HOMEBREW Digest #3615 Tue 24 April 2001

[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]


	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:
  Doppelbock ("Casey Cobb")
  Homebrew Clubs (Drew Beechum)
  Fluid flow and Reynolds Number (Dan)
  Oxygen ("Greenly, Jeff")
  re: haze ("Stephen Alexander")
  RE: Solid Sate Relay Answer/Lesson ("Steven Parfitt")
  Converting Extract to All-Grain (Ken Schwartz)
  Yeast Viability (george fix)
  RE: Solid Sate Relay Answer/Lesson ("Steven Parfitt")
  Skunked? ("Jay Wirsig")
  sour beer, souring weisse beer (Nathan Kanous)
  Clear Beer ("Cade Morgan")
  Oxygen purity (pedwards)
  homebrew clubs (david.persenaire)
  Temperature Controllers ("Glen Pannicke")
  Re: Hops References (Steven)
  Oxygen contaminants ("Tracy P. Hamilton")
  Re: UPS beer shipping woes (Spencer W Thomas)
  Re: sour beer, souring weiss beer, peroxide (Jeff Renner)
  microbrewing equipment (Marc Sedam)
  Re: sour beer, souring weiss beer, peroxide ("Steven Parfitt")

* * 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: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 22:24:19 -0700 From: "Casey Cobb" <acez at mindspring.com> Subject: Doppelbock Hey guys, hope you all are doing well. I've done a few all grain batches and have now started designing my own brews and want to run this one by you all...need some suggestions, especially on the hops. I did my research, but still...don't want to wait 2-3 months for a delicious doppelbock and be let down. (5.5 Gallons, 70 mins boil) 1.5# Crystal 105L 5# Munich Malt 3# Lager Malt (2 row) 2# Pilsner Malt (2 row) 2# Honey Malt (God I love this stuff) 1.25# Wheat Malt 2.5# Vienna Malt (2 row) .35# Chocolate Malt 2.5# Cara-Pils This adds up to a whopping 20.1 pounds with a predicted OG of 1.084 (So claims Promash). I'm thinking maybe some Hallertau (2 oz) and Northern brewer (1 oz) 10 mins into the boil, Some Saaz (.5 oz) 50 mins in, and some tettnanger (.5 oz) for finishing. Promash predicts a 30.1 IBU. Still up in the air about the yeast...WYeast Bavarian Lager, perhaps? Do you think with an OG that high, the alcohol will dominate the taste of the final brew? Anyways, I would greatly appreciate any suggestions. Thanks, Casey Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 23:08:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Drew Beechum <Drew.Beechum at disney.com> Subject: Homebrew Clubs For my money I think the world of homebrewing clubs. Of course I'm a little biased, I'm an officer and webmeister for my club. (Tends to make you more passionate.) Through the club I'd have to say my technique and understanding of the process dramatically increased. I mean, here's a group of 150 (a large club, I realise) people who are passionate about the hobby and a number of them passionate about understanding what's happening. By all means join up with a club. IF nothing else you get a group of people who can give you hell, erudite judging of your craft, and a lot of opportunities for drinking the brew. (If nothing else there will always be one person to drink that bad brew you wouldn't touch with your enemie's mouth.) Oh and guys.. go to the 2001 AHA National Conference in Los Angeles. There are quite a few great brewers who'll be bringing their local specialities. - -- Drew Beechum Public Relations - Maltose Falcons Webmeister - www.maltosefalcons.com Webmeister - www.beerodyssey.com Request Address Only - No Articles writes: > From: "Taliesin2" <shane.saylor at verizon.net> > Subject: Home Brew Clubs... > > What is everybody's opinion of brew clubs? And what can one expect from > the club? Also, do the clubs offer lessons in Homebrewing? And if they do, > do you have to be a member to take them? Thanks... Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 03:36:35 -0400 From: Dan <knurdami at iname.com> Subject: Fluid flow and Reynolds Number Patrick, Fluid flow behavior is dependant mostly on the influence of solid boundaries. Fluid flow in a tube or a pipe, the most common situations that brewers will encounter, is influenced by shear stress near the wall of a pipe or tube. The shear stress is greatest at the surface of the tube wall and reduces as the distance from the pipe wall increases. A flow of an ideal fluid (zero viscosity and incompressible) does not suffer from any shear stress and is considered potential flow. Since we work in the real world, we will not be so lucky as to work with these magical fluids. The aforementioned flow layer at the (inside) surface of a tube is called the boundary layer. In laminar flow (lateral flow without mixing), there can be both a boundary layer and potential flow. In turbulent flow (flow with mixing), there is no potential flow and the entire fluid becomes the boundary layer. The fluid film directly in contact with the tube's wall has a velocity of zero and there are variations of velocity from point to point as you move out from the wall. Without getting into all of the particulars: The larger the tube, the smaller the percentage of boundary layer for a given flow rate. The faster the flow, the larger percentage of boundary layer for a given tube diameter. If you are trying to maximize heat transfer as in a heat exchanger, you will want to insure that you have a pipe narrow enough to create turbulent flow and if you aren't concerned with heat transfer and you want to save on pump size, use a large enough diameter to ensure laminar flow. The calculation for Reynolds Number for Newtonian fluids (to determine turbulent and laminar flow) is: Nre=(DVp/u) or Nre=(DV/v) Where D=diameter of tube, V=average velocity of liquid, u=absolute viscosity of liquid, p=density of liquid, and v=kinematic viscosity of liquid. This is a simple equation to use and it will tell you a lot about what is going on inside of your pipes. A couple of quick tips: 1. Absolute viscosity (u) commonly uses units of lb/ft-s or Pa-s. 2. Average velocity of liquid (V) can be calculated as the total volumetric flow rate of the fluid divided by the cross-sectional area of the tube (V=q/S). 3. The bad news is that if you get into changing diameters or turns in the tubing such as elbows, you will need all sorts of correction equations. A Reynolds Number between zero and 2100 is almost guaranteed to be laminar and a Reynolds Number above 4000 is almost guaranteed to be turbulent. The range in-between is the transition region and could be one or the other or a mixture of both. One word of advice when calculating Reynolds Number is to make sure that your units match. If they don't you can be in for some interesting numbers! Patrick, I know this post was a bit lengthy but I hope that it has some useful information for you. Dan Kiplinger http://hbd.org/klob Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 03:47:27 -0400 From: "Greenly, Jeff" <greenlyj at rcbhsc.wvu.edu> Subject: Oxygen Fellow Brewers, There has been a lot of talk about the use of oxygen injection in the home brewery, especially as regards the "type" of oxygen to use. Oxygen injection as a stimulus to fermentation is a proven technique, but there has been some confusion about the different grades of oxygen. I work at a hospital. I also am an amateur welder, and oxygen is pretty important in both settings. I am no expert, but after calling a few people, both here at the hospital and at an industrial supply place, and doing some research on the Web and at my local library, I came up with a few facts. There are four main classifications of commercial oxygen: Medical, Welding, Research, and Aviation. All forms of the gas are produced from the regulated boiling off of liquid oxygen. Medical oxygen is humidified when it leaves the bottle. Welding and Research O2 is not. Welding gas is very pure; the standard is <.4 PPM impurities, those being helium, argon and nitrogen, in trace amounts. Contrary to what you might think, it is generally held to a higher purity standard than Medical, or USP Oxygen. I spoke to an anesthesiologist and a respiratory therapist here at the hospital. Both said that "Medical" oxygen really doesn't become "medical" until it is humidified. The oxygen must meet a 93%(!)to 99% purity to be USP (United States Pharmacopoeia) certified, and this USP Oxygen was available only by prescription. Welding gas has to be 99.6% or better, according to OSHA and the industrial supplier I spoke to. I was surprised by this, but I was told that the measure was taken at the point of delivery, and that the humidity in USP Oxygen was considered an impurity. All of that said, I think that it's important to again stress the dangers of having 02 around the home. Before obtaining O2, the home brewer would be well-advised to obtain a copy of the MSDS sheet for oxygen. You can get one at the following URL: http://www.hoopersupply.com/msds/oxygen.htm Please understand that this gas, under pressure, can cause some pretty wild things to happen in a very short amount of time if exposed to heat or petrochemicals. You have to have special regulators, seals and hoses, and you must work with it in a well ventilated environment. Oil, lubricants, gas, etc. will flash and burn violently when exposed to oxygen. It can pool up at ground level, saturate clothes, carpets, towels, and with one static spark, you have one hell of a fire. Some metals will combust when the flame is fueled by pure O2. Stainless steel is a good metal to use with pure O2, as it resists oxidation well. If you breathe pure O2 in for an extended period of time, it can cause throat and lung irritation. Infants exposed to 100% oxygen can receive serious eye damage. Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or COPD, (i.e. asthma, etc.) when exposed to 100% O2 can suffer a seriously depressed breathing reflex and can asphyxiate. If you still want to use it, a number of companies make disposable canisters for light duty use. With the proper regulator and hoses, these work just fine, and I have seen them in Northern Brewer and B3's catalogs. I've even seen a rig at Wal-Mart, made by Bernz-o-Matic. You can get 20-30 good shots of O2 from one canister, and they're not that expensive. Just use proper safety precautions and think about what you're doing. Using O2 to oxygenate your wort is probably one instance in which relaxing and having a home brew isn't the best advice. A concerned brewer, Jeff Greenly greenlyj at rcbhsc.wvu.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 08:08:56 -0400 From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net> Subject: re: haze Paul Smith (obviously a pseudonym) has been chipping around the edges of the haze issue and writing some very good stuff - tho I think some practical context is missing ... << [...] sources of your haze, I would look to the polyphenol contribution of your hops (likely) or your malt. >> The hops are a less likely source unless the original poster was dry-hopping. The gallotannins present in hops mostly remain in the break. In a 'typical' beer roughly similar amounts of phenolic compounds appear in hops and malt, but the malt phenolics dominate the beer. << The permanent haze you describe may be due to the complexation of the polyphenols with haze-active, proline rich protein residues in your beer, very common. >> This is classic chill/permanent non-biological haze. The "proline rich protein residues" aren't some rarefied fraction of barley protein. In one study of the amino acids of wort proteins, of the 20 common amino acids, proline made up 30.9% of the total ! Proline is by far the most prevalent amino acid in barley protein and also the most likely to bind to polyphenols. BTW - your tongue is proline rich and this is part of the story of astringency sensation. Haze requires complexes large enough to scatter visible light, and so polyphenols that can bind two proteins (not just attach to one), and numerous enough to be noticable. Polymers with 2-5 phenolic units are best at this cross-linking of proteins. This is similar to the action of tannin so called "tannoids". Monophenols don't cross-link and polyphenols peak in their tendency to bind to proteins at about 3-5 units. Beyond that they bind much less strongly and at about polymerization of 10 they cease to be soluble. The proteins involved have 100 - 600 amino acids and also are bound to a significant amount of carbohydrate. << Outside of time, fining, or filtration, there is not much you can do except say to hell with it and enjoy your great tasting pilsner. >> Once the haze has formed you could use proteolysis or filtration. The time to act is before haze formation using PVPP, PolyclarAT Nylon66, etc - very effective in removing the offensive part of the polyphenols. <<Polyphenol-protein induced haze is not as much a function of total amounts of protein or polyphenols which survive the boil into your beer, but rather the ratio between the two .. the haze active proteins have "enabler" sites along their chain, but only in certain numbers, which lock up with polyphenolic "ends." In order for the complexation to take place, these active sites must be available in roughly equal proportion the the polyphenolic "ends." >> The statement is along the right lines, but the explanation is garbled. If you have "enough" of the right sort of protein to create haze in a beer then there is an "optimal" amount of polyphenol to add in order to create haze. Too little and there will be more haze potential available. Too much polyphenol and you get complexes so big that they precipitate fast. Adding tannins to clear hazes has been used commercially. The other part of the "ratio" doesn't work well. If you add more haze-potentiating protein in a beer then you'll get somewhat more haze for a fixed level of polyphenol. << Also, the presence of oxygen, or certain heavy metals (e.g., iron or copper) aid in the formation of haze - by bringing about the formation of proanthocyanidin dimers from monomers. >> Actually tin, lead and antimony top the list, but Cu and Fe are more common. This comes down to oxidation. The metal ions allow the creation of ionized O2 and O2 complexes which go on to oxidize phenolics and polyphenols which polymerize or bind to protein. The proline sites of proteins and proanthocyanidins, and catechins are probably the most important and most studied - but other amino acids and phenolics are involved in haze. << The recently revisited hot-side aeration discussion impacts here - HSA may actually reduce eventual haze formation by catalyzing complexation in the kettle - and thus increasing the rate of dropout before transferring to the fermentor. >> This is correct. Adding peroxide to the mash to create improved beer stability has been practiced too. Purposely oxidizing the wort is IMO a bad techniques. The simple unoxidized phenolics - monomers, are an important part of brisk fresh beer flavor and these are oxidized by this method. This method reduces the post boil level of phenolics, but at a terrible cost. This technique might have value if you were stuck with inferior malt - otherwise it deserves a pass. Gillian Grafton of the UK HB digest has a webpage with a compiled list of haze reduction methods. Many of the old methods (like oxidizing & polymerizing the phenolics w/ formaldehyde) were comparable IMO to cutting off your toes to make your shoes it better. << The bottom line: avoid oxygen after the kettle, expecially in the presence of a good amount of malt- or hop-contributed polyphenols and proteins. >> Absolutely. Much of the oxidized phenolics are left behind, given a good boil & break. Only oxidized phenolics are a serious problem re haze formation. Oxidized phenolics are also much more flavor active on the bitter/harsh/astringent scale . New oxidized phenolics form after the boil in two ways - by the introduction of O2 after the ferment *or* by the transfer of oxidation state from some other material oxidized in the boil or mash or before. The yeast are very strong reducers and much of the oxidation state transfer which could otherwise occur doesn't during fermentation. After fermentation the beer chemicals all get together and play "hot potato" with oxidation state until the phenolics get oxidized and latch up to a protein or some other stable fate. The best (IMO) way to avoid oxidized phenolics in the beer is to prevent wort oxidation and use PVPP etc if needed. Haze also requires the protein have binding sites (of proline or some of the hydroxyl- or sulfur containing amino acids) *and* be large enough to eventually form near-visible light wavelength size particles. Smaller proteins are more difficult to craft into such large bits, so more proteolysis makes for more haze resistant beer. The problem is that we like lots of protein for body and head in the beer. Frank Tutzauer writes ... << A guy in my club suggested using a protein rest because of the pilsner malt. [...] would a protein rest help? >> He's right. Some malts will throw a haze if you don't perform a limited protein rest, but too much and you'll reduce head & body. IMO start w/ 15' at 57C(135F) then a boost to the sacchar range as a haze reduction rest. Also use PVPP or Polyclar as soon as the yeast drops - it's very effective. I have a paper that purports to give "total stabilization" of beer which adds large insoluble gallotannins to the beer which chelate metal ions and remove polyphenol/protein complexes. The gallotannin complexes are then removed by centrifugation. Neat method, but a continuous centrifuge is beyond HB means. -S Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 08:21:19 -0400 From: "Steven Parfitt" <the_gimp98 at hotmail.com> Subject: RE: Solid Sate Relay Answer/Lesson Mike Posted: >Well my HLT is sitting at a very even 165 degrees right now. Thank >you >very much to all the people that tried to help. The answer made >me want >to kick myself in the butt! Seems that when you read voltage >on a SSR that >does not have a load it will look like it is >conducting. As soon as you >put a load on it it operates perfectly. >End of lesson. Now all I have to >do is figure out why my pump quit >working and get another PID controller >and i will be in business! An SSR normally contains an Opto-isolator, a Triac, and a Snubber network. The Opto-Isolator provides roughly 1500-5000 Volts of isolation between the logic control input and the output drive side of the circuit for safety isolation. The Triac is the Power handeling switch. The Snubber usually consists of a resistor and capacitor in series across the output terminals of the Triac, to suppress comutating dv/dt from false trigering the TRIAC. Since it is a capacitor and resistor in series across the output terminals, it will pass a small current. Normally in the 1-3 milliampere range. Power triacs also have a minimum holding current specification. It is important to use a load which will excede the minimum holding current to insure proper operation of the triac. This is normally around 100mA. There is also a "Tungsten" rating of triac which is related to turn on surge of incandescent lamps. For TRIACs with current ratings in the 4 to 15 ampere range, a 60W lamp is a good test load. I wouldn't cycle it too much as the in-rush is going to be stressfull to the Triac if the lamp is allowed to cool significantly. Mike ping me about the motor if you are still trying to figure it out and I will try to help. Steven Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 06:22:14 -0600 From: Ken Schwartz <kenbob at elp.rr.com> Subject: Converting Extract to All-Grain Hop Head writes: "I am converting some of my partial mash recipes to all grain. In one of them I used amber DME. What type of grain and in what quantity would I use per pound of DME?" This is actually trickier than going the other way. Here's why. Consider amber extract and the beer it makes. The beer (specifically, the wort, initally) has a certain color and gravity. How do you create gravity? By how much *total* grain you use. How do you create color? By how much of *what types* of grain you use. That's the tricky part -- is the extract made from pale ale malt and roast barley, or from pilsner malt and crystal? Both of these combinations (and many others as well) can be made to yield equal colors and gravities, yet they would clearly produce very different beers. The answer to your question then depends on what kind of beer you are making. Study typical recipes for the style to see what goes into them that you're not already putting into your extract/partial-mash versions. This should guide you as to what types of grains you would consider to substitute for the extract. Next, determine the *total amount* of grain needed to substitute. A quick rule of thumb for converison of liquid extract to grain is to use 1.33 lb of grain for every pound of liquid extract, or 1.50 lb grain for every pound of dry extract. Now you must determine the proportion of the different grains that you have selected to substitute. Here's a possible procedure. Use a recipe formulation program or spreadsheet. Create a beer of your usual batch size using *only* the amount of "amber extract" that your extract or partial mash recipe calls for. Note the gravity and color that results. Now delete the extract and add the grains you selected to substitute for the extract. Play around with the quantities until you acheive the same gravity and color, remembering that the bulk of the grain bill will likely be the pale "base" malt (pale ale malt, two-row, pilsner, etc). Now add the rest of the recipe, and you're finished. There is an article on my website ( http://home.elp.rr.com/brewbeer ) that describes the process of all-grain to extract/partial-mash. It has information that might be helpful going the other way. Good luck! - -- ***** Ken Schwartz El Paso, TX Brewing Web Page: http://home.elp.rr.com/brewbeer E-mail: kenbob at elp.rr.com Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 08:13:29 -0400 From: george fix <gjfix at CLEMSON.EDU> Subject: Yeast Viability Hi! It was pointed out on Monday that: >Well you've seen some inputs but one confused poster writes: >>I came up with this test in the late 1980s when I was writing the first edition >>of [...] >Yeah - and Al Gore invented the internet. The earliest reference to using >iodine as a simple visual test for glycogen that I am aware of appears in ">Brewers' Guardian", page 43, February 1972, by C.Rainbow - a well known >brewing yeast researcher. This method is referenced in a Cambridge prize >lecture by David E.Quain published in JIB v95, pp315-323, Sept-Oct 1988 This is absolutely correct. The references were also pointed out to me in private e-mail (in a slightly more civil manner!). In any case I was dead wrong in thinking I was the first to use the test. In fact the test is so simple and obvious that it would not be surprising if there were other references as well. This is elementary homebrew methodology, but as long as it is a reliable guide to predicting if my yeast will meet expectations, I tend to be flexible about such things. > Glycogen level is >a good thing to measure/understand but it's not viability. This assumes there is a universally accepted notion of "viability". In fact there is not, and as far as properties relevant to brewing (which can be quite different from other applications), viability is in effect defined by how it is measured. There is a fantastic recent article by Inge Russell, R.J. Stewart and others which contains a readable and comprehensive review of yeast viability as it relates to brewing which makes these and other points. It appeared in the MBAA Tech. Qr., Vol. 37, no.4, 2000. >The long used test for brewing ability is methylene blue , which has >limitations. Methylene violet stain has recently been suggested as an >improvement. The advantages of this over methylene blue are discussed in >J.ASBC 57(1):18-23, 1999 by Smart et al. which is available at the ASBC >website. This paper notes some of the limitations of Methylene blue, and >also demonstrates methods of testing the relationship of the stain level >with other measures of viability. I have discussed this article at length elsewhere, including many private e-mails with people on this forum. I also discussed it in my presentation at MCAB II. The limitations of staining cited in this article occur only when < 90% viability is experienced. Some of the most problematic beers I have produced in the past have been with yeast in this condition. Quite frankly if it is below 90% I am going to take corrective action, and from a practical point of view I could care less if it 60% or for that matter 80%. The pros use 95% as the cutoff, which is well into the accurate zone. This is most certainly why Methylene blue (as well as variations using other stains) is still recommended by the ASBC, and can be found in their Methods Of Analysis. MCAB III like its two predecessors should be a blast! I am looking forward to lively and stimulating beer discussions. Cheers, George Fix ******************************************************* George J. Fix Phone: 864-656-4562 Professor and Head Department of Mathematical Sciences Clemson University 29634 ******************************************************* Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 08:21:19 -0400 From: "Steven Parfitt" <the_gimp98 at hotmail.com> Subject: RE: Solid Sate Relay Answer/Lesson Mike Posted: >Well my HLT is sitting at a very even 165 degrees right now. Thank >you >very much to all the people that tried to help. The answer made >me want >to kick myself in the butt! Seems that when you read voltage >on a SSR that >does not have a load it will look like it is >conducting. As soon as you >put a load on it it operates perfectly. >End of lesson. Now all I have to >do is figure out why my pump quit >working and get another PID controller >and i will be in business! An SSR normally contains an Opto-isolator, a Triac, and a Snubber network. The Opto-Isolator provides roughly 1500-5000 Volts of isolation between the logic control input and the output drive side of the circuit for safety isolation. The Triac is the Power handeling switch. The Snubber usually consists of a resistor and capacitor in series across the output terminals of the Triac, to suppress comutating dv/dt from false trigering the TRIAC. Since it is a capacitor and resistor in series across the output terminals, it will pass a small current. Normally in the 1-3 milliampere range. Power triacs also have a minimum holding current specification. It is important to use a load which will excede the minimum holding current to insure proper operation of the triac. This is normally around 100mA. There is also a "Tungsten" rating of triac which is related to turn on surge of incandescent lamps. For TRIACs with current ratings in the 4 to 15 ampere range, a 60W lamp is a good test load. I wouldn't cycle it too much as the in-rush is going to be stressfull to the Triac if the lamp is allowed to cool significantly. Mike ping me about the motor if you are still trying to figure it out and I will try to help. Steven Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 08:59:46 -0400 From: "Jay Wirsig" <Jay.Wirsig at can.dupont.com> Subject: Skunked? My helles has a bit of an off flavour. My wife says it is a little skunky, I detect a bit of sulfer. It was feremented at 11 dec C using a yeast cake from a previous batch (Budvar) for 16 days and racked to a secondary for lagering for 16 days. I did not do a diacyl rest. I have kegged 5 gal and have a second 5 gal in a carboy. My questions are: 1) What could be the cause? 2) What can I do to correct it? >>Jay Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 08:09:38 -0500 From: Nathan Kanous <nlkanous at pharmacy.wisc.edu> Subject: sour beer, souring weisse beer Steve Parfitt asks about using yogurt or yogurt cultures to make a beer sour. Well....yes...no...well..not exactly. Let me start by saying I'm not a microbiologist. As I understand it, sour beers are made as such with the use of certain yeast strains (Brettanomyces) and bacteria (pediococcus and lactobacillus). Let's look at lactobacillus. As I understand it (ouch those comments were sharp Steve ;^) the Lactobacillus used in sour beers is Lactobacillus delbrukii (pardon the spelling). Yogurt typically use Lactobacillus bulgaricus. Note Phils recent postings about the virtues of local flora for the souring of beers (that was bordering on poor taste.....are those Lactobacillis acidophilus?). Needless to say these are different bugs. They will ferment differently and produce different fermentation products. Will yogurt cultures make sour beer? Sure could. Will it be the same as those soured with other microbes? Not likely...but it's dependant upon your definition of "same"? Case in point. Last spring I made a batch of Berliner Weisse. I mashed the malt with some hops in the mash and ran off into the boil tun. Brought that baby up to about 190 deg F and then chilled it. Never boiled it. I pitched a BUNCH of Lactobacillus acidophilus capsules that I had available. I put this in a water bath at 100 deg F for 3 days until the wort seemed to be slightly sour. I then dropped the temp into the upper 60's (deg F) and pitched a kolsch yeast and let it go. Do I have a berliner weisse? Sort of. It's got a hint of sourness, not at all as sour as a berliner weisse should be, but it's there. It's also rather distinct and one-sided. That is, it seems to have made lactic acid and nothing else. It worked, but I'll try some other cultures this summer. Also, don't forget that many yogurt cultures also contain yeast. Look at the small print. I wouldn't try it. Now, I may very well try to make a Finnish Sahti with a sourdough yeast starter though..... Hope this helps.... a little. nathan in madison, wi Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 15:03:47 +0200 From: "Cade Morgan" <Cade.Morgan at eskom.co.za> Subject: Clear Beer Hi brewmeisters A quick question. How do I get rid of all yeast sediment in my beer? I read a posting recently that I interpreted as follows: 1) Prime the beer in the fermenter, 2) Seal off fermenter to retain CO2, 3) Allow the 2 weeks 4) Chill beer to as close to 0 C as poss. 5) Fill bottles. Will this have the desired effect? Has anybody tried this method before? I enjoy drinking beer from the bottle, and with the amount of sediment in my beer at the moment this is not possible. Please advise. Cade A Morgan cade.morgan at eskom.co.za +27 (0)17-7993244 Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 08:34:13 est From: pedwards at iquest.net Subject: Oxygen purity here's a replay of what I posted to HBD 2904 on 12/18/98 here's the infor I got from a supplier of welding oxygen that I patronize for my brewing oxygen: "U.S.P. Oxygen (medical) has guranteed specifications of 99.0% minimum oxygen purity, no odor. "Industrial (welding) oxygen does not have guaranteed specifications, but typically is CGA grade C, < 50ppm of moisture, 99.5% oxygen purity. "Both grades come from the same cryogenic bulk source, with typical contaminants being: nitrogen, argon, hydrocarbons, krypton, carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide. The difference in grades arises from the care taken in cylinder preparation and analysis. U.S.P. gases must be produced and tested in accordance with "FDA Good Manufacturing Practices" and may be legally used ONLY as directed by a licensed physician or for emergency use by trained personnel." Back to me: Note that the "contaminants" are primarily the other gases that make up the air we breath. BTW, oil will self-ignite in the presence of 99.5 percent pure O2 (we did this in high school chemistry), as will many other substances, so the "oil/acetelyne in the oxygen" is a myth. Many commercial breweries I've seen use welding grade O2 for oxygenation. I hope this answers the questions --Paul Edwards Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 08:42:02 -0500 From: david.persenaire at abnamro.com Subject: homebrew clubs Shane Saylor asks what our opinions of homebrew clubs are. I have been a member of our club in the south suburbs of Chicago since its inception ten years ago. Our club never gave brewing lessons (well maybe once but too much homebrew flowing and that's another story) but the members themselves are always open to having someone stop by and watch them brew to learn a few points. When I decided to switch to all grain a little over a year ago I decided to take up invites with two of our more accomplished members and picked up pointers from each and watched two different approaches. I would recommend joining a club simply for a place to talk beer one on one with fellow beer geeks. After that you'd be suprised at the different walks of life people come from and yet you all have a common bond in that illustrious malt nectar. My question/request for the great minds in this forum is this. I have lurked in my club for ten years and they finally did something crazy and made me president for the next year. I would like to keep it going as well as my predecessor and have a fine example to follow. Any one have any suggestions for events, outings, meeting ideas? We meet once a month in a member's house and feature a style that month where a member can bring a commercial example or a homebrewed one. We have an annual picnic, competition, and a Christmas party as our main events. Any other thoughts comments would be appreciated. I read Phil's comments on pilsner mark 2 and I need more details. How long did it lager? Any decoctions? Water treatment? I just tapped my maibock after a painful 85 days of lagering and I have to say the wait was worth it. I have hit spring nervana. Phil, next time take that same yeast and beef up your grain bill a little more to hit a gravity of 1.070 or 1.080 and you have a maibock. Do you get spring in oz to take advantage of maibock season? I would also like to hear the differences between the two yeasts since I am going to be tapping a budvar strain myself after 70 days of lagering(the 85 was too painful couldn't wait any longer). Dave Persenaire Tinley Park, Illinois Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 09:49:11 -0400 From: "Glen Pannicke" <glen at pannicke.net> Subject: Temperature Controllers chezrad at bellsouth.net wrote: >John Zeller asked why people tend to use PID's but not PLC's. In my opinion >there are several reasons for this. [snip] I am interested in creating a controller using a homebrewed microcontroller (uC) setup, however my free time is now occupied by a little 9 mo. old who has just learned to crawl. So this project will have to have to hit the back burner for quite some time. Designing your own uC controller is no easy task. It will require an intermediate knowledge of digital and analog electronic circuits, plus you'll have to learn how to program the controller. To date, I have found that the AVR uC family (Dallas Semiconductors)is cheap and pretty versatile. 2 port uC's go for around US$2-3 a piece and can be programmed in a number of languages such as C and BASIC. Depending on the model you can get any combination of: 1-10 MHz, 2-4 I/O ports (7-8 pin/port), MAX232 UART capablity, 0-2 ADC, 0-2 timers, watchdog timer, additional EEPROM memory, brownout protection... I know I'm forgetting something else... Oh. It's flashable ROM is good for over 1000 cycles. See www.atmel.com for details. BASIC programming can be acomplished using the BASCOM AVR programmer. This software package will allow you to program "in system" or through a hardware programmer. The evaluation copy will allow programming up to 2K for free. Greater than 2K of instructions require the full version. See http://www.mcselec.com for details. Additionally, many peripheral devices (such as temp sensors) may be added to the system using a simple 1-wire or 2-wire interface. The best I've seen so far which work well with the above reside at www.dalsemi.com. If you'd like a good intro to the subject, check out the "Little rAVeR" package available at www.dontronics.com. It's an Aussie site which will set you on the right track. They have PIC micros as well as AVRs. I prefer the AVRs over PICs. I've dealt with Dontronics in the past. They get a thumbs up from me. I have no affiliation with any of these links. It's just a listing of a few months worth of research into the subject. I originally wanted to design my own RIMS/HERMS controller - and I will - SOMEDAY... Now back to your regularly scheduled beer-related geekdom... P.S. - It's good to see so many HBD'ers publishing in Zymurgy as of late. Hat's off gentlemen! =================================================== Glen A. Pannicke glen at pannicke.net http://www.pannicke.net Check http://pgpkeys.mit.edu/ for PGP public key 75CE 0DED 59E1 55AB 830F 214D 17D7 192D 8384 00DD ================================================== Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 10:30:15 -0400 (EDT) From: Steven <stevensl at mindspring.net> Subject: Re: Hops References I got some requests to post the replies to my hops references question here are the majority of the replies URL's i received. I was looking for flavor character and the first three fit that bill nicely. Again thanks to all those who replied. HDB's underused resource http://hbd.org/brewery/Library.html#Hops FAQ at realbeer http://www.realbeer.com/hops/FAQ.html John Palmer's book http://www.howtobrew.com/section1/chapter5-3.html Hop Union Hops Reference http://www.hopunion.com/hvcb.htm Intresting Reference http://yakimachief.com/hoppages/hopvarietal.html Steven St.Laurent ::: stevensl at mindspring.net ::: 403forbidden.net "You want the government to handle your medical care? You want the government to take care of your retirement? Go stand in line at a post office." -- Neil Boortz Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 09:54:44 -0500 From: "Tracy P. Hamilton" <chem013 at uabdpo.dpo.uab.edu> Subject: Oxygen contaminants Somebody said: >> He said that the welding grade can be contaminated with nasty stuff >> such as acetylene The Janitor said: > Wouldn't that make the cylinder a bomb? I mean, if you can't have > simple oil in the cylinder, acetylene is far more combustible. As I > understand it, the "contaminants" are more along the lines of noble > (inert) gasses - but what do I know? > Any one out there with the proper credentials care to speak up? There are pressure and composition regimes which are explosive, those which are flammable - which grade into those which are safe. They are separated by a curve which is commonly backwards S shaped (cut the curling tips off of the "S"), the different slants being the first, second and third limits. Physical Chemistry textbooks usually give H2 and O2 as an example. Examples: 1. Fuel-air bombs such as used in the movie Outbreak. 2. The natural gas explosions that occur only after a buildup of natural gas and then a spark. For the same reason you may want to be careful where you store that propane tank if it is full and the pressure release valve is working on sudden warming. Maybe the melting snow from the sudden warming will put out the cinders of your house. 3. Lighting my barbeque grill. Similarly the stove used by the 3 Stooges. 4. A nearly empty gas tank - watch out with that torch, Eugene! Tracy P. Hamilton Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 12:20:00 -0400 From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer at engin.umich.edu> Subject: Re: UPS beer shipping woes Well, they've got your number now, so you probably can't go back there. I label mine as "nonperishable food in glass" which ain't no lie. I also use a "mailboxes etc" type place (a local firm, not really mailboxes etc.) figuring they're much less likely to quiz me on the content (and so far, so good), and that the UPS guy is not going to go through the boxes he gets from them looking for suspicious contents. Another thing that may raise a flag would be the destination address. If it's "XYZ Homebrew Competition" then that's suspicious. If it's "XYZHC" that's maybe not. =Spencer Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 12:13:00 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <JeffRenner at mediaone.net> Subject: Re: sour beer, souring weiss beer, peroxide "Steven Parfitt" <the_gimp98 at hotmail.com> wrote >As far as a source for Lacto-Bacilis.... Could one just use a teaspoon of >yogurt? Add it to a batch of malt and water that had been boiled to build up >a batch of yeast? Let this ferment for a couple of days and use it? It might work, but there are many species of Lactobacillus, and many varieties or strains of many of these species. The one you may want for souring your beer may very well not be one you could find in yogurt. There are many species/strains in yogurt, notably L. acidophilus and L. bulgaricus, as well as Streptococcus lactis. The Berlilnner Weisse souring bug is L. berolinensis, which DeClerck suggests is probably a strain of L. pastorianianus. This is only theory. I don't know what practice would produce. Jeff - -- ***Please note new address*** (old one will still work) Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, JeffRenner at mediaone.net "One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943 Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 13:01:55 -0400 From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam at unc.edu> Subject: microbrewing equipment Hey all, I'm trying to price out the startup costs to create a microbrewery for an "entrepreneurial project" at business school. I'm thinking a 60bbl brewery, three fermenters, ability to brew lagers, etc. Could someone please point me in the direction of an online resource to buy used equipment? Or any links to new equipment providers would be cool too. Thanks, Marc - -- Marc Sedam Associate Director Office of Technology Development The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill 308 Bynum Hall; CB# 4105 Chapel Hill, NC 27599-4105 919.966.3929 (phone) 919.962.0646 (fax) OTD site : http://www.research.unc.edu/otd eMTA site: http://mta.unc.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 14:10:46 -0400 From: "Steven Parfitt" <the_gimp98 at hotmail.com> Subject: Re: sour beer, souring weiss beer, peroxide Good point that I hadn't considered. Another point I hadn't thought about till now is - how do I know that whatever I am growing currently will not over time become too sour. Right now it is nice and tart, but not like a persimon. Over time it could get lots more sour. I guess some experimentation is in order. Since I am about out of the wheat beer (just a slight slosh in the bottom of the keg), I could add a gallon of my Kolsch to it and let it set for about a month, then bottle it and set it aside for a month or so and then try one every couple of weeks to see how it matures. Is this something I could apporach the biology department at the local college to try to identify? Or is identification of such organisms relativly difficult? Hydrogen Peroxide tasts flat to me, this is a pucker sour. Are there other peroxides that would exist in beer giving it a sour taste? Steven >From: Jeff Renner <JeffRenner at mediaone.net> >To: homebrew at hbd.org (Posting Address Only - No Requests) >CC: "Steven Parfitt" <the_gimp98 at hotmail.com> >Subject: Re: sour beer, souring weiss beer, peroxide >Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 12:13:00 -0400 > >"Steven Parfitt" <the_gimp98 at hotmail.com> wrote > >>As far as a source for Lacto-Bacilis.... Could one just use a teaspoon of >>yogurt? Add it to a batch of malt and water that had been boiled to build >>up >>a batch of yeast? Let this ferment for a couple of days and use it? > >It might work, but there are many species of Lactobacillus, and many >varieties or strains of many of these species. The one you may want >for souring your beer may very well not be one you could find in >yogurt. There are many species/strains in yogurt, notably L. >acidophilus and L. bulgaricus, as well as Streptococcus lactis. > >The Berlilnner Weisse souring bug is L. berolinensis, which DeClerck >suggests is probably a strain of L. pastorianianus. > >This is only theory. I don't know what practice would produce. > >Jeff >-- >***Please note new address*** (old one will still work) >Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, JeffRenner at mediaone.net >"One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943 Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 04/24/01, by HBD2HTML v1.2 by KFL
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96
Convert This Page to Pilot DOC Format
/n