HOMEBREW Digest #3171 Wed 17 November 1999

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


	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: Garbage pails, cider (phil sides jr)
  Re: aha 98 financials (John_E_Schnupp)
  Decoction/pH & Conversion (AJ)
  No foam ("Doug Marion")
  Re: Secrets of The Horizontal Pour? (Jeff Renner)
  Re: Basic Questions (Jeff Renner)
  Emeril and Garbage pails (Rob Dewhirst)
  inquiring minds ("Alison, Colin, Scott Birdwell")
  Re: Barley/Corn Extract (Jeff Renner)
  Re: Sanitizers in septic systems (Rob Dewhirst)
  new Briess malt (Jeff Renner)
  Plastic fermenters, 40# Propane tank, gushing Belgians (Dave Burley)
  Re: Carboy Cleaning (Bob Sheck)
  RE: 3 Tiered Home brewery (Bob Sheck)
  RE: Munton's Wheat LME (Bob Sheck)
  Re: Basic Questions (Spencer W Thomas)
  wheat beer problem ("Bayer, Mark A")
  Re: Engineering or Science? ("Robert A. Uhl")
  The joy of siphoning! (Ben Newman)
  RE: system queries! (Bob Sheck)
  FW: Decoction mashing question posed by Kevin Elsken ("Sieben, Richard")
  FW: aha financials ("Sieben, Richard")
  Oxygenation ("J. Kish")
  Flavor Balance Equation ("Martin Brungard")
  Re: basic Q's (Mike Uchima)
  The First Annual Blue Ridge Brew Off ("Jay and Arlene Adams")

* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! * The HBD now hosts eight digests related to this and a few other hobbies. * Send an email note to majordomo at hbd.org with the word "lists" on one * line, and "help" on another (don't need the quotes) for a listing and * instructions for use. 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: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 02:22:18 -0500 From: phil sides jr <psides at carl.net> Subject: Re: Garbage pails, cider >My current primary has cranked through over 160 gallons this year alone, What state are you in Jonathan? ;-) Phil Sides, Jr. Condord, NH - -- Macht nicht o'zapft ist, Prost! Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 03:20:04 -0800 From: John_E_Schnupp at amat.com Subject: Re: aha 98 financials >Revenues 98 final <snip> >total $712,556.61 >Expenses <snip> >total $653,237.24 This looks like a balance sheet type format, but I just don't see it balancing. John Schnupp, N3CNL Colchester, VT 95 XLH 1200 Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 12:57:19 +0000 From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com> Subject: Decoction/pH & Conversion Kevin asks: >When the instructions say 'take the thickest one third of the mash', how >do you quickly and accurately measure the one third? There must be dozzens of answers to this but here's how I do it. Armed with a large strainer and a 2 qt stainless steel pitcher in the other I fearlessly approach the mash vessel. I scoop up a strainerfull of mash, wait a few seconds for most of the liquid to drain (not letting it splash) and then scoop from the strainer into the pitcher which then gets dumped into the decoction vessel. Note that the 1/3 is just a guideline. You may need more or less depending on thickness of mash, temperature step, loss during boil etc. The first couple of times you do this be ready with both boiling (in case you undershoot) and cold (in case you overshoot) water. The strainer is used in the same way for the second decoction. For the third it is used as a stuykmanden i.e. it is pushed into the mash and the liquid ladeled out from the center. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mike wrote: >Mash pH was 4.5 after mashing-in. The problem was with conversion. Should that be 5.4? If 4.5 was really meant then something is out of kilter here. Certainly 4.5 is well below the recommended compromise pH range of 5.2 - 5.6 and will have a detrimental effect on conversion. Looking at the grain bill I see a lot of caramel and crystal malt. If the water is very low on alkalinity I suppose it's possible that these malts, comprising 8% of the grist, could pull the pH that low. The fix is to use enough calcium carbonate (chalk), mixed into the mash in small increments, to get the pH up to the low 5's. - -- A. J. deLange Numquam in dubio, saepe in errore. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 08:06:12 MST From: "Doug Marion" <mariondoug at hotmail.com> Subject: No foam I just experienced something this weekend that I've never seen before in my five years of brewing.Wondering if anyone else might have. I brewed a 10 gal. all grain ESB this weekend. Everything went great. Got the gravity I was shooting for and everything looks good. When I started aerating with my oxygen bottle and stone, I didn't get any foaming of the wort. It always foams when I aerate it. OK, no big deal, I thought. It started active fermenting withing 10-12hrs. At heavy ferment,though, it still never foamed up. Even under strong heavy ferment, the bubbles dissapear on the top. No foaming. I've never seen this before. The only thing different with this batch was a different water source. >From a creek in the mountains. Done that before though. Shouldn't be a problem. And for the first time I used Star San sanitizer in my fermenter. I always used iodaphor before. Does the film thats left behind from the Star San act as a foam inhibitor? I wouldn't think so. Has this happened to anyone before? Any info from anyone who might know would be helpful. Don't know if this suggests a problem and my finished beer might not have any foam stability or if I just shouldn't worry about it. Either private e-mail or post. Thanks in advance. Doug Marion Meridian Idaho ______________________________________________________ Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 09:29:13 -0500 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: Secrets of The Horizontal Pour? Bill Coleman of Brooklyn, NY <MaltyDog at aol.com> has trouble pouring his cork sealed beers without disturbing the sediment. I suggest that for your party next weekend you stand the bottles up and quickly twist them back and forth to loosen the sediment from the side of the bottle without roiling the beer. I've done this with success - the yeast falls pretty much straight down. It takes several sessions but you should end up with clear beer and the yeast on the bottom in a few days. The corks won't dry in that short time. When I designed my wine cellar, I tipped each bin back about 15 degrees so the sediment slips to the bottom of each bottle while the cork stays wet. I always store the bottles with the label up so I know where the sediment is. Then you can open the bottle vertically and pour (or decant in the case of wine) nearly all without disturbing the sediment. In my first cellar, I used stacked 4"x12" red clay drain tiles and just put a wood strip under the front of the first layer. You will probably first have to loosen the sediment and stand the bottles up for a week or two to get most of it to the bottom as the yeast may be stickier than the typical red wine sediment, which slides down the slope easily. Of course, this technique may work without the slanted storage if all of the sediment settles in that week or two. For old vintage port with a heavily crusted sediment, this can be a real problem, especially as the corks may be pretty fragile and getting them out may disturb the sediment. One answer is a specially made tong-like device that is heated in a fire and then closed around the neck of the bottle just below the cork. This neatly cracks the neck with (it says here) no glass fragments. I've seen it done (on a '60 Dow, I think) by Dick Sheer, owner of the Village Corner here in Ann Arbor, a great wine shop. Dick also has no problem filtering cloudy port through a coffee filter. Don't think this would work with Belgian beer. ;-) Hope this helps. Jeff -=-=-=-=- Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, c/o nerenner at umich.edu "One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 10:00:14 -0500 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: Basic Questions Bob in Texas <RobertS735 at aol.com> asks some "Basic Questions." I'll tackle some of them that I know something about and leave the rest for others: >Q2. First Wort Hopping: Am I missing something here or is the only difference >between a FWH schedule and a "normal" schedule that you put the hops into the >wort before it begins to boil-as opposed to waiting for the boil to begin- >then adding the hops? FWHing is steeping the hops at runoff temperature (~170F) for the entire sparge/runoff or lauter time, ~ one hour. It is this long steep at lower temperature that makes the difference. See http://brew.oeonline.com/ddraper/beer/1stwort.html for Dave Drapers summary. >Q4. Reference above #3 which "splash pattern" is better when racking from >finished fermenter to bottling bucket to avoid oxidation? When racking, put the end of the hose *below* the surface of the liquid in the receiving vessel for no splashing. > >Q5. I still use my mouth to start the siphon.... is this a cardinal sin? 39 >batches so far- no apparent contamination. I did it too without problems for years, but I feel better when I use a sanitized 3 inch piece of clear plastic racking cane (I always seem to break these so there are always scraps around) on the end of the hose to suck on, which I remove when the hose is nearly full. A clamp helps. >Q6. Can I split the boil of my 6.5 gallon wort (after the sparge) into two >batches so they boil faster and thus save time? Should I re-join them after >the cooling and before pouring or racking into fermenter or pour one then the >other? Sure. I'd combine them after they're cool so you reduce the chance of hot side aeration. > >Q7. Can you infer, or even deduce, something (anything) from the nature of >the finished beer by looking or smelling the blow-off? I love the way this >stuff smells, as does my SO. Too bad it dosen't have a better use. When it's not the dreaded "wotten egg" smell of lagers (and some others), I too love this fruity smell. However, even if/when it's bad, I don't think you can conclude anything. Wait to taste it, and if it seems bad, then wait to taste it when it's aged. Jeff -=-=-=-=- Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, c/o nerenner at umich.edu "One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 09:32:46 -0600 From: Rob Dewhirst <robd at biocomplexity.nhm.ukans.edu> Subject: Emeril and Garbage pails >From: Kurt Kiewel <kiewel at mail.chem.tamu.edu> >Subject: Fermenting in garbage cans? > >Dave Burley ferments in plastic covered garbage cans. If the garbage can is not food grade, it may have either antibacterial additives in the plastic, or chemical residues leftover from the things used to extrude the plastic. >From: Brad Miller <millerb at targen.com> >Subject: Emeril Live Homebrew > > The other day while watching food TV one of their chef's, Emeril >Laggasse, had a pub special. He made "pub food" and even went as far as to >make "beer". Normaly this guy is sweet, at least with food. The beer >though is another issue. Each step he did was wrong and detremental to the >beer. Did anyone else see this? It would be a good one to watch out for >to have a good laugh or get mad at. I saw this and couldn't diagree more. Yes, I cringed at his mucked up air lock, and a lot of other things he did, but this was on the whole good exposure of the hobby to the general public. Personally, I think every homebrewer I know got started doing exactly the same thing Emeril did on TV. I know I didn't even start out using whole hop plugs like he did. The show on the whole also did a good job of covering the subject of craft ales (calling domestic beers "seltzer water beers"), and talking about the history of beer making in general. In a time when homebrewing is in a general decline, we should be thankful that a well-watched TV personality devotes time on his show to explaining how easy GOOD beer is to make, and how to enjoy beer by style. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 09:28:20 -0800 From: "Alison, Colin, Scott Birdwell" <defalcos at insync.net> Subject: inquiring minds Bob in Texas asks: "First Wort Hopping: Am I missing something here or is the only difference between a FWH schedule and a "normal" schedule that you put the hops into the wort before it begins to boil-as opposed to waiting for the boil to begin- then adding the hops?" Procedurally, this is the only difference, however, in terms of the final product, FWH will produce a more prominent hop character, so you'll want to add some of those low alpha, high fragrance hops to the kettle before heating to a boil. If you just change your schedule to adding your bittering hops prior to the boil rather than several minutes into it, you will just bring out the character of those bittering hops. This could be good or not so good, depending upon what you're bittering with. "Aeration or Oxidation.... when racking wort into the fermenter should I let the hose run down the side of the fermenter and smoothly spread out - thus maximizing the surface area in order to aerate... or do I aim that sucker right down the middle making a big splash? Which seems better?. . .which "splash pattern" is better when racking from finished fermenter to bottling bucket to avoid oxidation?" When transferring your wort from the kettle into the fermenter, I'd recommend that you just splash it down the middle and aerate the wort as much as possible. Conversely, when transferring from fermenter to fermenter or bottling bucket, you'll want to avoid splashing as much as possible. Make sure your syphon hose reaches the bottom of the fermenter/bottling bucket and, if need be, "let the hose run down the side" to minimize splashing and aeration. "I still use my mouth to start the siphon.... is this a cardinal sin? 39 batches so far- no apparent contamination." I suppose "if it ain't broke, don't fix it!" Perhaps you should gargle with 151 rum just prior to sucking on that syphon hose. Go ahead, swallow. These days I generally sanitize the hose and then fill it with water using the water pressure from the tap. I then clamp the tube off, trapping the water inside. I then set everything up and simply unclamp the hose and it'll start itself. You may not want to do this if you have some reason to suspect your local water supply. It's been known to happen in Texas. BTW Fermtech makes a relatively new device called the Auto-Siphon which will start the siphon easily with no sucking at all. They'll run $10 to $15 at your local homebrew shop (I think we sell'em for $11.95). "Can I split the boil of my 6.5 gallon wort (after the sparge) into two batches so they boil faster and thus save time? Should I re-join them after the cooling and before pouring or racking into fermenter or pour one then the other?" I've split my boil dozens of times. It works fine. I don't think it really matters whether you "marry" them before or after cooling. Hey, they're going to end up in the same fermenter, anyway, eh?! "Can you infer, or even deduce, something (anything) from the nature of the finished beer by looking or smelling the blow-off? I love the way this stuff smells, as does my SO. Too bad it doesn't have a better use." If the beer smells good at this stage, it is probably a good sign that your beer will be clean, if not necessarily "good" (i.e. well balanced and formulated). Just consider it to be an early indicator of things to come. That's my two cents worth, anyway. . . Scott Birdwell DeFalco's Houston (Hey, that's in Texas, too!) Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 10:31:48 -0500 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: Barley/Corn Extract "Susie O'Mahoney" <breck at communique.net> asked: >Anyone out there used the 30% corn extract marketed by St. Pat's? This >looks like an interesting alternative to all-grain when making a CAP. If >anyone has used it, what kind of points/lb/gal did you get, what color >was the resultant beer, yeast/hop combinations, comments in general? I have my doubts about this. I went to the St. Pat's site and found that it is a briess product, and went to their page http://www.briess.com/Products/gl.htm for their "Golden Lager Concentrated Brewers Wort," which is no doubt the produt St. Pat's is selling. I see several problems suggesting that this is not going to produce what you want. First is color - 10-15L for a 10% dilution. Bass Pale Ale is 11L, 6L is the upper limit for CAP. Second, the product is not made by mashing 30% corn with malt but rather by adding 30% corn solids, which means, to my mind, corn sugar, although not the 100% fermentable stuff we prime our bottles with, I am sure, but one produced with a similar balance of sugars as normal wort. However, this will be essentially flavorless, and corn has flavor. I have convinced myself of this by brewing a rice adjunct brew that I felt was lacking the flavor I get from corn. Williams Brewing marketed an extra light liquid extract a few years ago that was made from a similar percentage of corn *mashed* with malt, but they discontinued it before CAP became an established style. I never used it so I don't know how it was, but it would have been very pale, I'm sure. I used their light years back and found it gave a pale gold color. It would be nice if they made this again or if Briess would mash with corn. Of course, they can do it cheaper by mashing 100% malt and adding the corn solids later. I think that for true CAP you need to mash. Jeff -=-=-=-=- Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, c/o nerenner at umich.edu "One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 09:45:24 -0600 From: Rob Dewhirst <robd at biocomplexity.nhm.ukans.edu> Subject: Re: Sanitizers in septic systems At 12:27 AM 11/12/99 -0500, you wrote: >Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 23:51:37 -0800 >From: "Alison, Colin, Scott Birdwell" <defalcos at insync.net> >Subject: Star San > >Dan Ritter was asking about Star San and excessive foaming > >"I just tried Star San as a sanitizer for the first time. I have been >using >Iodophor for as long as I can remember but, because I don't want to dump > >any sanitizer into my septic system, Our county extension office holds a "rural living" seminar once a year, and they cover several subjects in one hour sessions given by the experts in the office on each subject. Septic systems were discussed this year, and the question of sanitizing chemicals such as bleach was asked specifically. The answer from our expert was this won't hurt it, even in large quantities. The colony of organisms in a septic system rebounds very quickly. The procedure of pumping out a septic tank (which is RECOMMENDED on a regular basis) removes far more than chemicals can. So don't worry. If your septic system is healthy it shouldn't be a problem. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 10:46:40 -0500 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: new Briess malt Has anybody tried the new "Extra Special Malt" from Briess? It's described in an article in the October, 1999 newsletter on their home page http://www.briess.com/ and on a product spec page http://www.briess.com/Products/es.htm. >From the newsletter: "2-row barley variety is double processed for a raisiny flavor "A complex-flavored malt that lends itself to all beer styles is one of several new malts introduced by Briess recently. "Extra Special Malt has a touch of a biscuity, slight raisiny flavor. It's very smooth with no astringency of dark roasted malts," explained technical services representative Jim Basler. It's not as biscuity as Briess' Victory Malt, he continued, and the special double-process developed by the Briess research and development team contributes an appealing raisiny flavor. "Because it's not sweet, the 130 L malt can be used as coloring for any style of beer where you don't want sweetness, Jim said. It'll make a great Belgian ale, too, he added. "In particular, Jim thinks it's a great malt to use when brewing a red or bock beer. "Extra Special Malt can be used in place of Caramel 120 L to achieve a deep red hue without sweet toffeeness," he explained. As a result, there's no need to heavily hop to offset the sweetness of caramel. "That gives brewers tons of room for experimenting, because sweetness can then be derived from the base malt using a higher mash temperature. Jim recommends trying Briess' Bonlander Munich Malt for part of the base malt bill. Doing so will result in a decidedly different flavor than if caramel malt had been used as the sweetener." -=-=-=-=- Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, c/o nerenner at umich.edu "One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 11:42:27 -0500 From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Plastic fermenters, 40# Propane tank, gushing Belgians Brewsters: Kurt Kiewel asks how I clean plastric fermenters and aren't I worried about the scratch hiding microorganisms momily. Very easily. and no. I don't know who started the idea about scratches in plastic being a problem, but I would like to see some hard data. I also ask those carboy owners who use a wire handle carboy brush to look at the carboy around the shoulder and see if you don't also have scratches. Frankly, the only way the scratch could be a problem is if it has organic material in it, which is always possible if its not thoroughly clean.This is true if it is glass or plastic. So cleanliness is the issue and not scratches. The biggest difference is the plastic fermenter is softer and easier to scratch but is much easier to clean and apply pressure and scrubbing to a particularly stubborn area of gunk with those marvelous tools that took millions of years to develop - your fingers. How do I do this? With a piece of paper towel and pure bleach ( rubber gloves). You should avoid scrubbies and the like as your common sense would tell you. I would, of course, suggest that you not use scouring powder containing silica ( many now use calcium carbonate) on glass either. Do I think scratches are a problem? Not in my case as I have used the same fermenters for years and years with no problem from contamination. My method is simple. Clean the fermenter immediately after use with a stream of hot water to "melt" the oily gunk off as much as possible. While hot, a cup or so of pure bleach is rolled around to cover all surfaces. A paper towel dipped in this bleach is used to remove any stubborn gunk and the area of the ring is scrubbed with the paper towel. Dilute with hot water and coat all surfaces and rinse with hot water. Turn upside down to drain and dry. If it falls off the sink it doesn't break. Which is probably why I have been able to use the same fermenters for such a long time. Carboy users are often forced to soak a fermenter to remove this ring of gunk. Unless you are conscientious, a carboy can sit with a dilute solution of protein and carbohydrates for a long period. This is dangerous, as you might imagine, since I imagine, without any proof, an organic film with perhaps microorganisms can develop on the conatiner wall and under any beerstone. Incidentally, I have never noticed a coating of beerstone on plastic. Maybe it is my cleaning method or maybe it doesn't stick to polyethylene, don't know. Understand, please, I am not against carboy use, but just not for the primary fermentation. I use carboys for my secondaries and often for my diacetyl rests and the like, where violent fermentation cannot make a mess and cleaning the carboy thoroughly is not a problem. - ---------------------------------------- Brett Schneider's wish list included a 40# propane tank. Why not just use the rental tanks and avoid this expenditure. Just don't count this deposit as an expenditure. If you are insistent on not changing tanks during a brew ( and I presume why you want a 40#er), some sort of "y" connector could be used on the standard 20# tanks to connect these tanks in parallel. Your cost would be reduced to the connections. Gurus here on the HBD could probably comment on a safe way to do this or if there are problems. - --------------------------------------- Bill Coleman has trouble with gushing beers from Belgium and has acquired resting baskets. I can suggest you get the beer as cold as you can to reduce the gushing. I suggest you store the beers straight up to chill them and use these baskets to hold the incompletely poured bottle. Alternatively, pour all of a bottle once you open it into several glasses without tipping it back up. Many Belgians are cloudy ( not always the yeast) and some claim need the yeast to get the proper taste. Others will have to comment on which ones those are. I have seen Belgians, Germans and Brits who insist the yeast should be stirred back in. I don't agree in most cases, unless it is "mit hefe"style. - ----------------------------------------- Keep on Brewin' Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 22:40:48 -0500 From: Bob Sheck <bsheck at skantech.net> Subject: Re: Carboy Cleaning C'mon guys, this is easy! put a 1/4 cup of electric dishwashing powder in the carboy, fill with water and dissolve, leave it alone for a few days and come back and wash it out. No muss, no fuss. Better you should do a primary in plastic for 3-4 days then rack to glass. No blow off probs, either. Bob Sheck bsheck, me-sheck, abednigo! Greenville, NC email:bsheck at skantech.net or see us at: http://www.skantech.net/bsheck/ (252)830-1833 - ------------- "Madness takes its toll -- Please have exact change!" Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 22:51:43 -0500 From: Bob Sheck <bsheck at skantech.net> Subject: RE: 3 Tiered Home brewery Joe (and anyone else who's interested) Any kine lid would be OK for the HLT. - Or none, except then you'd lose heat out the top! Plywood would be OK too! Even if splinters fell into it. After all, this water is going into the mash, and then it will be boiled, so don't worry about sanitation at this stage! As for volume amounts- I would figger on having a mash-tun that could hold at least 20 pounds of grain- this will be equiv to a 12 gal container (the stuff swells up when you wet it down with mash water!) - I have a 1/2 keg that I use for really big mashes and adjuncts- like if you wanna do a pumpkin or wheat you have to figger you're gonna hafta add a couple pounds of rice hulls which really can swell the volume!) Then, as a boiling vessel, I would want at least a 1/2 keg to hold a 10 gal batch of wort. Anyways, I like the way you think- using a SS pool filter container. Where can the rest of us find these things? >Date: Sat, 6 Nov 1999 17:07:11 -0600 (CST) From: TO1JRB at webtv.net (Joe Berlin) >I'm just getting into all grain brewing. I'm going to use a 14in. >diameter x23in. ss pool filter tank as a HLT. I have a ss tank 16in >diameter x 56in. that will be cut into 2 pots for the Mash/Lauter Tun >and the brew Kettle .How tall should I make each of the tank parts to >get the most volume out of what I have? What will the volume of the >Brewing Kettle and MLT be ? At a later day I may make this into a HERMS >or RIMS. Would a plexiglass lid be ok for the HLT and Brewing Kettle? >Thank you good people for your input to a newbie . From the future home >of the "Hair of the dog Brewery" Joe Berlin > > Bob Sheck bsheck, me-sheck, abednigo! Greenville, NC email:bsheck at skantech.net or see us at: http://www.skantech.net/bsheck/ (252)830-1833 - ------------- "Madness takes its toll -- Please have exact change!" Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 22:34:44 -0500 From: Bob Sheck <bsheck at skantech.net> Subject: RE: Munton's Wheat LME It could be that the malt had 'aged' in-situ. Check with your homebrew shop supplier and see if they changed drums. It does get pretty hot there in Florida! And mistakes do happen. Maybe it's not the supplier's fault after all. I've always had good luck with Muntons products. Bob Sheck >Paul Haaf wrote several days ago: > >Lately I've been purchasing Munton's Wheat LME in the 3 gal (33 lb) >'buckets'. The last batch that I bought was NOT wheat malt. > >I have a similar experience involving this product. I recently crafted two Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 12:42:38 -0500 From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer at engin.umich.edu> Subject: Re: Basic Questions >>>>> "RobertS735" == RobertS735 <RobertS735 at aol.com> writes: RobertS735> Q1. Why do we say that a sanitizing boil is 20 minutes RobertS735> in duration? ... Well, the NJ dept of health recommended 1 minute rolling boil during the Hurricane Floyd "boil water advisory." So 20 seems like overkill. (http://www.state.nj.us/health/boilwater.htm) RobertS735> Same question on chlorine bath... if I make the bath RobertS735> with relatively more chlorine can it be quicker? Yes, but you'll have to rinse more thoroughly. There's a nice article in the Brewing Techniques archive, see http://www.brewingtechniques.com/library/backissues/issue1.2/raines.html Seems to me there was a more recent one, but I can't find it. RobertS735> Q2. First Wort Hopping: ... you put the hops into the RobertS735> wort before it begins to boil-as opposed to waiting RobertS735> for the boil to begin- then adding the hops? You add the hops as you start the run-off from the mash tun. RobertS735> Q3. Aeration or Oxidation.... run down the side RobertS735> ... smoothly spread out ... or making a RobertS735> big splash? You got me on this one. RobertS735> Q4. Reference above #3 which "splash pattern" is RobertS735> better when racking from finished fermenter to RobertS735> bottling bucket to avoid oxidation? Don't splash at all. Run it all the way to the buttom so that the end of the hose is submerged almost all the time. RobertS735> Q5. I still use my mouth to start the siphon.... is RobertS735> this a cardinal sin? 39 batches so far- no apparent RobertS735> contamination. Lucky... :-) RobertS735> Q6. Can I split the boil of my 6.5 gallon wort (after RobertS735> the sparge) into two batches so they boil faster and RobertS735> thus save time? I don't see why not. I do this sometimes. RobertS735> call me Bob in Texas What should I call you in Michigan? Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 11:08:48 -0800 From: "Bayer, Mark A" <Mark.Bayer at JSF.Boeing.com> Subject: wheat beer problem collective homebrew conscience_ mike w wrote: >The grain bill and mash schedule was as follows: > 7 lbs. German Wheat Malt > 3 lbs. Munich Light malt > .5 lbs. German Caramel > 1 lbs. Flaked Wheat > .5 lbs. Crystal, 40L >Mash pH was 4.5 after mashing-in.<snip>then a decoction was pulled and >temp held at 158 for over an hour with no conversion indicated by starch test. >Decoct was added to main mash and temps brought through to 158 and >conversion was not indicated after over an hour and a half. <snip>If the problem with slow conversion was with the low diastatic >power of the malts, why do other recipes having a similar grain bill work >OK? Should I add some 2 or 6 row to speed things up? Were mash temps >too high? i would say try and get your mash ph up in the 5.5 to 5.8 range ( at room temp) next time, if possible. getting a ph of 4.5 with the above malt bill looks a little unusual (very soft water and/or weird mineral content), unless you also added gypsum/calcium chloride/acid. if the mineral content of your water is able to pull the ph down that far without caso4/cacl2/acid, maybe you should dilute it with a little distilled and use calcium carbonate next time. otherwise forget the caso4/cacl2/acid totally and replace it with caco3, if necessary. as far as enzymes go, alpha amylase activity is going to be lower than you want it at ph 4.5. alpha works best at ph levels close to 5.8 or so. consider also that beta amylase, at 158degf, is going to go away (denature) pretty quickly. so after a short period you've got mostly alpha amylase in a bad ph range for activity. this is likely a big part of the problem. you also mention that "other" recipes using this exact malt bill work out just fine. that tells you there are sufficient enzymes, given the right conditions. are you also decocting them and using the same temperature rests? if the ingredients are identical, then it must be a process difference. as a last resort, have a half pound of 2-row lager malt ready next time, and if you run into the same problem, even after getting the ph up in the proper range, use the lager malt. this doesn't solve the fundamental problem, but it will help your brew day go faster. fnally, check your thermometer and ph meter, if applicable. hope this helps. brew hard, mark bayer Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 15:08:59 -0700 (MST) From: "Robert A. Uhl" <ruhl at austinc.edu> Subject: Re: Engineering or Science? Messrs. Babcock & Prather write on whether brewing is a science or engineering, pointing out that engineering _is_ a science. I don't recall the original poster's question, but figured I'd guess at it. It seems to be a perennial question: is brewing a science? Or is it something else, an art or some form of engineering? Probably we will never agree. There are those who utilise every scientific tool they can get their hands on, measure temperature to tenths of a degree, apply corrections to hydrometers, use thermostats to achieve a temperature range similar to a Munich or Flemish cellar, send in samples of their beer for lab analysis and otherwise make a science of it. They make good beer and enjoy it. There are those who throw a little bit of this and a little bit of that in the mix, who haven't touched a hydrometer in years and use a meat thermometer for mashing (or use an infusion mash and no thermometer at all; it _is_ poss., although I'd not recommend it), ferment in a closet, grow their own hops, don't `waste' a drop of beer and otherwise treat it as an art. They make good beer and enjoy it. There are those who do a little of each. _They_ make good beer and enjoy it. As long as you're having a good time and like what you make, relax, don't worry and HAVE A HOMEBREW. Say what you might about CP, he did have a point with that slogan. Bob Uhl, who is dreaming of the nut brown ale back at his flat... Return to table of contents
Date: 16 Nov 99 09:57:56 PST From: Ben Newman <benewman at netscape.net> Subject: The joy of siphoning! In HBD#3170, Bob in Texas asks - >>Q5. I still use my mouth to start the siphon.... is this a cardinal sin? >>39 batches so far- no apparent contamination. For me it's an easy way to get a quick taste of the beer to be. But seriously, I've always siphoned this way with no ill effects, and I do draw a little off for testing (gravity, colour etc..) and further sampling. My first few siphoning attempts did create quite a mess, but once you get used to it it's quick and easy. Keep on brewin' Ben Newman ____________________________________________________________________ Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 14:27:29 -0500 From: Bob Sheck <bsheck at skantech.net> Subject: RE: system queries! Remember the difficulty NASA got into mixing measuring types - can we keep everything English or Metric _in the same post?_ (ie: pounds/liters, below) Things are hard enough for my homebrew-sodden head! >Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 09:47:23 -0600 >From: DAN ELGART <cogneeeto at earthlink.net> > >2)Commonly- the initial rest temp.( for home brewers) is achieved by >starting with a known water Vol.+ a known grain Vol. >(usually at a pound of grain per liter of water) producing an expected Bob Sheck bsheck, me-sheck, abednigo! Greenville, NC email:bsheck at skantech.net or see us at: http://www.skantech.net/bsheck/ (252)830-1833 - ------------- "Madness takes its toll -- Please have exact change!" Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 14:48:29 -0600 From: "Sieben, Richard" <SIER1 at Aerial1.com> Subject: FW: Decoction mashing question posed by Kevin Elsken > Kevin asked, "When the instructions say 'take the thickest one third of > the mash', how > do you quickly and accurately measure the one third?" > > I have calibration marks on my stiring spoon and I just check the depth of > the full mash and roughly guestimate where on the spoon the mash should be > after taking the decoction. It's quick and easy. But, my experience is > that you should take 50% of the volume of the mash for the thick decoction > because the thickest part of the mash will not hold as much heat content > as the later thin decoctions. If you only take 1/3 you will not be able > to raise your temp from 122 to 150 without adding additional heat either > via infusion or direct fire. ( I am talking from the frame of reference > of using a picnick cooler mash tun, to which you can't add heat directly.) > > Good luck on your brew, > > Rich Sieben > Island Lake, IL > (not on the island, nor on the lake...just in the town) Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 15:46:21 -0600 From: "Sieben, Richard" <SIER1 at Aerial1.com> Subject: FW: aha financials > >Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 20:45:03 -0500 > >From: Jim Liddil <jliddil at vms.arizona.edu> > >Subject: aha 98 financials > > > >the AHA is swamped so I thought I'd post this here befor eit appears on > >their web site. > shortened for brevity..... > >Research $53.70 > > $53.70? for research? What did they buy, two cases of Sam Adams? > HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! > wow, so extensive....this will REALLY promote homebrewing. > Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 14:40:26 -0800 From: "J. Kish" <jjkish at worldnet.att.net> Subject: Oxygenation When Tom O'Conner ran his cooled wort into his fermenter that got oxygen squirted into it, he should try putting a clamp on the end of the tubing so that the wort 'squirts' in a thin stream through the oxygen, or plain air, too. It gets aerieated (or oxygenated) to the max. It works like a charm, and there is no need to shake the carboy. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 17:37:31 EST From: "Martin Brungard" <mabrungard at hotmail.com> Subject: Flavor Balance Equation I have done some research recently regarding flavor balance in beer and I need some learned brewers comments on the information I've gathered. I like to have an idea of a beer's flavor balance (sweetness vs. bitterness) before I attempt the brew. I have found a recipe calculator at http://www.cellar-homebrew.com/cgi-bin/calc/calc that provides an indication of flavor balance with respect to the IBU and S.G. of the brew. From what I could tell by comparing with Promash, the recipe calculator above probably uses the Garetz IBU formula. Through trial and error, I have deduced the equations used in the calculator to estimate the flavor balance. The relationship is described below: Very Bitter 12 IBU per 10 points S.G. Balanced 7 IBU per 10 points S.G. Very Sweet 2.75 IBU per 10 points S.G. Researching the HBD archives provided 2 conflicting IBU/S.G. relationships for a balanced beer. In an early post, a relationship of 8 IBU per 10 points S.G. was reported. That was subsequently disputed and a relationship of 4 IBU per 10 points S.G. was provided. I realize that there may be other factors involved with estimating flavor balance, but I was hoping that some of you could comment on the applicability of the relationships above and if there was some other references to this type of flavor criteria. Martin Brungard Tallahassee, FL "Meandering to a different drummer" ______________________________________________________ Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 18:13:08 -0600 (CST) From: Mike Uchima <uchima at enteract.com> Subject: Re: basic Q's Bob in Texas asks a bunch of questions... > Q1. Why do we say that a sanitizing boil is 20 minutes in duration? Is there > a study somewhere that has experimented on this? What I mean is; do I really > have to boil my priming water and sugar for 20 minutes? What about 15 or 12? > Same question on chlorine bath... if I make the bath with relatively more > chlorine can it be quicker? I'm sure there's a study that says "X percent of microbes killed in a Y minute boil", but I haven't seen it. I generally boil my priming sugar briefly (5 minutes or less), yeast starters for Wyeast packs somewhat longer (around 10 minutes). When I brew with honey, I typically add it during the last few minutes of the boil. I haven't had a problem with any of these procedures. More chlorine should work faster, but you may need to wear rubber gloves... > Q2. First Wort Hopping: Am I missing something here or is the only difference > between a FWH schedule and a "normal" schedule that you put the hops into the > wort before it begins to boil-as opposed to waiting for the boil to begin- > then adding the hops? Actually, they are added at the start of the *sparge*, and the collected wort is run off onto them. Supposedly, at sparging temperatures, there is some sort of reaction which stabilizes some of the hop flavor/aroma compounds, and allows them to survive the boil intact. > Q3. Aeration or Oxidation.... when racking wort into the fermenter should I > let the hose run down the side of the fermenter and smoothly spread out - > thus maximizing the surface area in order to aerate... or do I aim that > sucker right down the middle making a big splash? Which seems better? I don't know that one is significantly better than the other. I aim it down the center, then after all of the wort has been transferred, I rock the carboy until I've got a huge head of foam -- I figure this probably has a much bigger effect on O2 levels, than how I transfer the wort. > Q4. Reference above #3 which "splash pattern" is better when racking > from finished fermenter to bottling bucket to avoid oxidation? Neither. Get a hose that is long enough to reach all the way to the bottom, or use a second racking cane, to avoid splashing altogether. > Q5. I still use my mouth to start the siphon.... is this a cardinal sin? 39 > batches so far- no apparent contamination. There seems to be a lot of anecdotal evidence both ways on this one -- people who claim to have infected batches by mouth siphoning, and those who say they've done it many times with no ill effects. My personal take on this is, "Why take a chance?". I do start my siphons by mouth, but I use the nozzle of a turkey baster as a sanitary mouthpiece. > Q6. Can I split the boil of my 6.5 gallon wort (after the sparge) into two > batches so they boil faster and thus save time? Should I re-join them after > the cooling and before pouring or racking into fermenter or pour one then the > other? I've done a lot of "split boils" (pair of 5 gallon pots on the two front burners of my stove), because the location of the upper oven on my stove makes it impossible to physically fit anything taller than a 5 gallon pot. As long as you allow for twice as much volume loss to evaporation, you should be fine. Split the hops more or less evenly (just eyeball it) between the two pots. I actually collect the runnings for the two pots separately (hey, since I can't fit a bigger pot on the stove, *all* of my pots are 5 gallons or less). I even out the gravity between the two pots somewhat, by collecting 1/4 of my runnings into pot A, then 1/2 of the runnings into pot B, then the final 1/4 of the runnings back into pot A. I doubt whether you combine before or after transferring to the fermenter makes any difference. In my case, I chill one, then rack it to the fermenter while the other one chills. > Q7. Can you infer, or even deduce, something (anything) from the nature of > the finished beer by looking or smelling the blow-off? I love the way this > stuff smells, as does my SO. Too bad it dosen't have a better use. Good smell coming from the fermenter usually means good beer. Bad smell coming from the fermenter *still* usually means good beer. :-) > Ideas? opinions? all welcomed and if I get any private replies I will > consolidate into a post. > thanks. > > call me Bob in Texas Hi, Bob in Texas! - -- == Mike Uchima == uchima at pobox.com == Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 20:17:22 -0500 From: "Jay and Arlene Adams" <goosepoint at teleplex.net> Subject: The First Annual Blue Ridge Brew Off The results of The First Annual Blue Ridge Brew Off are available on our web site http://www.caveartmedia.com/malt/brbo.html. Congratulations to Al Clayson of the Carolina Brewmasters for winning best of show, Brian Cole of MALT for winning second best ot show, and Bill and Christie Newman of BURP for winning third best of show. Jay Adams Organizer, Blue Ridge Brew Off Mountain Ale and Lager Tasters (MALT) Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 11/17/99, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96