a simple infusion at 155 for 60 minutes.  The flaked maize does not
need a protien rest, nor does the 6 row.  Mondern 6 row is very well
modified.

This is one of my favorite recipes and it's the one I use to test out
variables like different yeast strains or hops.  Right now I'm tring it
with the White Labs East Coast Ale strain, which I gather is reported to
the the Sam Adams strain.  I cant' wait.

Chris




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 13:01:32 -0400
From: Ken Miller <kgmiller2 at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Brewing Techniques (BT) And Cash Owed

Chet has questions about the back issues owed and the apparent ability
of getting issues if you pay for them.  My situation may help reinforce
what you suspect.

I received the same letter everyone did outlining how much money I was
owed.  I was lucky and was only owed $8 or one issue.  To summarize the
options we had were forgive the debt, get back issues in lieu of refund,
or wait and hope for a cash refund.  I selected the second option and
picked an issue.  Now here is the interesting part.  I also selected an
additional back issue and sent in a check to cover that one.

What did I receive?  BT cashed my check and sent me one issue.  It
arrived without any cover letter or note explaining why they were able
to send an issue for which I included a check for, but not the issue
they said they owed me.  Obviously, there was a conscious decision to
fill orders that would bring in cash, but not fill the orders issues
owed under subscriptions.  I say this because the request to BT was all
on the same form.  So someone looked at my form, saw which two issues I
wanted (I included third and forth choice if the two I requested were
unavailable) and cashed the check and sent one issue.  Dropping the
second issue in the envelope would have cost too much more and would
have satisfied my subscription.

As always, emails have gone unanswered.  I loved the magazine and miss
reading it, but the end has been frustrating.  A promise of back issues
was made and not followed up on.  My guess is that BT cannot spend money
to make good on back subscriptions because this would reduce both the
cash available and magazine inventory, which I imagine will be needed to
satisfy BT's creditors.  I don't know how subscribers fit into the list
of creditors of a magazine, but to send us issues would be paying us at
the expense of paying others.  Without any knowledge of BT's bankruptcy
status and our payment priority, this is as much as I will guess.

However, for the $8 I lost, I now know how to spot the signs of trouble
from a small niche magazine and to never subscribe for 2 yrs.  There
have definitely been more expensive lessons than this.

Ken
No longer waiting for the missing issue.....




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



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 10:48:19 -0700 (MST)
From: Jim Liddil <jliddil at VMS.ARIZONA.EDU>
Subject: zymurgy

Not one to let go I'll add a few comments on the recent zymurgy.  First
off the "beer geek" article on the rims needs to be spell checked by an
editor.  I found at least 3 typos.

The article on fruit pits told me nothing.  As a toxicologist I found that
the article to contain no information relevant to what is done in
homebrewing.  Has anyone done determinations of cyanide in fruit beer?
What is the average perrsons intake of cyanide from other sources?
Laetrile ahs been banned from importation since 1987. I just did not see
what the point of the article was.  What about ricin and aflatoxin
exposure?

And although the beer geek is updated the zymurgy online section is still
out of date.  and talkback has not functioned in months.

Jim Liddil
North Haven, CT



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 14:06:44 -0400 (EDT)
From: Some Guy <pbabcock at hbd.org>
Subject: Re: 



Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager...

Gordon writes:

> OK, so here's the question.  Which, if any, of these will give me a
> gravity of 1.025?  I'm assuming it's a 1:8 or 1:9 ratio, since that's
> the most popular suggestion.


First, measuring by volume is silly. Is that a cup packed, loose or
sifted? See what I mean? Use mass.

Based on mass, DME will typically (ROT) yield 1.045 if 1 lb of DME is
added to 1 gallon of water. Thus, you can easily estimate what any
quantity of DME in any quantity of water will yield by knowing this. In
simple terms, your expected yield will be 45(lbs DME)/Gallons H2O

And yes, I realize pound is a force. Those English units and all....


- -- 
 -
See ya!

Pat Babcock in SE Michigan         pbabcock at hbd.org
Home Brew Digest Janitor           janitor@hbd.org
HBD Web Site                       http://hbd.org
The Home Brew Page                 http://hbd.org/pbabcock

"The monster's back, isn't it?" - Kim Babcock after I emerged
                                  from my yeast lab Saturday





Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 14:59:39 -0400
From: Mark Kempisty <kempisty at pav.research.panasonic.com>
Subject: Another bulkhead idea

In reference to Paul Kensler's and Ken Schwartz's comments on making a
bulkhead for a Gott, I came up with another bulkhead method that is
incredibly simple and cheap.  It also uses readily available parts.

Get a 1/2 inch CPVC male and female threaded pipe to 1/2 inch slip on
fittings.  The female one has a washer in it.
Go the faucet repair washer rack and find a suitable O-ring that will
rest comfortably on the bell of the female fitting.
Go to the hardware section and find a rigid washer about an inch in
diameter.  If it has a hole that will let it slip over the male fitting
so much the better otherwise you will have to enlarge is with a Dremel
or other tool.  I used a nylon washer.  As this never touches the wort,
it can be almost any material.

Now screw the two fittings together through the Gott bulkhead as per my
crude picture below and you'll have a leak proof seal in about two
minutes.  I recommend putting Teflon tape on the threads to ease
disassembly in case you want to clean it..

                ||+
       /------[]||+-}----|
      /       []||+ }    |
- -----/        []||+ }    |
              []||+ }    |
              []||+ }    |
- -----\        []||+ }    |
      \       []||+ }    |
       \------[]||+-}----|
            | | ||+   |
Female CPVC-| | | |   |
O-Ring -------| | |   |
Gott Bulkhead --| |   |
Washer -----------|   |
Male CPVC ------------|

I used an extra washer inside the female fitting so the male threads
would bottom out against it.  Between this and the O-Ring, the threads
are completly insulated from the wort.  I friend of mine used to use the
standard Phalse Bottom washer and you can hear wort swishing around
inside his Gott.  He has rebuilt his very similar to mine and loves it.

Home Depot carries the Nibco plumbing line. Their male CPVC threaded
fitting has a slightly bigger shoulder that lets it rest against the
washer more securely than another brand I have seen at Lowes.  (No
affiliation, yada, yada, yada.)

On the inside of the Gott I used Ken's manifold design (thanks for the
info and measurements) with a 2 inch (or so) piece of vinyl tubing to
slip fit into the female fitting.  On the outside I used a short piece
of CPVC pipe to another male threaded fitting.  These were solvent
welded to keep things from falling apart at the wrong time.  To this I
screwed on the ball valve.

This has worked so well I am duplicating it on an Igloo 48 quart cooler
me and my friend are building for bigger batches.  On this cooler the
bulkhead hole is slightly smaller so the rigid washer and extra washer
in the female fitting are not needed.

- -- 
Take care,
Mark


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 20:59:51 +0200
From: "Hubert Hanghofer" <hhanghof at netbeer.co.at>
Subject: term krausening  used in wrong context

Hi all,

I assume that "krausening" is derived from the German "Kra:usen"
(where a: = umlaut-a) or the verb "aufkra:usen". If that is so, the term 
is used in a wrong context in recent HBDs! Aufkra:usen means adding 
actively fermenting beer (beer at "high krausen") to an almost completely 
attenuated beer. The fresh yeast causes a strong secondary, assures 
complete attenuation and good reduction of diacetyl.

If you add wort or first runnings, then we speak of "Speisegabe" (adding 
"speise", literally translated: adding food). Only common with wheat-beers.

Yesterday I met with Eric Toft, Braumeister at "Private Landbrauerei 
Scho:nram", Bavaria. Eric is master in the art of krausening. He guided me 
through his brewery and I had the opportunity to sample his delicate, 
outstanding lagers, all of wich are krausened with about 10% krausen -- 
the exact krausening rate is determined by the actual content of 
fermentables in the krausen-beer.

Hope this helps,
Allzeit gut Sud!

Hubert, brewing in Salzburg, Austria
25 km south of Scho:nram
- --


"Bier brauen nach eigenem Geschmack"
Infos unter:
http://www.netbeer.co.at


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 16:38:51 -0400
From: "Spies, Jay" <Spies at dhcd.state.md.us>
Subject: Volume of a tube

All -

Doug Hurst writes:

>>>Subject: Volume of a beer tube

I will take a stab at answering this question, but am also posting it to the
list in case I fail miserably.  If I remember my high school math correctly:
Volume = Height * Width * Length
Of course in a cylinder (your 1/4" ID tube) there is a circle taking the
place of the width and heighth.  I believe the equation for the area of a
circle is:  Pi * Radius^2 (squared).  So you can figure the volume of your
tubing with:

V=L(Pi * R^2) 

Where L is the length of the tube in inches.  You gave a length of 10' =
120"
Pi is 3.14 or somesuch
R is the radius. You have 1/4" ID tubing. Radius of 1/8" which = .125 inches

Therefore V = 5.88 Cubic Inches * 16.3871 =  96.47milliliters <<<

wow.  Great work.  You lost me early on, but that's nice stuff.  I have
another suggestion...

Untap your keg, open your tap, and unscrew the connector from the tubing
while holding the tubing up, draining the liquid into a glass.

Then measure it.

;)
Jay Spies
Wishful Thinking Basement Brewery
Baltimore MD


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 20:27:13 -0400
From: "Steve" <stjones1 at chartertn.net>
Subject: Stupid beer tricks

Ok, I know I'll get a lot of ribbing for this one, but I'm going to pass
on my latest stupid beer trick (#423 if I remember right).

Heat 1 qt honey with 1 pt water to 170F, cover and let sit for 20
minutes to sanitize. Then pour into the secondary which was just racked
from primary. Can you say Volcano? Next time I'll set the pan in a sink
of cold water for a half hour.

Steve Jones
State of Franklin Homebrewers
Johnson City, TN
http://users.chartertn.net/franklinbrew





Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 20:52:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: Some Guy <pbabcock at hbd.org>
Subject: Re: Kraeusening

Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager...

Dan writes:

<SNIP> I was
> wondering of any down-side to using this method to carbonate beer.  Pat
> chimes in that he (explicitly) kraeusens his hefeweizens - (why) not other
> styles?
> 
> 	Does the gravity of different wort tend to make the carbonation
> level calculation into a 5 gallon batch too difficult?  too unpredictable?
>  - or at least more difficult then using corn sugar?
 
I don't kraeusen most other styles because, frankly, I typically force
carbonate. I don't force-carbonate hefeweizens because sediment is part
and parcel of the style since the style requires the sediment. No mystery.

Priming wort quantities can be easily calculated based on the gravity vs
total volume. If you typically use 1/2 c corn sugar, and know the mass of
the sugar, you can calulate it's gravity contribution to the beer. You can
then calculate just what volume of a known-gravity wort needs to be added
to reach the same level of carbonation.

Let's say your cup of corn sugar is 1/2 pound (in reality, it's probably
not). Corn sugar, like DME, contributes 45 pp/g.  If that 1/2 cup was
dissolved in a pint of water, the gravity of the priming solution is
45*.5/.125 or 180 pp/g. Its contribution to a 5 gallon batch would have
been 45*.5/(5+1/8)=4.4 pp/g (rounded). This can be also be written as
180*1/8/(5-1/8)=4.4. Generically, where

    prime points OG = pp       batch volume = bv
    prime volume    = pv       contribution = c

This relationship can be written

    pp * pv / (bv + pv) = c

You need to solve it for prime volume

    pv / (bv + pv)      = c / pp

    bv / pv + 1         = pp / c
   
    bv / pv             = (pp / cc) - 1

    pv / bv             = 1 / ((pp / cc) - 1)

    pv                  = bv / ((pp / cc) -1)

So, let's say we want to prime our 5 gallon batch with a priming solution
having a gravity of 1.030. How much of it do we need?

    pv                  = 5 / ((30 / 4.4) -1)
                        = 0.86 gallons (rounded)
                        = 3.5 quarts (rounded)
                        = 110 fluid ounces (not rounded)

Note that this is a bit of an oversimplification in that the sugars in the
1.030 wort will not all be as readily fermentable as the corn sugar would
have been, but for our game, it's close enough! (Use the 
 
Also note that this is not really kraeusening. As indicated in an earlier
post, this is spiese - unfermented wort - yeast food. To be kraeusening,
the wort used as priming would have to be added to the beer at high
kraeusen, and our calculation above would not carbonate your beer to where
you would wish it. It would be possible to take a gravity reading of the
beer at kraeusen to use the above, but it will not readily PREDICT the
volume of set-aside in order to accomplish your desired level of
carbonation unless you can predict the gravity of the priming solution at
high kraeusen.

- -- 
 -
See ya!

Pat Babcock in SE Michigan         pbabcock at hbd.org
Home Brew Digest Janitor           janitor@hbd.org
HBD Web Site                       http://hbd.org
The Home Brew Page                 http://hbd.org/pbabcock

"The monster's back, isn't it?" - Kim Babcock after I emerged
                                  from my yeast lab Saturday





Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 20:54:37 -0400
From: Will Fields <will at gfarch.net>
Subject: Re: Ratio of DME to water for starter


Gordon and Sue Ludlow ask how to achieve a gravity of 1.025 with malt 
extract.

Dave Miller suggests in his Homebrewing Guide that you can achieve 45 
points per pound per gallon using DME.  If extract efficiency is 80 percent 
then it follows that the points would be closer to 36.  I shoot for this 
for my starters but if you want 25 points you would need to use only 70 
percent of the DME or .7# per gallon (36 x .7 = 25)

Assuming you are not interested in making a gallon of starter you need only 
divide the water and the DME by the amount of starter you wish to 
make.  For example if you wish to make a pint of starter just divide by 8 
because there are 8 pints per gallon.  .7# of DME divided by 8 = .0875# 
multiplied by 16 to convert to ounces = 1.4 oz.

I use 2 oz. of DME per pint of water to achieve 36 points.  I believe I can 
produce 40% more yeast cells per step-up this way.  If you are worried 
about the comfort of the yeast I think you would do well to add a few hop 
pellets while boiling the starter.  This helps to resist the growth of 
bacteria somewhat and introduces the yeast to a more wort-like environment.

Will Fields
South Hamilton, Massachusetts



Return to table of contents

---