HOMEBREW Digest #4403 Tue 18 November 2003

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

		Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org


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

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

  Nominations For the Board of Advisors ("Rob Moline")
  RE:  slightly OT- sparkling wine (Bill Tobler)
  plastic vs glass fermenter temperature. ("-S")
  Digest vs individual posts ("Dave Draper")
  RE: Non-Digest version (Brian Lundeen)
  Exess flour from Valley Mill... ("Cave, Jim")
  Beer can turkey (Jim Bermingham)
  Care and nurturing of counterflow chillers (Wally Doherty)
  Correct Units for Potential Yield ("Todd Carlson")
  splenda and malto-dextrin (Randy Ricchi)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * The HBD Logo Store is now open! * * http://www.hbd.org/store.html * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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. Note that the Digest now automagically protects your address, so spam-proofing is a waste of your time, anyway :^) 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@hbd.org or read the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org. JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Spencer Thomas (janitor@hbd.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 00:38:42 -0600 From: "Rob Moline" <jethrogump at mchsi.com> Subject: Nominations For the Board of Advisors Nominations For the Board of Advisors The American Homebrewers Association (AHA) Board of Advisors is taking nominations for candidates for election to the Board of Advisors in the 2004 elections. Candidates must be members of the AHA and will serve a three year term. We are seeking homebrewers with a rich history of participation to help guide the AHA in its future. The BOA has brought to the membership elections to the Board, member run National Homebrew Conferences and the Pub Discount Program to name a few of our successes. All current members of the AHA Board of Advisors have been elected to their positions. For more information please review http://www.beertown.org/aob/ahaboa.html for info on the BOA and http://www.beertown.org/aob/pdf/aha_bylaws.pdf for the Bylaws. Nominations must be accompanied by Candidate Statements and Brewing CV's...photo's appreciated. Do you want to help improve the organization and contribute to the world of homebrewing? If you, or someone you know, would like to be considered for the AHA Board of Advisors, please forward your nomination to the email address below. Nominations will be open through December 16. Rob Moline Secretary AHA jethrogump at mchsi.com "The More I Know About Beer, The More I Realize I Need To Know More About Beer!" - --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.541 / Virus Database: 335 - Release Date: 11/14/2003 Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 05:28:41 -0600 From: Bill Tobler <wctobler at sbcglobal.net> Subject: RE: slightly OT- sparkling wine Mike is trying to serve a sparkling wine on tap and said he gets nothing but foam. That's an interesting idea. IF you are using 3/16" ID tubing, you should get 2.7 psi pressure drop/foot. So you would need about 11' of tubing. The 1/4" ID tubing gets about 1 psi/ft drop. But you probably already know this as you have 3 beer taps on line. Have you tried lowering the keg pressure to serve, then raise it back up when done? It might help. When I overcarbonate a keg, I usually can't get it out until I decarbonate the beer over a few days. You might have to settle for 2.5 volumes of CO2 and just have a "Slightly-sparkling wine" See the post below from Dan Listermann back in June. Apparently, you can make a clamp out of two pieces of wood and a C-Clamp and just dial in your foam rate. Not sure if this would work with a high-pressure wine. http://hbd.org/hbd/archive/4283.html#4283-7 Good luck! Bill Tobler Lake Jackson, TX (1129.7, 219.9) Apparent Rennerian Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 07:11:30 -0500 From: "-S" <-s at adelphia.net> Subject: plastic vs glass fermenter temperature. My initial test indicates that my estimate of the thermal resistance from the 'wort' to the environment was too high. I set up a plastic pale w/ a 100W aquarium heater and this reached a steady-state 28C above ambient temp ... unfortunately I couldn't defeat the internal thermostat and so this is with roughly a 75% duty cycle (abt 75Watts avg). I'll have to work on that and measuring the power more carefully. That makes the thermal resistance about 28C/75W or 0.37C/W. My recollection that ballparked the figure at 0.72 was too high by abt a factor of two. The energy released in a 20L 12P ferment is about 1280 kJoule. If this energy was released steadily over 36 hours (that's 0.1296 megaseconds for those who insist on metric) the power released would be 9.8 Watts. The fermenter temp would rise to about (9.8*0.37) or 3.6C (6.5F) above ambient. Glass in place of plastic should ferment cooler by about 0.13C(0.23F). Not much. Caveats ... I expect that the water in my test setup does nor circulate like wort in an active fermentation. The extra circulation in a real fermenter will decrease the thermal resistance and lower the temp above ambient from that calculated ... perhaps considerably. Typical ferments don't proceed evenly over 36 hours but instead peak sharply. -Steve Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 06:46:59 -0700 From: "Dave Draper" <david at draper.name> Subject: Digest vs individual posts Dear Friends, Greg Lehey asks in #4402 about the digest nature of HBD and asks why there can't also be individually delivered messages as well as digest form, "like other lists". Greg, from my own experience in ten years on and off the digest, I believe having the digest-only form is far better than the individual thing. The HBD did go to that option some years back, and for a variety of reasons the instant-reply, to my way of thinking, resulted in a very serious degradation of signal-to-noise as flame wars erupted the likes of which had not been seen in many years here. It seemed that having that instant-feedback thing going on brought out some serious crankiness on the part of many people, and they'd get into a shouting match back and forth in flurries of emails that those of us who remained in digest mode would only see as long trails of short, back-and-forth, acrimonious exchanges. Frankly, this was one of the major reasons I gave up on HBD at that time and why I've been gone so long-- that kind of behavior gets really old really fast. I hasten to add that going to invidual-mode did not suddenly convert the entire HBD readership into a mob of flaming ranters; obviously there was still plenty of good stuff to be had. But the noise levels, for my tastes anyway, substantially eclipsed the signal. The "forced" delay of having the digest appear just once per day, in my view, helps foster the collegial tone that has made the HBD far and away the most valuable web resource on any subject I've ever encountered. I greatly hope the format remains as it is. Cheers, Dave in ABQ =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- David S. Draper, Institute of Meteoritics, Univ New Mexico David at Draper dot Name Beer page: http://www.unm.edu/~draper/beer.html ...we are usually at the mercy of gravity. ---A.J. deLange Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 08:28:24 -0600 From: Brian Lundeen <BLundeen at rrc.mb.ca> Subject: RE: Non-Digest version > Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 16:54:23 +1030 > From: "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" <grog at lemis.com> > Subject: Non-digest version? > > This is > the only list I know which is available in digest-only form; > couldn't people have a choice of digest or individual > messages, like with other lists? > As someone who subscribes to a brewing list that offers both, I must vote an emphatic No to this proposal. The big problem in the other list is the number of individual message people who do not understand the importance of trimming the message to which they are replying. Sometimes an entire message is regurgitated to which a line or two is added. When you are receiving individual messages, these things aren't as annoying as when you are trying to page down through them to find the next message. Occasionally a call goes out to remind people to practice better snippage, but the unwelcome behaviour soon returns. At least here, everybody is in Digest mode, and I think that is one reason why messages are generally well-snipped. I say, leave well enough alone. Cheers Brian, imposing my will on brewers everywhere, from Winnipeg Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 08:23:53 -0800 From: "Cave, Jim" <Cave at psc.org> Subject: Exess flour from Valley Mill... I have been using a Corona Mill for the past 175 batches of all-grain beer (since 1991) and when the opportunity came to by an almost new adjustable Valley mill for $50 Cdn, I jumped at the chance. However, while I like the intact husks, I find that to get a crush that I consider acceptable, I find that the mill generates a lot of flour. If I use a coarser crush, there are too many intact grains and the efficiency drops by almost 20%. I have tried tempering the grain with a small amount of water prior to milling, but had a poor crush (too many intact grains). I have also tried passing the grain through twice at different settings but still get too much flour (in my opinion). The problem with too much flour is with obtaining a bright run-off of the wort. I find this difficult and half way throught the sparge, the run-off gets turbid again. So I have tried a few tricks. Any suggestions? Jim Cave Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 10:44:48 -0600 From: Jim Bermingham <JBHAM6843 at netscape.net> Subject: Beer can turkey Turkey day is drawing near and most of you are planning on how you are going to cook your turkey. I always fry one and I also cook a "Beer can turkey" AKA "Trash can turkey". For those of you that have tried and like a beer can chicken, here's how you cook a beer can turkey. B/M: 1 Small (10 gal) galvanized trash can (burn out the inside) 1 Small bag of charcoal 1 bottle of charcoal lighter fluid 1 wood stake (about 24 to 30 in long) 1 12 pound turkey (completely thawed) 1 roll of heavy duty aluminum foil 1 pare of heavy duty gloves (welders gloves) 2 cans of beer It is very important that you burn out the inside of the trash can. You must remove all the Galv. from inside the can or it could make you ill. Simply fill the can with wood ( sticks, tree limbs or scrap wood) light it and burn it out. Procedure: 1. Drive stake into the ground. 2. Place the charcoal in the lid of the trash can and light. Burn it until it has a fine gray ash covering it. 3. Place foil on the ground around the stake. Make sure to leave enough foil to extend 6 in all the way around the outside of the can when turned upside down over the stake. 4. Season your turkey with your favorite seasonings (tie legs and wings up) 5. Hang seasoned Turkey on the stake, not touching the foil. 6. Place at least two cans of beer next to the bird. 7. Place trash can over the turkey. 8. Spread coals 1 layer thick on the top of the can ( which is the bottom) 9. Place the rest of the coals around the bottom of the can on the foil extending out from around the can. Turn up the edges of the foil to hold in the heat. 10. Cook for exactly 90 min for a 12 lb turkey 11. Carefully remove the can using the gloves. 12 . Wa-La ! Melt in your mouth fallin' off the bone beer can turkey. Jim Bermingham Millsap, TX Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 11:45:05 -0700 From: Wally Doherty <wjd at email.arizona.edu> Subject: Care and nurturing of counterflow chillers Hey Everyone, My brewery just made the conversion from using an immersion chiller to a counterflow. It's a 50-ft. coil of 3/8" copper tubing in a garden hose. For those of you who use similar systems, I was wondering how you clean, sanitize, and store them. Thanks in advance, Wally Doherty Tucson, AZ Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 15:18:24 -0500 From: "Todd Carlson" <carlsont at gvsu.edu> Subject: Correct Units for Potential Yield While preparing to do my first all-grain batch, I was getting confused when calculating the predicted OG from the gain bill using potential yield values. Either I have a fundamental misunderstanding or the units commonly used for these numbers are incorrect. I'm sorry if this issue has already been addressed, but a quick search of the HBD turned up nothing. Please set me straight. The Recipator web page gives a potential yield for American Pale malt as 37 points per pound per gallon (p/p/g). The PromMash web page (and many others) give similar numbers with the same units. To predict the OG of my wort, I multiply this value time the pounds of malt, divided by the gallons of wort times the expected efficiency. So using 8 lbs of malt in a 5 gal batch with a 70% mash efficiency would give 37*8/5*.7=41.4 pts or OG=1.041 HOWEVER, given this calculation, the correct units for the potenital yeild should be 37 point*gallons/pound or 37 points/(pound/gallon) which are not the same as points/pound/gallon. Thus when you multiply by pounds and divide by gallons, these units cancel to give points. Using the units as given would produce an answer of points/gallon squared. As a chemistry/biochemistry professor, I constantly tell my students how usefull units can be, when used correctly, so perhaps I am more aware of this issue than most. Note added in proof - I did find a somewhat techniacal web site yesterday that did list the units as point*gallon/pound but now I can't find it (alas). Todd carlsont at gvsu.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 21:25:15 -0500 From: Randy Ricchi <rricchi at houghton.k12.mi.us> Subject: splenda and malto-dextrin I know there was a thread on splenda not too long ago, but it was a little over my head. My wife is just starting the Atkins diet, and she loves my homemade rootbeer. I use rainbow brand flavorings, and usually use .5 # malto-dextrin powder plus 2.5 # Sugar in a 3 gallon batch. I'm assuming I can ignore the calories/grams of carbs in a 2 oz addition of extract to a 3 gallon batch of rootbeer. If this is an erroneous assumption, please feel free to point that out. My question is, how many calories and how many grams of carbohydrates would I have in a 3 gallon batch of rootbeer made with enough splenda to be equivalent to 2.5 # of sugar, plus .5 # of malto dextrin. I've seen boxes of splenda that are advertised to be equivalent to 2# of sugar, but I don't recall the actual weight of the splenda. I think it was only a few ounces. Ideally, the answer would specify splenda and malto dextrin calorie/carbo grams separately, so I could decide on whether or not to include the malto dextrin (it does seem to add to the mouthfeel of the rootbeer). Thanks in advance for any insight you can provide. Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 11/18/03, by HBD2HTML v1.2 by KFL
webmaster@hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96