HOMEBREW Digest #3263 Thu 02 March 2000

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

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

  re: aerating meads (Dick Dunn)
  Temperature Controllers (Joe Kish)
  Soapy beer ("Fred L. Johnson")
  OT - microscope info? ("Darrin Smith")
  Acid Washing (Dave Burley)
  Misquote or misunderstood ("Nathaniel P. Lansing")
  pitching your dopplebock (Nathan Kanous)
  Budswill ("Dave Hinrichs")
  boosting carbonation in bottled beer (J Daoust)
  10 oz Budwiser? ("Kelly")
  yeast for bottling (cbuckley)
  Lactic ("Paul Niebergall")
  Re: First Wort Hopping (Jeff Renner)
  Bicarb (AJ)
  Malt Mill woes ("Philip J Wilcox")
  Re: Enameled Kettle Handles (Jeff Renner)
  musty notes in beer ("Alan Meeker")
  Re: enameled kettle handles (Gary Williams)
  Yeast Growth (RCAYOT)
  33 Quart Enamel Kettle Handles (John_L._Sullivan)
  Aeration and ceiling splooge (Brian Myers)
  Ceiling Splooge?! Please... (Some Guy)
  pitching rates ("Paul Niebergall")
  re: Not one Element but Two & mash stirrer ("C.D. Pritchard")
  High Gravity Pitching rate. (Mark Staples)
  Re: strange flavor ("Steve Stripling")
  another pitch (Tom Meier)
  chilling in secondary ("Thomas D. Hamann")

* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! * AOL members: Visit the AOL Homebrewing boards before they're gone! * Go to aol://5863:126/mBLA:185893 * Entry deadline for the Mayfare Homebrew Competition is 3/15/00 * See http://www.maltosefalcons.com/ for more information 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 FROM THE E-MAIL ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!** IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, you cannot subscribe to the digest as we canoot reach you. We will not correct your address for the automation - that's your job. The HBD is a copyrighted document. The compilation is copyright HBD.ORG. Individual postings are copyright by their authors. ASK before reproducing and you'll rarely have trouble. Digest content cannot be reproduced by any means for sale or profit. More information is available by sending the word "info" to req at hbd.org. JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 29 Feb 00 23:02:43 MST (Tue) From: rcd at raven.talisman.com (Dick Dunn) Subject: re: aerating meads Aaron Perry wrote: > I've made a few meads and never bothered to aerate before pitching. I heat > the full volume of water with the honey and chill, rather than heating the > honey with some water and adding to more cold water. So,to aerate or not to > aerate? Any insight would be great. There is a larger perspective to be gained here. Overall, when you are trying to get a beer going, you want fermentation to start as fast as possible, because the risk of infection due to a lag in fermentation is a Big Deal. This is not the case with mead! I'm sure it is possible to get an infected mead fermentation, but I've never seen one (in 17 years of mead making and tasting). [If you move on to cider, you will discover that the balance tips all the way to the other side: Cider-makers take some pains to get a *slow* fermen- tation. In short, rapid fermentations produce undesirable results in cider.] There is another consideration, namely not cooking off the volatile parts of the honey character. The best way to do this (IMNSHO) is to boil the water only, then add the honey and cool as quickly as you can. [If you're making a melomel, make the water/honey must first and add it to the fruit to cool further.] Aerate if you have the equipment and if it makes you feel good. It might help; it can't hurt as far as I can see. But don't worry about it. - --- Dick Dunn rcd at talisman.com Hygiene, Colorado USA ...Simpler is better. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 22:11:59 -0800 From: Joe Kish <JJKISH at worldnet.att.net> Subject: Temperature Controllers That nice temperature controller that Jeremy Bergsman told us about sure has a nice price range (19.95) but the temperature range is too small for brewing. That range--30 to 110 degrees might be nice for an egg-hatching incubator or starting seeds in a box. That Web Page (www.TekSupply.com) will not tell you anything unless you sign up with them. Surely there's got to be better temperature controllers than that out there! Does anybody know of controllers good for RIMS that go from 100 degrees to 212 degrees F, and don't cost an arm and a leg? Even Radio Shack has one for $180.00. How about something we can build ourselves? For $20 or $30? Terence Tegner was going to supply the HBD with a Beautiful Controller, but It's hard to say what happened to him? He has wiring diagrams and layouts, too. It looks like he dissapeared! Can anybody dig him up?? Joe Kish Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 06:45:47 -0500 From: "Fred L. Johnson" <FLJohnson at worldnet.att.net> Subject: Soapy beer Marc Sedam asks what could be causing a soapy taste in his CAP: I have often had the impression that Sam Adams Boston Lager tasted a little soapy, and I assumed that it was related to the hopping. Has anyone else ever thought this about Sam Adams? And can anyone advise me on the hops in Boston Lager. (Of course, what you are tasting in your beer, Marc, may be nothing like what I taste in a Sam Adams.) - -- Fred L. Johnson Apex, North Carolina USA Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 04:21:04 PST From: "Darrin Smith" <drsmithhm at hotmail.com> Subject: OT - microscope info? After having recently read the extensive discussion about yeast on the diet/science/flamewar/homebrew digest(not necessarily in that order) and having my tax return burning a hole in my pocket, I started looking for a microscope. Due to misuse/abuse that is inevitable with used optical instruments, I decided new was the way to go and I found the following scope(paste it together to go to that page): http://www.worldofscience.com/cgi-local/shop/search.cgi? user_id=33046&template=detailed.htm&0_option=1&0=213645 I have 2 problems with this scope, and I was hoping some of the more science inclined could enlighten me. First, if you recognize this scope and know the original manufacturer, please let me know -- this vendor knows very little about what they sell and can't even tell me if I can get a stereo head for it! I won't go into the details, but I do need to know where I might be able to find accessories. Second, I know little about how to use an oil immersion objective -- Is there a web page somewhere that details general use of such a feature? ObBeer: This all started with beer yeast. If nothing else, this would allow me to draw my own conclusions from some of the info I've learned on the digest. I will hopefully be able to restrain myself from posting my armchair observations to the digest. :) TIA - --Darrin ps - I have no idea what my Renarian location is, and it doesn't seem to have a negative impact on the beer. YMMV. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 07:30:30 -0500 From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Acid Washing Brewsters: Kevin Basso asks for an easy acid washing technique for yeast. Check the HBD archives. You will find it is just as easy as I indicated. Make up a ~ 1% solution of tartaric acid ( from your HB/wine hobby dealer). 1 gram per 100 mls of cold boiled water. Pour off all the beer above a yeast slurry, rinse it with cold boiled water by adding about a cup of water in a container ( I use an ehrlenmeyer flask) swirl, allow to settle ( in the fridge about 1/2 to 1 hour) , pour off the supernatant liquid. Add the tartaric acid solution, swirl and allow to settle, pour off the supernatant liquid. Try to do this step without an overnight hold as the acid conditions are not enjoyed by the yeast. I typically allow about a half hour for this. Don't know how critical this is and it likely varies from yeast to yeast. I have never had a problem. Repeat with three washes of cold boiled water. Pitch to a starter solution. Some breweries just pitch this directly to the fermentation chamber, without a starter, but I suspect they have several batches to blend it out. Acid washing is not a necessary thing unless you recycle your yeast many times. Likely you can get by with just washing the yeast free of beer ( a source of bacterial food) with three cold water washes and storing the yeast under cold boiled water in a capped beer bottle in your fridge for a long time. Pitch this yeast to a starter before you use it. Keep on Brewin' Dave Burley Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 09:01:26 -0500 From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew at compuserve.com> Subject: Misquote or misunderstood Steve responded, >>There isn't any very good evidence about what causes hangover headaches << I wasn't talking about hangovers, I mentioned headaches that happen with only *1 beer. >>and I responded that their controls are much better than those you site, not that their beer is superior.<< The point I was making was that such stringent microbiologic controls weren't a necessity for good beer. Dr. Fix gives a spec of <50 cells per ml to be regarded as "clean", with the specs published by Danstar and Coopers giving <16 cells per ml at a pitching rate of 12.5e6/ml. Again I must say, pretty darn clean. >>Acid washing causes problems for the cell walls of the yeast and abnormal budding - among other things. It's pretty unlikely that they could adapt to this.<< Why not? cold temperatures (approaching 32 degrees) produces "no growth" in S. Cerevisiae, yet repeated storage at these temperatures gave us a new yeast, S. Uvarum. Twenty years of repitching and acid-washing (and the occasional dumping of a "bad" batch) could select an acid tolerant strain. >>If your breweries are seeing those problems disappear after acid washing, then infection is the source of the problem.<< That is purely conjecture. NPL. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 08:15:59 -0600 From: Nathan Kanous <nlkanous at pharmacy.wisc.edu> Subject: pitching your dopplebock Jerry, Wait. See what happens with your starter. Start cold and then let it slowly rise into the "normal range" for this yeast. When it's done, if it looks like you need more attenuation, then consider adding additional yeast IF you need it. That's my $0.02. nathan in madison, wi Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 08:30:23 -0600 From: "Dave Hinrichs" <dhinrichs at quannon.com> Subject: Budswill All this talk about Budswill and hangovers. Personally I have had like three in my whole life. It's gross and disgusting and as my friends and I say "Sorry, I am not THAT thirsty". I had a homebrew party last year, a guest brought a 12 of Bud, I asked him to leave. As Nancy Reagan says "Just Say No". Dave Hinrichs Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 06:39:04 -0800 From: J Daoust <thedaousts at ixpres.com> Subject: boosting carbonation in bottled beer I currently have a small carbonation problem, with two batches of beer (both 3 gal.) The beer has failed to carbonate properly. It has a little carbonation, but not enough. I think I got the sugar amount right (1/3 cup) to prime, but to make sure, I uncapped and added some recently. I used 1/8 and 1/4 tsp. of corn sugar 3 each in a six pack as a test. There was no additional carbonation. I am thinking now, the yeast (white labs, california ale) ran out of sugar early in the primary, and crumped. I am going to try and add some sugar and yeast to another six pack and see what happens. The original gravity was not abnormally high (1.058). Any thoughts???????? e-mail is welcome, Thanks, Jerry Daoust Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 09:20:58 -0600 From: "Kelly" <kgrigg at diamonddata.com> Subject: 10 oz Budwiser? Where do you get Bud in 10 oz cans? I've only seen it in 12 oz.....maybe the occasional pony sized ones, but, never see a 10 oz can or bottle. Is this outside the US? Kelly Quoted Stuff:\---------------------------- >For Steve: I know one guy who refers to Budweiser as "hangover in a >can", an asessment with which I essentially agree. If I go to an >ordinary bar with normal people and have two 10 Oz Bud's I feel worse >the next morning than after three pints of one of my own creations even >though the latter is more alcoholic. I've always blamed this on the >noticeable levels of acetaldehyde in Bud (gives it that apple-like >aroma) which is, after all, the stuff of hangovers, but I rather doubt >that the small amount that produces the flavor is significant relative >to the amount oxidized from alcohol during metabolism. A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any other invention, With the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 10:27:26 -0500 From: cbuckley at newsoft.com Subject: yeast for bottling Darrell Leavitt writes: "In a back room that I use for lagers, I have several containers full of chilled water. Well, the other day I decided to place a Burton Ale into 50F water thinking that this might help to clarify the final product....but I woke up this morning thinking that I had made a mistake; ie, perhaps there might not be enough yeast left for bottling! The ale had been in secondary for just over 1 week....Should I have kept it around 60F to keep some of the yeasies around ?" I also have the same question. I recently moved my secondary full of ale to a nice cool spot. I was trying to get the real hazy beer to clear up some. Well it did clear up nicely. ten days after I bottled the beer there was almost no carbonation and no sediment on the bottom of the bottles. Is this because too much yeast fell out? Should I just wait longer or can I add a little yeast to each bottle? I just want to know if time will fix this or if there is something I can do now.... Thanks for any advice... Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 09:32:00 -0600 From: "Paul Niebergall" <pnieb at burnsmcd.com> Subject: Lactic Dave Burley writes about the "correct" way to adjust mash pH: >adding lactic acid to >your water before mashing to get to a >pH of 6-7 will IN NO WAY guarantee that >your mash pH will be correct. Whatever Dave. If you are looking for GUARANTEES in home brewing, you will never be happy anyway. I never said that was trying to achieve the correct mash pH. I simply stated that my water comes out of the tap at high pH levels (sometimes as high as 11). This is un-acceptable to me so I knock it down a few points by adding lactic acid. Call me crazy, but it just makes good common sense to start with neutral brewing water rather than water at a pH of 11. I rarely ever measure the pH of my mash. Dave goes on to present a rather involved method of adjusting mash pH which is backed up by A.J. later in the digest. While I do not disagree at all with any of the information that was posted, this is an all too typical case of making things way more complicated than they need be. It is no secret that the water in my part of the country (Kansas City area) has a high pH. I am just looking to adjust it to a more neutral starting position. It is interesting that someone in our local home brew club did some checking a few years back on local water conditions and brewing water treatment in the Kansas City area. It turned out that two water treatment techniques were used by most, if not all, of the local breweries operating at the time. Carbon filtration to remove chlorine and acid treatment (with either lactic or phosphoric acid) to lower the pH. Both techniques are extremely fast, simple, and work very well. Nothing more than that came up. No boiling, no cooling, no decanting off the precipitate, no lime treatment, no chanting and walking around in circles, and no actual acid additions to the mash. I couldn't imagine spending (wasting) the extra time it would take to boil my water first, add chalk, cool decant, etc. Martin Brungard writes: >Paul's mention of his water supply's very high pH is alarming. The legal >limits for pH in a drinking water supply are 6.5 to 8.5 pH units. Paul, I >would either question the pH meter you are using or I would raise an alarm >with your water provider. Hopefully a smart guy like yourself is using pH >buffer solutions to check and calibrate your meter, and if that is the case >then I would alert your water supplier that you are measuring excessive pH >in their system. They have to correct it ASAP under the requirements of the >Clear Water Act. Yes my pH meter is calibrated. I use fresh standard solutions and do a three point calibration at a pH of 4, 7, and 10. Actually the Clean Water Act sets only "Secondary" standards for pH. Secondary standards are "unreinforcable federal guideline regarding taste, odor, color, and certain other non-aesthetic effects of drinking water. The EPA recommends them to States as reasonable goals, but federal law does not require water systems to comply with them." The secondary standard for pH of 6.5 to 8.5 was established in 1996 and is considered "final" by the EPA. (The material appearing in quotes above is quoted directly from the EPA publication "Drinking Water and Health Advisories, October 1996. This information is available on the web at http://www.epa.gov/OST/Tools/dwstds.html). I deal with the EPA a lot. Believe me, that last thing they worry about is the pH of your tap water. Paul Niebergall Burns & McDonnell pnieb at burnsmcd.com "Illegitimis non carborundum" Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 10:16:39 -0500 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: First Wort Hopping "Bill Bunning" <bunz at pcola.gulf.net> asks >I know this has been covered here before many times but I was wondering how >exactly do you "first wort hop"? At it's most basic, you add some/most/all of your flavor/aroma hops to the first collected wort. It givbes inproved hop flavor and perhaps aroma. This method was first reported to HBD by george Fix several years ago. It was a German method at the turn of the century (100 years ago, guess we'll have to come up with a new term for that period now) that was rediscovered and investigated recently in Germany and reported in Brauwelt. Taste panels prefered FWHed Pils over those hopped conventionally and found the bitterness more pleasing and not more bitter, even thought they tested higher in actual IBUs. Commerical breweries have a big enough thermal mass in the kettle to keep the temperature at lauter temperatures (~170F), but we homebrewers have to keep so low heat on it during runoff. This is my SOP for CAPs and other pislners, and I have used it in APAs (that's standard operating procedure, Classic American Pilsner and American Pale Ale) and even English bitters. There is no documented evidence that I know of of American brewers 100 years ago using FWH, but since they were in close contact with Germany, and often trained there, I infer that it was know and used here. Besides, I really like the flavor. It's conventionally done with noble hops, and I've had luck with EKG (East Kent GOldings), Centennial, Cascade and Columbus. I tried it once with Cluster hops in a CAP, though, and it was not nice. Almost like someone had put blackberries or black currants into the beer. For a more details, see former HBDer Dave Draper's summary at http://brew.oeonline.com/ddraper/beer/1stwort.html. (This may have a more up to date hbd.org URL). 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: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 10:36:21 -0500 From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com> Subject: Bicarb Scott Jonhson posted pH: 7.77, Total Solids (mg/L): 166, Alkalinity as CaCO3 (ppm): 72, Hardness as CaCO3(ppm): 94, Sulfate (ppm): 30, Calcium (ppm): 26.5, Magnesium (ppm): 6.4, Sodium (ppm): 12.7 and asked some questions about this water. First was as to the bicarbonate and carbonate levels. For pH below about 9 (this water qualifies) bicarbonate ion concentration is 61*alkalinity/50 = 87.8 mg/L. At pH 7.7 about 95% of carbo molecules are bicarbonate and about 0.5% bicarbonate. There are alkalinity/50 = 1.44 millimoles of bicarbonate per liter (times the molecular weight, 61, gives the mg/L bicarb). There are, thus, about (1.44)(0.5)/95 = 0.0076 mM/L carbonate. Multiplying by the molecular weight of cabonate, 60, gives about half a milligram per liter for that species. This water is typical of that found east of the Mississipi and is suitable for brewing most styles of beer. The exception would be beers which use large quantities of noble hops as the sulfate is high enough to render these harsh. Thus for Bohemian Pilsner the water should be diluted 3:1 or so with deionized water (3 parts deionized to 1 part tap water). For the beers associated with hard water supplementation with sulfate and perhaps chloride (which will be low in this water, probably less than 10 mg/L) will be required. For most brewing, don't worry about it. If you lean towards ales experiment with gypsum incrementing the amount added until the hops are as you like them. Then perhaps add a bit of calcium chloride to see if you like what it does for mouthfeel. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 10:37:53 -0500 From: "Philip J Wilcox" <pjwilcox at cmsenergy.com> Subject: Malt Mill woes Jack and the HBD The last 3 brews I have scorched my mash tun because of heating while losing the recirculation due to a stuck mash. My maltmill is one of your non-adjustable mills. The Grain has been Durst Pils then Budvar Pils then Durst Munich and Pils for a Doppel. The last of which was notabley full of flour-the grains were well mixed before milling. This fall, the schive on the motor i was using broke, and I was force into using a new Shive on the motor one size smaller than the previous broken one. I figure no big deal, it will just take a little longer, faster isnt always better anyway. Well, that being a bigger change than using pils malt this summer to pils malt this winter. Why the change in results???? Would "wet milling" be helpfull in my case? if so, how should I go about "Wetting my grain" Is this and overnight thing or a half hour before milling kind of thing? How much water per 10 lbs should be my goal to add for "Wetting"? my plan is to use a spray bottle on the malt while I pour it from one bucket to another. WIll this help???? or do i stoop so low at to use rice hulls???? Phil Wilcox Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 10:45:55 -0500 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: Enameled Kettle Handles I wrote: >I used one of these for probably 15 years before going to aluminum 10 >gallon pots and never had a problem beyond a strained back. Toward the >carrying it for the same fear as you express. Apparently gremlins snatched the middle of that second sentence. It was supposed to read, "Toward the end, rust spots around the welds began to perforate the kettle wall and I stopped carrying it for the same fear as you express." Jack Baty <jack at wubios.wustl.edu>wrote: >It happened to me not long after I started using the pot. I suspect this was from a defective weld since it happened when it was new. I am grateful I haven't had the searing experiences Rich Sieben has had, but I agree on not carrying hot liquids. 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: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 11:04:07 -0500 From: "Alan Meeker" <ameeker at welchlink.welch.jhu.edu> Subject: musty notes in beer One potential source of "musty" character is the compound 3-hydroxy-2-butanone, more commonly called "acetoin." It is an intermediate species between 2,3-butanedione (AKA "diacetyl") and 2,3-butanediol. 3-hydroxy-2-butanone is formed during the reductive elimination of diacetyl by the yeast and is described as having a musty flavor. The flavor threshold is some 5-10 fold higher than that of diacetyl so you'd have to postulate some mechanism by which it would accumulate to this level (ie - not undergo further reduction to give 2,3-butanediol) . Was there a high diacetyl character prior to the mustiness?? Other sources of musty flavors might include bacterial metabolites or fungal contamination (of the barley or malt) but if it comes and goes this may implicate yeast metabolism and the diacetyl pathways then seem reasonable suspects... Alan Meeker Baltimore, MD Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 08:36:02 -0800 From: Gary Williams <jgwillfind at earthlink.net> Subject: Re: enameled kettle handles Please allow me to echo Mr. Sieben warnings against the carrying of boiling liquids/hot pots. It ain't worth it. In another incarnation I worked various restaurant kitchens (over 15 years) and have watched many a regretful person try to "hurry it up" trying to keep pace with demands, have done so myself and carry the scars. Again, it ain't worth it and besides, wort chillers are the neatest things. So is the 4 wheel cart I use to rolls big, full pots/carboys around on. The cart used to be used to roll some large, heavy electronic thingy around, can't remember what I traded for it (not much) , but works just like what I used in professional kitchens to move large stock pots with. Go slow, watch for imperfections in the floor... and I could go on. Just get me started on the correct use of knives in a fast, crowded working environment sometime. While I think about it, yes, handles on large pots are designed to stay on, before, during and after cooking heat is applied. However, I have used one handled stock/cooking pots before, didn't matter, was only sliding them around. Have a 15 inch skillet with no handle, too. They became one handled through lots of use, the point being, it can happen. Don't put that much faith in something you don't have to, when potentially, so much can be at stake. Gary Williams Closet Brewer Corona, California Return to table of contents
Date: 01 Mar 2000 11:06:23 -0500 From: RCAYOT at solutia.com Subject: Yeast Growth Steve asks: "Do you really believe that single cell that multiplies ninety-nine-fold somehow creates much more of a flavor impact than a trillion cells that 'only' double in count ?" Unh... yeah, I think thats the point. Of course you point out that cell division and growth in and of itself is not the problem, buyt the condition of the yeast. well I agree, but we are talking about yeast growing in a limited environment. the yeast go into a fermentation (after the lag phase) with everything they are going to have fopr the duration. under identical, and not ideal conditions, the fermentation that has more yeast, IMO, will more likely lead to fewer problems. Its really a lot simpler than one might think. Roger Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 14:02:17 -0600 From: John_L._Sullivan at NOTES.UP.COM Subject: 33 Quart Enamel Kettle Handles Jeff Renner stated... > I used one of these for probably 15 years before going to aluminum 10 > gallon pots and never had a problem beyond a strained back. Toward the > carrying it for the same fear as you express. I think they'd have to be > designed to hold a kettle of liquid since that's clearly their intended > purpose. Jeff: Actually these are canning pots and ARE NOT designed to be filled full with any kind of liquid and moved about. Enough liquid to do the canning job is all that was ever intended. When loaded with liquid, rack and jars, it was still not designed really to be moved about. It's supposed to sit in one place on the stove until the canning job is done. After the jars are removed, it can be picked up by the handles safely if you have not overfilled it with water. With 5 or more gallons of hot wort in one of these kettles, only move it by grasping the kettle rim. With hot wort this will mean that you will also need something to protect your hands from being burnt. Once you have this protection on, the hold on that small rim is precarious to say the least. John Sullivan St. Louis, MO Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 09:29:15 +1300 From: Brian Myers <BrianM at AdvantageGroup.co.nz> Subject: Aeration and ceiling splooge Aaron Perry asks about aeration: >I've made a few meads and never bothered to aerate before pitching. I heat >the full volume of water with the honey and chill, rather than heating the >honey with some water and adding to more cold water. So,to aerate or not to >aerate? Any insight would be great. I recently did an experiment in which I split a 10 gallon batch into two carboys. I aerated one by rocking the carboy vigorously for several minutes (my usual procedure) and the other I did not aerate at all, except for the small splash during transfer. Fermentation action was visibly identical, the final gravities were the same, and the two beers taste the same, so far, according to everyone who's tried them side-by-side. I used Edme dry yeast, one 10 gram pack per carboy, dumped right in (not re-hydrated, as I have done similar experiments in the past which show me that there is no noticeable difference between re-hydrating, and not). I believe that for normal (not high-gravity) beers, and when using dry yeast, aeration makes very little noticeable difference. Aeration *does* seem to make a big difference when pitching liquid yeasts, and it also seems to help high-gravity beers finish. Dave Burley says: >To "Sticky in Colorado" : As long as >you use a carboy for your primary >you will run this risk of splooge on the >ceiling. I don't agree. I like to use carboys. If I suspect a batch might climb out of the carboy, I put a piece of aluminum foil over the top rather than an airlock for the first day or so. It may overflow on to the floor, but it won't clog the airlock and then explode on to the walls or ceiling. regards, Brian Myers Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 18:06:55 -0500 (EST) From: Some Guy <pbabcock at hbd.org> Subject: Ceiling Splooge?! Please... Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager... Sir Dave of Burley spaiketh thusly: >To "Sticky in Colorado" : As long as >you use a carboy for your primary >you will run this risk of splooge on the >ceiling. In the words of Col. Sherman T. Potter: horse puckey! I've used a carboy for primary for as long as my ten gallon crock (rest its soul) has been broken. I've never once had ceiling splooge. If you use a blow-off hose that fits in a stopper, or if you use an airlock before kraeusen falls, you're at risk, but come on! It's NOT the carboy - it's all the other apparatus some slap in the mouth of the thing. - See ya! Pat Babcock in SE Michigan pbabcock at hbd.com Home Brew Digest Janitor janitor@hbd.org HBD Web Site http://hbd.org The Home Brew Page http://hbd.org/pbabcock "Just a cyber-shadow of his former brewing self..." Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 17:17:31 -0600 From: "Paul Niebergall" <pnieb at burnsmcd.com> Subject: pitching rates I just thought that I would add a note of reality to the current pitching rate debate. Remember the Palexperiment back in 1998? The Palexperiment involved 45 home brewers brewing the exact same recipe and a judging to see which of the beers turned out the best. If I recall correctly, the ingredients list specified that a single Wyeast Smak-Pack (1056) be used to innoculate the boiled and cooled wort. That's right, NO STARTER!. This was done to eliminate the variables that would occur with different starter sizes. (The intent was for everyone to use Exactly the same ingredients. Technique may vary, but ingredients including the exact amount of yeast had to remain constant). Anyway, the Palexperiment came and went, results were posted, and I believe even Louis Bonham volunteered (courtesy of BT) to do laboratory testing on samples of the beer that were submitted. It is interesting to note that one of the laboratory tests included "Bacteria Contamination Tests - (LDMA)". The web page detailing all this is found at: http://gatekeeper.bdsinc.com/~jjorgens/ What is interesting about the Palexperiment is that clearly (by just about anybody's account who subscribes to the HBD expurt cult) the beers were underpitched. Yet nowhere on the web page nor in the hundreds of lines that were subsequently written in the HBD concerning the outcome of the experiment, is there any reference to "problems" occurring from "underpitching". Not one reference to off-flavors, bacteria contamination, undercarbonation, excess esters, phenols, nothing, nada, zippo, zero. I wonder why this is? You would think that if there was a problem somebody would have surely pointed it out. You would think that if 45 people did something as terribly wrong as underpitching to such a severe degree, an overwhelming abundance of problems would have occurred that could not possibly be overlooked. According to the expurts here, the 45 batches of beer would have been "severely" underpitched thus causing any one of a plethora of problems that would render the beer undrinkable. According to the expurts, it would not have been just a minor problem with one or two of the samples, but virtually all of the beer should have resulted in ruin. (What if I was a newby and suggested to the collective that I was brewing my first beer and planned on pitching a smak-pack without a starter? Could you imagine the responses I would get from the expurts??) Maybe the expurts are wrong? Maybe the expurts should stop spurting forth from so-called text books? Maybe we should all take a good hard look at some real data. Paul Niebergall Burns & McDonnell pnieb at burnsmcd.com "Illegitimis non carborundum" Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 18:52:44 From: "C.D. Pritchard" <cdp at chattanooga.net> Subject: re: Not one Element but Two & mash stirrer Got behind in my HND reading... Brad Miller posted in Subject: Not one Element but Two > Does anyone know about running multiple heating elements at >the same time. Does this trip a breaker if they are on the same one? >I wanted to rig up my HLT with an element and run it at the same time >as my RIMS element. Would this work? It depends on the rated power of the heaters and the voltage and circuit breaker rating of the branch circuit you connect to. Use the following to evaluate the particular situation: I = P / V Where: I= current that the element will draw at the element's rated power (P) and the circuit's voltage (V) (not the element's rated voltage). Calcs. for connecting elements in parallel and in series are (as the textbooks say) left to the students as an exercise. If the circuit won't handle both and your RIMS controller cycles the power on/off (i.e. not a dimmer type control), the following will ensure only one of the elements can draw power at a time and that the RIMS element will have perference. +---------NC---> HLT element | Hot >---+--X--+---NO---> RIMS Element | Coil X= on/off control for RIMS element | Neu. >--------+ I used something similar for a couple of years. With an insulted and covered HLT, the water in it has plenty of time to heat up to sparging temp. while the RIMS heater isn't drawing power (i.e. during rests). - -------------- Joseph Gibbens posted about his false bottom supports putting holes in the bottom of his Gott mash tun and asked about mash stirrers. A manifold will put hardly any pressure on the bottom of the tun. Also, ne made of SS mesh liberated from plumbing connectors allows a higher recirc. flow than the false bottoms I tried. For a stirrer, see: http://hbd.org/cdp/rims_inf.htm#retmanifold. They are valuable for doughing-in and freeing up a stuck grain bed. c.d. pritchard cdp at chattanooga.net http://chattanooga.net/~cdp/ Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 16:16:21 -0900 From: Mark Staples <mark at wildales.com> Subject: High Gravity Pitching rate. Jerry, what does ok mean, well attenuated? Some clasic examples of dopple bock have relativly high final gravities. The question might be what is your preference sweet or dry? Pitching 1.5 gallons is a good pitch rate for lagers. And 308 is great on high gravity brews and will have no problem taking a 1.080 beer well below 1.015. In predicting a final gravity a more important variable is wort fermenability. RE: Other stuff This is my first time on this forumn. Is there always this much cry-baby-stuff going on? Who is Privo. RE: Pithcing Rates My reseach shows a gram of dry yeast is roughly 14,000,000,000 cells. Based on that I calculate a rate 4 grams per gallon for 1.050 beer to be about right. I don't care what Lalymaid says. Wyeast says to pitch a 50ml smack pack too, which is about 50 times to little yeast. As far as making good beer when under pitching, without doubt you can. However, can you do it consistently, not lickly. Under pitching becomes a far greater problem if the yeast is going to repitched. Mark Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 19:25:14 -0600 From: "Steve Stripling" <steves1 at hiwaay.net> Subject: Re: strange flavor In #3262, Marc Sedam asked about a strange flavor in a CAP. Hey Mark, I've occasionally had the odd taste from a single sample from a batch. I've attributed it to somehow transferring an offending substance to the glass I was drinking from, something on my fingers (garlic, gasoline, and perfume odors are hard to remove), or possibly something that I've eaten previously (in the way that eating artichokes makes water taste sweet). Don't know if this is the case for you, but I take comfort in my simple explanations, especially when the problem goes away. Steve Stripling Huntsville, AL Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 19:33:37 -0600 From: Tom Meier <tom.meier at mindspring.com> Subject: another pitch Thought this would fit in with the recent Bitchin' about Pitchin'..... ok, it seems that nearly every batch I have problems getting the correct starter (number of cells) pitched. The results is high gravity beer that is ok but not great. Last batch I used a 1/2 gallon starter on a 1.057 OG stout. I pitched the starter while the yeast was still in suspension and there was a good head of foam. Was this too early? It must have been because I aerated well and it still finished high at 1.020 FG, even after a secondary ferment. Preparing for my upcoming batch, I let a Wyeast XL pack ferment out a 1L starter. By the time the yeast was settled out (2.5 days) it smelled of autolysis. I am sure of this because I have created autolysis on purpose before so I'd know what it smells like. I guess I am closing the gap on when/what to pitch, but its damn frustrating. Can anyone recommend what size starter to use and at what time to pitch it? I have had one good result using a 50ml wyeast into a 500 ml starter that was partially settled out. I have read it is best to pitch at high krausen while the yeast are still floating, but my own experience says otherwise. By the way, can somebody from Wyeast post some suggestions? I am about to switch to dry yeast, but if I had some good pointers.... Tom Meier Decatur, AL Return to table of contents

Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 13:37:34 +1000 From: "Thomas D. Hamann" <tdhamann at senet.com.au> Subject: chilling in secondary Don't worry Darrell, be happy, I've had many beers (lagers and ales) stored in the fridge at temps between 0-10 degC and have never had probs with carbonation. They had been lagered for 1-5 weeks and have been high and low gravities too. My guess is that you'll be fine. >From: "Darrell Leavitt" <Darrell_Leavitt at sln.esc.edu> >Subject: question: chilling ales in the secondary ? > >In a back room that I use for lagers, I have several containers full of >chilled water. Well, the other day I decided to place a Burton Ale into >50F water thinking that this might help to clarify the final product....but >I woke up this morning thinking that I had made a mistake; ie, perhaps >there might not be enough yeast left for bottling! > The ale had been in secondary for just over 1 week....Should I have kept >it around 60F to keep some of the yeasies around ? > > Worried. > ..Darrell Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 03/02/00, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96