HOMEBREW Digest #3300 Sat 15 April 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: Iodophor (phil sides jr)
  RE: Strike Temps (phil sides jr)
  Newer Brewer builds Cooler Cooler (John Roe)
  Fw: Chicken Feed ("Rick Dobler")
  Decoction info for Robert Jones ("Sieben, Richard")
  Rims, Herms mash thickness (Rick & Ruth Duyck)
  re: Chiller turned flusher ("Dan Schultz")
  Bottles ("West, Robert M. SFC")
  packing peanuts (Marc Sedam)
  Re: Strike water temp calculation (Demonick)
  yeast question for Dr. Cone (Marc Sedam)
  mash-out ad nauseam ("Nathaniel P. Lansing")
  TNB Online Articles (Marc Sedam)
  "Scratcg feed" trivia (JohnT6020)
  Sticky in Colorado (geeks)
  Decoction , iodophore, Clayton Cone Cuestion, Partially (Dave Burley)
  Chicken Feed Update (William Frazier)
  Belgian Trippel recipe. ("Pannicke, Glen A.")
  re: Munich Lager Yeast (The Artist Formerly Known As Kap'n Salty)
  picnic tap/faucet as inline valve (Jeff Renner)
  Not the same old science vs. art ("Doug Moyer")
  Australian Brewers and other life forms ("Jim B Verlinde")
  Mashing Formulas (John Varady)

* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! * 18th Annual Oregon Homebrew Festival - entry deadline May 15th * More info at: http://www.hotv.org/fest2000 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: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 01:52:15 -0400 From: phil sides jr <psides at technologist.com> Subject: Re: Iodophor Dennis Templeton <djt2 at po.cwru.edu> writes: >This is certainly a good writeup, and Robert's conclusion that >rinsing after using proper concentrations of iodophor is well >justified. He notes that tasters can detect the iodine diluted in >water, but not in beer. You mean NOT rinsing after using proper concentrations of iodophor is well justified, right? Phil Sides, Jr. Concord, NH - -- Macht nicht o'zapft ist, Prost! Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 02:31:12 -0400 From: phil sides jr <psides at technologist.com> Subject: RE: Strike Temps Brad Miller <millerb at targen.com> asks: >just past my HSA manifold. All of this labor made me wonder, what is >the equation for strike temps? I've seen java programs on the net >but I actually want the equation, like 25lb of grains at 65 F and 9 >gal water at 170 F will give a temp of X. I'll let you think about (1.0 X weight of water X temperature) + (0.4 X weight of malt X temperature) - ------------------------------------------- (weight of water) + (0.4 X weight of malt) = temperature of mixture. I found this in Michael J. Lewis & Tom W. Young's book, Brewing (pg. 102) and have used it with good success to predict proper strike temp. I like this formula because it does not require any unit conversions. Just rearrange the formula to yield your unknown. Phil Sides, Jr. Concord, NH - -- Macht nicht o'zapft ist, Prost! Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 05:01:41 -0400 From: John Roe <Sensei_John_Roe at compuserve.com> Subject: Newer Brewer builds Cooler Cooler I'm a newer brewer, and have enjoyed this forum on several levels, thanks! I had a desire after pitching the yeast in my first batch, a William's IPA kit , to control fermentation temperature. So I brought home my little mini office refrigerature and bought a 4'x8' sheet of 1.5" double foil and plastic moisture barrier backed foam. I took the door off and with a kitchen knife and a big roll of duct tape made a top-lidded refrigerated chest which can easily hold two 5 gallon fermentors with bubble-locks. Took about an hour. I attached a williams original temp controller and stuck a digital thermometer probe through the side and was all set. ...Except I want to be able to lager and/or chill beer down in secondary to help drop the yeast before bottling, so I am going to build a "side box" onto the side, with it's own lid and room for two more carboys/fermentors. I will put a "muffin" fan in a circular cut out on the bottom of the shared wall with a foam "flapper" and another flapper "return" at the top. This fan will be controlled by my williams controller, while the main compartment will revert back to the original stock temperature control. Now I will have a refrigerature with room for a couple of six packs ready to drink, plus two carboys, or room for several cases at drinking / lagering temperature. AND I will have room for two more carboys/plastic fermentors at Ale temperatures, or whatever, on my separate williams controller. All this for a few bucks of foam and duct tape plus a fifty dollar controllor and an old mini-fridge I hardly used anyway. Sorry for the long post, but I'm thrilled to be brewing, already have done two batches in 10 days, the second my own recipe barley-wine using pro-mash for guidance. Now I am getting set to brew a stout. John Roe Laguna Hills, Ca www.martialartsacademy.org roe-sensei at martialartsacademy.org "have the good manners not to hit the man until he's your husband, and until he can hit you back" ... From the movie "The Quietman" Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 08:13:22 -0400 From: "Rick Dobler" <dobler at madbbs.com> Subject: Fw: Chicken Feed - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rick Dobler" <dobler at madbbs.com> To: <post@hbd.org> Sent: Friday, April 14, 2000 8:09 AM Subject: Chicken Feed Greetings, I live in Western NY. I work for a large animal feed manufacturer. I hope you realize that the 50 lb sack of cracked corn was not meant for human consumption. Feed grade products are not handled as cleanly as human grade. There can be bug infestations, pestisides, chewing tobacco spit. I worked at a smaller company at one time. I saw the mill workers taking a wizz in the corn bunk. They were too lazy to walk to the bathroom. Procede at yor own risk!! The Lone Brewer Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 08:12:44 -0500 From: "Sieben, Richard" <SIER1 at Aerial1.com> Subject: Decoction info for Robert Jones I used to guestimate the percentage of mash to remove by using my stiring spoon to determine the total depth of the mash and then decide how deep the mash should be after removal of the desired percentage. I also had gallon marks on my spoon that were calibrated to my boiling pot, this same marks helped out in measuring the mash depth with some consistency. Simple and it worked for me. Rich Sieben Island Lake, IL Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 09:39:46 -0400 From: Rick & Ruth Duyck <rnrduyck at mnsi.net> Subject: Rims, Herms mash thickness Hi all I'm about half finished building my H.E.R.M.S. system and am wondering about the mash thickness in a step mash. I've read somewhere (here?) that it is important to reach the next temperature quickly. I've also read in Charlie P.'s book that "a thicker mash favors proteolytic activity and thinner mashes favor diastatic activity". Is it ok to just add boiling water as he does in his book and use the heat exchanger ( or heater element in a R.I.M.S.) to maintain the temperature and for mashout? I figure you would have to mix the boiling water in the set grain bed ,but wouldn't the grain bed reset again? Of course this is not a completely automated system, its more of a hands on system. Thanks alot for any help. Rick Duyck, Windsor, Ontario, Canada eh! Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 06:48:55 -0700 From: "Dan Schultz" <dschultz at primenet.com> Subject: re: Chiller turned flusher >steve lane noted his lack of good results with his built in immersion chiller and success >with it as a heater for his clean up water: Sorry to hear your built in chiller wasn't working to your needs. I just ran my first run on my HE-Man RIMS that incorporates a similar built-in immersion chiller. I, however, did enjoy great success with mine (the chiller part anyway) and wonder what our differences could be. I used about 45 feet of 1/2" copper tubing that connects to 1/2" SS welded ports at about the 2 gallon and 7 gallon level marks. On the outside, I have garden hose quick connects. My first run was only a 5 gallon batch and even with about 25% of my coil above the wort, I was able to chill faster than when I used my 1/2" x 50' immersion chiller (which is now my HE-Man RIMS manifold in the liquor tank). I must admit that I am blessed with 42F tap water this time of year (goes up to 50F in the summer). There is no real rationale for the improvement other than pure subjective opinion. You can see a picture at http://www.primenet.com/~dschultz/boiler.html In my research on RIMS systems on the web, I have yet to note anyone else using a built-in immersion cooler. I suspect that for all the trouble, most go to C/F chiller. By my method, I eliminate any sanitation concerns and now I can put a nicely fit lid on my boiler as soon as I turn the heat off to minimize airborne contamination. Building this thing was a win-win situation becuase any failure as a immersion chiller meant that I could still use it as the liquor tank/HE Manifold. My major concern was for cleaning since I do not want to have to remove the coil each time to get all the hops out of the boiler. After my initial run, a good hosing did the job. I used hop pellets as a result of a gift kit and will test full leaf on my next batch. Burp, -Dan Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 09:54:43 -0400 From: "West, Robert M. SFC" <westr2 at ftknox5-emh3.army.mil> Subject: Bottles I have a very simple question. Can you or is it recommended to bottle our fine nectar in twist off bottles? Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 10:10:45 -0400 From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam at unc.edu> Subject: packing peanuts Someone finally figured out the packing peanuts trick. Huzzah! I do know what's in the packing peanuts and there's nothing in there to prevent mold. Eco-Foam (tm) was created a few lab doors down from me at a former employer and it's super cool. Much of the process is a trade secret, but I can tell you that it's made of food-grade starch and mineral salts. The stuff won't mold because if it gets moist it simply disintegrates. Cool stuff and great for the environment to boot. Cheers! Marc Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 07:27:37 -0700 From: Demonick <demonick at zgi.com> Subject: Re: Strike water temp calculation Brad Miller <millerb at targen.com> >... I've seen java programs on the net but I actually want the equation, Here's a post from about 7 years ago. I use this equation and with pre-heating my 10 gallon Gott I routinely hit my strike temp target within 1 C. Cheers, Domenick Venezia Venezia & Company, LLC Maker of PrimeTab (206) 782-1152 phone (206) 782-6766 fax orders demonick at zgi dot com FREE PrimeTab SAMPLES! Enough for three 5 gallon batches. Fax, phone, or email: name, shipping address (no P.O.B.) and phone number. (I won't call. It's for UPS in case of delivery problems). Sorry, lower 48 only. /****************************************** ** Date: Wed, 18 Aug 93 10:34:38 -0600 ** From: Kelly Jones <k-jones at ee.utah.edu> ** Subject: Heat Capacity of Malt / Infusion Calculations ** ** In HBD #1206, Andy Phillips asks about the heat capacity of crushed ** malt, to be used for calculations of infusion mashes. I have found ** that the number 1350 (where water is about 4200) to work well for me. ** I believe the units are J/Kg/K, but this is not important. ** Alternately, one could use the dimensionless number 0.32 for the malt, ** where water is equal to one. Of course, this will vary somewhat ** depending on the type of malt used, the moisture content of the malt, ** etc. but this should be a good starting point. ** ** For those not familiar with these calculations, I will present them ** here: ** ** First, let ** Cpm= heat capacity of your malt, about 0.4 ** Cpw= heat capacity of water, 1.0 ** Mw = mass of water used ** Mm = mass of malt used ** Tw = temperature of strike water ** Tm = beginning temperature of malt (usually room temperature) ** Tf = final temperature of mixture (rest temp) ** ** Masses and temperatures can be in any units, as long as you are consistent. ** ** The basic formula, then, is ** ** (1) Tf = (Cpm*Mm*Tm + Cpw*Mw*Tw)/(Cpm*Mm+Cpw*Mw) ** ** This can be rearranged in many ways to solve for the desired unknown. ** For example, if we want to know the quantity of water to add to result ** in a desired protein rest temperature, we can write ** ** (2) Mw = Cpm*Mm*(Tf-Tm)/(Cpw*(Tw-Tf)) or, using the numbers for Cpm&Cpw, ** ** (3) Mw = .32*Mm*(Tf-Tm)/(Tw-Tf) ** ** SO, suppose you have 4Kg of malt at 25C, and you want to add some ** quantity of water at 54C to achieve a protein rest temperature of 50C: ** ** Mw = .32*4*(50-25)/(54-50) = 8Kg of water ** ** These formulas can also be used to calculate additional water ** quantities to raise the mash temp further. However, different ** variables must be used: Instead of Mm, we will substitute Mmash, the ** mass of the mash, equal to the total mass of malt and water used so ** far; for Tm, we will substitute Tmash; and for Cpm, we must use ** Cpmash, calculated as ** ** Cpmash = (Cpm*Mm +Cpw*Mw)/(Mm+Mw) ** ** Thus, the revised formula (2) is ** ** Mw = Cpmash*Mmash*(Tf-Tmash)/(Tw-Tf) ** ** continuing our example, we have Mmash = 4Kg +8Kg = 12Kg, Cpmash = ** (.32*4+1*8)/(4+8)= .773. Suppose our mash temp is still at 50C, and ** we want to raise it to 66C for a sacharification rest using some ** quantity of water at 100C. Then ** ** Mw = .773*12*(66-50)/(100-50) = 3Kg of additional (boiling) water. ** Some simplifying assumptions have been made here, but they seem to work ** out just fine. (So please don't get on my case about enthalpies of ** mixing, non-additive Cp's, etc.) You may need to play around with the ** value of Cpm to get these eaquations to work out better for you. Also ** remember that your mash tun will absorb some heat, resulting in a rest ** temperature slightly lower than that predicted here. You may want to ** shoot for a degree or so higher to compensate. Note that your boiling ** water temp may not be 100C. ** Equation (1) may be rearranged, if instead it is desired to know, for ** example, what water temperature should be used to obtain a given ** temperature rest for a given volume of water ( if one is shooting for ** some specific mash thickness). Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 10:32:47 -0400 From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam at unc.edu> Subject: yeast question for Dr. Cone Is there a succinct reason why there are not many good dry lager yeasts out there? I've heard, anecdotally, that even the dry lager yeasts aren't true bottom fermenters. Is it a question of genetics or that there's really no big demand for dry lager yeast to make it worthwhile to investigate the problem? -Marc Sedam Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 10:38:15 -0400 From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew at compuserve.com> Subject: mash-out ad nauseam SA >>BA does NOT act more aggressively at the lower temperature. Just the opposite is true.<< As the temperature slips down from alpha rest temps the BA certainly still is active and at the point of it's more aggressive activity. >>. If you don't like your heat source then mashing conditions aren't the issue.<< Never said I didn't like my heat source; in fact the portablity is a benefit! >>I don't find your arguments compelling or even based on a good grasp of the issues.<< That's nice, you work for the Clinton spin-meisters? The issue is; does a mash out benefit someones' beer? 1)improves foam stand.(your 'pro lit' supports this) 2)improves lauter efficiency.( you stated up to 12%) 3)denatures beta amylase to set the RDF at the desired point. (you'll try to refute) 4)promotes greatest alpha amylase activity to avoid unconverted starch from entering the finished beer. (show me it ain't so) >>What seems to be missing is support for the claim the mashout temps (76+C) are NECESSARY for adequate foam.<< I specified 72 C to 74 C as a mash-out temperature. You pulled 76 out of the air or are confusing mashout with sparge temps. >>Kunze at least as early as 1996 suggests (pg 569) that malting conditions and mashing temps. Avoiding 50C-60C as foam negative, and encouraging 62-65C [and 70-72C long high pH *5.5 to 5.6 !!!] rests as foam positive. << Now you support what I was saying about mash-out (72-74 C) and foam, so what's the point? >>missing is support for the claim the mashout temps (76+C) are NECESSARY for adequate foam.<< This point is a disagreement based on semantics. What you say may be 'adequate' foam without mash-out your pro-lit says will see foam positive effects at 72C mash-out temps; supporting my allegations. Consider also the problem of HSA. Quoting back from a prior digest ( lost the #) >>I tend to agree with the latter view as lipoxygenase enzymes are very heat labile<< (not your quote) Would a high temperature mash out, 72 to 74 C, ensure degradation of lipoxygenase to help minimize HSA effects during the run-off to the grant and pumping to the kettle? N.P (Del) Lansing Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 10:46:13 -0400 From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam at unc.edu> Subject: TNB Online Articles Interesting blurbs about the Siebel Institute here. I'm surprised the topic hasn't surfaced on the HBD yet...is Rob Moline able to comment at all? http://www.beertown.org/IBS/Newbrewer/tnbonline.htm Cheers! Marc Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 10:50:35 EDT From: JohnT6020 at aol.com Subject: "Scratcg feed" trivia Flossmoor IL 000414 at 0744 CDT Fellow brewers: In HBD 3299 Glen Panicke comments about chicken scratch feed. I only reply because scratch feed is a product of a vintage similar to mine. In effect I have been an "eye witness" to making, and using scratch feed. Scratch feed refers to the time when chickens ran free in the back yard. They were constantly scratching the ground to turn up something to eat. Scratch feed was a cracked grain mixture that the owner threw out on the ground for the chickens to scratch for. Not quite floor sweepings, but the formula was highly variable, depending on what was in surplus supply at the "elevator" where such stuff usually originated. It nourished the chickens and was believed to be healthy for the chickens to work a little for their meal. There is a left-handed relation to brewing here. Adjunct grains in brewing can be almost any starchy grain that happens to be handy. 73 JET <johnt6020 at aol.com> Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 14:53:36 +0000 From: geeks at att.net Subject: Sticky in Colorado Greetz - Well, two months after my fermenter sprayed my guest bathroom with hops, malt, and yeast, I finally got around to cleaning it up. ( the spousal-unit was happy with that snap decision ). Anyway, after appealing for help here on the HBD, few suggestions came in, and distilling down the answers, painting was in order. Hmmmm. Sounds like too much work. Then, the answer popped into the cranium, the stuff tough enough to soak labels off of Anchor Steam bottles, the wonder chemical ... TSP!!! Mix this stuff 1/4 cup to 1 gallon of water, use a dishwashing rag, and gently wipe, and it all comes off! Unbelievable! The bathroom looks like new!!! ( as a bonus, much spousal appreciation was also noted later in the evening ) Just make sure you don't rub too hard ...( I'm talking about the tsp solution now ). Also, the box says it may remove some gloss from paint, but my catbox was already semi-gloss. Bill in malty-smelling Golden, CO Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 10:56:54 -0400 From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Decoction , iodophore, Clayton Cone Cuestion, Partially Brewsters: Time for a little engineeering. Robert Jones (hmmm, living in SC, where have I heard that name before?) asks a question that has often bothered me when doing decoction mashes. How do we know when too much is not enough and such when pulling a thick mash. I have always chosen the dip and look method, but it is not good enough. I always have to adjust the re-combined mash temperature. Have any of you developed a device to improve this to the point where we can pull the correct amount of mash and get the correct temperature hold points without heating or holding back when we recombine mashes? I can imagine a sort of strainer which is pushed into the mash to a certain depth and this is pulled out without mixing in too much air and put in the boiler, some measured amount of thin mash added to correct the consistency and brought up to the boil in desired stages. The trick would be to have some way to move this "strainer" back into the mash for the next decoction ( a movable flap, a bottom that folds up and then recloses or such?) to the desired depth and then lift it out. Proabaly not too tricky, but needs some engineering minds to make it simple and practical, which is my definition of engineering excellence. Best of all would be to be able to use an existing cooking? device. Thoughts and comments? - ----------------------------- Jason Foster's thoughts about iodophor and his concern of using it as a non-rinse sanitizer are common. Given the word "dry" which is what you are supposed to do after you use iodophor and what some people interpret as "non-rinse" which is to apply iodophor, drain it and immediately use the device are two different things. The latter is not necessarily dangerous as the iodophor will react with beer components, but it can affect the taste. If you allow the device to dry, you should have no concern. OTOH, if I am using a sanitizer with a difficult to dry carboy, for example, after sanitizing, I usually rinse all such containers with boiled and usually hot water, just to be sure there is no taste impact. It is cheap insurance and one more potential problem eliminated. - ----------------------------- Question for Clayton Cone: Would you please discuss % attenuation, laboratory conditions of the fermentation and method of measuring it? Will all brewing yeasts with similar bio-chemistries ( i.e. all those who can digest the same sets of sugars) attentuate to the same percentage under lab conditions if stirred during the fermentation and for a long enough period? What are other practical factors in a fermentation that can affect attenuation? How do you account for the various attentuation limits given for similar yeasts and how can we homebrewers use these numbers? - ----------------------------- Hmmm. Phil those "caramelly flavors" as you call them and darkening with the lid off during what you term a "high boil" is what I was talking about. I doubt you would see much of a difference if it were not that oxygen weren't having an effect. The flavors produced are not appropriate at all for most light, rice based lagers ( which I also enjoy) but maybe not too bad in beers with lots of other flavors. I suspect we have observed the same thing, just interpreted it differently with a different set of conditions. It is true, I guess, that you have never tried it my way, so you don't really know what I am talking about. It is possible that you are getting more water boiled off ( and a consequent higher boil temperature) during a "high boil" than a "low boil" and, as a result, you are <also> getting additional caramelly flavors in the high boil because of the higher temperature and higher concentration of reactive components . I suggest you try that next rice lager partially covered 2/3 during the long boil after the foamup and see for yourself. And for those ales, boil off the same amount of water but 2/3 covered and compare these results. If you have two identical kettles, try it side by side with each brew. I don't recommend the lid being on at all during the initial foamy boilup ( although being an experienced daredevil, I do keep the kettles covered during the heatup and listen for boiling sounds) and then uncover. When the foam clears I replace the lid, but only 2/3 closed. This jet of steam will keep oxygen away from the wort during the 1 hour or so rolling boil. It is easy to do and I don't know why anyone would resist it. Maybe you've never heard of oxidation during the boil because professionals do all of their boils in closed kettles and have a much smaller surface to volume ratio than homebrewers. I don't think those are caramel flavors induced by oxidation, more likely they're oxidized phenols. I can taste the difference and see the color difference between two different boilups of the same batch in two identical kettles, one covered 2/3 and one not. The amount of boiloff was not substantially different as the rate of boiloff is pretty much determined by the rate of heat applied - as you indicate, minus a little condensation on the lid at first. A towel on the lid reduces this condensation substantially. Same brew, same yeast, etc. Even Dr. Pivo could tell the difference. - ------------------------------- Keep on Brewin' Dave Burley Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 14:57:42 +0000 From: William Frazier <billfrazier at worldnet.att.net> Subject: Chicken Feed Update I bought 50 pounds of Farmland Cracked Corn a couple of days ago at the COOP. My idea was to replace the corn meal I usually use in a CAP with the cracked corn. A couple of problems. First the corn, while cracked, seemed to be in pieces too large to permit a good extraction. I passed it through a Corona Mill a couple of times and got the particle size down to that of a BB plus corn flour. I proceded with a cereal mash the night before brew day. Watch out! Big time scorch. I had enough time to prepare a second cereal mash with Aunt Jemima Corn Meal. This one worked out fine, like others in the past. I used the AJCM mash in the CAP brewed yesterday. Then I received a warning from Rick Dobler from Western NY, who works for an animal feed manufacturer. Without going into the details of Rick's warning I would suggest not using animal feed grade cracked corn. Thanks Rick! Presently the resident flock of grackles are enjoying the cracked corn. There are hundreds of them at my place this time of year building nests and laying eggs. Lots of expectant mothers out there and I figured they needed the corn a lot more than me. So, while using 9 cents per pound cracked corn in home brew sounded great it's back to human grade corn meal for me. Regards, Bill Frazier Olathe, Kansas Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 11:31:51 -0400 From: "Pannicke, Glen A." <glen_pannicke at merck.com> Subject: Belgian Trippel recipe. > P.S. Anyone have a favorite all-grain Belgian Trippel recipe? I have one for a 5 gal batch which I've finally settled on. Technically I guess it's a Special, but it's of Trippel proportions. It winds up light, crisp and VERY alcoholic. I usually only drink this stuff under heavy moderation, otherwise I'll wake up the next morning under the coffee table wrapped up in the throw rug hugging the dog. Look... I'm not proud of it. The dog thing, not the beer ;-) Grains: 10# Pilsner Malt 2# Vienna Carapils Mash: I do this now with that always special, backwards-ass Belgian decoction mashing regime (boiling portions of the wort, not the mash to raise the temp). It works, but I'm not sure if the end result tastes much better than a simple step-infusion mash. Mash in at 130F 30 min at 130 F 45 min at 150 F 15 min at 170 F Mash out at 170 F Sparge until final gravity reaches 1.010 or 6.5 gallons have been collected Hops: 1/2 oz. Hallertauer (3.0 - 3.5 AA) in the first wort (removed prior to starting the boil) 1/2 oz. Styrian Goldings(3.0 - 3.2 AA) in the first wort (removed prior to starting the boil) 1 oz. Hallertauer in the boil (add after the hot break starts to form) 1 oz. Styrian Goldings (3.0 - 3.2 AA) (add at halfway through the boil) Boil: Raise to a vigorous boil for about an hour (partially covered) to drop the volume to about 5.5 gallons. Add 2# honey (wildflower, clover or orange blossom have worked equally well), 1/2 oz. crushed coriander, 1/2 oz. Bitter Orange peel and 5 whole cloves. Allow to steep for 10 minutes and force chill to room temp. Rack off trub to collect 5 gallons. Fermentation: Ferment to completion at room temp (68 - 72 F) with White Labs WLP550 or Wyeast #1214, #1762 or #1338 (I prefer Wyeast #1762) Rack to a secondary for 5 days at room temp. Dry hop with 1/2 oz. Styrian Goldings (3.0 - 3.2 AA) for 2-3 days. Drop temp into the 40 - 50 F range for 24 hours prior to bottling/kegging. Cold condition after cabonation is completed for a 2 week minimum. There it is. My recipe, the way I like it, with the major process parameters included. Hopefully you can get something close to what I do. Belgian beers are supposed to be... weird?... no... ummmmm.... UNIQUE! The hops and spices mellow out some of the heavy phenolics which I have found to always dominate over the esters produced by most Belgian yeast strains available on the market. You may also can the spices, flavor hops and dry hops to attain a brew that adheres more to the style guidelines of a trippel. I prefer to use honey in place of candi sugar up to 4# total and I have found the best results with the Wyeast #1762 strain. Knock yourself out. It ain't hard to do with this brew! Glen Pannicke Merck & Co. Computer Validation Quality Assurance email: glen_pannicke at merck.com Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 16:32:25 GMT From: mikey at swampgas.com (The Artist Formerly Known As Kap'n Salty) Subject: re: Munich Lager Yeast AKGOURMET at aol.com wrote: > Got a question about Wyeast Munich Lager 2308. I brewed a > 10 gallon all grain batch of premium lager a month ago > and it's only down to 1.023. [snip] > Pitched a 3 quart starter (decanted) of yeast (I know, > underpitched for a lager, but not that bad). This looks like a classic underpitching problem. You probably should have pitched at least the sediment from a 2 gallon starter. Personally, I would have pitched at minimum 3-4 gallon starter at the smallest (decanted, of course) for 10 gallons. Sometimes you can get away with underpitching (some folks say they do it all the time), sometimes not. With lagers fermented cold from the beginning, underpitching can cause real problems. In my own case, the ferment usually stopped early. Another possibility is that you temp-shocked the yeast. Say by pitching a room-temp starter into very cold wort. Or maybe a combination of the two. In any case, the ferment is not likely to continue much lower. This is actually pretty easy to remedy -- just pitch some more yeast. I'd grow up another starter at room temp and just repitch. At this point, you could probably get away with repitching less yeast at room temp -- since the bulk of the extract is already gone, finishing at room temp is not likely to introduce much in the way of off flavors. Think of it as a diacetyl rest. Try growing up another 3 qt starter of munich (or maybe find something cleaner) and let it finish at room temp or just a little "cool". It should only take a couple of days to be done. I'll bet you could even use a clean ale yeast, but I haven't tried this personally. Also, consider verifying the accuracy of your hydrometer. Note: I speak only from my OWN experience. I do not claim to be an authority (although Biergiek and Fouch look up to me like a father). Some of you may not even use yeast at all or ferment your lagers at 350F in cardboard-- more power to you. Those of you who regularly complain about other postings (and you know who you are) should remain in your seats and take a few deep breaths. And finally: NOVICE BREWERS SHOULD NOT BECOME ALARMED BY THIS POST. I REPEAT: NOVICE BREWERS SHOULD NOT BECOME UNDULY ENTURBULATED BY THE CONTENTS OF THIS POSTING. Cheers -- TAFKAKS ************************************** Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball. ************************************** Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball. Return to table of contents
Date: 14 Apr 2000 11:28:43 -0400 From: RCAYOT at solutia.com Subject: DECOCT VOLUMES Regarding Robert Jones recent query on Decoction volumes: From: "Robert S. Jones" <bigskygyd at mcn.net> Subject: Decoction info needed "I am an all grain homebrewer and often use decoction programs in my brewing. I have always struggled with determining how much mash to remove for the decoction. Most of the decoction programs I use call for removal of 30% to 45% of the mash. I usually rely on the "That seems about like 40%" method and the beers turn out pretty good but I would like to have more consistency in doing this......." Robert, I would suggest that you read or reread Noonan's Brewing Lager Beer. Second, keep good notes! Remember that Decoction was developed by people who did not even have the benefit of a thermometer! The temperatures they used were fixed, "blood temperature" about 100F and Boiling about 212F. With these fixed temperatures, they could mix boiling mash with the rest mash and hit the correct temperatures only if the proportions were exactly correct. They determined these amounts by trial and error, and by keeping good records, determined for their brewery what worked best. We now know what temperatures we want, and with good estimates of the heat capacity of the mash components could calculate the appropriate volumes. I would suggest you do what I do however, and that is use the old "I know that three strainers full of mash, when decocted and returned to the rest mash did not have enough heat to raise the temp where I wanted it, maybe I'll try three and a half strainers full this time" This has worked well for me, I also keep some boiling water on hand to help with the temp boosts in case I undershoot, and if I overshoot I add cold brewing water. There are some great articles from Zymurgy and Brewing techniques that discussed the various heat capacities of wort and mash components, but I would use these as a guide unless you are really inclined to do the math, and measuring necessary. These articles will help you understand the thermodynamics involved. I hope you continue to do decoction brews as I believe that there is something to be gained from them. Good luck. Roger Ayotte Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 13:11:11 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: picnic tap/faucet as inline valve A few days ago I mentioned the trick I learned from watching Mike O'Brien of pico-Brewing Systems rack some beer. I used the term "picnic tap," which is perhaps an unfortunate and confusing term. I received an email from a confused HBDer from Oz (I'll preserve his anonymity so as not to embarass this poor party-throwing unfortunate who couldn't figure it out). I should better have called it a picnic beer faucet - you know, the black plastic gizmo on the end of a hose that has a thumb lever that you press to dispense beer. To recapitulate now that you have the proper image in mind, you can use this as an in-line valve by stuffing a hose in the spout and running this to the keg or whatever your transferring to. You can either press the lever for intermittent flow or flip it up into the lock open position for continual flow. 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: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 13:23:05 -0400 From: "Doug Moyer" <shyzaboy at yahoo.com> Subject: Not the same old science vs. art Brewers, Every so often, the list gets its collective panties in a bunch regarding some variation of, "Is brewing science or art?" This time, the variant seems to be along the lines of, "everybody else should keep it simple because I don't use science and I make beer my buddies love!" Give me a break. The hobby is what you make of it. Some like to make it as complex as possible, whilst some still prefer the can of Blue Ribbon malt and copious quantities of table sugar. But, don't chew people out for not sharing your personal approach to brewing! Someday, I plan to own a microscope and other paraphernalia for a complete homebrewing lab. (But, today, I don't even have room for the stuff I do have.) Someday, I hope to understand and participate in these seemingly esoteric discussions about yeast's biochemical pathways. Can I brew great beer without it? No question. But it would amuse me to take it to that level. Isn't that what hobbies are all about--personal amusement? At its best, the hbd bandies about quotes from literature, combined with well designed experiments, and, after much discussion and critical evaluation, puts together practical recommendations for the "lay" homebrewer. Wow! At its worst, you have boobs like me slicing off peoples' heads for making statements based on incomplete or inaccurate assumptions--attacking instead of leading the lost sheep gently back to the fold. In other words, while bad attitudes may occasionally seem disenchanting, the heart of the hbd is exploring the hobby to whatever level makes each of us quiver with excitement. Just don't get bent out of shape over someone else's level of interest. There's room for all of us. Brew on! Doug Moyer Salem, VA Star City Brewers Guild: http://hbd.org/starcity "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness.'" ~ Dave Barry (There. I've mentioned "panties" and "quiver with excitement" in the same post. If that doesn't get a rise out of Garvin or the Yates assemblage, I don't know what will.) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 13:58:11 -0400 From: "Jim B Verlinde" <beans at voyager.net> Subject: Australian Brewers and other life forms I have attempted to decipher Phil/Jill Yates' sometimes-beer-related musings for a period of time now but to no avail until I received the following email from The Learning Kingdom. While still not crystal clear, a perspective is coming into focus. Maybe one more homebrew will help! - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Why does Australia have such unusual life forms? - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The continent of Australia has one of the most unusual collections of native life forms on the planet. Why are there so many strange forms there? 50 million years ago, Australia was part of a land mass near the South Pole. It was connected with what are now Antarctica and South America. As the continents slowly shifted, Australia split off and began a long journey northwards. During that time it was isolated by wide stretches of ocean. In Australia, evolution continued for about twenty million years without interference from new forms emerging on other continents. The climate changed radically several times, and whole families of life forms became extinct while new ones evolved. As a result, Australia developed ecosystems quite different from those on other continents. More about the prehistory of Australia: http://www.austmus.gov.au/lostkingdoms/ Jim Verlinde Grand Rapids, MI (Not far from Eric and Fred) Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 14:53:33 -0400 (EDT) From: John Varady <rust1d at usa.net> Subject: Mashing Formulas There were a couple of questions in HBD 3299 about decoction/infusion amounts/temperatures. At the risk of trading in my library card for employment at the local branch, here are all the formulas you need to infusion/decoction mash. They can be found on my web site and are the formulas used in my software. The only credit I can take is for rearranging the basic formula to figure the others. Basic Formula The following formula will compute the final temperature of a mixture of two masses at different temperatures. Tf = (Hc1*M1*T1 + Hc2*M2*T2)/(Hc1*M1+Hc2*M2) Where: Tf = final temperature Hc1 = heat capacity of first mass M1 = wieght of first mass T1 = current temperature of first mass Hc2 = heat capacity of second mass M2 = weight of second mass T2 = current temperature of second mass Rearranging this formula, and using a value of 1 for the heat capacity of water, we come up with the following: Infusion Formula - Amount of Initial Strike Water The following formula will compute the mass of initial strike water required to hit a certain mash temperature based on the temperature of the initial strike water. Ma = Hcm*Mm*(Tf-Tm)/(Tw-Tf) Where: Ma = required mass of initial strike water Hcm = heat capacity of malt (about .4) Mm = mass of malt used Tm = current temperature of the malt Tf = final temperature desired Tw = temperature of initial strike water Infusion Formula - Temperature of Initial Strike Water The following formula will compute the temperature of the initial strike water required to hit a certain mash temperature based on the mass of the initial strike water. Tw = (Ma*Tf-(Hcm*Mm)*(Tm-Tf))/Ma Where: Tw = required temperature of initial strike water Ma = mass of initial strike water added Tf = final temperature desired Hcm = heat capacity of malt (about .4) Mm = mass of malt Tm = current temperature of the malt Infusion Formula - Amount of Step Infusion Water Required The following formula will compute the mass of the water required to boost a mash from one temp to the next. Ma = (Hcm*Mm+Mw)*(Tf-Tmash)/(Tw-Tf) Where: Ma = required mass of water to infuse Hcm = heat capacity of malt (about .4) Mm = mass of malt Mw = mass of water already in mash Tf = final temperature desired Tmash = current temperature of the mash Tw = temperature of infusion water added Infusion Formula - Temperature of Step Infusion Water Required The following formula will compute the temperature of the water required to boost a mash from one temp to the next. Tw = (Ma*Tf-(Hcm*Mm+Mw)*(Tmash-Tf))/Ma Where: Tw = required temperature of infusion water Ma = mass of water infused Hcm = heat capacity of malt (about .4) Mm = mass of malt Mw = mass of water already in mash Tf = final temperature desired Tmash = current temperature of the mash Decoction Formula - Decoction Mass of Mash Required The following formula will compute the mass of the mash that must be decocted, heated and returned to the mash to boost it from one temp to the next. Md = (Hcm*Mm+Mw)/(1+((Tf-Td)/(Tmash-Tf))) Where: Md = required mass of decoction Hcm = heat capacity of malt (about .4) Mm = mass of malt Mw = mass of water already in mash Tf = final temperature desired Td = temperature of decoction when added back to mash Tmash = current temperature of the mash Decoction Formula - Temperature of Decoction Required The following formula will compute the temperature the decoction must be when returned to the mash boost it from one temp to the next. Td = Tmash-(Hcm*Mm+Mw)/Md*(Tmash-Tf) Where: Td = required temperature of decoction when added back to mash Tmash = current temperature of the mash Hcm = heat capacity of malt (about .4) Mm = mass of malt Mw = mass of water already in mash Md = mass of decoction Tf = final temperature desired Fudge Factor When adding either hot water or decoctions to boost your mash temp, you must always take into account the amount of heat your mash tun will absorb. Typically, this will only be 1 or 2 degrees fahrenheit, but will vary from system to system. After a little trial and error, you will become familar with the temperature drop realized by your system and will be able to adjust for it. 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
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 04/15/00, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96