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 - kramerog

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 107
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Need some help with water
« on: February 19, 2017, 04:32:12 PM »
Without an alkalinity test, it is hard to know how to adjust your water. 

I'm with Chris.  Why are you wanting to warm the beer up and then cold crashing?  Sounds like unnecessary work.

All Grain Brewing / Re: How long does it take you to brew a beer?
« on: February 10, 2017, 02:32:56 PM »
6-8 hrs for 10-gal batches although it is overall trending downwards as I eliminate or reduce the bottlenecks.  Parti-gyling can be significantly longer especially if I'm making 3 or 4 distinct beers in the summer.

This is a fascinating thread, which coincidentally I found only after I posted this (provacatively titled) blog entry last night ("Are Homebrew Experiments Scientific?"):

I completely agree with you Andy. I have worked in science for 25 years, lab setting for 7, and clinical research for the last 18, and know that "labs" are not much different from a homebrew setting.

The humble advice to Denny and the IGORs (sounds like Benny and the Jets  :) )
- Researchers must do a literature review to the extent that is possible, so it is clear in your mind how your experiment will add to the knowledge in the area (it is not that it was never done, but that it must be done for every experiment)
- Researchers must provide an objective evaluation of the quality of the beer whenever possible. Less flaws mean less statistical noise. Flaws in the beer may explain why a difference could not be detected.
- Researchers must maximize the odds of finding a difference should there be one (meaning, pick the best style). The argument that a more flavorful beer is more "real world"is not invalid, but research-wise, one does the experiment with the best chance first, and then does the extrapolation experiment.

Welcome to the forum, Andy !!

Nice to be more active on the forum, and to have some good discussion!

It is worth noting that my "lab" equipment includes everything from helicopters to jackhammers to binocular microscopes to CT scanners. Science is awesome. The only place I use an Erlenmeyer flask (that old science stereotype) is in brewing!

The issue of delving into the brewing literature is one I talk about in a bit more depth for my post, and have been thinking a lot on lately...a real challenge is that much/most of the brewing literature is paywalled (and thus not terribly accessible in any easy fashion for most users), much of it is highly technical (I certainly am not always in a good position to evaluate its quality, and I have a Ph.D. in science!), and a lot of the brewing literature centers on brewing at commercial scales. Of course, the latter point has me thinking--has anyone done a good review article on differences and similarities between commercial and homebrewing setups, in terms of chemistry, physics, biology, etc.? There are lots of scattered references, of course (e.g., pressure differences between a 5 gallon carboy and a 500 gallon conical), but if anyone knows of a single piece that ties this all together I'd love to see it!

And it time to start a peer reviewed, open access journal of homebrew science? (I'd love to help out!)
When literature review is not practical, couldn't peer review of the knowledge base be done?

Sent from my XT1095 using Tapatalk

Time to pitch some Nottingham.

Ingredients / Re: Brewer's Invert Sugar Syrup
« on: February 08, 2017, 07:56:43 AM »
Look forward to hear how it turned out.  A few improvements to the method: 1)Corn sugar is unnecessary.  We're  making invert syrup, not caramel.  2) You can cut the water in half; boiling off the excess water wastes a lot of time.  3) You can add 1/2 the sugar and all the acid to the water while initially heating the water and add the rest of the sugar after boiling; no need to wait until boiling to start inverting the syrup.

Ingredients / Re: Galaxy Pale Ale Water
« on: February 05, 2017, 09:14:12 PM »
Over 100 ppm sulfate and chloride doesn't seem to be an issue in New England IPAs.  Check Scott Janish's blog for more info.

Maybe so. Those are more chloride heavy. I can't speak as a NEIPA expert by any means, but I do trust Martin's advice and have seen the results in sulfate heavy beers  with too much chloride. All in all, I'd rather give water advice to someone on the conservative end and let them run with it.
Perhaps our difference viewpoints might be explained by the starting water.  Specifically, a low mineral water - moderate alkalinity is OK - doesn't produce a beer that has unpleasant mineralogy with high sulfate and chloride but a high mineral one does?

Sent from my XT1095 using Tapatalk

Ingredients / Re: Galaxy Pale Ale Water
« on: February 05, 2017, 05:17:54 PM »
Over 100 ppm sulfate and chloride doesn't seem to be an issue in New England IPAs.  Check Scott Janish's blog for more info.

The issue you may be dealing with is that high pressure has different meanings in different contexts.  5 psi, the pressure of regulator for many high pressure propane regulators, is not considered high pressure generally. 

That recipe won't give you a beer with much hop aroma no matter how good of a brewer you are.  The hop additions are too early in the process for hop aroma to come through.  The hop additions should begin at the very end of the boil to get flavor and a modicum of aroma.  If you want a lot of aroma, you need to dry hop during fermentation.  Also I'm guessing you added about 2 oz of hops total, which is not much particulalry when 1 oz is Cascade.

Kegging and Bottling / Re: How expensive is kegging?
« on: February 01, 2017, 06:25:11 PM »
I live in a Northern State and intentionally started kegging in the winter so I could store my keg in my garage (never freezes) without refrigerators/kegerators etc. I bought a used keg ($30?) a regulator ($40?) a used steel Co2 tank and a new picnic faucet. Of course this was close to 30-years ago (I still use that keg and regulator). Like everyone else in this post, I added kegs, keezers, regs. etc. Obviously everything is more expensive now...but the point is you can start kegging relatively inexpensive if you are creative and are a "toe dipper" (cheap) like me.

That's pretty much how I started.  I got a deal on some used kegs.  I then started kegging dark beers and keeping the keg in a cold part of the basement in the winter.  My neighbor got rid of his fridge; I fixed it..... I still do keep dark beer outside the fridge.  I have never used faucets because I like the simplicity and ease of cleaning with picnic taps. 

There is a test involving tasting of 5 beers in which the taster has to identify the 2 that are different.  It is mathematically appealing because the chances of randomly guess the 2 odd ones is 1/10 rather than 1/3.  But appears not to be used much because of taste fatigue.

More beers doesn't address the problem of tasting beers with other dissimilarities like infections or different gravities.

Sent from my XT1095 using Tapatalk

[Rant on]I have 3 issues with many Brulosophy experiments. One many experiments are not based on what is known in the brewing literature so the experiment is sometimes not properly designed and sometimes the experiment does not create knowledge. Two the beers being brewed aren't good candidates for the experiment echoing what lupulus wrote, I.e. a beer with strong flavor is not useful for testing subtle differences. Third the write-ups are horrible as useful details are mixed in with useless details. An executive summary would really help. Pictures of thermometers have little value. [Rant off]

I wonder if the P value  criteria changes based on whether the result is a best practice as opposed to "true" knowledge.

Anyway, taste tests are not the end all of brewing.  The saison tests of experimental brewing doesn't require a taste test to produce useful info. [Still waiting for the write-up Denny and Drew!]

Sent from my XT1095 using Tapatalk

Yeast and Fermentation / Re: "Rack on to" secondary
« on: January 31, 2017, 04:01:22 PM »
Cinnamon powder takes a few days to achieve full strength.  Cinnamon sticks longer I imagine. 

Much of what I get out of the various experiments is that is really hard to run a proper experiment particularly one with a triangle test.

Sent from my XT1095 using Tapatalk

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 107