HOMEBREW Digest #4061 Tue 08 October 2002


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


	FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
		Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org


***************************************************************
       THIS YEAR'S HOME BREW DIGEST BROUGHT TO YOU BY: 

          Northern  Brewer, Ltd. Home Brew Supplies
        http://www.northernbrewer.com  1-800-681-2739

    Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********


Contents:
  Home malting and outdoor brewing ("Guy and Norine Gregory")
  Oops ("David Craft")
  re: Carafa malts (Paul Kensler)
  Re: Ion/water softener and pH (Jeff Renner)
  First Wort Hopping Query (David Towson)
  Re: false bottom help (David Towson)
  What th' el...... ("Berggren, Stefan")
  Beeson's Pale Chocolate Malt ("Hedglin, Nils A")
  Re false bottom help ("Mike")
  RIMS Cleaning -- Is CIP OK? (Charles)
  Re: Sunlight, Hops, and Outdoor Brewing (Michael Grice)
  Guinness comes alive ("Joseph Gerteis")
  Re: Zepto-sized brewing in a growler?? (R.A.)" <rbarrett at ford.com>
  False Bottom Specs ("Kirk Fleming")
  Yeast Experiment (Richard Foote)
  Re: Ion/water softener and pH ("Dave Burley")
  Free the Melanoidins (Kevin Crouch)
  RE: RIMS Cleaning -- Is CIP OK? (Mark Alfaro)
  RE: Zepto-sized brewing in a growler?? ("Todd")
  Good Eats beer episode ("John O'Connell at Work")

* * 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: Sun, 6 Oct 2002 22:12:37 -0700 From: "Guy and Norine Gregory" <guyg at icehouse.net> Subject: Home malting and outdoor brewing Gents: I did a home malting experiment before...even in Columbia, it could work. Try the Brewery home malting article, but basically 1: weigh a measured amount of grain. 2. soak the grain in a zapap lautertun for a couple of days, then spread on a screen box and keep moist until it sprouts. When the sprout is as long as the kernal, kiln it in the oven at 135-150F until it weighs about as much as it did dry. Crush, and brew with it. You'll need about 30% more than you would for a normal recipe. But, there it is, and it adds some dandy flavor. Simple brewing requires a thermometer, a large enough vessel, and your attention. Go for it. And I brew outdoors, all the time. The only time I have any trouble is when there is a lot of tree pollen in the air. 10 years, every beer I've made in May is spoiled. No matter what steps I took. Cheers! Guy Gregory Lightning Creek Home Brewery Spokane, WA Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 06:21:23 -0400 From: "David Craft" <chsyhkr at bellsouth.net> Subject: Oops Good Morning, I made a Dunkelweizen Saturday morning using a double decoction mash, my first decoction. I got so caught up in the process I forgot the iodine process. Any harm done? Some starch left over will lead to some cloudiness which is fine for this beer. Unless I really screwed up, most of the starches should have converted.................. Any other thoughts? David B. Craft Battleground Brewers Homebrew Club Crow Hill Brewery and Meadery Greensboro, NC Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 06:09:55 -0700 (PDT) From: Paul Kensler <paul_kensler at yahoo.com> Subject: re: Carafa malts One comment about Carafa malts from Weyermann... a lot of home-brewers I've met are under the assumption that all Carafa is dehusked - in fact, Weyermann makes "regular" Carafa malts and dehusked Carafa malts (both in grades I, II, and III). The dehusked Carafa malt is made from dehusked barley (my point being, the husk is removed before its malted). Hope this helps, Paul Kensler Gaithersburg, MD Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 09:00:13 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <JeffRenner at comcast.net> Subject: Re: Ion/water softener and pH "Dave Burley" <Dave_Burley at charter.net> wrote: >Michael Hackney has recently moved from a city water supply to a well and >wonders if pH paper is adequate to check the pH of the water for adjustment. > >The pH of the water is irrelevant as the calcium, and to some extent the >magnesium content, of the mash liquor (brewing water) and the grist makeup >control the pH of the mash. > >If your water source is a well ( as mine was when I lived in NJ) and you >soften it and ion exchange it ( as I did) you should have no problem except >carbon dioxide in it. A quick boil or air scrub should solve that problem if >you want to. > >I'd use the water ( which should be ion free) as you get it and modify it >with calcium for ales and the like. For lagers, I wouldn't touch it. If you >insist, then add 20 ppm as calcium chloride. I'm confused, Dave. Michael says he softens his water, and I presume, as you did, that it is softened by ion exchange, not by reverse osmosis. Ion exchange softeners. For those who don't know (Dave does), this exchanges two sodium ions for every calcium or magnesium ion (these are what makes water "hard". This makes the water "soft" - i.e., it makes good lather with soap. This is because calcium and magnesium ions in hard water substitute for the sodium on the soap molecule, which makes the soap insoluble, and if it can't go into solution, it can't clean. Back to your message. In your fourth paragraph above, Dave, you say Michael should use his water "as you get it." Do you mean as it comes out of his well, or out of the softener? Either way, it doesn't make sense. You seem to have jumped to ion-free RO water. Did the HBD server steal some text again? Michael - here's my advise. Your ion-exhange softened water will have no calcium (calcium is necessary for mashing) and lots of sodium (which is bad for beer, although it doesn't affect the mashing process). Your well water may need treatment for brewing, but you should probably get an analysis. A water softener company or Sears can do this for you if you tell them you are considering buying a softener. My well water here in Michigan is moderately hard (calcium and some magnesium) and relatively high in alkalinity. It works fine as is for dark and even copper-colored beers, but for all pale malt mashes, it is too alkaline. For these beers, I boil and decant, which removes much of the alkalinity. Since it also removes much of the calcium, I also add either CaCl2 or CaSo4 (gypsum), depending on style. pH paper for the mash and runoff is a good way monitoring how your brew is going and if the water is suitable for the style you are brewing. 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: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 10:23:02 -0400 From: David Towson <dtowson at comcast.net> Subject: First Wort Hopping Query I've been following with great interest the occasional posts concerning FWH, and I have poked around in the archives for more. But I have not found any references to the relationship between the physical form of the hops used (whole, pellet, plug) and the effect on the result. Can anyone provide either pointers to references or details of personal experiences concerning that? Dave in Bel Air, MD Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 11:53:58 -0400 From: David Towson <dtowson at comcast.net> Subject: Re: false bottom help In HBD 4060, Kirk McDonald asked about false bottom geometry and materials. The most common choice of hole size and spacing for stainless steel false bottoms seems to be 3/32" holes and 5/32" spacing with the hole rows staggered to form the hex pattern to which you referred. I have experience with two false bottoms having this geometry, and I am very pleased with their performance so far as flow and filtration are concerned in a HERMS using constant recirculation. But there is a big difference between the two with regard to their ability to support a large grain charge with the pump running full-time. The false bottom that came with my B-1500 system from Beer, Beer and More Beer is 0.034" thick, and is supported by five pieces of stainless tubing welded to the underside. It sits in a flat-bottomed stainless pot. I use it now only to filter hops in my boil kettle because it was forever being bent into strange shapes by the combination of grain weight and pump suction. It's just not sturdy enough to stand up under those forces. The other false bottom, which came with my Sabco half-keg conversion, is 0.060" thick and holds up very well, even though it consists of two semi-circles hinged together. This false bottom is supported around its entire outer edge by the domed bottom of the keg, and by a removable support which I place next to the siphon pickup tube in the center. Because this false bottom works so well, I now use only the Sabco keg for mashing. For a recirculating mash system, I highly recommend using a mesh filter beneath the false bottom to keep little grain bits from getting out of the mash tun. Otherwise, you'll go nuts fiddling with the throttling valve used to regulate the flow. The little bits build up in the valve and restrict the flow so you have to keep "burping" the valve to clear them out. For a filter, I use two metal mesh lint traps commonly available at hardware stores. These things look like metal mesh condoms (ouch), and they are intended to be fit over the ends of clothes washer discharge hoses to keep lint from going down the drain. I cut off the closed end to make a metal mesh tube, and then roll up the tube from both ends to form a stacked pair of metal mesh donuts. This arrangement gives a greater height than rolling the tube from just one end. I place two of these double-donuts, one on top of the other, around the siphon pickup tube underneath the false bottom. Stacking two gives enough height to allow them to be slightly compressed by the false bottom, thereby forming a good seal with both the false bottom and the bottom of the keg. This filter works very well so long as I don't pump so fast as to suck a lot of crud through the false bottom. I made that mistake recently with 30 pounds of grain in the tun, and plugged the filter so badly that it took me five hours to get through the mash and the sparge with the flow reduced to a mere trickle. But the Sabco 0.060" screen held up fine, even though I had to use maximum pump suction to get any flow at all. Dave in Bel Air, MD Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 11:12:04 -0500 From: "Berggren, Stefan" <stefan_berggren at trekbike.com> Subject: What th' el...... Hello everyone, I wanted to share a moment of both humor and seriousness...... Yesterday while brewing a pale ale, I experienced a rather amusing but somewhat painful epiphany. I had just brought in my brew kettle full of wonderful sugary hot wort, from outside and hooked up my wort chiller to the kitchen sink, ready to cool down my brew and have a well deserved brew. Slowly I turned on the faucet and the cool water surged through the vinyl tubing and into the copper coils of the wort chiller. As I carefully monitored the flow of water making sure all was well, I slowly increased the water. Then I noticed a small growth forming on the out tube of the chiller, no wait it was more of an instantaneous "balloon" ! Before I had time to figure out what the hell I was looking at "BOOM" the vinyl tube blew up in my face, hot water and all from the still hot wort. My brother now unable to contain laughter and nearly succumbing to micturition, saw more levity in the matter than I. After containing the water flow and cutting off the damaged segment of tubing and reattaching, I contemplated this error in my design. For all those home-made chillers out there, one might want to consider some heavy duty "High Temp" vinyl tubing when creating your chilling monster. Yes I have to laugh after the fact and smirk at my lack of forethought, but I can assure you that I will not make this mistake again...... Thanks for listening..... P.s. the slight burns were attended to by a nice cool porter...... Happy Brewing, Stefan Berggren One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." -Plato Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 09:22:57 -0700 From: "Hedglin, Nils A" <nils.a.hedglin at intel.com> Subject: Beeson's Pale Chocolate Malt Hi, I'm looking for Beeson's Pale Chocolate malt. Does anyone knew where to find it, or maybe a good substitute for it? Thanks, Nils Hedglin [I'd stick my Rennerian Coordinates in here, but the link I have for the calculator is broken.] Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 12:41:48 -0700 From: "Mike" <Mike at Bronosky.com> Subject: Re false bottom help The only time I have ever had a stuck sparge was with a false bottom. To be exact, it was a Phil's Phalse Bottom. After that I started using a homemade EZ-Masher. It was made using a short piece of 1/2" SS tubing, wrapping a SS screen (probably 1/8 grid) around an inch or so of the pipe with about 4 inches extending beyond the end of the tube. The open end of the screen was plugged off. This was held together with SS hose clamps. This may not be the best, the most effecient, the most whatever but she works great for me and several people in the homebrew club I'm in. Cost- Made out of scrap parts laying around. Someone else even made it for me. Can't beat that. Mike Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 10:00:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Charles at thestewarts.com Subject: RIMS Cleaning -- Is CIP OK? On Sun., Oct. 6, Lou from Ijamsville, MD, (right around the corner from me), worries about cleaning his RIMS system by pumping PBW through it. Lou - this is what I've been doing with mine from the begining without any problem. Well, there was problem once . . . I closed the lid to the ice-chest-mash-tun once. I opened it a little later and there was a slight off odor. Anyhow, what I do now is run a couple of gallons of PBW through it, then rinse with hot water. I then drain everthing and leave the hoses unplugged so that everthing can dry out. I can get this done while the wort is on the boil. Quick and easy. Chip Stewart Charles at TheStewarts.com http://Charles.TheStewarts.com Support anti-Spam legislation. Join the fight http://www.cauce.org Chip Stewart Charles at TheStewarts.com http://Charles.TheStewarts.com Support anti-Spam legislation. Join the fight http://www.cauce.org/ Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 12:21:09 -0500 From: Michael Grice <grice at binc.net> Subject: Re: Sunlight, Hops, and Outdoor Brewing Chad Gould wrote: >Firstly, hop skunking is only present in wort that has been boiled - >hop compounds have to be isomerized in the boil first. I imagine that >there is minimal skunking actually going on when you are merely boiling >the beer in the sun. Skunking (from what I've been told) will reverse >itself eventually if left in the dark for a couple of weeks, so I don't >think you have that much of a problem boiling the beer in the sun one >way or the other. On another note, does anyone know what sort of effect aging hops has on the propensity to skunk? I'm thinking of the lambics, which use aged hops. I've had great luck buying lambics, and only fair luck with other Belgian beers--I can think of a number I've bought which have been slightly or greatly skunked. So I wonder if the aging process had any effect. I realize also that lower amounts of hops used might have a similar effect. I am also tempted to demonstrate for my own satisfaction whether or not what you say about the reversal of skunking is indeed true... - --Michael Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 10:38:09 -0700 (PDT) From: "Joseph Gerteis" <joseph540 at elvis.com> Subject: Guinness comes alive Once again, there is some discussion of whether Guinness does, does not, or may exhibit a tang that may or may not come from Lactobacillus. E.g., from Jeff Renner: It has been argued that Guinness adds 3% soured beer to its final product, but this has never been confirmed. I don't find any particular lactic acid tang or aroma in Guinness. Dave Houseman agrees that Lactobacillus does not come into play in Guinness. I can't really comment on whether it does or doesn't -- I don't have enough experience with sour beers to know. But one point does confuse me a lot. I distinctly remember a "tang" to Guinness years ago - -- it was *not* grain-derived astringency. It was not really metallic either, but sort of a pleasant, mellow sourness. I noticed it in American pub Guiness (before wide availability -- like in the early 80s), and I noticed it in British pub Guinness when I tasted it in the early 90s. But I do not taste it now -- not at all. I don't think this is just a change in my taste buds or selective memory, but that is possible. Am I nuts, or has a defining characteristic really been bred out of the beer as it has gone global? Joe - ------------------------------------------------- Get your free at Elvis e-mail account at Elvis.com! http://www.elvis.com Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 14:27:29 -0400 From: "Barrett, Bob (R.A.)" <rbarrett at ford.com> Subject: Re: Zepto-sized brewing in a growler?? Robert Marshall (from where???) asks: >Has anyone brewed a complete batch in a growler?..... >What about carbonation? A growler will hold fermented >beer from a microbrewery for a couple of days, but its >not exactly designed to naturally carbonate in it. >Anyone have any successes/failures attempting this? I've used growlers to carbonate in when transferring from the primary to the secondary and all the beer won't fit. I just sanitize a growler and move the hose to the growler when the secondary is full. I've done it with beer that was at terminal and beer that still had a ways to go. In both cases the beer carbon- ates nicely. The beer at terminal only has about 2.0 volumes of CO2, but it's fine with me. Much better than tossing it out. The other beer was a pilsner that I racked to a keg with about 2 points to go on the hydrometer. I let it finish in the keg to naturally carbonate. The extra I put in a growler and it carbonated too. The growlers I've used are both the ones with the screw on lids and the ones with the swing top lids (like a Grolsch bottle). Both work fine. We make the beer we drink!! Bob Barrett Ann Arbor, MI (2.8, 103.6 Rennerian) Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 12:37:27 -0600 From: "Kirk Fleming" <kirkfleming at earthlink.net> Subject: False Bottom Specs In 4060 "Kirk McDonald" <kirem at ihug.com.au> asks about false bottoms. I won't say what's idea, but I've built a bunch of them for the Sankey keg and what I ended up with work flawlessly. It's an aluminum plate 1/8" (3mm) thick. I used 3/32" (~2.4mm) holes, spaced about 1/4" apart (6mm). Since I had to drill these by hand, if you do the math you'll see one reason I chose aluminum rather than stainless. On one side of the plate (the bottom) I relieved the holes using a standard countersink tool (used to countersink flathead machine screws). I relieved the holes deeply enough to leave only about 0.030" (~0.75mm) of the original hole diameter. I've thrown everything at this you can imagine in terms of grain bill--and have never been able to stick it. During initial mash in, I usually get a countably finite number of husks under the false bottom--if the pump pulls 'em out fine, if not, fine. Finally, even though this privitive fabrication technique may not be what you want to tackle, you can certainly compute the ratio of hole-to-plate (I probably did this--if you search the web for my name you'll come up with an article I did once on the whole setup--it might be in there "A Recirculating Wort Processor" or something like that). Good luck, good brewing. Jeeez..HBD #4060. I can't hardly believe it. Kirk Fleming FRSE, FRSL, BSAE, MSAE Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 15:43:49 -0400 From: Richard Foote <rfoote at mindspring.com> Subject: Yeast Experiment Yeast Experiment Have you ever wondered if that favorite yeast you use is really the best? Have you ever wondered how "they" come up with those yeast descriptions? Have you ever wondered whether there really are discernable differences among closely related yeasts? Our club did a yeast "experiment" to get some answers. DISCLAIMER: The standards used and the results obtained are in no way meant to hold up to scientific scrutiny so RDWHAHB. Five gallons of Helles wort were divided into five separate one-gallon jugs, each pitched with a different lager yeast strain. They were all fermented at the same temperature, bottled, aged, chilled and taste tested. A simple, sensory (aroma/taste) 1 - 5 point system was used, with 5 being highest (most preferred). NOTE: Although appearance notes appear in the descriptions, it was given no bearing on the ratings. It is provided for informational purposes only. Letters were arbitrarily assigned (why those letters?-dunno it was done by several SWMBO's) to corresponding yeasts by non-tasters. Letters were chosen so there would be no confusion between numerical rankings and identifiers. Only non-tasters (SWMBO's) knew which beers were produced by which yeast. There were five judges, one of which is BJCP National. Yeast descriptions from yeast producers: Pilsner Lager (WLP800) Classic pilsner strain from the premier pilsner producer in the Czech Republic. Somewhat dry with a malty finish, this yeast is best suited for European pilsner production. Attenuation: 72-77; Flocculation: medium to high; Optimum Ferm. Temp: 50-55 German Lager (WLP830) This yeast is one of the most widely used lager yeasts in the world. Very malty and clean, great for all German lagers, pilsner, oktoberfest, and marzen. Attenuation: 74-79; Flocculation: Medium; Optimum Ferm. Temp: 50-55 Southern German Lager (WLP838) This yeast is characterized by a malty finish and balanced aroma. It is a strong fermentor, produces slight sulfur, and low diacetyl. Attenuation: 68-76; Flocculation: medium to high; Optimum Ferm. Temp: 50-55 YCKC Ayinger Lager (provided courtesy of Jeff Renner--edited) It was hand carried to Ann Arbor from Germany by Herr Durst maybe five years ago or more for Dan McConnell, owner of YCKC. Durst was here for a tour of US breweries and trade shows to drum up business with GW Kent's owner Randy Reichwage. The yeast came from a brewery in Aying in Bavaria, but I can't say that it is THE Ayinger brewery or not. There are several in that town, I believe. It is a great lager yeast. It has typical lager yeast physical fermentation characteristics, and seems to me to produce a balance between malt and hops. I participated in a blind taste test of five or six one gallon pilsner batches that Arbor Brewing Co (an Ann Arbor brewpub, and my "local") produced. They wanted to choose a better lager yeast than the one they were using. Five or six one gallon pilsner worts were fermented with different yeasts at 50F, including probably 34/70, Anchor, A/B, Ayinger, and not sure what else, then lagered at 50F. ABC's two owners, the brewer, Dan and I were on the panel. The Ayinger was the unanimous first choice. I thought it blew the others out of the water. It was clean but not sterile tasting, and allowed the malt and hops to come thru. Saflager (no description available) Results: I = WLP838 20 Crisp, second cloudiest, somewhat spicey hop aroma, clean, most hop aroma B = Ayinger 18 Seems darkest of the entries (disturbed yeast sediment), very neutral, very clean aroma, a little malt aroma A = WLP800 13 Disturbing harshness F = Saflager dry lager 13 No notes M = WLP830 11 Malty, cooked veg., DMS, best clarity Conclusions: Readers are left to draw their own conclusions, if any can be drawn with but one trial. However, I would not hesitate to use either of the two top ranked yeasts. They were rated so close together in the scoring, and there was a noticeable gap between them and the rest of the pack. WLP830 may have picked up a "bug"*. The fact that comments were lacking on the Saflager, indicates it was not objectionable and could be a lifesaver in a pinch. *Post from J. Renner 10/7/02: "Rolling Rock is very high in DMS (dimethyl sulfate) and is an excellent example for palate education. DMS is a product of the malt, not of brewers yeast, although bacterial infections can also produce it." Thanks to anyone who provided yeast info., especially Jeff Renner. Hope this helps. Rick Foote Chicken City Ale Raisers Murrayville, Georgia Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 16:18:06 -0400 From: "Dave Burley" <Dave_Burley at charter.net> Subject: Re: Ion/water softener and pH Brewsters: Jeff comments on my recent comments about well water and correcting the mineral content and pH. Jeff, you're right. I jumped to reverse osmosis which is what I did myself after ion exchange from ion exchange alone which is what Michael does. Call it being out of practice after 6 weeks of picking grapes and making wine and trying to catch up on my HBD. Or no excuse for reading between the lines when nothing was written there. Thanks for pointing it out. Most of my message you can ignore if you don't have RO. But if Michael's water is very hard, using just an ion exchange bed will produce water with a high sodium level ( two sodium ions for every calcium ion originally there) which is not good for beer nor for drinking on a daily basis, perhaps. Reverse osmosis, aka RO, of the water with an under the sink model from Sears or Home Depot ( approx. $200 and easily self installed) for drinking and such will solve that problem as I did. I then upped my personal mineral intake with supplements as I suggested for this situation. Since the output of this unit was only a few gallons per day I would collect water in gallon jugs over several days in anticipation of brew day. I have used my RO water as is - straight from the tap - , that is without calcium addition for making Pilsners. There is sufficient calcium in the malt to produce about 20 ppm Ca as I recall. I had no pH problems with the mash. In fact, the pH hit around 5.6 or so which I consider to be ideal for Pilsners as it emulates the Urquell mash pH. As an aside, RO treatment is superior to water treatment schemes involving boiling, as you know the exact mineral content ( none) and this unit also has a carbon filter which removes any organics from the water. Remember, this passion for a lowish mash pH comes from British ale brewing and where single infusion brewing is king. The pH of British mashes is chosen to be in the range where the enzymes operate fastest as that is the optimal use of mash tuns. We have no such economic requirements. Also, British malts being higher roasted on average than the Pils malts also reach this lower pH naturally. The lower enzyme activity of the British and higher roasted malts would benefit from this lower pH and this may have been more necessary than in todays' sophisticated malting houses. In any event, the activity of the enzymes in this pH range is pretty broad. Straight RO water works fine. I do add calcium for the British mashes just because it is in the taste profile. Some of the Southern German beers also require sulfate, which I add usually as calcium sulfate, but have added other more soluble sulfates at times. As a matter of general comment, perhaps too much is made of adjusting the mash pH and a lot of misunderstanding that it is the <mash> pH measured at room temperature ( not mash temperature) that is quoted most often. It is definitely not the brewing water ( liquor) pH which is of importance. Although some of the more expensive multibanded pH papers ( at $15-20/roll) can be useful in the lighter colored beers, but not with the stouts and such, I would advise the purchase of a pH meter and associated standard buffers, versus pH papers. I recently purchased a pH meter from from OMEGA ( www.omega.com) for $35 that works excellently and the replacement electrode is only $22. Delivery was overnight, since my old pH meter bit the root after 7 or 8 years and I was in the middle grape picking and wine making. Works fine for my needs and should work fine for beer making. Just be sure the wort is at room temperature ( as it should be anyway) since the electrode is not temperature compensated. BTW make sure if you use pH papers that the wort is at room temperature as well, as these are only calibrated at 20C. Keep on Brewin' Dave Burley - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Renner" <JeffRenner at comcast.net> To: "Posting Address Only - No Requests" <homebrew at hbd.org> Cc: "Dave Burley" <Dave_Burley at charter.net>; "Michael Hackney" <mhackney at micromationsciences.com> Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 9:00 AM Subject: Re: Ion/water softener and pH > "Dave Burley" <Dave_Burley at charter.net> wrote: > > >Michael Hackney has recently moved from a city water supply to a well and > >wonders if pH paper is adequate to check the pH of the water for adjustment. > > > >The pH of the water is irrelevant as the calcium, and to some extent the > >magnesium content, of the mash liquor (brewing water) and the grist makeup > >control the pH of the mash. > > > >If your water source is a well ( as mine was when I lived in NJ) and you > >soften it and ion exchange it ( as I did) you should have no problem except > >carbon dioxide in it. A quick boil or air scrub should solve that problem if > >you want to. > > > >I'd use the water ( which should be ion free) as you get it and modify it > >with calcium for ales and the like. For lagers, I wouldn't touch it. If you > >insist, then add 20 ppm as calcium chloride. > > I'm confused, Dave. Michael says he softens his water, and I > presume, as you did, that it is softened by ion exchange, not by > reverse osmosis. Ion exchange softeners. > > For those who don't know (Dave does), this exchanges two sodium ions > for every calcium or magnesium ion (these are what makes water > "hard". This makes the water "soft" - i.e., it makes good lather > with soap. This is because calcium and magnesium ions in hard water > substitute for the sodium on the soap molecule, which makes the soap > insoluble, and if it can't go into solution, it can't clean. > > Back to your message. In your fourth paragraph above, Dave, you say > Michael should use his water "as you get it." Do you mean as it > comes out of his well, or out of the softener? Either way, it > doesn't make sense. You seem to have jumped to ion-free RO water. > Did the HBD server steal some text again? > > Michael - here's my advise. Your ion-exhange softened water will > have no calcium (calcium is necessary for mashing) and lots of sodium > (which is bad for beer, although it doesn't affect the mashing > process). > > Your well water may need treatment for brewing, but you should > probably get an analysis. A water softener company or Sears can do > this for you if you tell them you are considering buying a softener. > > My well water here in Michigan is moderately hard (calcium and some > magnesium) and relatively high in alkalinity. It works fine as is > for dark and even copper-colored beers, but for all pale malt mashes, > it is too alkaline. For these beers, I boil and decant, which > removes much of the alkalinity. Since it also removes much of the > calcium, I also add either CaCl2 or CaSo4 (gypsum), depending on > style. > > pH paper for the mash and runoff is a good way monitoring how your > brew is going and if the water is suitable for the style you are > brewing. > > 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: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 13:20:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Kevin Crouch <kcrouching at yahoo.com> Subject: Free the Melanoidins Peers, Last night I cracked open a bottle of Dunkle that I brewed over a year and a half ago and had all but given up on 9 months ago. It spent 5 warm months under my house this spring/summer (65-70 dgF) so I was prepared for pure unadulterated insipidity. To my surprise, that authentic toasty aroma from the munich malt (100% of the grist) was now evident and a delicate melanoidin-laced maltiness shone through on the palate, both of which were absent after a month of lagering (35 dgF) and 4 to 5 months in the cellar at 50DF. Before, it had a dull taste, but lacked any outstanding defects; it just simply seemed to have no flavor at all. Now, it is a wonderful authentic dunkle. At first I thought that I had oxidized all the delicate flavors, or that I had gotten old malt, or poorly made malt, though it was from Briess. However, after trying this beer last night I'm wondering if maybe the Carbonate content of my water was too high at the time...it varies from 75 - 125 ppm with the high point during the wet winter season and I brewed this beer in February. Can excess bicarbonate stifle malt flavors? I imagine that some bicarbonate made it into the finished product because I only have 12 ppm Ca in my water supply. Now, I've read some vague stuff about warm conditioning replacing a long lagering period, and I'm wondering, is there some relationship between warm conditioning and and the liberation of these malty flavors from the grips of whatever is in the beer? Not that I'm into cutting corners, but so far for me, the best flavor development of this melanoidin character has been after periods of warmth rather than after cold conditioning. Any comments on this? Malt Addict Kevin Crouch Vancouver, WA Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 13:41:15 -0700 From: Mark Alfaro <malfaro at qcpi.com> Subject: RE: RIMS Cleaning -- Is CIP OK? In HBD# 4060, Lou King asks, Are there people out there who use RIMS and have had success pumping PBW (or something else) through their RIMS chamber, etc? Lou, I always do CIP with my RIMS. When the mash is finished, I scoop the spent grains out of my mash tun (a converted 15.5 gal Sanke) then give the tun a quick rinse to let the remaining grain particles wash out of my center drain into a bucket. I then reconnect the pump and return manifold and dump in 1 gallon of hot water from the sparge tank along with 4 capfuls of BLC (beer line cleaner). I turn on the pump and let the hot cleaner solution recirculate for about 20 minutes. When this is done, I drain it and rinse out the mash tun, reconnect the pump and circulate clear hot water for about 10 minutes. I do not turn on the heater at all during this process. Once the clear water rinse is finished, I circulate a double strength solution of iodophor and water, not because I want to sanitize it, but I want to treat the stainless with an acid after the caustic alkali treatment from the BLC. I have opened my heater chamber on occasion and have not seen any evidence of crud, so I feel that my CIP regimen is effective. Regards, Mark Alfaro Chula Vista, CA 1950, 262.1 AR Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 14:25:44 -0700 From: "Todd" <bis9170 at hotmail.com> Subject: RE: Zepto-sized brewing in a growler?? Robert: For some time now I've been using an old but sturdy 1-Gallon glass Gallo wine jug for making test batches, but only for fermenting. Once the beer drops clear and fermentation is done (no more than a 2-3 days, when you compare the amount of wort to the amount of yeast I pitch), I siphon off the beer into a couple 12-oz bottles, prime with PrimeTabs (NAJASCYYY), and can enjoy the fruits of my labor (well, actually, it's not that laborious!) a week or two later. Carbonation? I'd be much more nervouse about that. If I recall, I seem to remember a HBD poster once asking if they could carbonate beer inside a 5- or 6.5-gallon glass carboy -- which was followed up by an emphatic "No! Don't do it! It'll explode!" I let the folks with the 40-lb heads that subscribe to the HBD answer up as to how's and the why's this isn't a good idea. But in regards to your growler, my common-sense/gut-feeling tells me that that may not be a good idea. Just my two pfennigs. Cheers! Todd ( P.S. Here's a link to my standard 1-gallon Test Batch Bitter Ale: http://members.cox.net/bis9170_f/Bitter% 20(Test%20Batch)_1.pdf ) Eye Chart Brewing Company "Beers So Bitter, Your Eyes Will Cross!" http://www.eyechartbrewing.com > Has anyone brewed a complete batch in a growler? > Obviously, fermentation wouldn't be an issue, since > you're using a cork and airlock to release CO2. > What about carbonation? A growler will hold fermented > beer from a microbrwery for a couple of days, but its > not exactly designed to naturally carbonate in it. > Anyone have any sucesses/failures attempting this? > I want to experiment with some zepto-sized batches, > rather than make 2.8/5 gallons at a time, and so > figured I'd ask here whether anyone has done this yet, > or not. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 17:42:18 -0400 From: "John O'Connell at Work" <oconn at mindspring.com> Subject: Good Eats beer episode To all, If FoodTV is to be believed, Alton Brown's Good Eats homebrewing episode "Amber Waves" will be showing at 9:00 pm on this Wednesday, October 9. And, if FoodTV is true to form, it will repeat several times, including midnight EDT Thursday, and 9:00 pm on Saturday, October 19. Check the site to make sure. Here is a link to the recipe he uses: since he has only 30 minutes, it's partial mash http://www.foodtv.com/foodtv/recipe/0,6255,23949,00.html Just so you know, John O'Connell Atlanta, GA Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 10/08/02, by HBD2HTML v1.2 by KFL
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96
/n