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 - mabrungard

Pages: 1 ... 58 59 [60] 61 62 ... 117
886
Ingredients / Re: Boiled Water Lab Test Results
« on: June 10, 2013, 08:15:20 AM »

This is post boil? Is it me or does that look totally whack?

No.  The limited amount of calcium restricts the degree to which the decarbonation reaction can proceed.  In this case, there is a significant Mg, Na, SO4 and Cl that conspire to limit the reaction.  But the primary limitation is the amount of calcium in relation to the carbonates (alkalinity).  The final Ca content and the remaining carbonates are not a surprise.  I think I mention in the Decarbonation by Boiling thread that there is a limit to the ending bicarbonate content of 60 to 80 ppm. But even that ending bicarbonate value can go up if there isn't enough calcium in the water.  That's the case with the Munich water.  Its full of alkalinity, but not enough calcium to allow the bicarb to drop into the 60 to 80 ppm range.

By the way, the elevated carbonate concentration is typical since the boiling drives off the CO2 and that takes out the carbonic acid.  The water pH goes up with boiling and those remaining carbonates will exist not only as bicarbonate, but carbonate too.  When I mention carbonates, that refers to all the species such as carbonic acid, bicarbonate, and carbonate.

887
Ingredients / Boiled Water Lab Test Results
« on: June 09, 2013, 07:55:29 AM »
As some of you may have read in the Decarbonation by Boiling thread, boiling reduces calcium content in waters with alkalinity.  All of my engineering texts indicate that the minimum practical limit for calcium content is about 12 ppm.  But those results are always presented in the Lime Softening section.  Since boiling is not a practical method for the large-scale treatment that we engineers typically deal with, there is no discussion on boiling and the practical minimum calcium level for that method.  I have someone else telling me that the practical limit for calcium after boiling is 20 ppm.  I'm not sure that the higher limit is factual.  I'm hoping that there are brewers that have had lab testing performed on their post-boiled water and they will share them here.

Please post laboratory testing results for your water after it was boiled. 

Thanks!

888
Equipment and Software / Re: Hose material
« on: June 07, 2013, 07:23:08 AM »
One problem I have with silicone tubing is its flexibility.  When hot, it may be too flexible for use as a pump suction line.  Since I RIMS, that is a deal killer for me.  I use the reinforced vinyl tubing since it is more rigid.  I do pre-boil my tubing to 'help' volatilize the plasticizers and methyl ethyl death from the tubing before initial use.

889
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Guiness style stout
« on: June 06, 2013, 02:06:38 PM »
I thought they had high alkaline water, well suited for stouts. Is this not the case?

Most of Ireland does have high alkalinity water.  However there are places that do not.  The southern area of Dublin is blessed with relatively low mineralized water.  Guess where Guinness is located. 

Of course, Guinness now uses RO for all their brewing water, so it matters less where they are located.  RO treatment is probably to ensure a stable water quality for their brewing.  The Dublin water can vary since they have multiple sources. Playing Russian Roulette with your brewing water is not the formula for a consistent product.

890
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Guiness style stout
« on: June 06, 2013, 10:53:45 AM »
It is not necessary to sour the beer to create a dry stout.  Guinness' method probably does not include a 'souring' step.  Their naturally low alkalinity water produces a more acidic extract when they perform their separate roast grain steeping step. 

Use the Guinness method to brew a dry stout.  Use RO or distilled water for its low alkalinity.  Mash all the pale malt and barley without the roast grains.  Steep the roast grains separately in RO or distilled water and add that 'flavor extract' to the wort from the pale malt mash.  The pale malt mash pH will be in the proper 5.4 range with minor additions of calcium chloride and gypsum.  The pH of the flavor extract will be well below 5.4 and it will help bring the overall pH of the finished wort down and produce that distinctive acidic perception that the dry stout style exhibits.

 

891
Equipment and Software / Re: Therminator
« on: June 06, 2013, 05:45:01 AM »
Be sure to set up a connection so that you can back-flush the chiller at high rate after each use.

892
Beer Recipes / Re: German Pils - hop and malt questions
« on: June 03, 2013, 02:39:38 PM »
FYI

Jever, Germany water profile:

Ca: 60   
Mg: 5   
Na: 15   
SO4: 75   
Cl: 30   
HCO3: 105

The alkalinity would have to be neutralized for use in a G Pils, but the sodium, chloride, and sulfate levels give you an idea of an appropriate balance and intensity for those ions.

893
Other Fermentables / Re: Copper does remove sulfur!
« on: June 02, 2013, 07:08:11 PM »
For sure, if you're going to have copper contact, it needs to be with the wort...pre-fermentation.  The wort is less acidic than beer and the yeast will subsequently bind the yeast.  No copper contact with beer!

894
Ingredients / Re: Dry hop help
« on: June 02, 2013, 11:05:04 AM »
The guy in our club making the best IPA's says he dry hops with four ounces per gallon.

That seems like a ridiculous amount of dry hopping.  I've been very pleased with around 2 oz in 5 gallons.  I couldn't imagine the mass of hop matter that would suck up much of my beer when 20 oz of dry hops were added to 5 gallons of beer.  My experience says that this is not workable or desirable.

895
Homebrew Competitions / Re: Judging at 2nd round NHC
« on: May 31, 2013, 04:39:43 PM »
The only confirmation I have is the note that pops up on the website telling you that you have completed the judging registration.  I'm sure they will be formulating the judge assignments in the next few weeks.  I expect that we will hear something a week or so beforehand.

896
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Who's going to NHC?
« on: May 31, 2013, 04:36:29 PM »
No. 6 for me.  Be sure to pace yourself.  Don't be a kid in the candy store like I almost was when I attended in Chicago. 

Of course you will need to restrain yourself on Friday night and make it to my presentation on 'Historic Water' at 9 am on Saturday.  Remember...pacing.

897
I observed a color change in a beer I racked onto darker beer yeast cake.  It can happen.

898
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: My Water Report
« on: May 21, 2013, 07:49:16 AM »
The ionic content is probably close enough that one could consider it pilsen like.  The bicarbonate would have to be neutralized, but the rest of the ion content is quite low.  That is not to say that a brewer should brew with it as-is. 

Do recognize that chloride is not the same as chlorine.  A well water would probably not have chlorine in it, but could easily have chloride.  I'm surprised not to see any chloride in this report, but its possible.  And since there is no chloride, the sulfate/chloride ratio is meaningless in this case.  Until the water has significant concentrations of both ions, their effect on flavor is negligible.  I recommend that the sulfate/chloride ratio is most applicable when the chloride concentration falls between 25 and 100 ppm. 

899
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: My Water Report
« on: May 19, 2013, 08:50:36 AM »
Its not the ratio, its the difference in the cation and anion totals.  You are good to go.  That is a lightly mineralized water and it doesn't take much to throw the difference off. 

900
Equipment and Software / Re: Those little red cans of Oxygen
« on: May 17, 2013, 08:12:00 PM »
I have read some dissolved oxygen info. Haven't bought into the idea for homebrew level yet. One side by side study I saw had three one gallon bottles of identical wort and yeast. One was not aerated at all, one was shook for two minutes, one was oxygenated for two minutes. All three made beer. The non aeration was slow and obviously under attenuated. The shook one started faster than the O2 one but the shook and O2 samples finished about the same.

I don't shake, I pour back and forth between buckets until the froth reaches the brim. Takes about three pours, less than a minute. There may be some science that proves O2 is better, but my low tech method works plenty good for me. Plus one less expense and piece of equipment to clean.

Unfortunately, you are playing with fire.  Everyone of those pours is introducing more airborne microbes into your wort.  If you don't have a big enough yeast pitch, you will be severely infected.  As it is, you are probably slightly infecting your beer.  Oxygenation is more sterile and therefore safer.

Pages: 1 ... 58 59 [60] 61 62 ... 117