HOMEBREW Digest #3302 Tue 18 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: Rims, Herms mash thickness ("C.D. Pritchard")
  Questions for Dr. Cone ("maltandhops")
  Inevitable wise cracks (Steve Lacey)
  AHA First Round May 6/7 in Philadephia (David Houseman)
  Getting started. (Kerrigan, Kevin [mailto:kkerrigan)
  lagering questions (kysard)
  Yeast Q's -Marc Sedam- Dr. Cone ("Rob Moline")
  The Rob Moline Report-Siebel ("Rob Moline")
  Re: Decoction , iodophore, Clayton Cone Cuestion, Partially (phil sides jr)
  (no subject) (Epic8383)
  Fruit Beer ? ("Francois Zinserling")
  Iodophor Rinsing ("Phil & Jill Yates")
  cooling times, cool tips, Aussie insolents ("Dr. Pivo")
  Re: Curious Australian Life Forms? (Jeff Renner)
  "The Cosmic Kid" ("Marc Gaspard")
  flaked out or loosing your liner ("Bob Bratcher")
  re: Mashing Formulas (Lou.Heavner)
  My 2 cents... ("Pannicke, Glen A.")
  re: Flow rate for chlorine removal ("Brian Lundeen")
  Carmelly flavors part deux and hot break amount (Dave Burley)
  caramelly flavors (Dave Burley)

* 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: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 18:44:35 From: "C.D. Pritchard" <cdp at chattanooga.net> Subject: re: Rims, Herms mash thickness rnrduyck at mnsi.net is building a HERMS and asked (edited): >I'm... wondering about the mash thickness in a step mash.... >Is it ok to just add boiling water... and use the heat exchanger >to maintain the temperature and for mashout? If you do use the system for those boosts, keep the hot water handy just in case the boosts between rests are "too slow". 1 to 1.5 degF.min. is often quoted as good. Where a slow boost is more likely affect the brew is during the protein rests (or so I've read). For a new system, I'd choose a brew recipe that doesn't require any boosts other than to mash-out since the boost time to there isn't nearly as critical as the others. I'd save the multi-step mashes until after you've gotten some experience with your system. Rather than waste electrons on stuff most aren't interested in, I just posted info on starting up a new RIMS type system at: http://chattanooga.net/~cdp/rims_com.htm c.d. pritchard cdp at chattanooga.net http://hbd.org/cdp/ http://chattanooga.net/~cdp/ Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 15:44:05 -0700 From: "maltandhops" <maltandhops at email.msn.com> Subject: Questions for Dr. Cone Dr. Cone They have been previous post in the HBD about the role of yeast and their influence on mouthfeel. I'm not referring to attenuation but possible interaction with proteins. (proteins contributing to mouthfeel, not yeast metabolism). There have been situations where a person has split the same wort into two fermenters and pitched different yeast, and the beer with the lower FG ends up having more mouthfeel. Can you explain what we are observing? Second question. I just rigged up my stir plate to stir my 7 gallon fermenter. I want to get good attenuation, not yeast growth. At what gravity (%) should I start the stir plate, and at what intervals should I run it? ( 1 minute per hour ??) Thanks, mike rose Crestline, CA maltandhops at msn.com Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 09:12:17 +1000 From: Steve Lacey <stevel at sf.nsw.gov.au> Subject: Inevitable wise cracks Rick appraised us of the less than hygienic conditions under which feed-grade corn can be handled: > 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. In Australia we call alcoholic drinks piss. As in "getting on the piss" or "getting pissed". I never thought to take these terms literally, but now I'm not so sure... If these questionable practices extend to more unsavoury acts, we might also have to consider renaming Classic American Pilsener to CrAP. Happy Brewing Steve Lacey P.S I shudder to think how Phil & Jill are going to take this news... Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 20:02:56 -0400 From: David Houseman <dhousema at cccbi.org> Subject: AHA First Round May 6/7 in Philadephia Final notice of the the Regional First Round AHA NHC for 2000 is being held May 6 & 7 at Drexel University's Department Of Restaurant & Institutional Management (HRIM), at 105 N. 33rd Street, Philadelphia, PA. It is an easily reachable location, about 6 blocks from Philadelphia's 30th Street train station served by Amtrak and local service. (THE BUILDING IS IDENTIFIED ONLY AS 'ACADEMIC BUILDING'.) We are inviting you to judge at this excellent location and enjoy some Philadelphia hospitality for the weekend. We need judges and stewards for this premier event. Judging will be held both days, punctuated by lunch and followed by a "happy hour" on Saturday, CATERED BY THE HRIM STUDENTS, AND INCLUDING BEERS FROM SOME OF OUR LOCAL BREWERIES AND BREWERS. This location will be warmer than Red Bell was last year! Judges and stewards are requested to be at the 6th floor of the HRIM at 9:00am on Saturday and 10:00am on Sunday. Judging will begin promptly at 9:30am on Saturday and 10:30am on Sunday. Please contact the Judge Coordinator, David Houseman, at 372 Harshaw Drive, Chester Springs, PA 19425 or email him with the same information at dhousema at cccbi.org. Remember that your commitment to judge is a commitment of your time, which we appreciate and rely upon. So, we will be counting on your attendance if you tell us you will be here. We still have lots of excellent styles waiting for judge assignments. We will be using the new common BJCP/AHA style guidelines. Contact George or Nancy at Home Sweet Homebrew for further details: (215) 569-9469 or homsweet at voicenet.com Dave Houseman Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 21:10:20 -0400 From: Kerrigan, Kevin [mailto:kkerrigan at hastings.edu] Subject: Getting started. To whom it may concern: Some friends and I were considering investing in a home brewery. We have no knowledge of cost or required supplies. If you could send us any information on getting started off it would be greatly appreciated. Kevin Kerrigan Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 11:29:36 -0700 (PDT) From: kysard at excite.com Subject: lagering questions Hello, I am new to HBD and home brewing, although I have had graduate courses in fermentation / biochemical engineering. I just need help applying to small scale practical home brewing. Before I invest any more capital I need to know if it is REALLY possible to brew CLEAR pilsner lagers like HernBrau on a 5 gallon scale with homebrew equipment: including soda kegs, CO2, 40 to 50F temp. Can anyone point me to a good website on this subject? I have the New Lagering Book, but find it a little impracticle, w/out much on expections for the final homebrew. Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 21:12:16 -0500 From: "Rob Moline" <brewer at isunet.net> Subject: Yeast Q's -Marc Sedam- Dr. Cone 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, There is a large enough market for a true lager yeast Saccharomyces uvarum (carlsbergensis) and it is high on our list of problems to be solved. The several hundred strains of yeast that we have actively produce and dried on a commercial basis all follow a similar growth pattern when grown in the highly aerobic, zulauf feed fermentation that is required to produce yeast economically for the commercial market.. Zulauf feed means that the wort and nutrients are fed to the highly aerobically growing yeast at a rate that does not allow more than 0.1 % sugar present at any time except for brief predetermined periods to achieve increased levels of enzymes and to control other parameters such as protein, phosphate, trehalose, glycogen and budding cycles. These parameters can only be controlled by the zulauf method, Batch grown yeast cannot be controlled to the degree that is required for drying and shelf life stability. The true lager yeast is the one exception to this growth pattern. We have finally resolved the growth problem. We are now working on the drying challange. We can now dry it with excellent viability but are not satisfied with the shelf life, and stability of the dried yeast. With a little fine tuning, the product should be on the market in the year 2000. We have a doctor from Weihenstephan and a doctor from a brewing department of a university in Scotland working full time on this project. Wort composition and fermentation temperature play such a significant role in the production of lager that several ale yeast strains can produce excellent lager beer. Clayton Cone Addendum from Rob Lallemand/Danstar makes a dry lager yeast that is currently on the market, Kroner....but due to the problems of stability that Dr. Cone references...it is only available to the pro-brewing market, from Scott Labs, in 500 gm bricks. I used it once, at LABCO, and tried to follow it's recommendations...i.e., that the batch be fermented at high..(72F from memory) temps for a period not to exceed 36 hours, then ramped the temps down as suggested....BUT, I left the batch at high temps for slightly in excess of 48 hours... Following ramp-down...the yeast performed exactly as described in the literature, following the factory's displayed curve of attenuation... But, after all was said and done, I found a very slight fruity ester apparent....which I attributed to the longer times I held it at higher temps.... I never used it again, but not for the fruity esters, purely for the economics of running a 7bbl brewhouse with 3 fermenters.....In the 2 weeks I held the lager brew in fermentation, I could easily have run 2, if not 3 ales through the same tank...and the same is said for secondary lager times..... All in all, brewpubs making lagers have planned for them, by capacity in vessels that I didn't have.....After all, a fella has to age his barleywine, huh? Cheers! Rob "The More I Know About Beer, The More I Realize I Need To Know More About Beer!" Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 21:49:44 -0500 From: "Rob Moline" <brewer at isunet.net> Subject: The Rob Moline Report-Siebel The Rob Moline Report-Siebel 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 Yes, Rob Moline is able to comment, but hasn't for what should be obvious reasons.....Attorneys bother me....One of my best friends is one.... ;-) I have loyalties to all involved.....especially Lallemand.....and Bill Siebel.... I couldn't...nor would I attempt to illustrate here what all the parties involved have ever done for me.....On both sides of this fence....Nor the debt I owe them.... But, my bottom line has to be.... Who is to question what Bill Siebel decides is in the best interest of his family, his Institution, and himself? Certainly not me..... Rob Moline Special Scholarship, Siebel Short Course, 1998 Lallemand "The More I Know About Beer, The More I Realize I Need To Know More About Beer!" Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 02:38:48 -0400 From: phil sides jr <psides at technologist.com> Subject: Re: Decoction , iodophore, Clayton Cone Cuestion, Partially Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> opines: >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. Dave, You mean those boil kettles with the huge exhaust pipes, uptake fans, and steam condensers attached? How about the manways they usually leave open? I'll concede that some homebrewer has not cut the top off of them with a sawzall, but they are definitely NOT closed kettles my friend. I know some commercial brewer out there somewhere probably does boil in a closed kettle so I am not going to say no one does, but in the well over one hundred brew houses I have been in I have not seen one. You are definitely right about the surface area to volume ratio. I think it is safe to consider kettle geometry the principal process difference between production brewing and homebrewing. Phil Sides, Jr. Concord, NH - -- Macht nicht o'zapft ist, Prost! Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 03:55:10 EDT From: Epic8383 at aol.com Subject: (no subject) Folks, I seem to have ignited an old debate (sci v art). I have no problem with how analytical anyone gets, hell 3 years ago I never thought I'd be at the stage I am now. I just think its rather cowardly and in bad taste to flame someone (although there does seem to be some civility creeping back in). Water seems to be one of those topics that'll invite discussion, I was running my tap water through a Brita filter until recently. I read an old BT that said they use an ion-exchange resin. During that time, I had a few beers go to competition and the judges all detected some astringencies, along with a few other out of character flavors. I suspected the yeastie boys weren't getting their fill of trace minerals and switched to an Omni U25 whole house filter, which is a carbon filter only. The first batch was pale ale and will be ready to drink this week. By memorial day a kolsh will be on tap. I'm hoping to find a local judge who will taste them and confirm my suspicions. Gus Just outside JFK Airport (sometimes known as the Blue Ice Brewhouse) Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 11:25:57 +0200 From: "Francois Zinserling" <francois at designtech.co.za> Subject: Fruit Beer ? We have some "alcoholic beverages" available locally. Known brand names are HOOCH and BACARDI BREEZER. (no affilia... bla bla) I am not sure if you would classify it as a "fruit flavoured beer" or an "alcoholic soda". Typical flavours are lemon, lime, raspberry, orange, apple(not cider) etc. I would like to attempt a brew of this. Does anyone know more about this ? Some recipes would be appreciated. CHEERS ZING (ZA) Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 22:07:04 +1000 From: "Phil & Jill Yates" <yates at acenet.com.au> Subject: Iodophor Rinsing There has been quite a bit of discussion lately on the use of iodophor. I know when I first got interested in using it, one plus that went with it's use was the lack of necessity to rinse it off. But I can't think of any reason why one wouldn't. What I mean to say is I can't see any situation in sanitising of equipment where you would walk away and let the stuff dry on. I've used it for a long time and find it most effective. But I would never not rinse it off. I know I've painted myself as a beer swilling obnoxious brewer with scant regard for any anal retentive procedures. But never would I let my sanitiser dry on the equipment. Just what slack brewing operations are some of you running? Can you not afford a bit of rinsing water? Dave Burley, you and I are going to have to get together. The HBD is obviously full of heathens. Phil Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 15:15:26 +0200 From: "Dr. Pivo" <dp at pivo.w.se> Subject: cooling times, cool tips, Aussie insolents Jim wrote: > I have found that the simple act of shaking one's > immersion chiller gently in the cooling wort decreases the time required to > cool it dramatically; before I 'discovered' this, my cooling times were on > the order of 30 minutes, or even longer; since I started moving the chiller > to and fro my wort cools from near boiling to 70F in 5-10 minutes ...and 'deed it is true, that convection plus conduction is way faster than conduction alone. Being the laziest bugger around, the only thing I am going to shake, is simply to prevent yellow stains in my skivies. To remedy this, I've made what I call a "jump valve". This is simply an expansion chamber and a check valve in series... the pressure does not exceed the check until it fills the chamber, when it does, a whole whoosh* (*accepted technical term for "whooshing") of water comes through and jolts the chiller, then the valve closes, and the whole cycle starts again.... you get sort of an automatic "chiller shaker". Whooshing rates are based on flow, pressure, volume of chamber (and up stream volume), and strength of spring in your check valve, according to Pivological studies on the subject. If you're like me, you may rather "play with your spring", than "shake your chiller". - ------ On another note, thanks for all the "cool tips" regarding England. A "special thanks" for a particularly detailed report from Gillian Crafton. ...and yes, William, I shall stop at Fuller's et al, and shall "pop thine question". - ------ ...as regards all those "au." signatures that think they are making good beer without getting the "Golden Librarian" stamp of approval.... just remember... I may leave for England tommorrow, but I SHALL be returning your way, and putting things into order... ... why last time I had to wrestle Dave Edne three time around the Picton pub floor when he threatened to replace the open fermenters. In the scuffle, he kicked the bag of cow dooty off the bar, mightily angering the barmaid for whom's passion fruit they were intended as fertiliser. She helped me hold him down, and we poured a bottle of Chardonay down his gullet, which on top of the Bock, sent him reeling out into the gravel. It did my heart good to see those glassy eyes and green cheeks loading 50 litre barrels into the truck the next day in 35C heat as I was getting up for my breckie. As to the closed fermenters?... Scharrer found out they cost money, and he couldn't find one free at the local rubbish tip, so that danger has passed. Dr. Pivo iiIii Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 09:26:05 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: Curious Australian Life Forms? Phil promised us a "ding dong party" but when I arrived at the Burradoo train station, he was nowhere to be seen. His excuse is a lame one. If Fred hadn't wanted to get back to civilization so badly, we'd have hung around (he apparently left his travel tube of K-Y in the gents at the station). As it was, I didn't want to spend a night sharing a room with Fred at the Burradoo version of the Hilton, so we scurried back home, as Phil reported. Back home, I found this report (thanks, Jim Booth) of Australian ding dong parties and strange life forms (although the main protagonist in the story no longer qualifies as a life form as he has joined Marilyn and will be unable to frolic with the ladies at Phil's party, if and when it happens. This report is a nominee for the 1999 annual Darwin Award. From http://darwinawards.com/darwin/darwin1999-45.html , "In the spirit of Charles Darwin, the Darwin Awards commemorate individuals who protect our gene pool by making the ultimate sacrifice of their own lives. Darwin Award winners eliminate themselves in an extraordinarily idiotic manner, thereby improving our species' chances of long-term survival. " Be sure to read the other nominees' stories. BTW, this makes this a beer related post. :-) The Winner Gets... a Post Mortem 1999 Darwin Awards Nominee Confirmed True by Darwin (August 1999, Australia) Drinking oneself to death need not be a long lingering process. Allan, a 33-year-old computer technician, showed his competitive spirit by dying of competitive spirits. A Sydney, Australia hotel bar held a drinking competition, known as Feral Friday, with a 100-minute time limit and a sliding point scale ranging from 1 point for beer to 8 points for hard liquor. Allan stood and cheered his winning total of 236, (winners never quit!) which had also netted him the literally staggering blood alcohol level of .353 grams of alcohol per 100 ml of blood, 7 times greater than Australia's legal driving limit of 0.05%. After several trips to the usual temple of overindulgence, the bathroom, Allan was helped back to his workplace to sleep it off, a condition that became permanent. A forensic pharmacologist estimated that after downing 34 beers, 4 bourbons, and 17 shots of tequila within 1 hour and 40 minutes, his blood alcohol level would have been 0.41 to 0.43%, but Allan had vomited several times after the drinking stopped. The cost paid by Allan was much higher than that of the hotel, which was fined the equivalent of $13,100 US dollars for not intervening. It is not known whether Allan required any further embalming. www.DarwinAwards.com (c) 1997 - 2000 Reference: Stephen Gibbs of the Sydney Morning Herald, Reuters -=-=-=-=- 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, 17 Apr 2000 08:54:31 -0500 From: "Marc Gaspard" <mgaspard1 at kc.rr.com> Subject: "The Cosmic Kid" From: "Alan Meeker" <ameeker at welchlink.welch.jhu.edu> Subject: The Science and Art of Brewing "I have a friend who's an artist, and he sometimes takes a view which I don't agree with. He'll hold up a flower and say, "Look how beautiful it is," and I'll agree. But then he'll say, "I, as an artist, can see how beautiful a flower is. But you, a scientist, take it apart and it becomes dull." I think he's kind of nutty. First of all, the beauty that he sees is available to other people - and to me, too, I believe. Although I might not be quite as refined aesthetically as he is, I can appreciate the beauty of a flower. But at the same time, I see much more in the flower than he sees. I can imagine the cells inside, which also have a beauty. There's beauty not just at the dimension of one centimeter; there's also beauty at a smaller dimension. There are the complicated actions of the cells, and other processes. The fact that the colors in the flower have evolved in order to attract insects to pollinate it is interesting; that means insects can see colors. That adds a question: does this aesthetic sense we have also exist in lower forms of life? There are all kinds of interesting questions that come from a knowledge of science, which only adds to the excitement and mystery and awe of a flower. It only adds. I don't understand how it subtracts. -R. Feynman from "What Do You Care What Other People Think?" I have friend who in high school was the science nerd (he now designs IC's for IBM!) who use to love to rag on this hippy-dippy type we called "The Cosmic Kid". Once TCK picked a flower and started rhapsodizing on its beauty. My friend looked at the flower in his hand, looked up at him and asked,"Do you always kill the things you love?" "Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy."-Ben Franklin Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 09:57:47 -0400 From: "Bob Bratcher" <rbratcher at advanceautoparts.com> Subject: flaked out or loosing your liner Brewers, Just brewed up a willy nilly version of a Ballantine IPA like CACA Saturday. I say willy nilly because the inspiration for the recipe originated from notes Jeff Renner was kind enough to forward to me on CACA's that were Ballantine attempts, but..... A couple of brews and some tapping of keys later in front of ProMash we end up with a whole new monster. I did stick to the hop schedule though, thanks Jeff. With this batch I experienced a 13% increase in system efficiency as calculated by ProMash. I know to some of you that that number means nothing so I submit that I also picked up about an additional 2.5~3 pts/lbs/gln. I haven't seen any real deviation in my efficiency since I started all grain until this batch. Now I get this significant, to me, jump all of the sudden. recipe: 7 lbs Pale 2 row (no 6 row available locally) 0.75 lbs Crystal 10L 4 lbs Flaked Maize 1.50 lbs (gasp!) Corn sugar Single infusion at 153*F ~60min Mash out at ~170*F ~70min Sparge water at ~170*F ~70min 5.5 gallons OG 1078 ( and I was shooting for something in the 60's ) I know that the amount of maize is significantly higher than many of you might recommend, but I did it any how. Is the maize the culprit for the increased efficiency? Does flaked maize contribute more by weight than grain? Kind of like you may get 70% out of 2 row but you will get 90% from flaked maize? I don't know I'm asking. These numbers take into account the use of corn sugar, so that's not it. I had one other variable that changed for this batch that I never have taken seriously as to its effect on system efficiency. I use a plastic bucket with a PhilsPhloaterPhalsy. Normally I'll use a mesh mash bag to line the lauter tun, this time I didn't. So is it the maize or the liner or something else? FWIW, Pitched two packs of Nottingham without rehydration. About 12 hours later the foam was just about to crawl out the air lock in a 6.5 gallon carboy. The box of yeast at the store had just arrived the day before brewing, I imagine that it was pretty fresh from Danstar. Brew On! Bob Bratcher Advance Auto Parts rbratcher at advanceautoparts.com Roanoke, VA Star City Brewers Guild http://hbd.org/starcity Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 09:13:22 -0500 From: Lou.Heavner at frco.com Subject: re: Mashing Formulas John Varady <rust1d at usa.net> posts: {snip a bunch of good information on calculating infusion/decoction temps...} 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. Another thing to consider is temperature drop during rests. If you make your calculations on the fly, no problem. But if you are trying to predict quantities ahead of time and your mash temp drops a few degress during a 30 - 45 minute rest, Your calculations will undershoot. Regards, Lou Heavner - Austin, TX Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 11:12:23 -0400 From: "Pannicke, Glen A." <glen_pannicke at merck.com> Subject: My 2 cents... Rick Dobler wrote about the nastiness in chicken feed used for cereal mashes: >Feed grade products are not handled as cleanly as human >grade. There can be bug infestations, pesticides, 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. Aside from the spit, this sounds close to human grade. Add rat turds, dirt and a host of other crud which USDA also considers acceptable under certain concentrations in some human foods. I think I'm more concerned over the potential for pesticides, hormones and vitamins than urine. But then it would be fitting if I were to shoot for a beer like Bud Lite, huh? ;-) Dave Burley spoke of tempting fate with his partially closed boils: >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. Maybe I'm bordering on the "daredevil" side too because I keep the lid cracked about an inch on one side from the time I start the flame until I turn it off. I have noticed a few things though. Since I've been FWH'ing my beers lately, boilovers seem to be less likely. Could it be due to hop particulates providing nucleation sites in the boil? Maybe. I still keep the thermometer in until it reaches about 205 F but now I don't have to watch it like a hawk until it boils. Since I've been doing this I've had the boil start with my back turned and no boil over - until I stick that stupid "charismatic wooden spoon" in the mix. Stainless, stainless, stainless! Chuck the wood! It also takes me less time to achieve a boil and I can get a stronger one too (on my stovetop) with the lid partially on. The stronger boil also makes for a GREAT hot break. Jeff McNally informed us of his improved bottle santizing techniques: >After a few batches, I started >re-using bottles that had previously held homebrew. Even though I had double >rinsed these bottles right after emptying them, they had a very noticeable white >"film" inside them only up to the fill level. > I had thought that a soak in dilute bleach followed by a triple rinse with my >jet bottle washer would not only sanitize my bottles but clean them as well. >As I was getting ready to bottle one day, I noticed that one of my clear >bottles still had this film on it's inside surface even after being "cleaned >and sanitized". From that point on I started using a bottle brush on every >bottle, every time I cleaned and sanitized them. I know a few guys who do the same - rinse, soak in bleach and jet rinse again. Unfortunately without mechanical or detergent action, organic and inorganic deposits are not removed from the sides of the glass. It looks smooth, but glass is really pretty porous and will still harbor "crud". Bacteria and yeast which have formed colonies on the glass can become entrenched in the pores with the top layers of dead cells (killed by the sanitizer) forming a layer of plaque over the embedded colony. This plaque can effectively protect the colony from further action by the sanitizer. Mechanical cleansing with a good detergent can more effectively remove most organic deposits and plaques thereby exposing the entrenched colonies to sanitizer. Don't believe me? Read up on some of the sterilization problems and techniques in implantable medical devices. It's the same principle. Bottle brushing sucks. There's no way around it. I've moved to kegging so I have less to scrub, but I still do bottles on occasion. All of my bottles get a shake rinse after being emptied. When I get six or so of them accumulated, I jet wash them and then soak them in a hot TSP solution over night. They then get jet rinsed and are bleached over night followed by a final jet rinse. I store them inverted in their case until it's time to bottle. Then they get jet rinsed again are put in the dishwasher (without rinse aid or detergent) so they can be sanitized by the heat cycle. Every now and again, I'll scrub with a brush prior to the TSP soak. It's not consistent, but I'd say that the scrub happens once every two or three fills. It's probably enough to scrape off any tough organic deposits before they become a problem. It may sound like a lot of work, but actually you wind up breaking up the task into smaller batches and it's not so much of a chore. The preparation of 54 bottles for a 5 gallon batch in one shot can ruin your evening to the point that even imbibing in a homebrew can't rectify ;-) And Sean Richens gave an informative narration on water quality: >I'm curious to hear what others think about not bothering to remove >chloroamines. As I said, I haven't had phenolic off-flavours, and now I >think I know why. I haven't had my water checked yet, but I get my brewing water from the tap. I've been using the Brita water filter for all of my batches since I started brewing. It's a slow process, but I can collect 2 - 4 gallons per day from this little bugger. I just collect water over the course of a week - while I'm growing up by "Big-Ass Starter". Brita suggests 2 gal/day to ensure maximum efficiency but I push it. With the exception of one batch, which was noticeably infected with some kind of nasty bugger in the carboy, I have not had any batches which exhibited a chlorophenic aroma or taste. I'm a big advocate of filtration. I'll shut up now.... Glen Pannicke Merck & Co. Computer Validation Quality Assurance email: glen_pannicke at merck.com Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 10:37:46 -0500 From: "Brian Lundeen" <blundeen at rrc.mb.ca> Subject: re: Flow rate for chlorine removal > - if you have chlorinated water, effective removal requires > a flow of 2-3 > USGPM or less per cubic foot of carbon. With chloramine, > this has to be > reduced to 0.5 to 1.5 USGPM or less per cubic foot. Nearly all > municipalities in the US and Canada using a surface water source are > switching to chloroamine for microbial control. So what volume of carbon do your typical screw onto the faucet types of filters have, and what would be a suitable flow rate for them? Brian Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 13:21:29 -0400 From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Carmelly flavors part deux and hot break amount Brewsters: Part 2 of Carmelly flavors >>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 think a little of the malty flavors that I think are produced in the >kettle boil (and cereal cooker) are nice in a CAP, including a rice CAP, >but not if done to excess. I wouldn't want to distress the billiard ladies. I am not at all against malty flavors from melandoins, nor even a few caramelly flavors in my CAP, these can still be produced by restricting the exit surface area relative to the kettle surface area to make a steam jet which prevents the air from reaching the wort surface. This reduces the hot wort oxidation substantially, without impairing the other reactions, if the lid is simply insulated with a towel or other sophisticated device to keep the boil off rate nearly the same as the lidless case. Wort oxidation products are a different thing. Phenols, tannins from the hops and other anthocyanins, say from the barley husk, and such in wort can be oxidised and do not produce nice flavors. I don't know the chemical identity of other oxidation precursors or products but my taster says they are there. There are obviously several things going on here during the boil. Loss of wort by an open kettle versus a partially open kettle will change to some extent the rate of loss of water and also the temperature/time profile of the boil. As water boils off and the concentration of sugars and other substances goes up, it takes a higher and higher temperature to reach the boiling point. As the concentration goes up, more melandoins are formed as are more caramels from the higher temperatures and concentrations and more melandoins decompose due to the higher temperatures. Different heating rates ( as Phil Yates notes with his "high" and "low" boil rate technique) will also change the temperature/time profile as this will affect the temperature/concentration/time profile and thus the product qualities. Boiling technique thus is shown to become a part of the flavor and color of the beer. What to do? Although I have never done it, it would be interesting to examine a series of final temperatures of the boiling wort as a starting point. This may be an interesting control and perhaps even better than time alone. Even more pertinent would be the time/ temperature profile. This could be a clue to the effects of the boil on the final flavor. Also, noting the level of loss of the wort at each measurement would be an interesting measurement to give a clue to the concentration of the sugars at various points throughout the boil. Instead of doing the obvious experiment, maybe brewers should start recording these as you brew each batch and see if you can find a final wort temperature guidline for your similar beers as a means of controlling flavors. If you want another angle on this and for those less interested in the chemistry, try cooking your spaghetti sauce with the lid off and with it on in identical kettle at the same time and compare the flavors. Now, I happen to like the oxidised flavors of the lidless spaghetti sauce better, but notice how it differs from the original fruit flavor of the lidded one. Also notice the darkening ( browning) of the lidless one. What happened? I believe the anthocyanins and other plant phenols and perhaps other phenolic compounds were oxidised and produced the change in flavor and color. If this can happen to something as strongly flavored as tomatoes and have a substantial flavor effect, the same thing can happen to the subtle flavors of a malty solution, aka your wort. - ----------------------------------------------------- Jeff also says: >An interesting sidelilght, even though I get decent (not great) hot break >in the kettle, which is pretty well filtered out by the hop bed, I always >get a good deal more hot break in the canned wort, especially the pressure >canned sort. Anyone know why? I'm I not getting enough break in the >kettle. I don't know how you determined this, but I suspect it is the hot break compactness that is different. I don't see how to do the experiment, but it would be interesting to do an experiment in which the hot break was measured both ways by actually weighing it. Protein precipitates are notorious for responding to physical activity, as are many other "fluffy" ( scientific word) precipitates. Depending on that level, the precipitate can be compacted or be dispersed. Keep on Brewin' Dave Burley Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 13:21:41 -0400 From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: caramelly flavors Brewsters: Jeff Renner (>) says: Quoting me (>>): >>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. Jeff (>) says: >A pertinent (and not impertinent, which there is an awful lot of around >here sometimes) observation - I often can a quart or two of leftover wort. >This is after I've aerated by cracking the outlet fitting so it draws >bubbles into the pump while I'm recirculating the cool wort as it gets down >to low 50's for a CAP. The atmosphere canned wort darkens a bit, and >pressure canned wort darkens a good bit more. I suspect this is a result of the higher temperature seen in the pressure canning giving rise to caramel and melandoin formation as well as, perhaps, oxidation products. An interesting experiment would be to compare the oxygenated wort with the just cooled but not oxygenated wort. Pressure can both and see if there is a color difference. I am only postulating that the oxidation products are colored ( see below) but I believe they are, based on my observation, and also cause a taste change. We also know that if we store an unopened can of malt extract a long time it darkens considerably. An interesting experiment would be to hold two unopened cans of malt extract, one in the refrigerator and the other at an elevated temperature for a long time and compare these. The higher temperature one should be darker and have a more malty character due to the formation of melandoins in the high concentration of the extract but with little to no assistance from the oxygen in the air.. > I don't know how much of >this is due to the dissolved O2. I thought that melanoidin producing >Maillard reactions (good things, I think) are between proteins and sugars, >and do not involve oxygen, so this darkening could be due th this and not >to any oxidizing reactions. If I recall corrrectly, a decomposition product of melandoins is caramelly flavors as contrasted to malty, bready and such flavors which are melandoin derived. Caramels are the ultimate product of the "browning reaction" which occurs via melandoin intermediates. Caramel can also be just sugar derived. I believe I have read that both caramels and melandoins are colored, although I don't really intuitively understand why pure melandoins should be colored. These are both identified as being responsible for the color of beer in addition to the grist composition. We know that table sugar by itself will produce caramelly flavors and colors when boiled at high enough temperatures and concentrations and long enough. Higher concentrations resulting in higher boiling temperatures both as a consequence of boiling off more water from the wort and longer boiling times should produce higher levels of caramelly flavors as well as malty flavors. This is temperature dependent and concentration dependent for the melandoins ( a bi-molecular reaction) and polymolecular for sugars ( you need more than one for the polymerization and subsequent coloring) but only temperature dependent for melandoins decomposition ( IMHO decomposition is likely uni-molecular). In some cases, I recall that the melandoin intermediates sometimes actually catalyse the formation of caramel in addition to being a source for these. So, holding at a constant temperature ( say with the lid on, not too tightly) will produce all three of these reactions but will cause increased decomposition of melandoins relative to the case where the lid is off and concentration and temperature goes up more during, say, a one hour boil. A side by side test of these worts, I postulate, should show for the "lid-on" case, caramelly in favor of malty, given all other things are equal, like the lid off is diluted to be equal to the lid on case. Flavors from oxidation have to be excluded, perhaps by not having hops around would help in this experiment, perhaps by a sophisticated palate. . Boiling with the lid off, giving a greater loss of water, will favor increased production of both caramelly and malty flavors. But, also, I believe with the lid completely off there is a second series of reaction with oxygen from the air which discolors the wort and produces flavors which are less desirable and may even lead to a shorter shelf life, aldehyde and other carbonyl flavors. I suggest interested brewers try a simple experiment which I have done with two identical kettles. Do one boil with the lid off and one with the lid partially on and covered with a towel or other insulator to reduce condensation on the lid so as to maintain as best as you can the same volume in the two kettles during the boil and compare the results. Compare the wort colors at the same OG. Ferment separately diluted to the same OG, but identically and compare the color and flavor. You will find the open boil to be darker and the flavor of the beer to be less clean. Do this with a pale lager to best understand the effect, although I have also noted ( but not experimentally) a similar effect in pales. One would conclude that higher hopped beers will be more affected. Part 2 for more comments follows Keep on Brewin' Dave Burley Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 04/18/00, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96