HOMEBREW Digest #4398 Wed 12 November 2003

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

		Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org


          Northern  Brewer, Ltd. Home Brew Supplies
        http://www.northernbrewer.com  1-800-681-2739

    Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********

  Storing CFCs filled with PBW (John Palmer)
  RE: sugar in secondary (Brian Lundeen)
  Re: Starter wort gravity revisited ("-S")
  Re: St. Pat's counter-flow wort chiller (Fred Johnson)
  RE: St. Pat's counter-flow wort chiller ("Houseman, David L")
  Soda Keg Cleanup and PBW-Copper Contact Time (rickdude02)
  making a big BW ("Jay Spies")
  Sticks and stones and malt milling ("Dave Burley")
  Re: SWAG Definition (Jeff Renner)
  RE: getting soda smell out of kegs ("Houseman, David L")
  Re: steam-rolled barley (Jeff Renner)
  RE: Motorizing a Mill (DC or AC motor) (Ronald La Borde)
  Re: getting soda smell out of kegs ("Rich Medina")
  re: nitrogen and hops don't mix ("Mike Racette")
  Replacement for 5 gallon soda kegs ("Orin Walker")
  3 Tier Systems & Aluminum Kettles ("Joe Berardino")
  Refractometer Tips (Bob Hall)
  Corny Kegs - 10's & 3's ("Chip Stewart")
  tap handle brass ferrules (Ed Jones)
  Re: Sanke conversion to corny ("Rob Dewhirst")
  Re: The making of Barleywine ("Webb, Mike")
  RE: The making of Barleywine ("Charles Duffney")
  Motorizing a Mill (DC or AC motor) (mpdixon)
  re: motorizing a mill (Rama Roberts)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * The HBD Logo Store is now open! * * http://www.hbd.org/store.html * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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 cannot reach you. We will not correct your address for the automation - that's your job. Note that the Digest now automagically protects your address, so spam-proofing is a waste of your time, anyway :^) HAVING TROUBLE posting, subscribing or unsusubscribing? See the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org. 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@hbd.org or read the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org. JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Spencer Thomas (janitor@hbd.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 21:32:51 -0800 From: John Palmer <jjpalmer at altrionet.com> Subject: Storing CFCs filled with PBW Brian asked about storing his CFC filled with PBW. No, don't do it. In the past, people whom have stored/soaked copper and brass objects in PBW solutions overnight or for a couple days have reported that the solution turns blue. I tried it but didn't experience a color change. But as a general rule of thumb, don't store you CFC full of anything except air. Water is usually benign, but the problem is the localization effects of stored solutions. Pits can readily develop in copper and stainless tubes if conditions are right. Usually plain water is okay, but if you have hard water or acidic water (look at your home plumbing) then its better to store them dry. Clean them with PBW by all means. Then Rinse them thoroughly and drain it and cap it. Good Brewing, John Palmer john at howtobrew.com www.realbeer.com/jjpalmer www.howtobrew.com - the free online book of homebrewing Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:56:09 -0600 From: Brian Lundeen <BLundeen at rrc.mb.ca> Subject: RE: sugar in secondary > Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 07:40:03 -0800 > From: "Tomusiak, Mark" <tomusiak at amgen.com> > Subject: Sugar in Secondary? > > Greetings all...I have been looking into techniques for > brewing high-gravity belgian strong ales, and have found a > number of references to adding sugars at some point after > primary fermentation commences (such as in the secondary). I can't comment on why other people do this, only my own reasons for adopting this practice. 1. As is being discussed in the barleywine thread, it creates an easier initial environment for the yeast. With my own techniques (YMMV) I've had trouble getting the attenuation I want in high gravity beers by starting with all the fermentables. Adding some sugar later seems to have helped in this regard. 2. I want to try and tame some of the wild esters thrown by these yeasts so the beer doesn't come across like a Carmen Miranda hat. ;-) Having the yeasts doing most of their work at a lower OG should assist this. 3. If I'm adding a sugar with some character of its own (such as dark candi) I figure it will retain more of those attributes by giving it a brief boil in creating the syrup, and adding late in the process. I don't worry about the small amount of water I use in the sugar syrup. However, if you wish to be precise, this water addition can be accounted for when determining the volume and OG you want after the boil. Cheers Brian, in Winnipeg Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 03:53:19 -0500 From: "-S" <-s at adelphia.net> Subject: Re: Starter wort gravity revisited Travis Dahl says, >Yeast grown on 15P(1.060SG) or higher wort > >should be discarded - the hi-gravity stress causes performance problems. [...] > > This has implications for people trying to reuse the yeast cake from a > previous fermentation. If I'm just dumping the new wort onto the old > yeast, it sounds like I need to make sure the previous beers were all under > 1.060 (and preferably under 1.040). Is this a reasonable > interpretation? Growing great yeast and making great beer are two different things. You should always be aware of which of these is the goal. Virtually all brewing yeast will do very well with starter wort gravities under 10P. Most conventional brewing yeasts can be repitched after fermenting common 12-13P worts with no problems whatsoever. Still you may attain better growth conditions at 7P or 10P. At 15P you are taking a chance. Yes you can often repitch yeast from a 15-16P wort and get good results, but it's more likely that these yeast will have performance problems compared to the same yeast from a 12P fermentation. >What can I do to help out the yeast in a situation like > this? (add nutrients? wash the yeast and use it to create a new starter?) Understand the problem. Yeast from a hi-grav ferment have endured high osmotic pressure and this in turn has caused them difficulty in extracting nutrients from the surrounding wort, and also in expelling unwanted ions from within the cell. You need more oxygen (1ppm per Plato degree is a Narziss rule of thumb) at high gravity, yet the wort holds less. These cells have usually tolerated higher alcohol levels which causes growth problems. The hi-grav fermentation usually is slower and more protracted than a lo-grav fermentation - so the yeast have tolerated these poor conditions longer. For these reasons yeast from hi-grav fermentation generally have lower viability and the viability drops off faster after the fermentation ! Doing a warm VDK conversion rest late in a hi-grav fermentation is an invitation to the graveyard for much of your stressed yeast. If you really want to salvage that yeast, pull it from the fermentation ASAP, and wash/separate with COLD sterile water (not acid washing). The water washing, described on Dave Logsden's Wyeast pages, will remove a fair bit of the trub and this also dilutes any ethanol. Then I'd be inclined to hit this with some wort and only re-pitch the live segment of this population.- the yeast which deflocculate and go back into suspension in wort. This method is more a matter of preventing further decline in the post hi-grav yeast and separating out the dead & dying. This is roughly what I would do with any 'old' slurry which is likely to have poor viability. Again 15P isn't magic. I'm sure some yeasts can handle 15P w/ no problems and repitch forever at that grav. A lot of yeasts will bog down around 15-16P. ======= It's a somewhat different question than you ask Travis, but there are some measures you can take to improve the hi-gravity yeast performance, which in turn will improve the health of the resulting slurry. Let me say that I still think that any yeast that has munched thru 18P or more deserves to be set free. And I'm personally inclined to toss yeast around the 15P mark. Of course increase the pitching rate in proportion to the gravity. Overpitching in moderation seldom causes a problem but you don't need an entire ale batch yeast cake for the next hi-grav batch. I'm not a big fan of the huge huge beers (hate fusels) but around that 18-20P mark I would plan on having a second full slurry available for repitching mid-way thru the fermentation. Perhaps keeping a fraction of that original yeast cake viable with a pint of starter wort in the fridge. Aerate the heck out of your yeasts prior to pitching cause the hi-grav wort may not hold enough O2 to get the job done. You may want to give the fermenter some air/O2 early after the first pitching ... in the first 12 hours. Decreasing the initial wort pH to 4.9 to 5.0 reduces the difficulty yeast have in obtaining metallic co-enzymes, like zinc. Knocking the initial wort pH down from around 5.4 to 4.9 decreases the fermentation time in one hi-grav study from 9 to 7 days and improved the attenuation by 1% at there same time. The final beer pH was 0.25 lower, however this was reportedly not a problem. The req for FAN is more stringent at higher gravity, so don't get carried away with unmalted adjuncts unless you'll supplement the nitrogen. There is an added req for magnesium (a few ppm) and it seldom hurts to add around 0.1ppm of zinc. Again - get rid of the fermenter CO2 to the extent practical ! -Steve Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 07:37:08 -0500 From: Fred Johnson <FLJohnson at portbridge.com> Subject: Re: St. Pat's counter-flow wort chiller Dave Houseman says that the convolutions of the counter-flow chiller that St. Pat's sells is on the outside rather than the inside of the tubing carrying the wort. Indeed, the photograph on the St. Pat's web site seems to show this, and I'm sure Dave is right since he actually has one of these. That means that wort flows in a laminar fashion as it does in any straight walled chiller, but the turbulence is with the cooling water, just as Dave has said. And it means that cleaning one would be no different than for a straight-walled chiller. But it is interesting that St. Pat's doesn't seem to have the same understanding as Dave, and from their description of how it works, one would certainly come to the conclusion that the wort (and hops) move through this chiller very differently and could conceivably get hung up in the convolutions. Excerpt from St. Pat's description of their chiller: "By the way, the generally held belief that cleaning counterflow chillers is difficult applies only to counterflows that use straight wall copper. Such chillers have boundary layers (see below) in which the flow rate is effectively zero thus necessitating either a brush or running enormous amounts of water through them. This is another manner in which our convoluted chiller is far superior." So which is it? Dave, are you sure that inside cross-section of the wort tubing is a circle? Fred L Johnson Apex, North Carolina, USA Fred L Johnson Apex, North Carolina, USA Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 08:42:57 -0500 From: "Houseman, David L" <David.Houseman at unisys.com> Subject: RE: St. Pat's counter-flow wort chiller No, Fred, I must admit I have not dissected my, or any, CFC to see how it's made internally. I made an assumption that if there are cooling fins or this sort of thing to cause turbulent flow it would be between the wort line and the outer jacket. Perhaps the inter wort line is itself twisted about it's axis to cause turbulent wort flow. This really shouldn't affect cleaning however. Whatever the make-up, I've used my counter flow chiller for two+ years without difficulty. No infections. No off flavors. I use both hop pellets and whole hops. I know that some of both have passed through my chiller. It hasn't got clogged (knock on wood). So I'm happy with it. One thing about this chiller that I had to learn early on was that I had to be sure that there was no air leaks at the tubing connections I made between it and the kettle. When I had a looser connection I was not getting a good solid siphon and had difficulty getting the wort to flow at a fast pace. When I fixed this problem with some hose clamps, I've found I can empty my kettle much faster than I could with my homemade CFC that only had 1/4" copper tubing. Dave Houseman Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 09:26:42 -0500 (GMT-05:00) From: rickdude02 at earthlink.net Subject: Soda Keg Cleanup and PBW-Copper Contact Time Marc asks about cleaning up a soda keg and is apparently having problems getting the smell out. All I can say, Marc, is that stainless won't harbor soda syrup. You said you changed the gaskets, but there's still a smell. Did you completely dis-assemble for the soak? Washing soda isn't a particularly good wetting agent, so you probably didn't reach into all the nooks and crannies with it. When I'm cleaning out a keg thoroughly, I take the whole thing apart and soak the pieces together inside the keg. (And if you didn't take it apart, you might have missed a couple of gaskets, too.) Then, after I know it is clean, I'll re-assemble. I alse believe in using a good cleaning compound such as Straight-A (yes, I make it, but what else would you expect me to use?) or <ahem> PBW. - -------------------- Someone else asks about storing their CF chiller with PBW in it. DON'T!! And I don't just say this because PBW is a competitive product to mine-- I'll say it for Straight-A as well. The problem is two-fold. First, part of the activity in both products is due to a form of peroxide. This will oxidize your chiller over time and both shorten the life and lower the performance of the chiller. Second, PBW is an alkaline product. Alkalis will degrade copper as well as acid (although not quite as spectacularly). The reason we can get around this is the presence of silicates protects the metal in the short run, but in the long run you'll have degradation/corrosion. Rick Theiner LOGIC, Inc. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 10:50:55 -0500 From: "Jay Spies" <jayspies at citywidehomeloans.com> Subject: making a big BW All - Bill Tobler spaketh thusly: >>I'm going to make my first Barleywine next week, and am looking for a few tips on fermenting it out. It's going to be 5 gallons of a 1.100 OG beer.<< Bill, I know you have a cake of yeast from a Cream Ale ready to roll, but here's an option for your 5 gallon BW recipe: 5 paks of rehydrated Nottingham. Aerate the whole batch with O2. Pitch. Yawn. Wait a week. Keg. Last month I made a Cyser with 5 paks of Danstar Windsor (which is reputedly a lesser attenuator) and it cranked the mead from 1.103 to 1.004 in ~ 6 days. And I didn't aerate b/c I *wanted* some residual sugar. Which I didnt get. I had to add potassium sorbate and 3 extra pounds of honey, but thats another story... I think for fermentations like these, use some yeasties which you *know* are packed full of sterols and have silos worth of glycogen reserves. Think of it this way - you're getting little Dolph Lundgren-genetically-engineered look-alikes instead of a colony of scrappers and misfits. Hey, your yeast may be in tip-top shape, but honestly, Barleywines are not the cheapest beers in the world to make, and for my money, I'd bet on a sure thing rather than taking your chances with the yeast you just used. Besides, Nottinghan is cheap. Seven bucks and you're at a commercial pitch rate. Just my .02... Best of luck on the BW. Make it right and you can lay it down for a couple of years and watch it improve...... Jay Spies Asinine Aleworks (formerly Charm City Altobrewery) Baltimore MD Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 10:45:39 -0500 From: "Dave Burley" <Dave_Burley at charter.net> Subject: Sticks and stones and malt milling Brewsters: Jeff Halvorsen asks about motorizing his Crankandstein mill and also asks the important question about how to design it so it can deal with detritus ( like stones) in the malt. In the good old, bad old days I used an AC powered drill to turn the key made from a cut down hex headed bolt to replace the manual crank. The bolt diameter was the same diameter as the crank handle and the top was cut across to make a "t" shaped section which fit into the slots on the mill. The bolt was held in the drill chuck and the chuck lay on its side on a platform of the appropriate height so the drill axis and key fit into the mill. I wrapped up the cord so the cord was tight enough that if the drill handle rotated around the drilling axis it would pull the plug, if something got caught in the mill. The drill was heavy enough that it would be able to turn the mill without strapping it down and was therefore free to rotate if the mill stopped. I used this configuration for lots of years ( hundreds of pounds of malt, no doubt) and the plug pulling worked succesfully several times. My drill was so old it was only a two pronged plug, so was easy to remove. Memorable are the chunks of rubber and the small screw which on different occasions stoppped the mill cold. Never had a situation where this configuration didn't pull the plug when needed. Pretty simple solution to this problem if you have this kind of drill. You may have to replace the grounded three prong plug with a two prong keyed plug. Pay attention to grounding. More recenly, since my old drill of 30 + years finally died during a screwing session (we can only hope), I have been using a new fangled Makita rechargable battery operated one. It comes with an adjustable clutch on the drive and should take care of any problems. Set it to the lightest slip . No junk in the malt so far, so can't say for sure it will work, but it should. Interestingly, when I was contemplating going to a new battery powered drill for my mill, I was mentally designing a clutch based on two concentric tubes or one tube in the chuck and the key for the mill in the inside of this tube.Tube was to be cut parallel to the central axis with two or more slots and the tube bent inward like fingers so the key fit snugly but not tightly, so I could get slip to prevent mill damage. Maybe something like a worm clamp would be needed to adjust the slip. And then I said "Hey, I already have that clutch on my drill." So now I just set my drill on the lowest numbered clutch position and mill away. Nevertheless, the clutch idea is a good one, I believe, especially for those millers who choose a direct drive method as in the reference Jeff provided. Maybe Dan Listerman or other mill suppliers would care to provide such a concentric clutch. It would be a service to the milling community. Just name it after me if it works. Keep on Brewin' Dave Burley Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 10:54:38 -0500 From: Jeff Renner <jeffrenner at comcast.net> Subject: Re: SWAG Definition >I learned SWAG was Stupid Wild A$$ Guess. A relative of SWAG is POOMA. Pulled out of my at ss, or, pulled out of mid-air, for public consumption. This was a commonly cited source for skipped steps in answers to class problems back in my ill-fated chemical engineering days at the University of Michigan in the mid-60s. Sometimes referred to as Professor Pooma, as in, "see Prof. Pooma," when going, say, directly from step G to step P, with no visible means of support. I still occasionally cite the old Prof. Jeff - -- Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, JeffRenner at comcast.net "One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943 Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 11:02:29 -0500 From: "Houseman, David L" <David.Houseman at unisys.com> Subject: RE: getting soda smell out of kegs Marc, The stainless steel itself isn't the problem, it's rubber. Replace all the O-rings. Main ring on the hatchway, on the out and in tubes, in the quick-disconnects on the keg and the QDs themselves. You may have to replace the poppets or any rubber that's replaceable as well. Dave Houseman Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 11:09:06 -0500 From: Jeff Renner <jeffrenner at comcast.net> Subject: Re: steam-rolled barley Marc Sedam writes from Chapel Hill, NC: >Steam-rolled barley refers to the process of barley kernels (sans husk) >that have been pressed through two metal rollers heated with steam. The >process quickly gelatinizes the starch in the barley kernel without >pulverizing it. In doing so, any enzymes are destroyed. I don't think this is everything - there has to be some moisture for the gelatinization of the starches and to soften the grain to prevent it breaking into pieces. The barley (or oats or whatever) kernels are moistened (perhaps with steam?) before being rolled between heated rollers. The rollers not only flatten the grain and gelatinize the starch, they dry the grain. Jeff - -- Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, JeffRenner at comcast.net "One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943 Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 09:44:49 -0800 (PST) From: Ronald La Borde <pivoron at yahoo.com> Subject: RE: Motorizing a Mill (DC or AC motor) >From: "Jeff Halvorson \(tTB\)" <jeff at truthbrew.com> > >I would like to motorize my Crankandstein CGM-2A >grain mill. What are my best >options? Jeff, there are many options, take a look at my design at: http://hbd.org/rlaborde/maltmill.htm It's one of many, but I can say it works well. If there's any downside it is that it takes up more room than a smaller setup. The motor can be had for free, if you cruise for discarded washing machines. Ron ===== Ron Ronald J. La Borde -- Metairie, LA New Orleans is the suburb of Metairie, LA www.hbd.org/rlaborde Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 14:16:27 -0500 From: "Rich Medina" <gothambrewer at att.net> Subject: Re: getting soda smell out of kegs Marc writes of trouble with the persistent smell of soda in some newfound kegs despite the replacement of o-rings. I would recommend braking down the down the poppets as well as the pressure relief valve (if you have one). You'll be amazed at the amount of caked-on syrup that is encrusted in the springs of both the poppets and valve. Basically, I made a PBW solution as per instructions for heavily soiled parts, brought the solution to a boil, added parts, waited overnight and repeated for the most stubborn parts. FWIW, HTH. YMMV..... Rich Medina Gothambrewery Jamaica Estates, NY You can observe alot just by watching - Yogi Berra Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 12:51:25 -0700 From: "Mike Racette" <mike.racette at hydro-gardens.com> Subject: re: nitrogen and hops don't mix What happens to the hop components? Do they break down into some other compound or do they go out of solution and mix with the nitrogen gas and then escape as the beer is poured? Why doesn't CO2 have a similar effect? Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 14:59:53 -0500 From: "Orin Walker" <orinw at hotmail.com> Subject: Replacement for 5 gallon soda kegs >>Bag-in-box systems are quickly replacing everything >>in my area, as I have to assume other areas, too. >>For the short term, this is going to mean more >>available kegs for us homebrewers, but I don't think >>its going to be all that long before all of these >>5 gallon soda kegs (Coke and Pepsi) are going to >>be hard to find, except for scrap metal. Bill's post got me thinking... * How long will it be before the 5 gallon soda kegs become hard to find? * Even if I stock up, will I be able to get replacement parts? * What can homebrewers use for replacements when the supplies are dimenished? Any thoughts? Orin Walker Tallahassee, FL Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 15:05:39 -0500 From: "Joe Berardino" <misbrewhaven at hotmail.com> Subject: 3 Tier Systems & Aluminum Kettles Hello All, I am in the process of designing a 3 tier system currently and have been debating over if I should should use aluminum or not. I am tentatively planning on using 2 -40 qt alum stock pots for HLT and brew kettle and a cooler of some sort for a mash tun. I eventually want to end up with a HERMS type setup but for now will have to make due with the previous. I think it would be fine for the hot liquor tank as all it is ever going to hold is water, but am wary of using it for the actual brew kettle. I am under the impression that the ball valve and fittings shouldn't cause any corrosion problems with the kettle due to the fact that there will be such a small amount of it and such a large amount of aluminum. I know that stainless steel would be a nicer option, but I am trying to be thrifty about this as I don't have that much $$ to spend making the jump to all grain. I guess my main concern would be pitting of the kettle and possible off flavors due to the aluminum. I have read that it should ok for brewing beer, but have also read that in distilling, it would be bad to use it. I am brewing beer, not distilling but still wonder why one source says to totally avoid it, and the other states that it's ok. Are there any folks who have a really slick system of this type and have advice about designing one? Are there any real pitfalls or disavantages in using aluminum I should be aware of ? TIA. Joe B. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 15:18:18 -0500 From: Bob Hall <rallenhall at toast.net> Subject: Refractometer Tips A year or so ago I purchased an ATC refractometer in hopes of reading OG with a few drops of wort rather than needing a whole hydrometer sampling tube. I gave up after awhile and went back to the hydrometer because my refractometer readings seemed to swing wildly in back-to-back readings with the same wort, same temperature. I think that I was following the directions; a few drops of wort to completely cover the prism window before dropping the plate, rinsing and drying between readings. I've since read somewhere that the sample should be left on the stage for 30 seconds before a reading is taken, but last night while watching the Thirsty Traveler on the Fine Living Channel I saw a Brazilian distiller literally take a ladel of potential Cachaca, pour it over the prism, and take an immediate reading. So what's the deal? Any tips from refractometer users would be appreciated. Bob Hall Napoleon, OH Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 16:31:11 -0500 (EST) From: "Chip Stewart" <Charles at thestewarts.com> Subject: Corny Kegs - 10's & 3's On Fri, 07 Nov 2003, NO Spam <nospam at brewbyyou.net>, AKA Bill Wibble informed us that: >The 10 gallon corny is the rarest bird of all. Welders have mostly turned them all into cylindroconical fermenters. I saw one on ebay not too long ago that went for almost $300. I wish. I occasionally sell them on e-Bay and generally get $70 or $80 for them. A current seardh on the completed items section of e-Bay show a number of them in that price range. They're not as common as the 5's, but I wouldn't say they're as rare as you suggest. > 3 gallon kegs are next, those are also getting hard to come by. Not at all. I sell them on my web site. So do hundreds of homebrew shops, beverage equipment distributors, etc. > Bag-in-box systems are quickly replacing everything in my area, as I have to assume other areas, too. For the short term, this is going to mean more available kegs for us homebrewers, but I don't think its going to be all that long before all of these 5 gallon soda kegs (Coke and Pepsi) are going to be hard to find, except for scrap metal. Get 'em while you can! I don't think I'd sound the alarm quite yet, as they're still in current production. But if you're that concerned, I'll be glad to sell you some. And I'll still donate $2.50 for each one sold to an HBD'er to the server fund. Don't forget to identify yourself, though. http://Charles.TheStewarts.com/brewing On another topic, I hate to brag, but I got me a brewery (okay, I like to brag). I just bought a 1825 house (http://Charles.TheStewarts.com/house) with a separate summer kitchen, and SWMBO is gonna let me turn it into a tavern/brewery (not commercial). I'll post pix as the project develops (probably in the spring). Chip Stewart Hagerstown, Maryland Charles at TheStewarts.com http://Charles.TheStewarts.com Support anti-Spam legislation. Join the fight http://www.cauce.org "I bet if you reached total enlightenment while drinking beer, it would make beer squirt out your nose" - -- Jack Handey Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 14:24:19 -0800 (PST) From: Ed Jones <cuisinartoh at yahoo.com> Subject: tap handle brass ferrules Does anyone have an inexpensive source for the brass ferrules and hanger screws for making tap handles? I have a buddy looking to make some custom tap handles and I'd like to source these ferrules cheaply. B3 ( http://www.morebeer.com ) has the ferrules for $3.25 and the bolt for $0.75 each. Are there any better sources? Thanks, Ed ===== Ed Jones - Columbus, Ohio U.S.A - [163.8, 159.4] [B, D] Rennerian "When I was sufficiently recovered to be permitted to take nourishment, I felt the most extraordinary desire for a glass of Guinness...I am confident that it contributed more than anything else to my recovery." - written by a wounded officer after Battle of Waterloo, 1815 Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 17:04:08 -0600 From: "Rob Dewhirst" <rob at hairydogbrewery.com> Subject: Re: Sanke conversion to corny > I have a similar project to this on my long term (i.e., may never > happen) list of things to do. I thought I recalled someone having > cut an appropriately sized hole out of a sanke keg and then just > using a corny lid in that hole, with no welding or other > modifications. I don't see how you could cut out a hole that would fit the corny lid unless you cut out the dome at the top of the sanke keg, which would remove the valve. This would make it impossible to get gas in and beer out. ? Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 16:27:16 -0800 From: "Webb, Mike" <mike.webb at pse.com> Subject: Re: The making of Barleywine I've made a few Barleywines in the 1.120 range and I used Wyeast Calif. Ale yeast (2 tubes) pitched from the tubes. (although next time I think I'll make a starter). The yeast performed wonderfully. It took it down in less than a week, and I bottled without repitching, and it worked well in the bottles also. This is probably near the top end for that yeast though. I used it on stronger beers and it petered out near 12%. Mike Webb Communications Foreman Puget Sound Energy mike.webb at pse.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 17:11:20 -0800 From: "Charles Duffney" <cduffney at wesleyan.edu> Subject: RE: The making of Barleywine Bill, When reading that quote, "...Incremental additions of concentrated wort," I interpreted it a little different than I think you did. The idea is that you want the concentration of fermentable sugars (and other things) in the wort at the start to be less than what you would normally make. If you just split the wort up into sections (such as 3 gallons, 1 gal, 1 gal from a 5 gallon boil) then you aren't changing the concentration. What I was thinking was go ahead and sanitize 2 gallons of water in the pressure cooker and boil a 3 gallon batch. You can then split up the wort (say in 3 equal one gallon sections). Add one gallon of the wort to the two gallons of water and start the ferment. The first ferment of both methods has a volume of 3 gallons, but difference between the two is that in the first method you only have 33% of the fermentable solids. That's a reduction of almost half! I'm not sure how you should store the wort for the next two additions or what pressure cooking will do to it. You'll have to rely on someone else's advice for that. As to a schedule for adding the extra wort I would say it's best to add more wort while the yeast are roaring. I'd try to wait until they have fermented a lot of the first section, but I'd also try to avoid a slow in their activity. Just when their food supply starts to get low, bam, surplus. I hope that helps you out, or maybe someone else out there. Cheers! Hoping the first boilover will be the last, Chuck Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 20:20:46 -0500 From: mpdixon at ipass.net Subject: Motorizing a Mill (DC or AC motor) Quoting Jeff Halvorson > I would like to motorize my Crankandstein CGM-2A grain mill. What are my > best > options? You can run it off a drill, or mount a motor. > > I have read the excellent article by Mike Dixon on using a 1/8 HP motor and > v-belt to rig up a pulley system > (http://hbd.org/carboy/motorizing_a_malt_mill.htm). While this method seems > decent, I thought I would see if anyone else had other suggestions or > information. I would suggest getting a little more powerful motor... > > My concerns/questions: > How will it handle stones in the malt? I'm assuming a pulley would just > slip > as opposed to damaging the mill or motor. Exactly, or the stones would be crushed. I have really only seen stones in a single malt in great numbers and that was Thos Fawcett Optic. I picked them out of the malt which was a time consuming process. > > With the above concern in mind, is there a good way to motorize without have > to > have exposed pulley system? Of course you can build a box around the > pulleys > to keep them hidden, but are there other options? You can certainly use a direct drive gearbox, but then the mill would take the brunt of any encountered stones. A box to hide the sheaves is easy to construct, and I have seen designs where the belt is run thorough a table which would make enclosing the belt even easier. I chose to leave the belt exposed since the only person who encounters the mill during grinding operations is me. Cheers, Mike Dixon Wake Forest, NC http://www.ipass.net/mpdixon Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 17:36:36 -0800 (PST) From: Rama Roberts <rama at sun.com> Subject: re: motorizing a mill Jeff Halvorson asks about motorizing his grain mill, and mentions Mike Dixon's document. I used Mike's notes when motorizing my grain mill, and am very pleased with the results. The only thing I would do differently is to design the stand to be freestanding rather than using the bucket as a rest, so you don't need to lift the assembly up to get at the milled grains. It is nice to have a tight fit like Mike's design to prevent dust from escaping. > is there a good way to motorize without have to have exposed pulley > system? Of course you can build a box around the pulleys to keep them > hidden, but are there other options? Gearboxes, but the can get costly, and... > How will it handle stones in the malt? I'm assuming a pulley would just > slip as opposed to damaging the mill or motor. Yup, the pulleys will slip- unlike a gear box. The pulley can be fairly loose too, which I recommend. Mine is loose enough to have an added benefit- it causes a slight wobble that helps feed the grain down to the rollers. > Are DC motors an option? Sure- whatever you can get your hands on. I would guess it'll be harder/more expensive to find a high torque DC motor, but I'm not sure. - --rama Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 11/12/03, by HBD2HTML v1.2 by KFL
webmaster@hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96