Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - porterpounder

Pages: [1]
1
Classifieds / Wanted: Chimay round ceramic pitcher
« on: December 05, 2013, 01:57:10 PM »
Hello All,

Until recently Chimay sold a round-bellied 0.5 L ceramic pitcher. The potters also made similar ones for Orval and Cantillon. If anyone out there has one they'd like to part with please PM me. Much thanks.

2
All Grain Brewing / Re: Poor mash efficiency on paler beers? (Water Chem?)
« on: November 04, 2013, 01:53:26 PM »
Agreed. Also a good point.

3
All Grain Brewing / Re: Poor mash efficiency on paler beers? (Water Chem?)
« on: November 04, 2013, 10:13:46 AM »
I get the wheat malt efficiency decrease, but have you also checked the pH of your sparge water? Treating the mash to get to a good pH is one thing, but I noticed a significant improvement in my pale beer efficiency when I started acidifying my mash water to about 5.4-5.5. My untreated sparge water usually runs about 8.0. Just covering all the bases.

4
Kegging and Bottling / Re: Co2 and Liquid Lines
« on: October 31, 2013, 03:04:36 PM »
The diameter of liquid line depends on how far you are moving the beer from the keg (both length and height) and at what pressure you're keeping the beer at. For most beers serving at 36-40 F at a keg pressure of 12-14 psi about 6-8 ft of 3/16" beer line works. If you're running from a basement to, say, an upstairs tap then you may need 1/4" line to get the right serving pressure to kill the foaming. If you're serving higher-pressure belgians or wheats then you're going to need longer lines to balance out the inc keg psi.

The idea of using 5/16" gas line is more to allow for proper gas volume going into the keg for consistent flow on the restricted "out" side of the keg. If you are using the same diameter gas line going into the keg than the liquid line out (or smaller diameter in than out) it MAY create a kind of vacuum effect int he keg that can intermittently reduce out-line pressure and create foaming when you dispense.

5
Events / Unbelievable Awesomeness
« on: March 28, 2013, 11:32:22 AM »
I want to give a big old public Cheers and kudos to Tom Schmidlin, Peter Twigg and Janis Gross. Had a big problem getting my Seattle NHC entries in due to a bottle-hostage situation and they went out of their way to solve the problem. Yet one more reason to be a member of the AHA, the people behind it.

Thanks!

6
Events / Re: NHC Direct links email
« on: February 26, 2013, 01:47:12 PM »
Not usually a complainer, but 45 minutes and one entry accepted? Going to name my next entry "503".

7
We're using a 10 gal gott cooler with a false-bottom for the smaller batches and a 80 qt rectanglar cooler with copper grid false bottom for the large batches.  Channelling hasn't been an issue as the diluted wort is pumped onto the top of the grain bed and then gravity fed into the kettle.  The pump has a ball-valve on the out to control flow. One of the best aspects of this method is that it is very esay to monitor the level of water in the mash tun when sparging because it is directly proportional to the level of liquid in the kettle.

I don't hace the efficiency data handy, but everything is logged.

8
Correct, Denny. After the initial recirculation to avoid boiling grain particles, it is dropping the first runnings into the liquor. But it is not just running off and then starting the sparge, it's running off at the same time as beginning the sparge.  It makes a shorter brew day by about 30mins to an hour depending on your usual sparge time. For larger batches, it also eliminated the hassle of stirring and recirculating the mash for each portion of batch sparging.  Also, as I stated initially, even with batch sparging there is the chance of tannin extraction when over-diluting the mash. That doesn't happen with this method.

Really it's just a new process that is fun to experiment with.  Nothing revolutionary, just tinkering as many of us enjoy doing.

9
Hello All.

Over that past year or so I've been playing with sparge method and I'm wondering if anyone out there has done it before.
Long story short, a brewing buddy of mine and I were trying to figure out how to do a 40 gallon batch of brew in the space of about 16 sq ft..  I awoke one night with one of those "right this down before you forget it" moments. 

Here's the skinny. The method requires a pump, a refractometer, 2 tiers and 2 vessels (a mash/lauter tun and a boil kettle): 

1) The water for the entire batch is heated to strike temp in the boil kettle
2) Mash in as usual with gravity feed or pumped to tun on higher tier (eventually the tun HAS to go above the kettle).
3) When the mash is completed, recirc for 5-10 mins to clear grain particles from the system.
Here's the new part:
4) Switch lines via QDs to then start running off wort INTO THE LIQUOR IN THE KETTLE.
5) Pump the now liquor/diluted wort from the kettle back into the tun in a continuous recirculating loop
6) Take a refractometer reading every 5 mins until the gravity stabilizes and then let the wort in the tun run off. This usually takes about 20 minutes with a 10 gallon batch.
7) Boil as usual.

There is some planning involved in this method. For a 10 gallon batch at 1.050 We’ve calculated that one will need about 15 gallons of water to 20 lbs of total grain. The method can work for various gravities, but you need to play with the total water volume a bit.  The extraction efficiency has not been lower that 75-80%, which has been better than my standard fly-sparging method. The beers brewed with this method are the brightest tasting, clearest brews we have made in 10 yrs of brewing.  Also, because you are recirculating diluted wort into the mash, the pH remains ideal throughout the sparge and there is no increased tannin extraction.  I initially thought that we would be leaving un-rinsed grain behind in the tun, thereby killing the efficiency, but this has not been the case. We’ve used this method on 5, 10 and 20 gallon batches about 15 times total in two different parts of the Northeast with the same results each time.  So there you go.  I’m sure this method can be improved upon, so have at it and happy brewing!

Pages: [1]