HOMEBREW Digest #3648 Fri 01 June 2001

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

		Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org


          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 *********

  Cooling wort with ice (TOLLEY Matthew)
  Kegged the mega-swill (craftbrewer)
  RE: intermediate mashing instructions? ("Mike Pensinger")
  Florida Bottle Bill Signed ("Mark Tumarkin")
  Pressure fermenting (AJ)
  AHA Elections ("Jeff Beinhaur")
  RE: ice vs chiller (LaBorde, Ronald)
  kegging system options ("murls")
  Beer Glasses (Brad Miller)
  re: H:W Huh ? (Tom M)
  CAP exp(yeast)&Aussie glasses (Frank Tutzauer)
  runoff clarity and harshness (Troy Hager)
  Re: ice vs chiller (Steven)
  RE: mash runoff clarity ("Houseman, David L")
  re: H:W Huh ? (steve-alexander)
  cold flocculation ("Paddock Wood Brewing Supplies")
  Big (CAP?) Spurments ("Dr. Pivo")
  Bottle Color, Cider Site ("Hedglin, Nils A")
  Re: Pressure Fermenting & H:W ("Robert J. Waddell")
  goin' to Red Lake ("elvira toews")
  Beer in Bath ("elvira toews")
  Re: H:W Huh ? (steve-alexander)
  Australian Serving Sizes ("Brad McMahon")
  Re: great beers in Southern England (alastair)

* * 2001 AHA NHC - 2001: A Beer Odyssey, Los Angeles, CA * June 20th-23rd See http://www.beerodyssey.com for more * information. Wear an HBD ID Badge to wear to the gig! * http://hbd.org/cgi-bin/shopping * * Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! * Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!! To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to request@hbd.org FROM THE E-MAIL ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!** IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, you cannot subscribe to the digest as we canoot reach you. We will not correct your address for the automation - that's your job. The HBD is a copyrighted document. The compilation is copyright HBD.ORG. Individual postings are copyright by their authors. ASK before reproducing and you'll rarely have trouble. Digest content cannot be reproduced by any means for sale or profit. More information is available by sending the word "info" to req at hbd.org. JANITOR on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 15:47:57 +1000 From: TOLLEY Matthew <matthew.tolley at atsic.gov.au> Subject: Cooling wort with ice From: "Tammy Duriavich" <murph at xsite.net> >John, & all that have given input re: force cooling w/ice, now I understand >that even tho the water is "clean" going into the freezer, it's not >necessarily so coming out of the freezer & going into my brew. >Therefore, I guess I'll just have to get a chiller, won't I?? Why? Here in Oz we get our milk in 2-litre or 3-litre plastic bottles. Wash, rinse, fill with water, freeze. On brew day, spray the bottle(s) with cold sanitising solution and let sit for the necessary period of time - melting will be minimal, especially if you sit the bottle in a sanitised esky. Gently sit the bottle full of ice in the hot wort. When you're done, clean the bottle and pop it back in the freezer for next time. Cheers! ...Matt... Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 19:56:45 +1000 From: craftbrewer at telstra.easymail.com.au Subject: Kegged the mega-swill G'Day All / Well the last of my sins have been completed. Jeff keeps yelling at me "Satan, I expell you to the never regions". Come to think of it, I can't remember how i ended up in this part of the world. / But yes people, I have kegged the "commercial Brew" for the young soon to be 18 year old SWMBO. Must admit I'm impressed. No not with the taste, nor my brewing skills, but the fact that I have got it so close to a commercial its frightening. I would recon if I hadn't used fresh Pride of Ringwood hops, and used isohops instead, I would have a VB/Fosters. But with the fresh hops, its more like a CUB premium beer. Still crap but gee its close. I am thinking for the party telling "the now it all" 18 year olds its a keg of commercial premium and seeing the reaction. / And how do we get away with that. Well up here its quite a common practice to take a corny keg to a pub and tell the publican to fill her up. Then take it home and you serve a megaswill on tap at home. Neat idea. And speaking of up here / Scott (wishing he was a North Queenslander) wrote / Graham in the nyuide is not easy on the eye we have heard, nor when he is charmingly dressed in Khaki <<<<<<<<<<< / And whats wrong with Khaki!!!!!!!. I have a suite made of the stuff. I get strange looks thou when I wear it down south. I can't work out why. Everyone tells me I have wonderful looking knee-caps, and great looking legs. / Still he has let one secret out of the bag. Unfortunately designs after this time were not "manly" enough and did not allow the flow of body odour to those withing a 5 meter radius easily.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< / Yeh guys SWMBO's are strange creatures. "Boy does that guy stink" they will say. Then later its "I have a good mind to tell him that". Soon its "hey you you smell a bit mate" to your face. But you have the last word. Next morning you roll over to her and say oh so softly "will you have a shower you smell". / Shout Graham Sanders / Oh speaking of errant Females. Seems Bushes young SWMBO to be, cant sneek in and out of bar now. Keeps getting caught. Should talk to my 17 year old. Not only can see do it properly, She also drinks responsibly. Now if old Bush could learn from that, you lot might have responsible drinking laws. / What am I saying!!!!!!! I have an 18th coming up. There is going to be some serious drinking going on, reminds me of my youth. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 07:47:57 -0400 From: "Mike Pensinger" <beermkr at bellatlantic.net> Subject: RE: intermediate mashing instructions? I highly recommend The Seven Barrel Brewery Brewers Handbook ((ISBN 1-887167-00-5) I got mine from Amazon and have loved it. It covers all phases of the brewing procees and was easy to use and read. Mike Pensinger beermkr at bellatlantic.net http://members.bellatlantic.net/~beermkr Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 08:23:05 -0400 From: "Mark Tumarkin" <mark_t at ix.netcom.com> Subject: Florida Bottle Bill Signed Hey everyone, It's time to Celebrate! The Florida bottle bill was finally signed by Governor Bush yesterday. The changes will take place Oct. 1st. This is the first time in over 35 years, since the law was passed limiting container size, that retailers can sell beer in container sizes other than 8, 12, 16, and 32 oz sizes. It has been a long, hard fight. Lawmakers had tried to change the legislation as early as 1973, but the current effort was led by Senator Tom Lee of Brandon. We really owe him a lot of thanks for continuing to sponsor this legislation,despite the fact that the bills have been defeated the last several years, in large part because of opposition from the lobbyists of the big beer manufacturers and distributors. This year however, the lobbyists decided not to oppose the legislation as vigorously. There has been a concentrated effort by homebrewers and beer lovers to write letters and make calls to all the state legislators to convince them the time had come to do away with the repressive restrictions. Thanks again to Pat, Karl, and the HBD for hosting the Florida Brewers List - the communication method we used for coordinating this effort. Thanks also to John Larsen, past president of the North Florida Brewers League, the Tallahassee homebrew club. John was our man on the spot in the state capitol. He not only closely watched the legislation, alerting the rest of us as events took place, but he spent a lot of time talking with lobbyists and legislators. He also testified very effectively at several of the committee hearings. The campaign to change the law was a group effort (a major effort!), but John was certainly at the forefront of that effort. So now that the bill was passed and now signed, beer lovers in Florida can now look forward to the opportunity to buy imports in metric sizes, and micro-brews in sizes like 22oz bombers or 7oz nips. That is, assuming that distributors can be found to carry the 'odd sizes' in the face of continued pressure from the big boys. I'm sure that there will be some enterprising distributors who will want to develop this niche market. So break out those American micro-brew bombers or those treasured Belgians and drink a toast to free choice. Chalk up one for the good guys! Mark Tumarkin Gainesville, FL Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 10:20:23 -0400 From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com> Subject: Pressure fermenting RE: >While I was in Split Croatia a few years back I got a tour of the local >brewpub and discovered that he fermented under pressure. He stated that it >sped the process up and allowed fermentation at higher temperatures without >off flavors being produced. I cant remember how much pressure was on the >vessel and it was in Bars which i didnt understand anyway. Apparently this is done fairly frequently. The idea is that if CO2 molar concentration can be kept close to what it would be in the more traditional cold lager fermentation the yeast will behave more or less as they do in the traditional fermentation but they will do their work faster because of the higher temperaure. You say the vessel was in the Bar? (sorry, I can't help it sometimes). A.J. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 10:22:29 -0400 From: "Jeff Beinhaur" <beinhaur at email.msn.com> Subject: AHA Elections Congrats Mark..... I have one comment concerning the number of votes based on total membership. Mark states that only 180 out of 10,000 members voted. Low yes but I wonder how many of those members are actually brewers. I ask this because I know of a few people that joined only to be able to attend members only events at GABF. I'm sure these guys could give a crap about voting they just want to drink. So are there any stats that might take this into consideration? Jeff Beinhaur, Camp Hill, PA Home of the Yellow Breeches Brewery Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 09:31:32 -0500 From: rlabor at lsuhsc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald) Subject: RE: ice vs chiller >From: "Tammy Duriavich" <murph at xsite.net> > >John, & all that have given input re: force cooling w/ice, now I understand >that even tho the water is "clean" going into the freezer, it's not >necessarily so coming out of the freezer & going into my brew. I've just >been lucky thus far. Therefore, I guess I'll just have to get a chiller, > Well, maybe you can hold off on that chiller for a while. The problem with ice is that it may have picked up some contamination from the fridge. If you start with clean water (boiled, then cooled), then put it into a Ziplock bag (supposed to be sanitized, it's for food after all), then place this into the freezer. Now you have some clean, sanitized ice which you can use by opening the Ziplock and placing the ice into the wort. You can first submerge the pack into some sanitizer much as you would the yeast pack to sanitize the pack's surface just before handling and opening it. Ron La Borde Ronald La Borde - Metairie, Louisiana - rlabor at lsuhsc.edu http://hbd.org/rlaborde Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 09:30:28 -0600 From: "murls" <murls at gateway.net> Subject: kegging system options Hello all, I'm in the planning process of putting a bar in my basement. I want to have a keg system and am looking at a couple options. The first is to have a full size fridge with the faucets mounted on the front door. The second is to use a chest freezer with an external thermostat to control temperature. I would put a tower on top of the freezer or bar for the faucets. For either system I would probably put the CO2 cylinder in with the kegs, however I would be open to having the CO2 external. I would appreciate anyone's input on both installations, pros and cons of systems, where to drill the fridge/freezer, pitfalls, don't do this or there could be problems, etc. Thanks, Todd Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 08:50:09 -0700 From: Brad Miller <millerb at targen.com> Subject: Beer Glasses If it were up to me, the Darwin stubbie (2 Liters) sounds the best. Now do they call it "Darwin" in honor of him or because after you have a few you might eliminate yourself from the gene pool? Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 09:41:56 -0700 (PDT) From: Tom M <tomomeier at excite.com> Subject: re: H:W Huh ? >H:W and Surf:Vol are NOT directly related ratios Del. They can be >varied INDEPENDENTLY. Take a fixed fermenter shape like a cylinder,. >choose any arbitrary H:W ratio and any arbitrary Surf:Vol ratio and >you can create a cylinder which has both ratios. The two are >unrelated D=diameter H=height VOL=volume (clever huh) SURF=surface area And incidentally W=D, and H:W will now be designated as H:D SURF=(pi/4)*D*D VOL=(pi/4)*D*D*H Therefore, SURF:VOL = 1/H H:D = H/D Testing your assertion, I choose a H:D ratio=1 and a surf:vol ratio based on H=3 ft For this cylinder, surf:vol=1/3.. Now if we inrease to 4ft, surf:vol=1/4 Thus for a given H:W, there is an infite amount of surf:vol ratios that can be chosen by varing the overall dimensions. A simple example will show that the same can be said for holding the surf:vol constant. Choosing surf:vol=1/3, therefore H=3 and H:D=3/D so H:D is also independent of surf:vol Unfortunately, in this case, Steve appears to be correct. Hate it when that happens. I mean that in the nicest possible way Steve. Now I need a beer!! Tom Meier Huntsville, AL Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 13:28:19 -0400 (EDT) From: Frank Tutzauer <comfrank at acsu.buffalo.edu> Subject: CAP exp(yeast)&Aussie glasses Paul's worried about "yeast problems" in the CAP experiment: > By the way, the CAP experiment sounds like a wonderful idea, >but I'm firmly on the side of the "split-batch" experimental >design as a way to remove as much noise as possible. This still >leaves the problem of worrying about each individual's yeast >propagation habits, though, since any problems there would >certainly negate any later claims about fermentation differences. Not if the yeast problems are random (and I see no reason why they shouldn't be). Now, if there is enough variation in yeast, then it might *obscure* differences of interest (we can't find the signal in all the noise), but if we do find a signal (a fermenter difference), random yeast problems won't "negate" claims of fermenter differences. I do believe that we should try to standardize yeast handling, though (to lessen the noise). *************** Then Matt teaches us about Australian beer glasses: >schooner...middy...pony...pint...half-pint... a pot... a glass... >a lady's waist...kite...butcher...ten...eight...seven... >a Darwin stubbie... a handle... a Shetland pony ... a bobby... >Now, which did you want? :) So do you folks in Oz just use random words for everyday items? In the US it's a glass or a pint. Occasionally you can get a wheat beer in a 22-ounce glass, in which case it's called "a 22-ounce glass." Geez. I'm not sure I'd want to drink whatever comes out of a Shetland pony... --frank Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 10:31:58 -0700 From: Troy Hager <thager at hcsd.k12.ca.us> Subject: runoff clarity and harshness Brian, I have been brewing for about 5-6 years now, have a three tiered brewing system and a conical fermenter (BBMB) which I ferment in a temperature controled lagering fridge... I even oxygenate my pitched wort with a O2 tank, pitch tons of yeast, have lag times of 2-4 hours, and have my beers consistently finish at 1.008-1.010 ... and my beers still are rough around the edges! I am trying to get to the bottom of this, as it seems you are, and have been reading and looking over my brew notes and procedures to find the problem. I am very anal about sanitization. I use PBW or TSP with lots of rinsing and sanitize with StarSan. I have thought about the fact that my recirculated wort is not very clear and have wondered if that is a problem. I have also wondered about using pots to recirculate and add back to the top of the mash - does this agitation add a lot of HSA? So, recently I have started using my pump to recirculate but have only brewed once doing this so the results are not in yet. After going back and doing some reading, especially in Noonan's 'New Brewing Lager Beer', I have realized that I have not been boiling very vigorously. In fact, to try to get my evaporation rates down to 10-15% or so I have been partially covering my kettle and boiling at just over a simmer... Noonan states (I don't have my book with me but will paraphrase as best as I remember) that it is essential to *violently* boil the wort and that this agitation is what helps the harsh hop tannins/polyphenols and other nasties adhere to the proteins and fall out in the hot break. He also states that a full violent open boil helps in stabalizing the wort and many of the nasties are also blown off in the evaporation. I don't know what this "stabalization" means exactly but it sounds like something that you would want to achieve and it seems that I am doing just the opposite with my low covered boil. Also, Noonan states that in worts with lower pH values (my water is very soft and very low in pH - my pale ale mashes run at 5.0) it is even more important to get that boil rolling wildly because in a boil with a low pH value, proteins have a more difficult time sticking together and falling out as break material. I have noticed that my hot break is very small particles. So, I am going to start boiling at full tilt to see if I can get better hot break and a cleaner tasting beer. Questions about your brewing process: - How are you crushing your grains - lots of shredding? - What temp are you mashing at? Single infusion? Step? - What is the pH of your mash? Your boil? - How long are you boiling and how hard? - What hops are you using, how much, when? - Are you religious about cleaning and sanitization? - Type of yeast, starter volume, lag times? One thing I have started to do to figure out what is wrong with my process is to brainstorm a bunch of experiments -eg. Pivo- to test some of my techineques. What I have found in my beer is that it tastes great after conditioning - it is when I keg that it becomes unstable and develops the harsh off flavors. I don't know if the problem lies in my packaging methods or in other steps. I will first rule out the carbonation methods: Some examples of exp. I am going to try are: - split into two kegs - prime one keg and force carbonate other - split batch to keg and bottle - prime both - split batch to keg and bottle - force carbonate keg and prime bottles - split batch to two kegs - one of yours and one of your brewing friends - carbonate and serve through different tanks and taps You might want to run some experiments as well on your beers. Another test you might do is to run the wort stability tests right out of the kettle after chilling: Sanitize 3 small glass containers (I use pint size canning jars) and carefully fill each with chilled wort and place them in a warm area about 80F (I use the oven). At 24 hours you open the first one and smell and taste. If you smell or taste nasty sour/nasty aromas/flavors you need to buck up on your sanitization procedures. Also test at 48hrs and 72hrs. If you make it to 72 without off flavors/aromas give yourself a pat on the back. This is written up in a back issue in BT by Louis Bonham I believe. Hope this helps. Any ideas keep me posted. Troy Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 14:18:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Steven <stevensl at mindspring.net> Subject: Re: ice vs chiller I'll weigh in on this debate, having tried both of course! Rubbermaid or Sterilite makes ice cube trays build in little water jug like containers. For you guys wanting to locate them they look like their quart liquid containers with screw off lids but inside are little cube "makers". They can be easily sanitized and will hold hot water. I would not attempt boiling water though. Just boil up some water, cool it down a little and dump it in these, then freese it. If you are feeling "frugal" grab a few dozen regular ice trays, boil water, fill them and cover with plastic wrap. nice and clean ice. Before i got the counterflow i would dump a tray or two worth in the wort to help get me to pitching temps. Steven St.Laurent ::: stevensl at mindspring.net ::: 403forbidden.net Democrats - Give a man a fish, feed him for a day Republicans - Teach a man to fish, feed him for life Libertarians - Screw him, I'm full from eating fish Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 14:54:37 -0400 From: "Houseman, David L" <David.Houseman at unisys.com> Subject: RE: mash runoff clarity > Brian Lundeen complains of "runoff envy", which might be > better described as > "haze halitosis" or even "pernicious protein precipitate > pouting". My own recirculation was with a 2 quart pot and I did maybe 8 or so of these. While I ceased getting particles by the end of this time, the wort was not as clear as it was after about 1/2 hour of running the wort into my kettle. I put a pump/heater (RIMS-lite) in the recirculation path to maintain the temperature while recirculating and used this to go from my mash temperature to 168-170oF final mashout temperature. After about 20 minutes of recirculation the wort is as clear as filtered beer when viewed through the 3/8" vinyl tubing. I did find that the reduced tannin content of the finished beer was reflected in reduced astringency when other parameters of my process were held essentially constant. Dave Houseman Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 19:25:24 +0000 From: steve-alexander at att.net Subject: re: H:W Huh ? Tom Meier wrote, > Steve appears to be correct. > Hate it when that happens. You've got company Tom. Most people hate me when I'm correct and only enjoy it when I'm wrong and I have the flame marks to prove it. It's easier, and more general than you describe, Tom. For any fermenter w/ vertical walls and a flat bottom (the top wort surface is always flat(almost)) where V=volume, S=surface area, H, W the obvious ... V = S * H so S/V = 1/H The S:V ratio determines the height uniquely, and you are still free to vary the width to create any H:W desired. True for cylinders, rectangals etc given any fixed definition for W for the particular shape. If you modify H to mean the 'average' height averaged across the entire surface area then it applies to any vertical walled fermenter with arbitrary bottom shape - like a CC. H' = Integral H(S) dS/S) V = H' * S ... Given H:W=x, and S:V=y then H=1/y and W = 1/(x*y) I thought it was obvious that V/S was just the wort height, and S:V it's inverse. I was wrong, so enjoy. -S thanks to Jerry Barkley for prodding me on the matter. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 13:32:22 -0600 From: "Paddock Wood Brewing Supplies" <orders at paddockwood.com> Subject: cold flocculation As Dominick noted, "flocculation" is not simply "falling to the bottom of the fermentor". But for clear beer, then enhancing sedimentation through finings or other methods is the goal. My question to the beer chemists out there is: Does cold enhance sedimentation of yeast and/or other suspended particulate? My experience has lead me to believe that rapid chilling will help to speed up the clarification process. Perhaps I have misinterpreted my unscientific results and something else is taking place? Clarification of this matter would be greatly appreciated... cheers, Stephen Ross -- "Vitae sine cerevisiae sugant." Paddock Wood Brewing Supplies, Saskatoon, SK, Canada orders at paddockwood.com www.paddockwood.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 21:28:46 +0200 From: "Dr. Pivo" <dp at pivo.w.se> Subject: Big (CAP?) Spurments This is certainly a North American topic, and has gendered all the ire that usually makes the rest of us just sit back and wait until the dust settles... so I hesitate to suggest.... but will anyway. The whole idea of a "Mass Experiment" is so intriguing, that I have read a bit of what is being suggested, among which a few lines that parallel my thoughts. Scott Murman writes: (Whose name, BTW, is really Scott Murphy, it's just that he had it officially changed so that he could tease me about my old age, and inclement eye sight). > if the > experiment accomplished nothing else but got a number of homebrewers > to try some new techniques that just might help them make better beer, > or they had some fun trying them, then i'd certainly say it would be > judged a success > And Petr Otahal (whose real name escapes me) writes: > The starting wort may vary from brewer to brewer depending on the process, > water, and even yeast type and pitching rate, BUT as long as we are only > focused on the DIFFERENCE between the two beers brewed by each brewer, > these process, water and yeast variations are not important. > My advice on really creating some mass brewing spurmenting hysteria would be to include the following criteria. 1) It should be fun. 2) The question asked should be straight forward enough that everyone understands what it is. 3) Everyone should be allowed to participate. 4) There is NEVER going to be much valid statistics gained from this, so make it so everyone can do their own analysis at home. 5) It should inspire people to doing more of the same. There has been suggestions of narrowing the question down to exactly two geometries, that require two different size cornelius kegs. In the first part.... "who cares?" This really seems to be a bit of trying to get the upper hand on "line 34 of paragraph 7 from two and a half years ago" or some such..... Argueing, in other words. This is self serving.... why not make it "selfless"? As to the need for having two different size cornies..... I am a known keg fetishist, and would qualify for participation (my 11 litre is named "Junior"), but why can't everyone else play? People who haven't hugged and demanded to own every strange and new keg that they come across? The suggested "two cornie size" experiment is an excellent one.... but why stop there? Why a CAP? Why indeed this American insistance on brtewing beers of which there is no longer any examples to compare it to? Does this stem from lack of ability, or confidence? Might, if one brewed something of which the original model is still tastable, run the risk of being judged inferior? It does seem a bit to me like having a competition about who can do the best vocal impersonation of George Washington. Should yee really like to go this route, might I suggest a creation of mine that represents how beer was brewed locally at the end of the 19th century. I call it the "Swedish Traditional Draught "(STD), and I am the absolute world master at making it.... because... because... em... er.... who can refute me? Should anyone else like to acquire an STD, or to share one with friends and loved ones, feel free to contact me. My brazen suggestions for a "Mass Spurment" would be the following: The question could be: (and I will avoid the use of the word "geometry", as there are certainly people out there who were scorched by this term at the age of about 14, and still flinch when they hear it.... doesn't mean they can't make beer, or do controlled experiments) "Does the size and shape of my fermenter affect how the beer turns out?" ...and I think the beer style of choice should be .... "Whatever you bloody feel comfortable brewing". Imagine that. Everyone who brews beer in a manner they understand, subjecting it to two different fermenting conditions based solely on the size and shape of the fermenter. Even the "goat bladder" fermenters would be allowed to take part...... though I strongly suggest that they thoroughly empty their vessels of its previous contents before adding the wort, less they not only introduce a "confounder" to their experiment, but should they come up with something really interesting, might have difficulty in re-inlisting their tasting panel. Then it turns out that the only thing you need, is one vessel to mix up your wort and yeast, that's as big as two different vessels (your choice!) that you want to ferment in. Oh yeah. Owning things like thermometers and hydrometers would be nice, and writing a few things down (though certainly not an absolute recquisite). If you have a Dissolved Oxygen meter, can count cells (I won't mention any dyes for fear of opening another debate), a spectrometer, a gas chromatograph, a Mass "Spec", and can do spin resonance.... by all means use them..... and by the way.... can I play at your house next weekend? And how to evaluate the results of these "two different kind of fermentation vessel" beers? Easy pie. Do a "triangle test". I formed a lot of my opinions about beer making by doing "blind tastings". They were a lot of fun, and people indulged me rather because they liked drinking my beer, than they had a great interest in the results, I think. But a normal "blind tasting" can really be subject to dominant personalities, and the wrong smacking of lips, grimace, or raised eyebrows, can really wreck your results. Plus, a lot of people are really worried about "getting it wrong"..... in other words... the "ego" can destroy both the results and the fun, and it's really no good playing "tasting police", and seeing people search your face for the "right answer". A guy named Louis Bonham introduced me first to the concept of "triangle testing" some years back, and I am forever grateful. I am, however, a bit "cheesed" that I hadn't thought it up first. It is SO simple, SO clean, and SO ego-free. All you need is some paper, some plastic cups, a marking pen, a die (which is half of "a pair of dice", or one fifth of a "Yahtzee" game), and 7 or 8 friends who want to drink your beer. There is no right answer, and nobody the hell knows what's going on (including yourself) until you tally up the papers, so there's no cheating. All you get is: "Is there a difference?", and if there turns out to be one, a good idea about what it could be. Just think. A bunch of brewers, trying to answer a single question, passing on their results, learning a bunch along the way, and learning a very honest tool for finding out even more things! Like all good science, we "may" answer the question. We will most certainly raise 50 more that might not of otherwise come up. We could probably try and answer those too. I think that people starting to make their own beer, because the stuff at the corner made by professionals seemed to have gotten less and less interesting, is a "kind of" revolution. Wouldn't it be fine if the people who already made one of the finest things you can ingest, also developed a culture of objectivity, and selfless discussion, and 'spurmentation, that perpetuated us finding out, what an industry whose main interests are expediency, economy, and long shelf life, can understandably not do for us? Now THAT'S what I call a revolution. Dr. Pivo PS Believing in the theory that "simple minds can make simple explanations", I do believe I can explain not only "how" to do a triangle test, but how to understand what you are "statistically" trying to achieve, to anyone who has enough stuff inside their skull, that they can make beer..... if this is wanted. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 15:42:49 -0700 From: "Hedglin, Nils A" <nils.a.hedglin at intel.com> Subject: Bottle Color, Cider Site Hi all, I know that clear bottles are bad because the beer can get sunstruck, but what about green bottles? I think I heard that green wasn't too good either, but I've got a friend with a couple a cases of empty Heineken bottles. Also, are there any good Hard Cider sites around? I've looked through both recipe collections at hbd.org, but I like like to find something that includes more of a beginner's guide too. Thanks, Nils Hedglin Sacramento, CA Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 18:45:32 -0600 From: "Robert J. Waddell" <rjw at dimensional.com> Subject: Re: Pressure Fermenting & H:W "Mike Pensinger" <beermkr at bellatlantic.net> sez: >Subject: Re: Pressure Fermenting >While I was in Split Croatia a few years back I got a tour of the local >brewpub and discovered that he fermented under pressure. He stated that it >sped the process up and allowed fermentation at higher temperatures without >off flavors being produced. I cant remember how much pressure was on the >vessel and it was in Bars which i didnt understand anyway. So... what I'm wondering is if the "Pressure Fermenting" thread and the Height/Width threads are related. It seems that there would be some optimum depth that the pressure would increase the fury of the fermentation. It also seems that it would be very difficult to observe with all of the turbulence of the ferment, so multiple sessions at different pressures would seem to be the way to determine this. Would there also be a difference in an open fermentation at sea level compared to one at altitude? I don't have the resources or the knowledge to chase this line of thought very far, so I'll turn it over to the collective. RJW I *L*O*V*E* my [Pico] system. 'Cept for that gonging noise it makes when my wife throws it off the bed at night. Women... --Pat Babcock *** It's never too late to have a happy childhood! *** **************************************************************************** RJW at dimensional.com / Opinions expressed are usually my own but Robert J. Waddell / perhaps shared. Owner & Brewmaster: Barchenspeider Brew-Haus Longmont, Colorado **************************************************************************** (4,592 feet higher than Jeff Renner) Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 20:00:09 -0500 From: "elvira toews" <etoews1 at home.com> Subject: goin' to Red Lake Dave Persenaire wants to know where to stock up in Red Lake. I don't know Tinley Park, but if your route takes you through or near Thunder Bay or Kenora, you might consider a stop in the Big City while you have the chance. Worst case, settle for Rickard's Red. It's Molson's concession to those who want to taste their beer, or Moosehead, which is generic NA beer with some Saaz thrown in. The Moosehead at least comes in cans, which is considered politically correct when drinking above granite. If you get lucky, Kenora might have Ft. Garry from Winnipeg. Otherwise, look for Wellington's, Upper Canada, Brick, Sleeman's, Connor's, etc. for the evening brews at the cabin. Maybe Robin Griller can update us on what's good in Ontariariario these days. Oh, and would you email me on your return and let me know how high the water levels are? Good fishin'! Sean Richens srichens at sprint.ca Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 20:03:34 -0500 From: "elvira toews" <etoews1 at home.com> Subject: Beer in Bath No, I'm not talking Prohibition brewing practices. I'm answering Herb's question. Mole is the name of one brewery whose real ales are available in Bath. As well as pretty buildings and Roman ruins, Bath is the better sort of university town and some decent beers are to be had. Just ask for "local ale" and the bartender will steer you right. Sean srichens at sprint.ca Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2001 01:10:24 +0000 From: steve-alexander at att.net Subject: Re: H:W Huh ? Del writes ... >Show me the dimensions for a 5 gallon fermenter with a >0.8 H:W and a surface:volume of 1 cm-e2/16.66 cm-e3. I see our communication difficulty. I never said you could choose VOLUME and H:W and S:V - all three independently. That's not possible. I did say you can choose H:W and S:V independently and design a fermenter. Take away the 5gal Vol requirement (never part of the H:W argument) and it's easy. Travis Dahl writes ... >Quite obviously, then, height:width and surface:volume are related! I'd like to use the words independent and orthogonal, but these have different meaning in areas like experimental design and statistics than in algebra and another tower of Babel discussion(TBD) would ensue. The two ratios H:W and S:V can be chosen arbitratily, and a fermenter designed which has both. You cannot derive a general function like S:V = f(H:W) since for any H:W there are infinitely many S:V possible. The best you can achieve is S:V = f(H:W, and other things) That is what I meant by unrelated, tho' my choice of terms isn't intuitive. It's true that H:W and H are unrelated by this definition too. Let's just say - H:W does not determine or constrain S:V or vice-versa. They are independent variables in fermenter design - but PLEASE that's not the same independent var that experimenters or statisticians are referring to. >3) I think the comparison should be between a (5 gallon?) glass carboy and >a similar size Cornelius keg This might help answer the question - are cornies significantly different to carboys in HB fermentation performance - and I too think that's an interesting question, but it doesn't really control enough to provide much of a clue about whether H:W is the critical factor or something else. You've changed H:W, material, fermenter smoothness, S:V, H, W, S, headspace, the shape of the bottom, heat transfer characteristics and more other things than you can shake a stick at. Do compare these two - it would be very interesting, but don't imagine for a minute you're testing H:W as an isolated performance factor. This gets back to the question - just what hypothesis *IS* the experiment about ? Dave Harsh writes ... >Personally, I haven't found even the implication in >deClerk to this effect. If anybody can give me the >specific citation, I'd like to know. >(I have the 1994 reprinting from Seibel) The implication and maybe a citation appear in Fix' AoBT. I thought it was in a journal from the 1950s, not his book. If anyone could send me a copy I'd certainly appreciate it. >Your comparison of the cornie to the test >tube, while a valid argument, is absurd on the face of >it. I thought we were restricting our arguments to >homebrewing. The result was presented as brewing related, not just HB, so i'd think anything from a post-slant starter to megabrewers tanks would be subject to the law. >The return of the absurd argument. But if the volume >is the same, a 3:1 container has less cross section >than a 2:1 container. Who ever said volume had to be the same ? You've missed the point if need to add more constraints to make your argument fly. >, my use of dimensional analysis techniques to describe >the fermenter geometry is not "handwaving You may have facts, but until you present the assumption, analysis method and results - you've just posted the handwaving argument. For such detail email would be best tho' Dave. >On the contrary, I have been paying attention. You >feel aspect ratio isn't the cause, something else is. No. You are stating this as if I agreed there was an effect related to H:W - I don't. I don't believe that high aspect ratio fermenters (separating out all the unrelated factors, vol, S:V, cross sectional area, etc) create any such effect. Based on the impression given in AoBT HBers seem to think H:W *defines* an independent performance parameter. That a 3:1 culture bottle is inferior to a 1:1 100HL tank. I do NOT believe this. I do expect different shaped, sized, 'materialed' fermenters to give different results for various reasons. I don't expect those results to consistantly show that high H:W give poor performance. >[..] I disagree with [...] your >interpretation of the literature on shear >induced flocculation. Then please email me your reference literature citations of shear induced flocculation of yeast and we can compare our interpretations. -S Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2001 12:21:15 +0930 From: "Brad McMahon" <brad at sa.apana.org.au> Subject: Australian Serving Sizes Matt Tolley wrote: >In South Australia, you get >a schooner, a kite (a pint) or a butcher (200ml). In SA, the schooner is 285ml and the pint is either 425ml, or 570ml. You have to ask what size pints they are serving. Generally, those selling British or Irish beers will give you an English pint and those selling Australian beers will give you a South Australian pint. It has never been called a kite. The butcher is right (200ml) but very rarely used. Yep there is always great confusion between the states where different sizes mean different things. New South Welshmen get confused when visiting South Australia. They order a schooner thinking 425ml and receive 285ml. Of course, the opposite happens going the other way. >But, pints are still offered in many places, whilst still not at the 650ml >pint standard. Huh? A real pint is 568.261 ml. A US pint is 473.1765 ml. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 20:06:57 -0700 (PDT) From: alastair <alastair at odin.he.net> Subject: Re: great beers in Southern England Herb, Sounds like you'll be in Wadworth country. Salisbury is close to the Wadworth brewery in Devizes, I'm not sure if they have tours, but you can checkout http://www.wadworth.co.uk/ for more info. Their best known beer is 6X. It's a fairly good Best Bitter, if you can find a good pub with it on cask, it's worth trying. They have other beers like Henry's IPA (not like USA IPA, more of a hoppier Ordinary) and some seasonal brews. You should be able to find Fuller's and some Burton brews like Pedigree if you look around. Just steer clear of things like Boddingtons, Caffrey's etc. They're not bad drinking, but they are nitro British mega swill... stick to hand pulled cask beer and you can't go wrong! See if you can find a copy of the "Good Pub Guide". It should fill in any blanks. Have fun! Alastair Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 06/01/01, by HBD2HTML v1.2 by KFL
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96
Convert This Page to Pilot DOC Format