---

	FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
		Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org
		Many thanks to the Observer & Eccentric Newspapers of 
		Livonia, Michigan for sponsoring the Homebrew Digest.
				URL: http://www.oeonline.com


Contents:
  valve stems/diacetyl rest/banana & bubble gum/Phalse/carbonation & fill/invert candi sugar (korz)
  RE: Dry yeast / Weizen & starch haze (George De Piro)
  Various (John W. Braue, III)
  Cranberry Lambic (William H Plotner)
  NHC Results, Californi & Nevada (HARRY HOUCK)
  Way to regulate air temperature?? ("Robert Marshall")
  marijuana in beer ("Grant W. Knechtel")
  Using Gelatine Finings (John Sullivan)
  Hops Medicine (Aesoph, Michael)
  Ruined? continued. ("John Penn")
  Chi Pwi Gees (David Johnson)
  calculating strike water temp (Wes Clement)
  CO2 cylinders\; Safety (dcstanza)
  IBU estimates in high-grav worts ("Dave Draper")
  burners and BTU (Eric Palmer)
  Cherry Stout ("David W. Schoemaker")
  Summer Brewing (DGofus)
  tart berries in beer (Eugene Sonn)
  Must I prime again ? ("Braam Greyling")
  Corny/ss question ("Braam Greyling")
  Clear Weizen??? ("Paul A. Hausman")
  Fermentation temps (John Wilkinson)


NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS:  hbd.org 

Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew at hbd.org
  (Articles are published in the order they are received.) 

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 homebrew-request@hbd.org. 
**SUBSCRIBE AND UNSUBSCRIBE REQUESTS MUST BE SENT FROM THE E-MAIL
**ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!! 
PLEASE NOTE that if you subscribed via the BEER-L redistribution
  list (BEER-L at UA1VM.UA.EDU), you must unsubscribe by sending a one line
  e-mail to listserv at ua1vm.ua.edu that says: UNSUB BEER-L
IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, the autoresponder and
  the SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE commands will fail!

For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to lutzen at alpha.rollanet.org

Homebrew Digest Information on the Web: http://hbd.org

Requests for back issues will be ignored. Back issues are available via:

  Anonymous ftp from...
	hbd.org	/pub/hbd	
	ftp.stanford.edu	/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer
  E-mail...
        ftpmail at gatekeeper.dec.com (send a one-line e-mail message with 
                                   the word help for instructions.)
  AFS users can find it under...
        /afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer

JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)


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


Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 17:27:04 -0500 (CDT)
From: korz at xnet.com
Subject: valve stems/diacetyl rest/banana & bubble gum/Phalse/carbonation & fill/invert candi sugar

John writes:
>I'd like to suggest a humble solution:  Sacrifice a lid and drill a hole in
>the center large enough
  <snip>
>bottle lids as a carbonation cap.  An off-shoot of this idea was to install
>valve stems on my kegs.  I often have more kegs filled with beer awaiting
>consumption than I have room in my fridge. In order to obtain the
>"correct", or should I say desired, carbonation level I need to apply a
>different CO2 pressure to the kegs that are not in the fridge that those
>that are.  A valve stem on the keg and an air chuck on the end of a CO2
>line make this task so much easier.

With all due respect John, I must be missing something here... don't your
kegs already have CO2-in fittings?  Why does a valve stem and air chuck
make this easier?

Personally, I have never liked the idea of valve stems and beer containers
because the rubber is guaranteed to *not* be food grade.

***
Alex writes:
>That is why many
>commercially produced lagers go through one or more "diacetyl rests"
>where they are allowed to warm up for a period of several hours at a
>time to stimulate diacetyl reduction.

Although I agree that diaceyl re-absorption is slower at colder temperatures
(which was the main point of Alex's post), I'd like to point out that
a diacetyl rest is not done more than once and is not for a few hours.
The beer is gently warmed up to the high-50's or low-60's F, kept there
for a day or two, and then gently cooled (over the course of a few days)
to lagering temperatures.  You can't cool the beer suddenly or the yeast
will drop like a stone and you will have damaged yeast which won't lager
your beer properly.  Although I don't know of any brewers doing it, I
suppose you could crash the yeast and the pitch more fresh yeast for the
lagering.

***
John writes:
>3068 to often be too banana or bubblegum like.  Banana and bubblegum are 
>desireable phenolics in a weizen but I do not think they should overwhelm 
>you.  

Whoops... sounds like a slip-up here... I can't believe that John meant
to write that.  He probably meant to say that "banana and bubblegum are
desireable *esters*" not "phenolics."  Of course we all know that
aromas with phenolic sources are ones like "smoky," "clovey," "plastic,"
"medicinal," etc.

***
Chas writes about his defective Carbonater(TM):
>I'm considering using some marine goop or super-glue on the thing.  But is 
>anyone else out there having similar troubles?  If not I may simply return the 
>product and request a replacement.

Return it.  I've got a dozen or so (and have sold a few hundred) and none
have this problem.  Liquid Bread is a great company and really stands
behind their products (no affiliation).  

>On the subject of HB products, how do folks who have Phil's Phase bottom like 
>the product?  Any clogging/floating concerns?  I am considering getting both 
>the sparge arm and bottom and wanted to hear some objective opinions from 
>those who have used these things.

They work very well.  One word of advice: use a rigid (copper, PE, or stainless
steel) tube to go from the device to the cooler wall.  It will solve both
floating and "hose squishing" problems you get with flexible tubing.

***
Scott writes:
>I had my first batch of bottle bombs a couple of weeks ago.  There
>were many contributing factors, but I think the most critical were my
>own sloppy and lazy procedures, and the fill level of the bottles.  I
>went back to the archives and looked at what's been discussed about
>headspace in the past.  Both Steve Alexander and AlK did experiments
>that showed that an underfilled bottle would develop more carbonation,
>while an overfilled bottle would develop less carbonation (both
>compared to a "standard" fill).  I agree with both of these
>statements.  It was theorized that the yeast would die off under
>pressure, and that was the cause of the over-filled bottles being less
>carbonated.  I'm not sure I agree with this theory.

Not exactly.  What my expriments showed was that overfilled bottles had
significantly less carbonation after a few weeks and also after a few months.
"Standard" fill and several underfilled bottles (some severely underfilled)
had the *SAME* level of carbonation.  I don't have a plausable explanation
for the physics (or biology) of what is happening, but the observed
results are clear:

     a high fill in a bottle interferes with the carbonation process.


My theory about why some brewers experience overcarbonation with
underfilling, is that they are over-priming.  If you prime too much
AND overfill, I theorise that the two may be cancelling each other
out.  When you underfill, the carbonation is not inhibited and the
beer overcarbonates.  Note... this is just a theory... as yet untested.

***
Eric writes:
>I got no comments about my attempt at creating a Belgian Invert Candi Sugar-
>boiling sucrose with honey and phosphoric acid to 150 C.  Dave?  Al?  Alex?
>Scott?  Any observations?

I've discussed this with a chemist (sorry, his name escapes me) and he
said that unless you boil an incredibly long time, only a very small
part of the sucrose gets inverted.  The purpose of inverting the sugar
was because pure sucrose syrup crystalises almost immediately.  If you
convert even a small portion of the sucrose into it's component glucose
and fructose (that's the invert sugar part -- fructose defracts light
the opposite (inverted) way relative to sucrose or glucose), the syrup
does not crystalise.  Inverting the sucrose was simly a way to store
the sugar as a syrup.

By the way... candi sugar is not invert sugar... it's simply sucrose.
You're thinking of "Golden Syrup."  They yeast will make invertase
which will completely invert the sucrose (yeast can't eat sucrose
without breaking it down into glucose and fructose), so you really gain
little by inverting the sugar *partially* for the yeast.


Al.

Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz at xnet.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 15:06:52 -0700
From: George_De_Piro at berlex.com (George De Piro)
Subject: RE: Dry yeast / Weizen & starch haze

     Hi all,
     
     Tim Plummer asks why his fermentation has apparently stopped after 
     just two days.  He pitched dried yeast, and it took off right away.  
     Well, without being there to take a hydrometer reading, I couldn't say 
     for sure that your fermentation isn't stuck, but I'd bet a lot on it.
     
     When an adequate amount of yeast is pitched, fermentation of a 
     "normal" gravity ale is quite fast.  It could be done within 2 days.  
     Take a hydrometer reading to know for sure.
     ---------------------------
     Dave Johnson asks about bottling his murky wheat beer, and wonders if 
     it is murky because of starch or yeast.
     
     It's not really possible to know just by looking.  My guess would be 
     that the haze is from the yeast and proteins (wheat is very high in 
     haze causing proteins).  If you know that your procedures were likely 
     to put starch in the final beer, then it could be a starch haze, too.
     
     Aside from being ugly, starch is bad to have in beer because of the 
     microbiological instability it causes.  Brewers yeast does not 
     metabolize starch.  Some other microbes can.  No matter how careful 
     you are, there will be some other bugs in your homebrew.  The idea is 
     to not give them an easy food source (i.e., starch).  With no starch 
     present, and a healthy pitching of yeast, the unwanted microbes won't 
     fair very well.  If they have access to food with no competition, they 
     will flourish.
     
     Starchy beer will only get worse with age, because of the likelihood 
     of a progressing infection.  Drink it quickly!
     
     Have fun!
     
     George De Piro  (Nyack, NY)

Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 10:22:41
From: braue at ratsnest.win.net (John W. Braue, III)
Subject: Various

This being one of the few days when I actually have time to respond
to (as distinct from merely read) my mail, I have a couple of
comments:

"John Vaughn" <j_vaughn at ix.netcom.com> writes:

>George De Piro mused about ascorbic acid's effect on aerated wort when
>pitching.  The question posed was, "Will the ascorbic acid use up all the
>oxygen?"
>
>Now I'm certainly no expert on ascorbic acid, but I believe that it
>protects whatever it is on (or in) from the effects of oxidation rather
>than using up the oxygen.  

Close enough for government work.  It should be noted that
oxidation, although historically associated with the effects of
free oxygen (hence the name), does not in fact require oxygen.

Ascorbic acid does not affect oxygen metabolism in any case. 
Oxygen is poisonous to all higher organisms (what about that stuff
you've been breathing, you ask?  Well, we higher organisms have
these cellular symbionts called "mitochondria", that actually make
use of it...), but the actual harm done via oxidation is done by
"free radicals".  These are (over-simplifying somewhat) bits and
pieces of molecules formed in the process of oxygen metabolism. 
Being only pieces of molecules, they are extremely aggressive in
their attempts to become Compleat Molecules, and will react with
anything in their paths, destroying DNA, producing all sorts of
interesting (and harmful) compounds, cross-linking protein chains
in the skin and arteries, etc.  Ascrobic acid (and several other
substances) appear to preferentially scavenge free radicals,
preventing them from doing the deed.

Bruce Baker <Bruce.E.Baker at tsy.treasury.govt.nz> asks:
>Subject: HBD policies
>
>G'day y'all,
>
>In HBD 2425, the following policy was set forth:
>
>1.      Our guiding principle is that the HBD should not censor or
>        delete *any* message that deals with beer or brewing.  The
>        only exception is where the message *itself* is *clearly*
>        against the law; for example, a post containing an illegal
>        solicitation of investors for a microbrewery would be
>        deleted, but posts discussing marijuana beer or home
>        distilling -- while not encouraged -- would not
>
>Why is a message soliciting investors for a microbrewery illegal?  It sounds 
>like 
>free speech to me.  It might contravene some other HBD rule against commercial
> solicitation, but it seems far less odious than a lot of stuff on the net.
> 

Without launching on a tirade against the guvmint's peculiar
interpretation of "free speech", let me note that it is held to be
good U.S. law that solicitation of direct investment from the
public can be done only through a MEGO-level document known as a
"prospectus" (what the law is like in New Zealand, I have no
idea).  If you read the U.S. edition of the _Wall Street Journal_,
you'll notice that the "tombstone" adverts invariably include the
disclaimer like:  "This advertisement is not an offer to sell or a
solicitation of an offer to buy.  That offer is made only through
the prospectus." (The "tombstone", you see, is merely an
advertisement that the prospectus is *available*; a subtle but
legally efficacious distinction).  No one is (I sincerely hope)
going to dump a prospectus into the HBD, nor may prospectuses
(prospecti?) be sent unsolicited, as to a mailing list. 

- --
John W. Braue, III                     braue at ratsnest.win.net
                                       akatsukami at aol.com

I've decided that I must be the Messiah; people expect me to work 
miracles, and when I don't, I get crucified.


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 21:18:40 EDT
From: billp4 at juno.com (William H Plotner)
Subject: Cranberry Lambic

Fellow Brewers,
Any body out there have an extract recipe for a close approximation of
Sam Adams Cranberry Lambic?
Thanks.
Bill Plotner
Colorado Springs, Co
BillP4 at Juno.com
In Search of the Eternal Brew

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 20:39:54 -0700
From: HARRY HOUCK <hhouck at ix.netcom.com>
Subject: NHC Results, Californi & Nevada

Finally, results from the NHC '97 judging in Fresno, CA. 536 entries. 
Sorry about the formatting!

Barley Wine	American-style Barley Wine	Cam Ireland 	38.00	First
Barley Wine	English-style Barley Wine	Fred Waltman	32.50	Second
Barley Wine	English-style Barley Wine	Joel Rosen 	35.50	Third
Belgian & French Ale	Dubbel	Ron Kline 	36.00	First
Belgian & French Ale	Belgian Strong Ale	Kelly Robinson 	38.50	Second
Belgian & French Ale	White (Wit)	Mike Smith 	37.33	Third
Belgian-style Lambic	Fruit Lambic	David Welch	38.00	First
Belgian-style Lambic	Belgian-style Lambic	Bill Krouss 	34.50	Second
Mild & Brown Ale	English Dark Mild	Randy Norman 	37.00	First
Mild & Brown Ale	American Brown Ale	Rod Parsons 	36.00	Second
Mild & Brown Ale	English Brown Ale	Mike Riddle 	36.50	Third
English-style Pale Ale	India Pale Ale	David Welch 	40.50	First
English-style Pale Ale	Classic English Pale Ale	David Welch 	41.50	Second
English-style Pale Ale	Classic English Pale Ale	Ken Brown 	41.00	Third
American-style Ale	American Pale Ale	Ken Armstrong 	39.00	First
American-style Ale	American-style Amber Ale	Al Lemke 	38.00	Second
American-style Ale	American Pale Ale	Rod Parsons 	40.00	Third
English Bitter	English Best Bitter	Robert Drake 	42.50	First
English Bitter	English Strong Bitter	Jim Hilbing 	42.50	Second
English Bitter	English Strong Bitter	Ken Brown 	42.50	Third
Scottish Ale	Scottish Export Ale	David Parker 	41.50	First
Scottish Ale	Scottish Heavy Ale	Daniel Darnell 	39.00	Second
Scottish Ale	Scottish Light Ale	Kevin Knox 	34.00	Third
Porter	Brown Porter	Mike Riddle 	32.00	First
Porter	Robust Porter	Patrick Mc Kee 	39.33	Second
Porter	Robust Porter	James Weiner 	36.67	Third
English & Scottish Strong	Strong Scotch Ale	Daniel Darnell 	37.50	First
English & Scottish Strong	Old Ale/english Strong	Peter Zien 	36.50	Second
English & Scottish Strong	Strong Scotch Ale	Richard Wenzlik 	35.00	Third
Stout	Classic Irish-style Dry Stout	Mike Fitzgerald 	41.00	First
Stout	Oatmeal Stout	Wayne Baker 	36.00	Second
Stout	Foreign-style Stout	Charles Hessom 	42.00	Third
Bock	Eisbock	Mike Brenner 	44.50	First
Bock	Doppelbock	Tom Estudillo 	39.00	Second
Bock	Traditional Bock	Tom Gaworski 	39.50	Third
German Dark Lager	Munich Dunkel	Peter Johnson 	39.00	First
German Dark Lager	Schwarzbier	Tom Estudillo 	39.50	Second
German Dark Lager	Munich Dunkel	Robert Ethington 	34.00	Third
German Light Lager	Munich Helles	Harrison Gibbs 	32.50	First
German Light Lager	Munich Helles	Dan Taylor 	31.50	Second
Classic Pilsener	German-style Pilsener	Daniel Darnell 	36.50	First
Classic Pilsener	German-style Pilsener	Ken Armstrong 	35.00	Third
American Lager	American-style Premium	Chad Thistle 	41.00	First
American Lager	American-style Light Lager	George Proper 	34.50	Second
American Lager	Lager/ale or Cream Ale	Byron Burch 	34.50	Third
Vienna/marzen/oktober	Marzen/oktoberfest	Tom Gaworski 	42.50	First
Vienna/marzen/oktober	Vienna	David Streeter 	40.00	Second
Vienna/marzen/oktober	Marzen/oktoberfest	Wayne Burgstahler 	38.50	Third
German-style Ale	Dusseldorf-style Altbier	Mike Riddle 	39.25	First
German-style Ale	Kolsch	Jim Hilbing 	37.75	Second
German-style Ale	Dusseldorf-style Altbier	Jon Appleton 	36.00	Third
German-style Wheat Beer	Weizen/weissbier	Rod Parsons 	42.00	First
German-style Wheat Beer	Weizenbock	Mark Stuart 	37.50	Second
German-style Wheat Beer	Weizenbock	David Teesdale 	42.00	Third
Smoked Beer	Bamberg-style Rauchbier	Ron Kline 	36.17	First
Smoked Beer	Bamberg-style Rauchbier	Jeffrey Sternfeld 	35.33	Second
Smoked Beer	Bamberg-style Rauchbier	Tom Spaulding 	31.00	Third
Fruit & Vegetable Beer	Fruit & Vegetable Beer	Kevin Johnson 	39.33	First
Fruit & Vegetable Beer	Classic-style	Mike Riddle 	36.50	Second
Fruit & Vegetable Beer	Fruit & Vegetable Beer	J. Helmich 	34.00	Third
Herb & Spice Beer	Classic-style	Patrick Mc Kee 	41.00	First
Herb & Spice Beer	Classic-style	Ron Kline 	34.50	Second
Herb & Spice Beer	Herb & Spice Beer	Tim Johnston 	40.50	Third
Specialty Beer	Specialty Beer	Craig Azevedo 	38.33	First
Specialty Beer	Specialty Beer	Tim Dozier 	36.83	Second
Specialty Beer	Specialty Beer	Wayne Burgstahler 	36.00	Third
California Common Beer	California Common Beer	Carl Weyl 	42.00	First
California Common Beer	California Common Beer	Craig Toms 	39.00	Second
California Common Beer	California Common Beer	Bob Thompson 	37.50	Third
Fruit & Vegetable Mead	Still Melomel	Gunther Jensen 	41.00	First
Fruit & Vegetable Mead	Still Melomel	Byron Burch 	41.50	Second
Fruit & Vegetable Mead	Sparkling Pyment	Dan Taylor 	41.33	Third


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 22:08:08 +0000
From: "Robert Marshall" <robertjm at hooked.net>
Subject: Way to regulate air temperature??

Well, I got my scoring sheets back from yet another brewing contest. 
Yet again a judge, several infact, write, "...watch fermentation 
temperature."

I ferment in a basement which fluctuates between 65-74 degrees 
generally. Can anyone make any suggestions on how I might be able to 
control this better and keep it in the low to mid 60s at most? 
Obviously I could buy a fridge, but I'm looking for a cheaper 
alternative.

Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated.

Later,


Robert Marshall
robertjm at hooked.net
http://www.hooked.net/users/robertjm/beerbook.htm
- ------
"They who drink beer will think beer."
     Washington Irving - (1783-1859)

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 21:04:24 -0700
From: "Grant W. Knechtel" <GWK at hartcrowser.com>
Subject: marijuana in beer

Forgive me as a newbie if this subject has been flogged to death, but I glanced
at a small book in the bookstore by some "outlaw" brewers about using marijuana
in beer.  It was several months ago, and I can't remember the title or author. 
It was fairly comprehensive about such a limited subject.   Scanned the recipes
 - basically they were for standard beers with 1 or 2 ounces  dry-hopped (dry
potted?) in the secondary.  The point was, as was stated earlier, that THC is
only slightly soluble in water and somewhat more so in alcohol.  Normally I'm a
sucker for any new brew book which comes out, but couldn't see much point in
adding hundreds of dollars worth of adjunct for so little effect, especially
since I never liked the stuff much even when it was cheaper and more socially
acceptable.  I guess one could make an extract with vodka, maybe even pressure
cook in Everclear, but why bother?  If someone wanted to pursue it further, the
bookstore was Borders in Tacoma, WA.  The book was about a hundred pages,
paperback with (I think) a green cover.   I have no affiliation with the store,
etc., etc.

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 06:03:02 -0700
From: John Sullivan <sullvan at anet-stl.com>
Subject: Using Gelatine Finings

Andy:

Here is how I use gelatin to help drop the non-flocculant yeast in my 
beer.  

Take 1 or 2 of the packets of gelatin and mix with approximately a pint 
of clean tap water. Apply heat and stir.  I stir with a dairy thermometer 
so I know exactly what the temperature is.  When the temp hits 160F, I 
kill the heat and cover the pan with plastic wrap (or the lid will do 
also).  Wait 5-10 minutes.  The 160F temperatures will help to ensure 
that everything is sanitized and for all practical purposes pasteurized. 
Some will argue the time and temp is not sufficient, yada yada yada but I 
will stand by the procedure.  There is probably nothing wild growing on 
the gelatin or in your water that will withstand 160F for any amount of 
time.  Mind your temperatures because you do not want the gelatin to set 
on you.  Add to your secondary and rack the yeasty beer directly into the 
gelatin solution.  There should be enough mixing from the flow of the 
siphon but you can also stir gently with a sanitized tool when racking is 
complete to ensure that the gelatin solution is evenly dispersed.  You 
should see dramatic results in 2 to 3 days.  

I would not recommend using this procedure unless I am sure that the haze 
is from yeast.  If I am unsure, I would use the same procedure described 
above but also add two tablespoons of polyclar to the gelatin solution.  
Polyclar dissolves as well as the gelatin.  This method works well for 
me.

John Sullivan	
St. Louis, MO

Return to table of contents


Date: 28 May 97 07:53:56 EDT
From: aesoph at ncemt1.ctc.com (Aesoph, Michael)
Subject: Hops Medicine

Collective:



	Does anyone out there have the HBD from 2-3 days back?  I am looking for 
the little article on the medicinal aspect of hops.  Please send via 
private EMail.



===============================================

Michael D. Aesoph, Mechanical Engineer

Concurrent Technologies Corp.       Phone:  (814) 269-2758

211 Industrial Park Road                    FAX:  (814) 269-4458

Johnstown, PA  15904                          EMail:  aesoph at ctc.com




Return to table of contents


Date: 28 May 1997 09:10:56 -0400
From: "John Penn" <john_penn at spacemail.jhuapl.edu>
Subject: Ruined? continued.

                       Subject:                               Time:8:52 AM
  OFFICE MEMO          Ruined? continued.                     Date:5/28/97

   Well I bottled that stout with the high FG, it was based on AlK's Spread It
On Toast Imperial Stout but with M&F in place of the Laaglander.  I had
aerated it when I racked to the secondary, possibly to the beers detriment, 
and repitched some more yeast.  Anyway I was glad to see that it had dropped
another 5 or 6 pts and was about 1.034-1.035 from a starting gravity of 1.085,
about a 60% attenuation.  I got mixed messages about whether I had ruined the
beer or not so I'll wait and see.  The batch sat in primary for a week with
three extremely active fermentation days, then slowed dramatically.  The SG
was 1.040 after a week and after another two weeks in the secondary it was
down to a more reasonable 1.034-1.035, there was virtually no bubbles the last
few days.  It tasted fairly sweet-about 60 IBUs (Rager)-but was very good so
far.  I only added 3oz of priming sugar, a little light on the carbonation.  
I got mixed reviews on wether it was ruined or not so I'll post a follow up in
a couple of months when it has aged a little.  
   John Penn


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 07:09:55 -0700
From: David Johnson <dmjalj at inwave.com>
Subject: Chi Pwi Gees

When looking over your friends recipe, I would suggest that this is 
probably the current incarnation of the recipe. I live in Wisconsin and 
we don't grow any of the grapefruit here. It must be substituting for 
something else. Also, what converts the starch in the potatoes? Can 
grapefruit do that? this might be one starchy brew(part of its charm?). I 
think it might be important to preserve this part of brewing heritage and 
ask your friend to find some older folk who might know how this was 
brewed long ago. Back to the grapefruit example, there is probably some 
kind of native fruit with a similar of flavor profile or just plain sour 
or bitter. If I was a guessing man, I would guess that the older recipe 
might use honey or maple sap or syrup as part of the recipe and might 
have been a form of mead.  I would agree that using a more refined yeast 
might help the product, but would want to capture what it is that makes 
your friend prefer it before we change it too much (and make it too much 
like what we already are doing). I think that there is an opportunity 
here. Do you feel like Pierre Celis?
	Dave



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 08:49:45 -0600
From: wesc at mails.imed.com (Wes Clement)
Subject: calculating strike water temp

     I need to know how to calculate the temperature of strike water (and 
     the amount) for single step infusions. Example: Given I have a 12 lbs 
     of grain at 75F. How much and at what temperature should the strike 
     water be in order to establish a mash temperature of 154F? 
     
     

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 11:26:22 -0500
From: dcstanza at OCC.PASEN.GOV
Subject: CO2 cylinders\; Safety

  I have only been a subscriber (lurker) to the HBD for two months now,
and am amazed at the collective thoughts, experiences and good advice
from those who post here. Your input is much appreciated.
  I am a very newbie (only two extract batches, so far) and am in the
process of setting up a corny system. I have been able to pick up great
advice from those who have posted on this issue in particular.

  In HBD  #2428, Mr. Charlie Scandrett posted the following:

"I have posted in the past about keg bombs and the dangers of working
with pressurised gas. Some have suggested that I lighten up?"

  I would agree that there is no such thing as "lighten up" when the issue
is safety (and lives) as far as pressurized gas is concerned. The keg
bomb would be instantaneous should someone be foolish enough to
connect up a Co2 bottle WITHOUT the regulator! In no way should we
assume that everyone is aware of these facts.

  He also added an interesting post from another forum pointing out
first-hand experience with Co2 cylinders:

">One of the #20 bottles had a loss of structural integrity at a weld
>near the bottom of the bottle."

  I am somewhat surprised by this sentence; a few years ago, my father
had a fire extinguisher sales and service business that I helped with. I
was trained and licensed to run the federally required hydro-testing
procedure that these (co2) cylinders must go through (correctly stated in
the post) at a maximum of 5 year intervals. What this means is that,
legally, a cylinder with an expired hydro-test date cannot (and should
not) be refilled - not that it cannot be used. Always check the date
yourself before going to get your cylinder refilled and take it where it wi=
ll
be hydro-tested if it has been 5 years since undergoing its last test. If a
cylinder has significant rust or evidence of possible damage, it may be
tested PRIOR to the expiration of the hydro-test date. It may be an old and
worn-out addage, but it's never been more true; "better safe than sorry".
  I am under the impression that under no circumstances were "repairs"
or "welded seams" allowed to these cylinders. These are usually spun
steel or aluminum cylinders with NO seams. It is quite possible that I am
either mistaken by my recollection, or that the regulations have been
changed, but I don't think so.

  One other point - the weakest part of the cylinder, and therefore the
most dangerous, is the end of the neck - or more technically correct, the
part where the valve assembly meets ( and sticks out of) the cylinder.
Should the cylinder fall over, it's own weight could be enough to snap
the valve assembly off - with exposive results - instantaneous Co2
rocket! Be sure to take steps that protect from this happening.

  Just wanted to add my $.02 worth on what is such an important safety
issue.

  Thanks again for such a great brewing resource!

  Dave Costanza (Dcostanza at occ.pasen.gov)
  Harrisburg, PA

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 10:54:54 -6
From: "Dave Draper" <ddraper at utdallas.edu>
Subject: IBU estimates in high-grav worts

Dear Friends,

I had a private email from a fellow HBDer named Brad Manbeck asking 
about estimating IBUs when one is constrained to use a small-volume, 
and hence high-gravity, boil.  This is the case for many homebrewers 
who dominantly use extracts and do "partial" boils in smaller 
kettles.  I thought I would summarize my reply to him here and 
solicit input-- is this approach reasonable?  I will be using the 
utilization data of Tinseth in this discussion, but it should be 
general to any formulation.

Here's the situation.  We all know that most of the well-known IBU
formulations incorporate some kind of factor that accounts for the
loss of utilization in high-gravity worts, and these are thought to
have varying degrees of accuracy.  One way in which this uncertainty
could be greatest is in a highly concentrated wort.  Now, because
IBUs are defined in terms of weight of isomerized alpha-acids per
unit volume of wort, the final wort volume is a crucial parameter.
The larger the volume, the more diluted the dissolved weight of
iso-alphas will be, and hence the less bitter will be the final
beer.

It could be that a low-volume, high-gravity boil topped up with water
to the final volume is close to worst-case as far as getting the most
reliable IBU estimate is concerned.  Trouble is, most of the data
available on utilization come from experiments that worked the other
way: the initial volume of wort was a lot *greater* than the final
volume, so that the final gravity was the most concentrated it ever
gets, and gravities earlier in the boil are lower; more importantly,
these earlier gravities are typically sufficiently low (in the 1040s
or so, or lower) that there will be little effect on utilization from
higher gravity.

So here's my idea about estimating how big the effect might be.
Calculate the IBUs twice: first using the smaller volume and whatever
gravity you actually have *of that smaller volume*, and the second
time with the final volume and gravity.  In principle there will be a
difference, and this difference should give you some idea how much
utilization you are losing by boiling at the low volume.  

Here's an example.  Consider a beer that will ultimately consist of 5
gal of 1.050 but for which the boil volume will be only 3 gal. Let's
keep it simple and model a single hop addition of 1 oz of 8% AA hops
boiling for 60 minutes, assuming the volume of wort stays constant
(not realistic but an endmember case). Using the Tinseth data (and
Pat Anderson's TINIBUW program to calculate with them), and putting
in these values, the result is 27.2 IBU. Now let's calculate what the
gravity of that very same liquid would be if it were concentrated
down to 3 gallons.  5/3 * 50 grav points= 83, or 1.083. Now, put in 3
gal of 1.083 in TINIBUW with the same 1 oz of 8%AA hops for 60 min,
with the same assumption of unchanging volume, and the result is 33.7
IBU.  But hey wait, shouldn't it be *lower*, since the gravity is
higher?  Yes, but the effect of lower volume (greater concentration
of iso-alphas) outperforms that of higher gravity, at least as
reckoned in the Tinseth formulation.  When you add that last 2 gal of
water (which has zero IBUs) to that 3 gal of 1.083-gravity, 33.7-IBU
wort, you have diluted both gravity and IBUs. The gravity we already
know will end up at 1.050, and with a similar calculation we can get
at the final IBUs.  3/5 * 33.7 =20.2 is the answer-- we have diluted
the 33.7 IBUs down to about 20 by adding the 2 gal of water at the
end. 

So, what we have done is reach the endpoint, 5 gallons of 1.050
beer, by two paths, one in which the wort was never concentrated,
and one in which it was.  You can see by comparing the value for the
concentrated version, 20.2, with the 27.2 we got for the
un-concentrated version that utilization will suffer to the extent
that the IBU estimate will be about 25% to 30% too high, from having
a higher gravity boil. That is, with no attempt to account for the
decreased utilization due to high gravity, we'd estimate about 27
IBUs, but when this kind of approach is used, the new estimate comes
out appreciably lower.

I make no claim that this kind of back-of-the-envelope calculation
is highly accurate, but it should at least serve as some kind of
guide. As with everything else, one will have to experiment some to
see what works best.  I also intentionally ignore other complicating
factors, such as whether one uses a hop bag, or whether one waits for
hot break to form before adding hops, etc. etc, in order to isolate
this one factor.  I'd love to hear from anyone who is still awake
about whether this approach seems sensible as a way for "partial
boilers" to get more accurate IBU estimates.

Cheers and sorry for being so long winded,

Dave in Dallas
- ---
*****************************************************************************
   Dave Draper, Dept Geosciences, U. Texas at Dallas, Richardson TX 75083
          ddraper at utdallas.edu  Home page: http://hbd.org/~ddraper
                 Beer page: http://hbd.org/~ddraper/beer.html
That's all very well in practice; but will it work in *theory*?
    ---Ken Willing


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 09:01:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: palmer at San-Jose.ate.slb.com (Eric Palmer)
Subject: burners and BTU

If I were to look for a propane burner that can handle a 5 gal
boil with ease, what kind of BTUs should I look for and what
price should I expect to pay? 

TIA,

Eric


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 11:05:35 -0500
From: "David W. Schoemaker" <dschoemaker at ameritech.net>
Subject: Cherry Stout

>Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 11:44:12 EDT
>From: billp4 at juno.com (William H Plotner)
>Subject: Cherries in my Stout

>HBD'ers,
>I've been reading the HBD for a while and finally have a question to
>post.
>I am fermenting a cherry stout. The question is, how long do I want to
>keep the cherries in the primary? Normally, I wait until the vigorous
>fermentation is done then rack into my secondary.Usually jest a few days.
> Would I want to leave it in the primary longer? How much longer?
>Thanks for any help.
>Bill Plotner
>Colorado Springs
>Billp4 at Juno.com
>In Search of the Eternal Brew
 
Make sure you use sour cherries.  I add mine to the secondary, and leave
them there around a month.  Freezing them or crushing them prior to
adding them will make the process go smoother.  You may want to have a
slightly sweeter beer than normal, as they will add some
sourness/acidity to your beer that needs to be balanced.

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 13:36:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: DGofus at aol.com
Subject: Summer Brewing

Since summer is right around the bend, what effects does this have on my
brewing. I am a newbie and this is my first summer. I realize that temp. has
a big effect on taste. My brewhouse (Basement) is about 64-66 degrees now. I
have a batch on the stove today and one more in waiting...a Canadian ale.
Should this be my last? Should I hope my reserve get me through the summer,
or stock up on......  { : ^  ( egads, store bought refreshment? I could
handle that, nut the cost of drinking good brew is outrageous. ( Why ? lower
the price sell more volume to the average joe six pack.)
Thanks for any help

Bob Fesmire
Madman Brewery
Pottstown, PA
Dgofus at aol.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 14:25:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: Eugene Sonn <eugene at dreamscape.com>
Subject: tart berries in beer

Hello HBDers,
	A friend of mine wants to make a fruit beer with a tart berry (I
forget which kind of berry).  I've already checked the archives and don't
see recipes for fruit beers which don't use sweet berries.  How should my
friend balance the tart flavor, with honey?  If so, how much for a 5
gallon batch?  

Please e-mail privately and I'll post results to the HBD.

Eugene
eugene at nova.dreamscape.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 09:32:35 +200
From: "Braam Greyling" <braam.greyling at azona.co.za>
Subject: Must I prime again ?

Hello,

I recently made a lager using a double decoction mashing and using 
wyeast munich lager yeast. My start gravity was 1050 and my end 
gravity was 1010. The beer fermented at the correct  temperature 
specified for the yeast and I transferred it to a secondary and 
lagered it for two weeks just above freezing point. The result was a 
VERY clear beer. After the two weeks I bottled it and used my normal 
priming procedure ( adding sugar solution to each bottle before 
filling).  I capped the bottles and left it to carbonate. On day 
three after bottling I tried the first one. I knew it would be flat 
but hell I couldnt wait no more. Well it was flat. On day seven it 
was still flat. On day 10 it was still flat. I am getting worried 
that it would be flat on day infinity. There were no bleach left in 
the bottles to kill the yeast. So this cant be the problem.
I decided to wait 14 days and see if the carbonation is still 
a problem. Can it be that after the lagering procedure that almost no 
yeast ended up in the bottle ? It is difficult to believe this 
although this beer is the clearest I have ever made.
What else could have gone  wrong ?  What should I do ?

Thanks!


Braam Greyling    I.C. Design Engineer
Azona(Pty)Ltd     
tel +27 12 6641910  fax +27 12 6641393

You can taste a good beer with one sip, 
but it is better to make thoroughly sure.

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 13:14:10 +200
From: "Braam Greyling" <braam.greyling at azona.co.za>
Subject: Corny/ss question

Yello,

During July I am going on a hunting trip in Namibia.  I hope I am not 
offending anyone. Anyway, I want to take few kegs of beer with me as 
we will live in the bush for a few days and will have no place to buy 
beer from. We have limited space in the vehicles so I will have to 
store some of the meat in the empty cornies when we are coming back.
Traditionally we use vinegar and salt and spices to preserve the 
meat.
What I want to know is will it be safe when a  mix of  vinegar and 
salt comes into contact with the corney`s stainless steel or rubber 
parts. What will the best method be to clean the cornies afterwards.
Probably caustic soda ?

Thanks very much in advance.


Braam Greyling    I.C. Design Engineer
Azona(Pty)Ltd     
tel +27 12 6641910  fax +27 12 6641393

You can taste a good beer with one sip, 
but it is better to make thoroughly sure.

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 18:07:29 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Paul A. Hausman" <paul at lion>
Subject: Clear Weizen???

On Tue, 27 May 1997 08:23:17 -0400, MARK WOOD wrote:
> 
> David Johnson <dmjalj at inwave.com> wrote . . .
> > <<  I just made a bavarian style weizen. I used wyeast 3068 and it has 
> > finished fermenting and is now sitting there looking murkily at me. I 
> > know that this yeast doesn't floc well and that the style can be 
> > cloudy but should I go ahead and bottle "Big Muddy".  >>
> > 
> I'm currently brewing my second batch of Weizen, using Wyeast 3068.  
> The first batch is just 10 days in the bottle, but it's already 
> delicious !!  I hate to rub it in, but my Weizen finished very clean 
> and clear.  It can almost pass for a Pilsner 
<<<SNIP>>>  
> It's true the 3068 doesn't floculate particularly well.  My bottles 
> aren't horribly yeasty, but it's much harder to pour without getting 
> some yeast in your glass.  Still, this is style appropriate.  If 
> you're in doubt, I suggest giving it plenty of time in the secondary.  
> This beer is great with minimal bottle conditioning and is a very 
> refreshing hot weather beer.
>  
>  Woody

I'm going to be sampling my ninth or tenth weizen batch tonight.  
It's one of my favorites to brew or drink.  Particularly in the summer.
I just couldn't resist commenting on a few details here:

1. It's supposed to be cloudy. (Pick up a bottle of Hacker-Pshorr in the
   local booze supply.) I usually leave it in the secondary for
   about 2 weeks (after a 5-7 day primary).  If it's not clear,
   bottle anyhow. Then gloat 'cause you've got the style right.
   A clear weizen may taste great, but it's not to style. (Sorry
   Woody, If you offer me a bottle, I won't turn it down.) ;-) 

2. Bavarian Weisse is often called "Hefe Weisse".  Hefe is german for
   yeast.  The idea is that you drink that too.  If you haven't tried,
   be bold, turn the bottle up hard and let all the yeast mix in.
   If you don't like it, go back to decanting; but you probably will.
   Then you can act the connoissuer at parties and tell everyone else
   how "it's supposed to be drunk", making a royal bore of yourself.

3. It's a great summer beer.  It likes to ferment at 68-70 oF; It's
   quite refreshing on a summer day; and it can go from malt to 
   perfect for drinking in only 5-6 weeks (I figure 1 week primary,
   2 weeks secondary and 2-3 weeks in the bottle).

- -- 
Paul A. Hausman   <Paul at Lion.com>
Lafayette, NJ, USA

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 28 May 97 18:39:16 CDT
From: jwilkins at imtn.tpd.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson)
Subject: Fermentation temps

I have been having a little trouble keeping fermentation temps as low as
I would like.  I have a refrigerator I ferment in and set the controller
to 62F for ales.  I usually ferment in a 10 gallon SS soft drink keg with
a thermometer strip stuck on it.  I was fermenting a 9 gallon batch last
weekend which I had chilled from the kettle to sanitized buckets which
were placed in the fridge for about an hour before pouring to the fermenter,
oxygenating, and pitching.  The fridge was below 50F but I didn't check the
temp of the wort as I did not have a sanitized thermometer handy.  It should
have been well below 70F, though.  I pitched a healthy yeast slurry after
oxygenating thoroughly and the airlock was bubbling steadily a few hours
later.  The next day foam was pushing out of the airlock and the strip
thermometer on the side of the fermenter read 75F.  The fridge was still set
at 62F and had been since pitching.  Could the ferment be generating that
much heat or could the strip thermometer be that far off?  I realize that
the air in the fridge is not the most efficient way to remove heat but the
fermenter is too large to set in a bucket of water and ultimately the
problem of transfer of heat from liquid to air remains.  I don't think I can
afford a glycol jacket for my fermenter.  Any ideas?

Thanks,

John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins at imtn.dsccc.com

Return to table of contents