FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: pbabcock at hbd.org
***************************************************************
TODAY'S HOME BREW DIGEST BROUGHT TO YOU BY:
Sponsor The Home Brew Digest!
Visit http://www.hbd.org/sponsorhbd.shtml to learn how
Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********
DONATE to the Home Brew Digest. Home Brew Digest, Inc. is a
501(c)3 not-for-profit organization under IRS rules (see the
FAQ at http://hbd.org for details of this status). Donations
can be made by check to Home Brew Digest mailed to:
HBD Server Fund
PO Box 871309
Canton Township, MI 48187-6309
or by paypal to address serverfund@hbd.org. DONATIONS of $250
or more will be provided with receipts. SPONSORSHIPS of any
amount are considered paid advertisement, and may be deductible
under IRS rules as a business expense. Please consult with your
tax professional, then see http://hbd.org for available
sponsorship opportunities.
***************************************************************
Contents:
FW: RE: Mill Gap Setting ("Michael D. Noah")
Fwd: Carbonation saturation (Fred L Johnson)
German Brewing ("Darrell G. Leavitt")
RE: Mill Gap Setting ("David Houseman")
CO2 ("A.J deLange")
water analysis questions (RI_homebrewer)
RE: Malt Analysis ("Mike Bennett")
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* The HBD Logo Store is now open! *
* http://www.hbd.org/store.html *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
NOTE: With the economy as it is, the HBD is struggling to
meet its meager operating expenses of approximately $3400
per year. If less than half of those currently directly
subscribed to the HBD sent in a mere $5.00, the HBD would
be able to easily meet its annual expenses, with room to
spare for next year. Please consider it.
As always, donors and donations are publicly acknowledged
and accounted for on the HBD web page. THank you
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.
HAVING TROUBLE posting, subscribing or unsusubscribing? See the HBD FAQ at
http://hbd.org.
LOOKING TO BUY OR SELL USED EQUIPMENT? Please do not post about it here. Go
instead to http://homebrewfleamarket.com and post a free ad there.
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 (pbabcock at hbd dot org), Jason Henning,
and Spencer Thomas
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 10:13:04 +0100
From: "Michael D. Noah" <michael.noah at physaliaos.com>
Subject: FW: RE: Mill Gap Setting
Josh,
You're not going to like this response, but in my experience, the gap
"depends." Not all grains of malt are the same size; some are fat and plump,
and some are thin and scrawny, though 99.99% of the grains are the same size
within a particular bag of malt. They just change from variety to variety,
and from year to year.
I have a Valley Mill, and I'm often resetting the variable roller adjustment
from "wide open" to about "half open" (I've never set it to the narrowest
setting). Sometimes, I forget to make a change, and after about a lb. or two
has passed through the mill, I'll take a look and see what it looks like -
e'g, has the husk only been cracked open (preferable), or is the mill it
turning into dust (not preferable). I know when the latter is happening when
I start sneezing!!!
Good luck with your project!!!
On-On!
Michael Noah
Heidelberg, Germany
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 06:25:43 -0500
From: Fred L Johnson <FLJohnson52 at nc.rr.com>
Subject: Fwd: Carbonation saturation
I should clarify that my last post regarding Joe Katchever's desire
to carbonate his beer using a single dose of CO2 at the beginning
used calculations of pressure that were peculiar to Joe's tank that
had a wetting pressure of somewhere on the order of 4 psi, so the
pressures I was quoting were peculiar to Joe's tank and the pressures
at his regulator. They would not apply to a tank in which on
pressurizes from the top with zero wetting pressure.
My calculations also did not consider that the beer already had some
CO2 dissolved in it--a big mistake. Thanks to Joe Walts for
correcting this one. I'm sorry for confusing what was already a
challenging (for me) scenario.
Thanks, Joe, for the corrections. This is what I love about the HBD.
I knew if I made a feeble attempt at Joe's question in public,
someone who really knows this stuff would set the record straight.
I also agree with Joe Walts that the easier way to actually add the
gas would be on a mass basis.
Fred L Johnson
Apex, North Carolina, USA
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 06:34:30 -0500 (EST)
From: "Darrell G. Leavitt" <leavitdg at plattsburgh.edu>
Subject: German Brewing
Kai;
Thankyou for the efforts to put this German Brew material together. It
is very interesting, and another resource to help those of us whom are
more artist than scientist in the hobby, to better understand the
process.
Darrell
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2009 07:42:39 -0500
From: "David Houseman" <david.houseman at verizon.net>
Subject: RE: Mill Gap Setting
Josh,
My mill is adjustable but I will admit I usually "set it and forget it."
There have been times when I did use the adjustability. One is when
milling wheat. The wheat kernel are not the same size as barley and they
are harder. So I've put them through 2 or 3 times a progressively smaller
gaps; it make the work much easier. And I did experiment with a similar
method with barley malt. Commercial roller mills have 3, 4, 5 or more
rollers. So to emulate those I would put the malt through twice, one at a
slightly wider setting then at a slightly narrower setting. I got a finer
crush without tearing up the husks. I also wetted the malt a bit as well;
again often done commercially, if for nothing else than to keep dust down.
Bottom line is that 90+% of the time I'm using one fixed setting but I have
enjoyed the flexibility that adjustability provides.
David Houseman
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 10:43:01 -0500
From: "A.J deLange" <ajdel at cox.net>
Subject: CO2
Additional perspective on the path Fred started us down: At
equilibrium at 34F with 2.5 vols the headspace pressure will be 9 psig
(23.7 psia). For 1000 gal of beer which is 3785 litres you would have
2.5*3785= 9462.5 litres (as released at STP) of dissolved CO2 which
has density (at STP) of 1.87214 g/L for 9462*1.87214 = 17.714 kg of
CO2 which is a lot but then remember that the beer weighs over 3785
kg. The simplest way to get this into the beer is to apply 9 psig to a
carbonating stone and recirculate the beer in the tank either by
running the chill bands (thermal recirculation) or by use of a pump.
The question of the day, though I am actually unclear on this, seems
to be what pressure would need to be applied to the headspace as a
bolus. To determine this you would first have to know how much CO2 is
already dissolved in the beer. You would estimate this from the ASBC
table or fit to it. Assuming that the tank is at atmospheric pressure
(0 psig, 14.7 psia) the dissolved CO2 volumes would be (released to
the atmosphere) 1.57 for a total of 3785*1.57 = 5942 litres equal to
5942*1.87214 = 11.125 kg dissolved gas i.e. over half the total
requirement. If you were able to retain enough CO2 to keep the
pressure at 4 psig you would have retained 1.977 volumes which amounts
to 7483 litres weighing 14 kg. Let's be optimistic and assume this
was the case. You would now need to add the remaining 3.7 kg plus an
extra 100*3.18807/1000 = 0.318 kg which is the mass of CO2 in 100L at
9 psig and 34F (density 3.19 g/L). The total mass required is thus
about 4 kg which, compressed initially into 100 litres has density of
40 g/L requiring pressure of 286 psig if you treat CO2 as an ideal gas
(which it is definitely not at such pressures ) or 249 psig if you try
to model it using the first virial coefficient (which model is only
good out to perhaps a couple of atmospheres). Deviations from the gas
law aside, the practical concerns should be apparent.
OTOH if the head room were 50 percent (typical of small
cylindroconicals) you would require 1892*3.18807/1000 = 6 kg CO2 to
fill the headspace plus the 3.7 kg to top up the beer giving a total
of 9.7 kg which, stuffed into 1892 liters would be at a density of 5.1
g/L corresponding to a pressure of 23 psig (B coefficient model -
probably valid at this pressure) or 23.7 psig (ideal gas model). The
obvious message here is that 6 kg of CO2 which do not end up in the
beer, are nevertheless paid for ($12) and (for those who worship at
the church of Al Gore) released to the atmosphere.
So now I better understand why brewers use carbonating stones. The
best way (other than retaining what the yeast gave you) seems to be to
carbonate a large mass of beer in a tank with small headspace using a
stone. For large volumes it's also clear that it might be a fine idea
to do the calculations as above and put the gas bottle on a scale. In
this way you could determine how close to equilibrium you are as the
carbonation progresses.
* * * * * * *
On the same subject, Joe says " That suggest beer can hold more CO2
than an equivalent volume of empty space at cool temperatures." Was
there ever any question about this? It's why a beer fizzes when you
open the bottle or pour it into a glass. Or perhaps I don't understand
the comment. When CO2 dissolves it get solvated i.e. surrounded by
water molecules so it doesn't have the same access to the boundaries
of the container that it did as a gas and exerts less pressure per
molecule. Thus some gasses are very soluble in water (ammonia, sulfur
trioxide) others quite soluble (CO2) and others not very soluble at
all (N2) depending on the size and configuration of the molecule. Only
very little dissolved CO2 actually enters/leaves the carbonic/
bicarbonate/carbonate system (except where carbonic anhydrase in
present as in a respiring creature).
A.J.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 15:32:26 -0800 (PST)
From: RI_homebrewer <ri_homebrewer at yahoo.com>
Subject: water analysis questions
Hi All,
I moved to a new house a while ago, and had a water analysis done for my
well when I moved in.
The numbers are as follows:
sodium 42.3 mg/L
potassium 1.9 mg/L
copper 0.84 mg/L
iron 0.04 mg/L
magnesium 4.3 mg/L
calcium 28.4 mg/L
pH 6.00 SU
turbidity 0.40 NTU
conductivity 471.0 umhos
TDS 282.6 mg/L
alkalinity 37.5 mg/L
chloride 70.6 mg/L
hardness 88.6 mg/L
nitrate 2.0 mg/L
sulfate 7.5 mg/L
Everything else tested was listed as "not detected".
I'm not sure if the alkalinity and hardness numbers are "as CaCO3". Is
there some way to tell?
From discussions of residual alkalinity (RA) and mash pH in the HBD
(#4232-13 and others) and John Palmer's RA article in BYO (pg 58, Oct 2008
issue), the mash pH should work out to 5.72 to 5.82 (assuming the alkalinity
and hardness numbers are "as CaCO3" ).
My view of the water is that I may need to add some gypsum (calcium
sulfate) to get the calcium level up to 50 to 100 mg/L in the mash, and
possibly some baking soda (sodium bicarbonate) for roasty beers like stouts
and porters.
Is that about it? Am I overlooking anything else? Other suggestions?
Jeff McNally
Tiverton, RI
(652.2 miles, 90.0 deg) A.R.
www.southshorebrewclub.org
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2009 15:25:01 -0700
From: "Mike Bennett" <mjb at efn.org>
Subject: RE: Malt Analysis
Thomas Rohner <t.rohner at bluewin.ch> wrote some time ago
Subject: Malt Analysis
> I think it would be a good idea for a maltster to put the lot data
> of the products on their Website. This way the ones interested in
> the data could get it without the maltster having to reply phone
> calls or emails.
I read your post when it first came out, but couldn't remember the which
website I saw that did this, so I kept quiet. I just stumbled upon it
again. It's the Cargill website that has an online lot analysis portal.
They have listings for Cargill, Dingemans, Gambrinus, Gilbertson & Page OIO
Brand Brewer's Grains, Meussdoerffer, Pauls Malt and Warminster.
http://www.specialtymalts.com/tech_center/lot_analysis.html
- --
Mike Bennett
Professional Brewer (retired)
St. Barts Brewing
mjbennett69<at>gmail.com
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #5521, 03/08/09
*************************************
-------
