HOMEBREW Digest #5521 Sun 08 March 2009

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

		Digest Janitor: pbabcock at hbd.org


                 Sponsor The Home Brew Digest!
     Visit http://www.hbd.org/sponsorhbd.shtml to learn how
    Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********

DONATE to the Home Brew Digest. Home Brew Digest, Inc. is a 
501(c)3 not-for-profit organization under IRS rules (see the
FAQ at http://hbd.org for details of this status). Donations
can be made by check to Home Brew Digest mailed to:

HBD Server Fund
PO Box 871309
Canton Township, MI 48187-6309

or by paypal to address serverfund@hbd.org. DONATIONS of $250 
or more will be provided with receipts. SPONSORSHIPS of any 
amount are considered paid advertisement, and may be deductible
under IRS rules as a business expense. Please consult with your 
tax professional, then see http://hbd.org for available 
sponsorship opportunities.

  FW: RE: Mill Gap Setting ("Michael D. Noah")
  Fwd: Carbonation saturation (Fred L Johnson)
  German Brewing ("Darrell G. Leavitt")
  RE:  Mill Gap Setting ("David Houseman")
  CO2 ("A.J deLange")
  water analysis questions (RI_homebrewer)
  RE: Malt Analysis ("Mike Bennett")

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * The HBD Logo Store is now open! * * http://www.hbd.org/store.html * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * NOTE: With the economy as it is, the HBD is struggling to meet its meager operating expenses of approximately $3400 per year. If less than half of those currently directly subscribed to the HBD sent in a mere $5.00, the HBD would be able to easily meet its annual expenses, with room to spare for next year. Please consider it. As always, donors and donations are publicly acknowledged and accounted for on the HBD web page. THank you 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, 7 Mar 2009 10:13:04 +0100 From: "Michael D. Noah" <michael.noah at physaliaos.com> Subject: FW: RE: Mill Gap Setting Josh, You're not going to like this response, but in my experience, the gap "depends." Not all grains of malt are the same size; some are fat and plump, and some are thin and scrawny, though 99.99% of the grains are the same size within a particular bag of malt. They just change from variety to variety, and from year to year. I have a Valley Mill, and I'm often resetting the variable roller adjustment from "wide open" to about "half open" (I've never set it to the narrowest setting). Sometimes, I forget to make a change, and after about a lb. or two has passed through the mill, I'll take a look and see what it looks like - e'g, has the husk only been cracked open (preferable), or is the mill it turning into dust (not preferable). I know when the latter is happening when I start sneezing!!! Good luck with your project!!! On-On! Michael Noah Heidelberg, Germany Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 06:25:43 -0500 From: Fred L Johnson <FLJohnson52 at nc.rr.com> Subject: Fwd: Carbonation saturation I should clarify that my last post regarding Joe Katchever's desire to carbonate his beer using a single dose of CO2 at the beginning used calculations of pressure that were peculiar to Joe's tank that had a wetting pressure of somewhere on the order of 4 psi, so the pressures I was quoting were peculiar to Joe's tank and the pressures at his regulator. They would not apply to a tank in which on pressurizes from the top with zero wetting pressure. My calculations also did not consider that the beer already had some CO2 dissolved in it--a big mistake. Thanks to Joe Walts for correcting this one. I'm sorry for confusing what was already a challenging (for me) scenario. Thanks, Joe, for the corrections. This is what I love about the HBD. I knew if I made a feeble attempt at Joe's question in public, someone who really knows this stuff would set the record straight. I also agree with Joe Walts that the easier way to actually add the gas would be on a mass basis. Fred L Johnson Apex, North Carolina, USA Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 06:34:30 -0500 (EST) From: "Darrell G. Leavitt" <leavitdg at plattsburgh.edu> Subject: German Brewing Kai; Thankyou for the efforts to put this German Brew material together. It is very interesting, and another resource to help those of us whom are more artist than scientist in the hobby, to better understand the process. Darrell Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2009 07:42:39 -0500 From: "David Houseman" <david.houseman at verizon.net> Subject: RE: Mill Gap Setting Josh, My mill is adjustable but I will admit I usually "set it and forget it." There have been times when I did use the adjustability. One is when milling wheat. The wheat kernel are not the same size as barley and they are harder. So I've put them through 2 or 3 times a progressively smaller gaps; it make the work much easier. And I did experiment with a similar method with barley malt. Commercial roller mills have 3, 4, 5 or more rollers. So to emulate those I would put the malt through twice, one at a slightly wider setting then at a slightly narrower setting. I got a finer crush without tearing up the husks. I also wetted the malt a bit as well; again often done commercially, if for nothing else than to keep dust down. Bottom line is that 90+% of the time I'm using one fixed setting but I have enjoyed the flexibility that adjustability provides. David Houseman Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 10:43:01 -0500 From: "A.J deLange" <ajdel at cox.net> Subject: CO2 Additional perspective on the path Fred started us down: At equilibrium at 34F with 2.5 vols the headspace pressure will be 9 psig (23.7 psia). For 1000 gal of beer which is 3785 litres you would have 2.5*3785= 9462.5 litres (as released at STP) of dissolved CO2 which has density (at STP) of 1.87214 g/L for 9462*1.87214 = 17.714 kg of CO2 which is a lot but then remember that the beer weighs over 3785 kg. The simplest way to get this into the beer is to apply 9 psig to a carbonating stone and recirculate the beer in the tank either by running the chill bands (thermal recirculation) or by use of a pump. The question of the day, though I am actually unclear on this, seems to be what pressure would need to be applied to the headspace as a bolus. To determine this you would first have to know how much CO2 is already dissolved in the beer. You would estimate this from the ASBC table or fit to it. Assuming that the tank is at atmospheric pressure (0 psig, 14.7 psia) the dissolved CO2 volumes would be (released to the atmosphere) 1.57 for a total of 3785*1.57 = 5942 litres equal to 5942*1.87214 = 11.125 kg dissolved gas i.e. over half the total requirement. If you were able to retain enough CO2 to keep the pressure at 4 psig you would have retained 1.977 volumes which amounts to 7483 litres weighing 14 kg. Let's be optimistic and assume this was the case. You would now need to add the remaining 3.7 kg plus an extra 100*3.18807/1000 = 0.318 kg which is the mass of CO2 in 100L at 9 psig and 34F (density 3.19 g/L). The total mass required is thus about 4 kg which, compressed initially into 100 litres has density of 40 g/L requiring pressure of 286 psig if you treat CO2 as an ideal gas (which it is definitely not at such pressures ) or 249 psig if you try to model it using the first virial coefficient (which model is only good out to perhaps a couple of atmospheres). Deviations from the gas law aside, the practical concerns should be apparent. OTOH if the head room were 50 percent (typical of small cylindroconicals) you would require 1892*3.18807/1000 = 6 kg CO2 to fill the headspace plus the 3.7 kg to top up the beer giving a total of 9.7 kg which, stuffed into 1892 liters would be at a density of 5.1 g/L corresponding to a pressure of 23 psig (B coefficient model - probably valid at this pressure) or 23.7 psig (ideal gas model). The obvious message here is that 6 kg of CO2 which do not end up in the beer, are nevertheless paid for ($12) and (for those who worship at the church of Al Gore) released to the atmosphere. So now I better understand why brewers use carbonating stones. The best way (other than retaining what the yeast gave you) seems to be to carbonate a large mass of beer in a tank with small headspace using a stone. For large volumes it's also clear that it might be a fine idea to do the calculations as above and put the gas bottle on a scale. In this way you could determine how close to equilibrium you are as the carbonation progresses. * * * * * * * On the same subject, Joe says " That suggest beer can hold more CO2 than an equivalent volume of empty space at cool temperatures." Was there ever any question about this? It's why a beer fizzes when you open the bottle or pour it into a glass. Or perhaps I don't understand the comment. When CO2 dissolves it get solvated i.e. surrounded by water molecules so it doesn't have the same access to the boundaries of the container that it did as a gas and exerts less pressure per molecule. Thus some gasses are very soluble in water (ammonia, sulfur trioxide) others quite soluble (CO2) and others not very soluble at all (N2) depending on the size and configuration of the molecule. Only very little dissolved CO2 actually enters/leaves the carbonic/ bicarbonate/carbonate system (except where carbonic anhydrase in present as in a respiring creature). A.J. Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 15:32:26 -0800 (PST) From: RI_homebrewer <ri_homebrewer at yahoo.com> Subject: water analysis questions Hi All, I moved to a new house a while ago, and had a water analysis done for my well when I moved in. The numbers are as follows: sodium 42.3 mg/L potassium 1.9 mg/L copper 0.84 mg/L iron 0.04 mg/L magnesium 4.3 mg/L calcium 28.4 mg/L pH 6.00 SU turbidity 0.40 NTU conductivity 471.0 umhos TDS 282.6 mg/L alkalinity 37.5 mg/L chloride 70.6 mg/L hardness 88.6 mg/L nitrate 2.0 mg/L sulfate 7.5 mg/L Everything else tested was listed as "not detected". I'm not sure if the alkalinity and hardness numbers are "as CaCO3". Is there some way to tell? From discussions of residual alkalinity (RA) and mash pH in the HBD (#4232-13 and others) and John Palmer's RA article in BYO (pg 58, Oct 2008 issue), the mash pH should work out to 5.72 to 5.82 (assuming the alkalinity and hardness numbers are "as CaCO3" ). My view of the water is that I may need to add some gypsum (calcium sulfate) to get the calcium level up to 50 to 100 mg/L in the mash, and possibly some baking soda (sodium bicarbonate) for roasty beers like stouts and porters. Is that about it? Am I overlooking anything else? Other suggestions? Jeff McNally Tiverton, RI (652.2 miles, 90.0 deg) A.R. www.southshorebrewclub.org Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2009 15:25:01 -0700 From: "Mike Bennett" <mjb at efn.org> Subject: RE: Malt Analysis Thomas Rohner <t.rohner at bluewin.ch> wrote some time ago Subject: Malt Analysis > I think it would be a good idea for a maltster to put the lot data > of the products on their Website. This way the ones interested in > the data could get it without the maltster having to reply phone > calls or emails. I read your post when it first came out, but couldn't remember the which website I saw that did this, so I kept quiet. I just stumbled upon it again. It's the Cargill website that has an online lot analysis portal. They have listings for Cargill, Dingemans, Gambrinus, Gilbertson & Page OIO Brand Brewer's Grains, Meussdoerffer, Pauls Malt and Warminster. http://www.specialtymalts.com/tech_center/lot_analysis.html - -- Mike Bennett Professional Brewer (retired) St. Barts Brewing mjbennett69<at>gmail.com Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 03/08/09, by HBD2HTML v1.2 by KFL
webmaster@hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96