HOMEBREW Digest #2857 Fri 23 October 1998

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

		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

  randy's pH paper questions (Boeing)" <BayerMA at navair.navy.mil>
  Interpretation of analysis ("Michel J. Brown")
  Bad Gas (Blink)
  Bad gas acid test (ThomasM923)
  electric heating a Gott cooler ("S. Jackson")
  re: small scale malting (Ian Lyons)
  Determining Hop Utilization (Sean Murphy)
  First Wort Socking - FWS, and lentil beer(?!) ("Chris Pittock")
  Metallic Tastes (oberlbk)
  Accuracy (oberlbk)
  "Set" the filter bed... (pbabcock)
  Mini masher (Andrew Stavrolakis)
  All Grain Equipment ("Steve Milito, M.D.")
  SHMS vs. HERMS (Peter.Perez)
  Lauter Design (Mike Isaacs)
  Pumpkin as a primary fermenter (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
  Re:  Using a commercial keg ("J. Matthew Saunders")
  AHA Seeks Invitations to Homebrewing Events (Paul Gatza)
  Aquarium Pump "Smell" Filter ("Brian LeCuyer")
  re:On combining decoction and household chores (Shane & Laura)
  Mashing vs. Extract: a big deal, or not? (Alan Edwards)
  King Kooker Cleaning? ("Marc Battreall")
  re First Wort Hopping (Jeremy Price)
  munich conversion/goods and process (Dave Sapsis)
  Vent. Hood (Posse4000S)
  Stuck fermtation? (dolmans)
  Flies in the wort/GFCI/Low partial mash OG (John Wilkinson)
  Seeking Books... (Badger Roullett)

Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! Send your entries in for Hoppiest Event On Earth yet? Details: http://members.tripod.com/~BrewMiester_2/Home.html NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS: hbd.org Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@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 request@hbd.org. **SUBSCRIBE AND UNSUBSCRIBE REQUESTS MUST BE SENT FROM THE E-MAIL **ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!! 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 brewery at hbd.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... ftp://hbd.org/pub/hbd/digests ftp://ftp.stanford.edu/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer 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: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 18:09:03 -0400 From: "Bayer, Mark A (Boeing)" <BayerMA at navair.navy.mil> Subject: randy's pH paper questions collective homebrew conscience: randy in modesto had questions about the merck colorPHast strips: <I recently bought some colorpHast strips (range 2 to 9) aftergiving up on the cheap paper ones. <The brief instructions on the package say "Dip in - --- read whilestill moist." Then "Immerse in <weakly-buffered solutionsuntil there is no further color change (1-10 minutes)." Thesetwo statements <seem to contractdict each other --- do I just dipand read, or do I have to wait several minutes?If <these strips work out okay, I plan to try acidifying the mashwith lactic acid also. Is this the right <approach for this waterand pale worts? regarding acidifying mashes with lactic acid - be careful because you can easily over-acidify a mash with small amounts of lactic acid. trust me - i've done it. it's best to dilute a teaspoon or so down to about a pint of brewing water and use that for additions so that you don't overshoot, and if you do, it's not by much. here is my experience with the colorpHast strips: i have used the 3-color strips sold by hoptech (mfg by baxter?) and also the colorpHast strips. when i first started using the 3-color strips, i would dip them in a sample and read within a minute or so. that worked fine - the colors didn't seem to change much after about a minute or two. when i first started using the colorpHast strips, it seemed that they were reading .3 to .5 units lower than the 3-color strips. but, if i left the colorpHast strips in the sample for 5 minutes, the color would gradually change during that time, and the final reading would agree with the 3-color strips. this was true for both sparge water and mash readings. so my advice would be this: immerse the colorpHast strips for a mash sample and read after one minute, five minutes, and ten minutes. see if you get a gradual creep in the indicator color like i've had, and you can then crudely determine how long you must leave the strip immersed before it settles to a steady state. i believe that depending on the water/mash composition, the time required will vary. (ajd can surely elaborate on this.) so for me, pHast <> fast. ; ) one other thing: the difference in the colorpHast color "key" for readings at 5.3 and 5.5 is nearly indistinguishable (to me), especially indoors. if you have the same problem, take the wet sample outside and reading in sunlight if possible. the 3-color strips weren't quite so hard to distinguish in the typical mash range, because you had 3 colors to compare against the key. also - don't forget that if you're reading mash ph at room temperature (60 deg f or so), the reading that you get is roughly .35 units higher than the real ph of the mash at typical mashing temps (150 deg. f). e.g., if you read 5.5 at room temp, the ph of your mash is really 5.15. the other piece of information that would help all of us using merck (or other) strips would be if somebody has taken an accurate ph meter and compared its readings to the strips. that would be valuable. brew hard, mark bayer Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:15:05 -0700 From: "Michel J. Brown" <homemade at spiritone.com> Subject: Interpretation of analysis Below are the results of my local water. Looks pretty good to me, albeit I can't seem to determine if chloramines are used or not. Also, if the hardness is so low, then where is the slight alkalinity coming from? Water Analysis Results, March 1998 Physical Characteristics Variable Raw Water Result Treated Water Result Method Detection Limit Primary Standard Secondary Standard Turbidity (NTU) 0.20 0.25 5 pH 7.1 7.3 6.5-8.5 Color (standard units) ND ND 5 15 Specific Conductance 19 25 0.1 Total Dissolved Solids 19 22 0.1 500 Fixed Solids ( at 550 degrees C) 15 18 0.1 Suspended Solids 0.5 1 0.5 Total Solids at 180 degrees C) 20 23 0.1 Nutrients Variable Raw Water Result Treated Water Result Method Detection Limit Primary Standard Secondary Standard Ammonia Nitrogen (NH3-N) ND ND 0.020 Nitrate Nitrogen (NO3-N) 0.01 ND 0.01 10 Nitrite Nitrogen (NO 2-N) 0.001 0.001 0.001 1 Nitrogen, Organic (N) 0.02 0.01 0.01 Phosphorus, Reactive (PO4-P) ND ND 0.003 Phosporus, Total (P) ND 0.012 0.005 Total Organic Carbon (TOC) 1.15 1.30 0.05 Silica (SiO2 as SI) 4.1 3.9 1 Anions/Cations Variable Raw Water Result Treated Water Result Method Detection Limit Primary Standard Secondary Standard Alkalinity (as CaCO3) 7.5 7.9 0.5 Hydroxide (as CaCO3) ND ND 0.1 Carbonate (as CaCO3) ND ND 0.1 Bicarbonate (as CaCO3) 6.9 7.9 0.1 Carbon Dioxide, Free (CO2) 1.1 0.8 0.1 Carbon Dixoide, Total (CO2) 7.2 7.8 0.1 Chloride (Cl) ND 1.0 0.3 250 Fluoride (F) ND ND 0.05 4.0 2.0 Sulfate (SO4) ND ND 0.5 250 Calcium (Ca) 1.5 1.6 0.01 Magnesium (Mg) 0.59 0.58 0.01 Hardness (as CaCO3) 6.3 6.3 0.1 250 Potassium (K) 0.20 0.20 0.01 Sodium (Na) 1.2 2.5 0.01 Metals Variable Raw Water Result Treated Water Result Method Detection Limit Primary Standard Secondary Standard Antimony (Sb) ND ND 0.001 Aluminum (Al) 0.074 0.055 0.001 0.05-0.2 Arsenic (As) ND ND 0.001 0.05 Barium (Ba) ND ND 0.001 2.0 Cadmium (Cd) ND ND 0.001 0.005 Chromium (Cr) ND ND 0.001 0.1 Lead (Pb) 0.001 ND 0.001 0.015 Mercury (Hg) ND ND 0.0010 0.002 Nickel (Ni) ND ND 0.001 Selenium (Se) ND ND 0.001 0.05 Silver (Ag) ND ND 0.001 0.1 Copper (Cu) 0.028 0.013 0.001 1.3 1.0 Iron (Fe) 0.017 0.019 0.001 0.3 Manganese (Mn) ND ND 0.001 0.05 Zinc (Zn) 0.012 ND 0.01 5 Disinfection By-Product Variable Raw Water Result Treated Water Result Method Detection Limit Primary Standard Secondary Standard Total Trihalomethanes (annual average) Not applicable 0.020 0.005 0.100 Synthetic Organic Chemicals 2, 4-D* Dalapon* Hexachlorocyclopentadiene* 2, 4, 5-TP (Silvex)* Dibromochloropropane* (DBCP) 3-Hydroxycarbofuran Adipates* Dicamba Methomyl Alachlor (Lasso)* Dieldrin Metolachlor Aldicarb Dinoseb* Methoxychlor* Aldicarb Sulfone Dioxin* Metribuzin Aldicarb Sulfoxide Diquat* Pentachlorophenol* Aldrin Edothall* Phthalates* Atrazine* Endrin* Picloram* Benzo(A)Pyrene* Ethylene Dibromide (EDB)* Polychlorinated Biphenyls BHC-gamma (Lindane)* Glyphosate* (PCBs)* Butachlor Heptachlor Epoxide* Propachlor Carbaryl Heptachlor* Simazine* Carbofuran* Hexachlorobenzene* Toxaphene* Chlordane* Vydate (Oxamyl)* Note: None of these chemicals can be detected in either Bull Run or blended groundwater. Chemicals marked with an asterisk are included on the EPA primary standards list. Volatile Organic Chemicals Benzene* 1,4-Dichlorobenzene* n-Propylbenzene Bromobenzene Dichlorodifluoromethane Styrene* Bromomethane 1,1-Dichloroethane 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane n-Butylbenzene 1,2-Dichloroethane* 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane sec-Butylbenzene 1,1-Dichloroethylene* Tetrachloroethylene* tert-Butylbenzene cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene* Toluene* Carbon tetrachloride* trans-1,2-dichloroethylene* 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene Chlorobenzene* 1,2-Dichloropropane* 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene* Chloroethane 1,3-Dichloropropane 1,1,1-Trichloroethane* Chloromethane 2,2-Dichloropropane 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 2-Chlorotoluene 1,1-Dichloropropene Trichloroethylene 4-Chlorotoluene Ethylbenzene* Trichlorofluoromethane 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane Hexachlorobutadiene 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 1,2-Dibromoethane Isopropylbenzene 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene Dibromomethane p-Isopropyltoluene 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 1,2-Dichlorobenzene* Methylene chloride Vinyl chloride* 1,3-Dichlorobenzene Naphthalene Xylenes* Note: None of these chemicals can be detected in either Bull Run or blended groundwater. Chemicals marked with an asterisk are included on the EPA primary standards list. Miscellaneous Raw Water Result Treated Water Result Method Detection Limit Primary Standard Secondary Standard Methylene Blue Active Substances (foaming agents) ND ND 0.025 0.5 Tannin & Lignin-like compounds 0.025 0.15 Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 23:01 +0100 (BST) From: beermonster at brewer.org (Blink) Subject: Bad Gas > So, after all this, I still believe that I have an off-flavor in the > carbonated beer that I haven't tasted in the secondary. I don't think > that > my cleaning/sanitizing is at fault. Could it be the gas??? It could be the gas, but don't forget that there are regulators and pipes and disconnects which can become contaminated on the gas side, especially if you have had a 'blowback' of beer up the gas pipes. If you're convinced it's the gas itself, why muck around - go and spend a few quid on a refill exchange or borrow a mate's. Alternatively, have a bit of patience and naturally condition a cask of beer. Cheers Graham Head Brewer and Kegwasher, Blinks Brewery, Derbyshire, England. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 19:37:51 EDT From: ThomasM923 at aol.com Subject: Bad gas acid test In order to find out if the gas is flavoring your beer, why don't you make some "seltzer" with it? Put some cold water in your keg and charge it with some of the suspected CO2, shake, etc. After a few hours draw off some and taste it. If the gas is good, you can make egg creams. - ---Thomas Murray Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 21:17:35 -0400 From: "S. Jackson" <sjackson at easley.net> Subject: electric heating a Gott cooler Has anyone ever (successfully) installed an electric heating element in a Gott cooler. I usually heat my sparge water in my kettle and transfer it it to my hot liquor tank. No matter how hot I get the sparge water initially it always seems to be too cool by the time I get to sparging. I think a heater element in my HLT might be the answer. Alternative suggestions are welcome also. Steve the Alabama Outlaw "Brewing beer was far more exciting when it was both a hobby and a felony!" Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:50:06 +0930 (CST) From: Ian Lyons <ilyons at science.adelaide.edu.au> Subject: re: small scale malting Homebrewers I put a question to the group regarding small scale malting of grains, in my case triticale, and got really good feed-back. Thanks for the input. The problem was with drying the grain at lower temperatures than my oven could provide. The two main solutions suggested were: Package the grain in pillowcase sized bags (REALLY sealed!), and dry them in the tumble dryer, or Sun dry them: aparently there is a traditional wind malt that is dried that way. I'll give them both a try, and report back! Ian ilyons at biochem.adelaide.edu add .au bcs that's where I am! Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:24:31 -0700 From: Sean Murphy <smurphy at sdcoe.k12.ca.us> Subject: Determining Hop Utilization When calculating hop bitterness, I usually use the following formula, Woz X U% X A% X 7849 / (V gal X C gravity) or Randy Mosher's Hop Go-Round, but I have a few questions about correctly determining the Utilization %. 1. When determining Utilization % do I use the pre boil gravity and the time or the post boil gravity and the time? 2. Does using either value have a tremendous effect either way? When inputing the value for volume in gallons, do I use the volume at the beginning of the boil, the volume in primary, or the final volume Sean Murphy Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:16:29 +11:00 From: "Chris Pittock" <pittockc at vida.agvic.gov.au> Subject: First Wort Socking - FWS, and lentil beer(?!) Hi All, I've been asked if it's possible (as opposed to desirable!) to make a lentil beer. Of course, I think it'd need gelatinising and a fair dose of high activity malt to convert the (presumably) useable starches. Also, given that lentils contain high (~24%) protein, it's need some attention to avoid protein haze. Wisdom anyone? Also, Jim Bentson wrote in #2856: >Gosh, to think I could have been doing my socks during my recent >decoction brew. There's a great potential thread in First Wort Socking! Cotton v nylon v wool or blends... Socks worn in leather shoes, runners... Enough said! Chris Pittock Horsham, Victoria, Australia 14483 kilometres (9000 miles) W-SW from Dave Draper Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 06:34:31 -0400 From: oberlbk at NU.COM Subject: Metallic Tastes I think this has been discussed before, but I do not think I have seen any answers posted. My wife bought me an entire corny keg system a while back - now she's a keeper. The tanks were used, but in very good shape. Prior to this time I was using bleach to sanitize, but concern for my newly acquired stainless kegs caused me to look for something new. I bought the Five Star kit - PBW and Star San and have been using it ever since. Since I was not allowed to modify our refrigerator, I used a cooler for flash chilling the beer on the way to the tap. My first purchase was a cold plate. My first 3 batches tasted like metal coming out of the tap. I convinced myself that it was some sort of problem with the cold plate. I sent it back, threw down some more cash and got a stainless steel coil. My next 3 batches have all still tasted like metal. Last night I went into the lab (a bench in my basement) and pulled a sample off of an old ale which had been sitting in the keg "aging" since June. I pulled the sample using a picnic faucet. Again, all I could taste was metal. I also found that the head was the worst offender. It was so metallic that I actually tried to pour it off. Knowing all of this, I have convinced myself that it is the CO2. I am very confused by this. I know a ton of other people who use CO2 tanks that do not have a problem. Due to a number of errors with my first CO2 tank, I am now on my second tank. Same taste. The place I get the gas from has numerous beverage accounts, so I don't suspect the gas. I checked out the inside of my kegs. I cannot find any signs of rust. What do I do? I have not tried priming naturally yet. This sort of defeats some of the purpose of my getting the keg system. Also, what is the difference in CO2 made from yeast and that in my tank? I am not a chemist, but I am pretty sure that CO2 is CO2 no matter what the source. Please help. As you know, by the time you are done with taps, coils, tanks, hoses, and regulators, this endeavor was not cheap. However, I am soon going to be going back to bottles, ugh. Right now I no longer consider my beer worth drinking. Thanks in advance for any suggestions. Private email is ok. Brent Oberlin oberlbk at nu.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 06:36:53 -0400 From: oberlbk at NU.COM Subject: Accuracy One more question. Has anybody ever bought a thermometer which was reading the wrong temp.? I have been extracting a ton of tannins from my grains and I am trying to isolate the cause. Since I only have one thermometer, it could be way off and I would never even know it. Is this possible? Brent Oberlin, East Hampton, CT oberlbk at nu.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 07:03:36 -0400 (EWT) From: pbabcock <pbabcock at mail.oeonline.com> Subject: "Set" the filter bed... Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager... Al writes: >> First a tiny terminological issue: a "set mash" is a bad thing. It is >> what many call a "stuck mash." When you say "the filter bed is set" >>that could be mistaken for "stuck," so I recommend saying "the filter >> bed is *established*." Well, now: let's not get carried away with that one! It's common terminology to state that you are "setting the filter bed" or "setting up the filter bed" oe even that the "filter bed is set" in the mash. It refers to the stratification of the flour, grits and husks in the bed rather than the permeability of it to the wort. Papazian et al set that precedent long before this post, it is prevalent in many of the homebrewing texts on the market and I don't think many associate setting the filter bed with a stuck mash... Just a miniscule terminological clarification ;-) Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 09:41:14 -0400 From: Andrew Stavrolakis <andrew_stavrolakis at harvard.edu> Subject: Mini masher Pete Perez asks whether a small mash tun can hold its heat... I've mashed between 2 and 4 pounds of grain successfully in a "6 pack" size gott cooler on numerous occasions with no significant temperature variations. FWIW, I used a a small copper manifold and siphoned the sparge from an attached hose barb... Cheers! Andrew andrew_stavrolakis at harvard.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 10:08:55 -0400 From: "Steve Milito, M.D." <milito at radonc.musc.edu> Subject: All Grain Equipment I have returned to brewing after a long hiatus. My experience in the past was with extracts, but I have decided do all grain this time. I have recently brewed a 5 gal batch using a Gott cooler and plastic buckets. I really enjoy brewing (and consuming) homebrew, but the time commitment with all grain is too great to justify 5 gal batches. Therefore, I would like be able to brew at least 15 gal batches, possible 20 gal. I have several questions. What size liquer tun is appropriate? Will a converted keg do, or do I need a larger volume? What size boiling tun is needed? I was thinking 25 gal, is this excessive? I was thinking of using a converted keg for Mash/Lauter tun. What are the advanatges / disadvantages of a manifold verses a false bottom? Can you recirculate with a manifold? Any advice as to a reasonably affordable method of ramping up would be greatly appreciated. Best Regards, SM Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 10:47:30 -0400 From: Peter.Perez at smed.com Subject: SHMS vs. HERMS I am planning to convert my 3 tier gravity system (using Gott) to either a SHMS or HERMS. My original plan was to make it a SHMS, but the necessity for a mash mixer kinda turned me off to this one. More recently I have been considering go the HERMS route, but this appears to have its own set of difficulties (don't overheat the wort, watch out for hsa, sanitize the pump and immersion chiller). Being able to just pump hot water thru the immersion chiller seems to make this option better to me. My question is what are some good solutions for an automatic mash mixer? Preferably something that is reasonably easy to build/install? Thanks, Pete Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 07:53:57 -0700 From: Mike Isaacs <misaacs at bigfoot.com> Subject: Lauter Design The recent posts on manifold design and grain depth have me rethinking the lauter tun I must build before my next batch. I anticipate making 7 to 10 gallon, all-grain batches in my 10 gallon Gott cooler. I had planned to make a manifold with soft copper tubing, spiraling around the inside of the round cooler eventually ending up at and out the drain. I have a similar setup in my kettle, with holes drilled on the bottom of the tubing for filtering trub and hops. Will the 7 to 10 gallon batches create an acceptable grain depth? I don't care, really, as I am keeping the cooler. I have always seen slits mentioned in lauter designs, not holes. Is there a reason for this? What about the liquid under the tubing? What other questions would I have asked? A little feedback would be appreciated. I had a lot of responses to my last post requesting info on full-boils and partial-mashes. The results of the advice I have read here have increased the frequency and quality of my brewing. Thanks in advance. -mike Son of a Son of a Aler, misaacs at bigfoot.com Nothing scares me like "Vampires, Mummies and the Holy Klsh" Jolly Mon Breweries Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 11:09:31 -0400 (EDT) From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker at welchlink.welch.jhu.edu> Subject: Pumpkin as a primary fermenter Hi all. Thought I'd chime in vis-a-vis the recent questions about mashing in pumpkins, etc. Last year I made a nice batch of spiced pumpkin ale a portion of which I used to fill up a hollowed-out pumpkin carcass for use as a primary fermenter. I had saved the "lid" which formed a tight seal across the top. Cut a small notch in the lid for a blow off tube and away she went. The most notable difference between the portion of the batch fermented in the pumpkin and the remainder kept in std. glass carboy was in the clarity - the beer in the pumpkin was CRYSTAL CLEAR when I eventually siphoned it off while the beer in the carboy remained very cloudy for a long time, only cleared after storage in bottles. Maybe someone should look into the possibility of using raw pumpkin as a clarifying agent! Stolat! -Alan - ------------------------------------------------------------------ "Graduate school is the snooze button on the alarm clock of life." -Jim Squire -Alan Meeker Johns Hopkins Hospital Dept. of Urology (410) 614-4974 __________________________________________________________________ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 11:31:41 -0400 From: "J. Matthew Saunders" <saunderm at vt.edu> Subject: Re: Using a commercial keg Brian writes: >I have >been buying a quarterbarrel once in a while for parties - can I somehow use >one of those barrels for homebrew? I would need to get out the "plug", >clean it, fill it, and re-plug it. Is anybody doing this? What's involved, >what do I need? There is a widget called a "Keg Man" that you should be able to get at your local homebrew shop. It comes with instructions on how to remove American Sankey Keg fittings. Along with the widget, you need a screw-driver and some kind of home-made wedge. I can't recall how much they cost but it is under $10. If your local place doesn't carry them let me know and I'll pass a web address to you of a place that will mail order them to you. Good Luck, Matthew. =========================================================== The Arts in Technology--Creative Consulting and Contracting J. Matthew Saunders (540)951-3090 saunderm at vt.edu http://www.dogstar.org "We have to work in the theatre of our own time, with the tools of our own time" --Robert Edmond Jones =========================================================== Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 10:30:09 -0600 From: Paul Gatza <paulg at aob.org> Subject: AHA Seeks Invitations to Homebrewing Events Steve Gibbs has raised the question of AHA participation in homebrewing events in the U.S. instead focusing on the GABF. I am working at changing that focus toward more involvement around the country at homebrewers events. Travel to events has to be balanced with the administrative functions at the office. The AHA is Brian Rezac and I. The other staff that help us put out Zymurgy, perform customer service, production etc.. are shared by the divisions of the AOB. Why the GABF? The GABF is the annually the largest gathering of AHA members in the country, usually in the 1200 member range. Interaction with the members, clubs, competition organizers results in great contacts in the homebrewing community. As a direct result of GABF contacts, I have scheduled attending homebrew club competitions in Las Vegas in January and Kansas City in February. In addition I will be headed to the competition in Princeton, NJ in December and the Bluebonnet in March. I would like to come to Temecula as well. If a club would like us to come to an event to speak, brew, judge or participate in some other way, please invite us. When Brian or I can't make it for budgetary or scheduling reasons, the AHA's Board of Advisors is specifically spread in all regions of the country to serve as AHA ambassadors at this type of event. - -- Paul Gatza Director American Homebrewers Association (303) 447-0816 x 122 736 Pearl Street (303) 447-2825 -- FAX PO Box 1679 paulg at aob.org -- E-MAIL Boulder, CO 80306-1679 info at aob.org -- AOB INFO U.S.A. http://www.beertown.org -- WEB Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 11:07:36 -0600 From: "Brian LeCuyer" <bmlecuy.AT.megavision.PERIOD.com at bertha.megavision.com> Subject: Aquarium Pump "Smell" Filter In HBD 2811, Mark Bayer inquired about the necessity of a carbon filter to remove the rubber smell from the air provided by aquarium pumps. This type of filter is suggested in Dave Miller's book. I have not seen any on-line replies to this question. I would appreciate feedback from people using aquarium pumps for aeration on whether you have experienced any "rubbery" effects, and/or if you use a carbon filter. I would suggest private e-mail reply, and I will summarize back to the Digest if response is adequate. Thanks to the Collective! Brian Columbus, NE Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 09:40:21 -0700 From: Shane & Laura <scook at infoserve.net> Subject: re:On combining decoction and household chores Jim Bentson mentioned a alternative to standard decoctions, <snip> decoction - A method of mashing that raises the temperature of the wash by removing a portion, boiling it and returning it to the mash tun. Gosh, to think I could have been doing my socks during my recent decoction brew. I'd be saving energy also! <end> I tried this and found that although the gym socks added great bitterness to my IPA the aroma left something to be desired. Sorry but I just couldn't resist. Shane - -- ___________________________ E-mail: scook at infoserve.net Phone: (604) 736-1187 ICQ #: 15754362 Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 09:47:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Alan Edwards <ale at cisco.com> Subject: Mashing vs. Extract: a big deal, or not? I want to ask you all: Is mashing really a time-consuming pain, or is that just a myth? In HBD #2856, Pete (Peter.Perez at smed.com) wrote | Subject: mini-masher | | Time does not always permit all-grain batches for me, but I always need | a supply of homebrew, thus I partial mash and extract brew on occasion. | I have seen these mini mashers, which are basically your little 1 or | 2 gallon lunchbox size coolers with an Easymasher type screen in them | and a valve output installed. I am contemplating making one, but I am | concerned that the small cooler and smaller amount of grain will not | maintain it mash temp the way an all-grain batch does in my 10 gal | Gott. Anyone have experience with these things? Can they hold their | heat in? for an hour? can you apply heat by adding boiling water without | thinning the mash out too much? | | Thanks, | Pete I was going to reply to Peter and say that he would be spending close to the same amount of time mashing small amount of grains as a large amount. But then I got to thinking. Perhaps people are scared to try all-grain because of the time involved. Sure it takes more time, but is it really all that big of a deal? For me (who is the only person I can speak for ;-), I went all-grain several years ago and NEVER looked back...not once! That says something. It says that there was never a *reason* for me to look back. (And that the improvements that I realized in my beer, have made me not *want* to look back.) In my experience, it only takes about 3 hours or so to turn grains into malt syrup. Time to wait for the mash to convert, and time to sparge. (I'm not counting the time to bring the water to mash temp, because that heat is not lost, and you would be spending the same amount of time to heat your water and malt syrup.) But, realistically, not all of that is wasted time. The really cool thing about the way I mash is that, after I dough-in into my Gott cooler, I don't have to worry about it again, until it is ready to sparge! (It holds it's temperature extremely well.) I can go do something else, or use that time to prepare for other brewing steps (things that an extract brewer would have to do as well). So is time spent on mash conversion really "extra" time? Not to me. The tasks that actually require you to focus on what you are doing are: * doughing in: a few of minutes * adjusting mash temp if you don't hit it right (decoct, or add ice): time varies, but you get better at this * starting the sparge, recirculating some of the wort: a few minutes * sparging--keeping hot water above the grain bed: 45-90 minutes (a guess) * cleaning the mash/lauter tun: a few minutes of spraying it out with a hose (no need to sanitize) I don't think time or hassle should be the factors that hold you back! Maybe money, but not time. About money: it is a one-time investment to buy your equipment, after that you don't need to look back. Start out simple (you can spend more money on other mashing gadgets later, if you wish). About hassle: I really *like* mashing, but that's me. I still get a kick out of commanding the elements to turn mere starch into liquid gold, er, I mean malt syrup. Sort of like alchemy! Of course, if you want to, or if you are brewing a style that dictates a step-mash, you can spend more time at it. But it is my opinion that BIG returns await those who are willing to make the SMALL leap to a simple all-grain process, like single-step infusion mashing into a false-bottomed cooler. -Alan in Fremont, CA PS. Of course, the experience of other people will vary. Please post *your* opinions! Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 13:13:08 -0400 From: "Marc Battreall" <batman at terranova.net> Subject: King Kooker Cleaning? Hello All, Got a question for your King Kooker users out there. I have one but don't know the model number. It stands about waist high and I bought it years ago for cooking fish, shrimp boils, and the like. Now it has been converted to a brewing cooker. It works great except for recently it has been sooting up my SS brewpot something fierce. I cleaned the element out with a wire brush a few months back and got out all the mud dauber gook that was causing it to flame mostly yellow and that seemed to improve the flame. But now, it is doing it again only worse. It has an adjustment plate that rotates to restrict the airflow located where the gas line attaches to the element but rotating it only modifies the flame a little. It seems that the burner element itself is gunked up. There is a circular disk with serrated edges that sits down inside the cup where the flame comes out and it has alot of rust and crap on it. I cannot get the screw that holds this disk in loose because it too is rusted severely. My question is, has anyone ever dealt with this before and how did they clean it out? I was thinking muratic acid would do the trick. The metal seems to be iron or something similar to exhaust manifolds on marine engines and I used to use muratic acid on those to get all the sea water deposits off with no apparent damage to the metal. I really want to get this fixed instead of buying a new one (obviously). I use liquid dishsoap on the bottom of the brewpot and it helps, but the soot rises up and covers 2/3 of the sides of the pot. I am sure that the flame is not as efficient as it could be too. Any help or ideas would be appreciated. Marc ======================= Captain Marc Battreall Backcountry Brewhouse Islamorada, Florida batman at terranova.net captainbrew at hotmail.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 13:34:52 -0400 From: Jeremy Price <pricejy at email.uc.edu> Subject: re First Wort Hopping > Pete asked about First wort Hopping, I started first wort hopping many of my beers about a year ago, and I am very pleased with the results. First Wort hopping (FWH) is just as it sounds; you add your bittering hops directly to the first runnings of the wort. The acidity of the wort facilitates extraction of the alpha acids in the hop. The increased extraction of the alpha acids is compensated by the fact that some of the bitterness will be lost in the hot break. The current theory is that you do not need to increase the amount of hops when FW hopping. Great, so why FWH? I have found that I get a cleaner, sharper bitterness when I FWH my German Ales, and Lagers. The bitterness is not "Muddled". An interesting side effect of FWH is that there is also an increased perception of hops in both the flavor and the aroma. I had been led to believe that most the flavor and aroma compounds are volatile, and will dissipate during a long boil; but apparently this is not always the case. FWH is great for Pilsners, Octoberfests, Kolsch and Alts, but I have yet to try it in an English or American style beer. From what I have read, FWH should only be done with noble type hops (i.e. Spalt, Saaz) I don't know where I read this, but there was an interesting experiment done with FWH. A brewery in Germany, brewed six Pilsners, three were hopped in the traditional schedule, and the other three were FWH. A panel of expert tasters predominately chose the FWH beers as their favorite. I would be interested to learn why we don't hear more about this. I have not heard of any commercial brewery that practices FWH. Any Ideas? I'm sold on FWH. I've done it before and I'll do it again!!! Jeremy Price, Quality not Quantity !! (sorry Chris, I stole your motto) Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 10:41:28 -0700 From: Dave Sapsis <DAVE_SAPSIS at fire.ca.gov> Subject: munich conversion/goods and process Someone recently questioned the potential differences in diastatic power of American vs. Continental Munich malts, derrived from an apparent lack of conversion after a 4 hour mash smack dab in the sacharification range. While I cannot comment on the current condition of American munich malts, Weyermann's have plenty of enzymes to do the trick. To wit, Matt's indication of: >In the FWIW category, an all-grain, Weyermann Dark Munich-based Alt is in my not->too-distant future! I can hardly wait! bodes well, as I just got through doing one of these, with a dough in at 60C, a single decoct (15 minute), and second rest of the main mash at 67-71C, and a lovely clear runnoff of high yield at 80 minutes after dough in. I guess what promts me to post is that I would strongly encourage folks designing specific beers to use the best and most appropriate goods possible. For German beers, use German malts. For British beers, use UK malts . It really makes a big difference. Too often, I have diagnosed faulty beer straight back the condition of the primary ingredients. The costs and energy associated with getting the right goods for the right job are in my mind, highly outweiged by the quality of the resultant product. That said, there is ongoing discussions whether the state of continental munich malts is as it once was (George Fix and Scott Bickham have both commmented on this) and the possibility that home production may be an excellent source for the depth of taosty flavor that is found in the best alts, dunkles, fests, and bocks. Be creative. But don't expect to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Peace. - --dave, sacramento Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 13:41:24 EDT From: Posse4000S at aol.com Subject: Vent. Hood Pete asked (10/22/89) about installing a ventillation hood in his basement in order to safely use his propane cooker. I would first be concerned with burning down your house, but the question about safe levels of CO is a big concern also. I don't know what the alarm level is of your CO detector is, I do know I would not rely on it soley for determining your vent hoods effectivness. Unfortunenately, good CO monitors are not cheap. Several manufacturers can be found on the web. If you trust the OSHA standards, they say the exposure threshhold of CO is 50 ppm and the 8 hour exposure limit is 25 ppm. The Indoor Air Quality industry standard is 5 ppm and 2.5 ppm respectively. Somewhere around 25 ppm will not kill you over a two hour boiling time. (99% sure of these levels) If the hood works the CO levels will not be a problem, I would sample the CO levels thouroughly and regularly and in several locations including other levels of the house. Those burners produce a lot of CO. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:46:29 +0000 From: dolmans at mail.tss.net Subject: Stuck fermtation? Hello everyone! As they say "I'm a long time lurker first time poster" and need some advice. After brewing a lot (for me) for about a year and a half, (20 some odd batches) I decided it was time to scale up my brew system. After getting a Sanky keg converted and buying a propane burner, no more kitchen brewing to my wife's relief, it was time to try a 10 gallon batch. My father was visiting and being a big pilsner fan we decided to brew a partial mash batch. Well that's when the fun started. Let me start by giving you the recipe and other relevant data. 8 pounds extra pale malt extract 5 pounds pale malt 1 pound Munich malt pound crystal malt 5 ounces Saaz (bittering) 3.5 ounces Saaz (flavoring) _ D.M.E (had it lying around so what the heck) 1 teaspoon Irish moss 2 packages Czech pils lager yeast, O.G was 1.049, a little high but I figured that it was nothing to worry about. Brewed and mashed as normal for me, with beer in hand and father helping out, boy can that man stir. After cooling with immersion wort chiller while still in boil kettle I drained into two plastic 6.5 gallon primary fermentation buckets. Added yeast, 1 pint of starter to each carboy. Moved to fridge and over 24 hour period dropped temperature to 50 F. Had good krausening and fermentation seemed to be proceeding nicely. After one week moved to secondary and back into fridge. No I didn't take a hydrometer reading at that time, I know stupid mistake. Two weeks later time to bottle, hydrometer read 1.020, panic!! Dad was leaving in a week and I wouldn't be able to send beer with him. Brew store guy suggested pitching more yeast so I did one more packet of Czech pils lager in each carboy. Two weeks later still no movement in gravity still at 1.020. What is the next step?? I am considering bottling the beer putting it in the fridge and forgetting about it for six months. Would that help? Beer currently tastes sweetish but is not to bad ( I still believe that if I brewed it I will drink it no matter how bad). As you can see my record keeping is not the greatest but I have never run into this problem before. Help. Gerard Dolmans Thanks in advance, private e-mail is fine. Dolmans at mail.tss.net. Sweaty Left Foot Brewery. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 98 14:49:17 CDT From: jwilkins at wss.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson) Subject: Flies in the wort/GFCI/Low partial mash OG Richard Hooper wrote of finding a dead, uncooked house fly floating in his cooled wort. I also had that happen once. I had cooled and drained my wort to sanitized buckets for aeration and found a fresh fly floating in one of the buckets. I quickly grabbed a spoon that had not been recently sanitized and dipped the critter out. I figured whatever might be on the spoon would not be any worse than what was on the fly. I got away with it in that the beer turned out fine but I wouldn't recommend it. - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- As to GFCI, I decided I should install such a device in the outbuilding where I do my brewing. I bought a GFCI receptacle to replace the ordinary one upstream from the strip at my workbench which I intended to protect. After I connected everything and turned the power back on the GFCI immediately popped off. I couldn't figure out why and put the original receptacle back until I could investigate further. Some time later I noticed that the wall socket in the strip at the workbench had the hot and neutral switched. Still later I got back to trying to install GFCI. I disconnected the wires at the before mentioned wall receptacle and started checking things. I found the white and ground wires were tied together. I took the strip at the work bench apart and found the white and black reversed and the black (now neutral) tied to the ground. What is more, the ground was nowhere attached to the ground terminals of the receptacles and the black (now neutral) was attached to some receptacles on the hot side and the ground attached to the hot side on others. I had been unknowingly using non-grounded receptacles on which even polarized plugs would do no good. Of course having the neutral and ground alternated to the receptacles was why the GFCI tripped when I connected it. I threw the strip out and put in regular wall receptacles with the GFCI upstream to protect them. Don't ever assume the person before you did their job correctly. I won't again. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mikey Beck asked about low OG of a batch made with 3# of DME and 3# of grain in a partial mash. His OG was 1.022. Assuming a five gallon batch and 42 pts/lb for DME (I think it yields at least that) he should have had at least 1.025 if he got nothing from the grain. I wonder if the hydrometer reading could have been wrong? Perhaps the wort was not adequately stirred and the sample was not representative. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- A note on large fermenters. I use a 10 gallon Cornelius type keg with the pressure relief valve removed from the lid and a blow off hose or air lock in a #3 stopper inserted. It is heavy with 9 gallons of wort in it but I can lift it by its handles the short distance to the floor of the fermentation refrigerator. When the ferment is done I replace the pressure relief valve and transfer the beer to kegs under CO2 pressure. I made a transfer hose with a plastic tee so I can fill two kegs at once from the fermenter. Since it is stainless it is also easy to clean. And not fragile. John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins at wss.dsccc.com - ----- End Included Message ----- - ----- End Included Message ----- Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 13:44:11 -0700 From: Badger Roullett <branderr at microsoft.com> Subject: Seeking Books... I am seeking a copy of these out of print books, if anyone knows of a line on one of these, let me know.. Curiosities of Ale and Beer by John Bickerdyke A history of brewing by H. S. Corran *************************************************** Brander Roullett aka Badger Homepage: http://www.nwlink.com/~badger In the SCA: Lord Frederic Badger of Amberhaven "It had to be a linguistics professor who said that it's man's ability to use language that makes him the dominant species on the planet. That may be. But I think there's one other thing that separates us from animals. We aren't afraid of vacuum cleaners." --Jeff Stilson Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 10/23/98, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96