---

	FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
		Digest Janitor: pbabcock at hbd.org


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

                     Your Business Name Here
    Visit http://hbd.org "Sponsor the HBD"  to find out how!
			 
    Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********


Contents:
  Ale pitching rates (Signalbox Brewery)
  Fermentabilty of Wort WRT mash thickness (Signalbox Brewery)
  Split Rock Homebrew Competition ("Al Hazan")
  Sour cherry substitute for Stout (Tom Puskar)
  Re: Fermentability of Wort WRT mash temperature (Fred L Johnson)
  Powered sugar (Brew)
  re: Fermentabilty of Wort WRT mash thickness ("-s@adelphia.net")


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*           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.

JANITORs on duty: Pat Babcock (pbabcock at hbd dot org), Jason Henning,
                  and Spencer Thomas



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


Date: Sat, 01 Sep 2007 10:10:13 +0100
From: Signalbox Brewery <signalbox.brewery at ntlworld.com>
Subject: Ale pitching rates

Fred L asked about Fix's magic million.

Lower pitching rates produce more esters, I believe,
which are a characteristic of British ales. Strange
people from other countries brew 'ales', but have
the most peculiar ideas that they should have as little
flavour as Anheuser-Busch's finest. They regard
esters, sulphur and DMS as flaws...

I don't know how Chris White survived the McCarthy
purges. He likes the exciting range of ale flavours and
advocates open fermentation to encourage them. He also
regrets that he can't sell the more characterful yeast
strains like Southwold, he told the Scottish Craft
Brewers a couple of years ago.

The (UK) Craft Brewing Association's champion beer
in 2004 was a 1064 porter fermented with 11g of S-04 for
40 litres (10 US gallons). Any computer nerd can tell
that's wrong, but the judges couldn't.

(Do you say 'nerd' in the States? I think 'geek' is similar).

cheers

David Edge, Derby, UK



Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 01 Sep 2007 10:14:14 +0100
From: Signalbox Brewery <signalbox.brewery at ntlworld.com>
Subject: Fermentabilty of Wort WRT mash thickness

Steve Jones seems to recall that Palmer's view on
thin mashes being fermentable was opposed to what
was discussed here.

I recall an informative post which stated that while
thin mashes kill enzymes faster (and that's what
most people focus on) they also reduce product
inhibition hence a more fermentable wort. I can't find
it using Google so perhaps it was in a personal reply
to me.

My experience agrees with JPs statement.

While I didn't turn up the original post, the lucid
technical exposition here on other mashy phenomena
may be of interest.

http://hbd.org/hbd/archive/4011.html#4011-2 ff

David Edge, Derby, UK



Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2007 08:25:03 -0400
From: "Al Hazan" <hazan at ptd.net>
Subject: Split Rock Homebrew Competition

This is the first announcement for the Homebrew Competition to be held on
Saturday, November 17th, at the Split Rock Resort in Pennsylvania's Pocono
Mountains. This competition is held in conjunction with their annual Micro
Brew Festival. 

This is a sanctioned competition judging all beer, mead and cider styles.
Entries should be shipped to the Resort at Split Rock, One Lake Drive, Lake
Harmony, PA 18624, and Attention: Shelly Kalins Lutz, for receipt from
November 3rd to November 15th.

Entry fees of $5 per entry will be donated to the Make-A-Wish Foundation.
By simply entering, you will be helping this charitable organization help
others.  Checks should be made out to The Resort at Split Rock.  

Two (2) brown or green bottles with no markings are required. Please use
rubber bands to attach bottle labels.  No tape please.  Any standard entry
forms identifying the brewer and the appropriate entry category/subcategory
are acceptable.  The 2004 BJCP Style Guidelines will be used for this
competition.  Get this from the BJCP web site at www.bjcp.org.

Judges are needed and they should contact me to secure a position.
Judges and Stewards can hand carry their entries if they pre-register with
payment.  All judges and stewards are required to be present by 8:30 so we
can get started promptly at 9am.  Judges will receive an entry to the beer
festival or entry to the beer dinner for their efforts and need to indicate
which they wish when they commit to participate.  

The BOS winner will receive a complementary weekend for two at next year's
Split Rock Beer Fest as well.  

More information will be available at the Split Rock web site: 
http://www.splitrockresort.com/beerfest/.   Or contact them at: spevents at
splitrockresort.com.

Al Hazan
Competition Organizer
hazan at ptd.net




Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 01 Sep 2007 12:02:16 -0400
From: Tom Puskar <tpuskar at optonline.net>
Subject: Sour cherry substitute for Stout

I found a recipe for an all grain chocolate cherry Imperial Stout that I 
wanted to try.  Now I find that sour cherries are out of season and can't 
seem to find any here in NJ.

Anyone know of a substitute that might work?  Would one of those syrups most 
homebrew shops sell fill the bill?

Thanks,

Teejay in Howell, NJ 




Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2007 14:23:34 -0400
From: Fred L Johnson <FLJohnson52 at nc.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Fermentability of Wort WRT mash temperature

Steve Jones asked about the source of some published data that was  
discussed on HBD a long while back regarding temperature vs mash  
thickness vs fermentability. Steve Alexander provided us with those  
data on several occasions. Here are a couple of quotes from Steve  
Alexander indicating the source (from off-line correspondence with  
Steve or taken from the HBD archives).

"Full Table 9.11 from M and B Sci 2nd edition data by Hall, quoted by  
Harris. Influence of mash temperature and concentration on the  
composition of sweet wort."

"The data [SNIP] actually come from an American research by R.H.Hall,  
as reported by G.Harris in his book "Barley and Malt" Academic Press,  
1962. The table appears in M and BS pp 289. [SNIP]... the earliest  
posting (and perhaps the best typeset one) appeared in HBD#1138, May  
1993 from Rob Thomas. Set your mail reader to a fixed width font to  
read easily."

Fred L Johnson
Apex, North Carolina, USA



Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2007 14:17:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: Brew <kristbigfoot at yahoo.com>
Subject: Powered sugar

What is the base sugar of powered sugar?


       


Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 02 Sep 2007 18:09:01 -0400
From: "-s at adelphia.net" <-s@adelphia.net>
Subject: re: Fermentabilty of Wort WRT mash thickness

Steve Jones brings up an old topic with ...
> On Brews n Views there was a comment made quoting John Palmer on this:
> "The grist/water ratio is another factor influencing the performance 
> of the mash. A thinner mash of >2 quarts of water per pound of grain 
> dilutes the relative concentration of the enzymes, slowing the
> conversion, 
> but ultimately leads to a more fermentable mash because the enzymes are 
> not inhibited by a high concentration of sugars."
>
> This seemed counter to a discussion here years ago (when there was much 
> more traffic here) that was about this same thing (but also including 
> Temperature). I believe that -s was involved, and I have some data in a 
> spreadsheet from that discussion. It has 2 tables - one with mash temps 
> of 140F, 151F, and 155F, and shows the amount of each type of sugar 
> (including dextrines) extracted from that mash. It also showed %extract,
>
> and %fermentables. The second table showed these same parameters and 
> values at mash thicknesses of 1.4, .81, and .61 qts/lb. The last table 
> showed an average of %fermentables for each of the 9 combinations and 
> ranked them, showing that the most fermentable wort was produced at 140F
>
> and .81 qts/lb.
>
> Does anyone remember that discussion, and the source of the data? I can 
> post the tables if anyone is interested.
>   
The data comes originally from an experiment by Hall, as quoted by 
Harris in "Barley and Malt", Academic Press 1962, but is reproduced in 
M&BS pp289 table 9.11 and partly reproduced in the late George Fix' 
first book.

Steve Jones however is incorrect in one important regard - the 
fermentability% is highest at 140F, but with a mash thickness of 
29%(1.65qt/lb) the thinnest lowest temp mash tested.  The 140F normal 
thickness of 39%(1.23qt/lb) mash was only very slightly less in 
fermentability (76.1% vs 76.2%).  Note that fermentability is something 
like the real attenuation, not the apparent attenuation so the apparent 
attenuation of these two would have been around 94% - very very high.

I have another paper (not in front of me but it's by Thurston published 
in JIB), shows small fermentability increases as you decrease mash 
thickness from 1.25qt/lb to 2 qt/lb, and even a tiny increase as you add 
more water to 2.5qt/lb.  FWIW German pale lager brewing (decoction) 
traditionally used mashes of 2.5qt/lb and even thinner - so this is not 
extreme.  Yes thinner mashed increase fermentability.

Perhaps it bears repeating; normal barley malt (pale or diastatic malt) 
has plenty of alpha-amylase(AA) to completely reduce all amylopectic and 
snip much of the amylose as well.   The major barrier to high 
fermentability is the careful use of limited amount of beta-amylase(BA) 
available.

Water is a limiting factor in the rate conversion early in a thick 
mash(<1qt/lb), but not so much at normal 1.25qt/lb mash or above.  The 
water of a thick mash is initially trapped as a gel by the amylopectin, 
but as this starch is decimated by alpha-amylase the water is freed and 
the rates of amylase hydrolysis increase.

Late in the mash the beta-amylase(BA) rate of reaction suffers from 
product inhibition. Higher maltose concentrations slow the activity of 
BA.  This is when thinning helps.  Many enzymes are inhibited by their 
own product. Ultimately all enzymatic conversions are reversible so if 
you add BA to a vat of pure maltose you will produce a tiny bit of 
maltotetraose(M4) as a result (tho' it is not energetically favored).  
Anyway maltose concentrations do slow the BA hydrolysis of amylose and 
slow any increase in fermentability.

Too much water dilutes the enzymes and precursor which slows the 
reaction rate according to the Michaelis-Menten eqn.

If high fermentability in a normal mash was my goal, I'd try a strategy 
of mashing at a normal thickness (say 1.25qt/lb) and after say 20 or 30  
minutes in the saccharification range I'd dilute 2 or even 2.5 qt/lb.  
Of course observine pH and temp issues.

Before you worry about extra-thin mashes you should verify that you can 
control mash temps accurately and that you are selecting an optimal pH 
for fermentability, but yes a thinner mash will marginally help, but 
lower mash temps are key.

One irritating reality of the brewing universe is that malt 
gelatinization temperature, the temp at which the starch is released, is 
about 65C(149F) and that the 'ideal' temp for maximal maltose production 
in a reasonable amount of time is closer to 60C(140F).   If you want 
high fermentability and you also want normal extraction rates, then 
you'll have to work past the contradiction of full gelatinization while 
maintaining a mash temp around 60C.   Yanking the grist from a thin low 
temp mash, in a decoction-like fashion, and only just gelatinizing this 
at ~67C and then returning this to a ~60C remix might be a useful 
strategy.  OTOH be aware that BA is denaturing at a significant rate 
even at 60C, so you really don't want to waste a lot of time with the BA 
not in contact with amylase while you heat a 'pseudo-decoct'.

Now if the goal is fermentability and not optimal tasting beer I'll 
point out that distillers regularly approach or slightly exceed 100% 
apparent attenuation by mashing in and leaving the grist and enzymes in 
contact for several days - during the ferment.  Of course there is no 
mashout, no boil, no sanitation and no hops extraction or protein 
coagulation but it is highly fermentable.  Ignore this extreme - longer 
mashes favor higher fermentability (even some alpha-amylase products are 
fermentable) but this is not generally positive for beer flavor & body.

A very similar extent of attenuation can be made by mashing and 
processing normally and then adding amyloglucosidase enzymes to the 
fermenter.   A few years ago I bought a bottle (I believe it was a 1L 
bottle and it requires only a few ml  per barrel).  These enzymes are 
intended for brewing, distributed by Crosby & Baker.  My LHBS 
(grape&granery - shameless plug for some very nice people) obtained and 
sold me the bottle for abt $15.   So it's very easy to create a "normal 
beer" and then drive the attenuation to 100%.

My experience using the enzyme was that it had little impact on flavor 
and it did noticeable remove body at 100% attenuation, but less so that 
I would have thought.   I never want very far inexperimenting at adding 
smaller amounts of enzyme to limit the attenuation.  In all you can make 
very tasty beer at 100% attenuation, but you will want to bump up the 
protein level to compensate for the body loss.

 -S



Return to table of contents

---