---

	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:
  re: Over pitching, Definition and effects? ("Stephen Alexander")
  barley flour/chloramines/Whiner of Our Discontent ("Stephen Alexander")
  Re Fluid flow study ("Grant Stott")
  Washington DC ("Combs Emmett")
  Storing Dry Yeast (msnyder)
  Re: Beer will not clear (Jeff Renner)
  Energizer Bunny Fermentation (RobertS735)
  wort viscosity(hydrometer readings)/ temp ("Dr. Pivo")
  Mason Jar Hop Back ("Weaver Joseph Todd  Capt. 39MDG/SGOAM")
  Wort viscosity / Light bulb dehumidifying (David Harsh)
  Slaked Lime ("Paddock Wood Brewing Supplies")
  O2 permability ("Philip J Wilcox")
  Reusing yeast ("Scott")
  fluid flow in lauter tuns (Frank Tutzauer)
  This must stop, enjoying a beer (craftbrewer)


* 
* 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: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 02:54:13 -0500
From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: re: Over pitching, Definition and effects?

Tony Barnsley  writes ...

>Here's a question that was asked on the UK Brewing Group recently. I've
>found loads of stuff on what is a good / minimal pitching rate, but not
very
>much on what happens when (if) you Over pitch, so here you go brew gurus
>
>- -------
>
>What defines over pitching?
>Too much yeast compared to the amount of what in the wort?
>How do I increase the amount of xyz in the wort?
>And what are the effects?

For bottom yeast, 'Malting and Brewing Science' (vol2, pp652) states
8 to 16 *10^6 yeast cells/ml is the conventional pitching rate. And,
"Low pitching rates result in extensive yeast growth and may give more
aromatic beers. High rates may lead to subsequent yeast autolysis".

For ale yeast a lower pitching rate is suggested and it is noted (pp 675)
"General experience appears to indicate that if the amount of yeast
produced,
per unit volume of beer, is changed significantly then there are important
alterations in the character of the beer.  This does not mean that
acceptable beer cannot be produced if the yeast crop is smaller or larger
than normal, but the beer will tend to differ appreciably from the normal
beer
in taste and aroma".

Elsewhere they state that the amount of yeast 'produced' (crop)
DECREASES as the pitching rate increases and  so the final yeast
mass is almost constant.

More recent texts suggest a viable cell count pitching rates proportional
to starting gravity; 1.5*10^6cell/ml for each degree Plato(P ~= 0.004SG)
of the wort in lagers and half this rate for ales. [example SG=1.060
wort ~= 15P, so {1.5*15 = 22.5}   22.5*10^6 cells/ml for lager, 11.3*10^
cell/ml for ale].

A homebrew rule of thumb is that lager yeast are expected to multiply
4X and ale yeast 8X-10X during fermentation so pitch accordingly.  Or
pitching 100ml of lager slurry(50ml of ale)  per 20L (5gal) of
1.048 wort is about right ignoring the yeast viability question.
Proportionately more/less yeast should be pitched for
higher/lower gravity worts.  The damage from overpitching is unlikely to
be very serious compared to underpitching on a homebrew scale in
my opinion.

My *guess* is that the autolysis damage mentioned for lagers is related to
the fact that by overpitching we are automatically increasing the number of
non-viable (dead) cells pitched.  This is especially a concern for
homebrewers
who neither measure viability rates nor follow careful yeast handling
procedures.

The flavor and taste impact for ales is likely related to the fact that by
overpitching we are decreasing the amount of new yeast growth and so
decreasing the amount of various yeast flavor byproducts from that growth.
For example decreasing the total amount of growth will reduce the
amount of esters produced and also certain fusel oils (higher alcohols).
The same probably applies to minor organic acids which are part of the
yeast flavor profile.

One nice thing about overpitching is that it leads to a rapid fermentation
which terminates with lack of sugar carbohydrate as the limiting growth
factor, and this is exactly what we want.

To Tony's second and third questions - it is too much yeast per unit wort
extract.  If you add more extract (higher SG) then higher pitching rates
are sensible and the growth will increase (hopefully) unless issues such
as osmotic pressure interfere.

'Malting and Brewing Science' , Chapman & Hall Press, Hough, Briggs,
Stevens,
and Young, 2nd edition, vol 2, ISBN 0-412-16590-2

 -Steve




Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 04:02:55 -0500
From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: barley flour/chloramines/Whiner of Our Discontent

Someone asked ...

> - What would be the effect on flavour of a Pilsner if I use 
>50% barley flour. lets assume I go through the gluten and  
>protein rests.

I've used barley flour for bread baking and it does impart a
recognizable flavor.  I haven't used it for brewing but there is
literature on the topic.  Raw barley has been used in various
quantities to reduce the grist cost in commercial ops. 
Apparently above a modest percentage (10-15% as I recall)
the raw grain flavor comes through.  I'm not saying that's a
bad thing - judgment call required.  Also the raw grain has
considerably higher levels of soluble gums which would have
been degraded by the maltster and much lower levels of FAN.
At 50% I'd plan on a beta-glucanase &  peptidase rest.  If
you keep it below say 25% then haze will probably be your
greatest foe,.

==

Richard Dulany asks about chloramines ...

>Can anyone provide a detailed description of the off-flavor(s) produced by
>brewing with water that has been "sanitized" by chloramine?

Very medicinal phenolic flavors from chlorophenols, but other chlorine
compounds are likely to be flavor active too.

>My [...]  beer [...] has an unpleasant "corn" off-flavor [...] a metallic,
>almost sour aftertaste.

The corn aroma is most likely to be diethyl sulfide (DMZ) and
could be from the extract if a sufficient boil and then chill of the wort
wasn't performed.  The other possibility is that the DMZ was created by
an infection.  Even yeast can produce a little, many bacteria produce
a lot.  Yeast produce more at lower temps. It's not from chloramines.

The metallic flavor could be from chlorine compounds, but I think,
especially linked with the sourness and corn aroma that you are
almost certainly looking at infection byproducts.

>It has been suggested that the beer suffers from chloramine
>contamination.

Most water departments will be happy to tell you over the phone
if chloramines are being used.

==

DP sez ...
>Noooooo.  What Mr. Yates does instead, is make the whole very serious
>business of brewing beer seem like it's something "fun".

No offense to Phil, but too often he makes swinging cats and dancing
on the billiard tables of burradoo seem like fun and says ZERO
of beer or brewing.   Maybe he should start a board for folks interested
in that stuff.

If ever a post should carry the title 'Fluid Flow from False Bottoms',
your cathartic spam was it Irvine.  No brewing content btw.

>Do you think it's a coincidence that you
>find the same word root in "discontent"? No, the prefix "dis-" comes
>from the greek word for "maker of".

Latin contenus vs  L. discontinere wrong language, wrong words,
wrong meaning and yes a coincident spelling in English.  Points for
most error in a paragraph, but you'll have to get that info content a
bit lower to compete with Phil..

 -S




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 11:43:30 +1100
From: "Grant Stott" <gstott at primus.com.au>
Subject: Re Fluid flow study

Thanks to John Palmer for the excellent experiment on fluid flow through the
mash tun.
My mash tun is of an unusual design in that I use a 23l rectangular cooler
with a 1/2" O.D. copper manifold, slots facing down, around the perimeter
and the vertical tube through which the wort is siphoned (out over the top &
into the kettle below) half way along the side.
On top of this manifold sits a false bottom ( a rectangular piece of
aluminium security mesh ) that fits snugly against the sides.
For the past 2 years I have gotten a consistent ( other than 3 batches which
got higher. 1 of which came 4th in the state comp) 75% efficiency.

My question is am I getting the benefits of the false bottom as far as flow
is concerned? Or should I add more tubing to my manifold as per the results
of johns manifold experiment?

I don't know a man gets busy & doesn't read the hbd for a few days & returns
to find Steve A doing an excellent summary of how to brew a full flavoured
low O.G beer that even I could understand. scary stuff, till I read the next
issue & the real Steve A had returned.

Grant Stott
Geelong Vic. Australia    mailto:gstott at primus.com.au





Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 08:09:50 -0500
From: "Combs Emmett" <combs_emmett at bah.com>
Subject: Washington DC

I second the Brickskeller Pub in Dupont Circle area.  I've just returned from a
business trip and highly enjoyed the beers, staff, and atmosphere.  Its located
a block or two from the Dupont Metro stop.  Their hamburger is famous as well.
Cheers!
Emmett Combs



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 07:31:53 -0600
From: msnyder at wm.com
Subject: Storing Dry Yeast



Greetings all!

A bit behind after the holidays, so pardon the delayed comment on an earlier
topic.  After reading Jethro's confirmation of the demise of London dry yeast, I
figure it's time to stock up.  I've always stored my dry yeast in the fridge,
but Jethro mentioned the freezer as a means of storage.  Is it acceptable/better
to freeze dry yeast and if so, how much longer might I expect it to remain
viable?  Of course, I'll build a starter from any packages that are way past
their expiration to ensure a good crop for pitching.

Maybe this one is best for Jethro to respond to directly.  Regardless, thanks in
advance for the input.

Mark Snyder




Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 09:24:40 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Beer will not clear

Steve <hardter at rcn.com> has a beer that will not clear.  I am always 
amazed at the efficacy of plain old gelatin (although you may want to 
try flavored Jello for exotic results).

I dissolve a 1/4 oz. (7 gram) packet in a cup or two of the beer to 
be treated, although water should work fine as well, then bring it 
nearly to a boil in the microwave, stirring frequently top avoid 
lumps.  Then I rack the beer and add the gelatin solution halfway 
through the racking to make sure it is well distributed.  If you are 
racking to a carboy you can watch it clear from the top down in 
hours.  I generally get clear beer in a day or two.  One packet 
clears 1/4 barrel (7.75 gallons or 30 liters) and will not be too 
much for five gallons.

This works great on suspended yeast.  I don't know what your haze is, 
but chill haze or starch haze may require other treatment.  Good luck.

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: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 09:34:24 EST
From: RobertS735 at aol.com
Subject: Energizer Bunny Fermentation 

I made a nice, heavy, porter- that does not seem to want to stop fermenting. 
I was wondering if anyone has ideas about why. The facts are these:
8 lbs of 2-row
 .6 lbs Crystal
 .6 lbs of Chocolate
 .4 lbs Oats
aggressive hop schedule...
Yeast is 2nd generation California Ale from White Labs- in the pitchable tube.

Note: I made a Celebration Ale clone using the CA. Ale first- I washed then 
saved the yeast cake for the Porter which followed a day after the 
Celebration Clone. The fermentation of the Celebration was slow also- but 
nothing like this. I am drinking the Celebration now, and find it clean, and 
about as expected- except it seems to be very high in alcohol.
The porter is taking its sweet time(pun intended). I have been holding it at 
about 70 degrees plus or minus one degree. Nice calm slow- deliberate 
fermentation.

I have made both these formulas many times but I usually use Wyeast. This is 
the first time for White Labs- and also the first time for the oatmeal.
It has been bubbling away now for just over two weeks!
I would appreciate thoughts on the reason for the long fermentation.

Bob the beer guy.


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 15:48:44 +0100
From: "Dr. Pivo" <dp at pivo.w.se>
Subject: wort viscosity(hydrometer readings)/ temp

This has been asked a few times..... haven't seen a response.

Not an easy one, as it's not linear.

Martin Brunner wanted between 50-80C.

Here's some numbers... it will give you a corrective factor to multiply
your hydrometer reading by, to get what you would have gotten if the
sample was cooled  to 60F  (standard). Of course the "real" reading
might be say...1.048, but forget the "1." part, and just fiddle with the
part after the dot that expresses it's relationship to water.

54.5C =1.70
60C   =1.92
65.5C =2.15
71.1C =2.42
76.&C =2.75

If you stare at them a bit, you'll notice an "increasing decrease" in
viscosity in proportion to temp., that is the viscosity will drop much
more in the 10 degrees between 80 and 90C, than it will in the 10
between 20 and 30C.

If you want them as true viscosity, they are of course in inverse to the
above.

Dr. Pivo


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 17:38:03 +0200
From: "Weaver Joseph Todd Capt. 39MDG/SGOAM"
Subject: Mason Jar Hop Back

Someone mentioned a hop back constructed from a Mason Jar.  Can't seem to
find instructions for it anywhere in the Archives.  Would someone describe
it here or please refer me to the proper archive addition.
Thanks

Todd in Turkey
Private replies OK:
toddweaver at superonline.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 10:45:48 -0500
From: David Harsh <dharsh at fuse.net>
Subject: Wort viscosity / Light bulb dehumidifying

Martin_Brungard at urscorp.com asks about Wort Viscosity

The primary solute (dissolved substance) in wort is sugar.  As a result,
I'd use published data for aqueous sugar solutions as a function of
temperature.  Check a CRC handbook, Perry's Chem Eng handbook, or the
International Critical Tables.  If you just want the equation, it
shouldn't be too hard to come up with one... 

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

Jack asks why a light bulb causes lower humidity in his fridge:

Probably because you are adding a heat source and the compressor is
running more.  Kind of like your home air conditioner needs to run a
certain length of time or it won't dehumidify, it will just cool. 
That's my hypothesis and it fits the result that higher light output
(and heat generation) causes lower humidity.

Dave Harsh
Bloatarian Brewing League				Cincinnati, OH


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 10:08:01 -0600
From: "Paddock Wood Brewing Supplies" <orders at paddockwood.com>
Subject: Slaked Lime


In my previous post in a reply to the Mystery Ingredients post I wondered if
the purpose of slaked lime was to adjust pH upward. Steve Potter gently
pointed me towards the HBD archives and to

www.hbd.org/1stdraft/lime.html

a great post from Hubert Hanghofer in 1997 to see that the purpose is
precipitate out hydrogen carbonates, to adjust water that is high in
temporary hardness. Hubert's post provides full instructions.

I should have looked before leaping... thanks Steve!

cheers,

Stephen Ross -- "Vitae sine cerevisiae sugant."
______________________________________________
Paddock Wood Brewing Supplies, Saskatoon, SK
orders at paddockwood.com  www.paddockwood.com




Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:25:18 -0500
From: "Philip J Wilcox" <pjwilcox at cmsenergy.com>
Subject: O2 permability

Brewers

I have acquired a bunch of 1 gal Hedwin cube style Polyethylene fermentors.
(http://www.hedwin.com/cubekdrsrc.html) for a miniscule price. I was
wondering how safe they are as secondary fermentors. Sure they will work as
primaries for my upcomming cider experiment trials. but how much O2 pick up
is bad? According to the engineers at the firm, The Oxygen permeation rate
is 5 cc of o2 per pkg. per 24 hrs. Which sounds high to me, but I don't
have any other numbers to compare it to. Does anyone else out there? Any
suggestions out there?

Phil Wilcox
Poison Frog Home Brewer





Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 09:07:46 -0800
From: "Scott" <Windsurf at bossig.com>
Subject: Reusing yeast

Ernie asks about reusing yeast:

When I racked to the secondary I had about 3/4 inch trub left in the
primary.  I swirled this around good and poured it into (half filling)
two Mason quart jars.  They are both in the fridge with about 1/2 inch
liquid on top.

What is the best way to pitch this stuff? Do I just pitch one jar into
my next brew, or do I wash this mixture and how is that done?  In detail
please, I have never reused yeast before.


The Wyeast website goes into great detail in how to reuse yeast, with
explicit instructions on how to wash and store.  I can tell you that I used
a White Labs American Hefe for about 10 batches this year, just by removing
the trub, adding some wort, storing in fridge, and pitching the whole thing
into the next batch.  Really didn't notice any evidence of a change in yeast
character (and this type of beer is very yeast noticeable).  However, I do
intend on buying new yeast stock next year, with my first brew.  An entire
year on one
tube of yeast is probably pushing my luck.

Experiment and see what works best for you.  It's only beer.  Just maintain
as clean and sanitized environment as possible anytime you handle your
yeast.  Good luck.

Scott
Richland, Wa.


When I racked to the secondary I had about 3/4 inch trub left in the
primary.  I swirled this around good and poured it into (half filling)
two Mason quart jars.  They are both in the fridge with about 1/2 inch
liquid on top.

What is the best way to pitch this stuff? Do I just pitch one jar into
my next brew, or do I wash this mixture and how is that done?  In detail
please, I have never reused yeast before.






Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 12:22:04 -0500 (EST)
From: Frank Tutzauer <comfrank at acsu.buffalo.edu>
Subject: fluid flow in lauter tuns

I, too, think John's fluid flow stuff regarding manifold/false bottom
design is great, both the stuff the other day and the material in
his book. I want to ask in public, and on behalf of the HBD (don't hit
me!) that you consider writing a description and summary for the beergeeks
column in Zymurgy.

 --frank




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 07:31:04 +1100
From: craftbrewer at telstra.easymail.com.au
Subject: This must stop, enjoying a beer 

G'day All

Ok I have had enough. This will stop right now.

All this fun errupting on the HBD is firstly uncalled for and not in 
the spirit of the HBD. You dont see me making fun on the HBD 
do you.  It seems all insundry has appointed me moral crusador 
of the HBD so as such its time to put my foot down and  sort out 
this rubbish that has invaded the common sense ( now there's a 
contradiction in terms for the HBD) and guide this board to new 
heights of worldly being or at least remove all fun from for the 
casual observer.

Now I have had enough of the ramblings of Dr Pivo. A man who 
wouldn't know which end of a banana to peel starts laying claim 
to Saint Arnolds position (i'm sorry mate that positions taken 
already in Nth Qld). I have sent you my spare copy of 'Moral 
American For Beginners" I was using it to keep the seat up in
the dunny, and stop people falling in, but now I see a better use. 
READ IT.  You will see such postings like yours dont fit the bill 
(or Richard come to think of it).  You will also notice Phil HAS 
adheared to at least one chapter.

And i ask most humbley of Dr P with this posting

>>Mr. Yates should be teaching us the finer technical aspects 
of making
beer, or at least asking the wiser of us (that's me), some 
supplicating
questions.<<<<

Can you please explain what you are doing using words us 
country boys have no idea  what they mean. Bloody hell !!!!!!!!

And one more parting shot

>>>absolutely sure that it is buried in enough technical 
terminology that very few will understand it, and the only ones 
that do will mmediately recognize it for what it is.... missguided,  
incorrect, and definately not written by anybody with very much 
practical experience actually "making" beer.<<<

Self gratification is also quite unacceptable in this forum as well. 
Dont think your standards apply to the rest of us in our posts.

And also Phil does have the odd content well worth saviouring

>>>>The master of such is alive and well and never never   
disappoints us. <<<<

never a truer word spoken.

To the rest  out there in La La land, Phil has been doing the 
right thing - AND I QUOTE (knowing Dr P needs glasses of one 
kind or another) the relevant chapters heading " Say It Loud, 
Say It Often, Say Nothing" . (Seems Texans in particular do this 
a lot and dont diserve any more band width), but Phil obviously 
has been reading this chapter with religeous zeal. Which bring 
me to the most verbose character on this board. Firstly one 
chapter does not make a book, Phil. True most Americans cant 
get past this chapter but do you have to follow suit.  Wake up 
man will you. And second you should be more suttle like me, 
you'll get in less trouble. You dont see me upsetting people do 
you.

Now i have to agree with the Good Doctor, (oh I'm going to 
up-chuck) this outburst of attempted humor must stop. Try to 
adopt the high moral standards that I set. 

And whats this I now see. Its bloody spreading (like a pros legs).
A certain Mr Pannicke has the gall to inject humour into his posts. 
here's a guy who now he thinks he's funny. I can't see 
where funny is part of this book, not even memtioned. What 
next - he actually makes me laugh.

But he must actually temper this extremely rare outburst of 
humour with fact.

>>>After which we can post his head on a pike pole in
front of Graham's house for all to see (though something makes 
me think
Graham's lawn is already decorated with things on pike poles - 
SHUDDER!)<<<<

Listen mate, we dont clutter our lawn with the victims of ill 
placed postings. No we hang them on the barbed wire fence 
out the front for the world to see.  I'm not that self rightious.

But speaking of this. I'll speak to St Arnold about increasing my 
powers. the Shout Effect will be extended beyond my abilities t
o affect yeast world wide. All beer humour will now emminate 
from Nth Qld. - PERIOD.

Shout

Graham Sanders

And to those who think I dont have the power

well

SWMBO still has a smile on her face -

Oh beer related, yes i'm into my upteenth 
glass of weissen as I type.


Return to table of contents

---

HTML-ized on 11/30/00, by HBD2HTML v1.2 by KFL webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96