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


Contents:
  Air pressure ("pratte")
  beer related activities (Keith Frank)
  RE: Problems with Liquid Yeast (david lawrence shea)
  Labatt's buyout (183582) <lewis at lvs-emh.lvs.loral.com>
  10 gal batches, 1098 yeast (Jim Dipalma)
  All grain time (Matt_K)
  gelatin finings, Maltmill (Mark Kirby)
  Late hop farming / Decoction?? (Pat McHenry)
  RE:"Stuck" 1098 (Jim Busch)
  To bleach or not to bleach (Joseph.Fleming)
  Liquid Yeast Bag Expanded Too Much (Jim Lando, MD)
  Bavarian weizen yeast/Wyeast 3056 ("LAVANSA0")
  Rhubarb Wine/Root Beer ("LAVANSA0")
  Re: CO2 Regulator Pressure (Bob Sutton)
  Open Fermentation ("RUCKER, WILLIAM G.")
  New Homebrew Shop (phiggins)
  An experiment for Larry Bristol (Jeremy Ballard Bergsman)
  Re: Tubing for steam (spencer)
  Stuck Palilalia/bleach use (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
  Steeping or Mashing? (John DeCarlo              )
  pressure (Eamonn McKernan)
  Pressure and Temp (U-E68316-Scott Wisler)
  U Fleku (Mark Kirby)
  honey flavor? ("Chris")



******************************************************************
* POLICY NOTE: Due to the incredible volume of bouncing mail,
* I am going to have to start removing addresses from the list
* that cause ongoing problems. In particular, if your mailbox
* is full or your account over quota, and this results in bounced
* mail, your address will be removed from the list after a few days.
* 
* If you use a 'vacation' program, please be sure that it only
* sends a automated reply to homebrew-request *once*. If I get
* more than one, then I'll delete your address from the list.
******************************************************************
 
#################################################################
#
# YET ANOTHER NEW FEDERAL REGULATION: if you are UNSUBSCRIBING from the
# digest, please make sure you send your request to the same service
# provider that you sent your subscription request!!! I am now receiving
# many unsubscribe requests that do not match any address on my mailing
# list, and effective immediately I will be silently deleting such
# requests.
#
#################################################################
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.
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
ARCHIVES:
  An archive of previous issues of this digest, as well as other beer
  related information can be accessed via anonymous ftp at
  ftp.stanford.edu.  Use ftp to log in as anonymous and give your full
  e-mail address as the password, look under the directory
  /pub/clubs/homebrew/beer directory.  AFS users can find it under
  /afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer.  If you do not have
  ftp capability you may access the files via e-mail using the ftpmail
  service at gatekeeper.dec.com.  For information about this service,
  send an e-mail message to ftpmail at gatekeeper.dec.com with the word
  "help" (without the quotes) in the body of the message.


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


Date:          Wed, 7 Jun 1995 08:51:08 EST
From: "pratte" <PRATTE at GG.csc.peachnet.edu>
Subject:       Air pressure

For Larry Bristol,

Sorry, Larry, but your explanation of equilibrium is wrong.  First of 
all, the higher pressure air near the surface of the earth does not 
flow up towards the lower pressure air at higher altitude because of 
temperature differences; it doesn't do it because of simple static 
equilibrium.  The reason the air pressure near the earth is so high 
is because of all of the air on top of it (i.e. it's at the higher 
pressure because of all of the higher altitude air that is sitting on 
it.).  The same thing happens in a column of water.  The water at the 
bottom of the column is at a higher pressure than that at the top.  
You are correct in stating that there is a temperature difference.  
However, this is do to several factors such as the pressure 
difference, the density difference (since air is compressible, the 
density of air changes with pressure in the atmosphere), etc.

On the other point, if I connect two gases with a line (at the same 
altitude) that are at different pressures, the higher pressure gas 
will flow to the lower pressure gas irregardless of the temperature.  
Imagine if a rubber membrane had been stretched across the inside of 
the tubing.  When you connect the two gasses to the tubing,
there would be a pressure difference across this membrane, which 
would result in a net force in the direction of the lower pressure 
side.  The membrane would therefore bulge in that direction.  You are 
correct in noting that, according to the Ideal Gas Law, as the 
temperature drops, so will the pressure.  However, these two gases 
will not be in equilibrium with each other, and there would be net 
motion.

John

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 7 Jun 1995 07:48:13 -0500
From: keithfrank at dow.com (Keith Frank)
Subject: beer related activities

***** from Mark Deweese ******

Fellow beer aficionados, I would like to poll  your  collective  experience
regarding  beer related activities  at  homebrew  club functions,  not beer
tasting per se, but fun beer related contests.

For example, my homebrew club recently had a spring party.  It was my task,
along with several of my homebrewing associates, to come up with some ideas
to serve as entertainment.  We came up with the following...

o KEG TOSS
This met with very enthusiastic participation.  Out of 31 entrants, 15 were
women.   We  used  a  17.5  pound  s.s.  keg (it was empty of course).  The
object of the competition was to toss it like a shot-put.  It proved to  be
great fun for all.  Hey guys, we had a woman toss it 18+ feet (that doesn't
count a roll).

o LABEL REMOVAL CONTEST
This also met with great interest.  We took  a  case  of  dry,  empty  beer
bottles  (all  of  a  different  type)  and  numbered them.  We handed each
participant a bottle and a  plastic  sandwich  bag  (with  a  corresponding
number).   The  object  was  to  remove  the  label  in  as short a time as
possible and as intact as possible,  put it in the bag and turn  it  in  to
the  timekeeper.   We had a time limit of 15 minutes.  We awarded 1st, 2nd,
3rd, and Butt Ugly Last Place certificates, to which we glued  the  removed
labels.

o LAWN MOWER BEER MATCH GAME
In this contest, we gave each participant a  list  of  ten  mass  produced,
available  at  your  local  quickie-mart  type  beers.  We then poured four
rounds of 1 ounce samples and asked that the beer be  identified  from  the
list  of  ten.   It  was  amusing  to hear people commenting that they were
absolutely sure of what was in their cup, only to find out later they  were
dead  wrong.  I  should mention here that not all of the folks at the party
were members of the homebrew club.  We stayed away  from  some  the  bigger
beers  so  that  these  folks  could/would  participate.   Out  of  all the
entrants, only one person correctly identified one of the beers.

At a past get-together, we also had a STYLE MATCH  GAME,  where  we  served
distinctive  styles and asked people to match the beer on a sheet which had
every style being served listed on it.  Out  of the eight styles we served, 
the two  most commonly  identified  correct  were  stout  and wheat. I like 
this contest because it incorporates an educational element.

Now, after all that rambling my question is this:  Do any of  you  know  of
other  fun  beer  related  activities  that would  be easy  to organize and 
inexpensive to fund ?

Mark DeWeese                              
Brazosport, Texas
c/o keithfrank at dow.com

"O parlez-nous a' boire, non pas de mariage..." from a well  know  tune  of
the Balfa Brothers repertoire.


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 7 Jun 1995 08:05:22 -0500 (EST)
From: david lawrence shea <dshea at indiana.edu>
Subject: RE: Problems with Liquid Yeast

Mark wrote about his problem with switching to liquid yeast:

After one week, a gravity reading of 1.032 is not all that unexpected.  I 
have found that most of my liquid yeasts take much longer than dry.  I 
think you will find that after racking and giving it another week, it 
will be down to the gravity you were expecting.  Before you make your 
final assesment on which type of yeast to use, taste the fruits of your 
labor to see if the slower fermentation and other things related to using 
liquid yeast are worth the switch.  Good luck.


David L. Shea
dshea at nickel.indiana.edu
Indiana University

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 7 Jun 1995 08:47:04 -0500
From: mike lewis (183582) <lewis at lvs-emh.lvs.loral.com>
Subject: Labatt's buyout

Dallas Morning News today had a blurb about the buyout. John Labatt Ltd agreed
to be bought by Belgium's Interbrew SA for $4 billion Canadian ($2.9 US).This
would create the world's 5th largest brewery in terms of volume by combining
Canada's second largest and Europe's 4th largest.
   If I recall correctly, Interbrew is the company that bought Pierre Celis's
original brewery in Belgium.

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 7 Jun 95 10:10:49 EDT
From: dipalma at sky.com (Jim Dipalma)
Subject: 10 gal batches, 1098 yeast


Hi All,

In HBD#1750, Tim Fields writes:

>RE time, however, I have your answer:  brew 10 GAL+ all-grain batches. 4
>hrs for (I assume) 5 Gal extract brew, or 8 hrs for 10 gal of all-grain
>brew - samesame!  And (just thought of this) only one cleanup.

I started brewing 10 gallon batches about a year ago, it doesn't take
twice as long as 5 gallon batches. It takes me about 6 hours for a 10
gallon batch, compared to about 4 hours for a 5 gallon batch. It takes
a few extra minutes to grind the additional grain, mashing still takes
about an hour, bringing the wort to a boil and chilling requires about
an additional 10 minutes each. The biggest time sink is sparging, which
does indeed take about twice as long as a 5 gallon batch, since twice as
much wort is being collected.

Mark Montminy replies:

>My 2 cents here... you're missing the point.  8 hours is 8 hours,
>regardless of the batch size.  For me, it's not a question of how much
>I can make in a given time, it's the time period.

There's another way of looking at this. I can devote a Saturday to brewing,
and get 5 gallons of beer. Or, I can devote a Saturday to brewing, and get
10 gallons of beer. A classic no-brainer, IMHO.

**********************************************************

In HBD#1751, Tim Fields writes:

>I recently made an IPA (Papazian Palilalia recipe) and experienced what I
>*called* a stuck fermentation.  My situation sounds allot like Harry's:
>His OG=1064 and stuck at 1038. My OG was 1063 and FG=1025. I used Wyeast
>1098 British Ale/pitched slurry from a pint starter; don't know what Harry
>used. The recipe targets were OG=1048-1052; FG=1014-1017. The advice I
>received made allot of sense *to me*, but I have not "tested" it yet.

>Synopsis of the advice: "unfermentables" had nothing to do with the
>problem.  The OG was too high for the 1098 yeast. The high OG (1063
>compared to target of 1050) gave the 1098 yeast more ferementables,
>resulting in higher alcohol production, resulting in alcohol levels that
>the yeast could not tolerate. In effect, the yeast fermented itself to
>death before reaching the target FG (what a way to go).

Not picking on you Tim, it's just that I find your posts interesting. :-)

With all due respect, I think the advice you've received is incorrect. I
use 1098 as my standard IPA yeast, and brew to a target OG of ~1.060. I 
prefer the "historically correct" version of the style, in which the OG
runs a bit higher than modern day versions. These beers routinely ferment
down to FGs of 1.014 - 1.016.
Given my experience with this yeast, I'm much more inclined to believe the
high FG's you are experiencing are the result of wort composition, pitching
rate, condition of the starter, and/or aeration procedures. Perhaps you
could post some more details about your procedures in these areas, so we
can try and nail this down.

           Cheers,
            Jim               dipalma at sky.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 7 Jun 1995 10:08:46 est
From: Matt_K at ceo.sts-systems.ca
Subject: All grain time

Recently there have been a few posts re. time and equipment costs 
keeping people from going all grain.  

Well, it takes me about 5.5 hours from start to end of cleanup.  This 
includes 1.5 hours mash, 45 min sparge and 1.5 hours boil.  While this 
is still considelably longer than an extract batch there is lots of 
"idle" time when you're mashing etc.  As a matter of fact I usually 
brew on weeknights and finish around 11:15 pm.

As for equipment cost, I scrounged a bunch of HDPE buckets for free, 
and used a 5 gal canning kettle for my first few batches.  While the 
kettle wasn't ideal it did work.  Point is that with a little 
ingenuity, maybe a little borrowing and maybe a little begging all 
grain does not have to be expensive to try.  If you find you like it 
then you can upgrade whatever equipment you like.  BTW if you have an 
all graining friend, invite him and his stuff to your house and he 
will probably help you through your first batch for the price of a few 
beers!!

Matt
in Montreal

Suds.... Gotta love'em  -- Kenny King --



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 7 Jun 1995 10:08:13 -0400
From: mkirby at isnet.is.wfu.edu (Mark Kirby)
Subject: gelatin finings, Maltmill

This is my first posting so bear with me. While brewing a 5 gal Bass-
like extract I realized I had run out of Irish Moss. At the same time
I was eager to try my first attempt with liquid yeast (Wyeast 1056)
(I followed the instructions on the packet with no starter). Active
fermentation commenced within 36 hrs, and after a week I racked into
my secondary where I let it sit for an additional 4 weeks. 3 days
before I intended to bottle I added an envelope of Knox gelatin (I
know, too much probably, but it was REALLY murky). The beer began to
clear, but then I noticed a line developing half way down the carboy
above which the beer was clear but below had clumps suspended that 
were not present before. I think my sanitizing techniques are ok 
(no infection problems through my first half dozen batches). My 
solution was to place the carboy in the freezer for 5 hours or so,
after which the brew had cleared nicely and I bottled. Now that it's
in the bottle for 3 weeks, I notice once again a settling problem. 
The beer tastes good but it's hard to decant it into a mug due to the
residues left on the sides of the bottle without a little yeasty 
flavor. Is this problem experienced by others using this yeast or do
you think I may have had a wild yeast infection of some type. My lag
time for this brew was along the same lines as previous brews using
dry yeast. I don't get it!
Secondly, I have taken the plunge in to all-grain with some buddies.
One has a lot of experience so we're not completely blind. While
searching the HBD archives for info on the maltmill (and e-mailing
Jack personally) the decision was made easily based on testimony
from all you satisfied owners. Thanks for your input on all the 
various grain mills available. I am eagerly awaiting its arrival for
the next brew.

Thanks,


Kirby

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 07 Jun 1995 10:16:42 -0400
From: mchenry at syrres.com (Pat McHenry)
Subject: Late hop farming / Decoction??

Hello, everyone!

     As a lurker coming out of the closet, I feel it my duty to first say
my thank-you for all of the helpful and interesting information I have seen
here since I started reading HBD.  Keep up the good work.

     My questions for the collective:

     I have a friend who brews, and his wife is into herbal medicine.  She
just recently read of a number of non-brewing uses for hops (don't have the
details), and they are now interested in growing some.  I know it is way
past the normal time for getting hops in this year (mine are already 14'
tall), but would it still be possible - assuming that he could get some
rhizomes?  Would they still be able to get the benefit of the first year's
'settling in', and be ready for some real growth next year?  Are there other
issues to consider?  Also, does anyone know of a supplier who still has
rhizomes available this late?

     Secondly, I am getting ready to brew a doppelbock (all-grain), and am
considering trying my first decoction mash.  I would probably do a single
decoction, to assist the transition from the protein rest to starch
conversion temperature.  My question is, while I am boiling the decoction,
am I not going to be suffering excessive protein breakdown in the resting
mash - with potential negative effects on the head retention and mouthfeel
of the finished beer?  If so, how can this be avoided?  Should I heat the
rest mash enough to denature the proteolytic enzymes?  If this isn't a
problem, then why not?  Are the majority of the mash proteins actually
contained in the decoction, and therefore safe from additional proteolysis?

   TIA - and private e-mail response is fine.

Pat

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- -----   Patrick G. McHenry     -----   In Heaven there is no beer ...    -----
- -----   mchenry at syrres.com     -----   So how bad can Hell be, anyway?   -----
- -----   Syracuse, N.Y. USA     -----                                     -----
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 7 Jun 1995 10:42:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jim Busch <busch at eosdev2.gsfc.nasa.gov>
Subject: RE:"Stuck" 1098

Tim writes:

<Synopsis of the advice: "unfermentables" had nothing to do with the 
<problem.  The OG was too high for the 1098 yeast. The high OG (1063 
<compared to target of 1050) gave the 1098 yeast more ferementables, 
<resulting in higher alcohol production, resulting in alcohol levels that 
<the yeast could not tolerate. In effect, the yeast fermented itself to 
<death before reaching the target FG (what a way to go).

I think this is missing the root cause of high final gravities.  An OG
of 1.063 is certainly not too high for just about any good ale yeast I
have ever known.  The problem is almost certainly due to too little 
oxygenation of the cast out wort and/or too low pitching density (cell
counts) or just plain non viable yeast.  The fact that it fermented to
some degree would say the yeast was viable, and I have had great beers
made with this yeast.

Jim Busch
busch at mews.gsfc.nasa.gov

"DE HOPPEDUIVEL DRINKT MET ZWIER 'T GEZONDE BLOND HOPPEBIER!"

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 07 Jun 95 10:34:27 est
From: Joseph.Fleming at gsa.gov
Subject: To bleach or not to bleach

    Tim Fields is considering going from B-Brite to bleach.
    Don't do it.  There are very few people cheaper than myself and I 
 started cleaning with bleach.  It took the destruction of one pair of 
 pants and the no-rinse, two minute contact time of Iodophor to make me 
 switch.  Bottom line: bleach is a hassle, Iodophor is the closest thing to 
 not sanitizing.
    I've used other cleaners (One-step, ect.) and all are superior to 
 bleach.  The ease of use offsets the cost.
 
    But if you're gonna do it, from the Clean and Sanitary FAQ by Michael 
 Froehlich:
 |Use 1 tablespoon per gallon of water.  Soak equipment at least 20 minutes 
 |for effective sanitization, and rinse well with water or cheap beer.
 
 Addendum, use cold water, re the cholrine gas thread of a while ago.  The 
 hot water may not kill you, but you don't need it anyway so don't bother.
 
 
                Joe - joseph.fleming at gsa.gov
 
 PS - I support Russell Mast's endorsement of Wyeast 3068 (Bavarian 
 Weihenstephan).  The aroma and taste it imparts is a real winner.
 


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 7 Jun 1995 09:26:07 -0700
From: jlando at unm.edu (Jim Lando, MD)
Subject: Liquid Yeast Bag Expanded Too Much

I am planning on brewing a wheat beer this weekend, and as it is my first
wheat experience, I decided to splurge and buy a special liquid yeast
culture.

I broke the little inner bag two nights ago, then yesterday morning saw
that it had expanded somewhat.  My plan was to pitch it to a starter
yesterday evening.

Imagine my surprise when, upon coming home, I saw that the bag had over
expanded and there was a small hole in the edge.

I quickly boiled up some starter (3/4 c amber DME in 3 c water), chilled
it, and pitched the still expanded bag of liquid yeast into a sterilized 1
gal jug.  Popped an airlock in it and am waiting.

This morning (some 12 hrs later) still no significant activity.  One blurb
every ten to fifteen minutes.

Is this normal?  (I've never used liquid, so IDK) Was everything fouled up
by the high pressures in the yeast pkg, the hole in the pkg (v. small),
both, or should I not worry.

At what point should I worry and get a new starter.  I plan to brew this
Saturday.

All replies appreciated.

Jim Lando, MD



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 07 Jun 95 08:29:37 mdt
From: "LAVANSA0" <LAVANSA0_at_WC-DENVER at ccmail.wcc.com>
Subject: Bavarian weizen yeast/Wyeast 3056

     Hello again -
     
     
     In HBD 1750, Timothy P. Laatsch asked " Any special considerations 
     when using Wyeast 3056 Bavarian Wheat?"
     
     Yes. Don't use it. It is quite mediocre. I have had much better 
     results (cloviness, etc) with WYeast 3086, Weihenstephan. I am also 
     fermenting another wheat/weizen now with Yeast Labs W51, Bavarian 
     Weizen and can let you know how it turns out.
     
     Relurk again,
     Luke Van Santen
     Woodward Clyde Federal Services - Denver
     lavansa0 at wcc.com
     
     When the folks on the Mayflower loaded the boat, they stored more beer 
     than water - Dr. David J Hanson - State University of New York


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 07 Jun 95 08:08:52 mdt
From: "LAVANSA0" <LAVANSA0_at_WC-DENVER at ccmail.wcc.com>
Subject: Rhubarb Wine/Root Beer

     Hello HBD'ers -
     
     While lurking recently, I saw the request for recipes for rhubarb wine 
     and root beer. I thought 'what a nice way to delurk for the first 
     time, why don't I send in those recipes'. So here they are:
     
     Rhubarb Wine No.1
     
     12 lb      Rhubarb
     1  qt      White grape concentrate
     10 lb      sugar
     6  qt      HOT water
     2  tsp     Yeast nutrient
     4  tsp     Liquid tannin
     2  tsp     Pectic enzyme
     8          Campden tablets (crushed)
     8  qt      COLD water
     1  pkt     Champagne wine yeast
     
     Procedure
     
     Place chopped rhubarb and sugar in fermenter. Mix well. Cover 
     w/plastic sheet for 24 hrs. Crush rhubarb. Pour HOT water over the 
     crushed rhubarb and stir vigorously. After a bit, scoop the rhubarb 
     into a straining bag and squeeze as much of the juice out as possible. 
     Discard the pulp. Add the grape juice. Add the next 5 ingredients. 
     Check and adjust (if necessary) the gravity of the must (should be 
     1.110) Check and adjust (if necessary) the temperature (should be 75 
     deg F). (The recipe doesn't say to, but it seems to me that you should 
     wait 24 hrs before adding the yeast so the Campden tablets don't kill 
     it too). Ferment at 75 deg F, rack to secondary, ferment  at  65 deg F, 
     rack to tertiary, etc., until clear. Bottle. Age 6 months. Bottle. Age 
     6 more months. Drink.
     
     From "Winemaking..." by Stanley F Anderson and Dorothy Anderson
     Pretty boy California-type Yuppie on the cover.
     
     Rhubarb # 2
     
     3          lb      rhubarb
     .25        pint    White grape concentrate
     7          pt      Water
     2.25       lb      Sugar
     0.25       tsp     Tannin
     1          tsp     Nutrient
     1                  Capmden Tablet, Crushed
     1          pkg     Wine Yeast
     
     O.G. 1.095-1.100
     Procedure is about the same as for #1. Recipe doesn't say anything 
     about aging or batch size.
     
     Rhubarb #3
     
     5          lb      rhubarb
     6          pts     water
     2.5        lb      Sugar
     0.5        oz      Precip. Chalk
     0.25       tsp     Tannin
     1          tsp     Nutrient
     1                  Campden tablet, crushed
     1          pkg     Wine Yeast
     
     O.G. 1.095-1.100
     Same procedures.
     
     "For old fashioned German rhubarb wine, add to either recipe 0.75 oz 
     ginger root (bruised) and 0.75 oz cloves per gallon. Tie up in 
     straining bag, suspend in must, and remove when must reaches 1.040"
     
     From "Winemaker's Recipe Book" copyright 1976 by Raymond Massaccesi.
     
     Root Beer
     
     Dear Uncle Charlie has a recipe for root beer in The Home Brewer's 
     Companion on pp. 368-9. It is called MacJack Root Beer and does not 
     involve the use of root beer extracts. It does sound pretty straight 
     forward though. He does caution about exploding bottles, containers, 
     bombs, etc., (which my mother attested to last night - seems I was 
     able to wear ultra-chic A&W (tm) BM collectors as a child). If anyone 
     wants the recipe or does not have access to THBC, e-mail me and I can 
     send it or post it if I get enough requests.
     
     Gotta work now,
     
     Luke Van Santen
     Woodward Clyde Federal Services - Denver
     lavansa0 at wcc.com
     
     Be careful or be roadkill - The Prophet Calvin
     
     


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 7 Jun 95 12:06 EST
From: Bob Sutton <BSutton_+a_fdgv-03_+lBob_Sutton+r%Fluor_Daniel at mcimail.com>
Subject: Re: CO2 Regulator Pressure




Text item: Text_1

Larry Bristol <larry at bristolpc.bmc.com> again comments:
Re: CO2 Regulator Pressure

>If your CO2 bottle and regulator are placed outside the fridge, however, then
>parts of the system will be at one temperature and parts of it will be at
>another.  The gauge on the regulator tells you the gas pressure at the gauge,
>but that does *NOT* give you a (direct) reading on the CO2 being applied to the
>keg.  This is because the gas at the gauge and keg are at a different
>temperatures.  However, the system is at equilibrium (gas is not flowing from
>one end to the other), and the equivalent pressure can be computed for any
>point in the system if we know the temperature at that point and at the gauge.

Arrgggggghhhhh !!! I be sucked into another never-ending thread. After ignoring
your first post as harmless misinformation, I am astounded that this belief is
held so tightly.

Sorry Larry, but you are mistaken (tell me you're trolling here). You can locate
your cylinder/regulator in a greenhouse and your pressure reading on the gage is
the same as that in the refrigerated keg, assuming that the system is
static...that is the gas is not flowing. Sure there is a temperature gradient,
but it translates into differing gas DENSITY from the regulator to the keg. The
pressure along the line is CONSTANT. Perhaps you are leaving your tap open :) to
account for the pressure drop. Please send me your setup with a full keg and I
will conduct an evaluation to be published here.

>suppose we have one CO2 bottle at 850psi/75F and
>another at 500psi/45F and we put a line between them.  Will gas flow from one
>to the other?  No - they are at equilibrium.

Of course it will...until the pressures equalized

>Have you noticed that the pressure of the earth's atmosphere drops as one gains
>altitude?  Shouldn't the higher pressure gasses at sea level rush to "equalize"
>the low pressure gas at higher altitudes?

We have gravity here on earth where I live

>How come CO2 at 17psi/75F does not "flow" to the keg where the CO2 is
>only at 10psi/45F?  Because these are equivalent pressures.

Perhaps you forgot to open the valve, or maybe your gages are a wee bit out of
calibration

>Information on how to determine the equivalent pressures is available in almost
>any standard text on the behavior of gasses.

Agree, perhaps you should read it.


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 07 Jun 95 13:08:25 EST
From: "RUCKER, WILLIAM G." <ruckewg at naesco.com>
Subject: Open Fermentation

     I would like to thank those that sent information and experienced with 
     open fermentation. The responses give the indication that all who have 
     tried it, like it or love it but not one person said they had bad 
     experience. The one key recurring theme that seemed to resonate from 
     all the replies was  'Use a BIG starter'. I myself can't wait until I 
     can find a suitable vessel to try it out. 
     
     Note to Kirk: The book was fine!
     
     Happy brewing!
     
     Bill
     
     brewzer at peanut.mv.com
     ruckewg at naesco.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 07 Jun 95 13:14:00 EST
From: phiggins at randomhouse.com
Subject: New Homebrew Shop

  A group of friends and I are going to be opening a new homebrew shop in
  the early Fall.  Obviously, we are looking to find the best wholesale
  prices we can.  Does anyone know of a good listing of all or most of the
  homebrew wholesale supply houses?  The only two we've been able to locate
  are Brewmaster in California and Crosby and Baker in Georgia and
  Massachusetts.  Any help would be greatly appreciated.  Thanks in
  advance.
  
  Send all responses to  phiggins at randomhouse.com
  
  


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 7 Jun 1995 10:23:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jeremy Ballard Bergsman <jeremybb at leland.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: An experiment for Larry Bristol

Here are selected highlights from an interesting post:
*****************************
From: Larry Bristol                  <larry at bristolpc.bmc.com>
Subject:  CO2 Regulator Pressure

Kirk Fleming <flemingk at usa.net> comments:
> the line is attached.  Regardless of any other issue discussed in this
> ongoing thread, I assert there can be only ONE pressure in the entire system
> between the regulator and the keg, regardless of what temperatures any of the

I'm sorry, but I don't agree that this is what I said.

If your CO2 bottle and regulator are placed outside the fridge, however, then
parts of the system will be at one temperature and parts of it will be at
another.  The gauge on the regulator tells you the gas pressure at the gauge,
but that does *NOT* give you a (direct) reading on the CO2 being applied to the
keg.  This is because the gas at the gauge and keg are at a different
temperatures.  However, the system is at equilibrium (gas is not flowing from
one end to the other), and the equivalent pressure can be computed for any
point in the system if we know the temperature at that point and at the gauge.

Have you noticed that the high pressure gauge on a bottle of CO2 at 75F reads
about 850psi, but that the pressure will "drop" to only about 500psi when it is
cooled to 45F?  Why is this true?  Is there any less CO2 in the bottle?  No, it
is because (for CO2) 500psi at 45F is equivalent to 850psi at 75F.  This is
simply the effect of the physical laws pertaining to the behavior of gasses.
Play with this hypotechtical - suppose we have one CO2 bottle at 850psi/75F and
another at 500psi/45F and we put a line between them.  Will gas flow from one
to the other?  No - they are at equilibrium.

I'm going on and on about about what I hope is obvious by now.  
Information on how to determine the equivalent pressures is available in almost
any standard text on the behavior of gasses.  Whew!  :-)
***********************end of quote***************************

Well, you are certainly going on and on, and I agree that information 
on gasses is available in any standard text.  I can't agree with much
else of what you have said.  Pressure is pressure.  I don't know what
you mean by equivalent pressure but I assume it means the pressure
of a gas in a fixed volume, fixed content container as a function of
temperature.  This is not relevant to this discussion.  

I have an experiment for you.  Take some iron pipe.  Tightly thread on
some end caps.  The pressure and temperature inside is the same as
outside, right?  One atmosphere, room temperature in each case.  Now 
start to heat the pipe.  According to your argument above, there should
be no flow, or attempt to flow, across the pipe walls.  "No - they are at 
equilibrium."  Ok then, keep heating.  Go on, keep on heating.  I'm
sure you won't mind staying in the immediate vicinity, the "equivalent
pressures" are the same.

Jeremy Bergsman
jeremybb at leland.stanford.edu

Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 5 Jun 95 11:34:06 EDT
From: spencer at med.umich.edu
Subject: Re: Tubing for steam

Mark A. Stevens wrote about Tubing for steam: 
 : Silicone            3/8"   1/2"   1/16"    500        $96.36 +

Having recently bought some silicone tubing, I think I should comment
on this.  Unless it has a "braid" in it, the pressure performance of
silicone tubing at high temperatures is abysmal.  The tubing I bought
(5/16" ID, 1/16" wall) is rated for 1.8PSI working at 100C (212F).
The burst pressure at 100C is 9PSI.  I would not want to use this
stuff with steam.

Unfortunately, the braided stuff is LOTS more expensive than the
plain.  Cole-Parmer has 1/4"ID braided silicone for about $13/foot (at
least they'll sell it by the foot).  Good to 150PSI at boiling.

Another possibility might be PFTE (teflon), but again, I'm not sure
about its pressure performance.  A more cost-effective option, if it's
got a sufficiently high pressure rating would be food-grade "Norprene"
tubing.

If you're really interested, call a supplier and ask them about the
numbers.  In my case, they refered me to the manufacturer, and the rep
I talked to there had to ask "the lab" and get back to me the next
day.

=S

Return to table of contents


Date: 7 Jun 95 13:55:00 -0500
From: korz at iepubj.att.com (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
Subject: Stuck Palilalia/bleach use

Tim writes:
>I recently made an IPA (Papazian Palilalia recipe) and experienced what I 
>*called* a stuck fermentation.  My situation sounds allot like Harry's:  
>His OG=1064 and stuck at 1038. My OG was 1063 and FG=1025. I used Wyeast 
>1098 British Ale/pitched slurry from a pint starter; don't know what Harry 
>used. The recipe targets were OG=1048-1052; FG=1014-1017. The advice I 
>received made allot of sense *to me*, but I have not "tested" it yet.  
> 
>Synopsis of the advice: "unfermentables" had nothing to do with the 
>problem.  The OG was too high for the 1098 yeast. The high OG (1063 
>compared to target of 1050) gave the 1098 yeast more ferementables, 
>resulting in higher alcohol production, resulting in alcohol levels that 
>the yeast could not tolerate. In effect, the yeast fermented itself to 
>death before reaching the target FG (what a way to go). 

Alcohol tolerance is partly a function of strain, but I feel that it is
mostly a function oxygen available to the yeast during respiration.
Oxygen is needed by the yeast to build cell walls.  Underoxygenation
results in weak call walls and low alcohol tolerance.

This may or may not have been your problem, but believe me, 1063 is not
a very high original gravity.  Your SG drop shows that you had 60%
attenuation.  This is not that far outside the "normal" attenuation for
this yeast -- I suspect that either you seriously underaerated your wort
or your extract was indeed high in unfermentables.  I don't have the
book handy, but if it called for pounds and pounds of crystal malts, then
they too would have contributed to the high FG.

Incidentally, you if you did underaerate the wort, the solution would be
to make up a big starter (2L) and make sure to aerate it well this time.
Let this ferment out and settle.  Pour off the spent wort.  Add a little
more wort (like 250ml) and wait till this ferments out, but don't wait for
it to finish settling -- just pitch that into the stuck ferment.

***
Tim later asks about bleach concentration.

200ppm is the recommended concentration for sanitizing.  To get this
concentration, you should use 1 tablespoon of fresh bleach per gallon
of water.  As bleach ages, it's strength goes down.  When fresh, bleach
is about 5.25% Sodium Hypochlorite.  I have used 1-year-old bleach
at the 1 tablespoon per gallon concentration and have experienced no
infections with the equipment sanitized in this solution.  If you are
really paranoid, you can buy chlorine indicator test papers.

I believe the contact time recommended for 200 ppm bleach is 15 minutes.

Al.

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 7 Jun 95 15:22:56 EST
From: John DeCarlo <jdecarlo at homebrew.mitre.org>
Subject: Steeping or Mashing?

Pat Babcock writes:
>o Generally speaking, the temperature used by most for 'steeping'
>grains is roughly the same temperature most all-grainers use for
>mash-out.  The  enzymes are denatured (de-activated) at these
>temperatures;  therefor, it  is doubtful that your steeping practices
>are performing  the same function.

Hmmm.  I always used 150F for "steeping".  If that's what most people are 
doing, they are right in the area single-temp infusion mashers are.  Therefore
they are doing a mini-mash if they have malt with enzymes in there.

Those that steep at 170F or above clearly are at mash-out temps, as you 
suggest.  Those that steep by throwing in cold water and taking it out as it 
boils are doing something that probably wouldn't result in much enzyme 
activity, but I don't know for sure.

John DeCarlo, MITRE Corporation, McLean, VA--My views are my own
Fidonet:  1:109/131  Internet:  jdecarlo at mitre.org


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 7 Jun 1995 16:19:36 -0400
From: eamonn at chinook.physics.utoronto.ca (Eamonn McKernan)
Subject: pressure

Larry Bristol makes some incorrect statements about pressure and temperature
in the last digest. I don't know how regulators work, but maybe this can help 
someone who does:

Larry said:
"Have you noticed that the high pressure gauge on a bottle of CO2 at 75F reads
about 850psi, but that the pressure will "drop" to only about 500psi when it is
cooled to 45F?  Why is this true?  Is there any less CO2 in the bottle?  No, it
is because (for CO2) 500psi at 45F is equivalent to 850psi at 75F.  This is
simply the effect of the physical laws pertaining to the behavior of gasses.
Play with this hypotechtical - suppose we have one CO2 bottle at 850psi/75F and
another at 500psi/45F and we put a line between them.  Will gas flow from one
to the other?  No - they are at equilibrium."

Actually, gas will rapidly move until an equilibrium pressure is attained.
In a matter of seconds gas will flow from the high pressure tank to the low
pressure tank and the situation will stabilize.
If temperature is not maintained at 45 and 75F, the cold gas will heat up
and start flowing back from whence it came, while the warm gas will chill,
and the formerly warm tank will suck even more gas from the colder tank.
Of course with the keg/CO2 cylinder setup, temperatures ARE maintained.

If Larry maintained the respective temperatures of the two CO2 tanks he
talks about, something really weird will happen, and has to do with
partial pressures. If there's any liquid in the bottom of the cylinders, 
it will want to maintain the partial pressure of CO2 in the tank. This partial
pressure is a (usually increasing) function of temperature. So the warm liquid
CO2 will start evaporating to try to get the pressure back up to 850psi, while
the gas in the cold tank which is now at a higher pressure than the "desired"
500psi will condense out. ie. the pressure will try to rise in the warm tank
and drop in the cold tank. This is not allowed, as any pressure gradient will
cause fluid motion down that gradient 

[The equations of motion for fluid flow are straightforward (until you try
solving them!). Conservation of momentum requires:
acceleration = (-1/density) * pressure gradient
(neglecting gravity, coriolis force, and friction)
Fluid flows down any pressure gradient. This should be clear because
pressure is FORCE per unit area. ]

The net result is continued flow of CO2 from the warm to the cold tank until 
there is no longer any LIQUID CO2 in the warm tank.
This whole process probably would take quite a while, and
has little to do with what happens when pressurizing a keg. When pressurizing
a keg, one uses a regulator to maintain a constant pressure which is much lower
than the actual pressure in the CO2 tank. What the regulator uses as it's 
reference pressure I don't know, but Kirk's explanation seemed good to me.

As for the atmosphere, I'm afraid Larry was quite mistaken:
Pressure is lower at high altitudes precisely because of gravity. In fact
temperatures are sometimes HIGHER in the upper atmosphere. It is very warm
about 40-50km above the north pole in summer, but the pressure is very low
there. Air at lower altitudes has more air weighing down on it from above,
and hence has a higher pressure.

And people, lets be clear about what we say. Some people think that 10psi at 45F
=17psi at 75F, and use other such sloppy concepts. 10psi is 10psi. The amount
of gas may be the same, but the pressures are quite different, and gas
will flow from high to low pressure regardless of temperature.

I don't wish this to seem like I'm flaming Larry, I'm just trying to correct
some mistakes which many people are guilty of making. It seems truly surprising
that noone (myself included) on the HBD knows how pressure regulators work!
Anyone?
        Eamonn McKernan
        eamonn at atmosp.physics.utoronto.ca


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 7 Jun 95 17:52:48 -0400
From: U-E68316-Scott Wisler <scott.wisler at ae.ge.com>
Subject: Pressure and Temp


 Good to talk to all of you again.

 Larry Bristol <larry at bristolpc.bmc.com> writes quite a bit. :)

 Most of it is correct, I think.  Some of it I need to think about
 some more.  

>If your CO2 bottle and regulator are placed outside the fridge, however, then 
>parts of the system will be at one temperature and parts of it will be at 
>another.  The gauge on the regulator tells you the gas pressure at the gauge, 
>but that does *NOT* give you a (direct) reading on the CO2 being applied to 
>the keg.  This is because the gas at the gauge and keg are at a different 
>temperatures.  However, the system is at equilibrium (gas is not flowing from 
>one end to the other), and the equivalent pressure can be computed for any 
>point in the system if we know the temperature at that point and at the 
>gauge.  

The system is likely in a steady state condition, rather than equilibrium, 
because there is a heat transfer process occuring.  But this is a nit.  
p=rho * R * T (perfect gas eq) will give you the pressure distribution for
a given temperature distribution achieved as a result the heat transfer.

>Have you noticed that the pressure of the earth's atmosphere drops as one 
>gains altitude?  Shouldn't the higher pressure gasses at sea level rush to 
>"equalize" the low pressure gas at higher altitudes?  Obviously, the force 
>of gravity prevents the gas from escaping completely.  But also observe that 
>in spite of the differences in pressure, the gasses are actually in a state 
>of equilibrium, achieved because the temperature also drops as altitude 
>increases.  

I think you got most everything else right Larry, but this is incorrect.  
Its not important to kegging, but should be cleared up.  Based on experimental
evidence, a standard atmosphere is defined [Ref 1].  Temperature
drops with increasing altitude in two regions (0 km to 11 km) and 
(53-79 km).  It is constant in 3 regions (11-25 km), (47-53 km), and (79-90km)
and it actually increases with altitude (25-47km) and (90-105km).  The 
pressure does decrease with altitude, but not because of decreasing 
temperature.  It is more a result of the hydrostatic differential equation
dp=rho*g0*dh.

Ref 1: Anderson, J.D. "Introduction to Flight" Mcgraw-Hill, 1985 pp 72.

>My original statement was simply this.  You have to interpret the pressure 
>reading on your pressure gauge in relation to the temperature of the gas being 
>measured.  In order to achieve the desired amount of carbonation, if your CO2 
>is at 45F, you want one pressure, and if it is at 75F, you want another.  
>Information on how to determine the equivalent pressures is available in 
>almost any standard text on the behavior of gasses.  Whew!  :-) 

well put.

scott

Scott Wisler
swisler at c0431.ae.ge.com
GE Aircraft Engines
Cincinnati, OH          o
               --O      ^\
              -\ <,     \    -Triathlon has just ruined my beer consumption...
   --^-0    ..o/ o...  //
      \

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 7 Jun 1995 19:20:53 -0400
From: mkirby at isnet.is.wfu.edu (Mark Kirby)
Subject: U Fleku

Does anyone out there have ANY info on a Czech-style brew named
U Fleku? A friend who recently visited Prague came back with
rave reviews and wants to mimic it if possible. OK homebrewers,
let's see what you can come up with. If you have a recipe, that 
would be fantastic. Private email is fine, and I'll be more than
happy to post the results. TIA!

Kirby

Return to table of contents


Date: 7 Jun 1995 18:25:32 -0800
From: "Chris" <chris at starbase1.caltech.edu>
Subject: honey flavor?


i was wondering if anyone knows how to get an actual "honey flavor" into a
finished homebrew.  it seems like many of the honey beers i've tried do not
have a very "honey -like" character.  only a handful actually taste like
there's honey in them and they are wonderful!

is there a trick?  do you just use more honey or what?

any advice would be much appreciated!!

thanks,
chris

Return to table of contents

End of HOMEBREW Digest #1753, 06/09/95