---

	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:
  re: O2 source & Valves ("C.D. Pritchard")
  Listerling, Schmidmann and their mills (Jack Schmidling)
  Re: Oatmeal stout recipes (Jeff Renner)
  Fermentor Geometry and Attenuation ("Sieja, Edward M")
  The Burton Union (Rod Prather)
  Barley Wine or Belgian Strong Ale? (Joy Hansen)
  Re: More on simple temps/tuns ("Jim Busch")
  Re: Infusion Mashing (Joel Plutchak)
  pH meters and SINK Holes ("John S. Thomas")
  Yeast Viability Tests: MBLUE, GUTSTEIN, SLIDE CULTURE TECHNIQUE, and other methods (Joe Rolfe)
   (Kevin Basso)
  Infusion Mashing Formulas (John Varady)
  BurtonUnion Device ("MrWES")
  leaky Gott cooler (Lou.Heavner)
  Acid levels in wit...let's make this easy (Nathan Kanous)
  North Coast Brewing Rasputin Imperial Stout ? ("Frederick L. Pauly")
  1999 AHA National Homebrew Competition ("Steven Lichtenberg")
  Mail order homebrew shop survey (Steve Potter)
  Vinometer (AJ)
  Aircraft Cargo Pressures (Jim Bentson)
  Long Wit ferementation / Inexpensive H20 filter (Manbeck, Brad J.)" <BJM at roisysinc.com>
  Specific Gravity Question ("Gradh O'Dunadaig")
  For Publication Only (RCAYOT)


Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!

This space free to a good competition...

Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org

If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!!

To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word
  "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to request@hbd.org. 
**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!

Contact brewery at hbd.org for information regarding the "Cat's Meow"

Back issues are available via:

  HTML from...
        http://hbd.org
  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

COPYRIGHT for the Digest as a collection is currently held by hbd.org 
  (Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen). Digests in their entirity CANNOT be 
  reprinted/reproduced without this entire header section unless 
  EXPRESS written permission has been obtained from hbd.org. Digests
  CANNOT be reprinted or reproduced in any format for redistribution
  unless said redistribution is at absolutely NO COST to the consumer.
COPYRIGHT for individual posts within each Digest is held by the
  author. Articles cannot be extracted from the Digest and
  reprinted/reproduced without the EXPRESS written permission of the 
  author. The author and HBD must be attributed as author and source in
  any such reprint/reproduction. (Note: QUOTING of items originally
  appearing in the Digest in a subsequent Digest is exempt from the
  above. Home brew clubs NOT associated with organizations having a
  commercial interest in beer or brewing may republish articles in their
  newsletters and/or websites provided that the author and HBD are
  attributed. ASKING first is still a great courtesy...)

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


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


Date: Wed, 03 Mar 1999 18:13:46
From: "C.D. Pritchard" <cdp at chattanooga.net>
Subject: re: O2 source & Valves

The ~$40 BenzoMatic O2\propane torch rig makes a nice O2 source for wort
oxygenation plus you've also got a high output (but costly to operate)
torch.  I use regular 1/8" ID aquarium tubing from the airstone and adapt
it to the tapered torch tip with a bit of 5/16" OD, 3/16" ID vinyl tubing.
I don't know if it's really necessary, but I blowout the torch's tubing and
tip before connecting the vinyl tubing.
 - - - - - 

There's been traffic on the "best" type of valves and sanitation thereof.  
I like those larger nylon clamp type valves that fit over vinyl tubing.
They're cheap, you can roughly throttle the flow and sanitation isn't an
issue.

For much finer flow throttling (but marginal for shut-off purposes),
American Science and Surplus (www.sciplus.com) has a nice "thumb-screw"
type gizmo just for the purpose (cat. # 88189 at 2 for $3.50).  For really
cheap, I've used vise grips as well as a crimp in the tubing secured with
the ever popular "baling wire".




Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 03 Mar 1999 21:55:54 -0800
From: Jack Schmidling <arf at mc.net>
Subject: Listerling, Schmidmann and their mills

"David C. Harsh" <David.Harsh at uc.edu>


"So, the question is directed to George Fix:  How did you do this...

Not sure George bothers reading this anymore but the last time
he was asked, he said the he ran it through the mill twice but
I do not recall how it was set up.  It was also one of the very
early mills and may not represent the current behavior at all.

In case you missed it, Zymurgy's "Roll out the Mills" article
concluded that the best crush of all mills was by running through
a fixed mill twice.  They also use an older mill but not the
same vintage as Fix.

" What
spacings did you use on the tested mill, what grain did you use, and at
what rate did you grind the grain?  Also, how did you analyze the size
fraction?  Give some details please.

Aside from the spacing, I believe all the other points are covered on
the published report.

"What I do know is that single pass through a hand-cranked MaltMill with 
the settings that Jack describes will not produce the results under 
discussion here...

Not sure what the "results under discussion here" really means.

"Just as long as you go away, we'll be happy...       ;)

Best way to achieve that is to get people to stop buying our
wonderful product.

"Remember the start of this discussion was the QDA claim that using the
distribution listed in the Practical Brewer will result in better 
homebrew.....

Not sure what a QDA is but I believe this discussion started by
someone asking the absurd question "is the Schmidling mill as good
as good as 6 roller commercial mill?"

"This so-called IDEAL DISTRIBUTION is irrelevant to homebrewing 
except as a very general guidline.....

I couldn't agree more and have said so many times.  It's those
nice folks who get paid or ego gratification for saying clever
things about beer that keep this topic alive.  I just provide
a little balance.

"One other comment about Jack's ad:  It claims that grain is actually 
milled across the entire length of the roller.  The hopper design 
prevents more than the center 50% from being used and if you motorize, 
the effective roller length is reduced even more....

This is simply untrue and all you need do is look at the rollers
after milling a batch.  The dust and fines cover the entire roller
although concentrated in the center.  The faster the rollers turn
the more roller length gets used.

" Jack has in the past claimed that the non-adjustable mill works 
similarly to the adjustable one and this is probably why.

Don't believe I ever said that.  I have said in essence, that the
fixed mill works well enough that I see no real need for an
adjustable one.  It only works "sililarly" to the adjustable mill
if said mill is adjusted like a fixed one.  You can get a very
wide variation in the grist distribution by adjusting it but I
have never found that to improve the beer in any way.

js

- -- 

Visit our WEB pages:     http://user.mc.net/arf

ASTROPHOTO OF THE WEEK..... New Every Monday




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 09:13:12 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Oatmeal stout recipes

"Ratkiewich, Peter" <PRATKIEWICH at ci.westport.ct.us> asks for oatmeal stout
recipes.

Peter, I hope you'll consider using oat malt for one of your two 15 gallon
batches.  This would be a great chance to compare malted oats with rolled
oats.  I just posted the outline of Maclay's Oat Malt Stout the other day -
70% Maris Otter pale malt, 22% malted oats, 6% roast barley, 2% chocolate
malt, whole Fuggles, 35 IBU.  This is moe bitter than a typical oatmeal
stout, but it works for Maclay.

As I have mentioned here, I really like the silky, oily mouthfeel that
malted oats seems to give.  If you order malted oats now from North Country
Malt in upstate NY, you ought to be able to get it in time for your brew.
If you do this, please post your results.

Jeff

 -=-=-=-=-
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan c/o nerenner at umich.edu
"One never knows, do one?"  Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943. 




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 08:30:34 -0600 
From: "Sieja, Edward M" <EMSieja at ingr.com>
Subject: Fermentor Geometry and Attenuation


I have noticed an interesting phenomenon with my last
few batches.  I typically brew so that I can collect about
11 gallons of wort.  I used to ferment in a pseudo-open
style in a 20gal Rubbermaid Brute trash can and had
great results with my house brew -- an American Pale
Ale.  I now have a toddler, so for safety I have gone to
splitting the batch into a 5 gal (10.5 inch OD) carboy
and a 6.5 gal (12 inch OD) carboy with glass blowoff
tubes.  This houses the volume perfectly with enough
room for proper blowoff.  The levels in the carboys are
about the same (within an inch anyway).  I step up a
large starter from a 1056 (Chico) culture.  The yeast is
divided equally between the two carboys, and I typically
do a single-stage fermentation for this ale just to save
time.  Original gravity is between 1.054 and 1.056 with
heavy use of Cascade pellet hops.  Lag time is less
than 6 hours.

Grain Bill:

20 lbs 2-row
1.5 lbs Crystal 60L
1 lb Carapils

So here's the main question - after fermentation is
complete (usually between 8 to 12 days) I keg the beer.
The smaller carboy always seems to finish at an SG of
1.012 while the larger finishes at an SG of 1.006.  My old
open fermentations always measured at an SG of 1.006
with the same mash schedule.  I typically mash with a
single infusion at 154F->152F for 60 to 75 minutes.  I know
that a higher temperature mash schedule would produce
a less fermentable wort and have tried that on occasion,
but is not what I'm asking.

Is the result simply the effect of the surface area that the
fermentor presents?  Is there any published data on optimal
sizes?

Note that both end results are fine -- however I typically like
the mouthfeel and body of the smaller batch with the higher
finishing gravity.

Ed Sieja
Bandit Brewing in 'bama



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 04 Mar 1999 09:45:24 -0500
From: Rod Prather <rodpr at iquest.net>
Subject: The Burton Union

The burton union seem like it might be a great product.  The pictures were
non existant and leaves me wondering just what the Burton Union acutally
is.  Except perhaps the first night after Richard and Liz's wedding.   Don't
think you'd want to publish that either.



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 09:53:38 -0500
From: joytbrew at halifax.com (Joy Hansen)
Subject: Barley Wine or Belgian Strong Ale?



>John Wilkinson wrote:
>>
>>From: John.Wilkinson at aud.alcatel.com (John Wilkinson)
>>Subject: Barley wine
>
>
>>".  .  .I have only had Big Foot and Old Foghorn and much prefer the Big
>Foot.
>>.  .  .  .  I wonder what OG is necessary to get the maltiness of Big Foot
>and what IBU >rate to offset the sweetness?  I have looked in the HBD
>archives and have found no >recipes purporting to be similar to Big Foot.
>I have thought of using Rob M.'s recipe >for 10/20 as its low FG would seem
>to promise not too much sweetness.  I tried Phil >Wilcox's version of that
>at the MCAB and found it quite good.  . . . . .
>>similar to Big Foot?  Also, I have a sizeable yeast cake of 1056 under a
>>fermenting beer and thought of using that but I notice that Rob called for
>an
>>English ale yeast and used Nottingham.
>
>> Would the 1056 be good for the type barley wine I am looking for or
>>should I go ahead and use Nottingham?  John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas"
>
>
>Hi John,
>
>I have a pseudo barley wine in a secondary sitting right next to the
>computer (a warn place).   I over boiled the brew and the IPA ended up at
>107, aka barley wine!  Munton's yeast really kicks a$$ and drops the SG
like
>mad, in a short time.   I'm confident that the high hop rate I used and the
>ester production in this pseudo barley wine will result in a great brew.
>
>Like you, I've tried commercial barley wines via bottle and brew pub.  The
>hop bitterness between Old Fog Horn and Big Foot is more to my liking.  The
>best example for me was the Arlington, VA Bardo Rodeo's (now closed) "White
>Lightening".   For my brewing, I tend to brew the highest gravity I can
>muster (mistake or not); preferring, to let the commercial brewers produce
>the ho-hum to style brews.  The ho-hum stuff is enjoyable, but boring.
>
>One barley wine I brewed with 1056 and finished with champaign yeast took a
>first in the strong ales category and third best of show.  Mr. Murphy, aka
>Murphy's Law, was with me for the entire brewing/maturing process (1 1/2
>years).  Just to let you know that I brew barley wines.  A more recent
>Strong Scotch Ale weighed in with a 10+ % by vol using Wyeast 1728
(Scottish
>Ale).
>
>IMHO, most examples of commercial barley wine are intended to be drunk
>early, such as Old Fog Horn.  Big foot seems to take three or four years to
>mellow.   Some Scandinavian brews seem never to mature!  Also, I doubt that
>there are meaningful style quides to brew to except to avoid defects; such
>as, fusel, cloying sweetness, warm haze, and over use of specialty malts,
>etc.
>
>Given the difficult task you chosen to undertake, I suggest that you
attempt
>a Belgian Strong Ale!  Using Wyeast 1388 (tolerates high alcohol) and gives
>the brew a striking citrus like flavor, a wonderful malt flavor, and the
>brew can be dry.  I prime this brew with honey and the complexity sometimes
>overwhelms me.  I don't add orange or coriander!  The yeast and honey
>provides all the flavor I like.  I think Wyeast 3944 has a unique, but
>typical Belgian flavor and I sometimes start a brew with this yeast and
>finish with the 1388.  I DO NOT BREW TO STYLE.  So, I mash to the limit of
>my mash tun and limit the sparge runoff.  Then, I boil for up to three
hours
>to adjust the gravity.    I add sucrose to bring the final wort gravity to
>110.  These finish in the range 30 to 45, depending on the mash schedule
and
>type of yeast, and Mr. Murphy!  If you do all grain, spend a lot of time at
>the 142 degree saccharification temperature and don't use any specialty
>dextrin malts.  (the same is true for barley wine)
>
>With regard to using 1056 for a barley wine, it's much too clean for my
>taste.  It can produce winning brews if the objective is to brew to the
>latest commercial whim.  However, other yeast produce more interesting and
>unique flavor.  Since these brews will last for up to 20 years in the
>bottle, wouldn't it be nice to have many barley wines and each unique?
>These are not session brews.  They are to be enjoyed like a fine aperitif
in
>small quantities.  Searching each for special attributes and savoring the
un
>ique complexity of YOUR brew, be it Strong Belgian Ale or Barley Wine is
>exquiset relaxation.  Uhmmm, I wonder what oxidation will lead to in my
next
>session with a barley wine of strong belgian ale?
>
>Unfortunately, home brewing high gravity beer is a lot like brewing wine.
>You really don't know the goodness of the brew until it's been down for one
>or more years.  So, start early and put a lot of it down for the future.
>
>Prost,
>
>                                            Joy"T"Brew
>
>IMHO, use a yeast with a high alcohol tolerance and produce a huge starter!
>
>
>



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 10:45:14 +0000
From: "Jim Busch" <jim at victorybeer.com>
Subject: Re: More on simple temps/tuns

I probably never should of bothered with this subject but Daves 
response has clarified his reasoning so maybe I should do the same 
with mine.

< I will spend
<a little of my currently precious time ( getting ready to move)
<to expand it a little.

Dave, I dont mean to rag on you but you post 3 times to the digest in 
one day, one post is a dumb Bud joke and the other is a total nit on 
George regarding a typo for crissakes!  Precious time, really! That 
said, most of the rest of the digest had some excellent content, good 
job guys!

<Jim Busch comments on my suggestion to use 180F water
<to infuse to 155F.  I know that C. Papazian and Jim Busch
<suggest the use of 165-168F liquor as the strike heat in

Hummm, Im not sure if I should be offended by the above or take it as 
some kind of validation of my point....also note that I didnt advise 
aiming for 155 either, 152 is probably a better temp for a single 
infusion mash as it will still favor some degree of beta amylase
activity.  (and with Daves 11% Caramel malt you dont want to mash as 
high as 155 either unless one wants a beer that finishes at 4P or 
more!).

<V(H2O) = {0.22 * (155-65)/ ( 170 - 155)  = 1.32 quart/lbs

This equation seems to support my point exactly, I desire about 
1.25-1.3 Qts/lb in most of my mashes.  I would use 163-5 water to get 
to 152.  Also remember it is much more desirable to undershoot the 
mash temp and adjust up with boiling water rather than overshoot and 
attempt to cool down.

<The heat sink of many mash tuns have a heat capacity
<equivalent to a pound or more of grain.

This explains a lot of Daves reasoning here.  I dont account for this 
at all because of my methods.  I have a SS mash tun, I add hot water 
to this tun, I measure the temp of the water in the tun.  This is the 
actual strike temp of the water I am assuming, no losses as the tun 
is already heated.  If you prefer another method, rinse hot water in 
your tun and allow to drain (this is what I also do with my lauter 
tun prior to adding foundation water so I dont lose more heat).  Then 
the heat capacity of the tun is a non issue.  It never occured to me 
that one would place hot mash water in a cold tun!  Also Im not one 
of those who likes to add water to grain, I add water first and then 
grain to that.  Never did understand Noonans insistance on the 
converse methods and it sure doesnt have any negative effect on my 
beers or extract.  Just stir so you dont get starch balls.

Cheers,

Jim Busch




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 09:39:40 -0600 (CST)
From: Joel Plutchak <plutchak at ncsa.uiuc.edu>
Subject: Re: Infusion Mashing

In HBD #2969, Dave Burley...

 ...takes issue with Jim Busch's strike temperature recommendation
of 165-168 degress F.

   As another extremely uncontrolled data point, I typically use
a strike temperature no higher than 168 degrees F., to reach 
mash temperatures ranging from 150 to 157, with grist/water
ratios raging from 1.0 to 1.33 quarts per pound.  This has
remained consistent over about 35 batches in the last three
years, and I usually hit my mash temp very well these days.
   I suspect the mash tun *and* heat source specifics have more
to do with this than confirmed "intermediate forever" brewers
like myself would think.  In my case, I heat on an electric stove
using a 5- or 8-gallon canning pot, and ususally the pot stays on
the heating element (stove off) while mashing in.  I would guess
if you have a different type of vessel and a heat source where
off *means* off, the 180 degree recommendation may hold.  However,
for those first-time all-grainers Dave was addressing, I suspect
more of them use a set-up like mine than use, e.g., coolers and
cajun cookers.
   My bottom line when starting all-grain was that it was easier,
and as I understood it less potentially harmful to the mash, for
me to undershoot a bit and add direct heat than to overshoot and
have to worry about "stirring down" the mash or having cold,
filtered water on hand.
   (Does that make any sense?)
- --
Joel Plutchak
A morning's drive south-southwest of Jeff Renner, in Flatlandia IL.



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 07:55:44 -0800
From: "John S. Thomas" <jthomas at iinet.com>
Subject: pH meters and SINK Holes

Ronald LaBorde,
ph meters and SINK HOLES for money.

Meters of any kind can be a sink holes for money and so can all fun hobbies.
Such is life.

My disclaimer - I sell meters and brewing equipment.  I am also a salesman
and have been for longer than I can remember.  I have an axe to grind - so
be careful.

But to the problem of why the short life of pH meters.  A $35 pH meter is a
throw a way meter.  It is not design for long life.  A top quality meter
will cost upwards of $100 and much much more.  If you want accuracy (ph .01)
start at $150.  Also look for one with a replaceable probe.

If you want to extend the life of the pH probe use it at ambient temperature
only.  Never stick it into the hot mash.  Remove a sample of wort let it
cool then measure the pH.  Use the manufactures rinse solution and storage
solution when finished.  The probe tip must stay wet while stored.

The pH electrode's life also depends on the temperature.  If constantly used
at high temperatures, the electrode life is drastically reduced.   The
higher the range of temperature, shorter the life of the electrode.

Typical Electrode Life
Ambient Temperature 1- 3 years
90 degrees C (164F) less than 4 months
120 degrees C (248F) Less than 1 month

There is a company in San Diego that manufactures pH meters for use at =
high temperatures in food processing.  They start at $1,000 for the =
probe only.  Expected life three years.

Ron,  Does pH meter use really improve the beer?  And does it improve =
consistency? Maybe these questions need to be answered first. =20

John S. Thomas
Hobby Beverage Equipment




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 04 Mar 1999 11:14:10 -0500
From: Joe Rolfe <rolfe at sky.sky.com>
Subject: Yeast Viability Tests: MBLUE, GUTSTEIN, SLIDE CULTURE TECHNIQUE, and other methods

I found some of my articles on the MBLUE and one I had been looking
for to give Dave Whitman for his viability/storage tests...

>From my recently found Siebels materials from the 2 week Microbiology
Course (excel course btw):

MBLUE
 - will also stain newly formed buds giving false readings.
 - mostly used for estimates of > 80% viable slurry
 - used to monitor trends of viability
for commercial brewing this works out well, the breweries tend to
repitch quickly and in most cases the repitch if less than 90% viable
wount be used.  this does not work well for homebrewing as we
typically only brew at most once a week if that.

A couple of recipes for MBLUE

 .1gr Mblue (dry I assume) in 100ml distilled water
take 10ml of this stock solution and disolve .2gr Sodium Citrate
dihydrate
add 90ml distilled water, store in amber bottle for less than 6 months

Fink Kuhles
SOLUTION A: MBLUE .1gr/500ml
SOLUTION B: KH2PO4 13.6gr/500ml
SOLUTION C: Na2HPO4 2.4gr/100ml

Mix 498.75ml SOL B with 1.25ml SOL C then add this to SOL A
ph 4.6 of final should be 4.6


Examine cells after 1- 5 min


Some REF material for this MBLUE - none of which I have seen other
than ASBC Methods so here is another QDA:

ASBC - Methods Manual,  Report on Subcommitee on Yeast Exams (no
date), Proceedings 1946 pg 126
Brewers Digest 18(9):45 1943
Wallerstien Labs Coummnucations 6:198 1943 
Chilver Harrison and Webb ASBC 36:13 1978
EBC Yeast Group JIOB 68:14 1968
Fink, Kuhles Phys Chemistry 65:218 1933
IOB Recommended Methods of Analysis 9.1.3.2 1977
Pierce JIOB 76:442 1970

A much better but more complex and time consuming manner
GUTSTEIN STAIN
1% MBLUE
5% Tannic Acid
1% Safranin O
mix all in distilled water in sep bottles

smear slide with slurry and dry
fix cells - carefully on flame
Stain with MBLUE 4 minutes and rinse 30 sec
Stain with Tannic 2 minutes and rinse 30 sec
Stain with Safranin 1 minute and rinse 30 sec
Dry slide
Observe under oil immersion w/o slide cover
The more red - the worse the condition
The more blue (yep blue) - the better the condition
you will no doubt see a rain bow of colors in the shades of blue and
red


****Dave Whitman - heads up this is for you - I found it finally.....

SLIDE CULTURE TECHNIQUE

1) With forceps, heat a slide over flame
2) Spread to a thin layer 1ml molten MYPG 
(or wort agar should do fine - I used this without trouble)
3) After agar has become solid, place 2 drops of dilute yeast slurry 
	1 cell/ml, this is pretty tough 
	- you dont what a crowd of yeast on the slide
	- min separation 4-10x diameter apart
4) Check slide at 100x (200- 250x recommended) for over crowding
5) Place in petri dish cover and incubate at 20-22C for no longer than
18 hrs.
6) Examine under 100x (200-250x recommended) 
	Count about 500 (colony growth or none) do the math and your done.

Some others for folks with access to nice labs 

Use of Phase Contrast Scopes - nice for examining the guts of cells

Epifluorescent Stains
	Acidine Orange
	Mg 1,8 ANS
clueless/never used or seen used but the doc states they are very
accurate and fast.

Impedence - for inline testing - nice if your A/B or Miller - very
expensive hardware This would be great for hard piped transfers to the
yeast storage rooms.  If it passed the test proceed to yeast brink
other wise - discard - all on the fly.


Enuff - got to do work
Good Luck and Great Brewing
Joe Rolfe


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 17:04:54 -0500
From: Kevin Basso <KevinB at AWSPERRY.COM>
Subject:  

Brewers East End Revival 1999 Brew-Off Homebrew Competition

April 24, 1999

Welcome to the 3rd annual B.E.E.R. homebrew competition! We are happy 
to be hosting an AHA-BJCP sanctioned competition on Long Island and 
look forward to seeing some friends from the past as well as many new 
brewers at the event. The Brew-Off will be held on April 24th at the 
Nesconset Knights of Columbus, with judge and steward registration at 
9:30 a.m. First round judging will start at 10 a.m. in a closed 
session. Best of Show judging will begin at 4 p.m. and will be open to 
the public. Medals, certificates and prizes will be awarded to the 
winners, and a special BREWMASTER'S CUP award for a beer chosen to be 
brewed at John Harvard's Brewhouse in Lake Grove.

The Official Brew-Off Rules and Regulations

1. This AHA-BJCP sanctioned competition is open to all homebrewers. 
Beers entered must be brewed at home. NO commercially produced beer 
will be accepted.

2. All 28 AHA beer categories and sub-categories will be accepted 
including mead and cider.

Categories will be collapsed at the discretion of the competition 
organizer.

3. Brewers may enter any category as often as they like as long as the 
entries are from different recipes.

4. All entries must be accompanied by a recipe entry form. Entry fees 
are $5.00 per entry. All entries over 10 will be accepted free of 
charge! Please make checks payable to: Brewers East End Revival. If 
you are mailing the entries, include the recipe entry forms and the 
check together in a zip-lock bag.

Three bottles are required per entry. Bottles must be 7 - 25 ounces in 
volume, brown or green glass, and free of any painted brand name 
lettering. Grolsch style bottles and PET bottle with carbonators are 
acceptable. Bottle caps must be tree from graphics or blacked out with 
a permanent marker. A bottle entry label must be attached with rubber 
bands to each bottle entered. Do not use glue or tape! Any entry not 
meeting these requirements will be disqualified. Disqualified entries 
will be judged but not eligible for any awards.


6. 	Entries are due by April 19. They may be brought to a B.E.E.R. 
club meeting or dropped off at the following location: Brewers Den; 
Brews Brothers at KEDCO, or Karps Homebrew. Entries may be shipped UPS 
to
	
46 Watchogue Ave.
East Moriches, NY 11940
ATTN : Chris Pranis

Carefully pack entries in a sturdy box. Line the inside of the box 
with a plastic bag. Partition and pack each bottle with adequate 
packaging material. It is legal to send beer for evaluation.
To avoid questions from UPS, identify contents as non-perishable food. 
Please note:
ENTRIES WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED THE DAY OF THE COMPETITION! . No 
exceptions will be made.

7. If you would like your score sheets returned, please include a self 
addressed stamped envelope. One SASE per three entries should be 
sufficient.

8. For further information pertaining to rules, regulations, entry 
requirements and style guidelines, see the Winter issue of ZYMURGY. 
Also check out aha at aob.org; http://beertown.org.

9. Judges and stewards are needed. If you are a BJCP judge or would 
like to help steward in this competition, please contact: Pete Algerio 
 at  (516) 924-2554 (Judge Director) or Chris Pranis  at  (516) 878-2091, or 
you can email the club at MikeBEER at aol.com. Lunch and plenty of 
homebrew will be available to all participating judges and stewards. 
Also, at the open session of Best of Show, fresh homebrew will be 
available to all B.E.E.R. members. The Third Annual B.E.E.R. Brew-off 
will be held at the Nesconset Knights of Columbus

Hall, 130 Lake Ave., South Nesconset, Long Island.

10. A Chili Cook-off will be held after the Best of Show round. For 
more information about the Chili Cook-off please contact Shawn Bosch 
at (516) 929-6989.

Directions to the Nesconset Knights of Columbus hall:

Take the Northern State Parkway to the end. Staying in the left lane 
through Hauppauge, take the left fork onto Route 347 (Approximately 2 
miles from the end of the parkway.) About3 miles from this junction, 
Southern Boulevard crosses Route 347. Take the following left onto 
Lake Avenue.
The hall is on your left about 1/10 of a mile up.

Enter early, enter often, and come on down for fun and homebrew at 4 
p.m. on April 24th.




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 11:36:46 -0500 (EST)
From: John Varady <rust1d at usa.net>
Subject: Infusion Mashing Formulas

David Burley gives his thoughts on calculating strike water temps and shows
us a formula where he expresses the heat capacity of malt as being
equivalent to .22 quarts of water for each pound of grain and gives the
following equation:

> V(H2O added) = {(0.22W(grist) + V (water present in mash))
> X  delT of mash}/(delT  water added) 


In the formulas I've seen, the capacity of malt is expressed as an
equivalent mass of water, not volume. If you convert Dave's .22 quarts/pound
to pounds/pounds (truly dimensionless), you have about .458 (8.33/4 * .22) .
This means that 1 pound of grain is equal to .458 pounds of water, or 1 kg
grain is equivalent to .458 kg water.

I have seen values for the heat capacity of malt listed as low as .32 (by
Kelly Jones, HBD #1207) to as much as .40 (by KennyEddy, HBD #1953). In
fact, let me quote Kenny here (from HBD #1953):

>The "water equivalent" (W.E.) is the amount of water whose heat capacity is
>equivalent to that of a given amount of grain (based on specific heat of
>grain being 0.4) and is calculated like this:
>
>W.E. = 0.0479 * Wg gallons
>     = 0.192 * Wg quarts
>     = 0.4 * Mg liters
>
>Example:  20 kg of grain has the same heat capacity as 0.4 * 20 = 8 liters of
>water.

(since 1 liter = 1 kg it is very convenient to use metric in the following
formulas)

It seems to me that your value of .458 is much higher than the other values
I have seen.

Now, we'll use the following formula to calculate some values:

Ma = (Hcm*Mm+Mw)*(Tf-Tm)/(Tw-Tf)

Where:

     Ma = required mass of water to infuse 

     Hcm = heat capacity of malt
     Mm = mass of malt 
     Mw = mass of water already in mash 
     Tf = final temperature desired 
     Tm = current temperature of the mash 
     Tw = temperature of infusion water added


Using your numbers; grain temp = 65, final temp = 155, added temp = 165,
malt heat capacity = .458, water already in mash = 0, 1 pound of grain:

(.458*1)*(155-65)/(165-155) =  4.122 lbs of water needed

converting lbs to quarts yields: (4.122/8.33*4) = 1.98, just like you stated
in your formula:

>V(H2O) = {0.22 * (155-65)/(165 - 155)   = 1.98 quarts/lb


So, let's do the same scenario, but assume that the heat cap of malt is .4:

(.4*1)*(155-65)/(165-155) = 3.6 lbs of water needed

converting lbs to quarts yields: (3.6/8.33*4) = 1.72 quarts/lb


Let's do the formula once more, but use 168F as our strike water temp:

(.4*1)*(155-65)/(168-155) = 2.77 lbs of water needed

converting lbs to quarts yields: (2.77/8.33*4) = 1.32 quarts/lb.


Now, let's go back to Jim Busch's post:

>Dave suggests:

><buy 8 pounds of pale *ale* malt, 1 pound of crystal malt have
><it milled. Wet it down in your mash tun with hot water ( 180F)
><stirring until you get it to 155F. Try to  add  about 1.5 quarts per
><pound. If you see that you are not going to make it, finish the last
><additions with boiling water and lots of stirring or heat 
><separately. Mix in gypsum ( calcium sulfate) 1/2 tsp at a

>This caught my eye as it sounds confusing and could easily overshoot 
>the desired strike temp.  Here is my advice:

>Add 1.3 Qt/pound of 165F to the mash tun.  Add gypsum.  Stir in malt. 
>Check temp, I would advise aiming for 149-152F.  Id be surprised if a 
>drop of 25F is achieved with Daves program unless the malt is kept in 
>a very cold place.


Dave's suggestion of using 1.5 quarts (or 3.1 lbs) of 180F water per lb of
grain to hit 155F would yield:

Tf = (Hc1*M1*T1 + Hc2*M2*T2)/(Hc1*M1+Hc2*M2) 

Where:

     Tf = final temperature 

     Hc1 = heat capacity of first mass (malt = .4)
     M1 = weight of first mass
     T1 = current temperature of first mass
     Hc2 = heat capacity of second mass (water = 1)
     M2 = weight of second mass
     T2 = current temperature of second mass

(.4*1*65 + 1*3.1*180)/(.4*1+1*3.1) = 167F

Ut-oh! This is way over the 152F mash in temp Jim was suggesting, or even
the 155F Dave was hoping to hit!

Now, Let's look at what Jim was suggesting, using 1.3 qts (2.71 lbs) of 165F
water per pound of grain to hit 152F:

(.4*1*65 + 1*2.71*165)/(.4*1+1*2.71) = 152F

Good job Jim!

Of course, these equations are based on no temperature drop being caused by
the mash vessel.

Why did I go into this in such detail?? Because I hate to see statements
like this made in the HBD:

>Enough said on this subject.

I guess not, huh? We'll see.

For a comprehensive listing of the various formulas required to do infusion
and decoction mashing, please refer to my web page listed below. It explains
how the mash temp calculator of my home brewing software works and provides
formulas to back up those calculations.

http://www.netaxs.com/people/vectorsys/varady/hbmash.htm

I hope this post is useful to someone and apologize for it's length.

Mashing With Math,

John
- -- 
John Varady                     The HomeBrew Recipe Calculating Program
Boneyard Brewing                Custom Neon Beer Signs For Home Brewers
Glenside, PA                            Get More Information At:
rust1d at usa.net                  http://www.netaxs.com/~vectorsys/varady 



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 11:02:21 -0600
From: "MrWES" <killshot at enteract.com>
Subject: BurtonUnion Device

RE: Homebrew Digest #2969 (March 04, 1999)

The following URL http://bullwinkle.gardnerweb.com/Beer/burtonunion.html
shows a blow over during fermentation and the need for either a blow off
hose or other device. The picture doesn't mention whether or not this is a
primary fermenter or secondary, but from the high krausen I figured it was a
primary.

Question: Why use a 5 gal carboy for a primary? No wonder you're loosing
brew, try using a 6 or 6.5 gal carboy and I bet you'll solve most of you
brew lost.

Bill






Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 10:53:58 -0600
From: Lou.Heavner at frco.com
Subject: leaky Gott cooler

     From: "Jeff Beinhaur" <beinhaur at email.msn.com>

     {snip}

     Today's question: Any suggestions for replacing the washers on the
     faucets for the Gott coolers. My coolers are fairly new and they
     always seem to leak around the faucet. I've tried to tighten them but
     this seems to only make it worse. I guess I could try to just replace
     with like washers but I wonder if anyone has a better idea. Thanks in
     advance.

     Jeff Beinhaur, Camp Hill, PA
     Home of the Yellow Breeches Brewery

     Jeff,

     I just use a 1-hole stopper with copper tubing through the hole.  Push
     the stopper in place from the inside, of course.  On my mash/lauter
     tun, the copper tubing snugs up to the hose barb on my phil's
     phloater.  On my hot liquor tank, the tubing just bends down to touch
     the bottom to maximize draining.  On the outlet sides, the tubing is
     connected to my valves with compression fittings.  Easy to assemble
     and disassemble and easy to clean.  It's cheap and it has never leaked
     during a brew session, even when I once got a stuck lauter and had to
     underlet hot water several times.

     Regards,

     Lou Heavner - Austin, TX


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 04 Mar 1999 11:36:55 -0600
From: Nathan Kanous <nlkanous at pharmacy.wisc.edu>
Subject: Acid levels in wit...let's make this easy

OK.  Heres the deal.  I want to make a wit with a touch of acidity.  In
AlK's great book (you know the one) the listings of Head Start Brewing
Cultures indicates that some of their lactobacillus cultures can be used
post-fermentation to sour wit beers and berliner weisse ("instructions
included").  Now, Head Start is not currently selling cultures.  Al doesn't
know how their directions tell you to do this, he just published the
information they provided.  I haven't been successful in tracking down the
owner of Head Start.  I know where he is, but he's busy and acidifying MY
wit beer isn't high on his priority list.  This I understand and respect.

So, you folks out there in HBD land...anybody know how much lactose should
be added to 5 gallons of wit beer to achieve a "desireable" level of
acidity after fermentation and innoculation with lactobacilli?

thanks...I should've asked my question more directly the first time.
nathan in madison, wi




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 13:15:44 -0500
From: "Frederick L. Pauly" <flp2m at avery.med.virginia.edu>
Subject: North Coast Brewing Rasputin Imperial Stout ?

Has anyone had any success duplicating this brew?
Any ideas on how to go about it?
All I know is that it is rich,strong and wonderfull
with an ABV of 8.9%
Thanks for any help,
Rick Pauly
Charlottesville,VA


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 13:28:50 -0500
From: "Steven Lichtenberg" <slichten at pci-net.com>
Subject: 1999 AHA National Homebrew Competition

In today's HBD Paul Gatza sent notification about the 1999 AHA National
competition.  While this is a worthy endeavor and I did have fun while
judging the 1997!!! regional competition (NE region), I was just wondering
if anyone has EVER gotten the issue straight with getting judge points for
that competition (2 YEARS AGO!!!) with the BJCP.  I know that myself and
many others are still so soured on the AHA's inability to get the paper work
straight that it will be a LOOOOOONG time before I will consider judging
another event like this.  (Too bad, since I did have fun doing it).

Doesn't seem like a difficult thing to do to just get the record keeping
straight.

- --S
  ^
BJCP Certified

_______________________________________
Steven Lichtenberg
Progressive Consultants, Inc.
"Your Progress is Our Business"
E-Mail:  slichten at pci-net.com
Tel:       (703) 790-9316
Fax:      (703) 790-9248
________________________________________




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 04 Mar 1999 12:31:46 -0600
From: Steve Potter <spotter at meriter.com>
Subject: Mail order homebrew shop survey

Dear collective,
At long last, the results of the homebrew shop survey are in.  To see
them, go to

http://hbd.org/1stdraft

Select the links page and then select the "Folks with stuff to sell"
category.  The survey is entitled "The great mail order survey."

Thanks for your patience and participation.

Steve
Madison, Wisconsin


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 04 Mar 1999 14:32:53 -0500
From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com>
Subject: Vinometer

Jeff Luck asks whether a vinometer would work with beer. Why don't you
try it and see (and, of course, let us know what you find out)? The
potential problems you might run into are related to the strength of
wine and the protein/sugar content of beer. The instrument may not
respond accurately at the 4-6% alcohol  levels of beer as opposed to the
say, 9  - 15% levels found in wine. How low does the scale go? Second,
the device works on a "colligative" propertiy of the solution i.e. the
surface tension which depends on all the things dissolved in the
solution. Beer contains quite a bit of protein  and residual extract-
sufficient to raise the boiling point of beer to the extent that
correction is required in ebulliometry (boiling point being another
colligative property). Wine, of course, contains things other than
alcohol and water as  well but they are different other things from
those found in beer. Thus the device might not appear to work at first
with beer but might be made workable with a simple correction for true
extract.

Jeff worries about protein buildup in the capillary and I think he is
right to be concerned about this. This protein can be removed with lye
solution (careful!) or the enzyme based solutions sold for removing
protein from pH electrodes.



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 04 Mar 1999 15:49:18 -0500
From: Jim Bentson <jbentson at longisland.com>
Subject: Aircraft Cargo Pressures

In HBD2966 Rob Ball stated the following:


 Just a quick answer to the posts about cabin pressure in jetliners.
The baggage compartments are the same pressure as the inside cabin,
only the temps are different.If these compartments were not at the 
same pressure as the rest of the plane it would rip apart and our 
worries would switch from bottles to the lack of parachutes!!
Happy flying,drinking,ect.ect. BTW  I LOVE THE HBDG!!

My comment is:

Just to allay fears, this statement about the aircraft ripping apart is
incorrect. Aircraft structures, including the floor, are designed to
survive sudden decompression. If Rob's statement was true the floor above
the baggage compartment would explode upwards into the cabin if the cabin
decompressed suddenly ( and vice-versa if the baggage compartment
decompressed). There have been a number of cases where aircraft cargo doors
blew off in flight with no consequences to the aircraft.

The usual design load for aircraft floors is 100 to 200 psf. At 35,000 ft
the pressure differential between the cabin and the outside of the fuselage
is around 0.5 atmospheres or 72 psf.




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 04 Mar 1999 14:54 -0600
From: "BJM (Manbeck, Brad J.)" <BJM at roisysinc.com>
Subject: Long Wit ferementation / Inexpensive H20 filter


I have some questions relating to a long fermentation time with a wit   
beer I recently brewed. The primary ferment was 15 days and activity   
hadn't subsided when I transferred to the secondary. Activity (slow and   
steady) continued in the secondary for 41 days. The fermentation was   
around 65 degrees.

Here's the grain bill
3.75 pounds Pale ale malt
1 pound flaked barley
4.25 pounds Wheat malt
1 pound rolled oats

Originally the recipe called for flaked wheat, but the homebrew shop was   
out so I had to improvise the best I could and I upped the pounds of   
wheat malt and flaked barley. I used WYeast 3944 Belgian Witbier.

I used an infusion mash at a temp of 152.

Towards the end of the secondary fermentation the carboy had small   
bubbles floating to the top almost like carbonation.

Has anyone experienced a similar experience with a wit? Does it look like   
there is a problem with recipe/technique that caused the problem?

 ------

I am looking for an inexpensive water filter for brewing. Something that   
wouldn't be permanent since I am renting.

TIA for all help

Brad Manbeck
Burlap Shack Brewing
bjm at roisysinc.com  


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 04 Mar 1999 14:19:52 PST
From: "Gradh O'Dunadaig" <odunadaig at hotmail.com>
Subject: Specific Gravity Question

hi kids, me again.
i just racked two meads that i brewed in December. the gravities were 
1.000 and 0.994. as i am certain that my hydrometer is fairly accurate, 
i am just wondering if this a normal occurrence with meads.
feel free to flame me here or by email. TIA

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com


Return to table of contents


Date: 04 Mar 1999 17:10:09 -0500
From: RCAYOT at solutia.com
Subject: For Publication Only

     Dear HBD'ers,
     
     I ahve been a homebrewer for some 20+ years, and have had many 
     equipment evoluitons, and now it is time for yet another iteration.  I 
     am trying to decide on a Brew-pot design.  Right now I use an aluminum 
     pot, either 8 or 20gallon capacity depending on brewlength.  I also 
     use a copper "cane" with a copper cap and a "chore boy" as a way of 
     removing hops and trub.  Now this system works VERY WELL when I use 
     whole hops, but either leaves too much wort behind, or if I "tip" the 
     pot, too much hops and trub get carried over into the primary.  What I 
     would like to begin is a discussion of is:
     
     How hops and trub are best removed from hot wort (I use a counter flow 
     wort chiller)
     
     I have a Sankey type keg I can convert, do any of the "false bottoms" 
     out there work well for removing pelletized hops?  Is there a "slotted 
     drain" or variant that works well with pelletized hops?
     
     Is there a brew-pot (like the ones advertised by St. Pats, and 
     Williams Brewing) that has a drain system that works well, again with 
     pelletized hops?
     
     
     The reason I am focusing on pelletized hops is that I ahve been using 
     whole hops or hop plugs almost exclusively, but recently found that I 
     got much better utilization of hops using pellets.  I know I know this 
     should have been no surprise, but I got MUCH BETTER utilization not 
     just the 10-25% higher value, at least by my taste buds.  Also, 
     pellets are more prevelant, easier to use, cost less, and store 
     better, why not use them, especiallly for bittering or boiling hops?  
     
     Anyway, I hope this can begin with several comments on the "standard" 
     set-ups I mentioned, and also would like to hear any "inventive" ideas 
     that may help me decide to convert my Sankey keg, or purchase a 
     "Brew-pot".  I think I can afford the SS pot, but I don't like the 
     false bottom approach as advertised, as I think they may let too much 
     of pelletized hops through.
     
     Regards,
     Roger Ayotte of the Escambia Bay Homebrewers  


Return to table of contents

---