---

	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:
  Re: Subject:  RIMS Temperature Control ("Gary Smith")
  Paint for volume measure ("Doug A Moller")
  Wyeast Dutch Castle yeast (Chet Nunan)
  Travel Kegs ("Chris Hart")
  Pediococcus ("A.J deLange")
  Re: RIMS Temperature Control (David Towson)
  Conical Fermenter Questions (W8AV)
  re:  Transporting Kegged Beer (R.A.)" <rbarrett@ford.com>
  Re: corny fermenters (Jeff Renner)
  Re: Transporting Kegged Beer (Jeff Renner)
  ADA (Jim Busch)
  Re:  CIP (Mark Kempisty)
  Re: RIMS Temperature Control ("Todd M. Snyder")
  RE: corny fermenters ("Mike A.")
  Re: RIMS Temperature Control (David Towson)
  Re: RIMS Temperature Control ("Todd M. Snyder")
  Re: RIMS Temperature Control (Dion Hollenbeck)
  Re: RIMS Controller (Dion Hollenbeck)
  Re: Transporting Kegged Beer (Jeff Renner)
  re: CIP products ("Brian Lundeen")
  How To Improve Heat Transfer in Brewery Vessels ("Steven P. Bellner")
  Re: RIMS Temperature Control ("Martin Brungard")
  Raw Eggs for Egg Nog (Kevin Elsken)


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*           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: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 03:06:07 -0600
From: "Gary Smith" <mandolinist at ameritech.net>
Subject: Re: Subject:  RIMS Temperature Control

On 12 Dec 2003 at 2:28, Gary Smith wrote:

Todd wonders about RIMS controls


> I've been thinking some about RIMS temperature controls, 
> and it seems that there are a couple ways that people 
> seem to do this, but they have problems IMO.

Not only do I have problems, sometimes I am one.  :P

On my web page & in the last digest I explained my 
equipment. On my page I also explained what I do to 
insulate the mash tun, hoses and rims chamber. The 
photo on the page shows where the temperature probe 
is resting. When it is at temperature it does not overshoot. 
If I have the temp set at 145 I will not see 146. It may 
drop to 144 but not to 143. I suppose there might be some 
moment during the mash that it might lower two points 
but I've never noticed it doing so.

<snip>

> Temperature changes on the
> order of 1-2 degree F/min result in a ramp between 
> steps taking almost as long as the targeted rests!

This is debatable. Too fast a temperature rise will 
caramelize the sugars. To go from 135 to 145 F and 
stage it at 145 for 30 minutes, a 5 minute ramp 
would be delightful but maybe too fast? to take 30 
minutes to go 10 degrees is too slow. My sole 
heat during the mash is from the RIMS alone. I 
can not raise the temperature by flame as the 
bottom of the mash-tun has the valve outlet located 
there. It is for that reason I would like to use 220V 
instead of 110V as it would hasten the ramp times. 

If I were to apply flame at the 
bottom to raise the temp I can't imagine that as any 
better in avoiding caramelization than applying 
more heat in the chamber with 5 gal/min flowing 
past the element.

My latest wheat has a 30 min acid rest at 108, 30 min 
Protein rest at 122, a 90 min sachrafication rest at 152
A mash out at 170 & Sparge at 170. Most people don't 
do the acid or Protein rest but I do. I would love to 
have a 2 degree/minute ramp rate but even one 
degree/min wouldn't be my tar baby, other things are
slowing me down. (However... the beer is really good.) 

> (2) Using a PID with the probe on the heating chamber 
> outlet. This will result in the mash tun never actually 
> reaching the target, it will asymptotically approach the 
> set point.  

That is not so.  

One could split hairs and say it's perhaps .3 degree F
less than the set temp by the time it's at the bottom of the 
mash tun but that would be a useless argument as the 
small difference in temp won't matter. Once temp a set 
temp is achieved I rarely see the power on LED lighting 
or the temperature change so the temp is just fine. 
RIMS have a very consistent flow and say there's 7 
gallons of fluid & it's circulating at 5 gal a min in a 
closed loop with the heating element, the grain is a 
nice buffer for temperature changes and your mash 
temps will be just lovely. 

<snip>

> It spoils the point of
> having a 'controller' if you are really controlling it by hand IMO.

If that were the case it would be true but to me, it's not so. I set
the desired temp and it achieves it infalibly. My "point" of having a 
controler is to maintain a precise temperature of my choosing so
I don't have to concern myself with maintaining it. My reason 
for the RIMS is to not have to stir, all grains getting equally 
bathed in the correct temperature of circulating water and to 
have the mash filtered before transferring it to the boil kettle.
Besides, I'm lazy and this saves me a lot of hassles.

<snip>
> Please post
> your numbers (ramp rates, wattage, etc) and the location of the temp
> probe.

Read my rims page. :)

I'm using a 220 volt - 6,000W ultra low watt density element 82" long
& double folded to 22" or so in length at 110 volts. It generates
1,600 watts of heat according to the engineer at Chromalox the company
that made it. 1/2 the power gives aprox 1/4 the heat. The ramp rate is
dependent on the ambient temperature and the difference in originating
& terminal temperatures. Again, with 220 volts, the ramp times would
be more of my choosing than that which the system at 110V can
currently provide.

> The question I'm getting at is why are these controllers being used
> for this application?  They're not ideal for it based on the
> problems above.  The problem is that they are dumb.  They don't know
> how much water you have in your system, how many watts your heater
> is, how much grain you have in there, or what the insulative
> properties of your system are.

They don't need to know. They work with what their environment is.
When the desired temp is achieved they shut off. When you have a
system that has the power to be as responsive as you wish you select
the ramp time you desire & it memorizes that and provides it from then
on. An underpowered system only slows the ramp time, not the accuracy
unless it's so underpowered it can't achieve the desired temp
(unlikely with hot water heating elements doing 1,200 watts or better)

Depending on the controller you chose, you can program the controller
to do all the ramping & lengths of times the temp is held so all would
be done if it were 60 outside or 100 outside. Your concerns about the
amount of water and grain doesn't "interest" the controller it simply
provides power on & off to do what you want it to do. My controler 
uses pulses of DC that become shorter the closer to set temp it 
gets. The solid state relay simply applies heat each time there's 
a pulse.

<snip>

> During a rest, if the temperature is a couple degrees low, it would
> calculate exactly how long to turn on the heater to bump the
> temperature right back onto target.  

It doesn't need to know. If it's low it triggers so the heat is on. if 
the temp is at the set point then the triggering/heat is off.

> It would also know how much heat
> is lost with time based on how well your mash tun is insulated, so
> those heat inputs would be added automatically, before observing a
> temperature drop.

The fluid is always flowing. As soon as there's a drop it turns on.
Since it turns off when the temp is right, there's never an overshoot
unless the brewer makes a mistake & sets it too high.

What I do is have a kitchen timer & I use Pro Mash. I print my recipe
& the step temps and then when I achieve a desired set temp I start
the timer. If it's 30 min at 128 I set the timer for 30 min. There's a
secondary relay on the PID I could use to trigger a beep so I'd know
when the temp was achieved were I inside but I'm usually close by
futzing around & I keep an eye on the ramping temp. I don't want the
5 year old neighbour kids around the unit if I'm not there so... I'm there.

I suspect you've picked up some wrong advice along the way about RIMS.
I wish you were out this way, I'd be happy to give you a tour & we could do 
a brew together so you could see for yourself how precise & simple it is to 
use.

Gary

Gary Smith
CQ DX de KA1J
http://musician.dyndns.org
http://musician.dyndns.org/homebrew.html

If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not 
bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and a man.

 - Mark Twain -




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 06:18:33 -0600
From: "Doug A Moller" <damoller at intergate.com>
Subject: Paint for volume measure

Hi,
I am looking to paint a ss bar with volume measurements for my brew system.
Can anyone recommend a paint I can use and where I might find it?
Thank you all!
God bless you!

Doug A Moller
Brewmaster
Oklahoma Brewing Ltd Co
brewmaster at intergate.com
20301 Palomino Way
Macomb, OK 74852-8808
405-226-3111



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 04:51:39 -0800 (PST)
From: Chet Nunan <katjulchet at yahoo.com>
Subject: Wyeast Dutch Castle yeast

I'm going to try the seasonal Wyeast 3822 Dutch Castle
yeast and am trying to figure out an appropriate
recipe.  Evidently this yeast was used for a beer
called Castille, and is a Belgian style with a higher
lactic acid production for tartness.  I am unfamiliar
with Castille.  Does anyone have any info on this?  Or
tried this yeast?  Any feedback is
appreciated...Thanks!

Chet



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 08:31:48 -0500
From: "Chris Hart" <rhayader at bellsouth.net>
Subject: Travel Kegs

As others have mentioned, transporting kegged beer involves some work. I
have figured out how to chill my 5-gallon cornies on the road. I bought a
garbage can from Bed, Bath, & Beyond that's about 14" in diameter and more
importantly, round. That makes it really easy to ice up the keg with no
wasted space or extra ice.

My question specifically is how to keep the yeast that has settled to the
bottom of the keg from going back into suspension with travel. Is time the
only resettler?

Also, kudos to Gary Smith for his travel idea (fill 1/2 a 3-gal and
pressurize), but will this work with a 5-gallon? Most of my beer needs to
maintain just under 10 PSI while at serving temp to serve properly and I've
noticed that after a few glasses (for instance, serving 3 or 4 people a few
homebrews), it can only trickle out of the tap with less and less head. How
can you retain the pressure w/o foaming if you don't have a tank/injector?

Any more ideas are appreciated from all the kegging pros out there.

Chris Hart
Hart's Valet Drycleaning
1000 NW 51st Terrace
Gainesville, FL 32605
(352) 339-0324





Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 13:42:31 +0000
From: "A.J deLange" <ajdel at cox.net>
Subject: Pediococcus

The aptly named P. damnosus is easily recognized under the microscope. 
It looks like pairs or quads of little dots.

A.J.



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 08:42:07 -0500
From: David Towson <dtowson at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: RIMS Temperature Control

In HBD 4424, Todd Snyder expresses his concern that a PID controller with a 
single temperature probe does not provide sufficiently precise control of 
mash temperature, and he proposes using a computer-based control system 
capable of better prediction through "knowledge" of more parameters.

What I'd like to know is WHY?  If there is a convincing argument as to why 
control within plus-or-minus one degree of the target isn't entirely 
satisfactory, then I'd like to hear it.  Striving to control mash 
temperature within a gnat's eyebrow may be a fun hobby, but I sure don't 
think it will make better beer.

Dave in Bel Air, MD



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 09:02:35 -0500
From: W8AV at aol.com
Subject: Conical Fermenter Questions

Greetings esteemed HBD gurus.  Beeen reading HBD for a while
but this is the first post.  I have recently acquired a 10
gallon Mini Brew High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) fermenter
and have a question with regard to it.  Everything That I
have read (including the recent analysis of plastic vs.
glass by the omniscient Mr. Wizard in BYO) warns not to do
any secondary fermentation in a plastic fermenter due to
the fact that oxygen can migrate through the plastic and
oxidize the beer.  It is recommended to do the secondary
Fermentation in glass or SS.  However, Mini Brew's web
site notes that it's OK to do secondary fermentation in
the conical after draining off the trub and dead yeast.
Has anyone tried secondary fermentation in this type of
conical?  Is the HDPE dense enough to serve as an oxygen
barrier?  I am more than willing to rack to a secondary
glass carboy for secondary fermentation, but if I can save
a couple cleaning steps by using the conical it would be
a real advantage.  Don't know if this topic has been
covered before, but inquiring minds want to know.   I
presently ferment in plastic buckets and use a glass
carboy as the secondary.

"Goose" Steingass, W8AV
Wooster, OH

Mmmm Beer.  WOOO HOOO!..................Homer Simpson



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 09:14:14 -0500
From: "Barrett, Bob (R.A.)" <rbarrett at ford.com>
Subject: re:  Transporting Kegged Beer

Bob Hall asks:
>One of the reasons that I haven't begun kegging was the transportation
>issue. I'd appreciate some comments on favorite methods of moving kegged
>beer to parties, vacations, etc. Many thanks.

Bob,
My favorite method for moving kegged beer to parties is in my 2000 Ford 
F-150super cab pick up.  I know I can get 52 cornies in the 6 ft bed.  
I just carry the CO2 tank in the cab.  That will usually take care of the first 
day.  I just fill the bed with kegs and then ice them down.  When I get to 
the party I have one of those easy, pop up canopies I use to provide some 
shade over the kegs and the ice.  When some of the party goers can't 
make it back to the truck for another beer, I just drive around and do some 
personalized delivering.  Everyone seems to like it.  I've never had any 
complaints. 

I try to stay close to home when I go to parties.  That way I can drive 
back and pick up more kegs as the party progresses into the rest of 
the week!!!  Very convenient!!!! ;-)

We make the beer we drink!!
Bob Barrett
Ann Arbor, MI
(2.8, 103.6) Rennerian





Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 09:29:22 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <jeffrenner at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: corny fermenters

"Patrick Hughes" <pjhinc at eriecoast.com> writes:

>I have read here many times how some rack their beer into corny kegs when
>within a few points of terminal gravity and let this small final
>fermentation carbonate the beer. How is the corny sealed so the natural  gas
>produced by this fermentation doesn't escape? Do you just pressurize with
>CO2 first? How much pressure can the yeast handle before they stop working?

I suspect that I am one of those who you have read that does this. 
It is my SOP.  Thing is, I use Sankey kegs for this, which seal 
without internal pressure.

I suspect that you could blast enough gas into a Corney to seal it, 
then bleed off some.  Corneys will stay seled at with less pressure 
than it takes to seat the lid seal.

At any rate, the yeast keeps working under pressure as evidenced by 
the fact that overpriming bottles gives bottle grenades, and 
overpriming kegs gives foam fire extinguishers.

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: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 09:42:26 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <jeffrenner at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Transporting Kegged Beer

Bob Hall <rallenhall at toast.net> writes from down the road in Napoleon, OH:

>One of the reasons that I haven't begun kegging was the transportation
>issue. I'd appreciate some comments on favorite methods of moving kegged
>beer to parties, vacations, etc.

Nothing makes an entrance at a party like you carrying a keg of draft 
beer.  You and your beer are instantly the center of attention, at 
least if it's a party worth attending.  Especially if you set up a 
clamp-on hand pump, as I occasionally have.

Most of the time, though, I bring a little (non-standard) four pound 
cylinder and a three gallon Corney.  This is a compact enough setup 
that it's convenient.  I bring them in a plastic milk crate which 
keeps the CO2 tank from tipping over.  Sometimes I will bungee them 
together instead.

I realize that not everyone can manage to have several size CO2 
tanks, but I've been brewing so long that I've acquired the four 
pounder, a ten pounder, and a twenty.  The ten was the only one I 
bought, the rest were given to me by people who didn't want them (the 
little one was left behind by a husband who was thrown out of the 
house and given to me by the wife 20+ years ago, which started me 
kegging).

You have to have your system balanced so you don't get glasses of 
foam, so get this done at home.  One problem with filling a keg half 
way with enough extra pressure to last for all the beer is that it 
can get foamy, especially with the jostling of transportation.  I 
think you'd need to let it sit for a while to come into equilibrium.

There's no question that there are times when bottles are convenient, 
but the advantages of kegging far outweigh this consideration for me.

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: Fri, Dec 12 2003 9:54:41 GMT-0500
From: Jim Busch <jim at victorybeer.com>
Subject: ADA

Yup, ADA is apparent degree of attenuation.  BTW, Im
still "just" a homebrewer, albeit one with a fairly
cool pilot brewery with uni.

ADA of 80% is a typical well attenuated beer.  Im a 
firm believer that most lager biers taste better to
me if they are highly attenuated, even beers such as
Spatan Ur-Maerzen are very well attenuated yet leave
a wonderfully malty finish.  Then there are the examples
of Bavarian lagers such as Augustiner which brews beers
with ADAs around 88%!  Talk about a dry finish, but not
from hops....

To achieve very high levels of ADA you just need to
perform a multistep mash program with a good 30 mins
in the 144F beta range before ramping up to 156F. When
ramping, it is beneficial to heat around 1F/min so you
will have some time spent in the optimum range for 
alpha and beta enzymes.  Other than this you just need
very healthy yeast with a strain known for high ADA.

Ive brewed with the typical American Ale yeast strain,
1056 and achieved ADAs of 83% easily.

Prost!

Jim



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 10:22:41 -0500
From: Mark Kempisty <mskhbd at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re:  CIP 

I routinely clean my Tap-A-Draft with Oxyclean (NAYY).

FIrst I empty any dregs out, fill it part way with hot tap water, put 
the dispenser on open it and shake some of the water through it, close 
it and then shake the whole think to loosen the easy stuff.  Dump this 
and refill about half way with hot tap water again.  I then add about 
3/4 of a scoop of Oxyclean, quickly put the dispenser on (making sure 
its closed) and shake to dissolve the powder.   I open the dispenser 
valve to get some solution through the pick up tube, close it and then 
let it sit for a while.  I find a shake after its been sitting gets a 
lot of the dissolved oxygen to come out of solution and really 
pressurize the Tap-A-Draft.  I then spit some more through the 
dispenser.  Let it sit a few minutes and then just open the valve while 
its aimed at the sink and let the pressure relieve.  Several rinses with 
hot water and everything is squeaky clean.

I have also recently given my carboys, hoses and racking canes a good 
long soak in Oxyclean and this has gotten them really clean and gotten 
some gunk out of the bend in the racking cane.

Doesn't get much easier than this.

Brew on,
Mark
Richboro, PA



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 10:24:06 -0500
From: "Todd M. Snyder" <tmsnyder at buffalo.edu>
Subject: Re: RIMS Temperature Control

Dave,

> What I'd like to know is WHY?  If there is a convincing argument as to why
> control within plus-or-minus one degree of the target isn't entirely
> satisfactory, then I'd like to hear it.  Striving to control mash
> temperature within a gnat's eyebrow may be a fun hobby, but I sure don't
> think it will make better beer.
>
> Dave in Bel Air, MD
>

The problem I see with PID control is not accuracy.  Given enough time, a
PID will force the temperature to the set point very accurately.   It will
just take a _long_time_.  That's my problem with it.

To avoid a large overshoot when there is a delay between the heat addition
and the temperature rise, the temperature ramping rate has to be small.  A
typical heating rate is 1 degrees F per minute.  So a 122F to 148F ramp
would take 26 minutes, almost as long as the rest is going to take at 148F
before you continue up to a higher saccharification temp or mashout.  What's
happening during that ramp?  The enzymes aren't sitting around waiting for
the next step.  They're going about their business as the temperature
allows.

You might as well just use an undersized heating element, heat the mash
slowly, and do a ramp mash from start to finish.  All the conversion will
take place as the temperature rises slowly from 95F up thru 158F.  Just
unplug it when it reaches 170F.  There's no need for a PID at all with long
ramping times.

A smarter controller could add the heat needed for a ramp step as fast as
the heat chamber and pumping rate would allow, and then stop adding heat
when the calculated amount had been added.  It would then be smart enough to
wait for the temperature increase to appear at the temp probe before making
a decision about tweaking the temperature closer to the set point. That
tweaking algorithm for settling on the set point could be a PID algorithm
written into the software, but the 'step' would be a simple heat addition
quantity calculated by the software.

A possible scenario is this.  Two heat sensors, one on the mash outlet and
one on the heat chamber outlet.  When the time for the next step arrives
(PC's have a clock, PID's do not) the software will calculate the needed
heat addition.  It takes the temperature of the mash outlet probe, compares
it to the next target, and accounts for the gallons of water and lbs of
grain in the mash.  Let's assume it comes up with 100 kw - seconds as the
heat needed to go from 95F to 122F.  Also assume for the point of
demonstration, that you've told the software the heater is 1000 watts.  The
software turns on the heater at a greater and greater duty cycle until the
outlet temperature probe reaches 170F (via a PI or PID algorithm), all the
while keeping track of the total time the heater has been on.  It quits when
the total 'on' time for the heater reaches 100kw-s/1kw = 100 seconds.  Then
it waits for the temperature at the mash tun outlet to stabilize, it should
fall close to the target.  Then a PI or PID algorithm in the software brings
the mash outlet temperature to the target.  The software would also add
occasional doses of heat to correct for heat loss, depending on  the
insulative properties of the mash tun, _before_ the low temperature shows up
at the mash outlet temp probe.

The advantages:
1. No operator standing around waiting to push the buttons on his PID for
each rest temperature.
2. No long slow ramps between rests, the mash is stepped up as fast as the
pumping/heating system will allow.
3. No asymptotically approached target temps, the target temp is actually
stepped up to.
4. Heat loss from the tun is added automatically before appearing as a low
temperature in the mash.
5. Almost everyone has an old PC laying around, waiting to be used as a
controller.
6. Each batch's mash temperature profile could be datalogged and saved

The disadvantages:
1. Software needs to be written.
2. An interface to a PC needs to be purchased or made.

For the disadvantages, these could be solved as simply as a Basic program
and a $55 A/D kit for the parallel port from www.mpja.com (no affiliation).
There are other ways I'm sure others will chip in their preferred method, NI
LabView, VB, Fortran, C++ etc and BasicStamps, PICs, etc.

Todd
Buffalo, NY



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 07:51:04 -0800 (PST)
From: "Mike A." <miander2 at yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: corny fermenters

Patrick Hughes wrote on Thu, 11 Dec 2003 ...
>How is the corny sealed so the natural gas 
>produced by this fermentation doesn't escape? 

I would recommend getting the slightly larger and
softer lid o-ring, which is available from William's
Brewing.  Although I don't use the procedures you
described for natural carbonation, I use kegs with
these o-rings for primary and secondary fermentation
and they seal quite well without pressurizing.  I
actually just finished writing up a page detailing my
methods for using soda kegs for fermentation.  You can
view it here:
http://www.bodensatz.com/upage/?page=mike_a_kegs

Mike A.



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 11:55:06 -0500
From: David Towson <dtowson at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: RIMS Temperature Control

Continuing the discussion, Todd is concerned that slow temperature ramping 
during the mash will do bad things to his beer.

Every discussion of alpha and beta amylase activity I've read describes 
this activity as a continuum in which the beta becomes active at a 
relatively low temperature, and then the alpha starts to become active as 
the temperature is raised.  There is a large overlap region in which both 
are active, and that is good if one wants a highly fermentable wort, 
because some alpha activity is needed to break-up parts of a starch 
molecule into "bite-sized" chunks that the beta can work on.  So why is a 
sudden jump in temperature needed for a multi-temperature mash?

But let's say, for the sake of discussion, that a very rapid rise is a 
valid requirement.  Now, we have to deal with the problem of quickly 
heating the wort without burning it, and that has been a problem with 
electric RIMS systems.  Common practise lately seems to have been use of 
"low watt-density" heaters (low number of watts per unit length), often 
augmented by operating the heaters at half-voltage (approximately 
quarter-power).  But that limits the heating rate.  Can anyone describe 
experience that shows whether or not a fancier control system would help 
surmount this limitation?

I use a HERMS system with the heating coil immersed in the HLT, and I have 
been quite satisfied with my ramping rates.  I use a simple Ranco on-off 
controller with the temperature probe about a third-the-way down the mash, 
and near the outside of the mash vessel, where the rate of heat loss is 
greatest.  Many measurements using a hand-held dial thermometer have 
convinced me that temperature is essentially constant throughout the mash 
given an adequate recirculation rate.

Dave in Bel Air, MD



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 13:35:17 -0500
From: "Todd M. Snyder" <tmsnyder at buffalo.edu>
Subject: Re: RIMS Temperature Control

Dave writes:

> Continuing the discussion, Todd is concerned that slow temperature ramping
> during the mash will do bad things to his beer.

No, I never said that.  I said that something is going to happen during the
ramp time which is significant.  The enzymes, depending on their temperature
preference will be doing their thing during those 15-30 minute ramps.

> Every discussion of alpha and beta amylase activity I've read describes
> this activity as a continuum in which the beta becomes active at a
> relatively low temperature, and then the alpha starts to become active as
> the temperature is raised.  There is a large overlap region in which both
> are active, and that is good if one wants a highly fermentable wort,
> because some alpha activity is needed to break-up parts of a starch
> molecule into "bite-sized" chunks that the beta can work on.

Exactly, sounds like a slow temperature ramp could be a recipe for a highly
fermentable wort and a highly attenuated beer compared to the same grain
bill using a step mash.

>So why is a
> sudden jump in temperature needed for a multi-temperature mash?

I don't think it is necessary, you'll still make good beer with a mash
schedule consisting mostly of ramps.

> Common practise lately seems to have been use of
> "low watt-density" heaters (low number of watts per unit length), often
> augmented by operating the heaters at half-voltage (approximately
> quarter-power).  But that limits the heating rate.

That limited heating rate is to overcome problems with overshooting the
target temp, and to prevent the wort from being too hot going into the mash.
Those are the problems I see also.

Overshooting could be eliminated by calculating and adding the right amount
of heat instead of searching for it blindly as a PID does.  And preventing
overheating at the heating chamber could be handled by the same system
because it can handle multiple temp probes.

> I use a HERMS system with the heating coil immersed in the HLT, and I have
> been quite satisfied with my ramping rates.  I use a simple Ranco on-off
> controller with the temperature probe about a third-the-way down the mash,

Your system overcomes the problems with direct electric heating, and the
temp probe placement seems to be a really good idea.  By the time the hot
wort from the heating loop makes it to the probe and turns off the heating,
a good amount of hot wort, 1/3 of the volume, is in there and brings up the
temperaure in the whole mash.  Sounds great!

I like this idea better than heating with electric elements in a RIMS. And
you're not using a PID which is overkill and I don't feel suited to the
application anyway.

Your system appears to be a very common sense way to do it.  If it
overshoots the temp after the ramp, raise the probe position in the mash,
right?  Is that how you came up with 1/3 of the way down in the mash?  So
you are adding a dose of heat, all at once until the on/off controller
switches off.  You've done the heat addition using experience to come up
with the 1/3 position, I am proposing to use a mathmatical formula to
calculate the heat addition.  It's the same concept.

Do you see any overshoot?  What are typical ramping times?

You see that this is not the same as a PID controlled RIMS, right? And it
sounds like you recognize the same problems I see in PID-RIMS setups.

Todd
Buffalo, NY



Return to table of contents


Date: 12 Dec 2003 15:59:46 -0800
From: Dion Hollenbeck <hollen at woodsprite.com>
Subject: Re: RIMS Temperature Control

>> Todd M Snyder writes:

TMS> (2) Using a PID with the probe on the heating chamber outlet.  This will
TMS> result in the mash tun never actually reaching the target, it will
TMS> asymptotically approach the set point.  

This has not been my experience in over 50 batches on my RIMS system.
I was concerned about this aspect and early on put a temperature probe
into the mash tun to see how it lagged behind the output of the heater
chamber.  Yes, it does lag behind, however, the lag is short, on the
order of 5 minutes.  And it always does get to the setpoint.  I do not
have to compensate by setting controller above the setpoint I want.

If you look at the lag, EVERY step is 5 minutes late, so every step
(relative to other steps) is always "on time".

I have an Omega iSeries PID, driving to 25A SSR's, each SSR driving a
6500 watt heater at 110v for 1250watts.  I have no insulation anywhere
in my system.  My heater chamber is all SS, the hoses are vinyl, the
mashtun is a converted keg with a tight fitting lid.

TMS> The question I'm getting at is why are these controllers being
TMS> used for this application?  They should be smarter.  A software
TMS> based controller on a PC could walk thru the step changes and
TMS> hold the rest temperatures based on needed heat input.

You are correct that a PC could do it better.  However, the PID when
properly set up is good enough.  While I laud any efforts to do a
totally PC controlled RIMS ala Joe Stone, there is NO commercial PC
controlled home brewing system that I know of.  You want one, you
gotta do the engineering.  The number of people who can roll their own
PC based system is much slimmer than the number of people who can buy
off the shelf PID and probe and assemble their own system.


dion
- -- 
Dion Hollenbeck  Email:  hollen at woodsprite.com
Home Page:       http://www.woodsprite.com
Brewing Page:    http://hbd.org/hollen


Return to table of contents


Date: 12 Dec 2003 16:11:44 -0800
From: Dion Hollenbeck <hollen at woodsprite.com>
Subject: Re: RIMS Controller

>> Gary Smith writes:

GS> I'm thinking still of running my ultra low watt heating element 
GS> (82" worth of element) at 220 and in that case I'll simply add a 
GS> second 50A SSR in parallel and the second line through it.

Once again, I will put forth my recommendation to not do this unless
you want to risk caramelizing your wort and ruining a heater element.

My reasoning is as follows.  Rodney Morris wrote the earliest documented
RIMS treatise published.  Being a scientist by profession, I am making
the assumption that he did a very thorough job of finding the correct
wattage heater element and heat density.  This same heater element is
still sold by Grainger and when run at 110V as Rodney suggests, puts
out a heat density of about 15 watts per square inch.

When you run your heater element (which appears from the length to be
a 6500 watt version of these elements) instead of getting the 1625
watts you would normally get, you will get the full 6500 watts.  You
will not have increased the surface area, so, you will have quadrupled
the heat density.

While I am unwilling to do the test on MY system because I believe it
works fine as it is, I have suggested that someone who is a risk taker
should actually try this.  My personal opinion is that you will burn
the crap out of your element and your wort.  I do not want to find out
where the edge of the envelope is by crossing the line.  I have
already burnt up one heater element by accidentally leaving it on
while system was empty after brewing and I certainly do not want to
repeat the experience.

If you try this and it works, you will have done great service to the
RIMS brewing community by blowing out the confines we currently live
with.  Please report your findings, but please no whining if you burn
it up.  B-}

regards,
dion
- -- 
Dion Hollenbeck  Email:  hollen at woodsprite.com
Home Page:       http://www.woodsprite.com
Brewing Page:    http://hbd.org/hollen



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 19:32:07 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <jeffrenner at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Transporting Kegged Beer

P.S.

I'm just heading out to the monthly Ann Arbor Brewers Guild with some 
homebrew, and I realize I've forgotten another way I transport 
homebrew (and which I'm doing for the meeting).

I attach a ten inch piece of an old broken plastic racking hose to a 
beer faucet (it fits inside the spout) and fill one or two liter PET 
soda bottles.  Ou can also use a larger diameter plastic hose and 
slip it on the outside of the faucet spout.

I turn the pressure down so I don't get fast flow and foam.  Then I 
attach a Carbonator (TM) Cap and pressurize the bottle.  If I feel 
the beer needs more carbonation, I can adjust it by adding higher 
pressure and shaking.

Cheers

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: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 18:51:03 -0600
From: "Brian Lundeen" <blundeen at rrc.mb.ca>
Subject: re: CIP products

> > Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 08:11:06 -0600
> > From: "Kenneth Peters" <kpeters6 at cox.net>
> > Subject: CIP products
> > 
> > I believe that
> > since both products seem virtually indistinguishable in use 
> > and since Rick is always eager to add his support to the HBD, 
> > and since his product is substantially less expensive, I 
> > think we should make an effort to support him and his product 
> > first. Not affiliated with either company, just a satisfied user. Ken
> 
> I don't want to be too miserable about this, I've bitten my tongue in 
> the past on this issue, but I think this calls out for an opposing 
> viewpoint.
> 
> Mr Theiner "supports" the HBD in a largely self-serving capacity. Many 
> of his posts relate to promoting the product he sells. Yes, he has 
> been very upfront about this, and I guess we will never know if Mr 
> Theiner would be in here to talk brewing if he wasn't in the brewing 
> products business. But let's be real, the HBD is free advertising for 
> his business. If he really wants to "support" the HBD, a regular check
> from his business to the HBD server fund would probably be welcomed, and
> would certainly alter my impression of him.
> 
> Cheers
> Brian, in Winnipeg



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 19:58:41 -0500
From: "Steven P. Bellner" <sbellner at chartertn.net>
Subject: How To Improve Heat Transfer in Brewery Vessels

I have an idea on how to improve the heat transfer and distribution from my
main kettle burner to the kettle itself.  It involves spray-painting the
bottom of the kettle with high-temperature black "gas grill" paint.
Polished SS has a pretty high emissivity, and painting it should lower it
considerably.  Has anyone ever tried this before?  I would be interested in
hearing if it made a difference.

Of course, it is entirely possible that the process is so inefficient that
the black paint trick would not make a noticeable difference at all.
Perhaps some sort of a shroud for the bottom of the kettle would be useful
to minimize all the heat "blowby" that seems to occur with a typical system.
I wonder if this has ever been tried.  I'm always trying to improve a little
here, a little there every time.

Steven P.  Bellner
sbellner at chartertn.net




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 17:47:06 -0900
From: "Martin Brungard" <mabrungard at hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: RIMS Temperature Control

Todd Snyder asked about RIMS temperature control and more specificly, the 
effect of PID's and thermocouple location.

I can provide definitive answers based on research, testing, and 
calculations I have performed on RIMS and PID use.

There is an important aspect of mashing and enzyme activity that should be 
pointed out first.  Enzymes exist predominantly in the wort during mashing 
and the enzymes in the grain bed are predominantly found in the wort flowing 
through the pore spaces of the grainbed.  An example of this condition was 
highlighted recently here in HBD.  There was a discussion of a decoction 
process where the grist was removed from the tun, leaving the wort.  The 
relatively thick grist was decocted and returned to the wort.  The enzymatic 
action of the mash was maintained since the majority of the wort was not 
over-heated and denatured.

>From the fact the enzymes flow with the wort, it should be apparent that the 
conditions within the grainbed are actually secondary to those of the wort.  
In other words, the temperature of the wort is what needs controlling, not 
the grainbed.

For that reason, the wort temperature at the heater outlet is the most 
critical aspect to monitor during mashing.  Monitoring at other points 
within or after the mash tun only provide information on the completeness of 
a temperature step.

I was once an advocate for monitoring the wort temperature at the tun 
outlet.  After suffering through many beers that exhibited poor attenuation, 
I figured out that I was cooking my wort when I applied my unregulated heat 
source.  When I placed a thermometer at the heater outlet, I was alarmed to 
see that I could easily exceed 180F.  That's when I decided that PID control 
was absolutely necessary.  It was also apparent that the PID thermocouple 
needed to be at the heater outlet.  I have not been sorry for taking that 
financial step to include a PID in my RIMS.

I took my curiosity a little further and created a hydro/thermodynamic model 
of the flow through a grainbed.  This model was a one-dimensional flow model 
that incorporated aspects such as specific heat of both the grain and water, 
initial and final temps, water/grist ratio, the permeability and porosity of 
the grainbed, and the wort flowrate.  The model is mathematically simple, 
but fairly arduous in its calculation.  Its not something that you would 
want to do by hand.  Using the temperature response and times recorded from 
my own mash tun, the results of the model were pretty good.  The model 
output showed the progression of the heated wave front and the continual 
temperature degradation at the wave front.  Most importantly, the model 
showed the depth to which the mash temperature was generally at the desired 
step temperature.  This was generally an academic study with some practical 
use, but it was very educational for me.  This model will be available 
sometime soon, I just need to improve the output format and incorporate wort 
specific heat into the model instead of water specific heat (that's why I 
was asking about wort specific heat a few months ago).

The model showed that the speed of temperature steps is predominately 
contingent upon the wort flowrate, the temperature difference of the step, 
and the depth of the grainbed.  The power of the heating element only comes 
into play when the flowrate is high enough to exceed its ability to heat the 
wort to the target temperature.

Todd mentioned that someone on BYO was setting his wort temperature a few 
degrees higher than the desired mash temperature.  From my findings, I can 
say that this is probably not desirable.  My model indicates that the wort 
will have passed through the heater at least three times before a majority 
of the bed is near the target temperature, assuming a bed depth of about 8 
inches.  The majority of the wort and the enzymes will be exposed to the 
higher mash temperature.  Sure, the mash will be brought to the desired 
temperature sooner using a higher temperature, but the wort may have 
suffered.  The degree of fermentability will certainly have suffered, if a 
certain fermentability was your goal.

Todd also pointed out that a PID can't possibly know how much energy to put 
into the wort due to the variables such as grain volume, water volume, 
system insulation, etc.  If the thermocouple is located at the heater 
outlet, all those variables won't matter.  With the thermocouple at the 
heater outlet, the PID control does provide everything a brewer needs for 
temperature stepping.  If the thermocouple is located anywhere else in the 
system, the PID control is fairly useless.  The thermocouple should be 
located close to the thing (heater) its trying to control!

With the thermocouple at the heater outlet, the only variable is the amount 
of time required to achieve the new temperature throughout the system.  
Having a thermometer at the tun outlet provides a good indication of the 
temperature throughout the system.  If rapid temperature steps are paramount 
to a brewer, then a couple of things can be done.  The depth of the grainbed 
must be reduced and the permeability of the grist must be increased.  The 
depth can be reduced by using a larger mash tun.  The permeability can be 
increased by using a coarser grist and/or adding rice hulls.

I hope this explanation will provide all RIMS users with the information 
they need to make their system perform well.

Martin Brungard
Tallahassee, FL



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 22:04:56 -0500
From: Kevin Elsken <k.elsken at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Raw Eggs for Egg Nog

I understand one can now purchase pasteurized eggs (in the shell).  I
have not used them myself, so I cannot vouch for their flavor.  I do not
know if they are widely available ( I heard about them on 'Good Eats').

Kevin Elsken
Little Boy Brewery
On the Move to USC!



Return to table of contents

---