---

	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:
  Liquid Level Control (Tony Barnsley)
  deactivation of enzymes/mashing and attenuation ("Steve Alexander")
  deactivation of enzymes/mashing and attenuation pt2 ("Steve Alexander")
  bitter taste/aftertaste ("Jeffrey McPike")
  Norrish Cleavages ("Dave Burley")
  Pretzel Results (Rick)
  Re: Rest at 122 deg F for Sierra Nevada Pale Ale Clone ("Shawn E Lupold, Ph.D")
  Acid in beer ("Dan Listermann")
  RE:  Rest at 122 deg F for Sierra Nevada Pale Ale Clone (Bill Tobler)
  CACA results (Rama Roberts)
  Hot Peppers. (Wesner Reing)
  All grain logistics question (Victor.E.Franklin)
  Selling recipes (Ken Pendergrass)
  Re: Goose Island Clone (Spencer W Thomas)
  SNPA Clone Recipe ("Eric Ahrendt")


*
* 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.

HAVING TROUBLE posting, subscribing or unsusubscribing? See the HBD FAQ at
http://hbd.org.

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 or read the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org.

JANITOR on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)



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


Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 10:38:05 +0100 
From: Tony Barnsley <tony.barnsley at blackpool.gov.uk>
Subject: Liquid Level Control

Hi all

I know that there is someone out there that can help me sort this one out.

I run off my sweet wort from the mash tun into an under back (Converted
Corny) and then pump it to the boiler. What I would like to be able to do is
to switch the speed of the pump to different levels depending on the liquid
level in the underback. The pump speed is currently controlled by a power
regulator and depending on the setting of the variable resistor depends on
the pumps speed.

What I would like to do, is to have two float switches at different heights
in the under back. I think that there are three scenarios IMBW

With both Floats open I would like the pump to run at a speed that enables
the underback to continue filling (R1)

With the Lower Float Closed the Pump runs faster, probably just about
keeping up with the run off from the mash tun or just a bit less (R2)

With Both floats Closed the pump runs much faster and empties the underback
UNTIL the Lower Float Opens (R3)

Can anyone come up with a discrete logic circuit to operate relays (opto
isolators) that switch the three resistors into the motor speed controller
circuit. I don't really want to get into the realm of PIC controllers.

Also anyone know of any good (cheap or free) Circuit and PCB design software
Probably best to contact me offline as its not 'strictly' beer related

- --
Wassail!
The Scurrilous Aleman (ICQ 46254361)
Schwarzbad Lager Brauerei, Blackpool, Lancs, UK

Rennerian Coordinates (3605.3,47.5) No Longer Lost In The Brewing Void!

Email Disclaimer is:
http://www.blackpool.gov.uk/democracy/corpdocs/EmailDisclaimer.htm

This message has been scanned by F-Secure Anti-Virus for Microsoft Exchange
as part of the Council's e-mail and internet policy.


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 07:25:22 -0400
From: "Steve Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: deactivation of enzymes/mashing and attenuation

Hans Aikema asks great questions like ...

>Does anybody know how fast enzymes deactivate?

In a 65C(149F) mash with a 2.5:1 water:grist ratio (1.25qt/lb)  the
half-life of beta-amylase(BA) is about 16 minutes, alpha-amylase(AA)
half-life  is about 42.5 minutes.  At 85C(185F) the numbers are roughly 5.5
minutes for BA and 12 minutes for AA.  See JIB v97,pp85-92 for details -
great paper by Robert Muller of BRI.

>When I want to use the beta-amylase at say 1 hour
>63 degr.C (145 F) and not so much alfa amylase
>and I heat up from 63 degr.C (145 F) to 85 degr.
>C (185 F) in 5 min., does that mean I used mainly
>beta amylase and both are ineffective at the time the
>mash reached 85 degr. C (185 F) ? Or is alfa
>amylase than stil working during sparging?

This question is based on misunderstandings that are commonly repeated in
the HB literature.

AA and BA are not entirely competitive.  The available sites for BA activity
increase as AA acts tho' AA can eventually dice-up the starch into sizes
that the BA is slow to digest.   Mashing at 63C does not prevent AA from
acting.   The ratios of instantaneous AA activity to BA activity are nearly
independent of temperature.   The value of a low temp (60C-67C) mash rest is
that it allows a lot of BA activity to occur before denaturing.

There is sufficient AA to completely convert all the starch in a single
infusion mash at even 85C/185F - far above typical  "mash-out" temps of
78C/172F.   Conventional pale malts has more than 20 times the potential  AA
activity as BA activity.  The amount of AA in 1kg of pale malt can convert
about 88kg (!!!) of starch in a 60':65C mash.   Step mashing is about
permitting a controlled amount of BA activity to achieve the desired
attenuation rate.  Separate protein degradation steps are usually
unnecessary with modern malts - with *extremely* rare exceptions.

Let's use a variation of Hans' mash as an example (60minute:63C, and boost
to 85C for a 20 minute very hot mash-out).    During the 60':63C mash there
is enough potential AA activity to convert 83kg of starch for every 1kg of
pale malt !!   In the first hour there is enough potential BA activity to
produce 4kg of maltose per 1kg malt.   Obviously there isn't enough starch
available to use all this potential.  After the hour about 46% of the AA is
still available and only 17% of the BA.

During the next mash phase 20':85C there is about 32% additional potential
AA activity (enough to convert 26kg of starch per 1kg of pale malt) and 11%
additional BA activity (enough to produce 0.4kg of maltose per kg of pale
malt).  At the end of this very hot mashout 15% of the original AA survives
and only 1.4% of the BA.

I give this example not because the specific numbers are of any value (even
minor changes in malt, pH, mash thickness etc will throw the numbers off )
but because it's important to observe the magnitudes of the activities under
various circumstances.   The figures above are based on calculations that
account for the temperature dependent denaturation rates and activity rates
for the enzymes.   This model does not include separate terms for product
inhibition (for example high maltose concentration slows BA activity) or
changes in water availability.

Note that -
/ Pale malt contains a vast excess of potential enzyme activity compared to
the available starch.
/ Malt contains far more potential AA activity than BA  activity.
/ Any saccharification rest will see the destruction of most of the BA
within 1hr (about 75% loss at 60':60C, more at higher temps), but
substantial AA activity can continue through mash-out.
/ The additional enzyme activity during the mash-out period is similar to
the same period at a lower temp, tho' losses of enzymes are greater.
/ The ratio of AA activity to BA activity during the mash is constantly
shifting in favor of AA, because BA denatures so quickly.
/The end of mash-out effectively destroys the BA in the mash but mashout
does not
rapidly destroy the vast amounts of AA - that takes considerable time even
at 85C.  Contrary to popular belief, the potential enzyme activity during
the (very hot 85C in this case) mashout period is considerable.

- ---

It should be apparent that even given great losses in potential activity
from sub-optimal conditions that the limiting factor in saccharification is
the availability of starch in the mash.  A topic never addressed in the HB
lit.  From various tables .... a 65C mash will release about 90% of the
final malt extract in 20 minutes ... at 60C it's 90% in 50 minutes (much
slower) and at 50C only 50% is in solution after 2+ hours.   The reasons for
the slow release are NOT the degree of malt modification, but the
gelatinization temperature(GT).  The GT of  malt is higher (64-67C) than raw
barley (60-62C) because of the kilning.

It used to be the case that English PA malt was called 'high kilned' malt
because there was a final high temp toasting phase which decreased the
amounts of BA enzyme considerably and also *presumably* caused a yet higher
GT.  I read in Kunze tho' that current European practice is to kiln-off malt
at 100-105C in order to reduce SMM levels and so avoid the costly long boils
that used to be needed to reduce DMS/DMSO levels.  Perhaps little difference
in the GT.

Anyhow after any reasonable saccharification rest the activity of BA will be
greatly decreased and the starch release rate during that period will depend
significantly on the mash temperature.  For a highly attenuative beer it's
probably better to get most of the starch into solution early with a 65C
mash-in rather than slowly let the starch out with a 60C mash-in.  My
experience is that the Fix (60C-70C-mashout) mash schedule can produce beers
with 70-74% attenuation despite the slow starch release.  For higher
attenuation (as in pale-ales) look to a different schedule with a hotter
saccharification step.

During the boost to mashout there is another release of starch from the
grist yielding 3-10% of total extract.  The enzymes active during mashout
will certainly convert the starch, but with the BA levels so low this final
puff of starch may yield more dextrins than previously released starch.  For
a more attenuative wort we'd like this final starch release to be small -
which calls for a warmer saccharification step (like 65C) and perhaps a slow
climb to mashout temps.

My comments - after 1hr at 63C your mash should have completed degrading all
the starch available.  The mash-out boost will release a little more and the
fermentability of the carbohydrate from that last little gasp is probably
medium-low.

Just for reference - in Muller's paper his results give the following
fermentability vs mash temperature for a mash with a 2.5:1 water:grist ratio
    70C    70%
    75C    52%
    80C    28%
    85C    22%
Obviously very dextrinous beer styles require saccharification temps above
70C/158F.

 -S




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 07:34:00 -0400
From: "Steve Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: deactivation of enzymes/mashing and attenuation pt2

I know Kevin Crouch has been providing some interesting speculation on Paul
Shick's mash ....

Kevin Crouch ...

>The notion that "full starch conversion
>can be achieved in 15 minutes" appears to be saturated
>in a good deal of commercial brewing rhetoric based
>on the principles of chemistry that we've discussed in
>recent posts, and the experiences of this community.
>This cannot pertain to the total % of available starch
>in the mash.

It's saturated in reality and not rhetoric Kevin.

EBC, IoB and ASBC each have a 'lab' mash regimes
which are rather hot and very thin and these regularly
produce high levels of extraction and complete
conversion *of starch* in relatively short period of time,
5-15 minutes.   In our cooler thicker mashes the conversion
is slower and the release of starch is slower as well - but
not so slow.    In an all malt grist with a high percentage of
pils or pale-ale type malt you should get a clean iodine test
in under 20-25 minutes at saccharification temps.

A clean iodine test tho' only demonstrated that the amylose
segments are below length .. ?16?.. or so - too short to
trap iodine pairs in the amylose helix.   The stuff is still
often too dextrinous to make good beer.

>In addition, malt modification really
>shouldn't be a major factor here.


Probably not.  Malt extract levels (using hot thin lab
mashes) are nearly constant from about halfway thru
malt germination period. see the previous post re
starch release and gelatinization temp.

[...]
> I am under the impression that
>the main purpose of the mash-out is to de-activate any
>viable enzymes so that the integrity of the malt
>constitution will be maintained after the sparge,
>which in most instances is going to be longer than the
>combined rest times.

That mashout inactivates all enzymes is a common and
incorrect belief.  Complete conversion of all starch can
be accomplished with a single infusion at 85C - well
above conventional mash-out temps !  Mashout spells
the end for beta-amylase tho' BA can be fairly active
during a 77C-78C mash-out.  AA will continue to act
to some extent after mashout and into the sparge.

fwiw,
 -S




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 07:24:54 -0500
From: "Jeffrey McPike" <n9cqs at insightbb.com>
Subject: bitter taste/aftertaste

Greetings.
I have brewed for several years, and have recently had three batches that
had a strong bitterness to them.  It isn't exactly a hop bitterness, and it
is worse in the aftertaste than while drinking.

I thought I was getting an infection.  I changed everything.  I sanitize
with Iodopher.  I have little brushes to clean out tubes.  I boil all water.
I use an imersion wort chiller.  I have purchased a new plastic primary, as
there were scratches in my old one.  I still have the troubles.

I am boiling in an aluminum brewpot that came with my burner as a turkey
fryer.  I don't do anything it but boil water and boil wort.  I use a
Stainless Steel brew paddle to stir.  Immersion chiller is copper.

Could my beer be picking up a taste from the aluminum?

Do I need to scrub the aluminum clean between brewings?  (I wash the
aluminum pot, but I don't use anything like steel wool and actually work to
get to a bright shine inside)

Could the aluminum be reacting with the copper chiller?

Maybe I just need to give in a buy a stainless steel brew pot, which I'm
willing to do, but I want to know before I spend the money if it's going to
solve my problem or not.  In other words, a SS brewpot would be desireable,
but I want this problem of bitterness solved FIRST, or have the new pot
solve it.

Thanks in advance.
Jeff



- ---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.381 / Virus Database: 214 - Release Date: 8/2/2002



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 08:50:09 -0400
From: "Dave Burley" <Dave_BURLEY at CHARTER.NET>
Subject: Norrish Cleavages

Brewsters:

Leppihalme Miikkali provided a reference for a skuky beer mechanism that
recalled some of my early academic work..

Having done my Ph.D. in Photochemistry and research in electron spin resonance
spectroscopy on organics as an undergraduate only a couple of years after it
was first demonstrated at Univ. of Chicago, I found it interesting that these
esoteric techniques are at last being used for practical purposes!  But
Malcomb Forbes as the lead researcher?  Oh, yeah that Malcomb Forbes of UNC.

I also have done my share of study of Norrish Type I and II cleavages, but
we'll leave that for another time.

Keep on Brewin'

Dave Burley




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 06:32:59 -0700 (PDT)
From: Rick <ale_brewer at yahoo.com>
Subject: Pretzel Results

I finally baked a batch of Jeff Renner's pretzels last
night, and they were so damn good I had to report it
immediately to the HBD.  They were a huge hit with
everyone who had them.

I've tried making them before using baking soda with
disappointing results. I bought some purified lye and
used that this time, and all I can say is that they
were fantastic. The lye really does make the
difference.  

One note for those making the dough in a bread machine
like I did: you may want to use a bit more water. I
started with 1 1/8 cups and had to add at least
another 1/4 to 1/3 cup.  Best thing to do is monitor
your bread machine and add water as needed.

Thanks Jeff.

Rick Seibt
Mentor, OH



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2002 09:33:14 -0400
From: "Shawn E Lupold, Ph.D" <lupolds at jhmi.edu>
Subject: Re: Rest at 122 deg F for Sierra Nevada Pale Ale Clone


William Menzl writes about his first all grain recipe:

This is the exact same recipe (Perle bitter and Cascade flavor?) as my
first mash!  First, let me say that this turned out to be a great beer.
It blew away all of my previous extract brews (over 10 years worth).
All grain is labor intensive, but so far it's worth the effort.

I can't tell you whether or not to do the protein rest, but I can tell
you the problems I ran into brewing this recipe as my first mash.  I
followed Papazian's schedule for 1 quart of water per pound, with an
expected drop in temperature of 16-18 F, to get near 122 F.  It ended
closer to 115 F, so I added more hot water to get to 122.  After the
protein rest, I followed the recommended water addition to get to 150.
In the end, I added almost double the recommended amount to only get to
142-145.  In short, the lesson is that these recommended temperatures
are guidelines and can vary widely with mash systems, temperature,
insulation, grain density, etc., etc.  Even with all of these troubles
(a water:grain ratio way over the 'recommended' limits, a lower temp
mash, rain pouring into my boiling brewpot) the beer turned out awesome.
If you do decide to go for the protein rest on your first mash, be ready
for some deviations from the expected.  

Some other pieces of advice I wish I had:  Run your first gallon or so
of run off back through the grain bed.  They'll tell you to run until
clear; however, in my experience, the first runnings are rarely crystal
clear.  Finally, lauter slowly, as running too fast will give you low
extraction efficiency.  I would guess the average lauter takes 40-60
minutes for 6 gallons?  

This will be a great beer!

Shawn





Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 09:41:41 -0400
From: "Dan Listermann" <dan at listermann.com>
Subject: Acid in beer


Steve Alexander discusses acetic acid in beer and notes that  O2 is required
for its formation.  I get a lot of customers who complain that their beer
tastes like "vinegar."   Usually they are tasting acid and vinegar is the
descriptor that they are most familiar with.  Almost always their real
problem is lactic acid, not acidic acid because O2 should be hard to come by
in brewing equipment.

Dan Listermann

Check out our E-tail site at www.listermann.com






Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2002 10:12:06 -0500
From: Bill Tobler <wctobler at sbcglobal.net>
Subject: RE:  Rest at 122 deg F for Sierra Nevada Pale Ale Clone

In HBD #4010 William Menzl asks,

"Is this rest at 122 deg F really needed or should I just do a 90 minute
mash at 150 deg F? 

With the malt bill you're using, I would skip the protean rest at 122 and do
the single infusion at 150.  I have read (I think on this digest) that a
longish rest in the 122 range can effect head retention.  If you were using
a lot of wheat, you might want to do a protean rest.

To find you Rennerian Coordinates, try this Calculator.

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/levetzowbt/homebrew/rennerian.html

Bill Tobler
Lake Jackson, TX
(1129.7, 219.9) Apparent Rennerian




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 09:38:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: Rama Roberts <rama at retro.eng.sun.com>
Subject: CACA results

I brewed a CACA about a month ago, and thought I'd share the results. The 
recipe I used was more or less what Jeff Renner suggested here a couple months 
back, but using Maris Otter as the base, and 24 oz of corn meal. The yeast used 
was Windsor, which I think was responsible for a fairly high FG of about 1.018 
(used Jeff's mash schedule, a large yeast starter, and well aerated wort). 

Having never lagered, I don't have a dedicated fridge. After about 2 weeks in 
the secondary for a rest, I thought I'd drop it in my food fridge at 40F, where 
it stayed for about 3 more weeks. Not sure what affect this may have had, as 
this was my first CACA. 

If I were going to do it again, I think I would keep the grain bill and hops 
just as Jeff suggests, but change something to lower the FG (or perhaps raise 
the alcohol content instead) to match its fairly full body, which doesn't seem 
to fit. Or maybe use a domestic 2 or 6 row instead of Maris Otter? 
 
In all, a very tasty beer. 

- --rama roberts
san francisco bay area



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 13:31:35 -0400 (EDT)
From: Wesner Reing <wreing at lynx.dac.neu.edu>
Subject: Hot Peppers.


I'm attempting the Dry Heat Chili Ale form the July-Aug Brew Your Own. 
And I have a question about putting peppers in the bottle.  Since The
majority of the capsaicin is contained in the seeds, should I put a small
slit in the peppers first to make sure that my beer is as hot as possible
or will the "heat" leach out through the pepper anyway?  Has anyone brewed
a beer like this?  Thanks for your help.

Wes
Brookline, MA



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2002 12:33:36 -0700
From: Victor.E.Franklin at bankofamerica.com
Subject: All grain logistics question



Hello!
I am going to be switching over to all-grain soon. I know the process takes
more time so I wanted to brew larger batches.  The thought being I will be
spending the same amount of time on the same volume of beer if I brew a
larger batch (i.e. instead of brewing 3 extract 5 gal batches, brew 1 large
all-grain).
However, I am not sure how large is too large. How much can one reasonably
brew at one time? I already have a good propane cooker. But I haven't
purchased any of the additional equipment yet and wanted to make sure I got
the right stuff. If I wanted to brew a 20 gallon batch for example, does the
logistics of handling that much grain and water etc. make it an exercise in
futility?

Any experienced all-grainers have equipment advice for the new guy? What you
would do different a second time around, for example?

Are there places that sell large pots and such for just such an at home
set-up?

Also, If you know of a good on-line supply company would send me the link or
number? (personal email is fine too) If anyone is interested in the list let
me know and I will shoot you a copy.

Thank you

Victor Franklin
victor.e.franklin at bankofamerica.com
"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy"




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2002 16:48:12 -0400
From: Ken Pendergrass <kenp794 at earthlink.net>
Subject: Selling recipes

Colby,
    I have bought thousands or at least a few hundred recipes in that I
continue to by brewing recipe books and magazines. If one divides the
price of a book by the number of recipes $1.25 is a ridiculously high
price. I am very reticent to trust on line posted recipes. I fear anyone
could post anything and probably before they try it. While I do know
enough about styles to tell at a glance if a recipe is pointing in the
right direction I just can't bring myself to use one unless posted by a
person I recognize and then I might email the alleged author to see if
he had posted it.
Ken



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2002 16:54:10 -0400
From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer at engin.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Goose Island Clone 

>>>>> "Beer" == Beer Drinker <srm775 at yahoo.com> writes:


    Beer> Does any one have a recipe for a Goose Island clone?


Well, first you raise a few million dollars.  Then you get yourself a
nice old building in Chicago.  Rip out the insides and install a
brewery.  Build a good restaurant to go around it.  Hire yourself some
kick-*ss brewers.  

Or did you mean one of the MANY beers that Goose Island makes?

=S


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 17:55:20 -0400
From: "Eric Ahrendt" <Rock67 at PeoplePC.com>
Subject: SNPA Clone Recipe

William Menzel writes:

"I am going to be brewing my first all grain batch this weekend
and I am planning on using the recipe for cloning Sierra Nevada
Pale Ale from Tess and Mark Szamatulski's "Clone Brews"."

I don't think you need the rest you suggest.  I brew a clone recipe by Chris
Frey (near, but not quite 0,0 Rennerian) that is awesome and is single
infusion.  I think Chris developed this over 30 tries or so, and it was
chosen for Big Brew 2000.  Chris inclides some wheat for head retention. If
you want this recipe let me know.

Eric Ahrendt
Fremont, OH



Return to table of contents

---