---

	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:
  siebel week (ensmingr)
  Sour Wit ("Partner")
  HSA MBO IBM Ad nausem ("Partner")
  Siebel Reply - Wort Gravity on Carbonation ("Kirk Annand")
  Siebel reply - Keg Cleaner Gaskets ("Kirk Annand")
  Siebel Reply - Bulk Malt Delivery ("Kirk Annand")
  Siebel Reply - Yeast Killing ("Kirk Annand")
  Siebel Reply - Tank Design ("Kirk Annand")
  Siebel Reply - Municipal Water Treatment ("Kirk Annand")
  dry hopping with tettnang, or hallertauer (Emily E Neufeld)
  Re: expressions ("Steve Heffner")
  Golden Monkey Tripel (David Harsh)
  Re: Middle-Of-The-Bottle Sediment (Jeff Renner)
  Re: Fullers Golden Pride (Rick)
  I DID IT!!!!! (Aaron Gallaway)
  How to learn "Flavors" ("Michael O'Donnell")
  Yikes! It's back up! ("James Sploonta")
  New York State Fair Competition ("Peter Garofalo")
  Seibel Week (Charles Hager)
  Siebel Reply - Hop Bag Use ("Kirk Annand")
  re: rims questions ("C.D. Pritchard")
  Siebel Response - Thick vs Thin Mash ("Kirk Annand")


*
* Show your HBD pride! Wear an HBD Badge! 
* 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 cannot 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: Sat, 18 May 2002 01:33:18 -0400
From: ensmingr at twcny.rr.com
Subject: siebel week

Kirk Annand (Siebel Inst.) provided some interesting insights on
oxidation (see:  http://www.hbd.org/hbd/archive/3943.html#3943-5
), a lively HBD topic of late. But the Siebel people have not
addressed the very first question posted during the HBD "Siebel
Week" (see: http://www.hbd.org/hbd/archive/3938.html#3938-1 ).
That is, are additives such as campden tablets or ascorbic acid
useful for preventing oxidation?

Ascorbic acid has its proponents and detractors. Some have even
claimed a deleterious effect (see:
http://hbd.org/hbd/archive/3930.html#3930-3 ).

Some have claimed a beneficial effect for using campden tablets
in the mash (see: http://hbd.org/hbd/archive/3930.html#3930-3 ),
but others have maintained that the pH of wort and beer was
significantly higher than wine (where campden is widely used) so
that free sulfite (the anti-oxidant) is essentially unavailable
(see:  http://www.hbd.org/hbd/archive/3934.html#3934-7 ).

What say ye?

Cheerio!
Peter A. Ensminger
Syracuse, NY
http://hbd.org/ensmingr





Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 02:25:45 -0500
From: "Partner" <Partner at Netdirect.net>
Subject: Sour Wit

Mr. Jeff Renner, (who lives in the Land of CAP and any other lager that's
easy to make, cause they never get warm weather way up North there ( or is
it their?)...... writes...........

>A wit!  They are sour.  What you did was what some brewers do
>deliberately.  Graham Sanders of Australia makes his famous Tropical
>Flower Wit by souring a portion (15%?) of his mash for two days, then
>adding it to the main mash.

BIG smile!!!


Jeff, thank you..................

Your correct, about 200 miles south, yes...  And My Grain bill was for a
Wit,  But I've not had a sour one yet.    I had adjusted my water to 5.4 PH,
before I began the mash, I purchased a Piccolo PH meter from B3, and it's
very accurate.

(Side Note)  My Brew Tragic arrived today , and I just did a test run on it,
I'm typing with one sorched red hand from the sparge tube that came loose in
the mash tun and scalded me, but other than that I am thoroughly pleased, I
know it was a humongous (sp.) amount of money to upgrade to this, but I'm
satisfied.   I never saw burner's like this before, it's not a fine
adjustment, but I get a fast rise in temp's from it, and it seems to use
less fuel.  The heat exchanger seems to give me slightly less than a 1 deg.
F. temp. rise per min.   I plan on brewing my Full Moon Wit with this system
tomorrow and see how it compares to mashing in a 30 QT. Tun and raising the
temp.'s with a burner.   I believe my brews will definitely benefit...

(Here is a chuckle OR IS IT?), ........MY wife is Ukraine,  She arrived last
November,   I showed her pictures of this and kept mentioning how I would
like a BEER MACHINE, She ALWAYS said if you want it get it.  So...........
after 6 months I did.    When I finally uncrated it in my garage, she said
  "You paided $3900.  For this????  I thought it would take up the whole
garage! "  She sat with me thru the test run and cleaning stage and listened
to my babble, and saw me scorch my hand and .... I believe she sees the
benefit to me moving everything into the garage and being able to quickly
brew and shove it out of the way....  Gotta love a woman like that...

Sorry for rambling about the machine, But I'm pleased... and my right hand
still smarts, 3 hours later....Thanks for letting me Tell people  " I got a
BREW TRAGIC!!!"


I believe I will slowly creep into the sour mash's, I'm scared right now of
introducing something I'm not sure of.. - I've had very good luck in all my
brews for years now, and (knock on wood) no bad batches.....    I think I'll
deliberately start out to make a sour Hefe or something, instead of saying,
Hey since it's going sour.... let's make a ??? Pseudo Lambic.


I would like to make a batch of this Tropical Flower Wit, if I could see a
recipe.. I just may do it since I know how to sour a Mash!!!

Byron..

206.9 , 212.1   Apparent.........  That's my story and I'm sticking to it!

That makes it South of Chicago and North of Memphis, in the heart of the
Blues!!








Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 03:00:22 -0500
From: "Partner" <Partner at Netdirect.net>
Subject: HSA MBO IBM Ad nausem

Someone (no names mentioned to protect the innocent) writes................


I agree with Pivo that the gold standard is to perform control brews with
and without HSA and then taste these over a period of time.  Pivo forgot to
mention that it requires a lot of work and a bit of luck to make two beers
which are not distinguishable by triangle test.  Not nearly as simple a his
trub test and one could throw stones at that one too.

On a less brew-relevant note Larry says he never asked for my applause.
Actually he asked that I "congratulate" folks  who make unsupported claims.
I guess the linguist can't associate 'applause' and 'congratulations'.
Jeff Renner's long list of  etymological gaffes missed "cunning".

Sorry to all for the length - next time I'll just point out what Larry got
right.
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- -----


Here's my answer to Hot Side!


Never had it, probably won't, and I'm tired of hearing someone say i
WILL....

to be decent............. I'll leave it at that..

or in otherwords,,, their is NO HSA in HB   !!!!!!!!!!!!!

so Flame me if your into flaming people.


Byron...






Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 06:21:49 -0700
From: "Kirk Annand" <kirk.annand at ns.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Siebel Reply - Wort Gravity on Carbonation

David:

You are right when you say that temperature and pressure are the most
important determining factors on the final carbonation level in any beer.
Another factor is the size of the bubbles that are injected into the beer -
the smaller the bubble the faster the carbon dixide will enter into
solution.  If you are not using a carbonating stones then you can duplicate
the effect by agitating or shaking the container that the beer and carbon
dixide are in.

There is some very minor effect from the viscosity of the liquid but it is
so small that it is not mentioned in regard to beer because beer is mostly
water.  You mentioned that it SEEMED as if the lower alcohol beer was
carbonating quicker.  Have you ever actually timed it?  One of the problems
is unless you have a gas testing apparatus is that there may be a perceived
difference (when tasting) in beers of different taste and alcohol profiles.
The effect of differing carbon dioxide levels on the taste of a beer is
profound and complicated.  Even though the levels may actually be the same
in both the beers that you mentioned it is possible that the higher alcohol
one just does not seem as carbonated because of the interaction with all of
the taste components of the beer.

Kirk Annand, S.I.T.


Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 18:24:56 +1000
From: David Lamotte <lamotted at ozemail.com.au>
Subject: Siebel Week: Carbonation Rates

Thanks to all concerned for the brilliant opportunity.

My question concerns the influence of wort gravity on rate of CO2
dissolution during carbonation.

I understand how pressure and temperature affect the amount of CO2
dissolved at equilibrium, but have noticed that high gravity beers (~8 w %
alcohol) SEEM to take much longer to carbonate.  Equally light beers (~3 %)
appear to gas up very quickly.

Is there any information on how the rate of solution of CO2 is affected by
the composition of the beer.

Thanks again,
David Lamotte,
Wondering, down under in Newcastle, NSW, Australia.






Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 07:02:33 -0700
From: "Kirk Annand" <kirk.annand at ns.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Siebel reply - Keg Cleaner Gaskets

Brian:

Steam is tough on gaskets.  Many brewers who sanitize with steam just
institute a standard gasket changeout problem and live with it.  It is
probable that you can get better gasket made in your local area.  There are
many formulations of rubber, plastics, etc. and you should be able to find
out from a local supplier what one is that will handle steam service well.
Some type of Teflon-based gasket material should be good.  Mention that you
heed the material to be suitable for incidental contact with 'food' since
you don't want any taste carryover with the steam.  You can also ask if the
keg cleaner manufacturer sells better grades of gaskets but in most cases
buying a suitable sheet of material and getting them cut locally is far less
expensive.

Kirk Annand, S.I.T.

From: Brian Owens
Subject: Siebel Week - Gaskets for keg cleaners

Hi,

I'm writting to find out where I can get gaskets for my keg cleaner that
will hold up longer.  I am using steam to clean kegs and the rubber gaskets
that fit in the hex nut that attatches to the sanky are not strong enough.
I'm looking for somthing that will hold up a little better under the steam
pressure and temperature.  I'm thankful for any tips or reccommendations.

Thanks,

Brian Owens brian1 at peoplepc.com
O'Fallon Brewery
O'Fallon MO




Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 07:47:11 -0700
From: "Kirk Annand" <kirk.annand at ns.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Siebel Reply - Bulk Malt Delivery

John:

The general rule with pneumatic bulk malt delivery is use the lowest
pressure and malt speed in the piping that will work.  The newer systems use
less pressure but pack the lines in large 'slugs' of malt that move slowly
and reduce damage.  Older systems used higher pressure - especially if they
had to move malt long distances or into high silos.  There are no hard and
fast rules about the correct pressures because each system must meet
different requirements.

In the end it is the quality of the malt in your silo that makes the
difference.  A brewer should sample the malt in the truck and do a screen
test and then sample it again coming into the silo after it has gone through
the delivery system.  This applies whether you are using pneumatic, screw,
bucket or whatever malt transport systems.  Malt is a delicate cereal grain
and requires as gentle handling as possible.  Malt crushing should take
place in the mill under control, not from the truck to your silo.

Most of the damage that occurs to malt happens in sharp transitions in
piping systems and the wear that occurs at these transitions (elbows worn on
the inside, etc.).  Check your system on a regular schedule and have a
procedure written out for the correct way to unload your malt with minimum
damage.

Kirk Annand, S.I.T.

From: John J. Hall <jjhall at gooseisland.com>
Subject: Siebel Week - Bulk malt delivery

Does anyone have any information about the optimum  PSI/ Pumping speed
during a bulk malt delivery?  We currently pump up to our silo at 5 psi, but
I've heard of other breweries that won't pump over 3 psi and some that pump
as high as 10 to 15 psi.  We've heard many different reasons for the
different speeds.  Too fast, you'll get shearing, too slow, the hose isn't
packed and again you'll get shearing.  Anyone have any practical experience
or horror stories to relate?

John J. Hall
Head Brewer
Goose Island Beer Co.
jjhall2gooseisland.com









Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 07:59:06 -0700
From: "Kirk Annand" <kirk.annand at ns.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Siebel Reply - Yeast Killing

Caleb:

I worked for a brewery that had converted a double pipe wort cooler (see pg.
229 of the new 'Practical Brewer') for yeast killing purposes and it worked
very well.  These old type of coolers have a relatively large pipe diameter
and so the yeast flows through them well and they are easy to clean.  They
are not really efficient at heat transfer but it also means that the yeast
is less liable to 'bake on' the tube interiors.  With modern temperature
sensing and control systems these should give good results.  I am sure there
is very specialized machinery made for this but this was a cheap solution to
the need to kill yeast in this brewery.

Kirk Annand, S.I.T.

From: Caleb McLaughlin <cmcbrew808 at hotmail.com>
Subject: Siebel Week - Yeast


Hello Panel,

I am looking for any information /experience(s) with autolyzing or "killing"
spent yeast on a large scale for use as a safe, high protein food source for
cattle. Any info. on a practical design/procedure to achieve best results
would be beneficial.

Thanks again!

Caleb McLaughlin
Rogue Ales
ph#541-867-3660
cmcbrew808 at hotmail.com








Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 09:40:48 -0700
From: "Kirk Annand" <kirk.annand at ns.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Siebel Reply - Tank Design

Caleb:

There is nothing inherently wrong about the design of a tall dish-bottom
tank for fermentation.  A 120 BBL fermenter is not considered large by
commercial brewery standards.  How deep is the beer level in this tank?  You
are right that the cone-bottom types of fermenters are much better for yeast
harvesting.  If there is a mandoor near the bottom of this tank you can
harvest the yeast once you have drawn the beer off - like in the good old
days before cylindro-conical fermenters!

Fermenter design is governed by a lot of factors but one of the main ones is
cooling jacket location and control. If the jackets are in the wrong place
or the temperature probe mis-located so it does not give a representative
temperature then operational performance can be seriously compromised.

I do have the name of a refrigeration engineer in Vancouver, B.C. who is
good.  I will send you his name and address.

Kirk Annand, S.I.T.

From: Caleb McLaughlin <cmcbrew808 at hotmail.com>
Subject: Siebel Week - Tank Design

Aloha Panel,

What is it about the configuration of a tall, skinny, dish-bottom tank (120
bbl) that makes it a bad design for fermentation? Besides the fact of
"cone-bottom" being better for yeast handling.

Also, does anyone know the name/contact# of a glycol specialist that has
experience with sizing up for a breweries growth?

Thanks in advance for everyone's involvement with the Forum this week,

Caleb McLaughlin
Rogue Ales
ph#541-867-3660
cmcbrew808 at hotmail.com





Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 10:09:12 -0700
From: "Kirk Annand" <kirk.annand at ns.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Siebel Reply - Municipal Water Treatment

Doug:

My feeling is that the ppm of changes in the water that you receive at your
brewery would not make a significant enough difference to change your
brewing salt addition.  Having said this I would never just continue on
without asking some questions of your local water authority.  Usually
breweries are one of the biggest, if not the biggest, water user in any
municipal water system so you are an important customer.  Not only that but
you are an important food manufacturer.

I would presume that the poly and ortho phosphate additives that they are
planning to use are fully compatible with potable water but I would ask them
as many questions as I needed to anticipate the proposed changes.  In my
experience the personnel in water departments are good at responding to
intelligent questions especially when they see that they are dealing with
concerned professionals.  You should ask for a tour of their facility and
find out their proposed dosage rates and what they expect will be the result
at the infeed of your water supply pipe.  They may be sacrificial additions
which are 'used up' in the piping system.

I would also ask:

1) What effect do these additions have on brewery water filtration systems?
2) How does heating/boiling this water effect these additions?
3) Will they affect the water flavor profile?
4) Do they have reports from other municipalities who have brewery customers
and use these additives?

I am sure that you can think of lots of other questions that are of
particular concern to your brewery.  There was a talk at the Craft Brewer's
Conference by A.J. DeLange on water which he was very passionate about.  He
is an electrical engineer but he has made a study of water chemistry and
brewing in his hobby as a home brewer.  The A.O.B. probably has his e-mail
address because he seemed like he would definitely be up to the minute on
all of this.

Kirk Annand, S.I.T.


From: Doug Macnair <Doug.Macnair at Redhook.com>
Subject: Municipal water treatment


My question for the Siebel week forum concerns municipal water
treatments and their potential impact on the brewing process.  Our local
municipal water works informed me that they will be implementing a
corrosion inhibitor program using a 50/50 blend of Poly and Ortho
Phosphates dosed into the final water downstream of the filtration
plant.  I am aware of the calcium- phosphate reactions in a mash and its
importance in acidifying the mash.  Do these other forms of phosphate
react in the same way?  Is a few ppm increase in the water worth
worrying about a brewing salt adjustment?  Any possible effects post
brewhouse from these treatments?
I look forward to responses from those with more water chemistry
background than I, which will not be very difficult by the way.

Doug MacNair





Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 08:32:58 -0500
From: Emily E Neufeld <eneufeld at juno.com>
Subject: dry hopping with tettnang, or hallertauer

I did a 10 gallon batch of low end (1.060 39 IBU) American IPA/ high end
pale ale. I dry hopped the first 5 gallons with 1 oz. of Cascade and have
been drinking a very enjoyable beer for the last 2 weeks. I was thinking
of dry hopping the other 5 gallons with tettnang or hallertauer because
that is what I have on hand.  What are your recommendations?  Thanks.

Drew Buscareno


Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 09:28:21 -0500
From: "Steve Heffner" <potatopotato at earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: expressions

Mind your P's and Q's:

About eight or ten years ago I heard that the bartender supposedly told the
waitresses this to remind them to keep track of how many pints and quarts
the customers owed for.

Steve



Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 10:47:12 -0400
From: David Harsh <dharsh at fuse.net>
Subject: Golden Monkey Tripel

Peter Ensminger asks about Victory's Golden Monkey:
At Spirit of Belgium III in D.C., their brewer talked about the beer and
explicitly evaded a direct question about the yeast used.  (In sharp
contrast to Garrett Oliver of Brooklyn Brewing who said he used Wyeast
3944 for his wit, btw)  

However, he did say that they fermented at 85 F and used the same yeast
they used for their wit (but the wit is fermented at a lower temp). 
They open ferment in "gurden tanks"  (spelling?), which are some sort of
dairy vessel with a 1:1 aspect ratio of width to height.  

If you choose the higher fermentation temp, which you probably should, I
have to warn against Wyeast 1214 above 72F unless you really like bubble gum.

Dave Harsh					Bloatarian Brewing League
Cincinnati, OH                  

P.S.  Beer and Sweat - August 17, 2002
      see http://hbd.org/bloat for details or e-mail me


Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 12:51:07 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <JeffRenner at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Middle-Of-The-Bottle Sediment

Matthew McCracken <matthew.b.mccracken at intel.com> writes from 
Wayland, Massachusetts:

>I've noticed that the cloudy
>haze from early in the conditioning has collected into what appears to be
>sediment.  The problem is, it's in the middle of the bottle! ... 
>grey/black chunks of this stuff drop into my glass. ... too thin and 
>highly alcoholic (or so my body tells me). ... Is it rogue yeast? 
>Maybe I can try to pawn this off as a new beer style...

My suspicion is that it isn't rogue yeast but rather a bacterial 
infection.  This could produce over-attenuation and off flavors, as 
well as slimy material in the beer - the suspended haze.  I suspect 
you need to toss the beer and be extra careful about your sanitation.

Jeff
- -- 
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, JeffRenner at comcast.net
"One never knows, do one?"  Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943


Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 10:43:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: Rick <ale_brewer at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Fullers Golden Pride

During a tour of Fuller's brewery back in 1997, my
guide, knowing I was a homebrewer, gave me a bunch of 
information that wasn't a standard part of the tour. 
This included a press release for 1997 Vintage Ale. 
It sounds a lot like the Golden Pride so I thought I'd
share it with everyone. Here's the recipe that was
included:

Fullers Vintage Ale 1997

Grist:
Malted Barley 90%
Crystal Malt 3%
Flaked Maize 7%

Barley Variety - Alexis

Hop Variety and Growing Area
Target - Kent
Challenger and Northdown - West Midlands

Technical Details:
pH: 4.30
Yeast Count in Bottle: 1.0m cells/ml
Alc/Vol: 8.5%
Colour: 40deg EBC
Bitterness: 38 EBU

Brewing: Mashing Temperature 69deg C
1 hour boil

Fermentation: Conical fermenters 7 days
max temp 20deg C

Maturation: 
2 weeks  at  6deg C
2 weeks  at  0deg C

Comments:
A balance of malt, hops and alcohol
Rich tawny colour
Warming and earthy with hints of Seville
Oranges from the Goldings (sic) hops
This product is made to improve and mature for at
least
3 years.

Oddly enough, the recipe didn't give a OG.  Hope this
helps.

Rick Seibt
Mentor, OH



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 21:28:19 -0700
From: Aaron Gallaway <baseball_junkie at hotmail.com>
Subject: I DID IT!!!!!

My SS Heat exchanger is a SUCCESS!!!

     It is me again, Aaron in Japan. My thanks to everyone who gave me
ANY kind of help, even down to recipes. But my big thanks go out to DION
HOLLENBECK for his help with my electronic retardation! I don't think I
could of done it without Dion's wiring help and general PID help. When I
get back to the states I will send you a bottle of something nice.

I do have a question that plagued me in the design, development, and now
operational; phases of this project. How do you handle the liter or 2 or
wort that remains in the H.E. during rest periods?? Doesn't cool down and
affect the overall Thermality of the thing when you restart? Or is is
insignificant?? Thanks again everyone. I am now going to special order
the ingredients for an Oktoberfest and lager it over this summer for my
wedding on October 13th! Almost a year to the date when I asked my
fiancee to marry me in Switzerland just 2 days after leaving the
Oktoberfest in Munich last fall.

Aaron




Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 17:53:21 -0700
From: "Michael O'Donnell" <mooseo at stanford.edu>
Subject: How to learn "Flavors"

I have been extract brewing for a while now and am building up the 
equipment to start all-grain.  In general, I am quite satisfied with the 
beers I produce, but often there are flavors that I am not quite satisfied 
with.  Some of these seem to go away with longer time sitting in the keg, 
but others persist.

The problem is that I don't know how to describe these flavors so I don't 
know how to ask for advice about changing them.  How do I go about learning 
the names of different beer flavors that I taste so that I can discuss them 
with others?

I suspect the answer might be to find a local club and bring my beers to 
people with more experience; to that end, does anyone know of a local club 
in Monterey, California?  Given that I have to drive 45 minutes to a brew 
store, I don't have high hopes, but perhaps there are other brewers around.

Thanks for any suggestions.

Michael O'Donnell
Monterey, CA



Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 21:25:34 -0400
From: "James Sploonta" <biere_god at hotmail.com>
Subject: Yikes! It's back up!

I apologize for my silence! For some reason, Hotmail has been not allowing 
me to log in (from work, where my Kleinerisms are). Just tried from home, 
and it seems to be OK (Maybe Brian located me in his quest to prove my 
identity and had my employer block access or something? Probably not. As a 
service of Microsoft, you expect the "blue screen of death" from Hotmail, 
too, I guess....). In any case, assuming it isn't a problem with the PC at 
work, I've stored up a Beeeeg pile of neat little Klein nuances. Including 
an argument related to his swilling from the bottle (Ever notice how 
differently he speaks of the process of enjoying a draft-only beer? Hmmm?)

In any case, more later - whether you want it or not.

Jimmy Sploonta
Somewhere between here and there.




Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 22:03:42 -0400
From: "Peter Garofalo" <pgarofa1 at twcny.rr.com>
Subject: New York State Fair Competition

Sorry for the relatively small audience that this message applies to...

I have "volunteered" to organize this year's NY State Fair homebrew
competition, and would like to solicit interest from NY State homebrewers
and any northeastern judges. Last year, the competition was not well
planned. There were 80 entries and four judges (yes, I was one...). This
year, I have promised 150 entries and will therefore need about 25 judges,
so I need some help here.

The competition will be held on Friday, August 9 and Saturday, August 10 at
the Fairgrounds in Syracuse, NY. The Fair folks take care of all expenses,
and give out some nifty medals, as well as cash for first ($100), second
($75), and third ($50) Best-of-Show. Also, every entrant receives a free
pass to the Fair, as well as a parking pass (even more valuable).

I plan to have a Friday evening judging session, then a pub crawl around the
Armory Square area. Saturday should be a relatively easy day. Judging takes
place in the Art & Home Center, where they do cooking demonstrations during
the Fair. It's a perfect place to judge, and we'd love to have you do so.

If you are a homebrewer and/or judge in NY State, drop me a note with your
s-mail and I will make sure an entry packet is sent your way. Brew now, so
you can enter early and often...just like voting in Chicago elections!

Cheers,

Peter Garofalo
Syracuse, NY



Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 23:26:13 -0700
From: Charles Hager <hagerc at vcss.k12.ca.us>
Subject: Seibel Week

I hope I can squeeze this one in at the end of this wonderful week!

I have a question about differences in wort boiling issues at the commercial
level vs. homebrew level.

In the Feb. 2002 edition of Brauwelt, there was two interesting articles
regarding boiling wort. Both articles state the purpose of boiling wort:

 -concentration by evaporation
 -reduction of coagulable protein substances
 -deactivation of enzymes
 -boiling off undesirable aroma components
 -formation of aroma and flavor substances

The first article, entitled "Wort boiling - current state-of-the-art"
discusses issues that commercial breweries have when boiling wort and the
various methods. It summarizes the history of boiling technology from early
kettles with inadequate heating and wort movement (homogeneity) into 20th
century changes in design and heating capabilities with the introduction of
high-performance kettles with 2 hour + boil times and 12-16% evaporation.
In the last 30 years breweries have had to rethink their boiling techniques
because of energy conservation and environmental issues leading to decreased
boil times and evaporation rates. Current averages stated are 60 minutes at
6-8% evaporation rate. Boiling time and temperature are two variables that
breweries strive to balance. Issues dealing with this balance are stated as:

 -High Temp: coagulable nitrogen too low, DMS level ok, excessive coloration
of wort
 -Low Temp: coag. nit. ok, DMS levels too high
 -Long Time: coag. nit. too low, DMS levels ok
 -Short Time: coag. nit. ok, DMS too high

Interesting statements:

"Heating times are frequently too long and lead to a not inconsiderable loss
of coag. N, apart from causing high thermal stress which can be expressed by
the thiobarbituric acid index (TBI)."

"The objective of development work was to implement the following criteria
as fully as possible:
 -gentle boiling (coag. N, foam)
 -little free DMS in pitched wort
 -low thermal stress (TBI)
 -further reduction in total evaporation"

The second article, entitled "New wort boiling system using flash
evaporation" has this interesting statement:

"Thanks to modern automatic control equipment, the term "beer boiler" is
slowly but surely becoming a thing of the past. One should ask oneself if it
is still appropriate to subject the wort to nucleate boiling or whether it
should be possible to boil it without actually bringing it to a nucleate
boiling stage? This question can definitely be answered 'yes'. Looking again
at the criteria for wort boiling stated at the beginning, it becomes clear
that boiling of wort is necessary only for evaporating excess water and for
expelling undesirable aroma substances. All other parameters are a function
simply of temperature and circulation or wort."

Homebrewers do not have to deal with:
 -trying to lower energy costs/energy usage
 -wort homogeneity
 -trying to lower evaporation rates

With this in mind, which of these issues can be applied to homebrew wort
boiling?

>From my experience as a homebrewer having read many basic and advanced
homebrewing books as well as participating on the HBD for many years - is
seems to me that most all-grain homebrewers boil for 90 minutes with
evaporation rates of over 15% - usually 20-30% in some cases with big
propane burners. This long and violent boiling seems to be in conflict with
some of the information in these articles and indeed may have detrimental
effects. "Gentle" boiling was mentioned a few times in the articles and is
said to have a positive effects on coagulation of proteins. Long boiling
times are stated to have detrimental effects on protein coagulation. Low
"thermal stress" and evaporation rates of 6-10% are mentioned as goals of
the commercial breweries.

How does this information apply to homebrew boiling?
Which of these issues produce better beer, not just cuts down on energy
costs and time?
What is the difference between a 60-minute boil and a 90-minute boil
assuming a 10% or greater evaporation rate?

Thanks for your time and thoughts on this subject

Troy Hager
thager at hcsd.k12.ca.us












Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 08:08:06 -0700
From: "Kirk Annand" <kirk.annand at ns.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Siebel Reply - Hop Bag Use

Paul:

You have touched on several points here.  It is not surprising that your
utilization is low and/or unpredictable using whole hops in a hop bag.
During a vigorous boil where whole hops or pellets are in the wort they are
in agitated and intimate contact with the fluid and so the dissolving of
alpha acids and their isomerization due to heating takes place everywhere in
the kettle.  When they are in a hop bag they do not have the same kind of
contact with the wort and so utilization can be expected to be lower.

Another point relates to the use of whole hops.  These are a VERY DELICATE
INGREDIENT since they are prone to oxidation and flavor changes.  Hops were
the first brewing ingredient that brewers knew were very prone to
degradation.  In a homebrew hops (especially whole cones) can be badly
degraded before you buy them from your supplier.  They are packed in 200 lb
burlap bags at the hop farm and kept in special refrigerated storage before
being sold or sent to hop pelleting and processing plants.  In order to be
sold in small quantities these bales must be opened and the hops exposed to
the atmosphere.  If this is done all in one stage and the hops from a whole
bale transferred to small vacuum bags and kept cool then damage is
minimized.  In many cases they are probably broken down from bale size to
final consumer packages in several stages and not kept cool or vacuum-packed
at all times.  This means that the whole cones that you buy may have been
degraded in terms of their bittering value, aroma and flavor before you ever
add them to your kettle.  Pelletized hops are sold in several sizes of
vacuum-packed containers from the hop suppliers but are much easier to
handle than a bale of whole hops.  They must also be treated with care and
kept vacuum-packed and cool to prolong their life but it is easier to do so.
As package a general rule if either of these types of hops have yellow or
brownish coloration (rather than vibrant green) do not buy them!

You also mentioned that you use a hop bag rather than throwing them into
your kettle because they will clog your wort cooler.  You were afraid to
strain them out due to possible problems with HOT SIDE AERATION.  I have
followed the discussions in the beer enthusiast press about HSA (you
mentioned 'holy war') with some amazement.  My experience in brewing has
taught me to prioritize my problems when producing beer.  To worry about HSA
and let this degrade the predictability of your beer making is 'putting the
cart before the horse'.  Before worrying about HSA make sure that your
process is under control in terms of ingredient addition, temperature
control, yeast health and cleaning and sanitation.  Once your basic process
has as few flaws as you can handle then worry about things like HSA.

I say this realizing that a lot of talk has gone on about this issue.  If I
look at the potential for HSA and its taste effects I refer back to the gas
laws.  The dissolving of a gas in a fluid like wort or beer depends on
temperature and pressure.  The higher the pressure and the lower the
temperature on the fluid (and gas) the more the gas will tend to dissolve in
the liquid.  One of the ways to reduce the amount of oxygen in water is to
heat it up.  Boiling water has little or no oxygen in it!  Above a boiling
kettle of wort is a layer of water vapor which tends to protect the wort
from oxygen - especially if you have the lid on the pot.  Even when the boil
is stopped and the wort is still very hot waiting to be cooled there is
often a protective layer of steam.  As long as this is not disturbed it
offers oxygen protection.  Even if the wort is poured through a strainer to
remove hops the very nature of the hot fluid will help reduce oxygen
ingress.  But remember right after this cooling stage you are going to
deliberately add oxygen so your yeast will grow!

Does this mean not to worry about HSA at all!  NO!  But get your beer-making
process under control and then attack things like HSA and COLD SIDE
AERATION.  If you are concerned about oxidation worry more about the
possibility of getting oxygen in your beer when it is cold and has less
yeast in it.  The colder beer is and the closer to being finished it is the
more damage can be done by unwanted oxygen addition.  (Remember the Gas
Laws.)  When looking for possible damage due to aeration work 'backwards'
from the finished beer and eliminate the possible causes working toward the
brewhouse.

Kirk Annand, S.I.T.


Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 12:55:04 -0700
From: "Paul Stutzman" <Paul.Stutzman at airborne.com>
Subject: Hop Bag Use

I have a couple of questions regarding the use of hop bags during
the boil.  I've used hop bags for a couple of years now, and it
seems that my hop utilization is quite low despite vigorous
boiling for 60 to 90 minutes.  I am frequently disappointed in
the amount bitterness in my final product.  I usually up my
hopping rate, but it's always been a bit of a crapshoot.  Does
anyone have a calculation for estimating the inefficiencies
associated with using hop bags VS allowing the hops to roam
freely during the boil?

The only reason I'm using the hop bags relates to my CWC.  It has
a copper racking tube, and I've had a couple of instances when
the tube got clogged by debris in spite of my best efforts at
whirlpooling my brewkettle.  (I use an unmodified 10-gallon
stainless steel pot as my brewkettle.)  I'd really prefer to
avoid using hop bags altogether.  My initial thought was to pour
the boiled wort through a strainer, but I'm reluctant to try
that, given the ongoing holy war regarding HSA.  What do other
brewers do to prevent hops from ending up in their chillers?
Should I simply switch to pellets and hope that my whirlpooling
is effective enough to prevent the hop residue from entering the
racking tube?

Thank you in advance for your advice in these matters.

Paul Stutzman
Seattle, WA




Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 08:15:44
From: "C.D. Pritchard" <cdp at chattanooga.net>
Subject: re: rims questions

Gary Smith had some RIMS questions:

>1. Position of mag pump: as long as the pump is below 
the kegs, does it matter what position it's in? I'm 
concerned about the impeller spinning & causing 
cavitation/bubbling in the liquid.

The literture that came with the March I use says to mount it with the
shaft horizontally- I think due to the design of the bearings and hence a
shorter life if mounted vertically.  OTOH, RIMS pumps don't see that much
use in a homebrewer's RIMS.  RIMS pump orientation is a negligable factor
with reguards to cavitation since cavitation occurs when the fluid pressure
is less than the vapor pressure.  Pressure loss in the tun is THE big
factor in cavitation.  A vertical orientation may make it easier to get all
of the air out of the pump casing since trapped air can bubble out via the
pump suction plumbing after you fill the system with foundation water.  A
tip: tap the plumbing or rock/jar the system to help dislodge air bubbles.

>2. I have a custom rims chamber from Movingbrews....
Should the fluid be flowing from the distal end of the element to the 
threaded end or is the fluid (& temp. probe) at the other 

Depends on if you want to measure the wort temp. before or after it's
heated.  I recommend both unless you measure temp. in the tun- mash temp.
is inferred from the temp. before heating and monitoring/limiting the temp.
after heating helps ensure the enzymes aren't denatured.

>3. I am planning on placing my element horizontal...
I'm wondering how much loss of sweet 
liquor I'll loose in the rims & I'm wondering about 
bubbles being trapped in the chamber if it's horizontal.

If you sparge and run off downstream of the chamber, the volume of trapped
wort won't matter since it'll be diluted.   A horizontal orientation may
result in alot of trapped air in the chamber and, worse yet, a large
air-to-wort interface area with highish velocity.  Consider connecting the
chamber with flexible tubing so the chamber can be tilted when filling with
foundation water.  This will allow the trapped air to be expelled.  

>Do you RIMS users dis-assemble the rims chamber 
after use or do you clean whatcha got with chemicals & 
leave the rims chamber intact?
What chemicals do you use to clean if that's your route?

I just flush it well by recirculating 2-3 batches of hot water through the
RIMS after brewing and once before brewing and give it an rare cleaning by
recirculating PBW.  No disassembly.  Judging by the crud the PBW removes,
flushing isn't great at cleaning, but the crud build-up doesn't affect the
beers so I don't worry about it.  YMMV...  


c.d. pritchard     cdp at chattanooga.net 
http://chattanooga.net/~cdp/



Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 11:45:17 -0700
From: "Kirk Annand" <kirk.annand at ns.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Siebel Response - Thick vs Thin Mash

Bill:

This is another question with no definitive answer.  The reason for using
thin or thick mashes is associated with the enhancement of particular types
of enzyme activity in the mash.  The trouble is there are other factors
which also have an effect such as: type of malt, malt modification, how well
malt is milled, homogeneity of mash, pH of mash, brewing water composition,
temperature, and time.  As you can see the thickness of the mash (grain to
water ratio) is only one factor and so most modern commercial brewers use a
kind of compromise thickness.

When considering mashing as a process the most important aspects are
controlling temperature and time.  With infusion mashing as practiced by
most homebrewers and brewpubs that means the final temperature of the mash
once all materials are added.  You are right that some malts work best with
thin versus thick mashes but less so than it used to.  Barley (and the malt
made from it) has changed dramatically since the traditional thick and thin
mashes were first developed by brewers.

It is a fact of modern agricultural practice that essentially none of the
barley varieties that existed one hundred years ago exist on a commercial
scale today.  The same can be largely said for hops also.  The effect of
crop breeding and 'improvement' programs has been all pervasive.  In hops it
is now almost impossible to buy hops with seeds in them.  Fifty years ago
this was not the case and so it is like chasing a 'moving target' when
trying to brew a 'classic' beer style.  We brewers are a pretty traditional
lot but we are a food industry that is ruled by our raw material
availability and the farmers often determine what we get because they want
maximum yield from their land.

Opps, sorry for the deviation from the topic.  A thick mash has a grain to
water ratio of 1 : 2 or 1 : 2.5 while a thin mash has a ratio of 1 : 4 or 1
: 5 (these ratios are all by weight).  A thick mash has a positive influence
on 'proteolytic enzyme activity' (breakdown of protein to peptide and free
amino nitrogen) while a thin mash has a positive influence on 'amyloltic
enzyme activity' (breakdown of starch to dextrin to fermentable sugar).  In
your example of 1 qt. water to 1 lb. of malt that is a thick mash (32 oz. to
16 oz.) with a ratio of 2 : 1.   This is mash-in water quantities and does
not take sparge water into account.  As I said most modern brewers use
ratios that are a compromise in the range of 1 : 3 or 1 : 3.5.  This a is a
good compromise for enzymatic activity especially with most modern malts.

As you can see like most things in brewing there is no set answer.  That is
what is so fascinating about brewing on both a homebrew and commercial
scale.  I think that "Don't worry, have a homebrew" is a good way to
approach it.

Kirk Annand. S.I.T.


Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 12:42:04 -0400
From: Bill Wible <bill at brewbyyou.net>
Subject: Siebel Week

Thanks for the opportunity to ask these questions!

Please talk about mashing, and the difference between 'thin'
mash and 'thick' mash, what affect this has on the final beer,
and in what styles one is more appropriate or better used over
the other.  I know that decoctions when pulled should be thick.
But if you're doing infusion mash, when do you use one over the
other?

Maybe there are some malts that thin or thick mash works better
with?  What is the proportion that is considered 'thick' mash,
(1 quart per pound or less?), an what is considered thin?

Bill









Return to table of contents

---