Software Vault: The Diamond Collection/The Diamond Collection (Software Vault)(Digital Impact).ISO/cdr12/hb1657.zip/HB1657

Text File | 1995-02-14 | 45KB | 1,048 lines

HOMEBREW Digest #1657                        Tue 14 February 1995


        FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
                Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor


Contents:
  Re: sealing corny kegs (Dion Hollenbeck)
  Rootbeer or Birch Beer ("Douglas Rasor")
  RE: removing rubber ("Charles S. Jackson")
  em Mashing (Frank J Dobner [phone])
  Seattle Beer info request ("LOWE, Stuart")
  IBU's (again?) ("David B. Sapsis")
  Pressure Relief Valves (Don Rudolph)
  Re: removing gasket (RWaterfall)
  Extract Efficiency (fwd) ("Mary G. Cummins")
  Motorize a Corona Mill (Frank Longmore)
  Protein Rests (Tim Ihde)
  Wort chiller tubing/Red beer/Dry hopping (Philip Gravel)
  Row, row, row the wort? (Mark Godar)
  Catalogues (Mike Thiessen)
  Re: AHA, AOB, et al ("Lee Bussy")
  New Subscriber Introduction ("DON HUNTER")
  Copper Doesn't Passivate from Acids (John J. Palmer)
  IBU Analysis ("George A. Dietrich")
  hop utilization data ("Daniel F McConnell")
  Mason Jars (dsanderson)
  2-row -vs- 6-row (ALKinchen)
  In Defense of AHA (Jeff Hewit)
  All-grain advice needed (Bloody as Hell)
  My beer tastes sour? ("Kevin D. Saavedra")
  Re: Guinness Stout - that slight sour taste (Tel [phone])
  Re: Gravity dispensing and Oxygen (Tel [phone])
  dropping beer (GRAFTONG)
  Homebrew System ("Robert Bloodworth ZFBTO    -MT0054")
  Selecting Strains for Culturing (Jim Ancona)



******************************************************************
* NEW POLICY NOTE: Due to the incredible volume of bouncing mail,
* I am going to have to start removing addresses from the list
* that cause ongoing problems. In particular, if your mailbox
* is full or your account over quota, and this results in bounced
* mail, your address will be removed from the list after a few days.
*
* If you use a 'vacation' program, please be sure that it only
* sends a automated reply to homebrew-request *once*. If I get
* more than one, then I'll delete your address from the list.
******************************************************************

Send articles for __publication_only__ to [e-mail]
  (Articles are published in the order they are received.)
Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc.,
  to [e-mail], BUT PLEASE NOTE that if
  you subscribed via the BITNET listserver ([e-mail]),
  then you MUST unsubscribe the same way!
If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first.
Please don't send me requests for back issues - you will be silently ignored.
For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to [e-mail]
ARCHIVES:
  An archive of previous issues of this digest, as well as other beer
  related information can be accessed via anonymous ftp at
  ftp.stanford.edu.  Use ftp to log in as anonymous and give your full
  e-mail address as the password, look under the directory
  /pub/clubs/homebrew/beer directory.  AFS users can find it under
  /afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer.  If you do not have
  ftp capability you may access the files via e-mail using the ftpmail
  service at gatekeeper.dec.com.  For information about this service,
  send an e-mail message to [e-mail] with the word
  "help" (without the quotes) in the body of the message.

----------------------------------------------------------------------


Date: Fri, 10 Feb 95 12:45:40 PST
From: [e-mail] (Dion Hollenbeck)
Subject: Re: sealing corny kegs

>>>>> "jc" == <[e-mail]> writes:

jc> what i do is put a _very_slim_ coat of vaseline on the rubber seal.  very
jc> thin!!  this really helps the seal form.

Better to use food grade silicone instead, or to heat the O-rings in
hot water just before putting on to soften them up.

dion

- --
Dion Hollenbeck [phone]x2814     Email: [e-mail]
Staff Software Engineer     Megatek Corporation, San Diego, California

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 10 Feb 95 15:55:30 EST
From: "Douglas Rasor" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Rootbeer or Birch Beer


          Don't Know if this is the place, but since I'm here here is
          the request.  I just started brewing in the past month.
          I've gotten alot of joy out of it thus far.   However, I
          mentioned to the boss that you could also make root beer or
          birch beer.  So now, she wants me to make one of the two or
          both.  Of course, I'd like to make it also.   I understand
          there are recipes at the Library of Congress, etc. but since
          I am not there I'd like to have someone respond to my email
          with a recipe for both.  Thanks in advance.  My email is:
          [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date:     Fri, 10 Feb 95 15:30:59 CST
From: "Charles S. Jackson" <[e-mail]>
Subject:  RE: removing rubber



>Doug writes:
>Which finally brings me to my question, is there any way to remove rubber
>without affecting the stainless steel? I would hate to lose such a nice keg.

>Al responds:
>Yes.  Elbow grease.  Take an old toothbrush and brush till the rubber all
>wears off.  I suppose you could use fine steel wool, but I believe you would
>have to use *stainless* steel wool (if you can find it).  I recall reading
>somewhere that regular steel wool should not be used on stainless steel.

The Outlaw wonders:
     What about a SS wire brush?  Readily available, cheap, and(?)harmless(?)
to SS?

Steve
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brewing beer is far more exciting when it is both a hobby AND a felony!
                                                The Alabama Outlaw

------------------------------

Date: 10 Feb 95 16:33:00 -0600
From: [e-mail] (Frank J Dobner [phone])
Subject: em Mashing

Since I saw at least two post recently regarding this subject I wwanted
to say one little thing:

For those of you using em's or EM's (TM) in your kettle, I would recommend
bending the nose of the em/EM away from the center of the kettle or wherever
the hot/cold break settles in your chilled wort. If you start draining
the wort with the nose of the em/EM in the cold/hot break pile you could
possibly clog the drainage and/or transfer the hot/cold
break into your fermenting unit. Trub in fermentation vessels is not
necessarily
bad, but you should know whether YOU want it or not, ahead of time, and
design to promote or prevent it.

Frank Dobner
Aurora, Illinois

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 10 Feb 95 23:10:00 GMT
From: "LOWE, Stuart" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Seattle Beer info request



I have the ultimate pleasure at the end of this month (Feb) of spending a
whole week in Seattle (I'm from the UK) I lived in Seattle a for best part
of a year a few years ago and was going thru a lapse of interest in beer
(shame I hear you cry!!) I therefore did not visit any of the Brew Pubs of
the area. I hope to rectify this matter during this visit.
Because of my previous stay I know my way around and would like some
guidelines of where to go to find some good beer (and  food). I understand
there is a brew pub in pike place market (never saw it while I was there)
any good? how do I find it?

I shall of course repay any info with an honest report of my findings to the
digest for debate and discussion.

TIA   Stu.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 11:08:42 -0800 (PST)
From: "David B. Sapsis" <[e-mail]>
Subject: IBU's (again?)


With some reticence over possibly beating all the damn acids out of the
hop, I want to comment on the recent discussions concerning bitterness
calculation and perception.

There are widely divergent algorythms available to the homebrewer who
wishes to calculate bitterness.  Some apparently work for some folks
while others work for others, and some of us are still scratching our
heads.  The fact that there is poor alignment of the various calcuations
should not be surprising.  They are based on different (and not
altogether available for scrutiny) data.  The fact that utilization has
high variance itself should also not be shocking.  I am aware of
commercially tested beers that have shown ranges from about 13% utilization

for full kettle additions, to about 41% for same as measured by Micah Millspah.

There are lots of factors that affect utilization other than those
included in the common utilization equations.  Garetz's book does a good
job of outlining these.  I will agree that in my setup, his equations
would appear to underestimate utilization while Rager's (although not
always) overestimate, thus if forced to use one, I would go with
Tinseth's middle  ground figures.  They appear to be generally close, as
best as I can *percieve*.  Yes, I and virtually every other homebrewer
who fails to measure IBU's can only rely on what we taste to evaluate
bitterness.  Fancy non-linear curve fitting based on scant data and no
estimate of goodness of fit aside, your still left with perception being
your only metering stick, and I would argue, its the one that really
counts.

That said, I found it dismaying that Algis finds the process of
calibrating one's pallete with known IBU levels to be "worthless".  Yes
there are factors that affect percieved vs. real bitterness.  But what
then.  If we are relegated to relying on our percieved assesment of
bitterness for feedback into our calculations of  utilization (that
is, we do not simply take as faith that the calculated number is indeed
right), then I argue that taste registration is the best means for
getting a handle on the vagaries of getting the bitterness "right".  I
also found it amusing that the comparison beers that Al uses as evidence
for perception having little relation to reality -- Liberty Ale and
Guinness Extra -- for me do exactly the opposite.  I percieve Guinness
to be more bitter, and I'm sure I get fresher Liberty here than he does
in Chicago.  Liberty has a *huge* hop flavor and aroma profile, and that
might be confounding his assesment of bitterness.  Its undeniable that
different folks have different capacities of taste destinction, but what
other tools do we have?

I am aware of some work by Glen Tinseth and others using controlled
factors and measured outputs that is to be published in the future.  I
await the data.  Garetz has also relayed to me that he is going to get
his spec up and running, and I plan on doing some measurements of my
own.  In the meantime, I suggest that people make every effort to
calibrate their  perceptions with known quantities, use correspondingly the
equations that seem to work best, keep track of what you do (as possible
sources of variation), and be entirely aware that utilization is a
multifactor process that even the big boys haven't entirely figured out.
cheers,
dave in berkeley

------------------------------

Date: 10 Feb 95 19:33:20 EST
From: Don Rudolph <[e-mail]>
Subject: Pressure Relief Valves



Dave Pike asks in HBD #1654 about pressure relief valves for corny kegs.
I purchased such a device that connects to the "in" valve of the corny
keg and keeps the pressure at about 10 psi, pretty ideal for lagering or
conditioning.  I've used it, it works.  I got it form Brewer's Warehouse,
you can find their mail order ads in Zymurgy.  If you can't find it,
email me and I'll get you the number.

Don Rudolph
Seattle, WA
[e-mail]




------------------------------

Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 21:27:51 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: removing gasket

A few days ago Doug asked about removing red rubber gasket residue from a
Cornelius keg and Al K. suggested "stainless steel wool" as opposed to
regular steel wool.  I'm not sure of the hardnessses of steel vs. SS, but
both are probably quite a bit harder than copper. Since hardness is a
controlling factor in what material will scratch another, I figure copper
scrubbies or copper wool would be a safer choice.  The trade-off is more elbow
 grease required.  Also, nail polish remover (these days usually acetone
based) may help to loosen up the rubber.  WARNING: Use acetone in a well
ventilated area.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 23:45:27 -0700 (MST)
From: "Mary G. Cummins" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Extract Efficiency (fwd)



Gunther Trageser                     email: [e-mail]
St. Albert, ALberta, Canada

- ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 23:41:25 -0700 (MST)
From: Mary G. Cummins <[e-mail]>
To: Rick Gontarek <[e-mail]>
Subject: Extract Efficiency

Rick,

For ale, your mashing procedure seems to be sound. However, when I think
that you can do a sparge in 20 minutes then one thing comes to mind: you
must be sparging whole grains, not crushed ones. I have had fast sparges,
like 45 minutes, but 20 - I just couldn't do it. I suspect that your
grains are left too course. I am not a Gott masher but think it does not
matter what equipment you use. Also, I feel that your mash may be too
thin, although I can't really see where tis could lead to any harm, except
that you have to boil the bejesus out of your wort to reduce it to 5
gallons. Gott coolers lend themselves ideally to doing decoction mashes,
although this is not the way they do ales and you may end up with too
much maltiness and body, but I can tell you, it does improve your efficiency.
I did a triple decoction Doppelbock before Christmas and I got an
original gravity of 1.086 out of 13 pounds of grain (7.5 lbs of pilsener,
5lbs Munich 100 and 4 oz of chocolate).

Depending on your malts, with a fully modified pale malt you may dough in
at 40C (I've never been able to get used to Fahrenheit), let rest for 15
mins, then take about 30% of the grain with just enough liquid as to not
to burn the grain and heat this is a pot with 20 mins rest at 65C, 10
mins rest at 70C and then boil for 30 mins. Return to main mash and temp
should rise to about 65C. After 15 mins take another thick decoction (c.
30% of grain) and repeat first decoction, this time only having a 70C
rest and boil. Returning the decoction should result in a temp near 70C.
Rest until iodine test proves negative. Take a 30% thin decoction, i.e
mostly liquid, boil and return to wort for mash-out. 2.5 gal of water for
dough in is ample. If your decoctions don't yield the proper temps you
can always add some boiling water.

The theory behind decoction is that you gelatinize the grains so that the
enzymes can get at the starch better for conversion. You leave most of
the liquid behind and that is where the enzymes are: they will survive.
By gelatinizing the starch you make more starch available for conversion,
even if you haven't crushed your grain too well. If you want to try it,
you'll be surprised. But I do think your real problem is too course grain.

Try it and if it helps drop me a note.

Ragards,

Gunther Trageser                     email: [e-mail]
St. Albert, ALberta, Canada



------------------------------

Date: Sat, 11 Feb 1995 09:50:40 -0600 (CST)
From: Frank Longmore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Motorize a Corona Mill

I know, I know, I really need a M....... , P....... , or a G.... ,
but I've got an old Corona mill (is there any other kind?)  It cost
me $15 at a flea market, and works pretty well.

Here's a pretty easy way to motorize one.  Go to a flea market or
goodwill store and get the motor assembly from an ice-cream maker.
Some are cased in plastic, some are in metal.  I've seen some which
draw 1.2 amps, some draw 1.7 amps.  Of course I would prefer metal,
and 1.7 amps, but I've used both and both work ok.

Mount the Corona mill on a piece of 2" x 6" x 12" CCA lumber with the
outlet facing toward one end, and as close to the end as possible.
I drilled a 1 1/2" diameter hole 2 1/4" from the end of the board.
Screw a couple of pieces of 2" x 4" x 12" to the edges of the board
to act as feet.  Screw a piece of 2" x 4" x 8" crosswise to support
the motor.  The motor is mounted into a steel or plastic bracket, and
you need to cut this with a hacksaw.  One end should be mostly trimmed
off, and the other end needs to be trimmed shorter so as to make the
motor shaft line up with the Corona mill shaft, when the motor assembly
is set on end.  Mount the motor on it, with screws, and in line with
the corona mill shaft.

To drive the mill, you need to get a 5/16 x 16 threaded stove bolt,
about 1 1/2  to 2 " long.  Find a hex-headed nut which fits into the
socket in the motor output (I think it will be a 3/4" nut), and place
it on the bolt.  Tighten it in place (centered) with a 5/16x16 nut, and
thread a 5/16x16 locknut on the bolt.  Thread this into the Corona mill
shaft, and lock it down with the locknut.  Screw everything together,
and you're in business.

Results:  Works fine for me, and for my local homebrew shop.  Very slow
throughput, since the motors are internally geared down to about 10 rpm.
It will grind wheat, but you have to be really careful about setting the
spacing.  A nice thing is that the motors have an internal temperature
cutoff switch in case something goes wrong.  Keep it clean and lubricated,
and it should last pretty long.

 -Frank


  >>>>>>>>>> Frank Longmore    Internet:   [e-mail]  <<<<<<<<<<<
  >>>>>>>>>> Olathe, Kansas    Compuserve: 70036,1546           <<<<<<<<<<<
  >>>>>>>    I feel more like I do now than I did when I started... <<<<<<<


------------------------------

Date: Sat, 11 Feb 1995 11:44:56 -0500 (EST)
From: [e-mail] (Tim Ihde)
Subject: Protein Rests


First of all, I wanted to thank the folks who responded to my question
about all the trub in my last batch.  Everyone thought that it was just
a lot of trub and nothing to worry about.

Thinking about this batch has brought another question to my mind.
The grain bill for this (partial) mash included one pound of Vienna
malt, three pounds of Klages, and one pound of Carapils.  When I
purchased it, the proprietor recommended that because of the Vienna I
do a protein rest at 122 degrees, which I did.

Here's the question: what is the attribute of Vienna malt that indicates
this step?  The protein percentage of Vienna is pretty close to that of
the Klages I've been using as a base for some time with a simple one
temperature infusion mash.

>From reading Papazian and Miller I have at least some idea of what is
going on during a protein rest, but when is it advisable to do one?

        tim

- --
Tim J. Ihde                                  | Novell Unix Systems Group
[e-mail]         [phone] | ISV Engineering
[e-mail] [phone] | Summit, New Jersey

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 11 Feb 95 16:25 CST
From: [e-mail] (Philip Gravel)
Subject: Wort chiller tubing/Red beer/Dry hopping

===> Mike Spinelli asks about wort chiller tubing:

>I'm thinking of making my own immersion chiller.  Which is better, 3/8"
>or 1/2" copper.  My cousin the HVAC mechanic says that 1/2" might be hard to
>bend in say, a 9" circle w/o kinking and recommended 3/8".  Does it really
>make a differnce between the two sizes?

IHMO, 3/8" tubing is the best to use for a wort chiller.  What you have
to do is balance the need to maximize surface area of the wort chiller
and minimize the pressure drop as the water flow through the chiller.  You
want to maximize the surface area in order to facilitate heat transfer.
This would argue for 1/4" (or 1/8") tubing.  OTOH, you want to minimize
the pressure through the tubing and this would lead you to 1/2" tubing.
3/8" tubing strikes a good balance between these to opposing constraints.

There are also a couple of practical considerations.  First, as your cousin
pointed out, 1/2" tubing is difficult to bend without kinking.  The second
is that coiled, 1/4" tubing does provide much self support.  It tends to
flop around.  Again, 3/8" tubing is not difficult to coil and has a fair
amount of strength to support itself.

===> Julie A Espy wonders about all those red beers...

>I don't know if anyone knows this, but...there seem to be an awful lot of
>"red" beers coming out on the market lately: red dog, Jamaican red, red
>this, red that.  Can anyone speculate as to why this is? Is it just the
>trendy thing to do? Now my friends want me to jump on the bandwagon and
>brew a red beer, just like the big boys.  Does anyone have a good recipe?

It's trendiness caused my marketing hype.  You can make a red beer by
adding 1/8 lb of roasted barley or Special B malt to any recipe that
produces a pale colored beer.

===> Jeff Hewit inquires about dry hopping:

>I have read a lot about dry hopping lately, and I want to try
>it.  However, I'm not sure how much to use, as I have not found
>any recipes that specifically call for dry hopping.  If I modify
>a recipe that does not call for dry hopping, do I reduce the
>amount of finishing hops, and make it up in dry hopping?  Or,
>do I just add more hops when I rack into the secondary
>fermenter?  Or what?

I'd suggest starting with 1/2 or 1 oz of hops for dry hopping and
see how that affects the beer.  You can then adjust to suit your
taste.  You can use pellets, plugs or whole hops for dry hopping.
You can also use a hop bag to hold the hops which will make it
easier to separate the beer from the hops.

Finishing hops add flavor in addition to aroma.  You can reduce
the finishing hop rate somewhat if you're going to dry hop.  Most
importantly, EXPERIMENT.

- --
Phil
_____________________________________________________________
Philip Gravel                                 [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 11 Feb 95 19:05:40 EST
From: [e-mail] (Mark Godar)
Subject: Row, row, row the wort?


I normally brew 5 gallon batches, and plan on moving up to 10.  While
mentally running through the process of brewing a 10 gallon batch, I
realized that my 2' nylon spoon is not going to cut it anymore for
stirring the decoctions into my mash.  I normally use a three decoction
mash, and broke my nylon spoon last batch while stirring the rather
thick mash in my GOTT cooler.

I have never seen stirring utensils discussed on the HBD. I have been
contemplating using a small canoe paddle to stir the mash.  There is no
way I could break it like that wimpy spoon, but am not sure how it
would handle the heat.

Does anyone know:

1.) what type of coating is used on canoe paddles?  (food grade?)
2.) if expansion and contraction from temperature variation would cause
    it to delaminate or come apart in some way?

I have seen many ingenious solutions to brewing related problems
discussed on this digest and hope to find help with this one.

Thank you very much,
Mark Godar             Clarkston Mi.            [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 12 Feb 1995 08:05:55 -0600 (CST)
From: Mike Thiessen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Catalogues

  I'm relativly new to homebrewing and have a question concerning mail
order supplies.  While we seem to have a homebrewing store on every street
corner in Canada most of them have only the basics (various extracts, a
few bags of grain, and various yeasts).  The rest of the store is usually
devoted to wine making.
  What I'm interested in is the equipment for more advanced brewing.  If
anyone could supply a list of current mail order companies which have
catalogues it would be appreciated.

 Mike Thiessen
[e-mail]


------------------------------

Date:          Sun, 12 Feb 1995 10:44:09 +0000
From: "Lee Bussy" <[e-mail]>
Subject:       Re: AHA, AOB, et al

Now I know why nobody bothered to flame me for my rather short
comments ahout the AHA/BJCP business, they are all after Patrick! :)

I  do have to defent them though *gasp*.  Yeah I know but after
making copies of the Cat's Meow II for people (at cost) in the brew
club, I understand how expensive it is.  The books the AOB are
selling do cost more than the pulp piction at the newsstands and
while I'm sure they make a profit, it's not as much as you think.

Just for reference, it cost me close to $30 for *one* copy of the
Cat's Meow II, bound and covered.  That's cost at Kinko's, the local
copy "mall".

Anyway, there it is.  I'm not all that fond of the AHA these days
anyway but thought I'd throw that in for their sake.

- --
 -Lee Bussy          | The 4 Basic Foodgroups....      |
 [e-mail] | Salt, Fat, Beer & Women!        |
 Wichita, Kansas    | http://www.southwind.net/~leeb  |

------------------------------

Date:          Sun, 12 Feb 1995 11:59:56 EST5EDT
From: "DON HUNTER" <[e-mail]>
Subject:       New Subscriber Introduction

Howdy,

I subscribe to two other digest, both caving related, and it is
common on both for new subscribers to introduce themselves.  I
haven't seen any Homebrew Digest, so I don't know if the practice is
the same here.  I started brewing in June of last year and so far my
brewing is restricted to kits and pure malt extracts and adjuncts.  I
currently have a lager in secondary in a thermostatically controlled
refridgerator and what is supposed to be a Celis White clone in my
pantry.  I hope I didn't overdue the cumin and coriander in the Celis
clone.  At the end of the boil, you would have thought that I had a
pot of chili on in the kitchen!  The gas from the lock has a nice
orangey aroma, though, so maybe it's o.k.

On a more self-serving note, does anyone out there have a good extract
recipe for a sweet stout, similar to Dragon Stout?  Please reply
directly.

Looking forward to learning and sharing....

Don Hunter

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 12 Feb 1995 11:11:56 -0800
From: [e-mail] (John J. Palmer)
Subject: Copper Doesn't Passivate from Acids

P. Babcock wrote:
>I believe it is in Papazian's 'Companion' book where he states that washing Cu
>in a weak acid (such as beer) causes a layer to form which prevents Cu from
>leeching into beer. Apparently, this will take place as the leading edge of
>your beer stream passing through (all but instantaneous); it is evidenced by
>the bright gold color resulting from this contact.

Papazian is an engineerwannabe. Copper and stainless steel are very
different when it comes to surface oxides. Stainless steel Does passivate
with an oxidizing acid solution, making the protective, inert oxide layer
thicker and impervious to corrosive media. Copper has loose green surface
oxides that dont do much but rub off. Sure they protect the surface from
atmospheric corrosion to a degree, but even Miss Liberty needed a skin
graft after 100 years.

Copper is resistant to most alkaline chemicals except ammonia and bleach.
It is fairly resistant to a few acids, but not many. Beer, being a weak
acid, dissolves copper from the surface of the metal. Copper, by itself, is
fairly resistant to this, and not much dissolution takes place. If the
copper is in an oxidised state, CuO or Cu2O3, these oxides are wimpy when
faced with a weak acid and the oxides are rapidly dissolved. This is why it
is nice to keep your copper chillers clean between uses. Clean copper is
resistant to acid, oxidized copper is not. Therefore, when the acid hits a
dirty chiller, more copper is going to dissolve into solution than a clean
one. It is Not passivation, its cleanliness.
Clean, or Be Cleaned.

John J. Palmer
Metallurgist
(posting from Home)



------------------------------

Date: 12 Feb 95 13:11:04 EST
From: "George A. Dietrich" <[e-mail]>
Subject: IBU Analysis

As long as we're talking about IBUs and utilization figures:

Well I received an IBU analysis from Scientific Service on two samples of beer
that I sent them.  Sample Number 1 was a Pilsner and that came back as 25.6
IBU.
Sample Number 2 was a California Common and that came back as 35.3 IBU.  The
lab
said that they would followup with a written report this week that would
contain
some additional data.

So now you might say, That's great, now he knows whose utilization formulas to
use and he's golden.  I'm not so sure!  Here's the problem,  I recalculated the
estimated IBUs I should have using both Mark Garetz's formulas (from his book)
and Jackie Rager's formulas from his article to see which one I matched.  Guess
what...on the Pilsner, Rager's calculations gave me 32.75 IBU.  Garetz's
calculations gave me 26.47 IBU.  Garetz was close enough for a match.  On the
California Common, Rager gave me 35.8 IBU where Garetz gave me 22.6 IBU.  Here
Rager was close enough for a match!!

For those of you who want to play with the numbers and maybe help me out here
are the hop schedules:
In both cases I boiled for 90 minutes total.

Pilsner:  .75 oz Saaz (AA 3.6%) 75 minutes
             .50 oz Saaz (AA 3.6%) 60 min.
            1.0  oz Saaz (AA 3.6%) 45 min.
             .50 oz Saaz (AA 3.6%) 15 min.

Final volume is 6 gallons.  Original gravity 1.050.  Whole Hops were used
throughout. Full wort boil.

California Common:
        .92 oz Northern Brewer (AA 8.2%) 70 minutes
        .49 oz Cascade (AA 5.7%) 25 minutes
        .46 oz Northern Brewer (AA 8.2%) 10 minutes         Excuse the wierd
decimals..they are converted from grams.
        .46 oz Northern Brewer (AA 8.2%) 2 minutes
        Finishing hops were added at the end of the boil but should be of no
consequence to the IBUs.

Final volume is 6 gallons.  Original gravity 1.050.  Whole Hops were used
throughout. Full wort boil.

Now for some final thoughts.  I probably should have chosen two similar styles
to have analyzed.  I don't know for sure but it may be possible that the
Pilsner
lost some IBUs during lagering.  I lagered in the carboy for about seven or
eight weeks, as I recall, at around 32F.  Maybe during all the settling (and it
was brilliantly clear) some iso-AAs went south.  That would mean that Gartez's
match was a coincidence and some compensation factor would have to be applied
to
Rager's formulas in the event of extended aging.

I'm probably going to have to have a few more analyses done to get to the
bottom
of this but I would be interested in everyone's thoughts on the subject.  Some
may think that I'm overanalyzing and I may be, but I would really like to know
what is in my beer so that I can continue to improve it.

E-Mail is okay for responses.

George


------------------------------

Date: 12 Feb 1995 14:02:07 -0500
From: "Daniel F McConnell" <[e-mail]>
Subject: hop utilization data

Subject:  hop utilization data

Hi All:

Having skimmed with some amusement the arguments both for and
against the various IBU calculation formulas,  I decided to go ahead
and get some real data.  I took a Belgian Ale that I had made (11P, 27
calculated IBU or cIBU) and measured the alpha (and beta) acids.  I don't
know who's formula I use, I simply calculate the percent of alpha
expected and then apply a linear utilization of 30% for full 60 min boils
and 15% for 30 min etc.  No correction for gravity in his case because I
consider 11P to be nominal.  This beer had 70% of the cIBU added at
60 min and 30% at 30 min.

I measured 25.4 IBU and feel this is certainly an acceptable result
especially since I am not an expert at this procedure (its a simple
extraction though, if you have some hexane and a UV spec).  Furthermore,
since I have no alpha acid standards, I can only assume that my extraction
was acceptable. In any case inadequate extraction would cause an
underestimation.   There's an N=1.  Lucky?  Maybe.  I have a few more
beers to check.

I seriously doubt that anyone without an absolutely astounding,
extraordinary palate can detect the difference between 27 and 25.4 IBU,
therefore my crude method is entirely sufficient for my needs.  Actually
I prefer a much more empirical approach...if the beer doesn't taste bitter
enough, add more hops the next time you brew it, i.e. let taste be your
guide, not numbers.  Works everytime.

DanMcC from Ann Arbor, MI                  [e-mail]
*****As long as Keith Richards is alive, I can have one more beer.*****


------------------------------

Date: Sun, 12 Feb 95 16:43:57 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Mason Jars


      Has anyone tried bottling in Mason Jars?

      Of course their not tinted to provide any protection from light
     and since their wouldn't be a need to pour there would be no head.

      But by keeping them out of the light, you could just drink right
     from the "bottle"..

      Since they're designed for vacuum and not pressure I'm not sure if
     they'd hold a seal.

      Has anyone tried it or care to comment?

      Dave


------------------------------

Date: Sun, 12 Feb 1995 17:48:34 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: 2-row -vs- 6-row


"Michael Bonner" <[e-mail]>

asks

Is there

>some obvious way to tell 2- from 6-row?

Well, not obvious, but it can be done with a little effort and
patience.

You need a magnifier and a sheet of white paper.

Take a spoonful of the malt in question and spread it out on the
white paper. It may also be helpful to do the same with a malt
that you know is 2-row, such as pils or pale ale.

6-row barley consists of two different shaped kernels: straight,
usually slightly slimmer than the plump 2-row kernels; and
twisted, usually slightly shorter than the straight kernels.

At this point, if all the kernels look alike, compare them with
the known 2-row sample. If you still can't tell that there are
different shaped kernels, you probably have 2-row.

The twisting of the 6-row kernels is very slight and usually most
of it is at the end of the kernel, but any twisting will
distinguish it from 2-row.

Separate the twisted and straight kernels. There should be twice
as many twisted kernels than straight kernels. This corresponds
to 4 (side rows) of the six rows and 2 of the six rows for the
straight ones.

This trick is also useful in seeing whether your maltster is
using cheaper 6-row barley for his specialty malts.

 -


------------------------------

Date: Sun, 12 Feb 1995 20:41:56 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Jeff Hewit)
Subject: In Defense of AHA



Lately, I have seen much trash talk on HBD and R.C.B regarding
the AHA.  I don't profess to know much about how the
organization is run, or what lead to the rift with the Beer
Judges.  However, as a relatively new brewer (1 year, 12
batches), I have found membership in AHA to be very helpful.  (I
just renewed my membership for 2 years.)  When I first asked AHA
for info, I received a package that include some very helpful
hints.  I also find ZYMURGY very helpful and interesting.  In
response to those who complain that it is a "catalog," I find the
adds helpful as I search for sources of equipment and
ingredients.  As far as judging goes, the only judge I worry
about is me.  I brew beer to satisfy my taste, not to score
points and win trophies.  Overall, the AHA is addressing my
needs as a homebrewer, and I will continue to support it.

Many have touted BREWING TECHNIQUES.  I have read it, and it
too is a good magazine.  However, it appears to be directed to
the more experienced brewer.  If one wants to subscribe to 2
mags, Z and BT are good choices.  But, if you're a beginner or
an intermediate and only want 1, take ZYMURGY.

- --
Jeff Hewit
******************************************************************************
Eat a live toad first thing in the morning and nothing worse
will happen to you the rest of the day.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 13 Feb 1995 00:33:12 -0500 (EST)
From: Bloody as Hell <[e-mail]>
Subject: All-grain advice needed

        After one full year of brewing I just had my first loss, but instead of
wallowing of the loss, my brewing companions and I have seen this a sign
to move on.  I'd like to think we're ready for all-grain.  I'd like
advice, any words of wisdom will be helpful on my first all-grain batch.
I've yet to buy the necessary equipment for all-grain, so any input you
can give me on what to buy/build will be greatly appreciated.
                                        Sincerely,
                                        Pat FitzGerald
P.S.-I can imagine that most of you on this net are way beyond me, you can
just write me personally, rather than taking up valuble net-space.
[e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 12 Feb 1995 23:25:58 -0700 (MST)
From: "Kevin D. Saavedra" <[e-mail]>
Subject: My beer tastes sour?

I'm brewing my first batch of beer (I'm a beginner) and the sample I took
from the fermenter today tastes very sour. It's been fermenting for about
8 days but there are still bubles coming through the fermentation lock
about every 30 seconds. Is my beer contaminated or is it just supposed to
taste like that at this stage?

Kevin Saavedra
[e-mail]


------------------------------

Date: Mon, 13 Feb 1995 08:52:32 +0000
From: Brian Gowland <[e-mail]> (Tel [phone])
Subject: Re: Guinness Stout - that slight sour taste

In HBD 1655 "Keith Royster" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> I vaguely remember reading somewhere that this sour taste is
> achieved, not in the brewing process, but by actually blending the
> stout beer with a little bit of "bad" / contaminated beer.
>
        I think that you were probably reading about the origins of
Porter. In the early 18th Century, drinkers would mix their own
blend of Mild and Stale beers. Mild, unlike the modern meaning,
simply meant that the beer was young and immature. Stale didn't
mean bad as such but meant that the beer had been aged and had
developed a sour (acetic) taste. Stale beer cost more due to the
aging process. Drinkers would buy a quantity of Mild and a quantity
of Stale and blend them to suit their taste and finances. The
breweries eventually caught on to this and beer that was aged
and blended became available ready-made - this was the origin
of Porter.
        On the subject of the sour taste in Guinness - I suspect that
you are referring to the taste produced by the use of Roast Barley.
This produces a dry, bitter taste and aftertaste and is used in
Stouts and Porters quite a bit.

Cheers,
        Brian


------------------------------

Date: Mon, 13 Feb 1995 09:40:04 +0000
From: Brian Gowland <[e-mail]> (Tel [phone])
Subject: Re: Gravity dispensing and Oxygen

In HBD 1656, [e-mail] (Gilad Barak) wrote:
>
> In HBD1654 <[e-mail]> said:
> > [snip]
> > you can always gravity tap the keg, however, you will be introducing
> > oxegen, and therefore should probably finish it off within 5 days before
> > the beer spoils.
>
> IMHO oxygen has nowhere to come from because this is a sealed container with
> CO2 in the headspace.
> [Rest cut]
>

        Your argument is mostly correct but you are forgetting one vital point.
You are assuming that the beer has sufficient residual sugars and yeast
activity
to carry on producing CO2 throughout its stay in the keg. I cask-condition and
some of my recipes do result in sufficient CO2 production to last right to the
end. Many, however, give up or slow down after 3 or 4 gallons and so air must
be admitted to the cask to allow the beer to be dispensed.

Cheers,
        Brian


------------------------------

Date:           Mon, 13 Feb 95  11:09
From: [e-mail]
Subject:        dropping beer

Just thought that I'd add my twopennorthworth to the subject.  I first
encountered the process of dropping beer in Graham Wheeler's book, like
many others I suspect.  I must admit that I was more than a little sceptical
at first but I gave it a go.  I'm a convert now!  Without doubt it has been
the biggest single improvement to my brewing that I ever made, even more
of an improvement than moving to liquid yeasts.  There's one differance
between the method that Brian Gowland described and the one that I use.
That is, after dropping the beer I do not re-aerate it.  i just cannot
bring myself to do it, being paranoid about oxidising the beer.  Can
anyone remember if Graham Wheeler specified to re-aerate after dropping
the beer, and if he did, can anyone tell me why it is beneficial then
but not later on in the brewing process?
 -By the way  I brew mainly British real ales, but you guessed that!-

Gillian Grafton
[e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 13 Feb 1995 09:47:50 EST
From: "Robert Bloodworth                            ZFBTO    - MT0054"
<[e-mail]>
Subject: Homebrew System


I just received information from a german brewing supplier about a 50 liter
"laboratory" brewing setup consisting of three stainless steel tanks (hot water
tank, a mash tun with a removable screen, and a boiling keg with a removable
screen) with gas burners for each of the vessels, pumps and lines for
transferring liquids, an immersion wort cooler, thermometers and a stainless
steel primary fermenter. It is also obtainable as a two-vessel system without
the hot water tank. This looks like a very classy setup, but the price is a bit
steep (DM 3000 <US $1900> for the three vessel system, including everything
down
to a wooden paddle for stirring). He told me this system was being sold by a
small firm in the US, but wouldn't give me the name of the company (probably
afraid I'd order it myself from the US). Apparently the DM 500 shipping costs
add a big chunk to the price. If anyone out there knows who manufactures this
setup or a better (read cheaper) alternative, and please contact me. Thanks in
advance for your help.

Bob Bloodworth
Cologne

------------------------------

Date: 13 Feb 95 10:22:36 EDT
From: Jim Ancona <[e-mail]>
Subject: Selecting Strains for Culturing

In HBD 1655,
"Fleming, Kirk R., Capt" <[e-mail]> writes:
>I recently posted to r.c.b "Selecting Strains for Culturing", a simple
>tabulation of Wyeast data with notations regarding how Wyeast products
>might be selected for culturing.  There are infinite ways to look at
>this data and I'd like your ideas about selecting a "minimum set" of
>yeasts to maximize coverage of beer styles.

I'll be looking for this.

>I also proposed experimenting with starters built with yeast strain
>pairs with differing floculation levels, and would like your ideas on
>this.  From [unknown source] I picked up the idea that there is some
>[good] reason for doing this, but have lost lock completely on what
>the reason was. Until I find out what the objective(s) is(are) I have
>to shelve the project--sounded good at the time, though, or I wouldn't
>have looked into yeast selection for that purpose.

George Fix has written about this in his book 'Principles of Brewing
Science' and in Homebrew Digest #806 in an article titled
'Multi-strain yeasts'. The goal is to use a strongly  flocculent yeast
to pull a non-flocculent yeast with otherwise desireable
characteristics out of suspension. The Whitbread Ale yeast (at least
one of them) is a mixed culture that uses this technique. See
George's article for more details.

BTW, based on articles here in the past couple of weeks, I bought
Dr. Fix's book. Highly recommended, if you're interested in the 'why'
behind a lot of what we do.

Jim
- --
Jim Ancona               [e-mail]               [e-mail]


------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1657, 02/14/95
*************************************
-------