HOMEBREW Digest #4522 Sun 18 April 2004

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

		Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org


                  Beer, Beer, and More Beer
      Visit http://morebeer.com to show your appreciation!

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

  competitions: BJCP, AHA ("Peter A. Ensminger")
  mash schedule questions ("-S")
  Kurz/ Hoch mash schedule ("Dave Burley")
  Re: mash schedule questions (Jeff Renner)
  Re:DCL American Ale #56 (CONN Denny G)
  RE:  Bad temp readings.. (Bill Tobler)
  DCL yeast (Marc Sedam)
  12th Annual Spirit of Free Beer - Call for Entries, Judges, and Sponsors ("Mark E.  Hogenmiller")
  re: Mash Thickness (Bill Gornicki) ("-S")
  Re: Brewoff Scoresheets... ("Al Quickel")
  Ping Jeff Renner: Ballantine IPA Clone recipe (Bob Girolamo)
  link of the week - viscosity (Bob Devine)
  First Lager Fermentation ("Pat and Debbie Reddy")
  Re: starch chemistry (contains new response from Marc Sedam) (part1/2) ("Fredrik")
  Re: starch chemistry (contains new response from Marc Sedam) (part2/2) ("Fredrik")
  Brewing and Buses ("Graham L Sanders")
  New Draft Style Guidelines (at last) (Ed Westemeier)
  What is the best way to clean an Immersion Wort Chiller? ("William and Karen LaCross")

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * The HBD Logo Store is now open! * * http://www.hbd.org/store.html * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Suppport this service: http://hbd.org/donate.shtml * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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. LOOKING TO BUY OR SELL USED EQUIPMENT? Please do not post about it here. Go instead to http://homebrewfleamarket.com and post a free ad there. 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. JANITOR on duty: Pat Babcock and Spencer Thomas (janitor@hbd.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 00:55:09 -0400 From: "Peter A. Ensminger" <ensmingr at twcny.rr.com> Subject: competitions: BJCP, AHA Many BJCP higher-ups (Garofalo, Houseman, etc) and AHA higher-ups (DePiro, Renner, Moline, etc) read the HBD. I suggest that these organizations should have an official policy of not recognizing any competition whose sponsors did not submit judging forms or score sheets for their previous competition. Cheerio! Peter A. Ensminger Syracuse, NY http://hbd.org/ensmingr - ------------------------- I entered a competition over a year ago (Coconut Cup in South Florida) and never heard anything from the judges. (my bank said they cashed the check, so I'm pretty sure they received the entry). Now I know that, like you, I must have had a Gold medal beer. Thanks for shedding some light on that. - ----- (shameless plug) Sunshine Challenge '04 in Orlando FL Check out www.cfhb.org for details They will give your judging sheets back on the last day of the competition (if you're there.) (end shameless plug) Al Q Longtime Lurker, First time Poster Groveland, FL [954.6, 172.6] Apparent Rennerian Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 06:17:29 -0400 From: "-S" <-s at adelphia.net> Subject: mash schedule questions Joseph Gerteis asks ... >I am specifically interested in lagers >here, since I have worked out my ale mash schedules and >since the malts are typically easier to work with. That's the rumor, but the specs in recent years show little difference besides the slightly greater Lovibond of the PA malt. The idea that lager malts have a bit greater beta-glucans level is believable, but you do NOT have to revise your mashing technique to use lager malts. They aren't any more difficult. > I am still wondering about the two-stage > high-temp rest (60/70c or similar).[...] > Is this an > extraction/conversion issue or is there a flavor impact? Neither ! Fix adapted his 60/70 steps (for both lagers and ales) from similar methods in the German sources. The idea is that you get as much fermentability as you want by choosing the rest *time* at 60C (beta-amylase) and then finish the mash w/ a good alpha-amylase rest at 70C. The main issue in saccharification is always getting the *right* amount of beta-amylase activity and therefore the right fermentability. On a relative basis malt has lots of alpha-amylase but just barely enough beta-amylase to do the job. A masher must be careful w/ the BA, but any oaf can complete the starch conversion given the excessive levels of AA in malt. Step mashers can time the low (60C) rest to control this variable but single-infusion mashers MUST control the temp. Both work well and produce very comparable worts - properly done. >(Side question: Steve Alexander mentioned yesterday >that Fix himself noted that a single step rest was not >clearly different from a multi-step mash in the taste >of the finished beer. Steve -- does that correspond >with your own experience with lagers?) I don't think many of the highly ornate and complex mashing schemes do much to change flavor so long as they don't kill body, haze & foam and result in the same fermentability. The one method which has a clear claim to a flavor impact is decoction. Decoction does create certain Maillard and caramel flavor products, but it's very inefficient at this. Many HBers have some fantasy image of immense malty flavors emanating from a decoction, but the reality is that decoction imparts only a subtle flavor difference. This is another case where a single side-by-side comparison says a lot more than all the "expert" opinions. IMO no-sparge will out-do a decoction every time, and a little additional munich, vienna or melanoidin malt will usually do the same. >Second, what kinds of schedules are most common at the >commercial and homebrew levels? I don't know. Kunze's book is a textbook of commercial German brewing. It's safe to say that Kunze's sort of abbreviated mashes which begin at 58C or above and step upward are common there. Decoction is still practiced in the continent, but less widely than in previous decades. M&BS describes 1980-ish British practice which I assume hasn't changed so much. Micro breweries use all sorts methods, but most often single infusion. > How many out there use >a 60/70c rest schedule or equivalent? I used 60/70c for many years and finally adapted this to 62C/72C. Later I found out that my schedule is closer to Kunze's recommendations. If my malt is likely to throw a haze I'll mash-in at 58C for a touch of proteolysis, then slowly step the temp to 62C. -S Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 09:35:56 -0400 From: "Dave Burley" <Dave_Burley at charter.net> Subject: Kurz/ Hoch mash schedule Brewsters: Joe Gerteis mentions he would like a little more information on the kurz/hoch German brewing regimen. For starters, the German expression "kurz/ hoch" means "short/high" as a description of a new ( relatively) regimen in the German brewing industry in which they gave up the older brewing methods using the older malts. The fact that it has a name tells you it is different from the old practice. Like Budweiser, the Germans are also in the business to maximize their profits, so now minimize their occupancy time in the mash tun by shortening the mash time. One of the techniques is to eliminate the low T hold. To Hell with tradition. As Kunze says p224 about German breweries "In a small brewery the time it takes to mash is not important........In large, modern breweries often eight brews or more per day are cast.......This demands not only the use of short mash processses but also an exact time plan which tolerates no delays..." This is made possible by the changes in the malting activities schedule, made from warm weather malts ( like US, etc) and the types of barley grown in Europe. Agricultural activites in Germany ( they even appointed a commission to select the types of barley and discard most of the traditional varieties ) have dramatically changed the barley coming to the maltster. Before WII they had 300 or more varieties of barley, now I think the number is down to about 6 and trending lower. These lower nitrogen and higher yield barleys can be malted to allow the kurz/hoch brewing schedule. Thus, the low hold T and decoction of German beers in a commercial setting, with the accountants dictating every brewer's move, means a real change in the taste and quality of German beers. You will find the brewing industry saying no changes in the taste have changed, but I know better and so do older Germans. But, like in the USA, the younger crowd buys most of the beer and they don't know any better, so the German beers ( even the famous Octoberfest beers) trend to the lighter side and lower flavor so more can be consumed P 218 of Kunze under "Three mash processes", "In the three mash methods the temperature increases between the main mash temperatures 35 C ( 95F) mashing in temperature 50C ( 122F) protein rest/gummy material degradation 64C ( 147F) maltose formation rest 75C ( 167F) saccharification rest is produced by the removal of the cooker mashes, boiling and second mashing .........These mashes produce very aromatic beers." But as I said in my earlier comments, I fool all these attempts at controlling my brewing by using Moravian malts and adding cooked raw barley to emulate the old malts and thus I use the older low T hold methods of brewing. When I gave some of my German style lager to a German staying with us, he said on his first taste "You MADE this? Tastes like the German beer I remember." Keep on Brewin' Dave Burley Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 10:50:59 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <jeffrenner at comcast.net> Subject: Re: mash schedule questions "Joseph Gerteis" <joseph540 at elvis.com> writes: > I am still wondering about the two-stage high-temp rest (60/70c or >similar). ... what kinds of schedules are most common at the >commercial and homebrew levels? How many out there use a 60/70c >rest schedule or equivalent? I have adopted a 145/158F (63/70C) schedule for my Classic American Pilsner, with the first rest being for the main mash and the second for after I add the boiling hot cereal mash. This is the schedule that A/B uses for Budweiser, as we MCAB attendees discovered when touring the pilot brewery in St. Louis for MCAB-2 four years ago. This results in a crisp, well attenuated pilsner. When things go right. ;-) For an modern American cereal mash beer with a typical 40% or more adjuncts, the cereal mash will easily supply enough heat to make the boost. For my more historic level of 22% corn, I need to use some propane and recirculation. 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, 16 Apr 2004 10:05:31 -0700 From: CONN Denny G <denny.g.conn at ci.eugene.or.us> Subject: Re:DCL American Ale #56 Bob, that post piqued my interest, also. I had my LHBS order some for me yesterday. I'll certainly post my results. --------->Denny Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 12:41:22 -0500 From: Bill Tobler <wctobler at sbcglobal.net> Subject: RE: Bad temp readings.. Mike said he's getting different readings from his dial gauge thermometer and a handheld stick thermometer. You can get pretty wild temperature differences in the mash tun, especially a SS one without insulation at the beginning of a temperature change, but you said you were getting a big delta T with just water and no grains. Put the handheld thermometer next to the gauge probe and read the temperatures. If both thermometers are accurate, they will read the same. (Within a degree or so) But, if one of them is off, you need to determine which one. You could test all three thermometers in boiling water and record the readings, but that is pretty far outside the range you use the thermometers, but will work. You could also just heat some water up in the 160 degree range and put all three in there and record the readings. If you have a problem, two will read the same or very close, and one will be off. More than likely, the one different from the other two is wrong. I have a lab grade Mercury thermometer I calibrate with every once in a while. (But not in the mash) I'll heat up some water and check all my digital thermometers against it. I'll test at different temps, from room temp up to boiling. One of my Omega temperature controllers tends to be off at low temps, but gets in line with the others above 120 degrees. BTW, just to encourage others to let everyone know where they are, last week I posted on the AHA techtalk and signed my name and location. The next day I received an e-mail from a new brewer right in town here looking for some advice, company and a club. We fixed him right up. Bill Tobler Lake Jackson, TX (1129.7, 219.9) Apparent Rennerian Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 15:23:55 -0400 From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam at unc.edu> Subject: DCL yeast Word is that this yeast is the old EDME strain. Whether that's the same as 1056 is beyond me. - -- Marc Sedam Chapel Hill, NC 27599-4105 Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 18:45:37 -0400 From: "Mark E. Hogenmiller" <mehogenmiller at cox.net> Subject: 12th Annual Spirit of Free Beer - Call for Entries, Judges, and Sponsors Competition Announcement - -------------------------------- Brewers United for Real Potables (BURP) is proud to announce that the 2004 Spirit of Free Beer homebrew competition will be held on Saturday, June 12th at Old Dominion Brewing Company in Ashburn, VA. For another year we will be a qualifying event for the prestigious Masters Championship of Amateur Brewing (MCAB). All BJCP recognized styles including meads and ciders are eligible for entry. First entry is $6.00, subsequent entries are $5.00 each. We have years of experience at organizing and judging homebrew competitions, so we take pride in doing it right. Experience and quality judging is the cornerstone of our competition. BURP educates and encourages the enhancement of judging skills and judges within the club. Over the past 12 years BURP has earned a reputation for the, um, *loot* that can be won at all levels of the Spirit of Free Beer competition. Each year, Spirit of Free Beer sponsors generously donate great prizes, including: ingredients, equipment (from small items to big stuff), breweriana, clothing, books, and, well, FREE BEER! Thanks to all of our sponsors past and present! A partial list of confirmed sponsors for this year's competition follows at the end of the message. For complete details and forms, please visit the BURP web site at www.burp.org/events/sofb/2004/ Call for Judges - ----------------- We welcome out of town judges from the Midwest, New England and the Mid-Atlantic regions. Feel free to email Judge coordinator Bill Newman at <Newman at burp.org>. If you need a place to stay, please contact Bill or competition organizer Dave Pyle. Entries will be accepted between May 21st and June 4th. For drop off and mail in locations please refer to the BURP web site. Call for Sponsors - ------------------- Some of the best homebrew suppliers, manufacturers, and retail shops read sponsor, and participate in the Homebrew Digest. If you would like to become a sponsor of this year's Spirit of Free Beer, please e-mail Rob Hanson at <kate.rob at verizon.net>. Good luck and cheers! Rob Hanson Sponsor Coordinator <kate.rob at verizon.net> on behalf of Competition Organizers Dave and Becky Pyle events at burp.org www.burp.org Mark Hogenmiller Burke, VA BURP - 2004 Spirit of Free Beer Registrar Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 19:29:32 -0400 From: "-S" <-s at adelphia.net> Subject: re: Mash Thickness (Bill Gornicki) Bill G writes, >I did a short excerpt for my club's education corner about mash viscosity >based on Dornbusch's model and it may be useful to some. > >Different mash viscosities favor different mash enzymes. Oh dear - You're propagating a lot of erroneous ideas Bill. "Viscosity" is *NOT* mash thickness. You cannot interchange these terms. They mean entirely different things. >Check out how I applied this model at the link below... >http://www.feathercraft.net/CRAFT/Documents/Mash%20Technique2.doc There is a lot of baloney in that sandwich, Bill. <<< Mash is discussed in many texts as, simply paraphrased, ".the thicker the mash the more full-bodied your beer will be. Likewise, the thinner [...] >>> Any book that suggests that should be ... recycled immediately. <<< Thick mashes encourage proteolytic enzymes (protein degrading) to degrade proteins and other gums into more usable components for both yeast health and clearer beer. >>> More baloney ! Mash thickness stabilized AND SLOWS these hydrolytic enzymes. The quote above is accurate only for mash rests far above the "optimal" protein&glucan degrading temp. That's a crazy method of mashing. A very thick 72C rest encourages more beta-amylase activity too (as compared to thin), but only a moron would try to make a highly fermentable wort in a very thick 72C rest. == I'm not picking on you Bill, but there are several misleading poorly researched books around and reciting their content just increases the thought pollution. -Steve Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 10:38:51 -0400 From: "Al Quickel" <alquickel at hotmail.com> Subject: Re: Brewoff Scoresheets... I just received an e-mail from MASH (Coconut Cup) regarding my last post. As I had suspected, my scoresheets were evidently lost in the mail. I still do not have judges comments, but MASH did provide a record of my score. NOT a gold medal winner prematurely disposed of. There goes that theory. The new postal carrier seems to have it together, though. Maybe next year. Thanks Scott & Denise. Al Q Groveland, FL [954.6, 172.6] Apparent Rennerian Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 09:32:57 -0700 From: Bob Girolamo <bob-girolamo at sbcglobal.net> Subject: Ping Jeff Renner: Ballantine IPA Clone recipe Jeff, I've been researching this for a while and have noted your 1998 HBD archive of the recipe but, have had no luck finding it. I was wondering if you still had it somewhere and could post it. TIA Brewer Bob Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 20:18:41 -0600 From: Bob Devine <bob.devine at worldnet.att.net> Subject: link of the week - viscosity Viscosity can be a tough concept to grasp. I've seen reports that viscosity is "mouth coating" (no, that is a different effect) or that it is a density (no, highly viscous liquids can be light) or that viscosity is determined by the original gravity (nope). So, viscosity is a characteristic of your beers but what is it? What causes it? and What is good? And just how does one make a "black and tan" (or if you don't want to re-open a political battle, a "half and half")? BTW, did you know that a lot of research in viscosity came from trying to make a good chocolate milk? http://www.foodproductdesign.com/archive/2002/0102AP.html Viscosity is the resistance of a fluid to flow. A fun introduction to viscosity of common fluids: http://www.cockeyed.com/science/viscosity/viscosity1.html The viscosity of water establishes the standard of 1.00 centipoise (also measured at 0.000891 Newton seconds per meter squared) where CentiPoises = CentiStokes x Density. The viscosity of beer depends on the type of beer. For example, the viscosity of larger is about 50% higher than water and stout is about twice as viscous. Many wheat beers are much higher. An often repeated note is that a beer's viscosity is caused only by "caused by the presence of polysaccharides (dextrins) in the beer that are not fermentable by the yeast." Yes, but that is only part of the answer but the whole anwser is a bit more complicated. See the following links: http://www.regional.org.au/au/abts/1999/stewart.htm http://www.asbcnet.org/Journal/abstracts/search/1995/bc1995a29.htm http://www.asbcnet.org/Journal/abstracts/search/2002/0919-01a.htm http://www.asbcnet.org/Meetings/2001/Abstracts/P-17.htm www.dal.ca/~foodsci/Jin.ppt Bob Devine not illegally brewing in Utah, nope, not me Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 22:48:35 -0500 From: "Pat and Debbie Reddy" <reddydp at charter.net> Subject: First Lager Fermentation I brewed my first lager this morning and pitched the yeast about 7 hours ago. I've never conducted a primary fermentation in glass, so maybe what I'm seeing here is normal, but it's ugly and, yes, I'm worried. Here's a link to a picture I took minutes ago - what is that crud in my beer? Is a lager fermentation supposed to throw a funky head like that? Calm me down, please! PMR http://webpages.charter.net/rede/First%20Lager - --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.659 / Virus Database: 423 - Release Date: 4/15/2004 Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 09:32:22 +0200 From: "Fredrik" <carlsbergerensis at hotmail.com> Subject: Re: starch chemistry (contains new response from Marc Sedam) (part1/2) Marc Sedam seem to have some technical server problems that seem to prevent him to post to the hbd list, so he asked me to post his response on this topic. While at it I've inserted some follow up comments/questions to his original response. It was too big for one post and I certainly can't cut Marc's response to I'll just split it in two. > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: starch chemistry > Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004 14:44:47 -0400 > From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam at unc.edu> > To: post at hbd.org > > > > Wow, I haven't seen this much heavy science on the HBD in a while. Makes > > for an early a.m. brain massage. > > Just to pick a nit.in the industry, it's called starch "liquefaction" > not liquification. Why? No idea. But in an effort to help your search > you'd probably get more hits if you use liquefaction in the terms. Sorry > 'bout that. Thanks, I had no idea. The fact that I'm swedish doesn't make it easier :) This will help. > > I'll speak, as Steve suggested, a little more to the starch since that's > where my background lies. If you search the HBD archives for "Sedam and > gelatinization" you'll probably get a few additional bits of information. I just did and found some these excellent old posts from you. http://hbd.org/hbd/archive/3284.html#3284-8 http://hbd.org/hbd/archive/3982.html#3982-2 This gave me some more great information to process! Thanks for these great posts. In the first post above you wrote this in the end :) "P.S. If you think the rest of the HBD would benefit, I'll post this. I didn't want to clog bandwith." These kind of posts are the best. Good stuff. It doesn't get anywhere near waste of bandwidth IMO. If you have more let it out if you get a chance. I for one will read it all with great interest. /Fredrik Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 09:32:27 +0200 From: "Fredrik" <carlsbergerensis at hotmail.com> Subject: Re: starch chemistry (contains new response from Marc Sedam) (part2/2) (part2/2) > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: starch chemistry > Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004 14:44:47 -0400 > From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam at unc.edu> > To: post at hbd.org [jump] > > The gelatinization of starch is critical to your model, although without > a DSC (differential scanning calorimeter) you're going to be a little > handicapped. The gist of it is this: starch granules first begin to take > up water and swell, then they "crack", and eventually completely > solubilize. You are going to get different percentages of amylose > available during each part. During the swelling, some short-chain > amylose is able to migrate out of the starch granule and into solution. > The granule is still intact. Further, even the intact granule is > susceptible to degradation by beta amylase. This creates small > "pinholes" in the granule through which further short-chain amylose can > leave. It is this swelling of the granule and uptake of water that Steve > A. talks about in the cereal mash. Note that amylose or amylopectin > don't gelatinize.the starch granule gelatinizes. That being said, the > relative composition of the grain (% amylose vs. % amylopectin) will > have an effect on the overall gelatinization temperature. Waxy starches > (high amylose) have lower gelatinization temps. > > Eventually, the "birefringence" of the granule (telltale "X" pattern you > see in a granule under a dark-field microscope) will disappear. The > granule cracks open and releases the remaining amylose and amylopectin > into the solution, as well as the trapped water. At the same time, the > amylopectin (and some short-chain amylose) can bind water. During a > cereal mash, this is when you see the viscosity dramatically drop. It's > a combination of the disruption of starch granules and the component > compounds in starch being rapidly digested by BA and AA. I should point > out that this entire process can be made MUCH more rapidly through shear > forces. In other words, regular stirring of the mash (or constant > stirring, in the case of the pro brewer) will get you through the > swelling stages much faster. > > Once everything is in solution, you still have two substrates being > attacked by the same enzymes. Amylose will generally get digested much > quicker than amylopectin as the entire starch chain (recall that amylose > is nothing more than a linear bunch of glucose molecules) is available > for BA and AA to attack. The AA is randomly cleaving the chain, while BA > is chewing it from the ends. The result is going to be a ton of glucose > and maltose from the combined AA/BA activity-as it relates to > amylose.some maltotriose is left here too. Amylopectin is a different > beast. Since neither BA or AA can digest the alpha 1-6 bonds in > amylopectin, you're left with less fermentable extract per weight of > amylopectin. Once all of the degradation of the amylopectin molecule > happens you're left with the "beta-limit dextrins"-most of the remaining > indigestible starch fraction. So I'll agree and disagree with Steve. > Amylose is available for digestion first, when the granule swells. Once > the granule gelatinizes both are available equally, although the amylose > fractions will still be digested to completion first. Thanks alot Marc for the great response. I will try to revise things and add something to the equations to mimic some of the new things you mention here. I will need to make some more actual tests too. You describe thing from the granule perspective but it seems I also need to somehow account for the grain perspective as it would be significant. Unless your mashing flour, from some "glass of water on the desk experiments" the hydration seems to work from the outside to the center and at least at room temp it's quite significant. Very quickly the surface softens, while the core is solid and apparently fairly dry. I figure the prehydration or 40C has some connection to this. I haven't accounted for this yet but I think I have to try and come up with something. I'd like to know the effect on resulst rehydrating the *grains* to a certain extent onto the core before entering the actual mash. Lack of other devices I've rehydrated whole grains, and after some time I take a grain and cut it in half with a razor to roughly inspect the process of rehydration visually via the cross section. I think I've got the enzyme stuff ok so far. Based on the probability for attacks at certain bonds I've come up with quite simplified model (maybe oversimplified? I won't know until I've tested it later). Anyway I count on accounting for the denaturation dynamics as well as the limit dextrins. I should get the polymer distribution with time and the 1-6 skeleton will be left as the residual regarldess of how much enzymes there is. Hopefully there will be some fun resulting gif animations of the polymerdistribution when it's all done. I assume that any point the enzymes attack amylose and amylopectin at valid bracnhes at a fixed probability distribution. For amylopectin the probability reach zero at and near the 1-6 branches. We'll see how this turns out together :-| I'm not done with putting the actual simulation (VBA/excel) together yet but it's on it's way, because lots of things come in the way all the time, it tend to be occasional jumps. I spend several hours yesterday calibrating a new temperature setup. I'll digest the new input and update the model. I hope to get some more comments from you guys later on. /Fredrik > > If you want to try and find these numbers, you may consider looking at > Novozymes website. http://tinyurl.com/37aqr > > They provide industrial starches to the brewing industry. It may not be > EXACTLY what's happening in the mash tun but it may provide a start for > your model. You also may want to look up a book called "The Handbook of > Water Soluble Gums and Resins" which has a chapter on starch that is > still THE bible in food science circles. I have a copy I could scan and > email you. Steve.you too! > > -- > Marc Sedam > Chapel Hill, NC > > -- > Marc Sedam > Life Sciences Consultant > Office of Technology Development > The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill > 308 Bynum Hall; CB# 4105 > Chapel Hill, NC 27599-4105 > > 919.966.3929 (phone) > 919.962.0646 (fax) > OTD site : http://www.research.unc.edu/otd > Monthly Seminar Info: http://www.research.unc.edu/otd/seminar/ > > > > > -- > Marc Sedam > Life Sciences Consultant > Office of Technology Development > The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill > 308 Bynum Hall; CB# 4105 > Chapel Hill, NC 27599-4105 > > 919.966.3929 (phone) > 919.962.0646 (fax) > OTD site : http://www.research.unc.edu/otd > Monthly Seminar Info: http://www.research.unc.edu/otd/seminar/ > > Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 17:28:24 +1000 From: "Graham L Sanders" <craftbrewer at bigpond.com> Subject: Brewing and Buses G'day all Now being a North Queenslander, one takes pride of our "rough and tough" nature. Even in ones death throws, we like to think we will go out in a typical bushies style, something like "he was taken by a saltie but he still tried to get one last beer down before he went under." Never in my wildest dreams did I think I would instead almost go out being the hood ornament not only for a bus, but a car as well. So it was on that faithful day, when I started making my Vienna lager well before sunrise. All went well, beer finished by lunchtime, and shoved into the fridge to finish cooling it down to lager temperatures. With the starters also on the go, I should be able to pitch the yeast by sunset. At that stage life was good, and one was looking forward to some of my Belgian Beauties as a reward that night. Never quite got that far. At 4.00pm, one decides to go on his daily constitutional on the "deadly treadly", sole aim to keep ones beer belly in check. Well it seems some bus decided that I would make a great addition to the look of the vehicle. This is nothing new up this way, as plenty of trucks commonly motor around with roos all over the bull-bars, from the nights drive, to be hosed off at the next fuel stop. Never thought buses would take up the fashion with me. So there I was, suddenly lifted off my bike and wearing a bus. And to show we up here have a fashion sense, the driver decided I didn't look that good, so threw me onto a car for good measure to see if I look any good there. Didn't look good on the car, so they dumped me on the road. End result of this little skirmish, I rattled like an old wooden bridge, chest all out of shape, broken bones, lung going down faster than Bill Clinton, skin greyer than a bush roo, well, one was a touch close to meeting his maker, or as a brewer would hope, finally working out that ultimate question "who is the real patron saint of brewing." Now what do dedicated brewers think off at this time. SWMBO - no way!, children or family - nope!, what about life flashing before your eyes - sorry that doesn't happen!!!!!. This little brewer was muttering one thing only, to paramedics, doctors, nurses in and out of reality, " THE YEAST, ---- SOME-ONE NEEDS TO PITCH THE YEAST ". I'm told rather off putting when they are trying to get your name, and where it hurts. Another thing we brewers must do is constantly think about brewing. So as I was drifting between worlds, talking to god, etc, they needed to do an urgent chest drain. To do this they use a pointed stainless steel rod, about 1/4 inch diameter. Now it seems when I saw this, I somehow wanted to abscond with said piece of metal for my brewing equipment, and tried to take it as they trust it into my chest, without any pain relief. Now I can tell you, being bayoneted by emergency staff certainly brings you back to reality and cuts shorts your conversation with the all mighty. And I certainly forgot about using that SS rod for brewing, instead suggesting in very colourful language that they stick it up the doctors PHD. But the end result of all this 1. Yes most important the yeast was pitched and That Bloody Bastard Bus Vienna is now kegged. 2. Never did get to keep that SS rod 3. Being bayoneted is not nice 4. And yes, I'm on the mend. Now one thing I am going to have to do is post more regularly on the HBD. It was very touching the goodwill I received from the brewing community. Might aim for once a week "posting from the tropics". Shout Graham Sanders Oh While I was having a chat to God, found out the only reason he sent me back was yes "God is a homebrewer". But he wouldn't let me up there yet. Seems he thought he knew all about brewing, til as he put it, that bastard Fix turned up and kept correct him. His last words to me before I was rudely send back to reality - " I'm not ready yet for another brewer telling me what wrong with my brews til I get a few more under my belt and get George off my back." Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 16:21:22 -0400 From: Ed Westemeier <hopfen at malz.com> Subject: New Draft Style Guidelines (at last) On behalf of our very hard working Style Guidelines Committee, I want to pass on the message below. As everyone knows, our style guidelines are due for revision, and this is the year. Here's your chance to see the draft guidelines the committee came up with, and put in your own two cents. This message and the links can also be found at the BJCP website (www.bjcp.org). Ed Westemeier BJCP Communication Director communication_director at bjcp.org - ------------------------------- The BJCP Style Committee has completed its preliminary review and update of the 1999 Style Guidelines. These draft guidelines are now posted for public review and comment. All BJCP judges and interested individuals are welcomed to participate in the review. The Style Committee will monitor the discussion and incorporate good suggestions. We intend to have an open comment period for at least one month, with the final guidelines being rolled out at the AHA National Homebrew Conference in Las Vegas, June 17-19. The guidelines can be viewed and commented upon in a web-based forum system found at http://www.hopmadness.com/bjcp/ They have been extensively revised, reorganized, and contain new style parameters and commercial examples. Eight new sub-categories have been added. Comments are welcome on the individual guidelines and on the overall organization. Identification of errors, omissions and misinterpretations are especially welcome. Note that these guidelines have not yet been approved for use by the BJCP. The 1999 guidelines remain in effect for BJCP- and AHA-sanctioned competitions. Gordon Strong BJCP Grand Master Judge Chairman, BJCP Style Committee Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 18:14:06 -0400 From: "William and Karen LaCross" <lacross at chartermi.net> Subject: What is the best way to clean an Immersion Wort Chiller? I'm interested in any tips I can get on cleaning my copper wort chiller. I have gotten a nasty metalic taste in a couple of batches before I realized it was from the wort chiller. The last batch was cooled the old fashion way; in the snow bank on the back deck, and didn't show a hint of the bitter metal flavor. I typically slosh the chiller in a 5 gallon bucket of PBW after every brew session, and again with PBW before using it again, but obviously I'm doing something wrong. Any suggestions would be appreciated. Bill LaCross Petoskey, Michigan (218.8, 345.7) Apparent Rennerian Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 04/18/04, by HBD2HTML v1.2 by KFL
webmaster@hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96