HOMEBREW Digest #1118 Tue 13 April 1993

Digest #1117 Digest #1119


	FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
		Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator


Contents:
  cooling (Ulick Stafford)
  Wyeast reuse/stretching (Troy Howard)
  camra (BadAssAstronomer)
  Re: Tabs and the such (David C Mackensen)
  RE: Request for decoction mashing help.... (""Robert C. Santore"")
  RE: Help, I boiled away the hops. (""Robert C. Santore"")
  Help, I boiled away the hops (Troy Howard)
  Bucket Sealer (/O=vmspfhou/S=dblewis/DD.SITE=JSCPROFS/)
  Re: I boiled away my hops (korz)
  Favorites (Darren Hanson)
  CO2 (Jack Schmidling)
  hops growing (Kirk Anderson)
  mailing list (Martin McMenamin)
  HOP ALPHA ACID (Jack Schmidling)
  Boulevard Brewing Co. (John Fitzgerald)
  Change of e-mail address (Randy Smith)
  Dry Hopping (Carl Eidbo)
  My Belgian rock collection (chris campanelli)
  proposed beer tax increase ("PAUL EDWARDS")
  alternative forum (Michael D. Galloway)
  Fermenting Apple Cider & Filtering Cold Break ("Anderso_A")
  more comments on bottles / European system (brew it  12-Apr-1993 0923 -0400)
  Coriolis force/Givin' carboys a swirly (John Adams)
  Re: Chiller Study (Kelly Jones)
  Yeast pitching rates (/O=vmspfhou/S=dblewis/DD.SITE=JSCPROFS/)
  Immersion Chiller Efficiency (Carl West)

Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew at hpfcmi.fc.hp.com (Articles are published in the order they are received.) Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc., to homebrew-request@ hpfcmi.fc.hp.com, BUT PLEASE NOTE that if you subscribed via the BITNET listserver (BEER-L at UA1VM.UA.EDU), then you MUST unsubscribe the same way! If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first. Archives are available via anonymous ftp from sierra.stanford.edu. (Those without ftp access may retrieve files via mail from listserv at sierra.stanford.edu. Send HELP as the body of a message to that address to receive listserver instructions.) Please don't send me requests for back issues - you will be silently ignored. For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to lutzen at novell.physics.umr.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 9 Apr 93 11:29:01 EST From: Ulick Stafford <ulick at bernini.helios.nd.edu> Subject: cooling Tim Anderson posted an adjustment he made to his chiller to improve cooling. I have been considering a simple change - reversing the flow. At present cold water enters at the bottom of the coil and exits at the top. That combined with water's tendency to stratify in layers causes the wort to be still, stratified and hot near the top. A reverse in flow would chill the top stuff first and it would then sink setting up convection currents that may aid coagulation and heat transfer. The reason I haven't until now is worry about air pockets being trapped in the coil, but given high flow rates that is probably a foolish concern, and an actual desire not disturb the hop pellets so much so I could rack off them quicker. However I usually have to rack wort twice anyway before pitching so this is of less concern. Comments? Also related peripherally to cooling, Al's post interested me. I have roused yeast since the first batch I did when I was a whelp, thought everybody did it, and thought it was essential for beers brewed with bottom fermenting yeast (not Al's beer of course). But the temperature thread intrigued me. 72 or 68 is much too warm for a house I have to heat, but then 60 is what I am used to. In Ireland I usually had to put the ferments in a warm place. But 60 is too cool for my SO's guinea pigs and bird. So their room is heated to 68-70. This mean that for nice temperature steps I can start at 68 in the rodent room, rack to secondary and move to the kitchen (60) and then put it in the basement 50-55 to clarify prior to bottleing. If only lager temperature steps were so easy. Another ale comment is that I have gone back to my plastic bucket for ale primaries. I never used to skim, but now I have decided after reading Warner that I should collect yeast from the top. I did so on my last ale. The yeast is quite the foulest stuff I have ever tasted due to the hop resins and other lovely scum. It doesn't seem to be contaminated in that I can't taste anything off but that could be due to masking by the hop resin. I have decided that I should rinse and, to be sure, acid wash the yeast prior to reuse. Comments? __________________________________________________________________________ 'Heineken!?! ... F#$% that s at &* ... | Ulick Stafford, Dept of Chem. Eng. Pabst Blue Ribbon!' | Notre Dame IN 46556 | ulick at bach.helios.nd.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 93 09:14:33 PDT From: troy at scubed.scubed.com (Troy Howard) Subject: Wyeast reuse/stretching Howdy all, Well, after all this talk about dry yeast contamination (notwithstanding the recent posts concerning the improvements at Whitbred) I have finally decided to take the liquid yeast plunge. !*SPLASH*! Ok, so I shelled out $4 for Wyeast Belgian Ale yeast. FOUR BUCKS! For microscopic fungus! It boggles the mind. In HBD #1103, Philip J Difalco <sxupjd at fnma.COM> reposted an article by Rick Cavasin on stretching Wyeast by making a 1/2 gallon starter, fermenting to completion, bottling the results in 5-6 bottles, and using the bottles to make starters for pitching into your wort. In the post, Philip asks for comments from the yeast-gurus out there. I have not seen any replies posted, so I thought I would ask again; with a slightly different slant (no pun intended). I have followed Rick's instructions and I now have a 1/2 gallon starter fermenting away. This should yield ~6 bottles of yeast. However, for my next brew, Belgian may not be appropriate. So I'll go out, get another packet of Wyeast (say, London Ale), and do the same thing for it. Then, I'll have 5 bottles of Belgian and 5 bottles of London in the fridge. So now I forsee obtaining my own collection of Wyeast, all bottled in 12 oz. beer bottles and stored in the fridge. I might only have to buy yeast once a year (once my collection is established). This seems like a very cheap, very easy form of yeast management. Is it? Are there draw backs (like problems with autolysis, or the yeast just dying)? Am I wasting my time? Rick mentions he has had bottled yeast last 6 months. Will they last longer? Are those 6 mo. old yeast just as good as those from a new Wyeast packet? Please, please, please, send me guidance. Lost in the terrifying world of expensive microscopic organisms, Troy Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1993 11:56:42 -0500 (CDT) From: STOREY at fender.msfc.nasa.gov (BadAssAstronomer) Subject: camra Hi everyone Just back from England with a bunch of real ale under and around my belt :) Man it was great, but I'll bore you with the details in some other post. However, the CAMRA Guide to Good Beer impressed me so much, I was thinking of joining CAMRA. Anybody out there a member or ex-member? Any and all comments will be appreciated. thanks scott Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1993 13:24:15 -0400 (EDT) From: David C Mackensen <cygnus at unh.edu> Subject: Re: Tabs and the such try using emacs and the M-x untabify... this will replace tabs with spaces and preserve columns.. what a bargain! - -- - -- Chris Mackensen (dcm2 at kepler.unh.edu or puck at unh.edu) Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 09 Apr 93 14:46:39 -0400 From: ""Robert C. Santore"" <rsantore at mailbox.syr.edu> Subject: RE: Request for decoction mashing help.... In HBD 1116 Stuart Galt asks: > Sorry about posting this to the whole world, but... with all the recent talk > about decoction mashing, I am a bit interested in giving it a try. > a) What books/article/whatever should I read to figure out how it is done? > b) Is there anyone in the Seattle area that is willing to come over and > help/show/whatever brew a batch. I seem to be entering my busy season > with an up coming wedding and the picnic season aproaching :-) I like Noonan's book - Brewing Lager Beer. I re-read it all the time. Also, FWIW, decoction mashing is easy! Easier, I think, than a temp. controlled mash. Much less to worry about. It is my favorite mash. Enjoy! Bob Santore rsantore at mailbox.syr.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 09 Apr 93 15:05:26 -0400 From: ""Robert C. Santore"" <rsantore at mailbox.syr.edu> Subject: RE: Help, I boiled away the hops. In HBD 1116 Markham R. Elliot writes: > My beers have dramatically improved since that first fateful batch. Reduced, > then eliminated the use of sugar. Then came the use of a secondary fermente > Then the use of DME, and finally the failed attempt at using DME as a primin > agent. Longer boils...longer boils...longer boils. No one reminded me that > when using a hopped extract, the longer you boil, the more you remove what t > hops were put in there for. No one to blame but myself, should have seen it > coming. Knew better. Dealt with essential oils in Organic Chemistry those > many years ago. Faithfully read the HBD daily, and see cautions about not > boiling away the "hop nose", etc, etc. > Now the plea for help. > Should have guessed why everyone said "not bad, but not bitter enough". Now > that I've screwed up another batch (now 3 days in the primary), is there a w > to salvage what I'm sure will be another "bland", hop-lacking brew? The fla > of the past few batches has been ok; rich, sort of sweet, but kinda watery a > again, missing a lot of what the hops were there for to begin with. Mark, In my opinion most hopped extracts are way underhopped. You didn't give us a recipe to work with but I suspect that if you are relying on the extract to give you your hops, that could be your problem. I would recommend using unhopped extract and adding your own hops. There are many advantages: it is more fun, you become more familiar with recipe formulation (after all, you may want to brew all grain some day), and your flavor will drastically improve. You also have much more freedom to brew what you want. If you use your own hops, remember - you cannot boil away bitterness! A vigorous 1-hour boil is just what you need to extract bitterness from hops. You will lose some of the more volatile flavor components but thats ok because you can add hops near the end of the boil to give you flavor and aroma. The amount to add and when to add it really depends on the style you're after. Find a homebrewer with a beer you like and get the recipe! Then stick to it (just once anyway). As far as the batch you have in the carboy, I know that hop extracts are available. Some are for bitterness, some for aroma. I've never used them. Ask your supplier and make sure you get the right kind (or both?). Good luck! Bob Santore rsantore at mailbox.syr.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 93 12:33:10 PDT From: troy at scubed.scubed.com (Troy Howard) Subject: Help, I boiled away the hops Markham R. Elliott writes: >My beers have dramatically improved since that first fateful batch. Reduced, >then eliminated the use of sugar. Then came the use of a secondary fermenter. >Then the use of DME, and finally the failed attempt at using DME as a priming >agent. Longer boils...longer boils...longer boils. No one reminded me that >when using a hopped extract, the longer you boil, the more you remove what the >hops were put in there for. No one to blame but myself, should have seen it >coming. Knew better. Dealt with essential oils in Organic Chemistry those >many years ago. Faithfully read the HBD daily, and see cautions about not >boiling away the "hop nose", etc, etc. > >Now the plea for help. > >Should have guessed why everyone said "not bad, but not bitter enough". Now >that I've screwed up another batch (now 3 days in the primary), is there a way >to salvage what I'm sure will be another "bland", hop-lacking brew? The flavor >of the past few batches has been ok; rich, sort of sweet, but kinda watery and >again, missing a lot of what the hops were there for to begin with. > >I have read with increasing interest over the past couple of weeks about "dry >hopping" in the secondary. Would me adding some high alpha hop pellets to the >secondary be worth the try to put back in what I boiled away ? Any other >suggestions (other than throwing it out) will be welcome. BTW, no more hopped >kits for this kid, gonna take another step toward what many seem to feel is the >only way to brew. OK, I'll give this one a try. I am not sure I am right, so if any of you out there know better, please feel free to gently correct me. Hop essence and hop bittering are two very different things. You are certainly right that boiling for any significant period will almost completly elimate hop aroma. However, my understanding is (and this is the part I am not really sure about) that the alpha and beta acids which are responsible for hop bitterness are not really all that volatile. So they should not easily boil away. Also, as I understand it, hopped extracts don't really have that much hop aroma to begin with. If I understand you correctly, you did not add any hops to the boil, and just relied on the hopped extract. So my suggestions depend on what you want: 1. If you want more bitterness, try boiling some hop pellets for 30 minutes in a ~pint of watter, and add this to your secondary. [I have never tried this. It seems like it should work. Any one know any better?] 2. If you want more hop aroma, try dry hopping in the secondary. 3. If you want both, try 1 AND 2. In the future, add your own hops. It's as easy as falling down, and it opens up a whole new dimension to your brews. Troy Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 93 12:45 PDT From: /O=vmspfhou/S=dblewis/DD.SITE=JSCPROFS/ at NASAmail.nasa.gov Subject: Bucket Sealer ***************************** PROFS Note ***************************** From: DBLEWIS --VMSPFHOU Date and time 04/09/93 14:45:54 To: POSTMAN --NASAMAIL FROM: Dennis B. Lewis <InterNet:dblewis at jscprofs.nasa.gov> SUBJECT: Bucket Sealer I recently acquired a couple of 20 liter plastic buckets. The bucket and the lid are both made from HDPE (which is food grade). The bucket is white and the lid is deep red. They used to contain laundry detergent. So far I've only used the buckets to soak-sterilize bottles. I would like to use them to ferment because if I put 19 liters (5 gal) in them the kraeusen will push the goop to the top of the bucket and stick it to the lid (Budweiser does this with their fermenters; it eliminates the need for a blow off hose, although I'll have to change the airlock a couple times.) I have a couple of questions regarding these buckets: 1.) Is there any hazard associated with detergent that may have seeped into the bucket walls? They have been cleaned, soaked in bleach water and in hot tap water (160F). The buckets no longer have any perfumy smell whatsoever. 2.) The lid does not seal well. Is there any food grade cheap sealant that I could use to caulk up the lid? How about some sort of gasket? Regular lids from other buckets don't fit. Dennis B. Lewis (713) 483-9145 ** NASA/JSC/DH65 Payload Ops Homebrew, The Final Frontier. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 93 15:12 CDT From: korz at iepubj.att.com Subject: Re: I boiled away my hops Mark writes: >My beers have dramatically improved since that first fateful batch. Reduced, >then eliminated the use of sugar. Then came the use of a secondary fermenter. >Then the use of DME, and finally the failed attempt at using DME as a priming >agent. Longer boils...longer boils...longer boils. No one reminded me that >when using a hopped extract, the longer you boil, the more you remove what the >hops were put in there for. It's true that boiling boils-away hop aromatics, thereby removing hop bouquet and flavor, but boiling does not boil-away hop bitterness. What I think your problem may be is that you added some DME to an already underhopped kit but did not add some hops to make up for the increased malt. The Extract Special Issue of Zymurgy has a useful, albeit somewhat outdated, table of commercial malt extracts which gives, among other things, Homebrew Bittering Units (HBU) per can and HBU per pound for the hopped extracts. I've switched over to IBUs long ago since they are much more universal, especially given that not everyone does full boils (using IBUs and Jackie Rager's formulas from the Hops Special Issue of Zymurgy, you can compensate for partial boils and get consistent bittering). >Should have guessed why everyone said "not bad, but not bitter enough". Now >that I've screwed up another batch (now 3 days in the primary), is there a way >to salvage what I'm sure will be another "bland", hop-lacking brew? The flavor >of the past few batches has been ok; rich, sort of sweet, but kinda watery and >again, missing a lot of what the hops were there for to begin with. > >I have read with increasing interest over the past couple of weeks about "dry >hopping" in the secondary. Would me adding some high alpha hop pellets to the >secondary be worth the try to put back in what I boiled away ? Any other >suggestions (other than throwing it out) will be welcome. BTW, no more hopped >kits for this kid, gonna take another step toward what many seem to feel is the >only way to brew. It's okay to use hopped extracts, as long as you use quality brands and know how many IBUs have been added (in converting from HBUs to IBUs, 25% utilization is often what's used). To save this batch, what you can do is to buy some isomerized hop oil and add that at bottling time. Another alternative, is to make a hop "tea" by boiling some hops in water for an hour (and while you're at it, you can add flavor hops 15 minutes before the end of the boil and finishing hops 5 minutes before the end of the boil), strain out the hops and add this "tea" to your batch at bottling. Try to minimize splashing so you don't oxidize the hop oils. Get the Hops Special Issue of Zymurgy to figure out how much hops to boil up in the "tea" for whatever IBU level you want your "tea" to have -- use 5 gallons for volume, since that's what it's going into, even though it's not what your "tea" boil volume was. *********************** Subject: Re: decoction mashing Stuart writes: >with all the recent talk >about decoction mashing, I am a bit interested in giving it a try. > >a) What books/article/whatever should I read to figure out how it is done? Greg Noonan's book, Brewing Lager Beer, is probably the best modern discussion of the decoction mashing method that I know of. Greg also has an article in the All-grain Special Issue of Zymurgy, which has a condensed version of the decoction process -- I don't recall if it was enough info to actually do a mash. DON'T PANIC! Al. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 93 13:37:20 PDT From: Darren Hanson <Darren.Hanson at f271.n103.z1.fidonet.org> Subject: Favorites Reply-To: darren at ofa123.fidonet.org A couple questions for everyone. Reply in e-mail (note the Reply-To address please!) and I'll post the results in a couple of weeks. 1) What is your favorite type of fermented beverage? a) Ale b) Bock c) Lagger d) Weissen e) Steam Beer f) Mead (including melomels, et al) g) Hard Cider h) Wine (grape based) i) Wine (non-grape based, Strawberry Wine for example) j) Other (please specify) 2) What are your three favorite draft beverages? (alcoholic) 3) What are your three favorite beverages in bottles or cans? (alcoholic) 4) What question did I leave out that I should have included? 5) May I use your name in relation to this questionaire? 6) Would you be willing to respond to a more in depth questionaire to be sent in e-mail in about a month? __ __ \/ Darren Hanson \/ Prefered Return Path: darren at ofa123.fidonet.org at ofa123.fidonet.org - -- Darren Hanson Internet: Darren.Hanson at f271.n103.z1.Fidonet.org Compuserve: >internet:Darren.Hanson at f271.n103.z1.Fidonet.org Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 93 22:42 CDT From: arf at genesis.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) Subject: CO2 Date: Wed, 7 Apr 93 13:54 CDT From: korz at iepubj.att.com > Regarding the high-pressure side gauge, I'll stick my neck out and say I think it's useless. It won't begin to drop till all the liquid CO2 has run out and has turned to gas. Then it will drop to zero in one or two days. That's not my idea of warning you that it's about to run out! That confirms my suspicions. I inherited an antique single gage regulator from my father who used CO2 for his airbrush in his art studio. He's long gone and it has a lot of sentimental value but I always wondered what I was missing. When I moved into this house, strangely enough, there was another one in a drawer in the basement just like my father's. I put that on my 2.5 lb cylinder for traveling. >I plan to weigh my tank the next time it runs out and use it's weight as an approximation for when I should go get it refilled. It should weigh, well... 20# more when full (for a "20#" tank). I did that for the last two tanks and it leaves little doubt. If you look carefully, you will find the tare (empty) weight of the cylinder stamped on it somewhere. So if you forget to weigh it empty, all is not lost. This is important for those of us who just swap tanks instead of waiting around for refilling. It is also a good idea just to be able to keep the gas man honest. The last time I swapped tanks, it seemed a bit light and when I got home it weighed in at 39 lbs. The tank weighs 31 lbs so I got 8 lbs of gas instead of 20. He cheerfully gave me a different one but it was a pain never the less. The final count on the previous tank was 40, 5 gal kegs carbonated and dispensed along with a lot of miscelaneous squiriting around. js Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 1993 10:03:07 -1100 From: Kirk_Anderson at wheatonma.edu (Kirk Anderson) Subject: hops growing I received my rhizomes and my Zymurgy special hops issue yesterday. Mr. Rajotte's article on growing is fine but does not give me enough information. Like first of all, I understand about needing a trellis and so on, but what do I do with these things to start? Do they go in the ground vertically? What kind of ground? How deep? etc. I've seen various postings on specific aspects of hop growing in the HBD over the past couple months, but could some one point me toward a more step-by-step treatment of the subject? Thanks for helping. ******************************** Kirk Anderson, Dept. of French Wheaton College, Norton MA 02766 <Kirk_Anderson at Wheatonma.edu> ************************* Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 93 8:25:50 PDT From: Martin McMenamin <mcm at orac.holonet.net> Subject: mailing list Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 93 13:52 CDT From: arf at genesis.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) Subject: HOP ALPHA ACID A Proposed Method for Determining Hop Alpha Acid Content The following methodology is based on empirical measurement and experiments. It may be seriously flawed but as the end results seem to achieve the goal desired, it is worth further experiments by anyone who cares to replicate the results. My pH meter arrived late last week and I must confess that I spent most of the time since then playing with it. Although I suspect it will not have much impact on my beer, I bought it mainly to learn whether pH could be used to determine Alpha Acid content of hops. The instrument I purchased is made by Oakton and is the pH Tester 2. Claimed accuracy and resolution is .1 pH unit. After calibrating the unit with pH 7 and pH 4 buffer solutions, I proceeded to test just about everything in the house. The biggest surprise was to learn that tea, as we drink it, has a pH of 6.9. I always thought that the astringency of tea was a result of tanic acid. I also found that to test tap water accurately takes about 9 minutes to reach a stable value. Boiled tap water reaches stability within a few seconds. I presume it has something to do with dissolved gas. My hypothesis on hops Alpha Acid was that a high AA hop should produce a tea with a lower pH than a low AA hop under controlled conditions. To test the hypothesis I proceeded as follows: Tea #1 3 grs Chinook (AA 12%) in 250 ml water. Tea #2 3 grs Saaz (AA 2.9%) in 250 ml water. The teas were brought to a boil for 5 minutes and poured through coffee filters. The quantity of 3 grs was selected because that is 1/10 the amount of Chinook I normally use to hop a 7 gallon batch and it would make the math easier later on. After cooling the teas to room temperature, the following pH measurements were obtained: Tea #1 Chinook pH 6.2 Tea #2 Saaz pH 6.6 The delta is .4 pH which I believe works out to a factor of 4 in the real world and nicely matches the delta of the AA in the hops. Although, measuring at different times sometimes provided different numbers, the spread was always the same and I attributed the problem to lack of understanding of how to use the instrument. The only significant anomaly was that on the third day, the pH of both teas dropped to 5.7. They had been left uncovered throughout the period but something significant happened overnight of the third day. In conclusion, if the results are the product of Alpha Acid in the hops then it should be possible to work out formulae to determine the approximate AA of hops or at least determine how much of an unknown hop is required to achieve the same pH of a known hop. js Return to table of contents
Date: 9 Apr 93 24:31:00 PST From: John Fitzgerald <johnf at ccgate.SanDiegoCA.NCR.COM> Subject: Boulevard Brewing Co. While on a recent trip through the mid-west, I picked up some micro brews (I assume) made by the Boulevard Brewing Co. in Kansas City,MO. I carried back some Bully Porter, and some Irish Red ale. Both of these beers seem to have a metallic after-taste, very noticeable in the Irish, less so in the Bully, because of the extra malt/hops flavor. What I am wondering is if any locals, or anybody else who has tried these beers has tasted something similar. Rather than criticizing their beers, I am trying to educate my taste buds. Is this taste from high metal ion concentrations as Miller suggests? Or is this what phenolic tastes like, perhaps from high chlorine content of the water? Or maybe the beer was stale - the label suggested drinking by April, so maybe I was catching the beer at the end of it's preferred life cycle. The two were tasted at room temp (Probably in the mid 60's F). If anybody has any input, I'd love to hear it. John. Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 93 9:19:59 EDT From: rjsmith at iron.afsac.wpafb.af.mil (Randy Smith) Subject: Change of e-mail address My e-mail address has changed to: rjsmith at iron.afsac.wpafb.af.mil The old address will continue to be recognized for another 6 months or so. - --Randy-- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Randy J. Smith DoD #2022 '93 CBR900RR C.E.T.A. Corporation rjsmith at iron.afsac.wpafb.af.mil "Most of our so-called reasoning consists in finding arguments for going on believing as we already do." - James Harvey Robinson - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 93 13:33:42 CDT From: Carl Eidbo <milo!eidbo at plains.NoDak.edu> Subject: Dry Hopping I have seen a lot of converstion about dry hopping lately. I have tried dry hopping a number of times, with limited results. I have tried enough that I do feel qualified to shoot my mouth off a bit. (I have only worked with pellets). 1. Several people have reported "gushing" upon the first addition of pellets. I have reduced and reduced the amount of pellets I add, to try and reduce the amount of gushing. The last amount I tried was one pellet about 1/8" long. The beer still gushed, although not quite as violently. I added the rest of the hops about a day later, with no gushing. The beer was at about 68F, and virtually done fermenting. Apparently, there are several factors involved: A. The slow release of CO2 by the yeast has caused the cool beer to become super-saturated with CO2. B. The hops particles are nucleation sites for CO2 release. C. The hop oils support head (foam) retention. D. The "shock" of the initial CO2 release triggers a much larger release from the super-saturated fluid. 2. I have frequently seen a re-start in fermentation a few days after the addition of the dry-hops. Several others have also reported this effect to me. It is easily observable by charting the "seconds per bubble" count of the airlock. Usually, a nice foamy head rises for a couple of days. Normally, there are no off-flavors associated with this renewed fermentation, but I have detected contamination flavors if the dry hopping was performed when the gravity is too high. I also pitched from a dry hopped batch, and the resulting beer was badly contaminated. Why? I don't know. 3. I have occasionally tasted a very bitter component after dry hopping. My feeling is that these are hop particles that have not settled out yet. Usually this "rough" flavor disappears in time. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Carl Eidbo Prairie Homebrewing Companions Fargo, ND - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 93 15:26 CDT From: akcs.chrisc at vpnet.chi.il.us (chris campanelli) Subject: My Belgian rock collection I have taken up rock collecting. And not just any rocks either. I collect only the finest. I collect Belgian rocks. Oh sure. I know what you're thinking. The answer is no. I'm not on drugs. And yes, I still think that rock collecting in general is still up there with bird watching, golfing and other ectomorphic endeavors. It's all come about innocently enough. I'm an avid user of Belgian malts. On top of that I don't buy it in no stinkin' five-pound bags neither. Only bulk flips my skirt up. If there's no risk of a hernia, why bother? Mixed in with the malt is a strange collection of unidentified malted objects. Most are easy to figure out. A tangled clump of barley rootlets, an odd twig or a mangled piece of wire. But every now and then I'll find a rock. And while all of the objects warrant inspection, to me the rocks are keepers. To date my collection numbers four. They all appear to be similar in appearance. All are bluish-grey, flat and layered. It's hard to tell whether they've been malted. I'd like to think that they have as I don't know of anyone who collects malted rocks. At least the authoritative source on the achievements of western civilization, The Guiness World Book of Records, doesn't seem to have a category for it. I look at the rock and try to imagine it's voyage. I try to picture where the rock came from and how it got mixed in with the malt. Where was the farm located? The malting company? What does the local terrain look like and how close is it to the coast? Considering the region's history, has this rock ever been tread on by a Roman sandal or the track of an armored vehicle? Only the imagination can provide such answers. When I go under I'll probably donate my collection to the Smithsonian. After all, when you consider what the Hursts, Rockefellers, and Carnegies of the world have donated, a Belgian Malted Rock Collection is far more interesting than a bunch of stupid paintings any old day. At least I think so. chris campanelli Return to table of contents
Date: 12 Apr 93 06:58:00 EST From: "PAUL EDWARDS" <8260PE at indy.navy.mil> Subject: proposed beer tax increase I've just seen a memo from the Small Brewers Coalition which contained the following information: Senator Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) has introduced Senate Bill 684, titled "National Health Care Act of 1993", which proposes to raise the excise tax on beer a whopping 450 percent, as follows: Large brewers: currently $18.00/barrel, proposed $81.00/barrel small brewers: currently $ 7.00/barrel, proposed $31.50/barrel Increases in taxes for distilled spirits and wine are 215 percent and 20-30 percent, respectively. Apparently, Sen. Inouye has it in his mind that beer is the root of all health problems in the US! Based on what I've seen of production figures for the last year or two, A-B's taxes alone will go from about $1.5 billion to $6.5 billion. Micro's would have to raise their prices to the point that some may not survive. If you feel as I do, write or call your senators and representatives and let them know. Taxes are one thing, highway robbery is an entirely different matter. -- Paul Edwards PS - If the bill passes, be *real* glad you know how to brew your own. It may be the only way to afford a beer. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1993 08:10:26 -0400 From: Michael D. Galloway <mgx at ornl.gov> Subject: alternative forum > First of all, whatever happened to Kinney? I still see his ads but he has > not posted here for months. I am sure it is just a coincidence but it seems > that he vanished about the time Jay Hirsh started his censored, politically > cleansed, alternative forum. I musta been asleep or brain dead, what alternative forum are we talking about here? Michael D. Galloway mgx at ornl.gov Living in the WasteLand Return to table of contents
Date: 12 Apr 93 03:23:37 EST From: "Anderso_A" <Anderso_A%55W3.CCBRIDGE.SEAE.mrouter at seaa.navsea.navy.mil> Subject: Fermenting Apple Cider & Filtering Cold Break The following attachments were included with this message: __________________________________________________________________ TYPE : FILE NAME : ANDY __________________________________________________________________ Greetings, I had a friend over last night to help me with a Steam beer I was making. He had with him a gallon bottle of apple juice he had picked up for his son. He decided to experiment with the apple juice by re-hydrating an extra packet of dry yeast I gave him, pitching it into the apple juice bottle, and putting a cork with an airlock on top. This morning I got up and it's bubbling vigorously (I wish my beers fermented that quickly!). My questions: 1. Does anyone know how this "cider" will turn out? 2. I never measured OG, so does anyone know how much alcohol should be created? 3. It may be too late, but is there anything that can be done now to make this concoction more palatable? With regard to the beer I made last night, I have a question. After the boil was over, I chilled the wort down to about 70 degrees and strained it into my carboy. I let it sit for about a half hour and watched as the cold break gently settled down to the bottom 1/4 of the carboy. I then poured the carboy's contents through 2 separate funnels with strainers into another carboy. I was attempting to filter out the cold-break. Apparently, it is too fine to be trapped by the normal stainers which come with a brew shop's funnel. Almost all the cold-break passed through both filters into my second carboy. My question is, aside from siphoning off the clear wort from the cold-break sediment, is there any practical way to filter out the cold-break? If a finer filter is the answer, then how fine should it be and where do I procure one? (And yes, I realize that by all this filtering between carboys I am increasing my risk of contaminating my newborn beer!) Thanks, Andy A Bitch's Brewery Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 93 06:23:36 PDT From: brew it 12-Apr-1993 0923 -0400 <ferguson at zendia.enet.dec.com> Subject: more comments on bottles / European system I also agree that genuine bar bottles are the best for bottling. I've heard horror stories of Sam Adams (tm) bottles breaking during the capping phase after so many uses, although, I personally have not had this problem yet! Has anyone seen this yet? Bar bottles are noticibly heavier then standard returnable bottles, such as Sad Adams(tm); the glass is much thicker, and hence, more durable. Another bottle type I like is the 16oz standard european bottle. these are pretty heavy, and, then have 4oz more capacity then the bar bottle types widely used in the states. When I was in Austria this past fall, we went on a tour of the Zipfer Brewery. It was completely in german, hence, I did not understand much, but I could guide myself through the tour with my nose! At any rate, they've really got their s%t down in Europe. Most of the brew sold in bottles there comes in a standard 16oz bottle (I think it is 16oz?!). So, on the bottle input side of the bottling room at the Zipfer brewery, you'll see returned bottles in standard returnable crates (much like milk crates) from all sorts of breweries. They all use the _same_ standard bottle, they make it easy to return them to just about anyone, and just about any brewery can fill the bottles. Green ones, brown ones, etc. Being an environmentally concious person, I _really_ liked what I saw. The US of A is so caught up in making $$$ as quickly as possible that we'll probably never see anything like that... JC Ferguson Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 93 08:38:30 -0600 From: John Adams <j_adams at hpfcjca.sde.hp.com> Subject: Coriolis force/Givin' carboys a swirly Ed Hitchcock writes: > To this I can but say: Horse poop. The coriolois force on the > liquid in a carboy 30cm or so in diameter is virtually nil. Swirl it any > way you please, there will be no difference. The friction of the side of > the jug is far greater than any coriolis effects on the water. As for the > pigs, they can poop too. Interesting hypothesis but I doubt you've have ACTUALLY testing it (the coriolis effects on the water that is). I have and I can say that getting the water swirling in EITHER a 5 gallon glass carboy or a 12 oz. bottle will indeed get the liquid to drain faster. I have been using this trick for quite some time but I'm sorry I didn't try to prove it on paper first. While I will not comment on the actual forces involved (we all really known there is not true coriolis 'force') or their magnitudes, the technique does indeed work. Dennis B. Lewis writes: > OK, I haven't tried this but, I assume that when you start swirling the water > in the carboy, that the carboy is already inverted (and over the sink/lawn). > If you get up a good swirl and then try to invert the carboy, you would really > goof up your swirl when the carboy gets horizontal. Plus the rotational > inertia of 3+ gallons of water spinning fast enough to hug the sides would be > impressive when you tried to flip it around.I think it just needed to be said. Yes, start dumping the water and then begin to swirl it about. As soon as the water starts to clear out of the mouth (and air can be drawn up) the carboy will quickly drain. You do not need to continue to swirl the carboy after the water starts draining quickly. Believe me the inertia is NOTHING to be concerned about in comparision to a gripping a wet, glass carboy containing somewhere between 16 and 32 pounds of water. John Adams Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 93 09:31:10 -0600 From: Kelly Jones <k-jones at ee.utah.edu> Subject: Re: Chiller Study I'd love to see someone perform this study, although one could probably get equally valid results by running a simulation, with less time/material expended. However, as I indicated in my last post on this subject, there are _two_ important heat transfer coefficients at work here: one inside the tube, and one outside the tube. It would make little sense to accurately quantify conditions inside the tube in terms of ID, flow rate, etc. and then simply characterize conditions outside the tube as "stirred" or "unstirred". One should include parameters such as chiller diameter, spacing between coils, diameter of pot, height of coil, velocity of stirring, etc., etc. A compounding problem is that the inside convective heat transfer coefficient is highly dependent upon the "scale factor": a new, shiny tube will conduct much better than an old, crusty one... Not a simple problem at all, unfortunately. PS: gak writes: >Got this from the sci.physics FAQ... >Summary: the Coriolis force is real, but irrelevant at the bathtub (or carboy) scale. (followed by technical explanation of fluid dynamics involved in the coriolis effect) Hey gak, could you get the guys at sci.physics to tell us how long to make our chiller coils? Kelly Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 93 08:12 PDT From: /O=vmspfhou/S=dblewis/DD.SITE=JSCPROFS/ at NASAmail.nasa.gov Subject: Yeast pitching rates ***************************** PROFS Note ***************************** From: DBLEWIS --VMSPFHOU Date and time 04/12/93 10:12:54 To: POSTMAN --NASAMAIL FROM: Dennis B. Lewis <InterNet:dblewis at jscprofs.nasa.gov> SUBJECT: Yeast pitching rates I have a question about how the yeast pitching rates affect the flavor/quality of the finished beer. I have been guilty of dumping in a puffed up pack of yeast directly into the fermenter. But lately, I've been brewing by racking cooled wort onto sediment from the primary of a previous batch. The results are like night and day. The resulting explosive fermentation is very satisfying to watch and commences withing a few hours :-). Anyway, here's to point: when I pitch the small packet of yeast into the wort, it makes copies of itself until it hits the terminal concentration (50 M cells/ml(?)), THEN it goes into the fermentation cycle. If you pitch about the teminal concentration, then there is very little reproduction and all fermentation. It seems to me that this method would leave a lot of proteins in the beer because they weren't used to make other yeast and more alcohol for the same reason. Is the taste noticable? Do the extra proteins increase head retention/taste? I haven't had enough experience doing this to tell the difference. One other point: one common thread I've noticed regarding yeast culturing is how many generations the yeast are good for. Since I'm only using one generation(?!?) for a couple batches... (N.B. I remove most of the trub so I don't think there is much of a problem with accumulated crud on the bottom of the fermenter.) I may be nuts. If so the phaser me directly and save the bandwidth for more important things like Coriolis force physics lessons. Dennis B. Lewis (713) 483-9145 ** NASA/JSC/DH65 Payload Ops Homebrew, The Final Frontier. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 93 12:01:31 EDT From: eisen at kopf.HQ.Ileaf.COM (Carl West) Subject: Immersion Chiller Efficiency There seems to be a confusion in this discussion of IC efficiency between time, water, copper, and dollar efficiency. To Improve Time Efficiency: A larger, colder surface will cool the wort faster than a smaller, warmer one. Use as long a chiller as you can manage, and run lots of really cold water through it. The cooler the water exiting the chiller the faster the wort will be cooled. When cool water is exiting it indicates that there is an appreciable temperature differential between the cooling water and the wort for the entire length of the chiller tubing, therefor more heat energy is being extracted from the wort than if the exit water were warm or hot. Simply put: The more cold water you run through the chiller the cooler your wort will get, the faster you do it, the faster it will get cool. Especially if you stir the wort. Use the chiller to stir with. To Improve Water Efficiency: This is a whole other question, one best answered by a thermodynamacist, which I'm not, but I'll take a shot at a simple answer anyway. Regulate the flow so that the output of the chiller is at the temperature you want the wort to be. This will take longer. Theoretically, I guess it would take forever because you would always be _approaching_ the target temperature, but the flow would become infinitesimal in an hour or two and you could get on with your brewing. I don't think the length of the chiller matters in this case. To Improve Copper Efficiency: Make the chiller very short. It will take a _long _ time to cool the wort by either method but you won't be using much copper to do it. To Improve Dollar Efficiency: Borrow someone else's chiller. The Real Question: What's important to you? Carl "In practice the difference between Theory and Practice is greater than it is in theory." Return to table of contents
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1118, 04/13/93